many of them have their hearts in the right place, but they spend their days being bashed in the head by their brothers and sisters in the faith

This is the aspect of it that burns me up.

I don't even listen to CCM. But I'm sick of those that do having their cool credentials questioned and having those that make it have their kingdom credentials questioned. It's gross.

What IS cool is a faith that embraces everyone, geeks and nerds and lousy musicians and good musicians that make lousy music, alike. And it's worth losing a few cool points to allow other people to know about it.

Yes!

Well said, Jeff.

Man, Jared, this is soooo right on. I am so sick of Christians bashing each other over something so personal as taste in art. Calling a band or song "lame" seems to be the badge of superiority. The ego of these critics is disgusting.

"They'll know you're Mine by your love for one another." Hmmm. No wonder we're virtually unrecognizable.

I'll tell you what. I go to a coffeehouse with a clientele of recovering addicts. They have a stage and bands that play every weekend. The music, by and large, is terrible. But they lift each other up, applaud each other, support each other, and encourage each other. Almost none of them are Christians. Where did they find what we've lost?

"What we need is some good old tribulation."

Oh man, Bill, I know. I just don't want to say it. I've never, in 50 odd years, seen so much line up in terms of prophecy as in this election.

I realize that it may be cliche to say that, but one of these times it's going to be true. I've seen a lot in my lifetime. This is the closest I've ever seen. The Scripture that rings in my mind as I look around at the Obama mania and the jubilation now that he's at the helm is;

1 Thessalonians 5:3 ESV While people are saying, "There is peace and security," then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.

Unfortunately for me, I'm a post-tribber. There's nothing I'd rather be more wrong about. I hope the rest of y'all are right. I want out.

Personally, I think music is one of the largest idols in our culture and I'd be thrilled if the church de-emphasized it.

I agree that the church over-emphases music -- at least in the way that it's used now. Then again, I think a lot of pop culture (and, again, all pop music is pop culture -- even the good modern Christian Music) is something the church needs to realize it is accepting without much discernment.

That said, I think it's perfectly fair to look at CCM and ask that a higher standard be followed. No, not exactly like Patrol has done it. I know some love Patrol, and while it does some good things, it falls into the "indie snob" category a little too much. It's gotten better since it started as a smart-alecked kid over at Blogspot, but it still seems like a Christian Pitchfork at times.

Rather, I think there is a point there. The most deeply frustrated people I've heard from about CCM aren't bloggers and cynical kids - it's from people who have worked in it. There are problems, and the fact that a lot of it sounds similar and produced in a way to be non-offensive to Soccer Moms, even the hard rock bands, is one of the symptoms. That good bands like Jars of Clay were told to do a worship album because it sells is problematic. That veteran musicians are ignored in favor of the flavor of the month shows we've got the same pitfalls of the "Secular" music industry we were told for decades to avoid.

No, sneering at worship leaders isn't going to help anyone. Neither is encouraging people to stop being critical. I look to Christianity Today as a good example of being tough but fair. There are plenty of good musicians in CCM (Sara Groves, Derek Webb, Fernando Ortega, Future of Forestry, Bebo Norman come to mind. "Britney" should be up for Song of the Year) to keep from whining about it all. But for those interested in music, I think it's fair to hold Christian Musicians to a higher standard. Not unrealistic or unforgiving, but higher nonetheless.

(By the way, Justin - I want to let you know that the prior unfocused rant was not directed at you :-) - I think your comment was good, for the most part, but it launched me into a whole other line of vent.)

Anyone else think criticizing CCM has jumped the shark?

But, well, CCM is bad. It just is. Are there lots of people out there who criticize it just to keep their cool cred certification current? Yeah, sure, I guess. But that doesn't change the fact that most of it is just bad music. Is music and idol, even in the church? Yeah. But it still has its place. If it's good. And CCM ain't.

If there's any yawning to be done, it's purely because the battle has been lost. "Praise and worship" has prevailed over the previous stuff, which wasn't all that good either, and will continue to reign, and no amount of complaining will change that now. So we should just make our peace and get over it.

But I have to agree with the initial point of the Patrol article. I can hear one second of a CCM song that I have never head before and know that it's CCM. And I can't really figure out why.

Speaking of cool cred certification and lack thereof, would someone care to fill me in on just what "Patrol" is all about?

...an objective level (which I wasn't aware was possible when talking about art...

I completely misread you in that other thread, then.

I'll admit it: I still listen to "CCM". Frankly, people who think it's silly or bad...eh, whatever.
I mean, I typically have my radio on to: keep me awake, make my drive to/from work (it's nearly an hour) less boring, and/or rock out to something. Considering that country, my other favorite, has about 50% of its volume taken up by song about drinking heavily or sleeping around...yeah. (Not to say all country is horrible; there's just less...wholesome stuff...sometimes).
Meanwhile, my biggest worry on a CCM station is either a kooky song, "My Jesus", or too much talking.
Idly, how many people today who are big "hymns only" realize the musical origin of many hymns?

No, I was going on about it, and I must have misread everyone replying to me as saying "Yes, dbd, you're right!"

So what do you like?

(By the way, I'm writing in general -- I don't really know what CCM sounds like. I'm not saying your favorite band is like pornography.)

Like I said, I don't know any of these bands or anything about the genre! I'm sure they're great!

However, the market does nothing at all to prevent really bad bands from achieving success and wide exposure, because lots of people like really bad things, and the more they get of really bad things, the less they want the good ones.

(Plus, criticizing me for hyperbole is an aesthetic criticism. Just let the market take care of me then!)

Karl,

Thank you for reminding us of "elastic-side boots". That is stellar Lewis commentary on this whole topic. As usual, Jack nails it.

Thanks!

And, for what it's worth (and I'm only inviting scorn here, but I have to be honest).

I don't like much of what Carmen produced. . . now.

But when I was a 19 year old brand new Christian (and an AOR music snob to boot, ironically) - I listened to one of Carmen's live albums until I wore the magnetism off the cassette tape. It blessed me and encouraged me beyond what I can explain.

I didn't, at the time, know I wasn't supposed to like it (this was the early 80's when CCM-hatred was still a in seedling form, versus the full-bloom it's in today). I didn't listen to Carmen the way I listened to Rush or Pink Floyd. I didn't know I was supposed to.

But, man, it edified me.

Confession time over. . .

P.S. Keith Green was another that I listened to over and over. I think on a musical level most people today might consider a lot of what he did "cheesy". But - wow! - didn't feel like it back then. I ate it up!

Sharpton asked, So what do you like?

Well, just like everyone else, Ravi Shankar and Yanni.

Quick thing - the guy's name is CarmAn, not CarmEn...I know it's not 1988, but even the man who who wrote "This Blood's For You" deserves a little respect ;)

Back to the topic - I work in Christian Radio, so I hear a lot of it, specifically the "Adult Contemporary" type stuff. Some if it is fantastic, insightful, reverent, and demolishes any theory that all CCM is bad (again, Bebo Norman's "Britney" is non-judgmental and insightful - http://tinyurl.com/5t7rxt). Some is pretty silly and reduces God to a slogan or salvation to a catch-phrase. Some is creative, some is blatantly derivative of whatever fad is occurring right now -- or worse, 5 years ago.

All of that said - I believe that it is more than fair to be critical, yet fair, when looking at CCM. It is a multi-million dollar industry, often owned by the same people who gave us Fergie and Amy Whinehouse. You can do it without becoming a self-absorbed snob who relishes in other's downfall, but I don't think dismissing or discouraging criticism is a good thing.

Jared,

In general, you're right about CCM criticism jumping the shark (hence, Patrol only rarely bothering to review a CCM album). But like Christians obsessing over abortion, it more "jumped the shark" because people got tired of it than because it was wrong. In any case, the point has been made and most of us, most of the time, don't bother discussing it anymore.

You're also right about certain aspects/artists of Christian music getting better. (Although stuff like Seabird? Leeland? Give me a break. It's not terrible, but only as good as the most aggressively average mainstream stuff out there.)

And Bob (#14) is right about the fact that, in the industry as a whole (web sites, radio, catalogs, whatever), the war was lost to awfulness. Yes, I don't care what you say, it is that bad. A few bands have resisted that by guess what? Making their music not very Christian. And thus, everything is happening as it should: the old CCM industry is left to gradually die of old age and disinterest, while the creative young Christian musicians will find a better way to make themselves heard.

If your complaint against me is that Christians need to stop criticizing Christians, then I'm sorry. That's been silly for as long as Christians have been rock stars and political pundits. If Christians are going to have their own public sphere - industry, marketplace, media, celebrities - then they are setting themselves up for all aspects of being public figures. (Especially when they regrettably come to culturally speak for many of us who'd like nothing to do with them.) If a lackluster work of art represents Christendom in any way at all, then it should be publicly repudiated (just like James Dobson's political pronouncements) by those who care about us having any cultural or artistic respect whatsoever.

I'm sorry, I know it's not the point of this post but I've got to comment on the "obsessing over abortion" remark.

I think our problem, frankly, is that not enough Christians are obsessing over abortion. If it is what most Christians say it is, the real question is why aren't more people upset about it?
Why are so many blase about it? We are in the new era of "It's sad, but not that bad."

Would that the Church "obsessed" more about the deaths of over a million babies every year.

Would you accuse Jews of obsessing over the Holocaust? Has Holocaust study "jumped the shark"?

I try to be optimistic about evangelical emphases, but man . . .

Re: Bill (#37) I'm not saying that only Christianness made the music bad (though that was definitely part of it). But the music that HAS improved has come from artists that have backed away from being explicitly Christian. It's not as if anyone in mainstream, big-studio Christian music has really solved the artistic dilemma of addressing faith in a fresh way.

Regarding the public repudiation notion, allow me to hedge a bit and say that, in my haste, I didn't actually say what I meant. No, I don't think we should be out there publicly name-calling about every disagreement. Or that would should be bashing well-intentioned Christian art (a good recent case would be the movie "Fireproof," which we didn't like, but didn't feel like it was appropriate to bash).

But there was a dearly departed age where CCM asserted its own moral superiority while continuing to be what it has always been: an intellectually shallow, money-making machine. And when the embarrassing products of that shallow, commercial subculture colored the way many saw Christians in general, it was time for us to speak up. We did -- quite forcefully at times -- and now maybe one could argue that enough has been said on the subject.

"Well, just like everyone else, Ravi Shankar and Yanni."
Who?

Seriously though. You must be listening to different music than me. I mean, I guess musically it's kind of similar to other stuff, but...that's music. So what if secular people don't like it? I mean, I've not heard more than maybe a half-dozen songs with truly bad theology. Never heard an off-key singer, or really atonal music or something. (That said, I dont' have perfect pitch or the like, so others may pick up more than me). I don't really see anything that's truly, strictly, objectively "bad". They do just as well as any other artist in not killing my ears. Beyond that, it's pure taste.
I've yet to hear a "dilemma of addressing faith in a fresh way". Many of these songs seem like sincere writings; people putting their thoughts to music.
Here's another question. You say:"I'm not saying that only Christianness made the music bad (though that was definitely part of it)." How is the "Christianness" making it bad?
I guess we're just coming from two completely different mental paradigms or something, because I just can't see what you see. Maybe it's the rebel in me who says "I don't care if other people say it stinks, I like it and that's good enough for me!"
I mean, did Micheal W. Smith beat you up or something? I'm sensing a real deep beef with the whole industry with these sweeping condemnations and judgements.

Re: Bill (#43)

"To bottom-line this: I think a lot of what we call "bad music" is more a reflection of the badness in us than it is anything inherently wrong with the music."

I'm sorry but I must - with utmost respect, of course - call that bogus. There are too many very serious and godly people who can't stand Christian music for that to be valid. Also, people like me in no way "extol the virtues of mainstream music." Most of that stuff is just as starved of artistry and skill as CCM (it just happens to be about more earthly topics, and it's easier to forgive an awful song about "bringing sexy back" than it is to forgive a mind-numbing song about God).

Admittedly, we do seem to be coming from different perspectives. You speak of the time you "came to faith," whereas I have been a Christian since before I was born, if that's possible. So Jeremy Camp has nothing to say that I haven't heard about 458 million times since I was in diapers. Not to suggest you're a new Christian, but I can see that stuff as much more appropriate for someone who is new to the faith or learning to think differently. But to me it's endless repetition of things I internalized years ago, and it seems rather obnoxious to keep listening to them on loop. I would be more than willing to listen to spiritually-challenging music if any were to be found, even though I don't primarily listen to music for spiritual insights. (More on that in the next comment).

Bill #43, I think the argument David's making is against most "pop" music across the board, whether secular pop or Christian pop. He seems to be echoing some of Ken Myers thoughts from Myers' essay: "Is Pop Culture Either?"

http://www.mtio.com/articles/aissar42.htm

[from the essay]

"For the most part, popular culture usually doesn’t come from the people. It comes from elites more decisively than does high culture. In the past, high culture has relied much more regularly on elements appropriated from folk culture (e.g., folk tunes in classical music, folk legends in literature, folk masks in Picasso). Popular culture is endorsed by large masses of people and hence is regarded as being of the people more than high culture.

". . . And, as suggested above, popular culture is not neutral with regard to the sorts of sensibilities it encourages. Because of the centrality of commercial concerns, popular culture maintains a preferential option for the upbeat, the informal, the new and interesting, not because these are the sorts of virtues that make a better person (let alone a better Christian), but because these are the attributes that make for the best consumers."

". . . So popular culture takes on the attributes of a kind of anti-culture, a system that rejects the task of restraint and normative character formation in favor of liberation and self-expression. Culture is not a legacy that is transmitted and received, it is a commodity that is consumed. Under this regime, children are not to be molded by participation in shared traditions, they are stimulated to be themselves and to buy themselves into being.

"This is a very abbreviated glance at a very complex issue, but if the outlines of it are generally sound, it should cause some concern among Christians who want to exploit or co-opt popular culture for the sake of the gospel. As I have argued elsewhere, individual artifacts within the system of popular culture may be delightful and innocently entertaining. But the Church cannot condone the social dynamics or the existential sensibilities of popular culture. They are too distorting or too inadequate to perform the sorts of social and personal tasks that culture has, in the providence of God, the function of performing."

Again with the implicitly sexist and patronizing bashing of soccer moms. . .

Yes. The problem with Christianity in America today is all those soccer moms. It's not self-absorbed, negative, arrogant, you're-the-problem bloggers.

What's wrong with inspirational, heartwarming fare?

Are we in the Twilight Zone?

I feel like a lot of these criticisms are about 2 or 3 CCM artists from 20 years ago.

There are songs on my local "Positive Music" CCM station about praising God in the midst of suffering, about suicide, about cutting, about loneliness, about losing a child, etc.

In fact, and this is gonna sound weird, one reason why I listen to the local indie rock college radio station a lot more than CCM is because it's 99% positive and clean and I can listen to it with my kids in the car.
Sometimes I don't listen to CCM b/c I don't want to have to explain to my daughters what the DJs are talking about between songs (reading letters from kids who wanted to kill themselves until they heard a song that reminded them of Jesus' hope).

But those are good things. It's good to be inspirational and praise God.
I'm against schmaltz as much as the next music snob, but a lot of these beefs with CCM are about stereotypes from people who haven't listened to CCM in years.

Here's the lead-in to the CT piece I'm referring to. Again, "Becky" sounds a lot like my wife. But I find this to be factual rather than patronizing:

"Her name is Becky.

"You probably know her. She's recently turned 40, but is not quick to admit it. She's a Christian and a devoted wife and mother. She drives a mini-van. Half-melted crayons roll around on the floor as she stops at a light en route to her daughter's Tuesday night soccer practice. She laughs sometimes, chagrined that she is the very "Soccer Mom" they talk about come election time. Becky lives in the suburbs, likes to read, enjoys the women's retreats at church, is struggling to remember algebra so she can help her son with his homework, and is a regular volunteer at the food pantry.

"One more thing about Becky, a very important fact for this discussion: she listens to the local Christian music station almost exclusively.

"Becky" is not one person, of course. She is the representative persona of the target audience of almost every Adult Contemporary (AC) Christian radio station in existence today. Station directors expend considerable effort identifying who she is and what she likes. Her tastes affect what's played on radio, and not just the music. She is the target of the ads, the promotions, even the morning show banter. Consequently, she is essential to understanding how Christian radio works.

The fact that Becky has a name is indicative of the dogged desire of stations to focus their efforts on a narrowly defined target, generally described in the industry as the 35-to-44-year-old female demographic. The focus has paid off. Many credit the decision of several stations, including and possibly led by Salem's "Fish" stations, to cater to this particular target audience as responsible for the unprecedented growth in Christian radio over the last decade.

And, again, I am being graceless here. I'm troubled by that. Some of the reasons my button was pushed so quickly in this case is I've heard the soccer mom thing 1000 times, I'm married to a soccer mom who I adore (who likes CCM), and this button was pushed earlier in the thread (in a less gracious manner than you did).

Thanks Bill for #56. I don't mean to be a jerk; I have read and thought about this stuff a decent amount but haven't had many discussions about it like it seems you have.

For what it's worth I'm also married to a soccer mom who I love and who listens to CCM a fair bit (although as a former music major she also says it - like most pop music - isn't very difficult or challenging music). We also go to a church whose primary worship fare is contemporary praise stuff and lots of what the local CCM station plays - and it often moves me. Like I wrote above, I'm of two minds about all this. I do find much of what Ken Myers has written to at least bear thinking about . . .