The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1872-09-28

standing committee, however, after full inyesti'
CATION and the lreest discussion, In WHICH lndl-
vIdual views were presented in the most mira
Bile spirit, arrived as q body at the same con.
illusions as myself, and 1 now beg TO lay our
united and accordant Judgment before You.
at is declded that the rubrical expression
| cal rendering OF that portion OF the service 70
| which 1t Is pr, fixed. Thus the psalter, wh:ch is
| appointed to be read, can be sung or pronounced
| without musical note.
musical renueriEg is excluded, as for Instance In
| the Lords prayer and the aposs'es' creed, and
elsewhere, where the alternative ':lng' 1, not In
the rubric.
| accordance with them, ! decide that rnbrical
| directions other than say do not forbid sing
Ing. Thus the amens, the litany, the responses to
the decalogue may be sung as well as said"
Such beins the result reached, and the deol.
sion made by the bishop and standing COM
mlttee, no churchman surely Will De iouna 10
speak evil of any pastor and congregation tnai
sees lit and expedient to render our service
after q choral manner.
But though this be 80, q member OF q church
In which there Is the greatest liberty Oh
thought. may, while submitting TO the ruling
of constituted authority, entertain the opinion
that it was the result OF mlsapprenenslon an y
snch ruling was based. He may practically
scouiesce in an authoritative decision and de-
| cree, that il, 80 far as conduct 10 concerned,
| and vet entertain the conviction that the same
Is erroneous or unreasonable.
This, we are constrained to say, Is our p0-
| sition in relation. 10 the decision OF the bishop
| and standing committee, viz: that the choral
| service Ia q lawful use, and Ia contemplated by
the American prayer-book.
1t Ia with unfeigned difldence we venture
| to entertain an opinion contrary to the au-
| thoritatIve decree of an ecclesiastical body,
| but we are not able, when reading attenllVely
| the llturgical rules, to avoid the conclusion
| that a choral service is not contemplated, and
| that the standing committee have put o con-
| struction upon rubrical language, which, on
| careful consideration and comparison. we
| snail find it will not bear. 'IG is decided" we
| are told In the pastoral letter, that the ru.
| brical expression "Read" embraces both q mu-
| steal and non-musical rendering OF tnat
| portion of the service to which 1t ID prehxed."
Let ms, by collection OF rubrics from differ
ent services OF The prayer-booE, see II this
comprehensive Specification oil the word
sRead' will stand.
We shall not at once refer to 'the order
how the psalter' and the rest OF the holy
Scripture Is appointed to be read; although,
as we are prepared to show, In the course OF
this inquiry, there Is here NO liberty given for
q musical rendering.
We propose turning at once to the order for
| the administration OF the Lords Supper. just
| before the oferlOry we have this ru0rlc:
tsThen shall follow the sermon, alter Wnlcn,
| the minister, when there Is q communion,
| shall return 10 the Lords table and Degln Inc
| offertory, saying, one OF more OF these sen
| teAces following as he thlnketh most conVen-
lent
Observe that the word s'ssying" Is used In
this rubrlc to Indicate the manner In which
| these sentences are to be rendered. Now, II
the principle of critical Interpretation laid
down by the standing committee De correct,
/ had .;reading" been the word inserted sooVe
| aud not saying, then these sentences might
| have been either sung or pronounced without
musical note.
But. how strangely are we perplexed when,
| endeavorlpg to hold On to this principle that
| s.read" embraces both q musical and nom
| musical rendering of that portion OF the ser
vice to which 1t Ia pre1xed, we Ind q rnorlo
alter the o%ffertory differing from aud seeming
Rubric-"While these sentences are In read
iny,'n &C., says the latter rubric. Then, &C.
cordIng to the different interpretations given
by authority OF the diocese to ''say" and
sread,n we observe that the sentences might
have been either sung or said, whereas, the
rubrlc before them restricted them TO being
said.
We will nexL, while examining the rubrics
of the communion service, call particular at
attention to the rubric Immediately following
the words said by the people, "Glory be to the
Lord" ~
Rnbric-"Then shall be read the Apostles
or Nicene Creed, unless one OF them has peer
read Immediately before In the morning ser
vice." Now the bishop and standing commit
lee tell us that the Lords Prayer and the
Apostles and Nicene Creeds cannot be rem
dered unsteady, because The word ''say" 10
used In the rubrlcal direction given with re-
gard to them In morning and evening
PRAYER. But here We find this rnbrlcal Ian.
guage In the communion service: '.rhen shall
be read the Apostles or Nlcene Creea, n a.
less one Of them has been read Immediately
before In the morning services" bearing In
mind that lit Is decided that the rubrical e1.
preston read embraces both a musical and
q non-musical rendering Of that portion OF
the service to which 1t Is preaxed," we have
here o plain liturglcal direction to this efect:
"Then shall be said or sung the Apostles
and Nlcene Greed, unless one OF them hath
been said or sung Immediately before IN
the morning SERVICE" 8
Can 1t be that we had the liberty Of chanting
the creed In the morning service, notwtth.
standing the direction there given TO SAY" 1t,
and now only discover the liberty when we
reach the communion service? Are we not
becoming more and more Involved IN the LADY,
rlnth of difficulty as we proceed In our 'rubrl-
car' Interpretation, based upon an erroneous
uCCIDlOn WILL ASkNAN
ssread,n throughout the liturgy?
We must not fall to note the rubrics found
over the exhortatlons In the communion SER
vice
First Rubric-when the minister giveth warn.
ing for the celebration OF the holy communion, ~
&C., 'he shall 'read' the exhortatio following"
Second Rubrio-"At the time OF the celebration
OF the communion, the priest shall say tnls ex-
hortation."
Most assuredly both these eXhortatlons
| should, from their character, be said.
The first exhortatlon is as solemn and per-
sonal an admonition and appeal as could be
addressed to the congregation, and ought TO
| be said In a tone and manner similar 10 If not
| identical with that used In prsnouncing the
last; indeed, there is no Disgusting the fact.
| that the two exhorlalions are 10 DO rehearsed
| after the same manner.
Are we at last forced to The conclusion that
| the rubrIcs are often contradictory, and that
the compilers of the prayer book used
| language in q most immethodical and careless
| manner ! If we hold that the rubrical express
| sion streadn embraces both q musical and non-
| musical rendering, then are we forced TO this
| conclusions; but II we part With this erroneous
| idea OF Tread" either implying or admitting
| a ~pronouncing with musical note, then shall
we be persuaded of the clearness OF the rl-
brlcs, unmistakably perceive their meaning,
| and readily follow their direction. We think
| that any one carefully regarding the ruorics
| to which we have made reference ought 70
| see that the words tread" and ''say" are used
\ anonymously throughout the services, having
only such shade of difference In their slgnif-
| cation as we notice when the minister ie
| direciad Tn .treadn the lpssons and ts58yn the