A DAY IN THE SANCTUARY. INTRODUCTION, ON HYMNOLOGY. AMONG the many popular mistakes of the day in ecclesiastical matters, there is none more prevalent, even among the better informed, and few further removed from the truth, than the notion entertained upon the nature of a hymn. It is supposed to be necessarily a composition in metre, and full nine hundred and ninety-nine out of every thousand would be surprised to learn, if indeed all would submit to learn, that so far from there being any authority for such a composition deducible from Eph. v. 19; Col. iii. 16, the whole practice of Scripture, both as to Old and New Testament, is against it without a single exception. So that if the axiom of our popular theology be true, namely, that whatever cannot be found in Scripture must therefore be anti-scriptural, there can be nothing more anti-scriptural than B the use of such a composition. In those passages, the word hymn probably denotes those short snatches of sacred song, or choruses, which occur in Isa. vi. 3; Luke ii. 14; Rev. iv. 8; while by spiritual songs are understood compositions in the form of psalms, such as we find in Luke i. 46-56. 68-79; Acts iv. 24-30. But neither these, nor any other divine songs, whether in Hebrew or in Greek, proceed upon any rule of metre. It has indeed been supposed, that the Psalms and other poetical parts of the Old Testament are metrical. But every scholar knows how utterly vain have been the numerous and ingenious attempts to realize this supposition. And were it true, is it likely that the pronunciation should be so utterly lost, that not a link of metre should be detected under the singular advantages afforded by the alphabetical compositions? This difficulty has occured to such as maintain that the true accentuation of the language' survives in the main, and that a loose measure, having no regulated return, depends upon it. But none seem to have been struck with the great improbability, it may indeed be called impossibility, of a rhythmical structure co-existing with a metrical. Their requirements are not the same, as will appear to any one who will take up Milton after Isaiah, or compare a Psalm with the versification of it. And supposing they could be reconciled, what a load of immense labour would be thrown upon the poet, and all without necessity. It would be impossible that his gait should not be remarkably affected by such heavy and close fetters. But where are the signs of this in the sacred writers? Until the contrary therefore can be proved, we are compelled, in all reason, to conclude that Hebrew poetry, if indeed it should not rather be called oratory, proceeds upon rhythm alone. And yet the language, cognate as it is with the Arabic and Syriac, can scarcely have been unsuitable for metre, and according to its present pronunciation, it certainly presents no greater difficulties than some modern languages, as to such an employment of it, and is so employed by the Jews at this day. Must there not, therefore, have been some reason, quite independent of the genius and construction of the language, for this singularity? And must it not have been the same reason, and not mere force of example, that influenced so strongly the mind of the Christian Church, that in none of its Liturgies did it admit, until comparatively corrupt times, of any admixture of metrical composition, and that too, although it was much more according to the genius both of the Greek and of the Latin language than rhythmical'. So far, therefore, from depriving us of 1 Ambrose first introduced Latin metrical hymns into the Church, towards the close of the fourth century.-See BINGHAM, Xiii. 5. 7. any portion of catholic inheritance in retrenching this part of their old liturgy, our Reformers banished an unauthorized novelty, pruned away a very inappropriate superfluity, which it would have been well if the lust of innovation, in its usual ignorance of the past, had never reintroduced into our churches. One piece indeed they left, and perhaps most persons will agree that, however striking its effect under the peculiar circumstances, this gives no great encouragement to admit more. The reader of course is referred to the version of the Veni Creator in the Ordination Service. The reason will appear from the very nature of sacred poetry, as addressed either from the Deity, or to the Deity, or indeed to our ownselves in such meditation as puts us consciously in God's presence. Any composition whatever must, in order to deserve the title, contain a whole, presenting its several parts in due and manifest subordination to the general design or leading idea. It must be put together with careful combination, with continual reference to the main object. Otherwise it will be nothing better than an undigested heap of sounding phrases and conventional diction. In such a work, therefore, there must always be two stages of the workman's operation. The former is the conception in its free and natural dress, as it appears when it has been distinctly apprehended, and |