It really is not lawful to print a personal-use copy (or "convenience copy") without permission.

Incidentally, the parish should be paying for the sheet music that you use. I've never heard of a parish that expected choir members to buy the scores themselves. If the choir were independent of the parish, that would be another matter.

One option that complies with the law is to buy the printed book and remove the binding; then have it hole-punched and keep the sheets in a 3-ring binder. A copy-print shop can do this neatly. I've done this with OCP's psalm book a couple of times.

Yes, publishers can block printing from a PDF file, though it is may be possible to get around it by technical means.

An alternative you might consider is a subscription to OCP's Spanish digital resource:
https://www.ocp.org/en-us/catalogo-musical-digital

$49 for a year, includes rights to print unlimited music for choir/ensemble. Up to ten people may have access to a single subscription. The parish could purchase the subscription and give you access. Or you buy a subscription yourself.

Win/win.

The OCP files on offer are ebook, not PDF files. This is a subtle difference, but a notable one nevertheless. That means you need to use a dedicated Ereader application rather than a PDF viewer. That also means any endeavor to print would be made more difficult as well. I personally think it absolutely absurd to sell a PDF copy for the same price as a print product; there are no material costs involved. Many publishers reduce the cost of digital only offerings for this very reason. It would seem to me, therefore, that they are selling the rights to usage of the music, in which case you should be allowed to print. The perennial problem—as others have alluded—is that people will take advantage. Considering the typically-cash-strapped nature of most catholic music programs, and the even more pitiable state of most hispanic music programs, this is little wonder. It is, however, very sad. It's all too tempting to pay for a single copy of the PDF and print 'till the cows come home. No doubt this is why they've offered it in ebook format; it throws an extra hurdle in the way from anyone inclined to abuse.

If I were you I'd have the church pay for a print edition of your liking. If you are going to be accompanying the group, it needs to be the fully-fledged accompaniment edition for $140. If you're just a singing member of the choir, then it should just be one of the hand-held hymnal versions.

The Respond and Acclaim pdf is probably printable because it's intended to be used at the ambo but the USCCB has not authorized the use of computer tablets or e-readers at the ambo or the altar during Mass, a restriction that does not apply to choir music. In order to use the R&A pdf in a liturgically licit way, it has to be unlocked for printing otherwise why would anyone buy it?

If you really are traditional, stick with vellum.

Anything anyone can do that costs OCP money and could lead to its ruination is a moral good.

No, the ends don't justify the means, so we cant do something morally illicit even if something "good" results from it. (And certainly performing the OCP music isn't a cause for its ruination but rather it's propagation... but do find myself amused at the clearly jesting nature of Gamba's remark.)

(To be clear, Gamba's text is purple...)

stulte... oh believe me, i am NOT saying to use PD exclusively, otherwise I would be speaking against my own craft!

But to promote (purchase and perform) the music that is put out by OCP and the likes is truly contrary to the philosophy and theology of sacred music in an extremely high percentage. IMO, we should not participate in supporting their offerings.

However, in my experience over the many years of selling my PDF files (myopus.com), I have found that those who purchase them purchase the correct amount of licenses for copies being produced for their ensembles. The rate is $1 per copy per person in choir for the lifetime of the existence of the ensemble. This means that if you lose a copy, or if one even becomes worn, it is permissible to discard the old and print a new copy.

I believe this is a very fair arrangement, gives me a bit of compensation, (nothing to live on, for heavens sake), and is a liberal license to any choir that wishes to perform my original works.

Now, it may be somewhat of a given, but traditionally minded music directors seem (to me) to try to be more upright in their business affairs and honest with copyright fees, licenses, etc. This may not be the case with a modernist's approach. I am grateful that my clientele prefer to reward me as a composer of modern traditional music, and it certainly shows.

I wish TLM choirs were more open to performing my (modern?!) works since they are almost exclusively in Latin, but the leaning toward Renaissance and Medieval music almost exclusively seems to come more from the need to remain safe with the known and approved body of RC work, and tend away from any possible air of modernism. I kind of laugh about living composers who feel compelled to mimic the strict style and theory typical in the time of Palestrina et al. Like Mozart, I find their works can become tiresome and boring... (running away fast, again)

So actually, I think we are probably mostly if not entirely in agreement.

@Earl_Grey

I do restrict the purchase of one copy of my work to a minimum of $5... my effort and time is definitely worth that for a performance of a piece at a wedding, even if it is only for one time. (I think it is worth more, actually) but hey!... I don't want it to become prohibitive to purchase and perform my works. From my (a living composer) perspective, I think this is quite fair.

that I hope I'll never be asked to play again

I do not have any clients who purchase music with this in mind. Good music is not like kale... you buy it because you like it, and you want to taste it again and again.

When I directed music for weddings on a regular basis, I made up a list of acceptable repertoire, and was quite ready to defend the reason behind sticking to it. If someone really wanted a piece for their wedding from the OCP fare, I would require them to pay for the one time license. Sometimes they would, and sometimes they took my alternatives.

Funerals was another matter... I was much more flexible in playing OCP music at their request for reasons we all understand... and of course, there were only ever three selections... OEW and HIAL or BNA.

My proverbial line... Be Not Afraid! Here I Am Lord... On Eagles Wings!

Though, seriously, there's good reason to master the old style (several good reasons, in fact. More beer and food required!).

It's one thing to master the old style, to mimic the form, but it's another to get stuck there and never find one's own voice... (theoretically speaking [pun intended])

The study of progress in harmonic development through the ages is certainly central to that discussion. 19th/20th/21st century composers have added something to the repertoire that is of great value and of single voice. When we think of Barber, Faure, Poulenc, Durufle, Langlais, Part, and the ominous talent of Stravinsky (God deliver Him) and others, there is a revealed beauty that did not exist before these greats came along... we definitely need to support the creativity of living composers of sacred choral music by including their works in the liturgy.

I wish TLM choirs were more open to performing my (modern?!) works since they are almost exclusively in Latin, but the leaning toward Renaissance and Medieval music almost exclusively seems to come more from the need to remain safe with the known and approved body of RC work, and tend away from any possible air of modernism.

Indeed, this is one sticking point for me too. If I compose a beautiful motet in Latin based on a liturgically appropriate text (such as a proper) which is in consonance with appropriate liturgical/musical norms, I see no reason to exclude it (or any other similar “modern” work, for that matter). This inclusion is akin, in my mind, to the idea of legitimate development of doctrine. New generations can bring new things to the liturgy... and in fact we have been explicitly exhorted to do so by various pontiffs the last two centuries. It is indeed an error to get stuck in a virtual past.

In the end, many on the forum regularly demonstrate that new liturgical music is being composed in a style that is 100% orthodox and in total harmony with genuine sacred liturgy, and such examples should in no way be excluded.

Yes... why try to imitate the style and harmonies of P, V, L, O, B, etc., when you will never rival their renditions? It then becomes a grade B (or hopefully not worse) knockoff of the days gone by.

No, the ends don't justify the means, so we cant do something morally illicit even if something "good" results from it.

Very true, but is this copyright law a just law? An unjust law is no law at all. If that is the case, then one doesn’t need to follow it.

I wish TLM choirs were more open to performing my (modern?!) works since they are almost exclusively in Latin, but the leaning toward Renaissance and Medieval music almost exclusively seems to come more from the need to remain safe with the known and approved body of RC work, and tend away from any possible air of modernism.

Our choir sings a number of more modern works, albeit most of which are our director’s own compositions (the pip complained about one piece that was written in a Medieval style and now we’re banned from singing it. People would complain to me that it was too “novus ordo-y” Oddly enough, no one complained when we sang a song written by Marty Haugen. The text was from a traditional hymn, but the tune was cheesy. Personally, I prefer to sing Renaissance polyphonic because there is something about it that helps me lift my heart and mind to God and heavenly things that I just don’t get from singing other music.

A hard test of a law's justice is how cheerfully one could accept its penalties to change it. These might range from a week in a Birmingham jail to being devoured by lions or burning.