Hi all!
It seems the forum has been quiet about the old music issue. When I first joined 21 years ago, it had it's own subforum, and that was where I started, going against long time members such as Aaron and later, DHK (is he even still around?) who took an anti-contemporary stand. I was going to an IFCA church (and it was in fact the pastor who had invited me here, but he dropped out not too long after), and attended a music and a "biblical counseling" class in a related IFB church, to get their full premise on both of those issues they have been sharply criticizing the "new evangelicals" over, accusing them of "compromise" with "the world". the music class used several sources from BJU related ministries, including Frank Garlock's "Majesty Music". This seemed to be the ultimate "conservative" and most strict.
But in recent years, when I happened to find a site About Us | FBC Radio either connected with HT Spence, or at least just selling his book, I find they are accusing even Garlock of "accommodating" CCM! The claim is “CCM is not just rock music; its elastic, existential nature reflects the multicolored facets of contemporary styles. We are witnessing today in such churches an enticement toward the perimeter of these contemporary facets. This attraction is evidenced by the surrealistic, ethereal, easy listening sound of piano and orchestral accompaniments as well as by the soft, meandering melodies rewritten for our stately traditional hymns.”
When I listen to some of their files, I didn't think it sounded all that different from Majesty Music.
So even more recently, I stop by and see what ol' David Cloud is doing, I find he is saying the same things now, and with a big emphasis on Majesty's Patch the Pirate childrens' series (Cloud plays some clips from that or something, and one he compares to “60’s rock”, and two others sound a bit like calypso), and a couple of IFB churches he keeps mentioning, who have supposedly "adopted" CCM!.
Where before, he had his main book on CCM, but spent more time on the KJV and “psychoheresy” issues, now he has become obsessed with the music issue. He has several titles on it, and seems to mention it in every article criticizing evangelical leaders. Like his page on MacArthur, he goes off and dwells on the music issue for the bulk of the article.
What's worse now, is that they have even stepped up the "empirical" arguments about the elements of music. Before, it focused on the "backbeat" and "syncopation". Now, they're scrutinizing the harmonic structure (they always used to mention harmonies, but I hadn't seen them break it down like this) with something called the "imperfect cadence":
“a chord cadence other than the ‘perfect’ or ‘authentic’ cadence, which is used by the old hymns and which resolves back to the first tone. A ‘weak cadence’ or an ‘imperfect cadence’ does not resolve in this way. It is always more ‘feely.’”
“The emphasis is on the IV chord. The V chord is always called the dominant chord in music, but in CCM it is avoided as often as possible. It doesn’t resolve.”
“Music works like this: You have a question (phrase) and then an answer (phrase). There is tension and then release (resolve). Contemporary praise music seems to present questions with no answers, no absolutes. It is wispy and draws on the emotions, with no intellectual purpose or guide. This is the philosophy of the Devil.”
You can get the basic sense of this here:
Cadences - Music Theory Academy - Perfect, plagal, imperfect, interrupted
You can see the first two examples (the “perfect” cadence) give that classic “hymn” sound, as the need to land back on chord I limits where you can go with the harmony. That’s part of what what makes the hymns sound so “straight-laced”. So it’s obviously very fitting for a march; which Cloud has said music should sound like (and Spence wants more specifically "battle"-themed hymnody as well!) But the last two examples (the “imperfect” cadence) leave it open. And it does sound a bit more like newer "praise" music. (This is useful to be able to “go more places” with the chords afterwards. The site says “Listen to how frustrating it sounds that the music doesn’t continue”; universalizing the “affect” to everyone, like the CCM critics do. l but I don’t find it “frustrating” at all. So this is more likely a matter of what one is used to! I’m used to it leading to something else nice or interesting!)
But SERIOUSLY; this is what helps determine music being "of the devil' and an affront to God?
And what's frustrating is how no one ever seems to respond to these critics. there's still only one book I know of, Miller's Contemporary Music Debate that addressed the issue, but did not cite or mention any of these critics! When we had the subforum here, we seemed to be somewhat evenly divided between those for and against CCM. I noticed at some point, most of the strict IFB's seemed to gravitate mainly to the Baptist only sections, so I'm not sure what kind of Baptists the ones I see in these sections are.
So being the music debate seems to have died down here, yet people are still very conservative in other areas, I'm wondering where everyone here stands with this issue these days? Has everyone pretty much accepted forms of contemporary? Is Majesty Music the default in Baptist churches, with full on CCM still avoided, and Cloud and Spence seen too strict. Are they considered "out in space", or might their philosophy even be picking up in conservative churches, as the Church as a whole feels increasingly under attack by the "world", and people seem to be becoming more radical, like in politics?
It seems the forum has been quiet about the old music issue. When I first joined 21 years ago, it had it's own subforum, and that was where I started, going against long time members such as Aaron and later, DHK (is he even still around?) who took an anti-contemporary stand. I was going to an IFCA church (and it was in fact the pastor who had invited me here, but he dropped out not too long after), and attended a music and a "biblical counseling" class in a related IFB church, to get their full premise on both of those issues they have been sharply criticizing the "new evangelicals" over, accusing them of "compromise" with "the world". the music class used several sources from BJU related ministries, including Frank Garlock's "Majesty Music". This seemed to be the ultimate "conservative" and most strict.
But in recent years, when I happened to find a site About Us | FBC Radio either connected with HT Spence, or at least just selling his book, I find they are accusing even Garlock of "accommodating" CCM! The claim is “CCM is not just rock music; its elastic, existential nature reflects the multicolored facets of contemporary styles. We are witnessing today in such churches an enticement toward the perimeter of these contemporary facets. This attraction is evidenced by the surrealistic, ethereal, easy listening sound of piano and orchestral accompaniments as well as by the soft, meandering melodies rewritten for our stately traditional hymns.”
When I listen to some of their files, I didn't think it sounded all that different from Majesty Music.
So even more recently, I stop by and see what ol' David Cloud is doing, I find he is saying the same things now, and with a big emphasis on Majesty's Patch the Pirate childrens' series (Cloud plays some clips from that or something, and one he compares to “60’s rock”, and two others sound a bit like calypso), and a couple of IFB churches he keeps mentioning, who have supposedly "adopted" CCM!.
Where before, he had his main book on CCM, but spent more time on the KJV and “psychoheresy” issues, now he has become obsessed with the music issue. He has several titles on it, and seems to mention it in every article criticizing evangelical leaders. Like his page on MacArthur, he goes off and dwells on the music issue for the bulk of the article.
What's worse now, is that they have even stepped up the "empirical" arguments about the elements of music. Before, it focused on the "backbeat" and "syncopation". Now, they're scrutinizing the harmonic structure (they always used to mention harmonies, but I hadn't seen them break it down like this) with something called the "imperfect cadence":
“a chord cadence other than the ‘perfect’ or ‘authentic’ cadence, which is used by the old hymns and which resolves back to the first tone. A ‘weak cadence’ or an ‘imperfect cadence’ does not resolve in this way. It is always more ‘feely.’”
“The emphasis is on the IV chord. The V chord is always called the dominant chord in music, but in CCM it is avoided as often as possible. It doesn’t resolve.”
“Music works like this: You have a question (phrase) and then an answer (phrase). There is tension and then release (resolve). Contemporary praise music seems to present questions with no answers, no absolutes. It is wispy and draws on the emotions, with no intellectual purpose or guide. This is the philosophy of the Devil.”
You can get the basic sense of this here:
Cadences - Music Theory Academy - Perfect, plagal, imperfect, interrupted
You can see the first two examples (the “perfect” cadence) give that classic “hymn” sound, as the need to land back on chord I limits where you can go with the harmony. That’s part of what what makes the hymns sound so “straight-laced”. So it’s obviously very fitting for a march; which Cloud has said music should sound like (and Spence wants more specifically "battle"-themed hymnody as well!) But the last two examples (the “imperfect” cadence) leave it open. And it does sound a bit more like newer "praise" music. (This is useful to be able to “go more places” with the chords afterwards. The site says “Listen to how frustrating it sounds that the music doesn’t continue”; universalizing the “affect” to everyone, like the CCM critics do. l but I don’t find it “frustrating” at all. So this is more likely a matter of what one is used to! I’m used to it leading to something else nice or interesting!)
But SERIOUSLY; this is what helps determine music being "of the devil' and an affront to God?
And what's frustrating is how no one ever seems to respond to these critics. there's still only one book I know of, Miller's Contemporary Music Debate that addressed the issue, but did not cite or mention any of these critics! When we had the subforum here, we seemed to be somewhat evenly divided between those for and against CCM. I noticed at some point, most of the strict IFB's seemed to gravitate mainly to the Baptist only sections, so I'm not sure what kind of Baptists the ones I see in these sections are.
So being the music debate seems to have died down here, yet people are still very conservative in other areas, I'm wondering where everyone here stands with this issue these days? Has everyone pretty much accepted forms of contemporary? Is Majesty Music the default in Baptist churches, with full on CCM still avoided, and Cloud and Spence seen too strict. Are they considered "out in space", or might their philosophy even be picking up in conservative churches, as the Church as a whole feels increasingly under attack by the "world", and people seem to be becoming more radical, like in politics?
