CHRISTIAN MUSIC: AN INDICATION OF WHERE WE ARE HEADED

by

Dr. Bruce Barnes

            The story of the “Pied Piper” is a classic where people hire a flutist to rid their village overrun with mice. After accomplishing this great feat and the villagers failing to pay him his rightful due, he uses his music to cause the children to follow him out of the village. The children gleefully follow the Piper, but left behind are bewildered parents. They become dumbfounded at what the Pied Piper’s music has done, take their children from them.

            Music has a convincing and alluring quality; it in some way moves almost everyone. As in the story of the Pied Piper, music can move people happily to believe and to react in ways that may or may not be the best for them. Musicians are now “piping” many new sounds in the church, and the veiled sounds many happily embrace are slowly leading the younger generation to a dangerous place: a place where many in the older generation do not want them to go!

            The sounds of “light rock,” “rap,” “rock-n-roll,” “hard rock” (all included in the term, Contemporary Christian Music [CCM]), Country Gospel, and even the varying sounds of Southern Gospel represent the varying musical choices available to today’s believer. A mixture of these styles is even being found in our churches and colleges, and we are steadily moving away from our musical roots—from the spirited and heartwarming traditional style to the entertainment-driven modern styles. A grave danger lurks behind this freedom of musical styles that we might not readily see.

Historical trends indicate that our musical choices will eventually affect our theology.

            In the book Escape from Reason, Francis A. Schaeffer (a noted and respected historian) shows historically how philosophical changes among free thinkers eventually affect various disciplines. For example, Schaeffer establishes a time line showing how secular existentialism (ethical thought based on free human behavior) leads to religious existentialism; that is, the free thinking that drives secular ethics will eventually show up in religious thinking and ethics. He goes further to reveal that the existential ideas of secular philosophers have increasing affect on the following disciplines and in the following order: philosophy→art→music→general culture →theology. Although theology is the last affected, it eventually is. Also note that one of the earlier indicators historically that changes are appearing in thought and experience is in music. Philosophical thought changes in the secular realm; then, artists and musicians begin to reveal those changes through their arts of experimentation, and this affects general culture. Therefore, theological beliefs gradually change because the general culture surrounding theology changes.

            This is true not only for the world but also for the church. Eventually, the experience founded in the musical sounds of today will affect the general culture of the church; that is, our youth will grow up under an experience-based influence that is not as clearly distinguishable as Christian as did the generation before them. In the years to come it will be the general culture of the church that will form the basis of thought through which interpretation and application of theology will come.

            We must begin opening our eyes to the dangers ahead for us. We are already on the slide because our music is changing in form to include and mirror the world’s form. Just as in the times of the Renaissance, we must have revival to bring orthodoxy back to church music. Many of us proclaim how we will not let “Christian Rock” into our churches because we recognize the necessity of separating ourselves from the world. We correctly tell our young people how wrong it is to put the pure gospel message to the world’s corrupt sound. We preach against the worldliness of “Dance Music,” “Jazz,” and “Country Music”; yet, we allow variations of these forms into our churches and colleges through swing-time instrumentals and the many new variations emerging in Southern Gospel songs. Our normal reaction to this is, “Well, I like it.” That is the same reasoning young people have for listening to “Christian Rock.” Personal likes and dislikes have nothing to do with it.

            These worldly styles provide us a definite historical indication to our direction. If we do not cut off the influence of the secular, we will continue to see the general culture of our churches change. Additionally, we will be responsible for allowing this generation to slide closer toward worldliness and liberalism. We need a revival of righteousness, not merely to change our songs but to help us renew our sense of right and wrong. This will change our philosophy, and this renewed philosophy will help us correct our songs. Note just how this process is presently happening in our churches and our movement.

1.         Consider the influence of liberal thought on musical choices.

            Free thinking in philosophy is the first influential change according to Schaeffer’s historical pattern to theological deviation. Liberalism represents today’s philosophical and theological “free thinkers.” All areas of theology and experience are open to the critique and influence of the liberal mind; therefore, changing beliefs or practices are common place within philosophical and theological liberalism. The reason? no Biblical foundation for truth. Truth, to the liberal, is relative; it is what one can understand or experience right now This system of thought promotes changes and new ideas, and the areas most susceptible to that change are the arts: the very areas that seek new ideas and concepts as a source for creativity.

            Part of the liberal philosophy related to music is the view that musical style is amoral; that is, it is only a vehicle. In this line of reasoning, the vehicle is no more significant than the type of car in which one would choose to carry passengers. It is just a vehicle, and if a “sportier” looking vehicle can attract more riders, then the choice of that vehicle is insignificant because of the purpose it serves. Although the logic of this argument appears reasonable, this frame of mind begins with an incorrect premise.

            The musical style in which a message appears has significance to communication, for the style is carrying the message. Even if the message itself is genuinely pure and uplifting, an unclean carrying case will eventually affect the purity of the message and application of the message to the heart.

            The lesson that free musical style promotes is that the result is more important than the means of presentation—thus, “the end [the result] justifies the means [the style].” This idea further implies a principle that any musical pathway arrives at the same destination. This destination is normally reaching people, and, of course, reaching people glorifies God. Although the goal appears noble and is most likely genuinely motivated, this goal is fallacious in believing that any means that produce results (whether true or misinterpreted as true) is valid. In essence this suggests that we glorify God through results and not means necessarily. This notion is not consistent with Scripture (I Cor. 10:31) or with God’s nature.

2.         Consider the sway of popular culture on musical choices.

            According to Schaeffer, the next effect will be that the mediums of art and music will sway popular culture. Undeniably, this influence has and is taking place in the world’s realm. The church’s culture is no less susceptible to a similar influence as it opens itself increasingly to forms associated and recognized as worldly. Since the art of musical expression lends itself to innovation and experimentation, song writers may easily drift toward the popular. The reason is understandable (although not entirely acceptable) because musical innovation generates newness, excitement, and interest where traditional church music emphasizes similar sounds, patterns, and methods. Consequently, the traditional music may not call attention to itself or elicit curiosity by the populace. The danger, however, lies in the fact that the musical innovation of popular culture becomes the guide for Christian music rather than the church. This is not to say that new music is bad simply because it is new, but music should not be characterized as “new” in the sense of worldly sounding. Music can be new but not affected by the worldly character of the day.

            A helpful guide in making proper choices is that of considering the source or fountain from which the musical style comes. Does the style originate within the church or out of the world? That is, does the style have the sounds of the world or the church? Although making this determination might seem difficult at first, the importance of the decision is critical. The church must not merely keep an arm’s length from the world musically, thinking that this will cause it to be separate from the world. If this is the church’s ideology, and as the world slides farther from Christian principles, the church will soon stand where the world once did and accept what at once it would not. This is already beginning to happen.

3.         Consider the danger of people making musical choices based on experience.

            As people are saved out of the world and its popular culture, they will confront their own “likes” and “dislikes” (formed in the world) with the “likes” and “dislikes” of the church’s culture. It will become a battle of propriety, of that which is appropriate for the church. What is unfortunate now is that many of our young people are growing up in a church culture that the worldly sound increasingly marks.

            Because the guidelines for making a choice of musical style fail to be defined clearly, most Christians approach the decision by the criteria of what he or she personally likes. Although this seems—at first—to be the most logical method for a believer to make a choice of styles, the basis for the choice is ultimately faulty. One’s personal “likes” and “dislikes” might be more a product of experience in the world rather than the proper model of acceptability for the church. Therefore, it becomes easy for one to like the upbeat, toe-tapping, country sound of the new Southern Gospel or any of the light to hard rock CCM styles because it appeals to the enjoyment of the flesh more than to the true uplifting of the spirit.

            Now statements like those above can appear offensive, but please consider the following. Why have we changed our musical style from thirty years ago and beyond? Some people feel that the music of that era is stilted and unexciting. Yet, now seemingly, some must have the sound of swing-time bands and vocalists to make it “speak to the heart.” Why could the church music speak to the heart three and four decades ago but not today? We have changed! Many churches today that still “preach” against Rock Music have silently let it in the church door through the lighter sounds of CCM. We must be reminded that the Holy Spirit is the One Who speaks to the heart! Our responsibility is that of using a musical medium through which He can work.

            The problem of making musical choices based on personal likes and dislikes is probably attributable to two reasons. (1) Our culture has become an entertainment-oriented culture, and this emphasis has bled over into the church approach; (2) The criteria for our selection of musical styles have become based on personal desires rather than on church or Scripture-based principles. We do not want to believe that the world has affected (infected) us; yet, however much we might protest the idea, the worldly forms are definitely showing up on all levels.

4.         Consider the fallacy that the world’s musical form will cause a greater harvest of souls.

            An additional problem is the philosophy that by using the sound of the popular culture, the church will reach more people, especially more young people who like the popular styles. After all, is not reaching people the most important thing we do? God’s Word and His principles are never at odds. God does not need questionable methods to “make” the gospel effective. We must remember that we are to give glory to God in all areas and through all means. “Whether therefore ye eat or drink or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God” (I Cor. 10:31). This Scripture clearly teaches that God is as concerned about our method of service as we believe He is concerned about the results. Also, we should be reminded that results are always to be left up to God, for He alone gives the increase (I Cor. 3:7). Since the results are God’s, our main concern must be that which glorifies Him in purity of method; this is the realm that God has left for us to control.

            The “greater harvest of souls” argument is also a fallacy promoted by the ecumenical movement. Ecumenism would have Christians believe that compromise in “small” areas can result in a greater harvest. In the ministry, compromise does not remain in “small” areas; it bleeds over into other areas. If we are willing to compromise in one point, we have proven the susceptibility to allow compromise in other areas. Our ministries will gradually go on the selling block, and the selling price will be compromise to the greatest pressure. With God’s help, we must allow Him to take care of the results. We must put our prayerful concern and labor of emphasis on glorifying Him with the best our ministries can offer Him.

CONCLUSION: 

            I have decided not to wait for the musicians to speak out and to set the musical record straight, for we already hear the strength of their voices in their musical selections. If there is a solution to enact, it falls solely at the pulpit. Far too long we preachers have hidden behind the excuse, “Well, I don’t know music.” If that is the problem, then it is time we learn.

            This trend will not stop until we make it stop because church musicians work under the direction of the pastor. If the preacher falls under the burden of this need, practical and Christ-glorifying changes can take place in this area of church ministry to influence a return to spirited music that glorifies God in style. If this would begin to happen on a local level (church-by-church), the effect will be felt on a national level. The future of our churches and ultimately our theology depends on it!