Extracts from a Speech by Dr. Hugh Martin, in the General Assembly of the Free Church, 3rd June, 1872.
First of all, then, on behalf of human hymns, it has been said, “We live now under a better and brighter dispensation than that of the Old Testament, therefore the inspired Psalms of David, and other Psalms in Holy Scripture, are insufficient.” But the question is not whether the dispensation under which we now live is better and brighter than that which preceded it; but whether, under this better and brighter dispensation, there is any security for better and brighter hymns than the Psalms of David, and whether there is a promise given to any man, or any body of men, of a richer unction of the Spirit — and not a richer unction only, but a specifically inspiring unction of the Spirit — for the purpose of composing hymns for the public worship of God in the Church than was given to him, of whom it is written, that in his blessed swan song he spoke as follows:— “David, the son of Jesse, said, and the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet Psalmist of Israel, said, The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and His Word was in my tongue.” Is there any modern hymnologist in circumstances to say that? Dr. Adam must tell us who he is, before his argument from the greater brightness of the New Testament dispensation is of any worth, otherwise it is an argument not only on behalf of hymns, but against the Book of Psalms.
Further, we are told that “it would be strange if we were never to rise in this respect above the dispensation which had passed away.” Yes, no doubt, when the fulness of the times was come, the Church rose above the dispensation which then passed away. But the question is not whether we are to rise above the Old Testament dispensation, but whether we are, by the help of uninspired hymnologists, to rise above the Spirit and Word of God in the mouth of “David, the son of Jesse, the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, the sweet Psalmist of Israel.” Is it modest to talk of rising above the height to which he who was “raised up on high” was raised? Still further, it has been said “It would be strange if we were always to walk in the morning dawn, and never pass into the sunshine of the perfect day”. Sir, who can fail to admire the ingenuity which has discovered the resplendent fulness of noontide glory in uninspired songs, and nothing but twilight in the Psalms of David? Was it an uninspired modern hymnologist whose pen produced the following, or was it the Psalmist of Israel? —
“Because of life the fountain pure
Remains alone with thee,
And in that purest light of thine
We clearly light shall see.”
If the Psalms are but twilight, and human hymns the sunshine of the perfect day, then walk always in the perfect light. . . Sing nothing but human hymns, for that is perfect sunshine; and sing no Psalms of David, for that is going back to twilight. Excuse me, however, if I think that this argument of our friends is moonshine, and the logic of it is the logic of the twilight, and suited for those only who are of weaker vision. I say the Psalms are the full noontday light of Messianic glory, and the hymns are but the twilight — likely, if you trust to them, or put them on a level with the Word of God, to prove an evening and not a morning twilight, and you know the fatal difference there.
Again, it has been said that because a crowd at our Lord’s entry into Jerusalem sang a quotation from the 118th Psalm, slightly modified, therefore human hymns are lawful. It is a marvellous argument, and branches out into several very marvellous syllogisms. Because an inspired psalm was sung long ago, therefore uninspired hymns should be sung now! Because a crowd, at their own instance, and not assembled for public instituted worship, chanted a quotation from a psalm, therefore Free Church ministers should give out human hymns to be sung by their people in the divinely instituted ordinance of congregational song! Because an inspired psalm was sung on a weekday in Jerusalem, therefore uninspired hymns should be sung in Scotland on the Sabbath! . . .
Then again, we have had an argument from Scripture, from the text, “Let the Word of Christ dwell in you richly, in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs.” But first, let it be inquired how the Word of Christ — the Word of God — is to dwell in us richly by singing the word of man? That is a strange idea to extract from the writings of a well regulated intellect like that of Paul — not to speak of their being written under the inspiration of the Spirit. I can understand how the Word of God should dwell in us richly by singing the Word of God — dwelling on it in solemn, meditative, grave, sweet singing of it, till — to use a Scotch phrase — it seeps into the soul and takes its dwelling there, while in warm emotion of faith the worshipper’s spirit in believing song dwells deliberately upon it. Thus it may come to dwell richly in us. But how is God’s Word to dwell in us by singing man’s word? How is the Divine Word to dwell in us by singing human hymns? . . . But even though it were granted that this verse refers to uninspired hymns, and though the strange problem could be solved of how God’s Word is to dwell in you by singing the words of man, how are you to prove that this text refers to public worship? Paul is not speaking in this connection of believers in their Church capacity, or in their action in public, divinely instituted, worship, I defy any man to show that the apostle is here referring to public worship at all.
But it has been asked in this house, “Are we always to sing predictions and never sing fulfilments?” But do you need to go outside the Psalms to get the language of fulfilment? Shall we sing of the Incarnation? Ps. 40: 6 — “Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not; mine ears hast thou bored.” Or, as in Heb. 10: 5 — “A body has though prepared me.” Is that the future tense? is that mere prediction? Shall we sing of Christ’s faithfulness and zeal in duty? Ps. 69: 9 — “The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.” Is that prediction, or is it the language of fulfilment? Shall we sing of the sufferings of our dying Redeemer? Ps. 69: 20 — “I looked for some to take pity, but there was none; and for comforters, but I found none.” If that is prophecy, is it not the language of history? And is not the spirit of prophecy the historic testimony of Jesus? Shall we praise Christ for His ascension? “Thou hast ascended on high; thou hast led captivity captive; thou hast received gifts for men.” Is that the language of mere prediction, as contra-distinguished from that of fulfilment? Sing we Christ’s reward in glory? “He asked life of thee, and thou gavest it him, even length of days for ever and ever.” Is that prophetic merely? Is it not historic? Shall we sing of Christ’s intercession, and of his mediation generally? “Let thy hand be upon the man of thy right hand, whom thou madest strong for thyself.” Of Christ’s action in His prophetic office? “I have preached righteousness in the great congregation.” What about the language of prediction, and the absence of the language of fulfilment, there? Shall we adore Christ in His priestly office? “The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.” His kingly office? “The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” What is there, sir, concerning Christ’s kingdom that is not celebrated in the Psalms in the language of fulfilment? I say that even when the mystery of God shall have been finished, and both the fulness of Israel and the fulness of the Gentiles shall have been brought in, the Church may celebrate her millennial glory in the language of fulfilment from the Psalms of David.
“He mindful of his grace and truth
To Israel’s house hath been;
And the salvation of our God
All ends of the earth have seen.”
All the ends of the earth that have seen the salvation of our God, know the Psalms of David. The Psalms are the grand catholic hymnal, and the singing of them provides for Christian union and for perfect catholicity. One more primâ facie principle, and I am almost done. The great, primary, responsible leader of all worship in the Church is our blessed Lord Himself — the minister of the true sanctuary which the Lord pitched, and not man. In this capacity He is pleased to say in the 22nd Psalm — and it is quoted in the New Testament too — “I will declare thy name unto my brethren; in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.” On this verse Calvin has this beautiful comment:— “It thus appears that our Lord is the leader of our songs and chief composer of our hymns.” Are they uninspired hymns which Christ composes, and leads us in singing in the great congregation? He is spiritually present with His people in their worship in the sanctuary. But were He bodily present, as in the synagogue of Nazareth, when there was given to Him the book of the prophet Isaiah, would you give Him any other book of song than the book of the Psalms of David, or other inspired songs of Scripture? Would you give Him other than His own Psalms to lead you in singing? — His own Psalms, in that they are composed by Himself; and His own Psalms, in that His soul sang them, with grace in His heart unto the Lord, in the days of his flesh. You maintain communion with Him, and He with you, when, in the praises of the sanctuary, you sing His Psalms. You may think your hymns are in accordance with His Word, but the Psalms are His very Word itself. You can sing them in faith untainted with doubt, in the full assurance of faith, unshackled from the spirit of criticism which man’s word continually provokes, yea, demands — in that faith which cometh by hearing, when the hearing is the hearing of the Word of God, and which goeth forth in songs of faith, when the songs are the songs of the Spirit of God.