How to determine what to listen to

[anon50218184]

Several years ago I came across a talk by a member of Opus Angelorum in which a connection is made between the tripartite nature of the soul and the tripartite nature of music.
To put it briefly the argument states that the three parts of music (rhythm, harmony, and melody) correspond to the three parts of the soul (the appetitive, spirited, and rational) and just like the appetitive and spirited parts of the soul ought to be subservient to the rational part of the soul, rhythm and harmony ought to be subservient to melody in music.
The talk also argues that the music is the language of the soul, that it has a more powerful effect on the soul than other art forms. I don’t recall the reasons for this argument, but it seemed to resonate with me.
The conclusion of the talk was one should be discerning in what kind of music one listens to. The speaker specifically said that while listening to a particular kind of music won’t necessarily result in your inability to practice virtue, it can make things more difficult.

An interesting point about the talk was the argument that a song might be detrimental to the soul even though it had good or even Biblical lyrics.

I think that taking the time to be discerning in what you listen to is wise. Most of the music we encounter is probably innocent enough or has redeeming qualities. However, is it possible that there are certain songs, bands, or even genres that ought to be completely off-limits?

A song that might be considered off limits might be something like From Here to Eternity by Iron Maiden which has the chorus
"Hell ain’t a bad place
Hell is from here to eternity"
This song seems to trivialize Hell and that can be very misleading and dangerous.

Another off-limits song might be a song that robs sexuality of its dignity.

Perhaps an off-limits band might be AC/DC because so many of their songs reference Hell (“I’m on the highway to hell” or “forget about the tab, we’ll get hell to pay”), or glorify evil (“if you’re into evil you’re a friend of mine”).

Helloween might be another off-limits band because of their name, even though their songs don’t have anything to do with Hell or Satan to the best of my knowledge.

Perhaps the whole genre of Heavy Metal should be condemned considering how many heavy metal bands and songs are about dark or evil things.

Some might argue that certain genres have redeeming qualities, the sheer technical talent required to play heavy metal, for example, or that there are bands that don’t glorify or trivialize hell, satan, or evil. Some might even point to studies that show the strong similarities between heavy metal and classical music.

I’ve singled out heavy metal and its sub-genres because they seem to be the most evidently satanic, but you could argue that every genre suffers from this phenomenon. After all, the evil one wants to destroy everything that is good and beautiful.

I guess the question is, can we come up with some hard and fast rule to help discern whether a song, band, or genre can be listened to?

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

Banned from what?

Mass? Without a doubt.

Catholic Radio Sation? Absolutely.

From the ears of everyone on Earth? No. If you don’t like it, don’t listen and don’t allow it in your house.

I don’t like Country/Western, rap, and electronica. None of them are sinful in themselves.

There is no hard and fast rule because there are no hard and fast internal inner workings of a person. One might be a highly sensitive soul and find Mariah Carey causes them to sin or be tempted to sin. Others can listen to music that has non-heretical lyrics but a bunch of other undesirable things and be fine.

That said, we can probably easily discern that it’s bad to listen to songs laced with vulgarity and heresies because we tend to become what we surround ourselves with.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Oh good grief. There is a ton of Christian-themed heavy metal out there, and quite a bit of other heavy metal that is somewhere between mundane and uplifting in its theme.

Banning music is about as productive as banning books. People take a lot of different messages away from what they read and hear. Context and the mindset of the reader/listener influence the outcome a great deal. What one person can read or listen to and be just fine might be a problem for someone else of a different age, background, or mindset, but in that case it’s better to just tell the person with the problem to abstain than to ban the work for everybody.

 

[pianistclare]

Some things are really over-thought.

People have to be responsible for what they listen to, read, absorb, and expose themselves to.
We used to call it “guarding our soul”.
This cannot be regulated because we all know what happens when we tell someone they CAN’T.
Particularly in church.
Lots of denominations were birthed by this notion of “I’ll do what I think is best for ME”.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

Some things are really over-thought.

People have to be responsible for what they listen to, read, absorb, and expose themselves to.
We used to call it “guarding our soul”.
This cannot be regulated because we all know what happens when we tell someone they CAN’T.
Particularly in church.
Lots of denominations were birthed by this notion of “I’ll do what I think is best for ME”.

LOL YES

Banning things never works. My college roommate was a rabid strict Baptist when she first arrived to College. She was going to live her faith NO MATTER WHAT. When our RA put the monthly new door decorations on, she tore it off—why? Because it WAS AN EVIL PUMPKIN and SHE did not celebrate Haloween.

She looked like a lunatic.

Eventually, logic prevailed and she realized that banning things only lead to misunderstanding and she realized that having been banned from holidays, books, food, etc during her childhood only lead her to be afraid and angry at boogeymen who didn’t exist.

 

[ChunkMonk]

I’ll gice the unpopular answer and say yes. Much of modern “music” should be banned from public use and the distribution of it should be illegal.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

I’ll gice the unpopular answer and say yes. Much of modern “music” should be banned from public use and the distribution of it should be illegal.

You’re going to have to elaborate a bit more. Please, tell us how you’d enforce this and what kind of punishments you’d assign to people who distributed, produced and consumed things you felt were inappropriate.

 

[ChunkMonk]

Enforce it the same way you enforce any obscenity law. I would probably classify it as a misdemeanor, so probably a fine for the first offense and then potential jail time (not prison) for further offenses. Consuming the music would not be illegal, not even necessarily producing it, and not even necessarily playing it in private. Just public use and public distribution. I wouldn’t beat down doors to confiscate someones IPod or their guitar, but I would punish obstinate offenders.

Sale and distribution to minors would be a more serious offense. Higher fines and more jail time, but still not a felony.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

Enforce it the same way you enforce any obscenity law. I would probably classify it as a misdemeanor, so probably a fine for the first offense and then potential jail time (not prison) for further offenses. Consuming the music would not be illegal, not even necessarily producing it, and not even necessarily playing it in private. Just public use and public distribution. I wouldn’t beat down doors to confiscate someones IPod or their guitar, but I would punish obstinate offenders.

Sale and distribution to minors would be a more serious offense. Higher fines and more jail time, but still not a felony.

Which works with old music distribution systems. But mainstream music systems are literally dying. Today you have youtube, Spotify, etc and plenty of channels for people to share.

Even major concerts can be private events these days.

But again, you’re still saying it would “never” be a felony. But then how are you going to actually punish your offenders? Jail and more jail? And you’d make musicians card people to get music? We can’t even get carding straight for alcohol and tobacco.

And I’m guessing you’re somehow subverting American laws on free speech.

 

[ChunkMonk]

YouTube would have some tough choices to make I guess. Since they do this already with pornography and extreme violence, I figure they have the capability to filter out whatever they want. The same would go for any streaming company.

A large concert would fall under distribution.

I would punish them with fines and potentially jail time for repeat offenders. If they keep offending then they will keep getting fined and jailed. Driving without a licence is a misdemeanor too. Never becomes a felony, no matter how many times you do it. If a person insists on breaking the law then they will deal with the consequences. If those consequences aren’t enough to dissuade them then bully for them.

Well, any distribution at all would be illegal. So this is like asking if we will force drug-dealers to card. I guess they can if they want, but most probably won’t.

Unfortunately for us, American free speech laws are not divinely inspired nor are they salvific.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

YouTube would have some tough choices to make I guess. Since they do this already with pornography and extreme violence, I figure they have the capability to filter out whatever they want. The same would go for any streaming company.

A large concert would fall under distribution.

I would punish them with fines and potentially jail time for repeat offenders. If they keep offending then they will keep getting fined and jailed. Driving without a licence is a misdemeanor too. Never becomes a felony, no matter how many times you do it. If a person insists on breaking the law then they will deal with the consequences. If those consequences aren’t enough to dissuade them then bully for them.

Well, any distribution at all would be illegal. So this is like asking if we will force drug-dealers to card. I guess they can if they want, but most probably won’t.

Unfortunately for us, American free speech laws are not divinely inspired nor are they salvific.

LOL and thank GOD they protect us from the Thought Poliece in America.

To equate verbal vulgarity with pornography is beyond pale.

 

[ChunkMonk]

Verbal vulgarity can send you to Hell just as fast as porn.

I can’t really see an argument for obscene music being allowed.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

Verbal vulgarity can send you to Hell just as fast as porn.

What? Umm no. Especially since properly used vulgarity in righteous anger is acceptable.

Porn is never, ever acceptable, ever.

 

[MchaelPatrick]

Banned, no. Regulated, yes. Perhaps like movie ratings. But if it works as well as any other regulation it’s probably a waste of time.

 

[ChunkMonk]

When would these be appropriate?

“They’ll find you wit’ your back open and your legs cut off/And as for your man, don’t you ever in your expletive life/Know when I gotta gun come at me wit’ a knife, a’ight?/And forgetting you ever saw me is the best thing to do/Don’t give a expletive about your family, they’ll be resting with you”

“Going off on the expletive like that/With a gat that’s pointed at your expletive/So give it up smooth/Ain’t no telling when I’m down for a jack move/Here’s a murder rap to keep y’all dancing/With a crime record like Charles Manson/AK-47 is the tool/Don’t make me act a expletive fool”

“I used to love her, too bad I had to put a slug through her/Dumped her body in the trash like I never knew her/Blood runnin down the gutter into the sewer/Her body stunk for weeks like horse manure”

“Man I murder fo’ fun but my job is never done/From morning morn’ to the setting of the sun/Bad men come come, come get murdered for fun/The hundred round drum in my tommy gun”

Righteous anger, huh?

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

Banned, no. Regulated, yes. Perhaps like movie ratings. But if it works as well as any other regulation it’s probably a waste of time.

Actually, look at the difference between music/TV/movie ratings and video game ratings.

The first was set up by the government and uses a miss-match of laws, rules and social cues to decide the rating. Smoking can get an R but nudity can be fine…because…rules. Each piece of media is judged by “focus groups” and can change depending on who invited that day and how they feel like enforcing the rules. It would not be uncommon for a movie to get a “PG” by one group and an “R” by another…and both are considered valid. :crazy_face:

Video games, on the other hand, are rated by video game professionals who consistently apply standards by their self-governing body. The professionals peer review and govern themselves deciding on firm boundaries.

So it could be done well, but only by people in the know.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

Now you’re getting ridiculous.

I’m not saying swearing is always good. I’m saying that it is NOT always bad.

It would be inappropriate to ban these words because you don’t like them. Many of these artists use this kind of language and narrative to express their point of view with the language that they are around.

What “cleaning up” these songs or forbidding them would simply turn into continual “whitewashing” as the primary targets so far for “anti-profanity” laws would be the music of minorities.

 

[ChunkMonk]

Okay, but two out of those four lyric samplings didn’t have any cursing at all. So it’s not about curse-words.

Many of these “artists” are expressing the point of view that they are cold-blooded killers who will rape and murder without hesitation or sorrow. I know you that you know I couldn’t even post the worst of it, even with the expletives removed a lot of it would be inappropriate to post. So let me ask you, is that kind of “music” in any way justifiable from a Christian perspective? Is it in any way good? Don’t whitewash it with a subtly-racist “they are just expressing themselves artistically” argument. They are communicating evil. Pure and simple.

There are country songs on the radio right now that I would ban. Along with a lot of Top 40 and a lot of Rock and Metal. Not necessarily because or cursing, but because the ideas and communicated attitudes are obscene. Promiscuous sex, drug abuse, and blasphemy are not good. Ever. For any reason. They have no spiritual value. At all. They do not please God, in any way.

The devil loves promoting sin and evil through music. He should not be allowed to do it. And if that means someone has to go without their sinful, hellish music then so be it. We all have to make sacrifices.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

You’d ban. Becuase you don’t like it.

Again, you can’t legislate morality.

And, again, like it or not, the primary target of this legislated morality is those who are not white.

And if you want to go down the “ban” route with music because God doesn’t like it–how far are you willing to go? No gummy bears because they have no nutritional value? No big houses because they provide more house than anyone would reasonably need? No rich people because Jesus said rich can’t go to Heaven?

I mean, gummy bears provide NO nutritional value. Sugar is a huge killer. You can go without, right, for the good of humanity?

Again I’m not arguing for the music. No doubt some of it is bad, maybe even evil I’m only arguing against frivolous bans that would likely create more interest and drive for the music, anyhow.

 

[SuperLuigi]

The only hard and fast rule is to follow your conscience.

I’m confused by the title versus your post though. You say should something be banned, but that’s different than just choosing not to listen to it.