Music Mondays - Can a heretic still teach (or sing ) God's truth?

I came across this article over the weekend and there were parts I liked and others I didn't like. I agreed with some of it and disagreed with enough of it that I began formulating a response in my head that I realized would make a good Music Monday post.

Now I fully admit critiquing another's critique may be a low-brow approach in a form (blogging) that is already low-brow. But my aim is not to trash anyone's opinion. only to critically think through this issue - and do so within the parameters the author himself sets. Let me also admit at the top that I own 1 song by Bethel on iTunes ("You Make Me Brave") and I'm not sure our church has ever used their music.

To sum the article up, or just give you a TL;DR version, the author uses the following four questions to ultimately conclude that churches shouldn't use Bethel Music's worship songs*:

1. Are you examining everything you consume through the lens of God’s Word?
2. Does the song stand on its own, proclaiming the truth of God’s Word without explanation?
3. Is it possible to separate the truth being sung from the error of its associations?
4. Would using the song cause us to actively support an errant ministry?

*To be fair, the author doesn't explicitly write that Bethel Music should be avoided. But it is clearly implied.

I completely agree with the first two standards the author provides. It would be accurate to say that they are biblical criteria even. 

Here's why I believe the article fails to fully make it's point. The author provides no evidence that Bethel's music fails to meet the biblical standards in either of the first two areas. One would expect each of those four criteria to shed negative light on Bethel's worship music. Yet under the first two questions, no particular lyric and no songs are given to demonstrate the problematic nature of their worship music. There are nods towards questionable teachings in Bethel's church ministry but the author doesn't even hint that any particular song fails to line up with God's Word.

I am not convinced by the case the author makes for the third and fourth standards either. I believe they are worthy questions. But I am not sure they have as strong of a biblical basis, nor does the article convince me that Bethel Music disqualifies itself in these areas. 

The last question is the easiest for me. Someone can show me the CCLI receipts and prove me wrong, but if an individual church sings one or two of their songs a month, that is 12-24 a year. I doubt the royalties are very significant at that level. I'm sure there would be more egregious examples of this kind of "bad support" if we scrutinized the list of corporations that our retirement plans are invested in or if we evaluated moral quality of the Hollywood production studios we support when we go to the movies. 

With the case of question #3, the author actually makes a good argument for embracing music from Bethel earlier in the article. He cites three classic hymns from three different writers who each had problematic views on various doctrinal issues. Are we sure Bethel is more erroneous than those examples? We aren't advocating Luther's anti-Semitism when we sing "A Mighty Fortress" nor are we affirming all of Bethel's theology by singing their version of "It is Well". And how realistic is it for our people to leave our ministries to embrace with Bethel's questionable doctrinal beliefs as the author implies? What does that say about my church's ministry if my people are so easily swayed by a doctrinally-sound song authored by a theologically-questionable church? 

This gets us to a larger question. Can a heretic ever teach God's truth? Could they author a song that is truthful? 

I'm of the persuasion that all truth is God's truth. I will not seek out secular psychologists for discipleship principles, but I might seek out their observations for how to best deal with addicts or those dealing with mental health issues. A con man who leads revival services so he can fill his pockets rather than save souls can still be a vehicle through which the Spirit convicts hearts. The Bible is full of examples of less-than-worthy vessels being used to further God's Kingdom. He even uses a donkey to prophesy at one point!

In the end, I wonder if this concern over Bethel Music could be an example more like Mark 9:38-41 than Arius. Yes, I find the reports of their theological drifting to be troubling. Yes, I think some of their "spontaneous worship" tacked on the end of their live performances is likely planned and it is certainly not my style. But if there are no glaring doctrinal problems with their worship music and if their music library instead has Christ-honoring qualities - what is specifically wrong with using it for your own God-glorifying purpose?