IMO it's mostly colloquially-affected.

Yes, the Missa pro defunctis saw massive changes in the 1970 Missal:

• the singing of Alleluias, etc. based on the season;
• the suppression of the Sequence, which is now used in the Office for the last weeks of ordinary time;
• the greater variation of propers and of vestments permitted

But both the actual texts and the actual rubrics emphasize hope rooted in Christ's sacrifice, not the "all dogs go to heaven" mentality so prevalent in modern Christian culture.

IMO the bigger issue is not one specific to the funeral liturgy, but rather a general weakening of the Church's penitential discipline. To be fair, this was in response to a penitential culture than in many cases had become toxic, more about ticking off boxes than growing in holiness and virtue — but as is so often the case, the reformers let themselves swing on the devil's pendulum and massively over-corrected, and far too little has been done to remedy matters since.

Vatican II (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 81) said that "The rite for the burial of the dead should express more clearly the paschal character of Christian death, and should correspond more closely to the circumstances and traditions found in various regions. This holds good also for the liturgical color to be used."

Here's Archbishop Bugnini's own commentary the changes to the funeral rite:
"The Introduction [to the new rite] emphasizes the point that a Christian funeral is a celebration of the paschal mystery of Christ as accomplished in his faithful followers. The need to bring this out was one of the main concerns guiding the reformers.

"To this end they drew from the treasury of euchological tradition texts that would best express this aspect of funerals. At the same time, they got rid of texts that smacked of a negative spirituality inherited from the Middle Ages. Thus they removed such familiar and even beloved texts as the Libera me, Domine, the Dies irae, and others that overemphasized judgment, fear, and despair. These they replaced with texts urging Christian hope and giving more effective expression to faith in the resurrection.

"These changes explain the closer and more organic connection between the funeral and the Eucharistic celebration in the new rite, the restoration of the Alleluia, and the abandonment of the color black for another, which, in the judgment of episcopal conferences, will inspire a calmer approach to sorrow and suggest a hope that is illuminated by the paschal mystery" (Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy, pp. 773-74).

The NO doesn’t allow the tract outside of Lent. Also, the propers belonging to the priest, that this, the orations, have been completely revised such that much like those of other Masses, sin, death, and our eternal fate are obscured.

But both the actual texts and the actual rubrics emphasize hope rooted in Christ's sacrifice, not the "all dogs go to heaven" mentality so prevalent in modern Christian culture.

So with respect to my comment: except for that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

The office of the dead does maintain some traditional texts, but many others are suppressed, and the Libera me is gone from the funeral. Also, the absolution at the catafalque is suppressed, and they got hives about calling it an absolution even at funerals. Sigh.

Liam is of course correct. With the liberality of a tradition friendly priest, it could be as he says.

Agree to disagree. The Dies Irae is a towering part of our western liturgical heritage. There is no document that says to stop doing it; that should carry more weight than the misbegotten intentions of Bugnini et al, who, for whatever reason, forgot to explicitly say to stop doing it. Those of us who are actively trying to preserve the penitential character of the Requiem, for which AnimaVocis pines, should have no qualms about exploiting the optionality of the books to do so. The traditional option is to do the traditional text, not the so-called first option given.

As far as the Libera Me goes, the books explicitly state "or another song" can be sung for the Final Commendation. This is not grasping at straws. Singing the responsory which has been sung at roughly this point in the liturgy for hundreds of years is likely the most appropriate "or-another-song" that could possibly be sung.

Agree that singing the alleluia with the Dies Irae is weird, but not as weird as dropping the sequence all together.

Those of us that believe in a hermeneutic of continuity need to fight for our liturgical inheritance

the change of focus of the Requiem Mass change from praying for the departed soul to God, to all this expectation of heaven and canonization of the departed?

As far as changes in the liturgy itself goes there are a few which spring to mind:

* Readings can be chosen that suggest or can be interpreted to say that the deceased is already in heaven. In particular, a very popular reading (Wisdom 3:1-9) begins: "The souls of the just are in the hand of God and no torment shall touch them." The gospel of the Beatitudes (Matthew 5:1-12) suggests that the deceased was holy and worthy of heaven; as it does when read on the feast of All Saints. (The reading from Wisdom was also traditionally read on feasts of the saints, not at a Requiem.)

* The proper chants pray for the deceased, but as these are optional other chants and songs can be chosen that never mention prayer for the dead. Other prayers for the dead were changed or omitted: the Agnus Dei was changed from " . . . grant them rest . . grant them eternal rest" to the usual ". . . have mercy on us . . grant us peace," and the final the "Requiescant in pace" was omitted.

* The prayers of final commendation ("Before we go out separate ways . . ") seems to speak of the future meeting in heaven with the deceased as a certainty - "One day we shall joyfully greet him/her again . . . "

* If a eulogy is done (and it is officially allowed in the rubrics), it is rarely put in terms of praying for the deceased.

So a Mass for the Dead (new rite) can be (and often is) said with very little emphasis on praying for the dead. Part of this may be because of customs quite foreign to the traditional understanding of the Requiem liturgy (it's a "Celebration of Life!"), but it's also on account of the official changes and options.

well: I think that there's a bit of a 50-50 on whether another suitable chant covers a proper that the reformers and even Solesmes seemed to suppress. I don't care, but maybe someone else does.

Kyrie tropes per se are not back in. You can't just do anything with form C!

in fact, we got the Justorum animæ at the offertory today in the traditional Mass…it's hardly fit for a funeral.

I think it would be impermissible to add it as a sequence between the gradual/responsory and alleluia, since the rubrics are clear about when sequences may or must be done, but alius cantus aptus clearly allows for its use elsewhere in the mass.