Writing 100 years ago, Camille Saint-Saëns decared:

"...in reality there is no religious art, properly so called, absolutely to be distinguished from secular art. There is good music, and there is bad music; for the rest, it is a matter of fashion, of convention, and nothing else." ("Music in the Church", The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 2, No. 1 (Jan., 1916), p. 1. See www.jstor.org/stable/738170). He similarly criticises church architecture and musical instruments such as the organ. A century later it seems he has been vindicated, and the Church has accepted these conclusions on a grand scale. If he is right then religious music (I would also include sacred music in this context) is caught in the same artistic pendulum that swings back and forth according to the tastes and ethos of those in charge. I realise this is a vast topic, but perhaps there can be some important insights gained from our readers: Are there principles or arguments better than others to refute him and the current state of art in the Church?