An answer??
  • JulesVanNuffel
    Posts: 126
    Were any of Jeffrey's questions ever answered? I found this on 133 of his book:

    The Bishops, GIA, Conception, and The Grail need to be
    required to be completely open and accurate and honest in
    answering the following questions:
    1. What precisely are the legal terms under which GIA plans to
    permission people the rights to print these Psalms? In the
    past, even some lowly bloggers have been beat up by The
    Grail for daring to quote Psalms without permission on their
    private blogs. They have charged up to 10 percent of proceeds
    for publishers. GIA will naturally have the incentive
    to charge high prices to keep others out of the market.
    2. They have pledged “equitable and efficient” distribution policies
    but the only terms under which this could occur is to put
    the Psalm into Creative Commons so that they can be used for
    free. Will they consider this?
    3. What precisely are the financial arrangements made
    between The Grail, Conception, and GIA? What kind of revenue
    do they expect to earn over the coming years?
    4. Was any money involved in the decision of the USCCB to
    embrace this translation of the Psalms? GIA is in a position
    to pay a high price to have its Psalms proclaimed as appropriate
    to the liturgy. Did they happen to offer the USCCB a
    donation to see this result come about? A clear, clear statement
    of “no” is the only morally satisfactory answer.
    The Texts 133
    5. In what way does the arrangement as currently constituted
    avoid the sin of simony, which the Catholic Encyclopedia
    defines as: “a deliberate intention of buying or selling for a
    temporal price such things as are spiritual of annexed unto
    spirituals.” This of course needs to be qualified that there is
    nothing wrong with allocated scarce goods such as books
    and materials. But the translations themselves are not scarce
    goods. To charge for the use of the text itself would be an
    injustice. It is bad enough that ICEL maintains a copyright
    but they have at least granted free online rights; moreover,
    ICEL is not a for-profit capitalist company. GIA is a different
    animal entirely.
    Catholics in this country are financially strapped enough as it
    is, trying to keep their buildings in good repair and their schools
    running. They don’t need to be charged money for access to their
    own Mass texts.
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    No answers. We know that many are asking these questions.
Add a Comment