own will, to bring down the divine curse; the superstitious belief that predictions were to be attributed to those who announced them-being not so much the communication of Divine purposes already formed, as the means whereby the Divine purposes were to be effected. And it seems to have been with view to undeceiving the Moabite in regard to this matter, that the prophet of Mesopotamia, with unwilling honesty, made the protestation, "I cannot go beyond the word of the Lord, to do less or more of mine own mind.” If the Moabite had been right in his superstitious belief; if Balaam's prophetic sentences had derived their efficacy from his own prayers or had had their origin in his own wishes; it is obvious that the true clue to the interpretation of these enigmatical speeches, would have been the study of Balaam's individual character; the investigation of the influences which were brought to bear upon him; the inquiries, what were the traits. which marked the prophet of Mesopotamia? To what impreations or benedictions would such traits give rise? The true solution of his oracles would be a solution appropriate to the age, the temper, the circumstances of their author; on the obvious principle, that when a man speaks spontaneously or of himself, the best exponent of his meaning is furnished by his personal character and history. If Caiaphas had spoken of himself when he said, "It is expedient that one man should die for the people," our chief business would have been to inquire who Caiaphas was; what were the age, circumstances and character, which distinguished Caiaphas; and the conclusion to which we should have been led, viz. that the speech imported merely that it was allowable to make an individual the victim of state policy; were unavoidable and beyond dispute. Not until the Evangelist tells us "Caiaphas spake not of himself, but being high-priest that year, prophesied," do we come to know that the speech of this person not having been proper to himself as an individual (idios), its solution cannot be proper to himself as an individual.

Such considerations throw light upon St. Peter's caution, knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of an interpretation proper to its author," a caution bottomed upon the statements that "prophecy came not of the will of man," that "the holy men of old spake as they were moved of the Holy Ghost." The word the apostle employs, ἰδίος, is opposed to ἀλλότριος. In the declaration πᾶσα προφητεία

γραφῆς, ἰδίας ἐπιλύσεως οὐ γίνεται, we are assured that no Scripture prophecy admits of a solution proper to its utterer, as opposed to a solution appropriate to its inspirer; no Scripture prophecy can be explained exclusively from the prophet, from the peculiar character of the mind, situation, or habits of the individual who gave it expression; its meaning must be sought from its real author; from the character and views of God the Holy Ghost discoverable from other sources. Important doctrine! It shows us how little regard is to be paid to interpreters when they tell us that Zacharias cannot be shown to have been above his countrymen in the largeness of his conceptions, and that therefore the language of his song, however strong it may be, is meant to be understood only of temporal or national deliverances. It shows us that, if we discover, from the history of Daniel, that he was patriotic and abounded in national feeling, we are not to infer from this that his vision of a kingdom, which was to subvert all other kingdoms, is to be understood of a worldly empire, such as modern Jews may dream of; inasmuch as not Daniel but the Holy Ghost was the true author of this vision, we are to look for an interpretation which other prophecies or the declarations of our Lord, prove to be agreeable to the mind of the Spirit.-Above all, St. Peter's caution teaches us that if we would take heed to the lamp of prophecy aright, we must have affinity with the Inspirer of prophecy; must cultivate communion with him by prayer; must possess that spiritual mind which alone discerneth the things of the Spirit of God.

ARTICLE IV.

THE PRINCIPLES AND CLAIMS OF DEVOTIONAL MUSIC. A PRIZE

ESSAY.

By Thomas Hastings, Professor of Vocal Music, New-York.

PRAISE, like prayer, is an important Christian duty devolving upon every individual of the human race. The obligations to praise God are unspeakably great; and whether we take into view the glorious perfections of his nature or the infinite bless

SECOND SERIES, VOL. VII. NO. II.

10

ings he bestows, the duty is evidently one that should neither be neglected nor misunderstood.

Among the authorized methods of praise, that which employs devotional song holds a distinguished place; and to this method the precepts, examples and exhortations of Scripture seem chiefly to refer. God requires the whole earth to become vocal in his praise; nor can we for a moment suppose him indifferent either as to the manner or the spirit of our songs. And to bring our offerings with cold indifference on the one hand, or to cause them, on the other, to minister chiefly to the gratification of taste, must doubtless be displeasing to him as well as injurious to the public edification.

The subject of praise has not, in the present age, been often discussed with that freedom and fulness which its importance demands. The reasons for this neglect may be sought for in the unsettled state of public opinion in matters of taste. One class of Christians, distinguished for their love of music, have laid such peculiar stress on the cultivation of a favorite art as to awaken the prejudices of another class, who, deficient in musical taste, have regarded praise chiefly as a spiritual exercise. Both extremes have been in fault, and the disagreement has operated in various ways unfavorably to the interests of churchmusic. But if we would fully understand the claims of duty in this matter we must descend to first principles. Here the two parties may meet, and build together in repairing the wastes which have been occasioned through mismanagement and neglect.

What then is implied in the duty of singing to the praise of God? The answer is not difficult. The Scriptures furnish us with themes which are eminently distinguished for their spirituality, and these themes are to be uttered with heart and voice, in the devout eloquence of song.

To say nothing of the higher claims of music, there are certain properties of style which may well be termed fundamental. There must be melody, and harmony, and measured time, or there will be no music in our performances. There must be articulation, accent and emphasis, or there will be no distinctness or propriety of utterance. Music in the absence of these properties degenerates into jargon. But melody and harmony, time, articulation, accent and emphasis are things which do not spring up spontaneously. They are the results of patient, well

directed effort.

There must also be an expressive utterance of the sacred text, accompanied with devout affections. And this, most of all, requires critical attention and mental discipline. Even in secular music, which employs feigned emotions, there is need of special training; and how much more is this essential where the nature of the exercise requires "truth within ;" when all our motives and feelings and purposes are to be consecrated to the great object of religious worship!

Music, when applied to the themes of inspiration, should serve to clothe them with the power of eloquence. This is its express design. The words being given, the singer, like the individual who officiates in prayer, is to utter them impressively, as conveying his own sentiments in the presence of the heartsearching God. This view of the subject, evidently accords with the whole tenor of the Scriptures. It shows us the very soul and essence of devotional song; and every thing short of it, however decent or tasteful in regard to manner, must fail to secure the divine acceptance. Nor can such a method of singing be attained without a twofold preparation of the voice and the heart. To meet in the presence of God, as is too often done, without this preparation, is to offer the lame, the blind and the torn in sacrifice. It is bringing an empty oblation.

And is it possible that a principle so obvious and so important as this, can be practically disregarded? Can the entire musical arrangements of a Christian assembly be so ordered as virtually to set it aside? Nothing is more common. Instances occur throughout the land. To say nothing of the general deficiency in elementary cultivation by which the praises of Zion too often become a dead letter; it not unfrequently happens, when there is much appearance of talent, that the leading singers of either sex, are persons who make no pretensions to personal religion, while most of the associated band appear equally indifferent to the subject. Here of course the pleasures of taste are substituted for the fervors of devotion. At least this is true of the performers; nor is it for a moment to be imagined that they are alone in the transgression.

Charity requires us to impute many of the existing abuses to the absence of correct information. But this plea can never serve to annihilate responsibility. The requisite information should be obtained. Laid under infinite obligations to love and serve God, we ought by all means to ascertain what he requires

of us in the celebration of his praise. This he has so plainly revealed, that no one who will examine the subject need be in doubt. Indeed there seems to be at this present time a general conviction upon the minds of Christians, that all is not right, and that something ought to be done; yet as to modes of operation, as well as in reference to individual responsibility, there is much darkness and misapprehension. Habits are to be rectified, prejudices to be obviated, false maxims and principles to be set aside; and above all, the public indifference is to be done away before any thing effectual can be achieved in the way of general reform. Many, whose attention has been called to the subject, feel the necessity of exertion, but are so surrounded with difficulties as to be in doubt how they should act.

Let us inquire, then, what methods of improvement can be adopted, which will prove equal to the exigency?

1. Correct information must be widely diffused. The conviction on the public mind with regard to duty is altogether too indefinite. The responsibility is, in imagination, so divided and subdivided, as to apportion a trifling share to individuals. This is a delusion that must be broken up and dissipated. A general disregard to duty forms not the smallest excuse for individual neglect, but on the contrary is a powerful motive to personal activity.

Information should also be given in reference to physical capabilities. A multitude of prejudices, false maxims and principles would thus be annihilated. The want of talent, which is so generally exhibited, is in most cases the mere result of neglect and mismanagement. All, it is true, have not been equally favored. Some have ten talents, some have five, and some have one. But to say nothing of music as a fine art, requiring peculiar genius and susceptibility, we may venture to affirm, that the God of nature has been sufficiently bountiful for all the purposes here under consideration. This accords with the testimony of intelligent musicians on either side of the Atlantic-testimony which has been given under all the advantages of practical demonstration. So far as regards the interests of devotional song, it is evident that taste and talent lie much within the power of cultivation. Our ordinary methods of instruction, in reference to the fundamental properties of style, are, however, susceptible of great improvement; and specific information respecting them should be everywhere sup