"Most Catholic church music programs run on a week-to-week basis. It's unfortunate, but true.

Long-range planning can make a difference in your parish."

YES! The greatest crime of Catholic church music programs is that there is no music program. It's come in, do whatever you want, repeat next week. That's not a program, that's chaos.

At my last job, I sat down with the pastor, and asked, "where would we like to be in a year?" Would we want to use ad orientem once a month? Have the congregation be able to sing Mass VIII? Use the Introit consistently? We dreamed big, and then asked, "how do we get from where we are to there?" Came up with a plan, and got to work. We did modify our plan as necessary - you have to be flexible - and probably didn't accomplish half of what we set out to do. BUT we did accomplish a LOT more than if we just said "let's just keep doing three or four good hymns."

"Brick by brick" is baloney. "Slow but steady" is a recipe for disaster. Get a BLUEPRINT, and THEN start laying your bricks! Find the finish line, and THEN start your slow crawl towards it!

At my current job, I asked myself, what skills do I want my choir to have after 4 months? Then I hit those things hard at rehearsals. It paid off IMMENSELY.

Another valuable point I saw in a TED Talk: Find your goal, and then ask, "What's the step immediately before that? And the one before that? And before that?"

The crisis in Catholic music ISN'T a crisis in quality. It's a crisis in parish leadership. As in, there is none.

One aspect missing from the discussion to some extent, and related to the thread on shifting to Orthopraxis, is that of realizing that ideally the years' liturgies are ALREADY planned. We're just not that far along the bell curve yet to the "sing THE Mass" paradigm, whether in the OF or EF. That has to be part of the long term equation even in a five year turnaround as I see it. And Gavin's right, it's only about leadership at each parish or cathedral level, and the exercise thereof.
All that given and accepted, the DM can effect the shift and still maintain a variety if that persists as a political reality. But, write on the chalkboard a hundred times:
"Get rid of the pulp hymnal or the substandard Big Publisher book (even if that's ADOREMUS or COLLEGEVILLE, if it cannot meet the paradigm in repertoire choice.)"
If your place loves the strophic hymn, then start figuring out how to infuse Tietze or Pluth with the great tunes.
If, OTOH, you have to have the sacro song form, then consider plowing through and culling only the finest verbatim and allusory versions of Propers. Ken Macek and others are diligently working to improve the number of such options in the Ensemble format.
Use the SEP, SCG, RR's new CG or the Weber/Kelly/PalmerBurgess/Fords/Rossini (for all I care) settings in the vernaculars.
Chant the Propers and Ordinary in Greek/Latin
Go all the way in with Latin OF or EF (ideally Cantata or Solemnis)
Use Aristotles indices with Chuck's CPDL for polyphony for normative or special service.

But, get it in our heads that the LITURGY IS BEFORE US ALREADY.

Lieber Charles,

As one who was a professional mathematician for nearly four decades and has taught many probability and statistics courses, I have to ask: What sort of "bell curve" do you mean that we are not yet far enough along?

I hope it might be some sort of musical bell and not the bell curve of a normally distributed random variable from statistics that you refer to, because I see neither a normal random variable nor evidence of any sort of large sample statistics with an appeal to the Central Limit Theorem in your discussion. A paradigm(?) shift simply doesn't happen along a bell curve, even in the case of mixed metaphors.

Otherwise ... well put - ausgezeichnet! - even if the academic mathematician in me got in the way.

Chuck

Sorry gentlemen, francais est mon langue!

With all due respect, it is about leadership. There is a saying among clergy and professional church workers (pardonnez mon francais) that is "if it is worth doing, it is worth doing half-ass." The other half of the equation is what I call "the tyranny of the urgent". Many places I have worked operate on both of those elements. Parishes only react to what is coming and then only do what is necessary and not very well. I have heard it said that the priests have too much to do and this is the way they act. I, for one, believe neither part of that statement. One has to assert that the liturgy is a priority and the parties that have the most effect have to take their respective roles and plan and prepare.

So, who is going to lead?

I assert that either the musician or the priest can be the catalyst. But it takes a trust on the part of both to prepare and make the plans. And a good working relationship, something that has already been hashed out in this venue.

As I am the end of my first year where I currently work, I am in the midst of making a five year plan with many of the ROTR ideas in the queue. When I spoke about this project, some have been surprised. But it has been received with good effect. But personally I think it will take more like 7 years to acheive. Among group dynamics experts, real change takes 5 to 7 years. Institutional change takes 10 years.

A short plug for canticanova's planning pages and JWO's CCW. There lies the bulk of my information for planning. While pages here would be good, it might be remaking the wheel for me.

My.02. Seen on a alcohol package store sign in my part of the woods,"Dad wants bourbon for Father's Day." I got it.

Noel brought up hymnody in the original post, so I'd propose an option in that vein: make one long-term goal that the congregation will more readily accept new hymns. It can be done, although it takes time and careful planning.