THE
REAL ISSUE
A
Church of Christ (non-instrument) minister in Nashville is presently
writing a series of articles in Texas’ Firm Foundation on
“Instrumental Music: The Real Issue Involved.” It is
refreshing to see Tennessee and Texas get together like this, for it
has not always been the case. In fact the Firm Foundation was
born out of concern for Tennessee heresy. The issue that time, back
in 1884, was rebaptism. “Uncle Dave” Lipscomb, editor of
the Gospel Advocate, believed, like Alexander Campbell before
him, that faith in Christ is sufficient grounds for being baptized,
and that one does not have to understand that it is for the
remission of sins. So, the Nashville editor opposed the rebaptism of
Baptists, believing that they should be accepted as brethren in
Christ.
Austin
McGary, a rough and tumble sheriff-preacher on the Texas frontier,
strongly disagreed. He not only bushwhacked his way across Texas,
rebaptizing all those he could who had not consciously been baptized
for the remission of sins, but he established the Firm Foundation
to promote the idea and to oppose Editor Lipscomb in Nashville.
Churches divided and court suits followed. I have recently read some
of these trials in Texas courts, one of them going to the highest
court in the state. In some cases one side is referred to as “the
Firm Foundation faction.”
For
decades the Tennessee-Texas relationship among Churches of Christ was
tense to say the least, and even today the fences have not all been
mended, leaving a few mavericks to run at large. It is a long way
from Nashville to Abilene. You might try driving it sometime! Even if
you try flying it there is no way to make it in one hop. You have to
change planes in Dallas!
So
there are some of us who note with glad hearts when a Nashville
writer appears in the Austin journal, even if it takes a series
against instrumental music to do it. It is often the case that folk
are united more by what they are against than by what they are
for, if indeed that is unity.
There
is yet another journal among us that has a series going on
instrumental music, Truth Magazine out of Dayton, Ohio, though
it is a Texan that authors the lead article, “Instrumental
Music and the Silence of the Scriptures.”
The
articles in the two papers have a similar view as to the real issue:
it is a matter or respecting Biblical authority. This means
that we non-instrumentalists respect the authority of Scripture while
the instrumentalists do not. The Texas paper puts it this way: “The
real issue involved in this controversy is the authority of the
Bible, and the authority of the Bible is at the very heart of
man’s relationship with God. It is not so much the presence or
absence of an organ in a church building as it is the attitude toward
divine authority which such presence or absence reflects.”
In
other words, if there is an organ in the church that shows that the
people do not have the right attitude toward the Bible. The Ohio
journal says this: “The absence of mechanical devices of music
in our meeting houses serves as a witness to our adherence to a
respected principle of Bible interpretation, the prohibition of
divine silence. “ The article closes with this daring
judgment: “The Christian who consistently exalts the will of
God above man’s, through an application of this principle, will
never worship God in music, except by singing.”
This
language is strong and unmistakable. One says our instrumental
brethren do not respect the authority of the Bible, and since this is
basic to our relationship to God their integrity as Christians is
challenged. The other says that if people “exalt the will of
God above man’s” they will sing only acappella, which is
to say, of course, that if they use an instrument they are putting
man’s will before God’s.
It
is hard to believe that these two writers could read a journal like
the Christian Standard, for example, and charge that those who
write for it do not honor the authority of Scripture. I would hazard
the guess that if an impartial judge were to study “their”
papers over against “our” papers he would find as much,
if not more, allegiance to Scripture in theirs as in ours. Their
preachers and their churches respect the authority of the Bible as
much as any of us. I circulate at large among both groups and I see
no appreciable difference. Perhaps we all need to grow closer
to Scripture.
The
music question is not a matter of some of us honoring the authority
of Scripture and others not, but a matter of interpreting the
Scriptures differently --- or a matter of interpreting the silence
of Scripture differently, if you like. The brother who referred
to the “prohibition of divine silence” as a respected
principle of interpretation would favor me with the name of any
hermeneutical authority that cites such a principle. This would have
to mean that God prohibits anything that the Bible is silent about.
If this is true, we are all under condemnation.
What
this amounts to is that each of our sects is very selective about how
it interprets Biblical silence. If we wish to erect a multi-million
dollar edifice, which includes all the modernity of the most
fashionable denomination, we do not let Biblical silence get in our
way. But when others practice what we don’t want, such as
instrumental music, we ungraciously accuse them of not respecting
Scripture, the silence of Scripture, mind you.
The
two journals that I have quoted represent different kinds of
non-instrument Churches of Christ. The Firm Foundation stands
with those churches that support Herald of Truth and all such
cooperative enterprises, while Truth Magazine opposes Herald
of Truth, etc. These churches are no longer in fellowship with each
other. The Ohio paper charges that the real issue is not a
cooperative radio-TV program, but an attitude toward the authority of
Scripture, that the Texas paper has surrendered its allegiance to
“the silence of Scripture.” After all, where does the
Bible say anything about having such an arrangement as Herald of
Truth? So, those who support it no longer respect Biblical authority.
The Texas
paper on the other hand considers those who oppose what they have,
despite the silence of Scripture, as fanatics and hobbyists, perhaps
even as troublemakers and factionists. Yet all they are doing is
making the same argument that the Texas paper makes against those who
have the instrument.
At
my side is still another journal. Gospel Tidings out of Fort
Worth, Texas and emanating from the non-Sunday School Churches of
Christ. Edited by an irenic soul, Larry Branum, it is more concerned
for peace and unity than the old controversial issues, which reflects
the change taking place among these people. But still they believe
the Sunday School to be wrong (which is their right, of course) and
they have always argued, like the editors described above, that to
promote the Sunday School is to impose upon the silence of Scripture
and to challenge the authority of the Bible.
There
is still another journal that comes my way that represents still
another kind of Church of Christ. It is anti-instrument and
anti-Sunday School, but also contends that the Supper should be
served in only one container, and so they are called “one cup”
churches. While they too are becoming more unity conscience, they
believe that those who use more than one cup (does the Bible not say
that Jesus took the cup?) do not show proper respect for the
authority of the scriptures.
They
all say the same thing, and the list could be extended to include the
Church of Christ that believes a precise order must be followed in
the assembly, as per Acts 2:42, and that segment that insists that
only wine should grace the Lord’s table. And on and on. They
all say that the real issue is not classes, cups, instruments, grape
juice, or what have you, but an attitude toward the authority of
Scriptures. Those who have what I object to do not respect the
authority of the Bible like I do, and those who object to what I have
are antis and fanatics. What I object to is a matter of faith;
what they object to is a matter of opinion. That is the party
line of all our sects.
The
answer to all this sectarian garbage is simple enough: “Accept
one another, just as Christ accepted us to the glory of God”
(Rom. 15:7). And the first verse of that chapter says that we are to
accept each other “but not for the purpose of passing judgment
on his opinions.”
That
is my own posit on exactly. I accept all these brother editors
that I have referred to, realizing that we will never agree on such
matters. But we don’t have to. But we do have to accept one
another, in spite of the differences. Romans 14 would never have been
written if Christians had to see everything alike. The apostle
plainly says in verse 5: “Let each man be fully convinced in
his own mind.” How beautifully liberating that is. I don’t
have to judge my brother over these matters that seem petty to me. I
am only to love and accept him. God will judge him as to the place he
gives to his scruples, and especially for the way he treats his
brethren who differ with him. “To his own master he stands or
falls” (verse 4). Again, how liberating! I do not have to judge
my brothers who differ with me. I am to love them, for it is the debt
I can never pay (Rom. 13:8).
But
we are judging when we say that we are the only ones that
respect the authority of the Bible. Unless they see it our way and
practice it the way we do we charge that they are placing man’s
will above God’s. That is being sectarian.
All
these editors believe the basics of Scripture, such as the seven ones
of Eph. 4, which the apostle lays down as the foundation for unity.
They differ only upon what the Bible says nothing about, its silence,
or in areas where differences can be expected. It is upon these that
we can be united, if we are not already. We may be like the
quarreling married couple that resolved to stop such foolishness when
they realized that God had lovingly made them one. We are one
in Christ. We only need to cut out our sinful judging of each other
over our opinions and deductions.
This
means that we can have Churches of Christ that are instrumental and
those that are not, those that have Sunday Schools and those that do
not, those that support Herald of Truth and those that do not, and
so on, and still be a united part of the great Church of God in
heaven and on earth.
Can
it really be any other way? Has it ever been any other way, even
among those congregations in the New Testament? They all respected
the authority of the Scriptures, but still they differed. --- the
Editor