Lauryn who?

Lauryn who?

Talk about an ungrateful and rude guest. American R&B singer Lauryn Hill was invited to sing at the Vatican Christmas concert, but instead of doing her thing and hitting the road, she pulled a Sinead O’Connor. She asked them why they were celebrating Christ’s birth and not mourning his death. (Um, maybe because he’s not dead anymore, but resurrected, and we rember his death and resurrection at Easter?) Then she told people to seek blessings “from God not men” and that she did “not believe in representatives of God on Earth.” To top it off, she didn’t sing the Christmas song she was supposed to sing.

Hey, Lauryn, if you were so mad, why did you show up? Thanks for spitting in the faith of a billion Catholics. We’ll be sure not to rush out and buy your records. Can you imagine inviting someone into your house only to be cussed out by them and insulted by them?

  • Dale,

    Yes, the tendency of some in the hierarchy to think the Scandal is over is unnerving. However, we don’t need some overblown pop princess lecturing us in our own house and blaspheming there as well, i.e. we don’t need organized religion.

    Like you, I ask why we have these secular Top 40 performers in this concert. Why not Amy Grant, Kathy Troccoli, Rachel Lampa, Jaci Velasquez? Oh, is it because they’re not on the Billboard Top 40? Your Eminences, if you want attention from the world by inviting all the cool people, you’re going to get the wrong kind of attention.

  • Righteous anger doesn’t justify any possible response. While some of the bishops may be culpable, it doesn’t mean that you can use any venue to express your anger at them. What if she decided to do this at Mass? If she wanted to say something, then say it to the press after the concert, but using the stage she was given at a Christmas concert is inappropriate. That’s the only point I’m making.

  • I’m not sure why I should trust a Babelfish translation over a professional translator. I use Babelfish all the time and it comes up with translations that may sound reasonable, but have a completely different meaning in context. For example, what would she have meant by: “I have not accepted to participate in order to celebrate, like you, the birth of Christ, but in order to ask you why you are not in mourning for its dead women within this place.” Huh? What is that supposed to mean?

    I’m not sure why anyone’s trying to apologize on her behalf. She said what she said and our anger at bishops for the what they did or failed to do should not lead us to excuse just any anger in any way it’s expressed. Voice of the Faithful is angry at the bishops too, but I don’t find myself on their side in most areas either.

  • Good intentions.
    Wrong time and place.
    Wrong audience.
    Wrong (i.e. intemperate) words.

    The log in your own eye problem: her own musical genre glories crime, violence, drug abuse and prostiution.