• Ronald Herzog, Bishop of Alexandria, LA:

    I am happy to inform you that the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has granted the recognitio for the Revised Grail Psalter by the Monks of Conception Abbey for liturgical use in the Dioceses of the United States, which has been approved by the Latin Church members of the USCCB in November, 2008.

    The recognitio, dated March 19, 2010, indicates that the Revised Grail Psalter is the translation of the Psalms to be implemented in all future editions of liturgical books in the Dioceses of the United States. While it will be some time before new editions of affected texts are published, especially the Lectionary for Mass, the Revised Grail Psalter is now considered approved for liturgical use within the liturgy. While the New American Bible translation of the Psalms as contained in the Lectionary remains the official translation of the responsorial Psalms to be included in hymnals, and seasonal and annual participation aids, composers of liturgical music can use the text of the Revised Grail Psalter especially in preparing arrangements of Psalms for the Lectionary for use at Mass.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,470
    This looks like news, Noel; I don't see it anywhere else on the web. Where did you find this out?
  • Scott R. Knitter, posting to Anglican-Music:


    http://www.praytellblog.com/
  • Paul Inwood responds:

    "Nothing on the GIA website yet, but some of us have had the text for several months now. A lot is the same as existing Grail, but a proportion of changes, too, not all of which will be easy to work with."

    A request for access was made last year and denied as no one was getting them until approval. Well, it appears no one did not include Inwood and others...

    Life just isn't fair, is it. It's not like we are all involved in the life of the church or anything....
  • The same notice was made to the Notre Dame Liturgy Network this afternoon also.

    What I'd love to know is why it took from March 19 until today for this news to make it from the Vatican to the US...

    Regarding copies being in the wild early, all Bishops get a copy of all texts that they are going to vote on, and then typically share that with their Office of Worship, and anyone else they want to--as they are Bishops. The Office of Worship is often asked by the Bishop to prepare comments and questions to assist him in preparing for the debate/discussion/voting at the national meetings. As Paul is the director of liturgy for his diocese, I can very logically see why he would have a copy of the text.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,470
    For a curial decision, three weeks is not particularly slow communication.

    Incidentally, this decision isn't the final release for GIA to publish the text, as they have to get an imprimatur from their local bishop (Cdl. George, I assume). Back to waiting.
  • G
    Posts: 1,391
    A request for access was made last year and denied as no one was getting them until approval. Well, it appears no one did not include Inwood and others...

    I had understood that anyone who requested it from the BCL was given a password to access the texts on the ICEL site, they were just forbidden to disseminate them.
    Was I misinformed?

    (Save the Liturgy, Save the World)
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,470
    The Roman Missal texts are on ICEL's site, but this is another case. The Revised Grail Psalter was produced by Conception Abbey, and the rights are controlled by GIA.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,187
    Please correct me if wrong, but I believe sung psalmody (at this point in time) is not stipulated to a single translation. I often use the original Grail for chanted psalms.
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    I still stand in amazement that no one in authority seems to understand the manifestly egregious implications of imposing a Psalter on the English-speaking liturgical world that will be entirely and exclusively controlled by a single pro-profit company (GIA) that has no ecclesiastical status at all and yet faces no limits on its discretion as regards mandatory payments, refusals, collections, terms, or anything else.

    Many people I've talked to have said that the Revised Grail will simply go unused in most places - that this action means the effective decentralization of Psalm texts. Composers and parishes of all sorts will avoid the "Psalm tax" by using the hundreds of beautiful translations in the public domain. Remember that only a few years ago, most people didn't have instant access to alternatives. Now everything will be MORE accessible than the new new new official translation which is locked behind its IP prison walls of monopolistic control and rent extraction. That is not a recipe for success.
  • G
    Posts: 1,391
    Of course, Chonak, I wasn't thinking, thanks.

    (Save the Liturgy, Save the World)
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,206
    Francis.

    Yes, per GIRM 61 as adapted in the US, there are more possibilities for sung psalms than recited psalms. According to Paul Ford's comment on a related thread at Pray Tell, USCCB authorization in 1968 is expansive.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,470
    Just to back away a bit from what Jeffrey wrote: I think the choice of the RGP was not a universal for the English-speaking world, but just a US decision. Of course, other countries may adopt that translation too.

    Public domain psalms are probably OK in the parts of Mass where "a suitable song" is permitted; but if they lack an imprimatur, they probably are not licit for use in the Responsorial Psalm.
  • G
    Posts: 1,391
    I think the choice of the RGP was not a universal for the English-speaking world, but just a US decision. Of course, other countries may adopt that translation too.
    Inwood is in some British diocese, is he not?

    (Save the Liturgy, Save the World)
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,470
    Yes, but I'm not surprised if he follows US developments too. He's writing for both markets.
  • It's intended for use beyond the US... (CARG=Conception Abbey Revised Grail)

    The new CARG Psalter has already been adopted by the bishops’ conferences engaged in the International Commission for the Preparation of an English-Language Lectionary (ICPEL), representing Australia, England and Wales, Scotland, Ireland, and New Zealand. Archbishop Mark Coleridge of Canberra-Goulburn is chairman of ICPEL, and Father Henry Wansbrough, OSB, of Ampelforth Abbey, is its secretary; both were involved with Conception Abbey in producing the new Psalter. (ICPEL hopes to produce a uniform Lectionary that would be used in all their countries.)

    The US bishops are also in the process of revising the Lectionary for Mass. Approving a good new liturgical Psalter would be a welcome step in the right direction.


    Quote from http://www.adoremus.org/1108Psalter.html

    It was prepared, like the new translation of the Roman Missal, in response to Liturgiam authenticam. It would appear that there is a desire for all English speaking countries share common liturgical texts.
  • Erik P
    Posts: 152
    "He's writing for both markets."

    It's a shame that he considers the Church a marketplace, not a religion.
  • G
    Posts: 1,391
    This, from Bob Batastini commenting at PrayTell
    Allow me to speak for GIA. Firstly, we have not been officially informed. Secondly, however, we do know that the recognitio included several hundred alterations. As soon as we receive them, introduce them into the text, proofread, etc., the text will be released. It took the Vatican two years to process the recognitio. It’ll take GIA at least a week or so. Hang in there.

    "It's a shame that he considers the Church a marketplace, not a religion."

    There is no indication that he does.
    (Save the Liturgy, Save the World)
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,470
    Those were my words, Erik, not his. I apologize for any misunderstanding they caused.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,187
    Jeff

    I think my mind is failing. Can you explain the point you are making? It is not obvious to me. Thanks.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    Sure, Francis. But give me a little time to make it more clear.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    OK, Francis, it has been updated a bit.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,187
    Jeff

    That is exactly my thinking. And here is the problem with that thinking. What exactly constitutes permission? And, what "other" musical settings are acceptable? And is another musical setting taking into account only those that use approved texts? All seems very gray to me. ...and I am tired of gray! I want black and red!

    In other words I spend far too much time gathering appropriately approved resources that could be spent on actually practicing and executing them well.

    Put succinctly, too much is left to whim and chance.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,187
    Jeff

    which version of the psalms do use to compose? Aristotle uses the NAB for his settings to the tones.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    I think 100% of Chabanel composers use the NAB right now.
  • Why is this so confusing?

    It's a conspiracy.

    One that results in making it possible for people with absolutely no background and understanding of the Catholic church and its rich liturgy to be hired and waltz into a Catholic Church as a Director of Music. Can you sing a melody? Play a piano....even better!

    The big guys have encouraged the confusion and made big bucks off it. Anyone, literally anyone, can easily pick music out for a Mass using the easy guides to liturgy that are mailed out to people who purchase their mass guides from the publisher. Like a chinese restaurant menu, pick one form column one and one from column two.

    Get rid of the confusion with clear, straightforward guides by the USCCB and simple online access to the correct texts...that is all that it would take.

    The EF is relatively easy to run when you have a priest who is savvy. But the OF? it's almost impossible to understand what to do and where to find it. While Grail Psalms are to be read, how many parishes that just bought Journey Songs with the readings are going to do anything but use them for the next 15 years? And we can be sure there will be a rule that permits this.

    If the USCCB had any interest in improving music they would offer the readings daily with full english propers and Gospel Acclamation text.

    They don't. Why not? They have obviously been told not to....or been told that it is not necessary.

    Who are the big guys? OCP, GIA...or the Bishops....or both? Of course the head of OCP IS part of the USCCB.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,187
    God is purging His church. Watch ... And pray.
  • BachLover2BachLover2
    Posts: 331
    jerry galipeau, head of wlp productions, is blogging on this very topic. somebody who knows how to make a link should link this: http://gottasinggottapray.blogspot.com/2010/04/revised-grail-psalms-i-am-befuddled.html
  • Jeffrey's head will be spinning after reading Dr. Jerry's post. We're deep into the rabbit hole now, between Dr. Galipeau and Fr. Ruff's latest offering on the subject.
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    it's a wonderful wonderful wonderful thing. Thrills me!