• RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    In the old days, there was not a real concern if the texts being sung matched perfectly the ones the priest prayed. Deference was made to the traditional version that had been sung for many centuries.

    __+__ __==__ __+__ __==__ __+__ __==__ __+__

    As proof of this, I have noticed that the 1962 Editio Vaticana Latin Propers (like we find in the Liber Usualis, e.g.) do not always match the Missal texts the priest reads.

    For example, in the TRACT for the 1st Sunday of Lent, the 1962 Missal says:

    Dicet Domino: Susceptor meus es tu, et refugium meum: Deus meus, sperabo in eum.

    However, the chants in the Editio Vaticana read:

    Dicet Domino: Susceptor meus es, et refugium meum: Deus meus, sperabo in eum.

    I am told that it has always been allowed to simply sing what is in the Editio Vaticana books, even when they are slightly different from what the priest reads at the Altar.

    My question is as follows:

    When did this rule change? For example, most people say that is not allowed to use Ted Marier's versions of the Responsorial Psalms because they don't use the most current translation. Is this a fact?

    __+__ __==__ __+__ __==__ __+__ __==__ __+__

    (I also remember reading somewhere that, once a text a is approved for the Liturgy, it can always be used, even when [for example] they update the Lectionary. I was shocked to read this. Anyone else ever read this?)
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,965
    Hi, Jeff--

    That seems to be the case for responsorial psalms. If spoken, they must match the current lectionary. If sung, they can be taken from any approved translation, even if the "approval" was granted in the past.

    GIRM 61 (US version):

    "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,
    as found either in the Roman Gradual 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."

  • So where, pray tell, does the permission for paraphrases of psalms appear? (ducking)
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,690
    See the earlier thread on translations that remain in use for sung psalms. Ted Marier's introduction in the hymnal has a methodical and detailed explanation of the translations used.
  • dvalerio
    Posts: 341
    The differences between the texts in the Missal and in the 1908 Gradual were explicitly allowed. The latter book says: «So that the true form of chants might be better restored, not a few of them were restored also in what concerns the words, which are alien to the modern Missal. This restoration, having been indulted by the Holy Father himself in an audience granted on March 14, 1906 to his Eminence the Pro-Prefect of this Sacred Congregation...» (Please forgive any inexactitude in the translation.) There has never been any blank permission for using any text whatsoever. Editions of the LU printed before this indult had to mutilate the chants to accomodate current Missal wordings. (There have been threads in this forum on that subject, 1, 2.)
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    Thank you, dvalerio!