Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Thank you for the replies!
I don't know a whole lot about the debate between EP and non-EP but I am under the impression that EP is believed because EP's would state that since God has given us a collection of worship songs and provides scriptural examples of them being sung, God requires these songs and these songs only to be used in public worship. But I wonder, given that God does not supply the melodies or give any indication as to what those melodies would be, using the strict hermeneutic and application of the regulative principle that EP's use, one would be forced to not sing the Psalms for fear of singing them with an inappropriate melody or inappropriate way. Also, especially given the fact that the Psalms are in Hebrew, can we be sure our English translation even provides us with the proper syllables or poetic structure so as to accurately determine the proper tempo and mood that said Psalm should be sung?
IN WHAT MANNER SHOULD WE SING THE PSALMS?
1. Intelligently. We are rational beings. This is a reasonable service. "I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also." It requires the concentrated action of all the mental faculties, as well as previous familiarity with the matter of the Psalms. On this account they should be regularly explained from Sabbath to Sabbath. Where their excellence is appreciated they will never be laid aside.
2. With the heart. God looketh on the heart. He says to every worshipper, "My son, give me thine heart." When filled with love, and joy, and gratitude, how it beats responsive in his presence, imparts its own thrilling emotions to the music and the psalm, and pours out its richest and its sweetest treasures unsparingly at his feet! Without this, the finest music and the noblest Psalmody are empty and worthless offerings—not better than the husks which swine do eat.
3. With the voice. It is the divine outlet and utterance of the mind and heart in man. God's voice is himself, and we receive it as such. So when we ask God to accept of us we say—hear my cry, attend to my voice. It is a distinctive and inseparable part of ourselves; the natural embodiment of our emotions and desires. We cannot give utterance to them without it. God has made it with special adaptation to this end, and therefore it is, beyond all comparison, the most consummate organ of expression and of praise. He formed it for himself, and claims its most skilful intonations for his worship. We insult, but do not praise God when we use mechanical instruments in its stead. If there be "no essential distinction between the music of the voice and the music of an instrument," may we not use instruments to deepen and interpret our emotions in prayer as well as in praise? The church of Rome plays her litanies and masses with as much propriety and effect as she plays her anthems and oratorios. This substitution of man-made instruments and offices in place of God's is the very core of Anti-Christian worship. The early Christians perfectly understood the symbolical import of the musical instruments which are mentioned in the book of Psalms, and could sing about them with as much freedom and intelligence as they sang of the sacrifices, which no one thinks of renewing. Thus Clement of Alexandria, at the close of the second century, refers to those mentioned in the 150th Psalm. "Praise him with the psaltery. The tongue is the psaltery of the Lord. Praise Him on the lyre. By the lyre is meant the mouth struck by the spirit as it were by a plectrum. Praise him on the chords and organ. Our body he calls an organ, and its nerves are the strings by which it has received harmonious tension, and when struck by the Spirit it gives forth human voices.'' The common sense of the Church in all ages has declared that instrumental music may be calculated to gratify the senses and inflame the passions, but not to aid, unless as types or symbols, the devotions of men. It properly belongs to the public procession and the battlefield, to the theatre and the drinking saloon, but not to the Church of the living God.
4. With distinct enunciation. Every word, as well as every note, should be clearly pronounced. Otherwise, to a stranger coming into the Church, our singing might as well be in an unknown tongue.
5. Skilfully. The art of singing cannot be learned without much study and practice. It is a divine art, and should be cultivated incessantly for the glory of God's name and the improvement of his worship. "As it is commanded of God that all should sing, so all should make conscience of learning to sing. Those, therefore, who neglect to learn to sing live in sin, as they neglect what is necessary to one of the ordinances of God's worship." If any say the heart is everything in praise, we reply they can have no heart whatever in the exercise who do not strive to perform it in the most skilful and perfect manner. In every congregation there should be a standing class for the improvement of sacred music.
6. With appropriate melody. Each psalm has its own character and style, and should have its own tune. The collection is not too large for this. The Reformers everywhere accomplished it with ease. Some of the longer historical psalms are specially adapted for chanting, and chanting is the most simple, ancient, and devotional form of all music. Every tune should be marked by a religious character; the singer and the hearer should at once feel that they are not in the theatre, or the concert-room, or in the private social party, but in the house of the most high God.
7. Harmoniously. All voices are not alike. In pitch as well as in tone they have deep natural distinctions. Instead of vainly trying to obliterate these distinctions, we should aim to harmonise them in God's worship. Human voices resolve themselves into what is called four-part harmony, a natural arrangement by which the different voices of women and men are employed together, according to their pitch. Each individual should find out his own proper part, and cultivate and practise it in full-toned harmony with all the rest. When two or three meet together in the name of Christ they are required to agree together, or harmonise, as to what they shall ask, and as to their general intercourse and action for the common good. Should they not, in the same manner, tune their feelings and voices to sing together in the harmonious expression of their common praise?
8. In the way of direct and sustained adoration. "O come, let us sing unto the Lord. Let us come before his presence with thanksgiving, and make a joyful noise unto Him with psalms. For the Lord is a great God, and a great king above all gods." Yet how often do the indolent posture, the wandering eyes, the frequent interruptions, that would not be permitted during prayer, indicate the want of that solemnity which befits an act of divine worship! When the Jews sang praises they bowed their heads and worshipped, and the redeemed in the Apocalyptic heaven fall down and cast their crowns before the throne. Should not we also take the attitude of highest respect and adoration when engaged in this exercise? "Thou, even thou, art to be feared; and who may stand in thy sight if once thou art angry?" "Praise ye the Lord. Ye that stand in the house of the Lord, in the courts of the house of our God."
Well, this objection, applied consistently across all worship forms, would also prevent the reading of Scripture in anything other than the original languages, and would further prevent the reading of Scripture even in those languages for fear of using the wrong intonation. Again, we must put forth our best efforts in applying WCF 1.6, and realize that we must be ever reforming. Sanctified sense is always in order.
Dear Mark, You wrote:
"Todd, I think you nailed my point exactly. If one were to take the EP hermeneutic consistently one would be forced to do just as you say. At least right now that is what it appears to be to me.
It just seems to me inconsistent to insist on EP when one is using melodies that are completely non-Biblical. "
The "EP hermeneutic" does not include the tunes--they're not in the text of Scripture, nor has the Lord seen fit otherwise to preserve them. If your point is that the EP hermeneutic *ought to* be thus, then you have a responsibility to prove it. I know of no EP'ers who hold such a hermeneutic. What you have attributed to EP'ers is a charicature, not their hermeneutic.
I'm not sure where to go with this discussion from here. The EP argument is not "sing these tunes" as divinely authored, but "sing these words" as divinely authored. It is the propositions of Scripture that inform our thinking, and the circumstances of various melodies serve other purposes such as making those words memorable, etc. To say that EP'ers demand that everything in song be ordered according to God's Word, and then say that we're somehow inconsistent because we don't use melodies that the Lord has not preserved in His Word seems to be reaching beyond "sanctified sense".
Ep'ers distinguish, as do all who hold to the regulative principle of worship, between elements and circumstances of worship. John L Girardeau on Chris Coldwell's website here. So no, not all things that take place in worship must be found in the Word. What kind of seats? What kind of lighting? What kind of facility? What time do we meet? How long is the service? These are questions of circumstance common to all human actions and societies and are to be governed by the light of nature, Christian prudemce, and the general principles of the Word, which are always to be obeyed. (WCF 1.6) The tune of the Psalm, as I said in my first post, falls in this category.
To answer your question directly, dear sir, no, Ep'ers, with all who hold to the regulative principle of worship, do not hold that "everything in worship" must have a specific command in Scripture. I hope this clarifies my position.
To say that the Lord does not desire melodies because He has not left any in Scripture is to deny the command given *in* Scripture to sing. The Lord has not left melodies, as He has not regulated lighting, seating, time of service, length of service.
Maybe I should modify my syllogism:
1. EP'ers demand that anything done during Public Worship specifically meant as part of the order of worship must propositionally come from Scripture.
2. Scripture does not propositionally provide musical melodies.
3. Therefore, musical melodies should not be used during the order of worship during Public Worship.
Maybe I should modify my syllogism:
1. EP'ers demand that anything done during Public Worship specifically meant as part of the order of worship must propositionally come from Scripture.
2. Scripture does not propositionally provide musical melodies.
3. Therefore, musical melodies should not be used during the order of worship during Public Worship.
Here is revealed something which you have been assuming all along, but which has no basis in the nature of the EP argument, namely, that musical melodies are a part of the worship of God. No Psalm singer claims to be worshipping God when they take up musical melodies; they simply use musical melodies as a necessary part of fulfilling the command "to sing." The Psalm singer does, however, claim to be worshipping God in *what* they sing, since the Scriptures prescribe the singing of a certain *quality* of song in praising God. This being the case, in responding to the EP argument, you are obliged to understand the distinction which is made between (1.) circumstances, the fulfilling of which are necessary in order to obey the command to sing, and (2.) elements, which are the essence of worship, and which God has commanded us to do in worship to Him, such as the singing of Psalms with grace in the heart. Failure to recognise this distinction will only lead to what is called the fallacy of composition, such as is committed in your modified syllogism above. Blessings!
To the OP:
The question was, "How do you choose the melodies to sing the Psalms?"
I see that the real question is clarified in Post #4 above.
Now that I think about it, apparently I failed to read between the lines when I read "the exclusive practice of singing only the psalms" back in Post #1. Had I been more careful, I would have spent that time period in alternative activity.
Lesson learned. I regret the misunderstanding.
I'm sorry you found your post to be a waste Jay. I personally found it very informative. I am just as curious in the answer you gave as the answers to my more clarified question in P4. I'm sorry if you feel you were misled and that I have caused you feelings of regret. I had no intentions of causing such feelings. On a brighter note, I definitely know who to ask for recommendations if I ever adopt EP or just adopt singing of the Psalter! God bless Jay.
...I try to be judicious as far as the choice of tune. It depends on the passage to be sung and the prevailing mood of the passage. Some tunes seem appropriate; others don't.
The Psalms in Meter (Irish split-leaf) suggests that tunes fall roughly into seven categories: plaintive, prayerful, restful, didactic, cheerful, jubilant, majestic; and the editors list tunes under each category. This is obviously subjective. Some tunes seem to span more than one classification. Within a classification the range of moods may be very broad. Two tunes in the same classification might not seem to work equally well.
We sing from the 1650 Scottish Psalter.