~Home~ ~Life Lines~ ~Study Surveys~ ~Bibliology~ ~Tracts & Articles~ ~Our Printed Materials~

In our last issue we were making the point that contrary to popular wisdom today which views music as amoral, that is, that it has no moral value or effects either for good or bad, the great philosophers of the past held that music certainly does have moral value. Remember that in this discussion we are referring only to the instrumental element, not lyrics. Almost everyone would agree that the lyrics, being speech, would have moral quality, ranging from the sublime to the benign to the profane and the filthy. Advocates of Christian rock, "rap," "hip-hop," etc., in their attempts to justify the use of these and other musical forms, frequently invoke the notion that all music is amoral and therefore suitable for Christian use. All one has to do is make the words Christian. But as we have seen and will continue to show in this article, the great thinkers in music and philosophy strongly disagree with the idea that music is amoral. As we go through the ages on music philosophy in this article, we will also mark the development of music in the church from what it was in ancient times up to modern forms.

We start with the views of the greatest of the Greek philosophers, Plato, and for this we turn again to Julius Portnoy's The Philosopher and Music:

Plato believed that music could mold character. He maintained that bad music could induce licentious moods which would encourage the molding of bad character. He therefore insisted that the State must be well educated in music so that they could detect and discourage music with incongruous texts, or music that lent itself to obscene or inappropriate gestures.... (The Philosopher and Music, Julius Portnoy;

The Humanities Press: NY; 1954, p.31)

Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) was Plato's most famous pupil, and for the most part he followed his teacher's thinking on music:

"...even in mere melodies there is an imitation of character," wrote Aristotle in the Politics, "for the musical modes differ essentially from one another, and those who hear them are differently affected by each. Some of them make men sad and grave, like the so-called Mixolydian, others enfeeble the mind, like the relaxed modes, another, again, produces a moderate and settled temper, which appears to be the peculiar effect of the Dorian; the Phrygian inspires enthusiasm....The same principles apply to rhythms; some have a character of rest, others of motion, and of these latter again, some have a more vulgar, others a nobler movement....music has a power of forming the character, and should therefore be introduced into the education of the young...." (Ibid., p.25)

The Romans, who took over and expanded the Greek empire, excelled in military power and government, but in culture, art, philosophy and religion, they were imitators, adopting Greek culture in almost everything. Portnoy continues:

The Romans contributed little to the growth of music. They adopted Greek theory and practices and modified them to their own use....The Roman period was musically active but lacking in originality....Quintilian (35 A.D.), a contemporary of Seneca's, bears him out on the Roman intellectual's concern over the music of his time. "...the music I desire to see taught is not our modern music, which has been emasculated by the lascivious melodies of our effeminate stage and has to no small extent destroyed such manly vigour as we still possessed. No, I refer to the music of old which was employed to sing the praises of brave men and was sung by the brave themselves. I will have none of your psalteries and viols, that are unfit even for the use of a modest girl. Give me the knowledge of the principles of music, which have power to excite or assuage the emotions of mankind." The doctrine of ethos [moral nature] in music which gained prominence with Plato, took on added zest in Plotinus [204-269 A.D.], and then dominated the entire history of art in the Middle Ages....Porphyry (233-305 A.D.), the student of Plotinus,...indirectly contributed to Christian music. Porphyry...was a staunch defender of paganism and a violent opponent of Christianity....[P]aradoxically he furthered the Christian view by speaking out against the sensuous pleasure afforded by music....(Ibid., pp.39,40,43,44)

Portnoy sums up the view of music in the Greco-Roman era with this:

The Platonic theory...was questioned in the Greco-Roman era by some few empirically minded philosophers, as it was by [two] in the Greek era....There were some other doubters of the Platonic theories on music in the following centuries, but very few indeed that we can find among the historical writings of the better known philosophers. (Ibid., p.44)

Next we come to the Christian era:

Since Christianity grew out of Judaism, it is not surprising that much of the music of the Synagogue found its way into the Church Service....The early fathers of the Church, the Patristics, also retained the philosophy of music which the Judaic hierarchy had toward its own music and the music of the Greek and Roman pagan. (Ibid., p.46)

For a brief account of the attitude of the Jewish leadership toward music in the century before and the early centuries after the Christian era, I want to insert these observations of A.Z. Idelsohn in his book Jewish Music In Its Historical Development:

[Even] before the Destruction [of the Jewish Temple], secular music was considered a bad influence upon the people. Greek song especially was regarded harmful, and the spiritual leaders tried to fight against it by urging the people to sing religious songs at festivities. This grew out of religious-ethical considerations. For example, among the transgressions of the apostate "Acher" (Elisha ben Abuyah) was counted his continuous singing of Greek songs. People who had musical ability and sweet voices were exhorted to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, there to join in the singing of sacred songs; and he who did not offer his talent for holy service was doomed to divine punishment. It is related of a certain Naboth who went regularly to Jerusalem to perform his songs in public that, because he refused to do so once, he was punished. The challenge of all the sages to all singers was this: "If you have a sweet voice, glorify God with the gift He bestowed upon you, chant the Shema, and lead the people in prayer." They went to the extreme in saying that profane songs of love and lust are sufficient cause to destroy the world, and that Israel's religious songs save it. Whenever God hears Israel's songs He calls the Heavenly host to listen. But after the Destruction, all instrumental music, even for religious purposes, was prohibited, as a sign of national mourning over the Temple....Hence, national mourning strengthened that antagonism to secular music which existed already before the Destruction. That antagonism cannot be credited to the exaggeration of moralists only. If a great man like Abba Areka (Rab), at the beginning of the third century, was of the opinion that "an ear which listens to (secular) music shall be torn out," though he himself was a fine singer and one of the greatest liturgists, then there must have been something in the current songs to justify that statement. Nor was he the only one to issue protests against "music." A generation later Raba said, "Music in a house must bring that house to destruction," and his colleague Rab Joseph expressed the opinion that "if women sing and men respond, the end is like a flame in hatcheled flax." The clue to the attitude here reported we find in the condition of secular and pagan music of a decadent civilization about the beginning of the Common Era [A.D., the Christian Era]. Greek art and culture, which had become international, degenerated to mere virtuosity, empty of any ideal. Hence, Greek music became a means by which to stimulate voluptuousness. It became synonymous with obscenity and was chiefly used for carnal purposes at frivolous occasions. No wonder then that Judaism opposed "profane" music. (Jewish Music, A.Z. Idelsohn; Schocken Books: NY; 1967, pp.92,93)

Call it "extreme" if you wish, but I agree that "profane songs of love and lust are sufficient cause to destroy the world"-which is evident by the effects such music has had on our own nation-and that good religious songs help save it. Our generation is at least no less decadent than the one referred to above. We should have nothing to do with music that "stimulates voluptuousness" and has become "synonymous with obscenity and is used chiefly for carnal purposes." We return now to Portnoy's discussion of the early Christian father's view of music:

The fathers could see only hypocrisy and sensuality in the heathen's music. They were all aware that the pagan rites and licentious music which surrounded the Christian imposed a severe temptation on the average Believer to give up a vague assurance of happiness in the distant future for a blissful present....[T]he fathers had not only to cope with [abuse and hostility from the Romans] but to overcome the destructive influence banal melodies could inflict on the moral life of the Christian. The music of the pagan was representative of his cultural, social and religious beliefs. When the fathers termed it degenerate they spoke of a comparative difference between the daily philosophies of the Roman and Christian. The emphasis on the carnal in Roman religion naturally reproduced itself in their religious and amorous music. By contrast, their music lacked the sincere plaintive songs which the Christian sang in the adoration of his God. Roman music stressed sentiments alien to the theological concepts embracing Christian thought. Since pagan music characterized the society which bore it, the root of the evil lay first with the decayed Roman culture and secondly with the musical pagan who was depicting his society in a type of song which strongly appealed to the emotions....The fathers were helpless against Rome, but they could endeavor to protect their flock from the vile influence emanating from the Roman's music. The Church Fathers regarded any inclination to develop instrumental music or instruments with disfavor. These fathers of the early centuries, who bore the burden of getting the Christian safely on his way, may have shunned instruments because they were reminiscent of pagan practices. Another possibility is that the early Christians were compelled to meet secretly and could not use instruments in their hushed prayer meetings for fear of being detected by their adversaries. During the first two centuries of Christianity, the Patristics displayed the same mistrust of musical instruments or musical accompaniments in religious ceremonies as the Rabbis had. Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-220) points out that even "The flute belongs to those superstitious men who run to idolatry." Plato had warned against the orgiastic nature of this instrument (pipes). Both the Greeks and Romans employed it in their frenzied Dionysian rites. Clement could only view such an instrument with misgiving since it lent itself to the excitement of the flesh rather than to spiritual contemplation. But there were some few instruments that Clement did not associate with heathen rites or consider morally damaging. He quoted the playing of the lyre in the Old Testament and the soothing effect it produced upon King David [sic., probably rather by King David upon King Saul]. He also recalled the allegory of the of the Jewish philosopher Philo (b.c. 20 B.C.) who likened "the human tongue to the God praising lyre". Philo had viewed the lyre as an instrument free from sensuality that soothed the feelings and brought surcease from strife and Clement concurred with him in this belief. (Ibid., pp.46-48)

For a more extended quote from Clement of Alexandria warning of the dangers of worldly music, we return to Idelsohn:

Let revelry keep away from our national entertainers, and foolish virgins, too, that revel in intemperance. For revelry is an inebriating pipe, the chain of an amatory bridge, that is, of sorrow. And let love, and intoxication, and senseless passions, be removed from our choir. Burlesque singing is the boon companion of drunkenness. A night spent over drink invites drunkenness, rouses lust, and is audacious in deeds of shame. For if people occupy their time with pipes, and psalteries, and choirs, and dances, and Egyptian clapping of hands, and such disorderly frivolities, they become quite immodest and intractable, beat on cymbals and drums, and make a noise on instruments of delusion; for plainly such a banquet, as seems to me, is a theater of drunkenness....Let the pipe be resigned to the shepherds, and the flute to the superstitious who are engaged in idolatry. For, in truth, such instruments are to be banished from the temperate banquet, being more suitable to beasts than men, and the more irrational portion of mankind....And every improper sight and sound, to speak in a word, and every shameful sensation of licentiousness-which, in truth, is privation of sensation-must by all means be excluded: and we must be on our guard against whatever pleasure titillates eye and ear, and effeminates. For the various spells of the broken strains and plaintive numbers of the Carian muse corrupt men's morals, drawing to perturbation of mind, by the licentious and mischievous art of music. (Idelsohn, op.cit., pp.93,94)

In the section of the quote from Clement that follows, we encounter the allegorical method of interpretation that was so prominent in Alexandria, Egypt, that he and others adopted from the Jews and Greeks before him. Clement as well as the rest of the early fathers, is opposed to the use of instruments in worship, so he says the musical instruments in the Psalms symbolically refer to parts of the human body. Then he continues:

For man is truly a pacific instrument; while other instruments, if you investigate, you will find to be warlike, inflaming to lusts, or kindling up amours [loves], or rousing wrath. In their wars, therefore, the Etruscans use the trumpet, the Arcadians the pipe, the Sicilians the pectides, the Cretans the lyre, the Lacedaemonians the flute, the Thracians the horn, the Egyptians the drum, and the Arabians the cymbal. The one instrument of peace, the Word alone by which we honor God, is what we employ. We no longer employ the ancient psaltery, and trumpet, and timbrel, and flute, which those expert in war and contemners of the fear of God were wont to make use of also in the choruses at their festive assemblies, that by such strains they might raise their dejected minds....Further, among the ancient Greeks, in their banquets over the brimming cups, a song was sung called a skolion, after the manner of the Hebrew psalms, all together raising the paean [a hymn of praise to Apollo or Artemas] with the voice, and sometimes also taking turns in the song while they drank healths round; while those that were more musical than the rest sang to the lyre. But let amatory songs be banished far away, and let our songs be hymns to God. 'Let them praise,' it is said, 'His name in the dance, and let them play to Him on the timbrel and the psaltery.' And what is the choir which plays? The Spirit will show thee: 'Let His praise be in the congregation (church) of the saints; let them be joyful in their King.' And again he adds, 'The Lord will take pleasure in His people.' For temperate harmonies are to be admitted; but we are to banish as far as possible from our robust mind those liquid harmonies, which, through pernicious arts in the modulations of tones, train to effeminacy and scurrility. But grave and modest strains say farewell to the turbulence of drunkenness. Chromatic harmonies are, therefore, to be abandoned to immodest revels, and to florid and meretricious music." The effort succeeded. Within a short time no instrument was used in any Christian service....The strict order of the Church Fathers that only one instrument should be employed, i.e., the human voice, has been observed in the Syriac, the Jacobite, the Nestorian, and the Greek churches to the present day. So also the Synagogue did not use any instrument in the service up to 1810, in which year the organ was introduced in the first Reform Temple in Seesen, Germany. The reason for abolishing instrumental music from the Church was the ethical concept of the day that instrumental music led to licentiousness.... (Ibid., pp.95,96)

Idelsohn seems to say that through the efforts of the fathers, especially Clement, instruments were removed from Christian worship; but surely this was not the case. It is doubtful that the early Christians ever employed instruments in worship. The fathers were merely reporting the general practice of the whole church at the time, not carrying on a campaign to remove instruments. I would not agree that all use of instruments should be banned from worship, but I am sympathetic with the distrust that the fathers had of their use. Today, even in good music like that in the Gaither videos, there is far too much sensuality and rock-style wailing in the harmonicas, guitars, bass, and drums. Rather than adding to the right effect the message of the song could have, they detract from it and dilute it, "lending themselves to the excitement of the flesh rather than to spiritual contemplation."

Portnoy suggests that the necessity of secrecy was perhaps a factor in the discouragement of musical instruments in the church, but this goes against what the fathers clearly said about it, that instrumental music was forbidden on moral grounds. There were periods of severe persecution throughout the empire during the first three centuries, but Christians could and did meet in their own facilities without harassment during much of this time. They were not always hunkered down in the catacombs. And the fact that instruments were brought into the church after Constantine made Christianity legal could just as easily be viewed as part of the laxness and worldliness that came into the church at this time.

Returning to Portnoy:

The Psalms, which had such fascination for King David, are in reality the oldest music of the Christians....David's Book of Psalms has been a rich source of poetry for musical literature. The Psalms were not poetry alone but were originally standardized songs with instrumental accompaniment. In accepting the Psalms for Her own, the Church made this traditional Biblical poetry the textual core of Her music. The poetical nature of the Psalms enriched with a chanting strain, lent itself so well to the Liturgy that the early Church Service consisted primarily of Psalm singing. One manner in which the Psalms were chanted was the direct Psalmody which means that the entire Psalm was sung straight through without any "textual addition or modification". In the second type, the responsory Psalmody, the form of chanting was identical with the manner in which it was originally performed in the Synagogue where a cantor [song leader] sang the Psalm and a choir responded with an Amen. The Hebraic cantor indulged in florid coloratura [runs and rills up and down the scale] singing of the Psalms. When the Christians adopted the Psalmody for their own use they omitted the coloratura or melismatic singing which the Jewish cantor displayed and marked their own chanting with a simple humility becoming a newly founded religion based on penance and submission. It did not take very long, however, before the Christian soloists and choirs began to sing melismas which grew all the more complex with succeeding years. The last of the three types of chanting consisted of the antiphonal [sung in alternating, responsive parts] Psalmody. This style of chanting effectively employed two alternating half-choruses concerning which Philo has left us a colorful description: "He observed that even in his time the chanting of the newly founded Christian congregations was similar to that of the Therapeutae, an ascetic and mystical brotherhood of Egyptian Jews. 'All at once on both sides rise up...and form two choirs, the one of men, the other of women. Each choir chooses as its leader and cantor one who is distinguished as well by the dignity of his person as by his skill in music. Then they sing hymns to God, composed in different metres and melodies, sometimes all together, sometimes answering one another in a skillful manner. Next...they form the two choirs into a single one...as did the Jews when they went through the Red Sea. One is reminded of this company by the choir of pious men and women, as throughout the singing and the alternation of the melodies the deeper sound of the men's voices and the higher sound of the women's voices singing together compose a sweet and true musical symphony.'" (Peter Wagner, op.cit., p.19)

Aha! There it is-"hymns to God...in different metres and melodies, sometimes all together, sometimes answering one another in a skillful manner..." What is this but old fashioned Southern gospel singing, right there in the first century! "Daddy sang bass, momma sang tenor, me and little brother would join right in there...."

We continue with Portnoy:

We do have a commentary, in which St. John Chrysostom described the music of the late 4th or perhaps early 5th century. St. Chrysostom repeated the common ecclesiastical thesis that music is a peculiarly empowered force which if virtuously used is often helpful toward the cultivation of the Good. But he warned that the Church Fathers must be on guard to stamp out any type of music with pagan qualities which might arouse the baser impulses in man...."your children will utter songs and dances of Satan, like cooks, and caterers, and musicians; no one knoweth any psalms, but it seems a thing to be ashamed of even, and a mockery and a joke. There is the treasury house of all these evils....Inasmuch as this kind of pleasure [i.e., music] is thoroughly innate to our mind and lest demons introducing lascivious songs should overthrow everything, God established the psalms, in order that singing might be both a pleasure and a help. From strange chants harm, ruin, and many grievous matters are brought in, for those things that are lascivious and vicious in all songs settle in parts of the mind, making it softer and weaker; from the spiritual psalms, however, proceeds much of value, much utility, much sanctity, and every inducement to philosophy, for the words purify the mind of the singer. For those who sing with understanding invoke the grace of the Spirit."

St. Jerome (c. 340-420)...wrote: "Sing to God, not with the voice, but with the heart; not, after the fashion of tragedians, in smearing the throat with a sweet drug, so that theatrical melodies and songs are heard in the church, but in fear, in work, and in knowledge of the Scriptures. And although a man be kakophonos,[discordant] to use a common expression, if he have good works, he is a sweet singer before God. And let the servant of Christ sing so that he pleases, not through his voice, but through the words which he pronounces, in order that the evil spirit which was upon Saul may depart from those who are similarly troubled and may not enter into those who would make of the house of God a popular theater." (Ibid., pp.48,49)

Augustine (354-430 A.D.) wrote in his Confessions of how deeply he was moved at the hearing of the songs of the church while at the same time fearing that he might get caught up in the beauty and the emotion of the music instead of its message:

I call to mind the tears I shed at the hearing of thy church songs, in the beginning of my recovered faith, yea, and at this very time, whenas I am moved not with the singing, but with the thing sung (when namely they are set off with a clear voice and suitable modulation), I then acknowledge the great good use of this institution. Thus float I between peril of pleasure, and an approved profitable custom: inclined the more (though herein I pronounce no irrevocable opinion) to allow of the old usage of singing in the Church; that so by the delight taken in at the ears, the weaker minds be roused up into some feeling of devotion. And yet again, so oft as it befalls me to be more moved with the voice than with the ditty, I confess myself to have grievously offended: at which time I wish rather not to have heard the music." (Ibid., p.50)..."How abundantly did I weep to hear those hymns and canticles of thine," wrote St. Augustine into his Confessions while speaking of his baptism and the tremendous emotional force which the musical form, the hymn, had upon him, "...being touched to the very quick by the voices of...thy truth pleasingly distilled into my heart, which caused the affections of my devotion to overflow, and my tears to run over, and happy did I find myself therein."

St. Basil (330-379) wrote eloquently of the singing of the Psalms, recommending it not only for the color it added to worship, but as a tool for the education of people, especially the young, in sound instruction:

St. Basil...defended Psalm singing, both antiphonal and responsory, as a colorful practice which gave added decorative contrasts to the solemn Liturgy....(Ibid., p.50). "The Holy Spirit saw that mankind was hard to draw to goodness, that our life's scale inclined to pleasure, and that so we were neglectful of the right. What plan did He adopt? He combined the delight of melody with His teaching, to the end that by the sweetness and softness of what we heard we might, all unawares, imbibe the blessing of the words. He acted like wise leeches, who, when they would give sour draughts to sickly patients, put honey round about the cup. So the melodious music of the Psalms has been designed for us, that those who are boys in years, or at least but lads in ways of life, while they seem to be singing, may in reality be carrying on the education of the soul. It is not easy for the inattentive to retain in their memory, when they go home, an injunction of an apostle or prophet; but the sayings of the Psalms are sung in our houses and travel with us through the streets. Let a man begin even to grow savage as some wild beast, and no sooner is he soothed by psalm-singing than straightaway he goes home with passions lulled to calm and quiet by the music of the song. A psalm is soul's calm, herald of peace, hushing the swell and agitation of thoughts. It soothes the passions of the soul; it brings her license under law. A psalm is welder of friendship, atonement of adversaries, reconciliation of haters. Who can regard a man as his enemy, when they have lifted up one voice to God together? So Psalmody gives us the best of all boons, love. Psalmody has bethought her of concerted singing as a mighty bond of union, and links the people together in a symphony of one song. A psalm puts fiends to flight, and brings the aid of angels to our side; it is armor in the terrors of the night; in the toils of the day it is refreshment; to infants it is a protection, to men in life's prime a pride, to elders a consolation, to women an adornment. It turns wastes into homes. It brings wisdom into marts and meetings. To beginners it is an alphabet, to all who are advancing an improvement, to the perfect a confirmation. It is the voice of the church. It gladdens feasts. It produces godly sorrow. It brings a tear even from a heart of stone. A psalm is angel's work, the heavenly conversation, the spiritual sacrifice. Oh, the thoughtful wisdom of the Instructor Who designed that we should at one and the same time sing and learn to our profit! It is thus that His receipts are imprinted on our souls. A lesson that is learned unwillingly is not likely to last, but all that is learned with pleasure and delight effects a permanent settlement in our souls. What can you not learn from this source? You may learn magnificent manliness, scrupulous righteousness, dignified self-control, perfect wisdom. You may learn how to repent, and how far to endure. What good thing can you not learn? There is a complete theology; a foretelling of the advent of Christ in the flesh; threatening of judgment; hope of resurrection; fear of chastisement; promise of glory; revelation of mysteries. Everything is stored in the book of Psalms as in some vast treasury open to all the world. There are many instruments of music, but the prophet has fitted it to the instrument called Psaltery [an ancient stringed instrument with a sound box]. I think the reason is that he wished to indicate the grace sounding in him from on high by the gift of the Spirit, because of all instruments the Psaltery is the only one which has the source of its sounds at the stroke of the plectrum from below. The Psaltery has the source of its melodious strains above. So are we taught to be diligent in seeking the things which are above, and not to allow ourselves to be degraded by our pleasure in the music to the lusts of the flesh. And what I think the word of the Prophet profoundly and wisely teaches by means of the fashion of the instrument is this,-that those whose souls are musical and harmonious find their road to the things that are above most easy." (St. Basil's Commentary On the Psalms)

Basil speaks of a "complete theology" in the Psalms and thus their usefulness as a teaching tool to instruct believers and their children in the great themes of the Bible and the Christian faith. The same may be said, albeit to a lesser degree, of the great hymns of the church in our song books, and, may I add, of Southern gospel music. (Actually, and this may come as a surprise to many, some of the best theology, it seems, is preserved in traditional bluegrass gospel music.) But the same cannot be said at all of contemporary Christian music or most worship choruses. Our children are bouncing along to contentless and mindless ditties repeated over and over again ad nauseam to the wailing and blaring of instruments with a rock beat in our services and in the process are being robbed of the great heritage and full theology preserved in our great but neglected hymns.

The words of hymns, as opposed to Psalms, are poems not taken directly from Scripture. At first there was some resistance to them, but they eventually won a place in Christian worship. The Council of Alopecia in the mid-fourth century ruled that only Biblical poems were to be used in public worship. Hymns were viewed unfavorably, and this attitude was reaffirmed in the French and Swiss churches of the Reformation. (Portnoy, p.54, note)

Portnoy adds,

St. Ambrose (c.340-397) was one of the pioneers in developing the hymnal form....Numerous other Church Fathers contributed to its development and to its acceptance as a form which, even in the fourth century, was regarded as superior to the Psalm....The simplicity of the hymn lent itself to congregational singing or perhaps it was written in simple style so that the congregation could easily take it up. The ease with which the hymn could be learned was undoubtedly a factor which fostered its popularity so that it was readily accepted throughout the Christian world....(Ibid., p.54)

Portnoy says that the musical philosophy of Plato was passed on to the Western world in the Middle Ages primarily through Augustine, the great bishop and theologian of Hippo, North Africa, and Boethius, a Roman philosopher.

[Boethius] (480-524) shared the Platonic view expressed in [Plato's Dialogue Timaeus]....A mathematical relationship, [Boethius] reasoned, binds the soul to the universal soul. Music, which was essentially mathematical, therefore took on moral significance, for the proper kind of music could keep the soul of man in harmony with the world soul. Improper music would disarrange this mathematical relationship, degrade the soul and destroy the body of man. The aesthetic thesis of the Greeks, which was begun by the Pythagoreans and developed by Plato, that music is related to us by nature and can ennoble or corrupt character, found its ablest exponent in the Roman world in Boethius....He, too, [with Pythagorus and Plato] believed that music had the power to degrade the morals of men when it appealed to the passions....Toward the end of his life, as he lay in a dungeon awaiting an untimely end, he wrote of the Muse as a siren warily leading all those astray who came under her seductive charms. He called the Muse of poetry and song a "tragic harlot" who offered man "sugared poison" instead of giving him wholesome philosophical remedies with which to relieve life's taxing burdens....He pointed out that lascivious minds took pleasure in lascivious melodies and stern minds derived their pleasure from more stirring modes, for people took to modes resembling their own character. But all men were subject to corruption, concluded Boethius, the weaker wills were softened and corrupted and sometimes not even strong wills were able to resist. Boethius then continued that Plato was justified in warning against musical innovations, for changing musical styles that were ethically questionable would surely degrade the minds of men. "Music was chaste and modest," reflected Boethius, "so long as it was played on simpler instruments, but since it has come to be played in a variety of manners and confusedly, it has lost the modes of gravity and virtue and fallen almost to baseness, preserving only a remnant of its ancient beauty." Boethius not only transmitted the views of the ancients to the medievalists but was himself responsible for shaping the musical aesthetics of Western civilization for many centuries after his death. The Christian theologians were more than pleased with the Boethian conclusion that...music was essentially mathematical in structure and moral in value....(Ibid., pp.55-58)

Portnoy notes that Boethius' contemporary Cassiodorus (485-580) also concurred with Plato that different kinds of music have differing moral effects. One kind "effects chastity and modesty," another "stirs to fighting and engenders wrath," another "calms the tempests of the soul and lulls the calmed soul into sleep," another "sharpens dull insight and directs the profane mind toward heavenly aspirations," while yet another "soothes the heavy cares of the soul and expels vexation by pleasant entertainment."

In the musical philosophy of Cassiodorus, music could be of spiritual value to carry men closer to God. Music could also engender varying moods. It was a potent form of katharsis [purging medicine] which, according to Cassiodorus, expelled vexation and soothed the emotions. (Ibid., p.59)

This completes our overview of the philosophy of music through the Middle Ages. We move on to the Reformation period and its greatest figure, Martin Luther (1483-1546). He wrote in a letter:

"There are, without doubt, seeds of precious virtues in the hearts of those who are moved by music; whereas those with whom this is not the case must be called blocks and stones. We know that the devil hates and fears music, but I do not hesitate to say that, after theology, there is no art to be placed beside music. Music and theology alone are capable of giving peace and happiness to troubled souls. This plainly proves that the devil, the source of all unhappiness and worries, flees music as much as he does theology. This is why the prophets practiced music as they did no other art. They did not link their theology to geometry, nor to arithmetic, nor to astronomy-but to music, and through music they preached the truth with songs and psalms." Luther reflects that "St. Augustine was afflicted with scruples of conscience whenever he discovered that he had derived pleasure from music and had been made happy thereby; he was of the opinion that such joy is unrighteous and sinful. He was a fine pious man; however, if he were living today, he would hold with us...." Luther played the lute and flute and took a delight in singing Gregorian Chants, masses, motets and contrapuntal [adding related melodies to a basic melody] song arrangements. The art of polyphony fascinated him. "How strange and wonderful it is," he said, "that one voice sings a simple unpretentious tune (or tenor, as the musicians call it) while three, four, or five other voices are also sung; these voices play and sway in joyful exuberance around the tune and with evervarying art and tuneful sound wondrously adorn and beautify it, and in a celestial roundelay meet in friendly caress and lovely embrace; so that anyone, having a little understanding, must be moved and greatly wonder, and come to the conclusion that there is nothing rarer in the whole world than a song adorned by so many voices. He must be a coarse clod and not worthy of hearing such charming music, who does not delight in this, and is not moved by such a marvel. He should rather listen to the donkey braying of the (Gregorian) chorale, or the barking of dogs and pigs, than to such music." (Ibid., pp.108,109)

Well! Once again we meet with Southern Gospel music-this time in Martin Luther! If Luther loved counterpoint and polyphonic music, he would love Southern gospel! "One voice sings a simple unpretentious tune...while three, four, or five other voices are also sung; these voices play and sway in joyful exuberance around the tune...in a celestial roundelay." What is this but Southern Gospel music, the old "convention" style singing out of which the quartets arose! Actually, of course, the polyphonic music Luther describes was a little more in the variety of classical music, but we find the same elements in our old-fashioned Southern singing convention songs. "Polyphony" is defined by Webster's New World Dictionary as "a combining of a number of individual but harmonizing melodies." "Counterpoint" is, similarly, "the art of adding a related but independent melody or melodies to a basic melody." In Southern gospel, the main melody is usually carried by the sopranos (sometimes called "second tenor" or "lead" in quartets), but often the altos (called "tenors" who sing alto an octave higher in male quartets) take it over in the chorus of a song. Sometimes the bass may take the lead in certain parts of the song also. The other three parts sing echoes and counterpoints, often on different beats, to the main melody as the song rollicks and weaves along, with all the parts at last ending together in harmony. The "response or echo" and the harmony produced by them in "responsive, alternating parts" is called "antiphony." And I agree wholeheartedly with Luther that "he must be a coarse clod and not worthy of hearing such charming music, who does not delight in this, and is not moved by such a marvel." It is superior in every way to the more contemporary forms of Christian music. According to Portnoy:

The origin of polyphonic music is not known....We know that Greek music was monophonic, a single voiced melody which accompanied the lyric....The earliest type of polyphonic music of which we have any record in the West was the medieval form of organum [song in parts]....[A]n Englishman by the name of John Cotton wrote that polyphonic music in the 12th century was being practiced in many ways, "but the most easily comprehensive manner," he wrote, "is when contrary motion be especially considered-in which the organizing part descends while the [simple melody] ascends, and vice-versa." Giraldus Cambrensis (c. 1147-1220) also furnished us with a description of the advanced part singing which he found the people of Wales performing with remarkable facility. "In their musical concerts they do not sing in unison like the inhabitants of other countries, but in many different parts; so that in a company of singers, which one very frequently meets with in Wales, you will hear as many different parts and voices as there are performers, who all at length unite, with organic melody, in one consonance and the soft sweetness of B flat. In the northern district of Britain, beyond the Humber, and on the borders of Yorkshire, the inhabitants make use of the same kind of symphonious harmony, but with less variety; singing only in two parts, one murmuring in the bass, the other warbling in the acute or treble." [Papal documents and the writings of theologians in the late medieval and Renaissance periods] registered the same complaint against polyphony as Plato had done in the Laws against two part music....Plato...believed that two different musical parts played simultaneously or in a staccato-like fashion [with disconnected breaks] expressed opposite principles which induced confusion and eventual moral degeneration....We do not know precisely when polyphony was first introduced into the Church but we do know that throughout the centuries the Church has voiced its displeasure at the more complex music that found its way into the house of worship....It was a widespread feeling among the dignitaries of the Faith that polyphony distracted the congregation from pious devotion with its part singing and truncated melodic line instead of a sustained melodic line.....(Ibid., pp.83-87)

None of the objections or attempts to thwart polyphony prevailed. By the sixteenth century it had gained widespread popularity in the church, as is evident from Luther's love of and employment of it. So, although four-part harmony as in Southern gospel music is itself an innovation that came originally from "the world" into the church, it is a development that is welcome. Few would contend that we must adhere to Jewish or early Christian forms of music alone in our worship in 20th century America. In this sense, we would disagree with the old philosophers that any change or innovation in music is harmful. We do agree with them and great theologians and leaders of the church of all ages in that we should be cautious and selective in what musical innovations we do accept. Some musical forms are entirely inappropriate for use by the church, and others are positively harmful because of the emotions and passions they induce. Music does have moral value.

Luther was a man of broad learning and talent, having expertise not only in theology but languages and music as well. He translated the Bible from Hebrew and Greek into German and revised his translation yearly. In addition, he had to create a new liturgy and develop a new hymnody for worship. He wanted everything about the service to be understandable to the common man, in native German instead of the antiquated Latin of the Roman service.

"We have planned," he wrote to George Spalatin in 1524, "to follow the example of the prophets and the church fathers and to compose German songs for the German people so that God's Word may resound in the singing of the people. We are seeking poets and musicians everywhere for this purpose....I request you to work with us in this matter and try to translate and adapt some of the psalms for singing....I would ask you, however, to avoid new words and the expressions of the court, so that the people may easily understand. Let the words be as simple as possible but at the same time pure and suitable; and see that the meaning be clear and as close as possible to that of the psalms. We must therefore use our own judgment, determine the original meaning, and translate it freely."...Luther not only retained a love for the music of the Mother Church but he borrowed from the Catholic repertoire liberally to enrich the Protestant faith artistically. He candidly professed, in commenting on a collection of burial hymns which appeared in 1542: "To set a good example, we have made some selections from the beautiful music and hymns used in the papacy, in vigils, masses for the dead, and at burials, and have published some in this volume....However, we have changed the texts and have not retained those used in the papacy....The songs and the music are precious; it would be a pity, indeed, should they perish." (Ibid., pp.109,110)

Luther was a man of music and may have written a number of hymns himself, and some of them we still sing today, the most notable of which are "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God," and the Christmas classic "Away In a Manger." The songs in the German service were in four-part harmony, and he urged the education of children in music. Although his views on music were obviously more liberal than those of the ancient philosophers and the church fathers, he nevertheless often denounced the influence of carnal and corrupt music in his day:

Luther frequently joined his youthful comrades in singing collegiate airs when he was a student. His love for music was always discerning. With his fine tenor voice and favorite instrument, the lute [a guitar-like stringed instrument], from student days on, he often sang and played the works of the Flemish and German masters with friends. He enjoyed good secular music even as a monk, but he had retained more of the Augustinian philosophy in his musical outlook than he dared to admit in his numerous denunciations of what he considered to be the carnal and corrupt secular songs of his day...."Every Christian knows...that the practice of singing spiritual songs is wholesome and well-pleasing unto God, for everybody knows that not only the prophets and kings of Israel (who praised God with vocal and instrumental music, with songs and stringed instruments), but also the early Christians, who sang especially psalms, used music already in the early stages of the Church's history. Indeed, St. Paul encouraged the use of music 1. Cor.14, and in his Epistle to the Colossians he insists that Christians appear before God with psalms and spiritual songs which emanate from the heart, in order that through these the Word of God and Christian doctrine may be preached, taught, and put into practice." "Bearing all this in mind, I, together with several others, have collected a number of spiritual songs in order that a beginning might be made to prepare and gather such material and also that others, whose ability is greater than ours, be induced to do such work." "The music is arranged in four parts. I desire this particularly in the interest of young people, who should and must receive an education in music as well as in the other arts if we are to wean them away from carnal and lascivious songs and interest them in what is good and wholesome. Only thus will they learn, as they should, to love and appreciate what is intrinsically good. I am not of the opinion that because of the Gospel all arts should be rejected violently and vanish, as is desired by the heterodox, but I desire that all arts, particularly music, be employed in the service of Him who has given and created them."...To those preparing for teaching and the ministry Luther stated: "A schoolmaster must be able to sing, or I will not look at him; nor should one admit young men to the ministry unless they have practiced and studied music at school." (Ibid., pp.110,111)

Other Reformers were far more austere than Luther regarding music. John Calvin went so far as to deliberately correct Luther's relatively liberal view of music:

The Swiss reformer Ulrich Zwingli (1484-1531)...was a poet and musician as well who had not only set two of his own songs to four part music, but played almost every instrument. His poetic nature and musical virtuosity did not deter his reforming religious spirit from cold-bloodedly allowing the organ in Zurich to be hacked in pieces, while the organist stood by helpless and weeping. This negativistic attitude toward music became even more pronounced with Calvin who deliberately set out to purify Luther's musical theories on the function of music in the church and home. Both Zwingli and Calvin feared that music would distract the faithful from the true purpose of religion. John Calvin's (1509-1564) philosophy of music is summed up in the statement that "properly practiced it affords a recreation but it also leads to voluptuousness...and we should take good care that it does not furnish the occasion for dropping the reins to dissoluteness or for causing us to become effeminate in disorderly delights." Luther never fully discarded the musical liturgy of the Roman Church but the Calvinists would not admit any religious music into their Service except congregational singing. French, Italian and German folk-songs which were often of a lascivious nature had made their way into the Masses of the Catholic Church until well into the 17th century. Not only did the Calvinists hold that such music, however adapted to liturgical needs, was in no way suitable to arouse religious thoughts and feelings, but they also held that it was evil to begin with since it stressed the carnal and worldly rather than the spiritual and sacred....Whereas the hymn alone with its secular text remained the unquestioned requisite of the Lutheran Service, the Calvinists rejected even that and began to create their own hymns on the sole basis of the Psalter. In his articles for the Reformed Church in 1537 Calvin recommended congregational singing of the Psalms in public worship. After he was expelled from Geneva in 1538 he took up residence in Strassburg where he tried to emulate Luther by compiling a Psalter for use in his church. Calvin deemed that the Reformed Church Service should be centered around the sermon so that through the sermon the Bible could be taught and explained. Since the Psalms are part of the Scriptures, Calvin found a place for them in the Service for he was well aware that Holy Writ could be made even more appealing to man through song than through sermon. Calvin fanatically guarded the Reformed Church from falling victim to the theatrical ceremonies of the Catholic Church. He insisted that the Service be devoid of all artistic adornment and that it be confined musically to the singing of the metrical versions of the Psalms and other Scriptural passages....Although Calvin refused to admit any type of music other than simple congregational singing into the religious Service he did permit some polyphonic settings of the Scriptures. These could be sung only in the home, in the family and with friends; not for mere artistic pleasure, but for the edification and praise of the Lord. Calvin called upon all Protestant composers to give of their talents to further the work of the Lord by setting the Psalms to music. But the austere liturgic-aesthetic demands which Calvin imposed upon the composers for the most part limited their creativity to simple harmonization of the Psalms. Calvin insisted that the Psalms be sung in unison and without accompaniment. He abolished the choir so that the Service would be more democratic and the entire congregation could sing the Lord's praise with their own lips. When the Huguenot composer Goudimel (c. 1505-1572), who was one of the most prominent musicians of his day, wrote his four part setting of the Psalms, Calvin looked upon them with disfavor. "They were too complicated for congregational singing, and the very beauty of their harmonic text would attract attention to itself." In a tone reminiscent of Augustine he wrote: "Certainly if singing be attempted to that gravity which becomes the presence of God and the Angels, it adds a dignity and grace to sacred actions, and is very efficacious in exciting the mind to a true concern and ardour of devotion. Yet great caution is necessary, that the ears be not more attentive to the modulation of the notes, than the mind to the spiritual import of the words....Whatever music is composed only to please and delight the ear, is unbecoming the majesty of the church, and cannot but be highly displeasing to God." Calvin believed that all art worthy of the name was a gratuity which God had bestowed upon man. Those arts which carried out God's Will on Earth were good and those arts which only offered sensuous enjoyment and did not further a Christian way of life were the demonic devices which the devil employed to debase man. Calvin would not permit instrumental music in his Service. He ruled out the use of the organ in the Church Service lest organ music detract from the significance of the simple hymn. A vain organist might be more apt to display his virtuosity and embellish the simple music, which would be contrary to Calvin's idea of liturgical music. Calvin insisted that the Holy Word and not the melody or arrangement was important in the Service; there must be no obstacle set in the way of the congregation for devout worship. Calvin's philosophy of music influenced all Protestantism so that composers wrote music which would not detract from piety and devotion....And yet, the rich polyphonic contributions which Claude Le Jeune (c. 1528-1600) made to Protestantism were indeed a contrast to Calvinistic austerity....The fiery spirit of John Calvin directed the course of Huguenot music in France. The Huguenot Psalter, of which there were over a hundred French editions in the 16th century, exerted a tremendous influence on all of Protestant Europe and the American colonies....The English Puritans disbanded the Cathedral choirs and...destroyed church organs and choir books wherever they could find them as an expression of their fanatical hatred for the "popish" musical practices which had been retained in the [Church of England] Service....[M]usic, if not eliminated from the Service, should at least not be emphasized at the expense of scriptural enlightenment....The [New England] Pilgrim Fathers brought with them a musical knowledge of the Psalms and once these separatists from the English Church found a religious haven in the new world they reacted to the "popish" elements which they objected to in English Protestantism....Work and caution became the gospel which must be adhered to if they were to build a church in the New World. Idleness and time taken from work for amusement was sinful. Puritans associated music with leisure and time spent in playing or singing could be better put to use in furthering the security of the Puritan to do God's Will on Earth. Although the more ardent Puritans disavowed all forms of music, there is little doubt that music was still played and sung in the home....Toward the middle of the 17th century a simple manner of congregational singing developed. Music became an integral part of Protestant worship among practically all of its denominations in the years that were to follow. (Ibid., pp. 112-118)

As I have said, I would not agree with everything that the Greek philosophers, the Jewish leadership, the early church fathers, and most of the great theologians and leaders of the church throughout its history said concerning music. I would agree with these philosophers and theologians on the basic points of their views as summed up by Portnoy:

(1) that music has strong ethical implications; (2) that music is a highly effective means to attain a desired emotional state; (3) the traditional relationship of text to tune; (4) distrust towards musical innovation.

(Ibid., )

Julius Portnoy was the Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Brooklyn College when he wrote The Philosopher and Music from which we have quoted profusely. He takes a purely secular point of view and rejoices at the final triumph of modern musical freedom of expression over the "oppressive" bondage of the past. The thing is, modern Christian musicians are in full agreement with him and also rejoice over this triumph.

Sensuous music and music that excites the baser and wilder passions have no place at all in the Christian life. The idea that these kinds of music can be made Christian by a change in lyrics is philosophically naive and is reflective of the decline of morals and theology in the church in her mad rush to keep up with the world in everything. My last two articles suffice to show that we who oppose this kind of music are not, as is so often suggested, some old fashioned traditional ignoramuses standing in the way of advancement.

In this and our previous articles, we have spent a lot of time with the over-all philosophy of music, which, though not specifically condemning rock music, certainly may be applied towards condemning it. In our next article we will have more to say specifically against it.

Leon Stump, Pastor of Victory Christian Center

`

Background from Greenfield Graphics.