Why I left the Conservative Music Movement
From the article:
“Truth is what we should be striving for. We are to pursue truth rather than some idealized period in the past. Yes, we should remember the past. Yes we should study the past. Yes, it is good to observe the traditions of the past and learn the songs of the past but the past should not be our ultimate focus because there is no perfect past where all the leaders and musicians had it all figured out. The past is flawed. Trying to conserve the past means accepting the errors of the past. “Give Me That Old Time Religion” is not just a bad song; it is also very bad theology.”
––––––
Ecclesiastes seems to concur:
“Say not, “Why were the former days better than these?” For it is not from wisdom that you ask this.” (Ecclesiastes 7:10 ESV)
Perhaps I’m a bit out of the loop anymore, but is this really still a thing in the broader fundamentalist/evangelical world? Isn’t the author a bit of a “Johnny-come-lately”? Some how in my mind I had thought this was no longer being actively debated or if so, only at the fringes of fundamentalism along with wire-rim glasses and the bus ministry. There’s just so many other doubtful disputations which can be used to re-direct our attentions away from the really important!
“These will be the good ‘ol days, 25 years from now.”
Someone once defined a hyper Calvinist as someone who is more enthusiastic about the adjectives than he is about the nouns.
While Christian seems to be an easily defined adjective for music, I’m finding that adjectives like contemporary, conservative, traditional, etc. are not as easily defined. I’m also finding that individual soul liberty in music is not usually tolerated.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
I think that Fundamentalism started going downhill when it forsook the singing of “Ship Ahoy” in special music, and the nail in the coffin was when the churches stopped singing “There’s a Welcome Here” to make their visitors feel special.
I am not sure we can ever recover.
:D
[Pastor Joe Roof]I think that Fundamentalism started going downhill when it forsook the singing of “Ship Ahoy” in special music, and the nail in the coffin was when the churches stopped singing “There’s a Welcome Here” to make their visitors feel special.
I am not sure we can ever recover.
A good cookie 
When singing “Ship Ahoy,” one should pause at that point of the song at the beginning of the chorus. They should then cup their hands to their mouth and hoarsely call “Ship Ahoy?” twice.
Hey, I like Ship Ahoy! I also like Chips Ahoy. But Ship Ahoy is healthier.
Seriously, Ship Ahoy can still bring a tear to my eye, especially at a funeral.
But I do think DLCreed is right for the most part:
Perhaps I’m a bit out of the loop anymore, but is this really still a thing in the broader fundamentalist/evangelical world? Isn’t the author a bit of a “Johnny-come-lately”?
There are still some hold-outs out there, though. But they tend to be kinder than they used to be. As an old Larry Norman fan in the 1970’s, I have, in more recent years, concluded that some of us are making whatever style of music an idol. And I am also among those who think we need more variety in general. The article recently posted about the value of the old songs and how the new choruses cannot compare had some merit to it.
In my opinion, a lot of this came about when we taught past generations to only listen to Christian music instead of only decent music (which, admittedly, can sometimes be hard to find in popular genres). I confess to being an advocate of Christian music only (although classical or instrumental of all sorts was fine with me). I think I erred. We have been putting too much of an entertainment burden on Christian music, a burden it was not meant to bear, IMO.
"The Midrash Detective"
There is no ‘conservative music movement’… conservative is what was there already.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
[Jim]A good cookie
Jim,
This is so illustrative of the problems in conversations like this. Chips Ahoy! is a commercialized, pre-packaged, mass produced product- the fruit of hype and marketing. Laden with preservatives, it lacks the true flavor, texture, and authenticity of a fresh, home-baked cookie. Then, you have the problem of associations. Nabisco markets Mallomars, a product that appears to be large and substantial, but when bitten into is little but fluff and sugar. The parent company has merged with RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company, further tainting the company’s already stained reputation. Your reference of Chips Ahoy! as a “good” cookie shows the appalling lack of discernment present within Christianity today. It’s time for people to rediscover the beauty of real butter, fresh eggs, flour, brown sugar, and Nestle Toll House morsels. If we continue to settle for these boxed counterfeits as “real chocolate chip cookies,” we truly deserve whatever it is we have coming—which is probably some tall glass of yuppified soy-milk to accompany our stack of cardboard Chips Ahoy!
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
Greg,
Recognizing that your post is tongue-in-cheek, I still want to comment a little more seriously.
I will certainly agree that Chips Ahoy! will compare poorly with a homemade cookie baked by someone who knows what they are doing. However, having sampled many home-baked chocolate-chip cookies over the years (I just had to sacrifice myself for research purposes), I can tell you that Chips Ahoy! cookies are indeed better than at least half of the homemade cookies I’ve tried. I think that’s the secret to its mass-market appeal — it’s better than a lot of what’s out there, and it’s certainly significantly easier than baking your own. Done right, the homemade product will win every time, but sadly, not enough people care enough about their home baking to put more than just a little effort into it.
To put this in musical terms, nothing will grate on your ears like Bach or Handel (or even great hymns of the faith) played poorly (not even poor compositions done well). If the choice is between that and something more modern played well-enough to be usable, I think I would choose the more modern as well. Of course, not all good music from the past is difficult, and not all is great, but I’m afraid the amount of musical training today not only doesn’t bode well for playing difficult but great music from the past, it doesn’t train people how to even appreciate what music might be better. There is certainly good music being made today, and the OP author is right that some avoid it just because it is “contemporary.” We ought to recognize that and learn to distinguish between schlock and quality, and by using other criteria than “it’s traditional!,” and by also recognizing that not all of what is mass-produced is bad just because it is mass-produced or has gotten “popular.”
Dave Barnhart
[Pastor Joe Roof]I think that Fundamentalism started going downhill when it forsook the singing of “Ship Ahoy” in special music…
Apostasy starts with singing “Ship Ahoy” instead of “Anchors Aweigh”. At least I’m sure that’s what my Navy family members would tell me, but I’m partial to the Marine Hymn myself. ;)
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
I won’t wade into this beyond saying that Howlett’s definition of conservative is deficient. It isn’t some sentimental nostalgia for some nonexistent good old days. I will concede however that the latter is what has often been passed off as conservatism in fundamentalist circles.
But enjoy your effigy.
But first a diversion. My mom’s first job out of college was for Keebler, and she got to watch as wonderful test cookies (real butter, real eggs, and the like) were changed to make them go well into a bag. She could not bring herself to eat them because she remembered what the first version of those cookies was.
And regarding the author’s premiss, I think you’ll find it more often than you’d think. If you listen to the older families in a lot of churches that are going to more modern music, you will hear these arguments.
Now I will agree 100% with David O that the author’s definition of conservative music is deficient. That said, it’s being used and should be confronted when it is found. As for my part, I am 100% on board with the argument that we ought to look at older music because the lesser quality stuff is mostly forgotten. I’m 100% on board with the argument that we ought to look at older music because it connects us with those who came before us in Christ. I’m 100% on board with the argument that we ought to listen to and use older music because our forebears tended to understand the tools of poetry and music better than we, and because the theology of the lyrics tends to be deeper. (if you doubt this, compare “breathe” with the shortest of the Psalms)
But if one tells me one should use music simply because it is older, that is the genetic fallacy and ought to be discarded posthaste.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
[Bert Perry]I’m 100% on board with the argument that we ought to listen to and use older music because our forebears tended to understand the tools of poetry and music better than we, and because the theology of the lyrics tends to be deeper. (if you doubt this, compare “breathe” with the shortest of the Psalms)
But if one tells me one should use music simply because it is older, that is the genetic fallacy and ought to be discarded posthaste.
Based on your descriptions of the poetry and theology of older music, it appears you give no options but to listen to older music. Is that what you mean to do???
Discussion