Overbearing Musical Priest

[Gorgias]

If you’re referring to me, let me tell you something.

In the post you cited, I’m not referring to you, but to Claire, as she noted. But, let me tell you something: although I don’t know you or your parish, I know what you wrote: you presented yourself as indignant that a priest might tell you what to do. In a certain way, that appears to say that you perceive yourself as being in charge – or, at least, that you think that you should tell him how to run liturgy. That, I would think, is what’s getting a negative response here.

We were never once told how we can improve or what is incorrect. I AM a humble person, by the way.

I’m not doubting that you are. But, when you act surprised that the person who hired you – or who (at the very least) signs your checks – tells you what to do… well, what does that say?

 

[Gorgias]

He was talking to me.
I’m a professional musician with an advanced degree that has worked in many parishes with many priests and 3 Archbishops now.

I know what I’m talking about.

You’re not the only one who knows – from experience – what they’re talking about.

Life for a Music Director is a lot of hard work, a lot of continuing ed, a lot of rehearsal time, and a lot of grief from those who want us to sing the same some every week, because it’s their favorite pre Vatican II piece, regardless of whether it’s appropriate for the readings of the day.

Without a doubt. Trust me – I’ve fought the battle on both sides … including fending off those who are unhappy that their favorite hymns aren’t part of the regular rotation.

Oh, and we should do it for free if we were truly thankful people. Feeding your kids is over-rated.

Right! Those who think that musicians and music directors are equivalent to volunteer ministers can be the most difficult to enter into dialogue with… :sad_yes:

it’s not a matter of “convenience” and I find that remark incredibly insulting.

It’s only ‘conveniently suspect’ that you consider your opinions are right and ours are mistaken…

Walk a mile in their shoes, and then get back with us.

Don’t presume that we haven’t… and then get back with us.

 

[EasterJoy]

In the post you cited, I’m not referring to you, but to Claire, as she noted. But, let me tell you something: although I don’t know you or your parish, I know what you wrote: you presented yourself as indignant that a priest might tell you what to do. In a certain way, that appears to say that you perceive yourself as being in charge – or, at least, that you think that you should tell him how to run liturgy. That, I would think, is what’s getting a negative response here.

I’m not doubting that you are. But, when you act surprised that the person who hired you – or who (at the very least) signs your checks – tells you what to do… well, what does that say?

Would you not agree that there are “industry standards” when it comes to how you treat employees, including whether or not they can expect to be consulted when they were hired for their expertise in the area in which they work?

Musicians chosen to lead liturgical music are professionals and are customarily at least given (name removed by moderator)ut when they are given regular positions at churches. That (name removed by moderator)ut is usually considerable. If their pastor takes over all authority to choose the music, it is hardly out of place to want some explanation. It would have been good, actually, if there had been some warning. These are not normal working conditions for liturgical musicians. (They’re paid peanuts, so there ought to be *something *in the deal for them!)

As for the pastor surprising those doing the music for Mass when he could have told them what he intended to do, that lacked consideration and kindness. Any priest I know who might infrequently do such a thing for effect would have admitted it out loud later, before dismissing the congregation. They all would have given some kudos to the musicians for being so kind as to go along with it.

 

[Gorgias]

OP, what does your pastor say when you complain to him?

What does he say when you *tell *him that you would like the same respect that other music leaders get, which is at least some (name removed by moderator)ut into what music you’re going to play? What does he say when you tell him that it is difficult for you, the other musicians, and the singers, not to mention the congregation, when he does his own thing with no warning at all?

Right! Absolutely!

What does he say when you suggest that your parish needs a liturgy committee, which is how other parishes plan liturgies that go smoothly and confidently for everyone?

Erm… ehh… not so much. At least, not as if a ‘liturgy committee’ were the final arbiter of what a liturgy must be in a parish. After all, the liturgy is not determined by a local committee – it is determined by the Church, and the Church is represented by the pastor. (Now, some pastors can really go off the deep end. However, that does not mean that the liturgy committee is the end-all and be-all of liturgical authority in a parish.)

Were I you, I’d go to a pastor at another parish, preferably one that is familiar with this priest, and ask for an entirely confidential stab of advice about how to have this conversation.

Not a bad approach… but here’s the problem: would the OP know whether the pastor to whom he’s going to advice is a buddy of his own pastor? If he were, then the attempt would look like an attempt to go around the pastor… which, to be fair, it is, in a certain sense. The trick, here, is in finding who the right priest to go to advice to…

Your pastor deserves to have feedback about how his behavior affects others, even if it is years before his stubbornness thaws enough to make use of the accumulation of feedback he eventually gets. Resolve to be a positive part of the change that needs to happen, even if you won’t be around to see it. Resolve to give it in a way that is charitable

You also need to consider whether or not to issue the ultimatum: Either I am included in selecting the music and we do the music as we agree ahead of time, or I quit. You are not being treated with the minimum of deference for your training that a music leader is normally given

That’s what’s most surprising here. Typically, a pastor might express a type of music he prefers; but, unless he feels that he’s completely not being heard, it’s odd that he might entirely take over the hymn selection. Perhaps there’s more here than meets the eye?

If I had the conversation I am suggesting you have with your pastor and he totally refused to budge, I’d quit if he did not fire me.

Yep. (Then again, I might wonder whether ‘quitting’ wasn’t already what had been in mind…?)

I’d also write a letter to the vicar of clergy, explaining why. The office that assigns priests deserves to know about problems of this kind

Umm. Really? I mean, unless the pastor walked in, and on day 2, changed everything around, it really is part of his assignment to manage the liturgies in his parish. What would the letter you’re suggesting, in fact, assert? “Our pastor took control of the liturgy and I don’t like it”? “Our pastor makes hymn choices that I don’t like”? “Our pastor takes offense when we don’t follow his direction”? Any of these might reasonably be expected not to be favorably received by the ‘vicar of clergy’, who assigned him there in the first place.

 

[Gorgias]

Would you not agree that there are “industry standards” when it comes to how you treat employees, including whether or not they can expect to be consulted when they were hired for their expertise in the area in which they work?

Musicians chosen to lead liturgical music are professionals and are customarily at least given (name removed by moderator)ut when they are given regular positions at churches. That (name removed by moderator)ut is usually considerable.

I agree; that’s what doesn’t meet the ‘smell test’, here. On the other hand, Brock only complains that, over 18 months, the pastor has “taken over the selection of all the music.” That sounds less like a dictatorial coup, and more like someone who has tried (but failed) to be listened to by his employee. Might I be mistaken? Possibly. Might we be hearing a selective narrative by Brock? Possibly.

If their pastor takes over all authority to choose the music, it is hardly out of place to want some explanation. It would have been good, actually, if there had been some warning.

If Brock had said “he did this without warning upon arrival”, I’d agree. That he said that it’s been something that’s happened “over time,” I wonder what ‘warning’ had been given.

As for the pastor surprising those doing the music for Mass when he could have told them what he intended to do, that lacked consideration and kindness.

Umm… I’m not seeing that in Brock’s original post. Rather, all I’m seeing is that the pastor refuses to sing the hymns that Brock inserts, when Brock deviates from the list that the pastor has provided. Where’s the “surprise”?

 

[EasterJoy]

I agree; that’s what doesn’t meet the ‘smell test’, here. On the other hand, Brock only complains that, over 18 months, the pastor has “taken over the selection of all the music.” That sounds less like a dictatorial coup, and more like someone who has tried (but failed) to be listened to by his employee. Might I be mistaken? Possibly. Might we be hearing a selective narrative by Brock? Possibly.

If Brock had said “he did this without warning upon arrival”, I’d agree. That he said that it’s been something that’s happened “over time,” I wonder what ‘warning’ had been given.

Umm… I’m not seeing that in Brock’s original post. Rather, all I’m seeing is that the pastor refuses to sing the hymns that Brock inserts, when Brock deviates from the list that the pastor has provided. Where’s the “surprise”?

It may not be nice to say it, but passive-aggression is hardly unknown in Christian churches. By that, I mean the situation where everyone is “nice,” but not necessarily where everyone is being good to each other. It is not because they want to be mean, but because they put too much value on avoiding even the appearance of conflict, even at the price of failing to communicate any discontent about anything.

What notoriously takes place in Christian churches, Catholic churches included, is that people bury their differences, maneuver behind the scenes, no one ever just comes out and says what they want, on the surface there is no “conflict,” and this passes for a “peaceful” situation when nothing could be farther from the truth. It is a recipe for making mountains of molehills, but that doesn’t mean that people do not really get upset or haven’t really wronged anyone else.

Of course the situation from the priest’s point of view could be entirely different! Why? Not because either the OP or the priest is being deceitful. No, the typical case would be where they just DO NOT TALK but instead project what they think the other one has as a motive for whatever they do and respond in kind.

The OP needs to be asking the priest what is up. Ideally, that ought to have happened the first time, but that is water under the bridge. The OP either needs to learn to talk to the priest and find a mutually-agreeable situation with the priest, or else quit. The priest isn’t going anywhere, but if the OP is not content with his way of doing things even after some communication has been tried, it is time to move on. Communication means risking the chance of being fired. The OP needs to realize that there are worse things than being fired. Going through Mass after Mass where the blood pressure starts going up as soon as you drive into the parking lot is one of them.

 

[Gorgias]

It may not be nice to say it, but passive-aggression is hardly unknown in Christian churches. … What notoriously takes place in Christian churches, Catholic churches included, is that people bury their differences, maneuver behind the scenes, no one ever just comes out and says what they want, on the surface there is no “conflict,” and this passes for a “peaceful” situation when nothing could be farther from the truth.

:sad_yes:

Of course the situation from the priest’s point of view could be entirely different! Why? Not because either the OP or the priest is being deceitful. No, the typical case would be where they just DO NOT TALK but instead project what they think the other one has as a motive for whatever they do and respond in kind.

Yep. I’ve seen that in parish situations, too.

The OP needs to be asking the priest what is up. Ideally, that ought to have happened the first time, but that is water under the bridge. The OP either needs to learn to talk to the priest and find a mutually-agreeable situation with the priest, or else quit.

Yep. Hopefully, they could talk things out, but I guess we’re just left to wonder why that hasn’t happened over the past 18 months…

The OP needs to realize that there are worse things than being fired. Going through Mass after Mass where the blood pressure starts going up as soon as you drive into the parking lot is one of them.

:sad_yes:

 

[HelenRose]

I have been a church pianist for a year and a half now and over time, the parish priest has taken over (by force really) selecting ALL of the music for Mass. I don’t think that’s fair at all. The cantor and I are the ones who look stupid if the music doesn’t go right. He sings extremely loud and overpowers the cantor and the congregation. Often he sings WAAAYY to fast and will start going so fast that he sings the wrong words and throws everyone off. Every year on Ascension Sunday, HE takes over the Alleluia and goes out to the front of the altar to sing it and it confuses everyone in the congregation. Anytime that we change a song on his list, he will refuse to sing. And it’s embarrassing. Any advice?

He is the boss. The fun part of being the pianist in our little mission church is the number of priests that come and go. We never know what to expect but we just smile sweetly and hang on. There are times when our eyes are the eyes of a deer in the head light of a car. But we play and sing on. A sense of humor will carry the day.

 

[ccmcmg]

To be fair, there are also plenty of musicians in parish ministry who consider themselves liturgical performers…

No, that’s misconception perpetrated here. Which is very unfair for people to assume.
**Most **share their God given talents very humbly.

Most…not all.

I don’t have a misconception (also unfair to assume I do); I’ve been to parishes (my own home parish included) where it was clear that to the ‘performer’, it was ALL ABOUT the cantor and/or organist. I very much respect your opinions my friend clare, but from my own experience, it can and does happen.

I do have some background both from the pew, and behind the mic as a cantor, as well as various other positions. I understand the frustration by the OP, and have no answers for either side, but I must defend those of us who have experiences, not misconceptions.