Choral Music and the Gospel

2

Comments

  • PomonaPomona Shipmate
    Ah, but what about churches for whom music has taken on a sacramental nature? Would you say that celebrant is appropriate there? Churches for whom this is the case usually do not recognise sacraments, but I think it's clear that for Hillsong et al, music has become one.
  • Thanks for so many thoughtful comments. This is really helping me think through the issues.

    It has been lovely to read of 'activist' choirs, and it may be that the choir I sing with could aim higher in this regards at least.

    I'm wrestling with the 'jars of nard' (thanks for this), and what it means where I am. Not least because of who offered the jar of nard (Luke). In churches it is relatively easy to fold people into some ministries, but music seems to be one where (for excellence) its hard to include.

    Here's the thing, in a past life I have directed choirs at 2 ordinary parish churches. And my rule was that anyone could join. So we had choir members with learning needs who struggled to hold a tune, but for whom the belonging was very important.

    Still thinking...

    Regards

    Asher
  • Asher

    I am going to suggest you get hold of John Bell's book The Singing Thing and read that. People are a lot more capable than I think you realise. Alright, the last time I was on Iona was exceptional. We were managing four-part harmony* but in a normal week, they manage three part.

    *The problem is actually lack of male voices. The week I went on we had a small group of women who preferred to sing in the male range. Some of the women could sing bass.
  • Rosemary7391Rosemary7391 Shipmate Posts: 4
    I can second the recommendation for "The Singing Thing" - very down to earth, helpful book! I think there is also an important distinction between performance and enabling congregational worship. A too-perfect choir may discourage participation ("I'm not good enough to sing with them") whereas one with flaws, yet providing a solid lead, is empowering to the congregation. I find it quite uplifting to hear folks singing even if they make mistakes (most people can actually sing passably well when they get used to it!). But of course it isn't for everyone - in the same way that everyone needs to eat, but doesn't like or can't eat the same food, everyone will find different approaches/priorities in worship and connection with God.
  • PomonaPomona Shipmate
    In Japan, the Japanese equivalent of TripAdvisor (Tablelog I think?) uses a 5 star rating system. 5 star reviews are pretty much unheard of, because in Japan that's seen as a sort of Platonic ideal that nobody ever actually reaches - and so even excellent restaurants get 3 star reviews.

    I suspect that many who strive for 'excellence' (what does excellence in regards to worshipping God actually mean?) in church music, at all points in the spectrum, have a similar concept of perfection being something to reach for but not ever achievable. Perhaps it's just the former Calvinist in me, but part of me is a little uncomfortable with that approach when it comes to worship music. Even if I officially believe otherwise now, the instinct that we cannot please God any more than we already have is....stubborn.
  • Thank you Enoch for a very helpful and perceptive post.
  • I've sung with many choirs, none of particular artistic merit, which is fine because I'm well aware that my own voice is given more to strength than accuracy of timing or ability to carry a line on my own. They've all been able to lead congregational singing and, on a good day, offer singing to accompany the distribution of communion or the signing of the registers. So long as those present are giving of their best I think that is sufficient for public worship. I do, on the other hand, admire those churches with the skills and resources to draw on the rich Christian tradition of choral music.
  • The choral music of the cathedral is the one thread still just about connecting me to the church in any meaningful way. And it only does that because of its exacting excellence. I would go never rather than seldom otherwise.

    Maybe that doesn't matter. Maybe it is just prolonging or concealing the death of my faith. Or maybe it is a thread that leads back somewhere. I don't know but am grateful for it.
  • PomonaPomona Shipmate
    CJCfarwest wrote: »
    The choral music of the cathedral is the one thread still just about connecting me to the church in any meaningful way. And it only does that because of its exacting excellence. I would go never rather than seldom otherwise.

    Maybe that doesn't matter. Maybe it is just prolonging or concealing the death of my faith. Or maybe it is a thread that leads back somewhere. I don't know but am grateful for it.

    But why does exacting excellence connect you to Christianity when that's essentially the polar opposite to the Gospel message? This btw is meant entirely sincerely. I think there is a problem when it's the *only* thing drawing someone to Christianity since it misleads them as to what Christianity is about.
  • Enoch First, I agree with your rant: the worship leader is the person at the front with the theological training, not the person, however gifted and qualified, conducting the choir.

    Second, you're absolutely right about the money involved: All Souls Langham Place was advertising for its Lead music person earlier this year at a salary north of £42k (bear in mind this is not a 7 day a week place like a cathedral). True, its not a lot compared to someone who waves a stick at the LSO, but that isn't a true comparison. The members of the orchestra at All Souls are all professionals, its just that as Christians they are expected to cheerfully take the financial hit of being paid less for working at the church: ditto the singers.

    The situation at HTB is fairly similar: they pay less than the going rate but most members of their worship and praise band/group earn another salary - but they're all paid. There certainly is not way any openings are there for well-meaning members of the congregation who may feel called to be in the music group, at least not unless they can get through a pretty stringent audition - conservatoire standard only need apply is what it boils down to.

    Speaking as a professional church musician, I get pretty tired of being accused from time to time of being somehow a lesser member of the church because I get paid. And I find it rather sinister that some assume members of choirs with a certain degree of excellence cannot possibly be really worshipping when they're in church.
  • PomonaPomona Shipmate
    I definitely think that church musicians should be paid. Nor do I think that being a good singer/other musician means you're not really worshipping. But I am trying to unpick what 'excellence' means here (particularly given that it is only being used to refer to a very specific Western oeuvre, suggesting that others cannot truly reach that 'excellence'), and why for some Christianity means striving for something very few people can achieve, when we worship a Saviour who died for all equally.
  • Most churches, at least in my tradition, have to make do with whatever volunteers they have to hand ... and can get really miffed when folk say, "It wasn't like that at HTB/St. Paul's/Spring Harvest". Dang it, lots of churches have NO musicians!
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    'No Organist, No Problem' comes to the rescue.
  • Most churches, at least in my tradition, have to make do with whatever volunteers they have to hand ... and can get really miffed when folk say, "It wasn't like that at HTB/St. Paul's/Spring Harvest". Dang it, lots of churches have NO musicians!

    Don't remind me. Our poor, elderly, organist recently suffered a stroke and so I've had the unenviable task of leading singing unaccompanied a couple of times in recent weeks. Manageable until one of the visiting ministers picks something neither I nor the rest of the congregations knows! I also observe that some things are very easy to sing until you have to pitch them blind and stay in the right key without any guidance.
  • ZappaZappa Ecclesiantics Host
    Cathscats wrote: »
    Regarding the OP it doesn't have to be one or the other, does it? But the gospel imperative to care shouldn't be excluded. I have just started to serve a church which could be described as a choir with a church attached, and while I intend to encourage and support the choir, I also intend to stir up the church, including the choir, to love and good deeds. It may take some stirring.

    I hope you'll take some time to find out what is going on before you commence stirring. Quite apart from anything else, members of the choir will be the people who attend church the most, and you're also likely to find that they'll be the first to volunteer for other stuff, such as delivering magazines, helping with sales and fetes, etc. And when it comes to "occasional" worshippers you may find it is choir partners/ parents who make up these numbers too.

    At our own place the choir provides 75% of the ministers of the eucharist, 80% of fete stallholders; 100% of the volunteer caterers, 100% of the after-church coffee rota, 90% of the magazine deliverers, 100% of people who run confirmation classes, 95% of the regulars at churchyard working parties. To be blunt, without the choir our place would fall apart. And yet whenever there is some urgent need - someone needs emergency accommodation, the local food bank puts out a frantic appeal, etc - it is choir members who are first to come forward.

    Just saying...

    Mileages/kilometerages clearly vary. I have had close association with two cathedrals now where to a lesser or greater extent the choir membership have nothing to do with the work of the cathedral beyond singing. In that capacity, yes, their work ethic (at least in the more recent example) has been exemplary, yes.

    I remember clearly one choir member (from the less recent example), when I asked him the difference between singing in the civic choir and the church, both of which he belonged to, waxing eloquent about the outpouring of love for God he experiences, warming his heart, when singing in the church. Except he never ever ever attended a church if he wasn't singing in the choir.

    In both aforereferenced cathedrals many of the choristers have been seen to pull out devices during the sermon and other non-singy bits of the liturgy.

    I love the cathedral tradition ... but :neutral: / :grimace:
  • ZappaZappa Ecclesiantics Host
    Pomona wrote: »
    I definitely think that church musicians should be paid. Nor do I think that being a good singer/other musician means you're not really worshipping. But I am trying to unpick what 'excellence' means here (particularly given that it is only being used to refer to a very specific Western oeuvre, suggesting that others cannot truly reach that 'excellence'), and why for some Christianity means striving for something very few people can achieve, when we worship a Saviour who died for all equally.

    I can't speak for others on the thread, but as an erstwhile broadcaster I would define "excellence" as "broadcast quality." The "clavinova, three snoring men and a chook" models tends not to broadcast too well.
  • Pomona wrote: »

    But why does exacting excellence connect you to Christianity when that's essentially the polar opposite to the Gospel message? This btw is meant entirely sincerely. I think there is a problem when it's the *only* thing drawing someone to Christianity since it misleads them as to what Christianity is about.

    It's not a particularly rational or transactional thing. And it can't really be misleading in my case since I know all too well what it's about from long and varied experience.

    It is, simply, the only context in which I can bear being in church at all these days.

  • Rublev wrote: »
    'No Organist, No Problem' comes to the rescue.

    It does for us. But it isn't very ... inspiring.
  • Jengie Jon wrote: »
    Asher

    I am going to suggest you get hold of John Bell's book The Singing Thing and read that. People are a lot more capable than I think you realise. Alright, the last time I was on Iona was exceptional. We were managing four-part harmony* but in a normal week, they manage three part.

    *The problem is actually lack of male voices. The week I went on we had a small group of women who preferred to sing in the male range. Some of the women could sing bass.

    <Waves at @Jengie Jon >

    The Singing Thing inspired me in my work leading choirs / congregations in last 2 churches. I have very strong connections with the Iona Community, and will be staying in Bunnessan this summer whilst Asher Jr is at Camas Community Kids Week. I've done bits with JB / Alison Adams / IC at Greenbelt.

    Are there many members / associates here on SoF?

    That's been part of the the shock in coming to the new shack, where the choir is very much 'Cathedral repertoire'. Music not as the work of the people. And hence this thread.

    Thanks

    Asher

  • But only to the folk who actually come inside and hear it ...

    How can choirs (which I like and value BTW) be "good news to the poor" unless (1) they put on concerts which raise funds for charities such as Shelter; (2) they offer to brighten up poor peoples' lives by going into homeless hostels and the like; (3) they run projects like "El Sistema" in deprived areas?

    I know a church in a busy downtown area that offers a outstanding music programs which many homeless people do come inside to hear. As a child of a single mom on a limited income, the only live music available to me was church music. I would say yes, music does serve the poor as well as praise our Lord. It is also a tool for evangelism many come first to the down town church because of the music program. Their music program also offers scholarships to music students.
  • Rublev wrote: »
    'No Organist, No Problem' comes to the rescue.

    It does for us. But it isn't very ... inspiring.

    You also have to have a functioning sound system, someone willing to operate it, enough notice of the hymns to get them downloaded and organised ahead of time (good luck with that one) and hope the pitch/tempo/whatever works for the congregation. In my experience if you have time to prepare then a cappella is more reliable and if you don't it is the only option. Plus singing along to a recording can feel more like karaoke than worship.
  • asher wrote: »
    Are there many members / associates here on SoF?


    Asher

    Guess. Sorry, I am a longterm Associate i.e 25 years plus.
  • You also have to have a functioning sound system, someone willing to operate it, enough notice of the hymns to get them downloaded and organised ahead of time ... and hope the pitch/tempo/whatever works for the congregation.
    Indeed. And some of the arrangements are ghastly!

  • I sing at a parish where there are two Sunday services, and two choirs - an early service with a choir that pretty much anyone can join and a later service with more demanding music that requires at least some musical aptitude and experience make it work. I sing in the more demanding choir, and have been singing in somewhat demanding Anglican choirs more or less continuously since I was ten years old. I appreciate there's nothing in any of the Gospels that says "thou shalt form good choirs capable of singing demanding music", but there is nonetheless quite a lot that we do as Christians that is strictly optional from the POV of the gospels. I'm having a really hard time seeing how what we're doing is at odds with the gospel.
  • Psalm 150? - let everything that has breath, praise the Lord
  • Baptist TrainfanBaptist Trainfan Shipmate
    edited April 2019
    Strangely enough that Psalm doesn't actually mention singing, only noisy musical instruments (and dancing). (I'm sure that other Psalms do, though).
  • It does mention voice as well as organs and cymbals, harps, timbrels, stringed instruments and trumpets. Which covers praise bands and traditional organs. Songs and singing are mentioned a lot too - see here and particularly Psalm 98:1-7
  • I know - I was being deliberately annoying! I suspect the OT Temple worship may have been LOUD but not necessarily TUNEFUL!
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    If you read the titles of the psalms it looks quite likely that there was a draconian precentor in charge of the Temple choirs and musicians.
  • O if only we knew!

    These days, we offer The Best We Can To The Lord™ no matter how rich or poor our offering, in the Eyes of the World..

    Surely, we can do no less.
  • You can't have a church without Berylware cups - particularly the light green ones!

    Or Gopak folding tables!

    They are two of the few things that would survive nuclear attack
  • Music has the ability to move people in all sorts of ways. Different people are moved by different styles - preferences. The big question is not what we do while we are at church but what we do after being moved at church?
  • As in the phrase that got used quite a lot in the 70s: "The worship is over, the service begins".
  • PomonaPomona Shipmate
    You can't have a church without Berylware cups - particularly the light green ones!

    Or Gopak folding tables!

    They are two of the few things that would survive nuclear attack

    Berylware also only refers to the green variety of Woods Ware, named after the semi-precious stone.

    I think my issues are mostly to do with the worry that only a very small part of even sacred music is considered to achieve 'excellence' - and I feel like the polarisation of churches is narrowing those choices. No, I don't want to hear a white elderly congregation struggle through a gospel tune, but I think actually improving the standard and *enjoyment* of congregational MOTR church music (and indeed non-MOTR church music not represented by either choral music or HTB types) would do a lot more than waging war against HTB. I think non-congregational church music certainly has its place, but increasingly I feel either end of the spectrum is pushing it to being the norm, and that I do not like.
  • Hmmm ... I'm not sure if that really is the case, but then I'm probably viewing things from a different place to you. My impression, certainly from the churches I know, is that (i) the days of the traditional "ordinary church choir are departing, probably due to ageing and shrinking congregations no longer having the people resources to sustain them; and (ii) there is any amount of small, enthusiastic but not always wonderful amateur "worship bands" around - perhaps that is more the case in Baptist churches.

    Of course there are parish churches which are not only striving for excellence in traditional music but actively recruiting and training choristers; there are also some churches which feature both traditional and more informal churches (at different services!) But I suspect that neither of these are plentiful.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    I think these days even the
    " small, enthusiastic but not always wonderful amateur 'worship bands' "
    are beginning to decline in number and enthusiasm. Perhaps it's the shift in generations - although the people in them look young to me, they don't to young adults. Perhaps it's that what they hear at Spring Harvest, on CDs etc is too dependent on expensive kit and no longer the sort of thing that a girl who sings to her guitar, a chap with a bass and an old amp box, and a teenager who's learning the violin can strive to emulate. Or perhaps it's just that fashions are changing.
  • PuzzlerPuzzler Shipmate
    That is a good description of the band that is now leading singing at our place twice a month. The singing is poor, and I hate to see the scruffy looking oik who is the most prominent singer, hands in pockets, or swigging from a plastic beaker in full view right up front, whereas our robed choir on the other Sundays makes a decent sound and is discretely placed in the chancel.

    I actually don’t object to most of the new songs, for what they are worth, but to me they are not worthy vehicles of praise.

    Even less do I appreciate the flautist who has taken it on herself to beat time rather than play, standing right in the centre at the front ( where the nave altar goes when it is Communion). She is self appointed, and will be calling herself a worship leader next.
  • This: one of the main things that any leader of music in worship needs to understand is that it isn't about them, or even the group singing/ playing, it is about the music and the text. That is why when you see a televised service from a cathedral the Master of Music isn't standing centre aisle but discreetly to one side.

    How to spot a good choir in a worship context: you are aware of the music but, more important, you can hear every word of the text, even if it may be in a foreign language.
  • Jengie JonJengie Jon Shipmate
    It is also why in traditional Nonconformity in England and many other broadly Reformed* churches elsewhere it is the Minister or another individual who responsibility has been delegated, e.g. lay preacher who is responsible for the choice of hymns.

    *in this case including many Methodist, Presbyterians, Baptists and Congregationalists at least.
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    And in the Church of England Canon B20(2) provides
    Where there is an organist, choirmaster or director of music the minister shall pay due heed to his advice and assistance in the choosing of chants, hymns, anthems, and other settings, and in the ordering of the music of the church; but at all times the final responsibility and decision in these matters rests with the minister.
  • The only problem I have with B20(2) is that it presupposes that the minister has had some training in music for the liturgy and acquired more knowledge of it than just whatever has been sung where she/he has worshipped. And sometimes old-fashioned common sense (or feeling) has to come into play. And illustration:

    My nearest neighbour spent Easter with her son and d-i-l and attended church with them: beautiful building, narrowish 15th century chancel, traditional east end placement of altar. Choice of hymn during communion on Easter morning ... Thine be the glory, sung at full belt; and when it didn't prove to be long enough they sang it through a second time.

    Conversation at the church door after the service made it clear it was the choice of the Vicar, who said it was a favourite of hers, and the placement within the service was her decision too.
  • But only to the folk who actually come inside and hear it ...

    How can choirs (which I like and value BTW) be "good news to the poor" unless (1) they put on concerts which raise funds for charities such as Shelter; (2) they offer to brighten up poor peoples' lives by going into homeless hostels and the like; (3) they run projects like "El Sistema" in deprived areas?

    Churches are not private clubs- generally anyone can come to enjoy the beauty of the architecture, painting, and music regardless of belief or involvement in the parish. They can provide people a window out of everyday drabness and into divine beauty. It’s a very important Christian ministry.

  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    Canon B20(2) presumes many things both about the minister and about the organist, choirmaster or director of music. It doesn’t work well if the minister is unwilling to listen to advice or accept assistance, or if organist, choirmaster or director of music doesn’t distinguish between ‘advice and assistance’ and ‘direction and control’.

    Common sense, goodwill, mutual respect, and a mutual concern for the wider mission of the church are essential.

    One of the trickiest things for an incoming minister is to negotiate the exercise of their office with existing post-holders: churchwardens, directors of music, readers and others with whom they will need to share public-facing aspects of their ministry, and who will have different views about whether, and if so what change is required. Views which differ often not only from the minister, but also from each other.

    That said, I completely agree that ‘Thine be the glory’ is a daft choice for a communion hymn.
  • BroJames wrote: »
    Canon B20(2) presumes many things both about the minister and about the organist, choirmaster or director of music. It doesn’t work well if the minister is unwilling to listen to advice or accept assistance, or if organist, choirmaster or director of music doesn’t distinguish between ‘advice and assistance’ and ‘direction and control’.

    Common sense, goodwill, mutual respect, and a mutual concern for the wider mission of the church are essential.<snip>

    :lol:
    Thanks for that, I was having a bit of a down-day till I read your second paragraph.
    IME many clergy look at a professional musician and see a target on their back; make that musician someone who has studied the use of music within the liturgy and you can double the size of the target.

  • We all know there are no valid vocations other than ordination which are lived out within the walls of a church.....

    *seismic eyeroll *
  • LeafLeaf Shipmate
    Mutual complaints concerning clergy and church musicians remind me of similar issues between car drivers and cyclists: it depends which vehicle you drive, and how many douchebags of the other kind you've had to deal with, which shape one's perspective.
  • angloidangloid Shipmate
    The only problem I have with B20(2) is that it presupposes that the minister has had some training in music for the liturgy and acquired more knowledge of it than just whatever has been sung where she/he has worshipped. And sometimes old-fashioned common sense (or feeling) has to come into play. And illustration:

    My nearest neighbour spent Easter with her son and d-i-l and attended church with them: beautiful building, narrowish 15th century chancel, traditional east end placement of altar. Choice of hymn during communion on Easter morning ... Thine be the glory, sung at full belt; and when it didn't prove to be long enough they sang it through a second time.

    Conversation at the church door after the service made it clear it was the choice of the Vicar, who said it was a favourite of hers, and the placement within the service was her decision too.

    At least it wasn't In Christ alone.
  • angloid wrote: »
    The only problem I have with B20(2) is that it presupposes that the minister has had some training in music for the liturgy and acquired more knowledge of it than just whatever has been sung where she/he has worshipped. And sometimes old-fashioned common sense (or feeling) has to come into play. And illustration:

    My nearest neighbour spent Easter with her son and d-i-l and attended church with them: beautiful building, narrowish 15th century chancel, traditional east end placement of altar. Choice of hymn during communion on Easter morning ... Thine be the glory, sung at full belt; and when it didn't prove to be long enough they sang it through a second time.

    Conversation at the church door after the service made it clear it was the choice of the Vicar, who said it was a favourite of hers, and the placement within the service was her decision too.

    At least it wasn't In Christ alone.

    :lol:
  • angloid wrote: »
    The only problem I have with B20(2) is that it presupposes that the minister has had some training in music for the liturgy and acquired more knowledge of it than just whatever has been sung where she/he has worshipped. And sometimes old-fashioned common sense (or feeling) has to come into play. And illustration:

    My nearest neighbour spent Easter with her son and d-i-l and attended church with them: beautiful building, narrowish 15th century chancel, traditional east end placement of altar. Choice of hymn during communion on Easter morning ... Thine be the glory, sung at full belt; and when it didn't prove to be long enough they sang it through a second time.

    Conversation at the church door after the service made it clear it was the choice of the Vicar, who said it was a favourite of hers, and the placement within the service was her decision too.

    At least it wasn't In Christ alone.

    Generally that is drowned out by the sound of the baby Jesus and his mother crying.
  • PomonaPomona Shipmate
    I have encountered the opposite to Puzzler - a MOTR church with robed choir in a semi rural location, which would be much much better off with a basic piano/drum/acoustic guitar setup. The congregation is mostly on the evangelical side, and there is that kind of band once a month which does draw more people in. As I understand it, the previous incumbent was there for a long long time until he either retired or died, and there was quite a long interregnum before the present incumbent, who is a 50something moderate evangelical. It is a generally evangelical area and the choir aren't trying to hold on as a last gasp of High Church activity (the choir is very much 80s MOTR), it's just What They've Always Done....but unfortunately What They've Always Done is really, really dire. Being a robed choir doesn't automatically mean they will be able to sing audibly or in tune....

    I don't by the see anything wrong with a singer daring to *gasp* have a drink from a beaker (why does the beaker matter, and why does it matter if the congregation is aware that the singer experiences thirst?) though....wearing a robe doesn't make you a better person or make you worship God more effectively. I think robes in context are perfectly good things. But nobody in a band needs to wear one and it's not a reason to dislike them.
Sign In or Register to comment.