Phasing out the “Christ has died…” acclamation over several months was the one thing that our former pastor had done before he was reassigned in August. Unfortunately, the priest who’s filling in has not read the memo.
and thats a bad thing?
indeed, there has been.
when in doubt, chant in latin. you can never go wrong with the prefered music of the roman rite.
With all due respect, there are MANY MANY MANY new mass settings, with styles varying from contemporary ( youtube.com/watch?v=MXFnNDiXMR8 ). To classical (youtube.com/watch?v=uo-pLZBglOo). My point is, simply putting it, is that there is no shortage of options for you. Note you, neither of the mass settings that I linked were from either of those composers.
Respectfully, possibly. If a parish has not chanted in latin in 40 years, this time of change would be an incredibly poor time to revert to a seemingly foreign style of music.
its not foreign, its the music of the roman rite. it is an excelent time to begin singing the mass instead of singing at mass
Exactly. Yet you must understand that, depending on the parish, an entire generation may have been raised without hearing chant at Mass. While this might be a travesty, a time where the spoken responses of the mass are changing would be a poor time to introduce chant in a parish where it has not been done in possibly 30 to 40 years. The requirement to use mass cards/other visual aids is already going to impede on a congregation’s ability to fully pray. Adding in a distinctly different style of music would be possibly disastrous considering all of the other changes being implemented. Personally, I’m of the opinion that this time should be a time of renewal for the church. For the fist time in 40 years, we are blessed with an abundance of new composers and new musical settings of the mass, that I feel it would be a waste not to see what they have to offer.
I find it difficult to show them much respect given some of the latest offerings some of which are riddled with the most basic errors, wild changes in time without changing the time signature and poor voice leading; quite useless if the congregation are supposed to join in. Let us not forget that they are all probably paid a small fortune for some of this quite lazy and shoddy work.
I’m sending this reply via mobile device, so please excuse any spelling or gramatical errors that may render. With all due respect, I feel that simply disregarding all liturgical that was written after 1962 as pseudo-contempory garbage is a little extreme. The comlosers of this music 95% of the time are music ministers who begin writing to fill a liturgical need in their community. So, if that premise is true, then it could very well be the case that the contemporary style came from a need in the parish. From there, they submitted their composed work to be published. As far as the wealth and income earned from these compositions, well, it is far less then one would think. My parish recently had a composer out to present a workshop on his new mass setting for our choir, and others in the diocese. Over that weekend, my wife and I had the opportunity to speak with him and get to know him. Really, his primary job was that as a Catholic music director at a church on the west coast. His mass was written well before the new translations for his community that he served, and from there it was being revised and published.
missed the opening prayer then as well.