[4.] But the most objectionable of all features has been the dissociation of old standard hymns from the stately tunes to which congregations have been accustomed to sing them, connecting them with trifling melodies.

This has been done in some cases in which unwarranted liberties have not only been taken with the hymn, but the tune which has been joined to it is altogether out of keeping with the words.

So it has been with two of Watts' most serious hymns, "Alas, and did my Saviour bleed" and "Come we that love the Lord." In both cases a chorus has been added that we hesitate to characterize. The words of the chorus are a deep and pitiable decline and the music is almost sacrilege. This is a serious charge; but let the tunes be examined. How can any devout worshiper, before the cross of his crucified Saviour, take up such a strain as that which this Gospel chorus furnishes. It is inexplicable. The other chorus is simply tawdry, picnic music-unworthy of pilgrims to the heavenly city.

[5.] The fact that a number of the standard hymns of the Church are always added to the editions of Gospel Songs is sufficient criticism.

The exceptional and temporary are thus made to pass current; an imprimatur is attached to them. Frequently in Gospel meetings, at the very climax of interest the standard hymns were used. They compelled their own adoption. The audience had reached a spiritual frame to which they alone could give expression.

[6.] The multiplication of these Gospel tunes settled into a mannerism.

This would have been an evil, even if the mannerism itself was not specially obnoxious. The old Scotch tunes, as we have seen, were good tunes; but their inflexible style was disheartening. The error in the case of the Gospel tunes was more serious. They created a musical idiom which was undesirable. They degenerated into a kind of musical "slang," which while it was eminently sincere and pious, yet operated to deprave the purity of praise as its counterpart in language operates to deprave purity in speech. Many a worshiper has been misled with regard to the qualities of a true hymn and the nature of sacred music. Reverence degenerates into familiarity, and solemn worship is displaced by musical harangue. The best effects of these songs were therefore local and temporary.

And yet the Gospel Songs have had this permanent influence; they have served to suggest a better use of the better tunes. Our congregational singing has been much improved by observing their methods. It might be still more improved, would we only heed the lessons we have been taught. There is by far too much sameness in our praise. We sing most of our tunes at the same rate and with the same degree of force. The minister and the choir care all too little whether any attempt is made to interpret the sentiment of the hymn or to express the meaning of the tune to which it is set. The great congregations

which sang the Gospel Songs were taught to "shade" them. There was always an interacting sympathy between choir and congregation, which we might continue to cultivate as well as not; and the variety introduced in the method of singing the same song might often be introduced in our church services-particularly at evening worship-to the greater pleasure and profit of the worshipers. If the same interest were taken in the proper rendering of our solid church tunes as was shown in the Gospel Songs their great and manifest superiority to the Gospel Songs would quickly and emphatically appear.

Notwithstanding what has been written above, the student ought not entirely to neglect the study of the Gospel Songs. After all, the proportion of good hymns and good tunes to the whole number does not reveal a great disparity to that displayed in those of the church at large. When we consider that some four hundred thousand hymns have been published, of which not more than five hundred are in common use, and not more than one hundred and fifty attain to the first rank, we should be somewhat sparing of our criticisms.

Still further, there are, and ever will be, occasions when the best Gospel Songs may be wisely and effectively employed, and the student should seek, by careful examination, an intelligent judgment of their respective merits. He is already sufficiently familiar with them. They have been so generally sung that we need not attempt a detailed notice of the authors,

either of hymns or tunes. His judgment will be materially assisted by inquiring which have been received into permanent collections, and it should be matured by a review of the material, which his studies now render him more competent to pursue.

CHAPTER XXI

THE CO-ORDINATION OF PUBLIC

PRAISE

We have been concerned, in this volume, with the acquisition of the best possible in Sacred Song. We have traced the history of the words and music in which it has been expressed. We have endeavored to reach some standard by which hymns and their tunes may be tried. We have sought to realize that the best words and the best music must be united, in order to the highest praise. And now we reach our final question: what relation should sacred song bear to all those other exercises which are conducted in the sanctuary? What is its proper co-ordination?

We assume that it will be admitted that the chief function of the congregation is worship. The service is properly called, "public worship"; the place in which it is held is a "house of worship." God, then, is the one supreme factor, and all acts of worship take character from their relation to him.

Omitting certain special acts of worship which are performed occasionally, the three chief features are the following: God speaks to us; we speak to God; and one speaks to us in the name of God. God speaks to us through his holy Word; we speak to God in prayer and praise; and the ordained minister speaks to us in God's name, in the sermon. Each of these