Inclusive vs Exclusive Psalmody

[arapahoepark]

What are arguments against Inclusive Psalmody from Exclusive Psalmodists?
What are arguments for IP over against EP?

 

[Logan]

In a nutshell, an exclusive psalmodist believes that applying the regulative principle in this area means that God has only permitted psalms in corporate worship, and we ought not to go beyond the bounds of what he has prescribed.

Thus, the exclusive psalmodist is not so much against inclusive psalmody as against inclusive hymnody, because our conviction is that man-made hymns are not permitted by God in corporate worship.

I believe the IP would argue that the phrase in Col 3:16 and Eph 5:19 "psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs" means that more than psalms ought to be sung, but I haven't met any IPs who hold to this position with conviction: i.e., their position is not so much that hymns should be sung, but more that they can be sung.

In practice though, I find the psalms are very sadly ignored, even by IP churches. Everyone seems to think we should be singing them but most churches sing none and the few who do may go entire months without singing any, only putting one in the order of service every once in a while. It makes me sad to think that Christians don't realize what a treasure they've given up: an inspired song book! I would love to see Churches once again singing psalms exclusively, but I would also love to see them singing any psalms at all.

 

[Southern Presbyterian]

Trent,

The subject of EP, and most every possible associated topic, has been discussed on the PB myriad times and in myriad contexts. The search bar at the top right of this page will yield a plethora of threads that should address your questions and many, many more.

 

[Marrow Man]

In practice though, I find the psalms are very sadly ignored, even by IP churches. Everyone seems to think we should be singing them but most churches sing none and the few who do may go entire months without singing any, only putting one in the order of service every once in a while. It makes me sad to think that Christians don't realize what a treasure they've given up: an inspired song book! I would love to see Churches once again singing psalms exclusively, but I would also love to see them singing any psalms at all.

Logan, we are what could be called an IP church (I am not EP, but I am under the conviction that psalms should be sung during every service). We sing at least one psalm every service, and usually sing 2-3 psalms per service. But I also understand that we are the exception and not the rule, and that most churches practice what could be termed exclusive hymnody.

 

[SeanAnderson]

I find it tragic that many evangelical churches do not sing any psalms at all. I have been trying to push this issue in my own church.

I have at times found exclusive psalmody attractive, but this isn't really an option for the vast majority of Britain. And there are some very good hymns, including some modern 'worship songs', full of biblical content and sound theology.

But there are also some very poor songs sung in churches today. I believe that even with inclusive psalmody, the regulative principle should be applied also to uninspired hymns, which should always be consistent with inspired scripture. They should call to mind the language of scriptural songs, the doctrines of grace and redemptive history, for example.

In my opinion, the principal argument for EP would be that we can be certain we are worshipping in a biblical way, a way that pleases God. An exclusive psalmodist can't get it wrong.

The principal argument for IP would be the opportunity it gives us to compose and sing new songs which celebrate events recorded in all of scripture, including the New Testament.

 

[arapahoepark]

Ok, I need some clarification. I asked this as I was browsing Tim's site on Exclusive Psalmody. In describing IP I took it as singing other songs from Scripture and not just the Psalms (in other words not hymns), save the Apostle's Creed that is mentioned..

By Inclusive psalmody, I mean that the practice is to sing the 150 Psalms of the Bible plus other selections such as (but not necessarily limited to) the Ten Commandments, Song of Mary, Song of Zacharias, Song of Simeon, Lord’s Prayer, and the Apostles’ Creed.

Here the comments in the thread seem to take IP to be Psalms + hymns not from scripture. Am I on the right track?

 

[Rom]

Both the IP and the EP positions should come by way of what we believe the Regulative Principle to teach - "if God commands IP, then we must be IP", if "God commands EP, then we must be EP".

At the end of it all, that's the principal issue. When we lose sight of this, I think that's when the danger begins and we start to become "wise in our own eyes".

I find it tragic that many evangelical churches do not sing any psalms at all. I have been trying to push this issue in my own church.

I have at times found exclusive psalmody attractive, but this isn't really an option for the vast majority of Britain. And there are some very good hymns, including some modern 'worship songs', full of biblical content and sound theology.

But there are also some very poor songs sung in churches today. I believe that even with inclusive psalmody, the regulative principle should be applied also to uninspired hymns, which should always be consistent with inspired scripture. They should call to mind the language of scriptural songs, the doctrines of grace and redemptive history, for example.

In my opinion, the principal argument for EP would be that we can be certain we are worshipping in a biblical way, a way that pleases God. An exclusive psalmodist can't get it wrong.

The principal argument for IP would be the opportunity it gives us to compose and sing new songs which celebrate events recorded in all of scripture, including the New Testament.

 

[Tim]

Trent - thanks for visiting my site. I think the key part of what I wrote is what was in parentheses: "but not necessarily limited to". My reason for writing it in that way is that many of the Dutch Reformed churches seem to identify with EP, and have a psalter, but upon a closer examination, they include some of those other non-Psalm selections that I mentioned in that quote. Because I wished to include such congregations with that caveat, I mentioned the issue on that part of the website.

I have no problem with IP referring to Psalms + something else (i.e., hymns not from scripture, as you put it). I think there are people who hold to "scripture songs only", which would include just the songs found in scripture: from the book of Psalms or any of the other 65 books of the canon.

My own position, and that of my denomination, is that while there are songs in scripture outside the 150 Psalms, only the 150 Psalms have been appointed by God for sung worship. Hope this helps.

I welcome any comments on what I wrote on my website, and I would be happy for folks to suggest a better way of describing things.