Hmmm ... that's odd. I cannot locate the article. It was basically a piece by Jeffrey Tucker claiming that the new translation of the antiphons is based on the Revised Grail.

I don't know if this has been spoken of elsewhere, but the GIRM speaks about the lectionary of which there are official translations. It would follow that it also speaks about the Graduale in Latin, not a translation of it, because there is no official translation of it. Or, has there been an official translation of it, as found in the 1965 provisional Missal? One has to remember that in chant there have often been a textual adjustments, especially in the Offertories. Moreover, different chant can originate from different Latin psalters for its text, sometimes having different meanings, some pretty nuanced.

Perhaps the USCCB should be asked to provide us with an official English translation of the Gradaule Romanum, but then I hesitate, considering that their new official Bible translation (NABRE) may be great for ecumenism (i.e. Liberal Protestantism) but horrendous for traditional Catholics. They could translate "Ecce virgo concipiet..." to "the young woman, pregnant and about to bear a son....", totally destroying the doctrinal intent of the Gregorian text, which, by the way, originates in the Septuagint.

This issue is going beyond the initial topic of the Sequence, yet it is related. How may hymnals have an official translation of the Sequence? It is the USCCB, or the local ordinary, that is responsible for providing the official translations, the former for national distribution, the latter, for the particular diocese. The USCCB has been getting away with not doing their job, that is, not following the precise instructions in the GIRM, in providing a national Catholic hymnal for USA. (I suppose there is too much invested money involved here.) Does that mean the faithful can similarly ignore the GIRM with regards to an official English translations of the Propers and the Sequence?