Does anyone else feel it that way as well?

I can't remember. At that point, I'm spacing out and keeping my head down as the lady warbles it with vibrato thick as cheese and doing the capital "T" pose. :)

@musicman923: I am happy that you and your parish are using responsorial psalm settings from the lectionary sections of Gather 3 and Worship IV and set to Guimont and Gelineau tones, with psalm texts from The Revised Grail Psalms.

Please allow me to address a few inaccuracies in what you wrote, since I do not think it is ever proper or ethical to attempt to persuade a parish to adopt a new approach to liturgical music if it is not based on the facts and on liturgical law. And the fact is this: The Revised Grail Psalms has been approved for liturgical use in the USA by the USCCB and confirmed by the Apostolic See, but it has not yet been mandated for use in the USA. In other words, it may be used now, but it does not have to be used until revised liturgical books (particularly the Lectionary for Mass) that include that psalm translation are published for the USA.

That accounts for why publications from OCP and WLP and some newly-published hymnals legitimately still use the psalm translation from the New American Bible. That translation may continue to be used until revised liturgical books that incorporate The Revised Grail Psalms are published for the USA.

GIA chose to use The Revised Grail Psalms in its four new hymnals now, because it could and so that those hymnals would not become obsolete in, say, five years when a new Lectionary for Mass using that translation may possibly be published. Missalette publishers do not have to worry about obsolescence, since their participation aids are only intended for a few months' or, at most, a year's use.

A second inaccuracy in what you wrote is your implication that the particular responsorial psalm appointed by The Lectionary for Mass for a particular day is the only legitimate choice available. There are also seasonal responsorial psalms given by the same Lectionary for Mass. And the last paragraph of no. 61 of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal gives quite a number of other options for the responsorial psalm, starting with the Latin chant “Responsorial Gradual” (what a strange neologism!) from the Graduale Romanum. One of those options is “Psalms arranged in metrical form.” Such psalms, of course, are not going to be 100% “translations,” since some paraphrasing is going to be necessary just to get the text into a metrical form.

As to your specific reference to psalms by Haugen and Haas from the GIA “Celebration” series that appear in Worship IV, some here on the forum may be interested in knowing that there are 13 such psalms and one canticle (Magnificat – the “Holy Is Your Name” setting by Haas). Personally I am not a great fan of these settings being used for the responsorial psalm, but, at the same time, I do not believe that the great latitude offered by GIRM, no. 61, rules out such use. And there are numerous other uses for these settings in both liturgical and devotional services - justifying their inclusion in Worship IV. Finally, the verses to these psalm settings are through-composed, so the texts from The Revised Grail Psalms could not be substituted.

Thank you, Andrew, for adding that the wording of GIRM no. 61 that I quoted is that for the dioceses of he USA only.

As to "responsorium graduale," I believe it is better to translate the term as "the Gradual responsory" or "the Gradual response." The adjective "responsorial," since it is so often used in "responsorial psalm," may lead some to think that this "responsorial gradual" has a refrain/antiphon that the entire assembly sings between psalm verses - which, of course, it does not.

new psalms translations came out

The psalms translations never changed. Just the Order of Mass and the Antiphons and prayers.

[The RGP] had already been adopted for the Office in certain countries (notably in an edition of the LOTH published in the wake of the synod for Africa).

It is valid for use in the Office in the US too, as the decree allowing it for use at Mass, more specifically allowed it for use in all liturgy in the US.

Songs or hymns may not be used in place of the Responsorial Psalm.

You know how sometimes, usually during the Easter season, the psalm has the refrain, or "Alleluia"? Well, when that happens, would it be fine to use a Gospel acclamation setting (with chanted verse), and then use the chant mode of the verse, to fit the verses of the psalm?

In some H&H settings that I have examined, the text is so remote from the orginal psalm text that it ought to be described as a song 'based on' the psalm, not a 'metrical paraphrase.'

Fr. Krisman - "Shepherd Me, O God" seems pretty remote from the source. I program it occasionally for Communion but would never use it for the RP.

"Shepherd Me, O God" seems pretty remote from the source.

That seems to be a fair observation. The refrain in particular departs from a literal translation of the first lines of Psalm 23. And H's verse 1 changes the Shepherd's action of leading and providing rest to "I rest... I walk." And H's verse 2 has "sing the music of your name."

How about Haas' psalm 138' "The Fragrance of Christ" - correct me if I'm wrong, but that refrain seems made up.

Only the second half is "made up."

"Let my prayer be directed as incense in thy sight; the lifting up of my hands, as evening sacrifice."
-Psalm 141(140):2 (DR)

Good song, but not a good responsorial Psalm.

One of my favorite contemporary songs to program for communion is Haas' Holy is Your Name - but alas it seems to me a remote paraphrase of the Magnificat.

Agree. Good piece. But not a Magnificat, in the liturgical sense. (That is, don't use it at Evening Prayer.) I use it as a congregational hymn (Communion, usually) and occasionally as a choir piece. (The refrain is gorgeous unaccompanied.)

You should avoid it in congregations with a large Irish population- the tune is a secular Irish folk song (Wild Mountain Thyme) and you probably don't want people noticing that fact.

Why it was chosen as the "primary" response for that setting when two other antiphons that appear in the Sunday lectionary were also available, I don't know ("In the sight of the angels, I will sing your praises, Lord." and "Lord, on the day I called for help, you answered me.").

Both of those are included as optional refrains for that particular piece of music. I doubt that the fact they were numbered 1, 2, and 3, and that the Fragrance one is listed first in the score is indicative of anything other than David Haas likes it better personally. (Also, it's a more evocative title, which is good for business.)