PANEL decisions

[Peter Jones]

It is. M27, page 60!

Oh really? I should have waited to receive my copy. Humble apologies to the editor of the Celebration supplement. My information was taken from the information on the McCrimmon website here:
http://www.mccrimmons.com/uploads/pdf/1875.pdf. This web page is manifestly not up to date and is not giving us the complete picture of the contents.

[NorthernTenor]

By the way.... all three publications (Laudate supplement, Celebration supplement and Glory to God) do show that the Panel permission to publish process really is about the texts of the Missal and not about making musical judgements. Yes, the panel is sometimes making observations about music but these are just that, observations. Musical assessments are being made by editors who, in virtue of their office, cannot be members of the panel.

I beg to differ, on the evidence of the addendum to the Panel's terms of reference (see Appendix I of the Composer' Guide) that insists: "Settings of the acclamations of the assembly in the Eucharistic Prayer should be complete and have a musical integrity." Neither completeness nor "musical integrity" are issues of textual fidelity (the stated purpose of the Process), and while the vagueness of the term "musical integrity" is representative of the sloppy thinking and expression of the Guide, it surely implies musical judgement.

Incidentally, the Guide also appears to take arguable positions on the practical implications of "the full, conscious and active participation of the faithful in the liturgy" that have nothing to do with textual integrity. In the capacity of a Guide, that's fair enough - it presumably reflects the thinking of the Acting Secretary of the Liturgy Office, and I for one have been happy to write a setting that happens to accord with that thinking. As a rule book that drives the Permission to Publish Process, though, it looks like an ultramontane exercise of power: this (however poorly expressed and outside the scope of the Process's stated purpose) is how I believe it should be done, and done it will be.

Given the arrogance of this approach, I suppose it shouldn't surprise me that no provision been made for appeals against the Panel's decisions, despite their being expressly provided for in the terms of reference; or that repeated requests of the Liturgy Office for enlightenment about this are simply ignored. I suspect the Liturgy Office is still reeling from the shock of receiving an appeal that questioned its judgement.

[Peter Jones]

I beg to differ, on the evidence of the addendum to the Panel's terms of reference (see Appendix I of the Composer' Guide) that insists: "Settings of the acclamations of the assembly in the Eucharistic Prayer should be complete and have a musical integrity." Neither completeness nor "musical integrity" are issues of textual fidelity (the stated purpose of the Process), and while the vagueness of the term "musical integrity" is representative of the sloppy thinking and expression of the Guide, it surely implies musical judgement.

Apologies to NT too. "Completeness" and "musical integrity" are indeed matters of policy of our Bishops' Liturgy Office, going beyond a simple scrutiny of textual fidelity and appropriate use of the texts. Would that there was a level playing field about these matters agreed among all participating English-speaking Bishops' Conferences worldwide. (And given the maverick approach of one bishop in Scotland, reported earlier in this thread, does anyone know what processes are in place north of the border now?)

……or that repeated requests of the Liturgy Office for enlightenment about this are simply ignored……

I think that the Liturgy Office qua Liturgy Office might be just as frustrated as you NT, given that, in my experience, a Bishop can take up to three years to reply to a letter. (Not my Bishop, I hasten to add!)

[NorthernTenor]

……or that repeated requests of the Liturgy Office for enlightenment about this are simply ignored……

I think that the Liturgy Office qua Liturgy Office might be just as frustrated as you NT, given that, in my experience, a Bishop can take up to three years to reply to a letter. (Not my Bishop, I hasten to add!)

It would be good to know that the Liturgy Office as such is as frustrated as me, Fr. Peter, but the absence of even a "still waiting" communication means that I don't know that. Unfortunately, the admitted failure to think about the detail of an appeals process until an appeal was received, and the failure to provide documentation as promised (or even an apology for the delay) leaves me inclined to suspect that at least part of the problem lies within the Liturgy Office itself. I'm afraid the inchoate nature of the Guide and the Process reinforce that impression.

Would that there was a level playing field about these matters agreed among all participating English-speaking Bishops' Conferences worldwide.

Well, there is, after a fashion: the standard aproach, hedged about with anomolies such as the Canadians' love of guitar chords and the Scottish Exception (Mornington Crescent, anyone?) is to focus on the integrity of the text. Unfortunately, our ecclesiatical bureaucrats seems to have modelled themselves on their civil service confreres in gold-plating the requirements of external authority. In doing so, both bring authority into disrepute.

[Peter Jones]

and the Scottish Exception (Mornington Crescent, anyone?)

Ah - the Morningside variant, so beloved in St Andrew's & Edinburgh.

[Calum Cille]

All bound for Morningside, make a sleepy noise ... still no public announcements about the official approach in Scotland to my knowledge.

[musicus]

I am sure you are correct, CC. We had a couple of visitors from Glasgow in our Midlands parish last Sunday. They reported that there had been nothing by way of formation for themselves, for musicians, or - so far as they could tell - for their priest, who was as bemused about it all as they were. All he has done so far is to ascribe the forthcoming changes to Benedict's desire for a return to more traditional approaches to the liturgy. They hadn't heard of any of the Scottish musicians I mentioned, apart from James MacMillan. Perhaps he will be doing something, they said.

[Peter Jones]

I beg to differ, on the evidence of the addendum to the Panel's terms of reference (see Appendix I of the Composer' Guide) that insists: "Settings of the acclamations of the assembly in the Eucharistic Prayer should be complete and have a musical integrity."

Oh NT - look (Silly me - I knew I'd read this somewhere other than our Guide for Composers but I've only just remembered where.)

This is from the US Bishops' document on Music, Sing to the Lord of 2007.

178. In order to make clear the ritual unity of the Eucharistic Prayer, it is recommended
that there be a stylistic unity to the musical elements of the prayer, especially the Sanctus, the
Memorial Acclamation, and the Great Amen

Our Composers' Guide has simply adopted (pinched?) something of the same policy. Yet the text you quote from Appendix 1 ('should') is not consonant with the less prescriptive "might" of section 74. (Note "It is recommended…" in the US document, not "You must…")

Sigh - our Guide does need tidying up so that we know clearly what it is saying.

[Peter Jones]

I am sure you are correct, CC. We had a couple of visitors from Glasgow in our Midlands parish last Sunday. They reported that there had been nothing by way of formation for themselves, for musicians,...........

The Society is a UK society, is it not? Perhaps some of our members in Scotland could organise workshops under the SSG banner, rather than that of the Scottish Episcopal Conference. It's not as if there's a lack of published material now - two hymnal supplements, a collection and several individual Mass settings - including, of course, Masses by James MacMillan.

[Nick Baty]

Our Composers' Guide has simply adopted (pinched?) something of the same policy.

But it's not a new policy. I can't remember a time when it was any different – although I also can't remember when I first came across the idea – perhaps in my late teens, around 1980 or so. Anyone else remember when, where, how?

[Calum Cille]

We had a couple of visitors from Glasgow in our Midlands parish last Sunday. They reported that there had been nothing by way of formation for themselves, for musicians, or - so far as they could tell - for their priest, who was as bemused about it all as they were.

Perhaps not in their own parish but definitely in the diocese (most recently, three hours or so at St Aloysius' in Glasgow on 27th August).
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1219&start=510

Scotland has been preparing; there have been a number of events in various parishes and dioceses.

[musicus]

Scotland has been preparing; there have been a number of events in various parishes and dioceses.

Thank you - a salutary reminder not to generalise on very little evidence. I dare say many an English or Welsh parishioner might be equally unaware of what has been on offer in their own neck of the woods, especially if, like the couple I met, they were not musicians.

I do like Peter Jones' suggestion regarding SSG workshops in Scotland. I'm sure the Society would be keen to support its Scottish members in organising such events.

Meanwhile, it really would be good to hear how the Scottish bishops intend to monitor the integrity of their national composers' new settings.

[Peter Jones]

Meanwhile, it really would be good to hear how the Scottish bishops intend to monitor the integrity of their national composers' new settings.

Yes it would. However, take into account where their music is being published. Music is submitted to episcopal panels in the territory of publication. So MacMillan - Boosey & Hawkes - goes through the England and Wales procedure, for example.

[auchincruive]

Recently added to the website devoted to the new mass in Scotland

http://www.romanmissalscotland.org.uk/g ... osers.html

[Nick Baty]

And they're requiring an Imprimatur.
Isn't that one stage further than the England & Wales arrangement?
As I understand it, down here an Imprimatur is only required if you're including ICEL settings in a collection with other texts – the new Laudate supplement, for example.