Nevin on the Applicable Principle
James Dodson
PRINCIPLE APPLICABLE TO THE CASE.
The Mosaic economy was abolished at the crucifixion of the Saviour, when the vail of the Temple was rent in twain from top to bottom, and the way into the most holy place was thus made manifest. As a general truth none is more clearly revealed in the New Testament than this. Yet it plainly cannot be understood that everything commanded or practised by the worshippers of God of old is no longer of obligation. How shall we discriminate? We must have some rule or principle to guide us. The principle assumed by the Instrumentalists is—That what was practised with Divine approbation of old is still allowable unless God Himself has recalled the authorization. The principle is a dangerous one. What kind of recall of authorization is required? Must it be express? If so, the way is opened for a return to Judaism in no inconsiderable measure. Will inferential proof suffice? Then, we can adduce of that what ought to satisfy, whether it do so or not. Most explicit and minute directions were given under the law of Moses, to keep lamps burning perpetually in the holy place in the Tabernacle and Temple. Nay, what is more, we believe this was the case in the synagogues, at least during the time of service therein. Where is this forbidden to Christians in their places of worship, in the New Testament? Again, the command to burn incense before the most holy place was as explicit and as regularly attended to as the offering of sacrifice. Where is this prohibited in the New Testament? We might ask the same question respecting the exhibition of show-bread. Are Presbyterians prepared, on the principle stated, for lighted candles or lamps at noon-day, and swinging censers with clouds of incense, not to speak of ornate erections called altars and show tables covered with ornamental loaves of bread, in their houses of worship, as part of their ordinary furnishing, during the hours of divine service? When these things, like the instrumental music, become as fashionable in other sections of the Presbyterian Church as they are already in some sections not Presbyterian, we may not be surprised to see some pamphlets published in defending them. That would, at least, be no more than consistent.
The general abrogation of the Mosaic economy must be taken
[Page 50]
to embrace the particulars we have referred to, with others, it may be, of a like nature, that is, in keeping with the general character of the dispensation. To require an express abrogation for every such particular is preposterous. Respecting the general character of the dispensation we are not left in doubt. As compared with the Christian, it was sensuous. Professor Wallace tells us “all music is sensuous,” p. 34. Not surely in a bad sense. And yet there is music that is so in a bad sense. When we apply the term to the Mosaic worship we do not use it in a bad sense as regards the people who were required to observe it. It does not follow, however, that what was good for the Jew might in every case be good for the Christian also. God in former times instructed men through the medium of the outward senses and by means of sensible things. The Apostle Paul informs us that He dealt with the Church as in a state of childhood and pupilage, “under tutors and governors.” He uses far stronger terms respecting the abolished economy, admittedly glorious as it was, than our word sensuous—“carnal ordinances,” “elements of this world,” and even “weak and beggarly elements.” These phrases are, of course, to be understood comparatively, for the dispensation was of God, and adapted in infinite wisdom to the capacities, conditions, and circumstances of those who lived under it. Toys are for children, and they can be made to minister instruction as well as amusement. There are such things as scientific toys. But when one arrives at man’s estate it is expected that he shall put away childish things. Were Paul now on earth we could fancy him addressing those who are so ardent in their advocacy of instruments of music as necessary to the perfection of Christian worship in some such terms as he addressed to the Judaizing Galatians of old—“Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?”
The true principle applicable to the case, in opposition to that assumed by the Instrumentalists, may be stated thus—The Old Dispensation is abolished as a whole, and only that is of permanent obligation, or permanently allowable, which is recognised as such in the New Testament, either expressly, or by good and necessary consequence, or by approved exemplification. The law of the Decalogue is recognised in the New Testament as of permanent and indefeasible obligation. So is the duty of singing of Psalms in praise to God. So is not the use of instrumental accompaniment in praise. We are to do whatsoever Christ has commanded, and teach men so. We are not at liberty to do every thing or anything which Christ has not forbidden, or to teach men so. The example of Christ and His apostles we take to be quite as authoritative as express command or prohibition. What they did in the worship of God we may most certainly do. What they did not we have no warrant for doing, and we should regard it as prohibited. When a
[Page 51]
practice occupied a conspicuous place in the olden worship, and becomes as signally conspicuous by its absence from apostolic precedent and example, the applicability and force of the rule ought to be seen in such light as to preclude all question. This we take to have been one fundamental principle of the Scottish Reformation, as distinguished from those systems in which an authority is claimed for the Church to decree rites and ceremonies not forbidden in Scripture—a principle which would open the door for the introduction of all manner of human inventions under the name of worship. The more fantastic the invention, indeed, the less likelihood of finding anything in Scripture approaching even to express prohibition. This we take, moreover, to be only another mode of stating the principle so distinctly and repeatedly enunciated by the Westminster divines in the Confession of Faith—a principle which completely eliminates instrumental music from the category of “some circumstances concerning the worship of God and government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word.” It should be observed that Church government is brought in here as well as worship. Let those who would tamper with the principle, through their love of instrumental music, take care lest they be found digging away a large part of the very foundation on which our cherished Presbyterian order rests. What authority have we for Presbyterian parity, for the total rejection of gradations of rank among the ordinary pastors of the Church, for the repudiation of a hierarchy, beyond the absence of such a thing from apostolic practice? We may be told that our Lord expressly forbade a prelacy in His Church. We admit that most readily, and contend for it as strenuously as any one can; but the advocates of Prelacy, of course, do not admit it. They put a different interpretation upon the Saviour’s words, and the advocates of Presbyterianism are constrained to appeal to apostolic precedent and example in order to sustain their interpretation. What has been established on scriptural ground by either of the methods we have indicated, that is, either by express command or prohibition, or by apostolic precedent and example, may not be gainsaid or overruled by any considerations drawn from reason, the light of nature, or Christian prudence, although these may be legitimately employed in the way of illustration or corroboration. With regard to those circumstances of which we cannot say that they are so established, we must be guided by the light of nature and Christian prudence, subject to the general rules of the Word, since we have nothing else to direct us. What the points are that come under the latter category it is very easy to perceive. In respect to Church government, the rules of procedure generally adopted in Presbyterian Church courts furnish an exemplification.
[Page 52]
In respect to worship, they are such as the hours for assembling; the order in which the constituent parts of the service, prayer, praise, preaching, shall be taken; the length of time that shall be occupied with each of these, with a multiplicity of like details which we need not wait to specify. It is equally plain that instrumental music cannot be brought under this heading. It is not, indeed, a circumstance of the worship at all, but a part of the worship. So, at least, it is regarded by those who employ it.