Recently, among people in the "worship" community there has been some uproar about choosing not to use music by Hillsong because of an ongoing investigation of sexual impropriety of the founding pastor, and the cover up of that impropriety by his son and subsequent senior leadership. Strangely enough, I never hear any of these folx complaining about using music by Hillsong (or Bethel, or Elevation, etc) because of the theological concerns raised about each of these churches. The message being sent is something like, "We won't stand for sexual impropriety, but we'll tolerate bad/questionable theology/doctrine.".
Clearly allegations of sexual impropriety (I'm using impropriety because I have no real desire to dig into the details and the term covers a lot of possible actions) at a church or ministry are, and should be, taken seriously and dealt with. Yet, the seeming uninterest by these people in the theological content contained in the music and preaching at these churches, seems strange.
Given the reality that churches are made up from sinful, fallen humans, while simultaneously being "the Bride of Christ", seems to indicate that somehow God will work through The Church despite the fallen, sinful, nature of those in The Church. Maybe we don't need to throw out the "baby with the bathwater" in these circumstances.
8 comments:
I've seen many criticisms about the music used in churches and it seems there absolutely needs to be a better process for selecting them.
Unfortunately, I don;t think that there is a way to force worship leaders to adhere to some objective criteria when picking music. As will all in positions of leadership, I suspect that they will be called to account for their choices when they come before God.
My problem is that these folks don't give a rat's backside about the bad theology in these churches, but are willing to act because of this particular bad behavior.
It's that both of these problems (bad theology/sexual misconduct) are indications that these churches and their products are unworthy of support.
"Unfortunately, I don;t think that there is a way to force worship leaders to adhere to some objective criteria when picking music."
Unfortunately?? Surely you're speaking with knowing irony/sarcasm there?
Jeez Louise.
I believe Scripture calls for church leaders to be way above suspicion, acting as closely to the teachings as possible so as to be good influences. In the meantime, the congregation is to call them to account when they misbehave, either as pastors or as fellow congregants.
Dan, well done. For once you've picked up on sarcasm.
Yet, surely you'd agree that worship music with good theology is more appropriate than with bad theology?
Surely you agree that financially supporting "churches" that actively teach bad theology is a less than optimal situation?
Or, do you simply not care about the theology communicated in music?
To answer your questions: I support good theology, good reason, and healthy, grace-filled communities and that which promotes all of these. In music or otherwise.
Glad to hear you were speaking sarcastically.
What you say and what you do...not the same.
Dan: "I support good theology, good reason, and healthy, grace-filled communities and that which promotes all of these."
That's funny.
Post a Comment