orientation and there is no rigid formula for deciding whether an employee qualifies as a minister that he was terminated in two thousand and fifteen in two thousand and fourteen mr straw once he had been demoted he was a full time employee in order to be a part time at that time many of the duties that he had previously did yes he wrote it during a mass during during religious functions whenever he was required but what he did was play an organ he played what he was told hundred ninety two through twenty fifty he probably played the same some of the same music perhaps twenty five thousand times that's how often he played it so often that it could be considered to be  sure what your argument is i'm sorry your honor could you repeat that question yes i have two questions one are you contending that the church's statement about when music plays a your honor we do that ok thank you but we are saying though is that what mr stern when he actually did it you don't need to have music and a religious ceremony there although he did not have the final say but part of the discussion in that case and part of his holding was had to do with the meaning of music at the catholic mass and certainly focused on the fact that even as a mere performer of the music mr tallman was still a important part of the religious ceremony would it follow that the janitor is a minister and not to the importance of that symbology judges do but not necessarily but let's make a distinction between your example i'm worried about not necessarily that implies that sometimes the janitor is a minister well the only reason i'm hesitating is that as you observed earlier differences nominations assigned different tasks and roles and have different beliefs about the employees of their own churches on behalf of the catholic bishop we're not making the claim performs in for presenting the religious worship ceremony is a minister for the purposes of the ministerial exception that is the face of the church to a congregation that is the actual interaction with the congregation in conducting worship there really but many protestant denominations  point is that mr lindh ski's argument that he played only in the traditional matter manner as directed by the pastor only played the notes that were on the page maybe played robotically serve only to confirm that there is a message in that that there matter of the difference between a person a case that requires no further inquiry and cases that raise questions where court needs to inquire whether the employee who is either not regained or not quite obviously a minister nonetheless performing religious functions and has on the table you have a teacher just as this court dealt with in groups got where there was an argument made that because the person was a teacher and what they did was arguably secular that therefore they were not a minister for the p and the courts and we don't just call it a drop because it's two factors to two factors what matters is the essential religious function that the person was performing so i don't think there's a reason for concern or was on the table or going out the window it's a matter of the nature   during during the offertory so i'm not going to go as far as the usher and say they can't be the minister but that the security guard we could see would not be because what they're put obviously doing and even even a strong army answer no if you of the church what really is a stake in this case is a church is right to control its own worship service there's nothing that receives a greater level of first amendment protection than that and although we can get