The Cadiz Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1854-1864, 1854-05-10
fur nEoursrl
From he Nov YstL Observer.
Deacon Goodman again.


The second appearance OF this smssiug
parsonage in the eol=Trns OF the Observer
brings 10 mind few thoughts which occur
red 70 me on former perusal Qf the story
The article is Ee.-hke, full OF hVipor and siti-
ficiently suggestive. But while it conveys
: rebuke to = limited class Of men, is there
not reason TO fear that Il Nil prove injurious
90 other Glasses?
The story begins with q fundamental er-
ror-that oil sttributing the want ol musical
ear to the hand of nature. Surely, Tor all
ordinary purposes Of religion, sony, nature
has been sufficiently bnunutul The drA
con himself, instead OF making a mise ike
horned cattle in distres, might hsyy been
tvlerable singer, il suitably ilsgnctet ia
early childhood.
A Second error is equally injurious. 1t
virtually represents the choiE and all vino
were connected with it to b. governed by
artistic principles, Is exclusively rs /! the
subject had been to give Sabbath coHsegts.
Even the neighboung congregations are ~
the same fault But the fault Is mot "Hpo.
sed. The Deacon is a.s only man whose
views of4ehe subject were substantially zip
tural. II. requiring the music OF the hsalt.-
But be alone is the subjccI Of meniE.rnG.
The third error MAS the offspring of the
two proceeding ones. Ii represents choirs
rs always unmanageshle. This is moi true
where christians Do their duty. Choirs AT.
tistically sustained viii indeed occasion
trouble. They are upon the wrong basis.
They are virtually eaaGtors OF praise in
cF b. IL
may well be in difficulty End be found 10
disturb the harmony Of congregations wha
employ them. How should it be otherwise
We would find equal difficulties in social
prayer and exhoftauon, il we were to he
governed by similar principle.
Nov put these three errors together, and
what would be the result? Why, that ma
ture makes all the singers, that these are
consttuionaliy irritable and head strong,
and that nevertheless they must be allowed
the exclusive privilege of artists, irrespect-
i've of personal religious consideaaIions.-
They must be nominal worshipers, while
real worship pers must be hpshed to silence.
This is the popular view among large class
OF amateurs; and doubtless the view enter.
tanned BY the narrator herereferre4 to.
Such errors should be exposed. They
are every way injurious to the cause OF de-
yo.ionsl song. Tbs truth is that almost
every thing in church music depends upon
culture. Such talent as most singers pos
sess is not the sgecjat gift of nature. 9th
ers might easily acquire it, and doubtless
are bound to do So. Now is it true that
singers rightly trained in devotional music
nrt a.troub blesome class in community? Far
from it. The very idea is dishonorable to
the cause Of religion. Let christians inform
themselves, and do their whole duty in this
mater, and troubles will SoQn be at an end.
Certainly, after more thaa forty years of
practice, experience and observation in shis
field Of efforts, may without any breach OF
modesty claim to understand the sebjcct.
And say unhesitatingly everywhere, in
public and in private, that the principles l
have been here exposing ere false and ex-
Ceedingly iniurioas 80 the cause of devotion
al singing. This might easily shoY in de-
tail, but hsying done SO in little vol
ume lately published, which you So kindly
noticed, will not trespass farther upon the
patience Of your readers. Welove to read
The story IN question. But while laughing
at the good Deacon's expense, let us be sure
that We are not still farther from truth and
duty than we conceive him to be.
xour old correspondent,
THOMAS HASTINGS.