慕理谈崇拜时为何唱诗篇（英文）一

Song in the Public Worship of God

John Murray

小约翰按

约翰.慕理得霍志恒和梅钦真传，后在威斯敏斯特神学院任系统神学教授多年，桃李满天下，同时在美国正统长老会（OPC）服侍。他学富五车，心思敏捷，善于化繁为简，深入浅出，既是20世纪一位伟大神学家，又是办公室从不关门备受学生爱戴的教育家。我在海外读神学期间，他的四卷本文集是我们系统神学课教材之一，也是我的案头必备书，尤其他对与基督联合的阐释以及对基督教伦理学的论述，都给我极大指引和点拨（读者可找到他的《再思救赎奇恩》和《神的护理》中译）。

不过，说得上对我最震撼的，还是他这篇以经解经、鞭辟入里的坚持敬拜时唯独唱诗篇的长文。此文是1948年为解决公共崇拜是否可以使用诗篇以外歌曲问题，正统长老会特别成立的委员会所提交的少数派报告。慕理坚持真理，不为放弃《威斯敏斯特信条》敬拜规范性原则以及抛弃唯唱诗篇的时代潮流所动，如中流砥柱，捍卫圣经教义和威斯敏斯特信条崇拜指南传统，令人钦佩。更重要的是，他强调回到圣经，并秉持唯独圣经又尊重教会历史之精神，交出了一份一言九鼎、掷地有声、不可不读的精彩报告。目前，已有肢体在翻译，但译校恐非一日之功，故先发英文以飨读者。

很多时候，你说唯独唱诗篇，他说经文歌为什么不可以唱（尽管他也不见得唱）；你说唱诗篇，他说古典圣诗为什么不可以唱（尽管他唱的绝大多数是十九世纪之后的歌）；你说上帝重视歌唱如同献祭，他说你为什么不重视讲道？到底谁在好争论？这种鸡同鸭讲式争执没有多大意义，反影响合一。在威斯敏斯特信条崇拜传统已经几乎完全被背离的今天，还不如大家平心静气看看老一辈的文字。我们绝不陷入相争，更不愿带来纷争，只愿祷告说：主啊，我们永不失望，因为祢是真理的主，祢的羊听祢的声音！愿祢恩待所有读到这篇文章的人！祷告奉耶稣基督的圣名，阿们！”

本文篇幅较长，分三部分推出

<一>

This preface and the editorial revisions by Sherman Isbell of the committee reports are not to be distributed to other web locations for retrieval, published in other media, or mirrored at other sites without written permission of Sherman Isbell.

The two papers given here were prepared by Professor John Murray for the Committee on Song in the Public Worship of God, which was elected in 1944 by the eleventh General Assembly of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. The committee was created in consequence of a suggestion by John Murray. The previous year the General Assembly had elected a committee to present to the 1944 General Assembly a preliminary plan for a hymnal for the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, and Murray was one of the nine members of that committee. When the committee reported, Murray presented a minority report, challenging three recommendations of the committee. The committee was proposing "that any larger hymnal which the General Assembly undertakes to publish contain both metrical psalms and hymns," "that the approximate composition of the musical portion of the larger hymnal be 85 percent hymns and 15 per cent psalms," and finally, "that the General Assembly elect a committee of nine to begin the preparation of the larger hymnal." Murray noted that "there has been division of judgment within the Committee as to whether uninspired compositions may legitimately be sung. . . . Our subordinate Standards distinctly provide that God may not be worshipped in any way not prescribed in the holy Scripture. This General Assembly, therefore, is inescapably faced with the question whether the singing of uninspired hymns in the public worship of God is authorized by the holy Scripture."

Murray urged "that this General Assembly elect a committee of seven to make a diligent study of the teaching of the Word of God and of our subordinate Standards regarding the question of the songs that may be sung in the public worship of God and to report its findings to the Twelfth General Assembly," and that meantime no further steps be taken toward the preparation of a hymnal. These two recommendations by Murray were adopted, and the General Assembly elected Messrs. Edward J. Young, John Murray, Robert S. Marsden, R. B. Kuiper, John H. Skilton, Arthur W. Kuschke and William Young to serve on the study committee.

The thirteenth General Assembly (1946) was presented with "a partial report" from the study committee. Murray was responsible for the opening section "A", which provides the fundamental statement of the regulative principle. Murray's authorship is evident from the draft text and draft cover letter, both in Murray's handwriting, which are preserved among his papers in the archives of the Montgomery Library at Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia. In his letter to the committee members, Murray says, "This paper is being sent to you in the hope that study of it beforehand will be of some assistance in furthering and perhaps expediting our work at the next meeting of the Committee on March 10th. . . . I thought it necessary to enter into some detail in view of questions raised at our last meeting." This statement of the Reformed regulative principle deserves recognition in the corpus of Murray's writings. William Young observes: "Section A of the 1946 report is clearly the work of John Murray. . . . Section C is evidently based on parts of my report on the scripture proof of the regulative principle, except for the addition to C in the 1947 report, in which I did not concur." Thus the bulk of the committee's incomplete report in 1946 was composed by the two men who dissented from the committee's majority report the following year.

The 1947 General Assembly received from the committee a majority report and a minority report, each seeking to complete what the "partial report" had begun the year before. The contributions by Murray and William Young to the 1946 report were viewed by the committee as a preamble to the 1947 reports. The majority report of 1947 argued that song need not be restricted to the words of Scripture, and that this position is compatible with the regulative principle set forth in the previous year's "partial report." However, the minority report, signed by the men who provided the committee's defining statement of the regulative principle, concluded that "there is no warrant in Scripture for the use of uninspired human compositions in the singing of God's praise in public worship." William Young has noted that the minority report, though signed by Murray and Young, "was written entirely by Prof. Murray."

For the text of Murray's section of the 1946 "partial report," we have followed the typescript of that report which is found among Murray's papers at Westminster Seminary, and which is evidently the text submitted to the 1946 General Assembly. In a very few places, the published General Assembly Minutes have introduced some minor and inconsequential departures from the committee text.

From "Report of the Committee on Song in Worship, presented to the Thirteenth General Assembly [of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church], on the teaching of our subordinate standards respecting the songs that may be sung in the public worship of God" (1946)

The Teaching of the Subordinate Standards respecting the Regulative Principle of Worship.

There is a principle clearly expressed in our subordinate Standards which has frequently been called, the regulative principle of worship. There is an appropriateness in the word "regulative," because it is the principle that deals with the question: in what way or ways are we to worship God? What are the elements which constitute the true and acceptable worship of God? How may we know that the way in which we worship God is acceptable to Him?

To be quite concrete and historical, there are at least two well-defined answers to this question in Christian churches. One of these is that of the Romish Church, followed in principle by Lutherans and Episcopalians, namely, that it is proper to worship God in ways not forbidden in the Word. In contrast with this there is another answer, namely, that God may be worshipped only in ways instituted, prescribed or commanded in the Word. The contrast is patent -- the one says: what is not forbidden is permitted, the other says: what is not prescribed is forbidden.

It is in relation to this question that the regulative principle is to be understood. It will surely be conceded that it has a right to such a denomination. The following examination of our Standards will show that a regulative principle is clearly enunciated and that it is precisely formulated in answer to the questions stated above.

I. The first statement in our subordinate Standards bearing upon this question is that in the Confession of Faith, Chapter I, Section vi, namely, "there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed."

With respect to this statement it should be noted that it is one of two acknowledgments made with reference to the doctrine that, "The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit or traditions of men." We are now interested simply in the import of the above acknowledgment with respect to worship as it bears upon the doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture just quoted. The teaching of this section as applied to worship would run as follows: "The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary" for the worship of God "is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture" except that "there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, . . . common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed." We may now proceed to analyze this statement.

1. The exception stated applies only to circumstances of worship. It cannot apply to any substantial part or element of the worship. It cannot apply to anything that enters into the worship itself but only to certain conditions under which the worship is given or conducted.(1)

2. The exception stated applies only to some circumstances. The effect of this restriction is to allow that there may be circumstances of worship that are either expressly set down in Scripture or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture.

3. The exception stated applies only to some circumstances common to human actions and societies. They are therefore circumstances that are not peculiar to worship. Such are, for example, the circumstances of time and place. They may also include order and length of service, for since human societies are mentioned it is natural for us to think of the meetings of such societies in this connection. The obvious meaning of this section of the Confession is that all that does not fall into the category of "some circumstances, . . . common to human actions and societies" must conform to what is "expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture," in other words, the authority of Scripture is necessary for the whole content of worship -- that for which we have Scripture authority is that which is expressly set down in Scripture or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from it and vice versa.(2)

II. The next statement in our subordinate Standards bearing upon the question is that in the Confession, Chapter XX, Section ii: "God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are in anything contrary to His Word; or beside it, if matters of faith or worship." This does not, of course, expressly state the principle regulative of worship, but it does teach something closely companionate with it. In matters of worship, as well as of faith, the conscience is free not only from what is contrary to the Word but also from what is beside it. That is to say, in the matter of worship the conscience is not bound by anything unless it is taught or enjoined in the Word, either by express statement or by good and necessary consequence. What is outwith the deliverances of the Word has no authority for the conscience. The law for the conscience in worship is that which is authorized by Scripture.

This section does not reflect on the question whether the Christian is free to worship God in ways not taught in Scripture or not authorized by Scripture. It would have been outside the purpose and scope of this section to introduce this question. However, it must be noted carefully that this section does not say or imply that the Christian is free to worship in ways that are beside the teaching of Scripture. What the section says is that the conscience is free from all that is beside the Word in matters of worship; it does not say that the conscience is free to use what is beside the Word.

This section, however, does say emphatically that to include in worship anything that is beside the Word, out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience. For the section proceeds: "So that, to believe such doctrines, or to obey such commands, out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience." The only worship that can be rendered out of conscience, then, is the worship authorized by Scripture, that is to say, worship not beside the Word but worship authorized in the Word.

It should be observed, furthermore, that, in matters that are beside the Word, worship and faith are put on the same level. It is pertinent to ask if, in the teaching of the Confession, we are conceded the liberty of incorporating into our faith anything that is beside the Word? It would appear that we are not. If so, are we not justified in presuming, to say the least, that the Confession meant the same principle to apply to worship, even in the terms of this section?

III. In Chapter XXI, Section i, of the Confession the principle regulative of worship is expressly and unequivocally formulated. It says: "But the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by Himself, and so limited by His own revealed will, that He may not be worshipped 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."

The following points may be made regarding this section.

1. It enunciates a principle that applies to all worship of God, a principle regulative of all worship. This principle is that God may be worshipped only in a way or in ways prescribed, instituted, or revealed in the Word.

2. That the regulative principle of worship enunciated in the Confession is that God may be worshipped only in a way prescribed in His Word is quite obvious from the following considerations:

(a) The Confession says, "the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by Himself." If "instituted," it must be positively ordained and not left to human invention or imagination.

(b) The acceptable way is "limited by His own revealed will." True worship, therefore, is exercised within the limits of what God has revealed to be acceptable. Obviously, if we worship God in a manner or way which Scripture does not determine our worship cannot be within these limits, and is therefore, in terms of the Confession, unacceptable.

(c) The Confession is negative and exclusive as well as positive -- God "may not be worshipped 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." This defines the extent of the limitation mentioned in the preceding clause, or it may be regarded as a consequence flowing from the said limitation. It is so limited that the succeeding are excluded.

A word must be said about the construction of this latter part of the section. At the end we have the alternatives "under any visible representation" and "any other way not prescribed in the holy Scripture." The immediately preceding part of the sentence, namely, "may not be worshipped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan," applies to both. So the construction is to the effect that God "may not be worshipped 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." By the former negation human imagination or device and Satanic suggestions are to be given no quarter in exercising their ingenuity in the direction of visualizing the worship of God. The Confession apparently felt the need of making special mention of this corruption. By the latter negation there is the most unequivocal statement that every way not prescribed in the holy Scripture is excluded, and this means that any particular element of worship that is not able to plead divine prescription in the Scripture is forbidden. To state it more positively, God may be worshipped only in the manner prescribed in the holy Scripture.

IV. The Larger Catechism, Questions 108 and 109, and the Shorter Catechism, Questions 50 and 51, clearly enunciate the same principle as we have already found in the Confession. It is stated both positively and negatively in both Catechisms. We shall see that it is most important to note the principle of exclusion as well as that of inclusion.

In Question 108 the Larger Catechism says: "The duties required in the second commandment are, the receiving, observing, and keeping pure and entire, all such religious worship and ordinances as God hath instituted in his word" and the Shorter Catechism, Question 50, says: "The second commandment requireth the receiving, observing, and keeping pure and entire, all such religious worship and ordinances as God hath appointed in his word." It might be argued that this positive statement, though it makes mandatory the worship of God instituted in His Word, yet does not rigidly exclude the propriety of worshipping God in ways not instituted in the Word. It is here that the effect of the principle of exclusion, formulated in Questions 109 and 51 of the respective Catechisms, becomes apparent. The Larger Catechism, Question 109, reads: "The sins forbidden in the second commandment are, all devising, counseling, commanding, using, or any wise approving, any religious worship not instituted by God himself," and the Shorter Catechism, Question 51: "The second commandment forbiddeth the worshipping of God by images, or any other way not appointed in his word."

Any further observation seems unnecessary other than to say that the worship authorized and enjoined is that instituted or appointed in the Word and that any religious worship or any way of worshipping God not appointed in the Word would be characterized in the language of Question 108 of the Larger Catechism as "false worship" and therefore to be disapproved, detested and opposed, and according to each one's place and calling, removed.

V. It remains to deal with "The Directory for the Public Worship of God," adopted by the Sixth General Assembly of The Orthodox Presbyterian Church.

There is an obvious distinction between the Confession, Larger and Shorter Catechisms on the one hand, and the Standards of Government, Discipline and Worship, on the other. The former are accorded a higher place in the constitution than the latter, inasmuch as the former are expressly mentioned in the formulae of subscription, whereas the latter are not thus mentioned, even though the approval of the government and discipline of the Church is required in some of the formulae.

It should be observed that the "Directory" is "The Directory for the Public Worship of God" and is more limited in its scope than the statements from the Confession and Catechisms dealt with already.

The relevant sections of the "Directory" may, however, be discussed briefly.

In Chapter II, Section 1, the "Directory" says: "Since the holy Scriptures are the only infallible rule of faith and practice, the principles of public worship must be derived from the Bible, and from no other source." In the succeeding sections some of these principles are formulated. The principle regulative of worship, found in the Confession and Catechisms, is not formulated, and there is no unequivocal statement affirming or denying it.