Defending the Historic View of the Regulative Principle of Worship: The Calvinistic Reformers Were Right About Worship
Posted by Kay Stanford Jr Kastum at 2:55 AMCritics of the Reformation doctrine of the regulative principle of worship (Steve Schlissel, Doug Wilson, and others) need to give us something specific as to their positive position on the second commandment and the public worship of God. We who uphold the Reformation doctrine of the regulative principle have specifically set forth our positive position concerning public worship in numerous lectures, books, newsletters, web pages, etc. It is the critics' turn to do likewise.
The critics must state specifically what the second commandment allows and what it forbids, to the best of their ability, after having studied the relevant data. They have taken their shots at our work, where we have stated our position. Once they have put forth their positive position we will critique it from the perspective of the regulative principle. Observers of this debate will then be able to determine which side represents the Scriptural position.
And if this work ever gets done by the modern detractors of Reformation worship, the readers should pay careful attention to all the footnotes cited (to compare them with the footnotes in our critiques), so as to determine who it is that is favorably citing the Westminster Divines, the Reformation Dutch Synods, Calvin, Knox, Rutherford, Gillespie, Owen, and even most of the early Independents.
It should then be clear who the real classical Protestants are, and who has set up tent in some other camp.
It is important to answer a couple of key questions pertinent to this issue: When the Calvinistic Reformers studied the Bible to determine the proper theology of worship, did they get their theology wrong? Was the truly Biblical position on worship held by the Episcopalians, Lutherans and Roman Catholics?
Once the opponents of the regulative principle state their positive position people will be able to ask: Does their view demonstrate that they follow in the footsteps of the original Reformers? Or, to the contrary, does it show that they are following those who rejected the Reformation position? Is their view in line with the historic Calvinist view of worship or quite different from it?
There are two sides to the coin of the regulative principle of worship. If you agree with it and apply it faithfully to every part of public worship, you are in agreement with the Westminster Assembly and the Covenanted Reformation. If you fundamentally disagree with it, then you have embraced the fundamental principles of Roman Catholic worship.
There is no neutrality; you either worship God according to His appointment, or you will find some human substitute. (This article has been adapted from "Saul in the Cave of Adullam by Reg Barrow.)
Biblical Worship: The Regulative Principle of Worship in History
The critics must state specifically what the second commandment allows and what it forbids, to the best of their ability, after having studied the relevant data. They have taken their shots at our work, where we have stated our position. Once they have put forth their positive position we will critique it from the perspective of the regulative principle. Observers of this debate will then be able to determine which side represents the Scriptural position.
And if this work ever gets done by the modern detractors of Reformation worship, the readers should pay careful attention to all the footnotes cited (to compare them with the footnotes in our critiques), so as to determine who it is that is favorably citing the Westminster Divines, the Reformation Dutch Synods, Calvin, Knox, Rutherford, Gillespie, Owen, and even most of the early Independents.
It should then be clear who the real classical Protestants are, and who has set up tent in some other camp.
It is important to answer a couple of key questions pertinent to this issue: When the Calvinistic Reformers studied the Bible to determine the proper theology of worship, did they get their theology wrong? Was the truly Biblical position on worship held by the Episcopalians, Lutherans and Roman Catholics?
Once the opponents of the regulative principle state their positive position people will be able to ask: Does their view demonstrate that they follow in the footsteps of the original Reformers? Or, to the contrary, does it show that they are following those who rejected the Reformation position? Is their view in line with the historic Calvinist view of worship or quite different from it?
There are two sides to the coin of the regulative principle of worship. If you agree with it and apply it faithfully to every part of public worship, you are in agreement with the Westminster Assembly and the Covenanted Reformation. If you fundamentally disagree with it, then you have embraced the fundamental principles of Roman Catholic worship.
There is no neutrality; you either worship God according to His appointment, or you will find some human substitute. (This article has been adapted from "Saul in the Cave of Adullam by Reg Barrow.)
About the Author:
For more information about Reformed worship (following the Regulative Principle of Worship), church history and the Reformation, please visit PuritanDownloads.com. There are numerous Reformation theology resources at that site.