While there is cause to celebrate the growth of an industry that celebrates the Gospel story, there is also great cause for alarm, for the underlying philosophical pillars which are holding up CCM need to be examined.
Is there in fact such a thing as "Christian" or "secular" music? Is the distinction truly valid and if so what set of criteria makes the distinction? Is it lyrical content only or can music itself be determined to be Christian or un-Christian? When you put your child to bed by singing "Mary Had A Little Lamb," or enjoy a love song are those "secular" activities? Conversely, is it possible to give glory to God when enjoying a beautiful piece of music written by a pagan or dedicated to a "secular" theme?
There is, to be sure, music which is set apart for the purpose of Christian worship, (i.e., hymns, liturgies, etc.) but in the context of popular culture the distinction becomes more difficult to define. A piece of music which is edifying to one believer may be, and often is, a stumbling block to another.
The founding of CCM was unprecedented in that for the first time in modern musical memory an entire genre of music was created solely on the basis of lyrical content. In succeeding years the difficulty of such a concept would be exposed when a whole range of styles from rap and bluegrass and jazz to pop and death metal would all be housed under the tent of CCM.
What began as an effort to bypass the censorious nature of the "secular" music industry actually resulted in the creation of a whole new industry. Though founded with the best of intentions, result didn't always promote the advancement of the Gospel into the domain of "the world."
Since the "worldly" music system wouldn't allow them to express themselves spiritually, CCM pioneers created their own musical universe including "Christian" radio stations, "Christian" record labels, "Christian" music magazines, "Christian" merchandise, and a whole host of other support organizations which, for the most part, catered exclusively to a relatively small segment of the Christian community. While "secular" record outlets carried "Christian" music, it was all too often hidden from the mass consumers view, tucked away in the Sacred/Gospel or Contemporary Christian Music section.
What resulted, it could be argued, was cultural, sociological and most importantly spiritual suicide resulting in the ghettoization of nearly all orthodox Christian thought in American music.
What also resulted were records which were all too often artificial in their stubborn refusal to address the full range of emotions that are part of the human experience. Many were strictly religious records which seemed to deny the fact that part of a "religious" lifestyle is relating those beliefs to every segment of a person's life.
Equally devastating was the effect it had on the popular music industry. For it effectively told a generation of musicians with genuine orthodox spiritual concerns and lyrical aspirations that their services were welcomed only in the ghetto of Christian music. Thus the mainstream musical community and the average listener was exposed to very little in the way of orthodox Christian thought in the music that was offered up in much of the 1970s and '80s.
For the most part, the non-Christians made music for the culture at large while the Christians made music for the religious ghetto. Incredibly those mainstream artists who experienced conversions or sought to express such thoughts were sent to the CCM ghetto where they made music for fellow believers and were asked to give up their loyal audiences who may have had an interest in hearing what their heretofore favorite artists had to say.
The list was long: Dan Peek, Leon Patillo, Phil Keaggy, Debby Boone, Mark Farner, Rick Cua, Deniece Williams, B.J. Thomas, Richie Furay, Dion, Bonnie Bramlett, Philip Bailey, Joe English and many, many others left behind "worldly careers" and their "worldly fans" whom perhaps most needed to hear their message. These artists were discouraged from singing about earthly love or most other non-spiritual topics that were not directly related to their conversion experience or subsequent spiritual triumphs. They were told to get out of rock and roll because it was a nasty place. They did and it really became a nasty place.
"Everything we do," wrote the great Chinese Christian Watchman Nee, "be it in field or highway, in shop, factory, kitchen, hospital or school, has spiritual value in terms of the kingdom of Christ. Satan would much prefer to have no Christians in any of these places for they are decidedly in his way there. He tries to frighten us out of the world."
Christians who made music were effectively silenced in terms of having any meaningful impact on the culture at large. But the real irony was the fact that the censorship was largely a self-imposed one. In the great war of ideas for the hearts and minds of the members of our culture, Christian thought was not only vanquished, but its proponents aided in bringing about its own demise.
Was this what Larry Norman, Randy Stonehill and a whole host of Jesus Music pioneers had in mind when they began their various efforts?
The term "Christian music" itself raises all sorts of questions. If a Christian sings love songs is that Christian music? If a non-Christian sings Christian lyrics is that Christian music? If a Christian sings a "Christian song" but is signed to a secular label, is that a Christian song? And what about the music itself? Are there stylistic boundaries to what can be considered a viable medium for a Christian message? Is there a point at which the nature of the music itself can no longer be a vehicle for a Biblical, or even a "positive" message? The controversy within the Church rages on, with on the one end those who embrace all forms of CCM while others maintain that any music with a "beat" is inherently evil. This raises a host of difficult problems for the Christian musician who is led to be a relevant voice in our culture and who already faces an uphill battle. These questions and a lack of satisfactory answers clearly illustrate the problem.
We have come to believe that there is no such thing as Christian music. It is bad business, but more importantly, it is bad theology. Nowhere in the Bible are we taught to separate activities into the artificial categories of sacred and secular. All activities, we are taught, are to be done to the glory of God. Satisfactory Biblical justification for calling one song Christian and another secular based on such factors as the spiritual status of the employees of the record label or the number of times the name of Jesus is evoked in a song, is dubious at best. Such a song may have been recorded with a flippant attitude by uncommitted "Christians" while another released in the secular realm by Bible-believing musicians would be condemned for being "worldly."
In place of the old secular/sacred distinction, we suggest a new standard modeled on Nee's exhortation to believers to stay in the culture and transform it. Music is either consistent with the inerrent, authoritative and flawless Word of God, the Bible, and thus honoring to Him, or is inconsistent with the Bible and thus dishonoring to God-period.
This "Nee-istic" standard will no doubt cause discomfort for some, for it is true that on occasion those who do not know God will write or perform a song that is completely consistent with the God of the Bible. Conversely, it is also possible-though perhaps less likely- that a singer who is a Christian and a devout adherent of the Word of God will create or perform a song that is inconsistent with the Bible.
Vanessa Williams' hit song, "Save The Best For Last," is an outstanding love song that embodies everything the Bible teaches us about human love. Don Henley's "Heart Of The Matter," presents loss of human love in a profoundly biblical way, addressing topics like forgiveness, grace, trust and pride. Steve Winwood's "Higher Love," challenges the listener in a most Christian way to "Think about it there must be higher love ... without it life is wasted time. ..."
While the 1978 smash single, "You Light Up My Life," was performed by a committed Christian, its message that something "can't be wrong when it feel so right" was nevertheless a dangerous and profoundly anti-Biblical one.
Rap star Hammer underwent a conversion experience in 1982 and has made no secret of his faith in Christ. On each of his records he has included a Gospel number. However, his most recent single, "Pumps & A Bump," portrays a raw, course sexuality that seems to take place far outside the bounds of marriage and seems to be based on not love, but rather, the heat of the moment. In the light of Scripture this, too, seems to be another anti-Biblical song.
In a way, this is not a new problem. In classical music, this has been dealt with for many centuries.
Sometimes a Christian composer like Johann Sebastian Bach would write a "secular" piece like his famous "Coffee Cantata." Sometimes an outspoken atheist like Hector Berlioz would compose religious works (often using Biblical texts) such as his beautiful "L'Enfance du Christ" ("The Infancy Of Christ"), or his stirring "Requiem Mass."
Are these last two works "Christian?" A typical musicologist would never even consider this question valid.
To clarify this issue, they have for centuries simply categorized music on the basis of the texts involved. When compositions contain words, musicologists classify them as either "sacred" or "secular," with no reference to the beliefs (or lack of them) of the composer or the performers.
Of course, much of the classical music is purely instrumental, without texts to give any indication of the composer's faith or intent. In these thousands of cases, musicologists have always declined to judge the works as "Christian" or not, even if the composer was a well-known believer. Thus, the Dvorak String Quartet No. 1 is considered no more of a Christian work than the Debussy String Quartet No. 1, even though Debussy was an etheist and Dvorak a devout Christian. Perhaps we could learn from the wisdom of the ages.
While an entire sub-category of "Christian music" may not make sense, what about purely religious or praise music set aside for the sole purpose of worship? There is precedent for such a distinction. In previous centuries, church traditions had special clothing or vestments which were used for the sole purpose of worship during a Sabbath service-thus a small portion of all of the clothing manufactured in any given town was set apart for purely religious purposes. There were however, no "secular" or "Christian" distinctions with regard to articles of clothing. A tunic was a tune-regardless of who produced it or wore it. In a similar way, within the framework of this new standard some music should be set aside for exclusive use by the believer to be used in worship-both personal and corporate.
Admittedly, this new standard of content-based analysis is more difficult to implement than the old, since it actually requires us to think about and evaluate music rather than accept blindly what has been approved by a musical-religious establishment. All songs must be held up for scrutiny using the innerent, flawless and timeless Word of God as the standard. It would require all arenas in our popular culture would abide by this new approach. Formerly "Christian" artists would not be pigeonholed because of their past associations while "secular" artists would not be banned from Christian audiences if they produced an edifying work. All types of artists and musicians would compete on a "level playing field" and their work judged on its own merits.
When that is accomplished perhaps it will no longer be necessary for a committee of the Gospel Music Association to convene and discuss whether a song such as Amy Grant's "That's What Love Is For," can be considered a "Christian" song, deserving of a Dove nomination. We will all recognize it instantly as a song consistent with the God of the Bible who daily teaches us about Himself by inspiring us to love Him and each other with all of our hearts.
Some will undoubtedly question the eternal value of a songs such as "Save The Best For Last," or Grant's many love songs just as for centuries many Christians have questioned the inclusion of the Song of Solomon in the canon or insisted on an allegorical interpretation.
Can such songs contribute to spiritual growth? We believe so. The Bible is not a guide for certain areas of our lives to the exclusion of others. Its principles are no less reliable in matters of love and romance than they are in matters of faith. Each area of our lives including the romantic, begs to be informed by a Biblical conscience. A Biblically informed love song whether with or without explicit references to God, by its very nature draws the listener closer to God's truth-how He wishes for His children to treat one another and thereby glorify their Father.
The future of CCM will depend largely on the willingness of its leaders to join the culture at large and bring their world view to bear on that culture. What will that future look like?
It could consist of radio stations which play not Christian or secular music, but music that fits the Neeistic model. That could mean, for example, a rock playlist featuring Guns N Roses "Sweet Child Of Mine," followed by Michael Sweet's "J.E.S.U.S," Poison's "Something To Believe In," and Ken Tamplin's "Testify."
Or a pop playlist featuring Sandi Patty's "Another Time, Another Place," Shanice's "I Love Your Smile," Janet Jackson's "Let's Wait Awhile," and Amy Grant's "El Shaddai."
Certainly, the suggestion that such stations should play Madonna, Elton John, Axle Rose's music alongside the work of Steve Camp, Amy Grant or Keith Green will be a difficult concept for many in believers to accept. Yet we owe it to ourselves to seriously examine whether the artist's personal life should be a factor in whether his or her music is allowed to be heard by the Christian community.
How are we to handle the art of a non-believer whose image or lifestyle contradicts (sometimes brazenly) Biblical principles? Does the artist's lifestyle invalidate the truth of the art he or she has presented? Does John's homosexuality make his Bibliocentric song "Healing Hand," any less true? Should Madonna's repulsive ideals and outrageous behavior invalidate the profoundly anti-abortion message of "Papa Don't Preach?" Do Janet Jackson's recent sleazy videos make her bold song urging sexual restraint "Let's Wait Awhile," any less true? Should Rose's checkered lifestyle keep the Christian community from a wholesome love song like "Sweet Child Of Mine?"
We think not. Those who follow Christ and live by His word must be discerning enough to be able to separate truth from the imperfect vessels who come bearing that truth. The argument that work created by those whose lives are less than exemplary should be shunned by Christians regardless of content is a questionable argument. We do not apply it to authors or else we wouldn't be able to read Plato, Socrates, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, John Steinbeck, John Grisham, or Michael Crichton-not to mention C.S. Lewis who in the eyes of many believers today spent one too many evenings in smoke-filled pubs with ale in one hand and a cigar in the other.
Nor do we apply such a standard to tradesmen or doctors or salesmen or people in other lines of work. Who among us has inquired about the spiritual health of the tradesman who crafted the sofa we sit on or the bed we sleep in?
Christians who understand the fallen nature of the human condition also understand general grace-that just as God accomplished His will through pagan kings in the Old Testament, so he is in control of the universe and can and does often accomplish His will through the work of those who may not know Him or live by His word.
God's truth is and will continue to be truth regardless of the flawed vessels that are used to deliver it. To insist that only artists whose lifestyles are holy be heard by Christian audiences makes a mockery of the very God who says that all have sinned and fallen short of His glory and may leads artistts to pretend that they are something other than that.
Finally, allowing "secular" and "Christian" songs to be integrated into a Bible-centered format has the potential to create positive peer pressure among "secular" artists. If such artists come to realize that their articulation of an anti-Biblical world view in their songs will result in their songs not being played on hundreds of stations acorss the nation perhaps they will think carefully during the writing process.
In addition to radio, it could feature television networks and music video channels whose offerings are consistent with a Biblical world-view.
It could feature popular magazines that view all products, artists and features through the prism of a Biblical world-view, evaluating records for instance, in addition to the artistic merit, on the artists' willingness or unwillingness to align themselves with a Biblical world-view.
It could feature record outlets that carry products that are consistent with a Biblical world-view.
In "The Body," Chuck Colson provides a road map for how such a movement should proceed: "We will be more effective when we penetrate behind enemy lines ... how does an army fight behind enemy lines? It doesn't move its forces en masse; it can't. Rather, it infiltrates small units to disrupt the enemy's communication and attack strategic targets. And that's exactly what Christians must do in a post-Christian culture."
A new generation of artists must emerge-artists who though not always surrounded by fellow troops are always in touch with the Commander. Artists who sing and play at a level comparable to their `secular' counterparts. Artists whose excellent art points to the inspiration of the Creator. Artists who are not afraid to, when the occasion presents itself, concisely talk about the Saviour. Artists who avoid moral compromise, recognizing that such behavior hands the enemy a sword with which to destroy them. Artists who refuse to tolerate evil around them and are unafraid to pass on a project, song, tour, etc., which is inconsistent with a Biblical world-view.
After Frederick Handel performed his "Messiah" before secular audiences, he was verbally assaulted from the pulpit by John Newton for 52 straight Sundays; Newton argues that it was sacriligeous to entertain with Bible-centric music in secular settings. Although they might suffer similar reactions from modern-day Newtons, today's artists must nevertheless by willing to follow Newton's example.
--------------------------------------
Mark Joseph is president of the Los Angeles-based MJM Entertainment Group. Dr. Patrick Kavanaugh is the author of several books including "The Spiritual Lives of Great Composers." Kerry Livgren was the founding member of the rock group Kansas and composer of such classic songs as "Dust In The Wind," and "Carry On Wayward Son."
Return to Comm
101 Folder