Should Catholic Church musicians be paid?

[jmcrae]

Actually the title of the thread is Should Catholic Church musicians be paid? so someone has decided to leap from musicians to directors

Do you consider singers and instrumentalists to be “musicians”? To my way of thinking, a “musician” is someone who has a Ph. D. in Music, or someone who has acquired that same level of knowledge through work and experience.

Mel Kirby is a “musician” - the people who play and sing under his direction may or may not be, depending on whether they would be able to do his job.

 

[TrueLight]

Do you consider singers and instrumentalists to be “musicians”? To my way of thinking, a “musician” is someone who has a Ph. D. in Music, or someone who has acquired that same level of knowledge through work and experience.

Mel Kirby is a “musician” - the people who play and sing under his direction may or may not be, depending on whether they would be able to do his job.

You need to have a PhD to be a musician or equivalent experience?

What do you call a guitarist who can read music, and plays in a band 3 evenings a week and waiters on the side?

Musician definition: m.dictionary.com/definition/Musician/?linkId=ibc5yn

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

…Plus Priests have to live somehow…

And other people don’t? This gets crazier all the time!

 

[DarkLight]

Do you consider singers and instrumentalists to be “musicians”? To my way of thinking, a “musician” is someone who has a Ph. D. in Music, or someone who has acquired that same level of knowledge through work and experience.

Mel Kirby is a “musician” - the people who play and sing under his direction may or may not be, depending on whether they would be able to do his job.

Nitpick: there’s a lot more that goes into being a director than just musical ability. I know some great musicians who would not at all be able to direct, because they lack the necessary skills for working with people and getting a group to harmonize.

 

[Phemie]

. Plus Priests have to live somehow and most churches can’t afford to pay their priest a full living wage so it got taken out of parish church hands so to speak.

Not quite sure what you mean by that. We pay our priest out of parish funds, an amount set by the diocese. It’s up to us to find the necessary funds.

 

[jmcrae]

That makes no sense at all.

Parishes have to pay their priests out of the collections. There’s no “priest fund” anywhere that would make up the difference if the parish were unable to pay him his wage. If the parish were consistently unable to pay his wage, then the Bishop would give him duties at another parish or else at the Diocese to make up the difference, and he would cut back his hours of work to what they could pay for.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

Actually the title of the thread is Should Catholic Church musicians be paid?
so someone has decided to leap from musicians to directors

Probably a majority of Music Directors are musicians. It’s pretty hard to direct something you don’t know about isn’t it? I do know of one “Music Director” who isn’t a musician, but I also know that person shouldn’t even have the job.

 

[jmcrae]

You need to have a PhD to be a musician or equivalent experience?

What do you call a guitarist who can read music, and plays in a band 3 evenings a week and waiters on the side?

Ummm - a waiter?

 

[SMHW]

This doesn’t really answer the question as to whether or not a Church musician *should *be paid. But I think it addresses the circumstances under which many people would find it reasonable to pay church musicians.

I would say that the in the following cases church musicians could reasonably expect to be paid:

1. 
   *]The parish advertizes for someone to fill a role. (This means the parish is willing to look both within the parish and outside of the parish.) The parish could be seeking a music director, choir director, instrumentalist, cantor, or even choir members.
   *]The persons who wish to fill a particular role must apply/audition and will only be allowed to fill that role if they meet a certain level of competency. (In other words, they have to compete with other applicants.)
   
   In the following circumstances church musicians are usually paid but might not be if a parish does not have much in the way of resources.
   
   1. 
      *]The parish priest (or his delegate) approaches a talented person and asks him/her to be a choir director/instrumentalist/cantor.
      *]The skills necessary for this position go beyond a typical person’s natural skills and would not typically be learned via liturgical training.
      *]There will be prep time for this position that will likely be triple or more than the length of a liturgy.
      
      In the following cases, church musicians are highly unlikely to be paid:
      
      1. 
         *]Instrumentalists, cantors, or choir members are invited to audition for volunteer positions. (Typically the instrumentalist is expected to provide his/her own instrument.)
         *]Choir directors, Instrumentalists, cantors, or choir members request the opportunity to provide music for Masses that would otherwise not have any music. Instrumentalists might need to provide their own instruments.

 

[pnewton]

come now - you can sit in the pew whenever you want to… get to other services where you don’t sing perhaps ? Or go to a church that is open and go in and sit for awhile. Its peaceful I can tell you that and totally different to being in church when required to sing…

There are no other services that I do not sing at. My responsibilities cover the time slots that Churches offer Mass, Saturday night and the first half of Sunday, except when I am sleeping. I do get to make daily Mass sometimes, though.

I can not expect the other person to cover more than his share. It would be unfair to him. This is the way things are for people who work shift work.

 

[Cat]

I am blessed to be in a parish where the priest and the people are kind enough to say “thank you” to me for playing, and often compliment me on my ability. Many people even share testimonies with me of how my playing encourages or inspires them, and helps them to worship better. And children often tell me that they like my playing. Like I said, I am truly blessed.

But I know that other church musicians are not as fortunate as I am.

I think a lot of church musicians would possibly be willing to give away their talents for free as long as people are kind to them and either say thank you with words or clapping (yes, in the United States in a church setting, clapping means “thank you”, and it is not irreverent or disrespectful to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament to say "thanks.)

But when people criticize them and accuse them of being irreverent or of doing “Protestant” music, or ask them why they don’t ever do “traditional” music or why they don’t ever do “rock” music or why they play everything so high or so fast or so slow…well, it’s no wonder that many church musicians refuse to play unless they are paid. Money in the pocket makes it just a little easier to ignore insults.

 

[englishredrose]

I am blessed to be in a parish where the priest and the people are kind enough to say “thank you” to me for playing, and often compliment me on my ability. Many people even share testimonies with me of how my playing encourages or inspires them, and helps them to worship better. And children often tell me that they like my playing. Like I said, I am truly blessed.

But I know that other church musicians are not as fortunate as I am.

I think a lot of church musicians would possibly be willing to give away their talents for free as long as people are kind to them and either say thank you with words or clapping (yes, in the United States in a church setting, clapping means “thank you”, and it is not irreverent or disrespectful to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament to say "thanks.)

But when people criticize them and accuse them of being irreverent or of doing “Protestant” music, hmm what do they class as protestant music if there is any real difference apart from every denomination has their own hymn books but not a reason to degrade it as not their music or ask them why they don’t ever do “traditional” music or why they don’t ever do “rock” music or why they play everything so high or so fast or so slow…well, it’s no wonder that many church musicians refuse to play unless they are paid. Money in the pocket makes it just a little easier to ignore insults.

 

[englishredrose]

Probably a majority of Music Directors are musicians. It’s pretty hard to direct something you don’t know about isn’t it? I do know of one “Music Director” who isn’t a musician, but I also know that person shouldn’t even have the job.

but are most muscians musical directors and the thread title is musicians and not musical directors as someone seem to have clearly forgotten or don’t know the difference perhaps

 

[englishredrose]

There are no other services that I do not sing at. My responsibilities cover the time slots that Churches offer Mass, Saturday night and the first half of Sunday, except when I am sleeping. I do get to make daily Mass sometimes, though.

I can not expect the other person to cover more than his share. It would be unfair to him. This is the way things are for people who work shift work.

I am sure if you tried you could find a time most weeks to sit in a pew whether or not a service was taking place. Even I am learning that to be in church when there isn’t a service taking place is as good as when there is a service taking place. Luckily I have the free time and freedom to travel about to find a church that is open and spend free time just sitting with God in Church. You don’t need a service to be in church. Admittedly the church has to be open but if enough of you can get together at said time you’re all free then the priest be willing to open it for that time for you to go and sit in the pew without a service just being there. Its another experience again.

 

[Cat]

but are most muscians musical directors and the thread title is musicians and not musical directors as someone seem to have clearly forgotten or don’t know the difference perhaps

englishredrose, I started the thread, and I deliberately used the general term “musicians” with the intent of including ALL who make music in the Catholic Church. That would include the music director (or whatever he/she is called), the choir members, the cantors, and the instrumentalists.

I am 55 years old and have been involved in church music all of my life; the last eight years I have been Catholic. I have been involved in some extremely large evangelical churches with fantastic music.

In my experience, church music directors generally ARE musicians. It is very difficult to plan, organize, and direct a church’s music activities without being a musician yourself.

I suppose it could be done, but I think that very few churches can afford to hire a non-musician as a “Production Stage Manager” who organizes all the practical nuts and bolts of the music, but doesn’t actually do any of the music. (To all of you who are music directors–wow! Wouldn’t that be great?! A Production Stage Manager to take care of all those “details” that keep you on the phone or online during all the time that you should be practicing or praying! Dream on! )

But most churches hire just one person who does everything connected with the music, both the business/practical stuff and the esoteric/musical stuff.

And although some people on this thread object, it has been my experience that almost all churches, Catholic and Protestant, large and small, PAY a salary to this person. It is ridiculous to expect that someone would do this full-time job for no salary. People in the United States have to be able to earn a living, and most people can’t sustain working two full-time jobs, especially when one of those jobs is no-pay. The salary may be very small, just a stipend in the small country or small town parishes, but it is money, not just words of thanks.

People on this thread have talked about “worship” and “service” and “free” all in the same paragraphs, but if they will read their Bibles, they will see plenty of teaching to the effect that a servant of the Lord deserves payment for their work here on this earth.

I can agree that not every musician in the church/parish should be paid, but I think that expecting the music director of a church to work for nothing is unrealistic. I also think that the principle musicians should be paid a stipend; this would include the keyboardists who serve at Masses, the directors of the vaious choirs (if this is someone different than the music director), and also the primary cantors who are called upon most often, and who are often in service at the large holiday and feast day Masses and expected to lead the congregation in the more difficult pieces (e.g. Latin chants) that require advance practice and preparation.

Of course, some young, energetic, single people can work a full-time job and then put in another 40 hours or more working as the church music director for free. But this is very rare, and it’s usually temporary. The young person volunteers for this duty in order to gain practical experience that will help them to get a paid position.

Also, sometimes a woman who is married to a man who makes a good income will work as the “volunteer” music director of a church, receiving no salary. I’ve seen this work really well. However, I’ve also seen it work very badly. Sometimes the volunteer becomes very powerful, because the local church doesn’t dare question anything that she does, because she will walk away from the job, and then they will be forced to spend money to hire a “real” music director. So everyone walks on eggshells around her and keeps their mouths shut. This is a very bad situation, and it often leads to a split in the church.

In fact, I think this can happen when a church underpays its music director. It gives that music director too much power. If the church even dares to say a word against the underpaid music director, he/she will sigh and say, “Well, maybe it’s time for me to leave this church. I’m not really getting paid enough to live on, and perhaps I should move on.”

And then the church has to apologize and kowtow and jump through hoops to make sure that their music director is happy and doesn’t leave, because then they will have to try to hire another poor soul and underpay them–and they probably won’t succeed in finding anyone willing to work for a pittance. So they will have to man up, and pay a music director a competitive salary.

When a church pays a person a fair and equitable wage, THEN they have power over that person, instead of the other way around. I think churches should write that down and remember it and act on it.

When a church hires a music director or a musician, they have the right to hold that person accountable for not only showing up on time and producing acceptable music, but also adhering to any code of conduct that the church imposes upon their staff members. They have no such hold over a volunteer, other than asking them to not come back, and of course, this creates bad feelings and often causes a split in the church as offended people take sides and leave.

And believe me, musicians are among the most fragile and easily-offended people on this earth. You can LOOK the wrong way at a musician, and they will crumple, cry, and spend the whole week in bed eating Oreos. That’s just the way we are–fragile. A WISE church will remember that, too, and treat musicians gently and fairly (but firmly).

I hope this clarifies my thread for you and others, englishredrose . I apologize for any ambiguity. Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut and opinions.

 

[superamazingman]

Great post, Cat. It doesn’t always sound nice, and it may come as a shock to some, but that’s the reality.

Here’s the other major point that is often missed:

For every hour of playing, there’s almost always at least 5 or more hours of preparation. Is that time worth nothing?

I will often spend half an hour learning and perfecting a communion chant’s antiphon that is only 40 seconds long. And I may only sing it once. 30 minutes of prep for 40 seconds of music. It’s beautiful music, but we can’t pretend it learns itself.

Maybe it would be easier for everyone to think of it this way:

The musician is being payed for their preparation time, and is not being paid to be at Mass.

Is that easier to accept for anyone?

 

[englishredrose]

englishredrose, I started the thread, and I deliberately used the general term “musicians” with the intent of including ALL who make music in the Catholic Church. That would include the music director (or whatever he/she is called), the choir members, the cantors, and the instrumentalists.

I am 55 years old and have been involved in church music all of my life; the last eight years I have been Catholic. I have been involved in some extremely large evangelical churches with fantastic music.

In my experience, church music directors generally ARE musicians. It is very difficult to plan, organize, and direct a church’s music activities without being a musician yourself.

I suppose it could be done, but I think that very few churches can afford to hire a non-musician as a “Production Stage Manager” who organizes all the practical nuts and bolts of the music, but doesn’t actually do any of the music. (To all of you who are music directors–wow! Wouldn’t that be great?! A Production Stage Manager to take care of all those “details” that keep you on the phone or online during all the time that you should be practicing or praying! Dream on! )

But most churches hire just one person who does everything connected with the music, both the business/practical stuff and the esoteric/musical stuff.

And although some people on this thread object, it has been my experience that almost all churches, Catholic and Protestant, large and small, PAY a salary to this person. It is ridiculous to expect that someone would do this full-time job for no salary. People in the United States have to be able to earn a living, and most people can’t sustain working two full-time jobs, especially when one of those jobs is no-pay. The salary may be very small, just a stipend in the small country or small town parishes, but it is money, not just words of thanks.

People on this thread have talked about “worship” and “service” and “free” all in the same paragraphs, but if they will read their Bibles, they will see plenty of teaching to the effect that a servant of the Lord deserves payment for their work here on this earth.

I can agree that not every musician in the church/parish should be paid, but I think that expecting the music director of a church to work for nothing is unrealistic. I also think that the principle musicians should be paid a stipend; this would include the keyboardists who serve at Masses, the directors of the vaious choirs (if this is someone different than the music director), and also the primary cantors who are called upon most often, and who are often in service at the large holiday and feast day Masses and expected to lead the congregation in the more difficult pieces (e.g. Latin chants) that require advance practice and preparation.

Of course, some young, energetic, single people can work a full-time job and then put in another 40 hours or more working as the church music director for free. But this is very rare, and it’s usually temporary. The young person volunteers for this duty in order to gain practical experience that will help them to get a paid position.

Also, sometimes a woman who is married to a man who makes a good income will work as the “volunteer” music director of a church, receiving no salary. I’ve seen this work really well. However, I’ve also seen it work very badly. Sometimes the volunteer becomes very powerful, because the local church doesn’t dare question anything that she does, because she will walk away from the job, and then they will be forced to spend money to hire a “real” music director. So everyone walks on eggshells around her and keeps their mouths shut. This is a very bad situation, and it often leads to a split in the church.

In fact, I think this can happen when a church underpays its music director. It gives that music director too much power. If the church even dares to say a word against the underpaid music director, he/she will sigh and say, “Well, maybe it’s time for me to leave this church. I’m not really getting paid enough to live on, and perhaps I should move on.”

And then the church has to apologize and kowtow and jump through hoops to make sure that their music director is happy and doesn’t leave, because then they will have to try to hire another poor soul and underpay them–and they probably won’t succeed in finding anyone willing to work for a pittance. So they will have to man up, and pay a music director a competitive salary.

When a church pays a person a fair and equitable wage, THEN they have power over that person, instead of the other way around. I think churches should write that down and remember it and act on it.

When a church hires a music director or a musician, they have the right to hold that person accountable for not only showing up on time and producing acceptable music, but also adhering to any code of conduct that the church imposes upon their staff members. They have no such hold over a volunteer, other than asking them to not come back, and of course, this creates bad feelings and often causes a split in the church as offended people take sides and leave.

And believe me, musicians are among the most fragile and easily-offended people on this earth. You can LOOK the wrong way at a musician, and they will crumple, cry, and spend the whole week in bed eating Oreos. That’s just the way we are–fragile. A WISE church will remember that, too, and treat musicians gently and fairly (but firmly).

I hope this clarifies my thread for you and others, englishredrose . I apologize for any ambiguity. Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut and opinions.

Thank you because it clarifies to me that you have answered your own question and didn’t actually want a debate on the issue about church musicians. just actually directors and the two are different in that anyone who plays an instruement in church is a church musician and they don’t have to be a musical director. But the biggest clarification is really that you didn’t want a proper discussion because if you did you would be quite happy for those of us who disagree that these people should be paid. They shouldn’t and its that simple to me. The church isn’t an employer. The church is somewhere where people go and pray and worship God. Church wardens work far harder than any musical director but they don’t get paid. The worshipper works far harder than any musical director and they don’t get paid for the hours they put in. So no the musical director does it out of the love of God and I have never once refered to biblical paragraphs in my discussion so haven’t done so in one breath as you put it. But your title to your thread there fore doesn’t match up to what you set out to post and by the sounds of it actually you didn’t really want a discussion that disagreed with you therefore some discussion. You happy with those that agree with you. I think I was only being fair to highlight the confusion over church musician and music director as to me they are completely different people. Our priest is a church musician in that he can and has done played the trumpet and the piano but that don’t make him musical director. Musical Director is a defined role that they don’t even have to play an instruement or sing in the choir may be if they couldn’t find anyone. So it be as well to explain fully what you really mean and hence less confusion but my point for musical directors is no they shouldn’t be paid. Ours aren’t and doesn’t expect to be but she may well think it be nice to be but doesn’t expect it. We don’t all do things for the love of money but because we want to properly serve God at services.

So do you mean church musicians or church directors but my answer is the same.

 

[englishredrose]

So since you are adament that musicians are directors and directors are musicians and they should be paid in your opinion based from what you’ve read.

Does that mean we can now move onto something more real or move it to a theoretical discussion slot because to do anything more. If your musical director isn’t being paid and should be then the next step is to take that to your PCC whatever Catholics call them because we can’t decide that for you. As it seems optional for each Church rather than decided by the Pope per se.

 

[englishredrose]

And believe me, musicians are among the most fragile and easily-offended people on this earth. You can LOOK the wrong way at a musician, and they will crumple, cry, and spend the whole week in bed eating Oreos. That’s just the way we are–fragile. A WISE church will remember that, too, and treat musicians gently and fairly (but firmly). And this is the reason you give to pay musicians - I hope this is tongue in cheek irony

The number of hours one spends choosing to be a church musician is entirely through choice. No one made you do so. It really is because you want that to be in that part of the service and along comes committment. But it still a choice because the church wont fall down if you choose to not play or sing and personal practice time is personal and a matter of choice still. Some are perfectionists and will overpractice and some are more relaxed and don’t practice at home. So whether one practices or not really is personal choice as part of their own committment to their choir they are in. I am sorry but that is the truth too. Its not overlooked. Just treated as a matter of personal choice to how much time each invididual needs and totally upto individual decisions because you are not contracted to put in 1 hour a day bearing in mind that if you are truelly practicing you will warm up before and after so only about 30 minutes possibly spent on the piece in hand. Thats if you are properly contracted paid singer. You can walk away anytime and the church wont ‘sue’ you for breaking an employment contract. Its all choice. Am sorry but thats the truth too.

Children don’t get to choose if their mothers really want them to be in the choir or on the Altar but adults are a different matter. It is a matter of choice for them how much time and effort they put into worshipping God and its no different whether worship God with an instrument or without an instrument. Its worshipping God and no one gets paid for worshipping God. Its your choice how you worship God. I sing in a choir too and okay we’re a relaxed choir compared to how you stress, but its how I see for musicians its their way of worshipping God and as thus I believe one should not be paid.

Blimy if you add all the hours up a priest actually does, most are very underpaid as most of them haven’t got enough hours in the day because there aren’t enough assistants and deacons to share the workload. So before complaining about musical directors not getting paid for the hours of behind the scenes, think about the overworked priest who is always there ready to listen to us no matter what he on with and does work far harder than most in the church and he’s got to.

The musical director, well they haven’t totally got to because things can be arranged into job share etc if its too much for one person and all the rest of it. Church isn’t an employing organisation and its not a question about living wages in reality. If you want to count the hours and call it a job then fine but then are you worshipping God though I suppose its fine too if you want to think you can get paid for worshipping God.

 

[Cat]

Great post, Cat. It doesn’t always sound nice, and it may come as a shock to some, but that’s the reality.

Here’s the other major point that is often missed:

For every hour of playing, there’s almost always at least 5 or more hours of preparation. Is that time worth nothing?

I will often spend half an hour learning and perfecting a communion chant’s antiphon that is only 40 seconds long. And I may only sing it once. 30 minutes of prep for 40 seconds of music. It’s beautiful music, but we can’t pretend it learns itself.

Maybe it would be easier for everyone to think of it this way:

The musician is being payed for their preparation time, and is not being paid to be at Mass.

Is that easier to accept for anyone?

I think you have pointed out a reason why so many parishes use “forgettable” or, as some call it, “banal”, music.

There is “easy” music that takes only a few minutes to learn and practice. I think that many parishes make use of this music because it can be done by people who are not trained musicians, or done by professional musicians who can’t spare the time to practice more difficult music because they have to teach lessons (student pay them for these lessons) or work at another (non-music) paying job to earn enough money to support themselves.

I confess to using “easy” piano music when I play a prelude. I have several books that I have had since childhood. I used to play these pieces when I was a little girl. Mainly arrangements of traditional hymns, and people like them. So I play them. Often I sight-read my way through them for the first time at the Mass.

But every once in a while, I will spend several weeks practicing a difficult and complex piano arrangement of a hymn, and when I play it, people sit up and shut up in the pews.

BTW, there’s the answer to “chatting before Mass”–it’s hard to chat when a good organist is blasting away on a great prelude by Bach or Vierne or Franck or Dupre, or when a singer is presenting an aria from one of the great oratorios. I still remember the time a few years ago when my daughter sang, “Rejoice” from Handel’s Messiah–there wasn’t a SOUND in that nave, although usually the people chat loudly enough to jar the pews.

Of course, when she finished, everyone clapped. Oh, well! I think that people would stop clapping if “high” quality music was the norm instead of a rare exception.

I just don’t have the time to work up these difficult pieces, though. I spent four weeks practicing an hour a day to learn the simple Bach fugue that I played two weekends ago for our Vigil Masses (and people liked it).

So if the complaint is, “We need better music at Masses!”, then the answer is, “You need to pay your musicians enough so that they don’t have to spend so much time working at an outside job and can instead, spend that time preparing the more difficult “high” music that you want to hear at Mass.”

One more thing–the music for much of the “high” music costs a lot of money, so paying the musicians also assures that they will be able to afford to buy the music.

I said it earlier, and I’ll say it again. We aren’t angels. We don’t just “emote” beautiful music.