Amazing Grace innapropriate for Church?

[Julia Mae]

Originally Posted by Cavaille-Coll

The question is in the line "How precious did that grace appear, the hour I first believed." This line implies a rejection of baptismal grace via the heresy of Sola Fide (faith alone).

Only in the fertile imaginations of people with far too much time on their hands, IMO.

It's a prayer. It's personal. It's set to music. That is all.

[Newbie2]

I think the reason some folks think this hymn is "Un-Catholic" is that they don't have a whole lot else to do. It's a hymn, not a theological treatise.

If someone wants to question lyrics, since we are now to use the word "chalice" instead of cup, how come we still sing "When we eat this bread and we drink this cup, we proclaim your death until you come?"

[Newbie2]

Originally Posted by Roy5

The word 'wretch' bothered me until I learned that John Newton had been the captain of a slave ship until his conversion. One story goes that his ship was caught in a violent storm at sea. In his terror he promised God that if he survived he would give up his evil business and become a minister. When the storm subsided he headed to the nearest port, left the ship for good, and went to the nearest church to commit his life to Christ.

I can remember, years ago, that Catholics didn't even sing carols like "O Little Town of Bethlehem" or "Hark, the Herald Angels Sing" because their authors (Brooks and Wesley) were Protestants. Thank God for John XXIII and Vatican II which put a stop to such bigoted nonsense.

I think "bigoted nonsense" is uber-uncharitable. Poor choice of words for an otherwise thoughtful post.

[maltmom]

Originally Posted by constantconvert

Aw! God is good. *sniff*

Yes, He is!

[pnewton]

Originally Posted by The Curt Jester

The problem comes in that the lyrics back up the Protestant belief of accepting Jesus int one's heart and being automatically saved.

The song does not actually say that anything is automatic. Nor does the Catholic Church deny baptism of desire. All that is said is that the author had a profound understanding of the depth of God's grace at his moment of conversion. Could St. Paul not have had the same depth of emotion on the Damascus Road when he realized both that he had been persecuting the Son of God, yet was being called by Him?

[pnewton]

Originally Posted by Cavaille-Coll

The question is in the line "How precious did that grace appear, the hour I first believed." This line implies a rejection of baptismal grace via the heresy of Sola Fide (faith alone).

It does not literally deny the rejection of baptismal grace, not if one reads the English words and grammar correctly. Implies? I don't see that in implies the rejection half as much as St. Therese's ,"Everything is grace" denies baptismal grace. Her statement expands the realization of grace even more, yet it does not deny sacramental grace, so why must this line be seen as implying a denial of baptismal grace?

[thewanderer]

Ok, so apparantly I opened a much bigger can of worms than I realized! I have looked through the other threads and links posted here, and have honestly tried to understand where the people who claim it is heretical are coming from, but I still can't. I see that if you assume that certain lines mean or imply such and such a thing, then it would be heretical. But I do not see the lyrics themselves, as such, as heretical. If they were it would be impossible to understand it in a way that was theologically sound. And the way that I understand it, I assure you, it is free from heresy. I am hesitant to try to explain why I don't see it as heretical because of looking over the controversy so far it seems unlikely that anyone is going to change their minds about it, and I'd rather not get into a pointless debate at present. The one thing I will say though is that since it is not in and of itself heretical, there is nothing to stop it being imported into the Catholic Church and embraced as Her own. The fact that some people interpret it in a way that is heretical does not make it heretical in and of itself.

[bearer]

It doesn't mean who wrote a particular hymn or whether it's popular among Protestants. If it brings glory to God and strengthens the faith of the Church, it's worthy of being sung.

We are part of the Universal Church, which follows the true Faith, but it is harmful to Christians and Christianity to put up walls between us and Protestants simply because they're Protestants. Even if the world didn't hate us, it would be a disservice to all Christians to factionalize ourselves and ignore our commonalities.

[YoungTradCath]

Personally, I think the song is simply too problematic, enough to be imprudent, even if it can be reconciled with Catholicism. Not everything fine and dandy in principle and not heretical is good in practice, as we know. It isn't just a few people who are rubbed the wrong way with this song. It's quite a sizable number, and I don't advocate for "majority rules" or the numbers game, but I think this song is clearly a breach of good sense unless it is sung by a group in which all the people are clearly well-catechized. Therefore I believe it is imprudent for a normal public parish Mass.

[YoungTradCath]

Originally Posted by thewanderer

Ok, so apparantly I opened a much bigger can of worms than I realized! I have looked through the other threads and links posted here, and have honestly tried to understand where the people who claim it is heretical are coming from, but I still can't. I see that if you assume that certain lines mean or imply such and such a thing, then it would be heretical. But I do not see the lyrics themselves, as such, as heretical. If they were it would be impossible to understand it in a way that was theologically sound. And the way that I understand it, I assure you, it is free from heresy. I am hesitant to try to explain why I don't see it as heretical because of looking over the controversy so far it seems unlikely that anyone is going to change their minds about it, and I'd rather not get into a pointless debate at present. The one thing I will say though is that since it is not in and of itself heretical, there is nothing to stop it being imported into the Catholic Church and embraced as Her own. The fact that some people interpret it in a way that is heretical does not make it heretical in and of itself.

And this is why it comes down to simple prudence.

It is not heretical to say a Mass with a priest suspended upside down from ropes, but it will give many people pause, and so, don't do it.

Amazing Grace, from what I can see, isn't heretical. However, it has certain tendencies that give many people pause, and so, I think common sense and prudence should win.

[pnewton]

Originally Posted by thewanderer

Ok, so apparantly I opened a much bigger can of worms than I realized! I

If you want something fun to think about, here is the first thread on the subject.
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=7264

[thewanderer]

Originally Posted by YoungTradCath

Personally, I think the song is simply too problematic, enough to be imprudent, even if it can be reconciled with Catholicism. Not everything fine and dandy in principle and not heretical is good in practice, as we know. It isn't just a few people who are rubbed the wrong way with this song. It's quite a sizable number, and I don't advocate for "majority rules" or the numbers game, but I think this song is clearly a breach of good sense unless it is sung by a group in which all the people are clearly well-catechized. Therefore I believe it is imprudent for a normal public parish Mass.

I'm just not sure... I know so many people who have always interpreted this song in a very Catholic light... I guess I can see how it would be imprudent around people previously influenced by the once saved always saved mentality in protestantism... but apart from those people I can't see people misunderstanding it. I guess its just that the theologically sound understanding of it is just so obvious to me, and from what I can tell to others I know as well, that I find it hard to believe that people would be led astray outside of whatever group has been influenced by OSAS. Which I can understand being a reason for not playing it at Church.... but wouldn't the better solution just be to have the priest give a homily about the nature of Grace? Then the people will receive instruction, not be led astray, and still be able to have music they find moving and uplifting.

Also, just to point out, this is a far cry from all the denouncements it receives about being 'protestant' and 'heretical'. This shows it to be a matter of prudence, not because the song itself is bad, but because many people are not well catechized.

[CB Catholic]

Originally Posted by thewanderer

Ok, so apparantly I opened a much bigger can of worms than I realized! I have looked through the other threads and links posted here, and have honestly tried to understand where the people who claim it is heretical are coming from, but I still can't. I see that if you assume that certain lines mean or imply such and such a thing, then it would be heretical. But I do not see the lyrics themselves, as such, as heretical. If they were it would be impossible to understand it in a way that was theologically sound. And the way that I understand it, I assure you, it is free from heresy. I am hesitant to try to explain why I don't see it as heretical because of looking over the controversy so far it seems unlikely that anyone is going to change their minds about it, and I'd rather not get into a pointless debate at present. The one thing I will say though is that since it is not in and of itself heretical, there is nothing to stop it being imported into the Catholic Church and embraced as Her own. The fact that some people interpret it in a way that is heretical does not make it heretical in and of itself.

Don't fret about it. You are on a message board on the internet. People are going to give you all sorts of opinions. The average Catholic in the pews probably loves this song, it is a religious standard, and they are moved by it. Doesn't affect their Catholicity one bit. So enjoy it. I personally like when it is done on a good set of bagpipes at a funeral.

[Cat]

Originally Posted by George Stegmeir

I attended a Parochial School in a Jesuit Parisn that was run by Irish Nuns, a goo 20 years before V II. We were taught that saying Protestant Prayers-like their version of the Our Father or singing Protestant Hymns was a mortal sin.
I was away from the Church for many many years, and when I returned, everything except the essential doctrines was changed! Even the original English translation of the Mass was not even remotely like the Latin, it was more like something out of the Episcopal Church. Thankfully the new translation has changed that.
I fully accept Holy Mother the Church's right to modernize itself, and if our Bishops permit Protestant Hymns to be sung at Mass, I will obey them. However, I am still uncomfortable when I hear "Heavenly Sunshine"-the old Southern Baptist standby,"Amazing Grace", the great Calvanist Anthem, assorted Negro Spirituals, and "A Mighty Fortress is Our God" by Martin Luther being sung in a Catholic Church. Apart from liturgical nuances, I feel this music sort of waters down the cultural and spiritual uniqueness of Holy Mother the Church.
Sing their hymns and saying their versions of prayers are not going to lure any of "them" into our church.

Even though you were raised in a very traditional setting, in which hymns like Amazing Grace would have been considered "mortal sin,", this strict conservativism in your catechesis apparently wasn't sufficient to keep you committed to Holy Mother Church. You said you were "away from the Church for many years."

I run across that all the time on this forum. Posters rail against "modernism," but then admit that they departed the Church back during a time when there was no modernism and everything was in Latin and chant was the only music at Mass.

So if this "traditional" approach is so stellar and worked so well, then why did these people leave? It apparently didn't work for them.

Perhaps if you (and these others) had been exposed to beautiful hymns like Amazing Grace, written in the vernacular (English) and written with simple, non-flowery language that even the most "wretched" person can easily understand, and using simple "folk" melodies, you might not have left the Church.

My husband and I were raised on beautiful and stirring hymns like Amazing Grace, along with all kinds of Christian rock music and Christian contemporary music (CCM), and by the Grace of God, we can honestly say that we have never left the Lord. We have been confused, and we have actually been kicked out of our evangelical Protestant church (which led to our eventual conversion to Catholicism, so Praise the Lord over our ousting!). But we have never "left the Church for many years."

I'm not saying that music is the anchor. Heaven forbid! The Holy Spirit is the One Who keeps us. But the Holy Spirit has definitely used music in our lives. Music is a form of catechesis, and in our case, the simple songs worked well, and still work to help us to remain loyal to the Lord Jesus and His Church. I think a lot of Catholics would be greatly helped in the daily journey to heaven by listening to more of the simple and heartfelt "Protestant" hymns and internalizing the lyrics.

[aicirt]

Originally Posted by George Stegmeir

I attended a Parochial School in a Jesuit Parisn that was run by Irish Nuns, a goo 20 years before V II. We were taught that saying Protestant Prayers-like their version of the Our Father or singing Protestant Hymns was a mortal sin.
I was away from the Church for many many years, and when I returned, everything except the essential doctrines was changed! Even the original English translation of the Mass was not even remotely like the Latin, it was more like something out of the Episcopal Church. Thankfully the new translation has changed that.
I fully accept Holy Mother the Church's right to modernize itself, and if our Bishops permit Protestant Hymns to be sung at Mass, I will obey them. However, I am still uncomfortable when I hear "Heavenly Sunshine"-the old Southern Baptist standby,"Amazing Grace", the great Calvanist Anthem, assorted Negro Spirituals, and "A Mighty Fortress is Our God" by Martin Luther being sung in a Catholic Church. Apart from liturgical nuances, I feel this music sort of waters down the cultural and spiritual uniqueness of Holy Mother the Church.
Sing their hymns and saying their versions of prayers are not going to lure any of "them" into our church.

Well said! Everytime something is brought up about the changes in Vat II, the reason is given that some misinterperted VII. Well there seems to be a vast majority who did just that, not a few here and there. Back then, the laity thought it would be a good idea to have the Mass said in English so we'd understand what was being said. One Mass on Sunday would have been fine and leave the others in Latin. Nope, Latin had to go to the chagrin of many of the elderly.

Battle Hymn of the Republic was a no-no too until Bobby Kennedy's funeral. Now I find there are just too many Protestant hymns being sung and not enough historically Catholic.

Your point about luring Protestants into our Church is right on. I'm sure that was the thought behind removing the statues, altar railings, candles, and confessionals. Wonder how many became Catholics because of those changes?