Glory & Praise Responsorial Psalms may not be used at Mass (Letter from Secretariat & OCP)
  • SanAntonioCath
    Since October, I have been corresponding with the USCCB Secretariat of Divine Worship regarding the 100+ pages of Responsorial Psalms found in the 2004 Glory & Praise Hymnal. These Psalms radically change the official texts, yet are explicitly recommended for use in the liturgy (e.g. see page 917 of the Glory & Praise).

    Oregon Catholic Press has confirmed that they do not have approval from the Bishop, and cannot be used during the Mass:

    Letter from OCP Publications

    However, once you read that letter, you will see that OCP still claims these Psalms can be used during other parts of the Mass:

    Although these Responsorial Psalms cannot be used in the way the book specifically claims (for the Responsorial Psalm during the Catholic Mass), "the paraphrased settings of Psalm texts can be used in other parts of the Mass, e.g., at Preparation of the Gifts, Communion Procession, and/or Closing. "

    I don't see how this is tenable. How can they used at Communion, since they lack approval? The GIRM says Communion songs must be approved: (4) some other suitable liturgical chant (cf. no. 86) approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop.
  • benedictgal
    This might actually be something that the Congregation for Divine Worship can (and probably should) investigate. Whenever I have had conversations with either the OCP editorial staff or one of their composers, they are quick to point out that Cardinal Leveda is on their board. However, that does not necessarily mean that everything the publishing house does is kosher. Your posting proves just that.

    Now, regarding the issue of using them in other parts of the Mass, I am leery about that in the sense that the Glory and Praise psalms tend to paraphrase the text. While one can say that we do use psalms (through the SEP), these are actually part of the Roman ritual. This is just another example of OCP still trying to promote itself.
  • Jeffrey Coggins
    By OCP:
    "To clarify, the paraphrased settings of Psalm texts can be used in other parts of the Mass, e.g., at Preparation of the Gifts, Communion Procession, and/or Closing."


    Did they not notice that in GIRM, those parts of the Mass still require settings to be approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop?

    And what's up with that last paragraph?

    "It is somewhat interesting that this approval process only seems to apply to musical settings published by legitimate liturgical publishers. If aspiring composers self-publishes their work, it is subject to no ecclesiastical review process."
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Smoke-screen - and I'm not talking incense here - just incensed!
  • chonakchonak
    I think I understand OCP's rationale. It's not surprising. They mention three cases: Preparation of the Gifts, Communion, and "Closing".

    The "Closing" is an easy case: after the Mass has ended, there are no restrictions on music.

    For the other two cases: OCP is suggesting that people treat the paraphrased psalms as if they were any other modern song published in OCP's book. The book does have ecclesiastical approval, and OCP probably figures that any old song in it is fair game for use at the Offertory or Communion. If "You Are Mine" is acceptable for use at Communion, why not some psalm paraphrase?
  • Ioannes Andreades
    Fascinating. I wonder whether the same thing can be said about the psalms sections in other OCP publications, e.g. Heritage Missal.
  • SanAntonioCath
    @chonak: but that is just it. The book does not have ecclesiastical approval. The Secretariat has said the USCCB approval in the front does not apply to any of the music, songs, paraphrased psalms, etc.
  • chonakchonak
    How curious: no "ecclesiastical approbation" stated in the hymnal? OCP has been getting that approval (from the Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon) for its missal booklets and its annual "Music Issue" for years.

    As a footnote, the original "Glory & Praise" books were published from 1977 to 1982 by North American Liturgy Resources in Arizona, and at least the first volume had an imprimatur from the bishop of Phoenix. I have the guitar accompaniments if anyone needs them :-) .
  • Charles in CenCACharles in CenCA
    Y'all have not been paying attention to the old Californian whose been to Portland and seen things up close and personal, and has some personal friends getting their paychecks from OCP. I did a fairly thorough forensic set of premises about the economy of LIC enterprise (Liturgical Industrial Complexes) a while back.
    There is, whether absolutist, empirical plaintiffs admit or not, a well-oiled and cushioned relationship between the See of Portland and the Oregon Catholic Truth and Tract Society that JT called out as "the hidden hand" a couple of years ago. As I said, Abp. Vlazny has an article under his authorship in the Lenten periodical. Appearances are like "style." And we live in a time where style trumps substance; get over it.
    I, for one, appreciate SanAntonioCath's efforts to clarify and receive (OMGosh) a response from USCCB that the OCP psalter ain't a psalter. Good. But, now what? Or more to the point, so what? This notice in this forum's gonna hit the front pages of what, either of the NCR's, the New Liturgical Movement, NPM's Pastoral Music?
    And don't take the positive step of relegating OCP's psalter to the option four status as being a significant seismic shift in St. Normal's ordo planning, even if they actually used that psalter over Alstott. If all the shot-callers in the USofA stopped using "Shepherd me, O God" as the default psalm the two Sundays it shows up in the lectionary, doesn't indicate any harbinger of the fall of BREAKING BREAD/MUSIC ISSUE as the go-to pulp worship aide that pastors choose out of simple convenience.
    Our job is to simultaneously get OCP's attention that the paradigm is shifting and they'd be wise to get on board sooner than later, and to learn how to shift our pastors' attention towards other means of worthier product that's, uh, gratis and open sourced and, ahem, superior. If parishes after parishes start cancelling LIC's subscriptions, you don't think that the Bari Columbari's (a good man) and John Limb's (another one) or whomever's replaced Bob Batastini at GIA (another good guy) are gonna notice?
    It's a horserace. We need to keep training thoroughbreds. End of story.
    Thanked by 1Jeffrey Quick
  • SanAntonioCath
    "But, now what? Or more to the point, so what?"

    I feel that OCP has an obligation to let people know that their Responsorial psalms cannot be used in Mass. They were willing to admit this by E-mail, but the book itself says otherwise. And, I have to agree with Jeffrey Coggins. I cannot see how these psalms can be used "in other parts of the Mass." Except, of course, after Mass.

    But let's face it. The book itself claims they can be used as the Responsorial psalm ... and recommends it ... against the wishes of the GIRM and USCCB Secretariat. I fear that many will simply do as the Glory & Praise says, without even realizing the lie.
  • Jeffrey Coggins
    Unfortunately, I think some people still do music that they realize they shouldn't do at Mass - because it makes them "feel good".
Add a Comment