1 of 3

Two weeks ago, we posted a thoughtful commentary from Kate Bowman entitled, "Secular, Sacred, or Both?" The essay looked at Christian artists in the mainstream and argued that the line between secular and sacred music is often a blurry one—if it exists at all.

Last week, we posted a somewhat controversial rebuttal from Jim Pruitt, "Have Crossover Artists Sold Out?" Pruitt made some strong statements in his article, claiming that Christian artists in the mainstream are "more carnal than spiritual."

We thought Pruitt's essay might spark some reader response, and sure enough, it most certainly did, prompting more letters than perhaps any article we've ever run in our five-plus years online.

Most readers disagreed with Pruitt, but a few thought he made some valid points, like Sam Brose, who wrote that crossover artists have "lost the focus on what they are supposed to do with God's gift. They've crossed over to make more money. My wife and I are [musicians], and we could do secular cover tunes to make a great living. But then we would miss out on [the opportunity] to change a single life because of the Word of God. We are focused on what God has sent us to do, and that's why we will never cross over."

Michael "SHOK" Gomes, an emerging hip-hop artist weighing the balance of faith and artistry, wrote: "I have struggled with this issue in the creative process of my most recent work. I have been very successful in the secular hip-hop market. I have dedicated all my work to Christ now. Making secular records was purely based on the commercial value and airplay potential. But when I did a recent album for God's glory, not mine, my thinking changed. I had some great ideas that would appeal to the masses, but under the conviction of the Holy Spirit, I examined my motives and I ended up cutting out many songs and recording new ones."

But most disagreed with Pruitt, however, including Kate Bowman: "As the author of the original commentary, I want to respond to Pruitt's contention that crossover artists are on a quest for superstardom. While I certainly recognize that tendency in some, I can vouch that the people I mentioned in my article are not that sort of musician. In my personal experience with their art, their numerous performances, and behind-the-scenes chats at the college where I work, they are genuinely interested in making good art that speaks the truth—which is not synonymous with "loving the world." Pruitt's disdain for the intentions of artists of integrity like Sufjan Stevens, Bill Mallonee, and Sarah Masen makes me wonder if he's ever attempted to engage with their music or if he's just making an unfounded generalization."

"Pruitt's commentary misses the mark on many levels," wrote Hilary Landis. "It is right to question artists who have [compromised their] faith.But [that doesn't mean] artists seeking to honor God with their lives and talents shouldn't receive recognition from mainstream critics and non-Christian listeners. Very few Christians would consider C. S. Lewis a sellout because of his symbolic writing and the mainstream success of The Chronicles of Narnia."

Gary D. Kersey disputed Pruitt's claim that Christianity has never "overtaken and consumed popular secular culture." Wrote Kersey: "One case comes to mind: Dr Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement. Dr. King believed he was under conviction to represent Jesus in stating that equality is a God-given right. Today, Dr. King's ideas of equality and civil rights have found nearly unanimous approval in this country. As Christians, do we want to be a 'shining city on a hill,' or are we content with finger-pointing, knee-jerk legalism, and [divisive] theology? Bravo to Christian artists who wish to express the beauty and truth of God in unique and personal ways."
>

next page... |  1 of 3