psalm singing

[benedictgal]

Not the same thing.

No tone.

Just not the same thing. I plan liturgies. I talk with my priests. I work hard. I also am the musician.

There’s more to it. Not the same thing.

I also wrote the General Intercessions, complied the worship aides (English and Spanish), worked with the lectors, get everyone on the same page and made sure that the music was in order. And, it was not just one language, another was involved and that carried its own set of issues. All my rector, or, in some cases, the bishop, had to do was step into his vestments and celebrate the Mass.

Yes, I know that there is more to it. I was exhausted week in and week out. Don’t think that others work harder than you do or do less than you do. From my end, there is more to it, not just being a musician.

There is also a lot of quality control. That is what I am getting at regarding the ilicit psalms being used. There has to be a stop-gap mechanism. Even the publishing house needs to be held accountable. They are the ones who market the stuff. Unfortunately, there are some who will just assume that everythinig is okay ahd not challenge what is put forth in front of them. Even worse will be those who knowingly realize that the publishing house is in violation of the norms and will still choose to use the ilicit stuff anyway. I believe that this is the point that pnewton was trying to make before he was mischaracterized. Bear in mind that willfully going against the norms that the Church dictates is wrong and is a sin. Ascenting to such action makes the person just as culpable.

Responsible folks in charge of planning liturgies, whether they be Vespers or full-blown diocesan Masses need to be up on the authoritative documents of the Church and make sure that what is set forth before them is fitting for use. The buck has to stop with someone, since, obviously, it is not happening wth the publishing company.

 

[agapewolf]

I also wrote the General Intercessions, complied the worship aides (English and Spanish), worked with the lectors, get everyone on the same page and made sure that the music was in order. And, it was not just one language, another was involved and that carried its own set of issues. All my rector, or, in some cases, the bishop, had to do was step into his vestments and celebrate the Mass.

Yes, I know that there is more to it. I was exhausted week in and week out. Don’t think that others work harder than you do or do less than you do. From my end, there is more to it, not just being a musician.

There is also a lot of quality control. That is what I am getting at regarding the ilicit psalms being used. There has to be a stop-gap mechanism. Even the publishing house needs to be held accountable. They are the ones who market the stuff. Unfortunately, there are some who will just assume that everythinig is okay ahd not challenge what is put forth in front of them. Even worse will be those who knowingly realize that the publishing house is in violation of the norms and will still choose to use the ilicit stuff anyway. I believe that this is the point that pnewton was trying to make before he was mischaracterized. Bear in mind that willfully going against the norms that the Church dictates is wrong and is a sin. Ascenting to such action makes the person just as culpable.

Responsible folks in charge of planning liturgies, whether they be Vespers or full-blown diocesan Masses need to be up on the authoritative documents of the Church and make sure that what is set forth before them is fitting for use. The buck has to stop with someone, since, obviously, it is not happening wth the publishing company.

ok, but there really is more to it being a musician. I’ve done all the things you listed. That was the easy part.

And there was no “mischaracterization”. There was a direct quote of what was said. “joining in the singer’s sin”. This has since been corrected, but the original stood and needed to be talked about…for the very basic idea that there is MORE to it being a musician.

I don’t understand what is so offensive about it. It just is.

 

[Phemie]

Gee, then what do you make of this?

God, come to my assistance.
- Lord, make haste to help me.

This isn’t ambiguous, is it?

No, in this case it isn’t because the English is a direct translation from the Latin, but based on what I read below I think Rome would agree with the OP.

The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, in its 2002 Observations on the English-language Translation of the Roman Missal (the translation it had just rejected) had this to say about something we often hear said in parishes today:

C. After the Orate, fratres, the people’s response Suscipiat Dominus sacrificium de manibus tuis . . . has been distorted, apparently for purposes of “inclusive language”: “May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of God’s name, for our good, and the good of all the Church.” The insertion of the possessive God’s gives the impression that the Lord who accepts the sacrifice is different from God whose name is glorified by it…

 

[InspiritCarol]

Might I point out that it seems strange to have such harsh bickering about details when it seems all (or almost all) agree that gender-neutralizing God is sick and wrong?

It goes: Sing to the Lord a new song, for He has done marvelous (wonderful) deeds.

Not only is it twisted to go to the extreme of changing Holy Scripture, but it doesn’t even flow well. It’s awkward to sing that way and it’s really poor grammar. It’s like saying: Joe went to Joe’s car. How stupid does that sound? Joe went to his car.

I appreciate the heads-up about OCP. I’ve been a bit lax in my oversight and must admit a few things have slipped past me. There was a great article in “This Rock” about being more vigilant regarding the liturgical accuracy of the music we put forth. I can’t say I agree entirely with the writer’s accusations regarding some of the songs he found issue with, but the bottom line is we need to always be vigilant and prayerful in our roles in the mass; whatever they may be.