Do we Sydney Anglicans need a creative arts college? This thought occurred to me after I visited a non-Anglican church on a wet long weekend recently…
The team on duty were obviously not the very top and yet they were excellent. How did they get such good musicians, and such depth of talent? Where did all these people come from?
I then noticed that associated with this particular church was a creative arts college. They seriously invest in the arts in their Christian outreach and upbuilding.
I think they are really on to something...it is an interesting weakness that we [Sydney Anglicans] do not have any explicit institutional investment in the creative arts. As yet…
It may be more of a mission priority that it first looks.
I think this is a very good idea. To make it work, however, the church would need to suspend some of its likely prejudgments about what constitutes “good” or “acceptable” or even “theologically correct” art. For example, that:
* the college should only support art that overtly and obviously contains an exposition of the gospel;
* the college should not support art that deals with morally dubious or debatable themes;
etc, etc
Ultimately, for such a college to work, the artists would need to be given a much freer rein, and be afforded a much greater level of trust, than the church may be happy / willing to give…
Perhaps the SydAngs interested in this could talk to the people at the evangelical Wesley Institute in Sydney on how to approach it
or even utilise some of their course subjects initially.
The team on duty were obviously not the very top and yet they were excellent. How did they get such good musicians, and such depth of talent? Where did all these people come from?
Sort of on the topic - what is a “good” musician in a church context? Someone who sounds professional, or someone who sings/plays heartily from a repentant and joyful heart? Does it need to be both?
Of course if people have the talent they should use it, and we all thank God for it. But is it the role of the church to train musicians, too? Can we encourage the non-church do this, while we focus our resources on preaching the gospel - the only thing the non-church can’t do?
(Content inspired by Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ Preaching and Preachers)
11 The priests then withdrew from the Holy Place. All the priests who were there had consecrated themselves, regardless of their divisions. 12 All the Levites who were musicians—Asaph, Heman, Jeduthun and their sons and relatives—stood on the east side of the altar, dressed in fine linen and playing cymbals, harps and lyres. They were accompanied by 120 priests sounding trumpets. 13 The trumpeters and singers joined in unison, as with one voice, to give praise and thanks to the LORD. Accompanied by trumpets, cymbals and other instruments, they raised their voices in praise to the LORD and sang:
“He is good;
his love endures forever.”
Then the temple of the LORD was filled with a cloud, 14 and the priests could not perform their service because of the cloud, for the glory of the LORD filled the temple of God.
the PRIESTS were MUSICIANS - Praise God! And remember, David ‘danced with all his might before God’ as he led the ark in procession.
YES I KNOW the temple is part of the Old Covenant, and we are living in the New, but there are some helpful lessons here - train your musos and performing artists well to serve God and His people.
Thanks David!
I really love creative arts and love nothing better than a good hearty sing and music in praise and thanks to God. I just wonder where we get the idea that we (as the church) need to ‘train’ people for this role. Even in that passage it was “All the Levites who were musicians...”, not “The Israelites set up and funded a training program to ensure that their musicians did not miss a beat on this special day”!
In other words, I think a group of people inspired by the Truth of the gospel, bursting with joy in their singing (even while missing the odd note) will be much more of a faithful witness to Christ (and what it means to belong to him) than a group of professional-sounding people who have spent so much energy to look and sound excellent. (Of course I still believe that if Christians have a gift, they should use it for the church, but that is different from pouring the church’s resources into training and perfecting to - whose standards? not God’s surely!)
Hi Anna, in regards to music (only a subset of creative arts), the Bishop wondered how such small churches fielded such talented bands. One explanation may be the creative arts college attached to these (unnamed) churches.
Anglican Media ran a few features on music in Anglican churches last year, and generally things are not so good. This conforms with what I’ve heard “around the traps”. Small churches especially are struggling.
Now, some people say “Well, even if it sounds terrible to everyone else, it sounds good to God!” For myself, I don’t believe that excuses us from doing the very best job we can.
Is it important? I’m bumping into a sacred cow here, but yes it is important. Sigh. If guests come into church and the music is bad, they will feel uncomfortable and won’t want to come back. That’s just reality. If the music is passable, it probably wont make a difference either way. If the music is good, they will enjoy it, they will enjoy church, and they will want to return.
Certainly in my church music is affirmed and valued. Our evening music is generally excellent. Morning music is going through a “rebuilding” phase at the moment… ;-)
You can be sure that the temple musicians were good musicians - they were playing for GOD. I understand your desire to be inclusive, which is wonderful, but maybe more suited to casual gatherings for worship - eg why can’t someone start an informal praise evening in Sydney somewhere? I’d come!
But I think for gathering before God in worship, make it the best we can - not to boast, but to serve.
In reference to “Quality of music in our churches”, one observation I have made specifically about music ministry is that often the “professional” or “aspiring” musicians i.e. the one’s who either do music for a job or work a job to support their attempt to launch their musical careers, do NOT serve in church music ministry.
Why? Not completely sure. Anecdotally it seems in some cases working with “non-professional” muso’s is not so artistically satisfying, or perhaps there is no time left over after all the late night gigs etc involved in other musical pursuits.
So the task of music is then left to the part timers who do their best (but as has been noted above) sometimes come up short.
One other thing I have seen is pro-muso’s moving to Hillsong/CCC etc where there is a chance of getting some royalties from CD sales presuming you can get yourself on an album.
Interested in any opinions/views from anyone fitting the categories above.
Yeah. I’ve seen this happen too Jeff, although I think the reason varies on a case to case basis. Some musicians can be worldly (as I’m sure many others are who come to church with a variety of other gifts which they don’t use for God’s glory).
I’ve also seen situations where ministers stifle the creativity of professionals because “I know best” (not doctrinally related).
I’ve seen the same thing, and there are two issues -
1. They play for a living, so the last thing they want to do is play at church as well. In a similar vein, I’ve often met Primary School teachers who will do any ministry except Kids Church. And fair enough too, I reckon.
2. It is very frustrating for a pro-muso if the attitude and approach to music is not fairly professional. It is painful for them to be part of something that sounds pretty terrible. And to have someone come up and say “Well, it doesn’t really matter how it sounds, you’re serving God.” is no comfort. In fact, it just convinces them that they are wasting their time - after all “it doesn’t really matter how it sounds.”
I suspect pro-muso’s go to penty churches because they value music so highly, and because the approach is so professional. I feel a fair bit of sympathy for them.
The way forward is not to guilt pro-muso’s into contributing to poor ensembles - rather, it is to lift the standard of our music. Which is along the same lines to what Bishop Bob was saying.
Jeff: I think those who support themselves by playing music are reluctant to commit themselves to playing a free gig every Sunday night and potentially having to turn down paid gigs as a result. Might sound like they need to be more generous or get their priorities right, but there’s a point for freelancers where the responsibility to support yourself and your family would override the responsibility to serve your church in this particular way. On the other hand, some churches (like mine) employ a music director and this attracts at least one pro-level muso. I think this is an excellent approach and means you get vastly more value out of your volunteer musicians. You need somebody who can handle volunteer management and admin as well as playing the notes though!
Re training: I think it’s over-ambitious for most churches to try to train musicians. Far better to outsource to instrument teachers. However providing openings for competent or up-and-coming players to smoothly integrate into the church music context is important, as is ongoing development of particular ensembles (rather than individual musicians).
Re a creative arts college: I like the intention but I agree with the concerns quoted in the feature story (http://your.sydneyanglicans.net/sydneystories/facing_the_music_question/) about isolation leading to mediocrity. I wonder if it would be possible to create a “shell” college which teaches subjects on the theology of art and cross-credits practical subjects from other institutions, leading to a qualification in creative arts ministry or similar?
I’ve seen the same thing, and there are two issues -
1. They play for a living, so the last thing they want to do is play at church as well. In a similar vein, I’ve often met Primary School teachers who will do any ministry except Kids Church. And fair enough too, I reckon....
The way forward is not to guilt pro-muso’s into contributing to poor ensembles - rather, it is to lift the standard of our music. Which is along the same lines to what Bishop Bob was saying.
Hi Craig,
Thanks for the corroboration. I have also observed the primary school teacher/kids ministry issue.
In regards to pro-muso’s not joining ministry until the standard of music is lifted, while I have some sympathy for this, it seems a bit chicken and egg - the standards might not be able to be raised significantly until some better musos pitch in.
There are other ways and means other than just joining a music team as a player. My church used one of our talented guys as a “band coach” and he went around helping the various bands with their arrangements e.g. bring the elec guitar in here, drums in here with this type of groove, bass do this run here etc etc. I personally learnt a lot about arrangement and many others did too.
In regards to pro-muso’s not joining ministry until the standard of music is lifted, while I have some sympathy for this, it seems a bit chicken and egg - the standards might not be able to be raised significantly until some better musos pitch in.
I don’t think just throwing a pro-muso into an ordinary ensemble is going to make a huge difference. Other things have to be corrected first regarding the approach to music. Are the right songs being chosen? Is the rehearsal efficient? (this is a big one for pros, I think. Amateur muso’s stuff around a lot at rehearsal)
If you have a pro-muso at your church, a good way forward may be to ask them to take over the music ministry. Some would be happy to contribute, I think, so long as they know it’s going to be done right.
In regards to pro-muso’s not joining ministry until the standard of music is lifted, while I have some sympathy for this, it seems a bit chicken and egg - the standards might not be able to be raised significantly until some better musos pitch in.
I don’t think just throwing a pro-muso into an ordinary ensemble is going to make a huge difference. Other things have to be corrected first regarding the approach to music. Are the right songs being chosen? Is the rehearsal efficient? (this is a big one for pros, I think. Amateur muso’s stuff around a lot at rehearsal)
If you have a pro-muso at your church, a good way forward may be to ask them to take over the music ministry. Some would be happy to contribute, I think, so long as they know it’s going to be done right.
The “music coach” idea is also a good one.
Some fair points.
If some of the pro/semi-pro guys were willing to take on leadership roles I think this would be awesome.
The opinions expressed in this forum belong to the individual posting the message and may not represent the view of the Sydney Diocese of the Anglican Church. Click here to read the Posting Policy.
Everyone is welcome on our forums, but please keep comments on-topic and civil. Any flaming or general nastiness will be deleted. No unsolicited advertising is allowed. All comments, suggestions, bug reports, etc. related to the forums should be directed to Robert Moller. Click here to read our complete Posting Policy.
Get the latest Sydney stories, Culture and Indepth on your mobile device. Visit sydang.mobi
