It's a blog sponsored by the Institute on Religion and Public Life, "an inter-religious, nonpartisan research and education institute whose purpose is to advance a religiously informed public philosophy for the ordering of society," according to them. Which is fine; I don't have to subscribe to their philosophy to read a few posts. I have a few suspicions about their "interreligious" claim, but we'll get to that later.
The list has only a few surprises, I think.
- The number one hymn does come out of nowhere; I don't ever recall encountering it on any similar list before, though it's certainly a fine text by Isaac Watts. I've written about five others of the ten (#s 4, 5, 7, 9 and 10) and all those seem to be reasonable choices.
- It is a bit odd that anyone would deliberately choose two paraphrases of Psalm 23 (#s 1 and 4) to be included in one top ten list, but there you are.
- Only one of the ten was written in the last hundred years (which may partially account for my never having heard of it), O God beyond all praising by Michael Perry. I'm not sure whether that is truly a text for the ages, or if they were swayed by the tune (THAXTED by Gustav Holst, better known in the UK to the text I vow to thee, my country - a favorite of Princess Diana).
It's not claiming to be a list of favorite hymns, so I'm not at all bothered that only one on their list (#7) is also on my own top ten list (though definitely lower than I'd put it). There's no real indication of their criteria, or even of how many "editors" contributed to the discussion. And, as we've discussed here before, there's no way you can ever pick just ten! You always remember later that you left one (or more) out.
Back in 1899, The Best Church Hymns produced a list of thirty-two. Comparing their top ten to these ten, only one hymn appears on both: When I survey the wondrous cross (#2 in 1899, #8 today). Christ the Lord is risen today came in at #24 then, and Holy, Holy, Holy was just off the list, "unofficially" ranked at #33. But I do think it's interesting that six of the other places on the list were not taken by newer hymns written since 1899, but by texts that were already being sung back then, though they had yet to gain the broader popularity they enjoy today.
As always, the comments on the post are interesting to read, partly because some of the commenters give away more information than they might intend about their individual biases (and many forget that the list is not supposed to be a list of favorites). But some certainly do have worthwhile possible substitutions, and you might also.
This post followed an earlier one titled Are These the Ten Worst Hymns of All Time? and I think it's here that the editors at First Things might have slightly dented their claim to be "interreligious." The giveaway is that all ten are Roman Catholic "contemporary" worship songs from the last forty years. Either the editors all grew up singing (and apparently hating) these songs, or they're looking at them from the outside and just happened to choose all their "worsts" from the same tradition, in which case they couldn't have looked very hard. No single denomination could reasonably be said to have a monopoly on bad hymns, and there were certainly bad hymns written more than forty years ago. Also, I've sung several of these ten, and I have to say that a few of them are really very effective in the right setting and people love to sing them. So whose standards are being used to condemn them?
But, as I may have said before, I don't generally write here about "worsts" or hymns I might consider "bad." Sure, there are texts and tunes I don't particularly like, but I think it's better to focus on the good hymns (or at least, on the interesting ones). Everyone has favorites, and there's little point in stepping on them.