Recent Posts
A church appoints qualified pastors because, if not, false teachers will gladly take their place. [more]
Kevin T. Bauder For me, learning to read was like being initiated into the mysteries [more]
Living in a wicked world presents challenges for people attempting to walk the way of [more]
How do we decide between these competing definitions of beauty? As Christians, we would firstly [more]
Titus 1:6–9 is a key passage for determining who may or may not be a [more]

The Regulative Principle of Worship

This entry is part 7 of 10 in the series

"Back to Basics"

Read more posts by using the Table of Contents in the right sidebar.

Back to Basics

Pastors and parishioners perennially battle over who has authority in matters of church practice, particularly in corporate worship. Should what happens in the corporate gatherings of God’s people fall under the control of church leadership, or should these decisions be left to congregational input and direction? If the former, are pastors to be guided by particular traditions and directories, or may they choose whatever they believe to facilitate goals toward which their congregation assembles? If the latter, are these matters to be given over to a vote, or will a representative committee suffice?

Each of these potential solutions falls short since the Word of God itself provides all that is necessary for the regulation of corporate worship. This regulative principle of worship very simply states that churches may include in their worship only that which Scripture explicitly prescribes or what may be reasonably deduced from Scriptural principles and examples. Conversely, churches may not include in their worship anything that the Bible does not command. Put simply, whatever is not prescribed is forbidden. Thus is it not left to either church leadership or church members to decide how they will worship; biblical worship must finds its justification in Scripture alone.

This principle is based on three key biblical principles:

First, God alone has the prerogative to determine how he is to be worshiped. The purpose of corporate worship is not primarily evangelism, edification, or entertainment. Although, with the exception of entertainment, these things do take place in corporate gatherings of the church, their primary purpose is to draw near to God through Christ by faith on his terms. Thus how that looks should be firmly rooted in what God has commanded.

Second, Scripture is full of examples of God rejecting worship that includes elements that he has not prescribed, even if the worshipers have right motivation. Whether with the golden calf (Deut 9:16), Nadab and Abihu (Lev 10:1-3), or the Pharisees (Matt 15:8-9), God does not approve of worship practices that he himself has not sanctioned.

Third, Scripture is clear that Christians have liberty of conscience in spiritual matters. In other words, no Christian may be expected to participate in a spiritual practice that he is not “convinced in his own mind” is necessary (Rom 14:5-6). This limits even pastoral authority. No pastor or other church leader has the authority to impose upon another a spiritual practice–no matter how it has “an appearance of wisdom” (Col 2:20-23)–that does not have explicit biblical warrant.

This principle, far from being restrictive, is actually quite liberating. Pastors do not need to worry about chasing after the latest popular worship fads or conducting preference polls of their people. Likewise, church members need not fear the next worship novelty, nor will they need to deliberate over what best worship practices they should adopt. The church simply follows the clear instructions of Scripture.

On might object that Scripture really doesn’t prescribe all that much for corporate worship, and therefor a church cannot be expected to limit its practice only to what God has commanded in his Word. Yet this objection begs the question. Perhaps the very simplicity of biblical commands regarding corporate worship demands simple, un-adorned corporate worship characterized by Scripture, song, prayer, preaching, giving, baptism, and the Lord’s Table.

Series NavigationPreviousNext
Scott Aniol

About Scott Aniol

Scott Aniol is the founder and Executive Director of Religious Affections Ministries. He is Chair of the Worship Ministry Department at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, where he teaches courses in ministry, worship, hymnology, aesthetics, culture, and philosophy. He is the author of Worship in Song: A Biblical Approach to Music and Worship, Sound Worship: A Guide to Making Musical Choices in a Noisy World, and By the Waters of Babylon: Worship in a Post-Christian Culture, and speaks around the country in churches and conferences. He is an elder in his church in Fort Worth, TX where he resides with his wife and four children. Views posted here are his own and not necessarily those of his employer.

6 Responses to The Regulative Principle of Worship

  1. “This principle, far from being restrictive, is actually quite liberating. Pastors do not need to worry about chasing after the latest popular worship fads or conducting preference polls of their people.”

    Reminds me of a Stravinsky quote: “My freedom will be so much the greater and more meaningful the more narrowly I limit my field of action and the more I surround myself with obstacles.”

  2. This clear explanation of the regulative principle is why it puzzles me that you, Scott, and others who seem to understand it hold to the use of musical instruments in the singing of the church. I can only imagine that it has to do with the fact that their use was commanded by God under the old covenant? I’d love to hear your thoughts on it.

  3. Sure, Jeri, thanks for asking.

    There are at least two reasons I believe the RPW allows for use of musical instruments. First, I make the classic distinction between elements and forms. I believe elements of worship must have explicit NT warrant, but there is more latitude with the forms those elements take, although they should still be governed by biblical principle and example (In other words, not all forms are appropriate). So, since music is clearly prescribed in the NT as an element of public worship, it is allowed, and we may use other precepts and examples (even from the OT) to give us direction for the forms worship music will take.

    Even having said that, I also find justification for musical instruments in the NT in at least 2 places. First, the Greek word psalmoi literally refers to songs sung accompanied by stringed instruments. So, since psalms are prescribed, instrumental accompaniment is at least permitted by implication. Second, in Ephesians 5:19 “making melody” translates psallo, which likewise literally means to play on a stringed instrument. I have little doubt that the original audience would have assumed the allowance of instrumental accompaniment.

    Hope that helps!

  4. Yes, thanks, Scott. Knowing your thinking on elements and forms and on the Ephesians and Colossians passages helps me understand this view (shared by many, I now see) of the RPW. I have a different view (shared by many but not as many, maybe), and want to understand all the reasoning behind the various views and takes on both the RPW and the biblical theology pertaining to music and singing in the church. This is an important area, as you obviously believe. Praying for more light for us all.

Leave a reply