Hi All,
Every once in-a-while I go over to the Puritanboard to see what is happening with our brothers & sisters in the Reformed faith. I really have trouble understanding them. While I respect and agree with their preaching & teaching of the Doctrines of Grace, I am confused at what they consider correct worship. My take on them is that a church is only to expositorily preach the word and sing old time hymns..and take the Lord's Supper, and that is about it.
I saw a thread on ther recently chastising a Baptist church that placed a few Christmas tress in their church, plus a manger scene. They didn't like the fact that there was rock style band or that the congregation clapped after a song. What is it about these reformed guys, they love to drink and even boast about it, but when it comes to music style or decorating a church they are sticklers. They seem to hate praise songs but love beer...I don't get it. I guess we all pick and choose. Hopefully we will all laugh it over in Heaven.
Interesting observations, brother, and not surprising that those arguments would leave you and many others puzzled. I'm a former member of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) and a former moderator on the PB. I still post there every now and then.
(I'll preface this by noting that I have yet to delve into the dozens of posts on this thread.)
What you're running into is the "Regulative Principle of Worship" (RPW) In brief, those espousing this priniciple teach that only what is commanded in the NT is allowed. The opposite principle, the normative principle, is that whatever is not forbidden is allowed. Among Protestants, the latter principle historically has been practiced by Lutherans, Anglicans and Methodists.
The Regulative principle is a reaction against the abuses of Romanism. In the British context it was also a reaction against perceived vestiges of Romanism in the Church of England. The most strict interpretation bans everything but a cappella Exclusive Psalmody. But they blatantly contradict themselves with their practice of sprinkling and infant baptism! Indeed, the old Baptists rejected infant baptism using what were essentially RPW arguments, namely that there is no explicit warrant for the practice. More recent Baptists appear to me to place heavier emphasis on the nature of the New Covenant. I think both are valid arguments.
In general I tend to agree with the RPW but don't take it to the lengths that some do e.g. arguing that "Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs" really means "Psalms, Psalms and Psalms." But I do think that most of us who are not exclusive Psalmodists err by basically never singing any Psalms. If Paul said we should sing Psalms, shouldn't we do that?
(Note that the Campbellite refrain of "Command, example, inference" when it comes to worship has its roots in the RPW. Campbell was originally a Presbyterian before turning Baptist and eventually splitting Baptist churches left and right with his teaching.)
Also note that what you see on the Puritanboard is basically the strictest form of Presbyterianism you'll find today, and they even have strong arguments amongst themselves. Many conservative and evangelical Presbyterian churches have "praise teams," Christmas trees, etc. and for all practical purposes follow the normative principle. For example, there's a big fight in the PCA now over intinction, which is dipping the bread into the cup instead of taking the elements of the Lord's Supper separately they way that appears to be seen in Scripture. If someone is looking for the kind of church that is advocated on the PB and happens to drop into a random PCA church, he is likely to be disappointed. The OPC will be more like what is described in the first post with old hymns. And it won't be "In the Garden" or Stamps-Baxter gospel songs either, which is what comes to mind when many Baptists think of "old-time hymns." IMO a lot of the lyrics in those kinds of songs are no better than the shallow repetitive "7-11" or "Jesus is my boyfriend" praise choruses that many of us deride.
In general I tend to agree with the RPW. Admittedly, some of it has to do with personal preference on my part, although I am prepared to argue on the rightness of some of my views (at least with regard to what is better or worse) when it comes to certain things that many Baptists and evangelicals do in worship. (IMO, unless you hold to something like the RPW, you basically have no grounds to keep things like drama and puppet teams and whatever else out of the worship service.) However, I do tend to find that some of the stricter RPW brethren arguably erect a somewhat artificial or arbitrary barrier, being strict in between the call to worship and the benediction and looser outside of that when gathered in the assembly. I really don't see it being that cut and dried in the NT with regard to the start and end of formal worship.
I'm not even going to touch the beer reference because IMO it's a totally different issue as it is not related to worship services. That is, unless one were to argue that the Lord's Supper is not valid unless "real" wine is used. And some outliers here and there basically do argue that.
