Calvin On Tap

The Rise and Decline of Exclusive Canonical Psalmody in the Reformed and Presbyterian Churches: The Dutch Reformed Church Pt.1

2013-01-24T13:05:00.002-08:00

In 1835, Hendrik DeCock, a minister and leader of the 19^th century Secession churches of Holland, wrote a pamphlet against the use of uninspired hymns in public worship entitled, The So-Called Evangelical Hymns the Darling of the Enraptured and Misled Multitude in the Synodical Reformed Church and even by some of God’s children from blindness, because they are drunk with the wine of her fornication, further tested, weighed and found wanting, Yes, in conflict with all our Forms of Unity and the Word of God. Though a catchy title, it would probably not attract much positive attention in the Reformed and Presbyterian churches of the 21^st century, since upon initially reading it most would immediately dismiss and reject it as nothing more than the mad ravings of a cranky internet blogger; however, in DeCock’s day, it caught the attention of a wide Reformed audience in Holland and was received with hearty affirmation. Cursory examination of the title would clue even the most inattentive reader in to the fact that DeCock was no fan of uninspired songs in public worship, that he believed exclusive canonical psalms alone had support from the history, practice, and confessions of the church, and that he believed using uninspired songs in worship was a violation of God’s law. As one might imagine, based upon the title of the tract, it is very negative in tone, and it would probably catch the typical 21^st century Reformed reader off guard since its rhetoric is very salty and its attack on man-made hymns is highly vociferous. A series of quotes from the tract provide a quick sampling of the fiery and bellicose tone that pervades the work:

Hymns were never introduced into the church, except to cause degeneration and contempt for the welfare of the church

We see as well, amongst other things in the New Covenant, that in the best of times, and in the purest churches, hymns are never found or tolerated

Where, therefore, were the hymns, or other whorish songs ever used in the days of the apostles in the congregations of the Lord?

History alone is sufficient to acquaint us with the stinking source from which they i.e. hymns flowed forth, and so we are able to judge them shameful and abominable

These quotes offer a brief orientation to the tone of the argument that DeCock makes against uninspired worship songs and additionally, it provides some confirmation for the claim made in the pop magazine article entitled, We Used to Sing the Psalms Only---What Happened?, which was alluded to at the outset of this series of blog posts. If the historical construction of the practice of exclusive psalmody in the Dutch churches that DeCock makes is accurate, then it would appear, that at least in the case of the Reformed churches in Netherlands, the article has struck deep into a vein of truth when it claimed that Reformed churches of Dutch descent in America made a clean break with the past when they added uninspired hymns to the public worship of the church. In the following paragraphs we will take up DeCock’s claims and trace the rise of exclusive canonical psalmody in the Dutch Reformed churches.

There can be no doubt that from the earliest days of the Reformation in the Netherlands, that the Psalms of David had a central place within the life of the church and its worship. By the spring of 1566 Petrus Datheen had overseen a project to translate the Geneva Psalter into Dutch. The intended design and role of the Psalter in the life of the Dutch church is signaled in the dedicatory letter which read, “to all congregations and servants of Jesus Christ, who sigh and weep under the tyranny of the Antichrist." Commitment to a central tenant of historic Protestant eschatology is given expression in the dedication as the people of God are viewed from the perspective of suffering under the diabolical and heavy hand of the Romish papacy, which all the 16^th century Protestant Reformers regarded as the Antichrist. One intentional design of the translated psalter was to bring solace from the inspired word of God to the Reformed saints who struggled under the Antichrist’s unholy oppression. Just how well the translated psalter did in accomplishing its intended purpose for this generation of persecuted saints can be evaluated by the comments of one historian who argued from the historical record that the word “all” in the dedication “proved to be prophetic, for the Psalter took the nation by storm. Soon all the congregations were singing Dathenus' psalms” (Kobald, 1997). Evidence for the psalter sweeping like a storm over the whole Dutch church is indicated by the fact that in 1568 at the Convent of Wezel, the synod adopted Datheen’s Psalter as the official song book of the church. Subsequent synodical decisions suggest that the principle of exclusive canonical psalmody was also adopted as the official position of the Dutch churches as the following evidence indicates:

The Psalms of David in the edition of Petrus Dathenus, shall be in the Christian meetings of the Netherlands Churches (as has been done until now) shall be sung, abandoning the hymns which are not found in Holy Scripture. (The National Synod of Dort 1578, art. 76)

Only the Psalms of David shall be sung in the church, omitting the hymns which one cannot find in Holy Scripture. (The National Synod of Middelburg, 1581, art. 51)

The Psalms of David shall be sung in the churches, omitting the hymns which one does not find in Holy Scripture (The National Synod of Gravenhage, 1586, art. 62)

Two immediate conclusions seem to be warranted from the testimony of these synodical decisions: one, the Dutch synods maintained that only the “Psalms of David” were authorized for use in public worship, and two, all hymns were to be omitted from use in public worship. The fact that alongside this series of decisions affirming the exclusive use of the psalms, corresponding declarations had to be made directing the churches to eliminate hymns in worship, suggests that in some places in the Dutch church, uninspired hymns were struggling to find a footing. Evidence of a struggle however does not indicate a lack of clarity about the principle staked out in these synodical rulings since the decisions are emphatic and unambiguous both in what they affirm and reject. A responsible conclusion drawn from the evidence listed above is that the Dutch Reformed churches of the 16^th century found Biblical warrant to sing the Psalms exclusively in worship and that they were convinced that Scripture warranted use of only these songs and no others.

By 1619 it might appear that a slight change in principle about worship song began to emerge. In session 162 of the National Synod of Dordt the following statement about song in public worship was fashioned:

In the Church only the 150 Psalms of David shall be sung. The 10 Commandments, the Lord's Prayer, the Articles of Faith, the Songs of Mary, Zechariah, and Simeon, the hymn 'O God who is our Father,' and so on, shall be left in the freedom of the Churches, whether they want to use them or not, as they see fit. The rest of the songs shall be taken out of the church, and similarly any which have previously been imported into the church shall be omitted in the most decent way possible.

At first glance it seems that this official synodical statement represents a softening in the principle that all other songs except the Psalms of David and a select few inspired canonical psalms are not to be used in public worship. Some have proposed that the actual intention of the statement is to support and affirm exclusive psalmody though it admittedly makes a few concessions concerning uninspired songs which appear to have found a place in at least some of the churches. With the rise of Arminianism, use of some uninspired songs had crept into the churches of the northern and eastern Dutch provinces and found popular support for use on Lord’s Day’s when the Lord’s Supper was served; so, on account of entrenched use of and support for these few songs on certain Lord’s Days, in some places in the church, a sort of political settlement was reached and is reflected in the statement made in session in 162 (Polman, 1998). Further support for such an interpretation is not only found in the series of unambiguous synodical decisions between 1578 and 1586 but is also found in the observation of 17^th century Dutch theologian Wilhelmus a’Brakel who commented on this decision in his The Christians Reasonable Service that, “The decision of the Dutch Synods has been very correct indeed, namely, that none other but the Psalms of David are to be used in the churches” (1700, vol.4, 34-35). Though it could be argued that a’Brakel is looking exclusively to synodical statements from the 16^th century, and not the statement of synod 1618-19, it could just as reasonably be argued that a’Brakel is interpreting the statement made in session 162 through the lens of prior synodical decisions and is operating on the assumption that those statements provide the proper framework for interpreting the more finessed and politically nuanced statement made by the great National Synod in 1619. Furthermore, what is clear from a survey of the Dutch psalters used from 1619 to the late 1700’s is that the Psalms of David comprised the manual of praise in the Dutch Reformed churches; however, by the latter part of the 18^th century breezy winds of change began to start sweeping through the church and the decline in commitment to the principle and practice of exclusive psalmody began to emerge, flushing the Psalms out of the church and replacing them with the songs of men.

Our next post will chart the decline of exclusive canonical psalmody in the Dutch Reformed churches.

On the Necessity of Reforming the Church by John Calvin:

If it be inquired, then, by what things chiefly the Christian religion has a standing existence amongst us, and maintains its truth, it will be found that the following two not only occupy the principal place, but comprehend under them all the other parts, and consequently the whole substance of Christianity, viz., a knowledge, first, of the mode in which God is duly worshipped and, secondly, of the source from which salvation is to be obtained. When these are kept out of view, though we may glory in the name of Christians, our profession is empty and vain.

I know how difficult it is to persuade the world that God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by His Word. The opposite persuasion which cleaves to them, being seated, as it were, in their very bones and marrow, is, that whatever they do has in itself a sufficient sanction, provided it exhibits some kind of zeal for the honour of God. But since God not only regards as fruitless, but also plainly abominates, whatever we undertake from zeal to His worship, if at variance with His command, what do we gain by a contrary course? The words of God are clear and distinct, "Obedience is better than sacrifice." "In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men," (1 Sam. 25:22; Matt. 15:9.) Every addition to His word, especially in this matter, is a lie. Mere " will worship" is vanity. This is the decision, and when once the judge has decided, it is no longer time to debate.

Brakel, Wilhelmus A, The Christian's Reasonable Service, trans. Bartel Elshout, 4 vols. (Ligonier, PA: Soli Deo Gloria, 1992), 4:34-35.

DeCock, Hendrik, According to the Command of the Lord: Rev. H. DeCock’s Case against Hymns, trans. J.A. Wanliss and W.L. Brendenhof (Surrey, BC: By the Editors, 1998.)

Kobald, Norma. The Psalms, the Organ, and Sweelink. Reformed Music Journal 9 (1997).

Polman, Bert. The Hymn Question in the Christian Reformed Church. Origins 16 (1998).

The Rise and Decline of Exclusive Canonical Psalmody in the Reformed and Presbyterian Churches: The German Reformed Church

2012-05-30T10:27:00.001-07:00

In the post that introduced this series on the Rise and Decline of Exclusive Canonical Psalmody in the Reformed and Presbyterian churches, reference was made to an article which caught my attention many years ago when I first started studying out the issue of exclusive canonical psalmody. That article was entitled, “We Used To Sing Only Psalms---What Happened?”, and in examining that article it was noted that the “We” in the title referred to several different American Reformed and Presbyterian denominations including the RPCNA, CRC, RCA, PCUSA, and OPC and PCA. The significant claim made in that article was that all Reformed and Presbyterian churches in North America, which have roots in continental Europe and the British Isles, sang psalms exclusively in their worship in the past. Of course, the only denomination which continues to remain faithful to the Reformed heritage when it comes to worship is the RPCNA, the rest of the denominations listed, long ago exchanged the praises of Scripture for the words of men. The keen observer will have noticed however, that one denomination, which has roots in the 16^th century Reformation, the German Reformed Church, has been left out of the article. Some might argue that omission was intentional and the account of it is that the German Reformed were so heavily influenced by the Lutherans when it came to song in worship, that they never really followed the pattern of Geneva. Such an accounting however is surely inaccurate and wrong. The PCA sub-committee on Psalm-singing was able to conclude many years ago that the German Reformed Churches shared the same worship practices as the rest of the 16^th century Reformed church as it reported that “the Reformed churches in France, the Netherlands, and Germany, as well as the Presbyterian church in Scotland and later the Puritan churches in America were all exclusively Psalm singing until the beginning of the 19^th century.” Obviously what is relevant for our purposes is that the German church is listed here with the rest of the Reformed and Presbyterian churches and the committee report asserts that the German’s along with the rest of the churches committed themselves the practice of Psalm singing until about the early 19^th century. In what follows, support for that claim will be provided.

The early Reformation era practice of the German speaking churches must be distinguished from the later, mid 16^th century German church practice. Hughes Old explains that the sources of Reformed psalmody and hymnody are to be traced back to four main cities: Strasbourg, Augsburg, Constance, and Geneva. The first three cities are relevant in this analysis because they were German speaking and their practice of praise in worship in the early days of the 16^th century Reformation did vary from the practice which would take hold in Geneva under Calvin. Strasbourg, having a strong claim on being one of the earliest German speaking Reformed churches, deserves attention first. Bucer, the reformer of Strasbourg, held the line, early on, when it came to the content of worship song. The first several Strasbourg Psalters contained only inspired canonical songs. Apparently, Bucer’s position was coherent enough and consistent enough on this point, that Old is able to conclude that Calvin took over his position on worship song from Bucer (p.260). However, honesty requires us to mention that the 1537 Strasbourg Psalter does contain, for the first time, some human compositions which were used for newly approved holiday services, Christmas, Good Friday, Easter, and Ascension. The newly revised practice of Strasbourg would be short-lived however as the city was sacked by imperial forces and returned to Papal control in the late 1540’s. As for the German speaking church at Augsburg it did not follow the early pattern set by Strasbourg, and as early as 1530 had included roughly 20 man-made hymns. Finally, we must note the rather obvious inclusion of a large number of hymns in the Constance Hymnbook of 1540 (p.260). Johannes Zwick and Ambrosius Blarer were so committed to the use of man-made hymns, that Old reports they made an argument for their practice in the preface to their hymnal. Conscious of a need to support their argument from the early church, they appealed to Tertullian’s comment that some brought songs of their own composition to church and to the example of Ambrose of Milan who is known for having composed a number of his own hymns for worship. Old’s comments at this point are instructive, as he points out that though it was legitimate, historically speaking, for them to appeal to Tertullian and Ambrose as support for the claim that the practice of Constance conformed to examples of the early church, it was also fraught with its own difficulties since “Tertullian and Ambrose represented the minority opinion in the ancient Church. From the middle of the second century until at least the end of the fourth century most churches confined themselves to hymns and psalms taken from Scripture” (p.261). It is not a great obstacle to the thesis presented in this post to note that Constance maintained such a liberal policy on man-made hymns since the Reformation was suppressed in Constance in 1548. That means, whatever worship practices emerged in the German Reformed church of the mid 16^th century are not necessarily tied by genealogical succession to the practice of Strasbourgh, Augsburg, or Constance, since the work of Reformation had largely been terminated in these areas.

The German Reformation in the mid 16^th century was marked by a new phase of development in the trend toward strict Calvinism. In 1546 the Protestant faith found an opening in the Palatinate but opposition between Lutherans and Reformed parties prevented a Reformed consolidation until Frederick III took control in 1559. Convinced of the Calvinistic brand of Protestantism, Frederick reorganized the doctrine and worship of the Palatinate along classically Reformed lines. Not only did Frederick commission a catechism, he also called for a new liturgy which included the requirement to sing the Psalms in German. Timing could hardly have been better since the finished form of the Geneva Psalter had just been printed in 1562 and all it took was some translation work to provide the church in the Palatinate with a song book. Westermyer (1980) tells us that the work of translation was performed by Konigsberg law professor, Ambrosius Lobwaser, by 1565, and it was done so on account of the fact that it was Calvin’s example that the German Reformed followed (pg.90). German Reformed church historian, J.I. Good, writing in the 19^th century confirms the German Reformed commitment to exclusive psalmody after the model of Calvin when he writes, "the Reformed Church of Germany had been like the other Calvinistic churches, a Psalm-singing Church for about a century. Since the days of Zwick and the Strasbourg hymn-writers in the time of Bucer they had produced no hymns (pg.403)." This quote makes it fairly clear that German Reformed Church after the mid 16^th century was a psalm singing church and that it followed this practice out of a conscious determination to align its worship with that of Calvin and Geneva.

Now comes the distasteful part, which is to relate in brief, the DECLINE of psalm-singing in the German Reformed Church. Whether it occurred by the mid 17^th century or by the early 18^th century, there seems to be no dispute among historians that the practice of the German church changed from exclusive psalmody to a position that is very similar to the Lutheran practice. How and why that change took place is not all that difficult to nail down. Good tells us that though the practice of psalm-singing had been the norm for the first 100 years of the German Reformed, the winds of change did begin to blow and those winds were fanned by rise of German Pietism. Perhaps a sampling of quotes from Good at this point will serve well to capture what caused the reversal in practice:

Now if it had not been for revival of Pietism, who knows but we might still be singing the Psalms in the Reformed Church?

We therefore have Pietism to thank for our hymns…

Strange as it may appear to us, the introduction of hymns was bitterly opposed in many parts of the Reformed Church as an innovation, as the old Reformed people had become greatly wedded to the Psalms…

They held that God’s word (the Psalms) and not man’s words (the hymns), should be sung in God’s worship. And in their Psalms they aimed at the literal rather than the rhythmical translation, so that God’s Word might be changed as little as possible.

For many years Neander’s hymns were not permitted to be sung in the churches. They were, however, used at private meetings, at conventicles and prayer meetings. But by and by they became so popular that they won their way into the churches, for the Church could no longer afford to pass them by.

So after will nigh a century and a half of psalm singing, the General Synod of Julich, Cleve, Berg and Mark issued a new hymn book in 1738 (pg.404).

Clearly, Good writes as one who supports the change caused by Pietism, but he also makes it abundantly clear that the change from psalms to hymns marked a radical and not minor change in practice. He points out that the radical change was more about what was pragmatic than principled. Notice the principle of the old German practice as Good says, “They held that God’s word (the Psalms) and not man’s words (the hymns), should be sung in God’s worship,” but now, the German church does what became “popular” through use in the private meetings and conventicles. In other words, the false piety of German Pietism actuated the change in practice not the discovery of a command in the word of God to sing man-made hymns.

This new policy was far from the old one not only in practice but also in tone and ethos. Again, a quote from Good, no advocate of exclusive canonical psalmody either, which implicitly contrasts the original German Reformed commitment to Biblical worship with the new captures the difference:

The Reformed in many places closed the organs and introduced the singing of the psalms into the churches. Many of the old hymn books contained nothing but psalms…these psalms sustained the Reformed in persecution and linked their hearts more fully to God’s word. The early Reformed Church was Puritanic in her churches and her services (pg.453-4).

What is striking about Good’s observation is that the psalms were for a time when the church endured suffering and persecution for the sake of the gospel, and the hymns were for a time of ease, after the blood had been spilt, and the sweat and pain of the previous generation of builders had provided them a church where they could take rest in comfort. Perhaps the key to understanding the rise and decline of psalmody in the Reformed churches is found in this off-handed insight of Good. When the church suffers it looks to the word of God for relief, but when the church is at rest it looks to the opinions of men to sustain its comfort and ease. In a sense though, that may be the silver lining in the story for those who desire to see the church return to faithfulness in worship since our age is growing increasingly hostile toward true Christian faith. It may just well be that as the church in our age begins to endure more significant forms of persecution from an increasingly hostile culture that the syrupy, feel good worship that prevails everywhere today, even in Reformed and Presbyterian churches, will be replaced with the worship prescribed in God’s word. However, our prayer should not be that God would send sufferings so that we may be obedient in our worship, rather, our prayer ought to be that God would send us the Spirit of obedience, and that out of gratitude for salvation and a desire to glorify His name we may return to the kind of worship which God commands.

On the Necessity of Reforming the Church by John Calvin:

J.I. Good, The Origin of the Reformed Church in Germany (Reading, PA: Daniel Miller, 1887).

Hughes Oliphant Old, The Patristic Roots of Reformed Worship (Zurich: Theologisher, 1975).

Westermeyer, Paul. German Reformed Hymnody in the United States. The Hymn 31 (1980): 89-94.

The Rise and Decline of Exclusive Canonical Psalmody in the Reformed and Presbyterian Churches: The Decline of Exclusive Canonical Psalmody in Geneva

2012-05-02T12:01:00.000-07:00

The following quote from Louis Benson will help reset the topic in this series of posts on the classical Reformed and Presbyterian commitment to exclusive canonical psalmody in worship, and help establish a baseline to measure the departure from this standard by the Reformed Church in the Enlightenment era:

There is no more difficulty in assigning the leadership to him (Calvin) than in assigning to Luther the leadership in establishing hymn singing in Germany and its spread from there into Lutheran countries. From this point indeed, the two figures stand as independent sources, from which flow two parallel streams of Protestant church song--- the Lutheran Hymnody on the one hand and the Reformed Metrical Psalmody on the other. And the streams were not fully united till after two centuries had passed. They are not in fact merged into unity even today, when the Calvinistic precedent of Psalm singing still furnishes the ground for maintaining denominational integrity among exclusive Psalm singers (p.75).

It may also prove helpful to add just one more quote from Benson about Calvin’s position on psalmody where he says of Calvin’s standard for worship song:

The Calvinistic Psalm took its authority and its appropriateness from its divine inspiration. It must be Holy Scripture, first of all; then it became metrical merely to facilitate its congregational rendering. Calvin had determined to make the Psalter the praise book of the Reformed Church (p.75).

From these two quotes a couple of important issues emerge. First, Luther and Calvin are regarded by Benson as the liturgical leaders of the Lutheran and Reformed churches respectively. This point is significant since it provides an objective reference point for the measuring the form of worship, particularly in the matter of congregational song, which is what we might call “classically” Reformed. Such a point of clarification is useful since many today who claim to represent the conservative Reformed and Presbyterian position on worship often describe their form of worship as “traditional” or as “classical” over against innovative forms of worship practiced in many Reform and Presbyterian churches today which they often like to label as “revivalistic.” However, Benson’s identification of Calvin as the liturgical standard bearer of historical Reformed worship means that the term “classical” can only honestly and accurately be used to describe worship which conforms to the actual model of worship instituted by Calvin in Geneva and which was followed by other Reformed and Presbyterian churches of the 16^th century. Second, Benson isolates the precise difference between Lutheran and Reformed when it comes to the element of song. Benson explains that Lutheran song can be fairly characterized as manmade compositions while Calvinistic songs were nothing less than divinely inspired and taken directly from Scripture. Further, Benson notes that these two contrasting views represented two distinct streams of worship song and they only converged in the Reformed Church 200 years after the Reformation, though he accurately notes some churches which wish to be distinguished as fully Calvinistic in worship continue to conform to Calvin’s precedent of exclusive canonical psalmody. It is evident from this manner of description, that Benson judges only exclusive psalm singing churches as classically Reformed and Calvinistic.

Now, moving on to our specific area of focus, attention will be given briefly to the DECLINE of exclusive canonical psalmody in the church of Geneva. First of all, Benson stakes out the bold ground of claiming that exclusive psalmody was the practice of the French-speaking Reformed churches for well over 100 years after the publication of the 1562 Geneva Psalter (p.108). It is true that the Synod of Montabaun in 1594 commissioned Beza to versify Scriptural canticles as a sort of appendix to the Geneva Psalter, which he did. Beza submitted 12 songs, 10 of which were taken from the Old Testament, and the Church approved their use in worship and private devotion; however, these songs never quite caught on as we might say, and never had a subsequent impact on the church’s repertoire of praise. Second, in the very late 17^th century the Venerable Company of Pastors in Geneva approved a motion to eliminate imprecations of the Jews against their enemies from the Psalms. This work was completed largely by Benedict Pictet in 1693 but again, was not unanimously received (p.112). Third, in the early 1700’s a strong push towards a more “evangelical” hymnody arose in the church. In response to this surge in momentum towards hymnody, Pictet proposed to supplement the Psalms with New Testament hymns. By 1705, Pictet, prepared 12 paraphrases of New Testament passages which were added to the Psalter as an appendix (p.115). The difference between this project and early attempted revisions and expansions is summarized well by Benson when he says that this project “took its impulse from Lutheran precedent, and it marks the beginning of the new period of Psalms and Hymns on equal footing” (p.116). With this foot firmly planted in the doorway, supplementation of Psalter continued to grow over time until the 1778 edition of the Psalter contained 54 hymns. Fourth, As the Lutheran hymnal began to influence the Reformed Church, changes in worship song continued to grow until a short period of resistance and push-back was witnessed in the Geneva church early in the 19^th century. Those who were committed to the classical model of Reformed congregational singing sought to resuscitate the Psalter by revising its language and tunes. This reform movement was short-lived however and by the 3^rd decade of the 19^th century, the Psalter ceased to have the sole place in the church’s praise.

Looking back over this brief presentation of the path to the decline of exclusive canonical psalmody, two important details are to be observed. One, the church of Geneva never ruled that Calvin’s regulative principle was unbiblical, nor did it even seem to grapple with the question of whether hymn-singing in public worship conformed to that principle; it simply “drifted” with the winds of change until this new practice was simply accepted. Surely this should be troubling to hymn-singers of the conservative stripe who think that somewhere in the history of the church, a synod met and decided that the regulative principle required the use of hymnody to supplement the Psalter (something the Reformed regulative principle surely requires). The fact is, no such meeting can identified as the catalyst for the change in the worship of the church of Geneva. It seems that over time, popular sentiment simply altered views of what was thought to be acceptable in worship. Two, the Reformed practice of exclusive canonical psalmody, in the church of Geneva, was disrupted by the Lutheran hymnal. In other words, prevailing popular trends influenced the worship of the church and ultimately changed it. The concern which such an alteration in practice ought provoke in the minds of conservative Reformed and Presbyterians can be easily appreciated by returning to Benson’s characterization of the two streams of congregation song which flowed from the two leaders of the Reformation, Luther and Calvin. From the stream of Luther, who held that worship is regulated by what God has not forbidden, man-made hymns flowed; while the stream which flowed from Calvin, who held that worship is regulated by what God commands, consisted of inspired canonical songs taken from Scripture. If we were to pose the question, “why did the Reformed Church of Geneva turn from Psalms to Hymns?” we would have to candidly bring forth the answer that the evidence indicates that a creep in the understanding of the regulative principle of worship, however imperceptible to them, seems to have occurred. The fact that the Venerable Company of Pastors in Geneva did not argue that Calvin’s principle and practice of worship was wrong, and, only over time, permitted the gradual use of hymns confirms our answer. Had they believed singing psalms only was a violation of the regulative principle they would have made the argument; however, there is no record of them arguing man-made hymns are commanded for use in worship and that therefore exclusive canonical psalmody was a violation of God’s word. Instead, the story of the decline of exclusive canonical psalmody in Geneva reads like a story of accommodation, weakening of conviction about Biblically regulated worship, and wholesale capitulation to popular sentiment. The result of this sad story of decline is the supplanting of the confessional and Reformed principle of worship for that which is non-Reformed and unbiblical.

In view of these facts, those who claim to love the Reformed faith and who imagine that they follow Calvin and his Biblically informed philosophy and practice of worship, tmust ask if the story of the decline of psalmody in Geneva conforms to Calvin’s very clear statement of the regulative principle. If the story of decline and the practice of Lutheran forms of worship, without Biblical mandate or command, is what has replaced Calvin’s practice in the area of song in worship, then it must be asked further—which liturgical leader of the Reformation is now being followed: Luther or Calvin? Beyond that, it is incumbent upon those who are Reformed or Presbyterian in name, and yet, who conform to the practice of Luther, to either show that Luther was doing what was commanded and that Calvin was not, or to admit that they have opted for Luther’s regulative principle. Further, regardless of which of the two options is chosen, such persons ought then either to affiliate with the Lutheran Church or demand that the Reformed and Presbyterian churches revise the Reformed confessional regulative principle of worship to conform to the Luther’s in order that they may pursue their innovative form of worship with a clear conscience. After all, that is not only historically accurate and honest, it is what is required especially of those who take a vow to uphold, teach, defend, and refute anything contrary to the doctrine contained in the Reformed and Presbyterian confession. No middle ground on such a crucial doctrine as the doctrine of worship is permitted.

(BTW, those Reformed people who think of themselves as conservative in their worship but who refuse to conform to Calvin’s principle and practice, in the interest of accuracy and honesty, need to stop using “classical” to describe their worship. Such persons may be “classical” in the sense of following the principles of the Luther or Anglicanism, but they are not “classical” in the Reformed or Presbyterian sense in that they are not following Calvin’s practice nor that of the 16^th and 17^th century Reformed and Presbyterian churches. For such “Reformed” persons to continue to use “classical” to describe worship which follows 18^th century revivalistic patterns is inaccurate, dishonest, and confusing. What they should say is that what they think of as true Reformed worship is what comes from the new school of 18^th century revivalism and that this model is much to be preferred both to the classical Reformed practice and to the contemporary revivalistic style perpetuated by Jack Miller in the late 1960’s in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.)

On the Necessity of Reforming the Church by John Calvin:

Louis F. Benson, “John Calvin and the Psalmody of the Reformed Churches,” Journal of the Presbyterian Historical Society 5, 1 (March 1909):1–21; 5, 2 (June 1909): 55–87; 55, 3 (Sept. 1909): 107–118.

The Rise and Decline of Exclusive Canonical Psalmody in the Reformed and Presbyterian Churches: The Rise of Exclusive Canonical Psalmody in Geneva

2012-03-28T11:13:00.000-07:00

It is a claim beyond dispute that the Reformed church in Geneva during the 16^th century sang only inspired canonical psalms. Support abounds for this assertion, but perhaps the easiest way to substantiate it is the contents of the 1562 Geneva Psalter. The 1562 Psalter was the finished form of the song book Calvin had been working to produce for at least 20 years. Previous editions contained various lyrical content, but by far and away these editions contained the Psalms to the virtual exclusion of anything else. By 1562 Pidoux is able to confirm that the final edition, which was printed and translated and distributed across Europe, contained only the 150 Psalms and the “Nunc Dimittis” and the Decalogue. In fact, so obvious is it that Calvin supported only the use of inspired psalmody in the worship of the church, evidenced in his signature work, the Geneva Psalter, that Benson (1909) can speak of a “peculiar” kind of worship song that was used in Geneva which called “The Calvinistic Psalm,” which he describes as “simply the Word of God, translated and versified in hymn-form, so as to be sung by the people.” With heavy weight scholars such as Pidoux and Benson lined up in support of the claim that in 16^th century Geneva, the church, under oversight of Calvin, sang only inspired psalms, no further argumentation will be offered in defense of the position. Surely, if someone can offer credible support from credible scholars to refute the claim presented here then the position being promoted would have to be reassessed and altered. Since such evidence and scholarship is most certainly lacking, then the basic soundness and correctness of the claim can be now taken for granted and another line of thought can be pursued, namely, the rise and then the decline of inspired psalmody in the Reformed church of Geneva.

The rise of inspired canonical psalmody in Geneva is very well documented by the scholarly research of Dr. Charles Garside. In the summer of 1979 Dr. Garside presented a study entitled “The Origins of Calvin’s Theology of Music: 1536-1543” to “The American Philosophical Society,” the oldest scholarly journal in America, which reaches back to 1769. This work is the gold standard, along with that of Dr. Hughes Oliphant Old, in establishing with the greatest scholarly credibility, the historical record of Calvin’s commitment to exclusive canonical psalmody. In the subsequent paragraphs we will follow Dr. Garside’s account of the rise of canonical psalmody in Geneva and then we will turn to the impeccable work of liturgist Luis Benson on the decline of exclusive canonical psalmody in the Genevan church.

With respect to the rise of canonical psalmody in Geneva, it is to be attributed exclusively to Calvin’s conviction and tireless effort. The story of the rise of canonical psalmody under the leadership of John Calvin begins with the Articles of 1537. These Articles contained four proposals which formed the backbone of Calvin’s attempt to bring order to Geneva: church discipline, psalm-singing in public worship, catechizing the youth, and reform of marriage statutes. For our purposes it is evident that the second proposal, psalm-signing in public worship, is of central significance. Expanding upon this second article, Garside quotes from Calvin where he gives expression to the rationale of this ordinance: Furthermore it is a thing most expedient for the edification of the church to sing psalms in the form of public prayers by which one prays to God or sings His praises so that the hearts of all may be aroused and stimulated to make similar prayers and to render similar praises and thanks to God with a common love. What is of such great importance about Calvin’s accounting for the essential role of psalmody in worship is that it marks a departure from Calvin’s previous views and the prior practice of the Church of Geneva.

When Calvin arrived in Geneva in the autumn of 1536, he complained that the prayers of the Genevan’s were “cold.” Garside explains that Calvin is probably reacting to the fact that when he arrived in Geneva there was no music in worship at all since Farel had abolished it from the liturgy (p.14). Though Calvin took note of this defect, he himself was not at this time in substantial disagreement with the position of Farel as Garside notes, the 1536 edition of the Institutes indicates that Calvin was yet under the sway of Zwingli who from1525 removed the “barborous mumbling” (worship song) from the churches in Zurich (p.11). However, by January of 1537, Calvin’s views about song in worship had sharply changed and he found himself proposing psalm singing in the worship of God. What accounts for this change in thought? Garside suggests two factors: cold prayers and Bucer. With respect to the former, it is evident that Calvin, having experienced the dreadful and spiritually numbing effect of the Zwinglian prohibition against worship song, began to reconsider his position and found support for a new way forward in the writings of Bucer. As early as 1524 Bucer defended song in worship in his Justification and Demonstration from Holy Scripture. This work not only proposes suggestions for where song is to be appropriately used in the course of the liturgy, it also defends congregational singing in the final chapter. Though it is fair to wonder if Calvin had read much of Bucer and his rationale for worship song, Garside’s judgment is likely correct that while the 1536 Institutes show an inclination towards Zwingli’s view of prayer (song), the Articles of 1537 betray the hand of Bucer.

Although Calvin experienced a renaissance in his thinking about worship song, the church in Geneva would not experience something similar in its practice, at least not during Calvin’s first stay in Geneva. By early 1538, not only would Calvin not yet be enjoying the proposed change in worship, he also found himself in the position of being banished from Geneva by the city council. On account of his refusal to endorse the arrangement which would cement political ties between Geneva and the Swiss city of Bern by implementing liturgical reform that would make these two cities uniform in their worship, Calvin and Farel were given their "pink slips" and were bounced out of Geneva (p.14). Upon their dismissal from Geneva, both Calvin and Farel went straight to Bern in order to give an account of the fallout in Geneva. From there, they went on to a local synod meeting at Zurich in early May of 1538 where something of a tectonic shift occurred. There, Calvin and Farel presented 14 articles for consideration to the synod, and among those, article 13, was a requirement to sing psalms in public worship. The synod unanimously approved these articles, including article 13, and just a couple of months later the city of Bern changed course from a Zwinglian policy of no congregational singing to one of exclusive psalmody in June of 1538. Ironically the unintended consequences of the Bernese political arrangement with Geneva left Calvin without a pastoral call, while at the same time, it triggered a massive change in policy among the Swiss churches signaling a decisive shift away from the policies of Zwingli toward the new views of Calvin (Bucer!) on worship song.

For a space of about 3 years, from 1538-1541, Calvin labored quite happily in Strasbourg as a he pastored a congregation of French speaking refugees. It would be during this stay in Strasbourg and working in close consultation with Bucer that Calvin would refine his views on psalmody and forge a connection between his theory of regulated worship and its practice. Shortly after arriving in the city, Calvin oversaw the production of a song book for worship in 1539 which was modeled on the Strasbourg Psalter. Another indication of growth and movement in Calvin’s thought on worship is found in the 1539 edition of the Institutes published during his stay in Strasbourg. By making a simple comparison between the 1536 edition of the Institutes and the 1539, Garside was able to show an important development in Calvin’s thought. For instance, in the 1536 edition Calvin expressed the opinion that he did not “condemn speaking and singing provided they were associated with the hearts affection and serve it” (hardly a ringing endorsement of congregational singing) while in the 1539 edition he inserted between “singing” and “provided” the following phrase: but rather strongly commend them (13). Another revision occurs where Calvin deleted the phrase “serve it,” as was expressed in 1536, removing the notion that song had a mere servile role in worship. Garside suggests that these slight modifications in the 1539 Institutes, written as they were in Latin, which means they were available to a wide reading audience, form a permanent record of Calvin’s views on worship song and set in motion the emergence of the liturgical principles of Strasbourg as the standard for the next few hundred years of Reformed worship which would eventually erode and give way under the weight of popular revivalism. With these developments in place, Calvin was prepared to return to Geneva and re-launch his quest for the Reformation in that most difficult of cities.

As time passed, the Genevans realized they needed Calvin, though Calvin was not exactly sure he wanted them. But, under council from others, Calvin returned to Geneva in 1541, on one condition however, that the city council accepts his proposals which were outlined in the 1541 Ecclesiastical Ordinances. On September 13, 1541, he reentered Geneva, met with the town council, and picked up his bid for reform where he had left off a few years before as he submitted his Ordinances. These Ordinances were substantially the same as the Articles of 1537 except for some changes to the proposals on worship song. Tucked away in the middle of a paragraph on marriage are the following two sentences: It will be good to introduce ecclesiastical songs, the better to incite the people to prayer to and praise God. For a beginning the little children are to be taught; then with time the church will be able to follow (16). Though these sentences are similar in content with the Articles they say little about the nature of worship song and they seem to shift the subject from worship to children’s education. The very wording of the Ordinances suggests that a future communication would be needed to clarify the content and role of music in the public worship of the Genevan churches and that clarification and expansion is found in the 1542 Epistle to the Reader for his order of worship for Geneva.

With the publication of the 1542 Epistle to the Reader, Calvin’s views on worship song have come to a firm and solid resting point. The title of this new work setting forth the liturgical order for Genevan worship is itself instructive, The Form of Prayers and Ecclesiastical Songs, with the manner of administering the sacraments and consecrating marriage according to the custom of the ancient Church. Here Calvin not only proposes the use of songs in worship he also classifies it is a form of prayer, describes its role, and gives us some sense of what its nature. With respect to the role of worship song Calvin says they are to “arouse and inflame the hearts of men to invoke and praise God with a more vehement and ardent zeal” while concerning the nature of song he explains “there must always be concern that the song be neither light nor frivolous, but have gravity (pois) and majesty (maieste), as Saint Augustine says” (p.18).” The 1542 Epistle represents the high water mark of Calvin’s views on worship song which never underwent subsequent change or alteration. From this point forward, Calvin worked tirelessly to produce a complete song book for worship containing the Psalms of Scripture which not only were able to “arouse and inflame” the hearts of men to praise but also met that high standards of quality proposed by Augustine.

Over the next 20 years several versions of the Geneva Psalter would be published as the body of poetry and melodies grew until 1562 when it reached its final form. At no time subsequent to 1542 did Calvin change his views on worship song. Many have thought that Calvin produced psalters which contained hymns and songs not taken from the word of God. Such suppositions are entirely false and baseless, and do not account for how Calvin could so openly contradict his own published views on the subject, yet retain his credibility as an advocate of exclusive canonical psalmody. The fact is, Calvin did not change his views nor his practice between 1542 and 1562 and the great proof of that is the final form of the 1562 Psalter. With this evidence in view, we can see that the canonical psalms had not only the principal place in praise, but the sole place in the praise of the Genevan church of the 16^th century.

In our next post we will examine the decline of psalmody in the Genevan church.

In every subsequent post I will always include Calvin’s comments on the centrality and primacy of worship to the cause of Reformation which is found in his great treatise On the Necessity of Reforming the Church:

I know how difficult it is to persuade the world that God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by His Word. The opposite persuasion which cleaves to them, being seated, as it were, in their very bones and marrow, is, that whatever they do has in itself a sufficient sanction, provided it exhibits some kind of zeal for the honour of God. But since God not only regards as fruitless, but also plainly abominates, whatever we undertake from zeal to His worship, if at variance with His command, what do we gain by a contrary course? The words of God are clear and distinct, "Obedience is better than sacrifice." "In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men," (1 Sam. 25:22; Matt. 15:9.) Every addition to His word, especially in this matter, is a lie. Mere " will worship" is vanity. This is the decision, and when once the judge has decided, it is no longer time to debate.

The Rise and Decline of Exclusive Canonical Psalmody in the Reformed and Presbyterian Churches: A Brief Introduction

2012-03-14T15:18:00.008-07:00

Early on in my seminary days as I was researching the Reformed regulative principle of worship and its classical application, I came across an article which grabbed hold of my attention: We Used to Sing Only Psalms; What Happened? It took only a moments worth of reading to determine who the “We” in the title referred to as the summary of the article listed the churches in view which included the RPCNA, CRC, RCA, PCUSA, and OPC and PCA. In other words, this article made the categorical claim that all Reformed and Presbyterian churches in North America which have roots in continental Europe and the British Isles sang psalms exclusively in their worship in the past.

Such a claim, if true, would certainly be a relevant consideration for one researching the historical Reformed and Presbyterian application of the regulative principle of worship because if the practice of exclusive psalmody could be traced to the beginnings of the Reformed church in the 16^th century and to the writings of the Reformers themselves, then it could be objectively established that the Reformed church historically modeled in its practice what regulated worship consisted of. The unbiased reader, only after fairly and charitably evaluating the evidence, would have to concede the truth of the claim if it is adequately supported.

Making such a concession is easier said than done since most people who are Reformed or Presbyterian will already know in advance that the claim is surely wrong. They will know that because their church is Reformed or Presbyterian, and at their church they sing hymns and so-called “spiritual songs” with guitars, drums, pianos, and organs; therefore, the article cited above must be wrong in what it claims about the historic practice of the Reformed churches. Furthermore, if the average Reformed or Presbyterian worshiper was unsettled by learning this truth for the first time and proceeded to ask anyone in the church who is “in the know” about such matters, they would be informed by such experts that it certainly is not the case that the Reformed and Presbyterians sang only psalms, and, even if they did (which they are certain they did not), they did not make this their practice because they thought the regulative principle required it; instead, the Reformed and Presbyterians maintained such a practice out of pragmatic concerns. Beyond that such experts will then provide thin support for this claim by sharing the anecdotal evidence that they once heard Calvin wrote a hymn “I Greet Thee My Fair Redeemer Art” (something for which there is not one shred of historical evidence).

The purpose of this series of posts is to expose this kind of ill-informed expert testimony almost universally provided in confessional Reformed and Presbyterian churches to those who inquire as to whether their church is conforming to the regulative principle as maintained and practiced by the Reformers. It is without question that if the historic practice of the Reformed church provides the model for the proper application of the confessional regulative principle of worship then it can be easily shown that the prevailing contemporary practice of most Reformed and Presbyterian churches is out of step with this confessional standard. This series of posts about the rise and decline of canonical psalmody aims to address this failure of conformity to the regulative principle of worship by setting the historical record straight through presenting evidence to substantiate the claim implied in the title of the article referenced above.

As Rome was not built in one day, so the evidence for the historical worship practices of the Reformed and Presbyterian churches cannot be reasonably presented in one post. So, in the introduction to this new series, we will seek to whet the appetite of the reader in order to encourage them to keep checking in to follow the evidence presented in subsequent posts. In what follows, we will set forth some documentation from reliable scholars which will provide evidence to substantiate the claim made in the introduction that the Reformed and Presbyterian churches of the 16^th and 17^th century sang only psalms. Evidence presented will show that the churches in Switzerland, Germany, France, Holland, England, and Scotland all sang the psalms exclusively. Having set forth that foundation, a series of posts will follow which will document the rise and decline of the psalms in these very same Reformed and Presbyterian churches. It will not be hard to establish that just as the rise of psalmody was on account of study of God’s word and an aim to apply the regulative of principle to the forms of worship, so the decline of psalmody and the rise of man made hymns was on account of replacing the authority of God’s word with subjective human standards.

So, in kicking off our introduction let’s take a moment to provide some evidence to support our claim that the Reformed and Presbyterian churches of the 16^th and 17^th century used only the psalms in worship. Remember, in reading over the evidence supplied here, challenge yourself to ask, who is more credible in establishing the historic practice of the Reformed church, the people who are “in the know” in your church or reputable scholars who are simply stating the facts as they understand them based upon careful research? By the way, asking that question is not all that radical, since most people make decisions about significant matters by weighing the evidence presented in credible and reliable sources. With that in view, consider the following:

One: Every “expert” consulted in the article referenced above, except for Robert Copeland from the RPCNA, is committed to singing hymns and spiritual songs in worship. In other words, the experts who were consulted about the actual historical practice of the Reformed and Presbyterian churches (John Frame, Harry Boonstra, Norman Copeland, Hugh McKeller, and Arlo Duba) concede that how their churches now worship is not in accord with the historic practice of the Reformed church. This means that the so-called experts you consult in your church who tell you our claim is wrong stand in disagreement with these reputable scholars who have abandoned the Reformed regulative principle and yet, are honest enough to admit it.

Two: Pierre Pidoux, a scholar of no mean credentials, in an article entitled, “The Fourth Centenary of the French Metrical Psalter” proposes the following question: it will be asked why, apart from the “Nunc Dimittis” and the Decalogue, the 1562 edition (the final form of the Geneva Psalter) contains only the psalms. It takes little thought to see that Pidoux is asserting that the 1562 version of the Geneva Psalter contains only inspired canonical psalms. So confident is he of this fact that he states it in categorical terms. If he is so sure of this fact, why is it that the anecdotal claim that Calvin once wrote and hymn and inserted it in the Geneva Psalter is given any credibility? Whoever offers that claim to you in order to argue for the practice of using hymns and songs in worship as consistent with Calvin and his practice is surely wrong unless they can prove that their opinion and evidence is weightier than that of Pidoux.

Three: The 1993 PCA sub-committee report on “Psalm-singing” presents the following question: how can it be that the Psalms, which God gave to His people specifically to be sung, particularly in public worship, and which for centuries were sung among all the major Protestant groups (exclusively so among Presbyterian, Reformed, Baptist, and Congregational, denominations) are universally neglected? Ouch, that is a zinger there, isn’t it? First, this is an official PCA sub-committee making this statement, not some “radical” Presbyterian theologian or even crazy group of Presbyterian zealots. No one would claim that the PCA committee is doctoring the evidence to fit their bias and current practice, and expect at the same time to be thought of as credible. Second, the question contains the statement that Presbyterian and Reformed churches exclusively sang the psalms and that they did so for centuries. Third, they lament that the practice of singing psalms is neglected today. When a PCA committee is willing to concede that the historic practice of the Reformed and Presbyterian church is exclusive psalmody and the contemporary practice is not, that is a wake-up call for all Reformed and Presbyterian churches and church members to sit up and examine whether their worship is Reformed.

Four: Louis F. Benson, perhaps one of the greatest liturgical scholars of the late 19^th and early 20^th century, in the Stone Lectures delivered at Princeton in 1907, makes the following claim about what he calls a “peculiar” type of Protestant church song:

As over against this Hymnody, the distinction of the Calvinistic Psalmody lay not in its form but in its authorship and subject-matter. The Hymn was a religious lyric freely composed within the limits of liturgical propriety by anyone who had the gift. The Calvinistic Psalm, on the other hand, was simply the Word of God, translated and versified in hymn-form, so as to be sung by the people. To mark this distinction of the Calvinistic type Church-Song, it is designated as Metrical Psalmody. When the purpose is merely to distinguish the two types of congregational song within the bounds of Protestantism, it will be sufficient to designate the singing of metrical Psalms in the Reformed Churches as Psalmody, as over against the freer Hymnody of Lutheran and other bodies (1909: 3).

To summarize Benson’s point we could say that his claim is that the peculiar and distinct form of worship song used by the Reformed and Presbyterians was Psalmody while hymns of human composition were the form of song used by other Protestants (Lutherans!). Someone might respond to Benson’s claim by saying, “but the peculiar music of the Reformed and Presbyterian was not rooted in subservience to principle, rather, it was developed out of mere preference.” Such a claim is surely wrong, at least according to Benson who says:

In this, Church usage and Lutheran precedent alike were disregarded. The Scriptures were searched to find Apostolic authority on which to rest the ordinances of praise, and conformity to Scripture became the determining motive. To this supreme test the subject-matter of the songs themselves had to be submitted (1909: 4).

Clearly, Benson thinks that the reason why there is such a species of worship song which is “peculiarly Calvinistic” is because the Reformed bound themselves to Apostolic authority and warrant for establishing the content of worship-song. In other words, Benson says that the Reformed church maintained that the regulative principle of worship applied to the content of worship song, and that not in a merely general way. This ought to pique the interest of any honestly inquiring Reformed and Presbyterian mind. You have been told that what your church does in worship is Reformed, that it conforms to the Reformed understanding of the regulative principle, that it is consistent with historical practice, and that it has Biblical warrant; yet, Benson, who is far more credible than anyone who you have heard this kind of thing from, insists that the historic Reformed practice claimed that the content of worship song was regulated by Scripture and that only inspired canonical psalms had Biblical warrant according to the Reformed. Someone is right and someone is wrong here, both about the historic practice and the Biblical warrant; and ,if you are a fair-minded reader, you must ask if Benson is more or less credible on this matter than the so-called “expert” who has proposed an alternate point of view to you.

Five: 17^th century pastor-theologian Wilhelmus a Brakel in volume 4 of his A Christian’s Reasonable Service testifies to what kind of songs were sung in the Dutch Reformed Church of his day: the decision of the Dutch Synods has been very correct indeed, namely, that none other but the Psalms of David are to be used in the churches (p.35). So much for the arguments made by the CRC in the 20th century when they claimed that the Synod did not have a principled objection to the use of man-made compositions. Obviously, a Brakel does not share that take.

Six: A group of families seceded from the Dutch Reformed Church in America in 1857 and formed what is now called the Christian Reformed Church partly because the RCA used man-made hymns in worship as crcna.org testifies: the seceders insisted on psalm-singing only http://www.crcna.org/pages/history_of_crc.cfm.

Seven: James I. Good, a 19^th century German Reformed church historian says that the German Reformed Church sang only the Psalms on account of the influence of Petrus Dathenus, court preacher of Frederick III in the Palatinate. Good says with respect to the use of Psalms in the German Reformed church that “through his influence” that is the Dutch pastor Dathenus “its use was sanctioned, and the singing of psalms became customary in the Reformed Church of Germany (History of the Reformed Church in Germany 1620-1890, pg. 287). He also is able to establish precisely when the German Reformed Church officially changed its practice. Good explains that it was at the “General Synod of Julich, Cleve, Berg, and Mark, after using Psalms for a century and a half, ordered in 1731 a new hymn book, which should have hymns as well as songs” (p. 356). Clearly, Good’s testimony, if it is accurate, establishes the fact that the German Reformed Church sung psalms exclusively. Furthermore, the fact that a synodical decision by the German Reformed Church was required to bring about an official change in practice speaks against the notion that psalms were sung out of mere preference for pragmatic considerations only. As we will see in a subsequent article, the German Reformed Church changed its practice only after altering its regulative principle of worship. All this means, that if you are in a German Reformed Church at the present time and one of your denominational “experts” tells you that it was not the practice of the German Reformed Church to sing psalms only out of submission to the regulative principle of worship, you need to ask them if their credentials as ecclesiastical historians can match up with Good’s and then demand evidence to establish their claim. By the way, the scholarly testimony of Dr. Paul Westermeyer can be added to that of Good’s whose Ph.D dissertation is in the history of music in the German Reformed Church in America . Westermeyer in an article entitled, “German Hymnody in the United States” testifies that not only did Calvin restrict church music to the metrical singing of the psalms, he also says, “it was Calvin’s example which the German Reformed followed” (1980: 89). In the mouth of two very reliable witnesses it is established that the German Reformed sang only the psalms and out of conviction at that!

Eight: Anyone remotely familiar with the history of the French Reformed Church is aware of the valiant profession of faith made by the Hugenot’s who were ruthlessly oppressed and slaughtered by the French crown. In a series of posts we have discussed W. Standford Reid’s claims about the central role of the psalter in shaping the piety and martial ethos of the psalms upon the French Reformed. The question remains however, did they sing canonical psalms exclusively? Here again the expertise of Benson is extremely helpful. He explains that psalm-singing patterned on the model of Geneva was already the universal practice in the French speaking evangelical churches by 1553. Beyond that, he cites from chapter 10 of the constitution of the French Reformed Church (1559) about worship song:

Singing of God’s praises being a divine Ordinance, and to be performed in the Congregations of the Faithful, and for that by use of Psalms their hearts be comforted and strengthened; every one shall be advertized to bring with them their Psalm-Books unto those assemblies, and such as through contempt of the this holy Ordinance do forbear the having of them, shall be censured, as also those, who in time of singing, both before and after sermon, are not uncovered, as also when the Holy Sacraments are Celebrated.

Clearly, Benson is able to provide documentation which demonstrates that exclusive psalmody was constitutionally mandated. Perhaps one more quote from Benson will help us appreciate just how constitutive the psalms were for the French Reformed. Commenting on the centrality of the psalter in the life of the French church Benson says, “to know the Psalms became a primary duty; and the singing of Psalms became for the Reformed cultus, the characteristic note distinguishing its worship from that of the Roman Catholic Church (pg. 72). It is indisputable then, that the French practice did not differ from that of the Swiss, the German, or the Dutch; the churches on the continent then were uniform in their practice from the 16^th century well on into the 18^th.

Nine: That the psalms found a home in the Presbyterian churches of the British Isles is beyond dispute. For instance, when the Reformation took root in Scotland under the oversight of Knox he not only brought the theology he had learned from Geneva with him, he also brought the Psalter as well. The Scottish Psalter of 1564 had all 150 Psalms and was used steadily until its replacement by the Scottish Psalter of 1650. Among the English Puritans psalmody was well established also. Multiple printings of the Sternhold and Hopkins Psalter were made from 1560 on and used for nearly 100 years. It is also to be noted that the Westminster Confession explicitly authorizes and sanctions exclusive psalmody in chapter 21 on “Religious Worship.” Smith notes that chapter 21 was passed in session 732, October 29, 1646 with very little debate (pg. 6). He explains that the reason very little debate was needed is because the assembly had approved the Rouse Psalter for public worship just a year earlier in session 535, November 15, 1645. Such a legislative act meant that exclusive psalmody was the settled law of the land, therefore it is unquestionable that chapter 21 on religious worship can authorize nothing but exclusive psalmody.

So, there we have just a smattering of the evidence which substantiates the claim that the Reformed and Presbyterian churches of the 16^th and 17^th centuries used the psalms exclusively. Certainly more can and needs to be said to support the claim made in the introduction, but the trajectory is clear enough: Reformed and Presbyterians sang the psalms exclusively. Anyone who denies that must offer facts which refute the simple statement of the evidence presented above. If you are encountering this evidence for the first time you might be reeling a bit. After all, being Reformed is about being Biblical; yet, if your Reformed or Presbyterian church practices a form of worship so completely different than the historic Reformed church (which claimed to be Biblical in its worship), it cannot help but lead you to question if you are being Biblical in your worship. While you mull that question over, you might also be wondering whether it matters all that much after all. Surely one can be solidly Reformed in "the most important areas" without slavishly following the historic Reformed practice of worship right? Well, let me leave you with Calvin’s thoughts on the centrality of worship for the Reformation, and hopefully as you ruminate upon his comments, you will challenge yourself to come back and read the rest of the posts in this new series.

If it be inquired, then, by what things chiefly the Christian religion has a standing existence amongst us, and maintains its truth, it will be found that the following two not only occupy the principal place, but comprehend under them all the other parts, and consequently the whole substance of Christianity, viz., a knowledge, first, of the mode in which God is duly worshipped and, secondly, of the source from which salvation is to be obtained. When these are kept out of view, though we may glory in the name of Christians, our profession is empty and vain.

I know how difficult it is to persuade the world that God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by His Word. The opposite persuasion which cleaves to them, being seated, as it were, in their very bones and marrow, is, that whatever they do has in itself a sufficient sanction, provided it exhibits some kind of zeal for the honour of God. But since God not only regards as fruitless, but also plainly abominates, whatever we undertake from zeal to His worship, if at variance with His command, what do we gain by a contrary course? The words of God are clear and distinct, "Obedience is better than sacrifice." "In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men," (1 Sam. 25:22; Matt. 15:9.) Every addition to His word, especially in this matter, is a lie. Mere " will worship" is vanity. This is the decision, and when once the judge has decided, it is no longer time to debate.

The Martial Ethos of Historic Reformed Worship: Psalm singing and civil defense in early 17th century Geneva

2012-02-01T08:19:00.000-08:00

For the last 400 years, in the evening of December 11^th and on into the wee morning hours of the 12^th of December, the longest day of the year on the Julian calendar, the city of Geneva hosts a very large and raucous celebration called the Fête de l'Escalade, the Celebration of the Scaling. During the span of this celebration a hot and tasty vegetable soup is sold everywhere in the streets of Geneva. Along with this soup, the famous chocolate "marmites", a replica of a soup cauldron, filled with marzipan vegetables and decorated with the colors of Geneva, is sold to revelers. According to a long standing custom, these chocolate pots are smashed, while shouting: Thus perish the enemies of the Republic [of Geneva]. Other customs include the offering of mulled wine and children in Halloween-like costumes singing Escalade songs in local bistros and in the streets, but the height of the celebration is marked by the procession of hundreds of Genevans dressed in full historical costume, along with horsemen, musketeers, crossbow marksmen, torch-bearers, a hangman and his assistant. The procession is accompanied by gun smoke, firecrackers and gun salutes which concludes its processional by marching to the Cathedral of Saint-Pierre where proclamation of Genevese victory is made. Everyone enjoys a good local parade and civic celebration, but what does this Genevan custom have to do with the martial ethos of historic Reformed worship? The answer is that this parade is a public celebration of the annual celebration of the victory of Calvinistic Genevan forces over hostile, Roman Catholic forces of Duke Charles Emmanuel of Savoy which launched a surprise midnight attack against Geneva.

From the inception of Duke Charles Emmanuel’s rise to the throne of the House of Savoy in 1580, he longed to subject the Calvinists of Geneva to Savoy rule and to make the city the northern capital of the house of Savoy. Over the course of time he alternated diplomatic and military offensives, intimidation, threats and promises of peace, none of which secured the objective which aimed at breaking the back of Protestantism in Geneva. The Duke of Savoy enlisting the help of his brother-in-law, Philip III of Spain, finally attempted to seize his objective by force, amassing a force of 2,000 paid mercenaries, and launching a midnight raid on Geneva. The plan was to use a small mobile force of commandos to scale the city walls and to open the gates from the inside in order to flood the city with attackers. However, the plan of the Savoy attackers was thwarted by an alert sentinel who was able to squeeze off an alarm shot before he was killed. This shot set off the tripping of alarms and bells across the city, waking the Genevans and rallying them to defend the city against attack. One of the enduring legends preserved from that fateful evening is the story of Mother Royaume (Mère Royaume), the mother of 14 children, who, when she realized the city was under attack took a large cauldron of soup she had on the fire and hurled it onto the head of a Savoyard mercenary. To this day this act of valor is commemorated by the selling of the vegetable soup and the smashing of the chocolate pots. The upshot of the story is that the citizens of Geneva managed to repel the attackers from scaling the city wall (climb = escalade); while the Duke's army of 2000 mercenaries suffered several hundred casualties, the Genevans suffered only 18.

When the smoke settled on December the 12^th and the citizen militia concluded its mop up campaign, they returned to the streets of Geneva in order to celebrate their victory. As crowds gathered and reveled in the streets they sang Psalms giving thanks to God for their victory. At some point during the celebration, Theodore Beza, at this point in his 80’s, appeared before the crowd and called upon them to sing Psalm 124, one of the psalms he had versified in the 1550’s (p.53). Down to this day on December 12^th the Genevans still mark the annual celebration of this momentous victory by the singing of this psalm. The Psalms then, not only galvanized the Reformed in France, the Netherlands, England, and Scotland to face the flames of persecution and filled their hearts with courage as they marched out to battle, they also unified the Calvinists in Geneva to rally in defense of the Reformation in Geneva and to defend it against the malevolent aims of the Roman Catholic Duke of Savoy.

It is apparent from the series of examples highlighted in these past several posts that the singing of the psalms cultivated a martial ethos in the hearts of Reformed worshipers across the continent and the British Isles, not only unifying the Reformed in their experience of their worship but also energizing them to take up the sword in self-defense and strengthening them in heart to face the fiery flames of persecution. Dr. Reid, looking over the evidence makes a couple of pointed conclusions. First he says that, “the vernacular-metrical psalm…became woven into the fabric of the sixteenth century Calvinist and life—one might even say it became part of the Calvinistic mystique” (p.53). So, Dr. Reid makes the claim that psalm singing was part of the fabric and mystique of the Calvinist way of life in the 16^th century. In thinking about that statement, a reasonable question to ask is if that could be said of the Reformed and Presbyterian church today. Is the singing of psalms part of the fabric and mystique of the Church? Only a moment of reflection will lead to the sad conclusion that no, psalm singing is not a part of the fabric and mystique of the Church today. The reason it is not is because the Reformed and Presbyterian church somewhere along the line decided that the regulative principle of worship, formulated in the 16^th and 17^th century confessions did not apply to the content of the songs sung in worship. An unintended consequence of this false assessment is that it changed the ethos of the Reformed and Presbyterian church, exchanging a martial ethos for an ethos of pietistic, syrupy and sentimental emotionalism reflected in the revivalistic hymns of the 18^th and 19^th century and the vapid praise songs of the 1970’s and 80’s which mimic the tunes and sentiments of Barry Manilow and Ann Murray. Second, Dr, Reid draws the conclusion that psalm singing became one of the major factors in “forming and inspiring Calvinist resistance to persecution, oppression, and attack” (p.54). Can this be said of the Reformed and Presbyterian churches today? Again, only a moments reflection will lead to the obvious conclusion that such an ethos of courage and valor to face persecution, oppression, and attack is not being formed and cultivated in contemporary Reformed and Presbyterian Christians. It would not be stretching the truth too much to say that a major problem in the Reformed and Presbyterian church is that it lacks an identity and therefore has no significant identity to embrace or rally around in support, defense, or self-sacrifice. The Reformed were once known for virulent defense of worship; now, Reformed worship includes everything from Bill Gaither style of worship to the worship style Calvary Chapel or the Vineyard. With such an amorphous worship identity it is no surprise that the Reformed church is suffering from spiritual anemia having replaced the regulative principle of the confessions with the principle suited to the taste of the masses which is constantly driven by the winds of change: whatever feels good, do it.

It is time for the Reformed and Presbyterian church to be honest, either admitting that the regulative principle of worship contained in the confessions is inaccurate and unbiblical, therefore standing in need of a reformulation which conforms more closely to Scripture, or, it is time to be honest and admit that the innovations which have taken place in its worship since the 16^th century are inconsistent with the regulative principle and thus mobilize to restore the old form of Reformed worship. This will not happen however until the record about historic Reformed worship is set straight and the Reformed and Presbyterian churches are consciously made aware of the fact that in practice they have both departed from and rejected the regulative principle of worship. Once there is an awareness of that fact, a decision will have to be made, will the Church embrace its own confession or will it reformulate the regulative principle of worship along the lines which Dr. John Frame has proposed. Evading this question is dishonest and not only undermines the credibility of the Reformed churches, it also cultivates a spineless mushy ethos in the churches and leaves it without a clear identity to embrace or an obvious purpose to rally around, promote, defend, and sacrifice for. No amount of substituting hot button commitments to home-schooling, six day creation, Van Tilian apologetics, or denial of women’s suffrage will restore vigor to the Reformed since the backbone and foundation of the Reformed church is worship as John Calvin himself said in On the Necessity of Reforming the Church:

If it be inquired, then, by what things chiefly; the Christian religion has a standing existence amongst us, and maintains its truth, it will be found that the following two not only occupy the principal place, but comprehend under them all the other parts, and consequently the whole substance of Christianity, viz., a knowledge, first, of the mode in which God is duly worshipped; and, secondly, of the source from which salvation is to be obtained.

The longer the Reformed and Presbyterian churches, which want to claim the mantle of faithful Calvinism, fail to reckon and make peace with this statement of Calvin, that the whole substance of Christianity rests upon the mode in which God is duly worshiped, the more the Church will suffer from anemia and will twist and shift with the winds of worship which blow across evangelicalism and it will not be able to draw sharp contrasts between itself and broad evangelicalism. Sadly, the Reformed will be indistinguishable from a broad range of churches which includes everything from Anglicanism, to traditional Southern Baptist worship, to Calvary Chapel and the Assembly of God.

People of God, now is the time to rise up in protest, now is the time to embrace our Biblical and historic Reformed heritage!

The Martial Ethos of Historic Reformed Worship: Psalm singing, persecution, and public resistance in the 16th century British Isles

2012-01-25T07:58:00.000-08:00

While the psalms may have been sung on the continent as battle songs for courageous soldiers marching out to war, Dr. Reid points out that they were put to a slightly different use in the 16^th century on the British Isles. Reid argues that the reason for this difference lies in the fact that the opponents of the Calvinists on the Isles were not primarily Roman Catholic; rather, the martial conflicts were related more toward nationalism and politics (p.50). However, it is worth pointing out, during the 17^th century, the psalms would be used by Ironsides and the Covenanters in a series of military skirmishes. Though it is proper to note that there is a difference in use between the Isles and the Continent, it is clear that the psalms continued to be a galvanizing force in Britain among the Reformed, and had important cultural applications.

Psalm signing was not always a prominent feature of British piety however. Dr. Reid explains that prior to 1539 there were no English metrical versions of psalms. This void was first filled by Miles Coverdale’s publication of his Ghostly Psalms, and was further supplemented by the work of Thomas Sternhold and John Hopkins who contributed another thirty or so psalms to the growing collection of metrical psalms. It is worth noting in passing that these psalms were suppressed by King Henry the 8^th and at the same time were used to strengthen the resolve of persecuted Christians such as Bishop Hooper as they were led to the stake for slaughter.

It would however be left to the leadership of John Knox to promote an expanded use of the Psalter. Knox, having been forced to move on from serving saints in Frankfurt on account of the swelling ranks of Anglican refugees, moved on to Geneva to serve a congregation of British exiles. Here Knox presided over the construction of a liturgy based upon the model used in Geneva and oversaw the publication of a Psalter consisting of 54 metrical psalms arranged and edited by Sternhold and Hopkins (p.51). Upon Knox’ return to Scotland he brought both the liturgy and Psalter with him establishing their use in the Scottish Church.

A similar liturgical use of the psalms occurred at this time in England as well. As Marian exiles returned home after the accession of Elizabeth, they brought a complete Psalter with them containing all 150 psalms. It would turn out that these psalms would take up a vital place in Puritan, non-conformist worship. Dr. Reid reports that when the lectureships were established, it was a common practice for the congregants to gather together about an hour before worship began to join their voices together in praise using the psalms. The use of psalms became a signature mark of English Puritanism and a badge of Puritan identity similar to their use on the Continent. One practice in particular highlights this characteristic feature of the 16^th century Puritans which was the gathering of large crowds in the evenings at St. Paul’s Cross to sing the “Genevan jigs” as a form of protest against Queen Elizabeth’s demand for religious and liturgical uniformity (p.52).

Two separate examples of the use of psalm singing in Scotland are worth mentioning here before winding this post down with a note of conclusion. First, when Mary returned to Scotland in 1561, she was greeted on her first night by a large crowd of Scottish Christians who serenaded her with psalms under her bedroom window. The rather chilling significance of this public display was not lost on Mary who experienced a taste of the psalm singing ethos, as it functioned among the Huguenot’s, during her stay in France while married to Francis II (p.52). Second, a specific incident occurred on 4 September 1582 upon the return of exiled minister John Durie. Durie, a minister in Edinburgh, who had been exiled by James VI by the hand of Esme Stuart, Duke of Lennox, was escorted from seaport to his Edinburgh rectory by a throng of psalm singing Scots. As Durie made his way toward the St. Giles Kirk, a crowd numbering in the thousands lifted up their voice in praise using the psalms. This public display of psalm singing was so unsettling to the Duke that he immediately tucked his tale in fear, leaving Scotland, never to return (p.53).

It is not too difficult to see the significance of the role of the psalms as the Reformation swept across the British Isles in the mid 16^th century. First, no sooner had a Reformed movement taken embryonic shape in Britain than metrical versions of the psalms were arranged, published, and made use of to strengthen and nourish the saints and to sustain martyrs as they faced the fires of unholy persecution. Second, the psalms were used exclusively in both Scotland and England as the manual of praise among those who identified themselves with the Reformation which emanated from Geneva. This fact is significant to highlight as it establishes the form of worship which was characteristic of Calvinistic worship in the British Isles of the 16^th century. Commitment to exclusive canonical psalmody was not a subsequent development of 17^th century hard line, fundamentalist Puritanism, as is sometimes claimed, rather it was the practice of the Calvinistic Reformed churches from the time when the Reformation gained a footing in Britain. Third, though the psalms did not quite have the same role in 16^th century Britain as they did in on the Continent, they certainly were an identifying feature of Reformed British worship and piety as is exemplified by the examples of their use in both England and Scotland which were cited above. A fair and reasonable conclusion to draw from this evidence is that wherever the Reformed church went the Psalter went, whether on the Continent or Britain, and, the psalms were put to use as a powerful means of resistance to tyrannical, anti-Reformed magistrates. All this points to the fact that psalm signing was central to the ethos of the church militant in the 16^th century British Isles.

The Martial Ethos of Historic Reformed Worship: Psalm singing and persecution in the Netherlands

2012-01-19T08:55:00.000-08:00

In pursuing the connection between psalm singing and persecution, we move from France to the Netherlands. Sadly, the experience of the Reformed in the Netherlands varied little from the experience of the French Reformed, as pools of bright red Reformed blood formed across the landscape of the Netherlands as the Reformed faith struggled to take root. Besides being bonded by blood, these churches were bonded by a common commitment to the singing of psalms, and it was this commitment that generated violent opposition against the Reformed church.

From the inception of Reformation in the Netherlands, there was no lack of Psalters available to Reformed Christians to help them give voice to their praise. As early as 1539 psalm books flowed from the presses in Antwerp as the Reformed faith began to gain a footing. In 1540 Souder Liedekens' complete Psalter was rolled out, eventually going through thirty-three editions. Another Dutch Psalter was produced by Jan van Utenhove who brought his own version of 100 psalm settings over from London. The introduction to Psalm 46 in this Psalter highlighted the relationship between psalm singing and persecution stating, “this psalm also aroused all those truly praising God to trust whenever the godless arose in persecution.” However, the Psalter which gained widest circulation was the Marot-Beza Genevan Psalter of 1562 which was translated into Dutch first by de Heere, and then by Dathenus, the latter version being adopted officially at the Reformed synods of Wesel (1568) and Dordrecht (1574).

As the psalms began to unite the hearts and voices of the Dutch Reformed in praise and worship, it will come as no surprise that persecution was initiated against them. Strada, a Roman Catholic historian, reports that hundreds of Reformed Christians flocked to public meetings where psalms were sung in protest against the Roman Catholic magistrate. In the Netherlands, public psalm singing led to the same experience of bloodshed as it did in France. On one occasion, 300 English refugees were sent to the stake with Psalm 130 on their lips, while on others, riots broke out and arrests led to mass executions.

A series of instances of persecution against the Reformed are worth taking a moment to highlight and draw attention to, as we consider the connection between psalm singing and persecution in the Netherlands. First, in 1562 at Valenciennes, when the magistrate attempted to execute a man named Faveau and his associate for publicly preaching Reformed doctrine, a large crowd of Reformed Christians began to form and started to loudly sing the psalms. Mayhem was unleashed and the end result was that the mob of psalm singers overwhelmed the executioners, effecting the release of the prisoners. Second, in 1562 a man named Christopher Fabricius was condemned to death for preaching Protestant doctrine. While positioned on the pyre awaiting execution, Fabricius began to sing Psalm 130 and the crowd began to join their voices to his. The situation rapidly deteriorated with the executioner and civic officials turning tale and running; however, before the executioner fled in panic he thrust Fabricius through with a sword and smashed his head in, instantly killing him. Third, in 1566 Viscount Brederode began to publicly organize large public worship services as a means of civil disobedience against the magistrate. These public services, often attracting crowds measured in the thousands, consisted of preaching and psalm singing. On one occasion, Dr. Hermanus led his followers into a cathedral and preached a fiery sermon against idolatry. In response to the sermon, the crowd began to vigorously sing the psalms, which eventually led to an outburst of iconoclasm as the worshipers destroyed all the images in the cathedral. The regent was so alarmed by these public meetings that she wrote to Philip II warning him psalm singing was leading to widespread civil unrest and rebellion. Fourth, by 1574 the public singing so enraged the magistrate that the Dutch Reformed experienced their own St. Bartholomews Day massacre in Alva’s Council of Blood, which effectively suppressed the public gatherings of the Reformed.

This brief survey of the early days of reformation in the Netherlands shows that the Dutch Reformed were psalm singers whose experience was one of persecution and the costly shedding of blood. While Roman Catholic oppressors hated the psalms, the Reformed found their identity and unity in them. Though the psalms were sung out of the conviction that God had prescribed them as an element of worship, they were not relegated to the Lord’s Day worship alone, as the Dutch Christians made use of them at home privately and in the public square openly as a means of civil disobedience. Clearly, the Psalms were the fuel of first generation reformers in the Netherlands, giving shape to Dutch worship, piety, and practice, and would remain dominant in Dutch Reformed life for hundreds of years until the winds of 19^th century liberalism would sweep over the Dutch church in the Netherlands and until the blight of revivalism and Yankee pragmatism would ravage Dutch Reformed convictions about worship in the 20^th century in America. If the Dutch Reformed church would regain the robust faith of their forefathers it will need to toss out the use of manmade revivalistic hymns and junk praise songs and replace them with the Psalms, God’s very own appointed manual of praise.

The Martial Ethos of Historic Reformed Worship: Psalm singing and persecution in France

2012-01-11T10:11:00.000-08:00

Continuing on in our series on the relationship of psalm singing to the corporate life and experience of the Reformed churches, which embraced the theology of worship spelled out by John Calvin, we turn to psalm singing and persecution. The experience of Reformed churches in three different geographical regions in France will be taken up for examination. Throughout the following paragraphs we will highlight certain key facts and insights provided by Dr. Reid.

First, strong opposition to psalm singing was encountered by the Reformed at the hands of Catholic leaning French authorities in city of Paris. As early as October 1557 in Paris, the Huegenots were being persecuted by the magistrate. Dr. Reid cites a particular instance of persecution which occurred at a meeting of Huguenots at the home of a Parisian citizen on Rue St. Jacues behind the Sorbonne. Here, hundreds of Huguenots met for worship with a large spillover crowd positioned outside the home. Sorbonne clergy, alerted about the meeting, gathered up a mob of thugs, deputized them and sent them in to arrest the men assembled at the gathering. A substantial portion of the men pushed their way of the house, leaving women and children behind, believing that the women and children would be unharmed by the clergy's deputies. The plan backfired as many women and children were incarcerated for an extended period of time; however, the incarceration led to greater antagonism as the captives spent much of their time singing psalms in unison. As for the men, many of them were subsequently captured and burned at the stake for the subversive act of practicing their Calvinist faith with its signature feature of psalm singing. At this point it is a reasonable question to ask whether these Christians would have been as savagely persecuted had they been gathering to sing hymns as praise songs and "ministered to" by naturally talented individuals who sang together in choirs, trios, duos, and solos. While it is difficult to answer the question to everyone's satisfaction, a reasonable conjecture, based upon a knowledge of the facts, is that the Reformed would not have experienced such severe persecution. It is undeniable that psalm singing generated stiff opposition then, as it does now.

Second, similar confrontation was experienced in La Rochelle and beyond. As early as 1550 ecclesiastical court documents indicate that authorities had banned the importation of the Calvinist Geneva Psalter. Opposition to psalm signing was also encountered about the same time at Bas-Poitou, Bourges, and Bordeaux. In all these places the civil and ecclesiastical authorities maintained the position that such singing "was in derision and to the great scandal of the Christian religion." In Nantes, the hatred of psalm singing ran so deep that authorities, in 1562, petitioned Duc d'Etampes to come and stamp out the public singing of the psalms. It is worth pausing to notice, that being Protestant in general, or more specifically "Calvinitistic" did not necessarily provoke the ire of civil and ecclesiastical authorities, rather, it was the additional factor of psalm signing that made these French Reformed Christians targets for savage persecution.

Third, Reformed churches in Normandy and Dieppe experienced similar hostility from authorities. To voice opposition to the Cardinal's opposition to the French Reformed churches in this region, the Huguenots positioned a force of 2,000 worshipers outside his residence who sang the psalms for hours. Of course, this action initiated a hostile response and many Huguenots subsequently lost their life. The Huguenots however were not to be deterred as throngs of worshipers openly sang the psalms as they marched the dead to their graves in public funeral processions.

These three examples of regional persecution of French Reformed Calvinists mark only a tip of the iceberg of violent persecution directed toward Reformed psalms singers. On the one hand, it is encouraging to think about the persistence of the Huguenots in practicing their faith in the face of fierce opposition, noting that this persecuted minority steadfastly maintained their faith believing they were commanded to do so, instead of caving in to the authorities and abandoning their convictions to pacify oppressors in order to make their lives more comfortable. One way to account for this remarkable testimony of faithfulness is by realizing that the practice of singing these Holy Spirit inspired Psalms itself, tapped into rich streams of energizing grace, which in turn, nourished and fostered dutiful and God-glorifying obedience. On the other hand, it is deeply discouraging to consider that fierce opposition to exclusive psalm singing persists 500 years later. What is especially disheartening is that the Roman Catholic civil and ecclesiastical authorities have been replaced by the Reformed churches as the primary oppressors and opponents of exclusive psalm singing. It is inexplicable that those who claim to bear the mantle of Calvinist theology are those who would have opposed and oppressed Calvin himself for instituting exclusive canonical psalm singing. I can only imagine that this hostility flows at least in part from ignorance of the history of the Reformed church and it is my hope that the publication of the record of the historic Reformed commitment to this distinctive practice of exclusive singing of canonical psalms will not only lead Reformed people to set aside their hostility and opposition to psalm singing, but will also lead them to reconsider their own practice of worship and conform it to the pattern of historical Calvinism.

The Martial Ethos of Historic Reformed Worship: Psalm-singing for Vigorous Kingdom Service (part 3)

2011-11-22T11:17:00.000-08:00

So far in our series of posts about the martial ethos of historic Reformed worship, cultivated as it was by the godly singing of the Psalms, we have noted Dr. Reid’s bold claim that this particular music developed a peculiar resolve in the hearts of Calvinists who were forced to use weapons to defend their lives and promote their liberty. Unlike the Lutherans, who after the Peace of Augsburg (1555) did not have to take up arms to defend themselves against hostile enemies, the Reformed were in a much different position and would spend the next 150 years marching out to battlefields and being marched to the stake to be burnt in the flames for holding to their Calvinistic, Reformed faith. These assertions are simple matters of fact, and Dr. Reid has made the argument that what galvanized the hearts of the Reformed around their cause, trained their hands to fight, and steeled their courage to endure intense persecution, was the singing of the psalms. Beyond that, we have seen that the construction of the Geneva Psalter, which was a life long pursuit of Calvin completed in 1562, left the Reformed with a song book comprised of nothing but the psalms bequeathing a distinct heritage of psalm-singing that would serve as a badge of identity and strengthen their morale in the face of persecution and conflict (p.42). That leads us in this post to address the question of why the Psalms had this effect by expounding the three reasons Dr. Reid furnishes as answers which account for it.

First, Reid argues that psalm-singing provided the Reformed with a distinct identity (p.43). It appears that this distinctive practice was so prominent among the Reformed that they were derisively labeled as “psalm-singers” by those from without. It is not too difficult to understand how this practice could have served as such vivid and accurate label when we consider that all the rest of the churches of 16^th century Europe sang what could be called “sacred music” meaning hymns and canticles accompanied by an organ. Encountering the “strangeness” of Reformed worship (a cappella singing) in that day would have left just as much of an impression upon the casual observer of the peculiarity of the practice, as it would in our church context today which almost entirely dominated by praise and worship music. So, singing of the Psalms had the effect of strengthening the Reformed to face opposition and conflict because it gave them a distinct identity which was as peculiar as it was easy to identify.

Second, Reid proposes that the identity shaped by psalm-singing produced unity among the Reformed (p.43). The bonds of unity were not only reinforced by sharing in the same practice of worship and the singing of psalms exclusively, it was also cultivated by sharing in a common cause and profession of faith expressed in the psalms. Beyond that Reid points out that the Reformed shared a profound sense of being enlisted in a common battle for the defense and promotion of the kingdom of God even to the point of bearing of arms in battle. Evidence for this form of unity is indicated in the fact that they sang the Psalms in unison as battle songs while they marched in columns toward fields of battle gaining the confidence every step of the way that “no matter what would take place they were on the Lords, i.e., the winning side” (p.43). Not only did the Psalms play a significant role in building up confidence and courageous resolve as the Reformed marched out to battle, they also united their hearts in praise as they gave thanks to the Lord for victory with psalms. So psalm-singing cultivated unity among the Reformed as they rallied together around the common cause of promoting the kingdom of God.

Third, Reid makes the case that the singing of the psalms had a profound effect upon the Reformed because they were convinced that they could legitimately appropriate them to themselves. A primary point of departure for appropriating the psalms to themselves was by identifying the new covenant church as the continuation of the covenant people of God who were bonded together in covenant with the sovereign Lord. By singing the psalms in worship and in a host of informal contexts they bore witness to this relationship. Hopeful that the psalms would be used for this very purpose Clarence Marot wrote, in his dedicatory address of his own publication of 49 metrical psalms in 1543, that it “would a happy time when prayer would flourish, with the laborer at his plow, the carter in the street, and the craftsmen in his shop singing psalms to ease their work” (p.44). Hostile witnesses provide more than ample evidence that Marot’s wishes were fulfilled as Roman Catholic Claude Haton, wrote in his memoirs the Huguenots sang psalms “to move their hearts” and fellow Catholic M. de Casteleneau observed that the “harmonious and delectable singing stirred the Calvinists to proclaim the praises of the Lord no matter what the circumstances” (p.44). Clearly, even beyond the walls of houses of worship, the Reformed testified to their identity as the covenant people of God as they took His sacred songs upon their lips in praise.

In our next post we will chronicle some of the opposition mounted against the psalm-signing Calvinists by their bitter enemies.

The Martial Ethos of Historic Reformed Worship: Psalm-singing for vigorous Kingdom service (part 2)

2011-11-08T09:04:00.000-08:00

In thinking about the historic Reformed practice of psalm-singing and how it cultivated the particular effect of a martial ethos, it will be helpful to briefly trace the origin and distribution of the Geneva Psalter which had such a substantial hand in shaping Reformed worship for at least a few centuries subsequent to the Reformation. Although Psalms were being sung as early as the 1520’s among the Reformed, it was Calvin who helped make this practice a badge of identity for the Reformed churches. Taking a middle road between Luther on the one hand, who incorporated hymns and psalms in public worship, and Zwingli on the other, who rejected the use of both instruments and songs altogether in public worship, Calvin proposed the singing of the Psalms a capella by the whole congregation.

To facilitate turning this principle into a consistent practice, Calvin oversaw the editing and publication of a French psalter in 1539, while yet in Strausburg (p.38). Though this first run at producing a psalter was not without its flaws or limitations, it did at least accomplish the objective of putting his principles into practice, not only in his congregation of French refugees, but it also laid the groundwork for the spread and use of the Psalms in the worship of the Reformed churches through the influence it had upon Valerian Poullain, his successor in Strausburg, who then went on subsequently to serve in England and then Frankfurt (p.39). A few short years later, in 1542, having returned to minister in Geneva, Calvin published a new version of the psalter, this time with a preface which explained the rationale for using the psalter in Reformed worship:

And in truth, we know by experience, that singing has great strength and vigor to move and inflame the hearts of men to invoke and praise God with a more vehement and ardent zeal.

It is evident from even this brief remark that Calvin saw the inherent power of music to move the soul and viewed the Psalms as the most pure lyrical form to mold pious zeal for holy ends.

Believing the Psalms were best suited to cultivate a true and substantial holy ardor and in view of that seeking to actually compile a psalter complete with musical settings was one thing, pulling it off in practice was quite another. Early on Calvin had put his own hand to translating and arranging metrical versions of the Psalms, but had to admit his own labors were less than satisfactory. By the providence of God, a man named Clement Marot was led to Calvin for just such a purpose. Hands down, Marot was one of the leading French poets of the day. So renowned for his capabilities was Marot that he had access to the court of Francis I, but acquiring his skills for Geneva's project proved to be quite an ordeal. In 1535 Marot had been accused of heresy and fled Paris to seek refuge in the court of Renee of Ferrara where he met Calvin (p.40). Apparently, someone was able to patch things up between Marot and Francis I because he can be found back in the king’s court by 1538 and was at that time already producing metrical versions of the psalms that even found favor with the king and his court. By 1543, while Marot’s psalm settings were growing in popularity in various pockets of France, they were growing in disfavor with the Roman intelligentsia at the Sorbonne and with the Roman authorities. To escape persecution Marot fled to Geneva where he received a hearty welcome from his old friend John Calvin. Though Marot’s stay in Geneva would not be a particularly lengthy one, he was able to publish a total of 49 metrical versions of the Psalms. Apparently Clement had a knack for crossing swords with people, and before he could finish his work in Geneva he was exiled from the city for inappropriate fraternization with some ladies down at the local pub. After expulsion from Geneva things took a sharp dive southward for Marot as he died suddenly and prematurely in Turin by means of poisoning (p.41).

With about one third of the psalter arranged for music, Calvin turned to another leading humanist and poet, Theodore Beza, in order to see to it that the work Marot started would be brought to conclusion. From 1549 to 1562 Beza worked steadily to complete the psalter project. Beza, working side by side with musicians such as Franc, Goudimel, and especially, Louis Bourgeouis, was able to produce a psalter that displayed a remarkable artistic touch and was well adapted for popular use.

With production complete, the psalter was ready for distribution, and all indications are that it was a hot commodity as it rolled off the press. Upon completion of the final edition in 1562, the Geneva Psalter was translated into Dutch, German, Hungarian, and English (p.42). For the most part, the new translations attempted to retain the tunes and simply translate and arrange the lyrics to the musical settings. The success of the psalter can measured by its massive popularity as Reid notes, “even Godeau, Bishop of Grasse in 1649, could witness to the popularity and influence of the Huguenot psalm-singing while his own Roman Catholics were either dumb or sang “des chansons deshonnetes” (p.42). The effect of the psalter was that it unleashed a wave of what Reid calls “popular music” for it had finally put sacred lyrics to tunes that were accessible to the musically untrained. This popular music certainly had unintended consequences, which we will take note of in subsequent posts, but for now I leave us to consider Reid’s preliminary summary of the psalter’s effect:

This was of great importance for it meant that the faithful could now sing together the songs of faith, a practice which was bound to strengthen their morale in the face of persecution and conflict (p.42).

Imagine that being said of Fanny Crosby or CCM songs, or even the trendy new worship songs advertised on one web site which promotes “intimate songs of the heart” that are “sure to capture your heart, and leave you with an enduring sense of His presence, and a hunger for more.” To even consider the question for a moment is to answer it; such pious doggerel does not nourish the heart for even a moment, let alone for the flames of persecution.

With these comments in view I conclude with Dr. Reid’s bold claim for consideration, “certain types of music have power to stimulate to action, even the power to incite hands to war and fingers to fight.”

In the next post we will examine how psalm-singing shaped the Reformed identity and bore witness to their motivation and purpose as they sought to spread the truth and how they sustained them when they faced the fiery flames of persecution.

The Martial Ethos of Historic Reformed Worship: Psalm-singing for vigorous Kingdom service (part 1)

2011-11-01T10:20:00.000-07:00

Calvinistic worship, that is, worship regulated according to Scripture alone (Heidelberg Catechism Q 96; Belgic Confession article 32), has fostered and cultivated a unique form of piety in the Reformed church in the past. Many examples and testimonies of this distinct form of piety could be cited, but in this new series, I propose the MARTIAL ETHOS produced by Psalm-singing, which characterized militant Calvinism in the 16^th and 17^th centuries, for consideration. The research I will use to discuss the martial ethos produced by Psalm-singing among the Reformed churches of this period has been generated and published by W. Standford Reid in an article entitled, “The Battle Hymns of the Lord: Calvinist Psalmody of the Sixteenth Century.” Dr. Reid was a professor of history at the University of Guelph and the research presented in this particular essay is found a volume of essays published in 1970 in Sixteenth Century Essays and Studies, edited by C.S. Meyer. In the subsequent posts based upon this essay, I propose to examine the following five areas for examination: 1) Psalm singing strengthened the Calvinists to fight, 2) A brief history of Geneva Psalter’s construction –including its distribution in several languages, 3) Reasons why the psalter strengthened the Calvinists, 4) The Roman Catholic opposition to the Psalter and the Calvinist Psalm-singers and, 5) Use of the Psalter of various Calvinistic military campaigns of the 16^th and 17^th century. As we consider the evidence set forth and make the connection between the singing of psalms and the martial ethos of historical Calvinism, I challenge contemporary Reformed churches to recommit to the exclusive singing of the Psalms and inspired canonical psalms in order that they may reclaim the Calvinistic heritage of fulfilling the Biblical mandate to embrace the roll of the church militant in this age, which it has been shamefully distracted away from through its conscious choice to adorn Reformed worship with the accoutrements of breezy evangelical revivalism and to follow its form of feminine piety.

Dr. Reid begins his essay by claiming that certain types of music have power to stimulate to action, even the power to incite hands to war and fingers to fight. A moment’s reflection upon various kinds of music will easily verify the adequacy of this assertion. Ask yourself, “which performer or group would tend to motivate a soldier for battle more, Barry Manilow or Metallica?” I don’t think anyone who wants to be taken seriously would propose that Barry Manilow is the more obvious selection. It is obvious that a particular kind of ethos corresponds to these styles of music: Manilow’s music is characterized by a syrupy emotionalism and is thus fitting for cultivating and evoking that response where such moods are desired, and of course, a sort of robust, manly, courageous aggressiveness has characterized the music of James Hetfield and Metallica from their earliest beginnings, and that music is well suited to cultivate and strike similar chords in the hearts of its listeners. That simple exercise then provides common sense confirmation of the assertion made by Reid that certain types of music stimulate certain actions, even martial action.

Next, Dr. Reid points out an obvious fact which is that the Calvinists had to fight their way to Reformation in the 16^th and 17^th centuries. To verify the point, one only needs to think for a brief moment about the Huguenot’s, the Dutch, the Scottish Covenanters, Cromwell’s Roundheads, or the “Reformes of the Cevennes,” all who valiantly engaged in battle to defend and promote their deeply held Calvinistic and Reformed convictions. Helpfully, Reid gives at least a brief explanation for why the Calvinists were so often found marching out to battle, and it was not because they happened to be blood-thirsty, maladjusted thugs. It was rather because Calvinists, unlike the Lutherans, were never afforded the same political and religious protections from Rome and its allies, as the Lutheran’s received under the settlement of the 1555 Peace of Augsburg. On account of that lack of protection the Reformed were often savagely persecuted for their faith, and were left with no other option but to resist and fight back.

Interestingly, what Reid points out as characteristic of these Reformed armies who trudged out to the battlefield in the defense of polis and ecclesia is that as they went out to battle “the psalmists’s words seem to have come almost automatically to their lips” (p.36). Beyond that, think for a moment about Reid’s claim which is that it was the Psalms that tipped the balance in the favor of the Reformed as they engaged in battle. It is true, as Reid points out that Reformed forces were often led by a militant aristocracy and funded generously by a wealthy bourgeoisie, but those factors alone cannot account for their military success. Instead of finding the secret of their success in the quality of their leadership or the adequacy of their financial partners, Reid digs down into the hearts of the soldiers themselves, and having peeled back the layers he finds the Psalms there and argues that it was the Psalms which both built up and maintained the morale of the soldiers as they fought (p.37). See that? Calvinist worship, as historically conceived of and practiced by the Reformed churches of the 16th century, led to Kingdom advancement!

As we bring this article to conclusion, it is best to give Reid the last word so we can hear his bold and decisive claims about the all significant role of the Psalms in the 16^th and 17^th century battles for religious and political freedom from Rome and her allies:

The things that really grabbed the common man, the ordinary Calvinistic soldier, was something much more mundane: his catechetical training and congregational singing of the psalms. More than all the fine theological training, both the catechism and the Psalter entered into the very warp and weft of the humblest members’ lives (p.37).

Well, there we have the main thought Reid proposes for consideration, which is that the Psalms, when repeatedly sung in the congregation, have the power to fashion a certain kind of piety and theological conviction in the heart such that it creates a vast reservoir of motivation and resolve which may be tapped repeatedly and used as fuel to energize “hands to war and fingers to fight” in order that Christ’s kingdom may be defended and advanced for the glory of His name.

Now, let me conclude with a question for my Reformed readers (and I ask this as gently as I can), whose churches long ago sold the precious birthright of Psalm-singing for the pottage of revivalistic hymns and praise songs, are your songs tending to motivate and strengthen you to fight and to defend and to advance the kingdom of God, or do they tend to keep your hands clean from such actions and concerns and focused instead on your prayer closet and personal piety? Of course having spent much of my life in Reformed churches which rejected the Calvinistic and Reformed heritage of Psalm-singing in favor of Watt’s paraphrases, hymns of the Wesley brothers, and Fanny Crosby’s ditties, I am satisfied that I know the answer, but I would like you to consider Reid’s assertion for yourself: certain types of music stimulate to action, even to inciting hands to war and fingers to fight. Try to answer honestly!

Next time we will give a brief history of the Geneva Psalter’s construction –including its distribution in several languages.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody Pt.13: recap and conclusion

2011-10-04T09:43:00.000-07:00

As all good things must come to an end, so to must this brief study of the development of Calvin’s thought with respect to music and song in public worship. In wrapping these series of posts, I want to follow Garside’s study to its conclusion where he summarizes the main lines of thought developed in Calvin’s growing convictions about worship song between 1536 and 1543. These main turns in thought can be summarized in four decisive steps:

First, Garside establishes the baseline for charting Calvin’s progression in thought by fixing on the year 1537 and more specifically, by appealing to the publication of the Articles. For the first time, Calvin advocates the use of vernacular psalm singing in public worship. This proposal marks a decisive change in practice, as just a year prior, in 1536, Calvin in his Institutes could only commend singing a psalm or reading some portion of scripture during and after participation in the Supper. So what generated this shift in perspective? Garside suggests that the several months of pastoral service in Geneva during the year of 1536 accounts for this change as much as anything else. In witnessing firsthand the coldness of the prayers of the saints, Calvin was moved to consider another course. For Calvin, nothing was more useful for stimulating the heart and emotions to godly fear and joy than the singing of the Psalms in the native tongue of the worshiper. While this proposal was not fully implemented before Calvin was exiled from Geneva in the spring of 1538, he did find opportunity to put this proposal into practice while serving in Strasburg. There he finally experienced the quality of worship which he had envisioned for Geneva, and upon his return in 1542 he made it a matter of first priority to oversee the implementation of vernacular psalmody as a means of intensifying the quality of the Genevan worship experience and stoking the ardor of the church’s prayers.

Second, Calvin’s conviction about the role of psalms in worship solidified as he grew to understand more fully the role of psalms in the worship of the ancient church. Through his extensive interaction with Bucer during the years of pastoral exile in Strasburg, Calvin became even more acquainted with the function of psalms in early worship. Evidence for his deepened awareness of psalm singing in the apostolic and early church is the title for the proposed alterations to Geneva’s worship liturgy which he described as “according to the custom of the ancient Church.” The description of the 1542 liturgy indicates Calvin’s desire to reform the church according to the model of antiquity.

Third, through a careful reading of Augustine, Calvin developed a concept of sacred music. From his study of Augustine, Calvin became impressed with the need for gravity and majesty in the church’s music and the necessity of permitting the text to take priority over the tune and melody. In this way the power of music would be harnessed for spiritual good as the music assisted the worshiper to think about the lyrical content of the song while at the same time restraining dangerous excesses which could be generated by music shaped strictly for the purpose of engaging the emotions while bypassing the intellect.

Fourth, Calvin’s final step in 1543 to replace secular songs with the Psalms even outside of worship marks a final significant turning point. Aiming at counteracting the potentially corrosive effects of immoral and obscene secular songs sung in wider society, Calvin proposed that the psalms could and should be sung around the home and hearth as well as in worship. While Calvin’s effort to banish secular songs and substitute the psalms only in their place may sound extreme to our 21^st century ears, Garside points out that this was not entirely out of step with 16^th century humanist ideas concerning the social dimensions of music which had been profoundly shaped by Platonic theory (p.29). Given such a context, it is not hard to appreciate how it happened that vernacular psalmody became something like a Calvinist badge as the Reformed sang their psalms in worship and took them on the go as they went into workplace and on to the battle fields while defending their heartfelt faith.

In bringing this final post on Garside’s article to a conclusion, I will give him the last word:

Calvin’s vernacular psalmody in the last analysis is nothing other than a formulation in uniquely musical terms of the Reformation principle of sola scriptura. Thus from its inception Calvin’s theology of music in its textual dimension was Scriptural. The Psalter was conceived, and always would be considered by him, as an indispensable instrument for the prosecution of his ministry of the Word of God to the city of Geneva and the wider world beyond (p.29).

I hope this close look at Garside’s analysis of Calvin’s developing thought between 1536 and 1543 has been both useful and informative, and that it may help stimulate a desire, at least among the Reformed, to return to the rich heritage of Calvin’s and by extension, the apostolic and early church’s practice of worship according to the Word.

In our next series, we will examine other aspects of Calvin’s views on psalmody.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody Pt.12: Singing that glorifies God and edifies the believer

2011-09-27T09:28:00.000-07:00

It is one thing to come up with a great theory, but it is quite another to put it into practice in such a way that others can understand it and easily apply it. A capella singing of the Psalms is one example of where theory and practice intersect and as anyone knows who has tried it, it provides us with a classic case of trying the rule of easier said than done. Not only does it presuppose that everyone understands and embraces the principle of the matter, it also requires some capacity on the part of those involved to execute the singing properly. Calvin was well aware of the complexities of this issue and put careful thought into making the theoretical become reality. In what follows, we will unfold three crucial components of Calvin’s practice of Psalm singing.

First, Calvin laid it down as a matter of principle that singing Psalms to the glory of God involved singing with the whole heart. It is interesting how many times between 1536 and 1543 that he revisits this principle and places a heavy accent upon it. For instance in the 1536 Institutes he strikes this note saying, “unless voice and song…spring from deep feeling of heart, neither has any value or profit from God’ (p.26). In other words, one could be physically engaged in the right worship activity and still not be pleasing the Lord in the performance of it because the very nature of true worship requires a body and soul connection. Similarly, his 1537 proposal of Psalm singing in Geneva required that it be done in a “heartfelt” manner. Finally, in 1543 he reinforces the theme explaining that it was a principle laid down by Paul that “spiritual songs can be truly sung only from the heart” (p.26). This emphasis upon the quality of heartfelt worship and singing is a testimony to the fact that clinical sterility and cold legalism is not the necessary byproduct of seeking to follow the regulative principle of worship as Calvin conceived of it, but is rather a violation of Calvin’s principle of regulated worship since Calvin himself set down the quality of heartfelt worship as a first principle of Psalm singing.

Second, Calvin places an emphasis upon the role of the intellect in worship. This principle flows from the Calvinist and Reformed requirement of the intelligibility of worship which is illustrated by their conviction that all worship must be in the vernacular. The Reformers were keen to make the point that worship could only be edifying to men if it was understandable to those who participated in it. Carrying on either in reading or song in a language foreign to the worshiper not only insures that those assembled will fail to understand what is going on it can, under certain conditions, easily lead to rank superstition. The latter, by all accounts, was a significant concern of the Reformers who had witnessed this problem first hand in their youth as members of the Roman church. But this matter of the prominence of the intellect was not only born out of experience, it was also informed and shaped by the ancient fathers. For example, Calvin could find ample evidence to support the idea of the centrality of the intellect in worship through his study of Augustine who argued that the all-important difference between the singing of a parrot and a believing human being was that one sang with intelligence while one did not (p.26). Of course, this emphasis upon the intellect in worship serves to demonstrate the mutual interaction and interdependence of heart and head in worship. Without the intellect, worship could easily degenerate into emotional excess and fanaticism if unchecked by sober reflection, while worship without feeling could become cold and impersonal. In this twin emphasis upon heart and head, Calvin strikes a godly and edifying balance.

Third, Calvin sees a major role for memory in public worship. It appears that memory has the potential of facilitating undistracted, contemplative worship as the worshiper is free to sing without the constraint of helps such as a song book if both lyrics and tunes have been thoroughly memorized through repetition of use. The role of memory is not only a critical aspect of unconstrained worship, it also provides the added blessing of portability as the worshiper can take the spiritual songs with them in their heart wherever they are whether at home or at work. In this way Calvin envisioned the Pauline admonition to “pray without ceasing” could be fulfilled as the believer spontaneously prayed and lived in the world when the Psalms emerged in the consciousness of the believer (p.27). This emphasis on the memory plays a vital role in the daily edification of the believer as they use the mind to recall and dwell on the spiritual songs sung in worship on the Lord’s Day.

Before wrapping up this series on Calvin’s view on psalmody, we will take the opportunity to briefly retrace and link together the steps forged together in Calvin’s thinking between 1536 and 1543.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody Pt.11: the Uniqueness of the Psalms

2011-09-20T07:53:00.000-07:00

Throughout this series of posts we have been charting out the course of Calvin’s intellectual development with respect to the role of song and music in worship. With great interest we have watched him scale the rugged terrain of worship and grapple his way up the mount of conviction about the role of Psalms in worship. We have watched him move from the tentative footing of merely commending the Psalms for singing in the church to the very firm ground of commanding the exclusive use of canonical songs in public worship. Along the way up that mountain, it is clear that his thinking about the role of the Psalms in the spiritual life blossomed and grew in some very unanticipated directions. A particularly interesting feature of his progress in thought brought forward to examine is the move to replace all secular songs with the Psalms whether that be within the church or without. In this post, our focus will be on Garside’s argument that this conviction expressed in the Epistle of 1543 is the logical conclusion of the very sharp antithesis forged in Calvin’s understanding between sacred and secular song, the former having the inherent power to raise the soul to joy, while the latter maintain the capacity to unleash the dark power of song which leads men to “disordered delights” and to “obscenity.”

The story of the journey toward the position that the Psalms alone are to replace all other songs, whether for worship or innocent amusement, begins in 1538. In May of this year he submitted a memorandum to the synod of Zurich which called upon Geneva to adopt the Bernese policy of eliminating certain lascivious songs which were used to accompany dancing that seemed to only promote lewd behavior. As Garside notes, at this particular time, Calvin was not aiming to replace secular songs with Psalms altogether, he simply aimed at eliminating one form of song which appeared to promote unseemly behavior. By 1542 a kind of substitution of one for the other began to be evident. Writing in the preface to the 1542 French liturgy for Strasbourg, Calvin wrote that the Psalms along with their melodies had been published “so that you will have seemly songs instructing you in the love and fear of God in the place of those which are commonly sung which are concerned only with dissipation and all vice” (p.25). Clearly, what is in the forefront of Calvin’s thought here is the binary quality of music which has the capacity to effect the soul either for the good or the evil. However, it seems there is still a reservation that some music may still be suitable for recreational use. A door remains open yet for some kind of non-sacred music which although it may not have the power to edify, would not at the same time be spiritually destructive. With the publication of the Epistle of 1543, all ambiguity is removed, and Calvin takes the very uncompromising stand that sacred music (the Psalms) must replace all other music since it alone has the power to promote Christian spirituality outside the context of public worship (p.26).

What remains to be solved at this point, is how Calvin experienced such a turn of thought. Garside maintains that Calvin’s fully matured position of 1543 owes to his extensive interaction with Bucer in the years between 1538 and 1541. Illustrative of Bucer’s point of view on this matter are the remarks he penned in the Foreword to the Strasbourg Song Book. Here Bucer argued that “no instrumentalizing may be sung or used except by and for Christian spiritual activities” (p.25). In a society ruled by the policies of Bucer, no secular songs are permitted and all children are required to go through an education process which subjects them to “psalms and spiritual songs” exclusively. For Bucer, following such a careful regimen was the key to inoculating a whole generation against the wiles of lewd and lascivious songs.

From all indications, the policy of Bucer became a matter of principle for Calvin, albeit with the exception of one crucial aspect. Throughout the Foreword, Bucer spoke of Psalms and “sacred songs” by which he meant human compositions. He freely admitted the influence of Luther at this point, who may have endorsed the use of Psalms but never considered that other non-canonical songs should be banished from public worship provided that they were of a sufficient spiritual quality. Calvin however took a very different stand. When he argued for the policy of replacing secular song with the Psalms in 1543, he argued for a replacement of all songs not contained in canonical scripture because as Garside argues, “For God and His angels as well now as for the world below, nothing else was, or even could be appropriate” (p.26). Just how successful Calvin’s policy was is indicated in what we will see in future studies, that the signing of the Psalms everywhere from the church, to the battlefield, to the factory, to the home around the table and hearth, became the distinguishing badge of French Calvinists.

In our next post we will examine the singing of the Psalms as we wind down our study.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody Pt.10: the 1543 Epistle to the Reader

2011-09-13T10:07:00.000-07:00

Knowing what to say and when to say it can be of as much strategic importance, in certain situations, as how something is actually said. In the 1543 Institutes Calvin had added a couple of significant lines of thought to reinforce and shore up his argument for psalmody in public worship: history and the necessity of moderation. Given the unambiguous testimony of the early church and its use of the psalms in worship, establishing the propriety of using the psalms for congregational singing in public worship was easily accomplished. A different format however, would be needed to enlarge on the significance of the concern to maintain appropriate moderation in the use of music in worship. It is to this subject that Calvin now turns in the 1453 Epistle.

Ever since Calvin had proposed the use of psalms in worship in the 1537 Articles, his appreciation for their spiritual power and worth had grown substantially as he both witnessed and experienced their powerful effects in worship. By 1543, after several years of experimentation with the singing of psalms, Calvin began to see their incredible utility for cultivating piety within worship and without, in the grooves of daily living. Calvin was so impressed with the spiritual value of singing psalms that he heartily commended their regular use “in the homes and in the fields” (p.21). What is developing and growing in Calvin’s thought is the fact that it is the very nature of music itself that makes it not only a vehicle of praise, but even more, a rich source of stimulation to praise as it fires the spiritual sensitivities to behold the power and glory of God in the full sweep of life.

Two sets of antitheses are used to expand upon the spiritual utility of music. The first antithesis is between is the spiritual duty of rejoicing in God on one hand, and the sinful tendency for man to delight in vanity on the other. As a wise and compassionate Father, the Lord knowing our weakness and proneness to wander repeatedly into snares and temptations, provided us with music to occupy our minds and fill our hearts with godly joy. Calvin expounds upon this line of thought with several well crafted statements:

Our Lord to distract us and withdraw us from the temptations of the flesh and the world presents us all means possible to occupy us in that spiritual joy which He recommends to us so much

(music is) a gift of God deputed to that use…

(music is given for the purpose of) recreating man and giving him pleasure

(and is) dedicated to our profit and welfare (p.22).

At once, not only the goodness, but also, the power of music is made evident for all to see. Yet, it is right there in the awareness of music's power, that a potential problem begins to emerge. If music can be put to such positive spiritual use, it can just as easily be corrupted by sinful men to cultivate gross moral degeneration. It is to this concern that Calvin now addresses himself in the second antithesis.

In a fallen world full of sinful men, even the best gifts are subject to corruption. This fact leads to the framing of the second antithesis which is that even though music has the power to “raise men up to spiritual joy” it also has the power to lead men to into “disordered delights” and even to “obscenity" (p.22). Clearly, Calvin is aware of contemporary discussions about the power of music to enhance or corrupt, but he has adequate testimony from “the ancient doctors” to confirm this point as well, when they lament that “obscene songs” were corrupting the world of their day already. Enlarging upon the degenerating and corrupting potential of music he explains:

There is scarcely anything in the world which is more capable of turning or moving this way and that the morals of men, as Plato prudently considered it. And in fact we experience that it has a secret and almost incredible power to arouse our hearts one way or another (p.22)

Garside notes that although sentiments such as these betray the influence of sixteenth century humanist thought, this philosophical perspective does not entirely account for his stance toward music. Arguing against such a wholesale influence, Garside makes the case that Calvin distinguishes himself from contemporary humanist reflection by developing “the notion of moderation in practice” (p.23). What that means for Reformed worship is diligent and careful regulation of worship music, which we turn to next.

For Calvin, the binary nature of music was more like a riddle to be solved or a knot to be untied rather than a Zwinglian death knell to the use of worship music altogether. Solving the problem begins by understanding the relationship of melody to lyrical content, for it is in the combination of words and sounds that music takes on its peculiar nature, as Calvin writes:

It is true that every evil word (as Saint Paul says) perverts good morals, but when the melody is with it, it pierces the heart that much more strongly and enters into it; just as through a funnel wine is poured into a container, so also venom and corruption are distilled to the depth of the heart by melody (p.23).

It is unquestionable that, from this remark, we can see Calvin’s view of the power of melody. On his understanding, melody is like the tip of the poison dart that drives the corrupting influence of song deep into the heart. However, it is equally clear from Calvin’s remarks that words and lyrical content are of great concern as well since we have apostolic testimony to confirm their capacity to pervert good morals. Distinguishing between these twin features of song points to the way out of the dilemma because if melody can drive corrupt ideas and influences into the heart it can also be used as a vehicle to harness the power of music for good if it accompanies pious lyrics. Such lyrics are in rich store and easily found since the Lord has provided them for us in the Scriptures. By putting the words of the Scripture, primarily the Psalms, to appropriate melodies, the spiritual value and power of music can be unleashed for the advantage of God’s people.

It turns out then, that the large leap forward, made in the 1543 Epistle, is that it represents the full flowering of Calvin’s thought as he makes the crucial connection between melodies and lyrics, and above all in fashioning the priority of words over tunes. While both are important, it is clear by now, that Calvin places the priority on what it is that is sung rather than how it is sung. Since the Psalms are worthy of God because they have been given by Him, it is clear to Calvin the key to using music in worship as a force for good comes through regulating its lyrical content and prescribing the rule that only songs inspired and produced by the Holy Spirit are fitting for the worship of God. Upon making this connection Calvin proceeds to make some of his most memorable and oft quoted statements about the Psalms:

When we sing them (the Psalms), we are certain that God puts the words in our mouths, as if He Himself were singing in us to exalt His glory…

(men will now have) songs not only seemly, but also holy, which will be like spurs to incite us to pray and praise God, to meditate on His works in order to love, fear, honor, and glorify him

Only let the world be so well advised that in place of songs in part empty and frivolous, and in part stupid and dull, in part obscene and vile, and in consequence evil and harmful, which it has used up to now, it may accustom itself hereafter to singing these divine and celestial hymns with the good King David (p.24)

Clearly, these statements indicate that Calvin did have a sort of regulative principle of song, and that principle is, that every word of edifying praise must come from God Himself. The claim is often made that Calvin merely preferred the Psalms and that he only commended their use rather than taking the position that the regulative principle of worship specifically required their use. Claims such as these fall flat upon reading Calvin in context. The reason Calvin can take the stand against the position of Zwingli who forbid the use of music in worship altogether is precisely because he came to understand that the way to resolve the problem of the potential spiritual harm of music was to find its value in the lyrical content. By making lyrics the issue, Calvin brought congregational song under the strict application of the regulative principle since only canonical songs possessed the specific quality of divine inspiration.

In our next post, we will examine the uniqueness of the Psalms.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody Pt.9: the 1543 Institutes

2011-09-06T10:01:00.000-07:00

Social movement scholars have for some time been aware of the fact that as social movements progress, the ideas which fire and drive it grow more refined and specific. Such was certainly the case in the magisterial reformation of the 16^th century. Numerous examples abound which indicate that as the years passed, reformed ideas and rhetorical expressions grew in refinement and depth. Thus far in our study of Garside’s analysis of Calvin’s view of worship song we have been noting how his thoughts and expressions mature, expand, and grow from 1536 onward. In coming to the Institution of 1543 there is evidence that Calvin, in this “Latin counterpart to the French Epistle” is concerned to both amplify and frame his thoughts on music and song with greater clarity and rhetorical force (p.20).

Though Calvin expands his argument in the new version of the Institutes, he continues to follow the structure of the argument found in the 1542 Epistle to the reader. In this edition he follows the threefold pattern of history, apostolic instruction, and appeal to St. Augustine. For the first time however, in marshaling his arguments for psalmody from Scripture, he quotes the apostle Paul directly saying:

This we may infer from Paul’s words: “I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind” [1 Cor. 14:15]. Likewise, Paul speaks to the Colossians: “Teaching and admonishing one another…in hymns, psalms, and spiritual songs, singing with thankfulness in your hearts to the Lord.” [Col. 3:16p.] For in the first passage he teaches that we should sing with voice and heart; in the second, he commends spiritual songs, by which the godly may edify one another (p.20).

By directly quoting from Paul he enhances the force of his argument by allowing the reader to see for themselves that his proposals are simply an implementation of Biblical injunction. In writing to a Protestant audience that was being trained to hold fast to scripture alone for faith and practice, the ability to lay hands on specific Biblical texts must certainly have lent great credibility to his argument.

Moving from Scripture to church history, he again puts the reader’s hands on specific historical texts that seemed to support his claims. In this case, as in past writings, Calvin lay hold of St. Augustine’s remarks about music and song made in the tenth book of the Confessions. Here, Calvin seizes on the link Augustine forged between melody and the verbal content of the song. From Augustine the lesson is learned that “our ears are not to be more attentive to the melody than our minds to the spiritual meaning of the words” (p.20). In a moment of transparency, Augustine confesses that when singing, he had a tendency to focus more on the singing than upon what was actually being sung; therefore, he heartily endorsed the prescription of Athanasius who admonished worshipers, when singing psalms in public worship, to “use so slight and inflection of the voice that it was more like speaking than singing” (p.20).

These caveats of Augustine, cited with approval, form a new way of conceiving of the role of music and song in worship. Instead of constructing songs that contain melodies and words which are crafted for the ear and for the sake of delighting and entertaining a human audience, Calvin admonishes that song and music are fitting for public worship if only they are consciously aimed at promoting the glory of God and are characterized by the kind of vocal inflection proposed by Athanasius which in turn promoted and reinforced the emotional restraint approved of by Augustine. Any other kinds of music and song conceived of for public worship were, according to Calvin, “unbecoming to the majesty of the church and cannot but displease God in the highest degree” (p.21).

With these remarks of Calvin in view, it is hardly conceivable how many so-called “Calvinists” today countenance the use of emotionally charged revivalist hymns and syrupy praise songs, both of which are extremely superficial and paper thin in theological content. Use of such music and song seems to betray a lack of candor and an apparent discomfort in the admission that they share nothing of Calvin’s and, by way of extension, 16^th century Reformed views of music and worship song. It would seem that a more honest and edifying course of action would be to openly refute Calvin’s views and repudiate them so that contemporary Reformed Christians would understand why their views and practices are superior to and more Biblically grounded than Calvin’s and the rest of the 16^th century confessionally Reformed churches.

The next post will examine additions made to the 1543 Epistle.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody pt.8: the 1542 Epistle to the Reader

2011-08-31T09:21:00.000-07:00

In the last post, mention was made of the fact that Calvin says scarcely little about music or song in the 1541 Ecclesiastical Ordinances. As Garside observes, only two sentences about song can be found, and these are tucked away in the middle of a paragraph devoted to marriage. The point was made that Calvin’s intention was to take up the subject of worship song separately and in an entirely different format. That new format is found in the 1542 Epistle to the Reader in his order for worship for Geneva. This 193 word statement would be enlarged upon and revised over the next year, and incorporated into a couple of different works, but in seed form, there are some very significant thoughts expressed about music and song in this current work which further chart out Calvin’s maturing thought.

The title of this new work setting forth the liturgical order for Genevan worship is itself instructive, The Form of Prayers and Ecclesiastical Songs, with the manner of administering the sacraments and consecrating marriage according to the custom of the ancient Church. Of particular importance for our purposes is that within the body of this work Calvin identifies three ordinances which constitute public worship: preaching, public prayers, and the administration of the sacraments. For the first time in Calvin’s writings about song, we see that he places song, an element of worship, under the rubric of public prayer. Expounding upon this rubric of public prayer he writes that prayers are of “two kinds: the one made with the word only, the others with song.” With respect to this apparently new liturgical development of subsuming worship song under the rubric of prayer Calvin explains that it “is not a thing invented a short time ago” (p.17). So what does he mean by all this?

Garside explains that Calvin is essentially introducing his theology of music and song to the public for the first time. Prior statements made about the role of song had only been made in private communications to the council of Geneva. In presenting this liturgical work to the broader church community in Geneva, it was necessary to offer some explanation of why song and prayer were joined together. The first point he wants to make about song in general is already signaled in the title of the 1542 Genevan order of worship, tucked away at the very end in the prepositional phrase “according to the custom of the ancient church.” Calvin’s primary explanation for the introduction of song as a form of prayer in worship is expressed in two succinct sentences in the Epistle: for from the origin of the Church this has been so, as appears from the histories. And even as Saint Paul speaks not only of praying by mouth, but also of singing (p.17). In other words, to “sing prayers” was to follow the custom and practice of the early church, and in turn, that was to embrace and follow a practice which was founded upon the authority of Scripture.

An additional insight into Calvin’s developing thought about song in worship is unveiled in the Epistle where he breaks new ground in commenting about the nature of worship music itself. With respect to music Calvin writes, “And in truth, we know from experience that song has great force and vigor to arouse and inflame the hearts of men to invoke and praise God with a more vehement and ardent zeal” (p.17). Garside makes the point that this marks a tangible movement forward in Calvin’s understanding since in the 1537 Articles his remarks were limited to the content of song, while in the 1542 Epistle his remarks branch out and cover new ground, taking into consideration the topic of music in general. This new insight about music seems to be have been generated and born out of his own experience of congregational singing in Strausburg. In 1537 Calvin could only propose song on the basis that the content of the songs (psalms) themselves could be “most expedient for the edification of the church.” Now however, in 1542, having experienced the “feeling” generated by hearing the whole congregation sing aloud in worship, Calvin speaks of music’s “emotional power.”

The concept of music’s inherent power to move the emotions was a matter of great concern for Calvin. He was not at all interested in moving the emotions for the sake of having an emotional experience. In other words, he was not “sanctifying” the mere experience of emotional uplifts, or any and every form of emotional manipulation. Rather, he was speaking to the benefit and blessing of a certain kind of spiritual vigor kindled in the heart by a peculiar kind of music. This fact is born out by a clarifying comment found subsequently in the Epistle: there must always be concern that the song be neither light nor frivolous, but have gravity (pois) and majesty (maieste), as Saint Augustine says” (p.18). Interestingly, Garside points out that neither “gravity” or “majesty” or their equivalents are found in the passage from Augustine that Calvin quotes. Instead, it seems that these two qualities of music are unique and original to Calvin himself.

In searching for an objective handle to sort of grasp hold of what Calvin has in mind by “gravity” and “majesty,” Garside proposes that a final comment in the Epistle provides a helpful starting point for analysis. Distinguishing between the quality of “sacred” and “secular” music, Calvin says, “And thus there is a great difference between the music which one makes to entertain men at table and in their homes, and the psalms which are sung in the Church in the presence of God and His angels” (p.19). Apparently, there is music which is directed to men (music "at table" and "in home"), and it is for the purpose of entertaining, and then, there is music directed to God (sung in Church), and it is uniquely suited for the worship of His glorious and eternal being. It is obvious from the context and tenor of Calvin’s remarks that it would be wrong to seek to inflame the emotions by the use of song and music which is purely for man’s entertainment (which is obviously the nature and character of all revivalistic and contemporary worship music ). For Calvin, only songs of a unique and specific quality (Psalms) combined with tunes which are appropriately grave and majestic can meet the rigid qualifications of worship song which is truly worshipful to the Lord. These comments then, contained in the 1542 Epistle, truly do mark out a significant leap forward in Calvin’s theology of music, and according to Garside, signal the beginning of “the sacred style” which would subsequently come to characterize the melodies of the Genevan Psalter.

The next post will take up Calvin’s remarks about song contained in the 1543 edition of the Institutes.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of music pt.7: the Ecclesiastical Ordinances of 1541

2011-08-29T08:27:00.000-07:00

Sometimes in life you learn things the hard way and end up having to admit that you were just plain wrong. Individual people learn this lesson and cop to it all the time, it is rare however for politicians to learn that lesson and be as forthright. There is an example from history where this did happen, at least partially, and that is found in the case of the Genevan council with respect to Calvin’s dismissal. In 1538, in the heat of personality conflicts, Calvin and Farel stared down the town council and refused to give in to their politically motivated demands. The council called Calvin and Farel’s bluff, eventually bouncing them out of town just after the Easter service. While Calvin was happy to leave and settle down somewhere else to the life he always dreamed of, the council in Geneva began to reconsider, realizing they had made a big mistake. After gulping down a heaping serving of humble pie, the council decided to bring Calvin back on board and Calvin reluctantly agreed to return.

So what did Calvin do when he returned to his old stomping grounds in Geneva? Well, he did exactly what a man like Calvin always does, he picked up right where he left off before. On September 13, 1541, he reentered Geneva, met with the town council, and started pushing immediately for the adoption of his church order. Evidence of partially changed circumstances emerged as the town council refused the opportunity to balk at Calvin’s proposal and passed his Ecclesiastical Ordinances in November of 1541. These Ordinances reflected a continuity in tenor and even wording with the Articles of 1537, as the basic guiding principle of both was the principle that the church was obligated to conform to Scripture and the practice of the ancient church.

When it came to the issue of music, there was a difference between the Ordinances of 1541 and the Articles of 1537. In the former, music is hardly even mentioned. Garside speculates that what accounts for that is Calvin’s determination to take up the subject of music separately. That decision is reflected in the fact that “there are only two sentences devoted to the subject, and even their position is peculiar” (16). Tucked away in the middle of a paragraph on marriage are the following two sentences:

It will be good to introduce ecclesiastical songs, the better to incite the people to prayer to and praise God. For a beginning the little children are to be taught; then with time the church will be able to follow (16).

Though these sentences are similar in content with the Articles they say little about the nature of worship song and they seem to shift the subject from worship to children’s education. The odd thing about the latter is that there were no city schools for the children to go to in order to be taught. Raising the prospect of children’s education, and education in music at that, is surely a good thing, but the very wording of the Ordinances suggests that a future communication would be needed to clarify the content and role of music in the public worship of the Genevan churches.

Next, attention will focus on one of the most significant statements Calvin ever made about music and worship song in the 1542 Epistle to the Reader for his order of worship for Geneva.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody pt.6: The Strasbourg pastorate

2011-08-24T07:12:00.000-07:00

Before pressing on to survey Calvin’s pastoral stay in Strasbourg, we should take a moment to set up the context by reviewing the principles of worship which had prevailed there for the past 15 years or so. In 1524 Bucer spelled out his Protestant understanding of the regulatory principles and practices of Christian worship in a book entitled Justification and Demonstration from Holy Scripture. Two themes emerge from this work which are particularly relevant to our concerns. The first is the emerging concept of the regulative principle of worship. With respect to the content of worship song, Bucer explains that “in the congregation we do not use songs or prayers which are not drawn from Holy Scripture.” It is evident that Bucer makes a concrete connection between theory and practice as he spells out the standard for songs sung in public worship. The second theme which is evident in Bucer’s early views on worship is the use of the church fathers and early church worship as a guide for applying apostolic principles of worship. This principle is evident as he takes a swipe at Zwingli in these remarks, “those who decry the use of song in the congregation of God know little either about the content of Scripture or about the practice of the first and apostolic churches and congregations, which always praised God with song” (12). Again, in the 1530 Tetropolitan Confession (written by Bucer) Garside notes that “Scripture and the Fathers continued to be the norm for evaluation of the liturgy” (12). So a regulative principle of worship which requires Biblical warrant for worship practices and the use of the early church and the Fathers as a guide to applying this regulative principle mark out two dominant characteristics in Bucer’s theory and practice of Christian worship, which of course were given expression in the Strasbourg liturgy which Calvin encounters as he arrives in 1538.

It was into this context of careful reflection on worship, that Calvin came to serve as pastor to French refugees the latter part of 1538. Calvin’s early correspondence from Strasbourg indicates that the prevailing liturgical practices were shaping and influencing his thoughts on worship. A profound indicator of this influence is the publication of a French psalter in 1539 edited by Calvin himself and modeled on the Strasbourg Psalter. Garside argues for more than a mere editorial role for Calvin in the construction of this psalter, as he makes the case that more than a handful of the psalms had been rhymed by Calvin himself. Another piece of evidence that indicates the influence of the Strasbourg liturgical practices on Calvin's thinking is found in the 1539 edition of the Institutes published there. Garside juxtaposes Calvin’s comments in the chapter on prayer contained in the 1536 edition and those made in 1539, siezing on a slight revision made in the latter version as evidence of a significant advance in Calvin’s thinking about the role of song in worship. In the previous edition (1536) Calvin expressed the opinion that he did not “condemn speaking and singing provided they were associated with the hearts affection and serve it” (hardly a ringing endorsement of congregational singing) while in the 1539 edition he inserted between “singing” and “provided” the following phrase: but rather strongly commend them (13). Another revision occurs where Calvin deleted the phrase “serve it,” as was expressed in 1536, removing the notion that song had a mere servile role in worship. Garside suggests that these slight modifications in the 1539 Institutes, written as they were in Latin, which means they were available to a wide reading audience, form a permanent record of Calvin’s views on worship song and set in motion the emergence of the liturgical principles of Strasbourg as the standard for the next few hundred years of Reformed worship which would eventually erode and give way under the weight of popular revivalism.

In our next post we will examine the 1541 Ecclesiastical Ordinances submitted by Calvin to the Genevan council.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody pt. 5: the influence of Bucer

2011-08-22T08:19:00.000-07:00

Thus far in our quest to understand the historical development of Calvin’s view of psalmody, led of course by Dr. Garside every step of the way, we have seen that a crucial pivot in Calvin’s views on song in worship occurred somewhere between the middle 1536 and early 1537. The baseline for dating and charting his rather significant change in thinking is the difference in tone and character of the remarks about song in worship in the 1536 Institutes, and the proposal of psalmody in worship to the Geneva Council in the Articles of 1537. Obviously whenever thinkers of Calvin’s caliber make large leaps in their thinking, it presents a problem for the intellectually curious to seek to unravel. In this installment of our series on Calvin’s view of psalmody, we are to going to walk through the unfolding steps in Garside’s analysis of Calvin’s developing views on song in worship in order to get a handle on what led Calvin to experience such a significant change.

At this time in the Reformation era (the 1530’s) there were essentially only a handful of serious players who could have exercised any substantial influence on Calvin’s thought, and, included among those, are Luther, Zwingli, and Bucer. Luther of course, had no objection to song in worship from the outset. It is safe to say that the Lutheran and the Reformed wing of the Reformation really had little in common when it came to public worship, except perhaps a shared common desire to rid worship of the most profane and idolatrous elements of Romish practice. Other than that, there is not much affinity in their respective positions on worship. That means, it is more than reasonable to rule out any influence of Luther on this area of Calvin’s view of song in worship.

Zwingli had for about the space of ten years made the most public noise about Reformation among those who would later become known as the “reformed.” Clearly, Zwingli was opposed to much of what passed as worship, at least as he understood Roman worship from his experience in the church. As early as 1519, Zwingli altered liturgical practice by making expository preaching the center piece of worship in Zurich. By 1523, he had come to the conclusion that song was to be subsumed under the rubric of prayer. Reasoning from Jesus’ criticism of the Pharisees’ model of public prayer recorded in Matthew 6:6, Zwingli argued that prayer was to be silent. It is evident from his Apology on the Canon of the Mass that he found further support and confirmation of his view of silent prayer from Ephesians 5:19 where Paul commands prayer from the heart. His conclusion was that since song was to be made in the heart, then it certainly could not be audible (a view that Bucer will challenge). In 1525, Zwingli’s views on worship song were formally instituted in Zurich and the “barborous mumbling” (worship song) was removed from the churches (p.11).

Turning from Zwingli to Bucer, we see a slightly different understanding of song in worship. It is fair to say that Bucer was not too keen on Zwinlgi’s argument about silent prayer. Instead, Bucer defended the role of song in worship as early as 1524 in his Justification and Demonstration from Holy Scripture. This work not only proposes suggestions for where song is to be appropriately used in the course of the liturgy, it also defends congregational singing in the final chapter. Bucer takes his stand on the Pauline corpus and argues that it would absurd for Paul to command Christians to edify one another by following prescribed rules in worship, if those very rules commanded worshipers to sing and pray silently in their hearts! Beyond that, the center piece of Bucer’s argument for singing in worship is found in his appeal to the model of Christ who sang the Psalms out loud with the disciples after instituting and partaking of the first Lord’s Supper. Scripture not only commended singing in worship, it virtually commanded it since Jesus established the New Covenant sacrament of the Supper as a permanent ordinance, commanding its regular use; so, who then could reasonably argue against singing the Psalms in response to the Supper, if Jesus himself sang them at the conclusion of the first celebration of the Supper? In addition to making a purely Biblical defense of song in worship, Bucer added to it the practice of the early church and the testimony of the Fathers. Not that the Reformed church was bound to follow every practice of the Fathers and the ancient church, but, the church legitimately could receive guidance and direction in matters of worship from the early church and the Fathers when and where their practices conformed to the Biblical model. And for Bucer, it was clear that in this particular matter they did.

The question which now needs to be asked, and, in turn, answered, is did Calvin have access to the views and practices of Zwingli and Bucer, and whether his writings betray an influence of their views upon his own thinking? As a matter of fact, it is difficult to establish a clean paper trail here which would provide a definitive answer, but Garside takes the very strong position that Calvin indeed had either read Zwingli and Bucer, at least in translation, or, had at least been informed about their practices through word of mouth testimony. It may just be a real possibility that each had influence upon Calvin in their own turn. Garside points out that the 1536 Institutes show an inclination towards Zwingli’s view of prayer, especially in his exposition of Matthew 6:6, while the Articles of 1537 betray the hand of Bucer.

What then, caused the change from a decidedly more Zwinglian approach to a more Bucerian view of song in worship. At this point, my read of Garside is that he claims the pivot was not as much intellectual as it was experiential. When Calvin arrived in Geneva in the autumn of 1536, he complained that the prayers of the Genevan’s were “cold.” Garside explains that Calvin is probably reacting to the fact that when he arrived in Geneva there was no music worship at all since Farel had abolished it from the liturgy (p.14). It seems like Calvin experienced a sort of renaissance in his thinking by actually experiencing what life would be like without worship song, and he found it lacking indeed! After enduring several months of songless worship Calvin submitted a proposal for change in worship practice in the Articles of 1537. What Calvin proposed would not, at least at this time, be approved in Geneva. By early 1538, not only would Calvin not yet be enjoying the proposed change in worship, he also found himself in the position of being banished from Geneva by the city council. On account of his refusal to endorse the arrangement which would cement political ties between Geneva and the Swiss city of Bern by implementing liturgical reform that would make these two cities uniform in their worship, Calvin and Farel were given their "pink slips" and were bounced out of Geneva (p.14).

In spite of the turbulence experienced by Calvin and Farel, a silver lining would emerge in the clouds as a result of their banishment from Geneva. Upon their dismissal from Geneva, both Calvin and Farel went straight to Bern in order to give an account of the fallout in Geneva. From there, they went on to a local synod meeting at Zurich in early May of 1528 where something of a tectonic shift occurred. There, Calvin and Farel presented 14 articles for consideration, and among those, article 13, was a requirement to sing psalms in public worship. The synod unanimously approved these articles, including article 13, and just a couple of months later the city of Bern changed course from a Zwinglian policy of no congregational singing to one of exclusive psalmody in June of 1538. Ironically the unintended consequences of the Bernese political arrangement with Geneva left Calvin without a pastoral call, while at the same time, it triggered a massive change in policy among the Swiss churches which signaled a decisive shift away from the policies of Zwingli toward the new views of Calvin (Bucer!) on worship song.

Next time, we will survey Calvin’s pastorate in Strasbourg.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody pt.4: the Articles of 1537

2011-08-17T08:13:00.000-07:00

The rise of twitter signaled a massive shift in 21st century communication theory and practice with its implicit declaration that if one cannot say what they think in 140 characters, then what they have to say is probably not worth saying in the first place. A similar shift in the theology of Reformed church music took place in 1537 when Calvin took only 146 words to lay the foundation for his conception of the role and significance of the psalms in public worship. As noticed in a previous post, just a short year earlier, in 1536, Calvin had little to say about the role of music in worship. At most, Calvin could only conceive of a small role for song as a part of the observance of the Lord's Supper. This very underdeveloped and embryonic conception of worship song marks the point of departure for evaluating Calvin's maturing views on congregational singing.

It is clear however that by 1537, the place and role of song in worship had grown much larger in Calvin's thinking. While in1536 song had a minor, if not optional role in public worship, by 1537 the psalms took on a significant and even necessary role in public worship. That massive leap forward in Calvin's thinking about the place of psalms in public worship is expressed in the following 146 words contained in the Articles of 1537:

The other matter is the psalms which we wish to be sung in the church as we have it from the example of the ancient church and also the testimony of Saint Paul, who says that it is good to sing in the congregation with mouth and heart. We are not able to estimate the benefit and edification which derive from this until after having experienced it. Certainly at present the prayers of the faithful are so cold that we should be greatly ashamed and confused. The psalms can stimulate us to raise our hearts to god and arouse use to an ardor in invoking as well as in exalting with praises the glory of His name. Moreover by this one will recognize of what advantage and consolation the pope and his creatures have deprived the church, for he has distorted the psalms, which should be true spiritual songs, into a murmuring among themselves without any understanding (10).

Expounding on Calvin's views expressed here, Garside explains that, "In the space of a mere 146 words Calvin presented the council with a statement which constituted nothing less than the foundation for his theology of music" (10).

Several items are worthy of notice and some elaboration. First, Calvin grounds the use of psalms in worship on the model of the ancient church. He does not elaborate on the practice of the ancient church, he merely asserts it, as if it were a matter of common knowledge, and in need of no defense whatsoever. Second, in just a breath later, Calvin commends the psalms for use in public worship since they are commended by the by the apostle Paul himself. Of particular interest in Calvin's appeal to Paul is that he has in mind Paul's remarks in Colossians 3:16. That much is evident from the claim that Paul urged psalms to be sung with "mouth and heart"indicating that he has in view the Pauline admonition to sing "with grace in the heart to the Lord."This appeal to Colossians 3:16 is intriguing since most contemporary Reformed opponents of exclusive psalmody argue that this passage has in the first instance nothing to do with public worship, and in the second, based upon Calvin's commentary on Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16, that Paul is actually prescribing man made compositions which have a mere spiritual quality. It is clear from Calvin's remarks here that these contemporary advocates of hymnody and praise songs have not read Calvin in sufficient breadth or depth. Third, Calvin advocates for the use of psalms because they glorify God by promoting profound spiritual edification: the psalms can stimulate us to raise our hearts to God and arouse us to an ardor in invoking as well as in exalting with praises the glory of His name (10). This remark echoes and builds on views already expressed in the 1536 Institutes where Calvin insists that acceptable and pleasing prayer to God must join heart and mouth together lest prayer degenerate into mere Pharisaical lip service. Fourth and finally, Calvin takes a thinly veiled swipe at the use of papal choirs in public worship when he says that the singing of psalms by the congregation will expose the "advantage and consolation the pope and his creatures have deprived the church (of), for he has distorted the psalms...into murmuring among themselves without any understanding." Garside illuminates this statement by Calvin as he explains that Calvin is taking aim at the singing of priests in Latin during public worship. In other words, Calvin is seeking to restore congregational singing to the church by returning the duty of praise to the congregation from the hands of the professionals and by requiring the psalms to be sung in the native tongue of the worshipers.

With these four distinct developments in view, it is not hard to see how these remarks in the Articles of 1537 mark a watershed moment in Calvin's theology of music and song in public worship. These 146 words signal that a reformation in worship is afoot in Calvin's thought and they portend the peculiar character of Reformed worship which prevailed in the churches for the next few hundred years until the riches of this Reformed birthright was traded in for a mess of revivalistic pottage. For the moment however, it is good to imbibe the spirit and quality of this robust theology of worship and song.

In the next post, we will examine the influence of Bucer on Calvin's developing view of song in worship.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody pt.3: the 1536 Institutes

2011-08-15T09:44:00.000-07:00

In the previous analysis of the Articles submitted to the Genevan Council in 1537 by Calvin, it was noted that congregational psalm-singing was presented as "essential for Christian worship" (8). This ground staked out by Calvin in the 1537 Articles marks out new territory in Calvin’s expressed views about song in public worship. Evidence to support that conclusion is presented by Garside from the 1536 Institutes. At the end of the fourth chapter of this same work, in discussing the proper administration of the Lord’s Supper, Calvin explains:

either psalms should be sung or something be read, and in becoming order the believers should partake of the most holy banquet, the ministers breaking the bread and giving the cup. When the Supper is finished, there should be an exhortation to sincere faith and confession of faith, to love and behavior worthy of Christians. At the last, thanks should be given, and praises sung to God (9).

According to Garside this is the first and only “unequivocal” set of instructions on music and congregational song in the 1536 edition of the Institutes. This single passing and underdeveloped set of remarks constitutes a loud silence on behalf of Calvin, since he wrote them while in Basel and undoubtedly must have been aware of the fact that German versions of the psalms had been sung in public worship for at least ten years (9). A fair and reasonable judgment to make about these instructions is that Calvin's views on music and song in worship are embryonic at this point and this matter has not yet begun to crystallize in his thoughts. These first published remarks of Calvin about music and song then, form a historical baseline which is of great assistance in charting and evaluating the progressive development of Calvin’s thinking about the role and significance of song in public worship.

Before leaving the 1536 Institutes it is worth singling out a few more remarks Garside makes about views expressed in chapter 3 of this work. A significant component part of Calvin’s view of prayer expressed here, which recurs subsequently and interlocks with his views on public prayer (congregational singing), concerns the quality of prayer, that is, it must be sincere and heartfelt. As Garside seeks to draw out Calvin’s views on the nature of private, individual prayer, he cites a number of statements made by Calvin which highlight this specific quality including, “unless voice and song spring from deep feeling of heart, neither has any value or profit in the least with God,” “we do not here condemn speaking and singing provided they are associated with the heart’s affection and serve it,” and finally, “the tongue without the heart is unacceptable to God” (8,9). Again, it will be important to keep these remarks close at hand, because they will find expression in Calvin’s subsequent remarks about the role and rule for music and song in public worship.

In the next post, more careful examination and analysis of Calvin's views expressed in the 1537 Articles will be given.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody pt.2

2011-08-11T10:57:00.000-07:00

B.B. Warfield once made the pithy and insightful observation that the very genius of Calvin’s reforming activity is that upon finding Protestantism an unruly mob, he organized it and turned it into a disciplined army. Perhaps Warfield was reflecting on Calvin’s 1537 Articles when he made that statement. Several months after accepting Farel’s call to serve Geneva and to lead the Reformation there, Calvin submitted a set of ordinances to the city council of Geneva for their approval and implementation. These ordinances were designed to order and regulate both church and society, marking the first concrete steps toward structuring Geneva’s civic and church life according to the gospel. Four proposals formed the backbone of Calvin’s attempt to bring order to Geneva: church discipline, psalm-singing in public worship, catechizing the youth, and reform of marriage statutes.

Much could be said about the each of these four areas of emphasis. Of particular interest for our purposes is the second ordinance which institutes the singing of psalms in public worship. Standing on its own, this ordinance gives the impression that congregational singing of the psalms is of the well-being of the church. On further analysis, it would appear that it is all of that and more. Garside quotes from Calvin where he gives expression to the rationale of this ordinance:

Furthermore it is a thing most expedient for the edification of the church to sing psalms in the form of public prayers by which one prays to God or sings His praises so that the hearts of all may be aroused and stimulated to make similar prayers and to render similar praises and thanks to God with a common love.

Commenting on Calvin’s commendation of congregational psalm-singing as “a thing most expedient for the edification of the church,” Garside says that for Calvin, psalm-singing is not “an indifferent matter” rather, it “was essential for public worship.” In other words, psalm-singing is of the essence of public worship, apart from which, God cannot be rightly worshiped. This foundational conviction, Garside explains, is the origin of Calvin’s theology of music.

In the next post, we will examine Garside’s analysis of Calvin’s remarks found in the 1536 edition of his Institutes.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody pt.1

2011-08-09T10:43:00.001-07:00

In the following series of blog posts I will be outlining Dr. Charles Garside’s very historically illuminating study on Calvin’s theology of worship song entitled, “The Origins of Calvin’s Theology of Music: 1536-1543.” This study was presented in the summer of 1979 to “The American Philosophical Society,” the oldest scholarly journal in America, which reaches back to 1769. To the best of my knowledge, the historical work produced here by Gardside, relating to the development of Calvin’s thinking on worship song, has not been exposed or refuted as false and inaccurate. Therefore, this historical analysis provides invaluable information about not only Calvin’s views on public worship song, but also, by extension, a baseline to help evaluate the worship views of subsequent 16^th century Reformed thinkers and ecclesiastical practice.

What made this particular study so useful for scholarly research and understanding concerning the factors contributing to the development of Calvin’s views on worship song, was that it plugged a hole in Calvin studies relating to Calvin’s theology of song. As Garside points out., since the late 19^th century and going on into the mid 20^th, a number of outstanding studies on Calvin’s view of song had emerged in the scholarly literature. Felix Bouvet published a work surveying the history of the Hugenot Psalter in 1872, in the later 1870’s Orentin Douen produced a two volume work, massive in scope, which attempted to critically analyze Calvin’s view on music, while Leon Wencilius presented valuable research on Calvin’s view on the arts in general in 1932, then Pierre Pidoux published a critical edition of the Genevan Psalter in 1962, and finally, Walter Blankenburg generated a wide ranging body of research which aimed at producing a panoramic view of the milieu of the Psalter as a whole.

What this massive compilation of research established was that psalm-singing formed something like a badge of identity for 16^th century Reformed Christians; what this research had not yet established was the chronological development of Calvin’s views on worship song. More specifically, Garside narrows the focus of his historical investigation to the events and factors which account for the shape and solidification of Calvin’s theology of worship music and song between 1536 to 1543. The historical investigation is bracketed on one end by Calvin’s scant and underdeveloped remarks about worship song in the 1536 Institutio and the rather enlarged and substantive remarks about the matter in the 1543 preface to the Genevan Psalter on the other.

I bring this first post on Garside’s publication to a conclusion by quoting Garside’s summation of Calvin’s matured and developed view on worship song:

Calvin’s vernacular psalmody in the last analysis is nothing other than a formulation, in uniquely musical terms, of the Reformation principle of sola scriptura. Thus from its inception Calvin’s theology of music in its textual dimension was Scriptural. The Psalter was conceived, and always would be considered by him, as an indispensable instrument for the prosecution of his ministry of the Word of God to the city of Geneva and the wider world beyond (p.29).

Four distinct factors converge to form the basis of Calvin’s views on worship song, which in turn will be the lines of investigation developed by Garside and explored in subsequent posts: pastoral concerns, historical considerations, Augustinian theology, and a 16^th century humanistic philosophy of music.

I trust that you will find the forthcoming posts informative, interesting, and edifying.