THE

NEW ENGLANDER.

No. CLIII.

NOVEMBER, 1879.

ARTICLE I.-NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS IN PUBLIC

WORSHIP.

THERE is reason to believe that the public worship of nonliturgical churches is not entirely satisfactory to a large proportion of the clergymen and people connected with those churches. Indications of dissatisfaction are to be found in numerous attempts which have been made to change the forms of worship, and which have resulted in considerable diversity of order, in various innovations, and in not a little superfluous ornamentation. Any one who has worshiped with different congregations knows, for example, that the same order of service does not prevail in all the churches. One is never quite sure what will come first, or what is coming next. Even at the end, when the benediction is to be pronounced, he is not certain whether he is to stand or to sit, to step instantly into the aisle or to wait a moment with bowed head. Preachers who find themselves in many pulpits are sometimes heard to complain of the annoyances to which this lack of uniformity subjects them. It is not unusual to find, also, that the respon sive reading of the Psalms, or the congregational use of the

Lord's Prayer, or the recitation of the Apostles' Creed, or all of these new features, have been added to the forms of worship more commonly observed. And, besides, in many of the large churches, trained choirs are employed, often at considerable expense, to render complicated music, until the service sometimes becomes more ornate and pretentious than in any of the churches which are ritualistic. These departures from the one undeviating order which was once followed in all the churches are mentioned only to confirm the statement that there is dissatisfaction with the forms of worship we received from our fathers, and to show that the desire is very general at the present time to escape from the extreme simplicity and even bareness of outward forms with which they were so long contented.

Now it would be entirely useless, even if it were desirable, to think of pushing all the churches back into modes of wor ship with which they are no longer satisfied. It is as truly our liberty to seek for better ways of approaching God in our worship as to seek for more accurate statements of truth in our creeds. It is not my purpose, therefore, to complain of the changes which are going forward, but rather to point out the directions in which improvement may most hopefully be looked for. I do not, then, contend for the reduction of services in all our churches to absolute uniformity. Strict uniformity would give a service too short for some churches and too long for others. The congregation which is counted by hundreds or thousands is capable of sustaining an order of worship not simple enough for the congregation which is counted only by dozens or scores. And there certainly are no weighty reasons for consulting the convenience of occasional preachers in the arrangement of public worship, for we are in the habit of advocating permanent pastorates. The order of service becomes familiar to the people and pastor in each church, and the stranger within the gates will not be disturbed by slight deviations in the succession of prayer and praise if he finds the devout spirit. We cannot permit ourselves, either, to join in the cry which is so often raised against choirs of professional singers. A well trained choir has important functions in public worship, and it would be senseless to do away with it

733 altogether merely because in some instances it has exceeded its proper functions. And as for the additions which have been mentioned, it is freely admitted that there is no objection to them in themselves considered. No one can reasonably object to the use of the Lord's Prayer by the congregation. The Psalms have been the devotional poetry of the church in all ages. The Apostles' Creed is a confession of faith in which all Christians have long agreed. It is my opinion, however, that these additions have usually proved to be disappointing. They seem like an unsuccessful imitation of another kind of worship. They do not flow in harmoniously with the forms to which they are attached. They seem like parentheses, which are not without meaning, but which are only incidental to the real progress and genius of our more simple modes of worship, and which therefore serve only to make the exercises somewhat longer. If public worship in non-liturgical churches is unsatisfactory, it is not, in my judgment, because there are serious omissions, but because its characteristic elements have not been properly developed; and if this is true, our worship cannot become rich, complete, and devout, by slight additions from other sources.

Without further preface I proceed to indicate the directions in which improvement may reasonably be looked for. If the changes which are proposed can be brought about, our worship will be developed in accordance with the elements which have always distinguished it rather than by importations from without; some of the appendages already described will give way to what is vastly better; and choirs will be restricted to their proper but important functions.

The characteristics of devotional services in non-ritualistic churches are that the prayers are extemporaneous and that the worship of the congregation finds audible expression in sacred song. In these respects we have long been distinguished from ritualistic churches, where the prayers are by the book, and the people join in various confessions and responses. The fitness and fervor of the prayers in our churches depend on the devotional culture of the minister. When public prayer is devout, appropriate, and scriptural, much is already done to bring worshipers near to God. But, while too much cannot