David Lipscomb - Opposition To Missionary Societies and Instrumental Music

Opposition To Missionary Societies and Instrumental Music

Lipscomb, along with his mentor Tolbert Fanning, opposed the newly formed American Christian Missionary Society. While there was no disagreement over the need for evangelism, many believed that missionary societies were not authorized by scripture and would compromise the autonomy of local congregations. The use of musical instruments in worship had been discussed in journal articles as early as 1849, though initial reactions were generally unfavorable. However, some congregations are known to have been using musical instruments in the 1850s and 1860s. Both acceptance of instruments and discussion of the issue grew after the American Civil War. Opponents argued that the New Testament provided no authorization for their use in worship, while supporters argued on the basis of expediency and Christian liberty. Affluent, urban congregations were more likely to adopt musical instruments, while poorer and more rural congregations tended to see them as "an accommodation to the ways of the world." While he was slow to come to a decision on the issue, articulating his final position in 1878, he also came to oppose the use of musical instruments in worship. One biographer describes Lipscomb as taking "a firm stand against the organization of human societies for the preaching of the gospel, and he as ably contended for the simple worship without the use of instrumental music, as taught in the New Testament."

A deeper theological concern for Lipscomb was the adoption of German liberal theology by many among the Disciples wing of the Restoration Movement. He saw them as taking a direction very different from the principles enunciated by Thomas and Alexander.

As the 19th century progressed, a division gradually developed between those whose primary commitment was to unity, and those whose primary commitment was to the restoration of the primitive church. Those whose primary focus was unity gradually took on "an explicitly ecumenical agenda" and "sloughed off the restorationist vision." This group increasingly used the terms "Disciples of Christ" and "Christian Churches" rather than "Churches of Christ." At the same time, those whose primary focus was restoration of the primitive church increasingly used the term "Churches of Christ" rather than "Disciples of Christ." Lipscomb served as a moderate among those with conservative views, to the extent that Austin McGary described him as liberal, and he was more inclusive than either McGary or Daniel Sommer. In 1906 Lipscomb answered the director of the U.S. religious census for the conservatives when they were asked if the Disciples of Christ were divided.