Lord of the Dance

[benedictgal]

You find children’s fiction a better way to appreciate the Gospel story than just reading the Gospels. Have I got it right?

That is what she said in her initial post about the song. I lifted the quote verbatim and told her that it was indeed a very sad commentary. If the Gospel story on its own doesn’t impact us and if we need some sort of re-telling by way of fiction, then we have not gotten the message. That is indeed very sad. No one is twisting anything, since that is what Cat said.

However, sentimentalities about the song aside, Lord of the Dance is based on gnostic theology that the Church deemed heretical from the get-go. Unfortunately, gnosticism rears its ugly head ever so often. Lord of the Dance is just one of those instances, as you, driver, have pointed out.

 

[patches]

Now, what to do about this horrid and abysmal song? OCP has it in its hymnals and it’s one of the few “adult” songs that has found its way into the kiddie song book (Rise Up and Sing). Should a letter-writing campaign commence to tell OCP to remove it? Or to whom should one write regarding this ditty?

I think that just like government, we get the kind of music publishing we deserve. When people stop singing it, abandoning it in favor of music that respects the Lord’s passion in awe and deep (not “high-five”) gratitude, it will disappear. I defy anyone to look at a crucifix for ten seconds and then assert that “Lord of the Dance” is an appropriate song to sing at Easter. Yes, we have great joy at the Jesus’ ultimate victory over death, but because the Paschal Mystery always includes our Lord’s passion and death, that joy is always marked with deep awe and solemnity in the shadow of the cross. This song simply lacks that gravitas. Jesus bore the marks of his passion when he rose from the dead, --therefore, even when we behold Him in glory, those wounds should never be far from our minds. A happy-go-lucky tune is an extremely poor choice to express these incredibly deep mysteries, --there are far better ways to fill those three minutes.

 

[Sarabande]

Arrgh!!!

Will someone else besides benedictgal PLEASE tell me whether or not I am insane?!!

If I am unable to read my own posts, then I should definitely NOT be at work today in a hospital!

I posted: “I personally find stories like The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe a much more effective way to appreciate the Gospel story than just reading the Gospel story.”

benedictgirl turned it into: “That is indeed a very sad commentary, to think that work of fiction is much more meaningful than the Gospel itself.”
.

I don’t think you’re insane, Cat. I think this has to do with how words are interpreted and understood based on people’s experiences, background and education - also by how well a person knows the other. (Although I’m a classical musician by profession, I also majored in journalism and had to take a bunch of classes in how the written and spoken words can be construed/misconstrued by various people.) People come from all sorts of backgrounds and experiences so everyone will understand things differently - and it’s even harder when you are not there face to face with the other person and only relying on what is written on paper or on the computer in this instance.

So, just analyzing your quote, there are a few ways it can be interpreted. I’m not saying that any of these interpretations are what I believe you to mean, but they can be construed that way, right or wrong.

1. The Gospels can’t be appreciated in full by themselves. I need books like “The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe” to help me appreciate the Gospels. (Many times to people this can be interpreted that the Gospels aren’t enough for a person. One finds more meaning in books like “LWW” than in the Gospels by saying that “LWW” can be much more effective in appreciating the Gospels with full meaning.)
2. The Gospels by themselves can’t be understood (I know that some people associate “appreciate” with “understood” even though it’s not really the same thing) on it’s own. I need “LWW” to help me understand the stories better.
3. The “LWW” can be a nice way to further comprehend and appreciate what is going in the Gospels for contemporary Christians. It’s by no means better than the Gospels, but it can help those understand better who may have a time trying to get what is being said in them.
4. I don’t think the Gospels can stand on their own without books like “LWW”.

So, I can see how benedictgal interpreted your quote in that way, although you may have not meant it in that way.

How I took your quote is that reading the Gospels by themselves can’t be appreciated as much by modern readers. But when you read stories based on the Gospels like “LWW”, it is a much better way of appreciating and finding more meaning in them rather than just relying on the Gospels.

I don’t know if that is what you actually meant, but for some people that can mean as an insult to the Gospels by needing those kinds of books to help a person appreciate them more. To others, as long as it doesn’t take precedence over the Gospels and it is used to help in appreciating them more, that’s fine. So, if there is misunderstanding, take a deep breath, try to analyze how the other person thinks then try to write a more clearer explanation on what you actually meant in a way that the interpreter of a quote can comprehend. We all understand things in different ways. Nothing wrong about it, though.

 

[ForMary]

But then, that’s the hymnal that also has one of my favourite Cat Stevens songs as well - “Morning Has Broken”.

**Actually, it was an Irish song before Cat Stevens got hold of it.

I might add that this person williingly did what his ancestors joyfully chose death rather than do–apostasize from Orthodoxy to Mahometism.**

Our hymnal has two versions of Morning has Broken, one is more wedding oriented and one is ordinary time oriented.

And I sang *Jesus Christ has Risen Today Aaaaalleluia *all day long on Sunday!

 

[Kevirish01]

This song makes me (and my kids) want to yak!

It has no business being sung in the Sacred Liturgy.

You preach it Benedict Gal – you too Patches!

It is banal, insipid, and dare-I-say stupid “ditties” like this which have added to the de-sacralization of the Holy Mass. (Gee thanks OCP *and *WLP) How can we ever expect our young Catholics to appreciate the Holy Sacrifice with this type of garbage?

Gimee “Jesus Christ is Risen Today” ten times in one Easter Mass over “The Lord of the Dance” being sung *once *in a year’s worth of Masses.

 

[Sarabande]

This is what I was talking about in terms of broadening the line. In the repeat, Marilyn Horne broadens it just a bit. This is with orchestra, but it is also often done with piano and there is actually another video of her ten years earlier singing it with piano. If you like this kind of singing, enjoy the rest of the songs with her and James Levine as conductore. There is also “Shall We Gather at the River”. She’s one of the best recitalists of her time.

youtube.com/watch?v=9i-X4IJzkNM&feature=related

Simple Gifts is wonderful for recitals (I’m performing it in a recital this May), but I wouldn’t sing it for mass.

Then compare this with how I remember it being sung in church minus the beer and the clapping - it would either be with guitar, piano or organ:

youtube.com/watch?v=Y1bglfv599I&feature=related

It’s even better hearing it as an Irish jig in a pub rather than in church, but this was the tempo that it would always be taken at mass.
youtube.com/watch?v=c0aEHw3vKLg&feature=related

Basically, great for pub singing and for kiddie parties, but not for mass.

 

[driver9]

Thanks for those videos. I agree with everything you’ve said.

 

[Pani_Rose]

Not that this really relates to the topic, but it does…

Many Jews on becoming Christian have found that they can effectivly incorporate certain cultural aspects from their Judaism in celebrating the holidays of their newfound faith. One such example of this is that many of us who have converted to Christianity enjoy playing the Hava Nagila at Pascha. Here are the lyrics.

Háva nagíla, háva nagíla,
Háva nagíla, venismechá.
Háva nagíla, háva nagíla,
Háva nagíla, venismechá.
Háva neránena, háva neránena,
Háva neránena, venismechá.
Háva neránena, háva neránena,
Háva neránena, venismechá.
Úru, úru, achím,
Úru, achím, belév saméach.
Úru, achím, belév saméach.
Úru, achím, belév saméach.
Úru, achím, belév saméach.
Úru, achím,
Úru, achím, belév saméach.

Come let’s dance, come let’s dance,
Come let’s dance, and be merry!
Come let’s dance, come let’s dance,
Come let’s dance, and be merry!
Come let’s whirl, come let’s whirl,
Come let’s whirl, and be merry!
Come let’s whirl, come let’s whirl,
Come let’s whirl, and be merry!
Rise, rise, brothers!
Rise, brothers, with a glad heart.
Rise, brothers, with a glad heart.
Rise, brothers, with a glad heart.
Rise, brothers, with a glad heart.
Rise, brothers!
Rise, brothers, with a glad heart.

It is a song about rejoicing, and what better time to rejoice than during the season of Holy Pascha.
byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=284478#Post284478

 

[benedictgal]

Not that this really relates to the topic, but it does…

Many Jews on becoming Christian have found that they can effectivly incorporate certain cultural aspects from their Judaism in celebrating the holidays of their newfound faith. One such example of this is that many of us who have converted to Christianity enjoy playing the Hava Nagila at Pascha. Here are the lyrics.

Háva nagíla, háva nagíla,
Háva nagíla, venismechá.
Háva nagíla, háva nagíla,
Háva nagíla, venismechá.
Háva neránena, háva neránena,
Háva neránena, venismechá.
Háva neránena, háva neránena,
Háva neránena, venismechá.
Úru, úru, achím,
Úru, achím, belév saméach.
Úru, achím, belév saméach.
Úru, achím, belév saméach.
Úru, achím, belév saméach.
Úru, achím,
Úru, achím, belév saméach.

Come let’s dance, come let’s dance,
Come let’s dance, and be merry!
Come let’s dance, come let’s dance,
Come let’s dance, and be merry!
Come let’s whirl, come let’s whirl,
Come let’s whirl, and be merry!
Come let’s whirl, come let’s whirl,
Come let’s whirl, and be merry!
Rise, rise, brothers!
Rise, brothers, with a glad heart.
Rise, brothers, with a glad heart.
Rise, brothers, with a glad heart.
Rise, brothers, with a glad heart.
Rise, brothers!
Rise, brothers, with a glad heart.

It is a song about rejoicing, and what better time to rejoice than during the season of Holy Pascha? So give it a listen.

byzcath.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=284478#Post284478

But, this is not necessarily suited for use in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. It can certainly be used at family gatherings, which, I would gather, is what you would do at home. But, this would not work for the Mass.

The Neocatechumenal Movement has a similar song in Spanish along with some bizarre ritual dance. However, the priest told them to move it away from the Mass, which, they did. It’s a really strange little ritual they do. But, for them, that’s par for the course.

Anyhow, we do not have the freedom to introduce something that is foreign to the Mass. I can understand the Jewish converts wanting to include something from their tradition, but, the song is better suited to perhaps after the Ester Vigil Mass, maybe during the Agape celebration.

 

[v3orb]

I never understood the catholic dislike of the song. I feel that people don’t look beyond the message printed on the page into the deep religious message between the lines. This song carries the message of the bible and the gospel deep within itself - something that has only been achieved by the great poets and writers of the centuries.
*
“A discerning person can find the good in all.” - Unknown
*

 

[benedictgal]

I never understood the catholic dislike of the song. I feel that people don’t look beyond the message printed on the page into the deep religious message between the lines. This song carries the message of the bible and the gospel deep within itself - something that has only been achieved by the great poets and writers of the centuries.
*
“A discerning person can find the good in all.” - Unknown
*

No, it does not. It seems to me that you have not read the posts on this thread.

If you read one of my earlier posts, this song does not come from the Bible. It comes from a heretical, gnostic account called the “Acts of John”. Gnosticism is a heresy that was condemned by the early Church as far back as the second century.

Gnosticism claims that the body is evil and only the spirit matters. Furthermore, if you read my post where I have the lyrics and the sections from this heretical gnostic book, you will see that it does not have any relation at all to Scripture. Even the songwriter noted as much.

 

[Sarabande]

… I feel that people don’t look beyond the message printed on the page into the deep religious message between the lines. This song carries the message of the bible and the gospel deep within itself - something that has only been achieved by the great poets and writers of the centuries.

I wouldn’t put Sydney Carter in the same realm of the great poets and writers of our time and before. One can be a simplistic writer/poet and still be extremely profound and deep, so for me it’s not about that. For instance, the original poetry “Simple Gifts” is very ‘simple’, but there is a profundity which goes beyond the simplicity of words and have persevered, to the point where the arrangement of the hymn has been performed over and over again in concert halls and recital halls alike.

The ‘simplicity’ of Carter’s words do not reach that point of depth. Sure, he might have been trying to aim for a deep religious message, although based on what he wrote about it in that link provided in this thread, it may have not been what people would like to think it was about. The point is that there are people, whether writers, composers, artists, etc., who may have a concept of creating something that which is deep and beautiful, but not all can achieve that aim. Some can achieve this depth while still keeping the music, the artwork or the poetry ‘light’ and ‘simplistic’. Others can’t or have not yet figured out a way to do it.

Believe me, as someone who must always search for the deeper meanings of the poetry that are within the art songs that I perform for recitals in order to have a complete understanding of the piece of music and why composers set the words in a certain way with the composition, this is something which I do constantly. What I find with the words of “Lord of the Dance” after studying it again, is still something light and who was trying to be clever in order to make it fit within an adaptation of an original hymn melody. He tried, but to me, he failed.

If the poetry of Lord of the Dance has any deep merit we’ll see it be used continuously for many years to come, just like many other works of music or writings. If not, it will die out, as it has in my diocese. I haven’t heard it played anywhere since the 80s. And perhaps, maybe one day someone will find it again and try to revive it, then we’ll see if there would be a new renaissance with it. But this is just all conjecture.

 

[Mintaka]

The lyrics of “Morning Is Broken” were written by Eleanor Farjeon, an Anglican writer and poet. The tune is a Scottish tune, which originally was attached to a very long Scottish Gaelic hymn to the Christ Child, “Leanabh an Aigh”.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bunessan has some of the info.

 

[jkatpc]

Cat, I understood exactly what you were saying. Jesus spoke in parables because they were more effective for his audience; however, the story itself wasn’t more meaningful or important than the message. Allegory endures precisely because of its effectiveness, opening the doors in some people’s minds that might otherwise remain shut.

 

[jkatpc]

Benedictgal–
I am not a theologian, but I read the sections of the Acts of John that you posted and I’m trying to find the heresy in the passage. I’ll take your word for it that the entire work might be heretical in nature, but that doesn’t mean each word or paragraph contained therein is. Is it because it describes an event not described in the Gospels? I’m sure there were things Jesus did that weren’t recorded in the Gospels, but that doesn’t mean he didn’t do them. Is it because he danced? He tapped the keg (so to speak) at the wedding at Cana, so it’s not a stretch to me that he enjoyed a dance there.

Personally, I kind of like the song. If you were there along the way to Calvary and knew that what Jesus was doing was the only means for your salvation, wouldn’t you dance? I know I would dance for joy–not at the spectacle of His suffering, but because of what it means for me.

 

[Cat]

Cat, I understood exactly what you were saying. Jesus spoke in parables because they were more effective for his audience; however, the story itself wasn’t more meaningful or important than the message. Allegory endures precisely because of its effectiveness, opening the doors in some people’s minds that might otherwise remain shut.

Thank you. I’m glad to see a friendly face in this section of the Forum.

Remember the words of Our Lord–“Unless you are converted and become like children, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.”

I’m glad that so many of you are intellectual and can comprehend the Gospel without the help of allegory. But I’m not like that. I’ve always been the one to see the story in the flower, hear the animals talk, and see the pictures in the clouds.

The hymn is not what it appears to be. If you read it literally, like soem Christians read the book of Genesis, you will miss the whole point of the words.

Here is how my “child’s mind” understands the hymn, Lord of the Dance:

The “dance” is not a dance at all, it is creation, and Jesus, of course, is the Lord of creation.

The “dance” also refers to the Work of Our Lord, who has always been, is now, and ever will be. He created the universe, the stars, the moon, and the sun–the “dance” or “the creation.”

He is the Author of the plan of Salvation, which He knew and pre-ordained from all eternity. Our first glimpse of God–True God and True Man–was in His incarnation in Bethlehem–the first time human beings ever held God in their arms. Up until then, the only human who spoke with God face to face was Moses. Now a woman held God and fed Him from her human breasts.

The “dance” or Work of Our Lord continued in His short life here on earth. The scribes and pharisees rejected Him, but the working people (fisherman) followed Him. He made it clear that God was not interested so much in adherence to a Code of Rules as He is in our showing love to one another. Jesus healed people on the Sabbath, a violation of the Law. He demonstrated for us the “Greater Way” of I Corinthians 13.

The “holy people” does not refer to true holy people or to Jews, but rather, to those who thought that they were holy. These people crucified Our Lord, little realizing that by doing so, they were carrying out His plan of salvation. He was in charge throughout it all–the mocking, the crown of thorns, the agony, the nails–Jesus was still God of the Universe–the “Lord of the Dance.”

But “the dance” wasn’t easy or painless. The “devil” was “on His back,” constantly tempting Him to end His Work and come down from the cross. When did Satan actually realize that Jesus had “tricked” him? Jesus wasn’t losing the game at all, he was winning! He was the Passover Lamb that would save the world from sin. And Satan thought he was actually killing God for all time!

They cut Jesus down and buried Him. But, as our Sunday School teachers used to say, “You can’t keep a good man down!” Jesus rose from the dead–He “leapt” up. What an apt description! Next time you see a ballet, watch the men leap–the strength and beauty of their leaps! Jesus’s human body had been laid to rest covered with sores and bruises and scars from His scourging. But when He arose, His Body, still human, was glorious, even as our bodies will be glorious. Now flesh could enter heaven! Oh, what hope for weary mankind!

Nice story. But what does it mean to us?

Jesus will lead–if we will let Him. And even if we don’t let Him lead us, He is still in charge of the Universe–the Lord of the Dance. We can choose to “dance” with Him, or walk away. We have the free will. But we’re kidding ourselves if we believe that we can “dance” without Jesus.

There is nothing “sentimental” about my love for this song. I don’t find anything “heretical” about any of the words in Lord of the Dance. The Incarnation of Christ, His Life, His Death, His Resurrection, and His Work in us–it’s all right there in the hymn for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear.

I humbly suggest that you not be so quick to condemn what you don’t understand. Think of how many people condemn the beautiful Catholic Church. They see our statues and call them idols. They see our Rosary and call it an amulet. They see our Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament and call Him a piece of bread.

But sometimes, these people open their eyes and ears and stop condemning, and then God shows them what is really there. That’s what happened to me and my husband and many others.

Look harder.

When my children were little, I told them that there were diamonds in the snow, and that if they had enough love, they would find those diamonds. Of course there aren’t diamonds in the snow–I know that, and my kids knew that, too. You have to listen harder to what I was telling them. Here is the meaning of the riddle of the diamonds in the snow: when you have love, you will find beauty and goodness in the midst of the most awful circumstances. My kids still remember this “truth”–my daughters talk about 'diamonds in the snow" when life treats them badly.

I hope this is helpful.

 

[v3orb]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

What I would have typed, had I the time

 

[Cat]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

What I would have typed, had I the time

I’ve been waiting for a week, and thinking about it. Finally sat down during the NCAA tourney and wrote it out. Hope it’s helpful. I don’t expect everyone to agree or suddenly start loving the hymn. There are certain hymns and songs that I don’t like (although very few). But I don’t call them heretical or claim that they make me want to throw up. We’re all different, made so by God, and of course what appeals to the heart and soul of one person will fall flat for another person.

The important thing is authority. As long as the bishops are allowing these hymnals and hymns in their dioceses, and the priests are allowing the hymns to be sung in their parishes, we, the faithful, should show respect for their decisions.

Do you honestly think that after nearly 40 years, no one has ever complained to a bishop about Lord of the Dance? This isn’t a “new” hymn, it’s been around for a long time.

Assuming that people have complained over the years, why is the hymn still available in Catholic hymnals? Some of you hint at vast conspiracy of publishing companies that is holding the U.S. bishops captive.

Maybe, but a bishop still has the power and authority to forbid this hymn from being sung in his diocese.

Has it occurred to you that perhaps bishops haven’t forbad it? Perhaps when people complain, their bishop reviews their complaint and says, “No, you’re wrong. This hymn is fine for Catholics.”

I think it must be horrible to be a bishop or priest and have everyone picking your every decision apart and even accusing your choices of being heretical. No wonder we have a shortage of vocations.

After attending the Redemptorist Mass at my daughter’s confirmation and hearing the 50 songs during the Triduum, I mentioned to my husband that it would be fun to be a Liturgical Director. He looked at me and said, “Are you crazy? You would open yourself up to all those people who criticize everything you do.”

BTW, for anyone who thinks this is a Protestant hymn, think again. Perhaps it would be a Mainline Protestant hymn. But in the evangelical churchest that I and my husband grew up in, dancing was strictly FORBIDDEN, and this hymn was never, ever heard. In most evangelical, fundamental, and Pentecostal churches, it wouldn’t have been allowed. (In fact, in my husband’s childhood denomination, Assemblies of God, dancing is still forbidden.)

I never heard this hymn until I went to a college Campus Crusade for Christ fellowship in the late 1970s.

 

[benedictgal]

Benedictgal–
I am not a theologian, but I read the sections of the Acts of John that you posted and I’m trying to find the heresy in the passage. I’ll take your word for it that the entire work might be heretical in nature, but that doesn’t mean each word or paragraph contained therein is. Is it because it describes an event not described in the Gospels? I’m sure there were things Jesus did that weren’t recorded in the Gospels, but that doesn’t mean he didn’t do them. Is it because he danced? He tapped the keg (so to speak) at the wedding at Cana, so it’s not a stretch to me that he enjoyed a dance there.

Personally, I kind of like the song. If you were there along the way to Calvary and knew that what Jesus was doing was the only means for your salvation, wouldn’t you dance? I know I would dance for joy–not at the spectacle of His suffering, but because of what it means for me.

However, gnosticism is a heresy. It is, as Chesterson once said, a “turth run wild.” In these passages, Jesus is quoted as saying that he really didn’t have to suffer all of this. He was merely “dancing through the whole thing”, which is an insult to the very notion of the true sufferings that he endured.

The problem is that the songwriter is using a very heretical gospel as the basis for a song that is also somehow wrapped up with a pagan deity. That is certainly not acceptable, by no means.

The message is also very skewed. No, I would not dance because his pains were caused by our sin. In fact, it should bring us remorse that we caused that for our Lord. While the exultet calls the sin of Adam, felix culpa, O happy fault, I don’t think that the Blessed Mother was dancing up and down for joy, either, as her only Son was undergoing a very painful death.

Your comparison to the wedding of Cana is a bit of a stretch. There may well have been dancing, but, it does have a different context. Yes, Jesus is the Bridegroom and the Church is His Bride; however, to actually believe that the whole notion of our salvific mystery was a mere dance is to have missed the whole point of our redemption. Now, the one thing that would resemble marriage in the crucifixion is the fact that Jesus hands his body over to His Bride, the Church. The consummation of marriage involves the handing over of the body to the beloved. In fact, Jesus’ last words were “It is consummated.” But, to bring in the dancing element is to stretch things a bit too far.

Regariding the issue of the parables, Jesus spoke to the people in parables for them to understand; however, to the Apostolic band, he explained their meaning so that they could get the fruit of the message. We seem to forget that we have the benefit of hindsight, as well as the Church’s 2,000+ years of interpreting what Jesus has said. When we no longer read Scripture with the mind of the Church, then we are taking a road that leads somplace else.

By the way, even though I do not agree with what you have said, I do, wholeheartedly, appreciate the sacrifices and the service you are giving to our country. God bless you.

 

[benedictgal]

I’ve been waiting for a week, and thinking about it. Finally sat down during the NCAA tourney and wrote it out. Hope it’s helpful. I don’t expect everyone to agree or suddenly start loving the hymn. There are certain hymns and songs that I don’t like (although very few). But I don’t call them heretical or claim that they make me want to throw up. We’re all different, made so by God, and of course what appeals to the heart and soul of one person will fall flat for another person.

The important thing is authority. As long as the bishops are allowing these hymnals and hymns in their dioceses, and the priests are allowing the hymns to be sung in their parishes, we, the faithful, should show respect for their decisions.

Do you honestly think that after nearly 40 years, no one has ever complained to a bishop about Lord of the Dance? This isn’t a “new” hymn, it’s been around for a long time.

Assuming that people have complained over the years, why is the hymn still available in Catholic hymnals? Some of you hint at vast conspiracy of publishing companies that is holding the U.S. bishops captive.

Maybe, but a bishop still has the power and authority to forbid this hymn from being sung in his diocese.

Has it occurred to you that perhaps bishops haven’t forbad it? Perhaps when people complain, their bishop reviews their complaint and says, “No, you’re wrong. This hymn is fine for Catholics.”

I think it must be horrible to be a bishop or priest and have everyone picking your every decision apart and even accusing your choices of being heretical. No wonder we have a shortage of vocations.

After attending the Redemptorist Mass at my daughter’s confirmation and hearing the 50 songs during the Triduum, I mentioned to my husband that it would be fun to be a Liturgical Director. He looked at me and said, “Are you crazy? You would open yourself up to all those people who criticize everything you do.”

BTW, for anyone who thinks this is a Protestant hymn, think again. Perhaps it would be a Mainline Protestant hymn. But in the evangelical churchest that I and my husband grew up in, dancing was strictly FORBIDDEN, and this hymn was never, ever heard. In most evangelical, fundamental, and Pentecostal churches, it wouldn’t have been allowed. (In fact, in my husband’s childhood denomination, Assemblies of God, dancing is still forbidden.)

I never heard this hymn until I went to a college Campus Crusade for Christ fellowship in the late 1970s.

Cat, no one ever said that this was a Protestant hymn. Even if some church had this particular song, there are several hundred different Protestant ecclesial communities, some you and I perhaps have never even heard of, that might be out there.

Now, OCP has no authority, ecclesial, liturgical or otherwise. Nor does GIA. Just because these publishing houses have the names “Catholic” and “Gregorian” doesn’t necessarily mean anything. We have to look beyond the label and really see what is there. Just because a song is included in the hymnals these publishing houses release doesn’t necessarily make it suitable for liturgical use. OCP was corrected when it had Christopher Walker’s Gloria removed from the service music section to the regular hymns because it was nowhere near the official translation of the prayer. In fact, it was a horrid paraphrase. His version of the Lamb of God will probably be the next to go.

Now, you mention authority. The Church tells us that we have the right to have the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass celebrated in the manner which the Church prescribes. This includes music. If there is a hymn that is questionable, if such music goes against what the Church teaches, then, we, as the faithful, do have the right to petition that such music be removed. OCP and GIA are not the Church nor do they speak with any legitimate authority. They are not a part of the Holy See. It is a shame that the Nihl Obstat and the Imprimatur are no longer required because half of the music in these hymnals would have been gone. The Nihl Obstat and the Imprimatur are the Church’s seals of approval that indicate that nothing in these books is contrary to the Faith.

The last time I saw the Imprimatur was in the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the signature on that one was from the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger.