So, is it Christian?

I was just beginning to distribute my new CD which I had spent a year recording. It was my first solo effort and was all my own material. I showed it to a pastor friend of mine and he asked the dreaded question.

"So, is it Christian? Or…"

Or what?

"No," I wanted to tell him, "it’s sort of a jazz-influenced, acoustic Hindu-rock."

Instead I mumbled a noncommittal reply and nodded my head, which seemed to satisfy him, but it left me stunned. Why? Why was I surprised? I had been fielding that question for years as I played in bars.

"So, are you playing Christian material, or…" "Are your tunes Christian, or…"

Say it.

Secular.

I guess I was surprised because it was the first time I’d actually heard a pastor ask that singularly uninformed question, and because for the first time these were my songs that were being questioned.

Now, I think I just stepped on some toes right there, and I’ll have some apologies to make if my pastor friend ever actually sees this in print, however I do mean uninformed, and I’ll explain why.

But first, allow me to digress.

I did not grow up in the Church. Religion always looked a little silly to me, and after I dabbled in a local conservative church in high school, I ran as far the other way as I could get. Among other things, I thought the "safe" music that was being listened to by Christians was ridiculous. By the time I did become a believer, I was thoroughly uninitiated in the trappings of the Church. I didn’t know the hymns, and I hadn’t read CCM. So, when I first heard the question, "Is it Christian?" I thought they meant, "Did a Christian write it?" Being a schooled musician, the only criteria I had for listening to music was whether or not it was good. (The discussion of what "good" means I’ll leave for another day and for when I’m of stronger stomach.)

Now, the reason the question in question is uninformed is that there is a semantic problem inherent in the text. The difficulty lies in the context of the meaning of the question, "Is it Christian or secular?" Christian is not comparable to secular. It’s apples and citrus fruit.

Let us define our terms.

I recently attended the Trinity Aesthetics Conference at the Trinity Institute where the following conventions were suggested.

Art intended for the express purpose of taking part in corporate worship is deemed "sacred."

Works not meant for the purpose of corporate worship are termed "secular" works.

If we describe a matrix based on these definitions, we see the following four options:

An example from the conference is of the sculptor who is a Christian that creates a bowl for use in the sanctuary of his church. That bowl is Christian-sacred art. The artist then creates a similar bowl to hold fruit in his house–Christian-secular art. Both bowls were created by the creature that was created by the Creator to create as a creator. The artist, we assume, strove for excellence in his craft while creating both bowls. Both are worthy works of art. God, therefore, smiles on both examples of His glorification through the use of the talent He has bestowed.

It is at this time that some of you will nod sage-like and say, "Well then, the question more clearly stated is, ‘Does your music glorify God?’"

As opposed to what?

This version of the question seems to be based on an assumption. That of two songs, written by the same musician who loves the Lord and seeks to please Him, one brings glory to God because it mentions His name, and the other doesn’t bring glory to His name because it fails to mention it.

All of humanity will glorify God forever. Some of us will glorify His mercy in heaven; some will glorify His justice in hell.

Similarly, all the music I write glorifies God. Some of it is sacred, some of it is secular (while mentioning) His name, and some of it makes no mention of Him at all. When I use the talent God has given me, striving for excellence in the art form that He created with the passion for the art which He has breathed into me, and being thankful for all of the above, how could it not glorify God?

The popular notion today is that the work of the Christian musician is only worthy if it "serves God" or if it is an evangelism tool. This assumes that the musician who is a Christian is somehow under a different set of rules for their profession.

The usual argument to this is the analogy of the dentist who is a Christian.

Is it possible to fill a tooth to the glory of God? Well, yes. The Christian worker, who is faithful and strives for excellence, doing the will of God from the heart, does his work to the glory of God.

Is it possible to share the Gospel through filling a tooth?

If you mean, can you convey the message of the Gospel through the physical act of filling a tooth, then, of course, the answer is no. Filling a tooth is not a verbal medium. A dental drill is not an appropriate tool for expressing the idea of man’s fallen nature and the sufficiency of Christ.

If you mean, can the dentist share the Gospel while he is in the process of filling the tooth, then the answer is yes. The patient is decidedly a captive audience and probably under the influence of drugs. Therefore we have to ask if this is an appropriate moment. The patient may not remember a gentle and loving expression of the Gospel, but rather that the dentist took advantage of them and slipped their religious agenda in under the guise of a dental procedure.

The appropriate method for a dentist to share his faith is to gain his patients’ trust through being a godly dentist, build relationships and pray for an opportunity to share.

Why do we assume a different responsibility for the musician who is a Christian? Unless the musician is a paid member of a church staff, he is a layman. His responsibility is to be the best artist he can, and salt and light like every other Christian.

Is it possible to compose and perform music to the glory of God?

Of course it is. God calls us all to be excellent workers. See above.

Is it possible to share the Gospel through composing and performing music?

The answer is a reserved yes. Again, you have a captive audience (quite possibly also under the influence of drugs), and again we have to ask if this is an appropriate moment. If you’re playing to a predominantly non-Christian crowd who came out not because you’re with a Christian act, but possibly just for the music, they may only remember that you snuck in the Gospel under the guise of a musical performance.

The appropriate method for a musician to share his faith is the same as the Dentist’s: to gain his audience’s trust through being a Godly performer, build relationships with listeners and pray for opportunities to share.

I will paraphrase Greg Wolfe’s statement from the Trinity Aesthetics Conference: Art in subjugation to something inevitably becomes propaganda.