Wayne
Tempus faciendi, Domine.
This is a spin-off from the "Fifth OPC membership vow" thread.
I recently came across this short article on the subject of standing for prayer, in an 1834 issue of The Banner of the Covenant.
[See also http://www.fpchurch.org.uk/about-us/how-we-worship/why-we-worship-this-way/standing-for-prayer/ ]
Banner of the Covenant (May & June 1853): 179-180.
On Certain Changes in Forms of Worship.—Some people are never satisfied with things as they are. Like a vessel sailing against wind and tide, they must be always tacking about, and yet losing ground at each turn. Change is good when it effects a real improvement; but variations from old forms, merely to suit individual tastes, or to secure transient objects, are not for general edification. Even in matters indifferent, changes are hazardous when religion is involved.
We have been lately struck with a change, introduced into the form of worship of many of the Congregational and New School Presbyterian churches. We refer to the change from standing to sitting in prayer, and from sitting to standing in singing. These innovations have their origin only a few years back. In conversing lately with a Congregational clergyman, he informed us that in his youth every body, except the infirm, stood up during prayer, and of course sat during singing. The reverse is now quite extensively the case. It would be interesting to know the origin of the innovation. The Puritan Recorder, of Boston, one of the leading religious papers in the country, gives the following explanation:
"What was the origin of the custom of congregations sitting down to pray? The Presbyterian refers it to the length of public prayers, in the former habits of ministers. But while we would make no defence of long prayers, we doubt the correctness of this account of the matter. For in our view the prayers were shortened before the sitting began.
"As far as our observation and recollection serve us, the new custom came in with the 'new measures,' that were introduced into New England by Mr. Finney. We never saw or heard of a New England congregation sitting in prayer till we saw it in Boston, at the time when Mr. Finney was carrying forward his revival measures here in 1831. And then we had, and ever since have had the impression, that the practice came in with him—whether by his recommendation we cannot say. If we are mistaken in this, or if others can give a truer account of the matter, we hope to stand corrected. For it would be well worth the while for the public to know where and when this new custom took its beginning."
Other persons, with whom we have conversed, have concurred with the "Recorder" in the opinion that the New Measure dispensation of Messrs. Finney, Burchard, &c., introduced the change in question. What the object of these reformers was, it is not easy to explain. Was it the love of notoriety, the ambition to do "something," the itch to "leave a mark"—an infirmity not rare in reformers? Or was it found to "work best" with the system of new measures, and adopted as an expedient to carry out plans? Or was it a kind of "act and testimony" against old practices and old-schoolism in general—a partition wall over against the ruins of dead orthodoxy? Whatever was the object of the reformation, we venture a few remarks.
1. Differences in the forms of worship are generally the result of differences in theological opinion. The various denominations of Christians are usually characterized by differences in religious worship. The Roman Catholics and the Episcopalians, who approach each other in doctrine, have a strong affinity in forms. The Congregationalists and the Presbyterians, whose Confession of Faith has hitherto been the same, have had almost entirely the same usages in public worship. The Methodists have forms, which correspond to the excitements of a peculiar type of divinity. The different sects are commonly marked by distinctions which strike the eye as well as the mind. When new-schoolism arose in theology, it was accompanied by its outward badges. The new measure men were the new divinity men too.
2. One innovation leads to another. Whether the rising in singing led to the sitting in prayer, or vice versa, we do not know. Probably the former. The Methodists, who more nearly resemble the Revival men, so called, make much of their singing and postures; and the itinerant evangelists of the Congregational and Presbyterian churches copies a good many things, doctrinal and practical, from the followers of Wesley. We think it probable, if not certain, that the rising in singing was the antecedent of the sitting in prayer. The one led necessarily to the other. Other changes will follow in time.
3. Let our own ministers take warning. There is a tendency sometimes to get up something new, in the excitement of the moment. A few weeks ago we heard a young licentiate from Princeton, after giving out the hymn, say : "The congregation will please to rise in singing the fourth verse, which is a verse of praise!" We wonder if the young man thought that a large part of the hymns require standing, on the principle he mentioned. On the last Sabbath we heard another of our ministers announce : "The congregation are requested to stand in singing this hymn." At least one of the auditors, who reluctantly complied with the request, was very much puzzled to know the reason, and he is yet in the dark. There was nothing peculiar in the case.
4. The usages of our fathers in the house of God ought to be retained for these four reasons, if for no others. They are good usages. They are characteristic of our Church. Change leads—we know not where. Many devout people are always annoyed at needless innovation.
I recently came across this short article on the subject of standing for prayer, in an 1834 issue of The Banner of the Covenant.
[See also http://www.fpchurch.org.uk/about-us/how-we-worship/why-we-worship-this-way/standing-for-prayer/ ]
Banner of the Covenant (May & June 1853): 179-180.
On Certain Changes in Forms of Worship.—Some people are never satisfied with things as they are. Like a vessel sailing against wind and tide, they must be always tacking about, and yet losing ground at each turn. Change is good when it effects a real improvement; but variations from old forms, merely to suit individual tastes, or to secure transient objects, are not for general edification. Even in matters indifferent, changes are hazardous when religion is involved.
We have been lately struck with a change, introduced into the form of worship of many of the Congregational and New School Presbyterian churches. We refer to the change from standing to sitting in prayer, and from sitting to standing in singing. These innovations have their origin only a few years back. In conversing lately with a Congregational clergyman, he informed us that in his youth every body, except the infirm, stood up during prayer, and of course sat during singing. The reverse is now quite extensively the case. It would be interesting to know the origin of the innovation. The Puritan Recorder, of Boston, one of the leading religious papers in the country, gives the following explanation:
"What was the origin of the custom of congregations sitting down to pray? The Presbyterian refers it to the length of public prayers, in the former habits of ministers. But while we would make no defence of long prayers, we doubt the correctness of this account of the matter. For in our view the prayers were shortened before the sitting began.
"As far as our observation and recollection serve us, the new custom came in with the 'new measures,' that were introduced into New England by Mr. Finney. We never saw or heard of a New England congregation sitting in prayer till we saw it in Boston, at the time when Mr. Finney was carrying forward his revival measures here in 1831. And then we had, and ever since have had the impression, that the practice came in with him—whether by his recommendation we cannot say. If we are mistaken in this, or if others can give a truer account of the matter, we hope to stand corrected. For it would be well worth the while for the public to know where and when this new custom took its beginning."
Other persons, with whom we have conversed, have concurred with the "Recorder" in the opinion that the New Measure dispensation of Messrs. Finney, Burchard, &c., introduced the change in question. What the object of these reformers was, it is not easy to explain. Was it the love of notoriety, the ambition to do "something," the itch to "leave a mark"—an infirmity not rare in reformers? Or was it found to "work best" with the system of new measures, and adopted as an expedient to carry out plans? Or was it a kind of "act and testimony" against old practices and old-schoolism in general—a partition wall over against the ruins of dead orthodoxy? Whatever was the object of the reformation, we venture a few remarks.
1. Differences in the forms of worship are generally the result of differences in theological opinion. The various denominations of Christians are usually characterized by differences in religious worship. The Roman Catholics and the Episcopalians, who approach each other in doctrine, have a strong affinity in forms. The Congregationalists and the Presbyterians, whose Confession of Faith has hitherto been the same, have had almost entirely the same usages in public worship. The Methodists have forms, which correspond to the excitements of a peculiar type of divinity. The different sects are commonly marked by distinctions which strike the eye as well as the mind. When new-schoolism arose in theology, it was accompanied by its outward badges. The new measure men were the new divinity men too.
2. One innovation leads to another. Whether the rising in singing led to the sitting in prayer, or vice versa, we do not know. Probably the former. The Methodists, who more nearly resemble the Revival men, so called, make much of their singing and postures; and the itinerant evangelists of the Congregational and Presbyterian churches copies a good many things, doctrinal and practical, from the followers of Wesley. We think it probable, if not certain, that the rising in singing was the antecedent of the sitting in prayer. The one led necessarily to the other. Other changes will follow in time.
3. Let our own ministers take warning. There is a tendency sometimes to get up something new, in the excitement of the moment. A few weeks ago we heard a young licentiate from Princeton, after giving out the hymn, say : "The congregation will please to rise in singing the fourth verse, which is a verse of praise!" We wonder if the young man thought that a large part of the hymns require standing, on the principle he mentioned. On the last Sabbath we heard another of our ministers announce : "The congregation are requested to stand in singing this hymn." At least one of the auditors, who reluctantly complied with the request, was very much puzzled to know the reason, and he is yet in the dark. There was nothing peculiar in the case.
4. The usages of our fathers in the house of God ought to be retained for these four reasons, if for no others. They are good usages. They are characteristic of our Church. Change leads—we know not where. Many devout people are always annoyed at needless innovation.
Last edited: