O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
I’m generally unilaterally against adopting any Protestant hymnology, but it seems the only issues persons can find with Amazing Grace is when they interpret a hymn as an exhaustive, systematic and technical treatise on faith (which it is clearly not). If one consistently applied this methodology consistently to any type of corpus of hymns they’d inevitably find errors because literary devices are meant to express a concept analogically and not formulaically (e.g. St. Ephrem uses the sun as an analogy to the Trinity in Hymns on Faith 40, but concludes but saying it is not supposed to be taken literally since one analogical understanding of the Trinity is not exhaustive; elsewhere he says its like taking a drink from a fountain - you don’t do so in hopes of exhausting the fountain in one drink, but the one analogy is equivalent to one thirst-quenching drink).
Likewise, Amazing Grace is appropriate insofar as it conveys the redeeming grace of Jesus Christ. This actually came up in one of my theology classes in seminary and people were outraged by even the self-referential use of the word ‘wretch,’ and I just so happened to be carrying St. Basil on the Human Condition and showed it has a very long (i.e. since the patristic era) Christian usage. It seems like Latins in general get fixated on what they deem “Protestant notions” when really they’re simply Christian notions exemplified by [some] Protestants (Scripture…).
Thank you for bringing some reason to this thread.
I love this song and never understood how anyone could object. Music is not/should not be thought of as a theological treatise.