Yet more on Psalmody

To the editor:

  In the June 2014 issue of New Horizons, R. Gaffin offers a brief consideration of Psalm 137 in order to question its propriety in public worship, and from thence to assert total psalmody (the use of all 150 Psalms in Christian worship) is not required of the Church today. Living in Denver, in the heart of the Great American Desert, our congregation has never had occasion to sing "Eternal Father, Strong to Save," a petition for "those in peril on the sea," and I can hardly imagine a time when we will. Nevertheless, I am sure that hymn will find a place in some congregation's worship. A hymnal is for all congregations everywhere, as is a psalter-hymnal; while Mr. Gaffin wonders whether Psalm 137 is "suitable for singing in public worship," I would guess that some pastor somewhere today thinks it highly suitable. 

  Not incidentally, this argument (that our congregation should have the option of singing all 150 Psalms for whatever occasion may arise in her corporate life) led our session to authorize the purchase of The Trinity Psalter some years ago to supplement The Trinity Hymnal. The continued existence of that Psalter (not to mention the recently revised RPCNA Psalter or the also updated Canadian Reformed Book of Praise, amongst many extant psalter-hymnals) by itself questions the need for an OPC psalter-hymnal. The Church should be able to sing all the Psalms and songs of Scripture; need she do so from an OPC-branded songbook?

grace & peace,

 The Presbyterian Curmudgeon