Steve Pettit and the Skillman family

[TylerR]

Don wrote:

Style says a lot about worldview

Not necessarily. You certainly can’t impute worldview motivations…

The point is that we can’t give into a subjective imputation of a person’s stated intent…

Where did I say anything about motivation or intent?

Style reflects worldview. It may be the actual worldview of the artist, or the worldview he is attempting to reflect for some reason or other. I made no judgement about intentions or motivations.

[dcbii]

Don Johnson wrote:

That sounds true, but I don’t think it is completely true. Style says a lot about worldview.

OK, so I’m curious if you can give me an example of a painting style that’s lewd. As an example, let’s take a painting in that style with the subject being a tree. Without changing the tree into something recognizably lewd, which would again be the content, what would make your chosen style lewd?

Style expresses worldview. It can do that in a lewd way, or it can do it in other ways. I suppose someone could make a tree lewd, I’ll not try to imagine how.

[dcbii]

Quote:

Then you aren’t judging the music. You are judging the literature.

While that’s *technically* true, I generally consider a song written with both lyrics and music as a unit.

Well, I think that’s an error. It is perhaps THE error that confuses the Christian music issue more than any other. If the lyrics and the music were truly a unit, they would be inseparable. You couldn’t have one without the other. Yet in fact they can be separated. You can judge a poem on its literary quality, and you can judge a piece of music on its musical qualities. You can judge the union of the two as well, but they can stand apart just as easily.

I grant that habits associated particular poems with particular pieces in our minds, so we can’t hear an instrumental of a well-known piece without mentally supplying the words,but that’s not the same thing as saying they are an inseparable unit. You wouldn’t be able to do that the first time you heard them.

[Don Johnson]

Well, I think that’s an error. It is perhaps THE error that confuses the Christian music issue more than any other. If the lyrics and the music were truly a unit, they would be inseparable. You couldn’t have one without the other. Yet in fact they can be separated. You can judge a poem on its literary quality, and you can judge a piece of music on its musical qualities. You can judge the union of the two as well, but they can stand apart just as easily.

I grant that habits associated particular poems with particular pieces in our minds, so we can’t hear an instrumental of a well-known piece without mentally supplying the words,but that’s not the same thing as saying they are an inseparable unit. You wouldn’t be able to do that the first time you heard them.

I agree that lyrics and music aren’t inseparable (e.g. Amazing Grace has several notable tunes), but when judging a piece for use in worship or in a church, we generally judge everything together, and I would argue that the words are the most important part, since it is the words which communicate clear truth. (Note that I’m not saying music doesn’t communicate on its own, but I’ve yet to hear a plausible way to tell clear truth or error from notes and rhythms.) The music can enhance or take-away from the words, and it has its own properties which may make it appropriate or not. That’s why it’s often judged as a unit. I didn’t mean to say they couldn’t be judged separately. However, for me, it’s much easier to dispose of a piece with inappropriate, vapid, or “vainly repetitious” words. Judging the music on its own is much more involved, and I would bet that just about any non-musicologist would be incapable of completely taking the words out of the equation. Sounds like you think anyone doing the judging of a piece of music should hear only the music first, without ever having read the lyrics. I know that at my current church, we have certainly used old hymns with newly written tunes that we would probably not have previously used, so there is some judgment of the music taking place.

I’m also curious how judging lyrics and music together is *the* error that confuses the Christian music issue. As should be obvious, churches rarely use purely instrumental music, so judgments that include both the lyrics and music will probably apply to >98% of church music. If you’re saying that the music portion can be *ignored* by some when judging them together, I’d agree that that shouldn’t happen, but I’ve yet to even visit a church (including those with music I’d never personally use) where truly *any* music is considered valid for worship. I’m sure those exist too, but I suspect there would be very few within even shooting distance of orthodox Christian doctrine. All churches I’ve attended have certainly judged the music for use, but it still seems like the judgment ends up being more like the type used by Tyler and Greg. It may not be done solely by one man, but leadership still makes those decisions. I’ve yet to hear a good, scripturally-based objective reason for choosing not to use music. It’s always based on other factors, and usually includes the subjective view of the one doing the judging.

OK, we’ve got Don saying that he can assert that style impacts worldview—the latter being a person’s general philosophical view of the world—and not be speaking to intent or motivations, which would be derived, ahem, from that person’s worldview.

Sorry, but it can’t work that way, by definition. If we say “style says a lot about worldview”, we are judging motives, committing a pretty-sounding guilt by association fallacy, and generally insulting people whose preferred musical styles are different from ours.

[dcbii]

I agree that lyrics and music aren’t inseparable (e.g. Amazing Grace has several notable tunes), but when judging a piece for use in worship or in a church, we generally judge everything together, and I would argue that the words are the most important part, since it is the words which communicate clear truth. (Note that I’m not saying music doesn’t communicate on its own, but I’ve yet to hear a plausible way to tell clear truth or error from notes and rhythms.) The music can enhance or take-away from the words, and it has its own properties which may make it appropriate or not. That’s why it’s often judged as a unit. I didn’t mean to say they couldn’t be judged separately. However, for me, it’s much easier to dispose of a piece with inappropriate, vapid, or “vainly repetitious” words. Judging the music on its own is much more involved, and I would bet that just about any non-musicologist would be incapable of completely taking the words out of the equation.

I think all of this is correct, though I am thinking more in terms of judging musical style than judging individual pieces. I would guess that most pieces you consider for your church are relatively the same in style — within a certain range, I mean.

[dcbii]

I’m also curious how judging lyrics and music together is *the* error that confuses the Christian music issue.

Well, generally speaking, the incrementalism of allowing contemporary styles into the church has been justified along the lines of, “But the words are so good.” (Or, “the theology is so rich.” or “deep” or “whatever.”)

I think the error comes when it is assumed the piece is acceptable because the words are good.

[Bert Perry]

OK, we’ve got Don saying that he can assert that style impacts worldview-

Please see my post above. Bert has trouble comprehending what I said.

Tyler put this out there:

For example:

• I think CCM is inherently unholy
• A Christian produces and performs a CCM song with theologically rich and accurate lyrics
• Therefore, the worldview of that individual is suspect because of the style
• Even though the performer is only motivated by the desire to glorify God, and performed the piece with that intent.

That is almost exactly the conclusions and positions that I came to a younger Fundamentalist, but eventually the weakness of that argument did more to get me away from traditional conservative music standards than anything else. And yes, there is a ton of junky fluff out there in CCM, but I find it interesting that many of the CCM music that remains and is used - even in the Majesty Hymnal or that is slowly becoming ‘acceptable’, like Speak O Lord or others, is almost always doctrinally solid.

Finally - and this is an old post that has been long buried in this thread - but someone (maybe Mark?) made a remark about regretting his involvement in CCM. Brother, let me put this out there for you. I went through a nasty spiritual crisis about three years ago and very nearly walked away from the faith. We changed churches, and that church used some Hillsong stuff that I had all kinds of problems with initially. But as I continued to work through what we were going through, those songs that most of us would deride as light and fluffy (and I probably would as well now) ended up providing serious comfort and encouragement to me in a way that the regular Christian music I usually enjoyed could not.

You don’t know what God is doing or did with that music, and while I’m sure that some of it was damaging to others, some of it may have helped pull others out of very difficult situations or may have even kept someone from walking away entirely. I don’t know you and don’t know what you were involved with, but don’t be quick to write off your past as a complete waste. God is still using it, if in no other way than because you are using it on this thread.

I’m trying to dredge up the appropriate Shakespeare quote from the cobwebs of my mind. Was it something like, “O consistency, thou are a hobgoblin.”?

I think Shakespeare said something like, “Consistency, thou art a rare jewel.” (Did someone else call consistency the hobgoblin of little minds?)

[G. N. Barkman]

I think Shakespeare said something like, “Consistency, thou art a rare jewel.” (Did someone else call consistency the hobgoblin of little minds?)

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds” — Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Given that the Scripture says nothing about time signature, whether music is on or off beat, major or minor keys, or structure of music, I’m going to go out on a limb keep my feet firmly attached to the ground and suggest that no reasonable interpretation of Scripture could endorse, or reject, any genre of music, any particular instrument, or any particular singing technique. The closest we can come to a Biblical description or prescription of music is found in Psalms 149 and 150, where Scripture clearly references and recommends percussive instruments and dance as something God wanted Israel to do.

Not holding my breath for the cultural fundamentalists to interpret those Psalms as written, to put it mildly.

When I was a teenager I often asked “What’s wrong with………..?” When I wasn’t viewed as a rebel, the answers given didn’t make sense. They were usually in the category of the “association” argument. When I became a pastor/Christian school principal/teacher, I became the one offering up weak answers to those “What’s wrong with….” questions. Now I’m asking the questions again and hoping for that someone can give me Biblical answers. What’s wrong with a strong beat/percussion? What’s wrong with a back beat? What’s wrong with certain styles of music (not lyrics–I figured that out when I was 13.)?

You’re only asking the question because you have a desire to rebel! Repent, sinner, and embrace that towering pinnacle of Baptist music theory … Soul Stirring Songs and Hymns.

I’ve written an article giving one line of Biblical thinking on making music choices. It will appear on P&D Tuesday morning if you are interested.