Top Christian Songwriters Collaborate Against Suffering
by Ted Slater on 01/14/2008 at 11:05 AM
My favorite songwriters include Steven Curtis Chapman, Chris Tomlin, Matt Redman, Tim Hughes, Martin Smith and Stu Garrard. Imagine what kinds of songs they could generate if brought together for a week-long song-writing retreat?
Now, imagine if you added to the mix Michael W. Smith, Darlene Zschech, Paul Baloche, Israel Houghton, Graham Kendrick and Andy Park. And you set the location in picturesque Perthshire, Scotland.
Well, it happened last week.
The organization that brought them together, Compassionart, was birthed by Delirious? frontman Martin Smith who had the vision to bring about a set of songs that would "raise money for the relief of suffering around the planet." In fact, 100 percent of the profits from these songs -- and they wrote 21 of them together -- will be donated to a variety of charities and ministries, for the life of each song.
While their collaboration may motivate some to engage in self-sacrificial philanthropy, I confess that my imagination is captured by something less sublime: getting my hands on these songs once they're available.
1. Riqui said the following at 12:56 PM on Jan 14:
I heard about this on KLOVE. I'm with you Ted on this one...I'm soooo psyched about getting my hands on these!!
2. Andrew R. (aka Canadian Boy) said the following at 2:33 PM on Jan 14:
Okay, wow. It's like the Christian version of The Travelling Wilburys.
3. Matthew Loftus said the following at 2:50 PM on Jan 14:
Eesh, as happy as I am to hear about this collaboration and the good music it will probably produce, I am skeptical of the buy-this-and-we'll-give-the-money-to-the-needy trend we're observing nowadays. I think that it distracts us from the joy of sacrificially giving and it might reinforce the idea that we can follow God and love others without having to change our lifestyle. The Product (RED) franchise sticks in my mind as a comparable example (though I think it's quite bold and exemplary that 100% of the profits are going to charity.) I hope at least one of the songs emphasizes one of the best ways to help the poor and needy: be frugal in your spending so you can give directly to others in a way that is costly to you. Better yet, take your time and your life and "spend yourselves in behalf of the hungry and satisfy the needs of the oppressed." (Isaiah 58:10a)
4. Ted Slater said the following at 2:57 PM on Jan 14:
Matthew Loftus -- I see your point, but let's not diminish what these musicians are doing. They in fact are practicing a kind of sacrificial giving, not only forfeiting personal income from these songs, but also spending time and money to make these songs happen.
5. Jacob Douvier said the following at 4:12 PM on Jan 14:
Personally, the artists don't appeal to me, given their tendency to write songs aimed at emotional appeal. Frankly, I've always though MWS was overrated. Not bad, just overrated.
I think a slightly different collaboration would be great. Get song writers like Matt Morginsky (of the Supertones), Dan Haseltine (from Jars of Clay) and maybe Jennifer Knapp.
Actually, this project sounds a lot like the City on a Hill projects. Top-names collaborating on stuff.
6. Justice said the following at 4:31 PM on Jan 14:
Matthew, product red gives 3%, not 100%
7. Ted Slater said the following at 5:31 PM on Jan 14:
Jacob -- I'd argue that these writers in fact focus their lyrics on communicating sound doctrine rather than primarily on emotional appeal. At least the ones in the first paragraph of my post.
That said, I am emotionally moved by their work. Nothing wrong with that. :-)
I listened to a City on a Hill project. Once.
8. Rachael said the following at 5:42 PM on Jan 14:
Thanks for bringing our attention to this! It's wonderful they're donating 100% of the profits!
9. Tami said the following at 5:50 PM on Jan 14:
I'm with Matthew... I sort of wish that there were fewer "buy this and we'll give the proceeds"-type things.
I wish we were motivated to give just because God told us to... not because an artist told us to, or because we got a CD out of it.
Sort of sad that we always seem to need famous people to tell us to give (guilt us into giving?) to the poor.
10. Jacob Douvier said the following at 6:36 PM on Jan 14:
Ted,
There's nothing wrong with being moved emotionally, just so long as it's not an end and it moves your mind as well. The artists that I mentioned are people whose songs have made me think and meditate on the truths of God, and not just made me feel "on fire for Jesus." And maybe I was listening to the wrong Delirious albums in high school...
11. Ted Slater said the following at 6:43 PM on Jan 14:
The level of cynicism about this story is distressing. It feels like a lot of people are making far too much of its "charitable" side. These musicians just wanted to do something nice, and here they are being criticized for doing so. They're not trying to make anyone feel guilty about their level of generosity; they're merely doing what's in their ability to make this world a better place.
As I mentioned in my original post, while I think these musicians' generosity is great, what I'm really excited about is hearing what they'll have produced. The good it may do in the world is just a happy byproduct.
12. Silas Wong said the following at 6:44 PM on Jan 14:
I am definitely looking forward to this release. It's so international, maybe us Canadians will have a chance at getting it at the same time as other countries!
Although it is easy to poke at songwriters and celebrities, I don't see this as any different from a pastor exhorting his congregation to let God lead them in their lives, and then those in turn go out and lead great examples in their everyday jobs.
Songwriters and worship leaders have an example to set, and this group seems to be doing just that through their everyday jobs of making great (hopefully theologically sound AND emotionally appealing) music... (a song that doesn't move me or make me want to sing has no lasting impact)
13. Ted Slater said the following at 8:02 PM on Jan 14:
Jacob -- I agree with you.
To see a fuller explanation of my thoughts on this, see this blog post and this blog post (both Boundless-related), and this forum post (not Boundless-related).
14. k. said the following at 8:10 PM on Jan 14:
I love Matt Redman -- I'd look into this CD based on that alone!
15. Elizabeth said the following at 9:25 PM on Jan 14:
I agree with Jacob (and Ted) that the primary goal of "worship" songs (I hate labeling songs like that, but I digress) is to point us to the truth found in the Bible. Emotions are just a tag-along to that truth.
When I first read this post and saw the artists, doctrinal truths weren't the types of songs I associated with them. Maybe, like Jacob, I listened to the wrong Deliriou5? cds in highschool, too...
Maybe I am just too cynical. I applaud their efforts for wanting to help others. And like previous posters have mentioned, I wish we didn't have to buy cds to give to the poor. It's a sad reflection on our society (myself definitely included) that we have to buy cds from artists we like to help someone else.
16. Tami said the following at 9:44 PM on Jan 14:
(You did expect us to comment on the charitable side, no? It was mentioned in the title of the blog post...)
If these folks (worship minded, all) want to get together and play music to the glory of God -- awesome. And record it, share it, and publish it? Even better for those who appreciate their music. And if the artists want to give financially to the glory of God -- even more praiseworthy.
I am commenting on our (Americans', at least) seeming need to have a celebrity endorse doing something (e.g., giving) before we would consider doing so ourselves. I don't think that calling that into question is cynical. I'm concerned about our tendency to avoid taking action unless we get something out of it. As believers, we should be motivated to give to the needy *before* someone famous or noteworthy tells us to do so. Certainly, we shouldn't act on expectation of getting something (save the hope of an eternal reward). I worry about an attitude that says, "Oh, I bought that charity CD so I don't need to tithe this week" or "I give to charity -- I bought a t-shirt."
Not saying the project is bad, or that the people doing it have bad motivations, or that everyone who buys it is merely hoping to check "charitable giving" off their lists of things to do. Of those names I recognize in the blog post, I know that they have sincere hearts for God. I hope the music is Spirit-filled and a blessing to many. But will we as a church and a nation get to the point that an influential person has to tell us to tithe before we're inspired to drop our envelope in the plate, or that we'll need a celebrity's stamp of approval before we consider a charity worth giving to?
17. Matthew Loftus said the following at 10:08 PM on Jan 14:
I don't think I meant to be cynical about the artists, but I guess I think it's wisest to be cautious about anything that makes us more it easier for us to give in a way that is removed from the recipient. Projects like this aren't all bad by any means, but we have to be careful about where our hearts for the poor are-- submitting to God, or to our CD player? (note: the last sentence is rhetorical excess, I know. I just want to express a note of caution, not disdain or cynicism.)
18. Fred said the following at 11:17 PM on Jan 14:
Ted,
I don't think people (2 people) are criticising the artists themselves but the society which needs them to do things like this in order to help others.
19. Justice said the following at 12:15 AM on Jan 15:
Once again, Boundless censoring, when will Boundless become a 'real' blog-line?
Let's not be misleading about product Red
Apple sells an iPod for $200, profit being $80. Now, people say product Red gives 100% of their profits, which can mislead you to believe that that is $80 when in fact it is $6. Now, $6 is much appreciated but really they are a middleman.
20. Matthew Loftus said the following at 2:15 PM on Jan 15:
Tami said it way better than I. But I will add that I think it was Ron Sider in his book "The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience" that said only 6% of evangelicals tithe and according to the latest studies we also very similar rates as our non-Christian peers when it comes to divorce and pre-marital sex. So there's something lacking in our obedience to the Bible, frankly, and I think it's shameful that we have to be at a point where someone needs to sell a CD to get Christians to give more to charity. Statistically speaking, we do a little better than the pagans but not by too too much. If you look at the church in Acts 4, it looked different. If affluent evangelicals realistically and sacrificially gave like they should (and I am implicating myself in this, too-- I could always do better), the world would be a far different place.
21. John said the following at 8:45 AM on Jan 16:
Matt,
You generalizations are too much to break down on this blog.
Simply put, your "statistics" are flawed and not exact.
Remember, lots of people profess Christ, not as many actually ARE Christian.
Every television ministry I've seen offers something in return for giving.
You wanna give more, give more, but don't criticize the true church for nominals' failures.
22. Tami said the following at 10:16 AM on Jan 16:
Statistics are imperfect, and I don't feel they're always definitive, but good research does give us a sense of trends. The Barna Group is among the most trusted of those doing research in evangelical Christian circles. Their stats on tithing and stewardship (about 5 years old, but that's what they had on their site):
http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=Topic&TopicID=3
Note that some of these specifically mention that the respondents identified themselves as "born again". Among those identified as having an active faith (as marked by reading the Bible, praying, and regular church attendance), *12 percent* tithe (that is, give 10% or more of annual income).
John -- Rather than simply criticizing Matthew, can you provide some documentation of your own? Believe me, I'll be ecstatic if you can show that giving is not in so sad a shape as it shows here.
23. Stephanie said the following at 12:01 PM on Jan 16:
Elizabeth,
I disagree. I believe that the function of music is primarily emotional -- that is what music is, that is what it is for. It is our emotional connection to God in the same way that reading and thinking about the Bible is our intellectual connection to God. That is not to say that music is ONLY emotional, just that it is PRIMARILY emotional. God created emotions as a special way of us connecting to him, and they are no less a worthy means of connecting to him than the mind is. I believe the key is balance; we need to have emotional, intellectual, and relational means of communing with God without neglecting any one of those.
24. John said the following at 3:22 PM on Jan 16:
It is assanine to call yourself Christian and not tithe!
It's one of the clearest commands in the bible.
Tithing is not giving, it's returning.
You can't find statistics that identify true Christians, it's not possible.
That's my point. Do you really believe that born agains are divorcing at a higher rate than non-believers? If so, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.
25. Tami said the following at 4:23 PM on Jan 16:
John, I agree that tithing is a critical part of our call to discipleship. However, I can't deny that, for whatever reason, many people whose faith I'm in no position to question (as I am not Judge!) are failing to give to the church. I would hazard a guess that one factor is a lack of clear teaching on the matter -- it seems as though any time a pastor brings up the subject, he's accused of being a "money grubber," so it's no surprise they shy away from the topic (even though it's critical and biblical for them to address it).
I'm not going to discuss this point further -- not because I'm walking away from the discussion, but because I realize I am drifting away from the point of Ted's post.