Choral Music Magazine

A professional choral singer recently wrote to the New York Times, seeking advice for an ethical dilemma that plagues many and is rarely addressed: To what extent should paid vocalists be required to participate in the Church/Temple service?

For many, it's easy to connect the musical and spiritual elements. For others, it's easy to separate the professional and personal aspects. One can understand that learning, respecting, and proficiently following the order of a service should be exhibited as part of a church singer’s professional duty, but where does one draw the line between participating in the service and forcibly practicing the religion? I believe most musicians see themselves as providers of music, not spiritual guidance. Though obtaining an emotional response from the congregation is preferred and even desired (as a sign of affective music-making), it is not a requisite for singers to move souls. Lead the congregation in song, yes, but singers are not employed to lead the congregation in religion. Perhaps, then, it is not reasonable to expect a religiously-abiding, spiritual deliverance from all choristers. For musicians, reciting prayers and creeds alone in the context of a service is very different from than presenting sacred verse in the context of music. When figuring out intervals in the constantly changing modes of chant, and counting through lengthy, syncopated rhythms of Magnificats, for most vocalists the power of the notes outweighs the power of the words, making the piece, in essence, spiritually unobjectionable – you submit yourself to the music. The sounds become the center of focus for the singer, not the religious impact. On the other hand, reciting sacred texts alone entails submitting oneself to the congregation, the clergy and to those persons' beliefs, and that is outside the realm of providing vocal expertise.

One vocalist, from a church that requires its singers to speak the prayers, had this to say about the mandatory policy:

"1.) Although I now comply with this to the best of my ability (at both churches where this has been requested of the choir), I feel that a well-performed reciting of creeds and prayers, by one who does not believe them, is potentially offensive to those in the congregation, to clergy and others on "stage" who do believe. I am squeamish when non-believers recite, because it becomes a false performance, which dilutes the meaning and substance of the text... I know the slippery slope could follow with, "well then, only Christians should sing in Church, and Jewish singers in Temple/Synagogue," etc, etc. No. Praying is not skilled labor; being paid for making music that presents sacred texts sets prayerful moods, enhances worship, and is skilled labor and need not necessarily be performed by one who is denominationally aligned. Prayer, however, is worship and should, in my opinion, be done by those worshiping, even if their voice and declaration are less than lyrical or beautiful. Some might argue that the Communion Anthem, for example, is worship. I don't think so. Ultimately, it is up to the leadership of each Church to decide, but I would hate to lose a valued singer whose principles forced him or her to leave a place that required spoken prayer.
2.) If you want the choir to say it, then give them the printed text; not all churches have a word for word bulletin."

Another singer, likewise required to recite the church’s prayers, commented that he moved his lips without actually reciting the text – a personal compromise, but an effective solution perhaps. Still, though this may satisfy the clergy keeping an eye out, it requires the singer to continually read the sacred texts and often commit them to memory. If you owned a restaurant, would you require your servers to do more than pleasantly great the guests, give information, take the order, and check up? Should the servers be expected to have a seat and fully socialize, memorize the mission statement, laud the chef, etc.? Obviously not. Similarly, singers need not be required to go above and beyond their obligation to provide quality music in falsely or emptily expressing the religious beliefs of others in prayer.

The logical counter-argument to this dilemma would be for singers to know what’s expected of them - check the policy of the church, and if in disagreement, those singers need not perform there. Applying that reasoning to the business world would mean a salesman should be expected to personally use and enjoy the product they’re selling, regardless of how they feel about it. While understanding, appreciating, even trying the product (in this case the religion) are acceptable expectations, being forced to use the product regularly or pretend to, in order to keep a job, are not a reasonable demands and is not a situation advantageous to the executive authorities (clergy) or their consumers (congregation). A good boss understands these principles. Fortunately, most choirmasters sympathize with their singers and respect their beliefs; such choirmasters usually modestly ask for cooperation and respect in line with the church's wishes, and generally get that in return. Yet still, many singers are left uneasy, worried about others watching them, and unable to focus completely and comfortably on the music. Choirmasters should constantly mind their singers' needs and work to find a pleasing stance for both the church and the singers. If room is not left for compromise in this matter, there may result an unhappy ensemble, or worse, not much of an ensemble at all.

It's no secret that some of the most well-known composers were skeptics, non-believers, or rejected the ideas of the religions for which they created and performed music. Beethoven, Schumann, Debussy, Berlioz, Mozart, Strauss, Bizet, Stravinsky, Paganini, Brahms, Schubert, Tchaikovsky, and Wagner, to name a few, had different beliefs, at one time or another, than exhibited in the music they composed. What if the church rejected their music? We would miss countless settings of Ave Maria, Te Deum, the Requiem Mass, and other great works that have become standard. Where would choral music be without these works and the influence of these musicians? Where would religion be without the power of this music and those who perform it? Singers should be expected to sing well and behave professionally. Clergy should be expected to pray well and lead religiously. You can make make someone be a good musician, but can you make a good musician be a believer?

Jonathon Hampton is Executive Editor of Choral Music Magazine. A Chicago native and Cornell University graduate, Hampton was previously a writer for the Cornell Daily Sun and now sings professionally in New York City after having launched his professional career performing across the San Francisco Bay Area as an Alto, Tenor, and Bass. His passion for choral music comes from 18 years of experience singing both sacred and secular music.

Photo Credit: atheists.org/Atheism/roots/musicians/