Westminster divines intended to express respecting the natural liberty of the will,' was, I presume, the same which Calvin has quoted from Lombard. The controversy between the conductors of the Spectator and myself is now, I suspect, at an end. The point at issue, it will be recollected is, whether in the passage originally quoted from me in the Spectator, I have misstated the doctrines of Calvinism. The conductors of that work, I am convinced, are too honest to continue to urge a charge, which they find themselves wholly unable to support by any proof or any plausible pretence. They have in fact virtually abandoned it in their notice of my letter; since their remarks are principally founded upon a sentence of that letter; and not upon the paragraph originally objected to. To this very sentence, understood in its obvious sense, they clearly have nothing to object; and their reply is directed only against a most singular misapprehension which they have formed of its meaning. I do not intend to say, however, that they will not probably continue to write. They may complain once more of the harshness of my language; and bring forward new specimens of the propriety and decorum of their own by way of contrast. They will hardly charge me again with being wholly unacquainted with Calvinistic authorities; but they may express their admiration at my ignorance, in knowing so little of such a famous and valuable book, as Ridgeley's Body of Divinity. They may endeavour to establish the fact, that Calvin did not understand his own opinions; and really believed at heart, that man was free to choose between good and evil. They may run through the whole series of quibbles, which has been taught them in the necessarian school of Edwards. They may entirely change their ground and attempt to defend the doctrines which they have heretofore disowned. Or they may bring forward their own peculiar opinions, remote enough from Calvinism, it is very likely, though hardly, I suspect, more consistent or rational, and may accuse me of misrepresenting these ; as if this were the question at issue, or as if in writing the paragraph of which their reviewer complained, I had ever thought or heard of the conductors of the Christian Spectator. But the original charge against me, I have no doubt, will be silently abandoned. I believe they will do every thing in their power to keep it out of sight, and to have it forgotten. It would be fairer, it is true, expressly to retract it. But this is more perhaps than can be reasonably expected from them; and they ought not to be defrauded of their due praise, if they should only pursue the course, I have supposed, and thus manifest their desire to withdraw it from public attention. ON THE CONNEXION BETWEEN SACRED POETRY AND SACRED MUSIC. FOR THE CHRISTIAN DISCIPLE. In the Christian Disciple for March and April, 1821, was published a communication on the requisite qualities of a good collection of Psalms and Hymns for public worship. It attracted some attention at the time, and has since been more than once referred to in the numbers of this work. To most of the suggestions therein made, I presume no objection has ever been offered. Indeed they are too obviously just and important to admit of any. The remark, however, on which the writer dwelt longest, and to which he seemed to attach chief value, which in fact is substantially a novel proposition, has been spoken of as visionary, fanciful, and quaint, and apparently rejected without fair examination. The remark was this: There should, if possible, be a perfect uniformity in the structure of the several verses intended to be sung together;—an exact coincidence between the emphases of one verse and those of every other; so that every tune, which is well suited to one verse, may not in point of rhythm or emphatic modulation, be unsuitable for any other. Some have said that they do not understand this, and many perhaps may doubt the possibility of accomplishing the object here stated. In my view it appears perfectly intelligible and possible. I should not however have recalled attention to the subject, were it not that I have lately met with a Hymn in the Springfield Liberal Recorder, in which the principles of this writer are fully illustrated. It is a chaste and correct specimen of devotional poetry, and will gratify those who have no faith in the scheme on which it is built. HYMN. On Divine Wisdom.-TUNE, Psalm 97. Now to the Lord, our God, we raise Wisdom array'd the worlds on high- Nor do the heavens alone reveal Wisdom design'd my living frame- Prone, as we are, to go astray, Lord-thou art God-the only wise; The plan quoted above is completely and successfully exe cuted in this Hymn. Each stanza is cast in the same mould with every other. There is a correspondent accent, rhythm and emphasis in each. If you find a tune, the accent and rhythm of which correspond with those of any one of these verses, they will equally correspond with those of the other verses. What has thus been done in this instance, is equally capable of being done in other instances, Whether it be possible so to vary the hymns now in use, that they shall be conformed to this rule, I do not pretend to determine; though I am persuaded that many of them would require few alterations, and those but slight. The improvement which would thus be introduced into the practice of psalmody, will be very apparent to any one, who will sing the hymn we have just quoted, in the tune for which it was written. He will be sensible of a correspondence between the sound and the sense, a united flow of melody and meaning, and consequently a smoothness, pleasure, and satisfaction which he rarely experiences throughout an equal number of connected stauzas. He will be more sensible of this if he will afterward try the same hymn in some other tune, in which the accents and pauses are differently arranged, as, Nantwich, or Eaton, or Sterling. He will perceive a disagreement, a collision, between the sentiment and its mode of recitation, which renders the whole awkward and embarrassing, very far from the easy natural expression which was given to it in the first attempt. By this slight attention to one case, the great object of the proposed rule is clearly and definitely laid before us. All poetry has a certain rhythm and certain accents. All music bas a certain rhythm and certain accents. Now the object simply is, whenever we unite poetry with music, to effect a coincidence between these not to suffer the rhythm of the one to interfere with and contradict that of the other, nor the accent of one to fall upon an unaccented portion of the other. When this statement is made, there is no one who does not assent to its reasonableness, and who would not pronounce any practice opposite to this perfectly irrational and absurd,-destructive indeed of the main purpose for which music and verse are united. Yet such is our actual practice. We are continually having accent in the music when there is none in the verse, and accent in the verse when there is none in the tune; pauses also in the line when there are none corresponding in the music, and pauses in the music where there is no suspension of the sense. If one will give attention, he will detect these and similar incongruities every sabbath, which if we were not so familiarly accustomed to them, would be in a high degree distressing and offensive. Whoever will observe them, will be persuaded that he has discovered one of the causes which render our psalmody so little affecting. He will perceive one cause why there are so many songs, the singing of which always produces a thrill of emotion, while the most eloquent and touching psalms so often fall coldly and without effect upon the ears of the hearer. For where the sound contradicts the sentiment, and the train of thought or feeling is interrupted or opposed by false accent or ill-placed emphasis, it is impossible that the force or beauty of the sentiment should be so exhibited as to affect the heart. We could not endure a reader of poetry, who should thus violate propriety and play false with the sense; we should say that he destroyed the very soul of the piece. Yet this is done more or less in nearly every hymn that is sung-an abuse that would be insufferable, if we had not borne it from our cradles. The regular verse in which our hymns are written is the iambic; consisting of syllables alternately accented; thus: The heavens declare thy glory Lord. This measure however admits of exceptions; the most frequent of which is the accent on the first syllable of the line. instead of the second; thus: Wide as the world is thy command. If a minister were to read this and similar lines with an accent on the second syllable, or lines similar to that first quoted with an accent on the first; there is no congregation that would endure him. Yet in singing, nothing is more common than this vile sin against sense and taste; and it is the very sin which the proposed rule is designed to remedy. The value of the principle may be illustrated again, in the case of pauses. In every line both of poetry and music, there is a natural pause--a short, scarcely perceptible stop, which seems to exist necessarily in the nature of things. In the random mode in which hymns and tunes are usually put together, there is always a chance that the musical and metrical cœsura vill fall in different places; and this is in fact an evil of frequent occurrence, which, though it may not amount to an absolute disturbance, yet prevents that exactness and perfection which are necessary to bring out the full expression. Any one may see an example of this in the hymn we have quoted. The pause in the second line is a distinct and peculiar one, both in the tune, and in each verse of the hymn. How different would be the effect of these verses, if sung to a tune having the pause of the second line after the fourth instead of the fifth syllable. It is inattention to this circumstance which so often renders the first and third lines of Arlington, and the third of Arundel, so grating. There are other pauses, both in verse and music. Some tunes pause at the close of each line. These are hardly suited to express an uninterrupted sense, and should be employed only for hymus whose lines close in a similar manner. Some tunes pause in some part of one of the lines, as Arundel and Carthage (C. M.) in the fourth line, and Costellow's Milan in the first, third, and seventh. Now if a verse have no corresponding pause, it is sadly marred by forcing it into such a tune; especially when, as sometimes must happen, you are compelled to divide an important word. Then in like manner there are pauses in the measure, and you equally ruin the effect by driving hurriedly over these with a tune that will not stop for the sense. Yet if every verse be not moulded on the same model, so as to create a similar pause in each, it is plain that this incongruity will inevitably exist; since the tune which is excellently fitted to express the sentiment of one stanza, will be, for that very reason, equally fitted to destroy the sense of another. These are mere hints. I could enlarge and add to them, almost indefinitely, and strengthen their force by examples without number. I have said enough however, I trust, to show that the principle contended for is not only capable of vindication, but is an important one, the neglect of which has been cause of serious evils. If suitable occasion should offer, I may bereafter add to these remarks. ARISTIDES. |