there is nothing about that Sunday, in any Lectionary year, that necessarily connects with that psalm text; rather, it is a general seasonal text, and the offertories are ordered as they are based on the order of the psalms.

Tunes can often (not always) have strong associations with their texts. Just a few weeks ago at my parish we sang a hymn whose first line was 'Go make of all disciples' to a tune I have long associated with the text 'The day of resurrection, earth tell it out abroad' (Tune name, Ellacombe, if I recall correctly). The whole time we were singing this hymn, I was thinking, 'but it's not Easter'. Appropriate? I think not.

Some time ago you asked me about the implicit preference suggested by the ordering of options for things like the Entrance, Offertory, and Communion songs in the GIRM. I've just come across something in print that makes this clear:

"A preference for singing many parts of the Mass is expressed in the new Instruction by the introduction of the phrase “is either sung or recited” at the profession of faith (137), the Lamb of God (155), Preface (216), the Kyrie (125) and the Gloria" (from The Theological Vision of Sacrosanctum Conciliumand the Roman Missal, Committee on Divine Worship).

This quotation proves that the preference for singing various parts of the Mass is expressed in the liturgical document in question by the phrase "is either sung or recited." How can a phrase that offers two options be said to express a preference for one over the other? The only possible answer is the order in which they are given. If the preference were for speaking, the document would say "is either spoken or sung."

The same logic can be applied to other options for the Mass. In the case of the processional propers, this is even more clear. Option one is a song that was specifically chosen (or reaffirmed) by the Church for a particular celebration with the reordering of the Graduale Romanum in 1974 (well after the close of the Council). The second option is a chant from a book called the Graduale Simplex. That this book is a "simpler" alternative to the preferred first choice is clear from both title and the inscription "for use in smaller churches." The third option allows for liturgical chant that is not proper to the Mass itself (examples would include Office antiphons, liturgical hymns, and proper chants from other Mass formularies) but is nonetheless suitable for divine worship. The forth option, which encompasses the other three, is the least specific, with the only requirement that the selection be "appropriate" (and, of course, approved by the local authority).

Given the arrangement of the processional options from the most specific (and therefore most appropriate) to the least specific, and the affirmation by the CDW of the explicit preference made by the ordering in options in the GIRM, I can see no other reading than that the proper of the Mass is the first choice, and that devotional hymns and other religious music foreign to the liturgy are permitted only when necessary as a last choice. Since these revisions to the Missal came about as a result of the Second Vatican Council and are fully in line with its spirit, and since the current GIRM reaffirms the importance of the participation of the congregation, one can conclude that the congregation participates most fully when the preferred options are followed.