Jon Green

I love the discussion that has gone on thus far and would like to see it continue.

Understand that I am typically skeptical of these kinds on...so take that into account as you read my response as I may may be trying to justify my own feelings toward the performance.

Maybe it is safe, maybe even healthy, to be critical because of the "form". I think I can understand where Courtney is coming from, as he has posted some good questions that have not received response yet.

If the song were given some type of explanation on the "Idol Gives Back" episode, such as "We want to recognize that all gifts are truly from God, and thank you for being good stewards of what God has given," I don't think we would be having this discussion. But since the song seemed so out of place/context with no explanation I think we should be skeptical. (And, no I do not believe that all art needs explanation)

I understand quoting Paul...and I rejoice if God uses this bring people to him. But could we just as easily quote the third commandment? Using God's name in vain. Attaching God's name to something he is not a part of. After all isn't this attaching Jesus's name to something that he may not be apart of. Questioning the motives of preachers that went around preaching the gospel out of selfish ambition is much different (in my opinion) than questioning the motives of a television show that is not and has never been about bringing the gospel to people using a song in bad form to attach Jesus's name to their giving project. (By the way they are not "giving" away the song. You can go download the song on Itunes for only $.99 under the American Idol Christian and Gospel section)

I heard a conversation that someone had about how cool it was that God used American Idol as a response to the church of Oprah. As if God has to fight his wars through media.

All that to say I agree, David Cook does rock!

all I can say is I really want David Cook to win. He rocks!

Right... Right,
So I don't disagree with Paul...
It's about FORM people.
The issues of our day are not with content, but form. If you use Paul to back up your claims, then what is aesthetically beautiful or artfully made is secondary to the message. In this case art becomes merely a package for ideology or propaganda. HOW we proclaim the gospel is very reason we even have an post-modern, "Emergent" sensibility. The language and ideals of Modernisms "rational defenders of the faith" have largely failed in American culture because we believe as a culture that form and content have equal standing (especially within a persuasive context). Is the gospel message enslaved by words? Do you all think words are magic?

So, great... a worship song appeared on American Idol, and words will always overpower the tacky, mundane and cliché forms of expression. No. It's the same as handing a person a tract on the street with no personal relationship or time spent to help that person understand what grace really means. Language was perceived entirely different in Paul's time.
Paul didn't bet on American culture's inability to read between the lines. Just like Karl Marx never expected Che Guevara's face to sell 1 million t-shirts in the malls of America. Revolutionary messages can be lost or diluted within capitalism and so can the message of Christ be lost on a culture when it is presented without consideration to form.
If you guys really think that form is less important than content then why pursue art, why pursue expression? Why try and have different services, or pursue "Beyond Sunday" type efforts. What is the point if form is less important than content. All effort will be in vain. It will all end up as contrived, inauthentic and irrelevant. Essentially it is why the church is where it is now. Because form has not been given it's proper place along side content.

If excellence in art and creativity is an "elitist" view then it is because the church insists on not pursuing form (beauty,aesthetics... whatever) as an important thing unto itself that can point to God with out words. Art, at it's best, is the language of our humanness. And the truth of our humanness is rarely expressed in totality, in all it's complexity , through words alone.

I'm at work typing fast so let me know if anyone needs clarification on some of these fragmented points.
Also I would like to encourage anyone reading these post's to look up things like Modernism, Post-Modernism, Spectacle, Kitsch, and language issues brought up by Ferdinand de Saussure and Foucault on wikipedia in order to have a better grasp on what I'm getting at.I promise you won't go to hell if you decide that Post-Modernism has some good things to offer our christian culture. We've embraced much of the negative aspects of it already, it's time we figured out and applied the rest.

I think like most Christians or even artists, my first reaction is that of disgust and anger. My thinking is "how dare they use this to make money or even worse dull down the gospel".

But as I think this, I feel myself rebel against myself. Should my (perceived) elitist view of this situation and of art and music should be accepted by everyone? I am reminded that being a musician that I might have a different understanding of the craft and thus rebel against the "hacks" that seem to make it as popular artist in todays market. But in reality, why are they popular?... Because popular music isn't about skill, it's about giving the masses what they want and like.

Having said that, I think its very tough to stand by and watch something that we consider sacred be used in a secular context, but I think ultimately we should take the attitude of "I am glad that God can still be proclaimed" even if we think it to be disingenuous.

I do say that I do not watch "Idol" but hearing they did this at first prompted laughter, then later I actually was inclined to be thankful for it, because at least it prompted some discussion and maybe grabbed the attention of some people to remind them that God does exist, even if they do try to make money off of him. In the end, isn't that what Art is supposed to do, make us think? Being a believer or not, I would gather at least on both sides we react to this in some way.

Ok, Maybe "excited" was not the right word, more like-I am confronted with and can have hope for the positive possibilities. also, whatever positive attitudes I have are under direct influence from the subject of Ken's response. Otherwise I would just gag and throw my TV at the wall.

Oops... I meant Courtney's concern, not Ashley's!

I understand Ashley's concern, and also wonder how the gospel can transcend through the slop of American Idol. However, there are at least two passages in scripture where, when the gospel is presented with false motives, we are told to not criticize for at least the gospel is being preached.

In Luke 9:49-50 the disciples tell Jesus there is someone out there casting demons out in Jesus' name, which was of great concern to the disciples. But Jesus seems to be unaffected by this loose canon and says, "do not hinder him."

In Philippians 1:15-18 Paul talks of some who preach the gospel out of wrong motives. His response is:

"What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed ; and in this I rejoice. Yes, and I will rejoice."

So as much as we may not like how the gospel is being presented, be it by tele-evangelist or American Idol, how should we respond? Probably as Paul does: rejoice that Christ is being proclaimed.

I'm going to be specific on what I comment on-
"On the one hand, seeing that song being used on American Idol makes me happy that we live in a country where that type of expression is even possible. I really get excited about the possibility that even maybe one person could have seen that song sung on prime time TV and been caused think of Christ or motivated to go to a church the next week. For these reasons I was excited to see people singing a worship song on TV. However, it also raised profound questions for me."

This is what kills me about the situation. That we are constantly put in this position of resignation. That our standards of artistic excellence are so low, and our tolerance of the trite and contrived at the hands of commerce are so high that our initial reaction is not one of righteous anger, but one of hoping for the "possibility that just one" can be reached. The context of "Shout to the Lord" on American Idol is so far removed from what worship is that I am forced to be suspect of any possible move towards God that could take place. As if music is magic.

That move on the part of "Idol" producers was made from the position of marketing and our nations gullibility in giving up "Passion Dollars" (thank you Mel Gibson). We are so hard up for affirmation and so insecure in our faith that we will swallow any presentation given to us.
I can't blame FOX for this. We have created the culture we live in, they just seize the opportunity to do what they do... make money.

And before anyone responds with "but how can you know what God can accomplish through that situation?" understand that I don't doubt God's power here. But that is a lazy cop-out that I hear all to often. It is passive and does nothing to better the perception of Christ through art or the media... two of the most powerful, and clearly misunderstood forces in our time.

I'm not even going to address the art issue here because American Idol is the furthest thing from it.

The more we coddle the spectacle the more it feeds on us.

Also I fully respect John and he should know that my pointed words are not meant to attack, only make conversation.