What Matters More

[foolishyetwise]

So now that we've heard the oh-so-controversial song that kicked off the crazy interstate tour... what do people think?

Quite frankly, I feel like Derek has, in repeating Tony Campolo's tired sentiment, gone in a direction of legalism and judgmentalism. I agree with the sentiment of the song but not the execution-- there is a serious confusion of priorities among evangelicals today and I think we are barking up the wrong tree when it comes to dealing with the sexual sins that are destroying the institution of marriage. At the same time, there is a need for a generous, sacrificial, Christ-like approach to the problems of poverty & injustice around the world that ought to make Bono cry for shame behind those ridiculous sunglasses. I went through a phase where I used that Tony Campolo quote about caring more for using foul language than 30,000 kids dying every day But I'm glad I'm through with it, because dealing with the problem of evangelical indifference that way is just divisive, accusatory, and judgmental-- it's the sort of discourse that the song decries. I wish that Derek would embrace the gracious yet incisive tack of his earlier songwriting with the new ideas he's working with and move away from the "if-you-don't-love-the-poor-like-I-do-you're-not-a-good-Christian" legalism of the evangelical left. It's just as ugly as the "if-you-don't-live-the-ideal-Republican-lifestyle-like-we-do-you're-not-a-good-Christian" legalism that has hurt the Bride of Christ so much in the last few decades.

So he's got some good ideas. But I don't think what he's chosen to do will contribute to the conversation or help to change the minds that he wants to change. I might feel good to make a few fuddy-duddies angry about using a bad word (I remember what it was like back in the day), but is that really what the Church needs right now? Is that really going to spur us on to love homosexuals genuinely in a Christlike way?

But that is just me. What do y'all think?

[Stockment]

I think it's a kick ass "bottom" song.

I especially like his phrasing and melody in the verses.

[foolishyetwise]

indeed! Let me also add that, musically, it is top notch. I had it stuck in my head before it was even complete!   

there should be no controversy whatsoever about the qualities of the song from a musical/songwriting perspective. if you don't think so, you clearly don't give a crap about good music.

[iknowsparticus]

I agree with you guys that this is a great song.  The use of profanity, I believe, is just a ploy to bring up a larger topic of conversation.  Once the waters have died down about the Campolo reference then the dialogue should get really interesting. 

[foolishyetwise]

If it's just "a ploy," that's kinda disappointing. Derek is a way better songwriter than that, and we all know that he could have written a great song to get dialogue going without resorting to a tired and (IMO) rather judgmental cliche.

Again, I think that change in how the evangelical community responds to homosexuality (especially in the political arena) needs to change. People really do need to grapple with the issues that are most important (I think that this guy is a pretty good example of someone walking the line well and loving people genuinely.) But I don't know how much more this song is gonna help. I already have friends who took themselves off Derek's e-mail list over this song, and it breaks my heart because they need to listen to what he's saying without being bowled over by the way he says it. Kinda like another group of people and another message...   

[BeautifulMess]

If and when I use the word "poop" it's because I mean to say it.

I'm not sure it's as much of a "ploy" as everyone is saying. Maybe he actually means it, eh?

[Noah]

If and when I use the word "poop" it's because I mean to say it.

I'm not sure it's as much of a "ploy" as everyone is saying. Maybe he actually means it, eh?

poop flack, why you be buggin' yo?

[foolishyetwise]

If and when I use the word "poop" it's because I mean to say it.

I'm not sure it's as much of a "ploy" as everyone is saying. Maybe he actually means it, eh?

I don't doubt that he means it, but anyone who takes offense is (I infer) supposed to immediately feel rebuked for not being as offended by poverty & injustice (after all, that's how Campolo did his thing, and it's a quote that Derek has referenced in an interview or two.) I have no problem with using the word "poop" appropriately and rightly, but again I question the wisdom of using it in this context for this purpose. Is it really going to help call our brothers and sisters who are obstreperously clinging to a way of speaking that hinders the spread of the Gospel, or just make them more annoyed at those supposed "social gospel politically correct liberal" Christians they love to tar so much?

[:-Peter]

I guess my thoughts on this stem from some stuff Andrew Osenga has said in the past about himself, especially when talking about the impetus behind his record "The Morning".  Not that I have any idea what Derek is actually thinking, but I feel like this record in particular makes Derek look like "the angry dude".  That is to say, Derek looks like all he really wants to talk about is how horrible things are.  I haven't listened to the record enough to say for sure, but I haven't really heard any songs on this record that are particularly...encouraging?  Obviously, I don't expect (and wouldn't want) a CCM-style "happy-slappy" record from Derek, but I think most of his albums have had some songs that are encouraging, and the more I think about it, the more I think that's important.  The Ringing Bell ended with a song that, while it highlighted a lot of disturbing things about this world, reminds me that all of those things will be made right.  I am not sure that Stockholm Syndrome has a single song like that, and frankly, a lot of the songs on this album are downright disturbing, even though he's approaching them from a Christian perspective.

So yeah...I don't know whether I think Derek is being too mean.  But I do think the record as a whole has a pretty negative feel to it. 

[foolishyetwise]

I guess my thoughts on this stem from some stuff Andrew Osenga has said in the past about himself, especially when talking about the impetus behind his record "The Morning".  Not that I have any idea what Derek is actually thinking, but I feel like this record in particular makes Derek look like "the angry dude".  That is to say, Derek looks like all he really wants to talk about is how horrible things are.  I haven't listened to the record enough to say for sure, but I haven't really heard any songs on this record that are particularly...encouraging?  Obviously, I don't expect (and wouldn't want) a CCM-style "happy-slappy" record from Derek, but I think most of his albums have had some songs that are encouraging, and the more I think about it, the more I think that's important.  The Ringing Bell ended with a song that, while it highlighted a lot of disturbing things about this world, reminds me that all of those things will be made right.  I am not sure that Stockholm Syndrome has a single song like that, and frankly, a lot of the songs on this album are downright disturbing, even though he's approaching them from a Christian perspective.

So yeah...I don't know whether I think Derek is being too mean.  But I do think the record as a whole has a pretty negative feel to it. 

y'know, as I was listening to the album through over and over again this afternoon, I had the some thoughts (and responded to them on the post about "The State.") I like what Derek is doing now, and he is doing it very well. But I do have to say that I miss having a song that speaks to my soul, challenging me to receive the love & forgiveness of God despite my sin and then going out to love others in the same way.

[ack!]

Woohoo, first post.

First of all.  Yay for cussing Derek!  When I heard Crooked Deep Down for the first time on SMASGF, I about lost it.  "Used to be a ______ mess."  I was almost actually angry about it, but since then I've learned to just sing over it and put the extra word in and everything is right with the world once again.

While I agree Derek is almost always a downer (I think of Mockingbird as a black hole for my soul-space-ship to have to navigate around), this song IS downright encouraging.  As someone who struggles with THE thing in What Matters More, and then struggles with Christians hating me for it, Derek Webb kind of became my hero with this song.  It would have been much more useful, personally, four years ago, but better late than never.

The lines about talking and debating and the tradition He's coming to save are just brilliant.  Very brilliant because he follows it up with what we SHOULD be talking about--getting to those who need love.  I ultimately disagree with the original post about Derek trading one legalism for another.  Mostly because Christ ACTUALLY told us to love the poor and said very little about being a Republican.  I'm kidding.  Sort of.

As for the tone of the rest of the CD, I have no idea yet.  I will say, though, I am loving I Love/Hate You.

"But your love..."

[bojangles12]

As for the tone of the rest of the CD, I have no idea yet.  I will say, though, I am loving I Love/Hate You.

"But your love..."

/agree

Great hook

[foolishyetwise]

The lines about talking and debating and the tradition He's coming to save are just brilliant.  Very brilliant because he follows it up with what we SHOULD be talking about--getting to those who need love.  I ultimately disagree with the original post about Derek trading one legalism for another.  Mostly because Christ ACTUALLY told us to love the poor and said very little about being a Republican.  I'm kidding.  Sort of.

Here's the thing: If you think you can't be legalistic about something that Jesus commanded us to do-- you've already fallen into the trap. Jesus commended the Pharisees for performing the Law-- but his concern was that they had put that in front of mercy & justice. Loving the poor is a very, very good thing that would be a sin to ignore, but if we make that the defining characteristic of Christians, or the only way you know obedient Christians from disobedient ones, or you make following Jesus about loving the poor-- then you've just got a different kind of legalism. Walking the line between God's unconditional grace and our responsibility to obey will always, always be a challenge. And we'll always need continuous calls from either side to correct us, but I still really feel like Derek has pulled too hard in the direction of legalism. Because to idolize loving the poor in the end is only selfish because then we do it to satisfy others, try to impress God and make ourselves look good in our own eyes.

[ack!]

It seems to me you think Derek is attempting to OVER correct the state of the Church with this song.  Whew, I'm dense.  I simply disagree, or maybe I really do agree, and I think it's actually a good thing to do.  I'm not sure that we'll ever see eye to eye on this, and that's fine.  But, here's what I'm thinking:

Yes, personal holiness should be a HUGE part of our response to Christ's grace.  However, I think if we are going to err on one side, it ought to be "forcing" ourselves to practice compassion for others.  People will know that we are Christ's disciples, not because we are straight, but because of our love for one another.  Hearing (and talking about) the Word of God is a wonderful thing, but DOERS of the Word are the ones who walk in liberty.  I'm sure you've heard some variation of the phrase "act your way into an emotion."  I kind of feel like this applies here.  Maybe we're legalistic (self-serving) at first about loving the least of these, but if you keep doing it, I really don't think it can't help but become genuine.  I'd really like to link all this to the parable of the talents, but it's too late for me to be entirely coherent and articulate.

And maybe this really is the crux of the song.  If we had to pick which legalistic track for Christianity to follow, if it HAD to be one or the other, which should it be?  What matters more, personal holiness or loving others?

Then again, I could be very, very wrong.  If that's the case, I apologize to the songwriter.  And yes, I'm aware I took a few "liberties" with James here, linking "hearers" to Pharisaical Christianity.  So... sorry about that too.

[foolishyetwise]

It seems to me you think Derek is attempting to OVER correct the state of the Church with this song.

That would be an accurate assessment! I don't think we have too much disagreement, but I do want to clarify what's going on in my head. And I am all for zealous obedience and encouraging others to do so, especially when it comes to loving the poor. I get very easily frustrated by the lack of love we see in the church today, not to mention the myopic focus on homosexuality & politics. BUT our first temptation is to reach for the legalism button to make people obey, and that's just not right. Challenging people with the grace & love of Christ-- reminding them of His generosity to us (e.g. 2 Corinthians 8) is the best way because it is Gospel-centered. It will work its way down to people's hearts and change them entirely from the inside out. Derek talked about this a ton when he was touring around the time of SMASGF. I think this is different than when you "act your way into an emotion," because it's not necessarily about emotion but motivation.

If you have to ask the question, "What matters more, personal holiness or loving others?" you've already set up the question the wrong way. Jesus spoke just as severely about loving the poor as He did about sexual purity. But what's more, loving others is borne out of personal holiness, because at the heart of everything you have to first repent to God for being selfish, materialistic, idolatrous, or whatever it was that kept you from loving others. Then you look to the work of Jesus on the cross for you to give you strength to love others, and out of that is borne a love that can't be sapped or sieged. If you just try to do it from your own strength or a legalistic impulse, you'll just harm yourself and the people you're trying to love. It's a tough line to walk between freedom in Christ and obedience to Him and it's a struggle we'll face every day for the rest of our lives, but I think that looking at it through a Gospel paradigm is absolutely essential.

And honestly, as I think about it more and listen to the song some more I think that the legalism criticism isn't nearly as strong as my first impression (I've been listening to SMASGF for a long time, so I tend to overreact to anyone that looks like it might be trying to bully us into obedience!   ) Also, I am reading into this song the writings of the evangelical left (Sojo, etc.) which tend to be pretty heavy on "well, this is what evangelicals are doing by TRUE followers of Jesus do this..." But what still sticks with me still on repeated listenings is the tone-- Derek is criticizing people who engage in discourse with an unloving attitude by using some pretty harsh words himself. Again, doesn't seem like the most effective way to help people repent of unloving attitudes.