Equipping The Saints or Fundamentalist Fantasy Camp?
by Greg Linscott
We Fundamentalists need to open our eyes to the pragmatism that is right in front of our faces.
What has been presented to us in the past as legitimate music ministry training is now being shamelessly marketed as a chance to hobnob with some of your biggest Fundamentalist worship stars. Is it really any wonder that many who have grown up under the influence of Fundamentalists are either leaving for churches that employ a slicker and more contemporary pragmatism, or trying to implement those trendy methods in their own churches? Is it any wonder that the folks putting this on were right at home at the “Pastors School” at First Baptist of Hammond this year?
Men and brethren, this is shameful and must be addressed.
Greg Linscott 
Ai-yai-yai.
Unbelievable. Truly unbelievable. 😦
I’m neither “men” nor ” brethren,” but I could not agree with you more–this IS shameful, and it needs urgently to be addressed.
I’m not entirely sure that I follow. I think the whole baseball theme is goofy, childish, and somewhat embarrassing, but I’m not sure it is pragmatic. It’s not quite the same as using worldly methods to reach the lost for Jesus, since this is targeting church musicians. I’m with you in that it makes me a little uncomfortable, but I’m not sure I see it as being as serious as it seems that you do. Can you develop your concerns in more detail?
I should add that my perception is perhaps being influence by the participation of Dr. Cook, whom I respect as an exemplary music minister.
I don’t think you’re asking me, Phil, but my take is this: MM puts out clever ads for their Musicollege. I get that. I imagine that the seminars themselves must be very profitable—I have a tremendous amount of respect for Warren Cook and Jerry Maxwell, for example, and would love to sit in on their workshops. However, comparing worship to “hitting one out of the park” is at least ill-advised, I think, especially when there is already such a tendency in our day to make music all about performance. The idea that a nice choral piece sung in a worship service is a “home run” just seems to magnify that. Maybe I’m just oversensitive, but I don’t like it.
And don’t get me started on the Pastor’s College. If MM did the same thing at Grace Community Church, there would be a revolution. The difference? Though one is orthodox, the other is fundamental.
Ugh.
Chris,
The picture doesn’t specify what they mean by “hitting one out of the park;” however, the inside does say “hit a home run with new ideas!” I don’t think there’s anything sinister about that.
Greg,
To be honest, I think this post is way off the deep end.
I wonder if you’d be so concerned about this brochure if these people had chosen to take a stand and not go to Hammond. Perhaps you’re seeing what you want to see here.
Admittedly, I don’t have that same level of appreciation for some of the BJ men as you do, not having sat under their ministries as you and CHris have. I can also understand the why someone might say this is somehow connected to my distaste for the recent appearance at Hammond.
However, that being said, I do think:
1. Pragmatism is not limited to evangelistic methods only. In the second photo I posted, “revival” is assured to those who attend. I understand that they might not mean that in the sense of a spiritual awakening, but the language is vague enough to leave open the suggestion that such a movement can be generated and manipulated, and furthermore, we can teach you to do it in your own church more effectively.
2. The whole idea of a musical “big leagues” reinforces an unhealthy performance mentality. On the page that contains the registration form, we are told that our musicians can “PLAY IN THE BIG LEAGUES!!!” They will “score big with fresh musical creations,” be mentored by “all-star coaches,” and “discover new strategies.” Defend it as clever advertising if you will, but as I understand it, one of the things that Fundamentalists generally have a problem with when they criticize CCM is a performance-based, entertainment-driven approach. I fail to see how this is any different. Furthermore, as a pastor, the last thing I want from my church’s music is to “score big,” or give the impression that those who labor faithfully in such ministry are somehow “stuck in the farm system.” We serve the Lord Christ- this is not about competition for prominence. I do not believe music is something we do in church to create an atmosphere, or to “prime the pump” so to speak. While I am certainly not against training or improving quality in music, what is promised in this circular goes far beyond those limits.
Chris is on target- if this were an advertisement for a Falwell conference, or something “PurposeDriven(R),” we in
The Movement” would generally be appalled. I submit that we rationalize, defend or excuse because it is “our own”- and I say that to our shame.
As a former MM employee (for over 5 years), and in keeping with what I learned under those there, I have to say, that every year they try for a “catchy” way to promote music college. That’s it. Now, grant it, some years it does seem pretty goofy, as I thought the barbershop theme was from last year.
I can give “testimonials” of many frustrated children’s and adults’s music leaders from churches of all sizes that would write in or call just to thank MM for providing helps in these areas through this seminar. And, as a Patch Club director myself, we have had 2 families come to know the Lord and attend our small church as a result of children attending our clubs.
I’m staying out of the argument of the afore mentioned appearance (as a mother of 4 now, I’m out of the loop on that one).
I truly believe that this was done in fun for the sake of promotion, and not as extreme as many have taken it to be. I’m sure that some could say that nothing be done “in fun”, but that’s another topic for another day. Maybe we are all just a little “jumpy” since a respected brother’s exodus from fundamentalism?
I happen to attend CBC in Columbus, Ohio, and I know Jenny Whitehead, as well as her dad, Jerry Maxwell. Both have been given extraordiary musical talents. However, this is such a silly absurd idea to market MM.
From one who sits in the pew!
DM!
1. I understood “revival” to be a reference to the revival of a church’s music ministry, but you’re right that it is vague.
2. I think “pragmatism” needs defining. We’re all pragmatic on certain levels—and rightly so! Not being pragmatic within biblical boundaries is called foolishness.
3. I don’t see how this demonstrates “a performance-based, entertainment-driven approach” to the ministry of music. I know for a fact that this is the furthest thing from being an accurate description of several of these individuals, and giving the benefit of the doubt to the others, I’m inclined to think it doesn’t represent them accurately either. Perhaps the one who came up with the “clever” idea didn’t think through the potential nuances that some would read into the analogy. I doubt that they would owe your words as their intention.
4. Since this must be addressed, I’m curious what your plans are in doing so. Perhaps contacting them would clear up the ambiguities as to their intent in some of the language and help them to be more discerning in the future. I’d be interesting to find out their response.
Thanks for the responses. Time is short at this moment (family calls!), but a couple of quick points:
Rebecca and Phil- I am having a difficult time distinguishing the nuances of where legitimate “fun” ends and inappropriate “entertainment” begins. “Performance based” is a similar source of consternation. Are Fundamentalists not entertaining because we generally don’t hold a microphone when we sing? I ask a bit facetiously, but what does make the difference?
Rebecca- Yes, maybe I am a little sensitive after the Z announcement. But really- when you look at this and other similar innovations in our ministries (I was a youth leader/pastor for nearly a decade), I wonder- is it really a big leap for someone like Joe when this is the kind of thing he has been party to over the course of his ministry life?
Phil,
As far as addressing it, I don’t so much that MM needs to address it as much as those of us in local churches. Frankly, the problem is bigger than this one circular or one company- I take this as indicative of bigger issues. Personally, I’m addressing it mining some previously undiscovered treasures such as Olney Hymns and the Psalter. I’m encouraging our church people to use hymnal in their personal and family worship- and sing in their homes. I’m giving my children a musical diet that includes more hymns and less- much less- “Sardines and Saltines,” “I Just Wanna Be A Sheep (BAAAA),” and so on.
Re: your “a performance-based, entertainment-driven approach” statement:
The brochure is not intended to present their philosophy of music, though it certainly shouldn’t be inconsistent with it. MM generally uses creative and admittedly “silly” means to advertise this conference. It is merely intended to be a fun way of making people aware of the conference. The conference itself is heavily focused on member participation with long reading sessions and all members being part of a choir.
Are you an alumnus of Majesty MusiCollege? If not, I’d encourage you to visit some year before drawing concrete conclusions.
Jason-
My thoughts exactly. Thank you for saying what I was trying to much more clearly.
Greg-Nothing replaces the hymns and psalter, and I completely agree about including them in family altar.
Please attend before you write the whole thing off. And while I believe outward appearances are important…you can’t judge a book by it’s cover. Or in this case, some graphic designer’s idea of themes and slogans.
I have attended Majesty’s MusicCollege, and I have drawn concrete conclusions. I appreciate the concerns being expressed by Pastors Linscott and Anderson and fully concur with them.
I will confess- I have not attended a MM event like this one. That being said, I have participated in a couple of Frank Garlock-led choirs, attended a series of workshops on song-leading taught by Kurt Woetzel,and grew up listening to Patch cassettes. My dad led our church choir in “Born to Die” when it was still hot off the presses- so I don’t think I’m completely uninformed.
But again, let me say that it isn’t just about MM- though they are obviously serving as a pointed illustration here- and their continued calculated consorting with the Hammond crowd does little to reassure me of their discernment. As I said before, I am more concerned with the pragmatism we often excuse in the name of “fun.” As we raise yet another fundamentalist generation on “harmless fun,” even as we watch many members of the previous one walking out our doors in pursuit of ministry that is essentially more “fun,” it seems prudent to me to examine the connections.
If I’m understanding you correctly, the substance of your complaint is 1) you believe this advertising theme is pragmatic, and 2) you’re uncomfortable with the idea that certain musicians are in the “big leagues” because you feel this promotes an entertainment attitude. Am I understanding you correctly?
1) Pragmatism. Could you explain exactly how you believe this advertising theme is pragmatic?
2) Entertainment. Is entertainment always wrong? Is it always wrong to use music as entertainment? Is the Wilds wrong to use music in their Fun Time? Is entertainment always wrong in a church setting? Is advertising an event that will be held in a church to train people for work in a church and doing that advertising with entertainment wrong? Does doing this mean that the approach to worship is entertainment based?
I understand that you and a few others here are bothered by this, but I’m just trying to get down to the substance of your disagreement.
Definitely not egalitarian! Don’t let Joe see it.
Maybe it is a prequel to an upcoming Patch the Pirate–“Patch goes to the Big Diamond”!
Much ado about nothing. It’s called a theme. It’s creative. It’s a little quirky. It’s harmless. Garlock is all about equipping music leaders in local churches. I’m on the record for not agreeing with everything he says and does, but this seminar is really a very practical, not pragmatic, series of workshops for the church musician. It’s very similar to what the Wilds does in their music conference, just a little flashier on the brochure.
“After further review…” (Oh, that’s football. My bad.)
I agree that the brochure is probably not a fair representation of the actual seminar (though MM choose it to communicate something, I imagine). I’m sure I could learn much from the seminar that would benefit the church I pastor. Much.
Further, we use the Majesty Hymnal and continue to enjoy it, though we supplement it often.
Anyway, I’m not sure “pragmatic” is the word I’d choose. I just see it this way:
* I like the idea of improving the way we worship in song.
* I like the idea of not taking ourselves too seriously—of being silly. (Think “YoBF Boyz,” Aniol’s b-day,etc.)
* I just don’t like combining the two.
(Of course, this is coming from a guy who wrote a children’s curriculum entitled “Buckaroo Bible Club,” so my credibility may be suspect.)
Jason,
I can live with your assessment, though I have tried to communicate in the comments especially that the problem, to me, is bigger than what I see in this advertisement. Let me address your questions:
Could you explain exactly how you believe this advertising theme is pragmatic?
Sure. It’s trying to draw people in with something other than what is supposed to be the focus of what they are there to accomplish. There is an assumption that whatever substance is being offered won’t be appealing enough to bring people in- the strength of the “product,” if you will, won’t be sufficient enough to stand on its own merits.
This is a major problem- particularly when we consider that the target audience are those who are supposed to be leading others in worship and music ministry.Have we grown so “bored”- have the riches of Christ become so commonplace, that we have to use devices such as this to generate appeal amongst those who are supposed to be teaching and equipping the saints in song? What does this reveal about what is important to the ones putting on this event? What does it reveal about the priorities and values of those of us to whom it is assumed it will appeal to?
Is entertainment always wrong? Is it always wrong to use music as entertainment…
I understand the question. I’m not sure I can answer that in articulate fashion myself at this stage. What I can say is that if there is indeed a place for it, it is certainly a much smaller place than it has been given in most Fundamentalist churches. We have taken great pains, particularly in children’s and youth ministry, to insure that music is as fun as we can make it (without, of course, drums and vocal sliding and the like). This also is very evident in our evangelistic use of music (which is not a recent innovation, as I’m sure we all know). I believe it is wrong how the things that should be most dear to us as believers and distinctive to our faith are often diminished in our music- hidden in clichéd language, masked by light and trite musical styles.
I have often challenged those I preach to to consider asking a different question than “is (whatever) always wrong?” or “what’s wrong with (fill in the blank)?” Perhaps the better question we need to ask is “what is right or good about this?” “how is this shaping my values and affections, as well as those of whom I influence?” Our tendency, particularly in Fundamentalist treatment of the music conversation, has been to reduce things to a list of acceptable and non, whether it is individuals, music publishers, or stylings and methods. I submit that this example illustrates how that kind of compartmentalized thinking can contribute to the diminishing of our overall purpose for music that pleases God and edifies the saints- as opposed to entertaining them. I will freely acknowledge that perhaps this wasn’t a deliberate, calculated move on the part of those at MM. But if it wasn’t, isn’t it tragic that they have not examined their intentions enough to understand how this might actually diminish their purpose rather than aiding it? Isn’t it a shame that many people in ministry positions in Fundamentalist churches will embrace the offerings and methods of institutions like MM (and others you mention) without really having reflected on why this is or isn’t a good idea?
You mentioned you wanted to know the substance of the disagreement. I will post some resources that have been helpful to me in thinking through these matters.
Thanks for the feedback.
Random thoughts:
I live daily on the “marketing” side of things in ministry as a graphic designer. I tend to think this was a creative idea that was doomed from the beginning. There is always the danger of being too cute and I think MM demonstrated poor judgment in putting this out.
Having said that it is rather interesting to see how people are coming to their defense.
Since when do we have to actually have to give the benefit of the doubt and be familiar with a ministry before we cut ’em off at the knees?
If I listed off those I listen to, and who influences me in regards to music, I’m sure many who would defend MM for this promotional piece would categorically write them off without knowing anything about their ministries.
It also strikes me that an organization who is so precise in their definitions of “proper” worship can be so sloppy in communicating with a piece like this.
Why do they feel it is so necessary to be “catchy” anyway?
What if this was for a pastor’s conference? Would there be stronger feelings against it then?
–end of random thoughts.
That list of resources I mentioned can be found here.
It seems to me that this is about more than the brochure. The brochure is simply an example of the differences in approach to the matter of worship. For some of us, it seems jarringly incongruous to promote a conference designed to help churches worship properly (biblically, with excellence, etc.). It seems implausible that the spirit of a conference gathered in this way can produce the kind of spirit we desire as we gather to worship.
The word that keeps coming to my mind is gravitas. The brochure communicates lightness and friviolity, whereas worship shouldn’t. I will readily concede that this is a conference, not a worship service, so it is being designed to be lighter and more enjoyable for the participants (camp-like). But I, for one, quite often get the sense that people trained in this manner don’t always recognize the difference.
The differences are deeper than the brochure. The brochure simply illustrates the preservation of a gimmicky, pep rally kind of approach to worship. That’s why some of it fits in Hammond. Thankfully, not all of the instructors agree with this, so there will no doubt be beneficial aspects as well.
FWIW, maybe they could schedule a showdown between Captain Patch and Mr. Buckaroo. I’d love to see that!
Transparency is way overrated.
Couldn’t resist. How do you think this would go over?
See This
Dave,
That was superb. I’m so glad you are saying things like this.
It appears that once again we fundamentalists are a day late…
And (more self-incrimination) a dollar short…
Ben Wright has Shannon’s graphic posted here.
Chris,
Does that mean that you use the Cowboy Bible for your Buckaroo Clubs?
Nice. For the record, they copied me. And per Dr. Z’s lecture, I think a lawsuit is probably justified since my livelihood is at stake. I may pray over it and see how I feel.
BTW, I’m not sure your “Sparky” is a whole lot more dignified than my cowboy. People who live in glass houses…
(And Majesty Music gets off the hook due to infighting among would-be critics.) 😀
same smell, different style of music.
Unfortunately, there are few churches that really have a philosophy of music that is firmly founded on theology. Those who actively denigrate the worship music crowd and say the CGM is all about entertainment have used music like that promoted by Majesty to engender a similar professional manufactured worship aire in their music program in the name of “excellence”
Perhaps they have a theological foundation of what worship should be, but the practice many times is built on the sand next to the beautiful foundation. Just because you have one, doesn’t mean your practice reflects that intellectual “knowledge”
The link should work now. Working with print media I am used to working with a different color space (geek speak) than for the web.
Click Here
I was wondering about Buckaroo myself….
Hmmm… Perhaps the most disconcerting fact about all of this is… I wonder if we would market a preaching seminar like this? Or, how about a theological seminar, or a missions seminar? Yet, we will market in this manner a seminar dealing with church music which, may we not forget, is all about congregational worship, proclamation, and edification.
This is an outworking of the low view of church music held to by Majesty Music, and it reflects a very poor understanding of the nature of what they are trying to accomplish.
No informed, serious pastor would go to a seminar on preaching that was advertised like this… No informed, serious theologian would go to a theological seminar marketed like this. And I can guarantee you no serious church musician would attend a seminar marketed like this. Yet, there will be lots of people there. What a sad commentary on fundamentalist music.
Not sure about that comparison, Andrew. Most preaching, theological, and missions seminars are exactly as dull and boring as they are marketed to be.
Welcome aboard, Andrew!
WOW…..I can’t believe people are complaining about this. People call THIS pragmatic? I would just call it “well done”. Too often much of what churches put out is tacky and embarrassing. I’ve always believed that if it’s Christian it should be better.
BTW, I don’t even support MM. Way too conservative for me. But to criticize this blows me away. I’ve heard people throw “pragmatic” around but had no idea this is the kind of stuff they are talikng about. What should they do? Use a memeograph machine?
I used to hear that a lot “if it’s Christian it should be better.” Isn’t the problem with that statement that it does not include the definition of “better.” In other words, isn’t it a “begging the question” kind of statement?
I don’t think Greg is complaining that the material contains professional quality photographs or that it was printed with state of the art printing machinery (instead of on a memeograph). He’s complaining (I think) about the gestalt of the thing — what have the professionals/quality producers actually produced? What have they said (in word and image)? What is the tone communicated?
Perhaps this will make my point more clearly. I don’t think Greg would be complaining about the photography and printing quality if this were an ad for a baseball camp.
Brochure should have been on a white sheet of paper in Times News Roman (font) 12 point only with a very conservative use of bold. Honestly this is worth arguing about! No wonder many care little for us and have such a negative view of Christ. Wonder what Paul would have thought about all this? (Sitting back ready to get pummled)
I have attended MusiCollege 4 times and I am going to be attending again in a few weeks. And, I am an “informed church musician.” My dad has taught my brothers and sisters and myself to “chew fish and spit bones” all of our lives. I do not agree with everything MM promotes. I do not believe that childrens “ministries” are appropriate for church services. (we have a family integrated church, aka no Sunday School) I always just ignore the session of Patch the Pirate club. But, I have learned a lot from those that God had given great talent to, and have loved every minute of it.
Some day Christians are going to learn to have “love on for an other” and stop being so petty. I am not saying to the attitude that anything goes, but to take a stand for doctrine (Which has been forgotten in most churches, and that definitely includes “fundies”)and let little things go. Some day we all need to learn that none of us has all the answers so we just might be able to learn from others.
Here is a link (at least I will try to attach it) for a sermon my dad preached at a pastors meeting in March. I think it has a great deal to do with this topic.
http://brandedforchrist.org/sermons/Fundamentalism.htm
Rhonda,
I’m heading off to pick up my daughter from her very first week of camp and so will be gone most of the day. In the meantime, I suggest reading the following entry “About Criticism”:
http://remonstrans.net/index.php/2007/07/06/about_criticism
I read the article on criticism. I fully agree. But, I think there should be a limit to what/how much we critique.
As a three-time alumn of MusiCollege, I think this is rather absurd. I have no doubt it’s in good intention, but there’s nothing wrong with a quirky advertisement, and I can tell you, having attended this particular one, that they hardly even mentioned the “theme” in the actual MusiCollege. Their classes are entirely about performing music in a way that honors the Lord, including having quality.
Harrison,
First of all, thanks for visiting.
Secondly, assuming for the moment things are as you say, how does this advertisement communicate these aims in a way that is true and accurate? If one wants to honor the Lord- make Him prominent, if you will- it would seem there would be much better means of accomplishing this than, well, never mentioning that fact in the promotion of the event and going so far as to obscure it by introducing a notion of participants being better equipped to (and I quote) play in “the big leagues.”
Judging from your comment, I don’t expect that you will agree at first consideration. But I would challenge you to give this matter some thought and contemplation. You almost seem to be assuming that the Fundamentalist “music stars” are above criticism. As I see this advertisement, I am forced to ask myself (among other things), “has the task of exalting the name of my God in song become so dull, so commonplace, that it requires such frivolous enhancements to increase the appeal?”
But let me ask you, Harrison- would you promote the primary gatherings of your church in such a manner? What would you think of a man who invited you to the joining of he and his bride in holy matrimony in such a fashion? What would it communicate to you about how he viewed the occasion? Of the honor and respect he had for his bride?
Chew on it, my friend.
Greg,
First of all, let me apologize and ask forgiveness for the tone of my original comment. It was not at all Christ-like, and rather harsh.
I do not believe the “fundamentalist music stars” are at all above criticism. However, having met many of them, and sat under their teaching, I am confident that their intentions are completely God-centered. At the beginning of one of the MusiColleges that I attended, Dr. Garlock got up and told us all that we weren’t there to become good musicians, we were there to learn how we could best honor God with our music. Part of that is having quality to your music, yes, but there is more to it.
As to the advertisement itself, frivolous, yes. However, Christ was evidently not above frivolous things, seeing as how he turned water into wine. (Or, as some people interpret it, grape juice. I myself have no opinion on that, as it misses the main point of the miracle.) I would call that of relatively little consequence compared to, say, raising the dead, at least to us humans and our very poor understanding of God’s purpose. To say that this is akin to advertising for people to come into your church, particularly those unsaved ones, I don’t think is necessarily an accurate or fair comparison. No, this is not necessarily “Scriptural.” However, simply because an advertisement is not covered in Bible verses does not make it wrong. For example, do you think a Christian car salesman should advertise his business merely by the fact that he is a Christian? He makes just as much a witness in his character as a salesman as a musician does in his quality of music, particularly if it is known that he is a Christian.
As to what I’d think of a man who “advertised” his wedding this way… well, to be honest, I’d think that he and his bride-to-be are really big baseball fans, and perhaps a little strange. Beyond that, I don’t think I’d think much of anything. We can’t make judgments on things like that outside of the authority of Scripture.
Finally, let me address the “superstars” issue again. I have extensive experience as a church musician, playing instruments, leading a choir, singing, and leading congregational singing as a fill-in. There is nothing more damaging to a church’s witness in their music than when it is lacks quality combined with a spirit that glorifies God. If I go to another church, and I see that they are clearly settling for second-best in their music, that instantly tells me that the church does not care about how their image reflects the God they claim to serve. In my church, we have some people who want to be a part of the music ministry, but they are unwilling to put their best into it. Therefore, when they participate, it is often more of a detraction than a blessing. It is not vain boasting to place the type of things in an advertisement that Majesty did here when it is true. I do not agree with them wholeheartedly. (For example, a former member of our church, Kimberly Smith, has written three books on the fallacies of CCM. They are excellent books. However, she and her family are Calvinists, and I know that some of the other people Majesty works with are the same. That concerns me somewhat.) However, they and the others like them (such as the Wilds, Soundforth, etc.) are unquestionably the most educated, trustworthy, and qualified Christian musicians in the country. To make large issues out of these sorts of things is, I believe, straining at a gnat to swallow a camel.
Just one more note as regards advertising the church. Our church hosted a basketball tournament run by National Hoops and Mike Washer, an evangelist. One of our biggest sellind points was that if the kids won that tournament, and then won the regional, they’d get to go to the NBA All-Star game and play at half-time. We also told them that they had to attend the preaching, however, and they did. We had about 25 kids there, and, if I remember correctly, 23 prayed to be saved. I personally led one of those kids to the Lord, and while most of them have not been back, we have had contact and are keeping up the communication. To put the icing on the cake, almost the ENTIRE basketball team of the school district in which our church is located prayed for salvation, including their coach. Now, if we had merely advertised preaching, do you think they would have come and been exposed to the Gospel message? We were not being dishonest, we were merely appealing to what we knew would attract them. We gave them everything we told them we’d give them, and they agreed to it. If you want to compare Majesty’s advertisement to advertising for one’s church, well, there’s an example for you right there of how God can work through it.
I appreciate the above Christian comments which largely at first glance appear to be holding everything accountable to Scripture. That being said, we are all capable of our selfishness getting in the way of what we tell ourselves is something we are ‘doing for God’. While there are differences of opinion and gray areas within orthodoxy Fundamentalism (and I am almost as pragmatic as everyone here because the alternative is worse than you could ever imagine – have you been to an evangelical church lately?), some of the above comments could be viewed by non-Christians or even curious evangelicals as petty, likening Fundamentalists to the seemingly ever-growing crowd of Americans that just criticize, criticize and criticize again because, after all, they are the all-knowing ones that everyone needs to be judged by (while they themselves occupy their time by merely sitting on the sofa and vegetating – or blogging like me!). Does anyone pray about what they blog before they press the ‘submit’ key anymore?
Tim,
Thanks for your thoughts. As a pastor of a church, I can assure you that I strive to do more than “merely sitting on the sofa and vegetating – or blogging.” I can also assure you that there are better ways of doing ministry than either the Fundamentalist or Evangelical varieties of pragmatism which your comment seems to view as the only two possible options.
I believe that we American Christians- particularly those of us in Fundamentalist congregations- must become serious about things like meaning- which, BTW, I believe the topic of this original post was a perfect example of a failure to do so. Consider Kevin Bauder’s perspective on this in his essay “A Fundamentalism Worth Saving”–
I would recommend that you read the entire essay if you wish to understand why I don’t believe this matter is simply petty criticism.
The obvious result of good theology, salted with a yielded heart, is a life lived for Jesus that begins to resemble that same Jesus. God put my wife and I through eight years of Fundamentalism we lovingly call boot camp. But there is more. The standards and regulations are a good place to start but can never ultimately substitute for an intimate, alive, relationship with my Savior. Too often Fundamentalism degrades into who is doing what, what preachers you admire, and how great so and so is, especially the pastor. What will the sheep do if the pastor or any of their heros die? Would any of them know what to believe? Remember, My sheep hear my voice and they follow me. We must teach and preach in such a manner to facilitate individual saints into intimacy, true intimacy, with Christ. To do less is self serving rather than Savior serving. I really like the Spirit in which you write. I believe you could be a Fundamentalist who loves Jesus more than Fundamentalism. They aren’t the same thing you know.
Buck
By the way, I also like what I have read by you on music. Biblically correct music isn’t about preferences,age demographics, old vs new, etc. Ultimately, God’s creation called music is about what music God creates and ordains. It all comes down to about two things. One is our motivation for creating music and singing it, and the other is a recognition that Godly music must be played and sung in a way that truly glorifies God must come from a pure and humble heart. Fleshly music comes in all stripes. I personally believe that God’s music fits a pretty narrow band of the “music” spectrum. By the way, Frank Garlock is right about something. The “music” communicates as much as the lyrics. There is no amoral music. I have heard classical music that is heathen in form and function and some written and performed for the Savior. I have never heard CCM meet the Biblical admonition of hymns, psalms and spiritual songs. It’s hard to make “melody” in my heart when the rythmn and beat obscure those.
[…] circles or even American Evangelicalism in general than the topic of music. I have been involved on conversations on the topic enough in the past to understand that I am unlikely to convince anyone of my specific conclusions […]