I once heard in a systematic theology class that music was instrumental in spreading the doctrine of Arianism around the early church world. The idea that music can spread a message more quickly is not a novel concept by any means, but a lack of dialogue regarding the issue has created some extremist views both to the right and left regarding music and the power it wields within church culture.
I often find myself rolling my eyes and defending the idea that specific genres of music are not demonic in origin, and that nit picking would very likely lead us to the conclusion that some of our "old fashioned" songs were born from music that was socially rebellious once upon a time.
Of late, I have been more concerned with the acceptance of the status quo among musicians and artists within the church. I feel that we are spending more time making congregations comfortable and at ease with regards to the music rather than singing the messages that are being preached from the pulpit. Mavis Staples once stated that her father changed their family's repertoire that they took on the road after hearing Dr. Martin Luther King. She credits her father with saying, "If he can preach it, we can sing it."
There are times and seasons for everything, and I am well aware that we have a responsibility to minister with song to communicate peace and healing to hurting people. We also have a responsibility to take the convicting message, whatever the subject, and remind the congregation that the Word doesn't change or go away.
Does anyone else feel like there is a need for a more "activist" approach to our music on occasion in order to reflect the values and principles that are being preached to us?
No comments:
Post a Comment