09 October 2008

Yeah... why not?

We might as well make it official.

Note: This is a commentary on the music that dominates the Sunday Mass- namely, African-American spirituals that have no connection to the Sacred, and do not convey the Catholic Faith. The same goes for the 'American' hymns that are heard at Sunday Mass. Why doesn't Saint Augustine's follow the teaching of the Church in Sacrosanctum Concilium or Musicam Sacram? Gregorian chant should have the pride of place, and all music should truly be fitting of divine worship.


Blogger Cliff said...

It is still funny

October 09, 2008 9:37 AM  
Blogger Daniel said...

I thought it was because St. Augustine was an African.

October 09, 2008 1:20 PM  
Blogger Jonathan Knox said...

Didn't even think of that! Yeah, he was from North Africa. A Berber, in fact.

October 09, 2008 3:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Be very careful Jonathan. You are claiming to know what God considers the "right" and "wrong" ways to worship.

Challenge: Find one verse in the Bible that tells us specifically how we are to worship (better yet, find one that denounces the African spirituals and another that says that we MUST worship in a way that is in connection to the Sacred).

You are in too deep in human tradition. It is sad to see this.

October 09, 2008 6:03 PM  
Blogger Gerald Lamb said...

"Challenge: Find one verse in the Bible that tells us specifically how we are to worship (better yet, find one that denounces the African spirituals and another that says that we MUST worship in a way that is in connection to the Sacred)."

Anonymous - if that is your real name (LOL) - despite the statement above, I'm going to assume you don't actually subscribe to the sola scritura view of Divine Revelation, for the simple reason that anyone who subscribes to that view is quite reasonably assured that they know what God considers the right and wrong way to worship. Plus, your tone and refusal to identify yourself suggests you are more interested in playing a game of "Gotcha!" than you are in formulating a coherent philosophy on the subject of divine worship.

That said, look up the secular meaning - to say nothing of the theological meaning - of the word worship sometime, and you will come to realize just how incredibly silly it is to suggest that it is possible to worship in any way other than that which is connected to the Sacred.

Anyway, I'll play your little game and throw out the first verse that comes to mind: Zep 3:4 (RSV version).

"Her prophets are wanton, faithless men; her priests profane what is sacred, they do violence to the law."

To profane in this context refers to taking what is sacred and removing it from its sacred context (i.e. not regarding the sacred during the act of worship). And such an act does violence to the law. So a priest of the Old Covenant violates the law when he profanes the act of divine worship. Guess what? A priest of the New Covenant violates the new law when he does the same thing.

As African spirituals were of no great concern to the Divine and human authors of Scripture, I regret to say there is no verse explicitly saying such spirituals are not connected to the Sacred. I regret to say that the same applies to invoking the devil's name, playing Grand Theft Auto 3, and eating cow dung. Seems to me the authors of scripture were more concerned with defining what divine worship is rather than with defining what it is not.

October 09, 2008 8:11 PM  
Blogger Jonathan Knox said...

Anonymous... I only claim to know what God has revealed through His Church.

I think Gerald did an excellent job in response to your post. I'd like to ask if this was a joke, though. "Find [a Bible verse]... that says that we MUST worship in a way that is in connection to the Sacred." Please say that is a joke...

And I hope to God that you are not a Catholic. Because you sure don't sound like one. The tradition of the Church has been preserved throughout her 2,000 years, and we have the magisterium to guide us in our worship of the Divine Majesty.

It is sad to see your lack of knowledge.

October 10, 2008 12:15 AM  
Blogger Anthony M Piferrer said...

I wouldn't pay anonymous any mind. He/she is probably a bored middle schooler trying to stoke the flames.

And Jon, if only I could spark controversy as effortlessly as you do!! I have been sucked into this thing by a person who shall not be named and am just reminded of how much at St. A's the only word that is sacred is "community". I always hear about the "St. A's community", and the Alpha "community", and the "coalition" but NEVER do I hear about the duty of ever Catholic to render worship to the Lord in a setting that is beautiful, solemn, and befitting He who gave all for our sins. NEVER!

That's why I haven't given up on pointing out the wrongs of that church since I first set foot at UF and will not. Thanks for having guts.

October 10, 2008 11:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do we not by worship that is devoted to God make it sacred? Such seems to be the teaching of the Apostles.

This is not a question I'm debating, but it is something to consider.

October 19, 2008 5:18 PM  
Blogger Jonathan Knox said...

In short, no. Singing is very important in the Mass. It is an elevated form of prayer. Or at least it used to be... now it is a beat and words that supposedly the people like or are comfortable singing.

What if we stopped using the Bible during the readings? If we read from the New York Times in a spirit of devotion, would that make it sacred?

October 19, 2008 5:24 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home