Archbishop of Westminster

Well it does to the people who post here... dispassionate and reasoned debate, with a good deal of humour thrown in for good measure.

Moderators: Dom Perignon, Casimir

John Ainslie
Posts: 395
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 10:23 am

Re: Archbishop of Westminster

Post by John Ainslie »

Gwyn wrote:The very prayable Rimskey Korsakoff (? spelling) Our Father is superb, but lacks a doxology, to sing the prayer then to have a spoken embolus and doxology is such a wind-down.

Quite so: GIRM (art 81) says 'The invitation, the Prayer itself, the embolism, and the doxology by which the people conclude these things are sung or said aloud.' ["These things"? :? ]

At the request of my PP (a musician, God bless him), I have added a setting of the embolism and of the doxology which I will send you (and anyone else interested) if you PM me. We sing the RK setting every Sunday unaccompanied; the whole congregation know it and join in it with great fervour.

Gwyn wrote:These are merely observations though, not intended as criticism. The liturgy was a delight.

It was indeed.
Southern Comfort
Posts: 2024
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 12:31 pm

Re: Archbishop of Westminster

Post by Southern Comfort »

Westminster also has its own version of the acclamation, not used on this occasion, which I believe I sent to John Ainslie the last time the RK setting was discussed on this forum. I believe I also sent him the original arrangement made by Fr Daniel Higgins (which they did use - it's not quite the same as those published by Kevin Mayhew and Decani Music, both of which were transcriptions from memory of the Higgins, but with different small glitches) from Gelineau's French arrangement of the Russian original. Perhaps John would send you the Higgins OF and both settings of the acclamation - Westminster and Ainslie - for comparison.
Post Reply