!MAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) // 1.0 I.I UiM23. 12.5 |50 ■^™ ■■M 1^ M 1 2.2 2.0 us m u IM 1.8 iiir-25 III '-^ 1'-^ ^ 6" ► «^ V] 0% A f /a //a 7 Photographic Sciences Corporation ^^u 33 WIST MAIN STRUT WnSTIR.N Y. 14510 (71*) •7a-4S03 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiquas Technical and Bibliographic Notea/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ D D D D D Couverture endommagte Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^ et/ou pelliculAe r~~| Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured maps/ Cartes giographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ D Planches et/ou illustrations on couleur Bound with other material/ Relii avec d'autros documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serrie peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion le long de la marge intirieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors .-"'une restauration apparaissont dans le texte. mais, lorsquo cela Atait possible, ces pages n'ont pas «td filmies. Additional comments:/ Commcntaires supplAmentaires: L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a it6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet oxempiaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mithode normale de filmage sont indiqute ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ D Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagies Pages restored and/oi Pages restauries et/ou pelliculies Pages discoloured, stained or foxei Pages dicolories, tacheties ou piquies Pages detached/ Pages ditachies Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prir Qualiti inigaie de I'impression IncludtiS supplementary materii Comprend du materiel suppKmentaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible pn Pages damaged/ pn Pages restored and/or laminated/ r~~| Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ I I Pages detached/ r~~l Showthrough/ r~1 Quality of print varies/ r~~| IncludtiS supplementary material/ r~n Only edition available/ Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellemant obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata. une pelure, etc., ont At* filmAes A nouveau de fa^on it obtonir la meilleure image possible. Tlw to Th( poi m m Or! bei th« sio ott fin sio or Th shi Tir vih Ml dif ent bei rig rec mt This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmA au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 2ex 30X / 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X J2X The copy filmed hero ha» been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Douglas Library Queen's University L'exemplaire filmA fut reprodult grAce A la gAnirositA de: Douglas Library Queen's University The imegee appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in iceeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies In printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the lest page with a printed or illustrated Impres- sion, or the bacit cover when appropriate. All other origlnel copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, end ending on the last page with e printed or illustrated Impresslcn. Les Imeges suiventes ont M reprodultes evec ie plus grand soln, compte tenu de la condition at de la nettetA de l'exemplaire film*, et en conformit* evec les conditions du contrat de fllmage. Les exemplaires orlginaux dont la couverture en papier eet imprimie sont filmAs en commen^ant par Ie premier plet et en terminant soit par la dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'iilustration, soit par Ie second plat, salon Ie cas. Tous les autres exemplaires orlginaux sont filmfo en commenpant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustrstion et en terminant par la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shell contain the symbol ^^> (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol ▼ (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un dee symboles suivants apparattra su? ia dernlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon Ie ces: Ie symbols -^ signifie "A SUIVRE", ie symbols V signifie "FIN ". iVIeps, plates, cherts, etc., mey be filmed at different reduction ratios. Thoss too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hend corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames ss required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre fllmte A dee taux de rMuction diff Arents. Lorsque ie document est trop grsnd pour Atre reprodult en un seul clichA, II est fiimA A partir de I'angie supArieur gauche, de geuche A droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant Ie nombre d'images nAcessaire. lies disgrammes suivants illustrent la mAthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 A 6 QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Kingston, Ontario Canada THE ORGAN QUESTION: * f » STATEMENTS 'r'b ST DR. RITCHIE, AND DR. PORTEOUS, FOR AND AGAINST THE USE OF THE ORGAN IN PUBLIC WORSHIP IHIHB PBOOEEDINGS OF THE PBESBYTEBT OF GLASGOW, 1807-a. Oliti in inirotiuttora TXtMtt, BY EGBERT S. CANDLISH, D.D., vBishxraaiSL. % Pmorial t0 \\i ^mbjkg of %mr&ti, XV OOVmOTIOV WITH THB 0HT7B0H OV BOOTLAITD, ON THE SAME SUBJECT. TORONTO: rilNTaD IT LOTBLI. * GIBSON, TOHOI BTBIBT. 1859. .111. 1. ■ i \.<:f'K: ■;-;y^ Ys/'ft-rr'^ .. frm::i'rV^ ■•■■■ ';j •■■; . ^ • ■ ■ ; -J'i'J ■ ■/ t^t' .■! •• f ; 2 s r S ' V I -i v-^ '.,1 i i; r 'h) b-"?ilCuK'>a & 3. •4 .' I' , f - '.. i 4 i ij i-j; ■ 1 - ■ -■•■ tt .«*?!>„ '!• '•■ -t ■J' >! 1::^,i*.,;:r!i;v.. t Ki .f *■ - « • Jl i ■ i- <:: ^ ,/ 1 ^ § > - *^ -» ■*,? ■**» -H* • \o 'n. THE ORGAN QUESTION- ; S'^ ti-r INTEODUCTOET NOTICE. I HAYB two reasons for this republication. The one is the alarm I feel at certain recent mavements on behalf of instrumental music in Presbyterian worship. The other is the anxiety I feel for the success of the movements now in progress for the improvement of our Presby- tery Psalmody. I have a deep conviction that movements in the for-^ mer of these directions will prove fatal to movements in the latter. That, however, is not the consideration which chiefly weighs with me. I dread the agitation of the question in our Presbyterian Churches^ I dread it because Ibelieve thatit inevitably tends to schism. And on the merits of the question, I hold a decided opinion, which I think I could myself maintain in controversy, but which, for the present, I mean: to defend by the arguments of another ; and that other, a man whose ability and competency cannot easily be disputed. I wish I had for a little the quiet ear of our firiends who are ocy casioning, if I may not say causing, the discussion of this subject in Presbyterian Church Courts. I would like to point out to them the yery serious responsibility which they unwittingly incur. I am not easily frightened by the nrr e of schism. Nor would I frighten others. But there can be no .Harm in a timely warning. And the wamiog is timely, at any rate. For as yet no one, I believe, is irre- vocably committed. In the first place, let the peculiar constitution of Presbyterian Churches be kept in mind. Where Congregationalism prevails, either avowedly, as among the great body of English Nonconformists, or virtually, as in the Engli^ Establishment, uniformity of worship is not necessarily a condition of union. Among our Independent breth- ren great diversity may be tolerated, for no one is responsible for what another does ; and in the Church of England, all sorts of hymns are allowed, and the service is conducted in all sorts of styles, from the richest ritualism to the baldest and tamest routine. On the Con- gregational system, every pastor with his people may take his own way, — one using instrumental music, and another condemning the nse of it ; and yet the harmony of any association they l-^rm among themselves may remain unbroken. This may or may not be a re- commendation of that system. That is not now the question. Ift ia 332337 '.•■5 !. enough to say that it is inconsistent with Presbyterianism. Those Presbyterians who disapprove, on conscientious and scripturalgroundBi of a particular mode of worship^ — as, tor instance, of the Organ,-^ cannot divest themselves of responsibility by merely excluding it from their own Congregations. They are bound to resist the intro- duction of it in all the other Congregations of the Church as well as in their own- Hence I "wotdd sfiggetrt, in €he second place, the impossibility of the question, if it be once raised, being left to the decision of individ- ual Kirk-sessions and Congregations. It is easy, of course, for those who are ready to sanction the use of instrumental music, or who reck- on it a matter of indifference, to consent to its being left as an open fquesdon, on which Congregatirais auiy agree to differ fr(»iii one tui- other. But if there be any, as there undoubtedly fure many in all tile British Presbyterian Changes, who, rigidly or wrongly, ^ave eome to entertain s^ong convictions against the lawfulness of the practice, it is impossible for thrasi to acqtiiesoe in the introducticm of it, even m. Oongregations to which ^ey do not tiiemselves belong. On Pres- l^eriui principlOB, it is unreasonable to ask them to do so- A Il- tpQ^verciy in the Courts of the Church becomes, in these oircnmstaai- cec^ inevitable. And if it is an unnecessary eonLtrovtersy,^ — if it is a (Kmtaroversy which on either nde mi^t be compromiiBed or avoided without violence to conBcieQee^-^it involves more or less ihe guilt of «chism, or at least c^ what tends to scMsm. I have to admit, in the Hhird [dace, that if the use of inatrumeatal music in ipublie worship had been the rude hiillMrto in o^ Fresbv- tertan Churches, — if it had been hereditary and oommouj-^and if ^ oppoi^^^B of it were the iimovators, professing to haveireceived a new light, and aeknowlecbing therefore anew obligation, I wovdd have not a^tle sympathy with parties indicating a reluctance to sacrifice their own customary and constitutional freedom to the new-fangled notions and scruples of weaker brethren. I suppose that, in the ease of the Church of England, an act of comprehension, allowing all who i:.;ivAi?wi.-tij^r-;jL iJMiitti in wontiippiiifli: €K>d, ean plead reasoM of oeiMeiaBee. Himm^ ia Sieotlsnd, Ei^land and Ireland, tbe;|F have bad no objeotion hithei4» to in-Or^^Mvio Fsalmody. It is not, in their case, liberty to eomi^ witkwbat they hold to be a peremptory obligation that is asked, m^' merely Uberty to e^joy wl»t they hold to be a lawful priyilese or pleaenre. And the Cmurohes whioh are aaked to grant that Ubertf within their eommimicm, are Chnrohee, I repeal, which, by their wevf Fresbyterianism, are preduded from the easy expedient of deyolvingf i^e question summaruy npon particular Oongregations. They mnsi as CmureheS) in their oolleotive capacity, take up the question and dispose of it. No doubt they may, upon full oelibwation, come to ttie eonclusion that the ques^lm had b^ter, after all, be lefi an opea one, uid that Eirk-sessions and Congregations should be allowea to eaMroke their discretion in regard to it. It is manifest^ however^ tiMit this is a oonelusioa whicn oould satisfy none but those who either af^rove of instrumental worship, or reekon it a mattm» of in- difibrenee. All who are conscientiously opposed to it,— who regwd it at mexpedient and unlawful, unauth and displaying the " Kigt o* vfhUtle*,** some unmanageable handfid of impracticable psalm-singer* would be driven away in sore disgust, to set up a tabemacle of the^ i^vnetf where they might lift up their unaided voices in the praise of 6hod, after the good old fashion of their fathers. On such grounds as these I greatly dread, and would most earaestfy d^recate, any procedure fitted to raise this question in our Presfay- ttnan Churcnes. It is a question that, if ruised, vnW eerteinly dn- tract and divide us. And eui we afford the luxury of a new intestine quarrel en such a point ? Is this a time for it ? Hurely Presby- terianism in these kingdoms has exhibited enough of the weaknes* which a tendency to dispute, and split, and s^>arate, occasions. Svupeljr, if y^e must fall out among ourselves, we might find some wortiuer cause^ in a day of rebuke and blasphemy, than a wrangfo aboirt such a poor mnovation on our hereditary mode of worship as 00 Ormnio fnea&a are for introducing. That it is an inno^tion, BO inteUigent man can deny ; for I will not condescend to recognifle intelligence in any man who at this time of day would quibble about pitolk pipes and tuning forks, or who could make game of the whole afiair by some abstract and recondite disquisition on the identity of wind instruments, whether living or dead. The plain and simple fact that it is an innovation, is the strongest of all reasons for for- bearance on the part of those who are in favour of it. They ought to desist from the agitation of it ; and I cannot doubt that they will desist from it, when they are made aware of the strong and conscien- tious feelings which many, probably a very large majority, in our Presbyterian Churches, entertain upon the subject. Even if these feelings were mere blind bigotry and senseless prejudice, they are entitled, in such a matter as this, to be respected, especially con- sidering that there is no case of conscience on the other side ; — for even those who ask most loudly for the Organ, cannot say that its abscence hurts their sense of moral and religious obligation. Much more if, as I am prepared to maintain, cogent arguments can be ui^ed, founded both on reason and Scripture, against the practice which they seek to introduce, I would calmly and earnestly put it to them, whether for such a cause they really are prepared to risk the peace and harmony, already sufficiently broken, of Churches which still, amid all their di£ferences, acknowledge a common reverence for the memory, — a common attachment to the principles, — of the re- forming fathers of the Church of Scotland and the puritan divines of the Church of England. It is chiefly with a view to show my brethren how serious the question was in the estimation of learned and able theologians of a former generation, that I republish the arguments on both sides in the once famous, but now almost forgotten, case about the introduc- tion of the Organ in St. Andrew's Church, Glasgow. The history of the case may be given in a few sentences : — In the month of August 1806, the minister, Dr. William Bitchie, addressed a letter to the Lord Provost, transmitting a " petition sub- scribed by a great number of gentlemen who possess seats in St. Andrew's Church," and asking permission, on the part of himself and the petitioners, to make certain " alterations in the seats behind the pulpit," at their own expense and risk, with a view to accommo- date an Organ which they proposed to introduce. Both the minister and his people were anxious to guard themselves against its being supposed that they meant to submit to the city authorities the ques- tion of the lawfulness or expediency of that mode of worship. They held the question to be an open one in the Established Church, to which they belonged. They considered themselves to be at full liberty to use the Organ if they chose. At all events, they did not think that in such a matter they were bound to ask the sanction of the civil magistrate ; and they wished it to be understood that their application had reference exclusively to the arrangements in the seating of the edifice, necessary to make room for the instrument. At the same time, they take care to throw in a little of what Brother Jonathan calls " ioft aatoder^" They are confident that the Town- gt'j a at s i i ' ^g. g Oouncil will " observe mth pleasure their attempt to advance in the Imowledge and practice of Tsalmodv, and will gladly concur in the endeavour to rescue our national character ^om the reproach of having almost entirely neglected the cultivation of Sacred Music" « Our Heritors," they add, in language approaching the sublime, ''Magistrates of one of the first commerciiQ cities of Europe, will thus give new evidence to mankind that the genius of commerce is not the contracted spirit of hostility to the liberal arts, but the en- livening sun of science, dispelling, in its progress, the gloomy fogs of prejudice, that have too long benumbed the energies, and untuned the feelings of our country. Q-lasgow has the honor of having first made the public proposal of introducing into one of its Churches the most perrect of musical instruments, and of employing it for the generous purpose of tuning the public voice for the exercise of praise. And the present Lord Provost, and Magistrates, and Coun- cil, will, we doubt not, eagerly embrace the opportunity of accom- plishing a measure which will give additional lustre to their names, and render the period of their adminin ^cation the opening of a new era in the annals of our national advancement." And they conclude with an appropriate musical benediction, ''imploring upon the heads" of the authorities ** the blessing of Almighty GK)d, who hath formed the ear for the delights of harmony, and whom we are bound to serve by the culture of every faculty which it hath pleased Him in lus goodness to bestow." Before submitting the matter to the Town-Council, the Lord Provost and Magistrates thought it right to have the opinion of their legal assessor, the first town-clerk, Mr. Beddie. The opinion of that gen- tleman is given in a paper well worthy of his high reputation as an eminently judicious, learned, sound and able lawyer. Personally, he avows his sympathy with the Minister and Congregation. But in his official capacity he advises, in substance, that the Magistrates and Council should decline compl;^in^ with the prayer of the petition until the sanction of the ecclesiastical authorities was sought and got. The following passage from this document ia deserving of notice : — " That there is any express act of the Legislature prohibiting the use of Organs in our Established Churches, I am not aware. But that the introduction of Organs into our Churches would be a material alteration, and innovation in our external mode of worship, there cannot be a doubt. The argument which would identify an Organ with apitch-pipe, does not merit a serious answer. " Whether the use of Organs in our Established Churches wouldi be an expedient, or an inexpedient measure, in a religious and ecde- siastical view, it is unnecessary here to inquire ; because your Lordship and the other Magistrates are not an Ecclesiastical Judicature, and have no right to take cognizance of the matter in that character. But, as Civil Magistrates, you are legally bound to maintain our Oonistitution, in Church and State, in its present condition ; and by express statute, you are bouad ' to take order, tbftt vaaa^ md jpettM Be preserved in the Church.' That there is gr^ dangOT of the tttvo* duction of Organs disturbing the peace, and interrupting ^e ham^mf of the Glhurch of Scotland, I should be sorry to suppose. At tktf same time, such an event is possible. Whether for the iuriettlor frati^cation of one Congregation, groiuid of offence should be ftff<»?ded %o other Congregations, is a matler that requires serious t)iiou|^« Some i^espect is due by the Civil Mf^istrate, even to what tttnj individuals may be disposed to term the prejudiees of their VFOakei brethren. And at all eVCTits^ if any innovation in our external mode of wori^ip be ezpedie&t and salutaity, the reform, or improvexfi^iit^ ought to originate with the Ecclesiastical Bnmch (^ the GK>venimenl!^ with the constitutional G^uardians of o)ir conduct and our welfare m ■uch matters. When the use of Org^s in owe Established Churehes lias been sanctioned l^ the Ecclemastical Legislator, tben it w^ be the d-ifcy of your Lordship and the other Magistrates, not tberefy to permit the use of these musical instrume&ts, but to protect m that use those Cohgregations who may conceive such instrumei^S to minister to their edification. Till the Ecclesiastical Branch of Mm Constitution have sanctioned the use of Organs in our Establisbed Churches, I do not see that the Magistrates and Council c«i, with any propriety, directly or indirectly, approve of such iaa. Eeelesiastieal innovation." Mr. Reddie s6outs the notion entertained by Dr. Bitobie and Iob people, "that the Magistrates and Council have the power of granting or refusing the present application, ' merely on the ground (^ expe- dience or inexpediency as to the removal of the seats' in the OhuroL" " With me>" he says, " this opinion has no weight." He tells ihib Magistrates and Council that they have " a right to judge of the application in two characters, as representative Heritors and as Civil Magistrates." In the former of these characters, thev hate to eoil- sidei the probable bearing of the proposed change of the interests of the community which they represent. In the latter, they are re^uired» in terms of the Confession of Faith, to " take order, that unitir Afld Seace be preserved in the Church." In the discharge oi this last uty, they are entitled, and if the matter seems to them to be of impor- tance, they are bound, to bring under the notice of the Chureh Ceurtk whatever in their apprehension may have a tendency to disturb tke Church's " unity and peaoe." And Mr. Beddie dearly holds, thet» in the case submitted to him, this was the proper course for the Magistrates and Council to follow. He advises that " they lAioold reoommend to the gentlemen subscribers and to the able and learned Pastor of that most respectable Congregation, before proceeding further, to apply lor the permission and sanction of the EcdesiastieM Branch of our Constitution." Mr. Beddie's views give a reaseneUe and just intorpretation of that phrase in our Coafession which hM eecasioned not a little controversy, — the phrase, namely, about tte ;■''■■■"■'■• V'- Oi^il Magistoite ** taking order/' He shows how, without intarfermg with the jurisdiction of the Church, the Civil Magistrate may see to it that " unity and peace be preserved," by bringing any mattw which seems to threaten dkiunion or dispeace under the notice of the proper eeclesiajstical authorities. Such, accordingly, was the conduct of the Lord Frorost, when, a year after, the question again arose. For Mr. Beddie's conolusiTO opinion, which the Town Council, on the 8th Sept. 1806, adopted as their reply to Dr. Ritchie and the petitioners, seems to have arrested the progress of the movement for a year. But in the autumn <^ 3,807, the smothered fire of Organic zeal once more began to bum with increased intensity. Happening accidentally to hear, " in a convenmtion which took place in a company where he was," on Friday 2l8t August 1807, that the Organ was to be used in public worship on the following Sunday, the Lord Provost wrote to Dr. Bitchie on Saturday, inquiring *' if r uuh really was his intention," and warning him that *^ it so, be Woulct consider it his duty to enter a solemn protest against him for all damages which might be the consequence." On the same day Dr. Bitchie replied : " I shall embrace the first possible opportunity of laying the Lord Provost's letter before the Committe of the Con- gregation, to which the business of the Organ has been committed, that they may know at what risk such an attempt as that which the^ have in view must be made. They will, as becomes them, pay all due deference to your Lordship's declaration." Next day, Sabbath, 23rd August, 1807, " through the long-drawn aisle and fretted vault" of St. Andrew's Church, " the pealing " Organ " swelled the note of praise." On the 26th August the Lord Provost's letter to Dr. Bitchie was laid by him before his Musical Committee. On the same day the Tx>rd Provost made a formal communication to the Moderator of the Presbytery of Glasgow, intimating the fact of the Organ having been used. He also wrote to Dr. Bitchie, telUng him that he had done 80, and repeating also more fully his former protest. On the 2nd September he writes again to the Moderator of the Presbvtery, mentioning that, on the 29th August, " a deputation from the 6t. Andrew's Congregation waited upon him." " They intimated," he tays, " verbally, that they had come to the determination of giving np the use of the Organ for the present if I would withdraw the oommunication which I had made to the Presbytery." His Lordsuip •dds, that he made no immediate answer to that intimation, but that he had since laid before the Magistrates and Council " the whole of his correspondence about the Orgcn." In conclusion, he announoei the final resolution of the whole body : " They unanimously approved 6f all that I had done, and agreed that the matter should now rest with the Beverend Presbytery." The prooeedings la itoA Coufit were short and summary. On 3nd * 10 September the Presbytery resolved to thank the Lord Frovost ; and, at the request of Dr. Bitchie, delayed the case till their next ordinary meeting. On the 7th October Dr. Eitchie was heard, and "judicially declared, That he would not again use an Organ in the public worship of God without the authority of the Church." Thereupon two motions were made. The first was, ** That the Presbytery are of opinion, that the use of the Organ in the public worship of God is contrary to the law of the land, and to the law and constitution of our Established Church, and therefore prohibit it in all the Churches and Chapels within their bounds : and with respect to Dr. Ritchie's conduct in this matter, they are satisfied with his declaration." The second was, *' That in consequence of Dr. Bitchie's judicial declara- tion, the Presbytery find it unnecessary to proceed further in this business ; declaring, at the same time, their judgment, that the intro- duction of an Organ into public worship is inexpedient, and unautho- rised in our Church." The first motion carried, Dr. Ritchie declining to vote; and there being no complaint or appeal to the Superior Court, the judgment of the Presbytery was final, and the case took end. It took end, — that is, in one sense, but in another sense the discus- sion then began. The minority lodged reasons of dissent. They were willing to condemn the use of Organs in public worship, as inexpedient and unauthorised ; but without going so far as to pronounce it, either civilly or ecclesiastically, unlawful and unconstitutional. Of the four names attached to the Reasons of Dissent, Taylor, Ranken, Davidson^ MacGill — the last, that of the late Professor of Divinity in Glasgow, will probably carry most weight. Elaborate answers were prepared by a Committee of Presbytery, consisting of Drs. Porteous, Balfour, M'Lean, and Mr. Lapslie ; and separate papers were given in by Dr. Taylor, junior, by Dr. Lockhart, and by Dr. Ritchie himself. This last paper raised again the whole question on the merits, being a long and able argument for the use of instrumental music in public worship. The Presbytery recorded a Reply to it, prepared by tne same Com- mittee who had answered the Reasons of Dissent. At last, on the 4th of May 1808, this war of protocols \»ithin the Presbytery ceased. Out of doors, the controversy raged in newspapers, pamphlets, and caricatures. Of the pamphlets, several, including one by that most strenuous and uncompromising foe to innovation, the late Dr. Begg of New Monkland, are very valuable, and will deserve attention if the fight is to be seriously renewed. Before the friends of the Organ renew the fight, they would do well to study the records of that former conflict. Of the caricatures, that which is best remembered is the one which represents Dr. Ritchie, who was about the time of these proceedings translated to Edinburgh, travelling as a street-musician, with a barrel-organ strapped across his shoulder, and solacing himself with the good old tune, " ril gang nae mmr to yon toun.*' The two papers now republished are the last of those received and n recorded by the Presbytery. They are both of them papers of no ordinary ability. And they have this advantage, that they discuss the question gravely upon its general merits, without mixing up with it umost any of the details and episodes of the particular case which raised it. Dr. Ritchie writes as a gentleman and a scholar ; he reasons with much ingenuity ; he shows great dexterity in evading or covering the weak points in his argument ; he skilfully selects the most plaus- ible and telling topics, and presents them in a graceful form, well fitted to impress men of accomplishments and men of taste and feeliug. The writer, as is well known, continued for many years to occupy respect- ably the position of a Minister and Professor in Edinburgh. The other production is that of a learned and profound Divine, " mighty in the Scriptures." It goes much more fully and thoroughly into the subject. It is not, perhaps, written in so attractive a manner as Dr. Ritchie's. Fastidious or superficial readers may find it less inviting. But by those who can understand and relish the formal discussion of a theological topic, it will be felt to be the work of a master. Long ago, when I first studied it, I remember how it impressed me with the sort of sense of completeness which a satisfactory demonstration gives ; and a recent perusal has not lowered my opinion of it. I thmk it would not be easy to meet any of its propositions in fair debate; although, of course, it may be open to cavilling and special pleading. Its style is clear, simple, and strong. The author, — for it is known to be mainly, if not altogether, the work of Dr. Porteous, — was no ordinary man. He was Minister of the Wynd Church, in the old town of Glasgow, — a Church which, towards the close of his ministry, was transferred to a new locality, and received the new name of St. George's.* He was held in high esteem among his contemporaries ; and if this treatise be almost the only literary remains we have of him, it is of itself quite sufficient to prove that their estimate of him was not too high. My task, for the present, is done. I do not intend to argue the matter myself. I have great hope that the argument as conducted by Dr. Porteous will make many, who have been almost led away by the Elausibilities that are so easily got up on the side of Organs, pause at jftst before they lend themselves to what may cause a most perilous agitation. It is not that I am afraid of a controversy on this subject, * After this transference, the site of the old Wynd Church became a market, with which, in former days, I used to be very fkmiliar. Within the last few years, the market being given np, the site was purchased by Dr. Buchanan of the Free Tron Church, and his OongreRrtion, for the erection of their new Territorial Church for the district of the Wynds, one of fhe wont in Glasgow. I preached in that new Church on the day on which it was opened, and Mveral persons present told me they remembered worshipping in the old Wynd Church. One gentleman in particular said he had found himself seated in the very spot where he WM •ooustomed of old to sit, in the time of Dr. Porteous. These are things worth noticing, not only fbr the interest that attaches to them as linking the past and the present together, but •tso, and chiefly, as pointing a higher moral. Forty or fifty years ago, the way was to take • Church out of the wynds and plant it in a fluhionable and wealthy street « and the Church SBMn* the nnnr hnraunn k flnah.in&rkAt. Tt w»a & cosarnon InAitufttlnn. of whioh w» mrm now reiHPtng the firuits. It is some consolation, at the same time, to think that we are also trylnf to repair the mischief The new Territorial Wynd Church, occupying the foraaken site Of that old Wynd Church, is burely one of the hopefUl signs of the tunee. or of its inrae, bo ibr as the metks of the qttestnni Are obtteerned. I bdievc th«t it is a qnestioii which touches sosm of the highest and deepei^ punts of ChristiaEa theology. Is the Temple deslri^edt I» 1^ Temfde worship wholly superseded ? Have we, or have we boI, priests and samfices amiiHig' us now ? is the Terapk or the Syn«{;og«e- the model on which the Church of the new Testament is formed? Dees die Old Testament itself point to anythmg but *' the fruit of the lips" as the peace-ofifSering or thank-o^ring of Gospel times ? Is HtMre- a trace in the New Testament of any other mode oi praise ? For my part) I am persuaded that if the Chrgan be admitte<]^ there is no bn^ rier, in principlie, against the sai^rdotal {rjrstem in all ita fulnesSb*^ against the substitutioa again, in our whole religion, of the formal fbr me spiritual,^ the ^fmbolical for the real. I do not judge others. The case » very different with those wfa» nerer reached our measure of reformation irom what it is with us. A Church which, stoppii^ short in the process of its emancipation from 8 false system, retains certaitt of the usages of that false system, » in a very different position from a Church which, having advanced jSsrther in the direetion oi purity and simplicity, vohtntarify retrogrades and retunss to these usages. To the one they may be comparatively ham- less, while to the other they may prove deeply hazardous. In the former instance, the continuance of them indicates no new leaning towards ritualism, no decline from what is more pure and spiritual. In the latter instance, the adoption of them may have a significaacy, and may exert au inflaence, or a serious character indeed. A landing- piece which is tolerable for those who are going forward, mi^ be the reverse of tolerable for those who are retreating. This is a considera- tion applicable to not a few matters of practieid concern, in which Puritans and Presbyterians have been led to entertain views somewhal stricter than those which some other Christian bodies hold. And it ia a consideration which makes zeal and anxiety in defence of our own ways, perfectly consistent with a charitable and liberal construction of the ways of those who have never learned to think and feel as we do. I have said that I do not dread controversy on this subject, for th« truth's sake. But I own I deprecate it for the sake of our commoA Presbyterianism. It cannot fail to raise questions painfViUy affecting the relations of Presbyterian Churches to one another. It may break us up even more than we are broken up already. It must interpose a sew obstacle to union. Our friends who would like to see the Organ introduced cannot possibly consider it a necessity. At the most, it if a luxury. Let them not purchase it too dearly. I hope thej will read these papers. They may not be convinced by the reasomng of Dv. POrteous, in which his brethren of that day lareely agreed. But if they are intelligent and candid, they must surely see that there ii more to be said on his side than perhaf s they were prepared to expect Aad at sssj rate they most own, that strong conviotions, founded on laeh grounds of Scripture, are not to be treated lightly. It reitf M wUk ibem, tibffovph what caan^ be to tliem tkweij cUffioolt eseedse mi ilMlMaraiic^ to presenre the peace of the Prei^jterian Ohupehes in Ibese realms. M diey wiH not, or CMsaot, consent to exwciae that fi»- 'bfiamnoe, they oan scarcely now compla^ that ikey have w^ knm. wuned in a ^friendly spirit^ — axid warned, I repeat, in tkne. .. ^ .. ■ SuU !i-><> :W^ i <■; I • ! i^'" \> t-i DR, RITCHIE'S STATEMENT. A misn had for years, for more than tirirty years, been cherished by 'the Congregation of St. Andrew's Church, to have an Organ epected, and employed in PwMic Worship. After the proposal for such an erection had been repeatedly made to me, by respectable members and heads of families belonging to that Congregation, I at last gave my assent, with the full approbation of my own mind. The principles upon which this my assent has been and still is founded, I nare now tthe honour to lay before the Presbytery. In doing this, I take no charge of the Reasons of Dissent from the sentence passed by the Pres- rt>idden by the Word of Cpod, but, on iUbB contrary, is expressly encouraged, perhaps enjoined, in the <^ Testament, and is clearly authorised by the New. Supported by \tibis high authority, let us next trace what we have to learn on this subject from the history of the Church. Was Instrur mental Music employed in theur Worship by the Christians of the first age ? There is eveiy reason to bdieve that it was not. No menti(« is made of it by the earliest historians ; and perhaps no mention would have be^i made, although it had been in general use, because snch Mttiuc in Wwship was neither striking ucht strange, either to ijrentiles or to Jews. That Harps and Organs could not then be employed, must be evident, from tb^ severe and unremitting perseoutien to whidt the Church was subjected. How could men think of emplaying Harps and Organs, while they wece fleeing from city to city, and hiding them- adves in holes, and aens, and caves of the earth ? Even wh^ by 4^ conversion of Constantine, a Christian Emperor was seated on tlie throne of the Boman world the peace of the Church was far from being aecoredi Wars and revolutions, and inundations of barbarous nations, succeeded each other with a ferocity and rapidity, and to an extent, of which we, even in these eventful times, can form only a very inadequate conception. Mingled with these wars, and promoted by them, controversy arose after controversy, and sect after sect in multi- tudes, and directed the attention of mankind to matters of far more importance than Sacred Music. Modes of Worship were forgotten, amidst the keen contention for modes of Faith. Yet, even in defiance cf the stern barbarism and fierce superstition of those ages, some atten- tion was paid to Psalmody ; for we find that controversies on this sub- ject arose between Church and Church, and among the members of the same Church. But, as might be expected, little progress was made by a people whose throats were more accustomed to the hideous cry of war than to the soft notes of praise. About the middle of the eighth century, an era of ^flattering promise seemed to begin. Some- thing like order w&i introduced amon' the Western natiana. and gome Jsint gleamsiof light began to dawn, struck out by the vigorous admin- \uiT9, taai. and bum md xrktt »lidfouiip le pasjM^e italMunc I. For k md never [J created By to pro- ere, then, [ Music in enjoined, re have to as Instrur f the first menti(« ion would EIUS8 aneh [>moted bv t in multi" far more forgotten, n defiance >me atten- 1 this suh" lembers of igress was 18 hideous Idle of the 1. Some- and gome tus admin- IstrMion of Charles Martel, of P^pin, of Charlemagne. While ]Pep% in the year 757, was holding a council of his clergy at Compiiegne, for the refbnnation of manners, there arrived an Organ, sent hun m com- ^ment to his high reputation, by that Constantine !Bbiperor of tJie £ast, who is so fkmous as the Iconoclast, the fierce enemy of images in Churches, of Convents, Monks, and Nuns. This Organ, — the first, k is said, that had been seen m Europe, — the French King presented ta the Church of St. Comeillc at Compiegne. Struck with the majeB^f of die instrument, and the solemnity of its sound, the heroic soul Off Plepin thought he could not better employ it, than by devoting it to the service of his God. Charlemagne, son and successor to Pepfn, continued the use of Organs, and we learn A-om a poet of the nmth eentury, who, describing the effects of that instrument in that age, says, that a woman was so transported with the Music, that she fainted and expired under the sweetness of the sound. His words are,-— Dulce melos tantum vanas illudere mentes ^ ,. Caepit, ut una, suis de«edens sOTsfbos, ipsam • *'-'^ Fsemina p«nltderit, vooum duUediae vltam.* ....... <.,,.;: This instrument seems stSl to have been employed, and to hsre Sread at last in fame, if not in numbers, during the reign of Louis e son of Charlemagne. For thfre exists a letter fVom the then Pope, John VIII, in which, towards the end of the ninth century, is thig feqoest to & German Bishop, ** Precamur autem, nt optimum OrgaK num, cum artifice qui hoc moderui et faoere ad omnem modulationis efiicaciam possit, ad instrucdonem musicse disciplines aut deferas, aut mitta8."f Such was the state of the arts even in Italy, during tike ninth century, that not a man could be found who could make, or tune, or play upon an Organ. And the Pope requests, as a singidar fkvour, that a man who could do so, mi^t be sent to him from Ger- many, for teaching the Italians Music. From the death of Louii^ and even during his reign, the prospect of dawning reformation in govern- ment, in science, and in religion, was darkened by a cloud that thidu ened ever deeper over £urope tot more than two hundred years; during which we leam nothing of Instrumental Music in Churches. At last, Europe was roused by the Papal summons to the Crusades^ Thousuids travelled for conquest to the Holy Land^ This fonatioal fnxutj continued to drain Europe of its inhabitants for a couple of ooktttries. Though most of the (^usaders fell in Asia^ yet some were continually returning, and by t^ir observations on what they hod seen, contributed not a little to awaken the human mind from t^e lethargy into M^ich it had been sunk. Then b^an tiie age of scho- Itstic philosophy, and of scholastic theology, whioh, exercising the human understanding on points of the nicest and most perplexing svb- tilty<, paved the way for that bright day of sound Uteratim*, and pi»e * "The sweet melodjr began, to exercise such a oharm on dreamy minda, that one «*inML ■aipi MMfV lli fMmvuny, !«■• iiH, iiianii utter mm awevMiCMtvi uit, TUioea. t " W«aak70ttto brii^or MOdil^ilM |Mrpoaa»ar»uiaal4bal»«ollMt*a ftick (■laOkfiM^ with an artiit competent to regulate it, and make it available for all muaioal modulationa.'* B \9 F: I' relinon, which now shines over Europe. At this era, so auspicious to the human race, it is worthy of remark, that we again find Organs beginning to appear, and walking side by side with the other improve- ments of the age. So far, then, were Organs from being the invention of the dark ages, that it was ever during periods of dawning light that they began to be employed, not by the authority of a Papal decree, but by the dicate of pious feeling, prompting the enlightened mind to consecrate the labours of genius to the devout exercise of praise. The dark ages had neither the head to invent, nor the hand to make, though they might have had the heart to enjoy them. During the fourteenth and fifteen centuries, great were the exertions of the human soul, struggling for knowledge, for liberty, for employment suited to its powers. The pressure of superstition, and of Papal oppression, counteracted their own ends, and, through the unseen workings of a gracious Providence, were overruled to bring on the Reformation. Organs did not shrink from the scrutinizing zeal of that keenly-search- ing age ; for Luther and Calvin, and the other enlightened Reformers, discovered in them nothing of the idolatry of a corrupted Church, which they so nobly laboured to overturn. And, indeed, upon the sUghtest attention by the most superficial inquirer, it must be discover- ed that Instrumental Music forms no essential part of Popery ; that it is founded upon principles widely different, indeed, from the ceremo- nies of the Church of Rome, because it is consonant at once to sound reason and the Word of God. Accordingly, it was retained, and it is still employed, by all the Reformed Churches on the Continent of Europe. A stronger argument in its favour cannot be produced, ex- cept that which I have already mentioned, the sacred authority of Scripture. Why, then, has it not been employed by the Church of Scotland ? The reasons are strong, as they were pressing ; and in tracing them we shall discover the origin of that prejudice which still remains i^ainst Organs. "Whatever our Psalmody might have been under the Popish power, we know that in the reforming Church of Scotland it must have been almost annihilated. Religious truth had to work its way amidst poverty and oppression, in opposition to the power of an arbi- trary Government, and to the persecuting spirit of the Church of Rome. There were neither houses for the celebration of religious or- dinances, nor Ministers to preside in the celebration of them, nor funds for the support of Ministers. No wonder that, in these circumstances, every thing was laid aside, but the pure preaching of the Gospel, and the performance of Worship in the best manner which the necessity of the times would allow. From this state of degradation it was long before our Church was able to emerge. The doctrines of the Reforma- tion, it is true, were generally embraced, and a system of ecclesiastical policy settled agreeable to the general wishes of the country. But the wealth of the Church had been seized by the landed nroprietors. and long and arduous was the contest, before even liberty o/ conscience, and Presbyterian govemment, could be fixed upon a permanent foundation. The causes of this contest are easily ascertained, and its effects are deeply felt, even in our day. The troubles unavoidable from the fac- tious spirit of a feudal nobility, under a female Popish reign ; — the bigoted partiality of a pedantic King for Prelatic splendour, which he deemed favourable to absolute monarchy ; — the mistaken piety of a virtuous Sovereign, contending, by unhallowed means, for what he thought agreeable to the Word of God ; — the hypocritical ambition of a bold usurper, wading through the dark fanaticism of his contempo- raries, to the possession of a kingdom which he affected to decline ; — the unprincipled treason of alawnil Prince, restored to the throne of hif ancestors, straining by force and fraud to impose upon our country a yoke which its brave inhabitants were determined never to bear ; — the weak infatuation of a Popish Sovereign, urging him on not merely to the destruction of Presbytery, but of the Reformation; — this unbroken series of persecution, maintained with such unrelenting obstinacy, through such a number of yeftrs, impressed, engraved, wrought into the very soul of our Presbyterians, a fear, a dread, an abhorence, not only of Popery and Prelacy, but of every thing that had been connect- ed with Popisn and Episcopal Worship. ". Under these circumstances, our forefathers thought, and felt, and contended honourably, nobly, as became patriots and ChristianB. What Scottish heart does not sympathize with them, asserting, at the expense of fortune and life, those nigh privileges which we now en- joy ! What mind but must approve of a conduct dictated by manly feeling, by religious principle, by the love of all that they held sacred on earth and in heaven ! Under the irritation to which they were subjected, they acted wisely, when, in obedience to thai strong im- pulse of what they owed to moral, political, religious existence, they wreaked, as they did, their vengeance on Altars, Crosses, Organs, on every the most distant seeming appendage of a form of Worship which they were determined not to embrace. And if an infatuated G-overn- ment should attempt, in any future age, a similar mode of infringing the sacred rights of man, it is to be hoped that the spirit of our ancestors would revive in their descendants, and animate them to contend, as their fathers did, even to the death, for liberty of con- science, and for pure religion. It is then evident, that from the Beformation down through the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, it was not possible for our Church to pay much, if any attention to Sacred Music. A new era com- menced at the Revolution ; from which period downwards our Pres- byterian Establishment has, under a limited monarchy, enjoyed all the peace and protection which G-overnment can bestow. During a century of uninterrupted prosperity, it is to be expected that legal in^c lendence, and perfect security against the encroachments of Fo- pefy Of Prelacy, may have disposed Churchmen and Laymen among among us to consider calmly what is, and what is not, essential to 99 '? thoae forma of Ecclctsiastic^ Qoxeimm^vii, 9i^ ta idfiQ auponov ^ tbt weakiid«i of rejecting improyemeAts ia tibiogs iodiffeceot, voeuBtkf because they are employed, by: CKurchss whose ix^odoa of Worshipi w^ reject. This, iu a very comiiderable decree, has taken place* Nft« tional and religious aotipalhieci Qxe yimijug to the lenient hand (^ time. A liber^it^ of spirit pervades our enlightened Church;. Imr pi^vements aven In onr F«ialmody are begun, which pKognoatioAW ravourablj for farther advancement. The tide of human ai^aii^ id strong. The hand of God, guiding the progress Qf mind* cannpfc b« resisted* The steps, will be made, which yet ^emaini for yind?^' vti4!:.|es our Cliurch and our country ftom tbe reproacH oif ne^lectU^i,; vni* of the best means that has ever been devised for the imiroveivsut oC Sacred Music. * And shall Organs,* it wiU b9 asked, * shaJOl Org^vi^ be intr.7dune4 into any of our Churches in Scotland?' And whv n; i« ? Have npj^ we, the disciples of Calvin, as good a right to Instrumental Musia ii;i, our Worship, and all its advantages, «8 hijs disciples in Qead^t^ \^ Switzerland, and in G-ermany ? ' But has not our Church been aJh w:ays hostile to Organs ?' Of such hostility no evidence exists, o;r can exist, in a case similar to tbe inteoduction of the Orga^ into Sft. Andrew's Church. 7or this is. a singular case, the fir^t attempt of the kind thai: WAI>t ever made according to the pure principleaof Poesbytery. The peopW of that Congregation, respectable both from character and fii^m nuni<> ber, and steady r,s any of their countrymen in the: attachmienjb to th#i religion transmitted to them by their fathers ;— the people made tbft proposal, not dictated to th^m by a domineering, priest, not impo944i upon them by a tyrannical government, but aa their own unbiassedp wish, cherished among them for years, before they ever knew the mfin, who is their present Minister. The Orgauwas introduced upon priB?>> ciples as free from an^ conDkection with Episcopacy and Popery, a» the principles of our Directory for Worship are firom connection witk, the Church of England and of Home. Against such an int^oductioii, our Church could not possibly enact laws, or discover a hostile spiiaV because it had never hitherto takf" ' nht-cB, Laws are a remerly prQn, vided against f'^M or present evAi. '* i '• sagaci ->f Legislat cannot pierce into futurity and f '> v- - .u^.vost what may arise. in i^ course of ages. ' But did not an Assembly of our Cbw^ch, in the year X644, r^r echo to the Scotch Divines at Westminster their ^pressions of triumpb; over the destruction of the great Organ at St. raul's ? Yea ; bu;t. those were times, of fierce, and furioua wm against the Church of I^ugland^ An invading amy who have no antipa.thy to^ bedgea. and 7illag«8, aid cprn fields, yet, while they are advancing to b^ttlp, may, levej qruUiy with the ground every obstacle that impedea their pro- gress to victory^i The enemy which; our Divines of tbaii age h«4 chiefiy at heart to sabdue, wa9. ^<>t the.helple8B> harAUeaa^Oj^^ \^vk '-I'^.u '\-*':^s-'-'^-.:^-'yi : - ■^r^.U ^i,.'V;--:-i>kt.i^'*fc''. .>■ : >\.- .L Wl^i^ V- -. W^TV-f-'T-; ,VT-;. fe-. '1 i I tihft hitMitc^ty and 6*rviee-b()0k of biff Bister Khgdom. And ftoti Hife f^iiceess in destroying whait they regarded as the oufiootlks, they sngfat With joy anticipfkte their reducing to subjection the last tesibtt df the adversary. Antipathy to Organs in this country has ever beett associated with antipathy to Episcopacy. Organs and Prelates haVe, hy a surpriHing want of discrimination, been involved in one commoli Mndenination But what have Organs to do with Bishops P Nothing more than with John Calvin, John Knox, or Mr. Ai .. w Merville. Therf are never otice mentioned in the Book of Comu u Prayer, The tiazrons 6? the Church of England never touch them Tnstru- caental Mmie in Worship is not the property of any o* parH* Mlar Chureh or Kingdom. It is the hereditary right of every 'hurch ttid Country under Heaven. * fiat has not out Church an Act of Security incorpor. ed with th^ Act of the "Union of the two kingdoms, and Ac':8 of n Ge leral A«sembly against Innovation, which completely guard us again^ the hlla'oduetion of Organs P' The Act of Security, of Union an aguiust Lanovation, had more important objects in view, with whi< '' Irgangt have uo concern. By the Revolution, the Act of Securit) ud the A^ of Union, there has been secured to us, to our Churc ad to lination Jr of St. ihey are ing the i, there- miform- [uantitj ' pass? are can our na- al, ever lind to nature of our igrega- pth, or igrega- 3 these buman pship ? jrCon- nestly Kirk, use of liable, pro* nd of iroati istles. But it is not against these petty distinctions, which are unavoidable in every large society, when French equality is not the order of the day ; it is not against these that thc> wisdom of our Church and State has so anxiously guarded us ; — hv* against the Hierarchy and the Service-book. From inattention to this, combined with the distract- ed state of the country in former times, has arisen the prejudice against Organs, while the mistaken idea has been cherished that they form a component part of Episcopacy. That this is mistake and pre- judice is proved beyond all possibility of doubt, by the conduct of th most purely Calvinistic and most strictly Presbyterian Churches on the Continent. Not free, I am disposed to presume, from the influ- ence of this mistake,* the Bespondents seem never to have inquired what was done in St. Andrew's Church. They conjure up to them- selves some horrid prostitution of sacred things, and then fight againsi; it, as, pro arts etfocis, wielding their arms against a shadow. What took place in our Church is literally this. The Precentor, as usual, was in his place : The Organ joined him, and so did the Congrega- tion. The Organ never struck a note but at the same moment with the Precentor ; it proceeded along with him, pausing from line to line in the ordinary method, maintaining throughout the whole that grave melody which our Directory enjoins ; and with him it ceased. Who can discover here the monstrous profanation of worshipping God by images P Another mistake which, in my apprehension, runs through the opinion maintained by the Bespondents is, that we, the Minister and Congregation of St. Andrew's Church, were assuming to our- selves the sovereign prerogative of enacting a law for the whole Church, for obtruding Organs upon all the Congregations in Scotland. This surely is a gigantic idea ; such a thought never arose in our minds. We exercised what we believed to be our sacred private right, and we will ever allow to others the free exercise of theirs. Acting under the influence of these, which I regard as mistaken apprehensions of the subject, the Bespondents have contended strongly against Epis- copacy ; which I have never undertaken to defend. They have passed a sentence which, in my apprehension, goes far beyond the object which they meant to condemn. For that cannot be illegal, against which no law exists, or could exist. That cannot violate, which touches not the Constitution. That cannot be against the law of God, which is authorised by his Word. That cannot be against the spirit and the genius of our Church, which she habitually recom- mends to the people, by her appointment of the singing of David's Psalmns. Before declaring her prohibition of Organs, it is incumbent on the Church to expunge from the Sacred Becords those passages which seem clearly to recommend the use of instruments in Worship ; that thus the worshippers may be delivered from the inconsistency of * The author eniDloyH thn term " Beflpondeni,i,"in referriiiK to the Presbytcry'i Answers to the ReMoni of Diuent given in by members votinK in the inihoniy. the Aniwori wsfs drawn up. as usual, by a Committee, and adopted by the Presbytery. Ttio B«spondenta there- fore are the Presbytery. I 24 promising and exhorting each other to do, what in their heartg thej resolve, and by the Church are forbidden, to perform. Such being the principles and sentiments which I had long enter- tuned with regard to Instrumental Music,! £elt myself fully warranted to concur with my people, in their scheme of erecting an Organ m. St. Andrew's Church. With this view application was, in autuma 1806, mado to the Lord Provost, Magistrates, and Council, — not for leave to erect an Organ in the Church : it became us not to present « request which the CivU Power had not the right to g^ant. All mat- ters of Worship belong exclusively to the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction. Tbe request was, that the Lord Provost, and Magistrates, and Couo- cil, as our Heritors, would allow certain alterations in certain seats, that there might be room for setting up an Organ ; — the petitionera at the same time binding themselves to defray the expense, and to make good all damages that might be supposed, but which they ap- prehended not to arise from the introduction of the Organ. This request the Magistrates, upon principles which to C'^.m seemed just, thought proper to refuse. The petitioners submitt^ , as became them, to the Civil Power, and never presumed to think ot touching the seats in question. In this situation the business ky, until, in the begin- ning of June last, it was resoked by the Minister and a few heads of families, to have a meeting one evening in the week, of such mem- bers of the Congregation as might find it convenient to attend ia Church, for the purpose of ioiproving themselves in Sacred Musio. This practice I believe existed in other Churches of this city, and tbe idea was borrowed from our neighbours. After find- ing that this proposal was relished by a number of the hearers, and that they gave regular attendance, it was next proposed by some of th« attendants to introduce a Chamber Organ, as a help to tne Precentor, for guiding the voices of the singers. For such an introduction it never once occurred to us that leave should be obtained from either the Civil or Ecclesiastical Power. This was the matter of merely pri- vate accommodation. We did not meddle with the seats ; — we made no alterations whatever on any part of the Church. The Organ waa introduced, was employed regularly one evening in the week ; and tbe use of it never did, as far as I know, excite even the appearance of a tendancy to disturbance. We walked to and from Church in peace and quietness. No body minded us; they were better employed i» attending to their own affairs. While we were thus meeting together, as members of one family, it was suggested that our edification might be promoted, and our improvement surely not retarded, by concluding our meeting with Familv Worship. This was done ; and in praise, we employed the Organ. The people present were highly gratified, and became loud and ureent in their requests for the use ot that tnstri^ ment in Public Worship. The resolution to employ it was adopted. But before our resolution was put in practice, I received from the Lord Provost of Glasgow the otficial letter of the '22d of August, which if arta thej ig enter- arranted Organ iai autuma —not for >reseQta ^11 mat- sdiction. d Coua- in seata^ titionerg I and to hej ap- i. Thig led juafc, ie theniy he seatB ' begin- leads of I mem- !end ia Musio. is city, r find- ers, and 3 of th« icentor, ition it t either sly pri- s made in wa« od the :eof a peace yedia ;ether, mi^ht luding se, we li and tistrn- >pt«d. ich m IMW in the Presbytery Record. This letter had not the effect of making me shrink one moment from what I believe to be my ri^t,"^ from the privilege of directing all that concerns Public Worship in tit Parish Church of which I am Minister, independently of Civil Power. I did not betray the cause of the Church, in yielding up to the Civil Magistrate what can only fall under the jurisdiction of my Eccfesias* tical Superiors. I mfuntained the privileges of this Court ; and I am now in my proper place, accounting for my conduct to the Presbytery of which I am a member. The Organ was employed in St. AndrewNi Church, in Public Worship, on 23d of August last. No explosion took place. No damage ensued. All was done decently and in order* According to my promise, in my answer to the Lord Provost, I em- braced the first opportunity of laying his Lordship's letter before a number of the gentlemen who have commonly acted with me in this matter. They idl with one voice agreed that his Lordship's terms were fair, were just, were what they expected ; and nothing more than what, upon a former occasion, in conversation with the Magistrates of the former year, they had engaged to perform. Three gentlemen were named tot waiting upon the Lord Provost, and giving him the assur* ance which he required. Here, surely, there was no mark of disre- spect to the Civil Power. This our meeting was on the 26th of August, and on that day I received the Lord Provost's second letter, conveying the official information, in full form, that he had taken the legal pro- test against us, which we never doubted would take place, and giving notice that he was to lay the whole matter before the Presbytery. Wishing, as from the beginning I had done, that every thing might be avoided that might have the most distant appearan"'; of an interference between the Civil and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction ; and fully persuaded that information not only might, but certainly would be lodged in some other way ; for how could a deed be concealed, done in a Parish Church in the face of a Congregation, during Public Worship on the Lord's day ? — with this wish, and under this persuasion, I sent two gentle- men twice in one day to request of the Lord Provost, that the Civil Power might no more be seen in this business ; because, whatever opi- nion the Presbytery niight form of the cause, they might perhaps be jealous of an encroachment on the rights of a Minister, since to them Delongs, exclusively, the judgment in such cases, and the privilege of calling in the Civil Power in aid of their judgment, against refractory and (A)stinate Ministers. On this principle I acted, from the most sincere respect tor both branches of this Constitution. The informa- tion was lodged ; and when the Presbytery was about to enter on its discQSiioB, I, not knowing in what light the Civil Power was to be regarded, craved a delay ; which the Presbytery obligingly grai^d. At next meeting the business received so very unexpected a direction, and was hurried on by such a storm of zeal, that I have no desire now to reBgitatB tiic BUuject. xiic FcSuit staHuS upon Fccoru. And it is my hope that what I have now submitted shall also be committed to record ; that thus both sides of the question may be subjected to the review of future generations. And whatever opinion men may form of the merits of either side, I trust that every insinuation against the loyalty to Magistrates and to the Church, of us who are advocates for an Organ, will be found groundless. We, the Minister, and Elders, and Congregation of St. Andrew's Church, are loyal citizens. We honour and we obey our Magistrates. We vie with our fellow- citizens m our exertions to maintain the Civil Power in that dignified respect- ability which the interests of good order in Glasgow may require. We are steady in our attachment to our Ecclesiastical Establishment, as transmitted to us by our fathers, and secured to us by the law of the land. In what we have done on the subject of an Organ, we have had ever in view our own edification, without even the imagination of doing injury to an individual, of being disloyal either to Church or State. We have acted as a united people, — not a voice from among us having been raised against those who have stood most forward in the business. The subscribers to the petition had the concurrence and the good wishes of the whole people for success in their scheme. The example is singular, of a Minister, and Elders, and People, uniting as one man for promoting their own improvement in Sacred Music, by means which they deemed fair, and legal, and honourable ; while yet, by those to whom thev were looking up for encouragement, they have been exhibited to the world as violating the law both of the Church and of the State. Feeling, as we do, the harshness of the sentence pronounced against us, we have confidence that the judgment of a candid public will be, that guilt has been imputed where there was no crime, and that we have become the victims of a prejudice which we wished to remove, — *;he prejudice that Instrumental Music in Public Worship is inseparably connected with Popery and with Prelacy. In combining my efforts for this end with those of my Congregation, I have made no sacrifice of judgment, or even of opinion ; for I have acted from the full approbation of my own mind, confirmed by the judgment and the practice of men of the most cultivated understandings, and of the purest hearts, that have ever adorned the Reformed Churches. And though, on this occasion, no sacrifice has been required of me for com- plying with the wishes of my hearers, yet I am persuaded they will consider what is past as a pledge on my part, that, if future circum> stances should require it, in whatever can contribute to their liberal enjoyment, as well as to their religious improvement, no sacrifice shall be refused by me to my people, to whom my labours and my life are devoted. (Signed,) WILL. RITCHIE. Glasgow, 6th January, 1808. y 27 ed to the may form gainst the ocates for Elders, ens. We (7> citizens I respect- uire. We iment, as iw of the have had of doing or State. IS having business, the good example one man y means by those ftve been th and of )nounced d public ime, and ished to orship is mbining ve made ed from lent and i of the |. And or com< hey will circum- liberal ce ahaXi life are HE. DR. PORTEOUS' ANSWER. YoiTR Committee, in obedience to the appointment of the Beverend Presbytery of Glasgow, beg leave to submit the following Answer to a paper given in to the Presbytery, by the Rev. Dr. Eitchie, on the sixth day of January last, entitled, " Statement of the G-rounds on which the Minister of St. Andrew's Church thinks himself vindicated in permitting, and the Facts connected with his employing an Organ in Public Worship on the Lord's day." Tour Committee beg leave to preface their Answer with the follow- ing request : That it may be explicitly understood by all parties, as a fixed principle, that in this discussion between our brother and us we are to avoid all general speculation about what might or what might not be a proper form of Religious Worship to be adopted by an infant Church, met for the first time to model its establishmeiiL. For the minister of St. Andrew's Church, and his Congregation, and we, your Committee, either in the character of teachers or in the capacity of hearers, are defined constituent parts of the Established Presbyterian Church of Scotland, and have pledged ourselves, each of us, to defend its Doctrine, Government, Discipline, and Worship, as contained and specified in its standards, and confirmed by the public law of the land. If that paper, which we are appointed to answer, had been written by a man entirely unacquainted with our Sacred Records, and only dictated by those feelings which, as the Statement expresseth itself, " the God of Nature hath implanted in every bosom, abstract from all positive religious establishments ;" or, had it been written by a professed Episcopalian, inclined by education, and influenced by habit, to prefer the pomp of cathedral worship to the simplicity of the pri- mitive times of the Church of Christ ; or, had it even been written by a Congregationalist, who conceives that the will of his particular flock is a law paramount to all Confessions, or Liturgies, or Directo- ries—your Committee, in their Answer, would have considered them- selves as called on to have adopted a very difierent mode of reasoning. But let it be remembered, that our Answer is directed to that State- ment given in by the Minister of St. Andrew's Church, for himself and his Congregation, component parts of the Established Presby- terian Church of Scotland. And while we shall allow the most liberal toleration, in matters of public worship, to other bodies of professing Christians in this part of the United Kingdom, in no shape whatever do we consider ourselves at liberty to infringe the Presbyterian Establishment of our country, as contained in her standards, makinff a part of the public law of the land, acquiesced in for a hundred ana twenty years, often recalled to our memory by the solemn decisions of our Church, and sanctioned by the decided approbation and vene- ration of the people of Scotland. Holding it, therefore, as an ! i undoubted principle, that neither the Reverend Presbytery nor the Minister of St. Andrew's Church are entitled to legislate a new form of Worship for their respective Congregations, but that they are expressly bound to defend and practise that form which was demanded by our forefathers in the Claim of Bights, established at the Ilevo* luiion, and declared to be unalterable by the Act of Security and Treaty of Union, — your Committee flatter themselves that they shall be able to convince the Minister of St. Andrew's Church, and the world at large, that the judgment passed on the 7th October last, by the Presbytery of G-lasgow, was agreeable to the law of the land, and to the law and constitution of this our National Church. And should we, in our reasoning, use any language which may seem to a stranger to condemn any practice of Public Worship used by other Churches of Christ, let it be remembered, that it is our object solely to defend our own practice ; and whatever argument of defense may assumo the appearance of attack, it ariaeth from the scantiness of language to express our ideas, not from any desire on our part to hurt too feelings of our Christian neighbours. Our brother commenceth his Statement by observing, that a wish had been entertained for more than thirty years to have an Organ erected and employed in Public Worship in St Andrew's Church, Though this may be literally true, it can be of no importance what- ever, when judgiag upon the legality or even expediency of this measure. During that period it is well known this Congregation have had two very respectable Ministers, who were as desirous of pleasing their people as faithful Presbyterian Ministers ought to be. They Irere men of wisdom and prudence, as well as of taste. Neither o£ these ever attempted to bring forward a measure of this kind. Ought not this circumstance to have put our brother on his guard, especially if he be well informed, when he says that for thirty years this Coa« gregation have wished for an Organ P The wish of any Congreg^ tion ought to have no weight whatever to induce the Minister of that Congregation to infringe the fundamental laws aud constitution o£ our Established Church, to which both Minister and people havs covenanted to adhere, and which they have promised to obey. The simple wish of a Congregation might be an argument to influence the Minister of English Independents, or Scotch Seeeders ; but in our Bstabliahsd Presbyterian Church, where the direction and superin- tendence of the Doctrine, Worship, Discipline, and Q-overnment, are committed to Ministers aud Elders, the office-bearers of our Churoh* acting in their legislative and judicial capacity, such an argument seems improper, and is most certainly unconstitutional. For our brother, therefore, to have so uuprecedently given ear to the wishei of his Congregation, and hastenea to obtain ^r them their favourite object, without even consulting the Presbytery of Glasgow in their omoial capacity, we do not trespass the rules of charity and polito- nesB when we say, was, on his part at least bordering upon something 4 r nor the lew form thejr are enaanded le tievo* rity and lej shall aad the last, by and, and d should stranger )h arches } defend assnme ftnguaffo lurt too k a wish Orgaa Church. !e what- of thig on have }leasinff Th^ Ither o£ Ought pecially is Con-* of that ition of le hav« . The ice the in our iperin- nt, are ihurofaf [ument or our wishev rourito 1 their polito- ething a Hke uncoastitutkOBaJl eooduet. Had the Reverend Presbytery ei G-iasf^ow carried their opinion no higher than the dissentients did, on the 7th of October last, who deriared the introduction of Instrumental Musie unwihorised and inexpeMeniy your Committee would still be justified in saying what they have now said, relative to the eondnet «f our brother, when he talks of having yielded to the wish of his Ce^regation. Your Committee are afraid that this strong desire to E lease his Congregation, may have imperceptibly warped our brother's etter judgment, an.l induced him to view that opposition which he has met with frojzi the Presbytery of Q-Iasgow to hia favourite mea- sure, as an opposition founded merely in prejudice; and to affirm such things in vindication of himself and his Congregation, in that Btaiement which he gave in, and which is xk)w upon record, as lair Jogioal reasoning will not support. CoDsidening the polite and candid manner in which thePresl^ievy ef G-lasgow accepted at once of the declaration of our brother, that he would not again use the Organ without the authority of the Church; and the indulgent spirit which they manifested, in granting him Uberty to give in nn explanation after the matter was decided, and even recording the whole of his argument in behalf of his opinion ; yOiUr Committee did not expect to have heard of such expressions as these,— "The discussion was hurried on with such a storm of zet^*"-— " Such insinuatioms against the People and the Minister of St. An- drew's Church, I can express by no other -terms, than tha4; they are a total perversion of the meaning of words, utterly con£3unding the nature of things "--^" Not free from the influence of this m^istake, i am disposed to presume, the Bespondents '^ (he must mean the Bev- erend Presbyt^y, because they had adopted the paper of the Sespon- denitiB prior to the giving in of hia Statement) " seem never to have ifiquired what was done in St. Andrew's Church ; they conjure up ta themselves some horrid prostitution of sacred things, and then fight agaiset it, aa pro oris et/bcia^ wielding their arms against a shadow." Your Committee are disposed to forgive irritation even in a lib^al, philosophical^ and Christiaa mind, when disappointed in a favourite measure. Even the best human characters are not free from imper- fections. And to the imperfections incident to humanity they are disposed to ascribe the unguarded language used by the Minister of St. Andrew's Church in his Statement. Perhaps your Committee would be Justified in saying, that, in point of form, our brother had no legal title to have uttered one syllable after our sentence was pro- nounced. He declined voting in the cause. He dissented not from the judgment, of the harshness of which he now complains. And therefore, had. the Presbytery adhered strictly to ecclesiastical form, our brother could not have been indulged in having recorded his laboured defence of his favourite opinion ; nor would we^ your Com- mitteCf have now been called upon to answer a volu mincus Statemeu t, oomprehending in some parts of it xvihxx an attaok upon the judgment I m hi i >m i: li 80 of the Fresbjtery, than merely an indulged explanation of his own oonduet upon the twenty-third of August last. The world, to which our brother appeals, shall judge between us* We find some difiiculty in ascertaining exactly the arrangement adopted by our brother in his Statement. But after the most atten- tive consideration on our part, we are inclined to believe that it resolves itself into the five following heads, which we shall analyse and answer in order : — I. "That the use of Instrumental Music in Public Worship is not forbidden by the Word of God, but, on the contrary, is expressly en- couraged, perhaps enjoined, in the Old Testament, and is clearly au- thorised by the New." In his reasoning to support this, his first conclusion, our brother sets out by observing, that " There is but one fixed and infallible standard for all that regards Public Worship. Whatever is not agree- able to, or founded on the Word of God, ought to have no place in the Worship of Christians." To this position we most heartily assent. It is with particular pleasure that we observe this great Protestant principle, the foundation of our Reformation from Popery, and by which the door is for ever shut against all the will-worship and super- stitious rites of the Church of Rome, recognised and gloried in by the author of the Statement. With respect to his reasoning adjected to this fundamental princi- ple; — namely, that "before the giving of the Law, Instrumental Music was employed by the twelve tribes of Israel ;" — and that when we "look into the covenant of peculiarity introduced by the ministry of Moses, no mention is made of Instrumental Music among the ritual obser>ances of the Law;" — we dare not give such positive assent. For a grea'; variety of opinions have been entertained by learned men, as to the precise period when Instrumental Music was introduced into the Jewish Church, in the Public Worship of God. Some have con- ceived that it had no existence prior to David, who, having a great genius for Music, and being himself a masterly performer, incorporated it with the Tabernacle service. Others suppose, from a passage in the eighty-first Psalm, and from another in Exodus (xv. 20), chat Instru- mental Music in the Worship of God was practised by the Israelites prior to the giving of the Law, " Sing aloud unto God our strength : make a joyful noise unto the God of Jacob. Take a Psalm, bring hither the Timbrel, the plesant Harp with the Psaltery. This he or- dained in Joseph for a testimony, when he went out through the land of Egypt." "And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a Timbrel in her hand ; and all the women went out after her with Tim- brels and with dances." While there are others who are of opinion, and perhaps with equally good reason, that Instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God was chiefly instituted by_ Moses, and that it crms an enactment of the Ceremouial Law. 'i'hus. Mum. x. «( Also in the day of your gladness, and in your solemn days, and in i 81; hia own sen us. ingement >st atten- resolves d answer ip is not essly en- early au- brother infallible ot agree- place in 7 assent, rotestant and by d super- n by the I princi- rumental lat when ministry he ritual e assent, led men, iced into ave con- ;; a great rporated ;e in the ; Instru- sraelites rength : n, bring is he or- the land , took a th Tim- opinion, ' c in the that it the beginnings of your months, ye sY '^ blow with the Trumpets over your burnt-offerings, and over your j^ ace-offerings ; that may be to you for a memorial before your God : I am the Lord your God." Of which last opinion is Calvin ; for in his Commentary upon Psalm xxxii. 2, he pronounces Instrumental Music a part of the " Pcedagogia Xe- galis ; that is, a Leyitical institution. But whatever opinion be adopted concerning the precise period when Instrumental Music was introduced into the Hebrew Church, we can never assent to the averment of our brother, "That in a system of merely temporary institutions, it was not deemed necessary, by posi* tive enactment, either to forbid or to enjoin the use of Instrumental Music ; but it was left to the will, and situation, and circumstances of the worshippers." For whether we are of opinion or not, that every circumstance relative to the Ceremonial Law and the Tabernacle ser- vice was shown to Moses on the Mount, it is certain that David, who was raised by Divine Providence to be king over Israel, having a great genius for Music, did either amplify what he found in the institutions of Moses, with regard to Instrumental Music, or did himself introduce it into the Tabernacle service, believing it would contribute to soften the rugged temper of the people. If the last opinion be the just one, — namely, that it was David who, either to gratify his own genius for Music, or from believing it would contribute to soften the rugged temper of the people, added the pomp of Instrumental Music to the Tabernacle service, which was afterwards adopted by his son in the service of the Temple ; — then we shall be entitled to say, from a strict examination of the history of the Hebrew Republic, that, like the first appointment of a king in the person of Saul, and like the building of a temple, suggested by David himself, this was a form of a Worship neither commanded^ nor even highly ap- proved of by God, but simply permitted. This view of the matter seems to be countenanced by that marked and accurate distinction which is kept up in Scripture, when speaking of the Temple service, betwixt what was positively enjoined by the Ceremonial Law, and what was commanded by David the King: "And the priests waited on their offices : the Levites also with the Instruments of Music of the Lord, which David the King had made to praise the Lord."* " And when the builders had laid the foundation of the Temple of the Lord, they set the priests in their apparel, with Trumpets, and the Levites, the sons of Asaph, with Cymbals, to praise the Lord, after the ordi- nance of David King of Israel."t If, on the other hand, authorities are not wanting to countenance the opinion that there are positive enactments in the Law of Moses in favour, at least, of one kind of Musical Instruments, vnth which •* all the earth " is exhorted to " make a joyful noise unto the Lord " % the conclusion must be, that it is a constituent part of the Ceremonial Law, " And he set the Levites in the house of the Lord with Cymbals, • 2 Ohron. vii. 6. t Bzn iU. 10. X Psal. xoviU. 6. ■^m S2 with Psalteries, and with Happfl> aocordimi, to the eemmandiBent of Ila.nd» Kod of Gad the king's seer, and Nathan the prophet ; fat ga was the comraandinent of the Lord by his prc^hets. And the Levkei stood with the instraments of David, and the priests with the Trampets. And when the burnt-ofPering began, the song of the Lord began also with the Trumpets, and with the instruments ordained Inr David king of Israai. And all the Congregation worshipped, and the singers sang, and the trumpeters sounded : and aA\ t&ui eontinued until the burnt-offering was finished."* Whichever of these opinions we adopt, it is evident that the reguls- tions relative to Instrumental Music in the Publk Worship of Qoi ave as much incorporated with the Mosaic or Jewish Constitution as Circumcision, which was instituted long before the giving of the Law ; er as the Temple itself, which was not built till after the death of David. Therefore, we are entitled to cimclude that Circumcision, Sar orifice. Instrumental Music, and the tci^ple — the whole of these insti- tutions, must stand or fall together. We shall allow to our brother that David was a prophet, and that he was actuated by the purest motives, when he set apart a particu- lar class of people to sing those hymns which he composed, with the accompaniment of Instruments of Music, improved or invented by himself. Still, it does not follow that the Worship of God shodd h&ve any such an accompaniment under the Gospel. We shall even allow that under the Padagogia Legalis, all the in- struments mentioned in tao hundred and fiftieth P^alm were daify used in the TemplCj and that the whole ritual Worship preseribea by the Law, by David, and the prophets, was in full authority, and in uninterrupted observation until the publication of the Gospel. It remmns still to be considered, whether Christianity did not dissolve the obligations of the Law, and entirely change many of those insti- tutions which relate to the Worship of God. It seems to be acknowledged, by all descriptions of Christiana, l^at among the Hebrews Instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God was essentially connected with Sacrifice — ^with the morning and evening sacrifice, and with the sacrifices to be offered up on great and solemn days. But as all the sacrifices of the Hebrews were oompletely abolished by the death of our blessed Bedeemer, so In- strumental Music, whether enacted by Moses, or introduced by the ordinance of David,— or, if you will, of Abraham, or any other pa- triarch,— being so intimately connected with sacrifice, ^nd belongme to a service which was ceremonial and typical, must be abolished with that service ; and we can have no warrant to recall it into the Chris- tian Church, any more than we have to use other abrogated rites of the Jewish religion, of which it is a part. Nor was there any need Ibr a particular commandment to abolish i% as our brother seems to 83 retr fov go Tmmpete. be^D also y«vid king he singers $ until the he regulo- •pof God titution as the Law ; » death of nsioDj Sa- bese insti- and thad 1 partieu- wifrh the ented hy d should 1 the in- er© daify reseriboa rity, and spel. It dissoire se inati- ina, tiiat >rship of ling and n great f^B were so In- l by the her pa- ilongiog «d with 9 Chrifl- rites of ay need >em8 to think, seeing that the whole service, of which it < % part, it com- pletely abrogated. But as our brother states it as his first and great argument, " That Instrumental Music is not forbidden in the Word of God, but is expressly encouraged, perhaps enjoined, in the Old Testament, and clearly authorized by the New," — your Committee conceive it their duty to bring forward the following reasoning from Scripture, in opposition to the last part of his averment, viz., that it is " clearly authorized by the New." We find, m Scripture, much information concerning great changes to be made respecting religious services under the G-ospel. These were foretold in the Old Testament, and they are explained in the New. The Apostle, writing to the Hebrews, declares, that the priesthood being changed, " there is made of necessity a change also of the law."* We are informed by the same inspired writer, that ** the first covenant had ordinances of divine service ;" which he describes as consisting chiefly ** in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances ;" which, he says, were "imposed until the time of reformation."t The *' carnal ordinances" include all the ritual, which was addressed to the senses and imagination, but neither enlightened the understanding nor purified the conscience. By what- ever authority these were imposed, they were only to continue till " the time of reformation." And whatever is meant by " the time of reformation," it cannot be doubted that it is now past ; and con- sequently, that the carnal ordinances imposed under the former co- venant are no longer obligatory. They were the rudiments of the world — the shadow of things to come ; but the body is Christ. The substance, which all these things represented, is to be found in the New Testament, The apostolic decree recorded in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, — the ministrations and epistles, of St. Paul, and particularly his strictures on the doctrines of Judaising teachers,— show that Christians are not under the Law, but under Grace. From the beginning of the world there has been a Moral Law and a Spiritual Worship ; which remain unchanged under every dispen- sation. Whatever is to be found in the Old Testament with regard to either of these, is of permanent and everlasting obligation. But with respect to the modes of external Worship, there was to be an entire change ; which was announced by our Lord himself in a very early period of his ministry : — ^'* The hour cometh, when ye shall neither on this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth ; for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a spirit : and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth ;"J — not according to the n^A -inaf-.ifiifirkri in i\\a Vtmi-n 4:1104: vtraa r\a.ah Tnnh a.t*n.f\vAintr t-j\ i-lUa nanr ^iTAV* AAAUWA VbftW&\^Jk*. AAA VA«^^ JIAW *V • Heb. vU. 12. t Heb. iz. 1-10. t John iv. 21, 23, 24. H *1 institution, in the hour which cometh, and now is. Nor must it be forgotten, that it is not the ordinary manner of the writers of the New Testament to inform us what Divine institutions were to be abrogated, but only what observances were to take place under the Gospel. They do not tell us that the Passover was no longer to be observed, but only that the Lord's Supper was to be administered. So, with respect to praising God, they do not expressly say that In- strumental Music is to be silenced, but they do expressly say that God is to be praised and worshipped by singing psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, with understanding and grace in the heart, for the purposes of instructing and comforting one another. This is to be the change under the Gospel, as far as Psalmody is concerned. The only point which remains to be ascertained is, whether this necessary change of the law extends to Instrumental Musicn as a con- comitant of the New Testament Psalmody. On this point our brother has given a most decided opinion, — that "Instrumental Music is clearly authorized by the New Testament ; and that, before declaring our prohibition of Organs, it is incumbent on the Church to expunge from the Sacred Records those passages which seem clearly to recom- mend the use of instruments in Public Worship ; that thus the wor- shippers may be delivered from the inconsistency of promising and exhorting each other to do, what in their hearts they resolve, and by the Church are forbidden, to perform.' * In the support of these assertions, our brother exclaims, in his Statement, " Nowhere do we find the great Head of the Church re- pealing the injunctions pronouced by the Psalmist David. And it is impossible to think that our blessed Saviour would have been silent on the subject, if Instrumental Music had been a gross profanation of sacred things. Nowhere do we find St. Paul warning against Harp, and Psaltery, and Organ. Nay, we find St. John declaring that he heard harpers harping with their Harps ir heaven." Without saying any thing more severe on this mode of reason- ing adopted by our brother, we conceive that it is neither agreeable to the rules of just Biblical criticism nor to sound philosophy. "We have already observed, that it is not the ordinary manner of the writers of the New Testament to inform us what Divine institutions were to be abrogated, but only what observances were to take place under the Gos- pel. And does not every Christian know, that during our Saviour's abode upon earth, the "time of reformation" was not fully come — that Jesus was not yet glorified — that it was the money-changers, not the priests and Levites, that our Lord cast out of the Temple ; and, of course, that it was the benches of the former, not the Altar, Sacrifices, Organs of the latter, which he overturned ? If Jesus did not destroy the Temple, but only foretold its destruction, is it not self-evident, that its Ministers, and all the instruments employed by them, whether musi- cal or sacrificial, must remain along withit? We shall transcribe the judgment on this point of an eminent Protestant divine, who is al- I I m m lowed by all parlies to have been one of the soundest and most judi- cious Biblical critics : " The Holy Ghost is here mentioned as the great gift of the Gospel times ; as coming down from heaven not absolutely — not as to his person, — but with respect unto an especial work, namely, the change of the whole state of religious worship in the Church of God. Whereas we shall see, in the next words, he is spoken of only with respect unto external actual operations. But he was the great, the promised heavenly gift, to be bestowed under the New Testament ; by whom God would institute and obtain a new way and a rite of worship, upon the revelation of himself and will in Christ. TJnto him was committed the reformation of all things in the Church, whose time was now come. — (Heb. ix. 10. ) The Lord Christ, when he ascended into heaven, left all things standing and continuing in religious worship as they had done from the days of Moses, though he had virtually put an end unto it. And he commanded his disci- ples, that they should attempt no alteration therein, until the Holy Ghost were sent from heaven to enable them thereunto. (Acts i. 4, 5.) But when he came, the great gift of God promised under the New Testament, he removes all the carnal worship and ordinances of Mo- ses, — and that by the full revelation of the accomplishment of all that was signified by them, — and appoints the new, holy, spiritual worship of the Gospel, that was to succeed in their room. The Spirit of God, therefore, as bestowed for the introduction of the new Gos- pel-state, in truth and worship, is the heavenly gift here intended.'** As to the authority borrowed from St. Paul, by interpreting his silence as expressive of his approbation of Harps, Psalteries, and Organs, — our brother seems not to be aware that Instrumental Music belonged entirely to the Temple service, and never was em- ployed in the Synagogue. Hence Paul, in all his joumeyings, could Kot find a single Harp, or Psaltery, or Organ, in any of the religious assemblies of his countrjrmen, beyond the precincts of the Temple at Jerusalem ; of consequence, warning or reproof on this subject, from that Apostle, is not to be expected. This circumstance accounts for the Jewish converts never betraying, as far as we know, the least predilection for instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God, while they discovered a strong attachment to Circumcision and other Levitical institutions. Had St. Paul, therefore, approved or admired Instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God, however poor and persecuted the Apostolic Church might be, it is not to be sup- posed that he would have preserved such profound silence on the sub- ject. On the contrary, he would have disburdened his oppressed mind, — he would have recorded his principles, — he would have de- plored the direful calamity of the times, and earnestly recommended the introduction or the revival of Instrumental Music in the Churches, the very first moment that the wealth, and safety, and peace of the Church, rendered it practicable. But St. Paul has recorded no * Owen on the Hebrews, Ghap, vi. 4. •Ill ii 8» sucli sentiments. Instead of speaking in commendation of InstrU' mental Music in the Public Worship of God, we find him on one occasion borrowing an allusion from it, expressive of some thing like contempt : " Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angols, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling Cymbal."* But our brother imagines that he is particularly countenanced in his favourite measure by a passage in the Book of Revelation, where St. John expressly declares, that he heard " harpers harping with their Harps in heaven "t "Words cannot be simpler," says our brother, " nor convey more plainly an unequivocal meaning ; and that meaning clearly is, that Instrumental Music is at least not in- consistent with the purity of evangelical praise." The author of the Statement, then, can produce only a negative conclusion, and that from a single highly figurative passage of the New Testament, in support of his favourite measur :, — a negative conclusion, too, repug- nant to the principles and practice of the Church of Scotland, and countenanced by nothing but what we apprehend is a mistaken com- mentary of Scripture. Even supposing for a moment, that, apparently to short-sighted mortals, any usage is not inconsistent with divine revelation, are we on that account to blend that usage with the Wor- ship of God ? The Established Church of Scotland allows no such latitudinarian principle. This was precisely the mode of reasoning by which the Popish corruptions were introduced into Baptism and the Lord's Supper, and by which any system of Worship may be vindicated. Our brother likewise cannot be ignorant that commentators are by no means agreed, that the celestial state, and the exercises of the redeemed in heaven, are the subject of this vision of St, John. What- ever be in this, it is evident that the imagery of the context is terres- trial and Levitical, and not Evangelical. The scene of the vision is upon Mount Zion, and the voice from heaven is described as ** the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder," — evi- dently alluding to the region whence the water descends, and in which the thunder rolls. A Lamb, Mount Zion, harpers and their Harps, an hundred and forty-four thousand, Elders, first-fruits, — do not all these images, in their literal meaning, carry back the mind to Jerusalem, and nlace us among the Jewish worshippers in the courts of the Temple P It would be in vain to expect, that, in a vision, " the forms of Christian worship " would present themselves in as familiar a manner to the mind of St. John as the worship of the Temple. For no man, no author, sacred or profane, takes his allu- •ions invariably from what is modern or familiar. The mantle of antiquity must often be thrown around allusions and illustrations, to render them venerable and majestic ; and this, we apprehend, i» most judiciously done in the passage before us, wbethof the subject *lGor.xiU.l. t Bcr. xiT. 2. r.mmmm^"-~^i^S' praising God by singing Psalms, and Hymns, and Spiritual Songs. Your ("om- mittee believe that there are only four passages in the New Testament which speak distinctly and directly on this subject : " Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom ; teaching and admonish- ing one another in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord."t " Speaking to yourselves in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord." J "Is any among you afflicted; let him pray. Is any merry ? let him sing psalms. "§ " 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."|| In all these passages, it is an undeniable matter of fact that the primitive Christians understood singing with the human voice alone, as enjoined ; for this, and this only, they employed in singing to the Lord, making melody in their hearts. Among them the accompaniment of any Instrument of Music in the Public Worship of Gcd was never known nor named. You Committee are aware that Bishop King would wish to persuade us that the Apostles, in the passages above quoted, recommend the use of Musical Instruments in the Public Worship of God, seeing they use a word which, in the original language, he says, signifies singing with an instrument, (i/^aAAo).) But this very criticism serves to show upon what slender fomidation the patrons of Instrumental Music build. Thus, the word generally used in the New Testament for worshipping (Trpocrfcuvew), signifieth, m the original, to pay homage by the kissing of the hand ; of course, if we are to follow the analogy drawn from the original meaning of a Greek word, Christian worshippers would only have been obligated to have paid their homage to God by the kissing of the hand. This is not all, for it is evident that these injunctions, be their meaning what it may, are directly and expressly addressed to all Christians, cither considered as assembled for Public Worship, or in their private, individual capacity. Now, is it at all credible, that each individual Christian in those times, or at any other time, was ca- pable of using a Musical Instrument, or that a suggestion, which in- volves a moral impossibility, could be made to the mind of the Apostles by the infallible Spirit of God ?^ • Kph. 1. 3 ; 1 Pot. 1. 8. t Col Hi. 16. t Eph. v. 10. ( James v. 13. || Heb. xiii. 15. K Tlio followinK Istlio translation Kiven in Conyhoare and Howson's Life and TIpistlos of Paul : " Let your sinniiiK bo of psalniH aiul hyniin and spiritual snii«N, and make melody with th(( music of your lieartH. to tlio Lord." And in a note It is said: "Tlironnliout the wliolo pavsano tlicre is a contrast implied between the heathen and th(> Cliristian practice,— r n., When you meet, let if<>«>' enjoyment connist not in ^Pfilmss of winr, but the fulness of the Spirit: let your snnifitlie, not the drinking sonpa ({f heathen feasts, but pmlma and /i.v /;m , and their accompanimvnt, not the music of the lyre, but the music qfthe heart" m I of idy he 'of nd t." When, therefore, we concentrate all the part of our argument to- gether, viz., that Instrumental Music was confined to the service of the Temple, and most intimately connected with the offering up of the sacrifice, and that we have no warrant to transfer it into the Chris- tian Church, any more than other rites of the Jewish religion ; that the silence of our blessed Lord and of his Apostles upon the subject affords no presumption that they approved of the measure ; and finally, that the passages in the New Testament which relate expressly to the praises of God, either allude to thanksgiving pronounced by the Minis- ter, without the vocal melody of the Congregation, or to singing with the human voice alone. Psalms, and Hymns, and Spiritual Songs ; — we have no hesitation in pronouncing a judgment in direct opposition to the first and the chief argument of the Minister of St. Andrew's Church. We say that the use of Instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God is not authorised by the New Testament— that whether it was enjoined by Moses, or onij introduced by David, it was appropriated to the Temple service, and of course, abrogated with it. The singing of Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs in the heart to the Lord, not the playing of thetn, is the express language of the New Testament. Therefore, Instrumental Music is neither enjoined, nor authorised, nor encouraged by the Word of God, in the Public Worship of Christians. As to the observation made by our brother, that " When we look into the history even of those nations that were strangers to divine revelation, there we find universally the use of instruments in giving E raise to their gods ;" — we consider any reasoning founded upon eathen examples as of no weight whatever in deciding this question, and even as hardly requiring a serious answer. According to our brother's own principles, " the fixed and infallible standard" for tho Worship of Christians is the Word of Ood alone. What he is pleased to say proceeds from " the unadulterated light of nature," we affirm, ariseth from a blind and corrupt superstition ; and if we'.vere disposed to indulge in conjecture about the origin of manners and customs amongbt the heathen, we would tell him that Jubal, of the race of cursed Cain, a race which early began to corrupt the Worship of the Supreme Being, was *' the father of all such as handle the Harp and Organ."* And there is no doubt that Ham, who was born long before the flood, and of course was acquainted with many of Cain'B posterity would transmit some of their corrupt, superstitious notions of religious Worship to Cush, Mizraim, and Canaan, the fathers of the Chaldeans, Egyptians, and Ph(Enicians, — those nations which ancient history informs us, first set up idols, and introduced Instru- mental Music into tho Public Worship of their goda. II. Lot us now proceed to tho second argument of our brother the Minister of St. Andrew's Church, and examine those conclusions which, he affirms, may bo drawn from the history of the church in * ^% ^-^ >-- '•« ' vreu. tv. Xi. 40 behalf of his favourite measure. He affirms, that although Instru- mental Music in the Worship of God was not known till " about the middle of the eighth century, yet then it was introduced through the dictates of the pious feeling prompting the enlightened mind to consecrate the labour of genius to the devout exercise of praise.'* He further affirms, that '* Instrumental Music forms no essential part of Popery, being founded on principles widely different from the ceremonies of the Church of Rome ; and therefore retained and em- ployed by all the Eeformed Churches on the Continent." " A stronger argument," continues he, " in its favour cannot be produced except that which I have already mentioned, the sacred authority of Scripture." We have fairly stated this second argument. Our brother's reasonning in support of these bold conclusions your Com- mittee conceive to be very unsatisfactory. According to his own statement of the matter, Instrumental Music was not used for the first seven centuries. This period, it is well known, comprehends along with the apostolic age, not only the^oor- est and most persecuted, but also the ~iost splendid and prosperous times of the primitive Church. The practice of such a period will more than counterbalance any thing that even the Reformed Churches on the Continent can furnish. To pretend to account for this re- markable fact upon the ground that the Church had, during so many centuries, no leisure, or means, or knowledge to attend to Sacred Music, is a very unphilosophical and inaccurate mode of reasoning. They had both leisure and inclination to form the most abstruse and metaphysical opinions concerning the doctrines of the Gospel. They had means to build the most splendid churches. The emperors of the West were devout, to a degree bordering upon superstition. The truth is, they considered it as unlawful to employ Instrumental Music in the Worship of God. In their eyes, it was so intimately connected with the Temple service, that both Arians and Orthodox would have regarded themselves as returning back to Judaism, if they had permitted it in their Public Worship. But we do not wish to support this branch of our argument by abstract of speculative reasoning, or mere dogmatical averments. It must rest upon authorities, which authorities we draw from the accounts of the primitive Christians, as recorded in the Fathers, and from the opinions of the Schoolmen, and fro.ri the judgment of the Reformers, If they knew their own sentiments, or have honestly recorded them, your Committee are confident that the following authorities ought to set this question for ever at rest. Thus, in u treatise among Justin Martyr's works, we have the fol- lowing testimony : — " Q. If songs were invented by unbelievers, with a design of deceiving, and were appointed for those under the law, because of the childishness of their minds, why do they who have received the perfect instructions of grace, tchich are most contrary to the foresaid customs, nevertheless sing in the Churches, as they did miMMmtWitfM 41 who where children under the law ? A. Plain singing* is not childish, but only the singing with lifeless Organs, with dancing and cymbals, &c. Whence the use of such instruments, and other things Jit for children, is laid aside ; and plain singing only retained." f The memorable testimony of Pliny, as quoted by Tertullian, com- bines at once Christian and heathen authority on this subject: — "We find it has been forbidden to make a search after us. For when Pliny the younger was governor of a province, and had condemned some, and made others comply, being disturbed by the great multi- tude of the Christians, he consulted Trajan, acquainting him, that besides an obstinate aversion to sacrificing, he could discover nothing concerning their mysteries, but that they held assemblies before day to sing to Christ as God." J Thus, Basil, though he highly commends, and zealously defends, the way of singing by turns, or what is styled antiphonal singing, does not deny that the manner of singing in use during the Apostolic times was altered by him in his Church. On the contrary, he expli- citly admits that the former practice was, for the people rising before dayliglit to go to the house of prayer, and having made confession to God, to rise from prayer, and betake themselves (eis r^v i/^aX/AwStW) to the singing of psalms. But now, indeed (8ixi} 8iavc/Ai/^cn-€9 avri^aX- A-ovo-iv A\X^A,ois), they sing to each other alternately, in parts, Ep. Ixiii. And so far from approving Musical Instruments in the Wor- ship of God, he calls them " the inventions of Juhal of the race of Cain,^* and thus expresses himself concerning them: "Laban was a lover of the Harp and of Music, with which he would have sent away Jacob. If thou hadst told me, said he, J would have sent thee away with mirth, and Musical Instruments, and a Harp. But the Patriarch avoided that Music, as being a thing that would hinder hia regarding the works of the Lord, and his considering the works of his hands. — In such vain arts as the playing upon the harp or pipe, or dancing {Trav(Tafiivripera Bed I his bcero Itmo- * " Nnquo fistula ad disciplinam est adducenda. nequo aliud aliquod artificiale OrKanum, puta Oithara nt si quid tale alteram est ; sed qusecunque faciuiit auditores bonos. Hujus- raodi onim Mnsica Instrutnenta magis animum movent ad delectationem, q^uam perea, formaturintcriuBbonadispositio. In Vetcri autcm Testamento nsus erat lahum instru- mentorem, turn quia populus erat ma^iH durus et carnalis, unde erat per hujusmodi instru- ment a provocanuus.sicut et per pivmissiones terrenaa; turn etiam quia hujusmodi instru monta corporalia aliud flgurabant."— (Thomas Aquinas, Secunda Secundro, QusBstio X\ , Oonclua. iv.) t " In Ecolesia oxcitandus est animus ad Deum et letitiam spiritualem, non tibiis. tubis, tymjtaiiis, quod vetcri durro cervicis et stupidsB mentis populu Deus olim indulsit. sed "aoris coucionibuH, psalmodiis et hymnis." 4A finished. And they are then used for a political purpose, to gratify those who seek pleasure from sound and harmony."* Molerus in his prelections on the 150th Psalm, says, " It is no wonder, therefore, that such a number of Musical Instruments should be so heaped together ; but although they were a part of the JPcBdoffopa Legalis, yet they are not for that reason to be ^jrought into Christian assemblies. For Q-od willeth, that after the coming of Christ, his people should cultivate the hope of eternal life, and the practice of true piety, by very different and mora simple means than these." t Erasmus, who was certainly a friend to the Reformation, complained of Instrumental Music as an abuse, and pronounced it unsuitable to the gravity and solemnity of Christian Worship. His words are, "We have brought a cumbersome and theatrical music into our Chui'ches, such a confused disorderly chattering of some words, as, I think, was never heard in any of the Grecian or Roman Theatres. The Church rings with the noise of Trumpets, Pipes, and Dulcimers, and human voices strive to bear their part with them. Men run to Church as to a Theatre, to have their ears tickled. And for this end, Organ-makers are hired with great aalaries, and a company of boys who waste all their time in learning these whining tones. l?ray now, compute how many poor people, in great extremity, might be main- tained by the salaries of these singers."^ It is curious to observe how little our brother seems to have attended to the history of the Protestant Churches, for it appears that Instrumental Music would not have been retained even among the Lutherans^ " unless they had forsaken their own Luthee, who (by the confession of Eckhard, a G-erman Doctor of Theology) reck' oned Organs am^ng the ensigns of Baal. His words are, Lutherus organa musica inter Baalis insignia refert."^ And, from record, it is evident that if Instrumental Music is used in some of the Dutch Churches, it is decidedly against the judgment of the Dutch pastors. Por in the National Synod at Middleburg in the year 1581, and in the Synod of Holland and Zealand in the year 1594. it was resolved, " That they would endeavour to obtain of the Magistrate the laying * *' Instrumentalis Musica in sacris et cultu divino popuU Judaici ad cei^emonialia Mosaica pertinuit quae nunc abolita sunt. XJtut sit contra praeceptiim et regulam Pauli factum est, qui 1 Cor. xiv. 26, vult, ut in cunventibus Ecclesiasticis ad edium usum in csetu Ecclesiastico proliibuit, multd minilts sonos illos Musices Harmonicos, quibus aures solas, iis quee cantantur nuUo mode, ne ab iis quidem, qui cantant plerumque intelleotia, feriuutur, in £cclesia tolerasset." —(Beza in Colloq. Mompelg. parte 2, p. 26.) t " Nisi enim omnia velimus confundere, tenendum est semper discrimen illud Vetoris et NoviTestamenti : quod ceremonieo auarum utilis sub lege erat observatio, non superflusa modo nunc sint sed absurdse quoqu6 et vitiossa." % " Non aptlora esso Gultui Divino in Ecolesia Christiana Instramenta Musica, quam sufiS* turn, luminaria, aliasque umbraa legia Mosaicn." m :Ba m ) i'j m ^fel 46 pTay or sing, they should pray and sing with understanding, not in an unknown tongue, but in that which is vulgar and intelligible, that edification may be in the Church. What, therefore, was in use under the Law, is by no means entitled to our practice under the Gospel, and these things being not only superfluous, but useless, are to be abstained from ; because pure arid simple modulation is suffi- cient for the praise of God, if it is sung with the heart and with the mouth. We know that our Lord Jesus Christ has appeared, and by his advent has abolished these legal shadows. Instrumental Music, we therefore maintain, was only tolerated on account of the times and of the people, because they were as boys, as the sacred Scripture speaketh, whose condition required these puerile rudiments. But in Gospel times, we must not have recourse to these, unless we wish to destroy the evangelical perfection, and to otscure the meridian light which we enjoy in Christ our Lord." * Whatever, therefore, maybe the practice of some Protestant Churches on the Continent, whether Lutheran or Reformed, it is evident, from the clear and decided judgment of the great founders of these churches, given by your Committee, in the very words of these eminent Reform- ers, that Instrumental Music ought to have no place in the Public Worship of God under the Gospel. " Perhaps it may not be improper here to take notice of what has been considered by the best informed historians as the ancient and genuine opinion of the Reformed Church of England relative to Instrumental Music. In her Homily, *' Of the Place and Time of Prayer," we have these remarkable words: — "God's vengence hath been and is daily provoked, because much wicked people pass nothing to resort to the Church ; either for that they are so sore bl'nded that they understand nothing of God or godliness, and care not v ith devilish example to of- fend their neighbours ; or else for that they see the Church altogether scoured of such gay gazing sights as their gross phantasia was greatly delighted with ; because they see the false religion abandoned, and the true restored, which seemeth an unsavoury thing to their unsavoury taste ; as may appear by this, that a woman said to her neighbour, ** Alas ! gossip, what shall we now do at Church, since all the Saints are taken away ; since all the goodly sights we were wont to have are * " Quare fuit in Papatu ridicula nimis et inepta imitatio, ^uura templa exornare, Deique cultum reddere celebrlorem existimarunt, si Organa et alia istiusmodi multa ludicra adhiber- ent : Quibus maxime Dei Yerbum et Ciiltus profanata sunt, populo externis istis ritibus ad- dicto potius quam Verbi Divini intelligentia;. Scimusautem ubi nulla est intelliKentiauuUam etiam sediflcationem esse : quemadmodum Paulus Apostolus docet, qnum ait, ' Quomodo potest idiota reddere fidei testimonium, aut quomodo dicturus est Amen ad gratiarum actionem, nisi intelligat P ' Quare fid les hortatur eo loco ut Deum precantes et ipsi psallentea et precentur et psallant intelligentia, non lingua peregrina, aed vulgari et intelliKiDili, ut sit in Ecclesia sedificatio. Quod itaque fuit in uhu Legis tempore, nullum hodie locum apud noa obtinet : et rubus isti, non modo supcrfluis, scd inanibus etiam, abstinendum est : quod Bufflciat pura et simplex divinarum laudum modulatio, corde et ore, nostra singuli idiomate ; siquidem scimus Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum apparuisse, et umbras illas legates suo adventu dissipasse. Musicam itaque illam Instruraentalem teneamus tunc ratione temporis illius ( tur, qui puerilibus istis rudimentis indigerent, quae hodie non sunt ultro revocanda, nisi per- fectionem evangelicam velimus abolere, et plenam lucem quam in Ghristo Domino noatro consecuti sumus obscurare."— (Calv. Horn. 66, in 1. Sam. xvui. 1-9, p. 570.) 41 gone ; since vre cannot hear the like Piping, Singing, Chauntiug, and playing upon the Organs^ that we could before 1 * But, dearly beloved, we ight greatly to rejoice and give God thanks that our Churches are delivered out of all those things which displeased God so sore, and filth' ily defiled his holy house and his place of prayer." We find also that the thirty-two Commissioners appointed by Edward VI., the most eminent men then in England either for Divinity or Law, complained of Cathedral Singing, and advised the laying of it aside. Their words are : — " In reading Chapters and singing Psalms, Ministers and Clergymen must think of this diligent- ly, that God is not only to be praised by them, but that others are to be brought to perform the same Worship by their counsel and exam- ple. Wherefore, let them pronounce their words distinctly, and let their singing be clear and easy, that every thing may be understood by the auditors. So that 'tis our pleasure, that the quavering operose Music, which is called figured, should he wholly laid aside, since it often makes such a noise in the ears of the people, that they cannot understand what is said."* And it is a remarkable fact, perhaps not commonly known by the advocates for Instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God, that in the English Convocation held in the year 1562, in Queon Elizabeth's tiiae, for settling the Liturgy of the Protestant Church of England, the retaining of the custom of kneeling at the Sacra- ment, the cross in Baptism, and of Organs, carried only by the casting vote. \ Burns, in his Ecclesiastical Law, under the title '•' Public Worship," says, " The rule laid down for Church Music in England almost a thousand years ago, was, that they should observe a plain and devout melody, according to the custom of the Church, while the ruie pre- scribed by Queen Elizabeth in her injunctions, was, that there should be a modest and distinct song, so used in all parts of the common prayers of the Church, that the same may be as plainly understood as if it were read without singing. Of the want of which grave, and srrious, and intelligible way, refortnatio legum had complained before." From these quot^.dons, therefore, from the Fathers, from the Schoolmen, and t'-.o Eeformers, we are entitled to say that the his- tory of the Church afibrds no countenance to the introduction of Instrumental Music into the Public Worship of God. That it was not admitted in the first seven centuries can never, as our brother affirms, be accounted for by the poverty and the persecution of the Church, nor by the calamities and convulsions of the times. For even supposing that Organs were too expensive and cumbersome instruments, was not the Pipe, the Cymbal, and the Harp, a cheaper and more portable substitute ? Coilld not Christians have carried these along with them in their flight from city to city, and hid them * Reform Leg. de Dir. Offio. t Vide Dr. Heniys Hist, Strype's Amials* p. 363. 4d witli themselves in holes, and dens, and cares of the earth. The Jewish captives had their Harps at the rivers of Babel, and why- might not persecuted Christians have used theirs if they had thought them lawful, even in the most distressing scenes of the ten persecu- tions ? Had they believed Instrumental Music to be " enjoined in the New Testament," would it not be a foul aspersion on their cha- racter to suppose that death, in its most direful form, would have deterred them from the duty of employing it ? Every person ac- quainted with the history of the martyrs of the primitive Church, must know weU that they never shrunk from a single article of Faith or Worship which they believed to be enjoined by Divine authority. Paul and Silas, at midnight, in the prison of Philippi, sang the praises of God, regardless of them who could only kill the body. But the truth is, that the primitive Christians considered Instru- mental Music neither as lawful, nor expedient, nor edifying. If, therefore, at least seven or eight centuries did elapse before Organs, or by whatever name you are pleased to call these instruments, were introduced into Christian "Worship, and the want of them, during all that period, was never regretted by the Church, it is a most decisive proof that the primitive Christians regarded them as inconsistent "with the purity of Evangelical praise. Tour Committee, therefore, cannot go along with the assertion of our brother, " that it was ever during periods of dawning light that Organs began to be employed. They consider his assertion as rather problematical, nor can they well comprehend what he means by the dawn of light in the eighth century. Its light, in the language of the poet, may be considered as little more than " darkness visible." But whether there was a dawn or not in the eighth century, and whether King Pepin, who devoted that Organ, the present of the Greek Empe- ror, to the service of the Supreme Being, notwithstanding the heroic soul ascribed to him by our brother, perfectly understood the nature and spirit of the Gospel of Christ, your Committee cannot positively determine. But they are confident that Instrumental Music began to be introduced into the Church when ignorance, superstition, and the love of external pomp, had made men more desirous of having their ears delighted, than their hearts improved, — at a time when all authors are agreed that Antichrist was already come into the world. When our brother, therefore, affirms that Organs were not at first " em- ployed by the authority of a papal decree, but by the dictates of pious feelings, prompting the enlightened mind to consecrate the labours of genius to the devout exercise of praise," he ought to reflect, that from a desire to consecrate the labours c>f genius in painting and statuary to the service of God, first admiration, then devotion, and at last worship, came to be paid to images. From allowing pious feeling to hurrry the mind too tar respecting the manner in which Gospel should be taught or the service of God performed, we may date almost every corruption which has disfigured Christianity. The conception that 49 we should be more at leisure to serve Q-od, if we could abstract our- selves frojn the cares of the world, paved the way for the monaetio life. The conception that we never could mortify the body and the lusts thereof too much, gave rise to penance, and its train of absur- dities. Mistaken pious feeling, therefore, may have led men, in every age, to add many extraneous circumstances to the AVorship of God, and may still induce Protestant Eeformed Churches on the Conti- nent to retain them. But wise men must always despise that pomp which is merely designed to amuse children or the vulgar. With Protestant Churches abroad we have no bond of communion. We shall apply to them the words commonly used in the public evening prayer of our Presbyterian Worship, " May the Reformed Churches be reformed more and more !" III. We shall now proceed to examine the third argument adduc- ed by the Minister of St. Andrew's Church, containing his reason why Instrumental Music was not employed in Scotland since the re- formation, and his p,ccount of that prejudice, as he is pleased to style »it, which still remains against it. He affirms that it arose from the peculiar state of the Civil Q-overnment of the country, which, during the whole of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, was of such a nature as to grant no leisure to the people of Scotland to attend to Sacred Music ; but that the tide of human affairs is now so strong, the hand of God guiding the progress of mind, in matters relative to the improvement of Psalmody, as cannot be resisted. A strict and accurate attention to the history of the Church of Scotland will indeed authorise us to conclude, that our forefathers in. matters of religion we*e often tyrannically used by the ruling powers, and that they had much to struggle with before they obtained that form of Ecclesiastical polity established at the Revolution, secured at the Union, and invariably acted upon since that time. But the same history will show, that the reason why Instrumental Music was not employed in Public Worship in Scotland was because both, people and teachers looked upon it as the offspring of Judaism, and abhorred it as a relic of Popery, and too intimately connected with that Pre- latic form which our forefathers never could endure. If we consult the Second Book of Discipline, framed in the sixteenth century, and the Directory composed in the seventeenth, we will find that our forefathers entertained the most clear and distinct ideas of what they esteemed Scriptural and Evangelical in Church Government, in Dis- cipline, in Doctrine, and in Public Worship. And during all the struggle, from the Beformation to the [Revolution either with the Popish or Prelatical Sovereigns of the House of Stewart, they never for a single moment lost sight of these four great branches of Eccle- siastical polity. They declared, in the most energetic terms, that they were reformed hy Presbyters^ — that they were determined ta copy from no model but that of the Scriptures, as understood by the primitive Church. And from their conduct^ as illustrated by the m ill ^^■i »0 Acts of Assembly, 163&, and from their directions to their Commis- sioners to the Westminster Divines, to be found in their letters pub- lished in the year 1644, you clearly perceive that they most decidedly and unequivocally condemn Instrumental Music to be an antichristian mode of Worship. Why, then, does our brother endeavour to parry the argument by saying, " that the aversion which the Scotch nation discover to Instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God pro- ceeded from the circumstance of their having no leisure to attend to it." In this vague manner of accounting for customs and modes of Church Government, you might affirm that the Magna Charta, the Bill of Eights, and the Eevolution Settlement, so much gloried in by the inhabitants of these lands, were all devised and obtained by mere accident. The truth is, the Scotch nation has no objection to Ins- trumental Music in the common amusements of life. It has been allowed by authors, foreign and domestic, that as a people, their genius is much more musical than that either of the English, the Dutch, or the French. But the people of Scotland abhor the blending of the inventions of men with the Worship of God . They conceive Instrumental Music inconsistent with the purity of a New Testament Church. It is not strictly true, that Psalmody was almost annihilated in the Beformed Church of Scotland. For,- in direct opposition to the assertion of our brother, there is the most satisfactory evidence, that from the Beformation, down through the sixteenth and seven- teenth centuries, our Church had leisure to pay attention to Sacred Music ;— schools were appointed for teaching it, and even the Govern- ment gave their countenance, by Acts of Parliament, for the same laudable purpose. Thus, in the 6th Parliament of James the VI., 1679, "Our Sovereign Lord, with advice of his three Estates of this present Parliament, request the Provost, Baillies, Council, and communities of the maist special Burrows of this realm, and the Patrons and Provosts of the Colleges, where Schools are founded, to erect and set up ane Sang School, with a master sufficient and able for instruction ot the youth in the said science of Music ; as they will answer to his Highness, upon the peril of their foundations, and in performing of this his Highness' request, will do unto his Majesty acceptable and good service." Thus, it is matter of history and sta- tute, not of opinion or conjecture, that both the Church and Civil Government of Scotland were not inattentive to Psalmody. During the whole of that violent struggle, which existed for more than a century after the Reformation, betwixt Prelacy and Presbytery, the people found abundance of leisure in the year 1592 to frame the great Charter of Presbytery ; and betwixt the years 1638 and 1660, they had leisure to join in framing a Confession of Faith and Directory, and leisure to put that Directory into practice. Why, then, does our brother affirm, '* that the reason for Instrumental Music not being introduced into the Public Worship of God in Scotland proceeded chiefly froQi ^^^^ circumstance, that the people had not much leisur'^ J 81 ! to attend to Psalmody?" Knox and Melville, Rutherford and Hen- derson, men to whom we owe much, were of too active a disposition of mind, and too anxious to settle our Presbyterian polity upon a firm foundation, to leave us any room for imagining that they had not attended to the minutest form of Public Worship. That laboured and oratorical description given us by our brother of the character of our Scottish Sovereigns from the Beformation to the Eevolution, may, indeed, serve to show that they were a most unprincipled race, but it can never serve to establish what he means to prove by it, that neither the people nor the Presbyterian Established Church of Scot- land had any aversion to Instrumental Music in the Public "Worship of God, but were hindered from adopting it merely by the want of leisure to attend to that object, from the peculiar political situation of their country. Your Committee beg leave to call your attention to the following remarkable fact, as narrated by Calderwood, in his Church History, p. 674 : — ^pon Saturday the 17th of May, 1617, the English Service, singing of queristers, and playing on Organs, and Surplices, were first heard and seen in the Chapel Royal. On the 25th December, same year, Mr: William Cooper, Bishop of Galloway, preached as Dean of the Chapel Royal, where there was playing upon Organs : so the Bishops practised novations, before ever they were embraced by any General Assembly, and therefore ought to have been secluded from voting afterwards in that matter, and con- dignly censured." Thus, it is matter of history, not of opinion or conjecture, that the Church of Scotland was not inattentive to Psal- mody ; that an attempt was even made by the King and his courtiers to revive the use of Organs ; and that this was deemed an innovation 80 odious that it shrunk before the scrutinising and commendable zeal of our forefathers. This attempt was made in the year 1617, when Prelacy was established in Scotland ; but notwithstanding all that royalty could do, the attempt was abortive, and the practice never extended beyond the walls of the Chapel Royal : so hostile was this Church, even in Episcopal times, to Organs in Divine Worship. The Same invincible hostility appears in the year 1644, after Presby- tery had been restored. It continues to operate from the Restoration to the Revolution, durin» the time when Prelacy had again supplant- ed Presbytery in our native land. It bursts fortn with renewed vigour from tlie Revolution to the Union, when Presbytery was once more restored and settled for ever as the Ecclesiastical government of this part of the United Kingdom. This invincible hostility procured the Act of Parliament, styled the Act of Security and the Act of Assem- bly against innovations, as barriers to preserve the purity, the sim- plicity, and the uniformity of our public worship. And from the Union, down to the present moment, the project which was formed a few years ago of introducing an Organ at Aberdeen, and this late attempt at QTaHgQw^ are the cniy iuuioations of a desire to undermine fid tbe invincible spirit of our forefathers against Instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God. Your Committee most cordially go along with the panegyric which our brother pronounces upon our venerable Eeformers ; but are at a loss to comprehend how this panegyric can be reconciled to the opi- nion which our brother says he has long entertained relative to Ins- trumental Music in the Public Worship of God. Does our brother seriously think, that Knox and Melville, and Eutherford and Hen- derson, were of his mind ? Knox was educated under Popery, and habituated to the use of Organs from his infancy. He had travelled on the Continent ; he had resided at Geneva ; he had sojourned in England. All these circumstances were calculated, as our brother knows, to form and cherish a predilection for Instrumental Music in the Public "Worship of God, had Knox not considered it as un- lawful. It has been said that both Knox and Melville were obliged to yield up their own judgment to the fury of the^imes, and to overlook those outrages against the ancient "Worship which in their hearts they con- demned. Granting that they could not control the fury of the popu- lace in its first paroxysm for destroying the Cathedral service, could they not afterwards teach their countrymen to discriminate the Aorw- less Organ, as our brother terms it, from the idolatrous image ? Could they not have persuaded their countrymen, if they had thought pro- per, to restore the harmless Organ to its place in the Church, as easily as they persuaded them to occupy those edifices which had been polluted by Popery? At least, if this was impracticable, could they not have regretted the perverseness of their countrymen in banishing from Public Worship such an enchanting instrument qf edification? But Knox and Melville, Rutherford and Henderson, offer not one word in its behalf. They allow it to perish unnoticed, as a portion of that trumpery which ignorance and superstition bad foisted into the house of God. Your Committee are conscious of neither religious nor political antipathies, founded in prejudice operat- ing in their minds. From attending to the history of the Church of Scotland, and from studying the genius of its people, they are per- fectly convinced, that the fixed, determined opposition to the use of Instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God, both in the Established Church and amongst the various bodies of Dissenters ariseth from legal, political, moral, and scriptural grounds — not from the want of leisure in our Ecclesiastical Patriots to attend to Sacred Music — not from the want of money to purchase such instruments — not from the want of accommodation in our Churches to use them. And when our brother is pleased to say, that the time when the Westminster Confession of I aith and the Directory were composed were times of fierce and furious war against the Church of England, he ou^ht, in the spirit of fair and candid reasoning to have added, thac tbey were times to which Scotland is much indebted, — times in 6a which a hold, free, devout, and thinking people opposed an attempt to enslave their consciences and entangle their affections in the laby- rinth of foolish and useless rites and ceremonies, which neither they nor their fathers could bear. IV. We now proceed to scrutinise our brother's fourth argument, viz., That the Act of Security, the Act of Union, and the Act against Innovations, had more important objects in view, with which Organs have no concern — roundly asserting, •* that that cannot be illegal against which no law exists — that cannot violate which touches not the constitution." Tour Committee cannot help saying, that the reasoning of our brother upon this part of the subject appears to them very vague and desultory. He at one time applauds the spirit of these Acts, and vindicates the character of our Scotch Patriots, who had wisdom to frame them, courage to demand them, and perseverance to obtain them. At other times, when these Acts seem too pointedly and too conclusively to oppose his favourite measure, he starts off at a tangent from the legal argument, and striveth to amuse, and even to perplex us, with subtle and mytaphysioal reasoning, '* about the na- ture of sound — about a mode without a subject — and about the ever- varying, unsubstantial nature of musical tones ;" exclaiming, ♦* that our national uniformity can never be broken in upon by introducing a certain quantity of modulated sound in the pipes of an Organ ; and to attach perpetuity of form to things from their nature incapable of uniform duration, would be a solemn mockery of our venerable Legis- lators." And therefore, what the wisdom of our Church and State has anxiously guarded against, in the Claim of Bights, in the Act 1693, for settling the peace and quiet of the Church, accompanied by the Acts of the General Assembly against Innovations, was entirely directed against the Hierarchy and the Service-hook, and not against Instrumental Music. And in no less than three different places of his Statement, he has been pleased to say, " That the Respondents (of course the Presbysery), from not attending to the spirit and meaning of these Laws, have argued strongly against Episcopacy, which our brother uever wished to defend ; and that the Presbytery have passed a sentence, which, in his opinion, goes far beyond the object they meant to condemn. That cannot be illegal against which no law exists, nor could exist, — that cannot violate which touches not the constitution,- -that cannot be against the genius and constitution of our Church which habitually recommends to her people the singing of the Psalms of David." As your Committee, however, conceive that the judgment of the Presbytery upon the 7th October last was well founded, that the ratio decidendi was legal and constitutional, and that the prohibition of Instrumental Music in the Public Wor- ship of God, in all the Churches and Chapels under its jurisdiction, was a wise and salutary measure, they shail take th ? liberty of stating, at some length, what they conceive to bi the Law of the Laud, tho _ri 04 Law and the Constitution of the Church of Scotland, upon this sub- ject. For your Committee believe, that it is this argument chiefly which must determine the question between our brother ii J us. — Eveiy opinion founded upon the history of the Church in general, or taken from the practice of foi-eign reformed Churches, or from specu- lative notions o^ public utility or private edification, must, compara- tirely speaking be vague and desultory ; but the argument drawn from the Law oi the Land, and the Law and Constitution of our own Church, must be clear, positive, and conclusive. To this argument your Committee wish particularly to direct t)ie attention of the Eev- erend Presbytery, of Dr. Eitchie, and of the world. "When James the VII. had forfeited the crown, and when his throne was declared vacant by the Scotch Convention, agreeably to the Claim of Eights made by that Convention, the Presbyterian Religion was established by "V/ iUiam and Mary ; and agreeably to the same Claim of Eights, Prelacy is for ever abolished within the kingdom of Scot' land, and a form of "Worship differing from the form which at that time was exercised by the Established Church of England was to be adopted. Now, though the use of Instrumental Music is certainly not enjoined by the Canons of the Church of England, and though it is practised on the Continent, in Churches which are not Episcopal, yet it is well known, that all denominations of Christians, both in England and Scotland, did, at that period, when the Claim of Rights was framed, consider Instrumental Music a characteristic of Prelac-y, and directly opposed to the Vocal Music, for which the Reformed Church of Scotland had uniformly contended. Therefore we conclude, from the sweeping clause contained in the Scotch Claim of Eights, that Instrumental Music was abolished along with Prelacy. And from attending to the history of the disputes which took place in Eng- land between the Puritans and the Episcopalian Church, we are en- titled to say, that the Puritans considered Instrumental Music as intimately and essentially incorporated with the Public Worship of the Prelatical Church. This will be found to be their opinion, as recorded in Strype's Annals, and Neal'a History of the Puritans. When, therefore, the Scotch Patriots demanded at the Revolution, in their Claim of Eights, that Prelacy should be abolished, they had no reserve in behalf of any one part of it whatever, whether essential to it or merely accidental ; but fairly and candidly meant, that not only Prelatical governnient, the Liturgy, and Service-book should be abolished, but likewise that kneeling at the Sacrament, the sign of the Cross in Baptism, and Instrumental Music in Public Worship, should sha.e the same fate. But as some form of Worship was to be substituted in room of the Prelatical, now abolished, the people of Scotbiud demanded, with great earnestness, in their Claim of Rights, that the Doctrines contained in the Westminster Confession of Faith, including the sum and substance of the Doctrines of the Eeformed f^l 1 _-J i.i._i. i.i._ /^i u n i. :c_j i_ xu_ i. v/uuii;uoD, uuu i/iiub luv vuuirv;u vruvoi'uuioui/ opcciuuu tu buo gicau 65 Chartsr of Presbytery, ?.5y2, and a Discipline as practised in the purer times of the Church, should be granted unto their request ; — all which claims were heard with attention, reduced into proper form, and enacted accordingly. — Now, your Committee beg leave to observe, that the outline of the Public Worship of Oody to be used in the Pres- byterian Church of Scotland, is specifically and clearly stated in the 2l8t chapter of the AVestminster Confession of Faith; which, in fact, contains the sum and substance of the Directory relative to the read- ing of the "Word — to Prayer — to Preaching — to the celebration of the Sacraments — and to Praise, — the five distinct heads under which the Reformed Presbyterian Churches arrange Public "Worship. The Con- fession of Faith was framed in the year 1647, confirmed by Act of Parliament 1649 ; and therefore it is certain that the f camera of it had distinctly in their view the Directory for Public "Worship, ap- proved by the G-eneral Assembly in February, 1645, and confirmed by Act of Parliament in the same year. In the 21st chapter of the Cofession of Faith, we have the most decided and unequivocal language relative to that part of Public Worship styled Praise : ** It is the singing of Psalms with grace in the heart." But as the Westminster Confession of Faith is not only the standard of our Church, but forms an Act of Parliament, now in force, — a part of the Public Statute Law of the Land, — your Com- mittee, therefore, are entitled to conclude that our forefathers intended, by the Claim of Rights, that Instrumental Music should be con- demned and abolished along with the other rites and ceremonies of the Prelatical Church ; and that the form of Worship, " the singing of Psalms with grace in the heart," as now in use, should be substituted in its room. Your Committee affirm, that when our forefathers iiamed the Claim of Rights, they had the most deary distinct, and accurate idea of a form of Public Worship, from which Instrumental Music was utterly excluded. Your Committee next proceed to analyse those other Acts of Par- liament relative to our Presbyterian Church, which flowed from, or are founded upon, the Claim ot Rights. It i& more than probable, if we knew every particular relative to the practice of the Clergy in those times, that some discrepancy of opinion relative to Public Worship had begun to appear betwixt the year 16S8 and the year ir>93 : most likely between the Ministers who had been ejected at the Restoration and now restored to their Kirks, — men who may be considered as strict and conscientious Presbyterians, — and some of those Conformists who had been educated under the Episco- palian Church of Charles and James, but who, by taking the oaths to King VViiliam, were continued in their cures, and who had a hankering after tbj rites and ceremonies of the Prelatical Worship which was practised in England. Thus, in an Act passed 1 693, entitled, an Act for settling the peace and quiet of the Church, " Their Majesties, with the advice aiid consent atoresaid, Jtatutc and ordain, that uniformity 50 of Worship, and of the administration of all Public Ordinances within this Church, he observed by all the said Ministers and Preachers, as the same are at present awed and performed therein, or shall here- after be declared by the authority of the same ; and no man shall be admitted, unless he subscribe to observe, and do actually observe, the foresaid uniformity." But where is that form of Worship specified if it be not in the 21st chapter of the Confession of Faith, in which it is declared to be the "singing of Psalms vtith grace in the heart ?" But if there should remain the least dubiety concerning what idea is to be attached to the expression, "singing of Psalms with grace in the heart," the last chapter of the Directory for Public Worship completely explains it : " In singing of Psalms, the voice is to be tunably and gravely ordered : end that the whole Congregation may join herein, every one that can read is to have a Psalm Book ; but for the present, where many in the Congregation cannot read, it is convenient that the Minister, or some other fit person, appointed oy him and the other ruling officers, do read the Psalms, line by line, before the singing thereof." Your Committee, therefore, with the most perfect confi- dence affirm, that the uniformity in Public Worship enjoined by the Act 1693, among other things, signifies the singing of Psalms with the voice alone. Had iLe Kingdom of Scotland remained an independent Kingdom, possessing a separate Parliament, as it possessed distinct Laws, and a separate Ecclesiastical Establishment, it is probable that the Scotch nation would have been completely satisfied with the regulations and Acts already quoted, in favour of its Worship, Doctrine, Dis- cipline, and Government ; seeing that there was but little danger now of its form of Worship being corrupted or altered by its own inhabitants. But the moment that there was a plan in agitation for a Union of the two Kingdoms under one Parliament, the people of Scot- land foresaw that if this Union took place, there would be greater inter- coiirse than formerly betwixt the two nations. Besides, from the circum- stances of our Legislators being called upon to reside, occasionally, in a country where the Prclatical form of Worship was established, and from the obligation of obeying the Test Act before they could enjoy the pub- lie offices of the State, there might be some risk that cur Presbyterian mode of Worship wo' Id, by degrees, and imperceptibly, come to be not only corrupted, but altered. The nation, therefore, became ex- ceedingly jealous, lest the Union, so much desired by Government, should prove prejudicial to the form and purity of our Presbyterian Worship. Accordingly, in Queen Anne's first Parliament, it is enacted, " That it should even be high treason, in any of the subjects of this Kingdom to quarrel, impugn, or endeavour by writing, or ad- vised speaking, or other open act or deed, to alter or innovate the Claim of Rights, or any article thereof." Most likely this Act was passed in order to crush the rash hopes which the Nonjurant Church of Scotland was indulging, that the Union would gradu^ly introduce Prelatical Worship. When, therefore, in 1705, the Parliament of Scotland took into their consideration with what earnestnesa the Queen's Majesty had recon^mended an Union betwixt her two inde- pendent Kingdoms, and that Commissioners were now appointed for the purpose of treating, they expressly enjoin, " That the Scotch Commissioner shall not treat of or concerning any alteration of the Worship of the Church of this Kingdom, as now hy Imw established** This clause, therefore, most certainly had in view the form of Worship expressed in the Directory, engrossed in the 21st chapter of the Con- fession of Faith, founded upon the Claim of Rights, and ordered to be uniformly observed in all +he Established C lurches of the Land, end approved by the Act 16^3, and ratified by the Act of Assembly 1705. Accordingly, in the next .Session of Parliament, 1706, in pur- suance of these principles and views of our forefathers, the celebrated Act of Security was passed, containing these words: '* That the form and purity of Worship, presently in use within this Church, shall re- main and continue unalterable." And, in order to avoid all ambigu« ity, the expressions in the Act are varied, that the one may be a clear and distinct comment upon the other. In the first clause of the Act, the words are, " As presently professed within this King- dom;" and then it adds, ''As now by law established;" then it adds, " As presently in use in this Church." And in the clause which ord dns the same to be observed by all Begents and Masters in every University, the words are, they " shall practise and conform themselves to the Worship presently in use in this Church." And it is farther enacted, that the Sovereigns, on their accession to the Crown, ihall swear and subscribe to maintain, and preserve inviolable, the Worship, Discipline, Rights, and Privileges, of this Church, as above established by the Law of this Kingdom, in prosecution of the Claim of Rights. And it is likewise statuted and ordained, " That this Act of Parliament shall be held as an essential condition of any Union to be concluded betwixt the two XingAoms, without any alteration there- of, or any derogation thereto, in any sort, for ever." All of which clauses were engrossed in that Act styled the Treaty of Union, and now considered as the Public Law of the Land, for a century past. Now, when you analyse the counterpart of this Act, as p'vssed by the English Parliament, for the security of their Church, before they allowed their Commissioners to treat of any Union ; when you ob- serve the jealousy expressed by their Parliament for the preservation of their form of Worship, and the accurate manner in which they de- scribe that form ; you cannot hesitate a moment in concluding, that the Scotch Patriots, at least equally enlightened and equally zealous vith their English neighbours, had a clear, accurate, and precise idea of what was meant by the form and purity of Public Worship then in use in Scotland. The English, attached to the Worship, Discipline, and Government of the K'jclesiagtical Establishment of their c m country, enact, that 58 their Commissioners " shall not so much as treat of or concerning any alteration of the Liturgy, Rites, and Ceremonies of the Prelatical Church, as by Law confirmed ;" quoting the 13th of Queen Elizabeth, and the 13th of King Charles II. ; which Acts the King is sworn to observe at his Coronation. Too many people, by not attending ex- actly to the state of the Eeligious Establishments in the two different countries, at the time of the Union — two independent Kingdoms under one Sovereign, each jealous of the other ; the Southern part of the Island remembering with disgust what they had seen practised under the government of Cromwell ; and the Northern recollecting with horror what they had suffered under the Episcopal administra- tion of Charles II. — have formed partial and erroneous views concern- ing the spirit of the Acts of Security of the two different Countries, at the time of the Union. While each nation was exceedingly jealous that no alteration should - ake place in their own form of Worship, it was not necessary, that they should step beyond their proj er ground, and verbatim et literatim, condemn the practice of their iieighbours, who were now to be connected by an incorporating Union, under ont Parliament. While the English nation expressly enact, that no altera- tion should take place in their Liturgy, Rites, and Ceremonies, as by Law established, they would c» i jider it as both injudicious and indeli- cate, to condemn our Directovy, our Presbyterian Worship, and our Confession of Faith, in open and avowed expressions. Still, however, if in the present day, an English Bishop should, of his own accord, attempt to introduce the Presbyterian form of Worship into the Established Church of England, your Committee have no hesitation in saying, that it would be contrary to the express Law of the Land. By parity of reasoning, though Instrumental Music in the Worship of God IS not, totidem verbis, condemned or forbidden in our Act of Security, out of regard to the feelings of the Church of England, still, by that Act, the form and purity of Worship then in use in Scotland is to remain unalterable. Will any man, therefore, pretend to saj, that if Instrumental Music shall be attempted to be introduced into our Public Worship, it is not contrary to the Law of this part of the L^nited Kingdom ? That very form of Worship then in practice was to continue in all time coming. Now, it is known to the whole world, that betwixt the Revolution and the Union of the two Kingdoms, the singing of the praises of God in Public Worship with the voice alone was the use and practice of the Established Church of Scotland. Your Committee have been at the more pains to illustrate the Scotch Act of Security, as they apprehend that both their Brother and the Congregation of St. Andrew's have allowed their judgments to be mis- led in this question by a mere quibble ; conceiving, that because they did not read in the Act that Instrumental Music was forbidden, totidem verbis, therefore that there is no law against it. But your Committee maintain that they have not interpreted the Act of Security more ftrictiy than its history, spirit, and eaactmcRtg, will justify, agreeably 59 it rppfthly to the authorised interpretation of any puhhc Act relative to privilege. "When a positive defined practice is commanded to be observed by any class of men, any other practice, altering the former, is most certainly prohibited by the spirit of that Act, though not expressed in words. And therefore, if the form of "Worship in use and practice at the Union was to continue unalterable in all time coming, Instrumental Music is most clearly, and to all intents and purposes, forbidden and condemned. And the Civil Magistrate hath authority to take order, that unity and peace be preserved in our Church, and that all innovations in Public Worship be prevented or reformed. Such your Committee hold to be the Law of the Land, and what they are confident in affirming that neither the Imperial Parliament of Great Britain nor the General Assemr bly of the Church of Scotland can alter, without infringing the civil and political constitution of this part of the United Kingdom, as under- stood and ratified by the treaty of Union. Surely, then, our brother hath not attended carefully to the spirit and meaning of those Acts of Parliament now quoted, when he so roundly asserts, " That cannot be illegal, against which no Law exists — that cannot violate, which toucheth not the Constitution." Let us now examine the Ecclesiastical Constitution of this part of the United Kingdom, as specified and confirmed by the Acts of her General Assemblies ; and your Committee flatter themselves that they will be able to show that Instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God is contrary to the spirit and principles of our Presbyterian Church ; and that the very bold and extraordinary assertions of our brother, contained in his Statement, are erroneous and improper. His words are, " That cannot be against the spirit and genius of our Church, which ahe habitually recommends to the people, by her appointment of the singing of David's Psalms. — Before declaring her prohibition of Organs, it is incumbent on the Church to expunge from the Sacred Records those passages which seem clearly to recommend the use of Instruments in Worship ; that thus the Worshippers may be delivered from the inconsistency of promising and exhorting each other to do, what in their hearts they resolve, and are forbidden by the Church to per- form." In treatina* this part of the subject, your Committee wish it to be understood, that every Established Church is entitled to arrange, in the form of a Creed, a Confession of Faith, or a Catechism, her explana- tion of the doctrines contained and set forth in the sacred Scriptures. This was done in the earliest times of the Church of Christ ; and has, with great propriety, been imitated by the Church of Scotland. Every Church has likewise a right to settle her form of Public Wor- ship, and to commit it to writing. By some authors, this writing has been styled a Missal ; by others, a Liturgy ; and by the Scotch, a Directory. If once these Creeds, and Confessions, and Catechisms, and Directories, are recognized, established, and put under the protec- tion of the State,— that Church, so protected, has it not in its power 60 to alter or infringe the fundamental principles contained in these writ- ings, if they mean to live mider, and claim the protection of Civil Authority. It is true, that we in Scotland acknowledge no temporal head in matters of religion. We deny the supremacy of the King over our Presbyterian Church. The executive, judicial, and legislative powers, in matters purely ecclesiastical, are vested in our Church, following the gradation of her various Courts. But still she must legislate, judge, and execute, agreeably to her Confession of Faith, her Directory and Presbyterian Government. These are fundamental principles^ acknowledged and protected by the State ; which every minister and Elder is sworn to obey ; and which the Civil Magistrate is bound to see observed, in the most full and literal sense. "When, therefore, we take into our consideration the Directory for Public Worship, and the lOth Act of Assembly 1705, recognising that Directory ; the 21st chapter of the Confession of Faith, and the Act against Innovations, passed 2 1st April 1707 ; — in connection with the practice of the Church of Scotland for at least a hundred and twenty years, following out what it believed to be the constitution of our Presbyterian Establishment ; — your Committee affirm, that Instru- mental Music in the Public Worship of God is contrary to the principles and spirit of the Church of Scotland. The Act of Assembly 1707, against Innovations, which your Com- mittee are afraid their brother, in his Statement, has somehow or other overlooked, begins by observing, " That the introductiox. of In- novations in the Worship of God has been of fi|tal and dangerous consequences." It then jjoes on to state, " That the purity of Public Worship hath been expressly provided by divers Acts of Parliament;" and after intimating " that Innovations either have taken or are about to take place," it therefore adds, " The General Assembly, being moved with zeal for the glory of God and the purity and uni- formity of his Worship, do hereby discharge the practice of all such Innovations ; and order Ministers to represent to their people the evil thereof; and instruct the Commissioners to use all proper means, by applying to Government, or otherwise, for suppressing or removing all such Innovations." ^ In conformity to this Act of Assembly, the Church of Scotland, ever since the year 1711, have peremptorily ordained the following questions among others, to be put, in the most solemn manner, to every Minister at his ordination ; and his answers to these questions are known by the name of his ordination vows. " Will you adhere to and maintain the purity of Worship, as pre- sently practised in this National Church, and as&vrted in the Act against Innovations P" *' Do you promise to submit yourself willingly and humbly to the admonitions of the Brethren of this Presbytery, and that you will of this Church?" /\rtr nn At\Tta-nra r»/\i-ii»aaa Twrkm 4-Vkia T4^a4*oliliaKa/1 TXT rtraliin ann Tlnof:nnA • _ And in the Pormula, which every Minister subscribes at his ordi- nation, he * * sincerely owns the purity of Worship presently authorised and practised in this Church, and that he will constantly adhere to the same ; and that he will neither directly nor indirectly endeavour the prejudice and subversion thereof." If such, therefore, be the Ecclesiastical Statutes of our Church, — if our Acts of Assembly and Formula be not mere waste paper, and if language has any meaning, — we solemnly and positively affirm, that the introduction of Instrumental Music into the Public Worship of God, within the kingdom of Scotland, is contrary to the Law and Constitution of our Established National Church. "We cannot help taking notice of a circumstance which tends to corroborate what we understand by the Principles and Constitution of the Church of Scotland. The numerous bodies of Seceders, under the various names of Covenanters, Associate and Eelief Synods, which have left our Establishment and declined its authority, were surely at full liberty to indulge the humour and wish of their re- spective Congregations ; yet in no one instance has that wish or hu- mour led them to introduce Instrumental Music into the Public Worship of God. Why ? Because they conceive it is contrary to the principles of Presbytery. They have uniformly adhered to that mode of religious Worship enjoined by the Directory, — the singing of the praises of God by the human voice alone. This attachment to simple Worship is so strong and so universal, and the habits con- nected with it so predominant, that we may consider it as the com- mon consuetudinary Law of the Country. V. Let us now proceed to analyse our brother's fifth and last argu- ment. — He affirms, that the Organ " was introduced into St. An- drew's Church upon pure Presbyterian principles, and that no Law exists, or can exist, against such use of it as took place upon the 23rd of August last ; and that, after the most serious attentio to the sub- ject, he cannot discover the most distant approach to any violation, either of the purity or uniformity of our Public Worship." His mode of reasoning upon this part of the subject your Com- mittee cannot help considering not only as metaphysical, but also tinctured with something not unlike sophistry. He says, " It could not be an innovation upon the object of Worship, for we worship the one God ; — or on the subject of Praise, for we all sing the same Psalms ; — or upon the posture of the Worshippers, for we all sit, as become true Presbyterians; or upon the tunes, for we sing only such as are in general use ; — or upon the office of the Precentor, for he still holds his rank, and employs the commanding tones of the Organ for guiding the voices of the people." We may allow it to be perfectly true, that, upon the 23rd of Au- gust last, the Minister of St. Andrew's and his Congregation wor- shipped the one God ; that they sung the same Psalms as usual j that they sat as became Presbyterians, when they praised the Lord ; and i t 62 that the Precentor held his place in the desk, &c.; yet, after all, by in- troducing an Organ as an appendage, they manifestly made an inno- vation on the form and purity of our Public Worship, in direct oppo- sition to pure Presbyterian principles. Such conduct was not agreeable to pure Presbyterian principles ; because, in the first place, it was an innovation on the ordinary ex- ternal form of Worship. For by blending Instrumental Music with the human voice, that the Congregation might better express the emotions of their heart, the simple melody of our forefathers becomes immediately changed into a medley, composed of animate and inani- mate objects. Of course, the very external form of Praise in use at the Eevolution is no longer continued unalterable in our Presbyterian Church. 2. It is an innovation upon what our Laws of Church and State denominate the purity of worship. Man being a reasonable creature and a reasonable service being demanded from him by God, that reasonable service cannot so properly be performed by man as when he useth his voice alone. This is the vehicle which God hath given him to convey to his Maker the emotions of his soul. Musical In- struments may, indeed, tickle the ear and please the fancy of fallen man. But is God to be likened to fallen man ? Are we taught by the letter or spirit of the Gospel that inanimate instruments are capable of conveying to the Father of Spirits the emotions of a pious and virtuous mind, animated with religious joy, filled with religious gratitude, and awed with religious veneration, pouring forth the va- ried and enraptured impulses of an enlightened, converted and sanc- tified soul ? Organs are the mere inventions of men, played often by hirelings, who, while they modulate certain musical sounds, may possess a heart cold and hard as the nether millstone. You may, if you please style such Music the will-worship of the Organist ; but you surely cannot, in common sense, denominate it the praise of devout Worshippers, assembled in the Congregation of Saints, to praise their God and Redeemer in Psalms, and Hymns, and Spiritual Songs, singing with grace, and making melody to the Lord in the heart. When, therefore, our brother asks (in what your Committee con- ceive a sneering manner) ^ '* Does our national uniformity consist in nothing more substantial than in a certain fixed quantity of sound, beyond which no Congregation has authority to pass ? What is the subject to which this uniformity relates ?" — is not this a species of sophistry, which we should not have expected from the known good sense of the Minister of St. Andrew's? But we shall not answer such trifling, by opposing sophistry to sophistry. Tour Committee will answer it by this bold, but plain and honest assertion, that the uniformity of our National Worship consisteth in the following things : — 1st. In the Minister reading the Scriptures, and lecturing upon these Scriptures. 2d. In preaching tc his Congregation from ft text of Scripture. 3d. In Prayer to God, not confined to the cold and lifeless phrases of any fixed form, merely of human invention.^ 4th. In the celebration of the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord'a Bupper, agreeably to the words and commandment of Christ himself, And Lastly, In the whole Congregation singing the Praises of God, with the voice gravely and tunably ordered, as expressed in the Directory. These things compose the uniformity of our Public Na- tional worship, not a certain fixed quantity of modulated sound. When, therefore, our brother indulges in such metaphysical rea- Boning as the following : " What is the subject to which this unifor- mity relates ? There can be no mode, without a subject to which it adheres. And shall our national uniformity be said merely to relate to things unsubstantial, ever varying, ever vanishing, even while the ear is labouring to hear, and the mind to catch them ? To attach perpetuity of form to things incapable from their nature of uniform duration, would be a solemn mockery of our venerable Legislators" — your Committee are almo *: tempt'^-l to say, that this mode of rea- soning is no better than «oZew?e trifl rig, though assuming the garb of philosophical acumen. Por yo x;. Committee affirm, that there ia a precise, marked and fundamental distinction, both in point of form and substance, between th , j. aises of God sung by the voice, — the means bestowed on rationi^ man by his Creator for expressing the religious sentiments of hi.s heart, — and a tune of modulated sound extracted from a MusIcrI Instrument. Mankind must be dull indeed, who cannot perceive that there is a fixed and eternal difference betwixt these two things, which no metaphysical reasoning can ever confound or amalgamate. With respect to that part of his argument where our brother affirms that he is countenanced in his opinion by the custom of admitting Bands of Singers into some of the Presbyterian Churches of Scotland, your Committee conceive that it can avail him but little. There is no innovation here whatever upon the external form of Worship ; for still the Praises of C ju are sung with the human voice alone. And if ever it should hi^i' ^en, that this custom shall induce any Congregation to neglect their duty, in joining devoutly in the Praises of God, then we say that this custom ought instantly to be abandoned. We do not deny but that Bands of Singers, directing the public Praise of God, have bee^i abused ; and we certainly give it as our opinion, that if ever at any time they shall encourage our enlightened Congregations to neglect the singing of Psalms, and Hymns, and Spiritual Song??, and to sit mute, and listen to the harmonic warblings of a Band, then they ought to be dismissed at once, as not only unpresbyterian, but highly pernicious. But the person must be very much inclined to yield his judgment to sophistry, who does not perceive a vast difference betwixt a Band of Singers, singing the Praises of God with the voice, and completely blended with the Praises of the Congregation at large, and an Organ tickiing the ear of the audience. 64 In the attempt of our brother to prove that he introduced the Organ into St. Andrew's Church upon pure Presbyterian principles, he desires us to attend to the conduct of what he styles the pure Pres- byterian Caivaniaiic Church eaupon the continent, which employ that instrument in the Public Worship of God. Most likely he borrows his examples from what may have taken place in Holland or Geneva. "We have no bond of union with either of these Churches. They lire establishments totally independent of us, and are entitled to chalk out a plan for themselves. On the other hand, their practice can have no authority whatever with us ; and indeed, from what we know of the opinions entertained by some of these Churches, we should be very unwilling to consider them as a proper model to copy from, either in Doctrine or in Worship. But be this as it may, having a right to form standards for ourselves, your Committee therefore wish that our brother had confined his views on this question to the principles of the pure Presbyterian Church of Scotland; which we conceive to have been animated by the purest principles of any Church upon earth. "In our Church the generous spirit of liberty breathes with universal vigour, and the noble soul of the Reformation animates every part of our establishment; so that no distinction was made by our fore- fathers of days and ceremonies, which were alike destitute of Scripture support. Our Church believes it to be the great design of the Gospel to raise the Christian Worshipper above the airy grandeur of sense, and, instead of a laborious service, to introduce a Worship worthy of the Father of Spirits." Our brother is pleased to say, " That he is disposed to presume, that the Presbytery never seem to have inquired what was done on the 23rd of August in St. Andrew's Church. They conjure up to them- selves some horrid prostitution of sacred things, and then fight against it, as pro arts elfocis, wielding their arms against a shadow." Your Committee know perfectly well what was done on that day in St. Andrew's Church. *l'hey know that an Organ accompanied the Public Worship of God. They know that Musical Instruments are the invention of men. They know, that though neither authorised by the New Testament nor by the Law of the Land, nor countenanced by the Presbytery, his Ecclesiastical Superiors, nor approved of by the Civil Magistrates of the City — the attempt was made to introduce a Musical Instrument into the Public Worship of God ; which, since the Reformation, hath, in this Land, been considered as illegal and uncon stitutional. Your Committee, therefore, know perfectly well what was done ; ana their opposition to the measiyre hata arisen from the most complete conviction that they were only doing their duty when they nipped such innovation in the bud. Why, then, does our brother affirm, that the attempt was made according to the pure principles of Preshy- tery ? Was not the Presbytery of Glasgow the radical Court by which such an attempt could be sanctioned ? But your Committee affirm, that this Eoolesiastinal Go ^us :;t:yer eunsuivcu on luu uuaiii-jaa. Indeed, from the narrahV** «; i. posed by some oAh. !,. '^ «'" "S"'" attendan,^^ f, •" * '"""''« help to the Prec^„,!rf '"'.^?°" *" '"^'oitl^Tcilu "?? ""«?'»- became loud ^JTsentt^r^^^' P'^^«"' ""e wShlvt ..^/T "* ment in ?„«;„ WoS " 'a/T/^I".""' f"' «he «l Waf b',?'"' -»&l^t„?f-f^heXC^^^^^^^ that tliere nelrZ ®"'™?»». your Committee ar„ V ,>'«y- Now, Sooiet/r^TuwC-'"" *!'" "-^ •» iXrdet"l'°. """".«". Head, of S>.?Pgt"mth "' ""'""^ » -^o-'o ™ile • . A r ^liiisterial. He J, " n*vi ^ legislative and judicial -Ithl ^^esbj- ^ --.. * ^ vfc:c:ii H mi eta «l. . x i '«»8«.ge«.d«pirit-ir,he23?d* chapter of the Confession of Faith.* He would have found that the Law of Scotland has declared, That it belongs to the office of a Magis« trate to maintain piety, justice, and peace, according to the wholesome laws of this commonwdalth. He hath authority, and it is his duty, to take order, " that uni^ly and peace be preserved in the Church, that all corruptions and abuses in Worship be prevented or reformed, and the ordinances of God duly settled, administered, and observed." " It is the duty of the people to pray for Magistrates, to honor their persons, to obey their lawful commands, and to be subject to their authority : from which Ecclesiastical Persons are not exempted." And as it is the proper duty of Magistrates to execute the laws, so they are bound, and it is their right and duty, to execute those laws which secure the uniform- ity of our National Public Worship, as practised in the year 1707. This they may do by inflicting civil penalties ; and if they omit any part of their sacred duty, they must answer for it to God and to their country. Your Committee, therefore, have no hesitation in saying, that the Magistrates of this City might have legally and constitution- ally ordered their servants to have taken possession of that Organ which was used upon the 23rd of August last, in Public Worship in St. Andrew's Church, without the authority of the Presbytery, until a Mitisfactory pledge was given that it should never be employed again in a similar manner. But as our brother in his Statement seems to lay so much stress upon the averment, that the Organ was introduced into St. Andrew's Church upon pure Presbyterian principles, your Committee deem it proper to give a short abstraci of what was the real progress of this business : — About two years ago, application was made to the Lord Provost, Magistrates, and Council, of the City of Glasgow, then in office, " That they would allow certain alterations in certain seats in St. Andrew's Church, that there might be room for setting up an Organ ; the petitioners at the same time binding themselves to defray the expense, and to make good all damages which might be supposed to ensue, but which they apprehended could not arise from its intro- duction." When we examine the letter accompanying the petition, and the petition itself containing this extraordinary request, we cannot help thinking that our brother has been disposed to treat our Presbyte- * A ridiculous quibble has been resorted to, in order to blunt the argument drawn from the 28rd Chapter of the Confci^ston of Paith- It han been averred, that by the Civil Magis- trate in tliis chapter can only l)e meant the Kinit ; becauHe the power of waginK war and calling Synods are ascriljcd uuto him. Is it necossara to repel such a Quibl)le by reasoning ? Who CHMts not know that all the Executive Power of the British Empire is underHtood to ftwoU in the King, and to emanate from him ? Does not a common summons run in liia Mi^esty's name, km well as a declaration of warf Docs not his Maiesity annually delcgatt whatever power he has to call Synods, as well as to be present at them, to his Commissioner in the General Assembly f Uas it not )>eeu understood, by the mont eminent Divines of our National Church, from the Revolution downwards, that the Judge Ordinary of the l)onnd8. or flrbt Principal Magistrate of a City, hath an inherent right, as Invest^Kl with constitutional authority, " to take order that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of God ur kept pnre and !>nt!re, th&l sll biMnhemios and heresies be auppressed, ai\d all corruptions and abuses in Wurshhip be preveuud or reformed i" m le nan, patriotic forefathers in rather too cavalier a manner. He speaks of them as men misled by passion, and as an ignorant, bigoted peo- ple, labouring under prejudice ;--language, to say no more of it, requiring stronger arguments in its support than our brother has yet been able to advance. Before the Lord Provost, Magistrates, and City Council, returned an answer to this extraordinary request, they asked and received the opinion of their Legal Assessor ; who, in a very manly and candid paper, now upon the Presbytery's record, gave it as his judgment, " That the introduction of Organs in our Churches would be a material alteration and innovation in our exter- nal mode of Worship ; and recommended to the Minister of St. Andrew's and his Congregation, before proceeding farther, to apply for the permission and sanction of the Ecclesiastical Branch of our Constitution." Tour Committee would have thought that the refusal of the Mag- istrates to grant the request of removing the seats, founded upon the opinion of their Legal Assessor, a gentleman so well known for hia candour and constitutional knowledge of the laws of his country, might have clamped this musical mania for introducing an Organ into the Public Worship of Q-od. But our brother tells us, in his State- ment, — to which your Committee beg leave particularly to call the attention of the Reverend Presbytery, — that although ho received from the Lord Provost an official letter, upon the 22nd August last, now upon your record, the purport of which letter was tc dissuade him and his Congregation from making the attempt, yet he, Dr. Ritchie, " did not shrmk one moment from what he conceived to be his right." The Organ, accordingly, was employed in Public Wor- ship on the Lord's day, in St. Andrew's Church, upon the 23rd August last. There is here a little ambiguity in our ^^other's Statement, which your Committee do not exactly unden-.,ctn(L Whetlier did L> Kitchie lay the Lord Provost's letter befoie '^he Committee of Qqi tlemen upon the evening of the 22nd, or not till the 26th, the day on which he received the Lord Provost's second letter ? If the first letter was only laid before these gentlemen upon the 26tb, your Committee solemnly declare, that our brother did not discover proper respect to the Civil Power, if he used the instrument after he received his Lordship's first letter, and before he had an opportunity of sub- mitting it to his Musical Council. But be this as it may, the naming of three gentlemen to wait upon the Lord Provost, and the sending two, twice in one day, to request of the Lord Provost, that the Civil Power might no more be seen in this business, was a piece of conduct not at all like the good sense which our brother has displayed in the more private concerns of his life. It was, apparently, first setting the Civil Power at defiance, and then apparently requesting them to shut their eyes to the contempt of their authority. Your Committee, taking all these circumstances into consideration, cannot help think- 68 ing, that the conduct of our brother upon this occasion did not discover proper respect, either to the Civil Power or to the Presbytery of which he is a member. Our brother, surely, was not ignorant of the official opinion pro- nounced by the Legal Assessor of the City Council ; neither was he ignorant of what is contained in the tw^enty-first chapter of the Confession of Faith, relative to Public Worship ; neither could he bo ignorant of the power with which the Civil Magistrate is invested, to preserve uniformity of Public Worship ; neither could he pretend ignorance that about two years ago, the City Council had refused to allow the seats to be removed for the accommodation of an Organ. Why then, did he, upon the twenty-third August last, authorise and direct the employment of an Organ in St. Andrew's Church in Public Worship, — taking the whole responsibility upon himself, as the director of all that concerns Public Worship in that Parish Church of which he is Minister? — a line of conduct which your Committee positively condemn. When our brother received the first letter from the Lord Provost, it was certainly high time for him to have stopped till once he got the authority of his Ecclesiastical Superiors ; and then, legally and constitutionally, he could have said to|the Civil Power, When you interfere with Public Worship, you are proceeding ultra vires. When, therefore, our brother sent two gentlemen, twice in one day, to request of the Lord Provost that the Civil Power might no more be seen in this business, is there not something more like a desire to dictate what the Civil Magistrate ought to do, " than a sincere respect professed for both branches of the Constitution ?" According to the Statement given in by our brother, relative to his conduct upon the 22d, 23d, and 26th August last, or even from the commencement of the business about two years ago, we bid defiance to any man to point out a single Preshyterian principle in the whole of it. Whereas, on the other hand, the interference of the Lord Provost was strictly Presbyterian. It w^as the legitimate exercise of that formal power in ecclesiastical matters; which the standards of our Church and the Laws of the Land uniformly assert and maintain. As to the conception of any Presbyterian Minister of the Estab- lished Church of Scotlard having an inherent right of directing all that respects Public Worship in his own Congregation, it is perfectly wild, visionary, and untenaole. No Minister has a legal right to Serform a single judicial or legislative act without the sanction of the [irk-Session ; and no Kirk -Session has a right to innovate on the general laws and universal practice of our Church. Instead, therefore, of your Committee admiring those gradual steps which our brother says were taken by the Congregation of St. Andrew's, since the Ist of June last, for the purpose of improving themselves in Sacred Music, they are rather disposed to imagine that these gradual steps were intended to accustom the mind imperceptibly to innovation, and to the receptioa 69 In. lb- all fly to he Ihe llOu of Instrumental Music into the Public Worship of God, in this our National Established Church, without surprise and astonishment. Perhaps, if the Presbytery had done its duty, they should have stepped forward and nipped such innovi tion xn the bud, convincing both our brother and the world that the hou^;e of God in this Presbyterian Country was not to be turned into a Concert-room. But \.e flattered ourselves that the good sense of our brother would have kept this musical ethusiasm within proper bounds — We were disappointed. When innovation begins, no man can say where it will stop. A man may perform an action fraught with consequences the most pernicious to his country. It may proceed from the most complete bona fide intention on his part, or it may even arise from an invincible error of judgment. Your Committee does not wish to speak harshly upon the motives of any human being ; but the consequences of an action, aflFecting our Ecclesiastical Establishment, they are entitled to investi- gate, and to approve or comdemn, as truth and justice shall demand. With respect to that pompous declaration made use of in the State- ment, to show the utility of the measure, and how wonderfully cal- culated an Organ is to increase the devotion of a Congregation of Christians, and "that the time is now come when we had it in our power to vindicate our Church and our Country from the reproach of neglecting one of the best means devised for the improvement of Sacred Music," — your Committee must beg leave to say, that they entirely withhold their assent. Our brother's argument is a mere petitio principii — a mere begging of the question — assuming as a principle what remains yet to be proved. Your Committee are uo enemies to Instrumental Music being used to exhilarate the mind in scenes of conviviality, or employed to animate the soldier to march with ardour to the field of battle ; nay, they even allow that the poet is not altogether fanciful when he says, that " Music hath charms to soothe tho savage breast." But still, they can by no means allow it to be an improvement of the Public Worship of G- ol, in singing the Praises of that God who is a Spirit, and must be worshipped in spirit and in truth. Your Com- mittee affirm, that the tones of the human voice, while they are the most simple, are at the same time, the most perfect, the most accurate, the most pathetic, and the most sublime, and the best quali^-^d to ..'^nvey the sentiments of the devout heart, in solemn Praise ^ he Father, the So > and the Holy G^v- Your Committee have heard yt r Amateur n and Dilettanti assert, that their nerves have been completely overcome with tb« .'werful tones of the Orpfan, and the sublime err af Instrumeu * r nsic in the oratorios of Handel. Your Committee are willing to .uiow thii musical effect ; but they believe, at the same time, that ali the M u- Bical Instruments that ever were used can never produce upon tho devout and contemplative mind that Hublime and pathetic effect, which the well-regulated voices of 8000 children produced, when aing- mm. t- 70 ing the Praiaes of God in the Cathedral of St. Paul's, upon the reco- very of our good oM, religious King. Away, then, with the cant of an Organ's be.ng so wonderfully calculated to increase the devotion of Christians ! Tour Committee have Rometiiues had an opportunity of listeniug to Instrumental Music, m w)>at is sfyled Cathedral "Wor- ship. It might for a little time please, and surpviae by its novelty ; the effect, however, was very trantiitorj. and someti.ios produced idei;.i in the mind very difP?rent from devotior. '' ii is but too common for person^, to deceiro theu^eelvetj, by iuiagiu;;.-', th^t wheiji they are greatly moved by airy rti Ins^/rumental Music, fchat they are then, and for that reaao'^ in a tor per of mind most pleasing unto God ; becaat^e pleasing lo themselves ; — a most unhappy delusion ; for men sometimes of very littla piety can enjo\ ali fchat sort of pleasure with as Ingh & ga^fo or relish as persons of a more virtuous chan eter."* Your Committee believe, that when the Pialses of God are sung b)' -^very infUvidual, even of a plain, unlettered country congregation ('."tiiieb hiii' been spoken of by some persons rather in a taunting '.imuer), where both the heart and voice are engaged, the effect is juach more noble, and much mon; salutary to the mind of a Christian audience, than all the lofty artificial strains of an Organ, extracted by a hired Organist, and acccompanied by a confused noise of many voices, taughj at great expense to ohant over what their hearts nei- ther feel nor their heads understand. When our brother, therefore, bewails the want of the power of discrimination in our countrymen to perceive the advantages which would result to Beligion by introducing Instrumental Music into the Public Worship of God, we, your Committee, rejoice in the thought, that our countrymen will not suffer when compared with the inhabi- tants of any country upon earth, as to their discriminating powers with regard to what is useful and proper in matters of Eeligion. They inherit that discriminating talent from their forefathers. It was a legacy conveyed to them as purchased by their blood ; nnd they will not abandon it for the p\. .» ? amusement of Pipes and Organs. If our countrymen have not Organs, and wish not to have them, they have Bibles, and can read them ; they have Churches, and they attend them ; they are distinguished for their attainments in arts and sciences ; they can study the history of mankind, and can reflect upon it ; and they know well that Organs and Instrumental Music have -een abused to the purposes o/' voluptuousness and impiety. T know, for Job bath told the ia- that the wicked among his co' noraries "took the Timbr ana ■iiu Harp, and rejoiced r' th< -tid of the Organ," and ye^ said I **!'.' God, " Depart from • , we desire not the knowledge of thy ways: what is tne Almig': . uat we should serve hi ;? and what profit should we have, if wo : / unto him ?"* And they ^)avo road * Job. zzl. la, 14, 16. 71 id 0^'. in the Sook of Amos tlie prophet, of a woe pronounced upon them **that are at ease in Zion, and trust in the mountain of Samaria; who put far away the evil day ; and cause the seat of violence to come near ; who lie on heds of ivory, who sat the lambs out of the flock, and the calves out of the midst of the stall ; who drink wine in bowls, and anoint themselves with the chief ointments." But this very numerous description of men in affluent circumstances, and addicted to luxurious habits, our countrymen have read, *' chanted to the sound of the Viol, and invented to themselves Instruments of Music like David.'** And they have also read in the Bo'^k of Daniel, that when Nebuchadnezzar dedicated his golden image in the pre- sence of a numerous and loyal assembly, "they all fell down and worshipped the golden image, at what time they heard the sound of the Cornet, Flute, Harp, Sackbut, Psaltery, Dulcimer, and all kinds of Music."t Thus we have endeavoured, step by step, to answer the various arguments adduced by our Reverend Brother, the Minister of St. Andrew's Church, in his Statement. We have in the first place shown. That Instrumental Music is neither enjoined, nor authorised, nor encouraged, by the Word of God, to be used in the Public Worship of Christians. In the second place. That, from the history of the Church, it appears that the Fathers, the Schoolmen, and the greatest of Reformers, con- demned it. In the third place. That the reason assigned by our brother why Instrumental Music in the Public Worship of God was not used in our National Church, (viz., That it arose from the want of leisure to attend to such things, or the want of money to purchase such instru- ments, or the want of accommodation for using them,) is consistent neither with historical fact, nor with fair and candid investigation.^ •Amosvl. tDan. ill. t Whether, In tho period immediately after the Reformation, the Public Devotional Music was an object of so very little attention In the ChHrch of Scotland as our brother is pleased to represent, may bo determined even by a very sliglit inspection of the Psalra-Book which was used In the Cliuroh dnrin^ that period. In our present version of the Psalms there are six varieties of measure ; with the knowlednre of six different P.salm Tunes, a Con«creKation may ■ing all the I'salms which it contains. In the old version there were twenty-flvo or twenty- ■ix different measures ; which implied a knowledge of Psalmody, and a mode of sindnir, which could not have existed amidst that iguorance and inattetition to Church Musio which ia inpposed then to have characterised and disgraced tho Church of Scotland. Copies of that Psalro-Book are now very rare. That which most generally occurs, is an edition printed by Andro Hart, 1636, and mnkes part of a volume which includes directions for different parts of Public Worship, as agreed on by John Knox and other eminent Ministers, whose recommendation is annexed. So much was this part of the Devotional Service of our Church an object of attention to thooe good men, that the particular Tunes, proper for particular Psalms, are commonly annexed to them in the musical characters of the time. And a* booki wore not to bo had so easily hi those days as in ours, an ingenious device has been emplc-^'ed, in ordor that one copy of the Book might accommodate the four different persons V ho sanor tli ' frur '.'.flferent pr*rrs of the Music. A considerable variety of Psalm Tunes, set . the JiiTcrcnt partM. .Tiak.) a portion of this volume. Par be it from us to blame our reverend b'othei for his ignorance of this subject ; perhaps ho will blame himself for writing ■0 decidedly upon a subject in which he must be conscious he has been at little pains to obtain infp-matioi!. Ho may r'erhaps see cause to regret, that, upon mere hypothetical reasoiiing, he should have pronouned such a severe judgment against his countrymen re- specting heir ignorance of Psalmody in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. A plcasiiur liltlovvish Temple »nd its scj ice. " For which reason we know we must lay onr account to be despised by thf. men of the worlt^ who value nothing that is stripped of the allurements of ser ie, aii^ fancy that a rich and gaudy dress contributes to the majesty " rais* s the excellency of religious service ; who seek for the same da >g i *mp and splendid appearances to recommend their Worship, which they are so fond of in their equipage and tables ; and think that a veneration and respect to the service of the Church is to be raised by the same methods that procure an esteem and fond- ness for a Court. We have nothing to tempt persons of such inclina- tions ; we know they will entertain the meanest thoughts and most disdainful notions of a Worship too plain and homely for them, and fit 76 I onl^ for the rude and unmannerly multitude, who have not a taste delicate enough for what is truly great and noble. " But how much soever, upon this account, we may be despised by the ^reat and learned, the Church of Scotland, we hope, will always publicly own the simplicity and plainness of her Worship as her pecu- liar glory ; and believe that these, to a spiritual eye, are beautified with a lustre which external objects are incapable of, and of too elevat- ed a nature for the senses to look at. She is not ashamed to acknow- ledge her sentiments ; that the devotions of Christians stand in no need of the outward helps afforded to the Jews ; and that the triumphs of all-conquering love, the mighty acts of a Redeemer, all the powers and glories of an immortal life, which are represented to our wonder and meditation under the Gospel, are far nobler springs of devotion, and fitter to animate with a cheerful zeal, and inspire the most fervent affections, than the meaner helps afforded under the Law — the costli- ness of pontifical garments, the glory of a magnificent Temple, the ceremony of Worship, and power of Music. " Our Church believes it to be one design of the better reformation of things, to raise the Christian Worshippers above the airy grandeur of sense, and, instead of a laborious service, to introduce a Worship worthy of the Father of Spirits, that should be truly great and manly, — the beauty and the power whereof should be spirit and life ; and which, instead of a servile imitation of the Temple, should be all purified rea- son and religion, and make the nearest approaches to the devotion of the heavenly state, where there is no Temple. And how despicable soever this may appear to earthly minds, and distastefuLto the senses that are pleased with show and appearance, we are not afraid to own, that we believe that an imitation of our blessed Redeemer and his Apostles, in the plainness and spirituality of their devotions, and an endeavour to copy after example of those truly primitive times, will ever bear us up to all the just decency and order of the Gospel Church; and that, in conformity hereto, the naked simplicity of our Worship is beautified with a superior lustre, and shines with a brightness more worthy of it, than when dressed in the gayest colours and busked up with the richest and most artful ornaments of human fancy and con- (Signed,) WILLIAM PORTEOUS, ROBERT BALFOUR, JAMES LAPSLIE, JAMES M'LEAN. 76 Unto the Beverend the Tresbytery of Toronto of the Presbyterian Church of Canada^in connection with the Church of Scotland, The Memoriax. and complaint of the Subscriber, being a Member of St. Andrew's Church Congregation, Toronto, within the bounds of said Presbytery, Humbly Sheweth: That your Memorialist and complainant has been connected with the congregation of St. Andrew's Church, Toronto, for the last twenty-four years, and that he and his family have been admitted to the full enjoyment of religious privileges therein. That recently he has for a season been compelled, from conscien- tious objections to the use of instrumental music in public worship, to discontinue his attendance on the means of grace in said St. An- drew's Church. That he has on more than one occasion, quietly, to individual mem- bers of the congregation, and also to the Minister, stated his dislike to a melodeon being used in the praise of Q-od, and that, for the sake of peace and out of esteem for the Minister, he has not until lately taken the important step of calling the attention of the Session of said Church to the matter, and to his remonstrances and complaint. That your Memorialist and complainant, on the ninth day of March last, addressed the following reasons of dissent to the use of a musical instrument in public worship in said Church to the Eev. Dr. Barclay, as Moderator of the Kirk Session of St. Andrew's Church : " First. That the Church in Canada, of which you and your Ses- " sion are members, is in connection with and professes to be governed "by the whole Standards and Acts of the Established Church of " Scotland. " Second. That the Established Church of Scotland does not re- " cognize the use of musical instruments of any kind in her Psalmody. " Third. That notwithstanding such professed adherence, and con- " trary to the discipline of said Church of Scotland, an organ, or, as ** it is called, melodeon, has been introduced into St. Andrew's Church, " of which I am or have been an humble, member. " Fourth. That the use of such an instrument, or any other, is a " gross innovation for which there is no precedent, and ought not to " be tolerated by any true Presbyterian, claiming connection with the *' venerable Church of Scotland, the brightest gem in the history of " our country, and whose discii)line and standards have, notwith- " standing many severe trials, stood the test of ages, nor is it too If " much to say that at this moment she stanrl • on the pinnacle of her " glory in the hearts of her many thousand s r ' Ltr ents. j, r ; "Fifth. That I cannot conscientiously continue to attend upon " the public worship of God in a Church where a musical instrument " is used in praising God, whether as an accompaniment or otlier- " wise. " Lastly. That I would deeply regret leaving St. Andrew's Church, " where I have sat so long, and where I had hoped to remain undis- " turbed until the close of my earthly career, but as it has otherwise " happened, I hesitate not to say that I prefer to leave the Church " rather than submit to what has become to me intolerable." To which the following deliverance was sent in reply to your Memorialist : " At Toronto, and within St. Andrew's Church there, the 20th day " of March, 1859, the Session of St. Andrew's Church met, on the " call of the Moderator, and was duly constituted. Present : Rev. " Dr. Barclay, Moderator ; Judge McLean, and Messrs. Cameron and " Thomson. " The Moderator stated that he had called the present meeting in " consequence of the receipt of letters from John Eobertson, Esquire, " complaining of the employment of a Melodeon in conducting the " Psalmody of the Church, and embodying a statement of his reasons " for objecting to its use, his aversion to which he assigns as his sole " reason for discontinuing his attendance at public worship in St. " Andrew's Church. Said letters were read, and are of the following " tenor : [Here the letters are engrossed at length.] After length- " ened conversation on the subject, and all the Members of Session " having given expression to their views thereupon, the Moderator " was requested to draw up a Minute in accordance therewith, and " submit the same to the Session for approval, at a meeting to be " held in the Church, on Saturday, the 26th March, at four o'clock "p.m., until which time the Session adjourned, and was closed with " the benediction. " Saturday, the 26th March, 1859. — The Session could not proceed " to the despatch of business, from the want of a quorum, owing to " the absence of members from town • and the meeting was accord- " ingly declared adjourned, to await anew the summons of the Mode- " rator. " On the 3rd day of April, 1859, the Session met and was consti- " tuted ; all the Members were present. The Session resumed consi- " deration of Mr. Eobertson's letter, and after mature deliberation, " agreed to the following deliverance : "The Session regret that anything connected with the mode of con- " ducting public worship in St. Andrew's Church should be distasteful " to any member of the congregation. The Session have no desire to " introduce or sanction any improper innovation. They expressly dis- n ** avow tlie introduction or sanctioning of what may properly be called " instrumental music as part of the Church service. "It is true that a melodeon was introduced into St. Andrew's " Church, about eight years ago, by the choir, with the express object *' of its bein,^ used as an accompaniment to help in sustaining the " voices of the singers, and thus to improve, as was generally thought " and desired, the style in which that part of divine service was con- " ducted. If not absolutely or indispensably necessary, it was yet ** regarded as so important and yet harmless an adjunct, that the Ses- " sion never thought of prohibiting its use, but on the contrary felt " that it was generally regarded as well fitted for, and that it did to a " considerable extent attain, the object for which it was adopted. " Besides, ha'' the Session been disposed to object to it as unneces- ** sary, they might still very pro^>erly have hesitated to require its ** removal now, from the consideration that it really seemed but a " small concession to the expressed wishes of those Ladies and Gentle- ** men who had for so many years given their services in the Choir, " and who, although acting in this from a sense of duty to the Church, *' have not the less strong claim upon the other members for the •* thankful recognition of services which it is believed the congrega- " tion at large duly appreciate, and would not be slow on all proper " occasions to acknowledge. The arrangement at present existing, " having gone on for nearly eight years, during which a melodeon has " been in use for the purpose stated, without, so far as the Session " are aware, its being other than acceptable to the congregation, it « seems undesirable, except for suflBcient reason, to deprive the choir « of the aid which they deem indispensable to the proper discharge ** of their important duties in conducting the Psalmody of the Church. " It is true that whilst the present instrument, just introduced to " replace the old and inferior one, is of a larger size and requires ** greater experience to play it properly, the choir at the same time *' happened to be diminished in numbers, and thereby weakened by " the temporary absence of several of its members, so that in this way "the melodeon may for a few Sabbaths have been more prominent " than was formerly the case, and thus some ground may have, unin- " tentionally, been given for the objection that a step was in contem- " plation towards instrumental music taking the lead and becoming " predominant in the praises of the Sanctuary. But these causes are " only temporary, and there is not, so far as the Session are aware, ** any intention or desire to use the instrument permanently for any *' other purpose than that for which it was introduced— namely as a •* simple accompaniment to aid and sustain the voices of the members *' of the choir, who feel and represent it to be highly desirable. Cer- " tainly no attempt to turn the church music into what may be pro- " perly styled inttrumental, or to give, as erroneously supposed was " the intention, a greater prominence ' . tho melodeon than what is " indicated above, would meet tl^e nor*; al of the Session. f 70 " Had the Directory of Public Worship prohibited the use of an *' instrumenic in connection with the Psalmody, the Session, of course, "as obedient sons of the Church, would not have given even the " modified sanction of their tacit consent to its introduction. But *' no such prohibition, so far as they are aware, is to be found either^ " in the word of God or in the standards of the Church of Scotland. " And the Session are persuaded that the use of an instrument, espe* *' cially to the extent and for the purpose to which, in the present case, **it is restricted, may well be regarded as one of those things non- ** essential, respecting which a difference of sentiment may exist ** among the members of a congregation, without involving the neces- '* sity on the part of any one, on that account, of taking the extreme " step of severing his connection with the church. " So far as the members of Session are personally concerned, they " would be satisfied to have the Psalmody in the congregation con- ** ducted either with or without the aid of an instrument, as they trust " that m either way they could profitably, and with the true feeling of ** devotion, join with their fellow- worshippers in the praises of God. ** But the question as presented for their considerctlon ia not one re- *' specting the introduction of an instrument, but, about the removal " of it after nearly eight years^ use. And whilst they are given to un- " derstand that the forced discontinuance of the very simple instru- " mental aid to the choir in conducting the Psalmody would be very " unacceptable to the congregation generally, and would draw forth ** the strong remonstrancob of many of its members, the Session ** (while entertaining every desire to meet the wishes of those who *' may seek the change) yet feel convinced that for the peace and " harmony of the congregation it would not be advisable, except for ** the gravest reasons, to insist on its expulsion now. " In view of the explanation already given as to the reason for the •* original introduction of the melodeon. and its present retention, and *♦ considering the aasrrances as to the mode of employing it for the •* future, the Session are reluctant to surrender the hope that the ob- ** jections expressed by Mr. Eobertson may be so far obviated as to *' enable him with propriety to continue his connection with St. An- " drew's Church, from which they would with great regret see him *' withdraw. They are unwilling to suppose that his conscientious ** scruples, as stated in his letter of complaint, and which appear to •* have been drawn forth into practical expression by the circumstance " already referred to as recent and temporary, would lead him to con- *• sider that part of the service during the last eight years impure and *' unbecoming, merely because of the slight aid the choir have sought •* and found in the employment of a melodeon ; and certainly it can- ** not be properly regarded as more objectionable if used for the samo " purpose foi' the future than it has been for the past period during ♦* which it has been so employed. 80 u . ** In tlius declining, in present circumstances, to require authorita- tively the removal of the melodeon, the Session trust that Mr. Ro- " bertson will reteeive their assurance that it is from no desire on their " part to slight his views, nor any intention to treat lightly his con- " Bcientious scruples as expressed in his letter, that they have adopted ® ** this resolution. And while in the introduction of the instrument " there has at least been no mere wanton desire for useless innovation, " — but a felt necessity has led to its use to enable the choir to per- *' form their important duties, as already stated, with greater facility " and effect, — the Session are persuaded that its removal would occa- ** sion general dissatisfaction and remonstrance, and would l>e in itself, " at present, inexpedient. " The Session was then closed with the benediction. "(Signed) "JOHN 3AECLAY, Moderator. " A true extract, " J. Baeolat, Acting Clerk of Session. " St. Andrew's Church, Toronto, April, 1859." That your Memorialist and complainant fails to discover the relev- ancy or cogency of the decision of the Kirk Session of St. Andrew's Church as tending even in an indirect way to meet his conscientious objections or to satisfy his scruples, and that in consequence, being sincerely desirous of worshipping God according to the manner of the church into which he was baptized, and deeming it a great hardship to be forced to leave a communion to which he is firmHv attached, and judging that it might tend to allay all future differentf^s in the mode of conducting public worship within the Presbyterian Church of Ca- nada in connection with the Church of Scotland, he appeals to the Presbytery for redress. May it therefore please your Reverend Court to take the foregoing statements and reasons into consideration, and, if found 30und and warrantable, to adopt or direct such means as you may think expedient for removing the evil com- plained of, or otherwise to do in the premises as to you may seem best ; and your Memorialist and complain- ant, as in duty bound, shall ever pray. JOHN ROBERTSON. Toronto, 17th May, 1859.