Whether or not the sentiments couched in, and expressed by,the language of the objection, be worthy of christian regard, I leave to the christian to decide; confident in the mean time, that, in the moment of serious reflexion, he will not contend, that the word of Christ, is, exclusively, restricted to the writings of the New Testament; that Psalms, and Hymns, and Spiritual Songs, are not to be found in the volume of inspiration; that the Apostle enjoins it on all, or on any, of the members of the Church, to commence hymn makers for her public worship; or, that there was some other way of access to God, for Old Testament saints, than by his Son, as Mediator.* Argu

words" ought to understand it, and understanding it, they ought not to contradict it. The attempt to puzzle, for a moment, an opponent will not justify us in teaching, that there has been, for sinners, a way of access to God, besides Jesus Christ; and, more especially, when it is considered, that such doctrine contradicts, in no very courtly manner, both the express word of God, and the symbol to which we have pledged our vow.

Before I dismiss this subject, I would, once more, call the reader's attention to this point, on which, the advocates of our little hymn books, expend no small portion of their breath; it is thus expressed by Mr Freeman: "There is no psalm of Das vid, in which we are directed to approach God in the duty of praise and thanksgiving, for the peculiar blessings of the gos. pel, in the name of Jesus Christ." What are the peculiar bles sings of the gospel? Are they not the redemption of the soul, a new heart, pardon of sin, communion with God, and assurance of a blessed immortality? He must indeed be very slightly ac † Freeman's Discourse, p. 6, and Latta's Pref. p. 7.

"

ments of the following description, cover the pages of the opposers of our Bible songs :-Under every dispensation of God, new favors have demanded and obtained a new song of praise; as in the case of Israel at the red sea; that of Deborah and Barak, of David and the prophets under the Old Testament; and, under the New Testament, the instances of Zecharias, Elizabeth, Mary, Simeon, and Anna, are all in point. The special providences which passed over them, authorized a special song. We must follow their examples, or be quainted with the Book of Psalms, who cannot find these subjects in its pages. It may be worth while to ask some of our friends, who chime so frequently and so long, on the words, "offering praise in the name of Christ," what they precisely intend by the expression. Is it, that, from a sense of our unwor thiness, and out of gratitude to God for all his benefits, we approach his throne through he mediation of the Savior and viewing that Savior, as placed at the head of the economy of salvation, out of regard to his authority, receive and observe his institutions; thus exercising. in all our deportment, a habitual reliance upon him for acceptance, before the Father, as he sustains the claims of the Godhead? Views, and exercises such as these, run through, and constitute, the spirit of the Book of Psalms. Nothing less would be consistent with the system of Grace; the Holy Ghost, who operated upon the hearts of the subjects of grace, and indited those spiritual songs, understood well the scheme of mercy; and on no other scheme could he direct them to God. But will it be contended that the express words, and letters, constituting the sounds, in the name of Jesus, or for Chists' sake, are necessary to evangelical songs of praise? How many, I demand, of those imitations and bymns, which have succeeded in banishing the inspired Psalus, because of this supposed defect, have supplied it? Count the number, and tell us how many; then atone for the quibble by, at least, a secret blush of generous sha me.

destitute of appropriate matter of praise. Thus they declaim, and they call it argument. But will it bear examination? I submit the following remarks. :)

According to the spirit of this objection, as every new favor demands a new song, a psalm whether of divine or human composition, can be only once appropriately used. This, however, our objecting friends do not act upon themselves; for they use the same hymn of tener than once; though no two circumstances be precisely the same. Consistency, on the principle of the exception, would lead to the preclusion of a psalm, or hymn book alto, gether. Every day brings its new mercies, and of course should bring its new song.-Nay; every individual has his special favors, and should produce his special hymn! But disorderly as Zion now is, still more disorderly would her assemblies be, were our brethren consistent with themselves.

The objectors should prove that such expressions of devout sensibility, as those of Zecharias, Mary, &c. were intended to be introduced as models, according to which, our New Testament Zion should, in future times, be sup

plied with sacred songs. This has been said, and with confidence too; but it has not been proved. No person doubts that gratitude is due, on the reception of divine mercies, or, that this devout feeling should be suitably ex. pressed; but, certainly, this proves nothing for a human system, or collection of songs in our public praise. Again, observe, that

Those who composed the public songs of Zion, were not only inspired; but were also under the special influence of the Spirit of inspiration, in that service. Their compositions were accordingly,not only embodied with the sacred scriptures; but were also distinctly collected into a Book of Psalms. When our modest brethren shall have substantiated their claims to similar qualifications and appointments, it will be soon enough for us to confess the legitimacy of their productions, to a place beside, or above, the scripture songs. I demand a proof from the word of God, that, with divine approbation, a hymn of human composure was, under any dispensation of grace, admitted into the Psalmody of the Church. Let the friends of innovation establish this, or tell us, how they will free themselves from the

charge, of being advocates of will-worship. Again, it is thus objected;

The scripture psalms are abrogated: they were adapted to the ceremonial rites, and so intimately connected with, and founded on them, that they have no being beyond the ce remonial institutions themselves. The fact, that the Old Testament Church had a form of Psalmody adapted to her state, proves that we should have one suitable to the condition of the New Testament dispensation.

This objection, as Dr. Ridgely shews us in his system of Divinity, sets aside the reading of the Book of Psalms in our day; for if it be unfit for us to sing it,. it is no less so to read it. There is no essential difference between the dispositions of mind, requisite to reading and singing.The same ends are, substantially, to be sought by the one and the other. Nay, every part of scripture, whether of Old or New Testament, that alludes to the peculiar forms of Israelitish worship, must be expunged as unprofitable. Jesus as the Lamb of God, and as the bread of life; Christ as our passover, sacrificed for us; as our High Priest, having entered within the vail; and the representation of our devotions,