Samuel Rutherford for the 21st Century (II)
Guy M. Richard
Rutherford’s Early Life and Education
Samuel Rutherford was born in 1600–the same year as King Charles I and Edmund Calamy, both of whom would later become outspoken critics of Rutherford’s jus divinum (i.e., divine right) brand of Presbyterianism. He was born in the town of Nisbet in the parish of Crailing, approximately four miles from Jedburgh, in what is called the Borders region of Scotland. Not much is known about his early life or education. Robert MacWard, who is probably Rutherford’s closest disciple and is the author of the first biographical account of his life, states that he was “a Gentleman by extraction.” Others, however, in the 20th century, claim that his father was a farmer or a miller. Prima facie, one would think that MacWard’s account would be the closest to the truth, seeing as how he had the benefit of knowing Rutherford personally and, therefore, should have known the story of his early life more accurately than would be possible for later researchers to discern. But, whatever the case may be in regard to Rutherford’s family, it is apparent that they at least were of sufficient means to allow Rutherford and his brother to receive the best education possible at the time.
Rutherford’s early education was most likely at the grammar school in the Jedburgh abbey, where the curriculum would certainly have been based upon the medieval trivium–i.e., grammar, dialectic, and rhetoric. Whatever else he gained from his time in Jedburgh, Rutherford clearly gained a thorough grounding in Latin. This was vital in the seventeenth century, because university lectures at that time were given entirely in Latin (still the lingua franca of the day). Not only did students have to pass a rigorous Latin entrance examination just to get in to university, but they also were required to speak only Latin among themselves the entire time they were there. After passing his Latin entrance exam, Rutherford began his course of study at the University of Edinburgh in November 1617.
Rutherford’s Conversion
Rutherford received the M.A. degree in 1621 from Edinburgh and, two years later, was appointed Regent of Humanity for the university. He was chosen for this position over three other candidates, who far exceeded him in years, because of his “eminent abilities of mind, and vertuous [sic] disposition.” Shortly after being named Regent in 1623, however, Rutherford was embroiled in two controversies that called this virtuous disposition into question and resulted in his being removed from the university. The more serious of the two controversies is recorded in the city records of Edinburgh for February 3, 1626. There we are told by the Principal of the university John Adamson that Rutherford had committed a great scandal by falling in fornication with his eventual wife Eupham Hamilton. Unfortunately, this account does not completely square with the university’s record, which states that Rutherford resigned on account of an “irregular marriage.”
Because the details lying behind this charge are nowhere given, a great debate has ensued over the years as to what exactly happened. Those who dismiss Adamson’s charge against Rutherford do so largely on the basis of the difficulty they have in believing that Rutherford could commit fornication one year and then be appointed minister in Anwoth the next. While this is a legitimate point that ought not to be treated cavalierly, it, nevertheless, seems best to conclude that Adamson’s charge was in fact correct. For one thing, the committee that was formed to investigate the charge against Rutherford and to appoint a replacement for him in the event that the charge was substantiated, did in fact appoint a replacement, which suggests that they did in fact find that the charge was substantiated.
Before moving on, it may be helpful to pause for a moment and to consider what lessons there might be for us to learn from Rutherford’s sin of fornication. There is, in the first place, a stark warning here to those who are ministers of the gospel or who are candidates for the ministry. The allurement of sexual immorality has ensnared far too many men and done untold harm (from a human perspective) to the cause of Christ. We need to be on guard against this in our own lives. In the second place, there is a warning here to those who might think they are above this sin and that something like this could never happen to them. Although it is true that Rutherford was probably not converted at the time he fell–as we will soon see–he was, nevertheless, described as being of a “vertuous disposition.” The example of Rutherford and many other at least outwardly godly men should be enough to alarm us and to teach us that none of us, no matter how virtuous, are above the reaches of this (or any other) sin.
As a result of what was clearly a profoundly difficult time in Rutherford’s life, one in which he was confronted like never before with the corruption of his own heart, Rutherford appears to have experienced Christian conversion. On this there is little disagreement among his biographers. Even some of those who deny the charges of fornication still trace his conversion to this point in time. If they are right that this event did precipitate Rutherford’s conversion, then it would help to explain why he might have been shown leniency and been appointed as minister in Anwoth only a little over a year after committing what certainly would have been a serious sin in the eyes of the church.
One of the most convincing reasons for tracing Rutherford’s conversion to the time of the fornication scandal is that this event sets the paradigm for the remainder of Rutherford’s Christian life. From this point on, Rutherford’s Christianity becomes deeply experiential, which one would expect to find following conversion, especially a conversion brought on by a public humiliation of the order that Rutherford endured. Beginning at this decisive moment and continuing throughout the remainder of his days, Rutherford’s life becomes marked by a profound sensitivity to the sinfulness of his own sin. And this, in turn, ensured that his life would also be marked by a profound gratitude and an overwhelming appreciation for what Christ accomplished on the cross on his behalf. These two aspects of Rutherford’s life–a profound awareness of his sin and a profound gratitude for Christ’s finished work on the cross–will uniquely qualify and equip him to speak so powerfully to the souls of others.
