Neo-Palegianism? One Learns Something New Every Day.
Posted by: tony on 11/18/2006 01:43 PM
Updated by: tony on 11/18/2006 04:29 PM
Expires: 12/19/2006 12:00 AM
You can always count on Todd at Catholic Sensibility to be edifying. He usually has his facts straight. One of his recent posts, The Myth of Neo-Pelagianism taught me a few terms I'd never heard before.
First, let’s clarify what is meant by pelagianism. It was a philosophy developed by a monastic, supposedly, who taught that human beings, through asceticism, good works, and personal discipline, could achieve salvation. Jesus is significant, not so much for his sacrifice, but for his role as a moral teacher. St Augustine, St Jerome and others vehemently strove against it in their day.
Many of our separated bretheren would consider us palagianists. They believe that we believe that we can buy our way into heaven by our good works.
The charge of heresy is a serious one. Lots of St Bloggers like to label people who think differently as “heretics.” It’s become a euphemism for “something I donhttp://www.m-w.com/dictionary/heretic’t like.” It’s sort of like using profanity. After a while it loses shock value. Taking a percentage of believers, say 96%, and labelling them as heretics, therefore non-Catholics, strikes me as a convenient way of doing theological business. “I can’t find a reasoned and charitable way to continue this discussion, so I’m just going to label you a heretic and declare myself a winner.”
Main Entry: her·e·tic
Pronunciation: 'her-&-"tik, 'he-r&-
Function: noun
1 : a dissenter from established religious dogma; especially : a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church who disavows a revealed truth
2 : one who dissents from an accepted belief or doctrine
Seems pretty straightforward to me. If you are a dissenter, you are a heretic. If you believe the Eucharist is simply a symbol, you are a heretic. If you believe artificial birth control is fine and dandy, you're a heretic. If you believe "we are the Eucharist", you are a heretic.
#1 in my opinion is much more serious than #2, though both are heresy.
So when people complain about singing “I am the Bread of Life,” I have to chalk it up to a matter of personal taste. “Voice of God” songs have been with us long before Vatican II. The development of more Scripture-based songs after the council also saw many of God’s Biblical words put into the mouths of soloists, choirs, and even the pew people. Do we trust Biblical literacy to inform our people we’re singing quotes or paraphrases from Scripture? Or are we going to be literalists about it?
It's less an issue when people understand that they are singing in the "voice of God". Some people actually believe that we all are the bread of life. They confuse the faithful as the "body of Christ" with the real and substantial presence of Christ's Body in the Eucharist.
I would also challenge anyone to find me a "voice of God" song, prior to Vatican II, which was sung during mass by the congregation. (As I have been proven wrong by Todd on a few different occasions, I'll post an update if he provides the info. :))
I believe some music directors have not watched the big picture of repertoire carefully enough. But I have a very hard time with accusations carelessly flung out at composers, even the ones whose work I dislike. Perhaps there are some composers who have gotten stuck in a particular voice or narrow expression. Perhaps parish music people get stuck in a rut, or go back to the same well all the time. I don’t think that’s a flaw of heresy, but one of imagination, if not motivation.
And in this I agree with Todd. We cannot imply the motivation of composers because we cannot look into another's heart. Though I dislike much of the music perpetrated by Messrs Haugen and Haas, I have sprung publicly to their defense when their faithfulness has been called into question. I can label a piece "heretical", but I have a difficult time calling a composer a "heretic" simply because they might not know what the Church teaches so they cannot dissent from it. It is up to us who do to make good musical selections.
But the main point of the article was pelegianism. Unlike Todd, I believe that minimizing the role of Christ (and he who stands in situ Christi, the priest) while maximizing our role, moves us inexoribly down Palegius' path.
Since Sr. Toolan was mentioned, I tood the opportunity to Google her. The top result was an article which contained gems like this:
"The primary focus of all liturgical and catechetical mission-based service is Jesus Christ, who never wrote a document himself but who did call us to love one another," said [David] Haas.
No, but those who followed Jesus did. We call them "Scripture", Mr. Haas. You've heard of that, haven't you?
The music and liturgical leaders present at the workshop noted that their challenges ranged from choir members who absolutely refused to sing in language that wasn't English, to saying "no" to liturgical requests by members of another culture, even for good, sound liturgical reasons.
We have never had a problem with choir members singing in Latin. Oops. I guess that's not one of the approved "multi-cultural" languages. Latin is the language of Catholic culture.
