OCP is a Catholic company. There are priests and theologians on staff who review the materials before they even make it into the hymnals. Someone at OCP is really not doing his or her job if you need to examine the theology of a song for soundness before choosing it.
It’s a question that only that particular congregation can answer. You need to not only look at what’s best liturigically speaking, but also at what kind of music is going to get the congregation involved in song. What type of music do they like to sing?
Then, you can consider stuff like the “freebies” that come with the hymnal package and all the ancillary materials that you may or may not have to be, the finances of the investment, how long they’ll be around, and on and on.
The very first thing you need to do is have a metting at church to discuss this, because it sounds like a pretty imporant decision is going to be made and I don’t think it’s fair to you (or to the rest of the parish) that you should figure everything out for yourself. I should ask, are you the music director at your church?
I would take issue with some of your comments becamse, as I have seen in reviewing a great deal of the OCP arsenal, much of its music is more along the lines of the horizontal (me/we/us) as opposed to the vertical (directed towards God). In fact, some of these songs are not even fit for use in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
It is as though the folks at OCP have not read any of the authoritative documents of the Holy See concerning sacred music, let alone any of the writings of the Supreme Pontifss. This statement from Pope John Paul II is perfectly applicable to most of what is in the OCP collection:
. In following the course of the teachings of Saint Pius X and of the Second Vatican Council, it is above all necessary to emphasize that music destined for the sacred rites must have as its point of reference sanctity: it in fact “will be the more holy the more closely it is united to the liturgical action”. Precisely because of this, “not all that which stands outside the temple (profanum) is fit to cross the threshold”, sagely affirmed my venerated Predecessor Paul VI, commenting upon a decree of the Council of Trent and clarified that “if it does not at once possess the sense of prayer, of dignity and beauty, music – instrumental and vocal – by this fact is precluded from admission into the sacred and religious realm”.
On the other hand, the category of “sacred music” today has undergone such a broadening of meaning as to include repertoire that cannot enter into the celebration without violating the spirit and the norms of the Liturgy itself.
The reform effected by Saint Pius X had specifically in view the purification of Church music from the contamination of profane theatrical music, which in many countries had polluted liturgical music repertoire and praxis. This is also to be considered attentively in our times, as I have placed in evidence in the Encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia: that not all expressions of the figurative arts and of music are capable “of adequately expressing the Mystery worshipped in the fullness of the Church’s faith”. As a consequence, not all musical forms can be considered suitable for liturgical celebrations.
And, of course, the very telling statement that Pope Benedict made about liturgical song in Sacramentum Caritatis, where the musician-Pope notes that:
- In the ars celebrandi, liturgical song has a pre-eminent place. (126) Saint Augustine rightly says in a famous sermon that “the new man sings a new song. Singing is an expression of joy and, if we consider the matter, an expression of love” (127). The People of God assembled for the liturgy sings the praises of God. In the course of her two-thousand-year history, the Church has created, and still creates, music and songs which represent a rich patrimony of faith and love. This heritage must not be lost. ***Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided. As an element of the liturgy, song should be well integrated into the overall celebration (128). Consequently everything – texts, music, execution – ought to correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons ***(129).
Furthermore, the Spanish songs have some serious errors. One has tinges of liberation theology. The parts of the Mass do not even conform to Liturgiam Authenticam, as the composers take license with the words and paraphrase them. The problem here is widespread in Spanish, but, the Englsih versions also have their issues as well.
As far as I can tell, one can have 20 theologians looking at what goes into a music book; however, if these folks aren’t on the same page as the Church, then, maybe the book is not worth having.
You also have the issue of inclusive language to consider. Liturgiam Authenticam clearly states that the Trinity must be referred to as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. However, Father is replaced by Creator and other names. According to a power-point presentation the USCCB made a couple of years ago, a minuscle 10% of songs used in the Mass today make scant reference to God the Father.
I LOVE this!!! Makes you feel good superficially, but so bad for you in the long run! hahaha!
