Agreed. I think the complaints of "me-centered" hymnody have mostly to do with the "look how wonderful we are; isn't God lucky to have us?" type. First person is not, in and of itself, a bad thing. It's the combination of Vox Dei and narcissism.

I agree with Andrew and Mark

I agree with Adam too.

It informs us of our call, instead of actually calling us.

That's an excellent point, Adam. In creative writing, they say "Show, don't tell." Don't write "He was very tall," write "He loomed over the others."

The problem you identify about saying that we're sharing a story rather than sharing a story also relates to something I have been thinking about lately, which is that weak-willed, mealy-mouthed, wishy-washy hymns oughtn't to be viewed as wrong, but rather as missed opportunities. There are plenty of hymns say say pretty much nothing in five verses and a refrain, and what I've seen from quite a few people is the temptation to go through line-by-line and try to "prove" that the hymn is not fit for liturgy by showing that it is incorrect in some way. This rarely works, since even hymns with troublesome-looking statements ("not in some heaven light-years away") can almost always be read in way that's entirely faithful to Catholic belief.

The problem is usually that an opportunity has been missed. Why say nothing special, when you could have said something? Why say "here we are to worship God," when you could have worshipped God? Why say something that might be misinterpreted and draw people away from an authentic Catholic understanding, when you could have said something solid that could never be misunderstood? And so on. The issue is that this relies on people having the same priorities: if someone thinks it is more important to affirm the community, then they will not have a problem with a hymn that amounts to "We are a firm community of God-worshippers," and they will not think any opportunity has been missed in the first place. Of course, it is very difficult to get others to adopt your evaluation and ordering of priorities, so people do not attempt this very often.

this strikes me as one of the most important liturgical insights of our times (besides being a very amusing analogy).

Just remember: you heard it hear first!

One thing that I believe you're pointing towards is the limit of the model of "the paschal mystery" as the meaning of the liturgy.

This is true, but can be misinterpreted. "The paschal mystery" could be misunderstood to be my personal growth. My personal consciousness' liberation. My faith development beyond the (alleged) boringness of doctrine.

Paradoxically, this "individual's point of view and understanding is so important" stuff has the opposite effect of that:

If I experience "pure" liturgy (by which I mean,Say the Black, Do the Red- no additions, deletions, or emendations... Proper texts... regardless of music style):
I have the opportunity to "interpret it" in my mind any way I want to. It comes to me, and I will filter it through my own experience, understanding, and relationship with God.

On the other hand, if I am subjected to someone else's interpretation of the event, by way of songs that tell me what is going on, prayers that inform me of their own meaning, and so forth,
I am robbed of that option, and instead given one, single view of the mystery.
Even if that one single view is accurate, it is still quite limited (as a photograph to a vista).

This is part of the reason that I think true "theological liberals" and people who encourage free thinking should in fact be champions of Liturgical Orthodoxy.

Charles,

I don't see how a text can be worship if it doesn't even mention God.

"We come to share our story, we come to break the bread, we come to know our rising from the dead."

As Adam indicates, it's not a song about God, but a song about liturgy. The prime actor is not God, but the assembly, and God disappears to become merely implicit, or even less.

Omer Westendorf's ripoff of "We Gather Together" is similarly very self-conscious:

"We gather together to sing the Lord's praises,
to worship the Father through Jesus His Son;
In this celebration, all sing with jubilation,
we are his holy people whose freedom he won.

"We greet our Lord present within our assembly
we hear His good news announced clearly to all,..."

This doesn't quite drive God out, but it is, as one wag put it, a song about rubrics.

You're on to something, but the issue is not "self-interest" per se. How much more self-interested, in a certain sense, can you get than the Psalms? And, isn't the proper end of our lives -- our eternal salvation -- inherently self-interested?

Weeeeeeeellll, aaaaaactually the Psalms' standard Christian interpretation from the days of the Fathers, is that they are all about Christ. Because Christ is praying all the Psalms to the Father for us, and because the Psalms are by David (who was a type of Him, since He's of David's house).

Sooooo, basically your Psalms are God incorporating the human experience and singing to God, and we're sorta looking over His shoulder. :)

Maureen,

I certainly don't disagree that the Psalms are about Christ. But, per my earllier comment, if they are about Christ then they are also about us.

I have a subscription to CCLI, which is probably the top Praise and Worship website for contemporary church music. It is interesting after this conversation, but the top song is "Mighty to Save"

Here are the words:

Mighty To Save


Chorus 1
Saviour
He can move the mountains
My God is mighty to save
He is mighty to save
Forever
Author of salvation
He rose and conquered the grave
Jesus conquered the grave


Verse 1
Everyone needs compassion
Love that's never failing
Let mercy fall on me
Everyone needs forgiveness
The kindness of a Saviour
The hope of nations


Verse 2
So take me as You find me
All my fears and failures
Fill my life again
I give my life to follow
Everything I believe in
Now I surrender


Misc 1
(BRIDGE)
Shine your light
And let the whole world see
We're singing for the glory
Of the risen King Jesus
Shine your light
And let the whole world see
We're singing for the glory
Of the risen King

____

Quite a mixed bag concerning what we were discussing here. IMBW, but this theology seems to me that we are telling God what we need and what we need God to do. Am I wrong?

Is "he is mighty to save" even proper English grammar?!

Having between us this agreement, is it possible to articulate what we mean by "liturgical" and "Catholic"? I, personally, have found it difficult, often resorting to the words of the U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stewart (albeit in an altogether different context): "I know it, when I see [hear?] it."

Amen, Maureen.

OK... I am going out on a limb here. (have been out on a lot of limbs in my lifetime)

Now, I will grant you that God is Mighty and is the Father of Salvation.

However, this is my perspective as a dyed in the wool RC: And I am only saying this as a 'member' of this RC forum and the RC Church. I am NOT an official representative of the CMAA, so they have nothing to do with my comments.

The text of this piece reminds me of those Christians standing a distance from the Church (and when I say Church, because I am Roman Catholic, I mean just that) singing about what is actually happening during the RC liturgy. So in that regard, it is an appropriate text for those of other denominations to be singing... just not a text of a song that is appropriate for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. You can be looking on the feast that people are enjoying or you can be partaking in it. That is the difference.

With that said, I must also clarify that I was a member of the non-Catholic ecumenical movement of Christians for 20 years or so. I was like Paul on the horse, running around and condemning Catholics for their "dead religious practices". But God (and the Virgin Mary herself) knocked me off my horse. Now I promote nothing but the true faith of the Catholic Church and guard her sacraments, the Virgin Mother and the Holy Sacrifice (who is Jesus in the Flesh).

Therefore, I will make no apologies for my statements. It is what it is.

(The Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible is down at the moment, so I cannot give you the translation of the RC Church for Isaiah until it goes up again. Sorry.) The NAB is just not that good a translation from the Latin.

A performance of the song can be viewed at this link.

One observation about the text is that it leads (verse two) to express a personal conversion and surrender to God. Evangelical Christianity emphasizes the importance of an explicit act of conversion as far and away the most important event in life, to the extent that sacraments, including even baptism, become unnecessary. To some Evangelicals, if you don't have a story of personal crisis and conversion, they may not think you've really become a believer.

So the movement of this song is to recognize one's status as a sinner (presented almost offhandedly in verse one), and to surrender one's life to God (verse two). The purpose of the song is to lead people through that recognition and surrender. The contrasting refrain praises God's might to bring about salvation from sin and to give eternal life, and that gives the motivating power for the conversion.

So while the song is somewhat about God, its real aim is to get people thinking about their own spiritual state, to the point where they turn to God if they haven't done so already.

For those who have already surrendered to God, the song becomes a grateful little re-enactment of their personal conversion: a sort of liturgy in itself, not bringing the Institution of the Eucharist or the Atonement on Calvary into present time, but bringing one's personal conversion into present time and reaffirming it.

We might tentatively posit a rule of thumb: if a song's text is an act of personal conversion, it's Evangelical and not Catholic.

My impression is that there is little like this in Catholic hymnody (i.e., Office hymns). On the other hand, some of the Mass propers (Introits? Offertories?) express motifs of crisis, repentance, and rescue. Compare and contrast. :-)

For what it's worth, bad poetry may be standard for pop music. My nephew, the front man for a grunge band, tells me that he deliberately writes bad poetry for song lyrics, because he was less satisfied with the results when he wrote better poetry.

Speaking in the most general terms and echoing Chonak a little, I find that Catholicism emphasizes a more continuous conversion--or turning to God--than Evangelicals, who tend to emphasize a single lightning-strike moment. If we think of the Carmelite writings of John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila, for example, then we can see how "conversion" is a series of ups and downs: two steps forward, one step back. The Bible, on the other hand, certainly has its moments of immediate crisis and conversion!

In the case of the conversion song above, I find songwriting conventions determining the content of the song as much as, if not more so, than any individual creativity or expression. For the purposes of writing a song, the single moment of crisis is a more seductive model than a life of faith filled with small struggles and victories. It falls easily within the standard plot for the AABA, or "popular," song form: exposition, conflict, climax, denouement/catharsis. In this song, the "climax" point (the bridge) places the narrative voice in a transformative space. Instead of a return of "A," or "what happens after," the bridge is repeated. This repeated modulatory bridge creates a kind of frenzy and denies the release found in peace and fulfillment. In doing so, it ignites the listener to act with God by shining light on the world, by evangelizing. In a way, then, the form and the function go hand in hand.

But consider this: think of how many country songs fit this same model, but without the specific religious context: verses 1 and 2 tell the story of a son's troubled relationship with his father; the bridge illustrates some kind of purification process--an awakening; and verse 3 flashes forward to a point where the son is now hiself father who identifies more closely with his own. Modulate to IV in the bridge, bring it back to I, and then modulate up a half- or whole-step to Verse 3 and you have a musical narrative that supports the lyrical narrative.

Style aside, the cliché of it all makes me want to wretch.

Oh, Charles. What a Debbie Downer!

I agree that there is a vast difference between "It's all about me" Catholic songs and CCM, and that they are all better than pure hate music. Doesn't make them any less cliché!

And maybe you haven't been to the South much, where the CCM-loving crowd is at times the same crowd at rallies filled with "Homosexuals, Roman Catholics, feminists, atheists, Communists, Islamists, (etc.), are going to Hell" signs.

Being a Christian doesn't insulate a person from being a hater too.

I'd like to regroup a bit.

What great revered hymns of olden days handle the God/me balance well? I'm talking phrases and stanzas--how has this been done right?

(Bonus points for Love Divine, All Loves Excelling)

The most perfect for me is...

Sing, my tongue, the Savior's glory,
of His flesh the mystery sing;
of the Blood, all price exceeding,
shed by our immortal King,
destined, for the world's redemption,
from a noble womb to spring.

Of a pure and spotless Virgin
born for us on earth below,
He, as Man, with man conversing,
stayed, the seeds of truth to sow;
then He closed in solemn order
wondrously His life of woe.

On the night of that Last Supper,
seated with His chosen band,
He the Pascal victim eating,
first fulfills the Law's command;
then as Food to His Apostles
gives Himself with His own hand.

Word-made-Flesh, the bread of nature
by His word to Flesh He turns;
wine into His Blood He changes;
what though sense no change discerns?
Only be the heart in earnest,
faith her lesson quickly learns.

Down in adoration falling,
This great Sacrament we hail,
Over ancient forms of worship
Newer rites of grace prevail;
Faith will tell us Christ is present,
When our human senses fail.

To the everlasting Father,
And the Son who made us free
And the Spirit, God proceeding
From them Each eternally,
Be salvation, honor, blessing,
Might and endless majesty.
Amen. Alleluia.

Pange, lingua, gloriosi
Corporis mysterium,
Sanguinisque pretiosi,
quem in mundi pretium
fructus ventris generosi
Rex effudit Gentium.

Nobis datus, nobis natus
ex intacta Virgine,
et in mundo conversatus,
sparso verbi semine,
sui moras incolatus
miro clausit ordine.

In supremae nocte coenae
recumbens cum fratribus
observata lege plene
cibis in legalibus,
cibum turbae duodenae
se dat suis manibus.

Verbum caro, panem verum
verbo carnem efficit:
fitque sanguis Christi merum,
et si sensus deficit,
ad firmandum cor sincerum
sola fides sufficit.

Tantum ergo Sacramentum
veneremur cernui:
et antiquum documentum
novo cedat ritui:
praestet fides supplementum
sensuum defectui.

Genitori, Genitoque
laus et jubilatio,
salus, honor, virtus quoque
sit et benedictio:
Procedenti ab utroque
compar sit laudatio.
Amen. Alleluja.

Sing, my soul, the King of heaven
To his feet thy tribute bring....

While sort of 'me' generated, it is certainly God directed
and really extols his love, care and greatness.
As in Francis' example, this is just what 'me' should do.