What is the Regulative Principle of Worship?

The Regulative Principle of Worship (typically abbreviated to RPW), common in Reformed churches, is the principle that whatever is not expressly commanded in the Scripture for worship is, therefore, forbidden.  It is typically contrasted with the Normative Principle of Worship (NPW), as we’ll see below.

Why I Reject the RPW…

1. The biblical basis for it is shaky.

   The primary text for support of the Regulative Principle is Leviticus 10:1-2.

   ¹Then Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, each took his censer and put fire in it, put incense on it, and offered profane fire before the Lord, which He had not commanded them. ² So fire went out from the Lord and devoured them, and they died before the Lord.

   The reasoning here is that Nadab and Abihu were in trouble for doing what was not commanded, not for not doing something that was directly commanded, or for doing something expressly commanded against and, therefore, we should conclude that we are not to do anything in worship that is not explicitly commanded.

   The problem is, this is faulty logic.  Regardless of the way it’s worded, it is clear that on this occasion, the priests were doing something decidedly different from that which God had commanded, in an area where He had provided clear instruction.  See, for instance, Exodus 30:9:

   You shall not offer strange incense on it, or a burnt offering, or a grain offering; nor shall you pour a drink offering on it.

   It is a leap to say that because on this occasion the priests clearly, knowingly, and intentionally violated God’s specific instructions that we are therefore mandated to avoid doing anything God has not spoken of.

   Consider an analogy.  If I tell my children to set the table for Thanksgiving dinner, and be sure to use the blue tablecloth, I will be displeased with them for setting the table with the red tablecloth.  (And probably even more so if I’ve very pointedly said, “Be sure you do not use any other tablecloth”!)  However, I will have no reason to be upset with them if they choose, after covering the table with the blue cloth, to also put candles on the table.  Why not?  Because I didn’t give them any instruction regarding candles, positive or negative.  As long as they don’t have some sinful motive, there is no problem with their putting candles on the table.

2. The biblical example contradicts it.

   Not only is the foundation for the RPW shaky, the biblical example seems to contradict it.  We see God’s people, on several occasions, worship in ways God did not prescribe.  When this worship violates God’s instruction, we see His anger poured out (as would be expected).  However, we do not see this when His people worship in ways He did not talk about at all.  To keep it simple, let’s look at the example of David and His men.

   In 2 Samuel 6, David and his men are bringing the Ark of the Covenant back to Jerusalem — on a cart.  This is already a problem, because God instructed that it be transported by carrying it on poles.  The Ark was the place where God Himself chose to make His presence known, and even the High Priest had to take special pains to make himself holy before going into the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle where it normally rested, lest he die.  As they rolled the Ark along on a cart, it started to topple, and Uzzah reached out to steady it — by touching it.  That was a big no-no and God struck him dead.  So here we have an example of the people disregarding God’s clear instruction, and it not going well with them as a result.

   However, consider some other examples.  In the same chapter we already looked at, David learned his lesson.  Three months later he again moved the Ark to bring it to Jerusalem, this time in the proper manner.  (The passage speaks of “those bearing the Ark.”  See also 1 Chronicles 15, a parallel passage.)  On this occasion, “David danced before the Lord with all his might” (possibly in a state of partial undress).  But wait — dancing wasn’t commanded in worship!  There is no indication here that God is displeased with David.  In fact, Michal (David’s wife) was made barren for treating him with disdain as a result.  In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, that would seem to be an indirect indication that David’s dancing was acceptable to God.

   David even went so far as to create a whole new “structure” for worship!  He appointed singers and musicians.  These were whole new roles God had not assigned.  Once again, we have no indication that God was displeased with this worship.

3. It relies on a false dichotomy.

   The Regulative Principles of Worship is nearly always, if not always, contrasted with the Normative Principle of Worship.

   The Regulative Principle says that anything not expressly commanded for worship is forbidden.

   The Normative Principle says that anything not expressly forbidden is permitted (as long as it is agreeable to the peace and unity of the Church).

   The problem is, this is a false dichotomy.  It is not an either/or — nothing goes or anything goes.  There is a third option: that those things which are not expressly commanded are not forbidden purely by virtue of not being expressly commanded, but that all other practices should be weighed by biblical principles and godly wisdom.  (Whether or not the church agrees on them is not the only consideration.)

   To return to my table-setting example, according to the “official” definition of the normative principle (anything not expressly forbidden is permitted), my children could place live chickens on the dining table.  Clearly this is absurd!  No sane person would consider live chickens within the realm of appropriate table decor.  To suggest that anyone not holding to the RPW believes the spiritual equivalent of chickens on the table is just fine is both untrue and uncharitable.

4. It requires too little of us.

   The previous three arguments are the reason I believe the claim for the Regulative Principle is unsupported.  This last point is the reason I believe the RPW is unhelpful to the life of the Church.

   Those holding to the Regulative Principle must necessarily draw a sharp contrast between “worship” and life.  If we cannot do in worship anything which is not expressly commanded, then these instructions for worship cannot apply to our lives as a whole, or we would be unable to function!

   The proponent of the Normative Principle (or the modified Normative Principle I proposed in #3) believes that all of life is worship and, therefore, every single moment and every single act of life is to be held to the God-given standard provided for worship.

   Is it unreasonable or unbiblical to suggest that all of life is worship?  I don’t think so.  Romans 12:1 tells us:

   I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.

   Interesting that this not only tells us that the offering of ourselves is worship, but refers to this in terms of sacrifice, connecting it to the idea of the Old Testament temple worship!

   So as for me and my house…rather than holding to a rigid standard for congregational meetings (which seems to not be reflective of the New Testament meetings we see modeled), we prefer to hold to a standard every day and in every situation of striving to obey and honor God in all that we do, trusting the Holy Spirit to provide wisdom when our choices are otherwise unclear.  (Which is not to say that we uphold this standard perfectly — because we don’t — but that this is the standard we believe we’re called to.)