# Westminster psalm singing omissions in catechism - Why?



## Catechist (May 27, 2010)

Dear Brothers,

I have been discussing this at

Deformation or Reformation? 

I would like to know your thought on this here:

All the ordinary duties of worship are listed in WCF Ch 21:5 which include psalm singing. The only duty not listed here is prayer, which is a special duty that encompasses praise and precedes the ordinary duties as outlined by the Confession.

Curiously, when we turn to WCF LC Q.108 they list the duties required of us in the second commandment. Peculiarly, they do not mention singing or psalm singing but everything else is restated... why did Westminster not restate the formal singing of psalms within the duties required in the second commandment yet mention all other parts of worship?

The same omission of psalm singing happens again between LC Q. 160 and LC Q. 161. It is noteworthy, that all the parts of worship, special or ordinary- in the Catechism, have some sort of catechetical direction attached to them in the form of “what” or “how” except for the singing in worship.
• Q. 157 How is the word of God to be read?
• Q. 159 How is the word of God to be preached…?
• Q.160 What is required of those that hear…?
• Q. 161 How do the sacraments become effectual…?
• Q 186 What rule hath God given for our direction in prayer?

I would think that somewhere within the set of catechetical questions they would have asked “What rule has God given for our direction in singing”. 

Your thoughts


----------



## MW (May 27, 2010)

Catechist said:


> Deformation or Reformation?



In response to the post -- The whole word of God was not given to be sung. What was designed to be sung was put within the Psalter. In the absence of further provision we are bound by the regulative principle to the Psalter.



Catechist said:


> All the ordinary duties of worship are listed in WCF Ch 21:5 which include psalm singing. The only duty not listed here is prayer, which is a special duty that encompasses praise and precedes the ordinary duties as outlined by the Confession.



Prayer was already treated in sections 3, 4, as "one special part of religious worship," and is to be taken together with the actions described in section 5 as "parts of the ordinary religious worship of God."



Catechist said:


> Curiously, when we turn to WCF LC Q.108 they list the duties required of us in the second commandment. Peculiarly, they do not mention singing or psalm singing but everything else is restated... why did Westminster not restate the formal singing of psalms within the duties required in the second commandment yet mention all other parts of worship?



I don't think we can read anything into it. It may have been accidental.


----------



## Catechist (May 28, 2010)

If it happened only once, then I think it may be accidental. However, both sections in the catechism omit it. Also, what makes it more intriguing, when you look at the scripture proof text of WCF 21:3 it points to singing praise with the understanding – within the prayer section?

Here's the problem I see: They could have easily picked a proof text which points directly to singing praise with the psalms. For example, they could have picked 1 Ch. 16:9, or Ps 95:2 or Ps 105:2 which all declare praise by singing the psalms. It’s like they deliberately took a step back and declared the manner of singing praise materially as prayer (with the understanding) rather than declaring the matter of praise formally with the psalms only. Then they omitted the catechetical instruction on the matter twice - by accident?

Seems unsettling for a Catechism not to instruct on a major doctrine in worship....


----------



## ADKing (May 28, 2010)

I cannot speak to the thoughts of the Assembly itself. However, while reading Thomas Ridgley's massive commentary on the Larger Catechism I cam across this statement at question and answer 154: 

"To these we may add the singing of the praises of God; which though it is not particularly mentioned in this Answer, is a duty in which we may expect to meet with his presence and blessing; and accordingly is an ordinance which God makes effectual to promote our salvation." 

He then goes on for several pages to argue that signing praise is a distinct ordinance from prayer etc. I thought that context might prove interesting to the discussion...


----------



## Catechist (May 28, 2010)

As Rev. King mentioned above - I think Thomas Ridgley helpful. It regards the same WCF LC Q. 154 "What are the outward means whereby Christ communicates to us the benefits of his mediation" Here Thomas Ridgley thinks through the implications of praise music in worship on his Commentary on the Larger Catechism. He does reason through the issue much in the same way I have tried to produce it on the Heidelblog Deformation or Reformation?  – just in a much more succinct way.

See Thomas Ridgley here: A body of divinity: wherein the ... - Google Books


----------



## RTaron (May 29, 2010)

Kevin, at the end of Ridgley's argument for sining as an ordinance he presents what he thinks is the best reason to alow uninspired compositions in publick worship. 
I thought it was very wishy washy and impractical. By the time you follow all his rules for how a human composition could be writen and what is allowed in the content you had to become one of his deciples first inorder to get it right the "Ridgley way".


----------



## Kaalvenist (May 29, 2010)

I would have preferred something more explicit in the Catechism(s). The omission in the Larger Catechism is a potentially bad one, in leaving out what is included in the Confession of Faith. Obviously, though, the Standards were meant to be taken as a whole, and therefore not meant to be set against each other -- what is lacking in the Larger Catechism is supplied by the Confession of Faith.

And I remember reading through Ridgeley on that section several years ago. I thought he stated everything very carefully, trying simply to set forth the cases both for exclusive psalmody, and for inspired psalmody supplemented by uninspired hymnody, without necessarily stating his own views on the subject (although his tone makes me think he favored the latter).


----------



## ADKing (May 29, 2010)

I do not agree with Ridgley's exposition of non-Psalms, but introduced him only because he spends a considerable amount of time arguing that singing is a distinct element of worship, which I believe is true. 

Also, keep in mind that the Westminster Directory for Public Worship includes the singing of Psalms.


----------



## Catechist (May 29, 2010)

For those who are not familiar with Paul Bayne’s, he was a puritan divine contemporary with William Ames who filled William Perkins pulpit and died prior to the Assembly. He was often quoted by Samuel Rutherford. 

In his commentary on Ephesians 5:19 he speaks to the ordinance of singing here An entire commentary upon the whole ... - Google Books and provides some insight into the practice of the day.

As to Formalism, I have stated my views here Deformation or Reformation?


----------

