I don't think that is a valid comparison, but I'll answer anyway.
Is it the usual and accepted procedure for members to make announcements at that point in time without permission or prior knowledge of the subject?
If yes, then I would have no basis to call it deceitful. (I could easily agrue that it is wrong on other grounds, but that's another matter.)
jw
Why is the comparison invalid?
Suppose, having sponsored the performer, it were your assigned role to introduce the performance and then thank the performer afterwards? If you must, take it out of the sanctuary and put it in some other church-related setting that is more extemporaneous than the regular service.
If you did this, you would have with malice aforethought disrupted a church meeting simply because you disagree with the doctrine expressed at the meeting. Isn't that what Harvey did at the Colorado legislature?