Money for Nothing

The Christian Chronicle is sent to my house, even though I pay no subscription. I’m glad it does, when I read some of the articles in the paper. In the past, The Chronicle has described itself as a “newspaper not a viewspaper”. Helen Keller could see the Chronicle’s views on certain topics, and that would be fine, if admitted by the Chronicle.

In April, the readers were treated to a dialogue with Royce Money, president of Abilene Christian University, my alma mater. Shockingly, the primary topic of the dialogue was the unity initiative with the Christian Church. I think I had read some articles on this topic in prior editions, but I could be mistaken. One particular answer from President Money was highlighted in the layout of the full-page dialogue. The highlighted answer was as follows:

“I would fight vigorously if instrumental music were attempted to be introduced into my home congregation. I am firmly within the a cappella tradition. But I have a tolerance for those who make other choices, and I don’t see that it needs to constitute a complete severing of fellowship or alienation. I just don’t see the need for that.” --Royce Money, April 2006, Christian Chronicle, A Dialogue with Royce Money.

The question from the Chronicle staff: Does it matter to you if a church uses instruments in worship?

I’m certainly not one of the elite scholars of our time, nor am I a member of the church police playing “gotcha” with my brethren. But, that response statement, if printed correctly and accurately, is not what I would expect from a reasonable person, even if he is a college president! The question is a reasonable one to ask. The answer is lame. It appears as if Money, too, is trying to play on all teams.

Call me crazy, but people on both sides, who fought “vigorously” because instrumental music was introduced into their home congregation, created the division that Money and his associates are trying to heal! He attempts to reassure one group in the division that he is “firmly within the a cappella tradition”. I’m not reassured! If a cappella music is a “tradition”, then so is instrumental music. And if either, or both, are simply traditions, then Royce, as are all of us, is sinning by fighting “vigorously” over a tradition. What is his beef with those in a cappella congregations? That they don’t believe it is a tradition, or that they are fighting and divided over a tradition? According to his statement, he believes a cappella music is a tradition, but he would fight vigorously to keep the instrument out of his home congregation. He attempts to placate another group in the division, who (through their “enlightenment”) is more tolerant of those who use the instrument. He says he is one of the tolerant ones, but he would fight “vigorously” to keep the instrument out of his home congregation. Do you follow that? How tolerant do you think the instrument boys would think Royce really is? Probably about as tolerant as Royce thinks we are.

As far as I can tell, there are at least four groups associated with this division. One, those in the church of Christ who believe that a cappella singing is the only scriptural music authorized. Two, those in the church of Christ who believe instrumental music and a cappella music are preferences, and both should be tolerated by all. Third and fourth, are the same two classifications in the Christian Church. I know Money attends a congregation that has the words “church of Christ” on the building. So, he is a member of group one or group two, as defined above. He sounds like those of us in group one, who share his opposition to the introduction of the instrument in our home congregations. But, he has a little DNA from group two, because he thinks a cappella music is a tradition, and that he is tolerant of those who don’t hold his traditional views.

I’m confused. But, it sounds like he is too. And adding The Chronicle to the group, that makes three of us.