Oratorios 2

II. Some pious people, who do not scruple to attend these performances, allege, in justification of their conduct, that they are able to 'separate the good from the bad'—and, leaving the ball, the miscellaneous concert, and the theater, to the votaries of worldly pleasure—go only to the performance of sacred music, where, they affirm, they enjoy, if they can trust their own consciousness, as sublime devotion as they experience in any of the stated ordinances of religion. This defense, certainly, seems to imply that such people consider the strange mixture of the sacred and the mirthful which usually characterizes a musical festival, to be improper; that they do not approve of "The Messiah" and the "Dress Ball" being blended together in the same general entertainment.

Then, I ask them, Why do anything to countenance it? Why give the sanction of your example, in any way, however remotely, to such a shocking profanation? True, you do not go to the ball, or to the theater—and thus may seem to bear your testimony against them. But you help those who make the amusements, to bring about their schemes—by your money and your presence. You are a partaker in their sins! You join in some measure in the desecration. The musical festival, in their estimation, is a whole; and you, by patronizing a part, are considered as patronizing the whole. And there are also other reasons which ought to deter you from attending even the sacred part, if indeed any can be sacred, of these fascinating amusements; I mean such as relate to the performers; who will come to be considered presently, as presenting a distinct and strong objection of themselves.

But let me examine a little this 'plea of devotional feeling' in reference to the pious, as I have already done in reference to the mirthful and the worldly. Is it, after all, so clear as you have taken for granted—that you are on such occasions the subject of highly-raised devotion? Have you ever had the inclination, or indeed the leisure, to analyze your feelings at such a time? If so, are you sure that the excitement of the moment was the effect of clear and impressive views of the truth? You are aware that devotion consists of affections kindled—not by sensible objects—but by truth. That your emotions at an oratorio are strong and pleasurable, and may be devotional, to a certain extent, so far as you contemplate at the time a scriptural truth, I admit. But I question whether there is so much of the sacred as you imagine. And even if there were, it would not prove that the means are legitimate.

It may be supposed, that in the case of devout Catholics, much of the same kind of devotional feeling has been excited by 'holy pictures' and crucifixes, but this does not establish the propriety of such aids to devotion. If the oratorio were restored to its original form, and were to come out as a sacred opera to be performed, not in the theater, but in the churches, doubtless there are some good people who could really have devotional feeling excited on such occasions by sublime sentiment united to sublime music; but this would not prove the propriety of such feelings. The circumstance then of the pious emotion that is supposed to be enjoyed, or that in some minds may to a certain extent be enjoyed, is an insufficient defense of these attractive amusements; since they are not a means of grace commanded by the word of God, and are usually conducted in a manner directly opposed to it; they are not intended to the glory of Jehovah, neither designed for this end, nor actually accomplishing it. But, they are intended for the multitude—as a mere entertainment, by which sacred things are shockingly desecrated.

Moreover, as it is at any rate, a matter of doubtful propriety to attend such performances, (by far the larger part, I may say an overwhelming majority, of truly pious people, and of those generally the most spiritual, whose senses are exercised to discern between good and evil, being opposed to them,) it becomes a question, whether a professor of true religion ought not, in a case of mere gratification of taste, to give up his own preferences. I am quite aware that the 'opinion of the majority' does not decide the right or wrong of any question; and of that everyone should be fully persuaded in his own mind. Still however when it is not a doctrine, but a practice, that is in question, and a practice too, that has so much in the way of personal gratification to plead for its propriety—the views of pious people on the subject should have great weight with us.

Not only are their minds surprised and grieved by what they conclude to be a great impropriety, but some who are young and weak in the faith are likely to be led astray into more questionable and sinful matters. The apostle's reasoning, expostulation, and example, seem to be very much in point here. "But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol's temple, will he not be encouraged, if his conscience is weak, to eat food offered to idols? And so by your knowledge this weak person is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died. Thus, sinning against your brothers and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble." (1 Corinthians 8:9-13)

Suppose then a weak brother hears of your going to an oratorio in a music-hall or a church—he will be emboldened to go a step further, and go to hear the same performance in a theater, and, going there first for an oratorio, he may be led to go there afterwards for a play, and fall into the temptations which abound in such places. Or, perceiving that you go to the sacred music, he will go to the profane. Or, observing you mixed up with worldly people in one amusement, he may feel emboldened to go a step further, and mix up with them in another.

So far as your own character is concerned, it seems to be a letting down of the strictness of Christian circumspection. And, in a world where such an unfavorable influence is perpetually produced by engagements and occupations into which we must enter, it is by no means desirable to increase the danger by voluntary and unnecessary temptations! It is at any rate but a very small sacrifice for any Christian to make—to give up his 'entertainments' for Christ's sake. And though we are not certainly, in default of greater demands upon our ease and comfort by the circumstances of the age in which we live, to go in quest of uncommanded sufferings, or to mortify ourselves by uncalled-for privations—yet we should manifest a willingness to deny ourselves in all matters of doubtful propriety.

Next Part Oratorios 3

Back to John Angell James