Tuesday, October 12, 2021

Fame

 I went to see the Jesus Music movie last weekend and thought it was pretty good.   I thought they ignored a couple of people who should have been mentioned, but realize that they couldn't cover everything in a movie.


What struck me was how this thing that started out with the best possible motives, ended up somewhere completely different.   I have no reason not to believe that the young people who gathered in CA in the late 60's early 70's and who found Jesus to be the answer they had been seeking through other means were not 100% sincere in their faith.  I also see no reason not to believe that the first "Jesus music" was an attempt to use their God given talents to praise Him and to reach others in their generation. 

The question I have is:  When did that desire to praise God and reach their fellow "hippies", go off the tracks, and why did it do so?

What's interesting is that I've also been listening to The Rise and Fall of Mars Hill recently, and the podcast explores a similar phenomenon in the Church, more specifically in certain pastors and congregations.

I think that the common denominator in all of these things is fame (celebrity, if you will).  What we see is that there often seems to be a point where the fame of the messenger, overshadows the message.   I could give examples, but don't see any reason to at this point.   I'll simply suggest that the Christian faith is incompatible with individual fame (or at least with seeking fame), to the point where Jesus becomes secondary or obscured.

Finally, I think there's a personal application as well.   While I'm not likely to be famous anytime soon, I am likely to place my wants, my desires, my success, my comfort, and my self, in front of God and His glory.


I'm not suggesting that having talented musicians write music that draws lots of people closer to God is a bad thing, nor am I suggesting that the Church doesn't benefit from the wisdom and preaching of pastors when it's published as a book or a video.  I'm certainly not suggesting that we not use the technology and media available to us to point people to God.   I am suggesting that once we start pointing people to ourselves, and increasing our fame, that there are likely to be problems.

15 comments:

Marshal Art said...

I don't know how it can be helped. When one is doing good work, attention will come...desired or not. I guess it's simply a matter of how one handles it, and whether or not there are those around who can sincerely help one remain grounded and humble. And of course prayers for help in that regard are a good thing, too.

Dan Trabue said...

Craig... "What struck me was how this thing that started out with the best possible motives, ended up somewhere completely different. "

I'm not familiar with the movie. Who are They?

Craig said...

Art,

I agree that there is some degree of fame that is somewhat inevitable once one does anything that has value beyond one's local circle. Obviously, how one handles that fame is a major factor. However, neither of those factors mitigates that reality there is an interesting correlation between negative outcomes (Falwell, Hybels, Mars Hill, Grant, English, etc.) and the degree of celebrity they achieved.

The fact that there are others who navigate this better makes it clear that it is possible to do so.

My primary point is that you see people with skill and talent in music, who really want to use that for Jesus, but who are unprepared to handle the fame and celebrity that might come along with it. This is exacerbated by an industry that is built on furthering the celebrity with less regard for the individual than is probably healthy. It would certainly be interesting to look at the differences between those who navigate this successfully, and those that don't with the goal of helping others do better in the future.

Craig said...


Dan,

The fact that you are unaware of this movie which has been in fairly wide release, and has been well publicized, isn't my problem. The fact that you were too lazy to google it, also isn't my problem.

Had you only read the very next sentence in my original post, you'd have gotten your answer.


"I have no reason not to believe that the young people who gathered in CA in the late 60's early 70's and who found Jesus to be the answer they had been seeking through other means were not 100% sincere in their faith. I also see no reason not to believe that the first "Jesus music" was an attempt to use their God given talents to praise Him and to reach others in their generation."

Or perhaps you are unaware of the genesis of "Jesus Music" and have no clue who Chuck Smith and Calvary Chapel are.

Dan Trabue said...

I am familiar with the Jesus people movement. I just wasn't sure to whom you were referring to as They who ended up "completely different" and who went "off the tracks."

That seems like a pretty specific charge to make against such a large group of people as the Jesus movement.

My follow up question would be how have they, as a group, gone off the tracks?

And yes, I am familiar with Chuck Smith... Is he the one that went off the tracks? Or are you talking about the whole movement?

In some parts, the whole movement has done quite well.. I would say that my personal church, for instance, is in part a result of the Jesus movement.

The larger Jesus People movement were people who rejected the racism, sexism, materialism, militatism and classism of the 1950s and decades before... people who believed in following Jesus and watching out for and siding with the poor and marginalized. There are large numbers of churches and Christians like ours that have been changed by these ideals that arose, in part, from the Jesus movement. We're doing quite well, thank you, and in no way have gone off the tracks...

That is why I asked. You seem to be of the mind that the Jesus movement has, as a group, gone off the tracks.

Craig said...

"That seems like a pretty specific charge to make against such a large group of people as the Jesus movement."

It's not.

"My follow up question would be how have they, as a group, gone off the tracks?"

I didn't say that "they as a movement" have gone off the tracks. I'm suggesting that what started as a small, organic, Christ centered, authentic movement in CA, has morphed into an industry that I suspect wasn't what they thought they were starting.

"And yes, I am familiar with Chuck Smith... Is he the one that went off the tracks? Or are you talking about the whole movement?"

Neither.

"In some parts, the whole movement has done quite well.. I would say that my personal church, for instance, is in part a result of the Jesus movement."

I'm sure you would.

"The larger Jesus People movement were people who rejected the racism, sexism, materialism, militatism and classism of the 1950s and decades before... people who believed in following Jesus and watching out for and siding with the poor and marginalized. There are large numbers of churches and Christians like ours that have been changed by these ideals that arose, in part, from the Jesus movement. We're doing quite well, thank you, and in no way have gone off the tracks..."

Pretty impressive and prideful statement.

"That is why I asked. You seem to be of the mind that the Jesus movement has, as a group, gone off the tracks."

No, you're mistaken.

I was clear that what the "Jesus music" folks started has grown into an industry has significantly different goals from the people that spawned it.

But feel free to read anything you'd like into my words.

Craig said...

It's amazing how the notion that a movement that started out as one thing as has become something else significantly different, and that fame/celebrity can have a negative impact on one's Christian walk/ministry, is this controversial.

For example, if you asked any of the folks around Calvary Chapel listening to Love Song or whoever what they'd think about "worship" that necessitated lasers, pyro, and smoke, I suspect they'd be less than thrilled.

Dan Trabue said...

Craig... "I was clear that what the "Jesus music" folks started has grown into an industry has significantly different goals from the people that spawned it."

Well, not clear enough. That is why I originally asked WHO you were speaking about? It was an effort PRECISELY to not read into your words something that wasn't there but to get clarity. That is why I asked who?

And yet you responded rudely and yet still did not answer the question.

So you're not talking about the Jesus people type of movement in general. You're not talking about Chuck Smith.

You're talking about some industry which you think has gone off track, is that right? Is that industry CCM?

You can't refuse to answer clarifying questions and at the same time accuse me of reading into your words something you didn't say. I'm asking questions to get clarity about WHO you're talking about?

So, CCM?

Dan Trabue said...

I certainly agree that fame and celebrity are worth watching out for for, something to be wary of. But I didn't think this post was specifically about fame, but instead some specific group which has gotten off the tracks... I'm just trying to determine who it is you think "got off the tracks." No more, No less.

Craig said...

"You can't refuse to answer clarifying questions and at the same time accuse me of reading into your words something you didn't say. I'm asking questions to get clarity about WHO you're talking about?"

Again, I've answered your questions multiple times.

"So, CCM?"

Given the fact that I mentioned other aspects of this besides music, I'd say that the CCM industry as it currently exists is based on a significantly different motivation that the Jesus Music folks back in the early 70's.

I tend to give Larry Norman somewhat of a pass because I think that he was dealing with some level of untreated mental illness, but I'd argue that Norman was the first person to seek personal fame, as a Christian artist. My point is not to bash Norman, who was incredibly talented and outspoken in his faith, but to point out that the trend toward seeking fame started before there was a CCM industry.

I know you want to make it more complicated than it really is, but the point was and still is as follows.

What started out as a "movement" intended to focus on Jesus, ended up focusing on something else entirely. In the same way that people in ministry start out intent on spreading the Gospel of Jesus, and end up spreading the gospel of themselves and allowing their fame to lead them astray.

Craig said...

Dan,

I'm surprised that you were confused about the topic of the post.

Exhibit A- The Title "Fame".

Exhibit B- "I think that the common denominator in all of these things is fame (celebrity, if you will). What we see is that there often seems to be a point where the fame of the messenger, overshadows the message."

Exhibit C- " I'll simply suggest that the Christian faith is incompatible with individual fame (or at least with seeking fame), to the point where Jesus becomes secondary or obscured."

Exhibit D- "While I'm not likely to be famous anytime soon, I am likely to place my wants, my desires, my success, my comfort, and my self, in front of God and His glory."

Exhibit E- "I am suggesting that once we start pointing people to ourselves, and increasing our fame, that there are likely to be problems."

Hopefully by my excerpting these direct quotes from the original post in this manner, you'll be able to get a better sense of the original post.

Additional clarification, my use of the Jesus Music folks, and Mars Hill are examples. Specifically examples of something that started out focused on Jesus and that spawned things that don't represent the intentions of those at the beginning.

Again, I apologize for your confusion and hope that the direct quotes will help.

Dan Trabue said...

OK. Whatever. Still not entirely clear clear who it is you criticizing criticizing or if you're criticizing them and what you're criticizing them for, but, whatever.

Dan Trabue said...

WHO? WHO has let "fame" corrupt them? WHAT is your evidence for this? WHERE is the specific problem?

I may not disagree with you. I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BEYOND SOME VAGUE "Fame=Bad..."

I'm just trying to get some specifics.

But here, I'll give you a chance to agree with me, too. You know about those... people, you know, the ones? And instead of doing a good, they did a bad. I think Bad is, you know, not Good, especially all the, you know, not Good stuff Those People did in that Situation, right? Don't you agree?

Good Lord. Why indeed do you want to make communication more difficult than it really is?

Are you also going to form a strong opinion piece on "less than ideal-ness..." of some other vague group of unknown whosits and whatits?

Dan Trabue said...

But yes, I GET and AGREE with your point, such as it is.

Fame can be not good.

Craig said...

Again, he fact that you feel compelled to couch your "agreement" is such hash, disagreeable, and combative terms seems strange to me.