That sort is not admitted into the Wesleyan hymn book, which contains only twenty-six different metres; but of those twenty-six we have to drop several. So of other things. The poet was wont to express innate depravity in strong terms: And Worse than all I find The bitter root within, The beastly heart, The devilish mind, The hell of inbred sin. The beast and devil I deny, Sensual and animal delight; The wanton and the curious eye Be closed in everlasting night; My learned lust be cast aside, And all my filth of self and pride. This, in the authorized books, is reduced to The beast and devil in my soul. But this, though merely a strong expression for an undoubted truth, is not exactly lyrical, nor adapted to edify a promiscuous audience. So, when the itinerant preacher, in the tender fidelity of his ministerial and poetical heart, exclaims: Outcasts of men, to you I call, Harlots and publicans and thieves! Come, Oh my guilty brethren, come, For you the purple torrent flowed We admire the powerful and elegant verses, but do not propose to sing them on ordinary occasions. Yet there is abundance that we can sing: a number, quite as large, we believe, as can be found in any other hymn-writer, that are not only poetical in a high degree, but thoroughly lyrical, and suited to the purposes of general worship. Where shall we find finer practical hymns than those beginning "A charge to keep I have"; "Sinners, turn, why will ye die?" With glorious clouds encompast round, Whom angels dimly see; Will he forsake his throne above, Himself to worms impart? No hymn-writer is more intellectual: none puts more doctrine, thought, solid mental pabulum, into his poems. And certainly none is more awakening and edifying; few others, in fact, approach him in native moral earnestness, force, fire; and none possesses a higher, purer, more consistent, uniform, and positive spirituality. How and why then does it happen, all this being so, that his writings are not more largely known, honored, and used? We shall attempt several suggestions towards an answer to this difficult question. First, then, it may seem absurd, but it is true, — the very merit of these productions has stood, and still stands, in the way of their more extended usefulness and honor. Says Mr. Burgess. "The peculiar excellence of many of the hymns; the high tone of devout sentiment which pervades them; the exalted spirit of piety which they breathe, are in fact the very things that make them unfit for general and indiscriminate use. They are too good for such purposes; too deep in meaning, too minute, and too accurate in describing the feelings and wants, the exercises and desires of genuine Christians. Hymns of an inferior order might be used more freely and with less danger." This is an honest, discriminating, and just remark, by one who had deeply studied the subject. And the criticism is honorable to its subject. There are few things in this world "too good" for their destined place and use; and we do not know another hymn-writer whose effusions are liable to this objection. That not merely the poetical, but the spiritual character of hymns should be too high for common and promiscuous use is a unique defect. But so it is. Of course it is largely our fault; as people become more spiritually minded they learn better to understand, enjoy, and profit by such poems. If the English language and the recognized metres be used in heaven, doubtless the Wesleyan hymns will be sung there with thorough appreciation. With so low a standard of spiritual experience and ambition as prevails here and now, of course they are above our heads. But if it be worth while to attempt to raise that standard, to teach the people more than they at present or usually know, to seek a higher point and larger measure of holiness, then it will be well to introduce more of the Wesleyan poetry into our hymn books. Secondly; it is commonly supposed, with some slight foundation of truth, that the Methodists have in some sense a gospel of their own; that they look at divine truth in a way peculiar to themselves, have built on the common foundation a superstructure of wood, hay, stubble, and hold certain views, habits, doctrines, which are an appendix to catholic Christianity, but essential to their system, as immersion and close communion to the Baptist, reprobation and Rouse's Psalms to the Old style Puritan, apostolic succession and exclusiveness to the Episcopalian. Now, as aforesaid, some little of this is so; and in proportion as it is, or as we of other names fancy it is, we are naturally disposed to shrink with a sort of suspicion from peculiarities which we do not endorse. There is a definiteness about the Methodist system of which the rest of us do not see the correctness or point. The idea of Christians generally — be it right or wrong- has been expressed by Samuel Wesley, Jr., the brother of John and Charles. "As it was in the beginning, I believe it will continue to the end, in another sense. Darkness will be, when the Spirit of God moveth upon the face of the waters. It is enough for us, that we are not concerned to tell how these things be." But John and Charles were concerned to tell it, and took a very different view of the matter. They soon had the region mapped out, with roads and distances and rules and technical terms. In their account, the mysterious operations of the Holy Ghost within man's heart become as clear and plain as external, sensuous, worldly matters. There must be a time of agony and darkness, then instantaneous conversion, then a period of ecstatic joy, then a "wilderness state," and subsequently various ups and downs, for which the rules would vary to suit circumstances. Whether all this scheme was right or wrong, it is not our business to decide. That the Wesleys committed no sin in believing and teaching it, we are satisfied; that it was a part of the necessary means to accomplish certain great ends at that time, appears probable; that it was wonderfully popular and did much good, is abundantly proved; that it or its perversions have done some harm, is likewise apparent. But the point is, that, correct or incorrect, this extreme Vol. XXI. No. 82. 40 definiteness; this dividing and arranging and explaining of mysteries; this carnalizing-which it sometimes almost runs into of spiritual things; this incarnating of the Spirit as well as Christ, in a visible, tangible form; this attaching so much importance to human emotions; this resting so positively on human evidences and inward signs,—does not exactly tally with the views of the church at large. A genuine Methodist cannot see that this is not an essential part of the gospel; and Mr. Burgess expatiates, with enthusiastic approbation and delight, upon the following couplets, which our readers will be more apt to consider sentimental than otherwise: "What a depth of meaning," he says, "what propriety, what truth is there in such lines as these." We cannot see it, nor that tears and sighs do any such thing: The tears that tell your sins forgiven, The sighs that waft your souls to heaven: The genuine meek humility: The wonder, "Why such love to me?" One would think he was painting an earthly heroine in some very human scene. The present writer would not put these verses in a hymn book, because he sees neither doctrine, devotion, nor practical profit in them: only wellmeant human emotion and misplaced prettinesses of fancy. Again; this hymn is very popular among the Methodists: How can a sinner know His sins on earth forgiven? How can my gracious Saviour show My name inscribed in heaven? And publish to the sons of men The signs infallible. The "infallible" signs are, of course, inward and chiefly emotional. Here is the first and chief: ' Exults our rising soul, Disburdened of its load, Our readers need not fear the contagion. These two are by |