Thomas Ohlgren
Dr. Westblade
18th Century Religion—Jonathan Edwards
November 22, 2013
For a
New Tradition:
Rationalist
Thought in the Regular Singing Controversy of Puritan New England
In
1723, Mr. Niles of Braintree, New England suspended Òseven or eight [members]
of the church for persisting in their singing by ruleÓ
(Hood 89). Their suspensions were later lifted but the question remains: just
how did a subject as inconsequential as singing excite
so much division? Often times the matter is portrayed as an instance of a
stubborn people clinging to old ideas and traditions. While it is true that the
Puritans were a conservative people, to dismiss the issue with that little
inspection is premature. Controversies usually become grand because of ideas.
With that in mind, one should first understand the PuritanÕs conception of
worship music and CalvinÕs thoughts on the matter before glibly dismissing the
introduction of singing by note. Then, it becomes clear that the controversy
surrounding the introduction of regular singing into Puritan New England is an
early instance of a fusion between Puritan orthodoxy and rationalist thought.
In
order to better understand the regular singing reform of the 1720s one should
first focus on CalvinÕs theology and theory of worship music. Then, one can
better understand the PuritanÕs conception of worship
music and ÒusualÓ way of singing in the 17th century. Lastly, this
paper will focus on the regular singing reform of the 1720s with its
rationalist roots and how that differs from the old way of singing of the 17th
century.
From
the time of the first settlements up through the 17th century, New
England congregations followed the musical theology of John Calvin. According
to Calvin, every part of the church service is justified and finds purpose in
the revealed word of God. This includes music. For Calvin, music is purely
intended for the glorification of God.
Further,
its form is provided for in the Bible. As Charles Garside Jr. explains, Calvin
agreed with Augustine, that Òno one is able to sing
things worthy of God unless he has received them from HimÓ (Garside 23). Accordingly,
the psalms of David are the only songs ÒreceivedÓ from God in scripture—a
view which Puritan clergymen held in the early
colonial period.
Besides
identifying the content of the songs, Calvin also deduced certain requirements
for the singing of the psalms. Garside identifies CalvinÕs three main
requirements: total commitment of the heart, intelligence, and memory. A total
commitment to the heart simply means that songs of praise must truly come from
the heart. By intelligence, Calvin writes: Òthe peculiar gift of man is to sing
knowing what he is sayingÓ (Garside 26). The people should be literate and
attentive to the words being sung, not Òwithout understandingÓ (Garside 26). To
sing without understanding would be to sing as the parrots do: beautifully, but
also neglecting the reason that comes with manÕs station in the world. Third,
Calvin hopes that the singer is not distracted by either the
text nor the music but fully immersed in the praise of God—freed
from distraction. This explains his insistence on memorizing the psalms.
Taken
together, it is evident Calvin concentrated on the content and text of the song,
more so than the actual beauty or structure of the music. His requirements for
singing are noteworthy but they nevertheless leave a treble clef empty and
unguided.
Of
course, this did not mean that there was total freedom within CalvinÕs theology
of music. Instruments were banned from use for fear of distraction and the
dangers they posed in appealing to the sensual side of man. Calvin spoke of
this in one of his sermons: Òthe invention of instruments had ministered rather
to manÕs pleasure than to his actual needsÓ (Covey 384). Additionally, the
entire congregation was expected to sing, not a set choir like the Lutherans. He
wanted the hearts of all to be engaged in the act of worship. In reality, then,
Calvin was strict about the structure of worship. But, because his views on
worship stemmed strictly from the confines of revealed theology these
qualifications seem justified. On the other hand, because Calvin drew solely
from revealed theology, he had a hard time establishing the actual music of a
ÔproperÕ worship service. The Bible has nothing to say about notes, melodies,
and treble clefs. If music is an art or science, as the regular singing
reformers believed, it would be impossible to extract that science from a
document about sin, atonement, and redemption.
Most 17th
century Puritans abided by CalvinÕs theology of music. They were, after all,
Calvinist reformers. In particular, this meant that Puritan psalmody maintained
a strict adherence to the scriptures, as Calvin would have hoped. Additionally,
as seen in John CottonÕs discourse, they concentrated upon the spiritual beauty
of the worship rather than the beauty of the musical sound.
In
order to examine CalvinÕs influence on Puritan psalmody one should look at the definitive
psalmody book in 17th century New England, The Bay Psalm Book. The first edition was released in 1640 by New
England clergymen who were eager garter international attention and display the
benevolence of the new world. True to CalvinÕs ignorance of musical
instruction, Ò[t]his first edition contains only
Psalms, there being no ÒSpiritual songs,Ó or hymnsÓ (Hood 21). Albeit, the end
of the book contains instructions—an Òadmonition to the
readerÓ—which contains vague instructions on setting the psalms to tunes.
All this is to say that the purpose of the psalm book was to set the Songs of
David to meter, not lay out notes and chords for the congregation to master.
Later versions
of The Bay Psalm Book continued to
focus on the words. There were many revisions of the book, all the way into the
18th century. Above all, the clergymen were worried about fidelity
to the text of the scripture. Hence, as George Hood puts it, Òits faults, as a
metrical version, designed to be sung, were many and palpableÓ (Hood 30). But,
as clergymen saw it, the musical faults in Puritan psalmody
were outweighed by the strict Biblicism being maintained. Nevertheless,
as this paper will later discuss, Puritan congregations developed a musical
tradition despite the lack of instruction.
Whereas
The Bay Psalm Book displays the 17th
Century PuritanÕs Calvinistic adherence to textual integrity, John CottonÕs
discourse on singing reveals another Calvinistic tendency in their worship
practices. The other noticeable musical approach the Puritans adopted from
Calvin was their emphasis on the spiritual beauty of the worship over the
beauty of the music. John CottonÕs 1647 treatise, Singing of Psalms a Gospel Ordinance, explores this idea with some
length. For one, the discourse supported CalvinÕs theology of music, namely
that music lay strictly within the confines of revealed theology. Cotton makes
no attempt to improve the quality of worship by adding written music or deducing
a natural philosophy about beauty in music. Rather, he believed the purpose and
form of worship was provided for in scripture. For Cotton, the glorification of God is increased by the spiritual beauty of the
singer, not by the music being sung. This is spelled out in his answer
to an objection about ÒcarnalÓ men singing in worship:
Though
their melody be more beautiful and glorious to the outward appearance, as being
more artificial and more musical: yet seeing the Spirit of Grace is more
abundantly poured out in the New
Testament, then in the old, if the holy Singers sin? with
more life and grace of the Spirit, our melody is the more beautiful and
glorious before the Lord, and his spiritual Saints, though theirs was more
beautiful and glorious in the outward sense. (Irwin 179).
Joyce Irwin rightly notes: Òthe
quality of the music, therefore, is determined not by the excellence of the
performance but by the degree of spiritual arousalÓ (Irwin 179). As Cotton and
Calvin see it, quality music was more likely to appeal to the sensual pleasures
of man than to glorify God. Consequently, the musical quality waned throughout
the 17th century but, again, this was tertiary compared to the
Calvinist calling to strict Biblicism. Besides, an informal singing tradition
did develop despite a lack of formality in rules and notes.
The
Òold wayÓ of singing, as it was called, was essentially an oral tradition. The
tradition consisted of a limited number of tunes sung in memory. Often times
the tunes were embellished and Òlined outÓ by a parish clerk or some other
Congregational leader. Paul R. Osterhout explains
this process of lining out: Òtypically, the psalm would be read in prose, a
tune would be chosen and announced, and someone would chant the psalm, one or
two lines at a time. Then the congregation, sometimes aided by a chorister, would
join in singing those linesÓ (Osterhout 127). This
process would be repeated through the end of the psalm. Because most
congregations were not musically educated, church members often became
dependent upon the leaders and this tradition of lining out.
Some
musical reforms were made during the 17th century, but they were
unable to unify worship music in New England. Ultimately, congregations were
left in the dark when it came to the art of singing. Churches realized this,
too: Òthere was for want of a proper supply of tunes, a general dullness and
monotony in the music of the churchÓ (Hood 57). One of the minor reforms
occurred in 1690, whereby music was appended to the Bay Psalm Book. This ÒmusicÓ attached was but a step in the right
direction, nothing like the introduction of regular singing which would come
twenty some years later. The music included many errors and even lacked the
bars for the notes. Note some of the musical directions included in the
appendage: Òthese two tunes, begin your first note low, in regard the tune ascends
eight notes above itÓ (Hood 59). Instruments were not used, so the degree of
pitch indicated was unknown. It is unsurprising, then, that by the end of the
17th century congregations throughout New England were unable to sing
more than three or four tunes (Hood 86)
And, of
these three or four tunes, no two congregations sung the same version. Thomas
Walter remarked on the ordeal, saying it sounded Òlike
five hundred different tunes roared out at the same time,Ó producing noises Òso
hideous and disorderly, as is bad beyond expressionÓ (Hood 84). Still, the
Clergymen should not be surprised considering so little emphasis was laid on the
actual beauty of the music.
That
all changed in the 1720s. Shockingly, the beauty of the music began to concern
a number of clergymen in the early 18th century. In a sermon, Thomas
Symmes commented on the state of singing: Òit is to
be feared, singing must be wholly omitted in some places, for want of skill, if
this art is not revivedÓ (Hood 85). Mr. Symmes was
not alone. According to Laura L. Becker, between 1720 and 1730 Òno fewer than
thirty-one clergymenÓ preached in favor of the new way of singing that was
being expounded (Becker 83).
The new
way of singing being endorsed by clergymen in the 1720s was called Òregular
singing.Ó As opposed to the Òlining outÓ that most congregations practiced, the
regular singing movement introduced patterns and notes into the psalm-books and
sought to base worship songs on the common rules of music.
Much
has been written on the effects of the Regular Singing movement throughout New
England. However, this paper will focus on the ways in which the Regular
Singing reform can be viewed as an early instance of Puritan orthodoxy mingling
with enlightenment rationalism. The works of Thomas Symmes
and Thomas Walter, in particular, reveal this fusion if not solely by their striking
dissimilarity to the musical approach of John Cotton.
For
context, one should remember that Boston in the 1720s was a thriving,
metropolitan city. The new world was gaining attention just as early Clergymen
had hoped. But, this had consequences. Boston became an intellectual hotspot,
taking in as many new ideas as its puritan ministers hoped it was sending out. Writers
and thinkers like John Locke were being imported to the states—primarily
through the University system.
Thomas
Symmes published The
Reasonableness of Regular Singing in 1720. The sermon is a defense of
regular singing, directed towards those who still preferred the usual way. As
Joyce Irwin points out, the very title Òis evidence of the passing of strict biblicismÓ (Irwin 182). There are no references to
scripture in the title, an uncommon approach for a Puritan minister. His
arguments are even more revealing. Symmes provided
four main points to advocate singing by note: history, melody, rationality, and
scripture. Interestingly, scripture is only the basis for one of his four points.
This should be compared to CottonÕs work in 1640 which
centered every paragraph on scripture. As a clear indication of rationalist
thought in the regular singing controversy SymmesÕ
third argument should be noted.
In
is third argument SymmesÕ places reason in a special
place of authority. To be clear, it would be heresy for Symmes
to place human reason above the authority of scripture. Yet, he comes close to
doing so, at least when it comes to music. In fact, he has no reservations
about submitting the singing controversy to the dictates of human reason. From
his sermon:
That
way of singing which is most rational is the best and most excellentÉ It is
most rational in any art or Science to practice according to the rules of it,
especially in that which is used in the joint worship of God; where every man
is following his own fancy, and leaving the rule is an inlet to great confusion
and disorder, which is very contrary to Him who is not the Author of confusion, but the God of OrderÉ (Hood 99)
One can see the beginnings of a
natural theology here. God is the God of order and that order includes rules
and ways of singing. To honor God, then, would be to sing according to those
rules. Interestingly, rationalist thought begins to infiltrate Puritan
orthodoxy through one of the more obscure aspects of a worship service—psalm
singing. To be fair, these changes were most likely made with the express goal
of unification, not simply because of new philosophical theories. But, it is
nonetheless interesting that the Puritan desire to unify New England churches is
based upon rationalist music reform. These small concessions are but a shadow
of the change that will accompany the enlightenment in America fifty years
later.
One
can also see the fusion of enlightenment rationalism and Puritan orthodoxy in
the works of Thomas Walter. His 1720 singing treatise, The Sweet Psalmist of Isreal, contains a similar
musical approach to Thomas Symmes.
For
one, Walter places the art of singing within the confines of science. In his
discourse, Walters describes music as Òa sweet and pleasant scienceÉ. There is
scarce anything in the whole Creation of God, so wonderful and astonishing, as
the Doctrine of Sounds and HarmonyÓ (sweet psalms 6). Later in the piece Walter
notes that Òthere is a Mathematical Sweetness and Pleasancy in SoundsÓ (Walter 7). In both instances, Walter
is splitting from both Calvin and Cotton by placing music under the discretion
of science. Like Symmes, Walter sees a natural order
and beauty in the mathematical-like Òdoctrine of sounds and harmonyÓ that
occurs in music.
Furthermore,
his brief discussion of chords and harmony point to his rationalist,
mathematical mindset. He writes: Òwhen the number of tremorsÉ caused by two
Sounds, are proportionable, there is an harmonious
agreement of those two Sounds; but if disproportionate, a Discord is producedÓ
(Walter 8). His deference to ÒproportionsÓ reveals his inclination to look at
music in light of its scientific qualities. That same inclination is found in SymmesÕ work.
Still,
Walter fused his mathematical disposition within the Puritan orthodoxy. Towards
the end of the treatise Walter qualifies a good psalm song: Òin general a good
Version of the Psalms is to be pleaded for, where moving Words and moving
Sounds go togetherÓ (Walter 18). So, he was eager, like Cotton and Calvin
before him, to Òmake the Statutes of God our Songs,Ó but the form changed
according to the new, rationalist conception of music.
WalterÕs and SymmesÕ discourses
were promptly followed by the release of musical education books and singing
schools in New England. To an extent, then, the reform had worked. On the other
hand, musical innovation would continue to be a point of contention for the
Puritans. Advocates of regular singing were ridiculed because they departed
from a revealed theology of music by addressing music as a science. For
Puritans such as John Cotton and Calvin, every part of the church service found
its purpose and content in the revealed word of God—including worship
music. Still, defenders of regular singing won the battle to unify churches by
fusing Puritan orthodoxy with rationalist thought. Time would later tell that
they lost the war to the enlightenment and the dismissal of Puritan piety.
Bibliography
Becker, Laura L. "Ministers v. Laymen: The
Singing Controversy in Puritan New England, 1720-1740." New England Quarterly 55.1 (1982): 79-96. JSTOR. Web. 22 Oct. 2013. <http//www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp>.
Covey, Cyclone. "Puritanism and Music in Colonial
America." William and
Mary Quarterly8.3 (1951): 378-88. JSTOR.
Web. 11 Oct. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1917420>.
Garside, Charles, Jr. "The Origins of
Calvin's Theology of Music: 1536-1543." Transactions
of the American Philosophical Society 69.4
(1979): 1-36. JSTOR. Web.
19 Oct. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1006143>.
Hood, George. A History of Music in New England; with Biographical Sketches of
Reformers and Psalmists. New York: Johnson Reprint, 1970. Print.
Irwin, Joyce. "The Theology of "Regular Singing"" New England Quarterly 51.2 (1978): 176-92. JSTOR. Web. 11 Oct. 2013.
<http://www.jstor.org/stable/364305>.
Osterhout, Paul R. "Note Reading and Regular Singing in Eighteenth-Century
New England."American Music 4.2 (1986): 125-44. JSTOR. Web. 11 Oct. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/3051976>.
Thomas, Walter. The Sweet Psalmist of Israel. Boston: J. Franklin,
1722. Print.