http://www.buzz24.org/story.php?title=jenifer-lopez-perfume

It becomes tougher than you think.

Pay the plumber, pay the pastor, pay the sparky, pay the cleaner, pay the musician. A fair days work for a far days wages. And if you have a pastor that is really really good at teaching scripture. pay him double! (1 timothy). That’s biblical.

Feed the poor – with good meals. Clothe the naked – with good clothes. Build buildings of quality, buy things of quality, be lavish. Use the good silver. Use the nice perfume. be generous in all areas.

Let’s be honest, churches don’t pay musicans because everyone thinks it’s just fun fun fun and there are so many wannabe players hoping to play.

We settle for the cheapest available. Sometimes that’s all you can get, but is church musicians were properly looked after there’d be a far higher standard of art glorifying God – instead the world has by far more interesting music than the standard church fare – because that’s where the money is. Everyone has to eat.

Didn’t the temple musicicians get fed and taked care of as part of the preists in the old testament? It means people can really focus on their jobs.

Handel’s “Messiah” exists because it was commissioned by the church – or at least King George, head of the church in those days.

Many of the composers were employed by the church – in their day that music was the at cutting edge.

Today church penny pinchers put up with bland out of tune music whenever they can get away with it. “Money better used for the poor” is a common argument.

If you pay your church admin people but not your musicians then clearly something is upside down.

Of course, every church should spend it’s money with wisdom. There nothing wrong with volunteer players, my point is that there are basically only volunteers everywhere. Artists have to sell Cd’s and market themselves just to put food on the table. What a shame.

Sorry I don’t have anything worthwhile to add – other than:

- I’m glad churches have the autonomy to make these types of choices themselves.
- I agree that musicians are worth their weight in gold, as are children’s workers who change my daughters poopie diapers…
- I agree that “pastors” are charged with “equipping” people to do the work of the ministry (however you define that – for me it’s building those relationships ie community). That’s what they should get paid for – lot’s of people can preach/teach/lead worship – it takes a pastors heart to build a church.
- I think any statement like “I would never pay/not pay” is really stupid.
- I’m glad we have this place to talk, thank you Los and everyone…

….OK….I’m over it.

Part of it is I know of at least 2 churches in SoCal (Sandals being one) that fall into the mega-church category, don’t pay their bands, and have awesome worship experiences.

To the point that there are some paid position, ie. pastor, worship pastor, etc. – true. However, I do think there is a discussion as to what those people are paid to do. Yes I am paid, full time at my church. Yes, I do lead worship among other responsibilities every Sunday morning, and I do consider this part of what I get paid to do. However, I don’t see that as my primary reason for being paid. Biblically, I feel like I am here ful-time with the goal of equipping others to do ministry. I’m not sure where this discussion goes or how it effects the issue exactly, but it seemed worth bringing up to me.

At the risk of sounding uncaring or un-understanding, I’d rather have a slightly lower quality of music with a higher quality of worship due to hearts of service. I think if you have a church the size of Saddleback, or Willow, and are in an area where there are lots of artists, and you can’t find enough quality musicians who want to volunteer their time for worship, could there be a deeper issue there? Either you don’t have enough musicians and you have to ask yourself why, or they are unwilling to give of themselves for the mission and vision of the church (within reason, of course) and you have to ask yourself why.

Church-hopping week-to-week for the paycheck has not-so-good feel to me.

However on the topic of paying musicians…I hope I don’t come off egotistical here…

When considering who should get paid and who shouldn’t, I tend to look at this issues in the light of “Who HAS to be in place to get the job done?”

Who are the Sunday Morning Critical Components that are necessary to have in place to meet the God-Given Focus and Mission of the church?

If your worship leader HAS to be there on Sunday Morning to make it all work, chances are he/she’s committing a lot of time and effort into that job. They probably have been sick as a dog but had to drag themselves in to lead more than once. This person is a Critical Component. IF the budget allows, pay him or her.

Same for musicians. If the church goal requires excellent musicians and the budget allows, pay them. Gear isn’t cheap and even a small bone from time-to-time helps, right?

I don’t want to sound egotistical, but there is a difference between ‘Critical Components’ – those WHO must be there to make things happen – and ‘Important Components’ – those who do important work but can more easily be filled-in for or replaced. Yeah, when it comes down do it, we can all be replaced, but you know what I mean.

Tony….shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! If Oscar reads this he’ll only offer food for me…I need food for the family…ha!

Los, I forget people actually read my blog and know me a little….HA! I thought we were supposed to get together sometime and play….I emailed you (sniff) and never heard back….(sniff, sniff).