THE LORDS OF LAODICEA
by
Stephen T. Nieman

Chapter 4

The next two argumentations we would like to address are really a continuum of thought. Yet they are expressed consistently as distinct conceptualizations by the elitist. The first of these expressions of debate surfaces habitually in the following format:

"Music is an expression of the soul, an art form. It is amoral. "

The idea conveyed here is that, in itself, music does not convey a morality. It is only when a specific moral dogma is attached to the music in lyrical form that it becomes either moral or immoral. The proponents of CCM find themselves in the epicenter of this vein of thought. It would be their contention that, regardless of the musical style, it is the lyrical message which is consecrated or profaned.

The elitist so believes this dogma that he will find it hard to be consistent and condemn any musical style. To be certain, there are a variety of levels of digression within the CCM industry, but it is the writer's contention that they all hold the same basic dogma mentioned heretofore.

Is music truly amoral? A simple definition of amorality is simply no morality. No goodness or ethic is attached to a music style until a lyrical dogma defines it. The question to be asked is: "Where did they get this idea?" How is it that we are to address this statement as if it carried corroborative authority? We will be discussing later in part two of this continuum of thought that the Bible does not support this dogma. Therefore, the venerable master of this dogma must be that secular realm of human wisdom. Certainly we must brace ourselves for an onslaught of musicological teachings, ranging from the Pre-Christian era to the Enlightenment, which pronounce with utmost profundity the absolute amorality of music. Right? Well, not hardly! In fact, quite the contrary is true. Although the writer considers secular wisdom dubious, the point is not to authenticate any one writing, but rather to display the complete historical non-corroboration of the statement regarding music as amoral.

Now to state it briefly, the overseers of the city must cleave to this, not letting it be corrupted unawares, but guarding it against all comers: there must be no innovation in gymnastics and music contrary to the established order; but they will guard against it as much as they can, fearing that when someone says Human beings esteem most the song which floats newest from the singer someone might perchance suppose the poet means not new songs, but a new way of song, and praises that. Such a saying shouldn't be praised, nor should this one be taken in that sense. For they must beware of change to a strange form of music, taking it to be a danger to the whole. For never are the ways of music moved without the greatest political laws being moved, as Damon says, and I am persuaded. ...'So it's surely here in music, as it seems,' I said' that the guardians must build the guardhouse. 'At least,' he said, this kind of lawlessness easily creeps in unawares...it attacks laws and regimes with much insolence until it finally subverts everything private and public.'⁵

Here we find Plato, one of the greatest among secular historical philosophers, addressing the very issue at hand. Please note that what is being addressed here is the occurrence of a musical style change within a given society. Nothing whatsoever is mentioned about the lyrical content of the musical style, as if that would somehow disannul the perceived impact. Nay, rather, it is a change in musical style which would subvert the laws and the people in a given society. Note that in the context a specific word is used to describe the anomaly of a change in music style...lawlessness.

To this same corollary of thought, Aristotle adds:

In addition to this common pleasure, felt and shared in by all (for the pleasure given by music is natural, and therefore adapted to all ages and characters), may it not have also some influence over the character and the soul? It must have such an influence if characters are affected by it. And that they are affected by it are proved in many ways...there is clearly nothing which we are so much concerned to acquire and to cultivate as the power of forming right judgments, and of taking delight in good dispositions and noble actions. Rhythm and melody supply imitations of anger and gentleness, and of courage and temperance, and of all qualities contrary to these and of other qualities of character, which hardly fall short of the actual affections, as we know from our own experience, for in listening to such strains our souls undergo a change...Enough has been said to show that music has a power of forming character, ...As to the vulgarizing effect which music is supposed to exercise, this is a question which we will have no difficulty in determining, when we have considered to what extent freemen who are being trained to political virtue should pursue the art, what melodies and rhythms they should be allowed to use, and what instruments should be employed in teaching them to play; for even the instrument makes a difference...for it is quite possible that certain methods of teaching and learning music do really have a degrading effect."⁶

Here again we find that a certain musical style has a distinct impact upon the very character and morality of the individual under its influence. Note that Aristotle even goes so far as to suppose that certain instruments were associated with specific degraded music styles. Again, we find a seemingly mystical void in both of the teachings of Plato and Aristotle. There is not one mention, either in the quotes or in the surrounding context, that lyrical content would hope to suppress the effect of the actual musical style upon the character.

To this adds Athenaeus, the avid Greek writer:

A mighty good treasure, good sirs, and a constant one, is music for all who have learned it and are educated.For indeed it trains character... ⁷

To be certain, we do not want to fall into the trap of building a musicology upon a specific region or culture and its underlying philosophy. If there is an intimate attachment of morality to music styles, then we would not be surprised to find this substantiated within other cultures. Again we are not disappointed. David Tame writes:

Each year in the second month, Emperor Shun could be found journeying eastward in order to check upon his kingdom, and to ensure that everything was in order throughout the vast land. Yet he did not do so by auditing the account books of different regions. Neither by observing the state of life of the populace, or by receiving petitions from them...For in ancient China there was considered to be a much more revealing, accurate and scientific method of checking on the state of the nation. According to the ancient Chinese text, Shu King, the Emperor Shun went about through the different territories and...tested the exact pitches of their notes of music...

Primitive superstition? Certainly Emperor Shun did not believe so. According to the philosophy of the ancient Chinese, music was the basis of everything. In particular they believed that all civilizations are shaped and moulded according to the kind of music performed within them....a civilization remained stable and unchanged as long as its music remained unchanged... Confucius believed there to be a hidden significance to music which made it one of the most important things in life, possessing potentially tremendous power for good or evil. And we discover the same basic beliefs in every advanced civilization of antiquity. It was the same in Mesopotamia. The same again in cultures as far apart as India and Greece...Music was not conceived by any of them, as it is conceived today, as being an intangible art form of little practical significance."⁸

Case closed? Not hardly. For as persistent is the charge that music is devoid of moral implications, so must our refutation accommodate the persistency. To this end a point must be belabored. Please note that we have yet to find an occurrence (and the challenge extends to the context of the quotes) or a scintilla of acknowledgment that music's lyrical persuasion might change its effect upon a persons character. This, of course is the very basis for the elitist's promulgation that CCM, utilizing the rhythmic intonations of Rock-and-Roll music, uplifts and edifies Christ's Body through its lyrical content. It is the writer's position that the lords of Laodicea have developed a dogma based entirely upon the prevailing philosophies of our society those philosophies of Naturalism and Pragmatism. J. Donald Butler writes:

Certainly pragmatism is not rationalistic. It does not begin with universal truths or principles and then deduce specific items of knowledge from these. By contrast, pragmatism is leery of all generalizations, whether priori or posteriori. It regards experience as radically specific and particular...Pragmatism is empirical in that its frame of reference is always sense-perceptual experience, not pre-disposed principles of reason."⁹

Therefore an identifiable trademark of someone who holds the philosophy of pragmatism would be a response to a questionable matter with the initiatory reply, "Well, I feel..." There is in this response a distinct lack of appeal to a source higher than his experiential truth. Furthermore, the dogma put forward to the enlightened masses stands in juxtaposition to the corroborative historical musicology of the past.

Aristotle's naturalism resulted in an ethical theory dialectical to rational idealism. Aristotle writes:

Such arguments then carry some degree of conviction; but it is by the practical experience of life and conduct that the truth is really tested, since it is there that the final decision lies. We must therefore examine the conclusions we have advanced by bringing them to the tests of the facts of life. If they are in harmony with these facts, we may accept them; if found to disagree, we must deem them mere theories. ¹⁰

Therefore it is this writer's conclusion that in a society where Christians have fully amalgamated the philosophies of Pragmatism, Naturalism and Christian Idealism, one would most certainly find the pretensions of self-government, and the primacy of experience-based initiatives by which we interpret higher law. It is then no small irony that this is exactly where we stand in our present "Christian" democratic society.