One way to approach the question of a non-Catholic singing the responsorial psalm is by looking at the rules for lectors in the 1993 Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism.

If the non-Catholic is Eastern Orthodox, this paragraph relates to the subject:

126. Catholics may read lessons at a sacramental liturgical celebration in the Eastern Churches if they are invited to do so. An Eastern Christian may be invited to read the lessons at similar services in Catholic churches.

If the non-Catholic belongs to another ecclesial community, this paragraph seems to be relevant:

133. The reading of Scripture during a Eucharistic celebration in the Catholic Church is to be done by members of that Church. On exceptional occasions and for a just cause, the Bishop of the diocese may permit a member of another Church or ecclesial Community to take on the task of reader.

As far as I can tell, it's OK for an Eastern Orthodox. For a Protestant Christian, ask the pastor (he may be able to tell you whether the diocese has given any guidance). For a non-Christian, I think it's not appropriate.

[I'm choosing to just deal with the one question so far. Maybe someone else can respond about the marriage situation.]

Incidentally, are you the music director, or do you have some other role in the matter?

That would be less of a problem, imo, than a non Catholic doing it.

The psalm IS a reading, whether sung or (unfortunately) said in the spoken voice.
PLUS: in liturgicalese, sing and say are synonymous, i.e., they both mean 'sing'.
And: Counting the psalm, then, there are four 'readings' at mass, and they should all be sung.

I would not allow a non Catholic to be a cantor. Regardless of the amount of talent a person has, or the lack of homegrown talent, I don't see how I could allow someone who essentially disagrees with the Catholic Church to serve in it. A cantor, historically was taken from the community in which he ministered. Every cantor that I supervise and train must be a practicing Catholic.  It is a ministry, not a gig.  With regard to the individual's marital situation, rely on the advice of your pastor. If he gives the okay, then go with it.

It is a ministry, not a gig.

This is the alpha and omega of it.

I worked with a synagogue once for their High Holy Days, and the role of cantor was a great honor, and I know its been that way forever. Being that we've grown out of that tradition (which Christ himself dutiful observed, with apostles in tow), it ought to remain just as a distinct an honor in Catholic liturgy.

Here is a person entrusted to present (sing, say, proclaim, mumble, shout, mutter, state, or whathaveyou) the word of God. It's not a Shumann art song to be performed. No matter how beautiful the psalm's setting or how beautiful the voice in said setting, its not a vocal gig. It's a liturgical ministry.

The local Byzantine parish by me has a beautiful cantor ministry. Of course, those cats are singing the whole time, so nothing's distinctly a performance. They've got the little choir in the back corner and a cantor comes halfway up the middle aisle to proclaim/sing/read/present at the appropriate time and then back with choir. It's very clearly an honorable distinction in the ministry, and a task taken on by a practicing member of their community.

Not a chance for a community-theater-soccer-mom to flaunt a whacky-inflatable-wavy-arm-man routine in front of her "audience" once a week.

Combining Fr. C's question with MJO's practice : Should non-Catholics be allowed to sit in the congregation?

Why stop at the cantor, you could extend Fr. C's post to EMHCs, lectors, servers and so on. How many times have you received Holy Communion from a EMHC, heard the psalm proclaimed or the readings from individuals in the state of mortal sin? Does the state of a persons soul change what you heard or received. Does it somehow invalidate the Word of God or Consecrated bread and wine? Can we look into the hearts of these individuals and say they should or shouldn't be serving the Lord?

As to the original posters question regarding irregular marriage, check with your Pastor and abide by his decision. Also check with your Pastor or with your dioceses to determine if there are any relevant guidelines with regards to non-catholic's participating in the Liturgy of the Mass.

Hmmmm.

Shall non-Catholics be barred from choir-singing? There's rumor that a local choir director was canned because there were two Jewish folks singing in the choir. By all accounts, they were the two best singers, too.

As to those 'in mortal sin,': shall we check for utilization of artificial birth control? Seems to me that determining the state of one's soul is beyond the pay-grade of the liturgy director.

Could the ministry of the choir not be evangelical in its work? Every year in our high school we have non-Catholic students who enter the church in no small part due to the witness given on campus. Maybe the seed planted in choir would lead a non-Catholic to convert? About 25% of my choir is not Catholic (which helps continue the communion chant while the Catholics receive), and just last year one graduated who converted as a Junior.

Incidentally, the whole choir sings the psalm verses each week at Mass. For a Jewish member, now graduated, that was one of her favorite parts. There is such beauty in the making of music--I've never found it surprising that the appeal crosses faiths.

There's rumor that a local choir director was canned because there were two Jewish folks singing in the choir. By all accounts, they were the two best singers, too.

So weird.

Yes, but it hasn't dispensed with the belief that the validity of sacraments is related to the validity of the orders of the minister.

Of course we are not Donatists, worried that the sinfulness of ministers would make a sacrament void. That is not the reason behind anyone's concern, so there is no reason to set up that strawman and push him over.

The purpose for a pastor to apply a restriction in choosing lectors or cantors is to avoid open, public contradiction between the Church's teaching and the lives of the ministers presenting it. It's not a matter of pretending to discern the state of someone's soul, but a matter of noting public actions. Marriage, by its nature, is a public act.

This is not about prying into people's personal lives, into matters not known to the public. Marriage, even civil marriage, is a declaration before society.

There are other types of public acts a pastor might want to consider: e.g., the speeches of civic authorities.

True, Chonak, but there seems to be a great deal of prying into the private lives of others going on. I couldn't tell you what the people around me on Sunday morning do after they leave the mass, and I don't want to know.

I was a member of the choir to which Dad29 refers, & I can tell you, that’s pretty much what happened. The parish Tridentine Mass community (lacking the direction of a wise, holy priest BTW) was vehemently opposed to the idea of having non-Catholic singers in the choir, let alone a couple of agnostic Jews. So somebody had to go. Almost everybody, as things eventually played out: the director’s dismissal (& poor treatment of non-Catholic singers on the part of the congregation) caused such hard feelings among members of the choir, that most all resigned in protest. Early on, we did establish some “ground rules” for non-Catholics participating in the choir. They were expected to be respectful of our Catholic traditions: to treat other members in the choir as friends, not adversaries; not to argue or push secular “agendas” on others, to listen to the priest’s sermon during Mass (no texting, checking email or Facebook, or other electronic pursuits). We opened & closed each rehearsal with a brief prayer; occasionally, our non-Catholic singers would participate voluntarily, though they were not forced to do so. These were pretty much the same “rules” imposed on everyone in the choir, but I have to say, our 2 Jewish friends were the most open-minded, hard-working, team-oriented singers in the entire group. And I think it’s important to note, both expressed interest (directly or indirectly) in learning more about Catholic Christianity. I used to tell other members of the choir, we needed to be all about evangelization—if only through a smile & a friendly manner. The Holy Spirit would take care of the rest. These singers have become quite embittered as a result of the whole sad experience. A wonderful opportunity to bring souls to Christ has been squandered.

They will know we are Christians by our love... Does that also mean they will wonder if we are Christians because of our lack of it.

No, anyone should be allowed to sing in the choir, especially if they have a good voice... heck, I know a few Satanists who have INCREDIBLE vocal abilities... If you exclude one denomination, then you will have to exclude them all.

They will know we are Christians by our love

I don't ever remember ever reading that in the bible. Are you perhaps referring to the wretched 70's lyric that attempts to put a spin on the scripture which says,

"By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another."

If that is the case, unfortunately the word and meaning of 'LOVE' is greatly misunderstood, and ill defined by our relativistic culture today.

On the other hand, HATE is a crime except when it is used against Christianity and its followers. True LOVE does not embrace all, it embraces the truth, and rejects falsehood (to which many today subscribe... the broad and easy highway which leads to destruction.)

LOVE is why we have a class of 'Christians' who are called martyrs in our Church. It is because the world HATES those who follow Christ and his Church, and they are willing to stand up for what they believe even if it enrages the unbeliever to the point of (earthly) death.

As Christians we are taught by Christ to love our enemies, but that in no way means embracing their beliefs, practices, philosophy or anything else that the world can fabricate or evil can conjure up.

Hasn't this thread rather gone off-topic? The original question was not about members of the choir, but about psalmists. (Pace Fr. Chepponis and his slippery-slope question.)

As Christians we are taught by Christ to love our enemies, but that in no way means embracing their beliefs, practices, philosophy or anything else that the world can fabricate or evil can conjure up.

As in everything, context must be applied within argument. My dad loved me. When I did wrong (in circa the fifties) he spanked me, which was a generation's lesser punishment for even minor infractions. I am grateful for that admonition to keep me on the straight and narrow.
That said francis, your tautology is flawed because it dwells in ideology, not circumstance. The assignment of rendering psalmody by Jews of any practicing stripe, even within a circumstance as relayed by the OP, is an irrelevancy.
Taking literalism seriously, what type of stone would the Decologue most ideally have been etched? Would it have meant more or less if they'd been enscribed upon petrified wood?

If we humans require proof positive apparent upon our fellow Christian/Catholic travellers, should we, like, have a bar code tattoo that's registered by an approved Vatican agency? Oops, I forgot, under HHF all infrastructure bets are off.

melo... your fluency shrouds your point. can you make it clearly for all to easily understand?

OK, that just does it. From now on:
All cantors must clutch rosaries while chanting psalms
Singers must wear underwear stamped with the Pope's coat of arms
No music by heathen composers such as Bach - music by Catholics only
Knights of Columbus will be armed and guard the door against entry by heretics
Scapulars will be worn by all
The Fatima Crusader will be required reading by all musicians
The first musician to smile during mass will perish in the eternal flames.

Hmmm... I wonder how many choirs sang on verses of "Shepherd Me, O God" as the responsorial psalm this past Sunday?!

(OK, now I'll duck and cover!)

The confession times at Our Lady of the Suburbs this week are....

Yes. I think he's far superior to most out there and just as good as (and better than) many of the Chabanel Psalms that everyone here raves about.

melo... your fluency shrouds your point. can you make it clearly for all to easily understand?

Morning francis and all,
In answer to the above: not really, tho' I much enjoyed the pun!
1. I like being an enigma; that's well-known.
2. It'd be easier to explain why Jim Chepponis' little quip is just a quip, and not one of the seven seals. (See what I did there, Adam?)
3. Give it some time, it'll likely come to you and all.
I will offer this pithiness- anyone auditing our conversations here, without context, might think it more demanding a task to be a "pastoral musician" than a sommelier. It ain't.