Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Lining of the Psalms

Expand Messages
  • covie1646
    ... Reformed ... Hence, I deferred to those more knowledgable than me such as Edgar, Bishopsdoom, Ginny, & c. I am new to the lining out of Psalms. ...
    Message 1 of 9 , Nov 25, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Glenn Ferrell
      <gferrell@m...> wrote:
      > That is stretching it Whit.
      >
      > I don't think you'll find that understanding in any historical
      Reformed
      > document.

      Hence, I deferred to those more knowledgable than me such as Edgar,
      Bishopsdoom, Ginny, & c. I am new to the lining out of Psalms.

      >
      > Actually, according to the Deut. text you quote, we need to be
      careful
      > not to add to anything God commands.

      I already covered that when I mentioned the full verse, part of which
      is the not-adding-to.

      >The Regulative Principle places
      > limits on the powers of the Church.

      Of course! That is been my understanding for a year or so now.
      >
      > Glenn
      >

      Whit
      > covie1646 wrote:
      >
      > >It would seem that lining out the Psalms is Scriptural since
      Psalms
      > >is a part of God's Word and in 1.Thessalonians, the congregation
      > >received the Word by "word of mouth or by letter". And from
      > >Deuteronomy 12, we should be careful to do everything that God
      > >commands without either adding to or subtracting from His
      > >commandments. Hence, not only would lining be Scirptural but also
      a
      > >Scriptural requirement especially since their are people
      illiterate
      > >or learning to read such as children in the congregation. I
      concur
      > >with what Edgar and Ginny said on this matter of lining out Psalms.
      > >
      > >Whit
      > >
      > >
      > >--- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Glenn Ferrell
      > ><gferrell@m...> wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > >>I read in Ginny's post that the lining of Psalms is an
      unalterable
      > >>practice, not because of a Scriptural requirement, but because of
      > >>
      > >>
      > >the
      > >
      > >
      > >>DPWG, adopted by the Scottish GA. I'm merely pointing out that
      the
      > >>
      > >>
      > >DPWG
      > >
      > >
      > >>is temporary, circumstantial and suggestive on this matter
      ("...for
      > >>
      > >>
      > >the
      > >
      > >
      > >>present,...where many..., it is convenient...) not rising to the
      > >>
      > >>
      > >level
      > >
      > >
      > >>of a requirement. You may read it as requiring the lining of
      > >>
      > >>
      > >Psalms as
      > >
      > >
      > >>long as there is one illiterate person in the congregation,
      > >>
      > >>
      > >including
      > >
      > >
      > >>children not able to read. It may not be a requirement when
      > >>
      > >>
      > >everyone
      > >
      > >
      > >>present is able to read. The goal is to have Psalters and
      everyone
      > >>
      > >>
      > >be
      > >
      > >
      > >>able to read, "...every one that can read is to have a psalm
      book;
      > >>
      > >>
      > >and
      > >
      > >
      > >>all others, not disabled by age or otherwise, are to be exhorted
      to
      > >>learn to read..."
      > >>
      > >>However, you raise another issue that discussion may help
      clarify.
      > >>General Assemblies do not have unlimited power. I don't believe
      > >>
      > >>
      > >you are
      > >
      > >
      > >>saying they do. They are bound by Scripture, the Confessions and
      > >>
      > >>
      > >the
      > >
      > >
      > >>Form of Government. In most American Presbyterian bodies, this
      > >>limitation of powers is more clearly defined. For example, Forms
      > >>
      > >>
      > >of
      > >
      > >
      > >>Government give Presbyteries certain powers not given to
      Sessions,
      > >>Synods or General Assemblies. Without amendment of the Form of
      > >>Government, the GA may not usurp those powers. The process of
      > >>
      > >>
      > >amending
      > >
      > >
      > >>the Confessions or Form of Government, Worship or Discipline
      > >>
      > >>
      > >usually
      > >
      > >
      > >>require more than a mere vote of a majority of one General
      > >>
      > >>
      > >Assembly.
      > >
      > >
      > >>Such amendment may start with the GA, but then must be approved
      by
      > >>
      > >>
      > >a
      > >
      > >
      > >>certain prescribed portion of the presbyteries, and perhaps
      > >>
      > >>
      > >approved a
      > >
      > >
      > >>second time by the GA.
      > >>
      > >>This procedure offers some protection and insurance against
      > >>
      > >>
      > >unscriptural
      > >
      > >
      > >>and unconstitutional practices. In the 1930's the PCUSA GA
      > >>
      > >>
      > >prohibited
      > >
      > >
      > >>continued membership in the Independent Presbyterian Foreign
      > >>
      > >>
      > >Mission
      > >
      > >
      > >>Board. Such participation was not precluded by the constitution
      of
      > >>
      > >>
      > >the
      > >
      > >
      > >>denomination. However, based on this usurped authority, J.
      Gresham
      > >>Machen was tried and excluded from the denomination. This was an
      > >>administrative and unconstitutional action leading to the
      formation
      > >>
      > >>
      > >of
      > >
      > >
      > >>the OPC.
      > >>
      > >>GA's have no authority not explicitly given in Scripture,
      > >>
      > >>
      > >Confessions or
      > >
      > >
      > >>their own Form of Government. Anything more is the opinion of
      one
      > >>particular GA and may be seen as non binding advice to the church
      > >>
      > >>
      > >as a
      > >
      > >
      > >>whole.
      > >>
      > >>As I said, I may need to think this through a bit more. I
      realize
      > >>
      > >>
      > >the
      > >
      > >
      > >>Westminster Form of Government does not provide a method of
      > >>
      > >>
      > >amendment.
      > >
      > >
      > >>Part of it was provisional; the remainder took its warrant from
      > >>Scripture. I'm prepared to read and learn more here.
      > >>
      > >>Glenn
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>Edgar A. Ibarra Jr. wrote:
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>>Glenn,
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>>It would be difficult to read this as a continuing requirement
      > >>>>where the congregants can read, have memorized the Psalms, or
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >have
      > >
      > >
      > >>>>Psalters.
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>> Glenn, you over-read or didn't comprehend what Ginny & Cheryl
      > >>>wrote. Our children that cannot read (due to age)are also part
      of
      > >>>the church and since they cannot read but can speak, we line
      them
      > >>>out so that they also may raise their voices to the LORD and
      sing
      > >>>songs of praise to Him. "Out of the mouth of bebes have ye
      > >>>perfected praise." I say this respectfully to you.
      > >>>
      > >>> Trevor, unlike Prebyterian churches of today that don't really
      > >>>uphold the rulings of their GA's but act like Baptists in the
      > >>>excercise of their Church Government and the rulings issued from
      > >>>their various courts, the Covenanters understand what Biblical
      > >>>Presbyterianism is and therefore we follow the faithful rulings
      of
      > >>>the General Assemblies of the 1st & 2nd Reformation. After 1650,
      > >>>there has not been any faithful General Assembly, hence why we
      do
      > >>>not recognize the other GAs, but hold to the faithful GAs of the
      > >>>past and remain biblical Presbyterians.
      > >>>
      > >>> Although lining out the Psalms is not a command from Scripture,
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >it
      > >
      > >
      > >>>is a command from Scripture that the body of Christ worship Him.
      > >>>Since our covenant children are part of that body, we do what we
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >can
      > >
      > >
      > >>>to aid them, without transgressing the 1st & 2nd Commandments,
      to
      > >>>worship the Triune God. Since they cannot read and the GA said
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >that
      > >
      > >
      > >>>in order to assist those who cannot read, to line out the
      Psalms,
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >we
      > >
      > >
      > >>>line out the Psalms, so that our covenant children can sing to
      our
      > >>>LORD. This does not violate the Commandments nor adds to them,
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >but
      > >
      > >
      > >>>is a circumstance in worship. See WCF 1.
      > >>>
      > >>>Is that anarchronistic? Is that pious claptrap? Maybe, but we
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >want
      > >
      > >
      > >>>to glorify GOD and are training our children to do the same.
      > >>>
      > >>>If that is anarchronistic & pious claptrap so be it. If Issac
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >Watts
      > >
      > >
      > >>>hated it (read his preface to his Imitation of the Psalms of
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >David),
      > >
      > >
      > >>>which ushered in a new wave of uninspired hymns to God's church,
      > >>>well, we will not follow a multitude to do evil.
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>Peace & for the glory of Christ,
      > >>>Edgar
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.