I've run into some adherents of [Exclusive Psalmody](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_psalmody) in my denomination. The general argument they've been running with is that if we teach the inspiration and perfection of the Psalms then they should be sufficient for the Church. But if that's the case, then why are they okay with all of these church service components when they also have perfect Biblical instances: - prayers (numerous) - creeds (for example 1 Corinthians 15:3-8, or Colossians 1:15-20) - sermons (Jesus' many sermons in the Gospels, the Apostles' sermons in Acts, or I've even heard Hebrews described as a collection of sermons) If writing new Psalms is opposed because the Biblical Psalms suffice, then what is distinctive about the Psalms that the same argument can't be applied to these other forms? Shouldn't the sermons of the Bible also suffice, to be read aloud but not expounded upon? Shouldn't the many prayers of the Bible suffice? Exclusive Psalmodists would presumably say no, that there is a place for Christian teachers/ministers/pastors to write new sermons and prayers etc, and that it's appropriate to recite the creeds of the Church. (I've never heard of any church which forbids all new works and allows nothing but reciting texts of the Bible!) So, according to Exclusive Psalmodists, what is particular about songs that is different, that means that the teacher can pray something not taken directly from the scriptures, that they can write and deliver a prose sermon, but cannot write and lead the congregation to sing a new song? (I've tried asking this question to the exclusive Psalmodists in my denomination but haven't gotten an answer yet, so thought I'd ask here in case anyone has a good explanation.)

Some groups of Christians hold to [*exclusive psalmody*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_psalmody) , that is, they believe that the only songs that may be sung in public worship must come from the canonical Book of Psalms. These Christians have to deal with two passages in particular that on at least a cursory reading seem to command singing more than just the Psalms: [Ephesians 5:19](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians+5%3A19&version=ESV) and [Colossians 3:16](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=colossians+3%3A16&version=ESV) . The latter of these reads: > Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, **singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs,** with thankfulness in your hearts to God. [ESV] In response, the common argument made by exclusive psalmodists is that this entire phrase refers only to the Book of Psalms; for example, by Brian Schwertley. > When we examine the Septuagint, we find that the terms psalm (*psalmos*), hymn (*humnos*), and song (*odee*) used by Paul clearly refers to the Old Testament book of Psalms and not ancient or modern uninspired hymns or songs. (["Exclusive Psalmody: A Biblical Defense," 10–14](http://www.reformedonline.com/uploads/1/5/0/3/15030584/exclusive_psalmody.pdf) ; see also Michael Bushell, *The Songs of Zion*) Psalms have been used exclusively or primarily in worship by some groups since the early church, so I wonder – **who was the first Christian writer to make the argument that Paul, in referring to "psalms and hymns and spiritual songs," was referring *only* to the Book of Psalms?**

The [Westminster Confession of Faith, 21.5](http://www.opc.org/wcf.html#Chapter_21) , in its list of elements that are "parts of the ordinary religious worship of God," includes the: > singing of psalms with grace in the heart The Confession makes no mention of the singing of *hymns* or other songs, however. Thus some adherents to the Westminster Standards, like the [RPCNA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformed_Presbyterian_Church_of_North_America) , argue that this indicates a position of "exclusive psalmody," that is, that only selections from the canonical book of Psalms should be sung in worship services. However, this section of the Westminster Confession is also approved by other Presbyterian denominations, like the [PCA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presbyterian_Church_in_America) and the [OPC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodox_Presbyterian_Church) , which reject exclusive psalmody. Their worship services often include the singing of psalms, but not exclusively – they also sing hymns and, in some congregations, contemporary praise songs. The PCA and OPC both use a version of the Westminster Standards that differs in some respects from the one approved by the Westminster Divines in the 17th century. So why did they not also change this line to more clearly indicate their belief that the singing of other songs is acceptable? That is: **What is the basis for understanding the Westminster Standards as permitting hymns and other non-psalms in worship?**