inspiration, we are not to consider the subject-matter thereof, as
always expressive of the frame of our own spirits, or denoting the
dispensations of providence, which we, or the church of God are, at
present exercised with. This is necessary in order to our singing with
understanding; and it may be inferred from what is observed under the
second of those heads, before laid down, relating to the agreement which
there is between singing and reading any of David’s psalms.
It must be allowed by all, that we ought to have the same acts of faith
in one, as we have in the other. This is evident from all composures in
prose or verse, whether divine or human. If the subject-matter be
historical, whatever the form be in which it is laid down, the principal
things to be considered are, those matters of fact which are therein
related. If an history be written in prose, and the same should be
turned into verse; its being laid down in the form of a poem, though it
adds something of beauty to the mode of expression, yet the ideas, that
are conveyed thereby, or the historical representation of things, are
the same as though they had not been written in verse. It may be, the
reading the same history in verse, may add something of pleasure and
delight to those ideas which we have of it, in like manner as singing,
according to the third head before mentioned, is a distinct ordinance
from reading (though the matter be the same, as it respects the exciting
the affections;) yet this does not give us different ideas of it; much
less are we to take occasion from thence, to apply those things to
ourselves that are spoken of others; unless parallel circumstances
require it. If this rule be not observed, I do not see how we can sing
many of the psalms of David. Sometimes the subject-matter thereof is not
agreeable to every age of life, or the universal experience of
particular persons. It would be very preposterous for a child, in
singing those words, _I have been young, and now am old; yet have I not
seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging bread_, Psal. xxxvii.
25. or what is elsewhere said; _Now also, when I am old and gray-headed,
O God, forsake me not_, Psal. lxxi. 18. to apply them, in particular to
himself. And when some other psalms are sung in a public assembly, in
which God’s people are represented as dejected, disconsolate, and, as it
were, sinking in the depths of despair; as when the Psalmist says, _My
soul refused to be comforted. I remembered God, and was troubled; I
complained, and my spirit was overwhelmed_, Psal. lxxvii. 2, 3. and
elsewhere, _I am counted with them that go down into the pit. Thy wrath
lieth hard upon me. While I suffer thy terrors, I am distracted_, Psal.
lxxxviii. 4, 7, 15. This cannot be applied to every particular person in
a worshipping assembly; as denoting that frame of spirit in which he is,
at present, any more than those expressions which we meet with
elsewhere, which speak of a believer, as having full assurance of God’s
love to him, and his right and title to eternal life; as when it is
said, _Thou shalt guide me with thy counsel, and afterward receive me to
glory_, Psal. lxxiii. 24. can be applied to those who are in a dejected,
despairing, or unbelieving frame of spirit.
And those psalms which contain an historical account of some particular
dispensations of providence towards the church of old, cannot be applied
to it in every age, or to the circumstances of every believer; as when
it is said, _By the rivers of Babylon there we sat down; yea, we wept
when we remembered Zion_, Psal. cxxxvii. 1. This is not to be considered
as what is expressive of our own case, when we are, in the present day,
singing that psalm, Or, when, on the other hand, the church is
represented as praising God for particular deliverances, as in Psal.
cvii. or expressing its triumphs in the victories obtained over its
enemies, as in Psal. cxlix. these are not to be applied, by particular
persons, to themselves; especially at all times. And when the Psalmist
makes use of those phrases which are adapted to the ceremonial law, as
when he speaks of _binding the sacrifice with cords, even unto the horns
of the altar_, Psal. cxviii. 27. or elsewhere, of their _offering
bullocks upon it_, Psal. li. 19. this cannot be taken in a literal
sense, when applied to the gospel-state. And when we are exhorted to
_praise God with the psaltery_, &c. Psal. cl. we are to express those
acts of faith which are agreeable to the present gospel-dispensation,
which we are under; and the general rule, which is applicable to all
psalms of the like nature, is, that with the same frame of spirit with
which we read them, we ought to sing them. Sometimes we are to consider
the subject-matter of them, as containing an account of those
providences which we are liable to, rather than those which we are, at
present, under; or what we desire, or fear, rather than experience; and
improve them so as to excite those graces which ought to be exercised in
like circumstances, when it shall please God to bring us under them.
With this frame of spirit the psalms of David are to be sung, as well as
read; otherwise we shall be obliged to exclude several of them as not
fit to be used in gospel-worship, which I would assert nothing that
should give the least countenance to,[22] any more than I would affirm
that such-like psalms are not to be read in public assemblies.
_Obj._ 1. To what has been said concerning our using David’s psalms in
singing the praises of God, it is objected, that some of them contain
such imprecation, or desires, that God would destroy his enemies, Psal.
lv. 15. and lix. 13-15. and lxix. 22-25, 27, 28. as are inconsistent
with the spirit of the gospel, or that love which we are, therein,
obliged to express towards our enemies, agreeably to the command and
practice of the holy Jesus, Matt. v. 44, 46. Luke xxiii. 34.
Before I proceed to a direct answer to this objection, it may be
observed, that this is generally alleged, by the Deists, with a design
to cast a reproach on divine revelation; and from hence they take
occasion, outrageously to inveigh against David, as though he was of a
malicious and implacable spirit; upon which account they will hardly
allow him to have been a good man, since these, and such-like
imprecations of the wrath of God on the church’s enemies, are reckoned
by them no other than the effects of his passion and hatred of them; and
therefore it is a preposterous thing to suppose, that his psalms were
given by divine inspiration.
And there are others, to wit, some among the Socinians, who give a
different turn to such-like expressions; and pretend, that under the Old
Testament dispensation, it was not unlawful for persons to hate their
enemies, or curse, or imprecate the wrath of God upon them, whereas, our
Saviour thought fit, under the New Testament-dispensation, to command
what was directly contrary thereunto. That it was formerly lawful, they
argue from what is said in Matt. v. 43. _Ye have heard that it hath been
said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy._ And the new
Commandment which he substituted in the room thereof, is contained in
the following words, in which he obliges them, to _love their enemies_,
&c. But this is a gross mistake of the sense of that scripture, which
speaks of _hating_ their _enemies_; since our Saviour does not, in
mentioning it, design to refer to any thing said in the Old Testament,
but only to expose the corrupt gloss of the Scribes and Pharisees, given
on some passages contained therein. Therefore, we must conclude, that it
was equally unlawful to hate our enemies before, as it is now, under the
gospel-dispensation. These things I could not but premise, before we
come to a direct answer to this objection; and, if what is contained
therein were true, it would certainly be unlawful to sing David’s
psalms; yet, at the same time, it would be a very difficult matter, to
substitute any hymns and songs in their room, which would be altogether
unexceptionable; and then the ordinance of singing would be effectually
overthrown.
_Answ._ But to this it may be replied; that the words being spoken by
David, under divine inspiration, some of those scriptures referred to,
may, agreeably to the rules of grammar, be understood as a prediction of
those judgments which God would execute on his implacable enemies;
especially when the word, that is supposed in the objection, to contain
the form of an imprecation, is put in the _future tense_, as it often
is. And if it be put in the _imperative mood_, as in other places, in
which it is said, _Let death seize on them; let them go down quick into
hell; let them be blotted out of the book of the living_; this mode of
speaking, especially when applied to God, contains an intimation of what
he would do, or the wrath which he would pour forth, as a punishment of
sin, committed, persisted in, and not repented of. And, indeed, in one
of these psalms, _viz._ Psal. lxix. in which the righteous judgments of
God are denounced against sinners, the Psalmist plainly speaks in the
person of our Saviour, to whom the 9th and 21st verses are expressly
applied in the New Testament, John ii. 17. Matt. xxvii. 34. Therefore,
when he says, ver. 22. _Let their table become a snare_, the meaning is,
that God would deny some of his furious and implacable enemies, that
grace, which alone could prevent their waxing worse and worse under
outward prosperity. And when he says, ver. 23. _Let their eyes be
darkened_; the meaning is, they shall be given up to judicial blindness,
as the Jews were; the providence of God permitting, though not effecting
it. And when it is said, ver. 23. _Pour out thine indignation upon
them_, it is an intimation that this should come to pass. And, in ver.
25. _Let their habitation be desolate_; the meaning is, that the land,
in which they dwelt, should be destitute of its former inhabitants, and
so contains a prediction of the desolate state of the Jewish nation,
after they were destroyed, and driven out of their country by the
Romans. And when he farther says, _Add iniquity to their iniquity_; this
may be accounted for consistently with the divine perfections, and the
sense thereof is not liable to any just exception; as has been observed
elsewhere. This I only mention, to shew that it is not necessary to
suppose that these imprecations are always to be understood as what will
warrant, or give countenance to private persons to wish, or pray for the
destruction of their enemies.
Moreover, if the evil denounced be of a temporal nature; as when the
Psalmist is represented as desiring that his enemies may be _consumed as
the stubble before the wind_, or as _the wood that fire burneth_, Psal.
lxxxiii. 13, 14. these are not the desires of one who meditates private
revenge, or wishes to see the ruin of those whom he hates. But they
contain the language of the church of God in general, as acquiescing in
his righteous judgments, which should be poured forth on those that hate
him, and persecute his people; and, if either the church must be ruined,
or those that set themselves against it, removed out of the way, they
cannot but desire the latter, rather than the former. If such
expressions be thus understood, there would be no sufficient reason for
that exception that is taken against the book of the psalms; nor will
any one have just occasion to lay aside a part of them, as what cannot
be sung by a Christian congregation.
_Object._ 2. It is farther objected, that if singing could be proved to
be an ordinance, to be used by particular persons; it will not follow
from thence, that the whole congregation ought to join with their voices
together. It is sufficient if one person sings, and others make melody
in their hearts; whereas, united voices in singing, will occasion
confusion in the worship of God; and, when a mixed multitude join in
this ordinance, it can hardly be supposed that they, all of them, sing
with the spirit, and with the understanding also. Therefore, if one
should sing, it is sufficient for them who are qualified to join in this
ordinance, to say, Amen; or, to have their hearts engaged therein; as
they have who join in public prayer, in which, one is the mouth of the
whole assembly.
_Answ._ To this it may be replied;
[1.] That to insinuate that singing with united voices, is confusion, is
to cast a great reproach on that worship which we often read of in
scripture, which was performed in this manner. Thus Moses and the
children of Israel sang the praises of God upon the occasion of their
deliverance from the Egyptians, in Exod. xvi. 1. which was certainly an
act of public worship, not performed by Moses alone, but by the whole
congregation.
And, in the New Testament, there is a very remarkable example of singing
with united voices, our Saviour himself being present, Mark xiv. 26.
thus it is said, that he and his disciples _sang an hymn_. The word is
in the plural number[23]; therefore they all joined with their voices in
singing; and some observe, that it is not without design that it is
said, _He_, that is, Christ, _blessed the bread_, and _He gave thanks_,
Mat. xxvi. 26, 27. they only joining with him in their hearts, as the
congregation joins with the minister, who is their mouth in public
prayer. But when he speaks of the ordinance of singing, they all join
with their voices therein; and therefore, the word, as was but now
observed, is in the plural number, ver. 30.
[2.] As to that part of the objection, which respects the congregation’s
joining in the heart, with one that sings with the voice, in like manner
as we do in prayer; let it be considered, that though he that joins with
the heart, with another that prays, may be said to perform the duty of
prayer, though he does not express his desires with his own voice; yet
joining with the heart, while one only sings, cannot properly speaking,
be called singing; much less singing with the voice, or singing with a
loud voice, as it is often expressed in scripture. The apostle, indeed,
speaks of _singing and making melody in our hearts, to the Lord_, Eph.
v. 19. which, in some measure, seems to favour the objection. And it is
inferred from hence, that, if one sings with the voice, others may make
melody in the heart. But I take the meaning of that scripture to be
this; the apostle is pressing the church to sing, that is, to make
melody to the Lord; and, that this ordinance may be performed in a right
manner, the heart ought to go along with the voice; hereby intimating,
that there ought not only to be a melodious sound, by which the praises
of God are sung, but, together with this, suitable acts of faith ought
to be put forth, whereby we worship him with our hearts, as well as our
voices. This does not therefore prove, that the melody here spoken of,
only respects the frame of spirit, as excluding the use of the voice in
singing.
[3.] As to what is objected against the inexpediency of joining in
singing, with a mixed multitude, in which, some must be supposed to want
two necessary qualifications for singing, namely, the Spirit and
understanding; this is to join in the external ordinance, where there is
no harmony, as to the internal frame of spirit, or the exercise of
faith, which alone makes it pleasing to God.
To this it may be replied; that, if a mixed multitude may join together
in prayer, and particularly the Psalms of David, may be read in the
public congregation; though, perhaps, there are many present who do not
understand the meaning of every particular phrase used therein: yet it
does not follow, that because we do not fully understand the Psalms of
David, therefore they ought not to be sung by us. We have before
observed, that there is no essential difference, especially as to what
concerns the frame of our spirit, between singing and reading[24].
Therefore it follows, that whatever psalm may be read, may be sung. He
that is not qualified for the latter is not qualified for the former.
The apostle, indeed, speaks of his _praying_ and _singing with the
Spirit_, as well as _with the understanding_; but the meaning of that
is, that we ought to desire the efficacious influences of the Spirit,
and press after the knowledge of the meaning of the words we use, either
in prayer or singing; yet the defect of our understanding, or having a
less degree thereof than others, or, than we ought to have, does not
exempt us from a right to engage in this ordinance. Therefore, we are
not to refuse to join with those in singing the praises of God, whom we
would not exclude from our society, if we were reading any of the Psalms
of David in public.
(5.) We are now to consider the matter to be sung. There are very few
who allow singing to be an ordinance, that will deny it to be our duty
to sing the Psalms of David, and other spiritual songs, which we
frequently meet with in scripture. Some, indeed, have contested the
expediency of a Christian assembly’s making use of several Old
Testament-phrases, that are contained therein. And others have alleged,
that the phrase ought to be altered in many instances, (especially in
those which have a peculiar reference to the Psalmist’s personal
circumstances,) and others substituted in their room, which are matter
of universal experience. But, if what has been said under the last head,
be true, this argument will appear to have less weight in it; inasmuch
as all the arguments that are brought in defence of making these
alterations in the Psalms, as they are to be sung by us, will equally
hold good, as applicable to the ordinance of reading them, and, it may
be, will as much evince the necessity of altering the phrase of
scripture, in several other parts thereof, as well as in these, if what
has been said under the second head be allowed of. For it will follow
from thence, that if some psalms are not to be sung by a Christian
assembly, in the words in which they were at first delivered, and
consequently are not to be read by them; because the phrase thereof is
not agreeable to the state of the Christian church; and therefore it is
to be altered, when applied to our present use; the same may be said
concerning other parts of scripture; and then the word of God, as it was
at first given to us, is no more to be read, than to be sung by us[25].
As to what is objected concerning the inexpediency of our making use of
those words, and applying them to our case, in our devotions, that David
used in his, with a peculiar view to his own condition. What has been
said under the fourth head, relating to the frame of spirit with which
the psalms are to be sung, will very much weaken the force of it; and
this is what, in a great measure, determines my sentiments as to the
ordinance of conjoint singing, as well as the matter of it; for, I am
well persuaded, that if the words were to be considered as our own, (as
they ought to be, when joining with another, who is our mouth, to God in
prayer,) there are very few psalms, or hymns of human composure, that
can be sung by a mixed assembly. But as a divine veneration ought to be
paid to the psalms, and they are to be read with those acts of faith
which are the main ingredients in our devotions; we are to sing them
with the same view, only with this difference; as making use of the tone
of the voice, as a farther help to the raising our affections therein,
as has been before observed.
The next thing to be considered is, what version of the Psalms is to
have the preference in our esteem, as it is subservient to the design of
this ordinance. It is not my business, under this head, to criticise on
the various versions of the Psalms; nor can it be supposed, that I have
a regard to those poetical beauties in which one version exceeds
another; for then I should be inclined to think some of them, which I do
not make use of in the ordinance of singing, much preferable to others,
for the exactness of their style and composure. But when I am singing
the praises of God, in, or as near as I can to, the words of David, or
any other inspired writer; that which I principally regard is, the
agreeableness of the version to the original; and then they may be sung
with the same frame of spirit with which they are to be read; and I am
not obliged in singing, to consider the words as expressive of my own
frame of spirit, any more than I am in reading them. But if the
composure cannot properly be called a version, but an imitation of
David’s Psalms, then I make use of it in the ordinance of singing, with
the same view as I would an hymn; of which, more hereafter[26].
The versions which, I think, come nearest to the original, are the
New-England and the Scots; the latter of which, I think, much preferable
to the former; inasmuch as the sentences are not so transposed in this,
as in the other, and the lines are much more smooth and pleasant to be
read. I should be very glad to see a version more perfect, that comes as
near the sense of the original, and excels it in the beauty or elegancy
of style. And it would be a very great advantage if some marginal notes
were added, as a comment upon it; which would be a help to our right
understanding thereof.
I shall now give my thoughts concerning the singing of hymns. These,
according to the common acceptation of the word, are distinguished from
psalms, and they generally denote a human composure, fitted for singing;
the matter whereof, contains some divine subjects, in words agreeable
to, or deduced from scripture. The arguments that are generally brought
in defence thereof, are, that though scripture be a rule of faith, from
whence all the knowledge of divine things is primarily deduced; and
therefore it has the preference, as to the excellency and authority
thereof, to any other composure; yet it is not only lawful, but
necessary to express our faith in the doctrines contained therein, in
other words, as we do in prayer or preaching. Therefore, if it be a duty
to praise God with the voice, it is not unlawful to praise him in words
agreeable to scripture, as well as in the express words thereof;
accordingly it is argued, that both may be proved to be a duty, _viz._
praising God in the words of David, and by other songs contained in
scripture, and praising him in words agreeable thereunto, though of
human composure. This is the best method of reasoning that I have met
with in defence of the lawfulness of singing hymns, not as opposed to,
or excluding David’s Psalms, but as used occasionally, as providence
directs us; that so our acknowledgments of benefits received, may be
insisted on with greater enlargement than they are in the book of
Psalms; wherein, though it may be, there is something adapted to every
case, yet the particular occasion of our praise is not so largely
contained in the same section or paragraph; and therefore an hymn may be
composed on that occasion, in order to our praising God thereby. But,
when on the other hand, persons seem to prefer hymns to David’s Psalms,
and substitute them in the room thereof, I cannot but disapprove of
their practice.