Oratorios 3
Back to John Angell James
III. I now go on to show the impropriety of oratorios, even when unattended, which they sometimes are, by the usual appendages of other worldly amusements, as, for instance, the one exhibited not long ago Westminster Abbey, and more recently at Exeter Hall. There were no balls, no theatrical representations, no amusements, songs, and glees; no, nothing but sacred music. Here, then, is the oratorio by itself, and what is there to object to this? I answer, nearly all that may be objected to a musical festival. I ask again this question, For what purpose is this 'sacred music' performed? It is for amusement! Purely for amusement! Is it, then, done, for the glory of God--to convert the most solemn and sacred topics of divine truth into a source of public entertainment? No! It is done to draw people together to hear the sufferings of the Messiah set forth for much the same purpose as they are called to be entertained by a dramatic representation of the sorrows of Hamlet or Romeo!
That this is not overstating the matter I will prove by referring to a report of, and some comments upon, the performances at Exeter Hall, and which are thus given:
"For Unto Us a Child Is Born," and the "Hallelujah," were rapturously encored! Mrs. Kuyvett charmed the audience in "I Know That My Redeemer Lives." Mr. Phillips, in the bass songs, especially, "The Trumpet Shall Sound," was admirable. Mr. Hawkins sang, with exquisite purity of voice and style, "He Was Despised and Rejected of Men." And moreover, the anthem, 'Worthy Is the Lamb,' was received with cries of Bravo! Bravo! Encore! and clapping of hands!
Christians, Christians, you who love and adore the Savior! You who look through your tears of penitence to His cross for pardon and eternal life; is there not in this enough to rouse to hallowed indignation all the piety you have in your very souls? "Oh, it is an amusement of worldly, sinful, and dying men—which is fitted to make angels weep!" Is it to be wondered at that the sufferings of a dying Savior do not impress the hearts, awaken the consciences, and melt the souls of sinners—when these topics are thus converted into a subject of public entertainment for the gratification of the lovers of pleasure, music and of song? How can a real Christian patronize such profanation?
Is it not, also, a very strong presumption against the propriety of these performances, that the public are not yet agreed upon their proper locality, their appropriate place of performance? Some consider that places of worship are desecrated by them. But how can this be, if they are religious services? Where should devotion be cultivated, if not in the house of God? This, then, is a plain admission that they are purely matters of amusement. Others think, on the contrary, that they are improper everywhere but in a church. Some people see no impropriety in their taking their turn, as they really do, at the play house, with 'Pizarro,' 'the Stranger,' 'the Hypocrite,' and 'Tom and Jerry'.
But I now advance to a very strong proof of their impropriety which is deduced from the character of the performers. Should there be any people who still contend for oratorios on account of their devotional tendency, even though they admit this is not their professed design, yet what will they say of the 'profanation of such sacred topics' by many of whom it is not defaming them to say, that they are far removed, not only from saving religion, but even from morality. The conduct of the great body of professional singers, performers, and actors, is far from being moral. Exceptions there are doubtless, and I would in charity hope not a few. But I speak of the many—of the generality of the performers. Let any one think who are the performers of any orchestra—whether at Drury Lane or in our Cathedrals, or in any of our music-halls—at the time of the performance of an oratorio. There will be found Jew, Papist, profligate—men and women of any religion, or rather of no religion—all uniting in singing, for amusement, the most solemn and sacred themes of revealed religion! All joining in singing "Worthy Is the Lamb!" "Hallelujah!" "The trumpet shall sound!" Imagine a Jew or a profligate singing, "I Know That My Redeemer Lives!"
Such profane people—performing one night at the theater—a little while after in a cathedral; at one time impersonating the heroes and heroines of the stage—at another time the church of Christ in its hopes, and the Son of God himself in his agonies; on one occasion harrowing up the feelings of the audience with a profane piece of immorality in the play-house—and at another thrilling them in the house of God with the words of prophets and apostles set to music! Can this be right? Can it be proper to employ these people, to hire them, to give them large sums of money—for an act in which they profane the name of God? Even if we admitted that the audience were rendered devotional by the performance—can we say this of the performers?
Think of the scenes of levity and mirth which occur during the seasons of training and rehearsal—when they are taught to perform their parts with the precision necessary to give effect to such services. What an unhallowed familiarity is then acquired with those subjects, which made the hearts of prophets and apostles tremble as they touched them with the hand of devotion, and in the spirit of pious awe! What a continued breach of the third commandment is going on! What a hardening process is carried forward in the hearts of those people in reference to true religion! By their very profession as performers, they are taught to trifle with sacred things. Is there any hope of their ever profiting by the doctrine of salvation which their very occupation leads them to sport with, and desecrate as a source of gain? Can any Christian who has a tender conscience, encourage his fellow-immortals thus to harden their hearts against the impression of the only truths that can be essential to their salvation?
I shall be told, for it is the usual reply, that by these remarks I condemn the practice of many of our ministers and congregations, who introduce selections of sacred music into their public worship. It is no matter to me whom or what I condemn, except as a matter of regret that there should be so much that calls for condemnation. The only question to be asked is this, Is my argument against oratorios Scriptural? I do condemn, most severely condemn, the practice which, I lament to say, is becoming increasingly prevalent, and therefore increasing the sins and the stains of Christian worship, until there is reason to fear we shall soon err on this point as widely as the Church of England, of converting the sanctuary into a place and season for Sunday concerts.
I am indignant and ashamed at the follies of some of my brethren in the ministry, who, either to indulge the whims and tastes of their choirs, or to draw a larger congregation to the 'offering-plate'—hire singers of all characters, and from all quarters, to come and treat the audience with a display of sacred music. Placards are to be seen at every corner of the street, and in almost every shop window, announcing the coming performance; the names of the performers, the number and kinds of the instruments, and the fulness of the band. And, to complete the enormity, these performers either dine or sup together at a tavern, on the Sunday when the concert is to be held, and come, some of them, in a state that can be easily imagined, from the scene of their gluttony and drinking—to that of their devotion, or, rather, of their amusement—in the house of God! In these statements I do not, in one particular, or in one degree, exaggerate! All this, and worse than this, has taken place in my own neighborhood, and in other places, again and again! Oh, shame and scandal upon religion! Oh, shame and reproach upon the men by whom these things are patronized! It is high time that the protesting and indignant voice were raised! It is high time that this 'torrent of profanation', which in some places threatens to roll over the simplicity and spirituality of Christian worship, were arrested. But to what is all this to be traced? To the oratorio—of which it is a lame and a humble mimicry.
Instead therefore of attempting to justify these things, or stopping the course of my argument, lest it should doom these practices to destruction, I am anxious that it should sweep them all away in its course, as things that are utterly contrary to true religion. Still, however, it will be said that after all, bad as these things are, they are not quite on a level with the oratorio, inasmuch as they are, professedly at least, introduced into the worship of God, and intended to be a part of it. It is, however, only pretense—and adds the crime of 'hypocrisy' to that of 'profanity'—and is, at the same time, not only a desecration of sacred things, but of sacred times and places also.
Let the matter, then, be fully, fairly, and dispassionately examined; let all our love of music, and our delight in the concord of sweet sounds, be put out of the question; and let us ask if it is right thus to convert pious subjects—subjects that enter into the most solemn and sacred part of religion, into a source of worldly amusement? Or if it is right to gratify our taste, or even excite what we may suppose to be devotional feeling, by encouraging ungodly people to profane, by their very profession, and for hire—the holy name and revealed truth of God?
If it is wrong in itself, the wrong is not, cannot be made right, by devoting, as is usually done, the profits of the service to some charitable purpose. This is a very common, though certainly not a very scriptural or logical argument. What will become of the hospital, or the dispensary, it is asked, if the oratorio be given up? I answer, support it in some other way; for even charity must not be supported by sin! Musical festivals have done little in the way of producing pious or charitable feelings, if those who countenance and attend them will not give their property for the relief of the necessitous, unless they can have value received for it in musical gratification and entertainment.
I now leave the whole matter for the serious, candid, and prayerful consideration of those who have been in any doubt about this matter; adding only one or two general remarks. Of what tremendous consequence is it that nothing should be done to trim down true religion. We should not reduce the only subject which can rescue the souls of men from hell, and raise them to heaven—to a mere entertainment! Of what tremendous consequence is it that nothing should be done to hide from men their own immortality, and help them to go merrily and thoughtlessly upon their eternal destiny! And, even in reference to professing Christians—how indescribably important is it that their own deadness to the world, the life of faith, spirituality, and heavenly-mindedness, should not be hindered by any unnecessary mixture with the world, and resort to worldly amusements—and that their example should not be given to aid the destruction of the souls of their fellow-immortals!
Back to John Angell James