Puritan Principle of Worship: Part IX
The Puritan Principle
of Worship: Part IX
William Young
The substance of "The Puritan Principle of Worship" was delivered on December 18, 1957 at the Puritan Conference, London. The article was published serially in Blue Banner Faith and Life, vols. 14-16 (1959-61), edited by Johannes G. Vos. We have extensively reorganized the material for greater clarity of presentation. Editorial revisions by Sherman Isbell of this article and of its footnotes are not to be distributed to other web locations for retrieval, published in other media, or mirrored at other sites without written permission of Sherman Isbell.
A favorite argument for the supplanting of psalmody by hymns of uninspired writers, or at least for the introductions of such hymns, is drawn from Scripture references to singing a new song (Ps. 96:1, Rev. 5:9). Cotton replies in considerable detail: "1. There is no estate and condition that ever befell the church and people of God, or can befall them, but the Holy Ghost, as he did foresee the same, so he hath provided and recorded some Scripture-Psalm, suitable thereunto. And these Psalms being chosen out suitably to the new occasions and new conditions of God's people, and sung by them with new hearts and renewed affections, will ever be found new songs. Words of eternal truth and grace, are ever old (as the gospel is an eternal gospel) and ever new; as the commandment of love is a new commandment as well as old. . . . 2 David's exhortation to sing a new song, pertained to them in the Old Testament as well as to us in the New. And yet they upon new occasions sang the old songs of David, and that with acceptance, II Chron. 5:13, 20:21, Ezra 3:11. 3. Asaph, Heman, and Ethan, were men indued with an infallible measure of a Spirit of prophecy, in inditing those Psalms, which the Church of Israel received from them. Give us the like men with the like gifts, and we shall receive their Psalms, as the Church of Israel did the other.
"4. The places objected out of the Revelation, admit a further answer, though the former might serve; the new song mentioned in Rev. 5:9-10 may either be understood metonymically for a doxology or thanksgiving, which the saints in the church should give to Christ upon occasion of his revealing a clear exposition of the Revelation; or else, if it be understood literally, that they sang that very song, as it is there penned by the Holy Ghost, then it appeareth, that at such a time that song shall be translated into number and meter, fit to be sung, and shall be sung by the church. . . . And thus, this place only sheweth, that it will be lawful to sing other songs, beside those of David and Asaph; but yet such only, as are penned by an infallible Spirit; or else upon special occasion, by men of spiritual gifts, which we deny not. The song of the 144,000 followers of the Lamb, it is not expressly said to be a new song, but as it were a new song, Rev. 14:3. New to them who had been wont to hear the worshippers of the beast to sing and rejoice in their own merits, and superstitious devotions: And new also in respect of the renewed affections, wherewith they sang it: But yet the same ancient song which the sheep and saints of Christ were wont to sing, even in David's time, of the righteousness of Christ, even of his only, and of their own blessedness in his not imputing their sins to them. Thus David's Psalms in the spiritual use and sense of them are new songs, or as it were new songs, to this day, unto all that are renewed by grace. . . ."(98)
Cotton gives the following exposition of the Song of Moses and of the Lamb: "The song of those who had gotten victory over the beast (Revelation 15) is said to be the Song of Moses and of the Lamb, verse 3. And surely the matter of Moses' Song (Exodus 15) might justly yield fit matter for the like doxology (or thanksgiving) upon the like occasion: As the like did fall out in the year 88, Rome being spiritual Egypt (Rev. 11:8). And the Pope with his Prelates resembling Pharaoh with his task-masters, and the Spanish Armada marching forth with the like pride and fury . . . upon which miraculous deliverance, not only the matter of Moses' Song, but the very words also were then fitly used, and still may be for a spiritual song of thanksgiving unto the Lord, both for that and the like deliverances. And as for the Song of the Lamb, which those that had victory over the beast did sing, surely all those Songs of David, which celebrate either his own deliverances from Saul, or the deliverance of the church from Egypt, or Babylon, or from other enemies, may justly own and bear that title. For when David acknowledgeth and professeth, that in his songs, the Spirit of the Lord spake by him, and that his word was in his tongue (II Sam. 23:2), what Spirit of the Lord was that, but the Spirit of the Lord Jesus? And what are then such songs, but the songs of the Lamb, through whose redemption the church and saints enjoy all their deliverances?"(99) The Song of the Lamb recorded in Rev. 15:3-4 appears to be compiled from Pss. 86:8-10; 111:2, 4, 7; 71:22; 9:16 and 64:9.
Thomas Manton, in his exposition of James 5:13, observes that singing of Psalms is a duty of the gospel. Although Manton does not forbid the singing of other songs besides Scripture Psalms, he has no other grounds to adduce for this besides the testimony of Tertullian's Apology, chapter 29: "Post aquam manualem et lumina, ut quisque de scripturis vel proprio ingenio potest, provocatur in medium Deo canere." Nevertheless, Manton proceeds to argue that Scripture Psalms may be sung and beyond this that they are the fittest to be sung: "1. That they may be sung, may be proved by reason; the Word limiteth not, and therefore we have no reason to make any restraint. They are part of the Word of God, full of matter that tendeth to instruction, comfort, and the praise of God, which are the ends of singing; and therefore, unless we will bring a disparagement upon Scriptures, we cannot deny them a part in our spiritual mirth. Besides, thus hath it been practiced by Christ himself, by the apostles, the servants of the Lord in all ages; and there is no reason why, in these dregs of time, we should obtrude novel restraints upon the people of God. That Christ himself sang Scripture psalms may be probably collected out of Matt. 26:30, Humnesantes, 'when they had sung a hymn,' etc., which hymn, that it was one or more of David's psalms, may be proved by these reasons to those that do not wrangle rather than scruple. 1. By the custom of the Jews; they were wont to end the paschal supper with solemn psalms or hymns; they sang six psalms in the night of the passover, when the lamb was eaten; the psalms were 113 to 119, which were called by the Jews the Great Hallelujah, as Lucas Brugensis, Scaliger, Buxtorf, and others skilled in their customs do inform us; and it is more than probable that Christ followed their custom herein, because in all other things he observed their usual passover rites. 2. From the word itself, they sang a hymn. Now what shall we understand by this, but such a hymn as was usual in that age? . . . Now the psalms or hymns then in use were the psalms of David. 3. The evangelists specified no new hymn made for this purpose, who are wont to mention matters of far less moment or concernment. Grotius, indeed, is singular, and thinketh that the 17th of John was the hymn; but that is a solemn prayer, not in meter or measured words, hath not the style of other hymns and songs; and those words were spoken by Jesus alone, the disciples could not so properly join in them: 'These words spake Jesus, and lift up his eyes,' etc., John 17:1.
"That hymn which Paul and Silas sang, Acts 16:25, was probably also a Scriptural hymn; such as were used in that age. Certainly it must be such a hymn as both were acquainted with, or else how could they sing it together? If the practice of the apostles may be interpreted by their instructions, the case will be clear. In Col. 3:16 and Eph. 5:19, Paul biddeth us to 'speak to one another, psalmois kai humnois kai odais pneumatikais, in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs.' Now those words (which are the known division of David's psalms, and exactly answering to the Hebrew words, Shurim, Tehillim, and Mizmorim, by which his psalms are distinguished and entitled), being so precisely use by the apostle in both places, do plainly point us to the Book of Psalms.
"2. Scripture psalms not only may be sung, but are fittest to be used in the church, as being indited by the infallible and unerring Spirit, and are of a more diffusive and unlimited concernment than the private dictates of any particular person or spirit, in the church. It is impossible any should be of such a large heart as the penman of the Word, to whom God vouchsafed such a public, high and infallible conduct; and therefore their excellent composures and addresses to God being recorded and consigned to the use of the church for ever, it seemeth a wonderful arrogance and presumption in any to pretend to make better, or that their private and rash effusions will be more edifying. Certainly if we consult with our own experience, we will have little cause to grow weary of David's psalms, those who pretend to the gift of psalmody, venting such wild, raw, and indigested stuff, belching out revenge and passion, and mingling their private quarrels and interests with the public worship of God. But suppose men of known holiness and ability should be called to this task, and the matter propounded to be sung be good and holy, yet certainly then men are like to suffer loss in their reverence and affection, it being impossible that they should have such absolute assurance and high esteem of persons ordinarily gifted as of those infallibly assisted. Therefore, upon the whole matter, I should pronounce, that so much as an infallible gift doth excel a common gift, so much do Scriptural psalms excel those that are of a private composure."(100)
Manton answers a variety of scruples, the last of which concerns "the present translation of the Book of Psalms, the meter being so low and flat, and coming so far short of David's original." He gives a sane reply: "I confess this is a defect that needeth public redress and reformation: But it is good to make use of present means, though weak, when we have no better; as the martyrs did of the first translations of the Bible, which in many places were faulty and defective. At least, it is far more safe to sing the psalms as now translated than to join in the raw, passionate, and revengeful eructations of our modern psalmists. Besides, for those that conscientiously and modestly scruple this, the Lord hath provided some help by the more excellent translations of Sands, Rous, Barton, and others. Thus I have shewed how many ways the devil seeketh to divert men from this comfortable ordinance."(101)
Finally, John Calvin, in the preface to La Forme des Prieres et Chantz Ecclesiastiques (1543), had also recommended the singing of Psalms on the grounds of their being from God. Divine authorization and divine inspiration do not appear to be distinguished by Calvin in the following striking statement: "But what then ought to be done? Let us have songs that are not only decent, but also holy. These will incite us to pray and praise God, to meditate on his works, in order to love, fear, honor and glorify him. But what Augustine says is true, that no one can sing things worthy of God, unless he has received them from Himself. Therefore, after we have made a thorough search in all regions, we shall not find better nor more proper songs to do this than the Psalms of David, which the Holy Spirit has dictated to him and produced. And moreover, when we sing them we are certain that God puts words in our mouth, as if he himself were singing in us to exalt his glory. Hence Chrysostom exhorts men, women and little children alike to become accustomed to sing them, in order that their practice might be as a meditation to associate themselves with the company of angels."(102)
Notes
(98) Cotton, Singing of Psalmes, pp. 25-27.
(99) Ibid., pp. 27-28.
(100) Thomas Manton, An Exposition on the Epistle of James (London: Banner of Truth, 1962), pp. 442-43. Manton's commentary was first published in 1651.
(101) Ibid., p. 445.
(102) Calvin, Calvini Opera, 6:169-72: "Or qu'est-il doncq question de faire? c'est d'avoir chansons non seulement honnestes, mais aussi sainctes: lesquelles nous soyent comme esguillons pour nous inciter à prier et louer Dieu, à mediter ses oeuvres, afin de l'aymer, craindre, honnorer et glorifier. Or ce que dit S. Augustin est vray, que nul ne peut chanter choses dignes de Dieu, sinon qu'il ait recu d'iceluy: parquoy quand nous aurons bien circuy par tout pour cercher çà et là, nous ne trouverons meilleures chansons ne plus propres pour ce faire, que les Pseaumes de David: lesquelz le sainct Esprit luy a dictz et faitz. Et pourtant, quand nous les chantons, nous sommes certains que Dieu nous met en la bouche les parolles, comme si luy-mesmes chantoit en nous pour exalter sa gloire. Parquoy Chrysostome exhorte tant hommes que femmes et petis enfans, de s'accoustomer à les chanter, afin que cela soit comme une meditation pour s'associer à la compagnie des Anges."
Go to The Westminster Presbyterian home page
|