I’m not of the opinion that the Responsorial Psalm is the ideal way to sing the Psalm between the readings. I’m grateful that the GIRM grants permission to use the traditional Gradual with its long melismatic phrases that inspire peace and contemplation.
However, the Responsorial Psalm is very deeply embedded into the practice of ordinary form liturgy today, and it is a reality for most parishes. Given that situation, I like what Arlene Oost-Zinner has done with the text. She provides a simple antiphon in plainsong followed by verses set to Gregorian tones, all of it sung by voices alone without accompaniment. To me, this is just about the best way to make something contemplative and beautiful out of something excessively minimalist. Here is her Psalm for this Sunday, for example.
Her Psalms for the entire three-year cycle can be found at Chabanel Psalms.
To be clear, does the GIRM give permission to use the old Gradual? My understanding was that the permission was to use the CURRENT Gradual (which also has melismas?)
In the US, the pertinent legislation is in GIRM 61, "the following may also be sung in place of the Psalm assigned in the Lectionary for Mass:
– either the proper
– or seasonal antiphon and Psalm from the Lectionary,
as found either in
– the Roman Gradual
– or Simple Gradual
– or in another musical setting;
– or an antiphon and Psalm from another collection of the psalms and antiphons,
– including psalms arranged in metrical form, providing that they have been approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop.
What you can't use are "(s)ongs or hymns."
The old Gradual seems to be covered in option #6.
Arlene's psalms are just fantastic. They're all I use when I have to sub at a Catholic church!
The use of the Gradual does indeed seems to be permitted, but my question is this: since there doesn't seem to be an 'official' English translation of the Gradual, one granted the recognitio from Rome, would that mean that only the Latin text from the Gradual would be licitly permitted for liturgical use?
"(W)ould that mean that only the Latin text from the Gradual would be licitly permitted for liturgical use?"
No. You've got more leeway on the psalm than on practically any available liturgical text. But I suppose the easiest way to go is to use the Latin text of the antiphon and adapt chant tones for the psalm verses in English. You could give those to the people, if they're accustomed to singing psalms in that way.
Todd, that's an interesting point. I've always been a bit confused on the textual demands on the Psalm between readings. Bruce Ford's American Gradual, I believe, has rendered all the Gradual chants in English. Now, here is an underused resource!
Just to clarify, there are two uses of the word "gradual" in this discussion:
1. The book
2. The proper chant between readings
Singing from the book and singing the proper chant are both fully licit.
In Jeffrey's original post, he was referring to #2: "I'm grateful that the GIRM grants permission to use the traditional Gradual with its long melismatic phrases that inspire peace and contemplation." This is option 1 in Todd's listing above.
But there are three currently authorized official books called "the Gradual". The Graduale Romanum of 1962, the Graduale Romanum of 1974 and the Graduale Triplex of 1979.
When someone says "traditional Gradual", I usually think they're referring to the 1962. But if we're talking about the Novus Ordo, it's the 1974/1979 that is being referred to in the GIRM, not the 1962.
Now if a particular text happens to be the same between 62/74/79, use whichever notes you please, but some of the Graduals are different, in text, I believe. If the '62 differs in text from the '74/'79, I don't think you can use that. It's like substituting prayers at low Mass between the two forms because the '62 missal says "Proper of Martyrs" and so does the Novus Ordo.
SJH, again, I believe when Jeffrey wrote "traditional Gradual," he meant the chant, not a specific book.
"The traditional Gradual with its long melismatic phrases." This describes graduals– that is, the pieces of music called graduals– precisely.
That being said, I have no idea what the difference between the two editions of the Roman Gradual might be. The 1979 edition is the essentially the same as the 1970 but includes additional neumes from older manuscripts.