Ahh, Jesus the O.G. of o.g.'s, the Pimp of all pimps, and the church is his Ho (see Derek Webb's lyrics) and His Biiaaatch! The disciples is his crew or posse and Judas is a "house nig..."
The bible says we can only use lyres and tambourines to worship God, but even then, you better stick to the beat (extreme sarcasm here). Hymnody and psalmist worship don't escape classification along the lines of music genre, hype, and new wave either. I don't have to tell FP or KDNY that hymns, like hip-hop, have stirred up great controversy as well. Even the idea of syncopation in a hymn (the horror!) has been the theological battleground for many well intentioned and asinine worship leaders.
Would I use upbeat guitar-led songs, hymns, or songs on a strong rock chord structure in the worship service? Well, I wouldn't ban it and would probably use all of these. I guess I'm not sure what the issue is here. What differs, theologically speaking, between hip-hop and organ hymnody?
I have had the privilege of witnessing many worship services in many different countries, classes and cultures. It seems that the local wave of music genre always affects, influences, and many times, steers the style of the worship service. I don't see anything (necessarily) capitulative about that as long as the proper object of worship is the focus.
To foreshorten an objection to my line of thinking, what I said does not mean that any means is therefore OK, as long as it focuses on the proper object. Obviously that is not the case and only fools and their mothers would believe this to be the case. You can't rip a chicken in half for Jesus just because that is one way to contextualize worship to a pagan culture.
FP asked if this was contextualization or capitulation. I take him flatly to mean, "Does this necessarily have to be capitulation or is there a context where this is good and right?" I say there could be such a context, because all of us worship in a radically different way than the prophets, Jesus, or the early church did. We all are worshipping in highly contextualized contexts. Whether my worship service is contextualized for the 7th century imperial China or 21st century mid-west America, it's all got a unique context.
To deny hip-hop a place in that contextualization carte blanche (notice the specific qualification here) is to deny the efficacy of that particular culture movement. This, in effect, denies its redeemability (I know this doesn't flow from the above, but it is a conclusion I am thinking about along with some other stuff. See anthony bradley's article on hip-hop in his blog concerning the redeemability of hip-hop).
For me, it is not so much an issue of "substantive critique" as it is of definition. (I realize it is easy to define a term and prove your point by definition, but...) I don't disagree with a thing Dru lays out, but I think we differ on what "hip hop" is. If it is simply the scratching of records, sampling beats, rhyming about how the Holy Ghost and the Apostles bum rushed the devil, and how 2Pac's "Thug Mansion" is what Jesus is going to prepare a place for us, then I'm, how do you say, "down wit it." Just like I'm down the "white, Republican, suburban Jesus". It's just an issue of contextualization.
However, as I learned re: the term "nigga", which is a state of mind, I find "hip hop" to be a culture and "state of mind" that is contra Christianity. It makes "white, suburban" America look thrifty and others-centered. Imagine me talking about redeeming "consumerism", although in the end this is just the contextualization of a given good like the Gospel. Depending on how the term "redeemed" is being used, I don't believe "hip hop" culture (or consumerism) can be redeemed, but is to be repented of. The porn culture isn't redeemed, but repented of. In saying this, I don't oppose the use of video and still cameras (or the production of goods), but its "direction". (Yes, I believe the porn culture is beyond redemption.) I look forward to the day that Niggas with Attitudes become "Niggas with Humility", and Death Row Records and Bad Boy become "Eternal Life Records" and "Good Boy", but I have a feeling that it will only be a poor image of its former self. When Jesus is iced out, sittin' on dubs, and kickin' it wit his crew poppin' off about his 9 milli and how he straight wu-tanged the pharisees ass, then he too only bears an image of his former self. I have no problem with a christian blingin' ice, sittin' on dubs, or packin' a 9 milli, so don't hear what I'm not saying.
On the next release of the Gospel Gansta's (a real group), I believe it is an issue of capitulation. Only a complete draining of the term "gansta" can have any truck with real Christianity. At that point, we are no longer contextualizing, but capitulating. "Hip hop", as I understand it, cannot be a church without being drained of its meaning. I have no problem going into a culture and transforming their various musical instruments and outlets and pointing it in the direction of Christ. That is simply contextualization.
In the end, I grew up listening to the hip hop and enjoy some of the beats. I recognize the great potential for hiphopricy in saying this, because as one of your readers, Molly, once said, using my own words against me, "that's the pot calling the kettle calling the kettle calling the pot."
I think u niggas know what I'm saying...u know what i'm sayin...
Two points: 1. I am completely ignorant of 99% of hip hop music and/or lyrical content. I should have disclosed that up front. So I will esteem KDNY's assessment of the culture much more than my own.
2. I still think redeemability is possible, even if not likely. I grew up playing in anti-theistic leftist punk bands. There was not a great deal of diversity of opinion in that mileiu (just wanted to slip that word in). But like KDNY's example of the porn industry (which is a great analogy), hip hop is essentially music to me. Just as porn is essentially film to me. Maybe this is where I have confused the issue, by reducing the music of hip hop to merely a musical form, rather than an entrenched culture.
5 comments:
Ahh, Jesus the O.G. of o.g.'s, the Pimp of all pimps, and the church is his Ho (see Derek Webb's lyrics) and His Biiaaatch! The disciples is his crew or posse and Judas is a "house nig..."
I'm going to go with capitulation.
The bible says we can only use lyres and tambourines to worship God, but even then, you better stick to the beat (extreme sarcasm here). Hymnody and psalmist worship don't escape classification along the lines of music genre, hype, and new wave either. I don't have to tell FP or KDNY that hymns, like hip-hop, have stirred up great controversy as well. Even the idea of syncopation in a hymn (the horror!) has been the theological battleground for many well intentioned and asinine worship leaders.
Would I use upbeat guitar-led songs, hymns, or songs on a strong rock chord structure in the worship service? Well, I wouldn't ban it and would probably use all of these. I guess I'm not sure what the issue is here. What differs, theologically speaking, between hip-hop and organ hymnody?
I have had the privilege of witnessing many worship services in many different countries, classes and cultures. It seems that the local wave of music genre always affects, influences, and many times, steers the style of the worship service. I don't see anything (necessarily) capitulative about that as long as the proper object of worship is the focus.
To foreshorten an objection to my line of thinking, what I said does not mean that any means is therefore OK, as long as it focuses on the proper object. Obviously that is not the case and only fools and their mothers would believe this to be the case. You can't rip a chicken in half for Jesus just because that is one way to contextualize worship to a pagan culture.
FP asked if this was contextualization or capitulation. I take him flatly to mean, "Does this necessarily have to be capitulation or is there a context where this is good and right?" I say there could be such a context, because all of us worship in a radically different way than the prophets, Jesus, or the early church did. We all are worshipping in highly contextualized contexts. Whether my worship service is contextualized for the 7th century imperial China or 21st century mid-west America, it's all got a unique context.
To deny hip-hop a place in that contextualization carte blanche (notice the specific qualification here) is to deny the efficacy of that particular culture movement. This, in effect, denies its redeemability (I know this doesn't flow from the above, but it is a conclusion I am thinking about along with some other stuff. See anthony bradley's article on hip-hop in his blog concerning the redeemability of hip-hop).
Peace Out!
I'm with Dru. Contextualization. I was there to begin with, but then when KDNY offered no substantive critique, it sealed the deal for me.
For me, it is not so much an issue of "substantive critique" as it is of definition. (I realize it is easy to define a term and prove your point by definition, but...) I don't disagree with a thing Dru lays out, but I think we differ on what "hip hop" is. If it is simply the scratching of records, sampling beats, rhyming about how the Holy Ghost and the Apostles bum rushed the devil, and how 2Pac's "Thug Mansion" is what Jesus is going to prepare a place for us, then I'm, how do you say, "down wit it." Just like I'm down the "white, Republican, suburban Jesus". It's just an issue of contextualization.
However, as I learned re: the term "nigga", which is a state of mind, I find "hip hop" to be a culture and "state of mind" that is contra Christianity. It makes "white, suburban" America look thrifty and others-centered. Imagine me talking about redeeming "consumerism", although in the end this is just the contextualization of a given good like the Gospel. Depending on how the term "redeemed" is being used, I don't believe "hip hop" culture (or consumerism) can be redeemed, but is to be repented of. The porn culture isn't redeemed, but repented of. In saying this, I don't oppose the use of video and still cameras (or the production of goods), but its "direction". (Yes, I believe the porn culture is beyond redemption.) I look forward to the day that Niggas with Attitudes become "Niggas with Humility", and Death Row Records and Bad Boy become "Eternal Life Records" and "Good Boy", but I have a feeling that it will only be a poor image of its former self. When Jesus is iced out, sittin' on dubs, and kickin' it wit his crew poppin' off about his 9 milli and how he straight wu-tanged the pharisees ass, then he too only bears an image of his former self. I have no problem with a christian blingin' ice, sittin' on dubs, or packin' a 9 milli, so don't hear what I'm not saying.
On the next release of the Gospel Gansta's (a real group), I believe it is an issue of capitulation. Only a complete draining of the term "gansta" can have any truck with real Christianity. At that point, we are no longer contextualizing, but capitulating. "Hip hop", as I understand it, cannot be a church without being drained of its meaning. I have no problem going into a culture and transforming their various musical instruments and outlets and pointing it in the direction of Christ. That is simply contextualization.
In the end, I grew up listening to the hip hop and enjoy some of the beats. I recognize the great potential for hiphopricy in saying this, because as one of your readers, Molly, once said, using my own words against me, "that's the pot calling the kettle calling the kettle calling the pot."
I think u niggas know what I'm saying...u know what i'm sayin...
PEEEEACE!
Two points:
1. I am completely ignorant of 99% of hip hop music and/or lyrical content. I should have disclosed that up front. So I will esteem KDNY's assessment of the culture much more than my own.
2. I still think redeemability is possible, even if not likely. I grew up playing in anti-theistic leftist punk bands. There was not a great deal of diversity of opinion in that mileiu (just wanted to slip that word in). But like KDNY's example of the porn industry (which is a great analogy), hip hop is essentially music to me. Just as porn is essentially film to me. Maybe this is where I have confused the issue, by reducing the music of hip hop to merely a musical form, rather than an entrenched culture.
I still think anthony bradley's post and responses on this topic are worth reading.
Post a Comment