When my revered father, more than thirty years ago, delivered the fourth Fernley Lecture, he laid this down as the first scriptural Church principle—‘The Church is not a thing of rigid definition.’ I may adapt that phrase to my own subject, and say, _A hymn is not a thing of rigid definition_. Commenting on the note which closes the second book of Psalms, ‘The prayers [LXX. _hymns_] of David the son of Jesse are ended,’ St. Augustine gives this definition: Hymns are praises of God with singing, hymns are songs containing praises of God. If there be praise, and not praise of God, it is not a hymn. If there be praise, and praise of God, and it is not sung, it is not a hymn. It is necessary, therefore, if it be a hymn, that it have these three things: both praise, and praise of God, and that it be sung. In commenting on Ps. cxlviii. he repeats this rule in almost the same words. The definition commends itself at once as excellent, and in regard to a large number of hymns adequate; but even when the widest sense is given to the words it is much too narrow and would exclude many of the truest hymns. Indeed, it is impossible to deny the title to innumerable compositions which do not fulfil these conditions. Many a verse of which it may be said, This is not a hymn, demonstrates its right by the fact that it is hymned by the Church from age to age. St. Augustine’s third canon may be accepted without hesitation. A poem that cannot be sung may speak in the sublimest accents of devotion, yet it is of necessity unsuited to the service of the Christian choir. Spenser’s ‘Hymn of Heavenly Love’ is a glorious example of this form of praise. Indeed, there are some stanzas which a skilful hand might make available for use in the congregation. O blessèd Well of Love, O Flower of Grace, O glorious Morning Star, O Lamp of Light! Most lively image of Thy Father’s face, Eternal King of Glory, Lord of Might, Meek Lamb of God, before all worlds behight,[6] How can we Thee requite for all this good? Or what can prize that Thy most precious blood? Yet nought Thou ask’st in lieu of all this love, But love of us for guerdon of Thy pain: Ay me! What can us less than that behove? Had He requirèd life of us again, Had it been wrong to ask His own with gain? He gave us life, He it restorèd lost; Then life were least, that us so little cost. But He our life hath left unto us free, Free that was thrall, and blessèd that was banned; Nor ought demands but that we loving be, As He Himself hath loved us afore-hand; And bound thereto with an eternal band, Him first to love that us so dearly bought, And next our brethren to His image wrought. Many of Herbert’s and of Miss Rossetti’s poems are of the same type. We would give much to add them to our hymnals, but they would be out of place there. They belong to the manual of devotion.