Today’s guest post is the first of a six-part series from Christian Copyright Solutions Founder and President Susan Fontaine Godwin, an educator and long-time member of the Christian arts community with 28 years of experience in the Christian media industry, church copyright administration and copyright management.
The first time I remember hearing a secular song used in worship was at a rural church in northern Indiana. It was “Let My Love Open the Door,” by Pete Townshend, performed by a spunky blond woman from the praise band. It was a catchy and energetic way to kick off a service closing out their “Doors” series, which would invite people to walk through a large door on stage to symbolize their acceptance of Christ.
I became an instant fan of using secular music in worship, if it supported the message. I anticipated opposition to the idea from our church’s leadership, partially from a legal perspective (was a church even allowed to do that without special permission?) but mainly from a theological perspective. It can be controversial, as a lot of people feel secular music has no place in sacred worship. Granger pastor Tim Stevens makes the case for using secular music in his book, Pop Goes the Church, saying there is biblical precedent and gospel imperative for churches to leverage pop culture to reach secular people.
If you can remove the theological stumbling block for your congregation and fellow worship planners, you can rest easy knowing that the legal stumbling block has already been taken care of. As it turns out, secular music is included under the Religious Services Exemption to U.S. copyright law, stating that churches do not need a performance license to play live or pre-recorded versions of any kind of music (sacred or secular) in the context of regular worship services. The only exception in the exemption is “dramatico-musical” works (operas and plays) of a secular nature. These are not exempt and would require licensing.
It’s important to note that this exemption only applies to playing or performing music, and does not extend to reproducing music in any form, such as making an audio or video recording of music in your service, or making copies of song lyrics.
The morning after that service at Granger, I heard Pete Townshend’s song again on a pop radio station, and I was immediately reminded of the service’s message. To this day, I remember that Christian message whenever I hear the song. That’s the power of using pop songs in worship, and there’s no law to keep you from embracing it.
Want to know more about copyright myths that put your church at risk? Watch this helpful video from Christian Copyright Solutions and download their free downloadable resource to worship ministers – 6 Myths About Copyrights That Put Your Church at Risk. CCS’s quest is to help churches and Christian ministries “do music right.” CCS is an expert on church music copyrights and our primary focus is providing licensing and clear educational resources to churches, as well as representation, administration and advocacy for copyright owners.
@PaulAlanClif It isn’t, the feelings and the propose of the hearts are differents in both cases, the worship to God begins from the heart
Thanks so much for the post Susan. I couldn’t agree more.
BTW, to people who are offended, turn your offence toward my namesake, the Apostle Paul, who quoted secular poetry and even used an idol in his preaching on Mars Hill in Athens.
That’s a great point, Paul, and very strong scriptural reference and example of how to preach the Gospel (whether spoken or in song) in a relevant way for our culture and time.
A guest post by our Founder on @PaulAlanClif’s blog >> Myth#1: Is it legal to use secular songs in #worship? http://t.co/FcJbqm7ybb
This is amazing to have found. We always alot of questions what media can or cannot be used especially in having a CCLI. Thanks
CCS (ChristianCopyrightSolutions.com) have a streaming license that permits streaming for all sorts of songs, Christian and secular. The CCLI worshipcast (I think is what it’s called) license is only for CCLI Christian music. You can read more at the CCS site here: The Difference Between CCS and CCLI.
I am glad I could come across this. It is really true how some secular songs can make amazing impact on a service. We have the privilege to use a lot of secular music to connect theme of our service back to the people. Thank You
I love it when I hear a song during my week that brings me back to church at the end of the previous week. Very fun.
I am sorry but I totally disagree with bringing secular music into the church. I just can’t help but think this a conforming to this world & bringing the world into the sanctuary. If Jesus were going to visit your church next Sunday would this song be included in your song list? If so what would He do? Maybe walk out as He did when He turned over the tables as He did in the Synagogue? Granted this is my conviction, however I will stand by it! Let me further my stance, the lyrics state; I bring you a four leaf clover
Take all the worry out of your mind, in our Christian walk why would you want to sing that a four leaf clover is going to take worry out of your mind when the word clearly says the Lord has given specific instructions as how to deal with worry? Specifically; Philippians 4:6
Don’t worry about anything; instead, pray about everything. Tell God what you need, and thank him for all he has done. I realize you are discussing the legality of singing a secular song in church, however I would much rather sing a song that glorifies His name, rather than glorifying a four leaf clover, that as a Christian does not advance my walk with the Lord!
Romans 12:1-3 (NLT)
A Living Sacrifice to God
12 And so, dear brothers and sisters,[a] I plead with you to give your bodies to God because of all he has done for you. Let them be a living and holy sacrifice—the kind he will find acceptable. This is truly the way to worship him.[b] 2 Don’t copy the behavior and customs of this world, but let God transform you into a new person by changing the way you think. Then you will learn to know God’s will for you, which is good and pleasing and perfect.
So what do you think about Paul quoting pagan poets (and Luke quoting him doing it) in Acts 17:28? That seems like “conforming to this world” by your definition?
Paul
Mars Hill is the Roman name for a hill in Athens, Greece, called the Hill of Ares or the Areopagus (Acts 17:19, 22). Ares was the Greek god of war and according to Greek mythology this hill was the place where Ares stood trial before the other gods for the murder Poseidon’s son Alirrothios. Rising some 377 feet above the land below and not far from the Acropolis and Agora (marketplace), Mars Hill served as the meeting place for the Areopagus Court, the highest court in Greece for civil, criminal and religious matters. Even under Roman rule in the time of the New Testament, Mars Hill remained an important meeting place where philosophy, religion, and law were discussed.
The biblical significance of Mars Hill is that it is the location of one of Paul’s most important gospel presentations at the time of his visit to Athens during his second missionary journey (Acts 17:16-34). It was where he addressed the religious idolatry of the Greeks who even had an altar to the “Unknown God.” It was this altar and their religious idolatry that Paul used as a starting point in proclaiming to them the one true God and how they could be reconciled to Him. Paul’s sermon is a classic example of a gospel presentation that begins where the listeners are and then presents the gospel message in a logical and biblical fashion. In many ways it is a classic example of apologetics in action. Paul started his message by addressing the false beliefs of those gathered there that day and then used those beliefs as a way of presenting the gospel message to them.
We know that when Paul arrived in Athens he found a city “given over to idols” (Acts 17:16). In his usual manner Paul began presenting the gospel to both Jews and Gentiles. He started by “reasoning in the synagogue with the Jews and with the Gentile worshipers” (Acts 17:17) and then also proclaimed the gospel “in the marketplace daily with those who happened to be there” (Acts 17:17). While at the marketplace he encountered some Epicurean and Stoic philosophers (Acts 17:18) who, having heard Paul proclaim the resurrected Jesus Christ, wanted to learn about “this new doctrine” he was teaching so they “brought him to the Areopagus” to hear more from him (Acts 17:19-20).
We know from history that the Epicurean philosophers generally believed that God existed but that He was not interested or involved with humanity and that the main purpose of life was pleasure. On the other hand the Stoic philosophers would have the worldview that “God was the world’s soul” and that the goal of life was “to rise above all things” so that one showed no emotional response to either pain or pleasure. These groups and others with their dramatically opposing worldviews loved to discuss and debate philosophy and religion. Intrigued by what they considered Paul’s “babblings” about the resurrection of Christ, they brought him to the Areopagus where the Athenians and foreigners “spent their time in nothing else but to tell or hear some new thing” (Acts 17:21).
As mentioned earlier, Paul’s presentation of the gospel is a great example for us, both as a pattern for how Paul identified with his audience and as an example of apologetics in action. His connection with his audience is seen in how he begins addressing those gathered at the Areopagus. He begins with the observation that they were “very religious” based on the fact that they had many altars and “objects of worship” (Acts 17:23) including an altar to “the Unknown God.” Paul uses that altar to introduce them to the one true God and the only way of salvation, Jesus Christ.
His apologetic method and his knowledge that they did not even know what God is really like leads him to go back to Genesis and to the beginning of creation. Having a completely wrong view of God, those gathered that day needed to hear what God really was like before they would understand the message of the gospel. Paul begins explaining to them the sovereign God who created all things and gives life and breath to all things. He continues to explain that it was God who created from one individual all men and nations and even appointed the time and boundaries of their dwelling (Acts 17:26). His message continues as he explains the closeness of God and their need to repent of their rebellion against Him. Paul completes his message by introducing them to the One before whom they would all stand one day and be judged—Jesus Christ, whom God had raised from the dead.
Of course many in the audience scoffed at the idea that Christ was crucified and rose from the dead on the third day because the idea of the resurrection to the Greeks was foolishness (1 Corinthians 1:23). Yet a few believed what Paul said and joined him.
What happened on Mars Hill is important because of the many lessons that can be learned, not only from how Paul presented the gospel and presented a biblical worldview, but also in the varied responses he received. Some of those there that day believed and were saved, others mocked Paul and rejected his message, and still others were open-minded and desired to hear more. We can only hope that those who were open-minded were later convinced of the truth and also repented and believed.
As with all men, those who were confronted with the truth of the gospel and did not respond in faith had no guarantee of a second chance. As Hebrews 3:15 says “Today if you will hear His voice, Do not harden your hearts as in rebellion.” Paul’s message to the philosophers on Mars Hill that day ended with a call to repentance and acceptance of the two fundamental truths of Scripture that Paul was committed to preaching—the crucifixion and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul preached Christ crucified to them as he always did wherever he went (1 Corinthians 2:2).
This is all true, but the fact remains that Paul quoted secular poetry and philosophy that is quite different from his own Jewish background (in stark contrast, actually).
“Let My Love Open the Door” mentions a four-leafed clover in passing. Paul quoted a poem about Zeus, a pagan god, as part of his message. That makes a love song played in church seem tame by comparison (at least to me).
The story of Mars Hill is one of my favorite (and a great example of the truth of scripture; fiction wouldn’t have included those details).
Paul
Many Christians struggle with this question. Many secular musicians are immensely talented. Secular music can be very entertaining. There are many secular songs that have catchy melodies, thoughtful insights, and positive messages. In determining whether or not to listen to secular music, there are three primary factors to consider: 1) the purpose of music, 2) the style of music, and 3) the content of the lyrics.
1) The purpose of music. Is music designed solely for worship, or did God also intend music to be soothing and/or entertaining? The most famous musician in the Bible, King David, primarily used music for the purpose of worshipping God (see Psalm 4:1; 6:1, 54, 55; 61:1; 67:1; 76:1). However, when King Saul was tormented by evil spirits, he would call on David to play the harp in order to soothe him (1 Samuel 16:14-23). The Israelites also used musical instruments to warn of danger (Nehemiah 4:20) and to surprise their enemies (Judges 7:16-22). In the New Testament, the apostle Paul instructs Christians to encourage one another with music: “Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs” (Ephesians 5:19). So, while the primary purpose of music does seem to be worship, the Bible definitely allows for other uses of music.
2) The style of music. Sadly, the issue of music styles can be very divisive among Christians. There are Christians who adamantly demand that no musical instruments be used. There are Christians who only desire to sing the “old faithful” hymns. There are Christians who want more upbeat and contemporary music. There are Christians who claim to worship best in a “rock concert” type of environment. Instead of recognizing these differences as personal preferences and cultural distinctions, some Christians declare their preferred style of music to be the only “biblical” one and declare all other forms of music to be unwholesome, ungodly, or even satanic.
The Bible nowhere condemns any particular style of music. The Bible nowhere declares any particular musical instrument to be ungodly. The Bible mentions numerous kinds of string instruments and wind instruments. While the Bible does not specifically mention drums, it does mention other percussion instruments (Psalm 68:25; Ezra 3:10). Nearly all of the forms of modern music are variations and/or combinations of the same types of musical instruments, played at different speeds or with heightened emphasis. There is no biblical basis to declare any particular style of music to be ungodly or outside of God’s will.
3) The content of the lyrics. Since neither the purpose of music nor the style of music determines whether a Christian should listen to secular music, the content of the lyrics must be considered. While not specifically speaking of music, Philippians 4:8 is an excellent guide for musical lyrics: “Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.” If we should be thinking about such things, surely those are the things we should invite into our minds through music and lyrics. Can the lyrics in a secular song be true, noble, right, pure, lovely, admirable, excellent, and praiseworthy? If so, then there is nothing wrong with a Christian listening to a secular song of that nature.
However, much of secular music does not meet the standard of Philippians 4:8. Secular music often promotes immorality and violence while belittling purity and integrity. If a song glorifies what opposes God, a Christian should not listen to it. However, there are many secular songs with no mention of God that still uphold godly values such as honesty, purity, and integrity. If a love song promotes the sanctity of marriage and/or the purity of true love—even if it does not mention God or the Bible—it can still be listened to and enjoyed.
Whatever a person allows to occupy his mind will sooner or later determine his speech and his actions. This is the premise behind Philippians 4:8 and Colossians 3:2, 5: establishing wholesome thought patterns. Second Corinthians 10:5 says we should “take captive every thought and make it obedient to Christ.” These Scriptures give a clear picture of the kind of music we should not listen to.
Obviously, the best kind of music is that which praises and glorifies God. Talented Christian musicians work in nearly every musical genre, ranging from classical to rock, rap, and reggae. There is nothing inherently wrong with any particular style of music. It is the lyrics that determine whether a song is “acceptable” for a Christian to listen to. If anything leads you to think about or get involved in something that does not glorify God, it should be avoided.
Thanks a lot for your insights Robin.
When you worship the Lord you are entering into God’s realm & worship is to honor our God & maker, why would you want to sing to Him how a four leaf clover can stop your worry?
Revelation 4:9-11
New King James Version (NKJV)
9 Whenever the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks to Him who sits on the throne, who lives forever and ever, 10 the twenty-four elders fall down before Him who sits on the throne and worship Him who lives forever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying:
11 “You are worthy, O Lord,[a]
To receive glory and honor and power;
For You created all things,
And by Your will they exist[b] and were created.”
I really can’t see the elders around the throne & singing a Pete Townsend song, that is all I am saying, again this is my conviction & I don’t expect all to agree, I am a worship leader & I will not be singing about four leaf clovers, I will however sing a new song to honor Him!
Psalm 40:3
He has put a new song in my mouth— Praise to our God; Many will see it and fear, And will trust in the Lord.
So, will you sing the U2 song 40, which is in fact, based on Psalm 40?
Kansas’s “Carry on Wayward Son” performed by Rachel Rachel and Matt Brouwer’s cover of Sheryl Crow’s “I Shall Believe” come to mind. Or what about songs written and performed by someone once billed as a Christian artist who now lives an unbiblical lifestyle? If the lyrics speak spiritual truth, does the origin of the song matter?