Altering Responsorial Psalm

[muledog]

At Mass today, the Cantor began the Responsorial Psalm by singing, “If today you hear GOD’s voice, harden not your hearts.” As memory serves, the correct reading should be “If today you hear HIS voice, harden not your hearts.”

I asked the Cantor after Mass about this, and she said this was an approved reading of the Resp. Ps. When I went to the USCCB website, the correct reading is rendered as HIS and not GOD’s.

Was the cantor within his/her rights to change this word? I say “no”, that this is a blatent attempt to add “inclusive language” into the liturgy that is not within the bounds of current liturgical norms.

 

[David_Zampino]

muledog:

At Mass today, the Cantor began the Responsorial Psalm by singing, “If today you hear GOD’s voice, harden not your hearts.” As memory serves, the correct reading should be “If today you hear HIS voice, harden not your hearts.”

I asked the Cantor after Mass about this, and she said this was an approved reading of the Resp. Ps. When I went to the USCCB website, the correct reading is rendered as HIS and not GOD’s.

Was the cantor within his/her rights to change this word? I say “no”, that this is a blatent attempt to add “inclusive language” into the liturgy that is not within the bounds of current liturgical norms.

I agree with you. I can’t stand this stuff.

Blessings,

 

[Ace86]

You are probably right. I don’t think inclusive language does anyone any good. I don’t think a cantor or anyone else has any right to change the WORD OF GOD. The US bishops need to battle inclusive language.

 

[G_S]

Although such an ad libitum altering is disallowed, seasonal responsorial psalms may replace the one in the missalette for a particular Sunday. Also, in paschaltide, and when otherwise indicated, an alleluia may be used as the response.

 

[SMHW]

Chances are it was not the cantor who was personally attempting to alter any text. It was probably the text in the musical score she was using. Unless the cantor is the music director or parish liturgist (who could be expected to worry about inclusive language) it’s pretty much her job to just sing what is written in the music with which she is provided.

 

[msproule]

muledog:

At Mass today, the Cantor began the Responsorial Psalm by singing, “If today you hear GOD’s voice, harden not your hearts.” As memory serves, the correct reading should be “If today you hear HIS voice, harden not your hearts.”

I experienced the same thing yesterday.

However, the regular priest was out of town so there were far fewer abuses than on a normal Sunday (thanks to a wonderful visiting priest) so I did not complain about this one!

 

[St.BJLabre]

At a Church I used to attend, they changed everything to make it more PC…

For example:

Priest: Let us give thanks to the Lord our God
Congregation: It is right to give GOD thanks and praise

During the creed: Through him all things were made. For us (instead of for “us men”) and for our salvation he came down from heaven

Sometimes would change the readings to be more PC: “make you fishers of men and women”

Everyone in the entire congregation would hold hands during the Our Father

The priest would come off the altar to give the homily and would crack jokes at the end of mass

Its not that I think God is actually a man or that Jesus didn’t call the disciples to be fishers of both men and women, but it is just the principle of altering God’s word and the mass that makes me uncomfortable… I changed parishes pretty quickly, especially after I found out the priest was encouraging homosexual relationships

 

[MusicMan]

St.BJLabre:

At a Church I used to attend, they changed everything to make it more PC…

For example:

Priest: Let us give thanks to the Lord our God
Congregation: It is right to give GOD thanks and praise

During the creed: Through him all things were made. For us (instead of for “us men”) and for our salvation he came down from heaven

OK, these two are understandable. An abuse of the Mass, but understandable.

What gets me is the people’s response to the “Pray, brethern…”

“May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of his name, for our good, and the good of all his Church.”

The PC version goes as follows… “May the Lord accept the sacrifice your hands for the praise and glory of God’s name, for our good, and the good of all God’s Church.”

Abuse aside, what bothers me is that the Church was established by Jesus, who was male. Therefore the last “his” refers to Jesus, not God. Jesus was male, so “his” is the appropriate pronoun. Isn’t the sacrifice at the priest’s hands the sacrifice of Jesus, and we’re resacrificing him for the praise and glory of his name? So the first “his” also refers back to Jesus, a male. An example of PC gone to far.

I also like the other PC version that ends, “… and the good of all Christ’s Chuch.” Again, Jesus Christ was male. Therefore, there’s nothing wrong with using the “his” pronoun.