FROM THE LIBRARY OF 
 REV. LOUIS FITZGERALD BENSON, D. D, 
 
 BEQUEATHED BY HIM TO 
 
 THE LIBRARY OF 
 
 PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY 
 
 ***** bOOO 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2013 
 
 http://archive.org/details/stproceOOpres 
 
*.* 
 
A 
 
 § T ATE M ENT 
 
 OF THE 
 
 PROCEEDINGS 
 
 Or THE 
 
 $resftpter? cf C5lasgoto, 
 
 RELATIVE TO THE USE OF 
 
 A. JV o m a si JY 
 
 IN 
 
 St. J uircl), 
 
 IN THE PUBLIC HIP OF COD, 
 
 ON 'J, I '-■ ST, 1807. 
 
 GLASGOW, 
 
 PRINTED BY W. LA NO, t>2, BELI-5TREIT, 
 
 SOLD BY M. OGLE, WILSON-STREET J 
 
 AND J. STfcVEN & CO. GLASGOW; OGLE & AlK 
 AND P. HILL, EDINBURGH 5 R. OGLE, 
 AND T. HAMILTON, LONDON. 
 
 1808. 
 
P R E F *4 C E. 
 
 bucH gross misrepresentations have gone abroad, 
 relative to the conduct of the Presbytery of Glas- 
 gow, in what has been styled the Organ Cause, that 
 regard for the honour of the Minister more imme- 
 diately implicated in this affair, as well as justice to 
 the character of the Brethren, demand that the er- 
 roneous opinions which have been so industriously 
 circulated, should be instantly repelled, and the facts 
 and circumstances connected with this very singular 
 business, fairly and impartially stated as they occurred. 
 
 Whether such misrepresentations ought to be 
 ascribed to ignorance or ill nature, will be difficult 
 to determine. The world, however, has been cen- 
 sorious enough to insinuate, that i ted vanity, 
 ami misguided zeal, have had too great a share in 
 giving them body, vigour, and popularity. 
 
 Had we lived in an age when men were uniform- 
 ly actuated by a sacred regard to truth, and capa- 
 ble ot discriminating always betwixt truth and false- 
 hood, we would have thought it superfluous to have 
 
IV 
 
 wasted a moment of time, in attempting to unde- 
 ceive the public. They would very soon have un- 
 deceived themselves. 
 
 But in the present age, when scurrility too often 
 usurps the place of wit, when effrontery styles it- 
 self independence . of spirit, and when downright 
 falsehood arrogates to herself the honourable titles 
 of candour and liberality of sentiment, a very dif- 
 ferent conduct must be observed, by every man 
 who has character to lose. " Rebuke with all au- 
 " thority: let no man despise thee," are the injunc- 
 tions of one who knew well how far motives of de- 
 licacy, and the principles of the Gospel, require 
 Christian Ministers to sit in silence under the in- 
 sulting tongue of the scorner. 
 
 Even Christian " charity, which suffereth long, 
 " and is kind," orders us to shake off this mental 
 apathy, which hath hitherto only provoked the re- 
 iteration of injuries: She says, the moment is now 
 come, when not only selfxdefence, the honour of 
 our Ecclesiastical Order, and the purity of our Nation- 
 ill Worship; but likewise, what we believe to be 
 an essential truth of the everlasting Gospel, impe- 
 riously call upon us to detect unfounded slanders, 
 to expose them to the indignation and abhorrence of 
 every honest and virtuous mind; — and to let the 
 world know, that the judgment passed by the Pres- 
 bytery of Glasgow, on the 7th of October, 1807, 
 prohibiting the use of Organs in all the Churches 
 and Chapels within their jurisdiction, was founded 
 
©n the "Word of God, agreeable to the Law of the 
 Land, and to the Law and Constitution of the Estab- 
 lished Church of Scotland. 
 
 Does not every Scotsman know, that had the 
 Presbytery passed an improper judgment, a com- 
 plaint or an appeal was competent to their Ec- 
 clesiastical Superiors? But neither complaint nor 
 appeal was made. Does not every Scotsman 
 know, that had the Presbytery treated any Mem- 
 ber of Court with that cruelty which has been 
 laid to their charge, they were amenable to the 
 Laws of their Country? And had they been so 
 wantonly tyrannical, as even to attempt to deprive 
 any body of Christians of " their just hereditary 
 " rights," does not every Scotsman know, that there 
 is a legal and constitutional method, by which re- 
 dress might honourably be obtained ? 
 
 But the Public conduct of a legal constituted 
 Court, recognized and protected by the State, an.i 
 acting in their judicial capacity, must not be attack- 
 ed and vilified by an obscure individual: nor the 
 Lord Provost, Magistrates, and Council of the City 
 of Glasgow, following out the precise line of con- 
 duct prescribed to them by their predecessors in 
 office, be, with impunity, calumniated by an anonv- 
 mous Pamphleteer. 
 
 Docs not eveiy virtuous and honest man clearly 
 
 perceive, that in wantonly addressing Letters to the 
 
 Lord Provost about an Ecclesiastical business, the 
 
 Writer could have no other object in view, than the 
 
 a 3 
 
VI 
 
 gratification of private malice, or the ill=timed 'de- 
 fence of Irish Roman Catholic Claims (which he 
 hath so irregularly foisted into his production) or 
 the disseminating among tW multitude, writings 
 which have a manifest tendency to bring the most 
 respectable constituted Civil Authorities into con- 
 tempt, with those who are taught to hate all order 
 in Church and State. 
 
 Why are Records and Letters designedly mis- 
 quoted, so as to perplex and mislead the unwary 
 reader. Why is the plain language of Epistolary 
 Writing so tortured, as to give it the appearance of 
 the technical formalities of Law ? Is it not from the 
 illiberal intention of putting an argument into the 
 mouth of the First Magistrate of the City, upon which 
 the Letterzwriter may pour ridicule, and then demo- 
 lish at pleasure ? We know not what answer the ad- 
 mirers of Instrumental Music in the Public Worship 
 of God, may give to these plain questions; nor do 
 we care. But the world can be at no loss to per- 
 ceive, that this controversy about the Organ, in the 
 Presbytery of Glasgow, the popular topic of the day, 
 is made a mere vehicle to give currency to the dis- 
 appointed malice or envy of some one, who has lit- 
 tle character to lose. 
 
 We certainly do not wish to infringe die liberty 
 of the Press. Long may it be a successful instru- 
 ment to protect innocence, to defend the Laws and 
 Constitution of our Country, and to expose the 
 . ", and lash the vanity of weak wd nre- 
 
Vll 
 
 sumptuous Authors. But when the liberty of the 
 Press is prostituted to serve the despicable purpose 
 of vilifying the conduct of the Ministers of the 
 Gospel, acting legally in their judicial capacity, 
 and confining their speeches and writings within 
 the precincts of their own court, and never either 
 directly or indirectly, soliciting the Public to inte- 
 rest themselves in the discussion, such conduct, we 
 arffim, is a gross abuse of the liberty of the Press. 
 
 If there are some unprincipled persons, actuated 
 with such a spirit of knight=errantry, as to induce 
 them to wander about in search of literary adven- 
 tures, offering their services to those who are so un- 
 wise as to purchase their venal labours, it would 
 be but fair and honest in those who employ them, 
 to give some pledge to the public that such adven- 
 turers should observe the laws of honour and truth, 
 in this warfare of words. 
 
 The public has an undoubted right to investigate 
 the motives which could induce these adventurers to 
 engage in the literary quarrels of others. The public 
 has a right to judge of their sources of information, 
 and to examine with impartiality, whether they have 
 heretofore shewn themselves to be friends to peace, to 
 good order, to decency, and to truth. Perhaps such a 
 pledge will not easily be obtained. The Lord Pro- 
 vost and Magistrates of Glasgow are known to the 
 world. The members of the Presbytery of Glasgow 
 are known to the world. The public holds a pledge 
 from these bodies of men, that they neither will state 
 
V11I 
 
 a single circumstance but what is true, nor advance 
 a single opinion but what they conceive to be just. 
 But upon an anonymous pamphleteer the public 
 hath no hold whatever. He may be, and most 
 likely is, the veriest bankrupt in private character, 
 at the very moment he is wantonly calumniating the 
 Civil Magistrates of the Country, and the Ministers 
 of Religion. To use the pen of a satyrist with pro- 
 priety, requires much good sense, much honour, and 
 much virtue. A man who labours under a natural 
 malignity of temper, and to whose soul invective 
 and calumny is daily bread, is incapable of using 
 the legitimate, poignant touches of irony. To sa- 
 tyrise, is a dangerous employment. — " Are we not 
 « in sport? are we not amusing the public, when 
 " we attempt to derogate from the respect due 
 w to constituted Civil Authority, — when we at- 
 " tempt to undermine the pillars of the Church ?" 
 — is language well known to the disciples of Paine 
 and Voltaire; and to the admirers of Paine and 
 Voltaire, we abandon the Letters of this anonymous 
 Pamphleteer. 
 
 The Presbytery of Glasgow neither began this con- 
 troversy, nor wished it to be continued. For no less 
 than two years have our ears been stunned with what 
 we then considered as idle and impertinent rumours, 
 viz. That an attempt would soon be made by the 
 Minister and Congregation of St. Andrew's Church, 
 to introduce an Organ into the Public Worship of 
 God. And to render the talc more plausible, we 
 
IX 
 
 were told, that some private person in England, had 
 bequeathed a sum of money to that Congregation of 
 the Established Church of Scotland, who should 
 first break through the prejudices of education, and 
 introduce an Organ into the Public Worship of 
 God. And that now the time was come, when 
 some enlightened, liberal, and spirited citizens of 
 Glasgow, were determined to gain this bequest. 
 Prudent people might, perhaps, be disposed to say, 
 that such conduct would be rash, but surely none 
 will deny, that it was a bold conception for the 
 Minister and Congregation of St. Andrew's, to ima- 
 gine that they alone were capable of removing the 
 religious prejudices of a whole nation, and triumph- 
 ing over the early habits and education of their 
 countrymen? This report, however, began in Sep- 
 tember, 1806, to appear something more than idle 
 rumour. For we were informed, that a petition 
 from the Congregation of St. Andrew's, accompanied 
 by a letter from their Minister, had actually been 
 sent to the Magistrates and City Council of Glasgow, 
 craving liberty to remove certain beats in that 
 Church, for the accomplishment of their plan — the 
 introduction and u^e of an Organ in Public Worship* 
 But as we were aho informed, that not only the 
 prayer of the petition had been refused, but that 
 likewise it had been strongly recommended to the 
 Petitioners, to be cautious of venturing upon such 
 a measure without first consulting their Ecclesiasti- 
 cal Superiors, we flattered ourselves that their en- 
 
thusiasm would, in due time, subside, and that by- 
 gentle and delicate treatment, the persons labouring 
 under this Musical frenzy, would be restored to 
 their senses; and that the Presbytery of Glasgow 
 would never be called upon to exert their authority, 
 to convince any Minister or Congregation of the 
 Established Church of Scotland, of the impropriety 
 of following what many would reckon divisive 
 courses, — to convince them that the uniformity 
 and purity of our Public Worship, must not be sa- 
 crificed to a blind rage for innovation, which is un- 
 happily so characteristic of the present times. 
 But we had augured wrong: — not reflecting to 
 what length an enthusiasm for Music will carry its 
 votaries; — for th.re are fanatics in Music, as well as 
 in Religion. 
 
 When we were told, that during last summer, 
 not only the young, the gay, and the idle, but like- 
 wise the old, the grave, and the busy, repaired in 
 the evenings to St. Andrew's Church, to improve 
 themselves in Sacred Music, we became apprehen- 
 sive, lest in that gaiety of heart which Music is 
 said to inspire, they might be prompted to overstep 
 the line of conduct which prudence and good sense 
 should have taught them to observe. Unfortunate- 
 ly our apprehensions were too soon verified. But 
 when an Organ had actually been introduced in- 
 to St. Andrew's Church in Public Worship upon 
 the 23d of August last, though not a little sur- 
 prized at the change which had taken place in 
 
XI 
 
 Glasgow, in matters relative to religious Wor» 
 ship, and not a little astonished at the perseve- 
 rance of the Gentlemen who seem to have framed 
 and directed the measure, the Presbytery did not 
 utter a single whisper against the private character 
 or public conduct either of the Minister or Congre- 
 gation of St. Andrew's. They never attempted, by 
 dark insinuations, to stir up the people to oppose 
 the measure, either in word or in deed. They ne- 
 ver attempted by scurrilous poems — by insidious pa- 
 ragraphs in newspapers — nor by anonymous pam- 
 phlets — to pervert the judgment, or poison the mind 
 of the public. When the business was brought 
 before them in their judicial capacity, by the Chief 
 Magistrate of the City, (whose bounden and sacred 
 duty it is to take care that the uniformity and puri- 
 ty of Public Worship be preserved, and all abuses 
 reformed, and for performing which sacred duty 
 the Lord Provost has been so unjustly calumniated,) 
 the same forbearance and lenity marked every part 
 of the Presbytery's conduct. They did not even en- 
 ter upon the discussion, conceiving that Dr. Ritchie 
 would reflect seriously upon the consequences, and 
 kindly save them from the disagreeable task of even 
 appearing to wound his private feelings, in the dis- 
 charge of their public duty to God and their Coun- 
 try. Nay, even upon the 7th October, so con- 
 descending were they, that it must be remembered 
 by Dr. Ritchie, that every honourable attempt was 
 made by the Presbytery to have the matter settled, 
 
Xll 
 
 before they proceeded to the business of the day. 
 It was even proposed to expunge from the Presby- 
 tery record every word which had any relation to 
 this singular business, if Dr. Ritchie would but 
 give the Presbytery any reasonable pledge that 
 he would never again agitate the subject. But he 
 could not be prevailed upon to say any more than 
 what he had already said upon the 2d of September, 
 " that he would not again use an Organ in the 
 " Public Worship of God, without the authority of 
 « the Church." 
 
 The Presbytery, however, reflecting on the ca- 
 valier manner id which they had been treated by 
 that Gentleman, (never having been consulted by 
 him, either directly or indirectly, when he first in- 
 troduced it) were determined that they would not 
 allow themselves to be 7ioodwinked y by such a 
 vague and unsatisfactory pledge. They were de- 
 termined not to suffer such a palpable innovation to 
 creep into the Church of Scotland. They consi- 
 dered it as their sacred duty, to pass a judgment 
 upon the illegality of the measure, and to set the 
 question for ever at rest, at least with the Congre- 
 gations under their jurisdiction. They, with re- 
 gret, perceived that lenient measures had produced 
 no good effect j and that nothing but decisive mea- 
 sures could bring some people to their senses. But 
 instead of calling Dr. Ritchie as a party, they al- 
 lowed him to sit, and speak, and vote, as one of 
 the constituent members of the Court. He sat 
 
Xlll 
 
 and spoke, though he declined voting: and he must 
 perfectly recollect, that during that long and spirited 
 debate there was not even an ill-natured or indeli- 
 cate remark made upon his particular conduct, as a 
 Gentleman or as a Minister. And if any general 
 reasoning upon the part of the Presbytery, pressed 
 hard against his favourite measure, he had no right to 
 complain. Every member of Court was perfectly en- 
 titled to use the most plain and energetic language in 
 the discharge of his duty. But while it was their de- 
 termined object to condemn the measure, it was their 
 wish to save their Brother. They knew well that they 
 were entitled to have sisted him as a party. This, how- 
 ever, from motives of delicacy, they most studiously a- 
 voided. And whatever now that Gentleman may 
 think of their conduct, their object was solely to 
 convince the world, that Instrumental Music in 
 Public Worship of God in the Church of Scotland, 
 was illegal and unconstitutional, and yet to forgive 
 the mistake or the fault of their Brother. 
 
 The Presbytery who passed that judgment upon 
 the 7th October last, did not do it in a corner, or 
 with shut doors; what they spoke, and what they 
 did, they spoke and did in the presence of numbers 
 of the best informed and most respectable inhabit 
 of the City of Glasgow. Both the Dissentients and 
 die Presbytery pressed their arguments with accute- 
 ness and with vigour, yet there was not a single sen- 
 timent uttered which could give the least offence to 
 Congregation of St. Andrew's. Their wishes 
 b 
 
XIV 
 
 indeed were opposed, and their scheme was frus- 
 trated, but this was done in the language of Gentle- 
 men and Christians. So much so, that even one 
 of the Dissentients rose up in his place, and formally 
 took notice of the handsome and liberal manner in 
 which the debate had been conducted. Here, the 
 Presbytery of Glasgow flattered themselves that the 
 matter would rest, and that peace, and friendship, 
 and unity, would once more be restored among the 
 Brethren ; — but in this they were most unfortunate- 
 ly disappointed,. The minority as Dissentients, con- 
 ceived that they had a title, as no doubt they had, 
 to give in Reasons of Dissent, which were re- 
 ceived and recorded. A Committee was ap- 
 pointed to prepare Answers to these Reasons, 
 which were likewise received, approved, and re- 
 corded. As these Answers, though approved by 
 the Presbytery, appeared to two of the members 
 rather severe, they craved liberty to submit some 
 explanations in their own language, and after their 
 own manner. Liberty was granted them: and 
 though the Presbytery did not conceive that the 
 Answers to the Reasons of Dissent were more severe 
 than the language of the Dissentients authorized them 
 to use; and though the explanations given in by 
 these tw ) Gentlemen were not complimentary of 
 the Presbytery's conduct; and though according to 
 strict form, such 'xplanations should only have 
 been kept in retentis; yet the Presbytery did not 
 hesitate one moment, in allowing these two papers 
 likewise to be put upon record. 
 
XV 
 
 Dr. Ritchie, though he neither dissented nor 
 
 complained against the judgment of the Presbytery 
 on the 7th October, having likewise asked liberty 
 to submit some explanations relative to his conduct, 
 it was cheerfully and unanimously granted; but in- 
 stead of confining himself to an explanation of the 
 particular part he had acted, he gave in a long, 
 elaborate defence of the measure itself, inter- 
 spersed with some severe strictures upon the con- 
 duct of his Brethren. Yet even here, although 
 both Dissentients and Presbytery were agreed 
 that he had far overstepped the liberty granted him; 
 and although his Congregation had been invited, by 
 circular letters, signed by two of his Elders, to at- 
 tend the Pre&bytery, and give countenance to their 
 Minister's defence, (a mode cf conduct most cer- 
 y unprecedented, not to say highly illegal), still 
 DO C nsure was passed upon him by the Presbytery. 
 
 paper was allowed to be read, was heard with 
 patience, and even recorded, that the world might 
 be convinced that the Presbytery had no interest, 
 nor even a wish to prevent the arguments of their 
 Brother from going down to posterity, along with 
 
 judgment which they had pronounced. The 
 Presbytery therefore miy challenge even malice it- 
 scli to say, that in all this conduct, there was a 
 single circumstance oppressive, or even harsh to- 
 ward* their Brother. Their speeches had been for- 
 got, thei arguments were no longer remembered, and 
 that time they were disposed to have alloweV 
 b 2 
 
XVI 
 
 reasoning, contained in his elaborate Statement, to 
 have gone down to posterity without a single com- 
 ment made upon it. No abstract speculative rea- 
 soning, however powerful it might have been, 
 would have produced even the smallest irritation in 
 their minds. 
 
 For when a motion was made to print all the pa- 
 pers on record, that the world might fairly judge 
 upon the merits of the question, it was opposed, 
 from motives of expediency, that this was not a 
 proper season to agitate people's minds with religi- 
 ous controversy. In the spirit of Christian meek- 
 ness, the motion was withdrawn, and a Committee 
 merely appointed to prepare Answers to Dr. Ritchie's 
 Statement, which Answers have been given in, 
 read, approved of, and ordered to be recorded. 
 The public may be perfectly assured, that it was the 
 sincere and uniform desire of the Presbytery, to a- 
 void taking any step, which might appear either in 
 the eye of the world, or of their Ecclesiastical Supe- 
 riors, to have the least tendency to spread the flame 
 of religious controversy, or imprudently to compro- 
 mise the dignity of a court acting fairly in its ju- 
 dicial capacity, by engaging in a paper war with a 
 single solitary individual of that Court, apparently 
 irritated by disappointment in a favourite mea- 
 sure. 
 
 All this lenient and condescending conduct on the 
 part of the Presbytery has answered no one good 
 purpose whatever. The Minister of St. Andrew's- 
 
XV 11 
 
 Church, for reasons best known to himself, has beeri 
 shy of intercourse with some of his Brethren. Al- 
 though they have no reason to feel mortified at the 
 want of his society, they cannot help expressing sur- 
 prise, that opposition to a favourite measure, could 
 have produced such irritation in the liberal mind of a 
 Minister of the Gospel. But no private conduct of 
 their Brother, should have ever prompted the Edi- 
 tors to appeal to the public, had not Pamphlet after 
 Pamphlet been published, wrote in all the malevo- 
 lence of party=spirit, artfully blending argument 
 and invective together, and pouring forth indiscri- 
 minate falsehoods against the Members of the Pres- 
 bytery, and against the Lord Provost of Glasgow, 
 as persecutors of a worthy man ; as friends of igno- 
 rance and bigotry ; as common informers; as d 
 ful handlers of the Word oi God-, as involving them- 
 selves in the same condemnation, when they wan- 
 tonly charged Dr. Ritchie with the awful crime of 
 'perjury* — It is morally impossible that Dr. Ritchie 
 could have countenanced such false and slanderous 
 publications: — It is morally impossible that Dr. 
 Ritchie could have put his papers into the hands of 
 a scurrilous Pamphleteer, who might vamp up his 
 arguments anew, in the form of Letters addri 
 the Lord Provost of Glasgow: — It is- morally im- 
 possible that this crude mass of invective and f. I 
 hood, could have been licked into shape, modelled, 
 corrected, and dressed up in the quaint style of 
 Epistolary Writing, by any of Dr. Ritchie's literary 
 ' b 3 
 
XV111 
 
 friends: — Nor can they conceive it even possible, 
 what the censorious world has more than once af- 
 firmed, that there is a Minister of the Gospel, who, 
 from nature, possesses vanity, meanness, and pe- 
 tulance enough to father a publication which can 
 neither do honour to his head nor his heart. — All 
 this, in our eyes, is morally impossible. 
 
 From whom the Pamphleteer has picked up the 
 gleanings of Poetic Description, of Classical Litera- 
 ture, and Biblical Criticism, with which his Letters 
 are sprinkled, we presume not to determine. The 
 world has not been complaisant enough to ascribe 
 talents for any of these to the Gentleman who is 
 said to have concocted these Epistles. But who- 
 ever compiled these Letters, we cannot help thinking 
 that it was the bounden duty of Dr. Ritchie, who 
 knew every step of the business from its commence- 
 ment — who knew how unwilling the Presbytery was 
 to engage in this warfare of words, to have stept 
 forth, and told the world, in a fair and candid man- 
 ner, that his anonymous advocate had used the 
 Presbytery of Glasgow in an unhandsome manner, 
 and that he had most unjustly, and most falsely 
 represented the conduct of the Lord Provost of Glas- 
 gow, lie should have told the world, that though 
 his Brethren differed from him, yet Mr. M'Lean 
 raid, that " those Churches which used Or- 
 Churches of Antichrist ,•" — that Dr. 
 ur was no deceitful handler of the Word of 
 that Dr. Porteous nrd Mr. Lnpslic never 
 
XIX 
 
 wantonly charged Dr. Ritchie with the awful 
 crime of perjury j — and that the Lord Provost of 
 Glasgow was not the public informer. He 
 should have told the world, that as he was now 
 leaving the Presbytery of Glasgow, he was hap- 
 py in bearing testimony that he had experienced 
 from them the most kind and gentlemanly treat- 
 ment, and that though his private feelings might be 
 irritated by disappointment in a favourite measure, 
 yet he would not allow a single whisper to be utter- 
 ed by an anonymous Pamphleteer, against the con- 
 duct of men who he believed acted from a sincere 
 I to the Laws of God and their Country. 
 This would have been magnanimous conduct, bow- 
 er difficult to be expected from the selfish mortals 
 of the present age. But it would have been con- 
 duct worthy the man who is soon to be translated 
 to fill one of the first charges in the kingdom. 
 
 Dr. Ritchie has done none of these things: We 
 are therefore imperiously called on to do them for 
 him. His honour, and our own character demand 
 it at our hands. We have accordingly, from 
 authentic documents, published the whole transac- 
 tions as they took place. Our Statement contains 
 the arguments, and illustrates the conduct both of 
 Dr. Ritchie and of the Presbytery of Glasgow. It 
 is only necessary farther to observe, that we have 
 given the proceedings in their order from the 2d 
 September last, down to the 4th of this present 
 month, inclusive. The quotations in the original 
 
XX 
 
 languages were approved by the Presbytery, and are- 
 printed at the bottom of the page, to avoid incum- 
 bering the text. The Preface, Explanatory Notes, 
 the Conclusion, and Appendix, have been furnished 
 by the Editors, and for all these, they alone are re- 
 sponsible. 
 
 To remove any ambiguity, which might arise 
 from the apparently abrupt manner in which the 
 Letters of the Lord Provost are introduced into the 
 Presbytery's Minute of the 2d. Sept. last, as if his 
 Lordship had taken the whole responsibility on him- 
 self, without consulting the Magistrates and Town 
 Council, we have thought proper to publish the fol- 
 lowing extract from the City Records, which will 
 connect and explain these Letters, as they appear in 
 this Statement, and shew how unjustly and falsely 
 the conduct of the present Lord Provost of Glas- 
 gow has been misrepresented. 
 
 At Glasgow, the first day of September, one 
 thousand eight hundred and seven years, 
 Which day the PvTagistrates and Council of the 
 City of Glasgow being in Council assembled, the 
 Lord Provost stated, that he took this opportunity 
 of laying before the Council, some correspondence, 
 which, since last meeting, had passed between the 
 Reverend Dr. Ritchie and him, relative to the in- 
 troduction of an- Organ into St. Andrew's Church* 
 But, before mentioning the particulars, he proposed 
 that the minutes of the procedure which took place 
 
XXI 
 
 in the month of September last, 1806, should be 
 read, which minutes having been read accordingly, 
 his Lordship stated as follows : That having received 
 information that an Organ had been placed in St. 
 Andrew's Church some weeks ago, and that it was 
 proposed to use this Organ during Divine Service, 
 on Sunday the 23d ultimo, he thought it right, on 
 the Saturday immediately preceding, to write to the 
 Minister of that Church the following Letter, (vide 
 page 14.) and that to this Letter he received the 
 following Answer, (vide page 15.) That since he 
 transmitted the said Letters, a deputation from the 
 Congregation of St. Andrew's Church had waited 
 on him, and expressed their determination not to 
 use the Organ for the present, provided he withdrew 
 the intimation to the Presbytery j that to this pro- 
 posal he gave no immediate answer, but mentioned 
 his intention to lay the matter before the meet- 
 ing of Council, which was to be held to=day about 
 other business: That having thus given a detail of 
 what he had deemed it his duty to do, in relation 
 to this subject, he now wished the Council to de- 
 termine what further measures, if any, ought to be 
 adopted. On considering which statement and Let- 
 ters, the Magistrates and Council, on the motion 
 of Baillie M'Nair, unanimously approve of the line 
 of conduct observed by the Lord Provost, and re- 
 turn his Lordship their thanks for his attention to 
 
XXli 
 
 the business, and further resolve, not to withdraw 
 the intimation made to the Presbytery. 
 
 Extracted from the Records of Council, by 
 
 (Signed) Richd. Henderson. 
 
 We have felt gTeat reluctance in calling the atten- 
 tion of the Public to this singular business. Stern 
 necessity compelled us. Eut here, on our part, the 
 matter shall rest. No irritation shall ever provoke 
 us to prolong the controversy. The public are now 
 in possession of every fact and circumstance requi- 
 site to form an enlightened judgment. And to a- 
 void the very suspicion that the Editors shrink from 
 the strictest scrutiny into their motives and charac- 
 ter, they have left their names with the Printer. — 
 They are all Ministers of the Gospel, and Members 
 of the Presbytery of Glasgow. 
 
THE CONTENTS. 
 
 Page. 
 Minute of the Presbytery of Glasgow, Sep- 
 tember 2d, 1807, 1 
 
 First Letter, Lord Provost to the Presbytery, 
 
 26th August, 1807, ib. 
 
 Extract from the City Council Records of 
 
 Glasgow, September 8th, 1806, 3 
 
 Dr. Ritchie's Letter to Provost John Hamilton, ib. 
 Petition of Gentlemen who possess Seats in St. 
 
 Andrew's Church to City Council, i 
 
 Mr. Reddie's Letter, 6th September, 1806,... 8 
 First Letter, the Lord Provost to Dr. Ritchie, 
 
 22d August, 1807, 14 
 
 Dr. Ritchie's Answer to the Lord Provost, ... 15 
 Second Letter, the Lord Provost to Dr. Rit- 
 chie, 26th August, 1807, 16 
 
 Second Letter of the Lord Prorost to the 
 
 Presbytery, 2d September, 1807, 18 
 
 Minutes of Presbytery, September 2d, and 
 
 October 7th, 1807, J<J 
 
 Minute of Presbvterv, November 4th, 1807, 21 
 
XXIV 
 
 Page. 
 Reasons of Dissent, 13th October, 1807, ... 21 
 Answers to Reasons of Dissent, 1st Decem- 
 ber, 1807, 25 
 
 Minute of Presbytery, January 6th,. 1808, ... 52 
 Dr. Taylors, jun. Explanation, January 5th, 
 
 1S08, ib. 
 
 Dr. Lockhart's Explanation, 58 
 
 Dr. Ritchie's Statement, 6th January, 1808, 61 
 Minute of Presbytery, February 3d, 1808, ... 94- 
 Answer for the Presbytery to Dr. Ritchie's 
 
 Statement, ib. 
 
 Minute of Presbytery, March 30th, 1808, ... 202 
 
 Minute of Presbytery, May 4th, 1808, ib. 
 
 Conclusion, 205 
 
ST si J: E-JV2T, &c. 
 
 T 
 
 Minute of the Presbytery of Glasgow. 
 
 tember 2d, 180' 
 
 "WO letters from the Lord Provost of the City 
 of Gl isgow, respecting an Organ having been intro- 
 duced into St. A church, were produced and 
 r.?ad. Also produced id copy of letters, 
 Provost Mackenzie and Dr. Ritchie*, — and extract 
 from the records of the Town Council of Glasgow, 
 
 •'nor of all the foresaid productions follows. 
 
 First Letter J*ord P&orosT to the Presbytery. 
 
 Glasgow, 26th August, 1807. 
 Rev. Sir, 
 
 In discharge of the legal duty incum- 
 bent on Civil Magistrates, Patrons of Churches, and 
 A 
 
Heritors 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, according 
 to information I have received, an Organ has recent- 
 ly been placed in St. Andrew's church, by the Mini- 
 ster and congregation cf that parish, and was used 
 on Sunday last, while the congregation was assem- 
 bled for the purpose of Divine worship. 
 
 Whether the introduction of Organs into our e- 
 .stabiished churches, be an improvement or not, is the 
 province of the Ecclesiastical Judicatories, not of the 
 Civil Magistrate, to determine. And that the Reve- 
 rend 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 returned in the month of 
 September last, to an application from the Minister 
 and congregation of St. Andrew's church, and also 
 copies of two official letters which I have addressed 
 to the Rev. D;\ Ritchie on the subject, and of hi* 
 answer to one of them. 
 
 I am, with much respect, 
 Rev. Sir, 
 
 Your most obedient Servant, 
 (Signed) James Mackenzie, 
 Lord Provost. 
 
 The Rev. Dr. William Taylor, Mo- ? 
 delator of the Presbytery of Glasgow. $ 
 
Extract from the Town Council Records qfCtlasgtns 
 
 At Glasgow, the day of September, 
 
 eighteen hundred and six years, 
 Which da ;s and Council of the 
 
 City of Glasgow being in Council assembled. The 
 Lord Provost* laid before the Magistrates and Coun- 
 cil a letter from the Rev. Dr. Ritchie^ Minister c f 
 St. Andrew's churcl from a numtx r 
 
 of respectable inha i possess se; 
 
 that church, requesting the ion of th< 
 
 gistrate Council, as H 
 
 terations in the seats behi 
 
 requisite for the intra : an Organ. Of 
 
 which letter and petition th 
 
 Glasgow, c :\ . 
 My Lord, 
 
 I Like the liberty i 
 questing your Lordship to lay before the W 
 trates and Council of the citv of Glasgow, the pe- 
 tition herewith transmitted by the < 
 St. Andrew' churcl , he suc- 
 
 f a request bv an , I i 
 
 equally anxious that our \ res and Council 
 
 should pronoun dvt:? 
 
 and the oiHce with v." are invested. No 
 
 law, so far as I 
 
 le with regard to orgai . I hope, 
 
 • 
 
fore, that the judgment of the Council, whate 1 
 it be, shall be expressed in language that convey a 
 neither approbation nor disapprobation of instru- 
 mental music in churches: But that the petition 
 shall be granted or refused, merely on the ground 
 of expediency or inexpediency as to the removal of 
 the seats. To this alone, in my opinion, the juris- 
 diction of Heritors extends. In giving this opinion, 
 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 
 mantain 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 Glasgow. 
 
 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, 
 Magistrates 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 ourselv* 
 liberty, without permission of our Patr< He- 
 
 rs, to make such the chu] 
 
 as the placing of an Organ may i Tor ob- 
 
 ling tliis permissio , 
 as our Heritors, on whom lies the bttrd 
 care that the 
 
 church, either in omodation for 
 
 hearers. Every appe< 
 determined to ai , 1 therefore i: i 
 quest, that the proposed altei e carried 
 
 on under the inspection of the Master of Works, 
 of such other Gentlemen zs it maybe judge 
 dient to appoint. The qu 3 to the | 
 
 of using an Organ in church, it becomes us not to 
 discuss before you, either as Magistrates or II - 
 s. This is a matter of private judgment mere- 
 ly, in which we alone can decide for ourser 
 are fully persuaded, that in the execution of our plan, 
 we violate no law either of the church or of the 
 Matt* We give no offence to the prejudice of cur 
 people, for the congregation are all of one mind. 
 We bring no new burden on the Heritor-, for 
 whole of the expence we bind ourselves to defj 
 We prescribe no rule of conduct to others. We i - 
 ly adopt what we think and feel to be for our own 
 edification. We encroach upon no sacred privi- 
 lege, no civil right of any man, or of any body of 
 men in the kingdom. Acting thus within the lin 
 
 A 3 
 
of the law of the land, of the law of the church, 
 and of the obligations of good neighbourhood, we 
 cannot entertain a doubt that our scheme shall not 
 only be permitted, but encouraged, by our enlight- 
 ened Heritors, who, we know, are ambitious of 
 promoting every rational improvement, who will 
 observe with pleasure, our attempt to advance in the 
 knowledge and the practice of Psalmody, and will 
 gladly concur in the endeavour to rescue our nation- 
 al character from the reproach of having almost en- 
 tirely neglected the cultivation of Sacred Music. 
 Our Heritors, Magistrates of one of the first 
 commercial cities of Europe, will thus give new e* 
 yidence to mankind that the genius of commerce 
 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 energies, and untuned 
 the feelings of 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 
 tuning 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 opening 
 
of a new sera in the annals of our nation;.; ad\ anc< 
 
 ment. 
 
 May it therefore please our Patrons and 
 Heritors, to grant us liberty to make such 
 alterations in the seats behind the pulpit 
 in St. Andrew's church, as may be requi- 
 site for carrying into execution our design. 
 There exists not, we believe, in any pa- 
 rish, even in the remotest and least culti- 
 vated part of the kingdom, a body of He- 
 ritors, who would not feel at least some 
 reluctance to refuse the petition ot an unit- 
 ed people, for so very small a favour, 
 the granting of which involves not any 
 expence, and hurts not the claims of any 
 human being. Your complying with our 
 earnest request will form a new bond 
 of attachment between our Magistrates 
 and our congregation, while it will unite 
 the tie of private gratitude to the senti- 
 ments of public veneration, with which 
 we implore upon their heads the blessing 
 of Almighty God who hath formed the 
 ear for tie delights of harmony, and 
 whom we are bound to serve by the cul- 
 ture of every faculty which it hath 
 pleased him in his goodness to bestow. 
 
 Subscribed by a great number of 
 Gentlemen who possess Scats in 
 St. Andrews Church. 
 
8 
 
 Which letter and petition having been read, 
 the Lord Provost stated, that before he submitted 
 this matter to the Council, he and the other Ma- 
 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=c)erk an official letter on 
 the subject. Which letter having been also read, 
 and the said petition and letter having been delibe- 
 rately considered, the Magistrates and Council ap- 
 prove of the opinion given by Mr. Reddle; 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 answer of the Magistrates and 
 Council to the said application. Of which letter 
 from Mr. Reddie the tenor follows: — 
 
 (copy.) 
 Mr. Reddi£s Letter. 
 
 Glasgow, Gth September, 1806. 
 
 My Lord, 
 
 I have perused, and deliberately con- 
 sidered, the petition of a number of most respect- 
 able inhabitants, 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 Lordship, along 
 b the petition. Agreeably to the direction of 
 your Lo v dship, and the other Magistrates, I shall 
 now, as briefly as I can, state what occurs to me on 
 this subject. — And I have no dcubt, whatever reso- 
 lution the Magistrates and Council may ultimately 
 adopt, that they will be guided by views, at once 
 liberal and prudent, and that the grounds, on which 
 they proceed, will be such, as to command the re- 
 spect of their fe!low=citizens, and of their Coun- 
 try. 
 
 Were I called upon t i my own individ- 
 
 ual opinion and feelings, I should, perhaps lay claim 
 to the honour of participating in tlie sentiments and 
 wishes of the enlightened ration of St. An- 
 
 drew'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 die 
 city of Glasgow, that your Lordship, and the other 
 Magistrates require. 
 
 In the petition, and in Dr. Ritchie's letter, it 
 seems to be hinted, that the Magistrates and Coun- 
 cil have the power (S granting, or refusing, the pre- 
 sent application, " ] e ground of ex- 
 " pediency, or inexpediency, as to the removal of 
 " the seats" in ; ; >. With me, tins opinion 
 has no weight; because I do not conceive 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, 
 
10 
 
 as representative Heritors, and as Civil Magistrates. — 
 As Heritors, they have a legal right to insist, that 
 their patrimonial interests shall not be impaired, by- 
 the proposed measure. These patrimonial interests, 
 the Gentlemen of the Magistracy and Council might, 
 perhaps, on such an occasion, be disposed to wave, 
 were they Heritors in their own personal right. But 
 the members of the Magistracy and Council are not 
 Heritors in their own right. They are Heritors mere- 
 ly, as representing the community of Glasgow. And 
 to the interests of that community, they are bound, on 
 this, as on all other occasions, to attend. Whatever 
 resolution, therefore, may be ultimately adopted, it 
 will be necessary, that due precautions be taken, 
 to secure effectually the pecuniary interests of the 
 community. 
 
 But there is another, and a more important charac- 
 ter, in which your Lordship, and the other Gentle- 
 men of the Magistracy, are called upon to judge of 
 the present application ; I mean as civil Magis- 
 trates. 
 
 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 introduc- 
 tion of Organs into our churches, would be a materi- 
 al alteration, and innovation in our external mode 
 of worship, there cannot be a doubt. — The argu- 
 ment, which would identify an Organ with a Pirch= 
 pfoe, does not merit a serious answer. 
 
 Whether the use of Organs in our Established 
 
11 
 
 Churches, would be an expedient, or an inxepe&ent 
 measure, in a religious and ecclesiastical view, it is 
 unnecessary here to inquire-, because ycir Lord- 
 ship and the other Magistrates are not an Ecclesias- 
 tical Judicature, and have no right to take cogniz- 
 ance of the matter in that character. But, as Civil 
 Magistrates, you are legally bound to maintain our 
 constitution, in church and state, in its 
 condition; and by express statute, you are bou 
 " to take order, that unity and peace be presen 
 " in the church." — That there is great danger of 
 the introduction of Organs distill ice, 
 
 and mterr _ the harmony or" the Church of Scot- 
 
 land, I - - '. ■ 
 
 time, such an event is possible. — Wheth 
 auricular gratification of , ground 
 
 of offence should be ;>.■: o other c 
 
 is a matter, that req - 
 respect is due by the Civil 
 mar- ^uals may be disposed to t ;rm, I 
 
 judiccs of their v. ... ts, 
 
 if any i;-, ir external m 
 
 expedient an , or impi 
 
 ought to originate w the 1 
 of the Cover. Guard- 
 
 dians of our conduct, and our welfare, in such mat- 
 ters. — When the use of O hed 
 Church n sanctioned bv our Ecclesiastical 
 Legislature, then it will be the duty of vour Lord- 
 ship and the other Magistrates, not merely to per- 
 
12 
 
 rait the use of these musical instruments, but to 
 protect in that use, those congregations, who may 
 conceive such instruments to minister to their edi- 
 fication. Till the Ecclesiastical Branch of the Con- 
 stitution have sanctioned the use of Organs in our 
 Established Churches, I do not see, that the Magis- 
 trates and Council can, with any propriety, directly 
 or indirectly, approve of such an ecclesiastical in- 
 novation. 
 
 I have been told, that the only way in which this 
 matter can be brought before our Ecclesiastical 
 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 in- 
 deed, if our Establishment be so grossly defective, 
 as not to afford some way sufficiently formal, of 
 obtaining the permission, or sanction, of our Eccle- 
 siastical Legislature, for what may be an expedient 
 alteration in our mode of worship. 
 
 From the language of the petition, it seems to be 
 supposed, that were not the Magistrates and Coun- 
 cil Heritors of St. Andrew's church, the subscribers 
 might, of their own authority solely, introduce an 
 Organ. In this opinion I cannot coincide. To the 
 happiness, and glory of this nation, every man may 
 worship God in the manner he thinks fit. But 
 while unlimited toleration prevails in this country, 
 we have at the same time, an Ecclesiastical Establish- 
 ment, recognized by law. Under that Establish- 
 ment, a certain mode of worship is, and has been, 
 
IS 
 
 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 religious 
 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 compose the Magis- 
 tracy and Council, are, at least, as anxious, as any 
 of their predecessors ever were, to promote every 
 rational and liberal improvement. But zeal for im- 
 provement, ought to be tempered with prudence. 
 And I own, I should be sorry indeed, were the 
 r rates and Council of Glasgow to commit 
 themselves so far, as to sanction, authorize, or ap- 
 prove, in any capacity, directly or indirectly, express- 
 ly or tacitly, what, it is possible, the General Assem- 
 bly of the Church of Scotland, in the exercise of its 
 constitutional functions, may afterwards disapprove 
 and prohibit. 
 
 Upon the whole, then, my opinion is, First, That 
 the Magistrates and Council, as representative Heri- 
 tors, are bound to take such measures, as may pre- 
 vent the funds of the community from sustaining 
 any injury by the introduction of the proposed Organ; 
 and, Secondly, That the Magistrates and Council ought 
 to recommend it to the Gentlemen subscribers, and 
 to the able and learned Pastor of that most respect- 
 B 
 
14 
 
 able congregation, before proceeding farther, to ap- 
 ply for the permission and sanction of the Ecclesias- 
 tical 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 assembly, 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. 
 Glasgow, 22 d August, 1807. 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 In a conversation which took place in 
 a company where I was yesterday, it was mentioned 
 by a member of your congregation, that it was in- 
 tended to make use of the Organ at present in the 
 St. Andrew's church of this city during Divine ser- 
 vice, to-morrow, or on some Sunday soon. I beg 
 to know if such really is youv intention, because, if 
 so, I shall consider it my duty to enter a solemn 
 
15 
 
 protest against you for all damages which may be 
 the consequence. 
 
 I am, &c. 
 
 James Mackenzie. 
 
 (copy.) 
 Letter from Dr. Ritchie to the Lord Provost. 
 
 My Lord, 
 
 I have this moment had the honour of 
 receiving your Lordship's letter, relative to what you 
 have heard about the intention expressed by the con- 
 gregation of St. Andrew's church, to employ an Or- 
 gan in public worship. I shall embrace the first 
 possible opportunity of laying the Lord Prov 
 letter before the committee or' that congregation to 
 whom the business of the Organ has been committed, 
 that they may know at what risk such an atten 
 as that which they have in view must be made. 
 They will, as becomes them, pay all due deferem ! 
 to your Lordship's declaration*. 
 
 I have the honour to remain, &c. 
 
 (Signed) Will. RfTCHlE. 
 
 Miller-Street \ 1 
 22.(1 August, J 807. \ 
 
 * The Public may judge of the deference Dr. Ritchie paid to 
 the Lord Provost's declaration, when the) arc informed th;;t the 
 Organ was used in St. Andrew's Church in the public worship 
 cf Ciod, the very next day after he had received that letter. 
 Indeed, it appears from Dr. Ritchie's own 'account, th.it he did 
 not lay that Jitter before his Musical Committee till the 36th. 
 
 15 2 
 
16 
 
 (copy.) 
 Secojid Letter the Lord Provost to Dr. Ritchie* 
 Glasgow > 26th August, 1807. 
 
 Rev. Sir, 
 
 After the answer returned by the Ma- 
 gistrates and Council of this city in the month of 
 September last, to the application of the Minister 
 and various members of the congregation of St. An- 
 drew'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 perform- 
 ance on such a musical instrument on Sunday, and 
 at the time of Divine service, without having previ- 
 ously obtained the sanction of our Ecclesiastical Le- 
 gislature 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 Divine ser- 
 vice, I have received information from different 
 quarters, and I have not yet learned that the Ecclesi- 
 astical 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 improvement, 
 or the reverse, it is not the province of the Magi- 
 strates and Council to inquire, or to determine. 
 And I conceive I shall discharge the legal duty in- 
 cumbent on the Civil Magistrate in a religious or ec- 
 clesiastical point of view, by merely giving intima- 
 
17 
 
 tion of the event to the Rev. Presbytery within 
 whose bounds this city is situated. 
 
 But while the Magistrates and Council thus leave- 
 entirely to the Ecclesiastical Judicatories, whose pro- 
 vince it is to take cognizance of such matters, the 
 superintendance and regulation of our c\:cmal f< 
 of worship, I think it necessary on the part of the 
 Patrons of St. Andrew's church, and of the Heritors 
 of the parish, as notified in my letter of Saturday, 
 thus formally to protest, and intimate to you as Mi- 
 nister, and through your medium to the other mem- 
 bers of your kirk=session, and to the individuals 
 whom the congregation is composed, that, in th< 
 vent of the measure which you have thought fit to 
 adopt, without the approbation of the Patrons and 
 Heritors, proving detrimental in any respect to the 
 pecuniary interests of the city and community of 
 Glasgow, the Patrons and Heritors hold you, and 
 other members of your kirk=session and congregation 
 as legally liable for the consequences, whatever tl 
 may be. 
 
 Farther, on the part of the Magistrates of this city, 
 I feel myself called upon to give you this formal in- 
 timation, that although determined) as in duty bound, 
 at all times to preserve peace and good order am 
 the inhabitants, the Magistrates hold you and the 
 other members of the kirk=session, and congregation 
 of St. Andrew's church, as responsible for the con- 
 sequences of any breach of the peace which may 
 D 3 
 
IS 
 
 possibly be occasioned by the innovation you have 
 attempted to introduce. 
 I am, &c. 
 
 (Signed) James Mackenzie. 
 To the Rev. Dr. Ritchie. 
 
 Second Letter to the Presbytery. 
 
 Glasgow, 2d September, 1807. 
 Rev. Sir, 
 
 Since my letter of the 26th ult. was 
 transmitted to you, I think it right to inform you 
 that a deputation from the St. Andrew's congrega- 
 tion waited upon me on Saturday last*, and intimated 
 verbally, that they had come to the determination of 
 giving up the use of an Organ for the present,, if I 
 would withdraw the communication which I 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 unani- 
 mously 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. 
 The Rev. Moderator of the Presbytery of Glasgow. 
 • The 29th of August. 
 
7<J 
 
 MINTTES OF PRESBYTERY. 
 
 September 'Id, 1807. 
 The Presbytery unanimously appoint the Modera- 
 tor to write a respectful letter of thanks to the Lord 
 Provost, acknowledging his communication, and in- 
 forming him, that the same is recorded, and that the 
 Presbytery will take the case referred to, into their 
 serious consideration. Dr. Ritchie requested the 
 Presbytery to delay procedure in this cause till next 
 ordinary meeting, solemnly promising, that the Or- 
 gan should not again be used, without the authori- 
 ty of the church. The Presbytery unanimously 
 granted said request. 
 
 October 7th, 1807. 
 
 Mr. Burns, the Moderator of last meeting, pro 
 ie w pore, reported, that lie wrote a letter of thanks 
 to the Lord Provost of Glasgow, agreeably to the 
 Presbytery's appointment. 
 
 The Presbytery haying 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 Or- 
 gan in the public worship of God without the au- 
 thority of the church. 
 
 The Presbytery having deliberated on this cause at 
 great length, and maturely considered the same, a mo- 
 tion was made and seconded, viz. That the Presby- 
 tery are of opinion, that the use of Organs in the 
 
20 
 
 public worship of God is contrary to the law of the 
 Land, and to the Law and Constitution of our Estab- 
 lished Church, and therefore prohibit it in all the 
 Churches and Chapels within their bounds: And 
 with respect to Dr. Ritchie's conduct in this matter, 
 they are satisfied 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 unnecessary 
 to proceed further in this business, declaring, at the 
 same time, their judgment, that the introduction of 
 an Organ into public worship is inexpedient, and un- 
 authorized in our Church. 
 
 The state of the vote being first or second mo- 
 tion, 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 Presbytery did, and hereby do, in 
 terms of the first motion, 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 Consti- 
 tution 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 matter, 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 
 
21 
 
 Dr. Ranken, and Dr. M'Gill, Mr. Davidson, and 
 Mr. Jack, and took instruments in the Clerk'* 
 hands. 
 
 November 4///, 1S07. 
 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 tanor whereof follows: 
 
 Glasgow, 13M October, 1807. 
 Reasons of Dissent from a Judgment of the 
 Presbytery of Glasgow, October 7th, 1807, 
 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 Constitution of the Lstablish- 
 « ed Church," &c. &c. 
 1. Because this sentence gives a decision upon a 
 general question which was not properly under 
 the consideration of the Presbytery. The ques- 
 tion was not respecting the competency of the 
 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, 
 
22 
 
 the Dissenters conceive should be seldom attempt- 
 ed by an inferior court ; but still less, when such 
 general questions are not directly or necessarily 
 brought under their consideration. 
 
 2. There were peculiar reasons in this case, which 
 should have rendered the Presbytery satisfied with 
 giving their judgment on it alone. The circum- 
 stances of the case, as brought before the Presby- 
 tery, were of a peculiar nature, and formed suf- 
 ficient ground for a determination on its own 
 merits. Any member could not be supposed 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 sufficiently 
 and better secured, by agreeing to receive the 
 
 judicial declaration of the Minister concerned^ 
 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 unauthorized. 
 
 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 from meaning 
 to impute blame to their brethren, for whom 
 they have the greatest respect and affection, they 
 mean merely to express that difference of opinion 
 
23 
 
 which they feel themselves obliged to entertain 
 upon the subject. They observe therefore, a* 
 their last and principal reason of dissent, That the 
 opinion expressed by the Presbytery, not only 
 proceeds farther than the case required, but as- 
 serts as facts, concerning the Law of the Land, 
 and the Constitution of the Church what the Dis- 
 senters cannot perceive, and dare not, consistently 
 with a good conscience affirm. No Law of the 
 Church, nor of the Land, has been passed con- 
 cerning Instrumental Music, and they know of 
 no law existing, to which they can go the length 
 of pronouncing that it is contrary. The Dissen- 
 tients allow, that it is unauthorized, 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 lawfulness, utility, 
 or expediency of Instrumental Mu^ic in j 
 worship, is open for the Church of Scotland 
 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 th^ 
 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, to take 
 the subject under their consideration. The ques- 
 tion, the Dissentients consider to be a question of 
 utility and expedience, which the Church has it in 
 its power at any tune to consider and determine i 
 
24 
 
 nor do they know any Law of the Land, or principle 
 of the Constitution, which should prevent the Church 
 from giving any determination, it shall, in its wis- 
 dom, judge right. The Act of Security, the Dissen- 
 tients conceive ,has been interpreted by the Presby- 
 tery 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 shews that the 
 Church has the power of deciding upon new pro- 
 positions or overtures, which interfere not with 
 those general and leading principles 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 answer 
 said Reasons of Dissent. 
 
 December 2d, 1S07. 
 The committee nppointcd to draw up Answers to 
 the Reasons of Dissent against the judgment cf the 
 Presbytery on the 7th of October last, respecting the 
 
25 
 
 Organ, gave in said Answers, which were read. — 
 The Presbytery approve of said Answers, and appoint 
 the same to be recorded. The tenor whereof fol- 
 lows. Reserving it to Dr. Ritchie, Dr. Taylor, jun. 
 2nd Dr. Lockhart, to submit to the next Presbytery 
 such explanations as they shall think proper. 
 
 The Committee appointed to prepare An- 
 swers to Reason's of Dissent from a 
 judgment of the Presbytery of Glas- 
 gow, 7th October, 1807, 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 
 u and Constitution of the Established 
 " Church," &c &c. beg leave to submit 
 the following to the Reverend Presby- 
 tery. 
 The Committee enter on this business with deep 
 concern. But when reasons of dissent are recorded, 
 an appeal is made to posterity, which renders 
 recording of answers indii -.-. Un- 
 
 fortunately, in these i . the Presbytery is not 
 
 d with having acted improperly, but 
 with having violated truth and justice. To repel 
 so serious charge, it seems unavoidable for the Pres- 
 bytery to furnish posterity with an account of their 
 tion, and of the various extraordinary circum- 
 stances in which they were called to act. Should 
 C 
 
26 
 
 tlrls give rise to strictures which seem severe, the 
 responsibility must rest with these who have record- 
 ed reasous of dissent, and made it necessary for 
 the Presbytery to vindicate themselves, as well as 
 t defend 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 introduc- 
 ing an Organ into St. Andrew's church. During 
 this long period, the Presbytery waited with pa- 
 tience, in the hope, that time and good sense, would 
 dispose the authors and abettors of this proposal, 
 to listen to wiser counsels. 
 
 About the end of August last, a communication 
 was made to the Presbytery by the Lord Provost, 
 with the approbation of the City Council, contain- 
 ing extracts, letters, and copies of letters, which, 
 having been read by the Presbytery, they ordered 
 a respectful letter of thanks to be written by the 
 Moderator, and sent to the Lord Provost, acknow- 
 ledging the receipt of these papers. 
 
 From this communication it appeared that an Or- 
 gan had been introduced into St. Andrew's church, 
 and employed en the Sabbath, in time of Divine 
 service. — St. Andrew's church belongs to the Na- 
 tional Establishment, and is under the jurisdiction 
 of the Presbytery of Glasgow. — It was certainly 
 known, that Organs have never been used in the 
 Pr > n church of Scotland, — and that no mi- 
 
 nister of that church had ever presumed, before this, 
 
27 
 
 to introduce them. — It was certainly known that 
 the people of Scotland are not given to change — 
 especially in matters connected with religion. 
 And it might have been known, that Glasgow is not 
 the place, and the present is not the time, for a bu- 
 siness of this sort. 
 
 Without consulting the Presbytery, or seeming 
 to think they had any concern in the matter, some 
 persons describing themselves as the congregation 
 of St. Andrew's church, sent a petition to the Hon- 
 ourable Magistrates and City Council, containing a 
 proposal to have an Organ introduced under their 
 patronage, or with their consent 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 
 This opinion the Council adopted, and accord 
 refused " to sanction, authorize, or approve in 
 " any capacity, directly or indirectly, expre^ - v 
 " 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 Organ: and 
 yet the refusal of their request, did not hinder an 
 Organ from being introduced into St. Andrew's 
 church. It may therefore be doubted, whether 
 greater respect has been shown to the Presbytery in 
 C 2 
 
28 
 
 not consulting them at all, or to the City Council, 
 in setting at nought their opinion, after having ask- 
 ed, and obtained it. 
 
 Some time afterwards, the Lord Provost received 
 information that an Organ was to be employed in 
 St. Andrew's church, on the Sabbath, being the 
 day immediately following, in time of Divine service. 
 It is easy to conceive his feelings as a Chief Magis- 
 trate, when the highest authority in the city, and 
 the respectability of those in power, was thus treat- 
 ed, and that too in the sight of the astonished citi- 
 zens, who have been taught, and are accustomed 
 tp reverence and honour Magistrates* 
 
 Under these feelings, he wrote the letter of the 
 22d August last. Of the same date, he received an 
 answer, very decent and proper in itself; but, when 
 it is connected with the operations of the follow- 
 ing day, we are at a loss what to think of it. The 
 fact is, however, that an Organ was, on the follow- 
 ing day, employed in St. Andrew's church, in time 
 of Divine service. 
 
 A measure of this kind could not fail to strike 
 the minds of the people. They saw the constituted 
 authorities of the city trampled upon — the order of 
 the church deranged — the peace of the city disturb- 
 ed — contention and its ordinary companions let loos^ 3 
 and they could perceive no motive for all this, but 
 such as they are unwilling to describe. 
 
 The immediate consequences of this 'explosion 
 '.vere, the communication of the whole transactions 
 
29 
 
 by the Lord Provost to the Presbytery, and the un- 
 animous approbation of the Lord Provost's conduct, 
 in a recorded Act of the City Council. 
 
 [Sept. 2d, 1S07.] In this state, the business came 
 before the Presbytery, and let posterity judge, whe- 
 ther the Presbytery have net all along treats I 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 | 
 posal was frustrated by Dr. Ritchie's dem .ruling 
 extracts; and saying, in a short speech, 
 lidered it as his ri^ht 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 ordering the letter of thanks; 
 and it ought to be remembered, that Dr. Ritchie 
 either dictated or approved every clause in the sen- 
 tence pronounced by the Presbytery of this ( 
 
 An interval of a month was 
 preparing such explanations, with respect both to 
 the Magistrates and the Church, as would have en- 
 abled the Presbytery to send a suitable and decisive 
 answer to the Lord Provost's letters. 
 
 [Oct. ~th, 1807.] The Presbytery met and were 
 disappointed in all their expectations. Dr. Rite 
 said nothing more than he had said at the former 
 C 3 
 
30 
 
 meeting, namely, That he would not again use an 
 Organ without the authority of the Church. The 
 Presbytery unquestionably shewed not a little in- 
 dulgence, in declaring themselves so far satisfied 
 with this, as to decline proceeding on the individ- 
 ual case. But they could not leave the business 
 in this ambiguous form, without forfeiting their 
 claim to firmness and integrity, and without expos- 
 ing the city and the country to constant agitation 
 and apprehension. 
 
 A solemn deliberation having therefore become 
 necessary, it was now resolved on, — it was not ob- 
 jected to, — or if objections were hinted at, they were 
 either not insisted on, or overruled by the Presby- 
 tery. And though no particular mode of conduct- 
 ing the discussion was laid down, yet, not a single 
 member uttered a syllable, disrespectful or unkind 
 towards his brother. 
 
 Could it be inconsistent with justice y or truth, or 
 propriety, to consider the laxofulness of employing 
 an Organ in the public worship of this national 
 Established Church ? If it was lawful, then, there 
 was no transgression. If unlawful, then, too, the 
 business was likely to be settled without proceed- 
 ing much farther. For the unanimous desire of 
 the Presbytery manifestly was, to avoid, as long as 
 possible, every stricture on the circumstance of the 
 case which could lead to personalities, and to treat 
 the Minister and congregation of St. Andre wV 
 church with all possible lenity. 
 
31 
 
 We shall member two its which 
 
 ■e employed in the course cf this d rion, 
 
 and which we apprehend, it is consistent with jus- 
 tice, truth, 2nd propriety, to consider in this place. 
 
 1st. That God hath implanted in man, a 
 for music, which ought to be cultivated, by introduc- 
 ing Organs into our churches, where, as well as 
 in camps, great and good effects might be expect- 
 ed from it. 
 
 If this argument be applicable at all to the busi- 
 ness in hand, it amounts to this, — that every prin- 
 ciple, 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 Christian i 
 An argument of this kind needs no refutation, to 
 any who know what is forbidden in the second com- 
 mandment. 
 
 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 re- 
 quisite. The Corinthians were charged by the a- 
 po^tle 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 cat and to drink 
 plentifully, ai.d given them all the faculties neces- 
 sary for doing so, which, therefore, it was their du- 
 ty to cultivate and exercise in the house of God, 
 and at the Lord's Table. They might have added, 
 
S2 
 
 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 anticipat- 
 ed almost every sentiment, and even expression in 
 the petition of this congregation. But they did 
 no such thing: 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 Book of 
 Revelation, 
 
 If this be almost the first instance of a Christian 
 pleading Divine authority for the use of Organs in 
 religious worship, the singularity may excite some 
 suspicion that the argument is not well founded. 
 
 Had the primitive church considered Organs as 
 a part of instituted worship, they would, no doubt, 
 have used them, or recommended them, or regret- 
 ted the want of them. After the establishment cf 
 Christianity, and its consequent prosperity, no rea- 
 son 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 elnpsed, after the commencement of the 
 Christian sera, 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 
 
33 
 
 was, in a great measure, denied by the reformers, 
 who endeavoured to 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 success. 
 Page 200, he says, " I Protestants in Scot- 
 
 " land, when they accomplished the reformation 
 " in the year 1.5(30, departed in a wide extremity 
 " from the splendour and pomp of the Romish 
 " forms and ceremonies, disdaining to flatter the 
 " senses and fcion; arid confident and secure 
 
 " that the native purity and brightness of their doc- 
 " trines, were fully sutiicient to uphold them. 
 " All exterior greatness, the allurement of magni- 
 H ficence, the charm of painting, and the enchant* 
 " merit of music, Mere disregarded, not only as 
 " mean and useless artifices, but as dangerous trap- 
 " pings, which might obscure and degrade the in- 
 " terests and dignity of truth. They sought to 
 " revive the plainness and sincerity of primitive 
 " tin. 
 
 It may be added, that if the practices of an Old 
 Testament prophet are understood to be recommend- 
 ed under the \ ient, then all the particu- 
 lars of his usage must have the same authority, 
 dancing, or piping, among the rest. Nothing, how- 
 ever, can be more manifest, than that all Christian 
 Divines, with the aposle Paul at their head, have 
 believed, that the Old Testament worship was al- 
 tered, so as to suit New Testament times, and that 
 
54 
 
 they had authority from the Lord Jesus Christ to 
 teach this doctrine. Nor can it be doubted, that 
 such alteration did take place in the present instance, 
 with more precision than in any other particular; 
 for singing is the only instituted mode of perform- 
 ing this part of religious worship, and was exclusive- 
 ly employed for that purpose, upwards of eight hun- 
 dred years. 
 
 We shall now proceed to a more particular review 
 of the reasons on which the Dissentients, after ma- 
 ture reflection and research, have chosen to rest their 
 Dissent. These reasons are certainly both in re- 
 spect of matter and manner, liable to severe criti- 
 cism, and easy refutation. 
 
 1st. The first reason of Dissent might be answer- 
 ed, merely by copying it, leaving out the particle 
 not in every negation, and discreetly replacing it in 
 almost every affirmation. The result would be 
 very nearly a true statement, but the mode of pro- 
 ducing it, not sufficiently dignified for the Presby- 
 tery, nor respectful to the Dissentients. 
 
 We therefore refer them to their own motion for 
 an answer to their first reason. This motion de- 
 cides the general question, with no less precision 
 than the Presbytery's sentence, and the contradic- 
 tion 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 judgment, that 
 the introduction " of an Organ into public worship 
 « is inexpedient and unauthorised in our church." 
 
35 
 
 And in the first reason of dissent, they blame the 
 Presbytery for deciding the general pom 
 fuln utility. Now, it must be 
 
 every ordinary understanding, that the moti 
 cides 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 befi • 
 the Presbytery: no parties were called, and no | 
 sons were considered, or considered them 
 parties. The name of the Minister principally con- 
 cerned having been unintentionally passed over in 
 ea ling the roll, was, at the very desire of one of the 
 mtients, called in the vote, which shews that 
 he did not then consider him as a party. 
 
 The simple truth is, that ; a deliberation 
 
 which might have led to the calling of 
 not the Presbytery, regard! I provocate 
 
 inore indulge ers, than they have 
 
 from them in retur i, 
 intention, of treati 
 business with the uti 
 
 arming their duty to the C pub- 
 
 Ik with firmness and 
 
 2d. The second i 
 rious that it cann \\ I il ;y be reduced to 
 
 common head. Part < . ion 
 
 of what the Dissentients had st. t d in their first rea- 
 i i cting the individual case, and 
 has been answered already. The Dissenti 
 
36 
 
 complain that they were taken by surprise, anil 
 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 " concern- 
 ing it. 
 
 This is certainly not a little wonderful. Had not 
 more than two years elapsed since the attention 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 communication 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 
 use 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 in- 
 dispensably necessary to warrant such an opinion. 
 And how, in the nature of things, could a positive 
 judgment on these particular points be formed, 
 without coming to a similar judgment on the gene- 
 ral question, which is evidently less intricate, and 
 attended with less difficulty; which the Catechisms, 
 and Confession of this Church, and our other solemn 
 engagements at ordination, are of themselves suffi- 
 cient to ascertain ? 
 
 The term unauthorised mav have been selected 
 
S7 
 
 with some dexterity, and the Dissentients seem to re- 
 gret that it was not adopted by the Presbytery but 
 if it was intended as an insinuation that our Church 
 had heretofore never interposed her authority in op- 
 position to Organs, and a preparation for asking and 
 obtaining her authority in favour of them, the adopt- 
 ing 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 winch were pur- 
 chased by our Ancestors, at theexpence of their tal 
 their treasure, and their blood. It • ve ener- 
 
 vated the Presbytery's sentence, and rendered it 
 utterly insufficient for the purpos ace and 
 
 order, which have been accomplished and secured 
 by it, as it now stands. 
 
 3d. The third reason of dissent contains a pr 
 lion of the greatest respect and affection from the 
 Dissentients towards their Brethren. We c. - 
 fully acknowledge, and return the compliment. 
 As this is the last and principal reason of dissent, 
 ; iout which we are informed there would ' 
 been no dissent, nor even, perhaps, a division of the 
 Presbytery on the subject, we lament that there i 
 little lucid order, or Logical precision in it. But we 
 presume, the argument it maybe con:, 
 
 hended in the two following propositions. 
 
 1st. That there is nothing in the Constitution or 
 I iaws of the Church or State, inconsistent with, 
 D 
 
38 
 
 •pposite, or contrary to the use of Organs, in religi- 
 ous worship. 
 
 2d. That Organs may now, or hereafter, be in- 
 troduced, by the authority of the Church of Scot- 
 land. 
 
 Both these propositions we consider as quite un- 
 founded and untenable, and are not a little surpris- 
 ed, that any Scotch Presbyterian should venture 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 Scrip- 
 tures, as these are explained in our acknowledged 
 Standards ; and from these we derive evidence, little 
 short of demonstration, subversive of these proposi- 
 tions. 
 
 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 Commandment re- 
 « quireth the keeping pure and entire all such reii- 
 « gious worship and ordinances as God hath ap- 
 «< pointed in his^ word. - ' Query, Is that reii t ious 
 worship kept pure, according to God's appointment, 
 
S9 
 
 which is blended and mixed with human inventions 
 at least TOO years later than the death of the last of the 
 Apostles? — "The second Commandment^?*^'*/*/?//* 
 « c the worshipping of God by images, or any other 
 " ui-at/ not appointed in his word." Query, Was 
 this -day of Organs appointed in his word ? — In the 
 Larger Catechism, the second Commandment re- 
 quireth as in the Shorter, and particularly sanctions 
 thanksgiving; but it farther requireth, " disap- 
 « proving, detesting, opposing, all false xoorship t 
 " and according to each one's place and calling, 
 " 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 insti- 
 " tuted 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, custom, devo- 
 " tion, or any other pretence whatsoever," &c. 
 
 These passages contain the great and leading 
 principles of our Ecclesiastical Constitution respect- 
 ing the worship of God. And the Confession of 
 Faith is equally explicit on this point. " The ac- 
 " ceptable way of worshipping the true God is in- 
 m stituted by himself, and so limited by his own 
 " revealed will, that he may not be worshipped ac- 
 " cording to the imaginations and devices of men." 
 D 2 
 
40 
 
 That Organs were an abomination to our vener- 
 able Ancestors, who assisted in composing these Ec- 
 clesiastical Standards or sanctioned them with their 
 most solemn approbation, is an historical fact, estab- 
 lished by the most unexceptionable authorities. 
 Thus, Baillie, vol. 1, let. 43, page 421, dated 18th 
 February, 1644, and addressed to Scotland, says, 
 " We had so contrived it with my Lord Wharton, 
 " that the Lords that day did petition the Assembly 
 " that they might have one of the Divines to at- 
 " tend their House for a week, as it came about, to 
 " pray to God for them. Some days thereafter the 
 " Lower House petitioned for the same. Both 
 " their desires were gladly granted: for by this 
 " means 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 of their Images, Organs, and all which 
 " gave offence. My Lord Manchester made two 
 " fair bonfires of stick 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 the good 
 " hand of God in the great things done here al- 
 t( ready, particularly that the Covenant (the foundation 
 " of the whole work) is taken; Prelacy and the whole 
 " train thereof extirpated*, thcService=book in many 
 " places forsaken; plain and powerful preaching set 
 " up; many colleges in Cambridge provided with 
 " such ministers as are most jealous of the best re- 
 
41 
 
 « formation, altars removed, the communion in some 
 " places given at the table with sitting; tlie great 
 " Organs at Paul's and of Peter's, Westminster, 
 " taken down; Images, and many other monuments 
 " of idolatry defaced and abolished ; • the Chapel 
 « Royal at Whitehall purged and reformed, and 
 w all by authority, in a quiet manner at noon day" 
 Nay, the General Assembly 161-4-, in their answer 
 to the Right Rev. the Assembly of Divines in the 
 kirk of England, not only adopt the sentiments of their 
 Commissioners at London, but express them, if pos- 
 sible, with greater energy, force, and triumph. 
 " We were greatly refreshed to hear by letters from 
 H our Commissioners there with you, and by a more 
 " particular relation from the Lord Waristown, now 
 " with us, of your praise=worthy proceedings, and 
 N of the great good things the Lord hath wrought 
 " among you, and for you: Shall it seem a small 
 " thing in our eyes that the Covenant (the founda- 
 " tion of the whole work) is taken: That 
 " christian Prelacy with all the train thereof is ex- 
 " tirpate: That the door of a right entry unto faith- 
 " ful shepherds is opened: Many corruptions, as 
 " Altars, Images, and other monuments of idolatry 
 " and superstition removed, defaced, and abolished; 
 " the Service-book in many places forsaken, and 
 " plain and powerful preaching set up; the great 
 " Organs at Paul's and Peter's taken dffwn; that 
 • the Royal Chapel is purged and reformed; sacra- 
 D 3 
 
42 
 
 w ments sincerely administrate, and according to the. 
 « pattern on the mount." 
 
 The great and leading principles of our Ecclesi- 
 astical Constitution have been subscribed and a- 
 vowed by every Minister of the Presbytery, before 
 God and men, in the most solemn manner, as ar- 
 ticles of their faith. Whatever then, they may be 
 to others, they must be a law to them. It is for 
 the Dissentients to judge whether this third reason 
 of dissent be compatible with this law, and consist- 
 ent with truth and justice. 
 
 About the time of the Union with England there 
 were some apprehensions of danger to the uniformi- 
 ty of our national worship. Our church had hither- 
 to rested with confidence on her Catechisms and 
 ratified Confession, but now thought that some- 
 thing more might be done. Accordingly, in 1707, 
 the Assembly passed the Act against Innovations 
 in the Worship of God. " It discharges the prac- 
 « tice of all Innovations in Divine Worship within 
 « this Church, and requires and obtests all the Mi- 
 w nisters of this Church, especially those in whose 
 w bounds such Innovations 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 recovery and reformation." So much 
 convinced were this Assembly, that the removing 
 and suppressing of Innovations was vested in the 
 executive power by die ratification of the Confes- 
 
4$ 
 
 8ion, 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 enacted, 
 that every Minister before his ordination, do ac- 
 knowledge the obligation of this Act against Inno- 
 vation; promising in the most public and solemn 
 manner, in the House of God, in presence of the 
 Presbytery, and an assembled congregation, " firmly 
 " and constantly to adhere to, and to the utmost of his 
 " power, assert, maintain, and defend, the purity of 
 « Worship, as presently practised in this National 
 <• Church, and asserted in the fifteenth Act of As- 
 " tembly 1707," which is the Act above recited. 
 
 Thus the uniformity of our "Worship was taken 
 out of the hands of lawyers ami metaphysicians, 
 and brought home to the conscience, the honour, 
 and the honesty of every individual Minister of cur 
 Church. 
 
 It is surely impossible that any of the Dissen- 
 tients will again affirm, that no law of the Church 
 lias yet determined the question concerning Organs 
 or Instrumental Music in our public worship, when 
 it appears with so much evidence to be inconsistent, 
 not only with our Ecclesiastical Laws, but with the 
 great, leading, and fundamental principles of our 
 Constitution. 
 
 This reasoning needs no confirmation, but it 
 
44 
 
 may receive much illustration from the prevailing 
 sentiments, opinions, arid customs of our coun- 
 try. 
 
 No religious sentiment is more powerful and 
 universal among the people of Scotland than an at- 
 tachment to that simple, spiritual, and unornament- 
 ed worship, which is described in our Standards — 
 which was practised under the sword of persecu- 
 tion — reverenced by our fathers, adhered to from 
 principles of patriotism, as well as religion, and re- 
 tained as the fruit of victory, and the pledge of 
 liberty. This attachment to simple worship, is so 
 strong, and so universal, that all the Dissenters 
 from this Church, numerous and respectable as they 
 are, have never deviated from her forms of worship. 
 In the West of Scotland particularly, this attach- 
 ment, and the habits connected with it, are so predo- 
 minant, and have so long continued, as to form 
 a consuetudinary law, independent of all others, 
 to which the Dissentients and the Presbytery are 
 bound to conform. 
 
 But the people of Scotland do not defend the pu- 
 rity and uniformity of their national worship mere- 
 ly upon Ecclesiastical grounds — they claim these and 
 the tranquillity which attends them, as their birth- 
 right — as a portion of their political liberty, to which 
 they have the highest legal, as well as just and equi- 
 table 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 
 
45 
 
 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 country- 
 men should be found making an attack on this puri- 
 ty and uniformity 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 tilings, it may not be improper to 
 explain them. 
 
 Our Ancestors, immediately after the Revolution, 
 were, undoubtedly, very solicitous to have their re- 
 ligion and their religious v.-orship secured from 
 change and innovation. This security they obtained 
 by the Parliamentary ratification of the Confession 
 of Faith; which ^as' generally believed at that time 
 to make the Confession a part of the Law of the 
 Land, and consequently to invest the King's Judgei 
 with full authority to give it execution. Many are 
 still of this opinion. E ut before the year 1 700, some 
 persons seem to have thought that the term ratifica- 
 tion, and other terms employed in that Act, were not 
 sufficient to convey the right of enforcing execu- 
 tion to the Civil Ms 
 
 To remove every doubt on this important subject, 
 it was resolved to proceed with the Confession of 
 Faith, as they had done with respect to the Claim of 
 Rights, which is not Law, but a Cjuarry out of which 
 many of our most valuable Laws have been taken. 
 
 In order to embody certain articles of the Con- 
 
46 
 
 fession with the Laws of the Country, and thus secure 
 the execution of them without any controversy, the 
 Acts of Security were passed in the years 1700, 
 1 702, and 1 703 - These Act3, however, relate chief- 
 ly to the Doctrine and Government of the Church* 
 No particular mention is made of the Worship, till 
 the year 1705, when an Act was passed, for a trea- 
 ty with England^ the las" clause of which, is in these 
 words, " Providing also, that the said Commission* 
 « ers shall not treat of, or concerning any altera* 
 " tion of the Worship, Discipline, and Government 
 " of the Church of this Kingdom, as now by Law 
 « established." 
 
 This is almost the first time that the Scotch Parlia- 
 ment distinguished the Worship from the Doctrine, 
 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 pu- 
 rity and uniformity of our Worship. Without this, 
 any of the former Acts might have answered the 
 purpose almost as well as this one. Since, however, 
 the necessity of securing our Worship had been sug- 
 gested, the Parliament of Scotland were resolved that 
 this should be done, with precision, with authori- 
 
47 
 
 ties, and with solemnities unknown in any other 
 transactions between independent states. 
 
 It was enacted in Scotland, and declared to be 
 a fundamental condition of the Union: It was ra- 
 tified 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 M Inviolably maintain and preserve the 
 ** foresaid settlement of the true Protestant Religion, 
 " with the Government, Worship, Discipline, Rights 
 « and Privileges of this Church, as above established 
 « by the Laws of this Kingdom, in prosecution of the 
 M Claim of Rights." — And from the King, the execu- 
 tion of this, still more than any other Law, must pass 
 to the King's Courts and Judges; to the Judge Ordi- 
 nary 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 — that they shall be con- 
 tinued to the People of this Land to all succeeding 
 generations, as they were practised in 1707: and 
 further, " th x this Act shall be held and observed 
 " in all time coming, as a fundamental and essential 
 «* condition of any Treaty, or Unio 1 to be conclud- 
 " ed betwixt the two kingdoms, without any altera- 
 
4S 
 
 " tion thereof, cr derogation thereto, in any sorfi, 
 "for ever:' 
 
 As to the strictness with which these Acts 
 should be interpreted, we need not descend to alter- 
 cation with the Dissentients. Enemies being judges, 
 they cannot be interpreted more strictly than their 
 fair construction and primary intention will jus- 
 tify. 
 
 This we advance on the authority of a cotempo- 
 rary Historian, and celebrated Prelate of the Church 
 of England, who records the passing of 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 par- 
 " ty were lost, and every thing relating to the 
 (i Church did not only continue in the same state in 
 « which it was during the former reign, but the 
 " Presbyterians got a new Lav/ in their favour, which 
 " gave them as firm a settlement, and as full a se- 
 " curity, as Law could give; for an Act passed, not 
 « only confirming the Claim of Rights upon which 
 " the Crown had been offered to the late King; one 
 " of its articles being against Prelacy, and for a pari- 
 « ty in the church, but it was declared high treason 
 " to endeavour any alteration of it. It had often 
 w 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, 
 ft and that therefore he would never make a breach 
 " in any part of it; but he would not bind his sue- 
 
49 
 
 p cessors, bv making it a perpetual Law." — And 
 page 276, he says, of the Act 1707, as follows: — 
 P An Act was prepared for securing the Presby- 
 P terian government, by which it was declared to 
 ■ be the onlv government of that Church, unaltcr- 
 " able in all succeeding times, and the maintaining 
 P it was declared to be a fundamental and es^er.;!;.! 
 * article and condition cf the Union: :md this Act 
 " was to be made a part of the Act for the Union; 
 « and in consequence of that, was to be ratified by 
 w another Act of Parliament in England. Thus, 
 " those who were the greatest enemies to Presby- 
 " tery of any in the nation, raised the clamour of 
 " the danger that form of government would be in, 
 " if the Union went on, to such a heig t, that by 
 " their means, this Act tops carried cu far a 
 " wum Law coidd go for their security i forbi 
 « they had not only all the security that their own 
 " Parliament could give them ; y were to 
 
 " have the faith and authority of the Parliament 
 " of England ; it being in the stipulate •<. made an 
 ential condition of the Union: The can-ying 
 « this matter so f.tr, was done, in hopes that the Par- 
 " liament of England would never be brought to 
 " pass it. This Act was passed, and it gave anen- 
 " tire satisfaction to those wl disposed to re- 
 
 w ceive ary ; but nothing could s - sfy men who 
 " made use of this only to inflame others. '—Hence, 
 according to Burnet, the Act of Securitv is to the 
 British Parliament, what the Barrier Act is tc the Ge- 
 1 
 
;o 
 
 neral Assembly, a safeguard,2in 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 declara- 
 tion which the Presbytery have emitted on the 7th 
 October last, but in which the Dissentients cannot, 
 with a good conscience, acquiesce. 
 
 Were a spirit of this innovating and vacillating 
 kind to invade our Church, we tremble for the con- 
 sequences. Neither the Barrier Act, nor the Act 
 of Security would be able to prevent her from be- 
 ginning a retrograde course, till her glory was sunk, 
 and utterly lost in the darkness of the 12th century. 
 Then, as we learn from Mosheim, vol. 2, page 438, 
 " The rites and ceremonies used in Divine Worship 
 " were greatly augmented among the Greeks, and 
 " the same superstitious passiqn for the infroduc- 
 " tign of new observances, discovered itself in all 
 " the Eastern Churches. The Grecian, Nestorian, 
 " and Jacobite Pontifs, that were any way remark- 
 " able for their credit, or ambition, were desirous 
 « of transmitting their names to posterity, by the 
 
 ntion of some nnc rite, or by some s/:. 
 « chaii&e, introduced into the method of Worship 
 " that had hitherto prevailed. — Tims, sqnje at- 
 << tempted, though in vain, to render their names 
 " immortal, by introducing a new method of read- 
 " ing or reciting the prayers of the Church ; others 
 
51 
 
 " changed the Church Music, others again tortured 
 " their inventions to find out some new mark of ve- 
 " neration, that might be offered to the relics . 
 " images of the Saints, while several Ecclesiastics did 
 " not^lisdain to employ their time with the most 
 " serious assiduity, in embellishing the garments of 
 " the Clergy, and in forming the motions and pos- 
 " tures they were to observe, and the locks they 
 " were to assume, in the celebration of Divine 
 « Worship." 
 
 To avert so direful a calamity from cur Church 
 and our Country — to crush in the bud so scandal- 
 ous a prostitution of sacred things *, the Magistrate . 
 and City Council, and the Presbytery of Glasgow, 
 have, in this instance, done their duty with inte r 
 and honour; and in whatever light the Dissentients 
 may view the deed, we have pleasure in declaring, 
 and that in perfect consistencv with a good con- 
 science, that it has the most unqualified approbation 
 of our understanding and our heart. 
 
 We are happy to find it admitted bv the Di 
 tients in the close of r oris, that there \o cer- 
 
 tain general and leading principles upon which our 
 Constitution is founded, which the Church h?<\ ndt 
 power to alter. None of her Indicator', wer 
 
 to suppress the Christian or Protestant religion — to 
 change one article of the Confession of Faith — to 
 
 * This approbation of Mosheim's description, i. expressed in 
 strong language; nevertheless, it 
 description this language refeYs. 
 
 E 2 
 
substitute Prelacy or Independency in the room of 
 Presbytery, — in a word, to authorize any practice, or 
 to enact any Law, that is inconsistent with, or con- 
 trary 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 suc- 
 ceeding 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. 
 
 Minnie of Presbytery, January 6th, 1808. 
 Dr. Ritchie, Dr. Taylor, jun. and Dr. Lock- 
 hart, severally gave in papers in consequence of the 
 reservation in the Presbytery's last minutes in the 
 question respecting the Organ, which papers being 
 read, the Presbytery order the same to be recorded, 
 simj)licitcr. The tenor follows : 
 
 Rev, Dr. Wm. Taylor's, Jun. Explanation. 
 It is with reluctance that I make use of the li- 
 berty which the Rev. Presbytery has allowed me, of 
 
53 
 
 ig in an explanation of my reasons why the 
 ibytery should not have adopted, without ccrrec- 
 . the Answers that their Committee prepared to 
 the Reasons of Dissent, in the cause or -gari, 
 
 read at their meeting in November. I was out of 
 the Country when this business commenced-, I v 
 astonished, beyond measure, when I heard of it, by 
 accident, 400 miles hence; and when a final sentence 
 wa> given at a succeeding Pre bytery, I had the hon- 
 our of presiding in the Court And thus, from the 
 commencement to the clcse, had no opportunity of 
 taking part, either on one side or the other, in this 
 bingular business. I am sensible, therefore, of a 
 great aversion to stir it at this period. I f« I 
 ly a delicacy which fori 
 I bow to the sentence'of th I 
 
 bound, which now can neither *1 or appe - 
 
 ed from; and I bear a I pect tow. 
 
 abers of the Committee, i 
 rs, which th. 1 i i full, 
 
 But I am bnp I 
 
 duty I owe to . to make I 
 
 ance, however r !y. For 1 : uilcw, 
 
 that, by .!, that I 
 
 sam r, in which il 
 
 there are many things i 
 
 which, in my opinion, die Presbytery, careful of 
 their own fame and credit, should have rigorously 
 examined, and in many particulars amended. 
 There is a licence taken in the general frar 
 E 3 
 
54 
 
 the paper alluded to, that is altogether indefensible. ' 
 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 answering 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 necessary; they set about 
 recollecting and answering the arguments that were 
 used, viva voce y 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 general argument. This was mani- 
 festly leaving the business that was entrusted to 
 them by the Reverend Presbytery, and doing what 
 was altogether illicit, and unusual in such cases. 
 
 In these Answers, I perceive also, with much re- 
 gret, a mode of speaking often used, which might 
 well have been spared, in a paper that the Reve- 
 rend Presbytery was to adopt as theirs, in which there 
 is heat and passion; and which, heard by the ig- 
 norant and prejudiced, is, in various instances, too 
 liable to unhappy misconstruction. A heathen 
 could say, that it became men who were to deliber- 
 ate about difficult matters, to be free from passion. 
 And surely, the language which the Presbytery 
 adopts, should be calm, and grave, and moderate; 
 Mid it would be unpardonable, either to give as an 
 example to the present generation, or to hand down 
 to posterity, what is, in any measure, of a contrary 
 
character. In the historical detail of the orgin and 
 progress of this business, language of this heated 
 and exaggerated kind is sufficiently obvious. — The 
 manner in which the Congregation of St. Andrew's 
 is mentioned in this paper, is surely in too lofty a 
 style — " Some persons, describing 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 knowing the exibting circumstances, 
 language should have been avoided, that had any 
 tendency to convey the idea that there were preten- 
 sions on the part of those spoken of, that were not 
 well founded. 
 
 Allusion is made in the paper adopted by the. 
 Presbytery, to the word " unauthorized," 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 is not in this way that the Reverend Presbytery 
 has been in use to speak of the discussions of its 
 Members. Every man is understood to act lata 
 fide, conscientiously, and with fairness: And I 
 have no doubt, that this will amply apply to the rea- 
 sonings that have passed on both sides, in this very 
 singular question. I forbear adverting to any ex- 
 pressions which I might think alluded improperly 
 to a respectable Member, chiefly concerned in this 
 business, as he is sufficiently able to defend him- 
 self. 
 
There is a passage in the Answers which the Re-< 
 verend Presbytery should surely have hesitated in a^ 
 dopting as theirs. — " Had the primitive Church con- 
 " sidered Organs as a part of instituted Worship, 
 " they would, no doubt, have used them, or recom- 
 " mended them, or regretted the want of therm 
 " AfteT the establishment of Christianity, and its con- 
 " sequent 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 csra, before 
 " Organs were resorted to." It is said, " Had the 
 " primitive Church considered Organs as a part of 
 " instituted Worship, they would no doubt have 
 " used them*** But how was it possible to use, 
 what v/as 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 recom- 
 mend them in the primitive times, or in the pros- 
 perous times of Constantine, when the idea of an 
 Organ was not then formed ! How could they re- 
 gret the want of them, since, " Ignoti nulla cupide !" 
 It is obvious, that this portion of the reasoning in 
 the Answers is built upon a gross anachronism *. — 
 
 * 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, shew, that 
 
The Committee who prepared the Answers have 
 searched, with considerable labour, into the records 
 of Church and State, but it is very obvious, from 
 what has been produced, that they have not gone 
 deep enough. They have shown, with much con- 
 viction, the Presbyterian Church must differ from 
 Episcopacy ; — that it is averse to the Hierarchy of 
 Bishops — to liturgv, and read pravers, and that it 
 has a discipline of its own. — But, in the present 
 question, it was absolutely necessary to shew, that 
 our Church went still farther than all this, and that 
 it limited^ and defmed 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 Constitu- 
 tion and Worship. The Committee, in my opinion, 
 should have, if I may use the expression, stood up 
 closer to the argument. — The Presbytery, by their 
 sentence, built high; and it was the business of the 
 
 Musical Instruments had this name at the time these Fathers 
 flourished. — Indeed, the mere existence of Musical Instruments, 
 in the first seven centuries, whether called Organs or not, is all 
 that the Presbytery's argument M concerned with. — And the 
 argument is still unanswered, and we bt-lieve, unanswerable, viz. 
 Ii seven or eight centuries elapsed, before Organs or Instruments 
 ■I Music were introduced into Christian worship, and if the 
 want of them was, during all that period, never regretted by the 
 Church, it is a decisive proof, that the primitive Christians regard- 
 ed them as mAra/W, and humMuUmi with the purity of Evangelicut 
 praise. 
 
Committee to dig deep. I should beg the Presby- 
 tery's excuse, for taking up their time so long, on 
 a matter that is now decided on. — The rigidly sim- ( 
 pie Spartans nailed Tarpander's harp to a post, be- 
 cause, by a daring innovation, 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 secure position, and therefore there was 
 no need to say any thing of it. All that I intended, 
 was to shew, 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 5ih f 1808. 
 
 Dr. Lockh art's Explanation. 
 
 Having received permission from the Rev. Pres- 
 bytery to offer certain explanations on their Answers 
 to Reasons of Dissent from the sentence of Pres- 
 betery, with regard to the use of the Organ in the 
 Public Worship of God, I beg leave to offer the fol- 
 lowing, and request that they may be put on re- 
 cord. 
 
 1st. I must be explicitly understood as adhering 
 to the Presbytery's sentence, and as approving of 
 the Answer of the Dissentients, in so far, as these 
 Answers are founded on the prevailing sentiments 
 of our forefathers, on the Act of the Church against 
 Innovations in the Worship of God, and on the Act 
 of Security. 
 
5% 
 
 2d. It. docs not appear to me that the Dissenti- 
 ents, in their third Reason of Dissent, have charg- 
 ed the Presbytery with any violation of truth and 
 justice. I consider them as expressly denying 
 that they had any such intention, and as merely as- 
 serting, that they could not, with their view of the 
 subject, adopt the sentence of the Presbytery, 
 without a criminal inattention, on their put, to the 
 claims of truth and justice. I must, therefore, hold 
 them in respect, for acting under the influence of 
 their own conviction, and give them. full credit fqr 
 the liberality of sentiment which they have express- 
 ed, by declaring that they have, the greatest respect 
 and ailection for the Brethren from whose judgment 
 sent. It would, therefore, in my opinion, 
 haw .tremely desirable, that; the Presbj ., 
 
 iti their Answer, had declined employing the se- 
 ; to winch they have resorted; and 
 
 Joy- 
 ed, had they fully weighed the e >n given 
 by th I )i its. 
 
 3d. I m i, th it the 
 
 Answers on the part of : . I to 
 
 induci .' ! wit! ision to the 
 
 observations of individual M n C urt, sup r 
 
 • h.w^ bee ime of 
 
 ussion, but I to, in 
 
 the Reasons given by the Di ! 
 
 et, that in the rgu n ; it, I icted by the 
 
 ..Vbytery, they should have given any detailed 
 
60 
 
 statement, in relation to the particular case, which 
 led to the discussion. 
 
 4th. Even on the supposition that I had approv- 
 ed of that part of the Answers, which seems to em- 
 brace matter foreign to the sentence of the Presby- 
 tery, and to the Reasons given in by the Dissenti- 
 ents, I should have been disposed to deprecate the 
 introduction of that passage, in which the illustra- 
 tion of the Presbytery s argument is taken from 
 the case of the Corinthians, in their profanation of 
 the Lord's Supper. 
 
 Lastly, While I admire the simplicity of the 
 forms of Worship observed in our National Church, 
 as peculiarly congenial to the spirit of Christianity, 
 I 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 brethren 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 the li- 
 berality and indulgence of the Rev. Presbytery, in 
 allowing the preceding Explanations by the Rev. 
 Dr. Taylor, junior, and Dr. Lockhart, to be record- 
 ed, as none of these Gentlemen had judicially 
 dissented or complained against the decision in 
 question. And it is hoped, he wiil see the same 
 
01 
 
 spirit of liberality and indulgence, in thus publish- 
 ing these Explanations. Candour requires, that the 
 
 Public should be put in possession of every 
 in this Cause, whether favourable or unfavomv. 
 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 Ml- 
 kistlr of St. Andrew's Church 
 thi; >dicated in permitting, and 
 
 of th" facts connected xtnth his employing 
 an Organ in Public Worship on the Lord's 
 Bay. 
 
 A wish had for years, for more than thirty j 
 been cherished by the Congreg St. Audi, 
 
 Church, to have an Orga 
 in Public Worship. After tl. 
 erection had been 1 me, b] 
 
 spectable members of the heads oi 
 mg to that C rion, I at last 
 
 with the full approbation of my own mind. 
 principles upon \ nt has been, . 
 
 still is founded, I have now the h nour to lay be- 
 fore the Presbytery. I ,1 take no 
 charge of the Reasons of Di sent from the sc 
 passed by the tery against the m 
 These R h nigh not fully to my mind, are 
 in my opinion, valid, as to the main point, whic 
 are meant to establish. Neither do I e 
 F 
 
62 
 
 lists with the Answers to these Reasons, with many 
 of the positions in which I perfectly agree, while 
 yet, in many respects, my opinions are different 
 from those of the Respondents. But it becomes me, 
 in vindication of my Congregation and myself, to 
 open up the grounds upon which we think we had 
 the right to employ an Organ in Public Worship. 
 
 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 
 Worship of Christians. Now, in looking into our 
 Scriptures, we find, that before the giving of the 
 Law, Instrumental Music was employed by the 
 twelve tribes of Israel, to whom, through the Fa- 
 thers, the promises had been given. When we 
 look into the history of nations that were strangers 
 to Divine Revelation, there too, we find universal- 
 Iv, the use of Instruments in giving praise to their 
 Gods. Such use, then, appears to be something 
 that belongs not to sects or parties, but to human 
 nature. It is dictated by the best of those feelings 
 which the God of Nature hath implanted in every 
 bosom, prompting men to employ with reverence, 
 according to the means which they possess, all their 
 powers in expressing 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 
 
63 
 
 the covenant of peculiarity introduced by the minis- 
 try of Moses, no mention is made of Instrumental 
 Music among the ritual observances of the Law. 
 In a system of merely temporary Institution, it was 
 not deemed necessary, by positive enactment, either 
 to forbid, or to enjoin the use of Instrumental Mu- 
 sic in Public Worship, But it was left to the will, 
 and situation and circumstances of the W orsl ip- 
 pers. Yet, while the ritual law, in all its bn Tidi- 
 es, forms a majestic whole, guarded by most so- 
 lemn 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 recorded. David, of whom w :nc, 
 
 and of whom, according to h, is C< 
 
 Jesus the Mediator of the New Covenant, 
 raised from keeping his fath I k, to iVA an 
 
 eminent stati , 1 to act an importanl 
 
 the great scheme cf Providence. He v 
 dowed with gifts for maintaining an I 
 
 promoting, in the conspicuous 
 was exalted, the pure \- hip of the true G< 
 Many are the prophecies I d, as he was 
 
 moved by the Holy Ghost; many ai ime 
 
 strains of praise which he poured forth by 
 rit, and in some of the most sublime ci th< 
 strains, when rapt up in the majesty of the King 
 dored, he invites, exhorts^ 
 F 2 
 
6* 
 
 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 
 :. Psalm. Was his language, and His conduct an 
 
 ingement of the Law of Moses, so awfully hedg- 
 ed in on every side by curses and by bless- 
 ings? Was not lie zealous for the Law? Was he 
 
 vpelled by any superior authority, to adopt a 
 practice which he felt to be inconsistent with the 
 purity of instituted Worship? Was he not seated 
 on the throne? Was he not the anointed of the 
 Lord? Was he not animated by that pure tSpirit, 
 who alone kindles in the pious heart the ilame of 
 living praise? These Psalms of David have ever 
 been held in such high estimation, not only by 
 Jews, but by Christians, that they have been a- 
 dopted by all sects and parties; they have, by sove- 
 reign authority, been appointed to be sung by all 
 National Churches. They have been, and are ap- 
 pointed by the Church of Scotland, to be sung in 
 Congregations and in Families. And can it be a sin 
 to sing them as was dene by the original Composer, 
 with the accompaniment of an Organ ? If these 
 strains ever flowed warm and pure from a "human 
 heart, we cannot deny that they must have done 
 so, from fhe heart that first conceived them, 
 warmed by the sound of his Harp and his Organ, 
 under the immediate inspiration of the Holy 
 Ghost. Shall any Church, si all a Protestant 
 
65 
 
 Church, condemn the singing of the Psalms of Da- 
 vid, 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 P 
 ist David. — Jesus was continually going about, was 
 often in the temple and in the syi agoguee, often 
 was present at Public Worshi i : ng of 
 
 the Law. He often administ< to die Jews 
 
 for their attention to minute rites, and trie tradi- 
 tion of the Fathers, while they neglected " the weigh- 
 I tier matters of judgment, mercy, arid faith." He 
 was zealous for the honour of the temple, his la- 
 ther's house; he cast out the money=ch. infers, and 
 i overturned their benches; but lie n :e open- 
 
 ed his lips against their Music and tl ans. 
 
 Would Jesus have been silent on I ject, had 
 
 Instrumental Music been a gross profanation of . - 
 cred things? Can we suspect him of winking, 
 through weakness, at what he knew to be a corrup- 
 tion of Worship? The Apostle Paul, in his journey* 
 ings, frequented ever the synagogues. There he 
 met and disputed with the Jews. Ardent was his 
 zeal against the beggarly elements o ' rites and cere- 
 monies. Many are the important practical rules of 
 
66 
 
 life that he has laid down; many are the exhortations 
 to praise that he has given ; and is it not strange, that, 
 amidst all his warnings, he never warns his Gentile 
 converts against Harps, and Psalteries, and Organs ? 
 At Jerusalem, at Corinth, at Ephesus, 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 every dropt from his pen. If ever 
 a human being breathed the pure spirit of his Mas- 
 ter, it was John the beloved disciple. In his gospel, 
 written towards the evening of his days, and in his 
 epistles, we read not one sentence in condemnation of 
 Organs. When we advance to the Book of Revela- 
 tion that deeply mysterious book, which shuts up 
 the vision and the prophecy, we find that John, now 
 fifty years after the ascension of his 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 temple : — when we read this book, 
 Ave find not one, but frequent allusions so made to 
 Instrumental Music in Worship, as lead us to infer 
 on his part, high approbation of it. Nay, in one 
 passage, he expressly declares, that he heard " Harp- 
 " ers harping with their Harps in heaven." Words 
 cannot be simpler, nor convey more plainly, an un- 
 equivocal meaning: and that meaning clearly is, 
 that Instrumental Music is, at least not inconsistent 
 with the purity of Evangelical praise. And what- 
 ever value or meaning men may now attacli to the 
 
C7 
 
 imagery of that prophetic bcok, it certainly stood 
 high in the estimation of the Westminster Divine-. 
 I adduce but one example. In support of that pa- 
 ragraph of the 23d chap, of our Confession of Faith, 
 which asserts the right of Christian Sovereigns to 
 wage war, they give the following passage from 
 the Book of Revelation, as one of their authorities, 
 chap. xvii. 14 and 16 verses, « _ ake war 
 
 " with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall cvercome 
 " them, for he i > Lord of Lords, and King of Kii 
 " and they that are with him are called, and chosen, 
 « and faithful. And the ten horns which thcu 
 \t upon the beast, these snail hate the whore, 
 « and .^hall make her desolate and naked; and shall 
 " eat her flesh, and burn her with fire." Now, if 
 bold imagery of this p j, and what Mini- 
 
 ster or Presh 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 v. 
 then, surely. isage to 
 
 winch I ref - 
 
 trumentaJ Music accoi ctly with the pur- 
 
 praise that we can conceive. For it is an eter- 
 nal truth, that the Holy J ever did, and 
 never could, mind of David, or of 
 John, or of any created being, an image or a sound 
 that has the most distant tendency to promote im- 
 pure thoughts, and to corrupt religious Wot 
 Here, then, is one fundamental point established: 
 the use of Instrumental Music in public Worship is 
 
68 
 
 not in itself sinful, is not forbidden by the word of 
 God, but, on the contrary, is expressly encouraged, 
 perhaps enjoined, in the Old Testament, and is 
 clearly authorized 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 Music 
 employed in their worship by the Christians of the 
 first age ? There is every reason to believe that it was 
 not. No mention is made of it by the earliest his- 
 torians *, and perhaps no mention would have been 
 made, although it had been in general use; because 
 such Music in Worship was neither striking nor 
 strange, either to Gentiles or to Jews. That Harps 
 and Organs could not then be employed f, must be 
 
 * Be it so, that the " earliest historians do not mention In- 
 •' strumental Music as employed by Christians of the first age;" it 
 cannot thence be inferred that they were friendly to the employ- 
 ment of Musical Instruments in the Worship of God. For, it will 
 appear from the authorities produced by the Presbytery, that 
 when the primitive Christians had occasion to mention Instru- 
 mental Music, they uniformly expressed marked disapprobation 
 of it, and declared it inadmissible into Christian worship. 
 
 f Vague and general description of this kind has no meaning, 
 and 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 been Singers, or Mu- 
 sical Performers in the Temple. Barnabas, we know, from Acts 
 iv. 36. was a JLevite, an opulent man, of a cultivated and liberal 
 mind. His generous spirit is celebrated by St. Luke in the Acts 
 of the Apostles. " He sold his land, and laid the money at the 
 f Apostles' feet." When Paul returned to Jerusalem, and " as- 
 
09 
 
 evident from the severe and unremitting persecution 
 to which the Church was subjected. How could 
 men think of employing Harps and Organs, while 
 they were fleeing from city to city, and hiding them- 
 selves in holes, and dens, and caves of the c. 
 E m when, by the conversion of Constantine, a 
 Christian Emperor was seated on tfee throne oi the 
 R )man world, the peace of the Church was far from 
 ■g secured. Wars and revolutions and inunda- 
 tions of barbarous nations, ! d each other 
 h a ferocity and rapidity, and to an extent, ot 
 eh we, even in these eventful times, ( 
 only a very inadequate c ft. Mingled with 
 these wars, and promoted by them, controversy arose 
 after controversy, and sect after sect in multitudes, 
 
 " 83yed to join himself to the disciples, but they were all afraid of 
 •* hira, and believed not that he was a disciple," Barnab«s " took 
 ■ him, and brought him to the Apostles: ?" — He was the first 
 Christian at Jerusalem to befriend and patronize St. Paul; and, 
 for a considerable time, he was the intimate companion, and 
 zealous fellow:Lbourer of that Apostle. This Barnabas was doubt- 
 ailed in the Mu=ic of the Temple, and both familiarized and 
 attached to it, prior to his conversion. But he abandons his pro- 
 fessional hahits, his favourite employment as a Levite, the mo- 
 ment he becomes a Christian. Never does he practise, or extol 
 the services of his tribe or family, ncr recommend these to be 
 adopted by Christians in their public worship. To say, that Bar- 
 nabas, who shared in the toils, and dangers, and persecutions of 
 St. Pcul in Cyprus his native country, in Pamph)lia, in Pi- 
 in Iconium, was frightened from using a psaltery, or harp, lest the 
 sound should betray him to his adversaries, is peril-illy incredible, 
 and utterly irreconcilable to common ten 
 
10 
 
 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 controversies on this subject, arose between 
 Church and Church, and among the members of 
 the same Church. But, as might be expected, 
 little progress 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 sera of flattering promise 
 seemed to begin. Something like order was intro- 
 duced among the Western nations, and some faint 
 gleams of light began to dawn, struck out by the 
 vigorous administration of Charles Martel, of Pepin, 
 of Charlemagne. While Pepin in the year 757, was 
 holding a council of his clergy at Compiegne, for 
 the reformation of manners, there arrived an Organ, 
 sent him in compliment to his high reputation, by that 
 Constantine Emperor of the East, who is so famous as 
 the Iconoclast, the fierce enemy of Images in 
 Churches, of Convents, Monks, and Nuns. This 
 Organ, the first, it is said, that had been seen in 
 Europe, the French king presented to the Church 
 of St. Corneille at Compiegne. 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 ser- 
 vice of his God. Charlemagne, son and successor to 
 
71 
 
 Pepin, continued the use of Organs, as we learn 
 from a poet of the ninth century, who, describing 
 the effects of that Instrument in that age, says, that 
 a worn vi was sd transported with the Music, that 
 she fainted and expired under the sweetness of the 
 sound. His words are, 
 
 Dulce melos tmtumvanas illudere mentes 
 Ca?p:rat y ut una, suis decede is s?nsibus, ipsam 
 Farnina perdiderit, vocum dulcedine viiam*. 
 This Instrument seems still to have been employ- 
 ed, and to have spread at least in fame, if not in 
 nunbers, during the reign of Louis the son of 
 Charlemagne. For there exists a letter from the 
 Pope, John VIII. in which, towards the 
 end of the ninth century, is this request to a Ger- 
 man Bishop, " Precamur autem, ut optimum or- 
 ganum, cum artifice qui hoc moderari et facere ad 
 pmnem modulation^ efficaciam possit, ad instruc- 
 tionem musics disciplinx aut d< feras, aut mittas." 
 Such was the state of the arts even in Italy, during 
 the ninth century, that not a man could be found 
 who could make, or tune, or play upon an Organ. 
 And tlie Pope requests, as a singular favour, that 
 a man who could do so, might be se it to him from 
 Germany, for teaching the Italians Music. From 
 the death of Louis, and even during his reign, the 
 
 * Is this the kind of rapture that any Christian man rr woman 
 Hpould wish to die in? Can it be a recommendation of Or^an*, 
 that they produced so tragical an effect iu the ninth c.;:turv ? 
 
12 
 
 prospect of dawning reformation in government, 
 in science, and in religion, was 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. Thousands 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 a- 
 waken 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 human 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 sera, 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 im- 
 provements 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 
 
 * Does the author imagine, that the dark ages had not com- 
 menced when Pepin and Charlemagne flourished? The best his- 
 torians, Civil and EcclesLstic: 1. arc of a different opinion. By 
 them, the dark ages are considered as comprising the keventh, 
 and continuing till the twelfth century. There might he various 
 shades in the darkness of these centuries, but the state of litem- 
 
73 
 
 they began to be employed, not by the authority of 
 a Papal decree, but by the dictate of pious feeling, 
 
 prompting the enlightened mind to consecrate the 
 labours of genius to the devout exercise of : 
 The dark ages 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 
 fifteenth centuries, great were the exertions of the 
 human soul, struggling for knowledge, for liberty, 
 for employment suited to its powers. The pressure 
 of superstition and of Papal oppression counter- 
 acted their own ends, and through the unseen work- 
 ings of a gracious Providence, were overruled to 
 bring on the Reformation. Organs did not 
 from the scrutinizing zeal of that keenly: 
 age; for Luther and Calvin, and the other enligl 
 Reformers *, discovered in them nothing ci I 
 
 ture, philosophy and theology, during the v. hole of that dismal 
 period, establishes the melancholy truth that superstition reigned 
 triumphant over the minds of men. It bofno importance to 
 the argument, whether this degrading superstition was in the 
 hands of the Greek or Roman Church; whether it was aided by 
 the skill of a German or Italian Artist] whether it w« 
 by the influence of a Monk, of an Emperor, or i Pope. No nun 
 of any observation, or research, will deny, that pious feeling may 
 sometimes animate the heart of the ignorant and superstitious. 
 Indeed, unenlightened pious feeling, hath, too often, both engen- 
 dered, and fostered superstition. 
 
 • Whether this be a fair and accurate account of the opinions 
 of the Reformers, will appear from the quotations produced by the 
 Tresbytery, from the works of the Reformers, and in their own 
 words. 
 
 G 
 
7* 
 
 dolatry of a corrupted church, which they so nobly 
 laboured to overturn. And, indeed, upon the slight- 
 est attention by the most superficial inquirer, it must 
 be discovered, that Instrumental Music forms no 
 essential part of Popery ; that it is founded upon prin- 
 ciples 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. Ac- 
 cordingly, it was retained, and it is still employed, 
 by all the Reformed Churches on the Continent of 
 Europe. A stronger argument in its favour 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 are strong, as they were 
 pressing; and in tracing them, we shall discover the 
 origin of that prejudice which still remains against 
 Organs. Whatever our Psalmody might have been 
 under the Popish power, we know, that in the re- 
 forming Church of Scotland, it must have been al- 
 most 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 celebra- 
 tion of them, nor funds for the support of Ministers. 
 No wonder, that in these circumstances every thing 
 was laid aside, but the pure preaching of the Gos- 
 pel, and the performance of Worship in the best 
 
--> 
 
 manner, which the necessity of the times would 
 allow. From this state of degradation, it was long 
 before our Church was able to emerge. The doc- 
 trines of the Reformation, it is true, were generally 
 embraced, and a system of ecclesiastical policy, set- 
 tled agreeable to the general wishes of the country. 
 But the wealth of the Church had been seized by 
 the landed proprietors, and long and arduous wa , 
 the contest, before even liberty of conscience, and 
 Presbyterian government could be fixed upon a per- 
 manent foundation. The causes of this contest .ire 
 easily ascertained, and its effects are deeply felt, even 
 in our own day. The troubles unavoidable from the 
 factious spirit of a feudal nobility, under a female 
 Popish reign, the bigotted partiality of a pedan- 
 tic King for prclatic splendour, which he deemed 
 favourable to absolute monarchy; the mi taken pie- 
 ty of a virtuous Sovereign, contending, 1 . w- 
 cd means, for what lie thou sable to 
 word of God; the hypocritical an bold 
 usurper, wading thr< : his 
 cotemporaries n of a kin hich 
 he affected to decline; the unprinci] n of 
 a lawful prince, restored to the throne lH. is 
 
 , straining by force and fraud, to impose upon 
 our country a yoke which its brave info 
 determined never to bear; the weak ii n of 
 
 a Popish Sovereign, urging him on not merely to the 
 
 ruction of Presbytery, but of the Reformation; 
 n series of persecution, maintained with 
 G 2 
 
. o 
 
 such unrelenting obstinacy, through such a number 
 of years, impressed, engraved, wrought into the very 
 soul of our Presbyterians a fear, a dread, an abhor- 
 rence, not only of Popery and Prelacy, but of every 
 thing that had been connected with Popish and E- 
 piscopal Worship. — Under these circumstances, 
 our forefathers thought, and felt, and contended 
 honourably, nobly, as became Patriots and Christ- 
 ians. What Scottish heart does not sympathize 
 with them, asserting, at the expence of fortune and 
 of life, those high privileges which we now enjoy! 
 What mind but must approve of a conduct 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, reli- 
 gious existence, they wrecked, as they did, their 
 vengeance on Altars, Crosses, Organs, on every the 
 most distant seeming appendage, of a form of Wor- 
 ship which they were determined not to embrace. 
 And if an infatuated government should attempt, in 
 •any future age, a similar mode of infringing the 
 sacred rights of man, it is to be hoped, that the spirit 
 of our ancestors would revive 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 centuries, it 
 
was not possible for our Church to pay much, if 
 any attention to Sacred Music*. A new xra com- 
 menced at the Revolution, from which period clown- 
 wards, our Presbyterian Establishment has, under a 
 limited Monarchy, enjoyed all the peace and protec- 
 tion which government can bestow. During a cen- 
 tury of uninterrupted prosperity, it is to be expected 
 that legal independence, and perfect security against 
 the encroachments of Popery or Prelacy, may have 
 disposed Churchmen and Laymen among us, to con- 
 sider calmly what is, and what is not essential to 
 those forms of Ecclesiastical Government, and to rise 
 superior to the weakness of rejecting improvements 
 in things indifferent, merely because they are employ- 
 ed by Churches whose modes 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 enlightened Church. Improvements even in our 
 Psalmody are begun, which prognosticate favourably 
 for farther advancement. The tide of human affairs 
 is strong. The hand of Cod, guiding the progress 
 of mind, cannot be resisted. The steps will be 
 made, which yet remain, for vindicating our Church 
 
 * The printed Acts of the Scotch Parliament, and irrefragable 
 historical record, furnish the most direct and positive evidence, 
 that this averment has been made precipitately, and without suf- 
 ficient information: a blunder, which is less pardonable, when we 
 consider the tone and manner in which the Author sometime 
 speaks of others. 
 
 G 3 
 
78 
 
 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 rip-ht to Instrumental Music in our Worship, and 
 all its advantages, as his disciples in Geneva, in 
 Switzerland, and in Germany? But has not our 
 Church been always hostile to Organs ? Of such hos- 
 tility no evidence exists, or can exist, in a case simi- 
 lar to the introduction of the Organ into St. An- 
 drew's Church. For this is a singular case; the 
 first attempt of the kind, that was ever made accord- 
 ing to the pure principles of Presbytery. The peo- 
 ple of that Congregation, respectable both from cha- 
 racter and from number, and steady, as anv of their 
 countrymen, in their attachment to the religion trans- 
 mitted 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 go- 
 vernment, but as their own unbiassed wish, cherish- 
 ed among them for years, before they ever knew the 
 man who is their present Minister. The Organ was 
 
 * Though we are not the disciples of Calvin, and will not call 
 iviy man Master; yet cur respect for his opinion is increased, by 
 considering the grounds of it: and Calvin s opinion is dteidedlk 
 urainst Instrumental Music being used in the Public Worship of 
 God, as is shewn afterwards, from the express authority of that 
 - reat Reformer. 
 
introduced upon principles as free from any connec- 
 tion with Episcopacy and Popery, as the principles 
 of our Directory for Worship are, from connection 
 with the Church of England and of Rome. Against 
 such an introduction, our Church could not pos- 
 sibly enact Laws, or discover a hostile spirit, be- 
 cause it had never hitherto taken place. Laws are 
 a remedy provided against past, or present evils. 
 The sagacity of Legislators cannot pierce into futu- 
 rity, and provide against what may arise in the course 
 of ages. But, did not an Assembly of ouv Church, 
 in the year 1641, resecho 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 battle, 
 may love! cruelly with the ground every obstacle that 
 impedes their progress to victory. The enemies 
 which our Divines of that age had chiefly at heart 
 to subdue, was not the helpless, harmless Organ, 
 but the Hierarchy and Servicexbook of our Sister 
 Kingdom. And from their success in destroying 
 what they regarded as the outworks, they might with 
 joy anticipate their reducing to subjection the last 
 resort of the adversary. Antipathy to Organs in this 
 country, has ever been associated with antipathy 
 to Episcopacy. Organs and Prelates, have, by a 
 surprising want of discrimination, been involved in 
 
80 
 
 one common condemnation. But what have Or- 
 gans 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 Com- 
 mon Prayer. The canons of the Church of Eng- 
 land never touch themf. Instrumental Music in 
 "Worship is not the property of any one particu- 
 lar 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 Assembly against Innova- 
 tion, which completely guard us against the intro- 
 duction of Organs? The Acts of Security, of 
 Union, and against Innovation, had more important 
 objects in view, with which Organs have no con- 
 cern. By the Revolution, the Act of Security, and 
 the Act of Union, these have been secured 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 Scotland, are to be pre- 
 served to the people of Scotland, without alteration, 
 to all succeeding generations. 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 
 
 | The reasons of this will be afterwards assigned. 
 
81 
 
 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 Pope- 
 ry or Episcopacy. On this ground, no Liturgy, 
 or Service=Book can, or dare invade us. Vv'e 
 are an Established Church, fenced round by all 
 that can render us independent and free. Our pu- 
 rity and uniformity in Doctrine, we declare by our 
 subscription of our Confession of Faith. Our at- 
 tachment to the Discipline and Government of the 
 Church, we attest by oar subscription of one For- 
 mula. Our purity and uniformity of Worship we 
 prove by our adherence to the rules laid ('own in 
 our Directory. To each, and to all of these, I 
 trust, I have uniformly adhered, as faithfully 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 violation, 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 Paraphrases, in the same language, all 
 giving thanks for die same mercies; or u; 
 posture of the worshippers, for we all sit, as beet 
 
82 
 
 true Presbyterians; or upon the tunes sung, for we 
 sing only such as are in general use; or upon the 
 office 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- 
 is it? It is a help, a support given to the Precentor's- 
 voice, for enabling him more steadily, and with 
 more dignity, to guide the voice of the Congrega- 
 tion; and thus to preserve, not only uniformity, 
 but that unity of voice, which is so becoming in the 
 public service, which so pleasingly heightens devout 
 feelings, and prevents that discord, 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 union 
 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 demolishing the barriers for the security 
 ©f our religion — of committing a deed of perjury* 
 
 * We are not a little astonished at this very unguarded lan- 
 guage of the Rev. Author. The word perjury, as applied to 
 bim t 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 lust: liven the Dissentients, though dif- 
 fering 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, the readiness 
 with which the Presbytery received Dr. Ritchie's declaration, that 
 he would not again use an Organ, without the authority cf the 
 
8:5 
 
 to ordination 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 
 
 Church, as narrated in their Minutes must convince every one, 
 that they would never have granted such indulgence to a man 
 whom they had called perjured. They expressed, then, in the 
 course of the debate, what they have recorded in their Answers to 
 the Dissentients, " The great and leading principles of our Ec- 
 " desiastical Constitution, hare been subscribed and avowed by 
 " every Minister of the Presbytery, before God and man, in the 
 " most solemn manner, as Articles of their Faith. Whatever 
 " they may be to others, they must be a Law to t, 'cm.'* 
 They quoted the questions put to Ministers at their ordination. 
 1st, Will you practise and maintain the purity of Worship, as pre- 
 sently practised in this National Church, and asserted in the Act a- 
 gainst Innovations? 2dly, Do you promise to submit yourself quiet- 
 ly and meelly to the admonition of the Brethren of this Presby- 
 tery; that you will follow no divisive courses from the established 
 Worship and Doctni.e of this Church? And they quoted also the 
 Formula, which every Minister subscribes, in which he owns 
 " the purity of the Wtrsbip presently authorized and practised in 
 u this Church, and that he will constantly ad'rere to the same, and 
 ** that he will neither directly nor indirectly, endeavour the preiu- 
 " dice and subversion thereof." All this was urged in a gene- 
 ral question, relative to Instrumental Music Dr. Ritchie was 
 not a party in that question, and not more particularised 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 advocates presume, in the spirit of 
 falsehood and defamation, to publish to the world, that Dr. Porteous 
 and Mr. Lapslie " wantonly charged Dr. Ritchie with the awful 
 
84 
 
 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 Congregation 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 uni- 
 formity be said merely to relate to things unsub- 
 stantial, 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, incapable of uniform duration, 
 would be a solemn mockery of our venerable Legis- 
 lators. Have all Congregations, or can all Con- 
 gregations, have an equal number of voices, the 
 same heighth, or depth, or force of sound, for ex- 
 pressing themselves 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 pre- 
 vent, break in upon the national uniformity of 
 Worship? 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 nor, in 
 an eoir.-l degree, be d of human 
 
 singers, which is literally an Organ, composed of 
 the throats of moral agents, converting themselves 
 for hire into pipes and whistles. But it is not a- 
 gainst these petty distinctions, which are unavoid- 
 able in every largo society, when French equal: - * 
 is not the order of the day, it is not . 
 that the wisdom of our Church atfd State have 
 a.ixi juslv guarded us, but against the Hierarchv .rr.d 
 the ServicfeBook. From inattention to thus, t 
 bined with the distracted state of the country in 
 former times, has arisen the prejudice ag. 
 Organs, while tl ken idea has been cherish- 
 
 ed, that they form a component part of Episcopa- 
 cy. That this is mistake and prejudice, is proved 
 bey ibility of doubt, by th ; of 
 
 the most purely Calvai strictly 
 
 Pres Ql hes on the C it Not i 
 
 I am di 
 
 thi a, never to i. 
 
 inqui t was done in St. Andrew's Church. 
 
 elves some horrid pr 
 
 * We are at a lo?s to know 
 the phrase, " French equality." Th e Anthat must certainly be 
 liblc, that Presbyterian parity, and the uniformity of the 
 
 Public Worship of God, established by civil and ecclesia N 
 ^tes, and sanctioned by immemorial usage in this kingdom, 
 . t to be d'upara^l or ridhu'ed, by a despicable car.t e ipre>« 
 ited by the rcvolutionarv mania o: French infidels. 
 
 H 
 
 
86 
 
 tution of sacred things, and then fight against it, 
 as, pro aris et Jbcis, wielding their arms against a 
 shadow. 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 
 Congregation. The Organ never struck a note but 
 at the same moment with the Precentcr, it pro- 
 ceeded along with him, pausing from line to line, 
 in the ordinary method, maintaining throughout the 
 whole, that grave melody which our Directory en- 
 joins, and with him it ceased. Who can discover 
 here the monstrous profanation of worshipping 
 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. Andrew's Church, were as- 
 suming to ourselves the sovereign prerogative of en- 
 acting a law for the whole Church, for obtruding 
 Organs upon all the Congregations in Scotland. 
 This surely is a gigantic idea; such a thought ne- 
 ver 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 under the influence of these, which I re- 
 gard as mistaken apprehensions of the subject, the 
 Respondents have contended strongly against Epis- 
 copacy, which I have never undertaken to defend. 
 They have passed a sentence, which in my appre- 
 hension, goes far beyond the object which they 
 meant to condemn. For that cannot be illegal, a- 
 
S7 
 
 gainst which no law exists, or could exist. That 
 cannot violate, which touches not the Constitution. 
 That cannot be against the Lav/ of God, which is 
 authorized by his Word. That cannot be against 
 the spirit and the genius cf our Church, which 
 she habitually recommends to the people, by her 
 appointment of the singing of David's Psalms 
 Before declaring her prohibition of Organs, it is 
 incumbent on the Church to expunge from the Sa- 
 cred Records those passages which seem clearly to 
 recommend the use of Instruments in Worship, 
 that thus the worshippers may be delivered from 
 the inconsistency of promising, and exhorting each 
 other to do, what in their hearts they resolve, and 
 by the Church are forbidden to perform. 
 
 Such being the principles and sent! 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< 
 wis, in Autumn 1806, made to the Lord Pi 
 M gistrates, and Council, not for lea 
 
 i in the Church. It became us, not to pre- 
 mt a reque t, winch the Civil Power had n I I 
 right to grant. All matters of Worship belong exclu- 
 sively to th< Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction. T! 
 it the Lord Provost, and Magisl 
 and Council, as our Heritors, would allow certain 
 •Iterations in certain seats, that there m ; -■.: be 
 room for setting up an Organ. The Petitioners at 
 II 2 
 
S3 
 
 the same time, binding themselves to defray the 
 expence, and to make good all damages that might 
 be supposed, but which they apprehended not to 
 arise from the introduction of the Organ. This re- 
 quest, the Magistrates upon principles which to 
 them seemed just, thought proper to refuse. The 
 Petitioners 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 neigh- 
 bours. After finding that this proposal was relish- 
 ed 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 cither the Civil or Ecclesiastical Power. This 
 was a matter of merely private acct mmedation. 
 We did not meddle with the seats; — we made no 
 iterations whatever, en any part of the Church. 
 The Organ was introduced, was employed regular- 
 
so 
 
 Iy one erring in the week, and the use of it never 
 did, as far as I know, excite even the appearance 
 of a tendency to disturbance. We walked to and 
 from Church in peace and quietness. No body 
 minded its, they were better employed in 
 to their own affairs. While we were thus 
 ing together, as members of one family, it was 
 suggested, that our edification might he promoted, 
 and our improvement surely not retarded, by con- 
 cluding our meeting with Family Worship. This 
 was done, and in praise, we employed the ( x 
 The people present were highly gratified, and be- 
 came loud and urgent in their requests for the use 
 of that Instrument in Public Worship. The resc- 
 Iution 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 mak- 
 ing me shrink one moment from what I believe to 
 be my right, from the privilege of directin 
 that concerns Public Worship in the Parish Church 
 of which I am Minister, independently of the Civ3 
 Power. I did not betray the cause of the Church, 
 in yielding up to the Civil Magistral % , what can on- 
 ly fall under the jurisdiction of my Ecclesiastical 
 Superiors. I maintained the privileges of this 
 Court, and I am now in my proper place, account- 
 ing for my conduct to the Presbytery of which I 
 am a member. The Organ was employed in St. 
 II 3 
 
90 
 
 Andrew's Church, in Public Worship, on the 23d 
 of August last. No explosion took place. No da- 
 mage ensued. All was done decently, and in or- 
 der. According to my promise, in my Answer to 
 the Lord Provost, I embraced the first opportunity 
 of laying his Lordship's letter before a number of 
 the Gentlemen, who have commonly acted with 
 me in this matter. They all with one voice agreed, 
 that his Lordship's terms were fair, were just, were 
 what they expected ; and nothing more than what, 
 upon a former occasion, in conversation with the 
 Magistrates of the former year, they had engaged to 
 perform. Three Gentlemen were named for wait- 
 ing upon the Lord Provost, and giving him the 
 assurance which he reo^ired. 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 official informa- 
 tion, in full form, that he had taken the le- 
 gal Protest against us, which we never doubt- 
 ed would take place; and giving notice that lie wa$ 
 to lay the whole matter before the Pre byury. 
 Wishing, as from the beginning I had done, ihat 
 everything might be avoided that might Imve the 
 most distant appearance of an interference between 
 the Civil and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, and fully 
 persuaded, that information not only might, but 
 certainly would be lodged in some other way ; for 
 h0W could a deed be < '. done in a Parish 
 
91 
 
 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 cause, they might, perhaps be jealous * of an 
 encroachment on the rights of a Minister, since, 
 to them belongs, exclusively, the judgment in such 
 cases, and the privilege of calling in the Civil Power 
 in aid of their judgment, against refractory and obsti- 
 Ministers. On this principle, I acted from the 
 most sincere respect for both branches of the Con- 
 stitution. The information was lodged, and when 
 the Presbytery 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 business 
 received so very unexpected a direction, and was 
 hurried on by such a storm of . I have no 
 
 desire now to reagitate the subject. The result 
 stands upon record. And it is my hope, that what 
 
 * It would have been desirable that the Author of the Statement 
 bad, in this request to the Lord Provost, been a little more delicate 
 in bringing forward the Reverend PriM)) tery to the view of the 
 Public. He seems to have been all a] : ly attentive to their 
 
 mse and cbnv</iie/:<\, for never so much afl once did he consult them 
 in this affair of the Organ, hut kept all his plans and operation* 
 concerning it a profound iccret from them. Why then does he 
 now expose the Pre.bytery, by holding them up as a bugbear to 
 hinder the Civil Magistrate ironi doing his bounden duty. 
 
I have now submitted; shall also be committed t© 
 record, that thus both sides of the qtrestibri 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 Magistrates and to the Church, of us who 
 are advocates for an Organs will be found groundless. 
 We, the Minister, and Elders, and Congregation of St. 
 Andrew's Church, are Loyal Citizens. We honour 
 and we obey our Magistrates. We vie with cur 
 fellow=citizens in our exertions to maintain the Civil 
 Power in that dignified respectability which the in- 
 terests of good order in Glasgow require. We are 
 steady in our attachment to our Ecclesiastical Estab- 
 lishment, as transmitted to us by our Fathers, and 
 secured to us by the Law of the Land. In what we 
 have done, on the subject of an Organ, we have had: 
 ever in view our own edification, without even the 
 imagination of doing injury to an individual, of being 
 disloyal either to Church or State. We have acted 
 as an 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 
 
 * We have never heard that there -was a meeting either of the 
 Session or Congregation ar large, to approve or disapprove of 
 the measures adopted by their Musical Committee; Of course^ 
 the Congregation never had it in their pov • o give their voice 
 fn a formal constitutional manner, either fur, or against those v 
 who stood most forv-ard m the business. 
 
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 honourable, while 
 yet, by those to whom they were looking up for en- 
 couragement, 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 sen- 
 tence 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 
 Instrumental Music in Public Worship its insepara- 
 bly connected with Popei ■ :v. In 
 combining my efforts for this vnd, with those of my 
 Congregation, I have made no sacrifice of judgm 
 or even of opinion; for I huvc acted from the full 
 approbation of my o\v:i mind, confirmed by die 
 judgment and true practice of men pf :he most cul- 
 tivated understandings, and of tb : hearts, * 
 have ever adorned the reformed Churches. And, 
 though, on this occasion, e re- 
 quired of me, for complying with ; . my 
 bearers, yet I am persuaded th< 
 is past, as a pledge on my part, t! 
 cumstances shoui d it, in v, cao con- 
 tribute to their libera] enjoymej i as to their 
 religious improvement, no sacrifice shall ,ed 
 
by me to my people, to whom my labours and my 
 life are devoted. 
 
 (Signed) Will. Ritchie. 
 Glasgow, 6th January, 1808. 
 
 Minute 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. 
 
 Answers by the Committee for the 
 Presbytery of Glasgow to Br, 
 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, " State- 
 " ment of the Grounds on which the Minister of 
 " St Andrew's Church, thinks himself vindicated 
 u in permitting, and the facts connected with his. 
 ** employing an Organ in Public Worship, on the 
 « Lord's Day." 
 
 Your Committee beg leave to preface their An- 
 swer with the following request: That it may be 
 explicitly understood by all parties, as a fixed prin- 
 ciple, that in this discussion between our Brother and 
 us, we are to avoid all general speculation about 
 
that might, or might not be, a proper form of Re- 
 igious Worship, to be adopted by an Infant Church, 
 net for the first time, to model its Establishment. 
 r or the Minister of St. Andrew's Church and his 
 Congregation, and we, your Committee, either in 
 he character of Teachers, or in the capacity of 
 iearers, are defined constituent parts of the Estab- 
 ished Presbyterian Church of Scotland, and each 
 >f us have pledged ourselves to defend its Doctrine, 
 Government, Discipline, and Worship, as con- 
 ained and specified in its Standards, and confirmed 
 >y the Public Law of the Land. 
 
 If that Paper, which we are appointed to answer, 
 
 Kid been written by a man entirely unacquainted 
 
 vith our Sacred Records, and only dictated by those 
 
 ■clings, which, as the Statement expressed] itself, 
 
 the God of Nature hath implanted in every b — 
 
 som, abstract from all positive Religiou 
 
 lishments :" Or, had it been written by .1 pn 
 
 ed Episcopalian, inclined by education, and influ- 
 
 nced by habit, to prefer the pomp of ( 
 
 Worship, to the simplicity of the primitive times of 
 
 le Church of C&rist:. Or, had it even been written 
 
 y a Congregationalism who conceives that the will 
 
 f his particular flock is a law paramount t<> all 
 
 ifcnfessions, or Liturgies, or Directories-, your Com- 
 
 Uttee in their Answers, would have considered them- 
 
 ?lves as called on, to have adopted a very different 
 
 lode of reasoning. But let it be remembered, that 
 
 ur Answer is directed to that Statement given in 
 
96 
 
 by the Minister of St. Andrew's Church, for himself 
 and his Congregation, component parts of the Estab- 
 lished 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 consider ourselves at li- 
 berty to infringe thePrcsbyterian Establishment of our 
 Country, as contained in her Standards, making a 
 part of the Public Law of the Land, acquiesced in 
 for a hundred and twenty years, often recalled to 
 our memory by the solemn decisions of our Church, 
 and sanctioned by the decided approbation and vene- 
 ration of the people of Scotland. Holding it, there- 
 fore, as an undoubted principle, that neither the 
 Reverend Presbytery, nor the Minister of St. An- 
 drew's Church, are entitled to legislate a new form 
 of Worship for their respective Congregations, but 
 that they are expressly bound to defend and practise 
 that form which was demanded by our forefathers 
 in the Claim of Rights, established at the Revolu 
 tion, and declared to be unalterable by the Act of 
 Security and Treaty of Union : Your Committee 
 natter themselves that they shall be able to con- 
 vince the Minister of St. Andrew's Church 
 the world at large, that the judgment passed on the 
 7th October last by the Presbytery of Glasgow, wa? 
 agreeable to the Law of the Land, and to the Lavi 
 and Constitution of this our National Church. Am 
 should we, in our reasoning, u 18 any language wind 
 
 
97 
 
 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 argument 
 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 neighbours. 
 
 Our Brother commenceth his statement by observ- 
 ing, that a wish had been entertained for more than 
 thirty years, to have an Organ erected and employ- 
 fed 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 legal- 
 ity, or even expediency of this measure. During 
 that period, it is well known, this Congregation have 
 had two very respectable Ministers, who were as 
 
 us of pleasing their people, as faithful Pres- 
 byterian Ministers oughl They • 
 
 dom ami prudence, as well as of taste. Nei- 
 ther of thi attempted to bring forward a 
 
 ire of this kind. Ought not this circumstance 
 
 • our Brother on his guard, especially if 
 
 Iff be well informed, when he says, that for thirty 
 
 years this Congregation have wished for an Organ. 
 
 wish of any Congregation ought to have no 
 
 freight whatever, to induce the Minister of that 
 
 1 regation to infringe the fundamental Laws and 
 
 Constitution of our Established Church, to which 
 
 lid people have covenanted to adhere, 
 
 1 
 
98 
 
 and wliich they have promised to obey. The sim- 
 ple wish of a Congregation might be an argument 
 to influence the Minister of English Independents, 
 or Scotch Seceders; but in our Established Pres- 
 byterian Church, where the direction and superin- 
 tendence of the Doctrine, Worship, Discipline, and 
 Government, are committed to Ministers and Elders, 
 the o£hce=bearers of our Church, acting in their 
 legislative and judicial capacity, such an argument 
 seems improper, and is most certainly unconstitu- 
 tional. For our Brother, therefore, to have so un- 
 precedented!)' given ear to the wishes of his Con- 
 gregation, and hastened to obtain for them their 
 favourite object, without even consulting the Pres- 
 bytery of Glasgow in their official capacity, we do 
 not trespass the rules of charity and politeness, when 
 we say, was, on his part at least, bordering upon 
 something like unconstitutional conduct. Had the 
 Rev. Presbytery of Glasgow carried their opinion 
 no higher than the Dissentients did, on the 7th of 
 October last, who declared the introduction of In- 
 strumental Music unauthorized and inexpedient* 
 your Committee would still be justified in saying 
 what they have now said, relative to the conduct of 
 our Brother, when he talks of having yielded to the 
 wish of his Congregation. Your Committee are 
 afraid, that this strong desire to please his Congre- 
 gation, may have imperceptibly warped cur Bro- 
 ther's better judgment, and induced him to view 
 that opposition which he has met with from the 
 
99 
 
 Presbytery of Glasgow to his favourite measure, a$ 
 an ( . founded merely in prejudice, and to 
 
 affirm such things in >n of himself and his 
 
 Congregation in tement which he gave in, 
 
 and is now upon record, which fair logical reason- 
 ing will not support. 
 
 Considering the polite and candid manni 
 which the Presbytery cf Glasgow accepted at once 
 of the declaration of our Brother, that he wouid not 
 again use the Organ without the authority of the 
 Church, and the indulgent spirit which they mani- 
 fested, in granting him liberty to give in an ex 
 nation after the matter was decided, and even re- 
 cording the whole of his argument 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 
 K of St. Andrew's Church, I can express by no 
 " other terms, than that they are a total perversion 
 « cf the meaning of words, utterly confounding the 
 " nature of tilings. — Not free from the influence of 
 " this mistake, I am disi ; to presume, the Re- 
 " spondents " (he must mean the Rev. Presbytery, 
 because 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. An- 
 " drew's Church; they conjure up to themselves 
 " some horrid prostitution of sacred tilings, and then 
 " fight against it, as, pro avis ct jocis, wielding their 
 I 2 
 
100 
 
 *« arms against a shadow." — Your Committee are 
 disposed to forgive irritation even in a liberal, phi- 
 losophical, and Christian mind, when disappointed in 
 a favourite measure; even the best of human charac- 
 ters are not free from imperfections, and to the im- 
 perfections incident to humanity, they are dis- 
 posed to ascribe the unguarded language used 
 by the Minister of St. Andrew's Church, in 
 his Statement. Perhaps your Committee would 
 be justified in saying, that in point, of form, our 
 Brother had no lesal title to have uttered one 
 syllable after our sentence was pronounced. He 
 declined voting in the cause. lie dissented not 
 from the judgment, of the harshness of which he 
 now complains. And therefore, had the Presbytery 
 adhered strictly to Ecclesiastical form, our Brother 
 could not have been indulged in having recorded 
 his laboured defence of his favourite opinion: nor 
 would we, your Committee, have now been called' 
 upon to answer a voluminous statement, compre- 
 hending in some parts of it, rather an attack upon the 
 judgment of the Presbytery, than merely an indulg- 
 ed explanation of his own conduct upon the twenty- 
 third of August last. 
 
 The world, to which our Brother appeals, shall 
 judge between us. 
 
 We find some difficulty in ascertaining exactly 
 the arrangement adopted by our Brother in this 
 Statement, but after the most attentive consideration 
 qd our part, we are inclined to believe that it resolves 
 
101 
 
 itself into the five following heads, which we shall 
 analyze and answer in order. 
 
 1. " That the use of Instrumental Music in Pub- 
 " lie Worship is not forbidden by the word of 
 " God, but, on the contrary, is expressly encour- 
 * aged, perhaps enjoined, in the Old Testament, 
 « and is clearly authorized by the New." 
 
 In his reasoning to support this his first conclu- 
 sion, our Brother sets out by observing, that " there 
 " is but one fixed and infallible standard for all 
 « that regards Public Worship. Whatever is not 
 « agreeable to, or founded on the word of God, 
 « ought to have no place in the Worship of Ghrist- 
 « ians." To this position we most heartily assent. 
 It is with particular pleasure that we observe this 
 great Protestant principle, the foundation of our 
 Reformation from Popery, and by which the door 
 is for ever shut against all the will=worship and su- 
 perstitious rites of the Church of Rome, recognized 
 and gloried in by the Author of the Statement. 
 
 With respect to his reasoning adjected to this fun- 
 damental principle, namely, that before the giving or 
 the Law, Instrumental Music was employed by the 
 twelve tribes of Israel, and that when we " look 
 *« into the covenant of peculiarity introduced by the 
 " ministry of Moses, no mention is made of Instru- 
 " mental Music among the ritual observances of the 
 « Law;" — we dare not give such positive assent. 
 For a great variety of opinions lias been entertained 
 by learned men, as to the precise period when In- 
 I 3 
 
102 
 
 strumental 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 himself a masterly performer, incorporated it 
 with the Tabernacle service. Others suppose, from 
 a passage in the lxxxist. Psalm, and from another in 
 Exod. xv. 21. that Instrumental Music in the Wor- 
 ship 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 
 M Jacob. Take a psalm, bring hither the timbrel, 
 « the pleasant harp, with psaltery. This he ordain- 
 « ed in Joseph for a testimony, when he went out 
 <« through the land of Egypt." " 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 enactment of the Cere- 
 monial Law. Thus Num. x. 10. " Also in the 
 " day of your gladness, and in your solemn days, 
 « and in the beginning of your months, ye shall 
 «< blow with the trumpets over your burnt=ofTerings 
 " and over your peace=olFerings-, that they may 
 *i be to you for a memorial before your God: I am 
 »< the Lord vour God." Of which last opinion is 
 Calvin; for in his Commentary upon Psalm xxxii. 
 
103 
 
 2. he pronounces Instrumental Music a part of the 
 " Pcedagogia Legal: s" that is, a Levitical institu- 
 tion. 
 
 But whatever opinion be adopted, concerning the 
 precise period when Instrumental Music was intro- 
 duced into the Hebrew Church, we can never assent 
 to the averment of our Brother, " that in a system 
 " of merely temporary institutions, it was not deem- 
 " ed necessary, by positive enactment, either to for- 
 " bid, or to enjoin the use of Instrumental Music; 
 " but it was left to the will, and situation, and cir- 
 « cumstances of the worshippers." For whether 
 we are of opinion or not, that every circumstance 
 relative to the Ceremonial Law, and the Tabernacle 
 Service, was shewn to Moses on the Mount, it is 
 certain that David, who was raised by Divine Pro- 
 vidence, to be king over Israel, having a great geni- 
 us for Music, did either amplify what he found in 
 the institutions of Moses, with regard to Instrumen- 
 tal Music, or did himself introduce it into the Ta- 
 bernacle service, 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 ge- 
 nius for Music, or from believing it would contri- 
 bute to soften the rugged temper of the people, ad- 
 ded the pomp of Instrumental Music to the Taber- 
 nacle service, which was afterwards adopted by his 
 Son in the service of the Temple; then we shall be 
 entitled to say, from a strict examination of the 
 
104 
 
 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, suggested by David 
 himself, this was a form of Worship neither com- 
 manded, nor even highly approved 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 Temple service, betwixt what was 
 positively enjoined by the Ceremonial Law, and 
 v/hat was commanded by David the king. " And 
 " the Priests waited in their office, the Levites al- 
 " so with the Instruments of Music of the Lord, 
 " which David the king had made to praise the 
 " Lord *." " And when the builders had 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 praise the Lord after the ordinance of David 
 « king of Israel f-" 
 
 If, on the other hand, authorities are not wanting 
 to countenance the opinion, that there are positive 
 enactments in the Law of Moses, in favour at least 
 of pne kind of Musical Instruments, with which 
 « all the earth is exhorted to make a joyful noise 
 " unto the Lord J"' the conclusion must be, that 
 it is a constituent part of the Ceremonial Law. 
 « And he set the Levites in the house of the Lord 
 
 * 2 Chron. vii. 6. f Ezra> 11U 10, t rsa1, * cviii * 6 ' 
 
105 
 
 u 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 in- 
 H struinents of David, and the Priests with the 
 " trumpets. And when the burnt=offering began, 
 " the song of the Lord began also, with the tritm- 
 « pets and with the instruments ordained by David 
 " king of Israel. And all the congregation wor- 
 " shipped, and the singers sang, and the trumpet- 
 " ers sounded, and all this continued, until, the 
 " burnt-offering was finished §" 
 
 Whichever of these opinions we adopt, it is evi- 
 dent, that the regulation- relative to Instrumental 
 Music, in the Public Worship of Cod, are as 
 much incorporated with the Mosaic or Jewish Con- 
 stitution as Circumcision, which was instituted long, 
 before the giving of the Law, or as the Temple it- 
 self, which was not built till after the death of Da- 
 vid. Therefore, we are entitled to conclude, that 
 Circumcision, Sacrifice, Instrumental Music, and 
 the Temple — the whole of these Institutions must 
 stand or fall together. 
 
 We shall allow to our Brother, that David was a 
 prophet, and that he was actuated by the purest 
 motives, when he set apart a particular class of peo- 
 ple to sing those hymns which he composed, with 
 
 f 2 Chron.xxix. 25, 20, 27, 28, 
 
106 
 
 the accompaniment of Instruments of Music, im- 
 proved 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 Ptzdagogia 
 Legalis, all the Instruments mentioned in the 
 clth. 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 
 authority, and in uninterrupted observation, until 
 the publication of the Gospel. It remains still to 
 be considered, whether Christianity did not dis- 
 solve the obligations of the Law, and entirely 
 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, Instrumen- 
 tal Music in the Public Worship of God, was es- 
 sentially connected with sacrifice — with the morn- 
 ing and evening sacrifice, and with the sacrifices 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 enacted by Moses, or 
 introduced by i\\e ordinance of David, or if you will, 
 of Abraham, or any other Patriarch, being so inti- 
 mately 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 recal it into the Christian Church, any 
 
107 
 
 more than we have to use other abrogated rites of 
 the Jewish religion, of which it is a part. Nor was 
 there any need for a particular commandment to a- 
 bolish it, as our Brother seems to think, seeing that 
 the whole service, of which it is a part, is complete- 
 ly abrogated. 
 
 But as our Brother states it as his first and great ar- 
 gument, that Instrumental Music is not forbidden 
 in the Word of God, — but is expressly encouraged) 
 perhaps enjoined) in the Old Testament, and clear- 
 ly authorized by the New; your Committee con- 
 ceive it their duty, to bring forward the following 
 reasoning from Scripture, in opposition to the last 
 part of his averment, viz. that it is clearly authoriz- 
 ed by the New. 
 
 We find, in Scripture, much information concern- 
 ing great changes to be made respecting religious 
 services under the Gospel. These were foretold in 
 the Old Testament, and they are explained in the 
 New. The Apostle, writing to the Hebrews, de- 
 clares, that the Priesthood being 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 ser- 
 " vices," which he describes as consisting chiefly 
 " in meats and drinks, and diverse washings, and 
 " carnal ordinances," which he says, were " impos- 
 " ed until the time of reformation f. ' The car- 
 
 * Heb. vii. 12. f Heb. ix. 1—10. 
 
J 08 
 
 nal ordinances include all the ritual, which was 
 addressed to the senses and imagination, but nei- 
 ther enlightened the understanding, nor purified 
 the conscience. By whatever authority these were 
 imposed, they were only to continue till « the time 
 " of reformation." And whatever is meant by 
 « the 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 obligatory. They 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 Tes- 
 tament. The Apostolic decree recorded in the 
 xvth. chap, of the Acts of the Apostles — the mini- 
 strations and epistles of St. Paul, and particularly 
 his strictures on the doctrines of Judaizing Teachers, 
 shew, 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 re- 
 main unchanged under every dispensation. What- 
 ever is to be found in the Old Testament, with re- 
 gard to either of these, is of permanent and ever- 
 lasting obligation. But with respect to the modes 
 of external Worship, there was to be an entire 
 change, which was announced by our Lord him- 
 self, in a very early period of his ministry. The 
 " hour cometh, when ye shall neither on thii 
 mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the 
 
 u 
 
109 
 
 «< Father.— But the hour cometh, and now is, 
 « when the true worshippers shall worship the Fa- 
 ff ther in spirit and in truth: for the Father seek- 
 k eth such to worship him. God is a Spirit: 
 " and they that worship him, must worship him 
 « in spirit and in truth*:" Not according to the 
 old institution, in the hour that was past, but ac- 
 cording 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 in- 
 stitutions were to be abrogated, but only what ob- 
 servances were to take place, under the Gospel. 
 They do not tell us that the Passover was no long- 
 er to be observed, but only that the Lord's Supper 
 was to be administered. So, with respect to prais- 
 ing God, they do not expressly say, that Instru- 
 mental Music is to be silenced, but they do express- 
 ly say, that God is to be praised and worshipped by 
 singing Psalms, and Hymns, and Spiritual Song.-, 
 with understanding and grace in the heart, for the 
 purposes of instructing and comforting one ano- 
 ther. This is to be the change under the G( 
 as far as Psalmody is concerned. 
 
 The only point which remains to be ascertained 
 is, whether this necessary change of the Law, ex- 
 tends to Instrumental Music, as a concomitant of the 
 jw Testament Psalmody. On this point, 
 
 *ohn iv. 21, l J3, 24. 
 
 K 
 
110 
 
 Brother has given a most decided opinion, that 
 " Instrumental Music is clearly authorized bv the 
 « New Testament; and that, before declaring our 
 « prohibition of Organs, it is incumbent on the 
 " Church to expunge from the Sacred Records, 
 « these passages which seem clearly to recommend 
 " the use of Instruments in Public Worship — that 
 " thus the Worshippers may be delivered from the 
 " inconsistency of promising, and exhorting each o- 
 " ther to do, what in their hearts they resolve, 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 
 " the great Head of the Church repealing the in- 
 " junctions pronounced by the Psalmist David! 
 " And it is impossible to think, that our blessed 
 <c Saviour would have been silent on the subject, 
 « if Instrumental Music had been a gross profana- 
 " tion of sacred tilings. No where do we find 
 " St. Paul warning against Harp, and Psaltery, 
 « 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 Philosophy. 
 We have already observed, that it is not the ordi- 
 nary manner of the writers of the New Testament, 
 to inform us what Divine institutions were to be 
 
Ill 
 
 abrogated, but only what observances v/ere to take 
 place under the Gospel. And does net every 
 Christian know, that during our Saviour's abode 
 upon earth, the " time of reformation" was not fully 
 come — that Jesus was not yet glorified — 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 Tem- 
 ple, but only foretold its destruction, is it not 
 self=evident, that its Ministers, and all the Instru- 
 ments employed by them, whether musical or sa- 
 critical, must remain along with it? We shall tran- 
 scribe 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 judi- 
 cious Biblical Critics. « 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, but with respect unto an 
 " especial work, namely, the change of the whole 
 " state of religious Worship in the Church of God : 
 " Whereas we shall see, in the next words, he is 
 " spoken of only with respect unto external actual 
 " operations. But he was the great, the promised 
 « heavenly gift, to be bestowed under the New 
 « Testament, by whom God would institute and 
 " ordain a new way, and new rites of Worshir, 
 " upon the revelation of himself and will in Ch 
 K 2 
 
112 
 
 " Unto him was committed the reformation of all 
 " things in the Church, whose time was now 
 c< come, chap. ix. 10. The Lord Christ, when 
 (< he ascended into heaven, left all things standing 
 " and continuing in religious Worship as they had 
 « done, from the days of Moses, though he had 
 " virtually put an end unto it. And he com- 
 " manded his disciples, that they should attempt 
 " no alteration therein, until the Holy Ghost were 
 " sent from heaven, to enable them thereunto, 
 " Acts i. 4, 5. But when he came as the great gift 
 " of God, promised under the New Testament, 
 " he removes all the carnal worship and ordinan- 
 « ces of Moses, and that by the full revelation of 
 <f the accomplishment of all that was signified by 
 « them, and appoints the new, holy, spiritual 
 " worship of the Gospel, that was to succeed 
 *'< in their room. The Spirit of God, therefore, 
 « as bestowed for the introduction of the new 
 *< Gospel state, in truth and worship, is the 
 " heavenly gift here intended J." 
 
 As to the authority borrowed from St. Paul, by 
 interpreting his silence as expressive of his approba- 
 tion of Harps, Psalteries, and Organs, our Bro- 
 ther seems not to be aware, that Instrumental Mu- 
 sic belonged entirely to the Temple service, and 
 never was employed in the Synagogue. Hence 
 Paul, in all his journeyings, could not find a single 
 
 f Owen on the Hebrews. Chap. vi. 4. 
 
IIS 
 
 Harp, or Psaltery, or Organ, in any of the religious 
 assemblies of his countrymen, beyond the pre- 
 cincts of the Temple at Jerusalem-, of consequence, 
 warning or reproof on this subject, from that A- 
 postle, is not to be expected. This circumstance 
 accounts for the Jewish converts never betraying, 
 as far as we know, the least predilection for Instru- 
 mental 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 Worship of God, however poor and 
 persecuted the Apostolic Church might be, it is not 
 to be supposed, that he would have preserved such 
 profound 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 re- 
 vival 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. Instend 
 of speaking in commendation of Instrumental 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 
 K 3 
 
114 
 
 « 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 passage 
 in the book of Revelation, where St. John expressly 
 declares, that he heard " Harpers harping with their 
 w Harps in heaven j." " Words cannot be simpler, 
 " (says our Brother,) nor convey more plainly an un- 
 « equivocal meaning, and that meaning clearly is, 
 " that Instrumental Music is at least not inconsist- 
 « ent with the purity of Evangelical praise. " The 
 Author of the Statement 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, any usage is not 
 inconsistent with Divine revelation, are we, on that 
 account, to blend that usage with the worship of 
 God? The Established Church of Scotland allows 
 no such latitudinnrian principle. This was pre- 
 cisely the mode of reasoning, by which the Popish 
 corruptions were introduced into Baptism and the 
 Lord's Supper, and by which any system of will? 
 worship may be vindicated. 
 
 * I Cor. xiij. I. ' Rev. xfa 
 
115 
 
 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 imagery 
 of the context is terrestrial and Levitical and not 
 Evangelical. The scene of the vision is upon 
 Mount Zion, and the voice from heaven is described 
 as " the voice of many waters, and as the voice of 
 " a great thunder j" evidently alluding to the re- 
 gion 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 cf the Temple ? It would be in vain to ex- 
 pect, that, in a vision, " the forms of Christian wor- 
 " ship " 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 allusions invariably from what is 
 modern or familiar. The mantle of antiquity must 
 often be thrown around allusions and illustrations, 
 to render them venerable and majestic; and this, we 
 apprehend, is most judiciously done, in the passage 
 before us, whether the subject of the vision record- 
 ed in it, refer to the Church Militant or Trium- 
 phant. 
 
 Your Committee, therefore, are bold to contend, 
 
116 
 
 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 Jerusalem, that heaven, the 
 place of happiness for the righteous, is literally a 
 splendid city, " having twelve gates, and every se- 
 « veral gate of one pearl; and that its walls are of 
 " jasper, and its streets of pure gold.'* 
 
 If your Commitee were to borrow any thing con- 
 cerning the form of Evangelical praise to be used 
 by Christians from the Book of Revelation, they 
 would take it rather from the 6th and 7th verses of 
 this xivth. chapter, than from the 2d verse. " And 
 " I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, 
 " having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them 
 « that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and 
 " kindred, and tongue, and people; saying, with a 
 " loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him, for 
 " the hour of his judgment is come, and wor- 
 " ship 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 thanksgiv- 
 
117 
 
 ig, 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, unlebS we violate 
 the laws of sound criticism, and confound the lite- 
 ral and figurative meaning of language. Our bless- 
 ed Lord did not condemn Instrumental Music, 
 because it was a constituent part of the Temple ser- 
 vice, which, with other Levirical institutions, were 
 to outlive himself, and only to be nailed to his cross, 
 Or abolished by his death. The Apostle Paul could 
 not speak against it in the Synagogues, for in them 
 it never existed. He could not warn or reprove the 
 Jewish converts, for, as far as we know, they never 
 betrayed a 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 offer- 
 ing up our praises to God in Public Worship: the 
 one by thanksgiving, without the vocal melody of 
 the Congregation ; the other by the Congregation 
 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 cur Public Worship. " I exhort, 
 " therefore, that first of all, supplications, prayers, 
 " intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for 
 
113 
 
 « all men." And it is believed, that this giving of 
 thanks varied according to the nature of the mer- 
 cies which the Church was daily receiving: and that 
 the people performed no other part in these thanks- 
 givings, than saying, Amen *. 
 
 The second method is what the Scriptures enjoin 
 relative to praising God by singing Psalms, and 
 Hymns, and Spiritual Songs. Your Committee be- 
 lieve that there are only four passages in the New 
 Testament, which speak distinctly and directly 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, singing and making 
 « melody in your heart to the Lord $" " Is any 
 " among you afflicted? let him pray: Is any mer- 
 " ry? let him sing poalms ||." " By him therefore 
 « let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God conti- 
 " nually, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks 
 « to his name §." In all these passages, it is an un- 
 deniable matter of faet> that the primitive Christ- 
 ians understood singing with the human voice alone> 
 as enjoined; for this, and this only they employed 
 in singing to the Lord, making melody in their hearts. 
 Among them the accompaniment of any Instrument 
 
 * Eph. i. 3.— 1 Pet. i. 3. f Col. iii. \6. \ Eph. v. IP. 
 [j James v. J 3. § Hcb. xiii. 15. 
 
119 
 
 df Music in the public worship of God was Hefret 
 
 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 Mu- 
 sical Instruments in the Public Worship of God, see- 
 ing they use a word, which, in the original language, 
 he says, signifies singing with an Instrument; psaUo. 
 But this very criticism serves to shew upon what 
 slender foundation the patrons of Instrumental Music 
 build Thus, the word generally used in the New 
 Testament for worshipping, fprobkuneo } J signifieth 
 in the original, to pay homage by the kissi?ig of the 
 hand: of course, if we are to follow the analogy drawn 
 from the original meaning of a Greek word, Christ- 
 ian 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 di- 
 rectly and expressly addressed to all Christians, ci- 
 ther considered as assembled for Public Worship, 
 or in their private individual capacity. Now, is it at 
 all credible, that each individual Christian in these 
 times, or at any 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 die parts of 
 our argument together, viz. that Instrumental Music 
 
120 
 
 was confined to the service of the Temple, and most 
 intimately connected with the offering up of sacri- 
 fice, and that we have no warrant to transfer it into 
 the Christian Church, any more than other rites of 
 the Jewish religion: — that the silence of our blessed 
 Lord and of his Apostles upon the subject, affords no 
 presumption that they approved of the measure — 
 and finally, that the passages in the New Testament 
 which relate expressly to the praises of God, cither 
 allude to thanksgiving, pronounced by the Minister, 
 without 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 h 
 mental Music in the Public "Worship of God, is not 
 authorized by the New Testament — that whether it 
 was enjoined by Moses, or only introduced by David, 
 it was appropriated to the Temple service, and of 
 course, abrogated with it. The singing of Psalms % 
 Hymns, and Spiritual Songs in the hear.' to the 
 Lord, not the playing ofihcniy is the express language 
 of the New Testament. Therefore Instrumental 
 Music is neither enjoirwd, nor authorized) nor cn~ 
 couragedby the word of ( »od, in the Public Worship 
 of Christians. 
 
 As to that observation made by our Brother, thai 
 « when we look into the history even of those nag 
 " tions that were strangers to Divine revelation, 
 
121 
 
 ct there we find universally the use of instruments 
 p in giving praise to their Gods." We consider any 
 reasoning, founded upon Heathen examples, as of 
 no weight whatever in deciding this question, and 
 even as hardly requiring a serious answer. Accord- 
 ing to our Brother's own principles, « the fixed and 
 «' infallible standard " for the worship of Christians 
 is the word of God alone. What he is phased to 
 say, proceeds froin the unadulterated light of na- 
 ture, we affirm, ariseth from a blind and corrupt 
 :ition; and if we were disposed to indulge 
 in conjecture, about the origin of manners and cus- 
 toms amongst 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 
 P 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 posterity, 
 would transmit some of their corrupt superstitious 
 notions of re!". lp to Cush, MiZRAiM, 
 
 ar.J Can/. of the Chaldeans, 
 
 Phoi nations, which 
 
 ancient history informs us, first set up Idols, and 
 introduced Instrumental Music into the Public 
 Worship of their G 
 
 'J. Let us nnv proceed to the second argument 
 Minister of St. Andrew's Church, 
 
 * G • ■ 
 
 : 
 
122 
 
 snd 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 worship of 
 God was not known till " about the middle of the 
 <( eighth century ; yet then it was introduced, 
 « through the dictates of pious feeling, prompting 
 " the enlightened mind to consecrate the labour of 
 w genius to the devout exercise of praise." He 
 farther affirms, that " Instrumental Music forms 
 " no essential part of Popery, being founded on 
 <£ principles widely different from the ceremonies 
 " of the Church of Rome, and therefore retained 
 « and employed by all the reformed Churches on 
 " the Continent." — " A stronger argument (con-. 
 " tinues he) in its favour cannot be produced, ex- 
 « cept that which I have already mentioned, the 
 « sacred authority of Scripture." We have fairly 
 stated this second argument. Our Brother's reason- 
 ing, 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, compre-r 
 hends, along with the Apostolic age, not only the 
 poorest and most persecuted, but also the most 
 splendid and prosperous times of the primitive 
 Church. The practice of such a period, will more 
 than counterbalance any thing that even the reform' 
 
 ■ Churches on the Continent can furnish. To 
 
pretend to account for this remarkable 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 unphilosophieal 
 and inaccurate mode of reasoning. They had both 
 leisure and inclination to form the most abstruse and 
 metaphysical opinions concerning the doctrines of the 
 Gospel. They had means to build the most splendid 
 Churches. The Emperors of the West were devout, 
 to a degree 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 Arians 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 Reformers. If they 
 knew their own sentiments, or have honestly record- 
 ed 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, 
 L 2 
 
124 
 
 we have the following testimony. « Q. 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 per- 
 « feet instructions of grace, xvhich are most contrary 
 " to the foresaid customs., nevertheless sing in the 
 " Churches, as they did who were children under 
 " the law? A. Plain singing* is not childish, but 
 " only the singing with lifeless Organs, with Danc- 
 " ing, and Cymbals, &c. Whence the use of such 
 « Instruments, and other things fit for children, is 
 << laid aside, and plain singing only retained j-." 
 
 * A confusion seems to have crept into the minds of many, re- 
 lative to singing the praise of God. They conceive, that because 
 the Church of Scotland is hostile to the use of Musical Instruments. 
 in the Public Worship of God, she denies the antiquity of Vocal 
 Music in the Church of Christ. There is ground to believe, 
 that the Minister of St. Andrew's Church, his 'coadjutors, and 
 anonymous advocates, have fallen into this mistake. Now there 
 are three things which the Church of Scotland carefully and ac- 
 curately distinguishes. First, Plain singing, which she affirms 
 his been in use from the beginning of the Church. Secondly, 
 Cathedral or Antiphonal singing, which she takes to be neither 
 rseful, nor very ancient; being the device of the fourth century. 
 Lastly, Musical Instruments, joined with singing in the Church, 
 she maintains is the invention of a much later age — certainly not 
 earlier than the eighth, and not in general use till the thirteenth 
 century. 
 
 f " En ta'is eccleslais pro aireta'i el ton o.smaion be cbresis tin to'iutin 
 irganan kai ton ailln toh nipiois outun harmcdiZn kal J.upvlcu'piai to asai 
 kaplos" 
 
 Justin, Ouxst. et Respons. ad Orthodox. Q. 10". 
 
125 
 
 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 com- 
 «' ply, being disturbed by the great multitude of the 
 " Christians, he consulted Trajan, acquainting him, 
 « that besides an obstinate aversion to sacrificing, 
 " he could discover nothing concerning their my- 
 « steries, but that they held assemblies before day, 
 p to sing to Christ as Godf." 
 
 Thus, Basil, though he highly commends, and 
 zealously defends, the way of singing by turns, or 
 what is styled antiphonal singing, docs not deny 
 that the manner of singing in use during the Apos- 
 tolic times, was altered by him in his church. On 
 the contrary, he explicitly admits, that the former 
 practice was for the people rising before day light, 
 to go to the house of prayer, and bavin 1 ; made con- 
 fession to God, to rise from prayer, and betake them- 
 selves (" Eis ten Psalmodiam") to the singing of 
 Psalms. But now, indeed (« cliche dianemethentesy 
 " antipsalloisin allelois" J they sing to each other, 
 alternately, in parts, Ep. Ixiii. And so far hern 
 approving Musical Instruments in the Worship of 
 God, he calls them " the inventions of Jalul of 
 
 \ Tertul. Apol, 
 
 L :> 
 
126 
 
 « the race of Cain" and thus expresses himsel 
 concerning them. " Laban was a lover of the Hai 
 « and of Music, with which he would have sen|| 
 " away Jacob: if thou hadst told me y said he, / 
 M would have sent thee avoay with mirth, and Mu- 
 u sical Instruments, and an Harp. But the Patriarclu 
 " avoided that Music, as being a thing that would 
 " hinder his regarding the works of the Lord, and 
 " his considering the works of his hands. — In such 
 " vain arts, as the playing upon the harp or pipe, 
 " or dancing, (pansamenes tes energeias, ton crgom 
 « sunaphanidsttai. Kai ontos lata ten aposto-] 
 u liken pihonen to lelds touton apoleia." J As soon asj 
 « the action ceases, the work itself vanishes: so that 
 « really, according to the Apostle's expression, the\ 
 « end of these things is destruction." Comment, in 
 James > chap. v. 
 
 Chrysostom, who flourished in the fourth century,'] 
 often expresses his disapprobation of Instrumental 
 Music, and explicit'}' declares, " that it was only 
 « permitted to the Jews, like sacrifice, for the imbe- 
 " cillity and grossness of their souls, God conde- 
 " scending to their weakness, because they were 
 " lately drawn off from idols." « But now in- 
 " stead of Organs, Christians must use the body to 
 « praise God ||." 
 
 jj " Hoil topala'ion louto.* tgonio dfo tor: orgar.on touton, dla Unpaclule- 
 
 " tates d:anoias cuton; kai to arti aofspasihai apoton sidolon. Hvs/sr 
 
 ■ tas thusiai ' vta rfetrtpse tungkatabiinon 
 
127 
 
 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 making me- 
 « lody in your heart to the Lord. Let 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 man- 
 " ner of the tragedians, that theatrical notes and 
 " songs should be heard in 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 
 " 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.* ' This shews, as has been remarked by Dr. 
 
 " anion te asthenda" " Alia tote men organa en dl bin tat Idas ane- 
 " pbeion. Nioii dc antl organ on kehtestbai esti to somati." Chrysos- 
 tom, Fsalm cxlix. and cxlni. 
 
 If the reader should be at any loss, from these Greek quota- 
 tions being printed in the Roman characters, he may turn to the 
 original, the passage being fairly quoted. 
 
 * " Et canere igitur et psailere, et lauc^are Dominuin magis ani- 
 ■* mo quam voce debemus. Hoc est quippe, quod dicitur far- 
 
128 
 
 Whitby, that Choristers had then obtained an office 
 in the Church, though Jerome seems not much to 
 approve of them. If he disliked Choristers, what 
 would he have thought of Organists ? 
 
 Augustine, Confess, lib. 10. cap. 33. gives his. 
 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 me, 
 " which I remember I have been told of Athana- 
 « sius Bishop of Alexandria, who made the Read- 
 " er of the Psalm sound it with so little altera- 
 " tion of his voice, that he was more like to 
 « a person delivering a speech, than singing." 
 
 " tatttes ct psallentes in cord'ibus vestris Domhio. Audirnt hxc ado- 
 " lescentuli: audiant hi quibus psallendi in Ecclesia officium est-, 
 •' Deo non voce, sed corde cantandum: nee in Tragasdorum mo- 
 " dum, guttur, et fauces dulci medicamini collinienda-3 ; ut ia 
 " Ecclesia theatrales moduli audiantur et Cantica, sed in timore, 
 " in opere, in scientia scripturarum. Quamvis sit aliquis ut solent 
 " illi appellare lakophonos si bona opera habuerit, dulcis apud 
 " Deum Cantor est. Sic cantet servus Christi ut non vox ca- 
 " nentis sed verba placeant quae leguntur: \ Reg. 1 G. ut Spiritus 
 " malus qui erat in Saiile, ejiciatur ab his qui similiter ab eo possi- 
 " dentur et non introducatur in eos qui de Dei domo scenam \ 
 M fecere populorum." "Jerom.in Ep. v. 19. 
 
 \ Vetus baec damnatnque licet a Patribus consuetudo viget hodie 
 in Ecclesiis ubi audiuntur, theatrales moduli et dulcia canticn, 
 quse de domo Dei scenam faciunt populorurn, convenicntium ad 
 xnulcendas aures vocibus et modulis Tragadorum, quos vulgo. 
 
 IS Optra vocant. 
 
129 
 
 Thus it is evident, from the authority of the Fa- 
 thers, that it was simply vocal melody which was us- 
 ed in singing the praises of God, during the pri- 
 mitive times of the Church. And should we ana- 
 lyze the writings of Ecclesiastical authors in the 
 middle or scholastic ages, we shall find that Instru- 
 mental 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, lest she 
 " should seem to Judaize. — Nor ought a pipe, nor 
 " any other artificial instruments, such as Organ 
 i( or Harp, or the like, be brought into use in 
 " the Christian Church, but only those tilings 
 " which shall make the hearers better men. For, by 
 " Musical Instruments, the mind is more directed 
 " to amusement, than to the forming of a good 
 " internal disposition. But under the Old Testa- 
 " ment such instruments were used, partly because 
 " the people were harder, ?,nd more carnal; upon 
 " which account, they were to be stirred up by 
 " these instruments, as likewise by earthly promis- 
 " es; and partly, because these bodily instruments 
 " were typical of something." — 2. 2. Guest. 91. Art, 
 " 2. ad. 4<. *. 
 
 * " Neque fistula ad disciplinam est adducenda, neque aliud ali- 
 quod artificiale Organum, puta Cithara et si quid tale alterum est; 
 Sed qusecunque faciunt auditores bonos. Hujusmodi enim Musica 
 lnstrumenta magis aniniurn movent ad delectationem, quam per 
 
130 
 
 Others of the Schoolmen might be quoted, 
 but conceiving this to be unnecessary, we pro- 
 ceed to state the judgment of the Reformers. 
 
 Pareus in 1st. Cor. 147. declares, « That in the 
 " Christian Church the mind must be incited to 
 M spiritual joy, not by Pipes, and Trumpets, and 
 " Timbrels, with which God formerly indulged his 
 " ancient people on account of the hardness of their 
 " hearts, but by Psalms, and Hymns, and Spirit- 
 " ual Songs f." 
 
 Zepperus, De Leg. Mosaica, lib. 4. says, " In- 
 « strumental Music, in the religious Worship cf 
 « 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, 
 w that others may understand and be reformed: 
 
 ea, formatur interius bona dispositio. In Veteri autem Testa- 
 ments usus erat talium instrumentorum, turn quia populus erat 
 magis durus et carnalis, unde erat per hujusmodi instrumenta pro- 
 vocandus, sicut et per promisslones t err en as; turn etiam quia 
 hujusmodi instrumenta corporalia aliud figurabant." Tb*m*i 
 Aquinas, V. 2. Quest. 91. Art. 2. ad. 4. 
 
 f " In Ecclesia excitandus est animus ad Deum et letitiam 
 ipiritualem, non tibiis, tubis, tympanis, quod veteri duraj 
 cervicis et stupidae mentis populo Deus olim indulsit, std lacrii 
 coucionibus, Psulmodiis et Hynmis," Pare** in 1 Cor. 147. 
 
131 
 
 « so 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, bcl- 
 " 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 fur a political purpose, 
 " to gratify those who seek pleasure from bound 
 f< and harmony £." 
 
 jf " Instrumental Musica in sacris et cultu divino populi Judaici 
 ad ceremonialia Mosaica pertinuit quai nunc abolita sunt — Utut 
 sit contra pra:ceptum et regulam Pauli factum est, qui 1 Cor. 
 xix. 26. vult, ut in conventibus Ecclesiasticis ad edificationem om- 
 nia fiant, atque alii intelligent et informentur, quo quidem nomine 
 lirguas etiam in Eccleiia ibidem rejicit, nedum confragosa ilia 
 organa musica quae varium vocum garritum efficiunt et 1 i 
 iituis, tubis et fistulis personare, imo perboare et remugire faciunt. 
 ■ — In quibusdam Ecclesiis Reformatio organa ilia musica retini 
 Hon autem nisi omnibus cultus divini partibus peractis et demisso 
 coetu Ecclesiastico pulsantur. Ad finem politicum propter illos 
 qui ex sono et numeris oblectationem quandam quaerunr quibusque 
 huic instrumental musica interesse libet." Zepperus> dc L?-e Mo- 
 $aica, lib, 4. 
 
132 
 
 Molerus in his prelections on the 150th. Psalm, 
 says, « It is no wonder, therefore, that such a num- 
 « ber 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 willeth, that after the coming of Christ, 
 «* his people should cultivate the hope of etcr- 
 " nal life, and the practice of true piety, by very 
 " different, and more simple means than these §." 
 
 Erasmus, who was certainly a friend to the Re- 
 formation, complained of Instrumental Music as 
 an abase, and pronounced it unsuitable to the gra- 
 vity and solemnity of Christian Worship. His words 
 are, " Vv r e have brought a cumbersome and thea- 
 " trical Music into our Churches, such a confused 
 " disorderly chattering of some words, as I think 
 " was never heard in any of the Grecian or Roman 
 " Theatres. The Church rings with the noise of 
 " Trumpets, Pipes, and Dulcimers, and human voice; 
 " strive to bear their part with them. Men run to 
 " Church as to a Theatre, to have their cars tickled. 
 " And for this end, Organ=makers are hired with 
 " great salaries, and a company of boys who wa 
 
 § Non nimimm igitur tot musica instruments \\z co.u-erv.Hi. 
 Ouoe cum pars prvclagogia legalis fuerirft ncn sw.t bodie in Chi 
 ianorMm cxtibus mducendae. Alii; enith mediis, et simplidon- 
 bus spem vitx ;ttrrn;c et piet<u:- excercitiam, post Christum 
 ohibitum suos colt-re vull Domini -. - ' .■■■•< ^ ? ' ■ I •" 
 
* ail their time in learning these whining tones. 
 N Pray now, compute how many poor people, in 
 u great extremity, might be maintained by the sala- 
 " ries of these singers*." 
 
 It is curious to observe how little our Brother 
 seems to have attended to the history of the Pro- 
 testant Churches, for it appears, that Instrumental 
 Music would not have been retained even among the 
 Lutherans, " unless they had forsaken their own Llf- 
 " tker, who (by the confession of Eckhard, a Ger- 
 (c man Doctor of Theology) reckoned Organs among 
 w the ensigns of Baal. His words are, Lutherus 
 V organa musica inter Baalis insignia refert-f." 
 And, from record, it is evident, that if Instrumental 
 Music is used in some of the Dutch Churches, it i.> 
 decidedly against the judgment of the Dutch Pas- 
 tors. For in the National Synod at Middleburg in 
 the year 1581, and in the Synod of Holland and 
 Zealand in the year 1594?, it was resolved, " That 
 « they would endeavour to obtain of the Magis- 
 " trate the laying aside of 0?gans, and the 
 « singing with them in the Churches, even out of 
 u the time of worship, either before or after Ser- 
 
 * Opcrosam quandam et theatricam Musicam in Sacras aedes 
 rnduximus, tumultuosum diversarum vocum garritum, quakm non 
 opinor in Grascoium aut Romanorum Theatris unquam auJil^n-; 
 fuisse, 8cc. 
 
 x Vide Eckhard Fasciculus contra. The. 
 
134 
 
 « mons. So far are those Synods from bearing 
 " ivilh them in the IVorship 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 Com- 
 mittee 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 
 " the Church, much less would he have tolerated 
 « these artificial musical performances, which are 
 « addressed to the ear alone, and seldom strike 
 " the understanding, even of the performers tliem- 
 " selves f." 
 
 Calvin, in many different parts of his works, gives 
 it as his deliberate judgment, that Instrumental 
 Music ought to have no place in the Public Wor* 
 ship of God under the Gospel. 
 
 1st. In his exhortation to Charles the V. con- 
 cerning the necessity of reforming the Church, he 
 says, " Unless we intend to confound every thing, 
 « we must constantly distinguish between the Old 
 
 f Si Apostolus merito peregrinarum linguarum usuni in cmtu 
 Ecclesiasiico proliibuit, nuiko minus sonos illos Musices Harmoni- 
 co8, quibus aures solas, iis qua; cantantur nullo modo, ne *b iis 
 quidem, qui cantant plerunique intcllectis feriuntur in Eccjesia 
 
 tolerasset. 
 
 B;xa in Col'.oq. Mompclg. parte l.pag* 26. 
 
135 
 
 M and the New Testament. That although the 
 
 " observation of a ceremony under the Law m: 
 " be useful, now it is not only superfluous, but ab- 
 " surd and pernicious*." 
 
 2d. Calvin elsewhere declares, et That Instrument- 
 «< al Music is not fitter to be adopted into the Pub- 
 " lie Worship of the Christian Church, than the 
 " incense, the candlesticks, and the other shadows 
 « of the Mosaic Lawf." 
 
 Lastly, In his Homily on 1 Samuel, xviii. chap. 
 1 — 9. his deliberate judgment on this subject is ex- 
 pressed at length; where Organs are particularised 
 by him as a j)rofanation of the "Word and Worship 
 of God under the Gospel. His words are, 
 
 " In Popery, there was a ridiculous and unsuitable 
 imitation (of the Jews) while they adorned their 
 temples, and valued themselves as having made the 
 Worship of God more splendid and 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 
 
 • Nisi enim omnia velimus confundere tenendum est semper dis- 
 crimen illud Veteris et Novi Testament! • quod ceremoniae qiiarum 
 utilis sub lege erat observatio, non superfluae modo nuiic sit sed 
 absurds quoque et vitiosaj. 
 
 f " Non aptiora esse Cultui Divino in Ecclesia Christiana in- 
 •trumenta Musica, quam suffitum, luminaria, aliasque umbras 
 legis Mosaicaj." 
 
 M 2 
 
IS6 
 
 such understanding is not, there can be no edifica- 
 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 of thanks, 
 if he does not understand? Wherefore, in that 
 same place, he exhorts the faithful, whether they 
 pray, or sing, they should pray and sing with un- 
 derstanding, not in an unknown tongue, but in that 
 which is vulgar and intelligible, that edification may- 
 be in the Church. Yv r hat therefore was in use under 
 the Law, is by no means intitled to our practice un- 
 der the Gospel, and these things being not only 
 superfluous, but useless, are to be abstained from.. 
 Because pure and simple modulation is sufficient) 
 for the praise of God, if it is sung with the heart 
 and with the mouth: we know that our Lord Jesus 
 Christ has appeared, and by his advent, has abolished 
 these legal shadows. 
 
 " Instrumental Music, we therefore maintain, wnfr 
 only tolerated, on account of the times and of the 
 people, because they were as benjs, as the sacred 
 Scripture speaketh, whose condition required these 
 puerile rudiments. But in Gospel times, we must 
 not have recourse to these, unless we wish to de- 
 stroy the Evangelical perfection, and to obscure the 
 meridian light which we enjoy in Christ our ■ 
 Lordf." 
 
 f Quare fuit in Papatn ridicula nimis et inepta imitatio, qtium 
 templa exornare, Deique cultum reddere celehriorem existimarunt, 
 si Organa*t alia istiusmodi multa ludicra adhiberenf. Quibus 
 
137 
 
 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 Founders of these 
 Churches, given by your Committee, in the very 
 words of these eminent Reformers, that Instrumen- 
 tal Music ought to have no place in the Public 
 Worship of God under the Gospel. 
 
 Perhaps it may not be improper here to take no- 
 tice of what has been considered by the best inform- 
 ed historians, as the ancient and genuine opinion ot 
 the Reformed Church of England, relative to In- 
 
 maxime del verbum et cultus profanata sunt. Populo extern! s istrs 
 ritibus addicto potius quam verbi divini intellegeotise. Scimus 
 autem ubi nulla est intelligentia nullam etiam zedificationem esse. 
 Quumadmodum Paulus Apostolus docet, quum ait, quomodo p< - 
 test idiota reddere fidei testimonium, aut quomodo dicturus eft 
 Amen ad gratiarum actionem nisi intelligat ? Quare fideles fkorta- 
 tur eo loco ut Deum precantes et ipsi Psallentes et precentur et 
 Psallast intelligentia, non lingua peregrina, sed vulgari et intelll- 
 gibili; ut sit in Ecclesia sedificutio: Ouod itaque fuit in u<u I egis 
 tempore, nullum hodie locum apudnos obtinet: et rebus isii 1 - non 
 modo superfluis, sed inanibus etiam abstir.endum est: quod suf- 
 ficiat pura et simplex divinarum laudum moduhuio, corde et o;e 
 noitro sinpdi idiomate: Siquidem scimus Dominum nostrum 
 Jesum Christum apparuisse et umbras illas legates sud adventu dis- 
 sipa9se. Musicam itaque illam instrumentalem teneamus tunc fa- 
 tione temporis illius et populi fuisse toleratam, quod esscnt ut 
 pueri, quernadmodum sacra scriptura loquitur, qui puerilibus istis 
 rudimentis indigerent, quae hodie non sunt ultro revocanda, 
 perfectionem evangelicam vidimus abolere, et plenam lucem quam 
 in Christo Domino nostroconsecuti sumus obscurare. 
 
 Calv. Horn. 65. in 1 Su*. xviii, 1—9 /. 570, 
 
 M 3 
 
138 
 
 strumental Music. In her Homily of the place and 
 :e of prayer, we have these remarkable words: 
 " God's vengeance hath been, and is daily provoked, 
 a because much wicked people pass nothing to re- 
 " sort unto the Church ; either for that they are so 
 u sore blinded, that they understand nothing of 
 " God or godliness, and care not with devilish 
 11 malice to offend their neighbours; or else for that 
 " they see the Church altogether scoured of such 
 " S a y gazing sights, as their gross phantasie was 
 " greatly delighted with; because they see the false 
 " religion abandoned, and the true restored, which 
 " seemeth an unsavoury thing to their unsavoury 
 " taste, as may appear by this, that a woman said 
 " to her neighbour; Alas! gossip, what shall we 
 " now do at Church, since all the Saints are taken 
 " away, since all the goodly sights we were wont 
 " to have, are gone; since we cannot hear the like 
 " Piping, Singing, Chaunting, and playing upon the 
 M Organs, that we could before? But, dearly belov- 
 tc ed, we ought greatly to rejoice and give God thanks, 
 U that our Churches are delivered out of all those 
 ' ( /hings which displeased God so sore, and filthily 
 u defiled his holy house and his place of prayer." 
 
 We find also, that the thirty=two Commissioners 
 appointed by Edward VI. the most eminent men 
 then in England either for Divinity or Law, 
 complained of Cathedral Singing, and advised the 
 laying of it aside. Their words are, " In reading 
 " Chapters am) singing Psalms, Ministers and Cler- 
 
139 
 
 " gymen must think of this diligently ; that God is 
 « not only to be praised by them, but thai others are 
 " to be brought to perform the same Worship by 
 " their counsel and example. Wherefore let them 
 " pronounce their words distinctly, and let their 
 « singing be clear and easy, that every thing may 
 " be understood by the auditors. So that 'tis our 
 " pleasure, that the quavering operose Music, which 
 " is called fgured, should be wholly laid aside; 
 « since it often makes such a noise in the ears of 
 " the people, that they cannot understand what is 
 « said *." 
 
 And it is a remarkable fact, perhaps not common- 
 ly 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 Eliza- 
 beth's time, for settling the Liturgy of the Protestant 
 Church of England, the retaining of the custom cf 
 kneeling at the Sacrament, the cross in Baptism, and 
 of Organs, carried only by the casting vote\. 
 
 Burns, in his Ecclesiastical Law, under the title, 
 Public Worship, says, " The rule laid down for 
 " Church Music in England almost a thousand years 
 " ago, was, that they should observe a plain and de- 
 " vout melody, according to the custom of the 
 " Church, while the rule prescribed by Queen Eli- 
 « zabeth, in her injunctions, was, that there should 
 
 * Reform. Leg. de Div. OfTic. 
 fVide Dr. Henry's Hist. Stripe's Annals, p. 363. 
 
140 
 
 rt 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 intellegible way, the rc- 
 "formatio 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 
 affords no countenance to the introduction of In- 
 strumental Music into the Public Worship of God. 
 That it was not admitted in the first seven centuries, 
 can never,as our Brother affirms, be accounted for, by 
 the poverty and the persecution of the Church, nor by 
 the calamities and convulsions of the times. For 
 even supposing that Organs were too expensive and 
 cumbersome Instruments, was not the Pipe, the Cym- 
 bal, and the Harp, a cheaper and more portable sub- 
 stitute? Could not Christians have carried these a- 
 long 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 used theirs, if they had thought them 
 lawful, even in the most distressing scenes of the 
 ten persecutions? Had they believed Instrumental 
 Music to be " enjoined in the New Testament," 
 would it not be a foul aspersion on their character, to 
 suppose that death, in its most direful form, would 
 have deterred them from the duty of employing it, 
 
141 
 
 Every person acquainted with the history of the Mar- 
 tyrs of the primitive Church, must know well, that 
 they never shrunk from a single article of Faith or 
 Worship, which they believed to be enjoined by Di- 
 vine authority. Paul and Silas, at midnight, in 
 the prison of Philippi, sang the praises of God, 
 regardless of them who could only kill the body. 
 But the truth is, that the primitive Christians con- 
 sidered Instrumental Music neither as laxcful, nor 
 expedient^ nor edifying. If, therefore, at least seven 
 or eight centuries did elapse, before Organs, or by 
 whatever name you are pleased to call these Instru- 
 ments, were introduced into Christian Worship, 
 and the want of them, during all 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 al- 
 long with the assertion of our Brother, " that it was 
 *« ever during periods of dawning light that Organs 
 « began to be employed." They consider his as- 
 sertion as rather problematical, nor can they well 
 comprehend what he means by the dawn of UgJtt 
 ill 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 Supreme 
 Being, notwithstanding the heroic soul ascribed to 
 

 142 
 
 him by our Brother, perfectly understood the na- 
 ture and spirit of the Gospel of Christ, your Com- 
 mittee cannot positively determine: But they are 
 confident, that Instrumental Music began to be intro- 
 duced into the Church, when ignorance, supersti- 
 tion, and the love of external pomp, had made men 
 more desirous of having their ears delighted, than 
 their hearts improved, — at a time, when ail 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, first 
 admiration, then devotion, and at last worship, came 
 to be paid to images. From allowing pious feeling 
 to hurry the mind too far, respecting the manner 
 in which die Gospel should be taught, or the ser- 
 vice of God performed, we may date almost every 
 corruption which has disfigured Christianity. 
 The conception, that we should be more at lei- 
 sure 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 absurdi- 
 ties. Mistaken pious feeling, therefore, may have 
 
143 
 
 led men, in every age, to add many extraneous cir- 
 cumstances to the Worship of God, and may still 
 induce Protestant reformed Churches on the Conti- 
 nent to retain them. But wise men must always 
 despise that pomp which is merely designed to a- 
 muse children or the vulgar. With Protestant 
 Churches abroad, we have no bond of communion. 
 We shall apply to them the words commonly used 
 in the public evening prayer of our Presbyterian 
 Worship, " May the reformed Churches be re- 
 « formed more and more!" 
 
 3d. We shall now proceed to examine the third 
 argument adduced by the Minister of St. Andrew's 
 Church, containing his reason why Instrumental 
 Music was not employed in Scotland since the Re- 
 formation, and his account of that prejudice, as he 
 is pleased to style it, which still remains against it. 
 He affirms that it arose from the peculiar state of 
 the civil government of the country, which, dur- 
 ing the whole of the sixteenth and seventeenth cen- 
 turies, was of such a nature as to grant no leisure 
 to the people of Scotland to attend to Sacred Mu- 
 sic. But that the tide of human affairs is now so 
 strong, 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 history of 
 the Church of Scotland, will, indeed authorize us 
 to conclude, that our forefathers in matters of reli- 
 gion, were often tyrannically used, by the ruling 
 
144 
 
 powers, and that they had much to struggle with, 
 before they obtained that form of Ecclesiastical po- 
 lity established at the Revolution, secured 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 Pu- 
 blic Worship in Scotland, was, because both peo- 
 ple 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 never 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 esteemed Scriptural and Evange- 
 lical in Church Government, in Discipline, in Doc- 
 trine, and in Public Worship. And during all 
 their struggle, from the Reformation to the Revolu- 
 tion, either with the Popish or Prelaiical Sovereigns 
 of die House of Stewart, they never, for a single 
 moment, lost sight of these four great branches 
 of Ecclesiastical polity. They declared, in the 
 most energetic terms, that they were reformed /;// 
 Presbyters — that they were determined to copy from 
 no model but that of the Scriptures, as understood 
 by the primitive Church, arrd from their conduct, 
 as illustrated by the Acts of Assemblv, 1638. And 
 from their directions to their Commissioners ro the 
 Westminster Divines, to be found in their 1 
 

 14,5 
 
 published in the year 1644, you clearly perceive, that 
 they most decidedly and unequivocally condemn In- 
 strumental Music, to be an antichristian mode of 
 Worship. Why then does our Brother endeavour 
 to parry the argument, by saying, « that the aver*. 
 " sion which the Scotch nation discover to Instru- 
 N mental Music in the Public Worship of God, 
 M proceeded from the circumstance of their having 
 " no leisure to attend to it." In this vague 
 ner of accounting for customs and modes of Church 
 Government, you might affirm, that the Magna Char- 
 ta y the Bill of Rights, and the Revolution settlement, 
 so much gloried in by the inhabitants of these Lands, 
 were ail devised and obtained by mere accident. 
 The truth is, the Scotch nation has no objection to 
 Instrumental Music in the common 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 die blending cf the inventions of men with 
 the Worship of God. They conceive Instrument- 
 al Music inconsistent with the purity of a New 
 Testament Church. It is not strictly true, that 
 Psalmody was almost annihilated in the reformed 
 Church of Scotland. For, in direct opposition to 
 the assertion of our Brother, there is the most satis- 
 factory evidence, that from the Reformation, down 
 through the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, 
 •r:.x church had leisure to pay attention to Sacred 
 N 
 
146 
 
 Music; — schools were appointed for teaching it, 
 and even the Government gave their countenance, 
 by Acts of Parliament, for the same laudable pur- 
 pose. Thus, in the 6th Parliament of James the 
 VI. 1579, " Our Sovereign Lord, with advice of 
 « his three Estates of this present Parliament, re- 
 " quests the Provosts, Baillies, Council and commu- 
 " nities of the maist special Burrows of this realm ; 
 " and the Patrons and Provosts of the Colleges, 
 « where Schools are founded, to erect and set up 
 " ane Sang School, with a master sufficient and 
 v able for instruction of the youth in the said science 
 «' of Music ; as they will answer to his Highness, 
 « upon the peril of their foundations, and in per- 
 " forming of this his Highness 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 strug- 
 gle, which existed for more than a century after the 
 Reformation, betwixt Prelacy and Presbytery, the 
 people found abundance of leisure in the year 1592, 
 to frame the great Charter of Presbytery. And be- 
 twixt the years 1638 and 1660, they had leisure to 
 join in framing a Confession of Faith and Directory, 
 and leisure to put that Directory in practice. Why 
 then, does our Brother affirm, " that the reason for 
 « Instrumental Music not being introduced into the 
 « Public Worship of God in Scotland, proceeded 
 
147 
 
 « 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 
 disposition 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 Worship. 
 That laboured, and oratorical description given us 
 by our Brother, of the character of our Scotish Sove- 
 reigns from the Reformation to the Revolution, may, 
 indeed, serve to shew that they were a most un- 
 principled race, but it can never serve to establish 
 what he means to prove by it, that neither the peo- 
 ple nor the Presbyterian Established Church of Scot- 
 land, 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 si- 
 tuation of their country. Your Committee begs 
 leave to call your attention to the following remark- 
 able fact, as narrated by Calderwocd, in his Church 
 History, page 674. " Upon Saturday the 17th of 
 " May, 1617, the English Service, singing of que- 
 " risters, and playing on Organs, and Surplices, 
 " were first heard and seen in the Chapel Royal. 
 " On the 25th December, same year, Mr. William 
 " Cooper, Bishop of Galloway, preached as Dean of 
 " the Chapel Royal, where there was playing upon 
 " Organs: So the Bishops practised novations, be- 
 N 2 
 
148 
 
 " fore ever they were embraced by any General As- 
 " sembiy, and therefore ought to have been seclud- 
 " ed from voting afterwards in that matter, anc 
 " condignly censured." Thus, it is matter of his- 
 tory, not of opinion or conjecture, that the Church 
 of Scotland was not inattentive to Psalmody. Thai 
 an attempt was even made by the King and his cour- 
 tiers to revive the use of Organs, and that this was 
 deemed an Innovation so odious, that it shrunk be- 
 fore the scrutinizing, and commendable zeal of oui 
 forefathers. This attempt was made in the yeai 
 1617, when Prelacy was established in Scotland, 
 but notwithstanding all that Royalty could do, the 
 attempt was abortive, and the practice never ex- 
 tended beyond the walls of the Chapel Royal: S< 
 hostile was this Church, even in Episcopal times, 
 to Organs in Divine Worship. The same invinci- 
 ble hostility appears in the year 1644, after Presby- 
 tery had been restored. It continues to operate 
 from the Restoration to the Revolution, during th( 
 time when Prelacy had again supplanted Presbytery 
 in our native land. It bursts forth "with renewec 
 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 ol 
 Security, and the Act of Assembly against Innova- 
 tions, (vide Appendix) as barriers to preserve the pu- 
 rity, the simplicity, and the uniformity of our Pub- 
 
149 
 
 lie Worship. And from the Union, down to the 
 present moment, the project which was formed a 
 few years ago, of introducing an Organ at Aberdeen, 
 and this late attempt at Glasgow, are the only in- 
 dications 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 com- 
 prehend, how this panegyric can be reconciled to 
 the opinion which our Brother says, he has long en- 
 tertained, relative to Instrumental Music in the 
 Public Worship of God. Does our Brother seri- 
 ously think, that Knox, and Melville, and Rutherford,, 
 and Henderson, were of his mind? Knox was edu- 
 cated under Popery, and habituated to the use of 
 Organs from his infancy. He had travelled on th 
 Continent-, he had resided at Geneva; he had so- 
 journed in England. All these circumstances were 
 calculated, as our Brother knows, to form and che- 
 rish 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 outrages 
 against the ancient Worship, which in their hearts' 
 1 they condemned. Granting, that they could not 
 eoutroul the fury of the populace in its first paroxy- 
 N 3 
 
150 
 
 ism, for destroying the Cathedral service, could they 
 not afterwards teacli their countrymen to discrimi- 
 nate the harmless Organ, as our Brother terms it, 
 from the idolatrous Image ? Could they not have per- 
 suaded their countrymen, if they had thought pro- 
 per, to restore the harmless Organ to its place in 
 the Church, as easily as they persuaded them to 
 occupy these edifices which had been polluted by 
 Popery? At least, if this was impracticable, could 
 they not have regretted the perverseness of their 
 countrymen, in banishing from Public Worship,, 
 such an enchanting instrument of edification? But 
 Knox, and Melville, Rutherford, and Henderson, 
 r not one word in its behalf. They allow it to- 
 . ,h unnoticed, as a portion of that trumpery 
 ' :\i ignorance and superstition had foisted into 
 the house of God. Your Committee are neither 
 conscious of religious nor political antipathies, 
 founded in prejudice, operating in their minds, 
 tending to the history of the Church of 
 Scotland, and from the studying the genius cf its 
 people, they are perfectly convinced, that the fixed, 
 determined opposition to the use of I ntal 
 
 Music in the Public Worship of Cod, both iu 
 the Established Church, and amongst the various bo- 
 I e r , ariseth from legal, political, moral, 
 and scriptural grounds — not from the want of 
 sure in our Ecclesiastical Patriots, to attend to 
 I Music — not from the want of money to j 
 
151 
 
 commodation 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 I^ngland; — 
 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 at- 
 tempt to enslave their consciences, and entangle 
 their affections in the labyrinth of foolish and 
 useless rites and ceremonies, which neither they 
 nor their fathers could bear. 
 
 4. We now proceed to scrutinize our Brother's 
 fourth argument, viz. That the Act of Security, 
 the Act of Union, and the Act against Innovations, 
 had more important objects in view, with which 
 Organs have no concern — roundly asserting, " that 
 t( that cannot be illegal, against which no law ex- 
 ** isrs — that cannot violate, which touches not the 
 " constitution." 
 
 Your Committee cannot help saying, that the 
 
 I reasoning of our Brother upon this part of the sub- 
 ject, appears to them very vague and desultory. 
 He, at one time, applauds the spirit of these Acts, and 
 
 1 vindicates the character of our Scotch Patriots, who 
 had wisdom to frame them, courage to demand 
 them, and perseverance to obtain them. At other 
 times, when these Acts seem too pointedly and con- 
 clusively to oppose his favourite measure, he starts 
 
152 
 
 off at a tangent from the legal argument, and strir- 
 eth to amuse, and even to perplex us, with subtle 
 and metaphysical reasoning, _« about the nature of 
 " sound — about a mode without a subject— and 
 " about the ever varying, unsubstantial nature of 
 " musical tones, exclaiming, that our national unifor- 
 « mity can never be broken in upon, by introducing 
 " a certain quantity of modulated sound in the 
 " pipes of an Organ: And to attach perpetuity of 
 " form, to things from their nature incapable of uni- 
 " form 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 Assembly 
 against Innovations, was entirely directed against 
 the Hierarchy and the Service-book, and not 
 against Instrumental Music. And in no less than 
 three different places of his Statement, he has 
 been pleased to say, " That the Respondents, 
 " (of course the Presbytery), from not at- 
 " tending to the spirit and meaning of these 
 " Laws, have argued strongly against Episcopacy, 
 « which our Brother never wished to defend ; and 
 « that the Presbytery have passed a sentence, which, 
 " in his opinion, goes far beyond the object they 
 " meant to condemn. That cannot be illegal, against 
 w which no law exists, nor could exist, — that cannot 
 m violate, which touches not the constitution, — thai 
 
153 
 
 « cannot bs against the genius and constitution 
 " of our Church, which habitually 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 
 Instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God, 
 in ail the Churches and Chapels under its jurisdic- 
 tion, was a wise and salutary measure-, they shall 
 take the liberty of stating, at some length, what 
 they concieve 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 opi- 
 nion, founded upon the history of the Church in 
 general, or taken from the practice of foreign re- 
 formed Churches, or from speculative notions of 
 public utility, or private edification, must, compara- 
 tively 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 
 ■ our Committee wish particularly to direct the at- 
 tention of the Reverend Presbytery, of Dr. Ritchie, 
 and of die world. 
 
 When James the VII. had forfeited the crown, 
 and when his throne was declared vacant, by the 
 Scotch Convention, agreeably to the Claim of 
 
154 
 
 Rights made by that Convention, the Presbyterian 1 
 Religion was established by William and Mary, 
 and agreeably to the same Claim of Rights, Prelacy 
 \sfor ever abolished within the kingdom of Scotland, 
 and a form of Worship, differing from the form, 
 which, at that time, was exercised by the Establish- 
 ed 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 Eng- 
 land, and though it is practised on the Continent, 
 in Churches which arc not Episcopal, yet it is well 
 known, that all denominations of Christians, both ill- 
 England and Scotland, did, at that period when the 
 Claim of Rights was framed, consider Instrument- 
 al Music a characteristic of Prelacy, and directly 
 opposed to the Vocal Music, for which the Re- 
 formed Church of Scotland had uniformly contend- 
 ed. Therefore, we conclude, from the sweeping 
 clause contained in the Scotch Claim of Rights, that 
 Instrumental Music was abolished along with Prela- 
 cy. And from attending to the history of the dis- 
 putes which took place in England, between the 
 Puritans and the Episcopalian Church; we are en- 
 titled to say, that the Puritans considered Instru- 
 mental Music as intimately and essentially incorpo- 
 rated with the Public Worship of the Prelatical 
 Church. This will be found to be their opinion, 
 as recorded in Strype's Annals, and Neal's History 
 of the Puritans. 
 
 When, therefore, the Scotch Patriots demanded,. 
 
155 
 
 at the Revolution, in their Claim of Rights, that 
 Prelacy should be abolished, they had no reserve in " 
 behalf of any one part of it whatever, whether essen- 
 tial to it, or merely accidental; but fairly and can- 
 didly meant, that not only Prelatical government, 
 the Liturgy, and Service=Book should be abolished, 
 but likewise the kneeling at the Sacrament, the sign 
 of the Cross in Baptism, and Instrumental Music in 
 Public Worship, should share the same fate. But 
 as some form of Worship was to be substituted in 
 room of the Prelatical, now abolished, the People 
 of Scotland, demanded, 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 government 
 specified in the great Charier of Presbytery, 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, re- 
 duced 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 specifi- 
 cally and clearly stated in the 21st chap, of the 
 Westminster Confession of Faith, which, in fact, 
 contains the sum and substance of the Directorv 
 relative to the reading of the Word — to Prayer — to 
 Preaching — to the celebration of the Sacraments — 
 and to Praise; — the five distinct heads under which 
 
15f> 
 
 the Reformed Presbyterian Churches arrange Public 
 Worship. The Confession of Faith was framed in 
 the year I6-i7, confirmed by Act of Parliament! 1649, 
 and therefore it is certain, that the framcrs of it had 
 distinctly in their view the Directory for Public 
 Worship, approved by the General Assembly in 
 February 1645, and confirmed by Act of Parliament 
 in the same year. 
 
 In the 21st. chap, of the Confession of Faith, we 
 have the most decided and unequivocal language, 
 relative to that part of Public Worship, styled 
 Praise, — « It is the singing of Psalms with grace in 
 " the heart." But as the Westminster Confession 
 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 conclude, 
 that our forefathers intended, by the Claim of 
 Rights, that Instrumental Music should be con- 
 demned and abolished, along with the other rites 
 and ceremonies of the Prelutical Church. And that 
 the form of Worship, " the singing of Psalms with 
 « grace in the heart," as now in use, should be sub- 
 stituted in its room. Your Committee affirm, that 
 when our forefathers framed the Claim of Rights 
 they had the most clear, distinct, and accurate idea 
 of a form of Public Worship, from winch Instru- 
 mental Music was utterly excluded. We next pro- 
 ceed to analyze those other Acts of Parliament, re- 
 
157 
 
 lative to our Presbyterian Church, which flowed 
 from, or are founded upon, the Claim of Rights. 
 
 It is more than probable, that if we knew every par- 
 ticular relative to the practice of the Clergy in those 
 times, that some discrepancy of opinion, relative to 
 Public Worship had begun to appear betwixt the year 
 1683 and the year 1693, — most likely between the 
 Ministers which had been ejected at the Restoration, 
 and now restored to their Kirks ; men who maybe 
 considered as strict and conscientious Presbyterians, 
 — and some of those Conformists who had been edu- 
 cated under the Episcopalian Church of Charles and 
 James, but who, by taking the oaths to King Wil- 
 liam, were continued in their cures, and who had 
 a hankering after the rites and ceremonies of the Pre- 
 latical Worship which was practised in England. — 
 Thus, in an Act passed, 1693, entitled, an Act for set- 
 tling the peace and quiet of the Church, " Their 
 « Majesties, with the advice and consent aforesaid, 
 " statute and ordain, that uniformity of Worship, 
 «« and that the administration of all Public Ordi- 
 " nances within this Church, be observed by all the 
 " said Ministers and Preachers, as the same are at 
 " present allowed and performed therein, or shall 
 " hereafter be declared by the authority of the same ; 
 « and no man shall be admitted, unless lie subscribe 
 « to observe, and do actually observe the foresaid u- 
 << niformity." But where is that form of Wor- 
 ship specified, but in the Directory, as engrossed 
 in the 21st. chap, of the Confession of Faith, which 
 
 • 
 
1 58 
 
 is the « singing of Psalms with grace in the heart ?" 
 But if there should remain the least dubiety, con- 
 cerning what idea is to be attached to the expression, 
 " si nging of Psalms with grace in the heart," the 
 last chap, of the Directory completely explains it. 
 " In singing of Psalms," says the Directory, " the 
 " voice is to be tuneably and gravely ordered, and 
 " that the whole Congregation may join herein, 
 " every one that can read, is to have a Psalm Book, 
 « but for the present, where many in the Congrega- 
 " tion cannot read, it is convenient, that the Mini- 
 t( ster 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 Worship, 
 enjoined by the Acts 1693, among other things, 
 signifies the singing Psalms with the voice alone. 
 
 Had the Kingdom of Scotland remained an inde- 
 pendent Kingdom, possessing a separate Parliament, 
 as it possessed distinct Laws, and a separate Eccle- 
 siastical Establishment, it is probable, that the Scotch 
 nation would have been completely satisfied with 
 the regulations and Acts already quoted, in favour 
 of its Worship^ Doctrine, Discipline, and Govern- 
 ment; seeing that there was but little danger now, 
 of its form of Worship being corrupted, or altered 
 by its own inhabitants. But, the moment that there 
 was a plan in agitation, for a Union of the two 
 Kingdoms under one Parliament, the people of Scot- 
 
159 
 
 land foresaw, that, if this Union took place, there 
 would be greater intercourse, than formerly, be- 
 twixt the two nations. Besides, from the circum- 
 stance of our Legislators being called upon to re- 
 side occasionally, in a country where the Prelati- 
 cal form of Worship was established, and from the 
 obligation of obeying 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 degrees, and imperceptibly, come 
 not only to be corrupted^ but altered. The na- 
 tion, therefore, became exceedingly jealous, lest the 
 Union, so much desired by Government, should 
 prove prejudicial to the form and purity of our Pres- 
 byterian Worship. Accordingly, in Queen Anne's 
 first Parliament, it is enacted, " that it should even 
 « be high treason, in any of the subjects of this 
 " Kingdom, to quarrel, impugn, or endeavour by 
 " writing, or advised speaking, or other open act or 
 " deed, to alter or innovate the Claim of Rights, 
 ** or any 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 Prelatical 
 Worship. When, therefore, in 1705, the Parlia- 
 ment of Scotland took into their consideration, with 
 what earnestness the Queen's Majesty had recom- 
 mended an Union betwixt her two independent 
 
 See Appendix. 
 
 O 2 
 
1G0 
 
 Kingdoms, and that Commissioners were now ap- 
 pointed for the purpose of treating; they expressly 
 enjoin, " that the Scotch Commissioners, shall not 
 " treat of, or concerning any alteration of the Wor- 
 "ship of the Church of this Kingdom, as now by 
 " Laiv established *." This clause, therefore, most 
 certainly had in view the form of Worship express- 
 ed in the Directory, engrossed in the 21st. chap, 
 of the Confession of Faith, founded upon the Claim 
 of Rights, and ordered to be uniformly observed in 
 all the Established Churches of the Land, and approv- 
 ed by the Act 1 693, and ratified by the Act of Assem- 
 bly 1705. Accordingly in the next Session of Parlia- 
 ment, 1706, inpursuance of these principles and views 
 of our forefathers, the celebrated Act of Security was 
 passed, containing these words, " That the form 
 M and purity of Worship, presently in use within 
 " this Church, shall remain and continue unaltera- 
 " ble" And in order to avoid all ambiguity, the 
 expressions in the Act are varied, that the one may 
 be a clear and distinct comment 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 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 
 
 * See Appendix. 
 
1C1 
 
 "to the worship presently in use in this Church? 
 And it is farther enacted, that the Sovereigns, on 
 their accession to the Crown, shall swear and sub- 
 scribe to maintain, and preserve inviolably, the Wor- 
 ship, Discipline, Rights and Privileges of this 
 Church, as above established by the Lav/ of this 
 Kingdom, in prosecution of the Claim of Rights, 
 and it is likewise statuted and ordained, " that thh 
 ¥ Act of Parliament shall be held as an essential 
 p condition of any Union to be concluded betwixt 
 " the two Kingdoms, without any alteration there- 
 K of, 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 you 
 observe the jealousy expressed by their Parliament 
 for the preservation of their form of Worship, and 
 the accurate manner in which they describe thai 
 form, you cannot hesitate a moment in concluding, 
 that the Scotch Patriots, at least equally enlighten- 
 ed, and equally zealous with their English neigh- 
 bours, had a clear, accurate, and precise idea of what 
 was meant by the form and purity of Public Wor- 
 ship then in use in Scotland. 
 
 The English, attached to the Worship, Discipline, 
 O 3 
 
162 
 
 and Government of the Ecclesiastical Establishment 
 of their own country, enact, that their Commission- 
 ers, " shall not so much as treat of concerning any 
 « alteration of the Liturgy, Rites, and Ceremonies 
 " of the Prelatical Church, as by Law confirmed;" 
 quoting the 13th of Queen Elizabeth, and the 13th 
 of King Charles the II. which Acts, the King is 
 sworn to observe at his Coronation. Too many 
 people, by not attending exactly to the state of the 
 Religious Establishments in the two different coun- 
 tries, at the time of the Union — two independent 
 Kingdoms, under one Sovereign, each jealous of 
 the other-, — the Southern part of the Island re- 
 membering with disgust what they had seen prac- 
 tised under the government 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 different Countries, at the time of the U- 
 nion. 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 et 
 literatim^ condemn the practice of their neighbours, 
 who were now to be connected by an incorporating 
 Union, under one Parliament. While the English 
 nation expressly enact y that no alteration should take 
 place in their Liturgy, Rites, and Ceremonies, as 
 by Law established, they would consider it as both. 
 
J6S 
 
 injudicious and indelicate, to condemn our Directory,. 
 our Presbyterian Worship, and our Confession of 
 Faith, in open ana avowed expressions. S till, 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 say- 
 ing, that it would be contrary to the express Law 
 of the Land. By parity of reasoning, though In- 
 strumental Music in the Worship of Gcd is not, 
 totidem verbis, condemned or forbidden in our Act 
 of Security, out of regard to the feelings of the 
 Church of England, still, as in that Act, the form 
 and purity of Worship then in use in Scotland, is 
 to remain unalterable. Will any man, therefore, 
 pretend to say, that if Instrumental Music shall be 
 attempted to be introduced into our Public Wor- 
 ship, that it is not contrary to the Lav/ of this part 
 of the United Kingdom ? That very form of Wor- 
 ship then in practice, was to continue in all time com- 
 ing. 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 Scot- 
 land. 
 
 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 Congrega- 
 tion of St. Andrew's, have allowed their judgments 
 
164 
 
 to be misled in this question, by a mere quibble; con- 
 ceiving, because they did not read in the Act that 
 Instrumental Music was forbidden, toiidem 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 justify, agreeably to 
 the authorized interpretation of any public Act 
 relative to privilege. "When a positive defined 
 practice is commanded to be observed by any 
 class of men, any other practice altering the former, 
 is most certainly prohibited by the spirit of that 
 Act, though not expressed in words: and therefore, 
 if the form of Worship in use and practice at the 
 Union was to continue unalterable in all time com- 
 ing, Instrumental Music is most clearly, and to all 
 intents and purposes forbidden, and condemned. 
 And the civil Magistrate hath authority to take or- 
 der, that unity and peace be preserved in our Church, 
 and that all Innovations in Public Worship be prevent- 
 ed or reformed. Such, your Committee hold to be 
 the Law of the Land, and what they are confident in 
 affirming, that neither the Imperial Parliament of 
 Great Britain, nor the General 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. Surely, then, our Brother hath 
 not attended carefully to the spirit and meaning of 
 those Acts of Parliament now quoted, when he so 
 
165 
 
 roundly asserts, " that cannot be illegal, against 
 « which no Law exists — that cannot violate, which 
 « toucheth not the constitution." 
 
 Let us now examine the Ecclesiastical Constitution 
 of this part of the United Kingdom, as specified 
 and confirmed by the Acts of her General As- 
 semblies, and your Committee flatter themselves, 
 that they will be able to show, that Instrumental 
 Music in the Public Worship of God, is contrary 
 to the spirit and principles of our Presbyterian 
 Church, and that the very bold and extraordinary as- 
 sertions of our Brother, contained in his Statement, 
 are erroneous and improper. His words are, " that 
 f* cannot be against the spirit and genius of our 
 " Church, which she habitually recommends to the 
 " people, by her appointment of the singing of 
 " David's Psalms. Before declaring her prohibi- 
 ts tion of Organs, it is incumbent on the Church to 
 " expunge from the Sacred Records, those passages 
 " which seem clearly to recommend the use of In- 
 ft struments in Worship, that thus the Yv r orshippers 
 " may be delivered from the inconsistency of pro- 
 " mising and exhorting each ether to do, what in 
 " their hearts they resolve, and are forbidden by 
 « the Church to perform." 
 
 In treating this part of the subject, your Commit- 
 tee wish it to be understood, that every Established 
 Church is entitled to arrange, in the form of a Creed, 
 a Confession of Faith, or a Catechism, her explana- 
 tion of the doctrines contained and set forth in the 
 
166 
 
 Sacred Scriptures. This was 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 
 Jllissal, by others a Lihtrgy y and by the Scotch a JD/- 
 rcctorxj. These creeds, and confessions, and cate- 
 chisms, ami directories, if once recognised* establish- 
 ed, and put under the protection of the State, that 
 Church, so protected, has it not in its power to alter 
 or infringe 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 Presbyterian Church. 
 The executive, judicial, and legislative powers, in 
 matters purely Ecclesiastical, are vested in our 
 Church, following the gradation of her various 
 courts; but still she must legislate, judge, and exe- 
 cute, agreeably to her Confession of Faith, her Direc- 
 tory, and Presbyterian government. These are 
 fundamental principles, acknowledged and protected 
 by the State, which every Minister and Elder is 
 sworn to obey, and which the Civil Magistrate is 
 bound to see observed, in the most full and literal 
 sense. 
 
 2d. Nay, so well understood is this principle in 
 ihe Law of Scotland, that « the Magistrate has all* 
 
167 
 
 w th rder mity and peace be 
 
 " pi that all corruptions or 
 
 « abi prevented or reformed, and 
 
 " the oi . >o<\ duly idministeredj 
 
 ** and oY r I. It is the duty of the people to 
 " honour their perso »s, to obey their lawful com- 
 " mands, and to be subject to their authority; and 
 
 " as it is the proper duty of Magistrates 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 in- 
 flicting civil penalties, and if they shall omit any 
 part of tins sacred duty, they must answer for it 
 to God and their country. 
 
 When, therefore, we take into our consideration 
 the Directory for Public Worship, and the 10th 
 Act of Assembly, 170.5*, receiving that Directory, 
 the 21st chapter of the Confession of Faith, and the 
 Act against Innovations, passed 21st April, 1707, in 
 connection with the practice of the Church of Scot- 
 land, for at least a hundred and twenty years, fol- 
 lowing out what it believed to be the constitution 
 of our Presbyterian Establishment, your Commit 
 affirm, that Instrumental Music in the Public Wor- 
 ship of God, is contrary to the principles and spirit 
 of the Church of Scotland. 
 
 The Act of Assembly 1707, against Innovations, 
 
 • See Appendix. 
 
168 
 
 which your Committee are afraid, their Brother, irt 
 his Statement, has some how or other overlooked, be- 
 gins by observing, (vide Appendix,) 4 « that the in- 
 « traduction of Innovations in the Worship of God, 
 " has been of fatal and dangerous consequences." 
 It then goes on to state, " that the purity of Pub- 
 « lie Worship hath been expressly provided, by 
 « diverse Acts of Parliament;" and after intimat- 
 ing, " that Innovations either have taken, or are 
 w about to take place," therefore, " the General As- 
 " sembly being moved with zeal for the glory of 
 « God, and the purity and uniformity of his Wor- 
 « ship, cloth hereby discharge the practice of all 
 *< such Innovations, and order Ministers to repre- 
 " sent to their people the evil thereof, and instruct 
 •« the Commissioners to use all proper means of 
 " applying to Government, or otherwise, for sup- 
 " pressing or removing all such Innovations." 
 
 In conformity to this Act of Assembly, the Church 
 of Scotland, ever since the year 1711, have peremp- 
 torily ordained the following questions 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 Nation- 
 " al Church, and asserted in the Act against Inno- 
 " vatiens?" 
 
 • See Appendix. 
 
169 
 
 2dly. " Do you promise to submit yourself quiet- 
 b ly and meekly to the admonition of the Brethren 
 « of this Presbytery, that you will follow no divi- 
 w sive courses, from the Established Worship and 
 « Doctrine of this Church ?" 
 
 And in the Formula, which every Minister subscribes 
 at his ordination, he sincerely owns the purity of the 
 Worship 'presently authorized and practised in this 
 Churchy and that he will constantly adhere to the 
 same; and that he will neitlier directly nor indirectly 
 endeavour the prejudice and subversion thereof. 
 
 If such, therefore, be the Ecclesiastical Statutes of 
 our Church — if our Acts of Assembly and Formula 
 be not mere waste paper — and if language has any- 
 meaning, we solemnly and positively affirm, that 
 the introduction of Instrumental Music 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 Scceders, under 
 the various names of Covenanters, Associate, and 
 Relief Synods, which have left our Establishment, 
 and declined its authority, were surely at full liber- 
 ty to indulge the humour and wish of their respec- 
 tive congregations, yet in no one instance, has that 
 wish or humour led them to introduce Instrumental 
 Music into the Public Worship of God. Why? 
 P 
 
170 
 
 "Because they conceive it is contrary to the principles 
 of Presbytery. They have uniformly adhered to that 
 mode of religious Worship, enjoined by the Direc- 
 tory, — 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. 
 
 5th. Let us now proceed to analyze our Brother's 
 fifth and last argument. — He affirms, that the Or- 
 gan « was introduced into St. Andrew's Church 
 " upon pure Presbyterian pri?iciples f and that no 
 « Law exists, or can exist , against such use of it 
 « as took place upon the 23d of August last; and 
 " that after the most serious attention to the sub- 
 « ject, he cannot discover the most distant approach 
 " to any violation, either of the purity or unifor- 
 " mity of our Public Worship." 
 
 His mode of reasoning upon this part of the sub- 
 ject, your Committee cannot help considering not 
 only as metaphysical, but also tinctured with some- 
 thing not unlike sophistry. They shall analyze his 
 argument, sylogism by sylogism. He says, " it 
 " could not be an innovation upon the object of 
 " Worship, for we worship the one God; — or on 
 « the subject of Praise, for we all sing the same 
 « Psalms; — or upon the posture of the Worship- 
 " pers, for we all sit, as becomes true Presbyterians; 
 <i — or upon the tunes, for we sing only such as are 
 
171 
 
 " in general use; — or upon the office of the Pre- 
 « centor, for he still holds his rank, and employs the 
 « commanding tones of the Organ for guiding the 
 " voices of the people." 
 
 We may allow it to be perfectly true, that, upon 
 the 23d of August last, the Minister of St. Andrew's 
 and his Congregation worshipped the one God, that 
 they sang the same Psalms as usual, that they sat 
 as became Presbyterians, when they praised the 
 Lord, and that the Precentor held his place in the 
 desk, &c. — yet, after all, by introducing an Organ, 
 as an appendage, they manifestly made an innova- 
 tion on the form and purity of our Public Worships 
 in direct opposition to pure Presbyterian principles. 
 
 Such conduct was not agreeable to pure Presby- 
 terian principles, because, in the first place, it was 
 an innovation on the ordinary external form cf 
 Worship. For, by blending Instrumental Music 
 with the human voice, that the Congregation might 
 better express the emotions of their heart, the sim- 
 ple melody of our forefathers becomes immediately 
 changed into a medley, composed of animate and in- 
 animate objects. Of course, the very external 
 form of Praise in use at the Revolution, is no longer 
 continued unalterable in our Presbyterian Church. 
 
 2d. It is an innovation upon what our Laws of 
 Church 2nd State denominate the purity of Wor- 
 ship. Man being a reasonable creature, and a rea- 
 sonable service being demanded from him by God, 
 that reasonable sen-ice cannot so properly be per- 
 P 2 
 
172 
 
 formed 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. Mu- 
 sical Instruments may, indeed, tickle the ear, and 
 please the fancy cf fallen man. But is God to be 
 likened to fallen man? Are we taught by the letter 
 cr spirit of the Gospel, that inanimate Instruments 
 are capable of conveying to the Father of Spirits, 
 the emotions of a pious and virtuous mind, animated 
 with religious jov, filled with religious gratitude, and 
 awed with religious veneration, pouring forth the 
 varied and enraptured 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 
 possess a heart cold and hard as the nethcr=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 devout 
 "Worshippers, assembled in the Congregation of 
 Saints, to praise their God and Redeemer, in Psalms, 
 and Hymns, and Spiritual Songs, singing with grace, 
 and making melody to the Lord in the heart. 
 
 " It is but too common for persons to deceive 
 " themselves, by imagining, that when they are 
 « greatly moved, and almost transported by the de- 
 « lightful airs cf Music, that they are then, and for 
 « that reason, in a temper of mind most pleasing 
 « to God, because pleasing to themselves; — a vain 
 " imagination indeed, and a most unhappy deln- 
 

 ITS 
 
 •« slon; for men of no piety, and destitute of a se- 
 " rious spirit, can relish all that sort of pleasure, 
 " and perhaps even with more satisfaction, thaa 
 " persons of a more virtuous character. They can 
 « say unto God, depart from us, for me desire not 
 " the knowledge of thy ways; what is the Afrnigh- 
 « ty, that we should 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, our Brother asks, (in what your 
 Committee conceives a sneering manner J, " Does 
 " our national uniformity consist in nothing more 
 " substantial than in a certain fixed quantity of 
 " sound, beyond which no Cogregation has autho- 
 " rity 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 Minister of St, 
 Andrew's. But we shall not answer such trifling, 
 by opposing sophistry to sophistry. Your Com- 
 mittee shall answer it, by this bold, but plain and 
 honest assertion, that the uniformity of our nation- 
 al Worship consisteth in the following things: — 1st. 
 In the Minister reading the Scriptures, and lecture 
 ing 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 
 
 * Job. xxi. 15. 
 
 P 3 
 
174 
 
 phrases of any fixed form, merely of human inven- 
 tion. — 4th. In the celebration of the Sacraments of 
 Baptism and the Lord's Supper, agreeably to the 
 words and commandment of Christ himself. — And, 
 Lastly, In the whole Congregation singing the Prais- 
 es of God, with the voice gravely and tuneably or- 
 dered, as expressed in the Directory. — These things 
 compose the uniformity of our public National Wor- 
 ship: — not a certain iixed 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 national uniformity 
 i( be sy id merely to relate to things unsubstantial, e- 
 u ver varying, every vanishing, even while the ear is 
 li labouring to hear, and the mind to catch them ? 
 i( And to attach perpetuity of form, to things incap- 
 k able from their nature of uniform duration, 
 i( would be a solemn mockery of our venerable Le- 
 " gislators." Your Committee is almost tempted 
 to say, that this mode of reasoning is no better than 
 solemn trifling, though assuming the garb of phi- 
 losophical acumen. For your Committee affirm* 
 that there is a precise, marked, and fundamental dis- 
 tinction, bcth in point of form and substance, be- 
 tween the Praises of God sung by the voice, — the 
 mean bestowed on rational man, by his Creator, 
 for expressing the religious sentiments of his heart. 
 
1h- - 
 To 
 
 — and a tune of modulated sound extracted from a 
 Musical Instrument. Mankind must be dull indeed, 
 who cannot perceive that there is a fixed and e- 
 ternal difference betwixt these two things, which 
 no metaphysical reasoning can ever confound or a- 
 malgate. 
 
 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 what- 
 ever 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, that this custom shall 
 induce any Congregation to neglect their duty, in 
 joining devoutly in the praises of God, then we say, 
 that this custom ought instantly to be abandoned. 
 We do not deny, but that Bands of Singers, di- 
 recting the public Praise of God, have been abus- 
 ed; and we certainly give it as our opinion, that if 
 ever, at any time, they shall encourage our enlight- 
 ened Congregations to neglect the singing of Psaims, 
 and Hymns, and Spiritual Songs, and to sit mute, 
 and listen to the harmonic warblings of a Band, 
 then they ought to be dismissed at once, as not on- 
 ly unpresbyterian, but highly pernicious. But the 
 person must be very much inclined to yield his judg- 
 ment to sophistry, who does not perceive a vast 
 difference betwixt a band of singers, singing the 
 
176 
 
 V laei of God with the voice, and completely blend- 
 ed with the Praises of the Congregation at large, 
 .Hid an Organ tickling the ear of the audience* 
 
 In the attempt of our Brother to prove that he 
 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 Conli- 
 nentf which employ that Instrument in the Public 
 Worship of God. Most likely, he borrows his ex- 
 amples from what may have taken place in Holland 
 or Geneva. We have no bond of union with 
 either of these Churches. They are establishments 
 totally independent of us, and are entitled to chalk 
 out a plan for themselves. On the Other hand, 
 their practice can have no authority whatever with 
 us; and indeed, from what we know of the opin- 
 ions entertained by some of these Churches, we 
 should be very unwilling to consider them as a pro* 
 per model to copy from, either in Doctrine or in 
 Worship. But be this as it may, having a right to 
 form standards lor our ourselves, your Committee 
 therefore wish that our Urothet had confined his 
 views in this question, to the principles of the purt 
 Presbyterian Church of Scotland, which we conceive 
 
 to have been animated by the purest principles of 
 any Church upon earth. « In our Church thfl 
 « generous spirit of liberty breathes with universal 
 « vigour, and the noble soul of the Reformation 
 " animates every part of our Establishment, so that 
 
177 
 
 *« no distinction was made by our forefather! of 
 m days and ceremonies, which were alike destitute 
 «< of Scripture support Our Church believes it to 
 " be the great design of the Gospel to raise the 
 " Christian Worshipper abore the airy grandeur of 
 
 H sense, and instead of a laborious service, to in- 
 
 " troduce a Worship worthy of the Father oi 
 
 « Spirit,." 
 
 Our Brother i I to say, " That he i 
 
 « posed to presume, thai the Presbytery never 
 « to have inquired what was done on the 23d of 
 a August in St. Andrew's Church, They conjure 
 u up to themselves, some horrid prostitution of sa- 
 « cred things, and then fight against it, as fro arh 
 « el /oris > wielding their arms against a shadow/ 1 
 
 Your Committee know perfectly well what was 
 done on that day in S Church. They 
 
 know that an Oi the Public Wor- 
 
 ship of God. They know thai Musical [nstrurm 
 are the invention of men. They know, that though 
 neither authorized b w Testament, nor by 
 
 the Law of the Land, nor countenanced by the 
 ry, his Ecclesiastical Superiors^ nor approv- 
 ed oi by the Git of the City— that the 
 
 to intro I Instrui 
 
 into the Public -< ' ■ b, since 
 
 Reformation, hath, in this Laud, b 
 illegal and. unconstitutional, ( 
 
 therefore, kno 4 was done, and 
 
 ire, hath arisen t. 
 
ITS 
 
 the most complete conviction, that they were only 
 doing their duty, when they nipp'd such innovation in 
 the bud. Why then, does our Brother affirm, that 
 the attempt was made according to the pure princi- 
 ples 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. Indeed, from the narrative given by our 
 Brother, this appears, for he says, "that it wasresolv- 
 " ed by the Minister, and a few heads of families, to 
 " have a meeting once in the week, for improving 
 m themselves in Sacred Music. Finding that this pro- 
 « posal was relished by a number of the hearers, and 
 « that they gave regular attendance, it was next pro- 
 « posed by some of the attendants to introduce a Cham- 
 " ber=Organ, as a help to the Precentor for guiding 
 i« the voices of the singers. The Organ was introduc- 
 N ed, and was employed regularly one day in the week. 
 w When we were thus meeting together, as mem- 
 « bers of one family, it was suggested, that our 
 « edification might be promoted, by concluding 
 " our meetings with Family Worship. This was 
 " done, and in praise we employed the Organ ; the 
 M people present were highly gratified, and became 
 « loud and urgent in their requests for the use of 
 « that Instrument in Public Worship." All this 
 is gravely related by our Brother, as a specimen, ive 
 presume, of the pure principles of Presbytery. 
 Now, even from his own Statement, your Committee 
 
179 
 
 are bold to maintain, that there never was procedure 
 held by an independent congregational society, more 
 subversive of, or incompatible with, the pure prin- 
 ciples of Presbytery. 
 
 It can hardly be spoken without exciting a sardo- 
 nic 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 companies are constituted 
 a family > who join in FamilyAVorship within the 
 Church — employ an Organ in praise — are highly 
 gratified, — and become clamorous for similar grati- 
 fication, when, by meeting on the Sabbath=day, 
 this Family shall resolve itself into a Congregation. 
 Is there the most distant reference here, to the 
 Kirk-Session or Presbytery, or any constituted au- 
 thority in the Church of Scotland? Nor were even 
 the Magistrates consulted in this stage of the bu- 
 siness, which commenced 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 he 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 is 
 « Minister, independently of the Civil Pow- 
 •« er. In this assertion your Committee conceives 
 
180 
 
 that our Brother is mistaken. No parish Minister 
 has any right but what he derives from his Presby- 
 tery, and these cannot be legislative and judicial, 
 they are purely ministerial. He is enabled to per- 
 form ministerial duties — to preside in Public Wor- 
 ship — 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 capa- 
 cities. And when our Brother talks so confidently 
 of his title to direct all that concerns Public Wor- 
 ship, 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 would 
 
 * A ridiculous quibble has been resorted to, in order to blunt 
 the argument drawn from the 23d Chapter of the Confession of 
 Faith. It has been averred, that by the Civil Magistrate in this 
 chapter can only be meant the King; because the power of wag- 
 ing war and calling Synods are ascribed unto him. Is it necessary 
 to repel such a quibble by reasoning? Who does not know, that all 
 the Executive Power of the British Empire is understood to 
 dwell in the King, and to emanate from him? Does not a common 
 summons run in his Majesty's name, as well as a declaration of 
 war? Does not his Majesty annually delegate whatever power 
 he has to call S) nods, as well as to be present at them, to his 
 Commissioner in the General Assembly ? Has it not been under- 
 stood, by the most eminent Divines of our National Church, 
 from the Revolution downwards, that the Judge Ordinary of the , 
 bounds, or first Principal Magistrate of a City, hath an inherent 
 rig,lit, as invested with constitutional authority, " to take order 
 " that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth 
 
181 
 
 have found, th.it the Law of Scotland has declar- 
 ed, That it belongs to the office of a Magistrate, 
 to maintain piety, justice, and peace, according to 
 the wholesome laws of this commonwealth. He 
 hath authority, and it is his duty, to take order, 
 " that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, 
 " that all corruptions and abuses in Worship be 
 " prevented or reformed, and the ordinances of 
 " God duly settled, administered, and observ- 
 " ed. 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 not exempted." And 
 as it is the proper duty of Magistrates to execute the 
 laws, — they are bound, and it is their right and du- 
 ty to execute those laws which secure the uniformi- 
 ty of our National Public Worship, as practised in 
 the year 1707. — This they may do by inflicting ci- 
 vil 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 constitutionally ordered 
 their servants to have taken possession of that Or- 
 gan which was used upon the 23d of August last, in 
 Public Worship in St. Andrew's Church, without the 
 authority of the Presbytery, until a satisfactory pledge 
 
 " of God be kept pure and entire, that all blasphemies and here- 
 r sies be suppressed, and all corruptions and abuses in Worship, 
 " be prevented or reformed." 
 
 o 
 
182 
 
 was given, that it should never be employed again 
 in a similar manner. 
 
 But as our Brother in his Statement seems to lay 
 so much stress upon the averment, that the Organ 
 was introduced into St. Andrew s Church upon 
 pure Presbyterian principles, your Committee, 
 deems it proper to give a short abstract of what was 
 the real progress of this business. — About two years 
 p.go, application was made to the Lord Provost, 
 Magistrates, and Council, of the City of Glasgow, 
 ihen in office, w that they would allow certain al- 
 « terations in certain seats in St. Andrew's Church, 
 " that there might be room for setting up an Or- 
 " gan; the petitioners, at the same time binding 
 " themselves to defray the expense, and to make 
 " good all damages which might be supposed to 
 " ensue, but which they apprehended could not a- 
 ♦* rise from its introduction." 
 
 When we examine the letter accompanying the 
 petition, and the petition itself, containing this ex- 
 . traordinary request, we cannot help thinking that 
 cur Brother has been disposed to treat our Presby- 
 terian patriotic forefathers, in rather too cavalier a 
 manner. He speaks of them as men misled by pas- 
 sion, and as an ignorant bigctted people, labouring 
 tinder prejudice; language, to say no more of it, 
 requiring stronger arguments in its support, than 
 our Brother has yet been able to advance. Before 
 the Lord Provost, Magistrates, and City Counci|, 
 returned an answer to this extraordinary request 
 
183 
 
 they asked, and received the opinion of their Legal 
 Assessor, who, in a very manly and candid paper, 
 now upon the Presbytery record, gave it as his 
 judgment, " that the introduction of Organs in 
 " our Churches, would be a material alteration and 
 " innovation in our external mode of Worship, and 
 " recommended to the Minister of St. Andrew's 
 " and his Congregation, before proceeding farther, 
 « to apply for the permission and sanction of the 
 " Ecclesiactical Branch of our constitution." 
 
 Your Committee would have thought, that the 
 refusal of the Magistrates to grant the request of re- 
 moving the seats, founded upon the opinion df 
 their Legal Assessor, a Gentlemen 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 tolls u; 
 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 lact, now upon your record, and the 
 purport of which letter was to dissuade him and 
 his Congregation from making the attempt, yet that 
 he, Dr. Ritchie, " did net shrink one moment 
 " 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 hut. 
 
 O 2 
 
18* 
 
 There is here a little ambiguity in our Brother's 
 Statement, which your Committee does not exactly 
 understand. Whether did Dr. Ritchie lav the 
 Lord Provost's letter before the Committee of Gentle- 
 men upon the evening of the 22d, or not till the 
 26th, the day on which he received the Lord Pro- 
 vost's second letter? If the first letter was only 
 bid before these Gentlemen upon the 26th, your 
 Committee solemnly declare, that our Brother did 
 not discover proper respect to the Civil Power, if 
 he used the Instrument after he received his Lord- 
 ship'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 concerns of his life. It was apparent- 
 ly, first setting the Civil Power at defiance, and 
 then apparently requesting them to shut their eyes 
 to the contempt of their authority. — Your Com- 
 mittee, taking all these circumstances into consider- 
 ation, cannot help thinking, that the conduct of our 
 Brother upon this occasion, did not discover proper 
 respect either to the Civil Power, or to the Presby- 
 tery 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 Couhcil; neither was he ignorant of what 
 is contained in the 21st chap, of the Confession of 
 Faith, relative to Public Worship. Neither could 
 
 lie be ignorant of the power with which the Civ ' 
 Magistrate is invested, to preserve uniformity of 
 Public Worship •, neither could he pretend ignorance 
 that about two years ago, the City Council had refus- 
 ed to allow the seats to be removed, for the accom- 
 modation of an Organ ; why then, did he, upon 
 the 23d August last, authorize and direct the em- 
 ployment of an Organ, in St. Andrew's Church, 
 in Public Worship, taking the whole responsibility 
 upon himself, as the director of all that concerns 
 Public Worship in that Parish Church of which 
 he is Minister? A line of conduct which your 
 Committee positively condemn. When our Bro- 
 ther 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 Supe- 
 riors, and then legally and constitutionally, he could 
 have said to the Civil Power, when you interfere 
 with Public Worship, you are proceeding ultra vi- 
 res. When, therefore, our Brother sent two Gen- 
 tlemen, twice in one day, to request of the Lord 
 Provost that the Civil Power might no more be seen 
 in this business, is there not something liker a de- 
 sire to dictate what the Civil Magistrate ought to do, 
 « than a sincere respect professed for both branch- 
 " es of the constitution ?" 
 
 According to the Statement given in by our Bro- 
 Q3 
 
186 
 
 ther, relative to his conduct upon the22d, 23d, and 
 26th August last, or even from the commencement 
 of the business, about two years ago, we bid defi- 
 ance 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 m r ?.s 
 strictly Presbyterian. It was the legitimate exer- 
 cise cf that formal power in Ecclesiastical matter! , 
 which the standards of our Church, and the Laws 
 of the Land uniformly assert and maintain. 
 
 As to the conception cf any Presbyterian Mini- 
 ster! of the Established Church of Scotland, having 
 an inherent right ci directing ail that respects Pub- 
 lic Worship in his own Congregation, it is perfectly 
 wild, visionary, and untenable. No Minister has a 
 legal right to perform a single judicial or legislative 
 act, without the sanction o^ the Kirk=Session - y and 
 ro KirkrSession has a right to innovate on the ge- 
 neral Laws, and universal practice of our Church'. 
 
 Instead, therefore, cf 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 dispos- 
 ed to imagine, that these gradual steps were intend- 
 ed to accustom the mind imperceptibly to innova- 
 tion, and to the reception of Instrumental Music 
 into the Public Worship of God, in this our nation- 
 .\- E d Church, without surprise and aston- 
 
 ishment. Perhaps^ if the Presbytery had done its 
 
1ST 
 
 duty, they should have stept forward* and rtipp'd 
 such innovation in the bud, convincing botli our 
 Brother and the world, that the house of God in this 
 Presbyterian Country, was not to be turned into a 
 ConceruRoom. But we flattered ourselves, that the 
 good sense of our Brother would have kept this mu- 
 sical 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 perni- 
 cious to his country. It may proceed from the 
 most complete bona Jzde intention, on his part, or 
 it may even arise from an invincible error of judg- 
 ment. Your Committee does not wish to speak 
 harshly upon the motives of any human being, but 
 the consequences of an action^ affecting our Eccle- 
 siastical Establishment, they are entitled to inves- 
 tigate, and to approve or condemn, as truth and 
 justice shall demand. 
 
 With respect to that pompous declaration made 
 use of in the Statement, to shew the utility of 
 the measure, and how wonderfully calculated an 
 Organ is to increase the devotion of a Congrega- 
 tion of Christians, and " that the time is now come, 
 " when we had it our power to vindicate our Church 
 m and our country from the reproach of neglecting 
 " one of the best means devised for the improve- 
 « ment of Sacred Music," — your Committee must 
 beg leave to say, that they entirely withold their as- 
 sent. Our Brother's argument is a mere jtetitio 
 
188 
 
 principii — a mere begging of the question — assum- 
 ing as a principle, what remains yet to be proved. 
 Your Committee are no enemies to Instrumental 
 Music being used to exhilarate the mind in scenes 
 of conviviality, or employed to animate the soldier 
 to march with ardour to the field of battle. — Nay, 
 they even allow that the poet is not altogether fanci- 
 ful, when he says, that 
 
 " Music has charms to sooth the savage fcreast;" 
 
 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 human 
 voice, while they are the most simple, are, at the 
 same time, the most perfect, the most accurate, 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 Music in 
 the oratorios of Handel. Your Committee are willing 
 to allow this Musical effect, but they believe at the 
 same time, that all the Musical Instruments that 
 ever were used, can never produce upon the devout 
 and contemplative mind, that sublime and pathetic 
 effect, which the well=regulated voice of 8,000 
 
189 
 
 children produced, when singing the praises of God 
 in the Cathedral of St. Paul's, upon the recovery of 
 our good, old, religious King. Away, then, with the 
 cant of an Organ's being so wonderfully calculated 
 to increase the devotion of Christians ! Your Com- 
 mittee have sometimes had an opportunity of listen- 
 ing to Instrumental Music, in what is styled Cathe- 
 dral Worship; it might for a little time please, and 
 surprise 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 themselves, 
 n by imagining that when they are greatly moved 
 " by airs of Instrumental Music, that they are then, 
 « and for that reason, in a temper of mind most 
 <c pleasing unto God, because pleasing to them- 
 « selves; a most unhappy delusion; for men some- 
 " times of very little piety can enjoy all that sort 
 H of pleasure, with as high a gusty as persons of a 
 w 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 persons rather in a taunting man- 
 ner) where both the heart and the voice are engaged, 
 the effect is much more noble, and much more salu- 
 tary to the mind of a Christian audience, than all the 
 lofty artificial strains of an Organ, extracted by a 
 hired Organist, and accompanied by a confused 
 noise of many voices, taught, at great expence, to 
 
190 
 
 chaunt over what their hearts neither feel, nor their 
 heads understand. 
 
 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, re- 
 joice 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 Organs, and wish not 
 to have them, they have Bibles, 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 man- 
 kind, and can reflect upon it; — and they know 
 well, that Organs and Instrumental Music have 
 been abused, to the purposes 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, fcr we desire not the knowledge of thy 
 it ways; — what is the Almighty, that we should- 
 
191 
 
 « serve him, and what profit should we receive, if 
 " we pray unto him * ?" And they have read in 
 the Book of Amos the prophet, of a woe denounced 
 upon them " that are at ease in Sion, and who 
 <c trust in the mountain of Samaria; who put far 
 « away the evil day, and cause the seat of violence 
 41 to come near; who lie on beds of ivory, who 
 " eat lambs out of the flock, and the calves out of 
 li the midst of the stall, who drink wine out of the 
 « bowl, and anoint themselves with the chief oint- 
 « meiits f ." But this very numerous description 
 cf men, in affluent circumstances, 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, sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, 
 " and all kinds of music £." 
 
 Thus, we haye endeavoured, step by step, to 
 answer the various arguments adduced by our Re- 
 verend Brother, die Minister of St. Andrew's 
 Church, in his Statement. 
 
 We have in the first place, shewn that Instrumen- 
 tal Music is neither enjoined, nor authorized, nor 
 
 * Job chap. xxi. ver. 12. f Amos vi. chap. \ Dan. ili. chap. 
 

 192 
 
 encouraged by the word of God, to be used in the 
 Public Worship of Christians. 
 
 In the second place, That, from the history of 
 the Church, it appears, that the Fathers, the School- 
 men, and the greatest of the Reformers condemn- 
 ed it. 
 
 In the third place, That the reason assigned by 
 our Brother, why Instrumental Music, in the Pu- 
 blic Worship of God, was not used in our Nation- 
 Church — (viz. that it arose from the want of leisure 
 to attend to such things, or their want of money to 
 purchase such Instruments, or the want of accomoda- 
 tion for using them) — is neither consistent with his- 
 torical foct nor fair and candid investigation *. 
 
 f 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 
 *he 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; 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 is supposed then to 
 have characterised and disgraced the Church of Scotland. Co- 
 pies of that Psalm Book are now very rare ; t'-it which most 
 generally occurs, is an edition printed by Andro Hart, 1G35, and 
 makes part of a volume which includes Directions for different 
 parts of Public Woiship, as agreed on by John Knox and other 
 
103 
 
 Your Committee have proved, that it arose from 
 the opinion entertained by our Scotch Ecclesiastical 
 Patriots, that Instrumental Music was contrary to 
 
 eminent Ministers, whose recommendation is annexed. So much 
 was this part of the Devotional Service of our Church an object 
 of attention to those good men, that the particular Tunes, proper 
 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 ac- 
 commodate the four different persons who sang the four different 
 parts of the Music. A considerable variety of Psalm Tunes, 
 set in the different parts, make a portion «f this volume. Far be 
 it from us to blame our Reverend Brother for his ignorance of 
 this subject; perhaps he will blame himself for writing so de- 
 cidedly upon a subject in which he must be conscious he has been 
 at little pains to obtain information. He may perhaps see cause 
 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 sixteenth and se- 
 venteenth centuries. 
 
 A pleasing little anecdote occurs, sufficient to shew that emi- 
 nent men in the Church of Scotland, were not so ignorant of, 
 and so insensible to, Music, as the representations given by some 
 persons in our days would imply. 
 
 Mr. Robert Boyd of Trochrig was Principal of the College of 
 Clasgow. " He was a man of an austere=like carriage, and yet 
 " was a most tender-hearted man. He was of a sourslike dis- 
 * position; he would sometimescall me, with other three or fourt 
 r and lay down books before us, and have us sing Tunes of Musici 
 n wherein he took great delight/' 
 
 Livingstone's Lift. — Characteristics. 
 We believe that a copy of the above Psalm Book is in the pos- 
 session of an eminent Clergyman of this neighbourhood, well 
 known for his scientific knowledge in every branch of the fine arts» 
 
 R 
 
194. 
 
 the genius and constitution 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 cur 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 contrary to the Law of 
 the Land, and to the Law and Constitution of the 
 Church of Scotland. 
 
 And, Lastly, Your Committee have shewn, that 
 the argument advanced by cur Brother, viz. That 
 the Organ was introduced into St. Andrew's 
 Church, upon pure Presbyterian principles, is sup- 
 ported by mere metaphysical and sophistical rea- 
 soning, only calculated to mislead those who have 
 not paid sufficient attention to the subject f. 
 
 If your Committee had been disposed to measure 
 out to their Brother such language, and such re- 
 flections as he hath been pleased to make upon his 
 Ecclesiastical Superiors, the Presbytery of Glasgow, 
 
 * See Appendix. 
 + We beg it may be remembered, what we stated in the com- 
 mencement of tins Answer to Dr. Ritchie, that we have been all a- 
 leng arguing witb a Minister of the Church of Scotland, bound by 
 -tbe same Laws of Church and State which bind the Presb}tery 
 of Glasgow. 
 
19, 
 
 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 imputed where there 
 " was no crime, and that we have become the vic- 
 m tims of a prejudice which 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 
 « Establishment." Your Committee will cheerful- 
 ly allow the Minister and Congregation of St. An- 
 drew'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 principles of 
 the fathers animate the children— if the universal, 
 and almost uninterrupted practice of cur Church, in 
 the midst of its greatest reverses Mnce the Reforma- 
 tion, down to the present moment, except in three so- 
 litary instances, — the attempt made in the . Chapel 
 Royal 1617, by the King and his Courtiers, which 
 never extended its influence farther than the wails 
 of the Chapel, — and an attempt which was made a 
 R 2 
 
196 
 
 few years ago, by a respectable Congregation in 
 Aberdeen, but instantly abandoned, — and this late 
 abortive attempt at Glasgow, — can consolidate the 
 constitution, and furnish an authoritative commen- 
 tary on the Law of the Church, and the Law of the 
 Land, — if the Hoiy Scriptures of the New Testa- 
 ment, illustrated by the example of Christians for 
 upwards of seven centuries — if the standards of our 
 Church, explained and corroborated by the testi- 
 mony of our venerable martyrs, be solid and unex- 
 ceptionable 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 lav/ — and 
 constitutional principle — and immemorial usage — all 
 sanctioned by an enlightened conviction, shall de- 
 termine this question, then the Reverend Presby- 
 tery may go with confidence, and demand a verdict 
 in their favour. 
 
 With respect to those sacrifices which our Bro- 
 ther hath pledged himself to make for the loyal, en- 
 lightened, and respectable Congregation of St. An- 
 drew's, your Committee do not wish to restrain 
 our Brother in the smallest degree. If a sincere 
 desire to benefit that Congregation, which hath dis- 
 covered such an uncommon attachment to his mini- 
 stry, hath prompted him to speak in such glowing 
 language, your Committee most sincerely pray, 
 that wherever Providence may order the lot of our 
 
197 
 
 Brother, he may always experience a similar at- 
 tachment from his Congregation. If, on the other 
 hand, this pledge " of his readiness to make sa- 
 " crifices," was thrown out, merely to announce 
 to the Presbytery, and to the world, his fixed and 
 resolute determination to use every lawful method 
 to carry his favourite measure, your Committee are 
 equally ready and equally determined to use every 
 legal and constitutional method to oppose him, and 
 they have no doubt of the resuk. 
 
 In fine, our Brother has repeatedly admitted, 
 that in Scotland, there is a prejudice against Organs, 
 which he says, has grown into antipathy. It was, 
 no doubt, bold and manly in him, to undertake, 
 single-handed) to cure that prejudice, and to remove 
 that antipathy. And though we do not wish to in- 
 fringe what he styles his sacred, private, hereditary 
 rights, there were many objects of no small import- 
 ance, to which he ought to have p;nd some atten- 
 tion, 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 of 
 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 direct- 
 ly or indirectly, to undertake such a business, with- 
 out consulting his Ecclesiastical Superiors. And 
 we, likewise, most certainly say, that however peace- 
 R3 
 
793 
 
 able 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 Council of Glasgow, with the people of 
 Glasgow, and with the people of Scotland. But we 
 will not allow, that since the Reformation, our coun- 
 trymen have laboured under prejudice. We will 
 contrast with the sentiments of the Minister of St. 
 Andrew's, the sentiments of the late Principal Dun- 
 lop of the University of Glasgow. 
 
 This venerable man, whose singular piety, grent 
 prudence, public spirit, universal knowledge, and 
 general usefulness, are celebrated in Wodrow's His- 
 tory, 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 understood them 
 well, arid thus expresseth himself, on the point at 
 issue. 
 
 « We celebrate the goodness of God, which car- 
 « ried cur Preformation to such a high pitch of per- 
 « fection, with respect to our Government and 
 " Worship, and delivered them from all that vain 
 « pomp, which darkened the glory of the Gospel 
 •« service, and the whole of the superstitious or in- 
 " significant inventions of an imaginary decency 
 « ami 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 
 
199 
 
 « Worship, more than in all the foreign ornaments 
 " borrowed from this world, though these appear 
 " indeed incomparably more charming to earthly 
 " minds. 
 
 " We are sensible that it is a necessary conse^ 
 " quence of the nature of our Reformation in these 
 « particulars, that there is nothing left in our Wor- 
 " ship which is proper to captivate the senses of 
 " mankind, or amuse their imaginations; we have 
 << no magnificence and splendour of devotion to 
 « dazzle ttm eye, nor harmony of Instrumental 
 " Music to enliven our Worship and soothe the ears 
 « of the assembly. Pomp, and shew, and ceremony, 
 " are entirely strangers in our Churches, and we 
 " have little in common, with that apostate Church, 
 " whose yoke we threw off at the Reformation, 
 " or witli the exterior greatness and magnificence of 
 " the Jewish temple and its service. 
 
 " For which reason, we know we must lay our 
 " account to be despised by the men of the world y 
 " who value nothing that is stripped of the allure- 
 " ments of sense, and fancy that a rich and gaudy 
 << dress contributes to the majesty, and raises the 
 " excellency of religious service; who seek for the 
 " same da z ling pomp and splendid appearances 
 rt to recommend their Worship, which they are 
 M so fond of in their equipage and tables; and 
 " think that a veneration and respect to the service 
 « of the Church, is to be raised by the same me- 
 « thods that procure an esteem and fondness for a 
 
200 
 
 « court. We have nothing to tempt persons of 
 •« such inclinations, we know they will entertain the 
 " meanest thoughts, and most disdainful notions of 
 " a Worship too plain and homely for them, and fit 
 M only for the rude and unmannerly multitude, who 
 " have not a taste delicate enough for what is truly 
 (< great and noble. 
 
 " But how much soever, upon this account, we 
 " may be despised by the great and learned, the 
 u Church of Scotland, we hope, will always pub- 
 M 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 look at. 
 M She is not ashamed to acknowledge her senti- 
 ** ments, that the devotions of Christians stand in 
 « no need of the outward helps afforded to the 
 « Jews, and that the triumphs of all=conquering 
 M love, the mighty acts of a Redeemer, all the 
 *< powers and glories of an immortal life, which 
 « are represented to our wonder and meditation 
 ** under the Gospel, are far nobler springs of devo- 
 « tion, and fitter to animate with a cheerful zeal, 
 " and inspire the most fervent affections, than the 
 « meaner helps afforded under the Law — the cost- 
 « liness of pontifical garments, the glory of a mag- 
 " nificent temple, the ceremony of Worship and 
 H power of Music. 
 
 " Our Church believes it to be one design of the 
 
201 
 
 " better reformation of things, to raise the Christ- 
 
 w ian Worshippers above the airy grandeur of sense, 
 
 m and instead of a laborious service, to introduce a 
 
 M "Worship worthy of the Father of Spirits, that 
 
 " should be truly great and manly; the beauty 
 
 " and the power whereof, should be spirit and life, 
 
 " and which, instead of a servile imitation of the 
 
 " temple, should be all purified reason and reli- 
 
 " gio?i, and make the nearest approaches to the 
 
 u devotion of the heavenly state, where there is no 
 
 " temple. And how despicable soever this may ap- 
 
 " pear to earthly minds, and distasteful to the senses, 
 
 " that are pleased with show and appearance, we are 
 
 * not afraid to own, that we believe that an imita- 
 
 " Hon of our blessed Redeemer and /lis Apostles, 
 
 l< in the plainness and spirituality of their devo- 
 
 f( tionsy and an endeavour to copy after the example 
 
 " of these truly primitive times, will ever bear us 
 
 " up to all the j ust decency and order of the Gos- 
 
 « pel Church; and that in conformity hereto, the 
 
 M naked simplicity of our Worship is beautified 
 
 " with a superior lustre, and shines with a bright- 
 
 " ness more worthy of it, than when dressed in 
 
 " the gayest colours, and busked up with the 
 
 « richest and most artful ornaments of human 
 
 w fancy and contrivance." 
 
 (Signed) William Porteous. 
 Robert Balfour. 
 James Lapslie. 
 James M'Lean. 
 
202 
 
 Minute of Presbytery, March 30//:, 1808. 
 The Committee appointed to draw up Answers to 
 the Statement of Dr. Ritchie, gave in said Answers* 
 which being read and approved of, without a vote, 
 were ordered to be recorded *, which Mr. Lapslie and 
 Mr. M { Lean were ordered to see done f . 
 
 Minute of Presbytery, toh May, 1808. 
 
 The Presbytery being met, and constituted, — It 
 was moved, and seconded, that the thanks of this 
 Presbytery should be given to their Committee for 
 their great diligence in preparing the able Answer 
 to Dr. Ritchie's Statement, mentioned in last Mi- 
 nute, which motion the Presbytery agreed to, and 
 the Moderator, in their name, gave the Committee 
 thanks accordingly ; it being understood, that the 
 original Dissentients, together with Dr. Taylor, jun. 
 Dr. Lockhart, and Dr. Ritchie, do not concur in 
 said vote of thanks *. 
 
 It was moved, and seconded, that the Presbytery 
 should give thanks to the Lord Provost, Magistrates, 
 and City Council of Glasgow, for the wisdom, pro- 
 priety, and discretion of their conduct, in referring 
 
 f This Minute should have preceded the foregoing Answers 
 in this Publication. 
 
 * It is to be regretted, that the original Dissentients, together 
 with the three Gentlemen who were indulged with 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 P.everend Presbytery. 
 
205 
 
 the Congregation of St. Andrew's Church to their 
 Ecclesiastical Superiors. The Presbytery, without 
 a vote, agreed to the above motion; and appoint 
 the Rev. Mr. Lapslie, Moderator, Dr. Porteous, Dr. 
 Balfour, and Mr. M'Lean, as a Committee to com- 
 municate to the Lord Provost, Magistrates, and City 
 Council of Glasgow, this vote of thanks, in name 
 of the Presbytery; together with an extract of the 
 Presbytery's Minutes of 7th October last, on this 
 business. 
 
 Mr. Burns called the attention of the Presbytery 
 -to two printed Letters addressed to the Lord Pro- 
 vost of the City of Glasgow, in which, among seve- 
 ral other misrepresentations, the following passages 
 are particularly submitted to the consideration 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 a- 
 " mong the number of childish things which the 
 " Apostle put away, when he became a man.'* 
 To which it is added, that this rather surprized the 
 Letter writer, as he " had been taught always to 
 " look up to him (Dr. B.) as a sound Divine, and 
 " one that would not handle the word of God de- 
 « ceitfully." — Page 40, Mr. M'L. is represented to 
 have said, " that those Churches that used Organs 
 a were Churches of Antichrist." — Pages 48, 49, 
 Dr. P. and Mr. L. are stated, " wantonly to have 
 t( charged Dr. Ritchie with the awful crime of per- 
 
 J UI 7> 
 
204 
 
 and Dr. P. is said to have " declared that man per- 
 " jured, who would deviate one iota from the prao 
 « tice established at the passing of the foresaid Acts." 
 — It was therefore moved, that the Presbytery should 
 declare their entire persuasion, that the expressions 
 referred to, in pages 40, 48, 49, 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 not employ the above passage as an ar- 
 gument against Organs, but merely as Scripture 
 language, m the way of accommodation. 
 
 The Presbytery having considered the above mo- 
 tion, 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 motion, " their 
 " entire persuasion that the expressions referred to 
 " in the 40, 48, and 49 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 not employ the above passage as an 
 " argument against Organs, but merely as Scrip- 
 *< ture language, by way of accommodation." 
 
205 
 
 cojvc'ztusiojsr. 
 
 IT is manifest, from the preceding Statement, 
 that the Presbytery of Glasgow and Dr. Ritchie 
 have respectively made a solemn appeal to posterity, 
 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 
 lias always acted upon the defensive, and contented 
 themselves with repelling the aggressions 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 tli2 no- 
 tice of their countrymen. 
 
 They have come with a plain unvarnished tale, 
 They have confirmed it with unexceptionable docu- 
 ments. They have judged it fair and honourable, 
 that their cotemporaries, as well as posterity, should 
 be furnished with the means of deciding on the me- 
 rits of the point at issue. 
 
 The candid manner in which Dr. Lockhart ex- 
 presses himself, would have inclined us to pass over 
 his explanation without any stricture whatever. 
 But a regard for the honour of the Presbytery, re- 
 <} aires the following remarks. Dr. Lockhart says, that 
 S 
 
206 
 
 « it does not appear to him that it was the intention 
 << of the Dissentients to charge the Presbytery with 
 « any violation of truth and 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 j 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 Presbytery, they should have 
 « given any detailed statement in relation to the 
 " particular case, which led to the discussion." 
 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 state- 
 ment of the particular case; and they are condemn- 
 ed by the Dissentients, for not confining themselves 
 entirely unto it. 
 
 When Dr. Lockhart in his last observation, de- 
 clares, that he is " unwilling to acquiesce in any 
 " such application of the Second Commandment as 
 « would charge with false worship, our Christian 
 " brethren of other Churches;" it ought to be 
 
207 
 
 observed, that the Presbytery did not apply the Se* 
 cond Commandment in the manner here supposed. 
 It is the author it alive commentary of this Church 
 upon the Second Commandment, from which the 
 Presbytery reason, and which they maintain, is bind- 
 ing upon all her Ministers and people. 
 
 Similar candour, we have no doubt, pervades the 
 explanation given in by Dr. Taylor, jun. It con- 
 tains, however, a Critique upon the Presbytery, and 
 some irrelevant matter, which might well have been 
 spared. " I was out of the country," 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, 
 w had no opportunity of taking part, either en ore 
 w side or the other, in this singular business -jv' 
 All this seems to be simple narrative, and yet it con- 
 tains such a view of the matter as cannot be passed 
 over without animadversion. As Dr. Taylor had 
 preserved his neutrality till the close of this business, 
 and had even presided in the Court, at that period, 
 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 op- 
 portunity, if he choose to ask it, of taking part in 
 any business before that Court? — and that he should 
 
 f Pape 53. 
 
 S 2 
 
 
208 
 
 be the last member of Court to impugn a senter.ee 
 passed under his own auspices? 
 
 The Editors beg it to be understood that these re- 
 marks, and others which follow, contain not a single 
 particle of disrespect towards Dr. Taylor, whom 
 they highly regard. But, as he has chosen to be- 
 come the aggressor, it is perfectly fair to shew that he 
 has done so ultroneously, and to repel his aggression. 
 
 As to the « licence taken," and " the heat and 
 " passion " betrayed by the Presbytery, in the paper 
 alluded to, the Public will judge, without our com- 
 mentary. But the specimen which Dr. Taylor 
 gives " of language of this heated and exaggerated 
 " kind," is certainly curious. H The manner,** 
 says he, " in which the Congregation of St. An- 
 " drew's is mentioned in this paper, is surely in too 
 " lofty a style. — Some persons describing them- 
 " selves as the Congregation of St. Andrew's 
 " Church, — this is the expression f." 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 exaggerated language 
 when he was forced to select this one. No express 
 sion in the whole paper is more calm, dispassionate, 
 and coldly correct. It has not the most distant " ten- 
 « dency to convey the idea that there were pre- 
 " tensions on the part of those spoken of, that were 
 " not well founded." It is nothing more than the 
 trite, formal expression, which has long been 
 lanctioned and recognized by practice, and might* 
 
 \ Page 55* 
 
with as much propriety, have been selected as a spe- 
 cimen 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 " unauthorized p n 
 For if the term " unauthorized " be of that ambigu- 
 ous, equivocal kind, which naturally suggested 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 suf- 
 ficiently exposed -f-. It is only necessary here to 
 observe, that as Dr. Taylor has been so prodigal of 
 his politeness to the opponents of the Presbytery, if. 
 might have been expected that he would have be- 
 stowed a mite of it on the Presbytery and their 
 Committee. " A gross anachronism," is certainly 
 a heavy charge, and not expressed in very gentle 
 terms, especially when it happens to be utterly 
 unfounded *. Nor can we admire the elegance 
 
 | Vide Pages 36 and 37. f Vide Note pagf 56. 
 
 * We can easily conceive how Dr. Taylor has fallen into the 
 ttiistnke on which this charge of anachronism is founded. Hi has 
 rot sufficiently attended to the distinction in point of time, be- 
 tween the invention of Organs, of which the Lust has the honour, 
 and their introduction into the West, by the Creek Eroperof 
 Constar.tinus Copronymus, who sent one as a presort to Pepin, 
 king of Prance, about the year 7C6. How long Organs had 
 teen known in the East, prior to this event, it is ioipossib 
 
 S 3 
 
210 
 
 of Dr. Taylor's compliment to the Committee of 
 Presbytery, for their " considerable labour" It 
 would, perhaps, have been as consistent with the 
 rules cf politeness, had Dr. Taylor withheld his 
 compliment, as well as his concurrence in the Pres- 
 bytery's vote of thanks to their Committee. 
 
 "We flatter ourselves, that the judicious reader 
 will find, that the Presbytery have shewn, not only 
 
 determine. Bat it is certain that they cannot be less ancient- 
 than the Council of Nice, as appears from the Emperor Julian's 
 Epigram upon this Instrument in the Anthologia. 
 
 " Cjuam cerno alterius naturce est fistula, nempe 
 " Altera producit fortasse hrec senea telius ; 
 " Herrendum stridct, nee nostris ilia movetur 
 " Flatibus, et missus taurino e carcere ventus 
 " Subtus agit leves calamos, perque ima vagatur; 
 ** Mox aliquis velox digitis insignis et arte 
 " Adstat, Concordes calamis pulsatque tabellas, 
 *' Ast illae 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 root** 
 «* while a robust mortal, running with swift fingers over the ccn- 
 •' cordant keys, makes them, as they smoothly dance, emit me* 
 " Iodious sounds.*' 
 
 Long, however, as Organs have been known in the East, they 
 have never, as far as we 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 was to 
 put the Church in tune, but to cast a glory upon the Court, and 
 to draw the admiration of foreigners upon the Emperor. Zon- 
 ar. Tom 3. Annal. in Michatle Imper. In the Greek liturgies, 
 much is said of Music, but an Organ is not s< 
 3n all their Books. 
 
211 
 
 that m the Presbyterian Church must differ from 
 w Episcopacy — that it is averse to the Hierarchy of 
 " Bishops — to Liturgy and read Prayers — and that 
 w it has a Discipline of its own:" — but also that 
 both our Church and State have gone « farther 
 " than all this, and accurately defined the particu- 
 " lars of Worship :" — And that if the Directory, 
 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 recognised by the Consti- 
 tution, and sanctioned and defined by the immemo- 
 rial, 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 concurrence, and de- 
 clared that the Ecclesiastical authorities must pre- 
 viously be consulted. An Organ, notwithstanding, 
 was employed in St. Andrew s Church at a weekly 
 rehearsal of Sacred Music. By and by, this re- 
 hearsal was blended with Religious Worship, and 
 
212 
 
 when every thing was ready for this grand Musical 
 performance, it was brought up 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 Edin- 
 burgh, — the canvassings, consultations, and convivia- 
 lities at Glasgow, for the furtherance of this singu- 
 lar business, the Editors appeal to the impartial 
 Public, whether they can here discern a vestige of 
 deference or respect to authority, Civil or Ecclesias- 
 tical ? Whether they can here discover any indica- 
 tions of the confidence of private friendship, or con- 
 cern for the public peace ? 
 
 With this remark the Editors would have beerr 
 happy to have taken their leave of this singular bu- 
 siness. But the two anonymous Letters addressed 
 to the Lord Provost of Glasgow, on the subject of 
 die Organ, render some animadversions upon them 
 indispensable. Common fame lias 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 Scot- 
 land would write any thing which could render 
 him liable to damages. Some copies, we are in- 
 formed, 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 as it may, the senti- 
 
213 
 
 ments and language of Dr. Ritchie in his Statement, 
 seem, in many instances, to be borrowed by this 
 Pamphleteer; and the plagiarism is but ill conceal- 
 ed, by all the transposition of words, and the in- 
 version of sentiment, to which he has had recourse. 
 From these circumstances, an adventitious import- 
 ance is stamped upon this Pamphlet, which it never 
 could have derived from its intrinsic merits. 
 
 Scurrilous personalities are unlawful weapons ei- 
 ther of attack or of defence. It is only the savage 
 and the coward who employs the poisoned arrow, 
 or the dagger of the assassin. They are abhorred by 
 every honourable combatant. Let the man beware, 
 who useth misrepresentation, calumny, and false- 
 hood, to obtain his object, lest he kindle a fire which 
 shall burn his character and his cause to ashes. 
 
 Whether " dismgenuity blushed M when the Com- 
 piler of these Letters addressed them to the Lord 
 Provost, it is unnecessary to inquire. The Minutes 
 of Presbytery of the 4-th of this month, sufficiently 
 detect his culpable inaccuracy *, and scandalous vio- 
 lation of truth and charity. This brand of infamy 
 he may try to obliterate, or cover in the best man- 
 ner he can. 
 
 His abuse of the Lord Provost is illiberal and 
 groundless. — Even the very plan of his Letters in- 
 volves an absurdity. Granting, for the sake cf ar- 
 gument, that the Presbytery are justly implicated 
 
 *• Vide page 202, 
 
214 
 
 with the Lord Provost in the first Letter, because 
 they had seen and applauded his Lordship's conduct, 
 can there be a greater insult to justice, and to com- 
 mon sense, than to attempt, as is done in the second 
 Letter, to implicate his Lordship in the reasoning 
 and sentence of the Presbytery ? Let that reasonings 
 let that sentence be supposed good or bad, it is 
 clear that the Lord Provost has nothing to do 
 with them. He had no controul over the one or the 
 ether. He was utterly unacquainted with both. 
 He cannot be more responsible for them than for the 
 speeches delivered on that occasion by the Minister 
 of St. Andrew's Church, or the contents of his ela- 
 borate Statement, recorded in the Books of Presby- 
 tery. — So much for the plan of this Pamphlet. 
 
 The contents of it arc justly liable to the severest 
 censure. The very first sentence of the first Letter 
 is pregnant with falsehood. — The second with fri- 
 volous impertinence. " My Lord, the subject of 
 •< the Organ has, through your interference^ become 
 « the topic of much private and public discussion. 
 H "Whether, without the •part you have acicd^ it 
 " would ever have been agitated in a Church Court, 
 " is to many doubtful," Now, it is notorious, that 
 the subject of the Organ had been the topic of 
 much private discussion, and that publicity had 
 been given to it y by a formal Extract from the Re- 
 cords of the City Council, transmitted to Dr. Rit- 
 chie, and widely circulated, before the present Lord 
 Provost had come into office. And the Editors are 
 
entitled to affirm, that the Letter=writer betrays Li > 
 want of information, when he says, that it.is to many 
 doubtful, whether, without the interposition of the 
 Lord Provost, this subject " would ever have been 
 " agitated in a Church Court." Let him consult 
 Dr. Ritchie, whose intimacy and confidence he per- 
 adventure enjoys, and learn from him, whether the 
 Presbytery of Glasgow lack either spirit or inte- 
 grity to agitate any subject which they are of opinion 
 touches the vitals, or even the externals, of the 
 Law and Constitution of our National Church. 
 
 Nothing can be more meagre than the statement 
 of facts, page 4th, which our Letter^writer sets 
 forth, as " sufficient to enable his reader to form an 
 *« accurate judgment." This statement is dispatched 
 in a short paragraph of three sentences. The read- 
 er is hurried on, as if he were on a forced march. Pre- 
 cipitancy of this kind, not only creates confusion, but 
 leads to error. We must not confine our attention to 
 the transactions of August 1 807 : — we must extend it 
 to all the incidents relative to the Organ, which 
 are known to have happened for two years before. 
 "We must read and ponder well the Letter of the 
 Minister, and the Petition of the Congregation, on 
 the subject of the Organ, which were presented to 
 the City Council, September 1806. We must study 
 the sound and j adicious answer which the City 
 Council returned to both. Then deny it, who can, 
 that the Lord Provost would have compromised the 
 dignity, the honour, and the rights of his consti- 
 
216 
 
 tuents, and slumbered at his post, had he not attend- 
 ed to the information received on the 21st of Au- 
 gust last. For it is highly proper the Public should 
 know, that this information was not obtained by the 
 Lord Provost in the light and transient manner which 
 the Letter=writer insinuates. It was given apparent- 
 ly on the best authority, in a company of Gentle- 
 men, where most of the Magistrates of the City 
 were present, and given in such a triumphant and 
 significant tone, as to occasion a spirited conversa- 
 tion at the time. — It is proper that the public should 
 likewise know, that in tins conversation the Lord 
 Provost took a much smaller part, than some of his 
 colleagues in office. 
 
 The puerilities scattered over many pages of his 
 first Letter about the Civil Magistrate's power of 
 " entering a solemn protest:" — about " his jurisdic- 
 « tion in matters of religion and morality:" — about 
 <£ his waging war:" — about " the Act of Indemnify 
 « for breaches of the peace," Sec. which are the 
 pith of the first Letter, if it has any, are too insigni- 
 ficant to require a serious answer. Pity towards 
 their Author is their appropriate recompence. 
 
 But the rudeness with which he descants on the 
 office of an Informer — the sv. - of lamenta- 
 
 tion with which he bewails the conduct, of the Lord 
 Provost's not holding back from being the Public 
 Informer, must not only excite the indignation of 
 every one who loves his country, and respects her 
 constituted authorities, but loudly demands the exe- 
 
217 
 
 cration of every honest and virtuous mind. With 
 far greater propriety, might the Pamphleteer, be he 
 a Clergyman of the Church of Scotland or not, be 
 complimented with the title of a spy* This charac- 
 ter he seems to have supported in a style of fatal 
 eminent to himself, in coming into the Pr-esbytery 
 of Glasgow, and collecting materials, which his ob- 
 tuseness of intellect prevented him from compre- 
 hending, or his disingenuity prompted him to gar- 
 ble and pervert: — Giving us reason to think that 
 he must have purloined from the depositories of the 
 Minister of St. Andrew's Church, the prototype of 
 that Gentleman's Statement to the Presbyter)*, from 
 which, if credit be due to internal evidence, (for it 
 is morally impossible that Dr. Ritchie could have 
 ultroneously intrusted him with his manuscript) 
 many parts of his publication are borrowed. The 
 man who can begin his public Ecclesiastical career 
 with a foul attack upon a venerable Professor, is well 
 fitted for acting the part of a sycophant and spy; but 
 the cause which stands in need of such infamous 
 artifice;;, is certainly desperate. So much for his wan- 
 t-on and insolent personalities. 
 
 Let us next inquire whether this Letter=writer is 
 more accurate in his representation of historical 
 facts. We have already seen, that in the virulent 
 accusations he has brought against the Lord Provost, 
 and four members of the Presbytery of Glasgow, he* 
 ryas been so unfortunate, as not in a single instance 
 to have stumbled upon truth: and we shall find that. 
 T 
 
21S 
 
 similar bad fortune follows him in his references to 
 history. It must be owned, indeed, that he has not 
 encumbered his pages with many historical facts. 
 A gerrius so fanciful and lofty, is naturally more at- 
 tached to poetry than to humble prose. Long quo- 
 tations arc accordingly given from two calebrated 
 Poems. They are works of merit, and we never read 
 them but with the highest pleasure. But they are 
 merely works of fancy, and therefore furnish no cer- 
 tain criterion of the opinion entertained by their au- 
 thors, relative to Organs in the Public Worship of God. 
 One of these authors is happily alive. Let him be 
 Consulted as a learned counsel, or impartial judge, 
 and if he pronounce it as his opinion, that the Organ 
 may, legally and constitutionally, " breathe even its 
 « lowest notes " in any Church or Chapel under the 
 jurisdiction of our National Establishment, then 
 shall we cheerfully allow the Letter-writer all the 
 weight of his authority. 
 
 Among the few references to prose authorities 
 contained in this Pamphlet, we find the three follow- 
 ing very palpable mistakes. 
 
 1. In page 42d, after stigmatizing the olTici. 
 ter of the Scottish Commi at London to the 
 
 General Assembly, 1644>, as speaking only their 
 private opinion, and thei rejudices, he 
 
 ns, " that this opinion of these Commissioners 
 « was • -. i sanctioned by the Church of Scotland, 
 " and adapted as theirs.fi" and gives this curious 
 f Vid. Letters, page 42. 
 
219 
 
 n, ff the General Assembly, in their an iwetfj 
 « : notice, either of sitting at table, cr of 
 
 a th » s at Paul's and Peter's." Is it possible 
 
 to c \ a stronger sanction of this opinion cr 
 
 these Commissioners, than the General Assembly gave 
 iii their answer to the Westminster Divines ? " We 
 « were greatly refr5shedf," &c. [The first part of 
 this answer the reader has already ' 41 of this 
 
 Statement.] The Gel . ! !y then proceeds 
 
 thus, " That ycur colleges, the seminaries of your 
 " kirk, are planted with able and sincere Professors? 
 « that the good hand of Gcd hath called and kept 
 " together, so many pious, grave, and learned Di- 
 " vines, for so long a time, and disposed their 
 " hearts to search his truth by their frequent huraili- 
 " ations, continual prayers, and learned and peace- 
 « able debates? Should not all and each one of 
 " these tr seal: to bless the Lord, and ren- 
 
 « Her both you and us confident, that he who hath 
 « .u ! the good work will perfect it, and put I 
 * cope stone upon it?" S:c. Such was the strong 
 and ample sanction given by the General Asseir. 
 to the opinion of the Commissioners at London; and 
 have not the people of Scotland, still more forcibly, 
 if possible, sanctioned this opinion, by their constant 
 and uni > m prat tice? To say, as the Letter=writef 
 has ('one, page 40, that « it is as presumable" that 
 the Westminster JUivmes f< did rot, as that they did," 
 approve of the ejection of Organs, because, « in 
 f Gen Assem. 161- \, Printed Letter. 
 
 T 2 
 
220 
 
 « their letter of the 17th May, 1644, to the Kirk of 
 " Scotland, they take no notice of it," is a mere 
 begging of the question, and of a piece with the 
 other historical remarks of this Letter=writer. 
 
 Perhaps he is the very first that has ventured to 
 presume that the Westminster Divines did not ap- 
 prove of the ejection of Organs. The celebrated 
 Dr.Burney has decidedly expressed the opinion of the 
 Westminster Divines, relative to Organs. History 
 of Music, vol. 3, page 433. " When the liturgy had 
 ** been declared, by an ordinance passed in the 
 " House of Lords, Jan. 4th, 1644, a superstitious 
 " ritual) the Directory, published by the Assembly 
 11 of Divines at Westminster, to whom the parlia- 
 " ment referred all matters concerning religion, 
 « established a new form of Divine Worship, in 
 " \v r hich no Music was allowed but Psalm=singing, 
 tf for which the following rules were enjoined. " 
 He quotes the last chapter of our Directory, and 
 adds, page 434, » In the opinion of those that 
 " were then in power, it was thought necessary, for 
 " the promotion of true religion, that no Organs 
 " should be suffered to remain in the Churches." 
 
 2. In page 44, he represents all these transactions 
 relative to the Organ, as " committed at the insti- 
 " gation of Cromwell, that arch=hypocrite." And 
 in page 75, he says, " The Organs were cast out 
 " of Peter's and Paul's about May 20th, 1644, and 
 « the Directory for Public Worship, was passed 
 << in both the honourable Houses of Parliament, be* 
 "fare the 6th January,. 1644. How then," con- 
 
QO] 
 
 tinues he, < f could any provision be made for a 
 " nonrentity? and this very circumstance, that the 
 " Directory for Public "Worship was passed before 
 " the ejection of the Organ by CromfSoell, is a coii- 
 " vincing proof, that Instrumental Music was not 
 " intended thereby to be abolished in the Churches, 
 «« for it then remained- in all its vigour in the 
 " Church of England." Cromwell, then, accord- 
 ing to this Pamphleteer, cast out, or instigated to 
 the casting out of the Organ. Cromwell did this 
 
 o o 
 
 about May 20th, 1644, and the Directory for Pub- 
 lic Worship was passed in both Houses of Parlia- 
 ment, before the 6th January, 164-4-, and prior to 
 the taking down of the Organs. These are stated, 
 as facts, and triumphantly set in opposition to the 
 Reverend Mr. Begg's reasonings in the 4th Section 
 of his Treatise. 
 
 Not a little insolence is discovered both towards 
 Mr. Begg and the Presbytery of Glasgow. Now, 
 it is most unfortunate for this Letter- Writer, that 
 we are here entitled to charge him with gross mis- 
 representation both of history and chronology. — 
 Cromwell, it is well known, was the hero of the In- 
 dependents, who plotted, and caballed, and threw 
 every possible obstacle in the way of our Directory. 
 — He was odious to a great majority of the Divines 
 at Westminster, and had it not in his power to in- 
 stigate them to pass the Directory. He never did 
 instigate any of our General Assemblies to a " sin- 
 « f gle Act,' — for he found them so intractable and 
 T 3 
 
222 
 
 hostile to him, that he seized the first opportunity 
 of breaking them up by military force. In confir- 
 mation of these facts, we might transcribe a volume 
 of authorities from Baillie's Letters alone. But the 
 following shall suffice, vol. 2, p. 'JO, May 31, 
 16-K-, " The Independents have no considerable 
 « power either in the Assembly, or Parliament, or 
 '•' the General, or Waller's Army, but in the City, 
 " and Country, and Manchester's Army, their 
 gth is great and growings yet, by the help 
 « of God and oar-friends, if once we had the As- 
 bl v- at an end, and peace, we would get them 
 << quieted. Since our Friday Fast we have made 
 :>peed in the Assembly. — Our great debate,, 
 the power of excommunication, we have laid 
 il aside, and taken in at last the Directory. Al- 
 «' ready we have past the draught of all the Pray- 
 ♦•' ers, reading of Scripture, and singing of 
 " Psalms, on the Sabbath-day, nemiue contradi- 
 ente. We trust, in one or two Sessions, to 
 
 « pass also our draught of Preaching." Page 24> 
 
 June 7, 1644-, " Our progress in the Assembly, 
 *< albeit slow, yet blessed be God, is sensible daily. 
 <f We have passed, but after a ►ate, 
 
 ** all which concerns oi Tay- 
 
 * 5 ers, reading of the "Word, singing alms, 
 
 " and Preachir.'-' Our toil is exceeding great. — 
 " We hope all, ere it be long, shall go according 
 i: to our he 
 
>,23 
 
 H selves, in the end, of their oppositions.'' 1 
 
 49, August 10th, 164.4, " We have ended our 
 " Directory for Baptism." And after mentioning 
 a mistake of Thomas Goodwin, the leader of the 
 Independents, Baillie proceeds thus, " God per- 
 n mits these gracious men to be, many ways, un- 
 " happy instruments. As yet their pride continues, 
 " but we are hopeful, the Parliament will not 
 m own their way so much as to tolerate it, if once 
 m they found themselves masters. For the time, 
 M they are loth to cast them off, and to put their 
 " party to despair, lest they desert them. The men 
 " are exceeding active in their own way. They 
 " strive to advance Cromwell for their head. 
 " They ascribe to him the victory of York, but 
 
 « most unjustly," &c. Page 73, November 21, 
 
 1644, " But that which most comforts us is the 
 " Directory. All that we have done in it is this 
 " day sent up, with a full unanimity of all. Ma- 
 
 tf ny a wearisome debate it has cost us.'' ""When 
 
 m we were at the very end of it, the Independents 
 " brought us so doubtful a disputation, that we 
 " were in great fear all should be cast in the hows, 
 " and that their opposition to the whole Directo- 
 M ry should be as great as to the Government, yet 
 " God in his mercy guided it so: that vesterdav we 
 " got them and all others so satisfied, that, nemi- 
 " ne contradicente> it was ordered all together to' 
 
 " be transmitted to the Houses." From rirst to 
 
 last, then, it is manifest, the Independents^ who a- 
 
224 
 
 lone can be supposed to be instigated by Cromwell, 
 opposed the Directory. — And Cromwell had as lit- 
 tle hand in casting out the Organs from Paul's and 
 Peter's, as any other military officer in England. 
 The Directory was not even transmitted to the 
 honourable houses' oi Parliament, until ten months 
 after this Letterxwriter roundly asserts it had been 
 pasted by them both. All the dogmatical contra- 
 diction with which the Reverend Mr. Begg is sa- 
 luted, on the 4th Section of his Treatise, is flatly- 
 opposed by the evidence of facts. How such pal- 
 pable mistakes, in history and chronology could be 
 committed, is almost inexplicable. But the man 
 who is capable of committing them, has un- 
 doubtedly .forfeited his claim to the confidence of 
 the public. 
 
 It would be easy to produce authorities equally 
 convincing, that Cromwell found the General As- 
 sembly of the Church of Scotland so intractable, and 
 hostile to him, that he ordered his soldiers to break 
 it up. Baillie describes this, in a letter to Mr. Caia- 
 my, July 1653, vol. 2, page SC9, to which the read- 
 er is referred. 
 
 It is believed, that the General Assembly of our 
 National Church was never afterwards allowed to 
 meet, during Cromwell's Protectorate. 
 
 The third and last instance of our Author's vio- 
 lating the truth of history, which we shall stop to 
 specify, is in page 51. The Act against Innovation, 
 says he, " it is evident was not made against Or- 
 
225 
 
 " gans, but against innovations, which were not 
 *< even known in the time of Episcopacy, which 
 " Organs certainly were.'" And page 77, he adds, 
 w Whoever reads that Act dispassionately, will find 
 " it carrying in its inditement, or phraseology, a 
 " refutation to all the Reverend Author's (Mr. 
 H Begg's) assertions. It is expressly said, that 
 " the innovations against which it complains, were 
 " not so much as known in the time of Episcopacy. 
 " But Organs were known in the time of Episcopa- 
 <£ cy; therefore, Organs were not the innovation 
 « thereof complained." Here again, much igno- 
 rance or perversion of historical fact is betrayed. 
 Must our Letter=writer be told, that Organs certainly 
 were not known in our National Church, from the 
 Restoration to the Revolution, the times which 
 are most probably alluded to, in the Act against 
 Innovations. Must he be told, that Organs were 
 never known in our National Church, from the Re- 
 formation downwards, either in times of Episcopacy 
 or of Presbytery? — the Chapel Royal excepted, in 
 the year 1617. — If he has the hardihood to chal- 
 lenge this fact, let him produce his evidence, and 
 we shall applaud, and thank him for the discove- 
 ry. 
 
 Before we leave this topic of history, it may be 
 proper to take notice of one principle which our 
 Letter=writer either copies from Dr. Ritchie, or in 
 which they happen to coincide: namely, that our 
 Directory, and the unanimous opinion of the West- 
 
226 
 
 •minster Divines, deserve no respect, because they are 
 the offspring cf turbulent times. " Would a mo- 
 " ment." says the Letter-writer « of usurpation — 
 " a moment of anarchy and confusion, be chosen as 
 U the fittest period for sound and deliberate legis- 
 " lation? Would it be good authority to quote a 
 " hundred and fifty years hence, some of the reso- 
 " lutions and motions, which in the beginning of 
 " the French Revolution, were carried triumphant- 
 " ly in the Convention, and which were received 
 " with enthusiasm, by the leaders of that day — and 
 " is hfair to quote an act as descriptive of the sense 
 " of the nation, when committed at the instigation 
 m of Cromwell, that archrhypocrite ?" — Is it fair 
 in the Letter=writer, if a Clergyman of the Church 
 of Scotland, to liken the Westminster Divines to the 
 French Convention? — To class the Directory, or 
 any unanimous opinion of that venerable Assembly, 
 with some of the resolutions and motions of a re- 
 volutionary infidel club? — Does he mean to insinu- 
 ate, that the Westminster Divines did not deliberate^ 
 or were not sound in their deliberation, which issued 
 in forming the Directory? — Was there less anarch]/ 
 and confusion to disturb their deliberation, when 
 employed in framing the Confession of Faith? 
 Quite the reverse. The Directory and Confession 
 it is well known, are the productions of the same 
 venerable Assembly — parts of the same grand de- 
 sign, and executed with the most consummate abi- 
 lity, erudition, and integrity, in spite of the anarchy 
 
227 
 
 and confusion of the times. Would the Letter-writ- 
 er consider it fair, to cast contempt upon our glo- 
 rious Revolution, by classing it with the French 
 Revolution? Is he prepared to maintain, that there 
 could be no sound and deliberate legislation in Bri- 
 tain, from the Revolution in 1688, down to the 
 Union in 1707, because the times were turbulent? 
 As well may he advance the paradox, that the whole 
 British Constitution, which is the envy of the world, 
 is utterly unsound, and has been formed without de- 
 liberation, because it has been reared up in spire of 
 anarchy and confusion, and stands unshaken amidst 
 nil the convulsions of the times. 
 
 Taking our leave of the Letter-writer as an his* 
 tor inn, let us consider him as a philologist. He 
 seems to have a proud consciousness of his excel- 
 lence in this capacity, for he loads his pages with 
 scraps of criticism, and sneers at Mr. Lapslie and 
 his learned coadjutors. He talks twice or thrice 
 about the best Greek writers. He is profound in 
 the etymology of psallo, telling us, in pages 29, and 
 31, that it radically signifi L y m g on a string - 
 
 « ed Musical Instrument." . j 67, that 
 
 it has a still mora i tdical meaning, viz. " first to 
 a ring, to tingle. Secondly, to sound, to quaver" 
 lie actually transcribes about a fifth part of a co- 
 lumn, or a fifteenth part of a page of Hedericus' 
 Lexicon, and overwhelms us with one quotation 
 from Euripides, which the Lexicographer had for- 
 tunately furnished to his hand. 
 
22S 
 
 Perhaps it might have sufficed as an answer to 
 all the frivolous criticism which is foisted into this 
 Pamphlet, to transcribe the following passage from 
 the Bishop of Gloucester. — " On what, then, is this 
 Author's paradox supported? On the common 
 foundation of most modern philologic systems, Ety- 
 mologies; which like fungous excrescences, spring 
 up from old Hebrew roots, mythologically cultivat- 
 ed. To be let into this new method of improving 
 barren sense, we are to understand, that in the an- 
 cient Oriental Tongues, the few primitive words 
 must needs bear many different significations, and 
 the numerous derivatives be infinitely equivocal. 
 Hence, any thing may be made of Greek'' words, " by 
 turning them to Oriental Sounds, so as to suit every 
 system past, present, and to com e. — To render this 
 familiar to the reader, by example, M. Pluche's sys- 
 tem is, that the Gentile Gods came from Agricul- 
 ture: all he wants, then, is to pick out (consonant 
 to the Greek proper names) Hebrew words which 
 signify a plough, tillage, or ears of corn; and so his 
 business is done. — Another comes, let it be Four- 
 mont, and he brings news that the Greek Go*.' i v 
 Moses or Abraham, and the same ductile sou 
 produce from i|ie same primiti , a chief, a 
 
 leader, or a true believer; and then to u 
 Nier qu'il s'agisse ici du seul Abraham, e'est etrt 
 aveugle d 1 'esprit, et (Fun aveuglemetit irremediable, 
 — A third and fourth appear upon the scene, sup- 
 pose them Le Clerc & Banier, who, prompted 
 
229 
 
 the learned "Bochart says, that the Greek Gods were 
 only Phoenician Voyagers ; and then from the ready 
 sources, flow Navigation) Ships, Negotiators,- and 
 when any one is at a loss in this game cf Crambo, 
 which can never happen, but by being duller than 
 ordinary, the kindred dialects of the Chaldee and 
 Arabic, lie always ready to make up the deficiences. 
 I have heard of an old humourist, and great dealer 
 in Etymologies, who boasted that he not only knew 
 whence words came, but whither they were going. 
 And indeed, on any system-maker's telling me his 
 scheme, I will undertake to shew, whither all his 
 old words are going; for, in strict propriety of 
 speech, they cannot be said to be coming from, but 
 going to, some old Hebrew root f ." 
 
 But to be serious. The Letter-writer has en- 
 deavoured to support his argument for the use of 
 Instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God, 
 by calling our attention to the etymology cf the 
 Greek word ^«xx« — « The Apostle," saith he, 
 " instead of using the word which simply denotes 
 " singing with the voice, employs one in which the 
 u idea of singing is uniformly incorporated or as- 
 " sociatcd with a stringe:! Musical Instrument. 
 " The word which the Holy Spirit used is the tech- 
 ( * nical term its If which the Greeks employed, 
 " when they solicited any person to play a piece of 
 M Music; — when the sacred writers confine sing- 
 u irig to the voice alone, they used «*T«; — .when nei- 
 
 f D;v. Leg book -1th, sect. 4th. 
 
 u 
 
'230 
 
 i( ther playing on a Musical Instrument was meant, 
 " nor pure singing, but a kind of recitative, or 
 < ( musical ^speaking, they used the word &/**»" — con- 
 cluding, " that all the Presbytery can contend for, is, 
 " that ^*>.a*» may be understood as commanding to 
 si sing the praises of God, either with or without 
 » instruments." But that if they should presume 
 to say, that the Apostles used the word ^«xxw to de- 
 note singing without any accompaniment, « it would 
 " be saying, that the language of Scripture is vague 
 " and inaccurate. And that the Holy Spirit allow- 
 « ed the inspired writers to make an unhappy se- 
 " lection of words to convey his sentiments to man- 
 " kind j — and that the words, as well as the ideas 
 " being inspired, the sacred writers were thereby 
 " prevented from using any word that was not 
 « fully expressive of his meaning, and free from 
 " all ambiguity." Such is a fair statement cf the 
 reasoning of this anonymous writer, upon the mean- 
 ing and use of the Greek word ±*>->*>, founded upon 
 what he says, is its acceptation ajnong the purest 
 Greek writers. 
 
 It is likely that this etymological argument was 
 compiled before the 30th of March last, when the 
 Answers of the Committee to Dr. Ritchie's State- 
 ment were given in to the Presbytery. In these 
 Answers it is observed, that the criticism of Bishop 
 King * upon the word 4*^-, is puerile and incon- 
 
 * Statement, page 1 1 9. 
 
251 
 
 elusive. — The Pamphleteer feeling the force of this 
 objection to Bishop King's criticism, from whom, 
 and from Hedericus and Parkhursfs Lexicon, he 
 seems to have borrowed all his knowledge of ety- 
 mology, renews the argument in his remarks tin the 
 Reverend Mr. Begg's Treatise, interlarding it with 
 insolent abuse against the members of the Presby- 
 terv of Glasgow, affirming, in the most dogmatic 
 manner, that " the word from which v^x* is evl- 
 *« dently derived, signifies^ first to ring, to tingle *, 
 m 1 Sam. iii. Ill 2 Kings xxi. 1C. Jerem. xix. 3. 
 " Secondly, to sounds to quaver." And u that 
 < s whether it ever afterwards, in the progress of lan- 
 " g U3 g e > carne to mean otherwise, or whether it was 
 w used originally dirierent from that signification, 
 « is of no consequence." This assertion must 
 appear wonderful indeed, to those who have at- 
 tended to the progress of artificial language. He 
 himself allows that words are constantly changing 
 their signification. Of course he abandons the ar- 
 gument from etymology with which he has eked 
 out so many of his pages — by declaring that " the 
 " point at issue is in what sense ^*\*» was used 
 " when the New Testament was written" 
 
 We have no objection whatever that the accep- 
 
 * The Septuagfnt translate the Hebrew in the passages quot- 
 ed, by the Greek word *x tu > one °& tne most general words to 
 express mere sound in the Greek tongue, and therefore giving no 
 c ountenance to the assertion of the Letter-writer, that ^»kk» 
 means playing upon a Musical Instrument. 
 
 U 2 
 
232 
 
 ration in winch +■*■»*» was taken, when the New 
 Testament was written, shall be the standard by 
 which we are to determine the point at issue, and 
 in doing this, that we shall confine ourselves to 
 the period immediately " before, during the time, 
 " and after the days of our Lord and his disciples/' 
 But when the Letter- writer talks of the purest Greek 
 v/riters, we must be explicitly understood as restrict- 
 ing the investigation to the Greek of the Septuagint — 
 of the New Testament — of the Fathers of the primi- 
 tive Church, and if he pleaseth, of Josephus. It is 
 by their writings alone, that the use and the meaning 
 of this word can be legitimately ascertained. It will 
 be found in the sequel, that the purest Greek writers 
 of antiquity are perfectly in unison with the Sacred 
 Classics. 
 
 With respect to the use and meaning of the word 
 ■4,x\xa, during the time of our Lord and his Apostles, 
 we affirm, that the anonymous Letter- writer has 
 completely misrepresented it. Ke has either never 
 studied the language of the New Testament, or wil- 
 fully perverted it. He may be original, for aught 
 we know, in his opinion, that the sacred writers uni- 
 formly and invariably mean by ^*^«, psalms, some- 
 thing that is sung with " the accompaniment of an 
 « instrument," — -$■*<, songs, something that is sung 
 «« with the human voice alone," — and V""» hymns, 
 " a kind of recitative or musical speaking." — Chry- 
 sostom, Augustine, Jerome, Estius, Erasmus, Calvin, 
 Bezaj and Macknightj all the most eminent com- 
 
!33 
 
 mentators to which we have had access, never once 
 imagine that such an idea entered into the acinus 
 of the inspired writers of the New Testament. 
 These commentators place the distinction between 
 psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, more in the 
 manner of their being composed, and in the matter 
 they contain, than in the mode of performing them. 
 Estius, as quoted by Macknight says, that " +xi/i*r m m 
 " profane authors, denote songs in general, es- 
 " pecially those which were sung with the harp, 
 «< and <^»«, those which were sung in honour of the 
 «' gods." " Beza thinks ^*v<"> psalms, in this pas- 
 sage, denote those poetical compositions in which 
 David uttered his own complaints, and prayers, also 
 those metrical historical narrations by which he in- 
 structed the people j and that «/*»«» hymns, are his 
 other compositions, in which he celebrated the praises 
 of God." — " By *1 ■< srvtuMaTJxai," say s Estius, " are 
 " meant those songs which were dictated to spiritual 
 " men by the Holy Ghost, as alluded to in 1 Coiin. 
 " xiv. 26. which after being uttered in the Church, 
 " were committed to memory, or perhaps to writ- 
 M ing, by others: — of this kind were the sones 
 " of Elizabeth, of Mary, and of Zacharias, re- 
 " corded in the 1st chapter of Luke's Gospel." 
 And the same author is of opinion, that when the 
 Apostle Paul in his advice to the Epliesians, recom- 
 mended to them to -speak in psalms, and hymns, 
 and spiritual songs, he recommended to them par- 
 ticularly to sing such compositions, in their private 
 U 3 
 
234 
 
 houses upon festival occasions. The propriety of 
 which comment will be discerned, from attending to 
 the context in the 18th verse. 
 
 Dr. Ivlackmght paraphrases Eph. v. 19. as fol- 
 lows : « Instead of singing lewd songs like the hea- 
 c thens in the festivals of their Gods, repeat to one 
 < ; another in the seasons of your joy, the Psalms of 
 " David, and those hymns and spiritual songs. 
 " which are dictated to you by the Spirit, singing 
 " them, and making melody in your heart, by ac- 
 <{ cornpanying them with devout affections, a me- 
 " lodv hiost pleasing to the Lord." 
 
 Vv'iien, therefore, the Letter-writer so confidently 
 asserts, that three of the passages quoted by the 
 Rev. Mr. Begg enjoin Christians to praise God by 
 playing on a stringed instrument, and so triumphant- 
 ly dwells, m \ is reasoning on Ephesians v. 19. upon 
 the panicle *«;, he should, in the first place, have 
 noticed, that the injunction both in Ephesians and 
 James, is given to Christians in a private capacity; 
 and secondly, he should have remembered that the 
 Apostle to the Ephesians, adds, <» w xa f k 
 
 w«x&e is used by none of the New Testament 
 writers, except by Paul and James. In the writings 
 of Paul it occurs only three times, Rom. xv. 9. 
 1 Corin. xi.v. 15. and Ephesians v. 19. The fust of 
 these passages is an exact quotation from Psalm xviii. 
 4 9. and therefore cannot be adduced as an authority 
 from a New Testament writer. 
 
 The other two passages are evidently figurative* 
 
235 
 
 and totally incapable of a literal construction, in 
 the Epistle of James, ^w* is only once employed, 
 viz. chap. v. 13. and this is the only passage of the 
 New Testament, in which it is possible to under- 
 stand this word in a literal sense. Here, however, 
 it is applied as an advice to individual Christians, in 
 a private capacity, and cannot be extended to com- 
 panies of Christians, met together for the Public- 
 Worship of God. Granting, therefore, this Letter- 
 writer all that he can ask; even allowing him, for 
 argument's sake, that it is " the technical term 
 i' itself which the Greeks employed when they so- 
 il licited any person to play a piece of Music," his 
 argument from this passage will amount to no more 
 than this, that a private individual Christian, when 
 alone, and in good spirits, may play a tune to him- 
 self upon an instrument, whether stringed or not. 
 But as we shall show immediately from the Sacred 
 Classics, that the Apostles attached a very different 
 meaning to ^**x«, it is highly probable from the 
 antithesis in this passage, betwixt i*x*tTQ and «t>»w 
 til"*"* that St. James, in particular, meant singing 
 with the voice alone. For, as praying is the ex- 
 pression of the voice, making known the desires of 
 the soul to God, so, in like manner, singing with the 
 voice, is by far the most ancient, and the most natural 
 method of expressing the joy oi die heart. 
 
 It is curious to observe, with whrrt dexterity the 
 Pamphleteer hath avoided taking notice of the cele- 
 brated passage in Cofossians Hi. 13. where St. Paul 
 
236 
 
 more immediately, and more distinctly, refers to the 
 Public Worship of God. There St. Paul useth 
 the same terms for the compositions to be sun^, 
 as he had done in the passages already con- 
 sidered, viz. -^xkuoi, ifitrtH and ?* xt **t'jv.%rtx,a.i, but whert 
 he speaks of the mode in which they were to be 
 sung by Christians in Public "Worship, he expressly 
 uses the term «$■•*«■ Now, St. Paul is surely the 
 best commentator upon his own language. In this 
 passage he clearly and significantly useth the very 
 expiession which the Letter-writer affirms was em- 
 ployed by " the sacred writers, when they confined 
 " singing to the voice alone." The Letter-writer 
 craftily overlooks this passage. He only notices it 
 in an indirect manner in his 35th page, when he in- 
 troduces an obscure and far-fetched argument from 
 the practice of the Quakers. 
 
 In addition to what has been said, let us now at- 
 tend to those particular instances of praise, which 
 -are recorded respecting our Lord, his Disciples, and 
 Christians of the Apostolic times. Thus, in St. 
 Matt. xxvi. 30. the Greek word •/•w«»r« is used, 
 when our blessed Lord sung a hymn with his dis- 
 c'ples, after he had instituted the holy ordinance of 
 the Supper. In Luke xix. 37. when our Saviour 
 entered triumphantly into Jerusalem, it is said, 
 
 9Jf|. VTIi «TKI T T>-> 9flf T.v ^OL$ 1U1 X" 1 ' 1 . V T ' S U '* IV T " V ®*' V ?*""'("'" 
 
 ymk*. Here the word *«*■ laudo, to praise, is em- 
 ployed. The Evangelist adds in the 38th. verse, 
 fc'r-»n fj saying, that is, reciting, or singing,, " bless- 
 
237 
 
 Ci ed be the king that cometh," &€« a passage from 
 Psalm cxviii. 26. which, according to the etymolo- 
 gy of the Letter- writer, should have been sung with 
 the accompaniment of an Instrument. Here it is 
 evident, that it was spoken or sung by the disci- 
 ples, without any Instrument whatever. — The next 
 passage is in Luke ii. 13. where the angels an- 
 nounce the birth of our Saviour to the shepherds; 
 the words in the original area'" *>***" «"» &«»,*** x*>*1»», 
 
 " praising God, and saying. " And in the 
 
 remarkable passage, Acts ii. 47, which our 
 Letter-writer mangles and misunderstands, insi- 
 nuating, that the many thousands there mentioned 
 as added to the Church, continued constantly in die 
 temple, and must therefore have sung their praises 
 with the accompaniment of Instrumental Music, 
 the words are *<»<*»«* *•• s.s», « praising God." 
 
 "We find in Acts xvi. 25 that when Paul and Silas 
 praised God in prison, the words used by the Evan- 
 gelist arc, TlivX } > xi ?:>.a.s voff^^tu.iv'.i luv.vv vvS.t*, <t and 
 
 " sang praises to God." In short, from all the pas- 
 sages in the New Testament which speak of the 
 different acts of praise, performed by the disciples, 
 or by Christians of the Apostolic times, the words 
 w^vev, xi-j u, u-.^j. are used indiscriminately, and they 
 are descriptive of the singing of the Psalms of Da- 
 vid with the human voice alone. Add to all this, 
 the passage in 1 Cor. xiv. 15. an allusion to what is 
 contained in the xlvii. Psalm 4^ AATi •"»•««, which 
 
238 
 
 St Je-orre translates, Ccnite Deo, canitc; regi no- 
 stro, ca te ; canite erudite. 
 
 We might here add a passage in Hebrews ii. 12. 
 the words are, « t**° «** *i**ak V» ~" <rr. in the midst of 
 " th • Church will I sing praise unto thee." — A- 
 greeably to the rule laid down, we proceed to the 
 acceptation of ^**x* in the period after the days of 
 our Lord and his disciples. 
 
 The writers of the four first centuries after Christ, 
 who may at least be presumed to know the meaning 
 of the words of their native language at the time 
 in which they wrote, speak in the following manner. 
 Pliny in his letter to Trajan says, Carmen Christo, 
 quasi Deo canere. He does not use the expres- 
 sion, canere fidibus, but simply canere." Tertul- 
 lian, who wrote in the second century, speaking of 
 the mode of Worship practised by the primitive 
 Christians, expresses himself thus *: " Scripturale- 
 guntur, psalm i canuntur." And the same Author, 
 •when inveighing against the marriage of a believing 
 woman with an infidel, exclaims, " Quid mar it us 
 " suus illi, vel mariio quid, ilia cantabit, sonant in- 
 " tcr duos psalmi, et hymni, et mutuo provocant; 
 " quis melius Deo suo canit." Pliny and Tertul- 
 lian therefore apply the word cano, to express the 
 singing of Psalms by Christians, and we know that 
 cano, in the Latin language, is never used but to de- 
 note singing with the voice alone j it is the appro- 
 
 * Tcr. de Anima, chap. iii. 
 
239 
 
 priate technical term of that language for the Mu- 
 sic of the human voice, equally expressive, and 
 equally marked in the mind of a Reman, as the 
 term singing is, in the English language, denoting 
 the melody of the human voice *. But Tertullian 
 was well acquainted with the writings of the New 
 Testament. He was a man of extensive learning, and 
 highly admired for his critical knowledge in the 
 Latin tongue. Had the interpretation of this Pamph- 
 leteer been just, it is impossible to conceive, that 
 this profound scholar would have used a Latin word 
 which is appropriated to singing with the voice a- 
 lone, to explain a phrase in the writings of the Apos- 
 tles Paul and James, which the Pamphleteer inter- 
 prets playing on an Instrument. Before this anony- 
 mous Letter-writer ventured to quote New Testa- 
 ment authority in behalf of the meaning which he 
 attaches to the Greek word ^^> he should h 
 consulted St. Jerome, who was a perfect master 
 of Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, and who translated 
 the Old Testament into Latin. Every person know.;, 
 
 * The " singing cf Psalms together in the Congregation," is 
 the authoritative phrase employed in oar Directory. And it is 
 pleasant to observe, th it the Scotch method of Binging the prais- 
 es of God in Public Worahip, Ivy metr'i al i jan as cur- 
 ly as the time of the Waldenses in the year TJ10; was imitated by 
 the followers of ' i John Huss, of Jero;>;e of Prague, an J 
 adopted by Luther and Calvin, and likewise by the Protestants 
 of the Church of England in the time of Edward VI. and Queen 
 Elizabeth, and it is hoped will continue to the late-t ages, to br 
 the only practice authorized by the Church of Scotland. 
 
240 
 
 that the passage quoted by the Pamphleteer from 
 Romans xv. 9. is taken from Psalm xviii. 49. 
 The words in the Septuagint are, k*< to dmJkm-i » u 
 ijkx«; — in the New Testament they are literally the 
 same. St. Jerome translates them by the Latin 
 words, " nomini tuo ca?itabo" a most decisive 
 proof, that this Latin Father considered 4*J*«» both 
 in the Septuagint, and in the New Testament, as 
 denoting singing with the human voice. 
 
 We shall now, in like manner, state the opinions 
 of the Greek Fathers upon the meaning of the word 
 
 Theodoret, who nourished in the beginning of the 
 fourth century, in his commentary on Ephes. v. 19. 
 thus expresseth himself: t*i *«f&« ^«ah b p* a<«»«» w 
 
 /X.vrTxn xiww, tth>.ct vcti ro\ v.v v «f T'/jw rav Xfy^iKwv narxvo^civ dtt- 
 
 yttfuv. if Cordc canity qui non solum linguam movct y 
 sed etiam meniem eaxitat ad eontnt, quce dicitntur, 
 tntelligentiam." 
 
 Chrysostom say's, k*» xifrixwrw ' v *pr*inf**99tu*i 
 
 ~r j c-Sptvcjv, Sv.rTij to ivrt T'.vro T't :i», l^ttl J 1(C) IS Opiji 3. ) 
 
 poteris in offlcina sed cms et laboranspsaUere, Et* 
 si miles sis, ant sedeas injudicio, paler is hoc ip- 
 sumjacerc f ." 
 
 Basil on the 29th Psalm, says 3 on *t,c r« r M *7« ^ - 
 
 ' + From the profrfis'ons, employments, and situations of the 
 pprsons, by wliom Chrysostom illus.tr; tea his idea, he must ui der- 
 stand \i<>>o< !(, signify singing 1 with the. voice alone, otherwise 
 his advice must be absurd. 
 
241 
 
 ■finrrtc tk ^a\fiu pnxccra, ou\->s -^xWtt ru nufiUj akK J 'orot a*» x.*f>~ 
 tix; xa$xpx; avxrepLVUtri <ra.g slxk,unlix$' xk o'lot ew«v "arm eu^oth; 
 t»> wast facv <r<<ot»5ci'v»jv, Ivroi itnmvTat '•pxkxc, tj Q.-a T»i( ovQuots TOlf 
 xnvfjiXTiKoiq ao.utljvrui a.K'\o\j1ou*rt;. Non si quis pSalmi 
 
 verba ore prqferat, Kic mox Domino psallit : scd 
 quicunque corde puro enunciat psalmodiam , et qui- 
 cujique sunt sancti justiciam erg a Deum servantes, 
 hi demum Domino psallere rhythmis, spiritualibus 
 concinno et consentaneo ordiae poterunl." 
 
 Theophylact says, *p«ajis« iv t» xapJis, tjvt trt fitr* w 
 
 <F/« ^xkxa. In corde, hoc est, cum inteUigentia t el 
 corde non vagabundo. Qui enim cum attentione 
 canity Me corde psallit." 
 
 And the Council of Laodicea in the year 313, has 
 the following words. n^< t», p* h» *\m r»v «a*o»»ov 
 
 •^xXrsov, TUi¥ iti <r;v XftSvia etvatxivovTuM, axt airo o^^af i£«X- 
 X?vtwv, lltpovc Ttfxt -yxWeti ev rn ix.y.7r,sia.- Ouod 71011 OpO)'- 
 
 tet prater Canonicos Cantores, qui ambonem ascen • 
 dimty ex codicc canunt, alias quoslibet canere in 
 Ecclesia. 
 
 From these quotations from the Greek Fathers, 
 the three first of whom flourished in the fourth cen- 
 tury, men of great erudition, well skilled in the 
 phraseology and language of Scripture, perfectly 
 masters of the Greek tongue, which was then writ- 
 ten and spoken with purity in the countries where 
 they resided, men too, who, for conscience' sake, 
 would not handle the word of God deceitfully, it 
 is evident that the Greek word ^«AXa», signified in 
 their time, singing with the voice alone. Had they 
 X 
 
242 
 
 conceived otherwise, we may be assured, that they 
 had both sufficient firmness of mind and influence 
 iu the Church, to have induced their hearers to have 
 used the Harp and Psaltery in the Public Worship 
 of God. 
 
 As to the assertion of the Pamphleteer, in his 
 .°)2d page, that if we consider ^xx«, as meaning any 
 thing else but playing with an instrument, we are 
 i{ saying, that the language of Scripture is vague 
 " and inaccurate, making the inspired writers mean 
 u one thing, while they wrote another; then scrip- 
 " ture might be made to speak any thing, or all 
 " things." The world will judge whether our Let- 
 ter-writer has here preserved that respect which is 
 due to the holy Scriptures. We " say," that when 
 God condescended, by his Holy Spirit to reveal his 
 will to man, he condescended also to use the lan- 
 guage of mortals — he made no new alphabet — he 
 made no new words — he said to none of his Pro- 
 phets, Go, give the etymology of old words — The 
 language employed by the holy men he inspired, was 
 the language then in common use in their country! 
 and could not, without a miracle, be divested of the 
 signification attached to it by their countrymen at 
 the time. 
 
 We have now shewn that the argument which 
 the Letter-writer founds upon the etymology ot 
 4*kKa, is completely fallacious. But supposing his 
 argument to be good, even supposing, that during 
 the temple-service, ^*>>.» meant playing on an in- 
 
243 
 
 strument, — does he not know, that words often 
 change their original signification? Numerous ex- 
 amples of this will be found, both in sacred and 
 profane writers. Even allowing that the very words 
 of the Scriptures were inspired, as well as the ideas, 
 we maintain, that the Holy Spirit overruled the 
 minds of the inspired writers, to employ the words 
 in common use at the time. Thus the word »?*f*rt»ir, 
 or v.c:r;Ttvu, ia some passages of Scripture, seems to 
 imply little more than a mere Poet or Psalmodist, 
 who sung some extempore verses to the sound of an 
 instrument f . Thus, in 1 Sam. x. 5. « And thou 
 " shalt prophesy," (*fo^»«*«< is the word in the Sep- 
 tuagint), meaning, to sing verses. — In the time of 
 Jeremiah, •xo^ji^ had come to signify the predic- 
 tion of future events, which may, perhaps, be the 
 true etymological meaning. Thus, chap. xx. I. 
 
 7 v'lpt/u.i'iv ?T(>'.<pKTiua.Toc Tdv; \cy:u; rstrevs. But in the time 
 
 of the Apostles, it is applied to teachers who excel- 
 led in the knowledge of sacred things, and who 
 taught them to others, Mark vi. 4. w-i wx *?-< irpofvrns 
 mrqu* And, last of all, in 1 Cor. xiv. 5. this word sig- 
 nifies, publicly exhorting in the church — t*a*Ku o= h% 
 
 f Nam quis ignorat muslcen, ut de hac primum loquar; tantum 
 jam antiquis temporibus non studii modo, verum etiam venera- 
 tionis habuisse,ut iidem musici, et vatcs, et sapientes indicarentur? 
 
 Who is ignorant, says Ouintilian, that Music in ancient times, 
 was so much cultivated, and held in such veneration, that mu- 
 sicians were called by the names of prophets and sages? 
 
 In A. lib. 1. cap. W, 
 
 X 2 
 
244 
 
 Thus, it is evident, that artificial language is con- 
 stantly undergoing a change. The wor<L«y» * « w , in 
 scripture, has no less than four different significa- 
 tions, yet the writers of these scriptures were inspir- 
 ed. 
 
 We might illustrate the same proposition, by in- 
 stances from the profane Greek writers. Thus, 
 Cfmm, for the most part, in the Classics, signifies the 
 singing the praises of their Gods, but in Plato, it 
 signifies to undervalue, to dispraise \. 
 
 In like manner, the word ^<t6d^ originally signi- 
 fies a due reward for virtue and good actions, but 
 in Herodotus, it is used for the punishment of wick- 
 edness, thus 'cvroi fit* Tun™ {*.i<r$»* t\a€ov. Herod. Gr. 
 8. 497. 1. 38. And in Hebrews ii. 2. it is used 
 
 in the Same Sense, Kdi Tor/raxo* t\aGt* tviixev /LiirGaroioatav, 
 
 Why, then, does this would-be Critic attempt to 
 amuse us with a shadow of literature, calculated on- 
 Jy to mislead the unwary ? At the very first glance 
 of his pamphlet, we saw the futility of his criticism, 
 and were disposed to despise it, knowing well, that 
 a man who could be so inaccurate, and superficial 
 in his researches into historical record, as not to per- 
 ceive the typographical error in the printed Letters 
 of the Westminster Divines, giving 1644 for 1645, 
 but even to reason from that error, would not be at 
 pains sufficiently to investigate the etymological 
 meaning of a Greek word. 
 
 We rest perfectly satisfied, that the translation of 
 the sacred Scriptures now in use, and sanctioned 
 | Plat. Reap. 1.8. Llff, 
 
245 
 
 both by the Church and the State, is a true and ac 
 curate translation, compared and revised by men who 
 perfectly understood the language and phraseology 
 of the sacred Scriptures, and who would not, for 
 conscience' sake, deceitfully handle the word of 
 God. 
 
 The world will, probably, now be disposed to ap- 
 ply to this Pamphleteer, the same language which 
 he has applied to Mr. Begg's Treatise. His " crude 
 " and superficial reasonings, can have no effeet up- 
 " on minds trained to habits of critical investigation*, 
 " and close deduction." Guided by a sincere love for 
 truth, and desirous to promote the glory of God, and 
 the interest of the Church of Scotland, let us " offer 
 " the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, 
 " the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to his name/* 
 Heb. xiii. 15. 
 
 Dismissing the Philology of this Pamphleteer, 
 let us attend a little to the specimen he has given 
 us of Theology. Perhaps his genius and researches 
 may point that way, as they S' o em not to have taken 
 any other distinct direction. But, alas! his Theolo- 
 gy is but sparingly dealt out, " it seems net to be de- 
 " rived from Locke nor Lyttleton, nor Luther nor 
 " Calvin," and what is worst of all, it seems not to be 
 derived from the Holy Bible. We are unwilling to 
 say any thing that might be deemed acrimonious, 
 but until we know more of the theological tenets 
 of the Letter writer truth extorts this declaration 
 from us, that he speaks liker a devotee of Rome, 
 X 3 
 
246 
 
 than an Eleveoi Glasgow College*, and a Clergy- 
 man of the Church of Scotland. We shall confine* 
 our observations to what he inculcates relative to 
 the devotions 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, page 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 sluggish. The learned, 
 fi as well as the ignorant, need something to rouse 
 < c the apathy of their minds to religious exercises ; 
 " and hence the necessity of devising external rites 
 (i and ceremonies, in order that the soul may be 
 « come at, through the medium of the senses."-— 
 ts The moral effects of all the fine arts, are to human- 
 « ize and improve manr, and whatever can tend 
 « to excite virtuous emotions, or deepen religious 
 " impressions, instead of being rejected, should, 
 U by every good man, be warmly adopted. Were 
 ** the Organ, with the arts of Sculpture, introduced 
 ■ i( into pur Churches, they might produce astonish- 
 " tng effects on the ignorant, who are the multitude ; 
 C( and who, in general, in every age and country, 
 '■<■ are only instructed in the solemnities of religion 
 
 • The Inscription upon one of the Copies of this Pamphlet, 
 Svhicn we have seen, says, that the Author is a grateful Ehve of a 
 learned and wortfty Prflfets'orof this University. 
 
247 
 
 *< through the sense?.'' — We know not whether the 
 Public may have patience to read, but we have not 
 patience to transcribe any more of this very dan- 
 gerous, and we must add, popish delusion. If « the 
 " spirituality of the gospel forbid not this vain de- 
 " ceit," then, every man may, both in divinity and 
 morality, do that which is right in his own eyes. 
 The Papist, according to this mode of reasoning, 
 has better means of being instructed in the solemni- 
 ties of religion than the Protestant, for he enjoys all 
 the benefit of Organs, Pictures, Images, &c. Ac- 
 cording to this mode of reasoning, the people of 
 England must be more intelligent in divinity, and 
 purer in their morals, than the inhabitants of Scot- 
 land, for " the dormant feelings of their souls are 
 " roused with irresistible force, by the grand and 
 41 solemn symphonies of the Organ." According to 
 this Letter-writer's plan, our blessed Lord's com- 
 mand to his Apostles, to teach all nations, or first to 
 enlighten the understandings of men, would be su- 
 perfluous. The work of the Spirit of God upon 
 the soul of man might then be accomplished by hu- 
 man means, or resolved into " the moral effects of the 
 « 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 rather be 
 guided in their devotions, by the rhapsody of Bruy- 
 ere, than by the writings of St. Paul ? 
 
'24$ 
 
 Tn his commentary on the beatific vision of John 
 hi the Revelation, the Letter=writer seems to indi- 
 cate, that heaven is a school in which the fine arts 
 are cultivated, and furnish no inconsiderable portion 
 of the happiness of the Redeemed. " The Redeem- 
 " ed," page 33, says he, " are represented as hav- 
 " ing the Harps of God in their hands, and sing-* 
 *< ing the song of Moses and the Lamb. Is it law- 
 rt July then, in the immediate presence of Infinite 
 •' Purity himself, for the happy, in their hallelujahs, 
 " to use harps? — Can any thing used, in the Wor- 
 " ship of heaven by the Church triumphanty be 
 " sinfuly in the Church militant?" Can this indeed, 
 be the view that St. John has given us of the Re- 
 deemed, and their celestial employment, in the Book 
 of Revelation? How different from the doctrine he 
 has taught in his 1 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 unspeakable words, which it is not law- 
 " ful for a man to utter." — This is the infallible re- 
 port that Paul has brought us of paradise, after hav- 
 ing been caught up into it. The reader will judge 
 
249 
 
 whether the paradise of the Apostles has been justly 
 represented by this anonymous Pamphleteer. 
 
 It is perfectly unnecessary to dwell any longer 
 upon this Pamphlet. As to his sneer at the manner 
 in which the Presbytery arranged their arguments, 
 which he seasons with a quotation from D'Alem- 
 bert — that arrangment was adopted by Dr. Ritchie, 
 in his speech, prior to a single word being uttered 
 by the Presbytery on the subject. — When he insi- 
 nuates, that the Presbytery hath pronounced In- 
 strumental Music, in its very nature, profane and 
 sinful — the answer is, that the Presbytery never 
 uttered a syllable, reflecting on, or condemning the 
 use of it, in any Church of Christ, but in their own. 
 — When he asserts that Organs were preserved not 
 only by a Melancthon and a Zuinglius, but by Cal- 
 vinists 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 u- 
 niform practice. — We admire them — we retain them 
 
 * " The only amusement," say* Dr. Durney " which Calvin 
 seems ever to have allowed his followers, was Psalmody, and that 
 of the most unmeaning and monotonous kind; without harmony, 
 variety of accent, rythm, and most of the Constituent parts of 
 mere melody. Not a Musical Instrument was suffered within 
 the walls of Geneva for more than a hundred years after the Re- 
 formation; and all Music, except this metrical psalmody, wa$ 
 proscribed, wherever the Doctrines of this Reformer were receiv- 
 ed." Hist. Music > vol. 3, fage 4. 
 
250 
 
 — we sing them with the understandings 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 question of too muck 
 magnitude and delicacy for him to determine. 
 
 He has talked with petulance about strange in- 
 novations in the Wynd Church of Glasgow, and 
 particularly of a pitch-pipe. At present, there is 
 not, and we are authorized to say, that there never 
 was a pitch-pipe used in that Church in the Public 
 Worship of God. He hath rashly, and injudicious- 
 ly, introduced the Catholic Question, which at pre- 
 sent agitates the public mind ; from what motive he 
 has done so, his own conscience can best inform him. 
 Perhaps the same motive which prompted him to 
 become an advocate for Organs, may have induced 
 him to become a champion in the cause of Po- 
 pery. 
 
 Finally, he seems not a little to countenance the 
 method of translating and interpreting scripture, 
 adopted by Socinians, and those who would be wise 
 above what is written — arrogantly condemning the 
 translation presently in use in our land, sanctioned 
 by the King, and authorized by the Church, — vain- 
 ly pretending to give more accurately 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 vcne- 
 
25! 
 
 liable Professor of Theology in this University hath 
 shewn, in the most convincing manner, that Scrip- 
 ture is the best interpreter of Scripture ; and that 
 such men as Dr. Geddes, by inveigling the unwary 
 into critical disquisitions about the meaning of the 
 Griginal, 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 ardent 
 friendship to Dr. Ritchie, when, in the spirit of 
 knightrerrantry, he sallied forth as the champion of 
 the Organ. But alas! 
 
 Non tali auxilio nee defensoribus istis, 
 Tempus 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 espous- 
 ed. 
 
 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 ordi- 
 nance, an advertisement appeared in the Glasgow 
 Courier, announcing this publication for Monday fol- 
 lowing, and giving the title page of it at length. The 
 Lord Provost of Glasgow, when coming from Pub- 
 lic Worship, and going home to the devotions of 
 
2J2 
 
 the family and closet, was held up to public view, 
 as, 
 
 " Playing 6uch fantastic tricks before high Heaven, 
 " As make the angels weep. " 
 
 Habitually influenced as that Gentleman is, by just 
 views of religion, it is scarcely to be conceived, but 
 that Ins mind, on that solemn occasion, would be 
 painfully disturbed, by so rude and unchristian a 
 provocation. The curiosity of the citizens was wound 
 up to the highest pitch. Conjectures about the Au- 
 thor, and the contents of these Letters, were set afloat, 
 — party=spirit was roused, and the minds of intending 
 Communicants were withdrawn from self-examina- 
 tion, from Christian charity, and from the contempla- 
 tion of the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. — The 
 Lord's day was diverted too much from its proper pur- 
 pose, and a Communion Sabbath, turned into a day of 
 suspense 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 us. — 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 words 
 << of his mouth were smoother than butter, but 
 M war was in his heart: his words were softer than 
 «< oil, yet were they drawn swords *." 
 
 * Psalm 1y. 20, 21. 
 
253 
 
 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 Gospel 
 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 res- 
 pectful to the Public to subscribe their names. 
 
 William- Porteous. 
 John Burns. 
 ' James Lap«lie. 
 Robert RenniE. 
 John Pollock. 
 James M Lean. 
 
 In the Note, page 210, where the Greek and 
 Armenian Churches are mentioned, as not using 
 Instrumental Music we ought likewise 10 hr.ve ad- 
 ded 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. 
 
2.54 
 
 ^1P-PEJ¥JDIX. 
 
 Taken from the Directory for the Public Worship 
 
 if God. 
 
 Of Singing of Psalms. 
 
 IT is the duty of Christians to praise God, pub- 
 licly, by singing of Psalms together in the congre- 
 gation, and also privately in the family. 
 
 In singing of Psalms, the voice is to be tunably 
 and gravely ordered : but the chief care must be to 
 sing with understanding, and with grace in the heart, 
 making melody unto the Lord. 
 
 That the whole Congregation may join herein, 
 every one that can read is to have a Psalm-book ; 
 and all others, not disabled by age or otherwise, 
 are to be exhorted to learn to read. But for the 
 present, where many in the Congregation cannot 
 read, it is convenient that the Minister, or some o- 
 ther lit person appointed by him and the other rul- 
 ing officers, do read the Psalm, line by line, before 
 the singing thereof. 
 
 Act of the General Assembly of the Kirk of Scot- 
 land) for the establishing and putting in execu- 
 tion of the Directory for the Public Worship of 
 
 God. 
 
 Edinburgh, February 3, 1645, Sess. 10. 
 
 ., The General Assembly, having most seriously 
 
25$ 
 
 considered, revised, and examined the Directory, 
 afore-mentioned, after several public readings of it, 
 after much deliberation, both publicly and in pri- 
 vate committees, after full liberty given to all to 
 object against it, and earnest invitations of all who 
 have any scruples about it, to make known the 
 same, that they might be satisfied, doth unanimous- 
 ly, and without a contrary voice, agree to, and ap- 
 prove the following Directory, in all the heads 
 thereof, together with the Preface set before it: 
 and doth require, decern, and ordain, That accord- 
 ing to the plain tenor and meaning thereof, and the 
 intent of the Preface, it be carefully and uniform- 
 ly observed and practised by all the Ministers and 
 others within this kingdom whom it doth concern ; 
 which practice shall be begun, upon intimation 
 given, to the several Presbyteries from the Commis- 
 sioners of this General Assembly who shall also take 
 special care for timeous printing of this Directory, 
 that a printed copy of it be provided and kept for 
 the use of every kirk in this kingdom-, also, that 
 each Presbytery have a printed copy thereof for 
 their use, and take special notice of the observation 
 or neglect thereof in every Congregation within their 
 bounds, and make known the same to the Provin- 
 cial or General Assembly, as there shall be cause. 
 
 Confession of Faith. — Chap. XXI. 
 V. The reading of the scriptures v/ith godly fear ; 
 the sound preaching and conscionabh hearing of 
 
 y 2 
 
x>5 
 
 the word, in obedience unto God, with understand- 
 
 , faith, and reverence; singing of Psalms with 
 
 2 in the heart; as also, the due administration 
 
 and worthy receiving of the sacraments instituted 
 
 by Christ; are ail parts of the ordinary religious 
 
 of God: besides religious oaths and vows, 
 
 solemn fastings and thanksgivings upon special 
 
 occasions, which are, in their several times and 
 
 seasons, to be used in an holy and religious man- 
 
 jier. 
 
 Confession of Faith. Chap. XXIII. 
 Of the Civil Magistrate. 
 
 I. God, the supreme Lord and King of all the world, 
 hath ordained civil magistrates to be under him over 
 the people, for hi sown glory, and the public good; and 
 
 is end, hath armed them with the power of the 
 ~d, for the defence and encouragement of them 
 that are good, and for the punishment of evil-doers. 
 
 II. It is lawful for Christians to accept and exe- 
 cute the office of a magistrate, when called thereun- 
 to: in the managing whereof, as they ought espe- 
 cially to maintain piety, justice, and peace, accord- 
 
 rholesome laws of each commonwealth; 
 y may lawfully now under the 
 U upon just and necessary 
 • 
 
 HI. The civil magistrate may not assume to him- 
 self the administration of the word and sacraments, 
 I he power of the keys of the kingdom of hea- 
 
f 3 - 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 sent 
 
 IV. 
 
 I 
 
 ■ 
 
 ■ 
 
 - 
 
 I 
 
 *n concerning ike 
 
 ■ 
 ■ 
 
25 S 
 
 ii onai Church, the due observation of the Directory 
 for the Public Worship of God, approven by the 
 General Assembly, held in the year 164-5, Sess. 10. 
 
 Act against Innovations in the Worship of God. 
 At Edinburgh, 21st April, 1 707, Sess. ult. 
 
 The General Assembly of this Church taking to 
 tieir serious consideration, that the purity of reli- 
 gion, and particularly of Divine Worship and uni- 
 formity therein, is a signal blessing to the Church 
 of God, and that it hath been the great happiness of 
 this Church ever since her reformation from Pope- 
 ry, to have enjoyed and maintained the same in a 
 great measure, and that any attempts made for the 
 introduction of Innovations in the Worship of God, 
 therein, have been of fatal and dangerous conse- 
 quence: Likeas, by the 5th Act of the Parliament 
 3 690, and 23d Act of Parliament 1693 years, and 
 the Act lately past for security of the present 
 Church Establishment, the foresaid purity and uni- 
 formity of Worship, are expressly provided for, and 
 being well informed by representations sent from 
 several Presbyteries of this Church, that innovations, 
 particularly in the Public Worship of God, are of 
 1 ite set up in some places in Public Assemblies 
 within their respective bounds, and that endeavours 
 are used to promote the same, by persons of known 
 disaffection to the present Establishment, both of 
 Church and State; the introduction whereof was 
 not -s-> much as once attempted even during th^ late 
 
2.59 
 
 Prelacy; and considering also th.it such Innovations 
 are dangerous to this Church, and manifestly con- 
 trary to our known principle, (which is. that nothing 
 
 is to be admitted in the Worship of God, but what 
 is prescribed in the holy scriptures) to the constant 
 practice of this Church, and against the good and 
 laudable laws made since the late happy Revolution, 
 for establishing and securing the samen, in her doc- 
 trine, worship, discipline, and government, and that 
 they tend to the fomenting of schism and division, 
 to the disturbance of the peace and quiet both of 
 Church and State; Therefore the General Assembly 
 being moved with zeal for the glory of God, and the 
 purity and unformity of his Worship, doth hereby 
 discharge the practice of all such Innovations in 
 Divine Worship within this Church, and does re- 
 quire and obtest all the Ministers of this Church, 
 especially these in whose bounds any such Innova- 
 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 all such as do 
 practise the same, in order to their recovery and re- 
 formation, and do instruct and enjoin the Commis- 
 sion of this Assembly to use all proper means, by 
 applying to the government or otherwise, for sup- 
 pressing and removing all such innovations, and pre- 
 venting the evils and dangers that may ensue there- 
 upon to this Church. 
 
 Questions to be put to Ministers at their Ordination. 
 lmo. Do you believe the scriptures cf the Old 
 
260 
 
 mud New Testaments, to be the word of God, and 
 the only rule of faith and mariners? 
 
 2d ). Da you sincerely own and believe the whole 
 doctrine contained in the Confession of Faith, ap- 
 proven by the General Assemblies of this Church, 
 a id ratified by Law in the year 1690, to be founded 
 upon the word of God, and do you acknowledge the 
 same as the confession of your faith, and will you 
 firmly and constantly adhere thereto, and to the 
 utmost of your power assert, maintain and defend 
 the same, and the purity of Worship as presently 
 practised in this National Church, and asserted in 
 the fifteenth Act of the General Assembly one thou- 
 sand seven hundred and seven, entitled, Act against 
 Innovations in the Worship of God? 
 
 3tio. Do you disown all Popish, Avian, Socini- 
 aii 3 Arminian, Bourignion, and other doctrines, te- 
 nets, and opinions whatever, contrary to, and incon- 
 sistent with the foresaid Confession of Faith? 
 
 4to. Are you persuaded, that the Presbyterian 
 Government and Discipline of this Church, are 
 founded upon the Word of God, and agreeable 
 thereto, and do you promise to submit to the said 
 Government and Discipline, and to concur with 
 the same, and never to endeavour, directly, or in- 
 directly, the prejudice or subversion thereof, but to 
 the utmost of your power in your station, to main- 
 tain, support, and defend the said Discipline, and 
 Presbyterian G comment, by Kirk=Se$*ions, Pre*- 
 
261 
 
 byteries, Provincial Synods, and General Assem- 
 blies, during all the days of your life ? 
 
 5to. Do you promise to submit yourself willingly, 
 and humbly, in the spirit of meekness, unto the ad- 
 monitions of the Brethren of this Presbytery, and to 
 be subject to them, and all other Presbyteries, and 
 superior Judicatories of this Church, where God in 
 his Providence shall cast your lot, and that accord- 
 ing to your power, you shall maintain the unity and 
 peace of this Church against error and schism, not- 
 withstanding of whatsoever trouble or persecution 
 may arise, and that you shall follow no divisive cours- 
 es from the present established Doctrine, Worship, 
 Discipline, and Government of this Church ? 
 
 6to. Are not zeal for the honour of God, love to 
 Jesus Christ, and desire of saving souls, your great 
 motives, and chief inducements, to enter into the 
 function of the holy Ministry, and not worldly de- 
 signs and interest? 
 
 7mo. Have you used any undue methods, either 
 by ycurself or others, in procuring this call? 
 
 8vo. Do you engage in the strength and grace of 
 Jesus Christ our Lord and Master to rule well your 
 own family, to live a holy and circumspect life, and 
 faithfully, diligently, and cheerfully to discharge 
 all the parts of the ministerial work, to the edifi- 
 cation of the body of Christ? 
 
 9mo. Do you accept of, and close with the call 
 to be Pastor of this Parish, and promise through 
 
26£ 
 
 grace to perform all the duties of a faithful Mini- 
 ster- of the Gospel among this people? 
 
 formula to be subscribed by all such as shall pass 
 Trials, in order to be Licensed, and that shall be 
 ordained Ministers, or admitted to Parishes. 
 I do hereby declare, that I do sin- 
 cerely own and believe the whole doctrine, contained 
 in the Confession of Faith, approven by the General 
 Assemblies of this National Church, and ratified by 
 Law in the year one thousand six hundred and ninety, 
 and frequently confirmed by diverse Acts of Parlia- 
 ment since that time, to be the truths of God, and 
 I do own the same as the confession of my faith : as 
 likewise, I do own the purity of Worship, presently 
 authorized and practised in this Church, and also 
 the Presbyterian Government and Discipline now so 
 happily established therein, which Doctrine, Wor- 
 ship, and Church Government I am persyaded are 
 founded upon the Word of God, and agreeable 
 thereto, and I promise, that through the grace of 
 God, I shall firmly and constantly adhere to the 
 same, and to the outmost of my power, shall in my 
 station assert, maintain, and defend the said Doc- 
 trine, Worship, Discipline, and Government of this 
 Church by Kirk=5essions, Presbyteries, Provincial 
 Synods, and General Assemblies, and that I shall in 
 my practice conform myself to the said Worship, 
 and submit to the said Discipline and Government, 
 and never endeavour directly nor indirectly the pre- 
 
263 
 
 judice or subversion of the same: And I promise 
 that I shall follow no divisive course from the pre- 
 sent establishment in this Church, renouncing all 
 Doctrines, Tenets and Opinions whatsoever, contra- 
 ry to, or inconsistent with the said Doctrine, Wor- 
 ship, Discipline, or Government of this Church. 
 
 Act Ratifying the Confession of Faith, and settling 
 Presbyterian Church Government , 1690. 
 Our Sovereign Lord and Lady, the King and 
 Queens Majesty's and three Estates of the Parlia- 
 ment, conceiving it to be their bound duty, after the 
 great deliverance that God hath lately wrought for 
 this Church and Kingdom, in the first place to set- 
 tle and secure therein the true Protestant Religion, 
 according to the truth of God's Word, as it hath 
 of a long time been professed within this land : as 
 also the government of Christ's Church within this 
 nation, agreeable to the Word of God, and most 
 conducive to the advancement of true piety and 
 godliness, and the establishing of peace and tran- 
 quillity within this realm; and that by an article of 
 the Claim of Right, it is declared, That Prelacy, 
 and the superiority of any office in the Church a- 
 bove Presbyters, is, and hath been a great and in- 
 supportable grievance and trouble to this nation, and 
 contrary to the inclinations of the generality of the 
 people ever since the Reformation, they having re- 
 formed from Popery by Presbyters, and therefore 
 ought to be abolished ; Likeas, by an Act of the 
 
264* 
 
 last Session of this Parliament, Prelacy is abolished : 
 therefore their Majesties with advice and consent 
 of the said three Estates, <io hereby revive, ratify, 
 arid perpetually confirm, all Laws, Statutes, and Acts 
 of Parliament made against Popery and Papists, and 
 for the maintenance and preservation of the true 
 Reformed Protestant Religion, and for the true 
 Church of Christ within this kingdom, in so far as 
 they confirm the same, or are made in favours 
 thereof. Likeas, they, by these presents, ratify and 
 establish the Confession of Faith, now read in their 
 presence ; and voted and approven by them, as the 
 public and avowed Confession of this Church, con- 
 taining the sum and substance of the Doctrine of 
 the Reformed Churches •, (which Confession of 
 Faith is subjoined to this present Act). As also they 
 do establish, ratify and confirm the Presbyterian 
 Church government and discipline: — and rescind- 
 ing, annulling, and making void the Acts of Par- 
 liament following, &c. — with all other Acts, Laws, 
 Statutes, Ordinances and Proclamations, and that in 
 so far allanerly as the said Acts and others generally 
 and particularly above-mentioned, are contrary, or 
 prejudicial to, inconsistent with, or derogatory from 
 the Protestant Religion, and Presbyterian govern- 
 ment now established. 
 
 Act for Securing the Protestant Religion and Pres- 
 byterian Church Government, 1706. 
 Our Sovereign Lady, and the Estates of Parlia- 
 
2G5 
 
 ment, considering, That by the late Act of Parlia- 
 ment for a treaty with England) for an Union of 
 both kingdoms, it is provided, that the Commis- 
 sioners for that treaty should not treat of, or con- 
 cerning any alteration of the Worship, Discipline, 
 and Government of the Church of this kingdom, as 
 now by Law established. Which treaty being now 
 reported to the Parliament, and it being reasonable 
 and necessary, that the true Protestant Religion, as 
 presently professed within this kingdom, with the 
 Worship, Discipline and Government of this 
 Church, should be effectually and unalterably se- 
 cured; therefore her Majesty, with advice and con- 
 sent of the said Estates of Parliament, doth hereby 
 establish and confirm the said true Protestant Re- 
 ligion, and the Worship, Discipline and Government 
 of this Church, to continue without any alteration 
 to the people of this land in all succeeding genera- 
 tions. And more especially, her Majesty, with ad- 
 vice and consent foresaid, ratines, approves, and for 
 ever confirms the fifth Act of the first Parliament of 
 King William, and Queen Mary, intituled, Act Ra- 
 tifying the Confession of Faith, and sealing Pres- 
 byterian Church Government, with the haill other 
 Acts of Parliament relating thereto, in prosecution 
 of the declaration of the Estates of this Kingdom, 
 containing the Claim of Right, bearing date the 
 eleventh of April, one thousand six hundred and 
 eighty nine. And her Majesty, with advice and 
 consent foresaid, expressly provides and declares, 
 
 Z 
 
266 
 
 That the foresaid true Protestant Religion contained 
 in the above mentioned Confession of Faith, with 
 the form and purity of Worship presently in use 
 within this Church, and its Presbyterian Church 
 Government and Discipline; That is to say, The 
 Government of the Church by Kirk=sessions, Pres- 
 byteries, Provincial Synods, and General Assem- 
 blies, all established by the foresaid Acts of Parlia- 
 ment, pursuant to the Claim of Right, shall re- 
 main and continue unalterable; and that the said 
 Presbyterian Government shall be the only Govern- 
 ment of the Church, within the Kingdom of Scot- 
 land. And further, for the greater security of the 
 foresaid Protestant Religion, and of the Worship, 
 Discipline, and Government of this Church, as above 
 established, her Majesty, with advice and consent 
 foresaid, statutes and ordains, That the Universities 
 and Colleges of St. Andrew's, Glasgow, Aberdeen, 
 and Edinburgh, as now established by Law, shall 
 continue within this Kingdom for ever. And that, 
 in all time coming, no Professors, Principals, Re- 
 gents, Masters, or others bearing office in any Uni- 
 versity, College or School within this Kingdom, be 
 capable, or be admitted or allowed to continue in 
 the exercise of their said functions, but such as 
 shall own and acknowledge the Civil Government, 
 in manner prescribed, or to be prescribed by the 
 Acts of Parliament. As also, That, before, or at 
 their admissions, they do and shall acknowledge and 
 profess, and shall subscribe to the foresaid Confes- 
 
2GT 
 
 of Faith ; as the confession of their faith, and 
 that they will practise and conform themselves to 
 the Worship presently in use in this Church, and 
 submit themselves to the Government and Disci- 
 pline thereof, and never endeavour, directly or in- 
 the prejudice or subversion of the same; 
 And that before the respective Presbyteries of their 
 bounds, by whatsoever gift, presentation, or pro- 
 vision, they may be thereto provided. And fur- 
 
 . Her Majesty, with advice foresaid, express- 
 ly declares and statutes, That none of the subjects 
 of this kingdom shall be liable to; but all and 
 every one of them for ever free of any oath, test 
 qr subscription within this kingdom, contrary tc, 
 or inconsistent with the foresaid true Protestant 
 Religion and Protestant Church Government, "Wor- 
 ) and Discipline, as above established: And 
 
 the same, within the bounds of this Church 
 and kingdom, shall never be imposed upon, or re- 
 quired of them in any sort. And lastly, That af- 
 ter the decease of Her present Majesty, (whom 
 GOD long preserve) the Sovereign succeeding to 
 her in the royal government of the kingdom of 
 G/v , in all time coming, at his or 
 
 ssion to the Crown, swear and subscribe, 
 That they shall inviolably maintain and preserve the 
 foresaid settlement of the true Protestant Religion 
 with the Government, Worship, Discipline, Right 
 and Privileges of this Church, as above established 
 Laws of this kingdom, in prosecution of the 
 Z 2 
 
268 
 
 Claim of Right. And it is hereby statute and or- 
 dainedy That this Act of Parliament, with the Es- 
 tablishment therein contained, shall be held and ob- 
 served in ail time coming, as a fundamental and es- 
 sential condition of any Treaty, or Union, to be 
 concluded betwixt the two kingdoms, without any 
 alteration thereof, or derogation thereto, in any sort 
 for ever. As also, That this Act of Parliament, 
 and settlement therein contained, shall be insert 
 and repeated in any Act of Parliament that shall 
 pass, for agreeing and concluding the foresaid Trea- 
 ty or Union betwixt the two kingdoms; And that 
 the same shall be therein expresly declared to be a 
 fundamental and essential condition of the said 
 Treaty or Union, in all time coming. 
 
 CHARLES I. Pari. 3. Sess. 2. 
 An Act of the Parliament of the Kingdom of Scot- 
 land, approving and establishing the Directory 
 for Public Worship. 
 
 At Edinburgh, February 6th, 1G45. 
 
 The estates cf Parliament now convened, in the 
 second session of this first triennial Parliament, by 
 virtue of the last act of the last Parliament holdcn 
 by his Majesty and the three estates, in anno 1641 •, 
 after the public reading and serious consideration of the 
 act under- written of the General Assembly, approv- 
 ing the following Directory for the Public Worship 
 cf God in the three kingdoms, lately united by the 
 solemn league and covenant, together with the crdi- 
 
269 
 
 nance of the Parliament of England establishing the 
 said Directory, and the Directory itself; do heartily 
 and cheerfully agree to the said Directory, according 
 to the Act of the General Assembly approving the 
 same. Which Act, together with the Directory it- 
 self, the estates of Parliament do, without a contrary 
 voice, ratify and approve in all the heads and arti- 
 cles thereof; and do interpone and add the authority 
 of Parliament to the said Act of the General As- 
 sembly. And do ordain the same to have the 
 strength and force of a law and Act of Parliament, 
 and execution to pass thereupon, for observing the 
 said Directory, according to the said Act of the 
 General Assembly in all points. 
 
 ALEX. GIBSON, Cler. RegistrL 
 
 This Act was rescinded by Charles II. but understood to be 
 restored by the Act 1G90. 
 
 Act Ratifying the turning the Meeting of the Es- 
 tates in the year 1689, into a Parliament. 
 
 — And further, The Queen's Majesty, with consent 
 foresaid, statutes and declares, That it shall be high 
 treason in any of the subjects of this Kingdom, to 
 quarrel, impugn, or endeavour by writing, malici- 
 ous and advised speaking, or other open act or deed, 
 to alter or innovate the Claim of Right, or any ar- 
 ticle thereof. 
 
 See also the Treaty of Union. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
ERRATA. 
 
 Page 
 via 
 
 XVI 
 
 50, 
 
 PREFACE, 
 lire 8, fgr repelled, read refuted. 
 
 12, for is daily bread, read ave daily bread. 
 28, for forgot, read forgotten. 
 
 13, for a Committee merely, nad merely a Com- 
 mittee, 
 
 10, for wrote, read written. 
 STATEMENT. 
 10, for Wus a spirit, read were a spirit. 
 85, Note, line 6, for is not to be, read are not to be. 
 106, line 13, for the obligations, read the ritual obligations. 
 151, Note, line 5, fur intelligent, read intelligent. 
 192, Note, line 12, for is supposed, read are supposed. 
 205, line 7, for has always, read have always. 
 208, 27, for that were net, read which were not. 
 
 210, Note, line 6, for Hsrrendum, read Horrendum. 
 216, line 27 ', for Provost's, read Provost. 
 232, 24, for ^iX/ao, readr -^cc\/u.oi. 
 
 225, 18, after Innovations, ptit a point of interrogation. 
 
 240 last line, for mu?t, read wouU. 
 
 W LANG, PRINTER-. 
 

 
 1 
 
> ■:■> 
 
 HI