I disagree, Gavin. Pelagian Heresy is clearly present in verse 1. Several theologians, that is, priests who have attended seminary and in whom I have a great deal of respect, have clearly identified it. So, in this case heresy is not inappropriate or an overuse of the term.

The problem with the texts isn't a confusion over the symbolism (?) of ashes as a sacramental, it is the notion that we rise again to create ourselves anew. Here is the Pelagian Heresy and the reason for objections over this text. Equally, and as mentioned before, ashes are a sacramental and as such are something we are offered as a vehicle of graces, not the other way around. We don't offer ashes to anyone for the purposes of anything, let alone creating ourselves anew.

I believe that there has been a systematic weakening of teaching the Truths of the Church and the opposite heretical teachings in clear, unequivocal terms. As a result, even those who should not shrink from the use of the term "heresy" suggest that it's "too strong a word. Heresy really doesn't exist anymore." B as in B, S as in S. We should no more quickly accept this text or others like it that promote heresy, or at the least a weakened, watered-down version of the Truths of the Faith than we would accept a priest who preaches on a subject we know promotes the same heresy. In other words, if you think a particular text may be really bad, but not fall within your understood definition of heresy, imagine hearing the words coming from a priest in the context of a homily and ask yourself if you'd give it a pass under those circumstances.

When we hide behind the veil of "pastoral consideration" to excuse ourselves from pointing out those texts which have the potential of weakening the faith of another, we fail to enter into the baptismal call to love our neighbor. It is important that the Truth, and not "pastoral consideration," be that which sets us free. That said, I recognize that there are folk who are better equipped to deliver messages of Truth with great sensitivity and Christian love (charity) than others, and we need to be willing to ask them to do so when we cannot. BUT we must not shrink away from naming heresy where it clearly exists.

All of this discussion points to the significant issue of horizontal-ism in the liturgy. In other words, its all about me, myself and I. The cardinal sin of the last 25-30 years.

One line I found comical in said song is in verse 2:
Give our stum-bl-ings direction (yes, a THREE-syllable "stumblings").
BMP

"Dust you are. And to dust you shall return."

According to Thomas J. Talley the ashes were not originally placed on the recipients' foreheads. They were sprinkled on top of their heads in token of dirt shoveled over a corpse. (Some prayers refer to their being "sprinkled.")The ashes are a sign of our common mortality, as the traditional sentence of administration "Memento, hom, qui pulvis es..." implies. The rite is intended to inspire self-examination and repentance. It is not an absolution of any sort.

"I don't blame the publisher or the songwriter. They are just ignorant, like me."

I can judge no individual, but it becomes clear after seeing enough of these songs, and reading essays by and interviews with the creators and dissemination of error, that some of the distorting or denying of doctrine is quite deliberate and agenda driven.

There is a deliberate elevation of human agency over dependence on God, of the assembly as the primary presence of Christ over the Real Presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament, of a friendly let's-meet-in-the-middle brand of "ecumenism" over bringing all the lost sheep into the One True fold...

One specific, I find it impossible to believe a publisher, in a Catholic publishing house, knowing full well that hymns and songs had de facto replaced the propers in most Catholic worship, would be unaware that in the make-up of their editorial board they were, for all intents and purposes, allowing non-Catholics to write the Mass.

Liturgy is not political press relations.
A Democrat might hire a Republican hack and assume the words he writes will just as effectively express the platform of "the other side" for a pay-check.

But a Catholic can not hire a non-believer, and assume that the words he writes will just as effectively reveal Catholic doctrine.

(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

Who exactly is an unbeliever? Isn't Tom Conry Catholic?

"a publisher, in a Catholic publishing house, knowing full well that hymns and songs had de facto replaced the propers in most Catholic worship, would be unaware that in the make-up of their editorial board they were, for all intents and purposes, allowing non-Catholics to write the Mass."

I suspect they really didn't know that hymns replaced the propers. Keep in mind the majority experience prior to the council was the Low Mass. God only knows where we'd be today if the High Mass were the norm - we probably wouldn't be in this mess at all.

And I suspect that NALR didn't really care about the theology in their hymnals. Does anyone know if Glory & Praise had an imprimatur? And then once G&P was in every pew, the "Catholic Truth Society" abandoned the totality of their name and became OCP, hocking trash to compete. And then GIA. I don't know the order these things happened, but I suspect that most of the publishers were thinking of the almighty dollar rather than Almighty God.

Google is your friend, Mia. A search for "bishops conference approve collection songs hymns" produces a list of links.

One of the links that comes up is this fine article by Susan Benofy, who has written numerous helpful articles for Adoremus Bulletin about how church music got into its current state.
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7939

Looking at things from the perspective of history, maybe it doesn't seem like a big deal. But looking at it from the perspective of individuals and their faith lives and experience of the Catholic church and Lent, it looks quite different.

Also, I think we attack a lot of things not because they're horribly bad in and of themselves (for instance, versus populum priests), but because they are symbolic of a greater problem at large (focus off God and on the congregation).

chonak, thanks for that link… I learned a lot from reading it and from reading the article in Sacred Music that it references.

Could someone recommend something for the procession for a cantor? This would most likely not have the congregation singing since they don't sing anything they don't know here.