Mass setting by Gordon Rock/other Masses

[oopsorganist]

Oh no
What happens to you if you use music that has not been past the panel? Does the melody have to be approved as well as the text. I would guess so.

To be fair, on occasion, the wandering from melody and even text that happens inadvertently, might not get past the panel either. I can think of one occasion when our PP suddenly and without warning, planning, or any preparation whatsoever, launched into the Gloria in Latin. What was eventually sung was a total pretended version. Even those who might have had a stab at it were so bewildered by the improvised version being sung by the priest that they had to give up and just pretend. I don't know if it is better to erase this from my memory or treasure it.

[keitha]

Firstly, there has been no change in the position of the Bishops Conference position on the use of anything other than the 2010 translation at Mass - here is the extract from the Conference's 2014 statement:

"The Bishops’ Conference has decided that from Pentecost Sunday, 8 June 2014 only settings of the Ordinary of the Mass using the new translation are permitted to be sung at Mass. Settings using the previous translation or paraphrased texts may no longer be used in our parishes, schools and communities."

In relation to the New Pilgrims Mass, this does not appear to have been approved through the "permission to publish" process for use in parishes, schools and communities in England & Wales - and if so, cannot be used in those communities. Here is the link to list of settings that have been approved through that process:

"http://www.romanmissal.org.uk/Home/Music/Published-Music"

This Mass setting might have been approved by another English-speaking conference of bishops, but as it is published in England, that should not be the case and, as JW points out, there is no copyright permission from ICEL for the use of those texts that are ICEL copyright, which means that the publication is unlawful as a breach of civil law.

To answer Oops, the 'panel' process is limited to the approval of the text, not a 'quality test' for music, however where the music has (in the panel's opinion!) distorted the text (for example, an over-long introduction to the Holy, holy which, in effect, completely separates it from the Preface) it will not be approved. Full guidelines for composers appear on the Roman Missal website above.

[oopsorganist]

Thanks Keitha for the link. There is plenty there to go at really.

So for example, if someone has written their own Mass setting and they would like to share it, it should not really be used unless it has been approved? So all new settings needs approval to be adopted. I ask because this has happened to me in the past and I did resist using a setting because I did feel there is time to mess with anything that is not quite common and well known. And I could guess that it caused a cooler relationship.

So. Is this the case. Settings should be selected from the list and new settings should be approved before being used? It is therefore not enough for the words to be just so. But that can't be the case because those settings of the Lord Have Mercy and Lamb of God which were being sung before the New Translation will just carry on because the words are the same usually. Ah, that is why sometimes old Gloria and Holy Holy settings could sneak in.

What about classical settings. Tagliatelle and such like composers. Are they OK even though not on the list? It is OK to dip into the historic repertoire used prior to Vatican 2 because they were in Latin. Is it just English which has to be rigorously approved. What if the historic Mass uses repetitions and so on -that obscures the words? Or does it not matter because it is in Latin Just wondering. Probably a thread on this somewhere already.

I think from my travels around these parts, that there is actually all sorts going on. Quite a few parishes don't have supplement style hymn books and so are just winging it.Sh And there is also some very good stuff going on.

[JW]

Everyone slips up and no one should be too concerned about that (we said the Gloria yesterday evening). My issue is when the slips are the result of careless preparation.

Latin Mass settings were never part of the New Translation regulations, so they're OK provided they meet the guidelines of previous times, e.g. the Verdi Requiem probably isn't a good idea for a funeral, being overly operatic, dramatic and long.

The Liturgy Office's Composer's specifically states that the approval process only applies where a composer wishes to publish their work beyond their own community. So it's fine to write settings only for your own parish and not go through the approval process; this is OK. However, permission from ICEL to used the copyrighted words is still needed. I think people have usually found ICEL helpful and there isn't usually a charge if you don't intend to charge for copies of your Mass Setting?

[keitha]

Yes, JW, you are correct. If you write a musical setting using ICEL copyright texts for regular use in your own community/parish but nowhere else, with no charge being made you will still need ICEL permission and will need to insert the correct acknowledgement, but no fee will be charged.

There will be a series of pertinent links placed on this website for all this sort of stuff shortly.

[Southern Comfort]

Yes, JW, you are correct. If you write a musical setting using ICEL copyright texts for regular use in your own community/parish but nowhere else, with no charge being made you will still need ICEL permission and will need to insert the correct acknowledgement, but no fee will be charged.

There will be a series of pertinent links placed on this website for all this sort of stuff shortly.

At the risk of going over old ground, it is worth checking first that the texts on which ICEL claims copyright are actually ICEL texts.

(1) "Lord, have mercy", etc, and "Kyrie eleison" are not ICEL copyright texts but in the public domain. Copyright is only involved if you use the tropes in Form III, e.g. "You were sent to heal the contrite of heart", etc

(2) The Gloria and all the Memorial Acclamations in the most recent Missal are ICEL copyrights. No question there.

(3) "Amen" as in the Great Amen is in the public domain, but the doxology "Through him" is ICEL copyright.

(4) The "Holy, holy" is not an ICEL copyright text. It is in fact copyright ICET 1970 with only two words altered, not enough to establish a new copyrightable text. Indeed, ICEL itself admitted this early on when the revised Missal appeared, and said it would not attempt to claim copyright in the text. Later it changed its mind, on the grounds that it needed to protect the copyright text by being its Administrator. It has no legal right to do this whatsoever. Indeed, ICET always made its texts available free of charge to anyone who wishes to make use of them, provided that a copyright acknowledgement is printed; and that tradition is continued by ELLC, ICET's successor.

(5) The Lamb of God was an ICEL copyright text in 1969, but for no clear reason when this text was reused (with a minor punctuation change) in 2010/2011 ICEL decided not to claim copyright in the text, and indeed suggested that it was an ICET text. (It was not: the ICET Lamb of God is completely different.) This seems to have happened as a result of ignorance in the ICEL offices.

Hopefully this will help aspiring composers and parish musicians.

[VML]

So if I reform my pre 2011 Gloria I have to ask ICEL permission, but the new Holy, Holy and unchanged Lamb of God are ok? But I have to get permission for the Mem. Accs?
Thanks for the clarification SC.

[keitha]

I chose my words very carefully because I share SC's views that not all of the Mass "ordinary" texts are ICEL copyright. But, in summary:

Lord, have mercy - public domain (except for Form III tropes - ICEL)

Glory be - ICEL

Holy, holy - probably ICET, authority claimed by ICEL - I'm not going to have a fight over it!

Memorial Acclamations - ICEL

Lamb of God - ICEL (from 1969 - if it was copyright in 1969 it remains so now unless it is specifically waived and it is not clear that this has happened - again, not something I would fight over!).

If it were me, given that I will need need ICEL ok for most of the Mass, I would go for the lot while I am at it, but then I will never have to pay royalties as no-one would ever pay money for anything that I might write!

[Southern Comfort]

Holy, holy - probably ICET, authority claimed by ICEL - I'm not going to have a fight over it!

Depends on how strongly you feel about paying money to ICEL for a text they don't even own.

Lamb of God - ICEL (from 1969 - if it was copyright in 1969 it remains so now unless it is specifically waived and it is not clear that this has happened

Yes, it was specifically waived in 2010. But of course they could have changed their minds again by now.

[JW]

Has anyone ever been to ICEL and specifically excluded the 'Lord Have Mercy' and 'Lamb of God' from the list of ICEL texts for which they requested permission? And not included ICEL copyright acknowledgment for those texts?

When I went through the process I just asked for and acknowledged the whole lot, but then I don't charge for my stuff, so the question of royalties didn't arise. It would be interesting to learn what happened to a professional composer. Presumably you would just have to put up with ICEL's view as none of us would want to risk a court case? Even the cost of a legal opinion is, I assume, out of the question.

Interesting!

[alan29]

This is as convoluted as the translation itself.

[Dom Perignon]

We are now drifting away from the topic and focusing on ICEL's rights to copyright. If we wish to continue in that vein could we please have a new thread or 'revive' an older one so that the topic is not 'buried' in the Gordon Rock thread.

[dmu3tem]

I think the bottom line is not so much what liturgist officials in the Vatican have to say but what answers the needs of congregations on the ground. Almost certainly this is not the official Catholic position; but at the end of the day, any religion (and its associated forms of worship) must answer people's needs and wishes if it is to survive. The nature of the music - and even liturgical texts - therefore is only a detail in a much broader scale of things. Provided the perceived intent is understood, I do not see why one should get too steamed up by such things: that is behaviour worthy of the Scribes and Sadducees.

I accept though that there are practical issues. If there is a lot of local variation in the texts that are set to music, then the might be problems with its dissemination nation-wide. Even here though, for much of the time effective solutions can be worked out by competant local arrangers/composers/performers. For example Anglicans up here use both the old (pre 2011) and new style (post 2011) Sanctus setting of Christopher Walkers Celtic Mass. Likewise, despite it being classified as a doxology, they also treat the Peruvian Gloria like any other Gloria and are quite happy to use metrical paraphrases of the full Gloria text.

Such practices also presuppose greater flexibility on the copyright issue discussed in another thread.

[Southern Comfort]

In the past few months, I have discovered quite a few more places that are still quite happily using pre-2011 setttings. Either they don't know, or they are cheerfully ignoring, what the bishops have said. I had previously thought that this only happened in isolated instances, but my recent experiences make me think that this is more widespread than anyone has hitherto realised.

Anderson's "clapping" Gloria and the Salazar Gloria are, for example, still alive and well, and I have encountered people using unrevised Mass of Creation, Gathering Mass, Celtic, and others too. In some cases, I was told that they did try the new versions but didn't like them and so went back to the older ones. Additionally, by no means everyone invested in the revised Celebration Hymanl or Laudate. The fact that, as Thomas points out, many of our Anglican sisters and brothers all over the country are still using those unrevised settings may be a factor in this. too.

Returning to Keith's earlier comment about approved settings, the website listing these is in fact incomplete. I do not know how often it is updated. In addition, in the case of the larger publishers it can be quite difficult to find what you are looking for as the settings do not seem to be listed in any kind of alphabetical order, whether by Mass title or composer's name.

[justMary]

I would love to stamp the Clapping Gloria out of existence in my corner of the world. But I have one low-confidence musician who realistically can only manage things that I am sure the congregation will sing - when he's on, the choices are CG or none at all. Not rostering him is not an option, some weeks it's him or nothing, and every time he plays successfully build just a small amount of knowledge and skill.

I'd suspect that practical issues like this have more effect that many of you more skilled musicians realise: in many parishes, it comes down to needs-must.

There's also the reality that some musicians aren't interested in putting time and effort into learning new Mass parts: in their eyes what they've already got is good enough, and the time they do have to spend on learning church music, they want to spend on material that enriches them spirituality, Again, we couldn't do without these people, even though they're not as teachable as some might like.