Enter your email address to receive updates by email:

subscribe in a reader like my facebook page follow me on twitter Image Map
Podcast Message Line: 512-222-3389
Logos Catholic Bible Software

« I Just Love This Story | Main | The Nature of Hell »

April 02, 2007

Comments

Arieh

I would offer one correction to the CNS article, the "Tridentine" mass was used far longer than 400 years. "Tridentine" is a misnomer, as if the mass had been an invention of the Council of Trent. It should be more properly called, as many like Monsignor Gamber argue, the mass of St. Gregory the Great (like how the Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholics have the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrisostom). The Traditional Roman Rite remained relatively unchanged in all its essentials for over 1500 years. To destroy that kind of organic liturgical development was foolish and has reaped some horrible results in the liturgy.

I pray that the Holy Father will indeed free the Old Rite, the Church needs to be re-anchored in Her own liturgical Tradition again.

Tim J.

WOOT!

I am praying there will be a TLM available in our area, soon.

BXVI says very correctly that the Novus Ordo was too much, too quickly, and with very poor catechesis to back it up.

However, it is a valid mass, and the Pope has always acknowledged that. Both those who reject the TLM and those who reject the NO are in error.

If not for the NO, my family would have to have been content with no mass at all in our area. I would never have acted in disobedience to my Bishop by attending a schismatic mass.

But I am VERY happy to hear of the possible return of the TLM.

A.Williams

I won't make any apology for the N.O. Mass at all, findng it to be highly edifying if done the way it's suppose to. Really, a liturgy is not some magical rite, but a communion with the 'biblical' Jesus. And everyone who studies well the Lord of the Gospels finds that he was well accustomed to 'dining with Sinners', preaching to the poor, and railing against the 'leaven of the Pharisees'. If anything He warned AGAINST excessive formalism in religion!

So, there is NOTHING wrong with the N.O. Liturgy!
What is needed is a proper understanding of it, which is a 'pastoral' and 'catequetical' issue. And this is what Benedict is doing..trying to give these catequetical lessons on the liturgy through documents such as Redemptionis Sacramentum and Sacramentum Caritiatis, amongst others.

The problem is, is that Catholics need to do what all Christians have done since the transfiguration of Mount Tabor..."LISTEN TO HIM"! We need to listen to Christ speaking in the Church, and follow these teachings!

However, I do believe the Motu Propio will be great for trying to connect us to the liturgical traditions of the past, and also inspire a more profound N.O. Liturgy. But what is needed most is just good ole' OBEDIENCE to the teachings, regulations and 'norms' that we already have...with the future Motu Propio being included!

BillyHW

If anything He warned AGAINST excessive formalism in religion!

Have you by any chance read the book of Leviticus, which He wrote?

Realist

Leviticus was written/inspired by God!!! Hmmm!!!! But did He not also write/inspire the N.O.??

A.Williams

BillyHW,

I'm not against ritual, but rather FOR the correct application of it. We all know how Jesus viewed the ways of the Pharisees. I'm really not comparing the Old MAss to the Pharisees in any way, but rather stressing the there is really nothing wrong with the current the N.O. Mass. The problem, as 'Redemptionis Sacramentum' teaches, is with the 'abuses'.

However, the styles of the liturgies are different, with the Old Mass being somewhat more formal in that it uses the Latin. However, we go to Mass to worship God, and to be united with Jesus in the Holy Eucharist. And we also remember that Jesus was the same Lord who walked amongst men, and ate with Sinners!
So, the style of the Litugy is secondary to the presence of the Lord in the Blessed Sacrament. And what is needed is for an increased catequises to teach everyone who this 'Eucharistic' Lord really is. For this we need to know well the scriptures.

Gospel in the Liturgy and Eucharist in the Liturgy...they go together! If we know well both, any approved liturgical rite should be satifactory.

Jordan Potter

"But did He not also write/inspire the N.O.??"

No. That's "N" "O" -- no, He did not inspire the Novus Ordo. He has only inspired the books of Holy Scripture. Liturgical texts and traditions are not divinely inspired, but would be divinely guided and informed.

"So, there is NOTHING wrong with the N.O. Liturgy!"

Let us pray that one day soon faithful Catholics will be free to attend a Mass again that doesn't depend only upon the Priest for its reverence and beauty, a Mass where active participation refers primarily to interior spiritual participation more than it does on apparent external participation, and hopefully a Mass where one will never ever hear Amazing Grace or Were You There sung, and where one is not forced to hold hands with neighbors and shake hands with strangers right before Holy Communion!!! Is that too much to ask? People who are bored by reverence, beauty and silence should always be free to attend the New Mass. One should not throw pearls before ...

A.Williams

..Again, these are all abuses! What is needed is discipline and catequesis in the N.O. Liturgy, which Benedict XVI is currently trying to promote. This is probably the real reason behind the Motu Propio to begin with. However, all of this might take some time?

I also hope and pray that at every Mass the Lord will be honored and adored as He ought to be, whether it be in the old or the new liturgy.

Esperanto Christopher

I am curious about the ramifications of the motu propio from an architectural standpoint. I can not envision the old mass in a modern-looking church structure that looks more like a barren protest church. Will they have to install temporary rails? Will they have to move the tabernacle? I can see some having more problems, such as having to move the drum kits out of the way of the chant choir.

As a post-Vatican II cradle Catholic, I don't know very much about the old way of doing things. I envision where at Communion, if you are in a state of sin, and should not receive, one could approach the altar and leave before receiving the Body, without calling attention to the fact that you have refrained. In the current "orderly" approach, if you don't go with the line, you are basically an obstacle and people may wonder what is wrong with you... are you not Catholic, are you harboring a grudge against the Church, just what exactly are you here for? So, under a kind of peer pressure, they receive with no confession, and make a habit of it.

Slowboy

"So, there is NOTHING wrong with the N.O. Liturgy!"

I wish I could film our pastor celebrating his Sunday mass. If all priests did their masses in his fashion then the clamor for the Trentian mass would have been much quieter.

Anonymous Catholic Diary entery dated 2020:

Oh, how I wish I weren't FORCED into a mass in some language I don't understand though my friends who speak Latin tell me the priest mangles the language so badly that they don't follow him either especially as he knows that no one understands him so he skips parts and tossing in nice sounding pharases in others.

Oh, If only the OLD mass in English were allowed! Then we could follow these priests and discipline them when they err and stray.

I suspect Jesus could find fault with every Mass said since the first one. It is, after all, our interior that matters more than the exterior...(Please note the qualifer "more")

Esau

MORE UPDATE RE: THE MOTU PROPRIO

Link:
Tridentine Mass: Pope looks for bridge to tradition

EXCERPT:

One big clue to the pope's thinking came in his 1997 book, titled "Milestones: Memoirs 1927-1977" and written when he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in which he sharply criticized the drastic manner in which Pope Paul VI reformed the Mass in 1969.

...

But the picture is not so clear-cut. As Cardinal Ratzinger, he said he considered the new missal a "real improvement" in many respects, and that the introduction of local languages made sense.

In one revealing speech to Catholic traditionalists in 1998, he said bluntly that the old "low Mass," with its whispered prayers at the altar and its silent congregation, "was not what liturgy should be, which is why it was not painful for many people" when it disappeared.

The most important thing, he said at that time, was to make sure that the liturgy does not divide the Catholic community.

With that in mind, knowledgeable Vatican sources say the pope's new document will no doubt aim to lessen pastoral tension between the Tridentine rite and the new Mass, rather than hand out a victory to traditionalists.


Link:
CNS on the Motu Proprio: a link and commentary


EXCERPT:

What came to my mind here was there is also a need for those who have rejected our tradition and traditional forms to likewise demonstrate their own good will and a hermeneutic of continuity. Let's be clear and fair, there has been a hermeneutic of rupture which has banished most anything deemed "pre-conciliar" and this is as problematic as the sort of traditionalist who has rejected anything and everything "post-conciliar."

Further, not all "traditionalists" take on this approach of rupture. If they are simply attached to the treasures of the classical liturgy, desirous of true liturgical reform in the light of both the Council and our tradition of organic development, all the while never questioning the validity of the modern Roman rite, but calling for a reform of the reform with regard to it, then it seems to me that they have nothing to justify and join the ranks of our Holy Father as a Cardinal in this set of ideas. In that regard, I would propose they form a part of the true liturgical centre and mainstream ---- just as do those who focus upon the reform of the reform, but who are supportive of the availability of the classical liturgy, provided we do not take an immobiliistic and triumphalistic approach to it, or one which rejects the Council -- not as popular opinion may go of course, but as the mind of the Church may go, as seen in the light of the Conciliar documents and our tradition.

As for the extremes, the road to a change of heart and mind is not a one way street as this article might make one think; it is rather and precisely a two-way street.

Maureen

"where one will never hear Were You There sung"

Just for you, darlin', I'm gonna translate "Were You There" into Latin. And maybe Greek, too. Heck, why not Old Church Slavonic? And we can do both chant and polyphony versions.

Bless your heart. :)

Esau

... polyphony versions.


Maureen,

Did you know there was a time in Church History where polyphony was considered as evil as Rock n' Roll?

Cracked me up when I was doing a study on the Chants back in College!

Smoky Mountain Vocalist

Did you know there was a time in Church History where polyphony was considered as evil as Rock n' Roll

They had Rock n' Roll back then?

Esau

Smoky,

What was meant by that comment was this:

Do you know/remember how folks despised Rock n' Roll back in the days as being evil?

Well, the very same sentiments were felt as regards polyphony way back then in those days.

I thought somebody as intelligent as you would come to realize that analogy.

Smoky Mountain Jokester

I thought somebody as intelligent as you would come to realize that analogy.

And I thought someone as smart as you would realize I was kidding. :)

Esau

And I thought someone as smart as you would realize I was kidding. :)

I knew that -- but couldn't help but call you on it and take a jab! ;^)

Slowboy

Esau: I think Smokey's pulln' your leg.

Arieh:
I would offer one correction to the CNS article, the "Tridentine" mass was used far longer than 400 years. "Tridentine" is a misnomer,

Amy Welborn has worked a long time on a "FAQ" sheet for news agencies to try and make heads or tails of the possible changes and part of her work was an open question of what to call the two masses as they have no formal names and all titles have become polititcized. I think she has it posted somewhere on her site.

Alex Benziger.G

Sir,
Pope Benedict XVI is the new era of the TLM,anyhow the Heavenly Liturgy of Mass is to come near future.
DEO GRATIAS

Jason

I prefer the current form of the Roman rite to the 1962 form, although I think they both have singular strengths. I would like to see the Tridentine Mass more commonly celebrated just because it is a beautiful ritual, along with the many other Liturgies in the Church's history. But I have no desire to "go back". I wouldn't want the Pope to say we're just going back to the Tridentine Mass (and I know he's not doing that). Hopefully if the Tridentine Mass becomes more common it will help us return to our Liturgical roots in the west, and give the current Mass the "aggiornamento" envisioned by the Council Fathers.

BobCatholic

I hope this Motu Proprio comes soon. I look forward to the revival of the TLM in the world.

MJ

Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal [TLM] is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and retain its full force notwithstanding the previous constitutions and decrees of the Holy See, as well as any general or special constitutions or edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and notwithstanding the practice and custom of the aforesaid churches, established by long and immemorial prescription - except, however, if more than two hundred years' standing...

...no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.

Sound familiar, anyone?

TLM here we come!!

Maureen

Yup. Eeeeevil polyphony. Encourages loose behavior and harmonizin'. :)

Of course, the major reason people think of these styles as... undesirable... is that they don't generally get invented in chaste conservatories full of clean living. Most forms of music seem to have been invented in taverns or other low places of entertainment, in order to encourage consumption of whatever was on offer there.

Anyway, as promised, my Latin version of "Were You There?" I'm pretty sure I got the grammar wrong somewhere, and that someone else already has a better version.

You can either sing the changing verse part as recitative, slowing down to sing the second half of the line in normal scansion; or you can sing the changing part as the whole line, and leave the stationary bit to the basses' answering part. The first way would sound more like chant, but the second way is more tuneful.

1.
Crucifixuntur quando Dominum --
(praesens eras?)
crucifixerunt quando Dominum --
O!
Me facitur tremere,
aliquando,
aliquando,
aliquando.
Crucifixerunt quando Dominum
(praesens eras?)

2.
In ligno confixerunt Dominum
(praesens eras?)

3.
In late transfixerunt Dominum
(praesens eras?)

4.
Recusat radiare quando Sol
(praesens eras?)

5.
In monumento posuerunt Dominum
(praesens eras?)

Maureen

Oops. Make that

Recusavit radiare quando Sol

Maureen

"Recusavit lucere" might even work better.

Maureen

"Tremere me facitur" scans better, too.

Btw, this was a lot easier than it might have been because I could just look up the Gospel words in the Vulgate. That made vocabulary a lot easier to choose.

Presumably the same thing would work with Greek and Old Church Slavonic, but I think I'll leave all that to others. Still, I bet Bach would have loved to play variations on "Were You There?" :)

Maureen

Btw, Jimmy, I noticed while looking for vocab that Deuteronomy says there was special shame in being hung on a tree. That kinda ties into Jesus' death, but also Judas', doesn't it? And isn't there a lot about hanging on trees in Paul somewhere?

I realize this is probably old news to you, but I've never heard about it before.

Esau

Hearken unto me, through that Medicine of our wounds, who didst hang upon the tree and who sittest at thy right hand "making intercession for us." -- Augustine

Galatians 3:13
13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us (for it is written: Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree). (DRV)

Alois

"there is no valid reason not to grant to every priest in the world* the right to celebrate according to this form."


Maybe I'm wrong, but shouldn't this say "every Latin rite priest?"

Jordan Potter

That's implied and doesn't need to be stated, because Cardinal Bertone was talking about the Tridentine Mass, the Roman Rite or Latin Rite.

Pope John XXIV (SuperNova)

The Mass of Pope John XXIII has caused millions of people to leave the faith! Do away with it!!!!fully restored the Saint Pius V Mass before it's too late!!!

Icon

Apropos of the current discussion, I'm pretty excited about Mel Gibson's next project. The working title is "Lethal Missal." It's one big splatterfest about the total emasculation and disemboweling of the Mass. Apparently, he's filming the thing in post-conciliar English, but with Latin subtitles.

Pope John XXIV (SuperNova)

ah, I see that I have disciples on this blog.

Jarnor23

Boy, all I can say is that some people must have it easy if they think the greatest threat to Catholicism today is the singing of Amazing Grace.

As an ex-Protestant, such a knee jerk reaction against anything remotely Protestant is rather annoying. I am blessed to be in the Church, but surely hope we aren't arrogant enough to think that there isn't a single positive thing we can learn from our separated brethren.

The N.O. frankly helped lead me to the truth. I don't believe I would have understood the faith enough were things still only taught in an ultra-traditional way in a language I didn't understand. I am indeed hoping that the TLM is made a regular thing, and plan on trying to attend one soon myself, but the N.O. has its place, and I don't think that should be forgotten.

Incidently, give me "Amazing Grace" and "Were You There" any day to move my spirit to worship of God.

"Incidently, give me "Amazing Grace" and "Were You There" any day to move my spirit to worship of God."

I am grateful that you were given the grace of conversion to the One, True, Holy and Apostolic Church. There are many Catholic hymns out there that have simply been discarded in lieu of Amazing Grace and Were You There. You are welcoms to the songs you like around the campfire, I am just praying for a return of the Mass where those songs would seem out of place.

Jarnor23

Well, I really have no trouble with traditional songs either. I particularly like some of those Marian ones usually sung on her holy days in Mass. I fully think that many forms of music that communicates to people's hearts can be accomidated without being inherantly "irreverant" or "evil", in large part. The problem is that they've done it very poorly, thrusting music at people who are unmoved by it and saying "well, this is the new way". I'd really like to see things more as they were at the parish I was received into the faith at. They have a traditional service with traditional music and a more contemporary service with more recent forms of musical worship.

I think the key here is to praise God in a true manner. Some people seem to get hung up on "their" way of doing things, that they neglect to see that it is He who matters. If they forced me to only go to Mass in Latin, or Sanskrit for that matter, I would to be with His precious body and blood. I'd reserve the right to think it a mistake though, at least privately. Where there isn't a good reason not to, accomidation seems wiser. Unfortunately, the abuses brought on by some maniacs have lead to accomidation being viewed in a lot of suspicion, I fear.

Esau

Jarnor23:

There are actually theological reasons why music such as "Amazing Grace" shouldn't be allowed at Mass.

Music that are theologically unsound since they may undermine Catholic beliefs by the very nature of their lyrics shouldn't be allowed at Mass.

The lyrics of "Amazing Grace" supposes that one actually enters a state of grace simply upon belief.

However, this is not at all in line with Catholic beliefs where, supported by both Scripture AND Tradition, it is the Sacraments by which this occurs.

Veritas

Whoa, Esau. I agree.

Jarnor23

So, you're saying Catholics believe God cannot impart His Grace upon sinners when they first begin to believe? That seems rather odd to me as we cannot come to Faith without the help of His Grace to begin.

Honestly, it's quibbling over things like this that keep Protestants from finding the Catholic faith. Instead of working as hard as possible to make them feel unwelcome, perhaps we can hold the line at things actually against the faith, and not things that emphasize things differently than Catholics are traditionally comfortable about. Comfort should really not be the goal of our faith. I'd rather be uncomfortably saved by Christ than comfortably led to hell. This includes if Amazing Grace really was an evil evil song, not singing it. However, I really would like to see more proof of this song that has helped many's belief in Jesus Christ being so harmful first. Especially since I've seen it in many music missals in many VERY faithful Catholic churches around here.

Esau

Whoa, Esau. I agree.

I actually don't know if that's a good thing or bad considering the source! ;^)

Esau

Comfort should really not be the goal of our faith.

COMPROMISING the Catholic Faith shouldn't be either!


I may have my bouts against Rad Trads and the like, but this matter I am categorically adamant on!

It is precisely when we COMPROMISE the Catholic Faith that it NO LONGER can be called CATHOLIC!

This APPLIES to BOTH Rad Trads and Liberals!

bill912

"How precious did that Grace appear the hour I first believed."

We received that Grace at Baptism. Most of us were baptised as infants, before we were capable of believing.

Esau

Exactly, bill912!

Don't confuse donum gratuitum with the State of Grace that results from the Sacraments!

Jarnor23

Interesting. The question is what is compromising the faith, and what actually is just a compromise. If you think the Catholic Church has no room for compromise about anything, that's a dark, dark path. It is one thing to sell out your core beliefs, it is another to belittle and degrade another's ideas when they do not conflict with your core beliefs.

Here, for instance, are the lyrics for Amazing Grace. If you cannot see a beautiful message here, that's a very sad thing, I feel.
--------------------------------------
Amazing grace! (how sweet the sound)
That sav’d a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found,
Was blind, but now I see.

’Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,
And grace my fears reliev’d;
How precious did that grace appear,
The hour I first believ’d!

Thro’ many dangers, toils and snares,
I have already come;
’Tis grace has brought me safe thus far,
And grace will lead me home.

The Lord has promis’d good to me,
His word my hope secures;
He will my shield and portion be,
As long as life endures.

Yes, when this flesh and heart shall fail,
And mortal life shall cease;
I shall possess, within the veil,
A life of joy and peace.

The earth shall soon dissolve like snow,
The sun forbear to shine;
But God, who call’d me here below,
Will be forever mine.
-------------------------------------------
Outside of that last line of the second paragraph, which I've provided a perfectly good explanation of why it doesn't go against the Catholic faith, where is your problem here? It seems to me that you are supposing that since a Protestant wrote it, it must be full of evil things and harmful to a Catholic. Poppycock, I say. If you have proof this historic song of faith is actively harmful to Catholics, then not only I, but the bishops should see this so they can work against such "diabolical" influence. *sigh*

Jarnor23

Many are not baptized, and many who are have falled out of Grace. To have that Grace appear (again or not) the hour you first believe is not an evil thing. Frankly, you're sounding in a way you accuse John of sounding most of the time.

Esau

It seems to me that you are supposing that since a Protestant wrote it, it must be full of evil things and harmful to a Catholic.


You've got to be kidding!

Have you even read any of the posts I've written here against Rad Trads that even advocates such prejudicial thinking?

Furthermore, do you even know anything about the person who wrote it?

In fact, I am a great admirer of his close friend and associate, William Cowper, whose Illiad I have a copy of, in fact, and whose eloquence, in my opinion, is unmatched by any literature in our day!

Esau

To have that Grace appear (again or not) the hour you first believe is not an evil thing.

Where the heck have I said it being evil?

You rather enjoy putting your words into people's mouths, don't you?

Esau

Kindly read again what I had ORIGINALLY said and QUIT putting such evil words into my mouth:


There are actually theological reasons why music such as "Amazing Grace" shouldn't be allowed at Mass.

Music that are theologically unsound since they may undermine Catholic beliefs by the very nature of their lyrics shouldn't be allowed at Mass.

The lyrics of "Amazing Grace" supposes that one actually enters a state of grace simply upon belief.

However, this is not at all in line with Catholic beliefs where, supported by both Scripture AND Tradition, it is the Sacraments by which this occurs.


Again, as I had mentioned earlier:

Don't confuse donum gratuitum with the State of Grace that results from the Sacraments!


Plus, if you should consider me evil for what I believe in this regard; so be it!

I rather be persecuted by BOTH Rad Trads AND Liberals rather than COMPROMISE the Catholic Faith!

Tim Brandenburg

I reject the heretical call to return to the mass of Saint Pius V made by Pope John XXIV (SuperNova). The only true mass, of course, is said in Aramaic and consists only of the exact actions taken at the Last Supper. No altar, no vestments, etc. Also, I don't see any way out of it... we'll have to have a designated Judas to jump up and run out. I'm supposing that the person in the Judas role will still have met his Sunday Obligation, but we may need some clarification form the Holy See on this issue.

BTW, if anybody is missing it, I'm trying to show how far the "return to the traditions" call can be taken.

Also, I haven't heard much about the Book of Divine Worship (used in Anglican Use parishes). Everybody hammers on the "Novus Ordo," and I'm feeling left out. Can't SOMEBODY please criticize the Book of Divine Worship? Please?

Jarnor23

What I'm writing is about the suitablity of this song for fostering Christian belief, and yes, even Catholic belief. You seem to be implying that this song does harm to Catholic belief and should not be sung at Mass. Logically, one could easily extend this to Catholic funerals, performances, or even simply Catholics wanting to avoid it at all, if it really was against Catholic belief. Would this then not be an "evil" to be avoided? If not, please let me know your words so I don't have to interpret.

And all because you don't like the idea that Grace would appear when someone began to believe? I know for a fact that God's Grace fell upon me greatly in that hour I first really believed. The problem is you are equating "appeared" with "was only then created" and taking the least charitable reading of something beautiful.

It seems of something more likened of the Pharisees than a genuine Catholic view.

Smoky Mountain Drama King

Plus, if you should consider me evil for what I believe in this regard; so be it!

He never called you evil. He suggested that you were suggesting the song was evil. I agree that "theologically unsound" is nowhere near the same as "evil", so you have both misrepresented each other's words.

I rather be persecuted by BOTH Rad Trads AND Liberals rather than COMPROMISE the Catholic Faith!

You can't be persecuted as an anonymous poster on a blog. That's just being excessively dramatic. :)

Esau

Jarnor23:

Isn't it even apparent to you that the very fact that you actually believe & support the notion that a person enters into a state of grace upon belief (just as the song 'Amazing Grace' says) is, in fact, PROOF that this music shouldn't be played at Mass since it does influence such notions contrary to Catholic Faith in Catholics as yourselves (unless, of course, you aren't one)?

Esau

He never called you evil.

Smoky --

You didn't pay particular attention to what I actually said:

Plus, if you should consider me evil for what I believe in this regard; so be it!


I mean with all the evil he was inserting into my actual statements, it seemed only a matter of time.

Jarnor23

Esau, please demonstrate where the song explicitly makes it clear the sinner is in a full state of grace, rather than the sinner being grateful for the Grace he has received.

Perhaps it is in differing terminology you find problems here and I do not. I'd thank you to not guess about my personal subscription to a "saved by faith alone" kind of philosophy, as you clearly have no idea at all where I stand there.

Perhaps "evil" being attributed to the song was a harsh conclusion on my part, but it did indeed seem to me that you believed this song was harmful to the Christian soul. Generally, I would guess that most things harmful to Christianity can be attributed to some sort of evil involved, but perhaps you did not mean it so.

My statement stands though that the lyrics as written should not pose such a threat to Catholic belief as to be discouraged. Nothing I've seen with the written lyrics has yet changed my mind, nor apparently with the Bishops, many of whom are good and faithful servants of the Church, contrary to popular opinion. Your arguments so far have been appearing to me to say "this is what Protestants believe, so the song must say this and cannot be taken in a Catholic context" - an arguement I disagree with.

John

Jarnor

Dont you know if Esau says it is sinful than so be it!!

I think Esau should start his own blog, I think I am going to count how many posts Esau places here a day from morning to night, interesting statistic

John

Tim posted:

"I reject the heretical call to return to the mass of Saint Pius V made by Pope John XXIV (SuperNova). The only true mass, of course, is said in Aramaic and consists only of the exact actions taken at the Last Supper."

Ahh, I have not heard that one in a while from a Vatican II Novus Ordo "renewal" supporter


Sure Tim, while we are at it, we can sit around the table as Jesus did and have a passover dinner

I guess you know very little about tradition the liturgy, the Popes responsibility to safeguard it and not "invent" or "change" what is sacred, and that the Traditional Latin Mass is organic and evolved over time with prayers ADDED and not DELTED as in the New Mass

Lame try

Mary Kay

Once more the Hobby Horse shows itself to be humor challenged.

Smoky Mountain, I haven't had time to follow the discussions, but had to tell you that I'm enjoying your user names. (getting curious to see how they connect with the discussion)

Esau

Your arguments so far have been appearing to me to say "this is what Protestants believe, so the song must say this and cannot be taken in a Catholic context" - an arguement I disagree with.

Well, gee, since you're putting, yet again, such words into my mouth, it's no wonder you're able to refute such an argument!

You say:
you clearly have no idea at all where I stand there.

Yet, you have no idea at all where I'm coming from since most, if not, all the things you've said so far were utterly gross misinterpretations of what I actually said with all this evil you keep on purposely inserting just so that you can advance arguments that cannot stand on their own without such utter fabrications of the truth on what I actually stated.

Let us pray for a return to a Mass where Amazing Grace does not appear to be appropriate.

I should just make it clear that my earlier comment regarding "Amazing Grace" and "Were you there" are somewhat driven by my often having to attend a Church where those 2 songs appear to be the only songs the Priest knows. Seminary education must be so lackig nowadays. Knowing that there are so many appropriate Catholic hymns out there, as well as Latin hymns, one can be driven crazy by hearing these 2 hymns all the time. Admittedly it is very penitential to listen to them, especially during Lent. Really, perhaps they have a nice sentiment, but then so does Kumbaya. Shouldn't hymns of inferior quality, and which are clearly inappropriate for Holy Mass be relegated to around the campfire and Protestant services?

bill912

And, at the Aramaic Mass (The TRUE Mass), we should recline on couches around a U-shaped table. It was good enough for Jesus, and it's good enough for me!

Esau

I think Esau should start his own blog, I think I am going to count how many posts Esau places here a day from morning to night, interesting statistic

Oh great, the closet homosexual who gets turned on by pedophile priests (just as he stated) has not only an obsession but a fatal attraction for me!

I guess that's what happens when you have such hate for Protestants and non-Christians and regard them as subhuman, as well as contemptibly hold such utter disdain for holy folks like Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul II to the point of spreading mere calumny regarding them!

Esau

... not to mention, disguising rebellion against Christ's Catholic Church as Traditional Catholic Teaching!

Smoky Mountain Pseudonymaniac

Thanks Mary Kay.

Tim Brandenburg

Levity is utterly wasted *sigh*

John

Esau posted:

"Oh great, the closet homosexual who gets turned on by pedophile priests (just as he stated) has not only an obsession but a fatal attraction for me!"

Esau last I checked it was you who were not married and protecting Cardinal Law and the pedophile priests, saying they must be forgiven!

Good try and so charitable of you! I thought the Vatican II church was the "church of Love" where even Moslems, Hindus, Protestants, etc can get to heaven as JPII prays with them!

Esquire

John,

Even you can get to heaven with JPII's prayers.

Esau

Esau last I checked it was you who were not married and protecting Cardinal Law and the pedophile priests, saying they must be forgiven!

Good try and so charitable of you! I thought the Vatican II church was the "church of Love" where even Moslems, Hindus, Protestants, etc can get to heaven as JPII prays with them!


Yes -- as charitable as the LIES that spewed from your mouth!

By the way, you do know that you don't actually need to be married to have a girlfriend, right?

Of course, given your obsession and how you get turned on by pedophile priests, it's no wonder why you hold such homosexual constructs in your mind.

I just feel sorry for your family though -- do they know these sordid details about you?

Smoky Mountain Referee

John and Esau: Enough with the mud-slinging! This is not productive, nor is it healthy.

Jarnor23

Esau, I told you what your argument was appearing to be to me, if it is otherwise, please refute it without mud-slinging or accusations.

I may not agree much with John about things (believing as I do that both the NO & TLM have their place), but I will agree with him that you do disregard the arguments of people you don't agree with, and generally treat them with a lack of charity. I'm trying to do better in return for you and apologize for where I must be failing at this to solicit such a response.

Esau

Agreed, Smoky.

It's just that yesterday was In Rememberance of John Paul II.

Observing how John continues his calumny on the blog against somebody I regard so deeply religious and holy, I can't stomach the vomit that issues from his mouth!

Esau

I will agree with him that you do disregard the arguments of people you don't agree with, and generally treat them with a lack of charity.


Jarnor:

If I disregarded them, I wouldn't be responding specifically to their points.

However, I challenge you to observe and see if John actually regards any of the arguments we present to him!

If he did, we wouldn't need to re-assert much of what we've told him in the past again and again.

In fact, it's funny that when we actually re-introduce arguments we had previously presented to him some time back, he would seem to be rather surprised by them as if he hadn't read them when we first posted them (even though we had posted these numerous times before)!

This is how he (dis-)regards people's posts which had come from me, Innocencio, bill912, Tim J., Ryan C., Rosemarie and many, many others here.

Esau

... and Jarnor23, please be more honest about how you are presenting the facts.


My post originally stated:

Jarnor23:

There are actually theological reasons why music such as "Amazing Grace" shouldn't be allowed at Mass.

Music that are theologically unsound since they may undermine Catholic beliefs by the very nature of their lyrics shouldn't be allowed at Mass.

The lyrics of "Amazing Grace" supposes that one actually enters a state of grace simply upon belief.

However, this is not at all in line with Catholic beliefs where, supported by both Scripture AND Tradition, it is the Sacraments by which this occurs.

Posted by: Esau | Apr 3, 2007 11:10:40 AM


You were the one who replied in the uncharitable manner below:

Interesting. The question is what is compromising the faith, and what actually is just a compromise. If you think the Catholic Church has no room for compromise about anything, that's a dark, dark path. It is one thing to sell out your core beliefs, it is another to belittle and degrade another's ideas when they do not conflict with your core beliefs.

Here, for instance, are the lyrics for Amazing Grace. If you cannot see a beautiful message here, that's a very sad thing, I feel.

Outside of that last line of the second paragraph, which I've provided a perfectly good explanation of why it doesn't go against the Catholic faith, where is your problem here? It seems to me that you are supposing that since a Protestant wrote it, it must be full of evil things and harmful to a Catholic. Poppycock, I say. If you have proof this historic song of faith is actively harmful to Catholics, then not only I, but the bishops should see this so they can work against such "diabolical" influence. *sigh*

Posted by: Jarnor23 | Apr 3, 2007 11:55:31 AM

Jarnor23

Actually I thought it was quite charitable, if not in agreement, especially considering some of the replies you were giving me. I would rather hope you'd address the questions I posed, but I really do not feel like a satisfactory answer was given.

Esau

It seems to me that you are supposing that since a Protestant wrote it, it must be full of evil things and harmful to a Catholic. Poppycock, I say. If you have proof this historic song of faith is actively harmful to Catholics, then not only I, but the bishops should see this so they can work against such "diabolical" influence. *sigh*


Jarnor:

You actually consider this demonizing charitable?

Look again on the thread since the other replies came only after yours here.

Pope John XXIV (SuperNova)

Jarnor23,

The problem with playing (or singing) Amazing Grace is not that there is a great danger of scandal. The problem is that the Church, Christ's Church, teaches that while everyone is given actual Grace to convert to and remain faithful to the Faith, their belief in Jesus and desire to be saved doesn't obtain Sanctifying Grace, the grace which can only come from first through baptism. Forbiding churches to play "Amazing Grace" will not be a scandal to reasonable protestants. There are many very old hymns, written by protestants, which show that protestants have done some good for God in this world, and which do not contradict fundamental Catholic teaching.

God Bless.

Pope John XXIV (SuperNova)

I know Tim was posting tongue-in-cheek. But for those of you whose humor meter is low right about now, my "heretical" statements (futher up the thread) are sarcastic.

John

Esau

Your imposter games are somewhat lame, grow up my unmarried sorry, fellow who sits at home with no one to love him all alone trying to make money as a frustrated Protestant on Catholics as Scott Hahn and other "former" Protestants are doing!!!

Amazed

The lyrics of "Amazing Grace" supposes that one actually enters a state of grace simply upon belief.

Could it be that it's you who is supposing and not the lyrics?

J.R. Stoodley

John,

Yes, Esau for whom Amazing Grace is too Protestant be sung at mass is really a closet Protestant himself, just trying to scam us. Nice one.

J.R. Stoodley

Regarding Amazing Grace, yes you can detect a non-Catholic theology behind some of the lines ("saved a wretch like me" "the hour I first believed") but it is so mild and can be reinterpreted in an orthodox way, so in general I think it would be excessive to ban such a beloved song.

bill912

Oh, that Esau *is* crafty, JR!

Jarnor23

Yeah, now that I can see JXXIV. I mean, the two usages of "grace" here definitely should be kept clear in the Catholic's mind.

And J.R., my feelings exactly about the mildness of any potential problem and the possibility of reading the lyrics in an orthodox manner.

JoAnna

I agree with Jarnor in that I also see no problem with "Amazing Grace."

"How precious did that Grace appear the hour I first believed."

As a Catholic convert, when I first learned about and first really BELIEVED in the True Presence of the holy Eucharist, it was very precious indeed when I recognized the truly amazing GRACE that was being imparted to me through that sacrament.

Esau, I also think that Jarnor has been very patient with you, and that you have been less than charitable with him.

Jarnor said:

It seems to me that you are supposing that since a Protestant wrote it, it must be full of evil things and harmful to a Catholic. Poppycock, I say. If you have proof this historic song of faith is actively harmful to Catholics, then not only I, but the bishops should see this so they can work against such "diabolical" influence. *sigh*

Esau said:

You actually consider this demonizing charitable?

How is what Jarnor said "demonizing"? He was expression his perception (by the words "it seems to me") of your comments, not saying that you were actually calling the song full of evil. If his perception was incorrect, by all means do correct him, but it might behoove you to do so without flying off the handle at him.

Gary

it might behoove you to do so without flying off the handle at him.

Speaking of perceptions, here's one from a stranger...

Behoove: "It's an old-fashioned word and is often used in a way to suggest that the person saying it is more important/more knowledgeable than the person who is "behooved" to do something. It comes across as somewhat self-righteous."

Ed S

Amen! Good night Esau. Good night Jarnor23. Good night John. Good night JR. Good night all.

John

Joanna posted:

"Esau, I also think that Jarnor has been very patient with you, and that you have been less than charitable with him."

Gee-Join the club! Dont you know that Esau and his lemming followers (whom Esau chastises if they dont fall in line with his warped thinking)know everything? He knows so much that he actually thinks Cardinal Law and the pedophile priests and Bishops who protect them are innocent, dont exist, that there are no gay priests and that if they are pedophiles (even with our Lord warning better a millstone be tied around ones neck than hurt a child) that they should be forgiven! What a guy this Esau is, but at the same time anyone else who doesnt fall in line with him is a schismatic, heretic, stupid, jackass, homosexual, you name it!

What a living example of charity and Apologetics at its finest!

Esquire

John,

I may just be one of Esau's lemmings in your mind, but your problem (objectively speaking) is not refusing to fall in line with Esau.

It is refusing to fall in line with the Church of Christ.

Esquire

John,

I think I am going to count how many posts Esau places here a day from morning to night, interesting statistic

First you're going to have Esau investigated, arrested and sued (all from past posts), then you're going to have Jimmy subpoenaed so that you can get Esau's address (again from a past post), and now you're going to start counting all of his posts.

Me thinks you might have an obsession that is bordering just a wee bit on the unhealthy side.

bill912

"...Grace...that *saved*..." is Sanctifying Grace, which we receive at Baptism, not at "...the hour I first believed". That's one of the theological errors in "Amazing Grace". The song was written by one whose religious tradition teaches that Baptism is merely symbolic, but doesn't actually confer Grace.

BobCatholic

>The Mass of Pope John XXIII has caused millions of people to leave the faith!

No, the mirror worshipping ethos of the 1960's caused millions to leave the faith.

Do away with mirror worshipping.

>fully restored the Saint Pius V Mass before it's too late!!!

If mirror worshipping is not done away with, this won't help.

BobCatholic

>BTW, if anybody is missing it, I'm trying to show how far the "return to the traditions" call can be taken.

Why stop there? We need to return to Leviticus :) Get that temple in Jerusalem rebuilt... :)

Or even better, go back to Abel's sacrifice :)

Of course, I'm saying this tongue in cheek for those who are unable to discern this :)

Esquire

I agree with JR and Smoky about the potentially orthodox interpretation of Amazing Grace.

Amazing grace! (how sweet the sound)

That sav’d a wretch like me!

I once was lost, but now am found,

Was blind, but now I see.

’Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,

And grace my fears reliev’d;

How precious did that grace appear,

The hour I first believ’d!

I doubt very much that this is the author's original intent, but it is possible to interpret these lyrics (the most problematic ones, it seems) as if Baptism is already assumed:

'Twas grace (received at Baptism) that taught my heart to fear (even before I believed),

and grace (received at Baptism) my fears relieved (even before I believed),

How precious did that grace (received at Baptism) appear,

The hour I first believed.

The first conversion occurs at Baptism, but anyone in serious pursuit of the spiritual life undergoes second and third conversions along the way. The grace already received and present is appreciated in a much different light when that happens.

It's certainly good to be aware of the deep Protestant roots and theology of the song, and I'm not suggesting that it should be played at Mass. (There is such an ample treasury of beautifully traditional Catholic songs that have to be bypassed to get to it.) But if it is, I wouldn't get all bent out of shape over it. (And I certainly wouldn't assume that the person choosing the music has the wrong interpretation in mind when playing it. In fact, charity often requires that the opposite be assumed.)

Tim Brandenburg

/tongue in cheek on/ Whoa BobCatholic! As you well know, the traditional (i.e. pre-Vatican II) opinion of Jews is that they are well-poisoning Jesus killers (cf. Sungenis)! This Leviticus stuff is obviously an attempt to subvert the Catholic faith to the Zionist conspiracy. /tongue in cheek off/

Esau

John:

When did I ever utter such things that you continue to spew from your viscious and deceiving mouth?

He knows so much that he actually thinks Cardinal Law and the pedophile priests and Bishops who protect them are innocent, dont exist, that there are no gay priests and that if they are pedophiles (even with our Lord warning better a millstone be tied around ones neck than hurt a child) that they should be forgiven!


As for what you say here:

Dont you know that Esau and his lemming followers (whom Esau chastises if they dont fall in line with his warped thinking)know everything?


You're the one who is WARPED since:

1. You disguise REBELLION against the Catholic Church as TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC TEACHING

2. DECLARE Vatican II Council as NONBINDING

3. DECLARE John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and John XXIII as Apostates and Mother Teresa as a PAGAN!


Just where do you get such AUTHORITY????


Indeed:

Jn:8:44:
44 You are of your father the devil: and the desires of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning: and he stood not in the truth, because truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof. (DRV)

David B. [Pope John XXIV (SuperNova) ]

" Yeah, now that I can see JXXIV. I mean, the two usages of "grace" here definitely should be kept clear in the Catholic's mind. "

They should indeed. Actual Grace is transitory, and is not sanctifying. Sancitfying Grace give life to the soul, and remains in one's soul forever (if one doesn't sin mortally. Songs convey a message. IF a non-Catholic were to hear these heretical words played in a Catholic church, he might believed that the church teaches that Baptism isn't saving. That truly is scandalous.

BTW, I thank you for your sarcastic response to my attempt to engage you in a thoughtful discussion. One resorts to sarcasism when one is either losing the argument or doesn't like opposing viewpoints.

Esau

"...Grace...that *saved*..." is Sanctifying Grace, which we receive at Baptism, not at "...the hour I first believed". That's one of the theological errors in "Amazing Grace". The song was written by one whose religious tradition teaches that Baptism is merely symbolic, but doesn't actually confer Grace.

Posted by: bill912 | Apr 4, 2007 7:37:04 AM


Thank-you, Bill912!


The fact of the matter is that the nominal Catholic -- especially these days where Liturgical Abuse is rampant and knowledge of the Catholic Faith is even non-existent these days with all the poor Catechisis the average Catholic receives -- would not be aware of these subtleties and, in fact, be influenced to the extent of accepting such notions as part of the Catholic Faith.

In addition, I find it a riscible notion that others here would actually accuse me of being intolerant of Protestants and, furthermore, materials that actually come from a Protestant.

Does Jarnor or anybody here who carry such notions of me actually know the fact that I have even read exegetical work done by Protestants such as Lutheran scholar, Dr. Walter Maier III and other such Protestant scholars?

If I actually viewed such works by Protestants with such intolerance, these would not be part of my library, for heaven's sake.

So, there goes the supposed notion that not only am I intolerant of Protestants and their works but also regarding things I am in disagreement with!

For, in fact, I do not wholly agree with their contents; however, I find some aspects of their work consistent with Catholic beliefs.

But that's just it -- one would need to have adequate knowledge of the Catholic Faith enough to discern such aspects (e.g., what bill912 rightly expounded regarding 'Amazing Grace').

For the normal Catholic these days whose knowledge thereof would be, in fact, lacking (especially if they are of an impressionable age); they may assume based upon researching the song, its Protestant source and the Protestant Theology behind its lyrics, they may erroneously assume that that's actually in agreement with Catholic beliefs and, thus, why it is being played at Mass in a Catholic Church!

I say this not from mere assumption but experience!

Further, I would caution those who may hold such prejudicial notions of me (i.e., my being intolerant of Protestants and Protestant works) to first stop and consider what they're actually saying given, as well, the history of my posts to John and the extent of my studies that have, in fact, included Protestant sources.

David B.

BTW, I thank you for your sarcastic response to my attempt to engage you in a thoughtful discussion.

That is, if you were trying to be sarcastic.

Jordan Potter

"How precious did that grace appear, The hour I first believed."

One could also interpret this line as a reference to the "prevenient grace" that the Councils of Orange taught is what makes justifying faith possible.

It's true the song is Protestant, and does not distinguish between grace and grace, and omits reference to the sacraments, but I think the song is not irreconcilable to the Catholic faith regarding grace. We don't expect hymns to be dogmatic treatises, after all.

Esau

Esquire:

(And I certainly wouldn't assume that the person choosing the music has the wrong interpretation in mind when playing it. In fact, charity often requires that the opposite be assumed.)


Nobody is assuming the worst about the person playing the song.

The point here is the person hearing/singing the song -- how s/he might perceive it.

If this song was played at a time in the history of the Church where the average Catholic possessed adequate knowledge of the Catholic Faith and can make such distinctions as those bill912 was able to make here in the following statement:

"...Grace...that *saved*..." is Sanctifying Grace, which we receive at Baptism, not at "...the hour I first believed".

That's one of the theological errors in "Amazing Grace".

The song was written by one whose religious tradition teaches that Baptism is merely symbolic, but doesn't actually confer Grace.

Posted by: bill912 | Apr 4, 2007 7:37:04 AM


...then I might not have such problems with it actually being played at Mass.

However, as it is, the fact that its Protestant source, history, lyrics, etc. carry such notions inconsistent with Catholic beliefs; when a person in church, who lacks adequate knowledge of the Catholic Faith and may even be impressionable, when s/he sees that music played in church (especially in light of what s/he knows of its Protestant background and the Protestant theology behind the song); the very fact that it's actually played at Mass in a Catholic Church might seem to give the song and its Protestant theological aspects as a certain "stamp of approval", one might say.


Liturgical music played at Mass should be Sacred Music that reflects on aspects of the Catholic Faith and cause one to reflect and meditate on it accordingly, in line with the Source and Summit of the Catholic Faith, the Eucharist, and the Holy Sacrifice re-presented at the Mass.

The comments to this entry are closed.

January 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31