Three of the most influential reformers, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Huldrych Zwingli, took very different approaches to music in corporate worship. Of the three, Zwingli was the most accomplished musician, but he was also the most negative about music in worship – he apparently rejected it completely. Not even Calvin's unaccompanied psalm-singing was sufficient for him. Jeremy S. Begbie writes: > Zwingli was ruthlessly consistent—the intricacies of Latin polyphony, the sounds of the organ, the chanting of the Psalms, the setting of the Mass, even the unaccompanied unison singing of the Psalms in the vernacular (as Calvin allowed) must all go. ([*Resounding Truth*, 115](https://books.google.com/books?id=bLqOBmjGznAC&pg=PA115)) Zwingli's recommendations were apparently put into effect in Zurich: organs were silenced and then destroyed, and in 1525 "the city council enacted the ban on singing in worship." I'd like to explore the reasons for this view. Begbie provides some insight – the [regulative principle of worship](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulative_principle_of_worship) played a role, for example, whereas a fear of the worldliness of music did not. But I'd like to see more detail, particularly from the writings of Zwingli himself. For example: - How did Zwingli deal with the apparent commands to sing in [Colossians 3:16](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=colossians+3%3A16&version=ESV) and [Ephesians 5:19](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians+5%3A19&version=ESV) ? - Why isn't the use of instruments in the Old Testament precedent for their use today? - Did he see a difference between a corporately recited prayer and a corporately sung psalm or hymn? - Why not at least unaccompanied exclusive psalmody, like Calvin?

In some strands of Reformed theology, the [regulative principle of worship](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulative_principle_of_worship) is understood to mean that "church holidays," not specifically established in the Bible, should not be recognized in public worship. Thus in some denominations, church services around Christmas and Easter make no special mention of the holidays. John Calvin, of course, was a developer and proponent of the regulative principle of worship, but it's not clear to me how strictly he applied the rule to the case of Christmas. There seems to be an ongoing debate over his beliefs which is a bit difficult to wade through (see, for example, [quotes in favor](http://www.rbvincent.com/BibleStudies/calvinxmas.htm) and [against](https://www.naphtali.com/articles/chris-coldwell/john-calvin-and-holy-days/)) . Here, I'd like to suspend judgment on what he *thought*, and instead focus on what he *did*. **Did Calvin recognize or observe Christmas during public worship?** Did he do so only in certain places or times in his career? And if so, in what way did he observe it? Casual mention in an unrelated sermon, more hymns about Christ's birth than usual, or perhaps a sermon text like Micah 5 or Luke 2? To be clear, I'm not interested in whether or not Calvin gave gifts on Christmas or otherwise celebrated the holiday *outside* public worship. I'm only asking about his application of the regulative principle of worship, which applies only to public worship services.

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?**

Some churches which hold to the regulative principle of worship (RPW) insist that recitation of creeds or portions of confessions or catechisms by the congregation is an important act in the public worship of God. Other churches who hold that principle do not consider such recitation lawful. Given that the principle has a "guilty until proven innocent" structure, how do those who hold to the principle and believe in confessional recitation demonstrate that God requires confessional recitation (since that is the condition demanded by that principle)? *Note*: this question is about a disagreement among those who hold to the RPW. I'm not interested in this question in hearing about why the RPW is wrong, or why confessional recitation ought to be done in some other worship paradigm. Please refrain from answering unless you understand the RPW.

I was in a church today that considers itself to hold strictly to the regulative principle of worship (that which is not explicitly commanded for public worship in Scripture is implicitly condemned) and was puzzled that a choir sang an offertory—sang without the congregation during the taking up of the offering. I am wondering, given their position on worship, what the Biblical justification for this practice might be. Is this practice defensible from Scripture, given the regulative principle?

At my old church (PCA) occasionally there would be a few women who would dance at the front of the sanctuary. Later, after leaving the church, I began to feel a little bit biased against that dancing because of the mindset that surrounded it. It served a primarily "mushy" purpose - the focus that it gave to the "worship" was one of subjective, feel-y experience rather than sincere praise to God. However, after reading through the Psalms a year or so ago, I encountered a few passages explicitly allowing, supporting - even commanding dance. > **Psalm 149:3 ESV** > Let them praise his name with dancing, making melody to him with tambourine and lyre! and > **Psalm 150:4 ESV** > Praise him with tambourine and dance; > praise him with strings and pipe! David dances before the Lord in 2 Samuel 6. Being in a PCA church now, we hold to the Regulative Principle - that is, we don't do anything in our worship service that isn't explicitly commanded in Scripture. So I understand the lack of other modern additions to worship. But dancing *is* commanded. And yet our church - and many more "reformed" or "traditional" services - does not include dancing as part of the liturgy. Why not? What's the biblical, logical, or traditional basis for this? For other non-reformed or non-"traditional" denominations or groups that still don't include dancing in the liturgy, what's your reasoning/scriptural backing?