Hymns replaced by Bono lyrics at church

B

BlaznFattyz

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,589
Reaction score
0
Points
36
John Lennon once enraged Christians by claiming that the Beatles were bigger than Jesus. The Church of England is now recognising the pulling power of rock stars by recruiting Bono, the singer and lyricist of U2, in its bid to boost congregations.

A Church of England bishop is to preside at this country's first "U2-charist", an adapted Holy Communion service that uses the Irish supergroup's best-selling songs in place of hymns.

In what is more rock concert than Book of Common Prayer, a live band will belt out U2 classics such as Mysterious Ways and Beautiful Day as worshippers sing along with the lyrics, which will appear on screens. The atmosphere will be further enhanced by a sophisticated lighting system that will pulse with the beat, and striking visual images of poverty and drought....

Cont'd
 
The idea was devised by the Rev Paige Blair, an American Episcopal priest in York Harbor, Maine, who held the first service in 2005. Since then, she has advised about 150 churches on U2 Eucharists in 15 states and seven countries.
"Bach and Handel were the popular music of their day, and they had trouble getting played in church," she has said.
"The Methodist hymn writers once wrote contemporary music. Are we worshipping Bono? Absolutely not. No more so than we worship Martin Luther when we sing A Mighty Fortress Is Our God."

Telegraph | News | Hymns replaced by Bono lyrics at church

Still a rubbish band though. :p

s.
 
RIGHT, THAT'S IT,

I'M REPORTING YOU TO THE PUN POLICE.
 
"Bono may be celebrated for browbeating world leaders into funding debt relief
for developing countries, but his Irish rock band is facing criticism for
switching its financial affairs overseas to avoid paying higher taxes.

Irish politicians have expressed surprise at U2's decision to move part of its
multi-million pound operation from Ireland to Amsterdam. The tax rate on
royalty earnings in the Netherlands - where many of the Rolling Stones' assets
are based - is only a few per cent.

The Irish Labour party's finance spokeswoman, Joan Burton, said this week:
"Having listened to Bono on the necessity for the Irish government to give more
money to Ireland Aid ... I am surprised that U2 are not prepared to contribute
to the exchequer on a fair basis along with the bulk of Irish taxpayers." "

[GJM] [Intertax] Bono and tax avoidance

Spiritually and financially astute!

s.
 
I applaud them... I -hate- tax so much that I will kinda leave it there so my rage doesn't build up and I end up smashing this monitor.... But will say, so what if he is doging tax? The goverment tax the hell out of anything even the $£"R%"$£ dead get taxed... (also don't mention TV liscence to me...) *runs off for a smoke to calm down before this builds)


--edit--

Trying to convince the wife we must move to Jersey (UK)

2 c
 
Hi,

It's not the tax avoidance per se, although of course taxes fund minor things like transport, health and education, but the hypocrisy, that made the story news-worthy.

s.
 
Snoopy said:
Hi,

It's not the tax avoidance per se, although of course taxes fund minor things like transport, health and education, but the hypocrisy, that made the story news-worthy.

s.
Click to expand...
Is it?

Namaste Snoopy....don't know the whole story...but if I may play devil's advocate...

Lets say U2 makes a billion ...

And Ireland wants to take x% and then use x% of that on causes that Bono implores....

Now lets say U2 reduces their tax burden which allows them to increase their charitable efforts and charitable spending...can't say they do...but it is worth exploring.

ie they have more control over where there money is placed...

Now lets wonder where U2 earns most of its money.... what percentage of records are sold in country, what percentage of tickets to concerts are sold incountry...ie what does U2 earn from their compatriots and what has U2 paid back??

I'm just wondering who are the hypocrites...of course all of my thoughts are conjecture...
 
Hi,

I know no more of the story than was reported in the Guardian. But if I may play angel’s advocate….


Maybe their actions are freeing up more money for U2 to spend directly on good causes, but it seems a little rich (another pun) to criticise the government whilst at the same time be diverting some of the government’s source of funds and thus reducing that government’s own ability to do what it is being criticised for.

And if I was an Irish citizen I think my umbrage would be even greater.

s.

 
Snoopy said:
Hi,

I know no more of the story than was reported in the Guardian. But if I may play angel’s advocate….

Maybe their actions are freeing up more money for U2 to spend directly on good causes, but it seems a little rich (another pun) to criticise the government whilst at the same time be diverting some of the government’s source of funds and thus reducing that government’s own ability to do what it is being criticised for.

And if I was an Irish citizen I think my umbrage would be even greater.

s.
Click to expand...
If the government is being criticized for mismanaging funds, wouldn't taking funds out of their hands so it won't be mismanaged be a good thing? :confused:
 
Next: Metallica? :)

I can understand the desire to liberalise worship music to better connect with their audience - but seriously, I think the Church of England's move is motivated more by public relations and the desire to look "cool" rather because of any inherent belief that U2 played in Church primarilly priases God.

I mean, the Church of England had a group setting up Rave's a few years back. Praising God or trying to be "cool"?

Either way, I'd be interested to know what the pensioner parishioners who appear to constitute the major attendence actually think of it all. :)

2c.
 
I said:
Next: Metallica? :)

I can understand the desire to liberalise worship music to better connect with their audience - but seriously, I think the Church of England's move is motivated more by public relations and the desire to look "cool" rather because of any inherent belief that U2 played in Church primarilly priases God.

I mean, the Church of England had a group setting up Rave's a few years back. Praising God or trying to be "cool"?

Either way, I'd be interested to know what the pensioner parishioners who appear to constitute the major attendence actually think of it all. :)

2c.
Click to expand...
'nother thought...pull out your hymnal and read the dates of the hymns...how many are 1000, 1500 years old?? I reckon most of them are from the 1900's...maybe some previous...

Every generation has its music and in a couple generations it becomes the standards...the classics...

When Wagner came around the old folks said it drove the kids to riot. Can you imagine the uproar when the Hallelujah chorus was first sung in some circles? What blasphemy singing like that in church...

They are just doing it to attract attention....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top