With the criteria they have stated, I will not be entering.

Is this your objection?

5. Contemporary Application
Entries are to avoid archaic language, such as "Which wert, and art, and evermore shall be", and non-inclusive language, such as "O brother man, fold to thy heart thy brother".

I find the following to be way more disturbing, and the reason I don't enter hymn writing contests:

4. New Work
Hymns previously published or currently entered in other contests should not be submitted.
6. Copyright
Copyright of the winning hymn text/s and music will become the property of The Australian Hymn Book Pty Ltd.

Set aside the copyright issue for a moment, which is a matter of personal philosophy.
What exactly does (4) mean? It's 2013, for goodness sakes. Is something I posted here considered "published"? What about if I put it on my site? Offer it for Print-on-Demand sale? (If P.O.D., is it only published once someone buys it and it is printed the first time?)

I agree that hymn-writing competitions could produce good fruit.

I also agree that some of the rules stifle the growth of such fruit.

How long, O Lord, will we choose to sweat under the dominion of publishers??

Why not? You can always write more.

Hymn Society of US does the same thing.

Problem really is not the publishers....it's the people who buy from them.

Winning a competition like that merely establishes your name to some degree without having to wait for a new hymnal to come along that needs hymns.

hymn competition judges seem to like total ca-ca, well then... maybe I could use a pseudonym or something.

Giving my penchant (and, possibly, talent) for humorous verse, I have often thought about trying to enter these competitions (and some of the more ridiculously conceived ones) with over-the-top stupid entries.

I have not done so, because I really couldn't live with myself if I won.

When certain publishers give the impression that the parish is almost guaranteed easy, one-step vibrant liturgy through use of their materials, they are part of the problem for being misleading.

Hence Kathy's frequent injunction that some of us more serious-minded folks create such a resource. (Which, BTW, Vatican II Hymnal does a good job of appearing to be).

(And also note- Kathy's suggestion, which I completely agree with, is often couched within her criticism of my copyright philosophy. Let it be known, if it wasn't already, that anything I have produced may be used in such a commercial endeavor.)

I know of four, including one Episcopalian parish here close to my house.

I get the impression that some of you who contribute to these kinds of discussions have been burnt by rejection letters from publishers in the past.

Don't dismiss (all) publishers so easily. If a publishing company does its job, its part of the contract giving it exclusive control over your intellectual property is to promote it.

Publishers are not the bad guys in the room. Perhaps what you have written does not conform to the types of music a specific publisher handles. If so, try another.

If what you have written has real quality, someone will recognize.

Be careful about posting your work on the internet and telling everyone they may use it. You may be placing your work in the public domain. If it turns out to be a masterpiece, you can be sure more than one publisher will publish it and not have to pay you one cent in royalties.

As to the Australian publisher running this competition, the stated "rules" make me leery. The rules should state that, in addition to the prize money, industry standard royalties will also be paid. That IS the industry standard.

We post our work on the internet, but EACH OF US OWNS IT. We copyright it ourselves, as we too are publishers. Serious composers and hymn writers who aren't chasing a passing fad don't bother with the publishers of the day. I was told (years ago in my rejection letter from WLP) that my content was too ... CATHOLIC! I am laughing all the way to the music of historical applause.

I get the impression that some of you who contribute to these kinds of discussions have been burnt by rejection letters from publishers in the past.

What an odd aspect to mention, Fr. Ron, and sort of a left-handed compliment to then conclude, well you might have a masterpiece out there and you'll have missed out on the big bucks. Take a number and spin the wheel....
First of all, may I remind you of the heavily evidenced difficult tenures of one J.S. Bach. I think there's more resemblence to that model of careerism among us here, than of those of the publishers' stable of stars who, once endowed that status, must keep a calendar of appearances far and wide to help push new product, not only at big conventions but at regional and parish commissioned events. That life is not for everybody, thanks.
Secondly, as one composer/arranger who accepted the arranging responsibilities in toto so as to uplift the quality of one publisher's artistic output (singer-songwriter tending toward the banal) and who did have those arrangements accepted and published, no one at said publisher gave a rat's patootie that without those efforts, the "songs" wouldn't have made it through the front door.
Nothing's new under the sun (which doth shine on the hindquarters of good and bad doggies) about this issue of public domain/copyright/commons. Most of us do what we do because we are gifted to repay the Lord for his graces. Mendelssohn did Bach a favor for which we're all grateful. But besides the corpus of music, we have his example of "soli Deo gloria."

I live to confound you and everyone else, Adam.;-)
My last paragraph basically said "I was someone's 'Quincy Jones'" for a major publisher's production of one of their name "artists." What I brought to the equation was huge. Did any of that change the course of my career. Nope. Didn't think it would. The fondest moments in our little cyber world are when I can scream "Heath Morber" to the mountaintops, or I can drop a wedding psalm to a seasoned pro like Jonathan Eason in a heartbeat and have JDE say: "That was really good, Charles."
Also, where's Jeffrey Quick in all these discussions?

To all who commented since 2:15 PM, I certainly meant no offense in that earlier comment of mine. As Roseanna Roseannadanna would... Sorry, lost my train of thought.

But, Charles, I was not confounded by either of your comments. Does that mean we're beginning to bond?

I know of four, including one Episcopalian parish here close to my house.

Five now, bud.

At the risk of giving Adam more material, make that six.

(Fr.) Ron, we're already bonded.Fresno shot-callers (of whom I am not among their number) have designated your bilingual Misa the official setting for diocesan Masses. So, I'm happy to tell you that I did my best Pepe Romero on my classical guitar for our "new" Bp. Ochoa's installation. Gotta admit I threw in some Clapton now and then.

To be faire his home's Visalia
Distance needed from the See.
Easily he doth transition
Duplets couched in time of three.

In any case, I've always written hymns to be sung to familiar tunes for specific occasions. Typically as additional verses for existing hymns such as By All Your Saints Still Striving. I also wrote an additional verse for O God Beyond All Praising for use as a recessional with a doxology.

I'm with Fr. K on that- of all the things that seem weird, the fact that they are asking for a hymn based on a passage of scripture seems totally normal, and hallf the point of having such a competition.

People want to give money to have a hymn written the way they want it written.

People don't want to write the hymn the way they want it written.

What's all the fuss about?

Surely using Pauline epistles and avoiding archaic language are mutually exclusive goals?

Remember: in Minneapolis, modern scholarship gave them the right not to do anything from St. Paul.

I won't be applying. What I call beautiful, the committee call archaic, I'm sure.

Would "Oh brother, where art thou?" be archaic, since it uses "brother"? On the other hand, can I start a hymn with

"Oh, God, this helpless aging cast
can't torment me for long;
behold, their time is almost past
and so: BREAK INTO SONG"

Adam,

I tried something else, but the censors wouldn't accept it.

Maybe "Heigh, Ho: Break into song" works better?

But, you know- there's just too many songs about singing already.

Correct. We need to remove about half the psalms from the psalter because they refer to singing.

I never have bought into that position, and I never will.

Tune: GILLIGAN'S ISLE

I was thinking more St Anne for those hymn words.