As To That Proposal of the Bishops...

Chironomo speculates that the USCC's draft proposal for "liturgical music" was both mis-directed AND has been sorta kinda buried.

Moreover, that the response from Rome was not direct, but indirect.

Michael McMahon, President of NPM, pens a curious look at the Directory for Music suggested by the Bishops in November of 2006 in “Establishing Criteria for Liturgical Songs”. From the outset, he misses the point entirely…. Liturgiam Authenticam doesn’t call for establishing criteria for liturgical songs… it calls for establishing a fixed repertoire of liturgical texts to be used for singing. There is a huge difference, which apparently the Bishops missed as well. Giving him his due, however, he does point out that the Bishop’s document has been submitted for recognitio as required, but that “as of July 1st, the U.S Bishops were still waiting to hear back from Rome.” I think this silence from Rome speaks volumes.

(Faithful readers recall that NAPM is more accurately referred to as NAP(AL)M; the organization spent about 40 years attempting to incinerate any clear and reality-based understanding of the term musica sacra, not to mention putting the publishers of that stuff out of business.)

Anyhoo,

I would suggest that they have heard back from Rome already, in both Sacramentum Caritatis ...and in the letter to Bishops accompanying Summorum Pontificam

Both of these documents were issued this year, following the Bishops submission of the Directory, and both set forth a vision of what the music in the liturgy should be (in the case of summorum pontificam, the vision is to enact what was intended in Musicam Sacram).

Not a bad thesis. Given the inclinations of the current Pope, NAP(AL)M might be ceding membership to the Church Music Association of America over the next 10 years, because CMAA actually gets it.