PAROCHIAL ANTHOLOGY.
In the clerical House of Commons, or Lower House of Convocation, at its last sitting, a reverend member brought forward a proposal which would be deserving of encouragement, if there were any hope that it could be satisfactorily accomplished. According to the Report of the proceedings of that venerable body:-
“Archdeacon Sandford, with the permission of the House, read a notice which he had placed upon the paper. It was to the effect, that his Grace the President be respectfully requested to appoint a committee of the Upper House to act with a committee of the Lower House for the preparation of a draft-book of hymns and a selection of psalms, which, if approved by Convocation, should be submitted to Her Majesty, with a view to its adoption in all churches and chapels that might be willing to receive it.”
Lord Byron once invoked a forty-parson power to enable him to sing on a certain subject. A committee of the Upper House of Convocation, and a committee of the Lower House of Convocation combined, would constitute a quantity of parson-power considerably above that which was desired by the noble bard. It is unlikely, however, that even the united parson-powers of the bishops and clergy will be sufficient for the preparation of a draft-book of hymns hit to be sung. Parson-power is one thing and poet-power is another thing. Hymns which are not poetry are doggerel. Hitherto the latter article has been almost the sole product of parson-power applied to versification. Parson-power may indeed succeed in making a selection of psalms from the Psalter, because that is a collection of poems in which a bad choice is impossible, the choice being supposed to be limited to the text pure and simple, uncorrupted and unturned into jingling rhymes by audacious hymns, parson-power will confine itself to the sphere of safety, and not appoint to be sung in churches a volume of inelegant extracts in bad verse, uninspired even by the Muse.
Back to THE LATEST PHOTOGRAPHIC DODGE. <<< — >>> Next to What’s in a Name?
