OK... Maybe it's me... How many of the congregants voluntarily sit through DOUBLE Sunday services? How many of the board of directors voluntarily sit through DOUBLE Sunday services?

Maybe the better questions to ask: What really is the "problem", and why is this YOUR "problem" to solve?

Do "they" (whoever they is...) want music throughout both services? If so, schedule the music accordingly.

How do other churches structure this in your denomination? Cehck with other pastors or music directors in neighboring churches...

Dear Mr. Shellenberger:

 

The issue you describe comes

to a focus on one central point:

the choir serves no functional

purpose following the anthem

in the second service--so it

stands to reason that they,

as volunteers who give two

hours (effectively their entire

evening) on Thursday night

and three hours (effectively

their entire morning) on Sundays--

for at least forty+ weeks a

year--would want to leave

at that point of the service--

rather than merely occupy

space.

 

I worked for six years at a

major United Methodist church

where I encountered the

same issue--my solution was

two-fold--1) I made a case

to the singers for the importance

of maintaining a choral presence

throughout every service

and 2) I instituted the use

of a choral benediction in

the second service (i.e.,

in every service)--then

asked them to ensure

that there would be at

least a double quartet

present at the end of

the service--to achieve

that, I asked the section

leaders of each section

(these were volunteer

singers, elected by their

peers to handle business

and attendance affairs,

etc) to get commitments

a month in advance--so

people could make their

plans accordingly--and

would expect to stay to

the end of the second

service on average about

one time each month.

 

It worked.

 

Both parts of the solution

were essential--I reminded

them of the excellence

and importance of the choral

program at that church over

many years' time--and made

sure that the benedictions

were musically engaging,

not mere excerpts from

hymns or any such ditties.

 

It all comes down to having

a reason for being there--

and a satisfying musical

purpose and result each

week.

 

Best wishes for a meaningful

solution.

 

 

Cordially,

 

Thomas Sheets, D.M.A.

I will have to admit that I feel very torn on this issue.  We have somewhat of the same issue at our church.  However, I am on the other end of the coin as I am in the choir.  We have two services: early contemporary, late traditional.  We attend the early service because of our small kids.  This is the time in which they offer the comprehensive children's program.  The second hour is Sunday School.  So 2nd service is the 3rd hour.  They only offer a "nursery" during this time, and my wife and I are both a part of the choir.  This means that our "active boys" are trying to be attended to along with several four year old and under children.  So we leave after the anthem, along with a half of the choir.

It hasn't been openly discussed, but I know that many would prefer that we stay.  I don't want to attend two services.  If I had a choice I would prefer the traditional service with a children's program.  I am sure that there are many reasons that people leave early, some that are very reasonable and some less so.

 

I think that the question I have not been able to answer is this: Is it fair to suggest that a volunteer choir member be asked to serve during two services?

 

I will admit that I don't have a good answer.  I can see merit in both sides of the argument.  I guess the best answer would be to investigate the reasons why members leave early and for the staff to see if there are ways create a solution that would motivate members to want to stay.

I hope it's not the pastor who is giving you problems about this, since he should be rejoicing that he has such a dedicated following of choir members in his congregation! Personally, a video presentation in the middle of church service would be enough to get me to leave, whether or not I'd been there for an earlier service!

I have to agree with the sentiments that run this way:  either there is a functional and liturgical reason for the choir to remain through the end of the second service (such as a choral benediction - and frankly, that's not much of a reason to stay, unless it is a substantive piece), or you have had the service and more of those volunteers who have come and have already done their duty and more by being at more than one service.  Even Catholicism requires attendance at only one Mass weekly - on Sundays - and anything more is completely voluntary (that the Church would like us to attend more than once a week is true, but the fact remains that the requirement IS only once weekly, except for obligatory days, most of which have been rolled into the nearest Sundays here in the U. S.!).  Consequently, I think, if this is not a matter of someone other than yourself complaining about the absence of the choir members (and that someone has to be pretty significant - the pastor, or the head of the Board of Visitors or someone similar), I'd ignore the comments.  If this is YOUR sense of appropriateness, I think that the question asked about whether another member not involved in the liturgy staying for more than one service is entirely appropriate.  And, if the significant someone is anyone other than the pastor, ask them how many times they've attended both services.

 

I agree with what I think is your underlying sentiment, though, which is that the appearance of the choir "bailing out" mid-way through the second service doesn't "look" good (sentiment from the congregation:  "Good grief!  Is the sermon THAT bad?!?").  Perhaps it is time to separate into two choirs - one for the first, one for the second.  Both may be smaller, but you'll have a happier music ministry in total, and then you can bring it all together for greater feasts.  I know:  maybe twice the management problem, but maybe not.  A thought....

 

Chantez bien!

 

Ron

I have seen this issue debated in churches for decades!  :)

If we sat on our derrieres and watched a TV show twice in a row, when there are elderly to be visited, children to be tutored, Sunday School classes to be taught, etc., would the pastor and powers-that-be consider that good use of our God-given energy?

Why not just have a certain designated time in the service where the pastor, (or the announcement-person, if s/he is at the pulpit/lectern then), says something like, [To congregation:] "We truly appreciate the choir sharing their music with us for 2  services today!     [ to choir ]  Enjoy your day; see you next Sunday!"  (Choir, quickly, and with a minimum of disruption, files out.)

Alternatively, or in addition, there could be a little sentence at that point in the service order that says, "Choir excused, as they have sung 2 services now, to spend quality time with their family, prepare their Sunday School lessons, warm up for their afternoon gig, and make sandwiches for the homeless."  If that is too long, use **** 's and put it at the bottom of the page, or in the announcement portion.

I have found that, when the pastor, in order to support this effort, says - in a loving-but-joking manner to the seated congregation, "How many of you would attend 2 services?"  - there are usually few, if any, hands raised.

A creative alternative might be a recessional hymn, or short refrain,  where only the choir recesses.  They could move down the aisle(s) during the 1st or 2nd verse, and stand at the back  - with "breaks'" in the line to welcome latecomers - to support all the verses, then quietly slip out.  (Does anyone chastise the congregation members who come early/leave late because  of travel, personal schedule, childcare issues, family obligations, ...  Ahem....not to mention golf and lake plans... ;/  Hmmm...so is this just that the choir is "up front and visible" ?)

We worry about "how things look" too much, I'm afraid.  I hope and pray that your pastor and church leaders will join you in just using a little more  balanced thought and communication about this..  :)

It seems that everyone here (incuding the choir) is aware of the problem and aware of the negative feeling it creates when most the choir walk out. I doubt they want to do anything negative to their church, as they are already committing a weekly rehearsal night and every Sunday morning to it. They feel, however, that the second service is too much on an ongoing basis. So would I if I weren't hired to be there. If this were my church, and I'm glad we don't have this issue, I would experiment with a soloist/small ensemble for one service and the whole choir for the other, and switch the services they sing at. The agreement with all of them would be that they remain for the entire service of whichever one they sing at. If the soloist/ensemble come from the choir, they agree to sing at both services. I would try to arrive at a compromise that makes all the participants (not necessarily the congregation—they all will want the whole choir all the time) feel positive and respected, and one that they could commit to. 

 

Also, it might be helpful to put a time-limit on the experiment, like, "We're going to try this for four months". That doesn't seem as drastic right off, and they would get a chance to get used to it. 

Thomas:  It would be interesting to know just how your situation evolved.  What happened at our church was quite different, and probably rather unusual.  When we moved to town my wife checked out a number of middle-of-the-road churches looking for the best children's choir program for our own four children.  And when the director of that children's choir returned to Australia with her family Susie was asked to take it over.

 

What evolved was what I would call a youth choir, The Choristers of Christ Church, plus a REAL children's choir, which was basic Kodály instruction for younger children to prepare them to "fly up" to the Choristers.  And that children's choir was trotted out a few times during the year--pretty standard procedure at many churches.

 

But the Choristers got good enough that they were tasked to be the choir for the early Family Service EVERY SUNDAY during the school year, while the Senior Choir (or Adult Choir or whatever you want to call them) was the choir for the 11:00 service. 

 

And here's the thing:  the members of the Senior Choir would never have agreed to sing two services on a regular basis.  In fact they were very good at finding excuses for not participating in just about ANY extra duties, including the annual Diocesan Conference, which the Choristers were happy to do and were pleased to get the recognition for.  It's almost as if some of the adults simply wanted to have a reserved seat for the big services during the year!

 

On the other hand, another church which I've worked with did have a single adult choir which DID sing for both services, and it was simply what was expected of them.  So I would say that expectations are VERY important in a case like this.  If a choir is indeed expected to sing two services, that has to be understood and agreed to from the very beginning.  It's when expectations are CHANGED that you can get into trouble.  And it sounds very much as if this was something that was imposed on your choir without allowing them an opportunity to consider it and agree to it.  And if that's what happened, I'm not at all surprised that there would be some disagreement with that policy.  Someone who should have done a good sales job did not!  Jason gave us a very clear explanation of why HE cannot spend the additional time.

 

I'm not sure what a "blended" service is, but most churches around here make a clear difference between two different kinds of service, and normally the choir is only involved in the "traditional" service--which seems to me to make pretty good sense.  So perhaps the solution will be found in not having two services with the same choir music, and drawing a clearer distinction between one service and the other.

 

Just a thought.

All the best,

John

I really like Karen's idea of solists/small group for one service.