Some churches which hold to the regulative principle of worship (RPW) insist that recitation of creeds or portions of confessions or catechisms by the congregation is an important act in the public worship of God. Other churches who hold that principle do not consider such recitation lawful. Given that the principle has a "guilty until proven innocent" structure, how do those who hold to the principle and believe in confessional recitation demonstrate that God requires confessional recitation (since that is the condition demanded by that principle)?
Note: this question is about a disagreement among those who hold to the RPW. I'm not interested in this question in hearing about why the RPW is wrong, or why confessional recitation ought to be done in some other worship paradigm. Please refrain from answering unless you understand the RPW.