Hello all

I'm in ranting mode (its Sunday at 12:35), however I must ask people how they would handle a couple of incidents in this morning's service.

Methodist Church: 1030 All Age Worship

First hymn, Songs of Fellowship 470 Praise to the Lord Almighty - start off fine, then on the first line of the first verse half the congregation go out of time with me. Some rather arrogant and sadly influential happy clappy couple are leading their 'side' of the church at the top's of their voices, and I look in the mirror and the husband is stood looking at me and conducting. I shook my head and put the reeds on to make my point and played it in the correct time which swiftly rectified things. They stayed quiet after that. This man couldn't play Mary had a Little Lamb on any organ.

Then, during my voluntary which was an improvisation, I got shushed like a nursery school child making too much noise with a toy. How arrogant is that? I shut up shop and left before I got in to a disagreement with said pensioner.

The joys. Rant over!

[quote name='Tosher' date='May 17 2009, 12:38 PM' post='827165']
Hello all

I'm in ranting mode (its Sunday at 12:35), however I must ask people how they would handle a couple of incidents in this morning's service.

Methodist Church: 1030 All Age Worship

First hymn, Songs of Fellowship 470 Praise to the Lord Almighty - start off fine, then on the first line of the first verse half the congregation go out of time with me. Some rather arrogant and sadly influential happy clappy couple are leading their 'side' of the church at the top's of their voices, and I look in the mirror and the husband is stood looking at me and conducting. I shook my head and put the reeds on to make my point and played it in the correct time which swiftly rectified things. They stayed quiet after that. This man couldn't play Mary had a Little Lamb on any organ.

Then, during my voluntary which was an improvisation, I got shushed like a nursery school child making too much noise with a toy. How arrogant is that? I shut up shop and left before I got in to a disagreement with said pensioner.

The joys. Rant over! [quote]

Hi, Tosher!

Sorry to read that you've had a bad morning. You must have felt depressed as well as angry.
I have been much more fortunate : now that I am retired and hold no organ post, I deputise occasionally when asked at various local churches. This morning I was made most welcome at the church where I was playing, several members of the congregation came to express thanks and appreciation and enquired if I would be playing for them again, and I had a public welcome from clergy and reader.
Visiting, deputising organists seem to be much more appreciated at the churches where they play than resident organists.
Best wishes for a better day next Sunday.

rk

Thanks for that - deputising certainly sounds good!!

The shushing was completely out of order. I don't know how old you are but I guess this kind of thing is more likely to happen to a youngster; I know I have had a lot fewer 'clever' comments to endure since entering old baghood maturity.

Congregations will often keep to their accustomed tempi, however, and you handled it entirely properly in my opinion.

I would suggest you have a word with the Minister or whoever is in charge of the congregation about the conducting. A member of the congregation should not be taking that kind of responsibility.

What a nerve!

Conducting the congregation is both entirely out of order and thoroughly discourteous. Talking to the organist whilst playing is also very rude.

Regrettably, I have no easy answer to this situation. It is probably worth mentioning it to the minister. If he or she will take no action then you have no support and should probably leave.

There are two things about such a service which would keep me a million miles away.

The first is the misnomer 'All Age Worship'. There is no such thing. What is meant is "Items of banal taste that we think children may like." (They usually do not.)

The second is this volume 'Songs of Fellowship'. (Without reference to the fact that hymn in question was seemingly orthodox.) It is full of music that is in the 'Spinners and Seekers in Church' style. There is nothing contemporary - not even the newly written material - in its pages. It is all dated and of no value in communicating to young people, whose music is of a very different style indeed. (It probably speaks to their parents, being of that generation's style!)

I am deeply sorry you have had this experience. It is common and is becoming more common.

If it does not change then take your skills where they will be appreciated and where you will treated like a professional musician.

Barry Williams

It is also badly produced, full of inconsistencies and needs a decent edit / proof read
(as though anyone would bother).

Tosher - that really is quite unacceptable. It would be worth having a word with the minister - although I regret to say I have no confidence that most ministers would actually say or do anything.

I'm sorry too.

Just don't talk to them at all.
Just get on with doing the job - well - and doing it your way. Most of them really don't know the problems associated with directing the music and won't understand anyway.

Reminded me of a volume we used to use in the 1980s which affectionately became known as 'Sounds of flushing Water', I hope you all know what it was called originally.

I've always struggled with the concept of 'contemporary', because its cleary not, as you say above. Kids at my school are listening to styles and genres I can't even pronounce, let alone analyse musically. Yet in church, contemporary is 99% of the time, diatonic harmony, stepwise melody and occasional syncopation. 'Spinners and Seekers'...couldn't have put it better myself.

Comedy aside, this doesn't sound like a happy scenario at all. Having endured my fair share of conflicts at all ends of the candle (Barry, some at the lower end would really make you blush!), my only piece of advice would be to try and remain the adult in all arguments.

This seems to me a very sweeping statement! My 19 year old son tells me that he finds some of the SoF songs very helpful - in general more helpful than many of the older hymns - although some are definitely dated. To say it is all of no value is to throw away the baby with the bathwater.

Young people don't have a single style of music, any more than older people do, though they tend to prefer keyboards, guitars and drum kits to church organs!

Tosher, I'm sorry that the "happy clappy" couple treated you as you did. They probably wanted you to play more like a music group would, but that certainly wasn't the right way to achieve their ends.

Young people don't have a single style of music, any more than older people do, though they tend to prefer keyboards, guitars and drum kits to church organs!

and that's not a sweeping statement?

In my experience not necessarily true.

Note the use of the words "tend to". Of course they don't all prefer music groups, though the great majority of those in our church youth club do.

"Conducting the congregation is both entirely out of order and thoroughly discourteous. " Barry Williams.

Not equivalent, but this might be of interest :-

It would be extremely unusual if the self-appointed conductor was in fact able properly to conduct. Much more likely that he waved his hand up and down to each beat ?
Years ago, I was afflicted with a choirmaster who did just this. After a couple of hymns in practise, I told him that I was having difficulty following him, and could he please use a conventional ‘stick’ pattern, with just the one ‘up’ beat to a bar – not four as he was doing. Also, where the first bar in a four-four was an anacrucis fourth beat, saying “one,two” didn’t really work as an intro..
“What do you mean?” he says.
Forebearing to explain further, I invited him to play the piano for the next couple of verses and, that I would show him what I meant. As you will already have guessed, his conducting skills were wholly matched by his proficiency at the keys.
At this point I was treated to a much-deserved lesson in grace and dignity. He quietly picked up his book, walked over and stood with the choir-men, displaying a fine tenor singing voice. During note-bashing , he was able to lead/assist not only tenor, but also bass and alto in good register.
Having embarrassed him publicly, I managed to overcome my arrogance and apologise, again publicly. We shook hands, he asked me to show him how the various beat patterns were conducted.
Twenty years or more further on, we remain firm friends.................... but it was a close run thing.
Take care now.
Chris Baker – Durham UK

I think everyone has got the wrong end of the stick (excuse the pun) regarding the conducting.

The way I read the OP's post was that her husband was trying to HELP her by conducting her via the organist's mirror to stay with the beat of the congregation, and wasn't conducting the congregation itself - it was the loud happy-clappy couple singing loudly that were responsible for the congregation not following the pulse of the organ.

David.

Still something of a generalisation.
My experience is that young people like a fair cross-section of the music they are
1) involved in and 2) exposed to.

Chris - that's a great story - well done to you!

Yes, I would agree there are people of all ages who find SoF 'helpful', but the point that vicars often make is that this music is 'contemporary' (which it isn't, never in terms of style, and rarely in terms of lyrics) and that this is the 'only' music that will appeal to younger congregations, which as your post says, isn't the case.

I get really irritated by a considerable hubbub whilst I am playing before the service starts.
Yet when I visit other churches as a member of the congregation, theyre mostly much quiter than 'my' lot.
After the service its even worse of course, but thats a bit more understandable.

Tosher, the advice given above sounds good to me. What you suffered was totally out of order. I do think behaviour like this needs to be nipped in the bud and it is probably best done by the minister. If the church wants you to lead the music they should trust you and give you the authority to do so. If they merely want you to act as a worship song machine who is subject to everyone else's beck and call, then you are in the wrong place. You have a right to expect your minister's support (which is not to say you'll get it, unfortunately).

Piling on the volume was right, IMO. As for the voluntary, the way I used to counter such interruptions was to explain that it was my offering to God and as far as I was concerned the service was not over until the voluntary finished. The offenders soon learnt to respect my view - not that it stopped them making the usual unholy racket over it.

Tosher, you'll find the acquisition of two qualities very necessary for being a church organist. 1, A hard neck and 2, a thick skin. Without these, the job will be especially fraught.

Amused by the thoughts as to what young people 'like' in church.

I still (on the rare occasions I attend my local parish church) get 'recommended' that I might prefer the contemporary service to the traditional one I choose to attend. I don't like to tell the kind old ladies that the reason I don't go to the contemporary service is that its a bit creepy, chaotic, and well attended by uni CU members. I try very hard to avoid the CU, although they're less militant (and creepy) now than they were...

Any ideas of what I can say to get the 'helpful' advisors to accept that I prefer a traditional service?
Sorry for thread hyjacking...

I guess if you are young and in the mood to rock then your local church is not the first venue that springs to mind.

If you are middle aged/elderly and feel some swing then you may wish to pursue it in church.

Of course I may be completely wrong.

"Thanks, but I prefer the more traditional service."

Seriously.
They don't need to know the reasons why you don't like the other one.

If they push the point, you could say that your church back home had quite traditional services so that's what you feel most comfortable with. (If that's true, of course.)

"This seems to me a very sweeping statement! My 19 year old son tells me that he finds some of the SoF songs very helpful "

This is the kind of 'logic' that gets poor quality material into churches. "I find it helpful therefore it is useful in public worship." This is called arguing from the particular to the general and it is not valid even when it is true. (Please accept my apologies for the lecture on evidence.) There is no objection to using any helpful material privately. Public Worship demands objective judgments on the quality of the material used.

What is useful is to ask the younger people what kind of music they listen to and, as Berkshire Mum has rightly pointed out, it is a huge variety of styles.

My point is that not one of those styles bears any relationship or similarity to Songs of Fellowship, or any music like it. The error comes not from saying that Songs of Fellowship is useful or helpful in church, but that it is especially useful or helpful to young people because "it is their kind of music". Mistakes of that type were made over Geoffrey Beaumont (who could write quite good music, though not decent hymn tunes,) and the Twentienth Century Church Light Music Group, who really thought that their banal ditties were the music of young people. In fact they were imitations of the 'pop' music of their own generation.

For the avoidance of all doubt I have no problem at all with Riff, Rave, Bob, Pop, Heavy Metal, etc in church and have been involved in it from time to time. (And Danckworth's Jazz Mass.) However,I object very strongly to the sheer artificiality of Songs of Fellowship and its utter lack of challenge.

Our young people deserve some better. These 'songs' make no demand of the worshipper. They give pleasure by means of an easy tune and lilting harmonies. The attraction is to the sense not to the mind. It is a tendency to try and repeat a 'conversion' experience rather than develop as a mature Christian. To use the Scriptural analogy, to seek milk when one should seek meat is, in effect to become a spiritual Peter Pan. (Apologies for the theology lecture.) Many modern services actually try to achieve that. In my experience it most often happens when the label is 'All Age Worship'.

But to return to the original post, when the minister, of whatever denomination, fails to take control, there is little hope for a good working relationship. If one can tolerate the situation is might be OK but, as HG has pointed out, it can be fraught, to say the least.

Tamsin's experience is not unique. It is interesting the the Prayer Book Society has many young people amongst its members, quite a few of whom report similar approaches. Yet the cathedrals and London Churches with professional choirs attract many young people, who sit through lengthy services of complex music performed to a high standard.

I feel another book coming on, but not till after I have fininshed 'Everything Else a Choirmaster Should Know'!

Barry Williams

PS Robin Rees' 'Weary and Ill at Ease' makes good ready for organists fed up with playing in church.

Just a wee, small comment. I am assuming that you are, in general, refering to the 1st edition of Songs of Fellowship - yes indeed, dated and a little passe, although not without some good material (Thine Be the Glory, When I Survey, to name but two). However, we are now onto the 4th edition of said song book - which is indeed representative of contemporary worship. Contemporary worship requires very different skills to more traditional worship - it is of a far more improvisatory nature and if you follow the music note by note, rhythm by rhythm, then you will indeed get bogged down!

However, this is the organists thread and not the time and place for a lecture on contemporary worship. I am an experienced practitioner of the latter. I visit the organists thread as I find it mildly amusing, sometimes frustrating, that although we seem to come from very different musical, and sometimes theological, standpoints, we often enjoy similar relationships with the 'clergy'.

Final word - don't knock something you may not fully understand. I understand the frustrations of the OP and others. We have a very big God who enjoys and deserves to be worshipped in a whole variety of contexts.

I do hope said fourth edition has been properly proof read!

Yes, and this is where sometimes we as organists don't make friends with the trendy sets! I've heard plenty of people claim you can't play Kendrick et al. on the organ, but you can. I did it for years, but it does take some more interpretative skills than just playing the dots.

Just to divert a little here. (A happy story.)

We had a visiting cleric yesterday who clearly knew his place! It was "organ Sunday" hence my OH was on duty. Head of music group arrived. She went off to let the cleric know that we sing most things. "Oh" says he, "the creed?" "Er no", says she. "Oh well" says he, "just drown me out if I start saying something you sing!"

Needless to say, the whole thing went swimmingly and cleric, congregation and OH were perfectly happy.

Actually, I really like the SoF version of the Creed by Graham Kendrick - number 572. Sorry to all those who hate Volume 1, but there it is!

Hardly surprising, though.

Beaumont and the rest of the Twentieth Century Church Light Music Group were always out of date, writing in an impoverished way in the style of 'dance hall' music in which they grew up, and which was already very outdated when they were composing hymn tunes in that fashion. Theirs was a misguided attempt to attract the youth of their day. Sydney Carter is now very '70s. In modern churches, Graham Kendrick is seen as very passé (compare his writing with modern pop music!). Tallis - et al - and plainchant sell many more recordings than any of the 20th century composers you've mentioned. Perhaps, because of their antiquity, people see Tallis et al as being somehow 'timeless' and more spiritual.

It is very interesting and I'm sure I'm not the only one who'd like to hear about the findings. With regard to question 1, I actually think a lot of them don't hear enough 'church' music to know their own tastes. So it's up to the rest of us to teach them good taste! Or at least give them quality music - of whatever variety - rather than assume a particular style is sufficient without the quality being important.

Plainchant does strike something - it sort of harmonises the soul with the world and the beyond.

This type of research has been done before, over many generations, with exactly the same result. It all goes to show that young people prefer and appreciate music that does not attempt to pander what others perceive their tastes to be.

As I have mentioned above, cathedrals and the major London churches have no difficulty in attracting young worshippers - and keeping them too, without recourse to Songs of Fellowship - I refer, of course, to the so-called 'contemporary' material contained in these volumes, rather than traditional music and words borrowed from hymn books.

Maggiemay refers to the errors. Yes, these abound, but Songs of Fellowship is not alone in that.

Much of the difficulty with such material is the sheer inaccuracy (as opposed to editorial errors) in the transcriptions of the scores from the originals. Quite a few are late nineteenth and early twentieth century - taken from CSSM Choruses, etc and re-worked rather badly. ('Lord of the Dance' is an example of how to water down a good folk tune and match it with confused multi-faith theology.) Some of the music in Songs of Fellowship is almost unperformable in its given score, with or without improvisation. The notes often bear little relationship to what is heard, especially with the more efficient performers. This gives rise to considerable difficulties in a number of areas, especially for less well qualified performers who have to rely on the printed page, at least as a basic starting point.

At a lecture in Hereford Cathedral on 2nd May this year, The Reverend Peter Moger, a member of the Liturgical Commission, spoke powerfully about the elitism that surrounds the 'Worship Leader Cult' and 'Praise Bands'. (His terminology.) This is, perhaps, as worrying as the apparent lack of skill of many who perform in 'Praise Bands'. Some are really rather good, but it is much more difficult to lead a congregation in song with a 'Praise Band' than on an organ in traditional hymnody. Folk hear the All Souls Langham Place orchestra and try it for themselves, not realising that the musicians at All Souls are very good and the arrangements rather sophisticated. It is the same problem as when a local parish church choir attempts Harris's "Faire is the Heaven" and makes a mess of it. Performing music badly in front of a congregation is inexcusable, whatever the style.

These are all considerations, apart from the lack of challenge and quality in what some term 'contemporary Christian music'. Even the newly written material is in a very dated style and deliberately so. It is important not to pretend that it is 'the young peoples' music' when clearly it is not in any modern or contemporary style. Church music fashion has produced a 'contemporary' music that is as artificial and unreal as Geoffrey Beaumont's 'Salad Days' style was in the nineteen fifties. His music was dated by the time it was performed in church and the same thing is happening again. His style was perpetuated by the Twentieth Century Church Light Music Group, but they did not put their music into hard cover durable hymn books. Perhaps that is the real danger. The Liturgical Commission has created a new form of Liturgical English in Common Worship that owes much to Cranmer and is very far removed from anything modern or contemporary. The Liturgical Commission appeared to reject fine modern liturigcal English in favour of what some call 'newspeak'. It is happening with 'contemporary' music, for those who play in 'Praise Bands' are rarely involved in real contemporary music outside of church.

Time will tell. I wonder whether future church music examinations will have an optional guitar piece. The debate will go on for a long time. I am just grateful that I am not asked to play in circumstances which give rise to the palpable tensions between ecclesiastical musical factions. It must be very stressful and spoil the occasion for organists trying to do their best in divine worship.

Barry Williams

I used to think like that. It didn't work.

I've since learnt to gently lead them by the hand in the direction you think they ought to go....

That's what I meant!

I am not an organist but I do very much appreciate what church organists do. I feel very sorry about some of the problems mentioned on this thread. Attitudes to church music seem to have changed vastly. I must say I have been turned off by some of the trite stuff I have heard in church and would like to support those who strive for high standards and respect for what is essentially a vehicle for worship.

Back in the nineteen seventies I belonged to a good Methodist church choir; It was run by an ex-naval commander who knew a lot about discipline, human relationships – and music. We were accompanied by a very competent organist . Every Thursday evening we practised for two hours – the hymns from the then Methodist Hymn Book, and for the evening service, an anthem. We prepared special items for Easter and a carol concert at Christmas. We did performances of Messiah, we joined with another choir do as much as we could manage of the Bach St Matthew Passion, we joined forces with others for Elijah. A sub group of the choir formed a madrigal group. We organised congregational hymn practices, particularly when the supplement to the Methodist Hymn book was published We were a choir of fairly mixed ages but there were not enough youngsters coming in.

So the choirmaster started a junior choir for which I eventually became responsible. When I finally had to move from the district I left behind a choir of forty boys and girls aged from seven to seventeen. They graduated to the senior choir as they became ready. We sang all sorts of things from Ceremony of Carols and a children’s vocal work “How the Stars were Made” to simple Sunday School stuff. Both choirs were robed and children and adults were loyal and hard working.

It was interesting to note that both the senior and junior choir members moaned when we were asked to sing pseudo-modern stuff. The better the quality of the music, the better we liked it, the better we sang and the better we performed our task of leading the musical part of worship.

The experience we had of church music was real, valuable and of as high a quality as could be attained with the resources we had.

I cherish the memory of those times and find myself now quite disheartened by the poor quality of much church music and the lack of respect for the church’s musicians. Let’s hope that the sort of research David is doing will lead to something better.

I would like you to publish your preliminary results in CMQ or the Church Times. Put the cat amongst the pigeons of banality!!

I am really enjoying this debate!

Is this really true, Barry? I would love to think that somewhere there are a lot of young people still interested in the church, but judging by my own area, young churchgoers are thin on the ground. We don't often get to cathedrals, and when we do it's usually at holiday times, but I've always had the impression that there were very few young (by which I mean between ages 15 and 30) worshippers other than in the choir. If it's true that cathedrals have no difficulty in attracting young people, what's their secret?

Music has always held an attraction for many, and the chance to sing in a church choir with other youngsters is a big incentive to those with a taste for more traditional music, particularly now the schools have relatively few choral opportunities. Youngsters who are interested in the organ of necessity find their way into churches. Similarly, the Salvation Army hold youngsters by offering a chance to play instruments in worship. But do they come to worship God or because they enjoy music?

In the Methodist Church where I worship we tell the preachers that we have both Hymns & Psalms (a more traditional hymn book) and Songs of Fellowship (all four volumes) and let them choose the hymns, so we are used to having different types of hymn. This isn't aimed particularly at the youngsters, but for everyone's benefit, as different styles "speak" to different people. Usually we have organ accompaniment, but on the first Sunday in the month it's a music group (sadly very depleted and aged now as our young players moved on to university this year).

I wonder how much BBC Songs of Praise is to blame?
I never watch it because although the interviews are, I am sure, sincere and inspiring, the music and hymns have been trite. I can't speak for the main body of its content but it does seem to feature a regular diet of soft -focussed, burning candle+ group of pretty people geometrically placed and singing some earnest piece of wrapped sliced-white singing that does nothing for me at all.

We have all laughed at some of the stories of this programme and how it records more than one season at a time with quick changes of flowers. How worrying then, that this is the picture of worship that is put before the people at the most accessible time.

On the occasions when I have seen it there has been a Kendrick song included so I don't know whether his song are included because they are liked, or if they are liked because they have been heard on this programme.
If the music of John Tave®ner has ever been featured then I have missed it, more's the pity; perhaps if we were presented with better music where we can easily find it then not only would congregations be more interested in participating rather than playing the fool, but wedding hymn requests might be more interesting and appropriate.

SoP has been going down the tubes for 20 years or more. It all started the day they replaced Herbert Chappell's fine theme tune with Robert Triteman's nonsense.

I take it you don't play Bob Prizeman's Toccata, then, Confutatis!

I haven't played it since I was a youth without any real taste in music. Do you have the Chappell?

Yes, I have both. I've never actually learnt the Chappell, only just played through it. I haven't played the Prizeman for a while now, as nobody seems to recognise it any longer!

Is it trite nonsense?

Thank you for this.

Attendances at Cathedrals generally are on the increase and the number of young people in London churches is quite striking. The 'secret' I suspect is doing things rather well, for All Souls Langham Place is very different to Bourne Street, yet they attract many young people. I know of one parish church with a very fine choir of forty trained voices, often having an orchestra to accompany settings of the mass, (it is Anglican and they often do full settings of the Creed with orchestra!), where many folk go because of the music, though the preaching is also very fine and the architecture splendid. (They do not do 'The Peace' !!!)

I have always been worried by this idea of getting young people to participate in the hope of holding them in the church, whether in the choir or in the Salvation Army Band. Originally, cathedrals offered orphans a chance to sing in return for their education. Nowadays parents have to pay for that education. Bursaries are often less than half the fees and some cathedrals have difficulty in filling all the places. (One with places for twenty four boys was down to eleven last year.)

I have grave reservations about working with children nowadays because of all the competing calls on their time. Getting committment from the children and their parents is very difficult. Robert Leach and I will be writing about this at length in our next book. Songs of Fellowship (i.e. the chorus items, not the traditional hymns.)



Thank you for this.

Attendances at Cathedrals generally are on the increase and the number of young people in London churches is quite striking. The 'secret' I suspect is doing things rather well, for All Souls Langham Place is very different to Bourne Street, yet they attract many young people. I know of one parish church with a very fine choir of forty trained voices, often having an orchestra to accompany settings of the mass, (it is Anglican and they often do full settings of the Creed with orchestra!), where many folk go because of the music, though the preaching is also very fine and the architecture splendid. (They do not do 'The Peace' !!!)

I have always been worried by this idea of getting young people to participate in the hope of holding them in the church, whether in the choir or in the Salvation Army Band. Originally, cathedrals offered orphans a chance to sing in return for their education. Nowadays parents have to pay for that education. Bursaries are often less than half the fees and some cathedrals have difficulty in filling all the places. (One with places for twenty four boys was down to eleven last year.)

I have grave reservations about working with children nowadays because of all the competing calls on their time. Getting committment from the children and their parents is very difficult. Robert Leach and I will be writing about this at length in our next book. Songs of Fellowship (i.e. the chorus items, not the traditional hymns.) with an organ seems a bit like using a guitar for 'Praise my soul, the King of Heaven'. Robert Leach and I will shortly be publishing 'One Hundred and Fifty Choral Choruses'



Thank you for this.

Attendances at Cathedrals generally are on the increase and the number of young people in London churches is quite striking. The 'secret' I suspect is doing things rather well, for All Souls Langham Place is very different to Bourne Street, yet they attract many young people. I know of one parish church with a very fine choir of forty trained voices, often having an orchestra to accompany settings of the mass, (it is Anglican and they often do full settings of the Creed with orchestra!), where many folk go because of the music, though the preaching is also very fine and the architecture splendid. (They do not do 'The Peace' !!!)

I have always been worried by this idea of getting young people to participate in the hope of holding them in the church, whether in the choir or in the Salvation Army Band. Originally, cathedrals offered orphans a chance to sing in return for their education. Nowadays parents have to pay for that education. Bursaries are often less than half the fees and some cathedrals have difficulty in filling all the places. (One with places for twenty four boys was down to eleven last year.)

I have grave reservations about working with children nowadays because of all the competing calls on their time. Getting committment from the children and their parents is very difficult. Robert Leach and I will be writing about this at length in our next book. Songs of Fellowship (i.e. the chorus items, not the traditional hymns.)

Yes, unfortunately I have to agree. However, I've often found that the children can be fairly committed, but the parents lack the commitment to get themselves up early to get their child to church on a Sunday morning, alas.


I think you'll find that the play is on the name 'Prizeman'....

If you are going to attempt some kind of study on young people and worship, then it would most certainly not be complete without visiting the 'Soul Survivor' genre and churches such as St Andrews, Chorleywood. Study song writers such as Tim Hughes, Ben Cantelon - Kendrick is at least a generation out of date.

If you try and simply produce what is on the pages of Songs of Fellowship 4, then the music will indeed be banal. However, contemporary worship of this style is a very different type of artistry from the likes of Tallis. The music on the page is the artists pallette, the artist is the worship leader/musical director. I train my musicians to listen, to watch and to improvise and not be afraid of spontaneity. They understand a look from me to mean certain things. We begin with the written page and use it as a basis for a much fuller musical work. The work we create this week, will often be quite different to the work we create from the same material next week. It is a very different kind of musicianship, of no less value, just different.

Yes, but try telling that to ageing clergymen who are trying to be 'trendy'!

Oh dear!!

I think what is striking me about this thread is that churches are trying to be all things to all people. This doesn't work!

I disagree. Any interpretation of a 'traditional' work will vary from week to week depending on, for example, whether or not the quire director has a hangover or the 'star' soprano 1 has fallen out with one of the altos in the vestry beforehand.

More directly, any organist worth their salt should be able to inject some spontaneous verse reharm where necessary to liven up a dour Victorian hymn.

We are, I feel, not that dissimilar - repertoire excepted. It is all about responding to the moment. Some organists/quires can do it and some can't. I am sure that is the same with worship groups and the material they use.