<snip> I would expect some immediate pastoral care to be shown to any choir members/families who are in financial or health-related difficulties...
🤣 IME the notion of pastoral care towards musicians is something entirely alien to many clergy.
The bigger and more professional the musical set-up the less they seem to be seen as a part of the "parish."
I'm not an Anglican and certainly not au fait with the musical goings-on of cathedrals. But is that last sentence perhaps part of the problem? - i.e, if the musical establishment regards itself as a separate "kingdom within a kingdom" and, possibly, makes it palpably clear that it will run itself quite nicely without interference from those Philistine clergy, then it's not surprising if those pastoral (and even organisational) links cease to exist in any meaningful way.
I'm not an Anglican and certainly not au fait with the musical goings-on of cathedrals. But is that last sentence perhaps part of the problem? - i.e, if the musical establishment regards itself as a separate "kingdom within a kingdom" and, possibly, makes it palpably clear that it will run itself quite nicely without interference from those Philistine clergy, then it's not surprising if those pastoral (and even organisational) links cease to exist in any meaningful way.
Yes, it always seems to be the Church (whether Dean, Chapter, Vicar, or whatever) who is in the wrong.
Just now and then, they might be in the right - I'm not referring to any particular case, including those being mentioned on this thread - but, of course, no situation is ever as clear-cut as one might perhaps wish!
Yes, it always seems to be the Church (whether Dean, Chapter, Vicar, or whatever) who is in the wrong.
Just now and then, they might be in the right - I'm not referring to any particular case, including those being mentioned on this thread - but, of course, no situation is ever as clear-cut as one might perhaps wish!
I agree. Despite having sung in a cathedral choir for many years and loving that sort of music, it seems to me that church is about rather more than being a repository for a certain style of worship.
Yes, it always seems to be the Church (whether Dean, Chapter, Vicar, or whatever) who is in the wrong.
Just now and then, they might be in the right - I'm not referring to any particular case, including those being mentioned on this thread - but, of course, no situation is ever as clear-cut as one might perhaps wish!
I agree. Despite having sung in a cathedral choir for many years and loving that sort of music, it seems to me that church is about rather more than being a repository for a certain style of worship.
Undoubtedly, and I'm familiar with a number of music programmes that have successfully adapted to different styles of worship, usually in different services. On the other hand, liturgy and music is important to many people's practical, week-to-week experience of church, and the extent to which formerly viable music programmes have foundered over the last decade or so is not an encouraging sign.
By the way, and FWIW - our Cathedral usually has a very small congregation at the weekday 530pm Evensong (apart from the clergy and choristers, of course, who are part of - or most of - the congregation!), but last year the Saturday figure increased greatly.
This it seems was partly due to the infamous miniature golf course in the nave, which attracted a large number of visitors (including many young families), some of whom stayed for Evensong at 315pm.
Not that such things can happen at the moment, of course...
<snip> I would expect some immediate pastoral care to be shown to any choir members/families who are in financial or health-related difficulties...
🤣 IME the notion of pastoral care towards musicians is something entirely alien to many clergy.
The bigger and more professional the musical set-up the less they seem to be seen as a part of the "parish."
I'm not an Anglican and certainly not au fait with the musical goings-on of cathedrals. But is that last sentence perhaps part of the problem? - i.e, if the musical establishment regards itself as a separate "kingdom within a kingdom" and, possibly, makes it palpably clear that it will run itself quite nicely without interference from those Philistine clergy, then it's not surprising if those pastoral (and even organisational) links cease to exist in any meaningful way.
I think this is complicated. The more everybody is on the same page about music, the less the music programme becomes a kingdom within a kingdom. I do think increasing clerical hostility or indifference to good music programmes is part of the equation here - a good music programme can be seriously undermined if the incumbent is not on board even if there is broad support within the parish.
I think this is complicated. The more everybody is on the same page about music, the less the music programme becomes a kingdom within a kingdom.
Is the choir drawn from the congregation, or does it comprise good singers drawn from
without? Would the choir members be regular church attenders if they were less gifted singers, or are they largely indifferent towards the church, but enjoy the opportunity to sing at a high level in (for example) a cathedral choir?
Good, classically trained singers are relatively rare. Christians are perhaps increasingly rare. It follows that there aren't many members of both sets.
Within the life of a church the choir has, to borrow Charles Handy’s language, a ‘service-delivery’ role within the life of the church - which is itself a hybrid organisation incorporating elements of advocacy, service provider, and self-help/common interest/mutual support.
Those in service-delivery role
take pride in being professional, effective and low-cost. It follows that they need to be selective about their recruits, demanding in their review of standards, prepared to reprimand where necessary, even to dismiss someone who’s work is inadequate. You cannot join… just because you agree with their work. They want and need professional qualifications… (Charles Handy, Understanding Voluntary Organizations)
The trouble comes when the choir’s expectations have been set primarily around musical excellence - within a liturgical context - but where the wider mission of the church is now needing them to take into account other considerations vital to the life of the church as a whole of making and growing disciples, building fellowship, proclaiming the Gospel, etc. And where the understanding of society, and of the nature of worship differs radically from the Book of Common Prayer in which they are musically immersed, and the social and cultural expectations which it embodies.
The irony of all this is surely that the 'traditional' surpliced choir of boys and men (plus girls and ladies in these more enlightened times) is something of a 19thC invention, harking back to a supposed golden age...
Much of the music - anthems, service settings, hymnody etc. - is also of 19th/20thC origin (yes, I know about William Byrd et al )
Time for a change, maybe? Bring back the West Gallery Band and Quire!
<snip> I would expect some immediate pastoral care to be shown to any choir members/families who are in financial or health-related difficulties...
🤣 IME the notion of pastoral care towards musicians is something entirely alien to many clergy.
The bigger and more professional the musical set-up the less they seem to be seen as a part of the "parish."
I'm not an Anglican and certainly not au fait with the musical goings-on of cathedrals. But is that last sentence perhaps part of the problem? - i.e, if the musical establishment regards itself as a separate "kingdom within a kingdom" and, possibly, makes it palpably clear that it will run itself quite nicely without interference from those Philistine clergy, then it's not surprising if those pastoral (and even organisational) links cease to exist in any meaningful way.
I think this is complicated. The more everybody is on the same page about music, the less the music programme becomes a kingdom within a kingdom. I do think increasing clerical hostility or indifference to good music programmes is part of the equation here - a good music programme can be seriously undermined if the incumbent is not on board even if there is broad support within the parish.
Fair would be fair if it was fair. In my experience almost anyone who takes on a cathedralesque clergy role is quite into music of a certain style - they may have broader taste but certainly, with few exception not "oh this is boring shit and I want to get rid of it" taste. many cathedralesque musicians (choral, organ and others) tend to be of the "let's get on with the performance and get over this goddy shit already" ilk.
And that tends to make a pastor's / priest's / vicar's / rector's / dean's BP* rise just a wee tad.
I think this is complicated. The more everybody is on the same page about music, the less the music programme becomes a kingdom within a kingdom.
Is the choir drawn from the congregation, or does it comprise good singers drawn from
without? Would the choir members be regular church attenders if they were less gifted singers, or are they largely indifferent towards the church, but enjoy the opportunity to sing at a high level in (for example) a cathedral choir?
Good, classically trained singers are relatively rare. Christians are perhaps increasingly rare. It follows that there aren't many members of both sets.
I made a similar observation upthread - there are fewer classically trained singers, and fewer Christians, and just for good measure such classically trained singers as exist are increasingly not Christian. This makes for an increasingly difficult Venn diagram for high-level amateur church choirs. (On the other hand, it's possible to overstate the importance of a high level of training. I learned choral singing by singing in a choir - admittedly aided and abetted by taking piano lessons for much of my youth, but I would not call myself a classically trained singer.)
As a rough-and-ready categorization, I would divide the kinds of singers you can find in a church choir into roughly four groups: (1) singers paid market rates who are singing only because they are getting paid, (2) volunteers who are not parishioners and whose only connection to the parish is through the choir, (3) parishioners whose main connection to the parish is through the choir, and (4) parishioners who happen to sing in the choir. Not all choirs will have all four kinds of singers, and there is some fluidity between categories. Choirs can be opportunities for evangelism, and/or for making places for people who don't consider themselves Christian but nonetheless value a connection to Christian worship. Category (1) is the most controversial class of singer, but they can go a long way to making a choir made up largely of amateurs in categories (3) and (4) accomplish things they would otherwise not be able to. That said, a choir made up entirely or mostly of singers in categories (1) and (2) is going to be very much an entity of itself in a parish. Conversely, the more a parish attracts musically inclined individuals as part of its normal congregation, the more possible it becomes to build a musically competent choir principally out of singers in classes (3) and (4). The above-mentioned Venn diagram is not our friend here, but I am inclined to think that there is a way to accomplish this for at least some parishes if the will to do so continues to exist.
This is specifically about cathedral choirs, I thought. Cathedrals are just about literally nothing without choirs. Or at least they lose one of their main distinctions - just another irrelevant huge church building with notthing beyond itself to offer by way of sustenance to its surrounding community.
I'm not decrying helter skelters or any other means of getting people in, but choral music sustains: it creates and distributes energy and transcendent experiences for many of us. For others there is masses of provsion out there; these are endangered oases. It can be wisely anticipated that they will be defended.
All that may be true, but, if it is, why do so few people attend daily Choral Evensong? Or Sunday Choral Mattins?
Special occasions (major Festivals and so on) are perhaps another matter, but then Evensong might be greatly altered, or replaced with a different form of service altogether.
In all fairness, our Cathedral has a fair-sized congregation of all ages for the Sunday Sung Eucharist, which is largely choral, and offers a very wide variety of music. It certainly creates and distributes energy and transcendent experiences!
I’m a Quaker, but I periodically attend CofE services. I like the music, even if only congregational hymns, & I find meaning in the liturgy but what I absolutely can not stand are the sermons.
In the same way I am interested in politics and may read a lot about it, and even campaign - but I can not bear to watch political speeches.
I’m a Quaker, but I periodically attend CofE services. I like the music, even if only congregational hymns, & I find meaning in the liturgy but what I absolutely can not stand are the sermons.
I was confirmed in the C of E, and now attend a TEC church, and I agree with you (and also about the political speeches.)
It's the same reason I have a virulent distaste for the modern practice of posting rambly instructional videos rather than just writing out some instructions - the expertise and experience of the audience is too wide to make it an effective or efficient way of communicating.
These days on zoom, we're doing a much shorter sermon, followed by a discussion, which I find I'm finding more useful.
I'd better make it plain from the off that I've worked in cathedrals as a musician and I can assure you of two things - the organists and adult singers were all paid, but they chose to work where they did because they were people of faith; and that the attitude of clergy towards their musicians, especially the singers, was that they were paid staff, nothing more. In more than one place I saw colleagues who started out as devout, faithful people gradually become less so as they were treated appallingly by some clergy.
At parish level too I've experienced (in fact this is the situation at the moment) clergy who couldn't give a toss about either their paid organist or their unpaid singers, not even the junior choristers.
Several people have suggested that there may be cases of an over-powerful musical tail wagging the clerical/faith dog. I can only speak from personal experience which is that this is not the case. In my current parish the only real outreach comes from me and my senior singers. From recruiting visits to our local schools, social events for families of junior choristers, encouraging wedding couples to attend services so they can get a feel for how music sounds, inviting families who have had a funeral in the year to come to our annual All Souls Requiem - it all comes from the musical side. Before lockdown we started a musical group for people with dementia, and we have a young people's secular singing group. NONE of that receives any support from clergy.
As for the swipe at Choral Evensong: we reinstated a monthly Evensong last year and in the 10 months before lockdown numbers have grown from 10-15 to 50, with most of the people attending new to church. Again, no clergy support - in fact we had to arrange for Evensong to be taken by a retired priest who lives outside the parish because our own chap refused to do it.
It's very easy to swipe at musicians, but my experience is that more people who have little or no pattern of church attendance are attracted to try it by good music than by a man or woman standing in a pulpit delivering a mumbled peroration on the writings of St Paul.
I strongly agree with your last para. @TheOrganist. When I was drifting back to church-going it was Choral Evensong sung by a really good choir that kept me attending. Even sometimes accompanied by my non-believing spouse, provided we left before the sermon.
Only gradually did I move to feeling able to say the Creed, and much later to attend the monthly Choral Eucharist. The music is the one aspect of Anglicanism for which I still sometimes feel nostalgic, now that I am - years later - Orthodox.
Well, I'm sure that many musicians, organists, and choristers are indeed people of faith (though probably some aren't - only God will know for certain), and I'm equally sure that not all clergy are evil Philistines bent on getting rid of the comparatively-recent choral *tradition*. Again, only God knows the secrets of their hearts...
However, we seem to be ignoring The Elephant In The Quire - namely, the fairly obvious fact that things are never going to be the same again, thanks to Ye Plague™.
Choral music - sacred and/or secular - is on the back-burner, and likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, churches (and cathedrals) will have to re-prioritise, and I'm afraid that, in some cases, maintaining the choir's status quo may not be particularly high on the list.
(BTW @TheOrganist - whilst I don't particularly like Choral Evensong myself, finding it wordy and tedious, I fully appreciate that others have a completely different view, and that it nurtures and sustains their faith. FWIW, I prefer Lutheran Vespers, or even the RCC Vespers...short, and to the point!)
I'd better make it plain from the off that I've worked in cathedrals as a musician and I can assure you of two things - the organists and adult singers were all paid, but they chose to work where they did because they were people of faith; and that the attitude of clergy towards their musicians, especially the singers, was that they were paid staff, nothing more. In more than one place I saw colleagues who started out as devout, faithful people gradually become less so as they were treated appallingly by some clergy.
I think you make a very good point. Philistine clergy are anathema.
I have to say, however, that I personally know a good many paid singers in cathedrals who are out and out atheists as well as devout, committed lovers of the music they love singing. And, for that matter, have sung with many parish choristers who similarly were atheist, but for the love of singing church music were willing to put up with the religious nonsense that went along with it. Both as fellow singer and as incumbent, I have no problem with that and personally try to ensure (no doubt in a flawed way) that church members who sing in the choir - for that's how I see them - are treated with the same pastoral attention as church members who couldn't care if the choir never existed. Similarly, down through the years I've often been dismayed by how little some congregations see choir members as fellow congregation members - and vice versa.
But it's axiomatic that, in general, many church choir members disappear from view for the months of the year that the choir is on 'holiday'! I've sung in at least three parish church choirs were I can guarantee barely more than two or three had ever in all their singing careers sat anywhere else in the church than 'their' choir stall, and where the phrase 'no choir? oh great, Sunday off!' was often heard. As well as the stomping off in high dudgeon response when an incumbent, once in a while, told the choir there would be something a bit different, musically, for a particular service, so an anthem wouldn't be needed. Or there was no need to robe etc. And the worst for going off in a huff were often the most 'religious'!
I've spent most of my lay-worshipping life sitting in parish choir stalls, and I value church music of the SATB kind very highly. But quires and people who sit in them can very definitely be a breed apart, and not necessarily because they are mistreated by anyone, or are in fact set apart by others!
Thank you. My experience as a Nonconformist is limited - musicians (apart from paid organists in some places) tend to be volunteers from the congregation. Nevertheless I, as a Minister, have certainly found the "Sunday off" mentality hard to cope with, although I have been pleasantly surprised on occasion. And I wonder if choirs' feelings of isolation can be at least partially of their own making, if they give the impression of being their own "private club" or if they don't mix with the rest of the congregation at coffee time? Of course other "working groups" can present the same issues, eg the Sunday School leaders, especially if they are so busy tidying up after the service that they don't "mingle".
I'm also a bit concerned about the references to "Philistine clergy" although I did use the phrase myself! Musicians quite rightly don't see themselves as experts in theology, equally clergy are not experts in music. However, I submit, clergy should at least be sympathetic to the idea of music even if they are tone-deaf. More to the point, clergy are responsible for "putting together" the entire service, of which music is usually an integral and important part. There should therefore be, in my view, some discussion and debate between clergy and musicians about "what fits" in any one service. (Not knowing how things work in cathedrals, I appreciate this may not be practical there).
<snip> ... many church choir members disappear from view for the months of the year that the choir is on 'holiday'! I've sung in at least three parish church choirs were I can guarantee barely more than two or three had ever in all their singing careers sat anywhere else in the church than 'their' choir stall, and where the phrase 'no choir? oh great, Sunday off!' was often heard. As well as the stomping off in high dudgeon response when an incumbent, once in a while, told the choir there would be something a bit different, musically, for a particular service, so an anthem wouldn't be needed. Or there was no need to robe etc. And the worst for going off in a huff were often the most 'religious'!
IME choirs are only "on holiday" for the month of August*, for the period between (roughly) Christmas** and new year and for Easter week, so if members of the choir aren't present it is likely to be because they are on holiday. It may also be that they take the opportunity to go and hear another choir, or even go to see relatives for Sunday lunch. For example, I've a relative who celebrates their November birthday with a lunch party on the Sunday nearest "the day": because of the distance (hour and a half drive) I've only once in 25 years been able to arrive in time to eat with everyone else, when I was recuperating from major surgery so not playing.
As for the case of an incumbent changing something, how much notice are they giving? There is nothing so frustrating as preparing service music only to be told at the last minute that it won't be needed/wanted, and clergy seem to make a point of telling the musicians of changes at the last minute. My own incumbent gets the music list in rough a month before the start of a singing term, and the detailed monthly list 3 weeks in advance, but invariably communicates changes via a note on the stairs to the loft after the 8am service on the day. Are you seriously suggesting that - bar something like a natural disaster or major terrorist incident - he only knows we have a visiting preacher at 9am for a 10am service?
There are far too many clergy who behave appallingly and whose approach to the liturgy can only be described as amateurish.
* August weddings appear without any regard to whether or not it is going to prevent the organist getting a clear 2 week break. Yes, you can put in a dep, if you can find one, but occasional service fees are part of my income and, to be blunt, help to make-up for the unrealistically low basic salary.
** Christmas at my current place includes a sung service on 26th December. In other places where I've worked it included sung services on th 26th, 27th and 28th, reducing the post-Christmas "week" to 3 days.
It was the attitude of a new incumbent towards the choir specifically and music in general that cemented my relationship with the church I now belong to. I was invited to augment the choir on a few occasions, including the installation service for the new incumbent. She made a point of coming to choir practice and specifically thanking the choir after the installation and indeed after every sung service. She hosted the Zoom choir practices over the summer and facilitated the return to singing in church at the earliest opportunity by a few of us. Yes, she and the Director of Music may have some different tastes, but so far they seem to be quite amicable about it.
She also has the gift of seeking out and stitching together various bits of liturgy to suit the occasion and sees the music as an integral part. Last Sunday was Harvest in two of her churches. She had not included our Harvest anthem in the evening service but was very happy to let us sing it again when asked.
No choir next Sunday, so I shall be going to a service elsewhere, not out of pique but to boost another congregation.
I do get the impression from reading this thread that we are dealing with very different realities in different parts of the world, and even locally within particular parts of the world for that matter.
All that may be true, but, if it is, why do so few people attend daily Choral Evensong? Or Sunday Choral Mattins?
Special occasions (major Festivals and so on) are perhaps another matter, but then Evensong might be greatly altered, or replaced with a different form of service altogether.
In all fairness, our Cathedral has a fair-sized congregation of all ages for the Sunday Sung Eucharist, which is largely choral, and offers a very wide variety of music. It certainly creates and distributes energy and transcendent experiences!
Broader social change is the answer to the question.
Anglican culture has shifted in the past half-century from being Mattins-default on a Sunday morning to Eucharist-default. I think that this is close to being a global (first-world) phenomenon. Even before the Plague arrived, I estimate that only 1 in 5 Ottawa parishes offered Choral Mattins and I think that it was only seriously attempted in 2 parishes outside the Cathedral (and one of those parishes had paid choristers).
Choral Evensong attendance was highest in places and times where folk would often attend two services daily. In my Irish student days, morning service was followed by the Irish Sunday dinner, a long walk, vespers, and then tea (student life may have changed since!). Outside cathedrals and a few major urban parishes, choral vespers really isn't going to happen, but that doesn't mean that it has no role in the life of those places. We've left, IMHO, the era where Anglicanism has standard practice-- it is now a period of allied and (one hopes) collaborating niches
In my home parish, it's held monthly, and gets a congregation of between 30 and 50. (*non choral tangent* I have long held that Evensong is a service suited best for the end of the work day. Students and such seem to go for compline at about 9pm, that being the end of their work day.)
I might note that the two major priest/choir contretemps I have seen were cultural in nature, and language of pastoral focus was used in an objectively dishonest manner, so I tend to look upon such discussions with a slightly jaundiced eye.
The promotion of the eucharist as the only service "of worth" has worried me for some time. It has become a knee-jerk response that virtually every and all activity should be preceded by a celebration of communion: PCC meeting, bible study group,Deanery Synod, etc are understandable; but churchyard gardening blitz, church spring clean, christingle making, fete committee meeting? As one retired bishop described it to me, it has become the CofE's equivalent of chips with everything.
IME many clergy never say their Offices, either in private or publicly, nor do they appear to believe that doing so is an obligation they undertook to perform at ordination. This de facto abandonment of non-eucharistic worship has been highlighted by some of the streamed "worship" offerings that have proliferated since March. Random prayers and readings interspersed with musical items with little or any relation to them abound - structureless, ranbling and disorganised, they have little appeal for the converted, never mind anyone unchurched seeking spiritual comfort or enlightenment.
Whether in traditional or contemporary language, the church would benefit from rediscovering the discipline of its formal Offices.
Random prayers and readings interspersed with musical items with little or any relation to them abound - structureless, ranbling and disorganised, they have little appeal for ... anyone unchurched seeking spiritual comfort or enlightenment.
Do you know that for sure? Have you actually asked such people - and not just those of your own age bracket/background/culture/interests? Or are you only "supposing"?
Clearly (and I speak as a Nonconformist) there is a strong case for Anglican worship being - well, distinctively Anglican! (Although that itself poses questions as to exactly what that is and how it should relate to a rapidly-changing cultural context). By the way, I am very much in favour of properly put-together and structured services, albeit following what is basically a hymn-sandwich model.
Are you seriously suggesting that - bar something like a natural disaster or major terrorist incident - he only knows we have a visiting preacher at 9am for a 10am service?
I'm assuming this is the 'rhetorical' you - and not me, even though it is my post you're quoting!
I refer only to my own experience as a chorister in various church choirs from the age of 8 to the age of 32 (and even after ordination). No doubt choirs vary? I've never belonged to a church choir that had less than two months off over the summer - and one, at least - that finished after Christmas and more or less had January off.
I have quoted the less delightful aspects of choir behaviour, not as a criticism. But I do feel entitled to, not least because it's true! Anyone who's spent significant time in the musical freemasonry of the parish choir knows all about it: the secret sweet-sucking, the passing of notes when the wrong chant has been posted for the Mag and Nunc, the covert looks and nudges when the preacher says something unintentionally rude, funny or stupid, the stash of alternative reading/crossword material for prayer and sermon-time, etc.
I'm bound to say I've never been incumbent of a church with a paid choir and can't easily imagine how complex life must get in that case. I'm currently very blessed with an outstanding organist/choirmaster; and (until lately) a small but very competent, great-sounding choir who I love dearly. They are each and every one a gem - even and quite possibly especially the atheists!
I do agree that there are many clergy who don't know how to integrate music with liturgy; who are not even liturgically literate enough to know how music enhances the experience. And too many who have destroyed good music ministry potential as a result. I'm grateful to be kept up to my paces by my extremely knowledgeable organist. But I'm forever going to remember where was the first time I was issued the immortal invitation, between the gospel acclamations: 'would you like to suck a Fisherman's Friend?'
<snip>... I'm forever going to remember where was the first time I was issued the immortal invitation, between the gospel acclamations: 'would you like to suck a Fisherman's Friend?'
🤣
I agree about some of the less-than-devout behaviour of singers, paid and unpaid (the back row at Winchester used to be particularly good at anagrams), but would say in mitigation that sometimes having to listen to the same sermon twice - even thrice - can be less than inspiring!
[Please excuse this digression but I think it is relevant to comments about choirs' (mis)behaviour and not really worth a thread of its own]. My experience as a retired priest who occasionally now shows up in various clergy vestries/sacristies is that – often despite placards like 'talk to God before mass: talk to each other after mass' – fellow clergy will engage in trivial banter right up to the start time of the eucharist. I think it has got worse, and it isn't confined to one sort of churchpersonship. It's not conducive to prayerful worship and certainly makes it difficult to complain about choirs and others.
Good point, @angloid . And in fact choir members notice, too. They notice when clergy don't do vestry prayers or do them poorly. I'm afraid I've probably underperformed in this area, many times.
Comments
Just now and then, they might be in the right - I'm not referring to any particular case, including those being mentioned on this thread - but, of course, no situation is ever as clear-cut as one might perhaps wish!
I agree. Despite having sung in a cathedral choir for many years and loving that sort of music, it seems to me that church is about rather more than being a repository for a certain style of worship.
Undoubtedly, and I'm familiar with a number of music programmes that have successfully adapted to different styles of worship, usually in different services. On the other hand, liturgy and music is important to many people's practical, week-to-week experience of church, and the extent to which formerly viable music programmes have foundered over the last decade or so is not an encouraging sign.
It does help to have someone looking in at the C of E, and its arcane doings, from another part of Our Lord's Vineyard.
This it seems was partly due to the infamous miniature golf course in the nave, which attracted a large number of visitors (including many young families), some of whom stayed for Evensong at 315pm.
Not that such things can happen at the moment, of course...
I think this is complicated. The more everybody is on the same page about music, the less the music programme becomes a kingdom within a kingdom. I do think increasing clerical hostility or indifference to good music programmes is part of the equation here - a good music programme can be seriously undermined if the incumbent is not on board even if there is broad support within the parish.
Is the choir drawn from the congregation, or does it comprise good singers drawn from
without? Would the choir members be regular church attenders if they were less gifted singers, or are they largely indifferent towards the church, but enjoy the opportunity to sing at a high level in (for example) a cathedral choir?
Good, classically trained singers are relatively rare. Christians are perhaps increasingly rare. It follows that there aren't many members of both sets.
Those in service-delivery role
The trouble comes when the choir’s expectations have been set primarily around musical excellence - within a liturgical context - but where the wider mission of the church is now needing them to take into account other considerations vital to the life of the church as a whole of making and growing disciples, building fellowship, proclaiming the Gospel, etc. And where the understanding of society, and of the nature of worship differs radically from the Book of Common Prayer in which they are musically immersed, and the social and cultural expectations which it embodies.
Much of the music - anthems, service settings, hymnody etc. - is also of 19th/20thC origin (yes, I know about William Byrd et al )
Time for a change, maybe? Bring back the West Gallery Band and Quire!
Fair would be fair if it was fair. In my experience almost anyone who takes on a cathedralesque clergy role is quite into music of a certain style - they may have broader taste but certainly, with few exception not "oh this is boring shit and I want to get rid of it" taste. many cathedralesque musicians (choral, organ and others) tend to be of the "let's get on with the performance and get over this goddy shit already" ilk.
And that tends to make a pastor's / priest's / vicar's / rector's / dean's BP* rise just a wee tad.
*And I don't mean petrol.
I made a similar observation upthread - there are fewer classically trained singers, and fewer Christians, and just for good measure such classically trained singers as exist are increasingly not Christian. This makes for an increasingly difficult Venn diagram for high-level amateur church choirs. (On the other hand, it's possible to overstate the importance of a high level of training. I learned choral singing by singing in a choir - admittedly aided and abetted by taking piano lessons for much of my youth, but I would not call myself a classically trained singer.)
As a rough-and-ready categorization, I would divide the kinds of singers you can find in a church choir into roughly four groups: (1) singers paid market rates who are singing only because they are getting paid, (2) volunteers who are not parishioners and whose only connection to the parish is through the choir, (3) parishioners whose main connection to the parish is through the choir, and (4) parishioners who happen to sing in the choir. Not all choirs will have all four kinds of singers, and there is some fluidity between categories. Choirs can be opportunities for evangelism, and/or for making places for people who don't consider themselves Christian but nonetheless value a connection to Christian worship. Category (1) is the most controversial class of singer, but they can go a long way to making a choir made up largely of amateurs in categories (3) and (4) accomplish things they would otherwise not be able to. That said, a choir made up entirely or mostly of singers in categories (1) and (2) is going to be very much an entity of itself in a parish. Conversely, the more a parish attracts musically inclined individuals as part of its normal congregation, the more possible it becomes to build a musically competent choir principally out of singers in classes (3) and (4). The above-mentioned Venn diagram is not our friend here, but I am inclined to think that there is a way to accomplish this for at least some parishes if the will to do so continues to exist.
I'm not decrying helter skelters or any other means of getting people in, but choral music sustains: it creates and distributes energy and transcendent experiences for many of us. For others there is masses of provsion out there; these are endangered oases. It can be wisely anticipated that they will be defended.
Special occasions (major Festivals and so on) are perhaps another matter, but then Evensong might be greatly altered, or replaced with a different form of service altogether.
In all fairness, our Cathedral has a fair-sized congregation of all ages for the Sunday Sung Eucharist, which is largely choral, and offers a very wide variety of music. It certainly creates and distributes energy and transcendent experiences!
But it's very much something I'd only attend infrequently - for nutritious worship I would definitely want a sermon (and, at times, Eucharist).
In the same way I am interested in politics and may read a lot about it, and even campaign - but I can not bear to watch political speeches.
I was confirmed in the C of E, and now attend a TEC church, and I agree with you
It's the same reason I have a virulent distaste for the modern practice of posting rambly instructional videos rather than just writing out some instructions - the expertise and experience of the audience is too wide to make it an effective or efficient way of communicating.
These days on zoom, we're doing a much shorter sermon, followed by a discussion, which I find I'm finding more useful.
At parish level too I've experienced (in fact this is the situation at the moment) clergy who couldn't give a toss about either their paid organist or their unpaid singers, not even the junior choristers.
Several people have suggested that there may be cases of an over-powerful musical tail wagging the clerical/faith dog. I can only speak from personal experience which is that this is not the case. In my current parish the only real outreach comes from me and my senior singers. From recruiting visits to our local schools, social events for families of junior choristers, encouraging wedding couples to attend services so they can get a feel for how music sounds, inviting families who have had a funeral in the year to come to our annual All Souls Requiem - it all comes from the musical side. Before lockdown we started a musical group for people with dementia, and we have a young people's secular singing group. NONE of that receives any support from clergy.
As for the swipe at Choral Evensong: we reinstated a monthly Evensong last year and in the 10 months before lockdown numbers have grown from 10-15 to 50, with most of the people attending new to church. Again, no clergy support - in fact we had to arrange for Evensong to be taken by a retired priest who lives outside the parish because our own chap refused to do it.
It's very easy to swipe at musicians, but my experience is that more people who have little or no pattern of church attendance are attracted to try it by good music than by a man or woman standing in a pulpit delivering a mumbled peroration on the writings of St Paul.
Only gradually did I move to feeling able to say the Creed, and much later to attend the monthly Choral Eucharist. The music is the one aspect of Anglicanism for which I still sometimes feel nostalgic, now that I am - years later - Orthodox.
However, we seem to be ignoring The Elephant In The Quire - namely, the fairly obvious fact that things are never going to be the same again, thanks to Ye Plague™.
Choral music - sacred and/or secular - is on the back-burner, and likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, churches (and cathedrals) will have to re-prioritise, and I'm afraid that, in some cases, maintaining the choir's status quo may not be particularly high on the list.
(BTW @TheOrganist - whilst I don't particularly like Choral Evensong myself, finding it wordy and tedious, I fully appreciate that others have a completely different view, and that it nurtures and sustains their faith. FWIW, I prefer Lutheran Vespers, or even the RCC Vespers...short, and to the point!)
I think you make a very good point. Philistine clergy are anathema.
I have to say, however, that I personally know a good many paid singers in cathedrals who are out and out atheists as well as devout, committed lovers of the music they love singing. And, for that matter, have sung with many parish choristers who similarly were atheist, but for the love of singing church music were willing to put up with the religious nonsense that went along with it. Both as fellow singer and as incumbent, I have no problem with that and personally try to ensure (no doubt in a flawed way) that church members who sing in the choir - for that's how I see them - are treated with the same pastoral attention as church members who couldn't care if the choir never existed. Similarly, down through the years I've often been dismayed by how little some congregations see choir members as fellow congregation members - and vice versa.
But it's axiomatic that, in general, many church choir members disappear from view for the months of the year that the choir is on 'holiday'! I've sung in at least three parish church choirs were I can guarantee barely more than two or three had ever in all their singing careers sat anywhere else in the church than 'their' choir stall, and where the phrase 'no choir? oh great, Sunday off!' was often heard. As well as the stomping off in high dudgeon response when an incumbent, once in a while, told the choir there would be something a bit different, musically, for a particular service, so an anthem wouldn't be needed. Or there was no need to robe etc. And the worst for going off in a huff were often the most 'religious'!
I've spent most of my lay-worshipping life sitting in parish choir stalls, and I value church music of the SATB kind very highly. But quires and people who sit in them can very definitely be a breed apart, and not necessarily because they are mistreated by anyone, or are in fact set apart by others!
I'm also a bit concerned about the references to "Philistine clergy" although I did use the phrase myself! Musicians quite rightly don't see themselves as experts in theology, equally clergy are not experts in music. However, I submit, clergy should at least be sympathetic to the idea of music even if they are tone-deaf. More to the point, clergy are responsible for "putting together" the entire service, of which music is usually an integral and important part. There should therefore be, in my view, some discussion and debate between clergy and musicians about "what fits" in any one service. (Not knowing how things work in cathedrals, I appreciate this may not be practical there).
Unless they sing like angels I can't abide them.
IME choirs are only "on holiday" for the month of August*, for the period between (roughly) Christmas** and new year and for Easter week, so if members of the choir aren't present it is likely to be because they are on holiday. It may also be that they take the opportunity to go and hear another choir, or even go to see relatives for Sunday lunch. For example, I've a relative who celebrates their November birthday with a lunch party on the Sunday nearest "the day": because of the distance (hour and a half drive) I've only once in 25 years been able to arrive in time to eat with everyone else, when I was recuperating from major surgery so not playing.
As for the case of an incumbent changing something, how much notice are they giving? There is nothing so frustrating as preparing service music only to be told at the last minute that it won't be needed/wanted, and clergy seem to make a point of telling the musicians of changes at the last minute. My own incumbent gets the music list in rough a month before the start of a singing term, and the detailed monthly list 3 weeks in advance, but invariably communicates changes via a note on the stairs to the loft after the 8am service on the day. Are you seriously suggesting that - bar something like a natural disaster or major terrorist incident - he only knows we have a visiting preacher at 9am for a 10am service?
There are far too many clergy who behave appallingly and whose approach to the liturgy can only be described as amateurish.
* August weddings appear without any regard to whether or not it is going to prevent the organist getting a clear 2 week break. Yes, you can put in a dep, if you can find one, but occasional service fees are part of my income and, to be blunt, help to make-up for the unrealistically low basic salary.
** Christmas at my current place includes a sung service on 26th December. In other places where I've worked it included sung services on th 26th, 27th and 28th, reducing the post-Christmas "week" to 3 days.
She also has the gift of seeking out and stitching together various bits of liturgy to suit the occasion and sees the music as an integral part. Last Sunday was Harvest in two of her churches. She had not included our Harvest anthem in the evening service but was very happy to let us sing it again when asked.
No choir next Sunday, so I shall be going to a service elsewhere, not out of pique but to boost another congregation.
See? They're not ALL out to do the dirty on the musicians/singers...
The Sheffield Cathedral website supplies the required information: https://www.sheffieldcathedral.org/news/2020/10/4/announcement-from-the-dean-of-sheffield-cathedral
The Dean's health has been affected, he says, by the various pressures - the question of the choir being amongst them.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation, I can well believe it.
Broader social change is the answer to the question.
Anglican culture has shifted in the past half-century from being Mattins-default on a Sunday morning to Eucharist-default. I think that this is close to being a global (first-world) phenomenon. Even before the Plague arrived, I estimate that only 1 in 5 Ottawa parishes offered Choral Mattins and I think that it was only seriously attempted in 2 parishes outside the Cathedral (and one of those parishes had paid choristers).
Choral Evensong attendance was highest in places and times where folk would often attend two services daily. In my Irish student days, morning service was followed by the Irish Sunday dinner, a long walk, vespers, and then tea (student life may have changed since!). Outside cathedrals and a few major urban parishes, choral vespers really isn't going to happen, but that doesn't mean that it has no role in the life of those places. We've left, IMHO, the era where Anglicanism has standard practice-- it is now a period of allied and (one hopes) collaborating niches
In my home parish, it's held monthly, and gets a congregation of between 30 and 50. (*non choral tangent* I have long held that Evensong is a service suited best for the end of the work day. Students and such seem to go for compline at about 9pm, that being the end of their work day.)
I might note that the two major priest/choir contretemps I have seen were cultural in nature, and language of pastoral focus was used in an objectively dishonest manner, so I tend to look upon such discussions with a slightly jaundiced eye.
IME many clergy never say their Offices, either in private or publicly, nor do they appear to believe that doing so is an obligation they undertook to perform at ordination. This de facto abandonment of non-eucharistic worship has been highlighted by some of the streamed "worship" offerings that have proliferated since March. Random prayers and readings interspersed with musical items with little or any relation to them abound - structureless, ranbling and disorganised, they have little appeal for the converted, never mind anyone unchurched seeking spiritual comfort or enlightenment.
Whether in traditional or contemporary language, the church would benefit from rediscovering the discipline of its formal Offices.
Clearly (and I speak as a Nonconformist) there is a strong case for Anglican worship being - well, distinctively Anglican! (Although that itself poses questions as to exactly what that is and how it should relate to a rapidly-changing cultural context). By the way, I am very much in favour of properly put-together and structured services, albeit following what is basically a hymn-sandwich model.
I'm assuming this is the 'rhetorical' you - and not me, even though it is my post you're quoting!
I refer only to my own experience as a chorister in various church choirs from the age of 8 to the age of 32 (and even after ordination). No doubt choirs vary? I've never belonged to a church choir that had less than two months off over the summer - and one, at least - that finished after Christmas and more or less had January off.
I have quoted the less delightful aspects of choir behaviour, not as a criticism. But I do feel entitled to, not least because it's true! Anyone who's spent significant time in the musical freemasonry of the parish choir knows all about it: the secret sweet-sucking, the passing of notes when the wrong chant has been posted for the Mag and Nunc, the covert looks and nudges when the preacher says something unintentionally rude, funny or stupid, the stash of alternative reading/crossword material for prayer and sermon-time, etc.
I'm bound to say I've never been incumbent of a church with a paid choir and can't easily imagine how complex life must get in that case. I'm currently very blessed with an outstanding organist/choirmaster; and (until lately) a small but very competent, great-sounding choir who I love dearly. They are each and every one a gem - even and quite possibly especially the atheists!
I do agree that there are many clergy who don't know how to integrate music with liturgy; who are not even liturgically literate enough to know how music enhances the experience. And too many who have destroyed good music ministry potential as a result. I'm grateful to be kept up to my paces by my extremely knowledgeable organist. But I'm forever going to remember where was the first time I was issued the immortal invitation, between the gospel acclamations: 'would you like to suck a Fisherman's Friend?'
I agree about some of the less-than-devout behaviour of singers, paid and unpaid (the back row at Winchester used to be particularly good at anagrams), but would say in mitigation that sometimes having to listen to the same sermon twice - even thrice - can be less than inspiring!