The Rous-Watts controversy as Old Testament Psalmody versus New Testament Hymnody

Source: the-transition-from-psalmody-to-hymnody-in-the-southern-presbyterian-church
Page: 45
Type: quote
Confidence: high
Date mentioned: 1788
Topics: psalmody-controversy theological-arguments rous-vs-watts
Institutions: synod-of-new-york-and-philadelphia

Context

The dissertation describes the 1788 meeting of the Synod of New York and Philadelphia, which adopted The Directory for the Worship of God. This passage explains how the controversy had evolved beyond simply Rous versus Watts versions to a deeper theological divide about the nature of Christian worship.

Extract

In the meeting of 1788, the synod adopted The Directory for the Worship of God, of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America. Where the opening sentence of the original chapter “Of the Singing of Psalms” in the Westminster Directory of 1644 had said “the duty of Christians to praise God publicly by singing of Psalms,” it now read “by singing of Psalms or hymns.” Other changes dealt with giving up the practice of lining, and of devoting more time to “this excellent part of divine service.” The real issue of the Rous-Watts controversy was now Old Testament Psalmody versus New Testament Hymnody, and those advocating the use of Watts meant his hymns as well as his Psalm paraphrases.

Significance

This extract identifies a crucial turning point in the controversy and clarifies its theological stakes:

  1. Revision of Westminster: The Synod formally changed the Westminster Directory from “singing of Psalms” to “singing of Psalms or hymns” - a fundamental alteration of the Reformed confessional standard
  2. Beyond Rous vs. Watts versions: The “real issue” was no longer simply which version of the Psalms to sing, but whether uninspired hymns could be sung at all
  3. “Old Testament Psalmody versus New Testament Hymnody”: This framing suggests proponents of Watts were arguing for a “New Testament” form of worship against an “Old Testament” limitation
  4. Hymns, not just psalms: Those advocating Watts “meant his hymns as well as his Psalm paraphrases” - the controversy had expanded beyond psalm versions to include Watts’ original hymn compositions

This helps explain why the controversy was so divisive: it was not merely about textual preference but about the fundamental principle of worship. For exclusive psalmists like Rankin, the shift to “Psalms or hymns” represented an abandonment of the regulative principle of worship.