In two past articles we've reviewed statements of both historians and early religious writers concerning music in worship. Both attest that singing was the only kind of music in Christian worship for centuries. The Roman Catholic church began adopting musical instruments during the Middle Ages, but that hardly closed the debate on their use. The Greek church in the East continued to reject them; and even as late as the sixteenth century there was enough protest within the Roman church that the Council of Trent (1545) came very close to abolishing their use (Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia, II, 1702).
The sixteenth century also saw the dawn of the Protestant Reformation, and with it a renewed vigor of opposition to instrumental music as unscriptural. That opposition continued in many denominations for several hundred years. Consider the words of a few major figures from the Reformation era and the denominational religious world. Some of them may surprise you.
Desiderius Erasmus (1469-1536), Dutch scholar: "We have brought into our churches a certain operose and theatrical music; such a confused, disorderly chattering of some words, as I hardly think was ever heard in any of the Grecian or Roman theatres. The church rings with the noise of trumpets, pipes and dulcimers; and human voices strive to bear their part with them . . . Men run to church as to a theatre, to have their ears tickled" (Comments on 1 Corinthians 14:19).
Martin Luther (1483-1546), reformer and founder of what is now the Lutheran Church: "The organ in the worship is the insignia of Baal" (Mcclintock & Strong's Encyclopedia, VI, 762).
John Calvin (1509-1564), another reformer, founder of modern Prebyterianism: "Musical instruments in celebrating the praises of God would be no more suitable than the burning of incense, the lighting up of lamps, and the restoration of the other shadows of the [Mosaic] law . . . Men who are fond of outward pomp may delight in that noise; but the simplicity which God recommends to us . . . is far more pleasing to Him" (Comments on Psalm 23).
John Wesley (1703-1791), an Episcopal and a founder of Methodism: "I have no objection to the instruments in our chapels, provided they are neither heard nor seen" (Quoted by Adam Clark).
Adam Clark (1762-1832), Methodist commentator: "I am an old man, and an old minister; and I here declare that I never knew them [musical instruments] productive of any good in the worship of God; and have had reason to believe that they were productive of much evil. Music, as a science, I esteem and admire: but instruments of music in the house of God I abominate and abhor. This is the abuse of music; and here I register my protest against all such corruptions in the worship of the Author of Christianity" (Commentary, IV, 686, on Amos 6:5).
Charles Spurgeon, renowned nineteenth century Baptist preacher: "We do not need them [musical instruments]. They would hinder rather than help our praise. Sing unto Him. This is the sweetest and best music. No instrument like the human voice. . . . What a degradation to supplant the intelligent song of the whole congregation by the theatrical prettiness of a quartet, the refined niceties of a choir, or the blowing off of wind from inanimate bellows and pipes! We might as well pray by machinery as praise by it" (Comments on Psalm 42:4).
Andrew Fuller, another Baptist scholar of the 1800s: "The history of the church during the first three centuries affords many instances of primitive Christians engaging in singing, but no mention (that I recollect) is made of instruments. (If my memory does not deceive me) it originated in the dark ages of popery, when almost every other superstition was introduced. At present, it is most used where the least regard is paid to primitive simplicity" (Complete Works, III, 520).
Questions on the Confession of Faith and Form of Government of The Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (1842): "Question 6. Is there any authority for instrumental music in the worship of God under the present dispensation? Answer. Not the least, only the singing of psalms and hymns and spiritual songs was appointed by the apostles; not a syllable is said in the New Testament in favor of instrumental music nor was it ever introduced into the Church until after the eighth century, after the Catholics had corrupted the simplicity of the gospel by their carnal inventions. It was not allowed in the Synagogues, the parish churches of the Jews, but was confined to the Temple service and was abolished with the rites of that dispensation" (55).
Why is all of this important?
All these quotes represent a very definite view on music in worship: in the New Testament age, instrumental music is without God's approval. I wonder what these men would think if they could see what their modern counterparts are up to. Today the vast majority of Lutheran, Presbyterian, Episcopal, Methodist, and Baptist churches (and any number of others) use instrumental music. Why has their belief and practice changed so much in just the last couple of centuries? Is it due to some new revelation from Heaven? If not, then what has caused it?
Next time: the rest of the story
The sixteenth century also saw the dawn of the Protestant Reformation, and with it a renewed vigor of opposition to instrumental music as unscriptural. That opposition continued in many denominations for several hundred years. Consider the words of a few major figures from the Reformation era and the denominational religious world. Some of them may surprise you.
Desiderius Erasmus (1469-1536), Dutch scholar: "We have brought into our churches a certain operose and theatrical music; such a confused, disorderly chattering of some words, as I hardly think was ever heard in any of the Grecian or Roman theatres. The church rings with the noise of trumpets, pipes and dulcimers; and human voices strive to bear their part with them . . . Men run to church as to a theatre, to have their ears tickled" (Comments on 1 Corinthians 14:19).
Martin Luther (1483-1546), reformer and founder of what is now the Lutheran Church: "The organ in the worship is the insignia of Baal" (Mcclintock & Strong's Encyclopedia, VI, 762).
John Calvin (1509-1564), another reformer, founder of modern Prebyterianism: "Musical instruments in celebrating the praises of God would be no more suitable than the burning of incense, the lighting up of lamps, and the restoration of the other shadows of the [Mosaic] law . . . Men who are fond of outward pomp may delight in that noise; but the simplicity which God recommends to us . . . is far more pleasing to Him" (Comments on Psalm 23).
John Wesley (1703-1791), an Episcopal and a founder of Methodism: "I have no objection to the instruments in our chapels, provided they are neither heard nor seen" (Quoted by Adam Clark).
Adam Clark (1762-1832), Methodist commentator: "I am an old man, and an old minister; and I here declare that I never knew them [musical instruments] productive of any good in the worship of God; and have had reason to believe that they were productive of much evil. Music, as a science, I esteem and admire: but instruments of music in the house of God I abominate and abhor. This is the abuse of music; and here I register my protest against all such corruptions in the worship of the Author of Christianity" (Commentary, IV, 686, on Amos 6:5).
Charles Spurgeon, renowned nineteenth century Baptist preacher: "We do not need them [musical instruments]. They would hinder rather than help our praise. Sing unto Him. This is the sweetest and best music. No instrument like the human voice. . . . What a degradation to supplant the intelligent song of the whole congregation by the theatrical prettiness of a quartet, the refined niceties of a choir, or the blowing off of wind from inanimate bellows and pipes! We might as well pray by machinery as praise by it" (Comments on Psalm 42:4).
Andrew Fuller, another Baptist scholar of the 1800s: "The history of the church during the first three centuries affords many instances of primitive Christians engaging in singing, but no mention (that I recollect) is made of instruments. (If my memory does not deceive me) it originated in the dark ages of popery, when almost every other superstition was introduced. At present, it is most used where the least regard is paid to primitive simplicity" (Complete Works, III, 520).
Questions on the Confession of Faith and Form of Government of The Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (1842): "Question 6. Is there any authority for instrumental music in the worship of God under the present dispensation? Answer. Not the least, only the singing of psalms and hymns and spiritual songs was appointed by the apostles; not a syllable is said in the New Testament in favor of instrumental music nor was it ever introduced into the Church until after the eighth century, after the Catholics had corrupted the simplicity of the gospel by their carnal inventions. It was not allowed in the Synagogues, the parish churches of the Jews, but was confined to the Temple service and was abolished with the rites of that dispensation" (55).
Why is all of this important?
All these quotes represent a very definite view on music in worship: in the New Testament age, instrumental music is without God's approval. I wonder what these men would think if they could see what their modern counterparts are up to. Today the vast majority of Lutheran, Presbyterian, Episcopal, Methodist, and Baptist churches (and any number of others) use instrumental music. Why has their belief and practice changed so much in just the last couple of centuries? Is it due to some new revelation from Heaven? If not, then what has caused it?
Next time: the rest of the story
No comments:
Post a Comment