tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3450626869303471458.post5257775633675140211..comments2024-02-20T21:53:17.168-05:00Comments on The Spirit's Sword: Music MattersBearhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01201581440686945990noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3450626869303471458.post-7974052030810268752011-05-08T18:21:41.549-04:002011-05-08T18:21:41.549-04:00"I don't see that at all. The context wit..."I don't see that at all. The context within the celebration of Mass is clear."<br /><br />So you have said across four posts now. My point is that the words of the song make it clear this piece has no place within the context of the Mass. But you don't see that.<br /><br />"Which pretty much leaves us at the start. Some people like the song. Some people don't." <br /><br />Which is the position I rejected in the opening paragraph of this essay. By the words of the Vatican, the fact that some people lke or dislike a song is no grounds for its use or non use in the Holy Mass.Bearhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01201581440686945990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3450626869303471458.post-2066509850002969642011-05-08T04:38:50.997-04:002011-05-08T04:38:50.997-04:00"... it de-emphasized and rendered ambiguous ..."... it de-emphasized and rendered ambiguous the "you" to whom this song is addressed."<br /><br />I don't see that at all. The context within the celebration of Mass is clear.<br /><br />"... is this a metaphor, or a direct description?"<br /><br />Both. Jesus as Lamb of God: descriptive of Jesus's role in the Passion, but also a metaphor.<br /><br />"(Y)ou offer no authority greater than your own reading ..."<br /><br />Which pretty much leaves us at the start. Some people like the song. Some people don't.Toddhttp://catholicsensibility.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3450626869303471458.post-7583468229022070552011-05-07T22:30:47.842-04:002011-05-07T22:30:47.842-04:00My argument, should you care to read it, was not m...My argument, should you care to read it, was not merely that the song repeated "us", but that it de-emphasized and rendered ambiguous the "you" to whom this song is addressed. The prayers you name all have a repetition of "us", I grant you, but they also have a repetition of "you", snd the you to whom the petition is addressed is named,as in: "Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us." Secondly, you cannot possibly consider: "Lord God, Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world, have mecry on on us" as being equal in any form to any petition in Gather Us In. All your examples merely prove my point and not yours. Furthermore, the liturgical texts call for a humble presentation of the self. Gather exalts the self.<br /><br />I made a mistake with the fourth verse, I agree. But your argument leaves me puzzled: is this a metaphor, or a direct description? The two are exclusive. Secondly, if he meant prisons, he should have said prisons, as the word is metrically identiccal to buildings. "Prison confining" actually makes sense and will fit the metre of the song. As for your interpretation, you offer no authority greater than your own reading, which does not detract from my authority and my interpretation, as I said in the opening paragraph of this little piece. We are at an impass with that line.<br /><br />This piece is something I wrote years ago, It was hardly a tired argument then. Your defense, however, is old now. I see nothing of wide liturgical experience in what you have said. You have not added anything new to the debate, and if you have nothing else new to add, feel free to withdraw.Bearhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01201581440686945990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3450626869303471458.post-86715077313754106622011-05-07T21:54:52.000-04:002011-05-07T21:54:52.000-04:00I don't have a problem with a repetition of &q...I don't have a problem with a repetition of "us" in a prayer of petition. Practically every intercession in every prayer of the faithful offered in every Mass in the world offers a repeated first person plural. The Agnus Dei. The Creed. Even praise sequences in the Gloria. It's my view you don't have a point by criticizing a hymn text because it uses a first person reference. Not unless you want to criticize the actual texts of the liturgy itself.<br /><br />The fourth verse line is actually, "not in the dark of buildings confining." It could be interpreted metaphorically as speaking of prisons. That's how I read the text. Combined with "not in some heaven ..." I would take the meaning to be directly descriptive of Christ and his Real Presence, especially the reference to the Kingdom of God.<br /><br />Look, I realize people don't like this hymn--text or tune. I can't count it among my favorites. But a serious criticism of any liturgical text really should be grounded in a pretty wide experience with the liturgy. And it should avoid the same tired arguments I've seen elsewhere.Toddhttp://catholicsensibility.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3450626869303471458.post-34686022925182223882011-05-07T13:23:36.982-04:002011-05-07T13:23:36.982-04:00You have not refuted my point. The use of the voc...You have not refuted my point. The use of the vocative case eleminates the repetition of "you" but not the repetition of "us" Figures of repetition are used for emphasis, so what is emphasised here is the "us" while the "you" is de-emphasised.<br /><br />Furthermore, my reading of the fourth verse is fair. "in the dark of a building confining" can be read as a whole as a phrase. Furthermore, assuming "of a building confining" was a mere modifier of "not in the dark", one must ask why it was chosen, when there could be so many other possibilities of examples of spiritual darkness. But the author rejected other possibilities and specified the darkness of a building.Bearhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01201581440686945990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3450626869303471458.post-48536714541782088662011-05-07T10:51:43.214-04:002011-05-07T10:51:43.214-04:00Every instance of "Gather us in ..." is ...Every instance of "Gather us in ..." is a direct petition to God in the vocative. The "you" is implied by both the language and the context in worship. It doesn't have to be explicit. English doesn't work that way. Latin even more so.<br /><br />For example, a Christian might call out "mercy!" and the context of the cry might well include the unspoken "Lord have ..."<br /><br />I think you've also misunderstood verse four (among other points). " ... of buildings confining" is a prepositional phrase describing "the dark." That particular text seems very clear to me: not in the dark, not only far away, but God's Presence is Real in the celebration of EucharistToddhttp://catholicsensibility.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3450626869303471458.post-75468340411811171212011-05-06T17:12:09.669-04:002011-05-06T17:12:09.669-04:00Incorrect. First, there are two mentions of "...Incorrect. First, there are two mentions of "you" and three of "your" compared to nearly thirty of "we" and "us". Two "you's" does not "many" make.<br /><br />To say that this "you" is God is an assumption not made explicit in the text. As I said, the song itself says "not in the dark of a building confining" and again "not in a heaven light years away"- whatever that meant. But a mass is held in a church, and a church is, whatever else it may be, a building. So if this song is not in building, and not sung to a being in heaven, where and in what context is this song to be sung, and who is the "you" who is gathering us in?Bearhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01201581440686945990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3450626869303471458.post-54465763212834778922011-05-06T16:02:46.559-04:002011-05-06T16:02:46.559-04:00"There is no explicit mention of God, neither..."There is no explicit mention of God, neither by name nor by attribute."<br /><br />God is mentioned directly in the second person, you, many times.<br /><br />The song is a prayer of petition. Nothing more, nothing less.Toddhttp://catholicsensibility.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.com