Dan, first of all, this is excellent.

My own thoughts, and that's all they are, are that:

a. The Gradual has been sung through for centuries by people who were assigned the role of being students of the psalms in text and music.
b. An Antiphon was sung prior to and following the Gradual
c. The GIRM today permits the psalm to also be sung by the people.
d. This may be in any of the historical forms and one new form.
e. The new non-historical form involves the congregation singing an antiphon at the beginning and end as well as inserted between lines of the psalms.

While generally done, there are those who find this practice to detract from the understanding and may be the most profoundly disturbing element of the Mass which has been introduced in modern times alongside the practice of the entire congregation sharing the peace and also mimicing the liturgical gestures of the priest celebrant.

The Psalmist studied the psalms, they became their life. Some feel the modern practice of participation by the people and a cantor whose study of the psalms has been limited to learning the notes they are to sing has greatly lessened the role of the Psalms in the life of Catholics. Just ask them to quote from their favorite psalm. The responses will be limited.

Another strange aspect of the modern use of the psalms is the inclusion of other scripture in place of the psalms being present in the lectionary. Possibly comoen might explain that...

Dan, expect heavy posting on this subject. Thank you for your work and bringing this up. We all will look forward and welcome your project.

May the games now begin. All posting who are coming from a view other than Roman Catholic may wish to mention this...your views are very valuable to us, especially since you are viewing the situation from a position that you feel strongly about.

A documentary for filming?

"less accessible to the faithful" - Not sure quite what you mean here. I think the use of the Latin Graduale makes many qualities of the chant, of the Psalm, and of the Mass more accessible to the faithful. Contrariwise, I find that pedestrian English congregational psalmody actually makes many of the same qualities inaccessible.

Is there a more precise term you can use?

Dan says:

I have quite a few books for reference, but many contradict on the topic of the Responsorial Psalm.

Do you have Western Plainchant: A Handbook by David Hiley, Music in Early Christian Literature by James W. McKinnon, and The Advent Project: The Later-seventh-century Creation of the Roman Mass Proper by James W. McKinnon? I can send you the page references you need to consult as you prepares your valuable documentary on the post-conciliar Mass (called the OF, “ordinary form,” on this list). I’d love to see it.

Dan asks:

1. Are graduales responsorial in nature, is it mixed, or are they sung straight through w/o a response?

(I could be wrong but I think the Latin plural of graduale is gradualia; the English plural is graduals.) If you mean by “responsorial in nature” that they respond to the reading that they follow, the answer is yes. But their style is not “responsorial” in the sense that they are dialogical, call and response.

Dan asks:

2. If they are responsorial, does the response come from the parishioners or from a choir/cantor set-up?

Only the most skillful parishioners can sing the gradual. The Ordo Cantus Missae says this:

5. The gradual response is sung after the first reading by the cantors or the choir. The verse is sung all the way through by the cantors. To be disregarded, therefore, is the asterisk in the Graduale indicating the choir’s coming in at the end of the gradual verse, the Alleluia verse, and the last verse of the tract. When it seems appropriate, the first part of the response may be repeated as far as the verse.

Dan asks:

3. Are all graduales Gregorian Chant or are there approved graduales that are not Gregorian Chant?

I don’t have the books of the Ambrosian or Mozarabic Rite but someone else may be able to answer this question. There are of course polyphonic settings.

I don’t think McKinnon would agree with your statement, "The singing of the Psalms in the early Church was lead by ordained clergy. But in order to enable them to give their full attention to their office, trained musicians for the sung parts of the Mass were introduced.” Music in Early Christian Literature refers to the singing by the people of short responses (see “responsorial psalmody” and allied topics in his index; see also the references to the gradual in McKinnon’s index to his Advent Project). It is true that these roles later became professionalized; readers were ordained (a minor order), cantors generally were not.

Noel, I hesitate to disagree with you because you and I seem to agree about so much; but I feel I must take issue with the following thoughts you expressed:

e. The new non-historical form involves the congregation singing an antiphon at the beginning and end as well as inserted between lines of the psalms.

There is little new about the form of the responsorial psalm in the lectionary. It represents a return to responsorial psalm practice in the early church, as far as we can discern it. The model for this kind of psalmody is the responsoria brevia of the divine office, as found in the Hartker Antiphonary and other sources, and revived in the Graduale Simplex.

It is significant that the eucharistic liturgies of the entire last session of the Second Vatican Council used the chants of the Graduale Simplex, including the responsorial and alleluia psalms. This means that this model influenced the model chosen for the lectionary. If only the chanted forms of the GS model had influenced the music composed for the psalms!

c. The GIRM today permits the psalm to also be sung by the people.

“Permits” sounds concessive. The GIRM expresses a preference for the singing by the people of the responsorial psalm as found in the lectionary. If you look at Article 61 of the most recent GIRM, the only differences over the previous editions are the addition of the italicized words in the following.

After the first reading comes the responsorial psalm, which is an integral part of the liturgy of the word and holds great liturgical and pastoral importance, because it encourages meditation on the word of God.

The responsorial psalm should correspond to each reading and should, as a rule, be taken from the Lectionary.

It is preferable that the responsorial psalm be sung, at least as far as the people’s response is concerned. Hence, the psalmist, or the cantor of the psalm, sings the verses of the psalm at the ambo or other suitable place. The entire congregation remains seated and listens, but, as a rule, takes part by singing the response, except when the psalm is sung straight through without a response. In order, however, that the people may be able to sing the psalm response more readily, some texts of responses and psalms have been chosen for the various seasons of the year or for the various categories of Saints. These may be used in place of the text corresponding to the reading whenever the psalm is sung. If the psalm cannot be sung, then it should be recited in a way more suited to fostering meditation on the word of God.
In the dioceses of the United States of America, the following may also be sung in place of the psalm assigned in the Lectionary for Mass: either the proper or seasonal antiphon and Psalm from the Lectionary, set either in the manner of the Roman or Simple Gradual or, in another musical setting; or, an antiphon and Psalm from another collection of the psalms and antiphons, including psalms arranged in metrical form, providing that they have been approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops or the diocesan Bishop. Songs or hymns may not be used in place of the Responsorial Psalm.

Note that all of the last paragraph replaces the simplicity of the Latin original here:

Loco psalmi in Lectionario assignati cani potest etiam vel responsorium graduale e Graduali Romano, vel psalmus responsorius aut alleluiaticus e Graduali simplici, sicut in his libris describuntur. [In place of the assigned psalm in the lectionary there can be sung either the gradual response from the Roman Gradual or the responsorial or alleluia psalm from the Simple Gradual, as described in these books.]

Continuing to dialogue with Noel:

there are those who find this practice to detract from the understanding and may be the most profoundly disturbing element of the Mass which has been introduced in modern times.

The Psalmist studied the psalms, they became their life. Some feel the modern practice of participation by the people and a cantor whose study of the psalms has been limited to learning the notes they are to sing has greatly lessened the role of the Psalms in the life of Catholics. Just ask them to quote from their favorite psalm. The responses will be limited.

What detracts from understanding the psalm is the failure of composers to set the text of the psalm and/or the failure of the psalmist to sing the text. The plainness of plainsong serves the text. Accompanied and/or harmonized psalms obscure the text. I find that people are moved by the words of the psalms when the music serves the text. Psalms sung in this way help people pray and have increased the love of the people for the psalms, if my fifty weekly liturgical bible study participants are any indication. For seven years I have taught from Living Liturgy and Sing a New Song: The Psalms in the Sunday Lectionary.

Then, too, not a few composers offer their own versions of the text to avoid paying half their 10% royalty to the owner of the translation of the text.

Another strange aspect of the modern use of the psalms is the inclusion of other scripture in place of the psalms being present in the lectionary.

Are you objecting to the inclusion of texts from the 75 Old and New Testament canticles, which can also be sung as responsorial and alleluia psalms? Or to some other practice? Please explain.

The theology of the responsoria brevia is reflected in their essential structure. The Word of God (in the 150 psalms and 75 canticles) is the inspired response to the Word of God proclaimed (in the rest of the Bible).

Let's look at the responsorial psalm in the second part of Advent in the Graduale Simplex (BFW 12; the text is NRSV except for verse 1b, which is ICEL).

Psalm 122 (121V) (1b) 1–9
1 I was glad when they said to me, *
"Let us go up rejoicing to the house of the Lord!"
2 Our feet are standing *
within your gates, O Jerusalem.
3 Jerusalem—built as a city *
that is bound firmly together.
4 To it the tribes go up, the tribes of the LORD, *
as was decreed for Israel, to give thanks to the name of the LORD.
5 For there the thrones for judgment were set up, *
the thrones of the house of David.
6 Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: *
“May they prosper who love you.
7 Peace be within your walls, *
and security within your towers.”
8 For the sake of my relatives and fríends *
I will say, “Peace be within you.”
9 For the sake of the house of the LORD our God, *
I wìll seek your good.

The psalmist sings versiculum 1a, "I was glad when they said to me." If the assembly knows the responsoria brevia style and has the text in front of them, they sing immediately the responsum, "Let us go up rejoicing to the house of the Lord!" If they do not know this style and do not have the text in front of them, the psalmist sings the responsum and the assemble repeats it. The Word of God is being responded to by the Word of God. The response arises from within the psalm. And thereafter, after every verse.

The Performance Note in BFW suggests a "choreography" for this psalm: Richard Hanson, The Psalms in Modern Speech (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1968) suggests that this psalm is best performed by two choirs alternating on the verses (e.g., choir one sings verse 1, choir two sings verse 2, etc.), in imitation of the way the crowds of pilgrims sang this song as they entered Jerusalem.

I have nothing to add to what has been said save to underline the importance of McKinnon's work for your documentary project (especially those particular items noted above).

McKinnon p. 102: "In the second half of the fourth century, however, in the period of great general enthusiasm for psalmody, it became the custom to include a psalm in every pre-" [p. 103:] "eucharistic service and thus the origin of the gradual psalm as a discrete liturgical item."

p. 104. McKinnon understands the Liber Pontificalis citation on Pope Celestine I's introduction of David's 150 psalms to be sung before the sacrifice to mean that they were only at that time introduced among the other readings proclaimed at mass in Rome. Others see the quote as referring to the introit, which McKinnon says has no evidence of existing at this time.

p. 105: "In the earlier centuries the pre-eucharistic service centred on the reading of Scripture. It concluded with a homily based on one of the readings and a period of formal prayer. Without doubt psalms would have figured occasionally, functioning simply as Old Testament readings. Perhaps their inherent lyrical characteristics would have resulted in a somewhat more musical recitation than that employed for the other readings, but this potential was limited by the absence of a specialised cantor. In any case there was no event singled out in the service as 'the psalm' or 'psalmody'. The change came about during the second half ofthe fourth century. Christian song had been fostered at common meals in earlier centuries but now an unprecedented wave of enthusiasm for psalmody swept from east to west," [p. 106:] "and as numerous psalms were sung in the great basilicas at early morning vigils, according to the eminently practical and attractive responsorial method, it became the custom to include a responsorially sung psalm among the readings within every pre-eucharistic service. Thus singled out because of its properties as a psalm it was no longer merely another reading; it was a discrete musical event requiring the vocal skills of a clerical cantor and stirring opposition among a conservative minority. It was in a word, the gradual, although that term of course - derived from its performance on the steps of the ambo - could not be applied until the advent of the ambo in the West some centuries later. Paradoxically, having achieved its musical independence from the readings, it rapidly assumed its medieval status of thematic subordination to them. Within a generation of the late fourth- and early fifth-century events described here, 'Musaeus, a priest of the church of Marseilles . . . selected . . . readings from the Holy Writings appropriate to the feast days of the entire year and responsorial psalms [responsoria psalmorum capitula] appropriate to the season and to the readings."

Another interesting point that McKinnon makes here and in another article is that originally the Alleluia w/ psalm before the Gospel was probably the case of a psalm being chosen as the gradual whose superscription was Alleluia (i.e. one of the Hallel psalms such as 146) and thus the response was Alleluia.

"I experience the response as the way for the Word to knock at the door of the heart."

Thanks for this...my aversion to the Responsorial Psalm I now see is not the psalm and its repetition, but instead the difficulty of singing it using the typical pulp missals and the music that they provide for it.

You've opened my eyes to this. I can now see that sung to music that is well-written, this would be quite effective. Thanks!