Would you have a problem singing this hymn?

[Marrow Man]

Have any of you sung the following hymn in worship:

"O for a Heart to Praise My God" by Charles Wesley

1. O for a heart to praise my God,
a heart from sin set free,
a heart that always feels thy blood
so freely shed for me.

2. A heart resigned, submissive, meek,
my great Redeemer's throne,
where only Christ is heard to speak,
where Jesus reigns alone.

3. A humble, lowly, contrite heart,
believing, true, and clean,
which neither life nor death can part
from Christ who dwells within.

4. A heart in every thought renewed
and full of love divine,
perfect and right and pure and good,
a copy, Lord, of thine.

5. Thy nature, gracious Lord, impart;
come quickly from above;
write thy new name upon my heart,
thy new, best name of Love.

Our hymnal only has verses 1, 4, and 5. It is not in the Trinity Hymnal (the red one at least), but it is in the old burgundy "The Hymn Book." Our hymnbook also has a different tune (Azmon instead of Richmond). The questionable verse is # 4, hinging on the word "perfect." I didn't think too much of it until I found this on a Methodist website:

This text of Charles Wesley's was first published in 1742. It was based on the Anglican prayer book's version of Psalm 51:1-10. It fully expresses Methodism's understanding of Christian Perfection -- a perfection in love.

John Wesley spoke of "inward holiness" (love of God and the assurance of God's love for humanity) and "outward holiness" (love of neighbor and acts of kindness). It is this oft-misunderstood doctrine that this hymn explains. So it bears careful consideration both for it's value as a hymn in the liturgy and as a exegetical resource if the preacher of these Lections isn't too squeamish about preaching a doctrinal sermon.

Any thoughts from hymn singers?

 

[Timothy William]

I wouldn't have a problem with the verse you highlighted; our hearts should, at least in some way, be a copy of God's in that we love what He loves, and we desire His will. Charles Wesley had errors in his theology but I think he was orthodox in his understanding of the difference between God and created beings; he wasn't saying that we will somehow become like God in every sense.

Of course we should be careful what we sing; we often sing songs of men (and women) we would never allow in the pulpit, and it can be away for heresy to enter otherwise sound churches, though I don't think this is a problem which particularly afflicts Presbyterians.

-----Added 1/9/2009 at 03:38:35 EST-----

Also, Charles Wesley did not always go along with John's more unorthodox ideas, and I don't see the text of this verse on its own teaching an inward/outward holiness distinction.

 

[Romans922]

Obviously in this life our hearts cannot be perfect, but does that mean we should not desire them to be perfect?

 

[jambo]

Wesley is not saying his heart is perfect but that is the longing of his heart (v1) I would like to think that would be the longing of all our hearts whilst on this earth but we know that only in glory will it be so.

I would have no problem singing this hymn and indeed I have chosen it when I have been leading services or else used it as a closing hymn after preaching.

 

[LawrenceU]

Ditto to Jambo.

 

[ManleyBeasley]

 

[Rich Koster]

If the word perfect is the hang up may I suggest this: plug in mature where perfect is. The old usage of the word perfect is many times interchangeable for modern English's mature.

 

[jambo]

Of course we should be careful what we sing; we often sing songs of men (and women) we would never allow in the pulpit,

I am reminded of Spurgeon's introduction to 'Our Own Hymn-Book' where he wrote concerning its choice of hymns, "...a good hymn has not been rejected because of the character of its author, or the heresies of the church in whose hymnal it first occurred; so long as the language and the spirit commended the hymn to our heart we included it, and believe we have enriched our collection thereby."

Hence he included hymns from the likes of Cardinal Newman, an Anglican turned RC.

We should be careful about what we sing but like Spurgeon we should take the hymn on its own merits rather than exclude it becasue of the author.

I may be a full tulip but I love the hymns of Charles Wesley.

 

[PresbyDane]

 

[Nebrexan]

There are some hymns I couldn't sing (e.g., "Oh, I'm happy, happy, happy, happy, happy all day long!") but as long as it's expressing a goal rather than a present state, I'm comfortable with it. I was just reading Matthew 5:48 last night ("You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect"). Here's what the ESV Study Bible had to say about it:

Scripture is a reflection of God himself as he has made his will and character known to his people. As Christians seek to live in conformity to Scripture, they are in fact pursuing the very perfection of God.

 

[Zeno333]

Some churches have changed the words to some famous hymns....

An example is a non-christian "New Age" church called the "Unity School of Christianity", that changed the words of "Amazing Grace" to read "saved a SOUL like me", instead of "WRETCH like me".
I am NOT saying that all churches that use this alternate wording for Amazing Grace are non-christian churches, I am just using an example that I know about specifically.)

 

[beej6]

If you look at the song as a prayer: "O for a..." then it's not so bad. But I'd have enough concerns about it to choose another. It could be misconstrued, especially to an immature Christian, that all the qualities mentioned in song are already mine, including "perfection."