At first there was one—one sect, that is. I refer to the Reformed Protestant churches. These churches hopped out of the Protestant Reformed churches a few years ago. The first sect is now two. Another sect has hopped out of the first. As is inevitable with sects, this sect has become sectier.
It might have appeared, at first, that these Reformed Protestant churches, by their official “Act of Separation” from the PRC were separating for good cause, for the reformation of the church. For ostensibly theirs, the cause of the separatists, was weighty: the honor of the hinge on which the church swings, the truth of justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. But that has proven not to be the case; the Separation was over the matter of two mountains—one insignificant, the Mt. of Mere Words, and another evil: the Mt. of Pride. The whole separating and then separation business, therefore, was a matter of attitude, vitriol, and nit-picking, not of doctrine, not of grace. And Christ, over it, was not in it.
Hence a sect was formed, the Reformed Protestant churches. A sect: a Thing deviating from truth, dividing Christians not along truth lines but according to man-made positions, posturing, and pride.
The sectarianism of the whole Thing soon became evident by its Dictatus Papae (read: papal) insistence that all members of the sect use the same Christian day schools according to “the demand of the covenant” and its ridiculous corollary: there may be, as a rule, no homeschooling.
This invention and promotion of a covenantal-ecclesiastical-liberal arts educational “togetherness” doctrine and pedagogy more of Lenin than of the Holy Spirit led to the Canadian members of the sect and one of its ministers splitting off and becoming independent.
Not many months ago another Thing, Thing Two (or is it by now Thing Three?) hopped out of Sect One. Led by Andy Lanning (now twice deposed, I think), a main reason for this new thing, this Sect Two calling itself The Remnant Reformed church, has been the insistence of Mr. Lanning, which now is the Sect’s insistence, on the singing of psalms, and of them only, in the public worship of God.
Exclusive psalmody. Never could figure that one out. Or the whole “purity of worship” thing which is supposed to be according to a “regulative principle” which is supposed to mean that whatever is not commanded or exemplified in Scripture is forbidden in the worship of God, which is supposed to be a rigorous and godly application of the second commandment especially as regards the public, formal worship of the Church of Jesus Christ, which is supposed to be the plain-sense interpretation of especially two texts, Ephesians 5: 18-20 and Colossians 3: 16, 17.
Not to poke too many hives, nests, or webs but please allow this now getting older pastor, Christian, and not-interested-in-controversy-for-its-own-sake blogger to come at this whole “exclusive psalmody” thing from the viewpoint, mainly, of those texts cited above. Yes, from the texts, and for truth and peace and the true worship of God in the Spirit and truth of Jesus Christ.
Here are the texts (NKJV):
Ephesians 3: 18-20
And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord, giving thanks always for all things to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ…
Colossians 3: 16, 17
Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.
In reference to these texts here is the position, briefly stated, of the exclusive psalmody people:
*Psalms and psalms only must be sung in the public worship of the Church of Christ. The texts, which both speak of our speaking to (and singing to and teaching and admonishing) one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs refer to the Old Testament Hebrew psalms as these are divided in the LXX, the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, it is said, refer to all the one hundred and fifty psalms: different names, psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, refer to one corpus of songs, all psalms, the songs we have in our Bibles (between Job and Proverbs) and which Israel used in its worship.
*The texts, therefore, call the New Testament Church to sing these inspired Old Testament psalms. And this, according to the strict psalmists, is for the keeping of the second commandment, forbidding the making of graven images of God and also the worship of God in any other way than he has commanded in his word (cf. the Heidelberg Catechism, LD 35).
The first thing I will say, and the only thing for now, is this: the view that finds in these texts ground for exclusive psalmody proves too much. For the exclusive psalmody position is with regard to what we sing in public worship. But the texts neither state nor imply that whatever is sung is in reference to the public corporate worship of the people of God. If the exclusive psalmody folks are right and psalms and psalms only may be sung by us, as is allegedly taught by the Apostle in Ephesians and Colossians, then it is always and everywhere. Just as always and everywhere, the texts surely say, we must “let the word of Christ dwell in us richly.”
So no more singing A Mighty Fortress. In the shower.
-Rev. Dick
revdick.blog 
Leave a comment