IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-S)

•^

.^* 4^ #/

1.0

!.l

1.25

1 1^ iS

^ IAS IIIIIM

1.8

1.4

1.6

^^^

i^"
^

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHM/ICIVIH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions

Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques

1980

Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available for filming. Features of this
copy which may be bibliographically unique,
which may alter any of the images in the
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked below.

L'Institut a microfilmd le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les d6tail!>
de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du
point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dans la mdthode normale de filmage
sont indiquds ci-dessous.

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

I I Coloured pages/

D
D
D

Covers damaged/
Couverture endommagde

Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul6e

Cover title missing/

Le titre de couverture manque

□ Coloured maps/
Cartes gdographiques en couleur

□ Coloured inl< (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

□ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/
Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

□ Bound with ot!ter material/
Reli6 avec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La reliure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge int^rieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6t6 filmdes.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires suppl6mentaires:

Pages de couleur

Pages damaged/
Pages endommagdes

□ Pages restored and/or laminated/
Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul^es

n Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
Pages d6color6es, tachet^es ou piqu^es

□ Pages detached/
Pages d6tach6es

QShowthrough/
Transparence

□ Quality of print varies/
Qualitd indgale de I'impression

□ Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du matdriel supplementaire

□ Only edition available/
Seule Edition disponible

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont 6t6 film^es d nouveau de fapon d
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

10X

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous.

14X 18X 22X

26X

aox

12X

16X

20X

24X

28X

32X

The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks
to the generosity of:

Izaak Walton Klllam Memorial Library
Dalhousie University

L'exemplaire fllm6 fut reprodult grAce d la
g6n6rosit6 de:

Izaak Walton Killam Memorial Library
Dalhousie University

The images appearing here are the best quality
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in keeping with the
filming contract specifications.

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated impression.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol ^^> (meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

Les images suivantes ont 6x6 reproduites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et
de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film6, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprim6e sont filmds en commenqant
par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la
dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second
plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires
originaux sont filmds en commen9ant par la
premidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par
la dernidre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

Un des symboles suivants apparaTtra sur la
dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le
cas: le lymbole — ► signifie "A SUIVRE ", le
symbole V signifie "FIN".

Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams illustrate the
method:

Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre
film6s d des taux de reduction diffdrents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre
reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 6 partir
de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche d droite,
et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la mdthode.

•

THE USE

INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC

IN THE

PUBLIC WOESHIP OF GOD.

REV. GEORGE CHRISTIE.

HALIFAX, N. S. :

PRINTED BY JAMES BARNES.

1867.

■

'I ' ' , 1, » , .I.Jtl ■.( ■ I ■ ^tU.!! '.jl.J (.tri!.,'l

'I " ■. I I - ■' 11 •! I • 'i; ( - , .,'1 •: I /"t, . t'lHidn • 1 .■.'»-

m •' ' , '. -M •■' ..■:',.' ,' , ' -. ., ;';, ■ ,_ ■ill , 1,,, . , ...(ri III \'':r.

■•■' ■ I.' r. , . ,, . I,, I ,' ..('.', I '7 , I.* I'.Ml'' ,»-'»il ■''. !"-■(

' •■ ■ '< ' • . • ■ 1 ; ' '. '' ; .■• ,,M, I ( r.''. :;i;i!>M'>f <_.! ) r^i^td^

' ■ . • ■ . i-i' I '.' .; ' , I'.ii!! ' I'l'h' ( I'l iiii. 'i\ )>>n - .? ■ '■/■•,

)' 1"'^ ••'■'• . ',' ■ • ' ,'.. I* ..,• ., ' I ■■ , it.^.ii. , (•HI, /(; ,'.;1;; ;».,.;. iij.

i . , ' ■ ' ' . ii; : .,'■'■ ' •* •■' ■' ' ■ '••'{>■ •/(>.-!. j/«,(( I >fc|iul I

■ "•' ; ;'^' ■' INTRODUCTION. - •^^•"-'f; ••'."'' ^'■';

• ;' ' 'i,i • I .il 'lii;.!' '■■: 'i.'.i;')" " '' . .-.i i' 'iiifi'_^ ■^IliUnuiXr'

' l' M ' 'i ...'111 • 'n-t I' Ir /7(M "W i/.j" I' ".ItX'M »! (t-M(f#

TV <Ae Members of the Presbyterian Church in general. To my
own Congregation in particular.

Dear BRBTHREN.'-The aim of the following Dialogue is to bring before you
the arguments for and against " instrumental music in the worship of Grod." It is
a subject in which many of you feel a deep interest— and respecting which it is
presumed you have a desire to form an honest and conscientious opinion. That
important principles are involved in the discussion, no thoughtful person can doubt.
And yet, from remarks which I have occasionally heard, I do fear that opinions are
Boir i;times formed before parties have taken time to examine both aides of the
question. The agitation about Church music has been carried on almost wholly
by parties seeking for change ; while the opposite party, relying upon the protection
of truth, have scarcely taken the trouble to reply — apparently believing that the
question was so plain as not to require argument. The effect of all this has been,
so far as I can judge, to create an impression in some minds that no solid arguments
can be brought against instrumental music ; and that our opposition is the fruit ot
prejudice, or ignorance of what may be said in favour of the practice. Thus, in the
language of lawyers, it may be said we have suffered "judgment to go by default."

Another circumstance that has tended to foster the impression that " instru-
ments" are at least lawful, is the practice of other christian churches — most of
which permit their use. And this Las been still farther strengthened by the bold
and confident language of the advocates of instrumental music who, not only make
a free use of Scripture, but backed, as they pretend, by such high authority, occa-
sionally venture so fiu as to hint that christians who do not use the organ, or some
other instrument, are wanting in their duty to God. It would be strange if such
considerations as these should have no influence upon those who are either unable
or unwilling to examine the subject closely. And it is to afford assistance to such
as are willing to accept a guide in their investigations that I have prepared and put
in a readable form the arguments on both sides of the question. There are other
arguments that I have not had room to introduce, but I have dealt with those which
the advocates of the organ seem to rely upon as the most forcible-^not forgetting,
at the same time, those that seem to have had success on account of their pUuuibUUy,
rather than their power to influence the judgment.

If time and space had permitted, I would gladly have given longer extracts from
the arguments of organ advocates, along with the names of the writers. I have
endeavoured to do them justice, for in my opinion, nothing is gained to the cause
oftratk by hiding or misrepresenting the arguments of an opponent. It will be

found that many sentences are marked by the usual sign of a quotation. These*
are, in almost every case, the very words of some writers from whose views I dissent,
and in most cases, they will be recognized us the arguments with which many of
you are most familiar. Whether I have done justice to the subject or not, must be
judged by reading what I have written. And I now ask you to look at the whole
subject — not as one of a trifling nature, but as one involving, to ii large extent, the
spiritual growth and comfort of God's people. In arguing the points brought up,
I hope I have done so " not as one who strives for the mastery," but with the feel-
ing that in this wwk, as in every of hor, tlie glpry uf God and tl»e good of my fellow
beings should be my chief aim. And now I submit to- you wliat I have written,
reminding you of the injunction of Scripture, " Pnwe all things ; hold fast that
which is good." That we may all meet at last in the sanctuary above, and there
unite in singing the praise of God and the Lamb, is the earnest prayer of him who
now addresses you.

avAj.Vs^s.^ ,', QEQjjQj. CimiSTIE,

YjiRHOUTn, January llth, 1867.""-"^ "*' «" •'

;*<ri' ,i">|jfi\|.i f)oi>iin;)i •• («A- . . »; > .t i,; u ',t» e us) '•'<■' I 'f\W i-i

' ..r^

;,•." r«':; i>,J(> itiflU lu-i' Oir I

"I'' fi (! :.i!r«iU ri'i

'9«JJ ui .Kurf'f A''U'»t'f(j .<ffl >;■ tv

1«««MB;

- ill''-:-.. ,i .ti,;:>h;l; 'r-IT nnl;.-:,

-i >■> .fl''J" '-h ,lii» i.j '"* .'.1 .V ('tl.'JiOVM'

; liiU! ■ ■ ' ' ' .,, ,

■• »(!•»! -//"^

(/■.■!■ ^'

'•■ITfK !■> .ftfr; ...

^ ..,..■,,. ,,« |,,, ,, „,|,,l Ti,
id )[ Ji.

(*^ 'nil 9

r, 1 .. .•

• w;. .«■■■'

. ,. „ ,^ . . ..

.'l.( , .1:1 I j'^». M 'H 1

DI^LOaUE

ON TIIK SUBJECT OP

.t ri

INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC.

I •','■■■ • '' ' ' -I' 1 f ..U^.')'

■ i.r '

M. I am told that the congregation of ■ • are going to have

an organ in their church. Their young minister, I am glad to find, is
not afraid to risk the censure of his " fathers and brethren," when he
believes he is right.

C. I cannot say that I participate in your feelings in this respect.
There are wiser men in the Synod to which he belongs than he, who
would disapprove of such an innovation ; and I would respect him
more, if he showed a little more regard for the Confession of Faith
and " Ordination vows" than such a step would seem to indicate.

M. It may be only a report, but I really hope it may be true, for I
think the Presbyterians are behind the times. There is our Synod,
for instance — condemning, almost unanimously, the use of instrumen-
tal music ; while all other churches, with a few exceptions, have &
fine " organ," and, of course, a far larger congregation than they would
have without such attraction.

C I am aware that other denominations permit, if they do noli
defend, the use of instruments ; and in this respect it is quite true that
we are behind the times. But a more important question is, " Are
we behind the word of God ?" For the Bible, and not human opinions
and practices, is the acknowledged rul^ in such mattef s.

M. But you will not surely venture to assert that the Scriptures
forbid the use of instruments in praising God ? On the contrary, we
find that God's people used them, under the Old Testament dispensa-
tion—and that is pretty good evidence that there was nothing sinful '
in their use. Indeed the case is even stronger than I have put it.
They were commanded to praise God with "stringed instruments"
and " organs." For my part, I do not see how people can pretend to
worship God, after what is said in the Bible, and not have an organ
or some other musical instrument It is plainly stated that " God
commanded his people to use such instruments, and I do not find any
place where he withdrew the command.** ^ v

C, You speak very decidedly my friend — and, If I may judge
from the tones of your voice, I would say, warmly. You must, how-
over, admit that the subject i» far too serious to be decided by mere
feeling. The privilege of worshipping God is so precious and exalted,
that <e//' should, as far as possible, be excluded from all discussions
respecting the mode in which that worship should be rendered. Nay
more : so important, in my estimation, is the subject now before us,
that if I could accept the opinions which you have expressed with refer-
ence to praise, I do not tliink that I could possibly feel reconciled to
worship in which instruments of music were not used. A command
of God is, in my view, too so' mn and binding to be left subject to the
will of any creature. Could you satisfy me that the statements you
have just made are correct, I would no longer feel that those who
reject instruments can offer acceptable praise to God. I have heard
your arguments before, and they always strike me as proving (if they
prove what you intend) that our present modes of worship are not
acceptable to God. I hold it to be as really sin to neglect anything
that €k)d has commanded, as it is to add to the " worship and ordi-
nances which he has a^ipointed in his word." Now, granting you the
full force of your argument, I have to ask you one question, Did the
Apostles and, the early Christian church use organs or other musical
instruments in the worship of God ?

M. No, of course not. I did not say they used instruments. The
state of the church at that time

C. Excuse me ; I am anxious that we should not encumber the
question in hand with any extraneous matter. At the proper time
you will have an opportunity of introducing your ojjservations about
the state of the early christian church. Your answer covers the whole
question that I put to you. Now, you admit that Christ and the
Apostles did not use musical instruments in the worship of God.
That admbsion you could not avoid, for there is nothing in the inspired
record to warrant us to believe they did — but much that seems to
render it certain they did not. I ask you, then, to put these facts be-
sfde your statement, that " the use of instruments is commanded ;"
that " God commanded their use, and the command has not been with-
drawn." If your argument be valid, you perceive it leads to the con-
clusion that the Apostles — men professing to be under the direction
of the spirit, of God — were, at the same time, acting in opposition to,
or disregard of, the command o& GU)d ! You are not willing to admit
such a coaclusion as this. I know you believe they were divinely
inspired ; and moreover that their instructions and example ought to
be received as in&lUble.

M. While I say that we have the authority of the word of God
for the use of musical instruments in his worship, I do not hold that
we are positively commanded to use them. I only maintain that it
cannot be wrong to use them, when we find that they have been used
for such a purpose — not that those who refuse are guilty of sin.

G. Exactly. Your argument is about the same as we meet in the
speeches and writings of the organ advocates in general. They
always start on this high ground. With more policy, as it seems to

mc iTian downright honesty, tlicy commence with throwing n few pas-
sages of Scripturo in the face of their opponents ; hut when they are
shown the consequences of their own argument, they draw back. In
fact, they find that it proves too much, and they must therefore know
that it is worthless. I think it would bo more consist^^nt with the
chanicter of honest men to let the Scriptures alone altogether, than to
handle them in tliis deceitful way. Reasoning from the forms of
worship under the Jewish dispensation, is an example of this. Every
person who reflects must be aware that all the worship of the Jews
was regulated by positive precept, and therefore could not be a matter
of indifference. Look, for example, at that favourite passage, among
organ advocates, (2 Chron., 29, 25.) There, they say, is a proof that
mtisical instruments were used by the command of God ; and, shall I
say it ? with most unblushing effrontery they add, " We do not find
that the command has been withdrawn." If they were content to
refer to such passages to prove that instrumental music cannot be
wrong per se, I would be contented to let the argument pass for what
it is worth, in that aspect. But surely it is disingenuous, or else indi-
cative of inability to comprehend the position into which they force
themselves, to use this passage as a proof text in favour of musical
instruments, while yet they plead that they are not bound to use
them. The offering of sacrifices had nothing wrong in it "jocr se."
Such offerings were commanded ; but what sane man would contend
that christians are now bound (or even permitted) to worship God, in
offering to Him the " blood of slain beasts," I suppose you are ready
to reply that sacrifices wore typical, and must of necessity cease after
the coming of the anti-type ; but allow me to say that, in the argu-
ment before us, this is only " begging the question." We hold that
thfl instrumental music was typical also ; and, in the present argu-
ment, both may fairly be put on the same ground. The advocates of
the organ do not attempt to deny that it was typical, but they labour
to get over the difficulty by maintaining that " instrumental music,
though entering ii:.;o a typical economy, had an aspect that was not
typical, but was, like singing, a help in producing devotional feeling —
a purely subjective effect, as well as an aid in singing." And then, of
course, they come to their favourite conclusion, to which I have refer-
red already, " It was warranted. By what principle, or by what
command, or in what way, was the warrant removed ?" Now all this
seems very plausible ; but there are difficulties in the way of adopting
their premises. For example, I find no warrant in the Scriptures for
f'ae assertion that the instruments were intended as an " aid in sing-
ing." The admission that it was * ceremonial worship,' seems to me
to overturn such an hypothesis. When we have found a sufficient
reason in what the Scriptures recognize as its intent, we may well
hesitate to add others which are only the suggestions of men who are
plainly making a case to sustain their own preconceived opinions.

M. But whether you are willing to admit that the instruments
were designed to assist the people in praising God or not, you will at
least confess that practically this was the effect

C As to that, I do not profess to have such knowledge as would

enable me to speak positively. I can only say that I have great diffi-
culty in imagining how the voices of singers could be assisted by such
* music as learned men suppose the instruments then in use could pro-
duce. I do not think a " hundred and twenty" trumpets could make
much music. I should say that the number of distinct notes would be
rather limited. I can indeed imagine the effect, when hundreds of such
instruments poured forth their deep solemn sound. Probably it would
have something of the same awe-imposing effect as the voice of
" mighty thundering ;" and this, I believe, was the design of the trum-
pets. The people had not yet been privileged to hear the soft, sweet
voice of the Gospel. Tliey were yet " under the schoolmaster pre-
l)aring them for Christ," and therefore the solemn and awful sound of
the trumpets was a fitting monitor for the time then being. The
author of the article on Music, in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible,
»ays the trumpets were probably intended to set forth, by way of sym-
bol, the royalty of Jehovah, the theocratic king of His people, as well
as to sound the alarm against His enemies. (2 Chron., 13, 12.)
There were also instruments with tones less awful, but according to
my ideas they could not be so sounded as to make a very harmonious
and pleas'ing concord. Of course I do not force my views on this
l>oint, because, as I said, it is one on which I do not profess to have sucli
knowledge as would warrant me to speak positively. But even were
I to admit that the dreams of those who speak with so much unction
and delight of the " splendid music" of the old Dispensation, were
sober truths, I do not think we would be much nearer the settlement
of the question before us, — for it wa» not (and couid not he) congrega-
tional singing. The music was a distinct part of the ritual service,
and it was entru»ted to a distinct class of men, viz., a part of the
Levites. And if you will read attentively your favourite chapter
(2 Chron., 29), you will find, at the 28th verse, that, while the singers
sang and the taumpeters sounded, the " congregation" are represented
as " worshipping." Tlie word " worship" here used signifies, in the
original Hebrew, " to bow down" — to prostrate one's self, — an atti-
tude most appropriate for prayer, but certainly not favourable for
singing. In fact, it is a word altogether different from that which is
used to describe the part which the singers took in the services of that
memorable occasion.

I do not pretend to great , kill in explaining the different parts of
the Jewbh ceremonial ; and on this account I would not venture,
while engaged in controversy, to attempt to strengthen my position
by shewing the typical character of those parts of Jewish worship
that we have been considering. It may, not, however, be out of place
to remind you that an inspired Apostle speaks of the previous " dis-
pensation" as only adapted to persons whose religious conceptions
were imperfectly developed. Tlie " heir" was yet in a state of
" nonage," and must therefore be under tutors and governors that
knew how to adapt their instructions to the pupil's age and previous
habits of thought. It were much to be desired that the christians of
our day would think of these things. Then we might hope to be able
to save them from a return to t]be " weak and beggarly elementft"

of a formor dispensation. I just now remember some remarks of
the celebrated Burroughs, one of the Westminster Divines. Allow
me to read a few sentences. " They (the Jews) had external things to
gain them to serve God. As we deal with children, so God dealt
with the O. T. church. As children when they begin to learn must
have a great many pictures in their books, so God taught the Jews
with outward ceremonies, which afterward the Scripture calls hue
beggarly rudiments. Children you know are much pleased with gay
things, and they that would bring Jewish ceremonies, or ceremonies of
their own invention into the church, treat the church as if in her

childish condition In the state of the Gospel, the people of God

are come to the adoption of sons. And so children, you know, are
pleased with hearing music, and pipes, and such things, which men
would bring still into the church, in the times of the gospel. I remem-
ber Justin Martyi*, in answer to that about musical instruments, saith
that they are fit for children and fools ; as organs and the like, and
therefore they were not in use in the church. And indeed for the
childish state of the church, these things are lit ; but now, when they
come to the " adoption of sons," other services that are more spiritual
are more suitable and honourable."

M. The quotations which you have read do, of course, harmonize
with your views, but after all they are the opinions of men like our-
selves. You do not find the inspired writers condemning instrumental
music ; and though you have referred to the words of the Apostle,
where he speaks of parts of the Jewish ceremonial as containing weak
beggarly elements, he does not specify instrumental music as one of
these. On the contrary, " the writers of the New Testament, while
enjoining praise as a part of worship, use words which denote, indif-
ferently, either singing with the voice unaided, or playing on an
instrument. Now this did not arise from tlie poverty of the Greek
language, for, as it is very copious, they could easily have found other
words to express their ideas, if they had regarded singing psalms to an
instrument as abhorrent to the christian dispensation. Besides, the

arranged

to be

sung

very word "psalm" meant a biblical song,

instrumental support, as was the practice in the social religious 'ife of

the Hebrews."

0. (After a pause.) I have just been trying to recall, from the
^* copious Greek language," some of the many words that the Apostle
might have used to express the idea of praising God — but I am sorry
to say that, either my memory is defective, or my knowledge of the
Greek is more limited than I supposed. Please mention some words
that the Apostle might have used, which no doubt were familiar to
him as well as the christian " brethren."

M. Really tliere are none that I can recall at present.

C Possibly you rested your assertion upon the words or writings
of some person whom you considered good authority in the case ?

M. It may be so. I spoke hastily ; but I have heard this very
often, and I do not know that I ever heard the statement questioned
before. Besides it is generally acknowledged that the " Greek lan-
guage is very copious."

C. M.y friend it does not do to take much on trust, now-a-days,
for the purpose of settling a controverted question. It was natural to
suppose that a very " copious language," as people sity the Greek is,
should furnish a liberal supply of words that we call synonymous.
But the fact is, the word " copious " as applied to the Greek language,
though correct, is misunderstood. Tlie Greek is not remarkable for
the number of its roots or " stem words " ; but on account of its
various inflections and possible cojnbinations, it is capable, beyond
most languages, of presenting thought in all possible shades and forms.
This is the meaning of " copiousness" when applied specially to that
language. Now with regard to the number of words in that language,
suitable to express the idea of praise to God, they are not numerous.
How could we expect it in the language of heathens, as the Greeks
were ? In fact we could scarcely expect to find any except those used
in the Septuagint. And, as the "seventy" were translating the word
praise as vmderstood in the Old Testament, it would be but reasonable
for them to use the word which came nearest expressing the idea of
the original. Now take this in connection with the fact that all lan-
guage must, of necessity, be to a large extent artificial and figurative,
and you will perceive, at once, that conclusions based upcMJ the pri-
mary idea of the word may be far aside from the truth. As to the
extensive vocabulary that the New Testament writera had at their
command, ^'ou may form an idea with very little trouble. How many
words, for example, could you find to express christian baptism ?

M. Only one that I know of.

O. And even the meaning of that can scarcely be found by digging
down to the roots. You will find in reading the New Testament that,
not only are the words suitable to express scriptural ideas, in many
cases very few ; but if you follow them to their derivation, they will
be found applicable, only in ajigurative sense.

Your argument from the meaning of the word "psalm" is not
much more warrantable than the one you founded upon the " cojmous-
ness of the Greek language." We need not differ about the original
meaning of the root from which the noun is derived. It means,
according to Gesenius, " to prune," (" especially a vine.") It is then
taken to mean " to 'sing," because this was usually done in words cat
off in rhythmical numbers, or measures. But this cutting off is no
more necessary as an accommodation to the instrument, than it is for
the human voice. I cannot therefore see any good reason, nor indeed
any true foundation for your assertion.

M. But you will not surely deny that the word " psalm," as under-
stood by a Jew, denoted a " biblical song arranged to be sung to
instrumental support ?" It was customary to sing them thus : And
we find, in some of the titles of the psalms, an intimation of the design
of the writer.

C. I say that the original meaning of the word decides nothing
positively in the case. And the fact you have just stated bears against
you, rather than in your favour. If the meaning of " psalm " settled
the question, as to the use of an instrument, in singing it, such notices
as you refer to would be quite supci'fiuoua. If a man were to say he

would make me a hat, I would understand him ; and exp«ct to use it
as a hat. But it would really strike me as superfluous, or even worse,
if he added that he made il for me to wear on my head.

M. I have listened with attention and, perhaps, profit to your
statements respecting the words used in the New Testament to d».:note
" praise." But, even supposing I should admit that the scriptures
contain no warrant for the use of musical instruments in the worship
of God, I do not consider that we should look upon them as prohi-
bited. There are a great many things connected with worship — of
the propriety of which none seem to doubt, for which we cannot pro-
duce any scriptural warrant : such, for example, as the " tunes we
sing," " the use of a metrical version," " choirs or precentors," " lining
out the psalms," &c. On your principle " we could hardly prove the
lawfulness of building churches." '

C. I dare not be so uncharitable as to suppose that you are not
sincere in the remarks you have just made ; and yet I cannot help
thinking you must have some misgivings as to the soundness of your
argument. The things that you mention, and perhaps hundreds of
others are, in a certain sense, connected with the worship of God.
And I may add, some of the things which you have named, and others
that you might name, I, for one, would not be disposed to advocate.
I doubt, for example, the propriety of having "choirs" in our
churches — not because they are open to the same objection as
" organs," but because I find that their practical effect has been to
injure the service of song — ^by closing the lips of many professed wor-
shippers. But still how different from the empty sound drawn forth
from " a thing without life T The singing of a choir is the voice of
praise uttered in words which may reach and affect the heart, while
the organ can give only sound, destitute of sentiment — and requires
the aid of words uttered by the human voice to raise it above a mere
" stage" exhibition. " God is a spirit, and they that worship Ilim
must worship in spirit and in truth."

As regards authority for the service of song, as practised in the
christian church, or in the family, we can refer to the words of the
Apostle. " Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spirituial
songs." These words show, in the first place, that the exercise
referred to is not the mere production of sound. Praise in words is
required. " Speaking, &c." With regard to the tunes, common sense
would suggest that this must be left to the worshippers themselves.
On that point the Apostle gives no charge. They might either sing
in " unison," or in " harmony," as they were able ; for the Apostle
merely says " singing and making melody."

M. But you forget that tunes such as we use were not known at.
that time. It is said that " the people in those days had no idea of
harmony."

C. Even if I should admit that, (which I do not,) the language of
the Apostle is sufficiently general to authorize any kind of singing
of which christians might, at any time, be capable. If they only
" spoke to themselves" in their exercises, the expression of the Apostle
would be equally appropriate, whether the music happened to be of

. 12

the rudest and most inartiutic kind, or whether it approached a style
equal to that of the present day.

But I am not disposed to allow our opponents even the small advan-
tage which they suppose would be gained by proving that the people
in those days had no idea of harmony. There is no sufficient warrant
for the assertion that " harmony or musical notation was not then
known." Music was cultivated at a very early period in the history of
the world. If you will read the article on music in the London Cyclo-
pedia, you will tind the eminent author maintaining that harmony wan
understood before the christian era. He says, " Tlie invention of
notation and musical characters marked a distinguished era in the pro-
gress of music. Terpander is the celebrated poet and musician to
whose genius music is indebted for this. He flourished 671 years before
Christ.^ In a note by the author, we read, " It has been asserted that
harmony must have been unknown to the ancients, because each of
their musical characters, vocal or instrumental, was the sign only of
one sound. May it not also be said, and with more propriety, (in after
ages), that harmony was unknown to us, from the adoption of our word
chord to express a union of sounds of a different pitch ?"

There is, indeed, much reason to believe tliat after the opening of
the christian era, music was less cultivated than it had been by the
Greeks and Romans. For proof of this, I might refer to the author
whose words I have just been quoting. And the use which I
would make of the feet is to infer therefrom the probability that the
higher kinds of musical performance — such as were intended for the
•^ stage," and in which instruments were extensively use<l— did not
receive the countenance of the christiiin church.

As for the " lining out of the psalms," (another ot _, m small argu-
ments), I venture to assert that the language of Scripture will abun-
dantly justify the practice where it exists. '' Speaking to yourselves
in psalms, &c.," implies that they must have appropriate words, and
such as they could all use. But when books were rare, and many
were unable to read, even common sense would suggest the use of
some sucli mean» to furnish all with the words suitable foi' praising
God. • ,

M. You have quoted two or three passages of Scripture, in which
there is reference to the singing of psalms or hymns ; but are you not
aware that these apply to private and not public worship ?

01 I am aware that organ advocates make such assertions, but I
am convinced that the assertion is incapable of proof. When we, for
example, quoting Scripture, say Jesus and his disciples " sung a hymn,"
" Oh," say they, " It was private worship." And yet the Apostle,
writing to the chureli at Corinth, refers expressly to the exercises of
Christ and his disciples, in that " upper chamber," as an authoritative
guide for the followers of Clirist in all subsequent ages. (1 Cor., 1 1, 23.)
I j It was, properly speaking, A/s church that the Saviour had around

I I him on that memorable occasion.

If time permitted, I could, or I am much mistaken, prove that lit
most of the passages which refer to s'nging, it is public, and not pri-
vate worsliip that Is intended.

But now that I have, as I trust, really disposed of this your last
ohjection, I may say that I do not see very clearly how it affects the
merits of the question in hand. Perhaps you can enlighten rae ou
the subject.

M. I think I can. You observe that, if the passages in which there
is reference to the singing of psalms and hymns can bt; shewn to apply
only to private devotion, you will be left without even a single verse
of Scripture in the New Testament as a warrant for this part of reli-
gious service : and consequently you will be thrown back upon the
Old Testament for authority to warrant the service of song. And I
think, when we have you on that ground, we will be able to defend
the use of instrumental music in our churches.

G. I think not. Even supposing we gave up all those passages,
yet keeping in view the generaj tenor of Scripture, we could find such
authority for our modes of worship as even the organ advocates would
scarcely despise. Ecclesiastical history carries us back almost to the
days of the Apostles. We have the writings of men who, if they did
not themselves converse with the Apostles, knew, from the most reli-
able sources, the forms of christian worship which they observed. And
among these the singing of psalms and hymns had a place. " We
sing," says Pliny, " a hymn to Christ as to God." Yes, the very
authorities to which we can refer in proof that instrumental music was
not used in the early christian church, assure us that a part of religious
worship consisted in singing the praises of God.

M. Perhaps I could furnish you with a better method for disposing
of the difficulty. My answer would be the following : " The New
Testament does not contain one example of the mode of conducting
religious worship on the Lord's day, nor one command organizing the
mode of worship. It assumes the singing of sacred songs in public and
in private, and the reading of the Scriptures and prayer, but it leaves
questions of mode and order to be shaped hy principles, by the reli-
gious life of the period, and by the Spirit promised to the church."
Though I am a Protestant and a Presbyterian, I do not like the prin-
ciple adopted by the framers of the Westminster Confession of Faith,
that we must not tolerate anything for which we cannot claim Scriptural
authority. I wQuld not say that I adopt the loose principles of Luther-
ans and Roman Catholics, that we may use anything in the worship of
God — any ceremony or form not forbidden. But I do hold that in
such matters as are now under discussion, every church should be left
to follow their own convictions as to what is best. St. Paul knew
nothing of §uch rigid uniformity as you anti-organists contend for.
He says, for example, »' Rom. 14, 6,) "He that regardeth the day
regardeth it to the Lord ; and he that regardeth not the day, to the
Lord he doth not regard it." And he asks, '' Why dost thou judge
thy brother ? The conscientious feeling of the man that he was under
law to God to observe the day, and the equally sincere, and, it may be,
more enlightened feeling that the day ought not to be observed, were
both right." Now you see the reason for the organ advocates refusing
to allow you those passages which you quote as authority for singing
in public worthip. It is not that we doubt about singing having been

■J
(

practised in the church, but we want to force you into the admission of
a principle which, once established, must demolish some of your strong-
est arguments.

G. I certainly ought at least to acknowledge your candour in thus
stating, so distinctly, the object of the argument with which I have
been dealing. But I must also take the liberty of saying that it
grieves me to find a Pr')sbyteriaii adopting and expressing such loose
views as you have just propounded. Apply them, and you will find
that, under them, the church is bound together, as one body, by a
" rof e of sand." Your exposition of the words of the Apostle brings
out a principle at variance with the unity of the christian church.
" Can two walk together except they be agreed ?" A church composed
of members holding views so thoroughly antagonistic could not possibly
exhibit the unity which is th^ strong bond of brotherhood among
Christ's disciples. This being an undeniable fact, I hold it as prima
facie evidence that you have given a wrong interpretation of the words
quoted from the Apostle's writings. Again your exposition does not
agree with the conduct of Paul and the other Apostles — another evi-
dence that you have misrepresented him. Read the 15th chapter of
the Acts. There you will find an account of a difficulty that arose in
the church at Antioch. It was not about what the Apostles represent
as one of the vital questions of religion. A man might be a christian,
and espouse either the one side or the other. Still, it was troubling
the church. Now the Apostle does not hete apply your favourite
"eirenikon" — "You are both conscientious, therefore you are both
right." No, but he consents to be one of a " deputation" to carry the
matter to a higher tribunal, in order that n deliverance may be had
which would tend to allay the fermentation of feeling in the church.
The question referred was, as we find, entertained with all seriousness.
There is no reason to think that the Synod at Jerusalem felt any
disposition to leave the question to the " conscientious feeling" of the
parties. Neither would it be correct to say that the Synod there
assembled " legislated" in the case. No, their aim was to discover the
mind of the spirit in the case, (just as " church courts" still do.) For
this they examined the Scriptures — ^keeping in view those lessons
which God had already taught the church by experience (v. 12, &c.)
And now mark — while they gave their deliverance they did not put it
forth as an opinion which might, or might not, regulate the church.
It goes forth in the form of a " Decree " — ^not merely for the settle-
ment of the dispute at Antioch but to regulate the whole church.
Hence we find Paul and Timothy, as they visited difiereiit churches^
delivering to them also the " decrees for to keep." Where now is
your argument from Rom. xiv. 6? Plainly you have applied the
words of the Apostle in a way he never intended they should be under-
stood. I do not quarrel with your statement that " the spirit of Chris-
tianity does not give prominence to mode or form." But still the
Scriptures do evidently teach that " mode or form" is essential to the
life and prosperity of the christian church.

M. As you have dealt so unmercifully with my iuterprotatloa of

the words of the Apostle in Rom. xiv., it is only fair that I should call
upon you for your exposition.

C. I am quite willing to state my views of the passage, and to
accord to you the same right of criticism that I have exercised. In
the first place, you will observe he is pleading for charity and forbear-
ance among brethren who do not see things in the same light. Know-
ing that there may be grace in the heart while yet the person is not
free from prejudice, he exhorts the more enlightened brother not to
despise the one whose knowledge seems to be defective. At the same
time he also warns the weak brother not to assume the functions of a
judge, but to exercise charity, with the feeling that both are account-
able to God. And the Apostle recommends such an exercise of
charity — not because all who offer worship according to their " sincere
and conscientious convictions" are equally acceptable to God, but
because the " Lord hath received him" — that is, as a child of God, by
faith in Christ, who is accepted through the righteousness of Christ.
God does not allow the " wood, hay and stubble" to remain as compo-
nent parts of the building, and yet the persons who have brought such
material may be saved, " yet so as by fire." Above all, he will not
allow us to assume the authority of judges over such. But neither
does he authorize the belief that their conduct has his approbation.
Such principles as these apply to christians in their private capacity,
everywhere and always. They might have been inculcated at Antioch,
just as they were given t» the Romans ; but this could not render it
unnecessary for the church, through her office-bearers, to give a distinct
expression of her views ; and to require submission to such deliverance.

M. Have we not wandered from our subject in entering so largely
into the meaning of the passage of Scripture that we have been con-
sidering ?

G. Possibly we have; still these criticisms have their use, as
connected with the discussion. And even if we were obliged to
acknowledge that we had been away from the subject, I would not
regret it, because the same popular catches about letting people follow
their conscientious convictions in reference to instrumental music have
done more than solid argument in the way of fostering prejudice
against those who resist innovations, believing that the old paths are
the safest. But I am now ready to listen to some more of your strong
arguments.

M. There is no want of arguments, on my side at least. My
greatest difficulty is to make a selection. I suppose, however, as you
profess to be guided in such matters by the Word of God, I ought to
dwell chiefly on its testimony.

G. Certainly, if you can sustain your position by arguments drawn
from the Bible, this would be your proper course ; for, when you can
shew from the Scriptures that it is the duty of christians, under the
present dispensation, to use instruments of music in the worship of
God, you will have settled the whole matter.

M. Do you believe that any of the commands of the Old Testa-
ment are now in force ?

G. Certainly I do. Every part of the Moral Law is as binding as
it ever was.

'•• M. Was praise, under the old dispensation, a moral or a ceremo-
nial obligation? '. ' "

G, Both. But you must remember that praise, and the mode of
rendering it, are two c'iiferent subjects. It has always been tl.e duty
of creatures to praise God ; and it will never cease to be their duty.
Praise will ever be one of the delightful employments of the
"redeemed" in heaven.

M. Much us I am in favor of instrumental music, I suppose it
would not do for me to entertain that they nill use instruments there.

0. Why not ? Do we not read of " harpers harping with their
harps" in heaven?

M. That, however, is one of the cases in which I would agree with
you, and hold that the language of Scripture is figurative ; for we do
not suppose that the worshippers there could really have material
harps.

C. Is it not strange that such language should be employed if they
have none ?

M. I cannot say that I think so, because there is no danger of it
being misunderstood ; while, at the same time, those figurative allu-
sions are very beautiful and interesting.

C. But why are you so confident that the language is figurative ?

M. Common sense forbids us to think differently — and besides,
they will not there need the aids whic'a we weak mortals need. Music
now would be much finer, more perfect, and more worthy of the high
themes in which we praise God, if we had the support and assistance
of instruments ; but none of us suppose that it would be improved in
heaven by such means.

C. Are you sure of that ? They will use some of those " grand
old psalms" probably in heaven. John heard them sing the " song of
Moses and of the Lamb." If human voices cannot render them wor-
thily in the church below, may we not say the same of the church in
heaven ? But after all, if they will not have instruments there, is it
not strange that the apostle, writing in the Greek language, which is
so *• copious," had not used words that did not in their primary signi-
fication denote material instruments of music ?

M. What word so beautiful and expressive could he have used ?

G. That I leave for you to answer — only asking you to remember
that (I also believe) the spirit of God might choose figurative language,
without intending thereby to force upon us, as the primary design of
such teaching, material rather than spiritual conceptions.

M. I see that you intend to make use of the fact that the praise of
heaven is spoken of in figurative language to defend the position that
the use of words in which there is primarily a reference to instru-
mental music, as connected with the worship of God, does not necessa-
rily warrant us to make use of this " natural help" in our praises. Of
■course 1 shall be very glad to hear what you have to say, but I think
you will find It rather difiicult to make out a satisfactory case. In fact,
I feel compelled to say that I cannot understand how any person can
hold such views as you do, and sing the Psalms that are used in the
Presbyterian church. If persons who have adopted the modern trash

called "hymns," while they reject the sterling old songs of the church,
were also the people who condemn instrumental music, I could under-
stand them ; but it does seem strange to me that people can sing our
psalms, and yur refuse to use instruments. In them, we not only find
the Psalmist dechrinjT tijathe will praise God on the timbrel, harp, &c.,
but also declaring " It is u good thing to shew forth God's loving kind-
ness upon an instrument of ten strings, and upon the psaltery ; upon
the harp with a solemn ^jund." In other places, we find a positive
command thus to praise God. " Sing praises unto him with the
timbrel and harp," (Ps. cxlix. 3). " Praisr him with the psaltery and
harp," «&c., (Ps. cl).

C. Would not your argument be more telling and convincing,
supposing you were to draw a full picture of one of these companies of
saints as exhibited to us in the Old Testament church, while tliey are
devoutly and obediently testifying their reverent submission to God in
those acts of worship which we find prescribed in the psalms from
which you have quoted ? It would surely be very expressive, and
might put to shame the quiet psalm-singers in our churches. You
must needs give one a sharp two-edged sword, or perhaps have a
whole company of such martial looking worshippers. You must
furnish others with " timbrels"— and doing so, of course you will insist
on strict obedience to Scripture and have a dance too. Others of the
company will feel that it is their vocation to " clap their hands to God,"
Ps. xlvii. 1. Others will carry flowing "banners," Ps. xx. 5. I
think, when you try to silence me by quoting in favour of your instru-
ments, you have taken hold of that dangerous weapon, a two-edged
sword, and, if I may carry the metaphor a little farther, you have hold
of the wrong end.

M. These expressiens to which you have referred must necessarily
be considered as figurative. It would be absurd to construe them in
such a literal way as to contend that they are called for in the worship
of God. But the same remark does not apply to the use of instru-
ments. I suppose too you are aware that some learned men consider
the word rendered " dance" denotes aii instrument of music.

C I am aware of that, but I have different reasons for refusing
my assent to their views. In the first place, the present rendering is
supported by very high authority (Gesenius and Fiirst for example).
Secondly the Septuagint usually renders the word by one that denotes
dancing. Thirdly, we know from other passages that dancing was
practised as a religious act. (2 Sam. vi. 14.) "David danced befoi:e
the Lord." But while you object to a literal application of such pas-
sages, I suppose after all, you do not class the acts of worshippers,
here referred to, among the ceremonial parts of the Jewish service ?

M. No.

C. Still you admit I suppose that most of them were familiar to
the Jews, and that some of them were really practised ?

M. I do. But still I cannot put them on a level with praise as
rendered by either the human voice or the instrument, or both com-
bined. Praise is a most solemn and spiritual exercise. This you
cannot deny. And notwithstanding your aversion to instruments, you

:ltl 1

will acknowledge that, even where they are used, the feelings of the
wor8hip[)er8 may be deeply solemn. The use of the instruments, as
you will admit, did not destroy the spirituality of the worship of David
" the sweet singer of Israel."

G. That I do not deny. But I know also that this same man
" danced before the Lord with all his might" — as a religious act. In
fact, we have reason te believe that he never engaged in the service of
God with more zeal and real fervour of spirit than when he " danced
before the Lord." Nay more, I have no doubt that he found the
dancing one special means of raising him to that pitch of religious
fervour which we find described by the inspired penman. It is a law
of our nature that the mind and body act and react upon eacn other.
So well is this understood by many, that they take advantage of these
physical manifestations to impress and influence the mind. I have
known people in a time of religious excitement literally clap their
hands and dance till they were ready to fall down with weariness.
Now you know, as well as I do, that God was pleased i:» give to his
people " of old" a system of ordinances, and commands adapted to their
condition. The Apostle however teaches us that, while the services
prescribed were adapted to the state of the church then existing, they
were not suitable for the church, after the coming of Christ, and the
increase of religious knowledge, and the ^^ giving of the Holy Spirit"
which followed the resur^-ection and ascension of Christ to heaven.
The ordinances of that time are called, by an inspired Apostle, " weak
and beggarly elements." They are also spoken of as adapted to the
church while in a state of "nonage" or comparative childhood. And
now, dear brother, though it may, for the moment, have appeared to
you like turning a serious subject into ridicule, while I drew a picture
of the Jewish church and her religious exercises, I assure you I had
no such intention, any farther than was necessary to bring out strongly
my answer to your Jewish arguments. I feel fair too deeply on this
subject to be able even to use lightness in such a discussion. I see in
the agitation among us for instrumental music, the beginning of a
serious evil. The church has passed through it before. Ecclesiastical
history is full of warnings. In all past ages, it has been found that
just as piety declined there have been increasing efforts to supply the
defect, by appeals to the less noble part of our nature. Popery, in all
its stages of advancement, testifies to the truth of what I say. Broad
Churchism and High Churchism look for success to things which tickle
the fancy, or flatter the pride of man. And Protestant churches, gene-
railly, are now following the example of Antichrist, far more than they
are aware of. Have you ever known any church where a revival of
religion was in progress, and the people at the same time loud in their
advocacy of instrumental music ?

M. I have not thought much about that, and never made any
inquiry.

G. I have — and I never yet knew a case where they would even
tolerate the organ, except for opening the service, or it may be closing
according to form. At such a time, none who are really engaged in
the work want the instrument. And why ? Because, instead of

i ;

assisting to higher degrees of spirituality, it is found to deaden trno
spiritual feeling.

M. But why should it be so ? " ' ' ' •

C I do not like to attempt an answer to that question. Perhaps
it would be better to speak for myself than for others. In my own
case, the feeling is as if some third party had come between mo and
the object of worship, and at once I feel as if I were farther off than
before. I feel like one who seeks warmth by approaching the fire, but
suddenly finds that some officious person has intercepted the heat, by
means of a beautiful screen.

M. Are you fond of music ?

a Yes.

M. "Well, you will surely admit that the instrument improves the
music. The singing is more correct. Persons of refined taste often
complain that bad music is very painful to them.

C. It pams me to hear discord in the music, or persons out of
time ; and of course every person should endeavour to avoid such
things. But a song of praise is not necessarily marred, and rendered
unprofitable, or even disagreeable, by this. I have heard voices that
at first grated upon the ear — voices that I»know would disgust a cold
critic ; and yet they were so evidently expressing the feelings which
the Holy Spirit had created within them, that the very expression,
with all its musical defects, had in it something that went far to make
up for the bad music of which cold and unsympathizing persons com-
plain. I pretend to no metaphysical explanation of those things. I
rather think it would be as impossible as to explain how the things of
God are hidden from the " natural man," while they are plain, and
sweet, and refreshing to those who are spiritual.

M. Yon talk of receiving benefit from the exercise of praise. Now
that is one of the strong arguments in favour of the organ ; for you do
not pretend that bad music is as likely to benefit the worshippers as
that which is correct and pleasing to the ear. If, then, the organ
secures this, it seems to me to be a " natural help" to the voice, which
we ought to use. Indeed it seems to me that it ought to be used, if
for no other reason, on account of the beneficial effect upon persons
possessing a highly cultivated musical taste. There have been cases,
according to my reading, where music is said to have produced most
extraordinary effects upon such persons — so much so, as almost to sus-
pend the functions of life.

C. I have read of such cases. I must say, however, that my sen-
sibilities are not so acute as to enable me to sympathize fully with such
feelings. Still, I do not deny the possibility of such effects having
been produced.

M. And I presume that you have never lieard of any such effects
having been produced by the human voice without the aid of instru-
ments.

C Indeed I have not. I have witnessed very remarkable effects
connected, in one way or another, with singing Grod's praise ; but if I
had stopped to criticise the music, I would perhaps have been led to
say they came in spite of outward hindrances. Certainly they did not

arino from admiration of tho music. It was a diflferent influeiico iilto-
gothor. If wo could describe tho vjfita of tho bridegroom to \m
spouHo, tho church, or even comprehend such descriptions, us given in
the book of Canticles — Jesus coming with the speed of the "chariots
of Amminadib," wo might know about us much us we shall ever know
here below It is not tho effect of the music — it is the result of the
oxorcise. God blesses us token we serve him in " spirit and in truth."

Those effects of which you speuk seem to havQ a very different
origin. I have known persons, in the theatre, experience precisely
the same. Some of those who have been most susceptible, in this
way, are known to have been degraded, miserable slaves of vice. Yes,
and they are likely to remain so, as long as tho church depends on line
music to convert them, and to raise them up from that state of degra-
dation. It is tho word of God in the hand of the Spirit that begets
souls to new life. It never will be Jine music. And now permit me
to say, in all affection, that the persons who are agitating for instru-
mental music are incurring a fearful responsibility. The world are
ever u pursuit of something that will act upon them through the sen-
suous or aesthetic part of their nature, — hence the common cry for
fine musical performances. ^And so soon as the church gives way to
that cry, they have digged a pit for those people. Music will not
convert them. And yet it may produce a state of mind which they,
in their ignorance and pride, will consider the next door to the king-
dom of heaven ; and when this happens, there is little prospect of
leading them to repentance, and faith in the Lord Jesus.

In one of the sermons of the late John Newton, of St. Mary, Wool-
noth, I find some observations so strikingly applicable to the subject
before us, that I hope you will permit me to read them. lie is refer-
ring to *' Handel's Messiah," one of the favourites of musical amateurs.
"' Whereunto shall we liken the men of this generation ?" " I repre-
sent to myself a number of persons of various characters, involved in
one common charge of high treason. ^ They are already in a state of
confinement, but not yet brought to their trial. The facts, however,
are so plain, and the evidence against them so strong and pointed, that
there is not the least doubt of their guilt being fully proved, and that
nothing but a pardon can preserve them from punishment. In this
situation, it should seem their wisdom to avail themselves of every ex-
pedient in their power for obtaining mercy. But they are entirely
regardless of their danger, and wholly taken up with contriving
methods of amusing themselves, that they may pass away the term of
their imprisonment with as much cheerfulness as possible. Among
other resources, they call in the assistance of music ; and amidst a
great variety of subjects in this way, they are particularly pleased with
one. They choose to make the solemnities of their impending trial —
thp "haracter of their judge — the methods of his procedure, and tho
awful sentence to which they are exposed, the groundwork of a musi-
cal entertainment ; and, as if they were quite unconcerned in the event,
their attention is chiefly fixed upon the skill of the composer in adapt-
ing the style of his music to the very solemn language and subject with
which they are trifling. The King, however, out of his great clemency

and compaHslon towards those who have no pity for themselves, pre-
ventH them with his ^oodiiCHs. IJiidcsired hy them, he HeiidH them n
gracious mesHagu. Ilo asHures them that ho is unwilliiij;; they Hliouhl
sutler : ho requires, yea he entreats them to submit. He points out a
way in which their confeHsion and nuhmi^ssion shall he certainly accep-
ted ; and in this way which he condescends to prescribe, he ofl'ers them
a free and a full pardon. Itut, instead of taking a single step towards
a compliance with his goodness, they set his message likewise to
music ; and this, together with a description of their present state, and
of the awful doom awaiting them if they continue obstinate, is sung for
their diversion, accompanied with the sound of cornet, flute, harp,
sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, and all kinds of instrrments. Surely if
such a case as I have supposed could be found in real life, though I
might admire the musical talent of those people, I should commiserate
their insensibility. But is not this case more than a supposition ? Is
it not, in tho most serious sense, actually realized amongst our-
selves?" I '' ' '
Cowper has also directed attention to the same painful subject in
these lines :

" Ton thousaiul 8it. '' ' '

Patiently present at a »acrcd '«)ng,

Content to henr .

(A wonderful effect of music's power) ,

Messiah's eulogies ybr Handel's sake."

M. I cannot but feel that our conversation has placed the subject
of instrumental music in a very serious light; and I may add that it I
believed such results as you point out would follow the introduction of
organs into, our churches, I would have no more to say. But with our
old psalms, it seems to me that any such abuse of the ordinance of
praise would be impossible. . >

C. I believe you are sincere. But allow me to sr,^ that our " old
psalms" would not long survive the introduction of the organ. It is
generally acknowledged (notwithstanding all the talk aboui. the neces-
sity of the organ to assist in " rendering them in a manner worthy of
the sublime subjects which they contain") that the musical taste of the
admirers of the organ is very far from being satisfied with these simple,
though sublime " songs of Zion." They would not stand long after
the introduction of the improved style of music for which some are
longing.

M. I think however that the high devotional feeling of our people
might be trusted as a safeguard against any such change — and I may
add, against such abuse and prostitution of sacred music as that referred
to in the extracts read from Newton and Cowper.

C. You forge!: that there are thousands who look upon those elabo-
rate and affecting musical performances with the highest admiration —
and would characterize such langu«ge as you now use as a proof of
pitiful bigotry, and want of musical taste.

M. I trust however that I shall never forget that the worship we
want for the house of God is something difTereut from a mere musical
performance. I only want the organ to secure more correct and

casteful music. There are many who cannot sing correctly, and need
a guide.

(7. The fact I admit, and mourn over it. But your mode of getting
over the difficulty is not the one I would propose. You want some-
thing to guide — something they can lean upon. My plan would be to
adopt means to teach every one vocal music : and I would try to make
it unpopular either to be unable to sing, or to have to lean upon the
organ. This plan has been tried, with perfect success, and those who
have, by their diligence, got their people into congregational singing
scout at the organ as a nuisance. They would no more consent to
have it now in their churches than a boy, who has learned to swim,
would consent to " float on bladders." And depend upon it, we will
not see even the beginnings of the " latter day glory" unless we have
first seen our congregations of one heart and one soul in singing the
praises of God. Singing remember, not following as one in leading
strings, as a drag and a hindrance, but with one mouth and one soul
glorifying God. Allow me to read an extract showing that all this
can be accomplished. It is the experience of Rev. J. T. Feaston,
(Birmingham, England, Congregational minister). "Three months
after I began with the children, and one month after I began with the
people, &c. . . . We began to sing Mr. Waite's tunes in harmony..
The harmonium was silent that day, and never spoke again. In a few
weeks I found it was gone. I suppose the deacons thought it would
be absurd to consult me or any body else about retaining or dismissing
it. The singers left the singing gallery, and sat wiCh the groups.
From that time we have gone on in the same course, improving as ice
go" (Note by the editor of the Magazine.) " No wonder that the
singers left the gallery so readily. . . . No wonder that the
harmonium was silent, for the Sunday school and the week night
services had already learnt to do without it, and every one knew that it
would be very much in the way at a psalmody exercise. The people
wanted to hear one another. The harmonium had become associated
■with the miserable style of sleepy scattered singing here and there."

You have more than hinted, in supporting your views regarding
instrumental music, that it hfis the special sanction of the Old Testa-
ment. But this is very far from being a correct statement of the case.
So far as the service of praise has a Jewish aspect it may indeed be
correct. But the Old Testament Scriptures sometimes carry us for-
ward to New Testament times — and then, we find a striking difference
in the language referring to praise. Take for example Psalm Ixvii.
That psalm looks far beyond the bounds of Canaan. Its prayer
embraces, not one nation only, but all. " Let thy saving health be
known among all nations." In connection with this is the prayer or
prophecy, " Let all the people praise thee." Formerly, the service of
public praise was confined, as we have seen, to a select body of men
chosen from the tribe of Levi. But in gospel times, all are appointed
to be kings and priests to God. And now the duty of praise must not
be confined to a select portion of the worshippers, whether Jews or
Gentiles. But do we find that instrumental music has rendered the
service of praise more general, where it has been introduced ? Far

II I

from it. The choir soon became the Levites of the congregation for
this part of the service — and very often, they are as jealous as the old
Levites were of any interference with their performances. I do not
say that this is the necessary effect. But I state a fact. There are a
few exceptions — but so few, that like exceptions to a general rule, they
tend to confirm it.

M. Supposing your statement respecting organs and choirs to be
correct, (of which I cannot speak positively), it does not prove that
instruments are unlawful. The most that you could draw from your
argument would be that they are not expedient. This however could
not be considered sufficient to set aside such authority as we claim
from Scripture.

C. But have you not noticed some peculiarity in the vt[ords used
to express praise, when, as in the psalm referred to, the language
applies to gospel times and the nations in general ? (I find you are
very particular about the original meaning.)

M. I have not examined them particularly. I only know that the
words used in the New Testament sometimes denote vocal, and some-
times instrumental music.

C. I have not, as you know, assented to the argument drawn from
these, for reasons which to my mind at least are satisfactory. But in
the mean time I wish you to ponder this fact, — that even in those
passages in the Old Testament which refer to the Gentile church,
when the inspired writers speak of praise, the word used is never, so
far as I have examined, one of those that might seem to contain an
allusion to musical instruments. The 67th Psalm speaks of praise to
be rendered by the nations to God, but the word only denotes vocal
praise. Again in Psalm cxvii. — which is quoted and applied by the
Apostle to the New Testament church, (Rom. xv. 11), the word praise
occurs — but it is praise with the lips or the voice.

M. But you must not forget that' in the New IbC-tament " praise"
is sometimes expressed by words which denote "playing upon an
instrument." For example Eph. v. 19, " Singing and making melody."
The word translated " making melody" denotes playing upon a harp.

C. Your quotation sounds better than it would, if you had added
" in the heart."

M. As to that, I do not see much difference between playing in
the heart and singing in the heart.

C But suppose I should make a slight change in the translation,
and read it " making melody with the heart to the Lord," I would not
be giving an unwarrantable translation, and yet I may be able to con-
vince you that the expression is very natural.

^ do not deny that " psalto" has a primary reference to playing with
an instrument. But on the other hand, I may inform you that very
few of the ablest critics consider that thif passage, taken in connection
with the context, can be considered as containing a warrant for the use
of instrumental music. If time permitted, I might prove my assertion
by quotations from able expositors, both ancient and modern, showing
that they did not consider this passage as warranting such views as
you express. If the persons referred to were known to be opposed to

instrumental music, you would of course accept their testimony with
hesitation ; but so far as their feelings are concerned, the majority are
on your side. I want you however to examine the peculiar form of
the expression " in your heart," (*' en te kardia humon.") Some take
it for granted that it is equivalent to our word " heartily" or " cordially."
But that is not a correct translation. If it were " ek" or " apo
kacdias," heartily would do ; but the words befo'-e us require a different
translation. The Bible is remarkable for the naturalness of the lan-
guage employed. While perfectly accurate, the words chosen are as
suitable for the child as the philosopher. Often the exjuession is so
comprehensive, and at the same time, so natural that we feel incapable
of conveying the full meaning in our own words — and more particu-
larly, in the precise and careful modca of expression which we are
obliged to use in controversy. This is the difficulty of which I am
conscious in attempting to explain this passage. In free conversation,
we would not hesitate to bori'ow a poetical expression, and speak of a
" heart responsive" to the sentiments of another. We would have no
fear of beinij misunderstood. And this being so, I feol that I need
not fear to apply the idea to intercourse with God as our " Father in
Heaven." It is just the opposite of the feeling which God condemns,
while blaming the formal worshipper for " drawing near to him with
the mouth and honouring him with the lips, while the heart is far from
him." Now, keeping in view this distinction, we may be able at once to
interpret the language in the verse before us. " Making melody, &c."
There is the utterance of the lips in appropriate words of praise, and
the heart beating in unison with the words. " Out of the abundance
of the heart the mouth speaketh." In the true worship of God, the
feelings of the heart find their distinct utterance in the words of praise
which fall from the lips. As Montgociery says of prayer, so we may
say of praise, so far as the heart is concerned.

(.. . ' " Prayer is the soul's sincere desire,

( t , ' * Uttered or unexpressed ; • ,

,' ■ '- ' The motion of a hidden fire ■■ t. j

That trembles in the breast."

True praise does not need to wait for acceptance with God till it
has been expressed by the lips — much less a lifeless instrument. The
incense of praise has already found its way to heaven, when we see
the eye kindled and glistening under the emotion produced by the
heart " making melody." Let us be able, like the psalmist, to say,
" Bless the Lord O ray soul, and all that is within me bless His holy
name, and already that heart is " making melody to the Lord."

It requires no great effort of the imagination to conceive of the
heart — " out of which are the issues of life," fulfilling the idea symbol-
ized by touching the strings of a musical instrument ; and certainly if
you can entertain the idea at%ll, there is no form of expression, that
we can conceive of, so suitable to our minds as that used by the Apos-
tle, " making melody." You observe that " te kardia is the dative
case, governed by " en" — and in many such cases " en" governs the
noun as the instrument producing the effect described. Thus we
have in Greek, " en opthalmois oran," (to see with the eyes.) " I

baptize with water" " en hudati." " Serve with my spirit" " en to
pueumati mou." The meaning of the Apostle seems to be, " Let
heart he so under the influence of the Holy Spirit, that it may affect the
vocal powers in such a way as to cause them to give expression to words
of joy and praise,^*

But there is a passage in the New Testament that seems to me to
settle, beyond the possibility of a doubt, this whole subject of contro-
versy. You will find it in Hebrews, 13, 15. Before entering upon
the consideration of that verse, however, it may be advantageous to
settle distinctly in our minds some preliminary matters that may help
us to understand the meaning of the Apostle. What seems to have
been the design of the Apostle in writing this Epistle ?

M. Of course he intended to exhibit the leading truths of the
christian religion.

C. But does it not strike you that there is something peculiar in
the mode of discussion which he has adopted ? In some of the Epis-
tles we have even a fuller statement of the doctrines of the Gospel than
we have here ; but yet there is much in this Epistle that we find
nowhere else.

M. It is generally understood that this Epistle was addressed to
the Jews, and was designed to meet and correct Jewish prejudices, and
thus sa .e them from the danger of apostacy.

C. That is precisely my opinion ; and I believe we will both rea-
dily admit that the arguments of the Apostle are most wisely adapted
to the object in view. He begins with proofs of the superiority of
Christ to the prophets, and even to the angels. He then shows how
far he was superior to Moses. By a variety of arguments, he proves
that the Christian religion, having Christ for its founder, was, for
various reasons, superior to the Jewish ; and this, though its rites were
few and simple, — though it had no temple service — none of the pomp
and pageantry, the music and the magnificence of the ancient religion.
He shows farther that all the rites of the Jewish religion, splendid as
they were, were but types, and were designed to pass away, for they
must have their fulfilment in the realities of the christian faith. Wh^,
then, should they go back ? Why return to a less perfect system ?
Why give up the substance for the shadow ? Why turn away from the
true sacrifice to the type or emblem? :

The doctrinal part of the Epistle closes in the 10th chapter ; and
then he begins his application (v. 19.) Here we have exhortation and
solemn warning — appeals to their own sense of right, and encourage-
ment to persevere. Next, a reference to the faithful now in glory,
connected with a consideration of the influence which their example
should have upon those who hoped to share, with them, the joys of
heaven ; and all this still farther enforced by a consideration of the
superior privileges which believers now enjoy. If there be one truth
more particularly impressed upon them than others, it is the fact that,
as members of the christian church, they have passed from the typical
to the real — from the shadow to the substance. In the 13th chapter
he plainly tdls them that believers under the Grospel may claim privi-
leges such as did not appertain to worshippers under a former di ~n-

sation. He also tells them that these privileges cannot be claimed by
those who still cling to the temple service. " We have an altar
whereof they have no right to eat who serve the tabernacle." The
types of a former dispensation have been fulfilled by " Jesus suffering
without the gate." And in view of this, he exhorts them to embrace
the substance, letting go the shadow. " Let us go forth unto him
without the camp, bearing his reproach." All this may involve pre-
sent trials ; but then these will be of short duration, and will end in
happiness infinitely precious. Instead, therefore, of shrinking from
present duty, or feeling discouraged and cast down because of present
trials, Che exhortation is to bless God for his mercies, and give him
constant praise for the infinitely great and precious blessings now un-
folded to us in the Grospel. And in order that we may be accepted in
this, it is said let us approach God — not as the worshipper of old, who,
after being accepted, brought his " thank offering," in which also he
had acceptance, through the blood of sacrifice. But let us, says the
Apostle, approach God, by Jesus Christ, " the new and living way to
the Father." " By Him let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God con-
tinually." And that he might shew them the complete, and entire,
and permanent separation from all acts of worship that were specially
Jewish and ceremonial, he carefully specifies the nature of the religious
service to which, as christians, they were called. Let us offer, as our
sacrifice of praise, " the fruit of our lips giving thanks to His name"

I confess that it seems to me impossible for any intelligent man to
read this passage, and then venture to assert that we have no warrant
for "praise" as apart of christian worship. And it seems to me
equally incredible that any person, considering the grand design of the
Apostle's argument throughout this epistle, could doubt as to the mode
in which such worship should be rendered. For all through it, he is
evidently endeavouring to "dehort" from Jewish and ceremonial
practices, by shewing that these have passed away, while others more
spiritual and better suited to the genius of Christianity — and withal
more honouring to the author of the " new dispensation," have taken
their place. The advocates of instrumental music, in their zeal, have
ventured to maintain that there is no evidence of it having been set
aside. One of the champions says, " the use of instruments is not a
mere practice not prohibited, and which might still be unwarranted.
It wsis warranted. By what principle, or by what command, or in
what way was the warrant removed?" Now to me all this is surpass-
ingly strange. If the case be not fairly made out from the language
of the Apostle, it seems to me impossible to prove that the ceremonial
law is set aside at all. It is true he does not specify, in detail, the
changes that have been made ; but in his directions for the regulation
of christian worship, the duties which he mentions are referred to in
such a way as to direct the mind to those things which are superseded.

M. But those who plead for instrumental music farther say that,
" though connected with the ceremonial worship, it was used in a non-
ceremonial way : not by sacred persons only, nor at sacred times only,
nor in sacred places, nor by divine regulation — but on social occasions ;
at the marriage, the funeral, the feast, in journeying, in exile, in

private devotions, by men and women, young and old, with no cere*
monial intention."

C Supposing all this to be true, can you show me the bearing
that it has on the argument before us ?

M. Yes. Being so, " we ought not to expect in the New Testa-
ment any directions as to its use or disuse."

C. Perhaps the argument satisfies you, but really I cannot perceive
how it affects the subject before us, which is the mode of worshipping
God hy praise, any more than telling us that a certain people play the
"bag-pipes" could be brought forward r«t a proof that the Ilighlauders
use instrumental music in public v/orship. All that your statement
conveys to my mind is that music was indulged in on many occasions — ■
sometimes, as a means of promoting hilarity, 9,t others, as a pastime,
sometimes, as an antidote to grief, and at others, as a means of mak-
ing their tears flow more freely. . The people had, it seems, a taste
for nmsic (not a very remarkable fact) which they indulged, according
to the mood in which they happened to find themselves. As to your
remark that the music of the Jews, though entering into a typical
economy, had an aspect that was not typical, I would only say that,
supposing it to be used for religious purposes in private, it might be
for the purpose of renewing those feelings of devotion which had been
produced, by waiting upon God in public worship. Though I have
not specified the special place that I consider it to have held among
the typical things, I am well satisfied that the Jews were taught
respecting its nature, so as to be able to prufit by it ; and they might,
as many devout christians now do, seek to renew in private the feel-
ings of which they had been the subjects, when worshipping God in
the great congregation. It may sound like the truth to maintain that
this might be dc ne " without any ceremonial intention," but a little
reflection will, I think, lead us to doubt the correctness of the state-
ment.

M. But my idea is that the instruments were not designed to assist
their religious conceptions but to help them to sing.

G. You cannot however give any satisfactory reason for such an
opinion. All the different parts of worship were " types of good
things to come." Besides, this argument has lost much of its force in
your hands, from the fact that you (or those whose views you seem
to support) speak of the music of that period as so rude and unskilful
OS scarcely to partake of the qualities of music at all.

M. Is it not strange, supposing your views on the subject before
us to be correct, that so many eminent divines as well as private
christians defend the use of instruments in the worship of God ?

C. I will answer your question by another. Is it not strange that
so many of the ablest divines as well as private christians reject, as
unscriptural, the Presbyterian form of church government, which we
believe to be warranted by the word of God ?

M. We can And some reasons for this in the past history of the
church ; and others, J would attribute to prejudice. When the church
of Christ emerged from the errors of Popery there was considerable
unanimity among the leaders of the Reformation on the subject.

-rtr

And 1 lAay say our Confession of Faith, drawn up at Westmlnstef,
and by divines who lived in England, will ever stand as a monument
of the prevailing opinion at that period as to the scriptural authority
for Presbytery, in opposition to Prelacy. But alas! the church was
curbed and nstrained by the civil powers. The sovereigns of Eng-
land, who had no religion themselves, used their authority in favour
of Prelacy, and against the form of government set forth in the
Confession of Faith.

G. And now following you I may answer your question, almost in
the same words that you have used, respecting the Confession of
Faith. On the subject of instrumental music, there was a contest
from the time the kingdom cast off the Papal yoke. It can also be
made out from history that, not only were the leading Reformers
opposed to instruments, which they denounced as relics of Popery,
bnt the sam? opinions were generally held by the ablest divines, down
to the tira'fs of the Covenanters. And this was the prevailing feeling
in the celebrated Westminster Assembly.

M. But I do not find anything in the Westminster Standards oppo-
sed to the use of instrumental music in the worship of God.

C, I think it would be more correct to say that you not find it
expressly and pointedly condemned. One thing is very certain, viz.,
that you do not find a word from which it might be inferred that the
men who framed our " Standards" approved of it. Many things in
our " Confession" are condemned, by implication, though not dis-
tinctly specified. This is one of them. It tells us that it is the duty
of christians to sing the fiongs of Zion, but there is nothing said about
any other way of praising God. Again, the practice of those churches
which adopted our Standards has been opposed to the use of instru-
ments. They did not look upon this as a matter of forbearance.
Instruments were understood to be forbidden, and neither Presbytery
nor Synod presumed to set aside the law which they felt to exist. To
say instruments are not positively prohibited by the Confession of
Faith an(| Directory for Public Worship, is to use language verbally
correct, but at the same time really false. Do you consider that our
Confession of Faith authorizes or permits kneeling while we partake
of the Lord's Supper ?

M. Certainly not.

C Suppose any of our congregations should suddenly become
enamoured with this practice—which we know is followed by many
Worthy christians, what would be the duty of the Presbytery under
whose inspection they were ?

M. It would certainly be consistent with the Confession and
Directory to forbid them ; but perhaps it would be better to let them
do as they pleased.

C. I understand you very well. This is your old doctrine creep-
ing out again, in opposition to what you have called in this discussion
" rigid uniformity." And yet you would not be sorry to find a Pres-
bytery sufficiently conservative to put a stop to this mode of observing
that ordinance, because we are sure that Christ and his disciples did
not kneel ; and because we are sure, moreover, that it is a Popish

practice, which would never have bcin thought of but for the purpose
of upholding the blasphemous sacrifice of the Mass.

Now our Confession does not, in so many words, forbid kneeling.
It merely gives directions regarding the way the Lord's Supper should
be celebrate(^ The language is scarcely as distinct as it is in refer-
ence to the subject of " praise." Still the practice of kneeling is con-
demned by implication ; and instrumental music, which the Reform-
ers in general considered as a relic of Popery, is condemned in the
same way. But now that we are on this subject, permit me to ask
another question. Do you think that a minister or session could con-
sistently, or with a good conscience, introduce the practice of kneeling
at the Lord's Supper.

M. I do not think they could, for, as I understand, they " sincerely
own the purity ot worship authorised and practised in the Presby-
terian church. They also engage in their practice to conform to the
said worship, and never to endeavour, directly or indirectly, the pre-
judice or subversion of the same, but, to the utmost of their power, to
support and defend the government and discipline, together with the
purity of worship received and practised in this church ; and never to
propagate any contradictory principle, nor introduce any contrary
practice, till their views have been submitted to the Presbytery, and
the general sentiments of the church ascertained."

C. It is indeed true that the " ordination vow" is, substantially,
as you have now quoted it, and I entirely agree with you as to the
solemn obligation it imposes. I v»ould now like to put to you one
more question : Supposing you were an office-bearer in the church,
would you feel at liberty to use your authonity and influence in f^vjur
of instrumental music, irrespective of the voice of the church ? I do
not press you for an answer to this question, and yet it may be well
to give it some serious thought.

M. I have never looked upon instrumental music as prohibited by
our Standards, and I would like to hear you state your reasons more
fully for holding, as you do, that it may be put on a level with prac-
tises that I know are not tolerated, — such, for example, as kneeling at
the Lord's supper.

O4 I shall do so most willingly. In the first place, they both
crept into the christian church in a time of awful reli^ous declension.
The Upas tree of Popery was sending forth its deamy exhalations-
poisoning and destroying all those who reclined under its shadow or*
bfeathed the tainted atmosphere around. The questioti with professed
Worshippers was no longer, " What doth God require." They sought
to please themselves, and to gratify the people by something more
showy and imposing than the rites of Christianity. The pretended
religious teachers, to the dishonour of Christ, appropriated to them-
selves the title of *' priests" ; and having done so, they began to ape
the ceremonies of the old Jewish religion. Because the high priest of
old had bells on the skirt of his robe, our counterfeit priests must
have the same. And because instrumental music 'constituted a most
imposing part of the ancient ceremonial, it was dragged into the chris-
tian church, with a multitude of other practices that did not rest on

tlivino authority. Hence the neceastty for the Reformers being
thorough in their work — -the necessity of asking, at every step, what
has God commanded? and, with uupitying zeal, sweeping out of the
Way all that could not claim to be of God. As already intimated,
they found Ihe practice of kneeling at the communion — and they said,
awiiy with such a practice. It ia not scriptural. It is not apostolic.
Now when the " framers of the Confession" took up their work, the
eyes of both the Protestant and Popish world were on them, and they
dealt with each subject when brought forward as men who were under
law to Christ. They sought their rule of faith and obedience in the
Bible, and when they saw what was right, they wrote it down for the
benefit of the world. In this simple way, they dealt a more effective
blow at existing errors than they could have done by angry discussion
and recrimination. If, then, we have neither of the practices named
forbidden in our Confession, that arises from the fict that they had
declared the mind of God — and, of course, in their view anything dif-
ferent must be forbidden. They say in the Confession, (chap. 29, 4,)
" Worshipping the elements, the lifting them up, or carrying them
about for adoration, are contrary to the nature of this sacrament, and
to the institution of Christ." The " Directory" also prescribes the
mode of observance, but kneeling is not expressly prohibited. In
reference to praise, the Confession (chap. 21, 5,) says it should be
" singing of psalms." And again, in the Directory, they refer to praise
as one part of the worship, which they express as simply " singing of
the psalm." And in the concluding chapter of the Directory it is said,
*' It is the duty of christians to praise God publicly by singing of
psalms together in the congregation. That the whole congregation
may join herein, every one that can read is to have a psalm book ; and
all others, not disabled by age or otherwise, are to be exhorted to
learn to read. But for the present, where many in the congregation
cannot read, it is convenient that the minister, or some fit person, do
read the psalm line hy line before the singing thereof." Here again
we do not find instrumental music named ; but yet there is no reason
to doubt that it was looked upon as among the things prohibited, yu<2
as much as "kneeling." Surely there must be an unwillingness to
see the truth among those who, after reading these extracts, or others
of a similar kind, will still venture to maintain that " there is nothing
in our Standards opposed to the use of instrumental music in the wor-
ship of God."

M. But are we to be always bound by these Standards, whether
we find them agreeable to the word of God or not ?

G. You have now introduced a question very distinct from the
one which has been und er discussion ; and there is not time to enter
upon it at present. The day may come when these Standards shall
be revised. This, however, will have to be the work of the higher
judicatures of the church, and not of bold, rash and proud men, who
aspire to override Presbyteries or Synods, under the vain idea that
they are " wiser than Daniel "—wiser than their brethren — wiser than
the spiritual and intellectual giants to whom, under God, the church
is so deeply indebted. I trust also that this revision (if it take placed

m ■

may not carry us away from the " Law and the testimony ;" and if
80, it will leave instrumental music among the things prohibited.

Our discussion has carried us farther than I anticipated ; but I trust
it has not been unprofitable. To me the subject is one of deep inter-
est, — all the more as I see involved in it what may prove to be one of
the articles of a •' standing or a falling church." I do not indeed put
it on a level with the great leading truths which lie at the foundation
of the christian religion ; but I do feel that it is one to test our faith
in God, and reverent submission to his authority. We see around us,
in many sections of the christian church, practices creeping in which,
though apparently harmless, may prove to be the first leakings of the
embankment ; and which, unless speedilv closed, may enlarge, till the
restrained waters have obtained such power as to sweep away in one
common ruin both the earth and masonry by which they had been
confined. And yet there are men, children rather, among us, who
can find pleasure in watching the pearly rill, all unmindful of its
threatening source. Our " fathers" had well and dearly learned the
divine wisdom of the injunction, " Buy the truth and sell it not." The
cost, in many cases, was their life's blood. Some of those who suc-
ceeded to the inheritance bequeathed at such a price, have known how
to value and defend it ; but in our day, I fear it is less highly prized.
The book of Chronicles, left to the church, has lost much of its inter-
est. It is often read with indifference ; and I fear there are many
who have no admiration for the courage and heaven-born zeal whicH
animated those noble witnesses for the truth. Many, now-a-days,
unable to appreciate the self-denying earnestness ot men to whom we
feel sure the Judge said " "Well done," virtually disown their work,
and try to pull down the barriers by which, under God, they hoped to
fortify the church against her enemies. To such I would say, in the
language of Scripture, " Stand ye in the ways and see, and ask for
the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall
find rest for your souls."