Is the popular hymn "Amazing Grace" heretical and unsuitable for Catholic liturgy?

[ac_claire]

Can’t you still say that there is grace present the hour a person first believes and still be theologically correct? Not sanctifying, but actual grace? Or is it clear, do you think, that the writer is talking about sanctifying/salvific grace?

The phrase “saved a wretch like me” would seem to suggect sanctifying, but it doesn’t seem like an airtight case. And if you consider that the writer is Protestant and most Protestants only recognize the one kind of grace, it sort of follows.

 

[Indyann]

Can’t you still say that there is grace present the hour a person first believes and still be theologically correct? Not sanctifying, but actual grace? Or is it clear, do you think, that the writer is talking about sanctifying/salvific grace?

The phrase “saved a wretch like me” would seem to suggect sanctifying, but it doesn’t seem like an airtight case. And if you consider that the writer is Protestant and most Protestants only recognize the one kind of grace, it sort of follows.

After reading the history of “Amazing Grace” on wicki and reading some of the quotes cited on the site linked below, I have come to the conclusion that John Newton absoulutely did NOT believe in OSAS.

quotationpark.com/authors/NEWTON,%20John%A0.html

Heaven
If I ever reach heaven I expect to find three wonders there: first, to meet some had not thought to see there; second, to miss some I had expected to see here; and third, the greatest wonder of all, to find myself there.

And he was not just a Protestant, he was an Anglican Priest.

Now, IF the info is accurate, there is no way this hymn is heretical or even ambiguous.

 

[pnewton]

And if you consider that the writer is Protestant and most Protestants only recognize the one kind of grace, it sort of follows.

While I do believe the belief system of the author is germaine to the appropriateness of the lyrics, I feel compelled to again add that he was Anglican and his conversion actual took place over time. Considering the Anglican view of grace being infused at baptism and the Sacramental nature of baptism, it may well be that John Newton’s understanding of baptism was close to the Catholic understanding. But of course, such speculation is nothing but speculation. I just wanted to point out that we can not look at this as a Baptist hymn, but an Anglican hymn.

 

[Newbie2]

No, it is not splitting hairs. The song states that grace appeared the hour the person first believed. At baptism, we are infused with grace. We just need to be better formed and informed about our Faith. Ambiguous songs like Amazing Grace really have no business in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Ambiguous does not equal heretical.

The song states that grace appears the hour the person first believed. We believe that grace comes at the moment of Baptism.

Rather than use something ambiguous that does go against Catholic teaching, we should concentrate on using doctrinally and liturgically sound hymns for the Mass.

Ambiguous does not equal heretical.

However, the song does contradict Catholic teaching. If the article noted in the OP does not convince you of that, I do not know what will. The song is not using the word “appear” in the sense that you are claiming it is. It is stating that grace kicks in the moment a person believes. It is a totally false reading of St. Paul’s Letter to the Romans and fails to take into account the Church’s teachings. Just because it is popular with the Protestants does not make it fit for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Whatever we use at Mass needs to be consistent with the doctrine, theology and liturgy of the Church.

The song does not deny that Grace is received at Baptism. Are you denying that Grace is not received when someone “first believes”?

If you’re saying that we shouldn’t use ambiguous songs, fine. If you’re saying that the song is heretical, you have no proof…you’ve used the word “ambiguous” more than once. Ambiguous does not equal heretical. If it does, and I’ve missed something, show me a quote where “ambiguous” equal heretical in the CCC or in any of the encyclicals.

 

[benedictgal]

Ambiguous does not equal heretical.

Ambiguous does not equal heretical.

The song does not deny that Grace is received at Baptism. Are you denying that Grace is not received when someone “first believes”?

If you’re saying that we shouldn’t use ambiguous songs, fine. If you’re saying that the song is heretical, you have no proof…you’ve used the word “ambiguous” more than once. Ambiguous does not equal heretical. If it does, and I’ve missed something, show me a quote where “ambiguous” equal heretical in the CCC or in any of the encyclicals.

Actually, Fr. Ward gave enough proof that it is heretical; it’s just that there are some people who, as I read it, refuse to acknowledge this and would rather relativize things. The best course of action is to use hymns from bona fide, theologically and doctrinally correct sources rather than this kind of stuff.

We need to expound the Faith not water it down with tripe like this. The problem here, as I see it, is that those who support this song really don’t have a theological leg to stand on and when someone like Fr. Ward makes concrete and solid arguments, they refuse to acknowledge them and base themselves on feelings rather than on authentic Church teaching. This song needs to go.

 

[Indyann]

I was going to quote a bunch of threads and refer to a bunch of others, but it’s a lost cause. Some people are just not reading what other people are writing, and the person who wrote the article referred to by the OP wasn’t reading the actual lyrics written by John Newton. For me to say “How beautiful my bride appeared on the day we got married” does not mean that was the first time I saw her, no matter how one may try to twist the statement around one’s preconceptions. To quote what someone who tried to rebuke me on a different subject, different thread, “Words matter.” All of them.

DaveBj

I think you’re right! Some are so openminded, their brains fall out. Some are so closeminded, their brains are incapable of expanding.

 

[rotlex]

Wow, the thought being put into some of the posts in this thread are simply astounding. To take a beautiful song such as this, and attempt to say it has no place within a Catholic Liturgy, or it’s anti whatever etc. etc., is simply mind boggling.

Makes me wonder if God himself even thinks about something like this as much as many seem to be doing. I would like to think he simply sits back and thinks to himself, “My, what a beautiful, moving song this is”.

 

[tweetymom]

Wow, the thought being put into some of the posts in this thread are simply astounding. To take a beautiful song such as this, and attempt to say it has no place within a Catholic Liturgy, or it’s anti whatever etc. etc., is simply mind boggling.

Makes me wonder if God himself even thinks about something like this as much as many seem to be doing. I would like to think he simply sits back and thinks to himself, “My, what a beautiful, moving song this is”.

Amen and amen. Me thinks God looks down and sees a lot of nothing over nothing. Also likes songs that praises Him.

 

[CatholicZ09]

I have to say, it isn’t overused in my Parish either. The last time we sang it actually was at Mass in the Summer of 2008 (excluding funerals). However, it’s possible my organist chose it for this coming Sunday (it was the top suggestion in my liturgical planning magazine - the same one he uses.)

 

[Lujack]

Actually, Fr. Ward gave enough proof that it is heretical; it’s just that there are some people who, as I read it, refuse to acknowledge this and would rather relativize things. The best course of action is to use hymns from bona fide, theologically and doctrinally correct sources rather than this kind of stuff.

We need to expound the Faith not water it down with tripe like this.

You know what? There’s absolutely no need to adopt this haughty position of superiority. Nobody here disputes Father Ward’s interpretation of the Catholic doctrine of grace. We dispute his interpretation of the song. He has provided no theological proof that Amazing Grace is heretical, because he first has to prove semantically that the song says what he says it does, and he hasn’t done that, and neither have you. And calling the song “tripe” is just an entirely unnecessary shot, as is this whole thing:

The problem here, as I see it, is that those who support this song really don’t have a theological leg to stand on and when someone like Fr. Ward makes concrete and solid arguments, they refuse to acknowledge them and base themselves on feelings rather than on authentic Church teaching. This song needs to go.

Why post this? Why make the discussion more bitter for no reason at all? The problem, as I see it, is that those who oppose this song really don’t have a semantical leg to stand on, and when they see other people in other parishes using songs that they don’t like for subjective reasons, they put boulders on top of sand, and insist that the boulder is inassailable, even as the sand is slipping away from underneath it.

Your subjective dislike of Amazing Grace does not make it objective heresy, and it certainly doesn’t give you the right or the ability to declare that it must go from all song lists in all parishes in all contexts.

 

[pnewton]

Actually, Fr. Ward gave enough proof that it is heretical; it’s just that there are some people who, as I read it, refuse to acknowledge this and would rather relativize things.

Perhaps he should take this supposed proof to the Church to have it declared as heresy. I think if should attempt such a feat, he would find that what he sees as proof does not qualify. His view is slanted from the start and his logic faulty. When one seeks for heresy, it is easier to find, even when it does not exist. Yes, I do not recognize that his evidence rises to the level of proof or even solid evidence. This is not an obstinate refusal on my part though. It is an honest appraisal of the man’s deficient reasoning, as I have already lined out.

Begging the question in stronger terms is the internet equivalent of shouting louder to make one’s view heard.

 

[Newbie2]

You know what? There’s absolutely no need to adopt this haughty position of superiority. Nobody here disputes Father Ward’s interpretation of the Catholic doctrine of grace. We dispute his interpretation of the song. He has provided no theological proof that Amazing Grace is heretical, because he first has to prove semantically that the song says what he says it does, and he hasn’t done that, and neither have you. And calling the song “tripe” is just an entirely unnecessary shot, as is this whole thing:

Why post this? Why make the discussion more bitter for no reason at all? The problem, as I see it, is that those who oppose this song really don’t have a semantical leg to stand on, and when they see other people in other parishes using songs that they don’t like for subjective reasons, they put boulders on top of sand, and insist that the boulder is inassailable, even as the sand is slipping away from underneath it.

Your subjective dislike of Amazing Grace does not make it objective heresy, and it certainly doesn’t give you the right or the ability to declare that it must go from all song lists in all parishes in all contexts.

Thank you, Lujack, well put. I totally agree that Fr. Ward has offered no proof that the song is heretical…after all, why would he use the word “ambiguous” at all?

Benedictgal did not address the fact that ambiguousness is not a criteria for heresy.

Actually, I’m disappointed in Benedictgal. Usually she is able and more than willing to back up her assertions with official church teachings, and does so quite well with quotes.
None so far…just:

“…is that those who support this song really don’t have a theological leg to stand on and when someone like Fr. Ward makes concrete and solid arguments, they refuse to acknowledge them and base themselves on feelings rather than on authentic Church teaching.”

Fr. Ward is giving an informed theological opinion. His opinion holds virtually no weight for the faithful; it is not an official proclaimation. He can ban it from his parish, but that’s about it.