which version of the psalms?
  • DrJS
    Posts: 22
    Hi all,
    Which is the correct version of the psalms for Mass? I thought it was the Revised Grail Psalms. I had a parishioner angry with me this weekend because the version of the text I was using did not match what he got from the USCCB website. The USCCB website's readings don't match the Revised Grail Psalms. Are they the original Grail Psalms?
    Is my parishioner just being a curmudgeon?

    Thanks

  • novusgordo
    Posts: 32
    Not familiar with all the minutiae of the USCCB Lectionary and its various editions. What I do know, however, is this: even if this angry parishioner was correct, that doesn't mean that he was in the right. At the very least, charity would demand a broad and generous application of Hanlon's razor.
  • Marc Cerisier
    Posts: 609
    USCCB website uses the NAB psalms. Other translations are also ok for use in the liturgy at the moment.
    Thanked by 2hilluminar LauraKaz
  • DrJS
    Posts: 22
    NAB psalms, thank you.
  • DrJS
    Posts: 22
    Are the NAB psalms, Grail Psalms, Revised Grail Psalms, and Abbey Psalms all approved for use at Mass?
  • Marc Cerisier
    Posts: 609
    Yes—at the moment.
    Thanked by 1DrJS
  • CGM
    Posts: 815
    The USCCB website does not use the current NAB psalms, but an older NAB translation instead. See this discussion:

    As for the psalm verses in the Lectionary, they are taken from the NAB 1970 translation (which in turn is base on the Confraternity version. In fact, the text of all the OT readings in the Lectionary are taken from this translation, with some modifications here and there. See this link for more information.) This accounts for the version Xopheros mentions, "I rejoice because they said to me . . . " which is from the NAB 1970 translation.

    Further, the responses (antiphons, refrains) to the psalms are translated from the Latin, which is the reason they do not always correspond to the same verse if it appears in the psalm verses. The translation of some of these antiphons was changed or modified for the 1998 Lectionary.
  • DCM
    Posts: 101
    The Revised Grail was intended to be the next liturgical psalter ever since it was first voted on in 2008 but it got hung up for one reason after another.
  • StephenMatthew
    Posts: 121
    Abbey Psalms will be what is going in the new Liturgy of the Hours, the Catholic American Bible, and the next US Lectionary edition... but I think somewhere behind the scenes what is being prepared for liturgical use has some edits relative to the current published versions of that translation.

    I think there also exists a textual variation in the responses that traces back to an ICEL version, but don't quote me on that.

    GIRM 61 offers this:

    In the Dioceses of the United States of America, instead of the Psalm assigned in the Lectionary, there may be sung either the Responsorial Gradual from the Graduale Romanum, or the Responsorial Psalm or the Alleluia Psalm from the Graduale Simplex, as described in these books, or an antiphon and Psalm from another collection of Psalms and antiphons, including Psalms arranged in metrical form, providing that they have been approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop. Songs or hymns may not be used in place of the Responsorial Psalm.

    (Bolding is my own, as is the following comment)Note that such approval must be current, so if the local bishop back in 1970 approved something don't assume it necessarily remains approved, your diocese should have a worship, liturgy, or music office that can help clarify. Your pastor may also have preferences / directives... mine is pretty set on using the lectionary wherever possible so that it matches resources in the pews and materials the congregation access at home.
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,693
    Not so much "current" as "not abrogated" when it comes to the USCCB's previous approvals. It's a very practical rule, so that you didn't have to ditch preexisting musical settings using approved texts on the turn of a dime.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,696
    How and where would you discover that a text has been 'abrogated'?
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,693
    Well, this is the USA version of GIRM 61; not England & Wales. Back at the rollout of the revised Missal 15 years ago, Paul Inwood was furious that the USA included such grandfathering for existing *sung* settings (but he was also furious that his settings of superseded text of the Ordinary were not given such treatment; then again, he was still mad that modernized translation of the Our Father in the 1998 Sacramentary did not survive at least in permitted if not required form).

    We've had previous threads on the existing approved translations. Mind you, this won't work for writing new settings - the USCCB has made clear that new settings will have to use the new translations (and, under GIRM 61, spoken recitation will need to follow the new translation).
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 3,713
    Paul Inwood is almost always mad anyway.
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,693
    He was a posie of unhappiness at that time, to be sure.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
Add a Comment