In the mid-twentieth century, those Christians who were willing to call themselves 'Reformed' or 'Calvinistic' were relatively few in number. Liberalism had done its work in the large mainline denominations to discredit 'Reformation' doctrine. Evangelicalism had fallen so low that many dismissed theology altogether by saying that doctrine only divides. 'Calvinist' was a slur to denigrate a Christian and to advise that the warm-hearted distance themselves from him. 'Orthodoxy' was a word seldom used without the adjective 'cold'.

Resurgence of Reformation Doctrine⤒🔗

Just at that time, in God's good providence, a number of theologians and gospel ministers boldly reasserted biblical or 'Reformed' doctrine. They were assisted by publishers who reprinted the works of the Reformers, the Puritans, and others through the centuries who had held to the same system of doctrine. Over the last half century the number of these men has increased. There has been an enormous amount of work to do, both in turning multitudes away from bewitching liberalism to the Christ of Scripture and in reaching out to fellow-Christians to enrich their knowledge of God's Word with the insights of the Reformers and their children.

As these important ministries have made ever-widening ripples on the waves of the religious world more people have felt their impact. Reformed commentaries and books are being read in places one would not have expected fifty years ago. The work of Reformed witnesses and Reformed preaching is having a spreading influence. One consequence of this is the growing number of individuals and organizations wanting to call themselves 'Reformed', 'Calvinistic' or 'Sovereign Grace'.

Adopting the title 'Reformed' is becoming somewhat popular. It is not uncommon for someone who had been self-satisfied in a 'non-doctrinal' Christianity to be awakened by biblical terms such as 'election' or 'imputation'. Most of these people have begun to look into Reformed truth through the doorway of man's salvation. Recognizing the sovereign moving of God's Spirit to awaken sinners and to quicken them to life as the prior cause of their coming to Christ opens up a whole new outlook. Yet after going through the doorway, most of us required years to understand the doctrinal system which is called 'Reformed'. One truth implies another, and then another still. The truths are interlocking, and mutually supportive of one another.

Those who are active in leading others into 'the doctrines of grace' are delighted when someone begins to grasp the meaning of God's 'grace'. It is no offence to us when such beginners call themselves 'Reformed', even though we realize that novices are far from understanding many vital elements of Reformed truth. Since it took us so long a time to work through the implications of these convictions we can be patient with others' journeys into truth.

However, many have come to approach Reformed theology as one would a salad bar. Such Christians seem to think that they may choose items they personally like but turn up their noses at Reformed doctrines that are not to their taste. Some cannot digest all of the foundational doctrines of the Reformation. Further study leads them to a decisive rejection of doctrines that are pillars upholding the great Reformed confessions of faith. All the while they call themselves 'Reformed'. Nevertheless other men publicly set forward leaders among this group as exemplary Reformed teachers. Entire organizations have been begun for the purpose of including those who are not in agreement with some very rudimentary truths on which the Reformation stood. These organizations also call themselves 'Reformed'.

The Authority of Scripture←⤒🔗

Nothing was as elementary to the Reformation as the doctrine stated by one of the Reformed creeds in this way: 'The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience.' This confession goes on to speak of '...those former ways of God's revealing his will unto his people being now ceased'. As if this were not sufficient, the confession is redundant: 'The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down or necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelation of the Spirit, or traditions of men.'

The Authority of Scripture and the Sufficiency of Scripture as an authority were truths set at rock bottom of the Reformation. Therefore, although friends and ministers who do not consciously assert the unique and sole authority of Scripture over what we believe and how we live may be beginning to move nearer to biblical truth, they are not 'Reformed'.

As the Lord was reviving the Reformed system of doctrine in the latter half of the twentieth century, there was an opposite movement within Christianity. The longing for more than God's Word to solve the church's weakness, the craving after modern day miracle-workers and revelations, has also made its impact on Christendom. This inevitably has led to a view of authority which is in conflict with the Reformed teaching on that topic.

Although Charismatic adherents believe that the Bible is God's Word and is authoritative, they still cannot assert with Paul that Scripture 'thoroughly' equips the man of God 'for every good work' (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

The Reformers emerged from a medieval church which also believed that the Bible was the authoritative Word of God. Yet this Scripture was only selectively called to the attention of congregations by a special class of leaders. Their teaching mixed God's words with the interpretations or 'revelations' of popes and bishops. The church vigorously downplayed Bible study while at the same time commending contemporary 'revelations' which attended tawdry 'miracle-workers' of the times.

The Reformers Were Very Definite on Authority←⤒🔗

Nothing was clearer in the Reformation than the assertion that Scripture stands alone as the authority which would inform our belief and bind us to action. Perhaps the most memorable statement, because of the dramatic circumstances in which it was uttered, was found in Luther's words to the head of the Holy Roman Empire, to princes and to bishops: 'Unless I am convicted by Scripture and plain reason – I do not accept the authority of popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other – my conscience is captive to the Word of God.'

Perhaps equally deserving of our attention is the reply of John Wycliffe when in 1408 a church council forbade him to translate Scripture into English:

You say it is heresy to speak of the Holy Scriptures in English. You call me a heretic because I have translated the Bible into the common tongue of the people. Do you know whom you blaspheme? Did not the Holy Ghost give the Word of God at first in the mother-tongue of the nations to whom it was addressed? Why do you speak against the Holy Ghost? You say that the Church of God is in danger from this book. How can this be? Is it not from the Bible only that we learn that God has set up such a society as a Church on earth? Is it not the Bible that gives all her authority to the church? ... Without the Bible, what charter has the Church to show all these? It is you who place the Church in jeopardy by hiding the Divine warrant, the missive royal of her King, for the authority she wields and the faith she enjoins.

In addition we have a guiding principle of John Knox as stated by lain Murray in his Scottish Christian Heritage, p. 14, 'Christians are bound to a universal obedience to the Word of God, no matter what the cost, no matter what the consequences. More particularly, nothing is lawful in the church unless it is found in Scripture.'

The Reformed doctrine of salvation for sinners arises from a careful study of Scripture, as do the other parts of the system of Reformed doctrine. Its conclusions have never been reached nor can they be supported by anything but scrupulous adherence to Scripture alone. Human reasoning and subjective impulses untied from the Scripture-alone approach have never arrived at these principles. Scripture as the only authority, and Scripture interpreting Scripture, build the superstructure of Reformed truth and maintain it.

When men abandon Scripture as their sole authority leading to truth and righteousness the door is thrown open to all of the abuses of medieval thinking. Subjective feelings and impulses which are not aroused by the truth of Scripture become free to roam at human will. When leaders who follow such impressions arrive at convictions contrary to Scripture they impose them on others in the church in the name of God's special (but unwritten) revelation.

Contributing to this movement, alien to the Reformation, is the human thirst for the visual or dramatic rather than the verbal. But we know that 'Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God' (Rom. 10:17). The Holy Spirit brought this Word to man through the prophets and apostles. He attends that Word in all his saving operations. 'Having been born again ... through the Word of God' (1 Pet. 1:23).

Remove God's Word as the singular authority for truth and practice from the collection of doctrines called 'Reformed', and the remainder will collapse into a heap, unsupportable by any other system. We say this not to suggest that such is the intent of those who hold to authorities in addition to the Bible. It is rather an expression of the hopelessness of upholding or conveying to others Reformation doctrine without the basic step of commitment to Scripture alone as the logical first principle of our system of thought. Any hedging on this point makes the entire system of divine truth shake with instability.

Many of us can recall the intense light and surprising warmth conveyed to our hearts when we first read the exemplary history of the Reformers and the Reformation Martyrs, along with their expositions of Scripture. Their brave and strong standing fast in the faith (1 Cor. 16:13) reached across the centuries and led us to new heights in serving the Lord. We were nourished by them in words of faith and of good doctrine (1 Tim. 4:6). It was their biblical system of doctrine which most gripped us.

It is exciting to see sound Reformed doctrine penetrating evangelical movements that were not historically friendly to the doctrines of grace. This activity has gone far beyond Europe and the Americas. It is powerfully reaching into Africa, Korea and China. But it is not without reason that Scripture calls us to watch and to resist forcefully those falsehoods which undermine the truth. It is not enough to teach the church the truth. Error must also be resisted by identification and by rebuke.

Now that 'Reformed' is a fashionable label, it is worn by some who are undermining historic Reformed teachings, the very truths of which the church is to be the pillar and the ground (1 Tim. 3:15). We would not speak in this way about those who are just awakening to the system of biblical doctrine but who have had little time to work through a whole theology. Voicing objections as one grapples to lay hold of the truth for the first time is one thing. There is a place for this in young students of the Word.

Teaching on God's Law←⤒🔗

On the other hand, we are now faced with men who are ministers of the gospel and seminary professors who fall into the category mentioned above. They want to be known as followers of the great Reformers or 'heirs of old Princeton Seminary'. Yet in their teachings, public statements and writings they undermine central tenets of biblical and reformed doctrine. Perhaps this is nowhere more common than in opposition to the Law of God.

William Tyndale, the first translator into English of the Greek New Testament and the Hebrew Pentateuch and a martyr for the faith (October 1536), wrote the following:

Expound the law truly, and open the veil of Moses, to condemn all flesh, and prove all men sinners, and all deeds under the law, before mercy have taken away the condemnation thereof, to be sin, and damnable; and then as a faithful minister, set abroach (to pierce [a cask, etc.]) so as to let the contents flow out the mercy of our Lord Jesus, and let the wounded consciences drink of the water of him. And then shall your preaching be with power, and not as the hypocrites. And the Spirit of God shall work with you; and all consciences shall bear record unto you, and feel it is so. And all doctrine that casteth a mist on these two, to shadow and hide them, I mean the law of God, and mercy of Christ, that resist you with all your power.Letter to John Frith, quoted in Foxe's Acts and Monuments.

This quote from a great leader of the English Reformation takes note of the purpose of the law of God: to convince us of our sinfulness and our need of a Saviour. As an avid reader of the publications of Martin Luther, no doubt Tyndale sharpened his understanding of the relationship of the law and the gospel on this other Reformer's books. You may see from both Scripture and the Reformers that the law is an essential tool of evangelism. By the law consciences are awakened to their guilt and therefore to their need of a Saviour.

Biblical Support for the Reformation View←⤒🔗

The New Testament is even sharper in support of this assertion. Sin is defined by the Apostle John as 'transgression of the law', or violation of the law (1 John 3:4). Since this is true it is indispensable that preachers know what law God has placed men under, or to which law the Most High will hold men to account on the Day of Judgment. To underscore the urgency of this matter Paul asserts that it is the law which brings wrath upon men: '...the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression' (Rom. 4:15). Once more, in Romans 5:13, Paul insists that 'sin is not imputed when there is no law'. Men are not sinners, and are not liable to wrath, nor are they assigned guilt, apart from a law! This law of God must be identified in order to treat men honestly in suggesting that they are sinners, and if men are not truly sinners they are not in need of a Saviour.

For Tyndale there was no doubt about what law it is under which all men live, Jew and Gentile alike. 'All flesh' is condemned, and 'all men' are proven sinners by the law behind Moses' veil. It is for this same reason, that of showing all men to be sinners, that Martin Luther began The Small Catechism with the Ten Commandments. It was his and Paul's view that this law was originally written in man's heart at creation (Rom. 2:14-23). This is the God-given moral law expressly confirmed by our Lord Jesus Christ as valid for all time and binding upon all men (Matt. 5-7, The Sermon on the Mount). Other Reformed catechisms place the Ten Commandments later in their instruction to show that they are also the law for believers' lives (Rom. 13:8-10, Eph. 6:1).

This view of preaching the Law and the Gospel deeply influenced the Great Awakening as well as the Reformation! In his Journal under May 24, 1738, John Wesley gave an account of the experience which launched his effective Revival preaching:

In the evening I went very unwillingly to a society in Aldersgate Street, where one was reading Luther's Preface to the Epistle to the Romans. About a quarter before nine, while he was describing the change which God works in the heart through faith in Christ, I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone, for my salvation, and an assurance was given me that he had taken my sins away, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death.

Luther's preface to Romans is a devotional clarification of Paul's and of the Spirit's view of the law and the gospel and their operations in converting sinners.

Opposition to Reformation Doctrine←⤒🔗

There are quite a few men today who trumpet their belief in election and limited atonement, yet who are 'casting a mist on' the law of God 'to shadow and hide' it. They are clear about God's sovereignty, but they befuddle their hearers as to the definition of sin and therefore the need of a Saviour.

One direction taken in doing this is 'Neonomianism', the teaching that there is now a new law to replace the Ten Commandments. Moses' ten rules were given at Sinai only as a temporary standard for the Jews, it is taught. This position is not a recent one. It was propagated during the Reformation by the Socinians to the ruination of the Reformation in certain parts of Europe. It was also taught by large numbers of liberal Protestants from the years 1875-1925 and onward. These men ruined many of the large Protestant denom­inations which had emerged from the Reformation. In both cases mentioned it was taught that there is a new law issued by Jesus that replaces the Ten Commandments. These conclusions were reached by means of a deep confidence in the ability of human reason to select which parts of God's Word we should believe to be true.

Oddly, Neonomians are usually more energetic in assaulting and denying the validity of the Ten Commandments than they are in giving a definition or codification of the new law. If the new law is the one which men live under now, any interest in defining sin or its forgiveness in Christ would require a prominent attention to publication of the prevailing law. Yet this all-important new law remains hidden in the shadows.

The so-called 'New Covenant' view casts an even thicker fog on the matter of God's law. It says that God gave one law to the Jews who lived under the Old Covenant, but has given another law to Christians who live under the New Covenant. Still, we must ask, 'Under what law do the millions of modern heathen Europeans and Americans stand?' They are not Jews and thus are not under the Old Covenant law; neither are they Christians and subjects of the New Covenant law. So what law defines their sin? What is it that shows their need of a Saviour, or specifies the wrath which must fall either on them or on their substitute Lamb? We are speaking of the issues most foundational to living a life pleasing to God, issues identifying sin, warning of judgment, and alerting men to their need of salvation. Without a clearly-delineated, God-given law all the afore-mentioned words simply disappear from our religious vocabulary.

Preaching the Law and Its Benefit to All of Society←⤒🔗

There is another matter which should be of great concern to Christians of the West in our day. To turn aside for a moment from the matter of convincing men of sin and of their need of a Saviour, there is a further vital function for the moral law. God's law and its terrors restrain the exercise of sin, even in men who are never converted. This is well expressed in the catechetical song of Matthias Loy (1828-1915):

When men the offered help (in Christ) disdain
And wilfully in sin remain,
It's (the law's) terror in their ear resounds
And keeps their wickedness in bounds.

Western Europe and the Americas have made a frightening and deplorable descent into moral degradation. Contempt for each of the Ten Commandments is at alarming levels with disgraceful and calamitous social consequences. No small explanation of these evils is the failure of churches to activate God's law in the consciences of its people by teaching and preaching the Ten Commandments. The mere mention of sovereignty in mercy is no cure for these moral ills. If the churches will not instil knowledge of God's law in this generation the full moral collapse of our nations cannot be far behind. The church with neonomian or antinomian (the view of those who are against any further mention of the law) theology has failed our culture.

One genius of God's moral law is the brevity with which it gives a complete and profound description of all moral duty (to God and to men) in ten concise rules. Our countries have imposed so many laws that no citizen (and few lawyers) could know them all or understand their implications without much research. Ten commandments are, by comparison, quickly grasped. If men can get through the mists cast up by theologians and actually read the laws kept behind a veil in the Ark of the Covenant as God's witness, great light would shine on our national way, even as these same moral precepts are preparing people's hearts to seek mercy in Christ.

Tyndale and the other Reformers were correct. It is not sufficient merely to give a positive presentation of the truth. Doctrine that casts a mist over the Law of God is to be resisted with all our power!

When men teach errors which confuse sinners and saints alike about their moral obligations to God and men, they are placing obstacles in the way of sinners' coming to Christ and in the way of decency in society. In similar fashion the Reformers identified Roman clergy and criticized their ministries because they were inhibiting men from finding the Grace of God in Christ.

We are too timid, wanting fraternal relations with those who cast a mist over the Law of God because we agree on some other matters. A passion for truth and for the souls which truth can set free will demand engagement against Neonomianism and Antinomianism for the glory of God and for the benefit of a clear light shining upon those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death.

Worship Service←⤒🔗

We have been speaking of ways in which modern Christian leaders who call themselves 'Reformed' are radically redefining the Reformation. It is not our concern to speak of those who have very recently discovered Luther, Tyndale and Calvin. The fledgling or tenderfoot in the Reformed faith may have much yet to learn from Scripture and much to unlearn from modern religious habits. Our focus is on those who present themselves as teachers able to instruct others in Reformed doctrine, but who are actively leading our generation away from biblical and Reformed principles and practices.

Over the last fifty years the conduct of public worship by Protestants has become scandalous. If our Lord were to send the historic Reformers to survey Protestant worship services in the West they would be shocked! It cannot be doubted that they would thunder denunciations of current worship practices even as they found it necessary to rebuke extremes in their own times. Yet many self-proclaimed 'Reformed' clergy flirt with the most alarming new measures. It is no longer uncommon for 'Reformed' ministers to pioneer the way for their own congregations to establish worship that is ever more remote from biblical standards.

The Charismatic←↰⤒🔗

Anyone who appraises Protestant worship today cannot ignore the 'miracle-workers' and modern 'prophets' who are exercising their 'supernatural' abilities in many worship services. This would not be new to the observation of the Reformers. They would think themselves back in Roman Catholicism. When Sir Thomas More wrote sharply and at length against Tyndale and Luther, he boasted that Rome continued to perform miracles. He taunted the Reformers for having nothing but the Bible and their sermons.

Of course miracle-working priests were the centre of attention at every Mass. All the congregation knew that by his mysterious (in the Latin sense of sacramental) incantations the priest turned ordinary bread into the literal sacred body of Jesus and wine into the Saviour's very blood. Ordinary men adopted the term 'hocus-pocus' as that which would be used by every illusionist pretending to possess supernatural powers. 'Hocus-pocus' was taken from the chanting priest at Mass. 'Hocus' was what the uneducated man heard when the priest said, 'Hoc est...'

Beyond this weekly sorcery were miracles performed by the 'saints' and miracles received by viewing relics of the 'saints'. The very canonizing of a 'saint' required certifying his or her 'miracles'. Then there were visions which excited the Romanists, often visions of the 'holy virgin'. They would gather up every word of these so-called visions and hold 'healing' services where the visions had been received.

The twin illusions of 'miracle-working' and new 'revelations' in modern worship represent a return to medieval Rome. No wonder the Protestant Charismatics have so quickly found allies among Roman Catholics. Why should Rome not welcome back such Protestants?

Contemporary Worship←↰⤒🔗

Other worship trends which would alarm any Reformer have become commonplace in our day. One should begin with 'Contemporary Worship', which has crossed all denominational lines in its popularity. As any description of this shameful popular form of worship begins, it must be said that every element mentioned cannot be found in every congregation or in a single 'service'. Yet all of the elements are defended by the same argument that is put forth for being 'contemporary'.

As one enters the place of 'contemporary worship', perhaps the first thing to attract attention will be the sight of those gathering for the service. One will be struck that these people are 'dressed down'. Everyone has come in his most comfortable casual clothing. Some may slouch in their seats with cups of coffee in hand. Even the minister may wear sandals, jeans and the sort of shirt one would wear to the beach on holiday. This projects an attitude of the effortless, the thoughtless, and the lackadaisical.

It would not be inappropriate to use Malachi 1:8 to address this apathetic presentation of themselves by the worshippers. 'Offer this to your governor! Would he be pleased with you? Would he accept you favourably?' Worship is presenting ourselves to the Lord, entering into his courts with a desire that he would be pleased with our approaches! Surely you know how to present yourself before someone with dignity and sovereign power over you!

Setting aside the encouragement of a haphazard attitude in self-presentation to God, we now look away to the place of worship. Usually there is a stage, a raised platform with space for much to occur. If there is a pulpit present (in contemporary worship services preachers tend to strut back and forth across the stage as they speak, hastening to a podium only when there is need to read out of the Bible) it is not the most eye-catching item. The more compelling appeal to the eyes is the 'trap set' (the collection of drums and cymbals, like those used in rock bands and musical groups that perform in night clubs). In the same area will be a number of guitars and other instruments equally at home in the pub. Stands, holding numerous microphones, are mixed among them.

When the 'worship service' begins a 'worship team' 'leads' for a lengthy period of time (a half hour is not uncommon). This team is composed of men and women (also in casual dress), each ensconced behind one of the microphones into which he plays an instrument or sings. The style of music is usually popular and may range from the blues to heavy metal. Even rap may be the genre. All of these practices are defended by the same apologetic – the silence of the Bible about such things.

The congregation is invited to sing, yet their singing seems superfluous. If they do enter in, their voices will be overpowered by those behind the microphones on stage, who are under the stage lights, rhythmically swaying or jerking or using a slight dance step to the jaunty tunes. Applause for the performance is usually in order.

Other features known to belong to 'contemporary worship' are clowns, puppets, interpretive dancers (at the more artsy services), actors performing plays, and video presentations to parallel song and sermon. Again, Reformers would have a memory of such things. There was, for example, Chaucer's Friar, the religious roundsman (known to us as an itinerant evangelist). To attract a crowd (anything does seem justified when the evangelist wants attention) the Friar might use a minstrel, a juggler or a group of tumblers in the market place. Of course the modern evangelistic campaign has been the proving ground for Protestant 'contemporary worship'. What's good for the evangelist is good for the parson.

In his account of 'The State of Europe Prior to the Reformation', Merle d'Aubigne writes,

a profane spirit had invaded religion ... the seasons which seemed most to summon the faithful to devout reflection and love were dishonoured by buffoonery and profan­ations altogether heathenish ... Preachers went out of their way to put into their sermons whatever might excite the laughter of the people ... The very temples were converted into a stage and the priests into mountebanks.

Evaluation←⤒🔗

One who makes a sober assessment must conclude that 'contem­porary worship' is meant to be a gala. Its mode is entertaining. Some churches call all of their services 'celebrations'. The theatrical and visual are major elements detracting from the Word of God, producing in the end a tendency well-known to Scripture. Israel did not much like Moses and his religion of the desert and of Mount Sinai. After having heard the terrifying voice of God in that solemn place the Jews begged Moses that they might never again hear the voice of God. It had not been a comfortable experience. Their proposal was that Moses should hear God, and he could then tell them what God had said.

Of course, God did have much to say to Israel through Moses. But while the prophet was gone from the congregation for weeks (to speak with God face-to-face) the Jews reverted to the heathen worship which they had learned in Egypt. What did they do? They built a golden calf – the visual! In this they were refusing to hear the voice of God but were choosing a visually bright object. Their worship of the golden calf was described in this way, 'The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play' (Exod. 32:6). It was a gala event: great food, abundance of wine, and satisfying amusement. Heathen temples do it so much better than do contemporary churches, because heathenism uses the same elements without restraint. The visual! The entertaining!

'Oh, but', some say, 'we get down to serious business in our small groups.' Small groups are behind the scene of the contemporary worship. 'The large service attracts; then we direct people to the group in which they will receive genuine help.' The idea of small groups comes from modern psychology. It is a device called 'group therapy'. In a small circle of people who share common troubles in life there will be more intimate and more personal discussion of the needs of everyone present. Just so, it is claimed, ministers, speaking to entire congregations, cannot effectively apply the Word to every need of those who are before him. By this argument, proponents of contemporary worship confess their lack of confidence in and contempt for biblical preaching.

Biblical Form and Substance←⤒🔗

Amending the ways of contemporary worship is essential for those who hold Reformed convictions! Nothing is more important to God's people than the corporate assemblies which God has required of them – 'not forsaking the assembling of yourselves together', with the awareness of the final Day approaching (Heb. 10:25). In those assemblies we approach 'the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem ... God the Judge of all ... Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant' (Heb. 12:22-24).

When we enter such solemn places, our compelling need is to know what is expected of us. How do God the Judge and Jesus the Mediator desire us to conduct ourselves? Their wishes for our worship are of supreme importance, not our preferences. We are informed how to worship by God's words, not by Hollywood, nor by our own impulses.

Central must be the frequent commands to preach and teach Scripture. In addition we must practise the sacraments which God's Word specifies, pray prayers shaped by God's Word, and sing psalms (of God's Word) and hymns and spiritual songs composed of biblical truths. Further, singing must be done in moods informed by God's Word (confession of sin should not be sung in lilting tunes, nor is joyful thanks to be sung slowly in a minor key).

'Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God' (Rom. 10:17). God majors on the verbal, not the visual, in his presentation of saving truth. He does not entertain nor does he provide a festival atmosphere. We are not called to imitate theatrical or musical entertainers, and to pronounce the result 'worship.'

Where biblical elements of worship exist there is no place for that which distracts from the directions of God's Word. Neither is there time for worldly desires to be met during our services. God's words are 'more to be desired than gold, yea, than much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Moreover by them Your servant is warned, and in keeping them there is great reward' (Psa. 19:10-11). Since we have been given such a precious treasure to proclaim, why would Reformation men want to plunge church assemblies into more of the world's amusements?

Many who had never before attended church services are at home with contemporary worship. They do not know better. However, a counter-trend has begun! Those who have tasted reverent worship, formed by God's Word and having the preaching of God's Word at its heart, are consciously rejecting the modern style of 'worship'. They are leaving the entertainment centres in search of congregations who hear the Word preached and taught, and who sing psalms and traditional hymns.