of the Church, and of her rulers and other ministers. Having spoken with commendation, which I desire duly to acknowledge, of my recent publication of "Ancient and Original Hymns," you proceed; "The Bishop designs it for family and private devotion only, as he expresses in his Preface a decided opinion against the introduction of forms of singing, any more than of forms of praying, into our churches and chapels, without public legal authority.' After the very general acquiescence by nearly the whole Established Church in the propriety of this practice, we do not apprehend that the opinion of a single bishop will be able to bring about an alteration. And, after all, we demur to the phrase, 'public legal authority;' the tacit consent of each bishop in his own diocese is surely sufficient in matters purely spiritual, without the authority of the civil legislature."

First, Sir, with respect to the phrase, "public legal authority;" by which I mean authority exercised in public acts for the guidance of the public, by those whom the law qualifies to exercise it. My meaning will be best explained by examples. Thus, our Book of Common Prayer, having been completed by Commissioners appointed by the King's Majesty under the Great Seal, was appointed to be used by "the authority of the Bishops and Clergy in Convocation; of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and of the Commons, in Parliament; and of the King's most excellent Majesty." Our Translation of the Bible, made by his Majesty's special command, addressed to a select body of the most learned divines, was, by authority of the King, appointed to be read in churches. Our versions of the Psalms, commonly called the Old and the New, have the royal authority, which "allows them to be sung in all churches:" an authority deemed so necessary when the New Version was made in King William III.'s time, that, although it contained no new matter for singing, but was only a new Version of the Psalms, a humble petition was presented to the King, "humbly praying his Majesty's Royal Allowance that the said Version may be used in such congregations as think fit to receive it ;" and his Majesty, taking the same into his royal consideration, was pleased to order in Council, in the year 1696, "that the said New Version of the Psalms in English metre be, and the same is, hereby allowed and permitted to be used in all such churches, chapels, and congregations, as shall think fit to receive the same." Whereupon the Bishop of London, (Dr. H. Compton,) thus legally warranted by the royal authority, in a letter which used to accompany the Order in Council, in editions of the New Version of the Psalms, but which, as well as the Order, has been omitted in late editions, so that I quote from recollection ;-the Bishop of London, I say, in this letter, recommended the New Version for use in his diocese, and it may be presumed that other bishops did the like in theirs. Some such "public legal authority," as I have thus exem→ plified, I hold to be indispensable for any part of the public service of the Church; this being in truth necessary for producing that uniformity, which, thus produced, is the principle, whereby the whole of our service is regulated. Your opinion, Sir, as I understand it, is, that with respect to forms of singing, there is a power in the individual rulers of the Church, independent of any other authority, so that these forms depend on "the tacit eonsent of the bishop in each diocese." Of the

ground of this opinion, Sir, I request you to have the goodness to inform me. For my part I must confess, that, so far from perceiving" the bishop's tacit consent" to be " surely sufficient" for authorizing in every different diocese a departure in a very important particular from the uniform worship of the whole Church, and the introduction of new, and different, and variable, and perhaps mutually conflicting and irreconcileable forms in each, I am quite at a loss to discover in any of the rules, or provisions, or declarations of the Church, the semblance or shadow of such power, whereas in fact her mind is most plainly declared to the contrary.

What may be the exact authority, requisite for the purpose under consideration, I have not ventured to define; but my opinion is, that ecclesiastical authority is that to which recourse ought primarily and principally to be had: ecclesiastical authority, however, not assumed and exercised in the form of "consent," whether "tacit" or avowed, "by each bishop in his own diocese," but exercised by the public act of those with whom the law entrusts it. That opinion was stated in the short pamphlet, alluded to in my preface, under the title of "Thoughts on the Singing of Unauthorized Hymns in Public Worship; respectfully submitted to the Consideration of the Archbishops and Bishops of the United Church, by one of their Brethren." The evils of the practice having been stated, the pamphlet remarks, "The remedy should seem to be some measure of public authority. . . . . To any measure of this kind, it is obvious that the spiritual governors of the Church must be parties: that such a measure should originate with them, may seem also to be not unfitting their station and function, as the legitimate overseers of the offices and of the other ministers of the Church, and as charged with the guardianship of her spiritual welfare. It appears therefore desirable, if I may venture, with deference to superior judgments, and without the appearance of presumption, to submit such a remark, for the requisite steps to be taken, for ascertaining the sentiments of the episcopal bench.". . . . After an interval, the pamphlet adds, on the supposition of a Collection of Hymns being the result, made and revised by distinguished ecclesiastics, and approved by the primates of the Church, "As to the necessary authority to sanction the use of the collection, permission, after the manner of that granted by Royal authority for the use of the New Version of the Psalms, would doubtless, if deemed sufficient, and if properly requested, be readily granted. If other authority were needed, means for procuring it might, I apprehend, with little difficulty be devised." And again: "If the episcopal bench, and most especially those who are in the stations of the highest dignity and trust, should feel themselves called upon to interpose, and should decide on causing due provision to be made, their collective prudence, under God's blessing, would doubtless discover a sufficient mode for effecting it, and for procuring the requisite sanction." I would repeat, that it is by such a concurrence of the spiritual rulers of the Church, and not by the independent agency of individuals, that the present question among Churchmen must be satisfactorily, as it can only thus be legally, adjusted.

There is one other point in the remarks that have caused this letter, on which I would lightly touch. When you affirm, "the very general

acquiescence by nearly the whole Established Church in the propriety of this practice," the practice, namely, of singing unauthorized Hymns, whilst I lament the prevalence of the practice, so far as it does prevail, against the assertion of its very general and almost universal prevalence, I protest on behalf of many parochial clergymen, who adhere constantly to what I presume to call their line of duty. And when you "apprehend that the opinion of a single bishop will not be able to bring about an alteration," whilst I lament whatever countenance may have been given to the practice by any of my episcopal brethren, from whom I am compelled to differ, I beg leave to decline the post, whether of honour or of dishonour, which belongs to my supposed singularity of opinion. I have, indeed, very insufficient means of ascertaining the sentiments of the bench in general; but I call to mind that the present Bishop of Peterborough, (Dr. Marsh,) and the late Bishop of Ferns, (Dr. Elrington,) in charges to their respective clergy, condemned the practice in question, as an unwarrantable innovation on the discipline and provisions of the Church.

What may be the result of such an expression of opinion by one bishop or more, must be left to the determination of God's good providence. But in any result it may be even to one a consolatory reflection, that, by such an expression of his opinion, he has used his diligence, under a conscientious sense of duty, that all things may be done in God's house and service according to the Apostolical rule, ευσχημόνως καὶ κατὰ τάξιν.

I trust that you will allow this letter to appear in your Magazine as soon as convenient. And again requesting to be informed of the ground of your judgment concerning the "sufficiency of the tacit consent of each bishop in his own diocese," as an authority for singing hymns otherwise unauthorized, I have the honour to be, Sir, With due respect, your very faithful servant, RICHARD DOWN AND CONNOR.

Down and Connor House, Belfast.

BEING thus called upon by his Lordship for the grounds of our opinion on the above question, we would, with all deference, submit both to his Lordship and the public the following considerations in reply:

We understand his Lordship to require information as to the authority on which we rely for the introduction of arbitrary "forms of singing more than of arbitrary forms of praying, into our public services.

Without at all entering into the question of the expediency or consistency of permitting the existence of such a distinction, we would remark that the law has uniformly recognised a decided difference between the two. The ancient right whereby each bishop authorized alterations in, and changed the forms of, the public service, was gradually circumscribed, till at the Reformation a rigid uniformity was exacted: but when the Rubric ordered the singing of an anthem after the third collects at morning and evening prayers, without setting forth any authorized forms for such purpose, the compilers of the Liturgy certainly left an opening, of which an occasion was taken, (and which

liberty was never attempted to be altered by authority), for the introduction of "forms of singing" at the discretion of the Clergy.

The statute of the 2d & 3d of Edward VI. cap. 1, sec. 7, says indeed, "That it shall be lawful to use openly any psalm or prayer taken out of the Bible, at any due time, not letting or omitting the service, or any part thereof:" but this evidently refers to other occasions, exclusive of the time when the anthem was appointed to be sung. This statute, however, we have reason to suppose, was repealed in the reign of Mary. In the injunctions of Elizabeth this law was revived, where it is said, "That at the beginning or ending of Common Prayer at morning or evening, there may be sung a hymn or such like song to the praise of Almighty God." Now it is remarkable that no order is here given about the Anthem of the Rubric, as if leaving that where it was before, but giving permission for additional singing. The word hymn we think must in all fairness be taken to mean some metrical composition, since it is distinguished from a psalm,

We, however, by no means rest the authority for the introduction of such compositions on the above injunctions; for the custom and right of introducing "forms of singing" at discretion, was a right of the Clergy anterior to the Reformation. It was the continuance of a right and practice which had prevailed immemorially in the Church, and which, without an express and formal prohibition, still remains in full force. Now it must be remembered that such prohibition has never been issued; and this disregard of these arbitrary "forms of singing," compared with the rigour of uniformity enforced in respect to the Liturgy itself, proves that the law regarded the two in a very different light.

It is well known that each Cathedral church has its own selection of anthems, many of which are taken neither from the Bible nor the Prayer Book, and certainly can lay claim to no such authority as his Lordship deems essential. Some of these may be traced up to periods anterior to the Reformation, and we may mention particularly that which was composed by Henry VIII. as an evening anthem, in metre.

By way of additional confirmation we would further suggest the perfect silence of the Acts of Uniformity, especially the last, at the restoration of Charles II.-as to any prohibition of discretionary "forms of singing," which surely would not have been the case, had not a great difference been supposed to exist between such forms and the Liturgy; especially as there were one or more versions, metrical, composed by Presbyterians, which had been extensively used up to that time.

We would still further remark on the want of any standard editions of any one of the five metrical versions of the Psalms, which have at various times received that public allowance and permission which his Lordship thinks necessary. Public authority has carefully provided for correct editions of the Bible and Prayer-book: and the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States has also an authorized edition for the correction of her book of hymns, We think the difference between the case of "forms of singing" and the Liturgy is here again fairly presumed.

Moreover, we have not found any proof that the old version of Sternhold and Hopkins really ever did receive the "Royal allowance;" at

least the point has been severely contested, and the doubt has never been satisfactorily removed.

The extraordinary variations of the several editions of the Old Version, (if really "allowed,") from one another; and the similar state of the several editions of the New Version, make it impossible to determine which is the genuine and original text of each.

They differ also as to the number and other circumstances of the appended Forms of Hymns and pieces of devotion; while most, if not all of them, are very uncertain as to the authority by which the latter were annexed; so that if such "allowance" as his Lordship thinks requisite be specifically necessary, as in the case of the Liturgy, then, we fear, the only safe way will be found in forbearing all use of the aforesaid metrical versions and appended hymns till a correct edition be promulgated by "public legal authority." Among the appended hymns, those of Bishop Ken for the morning and evening appear with great variation; whilst one, the Sacramental Hymn, commencing " My God, and is thy table spread?" bears internal marks of having been composed by an Independent.

We cannot then, with all due deference to his Lordship, recede from our opinion that it is the ancient right of the Bishops and Clergy in their several Cathedrals and Churches,—a right of which they have never been deprived by law, either civil or ecclesiastical, and which has never fallen into desuetude,-to appoint "forms of singing" at their own discretion. It does not appear that any of the "allowed" versions have ever been more than simply permitted, but never enjoined; nor that there is any means of prohibiting the exercise of this right by any legal or canonical process.

The whole practice of the Church, from periods anterior to the Reformation, is in favour of such a right; and we have just risen from the examination of no less than sixteen metrical versions or selections of Psalms, or of Psalms and Hymns, for public worship, dedicated, by permission, and authorized by the sanction of, names, than which none can possess higher authority or greater weight with orthodox Churchmen; viz. His late Majesty King George the Third, their Graces the present Archbishops of Canterbury and York, the Archbishop of Tuam, and several others, all bishops, who are no less distinguished for their piety than their abilities, the greater part of whom are still living. We must therefore conclude, that (by whatever process of reasoning) these eminent men had all arrived at the same conclusions which we have endeavoured to justify, or they would never have given their sanction to such publications.

We would further beg to draw attention to the correspondence between His Grace the present Archbishop of Canterbury and the late Bishop Heber on this subject; in which his Grace, as we understand him, says to this effect,-That it is expedient that any selection whatever should first obtain the general approbation of the public by an extensive use, previous to its receiving any sanction from Authority. It was, we imagine, in this sense that Bishop Heber understood his Grace, as the publication of his work, in consequence of that suggestion, and its use in his own and the neighbouring churches, incontestably proves.