New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Interested in writing music for the Liturgy?
Talk about it here!

Moderator: PaulW

Post Reply
Alan
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 1:52 pm
Parish / Diocese: Holy Redeemer Pershore [Birmingham Archdiocese]
Location: Malvern, UK
Contact:

New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by Alan » Wed Jul 29, 2009 8:41 am

Am I correct in thinking that in the English translation of 3rd edition of the Roman Missal the Glory to God (and, indeed, the Lord have mercy, the Holy, Holy, etc) is an ICEL text?

I ask this because ICEL's current Publication Policies document (http://www.icelweb.org/PubPolicy.PDF) says:

ICET texts are texts that have been produced by the International Consultation on English Texts, an ecumenical body of which ICEL was a member. These texts have been revised by the successor to ICET, the English Language Liturgical Consultation (ELLC). The following is a list of these texts:

The Lord's Prayer
Apostles' Creed
Nicene Creed
Kyrie Te Deum
Gloria in Excelsis
Sursum Corda
Sanctus/Benedictus
Agnus Dei
Gloria Patri
Benedictus (Canticle of Zechariah)
Magnificat (Canticle of Mary)
Nunc Dimittis (Canticle of Simeon)

The texts, whether in their original form (1975) or as revised by ELLC (1988), are in the public domain and as such do not require permission for reproduction. It is sufficient to acknowledge the source of the text...


If, as I suspect, the new translations are not ICET, but ICEL, then the copyright situation is very different. :(

I had hoped that the draft Composer's Guide on our Liturgy Office's website would make all plain, but the relevant Appendix has yet to be drafted!

Gabriel
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 7:06 pm
Location: London

Re: New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by Gabriel » Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:32 am

Yes, the texts of English translation of the third edition of the Roman Missal, including the Order of Mass will all be copyright ICEL. One of the effects of Liturgiam Authenticam was that translation bodies put working ecumenically on a lower footing and therefore producing common texts became less of a priority.

The ICEL website is slightly misleading as the ELLC series of text (which were revisions of the ICET texts) were never approved for use in the liturgy.

I would have thought that the final page of the ICEL policy document on Internet use gave some hope for the future - as it appears to allow free use, without permission needed as long as the text is properly acknowledged.
Another blog

User avatar
Nick Baty
Posts: 2067
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 11:27 am
Parish / Diocese: Everton, Liverpool
Contact:

Re: New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by Nick Baty » Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:25 am

But am I right in thinking that published settings will first have to be passed by a panel? One for each country?

NorthernTenor
Posts: 794
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 7:26 pm
Parish / Diocese: Southwark

Re: New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by NorthernTenor » Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:56 am

Nick Baty wrote:But am I right in thinking that published settings will first have to be passed by a panel? One for each country?


Thomas has raised this matter, too. If true, it would raise problems of principal and practice. We should therefore look for clarification from the Bishops of E&W as soon as possible.
Ian Williams
Alium Music

Gabriel
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 7:06 pm
Location: London

Re: New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by Gabriel » Wed Jul 29, 2009 12:17 pm

Rome has always desired that Bishops' Conference have some process for the approval of liturgical music. It was recently re-iterated in GIRM 393 - as I understand the localised version of the text was the amendment of the Holy See. ICEL, as a mixed commission of Bishops' Conferences, should normally check that authorisation is given by local Conference before giving copyright permission - this in particular applies to editions of ritual books.

I presume such a process for music would work similar to an imprimatur. To receive an imprimatur the text had to meet criteria (presumably the previously mentioned composer's guide is some indication though it will need to be revised in the light of the 3rd edition of the Missal). Two further aspects of an [i]imprimatur[ is that it is related to formal publication (i.e. it is necessary when making it available to others) and it is to be sought in the place of publication. So, for example, something published in the States (where they have had such a process for a number of years) and distributed here would not need to go through a second process.

What problems of principle and practice was NT thinking of?
Another blog

User avatar
Nick Baty
Posts: 2067
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 11:27 am
Parish / Diocese: Everton, Liverpool
Contact:

Re: New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by Nick Baty » Wed Jul 29, 2009 12:33 pm

I knew Gabriel would have the answer. And as the check is simply for textual accurary – rather than musical judgement – then there's no problem. Those who stick to the texts will get the go-ahead.

Sadly, this won't stop certain publishers producing metrical or other texts but it's a start.

Now, what about composers who write, for example, a set of choir-only eucharistic acclamations. Textually accurate but incorrect functionality? Will publication be denied?

Gabriel
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 7:06 pm
Location: London

Re: New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by Gabriel » Wed Jul 29, 2009 12:53 pm

It seems to me that textual fidelity is the starting point. And fidelity is to the liturgical text as a whole.

Who knows the bishops may wish to exercise musical judgement - though I think it would be much harder to provide identifiable criteria which were faithful to the catholicity of the Church.
Another blog

User avatar
Nick Baty
Posts: 2067
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 11:27 am
Parish / Diocese: Everton, Liverpool
Contact:

Re: New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by Nick Baty » Wed Jul 29, 2009 12:58 pm

Thanks. You should be a politician! :D

Gabriel
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 7:06 pm
Location: London

Re: New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by Gabriel » Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:13 pm

I am quite happy being a civil servant of sorts. :wink:
Another blog

Alan
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 1:52 pm
Parish / Diocese: Holy Redeemer Pershore [Birmingham Archdiocese]
Location: Malvern, UK
Contact:

Re: New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by Alan » Wed Jul 29, 2009 3:53 pm

Gabriel wrote:Yes, the texts of English translation of the third edition of the Roman Missal, including the Order of Mass will all be copyright ICEL. One of the effects of Liturgiam Authenticam was that translation bodies put working ecumenically on a lower footing and therefore producing common texts became less of a priority.

I thought so. Thank you.

Gabriel also wrote:The ICEL website is slightly misleading as the ELLC series of text (which were revisions of the ICET texts) were never approved for use in the liturgy.

Yes, I realized after I posted that these were not the same as our current Missal texts.

Anyway, very helpful. Thanks again.

Southern Comfort
Posts: 1792
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 12:31 pm

Re: New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by Southern Comfort » Sat Aug 15, 2009 8:04 am

NorthernTenor wrote:
Nick Baty wrote:But am I right in thinking that published settings will first have to be passed by a panel? One for each country?


Thomas has raised this matter, too. If true, it would raise problems of principal and practice. We should therefore look for clarification from the Bishops of E&W as soon as possible.


Who is Thomas?

Southern Comfort
Posts: 1792
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 12:31 pm

Re: New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by Southern Comfort » Sat Aug 15, 2009 8:09 am

Gabriel wrote:Rome has always desired that Bishops' Conference have some process for the approval of liturgical music. It was recently re-iterated in GIRM 393 - as I understand the localised version of the text was the amendment of the Holy See. ICEL, as a mixed commission of Bishops' Conferences, should normally check that authorisation is given by local Conference before giving copyright permission - this in particular applies to editions of ritual books.

I presume such a process for music would work similar to an imprimatur. To receive an imprimatur the text had to meet criteria (presumably the previously mentioned composer's guide is some indication though it will need to be revised in the light of the 3rd edition of the Missal). Two further aspects of an [i]imprimatur[ is that it is related to formal publication (i.e. it is necessary when making it available to others) and it is to be sought in the place of publication. So, for example, something published in the States (where they have had such a process for a number of years) and distributed here would not need to go through a second process.


The problem with all of this is that different Bishops' Conferences allow different things ─ for example, the Canadian Bishops currently encourage additional acclamations in the Eucharistic Prayer, but no US-based publisher will publish settings that do this ─ but the imprimatur or approval from the local Conference is based solely on the geographical location of the publisher. As most of our publishers are now US-based, this is a real problem. It means the American Bishops' liturgy secretariat are effectively deciding what other conferences may or may not use.

NorthernTenor
Posts: 794
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 7:26 pm
Parish / Diocese: Southwark

Re: New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by NorthernTenor » Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:00 pm

SC,

Sorry - Thomas == dmu3tem.

As to your most recent post: spot on. The confusion and unintended consequences arising from the combination of the application of commercial copyright law and practice to liturgical texts with ecclesiatical constraints on publication - it's developing into an unholy mess (a bit like this sentence).
Ian Williams
Alium Music

Southern Comfort
Posts: 1792
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 12:31 pm

Re: New Gloria etc (copyright, again)

Post by Southern Comfort » Mon Aug 17, 2009 7:33 pm

NorthernTenor wrote:Sorry - Thomas == dmu3tem.


Whoops, I should have thought of him. Mea maxima culpa!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest