“Our help is in the name of the LORD who made heaven and earth.” These words from Psalm 124 are well known, because every church service opens with them. With a classic and Latin term this liturgical element is called the “votum,” which literally means “a vow.” In spite of the obvious familiarity, there are often many questions about the origin and function of the votum. In this article I will attempt to formulate some answers. We will look for its historical roots and consider how the votum has been used and how it has functioned. In addition I will then discuss a number of practical aspects concerning the use and application of the votum in our liturgical practice.

As noted, the words of the votum are derived from Psalm 124:8. In Latin this psalm verse begins with the word “adjutorium.” What we know as the votum is therefore sometimes called the adjutorium. At this point I will leave all sorts of reflection on (the content of) these terms and whether the term votum is correct and desirable. Nor will I comment on other liturgical texts that are also referred to as votum, such as “In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” In this article we are limiting ourselves to the votum with the text of Psalm 124:8.

History⤒🔗

The oldest traces of the votum as a liturgical act bring us to the eleventh century. In the Middle Ages the adjutorium was used here and there as an introductory verse to the benedictions and the confessions of guilt. The practice became more pronounced of stating it as an introduction to the confiteor, that is, the confession of guilt and the plea for forgiveness of sin that took place at the beginning of the Mass. This custom was officially established in the Roman Missal of 1570.

The votum functioned here as an expression that in matters concerning his salvation man cannot do anything without the help of God, who has made heaven and earth. When it was pronounced before a confession, it also had a clear function as an invocation of God’s help. For half of the Middle Ages, the votum was not used exclusively as the opening of the church service, as in our present practice. And that was also the case in sixteenth-century Reformed liturgical practice. Also within the Reformation, the votum did not always sound (exclusively) at the start of the church service. In the liturgy of Valerandus Pollanus (1551) of the Reformed Refugee Church in England, the adjutorium could be heard after the singing of the first table of the Law and prior to a call of confession of guilt.¹

A more frequent phenomenon is that the votum was used in the context of the sacramental ministry. For example: in the liturgy of Bern (1529), it was pronounced after the sermon and it had a place within the liturgy for the Lord’s Supper.² There are several baptismal liturgies from the sixteenth century that begin with Our Help. In the Church Order of the Kurpfalz from 1563, the baptismal liturgy begins as follows: “Unser hilf stehet im names des Herrn, der himmel und erden erschaffen hat (Ps. 124:8), Amen. Dieweil unser Herr Jesus Christus sagt, daß wir anders nicht in das reich Gottes mögen kommen”³ [As our Lord Jesus Christ says that we cannot otherwise enter the kingdom of God]. Peter Dathenus took over this form in a translation in his church book from 1566, and that is why the votum was originally associated in the Netherlands with the start of the baptismal form.⁴

In Reformed Protestantism in the Netherlands, the votum was officially introduced by the provincial synod of Dordrecht of 1574. On June 18 this church assembly decided that “The preaching should commence after the words of this Psalm: our help is in the name of the Lord, etc.”⁵

Now it is an illusion to think that once this provision was made, the church services therefore began in the way in which we currently know it: a minister entered the pulpit, pronounced the votum, and after this the other liturgical elements were successively dealt with. For example, it became a common practice that the minister did not enter the church building before the reading elder had finished the scripture reading (and the reading of the law). Only after the preacher had mounted the pulpit was the votum pronounced. For many, the church service only started at that time (“church service = sermon”). And in the nineteenth century, various people who opposed the hymns therefore raised no problem when a hymn verse was sung prior to the votum.

Pastors did not always use the words of Psalm 124 as votum. Often you could also hear as votum: “(We commence) in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” It also became customary to extend Psalm 124:8, for example with the words “who keeps faith forever and does not forsake the works of his hands” (see Psalm 146:6 and Psalm 138:8),⁶ or with words from Revelation 1. Only in the twentieth century did the Reformed (Liberated) churches arrive at harmony in the usage of the votum.

The liturgical reflection in Dutch Protestantism at the end of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries resulted in the widespread practice of using the adjutorium as an opening for the church service. That means that it served as the first official liturgical act in a service, where no scripture reading or other acts were placed beforehand.

The placement of Our Help at the start of the service is a practice found in sixteenth-century liturgies of the followers of John Calvin. For example, in the Strasbourg service book from 1542, designated Pseudoromana,⁷ the adjutorium is placed at the beginning of the service and is immediately followed by the public confession of guilt. Our Help also has this place in La Forme des Prières (Geneva 1542). T. Brienen writes “Calvin motivates the commencement of the service with the votum by saying that all our actions and ventures need to begin by calling on the name and for the help of the Lord.”⁸ He references Calvin’s Institutes (Book III, chapter XX, 3). Calvin does not comment there about the beginning of the church service or about the votum. It does, however, appear from that paragraph of the Institutes that Calvin attaches great importance to invoking God’s name, because God is near to those who call on him in truth (Psalm 145:18). It is not insignificant to note that in the Pseudoromana and in La Forme des Prières the votum precedes the public confession (“Confession des Péchés”). As a result, the votum receives an emphasis of calling for God’s help. This practice is therefore a continuation of the medieval liturgy, where the adjutorium functioned as an introduction to the confiteor (the confession of guilt).

As it was during the Middle Ages, the votum in the Reformed tradition wants to express—and to remind—that the assembled congregation is wholly dependent on God and his help. We can also note that the votum functioned at the same time as an opening formula for a particular liturgical element, as a clear mark of a new part of the church service (for example the ministry of sacraments). The votum did not have an exclusive place at the start of the service.

Its meaning←⤒🔗

Several times now this article has discussed the functions and meanings of the votum. With the historical data in mind, I now want to explore this further. I focus in particular on the place that the votum has in the orders of service that we know and use.

Both during the Middle Ages and in the Reformation, the votum has never been an isolated liturgical element. It was always linked to another element, such as a confession or a baptismal administration. Now I do have the strong impression that in twentieth-century liturgies the votum is regarded more as an independent liturgical act. This is suggested especially by the fact that the votum and the salutations (or benedictions) are numbered in our orders of service as numbers 1 and 2. This is also the case in the Reformed Church Book. The numbering of parts of an order of service is not ideal in any case, because it gives the impression that we are dealing with agenda items for a business meeting. When the votum and the salutation are numbered as 1 and 2, the character of the adjutorium, as an opening formula and an introduction to another liturgical element (that is, the salutation or blessing), becomes clouded. The introductory function of the votum is the reason why in the Liturgical section of the Reformed Church Book the votum and the salutation are mentioned as one line: “Votum and salutation [of peace or benediction].”

That the adjutorium is intended as an introduction to and as an opening formula for the subsequent part also means that it needs to be and to remain a short formula. This conviction became commonplace within the liturgical reflection of the twentieth century,⁹ and led to the disappearance of the practice of ministers of extending the votum with, for example, the words from Psalm 146 and 138. Also an extension in the form of an explanation of the votum undermines the conciseness that the introductory character requires. An explanation of the votum thus serves as an introduction to an introduction, and the votum takes on too much of a life of its own. All this is apart from more substantive arguments not to give further introduction to the votum, as we will discuss later on.

In the meantime, it may be clear that the Our Help involves much more than a business-like sense of opening, which would be interchangeable with any other conceivable opening formula. It is also clear from its history that the votum has multiple layers of meaning and functions. This has been discussed above to some extent. It also became clear that the dominant function and meaning of the votum is partly dependent on the place where it is spoken.

1) Perhaps the most obvious is that the votum functions as a short confession of our dependence on God and as an expression of our affection for him. In Our Help we express our confidence and our expectation that God was and is near us. We confess that—in the words of Abraham Kuyper—“our wellbeing is only in the saving power of our God.” In this sense, according to Kuyper, Our Help does not refer explicitly to the church service (“our help for the upcoming church service is in the name of the Lord”). On the basis of the exegesis of Psalm 124, Kuyper states that the votum has a much broader scope: “We, lost sinners, who were nearly destroyed by sin and satan have been rescued and saved by God, and as a redeemed and saved people we now come together here and testify as the first expression of our hearts that it was God and God alone who saved us from death, and who now assembles us together as the redeemed and saved through his Word.”¹⁰ The name of God is mentioned in the votum. G. van Rongen links here to the “calling upon God’s Name”—an expression frequently used in Scripture. He refers to the church fathers and Calvin who have emphasized the importance of calling on the Name.¹¹ The “invocation” is characteristic of the Christian congregation, and has been designated by C. Trimp as “the description of public worship of God.” According to Trimp, the following meanings can be distinguished in “invoking his name”:

1. praying and giving thanks to God while publicly proclaiming his name,
2. publicly proclaiming the name of God (or Christ) over against the pretensions of the gentiles and their idols,
3. publicly mentioning and honouring the name of God (or Christ).¹²

When we mention the Name of the LORD in the votum, it is indeed the invocation of that Name, in which the meanings of prayer, thanksgiving, public proclamation, and praise are heard.

2) Because the adjutorium opens the service in our liturgical practice, the confession of dependence also immediately carries the element of “dedication.” The church focuses on the Lord. This dedication is not done individually, but jointly.

3) This brings us to yet another function: Our Help also functions as a constitution. The assembled members of the congregation are united to the visible and audible congregation that is about to celebrate the worship service (the encounter between God and his people). The votum is here, therefore, a formula that marks the moment when the service starts. Kuyper also gives this meaning to the votum. Although he is aware that his comparison is rather flawed, he compares the votum with the opening of a meeting by the chairman. It is a solemn statement by which the gathered believers really become “the assembling of believers.” Separate individuals are forged with the votum into one church community that is about to meet her God.¹³

4) According to A.F.N. Lekkerkerker, the votum has nothing to do with a gavel that opens a meeting, as Kuyper claimed. He does not entirely do justice to Kuyper here, because Kuyper has—as we have just seen—said something more about the votum and its substantive meaning. In any case, Lekkerkerker points out that in French Reformed church books since 1562 the title “prayer” was printed above the votum. He then refers to the fact that in the “Formulaire des Prières ecclesiastiques” (ecclesiastic form prayers) section the votum is printed under the title “Prière” prior to an “Exhortation” (a call for confession) and a prayer in which the congregation confesses her sins before God.¹⁴

According to Lekkerkerker, Our Help was included in Dutch church books—until the nineteenth century–among the “prayers at the commencement of the meeting of the congregation.”¹⁵ It remains a question as to what extent Lekkerkerker points to a generally accepted practice in the Netherlands. In about ten church books from before 1900 that I consulted on a sample basis, the votum is not even printed under the header of “Christian Prayers,” let alone that it was referred to as a “prayer.” But insofar as it was actually found in Dutch-language church books, the votum, as in the French-language service books, was related to the subsequent prayer in which the congregation confessed her sins. In the Dutch service books this prayer is known as “a prayer before the sermon.” Based on this fact and this placement, it is indeed possible to emphasize the prayer-like character of the votum.

Lekkerkerker rightly says that this character corresponds to the use of the votum as an introduction to the priest’s personal confession in the Roman Missal. He could also have pointed to the fact that in French orders of worship from the sixteenth century, the adjutorium served as an introduction to a public confession of guilt. It has been well established that the interpretation of the adjutorium existed as a prayer. Until well into the twentieth century the custom remained for the members to close their eyes during Our Help. Lekkerkerker considers this attitude of prayer to be appropriate because Our Help is “a confession in the form of a prayer.” Everything we do and do not do depends on God’s help. That is why we invoke the Name of God (see what I wrote above). By voicing the Our Help, the church places itself in a dependent attitude towards God the Creator.

In summary, it appears that we can view and interpret the votum from different angles. The votum thus appears to function not only as a confession of dependence and submission, but also as an expression of dedication and as an invocation of God’s help. It also has connections to matters that are referred to in Scripture as “invoking the Name.”

In addition, we need to realize that all these things are closely linked and that one cannot put any one aspect over against the other. You could say that the prayer character of the votum comes out more strongly when it precedes a confession (or prayer) of guilt or when the attitude of prayer is adopted. In all cases, the votum is intended as an opening formula, as an introduction to a subsequent liturgical element.

In practice←⤒🔗

For practical purposes, what does the above mean? What does it have to say about the way in which we deal with the votum?

The fact that Our Help serves for us as an “introduction” to the benediction means that it is better to omit saying “amen” after the votum. In this way, after all, the adjutorium is in a certain sense disconnected from the salutation. This is apart from the fact that otherwise “amen” would sound twice in quick succession.

Especially in the last decade, it is often considered good practice within our churches to provide an explanation with the liturgical elements. This explanation can vary from one single sentence to a sermon-in-a-nutshell. More than once the votum is clarified with brief explanatory words. There are ministers, for instance, who begin the worship service by saying, “We are in the presence of the Lord, so let us confess our dependence on him: Our help is in the name of the LORD...” Or, “We confess that we depend on God with the words: Our help...” Such explanatory additions are unnecessary. Because in the explanation it repeats what is already expressed verbally! Even without the addition of the minister, is it not completely clear to everyone that the votum is a confession of our dependence on the Lord?

In addition, the explanation may undermine the multiple layers of meaning that the votum has. The explanation is limited to just one meaning and function of the votum. As we have seen, in addition to confession of our dependence and affection, the adjutorium also factually serves in the constituting of the congregation, invoking God’s help, and the consecration of the church to God. All these elements disappear from view when the minister only focuses the congregation on the function of confessing our dependence. An impoverishment always occurs when you would alternately articulate the various functions as introduction and explanation of the votum. (Incidentally, why should a minister determine what meaning should be given to the votum in that service?) The function and meaning of the adjutorium is always more comprehensive than what can and should be said in a pulpit explanation. The beautiful and intriguing aspect of liturgy is precisely that, for example, with formulas (such as the votum) or actions more can be said and indicated than one can summarize in one sentence. This should not be “ruined” by further explanations.

All this is apart from the question whether explanations of parts of the church service can or will promote liturgical awareness and knowledge. Allow me to use a comparison: if you want to play a game, the rules of the game must already be known. Elaborations during the service are comparable to a soccer referee who whistles first in case of a handball, and—before the free kick is taken—starts to explain to the players and the public that during the game you cannot play the ball with your hands. Such an explanation is superfluous and it would take the pace, the rhythm, out of the game. Moreover, it breaks the tension of the match. Explanations in a church service have a similar effect. Information about or clarification on liturgical elements belongs to the liturgical education that should be given in catechism classes, schools and in families. If something needs to be explained, there is something wrong either with (the logic of) the order of service, or with catechetic-liturgical instruction—or possibly with both.

In short, despite all the good intentions that people have with introductory words for the votum, Our Help ultimately works in the best way when no attempts are made to explain the votum. It is sufficient to observe a brief moment of silence after the “lift your hearts unto the Lord,” and then to speak or to sing the votum without any further additions.

Realisations←⤒🔗

With the last sentence we have arrived at the “implementation practice.” Until recently it was customary in all churches for the minister to pronounce Our Help from the pulpit. In view of the scope of the votum, it is very defensible that someone other than the minister would speak these words. The congregation can also voice it. Nowadays there are several churches where the members sing the votum. A number of possibilities (melodies) are included in the Liturgical section of the Reformed Church Book, and some possibilities are presented that are suitable for church singing. However, it is also conceivable that a small choir sings the votum. There are also possibilities for that in the Liturgical Section.

To conclude this article, let me point to yet another possibility that is not used within our churches (as far as I know), but one that is obvious and can be used directly by all congregations. The votum can also be pronounced as a speaking-in-turn. This could be accomplished as follows:

Minister: Our help is in the Name of the LORD,
Members: Who made heaven and earth.

This possibility of execution is closely related to parallelism, a literary style figure that is found abundantly in the Psalms. It means that two lines of a verse belong together as far as the content is concerned. In this case it is about the sentences: 1) Our help is in the Name of the Lord, and 2) who made heaven and earth. It is not unlikely that these lines of verse in the Old Testament were performed in an alternating way, either in speech or song. And because the subsequent blessing or salutation is not sung but is spoken, it might even be preferable to also speak the votum. After all, votum and salutation are interconnected, and that unity is somewhat diminished by singing one part and saying the other. In my view, from the perspective of “unity of style and execution,” it is better to either sing both parts, or to pronounce both.