AN OVERTURE FOR HARMONY
Claude Stults

Allow me to preface this overture with an emphatic disclaimer of any intention of inveigling Churches of Christ into becoming Christian Churches, and even less of enticing members of Churches of Christ into deserting their present affiliation to “join” a Christian Church. My sole ambition is to persuade the members (all who will listen) of both the Churches of Christ, and the Christian Churches, that they are brethren in Christ, children of God, begotten and inspired of the same Holy Spirit. As such, it is my hope that they will act like brethren — one great brotherhood in Christ, and under God, for the glory of God.

Allow me to say also that I have no argument to offer in regard to either name (Church of Christ, or Christian Church), since, according to my Bible (King James, American Revised, American Standard and several others) , God never gave a name to the church; and in those books I find the church called: “Church of Christ,” “Church of God,” “Church of the Lord,” “Church of the First Born,” “Church of the saints,” and “Christians,” evidently the “New name,” foretold by Isaiah.

However, “There’s one high hurdle to jump,” in order to Christian unity, or harmony in the Restoration Movement. After more than forty years’ survey of the ground, and the continuous running of obstacle courses, I am convinced that that high hurdle is the problem of music in worship. Christian Churches and so-called “Disciple Churches” both use a piano or an organ, or both, in their public worship. There are some twenty-five or thirty factions, or sects, within the Churches of Christ, all of whom sing only, without instrumental accompaniment of any kind. The problem really consists in the fact that all parties to the division are fully convinced that their positions are fully authorized by the scriptures. It is to this problem that I address this overture; not in the hope of converting any group to the other side, but of persuading all groups to recognize each other as Christian and brethren, so that the Restoration Movement can once again become one brotherhood.

It has long been the position of the Christian Churches, and the Disciples, that there is neither commandment, apostolic precedent, nor necessary inference, that precludes, or invalidates the use of a musical instrument. That position needs some critical examination. On the other hand, it is the position of the Churches of Christ that there is an apostolic commandment telling what kind of music to use in worship, and since playing an instrument is not particularly specified, it is forbidden. That position, too, needs some critical examination. Perhaps, it would be better to begin with this latter examination; and since it all hinges largely upon the meaning of a Greek participle, “Psallontes,” I propose that we start with an examination of the Greek verb, “psallo.” It occurs five times in the New Testament: Romans 15:9; 1 Corinthians 14:15, twice; Ephesians 5:19; and James 5:13. It occurs many times in the Old Testament LXX, or Septuagint.

The first reference in the New Testament, Romans 15:9 says, “And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and psallo unto thy name.” Paul says, “It is written.” It is proper to inquire where it is written, and what Paul means by the citation. We find it to be a quotation of four Old Testament scriptures: 2 Samuel 22:50; Psalms 18:49, Psalms 57:9, and Psalms 108:3. What Paul is saying is that David prophesied that the time would come when the Gentiles would “glorify” God by “psalloing” unto His name. Furthermore, Paul cites that prophecy as justification of his evangelism among the Gentiles, and their conversion to Christianity. He cites the fact that God had foretold, through David, approximately a thousand years before-hand, that the Gentiles would do exactly what they were doing, as proof that it was God’s will and foreknowledge that they should do so. But what were they doing in Paul’s day, that had been prophesied, a thousand years before, in David’s day, that they would do? They were psalloing to God’s name, glorifying Him. And what was that? What was “psalloing”?

Most, or all, preachers of the Church of Christ say that it was “singing”; and cite the English translations, as evidence of their contention. But I respectfully submit to you that Paul had to mean exactly what David meant, by “psallo”, or he would be misquoting David. If David prophesied by the Holy Spirit that the Gentiles would glorify God by playing (a musical instrument) to His name, and Paul said that David prophesied that they would glorify God by singing to his name, he would certainly be misquoting David, and telling a lie besides. But, it is argued, he used exactly the same word that David had used a thousand years before. . . only “psallo” had alienated, or changed its meaning in the meantime. Brother Kurfees wrote that it changed meaning, from “play” to “sing” in the year 146 B.C. Before that date, it meant “play” (a musical instrument); after 146 B.C. it always meant “sing”; so David prophesied that the Gentiles would worship God by “psalloing” — playing a musical instrument; but Paul wrote that they were worshiping God by “singing”, although he used the same word that David had used. However, it cannot be denied that if Paul used any word that did not mean what David meant he misquoted David, and told a lie besides, saying that David said something that he did not say. I am sure that every Christian will agree with me, that the apostle Paul would not, and did not, tell a lie; that the apostle Paul would not, and did not, misquote and misrepresent the prophet David; that the apostle Paul did mean, in Romans 15:9, exactly what David meant and said, in 2 Samuel 22:50; Psalms 18:49; Psalms 57:9 and Psalms 108:3. A thousand years before Paul’s day, David prophesied that the Gentiles would glorify, or worship, God, by playing to His name; and a thousand years later, the apostle Paul declared that they were doing just what David prophesied that they would do.

Brethren, I submit to you, that, regardless of what “psallo” might mean, in the rest of the New Testament, in Romans 15:9, it has to mean “play” (a musical instrument), for that is what it meant in the prophecies that Paul quoted, and Paul had to mean what they meant, or else he was misquoting the Holy Spirit. If they meant one thing, and he meant another, he was misquoting them. Furthermore, I submit to you, that it is not enough to reply, “The translators said that it means ‘sing,’ in both places.” It would be excusable if this were the only wrong translation that our English translators made; but some of the world’s foremost Greek scholars declare that there are at least three hundred thousand errors in the King James Version.

For the sake of brevity, we shall quickly pass over the next reference (I Corinthians 14:15, where “psallo” occurs twice) with only a question or two. If “psallo” means “play” in Rom. 15:9, which it has to do, unless Paul was a liar and corrupter of scripture, why could not the same apostle give it that same meaning the next time that he used it? If “psallo” has to mean “play” in one instance of the apostle’s writings, what law of linguistics precludes its ever again having the same meaning, in the same apostle’s writings?

With this brief, passing notice of I Corinthians 14:15, we shall direct our attention to the next occurrence of “psallo” in the New Testament, Ephesians 5:19. All, or most, of the debaters in the Churches of Christ hold that this is a commandment that tells Christians exactly what kind of music to use in worship, and since it does not specifically command playing an instrument, it forbids it, making the use of a musical instrument in worship a violation of a commandment of God, and a presumptuous sin. However, that argument bogs down in the translation, “making melody.” “Melody” is a generic (or general) term, inclusive of any and every kind of melody in the whole world; and the selection is not, and cannot be, limited by the expression, “in, or with, the heart.” If a man can make one kind of melody “in, or with, the heart,” he, or other men, can make another, or any, kind of melody in, or with the heart. So, if this is indeed a command to Christians, telling them what kind of music to use in worship, it throws the door wide open, not only to playing an instrument, but to playing any kind of instrument.

Only last week, the minister of the Gloster Street Church of Christ, in Tupelo, Mississippi, tried to expound this scripture. His argument seemed to be that “psallo” is a specific, not a generic, word (but we have seen that “melody” is a generic noun, therefore the phrase “making melody” has to be generic also) . I am not much impressed with his argument; it succeeds in proving, mostly, that the translators made a mistake, translating a specific term with a generic phrase. However, I question his scholarship in saying that “psallo” is a specific, not a general term. As the Greeks used the word, one could psallo the beard, a bow-string, a chalk-line, a musical instrument, and, according to the debaters, the vocal cords. An Englishman can play a musical instrument, play games of all kinds, play jokes of every nature, and play a snared fish or animal, to say nothing of playing a part in a drama or farce, or in real life.

As for the rest of the argument, that since playing an instrument is not specifically commanded it is a presumptuous sin, because anything that is not commanded is sin, I want to point out that Paul puts a hydrogen bomb under that logic, in at least three places: Romans 4:15, Romans 5:13 and Romans 7:6, “Where there is no law, neither is there transgression.” (John says, “Sin is the transgression of the law.”) “Sin is not imputed when there is no law” and “Apart from the law sin is dead.” There is no more evident contradiction in any, and all, literature than the dictum of the debaters, “If it is not commanded, it is sin,” and the three statements of Paul: “Where there is no law, neither is there transgression”; “Sin is not imputed when there is no law”; and “Apart from the law sin is dead.”

Many of the most eminent Greek scholars object to the translation, “making melody,” in Ephesians 5:19, on other grounds, also, than those noted, above. They point out that nowhere else, in the other four occurrences of “psallo” in the New Testament, and several scores of occurrences in the Old Testament, have the translators ever found it possible, or honest, from the viewpoint of scholarship, to translate “psallo”, “make a melody.” In the New Testament, they have translated it “sing”, and “sing a psalm”; and in the Old Testament, “play”, and “sing praises”; but never, never “make melody.” Also, I have read that in no Greek literature translated into English, has “psallo” ever been translated, “make melody.” Not being a student of Greek literature, and not an extensive student of English translations of it, it is impossible for me to say whether this is true or false; but I accept it as true, on the basis of integrity of great scholars and scholarship.

It seems to one Bible student that both the whole fight against the use of a musical instrument in worship and the whole fight for the use of the instrument, are built upon speculation, interpretation, and fallacious translation; this being true, any conclusion would be an opinion. As such, it is not ‘THE FAITH”, and is neither essential to pardon and salvation, a criterion of Christian fellowship and brotherhood, nor the basis of Christian unity . . . or division. If God had only said, “Thou shalt not use a musical instrument in worship,” or “Thou shalt use a musical instrument in worship,” He would have settled the whole matter, once and for all, right then and there. That would have been “The FAITH.” But, since God has not said either, all that man can do is speculate, and form an opinion. However, his opinion will be, and must be, a personal opinion, which he has no right under God to force upon another with different, or with no, opinion, or make a test of brotherhood — either for, or against, the instrument.

It also seems to this Bible student, that the churches that have insisted upon using the instrument are as guilty of speculation, and making their opinion a test of fellowship, as are the churches who reject the instrument. Perhaps they are guiltier, and more responsible for the division in the Restoration Movement, over the question of instrumental music. Arguing, as they do, that the use, or non-use, of an instrument is a matter of opinion, they have made it, nevertheless, a test of fellowship and brotherhood, and perpetuated a most unchristian division of Christians and brethren over a mere opinion, to which they have made themselves slaves.

In order to notice a somewhat different argument, it is proposed that we skip the last occurrence of “psallo” in the New Testament, especially, since it can add little to the observation already made concerning that word: except to point out that it was an apostolic injunction, “Is any merry? Let him psallo,” whatever that means; and to point out that this probably does not refer to public, but to private, worship.

In Romans 14:23 it is written, “For whatsoever is not of faith is sin.” This passage of scripture has often been made to serve as proof that the use of a musical instrument in worship is sin, or sinful, “Because faith cometh by hearing the word of God; and God has not commanded the use of an instrument.” However, that argument works the other way, too. It is a law of logic, truth, and reason, that if a proposition is true, its converse has to be equally true. The converse of this proposition can be stated by transposition of terms; and we have, “Whatsoever is not sin is of faith.” It is easy to demonstrate that this converse is true; for if it is false, we have the proposition “whatsoever is not sin is not of faith.” But the scripture, and the original proposition, says that whatsoever is not of faith is sin; so we wind up with the absurdity, “whatsoever is not sin is sin.” Q.E.D. the converse, “Whatsoever is not sin is of faith.” The only significance of this fact is that instead of proving that instrumental music is sin, or sinful, because it is not of faith; it is necessary to first prove that it is sinful, before it is possible to prove that it is “not of faith.” That done, then ipso facto, it is not of faith, and, of course, sin. But on what other grounds will it be proved sinful?

In conclusion, allow me to reiterate, that I h a v e no desire to convert Churches of C h r i s t to Christian Churches, either “Independent,” or “Disciple”; and I have no desire to “steal sheep” from the Churches of Christ, to become members of Christian Churches. Even less do I have a desire to accomplish a merger or coalition between all of the Churches of Christ and the Christian Churches. The one supreme desire of my heart is that leaders and members of both groups will realize, that this debacle of division is entirely caused by speculation, where God has not spoken definitely and specifically; and that their conclusions are not “THE FAITH”, but a matter of human opinion. It is my heart-felt desire and ambition that both parties will be big enough to realize and acknowledge that since God has not commanded either the use or the non-use of an instrument, it cannot be “THE FAITH”, and cannot be sinful either to use or not to use. It is the ardent desire of my heart that each party will recognize and acknowledge the right of the other party to its opinion, since it can only be an opinion, in the absence of divine commandment, plain statement of truth, approval by an apostle, or necessary inference, so long as they do not try to force that opinion upon others of different opinion. It is my hope that they all will be big enough to realize that we are united in “THE FAITH” however much we may be divided in our human speculation and opinion; that all of every group are children of God, brethren in Christ: one brotherhood united in the unity of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. I have no desire, or hope, that Churches of Christ will install pianos or organs in their houses of worship; or that Christian Churches will expurgate them from theirs. Members of Churches of Christ believe that it is scriptural and better to worship God without a musical instrument; for the sake of their conscience, and their love of their Lord, allow and encourage them to do so. Members of the Christian Churches believe that it is scriptural to use the instrument, and that they can worship more spiritually that way; allow them to do so. Neither party can really prove that the other is wrong; or that they themselves are right; why keep trying?

But such a policy, such procedure, might be only the recognition of an impasse. It might be only a gentlemen’s agreement to compromise, or to enter into an armistice, a cessation of hostilities. Even that would be better than the debates, acrimonious accusations and distrust, the shame among ourselves, and the scorn among “outsiders”, to which we have been treated for several generations; but it is not enough to satisfy God. His Son commanded that we love one another as He loved us. All of us, like prodigals, must return home to our Father; and let there be no elder brother among us. During the campaign for “Unification” between the northern and southern branches of the Methodist Church, I asked a southern Presiding Elder what he thought about “Unification.” His reply was: “The Northern Methodists are just a little bit north of God, and the Southern Methodists are just a little bit south of God. When they all come back to God, and get into Christ, we’ll all be united.” That was a good sermon for a Christian preacher, and all the congregations of Churches of Christ, and Christian churches, to hear . . . and heed. — 303 N. Third St., Baldwyn, Mississippi.

______________

Claude Stults (M.A.. Butler U.) has for many years ministered to Christian Churches in Mississippi. He is now in semi-retirement.