Latta's argument that Arians opposed gospel hymns to suppress Christ's divinity

Context

Latta argues that evangelical hymns were the norm in the early church and that the Psalms of David were only introduced in the fourth century - by Arians who wanted to suppress hymns celebrating Christ’s divinity. This historical argument turns the tables on exclusive psalmody advocates by associating their position with ancient heresy.

Extract

Nay the danger of the Church arofe from the difufe of the Hymns we plead for. Arianifm reigned in the fourth century. It had fuch influence in the general councils and in the courts of Emperors, that it banished and depofed many of the orthodox, and poffeffed itſelf of their Churches. No wonder then, if its votaries, rifen into power, and zealous for the propagation of their own opinions, bent their whole force to exclude a Pfalmody, which, if it had prevailed, would have effectually prevented the reception and progress of their pernicious tenets. And if they had influence fufficient to filence and banish the teachers and profeffors of orthodoxy, we need not be furpriſed to find, that they fhould have influence fufficient, gradually to filence and abolish thofe Hymns, in which divine honors were paid to Jefus Chrift, which they looked upon as idolatrous and impious.-Yet we fee, that with all the power and influence theſe heretics poffeffed thefe Hymns continued in ufe in fome parts of the Church of Chrift for whole centuries after their blafphemous opinions took their rife…

If then the Pfalms of David were conftantly in ufe in the Chriftian Church from the days of the Apoſtles; how comes it to pafs, that we hear nothing of them for the three firft centuries?-If the Apoftles had reftricted their converts to the uſe of them, how comes Tertullian to reprefent Chriftians, in his day, as enjoying fo full and entire a liberty?-How could Pliny affirm that Chriftians fung Hymns to Chrift whom they worshipped as God?…

There is not then, I will venture to affert, any practice of the Church of Chrift, that appears more truly primitive and apoftolical than that of finging Pfalms and Hymns drawn from the Gofpel.

Significance

This passage presents Latta’s most provocative historical argument: that exclusive psalmody, far from being the primitive apostolic practice, was actually introduced by Arian heretics to suppress the orthodox confession of Christ’s divinity through hymns.

Key claims:

1. The early church (first three centuries) sang hymns about Christ
2. The Psalms of David were introduced only in the fourth century
3. Arians promoted exclusive psalmody because gospel hymns “paid divine honors to Jesus Christ”
4. Gospel hymnody is “more truly primitive and apostolical” than exclusive psalmody

This historical narrative directly countered the exclusive psalmody claim to antiquity and Reformed purity. By associating David’s Psalms with Arianism, Latta implied that those who insisted on exclusive psalmody were unwittingly serving heretical ends - a serious charge in 18th-century theological debate.