Minister of Music, Director of Music, and Pastoral Care

Methodist Musicians List recently had a lively discussion about church musicians and pastoral and spiritual care. During the rather extended exchange of thoughts and ideas, the most commonly expressed belief was that those in musical leadership positions were truly ministers of music. They were pastoral musicians who cared for the well-being of the musicians they led as well as others in the congregation and community.

There was some disagreement on whether this pastoral aspect of music leadership should be included in a job description. Should it enter into compensation consideration? Is it, perhaps, an expected part of the job? One list member wrote the following:

It's not included in any of our job descriptions because it's a given. I would question it if it were given a referral. It's who we are, in our DNA. Something that intricate to our very being rates right up there with breathing and having a pulse. Without those, we're dead. Same thing for all those things you'd like to see referenced somewhere. Without them, we're dead.

I must disagree. While it is true that many of us see this as a given, as an obvious and important part of our work and ministry, this is by no means universally so. It is not a given. There are many church musicians for whom their position is employment. It is a job. They have entered into an agreement with a church to perform certain tasks and functions for specific remuneration. Pastoral care and ministry is simply not part of the job. Someone can recoil in horror at the thought, or shriek in disgust or disbelief, but it is actually quite common in churches. The choir director or organist shows up to lead the choir in rehearsal, worship, and performance…period. I have no argument with that model if that's what the musician and congregation agree to do. If pastoral care, spiritual growth, and personal ministry to participating musicians or the congregation is to be part of the employed musician's position, then that should be spelled out in a job description, agreed to in an employment contract, and stipulated and considered during the interview and hiring process. If this were the case, then everyone's on the same page and the possibility of conflict is greatly reduced. It is part of treating the musician professionally, and it is part of the musician meeting the needs and expectations of the congregation. I'm not much of a fan of placing unspoken, unspecified requirements and expectations on an employed church musician.

The United Methodist Book of Discipline, paragraph 340, lists the Responsibilities and Duties of Elders and Licensed Pastors, several of which include the pastoral care of church members. Musicians are not so covered by The Discipline and are left to negotiate their own employment agreement, job description, and compensation with the local congregation. This is too important an area to be left unspoken, undiscussed, and unattended to officially by all parties. There is nothing dishonorable about a choir director seeing his or her sole function as directing the choir in rehearsal and worship. Likewise, it is entirely appropriate for a congregation to expect its music director to exercise pastoral care and ministry for choir members. What is wrong is when the expectation or need of the congregation and choir do not coincide with the expectations of the musician. The expectations must be discussed, agreed to, and formalized in an employment agreement or job description and compensation.

The differences between minister, pastor, and director are often nebulous and the terms come to be adopted, assigned, or used without much thought to their implications for the work. Would that every musician had a mutually planned and agreed upon job description and separate employment agreement, the latter including compensation.