This request was sent to me by a friend and brother who is an exclusive psalm singer:
“When you get a chance could you please read Isaac Watts’ Preface which is found here: http://www.ccel.org/cceh/archives/eee/wattspre.htm,
and this article on Isaac Watts by the Associated Reformed Church found here: http://www.americanpresbyterianchurch.org/?page_id=893? ?”
I admit I just glanced through these articles but these were some thoughts that occurred to me as I did:
Watts seems to be saying that some Christians at least, at some times and in some circumstances, have nothing in common with some of the Psalms, which would thus be inappropriate for them to sing. I disagree with that.
He also says that there are no Psalms which could be appropriately sung at a communion service; I also disagree with that.
He further seems to be saying that it’s impossible, really, to translate the Psalms into English well enough so as to be able to then put them to music; and I disagree with that as well.
He really seems to suggest that some elements in the Psalms would be foreign to some Christians; but that says more about some Christians than it does about the Psalms, however, which are the heartbeat of any and every and all Christian throughout all ages. If you cannot find in at least some of the Psalms a mirror of your own soul and its experiences, it would seem to call into question whether you are Christian at all. This would be true of every Christian in every age, though admittedly there is a progress in the development of the spiritual life and sensitivities in each of us individually and so our experience overtime comes more progressively to match the experience of the psalmists; and since the Lord’s people are in various stages of growth and spiritual development, the whole gamut of the experience of the psalmists may not be present (especially) in young believer’s life experientially.
He also appears to be a dispensationalist in many ways, and he seems not to comprehend the way in which the Psalms are typical and analogical and promissory and anticipatory of Christ and his kingdom…that they are all preeminently his songs, first and foremost, before they can really and truly be the songs of his people in any sense. He would apparently have trouble singing the imprecatory Psalms; I would have no such trouble and can think of any number of people I would have in my sites as I prayed and sang through them!
And he also seems to be saying that the church cannot use the Psalms except as they are first emptied of their old testament content in order to then be filled with New Testament content. And I take issue with that. So, he appears to believe that the Psalms were written exclusively as a Jewish song book and that they therefore have no place, strictly speaking, in the new testament Church as a vehicle for worship. And I disagree with this as well. This is his dispensationalism coming through once again.
Also, he seems to be saying that it’s impossible to really put the Psalms that have been translated into English to music; and I disagree with that as well.
The only thing I find myself in agreement with is his contention that the church is free to compose and sing any song which expresses the reality of Christ’s Person and Work in a biblical way and which extols his glory in creation, salvation, judgment glorification with his people and providence in a biblical way.
Concerning his Unitarian leanings, it is of course possible that he was never a true believer in Jesus Christ at all. That raises the issue of whether or not the works of non-Christians can be utilized in any way by the church for the glory of God. Certainly, we have to be careful here, but one verse that comes to mind is, “To the pure, all things are pure”. When Paul, for example, says that his rivals preach Christ out of envy and selfish ambition, the assumption has to be that these preachers may, in fact, not have been in a state of grace. Yet Paul finds himself able to freely rejoice in the fact that, though the instrument may be unclean and its motivational complex, corrupt, the gospel is never the less being proclaimed. And in the Old Testament period, God spoke his very words through the mouth of the godless prophet, Balaam…whom he subsequently destroyed.
My own take is that it is possible to use the works of unbelievers to the glory of God. So can we use the songs of non-Christians even in Christian worship? Well, if they are true to the word of God I would say yes in the same sense that Paul says that some preach Christ out of envy and selfish ambition but rejoices still that the gospel is nevertheless being preached. (Upon their entrance into Canaan, Israel took over wholesale the entire Canaanite culture and owned it in totality as their own. They were commanded only to root out of it every last vestige of Canaanitish cult. In this, of course, they failed and on account of their failure they themselves were rooted out. I think that in the same way, all that is not, in the nature of the case, specifically evil in the world cultures (which are largely the fruit of non-Christian labors) will in the end become the possession of the people of God. We take ownership of presently and use for the honor and glory of Christ all manner of non-Christian cultural fruits, recognizing them as gifts of God and giving him thanks for them…things like digital technology, for example. This is not equivalent to saying that Christians are never involved in fulfilling the cultural mandate. But for the most part they are a minority of the population and their cultural achievements a relatively small percentage of the whole).
Concerning whether or not it would be appropriate for God’s people to give expression to biblical sentiments of worship through songs which are not specific texts, whether Psalms or some other portions of God’s word, it may be that Jesus’ response to his disciples’ question: Lord, teach us to pray, may serve as a guideline here. His answer to them is, “When you pray, say…” and he then gives them the Lord’s prayer (really the disciple’s prayer). And so we use this prayer. But when he says to them, and to us, this is how you are to pray, does he mean that this is the only prayer that any believer at any time or circumstance is permitted to pray and must pray; it really is a command, after all. But is it also a command to pray only this prayer whenever we pray?
When Paul says, “Preach the word”, for example; what does he mean? Does he mean that we are simply to take the scriptures in our mouths and repeat them verbatim? Or does preaching the word involve the whole personality with that set of experiences and gifts which are unique to it, and which all come to bear in handling the word, exposing its true meaning and applying it in a sensible, felt, experiential, experimental manner to the heart? Isn’t it a function also of the preacher’s spiritual depth and commitment, of how closely he walks with the Lord, of how passionate he is, of how committed to a course of obedience and faith he happens to be? To what degree he possesses the gift to preach? Do those things play out in the life of a preacher and come to expression in his own unique style of the proclamation of divine truth?
As an illustration of this principle, think about the way in which a spirit filled preacher is used by the Spirit to communicate divine truths. Though he is always bounded by the word of God, the preacher may exercise considerable imagination in good expository preaching, weaving elements of his own experience into his message as the word of God has searched his own heart and as the Spirit of God has taken God’s word and made its meaning clear to him in both the crucibles and green pastures of his own life experiences; and, for example, incorporating elements in the natural order as seen in the light of special revelation into his message. Indeed, it’s precisely the Spirit’s searching, interpretive and explanatory work in the preacher’s own heart and life in the midst of life’s experiences and his own Spirit-wrought ability to weave these into barbed and flaming arrows of divine truth, and then with real prayerful passion send them home to the hearts of his hearers in a way in which the Spirit is perceived as the one in Jesus Christ speaking to them through a particular preacher which makes that preacher a true proclaimer of divine truth: in a wonderful and mysterious way, Jesus Christ is actually speaking through the vessel. Have you not experienced such things? Perhaps deep felt joy, or conviction or sorrow for sins, or assurance of divine love and favor, or a real, solid volitional fervor accompanied by Spirit wrought power in your soul to turn your life more faithfully into the obedience of Christ; or a quickening of faith in Christ, of love for Christ, of hope in the promises of God? Yet all these things are driven home to your heart in words which belong, in many cases, exclusively to the preacher whom God has called, burdened and used, just as he is and has been prepared by God as his own mouthpiece, bringing his word powerfully to bear upon the hearers. (I have heard lots of expository preaching that was as dry as dust; I’ve also, though rarely, heard the sort of preaching I’ve detailed above. It has never failed to light me up.) If this is so, why may not the Lords people, in a similar way, use words which are not specifically lifted off the pages of scripture to compose spiritually edifying hymns?
A few other thoughts:
We are commanded to sing Psalms; no issue there!
Hymns are more or less biblical. Since there are so many to choose from, we should choose only the very best ones.
Christ has always to be the center piece of all the church’s songs; this, more than anything else, is the defining feature of a true hymn; all else is intrigue.