"Build the 'City of God' "
  • marajoymarajoy
    Posts: 781
    I knew a bishop who forbid the use of the song "City of God," because "we aren't building anything... the 'City of God' exists outside of anything that we do." (I'm probably misquoting him, but you get the idea.)
    That idea (of us "building the City of God,") is incorrect, right? Same thing with a song like "Bring forth the kingdom of mercy...bring forth the city of God."
    There is NO Biblical or Catholic basis for that sort of narcissistic theology, right? (One of several reasons those particular songs, or any similar, should be banned from Catholic repertoire, but let's stay on track here...)

    So I came across this brief video today, of Pope Benedict
    http://youtu.be/PVny5KqcfWU
    As you can see from the youtube title, CNS has decided that in the context of his speech, the Pope is saying that "Families are building blocks of 'the City of God.' "
    However, the exact quote that they draw this idea from is, "...The God of Jesus Christ has revealed our grandeur as persons redeemed by love and called in the Church to renew the city of man, so that it can become the city of God."

    I think that what the Pope actually said has been misconstrued to support this false idea, but I can't exactly put my finger on why what he actually said is fine, but the interpretation of CNS is incorrect. Anyone? Help?

    Anyone who is more articulate than I should please go to the video and comment to point out to them that their title is NOT what the pope said! :-)
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    This confusion of agency is a semantic issue, solved by a better understanding of how God works.

    Only heretic-hunters (or ridiculous liberals) would interpret the idea of us "building up the kingdom" or "building the City of God" as a narcissistic tribute to our own agency. The well-understood conception behind such phrases is that we are to be about our Father's work- allowing God to use us in the ongoing task of making earth "as it is in heaven."

    The sentiment in that song (cheesy though it is) that prays (to God) "Let us build the City of God" is similar to the sentiment "Make me an instrument of your peace." (This sets aside that most of the rest of the lyrics are meaningless mumbo-jumbo.)

    To say that "families are the building blocks of the City of God" does not strike me as particularly wrong or heretical. It even seems like a decent shorthand for what he said, although what he said is more interesting and less weird. Especially considering that building blocks do not have agency, the image is even more clear than the potentially sloppy "Let us build...".
    Thanked by 7melofluent MarkThompson PMulholland CHGiffen Spriggo E_A_Fulhorst Gavin
  • marajoymarajoy
    Posts: 781
    ok, ok... I'm a heretic hunter...
    Thanked by 1E_A_Fulhorst
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    There are worse things to be.
    Like a heretic, for example.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen E_A_Fulhorst
  • Mike R
    Posts: 106
    I agree to an extent, Adam Wood, but at the same time, repeating texts like this for decades in the liturgy does fortify some wacky ideas for people who do not have the same educated understanding of how God works that most of us on this forum have. I'd place it in the same camp as those Eucharistic songs that continually refer to the Blessed Sacrament as bread and wine. Yes, there is a basis in tradition for using the sacramentum tantum in song, especially when you use qualifiers such as "Bread of Life"...but when the people in the pews are as confused about the Eucharist as polls have shown them to be, why use them? They may not be heretical on their face, but they contribute to bad theology for Mrs. Murphy in the pew.

    The "city of God" stuff is more or less innocuous, but there is plenty of bad ecclesiology to go around, among both "liberals" and "conservatives" (especially among those of a more charismatic "conservative" bent).

    The songs about us becoming bread, however, pretty much are simply heretical. Even if you believe that the Eucharist is only a symbol, the bread is that which signifies something greater, not the other way around.
    Thanked by 2PMulholland noel jones, aago
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    My pastor has banned, "Let Us Break Bread Together..." although GIA apparently thinks it worthy of inclusion in Ritual Song.

    "Arise from your slumber,
    awake from your sleep.
    The homily is over,
    it wasn't so deep."
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    "Let Us Break Bread Together..."

    Strikes me as one of those songs that has no place to fit.
    That is to say: the kind of congregations who want to sing it probably aren't on their knees while breaking bread.
    Thanked by 2noel jones, aago Chris Allen
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    ...and if they ARE breaking bread on their knees, they probably aren't Catholics. I only break bread on my knees with stale baguettes.
    Thanked by 8Ben CHGiffen Ioannes Andreades E_A_Fulhorst noel jones, aago kevinf Andrew Motyka Chris Allen
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    Even if families are building blocks of the city of God, it is He who is doing the building, not we.

    Thanked by 6CharlesW CHGiffen Ben Andrew Motyka Chris Allen francis
  • BenBen
    Posts: 3,114
    That's the emphasis that Bishop Robert Morlino (my bishop) put on it as well, Chonak. I believe he may be the one Marajoy is talking about.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    "Let us build a mountain out of a molehill."
    It's what we do well.
    Thanked by 3chonak Spriggo francis
  • PaixGioiaAmorPaixGioiaAmor
    Posts: 1,473
    I believe that we DO "build the city of God" and that it is what we are called to do. Another way of saying it would be to speak of "building the kingdom of God." How do we do that? We do it by advancing Christ as the Savior, by feeding the hungry, caring for the poor, advancing the cause of pro-life philosophy while combating the culture of death, and by building up, in unity and peace, the Church of God. Nothing heretical about this sentiment.

    The bishop may have some valid points as well, but I see nothing wrong with the stated sentiment.
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    To say that only God builds the city of God has a particular meaning: it's starting from a POV that identifies the "city of God" as specifically the Church. Also, it emphasizes that being in the Church is a gift conferred by the grace of God and not ascribed to human action as the primary cause.

    I don't mean to rule out other theological approaches that might connect the term "city of God" with broader themes as PGA indicates. There probably has been extensive theology done over the use of terms such as "city" and "kingdom" in Scripture. I'm just trying to be conservative and work within the limits of my knowledge.
  • Andrew_Malton
    Posts: 1,159
    I'd like to say the the term Civitas Dei has had a fairly political meaning ever since St Augustine introduced it. A civilization meaning. Not a mystical thing, certainly not an end-times-only idea. City of God: the Church and the (e)States each in their own role (separate: Caesar is never the Pope) in a harmonious commonwealth right here in this world. For Augustine also, the society of the men of the spirit, as opposed to that of the men of the flesh who run the City of Man. Or rather, "ran", since probably Augustine reckoned the latter had come to an end with the establishment of the Church. The "building" of the City is therefore a kind of holy patriotism, building up and strengthening the spiritual and social life of our City by living according to its laws and values.

    The problem with the song is that it's such an awful pastiche. We're waking up, proclaiming, comforting, being born, dancing even, everything except the steady work of being a good citizen.

    I'd rather sing "Jerusalem" any day.
  • marajoymarajoy
    Posts: 781
    Biblically, as far as I can tell, there are very few references to the "City of God." (Once in reference to Jerusalem, and twice in the Psalms.) And while the "Kingdom of God" is often mentioned in the New Testament, it is NEVER mentioned in the context of us "doing anything" to affect it. (It's always like, "Repent! The kingdom of heaven is at hand." Or "You shall not enter the kingdom of heaven." Not exactly the kind of theology that these modernist theologians would like us to think about...)

    Maybe it does have more to do with Augustine's use of the phrase.

    (And Ben - actually, it wasn't Morlino. The bishop I'm referring to is retired now, and really wasn't all that "traditional." :-) )
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    If you listen to those "contemporary" songs - "contemporary" as in the 1970s - you will often hear the building theme. Let us build, create, resurrect, gather, whatever. I suppose you could substitute agitate, stir, annoy, obfuscate, or another suitable word for any of the "build" words. Perhaps spin would be a good substitution.
  • G
    Posts: 1,397
    As almost always, the aptness or otherwise of non-proper texts has to do with emphasis and over-emphasis.
    If your "songs" consistently ignore the Almighty's gracious agency, and tout what "we're gonna do," the text that says "let US build," is not a good choice.
    But if your presider has embraced the new translation and talked about how wonderfully the new wording, for instance, "these gifts we have RECEIVED," reminds us of our right relationship with God, it wont hurt once in a while.

    I dont think it hurts to think of the family as a chunk of adobe or limestone that He can stick where He will, in a wall, or curb, or pavement in His City.

    Save the Liturgy, Save the World
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    Some songs are down right heretical. They should be avoided.

    Some could be interpreted in a way that is heretical, but could also be understood in an orthodox way. They might be acceptable in certain circumstances.

    But as our current Catholic culture is not particularly well-formed, it's probably best to avoid texts that are in the gray area, because they are likely to be taken the wrong way, EVEN IF the original writer was completely orthodox in intention.

    However, a BETTER argument against many songs (including "City of God") isn't that they are heretical, or that they might be heretical, it's that they are meaningless mumbo-jumbo.

    Not heresy. Nonsense. The problem is nonsense.
    Thanked by 5DougS CharlesW Gavin CHGiffen ryand
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    I so hesitate to string this thread further, arggh, it's like being in a seven lane traffic jam bumper to bumper for miles, inching along and then suddenly everyone's back to 65mph and there's no sign whatsoever of why there was a jam. Yeesh.
    Okay, we want a "feast" of words rather than a "famine." And now Adam sez it's not about the famine (he's right, singing "Peace is flowing like a river" is a famine), it's about the box lunch word sets. Someone on a food truck assembled a pastische of otherwise perfectly scriptural images "Awake from your slumber (Are we quibbling over "Wachet auf?).....a new day is dawning for all those who weep...etc." with some others and we're up in arms!
    Can we call a hakuna matata on this? Don't program the darn song, end of story.
    If you're going to compose a non-propered hymn or alius cantus then learn from "da past" and adhere to the principles of us praising Him.
    But we keep hammering at each other on the same old gehenna that I fear some of us over the years have simply died on these meaningless hills and walked away from what was a valued service in music ministry simply because of the incessant arguing. Please, for the love of God, literally.
    Thanked by 5Adam Wood Andrew_Malton Gavin CHGiffen ParleyDee
  • Andrew_Malton
    Posts: 1,159
    I just learned "hakuna matata".
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    O Lord! Don't let the editors of Gather see this one or it will be in the next edition.
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    I actually have no major problem with the text, though I'll agree with Adam that it's mostly pious-sounding nonsense. I just think the music is bad. So I won't willingly program it. That's good enough for me.
    Thanked by 3CharlesW Adam Wood CHGiffen
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    My (Episcopal) parish has a sizable contingent of people who like "praise music," which (sometimes) means 70s-era Catholic folk, and I don't mind programming it (in theory) when the text fits (and you all know I like a lot of the genre). But I have to agree with Gavin about the quality. And, from first-hand experience- it's difficult to sing and feels strangely stressful from the congregation.

    Growing up with CFM/CCM (Cath. Folk, Contemp. Cath.) primarily, I didn't have much to compare it to. Now that the bulk of my repertoire is solid hymns and a decent smattering of chant, I find the a good deal of so-called congregational folk music to be just difficult to sing and it raises my blood pressure. I'm still way more contemporary-focused in my program than (I suspect) anyone else here, but there's an ever-growing body of common-use songs that I keep adding to my own personal black-list. City of God made it on there a few months ago.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    My (Episcopal) parish has a sizable contingent of people who like "praise music," which (sometimes) means 70s-era Catholic folk, and I don't mind programming it (in theory) when the text fits (and you all know I like a lot of the genre). But I have to agree with Gavin about the quality. And, from first-hand experience- it's difficult to sing and feels strangely stressful from the congregation.

    Starting new thread...
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    That's true....
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    were singing "hakuna matata" this week for our opening hymn
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    Andrew makes a fair observation about St. Augustine's use of "City of God": that it refers to the commonwealth or to civil society.

    On the other hand, the St. Louis Jesuits song of that title doesn't seem to be about that. Well, at first glance, it's hard to say what the song's about, really, except general rejoicing.

    Maybe we should just get together and have fun and sing:

    Let us build the city of God
    but without liturgical dancing
    'cause we know it looks rather odd
    and it drove the men all away.

    Thanked by 1ryand
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    Is that male-specific men, suggesting that liturgical dance is feminine (and THAT'S a bad thing specifically)?
    Or is that gender-inclusive men, suggesting that liturgical dance is alien and inhumane?
    Thanked by 1DougS
  • ryandryand
    Posts: 1,640
    Probably the same "men" that "altar-boys" once referred to ... you know, whatever gender. What's the difference, really?
Add a Comment