# Book of Psalms for Singing



## 21st Century Calvinist (Jul 23, 2008)

This is really directed to those of you who use the BPS in corporate worship. I recently bought a copy of the BPS. It's OK- sorry I prefer Sing Psalms- I do like Psalm 40E (even though it doesn't rhyme) and Psalm 5A. I am sure there will be more.
Anyway, my question is related to chanting. I noticed a couple of the Psalms with settings for chanting. Is this a regular feature in RPCNA worship services? If not, why not? If it is, is it done well?
Thanks.


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Jul 23, 2008)

I am not sure about the RPCNA, but there is a section in the BoPfS about chanting.


----------



## 21st Century Calvinist (Jul 23, 2008)

ChristopherPaul said:


> I am not sure about the RPCNA, but there is a section in the BoPfS about chanting.



It was this to which I was referring. I really just wanted to know if these psalms were chanted by those who use this Psalter.


----------



## Davidius (Jul 23, 2008)

Hey Donnie. We use the Book of Psalms for Singing but never do any of the chants in my congregation. I've heard of other RPCNA congregations that do them, though.


----------



## 21st Century Calvinist (Jul 23, 2008)

Thanks D. I can't imagine chanting being that popular in Presbyterian circles. Certainly in the FCS chanting has never happened to my knowledge. 
Shame really, as I quite like the idea of chanting and the sound it produces


----------



## Davidius (Jul 23, 2008)

21st Century Calvinist said:


> Thanks D. I can't imagine chanting being that popular in Presbyterian circles. Certainly in the FCS chanting has never happened to my knowledge.
> Shame really, as I quite like the idea of chanting and the sound it produces



Yeah, me too. When I have suggested that we do it here in Durham I usually get responses that seem like it's too Catholic or something.


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Jul 23, 2008)

21st Century Calvinist said:


> ChristopherPaul said:
> 
> 
> > I am not sure about the RPCNA, but there is a section in the BoPfS about chanting.
> ...



Oh really? I didn't realize that some of the psalm selections from the book were set to chanting. I only knew of the writeup that mentions the original Psalms were chanted.


----------



## dcomin (Jul 23, 2008)

The chant selections in the Book of Psalms for Singing are used very infrequently in RPCNA services. There are very few people around who know how to do it. I've only been in a couple of settings where they were used, and they were both at larger conferences where there were song leaders present who were able to explain how it's done and lead the group in the chants. They were awesome! I would love to see the practice used more. Sadly, it's a dying art.


----------



## 21st Century Calvinist (Jul 23, 2008)

Thanks Pastor Doug. I am sure that would have sounded awesome. I admit that I suspected that it wasn't really common practice. For some reason we seem to associate chanting with high church anglo-catholocism. This is a shame. On the Exclusively Psalms/You Tube thread there is a link to Psalm 121 being chanted by the choir at St Paul's Cathedral (or is it Westminster Abbey) and it sounds amazing.


----------



## Davidius (Jul 23, 2008)

The style of chanting in our book is not very hard. I think it's just intimidating for whatever reason.


----------



## dcomin (Jul 23, 2008)

Davidius said:


> The style of chanting in our book is not very hard. I think it's just intimidating for whatever reason.



I really don't think it's difficulty (unless it's _perceived_ difficulty) or intimidation as much as simple lack of knowledge about how to do it. People look at a chant in the Psalter and it looks like this:

1. Clap your hands, / all ye / people; //
Shout unto / God with the / voice of / triumph.//

For the LORD most / high is / terrible; //
He is a great / King over / all the / earth.

Okay... the slashes seem to indicate rests or pauses... but what's the tempo?

Now... there are stanzas above the words that show the notes that go along with the chant, but it's certainly not plain and obvious to most modern worshippers how chants work. And since folks are familiar with the metrical tunes, it's easier to ignore the chants and let them go the way of the pteradactyl.

I've honestly never heard anyone poo poo chanting because of a perceived connection with Rome. Not to say people don't say that... I've just never heard that before. 

All that said, I'd love to see a renewed interest in and utilization of chants in worship. They are quite striking when done right, and they allow the inspired words of the psalmist to take center stage rather than the catchy tune.


----------



## JoelYrick (Jul 29, 2008)

I'll just add that my church doesn't ever use the chants, but I hope that we will sometime. I wonder if the new psalter will have them. I think that they would be useful in that we'd be forced to look more closely at the words as chanting tends to highlight important parts of each sentence. Also, I often get frustrated with parts singing because it is often distracting. It seems the singing should be plain enough (just melody?) that the focus is drawn to the words.

Okay, I'll now admit the main reason I wanted to post here was because I saw the reference to Psalm 40E. I listened to this file so many times that I memorized it.  Thanks to the Cambridge RPC for their bandwidth!


----------



## yeutter (Jul 29, 2008)

The chant settings in the RPCNA Book of Psalms for Singing is Anglican Chant. It is very singable. The Geneva Psalm tunes in the Canadian Reformed Anglo Geneva Psalter are very similar to Anglican Chant. The Psalm section in the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod hymnal is also similar Anglican Chant. 

In most Anglican Churches the Psalms are chanted to a Plain Song Chant rather then an Anglican Chant.

The big advantage to chanting the Psalms is the music does not distract you from the words.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jul 29, 2008)

I attend North Hills RP in the evening on the Lord's Day and we have never chanted. Would like to see it though.


----------



## DeoOpt (Jul 29, 2008)

When I visited a relitive in Canada I visited a Canadian reformed church I found there Psalm singing style interesting. Although I find it interesting that whenever I visit a reformed church viz reformed baptist, OPC, PCA, FRC, RPCNA, thay all have stated that that there "regulitive principle" is the only true one. And of course theres my opinion getting in the way.


----------



## 21st Century Calvinist (Jul 29, 2008)

JoelYrick said:


> I'll just add that my church doesn't ever use the chants, but I hope that we will sometime. I wonder if the new psalter will have them. I think that they would be useful in that we'd be forced to look more closely at the words as chanting tends to highlight important parts of each sentence. Also, I often get frustrated with parts singing because it is often distracting. It seems the singing should be plain enough (just melody?) that the focus is drawn to the words.
> 
> Okay, I'll now admit the main reason I wanted to post here was because I saw the reference to Psalm 40E. I listened to this file so many times that I memorized it.  Thanks to the Cambridge RPC for their bandwidth!



Ha, that's so funny becuase it was from Cambridge RPC that I downloaded Ps 40E.That was ages ago. It really is done beautifully. The tune is awesome and fits well with the words and sentiment of Ps 40.
The thing I too like about chanting is the focus on the words and it's simplicity. Four part harmony is nice and really enriches the singing. It should definately be encouraged in churches- not just psalm singing ones. At my current church we end the worship service with the singing of the Doxology, usually a capella, and it is very harmonious.
When I used to be a Precentor I liked when I had opportunity to use tunes such as Naomi or Palestrina, which are kind of plainsong-ish. Don't get me wrong I also like the vigor of tunes such as New Lydia or Desert.


----------



## jwithnell (Jul 29, 2008)

What do you folks think is the most sing-able psalter out there? I'm not part of the psalm-only for worship contingent here, but think a psalter could be a great part of family worship. While I like the historicity of it, I don't find the tunes in the Geneva Psalter (which I have) very appealing.


----------



## jogri17 (Jul 29, 2008)

The french language psalters are so much nicer sounding then the english ones.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jul 29, 2008)

jwithnell said:


> What do you folks think is the most sing-able psalter out there? I'm not part of the psalm-only for worship contingent here, but think a psalter could be a great part of family worship. While I like the historicity of it, I don't find the tunes in the Geneva Psalter (which I have) very appealing.



I personally like the 1650 Scottish Metrical Psalter best.


----------



## 21st Century Calvinist (Jul 29, 2008)

jwithnell said:


> What do you folks think is the most sing-able psalter out there? I'm not part of the psalm-only for worship contingent here, but think a psalter could be a great part of family worship. While I like the historicity of it, I don't find the tunes in the Geneva Psalter (which I have) very appealing.



The 1650 Scottish Psalter is in many ways the easiest as every psalm is in common meter. The words are, in my opinion, archaic and thus sometimes difficult to understand.
My preference is for Sing Psalms. This is a contemporary psalter produced in 2003 by the Free Church of Scotland. in my opinion, some psalms are worded/metered better than others, but all in all the words are fairly straightforward. Sadly, for those of us in North America it is very pricey.As far as I know, it is available at Crown and Covenant.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Jul 29, 2008)

jogri17 said:


> The french language psalters are so much nicer sounding then the english ones.



Which French psalters do you use Joseph?


----------

