# Thoughts on Hiring A Pianist for Worship



## C. M. Sheffield (Jan 12, 2015)

Allow me to preface my remarks by saying I am not interested in discussing the legitimacy of instruments in worship. I would ask anyone denying their legitimacy to kindly refrain from commenting. Thank you. 

Our church is currently without a pianist. In the past we had an abundance of people who could play. Now in God's providence, we are without anyone. 

I am contemplating the idea of hiring a pianist to play for our services. I would of course insist the person be a believer. 

I would be interested in hearing others thoughts on the matter. Is this an acceptable option? Is it not? Why or Why not?


----------



## SolaScriptura (Jan 12, 2015)

If the pianist is not a "homegrown" volunteer doing it as an act of service to the body, then you'll almost certainly need to pay for someone to come to your congregation to provide instrumental accompaniment to your singing.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Jan 12, 2015)

How does one deal with the hiring of a Christian for the worship service that will likely prevent this believer from attending worship services in his or her own church?


----------



## Edward (Jan 12, 2015)

Deleted by original poster.


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jan 12, 2015)

Edward said:


> And yes, I am aware that such a student may not look like most of your congregation. So there is the potential for a high risk/high reward situation being created. Think your congregation is up for that kind of challenge?



I really don't know what you are implying here. Have you visited our church before?


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jan 12, 2015)

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> How does one deal with the hiring of a Christian for the worship service that will likely prevent this believer from attending worship services in his or her own church?



Yes that is something I've thought about. The only answer I have is that they would simply join our church. They would at a minimum have to qualify for membership in order to serve us in this capacity. This would involve a credible profession of faith and a willingness to submit to the government and discipline of the church.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Jan 12, 2015)

Ask Mr. Religion said:


> How does one deal with the hiring of a Christian for the worship service that will likely prevent this believer from attending worship services in his or her own church?



Or maybe they're attending a church whose service times don't conflict with yours.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Jan 12, 2015)

C. M. Sheffield said:


> Ask Mr. Religion said:
> 
> 
> > How does one deal with the hiring of a Christian for the worship service that will likely prevent this believer from attending worship services in his or her own church?
> ...



Then you're asking for too much. Really. So since you're a Baptist church this criteria would rule out any Lutheran, or Episcopalian, or Presbyterian, or Methodist - or whatever - from playing for you.
The bar you've set looks like you're trying to buy a member.

Let it be enough that they call on the name of Jesus and agree to live in a manner that won't bring disrepute on your congregation.


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jan 12, 2015)

SolaScriptura said:


> Let it be enough that they call on the name of Jesus and agree to live in a manner that won't bring disrepute on your congregation.



While your point is well taken, that would essentially mean that we are employing someone who has no real accountability to a local church as an actual member. This is part of the problem I'm having.


----------



## Edward (Jan 12, 2015)

Deleted by original poster.


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Jan 12, 2015)

You mean your wife doesn't play piano? How did you ever get hired by a Baptist church


----------



## matt01 (Jan 12, 2015)

C. M. Sheffield said:


> Our church is currently without a pianist. In the past we had an abundance of people who could play. Now in God's providence, we are without anyone.
> 
> I am contemplating the idea of hiring a pianist to play for our services. I would of course insist the person be a believer.



Do you have any members who play other instruments, such as the violin?

We have been part of congregations that hired musicians through local colleges. In one situation, the pianist attended a church that had services later in the morning. We were also part of a congregation that hired a musical director type, requiring him to join in order to continue. It ended unpleasantly. He was a gifted musician, but didn't seem interested otherwise.


----------



## thbslawson (Jan 12, 2015)

I was a music major in college, and it was a good experiencing serving as a musician in a church. I was committed to attending worship at a reformed church regardless, but when a position became available at a good reformed congregation it was a great opportunity. So I echo what someone else has already said, a college student seeking a good place to worship may be a good option. In many chases he or she is away from his or her home church so will be looking for a local church to connect with for a few years.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Jan 12, 2015)

Or make an appeal to the membership for anyone with piano talent. Maybe a child of a member is available? Place a notice in every Sunday bulletin and perhaps a visitor with experience will take notice. In the meantime, some other musical instrument accompaniment can be used.

Alternatively, how about recorded instrumentals that can be used:

instrumental piano recordings of baptist hymns - Google Search


----------



## Free Christian (Jan 12, 2015)

I might have this wrong, but if you hired someone isn't that employing them to do something on the Lords Day from which we are required to rest from?
Volunteer ok, but hire/employ?


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jan 13, 2015)

Edward said:


> I've not visited your church. If it is fully integrated, I couldn't tell that from your web site. The only picture I saw was of you and your family. So I won't apologize for assuming that like most churches in southwest Georgia (except some pentecostals) it would be fairly monochromatic.



In the first place our church is in Eastern North Carolina. In the second place, we're hardly a "monochromatic" church. By God's providence, our congregation is quite ethnically diverse. I am not the least bit bothered by you assuming our church was mostly white, that's perfectly understandable. I am more bothered the assumption that hiring a person of another race would be a "challenge" for our congregation. Having said that, I really don't know why you felt the need to address the issue of race at all. It just seemed to come out of left field; though I trust your intentions were harmless.


----------



## Ryan J. Ross (Jan 13, 2015)

Pastor Sheffield,

May I ask you to clarify? Are asking that one who holds the conviction that a cappella singing is required by God in public worship to refrain from participating in this thread or that one not respond by denying instrumentation as permissible in this thread? I'll await an answer before saying anything further.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Jan 13, 2015)

It is permissible in the OPC to hire someone to play piano, organ, or some other musical instrument to accompany the congregation in its singing in worship. 

_The Directory for the Public Worship of God _ requires that such a one be "a professing Christian who adorns his profession with a godly walk." I would think, and this is what I understood you to be saying initially, that you would want to require this of the person. 

Is it reasonable to require more, i.e, that they become a member of your church? Of course not, as this has every appearance of being mercenary and seeking to buy a member. If you hire someone from the outside to play, you do so because you lack having someone on the inside to serve in this way. In such a situation, you recognize that you are hiring a non-member (who nonetheless is a professing Christian who evidences a true saving faith), and that his obligation is not that of other members of your church but is simply that of someone who would come in and accompany the singing of the congregation in worship. If you are not comfortable hiring someone from the outside in that capacity, then you simply should not do it. 

It is not remotely reasonable, nor honorable, to hire someone and require that they become a member, only that they be a Christian. What does the leadership of your church think about this? Are they prepared to have a Christian, but not a member, playing the piano in worship? Such is not without its challenges and my encouragement would be not to do it unless you are completely free in conscience to do so. Given the nature of the case (this one would regularly be in your worship), I would counsel complete agreement among the leadership. In other words, I would only do this if all the leaders agreed. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jan 13, 2015)

Ryan J. Ross said:


> Pastor Sheffield,
> 
> May I ask you to clarify? Are asking that one who holds the conviction that a cappella singing is required by God in public worship to refrain from participating in this thread or that one not respond by denying instrumentation as permissible in this thread? I'll await an answer before saying anything further.



As far as this thread is concerned, the use of instruments in worship is not in question. The question concerns securing someone to play piano for the church. If you can abide by those parameters, feel free to contribute.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jan 13, 2015)

I am going to assume I can ask a question even though I am for singing psalms exclusively in public worship and without instrumentation. How is hiring someone to do what they do for a living to do something that is at best a circumstance of worship and not a necessity, lawful for the Lord's day? Surely there are other means to keep the singing going other than hiring a professional piano player who may or may not be a Christian (for instance Redeemer NY doesn't even require that they profess Christ)? Note I'm not addressing the bare use of a piano by a "church lady" volunteer; but wonder how is this not a fourth commandment issue? How is it an act of necessity to hire someone to labor over pursuing any other course but that?


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jan 13, 2015)

Alan D. Strange said:


> It is not remotely reasonable, nor honorable, to hire someone and require that they become a member



While I'm unsure that requiring one to be a member is best, I would object to the notion that it is 'buying a member.' That is a rather crude way of looking at it. It is rather ensuring that if they are believers and are not able to attend any other church because of their service to our congregation that they have the rights and privileges of membership. I hardly see how such a concern is unreasonable or dishonorable. If they were still able to attend their own church, it wouldn't matter. But if they could not, then they would have no real communion or accountability to any local church if they were not a member with us. Call it what you like, my concern would be for the welfare of that individual rather than being a mercenary church that goes about "buying" members.


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Jan 13, 2015)

While this may not be an ideal solution, your church may want to consider purchasing some accompaniment CD's to play instead of having a live piano. There are some really quality recordings available to accompany most any hymn that your church might wish to sing.


----------



## Logan (Jan 13, 2015)

Can I ask, just out of curiousity, if it is deemed necessary by the congregation to have a pianist? Is it difficult for the congregation to sing without one? Could the singing be done a capella until you have a pianist as a member again?

It just seems odd to me to actually hire someone to perform part of the worship service. Though I guess technically we pay our pastors for their "work".


----------



## VictorBravo (Jan 13, 2015)

Our congregation has a pianist and I open worship with psalms and hymns. Sometimes our pianist has to leave for vacations or family reasons. Nobody else is available to play (I can accompany, but I won't because, personally, I have views similar to Chris and others). On those days, I lead _a cappella_ using a pitch pipe or, if it is a new tune I'm introducing, I put the melody of the tune on my computer and play it through before singing.

It seems to work fine, and our people have adjusted without much trouble. The important thing is to get everyone interested in working through this little challenge as a congregation, rather than having it seem as an innovation imposed from the top.


----------



## SolamVeritatem (Jan 13, 2015)

Pastor Sheffield,

I'm not sure how much affiliation you have with other Reformed Baptist Churches in the area/region, but is there a possibility that another church that has an abundance of musicians could "lend" you one of their pianists? Or, would there be a situation where someone could relocate to your assembly from a sister church, provided you and the pastor of the individual's home church are in agreement with the arrangement?

I know that at our church (which is fairly large, 800 members) has multiple members who serve on the music staff, mostly voluntarily. I was just thinking if perhaps you knew another congregation who had been blessed above measure with folks who fill that role, maybe there would be a chance that one of those musicians would be willing to make a sacrifice for a church in need. Granted, you may not find many confessionally reformed churches in the area that are willing to do this, but considering your concerns about the individual being a professing believer, maybe you could still find someone in a larger church which is at least solidly reformed. And, since I know that you are Reformed Baptist, the links below provide what I think is a good place to start the search:

Church Search : 9Marks

Founders-Friendly Churches | Founders

Just my 2 cents...

In Him,

Craig


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jan 13, 2015)

Bill The Baptist said:


> While this may not be an ideal solution, your church may want to consider purchasing some accompaniment CD's to play instead of having a live piano. There are some really quality recordings available to accompany most any hymn that your church might wish to sing.



We have/are considering this also. 



Logan said:


> Can I ask, just out of curiousity, if it is deemed necessary by the congregation to have a pianist? Is it difficult for the congregation to sing without one? Could the singing be done a capella until you have a pianist as a member again?



Yes actually, we currently sing unaccompanied. It is something the congregation is used to doing when we lack a pianist. I'm simply trying to weigh our choices in securing someone to play. Many of the things that have been said on the board are things I have thought about. And I'm not really sure what would be best.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Jan 13, 2015)

My dear brother:

What I said was neither crude (not sure why you say that) nor incorrect: if you both seek to hire someone and require that, at the same time, that person become a member of your church, that is, on the face of it, plainly and simply, lacking in integrity and not to be done. The wrong of it should seem patent. If you hire them, you hire them, and there can be no requirement of membership in your church (and if they were a member there, why would you pay them?).

If you stick by what you said originally (that the one hired needs a Christian profession) then I think that you're fine. It's the addition of "member of this church" that muddies the water. I am simply trying to help you clarify and keep straight your thinking. Many others herein have offered helpful counsel as to solutions. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jan 13, 2015)

Alan D. Strange said:


> Not sure why you say that



Because characterizing the requirement of membership as a "mercenary" church out to "buy members" is crude. Even if I agree that requiring membership is not a good idea, to characterize it in that manner assigns motives and designs that are not there. 



Alan D. Strange said:


> if you both seek to hire someone and require that, at the same time, that person become a member of your church, that is, on the face of it, plainly and simply, lacking in integrity and not to be done.



Well if you wouldn't mind, perhaps you could indulge me and explain why that conclusion is necessary.


----------



## N. Eshelman (Jan 13, 2015)




----------



## Toasty (Jan 13, 2015)

C. M. Sheffield said:


> Allow me to preface my remarks by saying I am not interested in discussing the legitimacy of instruments in worship. I would ask anyone denying their legitimacy to kindly refrain from commenting. Thank you.
> 
> Our church is currently without a pianist. In the past we had an abundance of people who could play. Now in God's providence, we are without anyone.
> 
> ...



Some churches have what is called a music minister. This person is on the church staff and he is in charge of leading the congregational singing and instrumental accompaniment during the worship service. He would also be charge of the choir if the church had one. Is this the kind of person you want?

Is there anyone in your congregation who can play the piano? Is there anyone in your congregation who is willing to learn how to play the piano?


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Jan 13, 2015)

Pastor Sheffield:

Nothing I have said can in any way that I discern be said to speak to your motives. The mention of "mercenary" has nothing to do with motives and everything to do with how it looks: hiring someone just to play piano and then requiring them to be a member of your church. Perhaps the appearance of this seems more problematic to me than it does to you or others. I've really said all that I have to say about the matter. I am willing to admit this may be something that appears to me differently than it does to you (and perhaps others). 

And the reason that wanting someone simply to play a musical instrument in worship for hire and requiring that such a one be a member of your particular church seems to me to lack in integrity is that one who joins your church should do so out of conviction, not because you are paying them to play piano. If you hire someone and they come freely to join you that's one thing. If, however, you make that a requirement of being hired ("you must be a member") that seems to compromise the high matter of membership and render it something that easily appears mercenary. 

Ben said this, "The bar you've set looks like you're trying to buy a member," and that set me to thinking. It does have that appearance though no one here would think that that's your intention. That's why I say that I am not assigning motives but am adddressing appearances. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## matt01 (Jan 13, 2015)

Logan said:


> It just seems odd to me to actually hire someone to perform part of the worship service. Though I guess technically we pay our pastors for their "work".



I don't see an issue with paying a pianist a stipend for their services.


----------



## Edward (Jan 13, 2015)

C. M. Sheffield said:


> In the first place our church is in Eastern North Carolina.



My apologies. I had your church confused with that of another poster. Which is located in an area where race would still be a factor.

I've deleted my previous posts as they are not relevant to your situation.


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jan 13, 2015)

Alan D. Strange said:


> And the reason that wanting someone simply to play a musical instrument in worship for hire and requiring that such a one be a member of your particular church seems to me to lack in integrity is that one who joins your church should do so out of conviction, not because you are paying them to play piano. If you hire someone and they come freely to join you that's one thing. If, however, you make that a requirement of being hired ("you must be a member") that seems to compromise the high matter of membership and render it something that easily appears mercenary.
> 
> Ben said this, "The bar you've set looks like you're trying to buy a member," and that set me to thinking. It does have that appearance though no one here would think that that's your intention. That's why I say that I am not assigning motives but am adddressing appearances.



I appreciate your taking time to explain your sentiments on the matter. It makes a little more sense to me now. I suppose being around Southern Baptist churches for most of my life where any staff member hired by the church entailed them joining the church as a member. I'm not defending that practice per se, only mentioning it. Hearing your thoughts is helpful.


----------



## Free Christian (Jan 14, 2015)

NaphtaliPress said:


> but wonder how is this not a fourth commandment issue?


Me too.


----------



## greenbaggins (Jan 17, 2015)

I might venture a reply here on the 4th commandment issue. As has been pointed out, pastors do work on the Sabbath and are not violating the Sabbath by so doing and being paid for it. David arranged for musicians for the temple worship, much of which I'm sure took place on the Sabbath. They were Levites and therefore were paid from the treasury and from the offerings. See 1 Chronicles 25. Also, a parallel issue is the issue of electricity. Having electric lights is a circumstance. They are not an essential part of worship. And yet, very few would argue that we should use electric lights, even though we are paying some electric company to give us that electricity. 

One of the issues that I have had to deal with is an attitude among the church members that the musician should donate his time because he is simply exercising his spiritual gift. The problem here is that musical ability is nowhere listed as a spiritual gift in the Bible. It is a learned skill. I suppose one could debate the definition of "necessity," but in some congregations, I would think that accompaniment would be necessary if they are even going to have a prayer of following the tune. Yes, a cappella singing can be learned, if you have a skilled musician to teach them.


----------



## Ryan J. Ross (Jan 18, 2015)

My wife and I take the attendance at our church. We should be paid. Good record-keeping is a learned skill. Also, there was money given (Exodus 30:11). If the musician gets paid, then I think I have a case, especially if they're already paying for electricity on the Lord's Day.

We pay our pianist, but why should they get paid and not me, the singer? I mean, I'm performing the element; they're simply "aiding." Maybe we should split the money? According to Rev. Keister, the pianist may be necessary if one is to follow the tune—and we all know how important tune following is when performing the element of singing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, but I'd bet if the congregation doesn't sing, the pianist isn't "necessary." Thus, we should both be paid. Of course, I won't accept my check for 4th and 8th commandment reasons.


----------



## kodos (Jan 18, 2015)

I always find it fascinating how quickly Levites are appealed to. Just food for thought.


----------



## TheOldCourse (Jan 18, 2015)

It's interesting to me how the pianist in some of these discussions sometimes begins to sound strangely like an office in the church all to itself. It's been described in terms of a role played by a suitably qualified and skilled individual which is necessary to the performance of an essential element of the church's public worship, that commands a salary, and is built on the analogy of a group of men specially set apart by God from the rest of the covenant people unto the performance of temple worship. We Reformed have generally resisted the acknowledgement and appointment of "worship pastors" in contrast to many evangelical churches, but it seems to me that many of us today embrace the substance of the "office" nonetheless. When a church pays someone for their role in public worship (as opposed to, say, an accountant on common days), doesn't that carry some theological implications?


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jan 18, 2015)

Lane, you certainly open the door for an expansion of those in the church staffing business!  Back when I was a kid in a very liberal PCUS church there was a church secretary; and I’m sure they thought she was a necessity because everyone said she ran the church! 

Others have raised good points against this tact; but I will make a few comments since I made the objection about paying someone to play piano on the Lord’s day.

First, it is necessary to keep the church clean but there are other ways to do that without employing the janitor on Lord's Days who works that job the other days of the week. Ditto a pianist.

Preaching God’s word is a commanded part of the public worship of God and it is to be done by a duly called and installed preacher who we know is to be paid full time for performing that duty per the apostle. Congregational singing of psalms is also a commanded element of worship. So what is necessary is for the folks to learn to sing what they sing during public worship, and a musical instrument is not only not necessary circumstantially like to have lights on, it doesn’t really meet the problem that needs solving. It simply drowns the problem out. The solution is for the folks to learn the songs and tunes beforehand, between services or other times set during the week and have them learn them in their times of family worship at home. 

It is not even arguable that musical instruments are necessary (so not necessary to pay for their playing). Presbyterians did fine performing the public worship element of singing, from the Reformation to the late 19[SUP]th[/SUP] century, without any musical accompaniment, and there are certainly plenty of them around today that still do so without it.

So I say let’s not create (well, perpetuate) a church office of professional musician which passed with the old economy of the Jewish church.


----------



## Cymro (Jan 18, 2015)

To hire someone from another church means they are not attending their own place
for presumably a longish period. So is the person then a freelance, under no authority.
Surely there must be preceptor in your midst.


----------



## N. Eshelman (Jan 18, 2015)

Just a quick anecdote, I participate in a Reformation Day Service every year along with other NAPARC pastors. The church used to hire a brass ensemble from a local university to play (this church also has a well-beloved organist that is top notch, with a PhD in music and the whole enchilada). As I was explaining to my young son, who was, I think seven at the time, what they do and why they were playing "special music" he looked at me in all seriousness of a seven year old and said, "So are they Levites dad?" 

I about lost it! Out of the mouths of babes! 

Okay... back to the discussion, I am enjoying this tremendously.


----------



## Ryan J. Ross (Jan 18, 2015)

Ditto to the publisher's comment above.


----------



## Caroline (Jan 19, 2015)

I see no reason to suppose that someone would be absenting him or herself from their own worship service by playing music for your church unless your service really goes on all day. I used to play the piano for two churches, and it never resulted in me missing worship at my own. Different churches have different meeting schedules. I mean, MAYBE you'd be faced with that situation, but that really seems like a "cross that bridge if you come to it" issue. Maybe you will find someone who is new in town and looking for a church anyway. Maybe you will find someone who is from a church that meets later (or earlier) in the morning. Maybe you will find someone who is of another denomination, but interested in becoming Reformed. Maybe... etc. 

But I would caution against cheating people out of their rightful pay by claiming that it is a Sabbath violation to pay them. If you ask someone to do something regularly that requires work, preparation, etc.... it doesn't require less work or become more restful because you pick their pocket. If you go to the hospital on the Sabbath, I assume you plan to pay the doctor called in to fix your broken leg. You can't tell him that it is all volunteer and a work for the Lord because it is Sunday. 

Being a church musician is work. It is far more work than taking Sunday attendance. There is planning, practicing, travel to the church, etc... the time spent actually on the bench playing the piano for the church is the least of it. If you hire from outside your congregation, then it extra work they are doing in addition to service at their own church. If you don't feel comfortable paying them for morning worship, then pay them for their practice time Saturday night. And pay them well for that. Even musicians have to eat something more than snowflakes and rainbows.


----------



## Elizabeth (Jan 19, 2015)

Caroline said:


> If you don't feel comfortable paying them for morning worship, then pay them for their practice time Saturday night. And pay them well for that. Even musicians have to eat something more than snowflakes and rainbows.



What a good thought....because more time probably is spent on the practice/prep during the week than playing the actual service.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jan 19, 2015)

One goes to the hospital on a Lord's day out of necessity. A professional musician is simply not a necessity from any angle one looks at this. So if the professional musician requires payment out of simple equity then all the more reason the church should not be resorting to using them. My church has several ladies who volunteer; they are happy to do it free of charge and no one has ever said they feel cheated serving the church in this way (as much as I would prefer they serve some other way). I think it was noted already but again, the deacons and ruling elders do huge amounts of work for a church, without pay, and I never heard anyone argue they are cheated for not being paid, and their office is actually commanded in Scripture. If the church has such "free" cash they could pay professional musicians it would be far more equitable to forgo that luxury and pay those doing the essential work of the church.


Caroline said:


> I see no reason to suppose that someone would be absenting him or herself from their own worship service by playing music for your church unless your service really goes on all day. I used to play the piano for two churches, and it never resulted in me missing worship at my own. Different churches have different meeting schedules. I mean, MAYBE you'd be faced with that situation, but that really seems like a "cross that bridge if you come to it" issue. Maybe you will find someone who is new in town and looking for a church anyway. Maybe you will find someone who is from a church that meets later (or earlier) in the morning. Maybe you will find someone who is of another denomination, but interested in becoming Reformed. Maybe... etc.
> 
> But I would caution against cheating people out of their rightful pay by claiming that it is a Sabbath violation to pay them. If you ask someone to do something regularly that requires work, preparation, etc.... it doesn't require less work or become more restful because you pick their pocket. If you go to the hospital on the Sabbath, I assume you plan to pay the doctor called in to fix your broken leg. You can't tell him that it is all volunteer and a work for the Lord because it is Sunday.
> 
> Being a church musician is work. It is far more work than taking Sunday attendance. There is planning, practicing, travel to the church, etc... the time spent actually on the bench playing the piano for the church is the least of it. If you hire from outside your congregation, then it extra work they are doing in addition to service at their own church. If you don't feel comfortable paying them for morning worship, then pay them for their practice time Saturday night. And pay them well for that. Even musicians have to eat something more than snowflakes and rainbows.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jan 19, 2015)

And in most churches what we are hiring musicians to do is not so much merely accompany the singing, it is the "extra music" like the prelude, offertory, postlude, and other "special chorale" music that we are really hiring them to perform.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jan 19, 2015)

Which if it is the case, it is not for a circumstantial part of the worship of God to simply aid the singing (which is the only argument that is considerable since they are not elemental). Why pay someone for all these bells and whistles for which we don't have any command in Scripture?


Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> And in most churches what we are hiring musicians to do is not so much merely accompany the singing, it is the "extra music" like the prelude, offertory, postlude, and other "special chorale" music that we are really hiring them to perform.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Jan 19, 2015)

All the best churches have excellent instrumentalist accompanyment.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jan 19, 2015)

And pretty lighting and smells that make it feel like church.


----------



## Steve Curtis (Jan 19, 2015)

C. M. Sheffield said:


> I am not interested in discussing the legitimacy of instruments in worship. I would ask anyone denying their legitimacy to kindly refrain from commenting.



The OP took pains to try to keep this thread on (his) point from the outset. It seems we are veering...


----------



## SolaScriptura (Jan 19, 2015)

NaphtaliPress said:


> And pretty lighting and smells that make it feel like church.



Well, bad lighting and noxious odors kind of make it hard to focus... but maybe making it hard for our people to focus the mind and still the heart is part of how we prove how serious we are.


----------



## Caroline (Jan 19, 2015)

NaphtaliPress said:


> One goes to the hospital on a Lord's day out of necessity. A professional musician is simply not a necessity from any angle one looks at this. So if the professional musician requires payment out of simple equity then all the more reason the church should not be resorting to using them. My church has several ladies who volunteer; they are happy to do it free of charge and no one has ever said they feel cheated serving the church in this way (as much as I would prefer they serve some other way). I think it was noted already but again, the deacons and ruling elders do huge amounts of work for a church, without pay, and I never heard anyone argue they are cheated for not being paid, and their office is actually commanded in Scripture. If the church has such "free" cash they could pay professional musicians it would be far more equitable to forgo that luxury and pay those doing the essential work of the church.



True, but I believe the scenario here is bringing in an outside musician. People may be able to get someone from within their own congregation to volunteer, but the OP made it clear that there is no one. It is one of those other frustrating things about churches that people often say, "Just get volunteers" when there are no volunteers to be had, for whatever reason. If one finds oneself in need of a professional musician from outside the congregation, then one pays the musician. Nobody should be expected to "volunteer" at their profession at a church which they do not even attend.

You may not like the idea of musicians on Sunday, but again, that wasn't the question. The OP inquired of those who are open to musicians in worship. As another person already pointed out, even "teaching people to sing without accompaniment" requires a musician. In fact, it requires a good one, because that is harder than teaching them to sing with accompaniment. That is another one of those "just use volunteers" things when there are no volunteers. It's fine to not believe that is necessary, but I believe the question here is... for those who thing it is helpful and even necessary to have a musically talented person leading music, how does one go about filling the space when there are NO volunteers?

Churches do have to be cautious about taking advantage of people. It is true that deacons put in work. Do they put in more work than musicians? I'd suspect that's actually pretty even most of the time. In the case of our church, we have an organist who is also an elder (and clerk of Session). I totally support paying him for his music ministry. I don't think we can reasonably expect him to be elder AND the musician without compensation. Those two tasks together add up to a lot of hours. He is there at church Saturday mornings practicing, sometimes leaving after that to attend to elder duties. That's just a lot.

The assumption here that it is always some little old lady with loads of free time just isn't always the case. He has a family to support. If the thing we are asking him to do requires showing up on Saturdays away from his family, I think there ought to be money involved. 

My personal opinion on the best way to consider paying people is:

1. If you hire from outside the church for WHATEVER, then expect to pay
2. If you hire from within the church for a task that no one will do as a volunteer (janitor work, for example), then pay at least until you can find a volunteer
3. Consider how many tasks someone is assigned. Sometimes people cannot afford to take on the number of things put on them unless they are paid. Being secretary AND teaching Sunday school AND leading the hospitality committee AND being church musician will probably add up to pretty close to a full-time job. It requires enormous amounts of time. It also requires money for gas and sometimes for supplies. Sometimes people just can't afford to take that on volunteer. If you can't get other volunteers to relieve the burden, then it may be best to pay. Otherwise people just burn out because they are spending money they can't afford. Be fair with people. Being church greeter for 20 minutes on a Sunday is not the same as being there three days a week to do administrative work and then preparing for Sunday school Saturday morning and practicing music Saturday night.

It's about consideration and fairness.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jan 19, 2015)

... ... ... ... oh, sorry, that melody distracted my thought.


SolaScriptura said:


> NaphtaliPress said:
> 
> 
> > And pretty lighting and smells that make it feel like church.
> ...


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jan 19, 2015)

Caroline, actually the opening post asked for feedback on the idea of hiring. I have argued against it not on the basis of the illegitimacy of such accompaniment, but on the basis of the fourth commandment. The rest has come as a result of the responses to that objection. If the musician is working as much as the deacons (?!) then that is a waste of time and energy because it is not called for. All that is required is is to aid the singing which I assume is what the OP is trying to resolve. Also, as I have already noted, in my experience a church can learn to sing dozens of new tunes without a professional and without a piano. 


Caroline said:


> NaphtaliPress said:
> 
> 
> > One goes to the hospital on a Lord's day out of necessity. A professional musician is simply not a necessity from any angle one looks at this. So if the professional musician requires payment out of simple equity then all the more reason the church should not be resorting to using them. My church has several ladies who volunteer; they are happy to do it free of charge and no one has ever said they feel cheated serving the church in this way (as much as I would prefer they serve some other way). I think it was noted already but again, the deacons and ruling elders do huge amounts of work for a church, without pay, and I never heard anyone argue they are cheated for not being paid, and their office is actually commanded in Scripture. If the church has such "free" cash they could pay professional musicians it would be far more equitable to forgo that luxury and pay those doing the essential work of the church.
> ...


----------



## kodos (Jan 19, 2015)

SolaScriptura said:


> All the best churches have excellent instrumentalist accompanyment.



Actually, I hear that the best churches hire ministers who can spell correctly


----------



## SolaScriptura (Jan 19, 2015)

kodos said:


> SolaScriptura said:
> 
> 
> > All the best churches have excellent instrumentalist accompanyment.
> ...



Ouch! Touche!


----------



## Edward (Jan 19, 2015)

SolaScriptura said:


> Ouch! Touche!



Why do I think of France when I read that post?


----------



## kodos (Jan 19, 2015)

I also have to take exception to the whole "it is harder" to sing a cappella bit. We started out with no precentor, and one of the men took it on himself to help lead. He has no formal music background. Took a few vocal lessons and now our entire congregation is competent at singing with no accompaniment.

It also takes effort to learn to read, to learn to pray, etc. *But we are a people of Faith*, faith in a Sovereign God who makes means available for those who seek to do His Will. Do not let carnal limitations stop us from obedience. Whether it be music or whatsoever else we see commanded in the Word.


----------



## kodos (Jan 19, 2015)

SolaScriptura said:


> kodos said:
> 
> 
> > SolaScriptura said:
> ...



All in good fun brother


----------



## Cymro (Jan 19, 2015)

The psalm singing church in Singapore basically were all first generation Christians 
when it started, so the method of precenting unknown tunes was entirely new. But 
it has in a short time produced quite a number of precentors. But another excellent
feature is that the children have been taught in Psalmody classes to memorise the psalms
and the tunes so that they will be able to take over in the future. DV. It's something to
consider as the congregations age.


----------



## Tim (Jan 19, 2015)

Cymro said:


> The psalm singing church in Singapore basically were all first generation Christians
> when it started, so the method of precenting unknown tunes was entirely new. But
> it has in a short time produced quite a number of precentors. But another excellent
> feature is that the children have been taught in Psalmody classes to memorise the psalms
> ...



Also, if families and individuals are singing the Psalms daily in their homes, the skill can be further reinforced such that the members of the congregation can sing the Word as well as they can read the Word.


----------



## Free Christian (Jan 19, 2015)

One would imagine, or hope so anyway, that a person playing music to the Lord for praise would see it more as an honour and privilege than a labour worthy of being paid for! Placing it upon the same level as any other days work or labour just doesn't seem right. I don't think either that any similarity can or should be drawn between that and a Minister being paid. The Minister being paid is Biblical, I cannot find any Biblical reason for the other.


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Jan 19, 2015)

Free Christian said:


> One would imagine, or hope so anyway, that a person playing music to the Lord for praise would see it more as an honour and privilege than a labour worthy of being paid for!



And if the church building needs to be painted, we need only explain to the painter that it is an honor for him to be employed in such a task and as such, we as church expect him to offer his time and talents for free.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jan 19, 2015)

When the church needs to be painted if the church members are not going to do it themselves (which is still quite common I think), then the painter is worthy of his hire. But unless both parties are antinomian, it doesn't happen on the Lord's day! My issue apart from the unlawfulness of it (because instruments were done away with as ceremonial per Calvin et al), is that a professional pianist does not come close to the level of "got to have it" necessity that negates the fourth commandment. Other reasonable but perhaps less pleasing alternatives exist as have already been mentioned. I guess the problem is our sensitivity to the Lord's day is so low in our day, since we have such an antinomian society, we tend to justify what we need to as far as the easiest path to take. How else to explain some churches hiring unbelieving professional musicians, etc? And why not? We wouldn't insist on the painter being a Christian?


----------



## Ryan J. Ross (Jan 19, 2015)

This thread is getting silly, comparing pianists to deacons and perhaps elders with respect to work. First, I don't know how one quantifies a pianist's work if not acquainted with the specifics of the church and person. Second, they are without question qualitatively different. One is commanded by God; the other is at best a permissible circumstance (though I don't personally believe that). Paying anyone and requiring their work on the Lord's Day is a fourth commandment issue. The question is whether the Scriptures regulate the office or service by warranting pay.

Many would argue that their service to the church is equally important and yet unpaid. Why musicians get the money simply confounds me. Does the one recording the sermon and uploading it get paid? Do nursery workers get paid? Those in charge of refreshments, printing bulletins, setting up the church in the morning and evening, etc.?


----------



## Free Christian (Jan 19, 2015)

C. M. Sheffield said:


> And if the church building needs to be painted, we need only explain to the painter that it is an honor for him to be employed in such a task and as such, we as church expect him to offer his time and talents for free.


No, just tell him that his services are not required on Sundays. Unless you get him to paint during your service and make it a part of it I don't get how that comes into the equation?


----------



## Edward (Jan 19, 2015)

Ryan J. Ross said:


> Does the one recording the sermon and uploading it get paid?



I've been in churches that have done that. Most of the TV crew were volunteers, however.



Ryan J. Ross said:


> Do nursery workers get paid?



That too, in a former church. 



Ryan J. Ross said:


> Those in charge of refreshments



And that. 




Ryan J. Ross said:


> Those in charge of refreshments, printing bulletins, setting up the church in the morning and evening, etc.?



And those as well. The reference to the printer particularly bemuses me. If the printer isn't getting paid for his time, paper, and ink, is he claiming it as a charitable contribution in kind? In which case, isn't he getting some compensation from the tax benefit? Or are we talking of running a few dozen copies on a laser printer (which at some point won't scale if the church is growing).


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jan 19, 2015)

Not to worry about the refreshments; I hear McDonald's is offering franchises to churches.
Fourth commandment? fourth commandment be damned. I'm sorry to put such a stark face on it; but what is the difference other than scale, as to what can be justified by such arguments?


Edward said:


> Ryan J. Ross said:
> 
> 
> > Does the one recording the sermon and uploading it get paid?
> ...


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jan 19, 2015)

Is the printer doing his printing on the Lord's Day in the context of worship?


----------



## Edward (Jan 19, 2015)

NaphtaliPress said:


> I hear McDonald's is offering franchises to churches.



I've never seen a McDonalds in a church. I've seen several Baptist churches with Starbucks. To its credit, First Baptist Dallas dumped the Starbucks and switched to Community. Someone did suggest a Starbucks when we did our renovation a few years ago; to their credit, the elders quashed that one. 

One that I haven't noticed anyone mentioning yet is paid security.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jan 19, 2015)

When folks are in the building, pastor's packin more than the Word; alarm system otherwise.


Edward said:


> One that I haven't noticed anyone mentioning yet is paid security.


----------

