tions from the prose psalms, and the first paragraph of the rubric before the metre psalms, whereby the minister, at his discretion, is allowed to use the whole Book of Psalms in metre," and to reject by far the greater part of the Psalms of David in prose.

However, the rubrics, before the proses in the several offices, are rubrics of obligation, and those before the rhymes, of permit or allowance only, except in five instances, viz. before the delivery of the elements-before Gloria in Excelsisin the office for the ordaining of Priests-in-the office for consecrating a Bishop and in the office for consecrating a church or chapel. In these ́instances, and in none other, the expression “shall be sung" is connected with metre psalmody.

Between the rubrical words shall be sung or said before the prosaic psalms and hymns, and the expression before the metre psalms and hymns, allowed to be sung, at the discretion of the minister, there is a wide difference. The former is an authoritative command; the latter is only a permit, or rather a mere connivance. The species of music to which the words "shall be sung" refer, is the canonical music of the Church; that to which the words "allowed at the discretion of the minister" refer, is not her canonical music, but a species of music altogether adventitious and foreign, and which the Church is so far from enforcing, or even recommending, that she but

allows it; or, in other words, connives at a prac. tice, which she considers equally unpopular to condemn, as unecclesiastical to sanction.

Practice, founded upon ministerial discretion, is various as to its extent. In some churches, a metre psalm or hymn is sung before Morning and Evening Prayer; in others none is used. With a very few exceptions, no metre is sung after sermon at Morning Prayer. In some churches, other metre hymns are used beside the allowed ones.

By the rubrics of our Prayer Book there are about forty allowances to exercise ministerial discretion; and although, to the minister who avails himself of them, they afford a shield against the imputation of unrubricalness; yet, to him who rejects the indulgencies which they offer, they become not laws of obligation.

For instance; instead of the psalms of the day, an allowance is given to use one of the selections; but the minister rejects the allowance, and uses the psalms of the day. An allowance is given to omit ecrtain parts of the Litany, but he is not deemed unrubrical if he uses the whole of it.

In like manner, though an allowance be given to use Tate and Brady's psalms, the minister's discretion being rubrically appointed the counsellor to direct him, whether to accept or reject the allowance, he is equally rubrical whether he does the one or the other.

The Mosaic law 'gave an allowance to hardhearted Israelites to put away their wives; but that allowance did not oblige them to do so. Neither do the allowances for curtailing the service, or for using metre psalms and hymns, lay our Clergy under a necessity of doing the one or the other.

In our Church, the allowance for singing Tate and Brady's psalms is submitted to the discretion of the minister. A similar allowance for the use of the same psalms, granted by the King of England and his council, stands referred to "those churches, chapels, and congregations, as shall think fit to receive the same. The only difference between the proviso annexed to each of these allowances, is, that, in the former case, the psalms lie at the discretion of the minister; and in the latter, at congregational option. But so far are English congregations from considering themselves bound to accept the Royal allowance, that, at the present time, Sternhold's, Brady's, and also Merrick's are used occasionally in several of the collegiate, and many of the parish churches throughout the realm.*

The words sung or said are always placed before subjects in prose, which admit not of being sung to metrical music. Hence it appears that the Church, in her offices, recognizes no

Alout 20 years since Merrick's Version was introduced into Queen's College, Oxford, by its then head, the Rev. Dr. Monkhouses

other sort of music than that to which prosaic subjects are commensurate; and that wherever no metrical music is practised, the appointed proses are allowed to be said; but that, wherever metre psalms and hymns are sung, the prosaic forms of praise are to be chanted; because the capability of singing metres is competent to the singing of proses, the opportunities of instruction being equal. A wilful neglect, therefore, to sing the prosaic psalms and hymns of the offices of our religion, amounts to an intentional non-compliance with the intent of the rubrics relative to the canonical psalmody of the Church. And, so long as any congregation rejects the practice of chanting the prosaic psalms and hymns of public worship, just so long may it be said to be without canonical music.

Were metrified scriptures to be considered the canonical psalmody of the Church, then it had no canonical psalmody before the beginning of the fifteenth century; when, about the year 1412, John Huss, one of the Bohemian reformers, invented the method of versifying some of David's Psalms, in the German language, for the use of his converts from popery. But, if this invention be a thing so very precious, and so conducive to the glory of God and the salvation of men, as its advocates think it is, why was it not revealed and inculcated from the beginning? Why was not the mystery of rhyme revealed to some of

the prophets either of the Levitical or Evangelical dispensations? What reason can be assigned, why the Holy Spirit, during the ages of direct inspiration, gave no communications concerning the mighty art of versifying his own oracles?

In none of the ancient archives of the Church do we find any monument avouching the use of metrified scriptures in the worship of Almighty God, anterior to the fifteenth century. With justice, therefore, it may be deemed an innovation, and "we need not be ashamed to avow the sentiment, that all novelty in religion-and under the term novelty may be comprehended whatever has come under that name for at least fifteen hundred years past-carries the brand of error on the very face of it."*

Whilst our blessed Lord sojourned upon this earth, his ears were never saluted with rhyming psalmody; nor does it appear that his apostles had any knowledge of it. For a space of fourteen hundred years it was a thing utterly unknown among Christians. At the present time, metrified scriptures are unknown to the greater part of the Christian world; and they are only tolerated by the reformed Episcopal authorities of Europe, and the Protestant Episcopal Church in America. These allowances, to use metrified scriptures in the worship of Almighty God, are so far from

Bishop White's Lectures on the Catechism, p. 143.