On this page

• Text (2)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    often remain any alternative , but the total rejection of what , in most respects , is unexceptionable ^ but -in how many instances h $ * ve we seen liberties taken with this kind of writings , where little better reason

    could be offered than t he caprice or speculative notions of a compiler , who in his turn is supplanted by other innovators of still more varied fancy , till , at length , we are almost at a loss to recognize the original author through the disguise imposed upon him .

    It has become of late years a prevailing fashion for congregations to become editors of their own hymnbooks , and these have of course varied in merit , according to the taste or talent of those employed in their compilation . T am free to admit that the

    system , of which for some reasons L complain , has been of considerable service to the cause of religious poetry , hy calling forth the talents of contemporary authors , who have contributed to enlarge the number of unexceptionable compositions . But if good

    have incidentally followed , I cannot but lament the perversion of talent , which , in a large proportion of these publications , has led to the mutilation of even the best compositions , and the bad taste engendered by an affectation of refinement . A kind of puny criticism is made subservient to the

    detection of that , for which the poet alone is accountable , or is employed in raising matter for petty philosophical or theological cavils . And why is religious poetry alone to be

    at the mercy of every compiler , do matter how little he may possess of that sacred fire which originally gave birth to the object of his unsparing attacks ? Who can view without

    regret the tasteless mutilations of living and dead authors , which are not infrequently brought together from various quarters in the most unseemly manner ? With as little scrupulosity , we may often observe the name of an author retained , although he would scarcely recognize his own productions , still less would he have

    sanctioned so unfair a proceeding . In questioning the justice and propriety of subjecting the works of others to the arbitrary alterations of individual editors , 1 am well aware of the motives by which many estimable per-

    Untitled Article

    sons ^ ave been actuated in these well-mieant labours : at the same time I must be allowed to inquire , whether any of their praiseworthy objects is not counterbalanced by other more important considerations , not to mention the inconvenience to which

    strangers are subjected in our places of worship . I may also be permitted to doubt whether we -do not depart , in a great degree , from the original intent of poetry in public worship , when we make it merely a vehicle for moral sentiment and Scripture

    paraphrases , often possessed of no other of its pretensions than , that of mere rhyme . Surely this kind of versification adds little , either of dignity to public devotion , or of weight to the precepts of religion . A * regards the moral and religious improvement

    of children , \ cordially admit that much may be done by putting into their hands practical hymns adapted to their capacity , which can hardly be expected to appreciate the higher order of compositions ; and I think it desirable to admit into our selections

    for public use , such a variety of subject as shall be suitable to different classes and circumstances . This , I conceive , is perfectly compatible with the rules of propriety and good taste , which , as 1 have endeavoured to prove , ate violated by too many of our modern compilers .

    In making the foregoing remarks , I must observe that nothing invidious is intended . livery publication is open to fair criticism , and while , in many instances , I disagree in the views of the editors of our modern

    Unitarian hymn-books , in others I think a great deal of judicious taste has been shewn , without encroaching unnecessarily upon the undoubted prerogative qf the poet . B .

    Untitled Article

    On the Division of the Decalogue . 467

    Untitled Article

    *_^^ n >—_ Sir , July 8 , 1819-IN addition to what R . II . [ p . 29 <)] has replied to E . S . [ p . 164 ] , your readers may be referred to the following ; writers .

    Mr . Hallett , in his third volume * ( 1736 , ) says ( p . 52 ) , that "Austin undoubtedly joined the first and second commandment into one , and divided the tenth into two . ' * He then proceeds ( pp . 52—55 ) to point out the variations iu the * editions of the com-

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Aug. 2, 1819, page 467, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1775/page/7/