Reformed Worship (Acts 2:40–42)

Series: Reformation Day SermonsText: Acts 2:40–42

By: Shaun Marksbury Date: October 29, 2023

Venue: Living Water Baptist ChurchOccasion: PM Service

Introduction

As Hebrews 12:1–3 notes, we should remember the testimony of those who came before us if we wish to live a consistently Christian life. Yet, with this being now over half a millennia since the Reformation, we tend to forget the fights of the past. As we look to that history, though, and see how they also looked to Christ and Scripture, it helps us in our worship of Him, something we cannot afford to lose.

We considered one important aspect arising from the Reformation this morning — the ordinary means of grace. This leads directly into a broader question, that of worship. We don’t want to lose purpose for why we do what we do. Of course, one of the problems with forgetting about the past is that the whole question of worship is restricted to terms of music. Let’s take a 500-year step back in time.

Remember the state of worship in the Church of Rome in the Middle Ages. We noted this morning that it had added five more sacraments to what the Lord ordained for the church, and it was teaching the body and blood of our Lord became physically present in Communion (a doctrine called transubstantiation). It was, as one confession notes, “calling upon angels or saints departed, worshipping of imagery, relics, and crosses.” It was exalting multiple intercessors between God and man, and that’s to say nothing of other superstitious additions.

The Reformation sought to correct much of this. For instance, as Calvin looked upon the Roman Catholic Church of his day, he explained, “God rejects, condemns, abominates all fictitious worship, and employs his Word as a bridle to keep us in unqualified obedience.… [A]s God values obedience more than all sacrifices, it ought to be sufficient for the rejection of any mode of worship, that it is not sanctioned by the command of God.” As a result, most of us who have grown up in Evangelicalism probably have been spared some of the results of inventive worship.

However, many today have experienced something similar due to the normative principle of worship. This means that we should have what God commands in His Holy Word (which is good). However, this also means we may add what He doesn’t forbid in Scripture (which is where the problems arise). Everything from High-Church Anglicanism to a music-heavy seeker-sensitive service has resulted, allowing again for the insertion of the ideas of men.

The third view arising from the Reformation is more corrective, the regulative principle of worship. In other words, God commands how our public worship should be conducted, period. The Bible gives some latitude in this regard, which is good, considering that (for example) not every church throughout history would have been able to utilize the exact same music styles. There may be some question as to the circumstances of worship: hymnals vs. PowerPoint, homes vs. buildings, one hour vs. two., morning only or also evening services. Even so, God has directed the elements that our worship should contain, and we should not add or subtract from it.

What are those elements? The London Baptist Confession of 1689 defines them as, “The reading of the Scriptures, preaching, and hearing the Word of God, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with grace in our hearts to the Lord; as also the administration of baptism, and the Lord’s supper, are all parts of religious worship of God” (22:5). As such, worship extends beyond music, we want to follow all of what God has told us about worship in His church. Let’s consider the first of these.

The Reformation Called Us Back to Biblical Prayer in Worship

We began talking about this this morning, noting it as a means of grace. While it’s true that Roman churches have prayer in their services, it was unbiblical, considering that many of those prayers are directed to saints and angels. No such prayer is modeled in Scripture, but such prayers are often condemned. If any other verse should suffice, it is that of 1 Timothy 2:5: “For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” True worship demands that our prayers go through Jesus if they are to reach the Father.

Moreover, at least at the time of the Reformation through much of the twentieth century, most of the Roman public prayers were restricted to Latin. Of course, most of the commoners of the Reformation countries did not speak Latin, though they were nonetheless required to recite the prayers in the language of Rome. As such, the Reformers and their children began calling for public prayer to be “in a known tongue” (LBC 1689, 22:3). Prayer should be understandable to all the people.

It should also concern all the people. If you’ll notice, our prayers, like many biblical prayers, involve confession, petition, and thanksgiving. We don’t use tongues like in some Charismatic churches because prayer should be understandable. Jesus taught us to pray using words (Matt. 6:9–13), which is why you will always see someone leading in a prayer that considers the whole congregation.

The Reformation Called Us Back to Biblical Ordinances in Worship

We also noted the sacraments are a means of grace this morning, but we said that the Roman Catholic church added to their number. Scripture calls for two ordinances in the church; as the LBC 1689 says, “Baptism and the Lord’s supper are ordinances of positive and sovereign institution, appointed by the Lord Jesus, the only lawgiver, to be continued in his church to the end of the world” (28:1). In fact, we often call them “ordinances” to further distance ourselves from what the Roman church means when it describes sacraments, though the word itself is a fine one to describe what the Lord commanded.

What do we find so disagreeable here? We’ll ignore first that Roman Catholicism added five more ordinances to the church. Let’s just consider that, in the Roman church, the priest believes he has the power to magically call down the body of Christ from heaven and so convert the bread into flesh and the wine into blood — this Catholic ceremony is the origin of the term hocus pocus. He then drinks the wine by himself, keeping it from the congregation, and then parades the bread as a sign of blessing, of grace and worthy of prayer. This is to say nothing of the holy water with which the priest can wash away the original sins of infants.

We do need to practice baptism; our Lord’s Great Commission included this command (Mt 28:19). However, this also includes the concept of making disciples, i. e., those old enough to decide to follow Christ. Moreover, as the Greek word from which we get baptize literally means “to dip,” and we always see converts in Scripture going into the water, it seems that anything else is simply tradition to be shed. Baptism is meant simply to point us back to the work that Christ has accomplished on our behalf through His death, burial, and resurrection.

We also must practice communion or the Lord’s Supper. You won’t see a pastor at this church turn his back to the congregation to perform some priest-craft, nor will you be asked to kneel as the pastor places a consecrated wafer on your tongue. Jesus instituted His Supper as a remembrance of His death (Mt 26:26-28; 1 Cor 11:23-26), which means that nothing mystical occurs to the bread or wine. Instead, the Supper is another tangible reminder of the gospel. As the Heidelberg catechism puts it, “as certainly as I see with my eyes, the bread of the Lord broken for me, and the cup communicated to me; and… as assuredly as I receive from the hands of the minister, and taste with my mouth the bread and cup of the Lord, as certain signs of the body and blood of Christ.”

It’s sad today to see how flippantly both baptism and communion is treated in many Evangelical churches. This shouldn’t be. These practices have a purpose — like all worship, it should remind us of Christ and His gospel.

The Reformation Called Us Back to the Word in Worship

This was the primary means of grace we noted this morning. The teaching of God’s Word was nigh-absent before the Reformation. For instance, Martin Luther spoke of not knowing much Scripture as a priest. Calvin explained that the biblical view was that “no man is a true pastor of the Church who does not perform the office of teaching. But, in the present day, almost all those who have the name of pastors have left that work to others. Scarcely one in a hundred of the Bishops will be found who ever mounts the pulpit in order to teach.” When it was taught, it was not exposited but instead given a surface examination.

When Paul wrote to Timothy the last time, he said, “I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction” (2 Tim. 4:1–2). Without the Word, there is no worship. In times of decreased literacy or increased persecution, the church service was often the only means of hearing the Word of God, which is part of the reason for upholding the plain reading of Scripture as we do. At times when owning a copy of the Bible is illegal, individuals in the congregation would commit large portions to memory to recite during underground services. It’s a shame that churchgoers in the United States prefer less preaching and reading and more music!

The Reformation Called Us Back to Congregational Music in Worship

This also a commanded aspect of our worship services. Yet, here we arrive at the bone of contention in every church. Since music is typically what people think of as worship, this is all people refer to when they talk about the “worship wars”! How soon we have forgotten the rest.

Consider how people treat music. Voddie Bauchaum talked about this, noting that Christians who are new to say, the Doctrines of Grace, seek out churches like ours. They might come for a while, but because they don’t understand why we worship as we do, they begin to think about other churches. They may say they’ve learned more here than anywhere else, but the worship isn’t scratching their itch. They’re choosing a church with “better” worship (by which they mean, of course, music with the right feel to it).

Music isn’t a question of worship that we can separate from the rest. The Reformation also addressed this, as hymn-writing was one of Martin Luther’s first tasks. As with every other element of worship, Scripture must direct our philosophy of worship music, with one of the most oft-repeated commands in Scripture is that we must “sing.” To glory Christ, our music should be congregational, edifying, theological, and artful.

Biblical Music Should Be Congregational

Music should be crafted so that the whole congregation can sing it. As Psalm 111:1 says, “I will give thanks to the Lord with all my heart, in the company of the upright and in the assembly.” The singing should be corporate, simple enough for the common person to sing and remember for later.

This was one of the major problems with the Medieval church — it moved away from congregational singing. Music became more professional, meaning that trained choirs performed the numbers for worship. In fact, churches with wealthy patrons would present complex polyharmonies. While many of the arrangements were inarguably beautiful, they failed to meet this biblical standard for worship.

It is not that the requirement for congregational singing negates choirs, but a church should be thoughtful about the purpose of worship. For instance, we read about a 4,000-member choir of Levites in 1 Chronicles 23, and it isn’t necessarily unbiblical to have special numbers that only a choir or another musician sings. Yet, we must beware lest the music time become that of entertainment.

This is why many churches in Europe placed the choir in the rear of the church. Acoustically, this worked well whether the choir was singing a special number or “leading” (helping) the congregation in singing. The only person in front of the congregation was a pastor who would introduce and explain the music, but his voice becomes one of many when the singing starts. This way, people were not looking to musicians during worship, but rather, to the Lord.

Unfortunately, most churches in the United States today design the sanctuary as a multipurpose room with the choir on a large stage area. In fact, choirs are mostly considered a relic of the past, replaced with mood lights and a live band. Some of the worst offenders performing music that is typically played on the radio, requiring a vocal range unattainable by an average congregant. Even though the music appears congregational, with everyone on their feet and the lyrics projected on screens, it isn’t much more sing-able (and certainly not less entertainment-driven) than the music of medieval Catholicism. We need to consider the history that we’re repeating.

Biblical Music Should Be Edifying

If the music is not to be entertainment-driven but rather sing-able, it should be sung with the edification of believers in mind. Some pragmatic individuals argue we should change our musical style and content to attract unbelievers. However, in 1 Corinthians 14, Paul emphasizes that worship should be clear and intelligible (vv. 7–10, 19), with the goal that “all things be done for edification” (v. 26). That’s not to say that a number of well-meaning Christians provide their unique voices in all genres on the radio or at conferences, but we have to keep local church music in line with Scripture for the good of God’s people.

This means that our music should reflect a Christian attitude toward one another. For instance, based on Philippians 4:8, musical content in the church should reflect whatever is honorable, right, pure, and lovely. It should be of good repute, which eliminates some worldly styles widely recognized in our culture (for better or worse) as associated with rebellion and criminal activities. This means that some may have to put their preferences aside for the good of others.

Don’t mishear me; we don’t have the Christian liberty to use our musical preferences to bind the consciences of others. For instance, I heard a young music leader say something along the lines of, “They’ll learn to like it.” It’s unbiblical; we’re called to show “tolerance for one another in love” (Eph 4:2). As Philippians 2:3 says, we shouldn’t do anything “from selfishness or empty conceit,” but rather, “regard one another as more important than yourselves.” God directs the Christian conscience, and music should be chosen with His people in mind.

Biblical Music Should Be Theological

I remember asking a pastor once if music should be theologically accurate. He replied, “No. Theology has no place in worship music.” He had that idea that worship is music (not teaching), which typically meant mindlessly repetitive music that could last for an hour or longer.

All music should instead be theologically accurate and commensurate with the work of the pulpit ministry. As Psalm 119:54 says, “Your statutes are my songs in the house of my pilgrimage.” You may recall the famous quote by Martin Luther, that music is “the handmaiden of theology and second only to theology.” If worship music does not accurately reflect theology, it isn’t worship.

When we simply consider the Book of Psalms, we are considering the inspired hymnbook for God’s people. This doesn’t mean that we can’t have other arrangements of them, as we sang Luther’s “A Mighty Fortress is Our God,” which he based on Psalm 46, and we also heard, “All People That on Earth Do Dwell,” a song from the Genevan Psalter based on Psalm 100. The hymnals printed in America used to contain both metrical versions of the Psalms as well as theologically adept hymns and spiritual songs, but they eventually began adopting more camp and revival music and dropping the Psalms altogether. This arose in part because of the increasing desire for emotionalism in music. Moreover, some of these songs inevitably become a vehicle for false theology.

Indeed, as the church shifts to a more radio-driven worship set, it’s more common to see bad and even heretical teaching sung in churches, justified by the emotional value of the music. This is why we won’t sing anything from Hillsong, Bethel, or Elevation. In fact, a couple of the leading artists in contemporary Christian music today are Catholic, singing songs that promote the same theology we should have learned to reject in the Reformation. We’re forgetting the battles of the past, and it’s essential that we get back to theologically-accurate, biblical music.

Biblical Music Should Be Artful

One of the questions of contention in the Reformation was that of today: style. Because of the big productions of Roman Catholic music, Calvin and many others pushed for simple a cappella music. Others believed it was acceptable to have instrumentation, but pared-down and less polyphonic than that of the Roman Church. No Reformer wanted their congregations to be swept into superstitious emotionalism or vapid amusements.

Scripture does justify instrumentation. Indeed, the Psalms are songs that are to be sung with instrumentation (and we see this especially in Psalm 150). In Solomon’s temple, “4,000 were praising the Lord with the instruments which David made for giving praise” (1 Chr 23:3–5), and after the ark of the covenant was brought in, this praise service was followed by the glory of the Lord filling His house (2 Chr 5:12–14). Zerubbabel’s temple also employed musicians from among the Levities for the task of leading worship (Neh. 12:46–47). That these were Levites dedicated for this task communicates both a theological and an artful commitment in their instrumented music.

In Psalm 33:3, we read that we should “play skillfully with a shout of joy.” Even with what we’ve said about music being congregational and simple, “skillfully” means that worship shouldn’t be amateur hour. Regardless of how much as someone might claim God’s call on them to provide special music for next Sunday’s service, God has already called us to conduct our music as well as possible. Everything the Lord does is good (Gen. 1:31; Ps 8:1; Mk 7:37), so excellence in music reflects His attributes.

Art can be subjective, but there are clear guidelines that marks quality art. The Christian Reformed Psalter Hymnal explains, “The music of the church should be beautiful. Its religious thought or spirit should be embodied appropriately in the poetry as poetry, in the music as music, and in the blending of these in song. It should satisfy the aesthetic laws of balance, unity, variety, harmony, design, rhythm, restraint, and fitness, which are the conditions of all art.” In other words, artful music is done well.

Conclusion

God isn’t just the subject of our music; He’s the object of our corporate worship (cf. Psa. 100). However, this isn’t lip-service. In Amos 5:21–23, the Lord says, “I hate, I reject your festivals, nor do I delight in your solemn assemblies. Even though you offer up to Me burnt offerings and your grain offerings, I will not accept them; And I will not even look at the peace offerings of your fatlings. Take away from Me the noise of your songs; I will not even listen to the sound of your harps.” True worship at that point starts with repentance, not an external show of spirituality, regardless of how emotional you may be as a result.

That goes for all our worship. It should all be Reformed, which is to say God-glorifying and biblical. We cannot forget the race that Christians have run before us. In the Reformation, our brothers showed us that worship must be as God commands. We cannot allow the sinful ideas of men to direct our thinking in these areas. Instead, we must ensure that our worship is pointing us to Christ and His gospel. May all our worship remain be decent and in order, biblical and glorifying to Him.