ON THE USE OF INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC IN THE WORSHIP OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST, BY H. CHRISTOPHER, M. D. SAINT LOUIS: P. M. PINCKARD, 50S AND 510 PINE STREET. 1867. J * AN ADDRESS ON THE USE OF INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC IN THE WORSHIP OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST, H. CHRISTOPHER, M. D. SAINT LOUIS: P. M. PINCKARD, 608 AND 510 PINE STREET. 1867. NOTE The congregation in St. Louis, in an ex- change of property, acquired a building con¬ taining an elegant organ. The house was built by the St. Paul Parish, Episcopal. A law suit was afterward instituted by the Yestry of that parish for the value of the personal property attached to the building, among which was the organ. This suit has terminated, so far as the organ is concerned, in favor of the Christian Church. In the acquisition of a house containing an organ a desire sprang up in the hearts of some who had been decided enemies to this innovation on the primitive worship; and, since the organ has been acquired by this suit, this desire has spread. Believing that the great body of the con¬ gregation, embracing those so strongly in favor of using the organ, had given but little attention to the subject, the following Ad¬ dress was read before the congregation. ij address. Contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the Saints. — Jude. ■ Ti hG j® *? 0n . e P rom i n ent feature, one espe- cially distinctive and striking peculiarity in the religion of Jesus Christ, which is its ex¬ cellence and glory. In the eyes of Philoso¬ phy this may be its defect and shame. This peculiarity or distinctive feature is its stereo¬ typed character. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is a stereotyped religion. It was completed by the Holy Spirit speaking and writing by the inspired Apostles, and during their life time. Since their death no man has spoken by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. As the inspired men left the Gospel, so the Holy Spii it left it, and so it must ever remain un¬ til God shall change, alter or modify it. It is the same to-day that it was in the days of the Apostles; and it is but the dictate of common sense that man can not retouch it, embellish or modify it in the least important particular. The Apostle Jude affirms as much. He exhorts that we “contend ear¬ nestly for the faith once delivered to the Saints.” The words “once delivered’* point to a certain and particular time when this 4 faith was delivered to the Saints. This time was the Apostolic Age. By “the faith” he means the Gospel of Jesus Christ, called also by him “the common salvation.” By the Saints he must mean the Christians of the early years of the Apostolic Age. So that, as regards the application of this command to ns of the present day, we must understand the Apostle as exhorting us to contend for the Gospel as it was left by the Apostles m the New Testament Scriptures. The exhor¬ tation of the Apostle, equivalent with us to a command, confines us to the words of the inspired Apostles, and binds us down to the Apostolic Age. As a people we so under¬ stand the words of Jude. We look only to the writings of the Apostles of Jesus Christ, and repudiate all human authority or inter¬ ference in matters that pertain to our reli¬ gious faith and practice. The Bible is our only authority, and we reject everything that concerns our faith and practice not sanctioned by the Apostles. We stand firmly and immoveably on this ground. It is our glory or our shame, our strength or our weakness. We stand or fall here.. We believe and maintain that the religion of Jesus Christ was finished, completed and stereotyped by the Apostles, and in their day. We believe that the Christian Scrip¬ tures contain all that God has seen proper to reveal, and all that man's condition under sin in every age of the world needs or re- 5 quires. We do not believe that God has, since the death of the last inspired man, littered one word, or that he ever will utter another, in addition to what he spoke hy the inspired men of the New Testament. We are not ashamed to acknowledge the supreme authority of the Apostles of Jesus Christ, and to bind our consciences by their word. We recognize them as possessing vital and su¬ preme authority, and deny that their word is susceptible ot either addition, improve¬ ment or abridgment on the part of men. This position necessarily compels us to re¬ ject all human interference or authority in matters pertaining to our religious faith and practice. We have placed ourselves among the Apostles, and fear to come one century this side oftheir day, lest we also be overtaken and finally overwhelmed by corruptions, which men began so early to introduce into the Apbstolic faith and practice. So soon as the inspired men had passed away, “the iniquity” which began to work in the days of the Apostles was not long in developing itself. When the restraint of the presence of the Apostles was removed it felt that its time had come, and began to exhibit those princi¬ ples and characteristics which appear so con¬ spicuous in the Papacy. The sources of the innovations and corruptions which eventu¬ ally deluged the Church, and obscured the faith and practice of the Apostolic Church, were the various systems of Pagan Philoso- 6 phy, Jewish. Tradition and the Jewish Reli¬ gion, in which men supposed they saw more beautiful and rational expositions of the Christian philosophy, and more powerful, appropriate and attractive means of recom¬ mending the Gospel to an ungodly world, and of smoothing and softening its offensive plainness and simplicity. Innovations and corruptions having been introduced into the Church at such an early day in its history, it is not safe to stop this side of the days of its purity in deter¬ mining what God requires of us. For this reason we have determined to get behind all corruptions and innovations by ascending the stream to its fountain and .placing our¬ selves among the Apostles and in the Apos¬ tolic Church. Standing here we say to the world that we know nothing but what we find in the writings of the Apostles and in the practice of the Primitive or Apostolic Church. We pronounce these all-sufficient for every purpose relating to our religious faith and practice. The revelation of God contains all that we need or require to know of our relations, duties and responsibilities to God and to the Great Head of the Church. We confine ourselves to the narrow limits of the Apostolic writings and to the practice of the Apostolic Church, believing it to be our only safety against similar or other corrup¬ tions which bring defilement and ruin on the Church. If this step is to be considered shameful arid degrading, as ignoring or disregarding that Spirit of Progress which has done so much, and which will yet do much, for the advancement and improvement of the race in all the human elements and instrumental¬ ities of civilization, we can not help it. We know it is not. We know that it is not only honorable and ennobling, but imperiously necessary. And more than this, that it is demanded ot us by God, leaving us no discre¬ tion, because he allows no interference on the part of either angels or men in anything that he has commanded or ordained.* We believe the step to have been wise and judi¬ cious, and our only protection against an in¬ flux of errors, and we do not intend to recede from it We must not allow ourselves to be disturbed in our convictions, or led into dan¬ gerous paths by this deceptive plea of Pro¬ gress.. It has already done a vast amount of mischief. It has destroyed the religion of many a man, and we must be on our guard lest it destroy us. We must make necessary and proper discriminations. We must re¬ member that progress is a word not applica¬ ble to the religion of Jesus Christ. It was stereotyped by the Holy Spirit in the persons of the Apostles, and is not, consequently, susceptible of progress. How irrational and foolish, then, to apply words to the revela¬ tion of God, which can be properly applied only to human Art, Science or Politics. *1 Gal. i: 8, 9. 8 Had men been content with the ordi¬ nances of God and the provisions which he instituted for the advancement and preser¬ vation of his cause on the earth, the great Apostasy would never have occurred to dis¬ grace the religion of Jesus Christ. And, had the Protestants of the Sixteenth Century taken our ground and adopted our principles of going back to the Apostles, and contend¬ ing for nothing but the faith and practice of the Apostolic Church, the Church would have been spared its present unhappy divi¬ sion, the one great cause of modern infidel¬ ity. Hence, if we would preserve the unity of the Church and keep out corruptions and innovations of every kind, we must confine ourselves to the teaching of the Apostles and to the practice of the Apostolic Church. We are driven to this position and confined to it by the highest considerations for the interests of the Church and the most inexor- ble logic. This step is the distinctive feature of our reformatoiy movement, our power and glory, and our only hope of success; the only means and way by which the world can be con¬ verted to Christ and the Church preserved from corruptions with which human ambi¬ tion and pride have flooded it in days gone by. It was a grand and mighty con cep ion, a sweeping generalization, that carried us, at one bound, over the heads of eighteen cen¬ turies, and placed us behind all the corrup- 9 tions and causes of divisions which now defile and distract the Church. It evinces a grasp ot mind at once grand and wonderful It develoj s a logic that strikes at the root of all error and corruption ; that undermines their foundation ; and cuts down at one blow the great Apostacy and all its fruit. This work alone is sufficient to immortalize the name of Alexander Campbell and assure his tame to the latest generation. Had he done no more than give existence to this logic, and to set on foot this movement, the world would still have been greatly blessed by his v : u XS a ste P " k° se logic sweeps from the ( hurch all error and corruption, all hu¬ man interference with its faith and prac- tme; and carries us back once and forever to the Apostles, and there confines us. The axe which the Baptist laid at “the root of the trees ” was not more destructive of the claims and pretensions of the Jews than is this step destructive of the errors and cor¬ ruptions of the Church at the present day. Our movement, therefore, is similar to that ot the Harbinger’s, and, consequently, sanc¬ tioned by the highest authority in the uni¬ verse and by the soundest wisdom. We need not, therefore, be ashamed of this char¬ acter of our movement. There is no ground between this and Spiritualism but Poperv, so that we must hold to the Apostles, o"r, cutting loose from them, sail out into the boundless ocean of Spiritualism, or fret and 10 fritter away life in the lifeless forms and ceremonies of Bomanism. The position which this procedure gives us before the world, and the principle which underlies it, are no longer with us a subject for doubt or dispute. These are now settled and established. The principle on which we are proceeding is now as fixed, immoveable and unchangeable as an axiom of mathe¬ matics. To entertain a doubt of its wisdom and necessity is to let the world go back again to the darkness and confusion of the Papac} r . To doubt or reject this position and principle is to destroy all that has been done, and leave the religion of Jesus at the mercy of men. To doubt or reject these is to sweep the religion ot Jesus from the earth, and leave the world nothing but a mangled, bleeding corpse. To doubt or re¬ ject these is to destroy even an apostate Church from the earth, and leave scarcely a vestige of the religion of Jesus in the world. Christ and his Apostles must reign supreme and dictate to the world, or mankind must be left to the guide of human reason ; and then revelation, authoritative and final, will be spurned from the earth ) then Spiritualism will reign with undisputed sway. He, there¬ fore, who discards the position we now oc¬ cupy, and rejects the principle on which we are proceeding, which is the life and salva¬ tion of the Church, gathers not with Christ. The great leader in the present reforma- 11 tory movement saw the logic of hia proposed step, and though it seemed to annihilate his religious being, yet he did not falter or stag¬ ger. He was fully persuaded of its wisdom, necessity and efficacy, and he took his stand deliberately and resolutely. With one effort all human creeds and human dictation in all matters pertaining to man’s religious faith and practice were rejected, and the Bible taken up and held up as the only authority worthy of our submission and binding on the conscience. To give form and body to this principle, and make this step practical, and confine it within proper and necessary limits, it was wisely determined that for all matters de¬ manded of, and enjoined on, men we should have the sanction and authority of a “Thus saith the Lord.” This limitation is neces¬ sary to save the principle from a too sweep- mg application. The principle must apply to and include nothing, but those things which relate to our religious faith and prac¬ tice—to those matters which belong to ivor- ship. As to matters which are evidently and confessedly within the limits of, and belong to, the domain of human reason and wisdom ; as to Aatters which pertain to social, provincial or national customs and habits, “which perish with the using,” these are no more to be included as governed by this principle than are tlie various forms of civil government. We must, therefore, ob- 12 serve some necessary distinctions and limi¬ tations in the application of this great and important principle. There is another important and necessary distinction to be made, if we would convince the world of the corruptions of the apostasy and preserve ourselves from a similar late. This distinction has reference to the source whence our faith and practice are derived. This source is the New Testament—not the - Jewish Institution. The Old Testament may be suggestive and corroborative, but it is not authoritative. It has been superseded by the New, just as the Jewish Religion has been superseded by the Christian. The superses¬ sion is based on many reasons, an important one of which is the essential difference in their genius and nature. Because a distinc¬ tion has not been made just here, the Church has been oppressed for centuries with Jewish notions and practices. From Judaism the apostate Church has derived infant member¬ ship *, Jewish ceremonies of burning incense, of priestly robes and its ritual service. Growing up into power and influence under the influx of corruptions and innovations of the third, fourth, fifth and sixth centuries, the Roman Catholic Church has many things in its faith and practice of Jewish and Pagan origin. Its ritual service is mostly Jewish, and its worship of saints and images is Pagan, borrowed from the hero worship of Greece and'Rome. Protestantism has taken its chief 13 corner stone—infant membership—from Ju¬ daism ) and that moral excresence on our body politic—Mormonism—goes to David and Solomon for its polygamy. These corruptions, and especially the rea¬ soning which has given them existence, ought to show us the importance, and, indeed, the imperative necessity of making legitimate and proper distinctions, and to put us on our guard against false analogies and accidental resemblances. On our principles the New Testament and the practice of the Apostolic Church can be our only guides and authorities on all sub¬ jects that concern our religious faith and practice. Where the Scriptures are only didactic and allusory, the principle may be applied and the allusion verified and made clear by a reference to the practice of the Apostolic Church, as this is gathered from the Scriptures and cotemporary history. In this way many disputed points may be settled, and many corruptions and innovations exposed. There was, for instance, no worship of saints or of images in the Apostolic Church, nor any ritual or liturgical service. Neither was there such a thing as infant membership. There were no Popes, nor Cardinals, nor Archbish¬ ops, nor Prelates ; no such a thing as Roman or English Episcopacy; no such forms of church government as those represented by Presbyterianism and Methodism. Nothing was known in the days of the Apostles but 14 the Church of Christ, with its plain and simple worship and government. The modern machinery of Councils, Assemblies, Synods, Presbyteries and Conferences is not to be found in the New Testament, or in the practice of the Apostolic Church. This fact settles their fate, disposes of (heir authority, and deprives them of all vitality. It is a sweeping and merciless logic that thus de¬ stroys, at one blow, the labor and work of centuries—the inventions and appliances of great but mistaken men. But this is the vital and essential nature of truth. Light is not more destructive of darkness than is truth of error. It would be no longer truth if it were not thus merciless and destructive. Shall we shrink from it because of these in¬ herent qualities ? Never. We occupy a strong position; we wield a mighty % and sweeping principle. It is a sharp two-edged sword. It disarticulates the most difficult joints, and dissects the minutest structures. It cuts down every hill and fills up every valley. It pulls down the strongholds of errors and builds up those of truth. It is just as powerful in preserving as in destroy¬ ing, and just as necessary and important. While it sweeps every obstruction from before us, it is just as potent to preserve us. It first redeems and then preserves. This is the es¬ sential nature and quality of the religion of Jesus; and so long as we adhere strictly to it, we will escape the corrptions of a degen- 15 erate Church, and bo what Christ designed hi* Church to be —the ltght of the world. The sun derives no light from, the earth, neither does the Church, which Jesus re¬ deemed, derive any light from this world. Its light must shine, or the world will be in darkness. I have said that, in determining the prac¬ tice of the Apostolic Church, we must con¬ sult Jewish history as well as the Christian Scriptures. This necessity arises from the fact that the Scriptures on certain sub¬ jects are merely didactic and allusory. This results from the fact that the subjects were familiar to the readers. For instance, the Scriptures are not full and explicit on the worship and government of the Church. Yet these subjects were well understood in the days of the Apostles, and when they were spoken of but little more was necessary than a mere allusion. Hence the obscurity of the Scriptures on certain subjects to the modern reader. But these allusions can be verified and the obscurities cleared up by reference to external history, and this Jewish history. Such a reference is legitimate and necessary, because our religion originated among the Jews. The Lord and his Apostles were Jews, educated under Jewish notions and customs. The converts for eight years were Jews—the majority in every Church were Jews. The leading men and officers of the Church were Jews, so that we need not be 16 surprised to find that the Christian Church was modeled after the Jewish Synagogue. It was in the Synagogues of the Jews that Christ and his Apostles first preached the Gospel; it was here they found hearers, and here where Christianity first got a foothold. For these reasons it is necessary and proper to have recourse to Jewish history in certain cases in order to verify allusions in the Scrip¬ tures and clear up obscurities. As it regards the worship and government of the Apostolic Church—two very important subjects, in reference to which many corrup¬ tions still exist and act as causes of divisions —we must have recourse to Jewish history, and, guided by the Divine Pecord, seek a solution of our difficulties on these subjects; and since the Church was modeled after the Synagogue in its worship and government, it is not only highly advantageous, but im¬ portant and necessary to consult Jewish his¬ tory to obtain a clear and full knowledge on these subjects. As it regards worship, there were two kinds or forms under the J e wish institution. These were too distinct to be confounded. The one was instituted and regulated by stiitutary law; the other grew out of the wants of the people, and was only an extension of the family worship of the Patriarchal Age, No provision was made for this kind or form of worship in the law; no mention is made of 17 it in the law, which fact shows that it consti¬ tuted no part of the Jewish Institution. The first of these kinds of worship was the public worship of the Tabernacle and Temple. It was national in its character—not social or devotional—and consisted of sacrifices, ordinances, rites and ceremonies, conducted by a legally ordained priesthood prescribed by the law. These priests were the only persons permitted by the law to take part in this worship, and they all belonged to one tribe. The women of all the tribes were cut off from this worship, even though inspired, so that this worship was peculiar in every respect. With this form of worship nothing could have been in greater contrast than that of the Synagogue. Here the men and women of all tribes could meet and worship; here there were no distinctions made in regard to any state or condition of society; here there was only spiritual or devotional worship—a worship of the heart—and not one of sym¬ bols, rites and ceremonies. In this worship there was no sacrifice of animals, no rites and ceremonies, no burning of incense, no priestly robes, no mitred priest with his breastplate and Urim and Thummim ; noth¬ ing w^as found in the Synagogue that per¬ tained to the Temple, because disallowed. It was devotional worship of the people, and not the symbolic worship of specially or¬ dained priests and legally appointed sacrifices, 18 rites and ceremonies. It was grounded on piety, and came from the heart, and not on symbols and external ordinances. It con¬ sisted of praise, thanksgiving and prayer, and was more preci >us in the sight of God than all burnt offerings. Here the contrite heart prayed, and the soul, joyous and thank¬ ful, sang psalms and hymns, and spiritual songs, and made melody in the heart. Here none were acceptable worshipers but those whose hands were clean, whose hearts were pure, and whose souls were not lifted up with vanity and pride. Synagogues were conse¬ quently found wherever there were pious J ews. [n striking contrast with this was the wor¬ ship o-‘ the Temple at Jerusalem, where wor¬ ship was offered for the whole nation. After the building ot the Temple, the national wor¬ ship was allowed only at Jerusalem. Here the priests resided ; here morning and eve¬ ning sacrifices were daily offered. The ser¬ vices could be discharged as well by wicked as by godly priests Moral character was not an element of the Jewish priesthood or the Temple worshiper. He had only to serve according to the law, and the worship was genuine and acceptable, whether the offerer were a saint or a sinner in character. It was a legal worship, and not spiritual. On certain great occasions—certain grand convocations of the people—the great mass of the people repaired to Jerusalem to take 19 part in the worship of these occasions. Wor¬ ship at these times consisted of one continual round of sacrifices at the brazen altar and in the sanctuary on the part of the priests, and on the part of the people in feasting, singing, dancing, and music on cornet, timbrel and harp, the sound of trumpets and cymbals, and the general rejoicings of the whole people. All these things contrasted sharply wdth what transpired in the Synagogue on the Sabbath days. The two kinds of wor¬ ship were as distant as flesh and spirit. p-.?. These two kinds of worship have their re¬ presentatives under the Christian system. The Synagogue has passed into the Christian Church, and the Temple worship found its end and fulfillment in the death of Jesus Christ on the Cross, and his coronation as King and High Priest in the heavens. Under his reign there is his Synagogue or Congre¬ gational worship on the earth, and, in the heavens, that part of the Temple worship which consisted of praises, thanksgivings and rejoicings, where the saints, gathered out of all the nations of the earth, constitute the one great family or people of God ; and the wor¬ ship coming up as from one great nation, the symbols of the National worship of the Jews are used to describe it. The National or Temple worship perished with the destruction of the Jewish metropo¬ lis by Titus. Being wholly national, it per¬ ished with the nation. Not a vestige re- 20 mains. It served until the substance ap¬ peared ; and since the day of Christ’s corona¬ tion, the Temple worship has not ascended one inch towards heaven. All that now re¬ mains to the Jews is their Synagogue. They have been stripped of all their ancient gran¬ deur and glory. They are a people “ scatter¬ ed and peeled,” and even their Synagogue has been merged and lost in the Church. The Temple worship was in perfect conso¬ nance with the genius, nature and purpose of the Jewish Institution. It was a system of external rites and ceremonies, whose only value was their symbolic character, and whose only purity that of the flesh, and only holiness ceremonial. It had no reference to the spirit—was not designed to reach the heart—and looked only to the purification of the flesh. The Synagogue worship was the opposite of this in every essential particular—spirit¬ ual in its nature and devotional in its char¬ acter. It was only in the Synagogue that spiritual worship was ever seen while the “ first tabernacle was yet standing.” It was in the Synagogue that Jesus worshiped— never in the Temple; it was here that the first Christians worshiped God through Christ. The worship of the Synagogue, therefore, was adapted to the spiritual worship of the Church. The Church accordingly was mod¬ eled after the Synagogue. This being so, we will learn much of the worship of the 21 Apostolic Church by learning what was the worship of the Synagogue. This worship was simple in the extreme. It was adapted to every capacity, and was sufficient for the wants of all. All spiritual worship is plain and simple, and within the reach of all. It is like the historic style in composition compared with the poetic or symbolic. A religion of symbols is necessa¬ rily one of imagery and dress, of grand and imposing ceremonies. But such a religion can do no more than excite wonder, awe and fear; never can melt the heart to love, and give it the fearless confidence of the child. This fact is fully illustrated by the genius and history of the Jewish and Christian Institutions. The religion of Jesus being wholly spirit¬ ual, its worship is also spiritual. There is now no other kind of acceptable worship. He who worships God through Christ must worship him in spirit and in truth; for such only does God now accept. Spiritual worship is always and necessarily plain and simple. Demanded of every heart, it must be such as every heart can give; it must be within the reach and grasp of the great mass of mankind. Hence, in ordaining the forms and instrumentalities of worship, the Holy Spirit had regard to the condition of man under all circumstances, and in every age of the woild, however enlightened, re- 22 fined and cultivated the age might chance to be. The Holy Spirit in organizing the Chris¬ tian Church adopted the worship and govern¬ ment of the Synagogue, as adapted to and adequate for ail the wants and needs of the Christian in all ages and in all countries, whether barbarous, semi barbarous, or civil¬ ized, whether rude or refined. As we find the form or mode of worship portrayed in the Scriptures, and illustrated in the worship of the Synagogue, such, we must conclude, it was left by the Holy Spirit; and being left such by him, there is nothing left us but to accept it or reject him. We had as well, then, be ashamed of Christ as of the plain and simple worship of the Apostolic Church. If he ordained it, its simplicily can be no ob¬ jection. If it suited Christ and his Apostles, our refinement cannot certainly be offended or shocked at its unpretentious simplicity. We must never forget that it is not our province to determine what is or what is not acceptable worship. What pleases God should please us. But mankind have never been satisfied with what God has ordained; and it seems the most difficult thing in the world to persuade men to be content with what he has ordained. If he prefers the worship of the heart to all burnt offerings and sacrifices, why should rn'en object? Or if be suspends the salvation of the race on the obedience of the heart, why should we wish to make any- 23 thing else, either different or additional, the ground of acceptance with God ? What God hath ordained is best, and it is our wisdom and | iety to obey without a murmur. I have now sketched in general outline the ground on which we stand, and stated the principle upon which we are proceeding, and adverted to some of the conclusions to which the logic of this step conducts us. The rea¬ sons and considerations which I have here presented are sufficient, I think, to show the visdom, propriety, and absolute necessity of he step we have taken, and to justify this )Osition and principle in the judgment of ;very intelligent and unbiassed mind. .Regarding, then, the wisdom, propriety, ind necessity ot the stand we have taken be¬ fore the world as beyond any successful dis¬ turbance or reasonable objection, 1 proceed to the consideration of the subject which 1 have immediately in view, and to draw some practical conclusions which bear directly upon our own course of action; and it must not be objected if the logic which has swept away the labor and hopes of great and good men of other days, should prove as remorseless when applied to ourselves. Truth is a two- edged sword and equally destructive of error, whether found in friend or foe. The subject of which the foregoing remarks are but preliminary, and which i design to constitute my premises, is— the use of in¬ strumental MUSIC IN THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 24 With its use and value in other assemblies and for other purposes than that o i worship, I have no interest or concern whatever. I see no inconsistency in its use by religious parties whose very existence depends on hu¬ man dictation. Its use by them should be no argument with us. We have proposed to ignore their existence, and cannot, therefore, consistently borrow anything from them. 1 do not say that we cannot learn anything from them. On the contrary, we may learn much. Their experience and history serve to show us, and confirm us in, the wisdom and propriety of the course we have marked out for ourselves from the sacred Scriptures. In reference to what the Scriptures teach we are independent of them, and as to what we desire to know of matters relating to our faith and practice, we propose to consult nothing but the oracles of God. It has been claimed by some that Jesus borrowed some of his moral precepts from the philosophers of Greece and Home. But this is simply blasphemous. He was independent of all human sources of knowledge He spoke from Heaven. What he has left us is from God, and since all that we have has been given us4)y God, why should we look to any other source ? We must not forget that our religion and everything connected w T ith it is divine. We have originated nothing. We must take the Church as the Apostles left it, or as men have made or shall make it. One 25 of these we must do. Which shall we do? Did the Holy Spirit, then, ordain instru¬ mental music in the Church of Christ? or did he leave it to human wisdom and pru¬ dence to determine what shall be the mode of worship so far as regards the singing ? The last of these questions can never be answered in the affirmative. In the absence of certain facts it might be inferred: in their light it may be safely denied. These facts will appear as we proceed. The first question can be answered in the negative. Instrumental music was not used in the Jewish Synagogue, and as the Christian Church was modeled after it, it could not have been used in the Apostolic Church, unless specially ordained. The his¬ tory of the Church develops the fact that it was not used in any Christian assembly for several centuries after the death of the inspir¬ ed men; consequently it was not ordained b}^ the Holy Spirit in the Apostolic Church. We cannot believe that this was an accidental omission or an oversight. Hor can we be¬ lieve that he was not fully acquainted with the power and influence of instrumental music over the heart, and knew perfectly well all its advantages in any and every par¬ ticular, and in any and every age, and whether it was adapted to the spiritual worship of the Church. He knew that it had been used in the Temple worship, and whether it ought to be ordained in the Church. If, then, he 26 did not ordain it in the Church, what could have been the reason ? If it were not an oversight, it must have been intentionally discarded. But it matters not with us what was the reason. We have the fact, and this, with Christians, should be all-sufficient. The fact, then, that the Holy Spirit did not ordain instrumental music in the Apostolic Church is an argument conclusive that he did not design that it should be used. This fact should be with us an end of all thought and desire on the subject. It has, nevertheless, been introduced in the Church, and for many centuries it has showed what influence it has on the psalmody of the Church. Let us now look into its history and learn what character it has written on the scroll of time. For this purpose I will give an extract from Coleman's history of the “ Apostolic and Primitive Church/' and one from his “ Ancient Christianity Exemplified . 99 From the first I quote : “ Both the Jews in their Temple service and the Greeks in their idol worship were accustomed to sing with the accompaniment of instrumental music. The converts to Christianity accordingly must have been familiar with this mode of singing. But it is generally admitted that the primitive Christians employed no instrumental music in their religious worship. Neither Ambrose, nor Basil, nor Chrysostom, in the noble encomiums which they severally 27 pronounce on music, make any mention of instrumental music p. 370. In the Apostolic Church the music was entirely vocal and congregational. On this subject Chrysostom says : “It was the ancient custom, as it still is with us, for all to come together and unitedly join in singing. The young and the old, the rich and the poor, male and female, bond and free, all join in one song. All worldly distinctions here cease, and the whole congregation forms one general chorus. This interesting part of their worship was conducted in the same sim¬ plicity which characterized all of their pro¬ ceedings. All unitedly sang their familiar psalms and hymns, each was invited at plea¬ sure, and according to his ability, to lead the devotions in a sacred song indicated by himself. Such was evidently the custom in the Corinthian Church, and such was still the custom in the age of i ertullian.” These extracts establish the fact that instrumental music was not used in the Church as late as A. D. 400, to age of Chrysostom. This innovation on the worship of the Apostolic Church, like all other innovations and corruptions, came in gradually. The same author remarks that (< an earlier period than the fifth or sixth century can hardly be assigned 99 as the period of the introduc¬ tion of instrumental music. “ Organs were unknown in the Church until the eighth or ninth century. Previous to that time they 28 had their place in the theatre. They were never regarded with favor in the Eastern Church, and were vehemently opposed in many places in the West. In Scotland no organ is allowed to this very day except in a few Episcopal Churches. In the English Convention, held A. I). 1562, in Queen Eliza¬ beth's time, for settling the Liturgy, the re¬ taining of the organ was carried by a casting vote. )} p. 376. The use of instrumental music in the Church from the fifth century to the pre¬ sent day, a period of thirteen hundred years, gives it a history whose light will afford us some insight into its nature, tendency and effects on the worship of the Church, and discover, possibly, the reason why the Holy Spirit did not ordain it as an aid in spir¬ itual worship. In regard to the nature and tendency of instrumental music as devel¬ oped by its history, the same author says: “ The tendency of instrumental music is to secularize the music of the Church and to en¬ courage singing by a choir." The seculari¬ zation of the music of the Church was effected by the introduction of profane or secular music. On this subject the same author says : a The introduction of profane, secular music into the Church was one of the prin¬ cipal means of corrupting the psalmody of the Church." This effect proceeds from the nature of this kind of music. It is (t ar¬ tificial and theatrical in style, having no 29 affinity to the worship of God/* and, “ when it took the place of those solemn airs which before had inspired the devotions of his peo¬ ple,” congregational music perished. “ The music of the theatre was transferred to the i Church, which accordingly became the scene of theatrical pomp and display rather than the house of prayer and praise to inspire, by its appropriate and solemn rites, the spiritual worship of God. The consequences of in¬ dulging this depraved taste for secular music in the Church are exhibited by Neander in the following extract: “We have to regret that, both in the Eastern and Western Church, their sacred music had assumed an artificial and theatrical character , and was so far removed from its original simplicity that even in the fourth century Abbot Pambo, of Egypt, complained that heathen melodies had been introduced into their Church psalm¬ ody.” Others, as “Isodorus of Pelusium, complained of the theatrical singing , espe¬ cially of the women, which, instead of induc¬ ing penitence for sin, tended much more to awaken sinful desires.” And Jerome, in remarking on Eph. v. 19, says: “May all hear it who sing in the Church—Not with the voice, but with the heart , we sing praises to God. Eot like the comedians, should they raise their sweet and liquid notes to entertain the assembly with theatrical songs and melodies in the Church; but the fear of God , piety and the knowledge of the Scrip - 30 tures should inspire our songs. Then would not the voices of the singers , but the utterances of the Divine Word , expel the evil spirit from those who, like Saul, are possessed with one. But, instead of this, that same spirit is invited rather to the possession of those who have converted the House of God into a Pagan theatre.” The nature and tendency of instrumental music, and especially its effect on the wor¬ ship of the Church, are still more fully devel¬ oped in another evil consequence of its intro¬ duction. This consequence is the transfer¬ ence of the singing from the congregation to a selected choir, the music of which, espe¬ cially when accompanied by instruments, is confessedly beyond the reach of the congre¬ gation. On this point I quote : “ The prac¬ tice of Sacred music as an ornamental, culti¬ vated art, took it yet more completely from the people. It became an art which only a few could learn. The many, instead of uni¬ ting their hearts and voices in the Songs of Zion, could only sit coldly by as spectators. A promiscuous assembly, very obviously, could not be expected to bear a prominent part in such music.” Other methods were used with the same object in view. <( The clergy eventually claimed the right of performing the Sacred music as a privilege exclusively their own;” and “finally, the more effectually to exclude the people, the singing was in Latin.” These 31 latter methods have been abandoned in mod¬ ern times except the last, which still obtains in some Homan Catholic Churches. Instru¬ mental and choir music has been found fully adequate to the object of excluding the people from this part of the worship, and this almost universally obtains. From these extracts it will be readily seen that one corruption attends or is soon fol¬ lowed by another. The one makes room for or constitutes the precedent for another. Hence the importance and necessity of eter¬ nal vigilance. From “ Ancient Christianity Exemplified ” I quote : “ f he singing was congregational for the first three centuries. The charm of their music was not in the harmony of sweet sounds, but in the melody of the heart. . . . The singing was gradually drawn from the congregation and confined to a choir, which, in order to limit and confine this part of the worship to the choir, the style of the music was changed, so that the congregation were compelled to remit this part of the worship and leave it in the hands of trained singers. Church music thus became a refined art of difficult attainment, and limited to the few professed singers. The congregation were, by the exigencies of their condition, excluded from all participation in it. The devotional tendency of Sacred music was lost in the artis¬ tic style of its profane , secular airs. Thus , like our modern Church, the Ancient soon im~ 32 paired the devotional tendency of Sacred music by raising it above the congregation and limit¬ ing it to the choir, as they did their pray¬ ers by restricting them to the cold and for¬ mal rehearsal of the prayer book.” Comment on these extracts is unnecessary. They speak fur themselves. It is wonderful how much the modern resembles the an¬ cient ; how little instrumental music in the worship of a spiritual religion, as regards its nature and tendency, differs in modern times from what it was in the days of its power and influence, when it developed its true na¬ ture and influence on this part of the wor¬ ship of God. It is another evidence and ex¬ ample of how history repeats itself; how the same principles will ever produce the same results. History fully establishes the fact that for three centuries instrumental music was not used in the Church; and what reason can explain this fact, if not that it was design¬ edly and purposely excluded ? It found no foothold in the Church until the Church had been corrupted in other respects ; until men had begun to correct the errors and omis¬ sions of divine wisdom, to adorn the sim¬ plicity of the primitive worship, and to im¬ prove on the Apostolic teaching ; until human reason began to fasten its serpent fangs into the body of Christ. It had its origin in a state of things which gave existence to pedo- baptism, and the corruptions which finally in the 38 Papacy.^ ^ legitimate It is a fact that musical instrumpn+c, • troduce an artistic style of music far aL the reach and capacity of any but am-itp V6 or professional singers. Hence choirTof the present day, like those of former times Se almost universally composed of professional artists, those whose talents entitle them fp expect and demand a remunerat on f or ?he£ choir services. They are employed to « e cute the singing, and it is not strange that they should be more intent on exhibiting their musical powers and artistic taste than on the worship of God. Indeed, worship fs ra re Iy it ever, a concomitant of such music for choirs are seldomly composed of godly 'ner- sons ; and such is the nature and tendency of artistic music, that even if godly persons vvere to engage m it, they would not long remain so. Ihey could not long resist its effects. Its nature and tendency is to engender pride vanny and wordly ambition, and these are passions which the young, who generally compose the choir, can rarely resist. In many instances the singers are ungodly persons, and many not even professors, and Known to be such when employed. The music is all that is sought; the advertisement call for the best voice; character is never thought of. All this may comport well with a corrupt and an Apostate Church; but to think of such a thing for the Church of 84 " z"i » b SJf rtbV feebio»t conception of the ..cento n.t«. of Christon worth*.« J», d singing as any p«tof enter- taiiment It is not Lange, therefore, that instrumental music and all its concomitants i milfi be so heartily condemned by th gS anS good of all parties and of every aS When sacred music becomes 80 hl f; h !y a F" fistic as to suit instruments and choirs, it degenerates into a mere musical entertain. St: and such is really its character in churches where instruments and chons exist. It resembles more the orchestra music of theatres, which is designed to entertain the audience while the curtain is down, than spiritual worship welling up from the soul in gratitude and praise to the Great loan tain of life and blessing; and the congregation has no more to do with the singing of choirs than the audience of the theatre has with the music of the orchestra. It is, therefore, iust as reasonable to defend the withholding of the Bible from the people, or the perform¬ ance of religious worship in a foreign tongue, as to advocate a measure that effectually takes from the congregation all participation in the worship of singing. Who can con¬ sistently defend the one and not the other t Instrumental music is even more objee- 35 tionable than the use of a foreign tongue in any part of the worship. It has never been known that the ritual service in either the Roman or English Church was performed by a man of the world. Wicked and ungodly men may, in time, have crept into the sacred office; but in every instance they have been recognized by the worshiping assembly as ordained and consecrated persons. But it is a well known fact that ungodly and worldly men and women have discharged this part of the worship; and worse than this, in some instances, the men have spent the time of preaching in a drinking saloon, while the women have killed the time in gossip or novel reading. This is worse than the ritual service of Bomanism. But it is objected that these things are merely accidental, and not a necessary con¬ sequence of the use of instrumental music, and by no means universal. That they are startling, I am willing to admit, but that they are merely accidental the history of in¬ strumental music positively denies, and not only denies, but establishes the contrary. It is not an accident that Eve sinned when s she listened to the seductive pleas of Satan ; it was not an accident that the man became possessed with a demon when he had swept and garnished his house; it was not an ac¬ cident that the Jew became contaminated when he touched a dead body; nor is it an accident that the wheat is choked out when 36 the tares are sown in equal profusion. Prin¬ ciples possess power and character, and they communicate these to everything into which they are infused. “A little leaven leavens the whole mass." The isolated state of instrumental choirs, their conspicuous position, and especially the expectations that are formed of them, and the requirements made of them, all tend to engender pride, vanity and wordly ambition, and to banish from the mind and to repress all religious feelings or sentiments in the hearts of the choristers. They are intent alone on executing their part well, that they may elicit the approbation of the audience and the praises of men. What God thinks of their performance does not once disturb their thoughts; the sentiment of worship is a stranger to their hearts; they do not think that they have been praising God . Still, it is insisted that these dark spots are merely accidents In reply, I appeal to its history. It has there written its character as a corrupter of God’s spiritual worship, as the destroyer of an ordinance of God, and the author of a spirit inimical to the spirit of Christ. If there be not something inherently vicious and injurious in its use, can any one imagine a reason why the Holy Spirit dii not ordain such a powerful and beneficial aid to the human voice as this is claimed to be? We can not say that he was ignorant of these excellencies, or incapable of appreciate 37 taH fin ^ n ? U f ic; that he was rude, uncultiva ale an lr!d ° c rn the stailda fd of this modern why the ancient Church'Vor*three e ^ ea ? on Sfp ? ot S s p 1 hey were not ignorant of its use elsewhere, and possibly no less appreciative of its power and benefits than others Its absence from the beginning could only have been the result of design. ^ We have now had some insight into its !ts St n ry / m W ! UCl J We have seen somethin«• 0 f its nature, tendency and effects. In this development we have discovered its influ¬ ence for good or evil j what it is capable of cEh n M tmS , the 8tyle and character of Church Music, and in promoting piety and true spiritual worship! This history Is suf¬ ficiently full and complete to be satisfactory. ,, As a people, therefore, pretending before Iurity°o r f tbP f t u 0rn , lg . f0r the Apostolic purity of the Church, claiming to have con- wbhdft a ^ corruptions and innovations which now disfigure and defile the Church and who esteem it their honor and glory, as it is, that they have proposed a greater work than that of Luther; that they will be content with nothing less than the faith and practice of the Apostolic Church, such a people, I take it, can not adopt such an inno¬ vation, condemned even by themselves up to the present day, and such an instrument of corrupting and secularizing the Church with- 38 out blushing at their inconsistency—without beinf conscious that they have abandoned their original ground and trampled under foot the great principle on which they are proceeding, and placed themselves among those who believe that the religion of Jesus, the gospel of the Apostolic days, is too obso¬ lete for the refinements of the present age, and too rude and simple to suit the intelli¬ gence and cultivation of modern times. & Standing on the ground and proceeding on the principle so frequently proclaimed before the world, that in all matters of religious faith and practice, the faith and practice of the Apostolic Church are our only guides and authorities, the introduction of instrumental music into our congregations is simply a logical and a moral impossibility. It can not be done without abandoning our ground and aiving up our fundamental principle. We are 'compelled to discard this innovation on primi¬ tive practice, or give up all pretension and pur¬ pose of prosecuting any further the grand de¬ sign of our reformatory movement. And it we have been right up to this time, to abandon this ground and principle would be nothing less than apostasy. To this dilemma are we driven by the most remorseless logic and by the highest considerations for honesty and .consistency. 1 With such a history—with such facts and considerations before us, does it not sound strange to hear men say that no principle is 39 involved in the use of instrumental music in Christian worship? Such persons can no surely have examined the subject. They can which a It^ 1Ven ? 6 SUb f Ct that consideration vhich its importance demands. Nor can it before d is W th a 1 t t -t 11?tUre ’ t ?? denc - y and eff ects ance T* ? ? 18 a Sub J ect of no import¬ ance. It is not now a question of mere ex- mheres^ Ti 1D wM ? h n ° intrinsic character inheres. A tree with such fruit, an instru¬ ment with such a history, has a positive sta^of r f ° r ?00<1 ° r eviL Xt has passed the torv anH Xpenment; lfc haS passed int0 llis - t0 £ y f. I ? ow Possesses a character, and what this character is its history discovers. suJl llt Jfn? ber \ prin 1 dple involved in a mea¬ sure with such a history! No princinle involved in the use of a thing with such a nature, tendency and effects ! which has secu¬ larized the Church! which has destroyed and It *™ d « str °y congregational worship' wirl!t| engen ?T pride ’ van %> ambition and orldly-mindedness! No principle involved in a matter the bare proposal of which ex- ChurcM r ^ f ? V ^spiritual welfare of the Krr ,y ch • th f* wounds the feelings of a great brotherhood! that mantles the cheek of many great and good among us with shame and moi tification ! that makes the heart of many bleed for a cause wounded by its friends ' btrange, passing strange, that so many whose intelligence and piety can not be questioned 40 should so vehemently oppose a measure so innocent and beneficent! , , Wherever there is principle involved there a'so is Christian morality, lhe question, therefore, becomes one of Christian mora 1 y, because of which he who acts must fiist ex- a ”\yfth*hehistory of this innovation before rious proposal of a thing so prolific of mis¬ chief. 1 Is it, then, of love to urge a measure against the deep convictions of almost an entire brotherhood ? What is the spirit that would urge a measure against the solemn and affectionate protest of the soundest and best men in our ranks? If this opposition came from ignorant and unreasonable men, the friends of the measure might be excused for any little restiveness or impatience they might manifest under this opposition. But I submit that the opposition is neither igno¬ rant nor unreasonable. They have always been ready to give, and have repeatedly