Chapter 10: The Manner of Singing

The fourth and last head of Scruples remaineth, touching the manner of Singing: concerning which a threefold Scruple ariseth.

1. Whether it be lawful to sing Psalms in Meter devised by men?

2. Whether in Tunes invented?

3. Whether it be lawful in Order to Singing, to read the Psalm?

The two former of these Scruples, because they stand upon one and the same ground, may fitly be handled together.

The judgment of the Churches of Christ in these Points, is doubtless suitable to their Practice, That it is lawful to sing Psalms in English verses (which run in number, measure, and meter) and in such grave and melodious tunes, as do well befit both the holiness and gravity of the matter, and the capacity of the Singers.

A double ground or reason may be given hereof: The former is this; If it be lawful to translate and turn the Hebrew Bible into English Prose in order to reading, then it is lawful also to translate and turn David's Hebrew Psalms, and verse into our English Psalms and Verse, in order to Singing. But the former of these, is a confessed Truth, and generally received among Protestants; except only Mr. Smith, who had a singular conceit in this Point, That all Letters in the writings of the old Testament were typical (typing out the Law written in our hearts:) and therefore would have all reading of the holy Scripture to be abolished under the New Testament. But Christ himself commanded his Disciples to search the Scriptures (John 5:39). And how shall they search them, except they read them? And the noble Bereans are commended for searching the Scriptures, in the examining of Paul's Doctrine (Acts 17:11, 12), which how could they have done without reading? And therefore did all the Apostles and Evangelists write the New Testament in Greek? a language of all more generally known than the Latin, and therefore much more than any other in the world, as Tully himself testifies Pro Archià Poetà: was it not for this end, that the New Testament might be read, and generally understood of all Nations? And where it was not understood, there it might most easily be translated out of a language well known to the several language of every Nation? And as for the old Testament, it was translated to their hands out of the Hebrew into Greek almost three hundred years before the Apostles' times. Yes, therefore did God commit the whole Counsel of his will and word to writing, for the edification and salvation of all his people, but that it might be read and understood of them all? If then it be the holy will of God, that the Hebrew Scriptures should be translated into English Prose in order to reading, then it is in like sort his holy will, that the Hebrew Psalms (which are Poems and Verses) should be translated into English Poems and Verses in order to Singing.

The Consequence is evident and undeniable. For presupposing that God would have the Scriptures read of English men as well as of other Nations, then as a necessary means to that end, he would have the Scriptures translated into the English Tongue, that English People might be able to read them. In like sort, presupposing that God would have the Psalms of David, and other Scripture-Psalms to be sung of English men, (as has been evinced above in the second Point) then as a necessary means to that end, he would have Scripture-Psalms (which are Poems and Verses) to be translated into English Psalms (which are in like sort Poems and Verses) that English People might be able to sing them. Now as all Verses in all Poems do consist of a certain number, and measure of Syllables; so do our English Verses (as they do in some other Nations) run in meter also, which make the Verses more easy for memory, and fit for melody.

A second ground of this Point is this: If it be not lawful to translate Hebrew Psalms (which are Verses) into English Verses, which run in number, measure, and meter of syllables: then it is not lawful to express the elegancy of the Original language in a translation; for it is an artificial elegancy which the holy pen-men of Scripture used that they penned the Psalms, and such like Poetical books of Scriptures not in prose, (which men use in common speech) but in verses, which observe a certain number and measure of syllables, and some of them run in meter also, as those know that know the Hebrew, and as Buxtorf shows in his Thesaur. pag. 629. Now surely then it were a sacrilegious niceness, to think it unlawful lively to express all the artificial elegancies of the Hebrew Text, so far as we are able to imitate the same in a translation. Yes, doubtless it were a part of due faithfulness in a Translator, as to declare the whole Counsel of God, word for word; so to express lively every elegancy of the Holy Ghost (as much as the vulgar language can reach) that so the People of God may be kindly affected, as well with the manner, as with the matter of the holy Scriptures.

And for the English Tunes that we use in singing of Psalms, take this for a ground; Since God has commanded us to sing Psalms and Hymns and spiritual Songs, and among others, those of David: and yet withal has hid from us the Hebrew Tunes, and the musical Accents wherewith the Psalms of David were wont to be sung. It must needs be that the Lord allows us to sing them in any such grave, and solemn, and plain Tunes, as do fitly suit the gravity of the matter, the solemnity of God's worship, and the capacity of a plain People. As, to instance in a like case, when the Lord instituted the Paschal Supper, and therein a whole Lamb to be eaten, the head, feet, and appurtenances, and made no mention what drink they should use in it, whether wine, or water, or beer, or other liquor; It was therefore left to their liberty, to use any such liquor as they were wont to drink fit for such meat as was to be eaten, and for such stomachs as were to feed upon it: So here when the Lord appointed us to sing David's Psalms, and does not appoint us in what Tunes, He therefore plainly leaves us to our liberty, to make use of such Tunes as are suitable to such an Ordinance and to them that partake in it.

Object. 1. It will not follow, that because the word is to be dispensed in a known tongue, and so translated into it, therefore Hebrew Songs into English Song. For the former, we have the warrant of the Word to dispense it for edification, exhortation and comfort; but no word for the other, nor no gifts of that kind given for the Churches profit, to dispense the word this way. Such Songs therefore, and such Tunes (which are called grave Church-Tunes) are not of God. Nor do I believe that the Levites invented any New Tunes, I have no faith to believe that ever God entrusted man's corrupt nature, to frame any thing in God's worship to his praise. But suppose God had so far honored the worldly Singers then; yet it will not follow, that the Lord Jesus allows us the like liberty now. He will not now allow any flesh to boast in his presence, who is not able to bring to pass so much as a good thought.

Answ. To weaken the argument for translating Hebrew Songs into English Songs and Tunes, taken from the like warrant of translating Hebrew Scriptures into English Scriptures; this objection denies, that we have either the like word, or the like gift, or the like liberty. Whereto our answer is, we have all alike equally.

For 1. that we have the like word for singing Hebrew Songs, has been proved above, out of (Colossians 3:16 & Ephesians 5:19). And the same word that commands us to sing them, commands us also the translation of Hebrew Songs into English Songs, as a necessary means to the acceptable singing of them. For if we should sing Hebrew Songs in the Hebrew tongue, the People (the body of the Church) should sing without understanding, which were directly contrary to the Apostle's Direction (1 Corinthians 14:15).

2. That we have also the like gift of translating Hebrew Songs into English Songs, as well as Hebrew Prose into English Prose, is evident by the event. For we have not only as many but more Translations of the Hebrew Psalms into English Psalms, than of the Hebrew Bible into the English Bible.

If it be said, such a gift of translating Hebrew Songs into English Songs, is but a poetical gift, not a spiritual gift.

Answ. It might as well be said, the translating of the Hebrew Scriptures into English, is not a spiritual gift, but a grammatical, or rhetorical gift. Whatever the art or skill be, grammatical, rhetorical, poetical, they are all of them gifts of God (though common) and given chiefly for the service and edification of the Church of God.

3. That we have also the like liberty of inventing Tunes, appears from what has been said already; for if God have given us liberty and warrant to sing Psalms and Hymns and spiritual Songs, then we must sing them in some Tunes. Now the Tunes of the Temple are lost and hidden from us, so that we cannot sing them at all; and therefore we must sing such other Tunes, as are suitable to the matter, though invented by men.

But you do not believe that the Levites ever invented any New Tune.

Answ. Either the Levites invented New Tunes, or the Psalmists delivered musical Accents, and Notes together with the Psalms: which seeing we understand not, either we must not sing at all, or we must make use of such Tunes, as are invented by others.

But you cannot believe, that ever God entrusted man's corrupt nature, to frame any thing in God's worship to his Praise.

Answ. Then you cannot believe, that ever God entrusted the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, to be read in the Christian Churches in English words; for all English words are framed by English men, in corrupt nature, to wit, without the immediate assistance of the Holy Ghost in the framing of them. And if we may not make use of Tunes invented by men for the singing of the Psalms, then neither may we make use of words invented by men for the Reading of the Psalms, and other Scriptures. The one is as much a worship of God as the other: and English words are as much an invention of man as English Tunes. But lest you should begin hereupon to take up a scruple against the Reading also of Scriptures in English words, as well as against the singing of Psalms in English Tunes, and both upon this pretense of the inventions of men in the worship of God, be not ignorant, that such godly men as have been desirous of Reformation, and most zealous against human inventions in the worship of God, they always intended such human inventions in the worship of God, as had no warrant but the wit and will of man, not such as had warrant either from consequence of Scripture, or light of Nature, or civil custom. For a woman to cover her head in time of public Prayer, or Prophecying, and for a man to uncover his head, the Apostle warrants both from the light of Nature, and the custom of the Churches (1 Corinthians 11:4 to 16).

The kiss of love in holy Assemblies was warranted, not by divine institution, (for then it were a sin in us to neglect it now;) but by occasion of civil custom in those Nations; where, it being usual in their civil Assemblies to greet one another with a kiss of love, the Apostles do not disallow the use of it in holy Assemblies, but only require the sincerity and holiness of the love expressed in such kisses (1 Corinthians 16:20; 1 Thessalonians 5:26; 1 Peter 5:14). These Apostles did not believe in this point, as you do, that God never entrusted corrupt Nature, to frame any thing in God's worship to his Praise.

It is true, man's corrupt Nature cannot bring forth a good thought, to wit, a gracious thought, and that of itself, but yet by the help of Christ, it may bring forth both knowledge by Tongues, and Tunes by Music; and that with as good allowance in the New Testament as in the Old. God did as much disallow any flesh to boast in his presence in the Old Testament, as in the New (Jeremiah 9:23, 24). But what cause has any flesh to boast, either of his spiritual, or common gifts? Seeing both are gifts, and received of God: and if received, why should men boast, as if they had not received them? (1 Corinthians 4:7).

Object. 2. To sing with man's melody and meter, does not hold forth any spiritual gift of Christ, but only the art and nature of man: whereas Prayer and Preaching do hold forth spiritual gifts. And the tuning of Scripture by man's art, it is no gift of Grace, neither does it redound to the praise of Grace.

Though Prayer and Preaching do hold forth spiritual gifts, yet all the duties that tend to edification do not hold forth spiritual gifts, but some of them common gifts only. The reading of the Scriptures tends to edification, as being itself an ordinance of God, though exposition afterwards be added also, which is another ordinance (Deuteronomy 31:11, 12, 13). And yet reading of the Scriptures is no spiritual gift. Aquila, and Symmachus, and Theodotian, translated the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, and yet none of them were endued with spiritual gifts, or at best but common. To say Amen at the end of a public prayer tends to edification; and yet Amen may be said without holding forth any spiritual gift.

But that which is ground of your scruple seems to be this, that that which is no gift of grace, how can it redound to the praise of grace?

But the answer is ready, that such things as help either the understanding, or the affection, and are appointed of God for his worship, they do tend to edification, and so to the praise of grace, though they may be performed by a gift of God in nature or art, without any spiritual gift of grace. Translation of the Scriptures into the mother tongue, and the reading of them in a known tongue, do both of them help the understanding; and being appointed of God, they tend to the edification of the people in the grace of Christ. The translating of the Psalms into verse, in number, measure, and meter, and suiting the ditty with apt tunes, do help to stir up the affection; and the singing of Psalms being appointed of God, they tend to make a gracious melody to the praise of God and edification of his people. The sound of Aaron's bells, and the blast of the silver trumpets, and the workmanship of Hiram the Tyrian in Solomon's temple, did none of them hold forth any spiritual gift of grace: the gift of God in nature and art might teach them all. Yet all these being appointed by God, the putting forth of these gifts did tend to the edification of the Church of God in the grace of Christ.

Object. 3. The meter of the late translators, though it comes nearer to the original than the former meters, yet not so near as the prose. They frame their words and sentences more to the meter than the prose. Yes, they sometimes break the attributes of God, and for the verse's sake put Jah for Jehovah, which is a mangling of the word.

The meter and verse of the late translators comes as near to the words and sense of the original as does the prose; especially considering they do withal express the holy art of the original Hebrew poetry, which the prose does not attend to. Neither do the translators break the attributes of God, when for the verse's sake, they put Jah for Jehovah; for both Jah and Jehovah do hold forth one and the same attribute of God, even his eternal being. The Evangelists and Apostles give us a pattern of greater changes of the attributes of God than that; and yet without breaking of the attributes of God, and much more without mangling of the word of God. It is a usual thing with them to translate Jehovah as the Lord (Matthew 22:44, with Psalm 110:1), and yet Jehovah holds forth his eternal essence, the Lord his sovereign dominion. It were sacrilegious blasphemy to call this changing either the breaking of God's attributes, or the mangling of his word. Besides, it is very rare when the translators do make any such change of Jah for Jehovah; and to prevent all stumbling, either of yourself or others at it, I suppose they will help it in the next edition of the Psalms.

Object. 4. What delight can the Lord take in such praises of himself, where sinful men, or the man of sin has a hand in making the melody?

God delights that his will should be obeyed; at least he abhors that his will should be disobeyed, though by sinful men (1 Samuel 15:22, 23). Since God commands all men in distress to call upon him, and all men in their mirth to sing his praise, what is mortal sinful man (dust and ashes) that he should forbid what God has commanded? God knows how to allow, yes and to reward what is his own; when yet he takes no pleasure in the sinful manner of performance of any duty. God took notice of Ahab's humiliation, and rewarded it with respite of temporal judgments, though he took no pleasure in his sinful hypocrisy (1 Kings 21:27, 28, 29). And yet they that had a hand in making the melody of the English Psalms, whether in old England or New, were men of a better spirit than Ahab. But I can but marvel, why you should put in the man of sin, as having any hand at all, in making this melody. For neither the man of sin (by whom I suppose you mean Antichrist) nor any Antichristian church have had any hand in turning David's Psalms into English songs and tunes, or are wont to make any melody in the singing of them; yes, they reject them as Geneva jigs; and they be cathedral priests of an Antichristian spirit, that have scoffed at Puritan ministers, as calling the people to sing one of Hopkins's jigs, and so hop into the pulpit. God keep all anti-Psalmists from the like Antichristian spirit. They that have been in Antichristian churches can tell you that Popish churches are not wont to sing David's Psalms translated into verse in their own country meter, but they only sing the prose of David's Psalms in cathedral notes. Which how far yourself close with all, I leave to yourself to consider.