# Worship Service Music



## blhowes (Sep 8, 2008)

In the past, some on the PB (don't recall if they still participate on PB) who hold to EP have said that if they attend a church that sings anything other than Psalms that they refrain from singing. They don't make a big issue of it or bring attention to themselves, but they just refrain from singing.

For EPers:
1. Do you refrain from singing hymns, etc. at other churches? Why/Why not?
2. Since (in your view) singing of Psalms is the music commanded in scripture, do you think singing anything other than Psalms somehow displeases God? 

For non-EPers:
1. Have you ever been to a church that had a contemporary Christian music during the worship service where you felt compelled to refrain from singing? Why/Why not?
2. Is there any kind of music that is played in churches that you think would displease God?


----------



## dcomin (Sep 8, 2008)

blhowes said:


> For EPers:
> 1. Do you refrain from singing hymns, etc. at other churches? Why/Why not?



Yes. When I attend worship at a church where un-inspired songs of mere human composition are sung, I do not join in the congregational singing. I stand with an open hymnbook, but remain silent. I do this because in my conscience I am convinced that God has appointed His inspired Psalms as the only songs to be sung in His worship, and so, for me to sing songs that He has not commanded would be to sin against His Word and my conscience.



blhowes said:


> 2. Since (in your view) singing of Psalms is the music commanded in scripture, do you think singing anything other than Psalms somehow displeases God?



Is this a trick question? If God has commanded the singing of His inspired Psalms, and He has not commanded men to write their own songs and sing them in place of His appointed Psalms of praise, then how could singing something other than what He has commanded be anything but displeasing to Him? Sincerity of heart has never made a worship practice which God did not command pleasing in His sight.


----------



## charliejunfan (Sep 8, 2008)

*EP?*

What does EP mean? Electorally Presbyterian? I am newly presbyterian(was a reformed baptist) so i don't know the overall differences between the various Presbyterian denominations and reformed baptists


----------



## Davidius (Sep 8, 2008)

dcomin said:


> blhowes said:
> 
> 
> > For EPers:
> ...



Doug,

The scriptures tell us that we are to flee even the appearance of evil. If your practice is not to sing along with the congregation, which you would consider evil, why do you stand with an open hymnbook as if you were taking part? Doesn't this give the appearance to everyone else that you are doing something which you consider evil?




charliejunfan said:


> What does EP mean? Electorally Presbyterian? I am newly presbyterian(was a reformed baptist) so i don't know the overall differences between the various Presbyterian denominations and reformed baptists



EP stands for "exclusive psalmody." Adherents believe that the scriptures allow only for Psalms to be sung in worship. You will be able to find a lot about this in the Worship forum.


----------



## matt01 (Sep 8, 2008)

blhowes said:


> For non-EPers:
> 1. Have you ever been to a church that had a contemporary Christian music during the worship service where you felt compelled to refrain from singing? Why/Why not?
> 2. Is there any kind of music that is played in churches that you think would displease God?



We were visiting the CRC church that my in-laws attend over Canada Day last year, and they sung the national anthem. We refrained from singing, though it wasn't much, since many in the congregation did the same for their own reasons.


----------



## FrielWatcher (Sep 8, 2008)

I refer you to the long, long thread "Psalmody and Worship." VirginiaHuegonot has posted very good information about EP on there. There is also a debate in there somewhere. You may find it interesting. A lot of people contributed.


----------



## CovenantalBaptist (Sep 8, 2008)

I know some Presbyterian EP'ers (Exclusive Psalmody) who actually sing Psalms to the hymn tunes if they are the same tune (as they often are in a church with traditional hymnody). It's a bit confusing (in my personal view) but they do try and be discreet. I truly respect their desire and extreme effort to participate in corporate worship with a clear conscience even if I disagree with their theological conclusions. (I'm personally for _Inclusive_ Psalmody not exclusive).


----------



## dcomin (Sep 8, 2008)

Davidius said:


> dcomin said:
> 
> 
> > blhowes said:
> ...



I didn't say that I mouth the words and pretend that I'm going along. I stand out of courtesy to my brethren, though I believe they are in error. While they are singing, I look at the words of the song. It is not my place or my desire, in the midst of God's worship, to make a display of pointing out what I believe to be an error on the part of my fellow saints. But often, it is noticed that I did not join in the singing, and edifying discussions take place after the service. All without throwing milking stools (ala Jenny Geddes) or sitting in stone-faced defiance with a black scowl on my face and arms crossed in protest as my well-meaning, but errant brothers and sisters sing unauthorized songs.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Sep 8, 2008)

but were you at the picnic at RPTS tonight Doug?


----------



## dcomin (Sep 8, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> but were you at the picnic at RPTS tonight Doug?



Aahhhh... no... I didn't know there WAS a picnic at RPTS... Guess I wasn't invited.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Sep 8, 2008)

dcomin said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > but were you at the picnic at RPTS tonight Doug?
> ...



I got there late and saw a man of your general description driving away in a Tan Toyota Corolla.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Sep 8, 2008)

dcomin said:


> I didn't say that I mouth the words and pretend that I'm going along. I stand out of courtesy to my brethren, though I believe they are in error. While they are singing, I look at the words of the song. It is not my place or my desire, in the midst of God's worship, to make a display of pointing out what I believe to be an error on the part of my fellow saints. But often, it is noticed that I did not join in the singing, and edifying discussions take place after the service. All without throwing milking stools (ala Jenny Geddes) or sitting in stone-faced defiance with a black scowl on my face and arms crossed in protest as my well-meaning, but errant brothers and sisters sing unauthorized songs.



The cool thing is, I could fully participate in worship at your church, even though I consider your praxy to be in error, thus drawing no attention to myself or causing any disturbance to the worship of God at all.


----------



## matt01 (Sep 8, 2008)

CovenantalBaptist said:


> I know some Presbyterian EP'ers (Exclusive Psalmody) who actually sing Psalms to the hymn tunes if they are the same tune (as they often are in a church with traditional hymnody).



This would be more disturbing than the person not signing at all. If they don't agree with the music selection, they should refrain from singing, rather than determining their own music selection.


----------



## dcomin (Sep 8, 2008)

panta dokimazete said:


> dcomin said:
> 
> 
> > I didn't say that I mouth the words and pretend that I'm going along. I stand out of courtesy to my brethren, though I believe they are in error. While they are singing, I look at the words of the song. It is not my place or my desire, in the midst of God's worship, to make a display of pointing out what I believe to be an error on the part of my fellow saints. But often, it is noticed that I did not join in the singing, and edifying discussions take place after the service. All without throwing milking stools (ala Jenny Geddes) or sitting in stone-faced defiance with a black scowl on my face and arms crossed in protest as my well-meaning, but errant brothers and sisters sing unauthorized songs.
> ...



I suppose I should have seen that one coming, jd...

Of course, the same could be said by someone who holds that juggling cats is an acceptable element of worship. 

If it's a legitimate issue of conscience, based on a legitimate Biblical hermeneutic, the fact that someone who doesn't accept it can worship "freely" in my congregation does not prove that my position is wrong. 

The fact that someone who practices error is comfortable among those who do not, does not make error the preferable choice. Nor does it mean that one who is uncomfortable in the presence of those whose practice is in error is to be blamed for the scruples of their conscience.


----------



## Davidius (Sep 8, 2008)

dcomin said:


> Davidius said:
> 
> 
> > dcomin said:
> ...



While I understand that we would not want to make too much of a fuss, I would think that standing and holding the book open is pretty close to the appearance of participation. Thanks for the winsome response, though.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Sep 8, 2008)

dcomin said:


> I suppose I should have seen that one coming, jd...
> 
> Of course, the same could be said by someone who holds that juggling cats is an acceptable element of worship.
> 
> ...



Only making the point of contrast, my brother  and surely you would agree that a personal scruple should not distract from worship, even worship you see as flawed? 

Unless you are making the tacit statement that you don't see it as worship in spirit and truth?

In which case, why in the world would you participate in error?

Wouldn't that be violating the RPW?


----------



## dcomin (Sep 8, 2008)

Davidius said:


> Thanks for the winsome response, though.



Please forgive me, brother. The tone of my reply was unwarranted.


----------



## blhowes (Sep 9, 2008)

dcomin said:


> *Is this a trick question? *If God has commanded the singing of His inspired Psalms, and He has not commanded men to write their own songs and sing them in place of His appointed Psalms of praise, then how could singing something other than what He has commanded be anything but displeasing to Him? Sincerity of heart has never made a worship practice which God did not command pleasing in His sight.


No, not a trick question. I'm just thinking through EP/Hymns/Contemporary Music that's used in worship services, was wondering what conclusions others have drawn. I may not like a certain type (contemporary music), but that's just a preference. As one who prefers hymns, I've been wondering if I have any reason to say that God is pleased with the hymns sung, yet is displeased with any form of contemporary music.

Its a sobering thought if God is displeased with a form of music that's sung in so many churches.


----------



## JohnV (Sep 9, 2008)

blhowes said:


> dcomin said:
> 
> 
> > *Is this a trick question? *If God has commanded the singing of His inspired Psalms, and He has not commanded men to write their own songs and sing them in place of His appointed Psalms of praise, then how could singing something other than what He has commanded be anything but displeasing to Him? Sincerity of heart has never made a worship practice which God did not command pleasing in His sight.
> ...



If you want my opinion, Bob, I'll freely give it. But it's only my opinion. 

I think its an overstatement to say that God has not commanded to write songs, and especially that He is not pleased when men put their praises to music. In my view this kind of argument is the same error as being musically and doctrinally careless about what music is brought into the worship service. 

And that seems to me what you're trying to get at, Bob. What is it about worship songs and the music it is put to that is either pleasing or displeasing to God? And there's another thread wondering how this runs into areas of Christian liberties of conscience. 

It's a tough question, Bob. To answer it we have to depend on what the Bible says, and that what it says is quite sufficient for worship and faith. I try to divorce myself from the debate as much as possible so that I can read the Bible objectively on the issue. Neither the Bible nor the Confessions mandate EP; something that important would be stated in no uncertain terms just like other important teachings. So if the Bible and the Confessions aren't clear on it then don't let anyone push you around on that point: it is NOT a point of doctrine. But at the same time the fact is that we are pushed by the (wicked) culture into various forms of music, and we need to be much more careful as to what we call real music, especially for worship. And that's an important thing in reading the Bible on the issue. 

I define music, all of music, by the worship aspect of it. All music is related to worship in one form or another. Music begins and ends with worship. So to call certain forms of music idolatry is not that far off the mark for me. I see some forms of contemporary music as idolatry, and bringing it into the worship service merely by changing the words does not lessen the idolatry of it.


----------



## dcomin (Sep 9, 2008)

JohnV said:


> Neither the Bible nor the Confessions mandate EP; something that important would be stated in no uncertain terms just like other important teachings.



WCF 21.1 The light of nature showeth that there is a God, who hath lordship and sovereignty over all; is good, and doth good unto all; and is therefore to be feared, loved, praised, called upon, trusted in, and served, with all the heart, and with all the soul, and with all the might.(1) *But the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by Himself, and so limited by His own revealed will, that He may not be worshipped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation, or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scripture*.(2) 

(1)Rom 1:20; Acts 17:24; Ps. 119:68; Jer. 10:7; Ps. 31:23; Ps. 18:3; Rom. 10:12; Ps. 62:8; Josh. 24:14; Mark 12:33. 
(2)Deut. 12:32; Matt. 15:9,10; Deut. 15:1-20; Exod. 20:4,5,6; Col. 2:23.

WCF 21.5 The reading of Scriptures with godly fear;(1) the sound preaching,(2) and conscionable hearing of the Word, in obedience unto God, with understanding, faith, and reverence;(3) *singing of Psalms with grace in the heart*;(4) as also, the due administration and worthy receiving of the sacraments instituted by Christ; are all parts of the ordinary religious worship of God5) besides religious oaths,(6) vows,(7) solemn fastings,(8) and thanksgivings upon special occasions,(9) which are, in their several times and seasons, to be used in an holy and religious manner.(10) 

(1)Acts 15:21; Rev. 1:3. 
(2)2 Tim. 4:2. 
(3)James 1:22; Acts 10:33; Matt. 13:19; Heb. 4:2; Isa. 66:2. 
(4)Col. 3:16; Eph. 5:19; James 5:13. 
(5)Matt. 28:19; 1 Cor. 11:23-29; Acts 2:42. 
(6)Deut. 6:13; Neh. 10:29. 
(7)Isa. 19:21; Eccl. 5:4,5. 
(8)Joel 2:12; Esther 4:16; Matt. 9:15; 1 Cor. 7:5. 
(9)Ps. 107; Esther 9:22. 
(10) Heb. 12:28.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Sep 9, 2008)

blhowes said:


> For EPers:
> 1. Do you refrain from singing hymns, etc. at other churches? Why/Why not?
> 2. Since (in your view) singing of Psalms is the music commanded in scripture, do you think singing anything other than Psalms somehow displeases God?



1. Yes, I refrain from singing uninspired hymns (or any non-Psalms) in stated (public, family or private) worship. Because I believe God commands the singing of Psalms only, therefore everything else in song is prohibited.

2. Yes. He alone has instituted that worship which is pleasing to Him, and anything else besides what he has commanded is displeasing. To which, I would add, that any worship offered to him that is not in spirit and in truth, whether externally in accord with the RPW or not, is displeasing in His sight. 

My pastor has been preaching extensively this year on what Reformed worship is all about and it's far from being limited to exclusive psalmody, although that is an important aspect of Biblical worship, because one might sing the right words yet with a heart far from God. I would recommend the following sermons, in particular for anyone interested in this topic.

SermonAudio.com - Reformed Worship Important? 1
SermonAudio.com - Reformed Worship So Important? 2


----------



## blhowes (Sep 9, 2008)

JohnV said:


> I think its an overstatement to say that God has not commanded to write songs, and especially that He is not pleased when men put their praises to music. In my view this kind of argument is the same error as being musically and doctrinally careless about what music is brought into the worship service.


If we assume that God has commanded (or allows) the writing of new songs of praise, do you think all music offered in praise to God is acceptable and pleasing to God? Are there limits as to what is or is not pleasing to God? Or, is it a matter of preference?



JohnV said:


> It's a tough question, Bob. To answer it we have to depend on what the Bible says, and that what it says is quite sufficient for worship and faith. I try to divorce myself from the debate as much as possible so that I can read the Bible objectively on the issue.


Luckily, the purpose for this thread is not to debate. I'm just really curious if any music displeases God. From the EP standpoint, there's a rational (Biblical) reason to say that yes, there is some music that displeases God. From the non-EP standpoint, I haven't been able to come up with a good reason (yet) why God would be displeased with some (if any) music. My preferences may be different from another's preferences, so in a sense anything goes.


----------



## blhowes (Sep 9, 2008)

dcomin said:


> ...*singing of Psalms with grace in the heart*;(4)
> <snip>
> (4)Col. 3:16; Eph. 5:19; James 5:13.


Just curious. 2 of the 3 verses say Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, but they only say "singing of Psalms". Does that mean those who wrote the Westminster Confession thought saying "Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs" to be the same things as saying "Psalms"?


----------



## blhowes (Sep 9, 2008)

Interesting that the 1689 Baptist Confession reads a little differently:

5._____ The reading of the Scriptures, preaching, and hearing the Word of God, teaching and admonishing one another in *psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs*, singing with grace in our hearts to the Lord; as also the administration of baptism, and the Lord's supper, are all parts of religious worship of God, to be performed in obedience to him, with understanding, faith, reverence, and godly fear; moreover, solemn humiliation, with fastings, and thanksgivings, upon special occasions, ought to be used in an holy and religious manner. 
( 1 Timothy 4:13; 2 Timothy 4:2; Luke 8:18; Colossians 3:16; Ephesians 5:19; Matthew 28:19, 20; 1 Corinthians 11:26; Esther 4:16; Joel 2:12; Exodus 15:1-19, Psalms 107 )​
Not sure why. They too may have thought Psalms meant Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, perhaps not.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Sep 9, 2008)

Bob -- You may be interested to read this:

http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/westminster-psalms-36433/


----------



## blhowes (Sep 9, 2008)

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> Bob -- You may be interested to read this:
> 
> http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/westminster-psalms-36433/


Thanks. Interesting. (thanks also for your previous response and the links to the sermons)


----------



## JohnV (Sep 10, 2008)

blhowes said:


> JohnV said:
> 
> 
> > I think its an overstatement to say that God has not commanded to write songs, and especially that He is not pleased when men put their praises to music. In my view this kind of argument is the same error as being musically and doctrinally careless about what music is brought into the worship service.
> ...



Two things, Bob. First, its not quite right to say that non-EPers say nothing in regard to what is and is not acceptable as worship. For one thing, the class of "non-EP" would include anyone and everyone who is not EP, including the likes of John Lennon and Cat Stevens, if you get my drift. But for another, those who are Reformed but non-EP have a completely different category in which they discuss this, so you generally won't find written essays on the subject of "non-EP". Instead you will find a lot under such titles as "godliness", and "holiness" which would assume the discipline of writing songs along with other disciplines. J.I. Packer and F.A. Schaeffer come to mind. 

The second thing is "preferences". Everyone is equally free in his conscience to prefer some things to others, but it does not follow that therefore all preferences are equal. Some may choose the Christian God, and some another god, but that does not mean that all gods are equal. The fact that you may freely choose does not mean that the thing you choose is automatically right. And it has nothing to do with whether the things to choose from are equal. Disco music is hardly worship music. Old Country is more easily adapted to worship while old Western is more difficult, so modern Country & Western is not equal in terms of preference for worship with old Country. Its ridiculous to think that all genres of music are equal on the basis that people choose to like one more than another. 

But also, if its not a matter of indifference to us which type of music we like, why do we tend to think that it IS a matter of indiffernce to God? On what basis? 

I think the question of the pleasures of God is the right kind of question, but I think the presuppositions that seem to be prior to your question aren't quite right. Maybe an example of what I mean:

Someone tried to prove to me that worship bands and contemporary music is allowed in church. All he said was, "Psalm 150... etc." As if citing Psalm 150 proved the presuppositions he was pasting over that text of Scripture to make it say what he wanted it to. Because Psalm 150 itself is hardly proof. He was assuming that his presuppositions are unassailable solely on the basis that faith is a personal right, and that therefore personal interpretations of Scripture are unassailable. As if to say, That's what Scripture means to me, therefore that's what Scripture means." But you can't make Scripture say things that Scripture itself does not mean to say. Scripture means what it means; its our presuppositions that can be wrong. 

So citing Psalm 150 was not proof, even though it seemed so to him. Its not that he doesn't have a right to his opinion, or a right to read Scripture for himself; its that he doesn't know how to reason properly, and therefore he fails in applying the text properly. We can always find "proofs" for our predispositions, even in the very texts which disprove them. As Schaeffer used to say, you can find D.H. Lawrence (sp?) in the gospel of John if you wanted to. So also, if you wanted to you can find EP in the Westminster Confession of Faith. But the fact is, if it were there it would be clearly and expressly there. Citing Psalm 150 does not prove worship bands and contemporary music. Simply citing the things you paste your presuppositions over does not prove your presuppositions.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Sep 10, 2008)

JohnV said:


> So also, if you wanted to you can find EP in the Westminster Confession of Faith. But the fact is, if it were there it would be clearly and expressly there.



The Meaning of "Psalm" in the Westminster Standards - The PuritanBoard


----------



## JohnV (Sep 10, 2008)

Thanks for the link, Chris. I was also referring to the blanket statement that God is displeased with songs other than the Psalms, because that's going too far. But as you yourself say, you're not sure that your conclusions stand. We can't be happy with anything less than a sure revelation, because we're talking about what God wants, not what we think God wants. Overstating the case on God's behalf without sufficient warrant is one of the things those same Confessions warn us against. As a matter of fact, that's where the WCF utilizes the very text that defines the RPW. So if you are going to find EP in the Westminster standards you have to do it right. 

And again, if something that is so central to worship and which is that important is not stated clearly in the Confessional statements of the church, then it's not really there at all. We regard them primarily as the Spirit's witness, and secondarily as the Spirit's witness through the Church. Surely it would be that if God were displeased to hear praises sung in our own words, out of the mouths of babes so to speak, then the Confessions would make a plain statement to that effect. 

Remember, I can hold to those same Confessions and not be EP; I can hold to the RPW every bit as much as EPers, and still not be EP. As a matter of fact, I make the claim that I hold to it more. 

But that's not what this thread is about. Bob wanted different opinions, and my church says that my faith is accepted in their eyes, that I am truly Reformed, and also this Board has accepted me as a member on those terms, so I think that I may also submit my opinion. That's all it was. I'm not trying to argue here. I'm giving reasons for what I believe.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Sep 10, 2008)

JohnV said:


> But as you yourself say, you're not sure that your conclusions stand.


John,
What are you talking about? I'm convinced the Westminster Assembly authorized the psalter and only the psalter for public worship. I'm not convinced that they did so to a man convinced of EP as we have it developed today, but that they did so is pretty clear.


JohnV said:


> So if you are going to find EP in the Westminster standards you have to do it right.


We've been over this ground. It is by examining the words and work of the Assembly. Others may do it better than I did; see Matthew Winzer's forthcoming review of Nick Needham's work in _The Confessional Presbyterian_ 4. However he and I agree, and disagree with Needham, that in WCF 21 "singing of psalms" means "singing of the 150 psalms". 


JohnV said:


> Surely it would be that if God were displeased to hear praises sung in our own words, out of the mouths of babes so to speak, then the Confessions would make a plain statement to that effect.
> 
> Remember, I can hold to those same Confessions and not be EP; I can hold to the RPW every bit as much as EPers, and still not be EP. As a matter of fact, I make the claim that I hold to it more.


The Westminster Standards are clear in that they only authorized the 150 psalms. I believe one must take an exception to the original WCF and Catechism in a church that holds them, to hold that something other than the 150 psalms may be included in public worship.


JohnV said:


> But that's not what this thread is about. Bob wanted different opinions, and my church says that my faith is accepted in their eyes, that I am truly Reformed, and also this Board has accepted me as a member on those terms, so I think that I may also submit my opinion. That's all it was. I'm not trying to argue here. I'm giving reasons for what I believe.


Your a member here as long as you want to be and as long as you behave, just like anyone else approved for membership. Yes; you have your opinion. I am merely noting it is wrong .... in my considered opinion.


----------



## JonathanHunt (Sep 11, 2008)

To answer the original question, yes, I was once at a church where they sang the chorus 'Our God is an awesome God' eight times over. I sang it twice, then stood for two more choruses. Then I will confess I was so overwhelmed and distressed with the banality of it all that I sat down for the final four.


----------



## blhowes (Sep 11, 2008)

JohnV said:


> Two things, Bob. First, its not quite right to say that non-EPers say nothing in regard to what is and is not acceptable as worship. For one thing, the class of "non-EP" would include anyone and everyone who is not EP, including the likes of John Lennon and Cat Stevens, if you get my drift. But for another, those who are Reformed but non-EP have a completely different category in which they discuss this, so you generally won't find written essays on the subject of "non-EP". Instead you will find a lot under such titles as "godliness", and "holiness" which would assume the discipline of writing songs along with other disciplines. J.I. Packer and F.A. Schaeffer come to mind.


Either John Lennon and Cat Stevens became reformed when I wasn't looking, or I desperately need to work on my writing skills. My assumption with the term "non-EP" was that it was limited to people here on the PB. I'm surprised you couldn't read my mind. 


JohnV said:


> The second thing is "preferences". Everyone is equally free in his conscience to prefer some things to others, but it does not follow that therefore all preferences are equal. Some may choose the Christian God, and some another god, but that does not mean that all gods are equal. The fact that you may freely choose does not mean that the thing you choose is automatically right.


 If you could read my mind, John, what a tale my thoughts could tell...

Again, my assumption was that we were referring to the Christian God, and what pleases/displeases Him.


JohnV said:


> And it has nothing to do with whether the things to choose from are equal. Disco music is hardly worship music. Old Country is more easily adapted to worship while old Western is more difficult, so modern Country & Western is not equal in terms of preference for worship with old Country. Its ridiculous to think that all genres of music are equal on the basis that people choose to like one more than another.


I'm with you, John. Though ridiculous, that doesn't stop churches from using these genres of music. When they do, to me it seems not appropriate for worship, but to them it seems perfectly appropriate. Which brings me back to my original wondering - does it displease God?


----------



## JohnV (Sep 11, 2008)

Okay, but you got my point anyway. I figured you were confining the term to people on this Board. 

Yes, that doesn't stop churches from using them, that's true. But its a whole different thing to then assert that their worship "displeases" God. That's going way too far. What worship wouldn't displease God if it weren't for the sanctification of the Spirit? The question to ask, really, is if it ever gets to some point where the Spirit refuses to sanctify the singing? 

I think that there are many things that we can wonder about in worship, whether or not God is pleased with our worship. I find comfort in WCF I, vi: "The *whole* counsel of God concerning *all things necessary* for his own glory, man's salvation, *faith and life*, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture." My own worship isn't acceptable to God at all, except that I am received by the washing of Jesus' blood, and made holy by the Holy Spirit. Nowhere does the Bible or the Confessions say that God rejects my worship because I sing songs other than the Psalms, or because I sing songs of praise to the accompaniment of a guitar. 

What instruments are used and what songs are sung are left within the province of each individual church, in the hands of the elders. Our church puts it in the hands of the federation, so that there would be unity in worship throughout the denomination: a common song book; and a common presentation of the music. We sing the 150 Psalms and some 65 Scripturally-referenced hymns. That's what the federation agreed on, so all the churches stick to that. But I don't think they ever say that any church which sings songs other than what's in the Book of Praise is displeasing God. That's going way too far, and really is a whole 'nother kettle of fish.


----------



## FrielWatcher (Sep 11, 2008)

Reference:

http://www.puritanboard.com/f67/heres-some-worship-music-37412/


----------



## MW (Sep 11, 2008)

JohnV said:


> The question to ask, really, is if it ever gets to some point where the Spirit refuses to sanctify the singing?



As reformed people we should be looking at our actions in the light of the two causes of the reformation. The formal cause is sola scriptura and the material cause is justification by faith alone. The formal principle upon which our worship is acceptable to God is this -- does God require it in His word? The material principle is this -- is it offered by faith in Jesus Christ? A positive answer to both these questions provides the conscience with an assurance that it is offering Spirit-filled worship to God.


----------



## YXU (Sep 16, 2008)

blhowes said:


> In the past, some on the PB (don't recall if they still participate on PB) who hold to EP have said that if they attend a church that sings anything other than Psalms that they refrain from singing. They don't make a big issue of it or bring attention to themselves, but they just refrain from singing.
> 
> For EPers:
> 1. Do you refrain from singing hymns, etc. at other churches? Why/Why not?
> ...


----------

