Pastor Femi Lazarus’s recent sermon has sparked considerable debate within the Nigerian gospel music scene, centered on the financial expectations of gospel ministers. Lazarus argues vehemently that true music ministry should be driven by a divine calling, not by commercial interests. He distinguishes between “music ministers,” who offer their talents as a form of service to the church, and “music artists,” who operate within the secular music industry and are entitled to charge for their performances. According to Lazarus, a music minister’s primary affiliation should be with a local church, where they receive doctrinal grounding and spiritual guidance. He emphasizes that their ministry should be an extension of their church involvement, not a separate, profit-driven enterprise. Charging fees for performances, he contends, transforms the act of ministry into a business transaction. He uses prominent gospel artists like Nathaniel Bassey and Bukola Bekes as examples of ministers who prioritize their service within the church.
Lazarus acknowledges the need for gospel ministers to support themselves financially but suggests that those not called into full-time ministry should seek alternative income sources. He encourages them to pursue education, develop professional skills, and engage in business ventures to ensure financial stability. This, he believes, will prevent them from feeling exploited by the church and allow them to serve freely, without financial pressure. He also suggests that ministers can establish academies to teach music professionally, where charging fees is acceptable as it involves imparting knowledge and skills. This distinction clarifies that while ministry should remain free from commercialization, the teaching of musical skills falls under a different category. He criticizes the notion that ministers should endure financial hardship as part of their calling, emphasizing the scriptural responsibility to provide for one’s family.
Addressing the issue of churches employing full-time music ministers on salary, Lazarus concedes that such arrangements are permissible as long as they facilitate dedication and focus on ministry, rather than becoming transactional agreements. He stresses the importance of churches recognizing and supporting their music ministers, noting that many struggle financially due to a lack of assistance. This highlights his belief that churches bear a responsibility to care for those who dedicate their time and talents to serving the congregation. He warns against pastors pressuring ministers to fund their own promotion through expensive marketing campaigns, arguing that true promotion comes from God, not through self-promotion or controversial tactics. He also cautions Christian YouTubers against exploiting controversies within the church for financial gain, emphasizing the importance of unity and integrity within the body of Christ.
Lazarus’s stance draws a sharp line between ministry and business within the gospel music sphere. He criticizes pastors who pay music artists for performances disguised as ministry, emphasizing the divine judgment that awaits such practices. He asserts that music ministry should stem from a genuine calling, rooted in the local church, and driven by a desire to serve God, not by financial gain. He challenges the prevailing culture within some segments of the gospel music industry, where performances have become increasingly commercialized, often mimicking the practices of secular artists. This critique, he argues, is not aimed at devaluing the talent and effort of gospel musicians but rather at clarifying the distinction between serving the church and pursuing a music career.
Lazarus’s call for gospel ministers to pursue alternative income streams reflects a practical approach to ministry in a demanding economic climate. He recognizes that financial pressures can hinder effective ministry and encourages ministers to equip themselves with the skills and resources necessary to provide for themselves and their families. His emphasis on education, professional development, and entrepreneurship suggests a holistic view of ministry, where service to the church is integrated with personal and professional growth. This approach aims to empower ministers to serve freely, without the burden of financial insecurity, fostering a more sustainable and effective model for music ministry.
The controversy sparked by Lazarus’s sermon highlights the ongoing tension between ministry and marketplace within the gospel music industry. His strong stance challenges the status quo, calling for a reassessment of values and priorities. While some may disagree with his views, the discussion he has initiated is crucial for the long-term health and integrity of gospel music. His emphasis on service, accountability, and the importance of the local church provides a framework for evaluating the role of music within the Christian community. The debate surrounding financial expectations in gospel music is far from settled, but Lazarus’s contribution has undoubtedly sharpened the focus on this important issue.
