Is this hymn heretical?

[Petergee]

Thank you, peary. Additional kudos go to you for actually counting how many times certain words are used.

Unless you accidentally used the “thumbs up” instead of the “sarcasm” icon, you are actually serious that heresy is a matter of counting words. Now I know you are just jerking my chain, and I don’t appreciate it when I’m trying to have a serious discussion.

I asked you politely yesterday after your assertion that

the Holy Father’s words … contradict yours.

to " Please point out one statement I have made which contradicts one statement the Holy Father has made." As you have ignored this request and merely repeated your earlier misrepresentations, I again ask you to withdraw this offensive assertion.

You apparently regard it as just a debating point to combat me with, but my loyalty and obedience to the Holy Father is very important to me, and your continued unfounded assertions that I am supporting heresy and contradicting the Holy Father are more than somewhat distressing.

As I said, there are innumerable traditional hymns which would fare the same if not worse if the same selective, intense, persistent and tunnel-visioned destructive analysis was conducted on them which has been conducted here on SotBoC.

To take one I mentioned earlier, Away in a Manger. Written by a recalcitrant heretic and notorious heresiarch who undoubtedly had an agenda to tear down several major dogmas of the faith. It is set to a profane-type tune which is far removed from Gregorian chant and liturgical polyphony, and is not suited to the organ. There is no suggestion in it that Jesus is more than merely human, except for vague and nebulous references to “look down from the sky” and “fit us for Heaven to live with thee there”. It doesn’t even mention that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah. Apparently he is just a great man or saint. I wonder if you will be screaming blue murder if it is sung at your parish this Xmas?

Probably not, because I suspect the real “problematic” aspect of SotBoC to you is not the words or the music, but the little figure signifying its date of publication, 1960s or later being ipso facto heretical, earlier being orthodox. You seem to be suffering from what CS Lewis described as “chronological snobbery”.

 

[benedictgal]

Unless you accidentally used the “thumbs up” instead of the “sarcasm” icon, you are actually serious that heresy is a matter of counting words. Now I know you are just jerking my chain, and I don’t appreciate it when I’m trying to have a serious discussion.

I asked you politely yesterday after your assertion that
to " Please point out one statement I have made which contradicts one statement the Holy Father has made." As you have ignored this request and merely repeated your earlier misrepresentations, I again ask you to withdraw this offensive assertion.

You apparently regard it as just a debating point to combat me with, but my loyalty and obedience to the Holy Father is very important to me, and your continued unfounded assertions that I am supporting heresy and contradicting the Holy Father are more than somewhat distressing.

As I said, there are innumerable traditional hymns which would fare the same if not worse if the same selective, intense, persistent and tunnel-visioned destructive analysis was conducted on them which has been conducted here on SotBoC.

To take one I mentioned earlier, Away in a Manger. Written by a recalcitrant heretic and notorious heresiarch who undoubtedly had an agenda to tear down several major dogmas of the faith. It is set to a profane-type tune which is far removed from Gregorian chant and liturgical polyphony, and is not suited to the organ. There is no suggestion in it that Jesus is more than merely human, except for vague and nebulous references to “look down from the sky” and “fit us for Heaven to live with thee there”. It doesn’t even mention that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah. Apparently he is just a great man or saint. I wonder if you will be screaming blue murder if it is sung at your parish this Xmas?

Probably not, because I suspect the real “problematic” aspect of SotBoC to you is not the words or the music, but the little figure signifying its date of publication, 1960s or later being ipso facto heretical, earlier being orthodox. You seem to be suffering from what CS Lewis described as “chronological snobbery”.

Petergee, if you did regard the Holy Father’s comments regarding sacred Music as you say you do, then it would be clear to you that Song of the Body of Christ is problematic in many different ways.

The Pope and bishops wefre chieefly concerned about the use of styles of music which were intended for profane rather than liturgical use. Not about any supposed "heresy’ in the lyrics of any particular hymn.

Styles of music were not the only criteria that the Pope and the Synod Fathers were concerned about. Please re-read the portion from Sacramentum Caritatis:

Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided. As an element of the liturgy, song should be well integrated into the overall celebration (128). Consequently everything – texts, music, execution – ought to correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons (129).

Clearly, the texts of the music are chiefly important. Something that your quote seems to ignore.

Furthermore, you state:

Your repeated quotes of quite unrelated tracts from the papal documents undermine rather than support your assertions, as they show that there is in fact no official church document which supports your postion and you are merely bluffing on this point.

Is this, then, how you regard Sacramentum Caritatis and the Lineamata? Do you not hold Sacramentum Caritatis to be an official document or do you simply see this as Pope Benedict’s personal opinion?

Regarding Away in a Manger, according to the Worship III hymnal (older translation), Stanzas 1 and 2 are by an anonymous author. Furthermore, the line that you quote means that Jesus looks down to us from heaven. Isn’t that were we believe Jesus also is? Not only does he reside in our Tabernacles, but, he is in heaven. Your comparison does not make sense. Incidentally, the third stanza is attributed to a gentleman named William J. Kirkpatrick.

 

[Petergee]

Benedictgal, clearly you are determined to be as offensive as possible in your relentless war on this hymn and apparently all hymns less than 50 years old and those who sing them. Obviously you’re going to stick to your assertion that the pope has ordered Catholics to agree with you no matter how obviously unfounded it is. Just don’t expect orthodox catholics to be convinced by your spurious misrepresentations of the Holy Father and myself.

Regarding Away in a Manger, according to the Worship III hymnal (older translation), Stanzas 1 and 2 are by an anonymous author.

Right, so it’s OK as long as we pretend that we don’t know that heretics had anyhing to with it.

Furthermore, the line that you quote means that Jesus looks down to us from heaven. Isn’t that were we believe Jesus also is? Not only does he reside in our Tabernacles, but, he is in heaven. Your comparison does not make sense.

All the saints and prophets also look down on us from Heaven. At least that’s what orthodox Catholics believe.
I take it that you can’t think of even a spurious justification for the other “problematic” things I mentioned about Away in a Manger. Oh and I forgot to mention, it also has no Scriptural content, unlike SotBoC.
Not that I object to Away in a Manger. It’s perfectly fine. Just using it to illustrate the ludicrousness of your claim to have found “heresy” in SotBoC.

 

[benedictgal]

Benedictgal, clearly you are determined to be as offensive as possible in your relentless war on this hymn and apparently all hymns less than 50 years old and those who sing them. Obviously you’re going to stick to your assertion that the pope has ordered Catholics to agree with you no matter how obviously unfounded it is. Just don’t expect orthodox catholics to be convinced by your spurious misrepresentations of the Holy Father and myself.Right, so it’s OK as long as we pretend that we don’t know that heretics had anyhing to with it. All the saints and prophets also look down on us from Heaven. At least that’s what orthodox Catholics believe.
I take it that you can’t think of even a spurious justification for the other “problematic” things I mentioned about Away in a Manger. Oh and I forgot to mention, it also has no Scriptural content, unlike SotBoC.
Not that I object to Away in a Manger. It’s perfectly fine. Just using it to illustrate the ludicrousness of your claim to have found “heresy” in SotBoC.

First of all, no where in my posts did I say that music written over the last 40 years was all bad. And, I am not misrepresenting what the Holy Father has said. Nor, am I being offensive, unless you find the Truth odious. Away in a Manger doesn’t have scriptural content? Well, just what did the little Lord Jesus lay his sweet head upon? A Tempurpedic mattress or a manger? What does a manger contain? Down feathers and 300-count sheets? Mangers are feeding troughs that hold hay. A simple reading of the infancy narrative from St. Luke should help settle the matter, don’t you think?

I never outright said that Song of the Body of Christ was heretical. That’s the question from the OP as well as the title of this thread. What I did say and what I do keep on saying is that Song of the Body of Christ is deficient in its lyrics as it only emphasizes the “meal” aspect of the Mass while completely ignoring the Sacrificial element, which his why we go to Mass and why it is called the Holy Sacrifice. Lastly, it is more centered on “we” when it should immerse itself in the mystery of the “Thou”, the Wholly Other whom we are supposed to worship and adore.

You are simply grasping at straws at this point, as you have presented absolutely nothing that substantiates your claim, except a stubborn resolve and a rather condescending tone towards me.

Your arguments, therefore, are facetious and are about as accurate as a three-dollar bill.

 

[benedictgal]

Who holds the right to tell me this hymn is not of God because of their personal dislike for the words/melody?

Or that God is unable to minister to anyone who listens to this hymn, solely because the theology is imperfectly re-presenting the sacrifice of Christ?

With all due respect, the Church holds the right to tell us what hymns are appropriate and allowable for liturgical use. Are you now disputing the Church’s wisdom and holding your own tastes and prefernces over what the Church requires for liturgical music?

Peter has spoken rather loudly and clearly on this matter. In fact, if anyone is in a position to make statements on liturgical music, is our Holy Father. Perhaps you don’t know this, but, he is a musician and his brother, Msgr. Georg Ratzinger served as the choirmaster for the Regensberg Cathedral. The Pope has a very solid understanding of what sacred music should be. Unfortunately, publishing houses have taken excessive liberties with the mass production of songs, regardless of whether or not they conform to the Church’s standards.

 

[Petergee]

First of all, no where in my posts did I say that music written over the last 40 years was all bad.

OK, name one popular hymn written in the last 40 years which you do not find “deficient”.

And, I am not misrepresenting what the Holy Father has said.

You keep asserting that, but when challenged you’ve got nothing of substance. you’ll never be able to convince the majority of orthodox Catholics that the Pope has condemned SotBoC.

Nor, am I being offensive, unless you find the Truth odious.

I was referring to your condescending tomne, wild accusations and refusal to engage in productive discussion.

Away in a Manger doesn’t have scriptural content? Well, just what did the little Lord Jesus lay his sweet head upon? A Tempurpedic mattress or a manger? What does a manger contain? Down feathers and 300-count sheets? Mangers are feeding troughs that hold hay. A simple reading of the infancy narrative from St. Luke should help settle the matter, don’t you think?

Yes, you are correct, the one word “manger” appears both in Scripture and in the hymn. It’s an enormous stretch to assert that it is therefore quoting Scripture.

I assure you there is nothing facetious about my comments. I had no idea until this thread that there some Catholics (well at least one) who had such blind irrational fury towards a perfectly acceptable hymn. Thanks for giving me a deeper appreciation of this inspiring hymn.

 

[Petergee]

With all due respect, the Church holds the right to tell us what hymns are appropriate and allowable for liturgical use. Are you now disputing the Church’s wisdom and holding your own tastes and prefernces over what the Church requires for liturgical music?

No, I’m disputing your right to tell everybody else which hymns they may and may not sing and your ludicrous attempt to defend this based on your highly selective and highly imaginative re-interpretation of a couple of Church documents to match your own tastes and preferences. So you’ve found a priest who agrees with you. Bully for you. I know scores of holy orthodox and obedient priests who are perfectly happy with SotBoC.

Peter has spoken rather loudly and clearly on this matter. In fact, if anyone is in a position to make statements on liturgical music, is our Holy Father. Perhaps you don’t know this, but, he is a musician and his brother, Msgr. Georg Ratzinger served as the choirmaster for the Regensberg Cathedral. The Pope has a very solid understanding of what sacred music should be.

Thanks for the further “information” which even the mainstream media has been aware of since the day B16 was elected. Yes that’s an additional reason (as if one was necessary) why I obey B16 rather than you.

Unfortunately, publishing houses have taken excessive liberties with the mass production of songs, regardless of whether or not they conform to the Church’s standards.

No-one is disputing your right to hold that personal opinion, and if you are ever elected pope, no doubt you’ll make all hymns conform to your taste and we’ll all be happy to obey you. But as you have no authority over us, please stop asserting it. It only makes you look silly.

 

[Petergee]

So it seems we’ve come to some sort of consensus that the answer to the OP is “NO” -it’s not heretical. Though one at least is still doggedly pumping for “problematic” or “deficient”.

Now Away in a Manger is clearly “deficient” in the sense used here, in expressing the thology of the Nativity. Indeed a Moslem or a Bahai or in fact most non-Christians, who recognise Jesus as a good man, a saint or a prophet, could happily sing it. I guess most would respond that this “deficiency” in dogma doesn’t matter becasue we express our belief in the full dogmas many other ways during the Christmas celebrations, through other hymns and prayers.
Unfortunately some seem unable to apply the same logic to SotBoC. If as asserted it is “deficient” in the theology of the scrifice of the Mass (I would say it’s not, it’s just that it is implied rather than explicitly stated in the form some would wish) the answer is not to rewrite the word (thanks benedictgal but your metres are all awry and you’ve almost killed the mood and tone of the hymn) but that taken together with all the other hymns and prayers associated with the Mass, we express our belief in all the dogmas of the Mass and the Eucharist.
If a parish NEVER sung any hymns at Mass which explcitly mentioned Christ’s sacrifice, or never sung any hymns at Xmas which explicitly mentioned Jesus divinity or even Messiah-hood, then there would be a problem. But it seems that for all the ranting and raving, tracking down any parish which actually does this is as elusive as the fabled “clown Mass”.

 

[Joysong]

benedictgal:

With all due respect, the Church holds the right to tell us what hymns are appropriate and allowable for liturgical use. Are you now disputing the Church’s wisdom and holding your own tastes and preferences over what the Church requires for liturgical music?

All due respect? You have shown absolutely no respect for my posts and right to my own opinion. Your animosity is overtly apparent toward this hymn and any who happen to like it. Now I read your outlandish insinuation that it is “my own taste over what the church requires” as if I am seriously reprobate for liking it.

Unfortunately, publishing houses have taken excessive liberties with the mass production of songs, regardless of whether or not they conform to the Church’s standards.

And they have all been given a recognito by the Church to publish each and every hymn contained within their hymnals, which is acknowledged in the cover. Until the Church withdraws their approbation, there can be no further debate about licitness - only personal opinion.

It would be best to take your complaints to those who gave the recognito in the first place for none of us who post here are able to make any changes to hymns or hymnals. It would also help toward charity and unity if you would refrain from imposing your personal interpretations of church theology on the rest of us … if, and until the church agrees with your point of view,

Perhaps if I say it a fourth time you might hear? It is NOT the words, NOT the melody, but the inner witness of the Holy Spirit which draws me to cherish this hymn. Over that territory of the human soul, you have no authority and no argument. I withdraw from this baneless discussion.

 

[Joysong]

Petergee:

If a parish NEVER sung any hymns at Mass which explcitly mentioned Christ’s sacrifice, or never sung any hymns at Xmas which explicitly mentioned Jesus divinity or even Messiah-hood, then there would be a problem. But it seems that for all the ranting and raving, tracking down any parish which actually does this is as elusive as the fabled “clown Mass”.

Worth repeating!

 

[benedictgal]

All due respect? You have shown absolutely no respect for my posts and right to my own opinion. Your animosity is overtly apparent toward this hymn and any who happen to like it. Now I read your outlandish insinuation that it is “my own taste over what the church requires” as if I am seriously reprobate for liking it.

And they have all been given a recognito by the Church to publish each and every hymn contained within their hymnals, which is acknowledged in the cover. Until the Church withdraws their approbation, there can be no further debate about licitness - only personal opinion.

It would be best to take your complaints to those who gave the recognito in the first place for none of us who post here are able to make any changes to hymns or hymnals. It would also help toward charity and unity if you would refrain from imposing your personal interpretations of church theology on the rest of us … if, and until the church agrees with your point of view,

Perhaps if I say it a fourth time you might hear? It is NOT the words, NOT the melody, but the inner witness of the Holy Spirit which draws me to cherish this hymn. Over that territory of the human soul, you have no authority and no argument. I withdraw from this baneless discussion.

First of all, please point out where this recognitio exists for OCP. In all actuality, those who gain recognitio are the national bishops’ conferences only. I have examined one of OCP’s hymnals, Spirit and Song, and they don’t have any sort of authoritative stamp.

You still have not provided any documentation from the various statements and decrees from the Holy See that support your points.

Second, if the words are deficient in their content (Song of the Body of Christ), how can you claim that the Holy Spirit inspires them? Your refusal to accept the statements made in the documents is regrettable because it gives the appearance that, perhaps, you view them as mere opinions.

The heart of the problem with your posts is that you are, in fact, relying on your own tastes and placing what the Church says regarding how the hymns should be in second place, as though what the Church has already written is an after-thought.

Unfortunately, it is you who are imposing your own theology.

 

[benedictgal]

OK, name one popular hymn written in the last 40 years which you do not find “deficient”.You keep asserting that, but when challenged you’ve got nothing of substance. you’ll never be able to convince the majority of orthodox Catholics that the Pope has condemned SotBoC. I was referring to your condescending tomne, wild accusations and refusal to engage in productive discussion. Yes, you are correct, the one word “manger” appears both in Scripture and in the hymn. It’s an enormous stretch to assert that it is therefore quoting Scripture.

I assure you there is nothing facetious about my comments. I had no idea until this thread that there some Catholics (well at least one) who had such blind irrational fury towards a perfectly acceptable hymn. Thanks for giving me a deeper appreciation of this inspiring hymn.

Then, you have a deep appreciation for deficient theology, because that, in fact, is what this song is.

Your line of thinking is rather troubling. Are you now saying that everything goes as far as Sacred Music is concerned? If that is the case, then you are subscribing to liturgical relativism and you are allowing yourself to be tossed to and frow by every little fancy that you encounter. Your apparent display of pride leads to blindness when it comes to Sacred Music.

Regarding your question about the hymns written over the last 40 years, I did answer that several posts back (also within this thread).

 

[Petergee]

Then, you have a deep appreciation for deficient theology, because that, in fact, is what this song is.

Your line of thinking is rather troubling. Are you now saying that everything goes as far as Sacred Music is concerned? If that is the case, then you are subscribing to liturgical relativism and you are allowing yourself to be tossed to and frow by every little fancy that you encounter. Your apparent display of pride leads to blindness when it comes to Sacred Music.

And no doubt you will continue to self-righteously claim that you are not being offensive and condescending, and that you are not inventing calumnies agianst your brothers in Christ.

Regarding your question about the hymns written over the last 40 years, I did answer that several posts back (also within this thread).

Really? In post number…? I’ve re-read the whole thread and I can’t find any mention of even one <40yearold hymn which in your asserted authoritative opinion is not “deficient”. Unless you’re referring to your own “improved” version of SotBoC. (Don’t give up your day job.)

 

[benedictgal]

And no doubt you will continue to self-righteously claim that you are not being offensive and condescending, and that you are not inventing calumnies agianst your brothers in Christ.
Really? In post number…? I’ve re-read the whole thread and I can’t find any mention of even one <40yearold hymn which in your asserted authoritative opinion is not “deficient”. Unless you’re referring to your own “improved” version of SotBoC. (Don’t give up your day job.)

It is you who are being condescending and self-righteous. The Holy Father, in Sacramentum Caritatis, already answered your statement regarding musical standards.

The thread concerns Song of the Body of Christ. Your question was not germaine to the OP. My selections were placed in another thread regarding what music will survive in the next 500 years. You may read my selections there.

You are the one who has been insulting and rude. I have not leveled personal attacks against you. The rock-throwing has come from your end, not mine. You have yet to substantiate any of your claims by way of documentation from the Holy See.

 

[benedictgal]

One other thing: one of the posters previously counted how many times the word “we” was said in the Song of the Body of Christ. I believe the count was over 10 times. The song is about what “we” are doing. We come to tell our story, we come as your people, etc. It’s all about us and God is an after-thought in this whole song.

When we emphasize ourselves over the sublime majesty of God, our whole concept of liturgy is skewed. We have turned the Mass into a celebration of ourselves, rather than the Holy Sacrifice that it truly is.

I rewrote the wording to reflect how the Song of the Body of Christ could have been better reflected what the Mass is all about. It is a sacrifice and it is a meal. However, to emphasize the “meal” more than the sacrifice shows some serious flaws in the composer’s theology. It is more Protestant in nature because Protestants do not believe in sacrifice. Nor do they believe in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament.

The Marian Hymns and the Christmas hymns are appropriate for use because they do reflect the mysteries of the various feast days the Church celebrates in her liturgical calendar. Regardless of who wrote the music, the text of the Ave Maria is a translation of the Hail Mary, which the Church has prayed for centuries. To say that these hymns should not be used for the Mass shows a very poor and deficient understanding of sacred Music because these hymns reflect the seasons of the Church year.

The bottom line is that the OP asked the question: is this hymn heretical? There are some truths to the Song of the Body of Christ, but, it does not contain the complete picture. It celebrates us rather than the mystery we are supposed to come every week to ponder and pray. I like this verse from Let All Mortal Flesh Keep Silence:

Let all mortal flesh keep silence, and with fear and trembling stand, ponder nothing earthly minded, for with blessing in his hand, Christ our God to earth, decendeth, ***our full homage to demand./***QUOTE]

Christ demands our full homage. The hymns need to reflect that. Song of the Body of Christ does not.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

This thread is closed. Thank you all.