Labels: Entertainment, Reflections
At 3/29/2006 08:58:00 AM, Julie
it was more like mike said about hitting you upside the head with a sermon. Her whole performance came across as a worship leader trying to rally a charismatic crowd up into worship. She not just sang, she shouted preachy things at the crowd. the genre of her song was outside the typical pop expectations of American Idol (as was the heavy heavy rock song of the next contestant) - both were personal choices they were allowed to make, but indulgent in that they cared more about their personal taste than the needs of the audience and the "rules" of the contest. While if Chris gets voted off for his choice to sing heavy rock people will just agree that his choice was too indulgent. But if Mandisa gets voted off it will be blamed on antichristian feelings...
At 4/04/2006 03:18:00 PM, Brother Paul
I didn't watch that episode, but just reading your account of it makes me cringe. It's unfortunate that the gospel has been relegated down to another form of secular entertainment. Maybe I'm a bit old fashioned, but I always try to visualize someone like Paul or Jeremiah or John the Baptist standing before King Herod, singing lovey-dovey stuff about Jesus, hoping to win a talent competition.
I think the whole thing is an embarassment, and it saddens me that Christians are not divorced from worldly entertainment, as God commands us to be. Sure, we need to reach these people, but if you wanted to reach a porno star, would you audition for a part in the movie?
Very thought-provoking post. It upset me, and I can express a soladarity with your line of reasoning.
In Christ,
Paul West
Hmmm, that indulgent idea makes me think, but I'm not sure I can agree completely. If she picked a 21st cen song on world hunger or some other platform, would it have been received differently? Was it received as indulgent because it infringes on the taboo of "religion and politics?" If so, is that a valid distinction?