than the Psalms, and that, therefore, they could sing the former more intelligently. To all such I say-compare this latest effort of hymn compilers with the Psalms of David, and for ever hold your peace. In one of the hymns you will find at the end of each verse, this line, "Blessed Son of Mary, hear." I know not whether this song will be often sung, to me it would have an awkward ring in a Presbyterian Church. Has not the Church of Rome grievously sinned against the Most High, by offering idol worship to the mother of our Lord. In view of this fact is it not the plain duty of the Church of God, in so far at least as their worship is concerned, to say of her, though highly favoured among women, as did Jesus himself, "Woman, what have we to do with thee?" A United Presbyterian friend informs me that this hymn was omitted in the proof copies, from which I infer that the compilers themselves did not altogether like it. In point of real poetic feeling and expression, there are no hymns in the book finer than two from the pen of Sir Walter Scott, which appear also in the former hymn book. One is the hymn of Rebecca, the Jewess, from the novel of Ivanhoe, beginning, "When Israel, of the Lord beloved, Out of the land of bondage came, An awful guide in smoke and flame." The other, from the Lay of the Last Minstrel, beginning, "That day of wrath, that dreadful day, Of these, however, and most of the others, I think it may safely be said, that we have the same ideas better expressed in the book of Psalms. The writer of these two beautiful songs certainly never intended that they should be used in the worship of God. He has left on record his intense admiration of our metrical translation of the Psalms, and his earnest wish that it should not be altered. Again, I object to the use of hymns because they practically oust the Psalms from the service of praise. Dr. Lee, to whom I have already referred, published some years ago a book of praise, still used in the Greyfriars congregation. It is composed of hymns and some portions of the psalms. In a few introductory remarks in the book he takes credit for leaving out parts of the Psalms which he says are didactic (a reason we should have thought for retaining them) or Jewish in their tone; or are more strictly prayers. (Why should It is they be left out?) He also wishes our worship more refined. curious to mark the Psalms which in his wisdom he would leave out, the 14th, for example, beginning, "That there is not a God the fool." Now, on turning to the 53d Psalm, which he also omits, we find that the words of it are nearly the same as the 14th. The sacred penman, therefore, has thought it doubly worthy of insertion. Why should Dr. Lee wish to omit it? Is it not refined enough for him? or is it because the plain story there of the fallen state of man, will not square with the easy Arminian doctrines prevalent in the school which he represented? The same may be said of the 101st Psalm, which he also omits. Turning now to the 119th we find him putting in, as worthy to be sung, 48 single verses, leaving out 84. Now let any man calmly read that beautiful Psalm. I am persuaded he will find every line of it immeasurably superior for purposes of praise, to nine-tenths of the hymns which are now set up alongside of it. And do not the children of God see tender sacred memories clustering round these songs of Zion? Far up into the dim distant past, do we not hear them sung by God's ancient people at times a plaintive cry for help and deliverance :-"O God, why hast thou cast us off for ever? why doth thine anger smoke against the sheep of thy pasture? Remember thy congregation which thou hast purchased of old: this Mount Zion wherein thou hast dwelt ;" and anon a tumultuous song of confidence and praise, "When the Lord turned again the captivity of Zion we were like them that dream. Then was our mouth filled with laughter, and our tongue with singing; then said they among the heathen, The Lord hath done great things for them." Again, are not these songs interwoven with the whole history of the Church in our land? Calderwood tells us that three hundred years ago, our King, at the urgent entreaty of the inhabitants of this city, ordered the return from banishment of John Durie, one of their ministers. He was met at the gate by a multitude of the people, who escorted him to the great Kirk singing as they went, "Now Israel May say, and that truly, If that the Lord Had not our cause maintained; If that the Lord Had not our right sustained, The raging streams, With their proud swelling waves, O'erwhelmed in the deep. But blessed be God, Who doth us safely keep." The people were much moved themselves, says the historian, and so were all the beholders. The Duke of Lennox (then ruling in the city) was more afraid at that sight than at any thing that he had ever seen before in Scotland. Again, when our fathers were shortly afterwards engaged in a death struggle against Popery in the Church and tyranny in the State, did they not cheer themselves with these very Psalms that we have so often sung? And to come down to our own day, have we not heard many of the children of God refreshing themselves with these songs of Zion? Some of them have crossed the river. Under the guidance of the great Captain of Salvation, they have reached their desired haven. They are in through the gates into the city, and stand before the throne, dazzled for a while, it may be, with its exceeding brightness. Think you, will they at times sing one of the old songs? If it should be our lot to reach that happy shore, our hearts will be in tune to join them as of yore; yes, and in the New Song of the Zion above, we shall recognise the hand of that God who indited our songs in the Zion below. We say then to all who differ from us in this matter, Choose ye how ye will praise the Lord, as for us we can say, "Thy statutes, yes, Thy statutes, and in the very words which Thou Thyself hast inspired, will be our songs, in the house of our pilgrimage." In connection with this subject, I would recommend all, especially young men, to read a book published by the late Dr. James Gibson of Glasgow, entitled, "The Public Worship of God: its Authority and Modes." In regard to music, I hope we are all prepared to give it its due place; no doubt there is room for improvement in some of our congregations. In this, as in all matters pertaining to the service of God we should endeavour to give no occasion to others to find fault. We must, however, guard against the idea, that fine cultivated music alone will make praise acceptable to God. As has been well said, "emotion is not devotion." Why, I have heard music. In lofty cathedral, surrounded by all that art could do to adorn the house of God, amid incense smoke and prostration of assembled worshippers, I have heard a choral song, which filled the breast with emotion, and the knees with trembling, and which will linger in my ears as long as life itself shall last. As one has said, the voice of seraph before the throne alone, could strike a higher note, and yet this praise was offered by that Church, whom the Lord has assured us He will destroy with the brightness of His coming. Yes, and in synagogue at close of day, when the Jewish Sabbath had begun, I have heard the daughters of Judah sending forth a cheerful voice, singing loud to God their strength; and as memory recalled their painful history, theirs was truly a heart moving song; but ah, they have rejected the Messiah, promised to their fathers; what wisdom therefore is in them? Again, in a humble Church adorned only by an assembly of believing worshippers, I have heard a song of inexpressible sweetness, it was a song of love, and it seemed as if in that sanctuary the goings of our God were to be seen, and His steps of majesty. It seemed as if God was there worshipped in spirit and in truth, which we must believe is a sacrifice acceptable and well pleasing to Him. As has been well said by our own poet,— "Compared with this how poor religion's pride, In all the pomp of method and of art, May hear well pleased the language of the soul, In connection with music, you will no doubt have noticed frequently, advertisements to the effect, that in a certain Church, what might be called a sacred concert would be given, consisting of organ recitals, selections from well-known oratorios, or it may be from musical masses composed by Mozart and others. As you may have noticed from the words, the most sacred mysteries of our faith are spoken of on these occasions. As no one pretends that these meetings are held for the praise of God, but rather for recreation or amusement, I do not think that our principles will allow us to countenance them. In passing from this part of my subject, I shall read to you the following sentences from Romaine's works, which I think are in entire harmony with our views. "Harmony in sound is pleasant in our ears, but harmony in affection is the music which enters into the ears of the Lord of Hosts. 'My son, give me thine heart,' He will have no service without it. I have scarce ever seen a congregation in which every one joined in singing. This is a very great abuse, because it is defeating the end of God's institution, He commanded Psalms to be sung for mutual edification. It was to be the service of the whole Church, all were to join, whereas among us it is performed by some few, and they are sometimes set by themselves in a singing gallery, or in a corner of the Church, where they sing to be admired for their fine voices, and others hear them for entertainment. This a vile prostitution of Church music, and contrary to the letter and spirit both of the Old and the New Testament. We know from profane history that the first Christians, in their meetings, sung the praises of Jesus their God; and Jerome says, you might have heard the ploughmen and reapers in the fields singing Psalms, yea, several of them could repeat the whole book in Hebrew. In the time of Justin Martyr, instrumental music was abolished, and he highly recommends singing with the voice. St. Augustine makes it a high crime in certain heretics, that they sung hymns composed by human wit. Dr. Watts saidFar be it from my thoughts to lay aside the book of Psalms in public worship, it is the most artful, most devotional, and divine collection of poesy, and nothing can be supposed more proper to raise a pious soul to heaven, than some parts of that book." A word or two now as to our postures in the service of God. Kneeling and standing at prayer are both spoken of in the word of God. Kneeling, however, especially at the sacrament of the supper, has been abused, as we gather from the fact, that this was one of the five superstitious articles of Perth which King James strove to foist on the Church, and which our fathers strenuously opposed. Standing at prayer certainly is a more seemly posture than the present growing habit of sitting. In Crookshank's history we read that during the time of the persecution in the reign of James VII. in Dumfriesshire, "when any of the people were prevailed with to take the ensnaring oaths, the managers likewise obliged them to promise to stand at the singing of the Doxology." We infer from this that sitting during praise, as we do now, was the practice of our fathers; and we see no good reason for changing it. The following quotation from Dr. Lee's book is worth attention, especially as coming from one who did his utmost to overturn the usual practice of the Church. He says, "From the liturgies of Basil and Chrysostom, it plainly appears that during the early centuries of Christianity, standing at prayer was the rule, and kneeling the exception. The same view is supported by Grotius, and lately by Dean Stanley." The Popish custom of having stained glass windows, with pictures of our Saviour, is now very general, and seems in our day to be tolerated in all the Presbyterian Churches, except our own. I think it is most reprehensible, and one which we could not consistently allow. The newspapers a few days ago chronicled the fact that a stained glass window had just been put into the Free Church, Melrose, with pictures of the Adoration and the Ascension. The window is in memory of Sir David Brewster; and, oddly enough, his portrait figures in the picture of the Adoration as one of the wise men. The bad taste of this latter idea is surely apparent to every one. In reference to this window a temperate, well-written letter appeared in the Scotsman of 29th October, and as it represents to some extent my ideas |
