•• / y^p ftf/s [EXTRACTED FROM THE EVANOEl(tC#i WITNESS.] JAN 7 1937 REVIEW. FIRST. HINTS ON THE CHURCH'S PSALMODY BEING AN ATTEMPT TO REPEL THE VIOLENCE OF SUCH AS WOULD ROB HER OF A PRECIOUS RIGHT, PP. 70, l£MO. GEORGE PHILLIPS, PRINTER, CARLISLE, 1821. SECOND. STRICTURES ON A BOOK, ENTITLED, M AN APOLOGY FOR THE BOOK OF PSALMS, BY GILBERT M'MASTER." TO WHICH WILL BE ADDED, REMARKS ON A BOOK, ENTITLED, THE DESIGN AND USE OF THE BOOK OF PSALMS. BY ALEXANDER GORDON." BY HENRY RUFFNER, M. A. 8VO. PP. 56. LEXINGTON, VA. PRINTED BY VALENTINE M. MASON, NO. X. 1. Hints on the Church's Psalmody. Being au attempt to repel the violence of such as would rob her of a precious right pp. 70. 12mo. George Phil- lips, printer, Carlisle, 1821. 2. Strictures on a Book, entitled, " An Apology for the Book of Psalms. By Gilbert MTtfaster*" To which will be added, Remarks on a Book enti- tled, The design and use of the Book of Psalms. By Alexander Gordon. By Henry R; finer, M. A. 8vo. pp.56. Lexington, Va. Printed by Valentine M. Mason. During forty years past the controversy respecting Psalmody has been agitated in our t country, with that degree of spirit, on each side, which indicates sufficiently the interest felt in the subject at issue, by the respective parties. That an Imitation of the Book of Psalms and other hymns of modern date, composed by men of different shades of character, should be fitter for the Psalmody of the Christian temple, than those songs indited by the Spirit of in- spiration, was a suggestion novel to many serious and intelligent Christians ; and the substitution of the one for the other, was not likely to meet with uni- versal consent. When this substitution was urged by superior influence or authority, the recusants would of course assign their reasons, these reasons called forth replies, and thus the subject became matter of public controversy. At the close of the last and commencement of the present century, the Rev. Drs. Laita and binder son occupied the field. The last edition of Dr. Ander- son's very full and temperate discussion, appeared in A.D. 1800. In A. D. 1S01, the fourth, and it is believ- ed, the last edition of Dr. Latta's discourse, by far the ablest work on that side of the question that has ap- peared was issued from the press. The advocate of uh- ( 2 ) inspired hymns was then allowed the last word. &# far as public discussion was concerned, the matter rested till A. D. 1816. Early in that year a publi- cation, by Mr. Baird, a minister of the Presbyterian church, eame out in defence of the "spontaneous ef- fusions" of modern poets and poetasters, and, in no very measured terms, against the use of the Book of psalms, in the church's psalmody. An ecclesiasti- cal decision of that year, by the General Synod of the Associate Reformed Church, opening the door for the admission of Watts' psalms into their congre- gations; gave some currency to the pamphlet of Mr. Baird, and called from the shelves the abler dis- course of Dr. Latta. Thus the war was once more renewed. Those who still preferred the songs of inspiration, and refused to substitute in their place the compositions of Dr. Watts, were pointed to with a •sneer, as illiberal bigots. The question was often put to them, why they did not prefer the modern hymn, to the antiquated song of scripture in a literal version ? These events and inquiries gave occasion to the publication of a small volume, entitled 'An Apology for the Book of Psalms.' The author of this, we are warranted to say, during the first eight or nine years of his ministry, introduced* the controversy re- specting psalmody, neither into his public discus- sions, nor into the private circles where he associa- ted. Nor is it probable that he would ever have appeared on that subject, had it not by various means been forced upon his attention. We give this state- ment of facts, in order to the correction of misrep- resentations which have found their way abroad. It is not true that Reformed Presbyterians and Seceders have been the instigators of this controversy. From first to last, it is believed, the assault has been made from the other side. And we w T ish it to be under- stood, that when such assaults are made, w r e have no disposition either to concede the point, or to occupy neutral ground* We can come to no terms r we can. ( 3 ) make no truce, with those who speak, and continue to speak, as Dr. Watts and his successors have done, respecting this very precious portion of the Book of God. We hope indeed, in acting that part which may be allotted to us in this cause, never to forget what is due to candour and sobriety. The employ- ment of bad passions, we know, can never be bene- ficial ; and in a cause requiring nothing but sound argument, good temper and suavity of manner, why so much angry fretfulness should be put in requisi- tion, as appears in these little books, whose titles are placed at the head of this article, we shall not ven- ture even to conjecture. We have no temptation to trouble ourselves, either in recording the testimoni- als of their peevish bitterness, or of imitating their example. The following syllabus of the works, will put our readers in possession of the ground occupied by their authors. It may just be noticed, that both the publications are directed against the * Apology for the Book of Psalms,' already alluded to. The writer at Carlisle assails it no very courteous man- ner, and Mr. Ruffner furnishes the following reasons- for his appearance before the public : " Last year a second edition of Mi M'Master's work on Psalmody was published, and considerably circulated in this country. It soon made a good dealof noise — seem- ed to be al^nating the minds of some of our sece- ding brethren from us, and to disincline them to any measures tending to an ultimate union with the Gen- eral Assembly. It also disturbed the consciences of some with regard to their present practice of singing Watts' Psalms and Hymns." Allthrwas effected, according to Mr. R. by misrepresentation, &c. and bow he appears with the avowed aim of " lessening the influence of a book sO inimical" to truth and con- cord. The Carlisle author proposes to cast his "has- ty (passionate ?) production — like oil upon the waves to smooth their roughness." Such are the proposed ends of these writers. v ( 4 ) The Hints from Carlisle, as they are tbe eldei ■production, have, by courtesy, the first claims to at- tention. After making a statement of the subject in question, not indeed that contended for by the friends of a Scripture Psalmoay, but such as the writer tho't he could more easily manage, he proceeds in his ar- gument. " We shall," says he, "venture to express a few things by way of prejudice against it." — That is against the use of the Book of Psalms in the psal- mody of the church. Thus he ventures to say, — M There are 'things of such a local nature in the Book of Psalms, as to shew that they were designed chief- ly if not exclusively, for the Jewish Church." " There are some things which accord only with that spirit of extermination, that work ol havoc and destruction, which God required that church to cherish" And he assures us that u men may talk as they please, but the fact cannot be denied, that the spirit o{ the Jew- ish and of the Christian Church, are very different." " That our Lord teaches this ; that the spirit of the church of old, and many of the psalms do not accord with a gospel spirit ;" that " it is certain the use of these psalms, in the Christian Church, has a tendency to foster malevolent feelings;" that those who use the songs of inspiration, are remarkable for angry pas- sions, and the use of those songs is, very probably, the cause of such passions ! That the singing of the Bible psalms, cannot be called praise ;* that those psalms were adapted to a state of the Church, when such a political righteousness was required, as that in Ezekiel, 17th chapter, (the errata has it chapter 18th, J demanding abstinence from idolatry and adult- ery, ver. Gth, which requisitions, he assures us, are neither made now, nor can a compliance with them, be possibly obtained !! !f That the government of the Israelitish Church, was a political government. | That whatever is discriptive of the condition of the ancient * Page* 11, J&,15. f Page 14, i Page 14. ( 5 ') * Church, is inapplicable to our psalmody; so is all that is peculiarly referrible to our blessed Redeemer, as psalm 22. || He likewise tells us, that the New Testament produced such a thoroughly radical up- rooting change, that the spirit of the church is whol- ly transformed. Page 18, 19. These considerations, together with the exterminating and unevangelical character of so many psalms, are good reasons for their rejection by people of tender consciences. Page 21. That unless the authority of God be adduced, "totidem verbis" in just so many words, ordering it, we are under no obligation to use any of the inspir- ed psalms. Page 25. He likewise proposes to prove, that under all dispensations, Levitical and Jlpostolic- al, the Church used in her psalmody, with divine ap- probation, uninspired hymns. Page 28. He like- wise certifies us, that so far as the matter is concern- ed,, there is " little difference" between the singing of the scripture psalms and " the idolatrous repeti- tions of ' Io Bacche, Io Bacchic,' w r ith which that heathenish divinity was praised !" Page 49. That there are errors in the old version of the psalms ; that in translation, the inspiration of scripture is lost, ex- cept the translation be inspired, and that hymns made by Socinians, or even the devil, might be sung in the worship of God, if they contain nothing erro- neous, are among the items of valuable information given us by this christian divine. Pages 57, 5S, 62. To these items he adds, that as the inspired psalms were adapted to " superinduce a spirit of bondage" they are unfit to be channels of the graces that be- long to adoption ; hence the churches that use them languish, while those Who use others, we suppose such as Watt's and Wesley's, are pre-eminent in grace. See pages 15, 69. The above is a very fair expose of the heads of this writer's sentiments, as given in his " hasty produc- tion." We shall now gratify our readers with a spe- ll Pages 14, 15, 16. ( o > cimen of his liberality and. Christianity of temper.— We pass over the gentlemanly manner in which he speaks of the author of the ' Apology for the psalms/ in particular, and refer to his general style. The friends of the scripture psalms, he represents as u big- oted, censorious, ignorant zealots, ostentatious Phar- isees" — bully-ragging the meek and lowly christians. Page 22. Their churches are unblest. Page 23. They " are men of narrow and conceited minds" — u fly from the preaching of the word — despise the ministers of Christ — turn their backs upon divine or- dinances,* disturb the church's peace, and throw the whole weight of their example over into the scale of Christ's enemies." See page 26. " Stupid advo- cates for David's psalms." Page 49. "Ignorant big- ots." Page 51. He likewise represents them as drunken and lewd characters, page 38 ; under the in- fluence of the worst passions, enemies to prayer, and destitute of love to souls. Page 68. The Episcopal Church, too, where the book of Psalms has a promi- nent place in psalmody, he represents as " barren, rotten, heretical." page 65. We have thus been liberal in quotation and refer- ence, to the end that this Carlisle gentleman may appear fairly before our readers. His spirit, style and manner, we know, are not such as they have been accustomed to ; but we wish their improve- 3 .ent, and this writer ranks himself with "such chris- tian men and ministers as keep pace with the en- lightened spirit of the age !" Page .4. He likewise reminds us, that he is a meek and lowly minded chris- tian, who is actively engaged to glorify God, and promote the spiritual welfare of his fellow men. Page 22. It will be recollected, too, that the above is that * The Church is surely criminal, whose ministry is permit- ted to teach, to write, and to publish, that the righteousness which prohibits idolatry, adultery, injustice, and cruelty, " is not now required 5 nor can it be acquired.!" To commit abomina- ble deeds is bad, but to teach that they may be committed, as a gospel privilege, is worse. This is, indeed, to turn the grace of Gpdinto ltdviovjness." i Hints,' page 14, See Errata, ( 1 1 * oil which is cast upon the waves to smooth their roughness.' However some of our readers may con- jecture, as to the possibility of the apothecary's mis- take in the kind of oil, we are persuaded that our author and they will coincide, in the assurance of his perfect freedom from the spirit of the scripture psalms ; and if that by which he is actuated, be a fair specimen of the " spontaneous feelings" generated by the spirit of modern hymns, there will be no difficulty in appreciating its character. The Carlisle man has occupied so much of our at- tention, that we fear some encroachments have been made upon the space allotted to our Virginia brother. He will, however, we hope, find a compensation in having fallen into such company, and esteem himself happy in finding such a coadjutor in his Pennsylva- nia friend. Whilst thus associated, therefore, in the good work of setting aside the Book of inspired psalms, from having any place in the psalmody of the church, above Horace, Watts , Wesley, or any of the measuring or rhyming brotherhood, and we, contem- plating the accordance of their spirit, hail them with the acclaim of ' Par nobile fratrum /' they will doubt- less respond in a shout of joy, ' Fortunati ambo /' We shall, nevertheless, duly notice our Lexington friend. As the work of this gentleman purports to be a direct reply to Mr. M'Master's ' Apology,' that work is accused of an error in chronology, of sup- pressing a fact in the history of psalmody, of misre- presenting Drs. Watts and Latta, of not proving the divine authority for the stated use of the Book of Psalms, in the psalmody of the church ; for this is in- capable of proof, either as respects the Old or New Testament dispensations, there being in reality, ac- cording to Mr. R. no such appointment ! He main- tains that explicit appointment, in so many words, is requisite to settle the stated use of any of the psalms ; for an inference from a command, however fair, is no part of the command, pages 31 t 43j and, thirf (. s ) ' ! * such as confine themselves or others, to the use of inspired songs, are chargeable with adding to the word of God ! Page 43. Again, it would be as easy to sing the odes of Horace, as the psalms of David, to spiritual edification, page 37; and that Dr. Watts never denied the deity of Christ, that he only denied the doctrine of the Trinity I Pages 20, 21. There is, of course, a great deal of that common place ma- terial which has supplied the whole tribe of fanatics, from ancient times to this day, and which has been refuted and exposed by such men as Brown and Baxter, before our grand sires were born. Of this material are such fragments as these. The psalm& were given on particular occasions, and, therefore, are unfit for general use. They are Jewish — they cannot be assumed as our own. We may as well make our own psalms as our own prayers; and all that slang which has filled the pages of former and present impertinence on this subject. Our readers will not expect U3 to go into a laboured argument against the foregoing follies and impieties. To state most of them, is to refute them, among sober and moderately informed christians. To cast by our re- ferences, and so conclude our labours of review 7 , we are very strongly inclined. We would recommend, however, should we do so, the perusal of all the doc- uments refered to, by such as can procure them. — We are persuaded the argument of the " Apology for the Psalms," remains unaffected by these assailants. We recommend, too, very cordially, Dr. Anderson's volume on the same subject. There the c^ntrover- sy is viewed extensively in its various branches. But notwithstanding the inclination just now ex- pressed, for the sake of those who may not have at hand all the documents we recommend, a few thoughts shall be offered on the several subjects treated of by our authors. And first, a mighty discovery is made by Mr. Ruffner. At the out-set he says, the author of the { 9 ) Apology 9 * refers the case of P (tufas of Somosata, to the 4th cent.; but that heretic lived about 40 years before." This, were it so, is of little conse- quence, except to show the temper of the man. It is, however, not so as stated by Mr. R. The fact is this; Eusebius was of the 4th cent. Dr. Lntta had appealed to that historian, who relates the affair of Paulus. The author of the ' Apology 5 follows Dr. L. to Eusebius of the 4th cent., without saying to what period Paulus belonged. So much for Mr. R's perspicacity. Mr. M'M. is again accused of misrep- resenting Dr. L., as arguing for the exclusive use of modern hymns, from each case, referred to page 9. Hear Dr. L. for himself: " We have already said that they (the inspired psalms) were not in use for the three first centuries." " Flavius and Diodorus, were the first who made this innovation." Pages 76, 77. In the latter page the reader will find Dr. L. proceeding upon the ground of the exclusive use of human compositions, till the 4th century, and then by Arians alone, as the result of his argument from history ; Mr. M'M. follows him in detail and proves his conclusion, unauthorised by his premises. Read both and see for yourselves. But has not Mr. M'M. suppressed a very important item in the history of Paulus? The subject of inquiry must be kept in mind : It is, whether scripture psalms and hymns were, or were not, used before the 4th century ; and whether they were then introduced by Arians. The words in the case of Paulus, ' as being modern, and the compositions of modern men,' it seems the au- thor of the ' Apology' did not quote, perhaps because he saw they had no bearing upon the question at is- sue. Were the quotation of any consequence in the argument, Mr. R. might regret that Dr. L. had omit- ted it. But had both Dr.L. and Mr. M'M. introduced it, it could not have proved more than is fully con- ceded in the i Apology.'* Page 53. " I adnv f n * We quote from the 3d Edition. \\ ( *o ) t says the author, M the probability of hymns of human composition being numerous, and that they were/re*- quently used in the public worship, we need not doubt That many of them were intended to honour, and as many to dishonour the Redeemer of men, neither the opinions of the times nor the prime actors of those days, forbid us to suppose." Mr. R's ground for such immoderate exultation, we really cannot see. We are ready to grant upon this head, all that Mr, R. can justly require. Who is ignorant of the Thal- ia and Cantica of Arius, composed in heathenish form, to promote his heresy ? Who knows not, when truth and purity were gone, that the " addition of various hymns, and other things of that nature, were considered as proper to enliven devotion, by the power of novelty ?f Illecebris erat et grata novitate morandus. Upon this principle, as a testimony against heresy, connected with the Nestorian con- troversy, the image of the virgin Mary, holding the child Jesus in her arms, obtained the principal place. J Bring as much of this lumber as you please, Mr. R., it will do our cause no harm. The promo- tion of religion by the power of novelty, and the im- ages of Mary and of Christy as testimonies against heresy, will probably be found to stand upon as high authority, and to be every way as serviceable to the cause of godliness, as were either those hymns of human composure at Antioch, or those of more re- cent date. Let them all have a place upon the same shelf. As to Mr. R's reasoning upon Pliny's letter, it is evident he has either never seen it, or he does not understand what it states. We are unwilling to accuse him of dishonesty in his use of it. Upon the subject oi' Dr. Watts' language respect- ing the Book of Psalms, Mr. R, complains, as was to be expected, that Mr. M'M. treats the Dr. unfair- ly. And in what does he do so ? He does not give *134. f Mosh. }Da.54< • ( « ) all the rea3oning, and explanations, and parentheses of Dr. W ! Were Mr. W. to give an outline of Whit- bey on the five points ; of Hopkins' System, or of Priestley's comparison of Jesus Christ and Socrates, must he, to do it fairly, transcribe the whole of those; works ? Dr. Priestley complained, that when his as- sertion, that Paul did not always reason logically^ was criticised, his reasons for so saying were not re- garded. The truth is, the assertions of Dr. W., like those of Dr. P., should never have been made; they do not admit of satisfactory explanation ; and even as exhibited by Mr. R., are as abominable and impious as in the outline of Mr. M'M. And in the prefaces where they are found, exolanations and all, they appear as bad as any where else. On the subject of the Dr's general creed, much has been said, and much is repeated in the books under review. We have a word or two, likewise,, to add. To us, it appears,, that Dr. Watts never in^ teUigently believed the doctrine of the Trinity, as taught in divine revelation, and professed in the symbols of the Church of God. That he was not., in early life, decidedly hostile to that doctrine, may be true ; but that he knowingly, cordially, and un- reservedly, embraced it, upon examination does not, appear. The phraseology he indeed employs ; but so would the Sabellian, the indwelling-scheme men, and the Arian. That Dr. W., when he wrote his piece on the Trinity, the preface and introduction to which, Dr. Janeway, of Philadelphia, circulated through the medium of the Presbyterian Magazine, for July 1821, to prove that Dr. Watts "was so far from being shaken in his belief of that glorious doc- trine of divine revelation, that he become still more firmly settled in a conviction of its beiag plainly taught in the sacred scriptures ;" when he wrote this piece5 we say, he was undoubtedly unsettled in this doc- trine of the Trinity. In the preface and introduc- tion thus published, there is nothing to which a Sa*> 1 ( ) bellian could not subscribe ? He uses the term three persons, but he claims liberty to explain ihe import of those terms in his own way. He identifies per* sons with principles of action : ;i three such distinct agents or principles of aciion, as may, reasonably, be called persons.* Dr. Janeway is, perhaps, not to be blamed for intellectual incompetancy to understand Dr. W., but :£ he did understand him, he is criminal in practising a'deception, to serve a little party pur- pose. This book of Dr. W's., was published in 1122] and, in three/years after, he came out openly against the doctrine of the Trinity. This wasinihe flower of intellectual life, just as he had passed the 10th lustrum, and twenty-three years before his death. — In all his heretical pieces, he displays maturity of in- tellect, and, we think, more vigor than in his other works. It was in this year, 1725, that Mr. Bradbu- bury, a name justly high in the churches, charged Dr. W. with "making the divinity of Christ to evap- orate into a mere attribute." Mr. B., after treating the Dr's. professions of love to truth with a sneer, says, M It is pity, after you have been more than thir- ty years a teacher of others, you are yet to learn the first principles of the Oracles of God* Was Dr. Ow- en's church to be taught another Jesus ? That the Son and the Spirit were only two powers in the divine nature !"* And what says Dr. W. himself in a let- ter to Dr. Colaman ? " 1 think I have said every thing concerning the Son of God which scripture says ; but I could not go so far as to say with some orthodox divines, that the Son is equal with the Fa- ther." * Watt's Memoirs. Y 13 ; There is, however, one argument adduced for the continued orthodoxy of Watts, which merits a passing remark. He never called in, or altered his hymns, or doxologies, in which the doctrine of the Trinity is recognise' The correspondence between Mr. J\l 'n romkins, of Stoke Newington, and Dr. W. on this very subject, will unvail this mystery. Mr. Tomkins, an avowed enemy of the scripture doctrine of the Trinity, pressed Dr. Watts, with the great inconsistency between his real sentiments, and those contained in his hymns, &ic. " I freely an- swer," said the Dr., " I wish some things were cor- rected ;" and after assigning some prudential rea- sons for not doing it, adds — " I might tell you, that of all the books I have written, that particular copy is not mine. I sold it for a trifle to Mr. Lawrence ; and I can scarcely claim a right to make any altera- tions in the book which would injure the sale of it."* To establish the orthodoxy of Dr. W., not a particle of evidence has been adduced, but has been set aside, by the most satisfactory proof. His own wri- ting, his undisguised declarations, the testimony and rebuke of Bradbury, the declaration and w r ritings of president Edwards, of Dr. Ely, and the admission of even Mr. RufFner, all go to prove him at least a Sa- bellian, a denier of three distinct persons in God. — We ask, is the God of Sabellians the God of Israel? No. Was it then honourable in those managers of the " Presbyterian Magazine," to whom its super- intendence belonged, to hold up men whom they were confessing as brethren, and inviting to their communion, as forgers and slanderers^ to the odium of the public ! Were they not aware that in a few short months this deed would be unmasked? Was it consistent with fidelity to their God, to their own vows, to the immortal interests of their flock, to hold up a man as unshaken in his foith of the Trinity, Watts' Memoirs. 2 ( 14 ) whose pernicious works, which have seduced many; were circulating among them? Or did Dr. Janeway alone, pit his mighty name against those of Bradbu- ry, Coleman, Hervey, Edwards, Ely, &c. and hope to succeed, in the face of all truth and evidence to the contrary, in establishing the charge of falsehood and slander against them ? Humble and self denied man ! We are, however, disinclined in the present there are, perhaps, very few, whose religious sensibilities are of that obtuse character, that would permit them to take their psalms from either a known Socinian or from the devil, merely because such compositions did not contain a lie. That gentleman informs us pretty plainly of his accommodating disposition in this res- pect. " Even admitting that Dr. W. was a Socini- an, what relation has this fact to the point in hand ? Would truth become a lie because it might come from the mouth of the devil ?" Hints, p. 62. Re- flecting men will, perhaps, be weak enough to beC^r / ( 15 ) that, considering psalmody in all the extent of its in- fluence upon religious character, the creed of their psalmist may become so dear to the worshippers, as to recommend to their favourable regard all his de- liberate opinions, good or bad. This, in the case before us would be a deplorable result. And fur- ther, even those who are but little restrained, either by the pride of consistency, or fear of results, there may stiil be a feeling of repugnance, in directly ad- dressing their God and Redeemer, in the language of a man whose literature and whole mental efficien- cy were, put in requisition to teach another God, and as Mr. Bradbury expressed it, " to teach another Jesus" than the Bible reveals. Upon this subject there is much to be said ; but for the present we have done with it. A word or two must be offered on the main argu- ment. We think the author of the 'Apology' has stated with sufficient distinctness, the position for which he pleads : "A correct version of the whole Book of Psalms should be employed in the psalmo- dy of the church of Christ." pp. 77, 78. In this we see nothing of Rouse and exclusive use of the Book of Psalms. The author indeed seems, for himself, among existing versions, to prefer that, erroneously called Rouse's, and is satisfied with the exclusive use of the Book of Psalms ; but we are assured he makes no matter of controversy with others, if they use another version, or employ other inspired songs. No church, indeed, known to us, pleads for the statement put into their mouths by those critics. Mr. Ruffner says it is this: " Let all Christians sing Rouse's version of the Psalms and nothing else." This false statement is made again and again by these men, and by abet- ter man, we think, than either of them, Dr. Ely, is repeated. Hear Mr. M'M. for himself. " The in- quiry," says he, " is not whether it be lawful to use, in the praises of God, any other inspired songs beside what are found in the Book of Psalms. Nor is Tt r i6 ; any matter of dispute, in the present instance, what version of the inspired songs shall be used." Again, " Let us have that which justly merits the name of a version and the contest shall end." These state- ments, the author of the ' Apology' repeatedly makes, and with a solicitude that they should be attended to, it seems, not without necessity. Why, then, do all who have appeared against him, make that which he so emphatically rejects, the very subject of dispute ? Is it that they may have the opportunity of trying their logical weapons upon that from which they are sure no injury can come to them ? Gentlemen, en- joy your victory over your man of straw ! We do not plead for the use of the Book of Psalms exclusively of other inspired songs, nor do we plead for any par- ticular version exclusively of others ; and yet, as you suppose we must, we do not give up the question in- asmuch as that is not the question at all. We can very consistently plead for the continued use of the T>^^ r of Psalms, to the exclusion of Watts' imitation and hymns, and yet admit of other nmpi^* "jmns. If you cannot see what every body else sees, we can- not help it. There is something in the pleadings and admis- sions of these gentlemen, proving very clearly that either a very good or very bad exterior influence is in operation, keeping them back from a full and con- sistent developement of all their heart. An internal principle of action appears in operation, whether good or bad we do not say, and the eye directed to some opposite influential cause, leads to very palpa- ble and very ludicrous contradictions ; the heart ur- ging the tongue and the pen now, and then the bran- dishing of the master's whip compels to a contrary act. Our readers will perceive the correctness and the application of this remark by such specimens of these works as the following : " The great point at issue," says the Carlisle man, " is not, whether human songs, are to be sung ; but whether the king of Zion, ( 11 ) as not granted her, fthe church,) the privilege of employing the compositions of uninspired men !" The question at issue is not whether the psalms of David have been or may yet be lawfully sung by the church :" for Mr. M'M. M has proved that the church may employ the book of psalms in her praise ; what he says is proper enough in its place ;" yet such is the local character of some of these psalms, extermi- nating and havoc making spirit of others, and the "po- litical righteousness" cast of many, that " an entire new psalmody must be introduced. The old, Da- vid's psalms, have by the very fact of Christ's death, in a great measure been rendered unsuitable and in- appropriate." See the book, especially, pp. 6, 7, 10, 11,14,47. Thus in like manner Mr. Ruffner bends his whole force to prove that the book of psalms, neither un- der the Old nor New 7 Testament, was used in the stated psalmody of the church by divine authority^ That there are reasons to induce the belief, that undei the Old Testament they did not use all the psalms ; that the book of psalms is just a number of psalms that, floating about without finding a suitable place in other books, were gathered into this collec- tion; that, nevertheless, the Jews commonly sung out of the book of psalms with divine approbation, that though this collection be very defective and ob- scure, yet Paul did not teach the Gentile Christians to lay it aside from their psalmody; that it is not probable the Christians of Bythinia would sing the inspired psalms, because the Jews who blasphemed Christ sung them ; that it is yery probable that Paul of Samosaia, the enemy and reviler of Jesus Christ, when he set aside the hymns that were sung at Anti- och, adopted those given by the Holy Ghost, as aiore suited to his views; that an inference, fairly drawn, exhibiting the intention of a divine command, is no part of the command ; and that Dr. Watts nev- er denied the deity of Christ ; that he was only a ( 18 ) Sabellian, and denied the doctrine of the trinity ! A number of good things are said by these gentlemen, after the example of their predecessors, respecting the book of psalms. This must have been done by them ; yet their cause has forced them to say such things of it as tend to diminish the veneration of the reader for that important portion of the sacred vol- ume. We are wearied and disgusted with their a- bominable principles. How chilly and deadly the representations made of the book of psalms by Watts, Wesley, L*atta, Ruffner, and the rest ! How great the contrast between them and the deep devotion exhi- bited, and soul inspiring views given, by Pool, Hen- ry, Scott, Home and Horsley! We beg our readers pardon for venturing to inscribe such names upon the same page with those of the men who revile this part of the inspired volume. We leave Mr. R. to form conjectures and to draw conclusions upon the supposition of a book of inspir- ed prayers having been given to us. The fact being that no such book was ever possessed by the Church, to reason about it is waste of time. The old cant of not being able to assume the matter of the Book of Psalms, as our own, is so unmeaning, so uncandid, so self-inconsistent, that we cannot come down to rea- son it. Dr. Watts, and all, admit that we may sing narratives not expressive of our own experience ; and by a reference to the hymn book of these men, there will be found, in every page, much that many, per- haps the majority of worshippers, cannot assume as their own. Whether we read or sing the descrip- tions of the ancient temple worship, we ought to take the principle of what the spirit of God exhibits to our view, and make of it an instructive application. This we may do in singing as well as in reading. The Author of the apology, had pointed out how this might be done, and from that Mr. R., something in what is understood to be the manner of the lower °lass of those very consonantly denominated pettifogs \ ( « ) jgws, attempts to turn the whole into matter of pro- fane jest, p. 37. We shall notice this in the sequel. Nothing, it seems, will satisfy these gentlemen, as proof of a divine appointment, less than " totidem verbis ," just so many words. Mr. R. instructs us that an inference embracing and exhibiting the inten- tion of a command, is no part of the law ! p. 31. He and we,. then, must cease from ail future attempts at reasoning. We cannot reason without inferring, and the intention of our premises is really what we want. We place the argument for the divine appointment of the Book of Psalms, in the Church's psalmody, on a similar footing with the warrant for the continued application of the seal of God's covenant, to the in- fants of the Church. Presbyterian church govern- ment, the first dav of the w T eek as the Christian sab- bath, the female's right to sacramental communion, and other things, which are all matters of inference ; and whatever Mr. R. and his friends may suppose, are institutions of divine right. Upon this deeply interesting subject there appears, in these men, and we fear it is generally prevalent, a deplorable igno- rance. He is unworthy the name of a divine who has not settled upon a scriptural basis, a definite view of what establishes a divine right. We have precisely the same reason to suppose that every psalm of the sacred collection was appointed to stated use, that we have to believe that any w r ere ; and we have as strong reason to believe that the Book of Psalms was given for the purpose of psalmody, as to believe that they were given for the public use of the Church at all. Their title, their form and matter, their spirit, their collection into one Book by inspired authority, the uncontradicted fact of their use in the psalmody of the Church of old, and under the New Testament, without exception; this use opposed by none, at any timo, but the wildest fanatics, and vin- dicated by the ornaments of the Church in every age ; by Augustine formerly, by the Reformers, Calvin* ( 20 ) Luther, Beza. Knox; all of whom were careful to have the Churches supplied with literal versions for their psalmody ; and in later times they have found their advocates in such men as Brown, Marshal, and Baxter ; in Ridgeley, Romain, Gill, Scott, Horsley, and others, of a period more recent, establish for these Psalms this claim. We indeed are proud in being allowed, with such associates and against such opponents, an humble place in defending this invalu- able Book. Are these men not aware, that the great- er part of the scriptures was written upon particular occasions, and with a reference to particular cases, but exhibited upon general principles, calculated to direct the people of God in succeeding times ? With just the same reason, that is none at all, might it be urged, that most of Paul's Epistles are not of general use, and that in totidem verbis) we have no authority for reading all of them or any of them publickly, in the Church. The tendency of such an objection is to no purpose, except to unsettle the faith of the ig- norant and to secure the contempt of the wise. We dismiss this part of our labour with a remark or two, to which we invite the attention of our read- res. Psalmody is an institution, like every other di- vine one, agreeing with others in many points; but in something essentially distinct from them all. What then is peculiar in Psalmody ? Certainly not the ob- ject addressed, nor the state of the worshipper; nei- ther is it in carefully observing the general* spirit of religious worship.. It is in the following points that psalmody is peculiar : tuning the voice with highly elevated sensibilities of heart, led on by the understand- ing, sanctified by the illuminating grace of God ; the mindand the affections are to be instructed and led on by the matter sung ; in prayer, with which psalm- ody is often very thoughtlessly identified, a simple articulation or even mental address, if personal, is all that is required; while the understanding, the affec- tions and circumstances of the worshipper., suggest ( 21 ) the language to be used, and lead in the form of ex- pression. The intention of the ordinance of prayer, and not of Psalmody, is to bring our own and the case of others, as far as known, before God in direcl expressions thereof; and the prayer that does not so is unworthy of the name. This is the ordinance in which the present condition of our own hearts and the peculiar circumstances of our lives, at the instant are to be opened up without reserve before the throne of mercy; and for this purpose God has not furnished a liturgy of prayer to his church, but he has given a general pattern, and furnished, in the doctrines, promises, and commands of his Bible, an'abundance of material for supplication, and withal has promised his spirit, as the spirit of grace and prayer, to aid in the whole of the duty, leading the soul to proper mat- ter, fit expressions, and supplying the holy influence that gives the intensity of heart requisition in this part J of devotion. The design of Psalmody is more gen- eral, more extensive, and contemplates, immediately, that which is more important: the recounting of the I displays of Jehovah's character, whether made in creation at iarge, in general providence, or in special acts of mercy and love. For this purpose God has not only, as in the case of prayer, given the general light of his word and promised his spirit to sanctify the heart, but has done more ; as the words are in- tended to lead the mind and awaken to devotional sentiment the heart, he has furnished the liturgy of sacred song, inspired by the Holy Ghost, and infalli- bly unfolding, with an energy unknown to the pro- ductions of uninspired men,the glory of his attrib- utes as drawn in his all-comprehensive plans, his works and grace. In Zion's inspired hymns there is no grace, no holy disposition passed over, no sorrow of a godly sort, but is delineated, no fibre of celestial joy but is finely touched, nor is there a perfection of tbe Divinity that remains unsung, in those odes of heavenly birth. We repeat with the " Apology," ( 22 ) ' '" It is precisely what a liturgy of Psalms ought to be.* J Indistinct views of the nature and end of God's insti- tutions, and disregard of their essential distinctions, have confounded the minds of many and have been productive of much evil in the Church of God. Alas! the low state of sound theological learning. When shall the spirit of the Reformation age bless again our world ? In the spirit of the above views we sing the uner- ring descriptions of the experience of others, though not like our own, as God's instructive exhibitions of character; we sing what he has done in other days, as unfolding his attributes : we sing the vows and services of the saints, rendered according to the di- vine will, as examples of devotion ; and we sing of sacrifices offered at Zion, as most impressive exhibi- tions of the blood of atonement offered for the salva- tion of man, together with its accompanying doctrines. In doing all this, we hope to embrace the principle which pervades the whole, to enter into the spirit of our inspired song ; and, with us, it is a matter of no moment, whether we be led to behold the Lamb of God through the medium of a type, a prophecy, a his- tory, a promise, or a command, exhibited to our minds by the spirit of our Redeemer. Our great business is to behold the glory of God in the face of Jesus, in order to a transformation into his imag;e, and to re- fleet back the splendour of that image to its great Original. Both these ends are remarkably effected in the singing of Zion's inspired songs, while the w r ords and the dictates of the Holy One awaken the mind and lead the affections, the impression of the living image of the living God is deeply made upon the soul, the glories of his name are sung, in hymns which God himself has given, and in a tone of sol- emnity too deep to meet the notice of a giddy and heedless world. All this requires understanding and grace. We fear that ignorance and little grace lie at the founds- ( 23 } tlon of that systematic opposition to the stated use ol the Book of Psalms, which has for some time ap- peared. In confirmation of this, we refer to a well written essay in the 'Presbyterian Magazine,' of Ju- ly, 1822, under the signature of Moderator. Hav- ing expressed his regret for the want of a literal ver- sion of the Psalms, more smooth and harmonious, the writer supposes that " to this want is to be as- cribed \n part the disrelish into which the psalms of Scripture have fallen with many pious persons, but," adds he, " it is humbly conceived, it is not the chief reason. The very excellence of the Psalms them- selves has it effect. The depth of matter, their spir- ituality, their sublimity, their transcendent elevation of devotion, raise them above the comprehension, and above the standard of devotional feeling of ordi- nary Christians. It is a fact that Christians of de- ficient attainments often find themselves more edifi- ed in reading other books than the Bible, and really relish them more. But the higher Christians rise in gracious experience, the higher is their esteem for the pure word of God, until at length every human production becomes insipid in comparison therewith. As it certainly can have no good effect to promote, in the public mind, a preference of other books to the Bible, so it is conceived there can no good effect 1 arise from promoting in the public taste, a preference of other compositions to the Psalms the Holy Spirit hath inspired." The essay is excellent throughout, with two exceptions, and ministers severe rebuke to such writers as we now mention. The author con- founds the ordinance of psalmody and prayer; and. in his implied laying aside, for a time, the use of an inspired song to accommodate ignorance and a low state of grace, we think him incorrect. There is, we fear, too much of this coming down and staying down. In the case before us it is lamentably so. — The gran dour of the Book of God is intended to ele- vate the character of man ; it calls him up, as did ■ I ( 24 ) the voice which addressed the Apostle John, to en- large the compass of his view. All the depth on those divine songs cannot be fathomed, let us, how- ever, according to our depth, enjoy their salubrious 1 purity ; all the extent of divine excellence which ! they infold cannot at once be taken in by us, yet we are mistaken if more will not be had, by occupying this boundless field, than by hedging up the ignorant in the narrow and barren spot which his own little mind can cover. There too the Christian of advanc- ed grace must be fettered and must languish. Let us have the whole and advance from step to step, from field to field. Away with this belittering ac- commodation to ignorance and gracelessness from the church forever. Let her lengthen her cords and strengthen her stakes. A third general article of these little volumes mer- its attention: The proof that the church never was under any dispensation, confined to inspired songs. The author of the ' Hints' states it thus: " We are bold to assert that it is a right, or privilege, which the church has ever possessed, to enjoy in her praise the compositions of uninspired men, and that it now re- mains valid and sure." p. 28. With the author at Carlisle the writer of the ' Strictures' agrees in this. Now what is the evidence which gives such confi- dence ? Why, that Solomon wrote 1005 songs, one of which only has come down to us. This boastful scribe does not indeed condescend to tell whether the other 1004 songs, which he says, Lave not come down to us, were religious, inspired, philosophical, historical, or fanciful songs ; perhaps because he did not know. Let us then see his argument in due form. Solomon wrote 1005 songs, 1st Kings, 4, 32. But of 1004 of these songs, as to their character or use, we know nothing. Therefore, the ancient church used, in her praise, uninspired compositions ! This is argument, indeed. He, however, gives us more. " The titles of some of the psalms show that ( 25 ) there were others written by the same persons — A psalm of Asaph — a prayer of Moses — one out of ma- ny." This is the whole of the second proof. Ta- king his averment as all true, the argument is this : Moses and Asaph were inspired prophets. But they wrote many psalms for the use of the church ; there- fore the. church used in her praise compositions of uninspired men. Strong as these arguments are, he seems to hesitate a little in respect of their sufficien- cy, seeing 'these songs were never used by the church,' according to his own concession ! p. 29. The next proof of the position is taken from Isa. 38, 20. Hezekiah, he assures us, introduced unin- spired hymns of his own composition into the worship of the temple : We will sing my songs in the stringed instruments all the days of our life on the house of the Lord. As this scripture has been adduced by the predecessors of our authors, in this dispute, we shall examine what it proves. The whole proof of q human psalmody rests on the words, my songs, and the assumption that Hezekiah was not inspired. A right understanding of the word rendered, my songs, will settle the whole matter. Dr. Lowth renders the this scripture thus: " Therefore will we sing our ongs to the harp." The original is, uneginuthi nen- egen. Let it be literally rendered and it is, There- fore we will play upon my stringed instruments. — - There is no distinct word for songs ; but as the mu- sic was employed in subserviency to the song, the psalm is implied and is very properly brought into view in the translation. JVegen, to play upon an sn- irument, or harp, corresponds to th« Greek,