>/ . A . sc3 4» ,^-- --- Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2012 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library http://archive.org/details/letterOOanna LETTERS ON PSALMODY: A REVIEW OF THE LEADING ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE BOOK OF PSALMS. BY WILLIAM ' AXXAX, AUTHOR OF "DIFFICULTIES OF ARMINTAX METHODISM," " GOTTZSCHALC'S LETTERS TO PROF. YOUNG," ETC. v .ey (in heaven) sung a new song, saying with a loud voice, "Worthy is To* Lamu that was slain." Rev. 5 : 9-12. T II I L A D E L P II I A : WILLIAM S. & ALFRED MARTIEN, No. 600 0HB8TNXTT STREET. 1859. Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1859, by WILLIAM ANNAX, In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Pennsylvania. STEEBOTYPKD BY W. S. HAVEN, PITTSBUBGH, Pa. CONTENTS. LETTER I . Page factory remarks — Origin of this work — Extract from a letter of an inquiring friend — Unhappy exaggerations of our views and usages — Drs. Watts: and Latta misrepresent- ed — l>r. Preasly formerly on the Presbyterian platform — His views at that time of the " traditions of the elders" — Plan of the discussion pursued in this treatise. - - J 3 LETTER II. Question at issue: "Is a fair and full version of the whole book of Psalms of Divine appointment," — Rouse's versi- fication not "the pure word of God" — not a version at all, but in many parts "a paraphrase" or mixture of in- i truth with human composition — This proved by extended quotations. -------22 LETTER III. Discussion of previous Letter continued — Rouse's versifica- tion a patchwork of human and Divine sentiments and phraseology — Not M the word of God " in the same sense in which ttie prose translation of our Bible is so — Further extracts and extended parallels to prove this. - 31 LETTER IV. The book of Psalms never designed to be the only perpetual and unchangeable Psalmody of the Church — Not so re- gard cburch of Scotland, martyrs, reform- ind other holy men — The exclusive doctrine a modern v — Not practicall; . even by the stri< of our opposing brethren — Omission of Psalm 72 : 20 — I of the inspired titles excluded from Rouse — These pr< v part of the Inspired text, by Dr. Alexander, me and others — A glance at the Presbyterian doctrine of Psalm 33 (iii) IV CONTEXTS. LETTER V. Pagb Rouse an explanatory "paraphrase," not a version or trans- lation — Not "as literal as the laws of versification will allow" — A glance at the history of Scottish Psalmody prior to the publication of Rouse — " Sternhold and Hop- kins" a loose paraphrase, and having many "gospel turns," after the manner of Dr. Watts — Acts of the Gen- eral Assembly of the Church of Scotland authorizing Rouse call it a "paraphrase" twenty times, but never a version — The real question: "Shall we sing ' Rouse's paraphrase ' or Watts' paraphrase?" — The idea of the Di- vine and exclusive authority of "a correct and faithful version " purely a modern invention. - - - - 53 LETTER VI. Sources whence the church must derive her songs of praise — " All Scripture of use to direct us " in praise as weli as "in prayer" — Our brethren hold to the "Psalms exclusively ;" all else they view as "corruption of Divine worship" — Scottish churches almost without exception, use "other songs" — Examples of "the Free and Established churches," " United Presbyterian church," &c. — The exclusive doc- trine not countenanced by the examples of the inspired men of the Old and New Testaments, Isaiah, Hezekiah, &c. 68 LETTER VII. Question of "the Divine appointment" of the book of Psalms continued — Examination of 2 Chron. 29 : 30 — Contains no such Divine warrant — The common arguments from "the peculiar matter," "titles," and "original use" of the Psalms shown to be fallacious — The title and matter of "Solomon's Song" presumptive proof that it should be used for purposes of praise - - - - -75 LETTER VIII. Discussion of previous Letter continued — "A Divine war- rant " for the exclusive use of the Book of Psalms, not found in Paul's "psalms, hymns and spiritual songs," Coloss. 3 : 16— Septuagint use of these titles— The fact that the Psalms were originally given to be sung by the Jews, does not prove them to be intended as an unchangeable, per- petual and exclusive system of praise — Various unsound arguments exposed. .----.-87 CONTENT.-. V LETTER IX. Tags «»A it at way" — "Whole word of God of use to direct as' 1 in praise — Act of our Genera] Assembly— - of Ralph Erskine — Sentiments of " the North British Review" in commendation of Dr. Watts — He fiewed his versificati< d a- "a paraphrase;" not always a striol ?er- sion "r translation — Many of his Psalms rrect in some parts more so — I )i\ Watts' manner in " Bternhold and Hop- kins '* — The Psalms need explanation — Testimony of Pro- fessor Patterson. -------- 101 LETTER X. Attempts to create prejudice against our usages by references to certain expressions of Dr. Watts — Presbyterians not responsible t« r certain of his reasons in regard to the proper method of using the Psalms — Dr. Watts greatly misf . — His high valuation of the book of Psalms — Objections examined : u Watts wrote better than David," " Presbyterian Psalmody not the word of (i "tends to weaken the claims of inspiration," "those who use Rouse sertainly sing the truth," "dare not sing 'hu- man composition, , " &c. - - - - - -119 LETTER XI. B, or " the other songs of Scripture " — Example of the Scottish churches against the exclusive principle, in the proportion of two thousand eight hundred to thirty — Action of the early fathers of the Associate Reformed ehnrcfa — Dr. M'Master's sentiments in favor of hymns — Present view- of Drs. Kerr and Preasly — Glance at the results — trge part of Dr. Watts' hymns are fair paraphrases of portions of the inspired word of God, and no more u hu- n" than much of "Rouse's paraphrase" — »f the remainder. 133 LETTER XII. D the early church — Glance at Ephes. 5 : 19, and I 16 — Authority of Ralph Erskine in : of o — Usage of the primitive chur i : »«B ok Der- ating i word," r 'hymns lead to alto • the inspire 1 rec i s t " - 1 17 1* CONTENTS. LETTER XIII. God has given ns no system of Psalmody for exclusive use — Five further arguments to prove this point — Fruits of the exclusive system : Suspension of ministers, elders and church members — Argument from analogy : Prayer and praise, both of human composition, so mingled in the Psalms and in all direct worship of God as to be insepara- ble — Strange inconsistencies and jarring opinions about the real nature of "inspired Psalmody" — Views of Dr. Cooper, the "Preacher," &c. — Gross errors in Rouse. - 166 LETTER XIV. Misrepresentations of Dr. Watts exposed — Further proof of the use of "other than the Psalms" in the primitive church — Admitted by Dr. M'Master; proved by Merle D'Aubigne, and "the North British Preview " — Letter of Pliny — Testimony of Eusebius — Hymns condemned by the Council of Laodicea, which also forbid any to sing but the choir — Case of the heretic Paul of Samosata — Truths es- tablished by that case. ----.- 186 APPENDIX. Review of "The True Psalmody." 206 Several years ago it was suggested to the author, by one of our most energetic and useful ministers, an honored pastor in the Presbyterian church, to undertake "the preparation of a small popular work on Psalmody." This request was enforced by the kindest considerations of a personal nature, and the brother was pleased to add : ** we need a popular treatise * * * to meet the public demand on this subject." Many circumstances conspired to forbid compliance with ibis suggestion until a recent period. The result is now with great diffidence submitted to the Christian public. The providential circumstances which have seemed to demand some further defense of the cherished usages of the Presbyterian church in relation to the public and private singing of the praises of God, are fully stated in the progress of this discussion, and espe- cially in the Introductory Letter. If our system of Psalmody be such as is described in the quotations made from the writings of the brethren whom we oppose, then the sooner it is abandoned the better ; since it must be, as they are pleased to allege, "a corrup- tion of Divine worship " of a very offensive and dangerous sort. But if, on the other hand, it is clearly demonstrable that these brethren have misapprehended, and therefore, greatly misrepre- sented the views and usages of our church ; if, moreover, their confident and peculiar claims to the exclusive use of an "inspired Psalmody " can be shown to be altogether without founda- tion ; a superstructure without a basis either in the Holy Scriptures, Church History or fact; then it becomes an obvious duty to present the evidence which clearly establishes these positions. This has been attempted in the following Letters. Kbim at the OlttMt, the slightest intentional disrespect : 1 the Psalmody in ns< these brethren, by the em- ployment in this work of the phraseology, "Rouse's versitica- (vii) Vlll PREFACE. tion," " Rouse's paraphrase," &c. We are told, indeed, "that to call the Divine songs in this version, ' Rouse's Psalms,' is to evidence gross ignorance or something worse."* Yet Neal, the distinguished historian of the Puritans, employs the phrase, "Rouse's Psalms in metre."f And what is much more to the point, the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland — 1644- 1649 — in their formal acts authorizing that versification, employ not less than twenty times the phrase "Rouse's paraphrase of the Psalms," and similar terms. In such excellent company, we cannot be justly chargeable with intentional contempt of the Psalmody of these brethren, though we use the expressions re- ferred to. We admit that the Scottish General Assembly revised and amended Rouse's work ; but probably did not alter it to as great an extent as Dr. Watts 1 "paraphrase" has been changed from the original of Dr. W. Yet this does not prevent these brethren from using the epithet " Watts' Psalms," though in strictness of speech they are not so. In the numerous quotations in the following Letters from lead- ing works of these brethren, such as " M' Master's Apology," "Pressly on Psalmody," " Testimony of the United Presbyterian Church," &c. it has been the constant aim of the author to let • them speak for themselves ; as it was his earnest wish to meet their arguments in their own chosen forms. In reference, how- ever, to a number of remarkable extracts from "The United Presbyterian," Cincinnati, it is only an act of justice to say that the editors of that paper, viz. the late Dr. Claybaugh, and Rev. James Prestley, now of Pittsburgh, were not personally respon- sible. The extracts referred to, are chiefly from communications over the signature of "Pastor." How far the editors were pre- pared to indorse the views of " Pastor." we can only conjecture ; though one or more editions of his articles in pamphlet form were printed for wider circulation. The zeal of these brethren for their favorite Psalmody does not seem to flag. Since the organization of " the United Presby- * Pressly on Psalmody, p. 178. f History of the Puritans, vol. 2, p. 42. Francis Rouse was a lay member of the Westminster Assembly of Divines, in 1043. PREFACE. IX terian church," about twelve months ago, they have issued a 4i Testimony " agaiust the supposed errors of other denominations, not overlooking this subject. Over 20,000 copies of "the Testi- mony,'' if we are rightly informed, have already been put in circu- lation. In addition, a new work directed more especially against ''the corruption" of singing hymns, has within a few months been published in Philadelphia, and circulated in the West. A venerable Professor, too, has been employing the pulpit at home and abroad, in the same cause, warning the people against the great inconsistency, and, if his theory be the true one, the immi- nent peril of those who mingle in devotional meetings which em- ploy other than "the inspired Psalmody." To obviate in some measure these varied efforts to perpetuate what the author is con- strained to view as mischievous error, and to contribute his mite to remove a needless source of division in the Church of Christ, is the object of this treatise. Having submitted his manuscript to several honored brethren in the ministry, the author has great pleasure in presenting to the public the appended testimonials : Rev. W. Anus : Dear Brother : — The undersigned have perused with great pleasure, the Letters on Psalmody you were pleased to put in their hands, and are happy to express their approbation of them. The prin- cipal arguments of those who contend for the exclusive use of u Rouse's version of the Psalms " in the worship of God, are fairly stated and completely refuted; and whilst you discuss your theme with candor and vigor, we are happy to observe it is in an eminently Christian temper. Although there are already several excellent treatises on this subject, your letters fill a gap in this controversy, as you appear to us to meet the arguments of those from whom we differ at a number of points v/hich others have not touched. A clear, brief and courteous discussion of this whole subject, such as you have here furnished, is, in our judgment, much needed at this time ; and the publication of what you have written, we are persuaded, through the Diviue blessing, would do much to correct erroneous opin- ions, and to increase the attachment of our people to a Psalmody which X PREFACE. embraces the New Testament as well as the Old, and speaks of Calvary as well as of Zion. We hope you will consent to give these Letters to the public, and trust they may have an extensive circulation, and that their publication may result in the edification of God's people and the glory of his name. Yours, fraternally, W. D. HOWARD, W. M. PAXTON. Allegheny City, March 11th, 1859. Rev. W. Annan: Dear Brother : — Having with much pleasure perused your " Letters on Psalmody/' I very cordially concur in the expressions of the foregoing letter from the pastors of the First and Second churches of this city. Respectfully, yours, A. 0. PATTERSON. Pittsburgh, May 13th, 1859. The writer does not deem it necessary to occupy his pages with further testimonials. He will only add, that having read some of the most important parts of his work to the learned and honored Professor of Theology in the Western Seminary, Dr. Plumer after " examining the plan of the whole discission." addressed to the author a very kind note, from which the follow- ing is an extract: 44 The result is, that I have no doubt your work is such as is called for by the exigency of our times. I therefore cordially commend it to the perusal of 4 Zion's friends and mine. , I have great confidence that the Rev. Dr. Howard, Rev. Win. M. Pax- ton and Rev. Dr. Patterson, have given a fair and just view of the whole work.*' It may be proper to add, that Dr. Plumer having at that time only partially recovered from a long and painful illness, and his official duties in the Seminary having greatly accumulated, was unable, though desirous, to peruse the whole discussion. In concluding this Preface, we may be permitted to add a few words for the prayerful consideration of the brethren who dissent from our views. Agreeing aa we do in the great fundamentals of PREFACE. XI the C:\lvinistie faith and of Christian morals, let us inquire seriously an 1 earnestly, whether we are not also substantially one in the ordinance of praise. In theory we differ, but in prac- tice the disagreement ceases to be a matter of principle. Just as every pious Arminian when on his knees, becomes a Calvinist; so do these brethren habitually forsake the exclusive theory and practice in part on the principle which we adopt. So at least it seems to us. We appeal to the ensuing argument to prove that they worship God to a large extent, in the use of "human com- position." As to the injurious and even fatal consequences flowing from these needless divisions, especially in the sparse settlements of our country, they are only too obvious and deplorable. How often does it occur, that two church edifices must be built in a neigh- borhood where not one can be half filled with worshipers — two ministers must labor where not one can be half supported, &c. Hence for more than half the year silent Sabbaths — while heresy and delusion of every shade are spreading their soul- destroying influences into every nook and corner of the land. Thus in numerous instances are the professed friends of the Lord Jesus found working into the hands of the great adversary of souls. With these remarks we commend the work to the blessing of 44 the Father of lights and of wisdom, from whom cometh down every good and perfect gift," with the earnest prayer that it may be made the humble instrument of promoting the union of Chris- und the salvation of souls. Pittsburgh, May, 1859. LETTER I. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS — ORIGIN OF THE WORK — EXTRACT FROM A B FROM AX INQUIRING FRIEND — unhaffy exaggeration 01 OITR fDIWI — OUR usages misrepresented — NOTICE OF DRS. I \TTA — DR. PRESSI.Y FORMERLY ON THE PRR8I VTERIAN PLATFORM HIS VIEWS OF " TRADITIONS OF THE ELDERS" PLAN OF TIIE DISCUSSION PURSUED IN THIS TREATISE. My Dear Sir: — I received in due season your very acceptable communication, and return you my grateful acknowledgments for the many kind expressions it con- tains. It is true, as you intimate, that under the force of circumstances beyond my control, ray attention has been at different times directed to the subject which has occasioned your letter. Nor do I consider myself at liberty to disregard suggestions which have had an origin such as that to which you refer. That the Christian public, before which these Letters will probably appear, may understand these allusions, I take the liberty of making some extracts from your letter, as follows : "During a recent visit among distant relatives, there was placed in my hands, and earnestly recommended to my perusal, a copy of a work entitled 'An Apology for the Book of Psalms.' In turning over its pages I con- fess the impressions made upon my mind were anything but pleasant, and I must add, by no means favorable to the Presbyterian church. " I was born of parents, who, as you are aware, were of the old Scottish stock, and my excellent father was for many years a minister of the Associate Reformed chur ch. I had been accustomed from early youth, to what is called 'the old Psalmody/ both in public and worship, and have many of its stanzas still famil- iar to my memory. But when, as I grew up, I exper 2 (xiii) 14 BETTERS ON PSALMODY. those deep religious impressions, which, as I trust, were the evidence of the 'effectual call' of God's Spirit, and when I united with a church under the care of the General Assembly, it was certainly without the remotest suspicion that I thereby renounced, even by implication, any of l the great and precious' principles of Divine truth, in which I had been so carefully trained by my honored parents. " Judge then of my painful surprise, when there was handed to me a work whose very title indicates that a most precious portion of God's sacred word had been seriously assailed and its Divine inspiration bitterly impugned by the very branch of the church with which I had cast in my lot. That for this reason, the author referred to had felt it to be incumbent upon him to enter the controversial arena in defense of the book of Psalms — very much as some of the early fathers wrote ' apologies ' for Christianity, which were designed to obviate and rebuke the malignant assaults of Jews and Pagans against the rising power and influence of the religion of Christ ! " On looking through the volume, I found the General Assembly of our church charged with ( the entire rejection of the inspired book of Psalms from the church's Psal- mody, and the substitution of others of human device in their place ' — and several authors belonging to the Pres- byterian body are professedly quoted as employing l ar- guments most popular and frequently used ' * * ' repre- senting tho.se Divine compositions (the Psalms of David) as Christless,' and of course, i almost, if not altogether contrary to the spirit of the Gospel, ' pp. 51, 67, 69. Again, the author charges ' that most numerous and in- fluential body of professors (the Presbyterian church) with abandoning the songs of inspiration and practically declariDg them unfit for Christian lips,' p. 85. And he solemnly testifies i against those who have entered into these views.' u Such, Rev. Sir, are a few specimens of the spirit and substance of the loook — imposing, as the author inti- INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 1 ."> matt-, a neccmify upon him to step forward to shield a most precious part of revealed truth from the ' l>itter libels ' and the l anhallowed suggestions uttered against it.' And in endeavoring to trace these evils to their BOOroe, he without hesitation ascribes them 'to the prin- ciples of Infidelity which had extended to every depart- ment both of Church and State/* " Baying only recently commenced my preparatory studies for the ministry, and never been placed in cir- cumstances where it became necessary to examine with inueh care the Psalmody question, you, Rev. Sir, can readily conceive with what impressions I perused such paragraphs as the foregoing. Could it be possible there i the slightest foundation for allegations such as these ? Certainly from some considerable acquaintance with the ministry and membership of the Presbyterian church, I had never conceived the smallest suspicion of such a state of feeling toward the productions of 'the sweet Psalmist of Israel;' but on the contrary had always nut with expressions of the most profound veneration and r that delightful manual of devotion, especially as a component part of the ' holy oracles.' And in rd to my own experience, from the earliest dawn of religion in my soul, I had been in the habit of resorting to that precious book, the Psalms, as a most abundant fountain of light, consolation and refreshment for all classes of pilgrims to the heavenly land. Moreover, this I knew to be a common experience in the Prcsby- 11 church. Still, as these grave charges were made by in- n venerable for years and respected for their talents, the only alternative left me was to express my conviction l)f an utter mistake as to matter of fact, or to remain en- tirely silent in regard to statements which I was not pre- refute." ragraphs sufficiently define the circumstances which produced the letter of my correspondent. His experience is by no means singular. In the same letter * The latest edition was publi.-V-l in 1 W 2, 16 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. he mentions the case of a Presbyterian lady, who had never made herself acquainted with the merits of the Psalmody question — who, having placed in her hands a copy of the same work ("Apology, &c") was so im- pressed with its confident assertions, that she declared to her pastor her full determination never again to em- ploy the Psalmody of the Presbyterian church.* In like manner those whose circumstances have brought them in contact for any considerable length of time with the books, periodicals, &c. of these brethren, must have often been grieved and indignant at the tone of rash, unbrotherly assertion which frequently appears in con- nection with this subject. Charges of " Infidel flouts" — " impious rejection of the Psalms which God has given" — " infamous conduct in setting aside the God-made hymn book and adopting man-made hymn books" — " disregard of Divine authority, want of reverence for the Scriptures, and low views in relation to their inspira- tion" — u speaking reproachfully of the book of Psalms" — " daring presumption" — " daring profanity" — " sen- timents derogatory to the Spirit of inspiration" — " crime verging on the sin against the Holy Ghost." These are copied from the most respectable sources, from the wri- tings of men of years and standing in their own denomi- nations ; and several of them from the official " Testi- mony" recently issued by the Associate and Associate Re- formed, now known as u the United Presbyterian body!" In regard to the practical working of our Psalmody, the following extraordinary statement was published in two of their leading magazines,*)* issued in Philadelphia, viz : " The Puritan churches in Old and New England, and also the two General Assemblies (Old and New School) in the States, are beacons too alarming to be disregarded. In these churches they have renounced the Bible Psalms, * She soon after joined the Seceders. f Christian Instructor and Evangelical Repository, for June, 1854; edited by Drs. Dales and Cooper. nmtODUCTORT REMARKS. 17 and adopted Watts' and other collections. The expo rience of these churches Is, that when human hymns n introduced they were not generally sung by the congre- d : that was left with the leader and a few oO* d a choir was needed to keep up the volume of sound 1 respectable. This, ere lrk lately carried four hymn books to church, and only out <>f the four hymns sung was in the four books.) The result is, that nobody out of the choir now sings, and hurches are literally without praise — the most inter- Qg and celestial exercise of the church on earth, per- haps in heaven." It is not necessary to extend these quotations. Suffi- cient has been given to indicate the tone and spirit with which this controversy is conducted by the more sober and mature minds among these brethren. Neither do we propose at present to say a word to espose these sin- gular allegations. Most of them will come in review as we proceed in the discussion. Charity demands that we presume their authors thought "//<>// were speaking the truth in love!" p]ven good men, as all experience testifies, when they become heated by controversy, may be deceived, and unintentionally deceive others. David himself admits that he spoke " in haste," when he uttered a certain sweeping condemnation. To revert for a moment to the particular work referred r correspondent — the extracts professedly given from the treatises of the late Dr. James Latta and r three others, we have not the means of testing by i !•■ i the books themselves. They arc out of print. Nor have * seen Dr. Latta'fl work, ei "py some yean since, in the private library of Dr. M'GiH, who had been t Beceder clergyman! That Dr. L. never designed to utter most of tl 2* 18 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. ments attributed to him, is plain to my mind from several considerations : they are in direct contradiction to the whole tenor of his honored and useful life. So that it is much easier to believe that the author of the " Apology" in the heat of contest has mistaken his meaning, than to conceive that Dr. L. ever meant to express some of the sentiments ascribed to him; and the same thing is true of the others. If, however, any opinions on Psalmody have been uttered by any member or minister of the Presby- terian body, such as some of those imputed to Dr. L. and others, let them be condemned ! Every sound Pres- byterian will add his amen to the sentence. Let the volumes be produced and the quotations verified — then we will join these brethren in their earnest repudiation of them. As to the professed quotations from Dr. Watts, his case will receive, as it deserves, a more particular notice. He was the honored instrument, in the hand of Provi- dence, in arranging and versifying the Psalms and Hymns as they are generally used in our churches ; and he has met with no ordinary share of abuse and misrep- resentation. Suffice it to say for the present, that as our Psalmody has been repeatedly revised with great care, by large and respectable committees of the General As- sembly, the system now bears the official sanction of that body. The views of Psalmody uttered by Dr. W. in his " Essay" and " Prefaces," have never been indorsed by our Assembly. They may be true or false — they are not ours. So also with the reasons Dr. W. assigns for cer- tain changes introduced into parts of the Psalms. The General Assembly have sanctioned and adopted many of those alterations, with their own amendments — but not one of the published reasons of Dr. Watts.* We wish this to be particularly noted. Admitting for argument, that to a certain extent Dr. W. has expressed himself unhappily, injudiciously and unwisely, in regard to parts of the Psalms — our church is no more responsible for * For a defense of Dr. W. see Letter XIV. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 19 those forms of utterance which she has never sanctioned, than she is responsible for the blunders of House, in making Pavid say the true Christian in his experience of this life, "hath perfect blessedness 91 — which, of course, is the fruit only of per/bet hdine$8 } and leads directly to the error of " sinless perfection." So Rouse may have had his reasonsfor exhibiting the Lord Jesus Christ in Pb. : 4, as saying of the satisfaction he made to the Divine law — "TO RENDER FORCED WAS I J M which, of course, utterly subverts the doctrine of Atonement, by representing the blessed Saviour as a /breed victim to Divine justice ! Still, we have too much charity for these brethren, to imagine that they hold these gross errors, or that they have ever sanctioned Rouse's reasons for so misrepresent- ing the inspired Psalmist. Let them exercise the same Messed charity toward their brethren of other denomina- tions. We use the poetical labors of Dr. Watts where we approve of them, just as we use those of any other man — but so far and no farther are we responsible for his sentiments. The bitter denunciations he has met with are no concern of ours, except to see that there is no misrepresentation and slandering of the venerable dead. 13ut of this more hereafter. In view of the offensive language we have quoted in this Letter, it must sadden every Christian heart to reflect that the followers and friends of a common Saviour lid allow themselves to speak thus of one another. There are better momente^ when even the authors of such harsh expressions, under the sacred impulse, we trust, of a commote faith and a common salvation, feel free to k of us as " a branch of the Calvinistic Presbyterian church, who are doing much to build up the Lord's cau$e f * * * and. in who* }>r<>.

rity w< (they; rejoice.*** This is kind and brotherly, but in strange contrast with othei forms of expression from the same general Bource. It i- not the prerogative of man to judge the motives or " try the heart" — but it should not surprise these * Uiii • rian, of Cinciuuati, August ( J, 1849. 20 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. brethren if we find ourselves unable to appreciate their extraordinary zeal on such a topic as Psalmody. In this we only follow the safe precedent of the Rev. Dr. Press- ly, of Allegheny City, who many years ago, having be- come the pastor of a church in Abbeville, S. C, wrote to Dr. J. M. Mason, his former preceptor, as follows : "I have some trouble occasionally with extremely good people, who have great attachment to what they term the 'good old way/ but which might as fitly be called i tradition of the elders. 7 There are three bones of contention which have already been often picked, but yet are not likely to be laid aside till some of our fathers are removed to the land of silence, viz. Is it lawful to omit the observance of a fast preparatory to the Lord's Supper ? Is it scriptural to extend our Christian fellow- ship beyond the limits of our own church ? Is it right to use any other than a literal version of David's Psalms in the public praise of God ? " When I inform you that it has been customary, on sacramental occasions, to hear those anathematized who would dare to believe the affirmative on either of these points, you will be prepared to understand somewhat of the spirit which we have to meet.'" Again, the same writer, after speaking of " the unity of the church as taught in the Epistle to the Ephesians/' adds — " This admitted, the doctrine of Catholic commu- nion seemed to be an irresistible consequence ; and there- fore I thought it my duty to utter it," i. e. "the doctrine of Catholic communion."* It need occasion no astonish- ment in the breasts of these brethren, if the arguments which, at the date of this letter, convinced even a Pressly of the truth of our principles, should even to this day be satisfactory to the mind of the Presbyterian body ! It is stated by Dr. M' Master, in his " Apology for the Book of Psalms/'f that "in the neighborhood of those * Life of Dr. J. M. Mason, p. 487. f This is the work alluded to by our correspondent, near the com- mencement of the Letter. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 21 churches where the compositions of l)r. Watts produced latisfaction, the Associate Reformed ministers were met tenmdout in keeping olive the discontents that ex- L It is no impeachment of their motives," he adds, " when it is stated as a fact, that day profited by these discontents. Separation from former connections , raged ; and by euch cu eepatated % their churches, in various parts of the continent, were enlarged^ and tome almost wholly formed '" Again, the same writer charges the Associate Reformed with " employing this as an in- strument of rending church* s and of breaking up former connections," p. 87. If these things be true, we indulge the hope, that at least since the union with the Asso- ciate church better counsels will prevail; and that as branches of the great Presbyterian family, and especial- ly as children of a common Parent, the redeemed of a common Ransom, we shall henceforth cooperate, as far as we can, in the glorious cause of a common Salvation. A spirit such as this will do much to soften asperities, and especially to frown down that disposition, too preva- lent among these brethren, to exaggerate, caricature and render odious some of the usages of the Presbyterian church. 'With the sincere desire to contribute something to the attainment of these much wished for results, the writer has prepared the following Letters. And he has been the more encouraged to this from the fact, that in their " Testimony" these brethren earnestly " beseech us seriously to consider the grounds of their controversy with u< — and to give them our prayerful consideration."* The plan proposed in the following discussion is this : I. To examine the question, whether our brethren em- ploy in praise, " the songs of mtpiratioA" u an inspired Psalmody' 1 — or rather, whether their Psal- mody be not, to a great extent, an explanatory para- jJtrasr. Letters II. — V. II. The question of a Divink Warrant for the exttm- sive use of the "book of Psalms/' as the only and * Bm their Twtimonj, j>p. 7, 46. 22 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. perpetual Psalmody of the church, under both Jewish and Christian dispensations, and to the end of time. Letters VI.— VIII. III. "The more excellent way." Statement and de- fense of the principles and practice of the Presbyte- rian church in regard to the subject of Psalmody. Letters IX.— XIII. IV. Defense of Dr. Watts, &c. Letter XIV. LETTER II. QUESTION AT ISSUE! u IS A FAIR AND FULL VERSION" OF DIVINE AP- POINTMENT? ROUSE'S VERSIFICATION NOT "THE WORD OF GOD '"' NOT A "VERSION" AT ALL, BUT IN MANY PARTS A "PARAPHRASE," OR MIXTURE OF INSPIRED TRUTH WITH "HUMAN COMPOSITION" PROVED BY EXTENDED QUOTATIONS. My Dear Sir: — In all discussions of a moral and religious character, it is of the last importance to com- mence with a well defined statement of the main point in dispute. In arriving at correct views of this subject, we will first present "the question" as stated by our brethren, and then point out its inaccuracies and incon- sistencies. In some future Letters it will come in course to exhibit the theory held by our church, and to defend it against their assaults. "The question at issue/' we are told, "is, shall we have any fair and full version of this Divine book (of Psalms) as the matter of praise" — or "shall we reject that (Psalm book) which God has given, and prefer our own effusions." * " You (Presbyterians) think this heav- enly hymn book * * * is obsolete now, and that almost any body can write a better Psalter than it is." * Apology, p. 92. On p. 121, Rouse is called " a literal and faithful version." WHAT SONGS ARE INSPIRED. 23 " Ilcnce you throw it all away except two short hymns, and substitute in its place all kinds of poetry written by all kinds of men." * " The question/' we are further told, "has been pressed upon us, involving an impious rejection of the Psalms which God has given to his church as unfit to be sung, and the substitution of hymns of man's composure, &c." f It would be easy to quote much more of the same sort from the accredited writings of these brethren. But it seems scarcely credible that they really consider the fore- going a fair, unexceptionable statement of the Psalmody question. Certainly they must have known that to the mind of every intelligent Presbyterian it would present only an offensive caricature — and that all their arguments to overthrow such positions as those imputed to us, would be viewed by us as "contending with a man of straw," and demolishing a logical figment! and more than this — their statements do not give a correct representation of the position practically held by their authors themselves, as we proceed to demonstrate by incontrovertible facts. The main proposition of the earliest and perhaps the ablest work on the subject, is stated as follows : "A CORRECT AND FAITHFUL VERSION OF THE WHOLE BOOK OF PSALMS SHOULD BE EMPLOYED IN THE PSAL- MODY OF THE CHURCH." J This position is vindicated "on the ground of Divine appointment" — and heavy judgments are more than hint- ed as the inevitable doom of those who " by their com- positions have excluded the songs of inspiration from the Psalmody of the church" — and who have preferred "some one prepared by men, to the book of hymns which God has provided." || And much zeal is at times enkindled against this H profane exclusion of God's Psalm book !" * United Presbyterian, of Cincinnati. f Rev. Dr. Kerr, in Preacher. t Apology, p. 98. The capital letters are not ours. || Preacher, June 4th, 1844. 24 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. These and many similar expressions of indignation are uttered by those who employ in public and private praise, what is commonly known as " Rouse's version of the Psalms." Of course these brethren must regard that " version" as the veritable Psalms of the Holy Scriptures. Hence we are told that " like the prose ver- sion of the Bible, it is remarkably literal — it presents the Psalms in their native simplicity, beauties and force ." "We do not say it is perfect; it is susceptible of im- provement as the (prose) version of the Bible is" — "it is a literal and true version." * To the same effect another leading author writes as follows : he is speaking of those who from the very frequent use of the term " paraphrase " in the acts of the Scottish General Assembly authorizing " Rouse's version," " have endeavored to produee the impression that it (the "version") was not adopted by those who regarded it as a literal or correct translation of the original." Dr. P. adds — "This is disingenuous." Again, Dr. P. tells us, "it (the "version") was adopted upon the principle that it is a faithful translation of the origi- nal text." Again, the same writer quotes with strong approval the Rev. Wm. Romaine, affirming that " Dr. Watts had taken precedence of the Holy Ghost and thrust him entirely out the church." Again says Dr. Pressly : — " This (Rouse's) version is not an explanation, but a translation of the Psalms. Like the prose translation of the whole Bible, it is the work of man, and in some respects might be amended. The same will be universally admitted in relation to the prose translation of the Bible. Both these translations are substantially correct and faithful ; and for the same reason they are both to be regarded as the word of God." In these extracts from two of the leading authors on that side of the controversy, we have at a glance the precise position maintained by the denominations which * Apology, p. 121, Ac. WHA1 SONGS ARE INSPIRED. 25 they reprosont ; they sing " the inspired Psalm book" — "the word of God ;" we ring only "human composi- tions " — " the effusions of fallible men." Theirs is "God's Psalter" — "a correct and faithful translation; 91 ours is "a human Psalm book." Their principle is " a literal or correct translation." Ours is " human composition" in preference to that of the Holy Spirit. Now we do not ask the reader to receive our assertions as proof — we appeal to the record, and undertake to show by most incontrovertible evidence, that these charges and allegations are without foundation. The Psalmist say-, that on one occasion he spoke "in haste" — and so with ft brethren in this instance. We accept the V st which they offer, viz. " the prose translation of the Bible," and we undertake to prove that measured by this rule, "Rouse's version" is not "a correct and faithful version or translation," and is not "for the same reason the word of God." * And we feel the greater willingness to measure their Psalmody by this standard, because in the judgment of th*e Christian world wherever the English Bible is read, its fidelity, perspicuity and excellence have deservedly secured for our prose version a high and distinguished place. " It is the best translation in the world." " It may justly contend with any now extant in Europe." "It is the best standard of our language." "It has enriched and adorned our language." " Of all ver- sions, it must in general be accounted the most excel- lent." " The translators have seized the very spirit and of the original) and expressed this almost every where with pathos and energy." "They have been as lib r y could to avoid obscurity." Such are a few of the expressed opinions of scholars of the highest eminence, and of various shades of theological belief. And tried by this standard, the system of praise called u B -ion" has no just claims to be " a true and literal translation," "or inspired Psalmody" — but to a ♦Preacher, Doe. It, Ml; Au-. 'J, Is 11. 3 26 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. great extent is a mere patchwork paraphrase, u a human explanation of the word of God ! " Now for the proof. We begin with Psalm 102 : PROSE VERSION. I am like a pelican in the wilderness. I am like an owl of the desert Because of thine indigna- tion and thy wrath. And not despise their prayer. When the people are gath- ered together. They that are mad against me, are sworn against me. But thou, Lord, shalt en- dure for ever. ROUSE. Like pelican in wilderness Forsaken I have been. I like an owl in desert am, That nightly there doth moan. Thy wrath and indignation Did cause this grief and pain. Their prayer will he not despise, By him it shall be heard. When as the people gather shall In troops with one accord. The madmen are against me sworn, The men against me that rose. But thou, Lord, cTialt still endure, From change and all mutation free. These illustrations occur in the first twelve verses of the Psalm; and it will be seen that a full half is "mere human composition l" And is this " a literal and faith- ful version t" Does this " deserve to be regarded as the word of God as really as the prose translation V 9 Is not this " human explanation ?" We next refer to the 105th Psalm : PROSE VERSION. Seek the Lord and his strength, seek his face ever- ROUSE. The Lord almighty, and his strength, With steadfast hearts seek ye: His blessed and his gracious face Seek ye continually. When they went from one na- tion to another, from one king- dom to another. While yet they went from land to land, Without a sure abode ; And while, thro' sundry kingdoms, f/*ey Did wander far abroad. But yet he sent a man before, By whom they should be fed. Until the time that his word came To give him liberty. It will be observed that more than half of these sis He sent a man before them. Until the time that his word came. WHAT 80*68 ARE INSPIRED. 27 couplets is "men explanation" and paraphrase. Yet it is all declared to be "not an explanation, but a transla- tion;" jrea, a "literal and faithful translation I" Thus "the productions vf men are exalted to a level with the word of God I" If this is what they mean by u the -"Ugs : in heaven/' which they prof eu to su\'j } they re- duce the inspired word of God very near to a level with their prayers and sermons, "mere human effusions.' ' It WOtdd be easy to fill pages with similar illustrations — but leal we should weary the reader, we adduce some further examples under three distinct heads, as follows : I. In numerous examples, "the human composition" is a more repetition of the inspired sentiment, with some expansion of the thought : PROSE VERSION. ROUSE. amiable are thy taber- How lovely is thy dwelling place naeles, Lord of hosts. Lord of hosts, to me ! The tabernacles of thy How pleasant, Lord, they be. Thy mercy held me up. Thy mercy held me up, Lord — >.$8 did me Round about their habita- All round about the tabernacles, tions. where they did dicell. The voice of thy thunder was Thy thunder's voice along the heaven in the heaven. A might)/ noise did make. Thou Ltddttt thy people like Thy people thou didst Mt/t/j a flock by the hand of Moses Like to ■ flock of sheep, and Aaron. Bj Motet 1 hand an 1 Ation'a thou Jjidst them conduct and keep. M are bright specimens of the "inspired Psalmo- dy u of these brethren ! " In the Psalms," says one of tl authors, "God has presented his own truth in thr* way which to his infinite wisdom * -:." But here there is an evident and great departure from "the way of infinite wisdom I" Yet we are required to receive all rain repetitions" and explanation* as "a literal and correct translation of the original." 41 It is all ''the word of Qodr j With about the same propriety might • Preacher, December 13, 1 - 28 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. they call their pulpit " explanations " of the Psalms "the word of God l u II. Many scores of these " human explanations " are merely Rouse's additional thoughts employed to fill up the verse and make metre. Thus : PROSE VERSION. ROUSE. Be thankful unto Him and Praise, laud and blesshis name always; bless his name. For it is seemly so to do. Which sing among the Which do among the branches sing branches. With delectation. God hath spoken in his holi- God in his holiness hath said, ness. Herein I will take pleasure. My soul breaketh for the My soul within me breaks, and doth longing that it hath. Much fainting still endure. I delayed not I did not stay, nor linger long, As those that slothful are. I thought on my ways. I thought upon my former ways And did my life well try. For I am become like a bot- For like a bottle Fm become, tie in the smoke. That in the smoke is set. I'm black and parched with grief. Their heart is as fat as Their hearts, through worldly ease grease. wealth, As fat as grease they be. In the following examples House's explanations are in italics, to distinguish them from the inspired word of Thy holy words forgotten have, And do thy laws despise. Rose up in wrath To make of us their prey. And as fierce floods, Before them all things drown. Unto their teeth And bloody cruelty. To him that Egypt smote, Who did his message scorn, And in his anger hot Did kill all their first born. Even through the desert dry And in that place them fed. WHAT SONGS ARE INSPIRED. 29 T-> thee my htlp alone ■ md* AH mi/ complaint and nocm* there tb<> v wett afraid, and stood ]\'ith trtnih/hnj, all dixmny'd, it all W hy they §hould l» afraid, 'in and tlti/ truth. That We may live th> • But overwhelmed and lo%t Wu proud king Pharaoh, AVith mil hi? mighty A And tkariott uUo. \ comment is necessary to point out to every intelli- gent reader the absurdity of calling all this u the word of God" — "songs of inspiration;" "songs composed in heaven;" "a correct, faithful and literal translation I" "We are almost tempted to employ the language of the prophet, and say of these brethren, " who is blind as my servant !" This " the word of God for the same reason that the prose mi tmr Bibles is so /" III. A third class of these u human improvements" includes a full half of House's inventions, as follows : Thou art the Gtod that wonders dost thy right hand mo»t strong. Their ensigns they set up for signs Of triumph thee I A man was famous and was had In estimation. They set their mouths ■gainst the heavens In their b ■■ilk. And they a passage had, Lu'n marching through the flood on foot, y when fl Ii of i • U up to thi ihaU mot overwhelm his soul, ones come nigh bo him. The Lord will light mv candle so That itehaU thim full bright. r in their heart thej tempted God, And tpoaking with mietruot, 8* 30 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. The nations of Canaan By his Almighty hand. And there were none to bury them When they were slain and dead. So that all passengers do pluck And make of her a prey. They in their hands shall bear thee up, Still waiting thee upon. The italics will show at a glance where the inspired word ends, and Rouse begins his composition. We have no room for further illustrations of this sort. But how many of these complete lines of Rouse's composition does any one suppose are found in this " correct and faithful version V 9 We have not examined the whole, but so far as we have compared the " version M with " the prose in our Bibles," we have marked one hundred and seventy-four entire lines. In other words, there is sufficient of this sort of interpolation, this "human" patchwork upon " the in- spired word of God," to make seven whole Psalms of the size of Psalm 1, and more than twenty-four of the size of Psalm 117. These are all " the suggestions of men " — they are "human inventions," with which "the word of God" has been interwoven, explained, the versification length- ened out, &c. Yet all this is recommended as a " literal or correct translation of the original text " — u a correct and faithful version," &c. And now in closing this letter, we make our appeal to every intelligent mind. Are these " the Holy Spirit's Psalms ?" Is it not an insult to the Spirit of inspiration to attribute to Him all these specimens of " human effu- sion." What sort of idea of " inspiration " must they have, who thus degrade it to the level of " human inven- tions." The theory of "a literal and faithful version as of Divine appointment," proves to be a mere fig- ment. Yet strange to say, these brethren proclaim, "we dare not put a human explanation in the place of the word of God." " Why does any one ask us to take a hu- man explanation of an inspired Psalm ? * * * To WHAT BOKQfl ARE INSPIRED. 31 such ■ request we could not accede without offering crim- inal disrespect to the word of .! !"* It may perhaps harsh to pronounce such professions h these mere oratorical flourishes employed for effect. But facts are stubborn things. We shall resume the subject in our next letter. LETTER III. DISCUSSION CONTINUED — ROUSE A PATCHWORK OF HUMAN AND DIVIVR ::NTS AND PHRASK«»LuCY — vol IU word of god in the IN WHICH OUB PROSE TRAN^I.ATI >N IS SO FURTHER EXTRACTS AND PARALLELS TO PROVE THIS. My Dear Sir: — We are employed in testing "the inspired Psalmody" of our brethren, by the standard proposed by themselves, viz. the admirably correct and faithful translation found in our Bibles. Do they em- ploy in praise "an inspired Psalmody exclusively?" This is their profession — but we appeal to the record. Our examples have thus far been confined to complete lines of interpolation, the inventions of Rouse. Let us next glance at some lesser improvi mt tUt upon the inspired text. Of these smaller additions we have marked more than \dn /. varying from a couple of words to almost a full line of the verse. These are all mere human patch- _' 1 with the inspired text, and they make " R reion" Tery unlike "the prose translation of the Bible," and for that reason, it is not " the word of God" in the same Bense. We confine our extracts to select specimens, the "human composition 9 ' being in italics : ou thine hand doit open wide A ml •-very thing dot! satisfy Of thy great liber i * rres«lj on Pnln >!; , p, ! | 32 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. And divers hinds of filthy frogs He sent them to destroy. . Behold the sparrow findeth out A house wherein to rest: The swallow also for herself Hath purchased a nest. Also the rain that falleth down The pools with water fills. Who by assured confidence On thee alone doth rest. And in old age when others fade, They fruit still forth shall bring. They shall be fat and full of sap, And aye be flourishing. Although they curse with spite, yet Lord Bless thou with loving voice. Wherefore their days in vanity He did consume and waste ; And by his wrath, their wretched years Away in trouble past. Lord, the God of Israel, Let none, who search do make And seek thee, be at any time Confounded for my sake. In the u inspired Psalmody" of these brethren, we have noted three hundred and thirty-two examples of this sort. Varying from two words to six or seven, we will suppose the average to be three, which will give one hundred and sixty-six full lines of poetry, the whole of which is " hu- man composition/' superadded and interwoven with " the prose translation of the Bible." Thus taken collectively, we have here matter amounting to seven more full songs of praise of the size of Psalm 1, and more than twenty-four of the size of Psalm 117, all of which is of human origin and invention ; yet are we seri- ously assured by these brethren, that " like the version of the Bible, this of the Psalms is very literal." And Dr. P. adds, " that like the prose version of the Bible, it should be considered as a literal or correct translation of the original text." In addition to all this, the statements of these authors is WHAT S<>N»;S ARE INSPIRED. 33 refuted in nearly every page of their Psalmody. Besides matter sufficient to make more than fourteen songs of praise of the size of Psalm 1, and twenty-four like Psalm 117, there is a large number of epithets and expletives of vari- ! and sizes, thrown in to fill out the verse, of which we have counted one hundred and eighty-six which be- long not to " the prose translation of the Bible. " In proof <>f these allegations we refer jirat to the very doubt- Jul use which is often made in Rouse's Psalmody of the peculiar names and titles of the Divine Being as mere ver- bal expletives, mere poetical expedients to round a stanza, or fill up a defective line, where those awful names are entirely wanting in the original. We present the follow- ing example, the words supplied being in italics : The spearmen's host, the multitude Of bulls, tohiek jhrr,h/ 1, ,(,];. Tnoee enlrei which people ha\e forth sent, Lord our God, rebuke, Till every one lubmit himself And silver pieces bring. The people that delight in war Diiperae, God and Kukj. The verse (Ps. 68 : 30) of which this is assumed to be "a literal and faithful version," does not once name the great Being who is the object of all religious adoration; and it really presents a serious inquiry how far this inter- polation of the great and glorious name which is above rj name, for such a purpose, is a rttigum* and dt use of it — how far it is morally right to thrust tl awful titles into the verse to make rhyme, or help out a defective stanza, where Divine Wisdom has seen fit to with- hold them; and this objection lies with peculiar force when this is viewed as an irreverent ///>< rty taken by Iding to the word of God," the very thoughts and matter in which He has "taughi tu how to praise," thus much and u<> more. Set this u^e of the peeuliar nam. s and titles of the Deity II v» ry frequent, not less than eighteen or twenty sach ezampl found in the 119th Ptalao aa versified by Bouse; and indeed they are 34 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. to be thus met with in very many of the Psalms, perhaps in most of them. The following examples are from Psalm 119 : An end of all perfection Here have I seen, God. But as for thy commandment, It is exceeding broad. I am with sore affliction Even overwhelmed, Lord, In mercy raise and quicken me According to thy word. In the next place, a similar use is made of many of the revealed perfections of the great and terrible God, for the mere purposes of poetry, smoothing a line or com- pleting the requisite number of feet. Such are " Most High/' "Most Gracious/' "the Eternal," "Mighty/' " Almighty/' &c. These are all the improvements of Rouse upon "the Psalms which God has given." They belong not to the work of the Holy Spirit, but are the work of man. In the third place, there are many scores of adjectives and similar qualifying terms thrown in, and put where the Holy Spirit never put them; such as bashful, dread- ful, bright, clear, glorious, gloriously, sharply, closed, subtilely, wrong, spitefully, wholly, fierce, fiercely, cheer- fully, plenteously, devouring, lofty, cruel, sore, safely, faintly, openly, proud, flaming, beloved, dear, truly, continually, dolefully, exceedingly, malicious, greatly, secretly, openly, lewd, mournfully, profanely, pure, un- tainted, unspotted, sweet, straight, divine, earnestly, carefully, devouring, perplexedly, perfect, and many others of the same sort. These, in the places from which we have copied them, are examples of mere poetical license — mere patchwork — " human inventions" to save the credit of the verse, lest it should appear like " the legs of the lame." Of course, they are no part of "the word of God," and therefore form another large collec- tion of exceptions to " the literal or correct translation." Again ; we appeal to every candid mind, whether it be a WHAT SONGS ARE INSPIRED. 35 fair statement to speak of such a system of Psalmody as "the inspired Psalter" — " God's Psalm book" — "the BOQgfl of the Hoi j Spirit," &0, Have they not spoken "in haste," who claim for Rouse's version an inspired literalnees and correctness equal to the prose translation of the whole word of God? Yet we are told with all Bible gravity, that in "these songs the church is fur- nished with suitable matter for praising God, * * * tmatter as is proper to be offered in praise to God, * * * thi 9ong* in which He has presented his own truth in the way which to him seemed be*L"* And to give point and energy to these statements, it is vehe- mently inquired, " May we not introduce some thinys into the worship of God for which we have not, Thus saith the Lord r 1 To which I answer, No !| We would respectfully inquire, whether all these patches of " human composition" are not "some thinys?" and if so, have they* a "thus saith the Lord?" "Our plea," say these brethren, "is for a true version of the book of Psalms as of Divine authority." "An inspired P>almody only is to be used, to the exclusion of the compositions ot* men, which give human views fjf Divine truth.^'l From this it might be inferred that Rouse has not given "human views of Divine truth." Indeed, if " the book of Psalms in a fair awl full vertion } a lit* and faithful version, is alone of Divine authority," as we are .red, then it follows that these brethren use only a human Psalmody ! Their " worship is without Divine ri}p'.intment."|| In their own language, we say — "these are not the songs which God has given to his church ;" but a system as different as a piece of silk cloth pate with mnre than five hundred fragments of cotton is dif- Qt from the pure fabric ! If a strict literal adherence t<» the thought, sentiment and order of the Psalms is alene of Divine requirement, then these brethren use a * Prenlj od Psalmody, p. 115. f United I a, of Cincinnati. ; l'r — '. v on Psalmody, \>. G'J. | Apology, p, 103, LETTERS ON PSALMODY. system of human origin. It would be easy to quote from their volume of praise, many pages of these "human views of Divine truth," which they so zealously denounce and so constantly sing ! We have space, however, for only a few additional examples, from Psalm 18. PROSE VERSION. ROUSE. I was also upright before him. Sincere be/ore him was my heart, With him upright was I. Thou wilt save the afflicted For thou wilt the afflicted save, people. In grief that low do lie. For thou wilt light my candle. The Lord will light my candle so, That it shall shine full bright. By thee I have run through a By thee through troops of menl break troop. And them discomfit all. We respectfully submit, that in these and many other similar specimens, for which we have not room, " human views " constitute more than half of what is called " a fair and literal version," " an inspired Psalmody exclu- sively ! w And in view of such facts as these, may we not retort upon these brethren the inquiry, " Is not your own Psalmody a presumptuous attempt to improve the work of God ? " * Is it thus you treat " those Divine hymns in which you are taught by infinite wisdom how to praise Him ? "f Before closing this letter we wish to notice a paragraph from Dr. Junkin's work "on the Prophecies/' which these brethren often quote in this discussion with great apparent satisfaction. " Dr. Watts/' says Dr. J., " has at- tempted to improve upon the very sentiment and matter and order of the Psalms. " Again, " God's order of thought is doubtless the best for his church. " Now sup- pose we grant what is here asserted, does not Rouse alter the matter and order and sentiment of the Psalms? Look at the specimens in previous pages ! Is there no attempt to improve upon the sentiment there ? No change * Preacher, April 5th, 1844. f Preacher, March 8th, 1844. WHAT BONGS ABB INSPIRED. 37 of or/ lay asidi a% ust >> u large portions of the word of God;" in other words, they t^y^V parts of alms from their system of } : But before proceeding to the prouf, we premise one or two i bserrataons : 1. This notion of the absolute and intangible sacred- * I': v. p, 112. t -M "-••-y- i i • 101, no. 40 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. ness of the book of Psalms as the system of praise for the church in all ages, is purely a modern discovery ! The fearful crime of adding to and taking away from the book of life, viz. by omitting to use " a faithful and literal version of the Psalms " — seems never to have suggested itself to the church of Scotland in her earliest and best days. Take for example the 51st Psalm, sung by the martyr Wishart, shortly before he suffered death.* As it stands in our Bibles, it consists of nineteen verses and fifty-three lines : as sung by Wishart there are twenty verses and one hundred and forty lines. Here is verse 7 : " Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean ; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow/' The martyr sung it as follows : This isope is humility, Right law intill ascence. The snaw sa -white in all degree Betokens Innocence. For an this twa do govern me I shall do nane offence. To thy mercy will I go. The whole nineteen verses are paraphrased in this style — the which, if found in the Presbyterian Psalmody, would be denounced as exposing its authors to a degree of impiety little short of that of " Nadab and Abihu," &c. In truth, as compared with Wishart' s broad para- phrase, Dr. Watts has given quite a close versification! See Watts' Psalm 51 for the proof. And when we look into the earliest metre Psalms adopted by the church of Scotland, we are at once struck with the entire absence of anything like " a fair and literal version/' The versification of Sternhold and Hopkins was introduced, as we are told by Dr. M'Crie in his Life of Knox, " at the establishment of the Re- formation, " and " was in general use till the time of the Westminster Assembly." Of course, we have only to consult Sternhold and Hopkins to know whether that church adopted the principle of these brethren. That * See Howie's Scots Worthies, p. 46. WHAT BONGS ARE INSPIRED. 41 they did not is conceded by nil parties. In his report to the Associate Synod on the "improvenu nt of Psalmody/ 1 * Dr. Beveridge, Professor of Theology at Xenia, speaks Stcrnholdand Hopkins as follows: "While in. torn* v the adherence to the original is nt least as exact i onr present version, in other oases great liberty hat I- > n taken," and the versification is "far removed from thing like n close translation." Thus we learn from the best authority, that the Psalmody of the church of S bland in her purest days of reformation, and in the period of her martyrs, was only "in some INSTANCES " as i in adherence to the original as that by House, while in others it was no version at all, "nor any thing like it." T<> prove the correctness of Dr. B's. statements, we might cite any number of pages from that ancient mody. For the present, two examples must suffice. The first is in Psalm 125 ; 1. PB08M YMB& STERNITOT.n AND HOPKINS. that trust in the Lord, Those who do put their confidence . shall be aa Mount Zion, which I rd our God only e*nnot be removed, but ahideth And flee to him for their defen&e In all tht ir m > d and m ir faith U wire rtill to endure Gro\ 'M (hi com* r atone. Mored with none ill, but standeth Bt31 Steadfast like to the Mount Sion. I tnce will suffice to satisfy any one whether this b "a correct and faithful version or translation \" Yet » brethren in his book on Psalmody, calls it full version," and quotes others who term it -an lent translation/ 1 and " the word of God ! M Thus they place this human paraphrase or explanation on a with u the w<»rd of God ! " Our second example is from Psalm 1 : 1,2. Ml"l I) ANI> H0M I "Why 1 Why 'li»i • a vaiu thing. What r I Why did th * Evangelical K 1 42 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. PROSE VERSION. STERNHOLD AND HOPKINS. The kings of the earth set The kings and rulers of the earth themselves, and the rulers take Conspire and all are bent counsel together, against the Against the Lord and Christ his Lord; and against his anointed. Sonne, Which he amongst us sent. Now we respectfully submit whether on the principles adopted by our brethren, this be not the grievous crime of "adding to the word of God." Observe here the identical sin for which they so eloquently denounce our Psalmody, viz. u the gospel turn/' by which the Psalmist is represented as speaking of " Christ the cor- ner stone/' &c, in the common language of the Christian as distinguished from the Jew ! What floods of ink have been expended in heaping abuse upon Dr. "Watts, for the very thing which here had the sanction and approbation of the purest church of the Reformation, and in the days of her greatest glory. If these brethren will point out in our system of Psalmody any more gross and daring attempt to " convert David into a Christian/' viz. " Levitical ceremonies and Hebrew forms of speech changed into the worship of the gospel and explained in the language of our time and nation,"* they are welcome to denounce us as worse than the Scottish church before the days of the Westminster As- sembly. So evident is it that the fundamental principle of our authors is itself a modern " human invention." 2. A second preliminary remark : These brethren, notwithstanding their harsh language, do not practically adopt their own theory. They do not act as though they believed us Presbyterians guilty habit- ually of crimes not unlike those of " Uzza, Nadab and Abihu," &c. On the contrary, they often speak of us as a prominent branch of the Christian church, of " in- tellectual, moral and religious worth, extended activity, great resources and happy influence. "f They are always willing to receive the members of our congregations into • Dr. Watts. -j- M'Master'fl Apology, p. 4. WHAT SONGS AIM- INSPIRED. 43 theirs, nor do they ordinarily require any expression of of ringing hymns, nor b renunciation of prival - n the Bubject, provided they give no trouble. Nay more, they will reoeive our ministers, t such corrupt principles, and even install them in their chair* of Theology.* Surely, if these brethren really thought that we Presbyterians had fallen bo griev- ously u, is their theory teaches, they would not thus deal with us ! As to the thousands eminently pious persons who have "fallen asleep' 1 with the language of our Psalmody on their lips, we leave thren to decide what has become of them ! With these preliminary remarks, we proceed to demon- strate certain omissions from the " inspired Psalmody." They have "laid asid\ as useless" the 20th verse of the 72d Psalm : " The prayers of David the son of J are ended." This verse is excluded from Rouse. Nor can it be truly alleged that it does not form a part of the inspired Psalter. There is some difference of opinion among <>ur most eminent Oriental scholars, as to the re- it which this verse hear- to what precedes, whether as the close of the 72d Psalm, or rather as a general j! of the second book, or second leading division into which the Psalms have been distinguished. All agree, how- ever, that this verse is a constituent part of the words of inspiration, and of the sacred songs of Zion. It is found in the original Hebrew, in the (J reek Beptuagint, and in — thfj two latter of whieh use, in-' ■oyer* of David, the terms humnoi and laudes — the - of David. i>r. Addison Alexander, in his ^Commentary <>n the 1' -." thinks it most probable that these words belong ' wubdivisum of the whole collection. A- Lation to the verses immediately preced is that ri •• forms no nail of til- Ti'd to the wb r bp all the inspired titles! This would be h and Paul only as tiny treat Pavid and who spake by the Holy Qhost V 3 it is further objected, that "it i< not certain by what authority many of. the titles were made."* Supp isethis to 1 what follows? That all, both those which \ authority, as well as those which arc doubtful, must be excluded from the sacred text I Sure- * Preacher, September, 1S52, edited by Dr. Kerr. 48 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. ly not. The learned Home admits that " some of them are undoubtedly not of equal antiquity with the inspired text" — and the proof is, "they are not extant in the Hebrew manuscripts." Here, then, is a valid and most safe test to distinguish the inspired titles from those not of Divine origin. And as Home further informs us that one hundred and twenty-five of the Psalms have " titles in the Hebrew Scriptures/' only twenty-five being with- out them, is it a good and valid reason for rejecting them all, either to be read or sung, because some of them are of " questionable authority Y* Is this a good and sufficient reason for repudiating the whole one hundred and twenty-five titles, as well the few spurious as the many inspired, as " parts of the Psalms !" Truly this evinces most extraordinary respect for the productions of inspiration. Dr. Alexander, however, gives no intimation of such a distinction, but recognizes all the inscriptions as parts of the inspired text, as really as the inscriptions to the prophecies and epistles; and I strongly suspect that Dr. A., who is universally acknow- ledged to be one of the most profound and accomplished Hebrew scholars in this or any other country, is right, and that Home is mistaken in this matter. We have thus the deliberate and well considered judg- ment of scholars of the highest eminence, affirming that many of the titles are " canonical parts of the Psalms ?* and that "we have no reason to suppose" the contrary. It follows, therefore, that if " the whole book of Psalms is of Divine appointment" to be sung, these brethren must sing the canonical titles, or be convicted of taking away from, or " laying aside as useless/' parts of the songs of inspiration. Not the least curious feature of this whole subject re- mains to be noticed. It cannot be denied that Bouse has embodied in his verse ten of the titles of the Psalms. Thus it happens that the very men who treat with the utmost scorn the idea of singing these inscriptions, are found doing this very thing I This is clearly proved WHAT BOVQfl ABS INSPIRED. 49 by the distinguished Home, He pays: u The untitled Lms in our Etnglish version amount to thirty-seven j but many a/ them are Hallelujah Psalms,* which have •iption$ } because the venerable translators have rendered the Hebrew word Hallelujah, by the ex- 1 Praise the Lord,' which they have mad\ a the Pudm," tee. From this it appears, that . ing the Hebrew original, the translators have em- bodied the Hebrew titles of " many of the Psalms" in the English version, rendering it. " Praise the Lord/' N >W what is true of our translation, is also true of Bona 'a versification, as any one can see for himself. Hence it follows that these brethren themselves do what they regard as so very absurd, viz. they sing the titles of at least ten of the Psalms 1 Home also says of the Hal- lelujah Psalms : u To ten Psalms is prefixed the title 1 Hallelujah,' which, as already intimated, forms taut of the first verse in our English translation, [and in Rouse'- version also,] and is rendered, Praise the Lord." Thus these brethren do the very thing which they hold in so much contempt, viz. they >ing certain sacred songs, "commencing with their title* I" But if it be true, as one writer affirms, that u these titles were never intended to he tung;"^ then to this extent their worship is with- out Divine authority ! In addition they assume that cer- tain portions (the titles,) of about one hundred psalms, are unsuitable for Divine worship. They presume to ex- clude and "lay aside as useless/' parts of " the songs composed in heaven," and affirm that it is perfectly right to do so. Did our church ever take such strong ground as ti But in regard to those title* which our brethren sing, it ha< been said that in the original Hebrew, u Hallelu- jah " "is clearly a part of the Psalm/ 1 P>ut this is no more true of the title " Hallelujah/' than of all the other * Hon TTallelujah Psalms are : IOC, 111, 112, 113, 135, 150. Dr. Kerr. 'o 50 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. titles. Every one who can read the Hebrew, knows that this title stands in the precise position toward the Halle- lujah Psalms that all the other titles occupy toward their respective songs of praise, i. e. they stand as part of the first verse, or compose the whole of it. We have then the decision of Dr. Alexander, that to omit the titles is "to mutilate the sacred text." Tholuck and Hengstenberg take the same ground. These inscrip- tions existed when the Septuagint was formed, two hun- dred and eighty years before the Advent, and were even then venerable for antiquity. Kitto receives all of them (i except when there is strong internal evidence against them/'* Indeed the evidence in their favor is so conclu- sive, that these brethren themselves admit them as in- spired, except when they are engaged in controversy. Thus a correspondent of one of their leading magazines says : " The titles of the Psalms were written not by the persons who collected them, but by the sacred poets them- selves. A similar practice obtained among the ancient Arabian and Syrian poets, of prefixing their names to their songs. The same thing occurs in the writings of the prophets, e. g., the prediction of Balaam, the psalm of Habakkuk, and the song of Hezekiah. Numbers 24, Habakkuk 3, Isaiah 38. That David followed this cus- tom, at least occasionally, is evident from 2 Samuel 22, compared with Psalm 18. We may also with great confi- dence, refer to him those titles, e. g., Psalms 22, 56, which are poetical in form, and describe the subject of the Psalm. "f As to the suitableness of the matter of the titles, if that were an open question with these brethren, it would be easy to show that many of these titles are quite as suitable for song as some other parts of the col- lection. For example, Psalm 102:' a a prayer of the * Biblical Cyclopedia. A high authority adds : " Editorial audacity or ignorance has sometimes gone so far as to omit the titles or inscrip- tions of the Psalms as forming no part of the text/' — Biblical Reper- tory, April, 1859. f Christian Instructor, edited by Dr. Dales, of Philadelphia, March, 1S55. what BONGS ABE IN6PIRBD. 51 d be ia overwhelmed, and pouretih out liis complaint before the Lord/' So also Psalm 18, 51, &o. We are thus brought to the conclusion, that most of the : • ins] ired portions of the Psalms," originally iiposed by the sacred poets themselves." 'J i. brethren have incorporated at least ten of them in their Psalmody, and they thus recognize them ae aent parts of "the songs composed in heaven," " whoL book," which they say is " of Divine appointment" the unchangeable and perpetual Psalmody of the church. By what authority they venture to 4 * lay aside as useless" the other one hundred and fifteen titles as "not intended to be sung," every one must determine for himself. It will require something more than angry exclamation to prove that they do not, in this thin;:, lay :i their weapons and virtually come over to the I' B- rian camp. The titles which are excluded would form not less than fort;, iga of the salm 117. How then can they profess to employ "the whole bonk of this Letter, let us at the safe ] ution of the Presbyterian church. Our principl alreadj intimated, affirms that "the whole word of G< d is of use to direct us in a well as in prayer," and that in theN< w T stami ai disp usation we are not limited recise Psalmody of the Jews in ei - ntiment, &c. \\> maintain that from the rich, abundant and Divine 3 provided by the Head of the church in the book of Psalms and in other portions of the Scri] I -Lurch, by her highest ecclesiastical auth< authorized to Belect, arrange and introduce all suitable for this precious part of Divine worship. We ms, and agree that - ran be i i g and gl k its Divine excellencies and beauti< 1 it nc jim nr i i say of p I ample, that th Well 52 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. suited for Divine worship under the present dispensation as some other parts of Scripture, just as we think scarce- ly any language too exalted to describe the Divine excel- lencies of the Bible, which we love and reverence as the text book of the pulpit, and to be read in public wor- ship ; but there are passages in those Scriptures which no man of common sense would venture to take as his text, or even to read from the pulpit ! Some texts, for example, in the Levitical law, and which were 'read to the Jews in their worship. Nor is it any reproach to the word of God to say so — because though " all Scripture was given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, reproof, instruction in righteousness/' &c, yet the several portions were designed by InfiniteWisdom for different uses in the church, and her judicatories and min- isters have abundant instruction in the sacred pages them- selves, and by the teaching of the Holy Spirit, to guide them aright in the employment of the different portions for their Divinely appointed purposes and objects. WHAT BONOS ABE INSPIRED. 53 LETTER V. v •• p u: LPHH L8E, M EOT A VERSION, OB TRANSLATION — NOT ••\> LITERAL A.8 nil: LAWS OP VERSIPICATIOS WILL ALLOW* — A i.i LI I \i n:i: HI8TORT OF 8COTTI8B PSALMODT PRIOfl rO tin: PUBLP kTIOH OP BOUSE — BTERNHOLD AND BOPKINS — ITS I lw - - LNB " 008PEL 1 ORNS w - - 1 ffl Ll I - A8SEBIBLT OP uir. CHURCH OP SCOTLAND BEPRE8ENT BO !1 it A PARAPH! LLLED HORN THAN TWENTY TIMES, Bl EOT ON- »— VARIOUS OBJECTIONS ANSWERED — CONCLUSIONS — THK REAL QUESTION — "WHETHER siiai.I. WJ - :'s PARA- PHRASE OR WATTS 1 PARAPHRASE" — THE PRINCIP1 AND FAITIIFl'L VERSION AS ALONE 01 AUTHORITT, A MODERN INVENTION. My DEAR Sir: — It has now been demonstrated, if we mistake Dot, that "the inspired Psalmody" of th brethren, "their literal and faithful version" (or trans- lation is a patchwork paraphrase, embracing an amount of " the mere effusions of men" sufficiently large to make in ti. ite at least fifteen entire " songs of praise' 1 of the Bize of Psalm 1, and not less than / com- plete Psalms of the size of Psalm 117. Yet all this is in constant use by those who, with the language of fear- ful warning on their lips, tell us " we have NO AUTHOR- ITY to use the productions of uninspired men !"* All this is dignified with the titles " the Holy Spirit's Psalms," and "the ward of God y for the same reason that the prose translation of the Bible is the word of God!" This u full and faithful version" (or translation) is af- firmed to be imperfect only " as tne prose translation is tc., \v. Jet where in the " prose translation of the can these brethren find one hundred and seventy- four com] a added to the inspired text? Where will they matter and language of "mere human invention 1 at to compose fifteen whole Psalms sueh as Psalm I, or forty-five Buch as Psalm 117. The thing is impossible, for the whole Protestant world ag ■ . i .'■ . 6* 54 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. that the English version of the Bible is distinguished for its remarkable literalness, accuracy, and closeness with the Hebrew ; and if " susceptible of improvement" at all, it is only as the works of all men are so ; from the very nature of man as an imperfect creature. It has moreover been shown, that by rejecting verse 20 of Psalm 72, along with most of the inspired titles, they " lay aside as useless" a large amount of inspired matter originally indited by the Holy Spirit, and no doubt sung in the worship of the church under a former dis- pensation. Yet we are assured these brethren sing " in- spired songs only," " the book from heaven !"* The array of facts and quotations in previous Letters, also sheds light upon the question, " Did the church of Scotland, when she authorized ' Rouse's paraphrase/ consider it l a literal and faithful translation V " If she did, that venerable church certainly made a most singular and unaccountable mistake. If we adopt the views of these brethren, that church gave Rouse their sanction " as a literal or correct translation of the original." tl And it is still retained, we are told, because as a true and literal translation, it is decidedly superior to any other in the English language. "f Again, "it is framed on the principle of a translation of the original as literal as the laws of versification will allow." J Now these are certainly extraordinary assertions. Take for instance almost any of the examples so readily occur- ring : PROSE VERSION. ROUSE. But overthrew Pharaoh and But overwhelm'd and lost his host in the Red Sea. Was proud king Pharaoh, With all his mighty host, And chariots also. Now can any intelligent person imagine that the church of Scotland really adopted such paraphrases as this with the conviction that they are " a true and literal version or • United Presbyterian, of Cincinnati, f Preacher, December 13, 1844. J Pressly on Psalmody, p. 117. WH - ARE INSPIRED. 55 translation — superior to any other in the English lan- [fl it conceivable that thai venerable church now se paraphrase u ss literal aa the laws of id will allow 1" :: It' these brethren cannot frame any m ire closely literal versification of the foregoing Terse, let them go to Dr. Watts, who has it as follows: ]>ut cruel Pharaoh there "With all his host ho drowned. So also in verse 10 of the same Psalm : r. vkrsiov. BOVSa. To him that smote Egypt in To him that Egypt smote, their first born. Who did hi* jnettagi weomj And in h it anger hoi Lid kill all their first-born. This is no translation at all, but a broad paraphrase. Dr. Watts has a much more " literal version ?' lie smote their first born BODJj The Sower of Egypt, dead. The--' are giyen as mere Bpecimens, but they are faith- ful illnstrations of the power of prejudice to blind the mind.- of even good men.f In the light of many such curious facts as these, we proceed to examine the several acts of the General Assembly of the church of Scotland from 1644 down to 1650, wh nion \ or trans- lation I but only a M paraphrase/ 1 In these official de- Hud such phraseology a-, u paraphrase of the Psalms' 1 — ii new paraphrase" — " our own paraphrase" — '■ t.\ snd revising the paraphrase" — "considering tie I ■" — u authorizing said paraphrsi * Al iblished in Philadelphia by Dr. Cooper and otherf, Ihere in our • Matter prorided for us I ;•■ li In > .' /. p. 1". B -e, 56 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. — and finally in 1650, u . approving and ordaining said paraphrase, and no other, to be used throughout this king- dom," &c. In these various acts of the Scottish Assembly, the term " paraphrase" is employed not less than twenty times, and not once is the system called a version ! Does all this look as though they considered it " a literal and faithful version or translation of the original ?" If such men as Alexander Henderson, Rutherford, Gillespie, &c, knew the meaning of their mother tongue, they were surely never guilty of such blunders. In scores of in- stances a mere school boy could frame a more literal yet equally smooth versification. To weaken the force of this evidence, it has been said that by the term paraphrase, the Scottish Assembly meant version. No example, however, has been adduced of such a use, or rather abuse, of language. Ralph Ers- kine, who flourished a century and a quarter nearer the period of that Assembly (1649) than we are, may be re- garded as good authority on the question. He calls his versification of the Song of Solomon " a paraphrase, or large explicatory poem." Of the nature of his "ver- sion" one fact is sufficient proof : the title contained in the first line, is paraphrased into sixteen lines. And so of all the rest. This was what Ralph Erskine meant by u paraphrase, or large explicatory poem" This should satisfy every candid mind — but even the common standards of the English language teach that il a paraphrase" is a " loose interpretation, an explana- tion in many words,"* and of course it cannot be the same as if a version or translation." The General Assembly of 1649 well knew what they were saying when they author- ized tl Rouse's paraphrase of the Psalms with the cor- rections now given." Most assuredly they could not have meant " a literal and faithful translation of the ori- ginal!" A rapid glance at the early history of Psalmody in the church of Scotland, will shed some further light upon • Johnson followed by Walker. WHAT BONGS ARE INSPIRED. 57 the subject. Prior to 1546 there is no ant] of metr d Psalms. l>ut the Psalms were used in tome i in Divine worship. 311 It was in this year (1546) that Scotland's second martyr, the ootemporary, precep- tor and friend of John Knox, an 1 to whom Knoi u of all men most indebted/ 1 Bealed Ins devotion to his Divine Lord and Master with his blood. On the night when Wishart was apprehended, he gave a most consoling discourse on the death of God's children, and though he knew that on the morrow he should go to the stake, he I, u Methinks I desire to sleep." He then appointed the 51st Psalm to be sung, which had been turned into rhyme, kef But was this 61st Psalm "a literal and faithful version ? M It has been shown in a previous Letter that the fifty-three lines in our Bibles were expand- ed into one hundred and forty of " the effusion ! " We have room for only one additional stanza. PROSE mtSIOH. WISHART'S HYMN'. Though dclightest not in burnt Burnt sacrifice is no delito offering. Unto thy Majestie — TIiou carest not of it one mite Pot sinus to satisfy. For only Christ did make us quit Of all enormitie. To thy mercie will I go. This was the form in which the martyrs and early re- formers of Scotland sung the Psalms. Those holy men do not seem to have Bnspected any crinu in Buch a pel use of the inspired records. The whole Bong is ia the same Btyle, paraphrase and "gospel turns" after the manner of Dr. Watts I According to our brethren, this was nol '• practicing Psalmody" at all, but singing "the mere effusions of men." J This appears to have been among the earliest "metred * m i . 7i. t Ji Worthies, p. •' in& neither ma !•• hyn g then." — T ' ly, p. 124. -■.art was as much **a fti/ntn of human composition" si 58 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. Psalms" in Scotland j but in the southern parts of the island, as far back as 1538, Miles Coverdale (an honored name in the annals of the Reformation,) had made the earliest known attempt at rendering Psalms into English verse for the purposes of sacred song. During the reign of Edward VI. he published "Ghostly Psalms and Spir- itual Songes, drawen out of the Holy Scripture." In his preface Coverdale states that he had " set out certain comfortable songs grounded in God's word, and taken some out of the Holy Scripture, specially out of the Psalms of David, in order that the youth of England," &c. His book contained only thirteen Psalms, viz. the 2d, 11th, 13th, 24th, 45th, 50th, 67th, 123d, 129th, 133d, 136th, 147th, and 127th. The remainder con- sisted of versifications " grounded on other parts of God's word." So early did " corruption of Divine worship" begin in that church !* The versification by Sternhold and Hopkins made its appearance 1549-1563, at which latter period was pub- lished " The whole Boke of Psalmes collected into Eng- lish metre, conferred wiih the Eorue." This was the system of Psalmody used by the church of Scotland for one hundred years before the adoption of that by Rouse. Was it framed on the principle of " a true and literal translation ?" Very far from it. Professor Beveridge r as already quoted, admits that it was not. For example, take the last lines of the second Psalm : PROSE VERSION. STERXHOLD* "When his wrath is kindled but If once his wnith never so small a little. Blessed are all they that Shall kindle in his breast, put their trust in him. then all they trust in Christ Shall happy be and blest. Here again we find the "gospel turn" so frequently used by Dr. Watts ! But besides the constant recur- rence of broad paraphrase, to the 75th and 125th Psalms are appended " doxologies." The former reads as fol- lows : * Our authority for these facts is Thomas II. Home. WHAT SONGS ARE INSPIRED. 59 !Po Father, Boo, u I B >r\ be therefore : - now, And shall be evermore. other is largi r, and la without the smallest mark Listinguish it from the body of the Psalm : y to Sod the Father of might, An I line our Saviour, And to the 11- Ij Ghost) whose light Bhine In our hearts end as sa Thar tlw ri:;ht way from daj I We may walks and him glorifie : With I all that are here, Worship the Lord, and say, Amen. These are purely " human composures" added to the inspired text, " uecessarily defective effusions, claiming no higher origin than the ingenuity of man."* If these brethren, some of them at least, had lived in the days when this Psalmody was used, and had held the same views they now profess, they must have seceded from the S ttish church. They could not have tolerated such nations from the appointed order" — such contempt • i punctilious regard to every part of Divine institu- V — such "intrusion of an unhallowed hand upon the ark of God" — such ''impious license" — such " en- ihmcnt upon the instituted ordinances of God." y must have issued their " Testimony" against these dariny crimes, lest they should partake of the sin of • I dab and Abihu," and fled from a church which by thus "adding to the words of God," must have been "rq \d found a liar." So true is it, that in man] nhold and Hopkins' system bears a ublance to the Presbyterian Psalmody than to "a true and literal version/ 1 In a future Letter ♦ • further illustrations of these curious facts will be in connection with another topic. Thus, th< n, from the days of Knox and AVi>hart down to the period of the Westminster Assembly, the noble, * Apology, p, 202. r IX. 60 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. apostolic church of Scotland decidedly condemned in her practice the principle of " a correct and faithful version of the whole book of Psalms. " This of itself is pre- sumption strong against that principle, especially when associated with the arrogant claim of "Divine appoint- ment, " which of course places the ban upon all else as "human invention/' "will worship/' &c. If the reasonings of these brethren be correct, that venerable church, for the first century and a quarter of her exiscence, had only a " human Psalmody V Her martyrs, confessors, and apostolic men, sung in the praise of God only or chiefly " their own effusions/' " the imperfect, however well intended, effusions of fallible men/' &c! If it should be inquired — Why did that venerable church lay aside Sternhold and Hopkins, and adopt that commonly called Rouse's version ? we answer in the words of Dr. Beveridge : " In process of time the change in the English language became so great, and the dissat- isfaction with this antiquated version so general, that the necessity of an improved version became evident." But neither Dr. Beveridge nor any other writer that we have ever met with, pretends that the change was made on the ground that the martyr church of Scotland had for a century been guilty of a daring and high handed inva- sion of the Divine prerogative — had committed a sin resembling the fearful crime of Uzza — had offered in her songs of praise the strange fire of Nadab and Abihu ! ! There were reasons sufficient, as Dr. Beveridge well ob- serves, occasioned by the lapse of time and the revolu- tion in language, to warrant a change, without resorting to the startling supposition, viz. that the martyr church of Scotland then for the first time awoke to the fearful fact, that for a hundred years and more she had habitually profaned and trampled under foot one of the most pre- cious ordinances of God's house ! The principle of "a correct and faithful version or trans- lation/' is thus demonstrated to be a modern invention I It is repudiated by the earliest specimens of Psalmody sung WEifl SONGS AKE INSPIRED. Gl by distinguished reformers, martynand holy men of ( I It is repudiated by the earliest complete versification oi the Psalms authorized by thai church. It is repudiated by the very system used by these brethren themselves and by the church of Scotland — viz. Route, The men who framed and introduced it, were familiar with many precedents in the Scottish, French and other refor- mation churches, which gave no countenance to such a principle, hut the very reverse. They evidently had no thought of nuking "a literal translation/' Sfl is demon- strated by the title "paraphrase/' employed in their sol- emn ecclesiastical acts ; and especially, by examining the " version 7 itself, nothing can be plainer than that it is very far removed from "a true and literal translation/' Those who speak of it under this presuming title, and call it "an inspired Psalmody," are themselves guilty both of "adding to and taking away from the word of God." To represent this patchwork system as " an in- spired Psalmody," is to degrade the productions of the Holy Spirit to a level with the effusions of men !" To represent Bouse'fl paraphrase as "the Psalms and hymns and spiritual songs which God hatgioi n u* in hu wordy"* is a gross abuse of language, to say the very least Let us now turn to some of the objections or evasions, by which these conclusions are attempted to be set aside : 1. To account for the very paraphrastic character of l -nhold and Hopkins' psalmody, it has been attributed t i "the difficulty experienced in that age in making a strict translation." But the work itself refutes this eva- :. It gives no explanation at all of the "doxologies" re quoted, which are pure "human composition." does it account for the numerous I turns," [)hra>tie and explanatory clan-.-, ftc, A •. No one acquainted with the history of the church of Scotland, her mighty men of stature, her noble army of martyrs, would pay them such an equivocal compliment. It will not do to charge upon that glorious old Presbyterian * Preacher, February 23, 1 6 62 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. church "intrusion of a profane hand upon the ark of God/' contempt of " Divine institutions/' &c, and then apologize for her crimes, by alleging that she had no minds capable of making as "correct and faithful" a versification as that of Rouse ! These brethren know too well what sort of men consti- tuted the early church of Scotland, and comprehend too accurately the absurdity of such a solution of the diffi- culties suggested by the examples adduced. Besides, rather than thus " impiously corrupt the ordinance of God/' why not chant the prose of their Bibles ? " In the Scottish church/' says one of these authors, " the re- formers are reported to have sung the book of Psalms in prose — the form, perhaps, in which it should still be used."* If this be so, then surely that noble old church was under no necessity of corrupting the Psalms which God has given ! She was not chargeable with the un- natural crime of giving her children a stone, instead of bread — instead of a fish, a scorpion ! But besides all this, in many parts Bouse is very little better than Sternhold. Thus the difficulty remains in all its force. 2. Admitting the imperfections of " Rouse's version," it is sometimes said : " We are not particular about a version , but only contend for the principle of an inspired Psalmody." In other words, your theory is very sound, but in practice you trample it under foot ! The story is told of one who professed to be a very rigid Calvinist, but was often found intoxicated and profane ! When he was reproved by his pastor, he replied: " My dear sir, my principles are perfectly sound, though I admit I pay no regard to them in my life !" Our brethren are very earnest in defending " a true and literal version as of Di- vine appointment." But as to their practice, that is left to take care of itself; and " Divine appointment" is permitted to " go and do likewise !" We have shown by numerous extracts from their own writings, that whilst constantly employing a patchwork paraphrase, they pro- * M'Master's Apology. WHAT BONOS AUK INSPIRED. 63 ing "inspired BODga only," u the worn of G Thus fchej speak of their Psalmody I :;. Ir is farther objected, thai on the original title page, •- R mat's paraphrase " is represented as u more agreeable so the original text than any heretofore "f But this is not denied. Suppose it to be ''more agreeable" to the ori- ginal than "Sternhold and Hopkins'' — does that pi it to be u a literal and faithful version V s Is it therefore u the word of God in the same sense with the prose of our Bibles .'" 4. It is further objected, that the same original title- page represents " House's paraphrase" as "translai and diligently compared with the original text/' Sec. f But what does this prove ? In order to make a correct paraphrase it is of course indispensable to consult the original text. And as to the use of the term " translated/' it proves nothing, especially nothing against the evidence of facts adduced in former letters. Dr. Watts applies the very same term to his "paraphrase." And the _:nal title of Sternhold and Hopkins' contains the clause, "conferred with the Ebrue." But who is now so foolish as to call that system u a true and literal non," or indeed a version at all 1 The chosen title nsed by the Scottish General Assembly is " paraphrase." Still we do not deny that in a part of the Psalms, Rous is a version which may be properly termed " correct an 1 faithful;" but if focti do not deceive, there can be as little doubt that as a system it is not "a literal and faithful version," but in numerous instances, as we have proved, is a paraphrase or explanation. The Psalm lv of the Presbyterian church, as arranged by her commit- miiHtf of the Pbcdmty as correct a tunic the whole is denounced as "the effusions of fallibk men," while "the human additions" and "im- provements" of Rouse are called " tht word of Qodl " * u If the book of Psalm? in the prose translation, daMlfM to be v the iii'-tri'-ai ■ . un Psftlmodjj \>. 117. | P* :uU-r Uth, ISU. 64 LETTERS OX PSALMODY. 5. It is objected that the Scottish commissioners, Ruth- erford and Gillespie, in writing to their General Assem- bly say — " It [Rouse] will be found as near the original as any paraphrase in metre can readily be." * We think so too. It would really be a difficult task to construct a paraphrase in metre, (observe, a paraphrase, not a trans- lation,) much, if at all more near the original than this of Rouse. But does that prove the paraphrase to be " a literal and faithful version/' or translation of the original ? 6. It may be alleged, that vigorous efforts are now being made to improve the " paraphrase of Rouse," so as to make it "a literal version." We have before us two of these " improved versions," but compared with Rouse, they make but small pretensions to be an " inspired Psalmody." We give one or two illustrations. Thus in Psalm 147 : 10 — " He delighteth not in the strength of the horse ; he taketh not pleasure in the legs of a man." ROUSE. IMPROVED VERSION. His pleasure not in horse's Not in the fleetness, or the might strength, Of horse or man, can God delight. Nor in man's legs doth lie. So also in Psalm 136 : 15 — "But overthrew Pharaoh and his host in the Red Sea." ROUSE. IMPROVED VERSION. But overwhelmed and lost But overwhelmed and lost Was proud King Pharaoh, "Was Pharaoh, that proud king, With all his mighty host With all his mighty host And chariots also. Which he did with him bring. Both these versions "lay aside as useless" the inspired clause "in the Red Sea!" Do these brethren imagine "they write better than David!" Again, Psalm 122 : 1 — " I was glad when they said unto me, Let us go into the house of the Lord." ROUSE. IMPROVED VERSION. I joy'd when to the house of I was glad to hear them say, God, On the holy Sabbath day, Go up, they said to me. Let us now attend the courts Jerusalem, within thy gates Where the Holy One resorts. Our feet shall standing be. We within thy gates will stand, Salem, pride of all the land. • Preacher, December 13, 18-44. WHAT BOKGfl ABE INSPIRED. 56 Where these brethren learned that the Psalmist's glad- nets was u on the holy Sabbath day," more than any other day, they do not inform as. Certainly the Psalm does DO! Bay BO. Tli' • v Beem to have thought they could u improvi npon i>avid!" Vet they tell us, in their ZVe- . "The principle which the Associate Refors church Imhls, is, k a faithful translation OTvenion of the book of Psalm- !' " And the foregoing are a few out of many scores of examples of this u faithful translation .' " These are not wry promising attempts to obtain a more 11 mm and literal version " than Rouse. Indeed, if J?< was "framed upou the principle of a translation of the original as close as the laws of versification will allow/ 9 * IS l>r. Presslj assures us, it is of course vain to expect any more closely literal system, unless the original au- thors were totally unqualified for their work, which Pr. P. will not venture to affirm. And now, what are the fair and legitimate conclusions from this inyestigati 1. We have shown, by undeniable facts, that these brethren have taken away from " the songs of inspira- tion, in which God teaches his church how to praise "^ an amount of matter er I of proph -v to adduce scores of similar evan- •;1 Psalms from [saiafa and other prophets, but we ■ dismissiii g th . however, ttg of B< sekiah, [saiah 38 : 9-20 "That Hesekiah Bhould composes Psalm/ 1 remarks Dr. r, " is not Btrange. * * It would be far m ■ ruch like David in character and spirit had not followed his example/' " The inspiration and nical authority of this production are clear from it- inc rj» ration by Isaiah among his prophecies/' * It 18 Hezekiah's Psalm of thanksgiving after recovery from David and the other Psalmists of his had been dead for three hundred years; but " by Davi I'a instrumentality/ 1 we are told, "the church was furnished with a choice variety of Psalms, &c. adapted to I circumstances of thepri ver, and of the church of 1 1 1 1. "' r What, then, was the obvious duty of Beiekiah ? Surely as u a private believer" to adopt and sine one of "that collection of sacred soncrs which were to be used to the exclusion of all others." I this he did not do. Neglecting the "choice variety?' furnished by "the sweet Psalmist of Israel/' he wrr rhieownuse. And this song, be it observed, place in the "book of Psalms." !I sekiah did much more than this. In the 20th verse of this same chapter, he says — "The Lord was me, therefore we will sing my mmg$ to the Qts all the r. Alexander, "refers to the multitude who might * Coo p, 79, 74 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. expected to join in his public thanksgiving, not only at first, hut in after ages." " The general sense," he adds, "is that of public and perpetual praise ;" and that "in the house of the Lord — or as part of the stated public service of the church. How unseemly and unnatural, then, for our brethren, who, we are glad to say it, are generally sound on the question of inspiration, to set themselves in hostility to such " inspired songs " as these — songs whose public and private use in the praise of God is sanctioned by the very " Prince of the Prophets." We have presented several specimens taken from a great number of Divine songs. They were either written by Isaiah or received his sanction — were designed for the use of the church, and "God's worshiping people under both the old and the new dispensation were directed to sing them." * Yet all are excluded by these brethren ! How evident is it, therefore, that their principle is not that of an " inspired Psalmody." By their own showing, they select from the inspired volume some Psalms, and reject others — they testify in favor of a certain number of in- spired songs, and testify against a far greater number equally Divine, " equally composed in heaven ! " They sing a part — others, they venture " to lay aside as use- less." But perhaps it will be replied, that they have " Divine appointment " of the " book of Psalms " to be used ex- clusively in New Testament worship ; but no such " ap- pointment" for any others, whether inspired or unin- spired. This assertion, in both its parts, we propose to examine in our future Letters ; when we hope to make it more fully appear that no such Divine warrant exists for the exclusive use of the book of Psalms. * Testimony of the United Presbyterian Church, p. 44. WIIKKE IS TIIK DIVINE WARRANT. LETT K II VII. Of u DIVOTS APPOnmfBST M of the book or PSALM I ' ; i v rOH PRAISE — BXAMIBATIOB 01 tiii: USUAL A1 _ | RBOB. 29 : 30 SO DITTOS VPABBABT — PBCULIAB CBAB- iin: KATTBB 01 HI PSALMfl — mint OTLBS — thkik . PALLA< [01 B AS 1 PI SPB1 D LL IVINK WARRANT. 77 Dg from the phrase, "instruments of the I. • ..'" ; i prove the perpetual obligation of harps, trum- i, \ •. Thus we arrive, with the friends of the " at this conclusion, viz. "that tie - tions and examples are ttiU in foroty as there is no N T< stamen! intimation to the contrary/'* If Christ and bis apostles ever revoked this appointment of w the in- struments of the Lord," let it be fthown. And to render the difficulty still more embarrassing, one of the favorite its quoted in the u Testimony " is Psalm s l : '2, which while it enjoins to ''take a Psalm/' immediately adds : " Bring hither the timbrel, the pleasant harp with Nor need we inform these testit brethren where to find Bach inspired directions as the£ u Praise the Lord with the Bound of a trumpet; | r him with with the psaltery and harp ; praise him with the timbrel and dance; praise him with stringed instru- ments and organs/ 4 Psalm 150. If "the Psalm" is made perpetual and exclusive by the "ordinance of Da- vid," why not "the instruments of the Lord" madeper- 1 by the same "ordinance 1" The argument from 2 Chronicles 29 : 30, thus proves too much, and therefore thing to the p >iit. We are far from desiring v-lnde the book of Psalms from the devotions of the church. ]>ut the acts of Hezekiah are not the proofs on which we rely to designate the proper position of that ired and very precious book in the worship of God. But we shall speak of this more fully in a futur 2. The argument from - Chronicles 29 : 30 in favor •trine of our brethren, fails in another point of Thirteen years lafc r, II- sekiah himself oomp a Psalm for the "house of the Lord," and gave di is lt i ... " Bhould be sung in the temple - shown in our p. How then could that pious prince have \ Id and Asaph " as the exclu the church? I ntlydidnot so un- * T ,44, X« 78 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. derstand his own command as recorded 2 Chronicles 29 : 30. Of the one hundred and fifty pieces which are said to have constituted the Psalmody of the Jewish church, David wrote a little over seventy, and Asaph not over twelve, probably only ten. The others are variously ascribed to Heman, Jeduthun, Solomon, Moses and other authors. It is with surprise, therefore, we find in the United Presbyterian "Testimony" the following in relation to the book of Psalms : "The title given to David their penman, (' sweet Psalmist of Israel/) indicates that they should be used," &c. Why David was the penman of not more than half of those sacred songs ! Quite a number of them are referred, by the most eminent au- thorities, to periods long after David was in his grave ; and some of these songs to the times during and subse- quent to the seventy years' captivity ! How, then, could Hezekiah regard " the words of David and Asaph " as the exclusive Psalmody of the church ? Even if " David and Asaph" were the authors of the whole "book of Psalms," Hezekiah' s example is against, rather than in favor of the exclusive doctrine. 3. We object to the argument derived from 2 Chroni- cles 29 : 30, because it is inconsistent with 2 Chronicles 35 : 25 — "And Jeremiah lamented for Josiah; and all the singing-men and the singing-w T omen spake of Josiah in their lamentations to this day, and made them AN ordi- nance in Israel : and, behold, they are written in the Lamentations." We regard this passage as quite as good authority for singing the book of " Lamentations" in Di- vine worship as the acts of Hezekiah for the perpetual and exclusive use of "the words of David and Asaph !" Yet this " ordinance in Israel " (or the church) was made under the eye and approval of Jeremiah, more than one hundred years after the acts of Hezekiah in 2 Chronicles 29. So evident is it that the church of that period did not receive " the words of David and Asaph " as her ex- clusive Psalmody. For such reasons as these we are constrained to regard WH1 ■ 1: DIVINE WARRANT. 79 rrant for the I in <>ur day ; mud bor- i c that pur] g it iii in r ai . miliar chai !ar end were intruded."* Now we admit that in this book the "glory of Jehoyah Id the buI ii" Buoh suit r in the i the Scriptures ? Arc all the "Psalms, hymns rg " composed bj aiah, and . i in the whole of the New Testament, u un- fit to bt sung?" Was not much of this suited I in the form of Psalms and hymns and used by men, who nanded the church "to 1' r proof of these points s> i | heart will cordially respond to 9ai I in praise of the book of Psalms, noth- than to prove that large porti lany of tl r lie historical parts of I r prophets, and in that view, at least, quite as rang." For example, see '. -. I 5, I '. to. What D poetry" than the fol- He brought amoi -us of flic?, Which r. Wat They lay < g publicly read — we I praise. Which is the iime, goo d determine. ; to " thi titles which the Holy Divin any men every tray unequal to the task." lie means in the Septuagint 84 LETTERS OX PSALMODY. "What, then, was the case under consideration ? The inspired writers of the New Testament using the Greek language, merely wished to refer to the "book of Praises" by its general title. The error of the Septuagint in calling it " book of Psalms/' could not in the least weaken the reference, or in any way affect it. According to their usual custom, therefore, they quoted it as they found it, sufficiently correct for their purpose. But the mere fact of quotation in this case, no more proves"* that the Holy Spirit appropriates the Septuagint title, and thereby gives it Divine sanction, than scores of simi- lar citations by New Testament writers prove that the Holy Spirit approves the grossest blunders in the learned languages, and in fact adopts sheer nonsense. N< r is it of any weight in this discussion, that "the word Psalmis of Greek derivation, and signifies to sing." The truth is, that while in the New Testament it is some- times thus used, the original primary meaning conveys the idea of playing on an instrument. This, too, is the original meaning of the Hebrew verb zamar (from which comes mizmor, a Psalvi), viz. " to touch, or strike the chords of an instrument, to play, Greek psallein ; and hence to sing, to chant, as accompanying an instrument."* The title " Psalm/' therefore, proves too much for these brethren. As derived from the Old Testament worship it would sanction in our churches the use of instrumental music, for such is the uniform history of Psalmody under the ancient dispensation, especially in the public service of the church. The use of the title " Psalm," no more proves that all the Psalms are now to be sung literally in every sentiment and expression, than it proves that all are to be accompanied with stringed in- struments, organs, harps, cymbals, trumpets, &c, espe- cially since fcke Psalmist himself equally exhorts to the use of all these methods of praise, Psalm 150 ; and Heze- kiah's precept and example include the use of these " in- struments of God." • Gesenius, Hebrew Lex., in verba. WHER1 IB Tin: DIVINE WARRANT. 85 i lent le i> the argument from the original "titles" of And ' i our it be observed thai in Hebrew, one of the often Qsed for particular Psalms, is Skir f Bg. It is found some thirty times, and in the origi- nal Beemfl to refer to On use of the voice. Hence we read • the daughters of song/' and it is employed to denote • t* singing, as in 2 Chronicles 28 : 18. Now if the general title, "book of Psalms," proves that they were u intended to be sung," then by the same reason- ing the genera] title, Shir Hcuhirim, "the song of a that " Solomon's Seng" is in all ages to be suny in public worship ! This result, we think, is legiti- mately reached by the logic of our brethren themselves. Here is an inspired soivj with one of the titles of the Psalms — more than this, it is " the song of songs," "the most excellent of songs ! " It is pronounced by its au- thor to all the Psalms which bear the same title, for it is "most excellent!" Surely then it is, it must be "intended to be sung in the worship of God." In addition, " this is most evident from the peculiar cha- racter of its matter" * Dr. Scott, that eminently pious aud judicious commentator, well remarks, "No other poem in the world so well describes the state of the believer's heart, and is so adapted to excite admiring* love to God our Saviour, as this." The subjects of the whole book are Christ and his church, I w.'ll does it deserve the inspired title, "song of igs," or " the most excellent of songs." Why, then, at, if the title-logic is worth anything, is it excluded from the Psalmody of these brethren ? And to enforce this conclusion, hear the celebrated Ralph Krskine, one of the original fathers and founders of ' late or Seceder Presbytery in Scotland — " When the motion was made of turning all Ou Scripture sonjs into common metre, for the same use witii * £k 8 86 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. tiie Psalms of David, I was also urged to make a ver- sion of this song, &c."* Again he says, " This sacred book of Scripture (the Song of Solomon) contains the sweetest and noblest instances of the grace of Christ toward his church and people. " And in stating and de- fending the nature of his previous paraphrase, he adds, " If more seem to be said upon any verse than is directly imported in it, I hope it will be reckoned no great fault, if what is said be deducible from it, or necessary for the further explication of it, and for adapting this para- phrase upon an Old Testament song to a New Testament dispensation"^ So obvious is it, that Ralph Erskine and his compeers never dreamed of " a Divine appointment of a fair and literal version' ' of the Psalms as of exclu- sive authority for all ages. In regard to these topics, Erskine held the principles of the Presbyterian church — and the views of his modern successors are recent " human discoveries/' Thus evident is it that the Asso- ciate church of this country have turned aside from the good " old paths'' in which their fathers walked, in the purest and best days of Reformation ! But perhaps some one may reply that " the Song of Solomon" was never employed, so far as we know, in the temple worship. Very true, and therefore the proof is complete that the use of the title Shir, a song, though employed to designate about thirty of the Psalms, settles nothing in favor of their perpetual use as the matter of praise ; since the superlative form of the same title did not prove " the song of songs" to be the matter of praise, not even to the Jews. Of course Dr. Pressly's title argument falls to the ground. * He elsewhere says — " The first public recommendation was by the Associate Synod, anno 1747." Works, vol. 10, p. 425. f Works, vol. 10, p. 316. - THE DIVINE WARRANT. LETTER VIII. . QBD — "DITIS El I " IV PAU1 ' n of rHfl - I r.KS THK F\i r THAT TUT. M :.«»vi: THEM To isi: SS — VARIOl B My Deai Sir: — In my last I commenced the in- quiry: Where do our brethren discover "a Divin< rant " for restricting the praises of the church under her | • dispensation, to the book of Psalms'/ Such a - not found in the acts of Hezekiah (2 Chroni- s •_ r yet in the general title of the k proved, [t is granted, for the j ament, that they employ in their w dds which I tod has . •• the Psalms of inspiration," "th in heaven," (all which we utterly deny and hai to be tar ig tii is. tii retorna : \ Lord, ,j which hath i Established in this one book of songs as her only, all-suffi- tual Psalm book to the end of time? v the question — and we proec- d which our brethn n s itly to S8umes the form of an express command of the N In I s3: 16, Paul exhorts the church as fol- •• L ' the word of ( brist dwell in you richly in all bing and admonishing one another, in | s your beartfl to the ■ : 19. • [I is tru . luty and privil 88 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. church to praise God not only with Psalms, but with any other " hymns and songs" found in the inspired writings. But our brethren have endeavored to turn this old Pres- byterian battery against us in the following method, which wc will state as briefly as possible : "When Paul was addressing the Colossians," they argue, "he wrote in the Greek language, and the translation of the Old Testament then used generally in the Christian church was the Greek Septuagint. Hence when Paul enjoined the use of ' Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs/ he mere- ly quoted in Greek the Septuagint translation of several of the Hebrew titles of the Psalms, i. e., he wrote the Greek Psahnois, humnois, odais, instead of the Hebrew titles Mizmorim, Teh ill im, Shirim, both sets of terms meaning Psalms, hymns and songs. " Hence, they argue, Paul's injunction to sing "Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs," is equivalent to a command to sing the various Psalms of David which in Paul's Greek Bible bore these titles, being correct translations of the three Hebrew ti- tles, Mizmorim, Tehlllim r Shirim* But this argument fails to produce conviction for sev- eral reasons : 1. It is an error to assert, as these brethren do, that the three Hebrew titles, Mizmorim, Tehittim, Shirim, "are particularly used to designate these different com- positions," viz. "the sacred poems of the book of Psalms. "f Tehillah, (the singular of Tehillim,) which they say means hymn, (Greek, humnos,) is the title of only one Psalm (145th), and is not rendered by the Sep- tuagint humnos, but ainesis, that is, praise. Our English Bibles supply the 'word Psalm, and read it "Psalm of praise." The plural Tehillim, is never used for a title of a particular Psalm, but only as the general title of the whole book; and the Septuagint translates it not humnoi, hymns, but psalmoi, Psalms. This spoils the whole ar- * Pressly on Psalmody, (abridged) p. CO ; Testimony of United Presbyterian church, p. 15. f Pressly on Psalmody. WHERE 18 Tin: DIVINE WARRANT. 89 guinent. If Paul used tin 4 Septuagint translation, he could do! possibly have meant the term humnoi, hymns, to be a translation of Tthittim, because the £ igint do n t bo translate TehxUxm; they translate it psalmoi J Pba] [t follows, therefore, that if the apostle in- the Hebrew terms as rendered into Oi . he must have exhorted the Col< Bsians is and spiritual Bongs" — for lagint translation of both Mxzmorim and TehiU Urn is 'i : So far is it from being correct to say that "the Hebrew terms for Psalms, hymns and songs are Hcularly used to designate the different com] of tl ;' Psalms, that th< re are five or six of ; titles besides the three mentioned, all but one of which are used rly than Tehillah, one of them as much as twelve times. It is incorrect, therefore, to ai licularly used. 2. The term humnos, hymn, is never used by th Listinctive title of any Psalm. We read iu d Paalntj Psalm of David, but n hum n of David. : 1 1 is 1 that th tive plural, humnois, is 1"' mid in the title of Psalm G7, and other hut what does it mean? Does it moan ad the title of Psalm 67 : "To the chief musician on neginothj a Psalm of David." Here the int translate neginoth by humnou, hymns ! And what is the meaning of neginoth t It instruuu nts to be played on by the fing re." This is the by the 8 still — in Psalm 4, the Bame Septuagint trans fealms I So that t! wish mu- h Psalms and h . Paul must have ex- * In I our I litn. \ 00 LETTERS OX PSALMODY. another with Psalms, i. e., with neginotli, or " stringed in- struments;" (2) with neginoth agoin, i. e. 3 with u stringed instruments," or hymns; and (3) with spiritual sougs. And our brethren would persuade us that the apostle quoted these absurd Greek titles from the Septuagint, and gave them his inspired sanction !* Well might the very learned Home pronounce the Septuagint translation of the Psalms to be worthless for purposes of criticism. * 3. As to the third of the titles supposed to have been cited by the apostle, viz. odais pneumatikois, " spiritual songs," it is sufficient to say that there is no such title in the Septuagint — of course Paul could not have quoted it. The term ode, a song, is one of the Septuagint titles, but that is not the same thing with u spiritual songs." But granting for the present, that when the apostle exhorted to the use of " Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs," he intended to quote the pscUmoi, humnoi, odai of the Septuagint — what does it prove ? Certainly not that he had exclusive reference to these titles in the book of Psalms. The two last terms, humnos and ode, are used by the Septuagint to designate other portions of the inspired writings ) and why may not Paul have referred to those other " hymns and songs" not embraced in the book of Psalms ? Thus in Isaiah 42 : 10 : " Sing unto the Lord a new song" (Septuagint, humnon.) Why may not Paul have had in his eye the sublime and beautiful address of Moses (Deuteronomy 32), delivered just be- . fore his death, and in the previous chapter called ode by the Septuagint, not less than three times ? Thus chapter 31 : 19 : " Now therefore write ye this song," &e. Why may not the^ apostle have had his eye upon such humnoi and odai, "hymns and songs" as these, as they are found outside of the book of Psalms ? If he had reference to such as these, then what becomes of the ar- gument of these brethren ? Paul's exhortation to sing "hymns and spiritual songs" becomes an inspired au- • " The Psalms (of the Septuagint) were translated by men every- way unequal to the task." — Home's Introduction, vol. 2, p. 168. LNT. 91 thori froin a d g though ho d( InA aicd that rotation v, " These diff 1 i 3a] ..-. hyn ntially the son u th ibstantially of the Bame im [>< jrt.^* In view of all thi ' ia plain that this argument from the Septuagint titles ia an utter failure. argument from "the peculiar matter/ 1 and from "th of the Psalms, having been revk a third point : (iii.) " From the fact that God has given to his church a r to be the DWine will that this Bhould be used to the exclusion of all others of this statement, no Pr will Lially maintain that the Pfi whi. i to the J church, by their glorious Author. portion of the inspired records. J N it be denied that many of tl sung in the temple service by a magnificent choir of several i instrum tntal music — □ b, pr bably, as the world d ion of tl: i impleted, about three hundred y< the] Hezekiah they were collected into a | ]>ut we hav< a to believe that the church, either then or for i pre- the preci ined in the book of Psalms. On the contrary, the example * P Ml. through many oenturieSj an-1 they 92 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. of Hezekiah in preparing and ordering the singing of a song or songs, and of Jeremiah in sanctioning the sing- ing of the Lamentations for Josiah, proves the very reverse. And when it is inferred from such premises, that the same exact system of songs, so many, no more and no less, must necessarily be the Psalmody of the Christian dispensation to the end of the world — there is a gap in the logic. There is no positive proof, not even strong presumptive evidence, which will justify such a conclusion. For much proof to the contrary, see our Letter VI. With the statements already made before our minds, we open the New Testament. Do we there discover no forms of public and private praise, except in the words of the book of Psalms ? Far otherwise. The writers of the New Testament quote these sacred songs not less than sixty times, but never in any instance do they cite a comjilete song of praise ; only in three or four instances do they introduce a brief extract as a part of their ex- pressions of praise, and in every such case they amend by additions of their own. Nor do they ever speak of the book as a system of Psalmody. The apostles and our Lord often mention the Psalms, the book of Psalms and David, without quoting them, but they are commonly referred to precisely like any other portions of the Old Testament Scriptures, as they doubtless would have re- ferred to "the Song of songs," but not associated with singing at all. Thus when citing the 22d Psalm, on the subject of the crucifixion, the evangelist says : "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments, and for my vesture they cast lots." See for similar examples, Matthew 13 : 35, 2G : 35; Luke 2 : 42, 24 : 44. In truth, if the Psalms had never been sung at all, the New Testament, in such quotations as these, could not have observed a more profound silence on the subject of their "particular designation." James indeed exhorts: "Is any merry, let him sing Psalms." But the word "Psalms " is not in the original — it is WHERE H Tin: MVIXK WARRANT. simply "let him Bing, ,J psalleto. Nor if he had us 1 the i lit Lave in cessarily c - fined his meaning to the book of Psalms. The term a much wider meaning. The Bame result is reached wh< d we observe in what og the New Testament saints were accustom* I tpress their fervent thanksgivings to their Creator and Redeemer. How did Mary and Zacharias and Elizal prai& Q dJ By rep tting one of the Old Testam Ims? No Buch thing. Read the record in Luke 1. "What BOrt of a BOng was that which John heard BUD the presence of "Him that Bittetfa on the throne?' 1 Was it one of the Psalms of David? Listen — "Thou art worthy to take the * for thou wast slain an I hast redeemed us to God by thy bluod. * * * Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power and riches and wisdom and glory and blessing." gondii) himself, when about to commence hi- rerord of the won- derful mysteries of the closing book of inspiration, as though he could not restrain his emotions, breaks forth, u Unto him that loved us and washed us from our in his own b! ire merely spccinn ns f the Psalmody which meets our eye the instant we the New Testament. What person, having r< the example of primitive Christianity, can have any doubt as to the duty and privilege of - as tie There is, as it seems to us. a vast amount of current on the.-e topics. Thus,"If the.- .'ued * In • :]\c four "111 »f David are peculiarly adapted to U . and full of the grace and spirit of t! •• This," he . • i our P go nncfa agreeable matt and I- Works, roL I 94 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. in the book of Psalms were given to the church to be used in the praises of God, it will then be admitted that the point in dispute is settled. " * What point is settled? No one denies that the Psalms were given to the ancient Jewish church, and for the most part to be sung; but does that settle the further question, " Do these one hun- dred and fifty Psalms compose the exclusive Psalmody of the church under her new dispensation ? " Take a pa- rallel specimen of reasoning — The written revelation of God to the ancient church, consisted of " the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms." God was to be worshiped by the public reading of these Scriptures — they were given for this purpose. Y\ 7 hat point does this settle? Not surely that all other portions of Divine revelation in the New Testament must be excluded from the public reading in the house of God. Here is another example of bad logic. "The book of Psalms, whence was it? From heaven or of men? If from heaven, why not use it?"~j- We reply — " The Law and the Prophets, whence were they?" "If from heaven, why not use them" to the exclusion of the New Testament Scriptures? The heavenly origin of the book of Psalms no one doubts, and we rejoice " to use it" for every purpose for which it was designed under the new dispensation. But that it was intended to be an exclu- sive system of Psalinod} r to all ages, is tlie very point to be proved. Of course the argument from its Divine origin is a mere begging of the question. " The Song of Solomon," and all the other songs and hymns scattered throughout the pages of the Bible, are all " from heaven." Does it follow that they are all to be used in public praise ? If our brethren will follow their own reasoning to this result, it will narrow the discussion to a very small point. Another specimen. u When we consider how fre- quently the apostles introduce the Psalms in their dis- * Presely on Psalmody, p. 70. i Testimony of the United Presbyterian church, p. 44. WHBBfl IS Tin: DIVINE WARRANT. 95 com thai they r the matter of these sacred - ry Buitable to be employed in the n •■" "' But the fact that the propt . tu nth/ quol I in the New Testament than the Psalms, Of course it follows that u they are even more suitable" for public prais Liar errors in reas >ning are very frequent in connection with the inspiration of the Psalms, and it i- boldly affirmed that "no argument is needed to prove that Rouse's version is (It'- word of Godl"1[ But if \W\< were not the Law and the Prophi ts "th I " But this does n«>tpr<»ve that they 1 from the pulpit, to the exclusion of the whole New Testament ! To allege the u Divine appoint- ment' 1 o( the Psalms to he sung to solve the difficulty, is a Bheer petitio principii — a begging of the question. Much importance in the argument, seems to be at- ■d to the circumstance, that the Psalms have been collected into a separate " book" in the great volume of inspiration, and the inference is thence deduced that the ' furnish an all-sufficient Bystem of Psalmody for the church in all future ages. But here in the pn I toe narrow to support the conclu- sion. On the supposition that these inspired composi- tions were to be preserved for the spiritual benefit of the church, and t r > be used in other modes besides song, how iral and r that they should be grouped to- r and hold a separate place among the varied pro- bions of t ! Spirit? This was precisely what igent mind would anticipate, vis. that these should he embodied in a single book. The - d why a very few are found, not liter ally in other parts <>f the Bible, was that this . for the integrity and completeness rical narrative, as in 2 Chronicles, chapter 22, compared with Psalm l x — though in this and other * Pro««lv on P«.ihno«lv, p. 91. t Dud-J'i Reply, : 96 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. cases there are very numerous points of difference. How would any intelligent uninspired editor act under similar circumstances ? If called to arrange and publish the Works of a deceased friend, would not this grouping to- gether of the different species of composition be a first dic- tate of common sense ? It would be utterly absurd if such editor, in issuing the works of Cowper, for example, should throw together in promiscuous mass his fugitive poems and his familiar letters ! Again — If, as these brethren maintain, the songs of the church are to be restricted to one small portion of the inspired records, and if in disregarding this Divine limitation so far as to sing parts of Isaiah or the New Testament, we only expose ourselves to the Divine dis- pleasure, instead of having our sacrifices accepted — then certainly we are entitled to know very accurately, the time, place, personal agency, and other circumstances attending this "appointment" of an exclusive Psalmody for all coming ages. We are not inquiring as to the authority of the "book of Psalms" as an integral part of Holy Writ, given "for our learning." This is just as plain in relation to that book as to Isaiah and the other inspired writings. Nei- ther is it a question merely of arrangement and classifi- cation " for doctrine, reproof, instruction," &c. There is no difficulty in such points as these. But we think we are entitled to particular information as to the person by whom the number of the Psalms was fixed at precise- ly one hundred and fifty, neither more nor less, for the express purpose of Psalmody to the exclusion of all other songs, inspired and uninspired. How and when was he appointed by the Great Author of Inspiration to establish this Divine " ordinance" and place a limit around it like to that which encircled Mount Sinai, with the terrible inscription, " Pass not over lest tiiou die !" V\ r e have a right to demand of these brethren a clear " thus saith the Lord" on these topics. That we are entitled to demand full satisfaction on WHBRfl tfi TIIK MVrXK WARRANT. 97 to, is obvi oing of tl brethren them lelves V\ at in ar- gum< at, thej jtomed to remind as in the n mn manner, of "the terrible death of Nadab and .a;" and that "we have reason to apprehend that the disregard of Divine authority in the worohi] will now subject the guilty t<> the displeasure < be lifted up upon it." Exodus 20 : 24, 25. If these brethren really believe that Presbyterians are exposed to such judgments as those of Nadab and Abihu — if the crime flagrant and the penalty so certain, as they pretend, let th. in produce the Divine "pattern/ 1 We demand the exj r of the Holy Spirit, or at least fair in- ferential pro. t the fearful limit around the book * Fr Imody, pp, 0, 10. }ily on Psalo . 114. 98 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. of Psalms. But if no such directions are to be found, then we would warn these brethren of the folly and crim- inality of attempting to call " down fire from heaven " upon all who "do not follow with them." It is no sufficient answer to the foregoing reasoning, to allege that the canon of Scripture was arranged by Ezra, and the Psalms were placed in their present position by an inspired hand. That is not the point. The canon would have been equally authoritative and complete, if there had been no "book of Psalms," i. e., if these sa- cred songs had been inserted in the lives of David and the other penmen of the Holy Spirit. The question is, "among all the variety of devotional poetry in the Bible, what Divine oracle has selected and fixed by a perpetual decree, or at least by fair inference, an inspired psalter of one hundred and fifty songs as the only and all-suffi- cient volume of praise to all ages ? " If no answer can be given to this inquiry, then "where there is no law, there is no transgression ;" and we treat with derision pages of vapid denunciation as the empty flourish of feeble rhetoric. And we are the rather encouraged to this, be- cause the self-same logic which hurls upon our heads the penalties of the Jewish theocracy, would lead to the stoning of a man to death for "gathering sticks on the Sabbath." Numbers 15 : 32. But it is said with much confidence, that "there is no book of Psalms in the New Testament. Nor is there any promise of the influences of the Holy Spirit to assist any man in preparing one." * How is this to be accounted for? "We reply — no inspired booh of Psalms for the new dispensation - was necessary. The theory of the Presbyterian church is complete and satisfactory without any New Testament volume of praise. We find a rich and varied supply both in the Old Testament and in the New; in the former, especially in the book of Psalms — in the latter, not only all the noble songs and hymns sung by angels at the birth of Christ, &c., by the glorified church * Preesly on Psalmody, p. 85. WHEBB IS THE MVIXK WARRANT. 09 and by inspired men, but besides, hundreds of the m I and delightful and edifying and the epistles, already prepared to our hand.* All that is necessary is to versify, for example, such adn bl ■ | - that of "the prodigal sou," or any simi- lar | ad we have a most precious and affecting hymn of praise. And so with the deeply Impn ssi : the crucifixion: what heart can fail to relish, what tongue tenderly to respond to the narrative of the thief expiring on the cross, and turning his dying i upon the Saviour — "Lord, remember me." And then the Bweet answer of the compassionate Redeemer — "This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise. " And if we open the apostolic epistles, everywhere the holy raptures of the writers break forth in beautiful ascriptions of praise : "Unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only honor and glory forever and ever, amen/ 1 Or take Paul's Bublime argument for the resurrection, in 1 Corinthians 15 : 51—58 — "For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal put on immortality; * * * then Bhall be brought to pass the saying that is written. Death Bhall be .-wallowed up in victory. death where is thy stinc; ? grave where ia thy vi The sting of death is Bin, and the strength of sin is law. But thanks be to God who giveth us the vio- through our Lord Jesus Christ." These are noble . 'salmody of th< at. They are made to our hand, and we ask no her:, r. A volume at I : ; of Psalms " can I from this magnificent I . ;' Di- * u We find in them • I . -••fully looked into and examined with anj •• • much ; ; , 1 1 i*/" — . ) QO LETTERS OX PSALMODY. vine truth. * And then we have, besides, all that is most rich and grand and instructive and animating in the Psalms, Isaiah and all the prophets. Let hundreds of such passages as those we have cited, be paraphrased and versified with even the large license of many of the Psalms by Rouse, and we will have a volume of praise such as might fire the souls even of the ransomed in glory. "No book of Psalms in the New Testament!" We have what is far better — we have all that David and Asaph and Isaiah and the others wrote, illuminated by the brighter glories of the Sun of Righteousness, " who hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel." We have all that the seraphic Paul, and the heavenly-minded John, and the golden-mouthed Luke ("the beloved physician"), and the ardent lion-hearted Peter — what shall I say ! — we have the very words of Him who was goodness, and mercy, and virtue, and wis- dom, all embodied in the incomparable person of the Son of God ! Surely the church would be hard to satisfy, if she could ask more than this ! But hark! It is the voice of the objector — "Your New Testament hymns are a serious corruption of the worship of God ! We dare not sing them, lest we should offer strange fire before the Lord ! " Yet this is the language of ministers of the gospel, who profess great respect, yea, profound reverence, for the words of inspira- tion ! Strange ! prejudice ! How blind art thou ! * Many beautifnl specimens may be seen in the hymn book of the United Presbyterian church of Scotland, sixty-hve of which are by Dr. Watts. THE MORE EXCELLENT WAY. 101 LETT ER IX. "A I WAY" — WHOL1 WORD OF GOD OF FSF TO s BKIRl — KM: BORTH BRITI8B RK- ! PAAL- BO HIS \l ISIRK LT] El ki A PAR kPHB ' - AXWATfl - 1 TRANSLATION — vwv 0* Hlfl PSALMS ■ | PB w.vrs — Efl , STRRHHOLD .\M> HOPKIHI — PfALRI - . .'.\ — TR8TIMORT Of PROF. PA1 Mt DEAR Sir: — Having in previous Letters - the principle adopted by our brethren in the matter of Psalmody, and given numerous illustrations of their practice under it, we are now prepare! to exhibit, some- what at large, 4 * a more excellent way." R ivii the whole word of I use * is" in his praise, no less than "in pra . and the other parts of worship, we cannot adept the theory which limits the church under her present dis] a small, though very precious collection of Psalms originally given to the Jews for a part of their temple Bervice. Still less can we accept an explanatory phrase of those Psalms as "the Inch givi :i/' •• the verital of inspiration in a " the mor i\ way ? " If we were compel] pt the judgment of I will copy, for the amusement of tl w of the eur: ts by which they attempt to disparage the 1 ' >ur branch of the church. " Loose p phrases," "modern hymn-." "pi _ . ish poet/' "hymn human invention," ''entire re- 9* 102 LETTERS OX PSALMODY. jection, and impious rejection of the Psalms which God has given to his church to be sung/' " mere effusions of men," " man-made Psalm book/' " impious license taken with the book of Psalms," " preference of a human to a Divine book of Psalms/' " exclusion of Scripture songs/' "Psalm book prepared by man/' " songs of human com- posure/' "Watts' whymes," " confusion of Babel/' &c. These specimens are selected from the most respectable authors on that side of the question. But we are not to be silenced by declamation. Rail- ing convinces nobody. We propose the only safe test in such cases, viz. an appeal to the record and to facts. I. It is an undeniable fact that our Supreme Judicatory have, by a standing rule, often repeated but never repealed, authorized the use of Rouse's versification of the Psalms Thus, in 1787, after " allowing the use of Watts as re- vised by Barlow," they say, " we are at the same time FAR FROM disapproving of Rouse 7 s version, commonly called ' the old Psalms/ in those who are in the use of them and choose to continue • * * * and do highly disap- prove of severe and unchristian censures being passed upon either of said systems of Psalmody." Now as in the judgment of these brethren, " Rouse's paraphrase" is " the songs of inspiration," this action of the Supreme Court of the Presbyterian church certainly does not look like " an impious rejection of the Psalms !" " We are far from disapproving of Rouse s version." The men who constituted the first Presbytery of our church (1705) were emigrants from Scotland and Ireland. They brought their Psalmody with them, and being en- deared to them by recollections of home and similar asso- ciations, they were not likely to make any hasty changes in that department of worship. But the mother churches of Scotland had never adopted the modern exclusive prin- ciple which is so zealously defended in this country.* • This appears from several considerations : 1. From the earliest specimens Bung by the Scottish martyrs and reformers, and which were anything but "literal translations" of the Psalms. LLBNT W'V. 103 libera] and broad foanding and r * riaD church. on their in the : lina- ry revolutioo highly ; rovement in aid naturally call to mind tl, ssembly in 1»U7 and in 1701—7, i by Zachary I by the latter "having fed by that Assembly ',7 in private families, in order toprq And these early Pr - - well knew that in 1747 the Ajssocial land had recommended I Ralph Erskine u I i versify the o\ which labor he accomplished, quoting in hie " | volume the action of the church S ripturt f David are, and for the the church of Scotland, . and that f the ; particularly by an th, 1«U7." Sternbold and Hopkins') wa> a sxplanationa, .man oomp r 1 constantly - paraphras :,. thai by t ; . * the printed ami i 104 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. Nor were these early Presbyterians ignorant that the same Ralph Erskine had regarded his labors upon " the other Scripture songs," as an important addition to the Psalmody of the Associate church. Thus he remarks : " As the poems and songs here written, are in the form of what is called rhyme and common metre, so the reason thereof is, to answer the design proposed to me, of making the Scripture songs adapted to the common tunes, so as it may be practicable to sing them as ice do the Psalms of David." Again, in his preface to the " Song of Solomon," he says, after quoting Ephesians 18 : 19, and Colossians 3 : 16 — " That you may be the more able to sing it ('the song') over with understanding, I have endeavored to lay open its mysteries," &c. Again, he says he put his verse in u common metre," that "in case any should see. fit to make some of these lines a part of their spiritual and devout recreation in secret, they might, if they please, sing them over in any of the tunes to which they are accustomed in our Scottish church." This refers to secret worship — but the " Testi- mony" of our brethren includes (t worship both public and private." With such antecedents and authorities as these, it was to be expected that the Presbyterian church in this coun- try should early take decided action for the improvement of her Psalmody. Accordingly, under the leadership of Dr. Witherspoon, (clarum et venerabile nomen,') Dr. Hodgers, and men of like spirit, the act of our Supreme Judicatory quoted above, was passed, so far as appears on the records, without a dissenting voice. This action of our highest church court is viewed by the brethren we oppose, as a " preference of a human to a Divine book of Psalms" — "an impious license," calling for Divine rebuke. But the facts are all against them. In the year 1705, our church consisted of seven ministers, and two or three years later they reported ten small congregations, numbering probably less than one Tin: MORE EXCELLENT WAV. 105 thousand communicants. We pass op three-quarters of ntury, during all which term B rase's versification is, with almost no exception, exclusively the Psalmody of ihuroh. She now ( 17 x 7 | reports thirteen Ptesbyte- and one hundred and sixty-three ministers, with pro- v two hundred c >n ; rease has I and she has to triumph iu her God and King. But we pass over another three-fourths of a cen- tury, during all which time the church lies under the guilt of "an impious rejection of God's Psalm book." How stands the Bame church n >w, 1858? To the i • raise of h r '1 Saviour be it Bpoken — she now numbers one hundred and fifty-nine Presbyto ri two thousand four hundred and sixty-eight mini.-: three thousand three hundred and twenty-four churches, and more than two hundred and sixty thousand church members — while during the single year which terminated last May, she received to her communion from the world, twenty thousand Beven hundred and ninety-two hopeful converts. A* the same time, in all that constitutes puri- anity, Christian activity and usefulness, she is d whit behind the very chief of the embattled hosts of Q t. "her enemies themselves being judges." We say it in no spirit of boasting, but we trust with profound hu- mility and dependence on Divine grace. Facts like i not show a church of her Almighty King • At the same rate of increase, it will require than ars to swell her membership by an i ■ than the sum total of the I A — liate and Associate Reformed churches, new united in on le at this late day, to ascertain minutely the which induced Dr. Witherspoon, and the :' our church, to seek an iin- pp>. In the Act cited above there i> not, the remotest hint of any hostility to the precious "book of 1' antiquated versification they say they - pprotring." They did 106 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. not allege that "an uncouth version (Rouse's) had put David's Psalms out of the church, aud it would he'ep them out." * We do not read that they urged the duty and necessity of. an improved version, as Dr. Cooper does, because " no man of any taste and scholarship can fail to feel so." Nor yet in the words of Dr. Beveridge — "It must require a strong love for the inspired Psalms to overcome the distaste which would otherwise be felt to the language in which they are sometimes clothed, especially by young persons and strangers." These were doubtless regarded by such men as Wither- spoon and Rodgers as matters of considerable interest — but we have reason to believe that they felt as their fore- fathers did, and especially such men as the judicious editor of Ralph Erskine's works, who penned the follow- ing : " Though the Psalms of David are truly excellent and sublime, containing suitable matter for praise and adora- tion, &c, yet there are many passages in them peculiarly adapted to the old dispensation of earned rites and cere- monies, and on that account, cannot be supposed to be so clear and full of the grace and spirit of the gospel. The consideration hereof hath induced many devout and piously disposed persons, ardently and sincerely to wish that our Psalmody tcere enlarged, not only by adding some other Scripture songs out of the Old Testament, but particularly by selecting a number from the New." It is on such broad and liberal principles as these that our church has always acted. They could adopt, in part at least, the language of Dr. John Owen, whose name is a tower of strength in theology. He says : " There ivas a promise of eternal life given to the saints under the Old Testament : but whereas they were obliged to a wor- ship that was carnal and outwardly pompous, they never had clear and distinct apprehensions of the future state of glory : for life and immortality were brought to light by the gospel." * Roy. W. Davidson, of the United Presbyterian church. Till: MOKE EXCELLENT WAY. 107 Believing that there are brighter displays of the "ex- cellent w than in the <>M Testament, they felt it to be a duty to use the clearer light, no leas In the ordinance of prai» , than in the other «•>. raises worship. We art' far from "an impious setting aside of the Psalms which God has given, and using in their stead lion* of men" * as is rashly affirmed to rejudice. 1 1. We are now prepared to examine the improvenu nt$ which our church has authorised \ and this is the more ury, as it is especially upon these that onr brethren direct the chief battery of their denunciations. The main instrument in preparing " the Psalms and Hymns" as we now use them, was the celebrated Dr. Isaac Watts. t A few years subsequent to the organization of the first Presbytery of our church (1705), Dr. W. published his system of Psalmody, perhaps 1708. Of the position which the " Psalms and Hymns" versified by Dr. W. maintain in the Free church of Scotland and the sister inations, we cannot give a better idea than in the led extracts from the "North British Review,"! which was founded by Chalmers, and is sustained by the leading men of the Free church : u A century and a half ys the Review, " since the publication of Dr. Watts' Psalms and Hymns; yet nothing has ap- I to dim their lustre ; as yet nothing threatens to ■de them. With their doctrinal fullness, their sa- cred fervor, their lyric grandeur, they stand alone, over- topping all their fellows." " To elevate to poetic altitude- every truth in Christian experience and revealed i, need- the strength and sweep of an eagle's win<_ r ; and this is what Isaac Watts has done. He has taken ry topic which exerci& - the understanding and \ the believer, and has not only given it a de- .. I>r. K.tt. editor of the Preacher. That <>ur church feeli no in of Room, La obrioae, in that die has Lately added ED it to her Paalmodjj as must commonly used. ; 1' i Angnftg I 108 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. votional aspect, but has wedded it to immortal numbers ; and, whilst there is little to which he has not shown himself equal, there is nothing which he has done for mere effect. They are naturalized through all the Anglo- Saxon world, and, next to Scripture itself, are the great vehicle of pious thought and feeling." Again, says the same high authority : " A climbing boy was once heard singing in a chimney, 'The sorrows of the mind Bo banished from this place. Religion never was designed To make our pleasures less/ And, like King David's own Psalter, the same strains which cheered the poor sweep in the chimney, and melted to tears the Northamptonshire peasants, have roused the devotion or uttered the rapture of ten thousand thousand worshipers ; and there is many a reader who, in his ex- perience, can imagine nothing more akin to celestial en- joyment, than the sensations which he shared in singing, when the heart of some solemn assembly was uplifted as one man, 'Come, let us join our cheerful song/ or, ' Jesus shall reign where'er the sun/ " The contrast between this high eulogy from the pen of one of the gifted sons of the "Free church of Scotland/' and the abusive epithets near the beginning of this Letter, is curious enough. But our safest course is, " to search the record/' as the lawyers say, and thus ascertain for ourselves where the truth lies. III. The judgment formed by Dr. Watts, in regard to his poetical labors, may be gathered from his own words. He frequently describes his versification as a " para- phrase." Thus : " Whensoever there shall appear any paraphrase of the book of Psalms that retains more of the savor of David's piety, and discovers more of the style and spirit of the gospel, * * * let this attempt of mine be buried in silence." Whether he is more or less paraphrastic than Rouse, is of course another ques- tion, which is not now under discussion. THK MORS BXCILLBHI WIT. 10P in, Dr. W. employs the general title, "The Psalms of David, imitated in the language of the New Tcstamt at, and applied to the Christian state and worship/ 1 Bis meaning is indicated as follows: ''Where the Psalmist sacrificing goats or bullocks, L rather ch mention the sacrifice of Christ, the Lamb af (iod. When he attends the ark with shouting into Zion, I sing the sion of my Saviour. * * * Why should I now « my God and Saviour in a song with burnt sacri- fatlings, and with the incense of rams, * * * why should I hind my sacrifices with cords to the horns of the altar f* X \ in : In a letter* dated March 17th, 1718, and ad- I to the eminently pious Dr. Cotton Mather, of New England, and in which he submitted some speci- mens of his labors in Psalmody, Dr. Watts writes as fol- lows : u It is not a translation of David I pretend, but an imitation of him so nearly in Christian (or gospel hymns that the Jewish Psalmist may plainly appear } yet leave Judaism behind.' 1 From this extract two things are plain : 1. Dr. W. did not design to exclude David from the Psalmody of the church ; on the contrary, he says he aimed to make him "plainly appear" yet without "Ju- daism." -. In the phrase " Christian hymns," he obviously intended snob a use of the terms as when we speak of "the Christian (or gospel) dispensation," in opposition to the "Jewish economy." This also shows what he - when he sometimes uses the objectionable phraseol- ogy, u teach David to speak like a Christian, or the com- mon sense or experience) of a Christian." lie evident- ly means the opposite of Jm-ish ezperien Dg to translator- of the Psalms, he says: u taught the Hebrew Psalmist to speak EngUtk/' But how unfair would it be to represent Dr. W. as teaching that Ike 11 ly Spirit, author of the Psalms, did not * Published in th lb 110 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. understand the English language! Such a misrepresen- tation would be scouted by every candid and honorable mind, and must recoil upon its authors. Yet very much such usage has Dr. W. received from certain writers ! u A\ r hat need is there," he exclaims, "that I should wrap up the shining honors of my Redeemer in the dark and shadowy language of a religion which is now forever abolished ; especially since Christians are so vehemently warned by Paul "against a Judaizing spirit? " His ob- ject was, as he himself affirms, "to change the dark ex- pressions, and the Levitical ceremonies and Hebrew forms, into the worship of the gospel ;" * * * and he adds, "thus should I rejoice to see a good part of the book of Psalms fitted for the use of the churches and David converted into a Christian." We do not defend the use of such phraseology, because it is very liable to be mis- understood ; but when interpreted agreeably to the com- monest rules of candor, it conveys no objectionable sense to any intelligent mind. Indeed, Dr. W. in these sen- tences, proposes to do with David precisely what every minister does, when from the pulpit he explains to the people these typical expressions, and teaches them to sing them as interpreted by the light of the gospel ! If such a minister explains the Psalms correctly, he will, in most such cases, put into the hearts of his people (what- ever may be in their lips,) just the admirable sense and import of these Jewish ceremonies as they are happily explained and versified by Dr. Watts I It is thus these Associate and Associate Reformed ministers "convert David into a Christian !" The heinous crime in the one case, is no less shocking than in the other; the chief dif- ference being this — the one (Dr. Watts) sins in good poetry ; the other (the preacher) sins in plain prose ! And in singing such hymns, the devout Christian does what is enjoined in the Directory of the Associate Re- formed church — " in singing those parts of them [the Psalms] which are expressed in the ceremonial style, or describe the circumstances of the writer s } or of the church THE MOM EXCELLENT WAY. Ill ij we tkould have our eye upon the gem tai ciplet whioh are implied in them, and which arc op- plicabb to individuals or to the church in every ag r. k Bj Ch, S, - IV. We are DOW prepared to take another step in the :i. Every one familiar with his Bible, k:. that of the compositions of "the sweet Psalmist Israi 1," many have nothing of "Judaism" about them. They are beautiful expressions of that heaven-born pi which is the same at all times and everywhere, wh< I r Gentiles, How does Dr. Watts deal with this class of Psalms? We reply, he very generally gives correct versions of sueh Psalms ; for example, the iirst, the twenty-third, the hundredth, ftc In this large and very precious class of lie generally gives quite as correct a n I , and incomparably superior in all that consti- tutes poetry. This assertion may possibly surprise some i ho have been taught to regard our Psalmody, in the words of Rev. Dr. Kerr, of the "Preacher/ 1 ■re productions of men." But we again appeal bo the record. Here is Dr. Watts' own account of the matt» r : In speaking of u the true method " ^t' preparing the Psalms fur New Testament worship, 1. 11 Psalms that are purely doctrinal or merely historical, are subjects for our meditation, and may be translated for our present use with no variation, if it were possible; and in general, all THOSE s<>\<;s of Scripture which the : following ages may >am> for tht ir ova ; such 1-t, the 8th, the 19th, and wuamy o&en." We had intended to give a Beries of illustrations of this prin- ciple, copied from the Psalmody ^i our church — but fi r ie, we* confine ourselves to one specimen, the 100th Psalm, placing the prose of our Bibles in parallel column with the versification of Dr. Watts, as follof i joyful noise unto thi 1 tho earth, r I re the Lord, youi king. 112 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. oerve the Lord with gladness. Serve him with cheerful heart and voice, Come before his presence with With all your tongues his glory sing, singing. Know ye that the Lord he is The Lord is God ; 'tis he alone Grod: it is he that made us, and Doth life and health and being give, not we ourselves; we are his We are his work, and not our own, people, and the sheep of his pas- The sheep that on his pasture live, ture. Enter into his gates with Enter his gates with songs of joy; ,. thanksgiving, into his courts With praises to his courts repair, with praise ; be thankful to him And make it your divine employ and bless his name. To pay your thanks and honors there. For the Lord is good ; his mer- The Lord is good, the Lord is kind ; cy is from everlasting: and his Great is his grace, his mercy sure, truth endureth to all generations. And the whole race of men shall find His truth from age to age endure. The right column, it will be seen, contains a very fair version of a precious inspired song of praise. It is much nearer a " correct and faithful version " than two-thirds of Rouse's paraphrases ; and on the principles of our brethren, is therefore more strictly and truly " an in- spired Psalm." Yet in addition to this large class of purely devotional songs, Dr. W. says, "he designed to make no variation in the purely doctrinal and histor- ical Psalms." All these, therefore, if Dr. W. executed his purpose, are "the songs which God has given," not " tho mere effusions of men," not " hymns of mere hu- man invention," as our brethren rashly assert ! V. It was the express design of Dr. W. "wherever he found the person and offices of our Lord Jesus Christ in prophecy, to translate them in a way of history }" and he adds, " such evangelical truths should be stript of their veil of darkness," &c. When, for example, he read in Psalm 40 : 6, " Mine ears hast thou opened," — he added with the apostle, " A body hast thou prepared me," &c. But such a use of New Testament light is quite offensive to our brethren, savoring of " impious license with the Psalms," " attempting to write better than David," &c. But it is remarkable that in her earliest, her martyr THE MORE EXCELLENT WAY. 11^> Pbahnody, the ohurch of Scotland employed this very principlo, i. e., she accommodated the Psalms to New Testament forms. Open the versification by Sternhold and Hopkins, which was used by that honored church for an hundred years before Rouse was thought of. Let us look at a few specimens of this " gospel torn/ 1 How is •this matter managed in the second Psalm? Omitting Borne examples quoted in another Letter, pass to v 12th : u When his wrath is kindled but a little, blessed are all they that put their trust in him." STKKXHOLD. DR. WATTS. hil wrath never so small If once his wrath arise, Shall kindle in his kreaH: Ys perish on the place; then all they that trust in Christ Then blessed la the soul that flies Bhall rmppj be and blest. For refuge to his grace. Did the Church of Scotland imagine that such a use of the Psalms was ^impious J" But take another exam- ple : u The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together against the Lord, and against hi.- anointed." STERNHOLD. DR. WATTS. The kings and rulers of the earth Why did the Gentiles n Conspire and all r« the origins] runa In the f"rm of propb*ej eonoernlng Christ and his nalw U tui n to the Bense."— Dr. 10* 114 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. STERNHOLD. DR. WATTS. If thou with hyssop purge this blot wash my soul from every sin, I shall be cleaner than the glasse, And make my guilty conscience And if thou wash away my spot, clean. The snow in whiteness I shall passe. No bleeding bird, nor bleeding beast, Nor hyssop branch, nor sprinkling priest, Nor running brook, nor flood, nor sea, Can wash the dismal stain away. Again: observe the " gospel turn" in this: Psalm 87 : 5 : " And of Zion it shall be said, This and that man was born in her; and the Highest himself shall establish her." DR. WATTS. Egypt and Tyre, and Greek and Jew, Shall there begin their lives anew ; 'Twill be an honor to appear As one new born and nourished there. Thus it will be seen, in accordance with the commenta- tors, the venerable church of Scotland here fixes her eye upon " the Chiefest among ten thousand, the One alto- gether lovely/' and is neither ashamed nor a/raid to make the reference distinctly visible in her Psalmody. We have room for only one additional example of this ancient Scottish " gospel turn." It is in Psalm 120: 6-7 : " My soul hath long dwelt with him that hateth peace. I am for peace, but when I sptfak, they are for war." DR. WATTS. Peace is the blessing that I seek, How lovely are it? charms! I am for peace — but when I speak They all declare for arms. STERNHOLD. In their records to them it shall Through God's device appeare, Of Sion that the Chief of all Had his beginning there.* STERNHOLD. With them that peace did hate / came a peace to make And set a quiet life. But when my tale is told, Causeless I was controlde By them that would havo strife. If only " a correct and faithful version" is of u Divine * " I have often indulged the liberty of paraphrase, according to the words of Christ and his Apostles." — Dr. Watts. THE MORE IXCBLUNl WAY. 115 appointment," neither of these rereificatiana has very n tensions to it. But ours ifl quite a literal i pared with Sternhold. Three lines of Sternhold's six paraphrastic Watts did Dot venture to give this ■ K g spel turn;" but Sternhold and Hopkins evidently had in their eve the New Testament history of Christ the " Prince of peace," who came "a peace to make" by "the blood of his cross." And both Bishop Home anr. Bcbtt in their comments, direct attention to ''the of David, the Prince of peace," and Scott adds that here u David prefigured Christ. " So thought the ancient church of Scotland, and accordingly arranges her Psal* mody, bo as to express this blessed truth.* We could easily add to this list of u gospel turns," but we forbear. It thus appears that from the period of her first martyr, down to the Westminster Assembly (1643), the church of Scotland condemned in her practice the principle which requires u a correct and faithful version as of Divine appointment/' It appears, moreover, that se variations from a faithful version or translation, were designed, deliberate) made on principle, and not at all accidental, or to be attributed to haste, carelessness^ or the difficulty of constructing a versification in rhyme. Many of them are the very Bame sort of ttudied depairU I from the literal text for which our Psalmody has d so bitterly and unsparingly denounced; and in - eral instances, that venerable church, with her martyrs and other men of God, is demonstrated to have deliber- ately adopted and reduced to practiee some of the very principles which lie at the basis of our system, and that in a more open, obvious u impiontf 1 manner and degree than even by Dr. Watts himself ! It is }, therefore, as i> well remarked by Dr. ])• . ri Ige, that in the earliest metred Psalmody of that ♦ "Whatii- I wrap op the duning fa my B i ihadowy I -u thai is .'" " Wh.-u fa ■ bt in tnlargii g .t little on t:. .:iuld :i." — Dr. Watt*. 116 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. church, "great liberties were taken," and that these liberties were in numerous instances of the very same sort which Dr. "Watts adopted in constructing his system of praise, much of which has been embodied in the Presbyterian Psalmo- dy; and further, that those identical principles for which he has been most violently abused and denounced, are here incorporated and acted out by Sternhold, and practiced by the ancient Scottish church ! Hence it follows, that in the structure of her Psalmody, the Presbyterian church, by rejecting the exclusive idea of "a correct and faithful version of the whole book of Psalms," has only returned to the safe precedent and pure practice of the noblest and best church of the Protestant Reformation, in the days of her greatest glory. The principle is the same in both systems, though it has been more extensively introduced in our Psalmody than in theirs. Both equally reject " the Divine right" of " a correct and faithful version of the Psalms" — in both the right and duty are recognized and deliberately reduced to practice, viz. to deviate in various methods and on all suitable occasions, from " a correct and faithful version." The illustrations which might be brought forward from the system of praise adopted by that noble old Presbyterian church, would fill many pages, since more or less of the same additions, omissions, historic amendments, exegetical comments, "gospel turns," &c, might be collected from nearly every page. We pause here. Enough has been said to enable every one to decide whether " the songs contained in the book of Psalms are virtually excluded from the worship of the (Presbyterian) church."* In view of such facts and reason- ings as the foregoing, was it worthy of these brethren to publish our church as " shoving God's hymn-book aside, and substituting one made by ourselves — laying aside a God-written book, except two short hymns, and using in its place a man-written book," which they interpret to mean that " a mere man (Dr. Watts, for example,) has # Dr. Pressly, in the Preacher, September 27, 1814. Tin: HORH EXCELLENT WAY. 117 r book than Grod. w • Certainly Dr. V luv. r exposed himself t<> any such imputations, wnce his ivowed object was, "that the Jewish Psalmist the explanatory and paraphrastic improve- ments introduced by our Scottish forefathers, and ex- it >1 in our Psalmody F Was there a necessity tor Bach explanations of parts of the Psalms? We answer: 1. Bishop Borne, in the preface to his commentary, remarks — "Is it not to be feared that for want of such instructions (expositions, ftc.) the repetition of the Psalms, as performed by multitudes, is but on< de leckanism." Dr. AVatts Btates this thing in va- rious forms, and undertook his versification for the remedying this sore evil. '2. Our brethren themselves In effect concede all that is asserted by Bishop Home. They adopt the practice of explaining the l > s.">. He sayi — u T% Psalfns requin expo- sition" u That all may sing profitably for personal and * T'nit'^I Presbyterian, March, 1851. t w. , ; ■ ••• Dr. v i' ns. u / ; - from my l LAY A-ii'f. Tin: BoOI OF PSALMS in PUBLIC hi pretend - It ii • rtful. most derotional and Divitu collection of poesy; end nothing eai ipioni soul to heaven, thai. bat book ; i i bo jnstty i" d Psalmody, I minister of the : 118 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. mutual edification, they must understand them." " Peo- ple who hardly ever hear them explained know nothing of their spiritual worth." He says, " he has viewed the decline of the good old-fashioned plan of expounding a part of the Psalm, with feelings of deep solicitude' ' — and adds, that it is "a manifest declination from duty." " Shall these well-springs of the God of Israel be closed and sealed ? " These expressions are more than Dr. Watts ever ventured to say on that topic. Prof. P. is thus full and explicit, though we do not see why his re- marks do not apply with equal force to the five other Psalms sung each Sabbath, as well as to the first one used at the morning service, which alone is explained. It is not necessary to maintain that the people sing the minis- ter's explanations, — they sing "Rouse's paraphrase," putting the minister's explanations on the words. The Presbyterian system embodies " the explanations," not in all the Psalms, but in all cases in which they are needed, in the poetry itself. They are usually " the ex- planations" of our best commentators put into smooth verse. If both parties " sing with the spirit and under- standing also," as Paul requires, both employ the same sentiments, the chief difference consisting only in the form of words, whether of Rouse or Dr. Watts. I OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 119 LETTER X. ATTKMPTS TO CKKVTr. PBBJUDICI BY TO THK BBHTI- . IfATTfl — HOU I'M: PRBSBT1 1POH- - | LTEMEHTfl — QRBATLY MTSBBPRBSBHTID — HIS I OF PSJJLMfl — i:\amin \Ti«>. v op ITS " — •' WA1 N RAH DAYID*- - HOT THE WORD OF QOD M — '" tends TO - <N" — M THOSE WII.i i - ii ETfl Tin; TRUTH* — M DA1 ill van 001 . AC. Mt DEAB Sir : — In reading the ablest treatise? by our brethren, one thing must have struck every candid mind with surprise, viz. the labored effort they make to arouse prejudice and create odium by certain quotations from y" and u prefaces" of Dr. Walts. We are re- told that "the imitation 9 ' was introduced to public notice in this country by "prefaces" containing _ rinst the songs of Zion, and that it was re- ided by 1 - sentiments," and "the arguments popular and frequently used, represent these Divine ns (the Psalms) as Christless." * But surely it requires no proof to show that the essay and prefaces of Dr. W. are of no authority in our church. She has never indorsed, nor even printed them. So far M baa come under the notice of the writer, they have never been reprinted in tin's country ; and therefore are j rarely to be met with, except in the fragmentary found in certain books on Psalmody ! In pre- paring the materials for these Letters, we searched in vain y library to which we could gain access in Pittsbn: and rful in finding a copy of Dr.W works, only in the library of a gentleman who had .: from Europe. The Presbyterian church, as intimated in another Letter, has never adopted many of the sentiments and suggestions of that writer, exhibiting v. 77. 120 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. his reasons for certain changes in the Psalms. They are his reasons, not ours. This is true even when these reasons are understood in their most favorable sense — and especially so, when, as we maintain, they are perverted to mean what is notoriously contrary to his deliberate and oft repeated declarations. As to their being common and popular arguments in defense of our Psalmody, nothing is more opposed to the truth. The writer of these pages was for more than twenty -Jive years a member *> of the Presbyterian body, and never once met with the documents referred to, except in M' Master's Apology, and this we know to be a common experience both among our ministry and membership. Indeed, if some objection- able expressions of Dr. Watts' " essay and prefaces" had not been carefully published and disseminated by these brethren, for the avowed purpose of prejudicing the cause of a New Testament Psalmody, they would have been dead and, forgotten long ago. Upon their heads, not upon ours, must rest the blame, whatever it may be, of keep- ing certain injudicious phraseology used by Dr. Watts before the public mind. But Dr. AV. is charged with having uttered " bitter libels against the songs of Zion." We have never met with anything from his pen, which, on a fair construction, could justify such an assertion. Dr. W. is not common- ly accused with wanting common sense — yet he must have been little less than crazed if he could have been guilty of such profane and wicked conduct, while in the same pages he wrote as follows : "I esteem the book of Psalms as the most valuable part of the Old Testament, on many accounts.- I advise the reading and meditation of it more frequently than any single book of Scripture ; and what I advise I practice. Nothing is more proper to furnish our souls with devout thoughts and Lead us into a world of spiritual experiences. The expressions of it that are not Jewish or peculiar, give us constant as- sistance in prayer and in praise." Again, I quote Dr. W.: "Although there are many SOME OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 121 gone before me who have taught the Hebrew Psalmist to •peak English, (translators,) yet I think I may assume this pleasure, of being the firat who bath brought down the r«>yal author into the common affaire of the Christian (in opposition to Jewish) life, and fed the Psalmist of '•/ into the church of Christ without anything of a Jew about him/ 1 u My design was that the Jewish Psalmist thould plainly appear^ yet leave Judaism be- hind." Another ([notation from Dr. Watts : u I confess it is not unlawful nor absurd for a person of knowledge and skill to ring any pari of the Jewish Psalm book, and consider it merely as the word of God, from which, by wise medi- tation, he may draw some inferences for his own use. But when the words are obscure Hebraisms, or the poet personates a Jew, a soldier, or a king, speaking to him- self or to God, this mode of instruction in a song seems not so natural or easy, even to the most skillful Christian, and it is almost impracticable to the greatest part of man/chid." Dr. W. is here explaining one chief princi- ple in the formation of his system of Psalmody, and in- stead of proposing an " impious rejection of the Psalms," he assigns a most forcible and conclusive reason for the practice of u explaining the Psalm/' before the congre- gation sing it. I repeat, therefore, the man who could indite these and res of similar paragraphs, must have been destitute of c ramon sense, if in the same connections he could {i biU terly libel" the precious book of Psalms. But as this is effective, certainly the most popular y of all the arguments of our opposing brethren, we defer some other illustrations of the treatment they give Dr. Watts to our dosing Letter, No. X I V, Let ns now attend to some objections to our theory of 1. [1 is objected that "following Dr. Watts, we omit Some parts of the book of Psalms." Very true. Our principle is that "the whole word of God is of use to 11 122 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. direct us " in praise as well as " in prayer." We regard some parts of the New Testament as suitable for praise. But what shall we say of Rouse's omissions, for example, the 20th verse of the 72d Psalm, and the greater part of the titles or inscriptions, which Home and other standard writers admit to be parts of the inspired text, as really as the first verses of Isaiah and the Epistle to the Ephesians. You profess to regard the Psalms as " the inspired Psalter," given precisely in sum and sub- stance as Divine Wisdom saw best, for purposes of praise — and yet you venture to make these improvements upon " God's Psalm book " — to reject a part of the Holy Scriptures, &c! Again : In his preface to the recent " improved ver- sion," published under direction of a committee of the Associate or Seceder church, Dr. Beveridge says : " In a few instances things omitted in our version (Rouse) have been restored. See, for example, Psalm 31 : 11; Psalm 37 : 35, 36 ; Psalm 62 : 1-5 ; Psalm 78 : 21 ; Psalm 128 : 2, 3." Here is the same dilemma. Pro- fessing to regard the one hundred and fifty Psalms as exclusively " God's Psalter," indited for this very pur- pose by the Infinite Mind and "appointed as the Psalmo- dy of the church," as Dr. Pressly says, " in which God teaches his church how to praise," you dare to tamper with God's work ; by omitting parts of God's teaching, you thus destroy the Divine completeness of the Psalm book composed and appointed by Infinite Wisdom ! On the principle adopted by these brethren, to omit any part of the book of Psalms is to pretend to be wiser than God, who gave it all to be the Psalm book of the church ; and is nothing short of the impiety which "takes away from the word of God." We reject this view of the subject, believing that God has given his "whole word to direct us in praise" — and therefore we are no more obliged to sing every part of the Psalms, than to sing every other part of the inspired records. But this plea oilers no excuse for these brethren's "omissions." SOME OBJECTIONS ANSWKUED. 128 A parallel case is this: ''All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, ami is profitable for doctrine, n | roof, instruction in righteousness." The reading of th turefl from the pulpit, is an ordinance of (J id as really as public praise. Bui arc there not porti< ds of the inspired writings which no man of common b ever dart* to read to the people I Why? Those parts of Qod'fi blessed word are not snitahle to be read pul lv, though anciently read in the synagogues — in that way they are not profitable for instruction in righteous- iif--. Let any minister rise in the sacred desk and i for example, some parts of the Levitical law — how many hearers would he have on the next Sabbath? How soon would he be called to account by his Presbytery, as lack- ing common sense ! But does any one ever dream of this being an impious attempt to be iciscr than God? Apply the same reasoning to the whole word of God c sidered as of use to direct us in praise as well as in prayer ami reading — and everything is clear. And the same reasoning holds good in regard to the ordinance of ] reaching. I* not the whole inspired volume of use to direct us in this service? But there are certain : which none but a fool would ever make the foundation of a sermon. Now in omitting certain parts of the Psalms as less suitable for praise than some other parts of the inspired volume outside of that book, we offer no reproach to any part of God's word, but do equal h to all portions of the Divine volume, designed a- they . for different uses in the church. If, indeed, there were any "Divine precept" to sing every jot and tittle of the 1 '.-alius, we Would do it. So if there were a scrip- tural command to read publicly every text of the Bible, We Would do that too ! -. It i- objected that our system involves the daring implication, " that a liu re man 18 able to improve ' I I J 'f dm book,' and ' to write better than the Holy Spirit.' n This objection comes with a bad grace fruin those who 124 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. use " Rouse's paraphrase," with all its errors, omissions, additions, explanations, &c. For example : ° I like an owl in desert am, Which nightly there doth moan." The second line is a mere human improvement, an expla- nation (whether right or wrong) of what the Psalmist meant. Scores of these improvements, as we have al- ready shown, are found in Rouse — therefore it follows that these brethren have thought they " could write bet- ter than the Holy Spirit !" Or at least they have attempted to improve upon " God's Psalm book." 3. Another objection: "You Presbyterians do not sing the word of God." But is Rouse the pure word of God ? Is the second line above quoted found among " the words which the Holy Ghost teacheth V 9 There is an important scriptural sense, however, agreeably to which a large part of our Psalmody is "the word of God " — the sense in w T hich Paul uses these terms when he exhorts, " Preach the word." Compare the method we adopt, with some other parts of Divine worship : Does the able lecturer on large passages of Scripture, preach the word of God ? Does the minister who ex- plains the Psalms teach the word of God ? True, it is sometimes transposed, to increase the light to our feeble vision ; sometimes too the preacher selects particu- lar sections ; sometimes when the same idea occurs fre- quently, he groups the verses together. At other times he will group texts from remote parts of the Bible, as the ground work of a particular sermon, and adduce his proofs and illustration from every accessible source of Holy Writ. Still this does not make it less " the word of God." So we say of the system of Psalmody used by the Presbyterian church. Dr. Watts has grouped with the Psalms much of the thought and language of the New Testament, but this mixture does not make it less truly "the word of God." We do not mean that the two things are in all respects the same or exactly paral- SOME OBJECTIONS ANSWEB lei, but in this particular point tin v arc the Same in ]. nu- ll' then the sound minister "preaches the M in Beason, out of season/' on the same principle we Bing the word of God. If the Bame minister in explaining tiii: Psalm, gives a correct interpretation, and ten. "the word of God," and the people Bing with this planation fresh in their minds, and forming the sentiments of their hearts; with equal certainty do we Worship in the use of "the word <»t' Sod." The language is but / — the worship is the utterance of the SENTIMENTS OF ill K HEABT. If these latter are acceptable t<» God, able t<» Divine teaching, the worship is "in spirit and in truth/ 1 whether we Bing the prose of the glish translation of the Scriptures or poetry arrang by an uninspired man (Rouse), or an "imitation" in which "David (i. e., his inspired sentiments) plainly appears," and types and shadows, bullocks, burnt offer- j 3 trumpets, cornets, dances, &o., dissolve amid the I and transforming light of the gospel. We do n<>t plead that our system of Psalmody is per- fect. Particular examples may possibly be adduced in which the great "principle" adopted by Dr. Watts, viz. u t i make David I his inspired sentiments) plainly to ap- •"' is imperfectly developed. Bat there are also _ ra in Rouse. l>r. Dwignt has supplied the Psalms omitted by Hr. Watts; and if in a few others, certain parts are omitted, they uo more vitiate the whole system than blunders vitiate that used by our brethren. If any Berious departures from our principle art ered in our system, it is the province of our General nbly to supply the d In both systems it can be demonstrated that tin i numb I Psalms which approach so near "a eoi and literal version'' of I .1, as to entitle them to be regarded as "inspired Bongs of praise" — but it is no 1 AS true that. r extent, both Rouse and Watts are neitb nor less than "paraphrases." Th< . be mart or leu paraphrastio than the other; but 11* 126 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. that alters not the principle. He that strains at Watts, while he readily swallows Rouse, will not be suspected of great consistency. 4. Fourth objection. The Presbyterian principle in Psalmody " tends to make the mind indifferent to the claims of inspiration." We maintain " that all Scripture being given by inspiration of God/' it is lawful to sing any suitable part of it, whether of the Old or New Testa- ment; and that the church has a Divine warrant for drawing the subjects of her praise from other parts of the word of God. Consequently, that she may and ought to derive much of her praise from the inspired writers of the New Testament, which has so much more clearly re- vealed the character, offices and work of Christ. Now can any intelligent Christian inform us how such a " principle" tends to make men infidels ? Instead of some things descriptive of Jewish rites and ceremonies now abolished and forbidden, events in some of the Jew- ish wars, (see Home, Dr. Scott and others,) prayers for the destruction of the enemies of David as the king of the Jews, (see the commentators,) and some other matters of this kind which were highly appropriate to the Jews, but which probably would never have been thought of as literal matter of praise in the New Testament church, if found in any other part of the Holy Scriptures — in- stead of these we feel authorized by the word of God to sing the songs of Mary, Anna, Simeon, " the heavenly host," and in fine any suitable part of the New Testa- ment. In addition, therefore, to the Psalms, we rejoice to praise God in the use of several hundred hymns, em- bracing the chief instructions delivered by the Blessed Redeemer and his apostles. Would to God the whole world were full of such inft- clelit// as this ! We are perfectly sure that there is a much stronger tendency toward loose, infidel conceptions in another quarter. When ministers of the gospel speak of " Ptouse's paraphrase" as the " inspired Psalms," " the very songs which God has given," "God's Psalm BOM! 01 - ANSWEBKD. 127 '.." &o., it is an abuse of language leading directly to false and heretical viewa of inspiration, and accustom- ing the people to the low Socinian conceptions of Belsham applying that term to the patchwork of -•and others. This is a serious evil; nor does it "loan to virtu but to the ride of a most danger* . stroying heresy, [f you teach the people to re- gard " Rouse's paraphrase" as the inspired Psalms, it would be quite easy for them to go a stop further, and ; .ve the doctrines of Priestly and his Unitarian Col- li w It has been proved that House's paraphrases are inspired just as the pulpit explanation* at your morning ice. We do nut say this of a goodly number of his Psalms, which are quite closely and accurately versi- fied, but only <>f his numerous paraphrases; and to speak of these as " the inspired Psalms/ 1 istoconfound all distinc- tion between that which is inspired and that which is un- inspired— i human and Divine. Our brethren .id look at honu , when they inquire after tendencies to reject the doctrine of l>i\Mie inspiration. 5. Fifth obj< ction. u In the exclusive use of the one hundred and fifty Psalms we nlay be confident of sin "an tinted," i> a mere creature of a very high order ; that to u p rish from the way," meau any tiling more than Borne tempoEral evil, that hell ia an Eastern Cable, &o. With this explana- tion fresh in their minds, the <■< Qgregation sing the Psalm. I 1 ' thej "praim God with tentit liable to Himf" In what correct Bense do they 128 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. even " sing the truth. " Their lips may utter the lan- guage of truth, but their hearts are filled with a subtle and soul destroying heresy. With their lips and lan- guage, they "draw nigh to God ;" but what does the heart utter before Him — the answer is, falsehood and impiety. It will not be pretended that even if our brethren sung the prose in our Bibles, the naked words would con- stitute " the truth. " The truth is the Divine sentiment, the thought, not the verbiage. Then what is the sentiment of an Arian, who has just received and believes the "ex- planation" of his Arian pastor? Surely not the truth, but heresy, however correct the words which flow from his lips. So too the Jews in their synagogues sing the Psalms of David, the second among the rest. Do they too sing the truth, while cursing the Lord Jesus in their heart? We admit that it is no objection to any part of the Old Testament that it is read or sung by Jews and Arians. All that we now contend for is, that the fact of their thus reading or singing is no certain evidence that as it is explained to them, they either read or sing u the truth." They may read the words which contain the truth — but so do men often " draw nigh to God with their lips, while their heart is far from him." And we may safely affirm, that neither Arian nor Jew could be per- suaded to join with the Presbyterians in singing these verses of Dr. Watts' paraphrase of the 2d Psalm : The things so long foretold By David, are fulfilled : When Jews and Gentiles join to slay Jesus, thine holy Child! I call him my eternal Sox, And raise him from the dead; I make my holy hill his throne, And wide his kingdom spread. Be wise, ye rulers of the earth, Obey the anointed Lord ; Adore the King of heavenly birth, And tremble at his word. ( >r thi Or this, SOMl WKRED. 129 • v God, thy blood alone Hath power rafneienfl to tl Thy blood can make dm white m uim me to* Aside the Prince of glorj threw ine array. And wrapped hii GtOD-HBAS in a veil Of our inferior clay. nana maintain that the Psalmody of the istian church, like all her other institutions, should ct the light of the New Testament, which no Jew- will take into his hands, except to gnt upon it. Why so? Because it BO clearly reveals "Christ and his cross. M It is not denied that good men have often com- muned with their Saviour in the Psalms — so they have found him in innumerable forms of the Leyitical law. But that does not prove that in New Testament worship, ^31 further light is needless I What would be thought of the preaching and the public prayers, which, in the would leave a stranger habit- ually in doubt whether he sat in the presence of Chris- tians or Jews ? Yet just so is it in public praise with the Old Testament Psalms, except as their u explana- nati«»n" alters the case. We admit that there is much of Christ in them, and so was there in the Lcvitical sac- rifices as types of " the Lamb of God." But does that pr<>vc that in either case the far brighter displays of Di- love and mercy under the gospel are needless to the church in her forms of public prai-c *' No more than it - thrii) useless in ['reaching and pr Suppose it should he truly reported of all the ministers who use exclusively the Old Testament Psalms, that their preaching and public p stimony" such d 1 an Avian, or even i Jew, in regard to the Divinity and Messiahship of Christ Would such i re- putation nplimentt What Christian church would seek for such pastors? Yet that very cir- 130 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. cumstance, which would expose their preaching and prayers to the rebuke of Paul, viz. that their " trumpet gives an uncertain sound" — this very deficiency which would exclude them from Christian pulpits, is found in their system of praise I The Arians of Ulster and the Jews everywhere gladly hold fellowship with them in the or- dinance of praise, at least as often as they sing without a pulpit " explanation." Can this be the method in which the Lord Jesus requires us to " confess him be- fore men ? " And this argument has special force against those who think it necessary to prepare and pub- lish a pamphlet " Testimony" against their Presbyterian brethren — against " views and practices" which, they say, " demand of them such 'testimony' as witnesses for the truth!" And yet, in five parts out of every six of all their public praise, their " trumpet gives so uncertain a sound," their testimony for important truth is so fee- ble, that Jews and Arians hold communion with them ! Is there not great inconsistency and error here ? It is no valid objection to this reasoning, that Arians and Jews pervert in like manner the whole Bible. The Jew indeed hates the New Testament, because it is so full of the cross — but he receives the Old Testament. The Arian professes some sort of faith in both Testaments. But such ir. the blindness and wickedness of man, that even God's word, as it has pleased its glorious Author to give it to mankind, is found insufficient to exclude error from his church. Hence nearly all denominations form creeds and confessions of faith as a remedy for resulting evils, and our brethren add a formal " Testimony" to the Holy Scriptures and their Confession, to testify for the truth as they hold it. Now why is all this ? Obviously that they as u faith- ful witnesses for the truth," may make an open and in- telligible protest against error, which they admit could not be done by simply taking the Bible, " the perfect law of God," as their creed and " Testimony." And what is the object of their preaching and their "expla- BOMB OBJECTION ans\vki:i:i>. 181 nations" of the IValms ? Plainly that they may be u va- liant for the truth in the earth. The Bible, they i oed< ittratiom and helps, in order that error may be excluded and pure religion make >. and finally and universally triumph. Yea, the t law, makes those additional minis- trations of creeds, preaching, &c., a tofann duty, Ai 1 by these methods the Axian and other soul destroy are banished from the church. Thus in their ud testimonies, in reading and expounding the I in public prayer, these brethren clearly and distinctly lift up a banner fur the truth as they view it. But there is one wtrange exception ! In five parts of every six of their public praise, they are found deficient in testifying fur the truth ! Their trumpet gives "so un- :n a Bound" that the Jew and the Arian can hold \v>hip with them ! While they lift up their voices bher, in five-sixthi of their public i>rni<> it is impos- ts tell which is the Jew and which the Christian ! The ■ igh bitterly hating Christ, joins in worship with the Christian, and finds nothiug to offend him — the Arian, too, unites cheerfully in a wurship which allows him to regard "God's own Son" only as an "exalted creature !" In five parts of every six, they praise I 8 kbbathj in strains to which neither Jews nor OS object! These brethren do not thus preach the 1 — they are not thus defective in other ministrations, such as the public exposition of the Scriptures and praj It is only in the ascription of praise that their "coni . of the name of the Lord Jesus" is so indistinct, - so uncertain a Bound, that the _ stfl harmonise with the friends of the gospel. Can ay " which th< nour i : them that offer pi taking reproachfully of t'. " Nothing is farther from the truth, v Imirable buuk | 132 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. what you, by your creed and "Testimony," say of the whole Bible, viz. that it demands of the church certain additional explanatory forms of "witnessing for the truth," as bonds of harmony and tests of soundness in the faith, as well as ramparts against heresy. As a very pre- cious portion of the holy oracles ; as in part the text-book of the ministry ; as an invaluable source of " learning," and comfort of the Scriptures, &c, the Psalms, like the whole Bible, are precisely what they ought to be, most excellent productions of Infinite Wisdom. But believing, as we do, the church to be " the pillar and ground of the truth" she is bound to confess Christ just as plainly and unequivocally in praise, as in preaching and prayer ; and we, therefore, deny that "the book of Psalms" was de- signed by its Divine Author, especially in its literal and naked form, to be the only and all-sufficient volume of praise. And yet there are those, strange to tell, yea, ministers of the gospel, who boast of the an ti- sectarian character of "House's paraphrase," because, forsooth, Jews, Mormons, Unitarians, &c, can unite in singing it ! 6. A sixth objection. "We dare not sing ' human composition ' in the worship of God." Well, if any one can really persuade himself that dozens of "Rouse's par- aphrases" are "inspired composition," we shall not attempt to reason with him. All who use Rouse are ne- cessarily guilty of this sin. 7. "If some parts of the Psalms are unsuitable for praise, they are not fit to be read." It is not necessary to pronounce any parts of the Psalms absolutely, and under all circumstances, unfit to be sung. Our doctrine is, that some portions of that book are less suitable to be sung under the present dispen- sation, than many other parts of the holy oracles. But do not our brethren maintain that large parts of both Testaments are unsuitable for public praise ? Take the first chapter of 1st Chronicles — " Adam, Sheth, Enosh," &c. They will concede that this is not fit for public praise, and so of other whole books, except the one hundred DEFENSE OF SCRIPTURAL HYV. 133 and fifty Psalms. Are they therefore unfit to be read? Certainly Qod may speak to us in language which we may n< i t speak to him. 8. " The k imitation ' by Dr. Watts, is not much more of an imitation of the Psalms, than Young's Night Thoughts, or Pollok's Course of Time/' This extraor- dinary assertion has been deliberately printed and circu- lated, in at least three different forms within a few years. It furnishes a sad illustration of the extreme folly to which the furor of controversy will sometimes hurry otherwise serious and true men. Having now finished all that I deemed necessary to vindicate Presbyterian usages in regard to the book of Psalms, in my next I propose to speak of "the other songs of Scripture/' which our brethren call "corrup- tions of the ordinance of God/' when sung in public and private worship. LETTER XI. HYMNS — TITE IIISTORY OF " OTHER SONGS OF ■CBJfTUBX M — FSAGES OF MOST OF THE SCOTTISH CM U BOMBS, VIZ.: 2,S00 TO 30 ACTION OF THE EARLY FATHERS Of T!iK AftSOClATfl reformed CHURCH — ML m'master's sentiments — present views <>f i>rs. kerr and ILT — A GLANCE AT THE LEGITIMATE KESILTS A LARGE PART Of DB, watts' hymns ABB fair paraphrases OF portions OF THE INSPIRED BBCOBO, AND BO HOBB " 1ITMAN COMPOSH [OH " THAN BOUtl — DBfBBSB OF the remainder. My Dear Sir: — Before proceeding to discuss the merits of that large department of our Psalmody, viz. "the other scriptural songs/' &c., a glance at the history of the subject may tend to its better elucidation In a firmer Letter reference was made to the directions given by t: 'i Qeneral Assembly of 1047, to "Zachary Boyd to translate the other scriptural songs in metre, * * * that after examination they may send the same to the Presbyteries." In 1648, k ' Master John Aduin- 12 134 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. eon and Mr. Thomas Crawford were directed to revise the labors of Zachary Boyd upon the other scriptural songs, * * * that after examination the same may be report- ed to the next General Assembly." In 1649, the As- sembly ordered their commission for public affairs "to emit (Rouse's) paraphrase of the Psalms for public use;" but the labors of Z. Boyd do not seem have been author- ized ; and it is no matter of surprise. They appear to have possessed very small poetical merit. This history, however, clearly demonstrates that the Scottish Assembly even at that early day, were desirous of some improve- ment and extension of their Psalmody. Nor do they seem to have had any fear of committing a certain great sin ! Accordingly at a later date, that venerable church au- thorized and constantly prints in her Bibles, what she calls "translations and paraphrases of several passages of Scripture." They are seventy-two in number, the last five, however, being pure "hymns of human composition," not even professing to be founded on a passage of Holy Writ. These additions to "Rouse's paraphrase " are com- monly annexed to the Psalms in metre, at the end of the Bible. When the "Free church of Scotland" separated from the Establishment, they made no change in Psalmody. Accordingly, at the solemn funeral services of their As- sembly in May, 1847. on occasion of the death of Dr. Chalmers, "the proceedings were commenced by the Moderator giving out the last three verses of the 53d paraphrase," not a Psalm of David : " The saints of God from death set free, With joy shall mount on high/' t' David and other song* of Scripture. * * * And we do D-u mean to say, that hymn* of human composition may not ' v used in any case whatever/ 1 This "over- ture " was written bv Rev. EL Annan, 4 and we have per- sooa] knowledge that in his latter years he did not hold the exclusive views. Twenty three years later (1810) the same Synod of the Associate Reformed church received "the report of a Qommittee," in which they speak of the "very critical condition of a large section of their body, arising from the unpopularity of our present version (Rouse's) of the Psalms. * * From Wa>hington northward, " they say, "our present version is the chief obstacle to our prosperi- ty, ;,; * : and our social praise languishes r. K. D rring to the b the Ass"- ted and the G : u It Li il pinion "f Mr. A the union) ought to be brou j 138 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. on the above report to the Synod, though the subject ori- ginated in a petition from the people, and was from highly respectable sources. It is well known, however, that some years later, the majority of the Associate Reformed Synod united with the Presbyterian body, thus fulfilling the earnest desire of one who has always been viewed as a chief instrument in originating the Associate Reformed church. * The history of our own times is equally instructive. In 1852 the late venerable Dr. M' Master published the fourth edition of his u Apology for the book of Psalms/' He was an honored and influential minister of the Re- formed Presbyterian body, or Covenanters. Though he and his brethren had, as a matter of expediency, pro- hibited by express rule the use in their churches of any but the "Psalms of David," he uttered at the close of his book, and near the close of his life, the following senti- ments : — " If the church authorize it, collect from the books of inspiration at large, a volume or volumes of poetic matter, in prose or verse, leaving her ministers and people to use or not to use it." Again, says Dr. M 1 Master, " When the sources of in- spired poetry are exhausted * * * * let the church in council, endeavor to ascertain what may be necessary, safe, or advisable to do," &c. Dr. M' Master wished to retain a version of the Psalms, but had no objection to other songs of praise. These are certainly liberal sentiments — worthy of the head and heart of their author. And we have reason to know that they still express the views of a large number, perhaps all, of the (New School) ministers and mem- bership of that body. The} 7 show that the idea of the exclusive use of David's Psalms has but feeble hold upon the understanding and hearts of that respected denomi- nation. We are glad to be able to state further, that the discus- sions of some years past appear to have had a favorable influence upon the minds of prominent ministers of the DE] BCRIPTUEA1 1IYM 139 Ase tc R formed church, now united with the See** ders. Some j . the two brethren of that body who have written most on the rabject, assumed imeh po- s i 1 1 ■ a — "It is the will of God that the songs I in the book of Psalms be song fan his worship to the end of time, and we have no authority to use any "An 1 tb >se who depart from this appointm \A\ corrupting one of the most interesting and important ordinances of God." f But in subsequent publications the tone of these assumptions appears much Bubdui 1. We then are told that if the principle of in- )fahnodv exclusively be held, "the difference of opinion about the use of any tony of praise contained in the Bible" is "not of such a nature as should disturb the peaee of the church." £ Again, we are told, "the difference (between the churches of Scotland and the A — rmed church) is comparatively small, and Would never in all probability have disturbed the peace of the church." ', Thus observe the change of sentiment in a few years. In the former case it reads, the use of any but David's Psalms "seriously corrupts one of the in at im] riant ordinances of God;" but in the latter " //'■ BO SMALL AS NOT TO DISTURB THE PEACE Of the CHURCH." We are happy to hail this shitting of original positions, and apparent movement toward the large scriptural ground of the Presbyterian church. § In fact our brother of the "Preacher" here gives up ' debatable ground in regard to evangelical hymn- of "human composition." The five such hymns, no . the sixty-five "paraphrases" sung by the Free and Established churches of Scotland, are included in his * Dr. Precalj, noted bj Ralftoi^ p. 46. ■f P- I 'r. K'/rr, June 9, I - mbtr, 1852. I>»\ tho orpin of th- M.in-h, 1854): " Nor do »r« I using than in the trort k 140 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. admission as stated above. The principle, of course, is the same as though they were five or fifty times that number. Yet he says, " the difference is comparatively small" — " should not disturb the peace of the church." The first lines of these five Scottish hymns are as fol- lows : When all thy mercies, my God ! The spacious firmament on high. When rising from the bed of death. Blessed morning ! whose first dawning rays. The hour of my departure 's come. The first three are from the pen of Addison, and one of the others, we believe, from Dr. Watts. They are, in the broadest sense, " mere human compositions." It would appear then from these concessions, that whilst one of these brethren will "not disturb the peace of the church" by opposing the use of any song of praise con- tained in the Bible ;" the other, Rev. Dr. Kerr, editor of the " Preacher," goes much farther than "the songs of the Bible." He pleads for peace in regard to all such evan- gelical "human compositions" as the forementioned, by Addison and Dr. Watts. " The difference" he says, "is comparatively small, and should not disturb the peace of the church." He will never quarrel with the Scottish churches for singing any such hymns of an evan- gelical character. They are small matters, not worth contending about over there in the land of Knox. But if this be so, why does he denounce these " human com- positions" so bitterly, when they are found in our collec- tion ? We cannot search the heart for all the reasons which he and his brethren have for their great partiality toward hymn-singing Scotland. The avowed reason, however, we understand to be this, that we hymn-singing Americans " impiously reject the songs which God has given" and substitute Dr. Watts' productions in their place — or, in plainer language, we sing Watts' " para- phrase" instead of " Rouse's paraphrase." In other words, we Presbyterians treat u the Psalms" so badly, DEFENSE OF SCRIPTURAL HYMN-. 141 that tlit 1 very hymns which are quite tolerable in Scotland, must bi resisted on this ride of the great water. The consistency of this leniency toward Scottish hymns of "toere human composition," with other oft ex] sentiments of Dr. K. and his brethren, is a matter of minor conoern. But Groin the foregoing induction, we feel authorized to put on distinct record the following litiona as conceded by these brethren, the first by Dr. P., the aeoond by Dr. EL, viz. : I. The use in Divine worship of any song of praise Contained in any part of the Bible, should not disturb the peace of the church, provided the principle of u in- spired Psalmody" be preserved. II. The use of hymns of human composition, in the circumstances of the Presbyterian churches of Scotland, should not disturb the peace of the church. If, then, we have rightly understood the views of the brethren referred to, Dr. Pressly is ready to tolerate any of our hymns, provided it is "a song of the Holy Scriptures," and we hold his principle of u inspired Psal- And Dr. Kerr will not disturb th warring against any of our hymns, even though it be like the hymns of the Free church of Scotland, u human composition," proirid d we consent to sing " Rouse's paraphrase" along with the hymns. These are legitimate and gratifying inferences from the doctrines 1 by these brethren. On the conditions stated, the difference becomes " comparatively small," and should make no disturbance in the church. We would thus place in the same position with the churches of Scotland, whose hymns of "mere human composure," ling to Dr. Kerr, are quite tolerable, certainly not w«»rth contending about! If we will only use B other "inspired Psalmody," our u hymns of human oom- n" will then become current with Dr. K. and his brethren equally with the w m< PS human feffusion the churchy- S fond! We are glad to find that our 142 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. brethren have become so very tolerant toward such " se- rious corruptions of Divine worship. " In the light of this brief history, we open the volume which contains the hymns used in the Old School Presby- terian church. And here the first thing that strikes us is, how large a proportion of these hymns are versified " songs of praise contained in the Bible. " Of course, it follows, according to the judgment of one of these brethren, that "a difference of opinion" about the use of this whole class should not disturb the peace of the church, provided we will sing Rouse's paraphrase, or other equally inspired system. Take the very first hymn in the order of Dr. Watts. It is a paraphrase of Revelation 5 : 6-12. "We have room for only a few verses : And the four beasts and four Let elders -worship at h?s feet, and twenty elders fell down be- The church adore around, fore the Lamb, having ever}' one With vials full of odors sweet, of them harps, golden vials full And harps of sweeter sound. of odors. And they sung a new song, jSTow to the Lamb that once was * * Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, slain to receive power, and riches, Be endless blessings paid ; and wisdom, and strength, and Salvation, glory, joy remain honor, and glory, and blessing. For ever on thy head. Thou wast slain, and hast re- Thou hast redeemed our souls with deemed us to God by thy blood, blood, r. K. in our favor. These hymns are, to say the v«ry -\ not more entirely " human compositions'" than those adopted by the Free and Established churches of Soot- land. Yet of these latter Dr. K. says, " their use in that country should not disturb the peace of the church. " And by parity of reasoning in the Presbyterian church liis country, they ought not to be, on one condition, intention or disturbance of the peace. At identical "human compositions" of Dr. Watts, are used by those Scottish churches, and Dr. K. assures us they "ought not to disturb the peace/ 1 I ; or at least some equally inspired n. The sain is of course to be extended to the third book of Dr. Watts' hymns. It consists of forty- five pieces, of which the author says, "some are para- ripture." They are intended especially to oration of the Lord's Supper. Not a ;ry hymn can be found in the whole three books, that "a mere human composition" than a number of those in the Scottish collection, and which bland no sufficient cause for or breach of the \ re, that the t '. the great source of Psalmody, accord- ing to Dr, EL, is this : We Presbyterians "impiously re- ject the Psalms which God has given to be sung." But 144 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. if this a correct statement? We deny it in toto, for the following reasons : 1. Our Supreme Judicatory has expressly authorized the Psalms in " Rouse's paraphrase" to be sung in all our churches. See the Act quoted in a former Letter. Is this the same as impiously rejecting them ? 2. Our church, after careful revision and amendments made by the General Assembly, has also authorized the use of the Psalms in Dr. Watts' " paraphrase ;" and besides, she has recently printed in connection with it, fifty selections from Rouse. Is this rejecting " the Psalms ? " 3. All our churches are at perfect liberty to use one or the other of these versifications at their pleasure. If every congregation in our connection were immediately to reject every thing but Rouse, they would only .do what they are authorized to do by our highest ecclesias- tical court. And now, in the name of peace, how is this the same as "impiously rejecting the Psalms V* True, our con- gregations generally, of the two authorized "para- phrases," prefer Watts to Rouse — but even if the Gene- ral Assembly, instead of authorizing had expressly for- bidden Rouse's paraphrase, can any person really per- suade himself that this would be the same as " impiously rejecting the Psalms which God has given?" But they have not forbidden even that paraphrase, but given it their sanction. The same reasoning applies to all the other hymns in the Presbyterian collection, which are by other au- thors than Dr. W. The great mass of the verses are merely expanded texts of God's blessed Word. For example, Hymn 232 : Stretched on the cross the Saviour dies, Matthew 27 : 35. Hark ! his expiring groans arise ,* Matthew 27 : 46. See how the sacred crimson tide Hebrews 9 : 14. Flo\rs from his hands, his feet, his side. John 19 : 34. Whether such compositions as this deserve to be DSPBITSS 01 SCRIPTURAL HYMNS. 146 3 u mere human inventions/' is a question lifficult to decide. We have already shown that there ifl not a solitary in- the \ m T. stamenl of a Psalm of David 1 • On the contrary, the apostles and brethren a the book of Psalms in quite another manner, in the i in which alone they appear to have employed them in social praise. The first case is Luke 1!) : 38. disciples assumed part of a verse from Psalm 118, bat Bung ir with alterations to adapt it to their circiui:- The otherexample is in Acts 4 : 24, where the b< ginning of the 2d Psalm is sung by Peter, John, and r company. You find there an addition of praise in the beginning — then a narration of what David spoke — then an application to Herod, Pontius Pilate, &c. — then they enlarge the matter of fact by considering the hand of God in it, and the song concludes with the breathing of their de-ires toward God for mercies most precisely suited to their day and duty ; and having sung, they went to prayer, and then preached with amazing success. We have lure an inspired example of that identical Use of the Psalms and of other inspired matter, which our church sanctions. It is an apostolic hymn, which no- where appears in David, and affords abundant warrant from " the Author of light and wisdom" for the hymns of the Presbyterian church. The apostles seem to have known nothing of the " Divine appointment" of "the fealmist of Israel," to that exclusive authority for the church in all ages. itolic example of grouping together parts of Psalms with other inspired matter, is the v< ctjpfc on which most of our hymns are arranged. Our thren practice the same thing in preaching the gosj rending the Scriptures, "explaining the Psalms," an 1 in prayer. It is by their own admission, perfectly right in every other part of worship. How, then, d< - •ti g impii 'j in the matter of praise '. ; I 13 146 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. can the addition of a tune to a brief "explanation" of a Psdin, render it a solemn mockery of God ? In strong corroboration of these views, the visions of the book of Revelation distinctly point out the very style, sentiment and manner of the praises of the New Testa- ment church. Take for example, Revelation 5 : 9-14» Our soundest commentators inform us that John's visions in " heaven" shadowed forth the visible church on earth. Thus Dr. Scott, "These adoring praises were rendered by the representatives of the church." " Thus the whole church, by its representatives, fell down and worshiped." 11 These (especially the four and twenty elders) are gene- rally allowed to be the emblematic representatives of the whole church of God." They were engaged in worship- ing God and the Lamb. What do they sing? A Psalm of David? No such thins;. "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain." See the whole hymn in Revelation 5 : 9-14. Several similar songs are found in the same book. If there were no other evidence in favor of our New Testament hymns, this would be conclusive. We cannot be wrong in singing the very hymns which the Spirit of prophecy dictated to " the beloved disciple," as the subject matter of the exalted praises of God's people in all future ages ; and especially since these hymns were communicated as the very essence and joy of the worship that employs the blest voices of redeemed spirits in the presence of God.* Men may denounce such songs as " corruptions," but they are not so esteemed in the world of glory. * " Though heavenis the scene of these visions, yet * * * * • the state of the church on. earth is throughout particularly adverted to." — Scott. HISTOBTOAft AKul'Mi:.\T run hymns. 147 LETTER XII. ffl in thk CHUBCB — 9LABC1 at kcitis. 5 : 19 ; : In — A.UTHORITT Of KALPH KIOK1NK in M7B s — iuimitiyk CHUBCHj iir.i: Q8AG1 — "BOOK Of PSALMS PKKFBCT" — "no COMMAND B kISl " — " BBTTIHa AUDI i I WOBD " — " LMADti *• i tO SCHISM AC. My Dear Sir : — The history of the early use of hymns, viz. BongB of praise not found in the book of Psalms, affords s<-me instructive lessons. Eyen in the inspired record of the life of Jesus, v. find the author of the gospel by Mark employing a Ghreek ringing of the Saviour and hisdisoi] at tfa r and the L l's 8 ipper, which word, /. or u 9ung a hymn" is not the nmon one to indicate the Psalms. In every place but N w Testament which refers beyond all doubt to M David's Psalms," the word isjMa¬, nut hutnm the oorresponding verb. If, as is strenuously maintained ur brethren, the Saviour selected Psalms 113—118 for this hymn,* it would have been more natural for k to employ the usual term to indicate that the Psalms were sung. We admit, however, that JosephuS, the Jewish historian, applies the terms "hymns and • 1 the Bible Psalms. Antiquities 7 : 12, .*]. And it h said that tic the time of the Advent of ling the great Hallel (Psalms 113*118, at the celebration of the Passover. If this on on the original appoint- .*, which d<»>< not include ringing. Bee the record, 12:1-28, Besides, the Hallel (or Psalms 118- * Th 11. 'J and 11-4 before ■r it. 148 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. 118,) was not composed for several hundred years after- ward. The question, however, whether the Lord Jesus sung a part of the book of Psalms in connection with the Pass- over, is of very small importance in this discussion. Admitting that he sung the Hallel — then if we were re- quired to observe the Jewish Passover, we should feel bound to copy his example, even in this particular, (as in circumcision,) in order, like him, "to fulfill all righteous- ness." But how does such an example decide for or against the dogma, which affirms the Hebrew Psalm book to be the only and universal Psalmody of all ages ? If Christ and his disciples sung a part of the Psalms, they did only what every sound Presbyterian joyfully and thankfully approves and copies — a privilege which he very highly appreciates. But to sing any other portion of the holy oracles — is that the same as " offering strange fire V } There is the true point in debate. The term humnos, hymn, is found only twice in the New Testament, viz. in those well contested passages, Ephesians 5 : 19, and Colossians 3 : 16 : " Speaking to yourselves in Psalms, hymns, humnois, and spiritual songs." It suits the exclusive theory of our brethren, to affirm that these three terms in both passages, "proba- bly indicate sacred songs which are substantially the same;"* that is, they all mean the Psalms of David. But here the best authorities are against them. Henry says: "By Psalms may be meant David's Psalms, or such composures as were fitly sung with musical instru- ments. By hymns, such others as were confined to mat- ter of praise, as those of Zacharias, Simeon," &c. Dod- dridge adds : " I see not the authority for supposing all these words to refer to David's poetical pieces," &c. f Dr. Scott says the words mean, " the Psalms and hymns of the sacred Scriptures and such spiritual songs as pious men composed on the peculiar subjects of the gospel." * Pressly on Psalmody, p. 140. f See also Macknigkt ou the Epistles. iai AJwnjMBNi roB HYMNS. 149 A_ - Is to mean, u hymns and . and poena of every kind which i to prepare then Cm the worship of heaven : an i let them use tin se hymns and songs constantly, not sessions alone, but in social meetings also/' The learned editor of the Comprehensive Oommen- . Dr. Jenks, Bays: "Pealmoi, not simply David's, then the article would have been used, hoi PealmoL The m inly comprehended other compositions. " I' B Ige, in his Commentary on Ephesiaiis, takes the large view, and adds as one of the scriptural mean- ings of psahnoe, Psalm: M Any sacred poem formed on I >il Testament Psalms, as in 1 Corinthians 14 : 26, i appears to mean such a somj given !>'/ in- , and not one of the Psalms of David." Sooh is the unanimous testimony of these commentators: they In direct opposition to the view held by these breth- . viz. that by u Psalms, hymns and songs," Paul meant exclusively the book of Psalms. lint it is replied that the churches of Ephesus and tad in their possession the Psalms of David, and had no other — therefore they would most certainly understand the apostle as referring to the book of Psalms alone. But it seems to be forgotten that those churches recently formed amid a heathen population and in then cities — bo«>ks were scarce, and having to be ied by the hand on wax, lead, parchment or similar rials, were extremely expensive; and the ability to - by no me B tides, when the apos- ebokes the Corinthians as follows : " Every one of balm" — the common interpretation is, that the fruits of the gifts of the Holy red opon the membership of the Corin- thian church.* Then why might not the same Divine influence have beea found at Ephesus and C r to this class of Pi : OOmuieritarors of 150 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. well as to those of David ? In view of the whole argu merit, it appears most evident, as Dr. Hodge remarks, "that not only Psalms, but hymns as distinct composi- tions, also were employed." As to the Septuagint use of the term, when Isaiah would predict the glorious tri- umphs of the gospel, he exclaims — " Sing unto the Lord a new song (humnon or hymn), and his praise from the ends of the earth." Chapter 42 : 10. The Greek is very expressive — u Hymn unto the Lord a new hymn." The hymn immediately follows, and though not found in "the book of Psalms," Isaiah exhorts to sing it, including, of course, all similar hymns ; an exhortation or command just as binding upon the New Testament church as any requirement to "sing Psalms" which is found in the book of that name. But in ascertaining the correct meaning of these two celebrated texts, (Ephesians 5 : 19 ; Colossians 3 : 16,) we have decidedly in our favor no less a personage than the distinguished patriarch of the Associate or Seceder Presbytery of Scotland, Ralph Erskine. This may seem strange, but it is not the less true. In the preface to his poetical "paraphrase" upon the "Song of Solomon," af- ter speaking of the " Song " as full of Christ, he says : "I judge that a song upon this subject is not unseasona- ble, when the songs of the temple (the church) are like to be turned into bowlings, &c. How desirable," he adds, "that this little book might help her to sing away her sor- rows, * * to drive away the night of trouble with songs of praise," &c. "We have a Divine precept/' he continues, "perhaps too much forgotten and neglected, in Ephesians 5 : 18, 19, and Colossians 3 : 16." "Like- wise an express Divine appointment in Psalm 46 : 6, 7, how we are to sing," &c. "Now this sacred Song of Solomon being very mysterious, that you may be the more able to sing it over with understanding, I have en- deavored to lay open the mysteries, " Sec. He then states that he "had cast his paraphrase in the mould of common metre " for the purpose of singing. HISTORICAL ABGUHEHT FOR HYMNS. 161 II re, then, it will be seen thai Ralph Erskine interprets Paul's " Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs," a- a 1>i- vink precept t<> ting the "Song of Solomon." And his mmendation of the u Song " is not only for private de- votion, but as he says, H to help L> r (the church I to ting row$ with these songs of praise/ 1 Surely Ralph Brakine had not before his eyes the fear of "the, f Nadab and Abihu !" The truth is, he had no Psalmody to warp his judgment, and therefore he uttered the sentiments of piety and good ! f is certainly worthy <>f distinct record, that a man "whose name," as Dr. Beveridge affirms, k, doorves to be held in everlasting remembrance/ 1 should have thus discovered in these oft disputed texts, "a Divine pre- cept " to sing other productions than the one hundred and fifty Psalms — and that, too, at the very period when, as he says, 4% the songs of the church (Rouse) were turned into howlii But perhaps it will he replied, that Erskine refers only to nn "inspired song/ 1 and therefore, he does not approve "human composition." But this i- a mistake. He calls his poetical work, "a paraphrase, or large explicatory poem. 91 Tli.' first line of the " Song," viz. its naked ti- V> , he expands into four stanzas of four lines each, and of the rest. The line, verse 4, u Draw me; we will run after thee " — is paraphrased into twelve lines. Kr- skine'fl paraphrase is no more an inspired song than the Uion of the Psalm " by the Associate Reformed minister. Yet this distinguished father and founder of the Associate or Seceder body, finds "a I My ink pre- _- this li human production fi in the • Paul, Ephesiana 5 : l v . 19, and Colossians 3 : 16. Thus the evidence is full and clear, that the intcr- pretation which makes u Psalms, hymns and spiritual cclusively to the Psalms of David, is a _ 4 uj. t.» suit a particular purpose. u The • r of the thought/' I the primitive church, i. e., the church in the ages 152 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. immediately succeeding the apostles, was not restricted tc the hook of Psalms as their only Psalmody, is so clearly demonstrated by history as to admit of no doubt. Thus the celebrated Neander writes as follows : " Singing also passed from the Jewish service into that of the Christian church. St. Paul exhorts the early Christians to sing spiritual songs. What was used for this purpose were partly the Psalms of the Old Testament, and partly songs composed with this very object : especially songs of praise and thanks to God and Christ, and these we know Pliny found to be customary among the Christians. In the controversies with the Unitarians, about the end of the second century, and the beginning of the third, the hymns in which, from early times, Christ had been hon- ored as God, were appealed to." This is clear and decisive : 1. The praises of the church were offered in part, in the language of the Psalms of David. 2. They were offered also in songs (or hymns) com- posed with this very object. 3. These songs of praise to God and Christ, were af- terward quoted, in controversy with Unitarians. The Christians of the close of the second and beginning of the third centuries, cited them as hymns to Christ as Gocl, and as the testimony of u early times to his divin- ity." It is true, the learned Spanheim takes a different view. He says, in speaking of the fourth century: u That besides hymns and songs and private Psalms, of which there was a great number in their solemn assem- blies, the Psalm book of David was brought into the west- ern church in this age." With this testimony agrees that of the learned and generally accurate \Mosheim. In his account of the wor- ship of the fourth century, he says : " The Psalms of David were now received among the public hymns that were sung as a part of Divine service." For his author- ity, Mosheim refers to Cyril of Jerusalem, the apostoli- cal constitutions, and Beausobre. HISTORICAL ARGUMENT FOB HYME 158 The difference between these profound historians, it will be observed, is n<>t as to "other productions" being rang — in this they agree. The only point of dispul whether As /' David were used in public p\ prior to the fourth oentury. Neander, and more recent* ly Schaffof this country, are of opinion that p trtions of Psalms were suns in the churches from the berin- Spanheim and Mosheim decide, k * not until the rth c< ntury." Por some further references the reader may ' r XIV. We do n<-t deem it at all necessary to examine minute- ly certain historical citations made by the friends of Rouse. Admitting the correctness of the quotations from early writers, as they are adduced by our breth- ren — what would they prove? Only this — that por- tions of "the book of Psalms' 1 were employed in praising God. But no sound Presbyterian regards this I fact of any importance in this discussion. We rather rejoice to know that it was so. We practice the same thing. It is the custom among our churches to sing parts of "the Psalms of David" every Lord's day, re think it highly probable the early Christians did. But here is the point to be settled — " Did any one of those primitive Christians regard the book of Psalms as the only, universal and pi rpetual Psalmody of the church for all ages?" Did any one of them ever dream that it a high crime, scarcely less heinous than that of Uzza, Vbihu, &c., to worship God in any ott< of praise ? Let them produce a solitary scrap from any writer of those early times to prove these points, and i we will attend to their demonstrations. Till t! we will continue to believe that the primitive church found U A DrvTNfl precept," as Ralph Erskinedid, (in Ephesians 5 : 19 j I for singing h tman paraphrases of th< of Solomon," i - all other suitable portions of the Scripture*. An 1 further, that manj primitive Christian! ed by the Father of lights, to enable them | es 154 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. suitable songs of praise. As a specimen, Basil, of the fourth century, cites one that had become very ancient even in his day, and which is translated by Dr. Pye Smith as follows: " Jesus Christ — joyful Light of the Holy ! Glory of the Eternal, heavenly, holy, blessed Father ! Having now come to the setting of the sun — beholding the evening light, we praise the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit of God. Thou art worthy to be praised of sacred voices, at all seasons, Son of God, who givest life. Wherefore the universe glorifieth Thee I" Another, equally ancient, begins thus : " "We praise thee — we sing hymns to thee — we bless thee — we glorify thee — we worship thee — by thy great High Priest; thou who art the true God — who art the One unbegotten," &c. In such strains the early Christians conducted the service of song. It was of such hymns as these Clemens of Alexandria (about A. D. 175,) wrote as follows : " Gather together thy children to praise the Leader of children, the eter- nal Logos, the eternal Light, the Fountain of mercy. Filled with the dew of the Spirit, let us sing sincere praises, genuine hymns to Christ our king." * From the fourth century down to the period of the glorious Reformation, no one can question the common use of hymns not found among the one hundred and fifty Psalms. The martyrs, Huss and Jerome, who were burned by the Papists at the Council of Constance, sung such hymns, even amid their last sufferings. Of Jerome, history says : " As he went to execution he sung the Apostles' creed and the hymns of the church with a loud voice and a cheerful countenance. He kneeled at the stake and prayed. Being then bound he raised his voice and sung a paschal hymn, then much in vogue in the church : 'Hail! happy day, and ever be adored, When hell was conquered by great heaven's Lord.' " Luther wrote many hymns, among others a small vol- • For some further proofs and examples of these primitive hymns, see Letter No. XIV. HISTORICAL ARGUMENT FOB HYMNS. 158 ume of about forty pieces, for the celebration of the Lord's Supper. Nor was there in that noble offshoot of the Reformation, the church of Scotland, any great hos- tility to hymns. To the copies which we have seen of paraphrase of the Psalms, Sternhold and kins, we Bud prefixed thirteen hymns, including the js of Zacharias and Mary. Twelve similar songs Stand at the close, including " songs to be sung before morning and evening prayer" — " a prayer to be sung before the sermon/' and M a thanksgiving after receiving the Supper." Here are twenty-five hymns at- tached to the Psalms of David, and bound with the Bible ! Can any one doubt with what object? These songs are for the most part not even paraphrases of portions of ipture, but "mere human compositions. " To what erU nt they were used, we have no means of information. Such a prefix or appendix to Rouse, in these modern times, would produce some astonishment, if tolerated and published by our strict brethren in this country. us now turn to some of the objections to our views : 1. u The book of Psalms is an inspired system of Psalmody." " It is the workmanship of God; * * it is perfect, and m needs no addition/'* ]>wt it has been shown in previous Letters, that it was not so viewed even by the Jews. Hezekiah, the mourn- en for Joeiah, 4c., used "other productions." in : We admit that for all the purposes for which it Id promised pre* M !>t, ,\ " Lo I am with yoa alw to the end of the world ; and where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I," &e.j and has a moat clear and express title to expect the aids of the 'niy t" say tic leasts with n>> I S irit in "the hum /'' of his prayers! If it be said that this i- a very large and dan- ger to intrust in the hands of the church; we reply, nut a whit larger or more dangerous than the ation of her Oreed ut every preacher altera On order and conn lion of T S iptures, both in his serni To make them more plain and instructive I ad render the worship iL - it with the church in the )•■■■ of the •' Scripture for j ur atten pt r than than in the form r. E P ■ that "the I 3 a to open th ; fountains, which oth< i i 1/' &o, I: i | r vers — 160 LETTERS OX PSALMODY. either by the individual preacher in the pulpit, or under the supervision of the whole church in her highest court. Which is likely to be the safer guide, let common sense decide. For such ends as these, it is obvious that in order to worship with " the spirit and the understanding also," adaptation is needful, yea indispensable; selection is law- ful, explanation is absolutely necessary, transposition and grouping of parts may be highly expedient and proper, expounding typical matters, &c, may be highly com- mendable, condensation (as in creeds and catechisms) is the proper work of the church, &c. But surely it does not follow, because we advocate such liberties as these, that we must therefore to be consistent, attempt to amend "the rule of faith," " raise a hue and cry against the old Bible," &c. By no means. "The old Bible" is just what it ought to be, " the perfect Law of God." All that we teach is, that in the three great elements of public worship, preaching, prayer and praise, the church is entitled, yea, is bound in fidelity to her Divine Master, to use all the means and advantages which God has given her, to open and expound his Divine word, to employ its precious truths in the most suitable and edifying mode, and to draw from its inexhaustible stores, whether in the New Testament or the Old, the sacred and soul stir- ring themes, the blessed and delightful meditations, the glorious truths and bright manifestations of God in the flesh, the devout aspirations, &c, which have thrilled the hearts of God's children, both under the new and old dispensation, and formed the songs of angels and spirits of the just in heaven. The sum of the argument is therefore briefly this: The " principles" on which the Presbyterian system of Psalmody is formed, are substantially the same as those on which all exposition, especially all lecturing upon se- lect passages of Scripture, is conducted — the "princi- ples" on which ministers compose their prayers and "ex- plain the Psalms' — the " principles" on which the - TO OBJ] 1G1 church assumes the immense responsibility of construct- ing ber Creed and Catechisms; in a word, the Bame u principles" by which the church, as all admit, assumes poI and direction, under responsibility to her iher part of Divine worship. 6. But it is alleged u that the tendencies of onr hymns gly toward error and heresy — while th when vet exclusively used, have proved highly conserva- tive in keeping the church right." But here the facts are generally the other way. Take the example of the Jews. Tic y BUng, they still sing, David's Psalms alone and in the original Hebrew. Have they always been remarkably free from idolatry, heresy and apostasy '.' Th e blessed Saviour, too, a Divine Pastor, had a small congregation, which these brethren say praised God only in David. Were they, including the traitor Judas, all remarkable for stability in maintaining the truth ? On rtain occasion "they all forsook him and fled!" postolic church, too, these brethren affirm, used only David. But how early did "the mystery of iniquity . to work?" How soon were even apostlei sum- moned to contend with deadly heresies a in tie- bosom of the churches they had planted '.' Sing the Psalms of David, even in their purest and most un- adulterated form, was not a preventive of error among them, as their experience sadly testified. The Jew* ut day sing the Psalms of David in a much purer state than the friends of Rouse. The Arians of Ulster use the veritable '-old Bouse." They used it at time when their a; rarred. Perhaps, they also sung other productions ; hut in this they n . 1 1 1 i 1 1 _: worse than the Free church of Scotland ; uor is tier Uest evidence that to this Bouroe must be ly of Ulster, any more than their vol- ume of hymns by Watt- and others, is likely to corrupt the Fri •• church. Again, all Protestant churches u>e the Bame I 14* 162 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. Then how absurd for any one to ascribe to any English versification, say the patchwork verse of Rouse, a higher usefulness and efficiency in any particular, than he ascribes to the pure word of God, including the Psalms in prose, and the Xew Testament. 7. The use of hymns, it is further objected, u promotes disunion and schism, while the tendencies of David ex- clusively are manifest toward union and harmony. " This is, perhaps, the most extraordinary of all objec- tions. There are not less than five or six denominations which sing " Rouse's paraphrase 1" They are quite small in numbers, and their differences are admitted to be of no very great magnitude. For many years two of the more harmonious among them have been holding conven- tions, composing platforms, issuing " Testimonies '■' and other bonds of union ; writing, speaking, praying, preach- ing, yea, even singing Rouse, in order to promote their union. What has been the result ? Why, instead of two sects, as formerly, there are now three composed of the same materials ? Yet their leading authors bitterly reproach our hymns as sources of division, " sectarian- ism/' &c. Were all these smaller sects put together, they would not compose a body at all unwieldly for its magnitude — probably not over seven hundred or eight hundred minis- ters and perhaps seventy-five thousand communicants. Does this look like union and harmony ? The " secta- rian hymns" are not responsible for these divisions. They have all enjoyed an " inspired Psalmody" — but strange to say, it has neither prevented nor healed their fragmentary divisions and subdivisions, but a new one has just been added to the number. Admitting that each denomination naturally wishes to have its Psalmody in concord with its doctrinal and practi- cal views — and this is a result of common sense — what follows ? Is it any better among those churches which sing Rouse ? The plain truth is, that by " explaining the Psalm/' these brethren make Rouse teach whatever VfSRfi !!0 OBJECT] 1G3 tarian views" they may individually hav . just as the Brians of Ulster do — and what in- r« b dd of the authorised Psalmody of all other denominations 1 Of course each sect will reflect its own pture in its preaching, its prayers, and its public praise, and there be no cure Cor the evils more than the evils of the others. End / error is a far more "powerful and certain r the increase and perpetuity of sectarianism/' than prau Nor is the influence of House in the Presbyterian churches of Scotland much better. The four principal denominations embrace a little over two thousand eight hundred congregations — beinir five hundred congregations less than belong to the Old School Presbyterians of this country. Has the Psalmody of House always secured purity and concord there ? Head Iletherington's history M deratism," Burgher and Anti-Burgher strifes, (o. Elead Dr. Beveridge'a account* of the fearful con- flicts in the days of the Erskines, when as Ralph says, k> tL f the teni]>le were like to be turned into lings! 9 ' W>, even the " songs " of the anti-sectarian lloufi way by the flood of cold hearted u Moder- atism," or turned into "howling*! 91 And as a remedy f->r these evils,'Ralph Erskine recommends the singing of mon's Song/' &c, ]>ut perhaps Bome one will now inquire — "Did ever any nee really make sueh an objection to ian Psalmody "'" We reply in two or three from leading peri- '.Heals of our brethren : "These inan-made books," they say, " are all and always teeta* . and their tendency is to perpetuate errors and divi- " We have a Methodist hymn book, a B iptist hymn book, a Mormon hymn book, a Unitarian hymn b K>k," &e< f Well, there would be some force in this, if tfa r could persuade these several sorts of * Charts Memorial, | | United r .1, of Cincinnati. 1G-4 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. errorists to do all their preaching and praying according to Rouse, as well as their singing. And especially if he could persuade them to lay aside the time-honored cus- tom of "explaining the Psalm !" But until this is done, we greatly fear the Mormons, not unlike the Jews, might sing even Rouse and be no nearer the true religion ; and the Unitarian preacher, like the Avian of Ulster, might also sing Rouse; but by " explaining the Psalms" he would " wrest them, as he docs the other Scriptures, to his own and his hearers destruction !" But of one thing we are perfectly sure — that by the singing of the tcords of Rouse with a Mormon or Socinian " explanation/' no great ad- vance would be made toward union and harmony among Christian churches ! But hear another defender of this sort of faith. In speaking of those who, as he alleges, " set aside the Di- vine system of praise/' he says : "What is the spectacle which they present ? The Oalvinist praising the perfec- tions and works of God as they appear in his system of theology; the Arminian as they appear in his ; the Uni- versalist as they appear in his ; and so, down through every grade of error, from that which is nearest the truth to that which is most remote — making the worship of God as the confusion of Babel !" * We greatly marvel that these brethren have entirely overlooked the Jews, and " the Arians of Ulster/' espe- cially the latter, in their anti-sectarian labors. Those respectable bodies certainly call for their sympathy as loudly, to say the very least, as the Mormons and Uni- versalists. Particularly since they are so very anxious to effect a reform in what Dr. K. calls " the worship of God !" But seriously — can any well informed person imagine that the Jew is less of a Jew, "ihe Arian of Ulster" less of an Arian — or either Arian or Jew less of a sec- tary, because they both sing u the Psalms/' either in House or in Hebrew ? Or that any other sect, Mormon, * Rev. Dr. Kerr, in Preacher, Jun6 9, 1817. A&SWSRS 165 Universalis, ftc., would be at all oearci the Scriptural if which Christ speaks, by ringing B maen&eocplained by their sectarian teachers I All Christian churches are instructed by their faithful pastors, to read and study diligently both the Testaments, including the book of m& Still these Btudies d«> not lead them to the Bame precise oonclurions iu all minute matters of faith and practice. Nor can we reasonably expect any different re- sult from their ringing these Scriptures, or amy pari of them. Yet charity bids rtain the belief that the ling denominations are one in ''holding the Head." But what sort of Christian union would that be, even supposing all the sects to sing House, if they still con- tinued to teach and defend as earnestly as ever their sev- eral peculiarities ? We have a precious example of this sort of oneness in the half dozen or more small bodies which agree in singing Rous We maintain that there is quite as much true Chris- tian union in the vast majority of the evangelical world who reject Rouse, as among the small minority who use that Psalmody. The former can at least unite in the sweet anthem commencing : All hail, the power of Jesus' name ! L ' saints before him fall : Bring forth the royal diadem, And crown Him Lord of all. And the same sweet harmony pervades the entire volume of 1 1 . th comparatively few exceptions — - by DO means to render their public praise ik the Babel of OOufusiou." Certainly not a- much BO a> their public prayer and preaching. Does Dr. K. hold that the whole devotional B the sanctuary as maintained by all Christian deuominati' atei * If mi inch. monv. from the ad i muefa moi such a result froi four hundred or five hu: " human ii. 1G6 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. of Bouse, are "the confusion of Babel?" So it would seem. Such are his " brotherly kindness and charity." We are suspicious of a zeal for union which brings forth such fruits. But enough of such remedies for sectarian* The men who can have faith in them, need not find it hard to believe that baptism is regeneration, or that prayer and praise are appreciated in heaven by the char- acter of the sound rather than by the sense, by the words uttered with the lips, rather than by the spiritual emo- tions of the heart. But why should the various Christian denominations differ on this subject — why not all agree to adopt "the Psalms " as their system of praise, and in " a literal and correct version 1" This inquiry has been variously an- swered in our previous pages — but some further remarks will be given in our next Letter. LETTER XIII. BOOK OF PSALMS NOT DESIGNED TO BE THE ONLY AND PERPETUAL PSALMODY OF THE CHURCH FIVE FURTHER ARGUMENTS TO PROVE IT FRUITS OF THE EXCLUSIVE SYSTEM SUSPENSION OF MINIS- TERS, ELDERS AND CHURCH MEMBERS — ARGUMENT FROM ANALOGY PRAYER AND PRAISE BOTH HUMAN COMPOSITION SO MINGLED IN THE PSALMS AS TO BE INSEPARABLE, HENCE INCONSISTENCIES STRANGE JARRING OF OPINIONS ABOUT THE NATURE OF "INSPIRED PSALMODY" — GROSS ERRORS OF BOUSE. My Dear Sir :- — In pressing their demand that nine tenths of the churches in this country should abandon their cherished usages, and go over to the other tenth, viz. the friends of House, one of the most popular argu- ments takes this form : " You have no conscientious scru- ples in regard to the one hundred and fifty Psalms of the Bible. In perfect consistency with your position you can admit our practice to be in itself right — but in con- 5 :vi: THE ENABLE. 1G7 ncy with cur views, we advocates of Rouse cannot I your practice. You oan ring the Psalms of David, but we cannot use your Psalmody." And the inference seems to be, thai for the Bake o/* union, the .; body of the evangelical church Bhould conform to the Bmall fragment of the defenders of House, by adopt- ing their exclusive theory. Now without pausing to remark upon the modesty of all this, but putting the case in its strongest shape, sup- that these brethren really sing " the inspired not an explanatory paraphrase ; concede for a moment that the real question is not (what wc have shown it to ween " the paraphrase of House" and the phrase of Dr. Watts, amended by our Assembly, iitting all this for argument, this popular plea pro- - upon several obvious mistakes: 1. We don»t admit either their principle or their prac- u to be in itself right." The principle which assumes a Divine wan singing u a literal version of the • book of Psalms," we regard as both false and in- jurious to the best interests of the church under her pres- ent dispensation. That there is no such "Divine appoint- ment" either in the precepts or the practice of our Lord and his apostles, has been proved, we trust, in former Letters. And this result is strongly sustained by the inablene&s of the thing itself. Take for example, the first, though not the most Striking illustration that itself: "Thou desirest not sacrifice, else would —thou delightest not in burnt offering. The :ices of God are a broken spirit,'' ftc.* Rouse gives iment quite liUraUy y and as far as it goes, nothing appropriate. But is nothing more required is tl • nan Bung b Wishart the before his martyr* •A pi lm66: 15. "I will offer unto thee burnt : I will offer bullocks with goaW And so uith very many otfa 168 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. dom, and in the reformation times of John Knox, in parallel with our paraphrase : wishart's hymn. dr. watts. Gif thou had pleased sacrifice A broken heart, my God, ray king, I should them offered thee ; Is all the sacrifice I bring — But thon wilt not sic sacrifice, The God of grace will ne'er despise For thou art wonder free : A broken heart for sacrifice. And givest us thy benefites * * * * Through Christ's blude freely. Thy blood can make me white as To thy mercie will I go. snow, No Jewish types could cleanse me so. Indeed these brethren virtually admit this to be " the right practice/' for in " explaining the Psalm/' they teach the people to sing the words of Rouse with the very meaning adopted by Wishart and Watts ! The impiety of attempting to improve the inspired song, is just as great in the one form as in the other — the difference be- ing between improvement in prose and improvement in verse. And the distinct recognition of the only true sac- rifice, "the Lamb of God/' in this and other songs, we believe to be a duty — an essential method of " confessing Him before men." So the prophet Zechariah — "They shall look on me whom they have pierced, and mourn." 2. We have much stronger objections to the exclusive feature of our brethren's " practice." While in them- selves considered, there is no part of any of the one hun- dred and fifty Psalms which is absolutely unfit to be sung — there are unquestionably portions of many of those Psalms which are less suitable for New Testament worship than many other parts of the inspired Scriptures. And we have no hesitation in saying that it is wrong, ut- terly wrong to suffer such portions of the Psalms to rx- clude other more suitable and equally Divine ascriptions of praise from the private and public devotions of God's people. Take for instance those beautiful songs in the " Revelation." There can be scarce a doubt that the hymn, chapter 5 : 9-13, was intended to exhibit the na- i:x« LUSIVE THEORY UNTENABLE, 1G9 and characteristics of the New Testament Psalmo- dy. Dr. Soott Bays — "Though heaven is the tcetu of m$j yei they had continual reference to the tem- trahipj and the state of the church on earth is particularly adverted to." And what Jo they si u t in Dr, S )t\ answers — "They all joined in whioh was not cmly most excellent, but it was also new, in respect of the occasion and compost" (ion : for the Old Testament church celebrated the praises of Jehovah, * * and anticipated the coming of the ex- pected Messiah; but the New Testament church adored Christ as actually come i as having finished his work on earth * * * and entered into his glory. " And so of other songs in that book. Yet these very songs of ador- ing wonder and love — u Worthy is the Lamb tlmt loas $hii)t," ftaj these magnificent anthems sung with WeSB I I and sinless hearts " in heaven/' are pronounced iious corruptions/' if sung by the church on earth ! We cannot but regard the principle which leads to such results as wrong, and highly offensive to "Him who sit- teth on the throne, and to the Lamb." Yet the prinoi- of these brethren, while it repudiates such songs as a mentioned, regards as highly acceptable such stan- zas as the following : Let covetous extortioners Catch ali be hath away : Of all tor which he lahored hath, . Let there he none to pity him, Let there be Done at -ill That on hi^ children father!- Will let his mercy fall. Lei Gtod bii fkdu r*i wickedness nembranee <-;ill : ever let his moth' . Be blotted out at -ill. iniDg he like clothes put on, Illto } ; and into his bones .i. down let I 15 170 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. The New Testament interprets these passages as refer- ring to the traitor Judas — and of course they belong to "the legal or prophetic language" of a previous econo- my, as Dr. Watts correctly explains them. But why should such stanzas be esteemed of " Divine appoint- ment" and most acceptable praise, while the song of sub- lime triumph which John heard sung " in heaven n (Rev. 19 : 1—7,) over " the judgments " which " aveng- ed the blood of God's servants " upon " the great whore" of the apostasy, would be a vile "corruption ?" — " Alle- luia, salvation and glory and honor and power unto the Lord our God." "And again they said, Alleluia. Praise our God, all ye his servants." " And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters and of great thunderings, saying, Alle- luia, for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth." " In these praises," says Dr. Scott, " the emblematical representa- tives of the church and her ministers most cordially united." Yes, they could, unite "in heaven" — but these brethren cannot unite with the church on earth in such a song ! " They are compelled to be silent," they tell us, " lest they should offer strange fire \ n 3. That the "book of Psalms" was not designed by its Divine Author as the Psalmody of the church exclu- sively and for all coming time, appears most evident from a comparison of its contents with the substance, style and tenor of the New Testament, especially the Epistles. The new dispensation requires additional forms of wor- ship, preaching, prayer and praise. Probably no one will question that the writings of Paul and the other apostles form a perfect standard by which to construct our prayers and our sermons. How constantly and steadily is the attention fixed upon the cross ! How does the glowing mind of the writer, espe- cially of Paul, delight to place the crown upon the head of his Saviour ? How does he love to dwell upon that dear name " which is above every name" — " that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, and every tongue EXCLUSIVE THEORY rx'n:x.\i 171 conn--." fee. Thus, in the Epistle to the BphesianSj the titles Jesus, Christ, Jesus Christ, Lord Jesus Chi 1. .1. Bead, Master, Beloved, occur tixty-threi times in one hundred and fifty-five verses; and in Philippians, ty-tkret times in <>no hundred and four verses. And i* of praise, more or less direct, are offered to the adorable Redeemer, in not less than twenty instan in Ephesians — Philippians we have not examined, hut the peculiar name Jesus, communicated to hi- mother Special revelation from God, is not found in the ins, and the term "anointed," Heb. Messiah, is not used t-» designate Christ more than six or Beven times — though the volume contains between three thousand and four thousand verses — about fifteen times the number in the Epistles to the Ephesians and the Philippians. The same train of remark applies to the third 1' of the adorable Trinity. The three or four thousand verses of the Psalms mention the Holy Spirit n-'t m >re than live or six times; but in the Ephesians alone, we find his name in connection with his Divine operations, eleven times. The New Testament economy is emphati- cally "the dispensation of the Spirit;" ami therefore we may expect to discover much more full and precious de- monstrations of his person, character, offices, attributes, and works ; and this is especially true of his regenerating and sanctifying influences upon the hearts of men. This contrast miirht be extended through all the i_ r r at tinguishing doctrines and ordinances so clearly r« -\ ed in the new dispensation — all that is meant when it id, "the law was given by Moses, but g\ truth came by Jesus Christ" — and "life and immortality are br ught to light by the gospel/ 1 All devoted, able rs of the N ii f " E 1 1 alike on this ize the teaching of Christ and his a] ties as tfa pattern both id prayer and preacl and even in "explaining the Psalms." Why Bhould it be other? In these aspects we cannofbut iid the pi very Car 6 172 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. being right; and for such reasons as these, we cannot adopt their exclusive system of Psalmody, and especially not in a literal form. We feel conscientiously bound, in our measure to copy the inspired Paul, who often turns abruptly aside in the midst of his most logical trains of reasoning, to offer praise to his exalted Redeemer. For example, Rom. 9:5, " Of whom Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen." 4. We reach the same general result, when we exam- ine many of the prayers embodied in " the Psalms." It has been shown, in our previous Letters, that no Divine command has indicated that book as the crnjy system of song under the present dispensation. In regard to the very numerous prayers found in it, there is therefore no more reason why we should sing literally every expres- sion of the Psalmist, than that we should use literally the other numerous prayers of the Bible, as of Solomon, Hezekiah, Jonah, Daniel, <£c. Suppose a minister were to repeat literally, word for word, in the supplications of the pulpit, the prayer of Jonah, " Out of the belly of hell cried I." " I went down to the bottom of the moun- tains ; the weeds were wrapped about my head." {i Thou hadst cast me into the deep in the midst of the seas," &c. Such passages as these no doubt might be spiritual- ized (as Dr. Watts has done of parts of the Psalms) and used with a true " gospel sense," but we suppose no min- ister ever used this language in his prayers. And so of other prayers recorded in the Bible. They were com- posed for special occasions, and are universally regarded as unsuitable, and as never designed in their literal form for gospel worship. A similar example presents itself, one of many, in the 59th Psalm. David speaks of his enemies thus; At evening let thou them return, Making gre.at noise and sound, Like to a dog, and often walk About the city round. Now whatever may have been the particular allusions i:\CLrsivi; THEORY (J5TEXABLB. 173 of the Psalmist, every one feels that the use of thu lit* end prayer in tin pulpit would be, to Bay the least, alto- gether inexpedient. With this judgment probably even the sticklers for the old version would coincide. Why d do they ting it, Bince the only difference is that in the latter rase they pray with a turn '. And so with similar passage b, which all will acknowledge to be highly unsuitable for public formal prayer } but which nevertheless they think highly appropriate for public r with a tun* ! The groat obscurity of many parts of the Psalms has led at least am writer to take the position u that it is oot S8ary to understand what we sing . m- pray) in that k. M * But if so, why not express the Hebrew in En- glish letters and words, and sing them ? By this method we would be sure of using k 'an inspired Psalmody." "j* 5. The gnat fundamental doctrine that Jksus OF Nazareth was the true, the long promised Mes- siah, though nowhere taught in the Psalms, is often most emphatically inculcated in the New Testament. For as- suming this character, he was bitterly persecuted by the Jews. "These things/' says John, "are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ/ 1 " There- fore, M adds Peter, " let all the house of Israel know as- suredly, that God hath made that same Jesus * * both Lord and Christ." And the confession of this great truth is exhibited by "the beloved disciple" as a test of true u Many dea ith rt are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh/ 1 *• Hereby know ye the Bpirit <>f God — every spirit that oonfesseth that Jesus I Ihrist is come in the flesh, is of I lod. And erery spirit that oonfesseth not that Jesus Christ is • in the flesh, is notof God." These arc very strong declarations. And whatever else they teach, they at least * Hat. Mr. 1 1 ffdon. f ThomAi Aquinai held thai it irai Mary for firwi .1 the meaning of tin- Latin Mem B \ rononnee them. Even ■ ineil of Trent he! i5« 174 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. condemn any exclusive system of praise which is defective in such essentials as these. We are far from insinuating that these brethren deny this fundamental of all reli- gion — but so far as regards their forms of praise, they could not observe a more profound silence if no such doc- trine were true. Even the malignant Jew finds no fault with their confession in this particular, but unites with them cordially ! Can this be a full and scriptural com- pliance with the positive precept from heaven, viz. "that all men should honor the Son even as they honor the Father?" If it were necessary to multiply these objections, we might advert to the fruits of the system, of which ex- elusive Psalmody forms a prominent feature. We had the painful privilege, at the meeting of the Associate Synod in May, 1853, of being present at the trial of a com- plaint from the decision of a Presbytery, sent up by a minister of the gospel. The high crimes for which he had been arraigned, were these: 1. "Going to hear a minister of the Old School Presbyterians preach." 2. " Inviting to his pulpit an Associate Reformed clergy- man !" For these offenses, the Presbytery was directed by the Synod to proceed to trial I What was the final result, we never took the trouble to ascertain. Many of our readers are familiar with the action of the Synod of the Associate Reformed body, which con- firmed the suspension of one of their elders for uniting in singing, at family worship, two verses of the 92d Psalm in our system, thus : Sweet is the work, my God, my king, To praise thy name, give thanks and sing, &c. In his "Plea for Peace/' Dr. M'Claren has shown that our version of this 92d Psalm is as good as Rouse's, though not perhaps quite so close. This case occurred in this vicinity. Yet at the very same meeting of Synod, several of the speakers declared that it was common, in both the Associate and Associate Reformed Synods, to receive members to communion, " who did not hold the KXrU'SlYi: IHBOBI UNTENABLE, 1TT> ■ lectioB nn-1 predestination/' These facts nstrate clearly which < u to the mint, cummin and anifl •." and which to u the weightier matters of the Ian milar example was reported in "The Banner and rson interested, lie had been a rianj but baying I to Tipton county, In- ind it m< oient to unite with the Asa - Reformed. Soon a particular friend in the Pres- rian ministry came along ami preached in the neigh- B vcral tin. I the house of this gentleman. The Associate Reformed Bession got wind of it. lie was ised of being too sociable with Presbyterian*) hearing them preach, and uniting with them in singing. u This, they sai 1, was a bad example that I was setting before the congregation, and as I was one of their leading mem- mid be noticing these things; and that I would have to make some acknowledgments before I could have any church privilege. Not seeing that I had gainst the All-wise lluler of the universe, I was unwilling to confess that I had sinned against men : and the session accordii ceded to discipline." One good result speedily followed — a new Presbyterian church was in a short time erected, dedicated and occupied by a promif gregation. The explanation of such extreme measures as these is D"t difficult, on the principle stated by the late Dr. Clay- gh, of Oxford. In .-peaking of the state of denomi- risting in the Associate Reformed New York, he said : u It is believed that there eviction that, in order to maintain the life and energy of the body, and prevent it* being twallo vp by the larger denominations, on the principle that in the moral as well m U rial world the attraction of r than that of dies, the * For January I 176 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. distinctive principles and rules of the body should be firmly maintained/' * Whether the maintaining of " distinctive rules n after the manner above indicated, will be promotive of the great interests of truth, charity, and salvation, is a very serious question. Ought not these brethren to fear lest religion herself should prove to be the sufferer from the scorn of a profane and wicked world ? There are venerable and excellent men in most denom- inations, whose very prejudices we instinctively regard with respect. From such a brother f proceeds the fol- lowing : " Our views and usages lean to virtue's side — they originate in our fear of exalting the human above the Divine. Our error, if error it be, cannot be a dan- gerous one. It cannot arise from any disposition to slight the word of God." We regret to be obliged to take quite a different view of this subject. So long as Dr. M'D. sings " Rouse's paraphrase," interlarded, and if his views be correct, corrujrtcd by hundreds of patches of " human composition," it is vain to talk about " the fear of exalting the human above the Divine." But waiving this — our esteemed brother rejects, "lays aside as useless," very many Psalms and hymns of the Bible, which even he will acknowledge to be inspired and Di- vine. For example, listen to Ralph Erskine, a chief cap- tain of the Seceder host. He is speaking of the beautiful evangelical songs of Isaiah : u Of all the prophets (not excepting David,) none spoke so clearly of Christ. The whole of his prophecy * * * abounds with more poetical passages, sacred odes and evangelical songs, than all the other prophets besides (including David.) * * Those Divine hymns * * have in them as lofty and sublime strokes of poetry as are to be met with. ,} Now in these and scores of similar songs of praise in other parts of the Scriptures, there is nothing human for Dr. M'D. • Preacher, July 12, 1S54. t Dr. M'Dill, of Sparta, Illinois. EXCLUSIVE THEORY UNTENABLE. 177 to be afraid of* Erekin was not afraid of "turn- ing : rg int«> metro cm the P*atm* of David m u divisions about Psalmody." How often is moronity split into fragments on this very rock of stumbling I Two <>r more poor shriveled churches, look- ing like Pharaoh's lean kine, drag out a miserable exist- . the one denouncing the other as guilty of " idola- try," --offering strange tire before the Lord," " commit- ting the sin of Nadab and Abihu," " laying the ping stone for infidelity/' u exposing themselves to the seven last plagues," "ineurriug the curse pronounced upon such as add to or take away from God's revealed word," fcc. Thus they creep < d fir >m year to r, the one attempting to devour the other, neither able to Bustain a pastor, or eren to have preaching more than a half or quarter of the time. And what is the nal source of the division? Why just this: S^-me oher has taught the one party it is a r praise. This -•.ill duiu^. 180 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. of an inspired Jew, and by this instrumentality, living as he did under a dispensation of types and shadows, he may record for our instruction many matters pertaining to " burnt offerings/' " incense of rams/' " bullocks upon the altar/' " organs/' " timbrels/' " dances/' " cornets," " trumpets/' " new moons," &c, and the holy resolutions of the pious of that day, to observe those typical rites and ceremonies, which were then commanded duties, may come down to us as the inspired record of the zeal, self-denial and holy fervor of the pious Jews. " The only wise God" thus chooses his own method of address- ing us, expounded as it is by a further record — the Gos- pel dispensation taking the place of the Mosaic — the New Testament a commentary on the Old. But when we come to speak to God — to express " the desires of our hearts, in the name of Christ, and thankfully acknow- ledge his mercies," or perform the act of praise, " which terminates in God, and by which we confess and admire his perfections, works and benefits," circumstances are entirely changed. God may obviously speak to us in a manner and form in which it would be mockery and pro- faneness for us to speak to Him. It follows, therefore, that we may piously and profitably read or hear many many things found in the Scriptures which we may not employ, even though originally of a devotional nature, in speaking to God. For example, how incongruous and improper would it be for a minister to introduce into a prayer the greater part of the 150th Psalm, as follows : " God, we praise thee with the sound of a trumpet, we praise thee with stringed instruments and organs," &c. Indeed this is so obvious, and strikes the common sense of Christians so universally, that probably no person ever heard any min- ister of any denomination use such a prayer either in private or public. In the temple service these were com- manded duties, and therefore their literal performance was a religious act, and a refusal to obey would have been sin. But now that that method of praising God EXCLUSIVE THEOM UNTENABLE. 181 with trumpets, high-sounding cymbal-, organs, dan is all done away, " to speak to God" in prayer, and " in our I praise him/ 1 by expressing "our desire 91 or intention to employ this ancient service, " organs,' 1 "dances," &o., in his worship, all feel to be unsuitable; . probably no one ever ventured so far to disregard this c in limn feeling of propriety in the sacred and solemn duty :a\( r, unfolding as we do the most secret recesses of the heart to the Omniscient eye. as to make such an ex- perimenf npontheg and Christian conscientious- of mankind. How then, we ask, can it be most suitable and proper fur us to "speak to God" in praise, which is an equally solemn and direct address to the archer of all hearts," language which we shrink from in the act of prayer? Nothing but common us has sanctioned a distinction, where obviously there is no i r ial difference. We are far from supposing it ne- ury in all acceptable prayer and praise, "to assume every thought and expression for our own." But we maintain that if the whole book of Psalms is of Divine authority for praist literally, and in preference to all ' other inspired matter, its advocates fall into the forego- ing difficulties and inconsistencies. No scriptural diver- sity between praise and prayer can explain or justify such incongruities. In the foregoing Letters we have purposely avoided any extended comparison of the two versifications or 11 paraphrases" of the Psalms most commonly used. It has indeed been boldly asserted that we " exalt Watts above David." But it is scarcely necessary to point out the obvious distinction between the authorship of the Psalm-, which all admit to be inspired, and the very humble part performed by the uninspired arranger of a tical "paraphrase of the Psalms/ 1 God spake the Psalms by David — or David spake by the Holy Ghost Dr. Watts writes a poetical paraphra$e of the Psalms. Is he therefore a bitter writer than David? No n than /•//,/• than David. No Presbyte- 16 182 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. rian of ordinary sense ever conceived such a sentiment. It must have originated in another quarter. On the other hand the theory and practice of our brethren appear to take almost as various hues as the chameleon. Thus in their "Testimony" they say — "We testify for the book of Psalms in & faithful translation" * Dr. Cooper, on the contrary, says : " The only question is, has the translator observed the order and arrangment of the original, and is the idea fairly and fully brought out V But this is to abandon entirely the principle of " a faithful translation." All Dr. C. contends for is " the inspired order and arrangement — and that the idea be fairly and fully brought out." On Dr. C's. principle, all his "explanations" of the Psalms before singing them, are inspired, provided he has observed the original " order and arrangement," and has fairly and fully brought out the idea" — conditions which he, of course, ordinarily observes. Besides, Dr. C's. principle condemns Rouse in forty or fifty gross departures from "the order and ar- rangement of the original." For illustrations, see a previous Letter. Dr. C. of course repudiates the dictum of his brother Dr. P., viz. that Rouse, " like the prose translation of the whole Bible, is substantially correct and faithful, and for the same reason, is to be regarded as the word of God ! " — Preadier, Aug. 9, 1844. Very different is the judgment of a writer in "The Christian Witness," a Seceder organ. He utterly rejects Dr. C's. theory, thus : " It may be said that such rhyming and syllabification do not add to the ideas of the original. So }'ou may make a song or sermon out of a single sen- tence, without adding a single idea not contained in the text. But then you give us not the pure word of God." Indeed this latter writer candidly admits that the use of ''redundant words, paraphrastic phrases, diminutive expressions," &c, such as Dr. C. approves, is a virtual surrender of the ichole question of " inspired Psalmody." Thus he says : " If we may weaken the sense and add a * Testimony United Presbyterian church, p. 46. ■XCLUSIV1 THEORY UNTENABLE. 183 I to make ■ jingle ; it' we may impair the forte, and r supply a term or phrase, to make up the Dum- ber of syllables in a line, or the number of lines in a . in order to please our fam-y, may we not by the if reasoning, add a whole stanza, or make a wh Pour own com} A similar view is taken in an article published in "The Preacher."* The writer says: -The permissioB t.. rhymers t>> add and dfce, and dip and twist t/tr Holy & • >, for th( a rhyming Psalmody, has opened a irate through which ev- rj g \ and every con- ... and every poet, afflicted with an itch of wri- ting, has driven a hymn or a hymn book into the church Now, truly, I see no good reason why one church should have author itfj to give tuch pt rmtsnofi, and of it." This of course condemns Boose. It' the Associate or Associate Reformed church, •• may add to the word of God word* of it$ own dent to make half adoien Psalms more or less," why may not others 4> add the matter of a dozen!" And lusion to which he comes emphatically is this : bera of rhyming Pkalmody are dii 'eading th< 'red Psalmody" In closing his article, this writer plainly tells his breth- r n that they use a version v:hi<:h has no authority in the Bible. Dear him : " We have no authority, then, from Scripture, tor ma- king _ ing of rhyming Psalms ) we are under no Sltj to have Or to use them." But while some of these brethren, like the last writer, would repudiate Rouse (and every other system in rhyme) '/•"/, it Btill has Eealoua defenders. Thus Rev. l>r. Ken : u We Would have BO more objection to a f that which is known a version, with David, than we would to a comparison of translation of the Bible with the original "t * For J.mn.iry 10, 1 - | Preacher, AugOSt '.'. 1847. 184 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. Thus we are back on the basis of the " Testimony," viz. " a faithful translation," " the unadulterated word of God," " songs composed in heaven !" Nor do these brethren harmonize much better in re- gard to another aspect of the same subject. In a debate on the subject of " Improvement of Psalmody," in the Associate Synod, * Dr. Cooper said : " Something must be done. The interests of the church and the extension of our cause are involved. I refer members to a letter from brother Herron. He says we do not appreciate the matter here. We are familiar with this version, but it is not so elsewhere. He has great difficulty in persuading the people to make use of this version, owing to the awkwardness of the expressions. They are becoming tired of it. It makes me feel very unhappy when I think of the awkwardness of them, and know that the}' might be so easily improved. Those who have had any experience on this subject must feel the force of his ob- jections. Any poetry two hundred years old must he of such a character as to excite a smile. The pronunciation and phraseology are altogether different from what they are now." So also a writer in the " United Presbyterian " " despairs of ever bringing the Catholic church back to David's Psalms," without a new and better version — and without such version, he adds, "we must rest content, either to give up a Divine appointment, or remain a little separated branch of the church to all coming genera- tions." That there are very serious doctrinal and historical er- rors in " Rouse's paraphrase," does not admit of a doubt. Thus Psalm 69 : 4 :. " They that would destroy me, be- ing mine enemies wrongfully, are mighty : then I restored that which I took not away." This Psalm is a most re- markable prophecy of the Messiah. " The Holy Spirit," observes Scott, "evidently spoke of the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. Indeed it is so manifest a prophecy of Christ, that we should consider * May, 1854. BXCLUBIYI IHS0E1 (JNTHNABLB. 185 Jii in irts of it." How then has the Terse quoted ab Tbej that vronld me destroy, and are Miii- -'iy, thai I took not To render / isi made satisfaction for our sins, and restored r U) the Divine law which he hud not taken S % But was Christ "Jbrced" to do this? I to make satisfaction for sinners? To sup- khis ifl to overthrow the essential nature of the Di- vine sacrifice ; to misrepresent the inspired record, and ntradict the Saviour himself: u I lay down my life the sheep. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself." rendering in our system is liable to none of these objection- : Twtl then I paid that dreadful debt Which men could never pay, And I >non to thy law, Which sinners took an The following from Psalm 18 : 25, is nearly as unintel- persons as the Hebrew : Thou gracious to the gracious art, To upright men upright : Pure to the pure, Broward thou kyth'st Unto the froward wight. We cannot enter into further details. But in closing ft respectfully ask, ought not the arguments and facts of this and previous discussions to lead these bretl usly to reflect upon certain moral as] of • lition? Have they not virtually cut off i the church of Christ, the Free church, the Estab- lish, and all the other Scottish Presbyterian ehu; pi a small u fraction." I Bay virtually — they have not the power. But is not this mute result of their exclusive principles 1 >r. ( land] Cunningham 10* 186 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. were to come to this country, they could not be admitted to commune with these brethren ! Certainly not, if they would treat those distinguished persons as they do their own elders, who sing " the mere productions of men." LETTER XIV. MISREPRESENTATIONS OF DR. WATTS EXPOSED — THE USE OF HYMNS IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, PROVED BY DR. m'mASTER, MERLE D'AUBIGNE, NORTH BRITISH REVIEW, NEANDER, AND OTHERS LETTER OF PLINY TESTIMONY OF EUSEBIUS HYMNS CONDEMNED BY THE COUNCIL OF LAODICEA, WHICH ALSO FORBID ANY TO SING EXCEPT THE CHORISTERS CASE OF THE HERETIC PAUL OF SAMOSATA — TRUTHS ESTABLISHED BY THAT CASE. My Dear Sir : — In this, my closing Letter, I propose to examine with some care various injurious charges made against the memory of Dr. Watts, and intended to reflect odium upon those who employ his poetical labors in the worship of God. In view of the principles and arguments of former Letters, how strange that men of piety and sense, who have written much on these topics, should utter such a sentiment as this: "The principle which maintains that these Psalms (of David) are not suitable to be employed in the worship of the church un- der the gospel dispensation, is a discovery of modern times. " * But who maintains such a principle ? Certain- ly no Presbyterian. Dr. Watts and some others have said this in regard to certain farts of the Psalms — but never, to the best of my knowledge, of "the Psalms" as a whole. See how easy by a little twist of this sort, to caricature the sentiments of any man or set of men? A similar mis-statement represents Dr. W. as having * Pressly on Psalmody, p. 6. VINDICATION «>r DB. WATTS. 187 i that the Psalma as given by inspira* ti' ii. observe, the ftalms, the whole Builms!} are unfit to be rang/' * Here is a similar perversion. A.gain, Dr. K. tells us — u Isaac Watts conceived the idea * * that GENERALLY they (l. <., the Psalms as given by in- Bpiration) tended to 'sink our devotion and hurt oui In reply, I again deny the statement as a mat ter of tart. Isaac Watt- never "conceived such an idea/ 1 The words as partly quoted, are at the close oi an argu- ment in which Dr. Watts expressly says he is .-peaking of "several } and "the application of many : David;" he is Bpeaking of "the omission of whole lines and verses," by a certain class of intelligent " whereas," he adds, " the more unthinking go ging in cheerful ignorance wherever the clerk (or pre- centor) leads them, across the river Jordan, through the land Gebal, Amnion, and Anielek ; * * they enter into the temple, they bind their sacrifices with cords to the horns of the altar, they join with the high-sounding cymbals, their thoughts are bedarkened with the smoke of in« i nse and covered with Jewish veils." Now it is of these tpecial circumstances and expressions that Dr. Watts says — " I fear they do but sink our devotion and hurt our worship/ 1 Is this the same as saying that "GENERALLY they (the Psalms) tend to sink our devo- tion and hurt our praise!" Dr. Watts is speaking of tain special Jewish peculiarities which he admits to be "the beauties and perfections of a Hebrew Bong, and ite Wisdom to raise the affections of the that day" — but in his judgment adapted "to sink the devotion " of Christians at the present time. ])r. W itts 1 design and reference w are to these Bpecia] and peculiar feature- of a part of tin- Psalms — the editor of the " Preacher " quotes bis words as applicable to the Psalms gt i < rally .' I- this a fair and righteous use of the words! We fa ~ kte I that the Presbyterian church Las i ; etjohed Dr. Watts 1 prose writings, nor is • Tr - 10, 1861 188 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. she responsible for their sentiments. They may be right or wrong, true or false — they are not ours. When, there- fore, with great parade and triumph certain objectionable statements are quoted against us from those writings, this can scarcely be reconciled with the principles of fair and honorable discussion, which should govern all, especially Christians. This is true, even when the views of Dr. W. are correctly quoted — much more when they are pervert- ed as abo^. Again — Dr. "Watts is charged with " using arguments not only unsatisfactory, but impious/' because he says he kept his " grand design in view, viz. ' to teach his author to speak like a Christian/ or 'the common sense (or ex- perience) of a Christian/ " But let Dr. W. explain his own meaning. "My design is," he says, "to accommo- date the book of Psalms to Christian (in opposition to Jewish) worship. And in order to this, it is necessary to divest David, Asaph, &c , of every other character but that of a Psalmist and a saint, and to make them always speak the common sense (or experience) of a Christian." In other words, he designed that David should " leave Judaism behind/' instead of praising God with "incense of rams, trumpets, cornets, dances/' &c. So also in an- other oft-quoted and much abused passage, where he says that " David should be converted into a Christian /' yet in the very same sentence he explains himself, as follows, viz. "that a good part of the Psalms should be fitted for the use of the churches" in "a paraphrase in which dark expressions should be enlightened, Levitical ceremo- nies and Hebrew forms of speech changed into the worship of the gospel, and explained (as certain preachers do) in the language of our time and nation." This is what Dr. Watts meant by teaching "David to speak the common sense of a Christian," and "converting hiin into a Chris- tian." We do not defend the use of this phraseology — "con- verting David into a Christian." It sounds harshly, though in the same style with the expression, "teach the VINDICATION DP DK. WATTS. 1 9 Psalmist to speak English/ 1 i. e., by ''translation.' 1 * Yet ■ v^ry little candor would satisfy any intelligent man that his meaning was unexceptionable: "For why Bhonld 1 d ress G "1 my Saviour in a Bong, with burnt of fatlings and with the incense of ram-'.' Why Bhould I pray to be Bprinkled with hyssop, or recur to the blood of bullocks and goats? Why Bhould I him I my sacrifices with cords to the horns of the altar '.'" &o. By teaching his "author to speak like a Christian," I>r. Watts therefore plainly refers to Christianity as opposed t<> Judaism ; and means precisely what Dr. rressly prac- tices every Sabbath morning when he explains a I '.-aim containing these ceremonial and Jewish expressions! And yet Dr. P. has the boldness to ask — "Does not Dr. Watts virtually arraign the wisdom of the Holy One of ]-: ,1 and undertake to teach him ' to speak like a Chris- tian?' ' We reply — Docs not Dr. P. " virtually arraign the wisdom of the II<>ly One of Israel M when in explain- ing I of the Psalms, he teaches the people to sing them as he interprets them by the New Testa- ment? Is not this conduct of Dr. P. quite as " deroga- tory to the Spirit of Inspiration " as the language of Dr. Watts? "It would appear then," adds Dr. P., "that in the estimation of this man i Pr. W.) the teaching of the Holy Spirit which the Psalmist enjoyed was very insuf- ficient, and that it was necessary that one in modern times Bhould undertake the office of teaching him ' to k Like a Christian.' " t Well, as Dr. P. constantly practices this teaching of the Psalmist, we hope he will •forth be very Bev< re on Dr. Watts — especially the chief difference between the two sorts of teaching is, that Dr. P. teaches in prose y but Dr. W. mpdetry! in, Dr. W. is charged with affirming that pa the i to excite unholy passions,'' and u * Here ii a parallel case: u Lather * * * nndertook the difficult k l)i3 i //< -' i oj '■ i /:■_■' ■: a ■ ., ,, i . , t r 1 1". 190 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. press resentment and hatred against the Psalmist's per- sonal enemies." * Thus he says, " Among the impreca- tions that David uses against his adversaries in the Psalm (35th) I have endeavored to turn the edge of some of them from personal enemies against the implacable ene- mies of God in the world." On this last passage Dr. P. remarks — u Here the reader will see that David is sup- posed to have uttered imprecations against personal ene- mies. Could he, then, have been under the influence of the Holy Spirit ? " We reply — certainly the Psalmist could not " have been under the influence of the Holy Spirit," if his imprecations were directed against those who were his personal enemies, considered in his private character as a member of society ; or if lie was governed by feelings of private revenge. But was not David a king ? Did he not shed much blood f Did he not sus- tain the character of a judge in Israel, as also that of an eminent protector of the church? Were not the heathen around " his adversaries" in all these respects ? Or does Dr. P. think it equally unchristian to ci utter imprecations against enemies in any of these relations? Take for example, the familiar case of David and Goliah. Does Dr. Pressly think it was " unchristian" in David to pray that Goliah might be slain ? Was not Goliah his adver- sary, acting as David did in the person of a defender of his nation and his church ? Or to go farther back, did not Joshua and the judges " utter imprecations " against their " adversaries" whom they were commanded to ex- terminate, certainly not as private individuals, but as public persons ? So also when David uses the following prayer, we per- ceive what Dr. Watts means by " sharp invectives against personal enemies," and " imprecations against David's adversaries." " Consume them in wrath, consume them that they may not be." Psalm 59 : 13. "In this Psalm," remarks Dr. Scott, "David expresses what his thoughts and atfcctions were, when Saul sent officers to watch his • Pressly on Psalmody, p. 99. VINDICATION OF DR. WA I 191 house all Bight, to slay him.' 1 And on the 13th verse quoted above be adds — "It ia probable thai David meant the disgrace, degradation, and gradual extirpation of Saul's family, for their opposition to the Lord's anointed (David himself) and all their imprecations and calumnies against him." This is precisely what Dr. Watts means l>y u David's personal enemies" — viz. ene- mie> to his person as the King of the Jews, or ordained bo — enemies to his throne, and to his life, &c These examples also show the meaning of Dr. W. when he speaks of "some dreadful cume agcUnstmcn proposed to our lips, which is so contrary to the new commandment of loving our enemies," and "almost op- posite to the spirit of the gospej." Certainly Dr. YV. is right in affirming that there is nothing in u the spirit of the gospel" requiring us to destroy and exterminate the heathen, as was the duty of Joshua and David. "Why," remarks Dr. W., u why must I join with David in his legal or prophetic language, to curse my enemies, when my Saviour in his sermons has taught me to love and - them?" The reader will observe the qualifying clause — " in hit legal or prophetic language" Take ■ - from the Psalms. " He teacheth my hand* >r, so that a bow of steel is broken by my bands. / '"/•■'/ them that they were not able to ri*> i they are fallen under my feet. Thou hast given me the necks «»f my enemies; that I might destroy them that hate me. Arise, Lord, disappoint him, cast him down. When my enemies are turned back they shall fall and perish at resenoe." There are scores, perhaps hundreds of similar passages, some of them much Btronger in expression. To David, as the anointed king and captain of God's people, they were highly appropriate. To that u legal" or ceremonial dispensation,* when it was David!* duty to fight and terminate the surrounding heathen nations, this langv was moal suitable. u Hut," argues Dr. Watts, "as no such duties now devolve upon Christians, why must they 192 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. 'join with David in this legal or prophetic language?' I cannot use it against ' my enemies/ for I am com- manded i to pray for and bless them/ Why, then, should I use David's language toward foes long since dead, and which at best, was i legal or prophetic/ and thus altogether peculiar to that people, day and dispen- sation ?" These illustrations also explain Dr. Watts' meaning when he represents " persons of seriousness as forced to omit whole lines and verses, because they dare not sing without understanding •, and almost against their con- sciences." " I have left out/' he adds, " some whole Psalms, and several parts of others, that tend to fill the mind with overwhelming sorrows or sharp resentments. " The meaning of this is already explained. The reason which governed Dr. Watts in these omissions, Dr. P. says is this — " Some of them (the Psalms) are of dangerous tendency ! " But where has Dr. Watts said so ? " We meet a line/' he says, " which belongs but to one action or hour of the life of David, that breaks off our song in the midst ; our consciences are affrighted lest we should speak a falselwod unto God * * * before we have time to reflect that this may be sung only as a history of ancient saints." " There are a thousand lines in it (the book of Psalms) which were not made for a church in our days to assume as its own." Dr. W. speaks of the dark, " carnal," shadowy dispensation of Judaism, which Dr. Owen says " gave no clear and distinct appre- hensions of the future state of glory." But is this the same as to say that the Psalms which treat of that dis- pensation " are of dangerous tendency." He agrees with Dr. Jno. Owen, that the Jewish system of " worship w is carnal and outwardly pompous" — also that certain parts of " these Psalms of Jewish composure ought to be translated for Christian worship," and that some of them, and parts of others, may be properly omitted, as never having been designed by their Divine Author for the purposes of praise under the gospel. VINDICATION OF Dll. WATTS. 193 But is this the same as "slandering the Holy Spirit or offering a fearful indignity to the Spirit of Inspira- tion." * These examples will serve to show with bow liiiu-li truth Dr. W. is charged with representing "the Psalmist ie giving veni to feeling* of malevokna toward hu permmal enemies " &0. He admits that to persons who u have not time to reflect* how certain parts may be properly SUIg (viz. "as a history of ancient saints/') the tendency may be to produce " overwhelming sorrows and Bharp resentments." 13ut he adduces this rather as an abuse, which ought to be corrected, than a legitimate result from the right use of the Psalms. But it is in his versification of the 119th Psalm that Dr. Watts is affirmed to have treated the writings of the Holy Spirit with special indignity ! u I have collected and disposed/' he says. " the most useful verses of this Psalm under eighteen different heads, and formed a Divine song on each of them ; but the verses are much transposed to attain some degree of connection. " Dr. P. considers this as indicating that he could not have regarded the Psalm as "the production of Infinite Wisdom/' " Is the mind of the Spirit/ 1 he asks, "exhibited so awkwardly as to render it necessary that the verses should be much trans- posed to attain some degree of connection I" "j* But here Dr. P. exhibits much more zeal than wisdom or prudence. We know nothing is more common in the pulpit than to classify and group under heads the members of a para- graph. Thus in the Epistles, the rapid intellect of the apostle Paul, under the Divine inspiration, passes with admirable vehemence over the parts of a great subject, so that in lecturing on his writings, it often greatly aids in understanding the Bense, to have sacb a grouping together of topics. Yet the preacher or lecturer does not suppose he is thereby insulting the Holy Spirit ! So in the book of Proverbs, many whole chapters are made up of sep- arate sentences, whose connection it is very difficult to * Presslv on Psalmody, po. ( J9, 100, 71. | lr: i. p. 111. 17 194 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. perceive. Thus, also, in the 119th Psalm, the eminently pious and practical Matthew Henry says, " There is scl- dom any coherence between the verses, but like Solomon's Proverbs, it is a chest of gold rings, 'not a chain of gold links/ " But if Dr. P. is correct, Matthew Henry must have believed the book of Proverbs, as well as this Psalm, u to be very awkwardly exhibited by the Holy Spirit !" To such extravagance will men rush in pursuit of some favorite notion. It is obvious, therefore, that in grouping the verses of this Psalm under eighteen heads, according to topics, Dr. W. has done nothing worse than Dr. P. himself does, when he lectures on other parts of the Scriptures ; noth- ing which Henry does not admit to be necessary and proper on account of the want of " coherence between the verses." Nor is Watts more to blam3 than Henry and Pressly ! Certainly what is plain sober sense in Matthew Henry, cannot be so horribly impious in Dr. Watts ! Among one hundred and seventy-six verses, which Henry says u seldom have any coherence," nearly all spoken of the law of God, Watts has classified those which from their meaning seem properly to fall together. His object was good — not to offer insult to the Holy Spirit, but to aid the feeble understandings of mea in their attempts to show forth the praises of the infinite and incomprehensible God. Where two or more verses were exactly or nearly in the same terms, he classified them together, &c. In all this he did precisely what every able lecturer on the Holy Scriptures does in the pul- pit, in another part of public worship, to explain, apply and honor the blessed truth of God. u But," inquires Dr. P., " shall a sinful mortal select such verses as he considers 'most useful/ and pass over the remainder as unworthy of notice ?" * But does not Dr. P. "pass over" the 20th verse of Psalm 72, and reject it from his Psalmody? Does not he, "a sinful mortal, pass over " a number of other parts of the Psalms, espe- * Pressly on rsalmody, p. 114. VINDICATION OF DR. WATTS. ciallv most of the inspired titles? Does he d all the other "inspired Psalms, hymns and sj*irit- ual songs" in Isaiah and the other prophets, Ac., as u un« worthy of notice" in his system of praise! As to the q, we have already Bhown that there '//•/,/ or forty snch eases in Rouse! Did he "know than the Holy Spirit tJu order/' &c.? Again, Dr. Watts is quoted as Baying, that "he is bold t<> maintain the great principle' 1 of his work, "that if tightest genius on earth, or an angel from heaven, shou U David, and keep close to the §en$e } he could not make a suitable Psalm book." * Prom this Dr. K. infers that Watts did not design to give the "correct Benso of David/' But is there no ra- tion in Dr. Watts' language? What is the fact? The paragraph quoted, opens thus: u I must confess I u anv version or paraphrase of Hu Psalms .1 bwisb - feet as to dh all further attempts. ]>ut whoever undertakes the noble fc, let hi in bring with him : nt out the distinctly limil : Dr. Watts. He is Bpeaking of "the .1 "of the Psalm: — h thi y are, " the d ration* ' — d 1 it is in se to * 1)t. Kerr, in ! 196 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. the sense and style of the inspired author I" Yet who would ever dream that this was his meaning from the extract made by the " Preacher ?" But when this is made known it spoils the whole argument. Whether this is fair treatment of an author, others can decide. Again, I quote from a printed volume thus: "Dr. Watts, whose compositions are sung in public and family worship by a great majority of professed Christians in the United States, maintained that the Psalms were too Jewish to be sung with edification by Christians. " " And the idea is very prevalent that the book of Psalms is not adapted to Christian worship/' Both these extracts are untrue. Dr. Watts maintained that "a part of the Psalms are too Jewish," and "the idea is prevalent," not that u thc book of Psalms," but parts of the Psalms "are not adapted to worship" under the gospel. But we cannot extend these illustrations. They show what most unrighteous judgment Dr. Watts has received. His paraphrase of the Psalms is "the mere production of an English poet" — he is charged with having "ad- vanced principles which strike at the inspiration of the Scriptures," * and with "speaking reproachfully of the Psalms." With what small show of reason these assaults are made, the foregoing examples will prove. In his " Treatise on Prayer," he uses this language : " If we find our hearts very barren, and hardly know how to frame a prayer before God of ourselves, it has been oftentimes useful to take a book in our hand, wherein are contained some spiritual meditations in a petitionary form, some devout reflections, or excellent patterns of prayer; and above all, the Psalms of David, some of the prophe- cies of Isaiah, some chapters in the gospels or any of the epistles. Thus we may lift up our hearts to God/' &c. "Above all, the Psalms of David !" — And yet we are told that Dr. Watts "spoke disparagingly of the book of Psalms !" And in his " Advice to a Young Man," he * Pressly on Psalmody, p. 51. VINDICATION OF Ml. WA 191 : u To direct your cai irly with the book of Psalms." [osl I I be- : men/ 1 nothing would be in to prove by actual comparison, thai in a number of hi* versifications, be baa given all that i PlBalm, viz. not the very language of oar aslation, which was the work of uninspired men; f R use, but the sentiments doctrinal and dei is fully and fairly brought out in our Bjstem in that uf Rou . Dr. A V. Bays: M I think I may assume pleasure of being the first who hath brought down the royal author into the eomm n affairs of the Christian . and led the Psalmist of Israel into the don' Ch: t anythi J - about him." lei sert that it was Dr. Ws. intention "imj - tb( Pi dmist from the church !" i Imit, with the "North British Review," u that in hi- old age" Dr. Watts unfortunately attempted "to >• t phi ^ right on * and :„i) r to re-adjust, f r theol igians, the doctrine of the Trinity." * It was " in his old age " — when in E down by years and bodily in- firmity. But in his "Prefa Lyric Poems," he iks of u the eternal God 1 an infant of * * agonies of sorrow loading the bouI of him wh» was God over all, and the Sovereign of life is arm- on a cross, 1 leeding and • ild be more full and explicit than thes from the 45th and God of his hymns : God Fill* i in the Last jo i o — I i . -;iil, And I.;. •::.!. * North Dr. 17* 198 LETTERS OX PSALMODY. "What equal honors shall we bring To Thee. Lord our God the Lamb, When all the notes that angels sing Are far inferior to thy name. These are but specimens of many pages of the same import, which might be extracted from his writings. Nor is he less explicit in regard to the distinct personali- ty and divinity of the Holy Spirit. In Dr. Watts' work on the Trinity, published after his Psalms and Hymns, he says : M l. Those very names, titles, attributes, works and wor- ship, which are peculiar to God, and incommunicable to another, are ascribed to three, by God himself, in his word ; which three are distinguished by the names of Father, Son and Spirit. " 2. There are, also, some other circumstantial, but con- vincing evidences, that the Sox and the Spirit have the true and proper Godhead ascribed to them, as well as the Father. u 3. Thence it necessarily follows, that these three, viz. the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, have such an inti- mate and real communion in that one Godhead, as is sufficient to justify the ascription of those peculiar and distinguishing Divine characters to them. "4. Though the Father, Son and Spirit are but one God, yet there are such distinct properties, actions, char- acters and circumstances ascribed to these three, as are usually ascribed to three distinct persons among men." In our Letter No. XII., reference was made to the an- cient literature of hymns. A few further suggestions and some quotations from recent publications, are all that our space permits. 1. Dr. M' Master, author of the "Apology for the book of Psalms," admits "the existence of hymns of human composition at an early day^ and their use in the church," he adds, "is with us no matter of dispute" — " they were frequently used in public worship," &c. * • Apology, p. 34. HYMNS OF TIIK EARLY CHURCH. 199 2. Another important witness to tbe same truth, fa the eminent Merle D'Aubigne, the learned author of "The History of the Reformation of the Sixteenth Century/ 1 In that wonderful revolution which shook the Papacy to its foundations, M men could not confine themselves," lie -. u to mere translations of ancient hymns. The souls i f Luther and many of his cotemporaries * * * poured forth their feeling in religious Bonajs. * * * Thus the hymns were revived, which in the first century had wiled the pangs of the martyrs. M In these, he tells US] u ] try and music blended their most heavenly fea- tures. * The distinguished historian traces these 44 hymns of human composure " back to the very period of primitive Christianity, "the first century. M 3. A third important witness is the " North British Review." After quoting from the earliest historian of the church, *f who has preserved "a fragment of the second century," the hymn beginning, u We praise thee, we bless thee," kc, the Review adds, " this hymn is invested with a charm, * * * for it was the song which martyr after martyr sang so cheerfully as they marched from prison to their death place/ 1 J The same authority, after citing a number of ancient hymns by Ephream the Syrian, uses the following lan- guage: "In many cases, hymns like these were the sole con- I of gospel truth when heterodoxy grew and flourished beneath the Papal influence. They were too pure to be defiled by Romish contaminations, * * * they have come down to us in all the splendor of their first purity. * * * We ought to love them the more, because they flowed with dear and living streams through the barren wastes of Popery." || threefold testimony (Dr. M'Master, Merle D'An> * ITiptnry of Reformation, toL 8, p. 177. .1 History, I I Ibid. 200 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. bigne and the North British Keview) furnishes a full and triumphant reply to the vaunting challenge so rashly put forth and repeated, as follows : " If you can find a sin- gle instance from the day that heard the melodies of the sweet singer of God's Israel, on down to the day that heard the horrible blasphemies of Paul of Samosata, of a single church member, who on one solitary occasion used in God's worship any other than the hymns contained in the book usually called the l Psalms of David/ then I will give up this whole controversy." * If any further authority is required, we have it in the illustrious Neander, the prince of modern church his- torians — " The Psalmody of the early church consisted in part of the Psalms of David, and in part of hymns composed for the purpose." f Nor does ecclesiastical history for the first four centuries present so much as a fragment of evidence that any individual or Council made objection to these hymns until we come to the Synod of Laodicea, A. D. 344-346. That Synod passed an act prohibiting u all hymns as of dangerous tendency, and restricting their churches to the Psalter and other canonical songs of the Scriptures." J The Synod, it seems, tolerated " the other songs of Scripture," which our brethren call " corruptions." But the historian adds this significant clause — "The Arians of that age also opposed these ancient hymns, for different reasons." \\ The reason is not given, but perhaps the present practice of the Arians of Ulster in retaining Rouse may suggest an explanation. The celebrated letter of Pliny to the Emperor Trajan (A. D. 103-4) states that having tortured several of the Christians, he discovered no other crime in their assem- blies, than that " they were accustomed to meet before * United Presbyterian, of Cincinnati. f Allgem. Kirsch. J Xeander says that the same Synod, in the 15th canon, "ordered that no one should sing at Divine service, except the choristers." — Bib- lical Jicpertoi'Uf January, ] 832. || Primitive Church, by Coleman, p. 376. HYMNS OF Tin: EARLY CHURCH. 201 day, cafmen Christ divert invicem — Ihrist as God in alternate resp oses." Ter- tulliau. ■ oentury later, referring to this letter of Pliny, — u Every one was invited in their public worship to ring unto God, according to hi* ability } dc propria -a - >ng composed by himself, or one from the Scriptures." * Those who ical talent, prepared suitable hymns, and recited them in the public assemblies. The historian Eusebius, also quotes Cains, a COtem- porary of Tertullian, thus — " Who knows not * * * how man)- Bongs and odes of the brethren there are, written ining y jam prick m — { a long time ago/ by believers, and offering praise to Christ as the word of God, ascribing divinity to him." f Many of these hymns were preserved and appealed to in subsequent in the controversies with the Arians and other enemies of the truth. J Origen, who flourished A. D. 250, Dyo- nisius, and other early writers, often cited these hymns as a soil ^ common literature of the church, and thus con- founded the errorisl The case of the arch-heretic Paul of Samosata, who was deposed for denying the divinity of Christ, and other offenses, by the Council of Antioch, A. D. 269, has often employed in this controversy. The decision of the Council, translated from Eusebius by Milner, so far as it refers to Psalmody , is as follows: "He suppressed the Psalms made in honor of Jesus ( . I called them modern compositions — and he directed others to be - in the church in his own commendatii n." N ander • facts thusi — " The church hymns which had cond oentury, he banished as an inn-. : : " on the principle that only pottage* out of th> J! N ought to Lc $ung ; and thus he . c. S. 230, 202 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. probably suffered nothing but the Psalms to be used." This opposition to " the church hymns" by the heretic Paul, as well as his agreement with the Arians of the period of the Council of Laodicea, in preferring the naked Psalms, is not difficult of explanation. Why do all such heretics of the present day hate and oppose creeds and confessions ? Why do they denounce them as profane additions to the word of God, which they claim as the only and all-sufficient creed ? They all profess, like? Arius, when arraigned before the Council of Nice (A. D. 325), to believe the Scriptures. " But it soon appear- ed," says Milner, " that without some explanatory terms decisively pointing out what the Scriptures had revealed, it was impossible to guard against the subtleties of the Arians." * They were ready to adopt the strongest terms employed in the Scriptures to designate the di- vinity of Christ, even "God"— "the true God," &c, because they received them with their own interpreta- tions. But the Council at length drove Arius and his party out of all their hiding places, by employing such forms of confessing Christ as even the arch-heretic could not receive. In these facts we discover the secret of the hostility of Paul and his friends to the " hymns of the churches," and their decided preference for the naked text of Da- vid — just as the Jew and the modern Arian are quite willing to sing the simple words of the second Psalm — but what Jew would accept for worship Dr. Watts' para- phrase of it ? And the same is true of the Arian. But is not this the same as saying that the inspired Psalms are adapted to the propagation of fundamental error? No more than the same thing is asserted of the whole Scriptures by all who employ creeds as tests of sound- ness in the faith. Painful facts prove that the Holy Scriptures are not a sufficient safeguard against the in- trusion of heresy — and therefore other tests are adopted. What is true of the sacred volume, is true of all its • Ecclesiastical History, vol. 1, p. 2S0 HYMX8 Of Till- EARLY CIiriKll. 203 parK even of the Psalms. Paul and his Arian brethren kn» w this, and, therefore, they had the Bame prefer ma over the more explicit "hymns of the church," as modern heretics express for "thi Bible as 'iiiKiu crxkd," over the acknowledged Bymbols of sound • ptant churches. i ; >r Buch n as >na as these, the her- etic Paul of Bamo8ata " banished the church hyn i which expressly and beyond all controversy ascribed di- vinity to Christ, and he adopted the "principle thai only ught to he tung, and probably suf- I nothing but Psalms | of David I to be used." Such i< the testimony of Neander, the greatest of modern his- Q3. Ab to Paul's having on one occasion (Easter) required hymns t<> be >ung in hu own praise, it was a rate offense, and so dealt with by the Council. It is n"t intimated that such was his common practice, nor that he ordinarily enjoined songs in honor of himself, in the room of the worship of God. In view of such as this, we leave the reader to decide between ]>r. f Bsly and Dr. M'Master; the former of whom -. thai "the daring impiety of Paul was manifested in his taking Buch liberty with the Psalms whose author i< the Boly Spirit" — but the latter (Dr. M'M.) Bays— ulus refus Lebrate the Deity of Christ in a m hymn." * The whole history of ancient hymnol- st ablish the truth of the statement of Nean- . and he but expresses the views of the translator of M< sh im, and of all ecclesiastical historians, so far as fa- miliar t«> the writer. The recent attempt to give the sub- arose out of the exigencies of the mody controversy. - importance in ;:i the following truths, which it clear- 1 . I aul 1' am 1 in common use, certain " church hymns/' * Paulu- .■ in ftecomn per- vertir.i; th-- ' lem . honor of tl. ;."' — Biblie* 204 LETTERS ON PSALMODY. handed down from the second century, perhaps of even earlier date. 2. These hymns were very full and express in pro- claiming the Divine nature of Christ, and in offering him Divine worship — all which Paul abhorred. 3. In order to propagate his errors, this able and art- ful heretic felt it to be indispensable to abolish the use of these hymns. 4. In their place he enjoined the exclusive use of pas- sages of Scripture, probably of the Psalms ; at the same time denouncing the hymns as " modern composi- tions/' and human inventions. In conclusion, " we have all the evidence which speci- mens of undoubted antiquity can aiford, that such scrip- tural hymns were early composed and used by Christians. " Such is the testimony of the learned editors of the "Bib- lical Repertory" (for 1829), to which the reader is referred for many examples. The same authorities cite several most learned commentators to prove that Ephesians 5 : 14 — " Awake thou that sleepest," &c, 1 Timothy 3 : 16, 2 Timothy 2 : 11-13, are quotations from hymns in common use when the apostle wrote. The passage in Ephesians 5 : 14 is expressly given by the apostle as a quotation, without any reference to its author or origin. Grotius and many others, regard the passage, Acts 4 : 24-30, as a hymn, and Augustine calls it, "the first Chris- tian Psalm." It was probably chanted after the manner of the Jews in their synagogues. "And Philo, a cotem- porary of the Apostles, is reported by Nicephorus to have testified that the primitive Christians, after the time of Christ and the apostles, sang in their public worship not only the Psalms of David and other poems of Scrip- ture, but also hymns or odes composed by themselves."* " It has been demonstrated," says the learned Bingham,")" " that there were always such Psalms, and hymns, and doxologies composed by the pious (not inspired) men, and used in the church from the first foundation of it. Nor * Biblical Repertory, 1829, pp. 526 539. f Origines Ecclesiastical, vol. 4, p. 443. HYMNS OF THE KARL? CHUR< il. did any but Paul of Samosata exoepl against the use of them, which he did, because they contained ■ doctrine contrary to his nwn private opinions/ 1 Many of the ex- from early writers to prove these points, may be seen in the original languages, in Lord Chancellor King's 4 - Enquiry into the Constitution and Worship of the Primitive Church/' and still more fully in the great work of Bingham, quoted in the margin. Thus ecclesiastical history unites with the Holy Scriptures in condemning the exclusive system as an innovation upon apostolical in- stitutions. In view of the mass of evidence in these Letters, we cannot but indulge the hope that the needless and hurtful divisions and alienations originating in Psalmody, will soon cease. AVhen that happy period shall arrive, these honored fathers and brethren whom we are now con- strained to withstand, will be glad to copy the safe ex- ample of the ancient church of Scotland, and unite with her humble representative, the Presbyterian church — in their New Testament ascriptions of praise to the incom- prehensible Jehovah, the Glorious Trinity in Unity — u the King eternal, immortal and invisible, the only wise God." Nor will it any longer be regarded as u a corruption of Divine worship," to say with Sternhold and Hopkins, and the early Scottish church : To Father. Sonne, and Holy Ghost, All glory be th ore fore ; A> in beginning was, is now, And shall be evermore : And with Dr. Watts at the close of his hymns — " I can n<»t persuade myself to put a full period to these Di- vine hymns, till I have addressed a medal long of glory to God the Father, the Son, and the Holj Spirit." Thus did our Scottish forefathers delight to celebrate the praises of the adorable Trinity, which, as Dr. Watts expre>~ 3 that peculiar glory of the Divine nature, thai our Lord Jesus Christ has bo clearly revealed to men, and uaty to true Christianity. " 18 APPENDIX. After most of the foregoing Treatise was written, there appeared in Philadelphia a volume entitled u The True Psalmody/' which seems to demand a brief notice. On the 16th of August, 1858, as we are told in the advertisement, a meeting was held in that city, which ap- pointed Rev. J. M. Willson, J. T. Cooper and R. J. Black a committee "to prepare a work in favor of the exclusive use of the Scripture Psalmody/' At a subsequent meet- ing, this committee reported such a treatise, and were unanimously authorized to publish it. Hence the volume called "True Psalmody/' which professes to be "largely a compilation" from the treatises of Dr. M' Master, Pressly and others. Of course most of its arguments have been anticipated in the foregoing Letters. We add a few strictures. 1. The volume bears marks of haste. Thus, p. 117, we are told of "a touching hymn" with the title, "Veni Sancta Spiritus," "composed by King Robert of France, and in which all his gentle nature seems to speak." This professes to be a quotation from a volume called "The Voice of Christian Life." The committee should have corrected the bad grammar, either of King Robert or of the author of "The Voice." " Sancta Spiritus" is an unfortunate attempt at Latin. Again: The running title of the work from p. 71 to p. 183, is "Hymns unwarranted." But here is a labored attempt to prove that when Paul speaks of " Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs/' Ephesians 5 : 19, he intend- ed by all these terms, only "David's Psalms." If this be so, then it follows that we have inspired authority to call "the Psalms" hymns! But the title of the book repeats more than a hundred times, "hymns unwarrant- ed" — "hymns unwarranted/' &c. It is only from other (206) REVIEW 01 IRU1 PSALMODY. 207 parts we learn that the committee mean "uninspired hymns/ 1 thus escaping the odium of having placed their ban upon David's /(///tuts, as well as all the rest, •J. m their " Introduction " they say — M We believe most firmly * * * that this (the book of Psalms) dd be in a literal translation Bung in the worship I f God." This is said while its authors use constantly u \\ use's paraphrase/ 1 Of course they do not sii trituration at all, but a patchwork paraphrase or u ] I txpliccUum" as Ralph ESrskine defines the term. This subject is fully discussed in our first six Letters, where will also be found a satisfactory answer to the commit- a announcement — "we adhere to the very matter pro- vided for us by Him whose praises we celebrate." 1 are very extraordinary statements, proceeding as they do from a learned committee. How strange that they should speak of Rouse as "the very matter provided by Qod I" 3. Following in the track of their predecessors, they up u their man of straw " in various instances, and belabor it most lustily ! For example, they chai against whom they are arguing, with designing k, t > super- the inspired and appointed manual," and to " intro- duce other Psalms or hymns" in its stead, pp. 46, 71. And their favorite epithets for those with whom they dif- fer are, "the friends of human composition" — M advo- - of human Psalmody" — just as though there n no human composition in Rouse ! This volume, however, U rather more moderate in its phraseology than - have noticed. Though it dues not charge us in bo many words, with "impiously rejecting the . ;" yet we are reminded of the danger of "of- fering strange fire V s The commi s d to have very placently come to the conclusion, that their patch- ; paraphrase! are really "the songs composed in heaven/ 1 To attempt to disturb this pleasant di would be only to repeat much that has been already - in our ii Lettei 4. The materials which the committee have thrown 208 APPENDIX. together in this " compilation/' exhibit some curious ex- amples of incoherence and discord. Nor is it easy to determine, of two or more conflicting sentiments set forth with equal zeal and authority, which they wish us to re- ceive as their matured convictions. For example, in the "Introduction" they plead for — "The hook of Psalms in a literal translation," "to the exclusion of uninspired songs," page 7. But when they reach page 217, their proposition is, "the Psalms of Scripture to the exclusion of all uninspired songs." But do the committee really believe that "the book of Psalms," and "the Psalms of Scripture," are identical in meaning ? Are there no Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs in Scripture, except in the one book ? Will they venture to maintain so ab- surd a proposition ? Again : On page 7 of the " Introduction, " they plead for " the book of Psalms to the exclusion of all unin- spired songs." But when they reach page 65, they quote a leading author as follows : " It would appear to be the Divine will that this (book of Psalms) should be used to the exclusion of all others" This of course excludes not only "uninspired songs," but "all others" except the Psalms of David, both inspired and uninspired ! Which side does the committee maintain, or wish us to adopt in this conflict of sentiment 1 And what is most extraordi- nary, on page 133, the committee themselves say — "The issue before us is, have we liberty to make and sing * * songs other than those of the Bible I" On page 7, it was " the book of Psalms to the exclusion of all uninspired songs," but when they arrive at page 133, they forsake their first position/ "the book of Psalms," and are found arguing against " songs other than those of the Bible" — where of course they take under their protection not only "the book of Psalms," but "the songs of the Bible" generally, as well as those of the book of Psalms i The leading author whom they quote with so much approba- tion, says it appears to be " the Divine will" to exclude "all others" but "the Psalms;" but not so the commit- HKVIEW OF IBUI PSALMODY. 209 too when they arrive at page 133. They then Bay, it is 7<< /• than those of the Bible," against which they oontend ! At one time, it is u the book of Psalms M exclusively for which they are valiant — but at another '•tli : the Bible, " including, of course, all wonge in the BxbL — in defense of which they have unsheathed the sword of controversy I And still more to confound this confusion, the committee tell us near the close of the book (p. -17), u We have kept but one definite jj/<>jj- orition before us — the ftalnu of Scripture, the church's sufficient and appointed manual of praise." So that this oracle of " True Psalmody " greatly needs an interpreter to expound its responses. 5. This " True Psalmody M is largely employed with objections to " uninspired hymns." "They have led," the committee tell us, " to the abandonment of congre- gational singing;" and " in domestic worship," they strongly intimate, " there is comparatively little use of sacred songs." These are unquestionably great evils; and so far as they exist among the advocates of hymns, deserve to be condemned. But have the committee traced these evils to the true cause, viz. the use of hymns? In a foot note they admit a fad which entirely spoils their argument. "The Methodist denominations" not Only "retain congregational singing," as the committee concede — but as every one knows, make more use of song in Divine worship than all the other denominations put ther I Yet these Bame Methodists do not sing iW the Psalms' 1 at all, but only hymns ! The logic of " The True Psalmody" is sadly at fault here. Again, "the of hymns endangers the church's purity : they have i used in diffusing error and heresy." l>ut has not the pulpit been often used for the same purposes? Do not men wreet Scripture to their own destruction? Are the Scriptures and public preaching therefore to be dis- carded as dangerous to the purity of the church '.' Has not "the n been abused to licentious- IS 7 What, then, becomes of the committee's argu- 13* 210 APPENDIX. merit ? Do not the Arians of Ulster sing and explain " Rouse's paraphrase" so as " to diffuse error and here- sy?" Of course the use and explanation of " Rouse's paraphrase" should be abandoned as endangering the pu- rity of the church I 6. From page 73 to page 96, we have a labored at- tempt from the pen of Dr. Cooper, to prove that Paul's "Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs" (Ephesians 5 : 19) must mean the Psalms of David exclusively. Dr. C. is no bad special pleader — but we merely refer him to the de- cision of Ralph Erskine, quoted in one of our Letters. He will there find the unbiassed judgment of a prince among the original fathers of Dr. C's. division of the United Presbyterian church, viz. that Ephesians 5 : 19, Colossians 3 : 16, contain "a Divine precept" for sing- ing such human paraphrases as Erskine' composed on tl Solomon's Song." As Ralph Erskine had no peculiar dogma to defend, it is quite probable he was right, and Dr. C. altogether wrong. In the same connection it is argued that "the sayings of Mary and the prophecy of Zacharias" (Luke 1) are no " precedents" in favor of New Testament songs — " for," they tell us, u of Mary it is merely stated that she 'said;' her utterances are not styled a song; nor is there any evidence that she sang them." Now as this argument has been employed in Pitts- burgh, * as well as Philadelphia, it is worth a moment's attention. " Mary did not sing — she only said." But in Revelation 5 : 9, we read — " they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy," &c. Hence it follows, that the - four living creatures, and the four and twenty elders, did not sing at all — they only said! For other examples see Revelation 4 : 10, 5: 12, 7 : 10-12. Try the same argument with some of the Psalms. "David spake unto the Lord the words of this song." Psalm 18. Did Da- vid say or sing ? Or is Psalm 18 a song ? Again : " 1" said j I will take heed to my ways." Psalm 39. Of * Pressly on Psalmody, p. 44. REVIEW OF TRUE PSALMODY. 211 course this Psalm is not to be Bang, for David only d M it ! Again : Psalm 56 — u Sing forth the honor of his name — make his praise glorious. Say unto G"d, how terrible art thou/ 1 The committee ran perhaps de- cide whether this Psalm, like the l s th, is to be said or th terms are us Again : To aeoount for the fact, asserted but not 1, u thai singing praise has been dropped bo exten- v in connection with the use of hymns/' the com- mittee say u the id* a of worship has a a* / to no inconsid- erable extent to be attached to the singing of hymns/' To prove this extraordinary assertion, they quote "8. P." in the "Presbyterian/* thus: '-Protestants and Papists alike sing to creatures/' " Wi sing to all sorts of inferior creatures, especially to siun But if this is sound argument, we wonder the committee have not long since H dropped the use of the Psalms 1" Take this example from Psalm 52 : Why dost thou botft, mighty man, Of mischief and of ill. Thy tongue mischievous calumnies DeriMth tubtilely. If any worse example of u singing to creatures, espe- cially to sinner-," can be found in our hymns, we have never discovered it. Again, Psalm 94 : 8 — V l»ruti?h people, understand! Fools ! when wi v , 62, 66, ,; 7. 2, 4, 0, 10, and many others. If Dr. Cooper and his brethren will practice the doctrine they preach, and drop all such Psalms as these, ire will begin to think they feel the force of their own argument. By their own showing, the Psalms of David "contribute influences to mislead the mind> and corrupt the hearts of sinful men," equally in this particular with our hymns ! When <»ur Assembly shall issue an expurgated edition erf our hymns, Pr. 0. and his brethren of 0OUTS6 will be fuund expurgating 212 APPENDIX* David ! Our system, they tell us, " needs amending and purging/' p. 155. We reply, by your own showing, so does David ! On page 69, adopting the words of a leading au- thor, the committee say — " One thing is certain, that neither our Lord nor his apostles have furnished any Psalms and songs for the use of the church." The com- mittee surely do not think that saying " it is certain" — is the same as proving their proposition. But no man who carefully reads the New Testament, can for a mo- ment doubt that there are many iM songs" of praise in that volume; such for example, as those of Mary, and Simeon, and Zacharias, as well as those recorded in the Acts, the Epistles and the Revelation. Scores of pas- sages can be readily adduced, having much more of the attributes of sacred " song," viz. sublime devotion and poetical excellence, than many of the more prosaic parts of the book of Psalms. This is so obvious, the wonder is that it has ever been called in question. All that is neces- sary is to have some poet, such as Rouse or Watts, to par- aphrase these beautiful passages in verse and metre — and we have a volume of New Testament " songs." How strange that good men should venture to affirm that " our Lord and his apostles have furnished no songs for the church I" And this rash assertion includes " the new song," Rev. 5 : 9-14, recorded by the apostle John. It will not do to say "it is certain this ' new song' was not furnished for the use of the church." That is Hie very point to he proved ; and which never was and never will be proved. The commentators teach a very different lesson. To make this reasoning still more obvious, look at a few examples. Can any one doubt that there are many passages in the New Testament, at least, as worthy to be called " songs " and versified for purposes of praise as the following : At evening they go to and fro : They make great noise and sound, Or these : REVIEW OF TRUE TSALMODY. 213 Like to i dog tad often walk About th« city round. And lei th. >in wander op end down In eooUng food bo eel ; An their children leave. When tiny DM >aw, they from me fled; a so I am forgot As nn-n ere out make a little capital out of the fact, that some hymns in frequent OM wefre the pro- ductions of in. -II win. ttkYe m evidence <>f being reip rated; and that Tom Moore's hymn beginning — u ('"me wlatej where'er >/> languish" — is found in our collection. It can not be denied that our hymns in gen- ual arc from Christian pens, from such eminent authors 214 APPENDIX. as Watts, Newton, Toplady, Cowper, Heber, Montgomery, &c. But one of these songs is the production of Tom Moore — that is " the dead fly in the ointment. " Let us inquire whether nothing can be said in palliation of so great an enormity. (1.) Do these brethren never worship God by reading or otherwise uttering the prayer of Baalam : "Let me die the death of the righteous, and let my last end be like his ? " Numbers 23 : 10. Have they never wor- shiped God by reading from the pulpit his prophecies — " There shall come a star out of Jacob, and a sceptre shall rise out of Israel/' &c? Are these prophecies and this prayer the worse, because their author was not a regene- rate man? (2.) Is not a large part of the book of Job the utter- ance of error ? Does not the Lord tell Eliphaz — u My wrath is kindled against thee and against thy two friends; for ye have not spoken of me the thing which is right?" Chapter 42 : 7. But do not these brethren worship God by reading publicly these false sentiments ? (3.) When "the devils/' in various instances, ac- knowledged Jesus to be the true Messiah, " the Holy One of God/' he did not command them to be silent — he did not refuse a recognition of his Divine character and mission even from "devils." Yet our brethren wor- ship God by reading from their pulpits these just and true ascriptions of honor to Christ, though their authors were the devils ! Is not this almost as bad as singing a hymn of Tom Moore ? If the committee feel no " compunctious visitings M while worshiping God in the language of " Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness/' (2 Peter 2 : 15,) with the false sentiments of Job's friends, against whom God's "wrath was kindled " — and even in the language of " the devils" of the New Testament — then what becomes of their ar- gument? Doubtless even wicked men are sometimes deeply impressed with Divine things, as Balaam was, and are so under the teaching of the Holy Spirit as to REVIEW OF TRUE PSALMODY. 215 utter many most valuable and interesting truths. And if, after the manner of Balaam, they possess th< elevated poetic talents — ire think the scriptural exam- ples do not condemn the occasional use of their utterances in public worship. Certainly the committee are not in a position "to cast the first Btone n at us Presbyterians. (>. The "True Psalmody" has much to Bay against "uninspired Bongs," "human composition, n kc. A: 1 the committee Bay they "are certainly at liberty to pro- nounce very decidedly Hie Scottish version ("Rouse's paraphrase ") to be an accurate rendering of the orig- inal." Not to repeat what has already been said in our Letters, take these specimens from Psalm 102 : 6 — Like pelican in wilderness ■ ivon I have been. I like an owl in desert am That nightly there doth moan. "Will these brethren inform us where they find in "the original," the second and fourth of these lines? And the same is true of hundreds of similar stanzas. They are specimens of Rotue'i composition. Yet Dr. P. - of Rouse as " the Divine tongs in this version/* including, of course, all the sentiment and verbiage which he has added to the inspired text ! The commit- tee must not be surprised to hear from every intelligent Presbyterian, in reply to such argument — " Physician, heal thyself." And are they certain Rouse was " a re- ■ate person V } If not — "how dare they sing his effusi< D 7. The el ring chapter of " The True Psalmody" is em- ployed in lauding " the version," i. e. Rouse's poetry. But in addition to the testimony of Dr. Cooper and others adduced in our Letters, we have ro >m only for the follow- Vt the General Assembly of the United IV rian church at Xenia, in May, 1859,8 resolution was 1. "that the version of the book of Psalms I by the United Presbyterian church, I • ithout any change that would affect its integ- 216 APPENDIX. rity." In the debate on this resolution, as reported in " The Preacher/' the Rev. Mr. Van Eaton said—" He could not be brought to express any admiration for its blemishes, its positive uyliness. * * * The version was not argued against — it ivas simply laughed at. Those who had not been educated to it from childhood, could not use it at all. It had been said that other versions, and collections of hymns, were sectarian. The Psalms were catholic, but the version teas sectarian. It was just as certain as doom, that if the United Presbyterian church were bound down to the old version, she becomes exclusively an old country church, Scotch-Irish, and nothing more. The Psalms were God's Psalms — were inspired — but the version was not inspired. He hoped the church would not clog herself with this old and imperfect version/' Comment is needless. We here dismiss " The True Psalmody." We have endeavored to give the work that " careful investigation," that " devout and prayerful examination," which the committee recommend to "the candid inquirer after truth and duty." p. 11. If the result has not been such as they seem to have anticipated, it is no fault of ours. NOTE. Dr. James Latta.— " The True Psalmody," p. 162, exhibits Dr. L., whose "Discourse on Psalmody" is out of print, as "in the service of the infidel/' viz. by "representing the Psalms of the Bible as un- christian in spirit, in doctrine — unfit for devotion, tending to make heretics,"