INDIVIDUALLY, and especially as a I church, we do not like to admit it; but a real problem is developing in a field that can be loosely termed "cultural standards." Open discussion on this topic is virtually nonexistent. The generation gap has made the problem particularly acute in matters of music. Church leaders seem to the youth to be making decisions purely on the basis of tradition. Individual members, left largely without guidance, have some hazy notion about "good" and "bad" music or listen to anything that is thrown at them.
Obviously, either the church is in the field of musical standards or it is out. It cannot continue to loiter about some nebular threshold. If music is not a matter of morality, then the church should step completely out of the picture. If right and wrong do come into play, then the church has a spiritual responsibility to its membership.
Though the Scriptures do not have a great deal to say about culture or music, they seem to enter the field. Most Bible scholars accept Philippians 4:8 as having a bearing on culture. The various English versions mention such words as true, honest, just, pure, lovely, of good report, virtue, praiseworthy, gracious, excellence, noble, lovable, excellent, and admirable in describing the Christian esthetic standard.
It is patently impossible to say that a specific tune, chord, or tone is either good or bad. It is highly unjust to specify certain general types of music as bad and others good. What is needed is a simple, workable yardstick by which to measure each individual song or program. If there were a specific set of concepts by which to judge, institutional officers would not have the agony of unchecked power, and sincere Christians would know where to be gin in developing an honest structure in which to live.
In establishing this standard, certain premises are necessary. First a major concept of Christianity is respect for the individual. Musical standards then must be applicable to all personal tastes. The church must use a broad spectrum of good music to meet the needs of a broad spectrum of people. Second, the standard of judgment must be positive rather than negative. Good is positive and evil is negative. Third, any Christian Seventh-day Adventist standard must be scriptural and interpreted and elucidated by the Spirit of Prophecy.
The Index of Ellen G. White's writings includes more than two hundred entries under the listings "Music" and "Music, Instrumental." Most of these are references to "music fit only for a dance hall" and such, but there are a number of passages that speak directly of good and bad qualities in music. The point of her revelation would probably be shocking to many complacent Adventists. Mrs. White is primarily concerned with the motivation of the performers. Again and again the phrase "sung with the spirit and the understanding" is used. She condemns display and hypocrisy. Honesty is of utmost importance in Christian music.
As for the esthetic qualities of music, her statements are well summarized in this quotation: "Music should have beauty, pathos and power." --Evangelism, p. 505. What she means by beauty, pathos and power is made clear throughout her writings on the subject. She did not like "singing . . . done from impulse," or songs where the singers are "left to blunder along," or music that sounds like "funeral notes," or a frivolous ditty. She recommended "clear intonation, correct pronunciation, and distinct utterance," cheerful, spirited songs, and singing "accompanied with musical instruments skilfully-handled." She stressed that music can be used in evangelism and should communicate with the listeners. (See chapter 15.) One statement is particularly applicable to today:
In some of our churches I have heard solos that were altogether unsuitable for . . . the Lord's house. The long-drawn-out notes and the peculiar sounds common in operatic singing are not pleasing to the angels. They delight to hear simple songs. --Ibid., p. 510.
Drawing from this background, I would like to present this preliminary standard:
1. Good music must be honest both in style and motivation. The performers must be sincere, high-principled people. Pretentious music is not acceptable.
2. It must be spirited music that expresses the happiness and excitement of Christianity and motivates the listener to a dynamic faith.
3. It must communicate or speak to the heart of the listener. It must have the ability to spark deep thinking and talk about real problems. It must show a clear, yet challenging road to the way of Christ.
I cannot measure the implications of this standard. I do know that the spirit of institutionalization, apathy, tradition, and secularism has pervaded too much of what we presently accept as good music, and that we have not listened to some very honest, spirited, and Christian music that speaks to many people who are not impressed by so-called acceptable music.
I think that Ellen G. White, with the gifts of a prophet, foresaw this problem. I quote in full one of her most interesting, distressing, and timely statements.
I feel an indignation of spirit that in our institutions so little honor has been given to the living God, and so much honor to that which is supposed to be superior talent, but with which the Holy Spirit has no connection. The Spirit of God is not acknowledged and respected; men have passed judgment upon it; its operations have been condemned as fanaticism, enthusiasm, undue excitement.—Counsels to Parents and Teachers, p. 367. (Italics supplied.)
If this means a whole new approach to our standards, if this means rejecting what was once accepted and accepting what was once rejected, do we have enough courage to do it whatever others may say or do?
