lection of prayers and sermons. As 'G.' is disposed to deal in syllogism, let us deal a little in the same. God gave to His Church a book of Psalms, which was used by Christ and his Apostles;---but Christ and his Apostles never gave the Church a book of prayers and serinons---therefore their example in using the Book of Psalms goes for nothing-it is cancelled;-or rather, the fact that Christ and his Apostles did not furnish the Church with a book of prayers and sermons, has authorized the Churches to set aside the book of Psalms which they used, and provide an assortment for themselves! As·G.' says, “look at the logic."

In my fourth and fifth letters I advanced various arguments, which when taken together, establish conclusively, "as we think," the exclusive use of David's Psalms under the old dispensation.

Let it here be observed that the Old and New Testament Church are not distinct Churches, having no connection with each other. They are one and the same Church, or community of believers, under different dispensations of grace; they are inseparably connected--the New rises out of the Old: Now we want to know, Christian brethren, whether Christ and his Apostles, in introducing the new economy, made any change in the maller of Psalmody, and if any, what? They were connected with both dispensations, and if any change was demanded, it should have been made from the first, and it was their province to make it, and not that of the Church in our day. Christ was a member of the Old Testament Church for at least thirty years of his life, and while a member, conformed to all her divine regulations;---in fact the old dispensation was not abolished until he exclaimed on the cross, "it is finished." Did he, during the whole of his eventful life, ever intimate that the Psalms of David, which had been dictated by His Spirit, and collected by his authority, were "Jewish," (a term used, as 'G.' would say, ad captandum vulgus)— did He ever insinuate that for Him and his followers to sing them, as they stood on record, was to "pervert them to a use for which they were never intended?" (No 2, 4.) Did he gospelize any one or all of them, or command it to be done? Did He lay the Psalter aside and adopt hymns of man's composing, as preferable to his own, as has been done by His followers in these degenerate times? And after he rose from the dead, and sent forth his disciples to establish the New Testament Church, did he caution them against the use of the Psalın book, and assure them that it was no longer adapted to the circumstances of the Church-that its whole character must be changed before it would be fit for use-and that they must make, and encourage

others to make their own songs-that those Psalms (Ps 96, 98, &c.) which they had but yesterday sung as "new songs," were now old and out of date, the dispensation being changed;---in a word, is there a single intimation in the whole of the New Testament that Christ either used any thing else himself in praise, or authorised his disciples and followers to employ any thing else than the book of Psalms, which we have shewn, was used exclusively in Divine worship, when he made his humble advent. Surely there is not. What then follows? Why, in the conduct of Christ, the King and Head of the Church, we have, what has been called for, "indubitable example" that the Psalms of David are to be used exclusively under the gospel dispensation. Did the blessed Savior sing these Psalms from childhood to his agony,---did he die with them upon his lips, and shall his example avail nothing with his followers---shall it be said that they do not contain christian instruction-and shall a thousand other "hard speeches" be uttered respecting these Divine songs, with the repitition of which I will not wound your christian sensibilities?

But farther; not only was Christ himself a member of the Old Testament Church, the Apostles likewise were members, and thousands too of the Jews that were converted on the day of Pentecost, and after that day, and they had all been accustomed from childhood to the exclusive use of David's Psalms in Divine worship---it was the only Psalm book among them, and as it had been compiled by inspired authority they did not dare to add any thing to it while they were members of the Old Testament Church, And now when they became members of the New Testament Church, could a system of Psalmody in any degree similar to that which now exists in the church have been adopted or commended without producing some excitement among a people, wedded not only to their "lively oracles," but even to their "beggarly elements?" It is abundantly evident from the Acts of the Apostles, from Romans, Galatians, and also from Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews, that there was among the Jews a very strong opposition to the entire relinquishment of their carnal ordinances, their "meats, and drinks, and divers washings But what would have been the commotion among them had they been told that they must not only abandon their legal ceremonies, but likewise lay aside a part of their lively oracles---a part too, so dear to their hearts, that, at the very mention of it, all the sympathies of their ancestors were awakened, as they sat weeping by the Rivers of Babylon, and they were carried back to Zion with agonizing emotions, exclaiming, “If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, (where I have heard these songs so often

sung,) let my right hand forget her cunning---let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth."

Had the Apostles told the people that their Psalm book was no longer adapted to the worship of God---that it had lost all its sacredness, so that a hymn, by whomsoever composed, whether the religion had religion or not, provided it was "orthodox, dévotional, and proper," was just as sacred as one of their beloved, heaven-inspired songs--had the Apostles used such language as this, or any thing akin to it what a tremendous tumult would have been raised among the people, and surely some account of the commotion would have reached this distant generation. But there is not a word said in the New Testament that there was any excitement among the people on the subject of Psalmody;---they had no fear about losing their Psalm book. or about having it mutilated and marred, or of having the "defective" effusions of men obtruded upon them them.

Any change in the character of their Psalmody, or any excitement on the subject among the first Christians, is never once alluded to, while there was excitement on almost every other subject. From this the fair, and necessary, and scriptural inference is, that a change in the Psalmody of the Church was neither contemplated nor commanded---that the practice of the Church on this subject after the death of Christ, was just what it was before it; that is, the Psalms of David were used exclusively. Here, then, is the "indubitable example. And if Christ and his Apostles, and the first converts to Chris-tianity, all confined themselves, in praise, to the Psalms of David, shall their example, brethren, have no authoritative influence upon. our own hearts? In my next I expect to give the "plain précept." Very affectionately yours, &c. W. Re H..

GERMAN CATHOLICS LEAVING ROME.---The London Patriot, of January 2d, states, on the authority of German papers, that an excommunicated Romish priest has addressed a pamphlet to the lower orders of the Roman clergy, calling upon them to unite their exertions with him, in the pulpit and in the confessional chair, against the Ultramontanists and the Bishop of Rome, in order to found by council and synod, a national German Catholic church, independent of Ro man darkness. He wants to abolish auricular confession, the celebration of the mass in Latin, the making of proselytes by money, the

512

stultification of the lower clergy by the commands of the higher hierarchy, and, at the same time, he asks for liberty to think and to investigate for every clergyman, and permission to marry for all priests. The police have seized the pamphlet. The priest Czerski, who stands at the head of a small German Catholic community in Schneidemuhl in Prussia, distributes the holy Supper in both forms, without auricular confession, and reads the mass according to the recognized Roman rule, but in German, and omitting what refers to the saints and their intercession. In Bromberg the excitement in favor of the new German Catholic Church is very great, snd from Konigsberg an ad"dress has been sent to Czerski, signed by 43 of the most influential men in east and west Prussia, including several professors of the University, the chaplain of the garrison, teachers and directors of schools and several members of the upper law courts.---Boston Recorder.

BATTLES ON THE SABBATH.

The anniversary of the battle of Waterloo, which resulted in the downfall of Napoleon, was commemorated with the usual pomp and splendor at Apsley House, the residence of the Duke of Wellington, on the 18th of June. The "hero of a hundred battles," the Duke of Wellington, entertained in princely style the officers who fought under him on that memorable occasion. This great battle, which threw half of Britain into mourning, was fought on the Sabbath. Napoleon who began this terrible conflict with the armies of the allied powers, might have been defeated if the battle had been commenced and fought on any other day. But he was defeated on the Sabbath. It was Sal' ath-breaking on a great scale, but none the more justifiable because nations and armies were engaged in it. Great men and military men, of whom it has been said of the latter, "they know no Sabbath," are no more justified in violating the Sabbath on a large scale than on a small one, no more than the most humble in the land.

The battle of Waterloo was fought on the Sabbath, and Napoleon, who began it, was defeated. The battle of New Orleans was also fought on the Sabbath, in which the British army, who began the battle, were defeated, although composed of veteran soldiers---and were defeated with terrible slaughter. The naval battle fought by Commodore M'Donough with the British fleet on Lake Champlain, took place on the Sabbath. The British began the attack and were defeated, although their force was greatly superior to that of the American. The difference was so great, that it was a matter of wonder that a small American force should have been able to capture a force so greatly its superior. Here, then, are three battles, not to name more, which were fought on the Sabbath, and in each case the force which began the attack were defeated. The coincidence is striking, how

From the New York Evangelist.

A FRIGHTENED DISCIPLE.

case like the one

Now a fright is

People do not feel very well when they are frightened. And they do not look very well either. As to the last item, a in the caption, is one of the worst cases I know of. a frightful affair, if there be a real object of terror. But when the fright is occasioned by nothing adapted to such a result, there is something pitiful in the weakness of the sufferer, and ludicrous in the development made of himself.

A frightened disciple! But the very best authority has testified that "the righteous are as bold as a lion." And one who was once known to say, and I thought most were like him, "I will not fear though the earth be removed and the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea." Then the one I saw could not have been near akin to the one just named; indeed, one must look sharp to discover any relationship at all. But my readers will use their own judgment when I have given them the case.

1. He was frightened by a cloud! The precious privileges of the Sabbath would commence in an hour or two. But that cloud! It did not look good natured. There was no thunder or lightning about it. But there might be water; and if there was, and if it should let the dwellers below know it by an actual descent of the drops, and he should happen to be one of the number, how lamentable! He get wet! It was a terrific thought. I have read of an ancient disciple who was "a night and a day in the deen," and a good soaking he must have got by it. And he was not frightened either. It would take more water than there was in all the ocean, to frighten him. But the danger, not very pressing either, of a little sprinkling, did the work for the man I am noticing, and therefore I do not think a man could pitch a biscuit over the moral distance between him and Paul. 2. A supposition frightened him. The hour of a prayer meeting was approaching. It was in his mind to go. But a supposition started up, like a serpent out of the grass. "I may be called on to pray. I do not like it. I do not think I could offer up a prayer in my present state. My heart does not sympathize in such a business. I believe I will not go." The supposition stalked like a frightful spectre before him. It palsied his purpose, and his seat was vacant at the meeting for prayer. I believe many have been frightened from such meetings in the same way. I should like to see a group of them give each in his turn, his view of the passage, "Men ought always to pray and not to faint."

VOL. II-SIG. 33