www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy The shiny side of the coin.

Dear Jeff,

On this thread, Professor Thompson reminded everyone that the texts and music are copyright, implying that legal recourse could be had, if anyone dares to correct any mistake, or offer an alternative musical setting.

In the letters that have been published, everyone is reminded that no one is allowed to use any other setting, than these official ones.

Cantors all over the country have always set music to texts, there are choirs and choir directors who have been doing this for years. Is all the work to be shredded now?

You yourself have set music. This is now forbidden. Priests and cantors have put notes and choir music to our Liturgy forever. Now they are breaking the law?

Look on the Kliros forum, and you'll see that cantors are still doing this, even discussing the merits of various programs.

According to the professor, they will be breaking copyright, there work is illegal, and they should stop.

I call that threatening, and intimidating.

Yours in Christ,
Nick

Dear Nick,

I think you are misrepresenting both the meaning and intent of copyright law, and the reason it came up. In the process, you are making accusations which I believe to be both baseless and slightly inflammatory.

LOTS of texts are copywritten; for example, the publications of Mother Mary and Bishop Kallistos, which were reprinted "with permission... all rights reserved" by St. Tikhon's. Now, these books were intended for actual use, and there ARE fair use guidelines for copyright. I can sing them to any tune I like; I can quote them in small amounts in print; etc. If I REpublish significant parts in any form, I am obligated to obtain permission from the copyright holder. We are obligated to obey the laws, insofar as those laws are not immediately immoral; we should not need to be threatened, and as I say, you are conjuring threats out of a reminder of a fact.

The OCA, Greek and Ukrainian service books I have are the same way. I can't republish them, or modify them and present them as if they were the original work. Do you feel that the copyright notice on each constitutes a threat?

An earlier post MIGHT have suggested that an electronic form would allow us to simply correct the new texts OURSELVES and reprint it (this possible misperception was later clarified.) Copyright law (which IS the law of the land) would make this quite problematical; the translations are not simply in the public domain. I see no threat in mentioning a fact that lays out some basic moral boundaries; you are reading that into the conversation.

The new Ukrainian anthology states:

"All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the written permission of the publisher."

Quite a number of Byzantine Catholic choirs are already planning to adapt their existing harmonies to the new texts and music. Anyone with specific concerns involving the new texts should probably contact the Music Commission by sending a letter to their eparchial chancery marked Attn: Music Commission.

Yours in Christ,
Jeff Mierzejewski

P.S. A number of Monsignor Levkulic's books, and John Vernoski's, are also under copyright, with "rights reserved." We are morally obligated to respect those copyrights while making use of their materials. There are both laws and customs regarding fair use, but simply saying, "Oh, it's for the church" doesn't vitiate the obligation. Otherwise we would have had a complete Menaion set to prostopinije about 10 years ago.

Dear Jeff,

If I am inflamatory, your are understating the position. The letter I saw stated clearly that no other music could be used. It didn't make any exceptions for choir music, or other parishes unique or cherished melodies (there are many, or should I say, there used to be many). No other music may be used, means no other music may be used, period.

The language was deliberate, and the intention clear. All the choirs are out of business, as are cantors who can only sing the tones and the Liturgy the way they always have. Other music is no longer to be allowed. And older cantors who cannot learn the new stuff, are presumably, discarded.

a grieving,
Nick

Dear Nick,

Could you tell us specifically which letter you saw? The promulgation letter from Metropolitan Basil says that no other TEXT is to be used for the Divine Liturgy. I'm not sure which eparchy you are in; did some letter from your own bishop order than no other MUSIC could be used?

Yours in Christ,
Jeff

Nick,

The letter of promulgation states that the new text and music are promulgated as of 1/6/07. It also that after 6/29/07 the new text is the only one to be used it does not refer to the music. I am sure the hierarchs were aware the music is a much harder issue to change and so specifically did not specify it.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Jeff and Deacon Lance,

Are you saying that the new music is not mandatory? Does this mean we can keep using the music books we have as long as we mark the changes to match the text of the new liturgy?

This still leaves the problem of the word "man" being omitted from the creed. And the problem of gender neutral language. Maybe we can just forget to blacken them out when we update the pew books.

1 Th 5:21

Page 3 of the new pew book says:

This book is approved for use in churches of the Byzantine Metropolitan Church Sui Juris of Pittsburgh, U.S.A., promulgated on the feast of the Theophany of our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ, January 6, 2007. On and after the feast of the Holy and Pre-eminent apostles Peter and Paul, June 29, 2007, this text and its attendant music will be the sole liturgical text for the celebration of the Divine Liturgies of our Holy Fathers John Chrysostom and Basil the Great.

It may be clear cut to some, but I have a hard time interpreting the meaning of "this text and its attendant music will be sole liturgical text ...".

I confess that upon first reading I thought it meant the music was normative as well, but now I am not sure.