I like the “no practice” policy in my in-law’s ward chior. Anyone can show up and sing on Sunday in SM. A little risky, but effective in at least one ward.

Participation in ward choir should be a privilege.

Why? If you fear mediocrity, why not force the good singers to come by giving them a calling to sing alongside the amateurs in the choir instead? If such standards are the wave of the future, by the time the millennium rolls around Jesus won’t be accepting converts unless they have post-graduate degrees and 15 years of professional experience.

Our current choir director is a former opera singer/vocal music professor and is one of the most positive, encouraging people I’ve met, even though we are all far below him in terms of talent and ability. I’m sure he doesn’t get any professional fulfillment out of his weekly cat-herding exercise, but I know the ward appreciates our humble offerings.

I disagree.

If the talented singers want to be elitist about it, they can seek each other out in the stake and throw their own little singing gig. Organize a stake-wide choir audition for a special advanced choir that can then sing for community service stuff or even in various ward meetings.

You want to be a music snob, go do it someplace outside the ward, thanks. Because quite frankly, I value slightly off-key sister Schwartzenberg’s feelings a bit more than your esoteric musical needs. Unfortunately, being a part of Zion means having to put up with the un-gifted.

Get used to it.

I’ve seen a version of this happen. We have some stake and multi-stake choirs that seem to sometimes be only for the really talented (sometimes open only to invitation). I think it’s unfortunate. It causes some of the sort of okay singers (me?!) to figure I won’t make the cut and therefore not bother – and then a lot of wonderful experiences with music are missed out on. I think they’re making an effort to change that image….but elitism is hard to get rid of once it’s there.

I don’t imagine the angels that sang when Christ was born had to audition. :0)

As one who has been blessed with a great deal of vocal talent and spent many years cultivating that talent I find singing in a ward choir to be an excruciatingly painful activity. It’s not just boring because when I hear some alto cum soprano strain in vain to hit that G above middle C and come in flat it’s like fingernails on a blackboard. Or hearing each tenor in the choir sing with his own voice just makes me want to poke each one in the Adam’s apple. Those good singers who stick it out for the good of the ward wind up picking up very bad musical habits and slowly devolve into absurd caricatures of their former selves.

Seth:

What’s to solve? Frankly, I don’t care if the ward choir sucks and can’t fathom why anyone else would. If you like singing in the ward choir then do so but leave the rest of us alone who choose not to participate– regardless of our level of talent.

Tagore, you know I’m not going to comment on this.

I don’t think auditioning for choir is a good idea. There are to many people out there that will start complaining about the ‘fairness’ of the issue. You know the people that can become inactive over suggesting that they come to Relief Society.

That being sad, my choir sucks. Not just a little, but lots and lots and lots. I have been in many a ward choir and the director can make it or break it. I was in a Stake Ward choir where the director insisted on you being to all the rehearsals if you want to perform. If you miss more than 2 you are out. I like that idea. You put in the effort and you get to reap the reward, not to mention the fact that most people don’t know how to follow the leader and you sound pretty stupid when the choir is holding a certain note and then someone starts to sing the next verse.

I really don’t like to sing with the arrogant singers anyway, so it might be better that Paul and people like him, just don’t come. There is so much that people can learn from music, and it is sad to see the ones who can sing look down on those who can’t. Music can reach more people than the spoken word can..EVEN.. if you have no musical training.

As tough as it is for me to hear the ward choir sing, I know that someone in there has learned a great deal from their efforts. Aren’t we asked to multiply the talents that the Lord gave us?

“Aren’t we asked to multiply the talents that the Lord gave us?”

I think so, which is why all this glorying in mediocrity seems a little prideful. What is needed is strong and weak musicians putting aside their petty issues and assumptions and working together for the edification of all. For the strong that may mean a bit of tedium. For the weak it means taking the constructive criticism in the spirit in which is it is intended and getting to work on improving skills.

At one point when I had the music chair calling, we had three different level classes on music theory and sightsinging. Some people became much better contributors to choir as a result, and some of the stronger musicians felt like they were contributing in a way that wasn’t useless, creating more independent singers rather than dependent ones. Of course, not every ward has the resources for such a program, but the principle remains.

“As one talented singer explained to me, it’s like playing basketball with someone who doesn’t know how.”

More like trying to read through a script with someone who is illiterate. In the professional church choirs I have sung with in Manhattan, we come in a few minutes before, read through several possibly totally unfamiliar pieces once or twice, and are ready to go. Most ward choirs would take weeks to learn the music if they could learn it at all. (Obviously whether or not we should pay our choirs is the subject of a different post altogether, but the quality would certainly improve with the incentive).

But if we want the good singers to submit to the inevitable tedium of ward choir in the interest of strengthening their brethren, a few things would be helpful. The choir director, if at all possible, should be the best person available for the job. If the thought is that someone could benefit from “growth”, make them the assistant choir director. Nothing is worse than a rehearsal in which all discipline has been lost because the director really has no idea what they’re doing. People’s time is precious and ought to be respected (another reason for people to learn to read music, since, once the basic investment is made, a choir can learn ten times as much music in half the time). The most diplomatic of good musicians can only do so much to steer the rehearsal with tactful questions or comments from a position within the group. And it is wise to keep those contributions to a minimum even in this situation, as it only encourages others who think they know more than they do to start chiming in with irrelevant or pernicious (in its effect if not its intent) commentary. A strong director will ensure that every minute of the rehearsal is being used productively and make it clear that, in most cases, suggestions can be made before or after.

For that very small percentage of people who really have no musical talent at all, and for whom no amount of training will appreciably improve their skills, there is a place for their contributions as well, every week: congregational singing. Unfortunately, often people who could make very good choir singers think of themselves in this category, whereas sometimes those really in this category are totally oblivious, and keep attending rehearsals, their enthusiasm undiminished. Put them next to a good singer whom they can’t distract.

I like the schedule choir practice for the amateurs – but show up and sing on the day if you know you can handle it idea. It’s a bad idea in general to see professional fulfillment from church – that’s not what church is for. Requiring auditions, making people feel bad, and catering to the professionals is definitely not what church is for.

There should be a stake choir that requires auditions and leave the ward choirs open to everyone.

I am in a stake choir that used to be audition only and is now open to the masses. There are clearly some people who wistfully remember the past; there are plenty of talented musicians who no longer participate and others who do but complain about the riff raff.

FWIW, I am a professional teacher and cringe through many lessons at church and elsewhere. I am sure we can all see the wisdom in not requiring that teachers audition, or any of the positions in a typical ward, really.

“Having a nice voice isn’t everything.”

It certainly isn’t. Much more useful for a choir singer is the ability to read music, a skill in which some opera singers and aspiring opera singers are woefully deficient. Singing softly while maintaining an intensity of tone is also much more difficult than just belting it out all the time. So don’t pressure the vocal student to join the choir if they don’t want to be there. It may be a little embarrassing to have to explain that one is not yet confident enough in one’s technique to have the versatility to tone it down without undoing a certain amount of hard-won technical progress. What appears to some as arrogance is sometimes really insecurity. On the other hand, let’s not let the principle that solo voices ought to seek to blend when in a choir serve as an excuse for others not learning proper breath control and vocal production. Because a good singer can only tone it down so far until it becomes pointless.

ESO: Teacher auditions? I like it!

Seth (29): Yes, it does.

I thought you would. I would like Bishop auditions, but once we head down this road, we will be left with not very many people doing anything but attending.

I really do respect the excellent and professional musicians who serve among the rest of us, because I am sure it is very painful. Still, I prefer that humility to the ones who are “too good” for church music.

I tried to solve talent level differences by working many songs at the same time rather than one song for the whole hour. It meant I had to be prepared well in advance (I started a particularly complex Christmas piece [Schubert's The Omnipotence] in August) and commit to only spending a set amount of time on each song. For an hour-long rehearsal I’d probably do 10 minutes warm-up, 15 minutes on the song that was to be performed next, 10 each on two songs that I’ve introduced but are still a month or two off, and 15 minutes introduction to a new song.

That way the high-talents didn’t feel like they spent the entire hour bored while I worked with the others, and the low-talents had plenty of time to get work out what they needed.

DKL,

Would that same priestcraft logic apply to creating an “advanced level” Gospel Doctrine class that people on the bloggernacle keep wishing was a part of Sunday School?

Of course it wouldn’t be exactly the same if anyone in the ward was allowed in there.

But you wouldn’t allow (or at least severely discourage) a new member to attend. Right? At least, many members would be highly tempted to.

DKL: Interesting idea about the correlation between talent and social status. So what if a ward has an American Idol competition as a ward activity? Would that also be priestcraft?

Also, you mention that the gospel isn’t about showmanship. But to what extent are church-related activities the gospel? If a ward has a basketball team, is that part of the gospel?

I am sympathetic with this approach as I mentioned in previous posts, but I think it also depends on how you want to define certain phrases. For instance, in the phrase “willing to participate constructively in the game”, what does “constructively” mean. Because there are certainly people who may be willing, but are incapable of participating in a choir “constructively” from my understanding of the word unless they improve their skills.

There are plenty of scenarios in the church where willingness is not the only criterion. I may wish to participate constructively in the construction of a new building as was once an opportunity, but that function has now been professionalized. I may wish to participate constructively by being an auditor, but that position, while still volunteer, requires certain prerequisites in training.

The Tabernacle Choir uses resources of the church and auditions are required. When we had a temple dedication, unfortunately, there was not room for everyone who would have liked to participate; the weaker singers were generally not chosen. Obviously most ward choirs will take whoever they can get. I remember a few years ago, however, a stake choir that did have a requirement for participation, but it wasn’t anything to do with musical ability. It was no beards allowed.

DKL:

You have used social distinctions part of (your) a definition, at least a descriptor or Priestcraft and referred to the BoM.
Would u care to give a comprehensive definition and give us the BoM references?
Perhaps you have suggestion(s) as to how this can be reduced-eliminated or perhaps mitigated, even in the LDS social & cultural milieu- environment…
I think it is a Serious & Significant problem – situation.

All I’m saying is that there is no necessary reason why choir member could not also be a calling. In some wards that has been the case. Or for that matter, just because it is not now the case is no reason why music could not become part of the professional bureaucracy of the church, as it has in many other churches.

It is really just a convenient distinction to call everything to which one wishes to restrict participation a calling. If glorified congregational singing is all that is wanted, then no great effort is required. If a little more variety, more opportunities for development rather than squandering of talent is wanted, then some rethinking of the status quo could be useful. I’m pretty sure that when I was music chair, and organized a lot of solos and small group ensembles for musical numbers in addition to the choir numbers, that I wasn’t engaging in priestcraft, but was magnifying a calling.

It’s rare, but this post is an instance where I agree with DKL 100%. Once members have self-selected themselves through baptism and participation in the ward, every *activity* should be opened to them.

My ward has RS functions where mothers with children are banned. That’s just disgusting. Choirs with auditions, and basketball teams with tryouts, are disgusting. “Advanced” gospel doctrine classes are disgusting.

Now, I have no problem with wards who offer multiple GD classes and letting the free market decide which one to attend. I don’t think it’s the right approach, but I don’t think it’s that harmful. But to practice an exclusionary mechanism is inappropriate.

Don’t be an idiot, Guy. Priestcraft is when people set themselves apart. God and his judges set people apart all the time.

when Mitt Romney got married, they had ‘an exception’ to the year waiting period….So her family could attend.

47. No one is excluded from the temple. Really, any one can go. The criteria for a recomend is spelled out in black and white, and a recomend can be had by anyone who wishes to have one.

50. That wasn’t the first of last exception to the guidline.

53. The exceptions are in the CHI in black and white.

My understanding (having read it on Sunday) is that basically, the new rule is that if the country with the temple allows for the wedding to actually occur in the temple, that you can’t go to a country that requires a civil wedding and get civilly married first.

So, you cannot fly to France and get a civil marriage in front of family and guests and then return to the US the next day to get sealed.

I.e., can’t have your cake and eat it, too.

Again – I’m willing to concede that there are special circumstances and exceptions. But … I’m OK with the rule as it is. Sometimes you have to make a choice, and if one of my children were to marry someone in the temple whose non-member parents couldn’t attend, I’d be more than willing to sit outside with the other non-member parents.

Don’t change the subject, Guy. We started by discussing how you were wrong to state that Romney enjoyed a special exception. Then we discussed how you were wrong about the fact that the exceptions aren’t recorded anywhere in black and white. Then we talked about how you were wrong about the need to publish the known exceptions for everything. Then I brought up your mutually contradictory assertions that Mormons shouldn’t be concerned with the details and that Mormonism should give more expression to the details. You can’t latch on to the fact that the CHI is treated as confidential to avoid these.

But as long as we’re talking about it, nobody’s governed by the CHI. Attendance and participation in church is altogether voluntary. Regarding marriage exceptions: No matter where you’re getting married, you have to find out how things work from some authority; e.g., where to get licenses or whether you need a blood test. Nowadays, that info is available online for the civil aspects of a marriage, which is an added convenience but has nothing to do with whether talking with state or county “authorities” is “intimidating.” And whether a ward or stake must sustain a certain priesthood advancement hardly constitutes an imposition on the membership.

First of all, you’re really grasping at straws here. Second, your blind determination to mine something negative from each turn of conversation has driven you to make error after error after error. You did the same thing in the thread about the MMM book review by Stapley and Kramer. And it’s pathetic.

At some point, if you were intellectually honest, you’d stop pretending like your previous errors are irrelevant and simply concede that not all of your negative feelings about Mormonism are justified.

re: 56, I did not read the post before posting my previous comment, but what in the world is the harm if a couple flies to France for a civil wedding and flies to the US the next day to be sealed? Or, a civil wedding in Alabama followed the next day by a sealing in Atlanta? When it comes to weddings/marriage, what is possibly wrong with “having your cake and eating it too?” (Insert language re: sanctity of marriage and standard GA quote supporting same.) In other words, why do Mormon weddings have to be such bureaucratic affairs?

Seth,

The thought of it being sweeter is all well and good, but just last year in the SWK manual was a story about a couple that died durring the year long wait. There are alot of people in the church think there are salvific ramifications to this. IMHO, they are wrong, but I’m pretty sure I’m in the minority. I think the current culture/teachings of the church would have to change significantly to clarify a doctrinal grey area and the social stigma that something was morally wrong with one or both of the newlyweds.

The waiting period is probably not a negative thing and may even have the effect of making the sealing sweeter, but why do we force people to choose? What purpose is served?

In my limited experience, I’ve come across several couples who opted to exclude their nonmember parent(s) in favor of a temple marriage and regret that decision. If they could do it all over again, they would choose the civil marriage where everyone could be included and endure the approximate one year probation before being sealed. (I would not be at all surprised if a majority of people who opted for temple marriage over nonmember family participation would go back and do things differently.)

In practice this policy can border on the ridiculous. Consider a previously endowed bride and groom who marry civilly. The day after the honeymoon ends, they can, as a married couple, go to the temple and perform proxy sealings for other married couples, but for some mysterious reason(s) can’t be sealed to each other-at least until around a year later?!?!?!

There may be very good reasons for the rule. To date, I haven’t heard any.

I appreciate the suffering of our Savior more when I go through some of it myself.

LOL. I hadn’t thought about that angle: ward choir as vicarious suffering experience. I’m sure the ward choir directors out there are with you.

I should have said: “Why it applies AT ALL – ANYWHERE”
the Fact that policies like these aren’t easily accessible adds to the ‘mystery’ of church government, Which Shouldn’t be a mystery at all!

re: 69 and 70, I don’t understand what you are trying to say, and I don’t have the interest to do the mental work to try and figure it out. Let me just apologize if my comments gave you more grist for your anti-Church mill. I will end this discussion about the one year waiting period so as not to cause you any more stress in your fractured relationship with the Church.

Back to the OP; I agree that some ward choirs, especially any that are desperate enough to include me, would induce vicarious suffering for audience members.

Try outs are a great idea. As to other areas that might benefit from try outs, I would add high council speakers to the suggestions already made.

One of the mysteries here is how this got stuck on marriage waiting periods in the first place.

I have no problem with ugly people getting married in the temple. Perhaps the waiting period should be extended, but I favor keeping temple doors open for ugly people, if only out of a sense of self interest.

(Seriously) Just exactly whom does a / any waiting period serve? Where / How does it (+ others) fit into the ‘missions (objectives) of the church?
DKL: In case you didn’t know, Mitt’s dad George was probably the one behind the curtain pulling the strings; Governor of Michigan, head of American Motors (sold LOTS) of those mish cars, including the one Elder Cherry died in without a shoulder belt).
Silly Rule(s)? Silly exceptions? I stand behind what I said. Smacks of favoritism, Especially when the man behind the curtain makes the rules “Confidential”.

Guy, I know who George Romney is, and take it from me: You’re no George Romney!

But let me get this straight: On the one hand, you accuse the Mormon church of controlling its members. On the other hand, you accuse its members (like George Romney) of controlling the church. Which is it, Guy?

None of this changes the fact that your accusation of special treatment turned out to be wrong. Can we at least get an admission of that simple fact? You’ve been wrong on this blog more than all other participants combined — including Dan. (Just kidding, Dan.) And I’ve yet to see you acknowledge a single error. You just continue to find fault where no fault is to be found, and pretend like your previous errors don’t undercut your credibility.

When it comes to Christ-like behavior, you’re a real jewel. (Hint: Christ wants you to be intellectually honest.)

Oh and Kyle: does your advice apply to all who don’t buy the package from the Corp? Are all those who don’t buy into the endless details of Mormonism suspect?
right.
tCoJCoLDS is more like a franchise than a church.

Guy, four things:

First, asserting that there were some exceptions printed in the CHI proves just as much as your assertion that it was a special exception. Plus, I’ve been backed up by other commenters.

Second, saying that I’d make this up to defend the church doesn’t even sound true.

Third, arj is right. Check it out for yourself.

Fourth, your persistence on this issue of the alleged Romney-sealing exception and your unwillingness to admit that you’ve been wrong about anything you’ve commented about (e.g., me controlling the outcome of threads on this blog, the MMM book being a whitewash, etc.) indicates that you are not to be trusted

Fifth, It takes a twisted, dishonest man to suspect twisted, dishonest behavior from every Mormon he deals with.

Sixth, you’re shaping up to be the stupidest person I’ve encountered online.

I googled “Mennonite weddings” and the top hit says “Very little can be found in church records concerning American Mennonite wedding practices before the 20th century.” What are those Mennonites hiding about their 19th century weddings that they wouldn’t even put anything into their records? Not that I care, I just bring it up as a courtesy to this site’s Mennonite guest who’s upset about the Romney-Davies wedding 40 years ago and asking for documentation.

Just looking through this blog, noting who’s most involved. Guy, you sure spend a lot of time dissing the church you left. Aren’t there Mennonite blogs where you could celebrate your new faith and take joy in the good things of Christ? Isn’t it a bit of a rut to complain about something which is no longer a part of your life?

All right, Tagore, I’ll finally give you my two cents. As others have already pointed out on this thread, I don’t think auditions are the answer (and I don’t think you were 100% serious about it, but, no matter, it’s still interesting to discuss).

It is my opinion that, in most situations, ward choir cannot be “fixed” in terms of making it more artistically accomplished. True, a competent director can make any group better than they are, but the inclusion of people with little to no talent, the fact that a conductor rarely has the same group of people from one week of rehearsal to the next, and the fairly limited amount of time that can practically be devoted to rehearsal each month severely limit its potential.

Some directors may find themselves more or less fortunate in each of these circumstances (e.g. having people “called” to be members of the choir), and their choir may be generally better or worse as a result (and yes, there are the occasional perfect storms of circumstances in which ward choirs can transcend all three of these things). However, on average, most directors just have to recognize and accept that, despite their best efforts, they are unlikely to ever raise their choirs out of the slums of sub-mediocrity.

That being said, does it matter? Not really. The purpose of ward choir is to enhance worship services through song and help fellowship those that participate. As is the case with individual musical numbers, no one needs to be a brilliant musician to bear their testimony and invite the spirit through music (yes, it helps sometimes, but it is not strictly necessary). If we all had to be professionals at what we do in church, no one would ever serve in any capacity. A good choir director knows this, grits their teeth, does the best they can with what they have, and turns a blind eye to the rest. That’s all you can ever really expect. Sometimes this entails letting fixable problems go unattended in order to not offend anyone (e.g. those wannabe opera-singing old ladies that don’t blend but have high opinions of their abilities), but so be it. Letting people participate and feel involved is more important than musical perfection.

However, I don’t think that more musically talented people should feel obligated to participate. No one walks around judging professional graphic designers for not volunteering to help make the printed program look better – every single week. No one judges all the lawyers for not volunteering to give free legal advice every Sunday after church for an hour – for as long as they live. (I know these aren’t the best examples, but you get the idea.) Obviously it’s great if they do, but nobody expects it. As with these people, there are lots of other ways that musicians can use their talents to help build the kingdom (even in musical ways), we should let them worry about that and not police it. Besides, since the consensus is that lack of talent should not keep you from participating (screw talent!), an overabundance of talent should not keep you from not participating.

Choir is extra-curricular. Who wouldn’t like to minimize the time they spend in Sunday meetings, especially ones that they don’t like and, strictly speaking, don’t have to attend? Tagore’s friend’s basketball analogy sums it up perfectly. Some have more patience than others… and if they do, good for them. If they don’t, perhaps it’s better if they don’t show up if it’s going to make them struggle with un-Christlike thoughts the whole time.

There is plenty of room for musical snobs in the church as long as they aren’t naïve enough to be snobby about church music – it is not a battle they can win.

ctlewis,

I’ve asked someone very nicely to please write coherently. I appears that I was asking too much.

82. Nope, just you. Let’s get serious, Guy. It took you 40 years to figure out what you think you’ve figured out. Either you don’t catch on too quickly, or you’re new impression of the church is off base. It could be both.

ctlewis- Your comments regarding auditions and the inability to ever truly “fix” a ward choir is right on the money.

I consider myself a decent vocalist (i.e. I can carry a tune, sing both S&A parts, follow a conductor, and read music) but nothing near a professional. I participate in the ward choir when I can and try to lend support to the poor guy/gal who was called as Choir Director (all the while very grateful it wasn’t me!). I have found that participating in the choir can be uplifting as well as occasionally trying. If there were stricter guidelines for participating, I probably wouldn’t show up at all so the lack of auditions and the Choir Director’s inability to toss me out on my ear should I slack for a few weeks means I continue to show up on a semi-regular basis. Regardless, the congregation members can only become justifiably critical if they actually participate in the choir to make it better so I try not to worry about that and make my best effort to blend with the wannabe opera-singing old ladies even if I can barely hear myself.

rbc (59) said

As I recall, the rule about waiting a year to be sealed was beat to death in the bloggernacle, but I can’t remember the discussion producing any good reason(s) for the rule. To me it seems silly and awfully punitive on part member families.

This is going to come off as inflammatory … but quite honestly, I think the focus is on the couple, not their families. I don’t think the Church particularly cares about the part-member families, and I don’t know that they should. A marriage is about the couple, not the mother.

The Mo Tab has auditions. They’re intense. And WHY? Because we don’t want to hear crappy singing at General Conference. Church pageants have auditions as well. And I could write a book about how auditions for BYU productions were the most competitive, cut-throat auditions of my life.

For the ward choir audition, please bring 2 contrasting pieces, 16 bars in your key. Accompanist will be provided. No McClean, please.

Shout out to my boy Tagore: Good on ya for developing your talent and giving your time to ward choir. I’m a singer myself…but sorry Tagore, I don’t dance.

Hi! My name is ___________ and I am a choir director on the ward level.

I completely understand your frustrations. We would always only like to hear the good singers, but reality is that the Spirit doesn’t always work exclusively through those people who are musically gifted.

When I became the current choir director I initiated in our first meeting a private voice check. I wanted to hear everyones range so that I would not select inappropriate music (meaning totally out of range), to ensure that people were singing the correct part and to also track the choirs vocal progression. I had plans to check again half-way through the year. However, this freaked everyone out. I assured them it wasn’t an audition but it was too overwhelming for them. I couldn’t get a clear idea of their range either because they were too shaky and scared. Do they sound like this when we are singing as a choir? No way! They sound great and should have had nothing to fear, but the idea of an “audition” was too much for them. It was a big mistake.

Just thought I would share my experience with this topic.

As a Bishop let me first say Auditions for a Ward Choir are against the Church Policy. It is a moot point.

Second – I truly feel if a group of Saints got together as the Ward Choir and sang a simple hymn (hymnplicity or some other simply arrangement from the hymnbook) and they sounded decent, the spirit would be felt and the congreagation would be edified.

@1)

We have the same problem at my branch. We have someone who has been trained as a classical pianist. He thinks that the piano in the branch belongs to him, he refuses to let anyone else play. The BP as a result, doesn’t think anyone else can play, but they can but once this person comes in he kicks the person off the piano because according to him they don’t play well enough. Pure rubbish. On the other hand, we have someone who is trained to sing as a professional Opera singer, he has quite a different attitude. Its’ a joy to listen to him, but not the other person because of his behavior.

WOW! Thanks for all of the posts and ideas. I have just been called to be choir director. Half of our choir from a number of years ago stopped coming because 1) the director wasted too much time bearing testimony instead of practicing 2) there are simply too many people who are tone deaf. I mean really bad! Our choir sounds terrible. I am no professional but I can’t stand singing next to somebody who can’t hold a note. Many come because they love the socializing at practice. I have been critical of the choir and now find myself with the calling. Worst calling in the Church. Or should I say – toughest calling in the church. And the church doesn’t make it any easier by disallowing orchestration that would liven things up a bit and help the poor singers sound better. Admit it – when it comes to boring music, Mormons have a monopoly. When the choir gets up everyone cringes. Its not edifying. It’s downright disappointing. Wish me luck.

Uh…..delayed reaction? I bet he’s over it by now.