Sounds as though the congregation may not have been completely honest about the theology desired or the reverse, the minister may not have been honest about the theological position that he/she holds.  Probably should have been discovered before the call.  I don't see an easy resolution to this issue...cms

Joint meeting of the M&P and Worship committees?

A congregational study or worship series on worship?

As the new minister I would spend time getting to know the people, build relationships and after a time (likely a year) ask that I choose one hymn that fits with the theme of my sermon.  Other changes I would introduce gradually and with patience.

I think there is some merit in what Meredith is saying.  I've seen cases where a minister has come in and has wanted to change everything, and right now, and problems have followed.  I think there is wisdom in a new minister getting to know the people and why they currently do what they do.

And yet, I understand that ministers want to bring their own way of ministry to a congregation.  I think the situation CH describes needs to be worked through with caution, wisdom, patience, understanding, and a balance of give and take, otherwise, there could be serious problems.

For a new minister, don't make any major changes in the first year, but build up communication and relationships with the congregation, organist and choir.

Many organists and choirs like to sing in Latin, while congregations find it pretentious. While I have sung in many languages, the message is usually lost in foreign tongues.

Since I like the entire worship service to flow together with one message, I like the minister to choose the music in discussion with the choir director.

But I also agree that a new minister should bid her time until she gets to know the congregation and then introduce changes slowly; first suggesting the hymn following the sermon then, once this has become standard practice, start requesting certain opening hymns, and eventually the closing hymn - maybe letting the choir choose one hymn and then, after a year or so, occasionally vetoing their suggestion.  "I don't think it is a good idea to sing Battle Hymn of the Republic on Peace Sabbeth.  Perhaps we can choose something more suitable."

Suggesting a hymn sing before the service or at a different time might give the choir and members of the congregation an opportunity to sing the gospel tunes they like without detracting too much from the service.

Full agreement with Meredith and others... change takes time. Remember text about being invited to a table and dvice to take a seat near the circumference, waiting to be invited closer in? A sound principle rooted in good anthropology. To try and make chance at the outset could tone the whole project. Build good working relationships with key persons, specially those who may see things from the contrary point of view. Friendship is a solid foundation for transformational ministry. God's grace be with you.... all!

The choir may like those hymns more for the tempo & rhthym and are often unaware of the theology of the words. Unthinking traditionalism is harder to overcome  than it is to change doctrinal theology. Take time. Speak the truth in love, and then let it go, and let the Spirit work where it can.

 Sorry, folks - I have to disagree with the "no changes in the first year" idea.

The beginning of a new pastoral relationship is one of those times where congregational life is most malleable. My experience has been that people are much more willing to accept that 'things are going to be different' at that point, than after a period of 'relative' similarity, followed by changes that feel huge.

I think its important that ministry personnel be up-front, from day one (actually, from the interview situation) about areas - and specifics - of the congregation's life that they believe change might be necessary. This doesn't have to be done in a confrontational manner... but the conversations and movement needs to happen.

- 

About CH's choir question? I think I'd be sitting down with the choir leader and the choir to say things like, "I really need your help here. I know you love the music that you're sharing with the congregation... can you help me to understand what it is you love about it?" After hearing what that is (much of which I'd probably agree with - rhythm, flow, emotion), I'd say, "Ok... can we talk about what the lyrics seem to be saying? What are they saying to you? Here's what they're saying to me. I know, we both love the music and it says great stuff to us... but I'm not sure that the theology of the lyric is really what we say we believe."  Then to move into the, "One other thing - I've always been taught worship needs to be a 'complete package' - prayers, service music, call to worship, hymns, 'sermon', etc.... need to connect to the scripture focus for that service. From my perspective, what the choir does is another 'reflection on scripture' - what I do in words, you do in music. How can we help each other to help the congregation to worship God... because that's our primary purpose for doing what we're doing here, right?"

It'd be fun.

Christ's peace - r

If you are only talking about the anthem, and not the rest of the service music, I'd let it go (for now...).  Place the anthem near the offering and introduce it as the offering to God that the choir would like to make.  The rest of the music will speak to the theme of the scripture and sermon and so on.  Then get to know the music folk and start discerning why they choose the music they do, and look for opportunities for dialogue.  On my previous charge the music leader certainly had been picking anthem music based on how much she liked the musical arrangement, not the lyrics.  As we got to know each other better, and she trusted me, she would ask what I thought of different pieces, sometimes saying, "It doesn't have any of that blood stuff you don't like..."  :)   At times we altered a word or two so that I could sing along joyfully. 

Which is another point -- I have always sung with the choir and found it to be a great way to be in partnership with the musicians.  If the minister doesn't do this, it might be strategic?  grace-ful?  for her/him to start doing so.

shalom

clergychick - If I tried to sing along with the choir, they would all quit.  When there is a hymn that I really like and want to join in I make sure that I am well back from the mike.

Once I was guest at a tiny country church - maybe 12 in the congregation.  "Who plays the piano?"  I asked.  They answered  "The minister."

  "Who leads the singing?"    They answered  "The minister."

Everyone was relieved the next week when I brought a tape deck with some old fashion hymns. 

"The beginning of a new pastoral relationship is one of those times where congregational life is most malleable."

Or... most defensive.....? or some point between...?

If it does matter to the minister, then the interview process should have it on the table.

I have a question, I thought that theology and worship styles would be discussed during the hiring process.

If it is not talked about, what is?

We call. We do not "hire" in the United Church. And such matter should be the subject of conversation.

Alex you are correcting in the calling process the theological questions should be first and foremost - I am surprised the number of times they are not - When I was interviewed I made it clear that theology was at issue and if there was not a fit - I would move on before we went too far in the conversation.

I agree with Richard - waiting too long is a missed opportunity - Change can be done in a non confronting way - the issue of hymns that counter the intent of the theology that support the sermon needs to be dealt with just as well anthemns that go counter.  Music is one of the ways we form our theology and there must be a harmony in the worship service.

I was on a search committee back in the 1980s.  The person we were dealing with stated that she thought people should without financial support from M & S and Presbytery until 'the issue' was out of the way.  We politely asked her a few more questions, but the interview was over.  Obviously her theology wouldn't be a good fit with our congregation. 

The next person were spoke to laid out his theological position clearly without being asked and we called him to the church.

How would you handle the situation?

I would have the M&P committee tell the minister that we are singing the gospel songs and he is paid to work within the structure of the Church.  Translation: Suck it up princess we did things this way before you came and we wil do these things after you leave.

I like gospel music better than the UC traditional music.  The music is way superior musically.

post deleted due to the fact that it was just a double posting

I like the working and talking route....tell me what is important to you about it....ok, here is what is important to me....now....where can we go from here.

i would not wait, nor would I ignore.  For to do so, may miss some of the reasons I was called.

(if i were a minister, of course)   

(ps...glad i found this thread..was worried as hadn't seen our minister friends in other threads)

There are other thoughts on that. Myself, I'd be working for a balance. Some Gospel music suchs and some is great.  If the M & P Committee ever said that to me, though, I'd be updating my CV and thinking seriously about shaking the dust off my feet and moving on.

I don't see why we couldn't have some good up-beat music with good theology as well.  Search through Voices United and More Voices.  Surely there are some there that both could agree on.  Find some up-to-date tune for the anthem.  Work together to find a blance of good theology and good music. 

Interesting concept Serena.  My late grandmother, a classically trained musician and piano teacher, hated Gospel music as, quite simply, bad music.  SHe would have agreed with much of the theology but found the music inferior.

ADD:  It needs to be pointed out that the Gospel music she hated would now be called classics (think In The Garden, Power in the Blood, stuff from "Songs of the Gospel").  In this she was of a similar mind to the compilers of both the Hymnary and the 1971 Hymn Book who had a bias towards traditional hymnody.  I shudder to think how my grandmother would respond to contemporary Gospel.  She thought the 1971 Hymn Book was an abomination and we just didn't talk about Voices United (she was back in a PResbyteryian church by then anyway).

I would agree that type of music is bad.

The type of music I like is the Contempory Gospel music it is a little mystical and I like MOST of it but not all of it.  Seriously, would you go to a music concert of Voices United?   I have gone to Arlen Psalte concerts, Twila Paris, Amy Grant, and would have liked to have gone to Petra, White Cross (okay not exactly gospel but some do cross over) Statler Brothers,  and Carmen.

That might not be a bad idea.  No offense meant but seriously if your theology is so different from the congregations the best thing you could do is leave and go serve a congregation that thinks like you.

AH Serena,

I've never been to a "Voices United or "More Voice"

concert.

But I have heard Liinea God and the Good Company.

Revolve,

Bruce and Cheryl Harding,

Ron Kluisemmer-whose name I think I mispelt

Allare great performers (and their music appears in these books)

oh and Jim Stradee,,,,

It's disrespectful and completely inappropriate, for one thing. I would hope no congregation treats their staff like that, no matter what the denomination. And do look up Matthew 10:14 and the meaning of "shaking off the dust".

John Wesley's notes:

10:14 Shake off the dust from your feet - The Jews thought the land of Israel so peculiarly holy, that when they came home from any heathen country, they stopped at the borders and shook or wiped off the dust of it from their feet, that the holy land might not be polluted with it. Therefore the action here enjoined was a lively intimation, that those ... who had rejected the Gospel were holy no longer, but were on a level with heathens and idolaters.