I was having a debate with some friends last night over the merits of the various routes an organist can follow to further their development. It struck me though that there are some organists who spend their days practising, learning repertoire and then going through the mill of an undergrad degree and then perhaps some postgrad study before emerging into the sunshine of real life without ever having played regularly for church services.

Do you think that in-depth experience of playing in Divine Service is an absolute must for the modern organist? Is it understandable if an young organist eschews that traditional route and just concentrates on technique, repertoire and carves out a role as a concert organist without ever having played a set of Canticles, the note for the Sursum Corda or dancing their feet around the last verse of Laudate Dominum (Parry) ?

As a singer, Confutatis, it's admirable that you are concerned about us organists.

I think experience is worth a great deal - but on the other hand if a young sprog-organist is dead set on the concert route and may never have to accompany divine office in the future - I wonder if it really does matter. A gap in one's experience though which could have been ever so enriching. Not sure. I personally would not have missed that side of things - then that's just me (and I have ended up singing rather than playing, which may say something).

When I took arcm back in the days when dinosaurs roamed the earth, I had one question on the exam paper which was an absolute gift. Nothing that you had mugged up for the exam - simply to write some advice on accompanying hymns. This I had been doing since I was 13 and I grabbed the question like an old friend. I remember thinking 'this is how exams ought to be'.

Not that it answers your question, really. But bells rang. And I waffle.

Of course, a church position does allow the player free use of an organ on which to practise, with the added advantage of a regular income.

I think proficiency at the organ can be established entirely well without playing for divine office. However, there are so many aspects of musicianship in which accompanying worship can provide invaluable training for the player, including accompanying an untrained congregation, sightreading, reading four-part harmony (hymn tunes), improvisation... To name but four!

It is a great pity if the ABRSM becomes about 'church organ players' as opposed to organists. There are many other worthy organisations that look after those people who learn the organ solely that they may accompany acts of worship reasonably well.

Surely the ABRSM is about muscianship rather than church organ work, which is so often the death-knell for organists.

Barry Williams

Unless they are a practising Christian I don't see that they would necessarily see the need or have the desire to do service accompaniment.
Maybe my thinking is sometime a little too narrow but it's only recently I've realised that there are church organists who don't actually believe...............just strikes me as an odd thing to want to tie yourself to in that case but obviously there are those who are happy to take an active part in something they don't believe.

Surely the ABRSM is about muscianship rather than church organ work, which is so often the death-knell for organists.

Barry Williams
[/quote]

Why should that be the case? The death knell bit, I mean. Do you mean that time is taken up tidying anthems and canticles at the expense of recital works?
Unless you happen to have a capacious garage or live in a stately home with a gallery in which to house the beast then mostly one is dependent on the good will of a church community for the use of their instrument. I could not summon up the crust to use the facilities without offering some recompense in the form of music.
If there is a diplomatic way to do this I would be most interested to hear it because working long hours during the week and then doing the necessary twice over a weekend plus any weddings means I am meeting myself coming back! And my exam pieces are stagnating.

I think I've just answered my own question.

As long as the AB has some un-divine works in its lists I cannot see that it is necessarily steering organ students inevitably towards Church music.

Mel

The valiant souls who provide organ music for divine worship are often not properly appreciated and seem to have so much grief in the process that it might be better to pay for the use of the organ and avoid the hassle of playing for services as a return for the use of an instrument.

Fortunately, ABRSM permits the use of suitable electronic instruments for examinations, so those with such machines at home can be independent of churches. (It would be interesting to know how many candidates take ABRSM examinations on home electronic instruments.)

Wishing to play for services may be a valid reason for learning the organ, but it is not really the ambit of the ABRSM examinations. Other bodies do that, though the RCO is less directed to church work now than hitherto. This probably reflects the apparent unwillingness of competent and qualified organists to take posts in churches. (There is no shortage of organists, merely a shortage of organists willing to take posts.)

Many church organists find that their recital and examination pieces stagnate under the weight of a church job which is often a heavy committment, especially on top of an ordinary day job. Going out on a dark evening to a cold church to rehearse takes a lot of determination!

Barry Williams

Two possible reasons come to mind, viz i, The opportunity to perform in public and ii, Money!

Well put and it would be unfair if the AB examined the organ in a different manner to the way they examine all other instruments.

However, I would add a note about the RCO. Much a fan as I am of their exams (organists who have passed them always are), I do think that although they do test practical skills not tested in any other exams (fig bass, score reading etc.), and these are valuable skills, they are not applicable to the vast majority of church musicians. There are no tests in, for example:

-stopping the Wagner Bridal March half way down the second page and making it sound musical when the bride reaches the point of no return
-accompanying psalms in such a way that they reflect the words, rather than the organists' competence to piston push
-carrying on an improvisation on the offertory hymn for 30 seconds while the collection finds its way to the altar
-transposing hymns in to sharp keys so that the guitars in the music group can join in (actually, maybe a better skill would be transposing them into flat keys so they couldn't join in)
-playing for a whole service without touching the Eflat in the middle of the keyboard as you know it will cypher and cause embarassment to all

Not to mention all the skills of a politician, diplomat and social worker that you need if you run a children's choir.

I have heard two very eminient 'concert' organists whose hymn playing skills were most disappointing.

Well said, Monsieur!

I think the skills of a politician, diplomat and social worker are required for dealing with adult choirs too - perhaps even more so.

I am reminded of a major civic service for which I was playing a couple of years or so ago. The church music group evidently had scores and decided to join in - badly - during the first hymn, without having checked with me. I was supposed to be directing the music after all! Their playing was atrocious and, to make matters worse, they hadn't tuned up to the organ. Rather mean-spiritedly of me, perhaps, in between verses I extemporized a bridging passage and a modulation and transposed the hymn out of F major into G flat, thinking "Now try it in that key, folks". They tried, but soon gave up!

You missed out - working out which stop has suddenly decided to cypher in the middle of something, and being able to turn it off, whilst continuing with the playing.

I was at the piano for this one: Accompany a choir practice for a piece new to the choir, so you have to read from the four part split vocal part, and sing the tenor line, and cope with the tenor part being wrongly written and only having a four line stave.

All of these recent posts confirm my view that the average church is, more often than not, no place for a musician - a very few establishments excepted - mainly London churches with professional choirs that are permitted to sing decent music.

Barry Williams

Yes, I see where you're coming from, Barry.

However, it's a fact of life that a stable and regular income from church employment can be useful for musicians who have to earn their income from several sources and sometimes on an irregular basis. Weddings and funerals can be a useful supplement to one's regular income too.

But, yes, churches can be very frustrating places for musicians at times.

Well put HG, very frustrating at times!

Can I add though, that the jobs can be hugely rewarding as well as frustrating. On the odd occasion a member/visitor comes up afterwards and tells you that the voluntary/hymns/anthem whatever has enhanced their worship on that morning, and knowing you've managed to get 35 kids off the street/out of bed on a Fri evening/Sun morning, and they have a good morning, I can feel a warm glow inside more so than listening to perfect but cold 'professinal' singing from people who are only there for the money with no intention of any spiritual input and enhancing worship.

Barry - is it not the case that life and work in general is as you describe? I don't think it is particular to church organists!! Those of us who look in from the outside can see that the frustrations of work in other sectors are the same as those endured by organists. Office politics, favouritism, clashing personalities and lack of recognition are all issues that millions of employees have to deal with on a daily basis...

The problem as I see it is that most organists are too thin-skinned to deal with conflict/criticism and think that flouncing off/resigning in high dudgeon are the way to deal with it. I think if the RSCM/RCO/etc offered courses on interpersonal skills for church musicians, it might go some way to dealing with this situation. One could theorise that, in general, the type of people drawn to church music have certain personality traits and it is these which cause them to wring their hands, take offence and get overly emotional as soon as something doesn't go their way. Whilst I recognise that there are always impossible situations in life where walking away is the best course of action, in general most incidents could probably be dealt with in a more cool-headed, personable fashion...

*prepares to be shot down*

Thanks for that, Guilmant. Yes, indeed there are those moments of great satisfaction. It's just that - at times - they can be a bit thinly spread!



On the contrary, most of the professional organists I know - myself included - are really rather thick-skinned, and have hard necks to boot! I think it a necessary prerequisite for working in churches at times.

Perhaps I could comment on two issues.

Firstly, the question of poor relationships seems to trouble many organists in their church work. Relationships with the clergy can be problematic, which is why there is a whole chapter devoted to that subject alone in my book. Further, it is clear that bad experiences are strongly persuasive and this is one of the reasons why certain clergy have no difficulty in attracting and keeping organists and musicians. The choice of music gives rise to much discontent; trivial music can be very irritating. Examples of this are dull, repetitive words, badly set and scored in unison which choirs, understandably, do not like. Occasional items of this type are no problem, but a surfeit gives rise to unhappiness in the musical team. This is a constantly recurring problem and one of which I hear much, often in conjunction with the introduction of new hymn books. (One in particular seems to cause grief!)

Secondly, why should a professional choir be 'cold' and an amateur be 'warm'? I have worked with many professional choirs and always found that they can convey far more of the meaning of the words and music because they have a better control of their instrument than untrained people. There is undoubtedly a satisfaction to be acheived and enjoyed in training a local amateur group to a high standard and to feel the 'glow' in their results, but that does not make professional singing 'cold'. Ideally, all singers should have had singing lessons before they attempt to join a choir, for many of the problems of intonation derive from faulty voice production - a point often missed by organists who train choirs without having had any training as singers themselves. (Would you buy a trombone and immediatley join the orchestra? No, you would have lessons first. The same applies to singing.)

A small choir of properly trained voices is better than a large choir of untrained voices. The former produces far more exciting results with a wider dynamic and musical range than the latter. Unfortunately, some churches see the choir as a kind of musical youth club. It is not. The choir has a very important part in public worship, as has the organist. Both need to deliver their music to a very high standard. A high standard does not equate to complexity of music. Simple music rendered well is far more edifying than complex music performed badly. Fumbled performances are still heard far too often, sometimes even in radio broadcasts.

Barry Williams

Whilst I agree with you on the desirability of this, in the real world I would be left with a tiny handful of singers in each of my amateur choirs were this to be the expected norm.

Most amateur choir members join a choir hoping that they'll get vocal training along the way which, in my choirs, they do. Of course, group tuition isn't nearly as good as one-to-one training but it's better than nothing at all.

In considering your analogy of a person buying a trombone, I think this rather different. Yes, somebody without any training whatsoever wouldn't have the first clue, and it would be absurd of them to expect to join an orchestra, of course. However, with amateur singers, all are born with a voice of sorts which we practise using every day by using speech which is, after all, a form of singing. Perhaps a closer analogy might be that of somebody wanting to learn how to play football. They probably wouldn't improve their skills by kicking a football around a field one evening a week (or perhaps they might; I abhor football and wouldn't know). More likely they would join the local amateur team and expect to improve their skills with coaching and practise along the way. The same is true of most amateur singers.

On the positive side, I've had a number of my singers in various choirs over the years come to me for consultation lessons because they've wanted to improve their vocal technique, which is greatly to be encouraged.

However, I sometimes fondly remember the professional church choir I had several years back, and how much easier it was at times working with a group who could sight-read and sing flawlessly - almost effortlessly it seemed.

Of course there is a difference between one's self-perception and everyone elses reality - someone who protests they are thick skinned is often the opposite....

Yes, broadly agree with this. I've been very fortunate to work with clergy who are rather 'godly' in their outlook, rather than being driven by their own personality. They have also been very sensitive to the needs of their own congregation, rather than imposing ideas that worked in their last church. Yes, there have had to be compromises on both sides with regards to music, but neither side has had to drive the other out....yet! I do also find some of the 'trivial' music you describe very irritating, but I have had to realise that there are some for whom that is the only communication they have with their maker. It is possible to take trivial music and arrange it much better than the average hymn book does (I think we both know the one that causes the most grief!)



I hadn't meant the 'warm and cold' to be as 'black and white' as it may appear, but I do disagree with some of the points you raise.

I never thought that my choir was a musical youth club, but there has to be a way of attracting children into the choir at an early age, before they develop other weekend distractions. If that means that we provide social activities alongside the musical input that helps them to make friends in the choir, then that's one of the things that keeps them coming back for more. Better they are in church on a Sunday morning, than out on the rugby pitch, we have no idea how the seeds we plant then will work out in the future. I don't expect the kids to have had any musical training before they join, its my job to do that because they don't get it in school anymore. You were very kind enough to point out how good the choir were when you heard them a few years ago in a previous PM, but most of those children had very little musical ability (other than to be able to pitch a note in tune, the only qualification to joining aged 6 or 7) when they joined. They joined the choir practice and made friends and sang in some services, and then had separate extra lessons on voice production in the early weeks and months.

Quite a large number of them have since gone on to take singing lessons to supplement what I taught them and have gone on to sing at a much higher level (in fact, three of the 8 year olds you heard passed their Bishop's Award last week, and of the then Head Choristers, one went on to be an Oxbridge Choral Scholar and the other into the National Youth Choir). Much of the treble only music we did, was in fact very simple and I am a great believer in choosing music appropriate to the level of performer, but always with an eye on the next thing up the ladder.

I'm afraid if we could only have professional singers in our choirs, outside cathedrals, colleges and well endowed London churches, our choir stalls would be empty, and that would be a great shame. It is easy to confuse the choir's role in a service, not just to provide anthems and canticales, but also to lead the worship of the congregation at points where they are expected to join in, ie hymns, possibly the psalms.

This thread in general, and mwl1's post in particular, reminds me of a recent thread about being a "complete" musician. Perhaps the "complete" organist might be able to play for a service in the morning and give a recital in the afternoon, but it doesn't (or at least shouldn't!) make them any less of an organist if they don't give recitals or spend Sunday mornings playing hymns and psalms.

I can't improvise for toffee and my ability to play by ear is lousy, but I like to think I'm good at what I can do. Chacun a son gout and all that.


Bravo, HG!

At least the music group and choir at Valhalla Parish Church are never involved in the same services - most weeks we have bells and sometimes smells, but once a month go to the other extreme and have tambourines and songs without modulations (and occasionally without as much as an inversion either ). At least it gives me an excuse to play clarinet with other people, even if the music is shockingly bad (probably from the same heavy hymn book with a white background and colourful people in fleur-de-lys poses on a stave as previously hinted at).

Not in Holz Gedeckt's case MrC.

Perhaps you're thinking of yourself there....

"I'm afraid if we could only have professional singers in our choirs, outside cathedrals, colleges and well endowed London churches, our choir stalls would be empty, and that would be a great shame. It is easy to confuse the choir's role in a service, not just to provide anthems and canticales, but also to lead the worship of the congregation at points where they are expected to join in, ie hymns, possibly the psalms. "

I have the greatest possible respect for those who run childrens' and voluntary adult choirs, but the position is not quite as given in Guilmant's words quoted above. It is perfectly possible to have a very competent choir of trained singers without having to get invoved in the all the associated 'social' activities. I see the function of the choir as being solely one concerned with worship. But I would always insist on any person joining the choir being comepetent both in sight reading and voice production. One 'melody bass' can wreck the hard work of a whole choir - and often does! Also, the choir should not have to 'lead' the congregation in song. The congregation ought to be able to do that themselves. If they cannot there is something fundamentally wrong.

Nowadays many of the clergy will not permit choirs to sing decent music. What is the point of training a choir merely to sing in unison or to restrict their contribution to anthems? Unless a choir is given good music to sing they will fail to flourish. Perhaps it is the 'wrong' time for good choirs in the majority of churches, though it is within my memory when almost all churches had choirs that sang decent anthems and settings regularly.

My view is coloured by the great joy I have had over many years in directing professional choirs (who most certainly can give 'warm' performances) and the enormously stressful and very unrewarding hassle I have had with amateur choirs, where, for example, someone does not attend the pre-service rehearsal because they are making the tea after the service or the children go the Cubs instead of singing in the choir and many similar problems, which arise with monotonous regularity.

Next year my new book 'Everything Else a Choirmaster Should Know' (companion to 'Everything Else an Organist Should Know') is being published. I will not send you a complimentary copy Guilmant as you may not like it, but I will still enjoy listening to your choir! Keep up the good work. I admire your approach and your commitment to the cause.

Barry Williams

Barry, I think we are in agreement about most things here, particularly clergy avoiding decent music, as many of them see it is being elitist. The only time I had a small disagreement with the vicar was when we did all of Ascribe unto the Lord, which he felt was a little excessive for Divine Worship (especially when the joint of beef was in the oven). I do also agree about pre-service rehearsals and the problems associated with them. I very rarely allowed people to sing in the service if they didn't make it to the rehearsal; honorable exceptions were a trumpet player every Rememb Sunday who had to cover two services in a morning, and the odd genuine emergency.

I also agree with one 'rogue' bass spoiling the whole ensemble!

I'm still not sure I agree with you on the role of the choir outside canticles, anthems and mass settings, I still firmly believe it is the choir's job (those who have decided to use the musical talent God gave them) to lead the congregation at places where they are expected to contribute, and not only the sung parts of the service (eg hymns, the odd Merbecke etc.), but also in the spoken parts as well.

You have provided a timely reminder that I still haven't got round to buying your previous publication (which I know I need and will try to do so soon) and I will state my intention to buy the next volume as well. I'm sure I will enjoy it, because if it receives the same high recommendations that the last one did, it will be thoroughly researched and well written.

I know the children's choir route doesn't sound like your favourite cup of tea, but I hope you will cover some of the legal and child protection issues associated with running one in your book? What else is it likely to include?

Instant Puccini!



What about new hymns and mass settings &c if there isn't opportunity for sufficient congregational rehearsal?



Very true.



I'm having great difficulty with members of one of my choirs - who are basically just one clique who have gone through almost as many choirmasters as I've had hot dinners before I took them on several years ago - to persuade them that choir practise evening is choir practise evening, and not just the evening that they go to choir practise if there are no other social events taking place. I'm intending to bring in a new rule of "No practise, no sing" from the beginning of next year, and know that this is going to cause me a lot of hassle in enforcing.

Thank you, you are very kind.

Child Protection issues are covered fully in 'Everything Else an Organist Should Know'.

The new book will have chapters on choir managment, conducting, (all the basic techniques - nothing airy-fairy, but loads on the three methods of dealing with pauses, the preparatory beat, etc), much about singing - vowels, placement of consonants, etc, rehearsal techniques, photocopying, choir libraries, auditions, 'difficult' choristers, acoustics and loads more. We will probably 'road test' the main material at a course as we did for the first book.

There is an update on most aspects of the present book including the employment status of church organists on our Website. Also we now have a free downloadable form of contract for organists in churches as well as updates (also free) for all the chapters of 'Everything Else an Organist Should Know'.

Barry Williams

Neither of my churches has a choir any more, but for both choirs' final few years there only function was to lead the congregational singing - whether that be mass setting, psalm or hymn. But in this instance the combined congregation of the two churches is about 40. So with roughly 20 people sitting at the back of a big barn of a church, a choir to lead does make a difference. Just as well I sing along from the organ stool.

Yes, I've just been thinking of some of the very recent grumbles I've had with amateur choirs.

i, Not turning up to choir practise without letting me know
ii, Turning up on Sunday having not attended choir practise expecting to sing what others have rehearsed
iii, "Kindly" informing me that they won't be at choir practise for various reasons such as "My cat doesn't like fireworks", "My sister's coming to stay for a few days and I don't feel right about letting her stay on her own" (despite the fact that there's nothing wrong with her!), "I'm going to a party", "I've arranged a party for some of the choir", "My son turned up unexpectedly and I had to cook him some dinner", "So-and-so team are playing on the telly" &c &c....
iv, Turning up late to choir practise and interrupting everybody else as they walk in and loudly ask/demand to know what we're singing, despite being asked to wait by the door until being invited to join those who are already singing at a suitable break
v, Making sarcastic comments when I try to enforce a bit of discipline
vi, Having the attitude that they're doing the choirmaster and the Almighty a favour by attending.

I could go on, but I think you've got the message.

Oh dear! I think that we have all had this at sometime. It sounds terrible.

It is such a joy to stand in front professional singers who pay attention, deliver the music as well as the notes first time, do not need remedial work done on voice production and really care about the effect of their singing on the listeners. It all happens without hassle or fuss. The first run through is music, even quite early in the morning, when sopranos and tenors usually do not like singing.

Yet I have conducted amateur groups that can do this almost as well as the professionals and certainly without the fuss and hassle, even if they cannot quite get the musical perfection. There is a way of achieving it and it will be revealed in my next book. Charles Cleall, one of the world's most famous choir trainers, gave me the secret - probably the real secret of all choir training.

I do so admire your patience Mr Holz Gedeckt. I would have screamed in the first ten seconds.

Barry Williams

<hides head in surplice>

I'm guilty of quite a few of those, HG. In my defence I will say that my choir practice is at a rubbish time (I've campaigned for years to get it moved to a time which will enable the workers in our choir to attend rehearsals, but to no avail); our limited repertoire is diminishing to the extent where about one Sunday a year I end up sight-singing something, everything else coming round with disturbing frequency; our organist seems to show little interest in expanding either the choir (I've been the youngest member for the last eight years (i.e. when the last teenager went off to university), during which time we have gained two members and lost three) or its repertoire (see previous comment re sight-singing). Even when I know I'll be able to make choir practice it tends to be a scamper through the hymns and the Mozart Ave Verum for the Nth time this year - not even a whisper of improving vocal technique or a hint about musicianship.

I could go on but I think you get the message

Any suggestions on resolving this gratefully received.

Move church!


I remember it well, and often wonder why I moved!


I'll look forward to the book!



Thank you. This evening - when most of that happened - I nearly did!

Come and sing with us ! two fully choral services most Sundays. Duruflé and Byrd last week, Fauré tomorrow.

HG, commiserations. Truly demoralising.

What an interesting thread.

These are age-old problems. What strategies do you use for dealing with them? If you are as thick-skinned as you claim, I'm surprised you are letting yourself get angry and frustrated about it. Surely the fun of the job is working with people and getting the best out of them?

I'm not going to rise to the bait, MrC. Suffice to say that, despite all, I do actually get the best possible out of them, and have remained in that particular post considerably longer than several of my predecessors put together.

My goodness, HG, I didn't realise you were so scary! I had you down as a big pussycat; you must do wonderful repertoire and be a truly inspiring trainer to keep your singers with such a strict way of going on. I know adults take a dim view of being told off and are likely to think they are doing you and the Almighty a favour just by turning up.( To the best of my knowledge the Almighty has never asked for a sick note but He has some terrifying staff.)

How things vary. I tried to start up a choir a year or so back, because ours finally fizzled out. New blood, and all that - it would have been new to me, too, but I was prepared to accept any sentient being with a pulse and do some relatively easy stuff (from the accursed book referred to earlier) along with note reading, theory and really go with whatever was required. I did not aim for a particular demographic, even used a clipart picture of a choir of mice on my poster so's not to put anyone off.
I succeeded in putting everyone off.
Not a sausage.
Clearly no appetite for choral singing here! I packed away Imogen Holst and put it down to experience (lack of).
I would have hugged any potential singers, plied them with tea + biscuits after rehearsal and had endless patience - I have my limitations but patience isn't a problem.

Look after them, HG, because I might be waiting around the corner after your rehearsal with a cosh and a people-carrier to whisk them away.

Only jealous.

Mel

Wanna borrow a cosh and a people-carrier, Mel? I can lend you them both - gratis!

This is worse than I thought! Holz Gedeckt the kick-###### choirmaster!
If you conducted with the cosh then the discipline problems would melt away like snow in summer.








Oh for heavens sake!

I was only trying to say kick-a*s!!

Hardly a moral peril compared to implied violence earlier!

Very tempting indeed! I've sometimes contemplated jumping ship, and there are two reasons why I haven't: (i) I would probably have to raise my game (and pitch ) to find anywhere where the grass was much greener; and (ii) it would probably sound the death-knell for the choir if I left, and so another ordinary suburban parish church is left sans choir

Hmmm!!

This morning I went to heaven (musically speaking):

Professional choir of nine, (all superb singers - no 'difficult' choristers and they all knew the scores,) glorious music, (introit, three anthems and a full setting,) magnificent organ in a superb church, splendid liturgy, (all 'Thee' and' Thou' - Book of Common Prayer), no 'choruses', no 'worship group', no 'Peace' and they paid me handsomely for the privilege!

I do so admire all you who struggle in local churches with untrained singers. You deserve heaven for your patience.

Barry Williams

Is it me or is three services on one Sunday a bit over the top?...

Interesting edit, there, MrC!

Some of us have a minimum of that each Sunday....

Depends how you define "musicians" too. The able guitarist in the worship band can be just as frustrated as the able organist or singer. Churches overall can be frustrating, whether or not you're musical. A friend of mine has just had a gigantic run-in with her vicar about pastoral matters which he asked her to oversee and then didn't like what she'd done.

Alas, the world is not a perfect place and churches seem, quite often, to be setting themselves up to fail.

Yes, that's very true. As a friend and former organ teacher of mine (who, as a near nonogenarian, has over 80 years continuous experience of making music in churches since his early years as a Cathedral choirboy) is fond of saying "If you want aggro, go to church".

It helps to be philosphical.
The musicians and the clergy have different priorities, clearly, and whilst we on here feel that the correct ordering of the approprite settings of RSCM recommended music is the only acceptable offering to the Almighty, a lot of other people don't give a hoot and just want their hymns played at a breathable rate.

We must remember that we don't go to church to enjoy ourselves.

Music of the best kind can help us to overlook some of the odder things that go on church, like renewals of perfectly legal vows, blessings of bells and the like.
We hear stories of people who are 'put off' church because of the rituals, the choreography and the kind of sung anthems we are discussing here. Personally I have never met one but the stories abound so there must be an element of truth in them.
Perhaps it is as well in this case that the High Anglo Catholic stuff and its associated music (often composed by Protestants!) is mainly found in Cathedrals in the hands of experts and people can attend these once in a blue moon if that is the way they can be spiritually fulfilled, leaving the 'street corner' more accessible to the seekers.
That is my optimistic way of looking at it.

Mel

I'm not sure I'd entirely agree, Mel, although I see where you're coming from. Ok, clergy and church musicians have different areas of expertise, but hopefully we pull together for the same cause. It's when clergy and musicians do feel that they have very clearly different priorities that friction is created and problems ensue.

It's when clergy and musicians do feel that they have very clearly different priorities that friction is created and problems ensue.
[/quote]

I get the feeling that thereby hangs a tale!

I have known clergy who feel that music is a distraction (from their pearls of wisdom, presumably! it was an incumbent or 2 back) and it would be difficult to work around that attitude if they were not flexible - fortunately most are.

The aim is always to further cause of true religion, whatever that is. For some it will mystery and magic, for others it will be some kind of practical encounter. The skill is in trying not to quack in the midst of the numinous.

It all depends on what we think churches are for, I suppose. Surely their main purpose in life is to keep organs dry?

The skill is in trying not to quack in the midst of the numinous.

Hear hear!

It all depends on what we think churches are for, I suppose. Surely their main purpose in life is to keep organs dry?

Indeed you are right - I forgot that one.