Religion. ARE THE PREVALENT FORMS OF WORSHIP IN AFFIRMATIVE ARTICLE.-II. IMPERFECTION is the characteristic of man's work, and does not necessarily show that it is ineffective; nor do change and innovation always argue improvement. Let us not be thought illiberal and slavishly attached to conservatism. We are fully alive to the happy effects which both spirits-those of Change and Innovation-produce, either singly or when blended together in equal proportions. It is to these spirits of doubt and inquiry, which the more liberal spread of the educational agencies of the present century has mainly contributed to produce, by opening the mind to a fuller enjoyment of literary pursuits, and a more thorough appreciation of all that pertains to the heightening and sharpening of the intellectual abilities, and by awakening the mind to the lamentable and indisputable fact, that we have been grovelling along the erroneous paths tracked out in former ages by our predecessors in complete blindness, that we owe the means of uprooting false systems and opinions, and of supplanting those by others of an opposite nature, as well as possessing ourselves with an impetus to examine and improve any imperfect system or institution, though it may happen to have the authority of the highest antiquity to recommend its acceptance. This spirit of investigation has no limits. It embraces every subject, as well the ordinary matters of daily life as the more abstruse ones of metaphysics. Nor do religion and the forms of public worship escape its universal sweep. No age has been so prolific in religious bickerings and controversial works. The two earlier volumes of Colenso's investigations on the Pentateuch, as the Literary Notes" in this Magazine for last month inform us, have produced no fewer than seventy-five controversial publications. And even this debate has its origin in these books and the inquiries they have occasioned. It should be wished that they will produce unity in our opinions, and gather us together into one flock and under one Shepherd, but many fear that they will scatter the seeds of dissension still farther. In this fear we have no participation. Let us hope that our own debate will not close with so unsuccessful a result-a hope which we may surely regard as well founded when we remember the class of readers whom we address; men sedulous of truth and critical in intellect, not given to ready acceptance of 66 unproven opinions, not prone to prejudice in favour of established dogmas unless reasonably defended. The chief terms of the proposition are "forms" and "worship," a right and full explanation of which we will endeavour to give before proceeding to the main subject of the debate; for on a correct understanding of these terms the force of our arguments will depend. Form, in a moral sense, is used for the manner of being or doing a thing according to rules; but this is not exactly the sense in which the word is used here, nor does this definition convey its full meaning. It means, we think, the modes in which worship is conducted, so long as these modes express the feelings of the worshipper, but no longer. Surely we are not to take it as signifying more than this. It cannot be that it embraces all that occupies the attention of the worshipper while in the house of God, for then the field of discussion would be boundless. Many are the ways by which the worshipper might be occupied; such, for instance, as reading the Scriptures, listening to the sermon, and similar others. Such acts as these cannot be called forms of worship; or else the infidel in his closet, or the vilest scoffer, may be worshippers. Worship is something more than mere forms, which are but the outer vestments in which religious feelings manifest themselves. Besides, all that occupies the attention of the worshipper in the house of God might include all that passes through his mind, whether of a religious or of a worldly nature; for a worshipper, immediately that spiritual thoughts give place to earthly ones, no more ceases to be a worshipper than a painter ceases to be a copyist immediately on his tossing aside his palette and brushes, or a bishop a divine, immediately on his laying aside his mitre and vestments. Thus we see that forms, as applied in the question, mean more the acts of the mind than those of the body, though we are well aware that these forms must have some expression, and this expression is found in prayer and praise, but not, as may at first sight appear, in the respective attitudes which generally accompany them. The other term, worship, is more readily dismissed; indeed, it needs scarcely an explanation, for in ordinary usage it means prayer and praise. The school divines, we believe, divide it into several kinds; but with these we have nothing to do, at least for the present. We accept and assume the christian meaning which we have just quoted. We are no believers in modern (so-called) miracles; nor can we join hand in hand with those that prate about judgments and visitations on man's sins, singly and collectively. Yet we do believe, and for this belief we have the highest authority, that of our Saviour himself,-that prayers are answered, even with regard to our worldly prosperity. To this goodness of the Almighty, in granting the petitions of His people, we ascribe chiefly the incomparable prosperity of this christian country. The effectiveness of our forms of worship is, we think, manifestly shown in this success. We wish to draw no comparisons between this and other countries as proofs of the assertion; yet we would point to the circum stance, that wherever our religion (which we well know is more in harmony with the teaching of the Bible) prevails, there is sure to be found superiority. Many of our readers, doubtless, will reject this view as Pharisaical, and some few, perhaps, will even deny that any worldly advantage results from prayer. But surely these cannot but allow that religion has a beneficial effect on the mind, -in enlarging its comprehension for spiritual pleasure, in mode. rating its passions, and in a thousand other ways. Its hallowing influence has never been denied. Yet are these objectors so inconsistent as to refuse to allow that the moral power of man directs his actions to a considerable extent; that it adds an earnestness and disinterestedness to his thoughts and actions, which have been the means of benefiting man not more in spiritual matters than in worldly ones? No, it cannot be that any educated being will refuse it this especial power. How, then, can he escape the necessary consequence, that it influences and directs our actions, and thereby produces a beneficial result in the worldly prosperity of man? We could add the opinions of numberless divines and others, in testimony of our assertions, not only respecting the power of religion, but also of the excellency of its forms, by means of which it finds expression; but these cannot be unfamiliar to the readers of such a Magazine as this. Our Worship, we have said, consists in prayer and praise. It has been, and still is, a matter of no inconsiderable debate, whether these are more properly performed by preconcerted forms or liturgies, or by extemporaneous addresses to the Almighty. Both have their advantages and disadvantages; but neither has been proscribed by the sacred writers as opposed to the other. opinion is, that the form which is adopted in the English Church, and which is generally followed in the dissenting churches and chapels-the liturgical form,—is the more effective. For it prevents the absurd, extravagant, or impious addresses to God, which folly or fanaticism is always in danger of producing. It affords, too, the congregations the opportunity of joining in the prayers, which they cannot well do, if indeed at all, when the prayers are extemporaneous; for before the congregation can consider and assent to what is uttered, their attention is called away by that which immediately succeeds. Besides, in extemporaneous addresses the clergyman is solely responsible for them,-for their matter and composition on both of which he would most probably, to gain the good opinion of his congregation, bestow that labour and rhetoric which are incompatible with the fervour of contrite prayer. We will now examine the article signed M. H., and we trust to show that this gentleman's arguments are not so convincing as at first sight they appear. The definitions which he starts with are not strictly correct. We may say, without egotism, that those given by "Adam Bede" and ourself are more logical, and cannot but find readier acceptance on the part of our readers. We cannot see what instruction can possibly have to do with worship. Instruc tion is no element in worship; or a schoolmaster would necessarily possess more of that element than others, though he should be the most impious of men. The explanation is too vague and general. It seems, and the rest of his paper distinctly shows, that he has made worship depend chiefly on the conduct, and not, as it evidently does, on the inward feelings. He then attacks our forms, and tells us that the adjustment of the various parts that go to make worship is not proportionate. This is questionable. While one would assert it, another would deny it. Opinions are various. Some may prefer, or think that one part of worship ought to predominate; others hold just the opposite view, and maintain that another part should. An alteration in this part of the Church service would create a great dissension, as would any alteration, in fact, of the less objectionable part of the service. 66 The long account which follows,- -we were almost saying digression,-on prayer has little or nothing to do with the proof of the side M. H. has taken; so we omit any remark. In passing, though, we will notice his short-sightedness and singular tendency to take words as they stand, rather than the meaning they convey. Lord, teach us to pray," he says is mockery with a formula before us. Can M. H. soberly think this is a request for God to put prayer into our mouths, and not the spirit of prayer into our hearts? Taken literally, "teach us to pray" would not have the meaning M. H. attaches to it. A prayer is not the mere expression of words. Nor is to pray merely to utter words. Let him refer even to his own definition, as given in his article, and he will find an inconsistency that will be ludicrous to himself as well as his readers. Then, on page 23, M. H. begins a dissertation on the proper attitudes to be taken while engaged in prayer (which, however much may be said in opposition, we, as Churchmen, do not wish to see despised, though we cannot think them so important as he has endeavoured to inculcate), a dissertation which comes under the same objections as a former part of M. H.'s paper, that of being foreign to the question. We started with saying that the forms of worship, being the plans adopted by ourselves, must necessarily partake, to some extent, of the imperfectness which always characterizes human works. And now, at the end of our article, we would not be so inconsistent as to claim more than this; yet we would ask, and to do so we would descend to the definition M. H. has given to the terms in which the question is stated, What renders these forms ineffective, that could be altered without materially affecting the whole? In a recent criticism on our Poet Laureate, the critic affirmed that any change or alteration of even a single word in one of his poems could not be done without serious injury to the force or rhythm of the whole piece. This, too, we are sure our innovators on forms that have stood so many years, and have met with the approval of thousands, would find on meddling with this more important structure. ELPISTICOS. NEGATIVE ARTICLE.-II. OUR first article was devoted to a review of the forms of prayer in use in British places of worship: in this it is our intention to show that the modes in which christian psalmody is conducted, and the manner in which instruction is conveyed, defeat or neutralize the design of praise and preaching. The prominence given to praise in the Old Testament Scriptures affords a clear idea of the usefulness and acceptableness of psalmody in divine worship. The only enjoyment anticipated by our Lord in the vale of sorrows, through which His path lay to the mediatorial throne, was participation in the songs of His people-"I will declare Thy name unto My brethren; in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto Thee.' The "fruit of our lips" is shown by an apostle to be musical sacrifices, as exhilarating to worshippers as, through Christ, they are acceptable to God. Thanksgiving is the only return, man can make to his munificent Benefactor. Psalmody is a means of grace. It stills the tumults of the passions; tranquillizes the mind; is a preparation for contemplating the divine perfections, and for the reception of the impressions which the exposition of the Scriptures is intended to produce. With the mind constantly affected by sensuous influences, man requires something to rouse his spiritual susceptibility. To move the affections, to awe into veneration, to "cast soft and noble hints into the soul," nothing, as a means, is more adapted than well-conducted psalmody. The New Testament encourages it as of pre-eminently social tendency. To be "filled with the Spirit, speaking to ourselves in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs; singing and making melody in our hearts to the Lord," is one of the precepts of Christianity. Allusion is made in the same passage to those who, by animal stimulants, excite their spirits, and give vent to their merriment in ribald and licentious songs; but if any Christian is "merry, let him sing psalms." If any man wants healthy excitement, let him, the apostle enjoins, "be filled with the Spirit." To prepare themselves for divine communications, holy men of God placed themselves under the influence of music. David and his harp were almost inseparable companions; and it would be impossible to calculate the extent to which that Psalmist still trains the human heart to devotion. If we are to glorify God "in body and spirit," it is legitimate as well as natural to awaken our susceptibility to the power of musical sounds. The apostolic precept-to "make melody in our hearts unto the Lord," shows that it is justifiable to make praise to God a pleasurable exercise to the worshipper. From the words, "speaking unto your selves in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs," we perceive that Scripture both recognises and sanctions the influence of music as a means of grace. As by example we are to "provoke one another to good works," so by singing we are to "speak to one another for |