Because of some recent questions which have come my way, I have been encouraged to revisit the very important question of the standards which the church uses to guide and regulate what it will and will not do in worship. The regulation of worship is codified in the Westminster Standards by a principle which has been popularly termed “The Regulative Principle of Worship.” This is somewhat a misnomer, as everyone has some principle of regulation. Some principles are much freer than others. Nevertheless, I have come to this question asking this fundamental question: is the Regulative Principle as it is traditionally formulated supported by Scripture? How strong is the case biblically?
I know that as a man ordained in the PCA that I should be able to generate my own defense. I can, and have, but have wondered if my own defense is, uh, defensible. So, I have looked to others to make the case for me.
I have looked at articles by two men seeking a sound biblical defense of the principle that the only worship acceptable to God is that which he commands. Both men argue their case with Scripture and both would be expected to bring the strongest argument possible to the table. I have found neither persuasive. [Perhaps you have an article that you find persuasive? Let me hear from you.]
I find that in both similar logical lapses, confusing the way of approach to God in salvation with an approach to God in worship, taking texts which speak clearly to the former and applying them to the latter. Interestingly, I find the argument that a consistent application of this principle would lead to the exclusive use of unaccompanied metrical psalms. The outcome is a worship that is locked in space and time, to one historic and cultural moment: 17th century Puritan Great Britain. Do we really want to articulate that then in that time alone worship was restored to its pristine perfection?
My discomfort, I confess, arises partly from having worshiped in other countries among other cultures. I cannot conceive that a God who so creatively diversifies the cultures of the world would force all those cultures into one [Western] worship mold. To overcome this objection in my mind will take a strong exegetical case. I have yet to find it.
Secondly, I should note here the sense I perceive in those writing in support of the regulative principle. I sense that they are fearful of God giving liberty to his church in any area, but particularly in the area of worship. The idea of liberty for some of us is a difficult notion, for we fear what people would do with such liberty. Paul’s only concern is that we not use our liberty for licentiousness. But this proves that it is POSSIBLE to so use our liberty.
My sense is that the same liberty may apply in worship. God has given us great liberty in the gospel. Perhaps he gives us great liberty in worship. We resist saying that, fearful of what some might do with such liberty. So, we try to corral and restrain this liberty, perhaps contrary to God’s intention.
I do believe that Scripture must regulate worship. But I also believe that God’s regulation of worship may allow for greater freedom than our Reformed heritage might have imagined. God entrusts his people with greater liberty than we can imagine. There is joy in this realization. I fear liberty, too, but God doesn’t.
The church can be trusted with great liberty. When such liberty is embraced, so great will love for God be that the church will, stumbling here and there, no doubt (as we have seen over the past 40 or so years), learn to worship God with sincere reverence and awe. Does God require more?
A sinner's 2 cents
This is an interesting topic, but not one which I’m all that knowledgeable on. But since it’s here, let me make a comment. Personally, I’m more comfortable with “whatever is not forbidden by scripture, is permitted in worship”. But let’s look at it from a different perspective. Is it still worship if certain elements are missing? For example: Is it still worship, if there isn’t singing, or preaching, or praying, or administration of the sacraments?Tom
Randy Greenwald
Tom,This post was a test to see if anyone was out there. My tree fell in the forest, and lo and behold, it made a noise. Imagine that.Ironically, I just got off the phone after a lengthy conversation on this subject. I am trying to determine the degree to which I am and am not comfortable with the Confession’s statement on worship. My conclusion at this point is quite similar to your own. As proof, I quote here what I wrote just prior to looking at your comment:”I do believe that worship that is Scriptural will have singing, praying, preaching, and sacraments, and I believe that such worship will be God centered, reverent, and beautiful. These things I think are true to Scripture. As to how such beauty, reverence, and God centeredness is maintained and developed, that is a question of wisdom that the leaders of each worshiping community need to decide. That is the way in which I believe Scripture regulates worship.”This is, I think, at a minimal level at least, in agreement with the Confession, though not with some of the Confession’s more strident apologists.Thanks for dropping in!
MagistraCarminae
Randy-I don’t have leisure to comment at the moment, but I “heard” your tree, too, and it has me thinking…Chris