Regulative principle of worship

[Iosias]

Bunyan doesn't - Scripture does - and I agree with those who say that Scripture doesn't restrict us to the Psalms.

What is your argument from Scripture?

...if you're holding to the early church's practice you should be "chanting" (they didn't sing)

Could you prove this? BTW: chanting is singing when you get into the nitty gritty.

John Gill: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/gill/practical.iv.vii.html

 

[Iosias]

Check out: http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2008/05/03/could-instruments-be-idols/

 

[edie19]

What is your argument from Scripture?



Could you prove this? BTW: chanting is singing when you get into the nitty gritty.

John Gill: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/gill/practical.iv.vii.html

same as before - hymns, psalms and spiritual songs (not psalms only)

as to the second - I've read it several times in my pastor's library - will double check with him re: the sources

I do know this - it would appear very different than how we sing now (even for those of us who sing acappela psalms only)

 

[Iosias]

same as before - hymns, psalms and spiritual songs (not psalms only)

How are you arguing that these allow for human compositions?

 

[david01]

BTW, which translation do you use for the Psalms you sing? The Psalms we sing are a relatively free paraphrase and not a translation. They have been set to a regular meter and rhymed as well as given music which is singable and actually enjoyable. This is something the Puritans did not do until Isaac Watts appeared on the scene in the late eighteenth century. Arguments were presented at that time that it was a violation of the RPW to sing lyrices which were not, at the least, a translation of Holy Scripture and which were, in fact, the work of human invention and creativity.

 

[Iosias]

Apologies if I seem an idiot but I am not to sure what you are saying:

The Psalms we sing are a relatively free paraphrase and not a translation.

Who is 'we'?

They have been set to a regular meter and rhymed as well as given music which is singable and actually enjoyable.

What is 'they'?

This is something the Puritans did not do until Isaac Watts appeared on the scene in the late eighteenth century.

What is 'this'?

Arguments were presented at that time that it was a violation of the RPW to sing lyrices which were not, at the least, a translation of Holy Scripture and which were, in fact, the work of human invention and creativity.

Who produced these arguments and what were the arguments?

 

[david01]

Apologies if I seem an idiot but I am not to sure what you are saying:



Who is 'we'?

We are the members of my church, along with the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, and the Presbyterian Church of America.

What is 'they'?

They are the psalms sung from the Book of Psalms for Singing of the RPCNA and the psalms sung from the various hymnals and psalters of the OPC and the PCA.

What is 'this'?

This includes the Bay Colony Psalter.

Who produced these arguments and what were the arguments?

Various individuals debated the use of paraphrased psalms and I believe the various records of the general assemblies of the Presbyterian and Reformed denominations of the period would probably provide ample arguments, assuming that they are accessible. Unfortunately, with various mergers these records are sometimes lost.

The basic lines of argument went like this:

1. Mr. Watts has done a notable service to the church of God by making the Psalms both a pleasure to sing and yet retaining the essential meaning of them.
2. Mr. Watts has done an immense disservice to the church of God by using the force of his own imagination to rewrite God's Holy Word which, for many generations has been honored and revered and, thus, should not be distorted to conform to modern notions of music.

So, my question yet remains unanswered. Which translation do you prefer to use in singing the Psalms?

 

[david01]

I managed to track down a copy online of Thomas Shepad's THESES SABBATICAE

You will find it an interesting reading:

Thesis 5. For, though it be said that the Jews might not bake, nor see the meat upon this day, (Ex. 16:23 ) no, nor make a fire upon it, (Ex. 35:3,) no, nor gather sticks upon it, without death, (Num. 6:15, 30 ) — all which things Christians now may lawfully do, — yet none of these places will evince that for which they are alleged.

Thesis 7. Although also they were forbidden to kindle fire upon this day, (Ex. 35:3 ) in respect of some use, yet they are not forbidden so to do in respect of any use whatsoever. For there was fire kindled for the Sabbath sacrifices, and it would have been a breach of the rule of mercy, not to kindle a fire for the sick and weak in the wilderness. Nehemiah also, a man most strict and zealous for the Sabbath, yet had such provision made every day as could not be dressed nor eaten without some fire upon the Sabbath day, (Neh. 5:18 ) and the Sabbath not being a fast, but a feast in those times as well as these, hence it is not unsuitable to the time to have comfortable provisions made ready, provided that the dressing of meat be not an ordinary hindrance to public or private duties of holiness upon this day, (Ex. 12:16 ) this kindling of the fire here forbidden must therefore be understood in respect of the scope of the place, viz., not to kindle a fire for any servile work, no, not in respect of this particular use of it, viz., to further the building of the sanctuary and tabernacle, made mention of in this chapter; for it is said, whosoever shall do any work therein (i.e., any servile work, which is more proper for the week time) shall be put to death, (ver. 2) there is, therefore, either no dependence of these words in the third verse with those in the second, or else we must understand it of kindling fires restrictively for any servile work, which is there forbidden not only the Jews, but us Christians also.
​

I am afraid that the evidence does not support you.

Your evidence is written and from an English source. The New England Puritans left a consistent testimony to their beliefs in the physical meetinghouses. Please explain to me why none of these meetinghouses dating from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were constructed without any means of artificial heating. Was this some sort of oversight or could it possibly have emanated from a theological view?

 

[david01]

Would you mind letting me know who you have read on this issue? The reason I ask is all these objections are fairly common and have been dealt with by writers far better than I. Perhaps I could recommend some reading?

The Worship of God: Reformed Concepts of Biblical Worship

Down to business; we need to differentiate between the following:

Elements of worship: An element of worship is that which the worship of God actually consists of, or, that which constitutes worship, the substance of worship.

Circumstances of worship: A circumstance of worship is something “common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed” (WCF i.6). By this is meant those things needful to facilitate the worship of God and/or those things that are to accompany the worship of God but do not, in and of themselves, formally constitute worship. There are two types of circumstances, the first are regulated and the second are unregulated.


Forms of worship: A form of worship is simply the means by which the elements are ordered within a service. The regulative principle will regulate the form of worship insofar as it regulates the elements that the form contains.

So what you are talking about are forms of worship. The RPW does not cover this, it rather covers the elements which the form contains. That is not to say that Scripture does not help us in ordering our worship. Michael Daniels has drawn to my attention that Leviticus chapter 9 gives us details of the order of sacrifice in worship services. They consist of the following:

Call to Worship - This expresses the truth that none of us can approach God unless he initiates the covenant with us.

Sin Offering - This is where we hear the laws of God and lament our sins and confess our sins corporately, and of our need for forgiveness.

Burnt Offering - Or the Consecration, ascension offering. This represents the ascension of believers into the presence of God. In this way we show we belong wholly to the Lord. We will hear the Word of God read, we offer ourselves in prayer and praise to God, and we hear the sermon as the Lord speaks through the Pastor.

Peace Offering - Communion. Part of the animal was burned, part of it was waved before the Lord and then given to the worshipper to eat. The portion that was burned was called the Lord's good. This offering was unique in that it was the only one of the offerings in which the worshipper was permitted to eat a portion of it. In the peace offering the worshipper ate with God as an expression of deep love, trust and fellowship. Around the table of the Lord there is peace and assurance of his love for us. So it is that the covenant memorial of the Lord's Supper is offered to us by Christ, our peace offering, and he communes with us through it. As part of the regular Lord's Day worship, God gives us the privilege of sharing a covenant meal with him.

Commission - Aaron and Moses concluded the service by blessing the people with God's benediction. As we leave the assembly of the saints, we need to know that we are not leaving God behind.

This is the liturgy the bible gives us to worship God and the order that it should follow. It will only consist of the elements of worship that God has prescribed along with a covenantal dialogue between God and Man within the worship service.

Unfortunately, you did not provide any definition or examples of unregulated circumstances of worship, although you did state that there are both regulated and unregulated circumstances.

Please provide the scriptural references giving the liturgical order that you have provided. I was frankly surprised to find that a confession of sin is considered to be a sin offering, despite the fact that scripture (Hebrews 9:26) states that Jesus Christ is the sin offering for Christians.

You have failed to account for the following facts:

1. None of the holy days appointed by God for His people in the Old Testament, which you use as your model, are accounted for. Shall we assume that they are insignificant, but that the other aspects are significant. How does one reach this conclusion?
2. The liturgical order given above is not to be found in the Old Testament.
3. There is not a shred of evidence in the New Testament that this order was used by the primitive church.

 

[david01]

Installment #7.

It is an historical fact and the reason was theological.

Please provide evidence of this fact and the theological rationale.

 

[david01]

Does your church use a cantor or a precentor? Do you use a choir or a soloist?

 

[Iosias]

So, my question yet remains unanswered. Which translation do you prefer to use in singing the Psalms?

I would be happy to use the 1650 Scottish Metrical Psalter, but my preference is Coverdale's.

Your evidence is written and from an English source.

Actualy Thomas Shepard was a New England Puritan.

Unfortunately, you did not provide any definition or examples of unregulated circumstances of worship, although you did state that there are both regulated and unregulated circumstances.

I provided the general definition of a circumstance, i.e. something “common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed” (WCF i.6). By this is meant those things needful to facilitate the worship of God and/or those things that are to accompany the worship of God but do not, in and of themselves, formally constitute worship. Some of these are regulated, e.g. the day (sabbath) but some are unregulated, e.g. the time (8am, 10am, 11am etc.)

 

[Iosias]

Does your church use a cantor or a precentor? Do you use a choir or a soloist?

No.

 

[Iosias]

I was frankly surprised to find that a confession of sin is considered to be a sin offering, despite the fact that scripture (Hebrews 9:26) states that Jesus Christ is the sin offering for Christians.

You miss the point. I am not saying that "a confession of sin is considered to be a sin offering" but rather within the order of service the confession of sin parallels the OT sin offering.

1. None of the holy days appointed by God for His people in the Old Testament, which you use as your model, are accounted for. Shall we assume that they are insignificant, but that the other aspects are significant. How does one reach this conclusion?

2. The liturgical order given above is not to be found in the Old Testament.

Try Leviticus 9

3. There is not a shred of evidence in the New Testament that this order was used by the primitive church.

And your point is....

 

[david01]

I would be happy to use the 1650 Scottish Metrical Psalter, but my preference is Coverdale's.



Actualy Thomas Shepard was a New England Puritan.



I provided the general definition of a circumstance, i.e. something “common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed” (WCF i.6). By this is meant those things needful to facilitate the worship of God and/or those things that are to accompany the worship of God but do not, in and of themselves, formally constitute worship. Some of these are regulated, e.g. the day (sabbath) but some are unregulated, e.g. the time (8am, 10am, 11am etc.)

Thank you for your responses. However, I regret that you have yet to provide a reasonable explanation for the absence of artificial heating in the original construction of seventeenth and eighteenth century New England meetinghouses.

 

[david01]

No.

If your church lackes a cantor, precentor, choir, or soloist, how are the Psalms then sung in light of the fact that congregational singing is foreign to the pages of scripture?

 

[david01]

You miss the point. I am not saying that "a confession of sin is considered to be a sin offering" but rather within the order of service the confession of sin parallels the OT sin offering.

There is absolutely no scriptural support to this notion. No where do we find a confession of sin used to parallel the OT sin offering. In the New Testament the sacrifice of Jesus Christ is shown to parallel the OT sin offering. In the meetings of the primitive church that sacrifice was seen not as a confession of our sins, but as represented in the bread and wine.



The Pentateuch is explicit in the divine commandment to observe certain annual feasts to the Lord such as Passover, the Feast of Booths, Pentecost, the Feast of First Fruits. If the Pentateuch is to be used as a model for the liturgy of the church, some understanding and explanation of these annual feasts needs to be made. Otherwise, it appears that the Pentateuch is merely a mine for selectively choosing bits and pieces to reform according to our own preferences.

Try Leviticus 9

Leviticus 9 describes the consecration of Aaron and his family for divine service in the Tabernacle. This was a unique event and did not serve as the model for the weekly Sabbath service in either the Tabernacle or the Temple. To force this unique event into a model for the liturgy of the church is, therefore, a violation of the RPW.

And your point is....

My point is that if this understanding of the RPW was the apostolic practice, we should find some evidence of its use in the primitive church.

 

[Iosias]

Thank you for your responses. However, I regret that you have yet to provide a reasonable explanation for the absence of artificial heating in the original construction of seventeenth and eighteenth century New England meetinghouses.

What I have demonstrated is that your assertion that the reason for its lack was the sabbatarianism of the Puritans to be wrong. Why did they lacked central heating? Who knows, but it wasn't their view of sabbatarianism.

If your church lackes a cantor, precentor, choir, or soloist, how are the Psalms then sung in light of the fact that congregational singing is foreign to the pages of scripture?

The congregation sings the psalms as we are told to do so in Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16.

John Gill writes A Discourse on Singing of Psalms as a Part of Divine Worship:

...what I shall chiefly attend to, will be to prove that gospel churches, or the churches of Christ, under the gospel dispensation, ought to sing the praises of God vocally; and this I shall do from the following considerations.

1. From the prophecies of the Old Testament, which declare, that the churches, in gospel times, should sing; and in which they are called upon, exhorted, and encouraged to do it. In many of the psalms, which respect the times of the Messiah, and the gathering of the Gentiles to him under the gospel dispensation, such as the 47th, 68th, and 95th, the people of God are frequently invited to sing praise unto him, and make a joyful noise unto him with psalms. Likewise, in the prophecies of Isaiah (Isa. 52:7, 8, 9; 35:1, 2, 6, 10; 26:1; 54:1) it is declared, that not only the watchmen, gospel ministers, such whose feet are beautiful on the mountains, who bring good tidings, and publish peace and salvation, shall lift up the voice, and that with the voice together shall they sing; but also the churches under their care, and such souls they are made useful to, are called upon to break forth into joy, and sing together; yea, it is promised, that the Gentile church, under the name of the wilderness, and solitary place, shall be glad and rejoice, even with joy and singing; that even the tongue of the dumb shall sing, and the ransomed of the Lord return, and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads.
Moreover, that in that day, meaning the gospel day, shall this song be sung in the land of Judah, in the gospel church: We have a strong city; salvation will God appoint for walls and bulwarks. To add no more; how expressly is the Gentile church exhorted and encouraged to this work, in another part of these prophecies? where it is said, Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing; and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child; for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wise, saith the Lord. Blessed be God, these predictions are, in a great measure, fulfilled; gospel churches among the Gentiles, as well as in the land of Judea, have lift up their voices, and sung the praises of God according to these prophecies; which is, at once, a confirmation of the authority of the scriptures, and of the truth of this ordinance.



But,


2. I prove it to be a duty incumbent on gospel churches, under the New Testament dispensation, from express precepts and directions given to them concerning it. It is not only prophesied of in the Old Testament, but it is also commanded in the New, that they should sing. The church at Ephesus was a gospel church, as was also that at Colosse; and they are both expressly enjoined as such, by the Apostle Paul, who in this, as in their things, had the mind of Christ to sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). Besides, if singing was not a duty belonging to New Testament churches, why should any directions about it be given to them? such as to sing with grace in their hearts, with the spirit, and with the understanding; and to do it in such a manner, so as to speak to themselves, and to teach and admonish one another (1 Cor. 14:15; Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16).


3. That New Testament churches should sing, will more fully appear from New Testament instances and examples. There are not only prophecies and precepts, but also precedents in favor of this practice; and the first instance of this kind I shall mention, is, that of Christ and his Apostles, who sung an hymn, as a church, at the close of the Lord’s supper; of this the evangelist assures us; When they had sung an hymn, says he, they went out unto the mount of olives (Matthew 26:30): Our ears are continually dinned, by those who are of a different mind from us, with an old translation, in which, they say, the words are rendered, When they had given thanks. But, First, This work was done already; he, i.e. Christ, took the cup, and gave thanks.
​

My point is that if this understanding of the RPW was the apostolic practice, we should find some evidence of its use in the primitive church.

Not really, as I noted before, the order of service is not governed by the RPW only the elements of worship. You disagree with how a friend of mine interprets Levitcus 9, fine and dandy, but that simply means you disagree with his order of service, which isn't governed by the RPW anyway.

 

[david01]

What I have demonstrated is that your assertion that the reason for its lack was the sabbatarianism of the Puritans to be wrong. Why did they lacked central heating? Who knows, but it wasn't their view of sabbatarianism.

Would you care to give me some idea as to why you think the New England meetinghouses of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were constructed without heating? I offer the following possibilities and am open to other suggestions, as well:

1. They carried on the building tradition of English meetinghouses, which did not require heating because of the moderate climate. There was no tradition in England of meetinghouses for Puritans and the New England frame meetinghouse was architecturally and constructionally vastly different than anything in England.
2. The climate of New England was milder at the time such that heating was a luxury and not a necessity, given the one-hour Sunday morning services. This is not true. There was one year in the eighteenth century in which every month had a hard frost in New England. There are records of church members suffering frostbite during the winter. Puritan services typically ran from sunrise to sunset with a break for dinner at midday.
3. Efficient heating methods for public buildings had not been devised. Although heating methods were considerably less efficient than those currently employed, public buildings were heated, including places of public assembly such as courthouses and legislative buildings.
4. There was a great fear of conflagration such that the Puritans chose unheated buildings rather than the risk of fire. Although buildings did burn down on a fairly frequent basis, the fear of fire did not keep them from using heating in all other manner of buildings.
5. It was a cultural tradition not to heat churches and meetinghouses. As noted above, the New England meetinghouse was a radical architectural innovation unlike anything in England, so the cultural ties in all other aspects of the meetinghouse are virtually non-existant.
6. There just might have been a religious motivation. This has been discussed heretofore.

The congregation sings the psalms as we are told to do so in Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16.

"speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord;" Ephesians 5:19

"Let the word of God richly dwell within you. with all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with thankfulness in your hearts to God." Colossians 3:16

In Ephesians there is nothing concerning any instruction for the congregation as a body to sing. Instead, Paul commences by tell them to speak to one another. Then he instructs them to sing and make melody with their heart (note it is singular) to the Lord.

In Colossians he instructs them to teach and admonish each other with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs. Again he tells them to sing with thankfulness in their hearts (plural) to the Lord.

Because God has not commanded congregational singing, shall we presume that He accepts it as proper worship?

John Gill writes A Discourse on Singing of Psalms as a Part of Divine Worship:

...what I shall chiefly attend to, will be to prove that gospel churches, or the churches of Christ, under the gospel dispensation, ought to sing the praises of God vocally; and this I shall do from the following considerations.

1. From the prophecies of the Old Testament, which declare, that the churches, in gospel times, should sing; and in which they are called upon, exhorted, and encouraged to do it. In many of the psalms, which respect the times of the Messiah, and the gathering of the Gentiles to him under the gospel dispensation, such as the 47th, 68th, and 95th, the people of God are frequently invited to sing praise unto him, and make a joyful noise unto him with psalms. Likewise, in the prophecies of Isaiah (Isa. 52:7, 8, 9; 35:1, 2, 6, 10; 26:1; 54:1) it is declared, that not only the watchmen, gospel ministers, such whose feet are beautiful on the mountains, who bring good tidings, and publish peace and salvation, shall lift up the voice, and that with the voice together shall they sing; but also the churches under their care, and such souls they are made useful to, are called upon to break forth into joy, and sing together; yea, it is promised, that the Gentile church, under the name of the wilderness, and solitary place, shall be glad and rejoice, even with joy and singing; that even the tongue of the dumb shall sing, and the ransomed of the Lord return, and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads.
Moreover, that in that day, meaning the gospel day, shall this song be sung in the land of Judah, in the gospel church: We have a strong city; salvation will God appoint for walls and bulwarks. To add no more; how expressly is the Gentile church exhorted and encouraged to this work, in another part of these prophecies? where it is said, Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing; and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child; for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wise, saith the Lord. Blessed be God, these predictions are, in a great measure, fulfilled; gospel churches among the Gentiles, as well as in the land of Judea, have lift up their voices, and sung the praises of God according to these prophecies; which is, at once, a confirmation of the authority of the scriptures, and of the truth of this ordinance.



But,


2. I prove it to be a duty incumbent on gospel churches, under the New Testament dispensation, from express precepts and directions given to them concerning it. It is not only prophesied of in the Old Testament, but it is also commanded in the New, that they should sing. The church at Ephesus was a gospel church, as was also that at Colosse; and they are both expressly enjoined as such, by the Apostle Paul, who in this, as in their things, had the mind of Christ to sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). Besides, if singing was not a duty belonging to New Testament churches, why should any directions about it be given to them? such as to sing with grace in their hearts, with the spirit, and with the understanding; and to do it in such a manner, so as to speak to themselves, and to teach and admonish one another (1 Cor. 14:15; Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16).


3. That New Testament churches should sing, will more fully appear from New Testament instances and examples. There are not only prophecies and precepts, but also precedents in favor of this practice; and the first instance of this kind I shall mention, is, that of Christ and his Apostles, who sung an hymn, as a church, at the close of the Lord’s supper; of this the evangelist assures us; When they had sung an hymn, says he, they went out unto the mount of olives (Matthew 26:30): Our ears are continually dinned, by those who are of a different mind from us, with an old translation, in which, they say, the words are rendered, When they had given thanks. But, First, This work was done already; he, i.e. Christ, took the cup, and gave thanks.
​

This is all quite instructive, of course. However, one cannot definitively state that any of the cited Old Testament references were intended for the weekly worship services of the Church. I have addressed the Ephesians and Colossians verses above, but would also note that when an assembly of people are singing the same song together it is quite impossible for them to be speaking to one another or teaching one another. As for the singing of the Psalms at the last supper, this is not a surprise at all. Every Seder meal incorporates the singing of Psalms. This is a familial activity unassociated with synagogue worship. To typify this singular event as a commandment for the church of God in its worship services is similar to the Papists taking the Magnificat (Luke1:46-55) and turning it into a prayer.

Not really, as I noted before, the order of service is not governed by the RPW only the elements of worship. You disagree with how a friend of mine interprets Levitcus 9, fine and dandy, but that simply means you disagree with his order of service, which isn't governed by the RPW anyway.

More to the point, given the fact that the order of service does not fall under the RPW, is the lack of evidence that the primitive church meetings were governed by the same understanding of the RPW as the Puritan church meetings.

 

[Iosias]

Would you care to give me some idea as to why you think the New England meetinghouses of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were constructed without heating?

Who cares? This may interest someone who likes the history of New England meetinghouses of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries but it has nothing to do with the RPW. At any rate, the place of meeting is a circumstance of worship not an element and so is not covered by the RPW.

There just might have been a religious motivation. This has been discussed heretofore.

This has been discussed and your hypothesis has been shown to be highly doubtful. William Ames (1576-1633) writes in his The Marrow of Theology that it was lawful to light fire on the sabbath. Thomas Shepherd (New England Puritan), who taught at Harvard, used Ames' book as the core text and taught the same. Further, Cotton Mather (another New England Puritan) said that if a student of divinity were to have nothing but the Bible and The Marrow, he would be a most able minister.

In Ephesians there is nothing concerning any instruction for the congregation as a body to sing...he tells them to sing with thankfulness in their hearts (plural) to the Lord.

Well you have just contradicted yourself.

Because God has not commanded congregational singing, shall we presume that He accepts it as proper worship?

He has commanded congregational singing as I have shown previously.

Every Seder meal incorporates the singing of Psalms. This is a familial activity unassociated with synagogue worship.

But it was at this event that Christ established the sacrament of the Lord's Supper which is an element of worship. He attached the singing of psalms to it. So those who sing psalms are doing no less than following the example of Christ himself.

More to the point, given the fact that the order of service does not fall under the RPW, is the lack of evidence that the primitive church meetings were governed by the same understanding of the RPW as the Puritan church meetings.

I don't understand the question. The RPW governs the elements of worship. The elements of worship are the same from the NT church as they are now.

Prayer, with thanksgiving, being one special part of religious worship, is by God required of all men: and, that it may be accepted, it is to be made in the name of the Son, by the help of His Spirit, according to His will, with understanding, reverence, humility, fervency, faith, love and perseverance; and, if vocal, in a known tongue. The reading of the Scriptures with godly fear, the sound preaching and conscionable hearing of the Word, in obedience unto God, with understanding, faith and reverence, singing of psalms with grace in the heart; as also, the due administration and worthy receiving of the sacraments instituted by Christ, are all parts of the ordinary religious worship of God: beside religious oaths, vows, solemn fastings, and thanksgivings upon special occasions, which are, in their several times and seasons, to be used in an holy and religious manner.