The vocal minority is not necessarily a minority. That is, it might indeed represent a small group; but by the same token, it can also merely be the exposed tip of the iceberg. Given cognitive bias, it's easy for us to see what we prefer to see, rather than what is. One has persuade, and not simply engage in talking points (in fact, talking points are counterproductive, because people will see in them that their perspectives are merely scratching points for your desired answers, and that will tick them off, whether they tell you or not). The best thing to begin with open, non-leading, genuinely curious answers that are not predicated on converting people to your preferred answers (if you do this well, you actually might convert them in the end; it's a paradoxical process in that respect - the more detached you are from winning a debate, the more likely you are to listen to your audience and earn their trust so that they will in turn listen to you and may be even persuaded by you).

The moral of the story is, pastors have a lot of authority on paper, but it's meaningless (or worse, self-subverting) without deep and broad consultation. Committees and ministers tend towards self-selection bias over time, and are not proxies for this kind of consulation. The Catholic monarchical model is not that of the early modern state, but of the abbot, who knows that, if he does not operate with a deep understanding of those who bear the burden of his authority, he loses that very same authority. A lot of Americans misread Roman monarchical culture in this regard, assuming that what's on paper is what it's supposed to really look like; the traditional Roman reality is that, the more power you have on paper, the more you have to rely on consultation as you actually use it. Having the right ideas is not enough, by a long shot. It takes years and years to implement good ideas well, and you have to operate on the assumption that you do not get the gratification of reaping the good of what you sow - you only get the gratification of reaping the good of what those who preceded you sowed.....

As you ease things along, here's an encouraging, tangible idea.
Ask your pastor if you can start a youth schola. Meet/rehearse weekly. Aim for Advent or Christmas to have one Mass. Make sure the rep plugs into the hearts of complainers by programming some old favorites that aren't too sappy.
Ideas
Panis angelicus
Puer natus
Salve Regina
Mass VIII
In dulci jubilo
Adeste fideles/ O come all ye faithful

This could soften hearts and remove the 'it's too hard' obstacle. The youth get hooked on this music because its not cutesy and beneath their dignity. An added bonus- complaining about kids' singing makes one look quite unreasonable.

FNJ

Yes, vis-a-vis employees, to be sure. But pastors come and go, and the flock remains; the essential inertia of Catholic parochial life is founded on the flock, not priests. The force of the flock is like gravity on glaciers: slow, but inexorable. Pastors can imagine they are really "in control", but they fool themselves to the extent they believe their own press.

Thanks to all for your thoughts.

Mary Ann, there was acutally a youth choir here when I came, but the group of roughly 30 was not very disciplined, and their skill level was deplorable. The previous director had done a lot of jumping-around "singing" accompanied by midis on a keyboard. Vocal and musical technique had not been developed at all. The few in the group who could match pitch and actually sing were easily "overshadowed" by those who could not. One little boy who was quite a good singer and very bright acted out all the time, and I'm sure part of it was boredom.

I am starting a bell choir within the next few weeks in order to provide an opportunity for many of these children who are interested in music but vocally challenged, as I don't have adequate time to work with them individually on their vocal skill. I do wish to have a choir/schola as well; I'm just trying to discern how to reform it. Auditions are necessary, I think...but how does one go about auditioning children and then turning some down without damaging them??

I've recently come to suspect that I've long underestimated what a red flag Latin is for many people. This issue might actually be the #1 issue. If you look at all the complaints you have received, they all can be traced to this one issue. Latin!

For those of us in this world, the Latin is just part of who we are and what we do. But for the people in the pews, it might be the critical issue that excites the opposition more than anything else. It does make some people uncomfortable in many many ways, and could unnecessarily introduce instability that could doom the whole program.

If I were in your position, I would forget taking on this battle in the ordinary, propers, or dialogues of the Mass. Leave it to later. We have quality English now that is suitable in the transition. The Latin can be left of Latin hymns after communion sung by the schola but even here, it might be a good idea to minimize it. Maybe a Latin communion chant would be the only thing that takes place in Latin.

I once believed that all parish change hinged on the introduction of Latin. I don't think that I was right about this. Just take one issue at a time and leave Latin for further down the road. I know that this is disappointing but nothing is more important than staying on the right track going forward. If that means letting this red flag issue go for now, it seems worth it to me, especially now that we have resources to accomplish amazing things without crossing into the Latin territory.

As I posted last spring, our parish schola merged with a Lutheran Choir and the local college Masterworks Chorale to perform Mozart's REQUIEM. It was extremely successful, so much that we're repeating the union with a Christmas Seasonal concert featuring the Bach MAGNIFICAT and Vivaldi GLORIA (with some smaller tunes as well.)
At the first college rehearsal last night, after we'd read the Vivaldi and moved to the Bach, it suddenly occured to me that, in this union of two churches and a school, all we'd ever sung thus far was in Latin. Now the ancient arrangement has the Bach in King James/Douay English. So, I asked my co-director if it might be of relief to both the combined choir and audience to sing the Bach in English. I made light of saying "I know for a Roman Catholic to propose this sounds like heresy, but we needn't do everything in Latin." Now I know that some here would definitely cry "heresy" to the notion, but this is not just for a non-liturgical concert of sacred music, but an ecumenical endeavor. So, I very much understand Jeffrey's realization. Our familiarity and ease with the most beautifully formed language for singing ever evolved doesn't mean that everyone else is on our page.
In fact, the resistance to its use at Mass often begins in the rectory, with either an active or passive aggression surfacing when the clerical use of Latin question is raised! So, all in moderation as necessary.

BUT most people don't know Latin from Korean and it doesn't matter even slightly that Latin is the Holy tongue.

This is not really accurate.
For many "Vatican II Catholics" the desire for multiculturalism and inclusion means that a foreign vernacular is seen as a good thing, whereas Latin, specifically because of it's liturgical heritage, is seen as a bad thing.
Korean = Moving forward
Latin = Moving backward

More than anything, the most basic language of liturgy is unaccompanied singing, regardless of language. And unaccompanied singing is, for most people, a foreign enough language at first to be jarring.

In most places, it seems that one would do very well to get Musicam Sacram 29 — especially (c) — implemented in its fullness, week after week, whether in Latin or a given vernacular. It also seems that in most places, the near- to intermediate-term goal of liturgical music reform will be the chanted vernacular.

In case anyone is puzzled by Richard R.'s comment about "(earlier) CMAA advocates" - he of course means to say that I am selling out the CMAA cause by suggesting that change happen in stages. Just thought you need to know. He will be glad to elaborate on my dangerous opinions on the phone or email I'm sure.

1. "Latin is hard" (this is difficult for me to fathom since I've been exposed to Latin music my whole life, but some people claim to be very overwhelmed by it)
(I have had this same somewhat phobic reaction to Latin in my current parish)
2. "We don't like it" (I always say...give me the reason you don't like it)
(Because we aren't used to it... it's different and "new")
3. "We're going back in time" (ironically, this usually comes from Seniors who one would think would be thrilled about restoring music of their childhood!)
(I have a fairly old parish, demographically, and they are very unfriendly toward Latin)
4. "It's not comfortable for us" (sometimes going outside our comfort zone is such a novel concept!)
(Exactly)
5. "The people don't/won't sing because they don't know it" (this tends to come up anytime anything -- antiphon, chant, or new piece -- is new or unfamiliar)

I have found that the resistance to change has been extremely high at the parish where I direct now. The funny thing is that the people continually complained about the poor quality of the music to my predecessor as well. They did the same, tired old folk tunes from the 70's every week... and some really inappropriate ordinaries. I have completely backed off from any Latin at all at this point. They even complained vociferously about the short chanted offertory antiphons from the SEP that we were doing. In order to maintain peace in the midst of the big change to the chanted ordinaries, we have reverted to the use of a short hymn at Offertory and no proper antiphons at all at this point. The complaints have lessened, since they have seen that we were responsive to their complaints. They are doing very well at singing the new missal ordinaries so far.

Where we are now:
1. We continue to implement the use of the new Missal ordinary chants (so far, we chant: Lord, Have Mercy, Lamb of God, Memorial Acclamation, Our Father, and, beginning this weekend, Holy, Holy)
2. The hymn selection is much more the traditional classical hymns with solid texts that are in accord with Catholic beliefs (although I do throw them a bone now and then and do a favorite like One Bread, One Body... Christ Be Our Light... or Behold the Lamb from time to time). They still complain that they don't know all the hymns, but the whining has been much less lately.
3. We require choir members to attend rehearsals in order to sing at Mass with the choir (apparently, this was not required in the past -- given that they didn't learn new music very often, it didn't seem important to them; it just isn't possible when we have so much new ground to cover). I have had a couple of choir members quit because of this policy, but our music quality has improved without their presence.
4. My faithful members of the choir are sounding much better and have more confidence as time goes on. Despite their initial resistance, they are making great progress in learning to sing plainchant!
5. We changed our Mass booklets for the coming year. I had hoped for Jeff's hymnal or something else better than the throwaway worship aids, but the best I could do was that we went from Breaking Bread (which I very much dislike) to the WLP missalettes -- a slight step up, imo). I really couldn't, in good conscience, push for more since I will be leaving them in the spring. I have no idea who will be taking my place, but hopefully I'll leave the parish music program a bit better than when I found it. Many of the parishioners know that my tenure will be short, so it could be that they are just waiting me out (haha).

I wish you good luck, Claire.

About the Korean, maybe we don't 'demand' our language should be used in public places as much, even if there are many Koreans in this country, and the politicians don't need to pamper us because we are pretty quiet about that. We expect to learn and use English if we decide to live here while we teach our own children Korean culture at home and in our community places and share the beauty of it with our neighbors, and I think it's reasonable to think that one tries to learn basic prayers of Mass in Latin if s/he is becomes a Roman Catholic whether vernacular is permitted or not in Mass.

"..vernacular languages in the liturgy along side the Latin..."

Maybe the conflict exists because many are led to believe all vernacular is a norm in OF Masses and those who wish to preserve Latin has been almost completely ignored?

Friends, this is very helpful. Please keep it going!

Jeffery, does your insight on holding off Latin apply to something even as simple as Kyrie, Sanctus, Agnus Dei? We began using them in Lent of this year (Kyrie XVI, Sanctus XVIII, Agnus Dei XVIII) and have continued using them for all Masses two weekends per month. Surprisingly to me, the widespread comment from both English and Spanish communities is that "we don't know what we are singing" (!). This is pretty much all the Latin that has been introduced (originally we included the Mysterium Fidei, but let that one go before long as it's the hardest and least familiar of the bunch). Yet just the regular use of these three has prompted the resistance described in my initial post...

I did chat the other day with a priest who said he was teaching these three chants to the Hispanic community at his former parish. It sounded like he introduced them only one at a time, and for several months to a year before adding the next one.

A few things I'm realizing:

-90-95% of any growth, development, or change is attitude and motivation. If people have decided they don't want something, it will be "too hard" for them, no matter how simple or easy. Yet if they are motivated, anything is possible and hard things are tackled because it's worth it. Getting them on board for the "worth it" part is the challenge, of course! And naturally, this reality applies to any area of personal or communal life -- not just music or liturgy.

-What I've thought was "not much" or "slow" change often isn't so to the people -- it's a lot to them. Real baby steps are needed for them to cooperate and have a conversion of mind and heart so that their acceptance, and then desire, can take precedence over initial emotional kickback. And as has been mentioned before on this forum, change has to be even slower and more broken down/stepwise for the Hispanic community.

Patience and perseverance...!

Another thought:
It's all in the perception: It the people perceive that the changes are coming FROM the pastor, they react differently to them than if the changes are seen coming form the MD and just tolerated by the pastor.

And, if the flock is not happy with the pastor, it won't necessarily help the MD to be seen as enabling him if the MD doesn't establish a separate identity.