Thoughts on Exclusive Psalmody

by W. Gary Crampton

Chapter XXI, of The Westminster ConfessionO/Faith, has to do with "Religious Worship, And The Sabbath Day." There we read, in section I, that:

" ... the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by Himself, and so limited by His own revealed will, that He may not be worshipped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation, or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scripture."

This doctrine concerning worship is referred to as the "regulative principle (orrule) of worship. "This has always been the governingfactorregardingformal, public worship within Reformed churches; that is, only that which God commands in the Bible is to be permitted in formal worship. In fact, Reformed scholars avow that, "itis sinful toattemptto worship Godin anyway notprescribedinHis Word"; it is a violation of the second commandment (JosephC. Morecraft,III,A ChristianManuaIO/Law,pp. 33,34; cf. WLCQ 108,109). Scriptura1supportforthiscan befoundinDeuteronomy 12:32,Leviticus 10: 1-3,Matthew 15:9, and Colossians 2:23. (For more on this, see Carl Bogue, The Scriptural Law O/Worship.)

What, according to Westminster, is so commanded by God? In section 5 of chapter XXI, we read that, along with prayer (which is mentioned in sections 3,4,6):

'The reading of the Scriptures with godly fear, the sound preaching and conscionable hearing of the Word, in obedience unto God, with understanding, faith, and reverence, singing of Psalms with grace in the heart; as also, the due administration and worthy receiving of the sacramentsinstitutedbyChrist, areallparts of the ordinary

religious worship of God: beside religious oaths, vows, solemnfastings, and thanksgivings upon special occasions, which are in their several times and seasons, to be used in an holy and religious manner."

For the purpose of our study, we will focus on the phrase, "singing of Psalms with grace in the heart" Is Westminster restricting the church to the exclusive use of Psalms in formal worship? Axe those churches which practise the singing of "hymns and spiritual songs with melody (or grace) in their hearts" (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16), both of the inspired (i.e., canonical; cf. 1 Cor. 13: 1-8a; Phil. 2:6-11; Col. 1:15-18; 1 Tim. 3:16; Heb. 1:3; 1 Pet. 3:18-20; Rev. 4:8,11; 5:9,10,12,13),1 and uninspired (Le., non-canonical; e.g., "Amazing Grace," "Holy, Holy, Holy")varieties, along with thePsalms, non-confessional? That is the question that is facing much of Reformed Christendom today.

FITst, it should be stated that even if the majority of Puritans at Westminster were exclusive Psahnodists, this does not mean that one is non-confessional if he is not an exclusive Psalmodist. That is, chapter XXI of the Confession does not denounce the use of inspired or uninspired hymns and songs. It merely calls for the "singingofPsalms"as one "part"oftheregulativeprinciple.

Says Westminster, those elements listed in section 5, "are all paris of the ordinary religious worship of God" [emphasis added]. That is, they are to be included in such worship, butthey are not necessarily to be considered "all inclusive." For example, chapter XXI does not mention the giving of tithes and offerings as a part of formal worship. Is it therefore non-confessional for a Reformed fellowship to collect tithes during the worship service? Hardly! (cf. 1 Cor. 16:1,2). Interestingly, Douglas Kelly, Hugh McClure, and Philip B. Rollinson, in their New Edition (a modem day translation) of The Westminster Confession Of Faith, translate this portion of section 5, "Worship should include these ... " [emphasis added] (i.e., those elements listed above). Perhaps this is why A.A. Hodge, in commenting on this section of the Confession, strongly suggests that we can summarize the statement "singing of Psalms," with the phrase, "singing of praise" (i.e., not necessarily to be restricted to the Psalter) (The Confession O/Faith, p. 279).

The Witness Of Church History

There is little question that through the centuries of church history exclusive Psalmody has been heavily endorsed by those within the Reformed community. But

May 1991 • The Counsel of Chalcedon • 9

it ,has not been monolithically so. For example, RG. Rayburn writes that the most basic fonn of worship in the earlychurchincluded,notonlythereadingandexposiiion of Holy Scripture, prayers, and the proper adininistration of the sacraments, butaIso theuse of Psalm singing, as well 'as the singing of both Inspired and uninspired hYmns (EvangelicaIDiciioizaryOjTheology, edited by Walter A Elwell, p. 1193). ' ,

, ", "

Likewise, H.M. Best and D, Huttar aver that the early church did not in any way restrict itself to, the singing of Psalms, even though the Christian community was very careful as, to how it conducted itself in fOrmal worship. Paul's admonition to theEphesiaris (5.19) and ColOssians (3:16) to sing "Psalms, hymns/ and spiritUal songs" was understood to mean that the church was being el1i()ined to

, worship the Triune God bymeans of both inspired and uninspired songs of praise. These two passages were not

, col1Sidered to restrict the church to "exclusive Psalmody" {a position which the exclusive Psalmodists adopt; see "below} (the Zbndervan Pictorial EncyClopedia Of The Bible [ZPEB], Vol. N, pp. 318,319). '

This is further confirmed by church historian C. Gregg Singer. In his "l.eCtlires On Church History," Singer maintains thatexc1usive Psalmody was never the majority report within Christendom until the time of the Puritans (Le., 11th century). In the poot- Apostolic church, the Psalter was USed in formal worship, along ' With ,other "hymns and spirittial songs," albeit, the use of the Psalter was roundlyendorsed. " , '

On the one hand, the Canons of Laodicea(AD. 360, canon 59} forbade the singing of uninspired hymns in the worshipservice. The Council of Chalcedon (AD. 451) followed suite, as did the Second COimcil of Braga, Portugal (c; AD. 563, canon 12). Yet, none of these outlawed inspired hymns and spiritUal songs (i.e., those found within the New Testament canon; see above).

Thelater Secohd Council of Tours, France (AD. 567, canon23},andtheFourthCouncilofToledo, Spain (A,D. 633), on the other hand, defended theuse of non-c!lfionical hymns. The early church had such fourth centUry hymnwriters as , Ephraem, Gregory Nazianzen, and Ambrose, who Wrote in Syriac,Oreek; and Latin, respectively; and the seventh centUry boasted of the Anglo-Saxon ,hymnwriter Caedmon (Rowland Ward, Psalm-Singing In Scripture AndHistory, pp. 25,26).

Some of the ReformerS likeWise held to the view that ,the only proper songs to be used in formal worship are

10 ° The Counsel of ChaiCedOilo May 1991

those found Within Scripture. But these did not normally adoptan"exclusive"Psalmodyview. JohnCalvinpreferred the congregational singing of Psalms, Without musical accompaniment Yet, he also used a metrical version of the Ten COnimlUidments and the Lord's, Prayer in formal worship (along with the recitation of the Apostles' Creed) (Ward,lbid., pp. 27-30; J.W. Keddie, WhyPsaImsOnly? p.IO).

The WeStminster Assembly (the English Puritans) sponsoredametrical translation of the 150 biblicali>saIins. A metrical version of the Psalter to, be used in fonnal worship was also prepared by the American Puritans (and Pilgrims) .. Leland Ryken agrees With Singer, that the majoptyrepon among the Puritan theologians was that of exclusive Psalmody, Noteworthy, however, is the fact that the Apostles' Creed was frequently recited in Puritan worshiJ;l services -anactw~hmostexclusivePsalmodists consider a violation of tile regulative principle cited above (Worldy Sairits;pp. 1l9-124;'cf. Ward, Op. dt., pp.35-

. 4O). Yet,PuritanWrlterssuchasJohnBimyandidcompoSe hymns, which maY have (?) occasionally been used in formal worship (Keddie,Op. cit., pp: 1O,11).

With the coming of the' eighteenth centUry, thechilrch, in general, tetlimed to the use of inspired and uninspired hymns along with thePsiUter. HYnni , writers such as BenjarninKeach,IsaacWatts, John Newton, and William Cowper, were instrumental in this movement Basically, since that time, except for apiut of the Scottish church (e.g., Free ChurCh of sCotland), the majority ofRefonned

, communitieshav~! followed suite (ibid.). ' . ,

The Witi:less Of Scripture

The witness of churchb,istory, of course, is notour stanolU"d for determining sucb matters. Scripture alone is to be our guideline. ,It is here that the present writer finds no conclusive support for, the "exclusive", use of the, m.etrical Psalter in formal, public wor~hip,

LeOnard Coppes, ' in his Exclusive Psalmody And Progressive Revelation - A Response (pp. 1-18), argues that the numerous songs which existed in Old Testament

, Israel; priOt to the formation of the Psl!lter, mili,ta:tes against "exclusive" Psalmody (ie" the Psalter "only''). He contends that other songs were, obviously used in the Hebrew's worship of God. For example, inExodus 15 we have the Song of Moses (w. 1~18; which is likewise; repeatedinheavenlyworship: cf. Rev. 15:3), and the song ofMiriam(vv.20,21}. AndinJudges5, we have the song of Deborah (see also Num. 10:35,36; 21:17,18). (J.B.

Payne is incomplete agreementwithCoppes[ZPEB, Vol. IV,pp. 924-947].) Even the inspired Psalmist (ps. 119:54) speaks of the Mosaic statutes (cf. Dt 4:8), and not simply the Psalter, as being his songs.

Likewise, Dr. Coppes maintains that the heavenly songs found in the book of Revelation (e.g., chapters 4,5,7,11) lend to the use of more than 150 Psalms informal worship. After all, we in the New Testament community have, through our Mediator Jesus Cluist, already entered into heavenly worship (cf. Heb. 2:12,13; 9:24; 10:19-22; 12:22).2 He writes,

'sing a new song unto the Lord' [e.g., Pss. 33:3; 96:1; 98:1], and as the church answers this call in Cluistian Psalmody (celebrating redemption in Christ) it bears witnesstothepresentactionofGodinthefaith-<:ommunity, and to the presence of Christ who Himself sings praise in the worshipping congregation (Heb. 2: 12)" (The Biblical DoctrineOfW orship, aSymposium of worship, published by the RPCNA, p. 284).

Second, in the Philippians 2:6-11 hymn, the first century church has properly taken the most sacred name of Jesus

and incorporated it into a " ... the biblical standard for song in worship is faithfuloess to what has been revealed and not inspiration ... Therefore, the regulative principle does not obviate the use of uninspired songs in worshipwhetherprivate or public" (Op. cit., pp. 1,2). Coppes's point is that as long as the uninspired hymn is biblically correct, then it should be allowed in the worship of God.

"in the Philippians 2:6-11 hymn, the first century church has properly

taken the most sacred name of Jesus and incorporated it into a "spiritual song". It is a hymn

"spiritual song" (vv. 9-l1).ltisahymnofpraise to the Lord Jesus, who as t:he divine Kurios, is the fulfillment of the Yahweh enthronement Psalms (e.g., Pss. 93:1; 97:1; 99:1). The church gladly confesses in song that "Jesus is Lord (Kurios)." An exclusive Psalmodist can never take the Savior's name upon his lips in formal worship; thatis, the name "Jesus" is not found in the Psalter. This, in the present writer's opinion, is a serious error.

of praise to the Lord Jesus, who as the divine Kurios, is the fulfillment

of the Yahweh entronement Psalms (e.g. Pss. 93:1; 97:1; 99:1).

There are several seemingly insuperable biblical obstacles that exclusive Psalmody must deal with. First, it would seem that the

The church gladly confesses in song that "Jesus is Lord (Kurios). " An exclusive Psalmodist can never

take the Savior's name upon his lips in formal wors,hip; that is, the name "Jesus" is not found in the Psalter."

Third, it is difficult to determine how we are to differentiate between

various usages of the New Testament "hymns," such as Colossians 1:15-18, Philippians2:6-11, and soforth(seeabove), would give us every reason to utilize such songs in the formal worship of God. As noted, the redeemed saints in heaven are cited as singing such hymns in their worship (cf. Rev. 4: 10,11; 5:11,12). And, as noted, we have already entered into such heavenly worship.

Along this line, Joseph Hill comments: "As the church remembers and continuously experiences the event of cross and resurrection, and anticipates the fulfillment of Cluistian hope, it must continue to formulate new expressions of praise , always, however, in basic conformity to the paradigmatic Psalms and Christ-hymns of the Scriptures. The call to worship includes the invitation to

teaching by means of "preaching," "singing," and' 'reciting,'' of biblical truth. In Ephesians 5:19, we are told to "speak" Oaleo) to one another, and in Colossians 3: 16, to "teach" (didasko) one another, "by means of Psalms, hyrrms, and spiritual songs." Yet, Paul also instructed Timothy to "teach" (didasko) (1 Tim. 4:11; 6:2) and to "preach" (kerusso) (2 Tim. 4:2) to his congregation, presumably from the pulpit, in formal worship (though certainly notto berestrictedto this). Now is it really conceivable that it is biblically proper to preach the truth found in the Apostles' Creed: that Jesus Christ "descended into hell [on the cross]," and not to be able to sing or recite this same truth because it is nowhere found "exactly so worded" in Scripture. This is far from likely; indeed, it is nonsensical. It would seem that the church would ha veevery biblical warranttoformulate Scripturally

May 1991 • The Counsel of Chalcedon • 11

based uninspired hymns, songs, creedal statements, etc., and incorporate them into the fonnal worship of God !IS a means of praising Him, and teaching one another. .

,I : . ; : "

"Now is it really conceivable that it is .,

biblically proper to preach the truth

found in the Apostle's Creed: that

Jesus Christ 'descended inti> hell

(on the cross),' and not to be al?~. to

sing or recite this same truth beCause .

it is nowherefound (exactly so

worded' in Scripture. This is far

from likely; indeed, it ,iS nonsensical.

contend thatthis fact thereby asserts that Paul is restri~gt1Ie church to .exclusive Psalmody in formal worship is as clelit: a ~ of question-beggir)g as one could ask for.

William Hendriksen, for example, inbis NTC: Galatians aiId Ephesians, ,in commenting on Ephesians 5:19, . states, 'The term psalms in all probability has reference, at least mainly, to the OldTestamentPsalter; hymns, mainly to New Testament songs of praise to God and to Christ..and finally, spiritual SOIIgs, mainly to ,sacred lyrics dwelling on themes other than direct praise to God and .. Christ , There may; however, be some overlapping in themeanjng of these three tenns as used here l)y PaiJl.'~ With this skilled commentator, there is oot even a ,hiIlt thi¢-Paul is speaking solely to the use of the PSiIlter.

FF,Bruoe,inhisNIC On11r!iNew Testament:TheEpistles to the Colossians, to Philemon. and to' ~he Jl,phesiatis, says, regarding the PaiJliIiellsage of psalms, hymns, and Spiritual songs in Colossians 3:16, "It is unlikelY that any ~'y demarcated division is intended, althOugh the 'psalins; might

Ilwould seem that the churt;h

would haVe every bibliCalwarrantlo

formulate Scripturally based uninspired

hymns, songs, cre¢lkd statements, etc.,

and incorporate them into the formal

worship of God as a means of praiW,ng

.' be drawn from\he .OT Psalter (which has supplied a chief [N .B.: noube only; WGC] vehicle for praise from primitive times), the 'hymns' might ~ ChriStian c3rtticl~ (some of which are reproduced, in whole orin part, in the NT text), and the 'spiritual songs' mightile unpremeditated words song 'in the Spirit,' voicing holy aspirations:" Further, in a footnote concerning this Colossian 3: 16 issue, Bruce avers that, "It is uulikely that the psalmOi [psalms] and lninmoi [hyinns] and odai pneuma!ikai [spiritual songs ] should be confined to three types of COIllposition speCified in the Hebrew tiUes to the OT Psalter." ' '

Him, and teaching one, another."

JosephHill, here, contends that biblicaUybased hymns are the''ultimateformoftheology,''inthatthey are ~thdoxological and theologiCal. Such hymns, says Hill,are at one and the same time a word to God and a wordabout,God. As sucll, t\ley are definitely a means ofteachlng within the churCh oUesus aIlist (Op. cit .. p. 282).

Andfourth,theEphesians5:19andColossians3:16passages strongly suppon, not only the use of Psalms, but also the use of other biblically based hymns and songs. Exclusive Psalmodists contend that these verses refer exclusively to the Psalter. That is, they correctly note that the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament, the Septuagint (LXX), uses these three words (titles) in the superscription of its version of the Psalter. The word l'salm (psalmos) is found 67 times, hymn (humnos) occurs 13 times, and song (odee) is found 36 times. In the superscription of Psalm 76, all three occur (cf. Ward, Op. cit. pp. 8~t2; Keddie, Op. cit.; pp. 5-7). But to

12 • The Counsel of Chalcedon • May 1991

Finally, John Calvin. the prince of exegetes, says, ~Tbey . [the three words under study] ani commiJIily distin~hed in this way - that a psalm is that, in the singing of which some musical instrument besides the tongue is made use of: a hymiI is properly a song of praise, whedleritbesungsinlplywitli:thi:, ' voice or otherwise; while an ode contains not merly praises, but exhortations and other matters. He [paw] would have the' songs of Christians, however, to be spiritUal, not Iiiade up of frivolities and worthiess trifles" (CommeniiIry on Colossians 3:16). Again, with Calvio, therels no indication thiitPaul i~ even alluding to exclusive Psalmody. "

The burden of proof here is on the those adopiingexCluslve Psalmody; they must conclusively show that in Paw's llse of these three tenns, be lin1its the chUIclJ to the uSe of the Psalter infonnal worship. Ifthiscanootbeexegeticallyaceomplished, then Ephesians 5:19 aodColossians 3:16 stand as 'strong adversaries to exclusive Psalmodists. I suggest that then: exegetical burden is too great to bear. . ' , ,

Conclusion

The present writer is very much in favor of fue singing of fue metrical Psalms,3 in formal, public (as well as private) worship. The church needs to return to this practise, as a "part" of fue regulative principle (WCF XXI,S). It is a rich privilege, yielding spiritual blessings, to be able to sing fue inspired songs of Zion as found in the Psalter. Yet, there seems to be no biblical warrant for us to eliminate altogether the use of otper inspired and uninspired hymns and songs, as long as fuey are biblical in content (i.e., proper doctrine). Neifueris it non- confessional to do so. The witness of church history is far from convincing us of an exclusive Psalmody view. And fue biblical evidence, which is primary in import, overwhehning supports fue use of "hymns and spiritual songs," bothinspired and ofuerwise, alongwifu the singing of Psalms.

Endnotes

1. Forthe evidencethatatleastsomeofthe "inspired" New

Testament hymns listed here were composed by fue early church and incorporated into formal worshlp, see Donald Gu1hrie, New Testament Theology, pp. 343-365.

2. The fact fuat fue New Testament church is already involvedinheavenly worship, a form ofworshlp fuat I!tilizes musical instruments (Rev. 5:8; 15:2,3), would seemingly permit the use of such inslruments in our formal, public worshlp.

3. Anofuer question fuat must be posed here is, "What constitutes a metrical Psalm?" I would ask the exclusive Psalmodist, "How far are we to take the issue of 'exactness' to the original writings?" Some of fue so called metrical Psalms today are little more fuan "rough" paraphrases of the Hebrew text Does the exclusive Psalmodist violate fue regulative principle when he does not sing fue Psalms in the exactJanguageoftheHebrew? lusthowclosetotheHebrew text do translations. need to come? n

STAND UP! "Challenging Young Christians to a

Strong Christian Commitment"

Order Now Thru May 31 st for Just $8.00

(By ordering now you will be 3Sllisting us in tbe production oftbis tape and tbesupport oftbis ministry)

"The response to these songs in the past year of camps, conferences, and concerts has been tremendous from both young people and parents alike" Judy Rogers

I would like to order Tapes at $8.00/tape. (Please enclose payment)

~

• GLORIFY HIM!

• THAT'S NOT LOVE

·IF

• WOUNDS OF A FRIEND

• STAND UP!

·ONLYFORIHM

• ALLIGATOR SHOES

• IS IT JUST A DREAM

• ANGELFACE

Name __________________________________________ ___ Address ________________________________________ _

Mail your order to: Judy Rogers, 70 Hinton Ct., Dacula, GA. 30211

May 1991 • The Counsel of Cha\cedon • 13