# The Confessions and the Regulative Principle



## elnwood (Jan 8, 2007)

Is the corporate reading of the confessions allowable under the Regulative Principle? If so, how? Is there an explicit command? Do we see this in the New Testament church? Worship includes the reading of God's word, but I don't see anything about corporate reading of a non-canonical creed.


----------



## non dignus (Jan 9, 2007)

Don,

Peter was asked, "Who do men say that I am?"

If he and one other disciple had answered together, it would have been corporate confession.

Do you ever ask candidates for baptism to come to the front and affirm together their faith and trust in Christ for salvation?


----------



## panta dokimazete (Jan 9, 2007)

contrast

Colossians 4:4
Pray that I may proclaim it clearly, as *I* should.

with

Romans 10:8
But what does it say? "The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart," that is, the word of faith *we* are proclaiming:


----------



## elnwood (Jan 9, 2007)

non dignus said:


> Don,
> 
> Peter was asked, "Who do men say that I am?"
> 
> ...



David,

That's not relevant. The Regulative Principle of Worship applies to the aspects of worship when the body of Christ gathers together. It does not apply to the rest of the Christian life. If it did, the Exclusive Psalter, No Instruments crowd would forbid the singing of all non-Psalter songs and all playing of instruments!


----------



## non dignus (Jan 9, 2007)

I'm not catching your point. So what if some misinterpret scripture?


----------



## elnwood (Jan 9, 2007)

non dignus said:


> I'm not catching your point. So what if some misinterpret scripture?



Oh ... well, if you don't hold to the historical view of the Regulative Principle, then this question does not concern you. However, many find this taught in your own confession (Question 96 of the Heidelberg Catechism), as well as in the WCF.

Most people on this board do hold to the historical view of the Regulative Principle, so I will wait on an answer from them.


----------



## Davidius (Jan 9, 2007)

This is something I have pondered myself. 





(sorry, I don't have anything substantial to add ...but I _am_ interested in seeing the responses!)


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jan 9, 2007)

elnwood said:


> Is the corporate reading of the confessions allowable under the Regulative Principle? If so, how? Is there an explicit command? Do we see this in the New Testament church? Worship includes the reading of God's word, but I don't see anything about corporate reading of a non-canonical creed.



For what it's worth, not speaking for my pastor: I believe that it would be a break as there is no specific command. I have no problem w/ reading it before or after the call to worship. In my estimation, if you are guessing, it is safer to err on the side of caution.


----------



## elnwood (Jan 11, 2007)

Wow, the hardcore Regulative Principle supporters were all over the Exclusive Psalter and No Instruments issues, but there's barely a peep on this thread! Props to Scott Bushey for giving an honest answer.

I've been to an RPCNA church about four or five times, and I've never heard the confessions read corporately. But I know other Reformed churches in which confessional reading is an absolute essential to the worship service.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Jan 11, 2007)

See this previous thread: RPW and the Reading of Confessions/Creeds.


----------



## staythecourse (Jan 11, 2007)

*An aside on the Regulative Principle*

I took a class in Baptist History under Dr. Tom Nettles. Great guy.

Anyway, in his research and in the book he co-wrote in Baptist History years ago, he credits (along with others) John Smyth as the person who renewed baptism as the proper form of the sacrament as required by the Lord.

This zealous fellow went to the extreme of not allowing the Scripture in church as it was not in the original language! Everything was a translation (that the folks would understand) so he forbid it! How's that for trying to keep things pure.

At the end of his life, he was tired out, said he was sorry for being so extreme in many things and died.

Course, the book does it more justice and Nettles would just smile kindly at this lousy description but you get the idea.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jan 11, 2007)

This is a take from someone (me) who considers himself bound very strictly to the RPW. And yes I have friends here on PB who disagree with me.

The Scripture itself contains several "faithful sayings." Where and in what context were they said?

The Shema was the Jewish high-creed. "Amen" is a super-simple creed, and "all the people said" it (Deut. 27:15, etc.; 1 Chr. 16:36; Neh. 5:13; 8:6; 1 Co. 14:16; Rev. 5:14, 7:12, & 19:4)

Creeds are forms of Vow-taking, which is an element of worship.


----------



## Arch2k (Jan 11, 2007)

I have to say that honestly, I still struggle with this. I have had numerous discussions with my pastor, and have read up whatever I can find on the issue, but it doesn't seem as clear to me. On one hand, I find many commands to "confess" in scripture, and a strong reformed history of the practice. OTOH, it is not to be found in the confession, and it seems there is a history of rejecting the practice as well.

If I remember correctly, even the Church of Scotland was divided on the issue. John Knox's liturgy exercised a recitation of the apostle's creed, while later churches rejected it.

This is one issue I would surely like to be more settled about.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Jan 11, 2007)

I believe it is perfectly acceptable, and even preferred, in worship. There are a multitude of Reformed liturgies from the early Reformation era that included the Apostle's Creed.


----------



## MW (Jan 11, 2007)

If the congregation can recite a man made document, it can sing man made hymns.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Jan 12, 2007)

armourbearer said:


> If the congregation can recite a man made document, it can sing man made hymns.



Rev. Winzer,

Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding you, but are they not two separate elements of worship, and as such to be judged separately regarding their biblically-acceptable forms? After all, that very appeal to song being a _separate_ element of worship from either preaching, prayer or reading is the defense I always see given by EP-proponents when they are asked why the biblical allowance of uninspired words in preaching and prayer as well as of extra-Psalter Scripture-readings do not justify hymnody.


----------



## MW (Jan 12, 2007)

Me Died Blue said:


> Rev. Winzer,
> 
> Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding you, but are they not two separate elements of worship, and as such to be judged separately regarding their biblically-acceptable forms? After all, that very appeal to song being a _separate_ element of worship from either preaching, prayer or reading is the defense I always see given by EP-proponents when they are asked why the biblical allowance of uninspired words in preaching and prayer as well as of extra-Psalter Scripture-readings do not justify hymnody.



I consider praise-song to be an act of congregational declaration. Heb. 2:12, "Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee." It is prophetic in function, delivering the word of Christ, Col. 3:16. Any declaration by a private spirit is to be uttered by the person singularly, and the others are to judge of the correctness of what is delivered. 1 Cor. 14:29, "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge." This is what is done in preaching. If all speak together it should be in the words of inspiration, where the truth of what is spoken is beyond doubt. Blessings!


----------



## panta dokimazete (Jan 12, 2007)

elnwood said:


> Wow, the hardcore Regulative Principle supporters were all over the Exclusive Psalter and No Instruments issues, but there's barely a peep on this thread! Props to Scott Bushey for giving an honest answer.
> 
> I've been to an RPCNA church about four or five times, and I've never heard the confessions read corporately. But I know other Reformed churches in which confessional reading is an absolute essential to the worship service.



If Rick Warren wrote a confession/profession/creed and had the church confess it, you bet there'd be controversy!


----------



## Arch2k (Jan 14, 2007)

Doing a little research. 

Rev. Winzer, 

Do you know of any resources that discuss the use of creeds in worship from a negative perspective? I would love to get my hands on the best pro/con works regarding the use of creeds in worship.

For what it's worth here is a copy of Knox's liturgy where he models the Apostle's creed as a form of worship:


----------



## MW (Jan 14, 2007)

Sorry Jeff, I can't recall any resources at present. My only comment on the Knox liturgy is an expression of thankfulness to the Head of the Church for the second reformation. The Scot's Confession, First Book of Discipline, and Knox's Liturgy served their purpose in the initial reforming period; but I wouldn't like to see Superintendents, term eldership, set prayers, and a host of other interim measures brought back into our more mature Presbyterian government and worship. Blessings!


----------

