What is “Reformed Worship” Anyway?
“…Not Reformed Enough…”
In many conversations, I’ve heard Reformed Christians explain that they are looking for a church with “Reformed worship.” Often, this is stated in the context of dissatisfaction with their current place of worship: e.g. “Our church’s worship isn’t Reformed enough…” On the one hand, it is commendable that Reformed Christians are being thoughtful and intentional about how our theology (what we believe) and our doxology (how we worship) ought to intersect and inform each other. On the other hand, I wonder if trying to define a monolithic “Reformed worship” is even what we as Reformed Christians are supposed to be doing in the first place.
As I’ve written previously, Reformed theology was historically intended to be ecumenical and sufficient, not parochial and exhaustive. At the Westminster Assembly and other historic Reformed church gatherings, Reformed Christian leaders who held various theological, philosophical, and sociological viewpoints on many matters came together and were able to create statements of beliefs that they could approve of for use in their churches and future Reformed churches. They did not create confessions of faith that dove into every minute secondary and tertiary point of theology. Many worthy points of theology were intentionally left out of our Reformed confessions of faith, and much of the applicative onus was left for the church of every generation to wisely think about. Christian liberty not only enables but encourages us to use our renewed minds to think about the various social issues of our day and borrow the general revelation truths that non-Christians bring to the table while standing firmly upon our Reformed confessions as sufficient summaries of the system of doctrine found in the Bible.
Tradition Versus Theology — a Necessary Distinction
Thoughtful Reformed Christians have been able to carefully parse between the Reformed tradition and Reformed theology. The tradition includes the confessions of faith, the works of prominent theological leaders, common practices of churches, and so on. The theology, however, is intentionally limited to the confessions of faith as theological consensus documents. The tradition may include unique, esoteric, and splinter views; the theology is inherently based on consensus and ecumenicity. Being able to differentiate between tradition and theology enables Christians to go beyond the “But Calvin said…but Turretin said…but Hodge said” rigmarole and instead ask the question, “What have we as Reformed Christians agreed upon in the midst of all of our differences?”
The Regulative Principle of Worship Has Broad Applicative Intent
The ecumenical and sufficient spirit of Reformed theology flows into our doxology. When you read the Reformed confessions, you quickly come to the realization that statements on worship are sparse, general, and left at the principle level and rarely brought down to the applicative level. As the Westminster Confession of Faith Chapter 21.1 states:
“…the acceptable way of worshiping the true God is instituted by himself, and so limited by his own revealed will, that he may not be worshiped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation, or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scripture.”
Additionally, Heidelberg Catechism Answer 96 states:
“We are not to make an image of God in any way, nor to worship him in any other manner than he has commanded in his Word.”
And again, the Belgic Confession of Faith Article 32 states:
“Therefore we reject all human innovations and all laws imposed on us, in our worship of God, which bind and force our consciences in any way.”
All of these statements and others similar to them in historic Reformed confessions summarize what is called the “regulative principle of worship.” Simply put, the regulative principle of worship states that, in the gathered, corporate worship of God, Christians may only worship Him in the ways He has commanded us to do so. Christians are forbidden, therefore, from adding to the worship of God what has not been expressly commanded in Scripture.
What needs to be stressed above all things, however, is that the regulative principle of worship is just that — a principle. A principle always needs to be applied contextually in real life. If we are convinced of the regulative principle of worship, we need to naturally ask the question, “What is commanded by God for worship in His Word?”
The Reformed confessions are intentionally sparse on the applicative details, and I believe that this is to allow a broad range of worship expressions and practices that can all properly and genuinely be argued as appropriate applications of the regulative principle of worship.
Why Is One Form of Worship “More Reformed” Than Others?
A quick survey of Reformed Christians in previous generations demonstrates that there have been various applicative views of the regulative principle of worship. Many in the early Reformation period argued that the only words that can be sung by Christians should be from the songbook of the Word of God. Therefore, they argue for exclusive psalmody sung from the canonical Psalms. Another early view argued that, even though instrumentation is commanded by God in the Old Testament, New Testament Christian worship ought to be done by the human voice alone, and therefore, they argued for a cappella worship. But here, we need to make the distinction between the Reformed tradition and Reformed theology. While figures in our tradition may have argued for exclusive psalmody and/or non-instrumentation, the theology that was held by consensus and codified in our confessions do not argue that these views are the only acceptable expressions of the regulative principle of worship.
The arguments continue today as Reformed Christians who don’t hold to exclusive psalmody or a cappella worship engage in arguments about which types of instrumentation or worship music is more or less in line with the regulative principle of worship. Is organ > piano > guitar when it comes to conformity with the regulative principle of worship, and why? Are hymns prior to the 1900s more in line with the regulative principle of worship than contemporary Christian worship songs, and why? If we’re honest, many of the arguments are cultural more than they are theological. Simply arguing that someone in the Reformed tradition agrees with you is insufficient to make a wholesale declaration that someone else’s worship is outside of the theology of the regulative principle of worship.
Beyond the content and mode of worship is the question of worship practices and expressions. Reformed Christians have attempted to make distinctions between elements and circumstances of worship. Elements are those things without which the true worship of God cannot exist. Circumstances are things that are left to the wisdom and leadership of individual churches. But even in this distinction, Reformed Christians have had and continue to have great disagreement about what is an element and what is a circumstance. If Christians are commanded by God to “lift up holy hands,” is that a circumstance? Is the practice of the Lord’s Supper meant to be a weekly element?
Furthermore, the expectations of the role of the congregation are highly disagreed upon. Should congregants be vocally responsive during sermons? Should we move our bodies in line with our heads and hearts during worship? Should we have worship postures? Can “reverence” and “awe” only mean stoic, silent, and rigid? Why or why not for all of the above? Why is one set of expectations more in line with the regulative principle of worship than another?
The existence of such vast discrepancy demonstrates how broadly the regulative principle of worship can be legitimately applied. Barring clear examples of egregious forms of unacceptable worship, Reformed worship is meant to be a broad umbrella of various expressions and forms that are equally informed by the Reformed theology we all agree upon.
A New Posture on Worship: Charity, Humility, and Courage
If the application of the regulative principle of worship is intentionally meant to be broad based on the theology of our Reformed confessions, we as Reformed Christians ought to be extremely careful to label a church as “less Reformed” in worship because they don’t match something we see in the tradition. We should actually be more charitable towards those who express worship differently than we do, and we should be willing to listen and ask questions for a long time before bringing critique or (God forbid!) spreading rumors and gossip to others about how “less Reformed” that church’s worship is. We should be willing to take the ninth commandment seriously so that we would uphold the reputation of our brothers and sisters, especially those who share in our theology in our sister churches
Although the regulative principle of worship is meant to be applicatively broad, that doesn’t mean that there won’t be cases where certain forms and practices of worship are indeed out of bounds with the principle. However, we should be the most humble of Christians and give the benefit of the doubt before running trigger-happy into shooting down every instance that we believe runs contrary to what we expect how the regulative principle of worship should be applied. We should likewise be willing to challenge our own assumptions and arguments we’ve made for our preferred forms of worship before we even try to point out a speck in the worship of another church.
Lastly, if the regulative principle of worship was intended to be applied broadly, all Reformed churches with various forms and expressions of worship should courageously worship God without fear of trying to please certain gatekeepers of the regulative principle of worship. After we’ve done our homework and discerned wisely that the way we worship God is right and fitting with what He has commanded in His Word, we should worship with heart, soul, mind, and strength and inspire other Christians and the world around us to join us in our worship. What draws other people into worship should not be a spirit of suspicion. People should not be coming into our church doors because we are “more Reformed” in our worship than the church on the other side of town. The courage by which we worship God with our whole being should make the observer believe that truly God is among us.
