Expanded Thoughts on Choruses By Scott A. Klaft

Transcription

1 Expanded Thoughts on Choruses By Scott A. Klaft [The following was originally published in the September 2005 issue of The Reader s Monthly and re-edited here.] Justifiably, there has been much discussion in the brotherhood concerning the singing of songs we use for worship. Too often, however, the topic swerves from the original intended aim, the sincere desire to ascertain biblical principles, and it turns into a heated competition of personalities. Some want to contend for the justification of their past activities. Others feel their character or brotherhood-influence is challenged when an opposing voice is heard. Two things are certain in that regard: (1) our past actions must not play a part in ascertaining God s instructions for right or wrong; (2 ) we never base our beliefs on whose publication has the better writer, what school upholds a practice, or who holds the most influence in the brotherhood. Seeking the highest good for the church ought to be our aim; let us dispense with personal conflicts of pride, therefore, and humbly accept only what the Bible offers, nothing more or less. 1 As frequently as we must earnestly contend for the truth on how the song service portion of our assembled worship is to be conducted in order to be patterned after the first century church, it strikes me as strange that brethren, who would be otherwise in agreement, find conflict with each other concerning choruses. Before delving into the central issue, perhaps we ought to back away just a bit in order to find some common ground, some principles upon which all may agree, and try to work from there. May we all agree that, as it is with many things concerning the Law of Christ, it is the intent of the heart that makes an act a sin? (After all, who will claim that their knowledge of the mind of God is entirely without flaw? If we concede that we may occasionally sin in ignorance, then, would it not be the sincere intent of the heart to learn, grow, and do right that allows us to remain in the good favor of the Lord? Conversely, it would be the selfish, willful heart that sins so egregiously when the intent is without regard for God s will.) Surely, we can agree on that much.

2 2 Assuming we agree this far, let us take the principle into the assembled worship of a congregation. We can probably also agree that there is a beginning and an end to that designated period of worship. Since the Bible does not speak of time limits other than the explicit day, the specifics must be decided by the leadership of the congregation, whether it is the eldership or the men struggling to fulfill that capacity. Generally speaking, most congregations at the start have a man stand in a leadership position, often to make announcements or at least to draw attention to the proceedings. This, by default, is the beginning even if the words, It is time to begin are not specifically used. Usually, the conclusion of the final prayer is the indication that all may be dismissed or that the designated worship period has ended, even if the words are not specifically spoken. Understanding that the very idea of a beginning and an end to our assembled worship is contested by some, for the purposes of this article, it is assumed that those in dispute over choruses are sound enough in the faith to eschew the all of life is worship doctrine. If we are in agreement thus far, we have accomplished at least something. Now let us agree that not only is it well and good to sing songs to the Lord on our own outside of the assembly, but it should also be encouraged. Devotion to the Lord can and should be displayed openly. If others happen to hear, only good can result. Now we must be somewhat controversial. The rules that apply to our singing in the assembly also apply outside the assembly. The same can be said about any form of worship performed, whether in or out of the assembly. For example, prayer must always be directed to God the Father with Christ Jesus as the conduit, which we signify by saying in the name of Jesus. The rules for prayer do not change when we are not in the assembly. Therefore, when we rightly conclude that our worshipful songs in the assembly must be sung without accompanying mechanical instruments, consistency demands that the same

3 applies outside the assembly. Valid reasoning to the contrary has never been presented. The number of readers now in agreement may now be a bit narrower. 3 We may concede, for the moment, that one may not always be worshiping outright when singing these songs. One may be learning or practicing; in which case, it can be exceedingly difficult to have any worshipful intent. That is the crux, is it not? The intent of the heart combined with the essence of the action determines whether worship is acceptable to God. Stumbling in action may be tolerated so long as the predisposition, the intent of the heart, is such that, if one finds there is a need for correction, he is predetermined to make amends. To do otherwise is obviously a willful violation of conscience (cf. Rom. 14:23b). Are we still together? True enough, we are normally in no position to judge another s motives or intent. When a person makes that intent known, however, either verbally or implied by their actions, we can indeed know the intent of their heart. It is not inappropriate to judge according to righteousness (cf. John. 7:24). If we happen to hear a person walking down a hallway, singing a worshipful song, we have no basis to judge whether their song is motivated by the proper intent. It could be that they are sincerely worshiping God or sincerely practicing the song, learning to serve in a better capacity. The only other prospect is the possibility that they are trying to draw attention to themselves. If there is another option, I do not know it, and I would gratefully thank anyone who can give me some other explanation. The point is that, without some indication of the person s intent, we cannot presume to know it. We can only know the tree by its fruit (cf. Matt. 7:20). Suppose, then, someone wanted to bring a chorus into the building in which the church worships, before or after the designated period for the corporate worship. Legitimately opposing arguments in terms of appearance, consistency, or formality notwithstanding, it is the motive and intent that betrays its impropriety. The motives become

4 apparent when a man or a group of men (assuming there are no women) steps out in front of others to display themselves conducting a worshipful act. They are clearly trying to draw attention to themselves. If they were practicing, they would (and probably should) do it privately. If they are worshiping, why design the scenario where an audience could view? Has the scripture ever addressed the scenario where people are trying to draw attention to themselves with worshipful acts? Indeed, it has. Matthew 6:1 18 refers to doing service to God through alms-giving or worshiping God in prayer and doing it before men or to be seen of men. Such is called hypocritical and having no positive benefit because they have their reward. Would the principle not also apply to singing worshipful songs? 4 What about the person seated? Is their motive also displayed? When we sit in front of the television, our intent is obvious. We intend to be entertained in one form or another. The same occurs when a person purposefully comes (or stays when he normally would not) to watch, not participate with, others in song. If it were not worshipful songs, it would be called a concert, and those being completely honest are actually calling it that, for that is what it truly is: a concert designed for entertainment. The fact that they take songs set apart (i.e. sanctified ) for the worship of God using them for the purpose of entertainment and self-aggrandizement defines the meaning of profane. If it is something else, I would sincerely like to know what. The idea that the singers are teaching and the auditors are learning is a smoke screen (not to mention inconsistent with the scriptural design of singing reciprocally). We learn while watching television too, but that fact does not change the motive. We all learn in everything we do, whether we intend to or not. We should never use the excuse that singing worshipful songs is not inherently wrong in order to justify something done with inappropriate motives. That is what is known as a non sequitur, a conclusion that does not logically follow, or is not implied by the premises.

5 When our motives come from a desire to be seen of men, it is easy to recognize that our intent of heart needs some correction. Whether it is claimed to be personal worship, practice, or outright entertainment, the practice is hypocritical and certainly not scriptural. The brethren to the contrary of this position can still be considered brethren, and we endeavor to express the same longsuffering as the Lord whom we aspire to follow. I am convinced, nevertheless, that I stand on the surest ground. Those who have stumbled with this in the past, I encourage you to make things right with God and the brethren. I hold nothing but affection for you in my motives, and my intent is to join you in the eternal song of the heavenly host as the praises to the Father swell and ring. 5 -Scott Klaft sklaft@mtplezcoc.com