Thanks to Josh for this reaction to the previous post regarding then-Cardinal Ratzinger, Pope John Paul II, and Bob Dylan:

Excellent post on the whole Pope Benedict thing, even though – as Kathy points out – you misuse the notion of infallibility.

Benedict is good in many ways. He’s both brilliant and holy. However, it appears he hasn’t changed in his mischaracterization of all rock music as “anti-religion,” something he said long before he became a cardinal. And his misunderstanding of Dylan’s work is appalling; to think he’d label Dylan as a “prophet” – a title he’s often rejected – makes my blood stir. To have my “boss” label Dylan’s work as somehow counter to the message of the Church – WHEN GOD PLAYS AT THE EDGES IN EVERY ONE OF THE SONGS! – makes me sad.

It’s indefensible, really, and we Catholics deserve the heat we take on this one.

Anyhow, thanks for your level-headed response …

I just knew I’d get knocked for using “Infallible?” as the title of that post, but I went for the cheap gag as usual. Yes, nothing in either Pope Benedict’s or Pope John Paul’s actions or statements in connection with Bob Dylan constitute an ex cathedra statement on doctrine (thankfully!), so the infallibility issue doesn’t arise.

I was a little worried, after posting recently about the German bishops visiting the Holy Land, that I could be seen to be developing a flair for Catholic bashing, which would be far from my intent. I esteem the Catholic Church and Catholics — indeed, I have been one, and am not so very far away in the church I attend today. It is because of my understanding of the importance and influence of statements from cardinals and popes that I believe they are worthy of attention — even for non-Catholics — and that also means critical attention.

Ironically, when it comes to Benedict, I have a lot of sympathy for what I understand regarding his point of view about sacred music, in the context of the Mass. I know from personal experience the degree to which there has been a rush towards the insipid in many churches over the past several decades, in the name of supposedly “relating to young people.” His concern for having music during the Mass which is suitably time-tested and holy is, to me, a very respectable one, although many will disagree. However, outside of the context of the Mass, I clearly think that it is very mistaken to dismiss the ways in which some popular music can lead people to God.

At the risk of quoting scripture to suit my purposes, there is Luke, 9:49-50 :

And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us.

And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.

If Benedict had ears open enough to appreciate Dylan’s songs of faith, I think that he would hear therein devils being cast out quite specifically in Jesus’ name. And what we call Dylan’s secular material is not in opposition to the sentiments in those songs of faith, which is why Dylan can readily perform both in concert even to this day, without any incongruity, in my view.

...................
Share this!

Posts which might be related to this one based on a mysterious algorithm:

• Infallible?
• Potpourri of popery
• Historic times: Pope Benedict and the Jews