|
|
||
|
Graham Family Singers |
|
|
|
History of Music in the Baptist Church by:
I. A SIGNIFICANCE THAT NEEDS TO BE APPRECIATED II. A
STRUGGLE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED III. A
SOLUTION THAT NEEDS TO BE APPLIED
I. A SIGNIFICANCE THAT NEEDS TO BE APPRECIATED Martin Luther is quoted as saying, "Next to the Word of
God, music deserves the highest praise. The gift of language combined with the gift of
song was given to man that he should proclaim the Word of God through music." Many churches today, even some of our independent Baptist churches, are struggling with this issue of music in worship. But there have always been various struggles relating to this issue. Let me point out a few areas of struggle over the years. 1. On pages 83 and 84 of the book, This Day in Baptist
History, there is a story titled "To Sing or Not To Sing." It's about a man by
the name of Benjamin Keach, who at the age of 28, became the pastor of the Baptist church
in Horsleydown, London. Benjamin Keach was a rather controversial fellow to say the least.
Not only was he at odds with the enemy, but he was also at odds with those who were
supposed to be brethren. It's believed that Keach's church was probably the first Baptist church to introduce congregational singing. At first it was only used at the Lord's Supper. After about 20 years, the church, with some dissent, was persuaded to sing every Lord's Day, but only after the sermon and prayer. This same story went on to recount how the dissenters would leave the building and stand in the yard because "they could not conscientiously stay and hear the singing." These same anti-singing people eventually separated themselves and established another body exactly like the old church except without singing. The new anti-singing church remained songless until 1793. 2. The whole congregational singing question turned on one point, whether there was precept or example for the whole congregation, converted and unconverted , to join in singing as a part of divine worship. 3. How many of us are ready to go home and either do away with congregational singing altogether or ask the lost to please refrain from singing? 1. As far as I can ascertain, before the introduction of congregational singing into the churches, the singing was done by "persons as God had gifted to sing ... one by one; and in this form of solo all the Churches had singing, but only as the heart dictated the melody,' and not by the use of rhyme or written note." That is a quote from Thomas Armitage's book, The History of the Baptists, page 550. 2. It's at this point that Benjamin Keach comes into play once again. In 1691, he published a hymnbook entitled, Spiritual Melody, Containing Near Three Hundred Sacred Hymns. 3. It's my understanding, that the controversy associated with the introduction of the hymnbook, which included both "rhyme and written note", had to do with the fact that the songs were of "human composure" as opposed to singing directly from the Scriptures. 4. In the appendix of that 1691 edition, he wrote: 5. In Benjamin Keach's day, to USE a hymnbook was carnal. In our day, NOT to use a hymnbook is to be not only carnal, but bordering on apostasy. 1. By "sound" I mean whether singing was to be accompanied or unaccompanied. 2. In my research I found that the introduction of the organ in worship was a hotly debated issue. 3. Consider this quote from ERASMUS taken from his commentary on 1 Corinthians 14:19, "We have brought into our churches certain operatic and theatrical music; such a confused, disorderly chattering of some words as I hardly think was ever 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. And for this end organ makers are hired with great salaries, and a company of boys, who waste all their time learning these whining tones." I find that phrase "Men run to church as to a theatre, to have their ears tickled..." kind of amusing. Is that not the same charge that is leveled against many today who dare to cross the boundaries of what has been accepted as "traditional" among independent Baptists? 4. Here's a quote from Baptist historian named David Benedict
concerning The Introduction Of The Organ Among The Baptist. 5. "Baptists formerly were universally opposed to the introduction of musical instruments into the house of God. They asked, 'How can senseless things speak the praises of God?'" That's a quote from Francis Wayland in his book Notes on the Principles and Practices of Baptist Churches; pages 149-150 6. How many allow the playing of an organ in church? We would have been a liberal in the 1800's. We would have been the Bill Hybels and the Rick Warrens of that day. As if organs and congregational singing and hymnbooks weren't a great enough shift toward the left, churches then started allowing choirs to sing. Thus a controversy surrounding the: 1. According to Francis Wayland, this ungodly event happened as the Congregationalists imitated the Episcopals and the Baptists in turn imitated the Congregationalists. 2. Church choirs were considered to be "professional
singers." 4. Did you catch that? Before the introduction of choirs into church worship, congregational singing was a sin. But when the choir came along, all of a sudden, NOT to let the congregation sing was a sin. 5. When will it ever end? 1. When Bro. Landis pastored in Eastern Kansas in the 1970's his proposal to purchase a sound system was met with great opposition. 2. The prevailing thought was, a preacher who can't preach
without a sound system "ain't worth his salt." 1. With the introduction of the dreaded SOUND TRACK, came another controversy, this time it dealt with the SOURCE of music in worship. 2. OK, we'll let the entire congregation and choir sing out of
hymnbooks, and we'll amplify the sound, but ONLY if they're accompanied by the organ and
of course, our beloved piano. 1. The whole issue of style boils down to Contemporary versus Traditional Churches are finding themselves torn between the tug of the traditional and the pull of the contemporary. 2. What people don't understand is that what is now traditional was at one time contemporary and what is now contemporary will one day be traditional. 3. When it comes to THE acceptable style of worship, which
style is right? 4. Bach? Black Gospel? Folk Music? Chant? 5. Which particular time period in the history of music has God preferred? Is God stuck on 16th century European styles? If so, were the styles leading up to that time incomplete? Does God regret all musical advances since then? 6. What if we come to the end of our journey and find that the only acceptable worship to God was that done to a Javanese Gamelan orchestra, or a troupe of Central African drummers, or some other non-western music that doesn't use a 12-tone scale? 7. What if, as one writer put it, we "get to heaven and find out that God is, in fact, a huge fan of Country Western worship music"? 8. The point is, worship cannot be confined to a certain musical style or time period. 9. To make worship style a doctrinal matter instead of a
cultural and personal matter, is, in my opinion, a mistake. III. A SOLUTION THAT NEEDS TO BE APPLIED When trying to apply a solution to the problems surrounding worship, I think we need to go back to Paul's prayer in Romans 15. Again, the church at Rome was "at war" over whether it was right or wrong to eat certain meets and to observe certain days. Having confronted the issue in chapter 14, Paul then offers a short prayer in chapter 15. What he prayed for is what each of us should strive for when attempting to negotiate a cease-fire agreement in the "worship wars" both in our own churches and in our relationships with one another as pastors. Paul prayed for and we should strive for the: 1. Romans 15:5 2. People on both sides of the issue, those coming from the more contemporary side and those taking a more traditional stance, both believe that they are defenders of the way God wants to be worshiped. 3. Let's look at this first of all in light of our own churches. How do we keep those who prefer traditional hymns accompanied by the piano and organ from clashing with those who prefer worship choruses accompanied by a variety of instruments, including drums and guitars? 4. You can stand your ground and make it an either/or proposition. Either you accept the way it is (whether it's traditional or contemporary) or hit the road. 5. You can go to two services. You can have a contemporary service on Saturday night and a traditional one on Sunday or one of each on Sunday. 6. You can choose a more middle-of-the-road approach as many have done, including FBC, and conduct what is being referred to as a "blended" style worship service. 7. Blended worship is simply that. It's the blending together of the new and old in a way that provides for a meaningful time of worship for all those who are participating. 8. Let me give you an example of our version of a blended
service. Our annual Friend Day was October 14th. Our music for that Sunday morning
consisted of hymns, gospel songs and choruses. We had styles ranging from Southern gospel
to Contemporary. 9. As the pastors of local churches every one of us must be persuaded in our own minds as to what is best for us. We each know our churches, or as least we should, and we ought to be able to incorporate the style of worship that will best suit our congregation. 10. As to other churches, I would suggest we consider Paul's words in Romans 14:4. 11. A man who had a servant had control of that servant. It was up to him to either forbid or allow him to do certain things. It was not up to someone else to be his servant's master. 12. What YOU do in YOUR church is up to YOU and what I do in MY church is up to ME. It's just that simple. 13. We have absolutely no right to judge one another's style of worship, because who's to say which one is right and which one is wrong? 14. Our goal ought to be the Preservation of Fellowship, both within our own church and with our brethren. 1. Romans 15:6 2. In music, if you hit a major chord when it's supposed to be a minor chord or visa versa, it makes for a very unpleasant sound. 3. I say that to say this, when we major on minors and minor on majors, the results are not going to be very pleasant. We're going to have a very inharmonious congregation. 4. Two Christians at odds, whether they be fellows church members or fellow pastors, cannot effectively worship God. 1. Romans 15:7 2. "WE BE BRETHREN" 3. Notice how we are to receive one another ... "as Christ also received us" 4. Jesus received us with all of our imperfections and offensive ways. We ought to do the same. 5. Let's remember: In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity. | ||
