Finally…a response to Paul Jackson

At last, a return to the music I love.

This entry is in response to Paul Jackson, the lead singer of the reformed and rejuvenated Prophets Quartet that also features such fine singers such as Bill Baize, Ed Hill, and Mike Allen.

Paul has just started a blog of his own...and in his first entry, he asked a question almost as old as professional gospel music itself...is gospel music's primary purpose merely to entertain, or ought their be some sort of ministry as a part of the musical experience?

I have addressed this issue numerous times, on gospel music message boards, on my history articles for Southern Gospel News, and in both written and verbal correspondence with fans, artists, and industry people alike. My position has not changed on the issue in some time, so I'll try to summarize it with as much brevity as I can muster(many would say that that would be a daunting task for me!).

It can be both, or one, or the other...I'll elaborate.

If an artist's purpose is merely to entertain and please its' intended audience with the distinct American art form that is gospel music...there is nothing wrong with that whatsoever. Gospel music has always been very pleasing to the ears and to the heart to begin with, and one can certainly do worse than choosing gospel music if the purpose is only to entertain an audience with good music. The fact is that most gospel music historically has been made, recorded, and performed with that simple objective in mind solely...and all things considered, that's not a bad thing to do at all!

When the added aspect of ministry is introduced, however, it can bring a can of worms into an otherwise calm and simple discussion.

I might say from the outset that contrary to the assumptions of a lot of people, there is no conflict whatsoever in performing music that attempts to persuade the audience to consider and/or accept the gospel message and trying to entertain people with it at the same time.

In fact, I argue that music CANNOT minister effectively to people unless it entertains to some degree, at least!

Consider...if you're listening to a gospel quartet that doesn't sing well or have an enjoyable stage presentation for its' music, how likely are you to pay any attention whatsoever to what they're singing?

The answer of course is, you're likely not. So it follows that you need to have at least a minimum of musical competence if you want audiences to consider what your songs are saying to them.

So then, there is little or no chance of ministry of any kind through music if one is unable to reach its' intended audiences musically. I think we can agree on that much.

But John, you might say...what about artists with compelling personal testimonies who can move audiences to consider the cause of Christ? Don't they have a ministry?

And to that I say, they may very well have some kind of ministry. But unless they are able to reach their audiences musically, it is not a music ministry. It can be a preaching or a parachurch ministry or some other sort, but it's not a music ministry unless music is the primary tool used to minister to an audience.

So it follows that if a person wants to have an effective music ministry then, he, she, or they MUST be at least nominally "entertaining" to some degree at least.

Does that mean showy song endings, lame jokes onstage, or matching suits?

Yes...and no. If any of those things(or others I didn't mention)compel the audience to listen closely to the songs, and consider their message, that would be a valid music ministry as I see it. Or to put it another way...

If those things draw attention to the message of the songs, it's part of a music ministry. If they merely draw attention to the performers, and nothing more, it's not. And THAT is not all bad! As I inferred above, there is nothing at all "wrong" with merely giving people pleasure and a good time through the singing of gospel songs...that is perfectly legitimate. After all, it was listening to artists that did only that and not much else that made me a gospel fan at an early age, and ripened my ears and heart for the tue gospel message some years later, when I was in my teens!

The term "ministry" has almost become a cliche in the last twenty years...artists describe what they do as "ministries" rather than "careers", perhaps unwittingly implying that a mere "career" alone is not pleasing to God somehow, and you need to have a ministerial purpose with your music to legitimately perform gospel songs.

Do I consider say, the Statesmen as musical ministers in the same sense as someone like, say, the Weatherfords...since the Weatherfords declared their intentions to minister with their music, and the Statesmen never did?

Yes, I do...because both artists presented music which proclaimed the most important message in the world, and did so in a musically compelling and dynamic way.

That is not to infer that one of those groups was "better" at ministry than the other...it simply is my conclusion based on my analysis of the outcome of their works in the gospel music field.

Paul, I hope that gives you an insight into my answer to your question...I welcome any comments anyone might have.

UPDATE: Paul, what do you think? I believe I addressed the main issue you brought up in your original blog posting, and I'd like to know what you have to say about it. As of the time I'm typing this, I haven't seen any comment from you...I'd genuinely like to know your opinion of my thoughts...do you agree? Disagree? Could care less?:-) If you can spare a moment or two...weigh in...the give and take is always good.

Page 1 of 1 pages

Comments

Add Comments

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Please enter the word you see in the image below:

* Note: Members of Southern Gospel News.com who are logged in do not have to fill in the above information each time they post

By posting you agree to our Comments Policy

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?