Lecture given at meeting of the Inverness branch of the Scottish Reformation Society on 20/10/2014.
How shall we study Lady Glenorchy’s life? I shall begin by first giving a brief survey of Scotland and
Edinburgh during the decades of her lifetime because she lived in a very
different world from us. Sometimes, knowing such details helps us to understand
better a person. A more important question is, Why should we study her life? I hope my talk will give several
reasons, but I will begin by referring to a far more important authority for
looking at her life.
Dr. John Macleod once wrote
a series of articles for the Free Church of Scotland Monthly Record and that
series is now published by the Banner of Truth as a slim volume with the title Some
Favourite Books. It is basically an introduction to what the author regarded
as some of the best books connected to Christian spirituality, most of them
Scottish. Among them are classics such as The Christian’s Great Interest by William Guthrie and
Samuel Rutherford’s Letters. We may be
surprised to know that among the list of twenty is one on the life of Lady
Glenorchy, put together by her pastor Thomas Jones, and the noted theologian
observes that in his opinion this book ‘is one of the abiding treasures of Scotland’s religious history’. I
wonder how many of us have it or even have heard of it.
For those of us who are
interested in local aspects of Christianity, they may like to know that Lady
Glenorchy was in correspondence with James Calder, the minister of Croy, who
experienced a notable revival there in the 1770s. Macleod also mentions Lady
Glenorchy several times in his well-known volume, Scottish Theology, and in that volume we can also read about other
notable individuals from that period.
The times in which she lived
Lady Glenorchy lived from
1741 to 1786. Her life was not long but she did live through a turbulent
period, with many changes taking place within Scottish society. Four years
after she was born, the Jacobite rebellion connected to Bonnie Prince Charlie
occurred, indicating there were many who were opposed to the Protestant
government that then ruled over Great Britain, and indeed opposition to the
political union between Scotland and England would last throughout her
lifetime. Three years after she died, the French Revolution occurred and, as we
know, it was attempt to destroy the old order of society and many of the
aristocracy were guillotined. That degree of change did not happen in Britain,
but there were movements wanting to change the structure of society here, and
she as a member of an aristocratic family must have been aware of them.
Dr. Webster, a minister in
Edinburgh and who was a friend of Lady Glenorchy’s, engaged in a pioneering census in 1755 (it was almost the first in
Europe since Roman times) and concluded that Scotland had a population then of
1,265,380. Over the remainder of the century it increased by about 340,000,
which is a large increase indicating that life was getting better to some
extent, although the figure would have been even higher if there had not been
ongoing emigration.
Nevertheless there was a
great gulf between the very rich and the poor. Perhaps a quotation from
Benjamin Franklin from a report he wrote in 1772 will suffice for this detail: ‘I have lately made a tour through Ireland and Scotland. In these
countries a small part of the society are landlords, great noblemen and
gentlemen, extremely opulent, living in the highest affluence and magnificence.
The bulk of the people tenants, extremely poor, living in the most sordid
wretchedness in dirty hovels of mud and straw, and clothed only in rags.’ How would a Christian aristocrat respond to those conditions?
Intellectually, Scotland was
changing. It was the time of the Scottish Enlightenment when men like David
Hume, Adam Smith and Frances Hutcheson were promoting the priority of reason,
and a rapid departure from the authority of the Bible in the seats of learning
was underway. Indeed many observers are of the opinion that Scotland at that
time was leading the way in a sceptical approach to intellectual thinking. Lady
Glenorchy was well-educated, and while she may not have been an intellectual
she would have been able to sense the direction in which society was being
directed by those powerful thinkers. Did she see it as necessary to confront
them, and if so, how would she do so?
At the start of the century,
Sabbath keeping was strictly enforced and accepted in the Lowlands whereas by
the end of the century the attitude towards what was permissible behaviour had
greatly changed. No doubt, one reason for this was changes in the church but
another reason was the effect of increasing contacts with England and
elsewhere. Opposition to the stage had decreased as well and other previously
banned behaviour had become acceptable, especially to do with sports and shared
community events such as dancing and partying. There are several references in
her diary to the danger of innovations in worldliness, but what would be the
best way for her to do something about it?
Ecclesiastically, the
Presbyterian Church in Scotland was divided and dividing. Ebenezer Erskine and
others had left the Church of Scotland in the 1730s. They formed the Secession
Church in 1733, but it divided into Burghers and Anti-Burghers in 1745, and
towards the end of the century both groups divided further. In 1761, Thomas
Gillespie and Thomas Boston (the son of the famous father) led another group
out of the Church of Scotland, with the new denomination called the Relief
Church, with one of its main concerns being an attempt to bring different
groups of Christians together. Within the Church of Scotland the majority were
those known as the Moderates and they lived according to their name as far as
devotion in religion was concerned, although they were very enthusiastic about
culture and its concerns. Other groups were also present in Scotland, including
Methodists associated with John Wesley.
A few Baptist churches were beginning to appear in the final decades of
her life. The Sandemanians were having an influence beyond their small number
over their inadequate teaching about the content of faith. Would it be
straightforward for an influential Christian aristocratic lady to function in
such a situation, and what did she think of a divided church, and was there
anything she could do about it?
That is a very brief survey
of the country into which Lady Glenorchy was born and in which she lived for
forty-five years. We can bear these details in mind as we proceed. What about
the city of Edinburgh during her lifetime? Edinburgh, where she would live for
most of her life, was changing. Here are some important dates. In 1741, the
Royal Infirmary was opened because of the amount of diseases that existed. A
theatre was opened in the Canongate in 1747, indicating a desire for dramatic
entertainment. A stagecoach service was opened between Edinburgh and
Glasgow in 1749. There was a survey in 1751 that revealed the Old Town was in a
dreadful state, and in the following year the town council agreed proposals for
erecting new public buildings and expanding the city. In 1753, stagecoaches to
London commenced, a journey that too two weeks. Dr. Webster’s census in 1755
said the population of Edinburgh and Leith was 57,220. Linen weaving connected
to the Industrial Revolution began in 1757. In 1760, Thomas Braidwood opened the first
school in Britain for deaf children. A competition to design the New Town was
held and the construction began the following year. Between 1768 and 1771, the first
edition of Encyclopædia Britannica was printed. By 1775, the
population had increased to 70,430 and in the same year such was the scale of
the problem that a directory of brothels and prostitutes was published. In
1777, there were eight legal and 400 illegal distilleries in Edinburgh.
What
do those dates tell us about the city? The city’s population was increasing
rapidly, there was an air of confidence among some regarding the future, the
city had become an intellectual centre, the Industrial Revolution was changing
methods of employment, interactions with other cities were easier and more
regular, there was a growth of interest in the arts, and sin was increasing as
well.
Approaching her life
I suppose that brief survey
indicates that we could approach the life of Lady Glenorchy from a variety of
angles. The title I was given indicates it is her spirituality that is the
angle we should consider, so I will try and do so. What I propose to do is
approach her life from an historical point of view and note some major moments
as we go along. It is important to remember that she was a child of her times
just as we are of ours, and no doubt she had blind spots that are easy for us
to see. But when we do we should remember the Lord’s warning about trying to remove such a spot when we have a beam in
our own eye.
Before we look a bit closer
at her life, it may whet our appetites if I mentioned some sayings that she
recorded as they may give samples of the kind of Christian she became. They are
not in historical order:
‘What
a dreadful enemy is the world to religion!’
‘A
self-righteous spirit is ever present with me, prompting me to rest in duties
performed, and expect rewards.’
‘All
things appeared as dross and dung, when compared to the love of God shed abroad
in the heart.’
‘I
find that he [God] is always willing to impart strength for duty when we are
willing to perform it.’
‘What
joy does it give one’s heart to relieve the
indigent members of Christ! Surely all that the world calls pleasure is not to
be compared to it.’
Before her conversion
Willielma Maxwell was born
two hundred and seventy three years ago, on the second of September 1741. She
was named after her father William, a doctor who had made a fortune, but who sadly
died before she was born and after only two years of marriage. Her mother
however was a very ambitious woman, both for herself and for her two daughters
(the oldest girl was called Mary) and twelve years later she married Lord Alva,
a prominent judge in Scotland – he was seventy-three years old when he married Mrs. Maxwell. So the
daughters, in their teenage years, found themselves living in Edinburgh, in one
of the most important homes in the country.
The ambitious mother must
have been very satisfied when the elder daughter Mary was married in April 1761
to William, the seventeenth Earl of Sutherland, at that time the premier earl
in Scotland. No doubt her delight went into overdrive when John, Lord Viscount
Glenorchy, the third son of the Earl of Breadalbane, indicated his wish to
marry Willielma, and the wedding took place in September 1761. We can imagine
the mother’s delight at having her daughters married into
the wealthiest families in Scotland, with all the power and prestige connected
to them, not to mention her own situation as the wife of a leading judge in the
country.
As can be imagined,
Willielma lived a life of luxury and pleasure. Through her husband, she found
herself able to stay in magnificent properties throughout Britain. Their wealth
enabled them immediately to indulge in one of the favourite pastimes of the
wealthy at that time, which was to go on a prolonged tour of Europe, which was
how they passed the first two years of their married life. Yet despite the
constant opportunities for selfish pleasure, she began to sense the shallowness
of such living and wondered if a religious lifestyle would be more profitable.
Thoughts of this potential change in behaviour were strengthened by periodic
periods of illness and she made resolutions to turn to God. As is common, she
forgot her resolutions once she recovered and resumed her participation in the
social activities of her class.
Yet the Lord of heaven had
his eye on Lady Glenorchy and his hand was directing events that would lead her
to discover a very different kind of life. Her husband had a home in
Staffordshire and nearby lived another wealthy family, that of Sir Rowland
Hill. His family was very different from that of the Glenorchys, with several
of the younger members being earnest Christians, and one of them was Rowland
Hill, who later became a famous preacher. Willielma was drawn towards this
family and became friendly with one of the female members of her own age.
Throughout the biography of Lady Glenorchy, this woman is known as Miss Hill,
and she became a spiritual guide to her new friend.
The conversion of Lady
Glenorchy
Lady Glenorchy had another
experience of serious illness accompanied by a form of depression. Not
surprisingly, she took time to convalesce, and during this period she came
under conviction of sin. She was in need of spiritual counsel and she found
such a person in her friend, Miss Hill. In a letter she sent to Lady Glenorchy
at that time, Miss Hill advised her to make sure that she was really trusting
in Christ and not to depend on her own efforts at personal reformation. It
could have been the case that Miss Hill had sensed that Lady Glenorchy was
prone to a spirit of self-righteousness and therefore stressed very strongly
that she should trust in Christ alone. God used this letter to bring spiritual
insight into Lady Glenorchy’s
experience and she soon made public her faith in Jesus in 1765.
The biblical passage through
which she found peace seems to have been Romans 3. On her birthday in 1768, she
reflected in her diary about her conversion three years earlier. After
mentioning the letter from Miss Hill and the consequent increase in spiritual
interest, she goes on to describe a particular day on which, after a time of
earnest prayer, she opened her Bible. It is not clear in her account if she
opened it at random or whether she chose to read the chapter. During her
reading of it, she records: ‘The
eyes of my understanding were opened, and I saw wisdom and beauty in the way of
salvation by a crucified Redeemer. I saw that God could be just, and justify
the ungodly. The Lord Jesus now appeared to me as the city of refuge, and I was
glad to flee to him as my only hope.’
One wealthy Christian once
observed that he was glad that the letter ‘m’ was in one of the phrases
Paul used to describe the Christians in Corinth. The apostle wrote that ‘not many mighty, and not many noble’ were called, and the wealthy believer rejoiced that Paul did not
write, ‘not any
mighty and not any noble’. Among the relatively few mighty and noble that were called by God is
Lady Glenorchy, and from the time of her conversion she devoted herself and her
resources to the cause of Christ.
The new Christian
Now that she had been
converted, Lady Glenorchy had new priorities. Yet her station in life presented
several barriers to spiritual growth. In addition to the regular temptations
that accompanied the social life of the wealthy, she also had to cope with her
inability to understand Gaelic (her husband’s estate was near Kenmore in Perthshire and services in the parish
church there were predominantly in Gaelic) and with her lack of Christian
contacts (the only person she knew to ask for help was Miss Hill). So she faced
difficulties connected to public worship and private personal fellowship. Again
she turned to her friend for advice. We might find some of the counsel to be
rather elementary, yet we should not forget that in addition to being a
spiritual infant Lady Glenorchy was ignorant of most of the religious practices
normally associated with Christian discipleship.
So what did Miss Hill say to
the new Christian? As I mention some of the advice she gave, we should remind
ourselves that Miss Hill herself is a young believer. One thing Miss Hill told
her to do was to remember that God’s
omniscient eye was always on her, whether she was engaged in ordinary
activities or in public worship or in personal devotions. Moreover Miss Hill
advised her to meditate before she prayed because such meditation could lead to
her having ‘a lively sense of the infinite perfections of
that God before whose throne we would appear’. It was important for her to have a humbling awareness of her
sinfulness as she drew near to God, yet, wrote Miss Hill, ‘we must not dishonour God so far as to appear before him with a distrustful
dread; but, sensible of our own misery and want, we should with faith and
dependence plead the merits of a crucified Jesus, and the riches of his
boundless grace.’
Further, Miss Hill advised her to ask herself frequently
if she was ready to die. In addition, it was a good practice at the end of each
day to review what had happened during it, whether it was her activities, her
blessings, her moods, her failures or her sins. Miss Hill reminded her to focus
on the blessing of justification because of its unchangeable nature and of the
fact that it is always a source of spiritual comfort. She also challenged Lady
Glenorchy to remain faithful to Jesus when she found herself in her social
circle.
Around about this time
(1768) Lady Glenorchy began to keep a diary, and in this personal record many
details of her life are detailed. It was customary for those able to do so to
keep written records of notable events and also to include within the folder
other items of correspondence of significance to the individual. Diaries then
were not in the common format of today but were designed so that material could
be inserted into them.
There are many interesting
details in her diary, and only a few can be selected. An early reference to
answered prayer for her family members indicates how the God of grace was kind
towards her: ‘August 8 [1769]. Great cause have I to bless God
for showing mercy to my family. Sixteen of them were communicants last Lord’s day; and, unknown to me, they have set up worship among themselves.
O that I may never cease to pray for them, and for myself, seeing how
graciously the Lord has granted the desires of my heart concerning these poor
people, who a year ago were wallowing in sin, and now are every one seeking the
Lord. O for a tongue to praise him who worketh wonders, and by his great power
brings life out of death. Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his
benefits.’
Gets involved in Christian
endeavours in Edinburgh
Her prayers were not limited
to what we could regard as matters of personal relationships. As is always
found in the outlook of spiritually-healthy Christians, she was concerned about
helping the spread of God’s
kingdom and of providing ways for others to come into it. At this time in her
life, about 1769 and 1770, she focussed on three projects.
The first was connected to
the family home in Edinburgh called Barnton House, which her husband had
purchased around that time. She was allowed to oversee its refurbishment, a
process that took some time, and she revealed her priorities by arranging for
regular services during the week for the workmen. It says a lot about her when
one realises that she attended every such service that was held during the
refurbishment. Once the work on the house was completed, she arranged for a
chapel to be built beside the house. A suitable chaplain was found and he
preached every Sunday after the service in the parish church was over as well
as at other times. Many a person could trace their spiritual beginnings to
those services.
The second project was that
of a school in Edinburgh for poor children. After a while, she found a
headmaster, or John Wesley found one for her. This connection with John Wesley
had come about through her friendship with a Lady Maxwell who was one of the
strongest supporters of Methodism in Scotland. She and Lady Glenorchy became
close friends and in the years to come they together were involved in gospel
initiatives throughout the country.
The third project that she
wanted to provide was a place of worship ‘in which ministers of the gospel of every denomination who held its
essential truths might preach’. So
she hired a building called St Mary’s
Chapel, a hall used by some tradesmen in Edinburgh. Not every church leader
agreed with her plan, but she was influenced by the opinions of a Dr. Webster,
who was regarded as a staunch Calvinist but who also was a regular attender
each Sunday evening at a Wesleyan chapel in the city. Given his involvement,
and also the involvement of her friend Lady Maxwell, it is not surprising that
the plan for the chapel allowed it to be used by Presbyterian, Episcopalian and
Wesleyan preachers. Services were not allowed at the normal times of worship,
but Sunday meetings took place early in the morning (7am) before regular
worship, and also during the interval between the morning and afternoon
services. Other meetings were held on weekday evenings. The chapel was opened
on Wednesday, March 7th, 1770. ‘Ministers
of every denomination are to be admitted, who have a sincere love to the Lord
Jesus Christ and the souls of men, and who preach the doctrine of justification
by faith alone.’
Her new place of worship was
not approved of by everyone. On April
18, just over a month after she had opened the chapel, she recorded in her
diary that ‘Many tongues are let loose against me. The
godly, in particular, have spoken bitter, and imagined false things of me.’ She could have been overwhelmed by this opposition because, as she
recorded, ‘At first I was greatly hurt at this, lest I
should have given any cause for it, and that I was not suffering the reproach
of Christ, but bringing reproach on his name.’ She realised however that her motives, and that of the preachers she
used, were concerned about bringing sinners to Jesus. Instead of responding
with anger, she resorted to prayer and asked for ‘patience to bear with meekness the strife of tongues, and enable me to
return good for evil. Let me not only pray for my enemies, but love them and do
them every kind office in my power, for thy name’s sake.’ She
closes this diary extract with a very powerful desire for heartfelt religion – ‘Lord, thy love is all I want!’
Why was there such
opposition to her commencing a preaching centre? The main concern was the
possibility of Arminian teaching being advocated by Methodist preachers that
she might invite to preach. This prospect brought her into contact with one of
the leading preachers of the eighteenth century, John Wesley.
Dealing with John Wesley and
Arminianism
The opening of St Mary’s chapel had raised the issue of Arminianism because of the
involvement of Methodist preachers. It is clear from her diary that she
investigated the grounds for this criticism. On the day after the chapel
opened, she received a visit from a critic who disliked John Wesley and accused
him of ‘stealing in Arminian doctrines into the country,
and sapping the foundation of our faith under the pretext of greater sanctity
and strictness than others.’ What did Lady Glenorchy do? That evening she read some of Wesley’s sermons on Matthew 5 (did the critic had her a copy of the book and
ask her to read them?). She records her assessment and it reveals she possessed
a good theological grasp of the issues at stake: ‘I think he carries the doctrine of perfection too far, and I wish he
had laid the foundation, even Jesus Christ, before he began to build. He showed
me, however, that I cannot make myself a Christian, and sent me to my knees to
beseech the Lord to teach me, and to preserve me from being deceived.’
It so happened in the Lord’s providence that Wesley was engaged at that time in a tour of
Scotland and had during it reached Inverness. Five weeks after reading his
sermons, she met John Wesley in Edinburgh and she records the effects of
speaking with him: ‘I met with Mr Wesley, and
had much conversation with him. He appears to be a faithful minister of Jesus,
and to have a single eye to the glory of God. I believe him to be sound in all
essential doctrines.’
The issue would not go away,
however. Wesley seems to have assumed that her willingness to use some of his
preachers could lead to St Mary’s
Chapel joining his Society, as his religious groupings were called. He may also
have been motivated by the fact that those attending the Methodist chapel in
Edinburgh were few in number. She therefore wanted to have his views explained
to her, so a meeting was arranged between her and Wesley, with Dr. Webster also
present. It looks as if her sensitivity and her spirituality had made her
reluctant to disagree with a man of Wesley’s stature, yet she also realised the importance of biblical doctrines.
At that meeting in her home, Webster and Wesley had ‘a long conversation together. They agreed on all doctrines on which
they spoke, except those of God’s
decrees, predestination, and the saints’ perseverance, which Mr Wesley does not hold.’ After Wesley had left, Webster explained further why he disapproved of
Wesley’s opinions.
It is understandable why
Webster disagreed with Wesley because the former was theologically trained. Yet
Lady Glenorchy’s reaction to the meeting is interesting: ‘I must (according to the light I now have, and always have had, ever
since the Lord was pleased to awaken me) agree with Dr. Webster. Nevertheless I
hope that Mr. Wesley is a child of God. He has been an instrument in his hand
of saving souls; as such I honour him, and will countenance his preachers. I
have heard him preach thrice; and should have been better pleased had he
preached more of Christ, and less of himself. I did not find his words came
with power to my own soul. I desire to bless God for having enabled me in some
measure this day to be faithful to the convictions of his Spirit. O that may
daily receive more strength and courage, to be accounted a fool for Christ’s sake!’
I find her assessment of
that day’s meeting with Wesley to reveal many features of
her spirituality. First, she had a heart for evangelism and for conversions;
second, she wanted to hear about Christ in sermons; third, she knew when God
was speaking to her through a sermon and when he was not; fourth, she realised
the importance, indeed the necessity, of paying careful attention to matters
about which the Spirit was convicting her as she engaged in Christian
activities; and fifth, she prayed for divine strength to maintain a courageous
Christian witness, even if others regarded her as a fool.
Nevertheless, she still had
to make a decision about whether or not Arminian preachers could be allowed to
preach in St Mary’s. I suppose the problem is
obvious. Despite her commendable wish that the chapel would express Christian
unity it is not possible to do so if two different messages are being preached.
And the Arminian understanding of the gospel is not the same as the Calvinistic
interpretation.
The distinction became very
obvious when a Methodist called Richard De Courcy became the preacher in the
Chapel. He was a Calvinistic Methodist and so highly regarded that some wanted
him as the successor to George Whitefield in his London chapel (he had died
that year, 1770). But De Courcy believed he was called to Edinburgh. His
preaching soon showed the differences between Calvinism and Arminianism. So it
is not surprising to note that in June 1771, Lady Glenorchy brought to an end
the involvement of Arminian preachers at the chapel. She and John Wesley never
met again on earth.
Rebuked for her religious
zeal
It was one of Lady Glenorchy’s Christian activities to witness to the truth to all and sundry. She
often made such contacts a matter of prayer. Sometimes her efforts were
successful, at other times those she spoke to were resentful. There is nothing
surprising about those responses. Yet her activities in this matter were deemed
unwise by some of her ministerial friends and others who concluded that it was
unbecoming for her, a rich aristocrat, to speak to the lower classes about the
things of God. One ministerial friend advised her in this way: ‘The most ornamental parts of your character as a Christian, and those
which are the most demonstrative of the power of godliness, can make no
impression at all upon the lower ranks of people. Your condescension may
gratify them, your liberality will certainly profit them, and your advices,
thus accompanied, may penetrate deeply into their hearts.’ The minister is basically saying that Christian witness can only be to
others of your own class. He is sure that if she spent half the time amongst
people of rank and education she would do a lot more. Moreover, he was
convinced that God had arranged in providence for her not to be a witness among
the lower classes. His concern seems to have been motivated by the rough
response she sometimes received from the lower class whereas the higher classes
would not respond to her in such a manner.
The letter was sent to her
on January 2, 1771. A fortnight later, she wrote in her diary: ‘I went this morning to visit a poor dying woman – got power to speak to her, and to encourage her to trust in the Lord.
She was in great pain, and had lost clear views of Christ. She complained of
not being able to pray, or to attend to prayer, and said, “O, it is a great thing to be a Christian.” I was much affected with her distress, and could with pleasure have
attended her all day. I saw it was a privilege and duty to visit the sick.’
She records many instances
in her diary about how she helped spiritually and practically many a person and
I find it rather puzzling that some evangelical ministers wanted to prevent her
from engaging in this form of evangelistic witness. I could not discover what
her response to this and another similar letter was, yet it did not stop her
from speaking about the gospel to those she met.
Becomes a widow
Her husband Lord Glenorchy
died on Tuesday, November 11th, 1771, after ten years of marriage, and when his
wife was thirty years of age. He was not a professing Christian in an
evangelical sense, although his final hours indicated that he had paid some
attention to the witness of his wife during their marriage. As one could
expect, she was grieved with the Lord’s
providence at her loss, yet at that moment she had a profound spiritual
experience which she recorded. ‘My
heart rebelled against God, I inwardly said, “It is hard.” At
that instant, the Lord said unto my soul, “Be still, and know that I am God.” These words were accompanied with such power, that from that instant
an unspeakable calm took place in my mind.” Many other Bible verses came her with power that night and the
following day.
Not surprisingly, the calm
did not last, but it is sad to read in her diary that the cause of her loss of
calm was a Christian friend. Lady Glenorchy does not state how she lost her
calm, but she goes on to describe her time of distress and how it was relieved
by reading Thomas Boston’s
book, The Crook in the Lot. The outcome was that she devoted herself to
the service of Christ in whatever way he saw fit to use her.
She later discovered that
her husband had willed to her the estates at Barnton and Cramond as well as a
large share in his possessions. Yet she must have been very surprised to hear
that he had also stipulated that she could use all or part of it ‘for encouraging the preaching of the gospel, and promoting the
knowledge of the Protestant religion, erecting schools, and civilizing the
inhabitants in Breadalbane, Glenorchy, and Nether Lorn, and other parts of the
Highlands of Scotland, in such a way and manner as she shall judge proper and
expedient.’
In addition to having those
properties, she had a fortune of between two and three thousand pounds a year,
which according one estimate would be worth about three or four million pounds
in today’s value. She was determined that she would use
her place in society and her resources for the service of Christ’s kingdom.
Erects chapels
It became evident fairly
quickly that Lady Glenorchy knew how to manage her possessions. Her biographer
states that there is no record of her ever suffering from any material loss.
Indeed he says that while she had no difficulty in accomplishing the duties
connected to her temporal affairs, it was a different story with regard to her
spiritual priorities and pursuits. She often found the spiritual duties
difficult to sustain and this was compounded by her frequent loss of assurance
of her salvation. At times, she would adjust her use of time in order to
improve her devotional state and she was very careful about her interaction
with others.
Yet she did not allow her
fluctuating spiritual state to prevent her using her assets for the kingdom of
God. She decided to erect a chapel that would be connected to the Church of
Scotland. The foundation of this building was laid in the summer of 1772 and it
was opened in May 1774, large enough to hold two thousand people in comfort and
many more if crowded (the site is now part of Waverly Station). It took a while
before a suitable minister could be identified. One reason was the unusualness
of her chapel and how much freedom it could be given by the Presbytery of
Edinburgh. Her initial choice was Robert Balfour, and all seemed agreed that he
was suitable. Procedure prevented this induction from taking place, and eventually
it was decided that the case had to be decided by the General Assembly 0f 1777.
This decision so upset Lady
Glenorchy that she contemplated moving from Scotland. She decided to go to
England for a few months and during her time there heard a Mr. Jones preaching
in Plymouth, and he eventually would become a pastor in Lady Glenorchy’s Chapel in Edinburgh. She was in London when the General Assembly met
in Edinburgh and was encouraged by its decision that the chapel could have a
minister of its choice as long as he held to the standards of the church.
One interesting introduction
made by Lady Glenorchy’s
Chapel was to introduce more frequent celebrations of the Lord’s Supper from the usual twice a year to six times a year. The
congregation retained the old communions in May and November, but had a
shortened communion season in the other four months. Eventually its method
became common in the chapels of ease and in the Seceding denominations.
Back in Edinburgh, Lady
Glenorchy identified a Mr. Sheriff as a suitable minister and he became the
pastor in November 1777. He was not a well man and his ministry came to an end
in June 1778. So she had to resume a search for a suitable minister, and after
a couple of refusals from other men, the preacher she had met during her trip
to England became the minister of her chapel in June 1779, and he was to stay
there for a long time. It had
taken Lady Glenorchy almost seven years to find the man who would lead her
chapel into its future.
Some details about her
chapels
One interesting detail that
appears in her diary in connection with Lady Glenorchy’s chapel is the name of Alexander Bonar, and three of his descendants
were to be famous ministers in the Free Church of Scotland in the next century.
Lady Glenorchy supported the choice of a brother of Alexander’s, Archibald by name, to be the minister of her chapel in Cramond.
In the spring of 1773, an
opportunity arose for her to help with restoring a chapel at Strathfillan near
Killen in Perthshire. This she was glad to do and once ready for use it was
given to the Society in Scotland for Propagating Christian Knowledge. She also arranged for two preachers to work
for that Society throughout the Highlands and Islands and agreed to meet all
their expenses.
When in the south of England
in 1776, she agreed to fund the building of a chapel in Exmouth. Later, in
1781, she funded the restoration of a church in Carlisle, arranged for a
minister, and financially helped his congregation support him. Although the
congregation became independent in 1816, it is interesting to note that the
fourth minister of the congregation, a man called Thomas Woodrow from Glasgow,
emigrated to America in 1833. His daughter Janet became the mother of Woodrow
Wilson, the future President of the United States.
In 1784, on a tour of
England, Lady Glenorchy purchased a building in Matlock that became a chapel
holding 300 people. In the following year she went to the hot wells at Bath for
her health and arranged for a chapel to be built in Bristol called Hope Chapel
(after her friend, Henrietta Hope who had died there and left £2,500 to help with building the chapel). On the way back to Scotland
in 1786, Lady Glenorchy arranged for a chapel to be built in Workington.
The end approaches
Her diary reveals that Lady
Glenorchy had several periods of severe illness during her life and by the
middle of the 1780s it was obvious to her friends that her time on earth was
coming to an end. Her final illness commenced after she returned to Edinburgh
in 1786. Among her last words were, ‘Well,
if this be dying, it is the pleasantest thing imaginable.’ She died in July 17, 1786, and was buried in St Glenorchy’s Chapel in Edinburgh. Later on, when the building was demolished in
1844, her remains were removed to the family vault in St John’s Episcopal Church. In her will, she left £5000 for spreading the gospel in Breadalbane and Sutherland and
another £5,000 for Jonathan Scott, the pastor in the
church in Matlock, to use in spreading the gospel in England. The great day
will reveal what was achieved through those legacies.
Perhaps the best comment on
her life was given by D. P. Thomson, who authored a book about her churches,
when he said that ‘in the long history of the
Scottish Church there has been no one quite like her.’
Did she have faults?
Did Lady Glenorchy have any
negative character traits that stood out among all that was good in her life?
One feature that caused her some concern was her tendency to sometimes lose her
temper, even when she was engaged in religious discussions.
In her diary dated May 11,
1768, she refers to a heated discussion about the nature of saving faith that
she had with the factor of the Breadalbane estates. It seems that the
discussion had begun on the previous day. The matter was obviously boiling
within her. When she woke in the morning, she found her misdirected spiritual
energy prevented her from verbalising praise to God, even although she wanted
to do so.
Then at breakfast she
continued the argument with the factor and found herself saying what she did
not believe, mainly because she wanted to win the argument. She sensed that her
motive was wrong, but confesses that she did not do what she should have done,
which was to ask the Holy Spirit for his assistance. This wrong behaviour affected
her when she then went to her morning devotions as she found it difficult to
read the Bible. Yet she discovered that the Lord responded to her cries and she
was able to engage in prayer for herself and others.
We might have assumed that
the rest of the day would have been more comfortable from a spiritual point of
view, yet she tells us that she lost her temper again that evening, and her
words caused her many tears as she realised her sin and confessed it to God.
She realised that she had to
deal with this feature of her personality. So in her diary, she declares, ‘I this day resolve (with the assistance of the Spirit) to watch over
the first risings of passion, and to pray daily for the grace of a meek and
quiet spirit, and above all for humility, in which I am greatly deficient. This
has been a day of many errors and infirmities. Lord, if thou shouldst mark
iniquity, who could stand before thee? But with thee there is mercy, and
plenteous redemption.’
Does the way Lady Glenorchy handled this
spiritual problem give guidance to us when facing something similar in our path
of Christian discipleship? I think there is.
First, we can see that she
is honest about her wrong contribution, which is striking given that someone of
her social class would usually assume that they were always right in any
discussion with someone from a lower level.
Second, although she knew
that something was wrong with her spiritual temperature, she persisted in her
use of spiritual disciplines and discovered that divine help could be given,
even while she was still feeling the inner consequences of her wrong behaviour.
Third, she prayed
intelligently about the matter, with her petitions being specific in the sense
that she requested the graces that were the opposite of her flaws – she prayed for meekness and humility because she had displayed
assertion and pride.
Fourth, she realised that
the best time to deal with sinful attitudes was when they commenced – it is spiritual folly to give them any room, even an inch.
Lessons from her life
The first lesson to take
from Lady Glenorchy’s life is from God’s providential overruling that arranged for individuals to be in place
in order for them to be used by him in the spiritual recovery of the nation at
that period. He overruled the ambition of her mother for her daughter and used
it to have among the upper class a woman of remarkable spiritual abilities.
A second lesson from her
life is the importance of keeping a diary or an account of her spiritual
experiences. We are familiar with well-known ministerial diaries such as those
by Robert Murray McCheyne and Andrew Bonar and we tend to view them from the
help they have been to others who have read them. Yet it was also a common
practice for individuals to have personal diaries in which they recorded
moments of significance in their Christian pathway and thus were able to engage
in realistic self-examination over a period of time. Several times in her diary
Lady Glenorchy laments her failure to keep a record because of distractions and
it was her assessment that such failures were problematic in her growth in
grace.
She often used her birthday
to reflect on her spiritual state. On her twenty-ninth birthday (2 September,
1770), she noted this about herself: ‘The
anniversary of the day on which I came into the world. Upon reviewing last year’s experience, I find the desire of my heart to be the same as on this
day twelvemonth. Thou knowest, Lord, that my soul is now hungering and
thirsting after thee, and longing to be conformed to thy will. It is with shame
and confusion of face, that I look back on my past like, in which I can see
little else but sin and folly. Even my best duties have been tainted with sin.
I would adore the grace and long suffering mercy which has spared me to this
day, notwithstanding my numberless sins and iniquities. O God, enable me this
day, by thy strengthening grace, to begin a life of entire devotedness to thee;
and come, O blessed Jesus, into my heart, and reign there king for ever; subdue
thine enemies, and establish thy kingdom of righteousness, peace, and joy in
the Holy Ghost.’
We might assume from that
awareness of personal sin and desire to begin a life of devotedness that she
would have lacked any assurance of salvation. Yet that was not the case. ‘I find the light I now have to be of the same nature it was last year;
but, blessed be God, it is now clearer and stronger, and my soul is more
established in the doctrines of the gospel, and my heart more dead to the
world, than at that time. I have through
grace been enabled this year to give up my name, and most of my worldly
acquaintances, for Christ’s
sake. I have been employed at times in the Lord’s work. He has answered numberless prayers, and has enabled me to
begin several plans for the advancement of his kingdom upon earth – to open a chapel, and to set up a school, etc, for which I desire to
bless his name.’
What kind of assurance did
she have that could lead her to write such statements? It was not rapturous at
that moment, because she writes: ‘and
although I have not had much comfort in my soul, yet I have this day a
comfortable persuasion that the Lord is near, and that he that shall come will
come, and will not tarry; and although my own soul were to perish, yet I will
bless him for all the benefits already conferred upon me, and that he counted
me worthy to suffer reproach for his name, and employed me in awakening others.
Bless the Lord, O my soul, and magnify his name!’
With regard to her views on
assurance, and the debates with which some may be familiar as to whether or not
assurance belongs to the essence of faith, she seems to have come to the view
that some degree was necessary. She observes on one occasion: ‘I find Calvin, John Knox, Rous, all mention faith as a sure trust and
knowledge of forgiveness through the blood of Jesus. Calvin makes this
knowledge of pardon of the essence of faith, and the motive to love and
obedience.’ We might find it surprising that she was aware
of the opinions of those prominent theologians (it may be that the matter was
of concern because of the influence of Sandemanianism). Yet her affirmation
indicates the stress she placed on holding to correct doctrinal understanding
because, no doubt, her conviction on this matter must have led her to times of
distress because there were occasions when she lamented her weak faith and
sinfulness.
A third lesson from her life
is her strong desire to speak to others about their need of Jesus, even
although some criticized her for this burden. She often made this a matter of prayer.
She records that on one occasion she ‘rose
early, and besought the Lord to enable me to live this day as if it were the
last day of my life, and to make me useful to others. I found much desire after
Christ, and some liberty in prayer; and surely my prayers have been heard and
answered, for I have had an opportunity of speaking to nine or ten people with
some degree of earnestness, and a clear conviction of the truth of what I said.
May the Lord bless it to their souls! Without this, it will be water spilt upon
the ground.’ That kind of prayerful
witness is found many times in the story of her life.
A fourth lesson from her
life is the fact that she took her spiritual life seriously. Often she
complains about her sense of sin, her sense of spiritual deadness and the power
of temptations. They drove her to prayer. And because she prayed, she also
experienced times of spiritual comfort and delight in her God and Saviour. She
loved the Lord’s Supper and her diary contains frequent
references to her participating in the feast of love divine. As we read her
comments, we feel like a pygmy before a spiritual giant.
A fifth lesson is the
benefit of religious correspondence. She engaged in frequent contact with
Christian friends in which they discussed important areas of the Christian
life. In her letters she writes about the doctrine of justification, holiness,
dealing with inner sinfulness and so on. She sought advice at times and on
other occasions gave advice. In our age of emails and other aspects of social media
we have a far greater opportunity for this kind of Christian interaction. She
benefitted from this expression of brotherly or sisterly love, and so can we.
We could ask many questions
about her life? Why did she take her spiritual life so seriously? The answer to
that question is obvious – she walked with God. Why did she care about others physically and
spiritually? Again the answer is obvious – she was like her Master. The question I would like to ask is, how many
came to know Jesus through her influence? She was responsible for erecting
places of worship where thousands heard the gospel and she spoke to hundreds
personally about their need for salvation. Although she was not a preacher, on
the great day Lady Glenorchy will have many stars in her crown. And that will
be a fitting way for us to see a real aristocrat.
No comments:
Post a Comment