But, none of these ideas are popular in the current climate. Why? Because the professional church music industry wants to make money and get as much copyrighted material in our mouths as can possibly be jammed into a Sunday parish mass. Brings new meaning to mass consumption, doesn’t it?

I think most of us would admit that it would be painting with a rather broad brush to claim that all of Marty Haugen’s music is bad. Joel, for instance, noted this. I would agree with him. I do like his song, which you mentioned, “Shepherd me O Lord.”

The problem is more with specific — either shallow music or silly lines. Personally, the music of his which I do have a problem with, it is because it is not only uninspiring, but it detracts from the solemnity of the Mass and does not lift me to prayer. I understand that in many things, “ymmv (your mileage may vary)” but perhaps I speak for more people than just myself. When the music is treacly it does not invite me to participate in the Mass, and I think that this is one (of many) reason why I see so few of my contemporaries in church. I think my best friend would agree. I would like to see more young men at church, but quite frankly a lot of this music does not help. I could launch into a whole host of generalizations here, but I won’t.

On the other hand, if you do appreciate the music which Marty Haugen writes, I can understand why you could become exasperated at the internet discussions of him, which often can get quite snarky. I assure you that I am not so much anti-Haugen as pro- a different vision of church music. In my opinion, the emphasis on hymns to the detriment of the Mass actually being sung is perhaps a deeper issue which needs to be resolved. There’s a lot that can be said on this issue, but as ASimpleSinner noted, it won’t be because we dislike the Scripture which he quotes.

I am sorry, but that comment just irritated me to no end on the simple baseis that you know full well Diane’s objections to the absoulte and utter drivel of campfire music that Haagen has churned out and has been taught to Catholic school children for decades now in leiu of their musical patrimony has NOTHING to do with her opposition to the Word of God. You know it, I know it, anyone who knows her knows it. To frame a response to her objection to this insipid and milquitoast drek is intellectually dishonest and comes across as snyde and - dare I say it! - haughty.

By what seems to be your litmus test, anything that makes implicit or explicit reference to Scripture is to get a pss and always be presumed appropriate, sound, and tasteful. If I show up in Speedos that say “I love Jesus” on the posterior how pedantic would it be for me to counter the objections of those who raise eyebrows with “What, don’t you love Jesus? I am just wearing clothes that proclaim my love for Him. If you don’t love Him too why are you even here?”

So YES the words “I am the Bread of Life” are explicity in the Gospel - the words of Christ Himself, the second Person of the All Holy Trinity. I love to read them, I love to hear them, I do not like to sing them in the firsrt person voice in a fashion where we sing them as though they were our words. “He is the bread of life” SURE! Not as true to the text? Inasmuch as the pronoun is changed to understand the voice of the speaker and who the Bread of Life is, I suppose.

The whole loaded “If you don’t love this, why are you Catholic?” is a ridiculous way to try to shut someone up who disagrees with your tastes. I love my dogs, I don’t love their poop. Would you think to ask me why I have dogs?

I have been playing guitar for 20 years now. I was the lead singer/lead guitarist in a band that “toured” for about 5 years. I played almost all types of music and I lived the rock ‘n roll lifestyle. That kind of music does not belong in church.

It is another false dichotomy to say that so long as it is Biblical it is aesthetically pleasing.

His work is saccharine and it sounds dated. It has a feel of a sing-along and has a decidely more profane tone - to hear it, nothing of it screams of being a genre set apart. To hear Byzantine chant, Gregorian Chant, or even the changs of the Orient for non-Christian religions, one is aware of the solemnity present - techno mixes aside, these are not ways people sing for sing-alongs or dances… Likewise for traditions of robust choral singing for much of western hymnody. I would rather be singing Ein’ feste Burg ist unser Gott than Gather Us In any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

So no, I do not care for it. And as a result of not caring for it, I in no way deny “Christ is truly present here”.

Liturgical music has been a pet peeve of mine for a few years now. At the very least it needs to be theologically correct. I would not be opposed to having classic brass in the choir loft every Sunday rather than just on Easter and Christmas (but I know that can get expensive). Guitars on Sunday morning drives me up the wall! Kudoes to Pope Benedict for demanding a higher standard of excellence in that department.

Joel, what words did your choir change?

Actually, I find there is nothing so wrong with a Haagen Daaz song, that it cant be fixed with changing out:

the words
the instrumentation
the Key
the rhythm
the melody
and the theological biases.

Once you do that, their songs can be almost appropriate for liturgy.

Catholics have been doing “Gather Us In” long enough, and more than a few of us are tired of it. I grew up singing it at least once (usually twice) a week in gradeschool.

Here in this church the choir is droning;
“Gather Us In” is our entrance song.
Chanted this slow, it sounds more like groaning;
I notice no one is singing along.

“Gather Us In” is sung every Sunday;
“Gather Us In” is sung every Mass.
Give us a break and sing something different,
“Gather Us In” gets old really fast.

source