A writer of a brotherhood paper once acknowledged how the subject of instrumental music was one of the subjects that caused division in the late 19th century, and how it has become another subject causing division today. The writer, on the one hand, expressed concern about the possibility that this issue will lead to another major split. On the other hand, he expresses concern that the use of “proof-texts” has discouraged all of us from serious study of what God teaches, and the significance of the heart in worship and service. He wrote he firmly supported the rich “tradition” of a cappella music.
There is no question the issue of instrumental music in worship was one of the divisive elements in the church in the 19th century, a symptom of the much larger topic of Biblical authority then, as it is today. My question concerns whether or not those who oppose its use in worship are guilty of misusing Scriptures in reasoning against it. Is it just a “rich tradition” among churches of Christ, or is there more to it than that?
I believe the teaching in the New Testament that our worship is to be offered in song, not with instrumental accompaniment, is clear. The New Testament speaks only of singing in worship, offering no authority for the use of instruments. Instruments were not introduced into worship until centuries had passed, and even then it was initially distinguished from vocal music. During the Reformation, when Biblical authority was being re-examined, men like Luther and Zwingli excluded it and brought back congregational singing.
The issue of music in worship is not difficult to understand, unless we introduce human ideas and desires. It is not “proof-texting” in a bad sense, taking Scriptures out of context, when we examine the testimony of the New Testament and realize our only authority is to sing. We realize the Old Testament has been fulfilled, and we have no license to appeal to it for doctrine. Paul’s statement in Gal. 5:3, “And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law,” applies to any doctrine transported from the Old Covenant to the New, including the use of instrumental music. Are we willing to add animal sacrifices to our worship, as well? Such makes a mockery of Christ’s shed blood. To argue, “It doesn’t say I can’t use instrumental music,” is also fallacious, as by specifying singing, instruments are excluded, just as God, by specifying priests were to be Levites, excluded the other tribes (Heb. 7:14).
Interesting, isn’t it, that the term “a cappella” literally means “in the manner of the church,” which means singing without instrumental accompaniment. Where did this concept come from, but from Scripture itself? It is not just a “rich tradition,” as if the Lord’s church were a man-made denomination, subject to the whims of human desires. It is the Lord’s will, not human tradition, that we sing with our voices, offering praise to God from the heart (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). It is divisive because it violates God’s will. Worship must still be offered in truth, as well as spirit (John 4:24). May we support what the word of God clearly teaches, because it is His will, and may we not fail to clearly state it, so there will be no mistake in where we stand, in what we believe. “Whoever speaks, is to do so as one who is speaking the utterances of God” (1 Pet. 4:11). Now, more than ever, let us stand firm in what Scripture clearly teaches, and let us clearly teach it as such.
Robert Johnson
