Songs of Praise?

It is well-known that the Presbyterian Church in Scotland has sung metrical psalms since the Reformation. Hymns were introduced in the second half of the nineteenth century in each of the then-existing Presbyterian denominations (the Church of Scotland, the Free Church of Scotland, and the United Presbyterian Church). Prior to the nineteenth, there were two other forms of praise that were considered by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland – those called Spiritual Songs and those called Paraphrases. Here is a survey of the discussions concerning each, along with some questions and comments. 

Spiritual Songs 

The Old Scottish Psalter of 1565 only contained psalms. Additional songs were added in later editions and the edition of 1634 contained fourteen extra songs (they were entitled The Ten Commandments, A Prayer, The Lord’s Prayer, Veni Creator, The Song of Simeon, The XII Articles of Christian Belief, The Humble Suit of a Sinner, The Lamentation of a Sinner, The Complaint of a Sinner, The Song of the Blessed Virgin Mary, The Lamentation, The Song of Moses, A Thanksgiving after Receiving the Lord’s Supper, and A Spiritual Song). 

In 1647, the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland discussed Rous’ Psalms (which had been recommended by the Westminster Assembly) and authorised a revision of them. The same Assembly asked Zachary Boyd, a minister and author of several volumes of Scriptural Songs, to translate the other Scriptural Songs in metre, after which he should report his work to the Commission of Assembly which would arrange for his translations to be sent down to Presbyteries for consideration before the next General Assembly. 

By the 1648 General Assembly, the revised text of Rous’ Psalms was ready to send to Presbyteries. The same could not be said of Boyd’s work on the additional songs. John Adamson and Thomas Crawford were asked to revise Boyd’s labours, which indicates that the Assembly was not content with Boyd’s work. 

In addition to Boyd, two other men had been asked by the General Assembly to paraphrase songs from the Old and New Testaments. David Leitch from Ellon was working on some in 1648 in Edinburgh and Robert Lowrie was working on some in 1650. Neither man submitted any of their work to the General Assembly. 

In 1649, the General Assembly decided that the Commission should revise and issue the new Psalter in 1650, without waiting for the revised Scriptural Songs. It is possible that the General Assembly intended to include these Songs in subsequent Psalters. Whether it did or not, it did not have the opportunity because it was dissolved in 1653 and did not meet again until 1690. 

In 1695, the General Assembly again raised the issue of revising Scripture Songs but nothing appears to have been done. Ten years later, in 1705, the General Assembly raised the matter again, asking ‘their Commission to revise the book called Scriptural Songs in order to be prepared for public use and report to the next Assembly’. This Assembly appointed two committees and over the next three years various reports and Acts sending the Songs down to Presbyteries for consideration were passed. (It is not clear of these Songs were Boyd’s or those by Patrick Simson, a leading minister, who had been removed from his charge during the Covenanting period, but was restored after the General Assembly resumed its regular meetings in 1690 – he spent a lot of his time when banished from his pulpit writing spiritual songs.) 

In 1708, the following Act was passed on 27th April: ‘The General Assembly do Instruct and Appoint their Commission maturely to consider the printed version of the Scripture Songs, with the remarks of the Presbyteries thereupon: And after Examination thereof, they are hereby Authorised and Impowered to conclude and establish that version, and to publish and emit it for the publick use of the Church, as was formerly done on the like occasion, and when our version of the Psalms was published in the year 1649.’ 

Despite taking steps to get Presbyteries involved in the process, only two Presbyteries (Ross and Kirkcudbright) sent in their remarks by the following March. The Commission in March therefore decided not to make any ‘further procedure in this matter at this time, until the remarks of other presbyteries were also brought in.’ This is the last reference to Scriptural Songs in the records of the General Assembly or in the records of the Commissions of Assembly. 

It looks as if the barrier to including such Songs in the Psalter was the refusal of the vast majority of Presbyteries to heed the Acts of Assembly requiring them to review the revised Scriptural Songs. Possible reasons are (1) they could not be bothered, an unlikely reason; (2) they preferred the unrevised versions, also an unlikely reason; (3) they did not want them re-introduced in public worship, a likely reason and one for which they were prepared to ignore the Assembly’s intentions. 

Scottish Paraphrases – The First Collection (1751-1755) 

Before 1750, the term ‘paraphrases’ was used of metrical versions of the psalms. Metrical versions of other scripture passages were known as Scriptural Songs. Around 1750, the term was used to describe these passages and was no longer used of the psalms. 

In 1741, a request was made to the General Assembly ‘that it be recommended to some fit persons to turn some passages of the Old and New Testament into metre to be used in Churches as well as in private families.’ This request was passed on to the Commission, but it did nothing about it. The 1742 Assembly received a similar request from the Presbytery of Dundee and decided to appoint a committee of nineteen ministers to consider the matter and report their findings. This committee failed to report at either the 1743 or 1744 Assemblies. The 1744 Assembly enlarged the committee and appointed Patrick Cumming as its convener (he was minister of the Old Church, Edinburgh, and Professor of Church History in Edinburgh University). 

This enlarged committee returned the following year (1745) with a collection of forty-five paraphrases. Immediately the collection was sent to a Revision Committee who approved it on the following day, and recommended that it should be sent down to Presbyteries for approval, with the additional requirement that a failure to respond would be taken as a sign of approval. There was opposition to the recommendation, with the outcome that it was agreed that the collection should be sent to Presbyteries merely for their opinion and comments. 

In 1746, only a few Presbyteries had responded; the same happened in 1747 and 1748. An explanation was given at the 1749 Assembly for the slow response: many Presbyteries had lost their copies because of the recent troubles connected to the Jacobite rebellion. The Assembly ordered a reprint which was sent out in July 1750, but again in 1751 only a few Presbyteries replied. The 1751 Assembly, however, recommended that the Paraphrases could be used by families. Even by 1755, thirty-two Presbyteries had failed to respond. 

The attempt to introduce paraphrases had been going on for fourteen years, yet it failed despite repeated attempts of the General Assembly to get Presbyteries to recommend the collection. Two aspects are clear. One is that the Assembly had a sufficiently large group that demanded a prolonged attempt to introduce paraphrases; the other is that the majority of Presbyteries had no interest in introducing paraphrases. The only success that the pro-paraphrases group had was that the collection had been recommended by the Assembly for use in families. 

Scottish Paraphrases – The Second Collection (1775-1781) 

In 1775, the Synod of Glasgow and Ayr informed the General Assembly that there were several ministers and congregations who wanted to use the collection of forty-five Paraphrases that had been compiled in 1745 and the Synod requested that they be allowed to use them. A committee was formed to consider the matter. 

In 1778 the committee informed the Assembly that a large collection of Paraphrases had been compiled. Although the Assembly gave the committee permission to print the collection and send it for review to Presbyteries, the committee did not do so and continued to work on their assignment. 

Eventually in 1781, the committee completed its labours. The Assembly passed an Act in connection with this collection of sixty-seven Paraphrases and five hymns. Among its concerns were the following: [Having received the Report of the Committee,] ‘Which being considered by the General Assembly and they having deliberated thereupon, the Assembly appoints these Translations and Paraphrases to be transmitted to the several Presbyteries of the Church, in order that they may report their opinion concerning them to the ensuing General Assembly; and in the meantime, allows this Collection of sacred Poems to be used in Public Worship in congregations where the minister finds it for edification. The General Assembly renews the appointment of their Committee, with powers to judge of any corrections or alterations of these Poems that may be suggested, previous to the transmission of the same, and with directions to cause a proper number of copies, with such corrections as they approve, to be printed for the consideration of Presbyteries and for public use.’ 

This is the only legislation of Paraphrases ever passed for allowing their use in public worship. It allowed their use for a period defined as ‘in the meantime’ which was to last until the next General Assembly when the re-appointed Committee would report on action taken on any comments received from Presbyteries. Surprisingly, or perhaps not, given the disinterest shown previously by Presbyteries in introducing the Paraphrases into public worship, the committee never gave in another report. 

The outcome is that the use of Paraphrases after ‘the meantime’ was over has not been legislated for by a General Assembly. Nevertheless, Paraphrases continued to be used in public worship in some congregations in the Church of Scotland, and this practice was continued by such congregations that joined the Free Church of Scotland in 1843. 

As far as I can see with regard to the Scottish paraphrases, there are three areas that need clarification. One is their legitimacy according to church law, which basically comes down to the simple question, Do we have authority to sing them? That question, in itself, is not a statement of approval or disapproval of paraphrases. It is based on the necessity of having Assembly approval for the elements we use in worship, and I don’t think such approval exists with regard to paraphrases. If someone can show me that such approval exists, then that question is answered. 

Second, we do not have a definition of a paraphrase. Most would say it is a metrical version of a Bible passage. Yet there are many songs in the current paraphrases which do not meet that description (for example, what passage is ‘O God of Bethel’ based on? I think I know the incident that may have suggested it). So what kind of song do people have in mind when asking for paraphrases? 

Third, what authority do we have for turning prose passages into paraphrases? I can understand the argument that we should sing other Bible songs in public worship as well as psalms (although I don’t agree with it). But I am not aware of any indication that we should turn prose into paraphrases.