Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wonder at what point in history did churches decide the congregation was so off-key they needed to have paid performers?! It's a major turn-off for me.
I played professionally as a band member and later as a solo singer-guitarist for many years. But when I became a part of the church family, I took on the task as music leader 'for free'. It would never have occurred to me to ask for payment. Hiring a 'paid performer' also implies that this person is someone from outside the church. IF they are with the church already then why would they even want to be paid? Participating in church activities, musician or otherwise, without expecting payment is, I would have thought, a part of one's stewardship (is that the word?) to your church.
I played professionally as a band member and later as a solo singer-guitarist for many years. But when I became a part of the church family, I took on the task as music leader 'for free'. It would never have occurred to me to ask for payment. Hiring a 'paid performer' also implies that this person is someone from outside the church. IF they are with the church already then why would they even want to be paid? Participating in church activities, musician or otherwise, without expecting payment is, I would have thought, a part of one's stewardship (is that the word?) to your church.
I get that, but the bible also says "a worker is worthy of his hire" so for a church to assume they should get professional skills for free just because someone is a member is rather impertinent and exploitive.
It is fine to volunteer if it's truly voluntary. I'd suggest that in many churches it is expected and even demanded.
Put it in a slightly different context. As a software developer the church might ask me to put together a website with various elaborate / sophisticated features. I might charge $10K for this site, let's say, to any random prospect. Maybe I would want to do this for nothing, but then that is $10K of paying work I can't do for someone else (this is called "opportunity cost") and, worse, it is 2 or 3 weeks that I can't be earning a living unless I want to work nights and weekends and give both the church and my customers less than my best efforts.
Does a church have the right to be peeved if I want to be paid for this work? It would be an advantage to pay me the $10K rather than someone else, because at least I understand their needs and don't need them explained to me and would be less likely to unintentionally make design decisions they would not like.
In my experience, churches do a lot of ambitious things that they can't really afford to do simply because the consequences are trivial if it doesn't work out, because they don't have to pay for it. Someone comes up with a "moonshot" idea, gets a half dozen volunteers whipped up with enthusiasm, it does a total pratfall but who cares -- no one is out any money. So to have to actually pay for things might focus them a little bit. It's not all downsides.
My rule of thumb was that if the church couldn't afford to sustainably do something on the open market it might not be something they should do with volunteers. That's another thing -- sustainability. That $10K web site would need maintenance and updates over time, which they also maybe could not afford on the open market (or simply don't value enough to pay market rates). Should a church pursue such a project anyway, even though the ability to see it fully and properly through relies on the goodwill of a single volunteer? And will they even get that volunteer's best work -- because psychologically you know the volunteer is going to tend to cut corners they wouldn't otherwise, because the church is telegraphing to them that they don't value this work at market rates.
I played professionally as a band member and later as a solo singer-guitarist for many years. But when I became a part of the church family, I took on the task as music leader 'for free'. It would never have occurred to me to ask for payment. Hiring a 'paid performer' also implies that this person is someone from outside the church. IF they are with the church already then why would they even want to be paid? Participating in church activities, musician or otherwise, without expecting payment is, I would have thought, a part of one's stewardship (is that the word?) to your church.
I agree with you. A couple of years ago, I read about a church in New York that offered itself as a Sunday morning tourist attraction. It seems many churches are low-key tourist attractions. That's one of the main reasons I am not a part of any church or organized religion.
I agree with you. A couple of years ago, I read about a church in New York that offered itself as a Sunday morning tourist attraction. It seems many churches are low-key tourist attractions. That's one of the main reasons I am not a part of any church or organized religion.
In an opposite situation, Abyssinian Baptist in Harlem, which is often visited by tourists for its gospel choir, makes it plain on their website that they are a house of worship and not to be viewed as an entertainment venue.
I played professionally as a band member and later as a solo singer-guitarist for many years. But when I became a part of the church family, I took on the task as music leader 'for free'. It would never have occurred to me to ask for payment. Hiring a 'paid performer' also implies that this person is someone from outside the church. IF they are with the church already then why would they even want to be paid? Participating in church activities, musician or otherwise, without expecting payment is, I would have thought, a part of one's stewardship (is that the word?) to your church.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant
I get that, but the bible also says "a worker is worthy of his hire" so for a church to assume they should get professional skills for free just because someone is a member is rather impertinent and exploitive.
It is fine to volunteer if it's truly voluntary. I'd suggest that in many churches it is expected and even demanded.
I really never gave the matter of payment any thought. I was just happy to do it. And the church never expected or demanded that I volunteer. I simply volunteered when nomination time came around and I got the position. Honestly, if payment had been suggested I'm pretty sure that I would have refused it.
Each year for the past 20 years I've organized a music group to provide a half-dozen or so free-to-the-public Christmas programs throughout Townsville where I reside. The group (usually a 6-piece) puts in the hard yards with weekly rehearsals beginning around September through to December when we then hit the local stages. We have all the audio and visual equipment and musical accompaniment necessary to enable us to put on an enjoyable and professional show, most of which are performed in the evening outdoors.* And, as said, our time and talents are given for free. This is NOT a church event, by the way. In fact, most of the volunteers we have are not even Christians. We perform for the love of it.
Due to other commitments the Millennium Singers will not be performing this year. Hopefully, we'll be back on deck in 2023.
* Christmas occurs here in mid-summer when the weather is usually most appropriate for outdoor events.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I’m fully with the program, so I know that it depends on the circumstances. There’s a big difference between a congregant playing a song during a religious service and an outside band being hired to entertain the congregation during a social event. The key difference is engaging a non-clergy member for a secular service that just so happens to be provided in a religious setting.
We’re generous with our money and don’t try to bilk people out of fair compensation for payable work. It helps that we charge membership dues (with sliding scales based on household size and ability to pay) and don’t just pass around a collection plate.
Well, churches don't "just pass around a colllection plate", either. I hope you were bring facetious. It's not that random.
They don't charge membership fees or tickets for important holidays, but members make pledges on which a budget can be based, and most regulars these days have checks sent monthly. They still pass the plate for visitors or the few who still use envelopes for their pledge.
Well, churches don't "just pass around a colllection plate", either. I hope you were bring facetious. It's not that random.
They don't charge membership fees or tickets for important holidays, but members make pledges on which a budget can be based, and most regulars these days have checks sent monthly. They still pass the plate for visitors or the few who still use envelopes for their pledge.
I was being somewhat facetious. Keep in mind, I set a reactionary tone in response to the somewhat ignorant and accusatory nature of the other post, and I know that it is not the mindset you have when it comes to Judaism and other non-Christian faiths.
I suppose it’s two different ways of roughly doing the same thing. I just prefer a model where congregants know, upfront, how much they will be paying (and the congregation, in turn, knows how much it will be receiving) in base-level contributions. Certainly, members of synagogues can, and often do, contribute additional money on top of their membership dues and High Holiday ticket fees.
I was being somewhat facetious. Keep in mind, I set a reactionary tone in response to the somewhat ignorant and accusatory nature of the other post, and I know that it is not the mindset you have when it comes to Judaism and other non-Christian faiths.
I suppose it’s two different ways of roughly doing the same thing. I just prefer a model where congregants know, upfront, how much they will be paying (and the congregation, in turn, knows how much it will be receiving) in base-level contributions. Certainly, members of synagogues can, and often do, contribute additional money on top of their membership dues and High Holiday ticket fees.
I actually like the Jewish model myself. While it may on the surface sound a little more cold and calculating than "give as you feel the Lord moves you", it's efficient and logical and financially smart, and I don't think there's any great sin in those qualities. As long, of course, as those who do not have the required resources are covered by those who do, which seems to be the case in both scenarios.
I actually like the Jewish model myself. While it may on the surface sound a little more cold and calculating than "give as you feel the Lord moves you", it's efficient and logical and financially smart, and I don't think there's any great sin in those qualities. As long, of course, as those who do not have the required resources are covered by those who do, which seems to be the case in both scenarios.
I don’t think it’s cold and calculating at all. It’s transparent and straightforward and, as long as there are flexible sliding scales, it’s fair to every family’s individual resources and circumstances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoreau424
Let the churches and musicians decide what is right and what is needed for their situation.
It's idiotic to try and force mandatory ways for all situations. All or nothing is also childish.
Obviously, people on both sides of the equation are free actors who can and will do as they please. And you are entitled to your opinion just as much as I am to mine. I believe that when religious institutions reach outside their congregation for non-religious services, they should act like any other similarly situated nonprofit. If you think that religious institutions should be held to a different standard under those circumstances, that’s your prerogative to believe just as much as it’s mine to disagree.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
