Hi G:

Canticanova offered to publish my musics years ago, but I don't want to loose ownership of my comps and have constraints put on their distribution. With the tool of the internet, I can offer my music for FREE and be widely distributed.

More importantly, I am also able to respond quickly to those who would want altered keys, revisions to notes and/or passages, various arrangements, other languages (ie, Latin where there is presently English, and vice/verrsa, etc.) It is also the start of an organic roots movement of Catholic Composers establishing a guild or a forum where we can exchange ideas, musics, etc., much like CMAA is established to support those devoted to Gregorian Chant in the liturgy. I think composers need to dovetail with the historical music of the church, and find the best way to support that effort and at the same time compose the music of the Ecclesia orans. I also think we need to compose religious music for reflection. This is almost non existent now. I compose orchestral works which meditate on the Rosary, Stations of the Cross, The Passion, etc. Where is this music today? We are all watching Star Wars instead! Let's get on with the business of supporting true sacred art in music.

Composers must UNITE!

Hi Janet:

This is the way of the Church. It should never require copyrights, constraints, etc. This is all tied up in the desire for money, power and control, and has nothing to do with the Kingdom of God and His Church. This is why iconographers never signed their work. It belonged to God from the moment it was conceived. So it should be with those who are responsible for composing sacred music. The ways of the world have superimposed their ideas of ownership on the things of God, and with that they control and limit the things that should go to the people of God. Copyright laws are a new phenomenom and do not belong to the Church.

I would even go further and say that the music of THE Church should not be FOR SALE or for use outside of the Liturgy of the RCC. That is throwing pearls before swine.

"What kind of music SHOULD we be composing now? "

Well, if you have the average Catholic parish in mind - Compose music that is accessible, yet solemn and reverent. Look to Gregorian Chant for your inspiration. Steer WELL CLEAR of operatic styles. Maybe composers need to look at writing music that can satisfy several requirements at once: 1. Ease of participation by the congregation (without resorting to either "rock/pop" idioms or even "gestures" or banality 2. Optional choir parts that truly "add" something, while not destroying the congregation's part. 3. Interesting accompaniments, written for the organ with organ technique in mind.

Music specifically for trained choirs is a different field altogether. Here I think composers have more freedom to write "complex" music, including very rich polyphony. I would be so happy to see a composer continue (without imitation) the traditional left by Durufle - that is, "pick up where he left off." Poulenc's beautiful "Salve Regina" is another example that I would love to see more contemporary composers follow.

Palestrina:

I agree with you 100% on each and every point! Perhaps we can collaborate.

Francis and Palestrina, your project sounds great. Go for it.

Francis, I was just thinking about this - You actually have a brilliant opportunity - right now! With the new translations of the Roman Missal coming out very soon, you could be a "first mover", composing new music for the new texts, which could be used to replace some of the... "interesting"... settings that we hear in Parishes today!

Francis,

Do you expect Architects to give away their church plans, gratis?

Regards,

Ian.

Francis,

In your response to Nicholas, you say that in your humble opinion, it is up to the individual architect (or composer) or any craftsman, for that matter, and their individual conscience to do what God is calling them to do. I make money doing other things. I compose music for the church for love of God and His Church.

If you'll forgive me, that could be interpreted as being a touch weaselish, with perhaps a hint of the McCawber about it. You seem to be saying that the commercials are a matter for the artist and God, but you know the right thing to do. I'm sure that's not your position, but care needs to be taken with the way we generalise from our own experience and circumstance.

We need to rid ourselves of the myth of the romantic artist, starving in a garret (or labouring at a computer keyboard) in order to produce works of significance. Far better to think in terms of the artist-craftsman, whose skills we're willing to recognise in a number of ways, including decent remuneration where ability, reputation and demand make this possible. We take this for granted with ecclesiastical architects. Why not other artist-crafsmen who labour in the service of the church?

I don't say that anyone who considers themselves an artist has the right to payment for their work; rather, that we should recognise the best in an appropriate way. Nor do I suggest that giving art away is a bad thing. Far from it - this can be a useful way of having art heard or seen where the artist isn't in a position to sell it. But it is unwise to give the impression that we take the moral high ground in divorcing ecclesiastical art from payment. That way lies the cult of the dilettante.

Regards,

Ian.

Francis,

Sorry I named the wrong part of a complicated thread - my comment was in response to your answer to a question that I posed, in response to your reply to Nicholas; whose comment in turn was addressed to points you made in response to Janet (phew - got there).

My concern was that your seemed to be on the verge of suggesting that composers of liturgical music should not make money from it. Janet wrote: "How very generous of you to offer your compositions so freely". In reply, you said: "This is the way of the Church. It should never require copyrights, constraints, etc. This is all tied up in the desire for money, power and control, and has nothing to do with the Kingdom of God and His Church." It was this statement that Nicholas seemed to be responding to, in defence of the copyright on his CD of liturgical music.

However, in your response to my last posting you clarify your position, saying that "My issues aren't with a composer receiving money for sacred OR secular; it's with the holders or 'owners' of copyright APART from the author who make a business out of what is supposed to be sacred." I have no problem with business-like publishers of sacred music. They can be a great help to composers in a position to sell their work. And if the composer isn't happy with their ethos, he or she doesn't have to strike a deal with them. And it's probably not true to say that if the publisher "sells out", they can do what they like with the music - it's unlikely that the composer will have given away all rights.

You then went on to suggest a different problem: that church has made " 'church' a business", by getting involved with copyright. This can be true of text: I understand some composers have had problems with ICEL. I'm not sure of the extent to which it's true of music, unless perhaps you believe that the Bishops need to distance themselves from publishing operations. This is an interesting area of discussion.

I can't agree with your contention that the Church should look carefully at who has written the contents our hymnals. Such an approach is likely to become moralistic, judgemental and divisive. We should stick to assessing the worth of text and music.

Finally, I wish you good luck with your proposal. I'll watch it with interest.

Best wishes,

Ian.

Wow, you guys... this is really getting off track. Can we keep to the subject? I am VERY interested in the subject of copyrights and publishers, so I am going to start another thread. I really want to gather composers here and discuss the focus put out at the head.

New thread will be: Should Publishers or the Church Dictate the Music in the Pew?

Ian, I am posting a response to your last post there.

Yes. I want to regroup this post so that we have focus. I will write something that will do that and post asap. Thanks for the push, Palestrina.

Dear Francis,
I've been somewhat reluctant to enter this discussion, but your last post elicits a few observations. FYI, I compose RC music, have for nearly 4 decades, both English and Latin.
As much time in as a parish and cathedral DM.
Just bullet point observations and comments-
*The vanity of setting English texts would only apply if and when the GIRM prescriptions for the Introit, Offertorio and Communio are amended and eliminate the (presumed) lower heirarchical fourth option of the alius cantus. As tendentious as this action would prove, I'm not at all comfortable with the philosophical notion that the extent body of valid Catholic hymns (and I mean the texts) is forever set in stone. The various commentaries of prevailing documents, themselves, suggest that the evolution of the sacred arts (including prose and poetry) is to be fostered, as long as they meet their licit criteria. Practically speaking, I really don't see an "either/or" future, but a "both/and" regarding propers and hymns.
*It is certainly not impossible to compose "new" polyphony as we understand its Roman, classical rubrics. But, we need to face some artistic realities. Namely, the corpus of the various schools of Catholic polyphony from the Ars Nova through the early Baroque, even into the Romantic eras (ie. Bruckner, Vaughan-Williams, etc.) should still be considered "active mines" in which new generations of directors and choirs should continue to plumb. Otherwise, one has to choose to reinvent a wheel that is substantially already perfected in its form. Or, one can superimpose newer or personal compositional traits within the classic polyphonic structures such as the more exquisite harmonies of a William Hawley, the clustered and nebulous harmonic compounds of others mentioned here like Lauridsen, Whitacre, Part, Tavaner et al.
*Which brings us to- how can contemporary, orthodox RC composers best serve the Church in all places She lives: the small, impoverished parishes in both rural and urban areas? The choirs of only two voices (S/B) etc.? Parishes that are engaged in singing, though that is primarily via homophonic, strophic, metered music that is augmented by choral harmony support?
*The OF is an anomaly if you subscribe wholly to a Professor Dobszay-like creed regarding its organic authenticity, which I won't argue here. But your attached contention that it therefore is limited to the vernacular is completely, utterly non-factual. If I recall, you've attended CMAA colloquiums in the past? Then you would have heard its president state that an OF liturgy, properly (pun intended) executed, and mindful of the paradigm of beauty is effective in the vernacular, but even moreso in Latin. It, again is a "both/and" circumstance as I see it.
*I'm sorry, but I cannot also agree with you regarding the abolition of all musical forms not native to the Roman Rite, namely plainsong and polyphony, as necessarily abrogating or homogenizing our pre-eminent Christian mission. One needs to remember that the well-spring of our musical tradition was appropriated from the four corners of the Christian world and incorporated into one body we call Gregorian. This sort of enculturated melting pot has been brewing for 15 centuries; the Church's music subsumes "exotic" elements that compliment its native culture, and rejects those that are truly foreign and alien. To whit:
*Apropos of another thread, I would hate to see a Berlin Wall formally codified that would confine the treasury of Orthodox sacred music to the Eastern Churches, and vice-versa.

That's about all I have for now- got a rehearsal to run tonight. Along with Padre Martini's DEXTERA DOMINE, gotta go over Faure's CANTIQUE D. JEAN RACINE, M. Haydn's TRISTIS EST ANIMA MEA, Pierluigi's O CRUX AVE as well as some other chestnuts that we must keep roasting, lest we forget.

Hi Charles:

Thanks again for your input! I read your comments thoroughly a number of times. I am more convinced that composers and all Catholic Church musicians need to continue to have this discussion so we can best serve the Church with the good fruit of our efforts, however small and diverse they may be.

My thinking on your points in order posted are as follows:

1. I also have been selecting (and composing) music utilized in liturgies for approximately 35 years according to the alius cantus aptus. In doing so I found that the "choosing" of music resulted almost exclusively in the four-hymn-sandwich at best and at worst, a liturgical dance to some evangelical crooner on a boom box perched on the ambo. I was subtly pressured to this by priests, liturgy committees, cantors, choir members, 'liturgists' and parish members, most of whom did not even know there was a hierarchy of preference in music for the liturgy, and if they did, they outrightly denied the mandates and pleaded the fourth amendment ...I mean aptus. For them the 'GIRM' was nothing more than a sickness to be avoided. It was the Art and the Environment that tickled their fancies. Money nor means was not the object in parishes where I was employed. It was simply personal preference and 'freedom of creative expression' that towed their barge.

Not only myself, but my colleagues as well suffered under this pretense. In fact, I hadn't heard a single Gregorian Chant Proper at a liturgy for three decades or more and certainly no newly composed Propers. Worse, I witnessed Rock-n-Roll 'masses' that turned the altar into a stage, and priest into prop.

Personally, I have composed many pieces in English to date, (you can find a few on this board [e.g., 1 Corinthians 13]--so you see I am speaking from a theoretical position at the moment, not a pragmatic one -- at least not yet.) [NOTE: I also composed the prose for that work which is an adaptation of the scriptural text.] My stance isn't about 'to compose or not to compose' new music or text, it is simply that it should definitely not eclipse the entire historical repertoire of Catholic liturgical music that should be given due regard; especially the mandated texts.

Perhaps what I am truly driving toward, is the need to come back to balance in respecting and giving a rightful place to the 'eldest brother' while nurturing the 'new ones' along... (and wouldn't it be obvious that the new ones have a slight resemblance to their mother and father?)

Here is one article that I recently read that clearly outlines some thinking about this subject which really got me thinking the way I do now.

http://www.musicasacra.com/2007/11/06/winter-sacred-music/

2. At first I thought you meant land mines... lol. I definitely utilize all the 'active mines' when it comes to 'going for the gold.' (At the moment studying the full scores of Stravinsky, Torke, Messiaen, etc. as I am readying to compose a full orchestral work). My own style is an amalgamation of many of the composers that I have studied over the years (sacred and secular) including the sacred minimalists you also mentioned. 21st century music is my forte, but it has roots in the other 20 centuries as well.

3. First off, I must clarify my objective as a composer at this point in time. I have been without a post for a while now, which has given me time to think theoretically and from an objective point of view since I am not presently in the trenches getting a choir to sing SAB (or SATB if enough men show up for rehearsal.) Therefore, I am simply trying to formulate a tactical approach in composing music that could possibly help direct or redirect the musical eyes of the church back to their roots. (That is the only reason I am even having any of these discussions on this forum. But I am beginning to have a 'sinking' feeling that I stand alone.)

Once I have a frame of reference, I am also hoping to 'mine' the best gold I can dig up. One thing I have been doing along the lines you mention (for the Ordinary), is to compose Masses that give the congregation an 'active' part that is embellished with the SATB choir and organ. That, to me, seems to be where some of the unfound nuggets are hiding just below the surface.

4. Regarding the OF/EF scenario. OK... yes, there is also the OF, (latin flavor) but the real crux of the issue isn't latin or english, but the general attitude that everything exists in a "throw away" state: texts, hymnals and even the music documents themselves (the American ones anyway). We went from an Environment, to music in Catholic Worship, and now we are moving on to the SttL. In my view it is erroneous to think that one 'document' can now super-cede another. And it certainly does not work for serious minded composers. The text of the EF is unchanging. It's been around for centuries, and like the EverReady Rabbit it keeps on going and going...

5. Clarification. I am not proposing the abolition of ANY musical form (except of those that are profane--and this hasn't happened yet--but I think it is soon coming) but am simply trying to 'mine the purest gold' I can find that brings balance to ALL the forms (musical), especially the forms we have neglected in the past 40 years which happen to be polyphony and the chant that already embody a full set of proper text for the Mass of the day.

6. I compose jazz and I certainly love to play Gershwin and listen to Rhoda Scott. (Old "YES" is the only rock music that I have any interest to hear.) But no one has yet convinced me to compose a "Blues Kyrie", or a Requiem in the style of 'Close To The Edge' (although I don't for a minute doubt it has not already been done.) I understand the theoretical notion that when it comes to music style/culture, all things can and will be considered. But the question begs; should they? Isn't this how we wound up with pantheistic, narcissistic and "freedom focused" hymns peppered throughout the glossy hardbound hymnals that adorn the pews in the Catholic church? The dangerous homogenization is not in the musical styles--its far worse. That kind of drivel has infested the very faith. The music was simply the Trojan horse in which it came.

7. You can look at a wall from the outside or from the inside. What is good for the in-dwellers is bad for the outsiders and vice-versa. To some, the theological, liturgical and musical 'Berlin Wall' was torn down about forty years ago. (The ones that wanted out should have used the door and went far away! The ones that wanted in used Trojan horses.)

As one of the in-dwellers, I perceived the wall to be one as a centuries old armoured defense against the onslaught of our enemies--the world, the flesh and the devil. Anything and everything has broken through; the altars have been sacked, the organs have been dismantled, the stain glass and statuary removed, the priests spun on their heels (literally turned around), their rites rewritten, and the Holy Sacrifice and the chant was confined in the chains of an Indult. What was worse, we were all invited to participate in the work of the 'reform' (didn't Luther try this the first time?) ourselves all hyped up in the democratic semantic of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". (Eagles Wings?)

Unfortunately, you and I have born the fruit of this episode in the history of our Dear Mother Church. So as I stand in the middle of the battlefield and shuffle through the debris looking for something worth keeping, you can only imagine what it is I have found and am now clutching to my breast!

OK

We are coming to the end of lent. I have prayed and fasted about how I should proceed to promote 'composers unite'. I have developed a new model for publishing Roman Catholic Sacred Music in the Latin Tradition as you have seen here. The new model will favor (and help to fund) the livleyhood of the composer, not the publisher. I am building the website now and will erect it in a week or two.

It will need a domain name.

Here are a few domain names I thought of getting, but truly want your input on a good domain name. What do you suggest?

ecclesiaorans
romancatholicmusic
romancatholicsacredmusic

or

conciliarmusicinapostconciliarchurch.org!

I use Sibelius. I have been told you can purchase the meinrad font and create authentic scores with that, but I am not positive.

http://www.saintmeinrad.edu/monastery_lit_fonts_melody.aspx

thanks janet... i imagine the name is probably not all that important... it's the music and the mission that will make it what it is... i tend to think the shorter the better (easy to type) but for search engines, romancatholicsacredmusic would do very well because it covers all the bases.

Hello Francis, I would be happy to join and assist in any way in your project.
ghmus7@hotmail.com
www.Gregory hamilton.org
Many of my scores are found on Sheet Music plus.