The musical theater influence on new liturgical music
  • MarkB
    Posts: 683
    I debated posting this in the thread about "On Eagle's Wings," which has touched on whether OEW is in the style of American musical theater, but I decided to start a new thread instead in order not to deviate from the original poster's topic.

    I think much of contemporary Catholic "liturgical" music published by OCP and GIA over the past thirty or more years has largely imitated the styles of American musical theater and soft pop/rock.

    Listen to this example of a newly-released psalm from OCP, in which they don't even hide it: the description states that the composition is "reminiscent of Leonard Bernstein's music."

    https://youtu.be/FVyM2e-JjtA

    So many of OCP's "artists" are writing in styles that imitate pop/rock/theater.

    And they are doing it consciously, deliberately, in an attempt to make Mass sound like a concert or the theater.

    They mistakenly believe that doing so is inculturating the liturgy for America, making Mass more relevant for American cultural tastes.

  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,279
    Anyone up for a waltz around the altar?
  • Goodness me that was absolutely atrocious.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,577
    More of the same... novelty reigns, experimentation lives on and sacred music is continually sidelined and ignored.
  • Mark,

    What evidence can you provide that this music is (actually) not more relevant to America's cultural tastes?

    Surely, American Catholics have been fed this stuff (or earlier forms of it) for decades. The American bishops clearly believe this stuff resonates with all kinds of Catholics, especially that group they covet, the youth.
  • MarkB
    Posts: 683
    The popular musical styles do resonate with America's culture -- see the wild popularity of Disney musical/movies, for example -- but it's a mistake to attempt to bring such music into the liturgy in an attempt to make liturgy seem more relevant.

    For one, it's bringing the profane into the temple.

    Second, most parish music groups/bands sound awful trying to pull it off with their mediocre musical abilities, and the congregation knows it.

    I don't think most bishops believe the music is well-suited to the liturgy. I think many of them just don't know what else to do nor how to lead to something better because they lack musical knowledge and skill themselves, so they have largely abdicated teaching responsibly in the area of liturgy and liturgical music.
  • If Leonard Bernstein was alive today, he would be insulted.
  • First, to respond to the OP, Mark's example clearly shows that there are people in positions of influence who think it's ok to sing cabaret music at Mass.
    I don't think most bishops believe the music is well-suited to the liturgy. I think many of them just don't know what else to do nor how to lead to something better because they lack musical knowledge and skill themselves, so they have largely abdicated teaching responsibly in the area of liturgy and liturgical music.

    There's a lot to unpack here.
    1.) if I had to guess, the bishops are probably split. Some of them know full-well that this is not in keeping with the mind of Holy Mother Church... but then again, I've seen video after video of bishops dancing in the aisles and saying and doing all sorts of stupid things to know that many of them are... ahem... not properly suited to their state in life. [And I know the Holy Spirit guides the church... but we also know with positive proof that there's all sorts of awful politicking that goes on that clearly is not of the HS... perhaps He is simply keeping things from being worse than they would be otherwise.]
    2.) I DO think that anyone who cares to give it even cursory thought knows what to do, at least in a general sense. Church teaching is clear. But then again, it is crystalline on all sorts of other things too—they also get ignored, top down.

    The fact of the matter is, it takes a bishop with a good pair to stand up and ruffle feathers. For many, it is probably the least of their troubles. This is sad, since it involves the liturgy and should theoretically shoot right to the top of the list, alas.

    But remember too: this generation of bishops was raised by the generation that threw everything beautiful away (I don't just mean TLM; I mean music, architecture, statues, theology, etc. etc.) So some of them are genuinely clueless. They think that wreckovating churches, putting bands in the front where the altar used to be, and having scantily-dressed teens handing out communion are all "good" things. (Only apparent goods, in the Thomistic sense.) There is a strong anti-traditional vein in the clergy that is growing as rapidly as the traditionalist movement is. One group seeks to restore, the other group seeks to stamp out the efforts of the former.

    For someone who sits in the middle and isn't sure what to think, they don't know what to do. All they know is that everything that seemingly has come before is "antiquated" and "didn't work" so there's "no sense trying that again".

    Then there are those who think that the liturgy should be some grab-bag of every whim that floats in the air in a 100 mile radius. One of my choir members had to travel last weekend and was attending at a certain cathedral where all of the sudden the lector announced, "the second reading will be in arabic" which she then proceeded to proclaim. My poor choir member looked around in confusion because it seemed rather apparent to her that there was not a critical mass of arabic-speakers to warrant such an act. She figured the lector was probably the only person in the room who actually understood anything. If her retelling of the situation is accurate, I suspect this is one of those whim situations. This is why every high-school across the country has gangly white kids singing negro spirituals [terribly] for no other reason than the fact that they can. This is why parishes just loooooooove singing "We are marching in the light of God" and then they have the choir sing the refrain in a language that isn't spoken by anyone on their continent to be "inclusive" all whilst simultaneously rejecting any latin outright as rigid and antiquated. It is so schizophrenic and hypocritical. Again, I chalk it up to a search for novelty in all things. Anything but tradition. Anything. Dancing? You got it. Eucharistic procession? Nope. Singing in an african language at a completely caucasian parish? You got it. Having a schola chant during communion in Latin? Forget it. Crappy praise band in front of the no-longer-used St. Joseph side altar so little Jenny can feel great about telling her friends at public school that she played a flute solo on Sunday? Absofreakinlutely. Pipe organ? What is this? The 1600's?

    3.) You are absolutely right that the bishops writ-large—apart from Abp. Alexander Sample's exemplary letter—have abdicated any teaching responsibility in this regard. The problem is, this then falls to diocesan staff and even moreso to parish musicians. Since the broader collapse of the church took church music and budgets with it, relatively few parishes have any genuinely trained musicians. Of the many that are musically trained, they are not liturgically or theologically trained. That means that many musicians do the best they can, and many don't even know that what they are doing is not in keeping with the mind of the Church! It truly is the blind leading the blind here. And who can fault them? This is what most of them grew up with, so they don't know there is anything wrong with it. I think it's fair to say that the number of people who take pleasure in reading encyclicals and other church documents are comparably few.

    And again, since bishops grant imprimaturs like they're candy on halloween (I literally once owned a "catholic" prayer book with an imprimatur that had prayers to Egyptian deities in it... I kid you not.) rather than laying down firm guidelines for music in their dioceses, there's no system of checks and balances. (Many, ill-suited to their charge, believe that "teaching" the congregation is simply making sure they sing their favorite hymns with gusto... not realizing that they also have the opportunity to form minds about music.)

    Couple in the fact that there is always resistance to change... few people have the will to attempt to turn the tide in a parish, especially if there are people who are going to be vocal about the change.

    There was an email thread that recently went around a few of my geographically-immediate colleagues and we were assessing what the state of chanting & propers at each parish was. One of our consœurs lamented the fact that she was unable to do any chanting or propers (even in english) at this time because she barely had support from the pastor to even sing theologically correct semi-traditional hymnody. I think she's trying to weed out the SLJ stuff, and even that's a hurdle. In her case, she very much has the desire, but a resistant congregation headed by a resistant priest. She thinks it will be a good long while before she can even pepper in something like Bartlet's simple english propers in addition to what's already there, to say nothing of a Latin ordinary or propers from the gregorian missal. (Pray for her. Her struggle is heroic.)

    People are always more apt to complain than to praise. This is well-known. That means that for every letter praising the introduction of traditional chant, there were probably four more decrying it. We need to rally the faithful catholic troops and get them to be more vociferous.
    —————
    As an aside, we are trying an experiment today: for the first time, my schola is singing a much more elevated Mass; rather than tacking propers on after hymns, we are singing a florid introit (english), latin gradual rather than psalm, polyphonic ordinary (Kyrie and Agnus Dei to start with), latin communion antiphon (english verses), and Tallis motet at offertory. In short, we are trying to see how the congregation responds to an elevated liturgy on the first Sunday of the month. Hopefully all will go well.
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,079
    MarkB--FINALLY, we agree!!

    A niggle: perhaps it's not 'deliberate.' It's more likely that these 'composers' have so little knowledge of hymnody (and so much of Broadway) that it just comes naturally. The old "tin pan alley" style of hymns from the 1940's is prelude, so to speak.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Dad29, I bet you're right. If they spend most of their time playing in theatre pits and only serve the church on Sundays, (mind you, many (most?) churches don't want to pay a living wage, so it's almost de rigeur to have a second job) it is a distinct possibility. There's a reason the great composers studied the masters that came before them. Do the majority of modern composers do the same? I don't know. Obviously, many of us here have our eyes fixed firmly on excellent models (regardless of whether our works live up to them—mine certainly don't) but I think that this forum, by and large, represents a distinct minority rather than the majority.
  • RMSawicki
    Posts: 83
    Broadway musical/cabaret style... anti-sacral ethos... “Spirit of Vatican II”... lavender mafia... eh, it’s all there in the soup.

    Gaudete in Domino Semper!
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 2,730
    ServiamScores - I hope 1) that you have prepared the congregation for this, and 2) that you are seeking feedback. If it were thrown at me, as a PIP, I would mightily resent the loss of opportunity to raise my voice in song.
    As an amateur student of liturgy I would also ask how this florid introit meets the criteria of GIRM§47. Once the Mass is underway I think there is more flexibility possible, most people are mentally settled in.
  • 47. When the people are gathered, and as the Priest enters with the Deacon and ministers, the Entrance Chant begins. Its purpose is to open the celebration, foster the unity of those who have been gathered, introduce their thoughts to the mystery of the liturgical time or festivity, and accompany the procession of the Priest and ministers.

    48. This chant is sung alternately by the choir and the people or similarly by a cantor and the people, or entirely by the people, or by the choir alone. In the Dioceses of the United States of America, there are four options for the Entrance Chant: (1) the antiphon from the Missal or the antiphon with its Psalm from the Graduale Romanum, as set to music there or in another setting;…(


    What is the problem, exactly?

    Also, they got to sing the Gloria, the sanctus, the mysterium fidei, a communion hymn, and the salve Regina (which we do every other week and they know well enough for the congregation to sing a cappella); music for everything was in the worship aid, with translations for all the rest. I do not believe I deprived the congregation of anything; especially considering the intent is for this to happen at one single mass time once a month, with “regular” masses the rest of the time. I even made two different worship aids this week so the other masses were totally unaffected by todays endeavor.

    I also put my contact I formation at the bottom of the credits in the worship aid every week for people to send feedback. I have yet to receive a single email after a year of doing this.

    On the bright side, everyone who spoke to me after mass was quite happy.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 2,730
    Thanks. I hope it went well. I'm glad it went well.
    Yes that sounds a reaonable balance, if the schola is good enough that would suit me. One problem with the introit is that in my experience if the congregation does not have something to sing early in the service they lose enthusiasm for singing, YMMV. The Gloria is substantial enough and probably early enough.
    There can be no general rule for how to get the entrance song to achieve all those four tasks. In our small church, the celebrant will be from the sacristy door to the chair in barely one hymn (or antiphon + psalm) verse. (No opportunity for musical theater numbers).
    Anyway that's all by way of aside, I agree with what you say about bishops, even Abp Sample's exemplary instruction is offset by his responsibilty for OCP.
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 2,730
    If we start from the assumption that the best model for the propers is the Graduale Romanum or the Graduale Simplex, that is to say 4 psalms with antiphons but in English, then we should note that -
    1/ The Introit is a processional, accompaniment to the entrance procession but intended to consolidate the assembly and help it focus on a common purpose, best ensured by singing together;
    2/ The Responsorial psalm, or the Gradual, is a reading of scripture, preferably sung because it is from the collection of Temple songs, but the clarity of the words is of paramount importance, that excludes anything for the verses other than a psalmist with clear diction, so that the congregation can listen to scripture and respond;
    3/ The Offertory is ambiguous, it may be a processional similar to the Introit, it may cover a collection and a procession with simultaneous preparation of the altar (This ambiguity is reflected in its ommission from the Missal);
    4/ The Communion is said officially to be a processional, but that is unrealistic (absurd). How can it be when some are standing/sitting/kneeling in the pew, some are moving slowly up, some are walking back.
    Having the latter two performed by a musical ensemble in Broadway style is contrary to the mind of the church as consistently stated by Pius X onwards. But it is probably no worse than many of the motets performed at these points in the 19th century. The congregation are not all focussed on the same thing, some may at some points be listening, or not, as they please.
    The first two were AFAIK never treated in that way, and in the OF it is very clearly wrong to do so.
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,380
    This is why every high-school across the country has gangly white kids singing negro spirituals [terribly] for no other reason than the fact that they can. This is why parishes just loooooooove singing "We are marching in the light of God" and then they have the choir sing the refrain in a language that isn't spoken by anyone on their continent to be "inclusive" all whilst simultaneously rejecting any latin

    It's a problem trying to have things both ways, isn't it? I would hope no one has a problem with 'gangly black kids' singing Old Hundredth, even terribly. A couple of points to bear in mind:
    1) We church musicians ought to already know that the division of 'negro' and 'white' spirituals was a segregationist fantasy: this was always a shared American repertory, and the oldest sources suggest even "Deep River" originated among the Quakers.
    2) One should be careful in presuming to speak for a whole continent. Our Parish is a monthly host to a Kiswahili community Mass, and my previous employment was at a bilingual parish that was a little more than half East African.
    3) Siyahamba has a refrain???
  • My point is that I find the dichotomy of Siyahamba being eagerly received all the while the same people vehemently reject “Agnus Dei” a suffocating irony.

    Regarding your second point: Obviously, if you have a congregation full of African immigrants, that changes the situation. But most parishes don’t, so the exception to the rule doesn’t apply. I’m obviously speaking in broad terms. I can safely state that the average american parish does not contain a large African immigrant population—and certainly not sufficient critical mass to host Kiswahili community masses.

    And to stave any controversy: as for “negro spirituals” I consider that a musicological (read: technical) term. Whether you agree with the classification or not, it is certainly common parlance that is even used by the community whose music it seeks to classify.
  • CCoozeCCooze
    Posts: 1,172
    Let's not forget what Cdl Sarah said about trying to bring "culture" into the Church and liturgy, rather than the other way around.
    691 x 844 - 53K
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,380
    foster the unity of those who have been gathered

    The Lutheran Book of Worship enshrined a notion that unison was the church ideal, but this afternoon I came across some lines that should remind us GIRM 47 is not be taken to puritanical lengths:

    When truly brothers,
    men don't sing in unison
    but in harmony.
    (W. H. Auden Thank you fog, 1974)
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,079
    in my experience if the congregation does not have something to sing early in the service they lose enthusiasm for singing


    Huh.

    In my experience, since the flu-thing is over with, the congregation doesn't really sing at all and they're given the standard 4-hymn sandwich plus Ordinary parts in English.
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,079
    and help it focus on a common purpose, best ensured by singing together;


    You're asserting something without foundation: that singing together focuses the congregation on a common purpose.

    Your un-stated premise is that the entrance hymn denotes the purpose of the Mass, which is new to me.
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,380
    Yes, Serviam, I agree Siyahamba should not be used as a cudgel against latin (and why not vice versa?) But on averages alone, one might just as "safely state that the average american parish does not contain" any 16c polyphony.
    "Negro spiritual" is not an entry in Grove, and a phrase I only come across in books older than I am, which is to say before the Civil Rights movement (its first use seems to have been in 1867). Historical terms have been:
    Collection of Spiritual Songs and Hymns (1801)
    Slave Songs of the United States (1867)
    Jubilee Songs (1872)
    Plantation Melodies (1918)
    Songs and Spirituals (1921)
    National Jubilee Melodies (c1920s)
    Religious Folk-Songs of the Negro (1926, ed. Nathaniel Dett)
    White and Negro Spirituals (1943)
    The Oxford Book of Spirituals (2002)

    The first of these was edited by Richard Allan, preacher at a mixed race church in Philadelphia, and was discussed in Methodist Error (1819) by John F. Watson, who expressed disgust and alarm that the songs “has already visibly affected the religious manners of some whites.” Will it surprise anyone that the purchasers of most of these publications were primarily non-african Americans?
  • Yes, Serviam, I agree Siyahamba should not be used as a cudgel against latin (and why not vice versa?) But on averages alone, one might just as "safely state that the average american parish does not contain" any 16c polyphony.


    Perhaps the difference here is that the latter is formally enshrined in multiple teaching documents of the Church stating that it is an ideal that is properly suited to the liturgy.

    As for terminology, it seems (not surprisingly) the term has been superseded, but right from the Library of Congress:
    The African American spiritual (also called the Negro Spiritual) constitutes one of the largest and most significant forms of American folksong.

    It is the first article to pop up when you search the term, second only to the wikipedia article.

    I also refer you to https://www.negrospirituals.com. Or, try an amazon search of the term and see the hundreds of books and recordings that use this term as well. Again, I reiterate this simply to show that I mean nothing derogatory by the term. It still seems to be in quite wide use.
    Thanked by 1dad29
  • To get back to the original purpose of this thread:
    They mistakenly believe that doing so is inculturating the liturgy for America, making Mass more relevant for American cultural tastes.

    I suspect that I'm in the minority (most of us on this forum probably are?) but for me I want a liturgy that transcends both time and space. This is partly why I look to what has come before. I'm not interested in reinventing the wheel. I'd like to hear the same chant and other music that would be familiar to the great saints.

    Wasn't it Chesterton who quipped something to the effect that 'the problem with culture, so-called, is that it is always changing and therefore man is always one step behind'? In other words, any attempt to make the liturgy "current" will only mean that it will soon be outmoded by necessity.

    This reality is painfully obvious to anyone who reflects on the awful liturgies that resulted in the immediate aftermath of VII, the likes of which many of us are still trying to bury. People under 30 don't want to hear hymns that are reminiscent of the music their parents listen to when they themselves were in their twenties. Perhaps more obvious than the music, even, are the awful vestments and felt banners. They smack of the tastes of a certain generation. There's nothing transcendent or timeless about them.
  • bhcordovabhcordova
    Posts: 988
    Hey, my before my parish built the current church, we had 2 banners hanging from each rafter all the way to the altar. Each banner was in honor of a saint or an apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
    Thanked by 1irishtenor
  • That's all fine and dandy. And were they made of felt and looked like a preschool craft fair entry? Or were they finely stitched with gilt embroidery on silk brocade? If the former, then good riddance, even if what they represented was a good thing. It is only with exceptional rarity have I seen the latter (typically in Europe, and typically at least 100 years old). I have nothing against the latter. It's the former I resent. You know the type: dusty 40 year old felt with cartoonish depictions of wheat and grapes. How very transcendent.

    Also, if modern church architecture wasn't so iconoclast and ugly, then these banners wouldn't be necessary, because the frescoes and statuary would be sufficient. But when you build a plain brick box with white walls and ceiling, with no reredos, and only a single statue of our Lady banished to the vestibule, suddenly banners seem a real necessity.
    Thanked by 2dad29 irishtenor
  • davido
    Posts: 517
    If only ours was shaped like a box. Then it might have decent acoustics
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,364
    If it's not too much of a diversion, what I have wondered over the years is how many current DMs come to the job from a musical theater background.

    Aspects of performance as well as musical/textual choices might be influenced by this personal history to such a degree that publishers are only responding to their market rather than directing its taste.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 2,730
    dad29 - the common purpose is, one hopes, the worship of Almighty God.
    IGMR 47. Populo congregato, dum ingreditur sacerdos cum diacono et ministris, cantus ad introitum incipitur. Finis huius cantus est celebrationem aperire, unionem congregatorum fovere, eorumque mentem in mysterium temporis liturgici vel festivitatis introducere atque processionem sacerdotis ministrorumque comitari.
    47. When the people are gathered, and as the Priest enters with the Deacon and ministers, the Entrance Chant begins. Its purpose is to open the celebration, foster the
    unity of those who have been gathered, introduce their thoughts to the mystery of the
    liturgical time or festivity, and accompany the procession of the Priest and ministers.
    Thanked by 2Liam PaxMelodious
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,079
    A_F: we note that "the CHANT"--not 'the hymn'--is specified, and that it is to 'introduce....to the mystery of the...time...or festivity.

    That "chant" would be the Introit.

    But you provided a foundation for your remark, thanks!
  • fcbfcb
    Posts: 280
    Translating cantus as "chant" is falling prey to a false cognate. Lewis and Short give as the definition of cantus: "the production of melodious sound, a musical utterance or expression, either with voice or instrument; hence, song, singing, playing, music." Cantus does not specify any particular kind or type of song.
    Thanked by 1Liam
  • Cantus does not specify any particular kind or type of song.
    ...unless it is then clarified that the cantus is the chant from the roman gradual or the missal. (re: §48)
    Thanked by 1irishtenor
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,374
    OK, that's a dog that won't hunt well and hasn't in the last decade. This is very re-tread terrain.
  • It's not just the Church that suffers from this forty year old 'trend'. Ken Cowan at prestigious nearby Rice University requires his students to learn "Ride of the Valkeries' and its like. And on any and every recital one such is required. Cowan is training entertainers, not organists. If this disgusting trend is being nurtured in our universities, it's no wonder that pop, rock, theater, etc., find their way into our churches. Most of the masses sung on a Sunday morning could be waltzed or otherwise danced to.

    However, dance music has a rather old precedence in the Church - at least in France. It is no secret that dance forms were typical of many of the French baroque organ masses. This was not meant to be an musical affront to God, It was because the French believed that dancing would be a major part of life in the hereafter. Also, dancing in heaven is pictured in the left wing of Fra Angelico's tryptich of the Last Judgment. And, Dance forms are not at all rare in Bach's religious works. I don't believe, though, that any such lofty sentiments are being expressed in the musical effrontery of the purveyors of the street music enjoyed by priest and faithful on a Sunday morning.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,279
    I can understand why Cowan, a formidable organist by any standards, is trying to popularize the organ in his secular concerts. Outside of church and funeral parlors, the instrument is a dead relic of the past. People don't flock to organ concerts like they did 100 years ago - maybe they are tired of North German composers and organs. Those transcriptions of the earlier days did pack the house. With concerts these days, you may find 20 old souls from AGO in attendance, and that's about all. And of course, they will be nattering about something that is not being done right, according to themselves. I sometimes wonder if the audiences have left the organ world, or the organ world has left the audiences.

    Thanked by 1Carol
  • bhcordovabhcordova
    Posts: 988
    That's all fine and dandy. And were they made of felt and looked like a preschool craft fair entry? Or were they finely stitched with gilt embroidery on silk brocade? If the former, then good riddance, even if what they represented was a good thing. It is only with exceptional rarity have I seen the latter (typically in Europe, and typically at least 100 years old). I have nothing against the latter. It's the former I resent. You know the type: dusty 40 year old felt with cartoonish depictions of wheat and grapes. How very transcendent.

    Also, if modern church architecture wasn't so iconoclast and ugly, then these banners wouldn't be necessary, because the frescoes and statuary would be sufficient. But when you build a plain brick box with white walls and ceiling, with no reredos, and only a single statue of our Lady banished to the vestibule, suddenly banners seem a real necessity.


    I don't think you can in any way describe the old church as iconoclast & ugly. It was built in the 1930s with a 350 seat capcity to replace the even older church which was built in the 1800s with a 150 seat capacity. The banners were in no way looked like a preschool craft fair entry. While not stitched on silk, they were tasteful and just looking at the banners informed one of several saints and several apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary
  • Bhcordova, you seem to be taking very personally my generalized observations.

    I’m not talking about churches built in the 1930’s. I was making a general observation about the largely-terrible church architecture that has come in the wake of the council. I have no idea what church you call (or called) home. If you were one of the fortunate few who didn’t have terrible felt banners, I’m genuinely happy for you. Yours seems the exception, rather than the rule.
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,374
    regarding Negro Spirituals, this is the 150th anniversary of the Fisk Jubilee Singers, and the NY Times just released a long-form piece on their history and presence in the present (paywall):

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/04/opinion/fisk-jubilee-singers-black-spirituals-anniversary.html
    Thanked by 1MarkS
  • MarkB
    Posts: 683
    Exhibit B:
    https://youtu.be/JxyCST5yrbw

    50s doo-op background singers, stage theater arrangement of Psalm 23. Like a love-song duet that was rejected for "Grease".

    Brand new from OCP. Someone thinks this kind of music will sell and be loved by Catholic parishes.

    So says OCP: "highly appropriate for funeral liturgies." Yeah, right.
  • That came straight out of the latest Disney movie.
  • CCoozeCCooze
    Posts: 1,172
    That "I need nothing more" called to mind "I want him so" from Jesus Christ Superstar.
    I don't Know How to Love Him is a much better-written song, though.
    (Side note: if you haven't heard Linda Eder sing this, you should look it up. The video that says "Twin Spin.")
    However, neither would be appropriate for any liturgy.
  • CCoozeCCooze
    Posts: 1,172
  • Oh... my...

    (The most pitiful part, is you can spot the exact moment the priest was tempted to turn into a performer. He walks out perfectly normal, and then you see a sudden shift and ... )
  • TCJ
    Posts: 779
    In regard to the OCP psalm...

    Isn't it funny how singing a melismatic chant or a piece of polyphony is unnecessarily prolonging the Liturgy, but when it comes to sacro-pop ditties, they can be stretched forever and it's okay?

    In regard to the video...

    Even should that parish miraculously switch to actual sacred music, the woman singer needs to go.
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores