Don't Support Devilish Music(Rock Music)!!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter BintuluChuchGuy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’ve only heard their first three albums, which started off bearable and descended into… unbearableness, I guess.

I dislike Fall of Troy. Never heard Sound of Animals Fighting.
 
I’ve only heard their first three albums, which started off bearable and descended into… unbearableness, I guess.

I dislike Fall of Troy. Never heard Sound of Animals Fighting.
Try out the latest TMV album, its softer and less chaotic!
 
I’ve just gone through all the Canons and Decrees of Trent and see little mention of Mary anwyhere, let alone any indication that she gave birth without pain. Where is it stated that she did?
CATECHISM OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT
PART 1: THE CREED
Article III

But as the Conception itself transcends the order of nature, so the birth of our Lord presents to our contemplation nothing but what is divine.
Besides, what is admirable beyond the power of thoughts or words to express, He is born of His Mother without any diminution of her maternal virginity, just as He afterwards went forth from the sepulchre while it was closed and sealed, and entered the room in which His disciples were assembled, the doors being shut; or not to depart from every-day examples, just as the rays of the sun penetrate without breaking or injuring in the least the solid substance of glass, so after a like but more exalted manner did Jesus Christ come forth from His mother’s womb without injury to her maternal virginity. … To Eve it was said: In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children. Mary was exempt from this law, for preserving her virginal integrity inviolate she brought forth Jesus the Son of God without experiencing, as we have already said, any sense of pain.

Check the Summa Theologica III, q. 35, a. 6 (newadvent.org/summa/4035.htm#article6). St. Thomas explains why Mary wouldn’t have any pains of childbirth.

Hope this helps.
 
This sermon touches upon at the end, a song that is particularly unholy… and shows how there can be for some what might be surprising examples of this.
Okay, I’m seriously ticked now. If anything, your “last part” embodies what every people of my generation (and particularly my subculture) hate about religion: control and tyranny.

So anything that even smells of rebellion is satanic to you people? Whatever happened to free will? Self-confidence? Personal independence? You telling me those ideals were satanic? :rolleyes:
 
Okay, I’m seriously ticked now. If anything, your “last part” embodies what every people of my generation (and particularly my subculture) hate about religion: control and tyranny.

So anything that even smells of rebellion is satanic to you people? Whatever happened to free will? Self-confidence? Personal independence? You telling me those ideals were satanic? :rolleyes:
Don’t worry about it Lost Wanderer. The sermons found on those site are VERY fringe and not in the mainstream of the Church. Go to your typical church and talk with priests there to get well-rounded opinions.
 
I’ve heard from an exorcist priest that particular times have particular demonic spirits promoting particular sins… ‘the spirit of the age’. . . one of the most recent ones was rebellion against authority.

It doesn’t matter what such people are told to do, by the very fact they were told to do it they will not do it. And they admire this spirit in others. And hate any idea of law simply by its very fact, that they feel constrained the minute they have anything to live up to. This shows how interiorly sick they are, what is good medicine, they find bitter, what is poison and self destructive, sweet.

So only by following the model of Christ who obeyed even unto death on the cross is there hope.

They think it debasing that others sacrifice their wills to Christ, when they think about it. They admire themselves and their own will vainly, it does not matter what is done, they simply love that they can do all sinful things if they so decide. They do not see the beauty and purification of the will gained through obedience and self sacrifice, and how sin chains the will to enslavement to impure desires.

They do not see that there are only two Masters, one is either in the service of one or the other, that their freedom to sin is a temporary state and the value they place in it an illusion of degradation.

Of course we have more than one source of testimony about the rebelliousness of these times and its source.

Ask yourself what people in Heaven do, live by self-will, or by the will of God, by what you exalt, or what the saints exalt, then decide if you would even like to live there the way you are. If you would not like to live there, will you go?

🙂

‘Oh! how meritorious in the sight of God is prompt obedience. He has several times shown, even by supernatural prodigies, how acceptable it is in his sight. St. Mark, a monk, while engaged in writing, was called by his Superior, the Abbot Silvan; the saint left unfinished a word which he had just begun, and instantly obeyed. On his return he found the remainder of the word written in letters of gold. Blosius relates that a nun to whom the infant Jesus appeared, being summoned at the moment of his appearance to a certain duty, instantly obeyed the call. On her return she found him grown up to the age of manhood, and was addressed by him in the following words: “My child, your ready obedience has made me grow thus in your heart.” Jesus appeared to another religious, who on hearing the bell for Vespers left him, and went to the choir. When she returned to her cell, he appeared to her again and said: “Because you left me, you have found me again; had you not obeyed the call of duty, I should have departed from you.” To try the obedience of some of his monks who were confined to bed by sickness, St. Columban commanded them to rise, and go to the barn to thrash corn. As many as were filled with the true spirit of obedience instantly arose, and were suddenly restored to health. The others, because they were weak in spirit as well as in body, remained in bed and continued in their infirmities.’

St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori

‘An ordinary action, performed through obedience and love of God, is more meritorious than extraordinary works done on your own authority.’

St. Louis de Blois

‘Love alone leads to perfection, but the three chief means for acquiring it are obedience, chastity, and poverty. Obedience is a consecration of the heart, chastity of the body, and poverty of all worldly goods to the Love and Service of God. These are the three members of the Spiritual Cross, and all three must be raised upon the fourth, which is humility.’

St. Francis de Sales

‘Obedience will open for us, beyond a doubt, the portals of Heaven, which were formerly closed against us by the breaking of a Divine commandment, and which still are shut to whomsoever is guilty of the same crime.’

St. Ignatius of Loyola
 
One of my all time favorite priests, from St. Charles Borromeo in Minnesota, was a younger guy who used to wear the Roman cossack all the time. He only allowed male altar servers and they had to all be at least 13. While this church did not have EF or anything it was still quite traditional.

That said, that priest was also the youth group director and loved to rock out on the drive up north for snowboarding/ski trips. Of course, we’d be sure to get a rosary or two in as well! Every morning he’d say Mass for the teens and then grab his snowboard and shred for hours. Pretty sure he was a good and traditional guy… you should have seen how incensed he was when he found out kids were coming to the 8am Mass and receiving Eucharist just minutes after getting continental breakfast. He threatened to shut the trip down if he heard about another instance. Suffice it to say it didn’t happen again!
 
Dearly beloved friends,

Cordial greetings.

That rock music does not meet with the disapproval and censure that it rightly deserves, in some Catholic circles at least, is surely part of a much bigger issue, vis-a-vis, the recalctrant refusal to face up to the requirement of sanctity and separation from the godless world in which the Christian’s lot is cast. It is all part of the ‘Catholicism Lite’ approach to religion, which is basicly a hand in hand with the world type of christianity that allows one to cling on to a ‘few of their favourite things’. This type of Catholicism is often very popular with the young, usually doctrinally and morally orthodox, and not infrequently Tiber Crossers from Evangelicalism.

Rock music has been the cause of an immense amount of moral damage, especially to the young and impressionable, and its predominant message has always been sexual permissiveness and rebellion against authority, especially the authority of parents and the establishment. It is decidedly anti-religious, anti-conventional, anti-nationalistic and anti-capitalistic, as even John Lennon himself acknowledged.

Its very essence tends to foster a spirit of lawlessness which, as the moral revolution of the 1960’s evinces all too well, is capable of subverting the social order. Thus rock music has always played a key role in prompting youth to discard cultural and sexual restraints. The common adolescent practice of playing rock at a deafening and inconsiderate volume in public places demonstrates how readily it lends iteself to the violation of the basic rules of civil conduct. Rock music exposes its devotees to illiberality, insolence and other vices; by the same token classical and sacred music suggests peacefulness, moderation, self-control and disposes one to an orderly and courageous life, something that rock is incapable of doing. To put it quite simply harmonious music has a better chance of developing an harmonious soul.

Rock music inclines its listeners, especially the young still in a state of formation, away from self-control, respect for one’s elders and sublimation; it fails to channel emotions, but rather pumps them up. Thus instead of a passionate attachment to what is pure, noble, just and lovely (cf. Phillip. 4: 8), youth develop attachments to their own selfish needs, wants and feelings and to various rock performers. Given man’s innate sinful nature this is hardly surprising.

Usually the Christian critics of rock music are accused of failing to present a nuanced portrait of both rock and youth, but the real question at issue is surely whether rock has an untoward influence on character formation and one’s moral sense.

The Devil, yes I do believe in his existence, and his forces have deeply invaded man’s social and cultural structures - music has not been omitted. Satan is a malignant reality who is always hostile to God and to the Church. One of the greatest powers he possesses is the ability to appear harmless and benign. Indeed, Sacred Scripture states that there are times when the Devil ‘masquerades as an angel of light’ (2 Cor. 11: 14). Moreover, he is a past master at making that which is unsavoury and morally depraved, such as rock music, appear innocuous and inoffensive, how else would he deceive people into thinking that it was perfectly permissible to listen to this filth and befoul themselves thereby?

The Christian who is earnestly pursuing holiness in the fear of God has no option but renounce rock music, which by its very beat an sound has always repudiated restraints and celebrated freedom, rebellion and sexuality. It is beyond artistic redemption and therefore ought to be avoided by all the faithful.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait
 
Rock music inclines its listeners, especially the young still in a state of formation, away from self-control, respect for one’s elders and sublimation; it fails to channel emotions, but rather pumps them up. Thus instead of a passionate attachment to what is pure, noble, just and lovely (cf. Phillip. 4: 8), youth develop attachments to their own selfish needs, wants and feelings and to various rock performers. Given man’s innate sinful nature this is hardly surprising.
Kindly provide evidence of how “pumping up” is morally reprehensible and please, spare us from classicist citations of fallible encyclicals. Opinionated interpretations of verses with arguably arbitrary standards regarding the already arbitrary subject that is music are also ill-advised.
The Christian who is earnestly pursuing holiness in the fear of God has no option but renounce rock music, which by its very beat an sound has always repudiated restraints and celebrated freedom, rebellion and sexuality. It is beyond artistic redemption and therefore ought to be avoided by all the faithful.
I’ve heard from an exorcist priest that particular times have particular demonic spirits promoting particular sins… ‘the spirit of the age’. . . one of the most recent ones was rebellion against authority.
Tell that to Gandhi, Miguel Hidalgo, America’s Founding Fathers, Jose Rizal and even Jesus Christ Himself. All of these figures were revolutionaries and rebelled against the authorities of their time.

Honestly, just what is it with you religious people and this grand delusion that we are an authoritarian religion? Honestly, the two of you are just a couple of the saddest examples of “counter-culture Catholicism”. From one crazy end of the spectrum, you go the other crazy end. Just because we adhere to some form of authority does not make us blind sheep.

God gave us free will.
God gave us rationality.

If we were intended to be so blindly devout to authority, there would be no need for either the two. We would simply be mindless, encapsulated followers afraid of using our heads.

People like you make a poor case for Christianity. If anything, you just reinforce its worst stereotypes.
 
Kindly provide evidence of how “pumping up” is morally reprehensible and please, spare us from classicist citations of fallible encyclicals. Opinionated interpretations of verses with arguably arbitrary standards regarding the already arbitrary subject that is music are also ill-advised.
I wouldn’t bother.
Honestly, just what is it with you religious people and this grand delusion that we are an authoritarian religion? Honestly, the two of you are just a couple of the saddest examples of “counter-culture Catholicism”. From one crazy end of the spectrum, you go the other crazy end. Just because we adhere to some form of authority does not make us blind sheep.
I agree. We are not “authoritarians”. That is a sad stereotype. Everything requires discernment, ie. our brains. God gave us them. We ought to use them. Just because some of us enjoy other forms of music besides classical or Gregorian Chant doesn’t mean that we are less “holy”, etc.
God gave us free will.
God gave us rationality.
If we were intended to be so blindly devout to authority, there would be no need for either the two. We would simply be mindless, encapsulated followers afraid of using our heads.
Exactly. Of course, we should submit to the Church’s authority in the areas of the Faith and morals but when it comes to personal musical/artistic/movie, etc preferences, the Church is wide open. We have a lot of freedom.
People like you make a poor case for Christianity. If anything, you just reinforce its worst stereotypes.
I have to agree with this because it seems that some people believe that being a good, devout Catholic means shutting ourselves off completely from the world and from life. We can’t stay in our little fortresses. How can we show others the Truth of the Faith and even show its attractive if all the person hears is that everything is bad, etc? Wouldn’t it be better to take what is good in everything and build that up?
 
CATECHISM OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT
PART 1: THE CREED
Article III

But as the Conception itself transcends the order of nature, so the birth of our Lord presents to our contemplation nothing but what is divine.
Besides, what is admirable beyond the power of thoughts or words to express, He is born of His Mother without any diminution of her maternal virginity, just as He afterwards went forth from the sepulchre while it was closed and sealed, and entered the room in which His disciples were assembled, the doors being shut; or not to depart from every-day examples, just as the rays of the sun penetrate without breaking or injuring in the least the solid substance of glass, so after a like but more exalted manner did Jesus Christ come forth from His mother’s womb without injury to her maternal virginity. … To Eve it was said: In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children. Mary was exempt from this law, for preserving her virginal integrity inviolate she brought forth Jesus the Son of God without experiencing, as we have already said, any sense of pain.

Check the Summa Theologica III, q. 35, a. 6 (newadvent.org/summa/4035.htm#article6). St. Thomas explains why Mary wouldn’t have any pains of childbirth.

Hope this helps.
Uh huh. The Catechism of Trent is no more infallible than any other Catechism (say the most recent CCC).

And neither, for that matter, is St Thomas Aquinas. And quite easy to present counter-arguments to in this case.

For one thing, the argument about the causes of pain in childbirth are rot - our understanding of the processes has moved so far beyond St Thomas’ day that we need pay no mind to him.

And what’s this with pain in childbirth being a result of Original Sin? Most translations of scripture say that Eve’s pains in childbirth were MULTIPLIED or INCREASED, after the fall. This doesn’t mean childbirth hadn’t been painful before. In fact it means the opposite, that pain had existed before, just at a lesser level.

Then later, St Thomas says "As “by His death” Christ “destroyed our death” [Preface of the Mass in Paschal-time, so by His pains He freed us from our pains; and so He wished to die a painful death. But the mother’s pains in childbirth did not concern Christ, who came to atone for our sins. And therefore there was no need for His Mother to suffer in giving birth. "

If Christ indeed literally freed us from our pains by His pains - in other words by taking ALL of them upon Himself in His painful death, then there is no need for ANY of us to suffer any more. Not just Mary. Her pains in childbirth concerned Him as much as any of our pains do - her pains would have served the same purposes as our pains and sufferings do, when united with His.

And if her suffering at His birth would’ve served no purpose, then surely her sufferings at His death were likewise needless. Yet she indeed suffered on Calvary, as Simeon foretold she would. Why at that time and not at His birth? Doesn’t compute.

Mind you, having said all that, I didn’t necessarily mean to imply that Mary’s labour **must’ve been physically painful, although it’s not a settled matter that it wasn’t. There’s a certain amount of mental and emotional anguish gone through during labour as well, even if physical pain is absent (as it is for some new mothers today with the excellent pain management we have for them).
 
Before my two cents, just watch out for the polemics, fellow Catholics. It really is a sad sight to beat our chests in front of others, especially in the name of the Lord. Ridicule and sarcasm will not bring any new blood into the Church. I would only sympathize with non-believers if they turned away after seeing the flavour of some of the comments in here.
I believe Shin and Portrait have brought up good points. While I agree we need to use reason to make a position on all types of music, one must always be vigilant with bad influences. These negative influences are usually mixed with positive influenced, just like how it’s said the devil likes to mix truth with lies.

I’m sure many of us have been brought up post 60’s, but not many of us really understand just how much the world was turned upside down after that period. A lot of things we that we thought were okay just because it was normal to do so were an inclination to sin or a sin itself. One of the biggest eye-openers for me was some of the more intricate moralities of sexuality, which I could only truly comprehend when I saw outside my era.

For example, the idea of masturbation. We were told it’s a normal function, especially in men, as it’s a sign of potency, maturation and of course it’s half an act of reproduction. We’re even told it’s healthy because it can reduce prostate cancer. Thanks to the Church, we know better. However, I’m sure the majority of young Catholic men my age think it’s a-okay to gratify themselves and yet still faithfully serve the Lord.

So yeah, it’s always good to keep vigilant. That said, it’s probably safe to listen to the likes of Michael Jackson, the Beatles, Elvis, and most popular/rock music.

In fact, listening to some of Tool’s songs (lyrics to a song here), has actually strengthened my faith in the Church. Very sacrilegious, but it was an eye-opener.
 
I’m sure many of us have been brought up post 60’s, but not many of us really understand just how much the world was turned upside down after that period. A lot of things we that we thought were okay just because it was normal to do so were an inclination to sin or a sin itself. One of the biggest eye-openers for me was some of the more intricate moralities of sexuality, which I could only truly comprehend when I saw outside my era.
I’m sorry but you have a fallacious notion that somehow music should be judged by the era in which it was made. That is rather nonsensical not only when analyzing rock music but all others as well. For instance, how do I know that the piece of traditional Chinese or Japanese music wasn’t derived from a style that was during the bloody times of feudal/medieval Asia. Know what I’m sayin’? Does history somehow change the meaning or do we decide the meaning for ourselves? Again, standards of music become nothing but arbitrary.
 
I’m sorry but you have a fallacious notion that somehow music should be judged by the era in which it was made. That is rather nonsensical not only when analyzing rock music but all others as well. For instance, how do I know that the piece of traditional Chinese or Japanese music wasn’t derived from a style that was during the bloody times of feudal/medieval Asia. Know what I’m sayin’? Does history somehow change the meaning or do we decide the meaning for ourselves? Again, standards of music become nothing but arbitrary.
I believe you went off on a different tangent, as I don’t know where you’re coming from.

It’s no secret that there was a cultural revolution during the mid 20th century, perhaps catalyzed by the Industrial revolution (which brought along technology, colonialism etc), and both world wars, though probably started snowballing way back during the French revolution and Enlightenment period. Ever since then, the whole world has largely been based upon itself, because of it’s lack of faith in any sort of authority (from monarchy to religion). I shouldn’t say much more, but you can learn more about it by taking sociology and modern anthropology studies.

Music (and I can attest for all art forms; I can ponder about all aspects of life to be honest) of the 20th century matured out of this desire of individualism, self-worth and anti-establisment. You and your neighbour are all that matters. Everyone else can get stuffed, which is why developing countries severely need our help, and yet here we are arguing about the value of music on a forum which really requires the best internet technology (it’s barely workable in 56k!) like it’s important. So yes, I am making the assertion that popular music may be in greater error than musics of the past, due to the progression of society.

****That does not make music inherently evil. There’s truth in all songs (love, pain, joy, altruism, worship etc), each and every song having its own variable amount of truth. But only God contains the fullness of truth, purchased for us by his Son Jesus Christ. So as I stated before, we must be vigilant about what we expose ourself to.

For example, John Lennon’s “Imagine” song is a great song, considering its intentions. However, it’s message is definitely not compatible with Church teachings. Also consider that this is one of the most altruistic songs in popular music, even after all these decades. “Like a Rolling Stone” by Bob Dylan, considered one of the greatest pop songs of all time, is pretty much a song about spite and ridicule. I personally love the song, but I fear those who could be consumed by spite for someone because of it.

And despite what people say, yes, music can change people. We are emotional creatures. Music taps into emotion, not reason. I don’t want to elaborate on the pains my father and mother have wrought upon their family, but in conjunction with their sins, the music my brother has listened to as a teenager has turned him into an agnostic, and he has a rather bad attitude reflected in his choice of music. I’m no saint, but I have been blessed as God keeps Himself close to my heart, and was able to overcome a hurdle that could have easily turned anyone cold.

That being said, music isn’t inherently evil. It can cause people to commit sin, which is why I say we must stay vigilant.

Listen to your Frank Sinatras, Elvis’s, Madonna’s and Gaga’s. Just don’t make them your idols 😃
 
I wouldn’t bother.

I agree. We are not “authoritarians”. That is a sad stereotype. Everything requires discernment, ie. our brains. God gave us them. We ought to use them. Just because some of us enjoy other forms of music besides classical or Gregorian Chant doesn’t mean that we are less “holy”, etc.

Exactly. Of course, we should submit to the Church’s authority in the areas of the Faith and morals but when it comes to personal musical/artistic/movie, etc preferences, the Church is wide open. We have a lot of freedom.

I have to agree with this because it seems that some people believe that being a good, devout Catholic means shutting ourselves off completely from the world and from life. We can’t stay in our little fortresses. How can we show others the Truth of the Faith and even show its attractive if all the person hears is that everything is bad, etc? Wouldn’t it be better to take what is good in everything and build that up?
Dear rapunzel77,

Cordial greetings, I should like to reply to some of your comments above.

You are quite correct in stating that being an earnestly pious Catholic does not necessarily entail a complete withdrawal from the world or the affairs this life. Indeed, our Lord said in the Sermon on the Mount that we should “Let (our) light so shine before men, that they may see (our) good works and give glory to (our) God who is in heaven” (S. Matt. 5: 16). Obviously this will prove extremely difficult if we retreat from the world and live a life of seclusion. Clearly our “good works” must be practical, visible deeds of compassion, for these embody the very Gospel of love which we are seeking to communicate to our fellow men. Thus a flight into the invisible is not an option as this is a denial of our calling and mission as Christians.

However, as I said previously, we are called to a life of sanctity and separation from all that is impious and unwholesome. Holiness is not some optional extra for the thorough going but a requirement for all who name the name of Christ - “All Christians in any state or walk of life are called to the fullness of Christian life and to the perfection of charity. All are called to holiness: ‘Be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect’ (CCC para. 2013). Now positively this will include, of course, works of mercy and service to our neighbour; we must seek to do good in whatever capacity we can. Negatively, it will involve a rejection of all that is incompatible with the life of faith and devout living for "The way of perfection passes by way of the Cross. There is no holiness without renunciation and spiritual battle.” (CCC para. 2015). So evidently we are all called to be “spiritual types” for that is the very essence of authentic Christian living, at least according to the Church and the N.T.

Alas, the reluctance of many Catholics to heed the summons to sanctity and separation is all too plainly evident, but this is in complete disobedience to the teaching of our Church.

Our Lord said to His disciples that they were to be the “salt of the earth” (S. Matt. 5: 13), in other words, to put that into modern parlance, they were to be a sort of moral disinfectant in a world where moral standards were exceedingly low, constantly changing, and sometimes even non-existent. Now in order to do this effectively the Christian must not become assimilated to the pagan world view or become contanimated by the impurities that abound in this fallen world such as, for example, morally offensive rock music and culturally unhealthy films and tv programmes. A failure and refusal to do this in recent times has seriously hindered the mission of the Church; the Church has the greatest impact upon the world when it is most unlike the world. The Laodicean plight of the Church in 2010 is inexcusable and we ought to hang our heads in shame and repent in sackcloth and ashes, for the night is coming when no man can work.

If the extent of our worldliness is such that we are scarcely distinguishable from the non-Christians around us, then we have rendered ourselves useless in the service of Christ, as well as failing to present an authentic Christian counter-culture. We might as well be discarded like saltless salt for what use we are in this poor fallen and needy world.

To conclude, the Church will always be respected by the world when it seeks to keep its distance from that which is profane and ungodly. It is our deeds of compassion and our separation from the world that will make us “attractive” to our pagan neighbours.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait
 
To conclude, the Church will always be respected by the world when it seeks to keep its distance from that which is profane and ungodly. It is our deeds of compassion and our separation from the world that will make us “attractive” to our pagan neighbours.
On the contrary, how often do you surround yourself with non-believers? I’ve already heard tons of secularists keep away from the Church strictly because of people such as yourself. I’ve met people who are either non-Catholic, pantheist, or agnostic where I hang out and its people like you and Shin who reinforce their biases against religion. Don’t be so naive.
 
Before my two cents, just watch out for the polemics, fellow Catholics. It really is a sad sight to beat our chests in front of others, especially in the name of the Lord. Ridicule and sarcasm will not bring any new blood into the Church. I would only sympathize with non-believers if they turned away after seeing the flavour of some of the comments in here.
I believe Shin and Portrait have brought up good points. While I agree we need to use reason to make a position on all types of music, one must always be vigilant with bad influences. These negative influences are usually mixed with positive influenced, just like how it’s said the devil likes to mix truth with lies.

I’m sure many of us have been brought up post 60’s, but not many of us really understand just how much the world was turned upside down after that period. A lot of things we that we thought were okay just because it was normal to do so were an inclination to sin or a sin itself. One of the biggest eye-openers for me was some of the more intricate moralities of sexuality, which I could only truly comprehend when I saw outside my era.

For example, the idea of masturbation. We were told it’s a normal function, especially in men, as it’s a sign of potency, maturation and of course it’s half an act of reproduction. We’re even told it’s healthy because it can reduce prostate cancer. Thanks to the Church, we know better. However, I’m sure the majority of young Catholic men my age think it’s a-okay to gratify themselves and yet still faithfully serve the Lord.

So yeah, it’s always good to keep vigilant. That said, it’s probably safe to listen to the likes of Michael Jackson, the Beatles, Elvis, and most popular/rock music.

In fact, listening to some of Tool’s songs (lyrics to a song here), has actually strengthened my faith in the Church. Very sacrilegious, but it was an eye-opener.
Dear Liquid47,

Cordial greetings and thankyou for your courteous responses.

One of the key questions in this whole debate is whether rock music can be reformed from its morally permissive and unsavoury associations. Some men are of the opinion that it can be, that it is merely a matter of changing the lyrics, or somehow appending the music to right cause. Thus we have teachers nowadays who actually use rock in the classroom, educational films are produced with rock sound tracks and now we have so called ‘Christian rock’ and even Christian versions of rock magazines. There is this erroneous notion that the energy of rock can be channeled towards virtuous ends. The delusion appears to arise from a basic misunderstanding about the very nature of rock music itself. Whilst lyrics are important, they are clearly only secondary; the music per se is its own message. Thus irrespective of what the words may say, the music speaks the language of self-gratification, revolt against authority and downright immorality. Not only can rock not be rendered respectable, it actually has no desire to be respectable. A ‘respectable rock’ is a contradiction in terms, “…some dreamers have hoped to harness rock to propagate the values of transcendent idealogies”, writes Robert Pattison. “But rock is useless to teach any transcendent values…rock’s electricity…gives the lie to whatever enlightened propaganda that may be foisted upon it” Mr. Pattison, who has written what is perhaps the definitive book on the rock myth, and who is himself a defender of rock, argues that rock in its essence is vulgar and narcisstic, based on a denial of any value outside the self. Thus whilst it is possible to set a Christian hymn or song to the beat of rock, it simply cannot be done convincingly because the music will subvert the words.

No matter how many reforms are attempted, rock will always inexorably gravitate in the direction of violence, pre-marital sex and anti-authoritarianism; one could say, it just cannot help itself. The beat summons its listeners to throw off restraint and do as you please. This is why I say that rock music is beyond artistic redemption and must be renounced by those who are in earnest about the pursuit of holiness.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait
 
Anyone who tries to take away my Clash, Meat Loaf, Michael Jackson, or Beatles records in the name of God has another thing coming! [BIBLEDRB][/BIBLEDRB]
 
Dear Liquid47,

Cordial greetings and thankyou for your courteous responses.

One of the key questions in this whole debate is whether rock music can be reformed from its morally permissive and unsavoury associations. Some men are of the opinion that it can be, that it is merely a matter of changing the lyrics, or somehow appending the music to right cause. Thus we have teachers nowadays who actually use rock in the classroom, educational films are produced with rock sound tracks and now we have so called ‘Christian rock’ and even Christian versions of rock magazines. There is this erroneous notion that the energy of rock can be channeled towards virtuous ends. The delusion appears to arise from a basic misunderstanding about the very nature of rock music itself. Whilst lyrics are important, they are clearly only secondary; the music per se is its own message. Thus irrespective of what the words may say, the music speaks the language of self-gratification, revolt against authority and downright immorality. Not only can rock not be rendered respectable, it actually has no desire to be respectable. A ‘respectable rock’ is a contradiction in terms, “…some dreamers have hoped to harness rock to propagate the values of transcendent idealogies”, writes Robert Pattison. “But rock is useless to teach any transcendent values…rock’s electricity…gives the lie to whatever enlightened propaganda that may be foisted upon it” Mr. Pattison, who has written what is perhaps the definitive book on the rock myth, and who is himself a defender of rock, argues that rock in its essence is vulgar and narcisstic, based on a denial of any value outside the self. Thus whilst it is possible to set a Christian hymn or song to the beat of rock, it simply cannot be done convincingly because the music will subvert the words.

No matter how many reforms are attempted, rock will always inexorably gravitate in the direction of violence, pre-marital sex and anti-authoritarianism; one could say, it just cannot help itself. The beat summons its listeners to throw off restraint and do as you please. This is why I say that rock music is beyond artistic redemption and must be renounced by those who are in earnest about the pursuit of holiness.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait
You know, the beat of classical music has always made me feel a little funny… edgy, annoyed, ticked off… never felt that (or the other over the top emotions you conveyed) over rock music…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top