Thrownness Grabs a Frisbee: Part II

If my extensive audience will but grant me that I have established in my previous post that repristinating Presbyterianism is both feasible and desirable, I will proceed with with the what of Westminster-era Scottish Christianity. Hmmm....a quick scan of my crowded inbox not having revealed any dissenters, I shall proceed forthwith.

If there was a defining issue for Presbyterianism in the 17th century, it was worship. I do not mean to say that worship held a central place in their theological system; the Calvinistic revolt was always a battle with many fronts. Not until Abraham Kuyper reformulated (Dutch) Calvinism in the late 19th century was Calvinism really considered to have a central theme. [Kuyper indicated that the key concept of Reformed theology is the sovereignty of God (his Neo-Calvinist heirs have generally followed him in this). B.B. Warfield responded that the key concept is actually the glory of God. Warfield seems closer to the mark, but it appears to me that Calvinism was originally too organic an approach to be thought of as having a central concept.] The importance of worship to the Scots was the result of two distinct phenomena, closely related in the Scottish reality: one was the emphasis that they inherited from Calvin on the simplicity and spirituality of worship, the other was the recurring insistence of the English that the Church of Scotland accept the Episcopal liturgy.

Most of you will remember Jenny Geddes, who in 1638 at Greyfriars, Edinburgh, threw her stool at the priest, shouting, in response to the newly imposed reading of the Episcopal liturgy, "Villain, dost thou say mass at my lug?" [Most of you will simultaneously be loath to admit that pretty much every Presbyterian church you have ever attended voluntarily includes many, or most, of the then objectionable practices in its liturgy.] This was the beginning of the popular revolt that spawned the renewal of the National Covenant in 1638 at Greyfriars, the Bishops' Wars of 1639 and 1640, and the Solemn League and Covenant of 1643-the Solemn League and Covenant being the document that convened the Westminster Assembly.

Of all the Assembly's discussions, some of which were rancorous and long-lived, the discussion on worship was fairly short. This is because British Calvinists in the 1640s, whether Presbyterians or Independents, agreed on the structure and elements of worship. Worship consisted of a minister praying, reading from the Old and the New Testament, preaching, and blessing the people. The congregation was silent except in the singing, which was restricted to metrical Psalms unaccompanied by instruments. Sometimes a male member of the congregation acted as precentor in leading the singing. There was a rough order in the worship which was generally followed, but there was never a liturgy such as that found in The Book of Common Prayer-even the Westminster Assembly only produced a Directory for public worship, which was a recommended order instead of a prescribed format. In particular, British Calvinists, but especially the Scots, found kneeling, genuflecting, vestments, images, incense, hymns, and instruments troubling. These Calvinists believed that adding any element to worship that did not have express warrant in the Apostolic church of the canon involved committing the sin of Nadab and Abihu.

There are more idiosyncracies to 17th-century Calvinistic worship that a 21st-century Presbyterian would find odd: there was no passing of the plate for alms, and the Lord's Supper, when it took place (quarterly or yearly), was at a table with a common cup (of real wine) and a common loaf. The Lord's Supper was only open to members of the national church. Presbyterians, and Independents with them, did not celebrate any holidays, observing only the Lord's Day and occasional, spontaneous days of supplication or thanksgiving-which were often declared by the magistrate. In those churches that had seating, the congregation stood only for prayer and remained seated at all other times. Funerals were not allowed, as they were considered superstitious prayers for the dead. Congregational singing, utilizing the metrical psalter, was in unison, with no harmonies and no printed tunes (did I already mention that there were no instruments?).

Combined, these elements strike one with a quality of primitiveness. That was precisely the idea: to return to the severely simple worship of the Apostolic period. It was at the time of the Awakenings that Psalm paraphrases, then hymns, and then instruments were introduced, all for the purposes of creating a more emotive atmosphere in worship. British Calvinism became American Calvinism, a revivalistic evangelicalism that was more a product of the 18th and 19th centuries than of the 16th and 17th. And today, as conversionist evangelicalism is getting threadbare at its Victorian seams, contemporary Calvinism is diffusing into either postmodern evangelicalism or seeking roots in Anglican/Lutheran/Roman Catholic liturgical practices. Of course there is always a dogged minority that defends the Victorian status quo; this usually fails to inspire, since the sawdust of the tent revivals is by now giving off a rather rancid smell. Now that we are entering the era of the "emerging church" and the exploration of medieval liturgies, maybe the time for a return to Calvinism's own medieval anti-liturgy has come. If you're a dedicated Presyterian, the other options kinda suck.