New Psalms are coming our way, both for the liturgy of the hours and the celebration of Mass. (One hopes the celebration of other rites as well–they always seem to overlook funerals, RCIA, baptisms, Eucharistic worship ouitside of Mass, etc..) The USCCB voted 203-5 to endorse the Revised Grail Psalter above the Revised New American Bible Psalms for liturgical use.

We’ll likely see a tightening up of the texts of psalmody over the next generation or so: more use of the official psalms, fewer paraphrases, and more for the coffers of GIA, I presume, who has had exclusive publishing and distribution rights in the US.

About catholicsensibility

Todd lives in the Pacific Northwest, serving a Catholic parish as a lay minister.
This entry was posted in Liturgy. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Grail

  1. Chase says:

    Will this require yet another edition of the Lectionary? I’ve also heard that the Old Testament of the NAB is currently undergoing a re-translation. At this rate, Catholic Book Publishing will be making a fortune!

  2. Todd says:

    Yep. A new Lectionary is getting approved bit by bit anyway. Another few years.

  3. Liam says:

    Apparently, according to the discussion over at NLM, GIA has agreed to only charge a “reasonable fee” – it would be far better if the episcopal conferences commissioned their translations under creative commons licenses. They need to move into the 21st century and Vatican II in that regard (Vatican II, in the sense of encouraging competent laity to compose vernacular settings, et cet.)

  4. Creative commons must be, and likely will be the future terms that all interested parties should accept. The “Jeffrey’s” have laid all of the scenarios on the table at MSForum as well for months.
    Here’s a simple, just proposal for GIA- if/when their editorial boards that review settings of “their” Psalter texts submitted for publication, distribution and purchase are rejected by GIA, the composer should be pro forma granted “creative commons” for self-distribution. GIA cannot have and eat the cake at once; they know that by hook or crook such settings can find their way into parish use beyond that of the composer. They just made the decision they couldn’t financially support and benefit by rejected settings. Can anyone defend their proprietary right to exclude use of those “official” texts just because their foot was first in the door?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s