Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs

Two passages in Paul's letters make reference to the liturgical triad of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. These are Colossians 3:16 and Ephesians 5:19. Here is the first: "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teach and admonish one another in all wisdom, and sing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs with thankfulness in your hearts to God." And the second: "addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with all your heart." What is meant by these terms?

Some people think they know. One of these is R. Scott Clark of The Heidelblog, where he posted on the topic a decade ago: Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs in the Septuagint. Clark argues that these terms reflect categories in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) translation of the Old Testament, on which the New Testament authors relied for virtually all of their Scripture quotations. Here are his categories:

At the top of the Psalms in the LXX were titles or superscriptions. Those superscriptions described each Psalm, they categorized the psalms in 4 classes or groups:

• ψαλμος [Psalms] (2-8, 10-14, 18-24, 28-30, 37-40, 42-43, 45-50, 61-67, 72, 74-76, 78-84, 86-87, 91, 93, 97-100, 107-109, 138-140, 142)
• [συνεσις; understanding (31, 41, 43-44, 51-54, 73, 77, 87-88, 141)]
• υμνος [Hymns] (5, 53-54, 60, 66, 75)
• ωδη [Ode/Song] (3, 17, 29, 38, 44, 47, 64-67, 74-75, 82, 86-87, 90-92, 94-95, 107, 119-133)

In other words, all of these categories refer to the canonical book of the Psalms, and not to some other collection of songs that might have been used by the early church. 

Is this a correct proposal? On the surface, it seems plausible, because many contemporary Christians, especially Protestants, tend to forget that the LXX, and not the Hebrew, was the Bible most used by the early Christians. But there are at least four difficulties with this hypothesis.

First, it is obvious that, if these are indeed categories of Psalms, they are not very tidy ones and overlap a fair bit. Psalm 43 appears to be both ψαλμος and συνεσις, the latter of which is not found in the two New Testament passages above. Psalm 66 seems to be at the same time ψαλμος, υμνος, and ωδη, thereby falling into all three categories. Indeed Psalms 64 to 67 are psalms and (spiritual) songs.

Second, if these are indeed categories, it is by no means clear what marks each Psalm as such other than the superscription preceding it. Perhaps someone has done a literary analysis of the Psalms within each category, although the differences are not obvious in the English translations.

Third, these notional categories do not even cover all of the biblical Psalter. For example, the pivotal Psalms 1 and 150, along with many others, have no place here. Moreover, I do not see a superscription at all for Psalm 2, nor do I see the word ωδη in that for Psalm 3, or υμνος in that for 5. This prompts me to wonder where Clark found this list.

The 1912 Psalter of the former UPCNA

Fourth and finally, one senses an effort to force the diversity within the Psalter into these categories. Why? Because some Reformed denominations as a matter of principle sing only the Psalms in their liturgies. This was the case of the Christian Reformed Church before 1934 and of the former United Presbyterian Church of North America (UPCNA) before 1927. The Free Reformed Churches of North America and the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America still adhere to exclusive psalmody. One suspects that the desire to defend this position unduly influences the interpretation of the superscriptions in the LXX.

Although I myself do not adhere to exclusive psalmody, I do believe that the Psalms, along with other biblical canticles, should have priority in our worship of the triune God, irrespective of our interpretations of the two Pauline texts.