A significant number of composers published by OCP have indeed had access to what were assumed to be the new texts. They were sent them in March 2007, with a request for settings by the middle of May 2007, so that OCP could be ahead of the game.

However, those who went to the trouble of writing new settings (or adapting old ones) will have been disappointed to see that the new texts as recently provided by Rome are not identical with those that the US Bishops submitted for recognitio - for example, the first line of Sanctus is different - so there will have been more than a little time-wasting and (presumably, now that they know the texts are not what was previously thought) much weeping and gnashing of teeth. At least one distinguished American composer has been testing out a complete Eucharistic Prayer setting and will now have to go back to the drawing-board.

As a matter of fact, Paul Inwood is on record as saying, on various fora over the past 18 months, (a) that he did not intend to waste his time doing anything at all until such time as it could be certain what the final texts would actually turn out to be, and (b) that what the US Bishops have posted on their website is most probably not the end of the story.

His wisdom turns out to have have been well-placed, in the light of what has happened so far. It is still not clear what the final position will be on the 40 amendments that the US Bishops asked for along with their request for recognitio. For example, the word on the street is that "Christ has died", currently omitted from the latest recension, will be reinstated. There may yet be other changes to the text that Cardinal Arinze sent to the US Conference. (The Bishops of England and Wales have not yet received anything. It is believed that the same text is sitting on Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor's desk, awaiting his return from absence at World Youth Day and subsequent holiday, but who knows?)

Because the Order of Mass will not be implemented until the entire Missal (and Lectionary - but that's another story) is ready, and because the US Bishops have rejected a large part of the Proper of Seasons, it now seems quite likely that the earliest starting date for using the new Order of Mass texts is Advent 2012. Anything could happen between now and then. (As the late John Tracy Ellis said, there is nothing wrong with the Church that a hundred good funerals wouldn't fix.) If Mr Inwood sticks to his guns, he may have the last laugh.

As far as paraphrases are concerned, I think you will find that ICEL, acting under instructions from the American BCDW, will be much fiercer about not giving permission for paraphrased texts than it has been in the past. I think you'll also find that ICEL is not currently granting any permissions at all precisely because of the uncertainty surrounding what the texts will finally be, and not for any sinister reason such as restricting permissions to particular favoured composers. Anyone is free to set these texts. It's just that they might be unwise to do so just yet.

So, yes, a certain cynicism is in order, but I don't think it's correct to say that any of the major composers have had the kind of head start that Pastor in Valle is implying. If the new texts in fact never come to pass (as another word on the street, this time in Rome, suggests), then all the "approved" composers who have spent time working on them, whoever they may be, will have egg on their faces.