Harper II.26
James Dodson
CHAPTER XXVI.
THE PROHIBITORY THEORY—NEW TESTAMENT EVIDENCE IN ITS FAVOR.
A third argument for the prohibitory theory is, that, in addition to its silence which in such a matter is significant, the New Testament contains sundry indications, that in the devotional services of the New Testament church, no place should be given to instrumental music. Among those indications may be mentioned:—
(1.) The contrast suggested in the New Testament, and not dimly predicted in the Old, between the worship of the New dispensation and that of its predecessor. The worship of the Old Testament times, at least during the Mosaic period, was outward, sensuous and encumbered with minute regulations and restrictions; whereas the worship of the New Testament times, it is broadly hinted, would be comparatively inward, direct and simple. Such a contrast seems to be dimly intimated by the words of our Lord to the woman of Samaria, John 4:23, 24, “But the hour cometh and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit, and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a spirit, and they that worship him, must worship him in spirit and in truth.” It is obvious that our Lord in these words contrasts what was about to be with what had been in the matter of worship, and the point of contrast suggested is, that the worship, in the age then at hand, would be rendered in spirit and in truth, implying that such had not been the character of the worship in the age then closing. In addition, he hints that the Father was in quest of worship of this character, and proceeds to show the consonance of such worship with the nature of him who is a spirit. Now, what does our Lord mean when he speaks of worshipping in spirit and in truth? Surely he does not mean simply, purity of purpose and fervor of soul in worship; for who will assert, that in Old Testament times there were none who so rendered homage to God? To worship God in holiness was as much a requirement of the Old Testament as of the New, and is as clearly set forth as such in the former as in the latter. See Lev. 19:2; 1 Kings 8:38, 39; 2 Chron. 30:18, 19; Ps. 15 and 26, 51:17. Every true worshipper since the world began has worshipped God in sincerity and holiness. In this respect, all dispensations are alike, and no contrast exists between them. Yet a contrast our Lord surely speaks of, as distinguishing the age which was at the door when he spoke, from the age which was then coming to an end. By “spirit and truth,” must he not have meant comparative independence on outward sensuous rites, and on the shadows of the typical economy? This interpretation receives countenance from the previous words of Christ to the Samaritan woman (verse 21), “Woman believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem
Page 85
worship the Father,” that is, when the sanctity of particular spots on the face of the globe shall no more be acknowledged, and when men, untrammelled by ceremonial restrictions, shall with equal acceptance worship God anywhere. Afterwards he declares the general principle, that in all genuine worship, under whatever dispensation, the worshipper must have penetrated through all external rites and held real fellowship of soul with the Father of spirits. Now, such teaching from the lips of the great Prophet, prepares us to expect a simplicity in the forms of worship, and a directness in our religious services, in contrast with the arrangements of the Mosaic economy; and hence, we may not be disconcerted if we discover that the pomp and sensuousness of instrumental music are to be excluded from the worship in the present dispensation.
It is needless to occupy time in showing that in the Epistles, particularly in the Epistle to the Galatians, and that to the Hebrews, the same strain of sentiment abounds, to which our Lord, in the conversation with the Samaritan woman, gave utterance. Judging from all these representations we might expect a reduction in the rites and forms of the Old Testament ritual, when the transition was made to the New Testament order. The elimination of musical instruments might, in the circumstances, be rather a matter of anticipation than of surprise.
(2.) Another indication of the exclusion of instrumental music from the worship of the New Testament church, is, that in the New Testament no instrument is named as being used by the apostles, or in the church under their care. This is a fact which may well stagger those who tenaciously maintain that the verb, psallo, involves the idea of instrumental music. Had that, or some kindred word been connected expressly with some instrument, be it harp, or psaltery, or any other, and had we been told to do, what psallo in such a connection would suggest, the matter would have been altogether different; but there is no such mention made of an instrument. What is said about musical instruments, in the symbolic book of Revelation, has already been considered.
(3.) A third New Testament indication, unfavorable to the view that musical instruments must or may be used in worship under the present dispensation, is found in the account given of the institution of the Lord’s Supper. As we learn from Matth. 26:30, and Mark 14:26, our Lord and his disciples sung a hymn, or more literally “hymned,” on that occasion; the hymn or hymns used being, beyond much doubt, selected from the inspired Psalter, in which our Lord took such delight. It is not mentioned that a musical instrument was used on the occasion, and besides, the word rendered “sung a hymn,” is not any part or cognate of psallo; but a word which means, without any reasonable doubt, simply to sing praise.
(4.) Now be it observed that our Lord was, at the time alluded to, instituting an ordinance which was to show his death till he should come, an ordinance the most solemn of any belonging to the prescribed service of the New Testament church. He doubtless intended that his disciples, in all future time, should closely copy the form of observance then exemplified. But he coupled no instrumental music with the service, though he did link singing with it. Is it wise or safe for us to deviate in this particular from the example set us by the Master? If instrumental music may be to advantage dispensed with at the observance of the Lord’s Supper (and who, with the example of the Saviour before him, can deny that it may), is it needed in any other part of our worship? The objection has been raised that this occurred before the close of the Old Testament dispensation, and therefore is not an example to us now. But is it necessary to show that our Lord instituted the Supper with reference to New Testament times and gave the direction that what he had done should be imitated by his disciples in after days? The cause which needs to resort to such paltry evasions is not a good one. Besides, as the Supper was instituted within the limits of Old Testament times, when instrumental music was employed in worship, the omission of such music from the institution
Page 86
of the Supper is the more noticeable and significant. If, moreover, it should be said that the omission may be accounted for on the ground that there were no instruments of music at hand, the answer is obvious that our Lord had deliberately provided beforehand all the appliances deemed necessary or proper for the occasion. He had secured “a large upper room, furnished,” and had he desired instruments of music, he could have provided them, too. I cannot help thinking that our Lord, by using vocal, not instrumental, music on this memorable occasion, intended to indicate that in the worship of the New Testament church the music of the voice, not that of lifeless instruments, should be heard. We are sure that we are right in omitting instruments, as did he. Have those who use them equal ground for confidence that they have his approbation?
(5.) In Heb. 13:15, there is another hint adverse to the use of instrumental music in the New Testament church. “By him, therefore,” says the inspired writer, “let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is the fruit of your lips, giving thanks to his name.” These words seem to intimate that, in contrast with the temple service, the only instruments needed or proper for rendering to God the sacrifice of praise are our lips. If any one should be so fond of petty and pitiable evasions as to say that the writer does not exclude a flute and such instruments as are played upon by the lips, I would answer the “fool according to his folly,” by saying that, at least, such instruments as an organ, melodeon and harp are excluded.