Hymns still using the unspoken name

[LindaS]

This happens in my parish as well. Our choir director often chooses hymns with Yayweh in it.

When I asked about it, I was asked a question in return:

“Is this truly a Salvation issue”?

I have been asked this many times, and have come to the realization that Asking questions is not a very welcomed thing to do.

As it involves obedience to the Pope and the Magisterium, I would say that it is a Salvation issue.

Peace,
Linda

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

This happens in my parish as well. Our choir director often chooses hymns with Yayweh in it.

When I asked about it, I was asked a question in return:

“Is this truly a Salvation issue”?

I have been asked this many times, and have come to the realization that Asking questions is not a very welcomed thing to do.

Unfortunately.​

There’s something called “parvity of matter” in RC moral theology - that is, “littleness of matter”. Some things are too trifling to be of great importance. For instance, making the sign of the Cross from left to right or vice versa might be a fault, without being a sin, let alone a mortal sin, because it far too trifling to be of such great importance. A “secular” example: wearing a Hawaiian shirt to work. It would definitely be a sin against good taste, but it would be far too trifling to be mortally sinful; so it could not be a cause of damnation. Speeding OTOH is often sinful, though often not.

Ask yourself questions such as: is singing “Yahweh”

• going to affect sacramental validity ?
• going to change the meaning of the texts it appears in ?
• obscene ?
• heretical ?
• blasphemous ?
• schismatic ?
• unquestionable proof of any of the preceding or following ?
• morally certain evidence of any of the preceding or following ?
• liable - from the POV of an average prudent man - to lead to genuine scandal***** ?
• an occasion of sin to anyone not afflicted with scrupulosity ?
• a proximate occasion of sin…scrupulosity ?
  *****Not all scandal is genuinely scandalous - some “scandals” are perceived as such because people are excessively inclined to detect scandal; rather like those who are allergic to something in this or that food. That is called “Pharisaic” scandal. The genuine kind is called “scandalum pusillanorum”, scandal (= a stumbling-block) to the little ones". (I don’t know if there’s a name for what should be felt as a scandal, but is not )

 

[benedictgal]

Unfortunately.​

There’s something called “parvity of matter” in RC moral theology - that is, “littleness of matter”. Some things are too trifling to be of great importance. For instance, making the sign of the Cross from left to right or vice versa might be a fault, without being a sin, let alone a mortal sin, because it far too trifling to be of such great importance. A “secular” example: wearing a Hawaiian shirt to work. It would definitely be a sin against good taste, but it would be far too trifling to be mortally sinful; so it could not be a cause of damnation. Speeding OTOH is often sinful, though often not.

Ask yourself questions such as: is singing “Yahweh”

• going to affect sacramental validity ?
• going to change the meaning of the texts it appears in ?
• obscene ?
• heretical ?
• blasphemous ?
• schismatic ?
• unquestionable proof of any of the preceding or following ?
• morally certain evidence of any of the preceding or following ?
• liable - from the POV of an average prudent man - to lead to genuine scandal***** ?
• an occasion of sin to anyone not afflicted with scrupulosity ?
• a proximate occasion of sin…scrupulosity ?
  *****Not all scandal is genuinely scandalous - some “scandals” are perceived as such because people are excessively inclined to detect scandal; rather like those who are allergic to something in this or that food. That is called “Pharisaic” scandal. The genuine kind is called “scandalum pusillanorum”, scandal (= a stumbling-block) to the little ones". (I don’t know if there’s a name for what should be felt as a scandal, but is not )

However, we need to remember one very important thing. The Holy See has issued its decision, going back to 2001 when Liturgiam Authenticam was promulgated. The document had that prohibition. Unfortunately, it has been ignored by the publishing houses in this country. Now that the Holy See has reiterated its stance on the issue, we need to obey.

Remember, too, that part and parcel of being Catholic is to obey what the Holy See says. It is not up to us to decide these things. Rome has already spoken on this issue. We need to obey.