Reformed Presbyterian theological rejection of instrumental music in worship

Context

Immediately following his defense of exclusive psalmody, Glasgow explains the Reformed Presbyterian rejection of instrumental music. This position accompanied their commitment to psalm-singing and was grounded in the same regulative principle. The argument connects New Testament worship to Christ’s example and explicitly rejects the argument from silence.

Extract

Another peculiarity of the Reformed Presbyterian Church is that no instruments of music are used in divine worship. They believe that instruments were used in the tabernacle and temple worship by the Levites, and at the time of the offering up of sacrifices by the priests. As these services were wholly typical and were done away with at the coming of Christ, so also all the accompaniments and material supports of that service. At the advent of Christ the building was completed and the scaffolding was taken down. Christ and the Apostles never used an instrument of music in the synagogue worship, although they used the Psalms. If instruments had been necessary to acceptable worship, the example or direction of Christ in this matter would have been given. Christ requires a spiritual service—the melody of the heart with the fruit of the lips. The leading writers and fathers of the Church give instruments no place in the worship. They were introduced by Pope Vitalian, in A. D., 660, to “augment the eclat of religious ceremonies.” Being of Romish origin, all true Protestants should look upon the innovation with suspicion. The true principle of Christian worship is “What has the Lord required,” and not what He has not forbidden. All Presbyterians recognize the Westminster standards, and the Confession of Faith says we are to “sing Psalms with grace in the heart,” and “the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by Himself, and is so limited by His own revealed will that He may not be worshipped according to the imaginations and devices of men.” It is an admitted fact that instruments and operatic choirs destroy congregational singing, and substitute a meaningless service for that which every heart should render unto God.

Significance

This passage shows that for Reformed Presbyterians, a cappella singing and exclusive psalmody were twin expressions of the same regulative principle: worship must be positively warranted by Scripture, not merely permitted by silence. The argument deploys multiple strategies: (1) Old Testament instruments were “typical” and passed away with the sacrificial system, (2) Christ’s example provides the New Testament pattern, (3) instruments were a late papal innovation (“Romish origin”), (4) the Westminster Confession supports psalm-singing without instruments, and (5) instruments damage congregational participation. This comprehensive rejection helps explain why some exclusive psalmody advocates were equally concerned about the introduction of organs into Presbyterian worship during the nineteenth century.