Charles Finney - LECTURES ON REVIVAL -1835 -pp.162-65.

- "Our
present forms of public worship--all the facets of the way we do things--
have developed piece by piece through a succession of new measures.

1. REGARDING THE MINISTRY: Many years ago pastors always wore

special clothing, as they still do in catholic churches. They wore a cocked
hat, clerical bands instead of a necktie or scarf, small clothes and a wig. No
matter how much hair a man had on his head, he had to cut it off an don a
wig. And then he had to wear a gown. These things were customary, and
every cleric was obligated to wear them. It was improper to officiate without
them. All of these habits had no doubt developed through a series of
innovations, for we have no good reason to believe that the apostles and
early ministers dressed any differently from anyone else.
...When tradition changed, the church cried out as if some divine institution
had been struck down. Any change was denounced as "innovation". When
ministers began to wear hats like other men, it grieved elderly people
much; it looked "so undignified," they said, for a minister to wear a round
hat...
....When pastors began to wear white hats, many thought it was a sad
and very undignified development. and years later, people were still so
bigoted that in some places wearing a white hat could ruin a pastors
influence.
...when pastors abandoned their bands, their two strips of cloth dangling
fom their collars, and wore neckties or scarfs, churchgoers charged that
they were becoming irreligious. In some places a pastor wouldn't dare to be
seen in the pulpit in a necktie. The people feel as if no bands, no
clergyman....Even now many congregations won't tolerate a minister in the
pulpit unless he wears a flowing silk gown with sleeves as big as his body.

2. THE ORDER OF PUBLIC WORSHIP. Other changes met the same

opposition because the church has felt as if God Himself had established
precisely the mode they were used to.
a. Psalm books. Once it was customary to sing David's psalms. In time,
along came a version of the Psalms in rhyme--very bad, to be sure. When
pastors sought to introduce them, churches were distracted, people
violently opposed, and great trouble was created by the invention...
Later, another version in better poetry was opposed with substantial
opposition as a new measure. And finally Isaac Watts wrote his version,
which was still opposed in many churches a century after its introduction.
People in numerous congregations continue to walk out of church if a
psalm or hymn is taught from a new book. And if Watts' psalms were
adopted, they would split and form a new congregation rather than tolerate
such innovation.
b. Lining the hymns. When there were only a few books it was normal to
"line the hymns". The deacon stood and read the psalm or hymn a line at a
time and then sang and the rest all joined in. Later, churches began to have
more books, and so everyone sang from his or her own book. What an
innovation! What confusion it made! How could good people worship God
in singing without having the deacon line off the hymn in his holy tone?...
c. Choirs. Later it was thought best to have select singers sit by
themselves and sing to help improve the music. This was bitterly opposed.
Many congregations split over the desire of pastors and some leaders to
cultivate music by forming choirs. People argued about "innovations" and
"new measures," and thought great evil was coming to the church because
singers sat by themselves and cultivated music and learned new tunes the
old people couldn't sing. It wasn't so when they were young, and they
wouldn't tolerate such novelties in the church.
...e. Some congregations brought in instruments to help the singers and
improve the music. (These things)...caused commotion...Only recently in a
synod in the Presbyterian church, some felt it was a matter worthy of
discipline that a certain church had an organ in their building. They
wouldn't get half as upset to be told sinners are going to hell than to be told
someone is installing an organ in the meeting house.
...Why couldn't these customs be given up without producing a shock?
People felt they could hardly worship God without them--but plainly their
attachment was no part of true Christianity. It was mere superstition."