The Rise and Decline of Exclusive Canonical Psalmody in the Reformed and Presbyterian Churches: The Decline of Exclusive Canonical Psalmody in Geneva

The following quote from Louis Benson will help reset the topic in this series of posts on the classical Reformed and Presbyterian commitment to exclusive canonical psalmody in worship, and help establish a baseline to measure the departure from this standard by the Reformed Church in the Enlightenment era:

There is no more difficulty in assigning the leadership to him (Calvin) than in assigning to Luther the leadership in establishing hymn singing in Germany and its spread from there into Lutheran countries. From this point indeed, the two figures stand as independent sources, from which flow two parallel streams of Protestant church song--- the Lutheran Hymnody on the one hand and the Reformed Metrical Psalmody on the other. And the streams were not fully united till after two centuries had passed. They are not in fact merged into unity even today, when the Calvinistic precedent of Psalm singing still furnishes the ground for maintaining denominational integrity among exclusive Psalm singers (p.75).

It may also prove helpful to add just one more quote from Benson about Calvin’s position on psalmody where he says of Calvin’s standard for worship song:

The Calvinistic Psalm took its authority and its appropriateness from its divine inspiration. It must be Holy Scripture, first of all; then it became metrical merely to facilitate its congregational rendering. Calvin had determined to make the Psalter the praise book of the Reformed Church (p.75).

From these two quotes a couple of important issues emerge. First, Luther and Calvin are regarded by Benson as the liturgical leaders of the Lutheran and Reformed churches respectively. This point is significant since it provides an objective reference point for the measuring the form of worship, particularly in the matter of congregational song, which is what we might call “classically” Reformed. Such a point of clarification is useful since many today who claim to represent the conservative Reformed and Presbyterian position on worship often describe their form of worship as “traditional” or as “classical” over against innovative forms of worship practiced in many Reform and Presbyterian churches today which they often like to label as “revivalistic.” However, Benson’s identification of Calvin as the liturgical standard bearer of historical Reformed worship means that the term “classical” can only honestly and accurately be used to describe worship which conforms to the actual model of worship instituted by Calvin in Geneva and which was followed by other Reformed and Presbyterian churches of the 16^th century. Second, Benson isolates the precise difference between Lutheran and Reformed when it comes to the element of song. Benson explains that Lutheran song can be fairly characterized as manmade compositions while Calvinistic songs were nothing less than divinely inspired and taken directly from Scripture. Further, Benson notes that these two contrasting views represented two distinct streams of worship song and they only converged in the Reformed Church 200 years after the Reformation, though he accurately notes some churches which wish to be distinguished as fully Calvinistic in worship continue to conform to Calvin’s precedent of exclusive canonical psalmody. It is evident from this manner of description, that Benson judges only exclusive psalm singing churches as classically Reformed and Calvinistic.

Now, moving on to our specific area of focus, attention will be given briefly to the DECLINE of exclusive canonical psalmody in the church of Geneva. First of all, Benson stakes out the bold ground of claiming that exclusive psalmody was the practice of the French-speaking Reformed churches for well over 100 years after the publication of the 1562 Geneva Psalter (p.108). It is true that the Synod of Montabaun in 1594 commissioned Beza to versify Scriptural canticles as a sort of appendix to the Geneva Psalter, which he did. Beza submitted 12 songs, 10 of which were taken from the Old Testament, and the Church approved their use in worship and private devotion; however, these songs never quite caught on as we might say, and never had a subsequent impact on the church’s repertoire of praise. Second, in the very late 17^th century the Venerable Company of Pastors in Geneva approved a motion to eliminate imprecations of the Jews against their enemies from the Psalms. This work was completed largely by Benedict Pictet in 1693 but again, was not unanimously received  (p.112). Third, in the early 1700’s a strong push towards a more “evangelical” hymnody arose in the church.  In response to this surge in momentum towards hymnody, Pictet proposed to supplement the Psalms with New Testament hymns. By 1705, Pictet, prepared 12 paraphrases of New Testament passages which were added to the Psalter as an appendix (p.115). The difference between this project and early attempted revisions and expansions is summarized well by Benson when he says that this project “took its impulse from Lutheran precedent, and it marks the beginning of the new period of Psalms and Hymns on equal footing” (p.116).  With this foot firmly planted in the doorway, supplementation of Psalter continued to grow over time until the 1778 edition of the Psalter contained 54 hymns. Fourth, As the Lutheran hymnal began to influence the Reformed Church, changes in worship song continued to grow until a short period of resistance and push-back was witnessed in the Geneva church early in the 19^th century. Those who were committed to the classical model of Reformed congregational singing sought to resuscitate the Psalter by revising its language and tunes. This reform movement was short-lived however and by the 3^rd decade of the 19^th century, the Psalter ceased to have the sole place in the church’s praise.

Looking back over this brief presentation of the path to the decline of exclusive canonical psalmody, two important details are to be observed. One, the church of Geneva never ruled that Calvin’s regulative principle was unbiblical, nor did it even seem to grapple with the question of whether hymn-singing in public worship conformed to that principle; it simply “drifted” with the winds of change until this new practice was simply accepted. Surely this should be troubling to hymn-singers of the conservative stripe who think that somewhere in the history of the church, a synod met and decided that the regulative principle required the use of hymnody to supplement the Psalter (something the Reformed regulative principle surely requires). The fact is, no such meeting can identified as the catalyst for the change in the worship of the church of Geneva. It seems that over time, popular sentiment simply altered views of what was thought to be acceptable in worship. Two, the Reformed practice of exclusive canonical psalmody, in the church of Geneva, was disrupted by the Lutheran hymnal. In other words, prevailing popular trends influenced the worship of the church and ultimately changed it. The concern which such an alteration in practice ought provoke in the minds of conservative Reformed and Presbyterians can be easily appreciated by returning to Benson’s characterization of the two streams of congregation song which flowed from the two leaders of the Reformation, Luther and Calvin. From the stream of Luther, who held that worship is regulated by what God has not forbidden, man-made hymns flowed; while the stream which flowed from Calvin, who held that worship is regulated by what God commands, consisted of inspired canonical songs taken from Scripture. If we were to pose the question, “why did the Reformed Church of Geneva turn from Psalms to Hymns?” we would have to candidly bring forth the answer that the evidence indicates that a creep in the understanding of the regulative principle of worship, however imperceptible to them, seems to have occurred. The fact that the Venerable Company of Pastors in Geneva did not argue that Calvin’s principle and practice of worship was wrong, and, only over time, permitted the gradual use of hymns confirms our answer. Had they believed singing psalms only was a violation of the regulative principle they would have made the argument; however, there is no record of them arguing man-made hymns are commanded for use in worship and that therefore exclusive canonical psalmody was a violation of  God’s word. Instead, the story of the decline of exclusive canonical psalmody in Geneva reads like a story of accommodation, weakening of conviction about Biblically regulated worship, and wholesale capitulation to popular sentiment. The result of this sad story of decline is the supplanting of the confessional and Reformed principle of worship for that which is non-Reformed and unbiblical.

In view of these facts, those who claim to love the Reformed faith and who imagine that they follow Calvin and his Biblically informed philosophy and practice of worship, tmust ask if the story of the decline of psalmody in Geneva conforms to Calvin’s very clear statement of the regulative principle. If the story of decline and the practice of Lutheran forms of worship, without Biblical mandate or command, is what has replaced Calvin’s practice in the area of song in worship, then it must be asked further—which liturgical leader of the Reformation is now being followed: Luther or Calvin? Beyond that, it is incumbent upon those who are Reformed or Presbyterian in name, and yet, who conform to the practice of Luther, to either show that Luther was doing what was commanded and that Calvin was not, or to admit that they have opted for Luther’s regulative principle. Further, regardless of which of the two options is chosen, such persons ought then either to affiliate with the Lutheran Church or demand that the Reformed and Presbyterian churches revise the Reformed confessional regulative principle of worship to conform to the Luther’s in order that they may pursue their innovative form of worship with a clear conscience. After all, that is not only historically accurate and honest, it is what is required especially of those who take a vow to uphold, teach, defend, and refute anything contrary to the doctrine contained in the Reformed and Presbyterian confession. No middle ground on such a crucial doctrine as the doctrine of worship is permitted.

(BTW, those Reformed people who think of themselves as conservative in their worship but who refuse to conform to Calvin’s principle and practice, in the interest of accuracy and honesty, need to stop using “classical” to describe their worship. Such persons may be “classical” in the sense of following the principles of the Luther or Anglicanism, but they are not “classical” in the Reformed or Presbyterian sense in that they are not following Calvin’s practice nor that of the 16^th and 17^th century Reformed and Presbyterian churches. For such “Reformed” persons to continue to use “classical” to describe worship which  follows 18^th century revivalistic patterns is inaccurate, dishonest, and confusing. What they should say is that what they think of as true Reformed worship is what comes from the new school of 18^th century revivalism and that this model is much to be preferred both to the classical Reformed practice and to the contemporary revivalistic style perpetuated by Jack Miller in the late 1960’s in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.)

On the Necessity of Reforming the Church by John Calvin:

If it be inquired, then, by what things chiefly the Christian religion has a standing existence amongst us, and maintains its truth, it will be found that the following two not only occupy the principal place, but comprehend under them all the other parts, and consequently the whole substance of Christianity, viz., a knowledge, first, of the mode in which God is duly worshipped and, secondly, of the source from which salvation is to be obtained. When these are kept out of view, though we may glory in the name of Christians, our profession is empty and vain.

I know how difficult it is to persuade the world that God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by His Word. The opposite persuasion which cleaves to them, being seated, as it were, in their very bones and marrow, is, that whatever they do has in itself a sufficient sanction, provided it exhibits some kind of zeal for the honour of God. But since God not only regards as fruitless, but also plainly abominates, whatever we undertake from zeal to His worship, if at variance with His command, what do we gain by a contrary course? The words of God are clear and distinct, "Obedience is better than sacrifice." "In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men," (1 Sam. 25:22; Matt. 15:9.) Every addition to His word, especially in this matter, 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.

Louis F. Benson, “John Calvin and the Psalmody of the Reformed Churches,” Journal of the Presbyterian Historical Society 5, 1 (March 1909):1–21; 5, 2 (June 1909): 55–87; 55, 3 (Sept. 1909): 107–118.

The Martial Ethos of Historic Reformed Worship: Psalm singing and persecution in the Netherlands

In pursuing the connection between psalm singing and persecution, we move from France to the Netherlands. Sadly, the experience of the Reformed in the Netherlands varied little from the experience of the French Reformed, as pools of bright red Reformed blood formed across the landscape of the Netherlands as the Reformed faith struggled to take root. Besides being bonded by blood, these churches were bonded by a common commitment to the singing of psalms, and it was this commitment that generated violent opposition against the Reformed church.

From the inception of Reformation in the Netherlands, there was no lack of Psalters available to Reformed Christians to help them give voice to their praise. As early as 1539 psalm books flowed from the presses in Antwerp as the Reformed faith began to gain a footing. In 1540 Souder Liedekens' complete Psalter was rolled out, eventually  going through thirty-three editions. Another Dutch Psalter was produced by Jan van Utenhove who brought his own version of 100 psalm settings over from London. The introduction to Psalm 46 in this Psalter highlighted the relationship between psalm singing and persecution stating, “this psalm also aroused all those truly praising God to trust whenever the godless arose in persecution.” However, the Psalter which gained widest circulation was the Marot-Beza Genevan Psalter of 1562 which was translated into Dutch first by de Heere, and then by Dathenus, the latter version being adopted officially at the Reformed synods of Wesel (1568) and Dordrecht (1574).

As the psalms began to unite the hearts and voices of the Dutch Reformed in praise and worship, it will come as no surprise that persecution was initiated against them. Strada, a Roman Catholic historian, reports that hundreds of Reformed Christians flocked to public meetings where psalms were sung in protest against the Roman Catholic magistrate. In the Netherlands, public psalm singing led to the same experience of bloodshed as it did in France. On one occasion, 300 English refugees were sent to the stake with Psalm 130 on their lips, while on others, riots broke out and arrests led to mass executions.

A series of instances of persecution against the Reformed are worth taking a moment to highlight and draw attention to, as we consider the connection between psalm singing and persecution in the Netherlands. First, in 1562 at Valenciennes, when the magistrate attempted to execute a man named Faveau and his associate for publicly preaching Reformed doctrine, a large crowd of Reformed Christians began to form and started to loudly sing the psalms. Mayhem was unleashed and the end result was that the mob of psalm singers overwhelmed the executioners, effecting the release of the prisoners. Second, in 1562 a man named Christopher Fabricius was condemned to death for preaching Protestant doctrine. While positioned on the pyre awaiting execution, Fabricius began to sing Psalm 130 and the crowd began to join their voices to his. The situation rapidly deteriorated with the executioner  and civic officials turning tale and running; however, before the executioner fled in panic he thrust Fabricius through with a sword and smashed his head in, instantly killing him. Third, in 1566 Viscount Brederode began to publicly organize large public worship services as a means of civil disobedience against the magistrate. These public services, often attracting crowds measured in the thousands, consisted of preaching and psalm singing. On one occasion, Dr. Hermanus led his followers into a cathedral and preached a fiery sermon against idolatry. In response to the sermon, the crowd began to vigorously sing the psalms, which eventually led to an outburst of iconoclasm as the worshipers destroyed all the images in the cathedral. The regent was so alarmed by these public meetings that she wrote to Philip II warning him psalm singing was leading to widespread civil unrest and rebellion. Fourth, by 1574 the public singing so enraged the magistrate that the Dutch Reformed experienced their own St. Bartholomews Day massacre in Alva’s Council of Blood, which effectively suppressed the public gatherings of the Reformed.

This brief survey of the early days of reformation in the Netherlands shows that the Dutch Reformed were psalm singers whose experience was one of persecution and the costly shedding of blood. While Roman Catholic oppressors hated the psalms, the Reformed found their identity and unity in them.  Though the psalms were sung out of the conviction that God had prescribed them as an element of worship, they were not relegated to the Lord’s Day worship alone, as the Dutch Christians made use of them at home privately and in the public square openly as a means of civil disobedience.  Clearly, the Psalms were the fuel of first generation reformers in the Netherlands, giving shape to Dutch worship, piety, and practice, and would remain dominant in Dutch Reformed life for hundreds of years until the winds of 19^th century liberalism would sweep over the Dutch church in the Netherlands and until the blight of revivalism and Yankee pragmatism would ravage Dutch Reformed convictions about worship in the 20^th century in America. If the Dutch Reformed church would regain the robust faith of their forefathers it will need to toss out the use of manmade revivalistic hymns and junk praise songs and replace them with the Psalms, God’s very own appointed manual of praise.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody pt.6: The Strasbourg pastorate

Before pressing on to survey Calvin’s pastoral stay in Strasbourg, we should take a moment to set up the context by reviewing  the principles of worship which had prevailed there for the past 15 years or so. In 1524 Bucer spelled out his Protestant understanding of the regulatory principles and practices of Christian worship in a book entitled Justification and Demonstration from Holy Scripture. Two themes emerge from this work which are particularly relevant to our concerns. The first is the emerging concept of the regulative principle of worship. With respect to the content of worship song, Bucer explains that “in the congregation we do not use songs or prayers which are not drawn from Holy Scripture.” It is evident that Bucer makes a concrete connection between theory and practice as he spells out the standard for songs sung in public worship. The second theme which is evident in Bucer’s early views on worship is the use of the church fathers and early church worship as a guide for applying apostolic principles of worship.  This principle is evident as he takes a swipe at Zwingli in these remarks, “those who decry the use of song in the congregation of God know little either about the content of Scripture or about the practice of the first and apostolic churches and congregations, which always praised God with song” (12). Again, in the 1530 Tetropolitan Confession (written by Bucer) Garside notes that “Scripture and the Fathers continued to be the norm for evaluation of the liturgy” (12). So a regulative principle of worship which requires Biblical warrant for worship practices and the use of the early church and the Fathers as a guide to applying this regulative principle mark out two dominant characteristics in Bucer’s theory and practice of Christian worship, which of course were given expression in the Strasbourg liturgy which Calvin encounters as he arrives in 1538.

It was into this context of careful reflection on worship, that Calvin came to serve as pastor to French refugees the latter part of 1538. Calvin’s early correspondence from Strasbourg indicates that the prevailing liturgical practices were shaping and influencing his thoughts on worship. A profound indicator of this influence is the publication of a French psalter in 1539 edited by Calvin himself and modeled on the Strasbourg Psalter. Garside argues for more than a mere editorial role for Calvin in the construction of this psalter, as he makes the case that more than a handful of the psalms had been rhymed by Calvin himself. Another piece of evidence that indicates the influence of the Strasbourg liturgical practices on Calvin's thinking is found in the 1539 edition of the Institutes published there. Garside juxtaposes Calvin’s comments in the chapter on prayer contained in the 1536 edition and those made in 1539, siezing on a slight revision made in the latter version as evidence of a significant advance in Calvin’s thinking about the role of song in worship. In the previous edition (1536) Calvin expressed the opinion that he did not “condemn speaking and singing provided they were associated with the hearts affection and serve it” (hardly a ringing endorsement of congregational singing) while in the 1539 edition he inserted between “singing” and “provided” the following phrase:  but rather strongly commend them (13). Another revision occurs where Calvin deleted the phrase “serve it,” as was expressed in 1536, removing the notion that song had a mere servile role in worship. Garside suggests that these slight modifications in the 1539 Institutes, written as they were in Latin, which means they were available to a wide reading audience, form a permanent record of Calvin’s views on worship song and set in motion the emergence of the liturgical principles of Strasbourg as the standard for the next few hundred years of Reformed worship which would eventually erode and give way under the weight of popular revivalism. 

In our next post we will examine the 1541 Ecclesiastical Ordinances submitted by Calvin to the Genevan council.

Charles Garside on Calvin's view of Psalmody pt.4: the Articles of 1537

The rise of twitter signaled a massive shift in 21st century communication theory and practice with its implicit declaration that if one cannot say what they think in 140 characters,  then what they have to say is probably not worth saying in the first place. A similar shift in the theology of Reformed church music took place in 1537 when Calvin took only 146 words to lay the foundation for his conception of the role and significance of the psalms in public worship. As noticed in a previous post, just a short year earlier, in 1536, Calvin had little to say about the role of music in worship. At most, Calvin could only conceive of a small role for song as a part of the observance of the Lord's Supper. This very underdeveloped and embryonic conception of worship song marks the point of departure for evaluating Calvin's maturing views on congregational singing.

It is clear however that by 1537, the place and role of song in worship had grown much larger in Calvin's thinking. While in1536 song had a minor, if not optional role in public worship, by 1537 the psalms took on a significant and even necessary role in public worship. That massive leap forward in Calvin's thinking about the place of psalms in public worship is expressed in the following 146 words contained in the Articles of 1537:

The other matter is the psalms which we wish to be sung in the church as we have it from the example of the ancient church and also the testimony of Saint Paul, who says that it is good to sing in the congregation with mouth and heart. We are not able to estimate the benefit and edification which derive from this until after having experienced it. Certainly at present the prayers of the faithful are so cold that we should be greatly ashamed and confused. The psalms can stimulate us to raise our hearts to god and arouse use to an ardor in invoking as well as in exalting with praises the glory of His name. Moreover by this one will recognize of what advantage and consolation the pope and his creatures have deprived the church, for he has distorted the psalms, which should be true spiritual songs, into a murmuring among themselves without any understanding (10).

 Expounding on Calvin's views expressed here, Garside explains that, "In the space of a mere 146 words Calvin presented the council with a statement which constituted nothing less than the foundation for his theology of music" (10). 

Several items are worthy of notice and some elaboration. First, Calvin grounds the use of psalms in worship on the model of the ancient church. He does not elaborate on the practice of the ancient church, he merely asserts it, as if it were a matter of common knowledge, and in need of no defense whatsoever. Second, in just a breath later, Calvin commends the psalms for use in public worship since they are commended by the by the apostle Paul himself. Of particular interest in Calvin's appeal to Paul is that he has in mind Paul's remarks in Colossians 3:16. That much is evident from the claim that Paul urged psalms to be sung with "mouth and heart"indicating that he has in view the Pauline admonition to sing "with grace in the heart to the Lord."This appeal to Colossians 3:16 is intriguing since most contemporary Reformed opponents of exclusive psalmody argue that this passage has in the first instance nothing to do with public worship, and in the second, based upon Calvin's commentary on Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16, that Paul is actually prescribing man made compositions which have a mere spiritual quality. It is clear from Calvin's remarks here that these contemporary advocates of hymnody and praise songs have not read Calvin in sufficient breadth or depth. Third, Calvin advocates for the use of psalms because they glorify God by promoting profound spiritual edification: the psalms can stimulate us to raise our hearts to God and arouse us to an ardor in invoking as well as in exalting with praises the glory of His name (10). This remark echoes and builds on views already expressed in the 1536 Institutes where Calvin insists that acceptable and pleasing prayer to God must join heart and mouth together lest prayer degenerate into mere Pharisaical lip service. Fourth and finally, Calvin takes a thinly veiled swipe at the use of papal choirs in public worship when he says that the singing of psalms by the congregation will expose the "advantage and consolation the pope and his creatures have deprived the church (of), for he has distorted the psalms...into murmuring among themselves without any understanding." Garside illuminates this statement by Calvin as he explains that Calvin is taking aim at the singing of priests in Latin during public worship. In other words, Calvin is seeking to restore congregational singing to the church by returning the duty of praise to the congregation from the hands of the professionals and by requiring the psalms to be sung in the native tongue of the worshipers.

With these four distinct developments in view, it is not hard to see how these remarks in the Articles of 1537 mark a watershed moment in Calvin's theology of music and song in public worship. These 146 words signal that a reformation in worship is afoot in Calvin's thought and they portend the peculiar character of Reformed worship which prevailed in the churches for the next few hundred years until the riches of this Reformed birthright was traded in for a mess of revivalistic pottage.  For the moment however, it is good to imbibe the spirit and quality of this robust theology of worship and song.

In the next post, we will examine the influence of Bucer on Calvin's developing view of song in worship.