INTRODUCTION OF MORE HYMNS INTO THE PRAYER-BOOK.
To my surprise, I found that there was a liberty taken in regard
to hymns in public worship to which I had not been accustomed.
Not only were there voluntaries before and after service, with words
chosen by the choir or minister at pleasure, but there were several
hymn-books in use not known to the Church, as, for instance, in
Savannah, Georgia, and in Trinity Church, Boston. I saw also a
few printed hymns for some special occasion at Dr. Moore's Church
in Newburyport, Massachusetts. This struck me very forcibly,
having been from a child accustomed only to those in the Prayer-Book;
nor did it strike me very favourably.[58]
I was not aware at
that time that a variety of hymn-books was allowed in the English
Church, and I knew that each denomination in this country deemed
it best to have its own selection. Being conscious, however, that
we were stinted in hymns, whether for public, social, or private use,
and that many psalms were badly versified or unsuited for Christian
worship, I introduced a motion at the General Convention of 1823,
for additional hymns and a revision and selection of the metrical
psalms, and had the honour of being placed at the head of the
Committee of the Lower House. I urged the measure by stating
the diversity which I had witnessed a few years before, and plead
for such an increase of hymns and selection of psalms as would
answer all the purposes of private, social, and public worship. Dr.
Jarvis supported the resolution, and, I think, seconded it, though
maintaining that there was a perfect liberty here, as in England,
to have a variety of selections, as the hymns and psalms formed
no integral part of the Prayer-Book, but were only an appendage,
not subject to rubrics. The joint committee of both Houses, being
appointed, met during the interval between that and the next General
Convention. Dr. Muhlenberg, one of the Committee, selected,
prepared, and published a volume of hymns for the use of the Committee,
many of which were adopted. Dr. Onderdonk, afterward
Bishop of Pennsylvania, also prepared a number of paraphrases of
Scripture, some of which were also introduced into our collection.
Severe strictures having from time to time been passed upon our
work, I beg leave to offer a few remarks upon them. In the first
place, I affirm that none but those who engage in the work of selecting
hymns have any idea of the difficulty of the work. Dr.
Muhlenberg had collected hymn-books from all over England and
America, and brought a large basketful of them to the meeting.
They covered the table around which the Committee sat. I recollect
the remark with which he introduced them,—that he had no idea,
when he undertook the work, what a mass of bad poetry and false
sentiment was to be found in the hymn-books of the different denominations
of England and America, and how difficult it was to
get a good selection. The Committee found it so in the progress
of their examination. The various and strange tastes which sought
to be gratified in the selection formed another difficulty. I remember
that one of the first classical scholars of the Church, and
an excellent divine, proposed a great favourite to the Committee,
expressing a most earnest desire for its admission, and there was
every disposition to gratify him; but the hymn was so entirely unsuitable
that no one could think of adopting it. Another instance
may be mentioned. At this time the delegation from South Carolina
came around to the General Convention by sea, and it was
thought desirable, by one, at least, of their delegation, to have a
hymn suited to their case while on the ocean. Accordingly, one
had been prepared, and was put into my hands. The first line of
it read thus:—
"O thou epithet-exhausting ocean!"
I need not say that it found no support in the Committee, being
even more objectionable than one which may be found in some hymnbooks,
and which it was wished to have in ours, namely, "The Star
of the East." Each partook too much of the character of pagan
worship. The selection which has been made, we think, does not
deserve the criticisms which have been unsparingly passed upon it.
When we read the names of such men as White, Hobart, Professor
Turner, Dr. Muhlenberg, and Mr. Francis Key, as members
of the Committee, we might surely expect something more deserving
of praise than censure. The selection has been highly esteemed
by many good judges. When in England, at the house of Mr.
Bickersteth, who had them, I was pleased to hear him say that it
was either the very best, or among the best, he had ever seen; and
he lived in the midst of hundreds, and had himself selected one for
his own parish. Among the objections made to some of the hymns
of our selection, I have been amused to hear the following,—namely,
that we had altered the poetry of the authors of them. Now, it
happens that one of the rules adopted by the Committee was, to
give the preference to the original when it could be ascertained,
except when there was some very sufficient reason. When a hymn
was proposed, the original was called for. Certain changes complained
of were actual returns to the originals from the versions in
common use, whose compiler had altered them.
As to the desire expressed by some for an increase of hymns, I
confess I cannot feel the force of it, being convinced that a smaller
number frequently used, whether in private or public, is likely to
produce the greater effect. I do not mean to condemn selections
for Sunday-schools, and perhaps for some social meetings, but am
still decidedly in favour of one book of hymns and psalms, as in the
American Church, rather than the unbounded liberty of the English
Church, where so many hundreds, I believe, are in use.
