Trouble is that what ICEL is doing here is making rules concerning its proprietary texts. Nothing more. Rome is not going to challenge a national conference's rights administration of such a text. I agree that the fundamental principle here needs to be completely reexamined. Ritual texts should not be subject to intellectual property law. but there is nothing Rome can do right now to change that. In the age of print only, it seemed reasonable (though it is always wrong, in my view). The digital age has opened the question for the first time in 100 years.

Whether it's ICEL or USCCB, what I don't understand here is that what's wrong and confusing to study music and share it openly, when the texts is open to the public already? (as many others said in the previous posts.) I doubt that they publicized it because of the internet and modern technology.
Printing could have done the same and cause the cofusion as well.
Why they even bother to publicize the preliminary texts then? Was it Rome's decision or American's? I hope they send a good explanation for the policy about the music, before it becomes a bigger issue. (I'm sorry but I already lost the total trust in their policy towards sacred music, with 'Approved hymnals' and all. That doesn't mean that I lost my respect for them. No matter what, we are supposed to follow the policy and the instructions, and we will. But it seems that they need some help from the musicians who trying to bring sacred music back to liturgy as Our Church wishes.)

(I deleted this post: it belongs in another thread)

Jeffrey, did you get any reply from ICEL to your letter? I really hope they have a good explanation to the policy that is causing lots of trouble. Whether we agree or not, we could understand their reasoning. I think they owe at least to all the musicians who want to try their music and share to study it openly.

ICEL told me that we can distribute through email, but no response to my last letter to them. They tend to contact me when they think I've gone over the line.

francis, could you specify your 'everyone', sacred music composers, or profane music composers? The latter will be happy if sacred music composers stop producing music, no? They must be pretty bothered by sacred musicians who give lots of free music for our churches, while they are trying to make money by hitting the popuar profane music chart in churches.( I don't apologise for being so blunt about what they do. I may not have bursting energy of some young musicians in this forum, but a few things can really thin out my some wisdom acquired through the age. Whether it's from their ignorance or from their bad intention, they need to change the direction, and our church authorities need to see the truths by spending time learning about music and learn to chant!)

I heard a Father Fessio from Ave maria university (I cannot attach the mp3 file here, sorry ) preaching about how Jesus was angry at profane things entered in his Temple, and vigorously chase them out. He wasn't very gentle in this, and no compromise with the people who were doing it. This was something he would not tolerate. Whether people have good intention and try to participate in helping church, he chase them all out. That's the only way he can teach them and save them. If they want to come back to church, they need to have the right intention of glorifying God and sactifying themselves, nothing else. If they don't know this, they need to learn, instead of strumming the guitar all day. That's what our church authorities must do with profane music, chase them all out and teach people the right thing from the very beginning. Evangelizing with charity is not compromising, watering down the truths or giving what people want to hear. We have our perfect example to follow. Charity is patient, patient enough to keep the truths even if there are only few in the church, humble enough to do your best even for one person, and keep your hope from knowing that Christ is with you and help you always, and trust it is He who won the battle.
I'm saying all this because I feel that many church authories in US are doing and making policies that are not geared towards what our Church asks us to do.

Church musicians should be paid rightfully, including composers. But they have higher goals than just making their music popular and money. Many policies by ICEL and USCCB, such as vague interpretation of the Church's instruction, seen in 'Sing to the Lord, permitting questionable Hymns in "approved hymnals,' and this policy on the music of the new translations, don't seem the help many musicians to achieve their higher goals. Actually it just opens the door more wide to profane music to churches.

This is a quote from Our Sunday Visitor Feb. I

"After [the Second Vatican Council], the bishops left it up to the music publishers to decide what music would be used at the liturgy. Following the model of popular music, they went for what would sell the most, which was the lowest common denominator," Mahrt said.

Are there anything our Bishops do to help to promote sacred music? I'm genuinely interested in finding out. (I know there are individual priests and Bishops who try to help, but the decisions they made as a group don't seem to be that way.)


"May your gifts, O God, detach us from earthly pleasures, and ever fill us with heavenly refreshment."
(form Post communion in the mass yesterday, EF)