Really, Adam? Any empirical evidence for this?

Father, as a professional who has worked in many denominations, I can categorically say, "Yes, there is plenty of evidence!" Catholics are the worst, but that is in part because we have a lot of rules (just as we have many dogmas/doctrines as a part of Tradition). Empirical? No, I haven't done a study. However, in playing over 100 weddings in the past 5-6 years, I can tell you that many times I get calls from frustrated colleagues asking, "Why can't we use that as the responsorial psalm? It is a psalm in the psalter of Breaking Bread/RitualSong/Gather comp/etc." I try to explain the liturgical law (in a positive way: "The Church wants us to have the fruit of the actual scriptural text in worship, yadayada..." 9 times out of 10, it went over as a lead balloon and I was considered to be "too strict".

This is also the case in parish Masses. I was criticized by many in my parish for insisting we use the appointed psalm for each distinct Mass during Christmas and Easter.

People are extremely slipshod in this regard. I can say this as someone with a master's degree where I studied with one of America's most esteemed church musicians all the way down to my experience growing up in small town West Virginia. At one point, I thought, "oh, this is just West Virginia". A substantial amount of time in the Midwest taught me that evidently hillbillies and professionals with upper management jobs in multinational corporations are both likely to care little about if something is actually a psalm suitable for the Liturgy of the Word or not. I know talk is cheap, but I cannot insist enough that when a hymnal committee puts something *in the psalter*, especially in a hymnal published with the approval of the competent ecclesiastical authority in that diocese, then people believe that it is fine.

I can't imagine anyone with significant experience in parish music ministry that has not encountered that, although the situation in Pittsburgh from Fr. Rossini on to yourself has been more uniform than in most diocese (as one can see from the disproportionate number of cathedral musicians who have come from your diocese.)

i agree with jennyH... if its in the hymnal, it is ASSUMED appropriate for the liturgy by almost all DoMs

Father- with respect, I don't quite understand what you're saying- The songs in the psalter section aren't intended to be used as Responsorial Psalms, and it would be presumptuous and uncharitable to assume that GIA wants them to be used that way; except, actually, it's probably fine to use them that way.

The songs in the psalter section aren't intended to be used as Responsorial Psalms, and it would be presumptuous and uncharitable to assume that GIA wants them to be used that way; except, actually, it's probably fine to use them that way.

Adam, I am also scratching my head. It's like, "How dare you even IMPLY that people might think they're OK to use as Resp. Psalm ... but they are, right?"

Father- with respect, I don't quite understand what you're saying- The songs in the psalter section aren't intended to be used as Responsorial Psalms, and it would be presumptuous and uncharitable to assume that GIA wants them to be used that way; except, actually, it's probably fine to use them that way.

Adam, I'm just trying to surface some questions, since a number of people here seem to be interested in this discussion. I didn't intend my recent comments to specifically refer to Worship IV's psalter section, but rather to raise questions about psalm paraphrases and whether they should be actually considered as part of a hymnal (any hymnal) psalter. (And of course, you are correct once again that we don't want to be presumptuous and uncharitable about GIA!)

STTL is not an authoritative document of the Holy See, and cannot be used to change, supercede or ignore what is in the GIRM.

Francis, I know that the status of STTL as an authoritative document has been discussed in this forum in depth in the past. However, according to its front matter, STTL "was approved for publication by the full body of bishops at its November 2007 General Meeting."

I'm not aware of any parts of STTL that "change, supercede or ignore what is in the GIRM." If that were the case, I would think that Rome would have intervened by now.

Fr Jim:

Then you are clear about the status of STTL. It is simply a recommendation and nothing more. The GIRM states the rule succinctly:

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

Can you provide us with documentation that allows a metrical hymn or paraphrase to replace the approved Lectionary versions?

Why is this so objectionable to people?

From my reading of the forum entries, most are not in favor of this.

To those who are, please post a recording of your choir singing SATB last week. The microphone should not be in the choir loft, but in the pews, so we can hear how it sounds to have the congregation sing SATB parts.

Let's hear it, so we can evaluate it!

P.S. I, myself, already know how it sounds, which is precisely why I am not in favor of it, except at specialized choir schools and the like. But I am giving those who advocate this practice an opportunity to show us how it sounds.

For what I can find, a metrical psalm is set in rhyming verse in a fixed meter.

"Shepherd me, O God" does not rhyme and it does not have a consistent meter across the verses, so it doesn't appear to be a metrical psalm.

Father Jim said:

I'm not aware of any parts of STTL that "change, supercede or ignore what is in the GIRM." If that were the case, I would think that Rome would have intervened by now.

Rome did ask the USCCB to amend STTL in regard to the Agnus Dei. See:

http://www.usccb.org/about/divine-worship/newsletter/upload/newsletter-2012-08-and-09.pdf

To my mind, this actually lends more authority to the document. Rome has reviewed it, and asked for one change.

For all the people who have sat back and said, "If Benedict wanted the music improved, he'd do something about it."

It appears that he just did.

Thanks for posting that letter from +Sample. Much of what is contained in there is what I've been trying to tell a lot of priests (and cantors, and choirs) without much success. Then again, I'm not very good at being clear and concise like +Sample, plus I don't hold the authority that he does. Good for him though! I hope the priests in his diocese will pay attention to him.

CMAA Readers might find this as interesting as I did:

First impressions by Aristotle A. Esguerra