Talk:Alexander Campbell (Restoration movement)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Is this correct? "He was also the compiler of a hymnal which consisted of lyrics without any musical notations, which he considered to be superfluous and hence sinful."
The word "sinful" there seems like a misrepresentation. Anyone able to back that up? Carltonh 15:15, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Only in that I've seen a copy of his hymnal (and, for that matter, his edition of the N.T.) and that the explanation, given by a man who remembered people who remembered him and hence admittedly third-handed, was that such was his belief (one largely shared by this man himself, who had always disapproved not only of instrumental music, but of parts and harmony). This would certainly be the best justification for the book's unusual format.
Rlquall 17:25, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
If you see his only written comments about instrumental music, his argument against it was that it was emotionalistic, and perhaps materialistic. He did not argue that it was Biblically sinful. See http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/acampbell/ac1.html I think the same may at most have been his opinion on musical notations, so I think it should be changed. Carltonh 18:01, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Many hymnals of the Restoration Movement during this period contained words only, and not notes. I don't know this to be any type of proof that Campbell felt musical notation was sinful, though. I've never heard that anywhere.