Shall We Dance?
  • Earl_GreyEarl_Grey
    Posts: 891
    I can't help but to notice the increasing use of dancing references in modern hymn writing. Why is this? Will liturgical dancing soon be in vogue again? The following is but one such example. I get the analogy, but would this hymn really work during Mass? When would one use it?

    The Play of the Godhead

    Text: Mary Louise Bringle b. 1953
    Tune: BEDFORD PARK, 11 11 11 11 11
    © 2002, 2003, GIA Publications, Inc.

    The play of the Godhead, the Trinity’s dance,
    Embraces the earth in a sacred romance,
    With God the Creator, and Christ the true Son,
    Entwined with the Spirit, a web daily spun
    In spangles of myst’ry, the great Three-in-One.

    The warm mist of summer, cool waters that flow,
    Turn crystal as ice when the wintry winds blow.
    The taproot that nurtures, the shoot growing free,
    The life-giving fruit, full and ripe on the tree:
    More mystic and wondrous, the great One-in-Three.

    In God’s gracious image of co-equal parts,
    We gather as dancers, uniting our hearts.
    Men, women, and children, and all living things,
    We join in the round of bright nature that rings
    With rapture and rhythm: Creation now sings!



    Corrected. I was typing quickly. However the dashes do appear in Gather from which I copied.
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,388
    Mary Louise Bringle has this to say about her text, published in her 2002 collection Joy and Wonder, Love and Longing:
    William Rowan's minuet with its melodic figure that repeats three times made me think of the "threefold dance of the Trinity," celebrated in the early church's doctrine of perichoresis. In this doctrine, the persons of the Trinity are held to "dance [chore] around [peri]" one another as equal partners in an interchange of love. The second stanza notes various "natural analogies" for the Trinity that have historically been tried and found wanting: steam, water, and ice; root, shoot, and fruit.

    I do not believe this hymn is going to cause an outbreak of dancing in Catholic churches. And I am happy that Bob Batastini composed another tune for the text. I think that Bill Rowan's original tune, which is a minuet, may have tempted some folks to start curtsying and the like whenever this hymn was sung.

    The hymn is one of eight in Worship IV's section entitled Trinity.
  • Earl_GreyEarl_Grey
    Posts: 891
    Corrected. I was typing quickly. However the dashes do appear in Gather from which I copied.
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,388
    Corrected. I was typing quickly. However the dashes do appear in Gather from which I copied.

    Our punctuation editor removed the dashes from all or nearly all the "Three-in-One" and "One-in-Three" references in the Worship IV hymnal. I believe one living author would not part with his dashes.

    Thanks for pointing out that Gather 3, published six months or so before Worship IV, must have been too far along in production when the punctuation editor made the changes.
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,388
    There is a second hymn in honor of the Most Blessed Trinity in Worship IV that also uses the metaphor of the dance: no. 554, Come, Join the Dance of Trinity, Richard Leach, b. 1953, © 2001, Selah Publishing Company, set to my harmonization of THE FLIGHT OF THE EARLS, CMD.

    One of our editors discovered this hymn at no. 412 in the 2006 Evangelical Lutheran Worship. There the text is set to KINGSFOLD.

    Leach's text moves away from the dance metaphor in stanzas 2 and 3, but returns to it in stanza 4.

    There is this provocative statement about creation in stanza 1: "The universe of space and time did not arise by chance, but as the Three, in love and hope, made room within their dance."
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    Among those of a progressive or feminist leaning theology, the imagery of God/Trinity dancing is quite common. It comes from Proverbs 9, where the Second Person of the Trinity is described in terms of personified Wisdom- who dances at the dawn of creation. As Wisdom is female, this is a Big Deal.

    (Go read it, by the way. It's pretty clear there that Wisdom is Christ. What that implies about either gender or language is a whole different thing, though.)

    Unfortunately (for people like me) this impetus of a good idea gets mixed up with a bunch of other goofiness: the "dance of shiva" that creates and sustains the universe, the idea that dancing is a particularly female activity (it isn't), the notion that liturgical dancing is somehow a liberating force (egads!), and (most distressing to me personally) the whole conception that quality, sense, and good taste should all go out the window as long as there is some partisan point to be made.

    ---
    Edit: It's actually Proverb 8, by the way- in case anyone was of a mind to look it up.
    Thanked by 2Kathy Chris Hebard
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    I have misgivings about this text.

    First, in general: the idea of perichoresis presents an image of the three divine persons relating to one another in a metaphorical "dance". This song evokes it, but dwells mostly on a lot of material about the created world and about human beings, which are not part of this theological concept. Perichoresis (for those unfamiliar with it) is about the relation of the three divine persons; about the inner life of the Trinity, not about the relation of the Trinity to the created world. So the song raises the concept of Trinitarian 'dance', but then moves immediately out to the created world instead of saying something about what that 'dance' is or means about the inner life of the Godhead. It leaves the listener with the impression that the Trinitarian 'dance' is a dance with the creation rather than among the three persons.

    And there are some expressions in the song that make me wonder: "What is Dr. Bringle saying by that?"
    -- the reference to the divine persons as "parts" of the Holy Trinity
    -- the reference to "Creator... Son... Spirit" instead of the biblical "Father...Son...Spirit". It is misleading to attribute the role of Creator particularly to the First Person of the Trinity.

    The expression that "the Trinity's dance embraces the earth in a sacred romance" is really puzzling. After all, the earth is a thing, not a person. The resulting image is reminiscent of pagan mythology.
    Thanked by 3Kathy Andrew_Malton Adam Wood
  • MaryAnn Carr WilsonMaryAnn Carr Wilson
    Posts: 1,738
    The average member of the lay faithful will just find this type of text goofy.
    I could be erudite. I could offer similar substantial criticisms like Adam and Chonak. I could offer explanations, rationalizations, and defenses.
    But with this type of text, and this particular text- it seems the honest, perplexed, suspicious raised eyebrow of the average pew sitter was not enough considered.
    Thanked by 2Kathy Andrew_Malton
  • Earl_GreyEarl_Grey
    Posts: 891
    All excellent points. And I think we do well to critique such things at both levels. I had my choir sing through this just to test their reaction and the unanimous verdict was "goofy". Followed by pleas of, "your not really going to make us sing this, are you?"

    So why did this hymn make it past the censor?
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,388
    Perichoresis (for those unfamiliar with it) is about the relation of the three divine persons; about the inner life of the Trinity, not about the relation of the Trinity to the created world. So the song raises the concept of Trinitarian 'dance', but then moves immediately out to the created world instead of saying something about what that 'dance' is or means about the inner life of the Godhead.

    This is a very good point. It would be good to have perhaps a full stanza addressing the inner life of the Godhead; right now there are only the few phrases beginning with "Entwined."
    "What is Dr. Bringle saying by that?" - the reference to the divine persons as "parts" of the Holy Trinity

    Mel Bringle is a fine theologian. She too is concerned about the adequacy of her own wording to express the Church's faith. She has always expressed a willingness to search for another wording if ecclesiastical censors ask for it. For 10 years and 5 hymnals they have not.
    It is misleading to attribute the role of Creator particularly to the First Person of the Trinity.

    I would counter that statement by saying that it is misleading to attribute the role of Creator exclusively to any person of the Trinity. In Worship III, no. 368, Creator of the Stars of Night, stanza 6 begins "To God Creator, God the Son," using the wording found in numerous hymnals from the 1980's and afterwards. In Worship IV, that stanza begins "To God the Father, God the Son," not because of "inclusive language" issues, but because of the need for internal consistency in the hymn itself: "Creator" cannot be used for the First Person of the Trinity in stanza 6, because "Creator" was already used for the Second Person of the Trinity in the very first word of the hymn.
  • MaryAnn Carr WilsonMaryAnn Carr Wilson
    Posts: 1,738
    Earl Grey-
    I like the choir test.
    Disregarding or bypassing the sensus fidelium is not edification of the faithful.
  • hartleymartin
    Posts: 1,447
    This sounds like a repeat of the "Creator, Redeemer, Comforter" idea of the Trinity. There are many invalid baptisms because of this.
    Thanked by 1canadash
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,945
    Perichoresis is a profoundly Trinitarian theological concept.

    This text does not serve it well enough to be used in liturgy. It serves better the Matisse painting of dancers....

    Thanked by 1Chrism
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    I think some hymn writers have been reading too much Catherine Mowry LaCugna...
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    Fr. K. wrote:
    I would counter that statement by saying that it is misleading to attribute the role of Creator exclusively to any person of the Trinity.

    So we agree then! In talking about God's relation to the created world, the tradition allows us to speak of any one of the divine Persons as Creator (Creator alme siderum, Veni creator Spiritus). But in talking about the Trinity as such, replacing any of the names "Father, Son, and (Holy) Spirit" with a functional word such as "Creator" opens the door to erroneous interpretations of the type to which hartleymartin alluded above. [We had some cases of invalid baptisms right here in Boston some years ago because of priests changing the formula to "Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier" or something similar.]

    In Worship III, no. 368, "Creator of the Stars of Night", stanza 6 begins "To God Creator, God the Son," using the wording found in numerous hymnals from the 1980's and afterwards.
    I think the reason indicated above applies to that version. Probably various authorities have permitted such expressions -- after all, such words are not explicitly false -- but it would be good for the authorities to set a higher standard.

    In Worship IV, that stanza begins "To God the Father, God the Son," not because of "inclusive language" issues, but because of the need for internal consistency in the hymn itself: "Creator" cannot be used for the First Person of the Trinity in stanza 6, because "Creator" was already used for the Second Person of the Trinity in the very first word of the hymn.
    I'm glad to learn that the doxology of Creator of the stars of night has a clear Trinitarian invocation as the Latin original does.




  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,388
    But in talking about the Trinity as such, replacing any of the names "Father, Son, and (Holy) Spirit" with a functional word such as "Creator" opens the door to erroneous interpretations of the type to which hartleymartin alluded above.

    Chonak, the likelihood that the Church in these days would conduct a heresy trial for someone accused of the heresy of modalism is quite slim, IMO. There may be some material modalists out there, but I'm sure if someone could explain to them what modalism even means, they would recant in an instant.

    I'm not sure everyone even understands "Creator Alme Siderum" in a thoroughly orthodox way.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    rk:
    Which is why we need to make our liturgical language clear. We have a lot of people who are heretics because they just don't know any better.
    Thanked by 2Kathy CHGiffen
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,388
    We have a lot of people who are heretics because they just don't know any better.

    What a low opinion you have of "a lot of" your fellow believers.
  • Blaise
    Posts: 439
    Why do not our hymns make any plain sense anymore?? I read this hymn this morning as I got out of bed, and the first thing that comes to mind is that it sounds so.....forgive me....New Age(?), especially the second stanza ("The warm mist of summer....").

    I read several more of these hymn texts in the past few days, and they just sound outright silly, especially the one about the boy who won't go work in the vineyard. I am still trying to determine what that is: is it a hymn of praise? Doesn't sound like a typical one to me. A rehash of the story out of Scripture? Sure, but just cobbling something out of Scripture does not make it singable.

    I am quite sure that none of the hymn writers intended to make something attrocious sounding, but they really need to think also of us in the pews, including the adults, who may, at the whim of a pastor or DoM, have to sing this stuff (even as a child, I did not enjoy some of the songs, such as "Peter, do you really love me?").

    Thanked by 1chonak
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    What a low opinion you have of "a lot of" your fellow believers.

    It's not a statement about their spiritual lives or whether they're in a state of grace; it's about their intellectual comprehension of the Church's doctrine. There aren't a lot of Catholics out there who grasp the doctrine of the Holy Trinity well enough -- say, enough to understand the Athanasian Creed.

    Heavens, there are a lot of priests who make mistakes in speaking about it! Tomorrow is Trinity Sunday; and in my 33 years of attending Catholic Mass, I've heard more accidental heresies on Trinity Sunday than any other occasion in the liturgical calendar.
    Thanked by 3gregp CHGiffen canadash
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,388
    Chonak, I cannot agree with your statement. "Heretic" is a loaded word. It has a meaning. It also has consequences. If someone is judged to be a heretic, by definition that judgment says something about their spiritual lives. They are not in the state of grace if they are heretics. Period.

    Apparently you think it is OK for Adam to use "heretic" in a pejorative manner and then you move in and attempt to cover over the consequences of his statement with a namby-pamby "O, so sorry, Adam meant no offense. Of course he was not making any statement about people's spiritual lives or whether they're in a state of grace. That's bull.

    If a lot of people don't know their faith or aren't able to articulate it correctly, say it that way. But don't use the loaded word "heretic," and then come back with, "Sorry, nothing personal."
  • Blaise
    Posts: 439
    They are not in the state of grace if they are heretics.


    I am not quite sure about this, Father. According to the Church, Protestants and others born outside of and not instructed in the Holy Catholic Faith are "materially" heretics, though I have not a doubt in my mind that many Protestants are a lot better spiritually off than many Catholics.

    Though I agree it is a lot better to say that many of us don't know our faith as well as we should, than to call everyone "heretics".
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • MaryAnn Carr WilsonMaryAnn Carr Wilson
    Posts: 1,738

    "I am quite sure that none of the hymn writers intended to make something attrocious sounding, but they really need to think of also of us in the pews, including the adults, who may, at the whim of a pastor or DoM, have to sing this stuff."
    I couldn't agree more, Paul.

    Along with Adam's "so what?" test, perhaps we should also consider the faithful and the gut response/ "what the?" test.
    Thanked by 2Adam Wood CHGiffen
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,388
    Paul, of course I'm talking about formal heretics! Adam would not go around hurling the word "heretic" at Protestants, I don't think. Formal heretics are those who have been accused of a crime, have been judged, have been given a chance to renounce the heresy, and if they remain obstinate, then declared heretic. And that means excommunication. And that is, at least objectively, serious sin.
    Though I agree it is a lot better to say that many of us don't know our faith as well as we should, than to call everyone "heretics".

    It's not just a matter of what's "better" or "less offensive" or "more PC." Very few of us have standing in the Church which permits us to judge someone else as a heretic. And, when it is truly a matter of ignorance or lack of theological sophistication, it certainly does not call for labeling a person a heretic.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Fr. Krisman, if there's a worse Puck running amok in CMAA Land, it's our youngblood Adam. You have to know him for a while to get when his humor subsumes his meaning. I know this from daily mishaps.
    MACW- An earnest homily from your NoCal Dad: don't ever encourage the spoken use of "What the.....(unifinished)" especially around kids. That colloquialism is so pervasive that it precludes the utterance of the noun it implies. I suppress it in school anytime, anywhere I hear it.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    Adam would not go around hurling the word "heretic" at Protestants, I don't think.


    Well, some of them.

    You have to know him for a while to get when his humor subsumes his meaning.


    What humor? I take these thing very seriously.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Yes, of course, and I am the second Emperor of San Francisco, Norton the Rotund.
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    At any rate I should clarify-
    whether "heretic" is a good word or not-
    I think there are a lot of Catholics running around who believe things contrary to Church teaching simply because they don't know any better.
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,388
    So, Adam, it's time to cough up the secret.

    How do you make the purple?

    And your 7:18 post is much better!
    Thanked by 1veromary
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    Ok, but...

    Doesn't this just make us all want to set the bar much higher for the theology of hymnals? Shouldn't liturgy be leading the way in truth?
    Thanked by 2Adam Wood CHGiffen
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    I too found Adam's comments troubling... but I assumed that he meant "We have a lot of people who are heretics espouse heresy because they just don't know any better." Knowing Adam, I thought it would be correct to interpret his comments in the most charitable and knowledgeable light possible.

    Hmm... imprecise language can lead to confusions, even if one assumes the best of the writer. Any lessons in hymnody for us here?
    Thanked by 1Adam Wood
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,151
    How do you make the purple?

    The code:
    <font color=purple>How do you make the purple?</font>

    made:
    How do you make the purple?
    Thanked by 4ronkrisman Kathy veromary marajoy
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    Thank you, Chuck (CHGiffen).

    I wonder if this article might help the discussion?
  • Blaise
    Posts: 439
    *delete*
  • Chrism
    Posts: 868
    The tunes of these hymns, which are often sung in the language of the people, are memorized with almost no effort or labor. The mind grasps the words and the music. They are frequently repeated and completely understood. Hence even boys and girls, learning these sacred hymns at a tender age, are greatly helped by them to know, appreciate and memorize the truths of the faith. Therefore they also serve as a sort of catechism. These religious hymns bring pure and chaste joy to young people and adults during times of recreation. They give a kind of religious grandeur to their more solemn assemblies and gatherings. They bring pious joy, sweet consolation and spiritual progress to Christian families themselves. Hence these popular religious hymns are of great help to the Catholic apostolate and should be carefully cultivated and promoted.
    --Musicae Sacrae, encyclical of Ven. Pius XII (1955), referring to extra-liturgical hymns
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    Doesn't this just make us all want to set the bar much higher for the theology of hymnals? Shouldn't liturgy be leading the way in truth?

    Yes.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    (As an aside, if you're going to color your text, please don't use blue, because that is conventionally the color of web-page hyperlinks.)
  • MHIMHI
    Posts: 324
    .
  • Earl_GreyEarl_Grey
    Posts: 891
    Spinning a web generally tends to carry negative connotations.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    "A web daily spun" is a weird image. And it's another point where I had to ask what Dr Bringle meant.

    It would not make sense to connect that phrase to the relations of the Trinitarian persons. They never change, they do not need to be renewed daily: God the holy Trinity is timeless.
    Thanked by 1Kathy
  • MHIMHI
    Posts: 324
    .
    Thanked by 3Kathy CHGiffen Adam Wood
  • MHIMHI
    Posts: 324
    .
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Chrism
    Posts: 868
    The second stanza notes various "natural analogies" for the Trinity that have historically been tried and found wanting:


    Is it common for hymns to sing about errors, even in a negative way?
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,945
    Penelope the ikon of what - cunning fidelity?
Add a Comment