How Transylvania Presbytery characterized Rankin - bigotry, fanaticism, personal failings

Context

Robert Davidson’s 1847 “History of the Presbyterian Church in Kentucky” presents the Presbytery’s perspective on the Rankin schism. Chapter III, titled “The Rankin Schism,” includes sections explicitly labeled “Rankin’s Bigotry” and “His Pretences to Divine Direction.” This framing shapes the entire narrative, characterizing Rankin as a troublemaker rather than a theological reformer.

Extract

SMALL as the circle of Presbyterian influence was, the blighting curse of schism was destined to contract it, and to retard the healthy and triumphant march of evangelical truth. The author of this disturbance was the Rev. Adam Rankin. We have already seen him at the Conference of Cane Run, attempting to sow the seeds of discord by obtruding his rigid opinions on the subject of Psalmody. Although his brethren, on that occasion, disapproved of his views, he obstinately persisted in inculcating them in every quarter. Had he confined himself to the mere advocacy and use of Rouse’s literal version, no one would have taken umbrage; but not satisfied with calm and dispassionate argument, he took the field as a fierce polemic, and launched his anathemas against all who presumed to differ from him.

[After describing his appeal to the General Assembly…] In total disregard of this pious and salutary advice, and as if rather irritated by it, Mr. Rankin no sooner returned home, than he vented the most censorious invectives against the Presbyterian clergy, as deists and blasphemers, rejecters of revelation and revilers of God’s word; and all the admirers of Watts he unceremoniously debarred from the Lord’s table. Nor did he stop here, but shielded himself under the sanction of a Divine warrant, pretending to be directed in this and all other affairs of moment, by dreams and visions.

[From the biography section:] He appears to have been of a contentious, self-willed turn from his youth, for he had not been half a year preaching before he involved himself in a quarrel with his Virginia brethren on his favorite topic. At the Cane Run Conference, he tried to produce discord; he went to the General Assembly with the intention to dispute; and his wranglings at last ended in a schism. Obstinate and opinionated, his nature was a stranger to concession, and peace was to be bought only by coming over to his positions.

Psalmody was his monomania. He had, withal, a dash of enthusiasm in his disposition, bordering on fanaticism. Impressed with the persuasion that God had raised him up as a special instrument to reinstate “the Lord’s song” in its ancient honors in the sanctuary, he felt himself lifted above infirmities, and able to stem, single-handed, the torrent of opposition.

Significance

This extract is crucial for Chapter 5 because it shows how the Presbyterian establishment framed the controversy. Notice what is emphasized and what is minimized:

1. Emphasis on personality: Words like “obstinate,” “opinionated,” “contentious,” “self-willed,” “monomania,” “fanaticism” - the focus is on Rankin’s character, not his theological arguments

2. Dismissal of theology: The phrase “Had he confined himself to the mere advocacy and use of Rouse’s literal version, no one would have taken umbrage” suggests toleration was possible - framing Rankin’s behavior, not his doctrine, as the problem

3. The “dreams” issue becomes central: His claims to divine direction through dreams are presented as the real scandal, shifting attention from the Scriptural arguments about psalmody

4. The verdict from the opposition: “Psalmody was his monomania” - reducing his principled theological stand to a personal obsession

This is the opponents’ characterization that must be compared with Rankin’s own self-presentation in his pamphlet. Davidson wrote this 55 years after the events, with access to Presbytery records, and his framing became the standard Presbyterian account of the controversy.