Secularized

You know, ever since I read this post I can’t stop thinking about the phrase “hell bound community.” Just what is a hell-bound community, and what in the world does secular (read: “Worldly”, non-Christian) music have to do with it?

A few thoughts on this subject from a former christian/atheist:

1. Secular is a choice. Music you label secular or non-secular can directly relate to how you perceive it. Bands/artists who produce “secular” music may have a song that you may like. But does that negate their entire catalog? I’m curious.

2. Hell-bound is a judgemental term. This is what gets me. If everything is left to God, then what is left to you? If the hell-bound are going to be “judged by God”, then what made them hell-bound? The line between society’s laws gets very thin here, as hell-bound could mean those who deal drugs, commit crimes, etc. But you’re not going to try to reach carjackers with scripture, now are you? But they’re hell-bound! “Love Shack” or no, music isn’t enough to get the job done. Regardless of its content.

The problem with “Christian Music” is the idea that there is “right” music and there is a “wrong” music. Once upon a time the Beatles pissed off everybody when they said they were bigger than Jesus (What would Jesus do about that you think? I think he would say something like: “Oh, really? Neat.”), but since their lyrics are clean and they have been recognized as having written some of the best music we have available to us, hearing a Beatles song in church isn’t considered secular. Or is it?

Must non-secular music have lyrics deal with God, salvation, or (heh) God forbid, the cross? You know why most of the “Christian” music you find is terrible? Because it pushes too hard. You’ll find it very hard to be subtle when all you talk about is salvation, sacrifice and, of course, the cross (or any variation of Died For Your Sins, of which there are about a million of).

It was interesting to me to see that Creed was “accepted” into the non-secular club with their subsequent records (With Arms Wide Open, et al), yet their debut record was a good, subtle rock record that featured Goddamn quite a few times. But they changed right? Or at least, their albums did.

In yet another pick-and-choose moment, it appears that music in church has been distilled to three categories: vulgar/obscene/suggestive, “clean secular”, and Christian. Terry throws out a very obvious mention of “use music to set mood and then use that mood in your service” and I’m thinking duh but apparently this is a new concept. Using any music just for the sake of filling space is a bad idea no matter what your event happens to be. The idea that only secular or non-secular music makes or breaks a church service makes it sound like a bad service is trying to place blame on the music instead of the message. At least, it sure does to me.

On a final note, I turn 25 tomorrow. Woot. I’ve made it to a quarter century, let’s see how long my lucky streak lasts. Let’s talk more Monday.

I’m naked and I’m scarred
And you’re so perfect to me