Psalms at St Paul's

[underthecountertenor]

I don't know how to operate a lectionary at the best of times but I can find no correlation between Table 4, Psalms in ordinary time (which I assume I am being referred to) and the St Paul's music list for the last few weeks. Not that I disbelieve what you are saying but I just don't know what you're pointing at. Which week are they doing now?

Also, you kind of missed my point - not "which psalms are they singing?" (I can see that quite clearly from the music list) but "why are they singing those psalms?"



I must be very inattentive. Also, I just happened to notice at St Paul's because it was the "wrong" psalm for the day to my mind and I didn't think to check while at others. If W Abbey are the same it begs the same question - why. Perhaps I've been walking round with my eyes closed but I haven't come across this CW lectionary in cathedrals before.

I can think of several cathedrals that use it.

[Pulcinella]

Maybe my reaction is simply down to my irritation with the all-pervasive know-it-all tone of many of the contributors to this forum.....

Of which this, surely, is a prime example:

I can think of several cathedrals that use it.

Choralpete still hasn't had the answer he deserves.
The best I can do is to refer him to the tables in this pdf, which was NOT the top hit when I did the 'oh so funny' Google search.

https://www.churchofengland.org/media/1172724/weekday%20lectionary%202005.pdf

[choralpete]

Choralpete still hasn't had the answer he deserves.
The best I can do is to refer him to the tables in this pdf, which was NOT the top hit when I did the 'oh so funny' Google search.

I don't particularly deserve an answer but it would be nice to get one. For some reason that pdf was the top result in the witty google search for me but it still doesn't tie up with the psalms that they are actually singing down the road in the big church. If anyone can educate me in this regard I'd be grateful, but I'm not optimistic. What a lovely forum!

[Pulcinella]

What a lovely forum!

Meant to say: Welcome aboard.
Hope you stick with us.

PS: I hadn't spotted your reference to 'Table 4' or I would have realised that you'd found the pdf link.

[Chris Watson]

My Oh So Funny Google thing was a deliberately sarcastic reply to what I thought a rather snottily (sp?) phrased message, and was intended merely to point out the CW Lectionary, which is now pretty widely used and not a particularly new thing (a pity, I think - I much prefer the BCP psalms for the day). Specific details about why that psalm was sung that day at St P's are probably best obtained from St P's!

[french frank]

What a lovely forum!

It certainly can be, choralpete, and very informative - also it's much appreciated when new members are given a warm welcome!

[DracoM]

Indeed, FF, and I most heartily endorse the welcome.

[dansoper]

Has anyone pointed out yet that the St Paul's Psalm cycle doesn't match Table 4? Rather, I think St Paul's have their own two-month cycle. St Edmundsbury do too: their cycle was devised by Michael Hampel who is incidentally now at St Paul's.

[Alain Maréchal]

I risk being told to google off, but could anybody tell me why the BCP psalms calendar was in need of revision? It was as good a way of getting through them as any other (unless there is a connotation I, not an Anglican, am unaware of). *

* I have an idea that "of" is an unfortunate word placement, but cannot think where else it ought to be.

[Roger Judd]

Pedants corner ...! Try ... unless there is a connotation of which I, not an Anglican, am unaware. Sorry!
RJ

[jean]

* I have an idea that "of" is an unfortunate word placement, but cannot think where else it ought to be.

Nowhere else; it's perfectly placed.

But I think there should be more than one that.

[Pulcinella]

Nowhere else; it's perfectly placed.

But I think there should be more than one that.

Do you mean 'I think that there should be more than one that' as well, jean?

[Alain Maréchal]

No need for the apology, RJ. I am happy for my English to be corrected. In France it is considered quite permissible to subtly correct the grammar of perfect strangers (and thus put me in my place as a Wallon).

Jean: thank you. I rewrote that phrase at least twice and was never happy with it. I have just realised that "to be unaware of" is, I think, a phrasal verb.

Meanwhile, any answers to #24?

[dansoper]

I'm guessing the main reason for revision from the BCP cycle is to reduce the number of verses per service. There's also the problem that today's choristers will not get to know the morning Psalms as Mattins isn't sung as often, if at all. The St Edmundsbury cycle (and, I guess, the St Paul's one) is actually a 4-month one, ensuring that every Psalm appears at both morning and evening prayer in that period. In my time at St Edmundsbury, I played all but 3 of the Psalms in the entire psalter, so our cycle definitely gave the choristers a knowledge of a wider variety of psalter.

[jean]

Do you mean 'I think that there should be more than one that' as well, jean?

No, because there would only ever be room for one that in my sentence, and whether it's there or not, there's no doubt what sort of that it is.

But in Alain's sentence as written

I have an idea that "of" is an unfortunate word placement,

the 'that' could be either a demonstrative, identifying that 'of' as distinct from 'of's in general; or it could be a conjunction. The reader stops, worries, and the flow of concentration is lost.