These are some thoughts of mine ... only thoughts and not exactly backed by popes ....

I have to say, I think we as Catholics have been conditioned as part of our non-Catholic culture to see beauty as completely subjective and a "matter of taste". Quite frankly I think that which makes a certain song less objectively beautiful (i.e. those which distort our understanding and appreciation of God who is objectively perfectly beautiful) SHOULD be criticized.

I think the objectiveness is most obvious in the execution. For example, I think I am safe in assuming it is pretty much universally accepted that people who are tone deaf and cannot carry a tune are best left OUT of a choir. Therefore choirs sound better with more accomplished musicians. There is a reason for this. Talent is a GIFT from God and better images of the objectively perfectly beautiful attributes of God.

That said, I think there are objective reasons to select certain songs over others.

There are plenty of songs I like (even love) for various reasons. They are singable (much of contemporary Catholic and evangelical praise songs fall into this category). They have melodies that are pleasing to my ears. These might be subjective qualities (although I suspect certain melodies are objectively more pleasing than others for reasons I care to not get into). Contemporary pop Catholic music might be great for the time (relevance as they like to say). Its great outside the mass. Its helpful in a devotional sense. It will not (I strongly suspect) stand the test of time because it lacks some qualities that make it LESS suitable than a veritable host of selections we have from our past. It will not be categorized alongside the genius of Bach or the great traditional chants that have been handed down to us for generations. Those works of genius image the genius of God and is, I think, objectively more beautiful. I personally think that subjecting most Catholics to decades of merely OK music has conditioned us to not appreciate the genius of truly extraordinary music. Okay music undermines the idea of objective beauty.

So if I tell you I hate songs used in the mass in this country, there might be something more to it than a matter of taste.

I mean, you wouldn't wear casual clothes to a wedding. Current contemporary Catholic music is casual and in that sense is less deserving of a place in mass than something that 1) is properly suited for the purpose, 2) contains those elements of extraordinary genius I mention and 3) has stood the test of time.

Of course I have ignored the concept of disordered views of beauty of which I suspect most if not all of us suffer from. That is why this gets into subjective understandings rather quickly and, as this writer suggests, its difficult for us to judge others on musical tastes. Still, I think "standing the test of time" or being "traditional" gives us a good indication of what works closer to the ideal of heavenly worship.

I also ignored practicality. God bless em, a church I attend frequently is completely tone deaf. They have no choice but to worship with whatever folks happen to be in the choir. The means to create something like St. Peters is beyond that of nearly every parish in the world. Still, I think our expectations should be high and one of the first things that needs to go is letting people volunteer to do something they have no business doing so. If the parish has enough people of sufficient talent then a choir does not need twice as many people when half of them cannot carry a tune. JMHO.

One final thought. Consider these two images of the Transfiguration ... both good images .... but which belongs in St. Peters?