Richard Barcellos over at Illumination recently posted a 4 part series on John Calvin and the Regulative Principle of Worship. With our recent consideration of this topic here at SBF, we certainly recommend these posts to you.

Calvin on Public Worship (I)

Notable quote from Calvin in this post:

“…we must always carefully insist that simplicity and order be observed in the use of ceremonies so that the clear light of the gospel be not obscured by them, as if we were still under the shadows of the law; and then that there may be nothing allowed that is not in agreement and conformity to the order established by the Son of God, and that the whole may serve and be suited to the edification of the Church.”

In the comment section of the last post on this issue, it was pointed out that a form a drama was used in the Old Testament, specifically in the sacrificial ceremonies of the law which prefigured Christ. Note that Calvin mentions here that the shadows of the law obscured the gospel. Thus, it would seem odd for us to return to shadows even if it were prescribed New Testament worship, given that the greater revelation of Christ and the gospel were hindered thereby.

Calvin on Public Worship (II): The RPW

Notable quote from Calvin in this post:

“…there is a twofold reason why the Lord, in condemning and prohibiting all fictitious worship, requires us to give obedience only to his own voice. First, it tends greatly to establish his authority that we do not follow our own pleasure, but depend entirely on his sovereignty; and, secondly, such is our folly, that when we are left at liberty, all we are able to do is to go astray. And then when once we have turned aside from the right path, there is no end to our wanderings, until we get buried under a multitude of superstitions.”

Also,

“Every addition to his word, especially in this matter [worship], 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”

Calvin on Public Worship (III): The RPW - 2

Notable quote from Calvin in this post:

While discussing vows, he says:

“…[God] declares all self-made religion, however splendid and beautiful it may be in men’s eyes, accursed … If all voluntary worship which we ourselves devise apart from God’s commandment is hateful to him, it follows that no worship can be acceptable to him except that which is approved by his Word.”

Calvin on Public Worship (IV): The RPW - 3

Notable quote from Calvin in this post:

In his exposition of the Second Commandment, Calvin says,

“He [God] declares here more openly what sort of God he is, and with what kind of worship he should be honored, lest we dare attribute anything carnal to him”

What do you think? Did Calvin and subsequently the Puritans take an extreme view on the Regulative Principle of Worship and the Second Commandment?

With the Christmas season officially just days away, we’ll undoubtedly begin to see quite a few churches putting on Christmas plays over the next month or so. Because the Regulative Principle of Worship has been a topic here of late, I’d thought it would be appropriate to briefly discuss the issue of drama and how it relates to the principle and the season. (If you are not familiar with the Regulative Principle of Worship, please briefly research the issue here and here in order to properly follow the line of thinking in this post.)

Drama in Public Worship
No doubt that there will be many churches this holiday season using drama to tell the story of Jesus or some other Christmas-related tale –especially here in the South. From my personal experience, Christmas plays are often seen as an important tradition, at times just as foundational as the Christmas trees and the Christmas Eve services that have become apart of our very culture. Given this traditional element, questioning the biblical precedent for the practice is often seen as cold, divisive, narrow-minded, and, must I say it, scrooge-like.

The Appeal of Christmas Drama
It certainly must be noted that drama in worship is most often employed by seeker-sensitive, Arminian ministries, in an apparent attempt to evangelize. Everybody loves Christmas, especially here in the Bible belt, and there are relatively few who actually deny the birth of Jesus as the historical root of the holiday. So for holiday cheer and tradition, the Christmas play is appealing to a very wide audience –Christian, non-Christian, Mormon, Catholic, agnostic, family, friends, coworkers, etc.

Therefore the logic among many is that we should get people into church any way possible. We have discussed the root error of this line of thinking before, which ultimately lies in the misunderstanding of the nature of sin, the will of man, and the sovereignty of God (to say nothing of the methodology given by scripture), so it needs no repeating today. But it must be emphasized that the preaching of the word, the very proclamation of Jesus Christ, is simply not good enough, according to this logic, to attract a wide audience, and so the Christmas play is employed to bring in those who wouldn’t otherwise darken the door. Christmas plays do not offend, they do not divide households, they are generally warm and fuzzy at a very family-oriented time of year, and so they provide a great impetus for the numbers-driven mindset.

Where the Regulative Principle of Worship Speaks to this Issue
Setting aside the mindset and the root cause of such thinking, drama in worship, without a doubt, *is* a violation of scripture, and the RPW rightly speaks to this very issue. But, contrary to popular belief, it must be emphasized that the RPW is *not* designed to suppress, or to put God ‘in a box’. It is rather for our good and for our greatest joy in the Lord. God Himself knows what is best for our souls, and God Himself has given us means of worship as the highest and best means of attaining grace in our lives. God, through scripture, has left drama completely out of His Word and instruction to His Church, and that for an important reason. You just won’t find drama in scripture, despite the fact that drama was very prevalent during New Testament times, and you won’t find it because drama is inadequate to communicate the gospel of Jesus Christ, and it is insufficient in placing Christ as preeminent in our worship.

To break it down in practical terms:

• *What can be better for our souls than the preached Word?
• *What can be better for those outside of Christ than the clear proclamation of the gospel through the preached Word?
• *If preaching was completely sufficient to minister and save in scripture, who are we to say that it is now supplemented, at times, by better things? Has market research replaced biblical revelation?

Sadly, some believe that drama in certain situations is better for the soul than the very means which God has given us in His word. By implication, God simply left something out. By implication, the preached word, the Lord’s Table, prayer, singing of Psalms and Hymns, and baptism are insufficient for the Christian to grow in grace and the knowledge of Jesus Christ. By implication, instead of the preaching of the Word bringing about faith in the unbeliever (Rom 10:14), the gospel must somehow be communicated through another media which is at times superior to the preaching of the Word.

We are to Place Christ as Preeminent in Worship
My Brethren, Jesus Christ not only demands obedience and preeminence, He has given His Word to instruct us in all matters of faith and practice. The RPW isn’t simply to avoid the judgment of God in offering ’strange fire’ before the Lord, but it is also aimed at placing Jesus Christ as absolutely preeminent in worship. It is for our good! Drama in public worship, unfortunately, will only do more harm to your souls than good.

We have been given means to which we are to commune with Jesus Christ! Do you not see Christ as Prophet and King in the preaching and proclamation of His Word? Do you not see the broken body of Christ in the bread, and the spilled blood of Christ in the wine? Do you not see the image of Christ stamped upon the saints in their prayers and singing of hymns? Do you not see Christ as our High Priest in the prayers offered up to heaven’s throne and the preaching of the Gospel of grace? Where is Christ in drama? Where is Christ in the skits and the earthly, woefully insufficient representations of His earthly body? Where is Christ in the comedy, the showmanship, and the entertainment?

The plain fact is that we don’t see Jesus Christ in these methods; we see ourselves. And that, my friends, is why this principle is even debated. People want to be entertained, and they will respond in droves if you give that to them. But our hearts are idol factories; the subtleness runs deeper than we can imagine. Let us not look ourselves and what we want in worship, or what we think will best communicate the gospel to those outside of Christ; Christ, by His mercy, has saved us from ourselves, so let us look to Him in the Word.

We have been given Jesus Christ through the given means of worship. Let us ever seek to set Christ as preeminent in all things, especially our worship.

Do you believe that the Scripture not only regulates our theology but also our methodology? In other words, do you believe in the regulative principle? If so, to what degree? If not, why not?

The above question(s) have been posed by SBF blogger Timmy Brister to Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church in Seattle. Driscoll has established a forum on which those who have encountered the ministry of Mars Hill Church through the Internet can ask him direct questions. Having narrowed the list down to the top 50 questions, Driscoll is allowing people to vote to determine the top nine questions. Once voting closes on December 14th, Driscoll will take these nine questions and preach a sermon series on them early next year.

Driscoll is known as one who wishes to reach the postmodern culture with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In this regard, Driscoll is known as an “emerging” minister. This term “emerging” is distinguished from “emergent,” which describes those who not only wish to reach postmodern culture, but who have also embraced a postmodern theology (i.e. figures such as Brian McLaren and Tony Jones who question or deny many of the historic doctrines of the Christian Faith). Driscoll rejects postmodern theology and has vigorously defended such culturally unpopular Bible teachings as substitutionary atonement and the exclusivity of Christ in salvation.

Driscoll has also described Mars Hill Church as holding to “Reformed theological convictions” including a high view of God’s sovereignty in salvation. As discussed in my last post, one historical Reformed theological conviction has been the Regulative Principle of Worship (RPW) [if you do not know what the RPW is, or if you think that it means only signing the Psalms, then please read my last post HERE]. Now, Driscoll has, in the past, stated that he holds his theology with an closed fist, but his methodology with an open hand. This sentiment, in itself, is not necessarily against the RPW (any thinking adherent to the RPW would agree that Western orchestral music is probably not appropriate on the mission field). But what are Driscoll’s views on how the Bible informs our worship? How does he come to a conclusion concerning whether it is acceptable, say, to sprinkle water on an infant or pray through an icon as part of a worship service? What does it mean practically for Driscoll to be both “emerging” and “Reformed” when it comes to worship?

If you think that this is an issue that Driscoll should address, I urge you to vote for Timmy’s question HERE. As the title of this post says, vote early (starting today), and vote often (voters are allowed ten votes per day).

(more…)

At the time of the Protestant Reformation, the authority of the Roman Catholic popes and councils was called into question because, as Martin Luther pointed out at the Diet of Worms (1521), “they have contradicted each other.” Protestants sought to return to Scripture as the single, final basis for the faith and practice of the Church. As the Reformers rejected the Roman Catholic practice of the Mass, and pronouncements from popes and councils concerning worship in general, so they had to carefully consider how the Bible informs our worship practices. Over time, two main Protestant views on this subject became apparent.

The first is what is today known as the Normative Principle of Worship (NPW). The NPW teaches that Christians ‘may do anything in worship that is not forbidden by Scripture.’ Thoughtful adherents to the NPW qualify this definition, pointing out that everything must be done decently and in order and that all aspects of worship should focus our attention on the preaching of the Word. Branches of Protestantism that consciously follow the NPW include the Lutherans and the Anglicans.

The second, competing view on how Scripture informs our worship practices is known as the Regulative Principle of Worship (RPW). The RPW teaches that ‘we may do only what is commanded in worship.’ The Reformed branch of Protestantism has historically followed the RPW. We who adhere to the RPW believe that God has given us a sufficient and clear guide in Scripture as to how He is to be worshiped. As John Calvin wrote:

We may not adopt any device [in our worship] which seems fit to ourselves, but look to the injunctions of him who alone is entitled to prescribe. Therefore, if we would have him approve our worship, this rule, which he everywhere enforces with the utmost strictness, must be carefully observed… God disapproves all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned in his Word. [John Calvin, The Necessity of Reforming the Church, quote from a class handout by Dr. Greg Brewton]

As the elders of my home church, Grace Heritage Church, have expressed this principle:

Worship is the corporate expression of the delight, awe, and thankfulness that come from knowing our infinitely glorious and sovereign God and Savior. Because the distance between God and His creatures is so great, the only acceptable way of approaching God in worship must be revealed to us by God Himself. Therefore, He may not be worshiped in ways invented by us. This principle protects us from idolatrous worship and focuses our energies on those activities through which God has called us to draw near.

The RPW is particularly important for Baptists, because it is a thorough-going commitment to this principle that gave rise to Baptist convictions in the first place. As certain groups within the English separatist movement of the early 1600s began to seek continuing church reformation, they came to realize that the Bible provides no command nor example of infant baptism. From this consideration of Scripture and commitment to the RPW, the modern Baptist movement arose (I say “modern” as we believe that the apostolic churches practiced believers’ baptism). Baptist churches today that question the RPW must be able to give some answer as to why they refuse to sprinkle infants. If the Normative Principle is followed instead- if we may do in worship whatever is not forbidden- then where in Scripture do we find a command not to practice paedo-baptism?

It is certainly true that through the centuries the RPW has been applied in different ways by different groups. Some who (I believe, wrongly) only look to the New Testament to inform worship without drawing principles from the Old Testament have rejected the use of musical instruments in worship. Others have rejected hymns and other songs in favor of singing only the Psalms. This last issue was addressed in the late 1691 by the great Baptist theologian Benjamin Keach in his book, The Breach Repaired in God’s Worship, or Singing of Psalms, Hymns and Spiritual Songs Proved to be an Holy Ordinance of Jesus Christ. Keach addressed the issue from the Scripture within the perspective of the Regulative Principle. Since that time the great majority of Baptists (and, indeed, the great majority of all adherents to the RPW) have sung psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (with instruments!) in their worship.

Update: Readers are directed to comment #23 below as there is a correction to my understanding of Keach’s work.

I think it is safe to say when Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses on Wittenberg’s Door that he would have imagined the impact it would have 490 years later. It is rather fitting to find myself writing on a medium that has democratized the voice of Christians in the 21st century in a very similar fashion that Luther utilized the Gutenberg Press to promulgate his translation of the Scriptures to the masses. I am quite confident that, were Luther alive today, he would have taken full advantage of such mediums of communication as blogs to proclaim the gospel of justification by faith and herald the battlecry of ad fontes!

In the same year I was brought into this world, another birth came about, namely the birth of the Conservative Resurgence of the Southern Baptist Convention. I am forever grateful for the ways in which God providentially brought about the recovery of something which Luther held so dear–the authority and inerrancy of Scripture. With every passing year of my life, the mile marker will remind me that I am a beneficiary of a generation of Southern Baptists who believed that the truthfulness and trustworthiness of Scripture was something worth fighting for and dying for. I pray God never allows me to take for granted the blessings and benefits I have received as a result of such a resurgence, not the least of which include me being saved, licensed to gospel ministry, ordained, and now being theologically trained.

Nevertheless, with nearly three decades of the Conservative Resurgence under our belts, the Southern Baptist Convention and the churches of which it is comprised, is no better off now than when we did not believe in the principle of sola Scriptura. During this span of time, we have not seen an increase in people being saved and baptized, even in the midst of a heightened emphasis on church growth and rise of megachurches. We have effectively replaced one bureaucracy with another and have failed to realize the implications of what the recovery of the formal principle in our churches. Setting all political and personal agendas aside, it would be only fair to conclude that the Southern Baptist Convention is currently a denomination that is halfly reformed.

(more…)