Do you think church musicians should be paid?

[Butterfly08]

I'm on this fence on this one. I think there are a lot of other persons in the church that play an integral role, such as ministers, cooks, janitors, etc. Why should one position be paid and others not?

Let me say that I was over a dance ministry for years and I had no desire to be paid. It was ministry to me and the spiritual rewards and natural lessons in leadership were worth more to me than money. :reddancer: I am applying what I learned then to my management position now. But it sometimes irked me to see some of the musicians that were clearly there to be paid.

Not trying to start a riot, just wanted to hear others opinion on this.

 

[PaperClip]

I used to think that church musicians should give their talents to the Lord without compensation. I have had conversations with musicians and got to hear their side of the story and they made good points. I forget what their points were (sorry!) but they were convincing.... I think one major point had to do with their playing as being their livelihood versus another person who is serving/doing.... For example, I sing with my church's praise team, but singing is not my livelihood. My church's minister of music is a musician...it is his livelihood....

 

[Butterfly08]

I used to think that church musicians should give their talents to the Lord without compensation. I have had conversations with musicians and got to hear their side of the story and they made good points. I forget what their points were (sorry!) but they were convincing.... I think one major point had to do with their playing as being their livelihood versus another person who is serving/doing.... For example, I sing with my church's praise team, but singing is not my livelihood. My church's minister of music is a musician...it is his livelihood....

Excellent point, I agree there is a difference.

 

[mango387]

I have a close family member who was a musician at a large (not mega) church. He played every single Sunday at usually two services. He was responsible for learning and teaching new music (rehearsals w/ photocopied music/scores and CDs for lead singers). When the pastor was invited to preach, sing, etc., he had to go. That cost money. Moreover, homeboy was actually classically trained yet could also "play by ear" very well. From his experience alone, I know that church musicians should be paid.

A final point of consideration, the members of the kitchen ministry at most churches normally do not have to cook every week. The dancers at most churches do not perform every week at each service. Most musicians, however, are "on" for the church at least three days a week.

 

[Finesse]

I have a close family member who was a musician at a large (not mega) church. He played every single Sunday at usually two services. He was responsible for learning and teaching new music (rehearsals w/ photocopied music/scores and CDs for lead singers). When the pastor was invited to preach, sing, etc., he had to go. That cost money. Moreover, homeboy was actually classically trained yet could also "play by ear" very well. From his experience alone, I know that church musicians should be paid.

A final point of consideration, the members of the kitchen ministry at most churches normally do not have to cook every week. The dancers at most churches do not perform every week at each service. Most musicians, however, are "on" for the church at least three days a week.

ITA... with this post, they should be paid.

 

[MzRhonda]

I have a close family member who was a musician at a large (not mega) church. He played every single Sunday at usually two services. He was responsible for learning and teaching new music (rehearsals w/ photocopied music/scores and CDs for lead singers). When the pastor was invited to preach, sing, etc., he had to go. That cost money. Moreover, homeboy was actually classically trained yet could also "play by ear" very well. From his experience alone, I know that church musicians should be paid.

A final point of consideration, the members of the kitchen ministry at most churches normally do not have to cook every week. The dancers at most churches do not perform every week at each service. Most musicians, however, are "on" for the church at least three days a week.

I agree as well.....as another poster said that IS their livelihood...it is their career, job and/or profession thus they should be paid.

Now those who do it on the "side" ie 1 rehearsal and 1 Sunday per month I'm on the fence about that one.

 

[1god1]

I used to think that church musicians should give their talents to the Lord without compensation. I have had conversations with musicians and got to hear their side of the story and they made good points. I forget what their points were (sorry!) but they were convincing.... I think one major point had to do with their playing as being their livelihood versus another person who is serving/doing.... For example, I sing with my church's praise team, but singing is not my livelihood. My church's minister of music is a musician...it is his livelihood....

I used to also have a problem with musicians getting paid. I am taking music lessons and plan to be a church musician one day, but probably for free (my personal decision). As far as not paying for other services in the church.....I am not coming to church to see ushers, janitors, Sunday school teachers, etc. Usually music is a big factor in the church..all there every office (janitors, ushers, etc) work together for the whole body...there's just something about good music. Even within the music portion, you will find organists/keyboardists get paid more than drummers, bass players, etc. Good musicians are hard to find. As RR said some musicians depend on pay for income....there are also college students who don't have careers, but still need to pay for gas. Musicians also have to pay for instrument up keep (especially if they bring their own), drum sticks, folders, CDs, etc. Some musicians who don't need the money will simply put it right back into the church. You also have to look at skill set...pay will depend on the size of the church (some churches don't have any money to pay at all), how well the musician plays, how many services does he/she play for and other additional duties. Some musicians charge per service, clinic, concert, etc. Some make around $500 a week or even a lot more. There are those who strictly play for pay and will leave if the money stops....but this is not all. Some musicians play for more than one church.

Music can really drive a service..along with the Word of course. Having music DOES make a difference....not saying you can't have a good service without it.

 

[mango387]

I'm on this fence on this one. I think there are a lot of other persons in the church that play an integral role, such as ministers, cooks, janitors, etc. Why should one position be paid and others not?

Let me say that I was over a dance ministry for years and I had no desire to be paid. It was ministry to me and the spiritual rewards and natural lessons in leadership were worth more to me than money. :reddancer: I am applying what I learned then to my management position now. But it sometimes irked me to see some of the musicians that were clearly there to be paid.

Not trying to start a riot, just wanted to hear others opinion on this.

I missed this before I responded. I actually feel that it would IRK me if I knew some people were coming clearly to be paid. My family member worked his buttom off, because it was for GOD. That is why when God called him to another position in another state, his former church members (from the pastor to the backdoor) still loved him after seven years of service. It was clear that he was working for GOD. Still, a brother had to eat.

 

[mimi]

I honestly believe that being a member in the church is a responsibility and should not be treated as if it is a job or duty. Unless you have fully commited your self to the church and serve only the church then they should not be paying you on a regular basis. However if your sole purpose is to work for the church, it is their duty to provide you with a living. I have a friend who is a music major at Rollins College with a voice incredible beyond belief! She is the leader of our youth praise and worship team and they rehearse for hours to make sure that they are on point. Nevertheless, she does not charge the church for her services because she knows that her gift is God given. Although she has no job, (therefore no money) you better believe she is taken care of. She recieves a stipend from our church because all the hours she spends at rehearsal could have been spent working a partime job. But because she is passionate for God and the church we make sure she gets what she needs.

 

[All_Me]

I'm on this fence on this one. I think there are a lot of other persons in the church that play an integral role, such as ministers, cooks, janitors, etc. Why should one position be paid and others not?

Let me say that I was over a dance ministry for years and I had no desire to be paid. It was ministry to me and the spiritual rewards and natural lessons in leadership were worth more to me than money. :reddancer: I am applying what I learned then to my management position now. But it sometimes irked me to see some of the musicians that were clearly there to be paid.

Not trying to start a riot, just wanted to hear others opinion on this.

Good Post sis! I have a brother in law who is a musician and recently got hired on as a school teacher. My step father is also lead musician at the church that I grew up in. I personally believe that they should get paid. My brother-in-law and sister initial relocated to my area and had to live with me. My brother-in-law is soooo talented and dedicates atleast 30 hours to the ministry in which he plays. I am gladddddddd they paid him for it afforded them to move. When we render service to God in worship there is a great exchange that takes place.... His joy for our sadness, His strength for our weakness, ... so we shouldn't be bother by those who just collect checks because the Father knows. I meet some musicans like that too. I just had to learn that everyone is not spiritual on the same level and we must pray for one another and not become frustrated.

 

[tffy2004]

Honestly No .

When we use Music to worship God it should be free and no one should be paid for it. After reading this thread it takes me to Romans 11:33-36

33Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
How unsearchable his judgments,
and his paths beyond tracing out!
34"Who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has been his counselor?"
35"Who has ever given to God,
that God should repay him?"
36For from him and through him and to him are all things.
To him be the glory forever! Amen.

This clearly says that no one can give to God such that God should repay so why should musician be paid for worshiping God with his or her music?

 

[PaperClip]

Honestly No .

When we use Music to worship God it should be free and no one should be paid for it. After reading this thread it takes me to Romans 11:33-36

33Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
How unsearchable his judgments,
and his paths beyond tracing out!
34"Who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has been his counselor?"
35"Who has ever given to God,
that God should repay him?"
36For from him and through him and to him are all things.
To him be the glory forever! Amen.

This clearly says that no one can give to God such that God should repay so why should musician be paid for worshiping God with his or her music?

General comment: I think we should be careful about defining what is meant about paying, charging for services, etc.

Luke 10:7 says 7And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house.

The NLV translation says: Stay in the same house. Eat and drink what they give you. The workman should have his thanks. Do not move from house to house."

The Message translation says: ""Stay at one home, taking your meals there, for a worker deserves three square meals. Don't move from house to house, looking for the best cook in town."

This scripture is in the same chapter where our Lord outlines the role and function of the traveling minister (preacher, musican, etc.), essentially noting not to take much with them because as they minister, provision will be made for them.

What has happened in modern times is that the ministers, instead of allowing, if you will, for the provision to be fully and freely made, some ministers will SET a CRITERIA for their provision, e.g., an honorarium. In some instances, these ministers may have felt/believed that setting an honorarium is NECESSARY because they did not receive any provision AT ALL, that what was given to them did not cover the expense it took for the minister to get to the particular place to minister, or that there was disagreement about adequate (type of) provision. This is a dilemma.

So as a musician is there, ministering, there should be provision made for them. It helps that both the church and the musician agree on WHAT and HOW MUCH the provision should be, especially if this is the musician's livelihood. It's not about repaying anything for the priceless God-given gift of musicianship, but that there is bible to support that a laborer is worthy of his/her hire.

 

[tffy2004]

General comment: I think we should be careful about defining what is meant about paying, charging for services, etc.

Luke 10:7 says 7And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house.

The NLV translation says: Stay in the same house. Eat and drink what they give you. The workman should have his thanks. Do not move from house to house."

The Message translation says: ""Stay at one home, taking your meals there, for a worker deserves three square meals. Don't move from house to house, looking for the best cook in town."

This scripture is in the same chapter where our Lord outlines the role and function of the traveling minister (preacher, musican, etc.), essentially noting not to take much with them because as they minister, provision will be made for them.

What has happened in modern times is that the ministers, instead of allowing, if you will, for the provision to be fully and freely made, some ministers will SET a CRITERIA for their provision, e.g., an honorarium. In some instances, these ministers may have felt/believed that setting an honorarium is NECESSARY because they did not receive any provision AT ALL, that what was given to them did not cover the expense it took for the minister to get to the particular place to minister, or that there was disagreement about adequate (type of) provision. This is a dilemma.

So as a musician is there, ministering, there should be provision made for them. It helps that both the church and the musician agree on WHAT and HOW MUCH the provision should be, especially if this is the musician's livelihood. It's not about repaying anything for the priceless God-given gift of musicianship, but that there is bible to support that a laborer is worthy of his/her hire.

I understand where you are coming from with the scriptures you gave. But when it comes to music in the church, which I see the only purpose for it there is to worship God, the musician should not be paid.

If someone is going to be a musician and that be his career then he or she should find other ways of getting work. When it comes to music in the church I don't think anyone should be paid. I can understand money going to the "church" to handle expenses and what not but musicians are only needed once a week, right?

Why is it that when someone is doing something for the church people automatically assume that they should be paid for it? (not a sarcastic question but its something that I have always wanted to know.)

Isn't the purpose of the musician in church to worship God with his music?

 

[PaperClip]

I understand where you are coming from with the scriptures you gave. But when it comes to music in the church, which I see the only purpose for it there is to worship God, the musician should not be paid.

If someone is going to be a musician and that be his career then he or she should find other ways of getting work. When it comes to music in the church I don't think anyone should be paid. I can understand money going to the "church" to handle expenses and what not but musicians are only needed once a week, right?

Why is it that when someone is doing something for the church people automatically assume that they should be paid for it? (not a sarcastic question but its something that I have always wanted to know.)

Isn't the purpose of the musician in church to worship God with his music?

Technically, isn't EVERYTHING done in church supposed to be some form of "worship" unto the Lord?

I'm not sure what church you got to but at my church, the musicians have a realm of responsibilities that would and could have them in church every day of the week to the point that they could not do other things to generate income. Between services (worship services, weddings, funerals, etc.), rehearsals, meetings, time to pray, write, compose, etc., that's a full-time job and then some. And again, the "little" money that a church would pay would not measure up to the "tangible" costs for all those tasks. If anything, it would be considered a "stipend" or "here's a little something for your 'trouble'" type thing. The pay could or would never match the dedication/service, etc., unlike in the secular marketplace.

Let's be careful because it's like (I think) I said upthread, being a church musician is not a career-climbing/salary thing like I would consider myself doing in my secular work. Hopefully musicians or anybody calling themselves called by the Lord to minister, are doing the work because the Lord called them and because the Lord is the BEST BOSS in the UNIVERSE, He knows how to compensate above and beyond what a salary could give. But we do need money to function on planet Earth, the Lord provides for that as well.

And has been said, the distinction has to do with it being a person's livelihood. That goes for the church musician, secretary, janitor, pastor, etc.

 

[ceedeelight]

Yes, from my personal experience I believe dedicated musicians should be paid.

I started playing lead guitar for my church in 2000 and at the time we were not getting paid, which was fine for me because I want to glorify God. My husband also plays the drums. It was our Pastor's decision to give us a little something. He sees that we are dedicated to the ministry and appreciates all the time and effort we put in. I am very grateful for the $ God has blessed us with from the ministry. It has come in very handy. I have to buy guitar strings, my husband purchases drum heads, stick, etc.
We play for the Choir, P&W team, church plays, Dance Team, Guests Psalmist, etc.
We also have rehearsals with each of these groups, so a lot of time is invested. We have two services on each Sunday except 5th, We play for our Conference, Spring&Fall Revivals and the occasional Wednesday night service or Bible Study.
So I definitely believe dedicated musicians should receive something. If the Pastor is for it, then there should be no problem.

In case you wanted to know how much I received: $125 a month.
So you know, I'm doing it for God.

 

[tffy2004]

Technically, isn't EVERYTHING done in church supposed to be some form of "worship" unto the Lord?

I'm not sure what church you got to but at my church, the musicians have a realm of responsibilities that would and could have them in church every day of the week to the point that they could not do other things to generate income. Between services (worship services, weddings, funerals, etc.), rehearsals, meetings, time to pray, write, compose, etc., that's a full-time job and then some. And again, the "little" money that a church would pay would not measure up to the "tangible" costs for all those tasks. If anything, it would be considered a "stipend" or "here's a little something for your 'trouble'" type thing. The pay could or would never match the dedication/service, etc., unlike in the secular marketplace.

Let's be careful because it's like (I think) I said upthread, being a church musician is not a career-climbing/salary thing like I would consider myself doing in my secular work. Hopefully musicians or anybody calling themselves called by the Lord to minister, are doing the work because the Lord called them and because the Lord is the BEST BOSS in the UNIVERSE, He knows how to compensate above and beyond what a salary could give. But we do need money to function on planet Earth, the Lord provides for that as well.

And has been said, the distinction has to do with it being a person's livelihood. That goes for the church musician, secretary, janitor, pastor, etc.

See that is where our difference of opinion comes from. I don't go to church.

 

[Butterfly08]

Good Post sis! I have a brother in law who is a musician and recently got hired on as a school teacher. My step father is also lead musician at the church that I grew up in. I personally believe that they should get paid. My brother-in-law and sister initial relocated to my area and had to live with me. My brother-in-law is soooo talented and dedicates atleast 30 hours to the ministry in which he plays. I am gladddddddd they paid him for it afforded them to move. When we render service to God in worship there is a great exchange that takes place.... His joy for our sadness, His strength for our weakness, ... so we shouldn't be bother by those who just collect checks because the Father knows. I meet some musicans like that too. I just had to learn that everyone is not spiritual on the same level and we must pray for one another and not become frustrated.

You are clearly biased!

 

[PaperClip]

See that is where our difference of opinion comes from. I don't go to church.

I wouldn't call that a difference in opinion. It's more of distinguishing between an INFORMED versus an UNINFORMED opinion.

 

[Southernbella.]

Absolutely. My dh is paid for his work at the church (he is a chef and takes care of the pastor, first family, and all guests). I agree that if that is your livelihood, you should be compensated.

 

[Browndilocks]

I know a church organist who makes 70k per year. It's a job.

 

[golden bronze]

Yes, if that is what the church agrees to they should be paid. I have no problem paying a minister of music, a church secretary, or even a litergical leader if that is what is required to help grow a ministry.

Paying them frees them up so they can devote more time to doing it.

What I have a problem with is people who are just there to get paid. You should be there for God, and as people of God, we should support you on behalf of the service you do for the Lord.

We have some musicians that are paid at our church that believe in other faiths, and will not pray with us, which I have a big problem with. THAT is a major issue.