of such thoughts as raise the mind to sublime and spiritual things, abstracted from the inclinations, the temper, and the prejudices of the world. The most melodious sounds, that human instruments can make, are from the earth, earthy. But nothing can rise higher than its own origin. All true elevation, therefore, can only come, in the opinion of the Quakers, from the divine source. The Quakers, therefore, seeing no moral utility in music, cannot make it a part of their education. But there are other considerations, of a different nature, which influence them the same way. Music, in the first place, is esteemed a sensual gratification. Even those, who run after sacred music, never consider themselves as going to a place of devotion, but where, in full concert, they may hear the performances of the master-pieces of the art. attention to religious compositions for the sake of the music has been noticed by one of our best poets. "and ten thousand sit, Patiently present at a sacred song, This COWPER. But But the Quakers believe that all sensual desires should be held in due subordination to the pure principle; or that sensual pleasures should be discouraged as much as possible, as being opposed to those spiritual feelings, which constitute the only perfect enjoyment of a Christian. Music, again, if it were encouraged in the Society, would be considered as depriving those of maturer years of hours of comfort, which they now frequently enjoy, in the service of religion. Retirement is considered by the Quakers as a Christian duty. The members, therefore, of this Society are expected to wait in silence, not only in their places of worship, but occasionally in their families, or in their private chambers, in the intervals of their daily occupations, that, in stillness of heart and in freedom from the active contrivance of their own wills, they may acquire both directions and strength for the performance of the duties of life. The Quakers, therefore, are of opinion, that, if instrumental music were admitted as a gratification in leisure-hours, it would take the place of many of these serious retirements, and become very injurious to their interests and their character as Christians. SEC SECTION III. Vocal music forbidden-Singing in itself no more immoral than reading-but as vocal music articulates ideas, it may convey poison to the mind —Some ideas in songs contrary to Quaker-notions of morality; as in hunting-songs; or in Bacchanalian; or in martial-Youth make no selection; but learn all that fall in their way. Ir is an observation of Lactantius, that "the pleasures we receive through the organ of the ears may be as injurious as those we receive through the organ of the eyes." He does not, however, consider the effect of instrumental music as much to be regarded, "because sounds, which proceed from air, are soon gone, and they give birth to no sentiments that can be recorded. Songs, on the other hand, or sounds from the voice, may have an injurious influence on the mind." The Quakers, in their view of this subject, make the same distinction as this antient father of the church. They have a stronger objection, if it be possible, to vocal than to instrumental music. Instrumental music, though it is considered to be productive of sensual delights, is yet supposed as incapable, on account of its inability to articulate, E 2 ticulate, or its inability to express complex ideas, of conveying either unjust or impure sentiments to the mind. Vocal, on the other hand, is capable of conveying to it poison of this sort. For vocal music consists of songs, or of words musically expressed by the human voice. But words are the representatives of ideas, and as far as these ideas are pure or otherwise, so far may vocal music be rendered innocent or immoral. The mere singing, it must be obvious, can be no more immoral than the reading of the same song. Singing is but another mode of expressing it. The morality of the action will depend upon the words which it may contain. If the words in a song be pure, if the sentiments in it be just, and if it be the tendency of these to awaken generous and virtuous sympathies, the song will operate no otherwise than a lesson of morality. And will a lesson of morality be less serviceable to us because it is dressed up in poetry, and musically expressed by the human voice, than when it is conveyed to us in prose*? But if, on the other hand, the words *The Quakers, however, think that, even in this case, the moral lesson may be better conveyed, without the music words in any song be in themselves unchaste, if they inculcate false honour, if they lead to false opinions, if they suggest sentiments that have a tendency to produce depraved feelings,—then vocal music, by which these are conveyed in pleasing accents to the ear, becomes a destroyer of morals, and cannot therefore be encouraged by any who consider purity of heart as required by the Christian religion. Now the Quakers are of opinion that the songs of the world contain a great deal of objectionable matter in these respects; and that if they were to be promiscuously taken up by children, who have no power of discriminating between the good and the bad, and who generally lay hold of all that fall in their way, they would form a system of sentimental maxims very injurious in their tendency to their moral character. If we were to take a collection of songs, as published in books, and were to examine these, we should find that such a system might easily be formed. And if again we music of the voice, as singing it is apt to produce a volatile and frivolous spirit, which detracts from the serious impression of the sentiment. were |