On the way to church I sometimes listen to a local alternative rock station that plays what they call: "Brunch with Bob and Friends," an hour or two of all reggae music. Since most of these artists are adherents of Rastafarianism I am often struck with how many quotes and allusions there are to the Psalms in their lyrics. Ironically, the Psalms are getting more "air play" on the local rock station on Sunday morning than in many of our own Reformed churches.
What exactly is wrong with this scenario is lost on many, but there are two arguments in favor of Psalmody (singing the Psalms) that I'd like to reproduce here. The first, is one based on principle, that is, the Regulative Principle of worship (RPW). This historically Reformed doctrine simply states that in our worship, we ought to do that and only that which Scripture commands. Even things that are perfectly fine for us to do outside of an assembled worship service are not to be done or practiced because Scripture has not expressly or implicitly told us to. When the RPW is applied to the question: What should we sing in church? The 150 inspired Psalms are the obvious answer. It should be said that many Reformed Christians, who love and seek to uphold the RPW, do not apply it in this exclusive sense. Even the Church Order of the URC does not specify exclusive Psalmody, but rather states that the Psalms are to be given "priority."
As you may have experienced for yourself, most people are not easily persuaded of arguments based upon principle (especially if they do not share your assumptions) like the above argument. The next argument in favor of Psalmody is a pragmatic one. It simply states that the Psalms are the "best" songs for us to sing in church. I can't tell you how many times I've been in a worship service where the song lyrics are either false, misleading, or just plain cheesy that I have a hard time even singing along... You don't have this problem with the Psalms. The Psalms are not just human in origin, but they are also Divine. We never need to wonder how we ought to praise our Triune God, because he has already supplied the lyrics for us (contemporary tunes and arrangements are another matter).
Why has Psalm singing declined in our society so that it is almost non-existent even in confessionally Reformed churches? Dr. Robert Godfrey, my Church History Professor and a Psalm "fanatic," has traced three developments that led to Psalmody's demise. One is Liberalism. The classic Liberal take on Judaism and the Old Testament in general was one that adopted the developmental religion view. Simply stated, this said that Biblical religion developed from pantheistic to polytheistic to monotheistic. Using a Hegelian dialectic, they asserted that New Testament Christianity is a higher synthesis than its "barbaric" and "primitive" Old Testament counterpart. If this is true, why sing Psalms which speak about defeating one's enemies and other victories in battle? [This view which asserts the Old Testament reflects a lesser developed moral sense is one adopted by many Emergent thinkers. ]
Another development, ironically similar to the Liberal view, is that of Dispensationalism. Classic Dispensationalists assert that there are two people of God: national Israel and the Church. The Psalms were largely viewed as something that belonged to Israel and, in their view, it seems odd for the church to sings the songs of Zion because that isn't their time and place.
The next development that led to the demise of Psalmody is that of Revivalism. One of Finney's new measures, which continues to be used today, is intensive singing. Songs are sung to evoke an emotional response in the crowd and thus create a more moldable audience. Anyone who has regularly sung the Psalms knows that this is not the typical response one gets. Sure we have Psalm 23 and 51, but those can't hold a candle to "Come Just as You Are."
6 comments:
I was invited to a gathering of local "leaders" of Christ to put our heads together and tackle the nuisance of the world around us and the problems the world was creating in the Church.
The host pastor got up and asked us to rise to sing to Jesus and promptly introduced his "special" worship leader to lead us in a song.
Here's a portion of the song we sang:
"Lord Jesus, I love you so much, I just want to place my sloppy wet kiss on you!"
With my eyes closed and my heart throbbing, hands lifted up, I gulped and coughed and within myself, yelled:::> "What was that?"! and then smiled as I quickly quit singing the song, opened up my eyes to see if this guy was serious. He was. I got very serious at that moment and started "warring", as in "strategizing" how I was going to leave the gathering without making myself noticable!
Great post, however I would add a fourth. (I recognize that your list is by now means exhaustive).
The fourth would be a misapplication of the desire to have congregations be Christocentric. Many of my friends object to psalmody by saying that they want to sing the name of Jesus. (One who comes out and says this is T. David Gordon of my alma mater, Grove City College.) While they say Psalms are God's words and should be respected as such, they want to use their own songs in their stead. I am thinking specifically of Sovereign Grace Music and their latest CD entitled Psalms. (Good music and lyrics but they are radical departures from what the psalms say and are.)
Do not get me wrong. Congregations should be centered on the work of Christ. His blood on the cross is at the very foundation of Christianity and reformed theology (which is not hard since they are one in the same). Sermons must always reveal Christ, but the psalms do that as well. (I am thankful for Carl Trueman's thoughts on this here, as he elaborates on the Christian life and authenticity)
When you sing many Psalms (in the feigned attempt to follow the Regulative Principle) you admonish the hearers to violate the regulative principle and offer animal sacrifices or instrumental praise. Also, you teach Christians to kill their enemies rather than love them (although, I suppose, in Calvinism there is no recognized distinction between those two).
When I read Colossians 3:16 "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom" I understand Jesus' teachings in the gospels to be meant, not the Law of Moses nor the Prophets, "for the law and the prophets were until John," and when I read in the same verse, "teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord" I see an admonition to compose songs based on the gospel message of Christ, not to sing the Psalms of the Old Testament that teach the Law and the Prophets which were "until John."
"Lord Jesus, I love you so much, I just want to place my sloppy wet kiss on you!"
Colossians 3:16 "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom..."
What in the above constitutes "the word of Christ"? And how can it be said to have any "wisdom"? much less, be rich in wisdom?
But just because so many modern song writers are spiritually blind, does not mean that we throw out good old spiritual hymnals that have a great many songs that meet the Scriptural requirements of being based on "the word of Christ" and being wisely composed. Such as, for example, Isaac Watt's WHEN I SURVEY THE WONDROUS CROSS:
When I survey the wondrous cross, On which the Prince of Glory died, My richest gain I count but loss, And pour contempt on all my pride.
Forbid it Lord that I should boast, Save in the death of Christ my Lord, All the vain things that charm me most, I sacrifice them to his blood.
See from his head his hands his feet, Sorrow and love flow mingled down, Did e'er such love and sorrow meet, Or thorns compose so rich a crown?
Were the whole realm of nature mine, That were a present far too small, Love so amazing so divine, Demands my soul my life my all.
--Now, I should think that Lord would be more pleased with us singing that on the Lord's Day than Psalm 20!
Psa 20 "The LORD hear thee in the day of trouble; the name of the God of Jacob defend thee; Send thee help from the sanctuary [i.e the JEWISH TEMPLE], and strengthen thee out of Zion; Remember all thy offerings [i.e. THY MERITS, RATHER THAN CHRIST'S SACRIFICE], and accept thy burnt sacrifice [i.e. THY MERITS, NOT THE BLOOD OF CHRIST]; Selah. Grant thee according to thine own heart, and fulfil all thy counsel. We will rejoice in thy salvation, and in the name of our God we will set up our banners: the LORD fulfil all thy petitions. Now know I that the LORD saveth his anointed; he will hear him from his holy heaven with the saving strength of his right hand. Some trust in chariots, and some in horses [AS IF WE CHRISTIANS ARE GOING OUT IN CARNAL WAR ON OUR ENEMIES TO KILL, WHEN OUR LORD HAS SAID LOVE THY ENEMIES AND PAUL HAS SAID THE WEAPONS OF OUR WARFARE ARE NOT CARNAL AND WE WRESTLE NOT AGAINST FLESH AND BLOOD]: but we will remember the name of the LORD our God. They are brought down and fallen: but we are risen, and stand upright. Save, LORD: let the king hear us when we call."
Or perhaps, Thos. Shepherd's MUST JESUS BEAR THE CROSS ALONE,
Must Jesus bear the cross alone, And all the world go free? No there's a cross for everyone, And there's a cross for me.
The consecrated cross I'll bear, Till he shall set me free, And then go home my crown to wear, For there's a cross for me.
O precious cross! O glorious crown! O resurrection day! Ye angels from the throne come down, And bear my soul away!
Rather than, Psa 66:13 "I will go into thy house with burnt offerings: I will pay thee my vows,"
But indeed, let us sing Psalm 51, in verse 4 of which David lies saying "Against thee, thee only, have I sinned," as if Bathsheba and Uriah (and even Joab whom he made into a murderer) had not been sinned against, and for which lie he is rebuked by the unborn child of Bathsheba in verse 5 "Behold, I" even I, the child you have sinned against in causing to be a bastard, "was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." To which David responds in verse 6 "Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom," praising God for the miracle of making the unborn child rebuke his lie from the "secret part" which is Bathsheba's womb.
Jesus seems to have a pretty high view of the Psalms (Mt 22:43-44, Jn 10:35...)
Short extract from Isaac Watt's preface to his Psalms of David Imitated in the Language of the New Testament:
"In all places I have kept my grand Design in View, and that is to teach my Author to speak like a Christian. For why should I now address God my Saviour in a Song with burnt sacrifices of Fatlings and with the Incense of Rams? Why should I pray to be sprinkled with Hyssop, or recur to the Blood of Bullocks and Goats? Why should I bind my Sacrifice with Cords to the Horns of an Altar, or sing the Praises of God to high sounding Cymbals, when the Gospel has shewn me a nobler Atonement for Sin, and appointed a purer and more spiritual Worship? Why must I joyn with David in his legal or Prophetic Language to curse my Enemies, when my Saviour in his Sermons has taught me to love and bless them?...What need is there that I should wrap up the shining Honours of my Redeemer in the dark and shadowy Language of a Religion that is now for ever abolished, especially when Christians are so vehemently warned in the Epistles of St. Paul against a Judaising Spirit in their Worship as well as Doctrine?..."
AMEN. AMEN. AND AMEN!!!!
"Jesus seems to have a pretty high view of the Psalms (Mt 22:43-44, Jn 10:35...)"
The fact that Jesus quotes the Psalms doesn't mean he would bind exclusive Psalmody on Christians. Quite to the contrary, both he and the apostles would and do agree with Isaac Watts. What sense does it make for a Christian to go about singing about sacrifices animals, when our Lord has given HIMSELF for us?
Post a Comment