Should Christians listen to secular music?

Granted we are in “thread drift” with this discussion, I thought I would provide a sample from Scott Aniol that gives some background to what I was arguing above:

Pop culture exists only with mass media, which did not exist then. The only forms of culture that existed were high culture (the culture of the concert hall) and folk culture (the culture of common people). Most hymn tunes (then and now) are written in folk traditions. So even when people did compose new tunes, they were still in the same tradition of tunes that came before.

This is from this link.

You can search the term on Scott’s site and read more if you like.

The sheet music before the phonograph would be a kind of mass media, so don’t hold me to the phonograph as a terminus ad … something?? can’t remember the term. Starting point, how about that?

Back to the thread, its not really a question of, “should a Christian listen to secular music” - in some secular contexts, usually no problem. As worship music? No, not without adaptation, and some secular music can’t be adapted.

19th Century pop music was more than just barroom music. It was what was sung around the parlor piano in the Wilkinson household.

[Jay]

Pop music existed long before the phonograph. It existed in sheet music (Stephen Foster anybody?), parlor pianos, and player pianos. If pianos were unavailable then folks picked up a violin\fiddle or a penny whistle.

I had a really, really hard time thinking that any barroom songs in the Wild West would be anything other than Pop music. I mean, Revolutionary and Civil War soldiers had their own ditties and songs to pass the time. So limiting the definition of pop music to the radio or the phonograph seems to be a little…disingenuous. SNIP

If we wonder what popular music was like many centuries ago, good references would include the 11th-13th century collection of songs known today as “Carmina Burana.” There were dances and drinking songs, yes, and to be sure we don’t know what the meter or melody would have been (though Carl Orff did a wonderful job trying), but it is yet a good picture of medieval society. Also of note is a collection of klezmer-style Psalm singing in Hebrew that I own, which parallels the habit of Jews of dancing with the Torah scrolls, and quite frankly what God told His people to do in Psalms 149 and 150.

Coming forward to hymns, it’s worth noting that not only did Booth borrow popular songs, yes some from the taverns, but also that a lot of the older hymns do indeed use similar structure to the music used for the dances of the time. And that’s appropriate in my book—if I take Psalms 149 and 150 seriously, it tells me that somehow, God’s Person and His Word ought to occasionally communicate not just with heart and mind, but also body. The question isn’t whether the music fits a certain genre—be it bluegrass or “pop” (however well or ill defined), but whether the song communicates the Word of God to the people of God in a winsome way.

I’m appalled at your remarks! I would say more, but I must first separate from you, and then find an intermediary to relay my messages, lest I be complicit in your sin.

Tyler, I can’t be the middleman for you on this issue. Sorry!

JohnE, I see your point. Thanks for sharing, and I will patiently wait for you to join all three of us on the right side of the musical divide. ;)

Here’s a solution. If we want to know what kind of secular music is permissible for Christians to listen to all we need to do is have the music experts give us a list of secular music that fits Biblical guidelines. Kind of a musical Torah that would answer the question “Rabbi, can we listen to this?” #sarcasm

I’d be Tyler’s middleman, but I think he’s separated from me, and vice versa, many times. :^)

Regarding Ron’s idea, I’d actually welcome commentary on what kind of songs would be acceptable under, and which would violate, Biblical guidelines. For my part, if a song glorifies fornication or severe intoxication, or blasphemes God, that’s where I stop listening. No “Aqualung” or “Imagine” for me, though the musicianship is very good. Most hip-hop is out for similar reasons.

Musically, my line is not well defined, but is more or less when the tune just starts irritating me. Thrash metal qualifies, as does light rock. The worst is the modern habit of more or less sighing into the microphone while the instrumentalists are more or less filling an auditory void. Gack.

A more specific thing; there are some composers and groups who seem to think that musicality is a matter of adding more instruments playing about the same thing without any particular emphasis on how harmonies work together, or whether there are harmonies at all. It’s not sin, it’s just ineffective musicianship and composing.

And musicals? I agree with John regarding most musicals of the past 40 years or so. Bombast replaced musicality and subtlety, IMO. (note; no H there, I confess)

We need to remember that Frank Garlock was THE SOURCE for the fundamentalist war against rock music. Questioning any of his assertions was not allowed. Countless Christian school science fair projects sought to prove his claim that rock music killed plants. When they failed, students were often told it was their fault.

While his now embarrassing book and claims have been swept under the rug, the resulting prejudice against “popular” music remains. People are still condemning back beats and tritones (the devil’s interval) as sinful or at least leading to sin.

[Ron Bean]

Countless Christian school science fair projects sought to prove his claim that rock music killed plants. When they failed, students were often told it was their fault.

Were the students actually allowed to play the music while conducting these experiments? (Otherwise how were these “experiments” conducted?)

I’m picturing some bemused Christian school kids blasting Black Sabbath and Led Zeppelin in their classrooms or bedrooms, while assuring their horrified teachers and/or parents that it’s O.K., it’s all for the cause of Science.

I had been in the “popular” music business before I was saved at age 28. I went from that into teaching in a Christian school -n the late 70’s when Garlock was still a prime source. As you can imagine I had tons of questions but learned quickly to keep my mouth shut if I wanted to keep my job.

We rationalized the students use of rock music in their experiments as permissible because Dr. Garlock had listened to it to do his research and this was “science”. When their experiments failed we assumed that they hadn’t done it the proper way since Garlock had to be right.

….loud rock music kills plants, please explain to me how there is anything living on the campus of my alma mater, especially around frat row. Or any secular campus, really. And on the light side, don’t I remember reading that the “walk on the sidewalks rule” was because they were having trouble keeping grass growing in Greenville? Maybe it wasn’t the red clay after all…. :^)

Seriously, I wonder if I ought to read some of Garlock’s work simply to understand it, as it seems to be tremendously influential. Do you remember any titles, Ron?

And interestingly, I remember doing a song from “Patch the Pirate Club” where the first half of it was in a tango beat. I half wonder whether Ron Hamilton did that, and a bunch of other stuff, simply to tweak his father in law. Either that, or there are so few dancers in those circles that nobody noticed and just thought it was a cool melody.