i # 
 
 
 : .1 '- 
 
 a 
 
 Division 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 ? 
 
 S£B ! 
 
 
 %fe 
 
 it*, i 
 
 ~i 
 
 |l 
 
 8j 
 
 * 
 
PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 IN THE 
 
 PRESBYTERIAN FAMILY, 
 
 OJf THI SUBJECT O? 
 
 PSALMODY 
 
 BY REV.J.F.'M'LAREN, D. D. 
 
 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at 
 hand-Phil, iy, 5. 
 
 "Controversias, non multiplicare, sed quantum fieri potest, miniiere, 
 rriri Christiarri officium est." — Alph. Turretin. 
 
 What can be more irrational, than a disposition to defend pro- 
 position, only because we have had the rashness to adopt it.-*:' .rin. 
 
 PITTSBURGH: 
 
 DATIDS05 & AGNEW, MARKET STREET, PUBLISHERS 
 
 PRINTED BY J. T. SHRYOCK, 
 
 1 352. 
 
TO THE READER. 
 
 Western Theol. Seminary, ) 
 July 15, 1852. J 
 I have had the pleasure of reading, in manuscript, 
 the following treatise of Dr. M'Laren on Psalmody. 
 The clearness, candor, aud comprehensive brevity, of 
 this little work, must make it popular with unpreju- 
 diced men. The great point iii the controversy is firmly 
 seized, and distinctly presented ; so as to relieve the 
 reader of many irrelevant issues, which confused or de- 
 signing men have mixed up with the subject: and this 
 is done, with a calm dignity and fairness, which I do 
 not see how any reader can fail to respect. Brief as it 
 is, it quotes historical facts not generally known, nor 
 hitherto adduced, in the discussion; and which, if I 
 mistake not, must prove embarrassing to the advocates 
 of "exclusive use &c.;" and go far to satisfy reflecting 
 men that their tenet is a novelty. The admirable temper 
 with which these pages are written, deserves to be no- 
 ticed, and cited as an illustration of what christian po- 
 lemics maybe, and should be, even on the most exciting 
 occasion. ALEX. T. M'GILL. 
 
 As far as I can judge of the work above referred to 
 by Dr. M'Gill, from having heard portions of it read in 
 manuscript, I heartily concur in the recommendation 
 which he has given it. D. ELLIOTT. 
 
TO THE 
 
 CHRISTIAN PEOPLE, LOVERS OP PEACE IN THB 
 PRESBYTERIAN AND ASSOCIATE REFORMED CHURCHES, 
 THIS WORK IS RESPECTFTJELY DEDICATED, BY 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 To prevent the reader from laying aside 
 this little book, as soon as he discovers the 
 subject, some apology, or at least, some 
 explanation is deemed proper. The subject 
 is connected with the peculiarities of some 
 branches of the church, and hence has as- 
 sumed, in their esteem, a very prominent 
 and important position. Of course, it has 
 had controversy waged in its behalf; gallant 
 champions, in burnished armor, have crowd- 
 ed around it, every one anxious to wield his 
 sword or to sling his stone. In religious 
 controversies, it not seldom happens, that 
 some persons get possessed with the polemic 
 contagion, who are distinguished more by the 
 violence of their action and the loudness of 
 their battle-cry, than by the skill of their 
 tactics or the brilliancy of their exploits. 
 Thus has it been with the subject of Psal- 
 
VI. INTRODUCTION. 
 
 mody. And the writer begs the reader not 
 to allow his recollection of spiritless and 
 wearisome columns in newspapers, to prevent 
 his giving this little work a fair perusal. Its 
 author is one of those who believe that a 
 religious discussion may be conducted with- 
 out uncharitableness of spirit or unman- 
 nerly rudeness of style. His book will not 
 be found to contain much of mere partyism, 
 as he does not wear either the red or the 
 white rose of faction in his cap. He has 
 no one's book or periodical before him, to 
 inflame his temper or to sharpen his wit. 
 He is not even solicitous to show his own 
 opinion, so much as to give a just promi- 
 nence to argument and to point out the 
 direction and result to which it leads the 
 candid enquirer. 
 
 These statements, it is hoped, will afford 
 a sufficient guaranty to the reader, that he 
 will not be wearied by reiterations, nor 
 pained by personalities. And that no great 
 amount of time will be required for the pe- 
 rusal of this essay, its own slender propor- 
 tions 'give the best assurance. The object 
 has not been to make a book ; but, as far as 
 
INTRODUCTION. VII. 
 
 justice to the subject and the design of this 
 undertaking would allow, to avoid making 
 one. Hence, what needed to be said has 
 been compressed within the smallest intel- 
 ligible compass, and superfluous and irrele- 
 vant matter has been resolutely declined. 
 
 It is the honest and earnest w^ish of the 
 writer, to contribute his poor counsels to- 
 wards terminating the strifes on this subject, 
 which have too long disturbed the peace of 
 God's family, impairing the love of His 
 children, and interrupting their communion 
 with each other. Such evils ought not to be 
 entailed upon the church of Christ without 
 a clear and unavoidable necessity. Anc the 
 writer knows that there are many persons 
 in the contending churches, who deeply 
 lament these alienations among christian 
 brethren, which the intemperate zeal of par- 
 ty leaders has occasioned. He is well aware 
 that the ground of candor and conciliation, 
 in religious debates, is not the easiest ground 
 to hold, nor the most popular position ; yet 
 he can truly say, without claiming more 
 courage or confessing to the charge of less 
 discretion than other men, that he takes 
 
VIII. INTRODUCTION. 
 
 this ground by deliberate choice. There 
 seems to have been a long enough continu- 
 ance of this "strife of words" to make the 
 office of a conciliator neither absurd nor 
 impertinent. There seems a state of things 
 to have arrived, when some one, not intimi- 
 dated by the common fate of mediators, 
 may kindly approach the combatants, war- 
 ring with each other, instead of jointly 
 striving for the faith of the gospel, and 
 say to them, "Ye are brethren, why do ye 
 wrong one to another?" To do this is the 
 effort of the writer, in the following essay. 
 
 Some five or six years ago, he determined 
 to ascertain, if it were possible, the precise 
 scripture doctrine on the subject of Psalmo- 
 dy. With a humble desire to know the 
 truth, and a determination to embrace it 
 when found, he searched for it at the foun- 
 tains, in the word of God. And, now, in 
 view of the doctrine of the Holy Scripture, 
 he believes that the difference of sentiment 
 and practice, between the Presbyterian and 
 the Associate Reformed churches, is not 
 sufficient to justify their separation from 
 each other ; that the existing difference may 
 
INTRODUCTION. IX. 
 
 be accounted for on the ground of the in- 
 fluence of early education, prolonged habit 
 and party feeling, without supposing much 
 impulse of scripture argument on either side; 
 he believes that brethren have been aliena- 
 ted more by the fierceness of their fights 
 than by the doctrines which.occasioned them, 
 and he humbly desires to blunt the edge of 
 of party feeling, and to lead christian breth- 
 ren to exercise mutual forbearance and to 
 enjoy fellowship with each other. 
 
 It may be proper to state that the follow- 
 ing sheets were written more than three 
 years ago, when the author was a minister 
 in the Associate Reformed Church. Find- 
 ing that much more restricted views on the 
 subject of Psalmody prevailed in this part, 
 than he had been accustomed to in other 
 parts of the Associate Reformed Church, he 
 felt a natural desire to conform to the views 
 of his respected associates. He had every 
 inducement to do this, that could be drawn 
 from his occupying a prominent post in the 
 church, from his standing in the estimation 
 of his brethren, and from those suggestions 
 of ambition of which few persons are wholly 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 devoid. He thought that there must be 
 some evidences or arguments for the exclu- 
 sive use of the old Psalms, which had es- 
 caped his observation, but he could not leap 
 to that conclusion without looking for those 
 evidences ; and he determined, if possible, 
 to find the foundation of his brethren's be- 
 lief, that he might build upon it too. For 
 this purpose he searched the Scriptures for 
 the doctrine of the exclusive use of David's 
 Psalms, but he found it not. He often 
 talked with his brethren on the subject, du- 
 ring the progress of these investigations, 
 and was sometimes half disposed to be envi- 
 ous of their easy composure of mind, when 
 he found them, with much less pains and 
 study, strong in the belief that all Hymns 
 and Paraphrases were an abomination. But, 
 serious in his desire to know the truth, and 
 finding less evidence than he had anticipa- 
 ted, in favor of the prevailing sentiments ; 
 popularity and intellectual indolence and a 
 forced quiescence of faith, were deemed of 
 less value to him than a scriptural belief 
 and a clear conscience. This is not said as 
 
INTRODUCTION. XI. 
 
 a sarcasm upon others, but as a simple truth 
 in application to himself. 
 
 The process and results of this investiga- 
 tion were committed to writing, with the 
 intention of publishing them for the benefit 
 of the cause of Christ, which has suffered 
 much, though it is hoped not irreparably, 
 by angry debates on the subject; and it was 
 particularly hoped that a candid treatise, 
 coming from from one of themselves, might 
 exert a pacific and profitable influence on 
 persons of both parties, who have not ex- 
 amined the subject, except at second hand, 
 and not in the light of Scripture. For the 
 same reason, a few items are also added 
 from Church History, and particularly from 
 the history of the A. R. Church. 
 
 Having been prepared while the author 
 was in the A. R. Church, the same style of 
 expression has been retained that was then 
 used, as the reader will notice as he goes 
 along. 
 
Proper 
 
 •fitC, MAR 1882 
 THEOLOGICAL 
 
 /jt 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 STATEMENT OF THE QUESTION. 
 
 The question in dispute between the As- 
 sociate Reformed Church and the General 
 Assembly Presbyterians, is this — Are we 
 bound, in singing the praises of God, to 
 restrict ourselves to the use of the Psalms 
 of David? "When I say that the A. R. 
 Church takes the affirmative of this question, 
 I mean that this is the position of so many 
 of my brethren, that it may be called the 
 sentiment of the Church, although there is 
 no such doctrine taught in our church stan- 
 dards. The Presbyterians take the nega- 
 tive of this question. 
 
 Much controversy has been waged on this 
 subject, and it has led to much alienation of 
 feeling, and prevented that happy commu- 
 nion which ought to exist between these two 
 orthodox bodies. My desire is to mediate 
 between them, and to draw them together, 
 at least, in affection, in unity of spirit and 
 bonds of peace, by the not too elastic liga- 
 ments of mutual forbearance. It will facil- 
 itate this design, and subserve the interest* 
 
14 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 of truth and candor, to define the question 
 more minutely, and to raise around it some 
 landmarks, to keep the mind from wandering 
 and confusion. 
 
 The brethren who take the affirmative, 
 practically define their position by the fol- 
 lowing out-points: 1. That it is wrong to 
 sing, in the worship of God, a poetical com- 
 position which, although strictly orthodox, 
 is not a fair translation of any part of the 
 Scriptur es. 2. That it is wrong to sing 
 a composition which gives the sense of any 
 of the Psalms in the form of paraphrase 
 and not of strict translation. 3. That a 
 strict poetical translation of any other por- 
 tion of the Holy Scriptures, besides the 
 Psalms, must be excluded from use, just the 
 same as the forementioned kinds of compo- 
 sitions, viz. Hymns and Paraphrases. 4. 
 That to use either of these kinds of songs 
 of praise, whether in public, family or pri- 
 vate worship, is a grievous corruption, offen- 
 sive to God. 
 
 Those who take the negative of the ques- 
 tion in dispute, particularly our Presbyteri- 
 an brethren, illustrate their standing ground 
 by the statements, that it is right to sing in 
 divine worship, 1. Fair metrical versions of 
 the Psalms of David. 2. Paraphrases of the 
 Bible Psalms, which exhibit the sense there- 
 of, although it be not in the form of strict 
 
ON PSALMODY. 15 
 
 translation. 3. Metrical translations and 
 paraphrases of other parts of the Holy 
 Scriptures beside the Psalms. 4. Hymns 
 or poetical compositions which are sound 
 and scriptural in their matter; and, 5. They 
 claim that, in doing so, they are only wor- 
 shipping God "in spirit and in truth," exer- 
 cising the right to judgo of hymns and par- 
 aphrases by the standard of r cripture, as 
 they do of all human productions. 
 
 This, it will be admitted by both parties. 
 is a fair statement of their respective views, 
 and brings the main question clearly before 
 the reader's mind: Are we bound to sing, in 
 the worship of God, a strict version or 
 translation of the one hundred and fifty 
 Psalms, to the exclusion of everything else? 
 
 Before entering on an examination of the 
 arguments adduced on this subject, I beg the 
 reader's attention to the following thoughts. 
 It ought, surely, to soften the asperity of 
 party feeling, that the brethren on both 
 sides honor the word of the Lord in their 
 Psalmody: the one class taking their songs 
 of praise from a large and precious portion 
 of the Scriptures; the others taking theirs 
 from any and every portion of them. Both 
 make the Scriptures the standard and crite- 
 rion of their Psalmody : the one claims to 
 have a scripture, and the other a scriptural 
 Psalmody. Their points of agreement on 
 
16 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 the subject of praise, are more numerous 
 and important than their points of difference. 
 Is it, then, irrational to indulge, or imperti- 
 nent to express the hope, that by the bless- 
 ing of God, some of my brethren may be 
 induced to feel, speak and act with more 
 forbearance towards those who differ from 
 them? Why should the church of Christ 
 be divided on a question that comes fairly 
 under the head of "doubtful disputations. "- 
 Rom. xiv, 1. Why should the friends of 
 Christ be distressed by this war of words 
 and passions? Why should the enemies of 
 Christ have occasion of triumph? They 
 have never had it in their conflicts with us : 
 0, let them not have it, as spectators of our 
 unnecessary and ungracious combats with 
 each other. 
 
ON PSALMODY. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 MAIN ARGUMENT FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE 
 OF DAVID'S PSALMS, STATED. 
 
 I now proceed to exhibit respectfully my 
 views of the subject, which, if correct, will 
 justify the claim for such a degree of mutu- 
 al forbearance as will restore and perpetu- 
 ate peace and christian fellowship between 
 the contending parties. 
 
 In a controversy of such long standing and 
 in which so many persons have assumed the 
 attitude of championship, we naturally ex- 
 pect, when we take a historical survey, to 
 find a considerable number and variety of 
 arguments on both sides; nor will it sur- 
 prise a candid and intelligent review r er to 
 find Some that are sophistical, some that are 
 weak, some that are irrelevant. In my 
 reading on this subject, I have met with ar- 
 guments which it is not worth while to char- 
 acterize, as I have no intention of introdu- 
 cing them and do not wish to speak disre- 
 spectfully of absentees. 
 
 But there is one argument which occupies 
 a commanding position, and is admitted on 
 A2 
 
18 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 all hands to have an important bearing on 
 the question. It is called the argument 
 from the divine appointment, or "divine 
 warrant." I will state it as briefly and 
 plainly as I can, as follows: 
 
 In the Bible we have a large number of 
 psalms, composed under the inspiration of 
 God, by different persons and at different 
 times : these have been sung in the worship 
 of God by his appointment : they have, by 
 his direction, been collected into a book, 
 and after their collection have been sung in 
 divine worship. But there is no other col- 
 lection, in the New Testament or elsewhere, 
 that has like evidence of divine appointment; 
 and no promise is given of the aid of 
 the Holy Spirit, in making other psalms. 
 Therefore we have the divine warrant for 
 using the Book of the Psalms in God's 
 praise, and the use of any other is unau- 
 thorized and consequently unacceptable and 
 offensive to Him. 
 
 This is a fair and full statement of it. And 
 as it is, by general claim and admission, the 
 strongest argument in favor of the exclusive 
 use of David's Psalms, I desire the reader's 
 special and patient attention to it, first, in 
 its application to a particnlar version of the 
 Psalms ; and secondly, to its application to 
 the Psalms in any version of them. If it 
 is a sound argument, it is sufficient to estab- 
 
ON PSALMODY. 19 
 
 lish and maintain the doctrine of my breth- 
 ren, and all others are superfluous ; if it is 
 unsound, all others are inadequate, and the 
 cause of the A. R. Church, so far as Psal- 
 mody is concerned, is greatly weakened, if 
 not hopelessly prostrated. I propose, there- 
 fore, to dismiss all others from the arena, 
 and to "fight neither with small nor great, 
 but only with the king" of arguments; or 
 rather, as a herald, not a combatant myself, 
 I will examine the quality of this champion 
 knight. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 MAIN ARGUMENT EXAMINED. 
 
 First, let us examine the above main 
 argument in its application to a particular 
 version of the Psalms of David. We might 
 admit the obligation to use the Bible Psalms 
 alone, in the worship of God, and yet con- 
 sistently refuse to be confined to a particu- 
 lar version of them. If, desiring to use the 
 Bible Psalms, a worshipper should ask 
 where are they to be found, it will not do to 
 put Rouse's version, for example, into his 
 hands as the only songs of praise that he 
 
20 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 caiTproperly sing. This is only one version 
 among many. It does not, therefore, hold 
 exclusive claim to use, and the above main 
 argument says nothing about this or that 
 version. The distinction which I am now 
 noticing is a most important one, and if 
 candidly adhered to, in this controversy, 
 would narrow the grounds of dispute very 
 considerably. But, unfortunately, it is not 
 adhered to. The ground is taken by the A. 
 R. brethren, in favor of the Bible Psalms; 
 for the defence of this ground, ramparts 
 are raised and this argument, from " divine 
 warrant" is placed, like a Paixhan gun, on 
 a commanding point, and a banner is hung 
 out with the alluring motto, "An inspired 
 Psalmody," and we are loudly assured that 
 the contest is not about a particular version. 
 But when we look within the circumvalla- 
 tions, we discover that it is a particular 
 version that our brethren are contending for. 
 This is evident, from the single fact that, 
 while they admit the existence of excellent 
 versions of Psalms and parts of Psalms, 
 besides their own, they condemn the use of 
 them as much as they do the use of Hymns 
 of human composition. Besides, even our 
 own Psalm-book itself shows that the exclu- 
 sive claim for a particular version is not 
 founded in justice or candor, for this book 
 contains two versions of several of the 
 
ON PSALMODY. 21 
 
 Psalms, and it might have contained five as 
 well as two. So that a person might hold 
 the doctrine of a Scripture Psalmody and 
 conform his practice strictly to it, without 
 ever using the version in that book at all. 
 
 But we are told that this version is the 
 best one. The title page of some editions 
 bears the commendatory testimony, that this 
 versification is "more plain, smooth, and 
 agreeable to the text than any heretofore. " 
 This was doubtless true, two hundred years 
 ago, when it was made ; but the continuance 
 of this declaration on the title page of 
 modern editions, reminds me of a sign that 
 I once saw — "New Store:'' the sign was 
 nearly illegible, through age, and the store 
 had been discontinued long ago. The style 
 of language has greatly changed since this 
 Psalm-book was made. Much of the Eng- 
 lish metre of that period almost requires 
 re-translation, to make it the metre of the 
 present day. High commendation is given 
 to this version, by saying that it is " as near 
 to the original as the laws of versification 
 will admit. " Without expressing any opin- 
 ion on the the extent to which the laws of 
 versification were tested by the worthy Bar- 
 onet and his venerable coadjutors in making 
 this Psalm-book, I may remark, that the 
 above statement seems hardly consistent 
 with the repeated efforts of the church to 
 
22 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 get a better version. Again, altho' absolute 
 perfection is not claimed for this version, 
 yet the highest epithets are applied to it; 
 "Inspired Psalter," "God's Psalm-book," 
 &c; nothing else is ever sung in divine 
 worship; and the utmost alarm prevails 
 when individuals or church judicatories 
 make any movement towards altering and 
 amending it. 
 
 Now, notwithstanding these high and va- 
 ried laudations of our Psalter, it is not any- 
 where in the vicinity of perfection, as a close 
 translation: it is paraphrastic in innumerable 
 cases; it is often impenetrably obscure; it does 
 not always give the right sense, and in one in- 
 stane, at least, gives a direct contradiction to 
 the sacred word. But if the version is lia- 
 ble to these exceptions, it is palpably unjust 
 to restrict us to the use of it alone; and, 
 since the main argument which we are con- 
 sidering, says nothing about this version, 
 the restriction is as illogical as it is unjust. 
 To meet the difficulty that arises from the 
 inapplicability of the argument to the case, 
 our brethren have tried, by hard labor and 
 loud acclamations, to make the case fit the 
 argument. This is done by thrusting our 
 Psalm-book into the place of the Bible 
 Psalms, calling it the "inspired Psalter," 
 "God-given Psalm-book," "the Psalms of 
 inspiration," "the Bible Psalms," &c. 
 
ON PSALMODY. 23 
 
 I now invite the reader to accompany me 
 on a short tour of inspection into our an- 
 cient and excellent version. And I desire 
 him to go, with the same spirit of candor 
 with which I have myself gone into this 
 examination. Having set about the inves- 
 tigation of this subject, with a solemn con- 
 viction of its importance to the interests of 
 religion in this part of the country, I reso- 
 lutely, yet modestly I trust, determined to 
 turn over every stone, in search for the 
 truth. And being well aware that some 
 cherished sentiments have kept a place in 
 man's belief, by no other tenure than that 
 of long possession, and that there are many 
 arguments which, like coin, pass current, on 
 the sole recommendation of being well worn, 
 I determined to examine the claim of our 
 version of Psalms to the character of a strict 
 translation. And I must honestly confess, 
 that I was surprised at the amount of para- 
 phrase and of gratuitous deviation from the 
 text that I met with. Not to speak of the 
 words added in the way of epithets and of 
 synonymous words multiplied to complete 
 the lines, and of half lines added to make 
 out the verses and supply the rhyme, some 
 idea of the claim of our version to the char- 
 acter of beinsc "as near to the original as 
 the laws of versification will admit," may 
 be formed from the following additions, no- 
 
24 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 ticed in a couple of hours comparison of it 
 with the prose translation. Besides scores 
 of words in the former, which have nothing 
 corresponding to them in the latter, there 
 are many whole lines and some entire coup- 
 lets inserted either for explanation or mere- 
 ly to fill out the verses. Here are a few of 
 those found in Psalms taken at random from 
 the book. The added words are those in italics. 
 
 He made a pit and digged it deep, 
 
 Another there to take. — Ps. vii, 15. 
 Upon a ten stringed instrument, 
 
 Make ye sweet melody. — xxxii, 2. 
 O, for thy truth's sake cut them off, 
 
 And siceep then clean away — liv, 5. 
 The Lord my God my helper is, 
 
 ho, therefore I am bold. — liv, 4. 
 We surely shall be satisfied 
 
 With thy abundant grace. — lxv, 4. 
 They set their mouth against the heavens. 
 
 In their blasphemous talk. — lxxiii, 9. 
 Thou dost me hold by my right hand, 
 
 And still upholdest me — lxxiii, 23. 
 My flesh and heart doth faint and fail, 
 
 But God doth fail me never. — lxxiii, 26. 
 Still think the same upon. — lxxiv, 2. 
 Their ensigns they set up for signs 
 
 Of triumph thee before. — lxxiv, 4. 
 A man was great and he was had 
 
 In estimation. — lxxiv, 5. 
 O from thy bosom pluck it out 
 
 For our deliverance sake. — lxxiv, 11 
 
ON PSALMODY. 25 
 
 Thou clav'st the fountain and the flood 
 
 Which did with streams abound, 
 Thou dry'dst the mighty waters up 
 
 TJuto the very ground. — Ixxix, 15. 
 How lovely is thy dwelling place, 
 
 O Lord of Hosts, to me. 
 The tabernacles of thy grace 
 
 How pleasant, Lord, they be, — lxxxiv, 1. 
 And on the harp of solemn sound, 
 
 And grave sweet melody. — xcii. 2 
 
 The one hundredth Psalm, long metre is 
 exceedingly paraphrastic, from beginning to 
 end. A candid comparison will show that 
 it i3 not as near the prose as Watt's 100th 
 Psalm, first part. 
 
 Of all his gracious benefits 
 
 He hath bestowed on thee. — ciii, 2. 
 The Lord almighty and his strength 
 
 With steadfast hearts seek ye. 
 His blessed and his gracious face 
 
 Seek ye continually. — cv, 4. 
 That I will keep thy statutes all 
 
 Firmly resolved have I; 
 O do not, then, most gracious God t 
 
 Forsake me utterly. — cxix, 8» 
 
 Indeed, this Psalm furnishes so many ex- 
 amples of the very free paraphrase, that I 
 will not occupy room in reciting their con- 
 nexion. The following will be found inter- 
 polated in this Psalm. 
 
 In all my doubts and fears. — v. 24. 
 And did my life well try. — v. 59. 
 A3 
 
26 A PLEA FOR TEACE 
 
 As those that slothful are. — v. 60. 
 Through worldly ease aud wealth. — v. 70. 
 I'm black and parched with grief. — v. 83. 
 My life they scarce did leave — v. 87. 
 But close to them did cleave. — id. 
 
 I will not multiply these illustrations : 
 they have been collected with little effort, 
 and I leave out a considerable number that 
 I had collected, lest the reader should be 
 wearied with them. It will be noticed that. 
 in some of the instances, there is not mere- 
 ly amplification of the thought or sentiment, 
 but new thought is inserted. So that, in 
 singing our Psalms, we actually sing much 
 that is not in the Psalms of David; that is, 
 we sing " human composures-'' Why, then, 
 should we be hard upon others who do the 
 same thing? Thou that say est, a man 
 should not sing paraphrases, dost thou sing 
 paraphrases ? " Let us not, therefore, judge 
 one another any more. "-Rom. xiv, 13. 
 
 I only add, that the expressions in Ps. xiv 
 and Ps. liii, which are the same in the orig- 
 inal and in the prose translation, are varied 
 in the poetic version. The same is true of 
 Ps. xliii, 11, and xliii, 5. This fact show? 
 that the makers of the metrical version not 
 only did not deem it necessary to confine 
 themselves to a strict translation, but even 
 studied to give a somewhat free and varied 
 paraphrase. And it certainly shows, that 
 
ON PSALMODY. 27 
 
 they did not entertain the notion which we, 
 in these last days and in these ends of the 
 earth, are assured is the only correct one. 
 
 Although I speak of this version as not a 
 literal translation, yet I do not maintain 
 that a literal translation is the best one. 
 It is not the best for conveying the naked 
 meaning of an author, and it is probable 
 that a too servile effort to conform it to 
 the prose translation has introduced into 
 our version much of the obscurity and harsh- 
 ness which we find in it. And it may be 
 noticed that those portions of the Psalms 
 which are freely translated, as in the in- 
 stances just cited, are more easy and lucid 
 than other portions where the translation is 
 more rigidly verbal. For the statement, 
 that a strictly verbal translation is not the 
 best one, we have the authority of Cowper, 
 who was an equally eminent translator of 
 poetry and original poet. " There are mi- 
 nutise," says he, in every language which, 
 transferred into another, will spoil the ver- 
 sion. Such extreme fidelity is, in fact, un- 
 faithful ; such close resemblance takes away 
 all likeness. The original is elegant, easy, 
 natural; the copy is clumsy, constrained, 
 unnatural. To what is this owing ? To the 
 adoption of terms not congenial to your 
 purpose, and of a context such as no man 
 writing an original work would make use of. 
 
28 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 Homer is everything that a poet should be ; 
 a translation of Homer, so made, will be 
 everything that a translation of Homer 
 should not be, because it will be written in 
 no language under heaven ; it will be Eng- 
 lish and it will be Greek, and, therefore, it 
 will be neither." Again; "Homer is eve- 
 rywhere remarkable either for ease, dignity 
 ■or energy of expression; for grandeur of 
 -conception, and majestic flow of numbers; 
 if we copy him so closely as to make every 
 one of these excellent properties absolutely 
 unattainable, which will certainly be the 
 effect of too close a copy, instead of trans- 
 lating, we murder him." [Haley's Life of 
 Cowper. Vol. II, p. 102.] 
 
 Dr. Campbell, in his learned and ingen- 
 uous strictures on some versions of the 
 Scriptures, observes that a translator's work 
 requires strict attention to three principal 
 things; first, that an author's sense and 
 meaning is fairly represented, second, that 
 as far as practicable and consistent with the 
 language into which the translation is made, 
 the author's spirit and manner be conveyed 
 into the version ; and third, that the trans- 
 lation have so much the air of an original 
 work as to appear natural and easy. "A 
 slavish attachment to the letter, in transla- 
 ting, without any regard to the meaning, is 
 originally the offspring of superstition, not 
 
ON PSALMODY. 29 
 
 of the church, but of the synagogue, -where 
 it would have been more suitable in chris- 
 tian interpreters, the minister not of the 
 letter but of the spirit, to have allowed it to 
 remain." And of this method, as to its 
 significancy, he says, "Instead of the sense 
 of the original, it sometimes gives downright 
 nonsense; frequently a meaning quite dif- 
 ferent; and not seldom makes the aut 
 say in another language, the reverse of what 
 he said in his own." Again; "I shall only 
 add, that versions of this kind are very im- 
 properly called translations. The French 
 have a convenient word, travesty, by which 
 they denote the metamorphosis of a serious 
 work into mere burlesque, by dressing it in 
 such language as makes it ridiculous, makes 
 the noblest thoughts appear contemptible, 
 the richest images beggarly, and the most 
 judicious observations absurd." Much more 
 to the same purpose may be seen in Dis. X. 
 parts 1 and 2. A celebrated poet says — 
 "Pindar's high Lyrics, if translated literal- 
 ly, would become perfectly stupid." [Al- 
 fieri. 
 
 It would, I admit, be highly unjust to ap- 
 ply these observations rigidly to our version 
 of the Psalms. But that they exhibit the 
 true theory of translation, as far as they go, 
 no sound scholar will deny. And it will be 
 denied by few, that the strictures which they 
 A3* 
 
30 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 include do apply, to some extent, to our ver- 
 sion of the Psalms. The sense of the divine 
 original is often obscured by an inverted 
 and unnatural collocation of the words, not 
 suitable to the genius of English poetry; 
 and more frequently by crowding out quali- 
 fying and connecting words, for the sake of 
 contracting the expression into a certain 
 measure, and of making the verses of the 
 version in metre correspond numerically 
 with those of the original. 
 
 I have now shown, I trust clearly, that 
 the main argument, from "divine warrant," 
 does not restrict us to the use of a particu- 
 lar version, say that of Rouse. But inas- 
 much as my brethren, while they admit this 
 in statement, do yet practically set up a 
 claim for that version to exclusive use, ba- 
 sing their claim on its alleged superiority, I 
 have further shown, that, even as a version, 
 it is far from being correct. I do not dis- 
 parage it. But from what has been said, it 
 is evidently not so superior to ad others, as 
 to entitle it to the reverence due to an in- 
 spired work, or to preclude the use of every 
 other version, in praising God. We ought, 
 therefore, to be more diffident of our own, 
 and more gentle towards the Presbyterian 
 Psalmody. 
 
 With our version of Psalms we have be- 
 come familiar by long usage, and we are at- 
 
ON PSALMODY. 31 
 
 tached to it by early and sweet religious 
 associations. It is to most of our people 
 their mother tongue in the utterance of 
 praise. But to others, who have not had 
 this long practice, it is, to some extent, still 
 in an unknown tongue — an ancient if not a 
 foreign language. And we ought not to be 
 surprised at the embarrassment which even 
 ministers of other denominations feel in 
 reading our Psalms, for they are in a lan- 
 guage which they have not learned in their 
 childhood, and been familiar with, as we 
 have, by their daily use of it in worshipping. 
 The English metre of the seventeenth cen- 
 tury is not the same language as the Eng- 
 lish metre of the nineteenth. 
 
 It is, however, but just to add, that ex- 
 pressions of aversion and contempt for 
 these old Psalms are neither becoming nor 
 right. This style of speaking disparagingly 
 of each others Psalmody, renders the pros- 
 pect of reconciliation less encouraging, and 
 makes the exercise of mutual forbearance 
 more difficult, although it is, for that very 
 reason, the more desirable. It is not come- 
 ly or christian-like, in either party, to ridi- 
 cule the Psalmody of the other, as long as, 
 in the matter of it, it is conformable to the 
 word of God. This practice has led some 
 of the Associate Reformed people to believe 
 that the Presbyterians undervalued the in- 
 
A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 spired book of Psalms. And this impres- 
 sion lias been deepened and extended 
 some writers, I hope not intentionally, 
 their taking great pains to prove the inspi* 
 ration of the Book of Psalms, and to show 
 the high estimation in which it has heen 
 held by eminent christians, from Luther 
 down; and all this is solemnly addressed to 
 Presbyterians, for their conviction, as though 
 they did not already believe these thin — 
 firmly as we do ourselves. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 MAIN ARGUMENT FURTHER EXAMINED 
 
 Let us now approach a little more closely 
 the position that is defended by the main 
 argument. Having shown that the argu- 
 ment from i; divine warrant " does not re- 
 quire us to restrict ourselves, in singing the 
 praises of God, to the >h version, let 
 
 us now try whether it Ts sound amTcompetent 
 to prove an obligation to use exclusively the 
 Bible Psalms, in any one version or transla- 
 tion, however perfect it may be. 
 
 I admit that the argument is plausible; I 
 doubt not that it is honestly intended by 
 those who use it, to honor God's word; I 
 
ON PSALMODY. 33 
 
 own that, for years, it was satisfactory to 
 my own mind; and that it is the best the 
 case admits of. But it appears to thousands 
 of intelligent persons in the church of Christ, 
 to be insufficient to prove an obligation to 
 use exclusively the Psalms of the Bible in 
 praising God. The parties who differ about 
 this argument, agree in faith, in order, in 
 their estimate of the privilege and duty of 
 praising God, and of doing it in a right man- 
 ner. The difference, while they agree in 
 so many points, is too small to justify divi- 
 sions of the church and hostility of feeling. 
 Neither contemns the authority of God's 
 word, neither undervalues the exercise of 
 praise ; but they differ about the force of an 
 argument. The Presbyterian admits all the 
 facts included in the main argument, for the 
 exclusive use of the one hundred and fifty 
 Psalms ; he admits that they were given by 
 inspiration, nay, he contends for that as 
 much as any one does; he admits that they 
 were given to be sung by the people of God ; 
 that they were collected into a book by 
 themselves for the use of the church. And 
 he might even admit, that they were design- 
 ed to be sung, to the end of the world, and 
 yet consistently use tlymns and Paraphrases, 
 just as he does, in connexion with them: for 
 his opponent has done nothing towards prov- 
 ing that the Psalms alone are to be sung. 
 
34 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 This is his conclusion, I know ; hut between 
 his premises, admitted by the friend of 
 Hymns, and this conclusion, there is a very 
 wide chasm, that it requires great logical 
 athleticness to leap over. 
 
 The greatest stress is laid on the fact of 
 the collection of the Psalms into one book, 
 to prove the design of God that they alone 
 should be sung. There they are in the Bi- 
 ble by themselves ; put there by the divine 
 direction; therefore, he intended that they 
 and they alone should be sung in his wor- 
 ship, to the end of the world. 
 
 But let the reader remember that they 
 were sung for five hundred years before 
 they were collected into a separate book, if 
 this was done by Ezra; and it will appear, 
 that during all that period, in which the 
 Psalms were used in the worship of God, 
 with a splendor and effect greater than at 
 any subsequent time, the main proof of the 
 divine appointment would have been utterly 
 devoid of force. In the days of David, and 
 of Solomon, and in the period, even, when 
 king '-Hezekiah commanded the Levites to 
 sing praise unto the Lord, with the words 
 of David and of Aseph the seer, (2 Chron. 
 xxix, 30,) and for three hundred years af- 
 terwards, the Psalms were not collected into 
 a book, in their present form, and therefore 
 this part of our brethren's argument would, 
 
o:: PSALMODY. 
 
 35 
 
 during all that time, be utterly invalid. It 
 would seem more judicious, to rest their 
 claims to use on their inspiration; but then, 
 that would admit the use of other inspired 
 songs, as well; and the whole argument 
 would be upset by its own weight. 
 
 All that the collection of the Psalms into 
 one book proves is, that they were to be pre- 
 served as a part of the sacred Scriptures ; it 
 proves nothing about their being intended to 
 be sung. And it is worthy of notice, that 
 although the Psalms and the Book of Psalms 
 and David, are again and again mentioned 
 in the New Testament, yet they are referred 
 to in the same way as any other portion of 
 the Old Testament Scriptures, and not asso- 
 ciated with singing at all. David is spoken 
 of as a Prophet, his Psalms are quoted as 
 proofs and illustrations of doctrine, they are 
 classified with the Scriptures, but are not 
 mentioned in connexion with singing in a 
 single instance, in the New Testament. See 
 Matt, xiii, 35; xxvii, 35; Luke, xx, 42; 
 xxiv, 44; Acts, xiii, 33, 35, &c. &c. 
 
 It might appear frivolous, and yet not be 
 more so than the reasoning which it meets, 
 to say, that if a supposed design of the 
 Psalms is to be so narrowly defined and so 
 rigidly adhered to ; they ought by no means 
 to be read, because they w T ere given to be 
 sung. But there is another reply which 
 
36 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 meets the allegation, on broader and more 
 important grounds. The reading of the 
 Scriptures is inculcated as often and expli- 
 citly, as the singing of Psalms is. Now, 
 if the collection of one hundred and fifty 
 Psalms into one book is sufficient evidence 
 that God designed to restrict all our sing- 
 ing of praise to these, then the collection 
 into one book of all the inspired writings, 
 from Genesis to Revelation, is equal evi- 
 dence that he designed all our religious 
 reading to be confined to this one book, 
 and the reading of any other is a corrup- 
 tion of the ordinance of Scripture reading, 
 just as we are told, the singing of Hymns 
 is a corruption of the ordinance of praise* 
 Solomon's Proverbs were collected into a 
 book, therefore we must never make any 
 use of those terse apothegms which embody 
 the wisdom of other sages ; we must never 
 read church history, lest we disparage the 
 records of Moses and the Evangelists; nor 
 may we utter a sorrowing sentiment for the 
 church's declensions or disasters, unless we 
 do it in the words of Jeremiah's Lamenta- 
 tions, which have been collected into a book 
 by themselves. 
 
 This mode of arguing inferentially, from 
 a supposed design of the Head of the church, 
 gives a little too much room for the play of 
 fancy. And that my brethren avail them- 
 
ON PSALMODY. 37 
 
 selves of the space, in some measure, I 
 think has already been made to appear. 
 And I only add further, that this strict ad- 
 herence to design, does not appear to be 
 consistently carried out by my brethren, in 
 relation to other sacred books, for the only 
 book in all the Bible that stands under the 
 title of a "Song," they would no more 
 think of singing, than they would of sing- 
 ing the book of Numbers. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 SECOND PART OF THE MAIN ARGUMENT 
 EXAMINED. 
 
 I now come to consider that part of the 
 main argument which says that the Psalms 
 of David were sung in divine worship by 
 the church of (rod. This is not denied. 
 But that they were sung in the New Testa- 
 ment church, to the exclusion of all others, 
 is the thing to be proved. If I were dis- 
 posed to embarrass those who maintain that 
 they were, I would ask them to show that 
 they were sung at all in the apostolic age. 
 They were used, they were properly used, 
 like the other "Scriptures," as proofs of 
 doctrine ; but it cannot be shown, or at 
 least it never has been, that they were sung 
 Bl 
 
38 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 in the worship of God. Whether sinking 
 constituted any part of the service observed 
 in the synagogue is not; certain ; but it is 
 plain, from several considerations, that in- 
 strumental music could not have been intro- 
 duced into the synagogue. [See Jennings' 
 Jewi »h Antiquities, p. 193, 4.] And it is 
 but a fair inference, that those psalms which 
 demand the ruse of such music were not 
 sung in the synagogue worship. They were 
 sung in the Temple, where a large number 
 of persons were officially employed in this 
 service, with the accompaniment of all the 
 various instruments mentioned in the Psalms. 
 But, as the christian church was formed af- 
 ter the model of the synagogue and not of 
 the Temple, we should look to the former 
 and not to the latter for our example, in 
 singing the praise of God. Dr. Mason well 
 observes, on another subject, " inferences 
 should be cautiously drawn from institutions 
 under the law to duties under the gospel. 
 Error, here, has been one of the most fruit- 
 ful sources of corruption; and an inlet to 
 all the rabble of the anti-christian hierarchy. 
 
 But there was singing, beyond a doubt, 
 in the primitive church. Singing and Psalms 
 and Hymns are not unfrequently mentioned 
 in the New Testament. What was sung: 
 What Psalms did they use? Our brethren 
 reply, in a way which suits their purpose 
 
OX PSALMODY. 39 
 
 much better than it does the claims of 
 scripture evidence or of logical reasoning, 
 they sang the Psalms of David. How do 
 you know that, brethren? Why, say they, 
 the case is clear, for they had the Psalms of 
 David and they had no others, there being 
 no Psalms or collection of Psalms in the 
 New Testament. Now, if a Presbyterian 
 should say, that the primitive christians 
 sung Psalms and Hymns that were not in- 
 spired, and that because they were not in- 
 spired, they are not in the New Testament, 
 I do not see but that this assumption would 
 be just as good, and this inference just as 
 log : cal as the other. 
 
 But let us look at the matter, without 
 making either assumption, and see how truth 
 and reason present the case; it is of no use 
 for reasoners to meet each other with naked 
 assertions and denials, they did, and they did 
 not. Open the New Testament. We find 
 passages in which singing and praising are 
 mentioned as the acts of religious men, 
 worshipping God. In some of these in- 
 stances, the words which they used are not 
 given. Affirming or denying that they used 
 the Psalms of David, on these occasions, 
 may be carried to any extent ; but it proves 
 nothing for either side. They balance each 
 other, and the summing up of both is zero — 
 nothing. But there are other instances, in 
 
40 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 which the words used in praising are given 
 by the New Testament writers. These af- 
 ford better materials for argument. Well, 
 when we read these, we find, that in point 
 of fact, they are not the words of David's 
 Psalms. How will our brethren dispose of 
 this fact? They mus': admit, that in the 
 church of Christ, in apostolic times, the 
 Psalms of David were not exclusively used 
 in praising God, or, in other words, that 
 the doctrine which they now hold, viz. that 
 it is wrong to sing anything but the Psalms 
 of David, was not the doctrine of the church 
 in apostolic days. Whence, then, has their 
 doctrine arisen? Of men; and of men of 
 very recent times, as I shall shortly make 
 it appear. 
 
 But, to revert to these cases : Of those 
 in which the words are not given, take that 
 of Paul and Silas, in the prison.-Acts xvi, 
 25. To suppose that they sung in the pre- 
 cise words of a Psalm of David, is to sup- 
 pose that they were more particular in their 
 midnight singing, than they or others were 
 in their professed quotations from the Old 
 Testament Scriptures. Yet, perhaps they 
 did; no one can tell. 
 
 In the case of singing a Hymn, after the 
 institution of the Lord's Supper, it may 
 have been a Psalm of David, or it may not. 
 There is no way of determining that ques- 
 
ON PSALMODY. 41 
 
 tion. The confident assertion, made by 
 some, that it was what is callea the Hallel. 
 or certain Psalms used by the Jews at the 
 Passover, rests only on conjecture, without 
 even traditionary authority. Our divine 
 Lord, in instituting the ordinance of the 
 Supper, which was to succeed that of the 
 Passover, accompanied it with several new, 
 significant actions and circumstances, and 
 with explanatory words: and he might also 
 have added a new Hymn at its conclusion. 
 Poole very plausibly conjectures that the 
 discourse and Hymn used on this occasion 
 are the words recorded by John in the 14th 
 to the 17th chapters of his gospel. [See 
 Synopsis Criticorum, on Matt, xxvi, 30.] — 
 The conjecture is certainly as good as that 
 the Hymn used was the 113th to the 118th 
 Psalm, ^ay, it is much better, for the con- 
 nexion of events, the order of narrative, in 
 John, and the strain of the thoughts are such 
 as decidedly to favor the hypothesis. It is 
 rendered, too, quite probable, by the admit- 
 ted fact, that the apostle John records prin- 
 cipally such details of Christ's acts and 
 sayings, as were omitted by the other gos- 
 pel historians. It seems to me, to present 
 that interesting scene in a beautiful light. 
 Behold the blessed Jesus, during the obser- 
 vance of this first sacramental supper, com- 
 forting his disciples, who were sorrowful 
 
42 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 and depressed by his declaration that he 
 was going away from them: "Let not your 
 hearts be troubled," he says, "I go to pre- 
 pare a place for you;" " I will not leave 
 you comfortless, I will come to you;" '"these 
 things I said not unto you at the beginning, 
 because I was with you, but now I go to him 
 that sent me;" and then, having so fully 
 and affectionately discoursed with his disci- 
 ples, he turns and addresses to his father 
 in heaven the sublime and appropriate Hymn 
 contained in the 17th chapter: having spo- 
 ken these words to them, he ;; lifted his eyes 
 to heaven and said. Father, the hour is 
 come; glorify thy son." 
 
 This wonderful strain of discourse began 
 at the table ; (John, loth chap.) and wherj. 
 it was ended, "he went forth with his disci- 
 ples over the brook Cedron where was a 
 garden"— Gethsemane.-xviii. 1. The subject, 
 the style and the position of the discourse 
 seem to change the conjecture of Poole, al- 
 most into a sweet and undoubting convic- 
 tion. 
 
 Let us now proceed to the other Xew 
 Testament songs of praise, in which the 
 words used are recorded. The songs of 
 Mary, of Zacharias, and of Elizabeth, in 
 Luke, 1st chapter, are of this class. But 
 the words of their praises are found to be, 
 not the ivords of any Old Testament Psalm. 
 
ON PSALMODY. 43 
 
 Well then, here we have in the New Testa- 
 ment, songs of praise; a "collection,, of 
 them, indeed; three in one chapter. 
 
 Another case is recorded in Acts, iv, 24- 
 30. Peter and John being released from 
 their persecuting foes, returned to their 
 friends, and recounted to them all that had 
 befallen them, And the company "lifted up 
 their voice to God, with one accord, and 
 said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made 
 heaven and earth," &c. But these are not 
 words of David or of Asaph the seer. 
 These worshippers introduce part of an Old 
 Testament Psalm, but do not confine them- 
 selves to it. This is truly an excellent 
 model of a Hymn; the Scriptures are hon- 
 ored and intelligently applied to express 
 sentiments of adoration, gratitude and en- 
 treaty, and a prophetic Psalm is rightly 
 appropriated to Jesus by name. 
 
 A third case, and perhaps the most une- 
 quivocal of all, is the ascription of praise to 
 Christ, on his public entry into Jerusalem. 
 It is recorded in Matt, xxi, 9-15, and in 
 parallel passages in the other gospels. It 
 is partly in the language of an Old Testa- 
 ment Psalm, and partly not. The language 
 of the children is not at all in the words of 
 any Psalm. But it is praise ; and the Sa- 
 vior approves it, and cites a Psalm (Ps. viii, 
 2,) to justify it; "Out of the mouths of 
 
44 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 babes and sucklings, thou hast perfected 
 }) raise" 
 
 It is necessary to notice some allegations, 
 that have been made in relation to these 
 cages for the purpose of evading the argu- 
 ment, which they offer in favor of using oth- 
 er songs of praise, besides the one hundred 
 and fifty Psalms. This I shall do in the 
 next chapter. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 SOME OBJECTIONS NOTICED, AND MAIN AR- 
 GUMENT FINISHED. 
 
 1. It is said, that the New Testament 
 songs referred to, are inspired compositions, 
 and so, do not afford any justification of 
 the use of uninspired Hymns. Well, ad- 
 mitting this, does not the fact of their beiDg 
 inspired justify us in using them? If 
 then the claim of exclusive right for the 
 one hundred and fifty Psalms, must be giv- 
 en up. 
 
 But it is not certain that the company, 
 whose Hymn is recorded in Acts, iv, 24 
 -30, were inspired when they uttered it. 
 Indeed, the contrary is pretty certain: for 
 
ON PSALMODY. 45 
 
 it is said, after they had finished their Hymn, 
 "And when they had prayed, the place was 
 shaken where they were assembled together, 
 and they were all filled with the Holy 
 Ghost," &c. v. 31. If they were inspired, 
 why may we not sing their Hymn, which 
 appears to be very suitable for celebrating 
 the majesty of Christ? If they were not 
 inspired, then we have an uninspired Hymn 
 recorded, without disapprobation, by an in- 
 spired writer. Which horn of the dilemma 
 will be chosen? Both are equally against 
 the opinion, that it is wrong to sing any- 
 thing but the one hundred and fifty Psalms. 
 With reference xo the children, in the 
 other case, there is not the least reason to 
 believe that they were inspired. And yet 
 our Savior approves and accepts their prai- 
 ses, which the Chief Priests angrily cen- 
 sured. When an objector, in his zeal for an 
 inspired Psalmody, repudiates inspired songs 
 of praise, I cannot but think there is some- 
 thing inconsistent and wrong in his position. 
 It is hard to discover what would satisfy 
 those who reject inspired and uninspired 
 praises alike. And I would seriously ask 
 my dear brethren this question: Should the 
 children in one of your Sabbath Schools 
 rise up in your presence, and with their 
 sweet voices sing this short Hymn to Christ. 
 
 "Hosanna to the Son of David; ,f 
 
46 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 would your views of Psalmody allow you, 
 like the blessed Savior, to approve of the 
 deed, or would you, like the Scribes, be 
 "sore displeased." — v. 15. 
 
 2. It is further alleged, by some of the 
 more extravagant advocates of the restric- 
 tive system, that these are not praises. The 
 songs of Zacharias, and of Elizabeth, and 
 of Mary, not praises ? They certainly have 
 very much the appearance of them. Zach- 
 arias said, " Blessed be the Lord God of 
 Israel," &c; and Mary said, "My soul doth 
 magnify the Lord," &c; the people and 
 the children cried, "Hosanna to the son 
 of David, blessed is he that cometh in the 
 name of the Lord." If these are not prais- 
 es, it is hard to find anything that is. Be- 
 sides, our Savior, in justifying the children, 
 intimates the character of their ascriptions 
 very clearly, "Out of the mouths of babes 
 and sucklings, thou hast perfected praise ," 
 and Luke says of Zacharias, " He spake 
 and praised God;" and in his narration of 
 Christ's entry into Jerusalem, "The w T hole 
 multitude of the disciples began to rejoice 
 and praise God." Now, when a person as- 
 serts that these are not praises, he seems to 
 me, to evince great confidence in the easy 
 faith of those whom he addresses, or small 
 knowledge of the subject of which he speaks. 
 
 3. It is further said, that these passages 
 
 
ON PSALMODY. 47 
 
 were not sung, or expressed in musical tones 
 of voice. It would be quite as serious an 
 objection to the argument derived from them, 
 to say that they were not sung in a particu- 
 lar metre. I do not know how our breth- 
 ren found out that they were not sung. If 
 I am not mistaken, it was customary to 
 utter such poetic strains in a tone of voice 
 different from the ordinary conversational 
 or declamatory tones. And it is natural 
 to do it. Besides, the same objection would 
 exclude from use the 18th Psalm, for "David 
 spake unto the Lord the words of this song, 
 and he said" kc. How many more would 
 be excluded by this formidable objection, I 
 have not ascertained, and it is too frivolous 
 a matter to pursue. 
 
 It is supposed that they could not have 
 been sung, since they were extemporaneous 
 effusions. I cannot perceive why extem- 
 poraneous effusions might not be sung as 
 well as spoken, and why the disciples could 
 not as well sing "with one accord," as speak 
 "with one accord;" and, indeed, this man- 
 ner would seem to be more agreeable to the 
 exercise of singing than of speaking. 
 
 It may be well enough, however, to re- 
 mark, for the benefit of the ordinary reader, 
 that if we apply our ideas of modern hymns 
 and modern singing, to the ancient, we shall 
 commit a great error. Those Hymns were 
 
48 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 not divided into measured lines and verses 
 as ours are; nor was their singing like ours. 
 It was customary, under the influence of 
 strong excitement of feeling, to utter senti- 
 ments in a kind of lofty prose, and to do it 
 in a singing tone, or something like what is 
 called recitative, the tones of which are be- 
 tween singing and talking. This was done 
 extemporaneously, and however numbers 
 were able to unite in it, "with one accord," 
 there was no more difficulty in doing it in a 
 singing tone, than in the ordinary tone of 
 speech. 
 
 It appears, then, notwithstanding these 
 objections, that in the New Testament we 
 have songs of praise, both inspired and un- 
 inspired, some including portions of Psalms 
 and others not, and we have no disapproba- 
 tion of them, or of their use, by Christ or 
 his Apostles; but, on the contrary, their 
 their express approval. Yet, because they 
 were not put "into a book" by themselves, 
 and labeled, A New Psalm .Book, it is 
 wrong to use them, or any of those precious 
 praises that are scattered through nearly 
 all the Books of the Bible. 
 
 I now proceed to the last part of the 
 great argument for the exclusive use of 
 David's Psalms, viz. that "we have no pro- 
 mise of the aid of the spirit in making 
 Psalms" This is a mere play upon words, 
 
 
ON PSALMODY. 49 
 
 not comporting with the sanctity of the 
 subject, nor with the dignity of the argu- 
 ment upon it. We have the promise of the 
 Spirit to aid us in worshipping God, and we 
 need it as much in praising as in praying. 
 In both we are authorized to use the revela- 
 tion of the Spirit, all of which is profitable 
 for purposes of religious edification. There 
 is a difference, not noticed by our brethren 
 in using this part of their argument, between 
 the aid of the Spirit by plenary inspiration, 
 and his ordinary enlightening and sanctify- 
 ing influences. Inspiration is not claimed 
 for Hymns composed by men, yet the aid of 
 the Spirit may be enjoyed in making and 
 in singing them. And, on the other hand, 
 the inspired Psalms may be sung without 
 any aid of the Spirit. The brethren surely 
 cannot mean to say, that in singing an in- 
 spired Psalm, the worshipper does not him- 
 self need any aid of the Spirit, to render 
 his praises acceptable. Many a thoughtless 
 and ungodly person has sung that sweet 
 Psalm, beginning 
 
 "The Lord's my shepherd, I'll not want," 
 
 but surely he had no more promise of the 
 Spirit or experience thereof, in so doing, 
 than the devout christian in singing, 
 
 "Jesus, my shepherd, husband, friend, 
 My prophet, priest and king; 
 
50 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 My Lord, my life, my way, my end, 
 Accept the praise T bring.' 7 
 
 I have now completed the review of the 
 main argument for the exclusive use of Da- 
 vid's Psalms in praising God. Whether I 
 have proved that it does not show a "divine 
 warrant" for restriction to a particular ver- 
 sion, or to the Psalms in any version, however 
 perfect, must be decided by the reader. It 
 is no affectation or assurance, however, to 
 say that I have, at least, shown that there 
 is occasion and room for some doubt, about 
 the exclusive claim for the Psalms. And 
 this is the very case for the exercise of for- 
 bearance. Brethren who are no farther 
 asunder than the Presbyterians and us, 
 should not break fellowship for such a dif- 
 ference ; and we may be committing a great 
 sin against Christ, by shutting out the 
 Presbyterian people from our communion, 
 when we have only such a weak and tattered 
 argument for our own views. 
 
 Hitherto I have spoken negatively, defen- 
 sively, showing that the "main argument" 
 is not sufficient to sustain the practice of 
 the Associate Reformed Church. I shall 
 now undertake, with the same conciliatory 
 design, to prove from the Scriptures, that 
 we have divine warrant for the use of other 
 songs of praise, besides those contained in 
 the Book of Psalms. This has, indeed, 
 
 
ON PSALMODY. 51 
 
 been done to some extent already, but I 
 have another line of observation to pursue, 
 in drawing forth the scripture doctrine. 
 The Greek scholar will excuse the unbookish 
 manner of this part of our work- I sup- 
 pose it would not be difficult to spread some 
 of the signs of learning over these pages., 
 by the help of a small printer's font of He- 
 brew and Greek type; but as I write for 
 plain christian people, the machinery may 
 as A^ell be kept out of view. 
 
 Before proceeding, however, a remark or 
 two may be made, touching the demand 
 for a "Scipture warrant," as authority for 
 singing Hymns and Paraphrases of Scrip- 
 ture, and translations, in metre, of other 
 portions of the word of God besides the 
 Psalms. This demand can hardly be made 
 on Presbyterians, with consistency, by those 
 who, in very important matters, might be 
 confounded by a similar demand on them- 
 selves. As I have before intimated, if the 
 demand for "divine warrant" for singing, 
 not to say exclusively, the Psalms of David 
 in the New Testament church, were urged 
 upon the Associate Reformed, with half the 
 pertinacity they use in pressing a similar 
 demand on Presbyterians, it would be ex- 
 tremely hard to meet it. For it has been 
 shown, in this essay, that in every single 
 case in which the Book of Psalms is certain- 
 
52 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 ly referred to, in the New Testament, either 
 by name or by quotation, there is no con- 
 nexion with singing at all: and again, 
 that in every case in the New Testament, 
 where we have the language of song actual- 
 ly given, it is not the language of David's 
 Psalms. 
 
 What express "divine warrant" is there 
 for the sanctification of the first day of the 
 week? We have warrant sufficient, "divine 
 warrant," too, but not more express than we 
 have, as will be shown, for using other 
 Psalms and Hymns. Suppose we should 
 reason about the Sabbath day as we do 
 about the Psalms : There was a Sabbath 
 day already, divinely appointed; it had been 
 kept from the beginning ; it was solemnly 
 enjoined in the Fourth Commandment; it 
 is expressly referred to "by name," in the 
 New Testament; and it was observed by 
 our Savior and his Apostles ; but we have no 
 command, in the New Testament, to keep 
 another day ; therefore, the religious obser- 
 vance of the first day of the week, as the 
 the Sabbath, is a corruption of the divine 
 ordinance. The reasoning is just as strong, 
 or rather, just as weak, in this case as in 
 that of singing and praise; and both are 
 answered in the same way. This answer, in 
 the case of Psalm and Hymn singing, will 
 occupy the next chapter. 
 
ON PSALMODY. 53 
 
 Again; What express divine warrant is 
 there for infant baptism ? We have excel- 
 lent arguments, and scriptural ones ; but 
 have we any more express "divine warrant" 
 than we have for singing uninspired hymns? 
 It is only my determination to be brief, to 
 suggest thought rather than exhaust it, that 
 prevents me from pressing this inquiry, in 
 extended illustration. Instead of this, I 
 will refer the reader to a singular logical 
 fact. One of my Associate Reformed breth- 
 ren has written a work on Psalmody, which 
 is deemed to be a strong one. He has also 
 written a work of about the same size, on 
 Baptism, a part of which is of course de- 
 voted to the doctrine of the baptism of in- 
 fants. Now, what is singular about these 
 two books is, that the author's principles 
 and modes of reasoning in the one are 
 quite antagonistic to those of the other. 
 This is specially noticeable in relation to 
 the demand for " divine warrant." On 
 Psalmody, an express divine warrant is the 
 basis of the main argument for the exclusive 
 use of the Psalms, and the want of it is deem- 
 ed fatal to the opposite views; but on baptism, 
 the author says, "It is altogether unreason- 
 able to demand positive and express proof 
 from the New Testament, to show that chil- 
 dren of believers * * * have a right 
 B2 
 
M A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 to baptism. " Similar contrarieties occur 
 throughout the treatises. If I were desi- 
 rous to refute either one of these books, I do 
 not think a more effective method could be 
 chosen, than to take the mode of reasoning 
 "which is pursued by the same author in the 
 other. Although the advocate of the exclu- 
 sive use of David's Psalms cannot consis- 
 tently demand a "divine wrrrant" for using 
 other Psalms and Hymns, and spiritual 
 80ngS, yet I have no desire to evade it. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 POSITIVE ARGUMENT, FROM SCRIPTURE, FOR 
 THE USE OF OTHER SONGS OF PRAISE. 
 
 What is the teachir g of the New Testa- 
 ment, in relation to the Psalms of David 
 and their use? This is the grand question. 
 If we ascertain what this is, it matters little 
 what one writer or another may teach on 
 the subject. Well, it is certain that the 
 words, Psalms, Hymns, singing, praise, are 
 not unfrequently met with in the New Tes- 
 tament. And they were, doubtless, well 
 understood by those who used them. The 
 same is true of the words prophet, law, 
 
ON PSALMODY. 55 
 
 scriptures, prophecy, &c. These are all 
 general terms; the. were so then ; and their 
 specific sense and application must be de- 
 termined by the circumstances in which they 
 are used in particular cases. Hence, the 
 bare use of the word Psalm does not neces- 
 sarily designate a Psalm of David, any more 
 than the bare use of the word prophet 
 designates a particular prophet, as Isaiah, 
 Ezekiel, or Daniel. When there is refer- 
 ence to any particular thing or person, of a 
 kind or class, the reference is certified by 
 some attendant circumstance. This mani- 
 testly correct principle of interpretation is 
 always observed by the New Testament wri- 
 ters. Let us now apply it to the use of the 
 wor-i Psalm. 
 
 In the original cf the New Testament 
 this word is used but seven times. In the 
 Engl'sh translation, it occurs a few times 
 more, verbs and participles being so trans- 
 lated as to include it. I give the texts, with 
 a few hints on them, for explanation. 
 
 Luke xx, 42. — ki A_nd David himself saith. 
 in the Book of Psalms, the Lord said unto 
 my Lord," kc. Here the name of the 
 writer, the title of his book, and the quota- 
 tion from it, conspire to fix, beyond dispute, 
 the application of the word. 
 
 Luke xxiv, 44. — ^ ; A11 things which are 
 written in the Law of Moses, and in the 
 
56 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 Prophets, and in the Psalms," &c. Here 
 the conjunction of the Psalms with the Law 
 of Moses and the Prophets, assures us that 
 the Psalms of the Old Testament are inten- 
 ded, and especially, as all the authorities 
 referred to are included in what im is written 
 in the Sciiptures." — v. 45. 
 
 Acts i, 20. — u It is written in the book of 
 Psalms, Let his habitation," kc. The men- 
 tion of the book and the quotation, identify 
 the reference. The same is true of Acts 
 xiii, 83. fci It is written in the second 
 Psalm, Thou art my son," &c. See also 
 verse 35. 
 
 1 Cor. xiv, 26. — " Every one hath a 
 Psalm," fee. Here the general term is 
 used, without anything by which its refer- 
 ence can be determined to any particular 
 one. 
 
 Eph. v, 19, and Col. iii, 16.— " Psalms, 
 hymns and spiritual songs." The same re- 
 mark applies to these as to the passage 
 alluded to just above. As there is nothing 
 to indicate a reference to the Old Testament 
 Psalms in either of them, the words being 
 simply used in their general form and signi- 
 fication, they are properly applicable to any 
 compositions that agree with the definition 
 of the words themselves. These are all the 
 passages in which the word Psalm occurs in 
 the original of the New Testament. 
 
ON PSALMODY. 57 
 
 There are a few passages more, in which 
 it occurs in the English, where the verbs or 
 participles are so translated as to include it. 
 As Matt, xxvi, 80, and Mark, xiv, 26. — 
 "When they had sung a hymn;" literally, 
 having hymned. Acts, xvi, 25. "Paul 
 and Silas sang praises unto God;" literally, 
 but less- clearly, hymned to God, James 
 v, 13. "Let him sing psalms;" literally, 
 let him sing; as in 1 Cor. xiv, 15, and 
 Rom. xv, 9; where the same word (4a?.?.u) is 
 translated, simply. "I will sing." 
 
 In none of these is there anything what- 
 ever to designate the Old Testament Psalms. 
 Even the word Psalm is not used in all of 
 them ; and where it is used, there is nothing 
 except its general meaning to indicate such 
 reference. But its general meaning is not, 
 according to the principles of interpretation, 
 sufficient; for this applies to any composi- 
 tion answering the definition of the word. 
 To apply it, in these cases, to the Old Tes- 
 tament Psalms is, therefore, a mere assump- 
 tion, and constitutes what reasoners call 
 begging the question in dispute. But we 
 will not leave this matter yet, lest we should 
 appear to beg the question too. 
 
 The word prophet is a general one, and, 
 like the word Psalm, is often used in the 
 Xew Testament, for the purpose of citing 
 Old Testament writings. And it is also 
 
58 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 used in its general signification. But there 
 is always a clear distinction observable be- 
 tween, its general and its specific applica- 
 tions. Luke ir, 24. — U A prophet is not 
 without honor," &c. Matt, x, 4. — " He that 
 receiveth a prophet in the name of a pro- 
 phet," &c. Here the term is used in a 
 general sense, simply to designate an office, 
 or any person bearing it, and is not applied 
 to any particular one. Again; ;, In those 
 days there came prophets from Jerusalem 
 to Antioch." — Acts xi, 27. "There were 
 in the church that was in Antioch, certain 
 prophets and teachers." — Acts xiii, 1. u Ju- 
 das and Silas being prophets also them- 
 selves." — Acts xv, 32. '-God hath set in 
 the church, first apostles, secondarily pro- 
 phets," kc. — 1 Cor. xii, 28. Now, in all 
 these, and many more instances, the general 
 term, descriptive of the office, is so qualified 
 by the circumstances of its use, as clearly 
 to restrict its application to contemporane- 
 ous persons, and to preclude its application 
 to the Old Testament prophets. Paul calls 
 even a heathen poet a prophet, simply be- 
 cause he was so considered by them, and 
 because the word, in their language, meant 
 both a soothsayer and a poet. — Tit. i, 12. 
 
 On the other hand, when the Old Testa- 
 ment prophets are referred to, that applica- 
 tion is clearly indicated by various means.: 
 
ON PSALMODY. 59 
 
 their names are mentioned, or quotations 
 are made from their writings. And in this 
 way the Psalms themselves are quoted, just 
 as any other prophecies are : " That it might 
 be fulfilled which was spoken by the pro- 
 phet, they parted my garments, "&e. — Matt, 
 xxvii, 35 ; Ps. xxii, 18. See also Matt, xiii, 
 35; Ps. lxxviii, 2. 
 
 Another, and most common method of 
 referring to the Old Testament writers, is 
 to prefix the definite article to the word, 
 and then instead of a general, it must have 
 a specific application. The doctrine of the 
 Greek article is briefly this; that when a 
 class of things bear the same general name, 
 no one in particular can be indicated unless 
 the article is prefixed, or some equivalent 
 method of specifying be employed. It is 
 the same as it is in English: if I say, "a 
 Grecian poet," it might be any one; but if 
 I say, "the Grecian poet," I indicate a par- 
 ticular one. Applied to this subject, we 
 learn from this rule and usage, that the 
 general words, prophet, psalm, song, hymn, 
 mean any prophet, psalm, song or hymn, 
 for the words describe them respectively. 
 But when the definite article is prefixed, 
 some particular prophet, psalm, kc. is in- 
 tended. What particular one is meant, must 
 be ascertained by the circmstances in which 
 the words are used. We have already 
 
60 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 shown that, with reference to the Prophets 
 and the Psalms, this is done by mentioning 
 authors' names, by quotations, and other 
 ways. The following examples will confirm 
 these statements and afford very striking 
 illustrations of the principles we have ad- 
 duced. John the Baptist was a prophet, 
 was owned by Christ as an eminent one. 
 Yet when the Jews asked him y art thou the 
 prophet? he unhesitatingly declines the ap- 
 pellation. He was a prophet, but not the 
 prophet. The use of the article makes this 
 difference, and he well knew that its use 
 indicated a specific reference to the Messiah. 
 Again, among the many opinions concern- 
 ing Christ, some thought him "a prophet," 
 others as "one of the prophets." The wo- 
 man at Jacob's well readily discovered, by 
 his conversation, that Jesus was a prophet, 
 or religious teacher ; but the Jewish people, 
 better instructed in the Scriptures, when 
 they heard his sayings, said, "Of a truth, 
 this is the prophet," meaning the Messiah. 
 John iv, 19; vii, 40. So also when the 
 word prophets is used in the plural, with 
 the article, it indicates, unless restrained by 
 attendant circumstances, the Old Testament 
 prophets. 
 
 I trust these remarks and examples make 
 the force of the article sufficiently manifest. 
 In reasoning this point with brethren, I have 
 
ON PSALMODY. 61 
 
 seen them shrink from the argument behind 
 a declaration of this sort, that the article 
 was not of sufficient consequence, and its 
 use was not well enough understood to be 
 made the foundation of any argument on 
 this subject. I am willing that persons 
 should confess want of knowledge, for them- 
 selves, but some doubt may spring up about 
 the propriety of their including the sacred 
 writers, of any others in their confessions. 
 Should we discard the doctrine of the arti- 
 cle, it would convert Nathan's rebuke of 
 David, "Thou art the man,", into something 
 lying between commendation and nonsense, 
 " Thou art a man." And those who profess 
 to be theologians, especially, should be cau- 
 tious about trifling with the Greek article. 
 It is a small word, composed of a single 
 letter ; but they should know, that on this 
 small jewelled point turns some of the 
 strongest scripture argumentation for the 
 divinity of our Savior. 
 
 I now respectfully solicit the readers at- 
 tention to the application of these principles 
 of interpretation, and this doctrine of the 
 article to some of the passages of scripture 
 already cited. 1 Cor. xiv. 26.— "When ye 
 come together, every one of you hath a 
 psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue," &c % 
 These were gifts of the spirit to the Corin- 
 thian christians, and the Apostle only 
 B3 
 
62 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 blames the disorderly manner in which they 
 tirere exercised. It appears that they prayed 
 and sang in an unknown tongue ; that is, in 
 a language not understood by those who 
 heard them. This was a perversion of their 
 miraculous spiritual powers. They might, 
 it is true, exercise them in this way to their 
 own edification, but it would be without ben- 
 efit to others, for they knew not the mean- 
 ing, ver. 14, 16. To remedy this evil in 
 the manner of exercising their spiritual 
 gifts, the apostle proposes his own example 
 for their imitation: he would have them 
 pray and sing in a known language, or em- 
 ploy an interpreter, the same as in preach- 
 ing, ver. 27. "I will pray with the spirit, 
 and I will pray with the understanding also; I 
 will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with 
 the understanding also." ver. 15. That is, 
 my praying and singing shall not be merely 
 in the exhibition of my spiritual gifts, but 
 shall be intelligible, with meaning, that 
 others may understand and profit. 
 
 From the omission of the article before 
 the word psalm, from the connexion of that 
 word with the extraordinary spiritual gifts, 
 and from the train of reasoning throughout 
 the chapter, it is evident, that the psalms 
 offered in the Corinthian church were such 
 as the spirit enabled the christians there to 
 &ake, and not psalms of the old testament. 
 
ON PSALMODY. 63 
 
 The close parellel here observed by the 
 apostle, between praying and singing, shows 
 them to be religious exercises occupying the 
 same rank, and substantially of the same 
 character. And this fact upsets those arti- 
 ficial and hair-splitting distinctions between 
 prayer and praise, which some writers on 
 psalmody have made, for their own mere 
 convenience, without any authority from the 
 Bible, and with very little from the diction- 
 ary. I mean those distinctions which rep- 
 resent praise as a more awfully solemn, fixed 
 and uniform exercise than prayer, as invol- 
 ving more need of the aid of the spirit, as 
 requiring to be more accurate in its state- 
 ment. Such wire-draw T ing is not found either 
 in our catechism, or in the Scriptures, where 
 prayer, thanksgiving and praise are terms 
 used to express the same acts of worship, 
 many of the Psalms being called prayers, 
 and all of them, whether expressive of grat- 
 itude, adoration or supplication, being called 
 praises. 
 
 The two passages, Eph. v, 19 and Col. 
 iii, 16, deserve particular consideration. 
 They have always a place in discussions of 
 this subject. I have no interest to give 
 them a wrong interpretation. The inter- 
 pretation, of the one will do for both. I 
 take the one which contains the fuller ex- 
 pression, Col. iii, 16. And to cut off all su- 
 
64 
 
 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 perfluity of words, I remark that this text 
 includes three brief directions; 1. Let the 
 word of Christ dwell in you richly: 2. 
 Teach and admonish one another in all wis- 
 dom, (see Col. i, 9:) 3. "Sing psalms, hymns 
 and spiritual songs to the Lord, with grace 
 in your hearts," doing all in the name of the 
 the Lord Jesus. I dismiss all, and it is not 
 a little, that has been said on both sides of 
 the question, to connect the "psalms, hymns 
 and spiritual songs," in the latter part of 
 the verse, with "the word of Christ," in the 
 former part; I pass no judgment upon those 
 efforts, as my interpretation is independent 
 of them. 
 
 The only question pertinent to the present 
 treatise is, whether the psalms, hymns and 
 spiritual songs mentioned here are those of 
 the Old Testament alone, or any other com- 
 positions, together with them, which answer 
 the definition of the terms employed. To 
 say the former, is entirely gratuitous, for 
 David's name is not mentioned, his book is 
 not spoken of, no quotation is made, and 
 the article is not used, not one of the usual 
 ways of making a reference to the Old Testa- 
 ment Scriptures is employed. Why then 
 should the word be understood as referring 
 to the Old Testament Psalms? Only be- 
 cause the word psalm is used. But the word 
 is a general one, decriptive of a certain kind 
 
ON PSALMODY. 60 
 
 of composition ; and it is properly applied to 
 compositions of this kind, whether they are 
 found in the book of psalms, or elsewhere- 
 Had the apostle meant to confine his ref- 
 erence to the Psalms of David, he would 
 have said, u in the psalms, hymns and spir- 
 itual songs." And even then, it would not 
 fix the obligation to use them and no others. 
 If we should admit that nothing else but the 
 Psalms of David was referred to or included 
 in this expression, that admission would 
 not help our brethren's case at all. They 
 would still have the only hard part of their 
 case to make out. Suppose I say to my 
 Associate Reformed brother, who is strain- 
 ing this passage to prove that it refers to 
 the Psalms of David alone, Brother, you 
 need not trouble yourself to do it: you need 
 not trace the slender affinity between these 
 terms and the titles of the Psalms: you need 
 not assume that the Ephesians and Colos- 
 sians would naturally and immediately un- 
 derstand these words to mean the Psalms of 
 David; I will admit it ail. Then you admit 
 all I maintain, he gladly replies. Oh no, I 
 do not; for you have yet the hardest part of 
 your task to perforin, viz: to show that the 
 expression fixes the obligation to sing the 
 Psalms of David, to the exclusion of every 
 thing else; hie opus, hie labor est, f rater. 
 I will illustrate by a plain parallel. Christ 
 B3* 
 
A PLBA FOR PEACE 
 
 . "Search the Scriptures." This refers 
 indubitably and exclusively to the Old Testa- 
 ment writings, but it doesnotfixon us the obli- 
 gation toread those writings to the exclusion 
 I] others. So, admitting the verse un- 
 der consideration to refer to the Book of 
 Psalms, it does not bind us to sing them to 
 the exclusion of all others. 
 
 But I do not admit that it refers exclu- 
 sively to the Psalms of David. A just 
 regard for the principles of interpretation 
 will not e to do so, for the reasons 
 
 already stated; viz, that there is nothing to 
 identify them in the expression, except the 
 bare use of the general terms, descriptive of 
 hinds of compositions, and that is not 
 ^uiheic-n. 
 
 Ephesus and Colosse were cities in which 
 the Greek language was spoken, and among 
 the Greeks the words psalm and hymn 
 were as well understood and as commonly 
 used as the words song, sonnet and poem 
 are with us: and the bare mention of thes? 
 would not necessarily suggest the idea of 
 David's Psalms, any more than the n 
 sonnet would suggest to us the sonnets of 
 
 CO 
 
 Petrarch, or the word poem, the poems of 
 Cowper. These terms occur in the Greek 
 classics, and they are each connected with 
 families of above twenty derivative words, 
 from a common root. This fact shows how 
 
OX PSALMODY. 67 
 
 extensively they were used, and how readily 
 they would be understood in their general 
 sense. 
 
 But it is said, that these terms are the titles 
 of the Psalms, and so identify tbe reference. 
 It will not pass as good argument. Although 
 the coincidence between these terms and the 
 titles of David's productions were as close 
 as is pretended, yet, the omission of the 
 article is fatal to the argument: for we have 
 shown that prophets and prophecies are 
 mentioned in the Xew Testament, which cer- 
 tainly do iwt refer to those in the old, 
 although there are books in the Old Testa- 
 ment, bearing these titles, and these alone. 
 But, secondly, these terms do not very 
 closely correspond with the titles of the Old 
 Testament songs. This will best appear 
 by comparing them. Take the titles cf a 
 few, promiscuously chosen: Psal. 3d, ki A 
 psalm of David;" 16th, U A writing of Da^, 
 17th, "A prayer of David;" 30th, "A psalm 
 of a song;'' 37th, "A song of David;" 64th. 
 "A song of a psalm;" 89th, "Praise, a song of 
 David;" 103d, "Allelulia;" 120th, "A song 
 of Degrees," <fcc. A great many have no ti- 
 tles at all. These titles are taken from the 
 Septuagint version, which was generally 
 used in apostolic times. No sufficient 
 resemblance can be traced between the words 
 of the text under consideration and these 
 
68 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 titles, to identify a reference, and on such 
 slender grounds no judicious reasoner, unless 
 in extremity, would rest any argument. 
 
 But it has been farther said by our 
 brethren, to aid their use of this passage, 
 that these churches of Ephesus and Colosse, 
 had the Psalms of David, and they had no 
 other. I incline to the belief that their 
 statement is incorrect in both its parts. 
 These churches were collected in heathen 
 cities; they had lately been converted from 
 heathenism or from Judaism; books were 
 scarce and costly articles then; and it is not 
 very likely that they had much knowledge 
 of the Scriptures, except what they learned 
 from the public reading of them in the syna- 
 gogues or churches. Secondly, if at Corinth 
 psalms were so abundant, as the production 
 of the spiritual gifts of the disciples, that 
 "every one had a psalm," I know not why 
 psalms of the same kind should be scarce at 
 Colosse. 
 
 After all, as I have said above, this effort 
 and show of reasoning is superfluous, for it 
 is not denied by any good interpreter, that 
 the tevms of this passage include the Psalms 
 of David. We admit, before our brethren 
 laboriously reason the case, that the Psalms 
 of David arc deluded: and after they have 
 finished, they fail to show that other scrip- 
 ture songs or other scriptural songs, are 
 
ON PSALMODY. 69 
 
 excluded. These verses; by the general, 
 unqualified terms employed in them, enjoin 
 'he use of any religious, scriptural songs of 
 oraise, without specifying, and of course 
 without excluding inspired or uninspired 
 productions. 
 
 If this interpretation be correct, then here 
 •ve have the long demanded "scripture ivar- 
 "ant" for the use of other songs of praise 
 >eside those contained in the Book of 
 '^salms. Others are not to be used "in the 
 oom" of the Bible Psalms, but in addition 
 o them, along with them. Other songs of 
 scripture, properly versified, are no less an 
 inspired psalmody, than those of the Book 
 of Psalms. And hymns and paraphrases 
 constitute an approved uninspired psalmody. 
 
 Having now completed another department 
 of the subject, may I not say to dear christian 
 brethren, this is just the case for the exercise of 
 forbearance. The main argument t for the 
 exclusive use of the one hundred and fifty 
 Psalms, appears to some persons, defective; 
 the New Testament appears to them, to give 
 a warrant for the use of other orthodox and 
 edifying songs of praise, in addition to those 
 of the Old Testament. May we not hope 
 that some will extend their christian for- 
 bearance and fellowship to those who agree 
 with them in every point of faith and order y 
 except this ? And if we may hope for con- 
 
70 A PLEA FOE PEACE 
 
 filiation between those who differ only about 
 the exclusive use of Bible Psalms; we may 
 hope, with even more confidence for such 
 reconciliation between those who only differ 
 about the obligation to restrict ourselves to 
 the Scotch version, or any other particular 
 one. If we are not perfectly agreed in all 
 things "whereunto we have attained, let us 
 walk by the same rule, let us mind the same 
 thing.' ' 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 POSITIVE ARGUMENT, FROM THE HISTORY 
 OF THE ANCIENT CHURCH. 
 
 As the mind naturally follows the onward 
 progress of things, the inquirer after truth 
 on this subject will ask, what was the usage 
 of the early church, in relation to Psalmody? 
 Let it be borne in mind, that for the inter- 
 pretation of Scripture we do not require the 
 aid of the ancient christian writers, we hav- 
 ing the oracles of God ourselves, and as 
 good helps for understanding them as they 
 had. But, as historians, they are of use to 
 fiu ; nor are they silent concerning the 
 order and mode of worship in their times. 
 
ON PSALMODY. 71 
 
 We do not refer to them as authority, or for 
 agument, but for information. 
 
 Before giving the testimony of christian 
 writers, I will notice an incidental reference 
 to the custom of christians, in the celebrated 
 letter of Pliny to Trajan. Pliny was thirty- 
 seven years old, at the time of the death of 
 the apostle John, and this letter was written 
 in the very beginning of the second century. 
 He says of the Christians, "They are ac- 
 customed among themselves, alternately, to 
 rehearse a song to Christ as a God.' 7 The 
 expression, 'among themselves, alternately,' 
 secum invicere, seems to correspond with 
 the Greek uw*ous % "to yourselves," in Eph. 
 v, 18, and Col. iii, 16. Beza translates it, 
 inter vos, mutuo, between you, reciprocally. 
 
 Justin Martyr lived about the middle of 
 the second century, Eusebius mentions his 
 having written a work called Psaltes, the 
 Psalmist. Tertullian, a little later in the 
 same century, wrote as follows, in reference 
 to the custom of singing in the church : 
 "Each one is called out into the midst, to 
 sing unto God, either from the Scriptures 
 or from his own mind, as he is able." De 
 Scripturis vel de proprio ingenio. [See 
 Poole's Synopsis on Matt, xxv, 30. 
 
 Eusebius, in his history of the first three 
 centuries, quotes a certain writer, as using 
 the following language to prove against the 
 
73 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 Arians, the divinity of Christ, and that 
 it had been held in the church from the be- 
 ginning: "Who does not know the works of 
 Ireneus and Melito and the rest, in which 
 Christ is announced as God? Whatever 
 Psalms and Hymns were written by the 
 brethren from the beginning, celebrate Christ, 
 the Word of God, by asserting his divinity." 
 He also says that Paul of Samosata "stopped 
 the Psalms that were sung in honor of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, as the late compositions 
 of modern men." In conformity with these 
 and other historical testimonies in the an- 
 cient writers, the learned Xeander says, 
 -"The Hymns used in the worship of God 
 were appealed to, in the second and begin- 
 ning of the third century, in proof of the 
 incarnation and divinity of Christ." Hist, 
 pp. 192, 376. 
 
 I make no comments on these historical 
 testimonies. They show, as plain as lan- 
 guage can express it, that hymns of human 
 composition were used in the second century. 
 I have known persons try to pervert some of 
 them to the opposite service, but they have 
 always demonstrated, by their efforts, that 
 it was contrary to the natural meaning and 
 intent of the words. The case from Ter- 
 tullian has never before, I think, been cited 
 in the discussion of this subject. It would 
 b© worth an effort of some practiced sophist. 
 
ON PSALMODY. 73 
 
 to try what he could make out of the words 
 u de proprio ingenio," favorable to the ex- 
 clusive use of the Psalms. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 GLANCE AT THE PSALMODY OF THE REFORMA- 
 TION PERIOD AND OLD PSALMODY 
 
 CONTROVERSIES. 
 
 It is not probable that the churches of the 
 Reformation were long, if they were for any 
 period, without singing in their public wor- 
 ship. But there is a short interval, in which 
 it is difficult to tell what was the manner of 
 conducting this part of their worship, or 
 what songs were used. They may have 
 continued some of the old Hymns and 
 Chants to which they had been accustomed, 
 and they may have prepared Hymns for 
 themselves. The attention of the Reform- 
 ers was principally directed to the propaga- 
 tion of the gospel doctrines and the recov- 
 ery of the people from the errors and 
 superstitions of Popery. 
 
 The doctrines of the Reformation, it is 
 well known, spread rapidly in France, and 
 were embraced by persons of the highest 
 CI 
 
7-4 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 distinction and learning. Many avowed 
 their attachment to them publicly, and 
 many, who made no change in their former 
 relation to the old religious establishment, 
 gave the Reformed doctrines their approba- 
 tion and influence. 
 
 About the year 1540, a French poet, 
 named Clement Marot, who- regarded the 
 Reformation with favor, translated the first 
 fifty Psalms into French verse, and dedicated 
 his work, in a somewhat fanciful and flatter- 
 ing style, to Francis I, the reigning monarch, 
 to whom also Calvin dedicate Jhis celebrated 
 Institutes. Marot was a court poet, a pop- 
 ular writer, though not at this time a very 
 exemplary character. His translation of 
 the Psalms was not intended by him for use 
 in the - public worship of God, although 
 thev afterwards became a powerful auxiliary 
 to the spread of the Reformed religion, by 
 their pervading influence on the minds of 
 the people. He adapted his measures to the 
 popular tunes, which had hitherto been asso- 
 ciated with songs, many of which were far 
 from being of a good moral tendency. 
 From their being the work of a popular 
 poet, and from their being fitted to familiar 
 and favorite tunes, and from the novelty of 
 their themes, they soon gained a wide-spread 
 popularity. They were sung by the gallants 
 of the court, and by the nobility, male and 
 
ON PSALMODY. T5 
 
 female, and shortly resounded through all 
 the streets of Paris, being sung to the com- 
 mon vaudevilles and street tunes, and often 
 with the accompaniment of the fiddle. 
 
 There seemed to be no thought of employ- 
 ing them in the exercise of worship; for, at 
 this time and for twelve or fifteen years 
 afterwards, there was no organized Protes- 
 tant congregation i in Paris. The popish 
 clergy, therefore, made no opposition to 
 them. Indeed, they were so well received 
 at court, that their opposition would have 
 been vain. The Queen's favorite was the 
 sixth, which she sung to a fashionable ditty 
 tune. The Dauphin, fond of hunting, chose 
 the 42d — "As the hart panteth for the 
 water-brooks." Antony, king of Navarre, 
 sung, "Avenge me, Lord,Gn mine ene- 
 mies," &c. 
 
 These Psalms, however, soon found their 
 way to persons who knew how to use them 
 in ways more congenial with their intrinsic 
 value. The intelligent and pious christians 
 of Geneva used them in the solemn worship 
 of God. Beza translated the other one 
 hundred Psalms into French verse, and the 
 whole were then printed, in connexion with 
 the Geneva Catechism, and were for a long 
 time popular and useful in celebrating the 
 praises of< iGrod, botH in Switzerland and in 
 France. The popish plergy, who saw no 
 
76 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 heresy in them whil 3 they were only sung 
 for amusement, and were carelessly hummed 
 by the people, in their sports and at their 
 work: now, when they came into use in the 
 divine worship, denounced them as full of 
 heresy. And to wean the people from their 
 attachment to them and divert them to a 
 substitute, they actually put forth a versifi- 
 cation of the Odes of Horace, a heathen 
 poet, suited to the same fashionable tunes, 
 that were used in singing Marot's Psalms. 
 But the trick did not succeed. 
 
 A few years after the adoption of Marot's 
 Psalms in the churches on the continent, an 
 English version was made by the joint labors 
 of several poets of the day. Thomas Stern- 
 hold, John Hopkins. "Whytingham, Norton, 
 Robert Wisdome, and some others contribu- 
 ted to this work. The principal part of it 
 however, was done by the two first men- 
 tioned, and the version is known by their 
 names. Sternhold was, like Marot, a court 
 poet, highly favored and patronized by Hen- 
 ry VIII, and afterwards by Edward VI, in 
 whose reign, in the year 1548, his fifty-one 
 Psalms were published. He held the office 
 of Groom of the Ptobes to Henry. Hop- 
 kins was a clergyman. He versified fifty- 
 eight of the Psalms. Whytingham was also 
 a minister and a Hebrew scholar. He assis- 
 ted Coverdale in the translation of the Bible 
 
OX PSALMODY. 
 
 into English; He was the successor of 
 John Knox, in the pastorate of a church in 
 Geneva, and was afterwards dean of Dur- 
 ham, in the English church; a man of learn- 
 ing, strict orthodoxy and irreproachable 
 character. He versified the 100th and 119th 
 Psalms. He also wrote some hymns and 
 versified the Commandments and the Creed. 
 Norton was a lawyer, a strict Calvinist. He 
 translated Calvin's Institutes, in the begin- 
 ning of the rei^n of Elizabeth. Wisdome 
 was a minister of the English church. He 
 does not appear to have been much of a 
 poet; he versified the 25th of the collection. 
 He must have written more, for an English 
 writer introduces a precisian as saying — - 
 "he had rather hear one of Robert Wis- 
 dome's Psalms than the best hymn that a 
 cherubim can sing.' L, The whole collection 
 was finished in l&gi and published in /dis- 
 connexion with theTPrayer Book. 
 
 The age of Edward VI and of Elizabeth 
 was characterized by a prevalent passion 
 for Psalm making and Psalm singing. The 
 papists had no religious songs for the peo- 
 ple, and their other songs were of the most 
 lewd and immoral character. A new field 
 of literature was now opened, and it was 
 entered by a host of poets, whose produc- 
 tions constituted a most fashionable species 
 of entertainment for all classes of the peo- 
 
78 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 pie, who were glad to be freed from the vile 
 trash which had deluged them. Poets that 
 had any pretension to a religious character, 
 were ready to avail themselves of the favor- 
 ing taste of the times, to drive into merited 
 oblivion the corrupting songs that had, un- 
 der the regime of the bloody Mary and the 
 papacy, polluted the public morals. Almost 
 every part of the Bible was subjected 
 to the rhyming genius of the age, not that 
 it might be sung, but that it might wear the 
 attractive form demanded by the prevailing 
 taste, and receive thereby the attention of 
 the reading public. Hence didactic and 
 historical portions of the Bible, as well as 
 the poetic and lyric portions, were duly 
 turned into "Englysshe metre." 
 
 The whole Book of Psalms was versified 
 . by Archbishop Parker, and printed in 1557, 
 1 v but never published.-. ' Of his work the fol- 
 lowing may be taken as a fair and favorable 
 specimen : I retain the peculiar pointing and 
 the old orthography. 
 
 To f'eede my neede: he will me leade 
 
 To pastures greeueand fat: 
 He forth brought me : in libertie : 
 
 To waters delicate. 
 
 My soul and hart : he did convart, 
 
 To me he showth the path : 
 Of right vvisness: in holiness, 
 
 His name such vertue hath. - 
 
 . 
 
ON PSALMODY. 79 
 
 Yea though I go: through death his wo 
 
 His vale and shadow wyde: . 
 I fear no dart: with me thou art 
 
 With rod and staffe to guide. 
 
 A version of some of them was made by- 
 Lord Surry; of others, by Sir Thomas Wyatt, 
 in 1549; and afterwards a number of them 
 were put into verse by King James I. Wil- 
 liam Hunnis, a poet of some celebrity in the 
 age of Edward VI, published a work with 
 the following title — " Certayne Psalmes cho- 
 sen out of the Psalter of David, and drawen 
 furth into Englyshe metre, by William Hun- 
 nis, 1550." There was considerable point 
 and smoothness in his style, if we may judge 
 by the following, which was in bis last will 
 and testament. What will not men put into 
 metre, when the fashion favors ? 
 
 " To God my soul I do bequeathe, 
 
 Because it is oweir, 
 My body to be layd in grave, 
 
 Where to my friends best known. 
 Executors, I wyll make none, 
 
 Thereby 'great stryfFemay growe, 
 Because the goodes that I shall leave 
 
 Wyll not pay all I owe." 
 
 Hunnis published many pieces in metre. 
 The titles of some of them are in the quaint 
 alliterative style that was popular at that 
 period. Such are " Seven sobs of a sorrow- 
 ing soul for sin:" "A handful of Honey- 
 
80 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 suckles," containing Blessings out of Deu- 
 teronomy, a prayer to Christ, &c. in metre. 
 He also translated the whole Book of Gene- 
 sis into English rhyme, and the work, was 
 entitled a Hive full of Honey — "A Hyve 
 full of Hunnye.' 
 
 One of the most remarkable productions 
 was, The Acts of the Apostles in rhyme. 
 Its author was a remarkable character, 
 named Christopher Tye, a doctor of music, 
 in Cambridge. He employed his talents, 
 both as a poet and music teacher, in putting 
 into rhyme and tune a historical book. Some 
 of the music of Tye is admired to this day. 
 His work, designed to be sung in the royal 
 chapel, was dedicated u To the vertuous and 
 godlye learned prynce Edward the sixth," 
 in a somewhat protracted effusion of the 
 muse. The following gives a sample of the 
 poetry of the times, and also some informa- 
 tion of the extent of the rhyming propensity 
 of that age : 
 
 "Your grace may note, from time to time, 
 
 That some doth undertake 
 Upon the Psalms to write in rhyme. 
 
 The verse pleasant to make; 
 And some doth take in hand to write 
 
 Out of the Book of Kings, 
 Because they see your grace delight 
 
 In such like godly things. 
 And last of all, I, your poor man, 
 
 Whose doings are full base, 
 
ON PSALMODY. 81 
 
 Yet glad to do the best I can, 
 
 To give unto your grace, 
 Have thought it good now to recite 
 
 The stories of the Acts, 
 Even of the Twelve as Luke doth write, 
 
 Of all their worthy facts." 
 
 He also asserts his implicit fidelity to the 
 original, which seems to have been the hon- 
 est effort of all the rhyming translators : 
 
 " Unto the text I do not add, 
 
 Nor nothing take away, 
 And tho' my style is gross and bad. 
 
 The truth perceive you may." 
 
 The general character of the efforts in 
 poetry, of these times, is plainness and sim- 
 plicity. In subsequent times it has often 
 been tried to modernize the old productions, 
 by the substitution of current for obsolete 
 words, by divesting them of their antique 
 forms of expression, and by the adoption of 
 our orthography. But such endeavors have 
 generally proved futile. They impart a 
 mixed and motely character to the works, 
 which lose more in force by the operation, 
 than they gain in beauty. Such efforts have 
 been made more than once on Rouse's ver- 
 sion, and have generally resulted in a like 
 failure. Yet these failures do not extin- 
 guish the desire for some "improvement of 
 the version of Psalms,'' nor prevent the 
 repetition of the efforts ; nor will they, until 
 
82 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 in despair of success, the veneration for 
 antiquity and the force of long habit and 
 predilection is broken through, by a well 
 directed endeavor to make an entirely new 
 version. There are few stronger prejudices 
 than those which are built upon the old gray 
 rocks of " antiquity." Indolence and habit 
 are their two flanking towers. That a thing 
 has been long used, gives it a strong claim 
 to be continued in use; and its long use has 
 rendered it easy, easier than a new thing of 
 the same kind can be. The roughness of 
 style, in a book, is not noticed by one who 
 has become familiar with it. By use and 
 handling it seems smooth to him, while the 
 gentle, easy flow of thought, in a book of 
 different style, is mistaken for flatness and 
 insipidity. He misses the angular, the 
 inverted, the obscure in thought and expres- 
 sion, as a man might miss the pungent 
 seasoning from his food. 
 
 All this, as has been illustrated in the pro 
 and con sentiments of christian people, in 
 reference to Rouse's version, which is now 
 over two hundred years old, was felt in ref- 
 erence to Sternhold's when it was less than 
 half that age. Indeed, the parallel is so 
 close, in several respects, between the con- 
 troversy in that case and the one of which 
 I am writing, that I cannot forbear to 
 notice it further. 
 
OX PSALMODY. 83" 
 
 George Wither, a poet of the 17th cen- 
 tury, turned his attention to the versification 
 of the Psalms. He claims to have used that 
 " simplicity of speech that best becometh 
 the subject," and to have as naturally and 
 plainly expressed the sense of Scripture as 
 most tranlations in prose have done. His 
 " Hymns and songs of the church" were 
 published in 1623, by licence of King James 
 I. From the following specimen, taken 
 from the first Psalm, he appears to have 
 been as good a poet and translator w 
 Sternhold or Rouse. 
 
 '•Blest is the man who neither strays 
 Where the godless man misguideth, 
 
 Neither stands in sinners' ways, 
 Nor in scorneiv chair abideth, 
 
 But in God's pure law delights, 
 
 Thereon musing days and nights." 
 
 But good George Wither found people, 
 in his day, who were so much attached to 
 the Psalms of Sternhold and Hopkins, which 
 had been in use less than a hundred years, 
 that they would, by no means, allow his 
 version to be sung. Nay, they were shocked 
 at his presumption in attempting a version, 
 after Sternhold and Hopkins had made one, 
 some seventy odd years before. And with 
 a good deal of spirit, he replies to those 
 who charged bim with " indecently obtruding 
 himself upon the divine calling" — 
 
84 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 M I wonder what * divine calling ' Hopkins and Stern- 
 hold had more than I have, that their metrical Psalms 
 may be allowed of rather than my Hymns! Surely, if* 
 to be grooms of the privy chamber were sufficient to 
 qualify the n, that profession that I am of (the law) may 
 as well fit me for what I have undertaken. 
 
 Wither not only calls in question the 
 "divine calling" of Sternhold and Hopkins, 
 but he ventures, as some have done with 
 Rouse's, to make some criticisms on their 
 performance. With great modesty and can- 
 dor, he exonerates himself from blame in 
 so doing. He says— 
 
 " Excuse me, if I seem a little too plain in discovering 
 the faultiness of that whereof so many are ovenceening ; 
 for I do it, not to disparage the pious endeavors of those 
 who took pains in that translation ; but rather commen- 
 ding their laborious and christian intention, do acknowl- 
 edge that (considering the times they lived in and of what 
 quality they were) they made such a worthy attempt as 
 may justly shame us who come after; to see it no better 
 seconded during all the flourishing times that have fol- 
 lowed that troublesome age, especially seeing how curi- 
 ously our language and expression are refined in our 
 trivial discourses." 
 
 There is excellent good sense in these 
 observations. Why should the improve- 
 ments in language, which are carefully stud- 
 ied and highly prized in our '* trivial" that 
 is, our ordinary discourses — our sermon3, 
 our religious treatises, and in all our litera- 
 
02T PSALMODY. 
 
 ture — be sedulously excluded from our songs 
 of praise ? To have versified the Psalms in 
 the 16th or I7th century, does not give a 
 person any better claim to a " divine calling," 
 and does not stamp upon his work a "divine 
 warrant," any more than it does, to have 
 done the same thing in the 19th century. 
 Nor is there any impropriety in trying to 
 improve upon a former effort made by oth- 
 ers : their work was performed with a good 
 intent, and with good success, " considering 
 the times they lived in." But "it may 
 justly shame us who come after," if with 
 means and opportunity of improving upon 
 it, in the " language and expression," we 
 refuse to do it. This is just what the Asso- 
 ciate Reformed church does, in reference to 
 Rouse's version, which is now over two hun- 
 dred years old. 
 
 During these two hundred years, very 
 great changes have occurred in language 
 and the style of expression. And it is 
 not strange, if some works that were form- 
 erly grave, clear and respectable, should 
 have contracted such an air of quaintness 
 and obscurity, as to be neither attractive 
 nor edifying. There is a fashion in litera- 
 ture, as well as in dress. And the impress 
 of fashion is more observable on poetry than 
 on prose, because it is more susceptible of 
 the gay and ornamental. Hence antique 
 
86 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 poetry is more likely than prose to bene- 
 glected, as difficult to understand, or to be rid- 
 iculed, as quaint and comical. In this treat- 
 ment our versification of Psalms has shared, 
 in common with other productions of the sev- 
 enteenth century. The sacredness of its 
 themes, and the frequent beauty and -sim- 
 plicity of its measures, have, aided to main- 
 tain its position and repute in the church, 
 although they have not been able to protect 
 its many faults and weaknesses from criti- 
 cism. And while, by the concurring verdicts 
 of parties receiving and parties rejecting 
 this version, its dress and air are not ap- 
 proximate to the divine excellence, of the 
 original, the culpability of those who retain 
 it with its faults, is scarcely less than that 
 of those who reject it for its faults. 
 
 The versifying of Psalms, then, was com- 
 mon in the reformation period of the church; 
 and the use of paraphrases and hymns was 
 not deemed derogatory to the inspired 
 Psalter. They were intended not to super- 
 cede, but as Withers says, "jto keep company 
 with David's Psalms." This is the same 
 idea that is expressed in the Act of the 
 Associate Reformed Synod, in 1793, which 
 censures as a corruption of the worship, "the 
 substitution of devotional songs, composed 
 by uninspired men, in the place of the sa- 
 cred songs of Scripture. '' 
 
--ON -PSALMODY. 87 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 PSALMODY IN THE OLD SCOTTISH CHURCHES. 
 
 The doctrine, that it is wrong to sing 
 in the praise of God anything except the 
 one hundred and fifty Psalms of the Old 
 Testament, was never held by the church of 
 Scotland. Neither did the Secession church 
 in Scotland take that ground. The church 
 of Scotland adopted Rouse's version in the 
 year 1649, after it had been under consider- 
 ation for some time. In 1647, in the 18th 
 Session 6f the Assembly, an* Act was passed 
 for examining the labors of Mr. Zachary 
 Boyd, upon the other scripture songs; which 
 shows that the church of Scotland, at that 
 early period, even while they had Rouse's 
 version of the Psalms under consideration, 
 contemplated the enlargement of their Psal- 
 mody. The same thing was contemplated 
 and attempted by the Secession church, a 
 hundred years later, that is, immediately 
 after their secession from the established 
 church. The truth of both these statements 
 will appear from the testimonies -which, I 
 shall shortly give. 
 
88 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 I am aware that the contrary is affirmed 
 by our brethren, who desire to enlist the 
 testimony of the Scottish church in favor of 
 their views. And for this purpose they lay 
 great stress on the "deliverance" of the As- 
 sembly and the Act of Parliament, which 
 "ordain" the use of the new version, 
 Rouse's, and "discharge all the old para- 
 phrases" or versions. This is made to mean, 
 that the church of Scotland appointed 
 these Psalms to be used, to the exclusion of 
 every thing else, in the praise of God. If 
 this were their meaning, why did they take 
 into consideration Mr. Zachary Boyd's la- 
 bors upon the other scripture songs? No, 
 it is not their meaning. But having satis- 
 fied themselves of the excellence of the new 
 version of the Psalms, they adopted it, and 
 "ordained" it to be used in praising God, 
 so far as the Book of Psalms was concerned; 
 but they still designed to add to this, metri- 
 cal versions of the " other songs of Scrip- 
 ture." The design demonstates their views 
 of the subject, and proves conclusively that 
 they had very different views from those 
 bretheren in this country, who regard the 
 singing even of scripture songs, besides 
 the Psalms to be a corruption of divine wor- 
 ship. Why they did not carry out their 
 design, I have not the means of knowing. 
 Perhaps the labors of Mr. Zachary Boyd 
 
ON PSALMODY. 
 
 were not found to be satisfactory. From 
 all accounts of his performance in the de- 
 partment of versification, I do not wonder 
 that the Assembly declined his production. 
 But, I repeat, their design to enlarge their 
 Psalmody as clearly proves their belief of 
 its propriety, as the accomplishment of it 
 would have done. 
 
 And it was a design which the church of 
 Scotland did not relinquish, for, in the As- 
 sembly of 1701, Session 4th, "The scrip- 
 ture songs of Mr. Patrick Sympson, Minis- 
 ter of Renfrew, are recommended to be used 
 in private families, and in order to prepare 
 them for the public use of the church." 
 This recommendation was renewed by the 
 Assembly in 1707. And by the loth Act, 
 of April, 1708, the Commission of the 
 Assembly is 
 
 ''Instructed and appointed to consider the printed 
 version of the scripture so igs," (not the Psalms) "with 
 the remarks of the Presbyteries thereupon, and after 
 examination thereof, they are authorized and empow- 
 ered to conclude and emit the same, for the public use of 
 the church; the present version of the Psalms" (that is 
 Rouse's) fi having been ordered in the same manner, m 
 the year 1649." 
 
 These statements are taken from Stewart 
 
 of Pardovan's Collection of the Acts of the 
 
 church of Scotland. And they fully prove, 
 
 that no such notion as that which prevails 
 
 C2 
 
90 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 in the Associate Reformed Synod of the 
 West, had any place in the minds of those 
 noble and godly men. It is nugatory to 
 attempt to evade the conclusion drawn from 
 these historical facts. And it is also useless 
 to refer to the Act of Assembly and the 
 Act of Parliament of 1650, ordaining the 
 new " paraphrase of the Psalms," and " dis- 
 charging," that is, prohibiting the old para- 
 phrase of the Psalms, which had hitherto 
 been us^d; and the same may be said of the 
 warm recommendation of Rouse's version, 
 by Owen, Manton and others, for these 
 relate only to the Psalms, and not to the 
 "other scripture songs," the paraphrases of 
 which were yet under consideration, and 
 which do not appear to hare been satisfac- 
 torily finished, until the year 1708, as has 
 been stated above. 
 
 But, in order to turn the point of this 
 argument, it may be said, much more ab- 
 surd things have been said by controver- 
 sialists on this subject, in their extremity— 
 that the Scottish church was a corrupt body, 
 as was shown by the necessity for secession 
 from it. When was it a corrupt body? 
 Was it in 1647, when the labors of Mr. 
 Zachary Boyd on the "other scripture 
 songs" were examined by the Assembly, 
 with reference to the enlargement of the 
 church's Psalmody? This was only two or 
 
OX PSALMODY. 91 
 
 three years anterior to the time that Rouse's 
 version was adopted; it was in the very era 
 of the Westminster Assembly. Whether it 
 was a corrupt body in 1708, or whether it was 
 not, are questions that have no pertinency 
 on this subject. The corruption of the 
 body which, in 1733-7, rendered the se- 
 cession of the Erskines, in their judgment, 
 necessary, had no connexion with the subject 
 of Psalmody. It is well known, that it was 
 nothing in the mode of worship, or even in 
 the doctrine of the church, that occasioned 
 the secession; but matters connected with 
 ecclesiastical administration by corrupt ju- 
 dicatories. Indeed, the early seceders were 
 careful to say, that they did not separate 
 from the church but from a corrupt dominant 
 party in it. But Psalmody certainly had 
 no connexion with that separation, 
 
 It has before been said, that the original 
 seceders in Scotland did not hold the senti- 
 ment that has unfortunately crept into the 
 Associate Reformed church. Ralph Ers- 
 kine, one of those original seceders, will be 
 admitted as good authority. And his testi- 
 mony, I trust, will also be taken as to the 
 sound condition of the church of Scotland, 
 when she undertook to enlarge her Psalm- 
 ody. Read his words : 
 
 "The work of turning all the rest of the scripture songs 
 into meter, as the Psalms of David are, and for the same 
 
92 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 ■public use, was proposed by the church of Scotland, more 
 than one hundred years ago, and that in one of the. mesi 
 noted per ic As of reformation; particularly by an Act of As- 
 sembly, August 28th, 1647." [See Er«kiae'<s preface 
 to his Scripture Songs, in the 10th volume of his Works. 
 
 But this is not all that we learn from 
 Erskine. He says, in the same preface, 
 that he was recommended publicly by the 
 Associate Presbytery, in 1747, to versify 
 the other " scripture songs," that they might 
 be sung as the Psalms of David were. And 
 this great and godly man, one of the origi- 
 nal fathers of the Secession church, under- 
 took the work prescribed to him by the 
 Associate Presbytery in 1747, and actually 
 accomplished the greater part of it. That 
 is, he turned into metre the poetical portions 
 of the Old and New Testaments; and be- 
 sides, wrote a large number of Hymns, 
 which fall, we presume, under the head of 
 "human compositions." Erskine's attention 
 was, for a short time, and the church's 
 attention was, for a long time, turned away 
 from this useful design, by the breaking out 
 of the unhappy controversy about the Bur- 
 gess Oath, which eventually divided the 
 body. These fruits of Erskine's labors may 
 be seen in the 10th volume of his Works. 
 
 Erskine's views on Psalmody, which coin- 
 cided with those of the church of Scotland, 
 in one of her "most noted periods of reform- 
 
ON PSALMODY. 93 
 
 ation" and also with those of the Secession 
 church, in the days of her primitive purity 
 and integrity, were very different from those 
 ■which now prevail in our part of the coun- 
 try, among the churches which have, by 
 ecclesiastical lineage, descended from Fisher 
 and the Erskines. 
 
 Let it not be said, that he was merely 
 exercising his poetical talents, as men do 
 now-a-days, for the recreation or edification 
 of readers, with no design of having; his 
 verses sung in the worship of God, for he 
 says — 
 
 "As the poems and songs here written, are in the 
 form of what is called rhyme and common metre, so 
 the reason thereof is, to answer the design proposed to 
 me, of making the scripture songs adapted to the com- 
 mon tunes, so as it may be practicable to sing them as ice 
 do the Psalms of David." [Defence of Rhyme and Metre 
 
 It appears further, that Erskine differed 
 from some of his ecclesiastical descendants, 
 in this country, not only on the subject of 
 "other scripture songs," but also in relation 
 to paraphrases and imitations. 
 
 " If more seem to be said, upou any verse in this song, 
 than is directly imported in it, I hope it will be reckoned 
 no great fault, it' what is said be deducible from it. or 
 necessary for the further explication of it, and for adap- 
 ting this paraphrase upon an Old Testanent song to a 
 Ne?v Testament dispensation." [Pref. to Paraphrase on 
 the Sons of Solomon. 
 
94 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 Should the reader apprehend from this 
 last expression, that Ralph Erskine had been 
 unduly familiar with Dr. Watt's views of 
 Psalmody, as set forth in his notorious 
 a Preface," I cannot say that he is much 
 mistaken. The name of Dr. Watts, I am 
 aware, is not much revered or loved by those 
 whose views I have been examining. His 
 Psalms and Hymns are believed to be very 
 bad productions, by hundreds of good peo- 
 ple who have never read or seen them. 
 And his Preface to them, is regarded as 
 little, if any, short of blank blasphemy. 
 To such injustice does party feeling urge 
 even good men, when chafed and heated in 
 sectarian strifes. And how refreshing it is, 
 to read the noble ingenuous testimony of 
 such a man as Erskine to the excellency of 
 such a man as Watts. He says — 
 
 "A famous and religious poet, in his Preface to his 
 excellent Hymns and Spiritual Songs," &c. [Preface 
 to Paraphrase of Song of Solomon. 
 
 It appears that Erskine not only read 
 and approved of Dr, Watts' Hymns, but 
 that he submitted his own productions to 
 Dr. Watts' inspection; for he says — 
 
 u The iorementioned eminent poet, by whose remarks, 
 of which I had a little specimen, perhaps the following 
 sheets had been better polished for the public, had his 
 circumstances allowed a more close and full review 
 thereof." 
 
OX PSALMODY. 95 
 
 From all that has been said on this part 
 of the subject, there is ample reason for the 
 belief, that the doctrine in the church of 
 Scotland and in the Secession church was 
 quite opposite to that of the Associate Re- 
 formed church, and quite in harmony "with 
 that of the Presbyterian. The Editor of 
 Ralph Erskine's Works states the correct 
 doctrine in the following style : 
 
 " Though the Psalms of David are truly excellent and 
 sublime, containing suitable matter for praise and ado- 
 ration, &c. yet there are many passages in them pecu- 
 liarly adapted to the old dispensation of carnal rites and 
 ceremonies, and. on that account, cannot be supposed to 
 be so clear and full of the grace and spirit of the gospel. 
 The consideration hereof hath induced many devout 
 and piously disposed persons, ardently and sincerely to 
 wish that our Psalmody were enlarged, not only by ad- 
 ding some other scripture songs out of the Old Testa- 
 ment, but particularly by selecting a number from the 
 New." 
 
 I might leave these historical statements, 
 without a word of comment or application. 
 They must make hnpressionns on every can- 
 did mind favorable to the views expressed in 
 the former part of this treatise. It is re- 
 markable that these pointed expressions in 
 a favorite author should not have fallen 
 under the eye of previous writers on the 
 subject of Psalmody. The churches which 
 sing the old version often speak of their 
 
96 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 views as harmonizing with those of the Scot- 
 tish people. But certainly the Scottish 
 people, in the days of the Erskines, did not 
 harmonize with them, on the subject of 
 "other scripture songs." There is a much 
 plainer and stronger resemblance between 
 the views of the Erskine period and those- 
 of the Presbyterian church. 
 
 CHAPTER XL 
 
 ARGUMENT FOR THE USE OF S0XGS OF 
 PRAISE, FROM THE HISTORY OF THE 
 ASSOCIATE REFORMED CHURCH. 
 The doctrine prevalent in a church, and 
 the doctrine of the standards of a church, 
 are not always the same thing. This is but 
 saying that a belief may become common in 
 a church, which, is at variance with its ac- 
 credited public confession. Instances of 
 this are too abundant and well known, to 
 require specifications. The same general 
 remark applies to practices in the church, 
 particularly those that are connected with 
 public worship. Both these statements are 
 true of the Associate Reformed church, in 
 relation to Psalmody. Neither the general 
 
ON PSALMODY. 97 
 
 belief nor the universal practice, in the 
 West, are supported by the standards of the 
 body. Now, as we are not obliged to esti- 
 mate our orthodoxy by the conformity of 
 our sentiments to those of others — measu- 
 ring ourselves by ourselves — as our neighbor, 
 «or our minister, or any prominent member 
 in the church, is neither the exponent nor 
 the pattern of our belief, we are clearly 
 bound to look for the real doctrines of the 
 church, in the authorized standards of the 
 church. Well, what is the doctrine of the 
 Associate Reformed church, on Psalmody? 
 It is expressed in the following words of the 
 Directory : 
 
 "It is the Will of.Gud, that the sacred songs con- 
 tained in the Book of Psalms, be sung in his worship. 
 jotli public and private, to the end of the world:; and 
 the rich variety and perfect purity of their matter, the 
 blessing of God upon them in every age, and the edifi- 
 cation of the church thence arising, set the propriety o* 
 singing them in a convincing light : nor shall any com- 
 posures merely human be sung in any of the Associate 
 Reformed churches.'' [Book 3, Ch. 2, Sec. 3. 
 
 On the first and principal part of this 
 article, there is entire unanimity in the 
 church;: all agree that it is right to sing the 
 sacred songs contained in the Book of 
 Psalms. But the article does not exclude 
 or prohibit other scripture songs, besides the 
 Psalms ; and therefore, the prevailing belief 
 C3 
 
A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 which does so, is astray from the Directory 
 and unsupported by it. But on the clause 
 about human composures, there always has 
 been, and is now great diversity of senti- 
 ment, in our church. Many have under- 
 stood it to be intended as a rule for regula- 
 ting the singing in our own congregations, 
 and not to be binding on our ministers or 
 our people when worshipping in churches of 
 other denominations. But whether this was 
 the intention of the framers of the Direc- 
 tory or not, it is very certain that the clause 
 referred to, does not exclude from our use 
 the other scripture songs of praise; and our 
 brethren, in making that exclusion, can give 
 no higher authority for it, than the " com- 
 mandments of men" of very recent times. 
 Surely, the Song of Solomon is not a 
 •'composure merely human;" the lofty 
 strains of the evangelical prophet are not 
 human composures ; the songs of praise 
 in the Apocalypse are not human compo- 
 sures. Why, then, are we prohibited from 
 using them in the offering of praise ? Our 
 standards do not forbid it, but our brethren 
 do. 
 
 Our present standards, containing the 
 above clause, were adopted in the year 
 1799. It is important to note, that this 
 ambiguous clause about " composures merely 
 human," was introduced as a compromise <w 
 
ON PSALMODY. 99 
 
 conflicting views. The original " Draught 
 of an Overture for the Government, Wor- 
 ship and Discipline of the Associate Re- 
 formed Church'' was printed 1796, and 
 after receiving a sort of general sanction by 
 Synod, was sent down to Presbyteries for 
 their examination and judgment. The ar- 
 ticle in this original Draft, shows that it was 
 never the thought or intention of the fra- 
 mers of our Directory to restrict the church, 
 in its praises, to the Book of Psalms. The 
 article is as follows : 
 
 u It is the will of God, that the sacred songs contained 
 in the Book of Psalms be sung in his worship to the end 
 of the world : besides which other songs of scripture may 
 be added to the system of Psalmody, as the judicatories oi 
 the church shall find for edification; and the rich varietv 
 and perfect purity of their matter," &c. 
 
 The next article in the same original 
 Draft says — 
 
 " The substitution of devotional songs by uninspired 
 men, in the room of the scripture Psalmody, on the prin- 
 ciple that the Book of Psalms or any part thereof are 
 unfit for New Testament worship, is a grievous corrup- 
 tion of the worship of God, and is therefore utterly pro- 
 hibited in all the Associate Reformed churches." 
 
 In the former article, the use of the other 
 songs of scripture is allowed and commend- 
 ed; for the concluding expressions, "the 
 rich variety/' &c. are equally applied to the 
 Psalms and to other scripture songs. The 
 
100 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 first part of the former article and the whole 1 
 of the latter are opposed to those who say 
 that the Psalms are not fit for New Testa- 
 ment worship; but they do not teach that 
 the Psalms alone are fit. The doctrine of 
 these articles is not, that the use of other 
 sacred songs, in addition to the Psalms^ Si 
 a corruption of worship, but that the substi- 
 tution of others in the room of the Psalms ife 
 a corruption. It was left for our brethren 
 of recent times, to find out that is like the 
 sin of Nadab and Abihu, to sing anything 
 besides the one hundred and fifty Psalms. 
 
 Although this original Draft was not 
 finally adopted as a part of our standards, 
 yet the fact that it was, by the Synod, sent 
 down to the Presbyteries for their judgment, 
 shows what was the prevalent feeling of the 
 church at the time. I have said that the 
 clause in our standards, "nor shall any 
 composures merely human," &c. was intro- 
 duced by compromise. This cannot be 
 made clear in any way so well as by a 
 contemporaneous letter from a prominent 
 member of Synod. We have seen what the 
 original Draft was, and we know what was 
 actually adopted and is in the standards of 
 the church , now, what was tne occasion and 
 manner of making the change? 
 
 The following extract of a letter from Dr. 
 J.. M. Mason to Dr. A. Proudfit show thisy 
 
ON PSALMODY. 101 
 
 and it shows a good deal more; it lets us 
 know what were his views of the subject 
 and his anticipations in relation to it. It is 
 dated, "New York, Sept. 6, 1797," while 
 the original draft was before the Presbyte- 
 ries. 
 
 " By a letter from Mr. Hemphill, which is next to of- 
 ficial from the Presbytery of South Carolina, I am in 
 formed that the clause about adding other scripture 
 songs to the compilation of Psalmody will, if persisted 
 in, hinder the reception of the Directory in that Pres- 
 Irytery. He says that neither he nor his brethren wish 
 to dictate to us on that subject, that they are willing we 
 should cherish our own views, but cannot consent to admit 
 as a term of communiun for themselves, a principle of 
 the correctness of which they are not satisfied; and 
 that if we will drop the phrase, ^'besides which other 
 scripture songs may be added,'' &c, and alter the con- 
 cluding one thus, * Nor shall any Psalms of mere human 
 composition be added, 1 or something similar, they will 
 not ask the insertion of any claus-e rejecting- the principle we 
 have established; and every thing will go smoothe and 
 easy." 
 
 "I have received the judgment of the First Presbyte 
 ry of Pennsylvania, and of the Presbytery of New York 
 bojth of which unanimously are, that it is best for the 
 peace and edification of the church, to accede to the pro 
 posal. I wish you to procure the sentiments of your 
 Presbytery without delay, and let me know, as the work 
 will be printed off before the meeting of Synod. There 
 is a powerful reason, in my judgment, for agreeing to 
 ^he alteration. As the clause now " (that is, in the origi- 
 nal Draft ) " recognizes the -principle of scriptural Psal- 
 C3* 
 
102 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 mody. it is so restricted as to be in fact useless: we are 
 tied dawn to other songs of scripture literally versified. By 
 erasing the clause we get rid of the restriction, and 
 should the Lord prepare the churches, at some future 
 period, for an enlarged system of Psalmody, they will be 
 able to apply the principle in a more liberal and effec- 
 tive manner than is possible nnder the existing provi- 
 sion." 
 
 From these statements it is perfectly evi- 
 dent, that the much discussed clause in our 
 Directory, "nor shall any composures 
 merely human," fcc. was adopted by the 
 framers of our standards, on the principle 
 of compromise; and that it was adopted 
 with the understanding and avowal that it 
 was less restricted in its meaning than the 
 clause in the original Draft, which it super- 
 ceded. Even the brethren in Carolina did 
 not ask the insertion of anything that would 
 reject the principle of a Psalmody more 
 extended than the Book of Psalms. They 
 were not " fully satisfied " of the correctness 
 of that principle, but as the rest of the 
 church was fully satisfied of it, they would 
 not dictate, but they would propose a differ- 
 ent phrase, and this proposal the rest of 
 the church, for peace and edification, acced- 
 ed to. 
 
 I now invite the reader's attention to 
 other periods of the history of the Associate 
 Reformed Church: and whether we take a 
 
EST PSALMODY. 108 
 
 view of the period anterior, or of that subse- 
 quent to 1799, we will discover a perpetual 
 diversity of sentiment on the subject of 
 psalmoclv. Take the earlier period. Our 
 church was formed in 1782. Four years 
 afterwards, in 1786, the version of Tate & 
 Brady, the Episcopal Psalmody, was used in 
 the Associate Reformed Church, in Boston. 
 The Synod, in the latter year, disapproved 
 of this as an innovation. But, that this did 
 not settle the matter, or show an entire unifor- 
 mity of sentiment, is evident from the fact 
 that the synod, next year, that is, in 1787, ap- 
 pointed a committee to prepare and publish an 
 overture for the illustration of the doctrines of 
 our Confession, in which the subject of psal- 
 mody was formally introduced. This publi- 
 cation was issued before the next meeting in 
 1788. It was called up at this meeting, but 
 it was, on motion, resolved, that the consid- 
 eration of it be postponed till the next year, 
 and that the members be all warmly solicited 
 to attend, and that they be fully prepared 
 to examine it with candor and impartiality. 
 (Minutes of 1788.) 
 
 At this same meeting, in view of the diffi- 
 culties in Rev. D. Annan's congregation, on 
 the subject of psalmody, it was, 
 
 "Resolved. That the members of Synod be solicited 
 to make themselves acquainted with Watts' version, and 
 Brady's version, and any other version now used by any 
 
104 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 of the Reformed Churches, that they may be prepared 
 to speak on the subject at the meeting of the Synod 
 sext year. And further agreed to recommend it to Mr. 
 D. Annan and his .session, to use as formerly, the Scots 
 version."— (Minutes of 1788, pp. 59. 60.) 
 
 Notwithstanding this urgent appeal to 
 the members of Synod, when they came 
 together next year, 1789, they had not made 
 up their minds on the subject of psalmody, 
 and all they did was to refer the considera- 
 tion of the overture, in which it was treated 
 of, to the presbyteries. The next year, 
 1790, after it had been published three 
 years, after it had been before two meetings 
 of the Synod, and one year in the consider- 
 ation of Presbyteries, the Synod of the As- 
 sociate Reformed Church recommended the 
 overture "as being in substance an excellent 
 and instructive exhibition of their views of 
 the confession." 
 
 Let the reader now attentively read the 
 following sentences of this overture, ap- 
 proved by the Synod after three years con- 
 sideration: 
 
 "We are not afraid to assert and vindicate the propri- 
 ety of using the Fsalms and songs of the Old Testament 
 in the praise of God." "We are extremely sorry Jo 
 observe a growing disrelish, in some churches, for the 
 Psalms of David, and other songs of Scripture. We 
 could wish for a more finished and poetical version of 
 these than any yet given to the churches. And we do 
 not mean to say, that hymns of human compositions may not 
 
ON PSALMODY. 105 
 
 be lawfully used in any case whatsoever. But we think 
 it safest generally, to adhere to a Scriptural Psalmody. '' 
 
 Now what have we here ? The doctrine 
 of our modern champions of psalmody? 
 The doctrine, that to sing anything beside 
 the one hundred and fifty Psalms is a cor- 
 ruption of worship? No, nothing of the kind. 
 But we have the doctrine of the church in 
 1797, and that of our directory in 1799, viz. 
 that the Psalms of the Bible are proper to 
 be sung, and that other scriptural songs 
 may be sung too. In the overture, the 
 ground is taken strongly for the Psalms of 
 David, which there was a disposition, in; 
 some quarters, to oppose. Indeed the action 
 of the church, both in the overture here re- 
 ferred to, and in the original and ultimate 
 drafts of the Directory, was all defensive of 
 the Psalms, intended to teach that the Old 
 Testament Psalms were fit to be sung, I 
 only remark, further, in reference to this 
 period and the sentiments that prevailed in 
 it, that the growing disrelish which our 
 fathers observed with extreme sorrow, has 
 come to a still greater magnitude in our 
 times; for our brethren not only disrelish, 
 but utterly repudiate from their psalmody, 
 those "songs of Scripture," to which our 
 fathers refer. 
 
 Were we to examine, in like manner, the 
 period posterior to the adoption* of our stand- 
 
jL06 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 ; ards in 1799, we should find that a similar 
 diversity of opinion prevailed on the sub- 
 ject of psalmocty. At different periods, the 
 church has been agitated with discussions 
 and debates upon it. Synods have differed 
 about it, and individuals have done the same. 
 They have never differed about the pro- 
 priety of singing the Scripture Psalms, but 
 they have never agreed in denying the pro- 
 priety of singing others. I do not ask the 
 reader, however, to go into this historical 
 review, yet I cannot forbear to state one 
 fact, as it shows how unsettled was the state 
 of the church on this subject, and how little 
 some knew of their own minds: In 1802, the 
 Synod was [applied to, by the Presbytery 
 of the Carolinas, to know the meaning of 
 the expression, "composures merely human, " 
 a phrase which they themselves suggested as 
 satisfactory to them, and which, in accomr 
 modation to their views, had been adopted 
 in our directory, only three years before! 
 
 With respect to the versification, in use 
 in our church, there has been always a de- 
 sire, cherished and expressed by many, for 
 its improvement. That it needs improve- 
 ment, has been denied by few. The highest 
 judicatories of the church have, several 
 times, undertaken it. In former times, I 
 mention it simply as a historical fact, and 
 with no invidious purpose, there was a dis- 
 
 . 
 
ON PSALMODY. 107 
 
 position in the Associate Church, or at least 
 with some of its members, to lay hold of any 
 such measure, or proposal even, and turn it 
 to the disadvantage of the Associate 
 Reformed Church, by glowing appeals to the 
 fears of those who are wont to regard all 
 changes as identical with defections. To 
 exonerate themselves from blame, the Synod, 
 in 1801, addressed the Presbytery of the 
 Carolinas in the following words: 
 
 "It is hoped that neither you, nor those under your 
 inspection, will be discouraged by difficulties, or sha- 
 ken by the many false reports, which have been and 
 are still circulating to the prejudice of the Synod, 
 such as their using or proposing a new system of 
 psalmody, or their authorizing families or churches 
 under, their inspection to do so.' ? 
 
 Still the false reports and fears, within or 
 without the church, did not extinguish the 
 desire or paralyze the efforts to obtain an 
 improved version of the psalms. And in 
 1810, the General Synod unanimously re- 
 solved to undertake the matter of procuring 
 one. But, lo! the next year, the Synod of 
 the Carolinas and Georgia, in their re- 
 port represent that many of their people 
 "were greatly alarmed at General Synod's 
 proposal of a new version of psalmody/' 
 Whether this news greatly alarmed the 
 General Synod or not, it is certain that the 
 undertaking fell through, and the new ver- 
 
108 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 rsion, notwithstanding half a score of efforts 
 since, is still a desideratum, with no great 
 •prospect of its being supplied, to alarm any 
 (body. 
 
 There is abundant evidence, both in- 
 ternal and external, that the object of the 
 fathers of the Associate Reformed Church 
 was, to oppose the sentiment which Dr. 
 Watts was understood to have advanced, 
 viz, That some of the Psalms of David are 
 unfit to be sung in the New Testament 
 Church. It was this, and not the addition 
 of hymns, that gave offence. It was the 
 substitution of his "imitations" of the psalms, 
 in the room of the Psalms, and not the use 
 of hymns, that was the ground of complaint. 
 Had Dr. Watts given a fair and close version 
 of all the Psalms, and annexed his hymns 
 and paraphrases, and suppressed some ex- 
 pressions in his preface, I verily believe that 
 the book would have met with little opposi- 
 tion from any quarter; for it would have ac- 
 corded with the acknowledged wants, and 
 express wishes of the church. It would 
 have been a near approximation to what the 
 church of Scotland attempted in one of her 
 "most noted periods of reformation," and 
 what the secession church desired in the 
 "days of Fisher and the Erskines." But the 
 preface, the fatal omission of some of the 
 psalms, and the very loose paraphrases of 
 
ON PSALMODY. 109 
 
 others, excited alarm; and that alarm has 
 ultimately driven a portion of the church to 
 assume an anomalous and unscriptural posi- 
 tion, in opposition to every hymn and song 
 of praise, inspired and uninspired alike, ex- 
 cept the one hundred and fifty psalms. 
 
 But this is not the doctrine of the stand- 
 ards of the church, whether historically or 
 scripturally interpreted. The standards ra- 
 ther teach that it is right to sing other 
 scripture songs. If, therefore, any congre- 
 gation desired to use paraphrases or versifi- 
 cations of Scripture which express praise to 
 God, there is nothing in the church stand- 
 ards to prevent. Or if individual members 
 or ministers worshipping in the churches of 
 other denominations, choose to join in prais- 
 ing God in an orthodox and spiritual song, 
 they do not expose themselves to legitimate 
 censure by so doing, To debar the people 
 from this privilege is spiritual tyranny, con- 
 trary to the spirit and design of our author- 
 ized church standards. And it is not less 
 contrary to the spirit and law of God's 
 word. 
 
 These remarks may perhaps suggest to 
 the reader the enquiry — Whether, for such a 
 cause, members are ever brought under 
 discipline. To gratify the curiosity that 
 prompts the enquiry, I will state that the 
 cases are not very many, but they do occur 
 Dt 
 
110 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 sometimes. Only two instances have oc- 
 curred within the sphere of my own observa- 
 tion. I refer to them, both as perversions of 
 the ordinance of church discipline, and also 
 as illustrations of the little practical use 
 that we make of the important speculative 
 distinction which our own writers on Psalm- 
 ody are careful to assure the public that we 
 maintain — the distinction between good ver- 
 sions and hymns. It is always said, and 
 that very earnestly and conspicuously, that 
 our contest with Presbyterians is not about 
 versions ; we do not contend for a particular 
 version; we want the best version; give us 
 a better version than we have and we are 
 ready to receive it, &c. &c. I have noticed 
 this matter, in a former part of this work, 
 but I am led by the subject to revert to it, 
 and to the cases alluded to, which illustrate 
 the degree of importance which is attached to 
 it, in the estimation of some of our brethren. 
 / One of the cases was as follows: An El- 
 der in one of our churches, spending the 
 night with a Presbyterian friend, at family 
 worship united with the household in singing 
 the following verses of the 92nd Psalm, 
 long metre : 
 
 ''Sweet is the work, my God, my king, 
 j/> To praise thy name, give thanks and sing. 
 
 \ ' To show thy love by morning light, 
 *\^ And talk of all thy truths at night. 
 
ON PSALMODY. Ill 
 
 2. Sweet is the day of sacred rest; 
 No mortal care shall seize my breast; 
 4 ! may my heart in tune be found, 
 Like David's harp of solemn sound.'' 
 
 For this offence, the man was censured 
 and suspended by the Session, and upon 
 appealing, by the Presbytery. He then 
 appealed to the Synod, but being unable to 
 attend the meeting, accompanied his appeal 
 with a request that the Synod would defer 
 action on it till the next year. But action 
 was not deferred, the sente nce of the lower 
 c ourts was affirmed, and the man was thro wn 
 out of the communion of the Associate 
 ^Re formed churchTin which he had been a 
 Ruling Elder, in good and regular standing. 
 
 JNow, as to the "question about versions:" 
 here is the Scottish version, which may be 
 compared with the above one of Watts : 
 
 "To render thanks unto the Lord 
 
 It is a comely thing, 
 And to thy name, O thou most high, 
 
 Due praise aloud to sing : 
 
 2. Thy loving kindness to show forth 
 
 When shines the morning light, 
 And to declare thy faithfulness 
 With pleasure every night 
 
 3. On a ten stringed instrument, 
 
 Upon the Psaltery ; 
 And on the harp with solemn sound 
 And iU'ave sweet melodv." 
 
112 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 For the convenience of the reader, making 
 a comparison of the two versions, I subjoin 
 the prose version. 
 
 " It is a good thing to give thanks unto the Lord, and t° 
 sing praises unto thy name, Most High : 
 
 2. To show forth thy loving kindness in the morning, 
 and thy faithfulness every night. 
 
 3. Upon an instrument of ten strings, and upon the 
 psaltery: upon the harp with solemn sound." 
 
 Now, upon fair comparison, it appears 
 that Watts' version is as good as House's, 
 of the first two verses in the prose. Watts' 
 second verse is not a close version; but it 
 expresses truthful and devout sentiments, 
 which the author, no doubt, thought were 
 implied in the allusions to the temple wor- 
 ship. And in singing them, a devout wor-" 
 shipper may do no more than is allowed, 
 nay, enjoined in the Directory of the Asso- 
 ciate Reformed church, "in singing those 
 parts of them [the Psalms] which are ex- 
 pressed in the ceremonial style, or describe 
 the circumstances of the writers, or of the 
 church in ancient times, we should have our 
 eye upon the general principles which are 
 implied in them, and which are applicable 
 to individuals or to the church in every 
 age." [Book 3, Ch. 3, Sec. 3. 
 
 If it should be said that there are words 
 in Watts' which are not in the prose, it is 
 admitted. And so there are in Rouse's; 
 
ON PSALMODY. 113 
 
 for it has been shown before, that there is 
 nothing in the prose to correspond to that 
 sweet and graphic line, so descriptive of 
 what church music should be — " grave, 
 sweet melody." 
 
 The other case did not end so unhappily, 
 in the exclusion of a person from the com- 
 munion of the church. Indeed, it was 
 rather comical than tragical, throughout. 
 A young minister, preaching in a Presbyte- 
 rian church, gave out for singing the 100th 
 Psalm, long metre; that is, one of Watts' 
 Psalms. Whether it was from embarrass- 
 ment, or forgetfulness, or practical views of 
 the "question of versions," or indifference, 
 I do not know. But so it was; and the 
 Psalm was sung by the congregation, with- 
 out their knowing that any wrong had been 
 done. Some gossip, however, treasured up 
 this part of the service for future use; and 
 on the earliest opportunity,, one of the 
 watchful guardians of orthodoxy and order 
 solemnly spread the case before the Presby- 
 tery, and proposed something like a censure 
 on the young brother — a mild one, it is true 
 — just enough to make him think he had 
 done something wrong. 
 
 Well here again, in the discussion, the 
 "question of versions" came fairly up, and 
 the important speculative distinction was 
 again fairly dodged in practice. One of the 
 
114 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 members called attention to that distinction 
 by saying, with more diversion to himself, 
 probably, than to his brethren, "I am 
 scarcely prepared to vote for this resolution. 
 We have the highest personal authority in the 
 church for saying that our controversy with 
 Presbyterians is not about versions. I am 
 not able, at this moment, to say whether 
 the 100th Psalm of Watts is a good version 
 of David's Psalm or not. If it is, then ac- 
 cording to our own theory no fault has been 
 committed, and surely we would not censure 
 a person for singing a good version of a 
 Bible Psalm. But, non est tanti— the re- 
 mark has not weight enough to defeat or 
 defer the action. I have the resolution 
 before me: it is something of a curiosity. 
 
 Now, if the reader will compare the 100th 
 Psalm, first part, in the Presbyterian book, 
 and the 100th Psalm, long metre, in the 
 Associate Reformed book, with the prose 
 translation in the Bible, he will find that 
 the former is the closer paraphrase of the 
 two I 
 
 In these two cases, then, we seethe judi- 
 catories of the church chastizing one per- 
 son out of their communion, and showing 
 the rod of discipline to another, for doing 
 what is not forbidden in the word of God, 
 what is not forbidden in the church stand- 
 ards, and what is in perfect agreement .with 
 
ON PSALMODY. 115 
 
 their own theory and their own repeated 
 statements on the " question of versions." 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 SOME ARGUMENTS OF A SECONDARY CLASS 
 NOTICED. 
 
 Although I might here suspend my ex- 
 amination of this subject, with the convic- 
 tion that enough had been dc ne to show the 
 incorrectness and novelty of the notion 
 prevalent in the Associate Reformed church, 
 yet, lest I should appear forgetful or unjust, 
 I will briefly notice some other arguments 
 of a subordinate character. 
 
 1. It is said, "in singing the Psalms of 
 David, the worshipper has a feeling of con- 
 fidence that what he is singing is acceptable 
 to God, which he cannot have in singing 
 other hymns and paraphrases.'' In u »ing 
 this argument, it is common to exhibit 
 strong contrasts between Bible Psalms and 
 human composures ; the words of inspiration 
 and the tinkling fancies of poets; translations 
 *&nd imitations ; the songs of Zion and those 
 
116 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 of Parnassus. But let us look at it, with 
 the eyes of candor and in the light of logic 
 and scripture. I answer, then, 
 
 1st. No man of intelligent piety will place 
 the words of men on a level with the word 
 of God : but a poetical translation of Isaiah's 
 or of John's writings is no more a " human 
 composure" than a like translation of Da- 
 vid's Psalms is a human composure. And 
 the confidence that restricts us to the one 
 and repudiates the other, assimilates toe 
 nearly to the character of caprice and pre- 
 judice, to be entitled to much credit as a 
 ground of argument. Many a person has 
 been confident that he was doing an accep- 
 table service to God, who might better have 
 been employed in some other way. 
 
 2nd. In singing hymns, we have the same 
 standard and method of judging of their 
 agreement with the teachings of God's word, 
 that we have for sermons, prayers, books 
 and conduct. If they are approved by that 
 word, why may we not have confidence that 
 they are right? and, if right, why may we 
 not have confidence that they are acceptable 
 to God? If they are not agreeable in sen- 
 timent to the word of God, we should reject 
 them. But it is no part of wisdom or 
 piety, to treat the good and the bad alike, 
 rejecting the former as much as the latter. 
 
 3d. The odium that has attached to the- 
 
ON PSALMODY. 117 
 
 idea of "imitations," in this discussion, is 
 more real than reasonable. An imitation 
 of a good thing is good in proportion to the 
 closeness of the resemblance. The best 
 imitation of a Psalm, is what comes nearest 
 to the Psalm itself: even as a book is the 
 best religious book which comes nearest to 
 the Bible. If an imitation claims to be the 
 original, or of equal authority, it is then a 
 counterfeit. But this claim is not made for 
 any version or paraphrase or imitation ex- 
 cept ours, which is perpetually called the 
 "Inspired Psalter," "the God-given Psalm 
 Book." 
 
 4th. From the mere fact that we are 
 singing the words of scripture, we cannot be 
 sure that we are praising God aright; unless 
 it is certain that those words are never 
 misapplied, never perverted, never misun- 
 derstood. The form of words may be used 
 and yet not used rightly; and then the 
 confidence that we are worshipping God 
 acceptably will be a false confidence. This 
 is the fatal delusion in all formalism. The 
 familiar enquiry, often urged with a tingling 
 emphasis on the ear of hymn singers, "Who 
 hath required this at your hands?" (Is. i ? 
 12,) was not addressed to those who failed in 
 the matter and form of their service, but who 
 failed in the spirit of it, while they observed 
 the form. And the sin of Nadab and Abihu, 
 
118 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 so often drawn forth to gleam its minatory 
 terrors on the singers of hymns, did not 
 consist in the adulteration of the incense, 
 but in offering it with strange fire. Both 
 these historical events may be pondered 
 with advantage, as well by those who sing 
 the old Psalms as by those who sing the 
 new, and they may afford admonition to all; 
 to rest not in forms, but to worship God in 
 spirit and in truth; for such worship he 
 approves and accepts. 
 
 2. Another argument is, that the churches 
 which have left the Bible Psalms have fallen 
 into errors. By Bible Psalms, here, is 
 meant Rouse's versification of them. I 
 know of no evangelical church that has left 
 the Bible Psalms: I am sure our Presbyte- 
 rian brethren have not. But churches have 
 fallen into errors, which have not left the 
 versification of them used by us. Arian 
 heresy diffused itself widely in the Presby- 
 terian church in Ireland. The doctrinal 
 error of Arminianism, and the practical 
 error of Moderatism corrupted the church 
 of Scotland. The position of the three 
 great ecclesiastical bodies of that country, 
 ; at the present time, is peculiarly instructive. 
 In point of orthodoxy and piety, the United 
 Presbyterian and the Free churches are far 
 in. advance of the Established church. Yet 
 tte Established church uses almost exclu- 
 
ON PSALMODY. 119 
 
 sively Rouse's version of the Psalms; while 
 the Free church makes free use of the par- 
 aphrases, some of which are Watts' hymns-; 
 and the United Presbyterian or Secession 
 church is just now adopting several hundred 
 hymns, in addition to their old Psalmody. 
 
 I suppose I may also, without impropri- 
 ety, refer to matters nearer home. The Se- 
 ceders used to say that the Associate Re- 
 formed church had fallen into grievous errors 
 and corruptions ; and their testimony is still 
 lifted up against us. Nay, Seceders, Uniona 
 and Covenanters, all agreeing on Psalmody : , 
 have carried on reciprocal controversies 
 with each other, and have sometimes raised 
 such a dust about each others errors, that 
 most people could not see what their errors 
 were ! But they have testified against each 
 other, and, in rare instances, the witness of 
 two out of the three has agreed as to the er- 
 rors of the third ! On two points there is now 
 great unanimity — on the exclusion of all 
 hymns from their system of praise, and the 
 exclusion of each other from church com- 
 munion. 
 
 But it is more important to observe, in 
 reply to this argument, that it seems to 
 attribute to the singing of the Psalms, in a 
 particular version, a greater conservative 
 power against error, than belongs to all the 
 .ordinances of religion besides — to prayer, 
 
120 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 preaching, sacraments, reading the word of 
 God and all ! This looks like doing dishonor 
 to the institutions of the Head of the church, 
 which he has appointed for its edification, 
 merely to support a tottering notion of our 
 own. To hear some persons talk, one would 
 suppose they regarded the singing of Da- 
 vid's Psalms as the main, if not the only 
 preservative against error, and the singing 
 of hymns, however orthodox and scriptural, 
 as tending so strongly to error, that all 
 other restraining and sanctifying influences 
 are scarcely sufficient to withstand it. The 
 churches, they say, that have fallen into the 
 Unitarian heresies are churches that left the 
 Bible Psalms and took to singing hymns. 
 By this reasoning, addressed to the fears of 
 christians, it is intimated that the singing 
 of hymns is the cause or occasion of the 
 Unitarian errors. 
 
 This is poor, short-sighted logic. The 
 handle is as sharp as the point, of such 
 arguments. Our brethren think that hymn- 
 singing is itself a great error and sin : how 
 happens it, then, that the mighty conserva- 
 tive power of singing our Psalter does not 
 keep people from falling into this? If it 
 keeps people from the error of Unitarian- 
 ism, why does it not keep them from the 
 error of singing hymns? Even admitting 
 the facts to be as alleged, the reasoning 
 
Off PSALMODY. 121 
 
 leads to unsound conclusions, because it 
 confounds antecedents with causes, and 
 identifies consequents and effects, I will 
 illustrate this : our brethren say, many peo- 
 ple and even churches, that sang songs of 
 human composure in worshipping God, have 
 fallen into the error of Unitarianism ; there- 
 fore the singing of such composures is to be 
 deprecated. With the same reasoning, it 
 might be answered, many people and even 
 churches, that sang the Scotch version of 
 Psalrns, have fallen into the error of hymn- 
 singing ; therefore the singing of the Scotch 
 version is to be deprecated. 
 
 It is sometimes stated, as a matter of 
 fact, that people who sing other songs of 
 praise, besides the Psalms of David, go off 
 to corrupt churches, and it is implied that 
 they have a great facility in making such 
 transition. In the same way, it might be 
 said, that people go in considerable num- 
 bers, from time to time, out of churches 
 which sing David's Psalms exclusively, and 
 join Presbyterian churches. .So that, wheth- 
 er this style of reasoning or this allegation 
 of facts be considered, we reach as strong 
 conclusions against the old Psalms as against 
 the new. And the matter in dispute must 
 be settled on other grounds than such soph- 
 : stries supply. 
 
 3. The frequent changes made in the 
 
122 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 Psalmody of other churches are adduced as 
 evidences of a defect in the principle of it. 
 I answer, that changes alone are no evidence 
 of a defect in the principle; because chan- 
 ges have been made in the strictest kind of 
 scripture Psalmody, and changes are still 
 desired, very generally in our church. Per- 
 fection is not claimed for any Psalmody now 
 in use, either in our church or in any other. 
 But I cannot see that admitted imperfection 
 is either diminished or concealed by being 
 left undisturbed ; or that it is increased by 
 those efforts at improvement which are 
 made in changes. Improvements have often 
 been prevented by the fear of changing; 
 and have often been condemned under the 
 opprobrious name of innovations. This 
 spirit has convulsed and distracted congre- 
 gations, when so small a change was made 
 as the giving out of two lines instead of one, 
 or the singing of one line twice over, to 
 suit a tune. I have no doubt, that some 
 good people read with weeping eyes the 
 decree of Church and State which, in 1650, 
 4; discharged" the Bible Psalms of Stern- 
 hold and Hopkins, and ordained the use of 
 this new paraphrase of Mr. Rouse, then 
 recently imported from England. So, at a 
 later date, when Tate and Brady's version 
 was introduced into the English church, 
 many people were greatly displeased at the 
 
ON PSALMODY. 123 
 
 change, and, as Cowper playfully said, 
 u highly disgusted at the innovation, they 
 stick as obstinately to the old version as to 
 the Old style." 
 
 After all, the only difference between the 
 Presbyterians and us in this particular is, 
 that we have desired change, and they have 
 made it; we have wished for an improve- 
 ment of the Psalmody, they have wished for 
 it and tried to get it. 
 
 4. One of the most extraordinary state- 
 ments ever made on this subject is, that the 
 Psalmody of other churches is sectarian, 
 while ours is altogether divested of that char- 
 acter. This singular idea is put forth in a 
 doctrinal and historical tract, issued by our 
 General Synod. In itself and its attendant 
 reasonings, it is precisely like those of the 
 errorists who oppose creeds and confessions. 
 ,% Our Psalmody is as broad as the Bible," 
 (which, by the way, is not quite true, as 
 long as we reject a great number of Bible 
 songs,) "it is the very word of God, it is in- 
 spired and infallible ; while others are formed 
 by sects to suit their own views, man-made 
 productions," &c. &c. This is just the style 
 of those who make the Bible, as they say, 
 their creed, and refuse those useful formu- 
 laries which all orthodox and evangelical 
 churches are accustomed to use. 
 
 We might apply this notion to prayers as 
 
124 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 -well as to praises, and deny the right to 
 pray in any other words but those of scrip- 
 ture: all such prayers might be called man- 
 made, and sectarian, and lacking in cathol- 
 icity. We have more authority for such 
 restriction in prayers than in praises. Our 
 Savior said, " when ye pray, say, Our Fath- 
 er which art in heaven," &c. but he has not 
 said, when ye sing, sing the Psalms of David. 
 A similar strain of remark might be made 
 on the ordinance of preaching sermons, but 
 I will not pursue it. 
 
 It is remarkable, that while our Psalmody 
 is claimed to be the only unsectarian system 
 extant, no church makes its Psalmody more 
 prominent, as a distinctive peculiarity of 
 sect. It is pre-eminently our distinction: 
 on this article we separate from other de- 
 nominations : we make it a term of commu- 
 nion: it is conspicuous in all our church 
 policy. And yet, strange to say, it is the 
 only unsectarian and real catholic Psalmody 
 in the world ! If it is not sectarian in itself, 
 we have done what we could to make it so. 
 
 I will now notice some of the minor argu- 
 mentation against the exclusive use of the 
 Book of Psalms in praising God. 
 
 1. An objection has been raised on the 
 ground that some of the -Psalms contain 
 much matter that was personal to the wri- 
 ters, and peculiar to the times, historical 
 
6N PSALM0M*. 125 
 
 narrative and ceremonial language. It is 
 not disparaging to the Book of. Psalms, to 
 make a distinction between these things and 
 those of general interest and obligation, 
 any more than it is to the Book of Exodus, 
 to make a similar distinction between the 
 moral and the ceremonial laws recorded in 
 it. This is the distinction made by Dr. 
 Watts, which has given so much offence. 
 The local, personal and ceremonial parts of 
 the Psalms, he deemed not to be suited to 
 the use of persons worshipping in the 
 church, under its Xew Testament dispensa- 
 tion. I verily believe, that he intended to 
 express the same idea that is expressed in 
 the Directory of the Associate Reformed 
 church, and has been expressed a thousand 
 times in " prefacing the Psalms," by our 
 ministers, viz. " In singing those parts of 
 them (the Psalms) which are expressed in 
 ceremonial style, or describe the circumstan- 
 ces of the writers, or of the church in 
 ancient times, we should have our eye upon 
 the general principles which are implied in 
 them, and which are applicable to individu- 
 als or to the church in any age," [Book 3, 
 Ch. 3, Sec. 3. 
 
 Some of the Psalms themselves inform us 
 
 of the special occasions on which they were 
 
 composed and of the particular and personal 
 
 application of them in the first place. Of 
 
 D 2 
 
126 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 others we have no such information. We 
 have " A Psalm of David, when he fled from 
 Absalom his son;" (the 3d,) "A Psalm of 
 David, when he changed his behavior before 
 Abimelech; who drove him away, and he 
 departed, (34th;) "A Psalm of David, when 
 Xathan the prophet came unto him after he 
 had gone in to Bathsheba, (51st.) There are 
 many others of the same class. Whether 
 they were ever sung on any other occasion, 
 or at any other time, we have not the means 
 of knowing. The explicit mention of the 
 particular occasion would favor the idea that 
 chey were not intended for repetition ; but 
 the general and devotional strain of the 
 pieces themselves seems to fit them for uni- 
 versal use. 
 
 I do not consider the personal and cere- 
 monial expressions found in the Psalms, as 
 any objection to the singing of them; pro- 
 vided the worshipper sings them with un- 
 derstanding and with faith, as enjoined in 
 the Directory. It does not, however, appear 
 to make much difference whether the "gene- 
 ral principles " contained in such parts of 
 the Psalms, be set before the worshipper in 
 a short explanatory lecture, as in the Asso- 
 ciate Reformed church, or by an explanatory 
 paraphrase, as in the Presbyterian. In 
 view of the above important clause of the 
 Directory, it is to be regretted that the 
 
ON PSALMODY. 127 
 
 practice of " explaining the Psalm " is going 
 out of use in the church, whereby the people 
 will be exposed to the danger of not keeping 
 their eye upon the general principles implied 
 in the expressions referred to, and applicable 
 to themselves. 
 
 2. It is objected to our mode of praise, 
 that the name of Jesus is never heard in it. 
 I have no doubt that many and many a 
 believing worshipper of Jesus Christ has 
 found him in the Psalms, and has sweetly 
 praised him with these songs of Zion. But 
 still, he is not, in the Psalms or in any part 
 of the Old Testament scriptures, revealed 
 so plainly or so fully as in the New. To 
 suppose that he is, is contrary to the claims 
 and design of both. And now that he has 
 been personally revealed in the flesh ; and 
 the name of Jesus figures in the evangelic 
 history, from the annunciation to the cross ; 
 and he is known by that glorious appellation 
 in heaven, earth and hell, it seems, it seems 
 as though the name of Jesus should be heard 
 in the praises of those whom he has loved, 
 whom he has bought with his blood, whom 
 he has made kings and priests unto God. 
 The Scriptures make much of that worthy 
 name: "Thou shalt call his name Jesus; 
 because he shall save his people from their 
 sins." — Matt, i, 21. "Whatsoever ye do 
 in word or deed, do all in the name of the 
 
128 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 :Lord Jesus, giving thanks unto God and the 
 •Father by him."— Col. iii, 17. " By him, 
 therefore, 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. And if we will consider it candidly, it 
 is a sad thing, that we pass through our 
 entire christian life, even to the threshold 
 of heaven, loving him, serving him, saved 
 by him, and yet, without his dear name 
 Jesus being ever heard in our songs cf 
 praise ! Would a stranger attending in our 
 places of worship, be able to report of us 
 as was done of the christians in the days of 
 Pliny, that we "sing hymns to Christ as 
 God?" He might learn it from our ser- 
 mons, from our prayers, from our explana- 
 tions of the Psalms, but not from our sing- 
 ing itself. 
 
 3. An argument for singing hymns of 
 human composition, has been drawn from 
 the admitted propriety of conceiving our 
 thoughts and uttering our words in prayer. 
 The usual colloquial form of expressing 
 this idea is, "we may use our own words in 
 praise as well as in prayer." And the 
 usual way of answering this statement is, 
 that the great majority of christians do not 
 and cannot use their oivn words, in their 
 hymns of praise. There is here a turn on 
 the expression, "our own words." But it 
 
ON PSALMODY. 129 
 
 is not meant, that each individual must 
 compose all the hymns or any of the hymns 
 that he sings: it is only meant that he may 
 use human composition, as distinguished 
 from the inspired. And further this answer 
 intimates that but few persons can make 
 hymns of praise: two difficulties are in the 
 way, the one a theological and the other a 
 literary difficulty. 
 
 As to the first, our brethren affirm that 
 man cannot know what attributes and excel- 
 lencies to ascribe to God. This seems to 
 overlook all the knowledge of God which we 
 obtain from Moses and the Prophets, from 
 Christ and the Apostles. It has often 
 been said, in praise of the Psalms, that they 
 contain an epitome of all the truths of the 
 Bible, but I have never heard it said, that 
 they teach us more than all the rest of the 
 Bible does, what God is and what glories to 
 ascribe to him. Yet this notion seems to 
 imply as much. But the other parts of holy 
 Scripture are as authentic a revelation of 
 what God is and of what he does, as the 
 Psalms are: and we could praise him intel- 
 ligently even if all the precious Psalms of 
 the Bible were lost. If we use the words 
 of Paul or of John, we may have as much 
 confidence that our ascriptions are correct, 
 as we could have when using those of David 
 and Asaph; "0 the depth of the riches 
 
130 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 both of the wisdom and knowledge of God^ 
 How unsearchable are his judgments, and 
 his ways past finding out!" — Horn, xi, 33. 
 "To the king eternal, immortal and invisi- 
 ble," &c— 1 Tim. i, 17. "Unto him that 
 loved us and washed us from our sins in his 
 own blood, and hath made us kings and 
 priests unto God and his Father; to him be 
 glory and dominion forever and ever, amen.' , 
 — Rev. i, 5, 6. These divine praises are 
 found in the Scriptures, but not in the 
 Psalms. They are some of those other 
 icripture songs or praises, which our breth- 
 ren say it is wrong to sing in the worship of 
 God. 
 
 Now as to the literary difficulty, that is 
 in the way of praising God in our own 
 words. The difficulty is imaginary, and 
 springs from erroneous notions of what a 
 hymn is. It is not necessary to a hymn, 
 that it should be in rhyme, or in any regular 
 metre, or suited to any particular tune. A 
 hymn is an ascription of praise to God, 
 expressed in the style of excited and eleva- 
 ted devotional feeling. "Hosanna to the 
 son of David," was a hymn to Christ. 
 Some christians have been accustomed, 
 in their private devotions, to utter their 
 thoughts and express their feelings, their 
 desires and their praises, in a musical tone 
 of voice, without any regard to rhyme, tune 
 
ON PSALMODY. 131 
 
 or measure. It has a tendency to confine 
 the thoughts and make the devotional im- 
 pressions more deep, and to elevate the 
 affections more to God. This was undoubt- 
 edly the hymning spoken of in several pla- 
 ces in the New Testament. Such were the 
 songs of Moses, of Deborah, of Simeon, and 
 of others which have been mentioned. And 
 such, probably, were the " songs in the 
 night," Job xxxv, 10. And it is just as easy 
 for a christian who is intelligent and devout, 
 to make a hymn, a it is to make a prayer. 
 The difficulty, then, is imaginary. The 
 propriety of doing it has before been shown 
 at length. And the argument that shows 
 it, embraces hymns made by our fellow men, 
 equally with those which each person may 
 make for himself. 
 
 I might multiply these minor arguments 
 for the use of other songs of praise, besides 
 the one hundred and fifty psalms, but I will 
 forbear. I will forbear, also, to recapitu- 
 late the reasonings pursued throughout this 
 treatise. The smallness of the Book ren- 
 ders this unnecessary. The proof of the 
 paraphrastic character of our psalter ; the 
 refutation of the main argument for the ex- 
 clusive use of this versification or of the 
 psalms in any version ; the positive argu- 
 ment from Scripture showing a divine war- 
 rant for the use of other psalms, hymns, 
 
132 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 and spiritual songs ; the historical evidence 
 in favor of the practice in Apostolic times, 
 in the early church, at the Reformation, in 
 the church of Scotland and the Secession, 
 and in the Associate Reformed church ; the 
 proof drawn from the fact that the stand- 
 ards of the church do not forbid it — all these 
 things will occur to the attentive reader's 
 mind, and will persuade him that the doc- 
 trine of exclusive use, as held by many in 
 the A. R. Church, is an unsciiptural and 
 very modern innovation. 
 
 My object in adducing these arguments 
 and historical facts, has been to show to 
 my brethren that their position is not on so 
 firm a basis, that they may be uncomprom- 
 ising and unaccommodating to those chris- 
 tians who differ from them on this point. 
 I have attempted honestly to exhibit the 
 doctrine of Scripture, and the teaching of 
 history, on this subject. I have tried to do 
 it with candor and kindness. And it has 
 been done with a confidence in the reader's 
 intelligence and probity, which has exempt- 
 ed me from the humiliating necessity of 
 perpetually reminding him of the strength 
 of the arguments and of the utter impossi- 
 bility of withstanding them. I hope I have 
 not erred in leaving the discovery of this to 
 the reader's OAvn discernment. It is no -un- 
 due assurance, I trust, to claim that there 
 
03T PSALMODY. 13? 
 
 is argument enough to prove, that the use 
 of other songs of praise may be made a 
 subject of forbearance, and that to exclude 
 from our christian fellowship those who use 
 them, is contrary both to the word of God 
 and our own church standards. And if 
 the doctrine that would bind us to the ex- 
 clusive use of the Bible psalms, and make 
 that a term of communion, is contrary to 
 Scripture and to our standards ; much more 
 contrary is that doctrine, which would bind 
 us, in like manner, to the exclusive use of 
 our version. 
 
 0, will not brethren, then, leave this sub- 
 ject where scripture and reason place it ? 
 Shall it ever continue a stumbling stone and 
 occasion of strife and enmity? Must the 
 high interests of the soul and of Christ be 
 sacrificed on this Baal altar of party preju- 
 dice? Shall a " doubtful disputation" sepa- 
 rate brethren whom heaven will unite, par- 
 takers of the same grace, and professors of 
 the same precious faith ? We have a clear 
 divine warrant for the communion of saints. 
 We have unequivocal and reiterated injunc- 
 tions and earnest entreaties, in the Scrip- 
 tures, to maintain the unity of the spirit 
 and the bonds of peace. And we have im- 
 perious calls, in the word and providence of 
 God, to strive earnestly and jointly for the 
 faith of the Gospel. Shall all this be un- 
 D3 
 
134 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 heard and unheeded, through the din of 
 strife raised by a few combatants about 
 psalmody ? The peace and amity which we 
 advocate requires no sacrifice of principle ; 
 no change of practice, even. We may still 
 sing as we have done, but let us restore the 
 broken chain of friendly fellowship with our 
 brethren. Christians, has not this one- 
 barred fence kept you long enough asun- 
 der ? Bleeding church of Christ, may thy 
 children cease to inflict wounds on thee ! 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 SUPPLEMENTAL. 
 
 Since writing the foregoing part of this 
 work, the ecclesiastical relations of the au- 
 thor have undergone some change. For 
 nearly a year and a half, he has been in 
 happy fellowship with the Presbyterian 
 church. No change of views is he con- 
 scious of, in relation to any part of the doc- 
 trine, order, or worship of Christ's church, 
 nor of any diminution of attachment to any 
 portion of Christ's people. And in now 
 publishing a treatise which he wrote when 
 Ve had no prospect of leaving his former 
 
ON PSALMODY. 135 
 
 church connection, he does not find it ne- 
 cessary to make any material alteration 
 either m the sentiments or expressions of it. 
 Having had the unusual advantage of con- 
 templating the subject of psalmody from 
 two very different positions — from within 
 and from without the Associate Reformed 
 Church, — and having had the opportunity 
 of fraternal intercourse with the two por- 
 tions of God's people whose mutual good 
 feeling and fellowship he has aimed, in his 
 essay on psalmody, to promote ; he now offers 
 a few additional remarks on the subject, 
 and with the same conciliatory design. 
 
 The department of service in which I 
 have been engaged, has led me to visit ma- 
 ny churches in Western Pennsylvania, 
 Western Virginia, and the Eastern part of 
 Ohio. I have found a considerable number 
 of Presbyterian churches which use the old 
 psalms alone, in public worship, and many 
 which use them a part of the time. This 
 does not impair brotherly affection between 
 them and their brethren who do not use this 
 versification at all, nordoes it prevent their 
 happy and edifying communion with each 
 other. This shows that a similar amity and 
 fellowship might subsist between the Pres- 
 byterian church and those churches which 
 use the old psalms; nay it shows that they 
 might be united in the same body without 
 
136 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 embarrassment or injury, if they themselves 
 did not decline it. I have been in some 
 neighborhoods, where a state of things as- 
 similating to this actually exists, giving en- 
 couragement to hope for yet nearer ap- 
 proximations. The notion that it is wrong 
 to sing any songs of praise, except the 
 psalms, is by no means universal among the 
 ministers, elders, candidates for the minis- 
 try, or people of the Associate Reformed 
 church. Facts, which are the best evi- 
 dence, prove this. An aged and respecta- 
 ble gentleman said, on this point, " It don't 
 hurt my conscience to sing a good hymn." 
 Others declare the same thing, by their 
 practice. Some who abstain from singing 
 praise to God with their fellow christians, 
 in the use of the Assembly's Collection, de- 
 clare it to be only in accommodation to the 
 wishes of others and not from any belief 
 that it is wrong. Others do not hesitate to 
 say, that they regard the prohibition, which 
 custom has imposed, as oppressive on the 
 conscience ; and the espionage on their lips 
 when worshipping in churches of other de- 
 nominations, as humiliating and invidious. 
 As to the religious character of Union- 
 ists, Presbyterians, Seceders and Covenant- 
 ers, for they are all found in some locali- 
 ties, there is no perceptible difference among 
 them. They are, generally speaking, the 
 
ON PSALMODY. 137 
 
 same kind of sound, serious intelligent, 
 christian people, all attached to the Presby- 
 terian order and to the Calvinistic doc- 
 trines, . regular at church, and worshipping 
 God in their families. Now why should 
 people who are so much alike in all their 
 religious faith and character be divided? 
 Why should schisms be perpetuated among 
 these followers of Christ? It is giving too 
 much consideration to a new doctrine ; it is 
 too costly a sacrifice ta denominational po- 
 licy. 
 
 I dare say, even those, champions of 
 psalmody, who have taken the doctrine of 
 " exclusive use" under their special patron- 
 age and protection, will admit all that has 
 been said in-favor of peace and unity : but 
 then, they say they must maintain purity 
 of worship, and teach men " to observe all 
 things whatsoever Christ has commanded." 
 Mat. 28:19. True brethren, true; but in 
 this case you teach what he has not com- 
 manded. We look in vain for any such 
 command of Christ, or of any prophet, priest, 
 or king, apostle or evangelist, before your- 
 selves, either in the Scripture or in any 
 creed or confession. 
 
 But, the doctrine that has not hitherto been 
 admitted into any Confession, is now an ap- 
 plicant for that honor. I refer to a docu- 
 ment lately published, which the Associate 
 D3* 
 
138 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 Synod offer to the Associate Reformed, as a 
 Basis of Union between the two bodies. It 
 was admitted, I understand, to have been 
 hastily prepared and not discussed in detail, 
 by the A. Synod. I feel less diffidence, 
 therefore, in making a few friendly animad- 
 versions upon it, than I would have felt, if 
 it had been fully discussed by a Synod 
 which includes so many judicious, able, and 
 pious servants of Jesus Christ as I know be- 
 long to that body. The two following sen- 
 tences express the doctrine, judicially pro- 
 mulged in the basis : " We maintain that 
 Jesus Christ has appointed the Book of 
 Psalms to be used exclusively in this part 
 of his worship." "The substitution or use 
 of uninspired psalms, hymns, and spiritual 
 songs, imitations of the Book of Psalms, 
 and paraphrases, is a corruption of the 
 worship of God/' The Scripture proofs 
 adduced for this new doctrine, admitted not 
 to be in the Westminster Confession, are 
 these three, Eph. v, 19; Col. iii, 16; 2 
 Chron. xxix, 30. But my eyes look in 
 vain, for the exclusive clause, in either of 
 these proof texts, and the " exclusive doc- 
 trine" is the only one which is controvert- 
 ed. I have treated of the first two of these 
 texts before, and I only add here, that if 
 they were admitted to refer to the Bible 
 Psalms alone, still they do not support the 
 
ON PSALMODY. 139 
 
 Synod's doctrine. The reference, in these 
 texts, might be exclusively to the " Book 
 of Psalms," and yet the injunction not be 
 so. But I have shown that neither the re- 
 ference nor the injunction is applicable to 
 the Book of Psalms alone. 
 
 The third proof text is a part of the His- 
 tory of Hezekiah's restoration of the ne- 
 glected ceremonial worship. By what sort 
 of legerdemain is this made to support the 
 exclusive use of David's psalms in the New 
 Testament church ? This interpretation of 
 Scripture transmutes a command of Heze- 
 kiah into a command of Jesus Christ; it 
 makes the duty of the Levites our duty ; it 
 converts a temporary arrangement into a 
 perpetual statute ; a legal ceremony into a 
 gospel ordinance ; it adds an exclusive 
 clause not found in the text ; and it applies 
 the whole, thus augmented and transmuted^ 
 to the " Book of Psalms," which was not 
 made into a book for near two hundred 
 years after Hezekiah was dead. 
 
 Is the Synod wise in giving the world 
 such a sample of their hermeneutics ? Are 
 they consistent when they, in the same 
 breath, deprecate the " teaching for doctrine 
 the commandments of men?" They would 
 have to go far and search diligently before 
 they find so glaring a case of it as they 
 themselves exhibit, in giving as the proof of 
 
140 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 a doctrine and a term of communion, the 
 commandment of the man Hezekiah, with 
 whatever additional force it derives from 
 their own endorsement. I must say, and I 
 say it with sorrow, that I have met with no 
 such case of the assumption of authority, by 
 a church court, to impose an article of faith, 
 without even the slender right claimed in 
 the church of Rome — the right of Tradition. 
 Why the command of Hezekiah to the 
 Levites is not half so good proof of 
 the " exclusive" doctrine, as I can bring 
 from the Scriptures for singing exclusively 
 the Book of Lamentations. "And Jeremi- 
 ah lamented for Josiah : and all the singing 
 men and singing women spake of Josiah in 
 their lamentations to this day, and made 
 them an ordinance in Israel : and behold, 
 they are written in the lamentations." — 2 
 Chron. xxxv, 25. Here is an "ordinance;" 
 observed perpetually, "to this day;" and a 
 plain reference to the written Book — the 
 "Lamentations." This was one hundred 
 and sixteen years after Hezekiah had given 
 his command to the Levites : so that Jere- 
 miah and the singers of his time did not 
 confine themselves "exclusively" to the 
 Book of Psalms, which was not yet made, 
 nor to the words of David and Asaph. If 
 the words of Hezekiah established a divine 
 and permanent ordinance, Jeremiah,, a great 
 
ON PSALMODY. 141 
 
 prophet, would certainly have observed it. 
 But he did no such thing. 
 
 Now, in conclusion of this essay, which I 
 have condensed into the very smallest com- 
 pass, I respectfully express the hope, that 
 my effort for peace will be furthered by those 
 who read this little work. I have said no- 
 thing in it, I trust, that is inconsistent with 
 my avowed and real design, nothing severe, 
 unmannerly or detractive towards my former 
 ecclesiastical associates, whom I still am 
 happy to reckon as my personal friends and 
 christian brethren. In the use of argument 
 and in the statement of facts, alone, have 
 I been uncompromising, aad surely they 
 would not wish me to be lenient in this. I 
 have aimed, by fair reasoning, from Scripture 
 and history, to "conquer a peace." Peace 
 comports best with my own disposition, with 
 the spirit and mission of the church to which 
 I belong, and, above all, with the character 
 and commands of the Prince whom we serve. 
 When I think how the cause of Christ has 
 been retarded and cheated of its triumphs 
 by this ill-omened controversy ; how neigh- 
 borhoods have been, for years, left destitute 
 of gospel ordinances ; how shame has often 
 covered the cheek of piety with blushes, as 
 infidels and errorists have pointed the finger 
 of scorn at our domestic battle-fields; and 
 when I consider, how ministerial labor 
 
142 A PLEA FOR PEACE 
 
 might be saved; how missionary progress 
 might be accelerated; how mutual love and 
 unity might testify to the honor of Jesus 
 Christ before a skeptical world; and how the 
 energy that has been squandered on inter- 
 ecclesiastical strifes might be turned, in its 
 combined and augmented power, on the cause 
 of evangelization, at home and abroad ; I ask 
 with a throbbing heart and trembling voice, 
 will the enemies of the Lord never cease to 
 have occasions of contemptuous triumph? 
 Will the real and concurrent friends of the 
 Prince op Peace never be allowed to gather 
 with unanimous affection around his table . 
 and beneath his banner of love?