Exclusive Psalmody vs Free Hymnal Worship

Status
Not open for further replies.
Right, I just thought some had arranged it a certain way, specifically for the worship in church. Yes, the Psalter was arranged a certain way - into 5 books, probably during the Babylonian captivity. Psalters are in the same order as the text of Scripture, just rhymed and metered.
Edit: and I reckon my question was along the lines of: Do those who subscribe to EP sing all 150 over a course of time? My particular congregation has a "Psalm of the week" which we all are to practice during the week in family worship - in doing so we sing through the whole Psalter in order one after the other. The other 3 or 4 Psalms sung during worship are chosen by the minister for their connection to the sermon.
Edit #2: and, who picks the tune? And is there any repeat or just sung straight through? The RPCNA is constantly producing new editions with fixed tunes - in format it looks like a hymnal. The Psalms are not all the same meter so the tunes are not all interchangeable. Some of us prefer the older metrical Psalter, partly because the tunes are largely interchangeable, but also because it aids in memorization (just like some prefer to keep using the same translation). The minister will often choose the tune to fit the Psalm - a more somber tune for a more somber selection, for example. But I have had the wonderful experience of hearing a Psalm sung to different tunes because a different aspect of the text was being emphasized in different sermons. Congregations that are new to singing Psalms usually start with a few basic tunes - many tunes used for "classic" hymns were originally Psalm tunes.
 
Here is my little contribution. Not personally well versed on the topic. But this looks like a formal debate done about 20 years or so ago.
 
Here also are some Puritan Books I looked up on the issue; though I have not read them myself.

Gospel musick, or, The singing of Davids psalms, &c. in the publick congregations, or private families asserted, and vindicated, against a printed pamphlet, entitled, Certain reasons by way of confutation of singing psalms in the letter, objections sent in, in writing, scruples of some tender consciences by thy loving brother, N.H., D.D., M.M.S. ; vnto which is added, the iudgement of our worthy brethren of New-England touching singing of psalms, as it is learnedly and gravely set forth in their preface to the Singing psalms, by them translated into metre. - Homes, Nathanael, 1599-1678.


The breach repaired in God's worship, or, Singing of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, proved to be an holy ordinance of Jesus Christ with an answer to all objections : as also, an examination of Mr. Isaac Marlow's two papers, one called, A discourse against singing, &c., the other, An appendix : wherein his arguments and cavils are detected and refuted / by Benjamin Keach ...


A Christian, sober & plain exercitation on the two grand practicall controversies of these times; infant baptism and singing of psalms: Wherein all the scriptures on both sides are recited, opened and argued, with brevity and tenderness: and whatever hath been largely discussed by others, briefly contracted in a special method for the edification of the saints. By Cuthbert Sidenham, teacher to a church of Christ in Newcastle upon Tine.

Singing of Psalmes a Gospel-ordinance, or, A Treatise wherein are handled these particulars 1. Touching the duty itselfe, 2. Touching the matter to be sung, 3. Touching the singers, 4. Touching the manner of singing / by John Cotton ...

Singing the psalmes the duty of Christians under the New Testament, or, A vindication of that gospel-ordinance in V sermons upon Ephesians 5, 19 wherein are asserted and cleared I. That, II. What, III. How, IV. Why [brace] we must sing / by though. Ford ...
 
I just read your first post, so forgive me if you addressed this later on in the thread. I am not convinced that you are arguing from a consistent regulative principle framework. For instance, you state: "The fact is there is not a command to sing the book of Psalms exclusively." No one, and I mean no one who understands and defends the Presbyterian & Puritan view of worship, believes the Bible commands the exclusive use of Psalms as a positive command. In other words, we do not go to the scripture to see commands such as "you shall only do X." Rather, we see the command to sing Psalms and no clear and unambiguous reason to sing anything else.

You also state:
The EP advocates try to make that case by arguing that "psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs" in (Col. 3:16, Eph 5:19) refers the "book of Psalms". Those arguing for inclusive psalmody (singing Psalms but not exclusively) argue that there is no evidence within these texts to deduce Paul meant "the Book of Psalms only".

This is also a misunderstanding of our position. We do not argue positively from Col. 3 & Eph. 5 as proof for exclusive psalmody divorced from the canonical context. Rather, we see these three phrases used in the psalms themselves so there is no definitive proof that any of these three terms must mean an uninspired hymn.

Also:
The inclusive psalmody advocates are not persuaded that the argument for EP can be deduced by good and "necessary" consequence, either by what is commanded, or by the natural use of grammar or context into which Paul spoke there.

The burden of proof is not on the Psalm singer to prove the exclusivity of the Psalter. The burden of proof is on the Hymn singer to prove that singing uninspired hymns is necessitated by the NT text.

The boundaries for the content of our song is "the Word"

Amen. Carry this out consistently. The content of our song is limited by our song leader. In Christ, we sing with Christ and to Christ. He leads his people with his praise to the glory of his own name. The Word of Christ in this life is nothing other than the inspired praises of scripture.

Another unhelpful argument is trying to make "singing" an entirely separate category of worship.

Can a congregation be faithful to the commands of scripture if they never sing at all? If not, then it is admitted that sung praise is a separate element and must be regulated and defended on its own. Surely there is overlap in all of the means of grace, but the overlap does not overshadow the distinctions. Women are to sing psalms in the midst of the congregation, but that does not mean women are to pray on behalf of the congregation.
Continue reading my later posts in that thread, especially the last couple pages. I don't have time to rehash the same arguments again here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top