i 
 
OF THE 
 
 PROCEEDINGS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 PRESBYTERY OP GLASGOW, 
 
 RELATIVE TO THE USE OF AN 
 
 ORGAN IN ST. ANDREWS CHURCH. 
 
 In the Public Worship of God. 
 TO WHICH IS ANNEXED, 
 
 iflJV ADDRESS 
 
 TO THE REVEREND JUDICATORIES OF THE PRESBYTERIAN 
 CHURCH IN THE UNITED STATES j 
 
 By a Lay Member. 
 
 PHILADELPHIA 
 
 PBICTED TOR THE PUBLISHERS J AND SOLD BY D. HOGA> 
 J. Anderson, Printer. 
 
 1821. 
 
 / 
 
PREFACE 
 
 FOR THE AMERICAN EDITION. 
 
 TO those who profess to maintain any steady and 
 uniform adherence to the constitutional standards of the 
 Presbyterian church, in these States, or to the purity 
 and simplicity of Gospel worship, it is hoped that the 
 following Discussion, however distant as to local situa- 
 tion, will not prove uninteresting-. 
 
 In every period of the church of Christ, its truth 
 and simplicity have been invaded, not only by the pro- 
 pensity of the world at large, but even that of its own 
 professors themselves, to a sensual and pompous wor- 
 ship. Not all the express and positive precepts, nor 
 all the blessed example of its divine Author himself, 
 have been, even to this day, effectual for the entire sup- 
 pression and restraint of these vain and delusive work- 
 ings of the unregenerated hearts of the children of men. 
 
 In that tribute of homage and praise, especially, 
 which we owe to our God and Saviour, and that too, 
 in all the renovated and exalted strain of evangelical 
 gratitude, how prone are we, individually and collec- 
 tively, to listen to the syren sounds of sensual delusion ; 
 and even to aim at the wafting of our holiest aspirations 
 to heaven, through the medium of other sounds than 
 those that can issue from the heart ? 
 
 In Old Testament times, indeed, when mental and 
 spiritual exercise had few, if any, means of being sub- 
 limated from the grossness of sensual delusion, it pleased 
 God to indulge his people and worshipping servants, 
 with some condescension to their weakness and imper- 
 fection, in this respect. In divine consistency, however, 
 with his most gracious purposes, as well as with his 
 promises of a more spiritual worship, those very means 
 }>»> converted into types and shadows of those more 
 
i\ PRE 
 
 simple, spiritual and sublime joys, which bis church 
 was to exercise and enjoy under the Gospel. 
 
 This Gospel, in all its spiritual and simplified efful- 
 gence, we do enjoy, agreeably to his most gracious pro- 
 mise. It has been committed to US, in all its perfection 
 of truth, as well as in that purity and simplicity exhi- 
 bited in the example of our Lord and his apostles. The 
 Gospel day hath indeed dawned on a sensual and be- 
 lted world. Some of its meridian rays have indeed 
 arisen upon us; and yet, alas! how reluctant do we 
 seem, that those shadows, which have so lonu 
 them, should, forever, u ilee away"? 
 
 Tht 1 inroads, therefore, whether more secret or m 
 avowed, which have been, and still continue to be, mad*' 
 on the purest features of the Gospel service, in 
 corner of the Christian church, should be the subj< 
 our deepest regret. 
 
 Without extending our views to distant si 
 or to different denominations from those professing any 
 faithful adherence to our u Directory for Worship, 3 
 
 only adopted — adopted with all the holy sanctit) 
 of obligatory vows, how awful should be our n flections 
 on any innovations ? How conscious of having incurred 
 the guilt of a tacit acquiescence with wilful aberration 
 from spiritual worship ; and, in this respect, an ?/>?- 
 aunclioned conformity to the pride and fashions of this 
 world ? 
 
 In the nominally Christian world, under this sad 
 delusion, many still retain in their public service of 
 Go<), sucn incense, as is felt to be most agreeable to 
 their sense of odoriferous perfume and fragrance, — 
 Others can find but little relish for religious service, 
 but through the luxurious symphony of instrumental 
 and vocal sound ; and that under the direction, not of 
 
 the most pious, but rather of the most refined proficient 
 
 in the musical art — While not a few, who would seem 
 
 to have ; i more exalted and sublime sense of Gospel 
 worship, are led to succumb and to acquiesce; under 
 tin- timid apprehension of being considered, either de- 
 tinue of all refinement and taste, or as weakly wedded 
 
PREFACE. \ 
 
 to a mode of praising God, too unembellisbed for po- 
 lished society ; however sanctioned it may have been 
 by the example of our Lord and Master. 
 
 Thus do we find, that not only does depravity re- 
 ceive countenance in holy things ; but that, while we 
 become the illegitimate compilers with the advocates of 
 musical harmony of sound; we are promoting jarring 
 and discord in the church of Christ ; and substituting 
 for the discountenanced simplicity of that service, 
 whose melodies can flow only from the heart, a vain 
 and pompous combination of sounds, that not seldom 
 puts to silence more than one half the worshippers, 
 even in the house of God. 
 
 Let the impartial weigh these awful considerations. 
 Instances are become too notorious to escape the obser- 
 vation even of the ungodly themselves. Are not such 
 innovations either totally winked at, or shamefully ac- 
 quiesced with, by those whose sacred office it is to in- 
 culcate a far different spirit and practice ? 
 
 Is it not true, that in some of our churches, indivi- 
 duals, of conscientious feeling in this respect, have re- 
 fused to minister ? Has not the aged and devout wor- 
 shipper, rather than comply, for example's sake to his 
 family, been induced to walk out, after service had com- 
 menced, with his Bible in the one hand, and his Psalm 
 Book in the other ? 
 
 Has this innovation hitherto excited no division — 
 occasioned no discord in any church ? Is there no in- 
 stance among us, of its rising over all regard for con- 
 gregational privilege and right. Has it subjected no 
 individual member or minister, opposed to such an in- 
 road, to not only an exemption from any thing like bro- 
 therly kindness, but to an obloquy bordering on perse- 
 cution itself : 
 
 If to these inquiries no negative reply can be given 
 — and that such a state of things actually exists, and is 
 allowed to pass on without notice or censure — What, 
 may we not ask, is become of the watchmen of Zion ? 
 What avail our inquiries, or our reports, on this head, 
 in the churches within our connexion ? Or. mav it 
 
M PREFACE. 
 
 not be reasonably asked, What mounds or bulwarks 
 can we hope to see successful, for guarding and securing 
 the purity and simplicity of Gospel worship? 
 
 From the following interesting Discussion, we learn, 
 how innovations are attempted; and, also, how they 
 have been successfully resisted, in a most respectable 
 portion of the Presbyterian church ; not less acquainted, 
 surely, than we are, with those principles on which it 
 was founded at the Reformation. On some occasions, 
 we seem jealous, and not seldom justly, of foreign aber- 
 rations from ministerial fidelity, as well as from the 
 truths of the Gospel. But, a laying aside all partiality," 5 
 let us be equally jealous over ourselves; and, while we 
 deem it to be our sacred duty u to bear and forbear" 
 with one another, in our own infirmities, as well with 
 those of others, not in our connexion ; let us, never- 
 theless, be carefully and zealously alive to a just dis- 
 crimination between what this duty demands, and a 
 criminal acquiescence with unsanctioned innovations, 
 either in doctrine or in worship. Whatever tends to 
 sap the constitutional foundation on which alone these 
 can and should rest, can never be smoothed over as a 
 point of minor importance — can receive neither salvo 
 nor authority for the turpitude of acquiescence, under 
 any pretext whatever. 
 
 To be instrumental, in any degree, in maintaining 
 the purity of our church against all innovation, and 
 especially in public and social worship, has been the 
 sole motive of those who have had the principal share 
 in submitting tfie following publication to the considera- 
 tion of their fellow Christians; and. in whatever spirit 
 it may be received, or however useful, or otherwise, ir 
 may be found tor that design, they shall, at least, have 
 satisfied the dictates of their own consciences; and 
 leave the issue with Him, who alone can give success to 
 all they can aim at. for his glofy, and for his praise 
 upon earth. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Minute of the Presbytery of Glasgow, Sept. 2d, 1807, Page 1 
 First Letter, Lord Provost to the Presbytery, 26th August, 
 
 1807, 1 
 
 Extract from the City Council Records of Glasgow, Sep- 
 tember 8th, 1806, 2 
 
 Dr. Ritchie's Letter to Provost John Hamilton, .... 3 
 Petition of Gentlemen who possess Seats in St. Andrew's 
 
 Church, to City Council, 4 
 
 Mr. Reddies Letter, 6th September, 1806, 7 
 
 First Letter, the Lord Provost to Dr. Ritchie, 22d August, 
 
 1807, 12 
 
 Dr. Ritchie's Answer to the Lord Provost, 13 
 
 Second Letter, the Lord Provost to Dr. Ritchie, 26th Au- 
 gust, 1807, 13 
 
 Second Letter of the Lord Provost to the Presbytery, 2d 
 
 September, 1807, 15 
 
 Minute of Presbytery, September 2d, 1807, 16 
 
 Minute of Presbytery, October 7th, 1807, 17 
 
 Minute of Presbytery, November 4th, 1807, 18 
 
 Reasons of Dissent, 13th October, 1807, 18 
 
 Answers to Reasons of Dissent, 2d December, 1807, . . 22 
 
 Minute of Presbytery, January 6th, 1808, 46 
 
 Dr. Taylor's, jun. Explanation, January 5th, 1808, - . . 46 
 Dr. Lockhart's Explanation, 51 
 
1 ONTENTS. 
 
 Dr. Ritchie > Statement, Gth January, 1808, . . . Pagt 53 
 Minutes off P r e sbytery , February 3d, and March 30th, 1S08, 62 
 \ib\ver for the Presbytery to Dr. Ritchie's Statement, 83 
 
 Minute of Presbytery, May 4th, 1808, 175 
 
 Conclusion, 178 
 
 Address to the Judicatories of the Presbyterian Church, in 
 
 the United States, 193 
 
 Copy of a Letter to the Incorporated Committee, Sec. . >1\1 
 
STATEMENT, &c 
 
 Minute of the Presbytery of Glasgow. 
 
 September 2d, 1807. 
 
 TWO letters from the Lord Provost of the city 
 of Glasgow, respecting an Organ having been 
 introduced into St. Andrew's church, were pro- 
 duced and read. Also produced and read, copy 
 of letters, Provost Mackenzie and Dr. Ritchie; — 
 and extract from the records of the Town Coun- 
 cil of Glasgow. The tenor of all the foresaid 
 productions follows. 
 
 First Letter Lord Provost to the Presbytery, 
 
 Rfv Str Glasgow, 26th August, 1807, 
 
 In discharge of the legal duty incumbent on 
 civil magistrates, patrons of churches, and heri- 
 tors of parishes, I beg leave, on the part of the 
 magistrates and council of this city, to intimate 
 to the reverend Presbytery of Glasgow, that, ac- 
 cording to information I have received, an Organ 
 has recently been placed in St. Andrew's church, 
 by the minister and congregation of that parish. 
 1 
 
) 
 
 and was used on Sunday last, while the eoiu 
 gation was assembled for the purpose of divine 
 worship. 
 
 Whether the introduction of Organs into our 
 established churches, be an improvement or not, 
 is the province of the ecclesiastical judicatories, 
 not of the civil magistrates, to determine. And 
 that the reverend Presbytery may know the line 
 of conduct which the magistrates and council 
 have thought it right to observe on this occasion, 
 I transmit a copy of the answer which they re- 
 turned in the month of September last, to an ap- 
 plication from the minister and congregation of 
 St. Andrew's church; and also copies of two 
 official letters which I have addressed to the Rev. 
 Dr. Ritchie on the subject, and of his answer to 
 one of them. — I am, with much respect, 
 Rev. Sir, 
 Your most obedient servant, 
 
 (Signed) James Mackenzie. 
 
 Lord Pro^ 
 The Rev. Dr. William Taylor, Mode- 
 rator of the Presbytery of Glasgow. 
 
 Extract from the Town Council Records of 
 Glasgow. 
 
 At Glasgow, the eighth day of September, 
 
 eighteen hundred and six years; 
 
 Which day the magistrates and council of the 
 
 city of Glasgow, being in council assembled, The 
 
 Lord Provost* laid before the magistrates and 
 
 Provost John Hamilton. 
 
council a letter from the Rev. Dr. Ritchie, minis- 
 ter of St. Andrew's church, and a petition from 
 a number of respectable inhabitants who possess 
 seats in that church, requesting the permission of 
 the magistrates and council, as heritors, to make 
 such alterations in the seats behind the pulpit, as 
 may be requisite for the introduction of an Organ. 
 Of which letter and petition the tenor follows: 
 
 My LORD Glasgow, 21st August, 1806. 
 
 I take the liberty of requesting your lordship 
 to lay before the magistrates and council of the 
 city of Glasgow, the petition herewith transmit- 
 ted by the congregation of St. Andrew's church. 
 Anxious as I am for the success of a request by 
 a united congregation, I am equally anxious that 
 our magistrates and council should pronounce a 
 sentence worthy of themselves and the office with 
 which they are invested. No law, so far as I 
 have either read or heard, has ever been made 
 with regard to Organs. I hope, therefore, that 
 the judgment of the council, whatever it be, shall 
 be expressed in language that conveys neither 
 approbation nor disapprobation of instrumental 
 music in churches: But that the petition shall be 
 granted or refused, merely on the ground of ex- 
 pediency or inexpediency as to the removal of the 
 seats. To this alone, in my opinion, the juris- 
 diction of heritors extends. In giving this opi- 
 nion, I have no desire to dictate to my superiors 
 what line of conduct they ought to pursue, but to 
 discover my wish, that the decision given may be 
 such, as to maintain in the esteem of their fellow- 
 citizens, of their country, and of Europe, that 
 high reputation for liberality, combined with 
 prudence, which has hitherto distinguished those 
 
who preside over the interests of the city of Gin 
 goW. — I have the honour to remain, 
 
 With due sentiments of respect, 
 My Lord, 
 Your lordship's most obedient servant, 
 (Signed) Will. Ritchie 
 
 Follows the Petition. 
 
 To the Honourable the Lord Provost, Magish 
 and Council of the City of Glasgow. 
 
 We, subscribers, anxious for our own improve- 
 ment in sacred music, have long cherished in pri- 
 vate, what we now hope to realize, an earnest 
 wish of erecting an Organ in St. Andrew's church. 
 This our wish we should never have deemed it 
 necessary thus publicly to express, had we felt 
 ourselves at liberty, without permission of our 
 patrons and heritors, to make such arrangements 
 in the church, as the placing of an Organ may 
 require. For obtaining this permission, we ad- 
 dress ourselves to you as our heritors, on whom 
 lies the burden of taking care that the sitters shall 
 not in any degree injure the church, either in \u 
 revenue or its accommodation for hearers. Every 
 appearance of such injury we are determined to 
 avoid, and therefore it is our request, that the 
 proposed alterations may be carried on under the 
 inspection of the Master of Works, and of such 
 other gentlemen as it may be judged expedient 
 to appoint. The question as to the propriety of 
 using an Organ in church, it becomes us not to 
 discuss before you, either m magistrates or heri- 
 tors. This is a matter of private judgment mere- 
 ly, in which we alone vm\ decide for QUTSelves 
 
We are fully persuaded, that in the execution of 
 our plan, we violate no law either of the church 
 or of the state. We give no offence to the preju- 
 dice of our people, for the congregation are all 
 of one mind. We bring no new burden on the 
 heritors, for the whole of the expense we bind 
 ourselves to defray. We prescribe no rule of 
 conduct to others. W r e only adopt what we think 
 and feel to be for our own edification. We en- 
 croach upon no sacred privilege, no civil right 
 of any man, or of any body of men in the king- 
 dom. Acting thus within the limits of the law of 
 the land, of the law of the church, and of the ob- 
 ligations of good neighbourhood, we cannot en- 
 tertain a doubt that our scheme shall not only be 
 permitted, but encouraged, by our enlightened 
 heritors, who, we know, are ambitious of pro- 
 moting every rational improvement; who will ob- 
 serve with pleasure, our attempt to advance in 
 the knowledge and the practice of psalmody, and 
 w ill gladly concur in the endeavour to rescue our 
 national character from the reproach of having 
 almost entirely neglected the cultivation of sacred 
 music. Our heritors, magistrates of one of the 
 first commercial cities of Europe, will thus give 
 new evidence to mankind that the genius of com- 
 merce is not the contracted spirit of hostility to 
 the liberal arts, but the enlivening sun of science, 
 dispelling in its progress the gloomy fogs of 
 prejudice, that have too long benumbed the ener- 
 gies, and untuned the feelings Gf our country. 
 
 Glasgow has the honour of having first made 
 the public proposal of introducing into one of its 
 churches the most perfect of musical instruments, 
 and of employing it for the generous purpose of 
 inning the public voice for the exercise of praise. 
 
And the present Lord Provost, and magistrates 
 and council, will, we doubt not, eagerly embrace 
 the opportunity of accomplishing a measure which 
 will give additional lustre to their names, and ren- 
 der the period of their administration the open- 
 ing of a new era in the annals of our national 
 advancement. 
 
 May it therefore please our patrons and heri- 
 tors, to grant us liberty to make such alter- 
 ations in the seats behind the pulpit in St. 
 Andrew's church, as may be requisite for 
 carrying into execution our design. There 
 exists not, we believe, in any parish, even in 
 the remotest and least cultivated part of the 
 kingdom, a body of heritors, who would not 
 feel at least some reluctance to refuse the 
 petition of a united people, for so very small 
 a favour, the granting of which involves not 
 any expense, and hurts not the claims of any 
 human being. Your complying with our 
 earnest request will form a new bond of at- 
 tachment between our magistrates and our 
 congregation, while it will unite the tie of 
 private gratitude to the sentiments of public 
 veneration, with which we implore upon 
 their heads the blessing of Almighty God, 
 who hath formed the ear for the delights of 
 harmony, and whom we are bound to serve 
 by the culture of every faculty which it hath 
 pleased him in his goodness to bestow. 
 
 Subscribed by a great number of gentlemen 
 2vho possess seats in St, Andrews church. 
 
 Which letter and petition having been read, 
 the Lord Provost stated, that before he submitted 
 this matter to the council, he and the other I 
 
gistrates had thought it right to have the opinion 
 of the legal advisers of the city; and that in conse- 
 quence of the request of the magistrates, he re- 
 ceived from the first town-clerk an official letter on 
 the subject. Which letter having been also read, 
 and the said petition and letter having been de- 
 liberately considered, the magistrates and council 
 approve of the opinion given by Mr. Reddie; 
 resolve to act in the manner therein suggested, 
 with regard to the request contained in the said 
 petition, and direct an extract of this act of 
 council, with a copy of the said letter, to be 
 transmitted to the Rev. Dr. Ritchie, and to the 
 gentlemen who subscribe the petition, as the an- 
 swer of the magistrates and council to the said 
 application. Of which letter from Mr. Reddie 
 the tenor follows: — 
 
 (copy.) 
 
 Mr. Reddle's Letter. 
 
 t. «- -J Glasgow, 6th September, 1806. 
 
 I have perused, and deliberately considered, 
 the petition of a number of most respectable in- 
 habitants, who possess seats in St. Andrew's 
 church, requesting the permission of the magis- 
 trates and council to introduce an Organ into 
 that church. I have also perused the letter of 
 the Rev. Dr. Ritchie, transmitted to your lord- 
 ship along with the petition. Agreeably to the 
 direction of your lordship, and the other magis- 
 trates, I shall now, as briefly as I can, state what 
 occurs to me on this subject. And I have no 
 doubt, whatever resolution the magistrates and 
 council may ultimately adopt, that they will be 
 guided by views, at once liberal and prudent, and 
 
8 
 
 that the grounds on which they proceed, will bo 
 such, as to command the respect of their fellow- 
 citizens, and of their country. 
 
 Were I called upon to express my own indivi- 
 dual opinion and feelings, I should, perhaps, laj 
 claim to the honour of participating in the senti- 
 ments and wishes of the enlightened congregation 
 of St. Andrew's church. But on this subject, my 
 individual opinion is a matter of no importance 
 whatever. It is my opinion, as one of the legal 
 assessors of the city of Glasgow, that your lord- 
 ship and the other magistrates require. 
 
 In the petition, and in Dr. Ritchie's letter, it 
 seems to be hinted, that the magistrates and 
 council have the power of granting, or refusing, 
 the present application, u merely on the ground 
 " of expediency or inexpediency, as to the re- 
 " moval of the seats" in the church. With me, 
 this opinion has no weight; because 1 do not con- 
 ceive it to be warranted by the law of the land. 
 
 Of the present application, the (Magistrates and 
 council have a right to judge, in two characters, 
 as representative heritors, and as civil magis- 
 trates. — As heritors, they have a legal right to 
 insist, that their patrimonial interests shall not be 
 impaired by the proposed measure. These pa- 
 trimonial interests the gentlemen of the in 
 tracy and council might, perhaps, on such an oc- 
 casion, be disposed to waive, were they heritor- in 
 their own personal right. But the members of 
 the magistracy and council are not heritors in 
 their own right. They "are heritors merely, as 
 representing the community of Glasgow. And to 
 the interests of that community, they are hound. 
 on this, as on all other occasions, to attend. 
 Whatever resolution, therefore, may be ultimate- 
 
ly adopted, it will be necessary, that due precau- 
 tions be taken, to secure effectually the pecuniary 
 interests of the community. 
 
 But there is another, and a more important 
 character, in which your lordship, and the other 
 gentlemen of the magistracy, are called upon to 
 judge of the present application; I mean, as civil 
 magistrates. 
 
 That there is any express act of the legislature, 
 prohibiting the use of Organs in our established 
 churches, I am not aware. But that the intro- 
 duction of Organs into our churches, would be a 
 material alteration, and innovation in our exter- 
 nal mode of worship, there cannot be a doubt. — 
 The argument, which would identify an Organ 
 with a pitchpipe, does not merit a serious answer. 
 
 Whether the use of Organs in our established 
 churches, would be an expedient, or an inexpe- 
 dient measure, in a religious and ecclesiastical 
 view, it is unnecessary here to inquire; because 
 your lordship and the other magistrates are not 
 an ecclesiastical judicature, and have no right to 
 take cognizance of the matter in that character. 
 But, as civil magistrates, you are legally bound 
 to maintain our constitution, in church and state, 
 IB its present condition; and by express statute, 
 you are bound " to take order, that unity and 
 ;i peace be preserved in the church." — That there 
 is great danger of the introduction of Organs dis- 
 turbing the peace, and interrupting the harmony 
 of the Church of Scotland, I should be sorry to 
 suppose. At the same time, such an event is pos- 
 sible. Whether for the auricular gratification of 
 one congregation, ground of offence should be 
 afforded to other congregations, is a matter that 
 • ires serious thought. Some respect is due b\ 
 
10 
 
 the civil magistrate, even to what many indivi- 
 duals may be disposed to term, the prejudio 
 their weaker brethren. And at all events, if an) 
 
 innovation in our external mode of worship be 
 expedient and salutary, the reform, or improve- 
 ment, ought to originate with the ecclesiastical 
 branch of the government, with the constitutional 
 guardians of our conduct, and our welfare, in 
 such matters. When the use of Organs in our 
 established churches has been sanctioned by our 
 ecclesiastical legislature, then it will be the duty 
 of your lordship and the other maui-trates, not 
 merely to permit the use of these musical instru- 
 ments, but to protect in that use, those congre- 
 gations, who may conceive such instruments to 
 minister to their edification. Till the ecclesiasti- 
 cal branch of the constitution have sanctioned the 
 use of Organs in our established churches, I do 
 not see that the magistrates and council can, with 
 any propriety, directly or indirectly, approve of 
 such an ecclesiastical innovation. 
 
 I have been told, that the only way in which 
 this matter can be brought before our ecclesiasti- 
 cal judicatures, is by a complaint and interdict. 
 — I pretend not to be conversant with the forms 
 of our church courts. But, I am much mistaken 
 indeed, if our establishment be so grossly defec- 
 tive, as not to afford some way sufficiently formal, 
 of obtaining the permission, or sanction, of our 
 ecclesiastical legislature, for what may be an ex- 
 pedient alteration in our mode of worship. 
 
 From the Language of the petition, it seems to 
 be supposed, that were not the magistrates and 
 council heritors of St. Andrew's church, the sub- 
 scribers might, of their own authority solely, in- 
 troduce an Organ. In (his opinion 1 cannot 
 
11 
 
 incide. To the happiness and glory of this na- 
 tion, every man may worship God in the manner 
 he thinks fit. But while unlimited toleration pre- 
 vails IB this country, we have at the same time 
 an ecclesiastical establishment, recognized by 
 law. Under that establishment, a certain mode 
 of worship is, and has been for ages, observed. 
 And to that mode of worship, until altered by 
 constitutional authority, whatever Dissenters may 
 do, the members of the Establishment are bound 
 to conform. 
 
 In former times, the inhabitants of Glasgow 
 stood forward, the steady supporters of civil and 
 religions freedom. And although firmly attached 
 to the simple and unadorned form of worship, 
 handed down to them by their forefathers, I am 
 convinced the gentlemen who at present com- 
 pose the magistracy and council, are, at least, as 
 anxious as any of their predecessors ever were, 
 to promote every rational and liberal improve- 
 ment. But zeal for improvement, ought to be 
 tempered with prudence. And I own, I should be 
 sorry indeed, were the magistrates and council of 
 Glasgow to commit themselves so far, as to sanc- 
 tion, authorize, or approve, in any capacity, di- 
 rectly or indirectly, expressly or tacitly, what, it 
 is possible, the General Assembly of the Church 
 of Scotland, in the exercise of its constitutional 
 functions, may afterwards disapprove and pro- 
 hibit. 
 
 Lpon the whole, then, my opinion is, First, 
 That the magistrates and council, as representa- 
 tive heritors, are bound to take such measures, as 
 may prevent the funds of the community from 
 sustaining any injury by the introduction of the 
 proposed Organ ; and, Secondly, That the ma- 
 
12 
 
 gislrates and council ought to recommend ii tti 
 the gentlemen subscribers, and to the able and 
 learned pastor of that most respectable congrega- 
 tion, before proceeding farther, to apply for the 
 permission and sanction of the ecclesiastical 
 branch of our constitution. If the measure be 
 expedient and salutary, there will surely be the 
 less difficulty in obtaining that sanction. And 
 whatever may be the result, the measure will be 
 fully and fairly discussed by that deliberative as- 
 sembly, whose province it is to take cognizance 
 of such matters. 
 
 I have to apologize for trespassing so much on 
 the time of your lordship. And I have the honour 
 to be, with much respect and esteem, 
 My Lord, 
 Your lordship's faithful servant, 
 (Signed) James Reddie. 
 
 (copy.) 
 First Letter the Lord Provost to Dr. Ritchie. 
 
 ■j-v o Glasgow, 22d August, 1807. 
 
 LJEAR oIR, 
 
 In a conversation which took place in a com- 
 pany where I was yesterday, it was mentioned 
 by a member of your congregation, that it was 
 intended to make use of the Organ at present in 
 St. Andrew's church of this city during divine 
 service to-morrow, or on some Sunday soon. 1 
 beg to know if such really is your intention, be- 
 cause, if bo, I shall consider it my duty to enter 
 i solemn protest against you for all damages 
 which may be the consequence. — I am. fee. 
 
 James -Mackenzie. 
 
13 
 
 (copy.) 
 
 Letter from Dr. Ritchie to the Lord Provost. 
 
 My Lord, 
 
 1 have this moment had the honour of receiv- 
 ing your lordship's letter, relative to what you 
 have heard about the intention expressed by the 
 congregation of St. Andrew's church, to employ 
 an Organ in public worship. I shall embrace 
 the first possible opportunity of laying the Lord 
 Provost's letter before the committee of that con- 
 gregation, to whom the business of the Organ has 
 been committed, that they ma}' know at what risk 
 such an attempt as that which they have in view 
 must be made. They will, as becomes them, pay 
 all due deference to your lordship's declaration." 
 I have the honour to remain, he. 
 
 (Signed) Will. Ritchie. 
 
 Rimer-Street, > 
 
 22d August, 1807. $ 
 
 (copy.) 
 Second Letter the Lord Provost to Dr. Ritchie. 
 
 Rev. Sir Glasgow, 26th August, 1S07. 
 
 After the answer returned by the magistrates 
 and council of this city in the month of September 
 
 * The public may judjre of the deference Dr. Ritchie paid to 
 the Lord Provost's declaration, when they are informed, that 
 the Organ was used in St. Andrew's church, in the public wor- 
 ship of God, the very next day after he had received that letter. 
 Indeed, it appears from Dr. Ritchie's o\\ n account, that he did 
 not lay that letter before his musical committee till the 26th. 
 
14 
 
 last, to the application of the minister and van 
 
 members of the congregation of St. Andrew's 
 church, for permission to introduce an Organ, it 
 was not expected that you or any of the members 
 of that congregation would have placed an Organ 
 in that church, or would have authorized per- 
 formance on such a musical instrument on Sun- 
 day, and at the time of divine service, without 
 having previously obtained the sanction of our 
 ecclesiastical legislature for such a proceeding. 
 
 That an Organ has lately been introduced into 
 St. Andrew's church, and was used on Sunday 
 last, while the congregation were engaged in di- 
 vine service, I have received information from 
 different quarters; and I have not yet learned thai 
 the ecclesiastical branch of our constitution has, 
 in any shape, approved or sanctioned so material 
 an innovation in our external form of worship. 
 
 Whether such an innovation be an improve- 
 ment, or the reverse, it is not the province of the 
 magistrates and council to inquire, or to deter- 
 mine. And I conceive I shall discharge the le- 
 gal duty incumbent on the civil magistrate, in a 
 religious or ecclesiastical point of view, by mere! \ 
 ng intimation of the event to the Rev. Pres- 
 bytery within whose bounds this city is situated. 
 
 But while the magistrates and council thus 
 leave entirely to the ecclesiastical judicatories, 
 whose province it is to take cognizance of such 
 matters, the superintendence and regulation of 
 our external form of worship. I think it necessarj 
 on the part of the patrons of St. Andrew's church, 
 and of the heritors of the parish, as notified in 
 letter of Saturday, thus formally to protest, 
 and intimate to you as minister, and through 
 vour medium to the other members of your kirk 
 
15 
 
 session, and to the individuals of whom the con- 
 gregation is composed, that, in the event of the 
 measure which you have thought fit to adopt, 
 without the approbation of the patrons and he- 
 ritors, proving detrimental in any respect to the 
 pecuniary interests of the city and community of 
 Glasgow, the patrons and heritors hold you and 
 the other members of your kirk-session and con- 
 gregation as legally liable for the consequences, 
 whatever they may be. 
 
 Farther, on the part of the magistrates of this 
 city, I feel myself called upon to give you this 
 formal intimation, that although determined as in 
 duty bound, at all times to preserve peace and 
 good order among the inhabitants, the magis- 
 trates hold you and the other members of the 
 kirk-session, and congregation of St. Andrew's 
 church, as responsible for the consequences of 
 any breach of the peace which may possibly be 
 occasioned by the innovation you have attempted 
 to introduce. — I am, &x. 
 
 (Signed) James Mackenzie. 
 
 To the Rev. Dr. Ritchie. 
 
 Second Letter to the Presbytery. 
 
 -p „ q Glasgow, 2d September, 1807. 
 
 Since my letter of the 26th ult. was transmitted 
 to you, I think it right to inform you that a deputa- 
 tion from the St. Andrew's congregation waited 
 upon me on Saturday last,* and intimated ver- 
 bally, that they had come to the determination of 
 
 v The 29th of August 
 
16 
 
 giving up the use of an Organ for the present, ii 
 
 I would withdraw the communication which 1 had 
 made to the Presbytery. To this intimation I 
 gave no immediate answer, but having occasion 
 to hold a meeting of the magistrates and council 
 yesterday, on other business, I laid before them 
 the whole of my correspondence about the Organ; 
 they unanimously approved of all that I had done, 
 and agreed that the matter should now rest with 
 the reverend Presbytery. — I have the honour to 
 be, Rev. Sir, 
 
 Your most obedient servant, 
 (Signed) James Mackenzie. 
 
 Lord Provost. 
 Tbe Rev. Moderator of the Presbytery of Glasgow 
 
 Minutes of Presbytery. 
 
 September 2d, 1807. 
 
 The Presbytery unanimously appoint the mo- 
 derator to write a respectful letter of thanks to 
 the Lord Provost, acknowledging his communi- 
 cation, and informing him, that the same is re- 
 corded, and that the Presbytery will take the case 
 referred to, into their serious consideration. Dr. 
 Ritchie requested the Presbytery to delay proce- 
 dure in this cause till next ordinary meeting, so- 
 lemnly promising, that the Organ should not 
 again be used, without the authority of the 
 church. The Presbytery unanimously granted 
 said request. 
 
17 
 
 October 7tb, 1807. 
 
 Mr. Burns, the moderator of last meeting, pro 
 tempore, reported, that he wrote a letter of thanks 
 to the Lord Provost of Glasgow, agreeably to 
 the Presbytery's appointment. 
 
 The Presbytery having resumed consideration 
 of the cause respecting the introduction of the 
 Organ into St. Andrew's church — Dr. Ritchie 
 was heard on the subject, and judicially declared, 
 in terms of last minute, viz. That he would not 
 again use an Organ in the public worship of God, 
 without the authority of the church. 
 
 The Presbytery having deliberated on this 
 cause at great length, and maturely considered 
 the same, a motion was made and seconded, viz. 
 That the Presbytery are of opinion, that the use 
 of Organs in the public worship of God is con- 
 trary to the law of the land, and to the law and 
 constitution of our established church, and there- 
 fore prohibit it in all the churches and chapels 
 within their bounds: And with respect to Dr. 
 Ritchie's conduct in this matter, they are satis- 
 fied with his declaration. 
 
 On the other hand, it was moved and seconded, 
 That in consequence of Dr. Ritchie's judicial de- 
 claration, the Presbytery should find it unneces- 
 sary to proceed further in this business, declaring, 
 at the same time, their judgment, that the intro- 
 duction of an Organ into public worship is inex- 
 pedient, and unauthorised in our church. 
 
 The state of the vote being first or second mo~ 
 don, and Dr. Ritchie having desired it to be 
 marked that he declined voting — The roll was 
 called, and the votes marked, when it carried. 
 
 First motion. Wherefore, the Presbvterv did. 
 
 2* 
 
18 
 
 and hereby do, in terms of the first motion, de- 
 clare that the use of Organs in the public wor- 
 ship of God is contrary to the law of the land, 
 and to the law and constitution of our established 
 church; and therefore the Presbytery did, and 
 hereby do, prohibit the use of Organs in all the 
 churches and chapels within their bounds: And 
 with respect to Dr. Ritchie's conduct in this mat- 
 ter, they are satisfied with his declaration. 
 
 From which judgment, Principal Taylor, in 
 his own name, and in the name of all those who 
 should adhere to him, dissented, and promised to 
 give in his reasons in due time, to which dissent 
 adhered Dr. Ranken and Dr. M'Gill, Mr. David- 
 son and Mr. Jack, and took instruments in the 
 clerk's hands. 
 
 November 4th, 1807. 
 
 The clerk reported, that there was lodged with 
 him, in due time, reasons of dissent against the 
 judgment of the Presbytery at last meeting, which 
 reasons were read. The tenor wherof follows: 
 
 Glasgow, 13th October, 1607. 
 
 Reasons of Dissent from a Judgment of the 
 Presbytery of Glasgow, October^Tth, 1S07, in 
 which they declare, " That the use of Organs 
 " in the public worship of God is contrary to 
 " the law of the land, and to the law and con- 
 " siitution of the established chgreh," ccc. &c. 
 
 1. Because this sentence gives a decision upon 
 a general question which was not properly under 
 tlic consideration of the Presbytery, The ques- 
 tion was not respecting the competency of the 
 
19 
 
 Church of Scotland to judge in the case of instru- 
 mental music, nor even respecting the general 
 point of its lawfulness and utility, but regarded 
 an individual case brought before them, which 
 was attended with peculiar circumstances, and to 
 which the decision should have been confined. 
 Positive decisions, on general questions, concern- 
 ing which the church has not given an opinion, 
 the dissenters conceive should be seldom at- 
 tempted by an inferior court; but still less, when 
 such general questions are not directly or neces- 
 sarily brought under their consideration. 
 
 2. There were peculiar reasons in this case, 
 which should have rendered the Presbytery sa- 
 tisfied with giving their judgment on it alone. 
 The circumstances of the case, as brought before 
 the Presbytery, were of a peculiar nature, and 
 formed sufficient ground for a determination on 
 its own merits. Any member could not be sup- 
 posed to have formed a positive judgment on the 
 general question, concerning which he knew not 
 that he was to give an opinion, and the general 
 purposes of peace and order would have been suf- 
 ficiently and better secured, by agreeing to re- 
 ceive the judicial declaration of the Minister con- 
 cerned, that the Organ should not be again used 
 without the authority of the church, and finding, 
 as the Presbytery would unanimously have done, 
 that its introduction was inexpedient and unau- 
 thorised. 
 
 3. But these reasons would not have induced 
 the dissentients to have entered their dissent, nor 
 even perhaps to have divided the Presbytery on 
 the subject, could they have acquiesced in the 
 justice and truth of the declaration which the 
 Presbytery have emitted. They are very far 
 
20 
 
 from meaning to impute blame to their brethren, 
 for whom they have the greatest respect and af- 
 fection, they mean merely to express that diffe- 
 rence of opinion which they feel themselves 
 obliged to entertain upon the subject. They 
 observe, therefore, as their last and principal 
 reason of dissent, That the opinion expressed by 
 the Presbytery, not only proceeds farther than 
 the case required, but asserts as facts, concerning 
 the law of the land, and the constitution of the 
 church, what the dissenters cannot perceive, and 
 dare not, consistently with a good conscience, af- 
 firm. No law of the church, nor of the land, has 
 been passed concerning instrumental music: and 
 they know of no law existing, to which they can 
 go the length of pronouncing that it is contrary. 
 The dissentients allow, that it is unauthorised, 
 and they do not assert that authority for it should 
 be given; but neither, on the other hand, can 
 they assert that any law has yet determined the 
 question. The question concerning the lawful- 
 ness, utility, or expediency of instrumental music 
 in public worship, is open for the Church of Scot- 
 land to consider and determine. This being their 
 opinion, they could still less proceed the length 
 of declaring that it is contrary to the law of the 
 land, and the very constitution of the church ; 
 and, by consequence, that it is not in the power 
 of the Church of Scotland, even if willing, t<> take 
 
 the subject under their consideration. The ques- 
 tion, the dissentients consider to he a question of 
 utility and expedience) which the church has it in 
 its power at any time to consider and determine; 
 
 nor do they know an\ law of the land, or princi- 
 ple of the constitution, which should present die 
 
 church from giving any determination it .-hall. 
 
21 
 
 in its wisdom, judge right. The Act of Security, 
 the dissentients conceive, has been interpreted by 
 the Presbytery with a strictness in this instance, 
 which has never been applied to other subjects. 
 And though they readily admit that the Barrier 
 Act points out the mode, which, in the case of 
 new practices and laws, must be followed, yet 
 they conceive that the very design of the act, in 
 pointing out the mode which is to be pursued, 
 plainly shows that the church has the power of de- 
 ciding upon new propositions or overtures, which 
 interfere not with those general and leading prin- 
 ciples on which its constitution is founded, 
 
 (Signed) William Taylor. 
 
 Alexander Ranken. 
 David Davidson. 
 Stevenson Macgill. 
 
 Dr. Porteous, Dr. Balfour, Mr. Lapslie, and 
 Mr. M'Lean, are appointed a committee to an- 
 swer said Reasons of Dissent, 
 
 December 2d, 1807. 
 
 The committee appointed to draw up answers 
 to the Reasons of Dissent against the judgment 
 of the Presbytery on the 7th of October last, re- 
 specting the Organ, gave in said answers, which 
 were read. — The Presbytery approve of said 
 answers, and appoint the same to be recorded. 
 The tenor whereof follows. Reserving it to Dr. 
 Ritchie, Dr. Taylor, jun. and Dr. Lockhart, to 
 submit to the next Presbytery such explanations 
 as they shall think proper. 
 
22 
 
 The committee appointed to prepare answ< 
 Reasons of Dissent from a judgment of the 
 Presbyter) of Glasgow; 7th October, 1S07, in 
 which they declare, " That the use of Organs 
 " in the public workup of God, is contrary to 
 " the law of the land, and to the law and con- 
 " stitution of the established church," be. 
 beg leave to submit the following to the reve- 
 rend Presbytery. 
 
 The committee enter on this business with deep 
 concern. But when reasons of dissent are re- 
 corded^ an appeal is made to posterity, which 
 renders the recording of answers indispensably 
 necessary. Unfortunately, in these reasons, the 
 Presbyter}' is not only charged with having acted 
 improperly \ but with having violated truth and 
 justice. To repel so serious charges, it seems 
 unavoidable for the Presbytery to furnish poste- 
 rity with an account of their situation, and of the 
 various extraordinary circumstances in which 
 they are called to act. Should this give rise to 
 strictures which seem severe, the responsibility 
 must rest with those who have recorded reasons 
 of dissent, and made it necessary for the Pres- 
 bytery to vindicate themselves, as well as to de- 
 fend the purity and uniformity of the national 
 worship. 
 
 It is considerably more than two years since 
 the public mind was agitated by the proposal of 
 introducing aD Organ into St. Andrew's church. 
 
 During this long period, the Presbytery waited 
 with patience, in the hope, thai lime and good 
 sense would dispose the authors and abettors of' 
 this proposal, to listen to wiser counsels. 
 About the end of August last, a communica- 
 
23 
 
 lion was made to the Presbytery by the Lord 
 Provost, with the approbation of the city coun- 
 cil, containing extracts, letters, and copies of let- 
 ters, which, having been read by the Presbytery, 
 they ordered a respectful letter of thanks to be 
 written by the moderator, and sent 10 the Lord 
 Provost, acknowledging the receipt of these pa- 
 pers. 
 
 From this communication, it appeared that an 
 Organ had been introduced into St. Andi 
 church, and employed on the Sabbath, in time 
 of divine service. St. Andrew's church belongs 
 to the National Establishment, and is under the 
 jurisdiction of the Presbytery of Glasgow. It 
 was certainly known, that Organs have never 
 been used in the Presbyterian Church of Scot- 
 land, — and that no minister of that church had 
 ever presumed, before this, to introduce theme 
 It was certainly known that the people of Scot- 
 land are not given to change — especially in mat- 
 ters connected with religion. And it might have 
 been known, that Glasgow is not the place, and 
 the present is not the time, for a business of this 
 sort. 
 
 Without consulting the Presbytery, or seeming 
 to think the}' had any concern in the matter, 
 some persons, describing themselves as the con- 
 gregation of St. Andrew's church, sent a petition 
 to the honourable magistrates and city council, 
 containing a proposal to have an Organ intro- 
 duced under their patronage, or with their con- 
 sent and approbation. 
 
 This petition was accompanied by a letter, no 
 less extraordinary than the petition itself. 
 
 Before the city council gave any deliverance, 
 they consulted their legal assessor, who gave 
 
them a written opinion, which does him much 
 
 honour. This opinion the council adopted, and 
 accordingly refused " to sanction, authorize, or 
 
 u approve in any capacity, directly or indirectly. 
 " expressly or tacitly.'' the introduction of an 
 Organ into St. Andrew's church. 
 
 The applicants were certainly of opinion that 
 the city council had some right, or power, which 
 they wished to be exercised in favour of an Or- 
 gan: and yet the refusal of their request did not 
 hinder an Organ from being introduced into St. 
 Andrew's church. It may therefore be doubled. 
 whether greater respect has been shown to the 
 Presbytery in not consulting them at all, or to 
 the city council, in setting at nought their opi- 
 nion, after having asked and obtained it. 
 
 Some time afterwards, the Lord Provost re- 
 ceived information that an Organ was to be em- 
 ployed in St. Andrew's church, on the Sabbath, 
 being the day immediately following, in time of 
 divine service. It is easy to conceive his 
 as a chief magistrate, when the highest authority 
 in the city, and the respectability of those in 
 power, was thus treated; and that too in the sight 
 of the astonished citizens, who have been taught, 
 and are accustomed, to reverence and honour 
 magistrates. 
 
 Under these feelings, he wrote the letter of the 
 J2d August last Of the same (late, he received 
 
 an answer, Very decent and proper in itself; but, 
 
 when it i> connected with the operations of the 
 
 following day, we are at a los> what to think of 
 
 it. The fait i<, however, that an Organ wa>, on 
 
 die following day, employed in St. Andrew's 
 church, in time of divine service. 
 
 \ measure of this kind could not fail to strike 
 
the minds of the people. They saw the consti- 
 tuted authorities of the city trampled upon — the 
 order of the church deranged — the peace of the 
 city disturbed — contention and its ordinary com- 
 panions let loose, and they could perceive no 
 motive for all this, but such as they are unwilling 
 to describe. 
 
 The immediate consequences of this explosion, 
 were, the communication of the whole transac- 
 tions by the Lord Provost to the Presbytery, and 
 the unanimous approbation of the Lord Pro- 
 vost's conduct, in a recorded act of the city 
 council. 
 
 [Sej?t. 2d, ISO?.] In this state, the business 
 came before the Presbytery; and let posterity 
 judge, whether the Presbytery have not all along 
 treated their brother, who was chiefly concerned, 
 with greater respect and tenderness than they 
 have received from the dissentients. 
 
 It was first proposed to delay considering, and 
 even recording any part of the communication, 
 till the next ordinary meeting of Presbytery. 
 This proposal was frustrated by Dr. Ritchie's 
 demanding extracts; and saying, in a short 
 speech, that he considered it as his right and 
 duty to do what he had done. It was impossible 
 for the Presbytery any longer to delay recording 
 the communication from the Lord Provost. But 
 they did delay all further proceedings, except or- 
 dering the letter of thanks; and it ought to be 
 remembered, that Dr. Ritchie either dictated or 
 approved every clause in the sentence pro- 
 nounced by the Presbyter}' of this date. 
 
 An interval of a month was thus afforded for 
 preparing such explanations, with respect both to 
 the magistrates and the church, as would have 
 3 
 
26 
 
 enabled the Presbytery to send a suitable and 
 decisive answer to the Lord Provost's letters. 
 
 [Oct. 1th, 1S07.] The Presbytery met, and 
 were disappointed in all their expectations. Dr. 
 
 Ritchie said nothing more than he had said at 
 the former meeting, namely, That he would not 
 again use an Organ without the authority of the 
 church. The Presbytery unquestionably showed 
 not a little indulgence* in declaring themselves 
 so far satisfied with this, as to decline proceeding 
 on the individual case. But they could not leave 
 the business in this ambiguous form, without for- 
 feiting their claim to firmness and integrity, and 
 without exposing the city and the country to con- 
 stant agitation and apprehension* 
 
 A solemn deliberation having therefore become 
 necessary, it was now resolved on, — it was not 
 objected to, — or if objections were hinted at, 
 they were either not insisted on, or overruled by 
 the Presbytery. And though no particular mode 
 of conducting the discussion was laid down, yet, 
 not a single member uttered a syllable, disre- 
 spectful or unkind towards his brother. 
 
 Could it be inconsistent with justice, or truth. 
 or propriety, to consider the lawfulness of em- 
 ploying an Organ in the public worship of this 
 national established church: If it was lawful, 
 then there was no trangression. If unlawful, 
 then too the business was likeh to be settled 
 without proceeding much farther. For the unani- 
 mous de-ire of the Presbyter) manifestly was, to 
 avoid, a> long ;»< possible, ever} stricture on the 
 circumstance of the case which could lead to 
 personalities, and to treat the minister and con- 
 
 gation of St Andrew's church with all p 
 Me lenity 
 
27 
 
 We shall long remember two arguments whidh 
 
 were employed in the course of this deliberation, 
 and which we apprehend it is consistent with 
 justice, truth, and propriety, to consider in this 
 place. 
 
 1st. That God hath implanted in man a taste 
 for music, which ought to be cultivated by intro- 
 ducing Organs into our churches, where, as well 
 as in camps, great and good effects might be ex- 
 pected from it. 
 
 If this argument be applicable at all to the 
 business in hand, it amounts to this, — that every 
 principle, taste, faculty or propensity, implanted 
 in man by the goodness of God, ought to be 
 exercised in the house of God, on a Christian 
 Sabbath, in a Christian assembly, and in Chris- 
 tian worship. An argument of this kind needs 
 no refutation, to any who know what is forbidden 
 in the second commandment. 
 
 But as something like it is employed by those 
 who call themselves the congregation of St. An- 
 drew's, a short illustration of its fallacy may be 
 requisite. The Corinthians were charged by the 
 apostle Paul with a gross profanation of the 
 Lord's Supper. To this they might have replied, 
 that God, in his great goodness, had implanted 
 in every one of them, a taste and propensity to 
 eat and to drink plentifully, and given them all 
 the faculties necessary for doing so; which, there- 
 fore, it was their duty to cultivate and exercise 
 in the house of God, and at the Lord's table. 
 They might have added, that there was no law 
 of the church, nor of the state, against doing 
 what they had done, — that they encroached on 
 no sacred privilege, — on no civil right of any 
 man. In a word, they might have anticipated 
 
ftlmof sentiment, and even expression, in 
 
 the petition of this congregation. Bui they did 
 00 Buch tiling: they repented of what they had 
 done 
 
 2d. A second argument, which was urged with 
 much earnestness in favour of Organs, was built 
 on something said, written or done, by the 
 psalmist David, and on something recorded in 
 the hook of Revelations. 
 
 if this he almost the first instance of a Chris- 
 tian pleading divine authority for the use of Or- 
 gans in religious worship, the singularity may 
 excite some suspicion that the argument is not 
 well founded. 
 
 Had the primitive church considered Oru*aiib 
 as a part of instituted worship, they would, no 
 doubt, have used them, or recommended them, 
 or regretted the want of them. After the es- 
 tablishment of Christianity, and its consequent 
 prosperity, no reason can be given why they 
 were not used, if they were sanctioned by the 
 prophet David, and the apostle John. But, no 
 less than eight hundred years had elapsed, after 
 the commencement of the Christian era, before 
 Organs were resorted to; and even then, they 
 were not defended by an appeal to Scripture, but 
 by asserting a power in the church to appoint a 
 ritual for divine service. This power was, in a 
 e, denied by the reformers, who en- 
 quired t<> restore the primitive simplicity of 
 Christian worship. We learn from Stewart, in 
 his History of the Reformation, that in our land, 
 their endeavours were crowned with signal BUC- 
 200, he Bays, ik That the Protectants 
 • in Scotland, when they accomplished the Re- 
 " formation in the year 1500, departed in ;• \ 
 
29 
 
 * k extremity from the splendour and pomp of the 
 " Romish forms and ceremonies, disdaining to 
 " flatter the senses and imagination; and confi- 
 " dent and secure that the native purity and 
 " brightness of their doctrines, were fully suf- 
 11 ficient to uphold them. All exterior greatness, 
 " the allurement of magnificence, the charm of 
 " painting, and the enchantment of music, were 
 " disregarded, not oniy as mean and useless arti- 
 "jices, but as dangerous trappings, which might 
 " obscure and degrade the interests and dignity of 
 u truth. They sought to revive the plainness and 
 u sincerity of primitive times." 
 
 It may be added, that if the practices of an 
 Old Testament prophet are understood to be re- 
 commended under the New Testament, then all 
 the particulars of his usage must have the same 
 authority, dancing, or piping, among the rest. 
 Nothing, however, can be more manifest, than 
 that all Christian divines, with the apostle Paul 
 at their head, have believed, that the Old Testa- 
 ment worship was altered so as to suit New 
 Testament times, and that they had authority 
 from the Lord Jesus Christ to teach this doc- 
 trine. Nor can it be doubted, that such alteration 
 did take place in the present instance, with more 
 precision than in any other particular ; for sing- 
 ing is the only instituted mode of performing 
 this part of religious worship, and was exclusive- 
 ly employed for that purpose, upwards of eight 
 hundred years. 
 
 We shall now proceed to a more particular re- 
 view of the reasons on which the dissentients, 
 after mature reflection and research, have chosen 
 io rest their dissent. These reasons are, certain] v. 
 3* 
 
30 
 
 both in respect of matter and manner, liable to 
 • criticism, and easy refutation. 
 
 1st. The first reason of dissent might be an- 
 gwered, merely by copying it, leaving out the 
 particle not in every negation, and discreetly re- 
 placing it in almost every affirmation. The result 
 would be very nearly a true statement, but the 
 mode of producing it not sufficiently dignified for 
 the Presbytery, nor respectful to the dissentients. 
 
 We therefore refer them to their own motion, 
 for an answer to their first reason. This motion 
 decides the general question, with no less preci- 
 sion than the Presbytery's sentence, and the con- 
 tradiction which it gives to this reason of dissent, 
 is so striking, that it needs only to be pointed 
 out. In the motion, they declare it as their judg- 
 ment, that the introduction " of an Organ into 
 " public worship is inexpedient and unauthorised 
 " in our church." And in the first reason of dis- 
 sent, they blame the Presbytery for deciding the 
 general point of its lawfulness and utility. Now, 
 it must be evident to every ordinary understand- 
 ing, that the motion decides the general point, as 
 positively as the sentence of the Presbytery. 
 
 Another fact the dissentients ought not to have 
 overlooked, that there was no individual case be- 
 fore the Presbytery: no parties were called, and 
 no persons were considered, or considered thein- 
 seh es, as parties. The name of the minister prin- 
 cipally concerned having been unintentionally 
 passed over in calling the roll, was, at the very 
 desire of one of the dissentients, called in the 
 vote, which shows that he did not then consider 
 
 him as a party, 
 The simple truth is, thai this was a delibera- 
 
31 
 
 tion which might have led to the calling of par- 
 ties, had not the Presbytery, regardless of all 
 provocation, and more indulgent to others than 
 they have experienced from them in return, kept 
 steadily to their original intention, of treating all 
 who were implicated in this business with the ut- 
 most delicacy; at the same time performing their 
 duty to the church and to the public with firmness 
 and decision. 
 
 2d. The second reason of dissent is so multi- 
 farious that it cannot legitimately be reduced to 
 any common head. Part of it is evidently a re- 
 petition of what the dissentients had stated in their 
 first reason of dissent, respecting the individual 
 case, and has been answered already. The dis- 
 sentients then complain that they were taken by 
 surprise, and could " not be supposed to have 
 " formed a positive judgment on the general 
 " question; nay, that they knew not they were to 
 " give an opinion" concerning it. 
 
 This is certainly not a little wonderful. Had 
 not more than two years elapsed since the atten- 
 tion of this city and neighbourhood was directed 
 to this subject, and must have met them almost in 
 every company? Had not the communication 
 from the Lord Provost been more than a month 
 on the table of the Presbytery? Was it not known, 
 that at this meeting of Presbytery that communi- 
 cation was to be taken under consideration? 
 
 But it seems they had formed a positive opinion 
 on two points, much more difficult than this: the 
 inexpediency of introducing Organs, and that the 
 me of them is unauthorised in our church; — an 
 accurate knowledge of men, times, and places, and 
 a distinct review of all the acts of Assembly, was 
 indispensably necessary to warrant such an opi- 
 
32 
 
 iiion. And how, in the nature pf things, coin 
 positive judgment on these particular points be 
 formed, without coming to a similar judgment on 
 the general question, which is evidently less in- 
 tricate, and attended with less difficulty; which 
 the Catechisms, and Confession of this church, 
 and our other solemn engagements at ordination, 
 are of themselves sufficient to ascertain? 
 
 The term, unauthorised, may have been selected 
 with some dexterity; and the dissentients seem to 
 regret that it was not adopted by the Presbytery. 
 But if it was intended as an insinuation that our 
 church had heretofore never interposed her au- 
 thority in opposition to Organs, and a prepara- 
 tion for asking and obtaining her authority in 
 favour of them, the adopting of such an insidious 
 term would, we apprehend, have been a mean 
 and unbecoming sacrifice of truth, an unmanly 
 dereliction of principle, and a flagrant violation 
 of that admirable ecclesiastical constitution, and 
 of those invaluable civil rights, which were pur- 
 chased by our ancestors, at the expense of their 
 talents, their treasure, and their blood. It would 
 have enervated the Presbytery's sentence, and 
 rendered it utterly insufficient for the purposes of 
 peace and order, which have been accomplished 
 and secured by it, as it now stands. 
 
 3d. The third reason of dissent contains a pro- 
 fession of the greatest respect and affection from 
 the dissentients towards their brethren. We cheer- 
 fully acknowledge and return the compliment 
 
 As this is the last and principal reason of dis- 
 sents without which we are informed there would 
 have been do dissent, nor even, perhaps, a divi- 
 sion of the Pre>b\tery on the subject, we lament 
 that there is so little lucid order, or logical pre- 
 
eision in it. But we presume, the argument it 
 contains maybe comprehended in the two follow- 
 ing propositions. 
 
 1st. That there is nothing in the constitution, or 
 laws, of the church or state, inconsistent with, 
 opposite, or contrary to the use of Organs in re- 
 ligious worship. 
 
 2d. That Organs may now, or hereafter, be 
 introduced, by the authority of the church of 
 Scotland. 
 
 Both these propositions we consider as quite 
 unfounded and untenable, and are not a little sur- 
 prised that an} 7 Scotch Presbyterian should ven- 
 ture to assert them. 
 
 The constitution of our church may be easily 
 deduced from her principles and usages. Her 
 great and leading principles are contained in the 
 Scriptures, as these are explained in our acknow- 
 ledged standards; and from these we derive evi~ 
 dence, little short of demonstration, subversive of 
 these propositions. 
 
 We might have hesitated to produce some part 
 of this evidence to the learned dissentients, but as 
 a very respectable congregation are implicated 
 in this business, there may be no impropriety in 
 giving them an opportunity of being reminded 
 of some things which they were taught in their 
 youth. 
 
 The second commandment is surely a law of 
 this church, for it is a law of God: And the 
 church in her authoritative commentary, says, in 
 the Shorter Catechism, " The second command- 
 " ment requireth the keeping pure and entire all 
 " such religious worship and ordinances as God 
 " hath appointed in his word." Query, Is that 
 religious worship kept pure, according to God's 
 
■ . 
 
 appointment, which i> blended and mixed with 
 human inventions, at least 700 years later than 
 the death of the la^t of the apostles ? — u Tin. 
 " coiul commandment forbidaeth the worshipping 
 
 " of God by images, or any other way not ap- 
 " pointed in his word." Query. Was this way 
 of Organs appointed in his word? — In the La] 
 Catechism, the second commandment requiretfa 
 as in the Shorter, and particularly sanctions 
 thanksgiving; but it farther required), " disap- 
 "proving, detecting, opposing, all false worship, 
 " and, according to each one's place and calling, 
 u removing it." Query, Is not all worship false, 
 which is not instituted and appointed: — The sins 
 forbidden in the second commandment are " all 
 " devising, counselling, commanding, using, and 
 " any wise approving, any religious worship not 
 " instituted by God himself." It likewise forbids 
 " corrupting the worship of God, adding to it, or 
 " taking from it, whether invented and taken up 
 " of ourselves, or received by tradition, from 
 " others, though under the title of antiquity, cus- 
 " torn, devotion, or any other pretence whatso- 
 " ever," &c. 
 
 These passages contain the great and leading 
 principles of our ecclesiastical constitution, re- 
 specting the worship of God. And the Confes- 
 sion of Faith is equally explicit on this point. 
 '< The acceptable way of worshipping the true 
 
 M God is instituted by himself, and SO limited by 
 
 " his own revealed Will, that he may not be wor- 
 " shipped according to the imaginations and efe- 
 
 1 rices of men, 73 
 
 That Organs were an abomination to our ve- 
 nerable ancestors, who assisted in corapo 
 these ecclesiastical standards, or sanctioned them 
 
with their most solemn approbation, is an his- 
 torical fact, established by the most unexception- 
 able authorities. Thus, Baillie, vol. 1, let. 43, 
 page 421, dated 18th February, 1644, and ad- 
 dressed to Scotland, says, " We had so contrived 
 " it with my Lord Wharton, that the lords that 
 li day did petition the Assembly that they might 
 '' have one of the Divines to attend their House 
 " for a week, as it came about, to pray to God 
 i( for them. Some days thereafter the Lower 
 " House petitioned for the same. Both their de- 
 " sires were gladly granted: for by this means 
 i; the relicks of the Service-book, which till then 
 •• was every day used in both Houses, are at last 
 ; ' banished. Paul's and Westminster are purged 
 t; of their images, Organs, and all which gave 
 " offence. My Lord Manchester made two fair 
 M bonfires of such trinkets at Cambridge." — All 
 the commissioners at London, in their letter to 
 the General Assembly, dated 20th May, 1644, 
 thus express themselves, " We cannot but admire 
 11 the good hand of God in the great things done 
 ;; here already, particularly that the Covenant 
 ,; (the foundation of the whole work) is taken ; 
 i; prelacy and the whole train thereof extirpated; 
 " the Service-book in many places forsaken; 
 " plain and powerful preaching set up; many 
 " colleges in Cambridge provided with such mi- 
 '• nisters as are most zealous of the best reform a- 
 " tion, altars removed, the communion in some 
 " places given at the table with sitting; the great 
 " Organs at Paul's and Peter's, Westminster, 
 " taken down ; images, and many other monu- 
 <c ments of idolatry, defaced and abolished ; the 
 14 Chapel Royal at Whitehall purged and re- 
 *• formed; and all by authority, in a quiet man- 
 
36 
 
 •• nei. at m on-day." Nay, the i> ii>l\. 
 
 1644, in their answer to the Right K<\. the Ajb- 
 aembly of Divines in the Kirk of England, not 
 onh adopt the sentiments of' their commissioners 
 at London, but express them, if possible, with 
 greater energy, force, and triumph. " We were 
 " greatly refreshed to hear by letters from our 
 " commissioners there with you, and by a more 
 " particular relation from the Lord Waristown, 
 11 now with ns, of your praiseworthy proceed- 
 " ings, and of th. .rood things the Lord 
 
 " hath wrought among you and for you : Shall 
 u it seem a small thing in our eyes that the Cove- 
 " nant (the foundation of the whole work) is 
 " taken: That antichristian prelacy, with all the 
 
 ■tin thereof, is extirpate: That the door of a 
 " right entry unto faithful shepherds i- opened: 
 " Many corruptions, as altars, images, and other 
 •* monuments of idolatry and superstition, re- 
 • ; moved, defaced, and abolished ; the Service- 
 v ' book in many places forsaken, and plain and 
 u powerful preaching set up ; the great On 
 -' at PauVs and Peter's taken down; that the 
 • ; Royal Chapel is purged and reformed; sacra- 
 " ments sincerely administrate, and according to 
 u the pattern on the mount." 
 
 The great and leading principles of our eccle- 
 
 tical constitution have been subscribed and 
 avowed by every minister of the Presbytery, be- 
 
 God and men, in the DHOS1 solemn maiUie 
 
 articles of their faith. Whatever, then, thej maj 
 
 they must be a law to them. ll i^ 
 
 for the dissentients to judge whether this third 
 
 son of dissent be compatible * itfa this law, and 
 consistent with truth and/ti 
 
 About the tinje o\' the Union with England, 
 
.37 
 
 there were some apprehensions of danger to the 
 uniformity of our national worship. Our church 
 had hitherto rested with confidence on her Cate- 
 chisms and ratified Confession, but now thought 
 that something more might be done. Accord- 
 ingly, in 1707, the Assembly passed the Act 
 against Innovations in the worship of God. " It 
 ;i discharges the practice of all innovations in 
 " divine worship within this church, and requires 
 " and obtests all the ministers of this church. 
 *• especially those in whose bounds such innova- 
 w tions are, or may happen to be, to represent to 
 " their people the evil thereof, and seriously to 
 ,; exhort them to beware of them, and to deal 
 " with such as practise them, in order to their re- 
 " covery and reformation." So much convinced 
 were this Assembly, that the removing and sup- 
 pressing of innovations was Vested in the exe- 
 cutive power by the ratification of the Confes- 
 sion, and the various acts of security, that they 
 authorize application to be made to government 
 for that purpose. 
 
 It did not occur to this Assembly that any thing 
 more was necessary, nor, perhaps, that any thing 
 more could be done. But in 1711, it was en- 
 acted, that every minister, before his ordination, 
 da acknowledge the obligation of this act against 
 innovation; promising in the most public and 
 solemn manner, in the house of God, in pre- 
 sence of the Presbytery and an assembled con- 
 gregation, " firmly and constantly to adhere to, 
 " and to the utmost of his power, assert, mam- 
 11 tain, and defend the purity of worship, as 
 %i presently practised in this national church, and 
 
 -erted in the fifteenth act of Assembly. 1 7 
 which is the act above recited. 
 4 
 
38 
 
 Thus the uniformity of our worship v.,. 
 out of the hands of lawyers and metaphysiti 
 and brought home to the conscience, the honour, 
 and the honesty of every individual minister of 
 our church. 
 
 It is surely impossible that any of the dissen- 
 tients will again affirm, that no law of the church 
 has yet determined the question concerning Or- 
 5 or instrumental music in our public worship, 
 when it appears with so much evidence to be in- 
 consistent, not only with our ecclesiastical laws, 
 but with the great, leading, and fundamental 
 principles of our constitution. 
 
 This reasoning needs no confirmation, but it 
 may receive much illustration from the prevail- 
 ing sentiments, opinions, and customs of our 
 country. 
 
 No religious sgutiment is more powerful and 
 universal among the people of Scotland, than an 
 attachment to that simple, spiritual, and unorna- 
 mented worship, which is described in our stand- 
 ards — which was practised under the sword oi 
 "cution — reverenced by our fathers, adhered 
 to from principles of patriotism, as well as reli- 
 gion, and retained as the fruit of victory, and the 
 pledge of liberty. This attachment to simple 
 , is so strong, and so universal) that all 
 the dissenters from this church, numerous and 
 is they are, have never deviated from 
 her forms el' worship. In the west of Scotland 
 particularly, this attachment, and the habits eon- 
 ith it, are so predominant, and have so 
 to form a consuetudinary law, 
 independent of all others, to which the dissentients 
 and the Presbytery are bound to conform. 
 
 Hut the people vi' Scotland do not defend the 
 
39 
 
 purity and uniformity of their national worship 
 
 merely upon ecclesiastical grounds — they claim 
 these, and the tranquillity which attends them, ajs 
 their birth-right — as a portion of their political 
 liberty, to which they have the highest legal, as 
 well as just and equitable title — a title which, they 
 are well assured, will be made effectual by the 
 executive power, vested in all the king's courts 
 and judges. To prefer this claim is the privilege 
 of every Scotsman since the year 1688, or at 
 least since the Union of the two kingdoms; and, 
 of course, if any of their countrymen should be 
 found making an attack on this purity and uni- 
 formity of worship, the Presbytery of Glasgow 
 will not applaud either their wisdom or their 
 patriotism. 
 
 As the dissentients do not seem very clearly to 
 understand these things, it may not be improper 
 to explain them. 
 
 Our ancestors, immediately after the Revolu- 
 tion, were, undoubtedly, very solicitous to have 
 their religion and their religious worship secured 
 from change and innovation. This security they 
 obtained by the parliamentary ratification of the 
 Confession of Faith ; which was generally be- 
 lieved at that time to make the Confession a part 
 of the law of the land, and consequently to invest 
 the king's judges with full authority to give it 
 execution. Many are still of this opinion. But 
 before the year L700, some persons seem to have 
 thought that the term ratification, and other terms 
 employed in that act, were not sufficient to con- 
 vex the right of enforcing execution to the civil 
 magistrate. 
 
 To remove every doubt on this important sub- 
 ject, it was resolved to proceed with the Con- 
 
40 
 
 on of Faith, as they had done with n 
 to the Claim of Rights, which is not law, hut ;t 
 quarry out of which main of our most valuable 
 have been taken. 
 
 In order to embody certain articles of the Con- 
 on with the laws of the country, and thus 
 cure the execution of them without any contro- 
 versy, the Acts of Security were passed in the 
 rs 1700, 1702, and 1703. These acts, how- 
 . relate chiefly to the doctrine and govern- 
 ment of the church. No particular mention is 
 made of the worship till the year 170.5, when an 
 act was passed for a treaty with England, the last 
 clause of which is in these words, " Providing 
 " also, that the said commissioners shall not treat 
 " of or concerning any alteration of the icor- 
 " ship, discipline and government of the church 
 u of this kingdom, as now by law established." 
 
 This is almost the first time that the Scotch Par- 
 liament distinguished the worship from the doc- 
 trine, government and discipline of this church. 
 Now, that a union with England was projected, 
 these wise men foresaw increasing danger to the 
 worship of this church, and were determined to 
 provide against it. 
 
 With this view, the Act of Security, 1707, 
 was framed and enacted. Indeed, this seems to 
 have been the principal intention of this act; for 
 no new clause is introduced, except what relates 
 to the purity and uniformity of our worship. 
 Without this, any of the former acts might have 
 answered the purpose almost ;is well as this one. 
 Since, however, the necessity of securing our 
 ivorshi/j had been suggested, the Parliament of 
 Scotland were resolved that this should be done 
 with precision, with authorities, and will) so- 
 
41 
 
 lemnities unknown in any other transactions be- 
 tween independent states. 
 
 It was enacted in Scotland, and declared to be 
 a fundamental condition of the Union: It was 
 ratified by the English Parliament, and engrossed 
 verbatim in the Treaty of Union. 
 
 Henceforth, there can be no doubt that Scotch 
 uniformity of worship is secured as fully as it can 
 be by human laws: for the execution of this,' as 
 well as every other law, is committed to the king, 
 who, at his coronation, must swear and subscribe 
 that he shall " inviolably maintain and preserve 
 " the foresaid settlement of the true Protestant 
 " religion, with the government, worship, disci- 
 " pline, rights and privileges of this church, as 
 " above established by the laws of this kingdom, 
 " in prosecution of the Claim of Rights." — And 
 from the king, the execution of this, still more 
 than any other law, must pass to the king's courts 
 and judges; to the Judge Ordinary of the place 
 in the first instance, and in due course to the 
 House of Lords. 
 
 This very important, solemn and extraordinary 
 law, has enacted, that the forms and purity of our 
 worship shall be unalterable — tlia they shall be 
 continued to the people of this land to all suc- 
 ceeding generations, as they were practised in 
 1707: and further, " that this act shall be held 
 ' ; and observed, in all time coming, as a funda- 
 " mental and essential condition of any treaty or 
 " union to be concluded betwixt the two king- 
 " doms, without any alteration thereof, or dero- 
 " gation thereto, in any sort, for ever" 
 
 As to the strictness with which these acts 
 should be interpreted, we need not descend to 
 altercation with the dissentients. Enemies bein^ 
 4* 
 
42 
 
 judge-, they cannot be interpreted more stricth 
 than their fair construction and primary intention 
 will justify. 
 
 This we advance on the authority of a co- 
 temporary historian, and celebrated prelate of the 
 Church of England, who records the pa 
 these acts with manifest regret Burnet, ' Hist. 
 of his Own Times,' vol. 2, page 212, speaks 
 thus of the act, 1703, " By this, all the hopes of 
 " the Episcopal party were lost, and every thing 
 " relating to the church did iuot only continue in 
 ; - the same state in which it was during the for- 
 " mer reign, but the Presbyterians got a new law 
 " in their favour, which gave them as firm a settle- 
 " ment. and as full a security, as law could give; 
 " for an act passed, not only confirming the 
 " Claim of Rights, upon which the crown had 
 11 been offered to the late king — one of its arti- 
 " cles being against prelacy, and for a parity in 
 " the church — but it was declared high treason 
 " to endeavour any alteration of it. It had often 
 " been proposed to the late king to pass this into 
 " an act; but he would never consent to it. He 
 " said he had taken the crown on the terms in 
 " that claim, and that therefore he would never 
 11 make a breach in any part of it: but he would 
 M not bind his successors, 1>\ making it a per- 
 " petual law." — And page 27G, he Bays of 'the 
 act, 1707, as follow-: — li An act vras prepared 
 u for tg the Presb) fa mem, by 
 
 M which it \s;i> declared to he the only govern- 
 " ment of that church, unalterable in all 
 " ing and the maintaining it was decli 
 
 i be a fbndamental and essential article and 
 edition of the Union: and this act wbi to 
 made a part of the act for the Union: 
 
43 
 
 " and in consequence of that, was to be ratified 
 <; by another Act of Parliament in England. 
 " Thus, those who were the greatest enemies to 
 " presbytery of any in the nation, raised the cla- 
 " mour of the danger that form of government 
 " would be in, if the Union went on, to such a 
 ;i height, that, by their means, this act was carried 
 " as far as human law could go for their security; 
 " for by this, they had not only all the security 
 i; that their own Parliament could give them; but 
 " the} 7 were to have the faith and authority of the 
 " Parliament of England; it being, in the stipu- 
 " lation, made an essential condition of the Union: 
 %; The carrying this matter so far, was done in 
 " hopes that the Parliament of England would 
 " never be brought to pass it. This act was 
 " passed, and it gave an entire satisfaction to 
 " those who were disposed to receive any; but no- 
 " thing could satisfy men who made use of this 
 ;s only to inflame others." — Hence, according to 
 Burnet, the Act of Security is to the British 
 Parliament what the Barrier Act is to the Ge- 
 neral Assembly, a safeguard, an absolute veto, 
 against the reviving of antiquated general 
 questions, or the agitating of new ones, with 
 regard to the doctrine, worship, discipline and 
 government of our national church. The bishop 
 has recorded, a century ago, the justice and truth 
 of the declaration which the Presbytery have 
 emitted on the 7th October last, but in which 
 the dissentients cannot, with a good conscience, 
 acquiesce. 
 
 A\ ere a spirit of this innovating and vacillating 
 kind to invade our church, we tremble for the 
 consequences. Neither the Barrier Act, nor the 
 Act of Security, would be able to prevent her. 
 
14 
 
 from beginning a retrograde course, till her glory 
 was sunk, and utterly lost, in the darkness of the 
 12th century. Then, as we learn from IVIosbeim, 
 
 vol. 2. page 438, " The rites and ceremonies 
 " used in divine worship were greatly augmented 
 
 " among the Greek-, and the .same superlilious 
 "passion for the introduction of new observances, 
 " discovered itself in all the Eastern churches. 
 " The Grecian, Nestorian and Jacobite pontiffs, 
 " that were any way remarkable for their endlt, 
 Xi or ambition, were desirous of transmitting their 
 " names to posterity, by the invention of some 
 " new rite, or by some striking change, introduced 
 11 into the method of worship that had hitherto 
 " prevailed. — Thus, some attempted, though in 
 " vain, to render their names immortal, by intro- 
 11 during a new method of reading or reciting 
 " the prayers of the church; others changed the 
 11 church music, others again tortured their in- 
 u ventions to find out some new mark of vene- 
 " ration that might be offered to the relies and 
 " images of the saints; while several ecclesiastics 
 " did not disdain to employ their time with the 
 " most serious assiduity, in embellishing the gar- 
 " ments of the clergy; and in forming the motions 
 •' and postures they were to observe, and the looks 
 11 they were to assume, in the celebration of di- 
 " vine worship." 
 
 To avert so direful a calamity from our church 
 and our country — to crush in the bud so scan- 
 dalous a prostitution of sacred things,* the ma- 
 gistrates and city council, and the Presbytery of 
 
 ' This approbation of Mosheim's description i- expressed in 
 nevertheless, il is just • and ifl i^ to 
 description this langn i 
 
45 
 
 Glasgow, have, in this instance, done their dot] 
 with integrity and honour; and in whatever light 
 the dissentients may view the deed, we have plea- 
 sure in declaring, and that in perfect consistency 
 with a good conscience, that it has the most un- 
 qualified approbation of our understanding and 
 our heart. 
 
 We are happy to find it admitted by the dis- 
 sentients, in the close of their reasons, that there 
 are certain general and leading principles, upon 
 which our constitution is founded, which the 
 church has not power to alter. None of her ju- 
 dicatories has power to suppress the Christian or 
 Protestant religion — to change one article of the 
 Confession of Faith — to substitute prelacy or in- 
 dependency in the room of presbytery ; — in a 
 word, to authorize any practice, or to enact any 
 law, that is inconsistent with, or contrary to, the 
 laws of the land, especially the most sacred of all 
 her laws, namely, the Treaty of Union, and the 
 acts on which that treaty is founded: Conse- 
 quently, no ecclesiastical court in Scotland has 
 power to alter the forms of our worship, or to 
 deprive succeeding generations of that purity and 
 uniformity of religious worship, which has been 
 the glory of our land for more than a century. 
 
 (Signed) William Porteous. 
 
 Robert Balfour. 
 James Lapslie. 
 James M'Lean. 
 
 Glasgow, 1st December, 1807. 
 
46 
 
 .Minute of Presbytery, January 6r/*, 1S0S. 
 
 Dr. Ritchie, Dr. Taylor, jun. and Dr. Lock- 
 hart, severally pave in papers in consequence of 
 the reservation in the Presbytery's last minutes 
 in the question respecting the Organ, which pa- 
 pers being read, the Presbytery order the same to 
 be recorded, simpliciter. The tenor follows: 
 
 Rev. Dr. Win. Taylor's Jun. Explanation. 
 
 It is with reluctance that I make use of the 
 liberty which the Rev. Presbytery has allowed 
 me, of giving in an explanation of my reasons 
 why the Presbytery should not have adopted, 
 without correction, the answers that their com- 
 mittee prepared to the Reasons of Dissent, in the 
 cause of the Organ, read at their meeting in No- 
 vember. I was out of the country when this bu- 
 siness commenced; I was astonished, beyond mea- 
 sure, when I heard of it, by accident, 400 miles 
 hence; and when a final sentence was given at a 
 succeeding Presbytery, I had the honour of pre- 
 siding in the court. And thus, from the com- 
 mencement to the close, had no opportunity of 
 taking part, either on one side or the other, in 
 tins singular business. I am sensible, therefore, 
 of a great aversion to stir it at this period. I fed 
 strongly a delicacy which forbids me to seem to 
 interfere; I bow to the sentence of the Presby- 
 tery, as in dutj bound, which now can neither be 
 altered or appealed from; and I bear a high re- 
 spect toward- the members of the committee, who 
 prepared the answers, which the Presbytery has, 
 
47 
 
 in lull, adopted. But I am impelled by what i 
 owe to myself, and the duty I owe to the Pres- 
 bytery, to make this appearance, however reluc- 
 tantly. For I cannot allow, that, by my silence, 
 it should be understood, that I sanctioned a pa- 
 per, in which it appears to me, that there are 
 many things altogether improper, and which, in 
 my opinion, the Presbytery, careful of their own 
 fame and credit, should have rigorously exa- 
 mined, and in many particulars amended. 
 
 There is a license taken in the geneml frame 
 of the paper alluded to, that is altogethei*inde- 
 fensible. It professes to be Answers to Reasons 
 of Dissent that were formerly given in; and the 
 committee who framed it, were appointed for the 
 express purpose of anwering these reasons. But 
 not confining themselves to the reasons put into 
 their hands by the reverend Presbytery, they go 
 into a wide field of historical detail, no way ne- 
 cessary; they set about recollecting and answer- 
 ing the arguments that were used, viva voce, in 
 the presbyterial discussion by different members, 
 and that had no place in the writing they were to 
 answer; and enlarge in this manner on the ge- 
 neral argument. This was manifestly leaving 
 the business that was entrusted to them by the 
 reverend Presbytery, and doing what was alto- 
 gether illicit, and unusual in such cases. 
 
 In these answers, I perceive also, with much 
 regret, a mode of speaking often used, which 
 might well have been spared, in a paper that the 
 reverend Presbytery was to adopt as theirs; in 
 which there is heat and passion; and which, 
 heard by the ignorant and prejudiced, is, in va- 
 rious instances, too liable to Unhappy miscon- 
 struction. A heathen could say, that it became 
 
mull who were to deliberate about difficult mat- 
 ters, to be free from passion. And. surely, the 
 language which the Presbytery adopt-, should 
 be calm, and grave, and moderate; and it would 
 be unpardonable, either to give, as an example to 
 the present generation, or to hand down to pos- 
 terity, what is, in any measure, of a contrary 
 character. In the historical detail of the origin 
 and progress of this business, language of this 
 heated and exaggerated kind is sufficiently ob- 
 vious, ffhe manner in which the congregation 
 of Str Andrew's is mentioned in this paper, is 
 surely in too lofty a style — " Some persons, de- 
 " scribing themselves as the congregation of St. 
 " Andrew's church." This is the expression. We 
 should speak of those, who, in the constitution of 
 our court were absent, with respect; and know- 
 ing the existing circumstances, language should 
 have been avoided, that had any tendency to con- 
 vey the idea that there were pretensions on the 
 part of those spoken of, that were not well 
 founded. 
 
 Allusion is made in the paper adopted by the 
 Presbyter} 7 , to the word u unauthorised," as ap- 
 plied to the Organ, in the Reasons of Dissent. 
 In a case, hypothetically stated in the answers to 
 these reasons, this is said to be an " insidious" 
 term. It i- not in this way that the reverend 
 Presbytery has been in use to speak 01 the dis- 
 ions of it^ members. Every man is under- 
 stood to an bo, hi fide, conscientiously, and with 
 fairness: And 1 have no doubt that thi> will am- 
 ply apply to the reasonings that have pa6sed on 
 both sides, in this very singular question. 1 for- 
 bear adverting to any expressions which I might 
 think alluded improperly to a respectable mem- 
 
49 
 
 be*, chiefly concerned in this business, as lit 
 sufficiently able to defend himself. 
 
 There is a passage in the Answers, which the 
 reverend Presbytery should surely have hesi- 
 tated in adopting as theirs. — " Had the primitive 
 " church considered Organs as a part of insti- 
 " tuted worship, they would, no doubt, have used 
 " them, or recommended them, or regretted the 
 '• want of them. After the establishment of 
 " Christianity, and its consequent prosperity, no 
 " reason can be given, why they were not used, if 
 " they were sanctioned by the prophet David, and 
 " the apostle John. But no less than eight hun- 
 " dred years had elapsed, after the commence- 
 " ment of the Christian era, before Organs were 
 " resorted to." It is said, " Had the primitive 
 " church considered Orgruis as a part of insti- 
 " tuted worship, they would no doubt have used 
 " them." But how was it possible to use what 
 was not then invented! — the primitive church 
 taking in the three first, or four first centuries, 
 and the Organ was not invented till the eighth 
 century. How then could the church use them, 
 or recommend them in the primitive times, or in 
 the prosperous times of Constantine, when the 
 idea of an Organ was not then formed! How 
 could they regret the want of them, since, " Ig- 
 noti nulla cupide !" It is obvious, that this por- 
 tion of the reasoning in the Answers is built upon 
 a gross anachronism* — The committee who pre- 
 
 * This charge of Anachronism is unsupported, either by ar- 
 gument or authority. Organs are generally allowed to be the 
 discovery of remote antiquity. The quotations given after- 
 wards from Justin Martyr. Basil, and Chrysostom, show, that 
 musical instruments had this name at the time these Fathers 
 nourished. — Indeed, < ! :;> mere existence of musical instruo 
 
.30 
 
 pared the Answers, have searched, with coiim- 
 
 derable labour, into the records of church and 
 , but it is very obvious, from what has been 
 produced, that they have not gone deep enough. 
 They have shown, with much conviction, the 
 presbyterian church must differ from episcopacy; 
 — that it is averse to the hierarchy of bishops — 
 to liturgy, and read prayers, and that it has a 
 discipline of its own. But, in the present ques- 
 tion, it was absolutely necessary to show, that our 
 church went still farther than all this, and that it 
 limited and defined the particulars of worship; 
 because Organs do not belong exclusively to the 
 Episcopal Church, but are used in the Church of 
 Geneva, from whence, as a church, we are sprung; 
 and in Holland, who resemble us in our consti- 
 tution and worship. The committee, in my opi- 
 nion, should have, if I may use the expression, 
 stood up closer to the argument. The Presby- 
 tery, by their sentence, built high; and it was the 
 business of the committee to dig deep. I should 
 beg the Presbytery's excuse, for taking up their 
 time so long, on a matter that is now decided on* 
 — The rigidly simple Spartans nailed Tarpan- 
 der's harp to a post, because, by a daring inno- 
 vation, he had added one string to it beyond what 
 was common. The Organ, by a sentence of 
 Presbytery not appealed from, is in the same 
 
 in the fust seven centuries, whether ccrtlcd Organs or not. i> bH 
 that the Presbytery's argument is concerned with* And the 
 argument is still unanswered; and we believe, unanswerabli 
 It seven or eighl centuries elapsed, before Organs or instru- 
 ments of musk were introduced into Christian worship} and if 
 the wasst of then was, during all that period, never regretted 
 bv the church, it is ;« decisive proof, that tin- primitive Chris- 
 tians regarded them as unlawful, and incot 
 
 <iP'r]'|.;;i| pi ,i 
 
51 
 
 cure position, and therefore there was no need to 
 
 say any thing of it. All that I intended, was to 
 show, that the reverend Presbytery should have 
 carefully examined the Answers to the Reasons of 
 Dissent, and made some corrections, before they 
 adopted them as their own. 
 
 (Signed) William Taylor, Junior, 
 
 Glasgow, January 5th, 1808. 
 
 Dr. Lockhari's Explanation. 
 
 Having received permission from the Rev. 
 Presbytery to offer certain explanations on their 
 Answers to Reasons of Dissent from the sen- 
 tence of Presbytery, with regard to the use 
 of the Organ in the public worship of God, I 
 beg leave to offer the following, and request that 
 they may be put on record. 
 
 1st. I must be explicitly understood as ad- 
 hering to the Presbytery's sentence, and as ap- 
 proving of the answer of the dissentients, in so 
 far, as these, answers are founded on the prevail- 
 ing sentiments of our forefathers, on the act of 
 the church against innovations in the worship of 
 God, and on the Act of Security. 
 
 2d. It does not appear to me that the dissen- 
 tients, in their third reason of dissent, have 
 charged the Presbytery with any violation of 
 truth and justice. I consider them as expressly 
 denying that they had any such intention, and as 
 merely asserting, that they could not, with their 
 view of the subject, adopt the sentence of the 
 Presbytery, without a criminal inattention, on 
 their part, to the claims of truth and justice. I 
 
must, therefore, hold them in respect, for act 
 under the influence of their own conviction, and 
 give them full credit for the liberality of sentiment 
 which they have expressed, by declaring that 
 they have the I respect and affection for 
 
 the brethren from whose judgment they diss< 
 ft would, therefore, in my opinion, have been 
 tremely desirable, that the Presbytery, in their 
 answer, had declined employing the severe lan- 
 guage to which they have resorted; and which, 
 I apprehend, they would not have employed, had 
 they fully weighed the explanation given by the 
 dissentient?. 
 
 3d. I must farther express my opinion, that the 
 Answers on the part of the Presby tery, ought to 
 have been conducted without any allusion to the 
 observations of individual members of court, sup- 
 posed to have been stated viva voce, at the time oi 
 discussion, but not stated nor even alluded to, in 
 the reasons given by the dissentients. I likewise 
 regret, that in the argument, as conducted by the 
 Presbytery* they should have given any detailed 
 statement, in relation to the particular case, which 
 led to the discussion. 
 
 4th. Even on the supposition that I had ap- 
 proved of that part of the Answers, which seems 
 to embrace matter foreign to the sentence of the 
 Presbytery, and to the Reasons given in bj the 
 dissentients, I should have been disposed to de] 
 cate the introduction of thai passage, in which 
 die illustration of the Presbytery's argument i- 
 taken from the case of the Corinthians, in their 
 profanation of the Lord's Sup) 
 
 Lastly, While I admire the simplicity 
 forms ox w orship obsen t d in our national church, 
 liarly congenial to the spirit oi' Chris- 
 
53 
 
 tianity, 1 am unwilling to acquiesce in any such 
 application of the second commandment, as would 
 charge with false worship, or with a violation of 
 that part of the divine law, our Christian bre- 
 thren of other churches, whose practice, in the 
 instance to which the sentence of the Presbytery 
 refers, is different from our own. 
 
 (Signed) John Lockhart. 
 
 The reader will, no doubt, do justice to tin 
 liberality and indulgence of the Rev. Presbytery, 
 in allowing the preceding Explanations by the 
 Rev. Dr. Taylor, junior, and Dr. Lockhart, to 
 be recorded, as none of these gentlemen had ju- 
 dicially dissented or complained against the de- 
 cision in question. And it is hoped, he will see 
 the same spirit of liberality and indulgence, in 
 thus publishing these explanations. Candour re- 
 quires, that the public should be put in possession 
 of every paper in this cause, whether favourable 
 or unfavourable to the mode of procedure adopted 
 by the Presbytery. Perhaps an opportunity may 
 be taken, in the sequel, of making a few remarks 
 on these explanations. 
 
 Statement of the grounds on which the Minis- 
 ter of St. Andrew's Church thinks himself 
 vindicated in permitting, and of the facts con- 
 nected with his employing, an Organ in public 
 worship on the Lord's Day. 
 
 A wish had for years, for more than thirty 
 . lorn cherished by the congregation o! 
 5* 
 
5 i 
 
 Andrew's church, to have an Oi eted, and 
 
 employed in public worship. Alter the proposal 
 for such an erection had been repeatedly made 
 to me, bj respectable members of the heads of 
 families belonging to that congregatiop, 1 at last 
 gave my assent, with the fiill approbation of 
 my own mind. The principles upon which this 
 ffly assent lias been, and still is founded, I bare 
 now the honour to lay before the Prgsbytery. 
 In doing this, 1 take no charge of the Reasons of 
 Dissent from the sentence passed by the Pres= 
 bvterv against the use of Organs. These rea- 
 sons, though not fully to my mind, are yet, in 
 m\ opinion, valid ns to the main point, which they 
 are meant to establish. Neither do I enter the 
 
 with the answer? to the-e reasons, with many 
 of the positions in which I perfectly acrrec, while 
 yet, in many respects, my opinions are different 
 from those of the respondents. But it becomes 
 me, in vindication of my congregation and my- 
 self, to open up the grounds upon which we think 
 we had the right to employ an Organ in public 
 
 ship. 
 
 There is one, and but one, fixed and infallible 
 
 standard for all that regards public worship. 
 
 Whatever is not agreeable to, and founded upon 
 
 the word of God, ought to have no place in the 
 
 iij) of Christians. Nowj in looking into 
 Scriptures, we find, that before the giving of the 
 few, instrumental music \\a> employed bj the 
 
 \ i tribes of Israel, to whom, through the fa- 
 
 . the promises had been given. When we 
 
 the history of nations that were stran- 
 
 divine revelation, there too weiinduiri- 
 
 ,'i\. the i u <>i" instruments in giving praise 
 Juch use, then, appeals to be 
 
something that belongs not to sects or parlies, 
 but to human nature. It is dictated by the best 
 of those feelings which the God of nature bath 
 implanted in every bosom, prompting men to 
 employ with reverence, according to the means 
 which they possess, all their powers in express iiu 
 gratitude to their Creator. It appears to be such 
 from its existence prior to all positive religious 
 establishments, and from the universal practice 
 of mankind. 
 
 When we advance in our inquiry, and look 
 into the covenant of peculiarity introduced b\ 
 the ministry of Moses, no mention is made of in- 
 strumental music among the ritual observance 
 of the law. In a system of merely temporary 
 institution, it was not deemed necessary, by posi- 
 tive enactment, either to forbid or to enjoin the 
 use of instrumental music in public worship. But 
 it was left to the will, and situation, and circum- 
 stances of the worshippers. Yet, while the ritual 
 law, in all its branches, forms a majestic whole, 
 guarded by most solemn sanctions, instrumental 
 music was not found to interfere with its rites, to 
 break its unity, or to be inconsistent with the 
 perfect pattern furnished on the mount. What 
 was the practice of the church of Israel in this 
 respect, from Moses to David, has not been re- 
 corded. David, of whom was to come, and of 
 whom, according to the flesh, is come, Jesus the 
 Mediator of the new covenant, was raised from 
 keeping his father's flock, to fill an eminent sta- 
 tion, and to act an important part, in the great 
 scheme of Providence. He was richly endowed 
 with gifts and graces for maintaining and pro- 
 moting, in the conspicuous station to which he 
 was exalted, the pure worship of the true God. 
 
56 
 
 Many are the prophecies that be uttered, ai 
 was moved by the Holy Ghost; many are the 
 sublime strains of praise which he poured forth 
 by the Spirit; and in some of the most sublime 
 of these strains, when wrapt up in the majesty of 
 the King he adored, he invites, exhorts, enjoins, 
 not merely the congregation then assembled, not 
 merely the twelve tribes of Jacob, but all nations, 
 all the earth, to praise the Lord as he did, with 
 psaltery, and with harp, and with Organ, and 
 with the voice of a psalm. Was his language 
 and his conduct an infringement of the law of 
 Moses, so awfully hedged in on every side by 
 curses and by blessings? Was not he zealous for 
 the law? Was he compelled by any superior au- 
 thority to adopt a practice which he felt to be 
 inconsistent with the purity of instituted wor- 
 ship ? Was he not seated on the throne? Was 
 he not the anointed of the Lord ? Was he not 
 animated by that pure Spirit, who alone kindles 
 in the pious heart the flame of living praise: 
 These Psalms of David have ever been held in 
 £uch high estimation, not only by Jews but by 
 Christians, that they have been adopted by all 
 sects and parties; they have, by sovereign au- 
 thority, been appointed to be sung by all national 
 churches. They have been, and are appointed 
 by the Church of Scotland, to be sung in congre- 
 gations and in families. And can it he a sin to 
 sing them as was done bj the original cotnpo 
 with the accompaniment o( an Organ: If these 
 strains ever flowed warm and pure from a human 
 heart, we cannot dvuy that the\ muM have dour 
 so from the heart that first conceived them, 
 warmed by the sound of his harp and his Organ, 
 under the immediate inspiration of the Holy 
 
57 
 
 Ghost. Shall any church, shall a Protestant 
 
 church, condemn the singing of the Psalms of 
 David, as they were sung by the man according 
 to God's own heart? 
 
 But it may be said, that the church was then 
 in an infant state, and that now, become men, 
 we should put away childish things. Let us then 
 consider what we have to learn from the conduct 
 of our Lord and his apostles. Now, we no where 
 find the great Head of the church, the Lord Jesus 
 Christ, repealing the injunctions pronounced by 
 the psalmist David. — Jesus was continually going 
 about, was often in the temple and in the syna- 
 ues, often was present at public worship, and 
 the reading of the law. He often administered 
 reproof to the Jews for their attention to minute 
 rites, and the tradition of the fathers, while they 
 neglected " the weightier matters of judgment, 
 mercy and faith."' He was zealous for the honour 
 of the temple, his Father's house; he cast out the 
 money-changers, and overturned their benches; 
 but he never once opened his lips against their 
 music and their Organs. Would Jesus have been 
 silent on this subject, had instrumental music been 
 a gross profanation of sacred things? Can we 
 suspect him of winking, through weakness, at 
 what he knew to be a corruption of worship? 
 The apostle Paul, in his journeyings, frequented 
 ever the synagogues. There he met and disputed 
 with the Jews. Ardent was his zeal against the 
 beggarly elements of rites and ceremonies. Many 
 are the important practical rules of life that he 
 lias laid down; many are the exhortations to 
 praise that he has given; and is it not strange, 
 . amidst all his warnings, he never warn 
 
58 
 
 Gentile converts against harps, and psalteries, 
 and Organs? At Jerusalem, at Corinth, at Ephc- 
 5DS, at Athens, and at Rome, he must have often 
 seen and heard instrumental music in worship, 
 and yet not a single reproof of it has ever drop! 
 from his pen. If ever a human being breathed 
 the pure spirit of his Master, it was John, the 
 beloved disciple. In his gospel, written towards 
 the evening of his days, and in his epistles, wr 
 read not one sentence in condemnation of Or- 
 gans. When we advance to the book of Ref- 
 lation, that deeply mysterious book, which shuts 
 up the vision and the prophecy, we find that 
 John, now fifty years after the ascension of bis 
 Lord, while he himself was an exile in the isle of 
 Patmos, when the forms of Christian worship 
 must now have been at least as familiar to his 
 mind, as ever had been the worship of the tem- 
 ple: — when we read this book, we find not one, 
 but so frequent allusions made to instrumental 
 music in worship, as lead us to infer on his part, 
 high approbation of it. Nay, in one pass 
 he expressly declares, that he heard " harpers 
 harping with their harps in heaven." Words 
 cannot be simpler, nor convey more plainly an 
 unequivocal meaning: and that meaning clearly 
 is, that instrumental music is at least not incon- 
 sistent with the purity of evangelical praise. And 
 whatever value or meaning men may now attach 
 to the imagery of that prophetic book, it certainly 
 -I high in the estimation of the Westminster 
 Divines, I adduce but oneexample. In support 
 of that paragraph of the 2.3d chapter of our Con- 
 fession of Faith, which assorts the right of Chris- 
 tian sovereigns to wage war, they give the fol- 
 
m, 
 
 lowing passage from the book of Revelation, a~ 
 one of their authorities, chap. xvii. 14th and 16th 
 verses, " These shall make war with the Lamb, 
 and the Lamb shall overcome them, for he is 
 Lord of lords, and King of kings; and they 
 that are with him are called, and chosen, and 
 faithful. And the ten horns which thou sawest 
 upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and 
 shall make her desolate and naked; and shall eat 
 her flesh, and burn her with fire." Now, if the 
 bold imagery of this passage be — and what minis- 
 ter or presbytery of our church can deny it to be — 
 a solid foundation on which to build so important 
 a doctrine, as that of the right of kings to make 
 war, then, surely, the simple language of the pas- 
 sage to which I refer, clearly establishes this truth, 
 that instrumental music accords perfectly with 
 the purest praise that we can conceive. For it is 
 an eternal truth, that the Holy Spirit of God ne- 
 ver did, and never could, suggest to the mind of 
 David, or of John, or of any created being, an 
 image or a sound that has the most distant ten- 
 dency to promote impure thoughts, and to cor- 
 rupt religious worship. Here, then, is one funda- 
 mental point established : the use of instrumental 
 music in public worship is not in itself sinful, is 
 not forbidden by the word of God, but, on the 
 contrary, is expressly encouraged, perhaps en- 
 joined, in the Old Testament, and is clearly au- 
 thorized by the New. 
 
 Supported by this high authority, let us next 
 trace what we have to learn on this subject from 
 the history of the church. Was instrumental 
 ic employed in their worship by the Chris- 
 tians of the first age? There is every reason to 
 believe that it was not. No mention is made of 
 
GO 
 
 it bj the earliest historians,* and perhaps no m 
 tion would have been made, although it had been 
 in general use; because such music in worship 
 was neither striking nor strange, either to G 
 tiles or to Jews. That harps and Organs could 
 not thru be empl6yed,'|' must be evident from the 
 severe and unremitting persecution to which the 
 church was subjected. How could men think of 
 
 ■ Be it so, that the ;; earliest historians do not mention in- 
 strumental music as employed by Christiana of the first 
 it cannot thence bo inferred thai tl riendly to the em- 
 
 ployment of musical instruments in the worship of God. 
 it will appear from the authorities produced by the Prcsbj 
 that when the primitive Christians had occasion to mention 
 instrumental music, they uniformly expressed marked diappro- 
 bation of it, and declared it inadmissible into Christian w< 
 
 f Va^ue and general description of this kind has no mean- 
 ing, ;;;i«! tends to mislead. A closer and more particular view 
 will dispel the illusion. The infant Christian church could 
 boast of converts from among the Levites, who had l;e< n bii 
 or musical performers i>i the tem})le. Barnabas, we know, 
 from Acts iv. 36. was aLevitc, an opulent man, of a cultivated 
 and liberal mind. His generous spirit is celebrated by St. Taikr 
 in the Arts of the Apostles. u He sold his land, and laid the 
 . .it the apostles' f« t/* When Paul returned to Jerusa- 
 lem, and u assayed to join himself to the disciples, but they 
 were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple," 
 Barnabas " took him, and brought him to the apostles?" — lb- 
 was the first Christian at Jerusalem to befriend and patronize 
 St. Paul; and, for a considerable time he was the intimate com- 
 panion, and zealous fellow-labourer of that apostle. This Bar- 
 nabas was, doubtless, skilled in tlie music of the temple, and 
 familiarized and attached to it. i conversion 
 
 But he abandons bis professional habits, hi- favourite employ- 
 ment as a Levite, the moment he becomes a Christian. N 
 - be pi actise or extol the sen kcei <>i hi- tribe or family, noi 
 nomend the-.- to )><■ adopted b\ Christians in their public 
 
 Dabas, N\h<> shared in the (oil-, and 
 
 dangers, and persecutions of St. Paul, in ( native 
 
 Country, in Pamphylia, in Pisidia, in Iconit m, wai 
 
 i using a psalter} or hai ound should betray him 
 
 to his adi l lie, aiw! mi, i 
 
 cileable t" 
 
61 
 
 employing harps and Organs, while they were 
 fleeing from city to city, and hiding themselves 
 in holes, and dens, and caves of the earth? Even 
 when, by the conversion of Constantine, a Chris- 
 tian emperor was seated on the throne of the 
 Roman world, the peace of the church was far 
 from being secured. Wars and revolutions, and 
 inundations of barbarous nations, succeeded each 
 other with a ferocity and rapidity, and to an ex- 
 tent, of which we, even in these eventful times, 
 can form only a very inadequate conception. 
 Mingled with these wars, and promoted by them, 
 controversy arose after controversy, and sect after 
 sect in multitudes, and directed the attention of 
 mankind to matters of far more importance than 
 sacred music. Modes of worship were forgotten, 
 amidst the keen contention for modes of faith. 
 Yet, even in defiance of the stern barbarism and 
 fierce superstition of those ages, some attention 
 was paid to psalmody; for we find that contro- 
 versies on this subject, arose between church and 
 church, and among the members of the same 
 church. But, as might be expected, little pro- 
 gress was made by a people, whose throats were 
 more accustomed to the hideous cry of war, than 
 to the soft notes of praise. About the middle of 
 the eighth century, an era of flattering promise 
 seemed to begin. Something like order was in- 
 troduced among the Western nations, and some 
 faint gleams of light began to dawn, struck out 
 by the vigorous administration of Charles Mar- 
 tel, of Pepin, of Charlemagne. While Pepin, 
 in the year 757, was holding a council of his 
 clergy at Compiegne, for the reformation of man- 
 ners, there arrived an Organ, sent him in com- 
 pliment to his high reputation, by that Constan- 
 6 
 
62 
 
 tine, emperoB of the East, who is m> famous as 
 the iconoclast, the fierce enemy of images in 
 churches, of convents, monks, ami nuns. This 
 Organ, the first, it is said, that had been seen in 
 Europe, the French king presented to the church 
 of St. Corneille, atCompiegne. Struck with the 
 majesty of the instrument, and the solemnity of 
 its sound, the heroic soul of Pepin thought he 
 could not better employ it, than by devoting it 
 to the service of his God. Charlemagne, son 
 and successor to Pepin, continued the u^e of Or- 
 gans, as we learn from a poet of the ninth cen- 
 tury, w ho, describing the effects of that instru- 
 ment in that age, says, that a woman was so trans- 
 ported with the music, that she fainted and expired 
 under the sweetness of the sound. His words are. 
 
 Dulcc niclos lantuni vanas illudcre mentcs 
 Cseperat, at una, suis decedens sensibos, ipsam 
 Ftemina perdiderit, vocum dulcedine vitam.* 
 
 This instrument seems still to have been em- 
 ployed, and to have spread at least in fame, if not 
 in numbers, during the reign of Louis the son of 
 Charlemagne. For there exists a letter from the 
 then Pope, John VIII. in which, towards the end 
 of the ninth century, is this request to a German 
 bishop, "Precamur autem, ut optimum organum, 
 cum artifice qui hoc moderari et facere ad omnem 
 modulations eflicaciam possit, ad instructionem 
 musics discipline aut deferas, ant mittas." Such 
 i!k -late of the arts even in Italy, during the 
 ninth century, that not a man could be found 
 
 [i t!.i< the kind »>t' rapture that any Christian man or wo- 
 would with to die in Can it be ;< recommendation ol 
 ,.t they produced I an effect In the ninth 
 
 - ■ ntui 
 
&3 
 
 who could make, or tune, or play upon an org 
 And the pope requests, as a singular favour, that 
 a man who could do so, might be sent to him 
 from Germany, for teaching the Italians music. 
 From the death of Louis, and even during his 
 reign, the prospect of dawning reformation in 
 government, in science, and in religion, wos 
 darkened by a cloud that thickened ever deeper 
 over Europe for more than two hundred years, 
 during which we learn nothing of instrumental 
 music in churches. At last, Europe was roused 
 by the papal summons to the crusades. Thou- 
 sands travelled for conquest to the Holy Land. 
 This fanatical frenzy continued to drain Europe 
 of its inhabitants for a couple of centuries. 
 Though most of the crusaders fell in Asia, yet 
 some were continually returning, and by their 
 observations on what they had seen, contributed 
 not a little to awaken the human mind from the 
 lethargy into which it had been sunk. Then 
 began the age of scholastic philosophy, and 
 of scholastic theology, which exercising the hu- 
 man understanding on points of the nicest 
 and most perplexing subtilty, paved the way 
 for that bright day of sound literature, and 
 pure religion, which now shines over Europe. 
 At this era, so auspicious to the human race, it is 
 worthy of remark, that we again find Organs 
 beginning to appear, and walking side by side 
 with the other improvements of the age. So far 
 then, were Organs from being the invention of 
 the darkest ages, that it was ever during periods 
 of dawning light* that they began to be employ* 
 
 * Docs the author imagine that the dark ages had not com- 
 menced when Pepin and Charlemagne flourished ? The best 
 
64 
 
 ed, not by the authority of a papal de< • 
 by the dictate of pious feelintr, prompting the 
 enlightened mind to consecrate the labours of 
 genius to the devout exercise of praise. The dark 
 had neither the head to invent, nor the hand 
 to make, though they might have had the heart 
 to enjoy them. During the fourteenth and fif- 
 teenth centuries, great were the exertions of the 
 human soul, struggling for knowledge, for liberty, 
 for employment suited to its powers. The pres- 
 sure of superstition and of papal oppression coun- 
 teracted their own ends, and through the unseen 
 workings of a gracious Providence, were over- 
 ruled to bring on the Reformation. Organs did 
 not shrink from the scrutinizing zeal of that 
 keenly-searching age; for Luther and Calvin, 
 and the other enlightened reformers,* discovered 
 in them nothing of the idolatry of a corrupted 
 church, which they so nobly laboured to over- 
 turn. And, indeed, upon the slightest attention 
 
 historians, civil and ecclesiastical, are of a different opinion 
 By them, the dark ages are considered as comprising the se- 
 venth, and continuing till the twelfth century. There might 
 be various shades in the darkness of these centuries, but the 
 state of literature, philosophy and theology, during the whole 
 of that dismal period, establishes the melancholy truth, that 
 superstition reigned triumphant over the minds of men. \\ i- 
 of no importance to the argument, whether this degradin 
 perstition v as in the hands of the Greek or Roman chu 
 whether it was aided by the skill of a German or Italian artist, 
 whether it w;is managed by the influence of a monk. 
 emperor, or a pope. No man of any observation, orr< s< 
 will deny, that pious feeling may sometimes animate the heart 
 of the ignorant and superstitious. Indeed, unenlightened pious 
 feeling, hit!'. t"<> often, i><>tli engendered and fostered supei 
 
 Whether this be 8 fair and accurate account of the opinions 
 <<[ the n form< rs, will appear from tin- quotations produced i»_\ 
 the Presbyti ry, from the works of the reformers, and m their 
 
 own w< 
 
65 
 
 by the most superficial inquirer, it must be dis- 
 covered, that instrumental music forms no essen- 
 tial part of popery; that it is founded upon princi- 
 ples widely different, indeed, from the ceremonies 
 of the Church of Rome, because it is consonant 
 at once to sound reason, and the word of God. 
 Accordingly, it was retained, and it is still em- 
 ployed, by all the reformed churches on the conti- 
 nent of Europe. A stronger argument in its fa- 
 vour cannot be produced, except that which I 
 have already mentioned, the sacred authority of 
 Scripture. — Why then has it not been employed 
 by the Church of Scotland? The reasons arc 
 strong, as they were pressing; and in tracing 
 them, we shall discover the origin of that preju- 
 dice which still remains against Organs. What- 
 ever our psalmody might have been under the 
 popish power, we know, that in the reforming 
 Church of Scotland, it must have been almost 
 annihilated. Religious truth had to work its way 
 amidst poverty and oppression, in opposition to 
 the power of an arbitrary government, and to 
 the persecuting spirit of the Church of Rome. 
 There were neither houses for the celebration of 
 religious ordinances, nor ministers to preside in 
 the celebration of them, nor funds for the sup- 
 port of ministers. No wonder, that in these cir- 
 cumstances, every thing was laid aside, but the 
 pure preaching of the Gospel, and the perform- 
 ance of worship in the best manner, which the ne- 
 cessity of the times would allow. From this state 
 of degradation, it was long before our church 
 was able to emerge. The doctrines of the Refor- 
 mation, it is true, were generally embraced; and 
 a system of ecclesiastical policy, settled agreea- 
 ble to the general wishes of the country. Bui 
 G* 
 
66 
 
 the wealth of the church had been seized by the 
 landed proprietors, and long and arduous was the 
 contest, before even liberty of conscience, and 
 presbyterian government, could be fixed upon a 
 permanent foundation. The causes of this con- 
 test are easily ascertained, and its effects are 
 deeply felt, even in our own day. The trouble- 
 unavoidable from the factious spirit of a feudal 
 nobility, under a female popish reign; the bigoted 
 partiality of a pedantic king for prelatic splen- 
 dour, which he deemed favourable to absolute 
 monarchy; the mistaken piety of a virtuous sove- 
 reign, contending, by unhallowed means, for 
 what he thought agreeable to the word of God; 
 the hypocritical ambition of a bold usurper, wa- 
 ding through the dark fanaticism of his cotempo- 
 raries, to the possession of a kingdom which he 
 affected to decline; the unprincipled treason of a 
 lawful prince, restored to the throne of his ances- 
 tors, straining by force and fraud to impose upon 
 our country a yoke which its brave inhabitants 
 were determined never to bear: the weak infa- 
 tuation of a popish sovereign, urging him on not 
 merely to the destruction of presbytery, but of 
 the Reformation; — this unbroken series of perse- 
 cution, maintained with such unrelenting obsti- 
 nacy, through such a number of years, impressed, 
 engraved, wrought into the very soul of our 
 presbyteriaps a fear, a dread, an abhorrence, not 
 only of popery and prelacy, but of every thing 
 that had been connected with popish and episco- 
 pal worship. Under these circumstances, our 
 forefathers thought, and felt, and contended ho- 
 nourably, nobly, as became patriots and Chris- 
 tians. Whal Scottish heart does not sympathize 
 with them, asserting, at the expense of fortune 
 
67 
 
 and of life, those high privileges which we now 
 enjoy! What mind but must approve of a con- 
 duct dictated by manly feeling, by religious 
 principle, by the love of all that they held sacred 
 on earth and in heaven! Under the irritation to 
 which they were subjected, they acted wisely, 
 when, in obedience to that strong impulse of 
 what they owed to moral, political, religious ex- 
 istence, they wrecked, as they did, their ven- 
 geance on altars, crosses, Organs, on every the 
 most distant seeming appendage, of a form of 
 worship which they were determined not to em- 
 brace. And if an infatuated government should 
 attempt, in any future age, a similar mode of in- 
 fringing the sacred rights of man, it is to be 
 hoped, that the spirit of our ancestors would re- 
 vive in their descendants, and animate them to 
 contend, as their fathers did, even to the death, 
 for liberty of conscience, and for pure religion. 
 
 It is then evident, that from the Reformation 
 down through the sixteenth and seventeenth cen- 
 turies, it was not possible for our church to 
 pay much, if any attention to sacred music* A 
 new era commenced at the Revolution; from 
 which period downwards, our Presbyterian Es- 
 tablishment has, under a limited monarchy, en- 
 joyed all the peace and protection which govern- 
 ment can bestow. During a century of uninter- 
 rupted prosperity, it is to be expected that legal 
 independence, and perfect security against the 
 
 * The printed acts of the Scotch Parliament, and irrefraga- 
 ble historical record, furnish the most direct and positive evi- 
 dence, that this averment has been made precipitately, and 
 without sufficient information : a blunder, which is less pardon- 
 able, when we consider the tone and manner in which the au- 
 thor sometimes speaks of others. 
 
68 
 
 encroachments of popery or prelacy, may haw 
 disposed churchmen and laymen among us, 
 consider calmly what is, and what is not essential 
 to those forms of ecclesiastical government, and 
 to rise superior to the weakness of rejecting im- 
 provements in tilings indifferent, merely because 
 they are employed by churches whose mode- of 
 worship we reject. This, in a very considerable 
 degree, has taken place. National and religious 
 antipathies are yielding to the lenient hand of 
 time. A liberality of spirit pervades our en- 
 lightened church. Improvements even in our 
 psalmody are begun, which prognosticate fa- 
 vourably for farther advancement. The tide of 
 human affairs is strong. The hand of God, 
 guiding the progress of mind, cannot be resisted. 
 The steps will be made, which yet remain, for 
 vindicating our church and our country from the 
 reproach of neglecting one of the best means, 
 that has ever been devised, for the improvement 
 of sacred music. And shall Organs, it will be 
 asked, shall Organs be introduced into any of 
 our churches in Scotland? And why not? Have 
 not we, the disciples of Calvin,* as good a right 
 to instrumental music in our worship, and all its 
 advantages, as his disciples in Geneva, in Switzer- 
 land, and in Germany? But has not our church 
 been always hostile to Organs? Of such hostility 
 no evidence exists, or can exist, in a case similar 
 to the introduction of the Organ into St. An- 
 
 • Though we air not the <li>< iplcs of C;d\in. and will not 
 
 call any wutn master ; yet our respect for In- opinion i- in- 
 creased, *bj considering the grounds of It: and Calvin't opinion 
 »> decidedly again* instrumental music being used in tin* pub* 
 lie worship of God, as if shown afterwards from ' 
 
 authority of that great reformer, 
 
69 
 
 drew's church. For this is a singular ca^e; the 
 first attempt of the kind, that was ever made ac- 
 cording to the pure principles of Presbytery. 
 The people of that congregation, respectable 
 both from character and from number, and 
 steady, as any of their countrymen, in their at- 
 tachment to the religion transmitted to them by 
 their fathers, — the people made the proposal, not 
 dictated to them by a domineering priest, not 
 imposed upon them by a tyrannical government, 
 but as their own unbiassed wish, cherished among 
 them for years, before they ever knew the man 
 who is their present minister. The Organ was 
 introduced upon principles as free from any con- 
 nexion with Episcopacy and Popery, as the prin- 
 ciples of our Directory for Worship are, from 
 connexion with the Church of England and of 
 Rome. Against such an introduction, our church 
 could not possibly enact laws, or discover a hos- 
 tile spirit, because it had never hitherto taken 
 place. Laws are a remedy provided against past 
 or present evils. The sagacity of legislators can- 
 not pierce into futurity, and provide against what 
 may arise in the course of ages. But, did not an 
 Assembly of our church, in the year 1044, re- 
 echo to the Scotch divines at Westminster their 
 expressions of triumph over the destruction of 
 the great Organ at St. Paul's? Yes; but these 
 were times of fierce and furious war against the 
 Church of England. An invading army, who 
 have no antipathy to hedges, and villages, and 
 corn fields, yet while they are advancing to bat- 
 tle, may level cruelly with the ground every ob- 
 stacle that impedes their progress to victory. The 
 enemies which our divines of that age had chieflj 
 at heart to subdue, was not the helpless, harmless 
 
70 
 
 Organ, but the hierarchy and Service-book ol 
 sister kingdom. And from their success in de- 
 stroy ing whaj they regarded as the outworks, they 
 
 might with joy anticipate their reducing to sub- 
 jection the last resort of the adversary. Anti- 
 pathy to Organs in this country, has ei 
 associated with antipathy to episcopacy. Or- 
 gans and prelates have, by a surprising want of 
 discrimination, been involved in one common 
 condemnation. But what have Organs to do with 
 bishops? Nothing more than with John Calvin, 
 John Knox, or .Mr. Andrew Melville; they are 
 never once mentioned in the Book of Common 
 Prayer. The canons of the Church of England 
 never touch them.* Instrumental music in wor- 
 ship is not the property of any one particular 
 church or kingdom. It is the hereditary right of 
 every church and country under heaven. But has 
 not our church an act of security incorporated 
 with the Act of the Union of the two kingdoms; 
 and acts of the General As>embly against inno- 
 vation, which completely guard as against the 
 introduction of Organs? The Acts of Security, 
 of Union, and against Innovation, had more im- 
 portant objects in view, with which Organs have 
 no concern. By the Revolution, the Act of Se- 
 curity, and the Act of Union, these have been 
 cured to us, to our church, and to our country; 
 all that for which our fathers fought, and for 
 which so many shed their blood. The purity 
 and uniformity of the doctrine, and discipline, and 
 government, and worship of the Church of Scot- 
 land, are to he preserved to the people of Scot- 
 land, without alteration, to ;ill succeeding gene- 
 
 • 'i'lr i : tlii- \\ in be afterw eurds assignee 
 
n 
 
 rations. This is the firm foundation on which 
 we stand, and shall stand, as long as human 
 laws, and human power, and British liberty can 
 support us. From this foundation it is my 
 hope, and it shall be, through God, my endea- 
 vour, that no power of earth or hell, shall be 
 able to move us. Here we are guarded by high 
 and strong bulwarks against every hierarchy, 
 whether of popery or episcopacy. On this ground, 
 no liturgy, or Service-book, can, or dare invade 
 us. We are an established church, fenced round 
 by all that can render us independent and free. 
 Our purity and uniformity in doctrine, we declare 
 by our subscription of our Confession of Faith. 
 Our attachment to the discipline and government 
 of the church, we attest by our subscription of 
 one formula. Our purity and uniformity of wor- 
 ship we prove by our adherence to the rules laid 
 down in our Directory. To each, and to all of 
 these, I trust, I have uniformly adhered, as faith- 
 fully as my neighbours. I am not conscious of 
 a wish having ever arisen within me, to depart 
 from any of them. And in the use of an Organ 
 in our church, during public praise, I cannot, for 
 my life, after long and serious attention to the 
 subject, discover even an approach to any viola- 
 tion, either of the purity or uniformity of our 
 worship. For who will, or can allege, that an 
 Organ is an innovation upon the great Object of 
 worship? We all, I trust, worship the one God, 
 through the one Mediator: or upon the subject of 
 praise, for we all sing the same psalms, and pa- 
 raphrases, in the same language, all giving thanks 
 for the same mercies ; or upon the posture of the 
 worshippers, for we all sit, as becomes true Pres- 
 byterians; or upon the tunes sung, for we sing 
 
72 
 
 only Mich as are in general use: Or upon the offict 
 of the precentor? for he still holds his rank, and 
 employs the commanding tones of the Organ for 
 guiding the voices of the people. What then ifl 
 it ? It is a help, a support given to the precen- 
 tor's voice, for enabling him more steadily, and 
 with more dignity, to guide the voice of the con- 
 gregation; and thus to preserve, not only uni- 
 formity, but that unity of voice which is so be- 
 coming in the public service, which so pleasingly 
 heightens devout feelings, and prevents that dis- 
 cord, which so easily distracts the attention of the 
 worshippers. And shall the addition of a certain 
 quantity of modulated sound to the precentor's 
 voice, in perfect unison with his, and therefore 
 incapable of disturbing the current of devotion, 
 shall this be magnified into the monstrous crime 
 — the presumption of worshipping God by images 
 — of violating the Articles of the Union — of de- 
 molishing the barriers for the security of our re- 
 ligion — of committing a deed of perjury* to or- 
 
 * We are not a little astonished at this very unguarded lan- 
 guage of the reverend author. The word -perjury, as applied to 
 fetm, never escaped the lips of a single member of Presbytery, 
 during the whole of that long- and spirited debate which took 
 place on the 7th October last : Even the dissentients, though 
 differing from their brethren in opinion, spoke in terms of the 
 highest approbation, of the handsome and delicate manner in 
 which the debate had been conducted. Indeed, tlte 1 vaclinos 
 
 with which the Presbytery received Dr. Ritchie'* declaration, 
 
 that he would not again use an Organ, without the authority of 
 
 the church, as narrated in their minutes, must convince every 
 
 thai thej would never have granted such indulgence 
 
 man W horn they had railed p> rjun d . The) expressed, then, in 
 
 the course <>t the debate, what thej have recorded in their an- 
 
 I'tn nts, •• The great and leading prim iples of 
 
 l: our ecclesiastical constitution, have been subscribed and 
 
 sred by ever) minister ol tin- Presbytery , before God and 
 
 man, in the m - articles of their faith 
 
dination vows? Such insinuations against the 
 people and the minister of St. Andrew's church, 
 I can express by no other terms, than that they 
 are a total perversion of the meaning of words, 
 utterly confounding the nature of things. But 
 as all congregations will not, or cannot employ 
 Organs, therefore the national uniformity is 
 broken. Does our national uniformity consist in 
 nothing more substantial, than a certain fixed 
 quantity of sound, beyond which no congrega- 
 tion has authority to pass? What is the subject 
 to which this uniformity relates? There can be 
 no mode without a subject to which it adheres. 
 And shall our national uniformity be said merely 
 to relate to things unsubstantial, ever varying, 
 ever vanishing, even while the ear is labouring to 
 hear, and the mind to catch them? To attach 
 perpetuity of form to things, from their nature in- 
 capable of uniform duration, would be a solemn 
 
 M Whatever they may be to o titers, they must be a law to them." 
 They quoted the questions put to ministers at their ordination : 
 1st, Will you practise and maintain the purity of worship, as 
 'presently practised in this national church, and asserted in the 
 Act against Innovations? 2dly, Do you promise to submit 
 yourself quietly and meekly to the admonition of the brethren 
 of this Presbytery; that you will follow no divisive courses 
 from the established worship and doctrine of this church ? And 
 they quoted also the Formula, which every minister subscribes, 
 in which he owns " the purity of the worship presently autho- 
 •• rized and practised in this church, and that he will constantly 
 u adhere to the same, and that he will neither directly nor indi- 
 " reclly, endeavour the prejudice and subversion thereof/' All 
 this was urged in a general question, relative to instrumental 
 music. Dr. Ritchie was not a party in that question, and not 
 more particularized than any other minister of the Church of 
 Scotland. Why, then, does Dr. Ritchie insinuate, that any of 
 the brethren called him perjured? Why do his anonymous ad- 
 vocates presume, in the spirit of falsehood and defamation, to 
 publish to the world, that Dr. Portcous and Mr. Lapslie " wan- 
 •• I only cliargod Dr. Ritchie witli the awful crime of perjury 
 
n 
 
 mocker y of our venerable legislators. Ila\e all 
 congregations, or can all congregations, have an 
 equal number of voices, the same heighth, or 
 depth, or force of sound, for expressing them- 
 selves in praise? All congregations have not 
 bands of singers to guide them in praise. But 
 do these things, the result of situations and of 
 circumstances, which no human law can prevent, 
 break in upon the national uniformity of wor- 
 ship ? No more than the difference between a 
 plain untutored country congregation, where al- 
 most every man and every woman sing honestly 
 their own tune, and the well-regulated harmony 
 of a Glasgow kirk, guided by a highly cultivated 
 band. And there is not an abuse of which Organs 
 are susceptible, nor an objection to which they 
 are liable, nor an improper influence which they 
 may be supposed likely to produce, which may 
 not, in an equal degree, be ascribed to a band of 
 human singers, which is literally an Organ, com- 
 posed of the throats of moral agents, converting 
 themselves for hire into pipes and whistles. But 
 it is not against these petty distinctions, which 
 are unavoidable in every large society, when 
 French equality* is not the order of the day; it 
 is not against these that the wisdom of our church 
 and state have so anxiously guarded us, but 
 against the hierarchy and the Service-book. From 
 inattention to this, combined with the distracted 
 
 • We air at a loss to know what is meruit to be insinuated by 
 the p] m h equality.'.' The author must certainly 1>.' 
 
 ble, that Presbyterian parity, ;nnl the uniformity of the 
 public worship of God, established by civil and eccli 
 statutes, and lanctioned by immemorial usage in tin- 
 arc not to bo juparaged or ridiculed 03 le cant ex- 
 dicfc rohitionary mania of French infidels 
 
76 
 
 state of the country in former times, has a; 
 the prejudice against Organs ; while the mistaken 
 idea has been cherished, that they form a compo- 
 nent part of Episcopacy. That this is mistake 
 and prejudice, is proved beyond all possibility of 
 doubt, by the conduct of the most purely Cal- 
 vinistic, and most strictly Presbyterian churches 
 on the continent. Not free, I am disposed to 
 presume, from the influence of this mistake, the 
 respondents seem never to have inquired what 
 was done in St. Andrew's church. They con- 
 jure up to themselves some horrid prostitution of 
 sacred things, and then fight against it, as, pro 
 aris et focis, wielding their arms against a sha- 
 dow. What took place in our church is literally 
 this. The precentor, as usual, was in his place. 
 The Organ joined him, and so did the congre- 
 gation. The Organ never struck a note but at 
 the same moment with the precentor, it pro- 
 ceeded along with him, pausing from line to line, 
 in the ordinary method, maintaining throughout 
 the whole, that grave melody which our Direc- 
 tory enjoins; and with him it ceased. Who can 
 discover here the monstrous profanation of wor- 
 shipping God by images ? Another mistake, 
 which, in my apprehension, runs through the 
 opinion maintained by the respondents, is, that 
 we, the minister and congregation of St. An- 
 drew's church, were assuming to ourselves the 
 sovereign prerogative of enacting a law for the 
 whole church, for obtruding Organs upon all the 
 congregations in Scotland. This surely is a 
 gigantic idea ; such a thought never arose in our 
 minds. We exercised what we believed to be our 
 sacred private right, and we will ever allow to 
 others the free exercise of theirs. Acting uodei 
 
76 
 
 the influence of these, which I n 
 apprehensions of the subject, the respondents 
 have contended strongly against Episcop b 
 which I have never undertaken to defend. They 
 have pas&ed a sentence, which in my apprehen- 
 sion, goes far beyond the object which they meant 
 to condemn. For that cannot be illegal, against 
 which no law exists, or could exist. That can- 
 not violate, which touches not the constitu- 
 tion. That cannot be against the law of God. 
 which is authorized by his Word. That cannot 
 be against the spirit and the genius of our church. 
 which she habitually recommends to the people, 
 by her appointment of the singing of L)avid r s 
 Psalms. Before declaring her prohibition ol 
 Organs, it is incumbent on the church to ex- 
 punge from the sacred records those passages 
 which seem clearly to recommend the use of in- 
 struments in worship; that thus the worshippers 
 may be delivered from the inconsistency of pro- 
 mising, and exhorting each other to do, what in 
 their hearts they resolve not, and by the church 
 are forbidden, to perform. 
 
 Such being the principles and sentiments which 
 I had long entertained with regard to instrumental 
 music, I felt myself fully warranted to concur with 
 my people, in their scheme of erecting an Organ 
 in St. Andrew's church. With this view, appli- 
 cation was, in autumn, 1S06, made to the LOrd 
 Provost, magistrates, and council, not for It art 
 to erect an Organ in the church — It became us. 
 not to present a request, which the civil power 
 had not the right to grant. All matters of wor- 
 ship belong exclusively to the ecclesiastical juris- 
 diction — The requesl was, that the Lord Pro* 
 vost, and magistrates, and council, as our heri- 
 
77 
 
 tors, would allow certain alterations in certain 
 seats, that there might be room for setting up an 
 Organ. The petitioners, at the same time, bind- 
 ing themselves to defray the expense, and to 
 make good all damages that might be supposed, 
 but which they apprehended not to arise from the 
 introduction of the Organ. This request, the 
 magistrates, upon principles which to them 
 seemed just, thought proper to refuse. The pe- 
 titioners submitted, as became them, to the civil 
 power, and never presumed to think of touching 
 the seats in question. In this situation the busi- 
 ness lay, until in the beginning of June last, it was 
 resolved, by the minister and a few heads of fami- 
 lies, to have a meeting one evening in the week, 
 of such members of the congregation as might 
 find it convenient to attend in church, for the 
 purpose of improving themselves in sacred music. 
 This practice, I believe, existed in other churches 
 of this city, and the idea was borrowed from our 
 neighbours. After finding that this proposal was 
 relished by a number of the hearers, and that they 
 gave regular attendance, it was next proposed by 
 some of the attendants, to introduce a Chamber 
 Organ, as a help to the precentor, for guiding the 
 voices of the singers. For such an introduction, 
 it never once occurred to us, that leave should be 
 obtained from either the civil or ecclesiastical 
 power. This was a matter of merely private ac- 
 commodation. We did not meddle with the 
 seats; — we made no alterations whatever, on any 
 part of the church. The Organ was introduced, 
 was employed regularly one evening in the week* 
 and the use of it never did, as far as I know, ex- 
 cite even the appearance of a tendency to dis- 
 turbance. We walked to and from church in 
 
78 
 
 peace and quietness. Nobody minded us; the) 
 \sere better employed in attending to their own 
 affairs. While we were thus meeting together, 
 as members of one family, it was suggested, that 
 our edification might be promoted, and our im- 
 provement surely not retarded, by concluding 
 our meeting with family worship. This was 
 done; and in praise we employed the Organ. 
 The people present were highly gratified, and 
 became loud and urgent in their requests for the 
 use of that instrument in public worship. The 
 resolution to employ it was adopted. But before 
 our resolution was put in practice, I received 
 from the Lord Provost of Glasgow, the official 
 letter of the 22d of August, which is now in the 
 Presbytery record. This letter had not the effect 
 of making me shrink one moment from w hat I 
 believe to be my right, from the privilege of di- 
 recting all that concerns public worship in the 
 parish church of which I am minister, inde- 
 pendently of the civil power. 1 did not betray 
 the cause of the church, in yielding up to the 
 civil magistrate, what can only fall under the 
 jurisdiction of my ecclesiastical superiors. 1 
 maintained the privileges of this court, and 1 am 
 now in my proper place, accounting for my con- 
 duct to the Presbytery of which I am a member. 
 The Organ was employed in St. Andrew's 
 church, in public worship, on the 23d of August 
 No explosion took place. No damage 
 ensued. AH was done decently, and in order. 
 .According to my promise, in my answer to the 
 Lord Provost, 1 embraced the first opportunity 
 of laying his lordship's letter before a number of 
 the gentlemen, v i <- have commonly acted with 
 me in this matter. They all with one voice 
 
79 
 
 agreed, that his lordship's terms were fair, were 
 just, were what they expected; and nothing more 
 than what, upon a former occasion, in conver- 
 sation with the magistrates of the former year, 
 they had engaged to perform. Three gentlemen 
 were named for waiting upon the Lord Provost, 
 and giving him the assurance which he required. 
 Here, surely, there was no mark of disrespect to 
 the civil power. This our meeting was on the 
 26th of August; and on that day I received the 
 Lord Provost's second letter, conveying the of- 
 ficial information, in full form, that he had taken 
 the legal protest against us, which we never 
 doubted would take place; and giving notice 
 that he was to lay the whole matter before the 
 Presbytery. Wishing, as from the beginning I 
 had done, that every thing might be avoided that 
 might have the most distant appearance of an 
 interference between the civil and ecclesiastical 
 jurisdiction; and fully persuaded, that informa- 
 tion not only might, but certainly would be 
 lodged in some other way ; — for how could a deed 
 be concealed, done in a parish church, in the 
 face of a congregation, during public worship on 
 the Lord's day? — with this wish, and under this 
 persuasion, I sent two gentlemen twice in one 
 day, to request of the Lord Provost that the civil 
 power might no more be seen in this business, 
 because whatever opinion the Presbytery might 
 form of the case, they might, perhaps, be jea- 
 lous* of an encroachment on the rights of a mi- 
 
 ■ It would have been desirable that the author of the State- 
 ment had. in this request to the Lord Provost, been a little 
 more delicate in bringing forward the reverend Presbytery to 
 the view of the public. He seems to have been all along pe- 
 culiarly attentive to their ease and conveniens, for never so 
 
80 
 
 nister, since to them belongs, exclusively, the 
 judgment in such cases, and the privilege of call- 
 ing in the civil power in aid of their judgment, 
 against refr'actory and obstinate ministers. On 
 
 this principle, I acted from the most sincere re- 
 spect for both brandies of the constitution. The 
 information was lodged; and when the Pres- 
 bytery was about to enter on its discussion, I, not 
 knowing in what light the civil power was to be 
 regarded, craved a delay, which the Presbytery 
 obligingly granted. At next meeting the busi- 
 ness received so very unexpected a direction, and 
 was hurried on by such a storm of zeal, that I 
 have no desire now to reagitate the subject. The 
 result stands upon record. And it is my hope, 
 that what I have now submitted, shall also be 
 committed to record, that thus both sides of the 
 question may be subjected to the review of future 
 generations. And whatever opinion men may 
 form of the merits of either side, I trust, that 
 every insinuation against the loyalty to magis- 
 trates and to the church, of us who are advoc 
 for an Organ, will be found groundless. We, the 
 minister, and elders, and congregation of St. 
 Andrew's church, are loyal citiiens. We honour 
 and we obey our magistrates. We vie with our 
 fellow-citizens in our exertions to maintain the 
 civil power in that dignified respectability which 
 the interests of good order in Glasgow require. 
 We are steady in our attachment to our ecclesi- 
 astical establishment, as transmitted to us by our 
 
 much as once did li<- consult them In tlu> affair of I 
 
 but kept all his plant and operations concerning ii a profound 
 
 lecret from them. Wh\ then dors he now expate tin I 
 
 ry, by holding tlicni up as a bugbear to hinder the civil 
 Irate from doing his boumk'ii duty. 
 
81 
 
 fathers, and secured to us by the law of the land, 
 hi what we have done, on the subject of an Or- 
 gan, we have had ever in view our own edifi- 
 cation, without even the imagination of doing 
 injury to an individual, or being disloyal either 
 to church or state. We have acted as a united 
 people; not a voice from among us having been 
 raised against those who have stood most forward 
 in the business.* The subscribers to the petition, 
 had the concurrence and the good wishes of the 
 whole people for success in their scheme. The 
 example is singular, of a minister, and elders, and 
 people, uniting as one man, for promoting their 
 own improvement in sacred music, by means 
 which they deemed fair, and legal, and honour- 
 able, while yet, by those to whom they were 
 looking up for encouragement, they have been 
 exhibited to the world, as violating the law both 
 of the church and of the state. Feeling, as we 
 do, the harshness of the sentence pronounced 
 against us, we have confidence that the judgment 
 of a candid public will be, that guilt has been 
 imputed, where there was no crime, and that we 
 have become the victims of a prejudice which we 
 wished to remove, — the prejudice, that instru- 
 mental music in public worship is inseparably 
 connected with Popery, and with Prelacy. In 
 combining my efforts for this end, with those of 
 my congregation, I have made no sacrifice of 
 judgment, or even of opinion; for I have acted 
 
 We have never heard that there was a meeting either of 
 the session or congregation at large, to approve or disapprove 
 of the measures adopted by their musical committee. Ol* 
 course, the congregation never had it in their power to ltIvc 
 their voice in a formal constitutional manner, either for, or 
 against those, who stood most forward in the bugiiN 
 
82 
 
 from the lull approbation of my own mind, con- 
 firmed by the judgment and the practice of men 
 of the most cultivated understandings, and of the 
 purest hearts, that have ever adorned the re- 
 formed churches. And though, on this occasion, 
 no sacrifice has been required of me, for com- 
 plying with the wishes of my hearers, yet I am 
 persuaded they will consider what is past, as a 
 pledge on my part, that, if future circumstances 
 should require it, in whatever can contribute to 
 their liberal enjoyment, as well as to their re- 
 ligious improvement, no sacrifice shall be refused 
 by me to my people, to whom my labours and 
 my life are devoted. 
 
 (Signed) Will. Ritchie. 
 
 Glasgow, 6th January, 1808. 
 
 Minutes of Presbytery. 
 
 February 3d. 1808. 
 
 On reading the minutes of last meeting, the 
 Presbytery appoint Dr. Porteous, Dr. Balfour, 
 Mr. Lapslie, and Mr. M'Lean, a committee to 
 prepare an answer to the paper given in by Dr. 
 Ritchie at last meeting. Dr. Porteous to be 
 convener. 
 
 March 30th, 1808. 
 
 The committee appointed to draw up answers 
 to the Statement of \)\\ Ritchie, gave in said an- 
 swers, which being read and approved of, with- 
 out ■ vote, were ordered to be recorded; which 
 Mr. Lapslie and Mx. M'Lean were ordered t< 
 done. 
 
83 
 
 Answers by the Committee for the Presbytery of 
 Glasgow, to Dr. Ritchie' s Statement. 
 
 Your committee, in obedience to the appoint- 
 ment of the reverend Presbytery of Glasgow, beg 
 leave to submit the following answer to a paper 
 given in to the Presbytery, by the Rev. Dr. 
 Ritchie, on the sixth day of January last, entitled, 
 " Statement of the grounds on which the minis- 
 " ter of St. Andrew's church thinks himself vin- 
 " dicated in permitting, and the facts connected 
 11 with hi> employing an Organ in public worship, 
 M on the Lord's Day." 
 
 Your committee beg leave to preface their 
 answer with the following request : That it may 
 be explicitly understood by all parties, as a fixed 
 principle, that in this discussion between our 
 brother and us, we are to avoid all general specu- 
 lation about what might, or might not be, a pro- 
 per form of religious worship, to be adopted by 
 an infant church, met for the first time, to model 
 its establishment. For the minister of St. An- 
 drew's church and his congregation, and we, your 
 committee, either in the character of teachers, or 
 in the capacity of hearers, are defined constituent 
 parts of the established Presbyterian Church of 
 Scotland, and each of us have pledged tl ourselves 
 to defend its doctrine, government, discipline, 
 and worship, as contained and specified in its 
 standards, and confirmed by the public law of 
 the land. 
 
 If that paper, which we are appointed to an- 
 swer, had been •written by a man entirely un- 
 acquainted with our sacred records, and only 
 dictated by those feelings, which, as the statement 
 expressed) itself, " the God of nature hath im- 
 
84 
 
 : - planted in every bosom, abstract from all po- 
 " sitivc religious establishments :" or, had it been 
 written by a professed Episcopalian, inclined by 
 
 education, and influenced by habit, to prefer the 
 pomp of cathedral worship, to the simplicity of 
 the primitive times of the church of Christ: or, 
 had it even been written i>\ a Congregationalism 
 who conceives that the will of his particular flock 
 is a law paramount to all confessions, or liturgies, 
 or directories; your committee, in their answers, 
 would have considered themselves as called on, 
 to have adopted a very different mode of reason- 
 ing. But let it be remembered, that our answer 
 is directed to that statement given in by the mi- 
 nister of St. Andrew's church, for himself and 
 his congregation, component pints of the esta- 
 blished Presbyterian Church of Scotland: And 
 while we shall allow the most liberal toleration 
 in matters of public worship, to other bodies of 
 professing Christians, in this part of the United 
 Kingdom; in no shape whatever, do we consi- 
 der ourselves at liberty to infringe the Presby- 
 terian Establishment of our country, as con- 
 tained in her standards, making a part of the 
 public law of the land, acquiesced in for a hun- 
 dred and twenty years, often recalled to our 
 memory by the solemn decisions of our church, 
 and sanctioned by the decided approbation and 
 veneration of the people of Scotland. Holding 
 it, there lore, as an undoubted principle, that nei- 
 ther the reverend Presbytery, nor the minister of 
 
 St. Andrew^ church, are entitled to legislate a 
 new form of worship for their wspective con 
 nations, hut that the} are expressly bound to de- 
 fend and practise that form which was demanded 
 by bur forefather- in the Claim of Rights, estab- 
 
85 
 
 lished at the Revolution, and declared to be un- 
 alterable by the Act of Security and treaty of 
 Union, — your committee (latter themselves that 
 they shall be able to convince the minister of St. 
 Andrew's church, and the world at large, that 
 the judgment passed on the 7th October last by 
 the Presbytery of Glasgow, was agreeable to the 
 law of the land, and to the law and constitution 
 of this our national church. And should we, in 
 our reasoning, use any language which may 
 seem to a stranger, to condemn any practice of 
 public worship used by other churches of Christ, 
 let it be remembered that it is our object solely to 
 defend our own practice: and whatever argu- 
 ment of defence may assume the appearance of 
 attack, it ariseth from the scantiness of language 
 to express our ideas, not from any desire on our 
 part to hurt the feelings of our Christian neigh- 
 bours. 
 
 Our brother commenceth his statement by 
 observing, that a wish had been entertained for 
 more than thirty years, to have an Organ erected 
 and employed in public worship in St. Andrew's 
 church. Though this may be literally true, it 
 can be of no importance whatever, when judging 
 upon the legality, or even expediency of this 
 measure. During that period, it is well known, 
 this congregation have had two very respectable 
 ministers, who were as desirous of pleasing their 
 people, as faithful Presbyterian ministers ought 
 to be. They were men of wisdom and prudence, 
 as well as of taste. Neither of these ever at- 
 tempted to bring forward a measure of this kind. 
 Ought not this circumstance to have put our bro- 
 ther on his guard, especially if he be well in- 
 formed, when he savs, that for thirty ycar< this 
 S 
 
Ltiou have wished for an Organ. 
 wish of -.mix a tion ought to have no w. 
 
 whatever, to induce the minister of that con_ 
 
 ion to infringe the fundamental laws and con- 
 stitution of our established church, to which both 
 minister and people have covenanted to adh< 
 and which they have promised to obey. The 
 simple wish of a congregation might be an argu- 
 ment to influence the ministers of English Inde- 
 pendents, or Scotch Seceders; but in our Esta- 
 blished Presbyterian Church, where the direction 
 and superintendence of the doctrine, worship, 
 discipline, and government, are committed to 
 ministers and elders, (the ofiicc-bcarers of our 
 church acting in their legislative and judicial 
 capacity,) such an argument seems improper, and 
 is most certainly unconstitutional. For our bro- 
 ther, therefore, to have so unprecedentedly given 
 ear to the wishes of his congregation, and has- 
 tened to obtain for them their favourite object, 
 without even consulting the Presbytery of Glas- 
 
 in their official capacity, we do not trei 
 the rules of charity and politeness, when we B 
 
 . (ui hi> part at least, bordering upon some- 
 thing like unconstitutional conduct. Had the 
 Rev. Presbytery of Glasgow carried their opi- 
 nion no higher than the dissentients did, on the 
 7th of October last, who declared the introduc- 
 tion of instrumental music unauthorised and incx- 
 \ our committee would -till be justified in 
 saying what thej have now said, relative to the 
 
 duct of our brother, when he talks of having 
 
 yielded to die wish of his con u Your 
 
 committee are afraid, thai this strong desire to 
 
 gadon, nm\ have imperceptibly 
 
 warped our brother's better judgment, and in- 
 
87 
 
 Juccd him to view that opposition which he has 
 met with from the Presbytery of Glasgow to his 
 favourite measure, as an opposition founded 
 merely in prejudice, and to affirm such things in 
 vindication of himself and his congregation, in 
 that statement which he gave in, and is now upon 
 record, which fair logical reasoning will not sup- 
 port. 
 
 Considering the polite and candid manner in 
 which the Presbytery of Glasgow accepted at 
 once of the declaration of our brother, that he 
 would not again use the Organ without the au- 
 thority of the church, and the indulgent spirit 
 which they manifested, in granting him liberty 
 to give in an explanation after the matter was 
 decided, and even recording the whole of his ar- 
 gument in behalf of his opinion, your committee 
 did not expect to have heard of such expressions 
 as these : " The discussion was hurried on with 
 " such a storm of zeal. — Such insinuations against 
 " the people and the minister of St. Andrew's 
 " church, I can express by no other terms, than 
 " that they are a total perversion of the meaning 
 " of words, utterly confounding the nature of 
 M things. — Not free from the influence of this 
 " mistake, I am disposed to presume, the respon- 
 " dents" (he must mean the Rev. Presbyteiy, be- 
 cause they had adopted the paper of the respon- 
 dents, prior to the giving in of his statement) 
 " seem never to have inquired what was done in 
 " St. Andrew's church; they conjure up to them- 
 il selves some horrid prostitution of sacred things, 
 " and then fight against it, as, pro aris et focis, 
 " wielding their arms against a shadow." — Your 
 committee are disposed to forgive irritation even 
 in a liberal, philosophical, and Christian mind, 
 
i disappointed in a favourite m< - veu 
 
 the best of human characters are not free from 
 imperfections, and to the imperfections incident 
 to humanity, they are disposed to ascribe 
 
 uarded language used by the minister of St. 
 Andrew's church, in hi< statement Peri: 
 your committee would be justified in thai 
 
 in point of form, our brother had no legal title to 
 have uttered one syllable after our sentence was 
 pronounced. He declined voting in the cai 
 He dissented not from the judgment, of the harsh- 
 ness of which he now complains. And there; 
 had the Presbytery adhered strictly to ecclesias- 
 tical form, our brother could not have been in- 
 dulged in having* recorded his laboured dell 
 of 1 lis favourite opinion: nor would we, your 
 committee, have now been called upon to answer 
 a voluminous statement, comprehending in some 
 parts of it, rather an attack upon the judgment 
 of the Presbytery, than merely an indulged ex- 
 planation of his own conduct upon the twenty- 
 third of August last. 
 
 The world, to which our brother appeals, shall 
 judge between u<. 
 
 We find some difficulty in ascertaining exactly 
 the arrangement adopted by our brother in this 
 statement; but after the most attentive considera- 
 tion on our part, we are inclined to believe that 
 it resolves itself into the five following heads, 
 which we shall analyze and answer in order. 
 
 I. " That the use of instrumental music in 
 " public worship i^ not forbidden by the word of 
 11 God, but, on the contrary, 18 expressly eueou- 
 " raged, perhaps enjoined, in the Old Testament, 
 " and is clear!) authorized by the New." 
 
 In his reasoning to support this hi- first c< 
 
89 
 
 elusion, our brother sets out by observing, that 
 " there is but one fixed and infallible standard 
 ,; for all that regards public worship. Whatever 
 M is not agreeable to, or founded on the word of 
 " God, ought to have no place in the worship of 
 ,; Christians." To this position we most heartily 
 ut. It is with particular pleasure that we ob- 
 serve this great Protestant principle, the foun- 
 dation of our reformation from Popery, and by 
 which the door is for ever shut against all the 
 will-worship and superstitious rites of the Church 
 of Rome, recognized and gloried in by the au- 
 thor of the Statement. 
 
 With respect to his reasoning adjected to this 
 fundamental principle, namely, that before the 
 •.riving of the law, instrumental music was em- 
 ployed by the twelve tribes of Israel, and that 
 when we " look into the covenant of peculiarity 
 ;; introduced by the ministry of Mose«, no men- 
 • ; tion is made of instrumental music among the 
 • ; ritual observances of the law;" — we dare not 
 give such positive assent. For a great variety 
 of opinions has been entertained by learned men. 
 as to the precise period when instrumental music 
 was introduced into the Jewish church, in the 
 public worship of God. Some have conceived, 
 that it had no existence prior to David, who. 
 having a great genius for music, and being him- 
 self a masterly performer, incorporated it with 
 the tabernacle service. Others suppose, from a 
 passage in the 81st Psalm, and from another in 
 Clod. xv. 21. that instrumental music, in the 
 worship of God, was practised by the Israelites, 
 prior to the giving of the law — " Sing aloud unto 
 God our strength: make a joyful noise unto the 
 God of Jacob. Take a psalm, and bring hither the 
 8* 
 
90 
 
 timbrel, the pleasant harp, with the psalterx . — 
 This he ordained in Joseph for a testimony, when 
 he went out through the land of Egypt." M And 
 Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took 
 a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went 
 out after her with timbrels and with dances." 
 While there are others, who are of opinion, and 
 perhaps with equal good reason, that instrumental 
 music, in the public worship of God, was chiefly 
 instituted by Moses, and that it forms an enact- 
 ment of the ceremonial law. Thus, Num. x. 10. 
 " Also in the day of your gladness, and in your 
 solemn clays, and in the beginnings of your 
 months, ye shall blow with the trumpets over your 
 burnt-oflerings, and over the sacrifices of your 
 peaee-oilerings; thai they may be to you for a 
 memorial before 3 our God. I am the Lord your 
 God.*' Of which last opinion is Calvin; for in 
 his commentary upon Psalm xxxii. 2. he pro- 
 nounces instrumental music a part of the " Pce- 
 dagogia Legalis;" that is, a Levitical institution. 
 But whatever opinion be adopted, concerning 
 the precise period w hen instrumental music 
 introduced into the Hebrew church, we can n 
 assent to the averment of our brother, " that in a 
 " system of merely temporary institution, it was 
 " not deemed necessary, by positive enactin 
 M either to forbid, or to enjoin the use of in 
 " mental music; but it was left to the will. 
 
 >n, and circumstances of the worship- 
 For whether we are of opinion or not, 
 thai i lative to the ceremonial 
 
 law, and the tabernacle service, was shown to 
 Moses on the mount, it is certain that David, 
 who w.i raised l>\ Divine Providence, to be king 
 Israel, having a great genius for music, did 
 
91 
 
 either amplify what he found in the institution 
 of Moses, with regard to instrumental music, or 
 did himself introduce it into the tabernacle ser- 
 vice, believing it would contribute to soften the 
 rugged temper of the people. 
 
 If the last opinion be the just one, namely, 
 that it was David, who, either to gratify his own 
 genius for music, or from believing it would con- 
 tribute to soften the rugged temper of the people, 
 added the pomp of instrumental music to the 
 tabernacle service, which was afterwards adopted 
 by his son in the service of the temple ; then we 
 shall be entitled to say, from a strict exami- 
 nation of the history of the Hebrew republic, that, 
 like the first appointment of a king in the person 
 of Saul, and like the building of a temple, sug- 
 gested by David himself, ihis was a form of wor- 
 ship neither commanded, nor even highly ap- 
 proved of by God, but simply permitted. This 
 view of the matter seems to be countenanced, by 
 that marked and accurate distinction which is 
 kept up in Scripture, when speaking of the tem- 
 ple service, betwixt what was positively enjoined 
 by the ceremonial law, and what was commanded 
 by David the king. " And the priests waited on 
 their offices ; the Levites also with instruments 
 of music of the Lord, which David the king had 
 made to praise the Lord."* " And when the 
 builders laid the foundation of the temple of 
 the Lord, they set the priests in their apparel, 
 with trumpets, and the Levites, the sons of Asaph, 
 with cymbals, to pra.'se the Lord after the ordi- 
 nance of David king of Israel. "f 
 
 If, on the other hand, authorities are not want- 
 
 * 2 Chron. vii. 6. t Ezra iii. 10. 
 
iog to countenance the opinion, that there 
 positive enactments in the law of Moses, in favour 
 at least of one kind of musical instruments, with 
 which all the earth is exhorted to a make a joyful 
 noise unto the Lord,"* the conclusion must be, 
 that it is a constituent part of the ceremonial law. 
 u And he set the Levins in the house of the Lord 
 with cymbals, with psalteries, and with harps, 
 according to the commandment of David, and of 
 Gad the king's seer, and Nathan the prophet: 
 for so was the commandment of the Lord by his 
 prophets. And the Levites stood with the instru- 
 ments of David, and the priests with the trumpets. 
 — And when the burnt-otfering began, the xnic; of 
 the Lord began also with the trumpets, and with* 
 the instruments ordained by David king oi^ Israel. 
 And all the congregation worshipped, and the 
 singers sang, and the trumpeters sounded: and 
 all this continued until the burnt-offering was 
 finished."! 
 
 Whichever of these opinions we adopt, it is 
 evident, that the regulations relative to instru- 
 mental music, in the public worship of God, are 
 as much incorporated with the Mosaic or Jewish 
 constitution as circumcision, which was instituted 
 long before the giving of the law; or as the tem- 
 ple itself, which was not built till after the death 
 of David. Therefore, we are entitled to con- 
 clude, that circumcision, sacrifice, instrumental 
 music, and the temple — the 1 an hole of these insti- 
 tutions, must stand or fall together. 
 
 We shall allow to our brother, that David was 
 ;i prophet, and that he was actuated !»y the purest 
 motive.-, when he set apart a particular CmSS <>!' 
 
 Psalm \e\iii. 4. \ 2 Chron. xxis 25 — 28 
 
93 
 
 people 10 siny; those hymns which he composed; 
 with the accompaniment of instruments of music, 
 improved or invented by himself. Still, it does 
 not follow, that the worship of God should have 
 any such accompaniment under the Gospel. 
 
 We shall even allow, that under the Pccdagogia 
 Legalis, all the instruments mentioned in the 
 150th Psalm, were daily used in the temple, and 
 that the whole ritual worship prescribed by the 
 law. by David, and the prophets, was in full au- 
 thority, and in uninterrupted observation, until 
 the publication of the Gospel. It remains still to 
 be considered, whether Christianity did not dis- 
 solve the ritual obligations of the law, and en- 
 tirely change many of those institutions, which 
 relate to the worship of God. 
 
 It seems to be acknowledged by all descriptions 
 of Christians, that among the Hebrews, instru- 
 mental music, in the public worship of God, was 
 essentially connected with sacrifice — with the 
 morning and evening sacrifice, and with the sa- 
 crifices to be offered up on great and solemn days. 
 But as all the sacrifices of the Hebrews were 
 completely abolished by the death of our blessed 
 Redeemer, so instrumental music, whether enact- 
 ed by Moses, or introduced by the ordinance of 
 David, or if you will, of Abraham, or any other 
 patriarch, being so intimately connected with 
 sacrifice, and belonging to a service which was 
 ceremonial and typical, must be abolished with 
 that service ; and we can have no warrant to 
 recall it into the Christian church, any more than 
 we have to use other abrogated rites of the Jew- 
 ish religion, of which it is a part. Nor was there 
 any need for a particular commandment to abolish 
 it, as our brother seems to think, seeing that the 
 
94 
 
 whole service, of which it is apart, is compli 
 abrogated. 
 
 But as our brother states it as his first and great 
 argument, that instrumental music is not forbid- 
 den in the word of God, but is u expressly ( ,\eou- 
 " raged, perhaps enjoined, in the Old Testament, 
 " and clearly authorized by the New ;" your com- 
 mittee conceive it their duty, to bring forward the 
 following- reasoning from Scripture, in opposition 
 to the last part of his averment, viz, that it i- 
 clearly authorized by the New. 
 
 We find, in Scripture, much information con- 
 cerning great changes to be made respecting re- 
 ligious services uuder the Gospel. These were 
 foretold in the Old Testament, and they are ex- 
 plained in the New. The Apostle, writing to the 
 Hebrews, declares, that the priesthood b< un- 
 changed, " there is made of necessity a change 
 also of the law."* We are informed by the 
 same inspired writer, that " the first covenant had 
 ordinances of divine services," which he describes 
 as consisting chiefly " in meats and drinks, and 
 diverse washings, and carnal ordinances," which 
 he says, were " imposed until the time of refor- 
 mation."! The carnal ordinances include all tin* 
 ritual, which was addressed to t!: 3 and 
 
 imagination, but neither enlightened the under- 
 standing, nor purified the conscience. By what- 
 ever authority these were imposed, thej were only 
 to continue till " the time of reformation." And 
 whatever is meant by " (lie time of reformation," 
 it cannot be doubted that it is now past, and 
 consequently, that the carnal ordinances imposed 
 under the former covenant, are no longer obliga< 
 
 }• | Heb. a, 1—1^ 
 
95 
 
 . The) were the rudiments of the world— • 
 
 the shadow of things to come, but the body is 
 Christ The substance, which all these things 
 represented, is to be found in the New Testament. 
 The apostolic decree, recorded in the 15th chap- 
 ter of the Acts of the Apostles ; the ministrations 
 and epistles of St. Paul ; and particularly his 
 strictures on the doctrines of Judaizing teachers, 
 show, that Christians are not under the law, but 
 under grace. 
 
 From the beginning of the world, there has 
 been a moral law, and a spiritual worship, which 
 remain unchanged under every dispensation. 
 Whatever is to be found in the Old Testament, 
 with regard to either of these, is of permanent 
 and everlasting obligation. But with respect to 
 the modes of external worship, there was to be an 
 entire change, which was announced by our Lord 
 himself, in a very early period of his ministry. 
 • ; The hour cometh, when ye shall neither on this 
 mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Fa- 
 ther. — But the hour cometh, and now is, when 
 the true worshippers shall worship the Father in 
 spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such 
 to worship him. God is a spirit: and they that 
 worship him, must worship him in spirit and in 
 truth f* — not according to the old institution, 
 in the hour that was past, but according to 
 the new institution, in the hour which cometh, 
 and now is. Nor must it be forgotten, that it 
 is not the ordinary manner of the writers of 
 the New Testament, to inform us what divine 
 institutions were to be abrogated, but only what 
 ervances were to take place under the Gos- 
 
 u iv. 21; 23, 24. 
 
96 
 
 pel. They do not tell us that the PassoveJ 
 was no longer to be observed, but only that 
 the Lord's Supper was to be administered^ So, 
 
 with respect to praising God, they do not ex- 
 pressly say, that instrumental music is to be si- 
 lenced, but they do expressly say, that God is to 
 be praised and worshipped by singing psalms, and 
 hymns, and spiritual songs, with understanding 
 and grace in the heart, for the purposes of in- 
 structing and comforting one another. Thi< is 
 to be the change under the Gospel, as far as 
 psalmody is concerned. 
 
 The only point which remains to be ascer- 
 tained, is, whether this necessary change of the 
 law extends to instrumental music, as a con- 
 comitant of the New Testament psalmody. On 
 this point, our brother has given a most decided 
 opinion, that " instrumental music is clearly au- 
 " thorized by the New Testament; and that, be- 
 " fore declaring our prohibition of Organs, it is 
 " incumbent on the chusch to expunge from the 
 " sacred records, these passages which seem 
 " clearly to recommend the use of instruments in 
 u public worship — that thus the worshippers may 
 " he delivered from the inconsistency of pro- 
 " mising, and exhorting each other to do, what 
 u in their hearts they resolve not, and by the 
 " church are forbidden, to perform." 
 
 In support of these assertions, our brother ex- 
 claims, in his statement, " No where do we find 
 u the great Head of the chinch repealing the in- 
 " junctions pronounced by the psalmist David! 
 •' And it is impossible to think that our blessed 
 " Saviour would have been silent on tiie subject, 
 " if instrumental music had been a gross profkn* 
 * ation of sacred thhurs. No where do we find 
 
97 
 
 • St. Paul warning against harp, and psaltery, 
 - k and Organ. Nay, we find St. John declaring, 
 * that he heard harpers harping with their harps 
 " in heaven." 
 
 Without saying any thing more severe on this 
 mode of reasoning adopted by our brother, we 
 conceive that it is neither agreeable to the rules 
 of just biblical criticism, nor to sound philoso- 
 phy. We have already observed, that it is not the 
 ordinary manner of the writers of the New Tes- 
 tament, to inform us what divine institutions were 
 to be abrogated, but only what observances were 
 to take place under the Gospel. And does not 
 every Christian know, that during our Saviour's 
 abode upon earth, the " time of reformation" 
 was not fully come — that Jesus was not yet glo- 
 rified — that it was the money-changers, not the 
 priests and Levites, that our Lord cast out of the 
 temple ; and of course, that it was the benches of 
 the former, not the altar, sacrifices, Organs, of 
 the latter, which he overturned? If Jesus did 
 not destroy the temple, but only foretold its de- 
 struction, is it not self-evident that its ministers, 
 and all the instruments employed by them, whe- 
 ther musical or sacrificial, must remain along 
 with it ? We shall transcribe the judgment, on 
 this point, of an eminent Protestant divine, who 
 is allowed, by all parties, to have been one of 
 the soundest and most judicious biblical critics : — 
 11 The Holy Ghost is here mentioned as the great 
 " gift of the Gospel times, as coming down from 
 " heaven, not absolutely — not as to his person, 
 u but with respect unto an especial work, namely, 
 M the change of the whole state of religious wor- 
 " ship in the church of God: Whereas we shall 
 " see, in the next words, he is spoken of only with 
 9 
 
•• respect unto external actual operations. But 
 " Ik? was the great, the promised heavenly gift, 
 • to be bestowed under the New Testament, 03 
 ; - whom God would institute and ordain a new 
 •• way, and new rites of worship, upon the reve- 
 " lation of himself and will in Christ. Unto him 
 •• was committed the reformation of all things in 
 " the church, whose time was now come, chap. 
 " ix. 10. The Lord Christ, when he ascended 
 11 into heaven, left all things standing and conti- 
 :; nuing in religious worship as they had done 
 tc from the days of Moses; though he had vir- 
 t; tually put an end unto it. And he commanded 
 " his disciples, that they should attempt no altera- 
 " tion therein, until the Holy Ghost were sent 
 " from heaven, to enable them thereunto, Acts i. 
 11 4, 5. But when he came as the great gift of 
 " God, promised under the New Testament, he 
 11 removes all the carnal worship and ordinances 
 11 of Moses, and that by the full revelation of the 
 " accomplishment of all that was signified by 
 " them, and appoints the new, holy, spiritual 
 11 worship of the Gospel, that was to succeed in 
 " their room. The Spirit of God, therefore, as 
 " bestowed for the introduction of the new Gos- 
 " pel state, in truth and worship, is the heavenh 
 11 gift here intended."* 
 
 As to the authority borrowed from St. Paul, 
 by interpreting his silence as expressive of his 
 approbation of harps, psalteries, and Organs, our 
 brother seems not to be aware, thai instrumental 
 music belonged entirely to the temple service, 
 and never was employed in the synagogue. 
 Hence Paul, in all his journcyings, could not find 
 
 * Owen on the Hebrews, chap, ti 
 
99 
 
 a single harp, or psaltery, or Organ, in any of the 
 religious assemblies of his countrymen, beyond 
 the precincts of the temple at Jerusalem; of con- 
 sequence, warning or reproof on this subject, 
 from that apostle, is not to be expected. This 
 circumstance accounts for the Jewish converts 
 never betraying, as far as we know, the least pre- 
 dilection for instrumental music in the public 
 worship of God, while they discovered a strong 
 attachment to circumcision, and other Levitical 
 institutions. Had St. Paul, therefore, approved 
 or admired instrumental music in the public wor- 
 ship of God, however poor and persecuted the 
 Apostolic Church might be, it is not to be sup- 
 posed that he would have preserved such pro- 
 found silence on the subject. On the contrary, 
 he would have disburdened his oppressed mind — 
 he would have recorded his principles — he would 
 have deplored the direful calamity of the times, 
 and earnestly recommended the introduction, or 
 the revival of instrumental music in the churches, 
 the very first moment that the wealth, and safety, 
 and peace of the church, rendered it practicable. 
 But St. Paul has recorded no such sentiments. 
 Instead of speaking in commendation of instru- 
 mental music in the public worship of God, we 
 find him on one occasion, borrowing an allusion 
 from it, expressive of something like contempt: 
 " Though I speak with the tongue of men and 
 angels, and have not charity, I am become as a 
 sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal."* 
 
 But our brother imagines, that he is particularly 
 countenanced in his favourite measure, by a pas- 
 sage in the book of Revelation, where St. John 
 
 * 1 Cor, xiii. 1. 
 
100 
 
 expn lares, that he beard " harp 
 
 ing with their harps in heaven."* ; * Words can- 
 " not be simpler, (says our brother,) nor convt \ 
 " more plainly an unequivocal meaning, and that 
 11 meaning clearly is, that instrumental music i=> 
 11 at least not inconsistent with the purity ofevan- 
 " gelical praise.'' The author of the Statem 
 then, can produce only a negative conclusion, and 
 that from a single highly figurative passage of 
 the New Testament, in support of his favourite 
 measure — a negative conclusion, too, repugnant 
 to the principles and practice of the Church of 
 Scotland, and countenanced by nothing but what 
 we apprehend is a mistaken commentary of 
 Scripture. Even supposing for a moment, that. 
 apparently to short-sighted mortals, an\ usaj 
 not inconsistent with divine revelation, are we, 
 on tiiat account, to blend that usage with the 
 worship of God ? The Established Church of 
 Scotland allows no such latitudinarian principle. 
 This was precisely the mode of reasoning, by 
 which the Popish corruptions were introduced 
 into Baptism and the Lord's Supper, and b\ 
 which any system of will-worship may be vin- 
 dicated. 
 
 Our brother likewise cannot be ignorant, that 
 commentators are by no means agreed, that the 
 celestial state, and the exercises of the redeemed 
 in heaven, are the subject of this vision of St 
 John. Whatever be in this, it is evident, that the 
 imager} of the context is terrestrial and Lwitii-al. 
 and not evangelical. The scene of the vision is 
 upon Mount Zion, and the voice from heaven is 
 described as u the voice of many waters, and as 
 
 !'• i ... 2 
 
101 
 
 the voice of a great thunder;" evidently alluding 
 lo the region whence the water descends, and in 
 which the thunder rolls. A lamb, Mount Zion, 
 harpers and their harps, an hundred and forty- 
 four thousand, elders, first-fruits — do not all these 
 images, in their literal meaning, carry back the 
 mind to Jerusalem, and place us among the 
 Jewish worshippers in the courts of the temple? 
 It would be in vain to expect, that, in a vision, 
 " the forms of Christian worship" would present 
 themselves in as familiar a manner to the mind of 
 St. John, as the worship of the temple. For no 
 man, no author, sacred or profane, takes his al- 
 lusions invariably from what is modern or fami- 
 liar. The mantle of antiquity must often be 
 thrown around allusions and illustrations, to ren- 
 der them venerable and majestic; and this, we 
 apprehend, is most judiciously done, in the pas- 
 sage before us, whether the subject of the vision 
 recorded in it, refer to the church militant or 
 
 TRIUMPHANT. 
 
 Your committee, therefore, are bold to con- 
 tend, that no better authority for instrumental 
 music can be drawn from this highly figurative 
 language of St. John, than there can be deduced 
 from his allegorical description of the new Jeru- 
 salem, that heaven, the place of happiness for the 
 righteous, is literally a splendid city, " having 
 twelve gates, and every several gate of one pearl; 
 and that its walls are of jasper, and its streets of 
 pure gold." 
 
 If your committee were to borrow any thing 
 concerning the form of evangelical praise to be 
 used by Christians, from the book of Revelation, 
 they would take it rather from the 6th and 7ih 
 verses of this 14th chapter, than from the 2cl 
 9* 
 
102 
 
 verse. "And I saw another angel ih in the 
 midst of heaven, having die everlasting gospel to 
 
 preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to 
 every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and peo- 
 ple; saying, with a loud voice, Fear Cod, and 
 give glory to him, for the hour of h\< judgment 
 is come: and Worship him that made heaven and 
 earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters*" 
 Here he saw no harpers, no psalteries, no Organs. 
 And in that beautiful and sublime description of 
 the church universal, in chap. vii. 9. and 12. 
 " After this I beheld, and lo, a great multitude, 
 which no man could number, of all nations and 
 kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before 
 the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with 
 white robes, and palms in their hands ; saying, 
 Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and 
 thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, 
 be to our God, for ever and ever. Amen." 
 Here again he saw no harpers harping with their 
 harps. 
 
 Far then from finding instrumental music in the 
 public worship of God, " clearly authorized by the 
 New Testament," your committee contend, that 
 there is not a vestige of such authority, unless we 
 violate the laws of sound criticism, and confound 
 the literal and figurative meaning of language. 
 Our blessed Lord did not condemn instrumental 
 music, because it was a constituent part of the 
 temple service, which, with other Lcvitical insti- 
 tutions, were to outlive himself and only to be 
 nailed to his cross, or abolished h\ his death. 
 The apostle Paid could not speak against it in 
 the synagogues, for in them it nev( r existed. He 
 could not warn or reprove the Je\\i>h converts, 
 for, as far as ire know, the\ never betrayed a 
 
103 
 
 desire to employ it. The truth seems to be this. 
 as far as your committee can speak positively 
 from the writings of the New Testament, there are 
 in that sacred record but two ways enjoined of 
 offering up our praises to God in public worship : 
 The one bv thanksgiving, without the vocal me- 
 lody of the congregation; the other by the con- 
 gregation singing, with the human voice, psalms, 
 and hymns, and spiritual songs. Thus, in 
 1 Tim. ii. 1. we have an express commandment 
 for thanksgiving to be a stated part of our public 
 worship. " I exhort, therefore, that first of all, 
 supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving 
 of thanks, be made for all men." And it is be- 
 lieved, that this giving of thanks varied accord- 
 ing to the nature of the mercies which the church 
 was daily receiving:* and that the people per- 
 formed no other part in these thanksgivings, than 
 saying, Amen. 
 
 The second method is, what the Scriptures en- 
 join relative to praising God, by singing psalms, 
 and hymns, and spiritual songs. Your committee 
 believe that there are only four passages in the 
 New Testament, which speak distinctly and di- 
 rectly on this subject. " Let the word of Christ 
 dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and 
 admonishing one another in psalms, and hymns, 
 and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your 
 hearts to the Lord."f " Speaking to yourselves 
 in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, sing- 
 ing and making melody in your heart to the 
 Lord. "J " Is any among you afflicted? let him 
 pray: Is any merry? let him sing psalms. "|| 
 
 Eph. i. 3. 1 Pet. i. 3. f Col. iii. 16. | Eph. v. 19. 
 || James v. 13. 
 
104 
 
 " By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of 
 praise to God continually, that i>. the fruit of our 
 lips, giving thanks to his name."* In all these 
 passages, it is an undeniable matter of fact , thai 
 
 the primitive Christians understood, singing with 
 the human voice alone, as enjoined; (i>r this, and 
 this only, they employed in singing to the Lord, 
 making melody in their hearts. Among them, 
 the accompaniment of any instrument of music, in 
 the public worship of God, was never known nor 
 named. 
 
 Your committee are aware, that Bishop King 
 would wish to persuade us, that the apostles, in 
 the passages above quoted, recommend the use 
 of musical instruments in the public worship of 
 God, seeing they use a word, which, in the origi- 
 nal language, he says, signifies singing with 
 an instrument; psallo. But this very criticism 
 serves to show upon what slender foundation 
 the patrons of instrumental music build. Thus, 
 the word generally used in the New Testament 
 for worshipping, (proskuneo,) signified), in the 
 original, to pay homage by the kissing of the 
 hand: of course, if we are to follow the analogy 
 drawn from the original meaning of a Greek 
 word, Christian worshippers would only have 
 been obligated to have paid their homage to God 
 by the kissing of the hand. This is not all; 
 for it is evident, that these injunctions, be their 
 meaning what it may, are directly and expressly 
 addressed to all Christians, either considered as 
 mbled for public worship, or in their private 
 individual capacity. Now, is it at all credible, 
 that each indi\ idual Christian in these times, or at 
 
 " Ih •!>. \iii. 15. 
 
103 
 
 other time, was capable of using a musical 
 instrument; or that a suggestion, which involves 
 a moral impossibility, could be made to the mind 
 of the apostles by the infallible Spirit of God: 
 
 When, therefore, we concentrate all the parts 
 of our argument together, viz. that instrumental 
 music was confined to the service of the temple, 
 and most intimately connected with the offering 
 up of sacrifice, and that we have no warrant to 
 transfer it into the Christian church, anymore than 
 odier rites of the Jewish religion: — that the silence 
 of our blessed Lord, and of his apostles, upon 
 the subject, affords no presumption that they ap- 
 proved of the measure — and, finally, that the 
 passages in the New Testament, which relate ex- 
 pressly to the praises of God, either allude to 
 thanksgiving, pronounced by the minister, with- 
 out the vocal melody of the congregation, or to 
 singing with the human voice alone, psalms, and 
 hymns, and spiritual songs, — we have no hesitation 
 in pronouncing a judgment in direct opposition 
 to the first and the chief argument of the minister 
 of St. Andrew's church. We say, that the use of 
 instrumental music, in the public worship of God, 
 is not authorized by the New Testament — that 
 whether it was enjoined by Moses, or only intro- 
 duced b}~ David, it was appropriated to the tem- 
 ple service, and, of course, abrogated with it. 
 The singing of psalms , hymns, and spiritual songs, 
 in the heart, to the Lord, not the playing of them, 
 is the express language of the New Testament. 
 Therefore, instrumental music is neither enjoined, 
 nor authorized, nor encouraged by the word of 
 God, in the public worship of Christians. 
 
 As to that observation made by our brother, 
 that " when we look into the history even of 
 
106 
 
 * those nations that were strangers to divine 
 14 revelation, there we find universally the use of 
 ;t instruments in giving praise to their cod-." 
 We consider any reasoning, founded upon hea- 
 then examples, as of no weight whatever in de- 
 ciding this question, and even as hardly requiring 
 a serious answer. According to our brother's 
 own principles, " the fixed and infallible standard 93 
 for the worship of Christians, is the word of God 
 alone. What he is pleased to say proceeds from 
 the unadulterated light of nature, we affirm, 
 ariseth from a blind and corrupt superstition : 
 and if we were disposed to indulge in conjecture, 
 about the origin of manners and customs anion 
 the heathen, we would tell him, that Jubal, of the 
 race of cursed Cain, a race which early began to 
 corrupt the worship of the Supreme Being, was 
 " the father of all such as handle the harp and 
 Organ."* And there is no doubt, that Ham. 
 who was born long before the flood, and of 
 course was acquainted with many of Cain's pos- 
 terity, would transmit some of their corrupt super- 
 stitious notions of religious worship to Cush, Mil*- 
 raim, and Canaan, the fathers of the Chaldeans, 
 Egyptians, and Phoenicians; those nations which, 
 ancient history informs us, first set up idols, and 
 introduced instrumental music into the public 
 worship of their gods. 
 
 2. Let us now proceed to the second argument 
 of our brother, the minister of St. Andrew's 
 church, and examine those conclusions, which, 
 he affirms, may be drawn from the history of the 
 church, in behalf of his favourite measure, He 
 
 affirms, that although instrumental music, in the 
 
 • Gen iv. 21 
 
107 
 
 ^iiip of God, was not known till " about the 
 " middle of the eighth century; yet then it was 
 " introduced, through the dictates of pious feel- 
 " ing, prompting the enlightened mind to conse- 
 i; crate the labours of genius to the devout exer- 
 " cise of praise." He farther affirms, that " in- 
 " strumental music forms no essential part of 
 11 Popery, being founded on principles widely 
 " different from the ceremonies of the Church of 
 " Rome, and therefore retained and employed by 
 11 all the Reformed churches on the continent." — 
 " A stronger argument (continues he) in its fa- 
 " vour cannot be produced, except that which I 
 " have already mentioned, the sacred authority 
 " of Scripture." We have fairly stated this se- 
 cond argument. Our brother's reasoning, in 
 support of these bold conclusions, your com- 
 mittee conceive to be very unsatisfactory. 
 
 According to his own statement of the matter, 
 instrumental music was not used, for the first 
 seven centuries. This period, it is well known, 
 comprehends, along with the apostolic age, not 
 only the poorest and most persecuted, but also the 
 most splendid and prosperous times of the primi- 
 tive church. The practice of such a period, 
 will more than counterbalance any thing that 
 even the Reformed churches on the continent can 
 furnish. To pretend to account for this re- 
 markable fact, upon the ground that the church 
 had, during so many centuries, no leisure, or 
 means, or knowledge, to attend to sacred music, 
 is a very unphilosophical and inaccurate mode of 
 reasoning. They had both leisure and inclina- 
 tion to form the most abstruse and metaphysical 
 opinions concerning the doctrines of the Gospel. 
 They had means to build die most splendid 
 
108 
 
 Churches. The emperors of the W i de- 
 
 vout, to a decree bordering upon superstition. 
 The truth is, they considered it as unlawful to 
 employ instrumental music in the worship of God. 
 In their eyes, it was so intimately connected with 
 the temple service, that both Allans and orthodox 
 would have regarded themselves as returning 
 back to Judaism, if they had permitted it in their 
 public worship. 
 
 But we do not wish to support this branch of 
 our argument by abstract speculative reasoning, 
 or mere dogmatical averments. It must rest upon 
 authorities; which authorities we draw from the 
 accounts of the primitive Christians, as recorded 
 in the Fathers, and from the opinions of the 
 schoolmen, and from the judgment of the Re- 
 formers. If they knew their own sentiments, or 
 have honestly recorded them, your committee 
 are confident that the following authorities ought 
 to set this question for ever at rest. 
 
 Thus, in a treatise among Justin Martyr's 
 works, we have the following testimony. " <^. If 
 " songs were invented by unbelievers, with a 
 " design of deceiving, and were appointed for 
 " those under the law, because of the childishness 
 " of their minds; why do they who have received 
 " the perfect instructions of grace, which arc most 
 " contrary to the foresaid customs, neverth 
 " sing in the churches, a- tiny did who were 
 " children under the law? .7. Plain singing 
 
 * A confusion seems t«> bav< crept into the minds <>t* many, 
 relatire to singing tin' pi use "i God, The) conceive, thai be- 
 cause the Church "i Scotland iv hostile to th< luaical 
 instrument.- m the public worship <»t God, Bhe denies the an* 
 tiquitv <.f vocal music in the chinch ol Christ. There i^ ground 
 to believe, that the minister of h>t. Andrew's church, bj 
 
109 
 
 : not childish, but only the singing with life- 
 " less Organs, with dancing, and cymbals, &:c. 
 t; Whence the use of such instruments, and other 
 " things fit for children, is laid aside, and plain 
 •• singing only retained.* 
 
 The memorable testimony of Pliny, as quoted 
 by Tertullian, combines, at once, Christian and 
 heathen authority on this subject. " We find it 
 " has been forbidden to make a search after us. 
 " For when Pliny the Younger was governor of a 
 " province, and had condemned some, and made 
 " others comply, being disturbed by the great 
 " multitude of the Christians, he consulted Tra- 
 " jam, acquainting him, that besides an obstinate 
 " aversion to sacrificing, he could discover no- 
 " thing concerning their mysteries, but that they 
 ; ' held assemblies before dav, to sing to Christ as 
 " God."f 
 
 Thus, Basil, though he highly commends, and 
 zealously defends, the way of singing by turns, or 
 what is styled antiphonal singing, does not deny 
 that the manner of singing in use during the 
 apostolic times, was altered by him in his church. 
 
 adjutors and anonymou? advocate?, have fallen into this mistake. 
 Now there are three things which the Church of Scotland care- 
 fully and accurately distinguishes. First, Plain singing-, which 
 she affirms has been in use from the beginning of the church. 
 Secondly, Cathedral or antiphonal singing, which she takes to 
 be neither useful, nor very ancient, being the device of the 
 fourth century. Lastly, Musical instruments, joined with sing- 
 ing in the church, she maintains is the invention of a much 
 later age — certainly not earlier than the eighth, and not in ge- 
 neral use till the thirteenth century. 
 
 * w En tais ccclcsiais pro airctai ek ton asmalon he chresis ton. 
 toixddn organon kui ton allon tots nepiois outon harmodion km 
 hupoleleiptai to asai haplos." — Justin. Qua-st. et Respons. ad 
 Orthodox. Q. lUT. 
 
 t Tertul. Apol. 
 
 ]0 
 
(10 
 
 On the contrary, he explicitly admits, that th< 
 former practice was for the people rising before 
 day-light, to go to the house of prayer, and 
 
 having made confession to God, to rise from 
 prayer, and betake themselves (" eU ten psalmo- 
 " diem") to the singing of psalms. But now. 
 indeed, (" cliche diantmethcntes, antipsalloisin al- 
 " Iclois") they sing to each other, alternately, in 
 parts. — Ep. lxiii. And so far from approving 
 musical instruments in the worship of God, he 
 calls them " the inventions of Jubal, of the 
 " of Cain" and thus expresses himself concern- 
 ing them. " Laban was a lover of the harp 
 " and of music, with which he would have sent 
 " away Jacob: If then hadst told me, said he, 1 
 11 would have sent thee away with mirth, and mu- 
 u sical instruments, and an harp. But the pa- 
 " triarch avoided that music, as being a thing 
 " that would hinder his regarding the work- of 
 i; the Lord, and his considering the works of his 
 11 hands. — In such vain arts, as the playing upon 
 " the harp or pipe, or dancing, (//, s tes 
 
 " energeias, to mnaphanidsetai, Kai ontos 
 
 " kaka ten apostoli/cen phonen to telos teuton apo- 
 " leia") as soon as the action ceases, the work 
 M itself vanishes: so that really, according to the 
 11 apostle's expression, the end of these thin:: 
 :l destruction." — Comment, in James, chap. v. 
 
 ChrysOstom, who flourished in the fourth cen- 
 tury, often ex] approbation of instru- 
 mental music, and explicitly d< " that it 
 is only permitted to t : : I ifice, 
 i- the imbecili f their souls, 
 u God c6ndes< i<> their weakness, because 
 " they ii'erelatelj drawn off from idols." "But 
 
Ill 
 
 4i now, instead of Organs, Christians nm-t us< 
 ; - the body to praise God."* 
 
 Jerome, in his commentary on Eph. v. 19. thus 
 delivers his judgment on this point. " We must 
 " therefore sing and make melody ; and praise 
 * ; the Lord rather with the heart than the voice. 
 - ; For this is what is here said: singing and 
 M making melody in your heart to the Lord. Let 
 M young men mind this, let them mind it whose 
 " office is to sing in the church. We must sing 
 • ; to God not with the voice, but the heart. They 
 ; < are not artfully to supple their jaws and their 
 « throat, after the manner of the tragedians, that 
 ; ' theatrical notes and songs should be heard in 
 ;i the church; but they are to praise God with 
 " fear, with good works, and the knowledge of 
 " the Scriptures. If a man has an unpleasant 
 " voice, if he has good works, he is a sweet 
 " singer in God's ears. Let the servant of Christ 
 " so sing, that not the voice of the singer, but the 
 " thing sung, may please; that the evil spirit that 
 M was in Saul may be cast out of those, who, in 
 " like manner, are possessed by him, and not be 
 " let into those who have turned the house of 
 " God into a stage. "j This shows, as has been 
 
 * •'• Holi to palaion houtot egonlo dia ton organon teuton, dia 
 tea p achat eta tes dianoias avion; kai to arti apespasthai apo ton 
 eidolon. Hdsper can tos thusias sunshoresea houfo kai taata 
 epetrepse sungkatabainon aaton tc astheneia" " Alia tote men 
 orgona en di Hon tas ddas anepheroa. Aunt de anti organon 
 kchresthai esti to somatic — Chrvsostora, Psalm cxlix. and cxliii. 
 
 t " Et canere igitur et psallere, et laudare Dominum magis 
 animo quam voce debemus. Hoc est quippe, quod dicitur 
 cantaates et p salient cs in cordibus vestris Domino. Audiant hac 
 adolescentuli: audiant hi quibus psallendi in Ecclesia officium ' 
 est, Deo non voce, sed corde cantandum : nee in TragcdofUin 
 modum, guttur, et fauces dulci raedicamini colliniendas ; ill in 
 Ecdesia theatralea moduli audiantur et Canticn. sed in timore, 
 
112 
 
 remarked by Dr. Whitfcy, that choristers had then 
 obtained an office in the church, though Jerome 
 OS not much to approve of them. J The disliked 
 choristers, what would he have thought of organ- 
 ists? 
 
 Augustine, Confess, lib. 10. eap. s bis 
 
 testimony in favour of plain song in the worship 
 of God. — "I wish all nice singing of David's 
 • Psalms were removed from mine, and the 
 " church's hearing; and that seems safer, to ine, 
 " which I remember 1 have been told of Atha- 
 " nasius, bishop of Alexandria, who made the 
 " reader of the psalm sound it with so little altera- 
 " tion of his voice, that he was more like to a 
 u person delivering a speech, than singing." 
 
 Thus it is evident, from the authority of the 
 Fathers, that it was simply vocal melody which 
 was used in singing the praises of God, dui 
 the primitive times of the church. And should 
 we analyze the writings of ecclesiastical authors 
 in the middle or scholastic ages, we shall find 
 that instrumental music is positively condemned. 
 Thus, the celebrated Thomas Aquinas: " In the 
 " old law, God was praised both with musical 
 ,; instruments and human voices. — But the church 
 " does not use musical instruments to praise God, 
 11 lest she should seem to Judaize. — Nor ought a 
 
 in opere, in tcientia scripturarum. Qnamvii sn aliqnis at so- 
 lent illi appellare kakophdnoi si bona opera babuerit, dolcifl 
 apod Deum Cantor est. Sic cantel servm Chruti m non \<»\ 
 
 ktifl sed verba placeanl qua? Leguntur: 1 H « ^ . l<>. m S 
 tui malm qui eral in Sadie, ejiciatur ab his qui similiter ;ii> eo 
 
 dentur, el aon Lntroducatur in eoi <|ui de Dei domo 
 •niiiiin' fecere populonun.' 1 — Jerom. in Ep. w. 19 
 
 • Vetui lii Patribus consuetudo vigd hodie 
 
 ubi ;ni«liuiitur, 1 1 ■ < ;m .d< - moduli et dulcla caotfc 
 
 i Caciunl popuiorum, convenientium ad mulceodai sum votibos ef 
 
 I ( ' 
 
113 
 
 ; - pipe, nor any other artificial instruments, such 
 " as Organ, or harp, or the like, be brought into 
 " use in the Christian church, but only those 
 " things which shall make the hearers better men. 
 " For, by musical instruments, the mind is more 
 " directed to amusement, than to the forming of 
 11 a good internal disposition. But under the 
 " Old Testament, such instruments were used, 
 " partly because the people were harder, and 
 " more carnal; upon which account, they were 
 " to be stirred up by these instruments, as like- 
 '- wise by earthly promises; and partly because 
 " these bodily instruments were typical of some- 
 " thing."— 2. 2. Quest. 91. Art. 2. ad. 4.* 
 
 Others of the schoolmen might be quoted, but 
 conceiving this to be unnecessary, we proceed to 
 state the judgment of the reformers. 
 
 Pareus in 1st Cor. 147. declares, " That in the 
 " Christian church the mind must be incited to 
 " spiritual joy, not by pipes, and trumpets, and 
 ;i timbrels, with which God formerly indulged 
 " his ancient people on account of the hardness 
 " of their hearts, but by psalms, and hymns, and 
 u spiritual songs. "f 
 
 ■ • Neque fistula ad disciplinam est adducenda, neque aliud 
 aliquod artificiale Organum, puta Cithara et si quid tale alte- 
 rum est; Sed qiuecunque faciunt auditores bonos. Hujusmodi 
 enim musica instrumenta magis animum movent ad delecta- 
 tionern, quam per ea, formatur interius bona dispositio. In 
 Vt t( ri autem Testamento usus erat talium instrumentorum, 
 turn quia populus erat magis durus et carnalis, unde erat per 
 hujusmodi instrumenta provocandus, sicut et per promissiones 
 t«rienas; turn etiam quia hujusmodi instrumenta corporalia 
 aliud fi^urabaiit.*' — Thomas Aquinas, 2. 2. Qucs. 9\.Mrt. 2. ad. 4. 
 
 t u In Ecclesia excitandus est animus ad Deum et letitiaru 
 spiritualem, non tibiis, tubis, tvmpanis, quod veteri durae eer- 
 vicis et stupids mentis populo'Deus olim indulsir, sed -. 
 concionibus; psalmodiis et hymnis. M — Pareus in 1 Cor. 147. 
 
 ' 10* 
 
114 
 
 Zepperus, De Leg. Mosaica, lib. 4. says, " In- 
 " strumental music, in the religious worship of 
 " the Jews, belonged to the ceremonial law, 
 " which is now abolished. — It is evident, that it 
 " is contrary to the precept of St. Paul, 1 Cor. 
 " xix. who wills, that in Christian assemblies, 
 " every thing should be done for edification, that 
 "others may understand and be reformed: bo 
 " even that of speaking in unknown tongues 
 " should be banished from the church: much 
 " less should that jarring, Organic music, which 
 " produceth a gabbling of many voices, be al- 
 " lowed, with its pipes, and trumpets, and whis- 
 " ties, making our churches resound, nay, bel- 
 " low and roar." And the same author, speak- 
 ing of this practice being retained in some of the 
 Reformed churches, in direct contradiction to the 
 judgment of their founders, thus expresseth him- 
 self: " In some of the Reformed churches, these 
 " musical instruments are retained, but they are 
 " not played until the congregation is dismissed, 
 " all the parts of divine worship being finished. 
 " And they are then used for a political purpose, 
 " to gratify those who seek pleasure from sound 
 " and harmony."* 
 
 Molerus, in his Prelections on the 150th Psalm, 
 says, " It is no wonder, therefore, that Mich a 
 
 * " Instrumentalis musica in saeris el rultu divino populi 
 Judaic! ad ccremoniaJia M<»;uca j>< i timiit qua- nunc abolita 
 sunt — I'tut sit contra pra'ccptum el nmilam Paul] factum est, 
 <|iii | Cm. xix. !2<). vnlt, ut in convcmilms ecclesiasticis ad cdi- 
 
 ficationem omnia fiant, atque alii iatelligaiit el inforroentar, 
 quo quidem aomine linguas etiam fan ecclesia ibidem rejicR, nc- 
 dum confragosa ilia Organa muaica qua' varium vocum 
 tum efficient et templa lituia, tubis el fistulia penonan 
 perboare et reinugirc fackrat — In quibusdam ecdesiii I 
 raatis On;. ma ilia musica retinentur, non autem nisi omnibus 
 cultus divini partibufl peractu et demisao catu ecclesiastico 
 
115 
 
 11 number of musical instruments should be so 
 " heaped together, for although they were a part 
 " of the * Pcedagogia Legalist yet they are not, 
 " for that reason, to be brought into Christian 
 " assemblies. For God willed), that after the 
 " coming of Christ, his people should cultivate 
 " the hope of eternal life, and the practice of true 
 " piety, by very different, and more simple means 
 11 than Obese."* 
 
 Erasmus, who was certainly a friend to the 
 Reformation, complained of instrumental music 
 as an abuse, and pronounced it unsuitable to the 
 gravity and solemnity of Christian worship. His 
 words are, " We have brought a cumbersome and 
 " theatrical music into our churches ; such a 
 " confused disorderly chattering of some words, 
 " as I think was never heard in any of the Gre- 
 " dan or Roman theatres. The church rings 
 %i with the noise of trumpets, pipes, and dulci- 
 " mers ; and human voices strive to bear their 
 " part with them. Men run to church as to a 
 • ; theatre, to have their ears tickled. And for this 
 " end, Organ-makers are hired with great sala- 
 " ries, and a company of boys, who waste all 
 " their time in learning these whining tones. 
 " Pray now, compute how many poor people, in 
 
 pulsantur. Ad finem politicum propter illos qui ex sono et 
 numeris oblcctationem quandam quacrunt quibusque huic in- 
 strumentali musica interesse libet." — Zepperus y de Lege Mo- 
 saica, lib. 4. 
 
 Non niminim igitur tot musica instrumentahic coacervari. 
 Quae cum pars pgeda^ogia; legalis fuerint non sunt hodie iu 
 Christianoram cwtibus mducendse. Aliis enim mediia, et 
 umplicioribus spem vita) a;ternre et pietatis excercitiam, post 
 Christum exhibitum suos colere vult Dominus. — Multru.s in 
 Psalm W. 
 
116 
 
 • great extremity, might be maintained by the 
 " salaries of these singers."* 
 
 It is curious to observe how little our brother 
 Si nns to have attended to the history of the Pro- 
 testant churches; for it appears, that instrumen- 
 tal music would not have been retained even 
 among the Lutherans, " unless they had forsaken 
 " their own Luther, who (by the confession 
 " of Eckhard, a German doctor of theology) 
 " reckoned Organs among the cjisigns of Baal. 
 " His words are, Lutherus organa musica inter 
 " Baalis insignia refert."\ And, from record, it 
 is evident, that if instrumental music is used in 
 some of the Dutch churches, it is decidedly against 
 the judgment of the Dutch pastors. For in the 
 National Synod at Middleburg, in the year J 5S1, 
 and in the Synod of Holland and Zealand, in the 
 year 1594, it wai resolved, " That they would 
 " endeavour to obtain of the magistrate the laying 
 " aside of Organs, and the singing v:ith then in the 
 " churches, even out of the time of worship, cither 
 " before or after sermons. So far are those Synods 
 "from bearing with them in the worship itself" 
 
 As our brother seems to lay so much stress 
 upon the practice of the Church of Geneva, where 
 Beza and Calvin had their chief influence, your 
 committee conceive it proper to give, at some 
 length, the opinion of these great reformers. 
 
 Beza thus expresses himself, " If the Apostle 
 " justly prohibits the use of unknown tongues in 
 
 Op. rosam quandam el theatrical muficam in ra 
 induxiinus, tumultuoaum diver sani aa rocnm garritum, oualem 
 Don ppinor in Grecorum aui Romanorum theatru unquam 
 auditum fauw 
 
 ■ v ide I' 'ia. Tho. 
 
117 
 
 " the church, much less would he have tolerated 
 i; these artificial musical performances, which are 
 %i addressed to the ear alone, and seldom strike 
 " the understanding, even of the performers 
 • ; themselves."* 
 
 Calvin, in many different parts of his works, 
 gives it as his deliberate judgment, that instru- 
 mental music ought to have no place, in the pub- 
 lic worship of God, under the Gospel. 
 
 1st. In his exhortation to Charles V. concern- 
 ing the necessity of reforming the church, he says, 
 " Unless we intend to confound every thing, we 
 ¥ - must constantly distinguish between the Old 
 " and the New Testament. That although the 
 " observation of a ceremony under the law might 
 " be useful, now it is not only superfluous, but 
 " absurd and pernicious. "f 
 
 2d. Calvin elsewhere declares, " That instru- 
 " mental music is not fitter to be adopted into 
 " the public worship of the Christian church, 
 " than the incense, the candlesticks, and the 
 " other shadows of the Mosaic law. "J 
 
 Lastly, In his Homily on 1st Samuel xviii. 
 1 — 9. his deliberate judgment on this subject 
 is expressed at length ; where Organs are par- 
 ticularized by him as a profanation of the word 
 
 * Si Apostolus merito pereg rinarum lingnarum asum in caetu 
 Ecclesiastico prohibuit, multo minus sonos illos Musices Har- 
 monicos, quibus aures solae, iis qua? cantantur nullo modo, ne 
 ab iis quidcm, qui cantant plerumque intellectis feriuntur in 
 Ecclesia tolerasset. — Beza in Colloq. Mompelg. parte 2. page 26. 
 
 t INisi enim omnia velimus confundere, tenendum est semper 
 discrimen illud Veteris et Novi Testamenti : quod ceremonia- 
 quarum utilis sub lege erat observatio, non superilure modo 
 nunc sit sed absurdce quoque et vitiosa?. 
 
 \ " ]Non aptiora esse Cultui Divino in ecclesia Christiana in- 
 strumenta musica, quam sufntum, luminarin. aliasque umbras 
 i»\:ris Mosaic 
 
118 
 
 and worship of God under the Gospel. His 
 words are, 
 
 " In Popery, there was a ridiculous and unsuit- 
 " able imitation (of the Jews) ; while they adorned 
 " their temples and valued themselves as having 
 • ; made the worship of God more splendid and 
 11 inviting, they employed Organs, and many 
 " other such ludicrous things, by which the word 
 " and worship of God are exceedingly profaned ; 
 " the people being much more attached to those 
 " rites, than to the understanding of the Divine 
 " Word. We know, however, that where such 
 " understanding is not, there can be no edifica- 
 11 tion, as the apostle Paul teacheth, while he 
 " saith, 'How can a person give testimony to the 
 " faith, and how can he say, Amen, at the giving 
 11 of thanks, if he does not understand ?' Where- 
 " fore, in that same place, he exhorts the faithful, 
 " whether they pray, or sing, they should pray 
 " and sing with understanding, not in an unknown 
 " tongue, but in that which is vulgar and intelli- 
 " gible, that edification may be in the church. 
 M What therefore was in use under the law, i> bj 
 " no means entitled to our practice under the 
 " Gospel, and these things being not only super- 
 " fluous, but useless, are to be abstained from. 
 " Because pure and simple modulation is sufli- 
 " cient for the praise of God, if it is sung with the 
 " hear! and with the mouth : We know lhat our 
 u Lord Jesus Christ has appeared, and, by his 
 " advent, has abolished these legal shadow*. 
 
 " Instrumental music, we therefore maintain, 
 " was only tolerated, on account of the times and 
 " of the people, because tliey were as taw, as the 
 
 11 sacred Scripture speaketh, whose condition re- 
 * ; quired these puerile rudiment-. But in Gospel 
 
119 
 
 " times, we must not have recourse to these, un- 
 *• less we wish to destroy the evangelical perfec- 
 " tion, and to obscure the meridian light, which we 
 '• enjdy in Christ our Lord."* 
 
 Whatever, therefore, may be the practice of 
 some Protestant churches on the Continent, 
 whether Lutheran or Reformed, it is evident, from 
 the clear and decided judgment of the great foun- 
 ders of these churches, given by your committee, 
 in the very words of these eminent reformers, 
 that instrumental music ought to have no place, 
 in the public worship of God, under the Gospel. 
 
 Perhaps it may not be improper here to take 
 notice of what has been considered by the best 
 informed historians, as the ancient and genuine 
 opinion of the reformed Church of England, re- 
 
 " Quare fait in Papatu ridicula nimis et inepta imitatio, quant 
 tcmpla exoraare, Dcique cultum reddere celebriorem existima- 
 runt, si Orgrana et aHtt istiusmodi multa ludicra adhiberent : 
 Quibus raaxime dei verbum et cultus profanata sunt. Populo 
 externis istis ritibus addicto potius quam verbi divini intelli- 
 ^entine. Scimus autem ubi nulla est intelligentia nullam etiam 
 rediikationem esse. Quumadmodum Paulus apostolus docet, 
 quum ait, quomodo potest idiota reddere fidei testimonium, aut 
 quomodo dicturus est Amen ad gratiarum actionem nisi intelli- 
 L r at ? Quare fideles hortator co loco ut Deum precantes et ipsi 
 Psallentes et precentur et Psallant intellisreutia, non lingua pe- 
 regrina, scd vulgari et uttelligibHi : ut sit In ecclesia a?dificatio : 
 Quod itaque fuit in nsn le^is tempore, nullum hodie locum apud 
 mos obtinet : et rebus istis non modo superfluis. sed inanibus 
 etiam abstinendum est : quod sufficiat pura et simplex divina- 
 ruiu laudum modulatio, corde et ore nostro singuli idiomate. 
 SiquiAem scimus Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum apparuisse 
 et umbras illas lesrales suo adventu dissipasse. Musicam itaque 
 illam instrumentalem teneamus tunc ratione temporis alius et 
 populi l'uisse toleratam. quod essent ut pueri. quemadmodum 
 i ^criptui-R loquitur, qui puerilibus istis rudimentia indige- 
 rent, qua; hodie non sunt ultro revocanda. nisi pei toitionom 
 jclicam velimus abolere, et plenam lucemquam i:i Christo 
 uno nostro consecnti sumus obscurare. — Cab:. Horn, 66. in 
 i. xviii. 1 — 9. p. " 
 
120 
 
 tative to instrumental music. In her Homily ol 
 the place and time of prayer, we have these 
 markable words : " God's vengeance hath been. 
 " and is daily provoked, because much wicked 
 " people pass nothing to resort unto the church; 
 " either for that they are so sore blinded, that 
 " they understand nothing of God or godliness, 
 " and care not with devilish malice to offend their 
 " neighbours; or else for that they seethe church 
 11 altogether scoured of such gay gazing sight-. 
 " as their gross phantasie was greatly delighted 
 " with ; because they see the fal>e religion aban- 
 " doned, and the true restored, which secmeth 
 M an unsavoury thing to their unsavoury taste, 
 " as may appear by this, ihat a woman said to 
 " her neighbour : l Alas ! gossip, what shall we 
 11 now do at church, since all the saints are taken 
 " away, since all the goodly sights we were wont 
 Xi to have, are gone; since we cannot hear the 
 11 like piping, singing, chanting, and playing 
 " upon the Organs, that we could before r But, 
 11 dearly beloved, we ought greatly to rejoice and 
 " give God thanks, that our churches are delivered 
 " out of all those things which displeased God so 
 " sore, and filthily defiled his holy house and his 
 " place of prayer." 
 
 We find also, that the thirty-two commissioners! 
 appointed by Edward VI., the mo>t eminent 
 men then in England, either for divinity or laif, 
 complained of cathedral singing, and advised the 
 laying of it aside. Their words are, kk In read- 
 M ing chapters and singing psalms, ministers and 
 •• clergymen must think of ihi> diligently; that 
 " God is not only to be praised by them, but 
 " that otlurs are to be brought to perform the 
 " same worship by their counsel and example. 
 
121 
 
 • Wherefore let them pronounce their words dis- 
 •• tinctly, and let their singing be clear and easy. 
 14 that every thing may be understood by the au- 
 ;i ditors. So that 'tis our pleasure, that the qua- 
 " vering operose music, which is called figured, 
 u should be wholly laid aside; since it often makes 
 i{ such a noise in the ears of the people, that they 
 ik cannot understand what is said."* 
 
 And it is a remarkable fact, perhaps not com- 
 monly known by the advocates for instrumental 
 music, in the public worship of God, that in the 
 English Convocation, held in the year 1562, in 
 Queen Elizabeth's time, for settling the Liturgy 
 of the Protestant Church of England, the re- 
 taining of the custom of kneeling at the sacra- 
 ment, the cross in baptism, and of Organs, car- 
 ried only by the casting vote.\ 
 
 Burns, in his ecclesiastical law, under the title, 
 1 Public Worship? says, " The rule laid down for 
 " church music in England, almost a thousand 
 14 years ago, was, that they should observe a plain 
 M and devout melody, according to the custom of 
 M the church, while the rule prescribed by Queen 
 " Elizabeth, in her injunctions, was, that there 
 ;c should be a modest and distinct song, so used 
 " in all parts of the common prayers of the church, 
 " that the same may be as plainly understood as if 
 " it were read without singing. Of the want of 
 " which grave, and serious, and intelligible way, 
 " the reformatio legum had complained before." 
 
 From these quotations, therefore, from the Fa- 
 thers, from the schoolmen, and the reformers, we 
 are entitled to say, that the history of the church 
 
 * Reform. Leg. de Div. Offic. 
 
 I Vide Dr. Henry's Hist. Stripe's Annuls, p. 363. 
 
 11 
 
affords no countenance to the introduction 01 
 strumental music into the public worship of God. 
 That it was not admitted in the first steven cen- 
 turies, ran never, as our brother affirms, !)♦' ac- 
 counted for by the poverty and the persecution 
 o( the church, nor by the calamities and convul- 
 sions of the times. For even supposing that Or- 
 gans were too expensive and cumbersome instru- 
 ments, was not the pipe, the cymbal, and the 
 harp, a cheaper and more portable substitute i 
 Could not Christians have carried these along 
 with them in their flight from city to city, and 
 hid them with themselves in holes, and dens, and 
 caves of the earth. The Jewish captives had 
 their harps at the rivers of Babel, and why might 
 not persecuted Christians have \\<*>(\ theirs, if the J 
 had thought them lawful, even in the most dis- 
 tressing scenes of the ten persecutions ? Had they 
 believed instrumental music to be " enjoined in 
 the New Testament," would it not be a foul as- 
 persion on their character, to suppose that death. 
 in its most direful form, would have deterred them 
 from the duty of employing it. Every person 
 acquainted with the history of the martyrs of tin 
 primitive church, must know well, that they n< 
 shrunk from a single article of faith or wor- 
 which they believed to be enjoined by d< 
 authority. Paul and Silas, at midnight* in the 
 prison of Philippi, sang the praises of God, re- 
 gardless of them who could only kill the body, 
 But the truth is, that the primitive Christians 
 considered instrumental mpsic neither as lawful* 
 nor expedient, nor edifying* If, therefore, at least 
 en or eight centuries did elapse, before Or- 
 gans, or by whatever name you are pleased to 
 call thet e instruments, were introduced into Chris- 
 
tian worship, and the want of them, during 
 that period, was never regretted by the church; 
 it is a most decisive proof, that the primitive 
 Christians regarded them as inconsistent with the 
 purity of evangelical praise. Your committee, 
 therefore, cannot go along with the assertion of 
 our brother, " that it was ever during periods of 
 " dawning light that Organs began to be em- 
 " ployed." They consider his assertion as ra- 
 ther problematical; nor can they well compre- 
 hend what he means by the dawn of light in the 
 eighth century. Its light, in the language of 
 the poet, may be considered as little more than 
 " darkness visible." But whether there was a 
 dawn or not, in the eighth century, and whether 
 King Pepin, who devoted that Organ, the present 
 of the Greek emperor, to the service of the Su- 
 preme Being, (notwithstanding the heroic soul 
 ascribed to him b}' our brother,) perfectly under- 
 stood the nature and spirit of the Gospel of 
 Christ, your committee cannot positively deter- 
 mine: But they are confident, that instrumental 
 music began to be introduced into the church, 
 when ignorance, superstition, and the love of ex- 
 ternal pomp, had made men more desirous of 
 having their ears delighted, than their hearts im- 
 proved, — at a time, when all authors are agreed, 
 that Antichrist was already come into the world. 
 When our brother, therefore, affirms, that Organs 
 were not at first " employed by the authority of 
 " a papal decree, but by the dictates of pious 
 " feeling, prompting the enlightened mind to 
 " consecrate the labours of genius to the devout 
 " exercise of praise;" he ought to reflect, that 
 from a desire to consecrate the labours of genius 
 in painting and statuary to the service of God, 
 
124 
 
 . admiration, then devotion, and ai laatwor* 
 ship, came to be paid to images. From allow ing 
 pious feeling to hurry the mind too far, respect- 
 ing the manner in which the Gospel should be 
 .lit, or the service of God performed, we may 
 date almost every corruption which has disfigured 
 Christianity. The conception, that we should be 
 more at leisure to serve God, if we could abstract 
 ourselves from the cares of the world, paved the 
 way for the monastic life. The conception that 
 we never could mortify the body, and the lusts 
 thereof, too much, gave rise to penance, and its 
 train of absurdities. Mistaken pious lit linn. 
 therefore, may have led men, in every age, to add 
 many extraneous circumstances to the worship 
 of God, and may still induce Protestant Re- 
 formed churches on the Continent to retain them. 
 But wise men must always despise that pomp 
 which is merely designed to amuse children or 
 the vulgar. With Protestant churches abroad, 
 we have no bond of communion. We shall ap- 
 ply to them the words commonly used in the pub- 
 lic evening prayer of our Presbyterian worship. 
 " May the Reformed churches be reformed more 
 • ; and more!" 
 
 3d. We shall now proceed to examine the third 
 argument adduced by the minister of St. An- 
 drew's church, containing his reason why instru- 
 mental music was not employed in Scotland since 
 the Reformation, and his account of thai pteju- 
 pleased to style it, which still re- 
 mains against it. lie affirms that it arose from 
 the peculiar state of the civil government of the 
 country,, which, during the whole of the sixteenth 
 and seventeenth centuries, was of such a nature 
 as to grant no Irisvrr to the people of Scotland 
 
125 
 
 to attend to sacred music : but that the tide oi 
 human affairs is now so strong 1 , the hand of God 
 guiding the progress of mind, in matters relative 
 to the improvement of psalmody, as cannot be 
 resisted. 
 
 A strict and accurate attention to the historj 
 of the Church of Scotland, will indeed authorize 
 us to conclude, that our forefathers, in matters of 
 religion, were often tyrannically used by the 
 ruling powers ; and that they had much to strug- 
 gle with, before they obtained that form of eccle- 
 siastical polity established at the Revolution, se- 
 cured at the Union, and invariably acted upon 
 since that time. But the same history will show, 
 that the reason why instrumental music was not 
 employed in public worship, in Scotland, was, 
 because both people and teachers looked upon it 
 as the offspring of Judaism, and abhorred it as 
 a relic of Popery ; and too intimately connected 
 with that prelatic form, which our forefathers ne- 
 ver could endure. If we consult the Second Book 
 of Discipline, framed in the sixteenth century, 
 and the Directory, composed in the seventeenth, 
 we will find, that our forefathers entertained the 
 most clear and distinct ideas of what they es- 
 teemed scriptural and evangelical in church go- 
 vernment, in discipline, in doctrine, and in public 
 worship. And during all their struggle, from 
 the Reformation to the Revolution, either with 
 the popish or prelatical sovereigns of the house 
 of Stewart, the} 7 never, for a single moment, lost 
 sight of these four great branches of ecclesias- 
 tical polity. They declared, in the most ener- 
 getic terms, that they were reformed by Presbyters 
 — that they were determined to copy from no 
 I but that of the Scriptures, as understood 
 11* 
 
126 
 
 by the primitive church. And from their con- 
 duct, as illustrated by the Acts of Assembly, 
 1638, and from their directions to their commis- 
 sioners to the Westminster Divines, to be found 
 in their letters published in the year 1G44, you 
 clearly perceive, that they most decidedly and 
 unequivocally condemn instrumental music to be 
 an antichristian mode of worship. Why, then, 
 does our brother endeavour to parry the argu- 
 ment, by saying, " that the aversion which the 
 " Scotch nation discover to instrumental music, 
 " in the public worship of God, proceeded from 
 hi the circumstance of their having no leisure to 
 ,; attend to it." In this vague manner of ac- 
 counting for customs and modes of church go- 
 vernment, you might affirm, that the Magna 
 Charta, the Bill of Rights, and the Revolution 
 Settlement, so much gloried in by the inhabitants 
 of these lands, were all devised and obtained by 
 mere accident. The truth is, the Scotch nation 
 has no objection to instrumental music in the com- 
 mon amusements of life. It has been allowed by 
 authors, foreign and domestic, that, as a people, 
 their genius is much more musical than that either 
 of the English, the Dutch, or the French. But 
 the people of Scotland abhor the blending of the 
 inventions of men with the worship of God. 
 They conceive instrumental music inconsistent 
 with the purity of a New Testament church. It 
 is not strictly true, that psalmody was almost an- 
 nihilated in the reformed Church of Scotland. 
 For, in direct opposition to the assertion of our 
 brother, there is the most satisfactory evidence, 
 that from the Reformation, down through the 
 
 sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, our church 
 had leisure to pay attention to sacred music; 
 
127 
 
 schools were appointed for teaching it; and even 
 the government gave their countenance by Acts 
 of Parliament, for the same laudable purpose. 
 Thus, in the 6th Parliament of James the VI., 
 1579, " Our sovereign Lord, with advice of his 
 " three estates of this present parliament, re- 
 ki quests the provosts, baillies, council and com- 
 " munities of the maist special burrows of this 
 " realm; and the patrons and provosts of the 
 ;c colleges, where schools are founded, to erect 
 ;i and set up arte Sang school, with a master suf- 
 " ficient and able for instruction of the youth 
 " in the said science of music; as they will an- 
 " swer to his Highness upon the peril of their 
 " foundations, and in performing of this his 
 u Highness's request, will do unto his Majesty 
 " acceptable and good service." Thus, it is 
 matter of history and statute, not of opinion or 
 conjecture, that both the church and the civil 
 government of Scotland were not inattentive to 
 psalmody. During the whole of that violent 
 struggle, which existed for more than a century 
 after the Reformation, betwixt Prelacy and Pres- 
 bytery, the people found abundance of leisure in 
 the year 1592, to frame the great Charter of 
 Presbytery. And betwixt the years 1638 and 
 1660, they had leisure to join in framing a Con- 
 fession of Faith and Directory, and leisure to put 
 that Directory in practice. Why then does our 
 brother affirm, " that the reason for instrumental 
 H music not being introduced into the public 
 u worship of God in Scotland, proceeded chiefly 
 " from this circumstance, that the people had not 
 " much leisure to attend to psalmody?" Knox 
 and Melville, Rutherford and Henderson, men to 
 whom we owe much, were of too active a dispo- 
 
128 
 
 sition of mind, and too anxious to settle our 
 Presbyterian polity upon a firm foundation, to 
 leave us any room for imagining that they had 
 not attended to the minutest form of public wor- 
 ship. That laboured and oratorical description 
 given us by our brother, of the character of our 
 Scottish sovereigns, from the Reformation to the 
 Revolution, may, indeed, serve to show that they 
 were a most unprincipled race, but it can never 
 serve to establish what he means to prove by it, 
 that neither the people nor the Presbyterian 
 Established Church of Scotland, had any aversion 
 to instrumental music in the public worship of 
 God; but were hindered from adopting it merely 
 by the want of leisure to attend to that object, 
 from the peculiar political situation of their coun- 
 try. Your committee beg leave to call your at- 
 tention to the following remarkable fact, as nar- 
 rated by Calderwood, in his Church History, 
 page 674. " Upon Saturday the 17th of May, 
 " 1617, the English service, singing of quiris- 
 " ters, and playing on Organs, and surplices, 
 " were first heard and seen in the Chapel Royal. 
 " On the 25th December, same year, Mr. Wil- 
 " liam Cooper, bishop of Galloway, preached as 
 " dean of the Chapel Royal, where there was 
 " playing upon Organs: So the bishops prac- 
 " tised novations, before ever they were em- 
 M braced by any General Assembly, and thcre- 
 " fore ought to have been secluded from voting 
 * ; afterwards in that matter, and condignly ccn- 
 u sured." Thus, it is matter of history, not of 
 opinion or conjecture, that the Church of Scot- 
 land was not inattentive to psalmody ; that an at- 
 tempt was even made by the king and his cour- 
 to revive the use of Organs, and that this 
 
129 
 
 was deemed an innovation so odious, that if 
 shrunk before the scrutinizing and commendable 
 zeal of our forefathers. This attempt was made 
 in the year 1617, when Prelacy was established 
 in Scotland, but notwithstanding all that royalty 
 could do, the attempt was abortive, and the prac- 
 tice never extended beyond the walls of the Cha- 
 pel Royal: So hostile was this church, even in 
 episcopal times, to Organs in divine worship. 
 The same invincible hostility appears in the year 
 1644, after Presbytery had been restored. It 
 continues to operate from the Restoration to the 
 Revolution, during the time when Prelacy had 
 again supplanted Presbytery in our native land. 
 It bursts forth with renewed vigour, from the 
 Revolution to the Union, when Presbytery was 
 once more restored and settled for ever, as the 
 ecclesiastical government of this part of the United 
 Kingdom. This invincible hostility procured the 
 Act of Parliament, styled the Act of Security, 
 and the Act of Assembly against Innovations, a.* 
 barriers to preserve the purity, the simplicity, and 
 the uniformity of our public worship. And from 
 the Union, down to the present moment, the pro- 
 ject which was formed a few years ago, of intro- 
 ducing an Organ at Aberdeen, and this late at- 
 tempt at Glasgow, arf the only indications of a 
 desire to undermine the invincible spirit of our 
 forefathers, against instrumental music in the 
 public worship of God. 
 
 Your committee most cordially go along with 
 the panegyric which our brother pronounces upon 
 our venerable reformers; but are at a loss to 
 comprehend, how this panegyric can be recon- 
 ciled to the opinion which, our brother says, he 
 lias long entertained, relative to instrumental 
 
130 
 
 music in die public worship of God. { K N - our 
 brother seriously think, that Knox, and Melville, 
 and Rutherford, and Henderson, were of his 
 mind? Knox was educated under Popery, and 
 habituated to the use of Organs from his infancy. 
 He had travelled on the Continent; be had re- 
 sided at Geneva; he had sojourned in England. 
 All these circumstances were calculated, as our 
 brother knows, to form and cherish a predilection 
 for instrumental music in the public worship of 
 God, had Knox not considered it as unlawful. 
 
 It has been said, that both Knox and Melville 
 were obliged to yield up their own judgment to 
 the fury of the times, and to overlook those out- 
 rages against the ancient worship, which in their 
 hearts they condemned. Granting, that they 
 could not control the fury of the populace in 
 its first paroxysm, for destroying the cathedral 
 service, could they not afterwards teach their 
 countrymen to discriminate the harmless Organ, 
 as our brother terms it, from the idolatrous image? 
 Could they not have persuaded their country- 
 men, if they had thought proper, to restore the 
 harmless Organ to its place in the church, as 
 easily as they persuaded them to occupy those 
 edifices which had been polluted by Popery? At 
 least, if this was impracticable, could they not 
 have regretted the perverseness of their country- 
 men, in banishing from public worship, such an 
 enchanting im of edification? Hut 8 
 
 and Melville, Rutherford and Hen 
 not one word in its behalf. The} alloi 
 perish unnoticed, as a portion of that tramp 
 which ignorai superstition had foisted into 
 
 the house of God. Your committee are neither 
 conscious of religious nor political antipathi 
 
131 
 
 ,<ied in prejudice, operating in their mind-. 
 From attending to the history of the Church of 
 Scotland, and from the studying of the genius of 
 its people, they are perfectly convinced, that the 
 fixed, determined opposition to the use of instru- 
 mental music, in the public worship of God, both 
 in the established church, and amongst the various 
 bodies of Dissenters, ariseth from legal, political, 
 moral, and scriptural grounds — not from the want 
 of leisure in our ecclesiastical patriots, to attend 
 to sacred music — not from the want of money to 
 purchase such instruments — not from the want of 
 accommodation in our churches to use them. 
 And when our brother is pleased to say, that the 
 times when the Westminster Confession of Faith 
 and the Directory were composed, were times of 
 fierce and furious war against the Church of 
 England: — he ought, in the spirit of fair and 
 candid reasoning, to have added, that they were 
 times to which Scotland is much indebted; — 
 times in which a bold, free, devout and thinking 
 people, opposed an attempt to enslave their con- 
 sciences, and entangle their affections in the laby- 
 rinth of foolish and useless rites and ceremonies, 
 which neither they nor their fathers could bear. 
 
 4th. We now proceed to scrutinize our brother's 
 fourth argument, viz. 'That the Act of Security, 
 the Act of Union, and the Act against Inno- 
 vations, had more important objects in view, with 
 which Organs have no concern — roundly as- 
 » Tting, " that, that cannot be illegal, again-! 
 ; ' which no law exists — that cannot violate, which 
 " touches not the constitution." 
 
 Your committee cannot help saying, that the 
 
 soning of our brother upon this part of the 
 
 ct, appears to them very vague and desul- 
 
ton. He at one time applauds the spirit of tl 
 
 5, and vindicates the character of our Scotch 
 patriots, who had wisdom to frame them', com 
 to demand them, and perseverance to obtain them. 
 At other times, when these acts seem too pointedly 
 and conclusively to oppose his favourite measure. 
 he starts off at a tangent from the legal argument, 
 and striveth to amuse, and even to perplex 
 with subtle and metaphysical reasoning t; about 
 •- the nature of sound — about a mode without a 
 " subject — and about the ever-varying, ansub- 
 " stantial nature of musical tones; exclaiming, 
 " that our national uniformity can never be bro- 
 " ken in upon, by introducing a certain quantity 
 " of modulated sound in the pipes of an Organ : 
 " And to attach perpetuity of form to thin 
 " from their nature incapable of uniform duration, 
 " would be a solemn mockery of our venerable 
 " legislators." And therefore, what the wisdom 
 of our church and state has anxiously guarded 
 against, in the Claim of Rights, in the Act, 1693, 
 for settling the peace and quiet of the church, 
 accompanied by the Acts of the General As- 
 sembly against Innovations, was entirely directed 
 linst the hierarchy and the Service-booh', and not 
 against instrumental music. And in no less than 
 three different places of his Statement, he has 
 been pleased t<> say, M That the respondents, (of 
 
 ►urse the Presbytery,) from pot attending 
 " the spirit and meaning of these laws, have 
 •• ;ir<_Liird strongly against Episcopacy, which 
 " our brother never wished to defend; and that 
 " the Presbyter] have pitted ;i sentence, which, 
 " in his opinion, got - far beyond the object they 
 
 •• meant to condemn. Thai cannot be ill< 
 
 " against which no law exibi<, not could exist, — 
 
133 
 
 • that cannot violate, which touches not the con- 
 M stitution, — that cannot be against the genius 
 " and constitution of our church, which habitu- 
 * k ally recommends to her people the singing of 
 " the Psalms of David:" As your committee, 
 however, conceive that the judgment of the 
 Presbytery, upon the 7th October last, was well 
 founded, that the ratio decidendi was legal and 
 constitutional, and that the prohibition of instru- 
 mental music, in the public worship of God, in 
 all the churches and chapels under its jurisdiction, 
 was a wise and salutary measure ; they shall take 
 the liberty of stating, at some length, what they 
 conceive to be the law of the land, the law and 
 the constitution of the Church of Scotland, upon 
 this subject. For your committee believe, that 
 it is this argument, chiefly, which must determine 
 the question between our brother and us. 
 
 Every opinion, founded upon the history of 
 the church in general, or taken from the practice 
 of foreign reformed churches, or from specula- 
 tive notions of public utility, or private edifi- 
 cation, must, comparatively speaking, be vague 
 and desultory; — but the argument drawn from 
 the law of the land, and the law and constitution 
 of our own church, must be clear, positive, and 
 conclusive. To this argument, your committee 
 wish particularly to direct the attention of the 
 reverend Presbytery, of Dr. Ritchie, and of the 
 world. 
 
 When James VII. had forfeited the crown, and 
 when his throne was declared vacant by the 
 Scotch Convention, agreeably to the Claim of 
 Rights, made by that Convention, the Presby- 
 terian religion was established by William and 
 Mary; and, ugreeablv to the same Claim of 
 12 
 
134 
 
 Rights, Prelacy is for ever abolished within the 
 kingdom of Scotland, and a form of worship, 
 differing from the form which, at that time, was 
 exercised by the established Church of England, 
 was to be adopted. Now, though the use of 
 instrumental music is certainly not enjoined by 
 the canons of the Church of England, and though 
 it is practised on the Continent, in churches which 
 are not Episcopal, yet it is well known, that all 
 denominations of Christians, both in England 
 and Scotland, did, at that period when the Claim 
 of Rights was framed, consider instrumental mu- 
 sic a characteristic of Prelacy, and directly op- 
 posed to the vocal music, for which the Reformed 
 Church of Scotland had uniformly contended. 
 Therefore we conclude, from the sweeping clause 
 contained in the Scotch Claim of Rights, that 
 instrumental music was abolished along with 
 Prelacy. And from attending to the history of 
 the disputes which took place in England, be- 
 tween the Puritans and the Episcopalian church : 
 we are entitled to say, that the Puritans con- 
 sidered instrumental music as intimately and es- 
 sentially incorporated with the public worship of 
 the prelatical church. This will be found to be 
 their opinion, as recorded in Strype's Annals, 
 and NeaPs History of the Puritans. 
 
 When, therefore, the Scotch patriots demanded, 
 at the Revolution, in their Claim of Rights, that 
 icy should be abolished, they had no reserve 
 in behalf of any one part of it whatever, whether 
 htial to it, or merely accidental; but fairly 
 and candidly meant, that not only Prelatical 
 Government, the Liturgy, and Service-book. 
 should be abolished, but that likewise kneeling at 
 the sacrament, the sign of the cross in baptism, 
 
135 
 
 iind instrumental music in public worship, should 
 
 share the same fate. But as some form of wor- 
 ship was to be substituted in room of the prelati- 
 cal, now abolished, the people of Scotland de- 
 manded, with great earnestness, in their Claim 
 of Rights, that the doctrines contained in the 
 Westminster Confession of Faith, (including the 
 sum and substance of the doctrines of the Re- 
 formed churches,) and that the church govern- 
 ment specified in the great Charter of Pres- 
 bytery, 1592, and a discipline, as practised in 
 the purer times of the church, — should be granted 
 unto their request; all which claims were heard 
 with attention, reduced into proper form, and 
 enacted accordingly. Now, your committee beg 
 leave to observe, that the outline of the public 
 worship of God, to be used in the Presbyterian 
 Church of Scotland, is specifically and clearly 
 stated in the 21st chapter of the Westminster 
 Confession of Faith, which, in fact, contains the 
 sum and substance of the Directory relative to 
 the reading of the Word — to prayer — to preach- 
 ing — to the celebration of the sacraments — and 
 to praise; — the five distinct heads under which 
 the Reformed Presbyterian churches arrange 
 public worship. The Confession of Faith was 
 framed in the year 1647, confirmed by Act of 
 Parliament 1649; and therefore it is certain, that 
 the framers of it had distinctly in their view the 
 Directory for public worship, approved by the 
 General Assembly in February, 1645, and con- 
 firmed by Act of Parliament in the same year. 
 
 In the 21st chapter of the Confession of Faith, 
 we have the most decided and unequivocal lan- 
 guage, relative to that part of public worship, 
 styled praise—' 1 Tt is the singing of Psalms with 
 
136 
 
 race in the heart."' But as the Wotmii: 
 ( 'onfession of Faith is not only the standard of our 
 church, but forms an Act of Parliament, now in 
 force, a part of the public statute law of the land, 
 your committee, therefore, are entitled to con- 
 clude, that our forefathers intended, by the Claim 
 of Bights, that instrumental music should be con- 
 demned and abolished, along with the other rites 
 and ceremonies of the prelatical church. And 
 that the form of worship, " the singing of Psalms 
 " with grace in the heart," as now in use, should 
 be substituted in its room. Your committee affirm, 
 that when our forefathers framed the Claim of 
 Rights, they had the most clear, distinct, and accu- 
 rate idea of a form of public worship, from which 
 instrumental music was utterly excluded. A\ r e 
 next proceed to analyze those other Acts of Par- 
 liament, relative to our Presbyterian church, 
 which flowed from, or are founded upon, the 
 Claim of Rights. 
 
 It is more than probable, that if we knew even 
 particular relative to the practice of the clergy in 
 those times, that some discrepancy of opinion, re- 
 lative to public worship, had begun to appear be- 
 twixt the year 1688 and the year 1093, — most 
 likely between the ministers which had been 
 ejected at the Restoration, and now restored to 
 their kirks ; men who may be considered as strict 
 and conscientious Presbyterians, — and some of 
 those conformists who had been educated under 
 the Episcopalian Church of Charles and James, 
 but who, by taking the oaths to King William, 
 were continued in their ctiret, and who had a 
 hankering after the rites and ceremonies of the 
 prelatical worship which was practised in Eng- 
 land. — Thus, in an act passed, 109 J, entitled, 
 
137 
 
 An act for settling the peace and quiet of the 
 church, " Their majesties, with the advice and 
 11 consent aforesaid, statute and ordain, that uni- 
 • ; formity of worship, and that the administration 
 " of all public ordinances within this church, be 
 " observed by all the said ministers and preach- 
 " ers, as the same are at present allowed and 
 ;i performed therein, or shall hereafter be decla- 
 " red by the authority of the same; and no man 
 u shall be admitted, unless he subscribe to ob- 
 11 serve, and do actually observe the foresaid uni- 
 " formity." But where is that form of worship 
 specified, but in the Directory, as engrossed in the 
 21st chapter of the Confession of Faith, which is 
 the "singing of Psalms with grace in the heart?' 5 
 But if there should remain the least dubiety, con- 
 cerning what idea is to be attached to the ex- 
 pression, "singing of Psalms with grace in the 
 " heart," the last chapter of the Directory com- 
 pletely explains it. " In singing of Psalms," 
 says the Directory, " the voice is to be tuneably 
 " and gravely ordered, and that the whole con- 
 :i gregation may join herein, every one that can 
 " read, is to have a Psalm Book ; but for the 
 ki present, where many in the congregation can- 
 " not read, it is convenient that the minister, or 
 " some other fit person, appointed by him and 
 " the other ruling officers, do read the Psalm, 
 " line by line, before the singing thereof." Your 
 committee, therefore, with the most perfect confi- 
 dence affirm, that the uniformity in public wor- 
 ship, enjoined by the Acts 1693, among other 
 tilings, signifies the singing of Psalms with the 
 voice alone. 
 
 Had the kingdom of Scotland remained an in- 
 dependent kingdom, possessing a separate par- 
 12* 
 
138 
 
 liament, as it possessed distinct laws, and a sepa- 
 rate ecclesiastical establishment, it is -probable, 
 that the Scotch nation would have been com- 
 pletely satisfied with the regulations and act- 
 already quoted, in favour of its worship, doctrine, 
 discipline, and government; seeing that there 
 was but little danger now, of its form of worship 
 being corrupted, or altered by its own inhabi- 
 tants. But, as there was a plan in agitation, 
 for a union of the two kingdoms under one par- 
 liament, the people of Scotland foresaw, that, if 
 this union took place, there would be greater in- 
 tercourse, than formerly, betwixt the two nations. 
 Besides, from the circumstance of our legislators 
 being called upon to reside occasionally in a 
 country where the prelatical form of worship 
 was established, and from the obligation of obey- 
 ing the Test Act, before they could enjoy the 
 public offices of the state, there might be some 
 risk that our Presbyterian mode of worship would, 
 by degress, and imperceptibly, come not only to 
 be corrupted, but altered. The nation, therefore, 
 became exceedingly jealous, lest the Union, so 
 much desired by government, should prove preju- 
 dicial to the form and purity of our Presbyterian 
 worship. Accordingly, in Queen Anne's first 
 parliament, it is enacted, " that it shall be high 
 " treason, in any of the subjects of this kingdom, 
 " to quarrel, impugn, or endeavour by fflritiag, 
 " or advised speaking, or other open act or deed, 
 " to alter or innovate the Claim of Rights, or 
 " an\ article thereof." Most likely, this act was 
 passed, in order to crush the rash hopes which 
 the Nonjurant Church of Scotland was indulging, 
 that the Union would gradually introduce pre- 
 latical worship. When, therefore, in 1705, the 
 
139 
 
 Parliament of Scotland took into their conside- 
 ration, with what earnestness the Queen's Ma- 
 jesty had recommended a Union betwixt her two 
 independent kingdoms, and that commissioners 
 were now appointed for the purpose of treating; 
 they expressly enjoin, " that the Scotch Com- 
 " missioners shall not treat of, or concerning any 
 11 alteration of, the worship of the church of this 
 i; kingdom, as now by law established" This 
 clause, therefore, most certainly had in view the 
 form of worship expressed in the Director} 7 , en- 
 grossed in the 21st chapter of the Confession of 
 Faith, founded upon the Claim of Rights, and 
 ordered to be uniformly observed in all the es- 
 tablished churches of the land, and approved b} r 
 the act, 1693, and ratified by the act of Assembly, 
 1705. Accordingly, in the next session of parlia- 
 ment, 1706, in pursuance of these principles and 
 views of our forefathers, the celebrated Act of 
 Security was passed, containing these words, 
 " That the form and purity of worship, presently 
 " it* use within this church, shall remain and con- 
 " tinue unalterable" And in order to avoid all 
 ambiguity, the expressions in the act are varied, 
 that the one may be a clear and distinct com- 
 ment upon the other. 
 
 In the first clause of the act, the words are, as 
 presently professed within this kingdom; and then 
 it adds, " as now by law established;" then it 
 adds, " as presently in use in this church;" and in 
 the clause which ordains the same to be observed 
 by all regents and masters, in every university, 
 the words are, they " shall practise and conform 
 " themselves to the worship presently in use in thi^s 
 " church" And it is farther enacted, that the 
 sovereigns, on their accession to the crown, shall 
 
140 
 
 swear and subscribe to maintain, and prea 
 inviolably, the worship, discipline, rights and 
 privileges of this church, as above established by 
 the law of this kingdom, in prosecution of the 
 Claim of Rights; and it is likewise statnted and 
 ordained, " that this act of parliament shall be 
 11 held as an essential condition of any union to 
 11 be concluded betwixt the two kingdoms, ivitk- 
 " out any alteration thereof, or any derogation 
 " thereto, in any sort, for ever;" all of which 
 clauses were engrossed in that act, styled the 
 Treaty of Union, and now considered as the 
 public law of the land, for a century past. 
 
 Now, when you analyze the counterpart of this 
 act, as passed by the English parliament, for the 
 security of their church, before they allowed their 
 commissioners to treat of any union; when yon 
 observe the jealousy expressed by their parlia- 
 ment for the preservation of their form of wor- 
 ship, and the accurate manner in which they de- 
 scribe that form, you cannot hesitate a moment 
 in concluding, that tlie Scotch patriots, at leas^ 
 equally enlightened, and equally zealous with 
 their English neighbours, had a clear, accurate, 
 and precise idea of what was meant by the form 
 and purity of public worship then in use in 
 Scotland. 
 
 The English, attached to the worship, disci- 
 pline, and government of the ecclesiastical es- 
 tablishment of their own country, enact, that their 
 commissioners, " shall not so much as treat of 
 " concerning any alteration of the Liturgy, Rites, 
 " and Ceremonies of the Prelatical Church, 
 " by law confirmed;" quoting the 13th of Queen 
 Elizabeth, and the 13th of King Charles II., 
 which acts the king is sworn to observe at hi> 
 
Ill 
 
 coronation. Too many people, by not attending 
 exactly to the state of the religious establishments 
 in the two different countries, at the time of the 
 Union — two independent kingdoms, under one 
 sovereign, each jealous of the other; the south- 
 ern part of the island remembering with disgust 
 what they had seen practised under the govern- 
 ment of Cromwell; and the northern, recollecting 
 with horror, what they had suffered under the 
 episcopal administration of Charles II. — have 
 formed partial and erroneous views concerning 
 the spirit of the Acts of Security of the two dif- 
 ferent countries, at the time of the Union. While 
 each nation was exceedingly jealous that no 
 alteration should take place in their own form of 
 worship, it was not necessary that they should step 
 beyond their proper ground, and, verbatim ei lite- 
 ratim, condemn the practice of their neighbours, 
 who were now to be connected by an incorpo- 
 rating union, under one parliament. While the 
 English nation expressly enact, that no alteration 
 should take place in their Liturgy, rites and cere- 
 monies, as by law established, they would con- 
 sider it as both injudicious and indelicate, to con- 
 demn our Directory, our Presbyterian worship, 
 and our Confession of Faith, in open and avowed 
 expressions. Still, however, if in the present day 
 any English bishop should, of his own accord, 
 attempt to introduce the Presbyterian form of 
 worship into the established Church of England, 
 your committee have no hesitation in saying, that 
 it would be contrary to the express law of the 
 land. By parity of reasoning, though instru- 
 mental music, in the worship of God, is not, 
 totidem verbis, condemned or forbidden in our 
 Act of Security, out of regard to the feelings of 
 
142 
 
 ihe Church of England, still, as in thai act, the 
 
 form and purity of worship then in use in Scotland, 
 is to remain unalterable; will any man, there- 
 fore, pretend to say, that if instrumental music 
 shall be attempted to be introduced into our pub- 
 lic worship, that it is not contrary to the law of 
 this part of the United Kingdom? That very 
 form of worship, then in practice, was to continue 
 in all time coming. Now, it is known to the whole 
 world, that betwixt the Revolution and the Union 
 of the two kingdoms, the singing of the praises 
 of God, in public worship, with the voice alone, 
 was the use and practice of the established 
 Church of Scotland. 
 
 Your committee has been at the more pains to 
 illustrate the Scotch Act of Security, as they ap- 
 prehend that both their brother and the congre- 
 gation of St. Andrew's, have allowed their judg- 
 ments to be misled in this question, by a mere 
 quibble; conceiving, because they did not read in 
 the act that instrumental music was forbidden, to- 
 tidem verbis, therefore, that there is no law against 
 it; but your committee maintain, that they have 
 not interpreted the Act of Security more strictly, 
 than its history, spirit, and enactments will jus- 
 tify, agreeably to the authorised interpretation of 
 any public act relative to privilege. When a po- 
 sitive defined practice is commanded to be ob- 
 
 < (1 by any class of men, any other pra* I 
 altering the former, is most certainly prohibited 
 by the spirit of tlr.it act, though not expre 
 in words: and therefore, if the form of wor- 
 ship in use and practice at the Union was to 
 continue unalterable in all time coming, instru- 
 mental music is most clearly, and to all intents 
 md purposes, forbidden and condemned. Vnd 
 
143 
 
 the civil magistrate hath authority to take order, 
 that unity and peace be preserved in our church, 
 and that all innovations in public worship be 
 prevented or reformed. Such, your committee 
 hold to be the law of the land, and what they 
 are confident in affirming, that neither the Impe- 
 rial Parliament of Great Britain, nor the Ge- 
 neral Assembly of the Church of Scotland, can 
 alter, without infringing the civil and political 
 constitution of this part of the United Kingdom, 
 as understood and ratified by the Treaty of 
 Union. Surety, then, our brother hath not at- 
 tended carefully to the spirit and meaning of 
 those acts of parliament now quoted, when he so 
 roundly asserts, " that cannot be illegal, against 
 M which no law exists — that cannot violate, which 
 " toucheth not the constitution." 
 
 Let us now examine the ecclesiastical constitu- 
 tion of this part of the United Kingdom, as spe- 
 cified and confirmed by the acts of her General 
 Assemblies, and your committee flatter them- 
 selves, that they will be able to show 7 , that instru- 
 mental music in the public worship of God, is 
 contrary to the spirit and principles of our Pres- 
 byterian church, and that the very bold and ex- 
 traordinary assertions of our brother, contained 
 in his statement, are erroneous and improper. 
 His words arc, " that cannot be against the spirit 
 * ; and genius of our church, which she habitually 
 %i recommends to the people, by her appointment 
 
 * ; of the singing of David's Psalms. Before 
 
 • : declaring her prohibition of Organs, it is in- 
 M cumbent on the church to expunge from the 
 " sacred records, those passages which seem 
 " clearly to recommend the use of instruments in 
 M worship, that thus the worshippers may be de- 
 
144 
 
 u iivered from the inconsistency of promh 
 11 and exhorting eacli other to do, what in their 
 
 " hearts they resolve not, and are forbidden by 
 " the church to perforin." 
 
 In treating this part of the subject, your com- 
 mittee wish it to be understood, that every esta- 
 blished church is entitled to arrange, m the form 
 of a creed, a confession of faith, or a catechism, 
 her explanation of the doctrines contained and 
 set forth in the sacred Scriptures. Thi< w a> done 
 in the earliest times of the church of Christ, and 
 has, with great propriety, been imitated by the 
 Church of Scotland. Every church has likewise 
 a right to settle her form of public worship, and 
 to commit it to writing. By some authors, this 
 writing has been styled a Mitsai; by others, a 
 Liturgy; and by the Scotch, a Directory. These 
 creeds, and confessions, and catechisms, and di- 
 rectories, if once recognized, established, and 
 put under the protection of the state, that church, 
 so protected, has it not in its power to alter or in- 
 fringe the fundamental principles contained in 
 these writings, if they mean to live under, and 
 claim the protection of civil authority. 
 
 1st. It is true, that we in Scotland acknowledge 
 no temporal head in matters of religion. We 
 deny the supremacy of the king over our Pres- 
 byterian church. The executive, judicial, and 
 legislative powers, in matters purelj ecclesiastical, 
 are vested in our church, foUowing the gradation 
 
 t>f her various courts; but still she must 1« - 
 
 late, judge, and execute, agreeably to her Con- 
 fession of Faith, her Directory, ami Presbyterian 
 government These are fundamental principles, 
 
 icknowledged and protected b} the state, which 
 every minister and elder is sworn to obey: and 
 
146 
 
 which the civil magistrate is bound to see ob- 
 served, in the most fall and literal sense. 
 
 2d. Nay, so well understood is this principle in 
 the law of Scotland, that " the magistrate has 
 11 authority to take order, that unity and peace 
 " be preserved in the church — that all corruptions 
 u or abuses in worship be prevented or reformed, 
 M and the ordinances of God duly settled, admi- 
 11 nistered, and observed. It is the duty of the 
 " people to honour their persons, to obey their 
 %t lawful commands, and to be subject to their 
 %t authority; and as it is the proper duty of ma- 
 *' gistrates to execute the laws, it is their right 
 " and duty to execute these laws which secure 
 " the uniformity of our national public worship, 
 " as it was practised in the year 1707." And 
 this they may do, by inflicting civil penalties; 
 and if they shall omit any part of this sacred 
 duty, they must answer for it to God and their 
 country. 
 
 When, therefore, we take into our considera- 
 tion the Directory for Public Worship, and the 
 10th Act of Assembly, 1705, receiving that Di- 
 rectory; the 21st chapter of the Confession of 
 Faith, and the Act against Innovations, passed 
 21st April, 1707 ; in connexion with the practice 
 of the Church of Scotland, for at least a hundred 
 and twenty years, following out what it believed 
 to be the constitution of our Presbyterian esta- 
 blishment, — your committee aflirm, that instru- 
 mental music, in the public worship of God, is 
 contrary to the principles and spirit of the Church 
 of Scotland. 
 
 The Act of Assembly, 1707, against Inno- 
 vations, which your committee are afraid their 
 brother, in his Statement, has some how or other 
 13 
 
146 
 
 overlooked, begins by observing, " That the m- 
 " troduction of innovations in tlie worship of 
 " God, has been of fatal and dangerous eoase- 
 kt quences." It then goes on to state, " that the 
 M purity of public worship hath been expressly 
 " provided, by diverse acts of parliament;" and 
 after intimating, " that innovations either have 
 " taken, or are about to take place," therefore, 
 u the General Assembly, being moved with zeal for 
 ki the glory of God, and the purity and uniformity 
 M of his worship, doth hereby discharge the prac- 
 " tice of all such innovations, and order minis- 
 u ters to represent to their people the evil thereof, 
 " and instruct the commissioners to use all pro- 
 11 per means of applying to government, or other* 
 " wise, for suppressing or removing all such in- 
 k ' novations." 
 
 In conformity to this act of Assembly, the 
 Church of Scotland, ever since the year 1711, 
 have peremptorily ordained the following ques- 
 tions, among others, to be put in the most solemn 
 manner, to every minister at his ordination; and 
 his answers to these questions are known by the 
 name of his ordination vows. 
 
 1st. " Will you practise and maintain the purity 
 " of worship, as presently practised in this na- 
 " tional church, and asserted in the Act against 
 ;; Innovations?" 
 
 2dly. " Do you promise to submit your 
 k - quietly and meekly to the admonition of the 
 " brethren of this Presbytery, that you will fol- 
 " low no divisive courses from the established 
 " worship and doctrine of this church?" 
 
 And in the Formula, which every minister sub- 
 scribes at his ordination, he sincerely owns the 
 purity of the worship presently authorized and 
 
147 
 
 practised in this church, and that he will constantly 
 adhere to the same; and that he will neither directly 
 nor indirectly endeavour the prejudice and subver- 
 thereof. 
 
 If such, therefore, be the ecclesiastical statutes 
 of our church — if our acts of Assembly and For- 
 mula be not mere waste paper — and if language 
 has any meaning, we solemnly and positively 
 affirm, that the introduction of instrumental mu- 
 sic, into the public worship of God, within the 
 kingdom of Scotland, is contrary to the law and 
 constitution of our established national church. 
 
 We cannot help taking notice of a circumstance, 
 which tends to corroborate what we understand 
 by the principles and constitution of the Church 
 of Scotland. The numerous bodies of seceders, 
 under the various names of Covenanters, Asso- 
 ciate and Relief Synods, which have left our esta- 
 blishment, and declined its authority, were surely 
 at full liberty to indulge the humour and wish of 
 their respective congregations ; yet in no one in- 
 stance, has that wish or humour led them to in- 
 troduce instrumental music into the public wor- 
 ship of God. Why? Because they conceive it 
 is contrary to the principles of Presbytery. They 
 have uniformly adhered to that mode of religious 
 worship, enjoined by the Directory, — the singing 
 of the praises of God by the human voice alone. 
 This attachment to simple worship is so strong, 
 and so universal, and the habits connected with 
 it so predominant, that we may consider it as the 
 common consuetudinary law of the country. 
 
 5 th. Let us now proceed to analyze our bro- 
 ther's fifth and last argument. — He affirms, that 
 the Organ " was introduced into St. Andrew's 
 ••church upon pure Presbyterian principles, and 
 
148 
 
 " that no law exists, or can 
 
 " of it as took place upon the 23d of August last: 
 11 and that after the most serious attention to the 
 " subject, he cannot discover tlie most distant ap- 
 11 proach to any violation, either of the purity or 
 11 uniformity of our public worship." 
 
 His mode of reasoning upon this part of the 
 subject, your committee cannot help considering 
 not only as metaphysical, but also tinctured with 
 something not unlike sophistry. The} shall ana- 
 lyze his argument, syllogism by syllogism. I J i* 
 says, " it could not be an innovation upon the 
 " object of worship, for we worship the one God; 
 11 — or on the subject of praise, for we all sing 
 " the same Psalms; — or upon the posture of the 
 " worshippers, for we all sit, as becomes true 
 " Presbyterians; — or upon the tunes, for we sing 
 11 only such as are in general use; — or upon the 
 11 office of the precentor, for he still holds his 
 " rank, and employs the commanding tones of 
 " the Oreran for guiding the voices of the peo- 
 " pie." 
 
 We may allow it to be perfectly true, that, upon 
 the 23d of August last, the minister of St. An- 
 drew's, and his congregation, worshipped the one 
 God, that they sang the same Psalms as usual, 
 that they sat as became Presbyterians, when the\ 
 praised the Lord, and that the precentor held bis 
 place in the desk, &c; — yet, after all, by intro- 
 ducing an Organ, as an appendage, they mani- 
 festly made an innovation on the form and purity 
 of our public worship, in direct opposition to pure 
 Presbj terian principle 
 
 Such conduct was not igreeable to pure Pres- 
 byterian principles, because, in the first place, it 
 an innovation on the ordinary external form 
 
149 
 
 of worship. For, by blending instrumental mu- 
 sic with the human voice, that the congregation 
 might better express the emotions of their heart, 
 the simple melody of our forefathers becomes im- 
 mediately changed into a medley, composed of 
 animate and inanimate objects. Of course, the 
 very external form of praise in use at the Revo- 
 lution, is no longer continued unalterable in our 
 Presbyterian church. 
 
 2d. It is an innovation upon what our laws of 
 church and state denominate the purity of wor- 
 ship. Man being a reasonable creature, and a 
 reasonable service being demanded from him by 
 God, that reasonable service cannot so properly 
 be performed by man, as when he useth his voice 
 alone. This is the vehicle which God hath given 
 him, to convey to his Maker the emotions of his 
 soul. Musical instruments may, indeed, tickle the 
 ear, and please the fancy of fallen man. But is 
 God to be likened to fallen man? Are we taught 
 by the letter or spirit of the Gospel, that inani- 
 mate instruments are capable of conveying to the 
 Father of spirits, the emotions of a pious and 
 virtuous mind, animated with religious joy, filled 
 with religious gratitude, and awed with religious 
 veneration, pouring forth the varied and enrap- 
 tured impulses of an enlightened, converted, and 
 sanctified soul. Organs are the mere inventions 
 of men, played often by hirelings, who, while 
 they modulate certain musical sounds, may pos- 
 sess a heart cold and hard as the nether-millstone. 
 You may, if you please, style such music the will- 
 worship of the Organist, but you surely cannot, 
 in common sense, denominate it the praise of de- 
 vout worshippers, assembled in the congregation 
 of saints : to praise their God and Redeemer, in 
 
150 
 
 psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singi 
 with grace, and making melody to the Lord in 
 the heart. 
 
 " It is but too common for persons to deceive 
 M themselves, by imagining, that when they are 
 ~ greatly moved, and almost transported by the 
 a delightful airs of music, that they are then, and 
 " for that reason, in a temper of mind most 
 " pleasing to God, because pleasing to them- 
 " selves; — a vain imagination indeed, and a most 
 " unhappy delusion; for men of no piety, and 
 " destitute of a serious spirit, can relish all that 
 11 sort of pleasure, and perhaps even with more 
 " satisfaction, than persons of a more virtuous 
 " character. They can say unto God, ' Depart 
 u from us, for we desire not the knowledge of thy 
 ci ways. What is the Almighty that we should 
 11 serve him ? and what profit shall we have, if 
 " we pray unto him?* — yet can take the timbrel 
 " and the harp, and rejoice at the sound of the 
 « Organ." 
 
 When, therefore, dur brother asks, (in what 
 your committee conceives a sneering manner*) 
 " Does our national uniformity consist in nothing 
 w more substantial than in a certain fixed quan- 
 " tity of sound, beyond which no congregation 
 " has authority to pass? — What is the subject to 
 " which this uniformity relates?" Is not this a 
 species of sophistry, which we should not have 
 expected from the known good sense of the minis- 
 ter of St. Andrew's. But we shall not answer 
 such trifling, by opposing sophistry to sophistry. 
 Your committee shall answer it, by this bold, but 
 plain and honest assertion, that the uniformity of 
 
 " Job xxi. 14, lo. 
 
151 
 
 our national worship consisted! in the following 
 things: — 1st. In the minister reading the Scrip- 
 tures, and lecturing upon these Scriptures. — 2d. 
 In preaching to his congregation from a text of 
 Scripture. — 3d. In prayer to God, not confined 
 to the cold and lifeless phrases of any fixed form, 
 merely of human invention. — 4th. In the cele- 
 bration of the sacraments of Baptism and the 
 Lord's Supper, agreeably to the words and com- 
 mandment of Christ himself. — And, lastly, In the 
 whole congregation singing the praises of God, 
 with the voice gravely and tuneably ordered, as 
 expressed in the Directory. — These things com- 
 pose the uniformity of our public national wor- 
 ship : — not a certain fixed quantity of modulated 
 sound. 
 
 When, therefore, our brother indulges in such 
 metaphysical reasoning as the following: " What 
 " is the subject to which this uniformity relates? 
 
 " That there can be no mode, without a 
 
 " subject to which it adheres; and, shall our na- 
 " tional uniformity be said merely to relate to 
 " things unsubstantial, ever varying, ever vanish- 
 " ing, even while the ear is labouring to hear, 
 " and the mind to catch them? And, to attach 
 " perpetuity of form to things, incapable from 
 " their nature of uniform duration, would be a 
 " solemn mockery of our venerable legislators:" 
 — your committee are almost tempted to say, that 
 this mode of reasoning is no better than solemn 
 trifling, though assuming the garb of philosophi- 
 cal acumen. For your committee affirm, that 
 there is a precise, marked, and fundamental dis- 
 tinction, both in point of form and substance, be- 
 tween the praises of God sung by the voice, — 
 the mean bestowed on rational man, by his Crea- 
 
152 
 
 tor, for expressing the religious sentiments of his 
 heart, — and a tune of modulated sound, extruded 
 
 from a musical instrument. Mankind mu&t he 
 dull indeed, who cannot perceive that there is a 
 fixed and eternal difference betwixt these two 
 things, which no metaphysical reasoning can ever 
 confound or amalgamate. 
 
 With respect to that part of his argument, where 
 our brother affirms, that he is countenanced in his 
 opinion, by the custom of admitting bands of 
 singers into some of the Presbyterian churches of 
 Scotland, your committee conceive that it can 
 avail him but little. There is no innovation here 
 whatever upon the external form of worship, for 
 still the praises of God are sung with the human 
 voice alone. And if ever it should happen, thai 
 this custom shall induce any congregation to ne- 
 glect their duty, in joining devoutly in the praises 
 of God, then we say, that this custom ought in- 
 stantly to be abandoned. We do not deny, but 
 that bands of singers, directing the public praise 
 of God, have been abused : and we certainly gi\ e 
 it as our opinion, that if ever, at any time, they 
 shall encourage our enlightened congregations to 
 neglect the singing of psalms, and hymns, and 
 spiritual songs, and to sit mute, and listen to the 
 harmonic warblings of a band, then they oil 
 to be dismissed at once, as not only unpresbv- 
 terian, but highly pernicious. But the person 
 must be very much inclined to yield his judgment 
 to sophistry, who does not perceive ;» \;i>t differ- 
 ence betwixt a band of singers, singing the praise* 
 of God witli the voice, and completely blended 
 with the praises of the congregation at large, and 
 an Organ tickling the tar of the audience. 
 
 In the attempt of our brother to prove that 
 
153 
 
 introduced the Organ into St. Andrew's church, 
 upon pure Presbyterian principles, he desires us 
 to attend to the conduct of what he styles the pure 
 Presbyterian Calvinistic churches upon the Conti- 
 nent , which employ that instrument in the public 
 worship of God. Most likely he borrows his ex- 
 amples from what may have taken place in Hol- 
 land or Geneva. We have no bond of union 
 with either of these churches. They are establish- 
 ments totally independent of us, and are entitled 
 to chalk out a plan for themselves. On the other 
 hand, their practice can have no authority what- 
 ever with us; and indeed, from what we know 7 of 
 the opinions entertained by some of these church- 
 es, we should be very unwilling to consider them 
 as a proper model to copy from, either in doctrine 
 or in worship. But be this as it may, having a 
 right to form standards for ourselves, your com- 
 mittee therefore wish that our brother had con- 
 fined his views, in this question, to the principles 
 of the pure Presbyterian Church of Scotland, 
 which we conceive to have been animated by the 
 purest principles of any church upon earth. " In 
 " our church the generous spirit of liberty breathes 
 • ; with universal vigour, and the noble soul of the 
 " Reformation animates every part of our estab- 
 " lishment, so that no distinction was made by 
 " our forefathers of days and ceremonies which 
 ;i were alike destitute of Scripture support. Our 
 " church believes it to be the great design of the 
 " Gospel to raise the Christian worshipper above 
 u the airy grandeur of sense ; and instead of a 
 " laborious service, to introduce a worship wor- 
 11 thy of the Father of spirits." 
 
 Our brother is pleased to say, " That he is dis- 
 " posed to presume, that the Presbytery never 
 
( 5 1 
 
 Chi to have inquired what was done on ilic 
 " 23d of August in St. Andrew's church. They 
 
 " conjure up to themselves some horrid prostitu- 
 u tion of sacred things, and then fight against it, 
 " Bspro orii ctfocis, wielding their arm- against 
 " a shadow." 
 
 Your committee know perfectly well what was 
 done on that day in St. Andrew's church. They 
 know that an Or^an accompanied the public wor- 
 ship of God. They know that musical instru- 
 ments are the invention of men. They know, that 
 though neither authorized by the New Testament, 
 nor by the law of the land, nor countenanced by 
 the Presbytery, his ecclesiastical superiors, nor 
 approved of by the civil magistrates of the city — 
 that the attempt was made to introduce a musical 
 instrument into the public worship of God, which, 
 since the Reformation, hath in this land been 
 considered as illegal and unconstitutional. Your 
 committee, therefore, know perfectly well what 
 was done, and their opposition to the measure hath 
 arisen from the most complete conviction, that 
 they were only doing their duty, when they nipped 
 such innovations in the bud. Why then, does our 
 brother affirm, that the attempt was made accor- 
 ding to the pure principles of Presbytery? Was 
 not the Presbytery of Glasgow the radical court 
 by which such an attempt could be sanctioned? 
 But your committee affirm, that this ecclesiastical 
 court was never consulted on the business. In- 
 deed, from the narrative giv$n by our brother, 
 this appears; for he says, kk that it was resolved 
 M by the minister, and a few heads of families, 
 u to have a metering once in the week, for im- 
 u proving themselves in sacred music. Finding 
 im that this proposal was relished by a number of 
 
155 
 
 ^ the hearers, and that they gave regular attend- 
 " ance, it was next proposed by some of the at- 
 u tendants to introduce a Chamber Organ, as a 
 ct help to the precentor for guiding the voices of 
 * ; the singers. The Organ was introduced, and 
 k< was employed regularly one day in the week. 
 11 When we were thus meeting together, as mem- 
 " bers of one family, it was suggested that our 
 11 edification might be promoted by concluding 
 i; our meetings with family worship. This was 
 fct done, and in praise we employed the Organ; 
 " the people present were highly gratified, and 
 " became loud and urgent in their requests for 
 a; the use of that instrument in public worship." 
 All this is gravel}* related by our brother, as a 
 specimen, we presume, of the pure principles of 
 Presbytery. Now, even from his own statement, 
 your committee are bold to maintain, that there 
 never was procedure held by an Independent con- 
 gregational society, more subversive of, or in- 
 compatible with, the pure principles of Pres- 
 bytery. 
 
 It can hardly be spoken without exciting a 
 sardonic smile: " A few heads of families first 
 march in procession before us — then comes a 
 number of hearers — these are followed by a 
 Chamber Organ and precentor — all these compa- 
 nies are constituted a family, who join in family 
 worship within the church — employ an Organ in 
 praise — are highly gratified, — and become cla- 
 morous for similar gratification, when, by meet- 
 ing on the Sabbath day, this family shall resolve 
 itself into a congregation" Is there the most dis- 
 tant reference here, to the kirk-session or Pres- 
 bytery, or any constituted authority in the Church 
 of Scotland: Nor were even the magistrates con- 
 
156 
 
 suited in this stage of the business, which com- 
 menced about the beginning of June last, though 
 occasional hearers in St. Andrew's church. 
 
 Perhaps our brother thought this would have 
 been downright Erastianism, and inconsistent with 
 the pure principles of Presbytery. For lie again 
 gravely tells us, that " he conceives it to be his 
 " right and privilege to direct all that concerns 
 " public worship, in the parish of which he i< 
 " minister, independently of the civil power." In 
 this assertion, your committee conceive that our 
 brother is mistaken. No parish minister has any 
 rights but what he derives from his Presbytery; 
 and these cannot be legislative and judicial, they 
 are purely ministerial. He is enabled to perform 
 ministerial duties — to preside in public worship 
 and sessional business, according to the rules 
 of the church; but he has no power to depart 
 from these rules, or to direct in any of these ca- 
 pacities. And when our brother talks so confi- 
 dently of his title to direct all that concerns pub- 
 lic worship, independently of the civil power, it 
 would not have been amiss, that he had carefully 
 perused and studied the language and spirit of 
 the 23d chapter of the Confession of Faith.* He 
 
 * A ridiculous quibble has born resorted to, in order to blunt 
 the argument drawn from the 28d chapter of the Confession of 
 Faith. It lias been averred, that by the «i\il magistrate, in 
 this chapter, can only be meant the kin the power 
 
 of waging war and catting lynods is ascribed unto him. [i it 
 isarj to repel Mich a quibble bj reasoning? Who does not 
 
 know, that all the executive power of the British einpi 
 Understood tO dwell in the king, and to emanate from him' 
 
 not a common summons ran in his Maj< 
 
 well as a declaration ot \\ at ' Doei OOl hifl MsjettJ annu- 
 ally deb irate whatever power he has to call synod-, as well 
 as to be present at them, to his commissioner in the G 
 
 ral Assembly? Hm it not been understood, by the most urn 
 
157 
 
 tfould have found, that the law of Scotland has 
 declared, That it belongs to the office of a magis- 
 trate to maintain piety, justice, and peace, ac- 
 cording to the wholesome laws of this common- 
 wealth. He hath authority, and it is his duty, 
 to take order, " that unity and peace be pre- 
 " served in the church, that all corruptions and 
 " abuses in worship be prevented or reformed, 
 " and the ordinances of God duly settled, ad- 
 " ministered, and observed. It is the duty of the 
 " people to honour their persons, to obey their 
 " lawful commands, and to be subject to their 
 " authority, from which ecclesiastical persons are 
 11 not exempted." And as it is the proper duty 
 of magistrates to execute the laws, — they are 
 bound, and it is their right and duty to execute 
 those laws which secure the uniformity of our 
 national public worship, as practised in the year 
 1707. — This they may do by inflicting civil 
 penalties, and if they omit any part of their sa- 
 cred duty, they must answer for it to God, and 
 to their country. Your committee, therefore, 
 have no hesitation in saying, that the magistrates 
 of this city might have legally and constitution- 
 ally ordered their servants to have taken pos- 
 session of that Organ which was used upon the 
 23d of August last, in public worship, in St. An- 
 drew's church, without the authority of the Pres- 
 bytery, until a satisfactory pledge was given, that 
 
 nent divines of our national church, from the Revolution down- 
 wards, that the Judge Ordinary of the bounds, or principal 
 magistrate of a city, hath an inherent right, as invested with 
 constitutional authority, " to take order that unity and peace 
 " be preserved in the church, that the truth of God be kept 
 " pure and entire, that all blasphemies and heresies be sup- 
 " pressed, and all corruptions and abuses in worship be pre- 
 " vented or reformed." 
 
 14 
 
J 53 
 
 it should never be employed again in a similar 
 manner. 
 
 ]>ut as our brother, in his Statement, seems to 
 lay ^o much stress upon the averment, that the 
 Organ was introduced into St. Andrew's church 
 upon pure Presbyterian principles, your com- 
 mittee deem it proper to give a short abstract of 
 what was the real progress of this business. — 
 About two years ago, application was made to 
 the Lord Provost, magistrates, and council, of 
 the city of Glasgow, then in office, " that they 
 " would allow certain alterations in certain seats 
 " in St. Andrew's church, that there might be 
 " room for setting up an Organ; the petitioners, 
 " at the same time, binding themselves to defray 
 i; the expense, and to make good all damn. 
 u which might be supposed to ensue, but which 
 i; they apprehended could not arise from its intro- 
 M duction." 
 
 When we examine the letter accompanying the 
 petition, and the petition itself, containing tin- 
 extraordinary request, we cannot help thinking 
 that our brother has been disposed to treat our 
 Presbyterian patriotic forefathers, in rather too 
 cavalier a manner. He speaks of them as men 
 misled by passion, and as an ignorant bigoted 
 people, labouring under prejudice; language, to 
 no more of it, requiring stronger arguments 
 in its support, than our brother lias yei been able 
 to advance. Before the Lord Provost, magis- 
 trates, and city council, returned an answer 
 to this extraordinary request, they asked, and 
 received the opinion of their logal assessor, who, 
 in a very manly and candid paper, now upon 
 
 die Presbyter) record, gave il as his judgment, 
 
 " that the introduction of Organs in our churches, 
 
159 
 
 " would be a material alteration and innovation 
 • ; in our external mode of worship, and recom- 
 u mended to the minister of St. Andrew's, and his 
 - ; congregation, before proceeding farther, to ap- 
 • ; ply for the permission and sanction of the ec- 
 " clesiastical branch of our constitution. " 
 
 Your committee would have thought, that the 
 refusal of the magistrates to grant the request of 
 removing the seats, founded upon the opinion of 
 their legal assessor, a gentleman so well known 
 for his candour and constitutional knowledge of 
 the laws of his country, might have damped this 
 musical mania for introducing an Organ into the 
 public worship of God. But our brother tells us 
 in his Statement, and to which your committee 
 beg leave particularly to call the attention of the 
 reverend Presbytery, that although he received 
 from the Lord Provost an official letter, upon the 
 22d August last, now upon jour record, and the 
 purport of which letter was to dissuade him and 
 his congregation from making the attempt, yet 
 that he, Dr. Ritchie, " did not shrink one mo- 
 " ment from what he conceived to be his right.'" 
 The Organ accordingly was employed in public 
 worship, on the Lord's day, in St. Andrew's 
 church, upon the 23d August last. 
 
 There is here a little ambiguity in our brother's 
 Statement, which your committee do not exactly 
 understand. Whether did Dr. Ritchie lay the 
 Lord Provost's letter before the committee of 
 gentlemen, upon the evening of the 22d, or not 
 till the 26th, the day on which he received the 
 Lord Provost's second letter? If the first letter 
 was only laid before these gentlemen upon the 
 26th, your committee solemnly declare, thai our 
 brother did not discover proper respect to the 
 
J 60 
 
 < ivil power, if he used the instrument, alter lie re- 
 reived his lordship's first letter, and before he had 
 an opportunity of submitting it to his musical 
 council. But be this as it may, the naming of 
 three gentlemen to wait upon the Lord Provost, 
 and the sending two, twice in one day, to request 
 of the Lord Provost, that the civil power might 
 no more be seen in this business, was a piece of 
 conduct, not at all like the good sense which our 
 brother has displayed in the more private con- 
 cerns of his life. It was apparently, first setting 
 the civil power at defiance, and then apparently 
 requesting them to shut their eyes to the contempt 
 of their authority. — Your committee, taking all 
 these circumstances into consideration, cannot 
 help thinking, that the conduct of our brother 
 upon this occasion, did not discover proper re- 
 spect either to the civil power, or to the Pres- 
 bytery of which he is a member. 
 
 Our brother surely was not ignorant of the of- 
 ficial opinion pronounced by the legal assessor 
 of the city council; neither was he ignorant of 
 what is contained in the 21st chapter of the 
 Confession of Faith, relative to public worship. 
 Neither could he be ignorant of the power with 
 which the civil magistrate is invested, to preserve 
 uniformity of public worship; nor could be 
 pretend ignorance, that about two years ago, the 
 city council had refused to allow the seats to be 
 removed, for the accommodation of an Organ. 
 Why then did he, upon the 23d August hist) au- 
 thorize and direct the employment of an Organ, 
 in St. Andrew V church, in public worship, taking 
 
 the whole responsibility on himself, as the director 
 of all that concerns public worship, in that parish 
 church, of which he is minister? A line of eon- 
 
161 
 
 duct which your committee positively condemn. 
 When our brother received the first letter from 
 the Lord Provost, it was certainly high time for 
 him to have stopt till once he got the authority 
 of his ecclesiastical superiors, and then, legally 
 and constitutionally, he could have said to the 
 civil power, When you interfere with public 
 worship, you are proceeding ultra vires. When, 
 therefore, our brother sent two gentlemen, twice 
 in one day, to request of the Lord Provost, that 
 the civil power might no more be seen in thi^ 
 business, is there not more like something of a de- 
 sire to dictate what the civil magistrate olighi 
 to do, " than a sincere respect professed for both 
 ,; branches of the constitution." 
 
 According to the Statement given in by our 
 brother, relative to his conduct upon the 22d, 
 23d, and 26th August last, or even from the com- 
 mencement of the business, about two years ago, 
 ;>id defiance to any man, to point out a single 
 Presbyterian principle in the whole of it. Whereas, 
 on the other hand, the interference of the Lord 
 Provost, was strictly Presbyterian. It was the 
 legitimate exercise of that formal power in ec- 
 clesiastical matters, which the standards of our 
 church, and the laws of the land, uniformly as- 
 sert and maintain. 
 
 As to the conception of any Presbyterian mi- 
 nister of the established Church of Scotland, 
 having an inherent right of directing all that re- 
 spect- public worship in his own congregation, it 
 i iectly wild, visionary, and untenable. No 
 minister has a legal right to perform a single ju- 
 il or legislative act, without the sanction of 
 the kirk-session; and no kirk-session \y> 
 14* 
 
162 
 
 to innovate on the general laws, and universal 
 practice of our church. 
 
 Instead, therefore, of your committee admiring 
 these gradual steps which, our brother says, were 
 taken by the congregation of St. Andrew's, since 
 the 1st of June last, for the purpose of improving 
 themselves in sacred music, they are rather dis- 
 posed to imagine, that these gradual steps were 
 intended to accustom the mind imperceptibly to 
 innovation, and to the reception of instrumental 
 music into the public worship of God, in this our 
 national established church, without surprise and 
 astonishment. Perhaps, if the Presbytery had 
 done its duty, they should have stept forward, 
 and nipped such innovation in the bud, con- 
 vincing both our brother and the world, that 
 the house of God, in this Presbyterian country, 
 was not to be turned into a concert-room. But 
 we flattered ourselves, that the good sense of our 
 brother would have kept this musical enthusiasm 
 within proper bounds. We were disappointed. 
 When innovation begins, no man can say where it 
 will stop. A man may perform an action fraught 
 with consequences the most pernicious to his coun- 
 try. It may proceed from the most complete bona 
 fide intention, on his part; or it may even arise 
 from an invincible error of judgment. Your com- 
 mittee do not wish to speak harshly upon the mo- 
 tives of any human being, but the consequences of 
 OH action, affecting our ecclesiastical establishment, 
 they are entitled to investigate, and to approve 
 or condemn, as truth and justice shall demand. 
 
 With respect to that pompous declaration made 
 use of in the Statement, to fthow the utility of the 
 measure, and how wonderfully calculated an Or- 
 
163 
 
 gan is to increase the devotion of a congregation 
 of Christians, and " that the time is now come, 
 " when we have it in our power to vindicate our 
 " church and our country from the reproach of 
 " neglecting one of the best means devised for 
 " the improvement of sacred music," — your com- 
 mittee must beg leave to say, that they entirely 
 withhold their assent. Our brother's argument 
 is a mere petitio principii — a mere begging of the 
 question — assuming, as a principle, what remains 
 yet to be proved. Your committee are no ene- 
 mies to instrumental music being used to exhila- 
 rate the mind in scenes of conviviality, or em- 
 ployed to animate the soldier to march with ar- 
 dour to the field of battle. Nay, they even allow 
 that the poet is not altogether fanciful, when he 
 says, that 
 
 " Music has charms to sooth the savage breast." 
 
 But still, they can by no means allow it to be an 
 improvement of the public worship of God in 
 singing the praises of that God who is a Spirit, 
 and must be worshipped in spirit and in truth. 
 Your committee affirm, that the tones of the hu- 
 man voice, while they are the most simple, are, 
 at the same time, the most perfect, the most accu- 
 rate, the most pathetic, and the most sublime, and 
 the best qualified to convey the sentiments of the 
 devout heart, in solemn praise, to the Father, the 
 Son, and the Holy Ghost. 
 
 Your committee have heard your amateurs and 
 dilletanti assert, that their nerves have been com- 
 pletely overcome with the powerful tones of the 
 Organ, and the sublime crash of instrumental mu- 
 sic in the oratorios of Handel. Your committee 
 are willing to allow this musical effect, but they 
 
164 
 
 believe at the same lime, that all the musical in- 
 struments that ever were used, can never produce 
 upon the devout and contemplative mind, that 
 sublime and pathetic effect, which the well-regu- 
 lated voice of 8,000 children produced, when 
 singing the praises of God in the cathedral of St. 
 Paul's, upon the recovery of our good, old, reli- 
 gious king. Away, then, with the cant of an Or- 
 gan's being so wonderfully calculated to increase 
 the devotion of Christians! Your committee have 
 sometimes had an opportunity of listening to in- 
 strumental music, in what is styled cathedral 
 worship; it might, for a little time, please and sur- 
 prise by its novelty; the effect, however, was very 
 transitory, and sometimes produced ideas in the 
 mind very different from devotion. " It is but 
 " too common for persons to deceive them>el\e-. 
 " by imagining, that when they are greatly 
 " moved by airs of instrumental music, that the) 
 " are then, and for that reason, in a temper of 
 " mind most pleasing unto God, because pleading 
 " to themselves; a most unhappy delusion ; for 
 " men sometimes of very little piety can enjoy all 
 "that sort of pleasure, with as high a <r/> 
 84 persons of a more virtuous character." 
 
 Your committee believe, that when the praises 
 of God are sung by every individual, even of a 
 plain unlettered country congregation, (which 
 has been spoken of by some persona rather in a 
 taunting manner) where both the heart and the 
 voice arc engaged, the effect is orach more noble. 
 and much more salutary to the mind of a Chris- 
 tian audience, than all the lofty artificial Btraim of 
 an Organ, extracted b\ a hired organist, and ac- 
 companied by a confused noise o\' many voi< 
 taught, at great expense, to chant over what 
 
165 
 
 their hearts neither feel, nor their heads un- 
 derstand. 
 
 When our brother, therefore, bewails the want 
 of the power of discrimination in our countrymen, 
 to perceive the advantages which would result to 
 religion, by introducing instrumental music into 
 the public worship of God, we, your committee, 
 rejoice in the thought, that our countrymen will 
 not suffer, when compared with the inhabitants of 
 any country upon earth, as to their discriminating 
 powers of what is useful and proper in matters of 
 religion. 
 
 They inherit that discriminating talent from 
 their forefathers. It was a legacy conveyed to 
 them as purchased by their blood, and they will 
 not abandon it for the puerile amusement of pipes 
 and Organs. If our countrymen have not Or- 
 gans, and wish not to have them, they have Bi- 
 bles, and can read them; — they have churches, 
 and they attend them; — they are distinguished 
 for their attainments in arts and sciences; — they 
 can study the history of mankind, and can reflect 
 upon it; — and they know well, that Organs and 
 instrumental music have been abused, to the pur- 
 poses of voluptuousness and impiety; — they know, 
 for Job hath told them, " that the wicked among 
 his cotemporaries took the timbrel and the harp, 
 and rejoiced at the sound of the Organ; and yet 
 said unto God, Depart from us, for we desire not 
 the knowledge of thy ways; — what is the Al- 
 mighty, that we should serve him, and what pro- 
 fit should we receive, if we pray unto him?"* 
 And they have read in the book of Amos the pro- 
 phet, of a woe denounced upon them " that are 
 
 " Job xxi. 12. 14. 15. 
 
166 
 
 at ease in Sion, and who trust in the mounta.. 
 Samaria; who put far away the evil day, and 
 cause the seat of violence to come near; who lie 
 on beds of ivory, who eat lambs out of the flock, 
 and the calves out of the midst of the stall ; who 
 drink wine out of the bowl, and anoint themselves 
 with the chief ointments."* But this very nu- 
 merous description of men, in affluent circum- 
 stances, and addicted to luxurious habits, — our 
 countrymen have read, chanted to the sound of 
 the viol, and invented to themselves instruments 
 like David. And they have also read in the book 
 of Daniel, that when Nebuchadnezzar dedicated 
 his golden image in the presence of a numerous 
 and loyal assembly, " that they all fell down and 
 worshipped the golden image, at what time they 
 heard the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sack- 
 but, psaltery, dulcimer, and all kinds of music. "f 
 
 Thus, we have endeavoured, step by step, to 
 answer the various arguments adduced by our 
 reverend brother, the minister of St. Andrew's 
 church, in his Statement. 
 
 We have in the first place shown, That instru- 
 mental music is neither enjoined, nor authorized, 
 nor encouraged by the word of God, to be u 
 in the public worship of Christia 
 
 In the second place, That, from the history of 
 the church, it appears that the Fathers, die 
 schoolmen, and the greatest of the eel 
 condemned it. 
 
 In the third place, That the reason assigned 
 by our brother, why instrumental music, in the 
 public, worship of God, VT81 not used m our na- 
 tional church — (viz. that it arose from the want 
 
 • \i f Dan. iii 7 
 
167 
 
 of leisure to attend to such things, or their want 
 of money to purchase such instruments, or the 
 want of accommodation for using them) — is nei- 
 ther consistent with historical fact, nor with fair 
 and candid investigation.* Your committee have 
 
 Whether in the period immediately after the Reformation, 
 the public devotional music was an object of so very little atten- 
 tion in the Church of Scotland, as our brother is pleased to re- 
 present, may be determined, even by a very slight inspection of 
 the Psalm Book which was used in the church during- that pe- 
 riod. In our present version of the Psalms, there are six varie- 
 ties of measure; and with the knowledge of six different psalm 
 tunes, a congregation may sing all the Psalms which it contains : 
 In the old version there were twenty-five or twenty-six different 
 measures, which implied a knowledge of psalmody, and a mode 
 of singing, which could not have existed amidst that ignorance 
 and inattention to church music, which are supposed then to 
 have characterized and disgraced the Church of Scotland. 
 Copies of that Psalm Book are now very rare; that which most 
 generally occurs, is an edition printed by Andro Hart, 1635, and 
 makes part of a volume which includes Directions for different 
 parts of public worship, as agreed on by John Knox, and other 
 eminent ministers, whose recommendation is annexed. So much 
 was this pan of the devotional service of our church an object 
 of attention to those good men, that the particular tunes, pro- 
 per for particular psalms, are commonly annexed to them in 
 the musical characters of the time. And as books were not to 
 be had so easily in those days, as in ours, an ingenious device 
 has been employed, in order that one copy of the book might 
 accommodate the four different persons who sang the four dif- 
 ferent parts of the music. A considerable variety of psalm 
 tunes, set in the different parts, make a portion of this volume. 
 Far be it from us to blame our reverend brother for his igno- 
 rance of this subject; perhaps he will blame himself for writing 
 so decidedly upon a subject in which he must be conscious he 
 lias been at little pains to obtain information. He may perhaps 
 uise to regret, that, upon mere hypothetical reasoning, he 
 should have pronounced such a severe judgment against his 
 countrymen respecting their ignorance of psalmody in the six- 
 teenth and seventeenth centuries. 
 
 A pleasing little anecdote occurs, sufficient to show, that 
 eminent men in the Church of Scotland were not so ignorant 
 of, nor so insensible to, music, as the representation 
 is in our days would imply. 
 Robert Boyd, of Trochrig. was principal of the collage 
 
168 
 
 proved, that it arose from the opinion entertained 
 by our Scotch ecclesiastical patriots, that instru- 
 mental music was contrary to the genius and con- 
 stitution of Presbytery in this kingdom, and to 
 the word of God. 
 
 In the fourth place, We affirm, that from at- 
 tending to the Act of Security, to the Treaty of 
 Union, to the Directory, and to the Act against 
 Innovations, all confirmed by the consuetudinary 
 and common law of our church and state, acted 
 upon for more than these hundred and twenty 
 years, the Presbytery passed a just sentence on 
 the seventh October last, when they gave it as 
 their judgment, that instrumental music was con- 
 trary to the law of the land, and to the law and 
 constitution of the Church of Scotland. 
 
 And, lastly, Your committee have shown, that 
 the argument advanced by our brother, viz. That 
 the Organ was introduced into St. Andrew's 
 church, upon pure Presbyterian principles, is 
 supported by mere metaphysical and sophistical 
 reasoning, only calculated to mislead those who 
 have not paid sufficient attention to the subject.* 
 
 of Glasgow. " He was a man of an austere-like carriage, and 
 M yet was a most tender-hearted man. He was of a sour-like 
 11 disposition : he would sometimes call me, with other three Of 
 k - lour, and lay down books before us, and have us sing tunes 
 u of music, wherein he took great delight." — Livingstone's Life. 
 
 (Cm \k \< TERISTICS.) 
 
 IVe believe that a copy of the above Psalm Book is in the 
 -ion of an eminent clergyman of this neighbourhood, 
 well known for bis scientific knowledge in ever) branch of the 
 fine aii- 
 
 * We beg it nia\ he remembered, what we slated in the com- 
 mencement of this answer to Dr. Ritchie, that we have been all 
 
 along arguing w ith a minister 6f the chinch of Scotland, bound 
 by the tame laws of church and state which bind the Prt 
 tcry of Glasgow. 
 
169 
 
 IT your committee had been disposed 10 mea- 
 sure out to their brother such language, and such 
 reflections as he hath been pleased to make upon 
 his ecclesiastical superiors, the Presbytery of 
 Glasgow, they would be justified in saying, that 
 there are some remarks in the conclusion of his 
 statement, which, in politeness, he should have 
 avoided. Thus, " Feeling as we do," says he, " the 
 " harshness of the sentence pronounced against 
 " us, we have confidence, that the judgment of a 
 " candid public will be, that guilt has been im- 
 " puted where there was no crime, and that we 
 ; - have become the victims of a prejudice which 
 u we wished to remove. And instead of receiving 
 " encouragement, we have been exhibited to the 
 " world as violating the law both of the church 
 " and of the state, while we, the minister, and 
 " elders, and congregation of St. Andrew's 
 " church, are both loyal citizens, and steady in 
 " our attachment to our ecclesiastical establish- 
 " ment." Your committee will cheerfully allow 
 the minister and congregation of St. Andrew's 
 all the benefit of this pompous encomium passed 
 upon their own conduct, by one of their own 
 number. We cordially approve of the appeal 
 which our brother has made to the judgment of 
 the candid public. For, if the spirit and princi- 
 ples of the fathers animate the children; — if the 
 universal, and almost uninterrupted practice of 
 our church, in the midst of its greatest reverses, 
 since the Reformation down to the present mo- 
 ment, except in three solitary instances, (the at- 
 tempt made in the Chapel Royal, 1617, by the 
 king and his courtiers, which never extended its 
 influence farther than the walls of the chapel, — 
 and an attempt which was made a few years ago r 
 15 
 
170 
 
 by a respectable congregation in Aberdeen, but 
 instantly abandoned, — and this late abortive at- 
 tempt at Glasgow,) can consolidate the constitu- 
 tion, and furnish an authoritative commentary on 
 the law of the church, and the law of the land; — 
 if the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament, 
 illustrated by the example of Christians for up- 
 wards of seven centuries; — if the standards of our 
 church, explained and corroborated by the testi- 
 mony of our venerable martyrs, be solid and un- 
 exceptionable documents, — then the Presbytery 
 need not shrink from the impartial tribunal of a 
 candid public. If what is agreeable to, and 
 founded on the word of God, shall regulate the 
 worship of Christians — if historical fact, and 
 statute law — and constitutional principle — and 
 immemorial usage — all sanctioned by an enlight- 
 ened conviction, shall determine this question, 
 then the reverend Presbyter}' may go with con- 
 fidence, and demand a verdict in their favour. 
 
 With respect to those sacrifices which our bro- 
 ther hath pledged himself to make for the loyal, 
 enlightened, and respectable congregation of St. 
 Andrew's, your committee do not wish to restrain 
 our brother in the smallest degree. If a sincere 
 desire to benefit that congregation, which hath 
 discovered such an uncommon attachment to his 
 ministry, hath prompted him to speak in such 
 glowing language, your committee most >incerely 
 pray, that wherever Providence may order the lot 
 of our brother, he may always experience a simi- 
 lar attachment from his congregation. If, on the 
 other hand, this pledge v * Or hi^ readiness to make 
 sacrifices," was thrown out, merely to announce 
 to the Presbytery, and to the world, his fixed and 
 resolute determination to use every lawful tec 
 
171 
 
 thod to carry his favourite measure, your com- 
 mittee are equally ready and equally determined 
 to use every legal and constitutional method to 
 oppose him, and they have no doubt of the re- 
 sult. 
 
 In fine, our brother has repeatedly admitted, 
 that in Scotland there is a prejudice against Or- 
 gans, which, he says, has grown into antipathy. 
 It was no doubt bold and manly in him, to under- 
 take, single-handed, to cure that prejudice, and to 
 remove that antipathy. And though we do not 
 wish to infringe what he styles his sacred, pri- 
 vate, hereditary rights, there were many objects 
 of no small importance, to which he ought to 
 have paid some attention, before he engaged in 
 this difficult enterprize. For though we have not 
 indulged in the mistake, which he says we have, 
 of maintaining that the minister and congregation 
 of St. Andrew's were assuming to themselves the 
 sole prerogative ot enacting a law for the whole 
 church; yet we certainly have affirmed, that in 
 his bold attempt to remove that prejudice, he had 
 no title, either directly or indirectly, to undertake 
 such a business, without consulting his ecclesiasr 
 tical superiors. And we, likewise, most certainly 
 say, that however peaceable his designs might be, 
 they have been conducted in such a manner, as 
 to have a tendency to produce disputes with his 
 Presbytery, with the magistrates and town coun- 
 cil of Glasgow, with the people of Glasgow, and 
 with the people of Scotland. But we will not 
 allow, that since the Reformation, our country- 
 men have laboured under prejudice. We will 
 contrast with the sentiments of the minister of St. 
 Andrew's, the sentiments of the late Principal 
 Duulop, of the University of Glasgow. 
 
172 
 
 This venerable man, whose singular pietj . 
 prudence, public spirit, universal km . and 
 
 general usefulness, are celebrated in Wodro 
 History, acted a conspicuous part in the affairs of 
 our church, from the Revolution downward, for 
 many years. He had suffered for his attachment 
 to the pure principles of Presbytery ; he under- 
 stood them well, and thus i If on 
 the point at issue. 
 
 " We celebrate the goodness of God, which 
 * 4 carried our Reformation to such a high pitch 
 " of perfection, with re>pect to our government 
 %< and worship, and delivered them from all that 
 ;t vain pomp, which darkened the glory of the 
 " Gospel service, and the whole of the supersti- 
 " tious or insignificant inventions of an imaginary 
 " decency and order, which sullied the divine 
 " beauty and lustre of that noble simplicity which 
 " distinguished the devotions of the apostolical 
 " times; and our church glories in the primitive 
 " plainness of her worship, more than in all the 
 14 foreign ornaments borrowed from this world, 
 •• though these appear indeed incomparably more 
 ;; charming to earthly minds. 
 
 11 We are sensible that it is a necessary conse- 
 u quence of the nature of our Reformation in 
 " these particulars, that there is nothing left in 
 " our worship which is proper to captivate the 
 " senses of mankind, or amuse their imagina- 
 " tions; we have no magnificence and splendour 
 " of devotion to dazzle the eye, nor harmony of 
 " instrumental mlisic to enliven our worship and 
 " sooth the ears of the assembly. Pomp, and 
 11 show, and ceremony, are entirely strangers in 
 " our churches, and we have little in common. 
 " with that apostate church, whose yoke we threw 
 
173 
 
 " off at the Reformation, or with the exterioi 
 " greatness and magnificence of the Jewish tem- 
 " pie and its service. 
 
 " For which reason, we know we must lay our 
 " account to be despised by the men of the world. 
 " who value nothing that is stripped of the al- 
 Cl lurements of sense, and fancy that a rich and 
 11 gaudy dress contributes to the majesty, and 
 " raises the excellency of religious service; who 
 " seek for the same dazzling pomp and splendid 
 ;; appearances to recommend their worship, which 
 H they are so fond of in their equipage and ta- 
 " bles; and think that a veneration and respect 
 " to the service of the church, is to be raised by 
 " the same methods that procure an esteem and 
 " fondness for a court. We have nothing to 
 " tempt persons of such inclinations; we know 
 " they will entertain the meannest thoughts, and 
 " most disdainful notions of a worship too plain 
 " and homely for them, and fit only for the rude 
 " and unmannerly multitude, who have not a 
 " taste delicate enough for what is truly great 
 u and noble. 
 
 " But how much soever, upon this account, we 
 M may be despised by the great and learned, the 
 " Church of Scotland, we hope, will always pub- 
 " licly own the simplicity and plainness of her 
 " worship, as her peculiar glory, and believe that 
 " these, to a spiritual eye, are beautified with a 
 " lustre which external objects are incapable of, 
 " and of too elevated a nature for the senses to 
 u look at. She is not ashamed to acknowledge 
 " her sentiments, that the devotions of Christians 
 " stand in no need of the outward helps afforded 
 M to the Jews, and that the triumphs of all- 
 15* 
 
174 
 
 11 conquering" love, the mighty acts of a Re- 
 11 deenier, all the powers and glories of an im- 
 11 mortal life, which are represented to our wonder 
 11 and meditation under the Gospel, are far nobler 
 " springs of devotion, and fitter to animate with 
 " a cheerful zeal, and inspire the most fervent 
 " affections, than the meanner helps afforded un- 
 " der the law — the costliness of pontifical gar- 
 " meats, the glory of a magnificent temple, the 
 u ceremony of worship and power of music. 
 
 " Our church believes it to be one design of 
 ; ' the better reformation of things, to raise the 
 " Christian worshippers above the airy grandeur 
 " of sense, and instead of a laborious service, to 
 " introduce a worship worthy of the Father of 
 * ; spirits, that should be truly great and manly; 
 *' the beauty and the power whereof, should he 
 " spirit and life, and which, instead of a servile 
 " imitation of the temple, should be all purified rea- 
 " son and religion, and make the nearest ap- 
 " proaches to the devotion of the heavenly state, 
 M where there is no temple. And how despicable 
 u soever this may appear to earthly minds, and 
 • : distasteful to the senses, that are pleased with 
 •• show and appearance, we are not afraid to 
 u own, that we believe that an imitation of our 
 " blessed Redeemer and his apostles, in the plain- 
 " ness and spirituality of their devotions, and an 
 " endeavour to copy after the example of these 
 " truly primitive times, will ever bear US up to 
 n all the just decency and order of the Go-pel 
 •• church; and that in conformity hereto, the 
 " naked simplicity of our worship is beautified 
 •• with a superior lustre, and shines with a bright- 
 -• ness more worthy of i T . than When dressed iq 
 
175 
 
 u the gayest colours, and busked up with the 
 " richest and most artful ornaments of human 
 " fancy and contrivance." 
 
 (Signed) William Porteous. 
 
 Robert Balfour. 
 
 James Laps lie. 
 
 James M'Leax. 
 
 Minute of Presbytery. 
 
 4th May, 1S08. 
 
 The Presbytery being met, and constituted — 
 It was moved, and seconded, that the thanks of 
 this Presbytery should be given to their com- 
 mittee for their great diligence in preparing the 
 able answer to Dr. Ritchie's Statement, mentioned 
 in last minute, which motion the Presbytery 
 agreed to, and the moderator, in their name, 
 gave the committee thanks accordingly; it being 
 understood, that the original dissentients, to- 
 gether with Dr. Taylor, jun. Dr. Lockhart, and 
 Dr. Ritchie, do not concur in said vote of 
 thanks.* 
 
 It was moved, and seconded, that the Pres- 
 bytery should give thanks to the Lord Provost, 
 magistrates, and city council of Glasgow, for the 
 wisdom, propriety, and discretion of their con- 
 duct, in referring the congregation of St. An- 
 drew's church to their ecclesiastical superiors. 
 
 *It is to be regretted, that the original dissentients, together 
 with the three gentlemen, who were indulged v. irli liberty to 
 give in explanations, should have thought it necessary, in this 
 manner, to put the world in mind that they had ever differed 
 from the reverend Presbytery. 
 
176 
 
 The Presbyter y, without a vote, agreed to thr 
 above motion; and appoint the Rev. Mr. Lapslir, 
 (moderator,) Dr. Porteous, Dr. Balfour, and Mr. 
 M'Lean, as a committee to communicate to the 
 Lord Provost, magistrates, and city council of 
 Glasgow, this vote of thanks, in name of the 
 Presbytery; to ge th er with an extract of the Pres- 
 bytery's minutes of 7th October last, on this 
 business. 
 
 Mr. Burns called the attention of the Pres- 
 tery to two printed letters, addressed to the Lord 
 Provost of the city of Glasgow, in which, among 
 several other misrepresentations, the following 
 passages are particularly submitted to the con- 
 sideration of the Presbytery, viz. page 26, in 
 which Dr. B. is said to have quoted 1 Cor. xiii. 
 11. to prove " that Organs were condemned, and 
 " that they were among the number of childish 
 11 things which the apostle put away, when he 
 " became a man." To which it is added, that 
 this rather surprised the letter writer, as he " had 
 " been taught always to look up to him (Dr. B.) 
 11 as a sound divine, and one that would not 
 " handle the word of God deceitfully.*' — Page 
 40, Mr. M'L. is represented to have said, " that 
 " those churches that used Organs were churches 
 " of antichrist/'— Pages 48, 41), Dr. P. and Mr. 
 L. are stated, " wantonly to have charged Dr. 
 " Ritchie with the awful crime of perjury, in the 
 u violation of his ordination \o\\-;*' and Dr. P. 
 is said to have u declared that man perjured, 
 %< who would deviate one iota from the practice 
 11 established at the passing of the foresaid act-.* 1 
 — It was therefore moved, that the Presbytery 
 should declare their entire persuasion, thai the 
 expressions referred to. in pages 40, 48, 49, were 
 
m 
 
 not used by any member of this court: and that 
 with respect to the quotation, page 26, from 
 1 Cor. xiii. 11. Dr. Balfour did not employ the 
 above passage as an argument against Organs, 
 but merely as Scripture language, in the way of 
 accommodation. 
 
 The Presbytery having considered the above 
 motion, are of opinion, that it is beneath them, 
 as a court, to take notice of any anonymous 
 pamphlet; but, in the present instance, they judge 
 it proper hereby to declare, in terms of the mo- 
 tion, " their entire persuasion that the expres- 
 " ^ions referred to in the 40th, 4Sth and 49th 
 " pages, were not used by any member of this 
 • ; court; and that with respect to the quotation, 
 " page 26, from 1 Cor. xiii. 11. Dr. Balfour did 
 M not employ the above passage as an argument 
 " against Organs, but merely as Scripture Ian- 
 • ; guage, by way of accommodation," 
 
CONCLUSION. 
 
 It is manifest from the preceding statement, 
 that the Presbytery of Glasgow and Dr. Ritchie 
 have respectively made a solemn appeal to pos- 
 terity, in support of their several opinions relative 
 to the use of instrumental music in the public 
 worship of God in the Church of Scotland. The 
 Presbytery have always acted upon the defensive, 
 and contented themselves with repelling the ag- 
 gressions of their opponents. Self-defence, the 
 vindication of the Lord Provost, magistrates and 
 council of the city of Glasgow, and inviolable 
 attachment to the purity of our religious worship, 
 have induced the editors, who are all members of 
 the Presbytery of Glasgow, to intrude themselves 
 in this manner, upon the notice of their coun- 
 trymen. 
 
 They have come with a plain unvarnished tale. 
 They have confirmed it with unexceptionable do- 
 cuments. They have judged it fair and honour- 
 able, that their cotemporaries, as well as posteri- 
 ty, should be furnished with the means of deciding 
 on the merits of the point at issue. 
 
 The candid manner in which Dr. Lockhart 
 expresses himself, would have inclined us to pass 
 over his explanation without any stricture what- 
 ever. But a regard for the honour of the Presby- 
 tery, requires the following remarks. Dr. Lock- 
 hart says, that " it does not appear to him that it 
 14 was the intention of the dissentients to charge 1 
 " the Presbytery with any violation of trutU aiuj 
 
179 
 
 il justice — and that it would have been desirable 
 " that the Presbytery had declined employing the 
 " severe language to which they have resorted in 
 " their answer." We presume not to pry into 
 the motives of any class of men; but this we 
 know, that the manner in which the expressions, 
 truth and justice, were used by the dissentients, 
 perfectly authorized the Presbytery to give that 
 answer which is upon record, lest the world should 
 have conceived that the declaration which the 
 Presbytery had emitted, was contrary to truth 
 and justice. 
 
 Dr. Lockhart regrets, " that in the argument, 
 " as conducted by the Presbyteiy, they should 
 " have given any detailed statement in relation 
 " to the particular case, which led to the discus- 
 " sion." How could the Presbytery conduct 
 their argument without referring to the case 
 which had given rise to that argument? The 
 Presbytery is found fault with by Dr. Lockhart, 
 for giving a detailed statement of the particu- 
 lar case; and they are condemned by the dis- 
 sentients, for not confining themselves entirely 
 unto it. 
 
 When Dr. Lockhart, in his last observation, 
 declares, that he is " unwilling to acquiesce in 
 " any such application of the second command- 
 u ment as would charge with false worship, our 
 " Christian brethren of other churches;" it ought 
 to be observed, that the Presbytery did not apply 
 the second commandment in the manner here 
 supposed. It is the authoritative commentary of 
 this church upon the second commandment, from 
 which the Presbytery reason, and which they 
 maintain, is binding upon all her ministers and 
 people. 
 
180 
 
 Similar candour, we have no doubt, pervades 
 
 the explanation given in by Dr. Taylor, Jim. 
 It contains, however, a critique upon the W 
 bytery, and some irrelevant matter, which might 
 well have been spared. " I was out of the coun- 
 " try," says he, " when this business commenced; 
 " I was astonished beyond measure when I heard 
 " of it, by accident, 400 miles hence; and when 
 " a final sentence was given, I had the honour of 
 " presiding in the court. And thus, from the 
 " commencement to the close, had no opportu- 
 " nity of taking part, either on one side or the 
 " other, in this singular business."* All this seems 
 to be simple narrative, and yet contains such a 
 view of the matter as cannot be passed over with- 
 out animadversion. As Dr. Taylor had pre- 
 served his neutrality till the close of this business, 
 and had even presided in the court, at that pe- 
 riod, was this a good reason for his taking a side 
 when a final sentence was given? Does not every 
 one know, that the moderator of a Presbytery 
 may have an opportunity, if he choose to ask it, 
 of taking part in any business before that court? 
 — and that he should be the last member of 
 court to impugn a sentence passed under his own 
 auspices ? 
 
 The editors beg it to be understood that th< 
 remarks, and others which follow, contain not a 
 single particle ^i' disrespect towards \)\. Taylor, 
 whom they highly regard. But as he has chosen 
 
 to become the <>r, it i> perfectly fair to 
 
 show that he has done so akroneously, and to 
 
 repel hi- ion. 
 
 A to the " license taken/' and " the heat and 
 
 • ride page !•». 
 
181 
 
 ♦* passion" betrayed by the Presbytery, in the 
 paper alluded to, the public will judge, without 
 our commentary. But the specimen which Dr. 
 Taylor gives " of language of this heated and 
 " exaggerated kind," is certainly curious. " The 
 " manner," says he, " in which the congregation 
 " of St. Andrew's is mentioned in this paper, is 
 " surely in too lofty a style. — c Some persons de- 
 " scribing themselves as the congregation of St. 
 u Andrew's church,' — this is the expression."* 
 Now, with all due deference, it is contended, that 
 Dr. Taylor must have been hard run indeed for 
 a specimen of the lofty style — of heated and exag- 
 gerated language, when he was forced to select this 
 one. No expression in the whole paper is more 
 calm, dispassionate, and coldly correct. It has 
 not the most distant " tendency to convey the idea 
 " that there were pretensions on the part of those 
 " spoken of, which were not well founded." It 
 is nothing more than the trite, formal expression, 
 which has long been sanctioned and recognized 
 by practice, and might, with as much propriety, 
 have been selected as a specimen of the sublime 
 and beautiful, as of the heated, exaggerated, or 
 lofty style. 
 
 Dr. Taylor does not seem to be more happy in 
 his criticism on the epithet " insidious," as applied 
 by the Presbytery to the term " unauthorised."* 
 For if the term " unauthorised," be of that ambi- 
 guous, equivocal kind, which naturally suggest- 
 ed the hypothetical case put by the Presbytery, 
 then, neither candour nor politeness forbids the 
 use of such a plain, though unpleasant term. 
 
 The charge of anachronism has already been 
 sufficiently exposed.f It is only necessary here 
 
 * Vide p. 48. t Vide Note, p. 49. 
 
 16 
 
182 
 
 to observe, that as Dr. Taylor has been so pro- 
 digal of his politeness to the opponents of the 
 Presbytery, it might have been expected that he 
 would have bestowed a mite of it on the Presby- 
 tery and their committee. " A gross anachro- 
 nism," is certainly a heavy charge, and not ex- 
 pressed in very gentle terms, especially when it 
 happens to be utterly unfounded.* Nor can we 
 admire the elegance of Dr. Taylor's compliment 
 
 We can easily conceive how Dr. Taylor has fallen into the 
 mistake on which this charge of anachronism is founded. He 
 has not sufficiently attended to the distinction in point of time, 
 between the invention of Organs, of which the East has the 
 honour, and their introduction into the West, by the Greek em- 
 peror Constantinus Copronymus, who sent one as a present to 
 Pepin, king of France, about the year 766. How long Organs 
 had been known in the East, prior to this event, it is impossible 
 to determine. But it is certain that they cannot be less ancient 
 than the Council of Nice, as appears from the emperor Julian? 
 • pigram upon this instrument in the Anthologia. 
 
 " Quam cerno alterius naturae est fistula, nempe 
 
 u Altera producit fortasse ha?c aenea tellus ; 
 
 " Horrendum stridet, nee nostris illamovetur 
 
 M Flatibus, et missus taurino e carcere ventus 
 
 " Subtus agit leves calamos, pcrque ima vagatur ; 
 
 '• Mox aliquis velox digitis insignis et arte 
 
 u Adstat, Concordes calamis pulsatque tabellas, 
 
 " Ast ilia; subito exsiliunt, et Carmina miscent." 
 
 *' I see reeds of a new species, the growth of another and a 
 • brazen soil, such as are not agitated by our winds, but by a 
 
 blast that rushes from a leathern cavern beneath their roots; 
 ■ while a robust mortal, running wkh swift fingers over the 
 
 Oft-Mordant keys, makes them, as they smoothly dance, emit 
 ; melodious sounds." 
 
 Long, however, as Organs have been known in the East, they 
 have never, a^ far ;is w»- know, been used in religious worship 
 by the Greek or Armenian churches. Zonaras tells us of an 
 Organ set up all of pure gold. He adds, however, not that this 
 W99 to pod the church in tune, but to cast a glory upon the 
 court, and to draw the admiration of foreigners upon the em- 
 peror. Zonar. Tom. S, Anna! in Michaele Impef. In the Greek 
 liturgies, much is said of music, but an Organ is not so much a c 
 mentioned in all their book- 
 
183 
 
 to the committee of Presbytery, for their kk con- 
 siderable labour." It would, perhaps, have been 
 as consistent with the rules of politeness, had Dr. 
 Taylor withheld his compliment, as well as hi* 
 concurrence, in the Presbytery's vote of thanks to 
 their committee. 
 
 We flatter ourselves, that the judicious reader 
 will find, that the Presbytery have shown, not only 
 that " the Presbyterian church must differ from 
 " Episcopacy — that it is averse to the hierarchy 
 " of bishops — to liturgy and read prayers — and 
 " that it hath a discipline of its own ;" — but 
 also that both our church and state have gone 
 " farther than all this, and accurately defined the 
 " particulars of worship :" — And that if the Di- 
 rectory, the Confession of Faith, and the Act of 
 Security have any meaning, the singing of Psalms 
 with the human voice alone, must be regarded as 
 one of these particulars. This is exactly what 
 Dr. Taylor has demanded. 
 
 The editors have no desire to expose the secret 
 history of this controversy. Dr. Ritchie has cer- 
 tainly communicated sufficient information in his 
 Statement to enable the candid public to deter- 
 mine, whether the stirring of it ought not, from 
 first to last, to be imputed to himself and his 
 friends. 
 
 A scheme is apparently formed to alter the ex- 
 ternal mode of worship recognized by the consti- 
 tution, and sanctioned and defined by the imme- 
 morial, universal practice of our national church. 
 It seems to be systematically carried on, even 
 after the Lord Provost, magistrates and council 
 of the city of Glasgow had refused their concur- 
 rence, and declared that the ecclesiastical authori- 
 ties must previously be consulted. An Organ, 
 notwithstanding, was employed in St. Andrew's 
 
184 
 
 < hurch, at a weekly rehearsal of sacred music. 
 By and by, this rehearsal was blended with reli- 
 gious worship ; and when every thing was ready 
 for this grand musical performance, it was brought 
 np in the public worship of God, on the 23d of 
 August last. These seem to be facts attested by 
 the minister of St. Andrew's church himself. 
 
 Without dwelling upon the deputations to 
 Edinburgh, — the canvassings, consultations, and 
 convivialities at Glasgow, for the furtherance of 
 this singular business, the editors appeal to the 
 impartial public, whether they can here discern a 
 vestige of deference or respect to authority, civil 
 or ecclesiastical ? Whether they can here disco- 
 ver any indications of the confidence of private 
 friendship, or concern for the public peace ? 
 
 With this remark the editors would have been 
 happy to have taken their leave of this singular 
 business. But the two anonymous letters ad- 
 dressed to the Lord Provost of Glasgow, on the 
 subject of the Organ, render some animadversions 
 upon them indispensable. Common fame has 
 ascribed these letters to a minister of the Gospel. 
 The printer, we are told, has declared, that he is 
 not at liberty to give the name of his employer ; 
 but that he could not suppose a clergyman of the 
 Church of Scotland would write any thing which 
 could render him liable to damages. Some copies, 
 we are informed, have been sent as presents to 
 the particular friends of the author. One of these 
 copies we have seen, with an inscription, which 
 is presumed to be in his hand writing. Be all 
 this a> it may, the sentiments and language of Dr. 
 Ritchie, in his Statement, seem, in many instan- 
 
 . to be borrowed by \\\'\> pamphleteer; and the 
 plagiarism is but ill concealed, by all the trans- 
 position of words, and the inversion of sentiment, 
 
185 
 
 to which he has had recourse. From these cir- 
 cumstances, an adventitious importance is stamped 
 upon this pamphlet, which it never could have 
 derived from its intrinsic merits. 
 
 [Here the editors proceed to comment with se- 
 verity upon the language and puerilities of the 
 author of these letters, as well as upon various 
 circumstances connected with their publication; 
 and also to rebut sundry misstatements of histori- 
 cal facts, and etymological criticisms, which they 
 treat as " frivolous — a mere shadow of literature, 
 calculated to mislead the unwary." But as the 
 pamphlet referred to is not before the American 
 public, it is thought proper to omit these parts of 
 the discussion, as having little bearing upon the 
 main question previously decided; and to take 
 up the series of remarks towards the close, where 
 the editors come to notice the u theology" of the 
 letter writer. — Am. Ed.] 
 
 Alas! his theology is but sparingly dealt 
 
 out, " it seems not to be derived from Locke, nor 
 11 Lyttleton, nor Luther, nor Calvin," and what 
 is worst of all, it seems not to be derived from the 
 Holy Bible. -We shall confine our observa- 
 tions to what he inculcates relative to the devo- 
 tions of Christians upon earth, and to the view he 
 exhibits of the employment and bliss of saints in 
 heaven. 
 
 Of Christians on earth he thus speaks, pages 
 36, 37. " Were all men enlightened by education, 
 " and governed by reason and religion every 
 " hour, then indeed it might not be necessary to 
 " have recourse to external objects for raising 
 " devout affections; but mankind are weak and 
 H sluggish. The learned, as well as the ignorant, 
 11 need something to rouse the apathy of their 
 " minds to religious exercises; and hence the ne- 
 16* 
 
186 
 
 11 cessity of devising external rites and ceremo- 
 " nies, in order that the soul may be come at, 
 11 through the medium of the senses." — " The 
 " moral effects of all the fine arts, are to humanize 
 " and improve man; and whatever can tend to 
 " excite virtuous emotions, or deepen religious 
 " impressions, instead of being rejected, should, 
 11 by every good man, be warmly adopted. Were 
 " the Organ, with the arts of sculpture, intro- 
 " duced into our churches, they might produce 
 " astonishing effects on the ignorant, who are the 
 11 multitude; and who, in general, in every age 
 " and country, are only instructed in the solemni- 
 11 ties of religion through the senses." — We know 
 not whether the public may have patience to read, 
 but we have not patience to transcribe any more 
 of this very dangerous, and we must add, popish 
 delusion. If " the spirituality of the Gospel for- 
 " bid not this vain deceit," then every man may, 
 both in divinity and morality, do that which is 
 tight in his own eyes. The Papist, according to 
 this mode of reasoning, has better means of being 
 instructed in the solemnities of religion, than the 
 Protestant, for he enjoys all the benefit of Organs, 
 pictures, images, &c. According to this mode of 
 reasoning, the people of England must be more 
 intelligent in divinity, and purer in their morals, 
 lhan the inhabitants of Scotland, for " the dormant 
 ki feelings of their souls are roused with irrisisti- 
 M ble force, by the grand and solemn symphonies 
 14 of the Organ." According to this letter wri- 
 ter's plan, our blessed Lord's command to his 
 apostles, to teach all nations, or first to enlighten 
 the understandings of men, would be superfluous. 
 The work of the Spirit of God, upon the soul of 
 man, might then be accomplished by human 
 means, or resolved into " the moral effects of the 
 
187 
 
 c< fine arts." — Instead of stopping short at instru- 
 mental music, we instantly wander and are lost 
 among pictures, and statues, and endless contriv- 
 ances of a similar superstitious tendency. Does 
 the letter writer mean, that Christians should ra- 
 ther be guided in their devotions by the rhapsody 
 of Bruyere, than by the writings of St. Paul? 
 
 In his commentary on the beatific vision of 
 John in the Revelation, the letter writer seems to 
 indicate, that heaven is a school in which the fine 
 arts are cultivated, and furnish no inconsiderable 
 portion of the happiness of the redeemed. " The 
 redeemed," page 33, says he, " are represented 
 " as having the harps of God in their hands, 
 " and singing the song of Moses and the Lamb. 
 " Is it lawful, then, in the immediate presence of 
 " Infinite Purity himself, for the happy, in their 
 " hallelujahs, to use harps? — Can any thing used 
 11 in the worship of heaven, by the church (fir 
 " umphant, be sinful in the church militant?" 
 Can this indeed be the view that St. John has 
 given us of the redeemed, and their celestial em- 
 ployment, in the book of Revelation? How diffe- 
 rent from the doctrine he has taught in his 1st 
 Epist. iii. 2. " Beloved, now are we the sons of 
 God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be; 
 but we know, that when he shall appear, we shall 
 be like him; for we shall see him as he is." Is 
 this the view which St. Paul has exhibited of 
 paradise, after he had been caught up into it? 
 He heard sounds, indeed, and was ravished with 
 them; but they were articulate sounds, they were 
 addressed to the understanding. " He heard un- 
 speakable words, which it is not lawful for a man 
 to utter." This is the infallible report that Paul 
 has brought us of paradise, after having been 
 caught up into it. The reader will judge whether 
 
188 
 
 the paradise of the apostles has been justly repre- 
 sented by this anonymous pamphleteer. 
 
 It is perfectly unnecessary to dwell any longer 
 upon this pamphlet. As to his sneer at the man- 
 ner in which the Presbytery arranged their argu- 
 ments, which he seasons with a quotation from 
 D'Alembert — that arrangement was adopted by 
 Dr. Ritchie, in his speech, prior to a single word 
 being uttered by the Presbytery on the subject. 
 When he insinuates, that the Presbytery hath pro- 
 nounced instrumental music, in its very nature, pro- 
 fane and sinful — the answer is, that the Presbytery 
 never uttered a syllable, reflecting on, or condemn- 
 ing the use of it, in any church of Christ, but in 
 their own. When he asserts, that Organs were pre- 
 served not only by a Melancthon and a Zuinglius, 
 but by Calvinists themselves, and even in Calvin's 
 own church at Geneva, the assertion is false.* 
 
 His argument, that by rejecting instrumental 
 music, in the public worship of God, we virtually 
 abolish the Psalms of David, is confuted by our 
 uniform practice. AVe admire them — we retain 
 them — we sing them with the understanding, and 
 with the heart. When he introduces the abstract, 
 but very important question, whether not only 
 the ideas, but the very words of Scripture were 
 inspired, he ought to recollect that this is a ques- 
 tion of too much magnitude and delicacy tor him 
 to determine. 
 
 * u The only amusement," says Dr. Bumey, '• which Calvin 
 seems ever to hare allowed his followers, was fwdmody, and 
 
 that of the in<»t unmeaning and monotonous kind ; without 
 harmony. \aii«t\ <>! accent, t\t!>m,an<l most of the Constituent 
 j>;nt> o! men- melody. Not a musical inttrUBM nt w;is suffered 
 
 re than a hundred 3 ears .dor 
 the Reformation; and all music, except this metrical psalmody, 
 was proscribed, wherever the doctrines of this reformer wet* 
 
 vol. 3. p. 4 
 
189 
 
 Finally, he seems not a little to countenance 
 
 the method of translating and interpreting Scrip- 
 ture, adopted by Socinians, and those who would 
 be wise above what is written; arrogantly con- 
 demning the translation presently in use in our 
 land, sanctioned by the king, and authorized by 
 the church ; vainly pretending to give more accu- 
 rately the meaning of a passage, by analyzing 
 the original word as used by profane authors, — 
 a mode of criticism which has been destructive of 
 the interests of truth and virtue wherever it has 
 been adopted. The venerable professor of the- 
 ology in this university, hath shown, in the most 
 convincing manner, that Scripture is the best in- 
 terpreter of Scripture; and that such men as Dr. 
 Geddes, by inveigling the unwary into critical dis- 
 quisitions about the meaning of the original, have 
 been acting as pioneers of error and infidelity. 
 
 Among such a crowd of blemishes in this pam- 
 phlet, very few beauties indeed appear. 
 
 The author may have been animated with ar- 
 dent friendship to Dr. Ritchie, when, in the spirit 
 of knight errantry, he sallied forth as the chain- 
 pion of the Organ. But alas! 
 
 Non tali auxilio nee defensoribus istis, 
 Temp us eget. 
 
 Priam was as fit for driving the Greeks out of 
 Troy, as this pamphleteer is for vindicating his 
 friend, or for defending the cause he has es- 
 poused. 
 
 We cannot conclude, without taking notice of 
 the time in which this pamphlet was ushered into 
 the world. Upon Saturday the 9th of April last, 
 the day immediately preceding the celebration of 
 the Lord's Supper in the city of Glasgow — a day 
 devoted to serious preparation for that solemn 
 
190 
 
 ordinance, an advertisment appeared in the Glas- 
 gow courier, announcing this publication for 
 Monday following, and giving the title page of 
 it at length. The Lord Provost of Glasgow, 
 when coming from public worship, and going 
 home to the devotions of the family and closet, 
 was held up to public view, as 
 
 " Playing such fantastic tricks before high Heaven, 
 Ci As make the angels wciji.'' 
 
 Habitually influenced as that gentleman is, by 
 just views of religion, it is scarcely to be con- 
 ceived, but that his mind, on that solemn occasion, 
 would be painfully disturbed by so rude and un- 
 christian a provocation. The curiosity of the ci- 
 tizens was wound up to the highest pitch. Con- 
 jectures about the author, and the contents of ihese 
 letters, were set afloat; party spirit was roused, 
 and the minds of intending communicants were 
 withdrawn from self-examination, from Christian 
 charity, and from the contemplation of the grace 
 of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord's daj r was 
 diverted too much from its proper purpose; and 
 a communion Sabbath turned into a day of sus- 
 pense and distraction, about these letters and their 
 author. This author, if indeed a clergyman of 
 the Church of Scotland, and if officially employ- 
 ed to assist in dispensing the sacrament of the 
 Lord's Supper on this occasion, presiding at the 
 Lord's table! — (trembling cometh upon as; the 
 Psalmist shall finish the description) — He hath 
 put forth his hand against " such as were at peace 
 " with him: he hath broken his covenant. The 
 11 words of his mouth were smoother than butter, 
 " but war wa> in his heart: his Words were softer 
 " than oil, yet were the\ drawn swords/** 
 
 • Piafati te 20, 21 
 
191 
 
 The editors beg it to be remembered, that they 
 apply this description to no individual. They 
 are willing to believe that no minister of the Gos- 
 pel could act so culpable and unprincipled a part. 
 
 Though they at first conceived it sufficient to 
 have left their names with the printer, yet upon 
 more mature consideration, they judge it more 
 respectful to the public to subscribe their names. 
 
 William Porteous. 
 John Burns. 
 James Lapslie. 
 Robert Rennie. 
 John Pollock. 
 James M'Lean. 
 
 in the note, page 182, where the Greek and 
 Armenian churches are mentioned, as not using 
 instrumental music, we ought likewise to have 
 added the Russian, a branch of the Greek church. 
 For though the emperor be considered as the 
 head of that church, yet no music is allowed in 
 the public worship of God, but vocal music. 
 
TO IHL 
 
 Reverend Judicatories of the Presbyterian 
 Church, in the United States. 
 
 With that respectful regard due to the 
 ministering pastors of that church, to which 
 the author of the following remarks was 
 early introduced by pious parents ; and in the 
 prosperity of which, as a Christian church 
 of purest form and principles, he may justly 
 continue to rejoice; he has been induced, 
 thus publicly, to submit the peculiar circum- 
 stances in which he found himself and fa- 
 mily placed, by the unauthorised introduc- 
 tion of instrumental music into public wor- 
 ship, in that house of God, where he had 
 been for many years a regular member. 
 
 The foundation of the Presbyterian church 
 was laid upon the ground, cleared by the Re- 
 formation from the rubbish and machinery 
 of an artificial and corrupted church ; and its 
 simple form reared, in place of the fantastic 
 structures of superstition, upon the delinea- 
 tions and practice of our Saviour and his 
 apostles. It was approved, and partly es- 
 tablished bylaw, in the countries from which 
 our population has been principally derived. 
 And indeed the attachment to it, occasioned 
 17 
 
194 
 
 (lie abandonment of all their interests then, 
 and their hazardous settlement here, in re- 
 jection of a formal and pompous worship, 
 with all the countenance of wealth and 
 power, which has always accompanied and 
 enforced it. Nor was a fear of similar impo- 
 sition, by force or fraud, Wanting among the 
 feelings that gave birth to our Revolution: 
 And the conduct of a particular body of 
 clergy, in opposition to that event, suffi- 
 ciently denoted the temper prevailing in such 
 churches. 
 
 Soon after the Revolutionary war, the 
 Presbyterian church in the United States 
 issued and circulated, through all its Pres- 
 byteries, certain constitutional standards for 
 doctrine, government and discipline; and 
 for a" Directory of Public Worship;" being, 
 in all these respects, the same as those of 
 the Church of Scotland; and identified with 
 those of the Westminster Divines, digested, 
 ratified and sanctioned, in the purest days 
 of the Reformation. 
 
 This Constitution, after seasonable 1 pc- 
 rusal, and due consideration, by all the mi- 
 nisters and members of the church, a\;is to 
 he adopted or rejected, as a majority of the 
 General Assembly might direct, agreeably 
 io the instructions received for that purpose 
 from the several Presbyteries* 
 
 It was accordingly so adopted and sanc- 
 tioned by act of the f ieneral Assembly : and 
 
195 
 
 i v preacher of the Gospel, since liceni 
 for that purpose; even member, when first 
 admitted to solemn ordinances ; and ever} 
 pastor, set apart and ordained to a charge, 
 — have been solemnly tested, as in the pre- 
 sence of God, not only for a simple appro- 
 bation of that Constitution, in all its parts, 
 but also for their unequivocal acceptance of 
 it, as founded on the word of God. 
 
 In what respects, or to what extent, inno- 
 vations have taken place, in that so solemnly 
 sanctioned Constitution, ye who stand the 
 appointed watchmen in the church of Christ, 
 can best determine. But to an individual, 
 who feels his personal obligations as a mem- 
 ber, — though under a responsibility far less 
 solemn and awful than ye have assumed 
 who minister in holy things, — some obvious 
 innovations, in our constitutional standards, 
 have been, and still are, subjects of the 
 deepest regret. 
 
 Nor is it the least grievous portion of this, 
 that though such inroads have become pub- 
 lic and notorious, no judicial steps, known 
 to him who now addresses you, have yet 
 been taken in the judicatories, either effectu- 
 ally to prevent, or explicitly to bear testi- 
 mony against, some of the most glaring — 
 especially the introduction of instrumental 
 music. 
 
 It is not intended here, to develope the 
 aberrations that may have occurred, through 
 
196 
 
 j he wide boundaries of the church under your 
 care and vigilance. Against every instance 
 of that kind, it may be impossible to guard, 
 by the utmost jealousy and Watchfulm 
 But, beside the public effect, the hardship 
 to which an individual worshipper has 
 been subjected, in that corner of the church 
 where his lot was cast, becomes a proper 
 subject of serious representation. Espe- 
 cially, when several others, as well as his 
 own family, have not only been aggrieved 
 in the same respect, but even totally sepa- 
 rated from the benefit and privileges of that 
 church to which they were attached, and in 
 which they held an interest; and the privi- 
 leges of which they had, previously, enjoyed 
 from their infancy. 
 
 It will be a proof of the writer's freedom 
 from any censorious disposition, in making 
 the present address, that he has abstained 
 from all public reflections on these matt< 
 for a series of years — That, while he felt 
 an irresistible obligation to set his face 
 against a measure, indirectly misrepresent- 
 ing the nature of that God, who has so fully 
 declared in his word, that he regards nothing 
 external, but looks to the heart. — a measure 
 which mingles with his worship that which 
 affectd only the outward senses, and for 
 which the solemn charge addresses itself to 
 
 • Who hath required this at your hands 
 — While he considered it an addition to 
 
197 
 
 God's worship of their own fancy, and for 
 their own gratification, who introduced it; 
 while it imposed a yoke not laid by Him 
 whose authority alone is acknowledged by 
 the church ; and in the manner of the proce- 
 dure violating the fundamental principles 
 of Presbyterian church government; over- 
 throwing together, private rights with public 
 institutions — That yet, notwithstanding all 
 this, avoiding division and strife, he bore the 
 injustice; and having expressed his sense of 
 it, and declared his apprehension of the un- 
 happy consequences, in a letter* to the com- 
 mittee of the church ; that letter remaining 
 unanswered, unnoticed ; and the writer still 
 unconvinced of his error, — he relinquished 
 his seat, and silently withdrew to private 
 worship, or to its public performance, in 
 other Christian assemblies; with whom, in- 
 deed, he could cordially join, though with 
 much inconvenience and derangement to 
 those whom he was bound to lead and keep 
 together. 
 
 If it still be asked, why no reference was 
 made to the judicatories of the church, in a 
 case affecting its order and worship, as well 
 as the rights of the congregation ? It may 
 be answered farther, that this particular inno- 
 vation appearing to be, indirectly, sanctioned 
 by the acquiescence of our Presbytery and 
 
 a copy of that letter at the close of this adfresi 
 
 n* 
 
193 
 
 Synod, it was sufficient to admonish an indi- 
 \idual, that his complaints might be vainly 
 offered on the subject. Nor could relief be 
 attained, but by such processes as did not 
 comport with the employments of the writer 
 to pursue. The congregation also, having 
 submitted to the disposition of a few mem- 
 bers, in another case, whereby their own or- 
 der and appointment were set at nought, in 
 establishing a pecuniary allowance to the 
 minister, — it might have appeared as arro- 
 gating too much to himself, for any one 
 to place his individual objections in oppo- 
 sition to the wishes of the pastor, and the 
 same supporters, with the apparent approba- 
 tion of a whole Presbytery and Synod. 
 
 It may not be amiss to mention, that pre- 
 vious to the singular introduction of an Or- 
 gan into the church where the writer and his 
 family worshipped, some wandering incli- 
 nations appeared, in its pastor, to the adop- 
 tion of portions of the liturgy of a sister 
 church; and the M Gloria Patrt" &c. was in- 
 troduced, — all the congregation standing up. 
 However piously these things may be re- 
 garded, by those long in their practice; or 
 however acquiesced with by others, as in 
 their nature indifferent : yet, when taken into 
 v ie\v. as connected with other circumstances, 
 
 involving some important interests of the 
 
 church, they could not he considered in that 
 
 light bj your addresser: though his dis- 
 
199 
 
 approbation was manifested only by non- 
 compliance. A superstitious respect to a par- 
 ticular part of the same act of worship, was 
 enough to require such a course, from any 
 one aware of its common effects ; but it ap- 
 peared also a servile imitation of others, and 
 unsanctioned by that " Directory" which 
 the pastor, and indeed every member of that 
 church, was solemnly pledged to maintain. 
 The love of novelty, and the influence of 
 fancy, are ever working changes; and are 
 not restrained by the sanctity of any table of 
 duties, though inscribed by the finger of God. 
 Hence those additions that obscured, or over- 
 whelmed, first the worship, and finally the 
 knowledge of the Deity, in all ages. But 
 the nature of true worship, like the nature 
 of its object, changes not. 
 
 If the adding to, or the taking away from, 
 the code of divine revelation, be laid under 
 the most awful prohibition, can any change 
 in the immediate act of address to its Au- 
 thor, be of light consideration ? To prevent 
 this, have not the institutions of our church 
 been established, with the utmost fear and 
 caution ? Is all this care to come to nought, 
 under pretences of indifference, or even of 
 merit? But, that you, and all, should be on 
 the watch against these, there is before you 
 the fullest exhibition, in the past history of 
 the church, that things, equally as small, and 
 by some as much commended, brought in 
 
200 
 
 again and again, have actually changed and 
 corrupted all religion throughout the world; 
 even so far as to bring down the visitation 
 of God, to cleanse his temple from things 
 esteemed indifferent, or sanctioned by men 
 as useful. Yet they, who oppose the intro- 
 duction of innovations, are stigmatized by 
 the wise and zealous introducers, as men of 
 narrow and bigoted minds; superstitious, 
 and rigidly moulded in antique casts, — with- 
 out the pleasing refinement that abates the 
 spirit, and exalts the forms, of modern de- 
 votion! It is true, that " wisdom is justified 
 of her children ;" — such presumptions might 
 be scorned; those advancing them may be 
 pitied ; but no man, who feels that his res- 
 ponsibility rests where the changeful dic- 
 tations of human fancies will never be ad- 
 mitted, can easily permit himself to be borne 
 along by the throng of innovators, or si- 
 lenced when conscience bids him remon- 
 strate against them. 
 
 Innovations, in such a spirit of triumphant 
 self-complacency, are seldom complimentary 
 to individuals, or to their impressions, how- 
 ever pure or pious. Thus, when all things 
 were prepared^ without further notice, in- 
 struments of music and chorus-singing were 
 speedily introduced, without either congre- 
 gational or Presbyterial sanction, constitu- 
 tional]) obtained. So that those who were 
 taken by surprise, and precluded from pri- 
 
201 
 
 vileges by the measure, and who could not 
 bend to the imposition of being arbitrarily be- 
 reft of their privileges, were left to take their 
 course, in any new direction^ with " Provi- 
 dence their guide." 
 
 That an instance of this kind should in- 
 duce others, actuated by similar views and 
 motives, to avail themselves of the prece- 
 dent, was to be expected. Such as are con- 
 scious to themselves of any dereliction of 
 duty, concur as readily with similar innova- 
 tors, as these, on their part, do with such an 
 example. Accordingly, another congrega- 
 tion, in the bounds of the same Presbytery, 
 soon introduced this mechanical Organ-ser- 
 vice ; not only without obtaining the sanc- 
 tion or assent of the Presbytery, but in di- 
 rect opposition to some of its most pious 
 and faithful members; and that, too, in de- 
 fiance of discord and separation. 
 
 That such proceedings should have oc- 
 curred in the bosom of one of your judica- 
 tories, where so many watchmen are placed 
 to guard the important interests of the church, 
 and the constitutional standards they are so 
 solemnly pledged to maintain in all their pri- 
 mitive purity, — to one individual, at least, 
 appears wholly unaccountable. 
 
 However well founded these impressions 
 maybe, and however much to be regretted 
 the effects which such proceedings are calcu- 
 lated to produce, and actually have produced, 
 
202 
 
 it is nevertheless admitted, that a presump- 
 tion might be indulged by some, that no 
 violation of the Constitution had taken 
 place; and that every Presbyterian congre- 
 gation, under your jurisdiction, was at li- 
 berty to new-model its own public worship, 
 as it suited their own particular taste and 
 circumstances. That there are many who 
 consider themselves under no restrictions in 
 this respect, is pretty evident ; and it is not 
 easy to conceive how it should be otherwise, 
 when palpable deviations either pass unno- 
 ticed, or are tacitly acquiesced with, by 
 those whose solemn duty it is, not only to 
 pray for, but to watch over and guard, the 
 purity of our constitutional principles. 
 
 It is a serious consideration, that though 
 there be probably no system of church go- 
 vernment more congenial than our own w ith 
 the principles practised on by our Lord and 
 his disciples, or that affords more free and 
 ample means for procuring a redress of any 
 hardship, under which an individual may be 
 brought, in the due exercise of his religious 
 privileges; yet such is the predominance, ac- 
 quired and acted on by some pastors, in la 
 and influential congregations, as to absorb 
 every idea of an appeal to the judicatories 
 of the church; and, consequently, their will 
 and decision become often as arbitrary, and 
 as well supported by those who join them, 
 as if they were ; diocesan? bishops* 
 
203 
 
 This, to some, unacquainted with all the 
 circumstances on which it is founded, may 
 appear to be too severe an animadversion. 
 It is indeed hoped and believed, that in- 
 stances which would justify it are rare in 
 our churches. But this neither invalidates 
 the case here submitted, nor alleviates the 
 injustice of the innovations, to which the 
 author of these remarks, as well as others, 
 was subjected. On the contrary, the more 
 generally the great body of the church en- 
 joy its purity and its privileges, guaranteed 
 to them by its constitution, the more griev- 
 ous must a deprivation be felt in any corner 
 of its extended pale. 
 
 Whatever reasons formerly recommended 
 silence on this interesting subject, the pre- 
 sent is viewed as a fit occasion, — not yet out 
 of season, — for the observations now offered. 
 The correctness of former impressions might 
 not have been without some doubt. But 
 these are now revived and strengthened by 
 an accession of light and information; which, 
 it is to be regretted, were not derived from 
 that quarter where we might have supposed 
 a still greater attachment to reformation prin- 
 ciples existed; and where, on other subjects 
 and occasions, steps were soon taken to 
 guard against the innovations of some of 
 those transatlantic churches, whose uncor- 
 rupted constitution we had here adopted. 
 
 The able and luminous discussion in the 
 
204 
 
 Presbytery ol Glasgow, in Scotland, to 
 
 which this is annexed, has amply justified 
 the impressions before entertained on the 
 subject. These appear to be now sanctioned 
 
 by an authority, as well as by abilities and 
 arguments, which, it may be presumed, no 
 friend to tin 4 reformed parity 01 Presbyterian 
 worship, can feel disposed to controvert. 
 They arc not particularly adapted to the 
 state of the church as established in Scot- 
 land; but are equally so to all who have 
 vowed to serve God in consonance with the 
 same " Directory" for public worship, in 
 every part of the world. 
 
 Laying aside all consideration of what is 
 local or national in that learned and libera] 
 discussion, the introduction of instrumental 
 music into any Presbyterian church, or in- 
 deed into any Christian church founded on 
 the principles of the Reformation, is, above 
 all controversy, proved to be without New 
 Testament authority; and is therefore in 
 opposition to the true tenour and spirit of 
 the Gospel of Christ; as well as to his ever* 
 blessed example and practice, when he led 
 his disciples away from the splendour of the 
 temple service, and instructed them. that, se- 
 parated from the embellishments of worldlj 
 pomp, those who acceptably worship God, 
 must worship him kk in spirit and in truth." 
 
 It is rendered equaU) evident, thai Ofgan- 
 service is in opposition to the Wk Director) 
 
tor Pul)lic Worship ;" and consequently, thai 
 no minister in connexion with the Presby- 
 terian church, and much less any Presbytery 
 or Synod, under ordination vows to support 
 or accord therewith; could, innocently, or 
 constitutionally, consent to its introduction, 
 in public worship. 
 
 To plead that the " Directory" does not, 
 expressly, prohibit the use of Organs ; and 
 that their introduction is, therefore, no vio- 
 lation of that part of our constitution ; would 
 be only a wanton trifling with sacred things, 
 with vows and obligations. Upon such rea- 
 sons, it is not easy to see how much may be 
 introduced ; or w hat, that is absurd and er- 
 roneous, can be excluded. But our Cate- 
 chisms, in showing what is forbidden in the 
 Second command of the Decalogue, ex- 
 pressly assign a prohibition of all " will- 
 worship," and whatever is unsanctioned by 
 the word and practice of Christ, and his 
 apostles. 
 
 There is still an argument, that will have 
 its proper weight with the pious, whose af- 
 fections towards God are inseparably accom- 
 panied with the truest sympathy and con- 
 cern for their fellow men. Of this the 
 learned and able opponents of Organ-wor- 
 ship, in the Presbytery of Glasgow, seem 
 not to have availed themselves ; at least to 
 its full extent. Not only the spirit of the 
 Gospel, but that worship also which it in- 
 18 
 
206 
 
 traduced in j)lace of the temple-service, W( 
 uniformly, characterized by our Saviour's 
 example and instructions, as equally adapted 
 to all men, under every possible circum- 
 stance ; but in a more especial manner, to 
 the poor of this world. A mode of social 
 worship, adapted to the pride or to the taste 
 of the affluent, and wholly unattainable by 
 the poor, has no foundation or sanction in 
 the Gospel of the Son of God : and when 
 the expense of Organs, and the talents ne- 
 cessary for any harmonious accompaniment 
 of the service, is considered, it cannot be too 
 much to assert, that such a mode of praising 
 God is unattainable by most of the churches 
 in this or other countries. Indeed, most of 
 the vocal performers are silenced, and the 
 poor have retired to other churches, or to 
 different employments, on the Sabbath. For, 
 shall it be allowed us to say, " That the 
 yoke is no longer easy, nor the burden 
 light?" 
 
 Something has been said to the contrary 
 of all this; for something must be said — That 
 many, for instance, are induced to attend the 
 church by the charms of improved music: 
 and that some, who seem to decline joining 
 vocally in the praises of God, may lay aside 
 their reluctance, from Whatever cause it 
 arises, and take their pari in unison with the 
 instrument. This is not the fact, and is 
 contrary to the nature of men; who indeed 
 
207 
 
 catch a sympathetic enthusiasm from each 
 other, but in private or public, in as far as 
 divine worship is concerned, manifest great 
 coldness to instrumental music, — as every 
 day's observation evinces. A few amateurs 
 may, indeed, be induced to display their 
 vocal powers and attainments; or join the 
 harmony of sounds they admire ; but it can 
 hardly be said they add to the number of 
 worshippers, though they may to the audi- 
 ence of the minister. Indeed, it is not un- 
 common to find, in some of our churches, 
 men of no approved manners, taking the lead 
 in this way, in the most solemn parts of our 
 devotional service ; too plainly disclosing an 
 impious taste and propensity of preferring 
 musical skill in the worship of God, to piety 
 of principle, to the worship of the affections, 
 and the devotion of the soul. 
 
 It may not be amiss to consider the length 
 of time in which the primitive purity of the 
 church continued, not only without the fa- 
 vour of the world, but under its derision and 
 hatred. It never conciliated the great and 
 fashionable, the tasty and refined, by ac- 
 commodating itself to their desires and fan- 
 cies. It subdued them by the simple spirit 
 of goodness, and the power of truth, which 
 scorned all artifice. But, when Imperial 
 pride joined its vain parade, and when the 
 world courted, it forsook its Master ; lost its 
 original brightness and simplicity; sought 
 
208 
 
 an artificial and gaudy splendour; soothed 
 and swelled itself with pompous, but empty 
 souad ; increased in ceremonies as it lessened 
 in piety ; — and, instead of salvation, brought 
 subjection and slavery upon men. That in 
 our so favoured laud, where lordly power 
 has lost its dominion, its tinsel glitter, affect- 
 ed mien, and worthless pretensions, which 
 appear as the broken image of Dagon, in 
 church and state, before our nobler, simpler 
 institutes, — that there should be a friendly 
 feeling towards the debasing influence of 
 such mixtures, must excite shame as well as 
 regret. But, how should they feel, who have 
 participated in it, in the very face of solemn 
 obligations to the contrary ? 
 
 It may bo said, that the decision of a fo- 
 reign and distant Presbytery, with which 
 we have no connexion, and over whom we 
 have no jurisdiction, can be no precedent for 
 us; and, therefore, can render any innova- 
 tions of ours, neither more nor less valid. 
 This is an objection only to authority, and 
 not to the sanctions of reason or revelation. 
 It might have some weight, perhaps, were 
 that foreign Presbytery not a portion of the 
 same church of Christ; or founded on other 
 principles, sanctioned by any other authority, 
 or regulated l>\ any different standards than 
 
 those which we also have solemnly adopted. 
 
 But as ill all these we are perfectly one and 
 the same, however unconnected and sepa 
 
' 209 
 
 Tated in other respects, such an objection, 
 we cannot but suppose, neither will, nor 
 ought to have weight with intelligent minds. 
 It certainly cannot be said, that we have any 
 greater temptations to indulge in a gaudy 
 and pompous worship than those to which 
 they are exposed. As little do our manners 
 and habits, or the example of neighbours, 
 or the distinction of ranks, — so coveted by 
 the vain, but wisely brushed away from even 
 our civil concerns, — afford any plea or pre- 
 text for such disquieting innovations. 
 
 Indeed, the very reverse of what they ex- 
 perience in these respects, is our happy situ- 
 ation. For though we may have here and 
 there a few, who are taken with the mere- 
 tricious invitations of external show, even in 
 sacred things; yet, the happy simplicity of 
 our best principles, whether civil or religious, 
 is, in many essential respects, more favour- 
 able to the purity of our " Directory for Pub- 
 lic Worship," than that which they possess: 
 — and it might be added, than what was ex- 
 perienced by the Fathers of the Reforma- 
 tion, or enjoyed even by the apostles and 
 primitive Christians themselves. To be in- 
 sensible, therefore, of these blessings and 
 privileges, or to neglect the maintaining of 
 them, so far as to admit, or tacitly acquiesce 
 with, any inroad in a quarter of that church 
 with which we stand connected, is little less 
 than apostacy ; especially in the most hal- 
 18* 
 
210 
 
 lowed and vital part of our religion — the 
 immediate worship of the ever-present God ; 
 before whom we are admonished not to act 
 inconsiderately, but " to be more ready to 
 hear than to offer the sacrifice of folly." 
 
 This, it may be said, is speaking " with 
 all boldness." But it is the way in which 
 we are commanded to speak the truth — and 
 especially, when brought to the test, in be- 
 half of religious truth, endangered by dege- 
 neracy and corruption. 
 
 But, if it be grating to some, let them re- 
 member the epithets of " bigotry, narrow- 
 ness, and prejudice," applied to those they 
 first aggrieved, and then aspersed. 
 
 Liberality, is a just estimation of the es- 
 sentials or circumstances of things, and their 
 relative influence, according to the im- 
 portance of the objects — treating the little, 
 lightly; and the great, with grave regard. 
 It indulges weakness and infirmity; but 
 would lose its name and nature in counte- 
 nancing folly or error. The transcendent 
 importance of religious intercourse with the 
 Lord of life, " the' Holy One," — forbids the 
 light admixture of fancy's forms. These 
 must stand aloof, as the solemn, awful busi- 
 ness proceeds. They will retire, unable to 
 bear its weight) seriousness. But shall any 
 claim the sanction of liberality, while they 
 
 fly to the " paradise of fools,'* because " to 
 few unknown." 
 
211 
 
 In whatever light these strictures may be 
 viewed, either by those to whom they are 
 addressed, or by the public in general, it is 
 sufficient for the author, that he is impelled 
 by a conscious sense of duty in giving them 
 publicity. Far from indulging an accusatory 
 spirit, he has submitted, for years, to the 
 grievance of which he complains. And 
 though not unknown to those whose duty 
 it was to remedy, or at least to alleviate the 
 wrong; he, at no time, experienced this sym- 
 pathy, much less any overture for convincing 
 him of his error, in a Christian way, if error 
 it was. On the contrary, he seems to have 
 been deemed one, whose scruples might be 
 troublesome to the changeful and assuming 
 spirit of the period — And, though unstriving, 
 yet preserving a countenance of disapproba- 
 tion, too unpleasant and foreboding to be 
 retained within the fold ; and better cast out 
 than preserved, in opposition to pastoral or 
 congregational innovations, however uncon- 
 stitutionally introduced. 
 
 J. M°. 
 
 Baltimore , April, 1821. 
 
COPY OF A LETTER 
 
 To the Incorporated Committee of the Church, <yc. 
 alluded to in the preceding Address, and to 
 which no reply ivas received. 
 
 Gentlemen, Baltmoh*, August, 1811. 
 
 In consequence of the change made in the ser- 
 vice of the church, by adding instrumental music 
 to the worship of God, I am constrained to per- 
 form that duty in the association of other Chris- 
 tians; and to abandon the pew which I have 
 hitherto held, to your disposal. 
 
 Thus far, I suppose, you are the proper body 
 to communicate with. But to whom may be ad- 
 dressed the observations which I feel inclined to 
 offer, on the nature of the change, and the man- 
 ner in which it has been compassed? I am sen- 
 sible, that you may tell me it did not proceed from 
 you, nor is within the proper sphere of your du- 
 ties; and, as duties and powers are correlative, 
 that the committee could have no power for that 
 which was no duty. But as there is no one who 
 appears to be principal, where many are partici- 
 pators; and where every one also may, and in as 
 far as I know, does disclaim the responsibility for 
 an act, the consequences of which are as yet un- 
 seen; and may be attended with an accountability 
 that very few, who contemplate it, may be wil- 
 ling to incur; 1 must beg leave to express the 
 thoughts and feelings, produced by that measure. 
 to the body I am now writing to, and who cer- 
 tainly possess such influence in administering the 
 
213 
 
 general affairs of the church, that an innovation 
 so considerable, could hardly be supposed to have 
 taken place without their concurrence. If offence 
 be given, and injury done, to the church of God, 
 though every one who has contributed to it must 
 bear their part of the condemnation, yet they 
 who have authority and power, must answer dou- 
 bly for the failure or transgression. Upon this 
 acknowledged principle of divine precept, and 
 human consciousness, whatever is chargeable to 
 those who originated the measure, your body, as 
 well as the pastor and elders to whom, under the 
 congregation, the administration of the spiritual 
 and temporal affairs of the church are committed y 
 have no common share of blame, as well as the 
 peculiar one of failure, or unfaithfulness, in offi- 
 cial duty. 
 
 It cannot be expected that you will do less than 
 justify the deed, and repel the imputation ; which 
 you may, perhaps, in the common way, style or 
 denominate the offspring of narrowness of mind, 
 and illiberality. But though I would neither 
 violate charity by presumptuous censure, nor fail 
 in meekness of manners while venturing to re- 
 prove; yet it becomes necessary to remonstrate, 
 with plainness and decision, 011 a case affecting 
 the rights of the congregation, and the interests 
 of religion* — And, I may add, a procedure that 
 flagrantly violates the common principles of so- 
 ciety, as well as the peculiar ones of the Presby- 
 terian church; — that rejects acknowledged prin- 
 ciples, unsettles received and established usages, 
 and abandons open and legitimate deliberation; 
 
 * This alludes to the innovation bchi£ unsanctioned by the 
 proper authorities 
 
214 
 
 and substitutes a clandestine mode and a varying 
 principle of conveniency — for a part, to elude 
 the combined judgment of the ivhole. 
 
 Are not all those, who have objections to exter- 
 nal, mechanical, instrumental machinery, in the 
 service of God, utterly contemned, overruled, and 
 borne down by such a procedure as has been 
 adopted, in placing an Organ in the church ? 
 Was any one ignorant that it would offend many ? 
 Was this offence to be given, and their rights to 
 be suppressed, as of no consideration; and with 
 the most contemptuous determination to introduce 
 what was the purpose of a part of the congrega- 
 tion, through a private act of subscription, with- 
 out deigning to propose it for the consent of the 
 whole, to receive or hear objections, or allowing 
 any free discussion of the measurer Has it not, 
 hitherto, been universally held to be a principle of 
 Presbyterian church-association, that a matter of 
 such general concern, should be the subject of the 
 whole congregation's consideration, judgment, 
 and order? It has been said by one, whose station 
 in the church ought to manifest peculiar caution 
 and tenderness, " that it would not have been 
 Presbyterial, to submit the matter thus to the con- 
 gregation." Perhaps it is the first time this has 
 been said openly, in any of our churches in Ame- 
 rica; and it behoves, therefore, all the Presby- 
 terian congregations to look well to themselves, 
 if they value their privileges. If an election of 
 a pastor, elders, and a committee, can divest the 
 people of all power and right to judge and deter- 
 mine on the regulation of the service of the church, 
 they are under the most slavish subjection, and 
 are left only with the privilege of choosing their 
 Iters. But, it may be apprehended that the 
 
216 
 
 Presbyterian people will feel the refutation of such 
 egregious assertions, in themselves; and by their 
 powerful sentence put down the heresy. For 
 what is there in the character or office of any, or 
 of all of those, whereon to found such a usurpa- 
 tion ? Neither bishops, ruling elders, committees, 
 nor trustees, have any such powers attached to 
 their offices, characters, or trusts. 
 
 The truth is, that the consciousness that this 
 favourite object, of a few, could hardly endure 
 the trial of a public discussion, dictated the surer 
 mode of imposing it by a private engagement; 
 and suggested the idea of justifying a hardy as- 
 sumption of power, leading to the claim and 
 avowal of one still greater; and thus showing 
 more clearly than ever, the necessity for our con- 
 stitutional standards of union, and the principles 
 which they inculcate for adhering to those rules, 
 provided for the considering, judging, and deter- 
 mining on every important matter affecting con- 
 gregational interests, in the assembly of the 
 people. 
 
 They who consider themselves aggrieved in 
 this affair, are not concerned only for the dis- 
 placement they surfer in the church. Injured, as 
 they justly feel themselves, in their rights; and 
 that perhaps chiefly by those received into the 
 society as of yesterday; obliged to abandon the 
 scats made almost sacred to them by years of de- 
 votional occupancj'; and with recollections, also, 
 retrospective on the humbler building on the same 
 ^pot; but on which they never had dreamed that 
 their rights would have been invaded, by their 
 contribution to more comfortable accommoda- 
 tion; — how is it possible to be silent under such 
 circumstances? Not only the violation of a cha- 
 
2\6 
 
 ritable regard to themselves, the peace and union 
 of the church, but the interest of religion itself, ex- 
 cite their apprehensions; and compel them to bear 
 a testimony against the admission of unworthy and 
 frivolous matters into the adoration of that infinite 
 Spirit, who claims the heart and the thoughts, 
 and rejects every operation for that purpose, 
 merely external. It cannot, indeed, be the ex- 
 travagant acknowledgment of any, that an Or- 
 gan is introduced as ailbrding any pleasure to the 
 Deity; or, that empty sounds can be received by 
 him, as acceptable worship. But they must have 
 it in his worship, it seems, for the purpose of im- 
 proving the music. But in what consists this im- 
 provement? and by whom is it required? " Who 
 has required this at our hands?" It has never 
 been demanded or prescribed by Him, who is 
 " the way, the truth, and the life," of all Gospel 
 worship. He has, at no time, complained of bad 
 music in our truly devout service; but too often 
 has had reason to denounce inattentive, heartless 
 worshippers. There would seem, then, but little 
 reason to doubt, that they who are so fond of 
 music, mean to please themselves more than to 
 please God. Thus, what ought in truth to be 
 considered a mere luxurious sensation, they would 
 view as sufficiently meritorious to have a place in 
 the most solemn service of the church! 
 
 It might be viewed as invidious, to inquire, 
 how far this reason or motive appears in the per- 
 sons who actually join in the service; or in those 
 who are, usually, silent hearers only. It might 
 be equally so to surmise, that the musical taste of 
 the parlour is too refined and exalted, to be sub- 
 jected to the humble simplicity of the church. 
 However this be, we presume that it is to the 
 
217 
 
 truly devout worshippers alone, that any appeai 
 should be made for the aid to be expected from 
 the introduction of Organs into the solemn wor- 
 ship of the Most High. 
 
 As this worship requires not only the thoughts, 
 but also the affections, being kept close to Him, 
 while they utter the sounds of praise; so ought 
 they not to be distracted by such attention as is 
 necessary to the symphony with a musical instru- 
 ment. Indeed we need hardly fear contradiction 
 in asserting, that in as far as plain, easy, simple 
 music is set aside, and a more artificial composi- 
 tion employed, so far is true spiritual worship dis- 
 composed, troubled, and interrupted. But the 
 common music in our churches has seldom, per- 
 haps never, disquieted the worship of any reli- 
 gious man, in the house of God. There, the most 
 refined in the musical art, might not satisfy those 
 who feel no devotion of the heart. It is a solemn 
 and serious duty that all are called upon to per- 
 form there, and not the empty entertainment of 
 the eye or the ear. But should this be preferred, 
 and an undue respect to the luxury of sound be 
 allowed to temper the spiritual service, the bad 
 effects cannot fail to appear. Surely the coun- 
 tenance of him who is Lord of the church, can- 
 not be expected in such worship. He cannot, 
 will not be imposed on by pretences to improving 
 his service; while, at same time, we are seeking 
 our own pleasure in a way which he hath not ap- 
 pointed. 
 
 If a view to increase the number of attendants 
 
 on public worship give influence to the measure, 
 
 rest assured, that it is an unhappy policy, indeed, 
 
 that never will be blessed, nor what it aims nf 
 
 19 
 
2)8 
 
 realized. The state of the churches which have 
 exercised such helps in devotion and attend- 
 ance, sufficiently demonstrates the benefits af- 
 forded in both, or in either of these respects* 
 
 A- nothing is more shocking, on reflection, than 
 that of the idea of intelligent beings, professing 
 to meet for the worship of an omniscient and holy 
 God ; and yet mocking him by a fictitious, instead 
 pf a real, regard; or by praising him in a way 
 more adapted to their own amusement than to the 
 purity of his worship; so is it still an aggravation 
 of this, when introduced in an unauthorised or un- 
 sanctioned manner. In such service, even the or- 
 ganist and bellows-blower are criminally made to 
 attend to mechanical exertion, for the production 
 of senseless sounds, while the praises of God are 
 going on and they standing in his presence, for the 
 purpose of pleasing or serving their fellow men. 
 In what light can we suppose God to be looking 
 down upon such a scene, where many are waiting 
 on him only in appearance, but in reality serving 
 themselves? Let such things, therefore, as have 
 no connexion with true devotion, be removed to 
 where they may innocently be enjoyed. They 
 have no business in our churches. Why should 
 they who desire them, seek to place theft] there, 
 to the annoyance of others, or to the general in- 
 jury of the church ? Can they not be induced to 
 attend in the house of God, unless it be rendered 
 a more amusing place f Even a thing, in itself 
 indifferent, loses that nature, and become- offen- 
 sive, when either misused or misplaced: And 
 misplaced every thing must !><', and especially in 
 public worship, if intended to gratifj the proud 
 and vain, rather than the humble and contrite 
 
219 
 
 worshipper; or, in other words, that is better 
 calculated to please men, than Him who is to be 
 worshipped only " in spirit and in truth." 
 
 All the various appendages of instruments, 
 choirs, chantries, dresses, altars, pictures, im;» 
 Sec. kc; that enormous mass of worthless things 
 that overwhelmed religion, have, from time to 
 time, been introduced under like specious pretexts 
 of being innocent, and helpful to devotion; and 
 as being in themselves solemn, decent incentives to 
 piety and the service of God; producing reverence 
 in the beholders and hearers, &;c. But is it a truth 
 of which Presbyterians require to be convinced, or 
 even informed, that all these things became a nox- 
 ious, pestilent heap, under which the religion of 
 Christ long groaned, and had almost expired i 
 Our ancestors at the Reformation, of immortal me- 
 mory, cleared off the very rubbish of their ruins; 
 and embraced only the rational and spiritual wor- 
 ship of Jehovah, in all the simplicity of spontane- 
 ous prayer, praise, and administration of the ordi- 
 nances of the Gospel. And though splenetic wit, 
 and interested prejudice, have designated the pure 
 state of the Presbyterian church, as too bare, and 
 " stript until it was torn;" yet the impartial word 
 of revelation describes it differently ; while the 
 imaginary benefits, fancied by those who retained 
 so much of that so well fitted to strike the mere 
 external senses of men, have never been such as 
 to afford any reason for regret for their rejection 
 from our service in the sanctuary. If so, why 
 should we attempt, even in a legitimate way, to 
 bring them back ? 
 
 The dishonest attempt to cheat mankind into a 
 reverence of holy things, by show, and sound, 
 and pomp, "has verily had its reward." To one 
 
220 
 
 part of this system of vanity, however, we have 
 long assented. We have indulged our clergymen 
 with a sanctified-like costume, at which their pre- 
 decessors of the Reformation would have spurned 
 with indignation; not on account of the sable as- 
 pect of the vesture itself, but merely from the con- 
 sciousness of their being in need of no such ap- 
 pendage, — merely external. To this indulgence 
 we are now adding that of organs, and choral 
 music. To be honoured with titular rank, de- 
 grees and dignities, comes in, next in course ; so 
 that by and by it seems that, step by step, we 
 shall get back to the point from which we started 
 at the Reformation ; and thus verify the predic- 
 tive taunts of all the enemies of the simplicity of 
 the Gospel. 
 
 Here permit me to leave you, Gentlemen, with 
 my very friendly respects, though with the feel- 
 ings of an injured member. 
 
 Your obedient servant, &c. 
 
 J. M. 
 
I