Forum on Music and Christian Scholarship

“Spiritual” Selection: Joseph Goddard and the Music Theology of Evolution
Bennett Zon, Durham University

The history of religion and science has often been caricatured as strewn with mortal conflict. Early books on the topic, like John William Draper’s History of the Conflict between Religion and Science (1874) or Andrew Dickson White’s A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896) did nothing to dispel this view. The battle between religion and science was, however, never as consistently divisive as these books might suggest, and during the Victorian period there was at times an amicable, albeit dynamic, relationship between the two. Like twins separated at birth, religion and science occasionally rediscovered one another in the booming culture of post-Darwinian Britain, to find abundant similarities and curiously engrossing differences. This is the story of such a relationship, exploring the influence of evolution within the science and religion of Victorian Britain, and then tracing its impact on England’s leading music philosopher, Joseph Goddard (1833–1911).

Because Goddard published regularly throughout most of the Victorian period his work provides a helpful glimpse into the development of Britain’s musicological mind. That mind was deeply immersed in contemporary scientific, religious and philosophical debates, not least as they relate to changes in evolutionary theory. Indeed, as evolutionary theory evolved, so too did musicology. Goddard’s philosophy of music reflects those changes very clearly, from his early days as a flag-waving Spencerian to his later, more circumspect time as a devout Darwinian. Like many other intellectuals of the time, however, Goddard fell sway to the Darwinian argument, abandoning neither his good Spencerian principles nor his fundamental belief in the spiritual nature of the universe. To the extent that Darwin failed to resolve his own religious conflict, he was similarly compromised. Darwin calls it his “muddle,” and it is that so-called muddle between scientific knowledge and religious belief, played out in vast swathes of Victorian intellectual culture, which one finds represented and resolved in Goddard’s philosophy of music. This paper charts the history of Darwin’s muddle as emblematic of Victorian debates about religion and science, looking closely at the relationship of natural theology and the emerging science of evolution. It examines the resolution of that relationship into a theology consonant with evolution yet true to its religious roots, and then situates that theology broadly within Goddard’s philosophy of music.

A Kantian Framework for Music-Theology
James Jirtle, Durham University

Interdisciplinary interaction between theology and musicology is hindered by differences in method. In this paper, I will suggest that a close reading of Kant’s aesthetics can provide a philosophical foundation for research between these two disciplines, relating theological metaphysics and musicology’s empiricism. I have chosen Kant because of his profound influence on contemporary theology--through Schleiermacher and Transcendental Thomism--as well as on the development of musicology as an academic subject. The first ‘musicologist’, Guido Adler, was both a student of Eduard Hanslick, a formalist influenced by Kantian aesthetics filtered through Romantic philosophy, and a disciple of Alexius Meinong, who applied critical methods to questions of causation. Kant’s influence on musicology is also strongly felt through its appropriation of hermeneutical methods, principally mediated through Schleiermacher, Gadamer, and Dilthey.

The underlying philosophical barrier to interaction between musicology and theology is Kant’s insistence that truth is a property of our minds and our empirical observations rather than of the objects we observe. If knowledge is both founded on and limited to human cognition, metaphysical issues not only lie beyond our comprehension, but are irrelevant for understanding experience. I will argue, however, that Kant’s own aesthetic theory defies such a stark dichotomy. For Kant, judgements of beauty are subjective, yet they rely on a principle of “common sense” to ensure their universal validity. Unlike other metaphysical principles in transcendental idealism, which can be discounted once assumed, I maintain that this common sense plays a constitutive role in our aesthetic judgements, and consequently represents a metaphysical principle that is directly relevant for our appreciation of beauty. Because musical beauty is dependent on this metaphysical common sense, Kant’s aesthetics can serve as a framework for bridging the methodological divide between theology and musicology, opening the door to truly interdisciplinary music-theology.

Perceiving the Essence: Thoughts on Hermeneutical Parallels Between Musical and Biblical Interpretation
David Breckbill, Doane College

Western art music and Christianity are two domains in which texts serve both as inspiration or instruction for behavior (“What does the Bible/score say to do?”) and as a conduit to an intangible reality. Since “knowing” God is important to Christians, Christian musicians might learn much from considering similar interpretative principles that operate both in the realm of music and in the realm of faith. Consequently, this paper outlines and illustrates some common hermeneutical issues inherent in musical performance, and proposes that investigating the relationship between the composer, the score, and the performer might illuminate the relationship between God, the Bible, and the disciple.

One concern shared by many theologians and musical scholars alike is a fear that specific interpretations may fundamentally distort the essence of a Biblical passage or a musical work. But if one endorses Artur Schnabel’s dictum that “great music is music that is better than it can be played,” it emerges that no performance can capture the essence of a musical work in its entirety. In fact, strong readings—those that most powerfully convey to listeners “the” (or at least “an”) essence--inevitably distort some of the myriad details and potential implications of a musical work, and embrace others only selectively. This suggests that “essence”--whether musical or Biblical--is distilled from a complex, sometimes contradictory reality; the discarded or overlooked parts of one conception or rendition may contain materials useful in constructing another equally valid one. It might then be asked whether the essence lies behind performance as a Platonic “Ideal Form,” or whether it adheres in some crucial way to immediate experience. Recent musical scholarship seems to broach this latter possibility: might Richard Taruskin’s crusade against utopian understandings of music, and Carolyn Abbate’s interest in elevating to critical significance our ephemeral experience of it, nourish and elucidate Jesus’ pronouncement that “the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matthew 4:17)?