# Exclusive Hymnody or Exclusive Spiritual Song (um)-ody



## ChristopherPaul (Dec 8, 2005)

I understand some churches sing Psalms exclusively, some incorporate Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, but what about the many churches that only sings Spiritual songs or only sing Hymns? What is their support for such a practice?


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Dec 8, 2005)

*jeopardy theme song*


----------



## BobVigneault (Dec 8, 2005)

I'll take "Unanswerable Questions About Purity In Worship" for 300 Alex.


----------



## crhoades (Dec 8, 2005)

I'm not sure what their support is...I personally don't see how they could outside a dispensational hermeneutic. 

Are there any non-ep'ers out there that do not at least incorporate 1 psalm? Why?

My church is not EP but in the 7 year history of our existence, there hasn't been a service without at least 1 psalm.


----------



## biblelighthouse (Dec 8, 2005)

My church doesn't sing Psalms, but I'm working to change that.

I am not EP, but I do believe we should sing some Psalms every Lord's Day.

In fact, for my church's upcoming Christmas music program this coming Sunday evening, I plan to introduce everybody to Psalm 45 from the Trinity Psalter, and get them to sing along. I plan to make copies of it for everybody.

And my pastor wants to get everyone to sing Psalm 118.

I've also been having everyone sing Psalm 23 from time to time, since it is in our hymnal.

I really hope to see my church purchase a bunch of Psalters in the near future! I think we are moving in that direction (albeit slowly).


----------



## gwine (Dec 8, 2005)

> I plan to make copies of it for everybody.



 Make sure it is not copy-right material.


----------



## crhoades (Dec 8, 2005)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > I plan to make copies of it for everybody.
> ...



David won't mind...


----------



## gwine (Dec 8, 2005)

> David won't mind...



Silly me, thinking one could do this.

Taken from the site, Crown and Covenant Publications, publishers of the Trinity Psalter:



> Copyright Permissions:
> 
> If you are interested in reproducing certain selections from the Trinity Psalter or the Book of Psalms for Singing, *e will be happy to grant you permission for a special event or period of time. In most cases that permission is free. We ask that you go through a permissions process, however.*
> 
> ...



Never mind the various copyrights of Scripture.

English Standard Version (ESV)
The Holy Bible, English Standard Version Copyright Â© 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers.

New International Version (NIV)
Copyright Â© 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society

New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Copyright Â© 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation

At least the King James is ok:

King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain


And really, I was being somewhat facetious, but we do live in a litigious and depraved society.


----------



## crhoades (Dec 8, 2005)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > David won't mind...
> ...



For what it's worth...Our church owns psalters for every congregant. Our pastor wrote and got permission to put the psalm text in the bulletin in order to cut down on switching hymnals, bulletins, psalters...


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Dec 8, 2005)

My church sells a version of the 1650 Scottish Psalter which we call _The Comprehensive Psalter._ It is actually divided out so a person, family or church can sing through all the psalms in a year. It is a well built pew psalter and can be had reasonably, and at a case price of 24 even more reasonably (about $10 each including shipping); or if you want a bunch we probably would make you a really good deal. Even has a Presbyterian "blue" place ribbon. Check it out here.


----------



## gwine (Dec 8, 2005)

> _Originally posted by crhoades_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by gwine_
> ...





But isn't it sad that the Word of God is treated this way?


----------



## crhoades (Dec 8, 2005)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by crhoades_
> ...



John Frame on Copyrights


----------



## gwine (Dec 8, 2005)

> _Originally posted by crhoades_
> 
> 
> But isn't it sad that the Word of God is treated this way?



John Frame on Copyrights [/quote]

Good article. Now I know why our song book doesn't have the music to go along with it.

What a system.


----------



## BJClark (Dec 9, 2005)

That might also be why most churches don't sing the Psalms as often, because of the process they most go through just to get permission to do so.


----------



## crhoades (Dec 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by BJClark_
> That might also be why most churches don't sing the Psalms as often, because of the process they most go through just to get permission to do so.



Not necessarily. If they bought a psalter for each congregant or at least every other one where they could share, there would be no need to ask for permission. 

I'm still scratching my head on this one. Sticking to even OPC and PCA churches - I can't comprehend why every single one does not sing at least one psalm.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Dec 9, 2005)

I don't think copyright is the reason churches are not singing the psalms. Generally speaking I like the copyright laws, speaking as a writer and publisher. I will say our church generally is very generous in granting permission to copy out of the Comprehensive Psalter, but we do ask that you ask.


----------



## Arch2k (Dec 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by NaphtaliPress_
> I don't think copyright is the reason churches are not singing the psalms.



 Our church often excludes the Psalms altogether from worship. We are more fond of the "praise tune" and *some * hymns (we don't even use hymn books). I think the same copyright laws apply to the modern songs that we utilize. 

I think the reason for excluding the Psalms (at least in my experience) stems from a desire to worship God with emotion, and find materials that will be desireable to the "modern man." In their minds, the Psalms are a valid (although ancient and primative) form of praise. I think they would view it like the Geneva Bible, or KJV 1611, both the Word of God, but a little out-dated.

We should all look the Psalms more as a divinely instituted form of worshipping God as he has commanded.


----------



## py3ak (Dec 9, 2005)

My church bought the Psalter's that Chris' church sells. They are very nice. I recommend buying them.


----------



## Mike (Dec 9, 2005)

I've never heard of a church that self-consciously does not sing psalms. Those that do not, at least not often, usually do this out of tradition, and would explain that they do incorporate psalmnody occasionally.


----------



## wsw201 (Dec 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by BJClark_
> That might also be why most churches don't sing the Psalms as often, because of the process they most go through just to get permission to do so.



If a church has the Trinity Hymnal, it has the Psalms already in it.


----------



## crhoades (Dec 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by wsw201_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by BJClark_
> ...



What's a hymnal? (devilish grin...)


----------



## Kaalvenist (Dec 9, 2005)

I have a copy of the Comprehensive Psalter as well. Very nice.

Mind you, I still like my split-leaf Psalter, and the words-only Psalter, because of the ability to put any tune to any Psalm (I tend to match up tunes used in the Book of Psalms for Singing with the 1650 version of the same Psalms). But the split-leaf can get complicated. The Comprehensive Psalter outdoes the split-leaf for more easily used, as well as the neat one-year program that Dr. Bacon mentions in the preface.

The pastor at my old Evangelical Free church tried to argue with me, last time I was home, against singing Psalm 51. He insisted that the phrase, "Take not thy Holy Spirit from me" was David's peculiar cry that God not take the Spirit of inspiration from him, by Whom he was writing the inspired Psalms; and that we therefore should not sing it.

Does anybody else want to point out how ridiculous that argument is?


----------



## JohnV (Dec 9, 2005)

The joint committee from the URC and CanRC are making up a new Psalter-hymnal. It should be interesting to see the result.


----------



## beej6 (Apr 30, 2006)

My former church was in a unique situation re: copyrights. Most of our 40 or so hymns were in public domain, e.g. they were old . The six or eight copyrighted songs, I got individual, lifetime copyright permission to use them (fees ranged from free to $30, I think). We didn't use hymnals, in a congregation of 200+, so this turned out to be both economical, yet forced us to be choosy re: "newer hymns." A version of what Tim Keller calls "Reformed Contemporary Worship."


----------

