3R
. GtVS2
1
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY
OF
SCOTLAND. ;
V
"x
ABERDEEN'! PRINTRD BY ARTHUR KTNO AND CO..
FOR
KDMONSTON AND DOUGLAS, EDINBURGH,
LONDON- HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO.
CAMBRIDGE . MACMILLAN AND Co.
GLASGOW , JAMK.S MACLEIIOSR.
ABERDEEN . A. BRO'tt'N AND CO., AND
UEORGE DAVIDSON.
In compliance with current
copyright law, LBS Archival
Products produced this
replacement volume on paper
that meets the ANSI Standard
Z39.48-1984 to replace the
irreparably deteriorated
original.
1993
-^ TM
(00)
AN
ECCLESIASTICAL
HISTORY OF SCOTLAND
FROM THE INTRODUCTION OF CHRISTIANITY TO
THE PRESENT TIME. '
BY GEORGE ^RUB, A.M.
IN FOUR VOLUMES.
VOL. II.
MAR '^-^ 1994 ]
EDINBURGH:
EDMONSTON AND DOUGLAS.
1861.
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER XXVIII.
From the death of Archbishop Foreman in 1521, ^o the death of Archbishop
James Beaton in 1539.
Government of James V. — James Beaton, Archbishop of St.
Andrews — Attempted Reform of the Cistercian Order —
Foundation of St. Mary's College— John Mair, Provost of St.
Salvator's College — Alexander Mylne, Abbot of Cambus-
kenneth — Succession of Bishops — John Bellenden, Arch-
deacon of Murray — Gavin Dunbar, Bishop of Aberdeen —
Introduction of Lutheran Doctrines into Scotland — Patrick
Hamilton, Abbot of Feme — His opinions — His death — Death
of Henry Forrest and others — School of Reforming Divines
within the Church— John Winram, Sub-Prior of St. Andrews
— Gavin Logie, Principal of St. Leonard's College — Robert
Richardson, Canon-Regular of Cambuskenneth — Friar Alex-
ander Seaton — Friar William Airth, ..... 1
CHAPTER XXIX.
From the death of Archbishop James Beaton in 1530, to ilie death of
Cardinal Beaton in 1546.
Death of James V. — Accession of Mary — Regency of the Earl of
Arran — Cardinal David Beaton, Archbishop of St. Andrews —
Succession of Bishops— Gavin Dunbar, Archbishop of Glas-
gow— Persecution of the Protestants— Condemnation of Sir
John Borthwick — The Protestants favoured by the Regent —
The Scriptures allowed to be read in the vulgar tongue— Perse-
cution renewed — War with England — The Border Abbeys
destroyed by the English— George Wishart— His residence in
England—His return to Scotland— His trial— His death-
Death of Cardinal Beaton— His character, ... 15
vi ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Contents.
CHAPTER XXX.
From the death of Cardinal Beaton in 1546, to the end of the Earl of
Arran's Regency in 1554.
Regency of the Earl of Arran— John Hamilton, Archbishop of
St. Andrews — James Beaton, Archbishop of Glasgow — Suc-
cession of Bishops— John Knox — His residence in the Castle
of St. Andrews — His call to be a Protestant Minister — His
Controversies with the Clergy — Council at Edinburgh in
1549 — Members of the Council — Canons enacted — Persecution
of the Protestants — Death of Adam Wallace — Council at
Edinburgh in 1552 — Publication of a Catechism — Alleged dis-
pute about the Paternoster, 29
CHAPTER XXXI.
From the e7id of the Earl of Arran' s Regency in 1554, to the Council of
Edinburgh in 1559.
Regeucy of Mary of Lorraine — Succession of Bishops — David
Panter, Bishop of Ross — Robert Reid, Bishop of Orkney —
Return of John Knox — The effects of his preaching — His
letter to the Regent — His departure from Scotland — His
condemnation and appeal — Bond subscribed by the Protestant
leaders — Resolutions agreed to by them — Trial and death of
Walter Mylne — Provincial Councils in 1558 — Toleration con-
ceded to the Protestants— Advice given to the Bishop of
Aberdeen by his Chapter — Council at Edinburgh in 1559 —
Articles of Reformation laid before the Council — Remon-
strances presented to the Council — Canons enacted— Con-
clusion of the Council, 39
CHAPTER XXXII.
From the Council of Edinburgh in 1559, to the Parliament of August, 1560.
s
Quintin itennedy, Abbot of Crossraguel— Publication of his Com-
pendious Tractive — Summary of its Argument— Reply by John
Davidson, Principal of the College of Glasgow — Correspon-
dence between Quintin Kennedy and John Willock — The
Regent's Proclamation against the Protestants— Arrival of
Knox in Scotland— His Sermon at Perth— Destruction of the
Contents.] OF SCOTLAND. vii
Monasteries there — Spoliation of the Cathedral of St. Andrews
— Destruction of the Abbey of Scoue — Civil War— Queen
Elizabeth assists the Protestants — Destruction of the Monas-
teries at Aberdeen — Death of Mary of Lorraine — Treaty of
Edinburgh — Protestant Ministers appointed to the chief towns
— John Row, Minister at Perth — Alleged imposture at the
Nunnery of St. Catharine of Sienna — Improbability of the
Story — Appointment of Superintendents — Parliament at
Edinburgh — Confession of Faith presented by the Protestants
— Feeble opposition to it — Its ratitication — The authority of
the Pope taken away — The Mass proscribed — Conclusion of
the Parliament, . , 60
CHAPTER XXXIIL
From the Parliament of August 1560, to the return of Queen Mary to
Scotland^ in August, 1561.
The Confession of Faith — The compilers of the Confession — The
Book of Discipline — The Book of Common Order — The
Superintendents— First General Assembly — Proposed altera-
tion in the Law of Marriage— Convention of the Estates —
Aberdeen Clergy summoned before the Estates — Act for
demolishing Abbey churches and cloisters — Commissioners
sent by the Estates, and by the Roman Catholic nobles, to
Queen Mary— Return of Mary to Scotland, . . . .89
CHAPTER XXXIV.
From the return of Queen Mary to Scotland, in August 1561 , to the Reason-
ing between the Abbot of Crossraguel and John Knox^ in September,
1562.
Difficulties of Queen Mary — Her prudent government — Her inter-
view with Knox — Efforts of the Protestant Ministers to
obtain a competent maintenance — John Craig, minister at
Edinburgh — Controversial discussions between the clergy and
the ministers — Ninian Winzet, Schoolmaster at Linlithgow —
His Tractate addressed to the Queen — His eighty-three ques-
tions delivered to Enox — He is obliged to leave Scotland —
Reasoning between Quintin Kennedy and John Knox, . . 106
viii ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Contents.
CHAPTER XXXV.
From the Reasoning between the Abbot of Crossraguel and John Knox, in
September, 1562, to Queen Man/s Marriage with Darnley in July^
1565.
Rebellion of the Earl of Huntly — Second Interview of Mary with
Knox — Meeting of the General Assembly — Excommunication
of Paul Methven — Prosecution of the Primate and other
ecclesiastics — Knox's Sermon on the Queen's Marriage —
Riot at Holyrood — Knox summoned before the Council —
Discussion between Lethington and Knox — Marriage of Mary
with Darnley, 128
CHAPTER XXXVI.
From, Queen Mary's Marriage with Darnley in July^ 1565, to her
Abdication in July^ 1567.
Rebellion of the Earl of Murray — Knox's sermon at St. Giles' —
Attempts of the Queen to restore the Roman Church — John
Sinclair, Bishop of Brechin — John Leslie, Bishop of Ross —
Murder of Riccio — Question as to Knox's participation in the
crime — Proposal to send a Nuncio to Scotland — Baptism of
Prince James — Murder of Darnley — Meeting of Parliament —
The Queen's Marriage with Bothwell — Her Imprisonment —
Her Abdication, 143
CHAPTER XXXVII.
From Queen Mary's Abdication in July, 1567, to the death of Archbishop
Hamilton, in xipril,, 1571.
Coronation of James VI. — Regency of the Earl of Murray — Escape
of Queen Mary from Loohleven — Her defeat at Langside —
Her flight to England — Deprivation of the Principal and
regents of King's College, Aberdeen — Negotiations between
Murray and Elizabeth— Murder of the Earl of Murray —
Regency of the Earl of Lennox — Death of John Hamilton,
Archbishop of St. Andrews, , . 160
CHAPTER XXXVIII.
From the death of Archbishop Hamilton in April, \bl\,to the death of
John Knox in November, 1572.
Regency of the Earl of Mar— Letter of Erskine of Dun to the Regent
— Erskine's opinions as to Ecclesiastical Polity and the Episco-
Contents.] OF SCOTLAND.
IX
pal ofiBce — His remonstrances against the usurpations of the
State — Ecclesiastical Convention at Leith — Sermon preached
at the Convention, by David Ferguson — Ecclesiastical Polity
agreed to by the Commissioners of the Convention and of the
Privy Council — John Douglas appointed Archbishop of St.
Andrews— General Assembly at St. Andrews— General As-
sembly at Perth — Residence of John Knox at St. Andrews —
His return to Edinburgh — His illness — His parting interviews
with his friends — His death and character, . . . ~ . 170
CHAPTER XXXTX.
From the death of John Knox in November, 1572, to the resignation of the
Regency hy the Earl of Morton in March, 1578.
Regency of the Earl of Morton— Proceedings of the General
Assembly — Protestant ministers appointed to the vacant
bishoprics — Objections made to the office of Bishop — Andrew
Melville, Principal of the College of Glasgow — Limitations of
the powers of the Bishops — Patrick Adamson, Archbishop of
St. Andrews — Resignation of the Regency by the Earl of
Morton — Ecclesiastical condition of Scotland — Intellectual
and moral results of the Reformation, 189
CHAPTER XL.
From the resignation of the Regency hy the Earl of Morton in March,
1578, to the Raid of Ruthven in August, 1582.
Influence of the Duke of Lennox — His designs in favour of the
Roman Church — Roman Catholic Missionaries in Scotland —
Sermon of Walter Balcanquhal — Meetings of the General
Assembly — General Assembly at Dundee — Condemnation of
the titular Episcopacy — Subscription of the King's Confession
— Second Book of Discipline — Differences between the First
and Second Book of Discipline — The Tulchan Bishops — Dis-
tinction between them and the titular bishops — Conflict
betv/een the Church and the State — List of grievances drawn
up by the General Assembly — Andrew Melville at Perth-
Raid of Ruthven, 207
CHAPTER XLL
From the Raid of Ruthven in August, 1582, to the death of Queen Mary
in February, 1587.
Meetings of the General Assembly — Execution of the Earl of
Gowrie — Robert Brown, the English sectary, in Scotland —
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Contents.
Flight of Andrew Melville and other ministers — Archbishop
Adamson's intercourse with the English bishops — His oppo-
sition to the Presbyterian discipline — Ecclesiastical supremacy
of the King ratified by Parliament — Royal declaration regard-
ing the supremacy— The Earl of Arran driven from power —
Return of the ministers from exile — Archbishop Adamson
excommunicated by the Synod of Fife — His appeal to the
King and Parliament — Declaration by the General Assembly
— Proceedings of the English Government against Queen
Mary — Her trial and condemnation — Remonstrances of King
James— Death of Mary, 229
CHAPTER XLIL
From the death of Queen Mary in February, 1587, to the estahliahment of
Presbyterianism in June, 1592.
Indignation of the Scots on the death of Mary — The Spanish
Armada — Insurrection of the Roman Catholic nobles — Mar-
riage of King James with Anne of Denmark — Death of John
Erskine of Dun — Letter from EHzabeth to James— General
Assembly of August, 1590 — Sermon of James Melville — Speech
attributed to King James — Relations between the English and
Scottish Churches — Rise of Puritanism — Bancroft's Sermon at
Paul's Cross — Irritation of the Scottish Presbyterians — Illness
of Archbishop Adamson — His retractation — His death — Ge-
neral Assembly of May, 1592— Parliamentary ratification of
the Presbyterian Church, 245
CHAPTER XLIIL
From the establishment of Presbyterianism in June, 1592, to the accession
of King James to the Crown of England in March, 1603.
Renewed insurrection of the Roman Catholic nobles — They are
excommunicated by the Provincial Assembly of Fife — Suppres-
sion of the insurrection — Death of John Leslie, Bishop of Ross
— Sermon of David Black — Tumult of the seventeenth of
December at Edinburgh — Robert Bruce, minister at Edin-
burgh— Account of his conversion — Ecclesiastical convention
at Perth — General Assembly at Dundee — Publication of the
Basilicon Doron — General Assembly at Montrose— The Gowrie
Conspiracy — Vacant bishoprics filled up — Accession of James
to the crown of England— Death of Archbishop Beaton, . 262
Contents.] OF SCOTLAND. xi
CHAPTER XLIV.
From the accession of King James to the Crown of England in March,
1603, to the consecration of the three Scottish Bishops in October, 1610.
Coronation of King James — Conference at Plampton Court — Con-
vocation of 1604 — John Spottiswood, Archbishop of Glasgow
— General Assembly at Aberdeen — Imprisonment of John
Forbes and other ministers — Treatise by James Melville —
Trial of the ministers — Parliament at Perth — Scottish minis-
ters summoned to London — Imprisonment of Andrew Melville
— General Assemblies at Linlithgow — Court of High Commis-
sion erected — General Assembly at Glasgow — Episcopal Go-
vernment restored— Consecration of three Scottish Bishops at
London, 280
CHAPTER XLV.
From tJie consecration of the three Scottish Bishops in October ^ 1610, to the
Perth Assembly of August, 1618.
Consecration of the other Bishops — Directions issued by the King
—Acts of the Glasgow Assembly ratified by Parliament —
William Cowper, Bishop of Galloway — Execution of John
Ogilvie — Death of Archbishop Gladstones — John Spottiswood
appointed Archbishop of St. Andrews — Absolution of the
Marquis of Huotly — Creation of Doctors of Divinity — General
Assembly at Aberdeen — New Confession of Faith — King
James visits Scotland — Imprisonment of David Calderwood —
New erection of Cathedral Chapters — General Assembly at
St. Andrews — Patrick Forbes, Bishop of Aberdeen — His letter
to Archbishop Spottiswood — General Assembly at Perth —
Sermon of Archbishop Spottiswood — Five Articles agreed to
by the Assembly, 298
CHAPTER XLIV.
From the Perth Assembly of August, 1618, to the death of King James VI.
in March, 1625.
Synod of Dort— Death of Bishop Cowper — Scottish Ordinal of
1620 — The Perth Articles ratified in Parliament — Dissatisfac-
tion in consequence of the Perth Articles — Popular feeling in
Edinburgh — John Cameron, Principal of the College of Glas-
Xll ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Contents.
gow — Death of Andrew Melville — His character — Death of
John Welsh— English Service introduced at St. Andrews —
Dr. William Forbes — His teaching at Aberdeen — His removal
to Edinburgh — His dispute with the Puritans there — His
return to Aberdeen — Death of King James — His character
and ecclesiastical policy, ....... 320
CHAPTER XLVIL
From the death of King James VI. in March, 1625, to the ratification of
tlie Book of Canons in May, 1635.
Accession of Charles I — Ecclesiastical instructions issued by the
King — Arrangement in regard to Tithes— David Dickson —
Religious movement in the West of Scotland— Robert Blair
John Livingstone — Voyage of Blair and Livingstone— The
King's Journey to Scotland — His Coronation — Meeting of
Parliament — Service at the Chapel Royal — Foundation of the
Bee of Edinburgh— Dr. William Forbes, Bishop of Edinburgh
— His sermon before the King — His death — His character and
opinions — His writings — Archbishop Spottiswood appointed
Chancellor of Scotland — Patrick Forbes, Bishop of Aberdeen
— His diocesan administration — His restoration of the Uni-
versity of Aberdeen— His illness and death— His character
— Ratification of the Book of Canons, 335
CHAPTER. XLVIII.
From the ratification of the Boole of Canons in May, 1635, to the Act of
the Privy Council regarding ilie Book of Common Prayer in Decem-
ber, 1636.
State of the Scottish Church— Its Government, Ritual, and Doc-
trines—The Cathedral and parish churches— The Book of
Canons— Objections to the Canons— The Ordinal of 1636—
New warrant for the Court of High Commission— Alleged
Diocesan Commission Courts— Samuel Rutherford— Andrew
Boyd, Bishop of Argyll— John Durie's attempt to unite the
Lutherans and the Reformed— Judgment of the Theological
Faculty of Aberdeen on this subject— The divines of Aberdeen
—Dr. Alexander Scroggie— Dr. William Leslie— Dr. James
Sibbald— Dr. Alexander Ross— Dr. Robert Baron- Dr. John
Forbes- Education of Dr. John Forbes— His ordination— His
theological teaching— Publication of his Irenicum— Act of the
Privy Council regarding the Book of Common Prayer, . . 359
Contents.] OF SCOTLAND. xiii
CHAPTER XL IX.
From the act of the Privy Council regarding the Booh of Common Prayer
in December, 1G3G, to the three Proclamations oflllh October, 1637.
Difficulties in the introduction of a Liturgy — Alleged abandon-
ment of such a design by King James — Proposal to introduce
the English Liturgy— Resolution to prepare a Liturgy for
Scotland — Delays in its publication — Supposed differences of
opinion among the Bishops — The Scottish Service Book— The
Communion Office — The reading of the Service Book — The
tumult at Edinburgh — The authors of the tumult — Proceedings
of the Privy Council— Diocesan Synod of Glasgow — Petitions
against the Service Book — Conversation between the Primate
and the Earl of Rothes — Increased agitation — Proclamations
of the Seventeenth of October, 375
CHAPTER L.
From the three Proclamations of 17 th October, 1637, to the Proclamation of
19th February, 1638.
Gillespie's Book against the English Ceremonies — Objections to
the liiturgy — Unreasonable expectations of the King — Causes
of the opposition to the Liturgy — Opinions of the Clergy —
Conduct and Character of the Bishops— The Nobility — Riot at
Edinburgh — Complaint against the Bishops — Proceedings .of
the Privy Council — The King's determination to adhere to the
Service Book— Proclamation of the Nineteenth of February, 395
ECCLESIASTICAL
HISTORYOF SCOTLAND
CHAPTEE XXVIII.
FROM THE "DEATH OF ARCHBISHOP FOREMAN IN 1521, TO THE DEATH OP
ARCHBISHOP JAMES BEATON IN 1539.
Government of James V. — James Beaton^ Archhishojp of St.
Andrews — Attempted Reform of the Cistercian Order —
Foundation of St. Mary's College — John Mair^ Provost of
St. Salvator's College — Alexander Mylne, Abbot of
Cambuskenneth — Succession of Bishops — John BelUnden^
Archdeacon of Murray — Gavin Dunbar, Bishop of
Aberdeen — Introduction of Lutheran Doctrines into Scot-
land— Patrick Hamilton, Abbot of Feme — His Opinions
— His Death — Death of Henry Forrest and others — School
of Reforming Divines within the Church — John Winram,
Sub-Prior of St. Andrews — Gavin Logic, Principal of St.
Leonard's College — Robert Richardson, Canon-Regular of
Cambuskenneth — Friar Alexander Seaton — Friar William
Airth.
When the Duke of Albany finally returned to France, the
king's person and the government of the realm were for some
time under the entire control of the Earl of Angus. In 1528,
James escaped from the thraldom of the Douglases, and as-
sumed the actual exercise of sovereignty, being at that time in
his seventeenth year. The young king was animated by the
desire, which had uniformly been shewn by the princes of his
VOL. II J 2
2 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXVIII.
house, to protect the people from oppression, and to enforce
an impartial administration of the laws. The more effectually
to attain these objects, he instituted the College of Justice,
the establishment of which was completed in 1532. On the
first of January, 1537, James was married to Magdalen of
France, daughter of Francis I. Magdalen died within a few
inontlis, and in the following year James was united to Mary
of Lorraine.
The see of St. Andrews, which was vacant by the death
of Archbishop Foreman, was filled in the course of the year
1522 by the translation of James Beaton from the Church of
Glasgow. The new primate was much more of a statesman
than an ecclesiastic. In the former capacity he acted with
firmness and integrity, assisting his sovereign to throw off the
tyranny of the Douglases, ' and successfully opposing the
insidious attempts of the English king against the indepen-
dence of Scotland. Archbishop Beaton died in the autumn
of the year 1539.^
In June, 1535, an actof the three estates was passed, by which
it was ordained that a provincial council should meet within
the church of the Black Friars at Edinburgh, on the first day
of March next to come, and that the Archbishop of St.
Andrews should be called upon to hold the same — failing
which the king was to request authority from the Pope for
any two of the bishops to hold it. The Archbishop of Glas-
gow protested that, while he agreed to this for the common
weal of the nation, it should be without prejudice to the rights
of his see. The council was held, but no distinct account of
its proceedings has been preserved. ^
Towards the end of the fifteenth century, a visitation of the
Scottish Cistercian monasteries had taken place by order of
the general chapter of Citeaux, and three abbots had been
deposed. In the years 1533 and 1534, ^ more vigorous
reformation was attempted. Commissioners were appointed
by the general chapter, with instructions to prohibit the many
infringements of the strict rule of the order which had long
been prevalent. The monks of Melrose, Newbottle, and
^ Keith's Catalogue, pp. 36, 37.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 342. Hailes, vol. iii. p. 229.
Diurnal of Remarkable Occurrents in Scotland, p. 20.
A.D. 1533.] OF SCOTLAND. 3
Balmerino, were particularly referred to as transgressing the
Cistercian institute. The delinquents stopped the proceedings
for some time by an appeal to the general chapter, and it does
not appear what further was done.^
An additional college was founded by Archbishop Beaton
within the University of St. Andrews. It was called St.
Mary's College, and was intended to promote the cultivation
of Divinity, the Civil and Canon Law, Natural Philosophy,
Medicine, and other liberal studies. The foundation was
confii-med by PopePauIlII. in February, 1538. Archbishop
Beaton's erection was renewed and extended by Archbishop
Hamilton, in 1554. ^
In the year 1533, John Mair was appointed Provost of St.
Salvator's College, an office which he held till his decease
in 1550. He was a doctor of the Sorbonne, and, before he
came to St. Andrews, was for some time principal regent of
the college at Glasgow. In his own day, Mair was famous
for his theological and philosophical writings. The only
work of his which now attracts any attention is his History
of Scotland, but he is probably still better known as the
master of Knox and Buchanan. By some modern authors he
he has been praised, by others he has been severely censured,
for the opinions which he has expressed regarding the relative
duties of sovereigns and subjects. Both the praise and.Jthe
censure might have been considerably abated, if the writers
alluded to had been better acquainted with the political views
prevalent among many of the ecclesiastics of the middle ages.^
During the whole period of Beaton's episcopate, Alexander
Mylne was abbot of the Augustinian monastery of Cambus-
kenneth, in the diocese of St. Andrews. This distinguished
churchman was for some time a canon of Aberdeen, and
afterwards of Dunkeld. When the latter diocese was divided
by Bishop Brown into four rural deaneries, Mylne, as already
* Morton's Monastic Annals of Teviotdale, pp. 238, 240-242.
2 Appendix to the Report of the University Commissioners, pp. 388, 389.
Evidence taken by the University Commissioners, vol. iii. p. 357-367. Lyon's
History of St. Andrews, vol. ii. p. 255-262.
3 Mackenzie's Lives of Scottish Writers, vol. ii. preface, p. vii. Life of Mair
by George Crawford, prefixed to the edition of his History published at Edin-
burgh in 1740. Knox, vol. i. p. 37. M'Crie's Life of Knox, 6th ed. pp. 4-6, 381,
382. Lyon's History of St. Andrews, vol, i. p. 281-283.
4 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXVIII.
mentioned, was appointed dean of Angus, and he succeeded
Patrick Panter, as abbot of Carabuskenneth, in 1516. He
was the first president of the College of Justice — a dignity
which was conferred upon him on the institution of the court
by King James V. As abbot of Cambuskenneth, Mylne
zealously endeavoured to restore discipline and the love of
learning among the canons of his order. For that purpose,
carrying out a design formerly entertained by his predecessor
Patrick Panter, in the year 1522 he entered into a corres-
pondence with the abbot and canons of St. Victor, near
Paris, and made arrangements to send thither for education
the most promising novices of his monastery. He cultivated
literature himself, and wrote the Lives of the Bishops of
Dunkeld. Mylne died about the year 1548.^
Soon after the death of Bishop Douglas, Bobert Cockburn,
Bishop of Ross, was translated to the see of Dunkeld. In
1526, George Crichton succeeded Bishop Cockburn as Bishop
of Dunkeld. 2
James Hepburn, Bishop of Murray, was succeeded by
Robert Shaw, Abbot of Paisley, in 1524. Bishop Shaw died
in 1527. The next bishop was Alexander Stewart, Abbot
of Scone, son of Alexander, Duke of Albany, who held the
see till his death in 1534. Bishop Stewart's successor was
Patrick Hepburn, Prior of St. Andrews, son of the Earl of
Bothwell. This prelate held also the abbacy of Scone in
commendam.3
During the episcopate of Bishop Patrick Hepburn, the
archdeaconry of Murray was conferred on John Bellenden,
the well-known translator of Boece's Histoiy. Bellenden's
biographers have been unable to ascertain the precise date
^ Tytler'8 Life of Sir Thomas Craig, p. 46-51, Brunton and Haig's Historical
Account of the Senators of the College of Justice, p. 5-10. Epistolae Kegum
Scotorum, vol. i. pp. 275, 335-337. Preface to the Lives of the Bishops of
Dunkeld, ed. 1831, p. i.-v. Preface to the Chartulary of the Collegiate Church of
St. Mary and St. Anne, and the Charters of the Black Friars, at Glasgow, p. Ivii.
2 Leslie, p. 394. Keith's Catalogue, p. 94. Brunton and Haig's Senators of
the College of Justice, pp. 44, 45.
3 Keith's Catalogue, p. 148-150. Brunton and Haig's Senators of the College
of Justice, p. 30. Preface to the Chartulary of Murray, p. xv. Bishop Stewart
was the son of Alexander, Duke of Albany, by his wife Catherine Sinclair ;
but the marriage between his parents was afterwards dissolved, on account of
their being within the forbidden degrees of consanguinity.
A.D. 1539 ] OF SCOTLAND. 5
of his promotion to the archdeaconry ; that point, as well
as the other circumstances of his life, being involved in much
obscurity. ^
Bishop Gavin Dunbar ruled the diocese of Aberdeen for
thirteen years. Next to Elphinstone, he was the most illus-
trious of the line of prelates who filled the chair of St. Machar.
He completed several of the works begun by his great prede-
cessor, and, by his encouragement, Alexander Galloway, the
friend and executor of Elphinstone, was enabled to carry out
effectually the bequests of that prelate. On the twenty-third
day of the month of February immediately before his decease,
Bishop Dunbar founded an hospital for the reception of twelve
poor beadsmen. He recites in the preamble to his grant that
the prelates of the Church are not the lords, but the guardians
and stewards of the patrimony of the Eedeemer, and that they
are bound to bestow on the poor, and for pious uses, whatever
they derive from thence, beyond what is required for the
Church, and the necessary support of life. The history of his
episcopate shews that with him these were not mere words of
form. Bishop Dunbar was at Edinburgh when he signed
the deed of foundation of the hospital. Soon after he pro-
ceeded homewards, but died at St. Andrews on the tenth of
March, 1532. He was buried in his own cathedral, within
the southern transept, which he himself had erected, and
where his ruined monument may still be seen.^
During the lifetime of Bishop Dunbar, George, Prior of
Pluscardine, was appointed his coadjutor and successor in the
see. The bishop probably survived his coadjutor, since, on
the decease of the former, William Stewart, Provost of Lin-
cluden, was appointed to the see of Aberdeen. This prelate
1 See Trving's Lives of Scottish Poets, vol. ii. p. 119-127, and his Lives of
Scottish Writers, vol. i. p. 12-22. See also the Biographical Introduction to
Bellenden's Boece, p. xxxvi.-xlii.
2 Regist. Episcopat. Aberdon. vol. i. p. 401-406 ; vol. ii. pp. 211, 249 ; and
preface, p. Hi-lvi. Boece, Aberdon. Episcop. Vitae, pp. 84, 85. Keith's Cata-
logue, pp. 120, 121. Orem's History of Old Aberdeen, ed. 1791, p. 97-100.
Knox' says (vol. i. p. 43) that Bishop Dunbar had an illegitimate daughter.
The morals of many of the Scottish ecclesiastics at the time were such that,
even in the case of so good a man as the Bishop of Aberdeen, we cannot at once
reject a statement of this kind as improbable. But there is no authority for it
beyond Knox's own assertion, made in connection with one of those ribald stories
which he takes too much pleasure in relating.
6 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXVIII.
was bishop-elect in May, 1532, and was consecrated in the
following year J
Keith states that Kobert Cockburn, Bishop of Eoss, died in
1521. This is undoubtedly a mistake. Bishop Cockburn, as
already mentioned, was translated to Dunkeld. His successor
in the diocese of Ross was James Hay, who was bishop-elect
in February, 1525, and who still held the see in March,
1538.2
Andrew Stewart was Bishop of Caithness during the pri-
macy of Archbishop Beaton. The diocese of Caithness was
in as lawless a state as it had been before the time of St.
Gilbert, and its bishop was now, not the victim, but the pro-
moter of strife. According to Sir Robert Gordon, Bishop
Stewart instigated the clan Gunn to slay the laird of Duffus.
In retaliation, the dean of the cathedral church, brother of the
murdered baron, seized the vicar of Farr, one of the bishop's
dependants, and kept him prisoner in the house of Duflfus.
The bishop was obliged to retire to Atholl for some time,
and the matter was afterwards compromised. ^
John Hepburn was Bishop of Brechin during the whole
time of Archbishop Beaton's primacy.
James Chisholm was still Bishop of Dunblane in June,
1526. In the following year he is said to have resigned
the see in favour of his half-brother, WiUiam Chisholm,
retaining, however, the administration of the temporalities
till his death in 1534. William Chisholm, we are told, was
consecrated at Stirling on the fourteenth of April, 1527. He
was certainly bishop in May of that year.*
Robert Maxwell, provost of the collegiate church of St.
Patrick, at Dunbarton, succeeded Thomas in the see of
Orkney. He was bishop-elect in June, 1626, and still held
the see in 1540, when King James visited the Islands.^
^ Eegist. Episcopal. Aberdon. vol. i. p. 394, and preface, p. liii.-lvi. Acts of
the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 334. Keith's Catalogue, p. 121.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. pp. 289, 352. Keith's Catalogue,
p. 190
3 Keith's Catalogue, p. 215. History of the Earldom of Sutherland, pp. 102, 103.
^ Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 300. Keith's Catalogue, p.
179. Regifstrum Nigrum de Aberbrothoc, p. 462.
* Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 307. Leslie, p. 427. Keith's
Catalogue, p. 223.
AD. 1539.] OF SCOTLAND. 7
On tlie translation of Archbishop Beaton to St. Andrews,
Gavin Dunbar, Prior of Whithorn, was appointed Archbishop
of Glasgow. He was nephew of the Bishop of Aberdeen,
and had been preceptor to King James. He is mentioned as
bishop-elect in 1524, and was consecrated at Edinburgh on
the fifth of February, 1525. Three years afterwards he was
appointed chancellor of Scotland, an office which he retained
till 1543. In 1536, he received the abbacy of Inchaffray in
commendam.^
David Arnot, Bishop of Galloway, died in 1526, and was
succeeded by Henry, whose surname is said to have been
Wemyss. On the seventh of February, 1531, within the
chapel of Archbishop Dunbar's residence in Edinburgh,
Henry, Bishop of Candida Casa, took the oath of canonical
obedience to the archbishop as his metropolitan, saving his
rights as bishop of the Chapel Royal. Henry was still
Bishop of Galloway in December, 1540. ^
David Hamilton, Bishop of Argyll, was probably succeeded
by Robert Montgomery, parson of Kirkmichael, a son of the
Earl of Eglinton. Bishop Robert is mentioned as elect and
confirmed in February, 1531.^
As formerly stated, John was elect of the Isles in
February, 1525. He was still elect in November, 1526, and
in September, 1528. In 1530, Ferquhard M'Lachlan was
appointed Bishop of the Isles, and Commendator of lona.^
Nothing has yet been said regarding the most important
event in the primacy of Archbishop Beaton — the beginning of
the great religious movement which led to the subversion of
the ancient Church.
In Scotland, as in the other kingdoms of Western Europe,
the doctrinal corruptions which were prevalent, and, still more,
the general immorality of the clergy, had occasioned a deep-
rooted feeling of dissatisfaction with the established ecclesias-
tical order. Reference has already been made to the influence
^ Keith's Catalogue, pp. 257, 258. Preface to the Chartulary of Glasgow,
p.li.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 405, Regist. Episcopat.
Glasguen. p. 542. Keith's Catalogue, pt 278.
3 Regist. Episcopat. Glasguen. p. 542. Keith's Catalogue, p. 289.
^ Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. pp. 288, 308, 321. Keith's
Catalogue, p. 306.
8 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXVIII.
exercised by the opinions of Wickliffe and the Lollards.
Although these met with considerable sympathy, their ad-
herents were not sufficiently numerous or powerful to cause
much apprehension to the rulers in Church and State. It
was otherwise when the effects of Luther's preaching began
to be apparent. Scotland was now in constant intercourse
with the chief continental states, and the new doctrines of
the German Reformer soon became known to our countrymen.
Patrick Hamilton is generally referred to as the first preacher
of the Lutheran opinions in Scotland. He was the first who
suffered death on that account, but it is known that some of
Luther's disciples had prepared the way for his labours. As
early as the year 1525, an act of the Scottish parliament was
passed, forbidding the importation of Lutheran books into
the kingdom, and the propagation of the Reformer's tenets ;
and it appears that even in the northern diocese of Aberdeen
there were persons, both natives of the kingdom and strangers,
who favoured these opinions. Hamilton was related, though
by a descent of doubtful legitimacy, both to the royal house
and to the family of Arran. He was bom in the year 1504,
and in early youth, according to the custom of the time, was
appointed commendator of the abbey of Feme. The date of
this promotion is not mentioned, but it is conjectured to
have been about the year 1518, on the decease of Andrew,
Bishop of Caithness, who held the abbacy of Feme in com-
mendam. There is no direct evidence, beyond an assertion
of the English reformer Frith, that Hamilton was ever
ordained a priest. Being under suspicions of holding the
new opinions, he went abroad, in order to avoid enquiry,
and to prosecute his studies in the schools of Germany. At
Wittenberg and Marburg he became personally acquainted
with Luther, Melancthon, and Francis Lambert, and his
intercourse with them soon led to the entire adoption of
their views. He retumed to Scotland and began to pro-
mulgate the Lutheran doctrines, but was soon apprehended,
and committed a prisoner to the castle of St. Andrews. Being
brought before the ecclesiastical court, he was found guilty
of affirming, publishing, and teaching divers erroneous and
heretical opinions— such as, that man hath no free-will ; that
man is in sin so long as he liveth ,• that children, immediately
A.D. 1539.] OF SCOTLAND. 9
after their baptism, are sinners ; that all Christians who are
worthy to be called Christians do know that they are in
grace ; that no man is justified by works, but by faith only ;
that good works make not a good man, but a good man doth
make good works ; that faith, hope, and charity, are so knit,
that he that hath the one hath the rest, and he that wanteth
the one of them wanteth the rest. He was condemned to be
deprived of all his dignities, orders, and benefices, and to be
delivered over to the secular power. This sentence was pro-
nounced by the primate, within the metropolitan church of
St. Andrews, on the last day of February, 1528, in presence
of the Archbishop of Glasgow, the Bishops of Dunkeld,
Brechin, and Dunblane, the Prior of St. Andrews, and others
of the clergy. On the same day he was led forth to the place
of execution, in front of St. Salvator's College, where he suf-
fered death at the stake, enduring protracted torments with
the greatest constancy.^
The circumstances connected with Hamilton's trial and
punishment appear to have been communicated soon after-
wards to the University of Louvaine, by Alexander Galloway,
canon of Aberdeen. On the twenty-first of April, the masters
and professors of theology in that university wrote to Arch-
bishop Beaton, congratulating him on the event, and expressing
their hope that his vigorous measures would stop the farther
growth of heresy in Scotland. ^ The doctors of Louvaine
declared what was undoubtedly the general belief among
ecclesiastics in regard to the result which was expected firom
putting the laws against heresy into execution, but the actual
consequences were far otherwise. The cruel persecution of
the Abbot of Feme, and the patience with which he bore his
1 Knox, vol. i. p. 14-35, and appendix, p. 500-515. Lonmer's Life of Patrick
Hamilton, pp. 5, 63, 64, 142-155. Leslie, p. 407. Spotdswood, vol. i. p.
124-127. Keith's History of the affairs of Church and State in Scotland, Spot-
tiswood Society ed. vol. i. pp. 13, 14, 329-332. Acts of the Parliaments of
Scotland, vol. ii. p. 295. Extracts from the Council Register of Aberdeen, from
1398 to 1570, pp. 110, 111. It appears from a statement in the Accounts of the
Scottish Treasurer that Hamilton had a daughter ; and Mr. David Laing, who
first noted the entries in the accounts, took it for granted (Knox, vol. i. p. 515)
that she was illegitimate. She no doubt was so, as the law then stood, but it
is ascertained that the Abbot of Feme was married; see Lonmer's Life of
Hamilton, pp. 123, 124.
2 Knox, vol. i. appendix, p. 512-514.
10 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXVIII.
sufferings, excited deep sympathy, and led to the more exten-
sive diffusion of the condemned doctrines. The popular feeling
was characteristically expressed in the advice given by a
Scottish gentleman to the primate, to put no more heretics to
death, or, if he did, to burn them in cellars, since the smoke
of Patrick Hamilton had infected all on whom it blew.
The new opinions continued to acquire adherents, and the
rulers of the Church persevered in the attempt to check them
by violence. The next person who suffered on account of
religion seems to have been Henry Forrest, a Benedictine
monk, who was burned at St. Andrews. The precise date of
his death is uncertain, but it was probably in 1533. About a
year after this event, a gentleman named David Straton, and
Norman Gourlay, a priest, were tried before James, Bishop of
Ross, acting as commissary for the primate. The trial took
place in presence of the king. The accused were condemned,
and were burned at Greenside, near Edinburgh, on the
twenty-seventh of August, 1534. ^
On the first of March, 1539, Thomas Forret, a canon-
regular of Inch-Colm, and vicar of Dollar, two black friars,
named Kello and Beveridge, Duncan Simson, a priest at
Stirling, and Robert Forester, a layman of the same place,
were burned at Edinburgh. King James was present also on
this occasion. 2 In the same year, Jerome Russell, a Francis-
1 Knox, vol. i. p. 58-60, and appendix, p. 516*520. Spottiswood, vol. i. p.
129-131. Keith, vol. i. pp. 15, 16.
2 Knox, vol. i. pp. 62, 63. Spottiswood, vol. i. p. 132. Keith, vol. i. pp. 16,
17. There is a story told by Foxe (Acts and Monuments, Seymour's ed. p. 621,
and appendix to Knox, vol. i. pp. 521, 522), in which the Bishop of Dunkeld is
made to reprove Thomas Forret for preaching every Sunday, it being enough to
do so when he found any good epistle, or good gospel, which set forth the liberty
of Holy Church ; and to thank God that he never knew what the Old and New
Testament were. I have no doubt that the vicar of Dollar was censured for his
frequent preaching. The prelates neglected that duty themselves, and some of
them may have been angry with those of their clergy who attended to it. But the
statement about the Old and New Testament can hardly be received in its plain
meaning. The bishop, who was a good-natured, careless person, and who
wished to convince Forret of the absurdity of getting into danger on account of
what he esteemed a very useless practice, remarked, probably, that he himself
never looked into his Bible. Such a story, at least, was repeated at the time.
It is apparently to this saying that Archibald Hay alludes in his Panegyric
on Cardinal Beaton (ff. xxxi. xxxviii.), which was written soon after the
death of Forret: — "Qui cum ecclesiee prsefuerunt multis annis, ccnsum am-
A.D. 1539.] OF SCOTLAND. 11
can friar, and a young layman, named Kennedy, were brought
before the Archbishop of Glasgow on a charge of heresy.
The archbishop*^as reluctant to proceed to extremities, but
was urged on by his assessors. Sentence was pronounced,
and both Russell and Kennedy were burned.^
Besides those whose names have been mentioned, some
other individuals are known to have suffered on charges of
heresy, during the primacy of Archbishop Beaton. Many
likewise were compelled to abjure their opinions, and a con-
siderable number retired from the kingdom to avoid persecu-
tion. Among the latter were several persons who afterwards
rose to distinction as scholars or divines. Alexander Aless
had been led to embrace the Lutheran doctrines by the con-
versation which he had with Patrick Hamilton, dming his
confinement. He fled from Scotland in 1529, and subse-
quently became professor of divinity at Leipzig. John
M^ Alpine, or Machabaeus as he is styled in Latin, was prior
of the Dominican monastery at Perth. He went to England,
probably in 1535, and finally became a professor at Copen-
hagen. Among the exiles was also George Buchanan, who
escaped from prison, and fled, first to England, afterwards to
the Continent. 2
The condition of the Scottish Church, at this time, was
peculiarly unhappy. The persecution appears to have been
encouraged or allowed by all the prelates and chief ecclesias-
tics, and, on the other hand, those who suffered seem to have
maintained various opinions contrary to the faith of the Uni-
versal Church. But there were, notwithstanding, several
theologians who endeavoured to pursue a middle course, and
to restore a purer doctrine and discipline, without introducing
novel views of their own. Some of these adhered all along to
the communion of Rome ; while others, finding a true refor-
mation apparently hopeless, were induced to acquiesce in what
plissimum prseceperunt, nullam se literam Novi Testamenti attigisse gloriantur,
dira comminantes aliis omnibus qui sensum Domini in Scripturis Sanctis dili-
gentissime scrutantur."
1 Knox, vol. i. p. 63-66. Spottiswood, vol. i. pp. 132, 133. Keith, vol. i.
p. 18. , .
2 Knox, vol. i. pp. 55, 56, and appendix, p. 526-529. Buchanan, vol. i. p.
277. Pitcairn's Criminal Trials, vol. i. part i. p. 297. M'Crie's Life of Knox,
pp. 389 393, 395, 396.
12 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXVIIl.
they thought was the best which, under the circumstances,
could be obtained. It is to be regretted that so little is
known of the personal history of this portion of the clergy,
and of the extent of the influence which they exercised ; but
here, and in the course of the narrative afterwards, it will be
an object of peculiar interest to trace all that can be ascer-
tained regarding them.
Among the divines referred to, may justly be reckoned John
Mair, Provost of St. Salvator's College. We are told by
Knox that his word at this time was held as an oracle in
matters of religion ; and we know that he did not hesitate to
give his open support to the efforts for reformation which were
made by those who adhered to the Church's communion. ^
Another of those divines was John Winram, who was ap-
pointed sub-prior of St. Andrews some time before the decease
of Archbishop Beaton. He was suspected of secretly favour-
, ing the Reformed opinions, and of encouraging their more open
supporters. His name will often occur in the course of the
subsequent narrative. ^
Gavin Logic, Principal of St. Leonard's College, belonged
probably to the same class. The students of the university,
particularly those of his pwn college, became attached to the
new opinions by means of his teaching. This was carried so
far, that it was^ commonly remarked of any one inclined to
Lutheranism, that he had drunk of St. Leonard's well. Less
cautious than Winram, he was obliged to leave Scotland,
probably about the year 1535. His subsequent history has
not been ascertained.^
Another of the same school was Robert Richardson, a
canon-regular of Cambuskenneth. In 1530, he published at
Paris an Exegesis on the Rule of his order. This work was
dedicated to Alexander Mylne, Abbot of Cambuskenneth, and,
at the time when he composed it, Richardson was evidently
attached to the ancient doctrine and constitution of the Church,
though anxious for the correction of abuses. He speaks of
Mylne, who was a firm adherent of the Roman communion,
in terms of the highest commendation, while he denounces the
* Knox, vol. i. p. 37.
2 Knox, vol. i. pp. 36, 150. M'Crie's Life of Knox, p. 19.
3 Knox, vol. i. p. 36. M'Crie's Life of Knox, pp. 19, 394, 395.
A.D. 1539.] OF SCOTLAND. 13
intemperate habits prevalent among the monks, and the
scandalous and immoral lives of many of their superiors.
Whether it was that the opinions of Richardson became more
inclined to Lutheranism, or that the ecclesiastical rulers were
resolved to tolerate no attacks on their own conduct, he was
obliged to retire to England about the end of Beaton's pri-
macy. Under the year 1538, Calderwood mentions that
Robert Logic, a brother or kinsman of the Principal of St.
Leonard's, canon of Cambuskenneth, and teacher of the
novices there, and John Richardson, also a canon of the same
monastery, fled to England. " John " is perhaps a mistake
for "Robert " ; at all events we know that Robert Richardson,
a Scottish priest, returned from England to his native country
in 1543, and preached the Reformed doctrines there, till he
was again obliged to flee in order to escape from the persecu-
tion of Cardinal Beaton, who disliked him, both on account of
his religious opinions, and as an agent of the English king.
It seems almost certain that this Robert Richardson was the
canon of Cambuskenneth ; and, as he still retained his priestly
office and title, it is probable that he had adopted the belief
which at that time was established in the Church of England. ^
Among those divines may also be reckoned Alexander
Seaton, a Dominican friar, and confessor to King James. During
a Lenten season, he preached against the prevalent corruptions,
censuring particularly the conduct of the bishops. He was so
popular, and was held in such esteem by the king, that the
Archbishop of St. Andrews was afraid to proceed against him.
After some time, however, James was inclined to change the
opinion which he entertained of his confessor, and Seaton,
afraid of the consequences, left Scotland, still wearing the
habit of his order. On his arrival at Berwick, he addressed a
letter to the king, explaining the cause of his flight, and
pointing out what he thought was the proper course to be
adopted by James in regard to the disputes about religion.
The exact date of Seaton's flight is not mentioned, but it is
* Knox, vol, i. appendix, p. 530. Calderwood, Wodrow Society ed. vol. i. p.
124. Sadler's State Papers, vol. i, pp. 210, 217, 344. Lorimer's Life of
Patrick Hamilton, pp. 171, 172. M'Crie's Life of Knox, p. 397. Brunton and
Haig's Senators of the College of Justice, pp. 7, 8. Preface to the Chartulary
of the Collegiate Church of St. Mary and St. Anne, and the Charters of the
Black Friars, at Glasgow, pp, li. Ivi-lviii.
14 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXVIII.
supposed to have been in 1535, or 1536. He remained in
England, conforming to the established Church of that coun-
try. In 1541, Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, prevailed on
him to retract at St. Paul's cross certain doctrines which he
had taught. He is said to have died within a year afterwards,
in the house of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, where he
officiated as chaplain. ^
From the account which Knox gives of a friar named
William Airth, it is reasonable to infer that he also may be
classed with those who have been mentioned. In a sermon
preached at Dundee, about the year 1534, he censured the
licentious lives of the bishops, and spoke strongly against
false miracles, and the abuses of excommunication. Having
been severely rebuked for this discourse by his diocesan, the
Bishop of Brechin, he repaired to St. Andrews, and, en-
couraged by the support which he received from the Provost
of St. Salvator's, preached the same sermon in the parish
church of that city. Among his hearers, besides Mair himself,
were Patrick Hepburn, Prior of St. Andrews, the Abbot of
Cambuskenneth, and George Lockhart, Provost of the colle-
giate church of Crichton. It does not appear that he incurred
any farther censure on this account. He was afterwards
obliged to flee to England ,* but his steadfast attachment to
the communion of the Church is shewn by the fact that he
was imprisoned by King Henry for defending the authority of
the Pope. 2
1 Kuox, vol. i. p. 45-55, and appendix, p. 531-533. Keith, vol. i. pp. 15, 332-
334. Spottiswood, vol. i. p. 127-129.
2 Knox, vol. i. p. 36-41. Calderwood, vol. i. p. 83-85. I have been unable
to find any farther information regarding Airth than what is given by Knox
and repeated by Calderwood. The latter writer calls him Friar William
Archbishop.
A.D. 1639.] OF SCOTLAND. 15
CHAPTER XXIX.
FROM THE DEATH OF ARCHBISHOP JAMES BEATON IN 1539, TO THE DEATH
OF CARDINAL BEATON IN 1546.
Death of James V, — Accession of Mary — Regency of the Earl
of Arran — Cardinal David Beaton^ Archhishop of St,
Andrews — Succession of Bishops — Gavin Dunbar^ Arch"
hishop of Glasgow — Persecution of the Protestants — Con-
demnation of Sir John Borthwick — The Protestants
favoured hy the Regent — The Scriptures allowed to he read
in the vulgar tongue — Persecution renewed — War tvith
England — The Border abbeys destroyed hy the English —
George Wishart — His residence in England — His return
to Scotland — His trial — His death — Death of Cardinal
Beaton — His character.
Henry YHI. attempted to induce the King of the Scots to
follow his example in transferring the ecclesiastical supremacy
to the crown. His persuasions were disregarded. James
knew well that the prelates of his kingdom, however unworthy
in some respects, were his wisest counsellors, and the firmest
supporters of the royal authority ; and, besides this, lax as his
own personal conduct was, there is no reason to doubt his
conscientious attachment to the doctrines of the Church.
King Henry could ill brook opposition to any of his designs,
and, when repeated proposals of a similar kind were rejected
by James, a war between the two kingdoms was the result.
Unfortunately, great disaffection prevailed among the Scottish
barons. They were jealous of the royal prerogative, and
hated the clergy on account of their influence with the king.
A few of them, it is probable, had sincerely embraced the
Reformed opinions, but many more coveted the possessions of
the Church, and were desirous of partaking in its spoils after
the example which had been given them in England. The
dissensions or the treason of the nobles led to the rout of Sol-
way, and King James was unable to endui-e the disgrace. He
died heartbroken at Falkland, on the thiileenth of December,
16 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXIX.
1542, in the thirty-first year of his age, and was buried at
Holyrood.
Mr. Tytler mentions some points of similarity between the
character and fortunes of the first and fifth James. The com-
parison is so far just, but in one most important respect there
was a marked difference between them. The earlier sovereign
was distinguished by the purity of his personal conduct, and
by his anxiety for the welfare of the Church. James Y. was
dissolute and immoral, and, while he refused to sanction any
scheme for confiscating ecclesiastical property, continued the
traffic in ecclesiastical patronage which his immediate prede-
cessors had begun. Among other instances, he bestowed
some of the most important abbacies on his own illegitimate
children, one of whom became the deadliest enemy of the
Church which had tolerated so shameless an abuse without
a word of remonstrance.
Mary, the only surviving lawful child of James, was five
days old at the time of her father's decease. She was imme-
diately acknowledged as Queen of the Scots, and the usual
contests began for the administration of government. An
attempt was made by Cardinal Beaton, founded on an alleged
will of the late king, to assume the office of regent, but it
was defeated by the nobles, who raised to that dignity James,
Earl of Arran, head of the powerful house of Hamilton, and
next heir to the throne. On Sunday the ninth of September,
1543, the young queen was crowned at Stirling by the Arch-
bishop of St. Andrews.
On the death of Archbishop James Beaton, his nephew,
David Beaton, was appointed his successor in the primacy.
This famous ecclesiastic was a son of John Beaton of Balfour,
in the county of Fife, and is said to have been born in the
year 1494. He was educated for some time at St. Andrews,
and afterwards at Paris, and his first benefice was the chan-
cellorship of the Church of Glasgow, to which he was presented
by his uncle, who was then archbishop of that see. When
the elder Beaton became archbishop of St. Andrews, he re-
signed the abbacy of Arbroath to his nephew, reserving one
half of the revenues to himself during his lifetime. In the
year 1528, David Beaton was appointed keeper of the Privy
Seal. While ambassador for King James in France, he ob-
A.D. 1539.] OF SCOTLAND. 17
tained the favour of Francis I., and was presented to the
bishopric of Mirepoix in that kingdom, to which he is said to
have been consecrated on the fifth of December, 1537. On
the twentieth of December, in the following year, a still higher
dignity was bestowed upon him. He was appointed a cardinal
priest by Paul III., under the title of St. Stephen in the
Cselian Hill. On the fourth of May, 1540, the cardinal wrote
to Pope Paul, mentioning that, on account of the burden of
secular affairs which was laid upon him, he was unable to
devote the requisite attention to his ecclesiastical duties, and
requesting, in order to relieve him in part within the diocese
of St. Andrews, that William Gibson, Dean of Restalrig,
should receive episcopal consecration, and be appointed his
suffragan. It is said that the Pope acceded to his petition,
and that Gibson was raised to the episcopate, as bishop
of Libaria in partibus infidelium. In December, 1543, the
primate was created chancellor of Scotland, and, on the thirtieth,
day of January following, he was appointed legate a latere
by the Pope. ^
George Crichton, Bishop of Dunkeld, died on the twenty-
fourth of January, 1544, and was succeeded, after some delay
caused by the opposition of Eobert Crichton, nephew of the
late bishop, by John Hamilton, Abbot of Paisley, an illegiti-
mate brother of the regent. ^
William Stewart, Bishop of Aberdeen, died in April,
1545. A short time before his decease, the Pope had been
requested to appoint a coadjutor, and William Gordon,
1 Crawfurd's Officers of State, pp. 77, 78. Keith's Catalogue, pp. 36, 37.
Lyon's History of St. Andrews, vol. i. pp. 286, 287 ; vol. ii. pp. 352, 356-358.
Epistolie Regum Scotorum, vol. i. p. 340-342 ; vol. ii. p. 66-69. Sadler's State
Papers, vol. i. p. 15. Burnet's History of the Reformation, Nares' ed. vol. iv.
p. 342-348. Hay, Panegyricus, f. xiii.-xviii. The work last mentioned is a re-
markable composition. It was written on the occasion of Beaton's elevation
to the dignity of cardinal, and was printed at Paris in 1540. The author,
Archibald Hay, was a kinsman of the primate, residing at that time at Mon-
tague College, in the University of Paris. Jt is not easy to say whether his
praises of the cardinal are serious or ironical. He was zealous for the purity and
well-being of the Church, and denounces, in the strongest language, the ignor-
ance and vices of the Scottish clergy.
2 Keith's Catalogue, pp. 94, 95. Brunton and Haig"s Senators of the College
of Justice, p. 73. Epistolse Regum Scotorum, vol. ii. pp. 158, 159, 174-177,
183-187, 225-228.
VOL. II.] 3
18 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXIX.
chancellor of the cathedral of Murray, son of Alexander,
Earl of Huntly, was recommended for the office. Nothing
farther was done in this respect in consequence of Bishop
Stewart's death, and the chancellor of Murray was then ap-
pointed his successor. William Gordon was bishop-elect in
July, 1546, and was consecrated in the following year.^
James Hay, Bishop of Ross, was succeeded in 1539 by
Eobert Cairncross, Abbot of Holyrood. On his appointment
to the see, Bishop Cairncross resigned the great abbacy which
he held, but received soon afterwards that of Feme in com-
mendam. He died in the year 1545. The next bishop was
David Panter, secretary to the regent. ^
On the death of Andrew Stewart, Bishop of Caithness,
which seems to have taken place in 1541, Robert Stewart,
brother of Matthew, Earl of Lennox, was appointed to the see.
He was at that time very young, and had only received the
tonsure. It is probable that he was never ordained or con-
secrated. ^
In the year 1541, Robert Reid, Abbot of Kinloss, succeeded
Robert Maxwell, as bishop of Orkney, and was consecrated in
the course of the same year.^
The see of Glasgow continued to be held by Archbishop
Dunbar. He strenuously maintained the independence of
the Church of St. Kentigern. While admitting the su-
perior dignity of St. Andrews, he resisted the attempts of
its archbishops to extend their primatial rule over his pro-
vince. On one occasion this controversy gave rise to an un-
seemly brawl. When the papal legate, Contarini, Patriarch
of Venice, came over, soon after the appointment of Arran to
the regency, he was honourably entertained at Glasgow by
the Scottish bishops. A dispute arose between the two arch-
1 Keith's Catalogue, pp, 122, 124. Preface to the Chartolary of Aberdeen, p.
Ivii.-lx. Leslie, p. 456. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 467.
Epistolse Regum Scotorum, vol. ii. pp. 250, 251. There seems to be no good
reason for doubting that the William Gordon recommended as coadjutor to
Bishop Stewart was the same person who afterwards succeeded him.
2 Keith's Catalogue, p. 190-192. Brunton and Haig's Senators of the College
of Justice, pp. 45, 46. Leslie, p. 456. Epistolae Regum Scotorum, vol. ii.
p. 104.
3 Keith's Catalogue, p. 215. Epistolae Regum Scotorum, vol. ii. p. 222-223.
* Brunton and Haig's Senators of the College of Justice, p. 16. Epistol»
Regum Scotorum, vol. ii. p. 112-115. The Stirlinga of Keir, p. 400.
A.D. 1539.J OF SCOTLAND. 19
bishops — the cardinal contending that, in virtue of his legatine
and primatial authority, he was entitled to take precedence
even within the cathedral of Glasgow. The attendants of
Archbishop Dunbar, indignant at an attempt to enforce this
claim, attacked the primate's crossbearer, and the tumult was
only stopped by the intervention of the regent. ^
Archbishop Dunbar died on the thirtieth of April, 1547,
and was buried within the chancel of his cathedral. He was
a learned, accomplished, and pious prelate, stained by no
crime, except that of yielding, against his own judgment, to
the persecuting spirit of the day.^
On the sixteenth of January, 1546, Malcolm, Lord Flem-
ing, chamberlain of Scotland, with consent of Archbishop
Dunbar and the chapter of Glasgow, founded the collegiate
church of St. Mary, at Biggar. The foundation provided for
the maintenance of a provost, eight prebendaries, four choris-
ters, and six poor beadsmen.^ In the end of the following
year. Lord Fleming was slain at Pinkie.
Henry, Bishop of Galloway, was succeeded in the year
.1541 by Andrew Durie, Abbot of Melrose.*
Ferquhard, Bishop of the Isles and Commendator of lona,
finding himself unable, from advanced years, to discharge his
ecclesiastical duties, resigned the see and the abbacy in the
year 1544 in favour of Roderick Maclean, archdeacon of the
diocese.^
The proceedings against heretics during the primacy of
^ Regist. Episcopat. Glasguen. pp. 550, 551, 553-556. Leslie, pp. 445, 448,
449. Knox, vol. i. pp. 146, 147. The dispute mentioned by Leslie, . and that
described by Knox with characteristic glee, probably refer to the same occasion,
but there is an apparent discrepancy in the date. The establishment of two
metropolitan sees in Scotland, with privileges not always clearly defined, led to
contests similar to those which had so often taken place between the two English
archbishops.
2 Keith's Catalogue, p. 257-259. Brunton and Haig's Senators of the College
of Justice, p. 3-5. Buchanan (vol. i. p. 270) speaks of Dunbar as " vir bonus
et doctus, sed in quo nonnulli civilem prudentiam desiderabant." His beautiful
poetical commemoration of the archbishop's accomplishments is well known.
3 Deed of foundation— Miscellany of the Spalding Club, vol. v. p. 296-308, and
preface to that volume, p. 26-30.
^ Keith's Catalogue, p. 278. Brunton and Haig's Senators of the College of
Justice, p. 68. Epistolae Regum Scotorum, vol. ii. p. 115-120.
° Keith's Catalogue, pp. 306, 307. Epistolae " Regum Scotorum, vol. ii. p.
219-221. Calendar of State Papers relating to Scotland, vol. i. p. 53.
20 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXIX.
Archbishop James Beaton, had been carried on with the full
approbation of the cardinal, and, on the accession of the latter
to the see of St. Andrews, no change took place in the policy
of the Scottish rulers. In May, 1540, Sir John Borthwick, a
younger son of William Lord Borthwick who fell at Flodden,
was summoned to appear before the cardinal and other pre-
lates at St. Andrews. Before the trial came on, Beaton
himself had embarked with the king on his voyage to the
Western Isles, but there were present the Archbishop of
Glasgow, the Bishops of Aberdeen, Galloway, Brechin, and
Dunblane, and the heads of many of the monastic houses, and
other ecclesiastics, besides some of the chief temporal nobles.
Borthwick having fled to England, evidence was brought
regarding his opinions, and sentence was pronounced against
him in the cardinal's name. After the establishment of the
Reformed religion, he returned to Scotland, and obtained a
reversal of his condemnation. ^
The Earl of Arran, on his appointment to the regency,
went so far in his opposition to the cardinal, as openly to
favour the new doctrines. He entertained in his service two.
Protestant preachers, Thomas Williams and John Rough,
both of whom had been Dominican friars, and he encouraged
others to spread their opinions in various parts of the king-
dom. On the fifteenth day of March, 1543, upon the motion
of Lord Maxwell, one of the prisoners taken at Sol way, who
had been permitted to return by King Henry, an act of
parliament was passed, allowing the Holy Scriptures of the
Old and New Testament to be translated into the Eng-
lish or Scottish tongue, and read by the people. Against
this the Archbisliop of Glasgow, chancellor of the kingdom,
lor himself, and in name of all the prelates then present as
one of the three estates, entered his protest, until a provincial
council could be held for the pui-pose of considering whether
such a step was necessary. ^
^ Knox, vol. i. appendix, pp. 533, 534. Leslie, p. 430. Spottiswood, vol. i. pp.
138, 139, Calderwood, vol. i. p. 114-123. Keith, vol. i. pp. 20, 21, 335-341.
Dr. John Lee's Lectures on the History of the Church of Scotland, vol. i. p.
327-334.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 415. Regist. Episcopat.
Glasguen. pp. 559, 560. Knox, vol. i. pp. 95, 96, 100. Keith, vol. i. p. 89-91.
Extracts from the Council Register of Aberdeen, from 1398 to 1570, p. 189.
A.D. 1544.] OF SCOTLAND. 21
Almost from the introduction of the Protestant doctrines
into Scotland, the maintenance of those opinions was mixed
up with the political intrigues of the party which was opposed
to the French alliance, and willing to sacrifice the indepen-
dence of their country to the English supremacy. The great
body of the Scottish people were not yet prepared to renounce
the communion of the Church, and, with the exception of
those of the nobility who had bound themselves to Henry,
almost all were opposed to the selfish designs of the English
king. It was the object of that prince to obtain the real
sovereignty of the Scottish kingdom by means of a marriage
between the young queen and Edward, Prince of Wales.
The cardinal was at once the chief enemy of the new doctrines,
and the head of the political party hostile to England. By
the assistance, as is supposed, of John Hamilton, Abbot of
Paisley, Arran's illegitimate brother, he induced the regent to
abandon his connection with England, and to abjui'e the Pro-
testant opinions.
The first two years of the new reign appear to have been
unstained by the infliction of capital punishment for heresy ;
but, strengthened by the support of Arran, the cardinal re-
commenced the persecution. In January, 1544, a considerable
number of persons, accused of various offences connected with
religion, were summoned before the regent and the cardinal at
Perth. Four men and one woman, all of humble rank, were
put to death— the men by hanging, the woman by drowning;
and others were banished from the kingdom. ^
The Scottish clergy now began to experience the eff'ects of
the line of policy adopted by King Henry in England.
Open war had again broken out between the two kingdoms,
and a powerful army, under the Earl of Hertford, entered
Scotland. The monasteries, which had generally been spared
in former invasions, were now the chief objects of attack.
Their wealth allured the spoilers, and the sanctity of ecclesias-
tical buildings was as little regarded by King Henry's nobles,
as it had been of old by the heathen Danes. It was not to
be expected that they, who in their own land appropriated to
sordid uses the most venerated abodes of piety, would shew
^ Knox, vol i. pp. 117, 118. Spottiswood, vol. i. pp. U7, 148. Keith, vol. i.
pp. 98, 100.
22 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXIX.
more reverence in the country of an enemy. During Hert-
ford's invasion, and in a series of inroads which continued for
some time, the great abbeys of Holyrood, Melrose, Dryburgh,
Kelso, and Jedburgh, with many other churches and monas-
teries, were given to the flames. The conduct of the English
was wantonly cruel and destructive. At Melrose they defaced
the tombs of the Douglases, and the Earl of Angus was
recalled by this outrage to the duty which he owed to his
country. The spoilers were defeated, and two of their most
rapacious leaders slain at Ancrum Moor.^
Some of the most important events in Scottish history now
become mixed up with the personal fortunes of George
Wishart, one of the Protestant preachers. Wishart is sup-
posed to have been a son of the house of Pitarro in the
Meams. His early life is involved in obscurity. Most of
our writers speak of his residence at Montrose, and of his
having fled from that town to escape the persecution of
the Bishop of Brechin for teaching the Greek New Testa-
ment. But these circumstances are not mentioned by any
contemporary authority, and seem to be founded on a
wrong interpretation put on some of the statements made at
his trial. He left his native country, probably on account of
religion, and appears to have resided for some time in Eng-
land, and on the Continent. About 1543 he was at Cambridge,
and connected with Corpus Christi College in that University,
where he was highly esteemed for his piety, charity, and
ascetic devotion. In the autumn of that year, and before the
southern abbeys had sufiered from Hertford's invasion, the
first domestic attack was made on the monastic houses in
Scotland. This has been attributed to the preaching of
Wishart, but it is not certain that he had left England at the
time. Of the event itself there can be no doubt. The letter
of an English agent mentions that the work of reformation
had begun at Dundee by the destruction of the monasteries
of the Black and Gray Friars; that afterwards the abbey
of Lindores on the opposite side of the Frith of Tay had
been sacked, and the monks turned out ; and that a similar
1 Tytler, vol. v. pp. 314-317, 330, 331. Morton's Monastic Annals of
Teviotdale, pp. 36, 100, 243, 301. Preface to the Charters of Holyrood, pp.
Ixxiii. Ixxiv.
A.D. 1544.] OF SCOTLAND. 23
attack had been made on the monastery of the Black Friars at
Edinburgh, but that it had been repelled by the citizens. ^
George Wishart was in Scotland probably before the end
of 1544. His sermons had a great effect on the people,
and he found powerful protectors in some of the nobility
and gentry. Among those who attended upon him and
listened to his discourses was John Knox, who bore for
some time a two-handed sword which was usually carried
before the preacher. While Wishart was residing at Leith,
the regent and the cardinal came to Edinburgh. The latter
was aware that plots had been formed against his life, which
were encouraged by the English king, and in which some of
Wishart's protectors were deeply implicated. Whether it
was that he suspected Wishart to be cognisant of the plots,
or that he was merely desirous of seizing one of the chief
teachers of the new opinions, is uncertain ; at all events he
endeavoured to apprehend him. The preacher escaped from
Leith, but, on the sixteenth of January, 1546, was taken at
Ormiston, in East Lothian, by the Earl of Bothwell, and
delivered to the primate, who caused him soon afterwards to
be conveyed to St. Andrews.
On the twenty-eighth of February, Wishart was brought to
trial in the cathedral church of St. Andrews, before the cardinal,
the Archbishop of Glasgow, and other ecclesiastical judges,
the regent declining to take a part in the proceedings. On
^ Knox, vol. i. appendix, pp. 534, 535. Miscellany of the Wodrow
Society, vol. i. pp. 5, 6. M'Crie's Life of Knox, pp. 399, 400. Calderwood,
vol. i. p. 184-186. Keith, vol. i. pp. 103, 104. Chalmers's Life of Mary, Queen
of Scots, vol. ii. pp. 403, 404. Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 29. Tytler, vol. v.
pp. 341, 342. Wishart's excommunication by the Bishop of Brechin appears to
have taken place after his return to Scotland. The statement that he was a
schoolmaster at Montrose, and that he fled from that town in 1538 to escape the
persecution of the bishop, rests exclusively, so far as I am aware, on the
authority of a traditional story told by Petrie in his Church History, p. 182.
It has frequently been asserted, on the authority of an extract from the records of
the city of Bristol, printed by Dr. M'Crie (Life of Knox, p. 401), that in the
year 1539 Wishart preached at Bristol against the opinions then generally
received regarding: the merits of the Blessed Virgin, and that he made a public
recantation when brought before Archbishop Cranmer and others of the Eng-
lish prelates. Dr. Lorimer has shewn (Scottish Reformation, p. 93-96) that
this is a mistake arising from a wrong reading of the MS. record, and that the
heresy which was retracted was a denial of the merits of our Lord. Perhaps the
George Wishart who preached at Bristol was a different person from the reformer.
24 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXIX.
this occasion, Winram, the sub-prior, preached to the con-
gregation, taking his text from the parable of the tares in the
thirteenth chapter of St. Matthew. He said that heresy was
the evil seed, and he defined it to be a false opinion, clearly
opposed to the word of God, and pertinaciously defended. He
shewed that heresy was caused by the ignorance of those who
had the cure of men's souls, whose duty it was to have the
true understanding of the word of God, that ihey might be
able to win again the teachers of heresy with the sword of
the Spirit which is the word of God ; and thereupon he quoted
St. Paul's account of the duties of a bishop. Heresies, he
added, might be known by an undoubted touchstone, the true,
sincere, and undefiled word of God. He defended the law-
fulness of punishing heretics by the temporal sword, and
attempted to reconcile it with the text, " Let both grow
together till the harvest."
When the sermon was finished, the charges against Wishart
were read. These were chiefly the following : That he h-ad
preached after being forbidden to do so by the ecclesiastical and
civil authorities ; that he had denied there were seven sacraments ;
that he had taught that auricular confession wasnot a sacrament;
that he had affirmed that the sacrament of the altar was only com-
mon bread ; that he had stated that every layman was a priest,
and that the Pope had no more power than any other man ; that
he had denied Free-will, Purgatory, and the lawfulness of prayer
to the saints, and that he asserted that priests might lawfully
marry. These charges were specifically answered by Wishart.
Some he denied altogether, complaining that his language had
been misrepresented ; others he held to be doubtful points, as
to which a positive opinion could not be laid down, except in
so far as they were sanctioned by the word of God. He ex-
pressed himself cautiously in regard to the sacraments and the
invocation of saints, denying that he had directly contradicted
the teaching of the Church, but professing his inability to
believe farther than was agreeable to the word of God. He
admitted that he did not hold any distinction to exist between
the clergy and the laity, appealing to the texts of St. John
and St. Peter which speak of Christians as kings and priests
unto God, and as a royal priesthood.
Notwithstanding his defence, he was found guilty of heresy,
A.D. 1546.] OF SCOTLAND. 25
and condemned to death. When he wasu carried back to the
castle, two gray friars came to him, and expressed their readi-
ness to hear his confession. He answered, " I will make no
confession to you ; go fetch me yonder man that preached this
day, and I will make my confession to him." The sub-
prior accordingly came. What passed between them was
never known. On the following morning, Winram again
visited him, and asked if he wished to receive the Holy
Eucharist. " AVillingly," he said, " if it be administered
under both kinds, according to our Saviour's institution." The
sub-prior went to the bishops and mentioned his request, but
was told that it was not reasonable that an obstinate heretic,
condemned by the Church, should partake of the Church's
blessings. In the meantime the governor of the castle invited
Wishart to take breakfast with himself and his attendants.
He accepted their hospitality, and, during the meal, acting on
the opinion which he entertained in regard to the priestly
office, after discoursing for sometime on the Passion of our
Lord, and on the duty of mutual charity and forgiveness, he
took bread and wine, and, partaking of both himself, gave also,
to those who were present, exhorting them to remember the
death of Christ. He then retired to his chamber.
When the fire was prepared, he was led forth. Having
implored mercy of his Saviour, and commended his soul to
His keeping, he addressed the people, beseeching them not to
be offended with the word of God, on account of the sufferings
to which they saw him exposed. " For the word's sake," he
said, " and the true Gospel which was given me by the grace
of God, I suffer this day by men, not sorrowfully, but with a
glad heart and mind. For this cause I was sent, that I should
suffer this fire for Christ's sake. Consider and behold my
visage, ye shall not see me change my colour. This grim fire
I fear not ; and so I pray you for to do, if that any persecu-
tion come unto you for the word's sake ; and not to fear them
that slay the body, and afterwards have no power to slay the
soul. Some have said of me that I taught that the soul of
man should sleep until the last day ; but I know surely, and
my faith is such, that my soul shall sup with my Saviour this
night ere it be six hours, for whom I suffer this." He con-
cluded by praying that all those who liad passed sentence upon
26 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. XXIX.
him and were assisting in his death might be forgiven. He
was then fastened to the gibbet, and was burned to ashes. ^
It has been maintained by various writers that Wishart
was aware of the conspiracy which had been formed against
the life of Beaton. This question, like some others of a similar
kind in the history of the Scottish Reformation, is attended
with considerable difficulty. I cannot see, however, that there
is evidence of Wishart 's guilt. An individual of the same
surname was undoubtedly implicated in the plot, but there is
hardly anything beyond this to identify him with the preacher.
Suspicion certainly arises from Wishart's intimate connection
with several of the chief conspirators, and from the prophetic de-
nunciations of the evils about to befall his enemies which have
been attributed to him. These denunciations have probably
been exaggerated ; but, if otherwise, he had seen enough of
Brunstone and the other partizans of England to be aware that
Scotland was threatened with foreign invasion, and that the
leading statesmen on the opposite side were exposed to great
danger from their domestic enemies, without its being neces-
sary to infer that he was an accomplice in the plot against them.
In such a question also, it is most unjust to keep out of view
the gentle disposition and stainless character of Wishart.
Had he resembled in his language and demeanour some others
of the reformers, the accusation would not have been so im-
probable. But it is unreasonable to suppose that the man,
whose private life at Cambridge was so exemplary, and who
died with the words of meekness and forgiveness on his lips,
could have taken an active part in the designs of a body of
plotters and murderers. ^
* Knox, vol. i. p. 125-171, and appendix, pp. 535, 536. Foxe's Acts and
Monuments, p. 622-627. Buchanan, vol. i. p. 292-294. Spottiswood, vol. i. p.
150-162. Calderwood, vol. i. p. 186-219. Keith, vol. i. p. 101-106. Tytler,
vol. V. p. 343-349. The proceedings of Wishart on the morning of the day on
which he died are related by Buchanan, who also states that they took place
immediately after the visit from the two fHars, and the request to send for Win-
ram. This last statement is opposed to the narrative of Knox, and I have
adopted in the text what seems the most natural explanation. Buchanan men-
tions that the cardinal looked on while "Wishart suffered at the stake. Knox
is silent as to this, but it is to be feared that there is nothing improbable in the
circumstance. What Buchanan adds as to Wishart's prophecy of the cardinal's
death is much more doubtful.
2 On this point, see Mr. David Laing's appendix to Knox, vol. i. pp 536, 537 ;
Keith, vol. i. p. 109, and Mr. Lawson's notes, pp. 103-105, 110; note by
A.D. 1546.] OF SCOTLAND. 27
Soon after the death of Wishart, the cardinal went over
to Angus in order to be present at the marriage of one of his
illegitimate daughters with the Master of Crawford, and thence
returned to St. Andrews.^
No single event during the persecutions in Scotland seems
to have caused such a deep feeling in the popular mind as
the burning of Wishart. Before that time the Protestant
opinions were not generally received with favour, even among
the inhabitants of the towns, and the cardinal was held
in estimation on account of his opposition to the English
alliance ; but now the general feeling appears to have under-
gone a great and sudden change, which can only be explained
by something peculiar in the character and conduct of the
sufferer, and in the proceedings connected with his per-
secution. The cardinal became an object of hatred to a
large proportion of the people, and those who held the
new opinions increased in number and influence. The per-
sonal and political enemies of Beaton were encouraged to
proceed with their designs against him. He was at this time
residing in his castle at St. Andrews, where some new build-
ings were in the course of being erected. At day-break on
the twenty-eighth of May, 1546, Norman Leslie, Master
of Rothes, his uncle, John Leslie, William Kirkaldy of
Grange, and some other gentlemen, with a few attendants,
contrived to obtain admission into the castle. The household
retainers were seized one by one and dismissed. The cardinal,
awakened by the noise, attempted to escape by a private
postern, but, finding it guarded, returned to his apartment,
and with the assistance of his page barricaded the door.
The threat of applying fire compelled him to open it. The
conspirators rushed in, and some of them struck him. He cried
out, "I am a priest, you will not slay me." James Melville,
one of the assassins, reproved his companions for their violence.
Bishop Eussell, in his edition of Spottiswood, vol. i. pp. 230, 231 ; Lyon's His-
tory of St. Andrews, vol. i. p. 296, and vol. ii. p. 358-366 ; and Tytler's Life of
Craig, p. 333-343, and his History, vol. v. p, 376-391.
1 See Knox, vol. i. pp. 174, 175; Keith, vol. i. pp. 112, 113; and Lord
Lindsay's Lives of the Lindsays, vol. i. p. 201. Some writers, favourable to
the cardinal's memory, have attempted to shew that he was a widower when he
entered into holy orders, and. that his children were bom in wedlock ; but their
arguments and authorities appear to be very inconclusive.
28 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXIX.
telling them that the judgment of God ought to be executed
with more gravity. Then, alluding to Wishart's death, and
saying that they were sent by God to avenge it, he repeatedly
passed his sword through the body of the archbishop, who fell
on the ground and immediately expired. The citizens of the
town were by this time alarmed, and gathering close to the
castle ditch demanded admission, and insisted on being allowed
to speak with the cardinal. The murderers hung the dead
body over the wall, and the frightened townsmen dispersed.^
Such was the awful death of Cardinal Beaton. Whether
it was caused by private vengeance, by political and religious
hatred, or by paid assassins doing the work they were em-
ployed to perform, it was a most inhuman and wicked act. The
character of the murdered prelate has been estimated very
differently by writers of different opinions ; but the tnith can
be ascertained without much difficulty. His abilities were
undoubtedly great. As a statesman, he distinguished himself
by a fearless assertion of his country's independence, and the
maintenance of its real interests, in opposition to a selfish and
powerful faction of the nobility. As an ecclesiastic, he pur-
sued rigorously and without remorse those cruel measures for
the repression of the Protestant doctrines, which almost all the
adherents of the Roman Church held to be both a duty and
an imperative necessity. Had the personal character of Beaton
been pure, his memory would have been respected as that of a
prelate endowed with many high and noble qualities, though
stained with a crime in which all parties then partook in a
greater or less degree. But, while he punished with relentless
severity the maintenance of opinions opposed to those which
the Church of that day taught, he made no attempt to reform
the abuses which gave such weight to the arguments of her
opponents ; and his own manner of living resembled that of the
rude nobles by whom he was hated and feared. In the popu-
lar belief of Scotland vices and offences have been attributed
to him of which he was not guilty; but there is sufficient
evidence to shew that his life was secular and irreligious, and
in no way regulated by those principles which ought to govern
the conduct of a Christian bishop.
1 Knox, vol. i. p. 174-179. Spottiswood, vol. i. p. 163-165 Keith, vol. i. pp.
108, 109. T>tler, vol. v. p. 353-355.
A.D. 1546.] OF SCOTLAND. 29
CHAPTER XXX.
FROM THE DEATH OF CARDINAL BEATON IN 1546, TO THE END OF THE
EARL OF ARRAN'S REGENCY IN 1554.
Regency of the Earl of Arran—John Hamilton^ ArchUshop of
St. Andrews — James Beaton^ Archbishop of Glasgow —
Succession of Bishops — John Knox — His residence in the
Castle of St. Andrews — His call to he a Protestant minister
— His controversies with the clergy — Council at Edinburgh
in 1549 — Members of the Council^ Canons enacted— Per-
secution of the Protestants — Death of Adam. Wallace-
Council at Edinburgh in 1552 — Publication of a Cate-
chism— Alleged dispute about the Paternoster.
The murder of Cardinal Beaton was applauded by the more
vehement of the Protestant leaders, and openly abetted by the
political faction which was connected with England. The
assassins kept possession of the castle of St. Andrews, where
they were soon joined by many of their friends, and by John
Eough, who had formerly been chaplain to the regent. At a
subsequent period, John Knox took up his residence among
them. The regent was called upon by the party in alliance
with France, and by the clergy, and all the zealous supporters
of the Church, to take immediate steps for punishing the sacri-
legious crime which had been committed. The castle was
accordingly besieged, but was vigorously defended by the
garrison. The siege was tedious, and might have been un-
successful, if a French fleet had not arrived to assist the
regent. The garrison was finally obliged to capitulate in the
end of July, 1547. The assassins of the cardinal and their
chief supporters were conveyed to France, and detained in
various fortresses, or in the galleys.
In the autumn of the same year, the Earl of Hertford, now
Duke of Somerset, and protector during the minority of
Edward YI., again invaded Scotland. The regent sent the
fiery cross through the kingdom, and advanced against the
English with a numerous army, accompanied by a body of
30 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXX.
priests and monks who marched under a white banner bearing
an emblematic figm'e of the afflicted Church. They met at
Pinkie on the ninth of September, and the Scots were de-
feated with great slaughter. This victory was of little avail
to Somerset, who was recalled to England by the necessity of
attending to his own political interests. Hostilities continued
for some time without any decisive result, but the national
feeling was so embittered against the English, that the three
estates, which met at Haddington in July, 1548, unanimously
agreed that the young queen of the Scots should marry the
Dauphin Francis, and that, in the meantime, she should be en-
trusted to the care of his father. King Henry II. Peace was
not restored between England and Scotland till April, 1550.
In April, 1^54, the regent was induced by the queen dowager
and the court of France to resign his office, the duchy of
Chatel-herault being conferred upon him by King Henry, and
his title as heir to the crown of Scotland being solemnly re-
cognised. Mary of Lorraine was appointed regent by a com-
mission from the queen her daughter, and her authority was
acknowledged by the estates of the kingdom.
After the death of Cardinal Beaton, the see of St. Andrews
remained vacant for some time, but finally, John Hamilton,
Bishop of Dunkeld, brother of the Earl of Arran, was raised to
the primacy. The exact date of his appointment has not been
ascertained. He had been consecrated while bishop of Dun-
keld, probably in the beginning of 1546, and his formal trans-
lation took place in 1549. He continued to retain the abbacy
of Paisley. ^
Archbishop Hamilton's successor at Dunkeld was Eobert
Crichton, nephew of the former bishop, George Crichton. He
is said to have been promoted to the see in 1550.^
David Panter remained abroad for seven years after his
nomination to the see of Boss. He returned to Scotland in
1552, and was consecrated at Jedburgh, in presence of the
regent and a large concourse of the nobility. ^
On the decease of Gavin Dunbar, Alexander Gordon,
^ Keith's Catalogue, p. 95. Evidence taken by the University Commissioners,
vol. iii. p. 367. Lyon's History of St. Andrews, vol. ii. p. 262.
2 Keith's Catalogue, p. 96.
3 Keith's Catalogue, p. 192. Leslie, p. 477.
A.D. 1546.] OF SCOTLAND. 31
brother of George Earl of Huntly, was chosen archbishop of
Glasgow, but his election was disputed, and, in 1551, James
Beaton, Abbot of Arbroath, was appointed to the see. The
abbot was at that time in his twenty-seventh year, and was
not yet ordained. He was raised to the four minor orders
and ordained sub-deacon at Rome, on the sixteenth of July,
1552 ; on the seventeenth and twentieth days of that month
he was ordained deacon and priest ; and on Sunday, the
twenth-eighth of August, he was consecrated bishop. ^
In the year 1549, William was bishop elect and confirmed
of Argyll. He is said to have been a brother ot the Earl of
Glencairn. It is not known at what time he succeeded Bishop
Montgomery. ^
Roderick Maclean died about the year 1553, and Alexander
Gordon was promoted to the see of the Isles. This prelate
had been named to the administration of the diocese of Caith-
ness during the time that its titular bishop, Robert Stewart,
was under forfeiture for treason. As some recompense for his
disappointment at Glasgow, the Pope also conferred upon him
the nominal dignity of Archbishop of Athens. ^
After the death of Cardinal Beaton, the clergy seem to have
dreaded that attempts would be made to destroy the ecclesias-
tical and monastic buildings. On the eleventh of June, 1546,
an act of the Privy Council was passed, and was subsequently
ratified by parliament, denouncing the forfeiture of life, land,
and goods, against all who should be guilty of this or similar
outrages.*
At Easter, 1547, John Knox, accompanied by his pupils,
the sons of the lairds of Ormiston and Langniddry, repaired to
the castle of St. Andrews. Knox was born near Haddington
in 1505. He was educated at the University of Glasgow, and
when about twenty-five years of age was ordained a priest.
It is said that he embraced the Protestant doctrines in 1542,
1 Keith's Catalogue, p. 259. Regist. Episcopat. Glasguen. p. 662-577, and
preface, p. iii.
2 Keith's Catalogue, p. 289. Wilkins's Concilia, vol. iv. p. 46.
8 Keith's Catalogue, p. 307. Brunton and Haig's Senators of the College of
Justice, pp. 128, 129. Gordon's History of the Earldom of Sutherland, pp. Ill,
290. Epistolse Regum Scotorum, vol. ii. p. 223-225. Origines Parochiales
Scotiae, vol. ii. part i. p. 293.
* Epistolse Regum Scotorum, vol. ii. pp. 345, 346. Acts of the Parliaments
of Scotland, vol. ii p 470. Keith, vol. i. pp. 144, 145.
32 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXX.
but he first became known as a disciple of George Wishart, in
the year 1545. It is probable that, after the murder of Cardinal
Beaton, Knox's opinions exposed him to danger ; and he him-
self asserts that his residence in the castle was necessary for
his safety. His avowed sympathy with the act of the assas-
sins would prevent any scruple about the propriety of joining
himself to their company.
During the intervals of the siege, a Protestant congregation
had been established in the city, and from them, about the
end of May or beginning of June, Knox accepted a call to be
their minister. The circumstances connected with this pro-
ceeding shew how entirely the doctrine of holy orders was
rejected by the Scottish reformers. Knox had already declined
an invitation to become a preacher, but his friends were deter-
mined to overcome his objections. On an appointed day,
Eough preached a sermon, in which he explained the power of
the congregi'ation, however small in number, provided they
were more than two or three, to call to the office of the
ministry any one in whom they perceived the suitable gifts,
and the duty of the person so invited to obey the call. When
this discourse was finished, turning to Knox, he charged him
not to refuse the office to which he was now called by the
people. After some hesitation, Knox obeyed the summons.
No laying on of hands or other ceremony was used, and no
allusion was made to the priestly ordination which he had
already received. The solemn, deliberate choice of the people
was held to be the only authority requisite for conferring the
ministerial office.^
The ability of Knox was soon displayed in defence of the
Protestant opinions. His colleague Rough had been unable
to encounter the controversial skill of John Annand, Principal
of St. Leonard's College, a zealous maintainer of the Roman
doctrines. Knox, according to his own account, refuted the
arguments of the principal, and compelled him as a last
resource to appeal to the authority of the Church, which had
already settled the questions at issue by condemning Luther-
anism and heresies of every description. The reformer met this
statement by denying that the Church of Rome was the true
Church, and by asserting that it was the synagogue of Satan,
Knox, vol. i. p. 184-188. MTrie's Life of Knox, pp. 1-9, 25-33.
A.D. 1546.] OF SCOTLAND. 33
and that the Pope was the Man of Sin, and Antichrist.
He maintained these opinions in a sermon preached in the
parish church of St. Andrews. Among his hearers were
Winram the sub-prior, John Mair, and other ecclesias-
tics. The primate-elect, being informed of what had taken
place, ■^TTote to the sub-prior, who was the acting vicar-
general of the diocese, expressing his surprise that such doc-
trines were allowed to be taught without answer. Winram
sent for E-ough and Knox, and offered to reason with them on
certain articles drawn from their sermons. A conference took
place, relating mainly to the power of the Church to ordain
ceremonies, in which Knox, on the one side, and, on the other,
Winram, and a Franciscan friar named Arbuckle, took part.
Neither party was convinced by the arguments of its oppon-
ents. From this time the clergy began a course of sermons,
every Sunday, in the parish church, in which they avoided
points of controversy ; Knox continued his discourses on week
days ; and the result appeared in the increasing numbers of
those who adopted the new opinions. The progress of the
Reformation at St. Andrews was interrupted by the renewal of
the siege. Rough had previously retired to England, where
he was burned in the reign of Mary. Knox remained to the
last, and was carried prisoner to France.^
In Lent, 1547, a provincial council was held at Edinburgh,
at which, or at some former council, a canon was enacted
enjoining that in every cathedral church a doctor or licentiate
in theology, bound to preach the word of God to the people,
should be appointed a member of the chapter. ^
In August, 1549, a provincial council was held at Linlith-
gow, at which certain canons were enacted.^ A few months
afterwards another council met at Edinburgh. The proceed-
ings of this synod are interesting, both from their own import-
ance, and as being the first of which a full record has been
preserved. The Archbishop of St. Andrews, as primate and
legatus natus, summoned the council, and presided at its
1 Knox, vol. i, p. 188-206. M'Crie's Life of Knox, p. 36-42.
" Regist. Episcopal. Aberdon. vol. ii. pp. 317, 318.
^ Wilkins's Concilia, vol. iv. p. 209. This seems to have been a council
entirely distinct from that which met at Edinburgh ia the following November,
though our writers speak of the one as an adjournment of the other ; compare
Concilia, vol. iv. p. 46.
VOL II.] 4
34 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Chap. XXX.
meetings. It was convened within the church of the Black
Friars, on Wednesday, the twenty-seventh of November, and
was attended by the chief prelates, and many other ecclesias-
tics. The names of those present have been preserved, and
we are thus able to know who at this time composed the
provincial synod of the Scottish clergy. There met on
the appointed day William, Bishop of Aberdeen, Patrick,
Bishop of Murray and Commendator of Scone, Andrew,
Bishop of Galloway and of the Chapel Eoyal, William,
Bishop of Dunblane, Kobert, Bishop of Orkney and Com-
mendator of Kinloss, William, elect and confirmed of Argyll,
and the Deans of Glasgow and Dunkeld, as vicars-general
during the vacancy of these sees. There were also present
James, Commendator of the Priory of St. Andrews, afterwards
Earl of Murray, at that time only eighteen years of age,
James, Commendator of Kelso and Melrose, also an illegiti-
mate son of the late king, George, Commendator of Dun-
fermline and Archdeacon of St. Andrews, the Prior of
Whithorn, Quintin Kennedy, Abbot of Crossraguel, the
Abbots of Cupar, Glenluce, Newbottle, Dundrennan, and
Deer, the Commendator of Culross, the Priors of Pluscardine
and Monymusk, John Winram, Sub-prior of St. Andrews,
Alexander Anderson, Sub-principal of the College of Aberdeen,
John Greyson, Provincial of the Black Friars, John Pater-
son, General Minister of the Gray Friars of the Observance,
the Deans and Provosts of several cathedral and collegiate
churches, and various members of the cathedral chapters, of
the monastic orders, and of the universities. John Mair, and
another doctor in theology, named Martin Balfour, both of
whom were advanced in years and in infirm health, appeared
by their procurators. The prelates and clergy of both pro-
vinces met together in one house, and hence those synods were
sometimes styled provincial-general councils.
After the celebration of mass, the members of council left
the church and repaired to the refectory of the monastery.
They then took the seats allotted, and all persons who had no
right to be present having been excluded, a sermon was
preached, and the proceedings commenced. The synod had
been called for the correction of those evils by which the
Church was overwhelmed, and the preamble to its acts sets
A.D. 1550.] OF SCOTLAND. 35
forth that the two main causes of these calamities were the
corrupt morals and the ignorance of the clergy of all ranks.
Fifty-seven canons were enacted, which were chiefly designed
to correct the prevalent abuses, and were in themselves well
calculated for that purpose ; but the evil was now too deeply
rooted to admit of an easy remedy. It was agreed that another
provincial council should meet on the fourteenth day of August,
next ensuing, in the same place, or at St. Andrews, or Lin-
lithgow. ^.
The first person who suffered death for heresy during
Archbishop Hamilton's primacy seems to have been Adam
Wallace. He was a layman, a native of Ayrshire, apparently
of humble rank and little learning, but zealous and com-age-
ous in maintaining the opinions which he had embraced. In
the autumn of 1550, he was brought before a court composed
both of ecclesiastics and of temporal peers, among whom
were the regent and the primate. He refused to abjure the
doctrine which he held regarding the Eucharist and other
points, and was condemned to death. After sentence was
pronounced, the Bible, which hitherto had been his constant
companion, was taken from him, but, as he had learned the
Psalter by heart, he spent the night which followed in singing
psalms. Although he declined to receive the instructions of
two gray friars who were sent to him, he willingly entered
into religious conversation with John Sinclair, Dean of Res-
talrig, afterwards Bishop of Brechin, and stated that he was
much comforted by it. The place of execution was the
Castle-hill of Edinburgh. When the fire was lighted, he
lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said to those who were pre-
sent, ^' Let it not offend you that I suffer death this day, for
the truth's sake. The disciple is not above his Master." ^
It is probable that another synod was held, as had been
appointed, on the fourteenth of August, 1550 ; but we have
no record of its proceedings. The Scottish clergy again met
in provincial council at Edinburgh, on the twenty-sixth day
^ Wilkins's Concilia, vol. iv. p. 46-60. The acts of this council and of the
others to be afterwards referred to, were preserved among the MSS. of the Royal
Library at Paris, and were sent to Wilkins by Thomas Innes. See also Hailes,
vol. iii. p. 231-236.
2 Foxe, pp. 627, 628. Knox, vol. i. pp. 237, 241, and appendix, p. 543-650.
36 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXX.
of January, 1552, under the presidency of Archbishop Hamil-
ton. Seventeen canons were enacted, chiefly enforcing the
orders of the synod of 1549. The last two referred to the
publication and use of a catechism which was appointed to be
taught in the Scottish Church. The preamble sets forth, that
the inferior ecclesiastics, and the prelates for the most part,
were not sufficiently learned to be able, without assistance, to
instruct the people in the Catholic faith, and in other points
necessary to their souls' health ,* and it was therefore ordained
that a book, written in the Scottish tongue, and approved by
the wisest prelates and most learned divines and ecclesiastics
present at the synod, should be put into the hands of parsons,
vicars, and curates, as well for their own instruction, as for
that of the Christian people committed to their charge. This
book, containing a catechism on the Ten Commandments, the
Creed, the Seven Sacraments, the Lord's Prayer, and the
Angelical Salutation, was ordered to be printed and circulated ;
the primate being enjoined to deliver the requisite number of
copies to the clergy of his own diocese, and also to the ordin-
aries of other dioceses for distribution among their parsons,
vicars, and curates ; the rest to remain in his keeping for after
use. The clergy were warned not to shew the book to the
laity, except with the advice of their diocesans, but permission
was given to the ordinaries to supply copies to such discreet
laymen as would wish to examine them for the sake of
instruction rather than of curiosity. The parochial ministers
were enjoined to read the catechism to their congregations for
half-an-hour every Sunday and holy-day, unless when there
was a sermon, and, in order to do this the better, they were
directed to prepare themselves for the task before hand.^
The catechism printed by order of the synod contains a
summary of the doctrines then taught by the Scottish Church,
expressed in plain and moderate language. It has sometimes
been confounded with a much smaller compilation, issued by
a subsequent council, and popularly called the Twopenny
» Wilkins's Concilia, vol. iv. p. 69-73. Hailes, vol. iii. p. 235-240. Several
of our writers have mistaken the true date of this council. Even Hailes is
inaccurate. It was undoubtedly held in January, 1552, and the catechism,
which was printed in August of that year, was thus issued within seven months
after the couucil ; see Keith, vol i. pp. 6, 6.
A.D. 1552.] OF SCOTLAND. 37
Faith. The author of the catechism is not known ; but there
is considerable probability in the conjecture which attributes it
to Winram, Sub-prior of St. Andrews. ^
It is asserted by Foxe, and the statement is repeated by
Spottiswood and almost all our ecclesiastical historians, that a
dispute arose at this time in the Scottish Church, whether the
Pater Noster could properly be addressed to the saints. We
are told that Richard Marshall, an Englishman, and Prior of
the Black Friars at Newcastle, denied that such a practice
ought to be allowed, but that its lawfulness was maintained
by a Scottish Franciscan, named Cotes, in a sermon preached
at St. Andrews, on the feast of All Saints, 1551 ; that the
university was divided in opinion ; and that it became neces-
sary to call a provincial council to settle the question. It is
added that, when the council convened at Edinburgh, they
also differed in opinion, but that a compromise was finally
effected, and a definition adopted which was drawn up by the
sub-prior Winram. It is possible that some of the ignorant
clergy may have entertained such a notion, and that discus-
sions may even have taken place in the University of St.
Andrews ; but it is utterly incredible that there was any seri-
ous dispute on the point, or that it was formally brought be-
fore a provincial synod. Much better evidence than the un-
supported statement of Foxe would be required in attestation
of the fact. Dr. M'Crie states that the council of 1549 em-
ployed Winram " to draw up the canon intended to settle the
ridiculous dispute, which had been warmly agitated among the
clergy, whether the Pater Noster should be said to the saints
or to God alone." But the naiTatives of Foxe and Spottis-
wood can apply only to the council of 1552, although tlie
canons of that council make no allusion to the subject. The
forty-second and forty-ninth canons of the council of 1549
provide for the continuance of the ancient usage of repeating
the Pater Noster and the Ave Maria at the commencement or
1 See Keith, vol. i. pp. 5, 6, 149 ; Hailes, vol. iii. p. 237-240 ; M'Crie's Life
of Knox, p. 416-420; Cook's History of the Reformation in Scotland, vol. i. p.
363-367, vol. iii. appendix, p. iii.-ix. Lord Hailes has exaggerated the obstacles
to the knowledge of the catechism caused by the decrees of the council. It was
intended to be a manual for the clergy, and to be systematically read by them to
the people, but to be read by the people only under certain precautions.
38 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXX.
the conclusion of sermons ; and we know that both Marshall,
who was a doctor of theology in the University of St.
Andrews, and Cotes, were members of that synod. Some
dispute as to this practice may have given rise to the story.
Knox is silent on the point ; but, had such a discussion really
taken place, he would hardly have omitted to mention a
matter so prejudicial to his opponents, and the details of which
possessed such attractions for his peculiar humour,^
A provincial synod was held at Linlithgow, probably in the
autumn of 1552, at which the decrees of the Council of Trent
were accepted, and additional canons were enacted for reform-
ing the manners of the clergy. In the end of the same year,
or the beginning of 1553, another council met at Edinburgh,
but the canons there enacted have not been preserved. ^
During the year 1552, Archbishop Hamilton recovered from
a lingering disease by which he had been enfeebled, and his
cure was ascribed to the skill of the famous Cardan, who had
come from Italy at his request. It was probably while the
primate was prevented by illness from attending to his duties,
that Gavin Hamilton, Abbot of Kilwinning, was appointed
coadjutor in the see of St. Andrews — an office which he is
known to have held for some time.^
• Foxe, pp. 628, 629. Calderwood, vol. i. p. 273-277. Spottiswood, voL i.
p. 180-182. M'Crie's Life of Knox, p.. 419. Compare Wilkins's Concilia, vol.
IV. pp. 57, 68 ; Hailes, vol. iii. p. 238-240. Dr. Lee, who was ready enough to
believe anything to the discredit of the Church orRome, (if it be fair to judge of
him by his Lectures published after his decease,) nevertheless denies, or at least
doubts, the truth of this story ; see his Lectures on the History of the Church of
Scotland, vol. i. p. 76.
2 Leslie, pp. 476, 477. • Hailes, vol. iii. pp. 240, 241. See Wilkins's Con-
cilia, vol. iv. p. 209, where reference is made to councils held at Edinburgh both
in 1551 and in 1552. That of 1551 is evidently the synod of January, 1552, as
the year is now reckoned.
3 Lyon's History of St. Andrews, vol. i. p."320-322. Tytler, vol. vi. p. 379.
Calendar of State Papers relating to Scotland, vol. i. p. 177. M'Crie's Life of
Knox, p. 442, The ridiculous story of the precise mode of the archbishop's cure
rests on the authority of a letter from Randolph to Cecil, written nine years after
the event.
A.D. 1554.] OF SCOTLAND. 39
CHAPTER XXXI.
FROM THE END OF THE EARL OF ARRAN'S REGENCY IN 1554, TO THE
COUNCIL OF EDINBURGH IN 1559.
Regency of Mary of Lorraine — Succession of Bishops — David
Panter^ Bishop of Boss — Robert Reidj Bishop of Orkney
— Return of John Knox — The effects of his preaching —
His letter to the regent — His departure from Scotland —
His condemnation and appeal — Bond subscribed by the
Protestant leaders — Resolutions agreed to by them — Trial
and death of Walter Mylne — Provincial councils in 155S
— Toleration conceded to the Protestants — Advice given to
the Bishop of Aberdeen by his chapter — Council at Edin-
burgh in 1559 — Articles of Reformation laid before the
Council — Remonstrance presented to the Council — Canons
enacted — Conclusion of the Council.
Maey of Lorraine was a princess of great ability and of con-
siderable experience in government. Assisted by the power
of France, and steadily pursuing, for the most part, the true
interest of her adopted country, she succeeded for some years
in preserving the tranquillity of the kingdom, and acquiring
the favour and respect of the turbulent factions into which it
was divided. In April, 1558, the marriage of the Dauphin
Francis and the young Queen of the Scots was celebrated
with the utmost splendour in the cathedi-al of Notre Dame at
Paris. A treaty had previously been concluded between the
two kingdoms, by which the independence of Scotland was to
appearance amply secured. These transactions were ratified
by a parliament which met at Edinburgh in the month of
November. England and Scotland became involved in the
war between France and Spain, but the peace of Chateau
Cambresis, in May, 1559, was soon followed by a treaty be-
tween the two British kingdoms.
John Hepburn, Bishop of Brechin, died in the end of
August, or beginning of September, 1558. Donald Camp-
bell, Abbot of Cupar, son of Archibald, Earl of Argyll, was
40 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXI.
chosen in his place, but the election was not confirmed by the
Pope, in consequence, as is said, of the abbot's favourable dis-
position towards the new opinions ; and the see remained
vacant for some years. ^
The decease of Andrew Durie, Bisliop of Galloway, took
place almost at the same time. His successor was Alexander
Gordon, Bishop of the Isles and Archbishop of Athens. The
archbishop held the abbacy of Inchaffray in commendam with
the bishopric of Candida Casa, but was never confirmed in the
see.^
Alexander Gordon was succeeded in the diocese of the Isles
by John Campbell, who was never either confirmed or conse-
crated. Like his predecessors, he was commendator of lona
and Ardchattan.^
The decease of the Bishops of Brechin and Galloway was
soon followed by that of a more eminent prelate, David
Panter, Bishop of Ross. Bishop Panter was distinguished
both as a scholar and as a statesman. To him, and to Patrick
Panter, Abbot of Cambuskenneth, his predecessor in the office
of royal secretary, we are indebted for the series of Latin
letters, written in the name of the kings and regents of Scot-
land. Bishop Panter's successor was Henry Sinclair, Dean
of Glasgow, and President of the Court of Session.*
But the greatest calamity which Scotland sustained at this
time was the sudden death of Robert Reid, Bishop of Orkney.
^ Keith's Catabgue, p. 165. Bran ton and Haig's Senators of the College of
Justice, p. 69. Leslie, p. 498. Acts of the Parhaments of Scotland, vol. ii. p.
525. In the parliament of August, 1560, Donald is styled Abbot of Cupar, not
Bishop-elect of Brechin.
2 Keith's Catalogue, pp. 278, 279. Brunton and Haig's Senators of the Col-
lege of Justice, p. 129. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 525.
Leslie, p. 498. ELnox, vol. i. pp. 261, 262. Gordon's History of the Earldom
of Sutherland, p. 290.
^ John, elect of the Isles, and commendator of lona and Ardchattan, sat in
the parliament of 1560 (Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 525).
Keith (Historical Catalogue, p. 307) says that his surname was Campbell, and
that he was of the family of Calder ; and such was no doubt the case : see Book
of the Thanes of Cawdor, p. 186, where reference is made to this bishop by one
of his successors of the same name.
4 Keith's Catalogue, p. 192-194. Brunton and Haig's Senators of the College
of Justice, pp. 58, 59. Leslie, p. 498. Knoy, vol. i. pp. 262, 263, 274; vol. ii.
p. 398. Epistolse Eegum Scotorum, vol. ii. p. v.-vii. Tytler's Life ef Craig.
p. 83-85.
A.D. 1554.] OF SCOTLAND. 41
Hardly any of our prelates deserve higher praise than the
eminent churchman who filled the remotest of the Scottish
dioceses during the worst days of the falling hierarchy. Robert
Reid was the son of a gentleman who fell at the battle of
Flodden. He studied at the College of St. Salvator, in the Uni-
versity of St. Andrews, and completed his education at the
University of Paris. On his return to Scotland, he was
appointed sub-dean, and afterwards official, of Murray ; in
1526, he was promoted to the abbacy of Kinloss ; and, in
1530, he received the priory of Beaulieu in commendam. He
was nominated a senator of the College of Justice by King
James, and, in the end of 1549, or the beginning of 1550,
succeeded Alexander Mylne, as president of that court. He
was employed on frequent embassies to England, France, and
Italy, and was distinguished for his diplomatic ability.
Himself an accomplished scholar, he loved to encourage learn-
ing wherever he found it. Soon after his appointment to
Kinloss, he prevailed on Ferrerius of Piedmont to accompany
him to Scotland, where that writer composed the Lives of the
Abbots of his patron's monastery.
As formerly mentioned, Reid succeeded Bishop Maxwell in
the see of Orkney, in 1541. Notwithstanding his numerous
avocations, he ever kept in mind that his diocese was entitled
to his chief care, and he devoted himself with unwearied
energy to its improvement. He enlarged the church of St.
Magnus, and founded a school at Kirkwall for the instruction
of the youth of the Islands. He made a new erection of the
cathedral chapter, appointing seven dignitaries, the first oi
whom was styled, not Dean as in other secular chapters, but
Provost, the rest being an Archdeacon, a Precentor, a Chan-
cellor, a Treasurer, a Sub-dean, and a Sub-chanter. The
foundation included seven other prebendaries, thirteen chap
lains, a sacristan, and six choristers. The charter of erectif
was granted on the twenty-eighth of October, 1544, and w;
confirmed by Cardinal Beaton, on the thirtieth of Jun
1545. The Bishop of Orkney was one of the commissions
present at the marriage of Mary with the Dauphin, and, whil
preparing to return home, died at Dieppe, on the sixth (
September. As three others of the commissioners died at tht
same time, suspicions were entertained that they had been
42 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXI.
poisoned by the princes of the house of Lorraine, whose ambi-
tious designs they had opposed ; but, beyond their sudden
decease, there is no evidence to justify such a charge. By
his last will the bishop bequeathed eight thousand merks
Scots for building a college at Edinburgh for the education of
youth. The money was for some time appropriated by the
regent Morton, but was afterwards recovered, and applied in
terms of the donor's bequest. *
Bishop Reid was succeeded in the see of Orkney by Adam
Bothwell, who was put in possession of the temporalities on
the eleventh of October, 1559. ^
James Hamilton, an illegitimate brother of the Duke of
Chatel-herault, was appointed to the see of Argyll about the
year 1556.^
It was the policy of the queen dowager to tolerate the Pro-
testants so long as they conducted themselves quietly towards
the State, and for some years we hear of no attempt to inflict
capital punishment on account of heresy. Even the preachers
who fled from England, to escape the persecutions of Mary's
reign, found refuge in the northern kingdom. Among them
were two natives of Scotland, William Harlaw and John
Willock. The former had been originally a tailor in Edin-
burgh, and had been ordained a deacon in the English Church
during the reign of Edward VI. The latter had been a Domi-
nican or Franciscan friar at Ayr ; had been chaplain to the
Duke of Sufiblk in England ; and, after leaving that kingdom,
^ Keith's Catalogue, p. 223-226. Brunton andHaig's Senators of tte College
of Justice, p. 14-19. Leslie, p. 497. Knox, vol. i. pp. 264, 265. Gordon's
Histoiy of the Earldom of Sutherland, p. 137. Mackenzie's Lives of Scottish
Writers, vol. iiL p. 46-51. Pinkerton, vol. ii. pp. 422, 423. Tytler's Life of
Craig, p. .51-62. The charter of erection of the chapter of Orkney, and Cardinal
Beaton's confirmation, are inserted in the appendix to Peterkin's Rentals of
Orkney, p. 18-30. Knox relates the death of the Bishops of Galloway, Ross,
and Orkney, in language which would be unbecoming, even if the circumstances
mentioned were true. According to his narrative, the first was a card-player,
the second a glutton and a drunkard, the third a miser; and each of them at the
hour of his death was thinking only of his favourite vice : see History of the Re-
formation, vol. i. p. 261-265. The utter falsehood of the charge against Bishop
Reid may well make us suspect the correctness of what he tells us of the other two.
2 Register of the Privy; Seal, quoted by Mr. Mark Napier, in a note to the
Spottiswood Society edition of Spottiswood's History, vol. ii. p. 72.
3 Keith's Catalogue, pp. 289, 290. Origines Parochiales ScoticT, vol. ii. part i.
p. 24.
A.D. 1555.] OF SCOTLAND. 43
had practised medicine in Friesland, whence he was sent on a
political mission to the queen dowager. During the year
1555, the Protestants were encouraged by the exhortations of
these preachers, though they did not yet ventui'e to assemble
in public. In the autumn of that year a far more formidable
adversary of the Church returned to his native land.^
John Knftx, after a captivity of nineteen months in the
French galleys, had been released along with other prisoners
taken at St. Andrews, through the intercession of Edward YI.
of England. He was restored to freedom in February, 1549,
and lost no time in repairing to the court of his benefactor.
The statesmen and divines who had the chief direction of
ecclesiastical matters in England gave a commission to Knox
to act as one of the preachers employed at that time to dis-
seminate the Protestant opinions. By their order he went to
Berwick-on-Tweed, where he continued for two years, preach-
ing zealously against the Koman doctrines. In April, 1550,
he appeared before an English court — probably the council
of the North — to which he had been summoned at the instance
of Cuthbert Tunstall, Bishop of Durham, on account of the
language he had used regarding the Eucharist. He vigorously
defended his tenets, and, if we are to trust Bale, Tunstall was
unable to answer him. In 1551, he was removed to New-
castle, and in December of that year was appointed by the
Privy Council one of King Edward's chaplains in ordinary.
Knox was much esteemed by the young king. He was
offered the bishopric of Rochester, but declined to accept it,
because he held the episcopal office to be destitute of divine
authority. He was consulted in regard to the revision of the
Articles of Beligion, and it appears to have been at his sug-
gestion that in October, 1552, the Declaration on the subject
of kneeling at the Communion was inserted in the second
Prayer Book of King Edward. He was at London when
Edward died. When Mary was proclaimed queen, he re-
tired to the north, but during the summer of 1553 again
itinerated as a preacher in the centre and south of England.
The laws against heresy having been re-enacted^ Knox's re-
sidence in England became very unsafe, and in January, 1554,
' Knox, vol. i. p. 245. Keith, vol. i. p. 150. M'Crie's Life of Knox, pp. 104,
105. Miscellany of the Wodrow Society, vol. i. p. 261-263.
44 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXI.
he embarked for Dieppe. During that year he visited various
places in France and Switzerland, and remained for some time
at Geneva, where he contracted an intimate personal acquaint-
ance with Calvin. While he abode in that city, he received
an invitation to become one of the ministers of the English
congregation at Frankfort-on-the-Maine, and after some hesi-
tation accepted the call. The disputes which arose at Frank-
fort regarding the use of the Book of Common Prayer belong
to the ecclesiastical history of England rather than that of Scot-
land, and need not be more particularly alluded to here. One
chief cause of the strong feeling which prevailed against Knox
arose from the publication of his Faithful Admonition to the
Professors of God's Truth in England. In this work he used
language of the most violent description respecting Queen
Mary, and her chief counsellors. The treatise was condemned
in strong terms by some of the exiles themselves, and was un-
doubtedly one of the most conspicuous in that class of works,
published on the Continent by the British Protestants, which
provoked, though they could not justify, the cruel persecution
in England. In March, 1555, Knox left Frankfort, and, re-
turning to Geneva, ministered to the English congregation
there. Encouraged by the intelligence which he received re-
garding the favourable position of the Protestants in Scotland,
he left Geneva in August, and, embarking at Dieppe, landed
near Berwick in the month of September. After a short stay
in the north of England, he repaired to Edinburgh. It has
been supposed that about this time he solemnised a marriage
which he had previously contracted with Marjory Bowes,
daughter of Richard Bowes, an English gentleman of good
family. ^
The zeal and ability of Knox were well known, and many of
those who were attached to the Protestant opinions began to
resort to his lodgings, in order to obtain the benefit of his
teaching. Among the most distinguished of these were John
Erskine of Dun and William Maitland of Lethington. For
some time after his arrival in Edinburgh, several of the Pro-
testants continued to attend mass, and to join in the public
1 Knox, vol. i. pp. 231, 232 ; vol. iii. pp. 79, 80, 253, 256, 334. M'Crie's
Life of Knox, pp. 47-98, 105, 106, 406, 407. Tytler's England under the reigns
of Edward VI. and Mary, vol. i. p. 295; vol. ii, p. 140-142. Hardwick's His-
tory of the Reformation, p. 148.
A.D. 1555.] OF SCOTLAND. 45
worship of the Clmrch. Knox vehemently opposed this course
of proceeding, and a conference was held in Erskine's house
for the discussion of the question. The lawfulness of the
practice was defended by Maitland ; the contrary opinion was
maintained by Knox and Willock. The advice of St. James
and the elders of Jerusalem to St. Paul was referred to by the
former. Knox answered tliat the two questions were very
diflferent, the paying of vows being sometimes commanded,
and never being idolatrous as the mass was ,• and also, that he
greatly doubted whether the command of James and the
obedience of Paul proceeded from the Holy Ghost, but was
not rather worldly-wise counsel, justly punished by the evils
which followed it. The arguments of Knox prevailed, and
Maitland admitted that he was in the wrong.
Soon after this conference, Knox, at the request of Erskine,
accompanied that baron to his house of Dun in Angus, where
the chief persons of the neighbourhood came to hear him.
When he returned to the south, he abode for the most part at
Calder, in West Lothian, the residence of Sir James Sandi-
lands ; and among his hearers there were some nobles of high
rank, the Lord James, Prior of St. Andrews, Lord Erskine,
and Lord Lorn, eldest son of the Earl of Argyll. During the
early part of the winter he was generally at Edinburgh, and
after Christmas went to various places in Ayrshire, where
he preached, and occasionally administered the communion.
Some time before Easter, 1556, he administered the communion
at the Earl of Glencairn's residence on the Clyde, and after-
wards at the house of Dun, on which occasion most of the
barons of the Meams adopted the Protestant opinions. •
The bishops were now alarmed by the effects of Knox's
preaching, and summoned him to appear in the church of the
Black Friars at Edinburgh, on the fifteenth of May. Either
on account of some informality in the proceedings, or from a
fear of resorting to extreme measures, the citation was aban-
doned, and, on the day on which he should have appeared as a
criminal, Knox preached at Edinburgh with more publicity
than ever. Lord Glencairn brought the Earl Marischal to hear
him, and, at the request of these noblemen, Knox wrote a
letter to the queen regent, in defence of his conduct, and of
the Protestant doctrines. This letter was delivered into the
46 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXI.
queen's own hand by the Earl of Glencairn ; and a day or two
afterwards she gave it to the Archbishop of Glasgow, saying,
" Please you, my lord, to read a pasquil." These words were
reported to Knox, and were the cause, as he himself tells us,
of the additions which he made to the letter, when two years
subsequently it was reprinted at Geneva. The careless remark
of Mary of Lorraine annoyed Knox more than might be
expected in a person of his character. He mentions the
circumstance in his History; and, in the second edition of
the letter, his allusions, in connection with it, to the prophet
Jeremiah and King Jehoiakim, to Elias and Jezabel, would
be ludicrous, if they were not arrogant and profane.^
The letter itself is a remarkable production. As originally
written, though stern, it can scarcely be called disrespectful in
tone. Attention has frequently been drawn to the fact that, in
the preamble to the second edition, Knox appeals from the
unjust sentence of the bishops to a lawful general council.
There is no reason, however, to suppose that the reformer
would have submitted to the adverse decision of any synod
whatever. Deference to ecclesiastical authority was repug-
nant to his whole principles and practice, and it is idle to draw
conclusions as to his serious opinions from expressions which
were mere words of form or of policy. ^
Soon after these transactions, Knox received a call from the
English congregation at Geneva to resume the pastoral office
among them. He complied with their request, and left Scot-
land in July. The reasons which induced him to go away,
at a time when his presence seemed so important to the cause
of reformation, have given rise to much discussion. 'It is
generally supposed that his life was in danger, and that his
retirement for a season was necessary in order to his safety.
Had such been the case, there are few who would be entitled
to censure him severely. But he does not himself allude to
any immediate danger prior to his leaving Scotland, although,
if it had existed, he would probably have referred to it, as he
did in the case of his retreat to the castle of St. Andrews ; nor
» Knox, vol. i. p. 245-252. M'Crie's Life of Knox, p. 106-114.
2 The Letter to the Lady Mary, Regent of Scotland, with the additions, is
printed in the appendix to M 'Gavin's edition of the History of the Reforma-
tion, and in the fourth volume of Knox's Works.
A.D. 1556.] OF SCOTLAND. 47
is it likely that those who were ready to defend him in May
would have been unable to do so in July. The supposition of
immediate danger is indeed inconsistent with the deliberate
steps which he took before his departure, going round and
bidding farewell to the several congregations among which he
had preached, sending off his mother-in-law and his wife
before him, spending some time with the Earl of Argyll at
Castle Campbell, and, in answer to the entreaties that he
would remain in Scotland, declaring that he must once again
visit Geneva, but, if his friends continued in godliness, when-
soever they were pleased to command him, that they should
find him obedient. Timidity was not among his faults, and
mere apprehension of danger would never have made him leave.
His departure was probably owing to some cause, sufficient in
his own opinion, but which he was not willing to make
public, and which we have now no means of ascertaining. ^
Immediately after his leaving Scotland, Knox was again
summoned by the bishops, and, when he did not appear, sen-
tence was pronounced against him, and his e&.gj was burned
at the cross of Edinburgh. On receiving intelligence of these
proceedings, he drew up a document in defence of his conduct,
which was printed in 1558, under the title of " The Ap-
pellation of John Knox from the cruel and most unjust
Sentence pronounced against him by the false Bishops and
Clergy of Scotland, with his Supplication and Exhortation
to the Nobility, Estates, and Community of the same
Realm." In it he maintained two propositions, first, that
his appeal was lawful and just, secondly, that the estates
of the kingdom were entitled and bound to hear it. He
asserted that he had just cause to appeal from the sentence
pronounced against him, because he was not within the juris-
diction of the Scottish prelates when summoned by them,
because no intimation of the summons was made to him,
because on account of their tyranny he had no free access to
Scotland at that time, and because they could not be com-
petent judges, inasmuch as prior to the citation he had accused
them of various crimes which he was ready to substantiate.
He further contended that it was lawful to God's prophets and
the preachers of Christ to appeal from the judgment of the
1 Knox, vol. i. p. 252-254. M'Crie's Life of Knox, p. 115-117.
48 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXI.
visible Church to the temporal magistrate, and that the ma-
gistrate was bound to hear their cause, and to defend them
from tyranny. Knox did not merely seek to prove that the
civil power was bound to protect him against an unjust
ecclesiastical sentence, so far as it affected his life or property ;
he maintained that the temporal rulers were bound to see that
those subject to them were instructed in the true religion, and
that they were called upon to remove from honour, and
punish with death, if the crime so required, those who deceived
the people, or defrauded them of the food of their souls, God's
living word. If the sovereign should withold his consent,
the estates of the realm were bound to discharge those duties,
and, in so far as idolatry, blasphemy, and such like crimes were
concerned, not only kings and rulers, but the whole body of
the people, and every member of the same, according to his
vocation and opportunity, were bound to punish them when
manifestly known. ^
The condemnation of Knox did not stop the progress of the
Protestant doctrines. John Willock had returned to the Con-
tinent, but William Harlaw, and John Douglas, formerly a
Carmelite friar, and now residing with the Earl of Argyll,
preached in Edinburgh and the neighbourhood. Paul Meth-
ven, who at one time had been a baker, taught at Dundee ;
and other individuals propagated the same opinions in various
parts of Angus and Mearns. Several of these preachers were
summoned before the regent at the instance of the bishops.
They prepared to obey the citation, but the queen, dreading a
tumult, commanded all persons who were at Edinburgh with-
out authority to repair to the seat of war on the Border. The
proclamation was disregarded. A number of the Protestants,
headed by Chalmers of Gadgirth, forced their way into the
regent's presence, and in the most outrageous manner threat-
ened violence to the bishops. Mary, with some difficulty, per-
suaded them to depart. At this time Chatel-herault, Huntly,
and other great nobles, refused to assist the regent in carrying
the war into England, and, obliged to rely on the political
^ 1 Knox, vol. i. p. 254. M'Crie's Life of Knox, pp. 116, 117. The Appella-
tion is printed in M 'Gavin's appendix, and in the fourth volume of Knox's
Works.
A.D. 1557.] OF SCOTLAND. 49
support of the Protestants, she was under the necessity of
conniving at the insult which she had received.
On the tenth of March, 1557, a letter was addressed to
Knox by the Earl of Glencairn, the Lords Erskine and
Lorn, and the Prior of St. Andrews, mentioning that the cause
of the Eeformation continued to prosper, that the friars were
falling into disrepute, and that no farther acts of cruelty had
been committed, and earnestly requesting his return to Scot-
land. Knox, after consulting with Calvin and other ministers,
mtimated his intention of complying with their request, and
accordmgly set out for Dieppe, but, on amving there on the
twenty-fourth of October, received letters of a contrary tenor,
and in consequence returned to Geneva. He wrote, however
to his friends in Scotland, rebuking them in sharp language'
for their want of zeal and courage ; and his admonition had
such an effect that the Protestant leaders determined to come
forward more boldly in defence of their opinions. In order to
secure the aid and co-operation of all who were favourable to
the cause, a bond was drawn up and signed at Edinburgh, on
the thkd of December, by the Earls of Argyll, Glencairn, and
Morton, the Lord Lorn, Erskine of Dun, and other chief men
of the party. This bond was no doubt suggested by the
documents so common in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries,
hj which the Scottish barons entered into leagues of mutual
defence and support, and it became the model of the more
formidable covenants of after years. The subscribers bound
themselves to maintain and set forward, with all their might,
the ^ most blessed word of God, and his Congregation, de-
claring that they joined themselves thereto, and renounced
the Congregation of Satan, with all the superstitious abomina-
tions and idolatry thereof. Its words seem to bear reference
to the baptismal vow, but they were now used as the symbol
of hatred and strife. If the Protestants were the Congregation
of Christ, and the adherents of Rome were the Congregation
of the Devil, all hope of unity or peace was at an end. 1
» Knox, vol. i. pp. 256, 258, 267-274. Leslie, p. 496. M'Crie's Life of
Knox, pp. 121-124, 139. 140. Keith is of opinion (vol. i. p. 153) that the name
of ''Erskine," attached to the letter of tenth March, is the signature not of
Lord Erskine, but of Erskine of Dun, because the former had not jet joined the
Protestants. Lord Erskine, however, was among Knox's hearers at the house
VOL. II.] ^
60 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXL
The first step of the associated lords and barons, after
frequently meeting in council, was the adoption of the following
resolutions : — " First, it is thought expedient, devised, and
ordained, that in all parishes of this realm the Common
Prayers be read weekly on Sunday, and other festival days,
publicly in the parish kirks, with the lessons of the New and
Old Testament, conform to the order of the Book of Common
Prayers ; and, if the curates of the parishes be qualified,
to cause them to read the same, and, if they be not, or
if they refuse, that the most qualified in the parish use
''and read the same. Secondly, it is thought necessary that
doctrine, preaching, and interpretation of Scriptures, be had
and used privately in quiet houses, without great conventions
of the people thereto, till afterward that God move the prince
to grant public preaching by faithful and true ministers." It
was long disputed whether the Common Prayer here referred
to was the English Book of Common Prayer, or the Service
Book of Knox's congregation at Geneva. The most learned
writers of the present day are now agreed that the former was
meant. But it would be a mistake to suppose that the second
Book of King Edward VI. was adopted as a whole ; the
resolutions bear reference only to the order for Morning and
Evening Prayer, so far as applicable to Sundays and Holy-
days, and say nothing whatever of the other portions of the
English formulary. 1
In furtherance of these proceedings, the Earl of Argyll
requested John Douglas to preach in his house, and, his
example having been followed by others, the Archbishop of
St. Andrews, on the twenty-fifth of March, 1558, wrote to
the earl, entreating him to put away the heretical teacher
whom he entertained, and promising to send in his place a
wise instructor, who would teach nothing contraiy to the
Catholic faith. The primate farther mentioned that he was
himself much blamed for his remissness in allowing such
practices to continue unchecked, and that he was bound, both
of Calder, and, in connection with the meetings there, is mentioned by Knox,
along with the other three noblemen who signed the letter. See History of the
"Eeformation, vol. i. p. 249.
^ Knox, vol. i. pp. 275, 276. Sage's Works, Spottiswood Society ed. vol. i p.
164-168. Keith, vol. i. pp. 154, 155. M'Crie's Life of Knox, pp. 141, 425-427.
A.D. 1558.] OF SCOTLAND. 51
in honour and conscience, to put a stop to them. The earl
answered the various points contained in the archbishop's
letter in a document of some length, in the composition of
which we may conjecture that he had at least the assistance
of Douglas. It contained a denial of the charge of false
teaching ; rejected all submission to the authority of general
councils, appealing to that of Scripture alone ; and, under the
form of a defence of the preacher's doctrine, made a vehement
attack on the archbishop's practice. " He preaches against
idolatry : I remit to your lordship's conscience if it be heresy
or not. He preaches against adultery and fornication : I refer
that to your lordship's conscience. He preaches against hypo-
crisy : I refer that to your lordship's conscience. He preaches
against all manner of abuses and corruptions of Christ's sincere
religion : I refer that to your lordship's conscience. My lord,
I exhort you, in Christ's name, to weigh all these affairs in
your conscience, and consider if it be your duty also, -not only
to endure this, but in like manner to do the same." No notice
appears to have been taken of this answer, and the Earl of
Argyll died soon afterwards.^
The queen-regent had hitherto discouraged all violent mea-
sures, and there is reason to believe that the primate also was
sincere in his aversion to persecution. Whatever may have
led to a change in those respects, within a month after the
date of the archbishop's letter to the Earl of Argyll, an act
was committed, which proved as disastrous in its results, as
it was in itself wicked and cruel. Among those who had
adopted the Protestant doctrines was a priest named Walter
Mylne, who had been vicar of Lunan. Having been appre-
hended at Dysart, he was imprisoned in the castle of St.
Andrews, and on the twentieth of April was brought before
the ecclesiastical court. There were present, in the metro-
politan church, the Primate, the Archbishop of Athens,
the Bishops of Murray, Brechin, and Caithness, the Abbots
of Dunfermline, Lindores, Balmerino, and Cupar, John
Winram, Sub-prior of St. Andrews, John Greyson, Pro-
vincial of the Black Friars, WiUiam Cranstone, Provost
of St. Salvator's, and others of the clergy. Mylne was ac-
cused of eiToneous doctrines regarding the marriage of priests,
1 Knox, vol. i. p. 276-290.
52 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXI.
the seven sacraments, particularly the sacrament of the altar,
the office of a bishop, pilgrimages, and other points. He was
an old, decrepit man, but, when he rose to speak, the church
rang with the clear sound of his voice. He avowed the
opinions atti'ibuted to him, retorting the charge of false doc-
trine, with some asperity, on his accusers. When he was
asked to make a recantation, he answered, '' I am accused of
my life : I know I must die once, and therefore, as Christ
said to Judas, Quod facis, fac citius. Ye shall know that I
will not recant the truth, for I am corn, I am no chafif ; I will
not be blown away with the wind, nor burst with the flail,
but I will abide both." Sentence was pronounced that he
should be delivered over for punishment to the temporal judge.
The people's hearts were so moved by the defence which he
had made that the proper officers refused to execute the sen-
tence, and he was carried to the stake by some of the primate's
retainers. As he was raised up on the pile, he said, " Introibo
ad altare Domini ; " and, being allowed to address the multi-
tude, he thus spoke, " Dear friends^ the cause why I suffer this
day is not for any crime laid to my charge (albeit I be a miser-
able sinner before God), but only for the defence of the faith of
Jesus Christ, set forth in the New and Old Testament unto us,
for which, as the faithful martyrs have offered themselves gladly
before, being assured, after the death of their bodies, of eternal
felicity, so this day I praise God that He hath called me of his
mercy among the rest of his servants to seal up his truth with
my life which, as I have received it of Him so willingly I offer
it to his glory. Therefore, as you will escape the eternal
death, be no more seduced with the lies of priests, monks,
friars, priors, abbots, bishops, and the rest of the sect of Anti-
christ, but depend only upon Jesus Christ, and his mercy,
that ye may be delivered from condemnation." Walter
Mylne was burned on the twenty-eighth day of April, 1558.
He was the last person who suffered death in Scotland for the
Protestant opinions.^
In the summer of 1558, a provincial synod met at Edinburgh.
On this occasion a number of persons convicted of heresy were
allowed to escape from farther punishment, on condition of
» Foxe, pp. 629, 630. Knox, vol. i. pp. 307, 308, and appendix, p. 550 555.
Buchanan, vol. i. p. 310. Pitscottie, p. 517-523.
A.D. 1558.] OF SCOTLAND. 53
making a public recantation on the first of September follow-
ing, being the festival of St. Giles, the patron of the city. It
was part of the usual ceremonial of that day to have a solemn
procession through the streets, at which a wooden image of
St. Giles was carried. In the course of the previous year this
statue had been stolen by the Protestants, but another was
obtained for the festival of 1558. The queen-regent was
present during the early part of the day, but, when she retired,
a tumult was raised by the supporters of the Protestant party,
the image was cast down and destroyed, and the convicted
persons were rescued.^
Another provincial synod met in the church of the Black
Friars at Edinburgh, on the eighth of November. Paul
Methven was summoned before it, and, as he did not appear,
a sentence of banishment was pronoimced against him.^
In the meantime the Protestants continued to increase in
number and zeal. Aware of their own strength, they began
to contemplate the more public profession of their belief. In
this they were much encouraged by Willock, who again came
over from Friesland in the month of October. They were now
known by the name of the Congi-egation, and it was agreed
among them that they should express their wishes in a petition
to the queen-regent. In this document, referring to the per-
mission formerly given by parliament to read the Scriptures,
they requested leave to assemble, publicly or privately, at the
Common Prayers in the vulgar tongue, and that the sacraments
of Baptism, and the Lord's Supper under both kinds, might
be ministered to them in the same language. They farther
desired that the hard places of Scripture might be interpreted
in their assemblies, and that the wicked lives of the prelates
and of the ecclesiastical estate should be reformed. This
petition was presented to the queen by an ancient knight,
one of the most esteemed of the Congregation, Sir James
Sandilands of Calder. The clergy were willing to allow the
Prayers to be offered, and Baptism to be administered, in the
vulgar tongue, provided the same were done privately, and
also on condition that the doctrines of the Church respecting
' Knox, vol. i. pp. 256, 258-261, and appendix, p. 558-561. Buchanan, vol. i.
p. 310. Leslie, pp. 496, 497. Hailes, vol, iii p. 241.
2 Buchanan, vol. i. p. 311. Hailes, vol. iii p. 241.
54 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXI.
the Mass, Purgatory, Prayers for the Dead, and Invocation
of the Saints, were received. The Protestants indignantly-
rejected this compromise ; but, nevertheless, the queen-regent,
anxious, as has been supposed, to prevent opposition to the
parliamentary ratification of her daughter's marriage, promised
to tolerate them in the ministry of the Prayers and Sacraments,
provided they abstained from holding public assemblies in
Edinburgh and Leith. The Congregation were so much sa-
tisfied with this arrangement that they silenced Douglas, who
wished to preach openly at Leith. For their farther protection
they presented a letter to the regent, desiring that it might be
laid before the parliament which was to meet in November.
In this letter they requested that all laws against heresy might
be suspended till the whole questions at issue should be de-
cided by a general council, and that certain other privileges
might be given to the Protestants. As the queen did not
think it advisable to lay this request before parliament, a
protestation was drawn up and tendered to the estates, but it
was not inserted in their books. ^
It was now evident to all that a struggle was approaching
between the two parties which divided Scotland. The clergy
were well aware that the strongest arguments against the
Church were drawn from their own evil lives. An important
document has been preserved, which shews what was going
on in the diocese of Aberdeen ; and there can hardly be a
doubt that a similar state of matters existed in other parts of
the Church. The Bishop of Aberdeen having requested the
advice of his chapter in regard to reformation, and the sup-
pression of heresy, the dean and canons, on the fiifth of
January, 1559, gave him counsel accordingly. They desired
their ordinary to cause the churchmen of his diocese reform
their scandalous manner of living, and put away their concu-
bines, under the penalties enacted by the provincial synods ;
and the members of the chapter were themselves exhorted to
do the like. It was requested that provision should be made
for at least one sermon to be preached in every parish church,
between the date of the meeting and Fasten's-even, and again
between Fasten's-even and Easter ; that all who were absent
^ Eaiox, vol. i. p. 298-314. Buchanan, vol. i. p. 311. M'Crie's Life of Kjiox,
pp. 144, 145, 427, 428.
A.D. 1559.] OF SCOTLAND. 55
from their own parish churches, especially from the sacrifice
of the masSj should be cited before the ecclesiastical judges,
and that those who took part in the burning of the church of
Echt, or in the casting down of images in any churches within
the diocese, should be admonished to reveal the same to the
bishop or his commissaries. In order that the advice given
should have better effect, the bishop himself was entreated to
shew a good example, especially by removing from his com-
pany the gentlewoman through whom he caused great scandal,
and by shunning the company of those suspected of heresy.
To this counsel are attached the signatures of the dean and
treasurer of the cathedral, of the sub-chanter, of Alexander
Anderson, sub-principal of King's College, and of John Leslie,
parson of Mortlach, afterwards Bishop of Eoss.^
On the first of March, 1559, the clergy met in provincial
council at Edinburgh, and continued their sittings till the
tenth of April. The synod was convened with great for-
mality. The Primate, on the thirty-first of January, ad-
dressed a letter to the Archbishop of Glasgow, by which he
summoned a Provincial-General Council to meet in the monas-
tery of the Black Friars at Edinburgh, on the first of March
next ensuing, with continuation of days, and required the
archbishop to appear in person, at eight o'clock of the morn-
ing, on the day and at the place appointed. He also required
the archbishop to summon to the same efiect his sufiragan
bishops, and the abbots, priors, commendators, deans, and
provosts, and as many of the most discreet and learned of the
canons, clergy, and regulars, of his diocese and province, as he
might think fit. A like general citation was no doubt given
by the primate to the bishops and clergy of his own province.
Each bishop or vicar-general of a diocese addressed special
mandates to the several rural deans, enjoining them to sum-
mon the clergy within their respective jurisdictions.
When the council met, certain articles of reformation, which
had been presented by the Protestants to the regent, were, at
her request, laid before the clergy by the Earl of Huntly,
^ See this document, as transcribed from a copy of the original made by
Thomas Innes, in Keith, vol. i. p. cxx.-cxxiii., and in the preface to the Chartu-
lary of Aberdeen, p. Ixi.-lxv. ; and, as copied directly from the original, in Cook's
History of the Koformation, vol. iii. p. x.-xiii., and in the Miscellany of the
Spalding Club, vol. iv. p. 57-59.
56 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXI.
chancellor of Scotland. The chief of these were the follow-
ing : — That the prayers should be said and the sacraments
administered in the vulgar tongue ; that the bishops should
be chosen with the consent of the nobility and barons of the
diocese, and the parish priests with the consent of the
parishioners ; that those who were unfit for the pastoral office
should be removed, and others appointed in their place, who
could preach regularly to the people ; that in time to come all
persons of indifferent morals, or insufficient learning, should
be excluded from the ministration of the sacraments and other
functions of the Church.
There was considerable discussion in the synod as to these
points, but the following answer was finally returned : — That
to celebrate the prayers and sacraments in any other than the
Latin tongue was plainly repugnant to the tradition of the
Church for many ages, and could not be allowed ; that the
rules of the canon-law must be observed in regard to the elec-
tion of bishops and parish priests, and besides, that as the
election of prelates belonged to the crown, with consent of the
Pope, nothing affecting that privilege could lawfully be done
during the queen's minority ; and in regard to the other two
articles, that the ancient canons and the regulations of the
Council of Trent should be adhered to, and that all bishops^
abbots, priors, deans, archdeacons, parish priests, and the
regulars of every order, should within six months either per-
fonn their duties in person, or lose their benefices.
Besides these articles from the Protestants, a remonstrance
was presented to the synod urging earnestly the duty of refor-
mation in various important particulars. This document,
which is in the English language, has been preserved among
the acts of the council, but we are not told from whom it came.
It undoubtedly expressed the wishes of the large party among
the laity who were well affected to the Church, but who were
anxious for the correction of abuses. It is divided into
thirteen heads, embracing the following points : — 1st. Refer-
ring to the intentions of the late king, and the efforts of
various provincial synods to reform the lives of the prelates
and clergy, which hitherto had produced no good effect, the
remonstrants earnestly urged this duty on the members of
the council. 2nd. They requested that sermons should be
A.D. 1559.] OF SCOTLAND. 57
preached in every parish church on all Sundays and holy-days
— at the least on Christmas-day, Easter-day, Whitsunday,
and every third or fourth Sunday. 3rd. That before any one
were admitted to preach in public, he should be examined as
to his life and doctrine. 4th. That in time to come no one
should be admitted as curate or vicar of a parish, unless
sufficiently qualified to minister the sacraments of the Church,
and to read the catechism. 5th. That before the sacraments
of the Eucharist, Baptism, and Marriage, were celebrated in
church, an explanation of the nature of these sacraments
should be made to the people in the English tongue. 6th.
That the Common Prayers and Litanies in the vulgar tongue
should be said in parish churches on all Sundays and other
holy-days, after the celebration of Mass ; and that the Evening
Prayers should also be said in the afternoon. 7th. That in-
asmuch as corpse presents, Easter offerings, and the like,
which were originally given freely by the faithful, were now
demanded as of right by the clergy under the pain of excom-
munication, the same in time to come should be abolished, or
at all events brought back to their former voluntary use.
8th, 9th, 10th. That the forms of process in the consistorial
courts should be shortened, and a remedy provided for the
abuse of allowing appeals to E-ome in every case, however
small ; that relief against appeals to Rome should be given to
the feuars of church lands ; and that the acts of parliament in
the reign of James IV., regarding the privileges granted by
the Eoman see to the Church and kingdom of Scotland,
should be put in execution. 11th. That no person should be
allowed to speak irreverently of the sacrament of the Body
and Blood of Christ, and that no dishonour should be done to
the divine service of the Mass. 12th. That the sacraments
of Marriage, Baptism, and the Eucharist, should be celebrated
as before set down, and by such persons as were duly ad-
mitted and ordained to the administration of the same. 13th.
That no persons should be allowed to burn, spoil, or destroy
churches, chapels, religious places, or their ornaments ; and
that no innovations should be made in the rites and cere-
monies of the Church, but that they should continue as before,
until farther order were taken by the sovereign and the minis-
ters of the Church.
58 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXI.
This remonstrance is a very important document. It shews
that the reforming partj within the Church had objects
in view similar to those which prevailed among persons
of the like opinions in other parts of Christendom ^ especi-
ally in England. Had the members of the council been
heartily desirous of carrying out its recommendations, the
Scottish Church might even yet have been preserved. They
did partially adopt them, but such half measures were in-
sufficient to avert the storm which was gathering round.
Thirty-four canons were enacted by the synod. Some of
the more important points embraced in them may be men-
tioned. The former regulations against ecclesiastics keeping
concubines were renewed. In order to shew an example of
obedience to the canons, the two archbishops agreed to submit
themselves to the counsel and admonition of six members of
the synod — the Bishop of Dunkeld, the Bishops-postulate of
Galloway and Koss, the Dean of Restalrig, the Provincial of
the Black Friars, and the Sub-prior of St. Andrews. The
provisions in regard to frequent preaching, and episcopal and
archidiaconal visitations, were also re-enacted, and made more
stringent. The preachers were especially enjoined to exercise
themselves and instruct the people in regard to the Traditions
of the Church, the Invocation of Saints, the right use of
Images, the existence of Purgatory, the true presence of our
Lord in the Eucharist, the lawfulness of lay communion under
one kind, the profit of the Sacrifice of the Mass both to the
living and the dead, and the necessity of Holy Orders to give
the power of consecrating the Eucharist. Certain exhorta-
tions respecting the right use of the sacraments were appended
to the acts of the council, and were enjoined to be read by
the parish priests to the people before the celebration of the
Eucharist, and by the bishops and confessors in ministering
Confirmation, Orders, and Penance, These exhortations have
not been preserved. Eules were made to guard against the
admission of unfit persons to ecclesiastical benefices. Several
reforms were ordered in the proceedings of the consistorial
courts, and in regard to tithes, mortuaries, and Easter offer-
mgs. The thirty-third canon refers to some changes intro-
duced into the administration of baptism by the Protestant
preachers. The nature of these changes is not explained, butj
A. a 1559.] OF SCOTLAND. 59
to ensure the validity of the sacrament, it was enacted that
infants so baptized sliould receive conditional baptism from
the parish priest or other lawful minister. The thirty-fourth
canon prohibited all persons from ministering or receiving the
sacraments of the Eucharist and Matrimony, except according
to the established ritual of the Church, and that under the
pain of excommunication.
It was agreed that the next synod should meet at the same
place, on Septuagesima Sunday, in the following year, that it
might then be ascertained whether the canons had been duly
executed, and in order to advise as to any farther points which
might occm-.^
The provincial council of the Scottish Church never met
again.
1 Wilkins's Concilia, vol. iv. p. 204-217. Leslie, pp. 504, 505. Buchanan,
vol. i. pp. 311, 312. Hailes, vol. iii. p. 242-244. M'Crie's Life of Knox, p.
153-155. Lord Hailes is mistaken in supposing that the canons alluded to by
Knox are those of 1549 : they are evidently the canons of 1559 ; see Annals,
vol. iii. p. 234-236, and History of the Eeformation, vol. i. pp. 291, 292. The
error was owing to the great similarity of several of the canons enacted at the
councils of those years. Hailes remarks that Knox's account of the canons "is
exceedingly partial and erroneous."
60 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIl.
CHAPTEE XXXII.
FROM THE COUNCIL OF EDINBURGH IN 1559, TO THE PARLIAMENT OF
AUGUST, 1560.
Quintin Kennedy^ Abbot of Crossraguel — Publication of Ms
Compendious Tractive — Summary of its argument — Reply
hy John Davidson^ Principal of the College of Glasgow —
Correspondence between Quintin Kennedy and John Wil-
loch — The Pegenfs Proclamation against the Protestants —
Arrival of Knox in Scotland — His sermon at Perth —
Destruction of the monasteries there — Spoliation of the
Cathedral of St. Andreius — Destruction of the Abbey of
Scone — Civil War — Queen Elizabeth assists the Pro-
testants— Destruction of the monasteries at Aberdeen —
Death of Mary of Lorraine — Treaty of Edinburgh —
Protestant ministers appointed to the chief towns — John
Row J minister at Perth — Alleged imposture at the Nunnery
of St. Catharine of Sienna — Improbability of the story —
Appointment of Superintendents — Parliament at Edin-
burgh— Confession of Faith presented by the Protestants —
Feeble opposition to it — Its ratification — Tlie authority of
the Pope taken away — The Mass proscribed — Conclusion
of the. Parliament.
While the provincial council continued its sittings at Edin-
burgh, one of the most learned of the Scottish ecclesiastics,
Quintin Kennedy, Abbot of Crossraguel, was endeavouring
by his personal exertions to arrest the progress of the Re-
formed opinions in the West. Kennedy was a younger son
of Gilbert, Earl of Cassillis, and was educated at St. Andrews
and Paris. His first benefice was the vicarage of Girvan, in
tlie deanery of Carrick. He was afterwards appointed Abbot
of Crossraguel, and was present, in that capacity, at the coun-
cil of Edinburgh, in November, 1549. In 1558, he published
" A compendious Tractive, conform to the Scriptures of Al-
mighty God, reason, and authority, declaring the nearest and
only way to establish the conscience of a Christian man in all
A.D. 1559.] OF SCOTLAND. 61
matters which are in debate concerning faith and religion."
This work was written at the request of his nephew, Gilbert,
Master of Cassillis, to whom it was dedicated.
The author of the Tractive begins by stating that all errors
and disputes on the points referred to have chiefly proceeded
from a wrong understanding of the Law and Scripture of
Almighty God. In order, he says, to the due understanding
of God's word, it is necessary to know what judge is to
determine between the right and the wrong interpretation.
The Holy Scripture is the faithful witness to the truth, accord-
ing to the words of St. John's Gospel, " Search the Scriptures
— They are they which testify of me ;" but for that very
cause it cannot also be the judge. The Bible, experience,
reason, and authority, point to the Church of God as the only
judge, whose duty it is to pronounce sentence according to
the Scripture, the true and faithful witness of the will and
mind of the Lord. It is therefore necessary to know what is
the Church. The word Church has various senses in Scrip-
ture. Sometimes it means the whole congregation of Chris-
tians, young and old, rich and poor, learned and ignorant,
good and bad, all who are not heretics or excommunicated,
united together in one faith by baptism, forming one mystical
body of which Christ is the head. But the Church in this
sense can never be gathered together to take order in matters
of faith. This it can only do by means of those who are
specially appointed for that purpose ; and such power was
accordingly given to the apostles and elders, and after them to
those who succeeded in their place, who, duly assembled in
general council, and representino^ the Universal Church, had
the same power as if all the members of the congregation had
been joined with them.
He proceeds to prove these statements by testimonies drawn
from the history of the Church in all ages, beginning with the
first council at Jerusalem. Paul and Barnabas, though in-
spired apostles, did not venture individually to pronounce
judgment. That was reserved to the apostles and elders col-
lectively, and to them alone ; and their decision was binding
on the whole congregation. The question in dispute was
moved in the congregation ; the Scriptures were appealed to as
witnesses ; but the apostles and elders were the judges — " My
62 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXII.
sentence is " — " It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to
us." Thus, as under the old law recourse was to be had to
the priests of the tribe of Levi and to the judge that was in
those days, not to the Scriptures, so, under the new law, the
apostles and elders and their successors, in general council
assembled, are the sole judges regarding the interpretation of
the mysteries of Scripture, and the apostolic council at Jeru-
salem was the model for synods in succeeding times.
But, he continues, there is now a common saying, Why
should not every man read the Scripture and seek out his own
salvation ? Has not Christ bought us at as high a price as
bishop or abbot, prior or pope ? Must not eveiy man bear his
own burden ? Neither monk, friar, nor priest, will answer for
my soul, but myself only. This saying is very true, if well
understood. It is as important for a poor Christian man to
know all things necessary to his salvation, as for those in
highest dignity ; and there is one duty common to all — to love
God above all things, and their neighbours as themselves.
But, for this, provision is made in the Creed, wherein are con-
tained all things necessary for a Christian man's belief; in the
Ten Commandments, which comprehend the way to please
God and to do our duty to our neighbours ; and in the Lord's
Prayer, appointed by the Lord God to be said daily to Him,
wherein are contained all things necessary to be desired, both
for soul and body. To the direct question — whether the lay
people should read the Scriptures for themselves, he answers,
that the point has not been determined by the Church, but, in his
opinion, they may do so with much profit for the correction
of their lives and conversation, but not for curiosity regard-
ing mysteries such as the Sacraments, Predestination, Free
Will, and Justification.
He answers the ordinary objection drawn from the evil
lives of ecclesiastics against the authority of their office, by
reference to Judas and Caiaphas, and to the declaration of
our Lord, " The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat : all
therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and
do ; but do not ye after their works, for they say and do not."
He defends the rules of the Church in regard to Fasting at
appointed times, the Invocation of Saints, and the forbidding
of Marriage to the priests, by an appeal to the authority of St.
A.D. 1559.] OF SCOTLAND. 63
Jerome and St. Augustine, Cyprian, Origen, and Chrysostom.
He admits the grievous abuses which then existed in con-
nection with ecclesiastical patronage, and the lives, learning,
and manners of the clergy ; indignantly denounces the avarice
of great men and others which led to these evils ; and appeals
to those in authority to do their duty. " I beseech the living
God," he says, '■^ that they who are already ministers in the
Church of God, especially those who occupy the place of
apostles by office and authority, call to remembrance the severe
and rigorous sentence of the apostle, saying, ' Woe is unto me
if I preach not the Gospel,' and also the words of the prophet,
saying, ^ Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed them-
selves. Should not the shepherds feed the flocks.' Whereby,
the pastors doing their debt and duty to the simple people
committed to their cure, all heresies, wickedness, and vice,
should be suppressed, the Church fueed from scandal, and God
honoured, to whom be glory for ever."
We are told that the treatise of the Abbot of Crossraguel
was held in high esteem, and that many persons were induced
by his arguments to remain in the communion of the Church.
It continued unanswered till 1563, when, at the instance of
the Earl of Glen cairn, a reply was published by John David-
son, Principal of the College of Glasgow. This reply bears
special reference to an abstract of the Tractive, prepared by
the abbot for circulation among the Protestants, containing a
rash promise — not uncommon among controversialists of that
day — that, if any one part of his book were refuted, he would
hold the whole to be disproved, and embrace the Reformed
opinions. Davidson's answer is much inferior to the Tractive,
as well in learning and ability, as in style and expression.
Both are written in becoming language, and in a mild and
charitable spirit. The authors had in youth been fellow-
students, and it is pleasing to find Davidson alluding to " the
old Parisian kindness that was betwixt them," and speaking
of the Archbishop of Glasgow as his " good master and liberal
friend, howbeit for religion they were now separated, as many
fathers and sons were in these their days." ^
^ Kennedy's Tractive and Davidson's Answer are printed in the Miscellany of
the Wodrow Society. See also Keith, vol. iii. p. 405-412 ; M'Crie's Life of
64 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXII.
In March, 1559, John Willock was residing at Ayr, where
he had been a friar before he adopted the Reformed opinions.
He preached against the mass, asserting that it was idolatrous,
and maintaining that the texts of Scripture which he brought
forward in proof of this were expounded by him in conformity
with the interpretation of Irenaeus, Chrysostom, Hilary,
Origen, and Tertullian. On Easter Eve, the twenty-fifth of
March, the Abbot of Crossraguel came to Ayr. Hearing of
Willock's sermons, and of the line of argument adopted in
them, he entered into a correspondence with him regarding
the points in dispute. In his first letter, he maintained that
whoever asserts the mass to be idolatrous is himself a
heretic ; and he offered to prove this by the express word of
God, according to the judgment of the most ancient and godly
doctors, and that in presence of twelve persons to be chosen
by each of the disputants. Willock accepted this challenge,
and proposed that the discussion should take place publicly
in the church of St. John the Baptist ; but, on the abbot
expressing his apprehension of a tumult arising if the meeting
were open to all, it was agreed that it should be held in a
private house. The disputation, however, did not take place.
Willock having declared that he was content to be judged by
the word of God, Kennedy answered that, as they were sure
to differ about the interpretation of Scripture, there must be
some judge between them, and the most competent judges
were the ancient fathers and doctors whose authority the
preacher himself had appealed to. Willock, in reply, stated
that he consented to abide by the authority of the ancient
doctors, but so far only as they were in accordance with the
Holy Scriptures. As they could not agree on this point, the
correspondence ended. On the seventh of April, Kennedy,
who was then at Maybole in the immediate vicinity of his
own abbey, sent an account of the whole proceedings to the
Archbishop of Glasgow, at whose request, it would appear,
he had gone to Ayr.^
Knox, pp. 241-242 ; M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. i. p. 453-456 ; and Mr. David
Laing's prefatory remarks on the two treatises in the Wodrow Miscellany.
* See the correspondence, published from the papers in the Scots College at
Paris, in Keith, vol. iii. p. 393-404 ; and reprinted in the Miscellany of the
Wodrow Society. See also M'Crie's Life of Knox, p. 242, and Mr. Laing's
remarks in the Wodrow Miscellany, pp. 93, 261-263.
A.D. 1559.] OF SCOTLAND. f>5
The feast of Easter, in the year 1659, was kept witli oTeat
solemnity by Mary of Lorraine and her court. About that
time a proclamation was issued, forbidding any persons to
preach, or to administer the sacraments, except with the autho-
rity of the bishops. The Eeformed preachers paid no attention
to this injunction, and several of their number were summoned
to appear before the Justiciary Court at Stirling, on the tenth
01 May. i he Congregation were determined to support their
ministers, and assembled at Perth in great numbers. At this
very time John Knox returned to Scotland.'
From the time that he left Scotland in 1556, Knox had
resided for the most part at Geneva, where he and Whitting-
ham afterwards Dean of Durham, were joint ministers to the
English congregation. In the year 1558, he published the
i irst Blast of the Trumpet against the monstrous Regiment
of Women." The object of this work is expressed in the
opening sentence : " To promote a woman to bear rule, supe-
riority, dominion, or empire, above any realm, nation, or city
13 repugnant to nature, contumely to God, a thing most
contrariousto his revealed will and approved ordinance : and
fanally. It is the subversion of good order, of all equity and
justice. It was chiefly directed against Mary of England, but
Its arguments and allusions were equally applicable to the
government of the young Queen of the Scots and her mother
It has already been mentioned that an invitation to return to
Scotland was sent to Knox by some of the Protestant leaders
but that he stopped short in his journey, in consequence of
receiving subsequent letters of a contrary tenor. After the
subscription of the bond in December, 1557, he was ao-ain
requested to come back, and the Congregation wrote to Calvin
soliciting his influence in persuading Knox to comply. The
letters containing these requests were not received at Geneva
till November, 1558. In that month Mary of England died
The exiles began to return home, and Knox acceded to the
request which had been made. He left Geneva in Janu.iry
1559, and, on arriving at Dieppe, learned that an application
which he had made for permission to pass through England
was refused. This was chiefly owing to his treatise on female
■ Knox, vol. i. p. 316-318. HiBlory of the Estate of Scotland- Wodrow Mis
cellany, vol. i. pp. 56, 57. M'Crie's Life of Knox, p 166 158.
VOL. IJ,] ^
6(d ecclesiastical history [Chap. XXXIL
government^ the opinions expressed in which, now that Eliza-
beth was on the throne, were disavowed even by the exiles.
He sailed direct for Scotland in the end of April, and on the
second of May landed at Leith. As soon as his arrival be-
came known to the government, he was proclaimed an out-
law ; but, without giving his enemies an opportunity of
seizing him, and remaining only two nights at Edinburgh, he
hastened to Dundee, where several of the Protestant barons
were assembled for the purpose of accompanying the accused
preachers to their place of trial. Knox received a joyful wel-
come, and went with his friends to Perth, i
Had it been in the power of the Keformed to arrange before-
hand the precise time for the return of their great preacher,
they could not have done so more auspiciously for their cause.
The citation of the Protestant ministers by the queen-regent
brought the struggle between the two parties to a crisis, which
both must have foreseen, but for which neither seems to have
been prepared. The Protestants were evidently acting in
concert, yet there is no appearance of any formal plan of pro-
ceeding having been drawn up, or of any thing having been
resolved on beyond a determination to maintain the open pro-
fession of their opinions, and the exercise of their worship.
Neither, on the other side, was the regent in a position to
suppress any strong movement against her authority, although
she had avowed her intention of prohibiting the public exercise
of the Eeformed worship, and punishing all tumultuous opposi-
tion to the established Church. How far it was contemplated,
on the one hand, to assail the privileges of the hierarchy and
the power of the crown, or, on the other, to prevent the main-
tenance by individuals of the new opinions, we have no
sufficient means of knowing. The course of events hurried on
the adoption of measures which probably neither party could
have anticipated.
The Protestants who assembled at Perth were unarmed, it
is said, but this expression can hardly apply with accuracy to
the barons and their feudal retainers. They may not have
been prepared for actual hostilities, but the avowed object of
the assemblage was to overawe the government by their
presence at the trial, and to protect the accused, as they had
^ Knox, vol. i. pp. 274, 318. M'Crie's Life of Knox, p. 120-158.
A.D. 1559.1 OF SCOTLAND. (37
formerly done by similar demonstrations. Some, however,
were reluctant to bring matters to extremity. Erskine of
Dun, desirous of promoting moderate counsels, went on to
Stirling, and endeavoured to effect an accommodation with the
regent. Hoping to succeed in his desire, he prevailed
on the Eeformed to remain at Perth. When the accused
preachers did not appear on the tenth of May, those who had
become sureties for their presence, among whom was Erskine
himself, were fined, and the ministers were outlawed. The
laird of Dun, finding that his efforts were fruitless, returned to
his friends at Perth. ^
While Erskine was vainly endeavouring to promote tran-
quillity, the preachers at Perth were declaiming against the
mass, and enlarging on the divine command to destroy the
monuments of idolatry. The feelings of the multitude were
excited by the intelligence which they received of the condem-
nation of their ministers, and, on the day after the sentence of
outlawry had been pronounced, Knox roused their passions
still farther by a vehement sermon against idolatry, which he
preached in the parish church of St. John the Baptist. Soon
after the conclusion of the sermon, a priest appeared in the
chancel, and, preparing to celebrate mass, opened a magnificent
tabernacle which stood on the high altar. What his motives
were can only be conjectured. He may have intended simply
to perform the usual service at whatever individual hazard, or
he may have hoped to win back the affections of the people
by an appeal to what they had once been taught to reverence.
However this may have been, the result was most disastrous.
1 Knox, vol. i. p. 317-319. Buchanan, vol. i. p. 313. Leslie, p. 505. His-
tory of the Estate of Scotland — Wodrow Miscellany, vol. i. p. 57. Pitcaim's
Criminal Trials, vol. i. part i. pp. 406, 407. Spbttiswood, vol. i. p. 271. Keith,
vol. i. pp. 187, 188. Tytler, vol. vi. pp. 98, 99. It is not easy to ascertain 4he'
true history of the events at Perth and Stirling. Knox mentions that the
queen promised to Erskine that, if the multitude were stayed, she would take
some better order in regard to the ministers, and that, at Erskine's request, hoth
people and preachers remained at Perth. Buchanan states that the queen sent
for Erskine, and that the greater number of the Protestants, reljing on her pro-
mises, actually left Perth, though their leaders remained. The narrative, as
given by Spottiswood, Keith, and Tytler, assumes the deceit of the queen, and
the consequent dispersion of the great body of the Protestants. Yet this is more
than Knox asserts, and is not supported by the account given by Bishop Leslie,
and by the author of the History of the Estate of Scotland.
QS ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXII.
A number of persons had continued to linger in the church.
One of these, a young man or boy, cried out, " This is intoler-
able, that when God in his word hath plainly condemned
idolatry we shall stand and see it used in despite." The
indignant priest gave the boy a blow, and he, taking up a
stone and throwing it at the priest, struck the tabernacle and '
broke one of the images. The others immediately took up
stones, and dashed in pieces the tabernacle and all the orna-
ments of the church. When this was known through the
city, a disorderly rabble assembled from every quarter, and
attacked the Dominican, Franciscan, Carmelite, and Carthusian
monasteries. The work of spoliation and destruction continued
for two days, and so effectually was it accomplished, that only
the bare walls of the monastic buildings and churches remained.
It does not appear that any of the inmates sustained personal
injury. The Charter-house was a magnificent erection, and
was the burial place of its founder, King James I. In the
monastery of the Black Friars, the Scottish sovereigns had
frequently kept their court, and parliaments and provincial
synods had met within it. But when more solemn restraints
had been thrown aside, it was hardly to be expected that
recollections such as these would have any effect upon the
people. As soon as the proceedings at Perth became known
at Cupar in Fife, the inhabitants of that place followed the
example which had been given, and destroyed all the altars
and images in the parish church. ^
These excesses were noted at the time as an evil commence-
ment of the movement in favour of reformation, and ever since
they have frequently been referred to in the same unfavourable
manner. Attempts have been made to apologize for the riot
at Perth. It has been spoken of as purely accidental, and it
has been asserted that Knox and his friends did their best to
prevent it. For this last statement there is no evidence, except
one vague remark of Knox himself, and it is contradicted by
the facts of the case ; the outrages of the multitude could not
have continued two days successively, had the nobles and
preachers been really anxious to check them. The commence-
ment of the tumult on this particular occasion seems to have
Kdox, vol. i. p. 320-324. Buchanan, vol. J. p. 313. Leslie, p. 506. Spottis-
wood, vol i. pp. 271, 272.
A.D. 1559.] OJ^' SCOTLAND. fi9
been accidental, but when the feelmgs of an excited populace
have been systematically roused, when at the very time ex-
hortations to violence are ringing in their ears, when the act
itself is neither checked nor punished, it is obvious that the
multitude are not the worst criminals. Among the more vio-
lent of the Reformed the destruction of the monasteries appears
to have been deliberately planned. The example had been
given fifteen years before by the inhabitants of Dundee. The
monks, and still more the friars, had long been the objects of
the most outrageous invective, and in the month of January,
1559, a warning, in language borrowed from the ordinary
legal forms, had been fixed on the gates of the monasteries of
the friars, commanding them, in name of the poor, the
maimed, the widows, and the orphans, whose houses and pro-
perty they occupied, to depart forth therefrom before the ensu-
ing term of Whitsunday, in order that the true owners might
enter on possession, and afterwards enjoy the benefits of which
they had been unjustly deprived.^
The queen-regent received an account of the riot at Perth
with deep indignation. She dwelt particularly on the de-
struction of the royal foundation of the Charter-house, and
threatened to take severe vengeance on the guilty parties.
The Reformed began to fortify the town, and, at the same
time, addressed a letter to the regent, in which they stated
plainly that they would resist with the sword, if farther
attempts were made to molest them in the exercise of their
religion. This communication was written in a tone of defi-
ance, hardly veiled under words of seeming deference and
humility. They wrote in a similar strain to the nobility who
adhered to the queen, asserting that whatever tliey had done
was by the command of God, who plainly enjoins all idolatry
and the monuments thereof to be destroyed. After some in-
terval of time they put forth a declaration, bearing the follow-
ing superscription : — " To the generation of Anti-Christ, the
pestilent prelates and their shavelings within Scotland, the
Congregation of Christ Jesus within the same, sayeth — ." The
tenor of this document corresponded with the title. The oppo-
nents of the Congregation were told that, if they did not alter
^ Knox, vol. i. pp. 291. 320, 321. History of the Estate of Scotland— Wod-
row Miscellany, vol. i. pp. 57, 58.
70 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXII.
their conduct, the same treatment would be measui-ed to them
which they had meted to others ; and they were threatened
with the same war which God had commanded Israel to wage
against the Canaanites.
The queen-regent prepared to march against Perth. The
Reformed, in the meantime, had been encouraged by the
arrival of the Earl of Glencairn, and a large number of their
friends from the West, with whom was John Willock the
preacher. Before actual hostilities commenced, an accommo-
dation was effected by means of the Earl of Argyll and the
Prior of St. Andrews, who accompanied the regent. The Re-
formed agreed, on certain conditions, to depart from Perth,
and, on the twenty-ninth of May, the queen entered the town
with her army. According to Knox and Buchanan, the
articles of capitulation were broken by Mary, who declared that
no faith was to be kept with heretics, and that princes were
not to be too strictly bound by their promises. How far these
statements are to be relied on is very doubtful, but the Earl of
Argyll and the Prior, alleging that the queen had broken her
promises, openly joined her opponents. By these two lords
the Congregation were requested to assemble at St. Andrews.
Knox accompanied the barons of Angus, and on his way
preached at Crail and Anstruther. His hearers destroyed the
altars and images in the churches, and the reformer announced
his intention of preaching at St. Andrews on Sunday the
eleventh of June. The archbishop attempted to defeat this
intention, but, finding that the Protestants were determined
to resist, he retired with his followers. The sermon was
accordingly delivered. Its subject was the casting of the
buyers and sellers out of the Temple. Knox compared the
state of Jerusalem to that of Scotland, and pointed out the
duty of those to whom God had given power and zeal for the
work. The provost and magistrates, and the community of
the city, proceeded deliberately to execute the prescribed task.
The cathedral and other churches were spoiled, and the
Dominican and Franciscan monasteries were destroyed.^
1 Knox, vol i. p. 324-350. History of the Estate of Scotland— Wodrow Mis-
cellany, vol. i. p. 58-60. Buchanan, vol. i. p. 313-315. Leslie, pp. 506, 507.
Spottiswood, vol. i. p. 272-277. Keith, vol. i. p. 193-206. M'Crie's Life of
Knox, pp. 160-164, 486, 487. Lyon's History of St. Andrews, vol. i. p. 335-
AD. 1559.] OF SCOTLAND. 7X
The Congregation soon became so powerful that the regent
was unable to keep the field agahist them. The abbey of
Lindores, whicli had already suffered so mucli, was now
thoroughly reformed. The altars were overthrown, and the
images, vestments, and liturgical books, were burned in pre-
sence of the monks, who were commanded to throw aside the
habits of their order. Similar proceedings took place at the
neighbouring monastery of Balmerino.^
On the twenty-fifth of June, the queen's troops retired from
Perth, and the Congregation again obtained possession of the
town. The abbey of Scone, in the immediate vicinity, was
held by its commendator, the Bishop of Murray. The lords
of the Congregation wrote to him, that, unless he joined them,
they could not preserve his monastery from destruction. It is
said that he offered to comply with their request ; but, without
waiting for his answer, a multitude of persons belonging to
the towns of Dundee and Perth commenced an attack on the
monastery. They were persuaded to give up their pm-pose
for a time, but on the following day the assault was renewed,
and the magnificent abbey and palace, the residence of the
Scottish sovereigns, and the place of their inauguration, were
set on fire, and reduced to a heap of blackened ruins. ^
While these events took place at Perth, the Earl of Argyll
and the Prior of St. Andrews went southwards to Stirling and
Linlithgow. There also the monasteries were destroyed.
The regent abandoned Edinburgh at their approach, and on
the twenty-ninth of June they entered the capital. The friars
in that city had hitherto been protected from the populace by
337. A tradition of very general reception connects the destruction of the
cathedral of St. Andrews with Knox's sermon there. I have found no written
evidence of this. The reformer himself, in his History, and in a letter written
at the time, makes no express reference to the cathedral church. The language
of Bisliop Leslie, and of the author of the History of the Estate of Scotland, is
▼ague and amhiguous ; and Buchanan speaks only of the spoiling of the churches
and the destruction of the monasteries. It is certain, however, that the prima-
tial church sustained such injuries at the time of the Reformation that the arch-
bishops of the following century did not even attempt to restore it. There is
great probability in the conjecture that it was partially ruined in June, 1559,
and that its destruction was completed when the abbey churches were systema-
tically demolished two years afterwards.
1 M'Crie's Life of Knox, p. 487. Leslie, p. 507.
" Knox, vol. i. p. 350-3G2. Buchanan, vol. i. p. 316. Leslie, p. 508.
72 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXII.
Lord Seaton, the provost. All restraint was now at an end ;
the monasteries were demolished, the churches were spoiled of
their ornaments, and the palace of Holjrood was pillaged.
About the same time, tlie Earl of Glencairn and other gentle-
men of the West reformed Glasgow according to what was
become the established model. Some weeks afterwards a sort
of truce was arranged between the contending parties, and the
queen resumed possession of the palace of Holyrood.
On the eighth of July, Henry II., King of France, died,
and Francis, the husband of the Queen of the Scots, succeeded
to the crown. The princes of the house of Lorraine imme-
diately acquired the chief direction of the government, and
made vigorous efforts to restore the authority of their sister in
Scotland. More troops were sent over, and, towards the end
of September, Nicholas de Pelleve, Bishop of Amiens, after-
wards cardinal archbishop of Sens, arrived at Leith. He held
a commission as apostolic nuncio, with the authority of legate
a latere, and was accompanied by three doctors of the Sor-
bonne, of great reputation for their learning. According to
Leslie, their exhortations had the effect of confirming the
minds of many who were wavering in their attachment to the
Church.
There was no true reconciliation between the queen and
the Kefomied, and both only waited an opportunity of renew-
ing the war with advantage. The insolence and exactions of
the French soldiers excited deep dislike among the Scots, and
did Mary's cause more injury than the advantages derived
from their courage and discipline could compensate. The
feeling of the people was much divided. Appeals were made
to them by proclamations on either side, and Knox seems to
admit that those of the queen had considerable effect. The
Duke of Chatel-herault joined the Congregation, and, though
several Protestants of high rank still adhered to the reo-ent
the Earl of Huntly, the most powerful nobleman in the com-
munion of the Church, began to waver in his political prin-
ciples, and his eldest son, the Lord Gordon, openly allied
himself with the Eeformed. Encouraged by the support of
the house of Hamilton, the lords of the Congregation burned
the altars and images in the abbeys of Paisley and Kilwin-
■ ig ; and Dunfermline, which seems hitherto to have escaped
mni
A.B. 1559.] OF SCOTLAND. 7.,
now shared the same treatment. A decisive step was finally
taken. The Eefonned again occupied Edinburgh, and, on
the twenty-first of October, a meeting was held there for the
purpose of discussing the question, whether the regent ought
to be longer allowed to administer the government. Difi"erent
opmions were expressed, and the judgment of the preachers
was requested. Both Willock and Knox advised that she
should be deprived of her ofiice. This resolution was accord-
mgly adopted, and the deprivation was embodied in a formal
act, and proclaimed at the market-cross. They sent a letter
to the regent, by the Lion King-at-Arms, by which, in name of
their sovereign lord and lady, they intimated the suspension
of her commission, being assured, they said, that her proceed-
ings were contrary to their sovereigns' will. At midnight of
the same day on which this letter was sent, Knox announced
the event to one of the English agents. " The queen-regent "
he wrote, " with public consent of the lords and barons as-
sembled, is deprived of all authority and regiment among us.
... The authority of the French king and queen is yet
received, and will be, in word, till they deny our most iust
requests." 1
This proceeding was the prelude to open war between the
Congregation and the regent. The Congregation were at first
much less successful than they anticipated, and, on the sixth
of November, were compelled to abandon EdinburgJi, and
retreat northwards to Stirling. If they had been obliged to
rely on their own efi^orts alone, there is every reason to believe
that the insurrection would have been suppressed, but they
now obtained efiectual assistance from another quarter.
From the time of her accession to the throne. Queen Eliza-
beth had anxiously watched the state of matters in Scotland
She disliked the political principles and peculiar ecclesiastical
opinions of the northern reformers, and was at first reluctant
to give them any support. At an early period of the contest
negociations had commenced between the leaders of the Con-
gregation and Elizabeth's ministers, and, after the act sus-
' Knox, vol. i. p. 362-451. History of the Estate of Scotland-Wodrow Mia-
celany, vol. i. p. 61-69. Buchanan, vol. i. p. 316-319. Leslie, p 508 518
badler a State Papers, vol. i. pp. 464-470, 680, 681. Tytler, vol vi p U5-I47'
Keitb, vol. i. p. 211-237. Spottiswood, vol. i. p. 280-304.
74 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIL
pending the authority of the regent^ the application to the
English government for assistance was urged more strongly.
In these proceedings on the part of the Scots, the most active
political agent was Knox. He spared no exertions, and cheer-
fully exposed himself to the greatest personal danger, travelling
with rapidity from one part of the kingdom to another, in
order to encourage the supporters of the Eeformation, or to
hold conferences with the English envoys. His written cor-
respondence appears to have been unceasing, and, having no
doubts as to the goodness of the cause which he was support-
ing, he was not restrained by any scruples in regard to the
means for promoting it. On the twenty-fifth of October,
under the feigned name of John Sinclair, he wrote to Sir
James Crofts, the English commander at Berwick, urging him
to send troops to the assistance of the Congregation ; mention-
ing that this would be no infraction of the treaty of peace be-
tween England and France, because it was free to the soldiers
to serve any prince or nation for their wages ; and suggesting,
if this were not sufficient, that Sir James might declare them
rebels to their sovereign so soon as he was assured that they
had joined the Scots. About the beginning of the same month,
the Prior of St. Andrews received a letter, written as if from
France, containing an account of the great preparations mak-
ing in that country to aid the regent, and advising the Re-
formed to seek assistance from England. Queen Elizabeth's
envoy, Eandolph, suspected Knox of being the real author of
this letter.
The supposed political necessity of checking the French
ascendency in Scotland finally outweighed other considera-
tions in the mind of Elizabeth. She yielded to the advice of
her ministers, and resolved to support the cause of the Con-
gregation. From that time she carried out towards the
northern kingdom the line of policy which had long been
familiar to English statesmen. It was apparently justified in
this case by expediency, and by a due regard to the interests
of her people ; but in itself it was wicked and unjust, and,
though apparently successful, was fraught with evils which
produced results fatal to the happiness and well-being of both
kingdoms. On the twenty-seventh of February, 1560, a con-
vention was signed at Berwick between the Duke of Norfolk,
A.D. 1560.] OF SCOTLAND. 75
Lieutenant in the North, on behalf of the Queen of England,
and the Prior of St. Andrews and others, commissioners for
the Duke of Chatel-herault and the lords of the Congregation,
by which a league of amity and mutual defence against
France was concluded. The act of the Scottish commis-
sioners was afterwards ratified by their constituents, among
whom were the Earl of Huntly, the Lords Borthwick and
Somerville, the Bishop of Galloway, the Lord Kobert Stewart,
Abbot of Holyrood, the Preceptor of the Knights of St. John,
the Abbots of Kinloss and Culross, and the Commendators of
Arbroath, Kilwinning, and Inch-Colm. This treaty refers to
political reasons alone for its motives and justification. A
direct reference to religious differences was probably avoided
by the Duke of Norfolk, and would certainly have prevented
its ratification by some of the Scottish nobles. The opposition
to the regent at this time assumed the appearance rather of a
political combination, than of an ecclesiastical movement.^
In the beginning of the year 1560, the barons of the
Mearns, distinguished all along for their zeal in the cause of
the Eeformation, crossed the Dee and entered Aberdeen, where
they destroyed the Dominican and Carmelite monasteries, and
were proceeding to attack those of the Franciscan and Trinity
Friars, when they were prevented by the citizens. The work
of destruction, however, so far as the monasteries were con-
cerned, was completed by the townsmen themselves, and the
cathedral was saved only by the exertions of Bishop Leslie,
then official of the diocese, and the assistance of the Earl of
Huntly. 2
After the conclusion of the treaty between the Duke of
1 Knox, vol. i.p. 451-473 ; vol. ii, p. 3-56. History of tlie Estate of Scotland —
Wodrow Miscellany, vol. i. p. 69-80. Buchanan, vol. i. p. 319-321. Leslie, pp. 518,
519. Sadler's State Papers, vol. i. p. 499. Spottiswood, vol. i. p. 304-314. Keith,
vol. i. pp. 241-262, 395, 396, 398. M'Crie's Life of Knox, p. 174-181. Tytler,
vol. vi. p. 147-159.
2 Leslie, pp. 520, 521. Kennedy's Annals of Aberdeen, vol. i. pp. 112, 113.
Extracts from the Council Register of Aberdeen, from 1398 to 1570, pp. 315-
323, 325, 326. It has frequently been stated that the chancel of the cathedral
was demolished at the same time with the monasteries. This is inconsistent
with the narrative of Leslie, who could not have been mistaken as to the facts,
and who was certainly not disposed to palliate the excesses of the reformers, but
there can be no doubt that it was destroyed within a year or two after this date ;
see James Gordon's Description of both towns of Aberdeen, p. 22.
76 ECCLESIASTICAL H^STOEY [Chap. XXXIL
Norfolk and the lords of the Congregatioiij an Engllsli army
entered Scotland, and advanced towards Edinburgh. The
royalists and the French were unable to keep the iield against
the united forces of the Congregation and their English allies.
The war, however, continued to be carried on with various
success. In the meantime, the queen-regent, wearied with
care, and sinking under bodily illness, sought refuge in the
castle of Edinburgh, which the governor, Lord Erskine, had
refused to deliver up to either party. Her disease rapidly
increased, and on the ninth of June she requested the leading
nobles on both sides to visit her. They attended at her call.
She exhorted them to consult the true interests of their
country and their sovereigns, and asked their forgiveness for
anything wherein she had offended them. The Reformed
entreated her to receive the instructions of one of their
preachers, and she allowed Willock to be sent for. She
listened to his exhortations, professed that her only hope of
salvation was in the merits of her Saviour, and was silent
when he spoke against the superstition of the mass. Early
on the morning of the eleventh of June, Mary of Lorraine
expired, being then in the forty-fifth year of her age.
The Congregation refused to allow her Christian burial in
Scotland, according to the ritual of the Church, and, after con-
siderable delay, her body was carried to France, and interred
in the monastery of St. Peter at Rheims, of which her sister
was then abbess.^
Before the death of Mary, some of the most eminent of the
clergy had deserted the Church, and joined the Protestants.
Among these were three of the six persons who had been ap-
pointed advisers to the Archbishops of St. Andrews and Glas-
gow at the last provincial council. Alexander Gordon, Arch-
bishop of Athens and Bishop of Galloway, had gone along with
the head of his house in ratifying the convention of Berwick,
but he went beyond him in adopting the ecclesiastical principles
^ Knox, vol. ii. pp. 56-72, 160, 161, and appendix, p. 590-592. Buchanan,
vol i. p. 321-324. Leslie, p. 519-526. Spottiswood, vol. i. p. 314-321. Keith,
vol. i. p. 263-285. Tytler, vol. vi. p. 159-165. The character of the queen-regent,
as given by Buchanan, is not unfair in itself, nor incapable of being reconciled
■with the description of Bishop Leslie. The manner in which Knox speaks of
her, especially in connection with the circumstances of her death, has frequently
been commented on, and never more severely than it deserves.
A.D. 1560.] OF SCOTLAND. 77
of the Keformed. John Winranij Sub-prior of St. Andrews,
had for many years acknowledged the corruptions of the
Church, and had laboured to bring about a peaceful reforma-
tion in doctrine and discipline. We are not told what finally
led him to despair of success, but he now openly united
himself to the Protestants. John Greyson, Provincial of the
Black Friars, likewise conformed. On the seventeenth
day of March, 1560, he made a public and formal recan-
tation in the parish church of St. Andrews. This docu-
ment is valuable as throwino^ li^-ht on the nature and extent
of that change of opinion which had become so prevalent ;
and it probably shows how far the Protestant doctrines
were at this time adopted by those who belonged to the
reforming school within the Church. It is as follows : —
" Here, in presence of Almighty and Everlasting God, and
of this holy congregation, I grant and confess that in time by-
past I have maintained and defended divers kinds of supersti-
tion and idolatry, contrary to the laws and ordinances of
Almighty God, and have remained too long in the opinion
and defence of such things ; and I repent the same from the
bottom of my heart, and am content in time to come to
institute and conform my life to the word and doctrine of the
eternal God, set forth, explained, and declared by his prophets,
and the apostles of our only Saviour, Christ Jesus, in the Old
Testament and tlie New, and think that the Church and Con-
gregation of God may be sufficiently instructed to eschew sin,
death, and hell, and how they may come to everlasting life,
by those things which are revealed to us by the Holy Ghost
in the New and Old Testament ; and therefore I reject,
renounce, and abhor all other doctrines and traditions of men,
which are contrary to God's holy word, and were set out
to bind men's conscience to obey them under tlie pain of
deadly sin.
^' And in especial, I renounce the Pope to be the head of the
Church, and also I renounce him and all his traditions and
laws repugnant in any sort, or making derogation to God's
laws and the liberty of the same.
" Also, I renounce the Mass, as it has been used in times
by-past, and the feigned and invented Purgatory, as pestiferous
and blasphemous things, and as contrary to the merits, and
78 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXII.
passion, and omnisufficient sacrifice offered upon the cross by
our Saviour Christ for the redemption of mankind.
" Also, I grant that no graven image should be made and
worshipped in the Church of God, and that no honour should
be given thereto, and that all exhibition of such honour, ex-
hibited or to be exhibited to such stocks or stones, is very
idolatry, and against the express command of God.
" Also, I grant that we have no command of God bidding
us pray to any saints that are departed, but only to Him who
is Saint of all saints, Christ Jesus, our only Saviour, Mediator,
and Advocate, everliving, and perpetually making intercession
to his Father for his faithful people and members of his
body ; and so also I grant that we have no command to pray
for them that are departed.
" Also, as I grant that to them that have the gift of chastity
it is good and godly to live in chastity, even so I grant, ac-
cording to St. Paul's doctrine, that it is lawful to all men and
women to marry, who have not the gift of chastity, notwith-
standing any vow made to the contrary ; but if they be vexed
and wearied with the urgent appetites of the flesh, they are
bound by the commandment of the Lord to marry.
" Also, I deny all Transubstantiation in the sacrament of
the Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ Jesus, and that
Auricular Confession is necessary for the salvation of man.
" The foresaid and all other ungodly opinions and inventions
of men, which are contrary to God and his holy word, I
detest, abhor, and renounce for now and ever. And of my
long adherence to the same, I ask God mercy, and this holy
congregation forgiveness." ^
The country was miserably wasted by the contending armies,
but the ecclesiastics were the chief sufferers. The Bishops of
Ross, Dunkeld, and Dunblane, were driven from their palaces,
and deprived of their estates. Many monasteries were pil-
laged, and the abbeys of Melrose, Kelso, and Dunfermline, are
particularly mentioned as having again been exposed to the
ravages of the spoiler. The property of the clergy was seized,
and their rents were sequestrated, special officers being ap-
^ See Greyson's recantation, printed from the records of the Kirk Session of St.
Andrews, in Dr. Lee's Lectures on the History of the Church of Scotland, vol.
ii. pp. 107, 108.
A.D. 1560.] OF SCOTLAND.
70
pointed to collect and take account of them. All parties,
however, were weary of the war, and commissioners having
arrived from England and France, negotiations were begun,
which led to the establishment of peace between these king-
doms. The French commissioners, notwithstanding instructions
which they had received to the contrary, also agreed to certain
articles of accommodation between the King and Queen of the
Scots, and the party in arms against their authority. These
were drawn up in the form of concessions by the sovereigns
to the nobility and people of Scotland. One of the most
important of the stipulations was, that a parliament should be
held on the tenth of July, to be adjourned for the despatch of
business to the first of August, and that, during the interval,
the king and queen should be advertised of the concessions, and
humbly requested to confirm the same ; and it was farther
agreed that the parliament should be as valid, in all respects,
as if summoned by the express command of the sovereigns,
provided always nothing were treated of prior to the first of
August. The government, during the queen's absence, was
to be carried on by a council of twelve — seven to be selected
by the sovereigns, and five by the estates, out of twenty-four
to be named by the estates. Touching the articles of religion
presented by the nobility and people, it was agreed that,
inasmuch as this was too important a matter to be settled by
the commissioners, deputies should be chosen at the ensuing
parliament, who should repair to France in order to effect an
arrangement with the sovereigns.
On the eighth of July this treaty, known as the treaty of
Edinburgh, was proclaimed at the market-cross of the Scottish
capital, and a few days afterwards the French and English
troops left the kingdom. The Reformed were now the predo-
minant party in Scotland. A species of ecclesiastical discipline
had already been set up by them in some places, but ministers
were at this time formally appointed to the chief towns, and
persons, under the name of Superintendents, were entrusted
with the charge of various districts. The successful result of
the struggle had greatly added to the power of the Congi-e-
gation. That body was able not only to protect its own
adherents, but to proscribe and punish its opponents ; and
those who hitherto had secretly favoured the Reformed doc-
80 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXII.
trines, or who did not possess the principle and courage
required in the adherents of a falling cause, now hastened
to proclaim their adoption of the Protestant opinions. Some
of those that conformed were persons whose learning and
ability were of great assistance, and their merits were not
forgotten in the distribution of the newly created offices.
The following ministers were appointed to the cliief towns
— John Knox to Edinburgh, Christopher Goodman to St
Andrews, Adam Heriot to Aberdeen, John Row to Perth,
Paul Methven to Jedburgh, William Christison to Dundee,
David Ferguson to Dunfermline, and David Lindsay to Leith.
Goodman, an Englishman by birth, was the associate of Knox
in ministering to the congregation at Geneva, and like him
was notorious on account of the theories which he promul-
gated regarding the relative duties of subjects and sovereigns.
When he afterwards returned to England, he was obliged to
retract his political opinions. Heriot was an Augustinian
canon at St. Andrews, much esteemed for his learning, inte-
grity, and eloquence as a preacher. Having embraced the
Reformed opinions, he was now appointed to the chief city of
the North, where the Church had still many adherents ; and
the prudence and moderation which he subsequently dis-
played justified the wisdom of the choice. Of a similar
character was David Lindsay, a younger son of the house of
Edzeli, who had lately returned home after finishing his
education on the Continent. ^
The circumstances which are said to have produced the con-
version of John Row require more particular detail. Row was
educated at the University of St. Andrews, and practised for
some time as an advocate in the consistorial court of that city.'
He was employed by the Scottish clergy to act as their agent
at Rome. During his residence in Italy, which continued for
about eight years, he took the degree of doctor of laws at
Padua.
The following is the generally received account of the next
events in the life of Row. — He was in great favour with the
Pope, but, having fallen into bad health, was advised by his
^ Knox, vol. ii. p. 72-87. Buchanan, vol. i. p. 326. Leslie, p. 527-629.
Spottiswood, vol. ii. pp. 197, 198; vol. iii. p. 220. Keith, vol. i. p. 286-311.
Tjtler, vol. vi. p. 166-175.
A.D. 1560] OF SCOTLAND. 81
physicians to return to his native country. The Pope having
given his consent, he received a commission as legate, with
authority to check the innovations which were tlien commen-
cing. He left Eome on the twentieth of May, 1558, and
landed at Eyemouth, on the twenty-ninth of September, On
his arrival, he opposed the progress of the Reformation, by
disputing with the preachers and otherwise. At that time
the chapel of our Lady of Loretto, near Musselburgh, was a
famous place of pilgrimage, and was held in great reverence by
the adherents of the Roman Church. Taking advantage of
this superstitious feeling, the bishops and clergy endeavoured
to strengthen their influence by the performance of a false
miracle. A fit person had been carefully trained for the pur-
pose. In his youth, while in the service of the nuns of the
monastery of St. Catharine of Sienna, near Edinburgh, he had
learned to turn up his eyes in such a manner as to have the
appearance of one who was entirely blind. The sisters com-
municated this singular faculty of their servant to some of the
clergy at Edinburgh, and by their advice he was kept con-
cealed in the vaults of the nunnery for seven or eight years,
till it was forgotten that such a person existed. At the end of
that period he was brought out, and, having been taken bound
by a solemn oath to obey his instructions, was led through
the country as a blind beggar. After some time, it was
announced that a great miracle would be performed at the
chapel of Loretto. The man was led forth in presence of a
multitude of people, and, when certain ceremonies had taken
place, it was proclaimed that he had been restored to sight.
Among those who witnessed the cure was a gentleman
of Fife, known by the name of Squire Meldrum, who had
embraced the Reformed opinions. Doubting the truth of the
miracle, he induced the man to accompany him to his lodgings
at Edinburgh, and, when he was there, compelled him by the
threat of immediate death to confess the imposture. Meldrum
farther persuaded him to proclaim the whole story to the
people at the market-cross of the city ; and, as soon as this
was done, they both left Edinburgh, and crossing the Queen's
FeiTy landed in Fife, where the lords of the Congregation
were in arms against the regent. Meldrum returned to his
own house of Cleish, and soon afterwards John Row came
VOL II.] 7
82 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXII.
thither, on a visit to the lady of the mansion, who adhered to
the Eoman Church. Kow and Meldrum entered into dis-
course concerning matters of religion, and reference was
made to the wonderful cure lately performed at Loretto. The
latter explained the true nature of the transaction, and pro-
duced the man himself in confirmation of his account. Kow
listened in amazement, and was soon afterwards converted to
the Keformed religion.
This narrative calls for a more careful examination than it
appears to have yet received. !N'o writer of the time, or of
the period immediately succeeding, makes any allusion to the
pretended miracle at Loretto, or to the conversion of Row by
such means. The silence of Knox on such a subject is a
strong negative argument against the truth of the story.
Archbishop Spottiswood gives an account of Row, and says
nothing of the miracle, but refers to the counsel of the Prior
of St. Andrews, and the persuasions of Knox, as inducing
him to remain in Scotland and become a minister in the
Reformed communion. The only authority for the narrative
is an appendix to the supplement or concluding portion of the
History of the Kirk, by John Row, minister of Carnock, son
of John Row the reformer. The younger Row was not
twelve years old at the time of his father's death, and his
History was written when he was far advanced in years.
There is no evidence that the appendix was composed by him
at all, though it seems to have been the work of some of the
family ; and the manuscript from which it was printed was not
written till about the year 1670. The author of the appendix
gives the name of Squire Meldrum to the person who dis-
covered the imposture, confounding him apparently with the
well-known hero of Sir David Lindsay's poem. This is cor-
rected in the manuscript, by the insertion, in another hand, of
the name of Robert Colville, to whom Meldrum's estate of
Cleish belonged in the year 1559. The story itself bears no
date, but the events must have taken place while Mary of
Lorraine was in possession of Edinburgh, and the Congrega-
tion were in arms in Fife. Although the nan-ative states that
Row returned to Scotland in September, 1558, we know from
a letter written by him to Donald, Abbot of Cupar, that he was
still at Rome in May, 1559. The alleged miracle must have
A.D. 1560.] OF SCOTLAND. 83
been performed during the autumn of the latter year, but this
can hardly be reconciled with the circumstance that the nunnery
of St. Catharine, along with the other monasteries in Edin-
burgh, was demolished in the end of June, There are other
parts of the story which do not seem very probable, such as
the detention of the young man for eight years in the vaults
of the monastery, and his acquiescence in the subsequent
proceedings, and the holding of the office of legate by Row.
On a review of the whole circumstances, there does not appear
to be sufficient evidence for the narrative, while there are strong
indications of wilful fabrication, or of extreme credulity.^
It has been mentioned that superintendents of districts
were appointed at the same time with the ministers of the
towns. Willock was named to Glasgow ; the laird of Dun,
though not exercising the functions of a preacher, and in all
respects a layman, was appointed to Angus and Mearns ; and
John Carsewell, parson of Kilmartin, to Argyll and the Isles.
The superintendency of Lothian was conferred on John
Spottiswood. The father of Spottiswood — a descendant of the
ancient family of that name in the Merse — was slain at
Flodden. The son, left an orphan at four years of age, was
educated at the University of Glasgow, and afterwards went
to England, where he became intimate with Archbishop
Cranmer, and embraced the Reformed opinions. He was
presented to the parsonage of Calder by Sir James Sandilands,
but it is not stated whether he had ever received holy orders ;
it would rather seem that he had not. The superintendency
of Fife was bestowed on John Winram.^
The articles agreed to by the royal commissioners regarding
the calling of a parliament were not very clearly expressed,
and admitted of different interpretations. The commissioners
seem in this respect to have exceeded their powers, and the
concession was not ratified by Francis and Mary. The estates
of the kingdom, however, in terms of the previous adjourn-
ment, met in tlie tolbooth of Edinburgh, on the first of
^ Compare Row's History of the Kirk of Scotland, "Wodrow Society ed. p.
447-455, and Mr. David Laing's preface, pp. vii.-ix. xiv. xv. xvii. Ixii. ; Spottis-
wood, vol. ii. pp. 273, 274; and M'Crie's Life of Knox, pp. 197-199, 213, 214,
442, 443.
' Knox, vol. ii. p. 87. Spottiswood, vol. ii. p. 336. Keitli's Catalogue, p.
307.
84 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXII.
August. All were invited who were entitled by law or
ancient custom to be present, and there was in consequence
a large attendance. The ecclesiastical members were — the
Archbishop of St. Andrews, the Bishops of Dunkeld,
Dunblane, and Argyll, the Bishops-elect of Galloway and
the Isles, the Prior of St. Andrews, the Prior of the
order of St. John, the Abbots of Lindores, Cupar, New-
Abbey, Kinloss, and Feme, the Commendators of Arbroath,
Holyrood, Jedburgh, Newbottle, Dundrennan, Dry burgh,
Inch-Colm, Culross, Kilwinning, and Deer, the Postulate of
Cambuskenneth, the Commendators of Coldingham and St.
Mary's Isle, the Sub-prior of St. Andrews, and the Minister
of Failford. Many of these were ecclesiastics only in name,
and in religious opinions and political principles were among
the leading men in the Congregation. A number both of the
spiritual and temporal peers declined to attend, and several
zealous supporters of the hierarchy were absent, from various
causes. The Archbishop of Glasgow and Lord Seaton were
in France. The Earl of Huntly excused his absence on the
ground of ill healtli. We hear nothing of the Abbot of
Crossraguel, but his influence may probably be discerned in
the line of conduct adopted at the convention by the Earl of
Cassillis.
In the absence of the Earl of Huntly, the chancellor,
William Maitland of Lethington was appointed to preside.
The objections to the legality of the meeting were over-
ruled, and, in the choice of the Lords of the Articles, the
temporal nobles secured a majority, by electing those only
of the ecclesiastical estate who were favourable to the cause
of the Congregation. A petition was presented to the
parliament in name of the barons, gentlemen, burgesses,
and others professing the Protestant religion, craving refor-
mation in regard to doctrine, discipline, and the administration
of the sacraments, the power of the Pope, and the patrimony
of the Church. No notice was taken of the reference to
ecclesiastical property, but the Beformed were requested to
lay before parliament a summary of the doctrines which they
proposed to establish. Within four days, a document was
presented, containing " the Confession of the Faith and
Doctrine believed and professed by the Protestants of the
A.D. 1560.] OF SCOTLAND.
85
Eealm of Scotland." This confession was read over, first
to the Lords of the Articles, and afterwards before the
whole parliament. Some of the ministers were present to
defend it if necessary, and the members were desired to
make objections to it, if they had any. None appear to have
been stated at this time, and a day was fixed for taking the
votes.
These proceedings on the part of the Eeformed were
contrary to the previous stipulations, in terms of which the
whole subject of religion was to be submitted to the king
and queen by commissioners to be chosen at the conven-
tion. But the conduct of the primate and other bishops was
also deserving of censure. They were probably right in
attending parliament, notwithstanding the doubts as to its
lawfulness, but, being there, they were bound to defend to
the utmost the faith which they professed, and the institutions
which It was their solemn duty to maintain. It might not be
easy for them to determine what precise line of conduct they
should adopt, but under no circumstances could their silence
be justified. It encouraged their enemies, and entirely dis-
heartened their friends among the laity. The excuse has
been made, that it was unsafe to provoke by opposition a
party already irritated by past wrongs, and now forming a
triumphant majority. It has even been said that the primate
was threatened with death by his own brother, the Duke of
Chatel-herault ; but this statement is erroneous, and, however
violent the language of some of the preachers may have
been, it does not appear that the lives of the clergy were then
in danger. Even had it been otherwise, this was not the
time for caution or timidity. Those who felt no hesitation in
putting their fellow Christians to death for not believing as
they themselves did, should have been prepared to peril their
own lives in defence of their faith. It is to be feared that the
bishops' chief anxiety was for the restitution of their seques-
trated estates, and that they had no adequate conception of
the important nature of the change in religious belief which
was the subject of discussion.
On the seventeenth of August, it was put to the vote in
parliament whether the new confession should thenceforth be
the established creed of the Scottish kingdom. It was again
86 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Chap. XXXIL
read over, one article after another. Now at last the primate,
and the Bishops of Dunkeld and Dunblane, made some op-
position. They do not seem, however, to have argued against
the doctrines of the confession. The Earl Marischal thus
spoke : '' It is long since I have had some favour unto the
truth, and since that I have had a suspicion of the Papistical
religion ; but, I praise my God, this day has fully resolved me
in the one and the other. For seeing that my lords the
bishops, who for their learning can, and for the zeal that they
should bear to the verity, would, as I suppose, gainsay any-
thing that directly impugns the verity of God; seeing, I
say, my lords the bishops here present speak nothing to the
contrary of the doctrine proponed, I cannot but hold it to be
the very truth of God, and the contrary to be deceivable
doctrine. And therefore, so far as in me lieth, I approve the
one and condemn the other : and do further ask of God that
not only I, but also all my posterity, may enjoy the comfort of
the doctrine that this day our ears have heard. And jet
more, I must vote, as it were by way of protestation, that if
any persons ecclesiastical shall after this oppose themselves to
this our confession, they have no place or credit, considering
that they having long advisement and full knowledge of this
our confession, none is now found, in lawful, free, and quiet
parliameilt, to oppose themselves to that which we profess.
And therefore, if any of this generation pretend to do it after
this, I protest he be repute rather one that loveth his own
commodity and the glory of the world, than the truth of
God and the salvation of men's souls." Besides the three
bishops who have been mentioned, the Abbot of Kilwinning
voted against the confession. Of the temporal peers, the
Earls of Atholl, Crawford, Caithness, Cassillis, and Eglinton,
and the Lords Home and Gray, had refused to attend. The
Lords Somerville and Borthwick opposed the formulary,
giving as their reason, " We will believe as our fathers be-
lieved." All the other members of the three estates supported
the confession, and it received the formal sanction of the
parliament. 1
^ Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 525-534. Knox, vol. ii. p.
87-122. Keith, vol; i. p. 311-322 ; vol. iii. p. 4-7. Tytler, vol. vi. p. 175-184.
See also a letter from Lethington to Cecil, dated 18th August, 1560, quoted bv
A.D. 1560.] OF SCOTLAND. g-
On the twenty-fourth of August, three other acts were
passed. By tlie first of these, the authority and jurisdiction
of the Pope within the realm of Scotland were taken away,
and all bishops and other prelates were forbidden to do any-
thing in his name ; by the second, all former acts of parlia-
ment, contrary to God's word, and the Confession of Faith
now ratified, were declared to have no efi-ect in time to come ;
and by the third, on the preamble that the sacraments of
Baptism and the Body and Blood of Christ had been con-upted
by the Churcli of Rome, and that, notwithstanding the refor-
mation already made, there were some who persevered in their
wicked idolatry, saying mass and baptizing in secret places
according to the Roman ritual, it was ordained that no one, in
time to come, should administer the sacraments, openly or
secretly, except those who were admitted, and had power to
that efi'ect, and all persons were forbidden to say or hear mass,
under pain of confiscation of tbeir goods and personal punish-
ment at the discretion of the judge for the first off'ence,
banishment from the kingdom for the second, and death for
the third.
In terms of one of the articles of the treaty, several prelates
supplicated the parliament to restore their sequestrated estates.
Their petitions received no answer till the last day of the
session, and were then rejected, on the pretence that no one
appeared to support them. An express enactment was even
made, by which all rights to tithes, granted subsequently to
the sixth of March, 1559, by the Archbishops of St. Andrews
and Glasgow, the Bishops of Murray, Dunkeld, and Dunblane,
the Abbots of Dunfermline and Crossraguel, the Priors of
Dr. Lorimer, Scottish Reformation, p. 24G. Knox mentions that the only
temporal peers who opposed the confession were the Earl of Atholl, and the
Lords Somerville and Borthwick. Randolph, the English envoy, states in a
letter to Cecil, as quoted by Mr. Tytler, that the lords who opposed it were the
Earls of Cassillis and Caithness, In relating the proceedings of the parliament,
I have chiefly relied on the authority of a letter sent by the primate to the
Archbishop of Glasgow on the day after the vote was taken, which was preserved
among the archives of the Scots College at Paris, and is printed by Keith.
Archbishop Hamilton could hardly be mistaken, and had no motive to give a
wrong account to his brother-prelate. The primate mentions, in the commence-
ment of his letter, that he writes, more for the sake of friendship, than that he
had any matter of importance to communicate. This remark shews how little
weight he attached to the pariiamentary sanction of the new confession.
88 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [CnAp. XXXII.
Whithorn and Pluscardine, and certain other of the chief
opponents of the Congregation, were declared to be of no
avail. On the twenty-fourth of August the parliament rose.^
Such were the acts concerning religion passed by the con-
vention of estates which met at Edinburgh, in August, 1560.
By these statutes, the parties then possessing the temporal
authority in Scotland set up a new rule of faith ; threw off
the supremacy of the Roman see ; abolished the offices and
ceremonies formerly used at Baptism and the Eucharist ; and
forbade the celebration of the sacraments themselves by the
clergy of the Church. Nothing was yet said regarding the
mode by which lawful ministers were to be admitted, or the
source whence their authority was to be derived ; and, so far
as the mere words of the statutes went, the hierarchy, though
bound to adopt a new creed, and forbidden to obey the Pope,
or to minister the sacraments according to the ancient ritual,
might still have been supposed to be the only body entitled
to exercise ecclesiastical jurisdiction in the kingdom.
* Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. pp. 534, 535. Knox, vol. ii.
p. 123-125. Keith, vol. i. p. 322-326 ; vol. iii. p. 7-11. It is stated by Tytlerand
others that the parliament rose on the twenty-seventh of Aogust. The twenty-
fonrth of that month is the day given by Thomas Archibald, in a letter to the
Archbishop of Glasgow, written from Edinburgh on the twenty-eighth of August ;
Bee Keith, vol, iii. p. 8.
A.D. 1560.] OF SCOTLAND. 89
CHAPTEE XXXIIL
FROM THE PAELIAMENT OF AUGUST, 1560, TO THE RETURN OF QUEEN
MARY TO SCOTLAND, IN AUGUST, 1561.
The Confession of Faith— The compilers of the Confession—
The Booh of Discipline — The Booh of Common Order —
The Superintendents— First General Assembly— Proposed
alteration in the law of Marriage — Convention of the
Estates — Aberdeen clergy summoned before the Estates —
Act for demolishing abbey-churches and cloisters — Com-
missioners sent by the Estates, and by the Boman Catholic
nobles, to Queen Mary—Beturn of Mary to Scotland.
The Confession of Faith, ratified and approved by the parlia-
ment of August, 1560, consisted of twenty-five chapters.
Beginning with the belief in One God, Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost, it set forth the Creation of man ; his Fall, whereby
the image of his Maker was utterly defaced ; the promise of a
Saviour ; the continuance of the Church from Adam to the
coming of the Messiah ; the Incarnation of Christ, very God
and very man, united in one person — condemning the heresies
of Arius, Marcion, Eutyches, Nestorius, and all others who
deny the eternity of his Godhead, or the verity of his human
nature ; his Passion, Death, and Burial ; his Descent into
hell ; his Eesurrection and Ascension ,• his Session at the right
hand of God, from which He shall visibly return at the Judg-
ment of the last day ; and faith in the Holy Ghost, who is
equal with the Father and the Son.
After explaining whence good works proceed, and in what
they consist, it defined the Church to be a company of men,
chosen of God, who rightly worship and embrace Him by
true faith in Christ Jesus, its only Head ; Catholic, as con-
taining the elect of all ages, the Communion of Saints, out of
which there is neither life nor eternal felicity; invisible,
known only to God, who alone knows whom He has chosen.
The notes whereby the true Church is known from the false
one are neither antiquity, usurped title, lineal descent, place
90 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIII.
appointed, nor multitude of men approving an error ; but,
first, the true preaching of the word ; secondly, the right ad-
ministration of the sacraments ; and, thirdly, ecclesiastical
discipline, uprightly ministered. When controversy arises as
to the meaning of any part of Scripture, or for the reformation
of any abuse in the Church of God, regard should not so much
be given to what men have before said or done, as to what the
Holy Ghost uniformly speaks in the Scriptures, and what
Christ Himself did and commanded to be done. The decrees
of General Councils are not to be received without due exa-
mination. Such councils were convened, not to make any
perpetual law or new articles of belief, but partly for the con-
futation of heresies, and partly for the good policy and order
of the Church. But no policy, or order in ceremonies, can be
appointed for all times and places ; for as ceremonies, such as
men have devised, are but temporal, so they may and ought
to be changed when they foster superstition, rather than con-
duce to edification.
The sacraments were next defined. There are only two
under the Gospel, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord.
They are utterly to be condemned who affirm that the sacra-
ments are nothing but naked and bare signs. By Baptism
we are ingrafted into Christ Jesus, to be made partakers of his
righteousness, by which our sins are covered and remitted ;
and in the Supper, rightly used, Christ is so joined with us,
that He becomes the very nourishment and food of our souls.
To the right administration of the sacraments two things are
necessary ; first, that they be ministered by lawful ministers,
who are only those that are appointed to the preaching of the
word, or into whose mouths God has put some sermon of
exhortation, they being lawfully chosen thereto by some
Church ; secondly, that they be ministered in such elements,
and in such sort, as God has appointed. Baptism appertain-
eth to the infants of the faithful, as well as to those who are
of age and discretion ; but the Supper of the Lord to those
only who, being of the household of faith, can try and exa-
mine themselves, as well in their faith, as in their duty to-
wards their neighbours.
The power of the Civil Magistrate is declared to be God's
ordinance. Such persons as are placed in authority are to be
A.D. 1560.] OF SCOTLAND.
91
loved, honoured, feared, and held in most reverent estimation,
as being God's vicegerents, to whom also chiefly pertain the
reformation and purgation of religion. ^
The compilers of the Confession were Knox, Winram,
Spottiswood, Willock, Row, and John Douglas, rector of the
University of St. Andrews. Winram was not concerned only
in drawing it up : to him and to Maitland of Lethington
commission was given, apparently by some of the temporal
lords, to revise it before publication. They modified many
words and sentences, and, in particular, recommended the
leaving out of a chapter on the obedience and disobedience
of subjects towards their magistrates. It is probably allow-
able to trace in the language and character of the formulary
the influence of the conciliatory opinions of Winram j and, if
the conjecture formerly mentioned, as to the share which that
divine had in preparing the catechism agreed to in the council
of 1552, be correct, it is singular that the statements of doctrine
put forth both by the Eoman Catholic and by the Reformed
Church should have been composed or modified by the same
mdividual. It was no doubt owing to the recommendation of
Lethington and Winram that the chapter in the Confession on
the Civil Magistrate was drawn up in the language finally
adopted— language which gives no encouragement to the poli-
tical theories of the school of Knox and Goodman.^
After the dissolution of parliament, the same five persons
who had been entrusted by the Protestants with preparing a
confession of their doctrine were also empowered to draw up
a statement of the discipline which they proposed to establish.
A draft of such a work had been prepared before the parlia-
ment met, and it was now revised and completed. The
volume was submitted to a convention of the nobility, which
met at Edinburgh in January, 1561, and various opinions
were expressed regarding it. Some approved of it, and were
desirous that it should receive the authority of law ; others,
who feared the censures which their own evil lives might
^ See Acts of the ParliamentsV Scotland, vol. ii. p. 526-534, and Knox vol
ii. p. 95-120.
2 Knox, vol. ii. p. 128. Letter, Randolph to Cecil, dated 7th September,
1560, as quoted by Mr. Tytler, vol. vi. p. 183, and by Dr. Lorimer, Scottish
Reformation, p. 245. See also Calendar of State Papers relating to Scotland,
vol. i. p. 162.
92 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIII.
provoke, or who had partaken largely in the spoils of the
Church, opposed it altogether, styling it in mockery a devout
imagination. It received the support, however, of many of
the nobility, and, though not formally sanctioned by the con-
vention, was subscribed on the twenty-seventh of January
by the Duke of Chatel-herault, his son the Earl of Arran, the
Earl Marischal, the Earls of Argyll, Glencairn, Monteith,
Morton, and Rothes, the Lords Tester, Boyd, Ochiltree, and
Lindsay, the Bishop of Galloway, the Prior of St. Andrews,
the Commendator of Culross, the Dean of Murray, and others.
They added a proviso to their subscriptions, that the bishops,
abbots, priors, and other prelates and beneficed persons who
had joined the Congregation, should enjoy their ecclesiastical
revenues during their lifetime, under the burden of sustaining
the ministers of the word and sacraments. ^
The Book of Discipline was divided into nine heads.
The first head declared it necessary that the Gospel should
be truly and openly preached, and that all doctrine repugnant
thereto should be utterly suppressed. By the Gospel, it was
added, is meant not only the New, but the Old Testament ;
and by the contrary doctrine are understood all laws, counsels,
or constitutions, imposed on the consciences of men, without
the express command of God's word, among which are speci-
fied vows of chastity, superstitious observance of fasting days,
prayer for the dead, and keeping holy-days commanded by
man, such as the feasts, as they are styled, of Apostles, Martyrs,
Virgins, of Christmas, Circumcision, Epiphany, the Purifica-
tion, and other feasts of our Lady.
The second head declared that there were only two sacra-
ments, Baptism and the Holy Supper of the Lord. In Baptism
the element of water alone is to be used, and all additions to
it are forbidden. At the Supper, sitting at a table is declared
to be most convenient, because our Lord Himself sat with his
disciples. The error of the Papists in defrauding the people
of the cup is condemned. The minister is to break the bread,
and distribute it to those next to him, commanding the rest,
every one with reverence and sobriety, to break with each
other. During this action, some comfortable places of Scrip-
^ Knox, vol. ii. p. 128-130.
A.D. 1560.] OF SCOTLAND. 93
ture, bringing to mind the death of Christ, are to be read at
the discretion of the minister.
The third head required the utter suppression of idolatry,
and all the monuments thereof, such as abbeys, monkeries,
friaries, nunneries, chapels, chantries, cathedral churches,
canonries, and colleges, other than those then used as parish
churches or schools, and excepting also the palaces, mansions,
and dwelling places adjacent thereto, with the gardens and
orchards.
The fourth head related to Ministers and their lawful
election. No one ought to preach or administer the sacra-
ments, till he is regularly called to the office. Ordinary
vocation consists in Election, Examination, and Admission.
It appertaineth to the people and to every several congregation
to elect their own minister. Examination is to be in public,
by the ministers and elders of the Church. Admission is also
to be public. A sermon is to be preached by some specified
•minister touching the duties of the office, and an exhortation
is to be given, both to the minister to be admitted and to the
people. It is declared that no other ceremony is necessary
besides the approbation of the people, and declaration of the
chief minister that the person there presented is appointed to
serve his particular church ; for albeit the Apostles used the
imposition of hands, yet, as the miracle has ceased, the using
of the ceremony is judged not to be necessaiy. In those
churches where no ministers can be had. Readers are to be
provided, able to read distinctly the Common Prayers and
Scriptures, who afterwards, if duly qualified, may be raised to
the degree of ministers.
The fifth head related to the provision for the ministers, and
the distribution of the rents and possessions of the Church.
These provisions were to vary according to the rank and
condition of the persons on whom they were bestowed ; larger
sums being required for the superintendents than for other
ministers, and for ministers than for readers, the readers getting
an increase of their salaries when they were able to act as
exhorters. The Exhorters were recognised as a sort of middle
order between the common reader and the minister. It
was further declared that, if all the ministers were appointed
to fixed places, the greatest part of the realm would be desti-
94 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIIL
tute of doctrine. It was therefore thought expedient for that
time, that, from the whole number of godly and learned men,
so many should be selected, with power to plant and erect
churches, and to appoint ministers within the bounds of their
several jurisdictions. The districts and places of residence
proposed to be assigned to the superintendents were mentioned.
The Superintendent of Orkney was to reside at Kirkwall, and
to have for his diocese Orkney, Zetland, Caithness, and Strath-
naver. The Superintendent of Eoss was to reside at Canonry
of Eoss, and to have for his diocese Eoss, Sutherland, Murray,
and the isles of Skye and Lewis. The diocese of the Superin-
tendent of Argyll was to comprehend Argyll, Kintyre, Lorn,
Lochaber, the South Isles, Arran, and Bute, and he was to
reside in Argyll. The Superintendent of Aberdeen was to
reside at Old Aberdeen, and to have for his diocese the counties
of Aberdeen and Banff. The Superintendent of Brechin,
whose residence was to be in that city, was to have Angus
and Mearns for his diocese. The Superintendent of St.-
Andrews, who was to reside in that city, was to have for his
diocese the sheriffdoms of Fife and Perth, and Fothric as far as
Stirling. The Superintendent of Edinburgh was to reside in
that city, and to have for his diocese the Lothians, Merse, Lau-
derdale, Wedale, and the sheriffdom of Stirling to the south
of the Forth. The Superintendent of Jedburgh was to reside
in that town, and to have for his diocese Teviotdale, Tweed-
dale, Liddisdale, and Ettrick Forest. The Superintendent of
Glasgow was to reside in that city, and to have for his diocese
Clydesdale, Eenfrew, Monteith, Lennox, Kyle, and Cunning-
ham. The Superintendent of Dumfries, whose residence was
to be in that town, was to have for his diocese Galloway,
Carrick, Nithsdale, Annandale, and the other dales in the West.
If the superintendent were negligent of his duties, he was to
be deprived, without respect to his person or office. Eules
were laid down for the election of superintendents, similar to
those established in the case of ministers. Other ceremonies
than examination, approbation of the ministers and superin-
tendents, and the public consent of the elders and people,
were not allowed.
Under the same head, provision was made for education.
Every church situated in a town of any size was to have a
^■^- ■5'50-] OF SCOTLAND. ok
Schoolmaster attached to it ; in other places, the reader or
mimstei- was to instruct the youth in the catechism contained
m the Book of Common Order. In every large town, especially
where a superintendent resided, there was to be a college for
teachmg the arts and languages. The universities were to be
contmued as before at St. Andrews, Glasgow, and Aberdeen,
and the course of study there was pointed out.
The sixth head related to the rents and patrimony of the
Church, from which it was declared that the ministers, the
schools, and the poor, should be supported.
Tlie seventh head referred to Ecclesiastical Discipline
especially to the rules established in regard to Excommuni-
cation.
The eighth head related to the election of Elders and
Deacons. These office-bearers were to be chosen yearly in
each congregation. The elders were to assist the minister in
all the public affairs of the Church, in judging of causes, and
m admomshing licentious livers. They were also to take
heed to the life, manners, diligence, and study of the minister
himself, to admonish and correct him, and, where necessary
with consent of the Church and superintendent, to depose
him. The office of the deacons was to receive the rents, and
gather the alms of the Church, and to keep and distribute
them as should be appointed. They were also to assist in
judgment with the ministers and elders, and might be admitted
to read publicly, if required, and found fit for tluat duty The
elders and deacons were to receive no stipend, because their
office was only from year to year, and because their services
did not prevent them from attending to their own private
business.
The ninth head related to the Policy of tlie Churcli. It
was declared that there were two sorts of Policy, one abso-
lutely necessary, as that the word be truly preached, the
sacraments rightly administered, common prayers publicly
made, children and ignorant persons instructed in the chief
points of religion, and offenders corrected and punished with
out which things there is not even the face of a Visible
Church; the other, profitable but not necessary, as, that
Psalms should be sung, that certain places of the Scripture
should be read when there is no sermon, and that the Church
96 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIIL
should assemble on this or that number of days during the
week. In matters of the latter sort, every particular Church
was allowed to prescribe its own rules. It was thought expe-
dient that in great towns there should be either Sermon or
Common Prayer every day, with some exercise of reading the
Scriptures. On the days when there was a public sermon, it
was neither required nor greatly approved that the Common
Prayers should be used, lest the people should be fostered in
superstition who came to the Prayers as they came to Mass,
or else occasion be given to suppose that those were no prayers
which were made before and after the sermon. In all towns
the Sunday was to be regularly kept, the word being preached,
the sacraments administered, and marriage solemnized, in the
forenoon, and the cliildren taught the catechism in the after-
noon. Baptism might be administered whenever the word was
preached. Four times a yfear was thought sufficient for the
administration of the Lord's Table, in which the superstition
of seasons, such as Easter, was to be avoided, and none were
to be admitted to that mystery who could not say the Lord's
Prayer, the Belief, and the Ten Commandments.
It was thought expedient that in all towns, where there
were schools and learned men, one day every week should be
appointed for the exercise which St. Paul calls Prophesying.
These exercises were declared to be most necessary at that
time for the Church of God in Scotland, and rules were laid
down for their proper and becoming observance. Marriage,
as a general rule, was to be solemnized publicly on Sundays
before sermon, the banns having previously been duly pro-
claimed. Marriage was only to be dissolved on account of
adultery ; and the Civil Magistrate was exhorted to inflict on
adulterers the punishment of death. To prevent superstition,
it was judged best that neither singing nor reading should be
allowed at Burials. Churches were ordered to be kept in
proper repair, and each was to be provided with a bell to sum-
mon the people together, a pulpit, a basin for baptism, and
tables for the ministration of the Lord's Supper. It was de-
clared that papistical priests have neither power nor authority
to minister the sacraments of Christ, because that in their
mouth is not the sermon of exhortation ; and it is neither the
clipping of crowns, the crossing of fingers, the blowing of the
A.D. 1560.] OF SCOTLAND. 97
dumb dogs, called the bishops, neither yet the laying on of
their hands, which maketh true ministers of Christ Jesus, but
the Spirit of God, first inwardly moving the heart to seek
God's glory and the good of the Church, and thereafter the
nomination of the people, the examination of the learned, and
public admission, as before mentioned. ^
The Book of Discipline has several references to the
mode of worship observed at that time among the Reformed
in Scotland, and makes special mention of the Book of Com-
mon Order, called the Order of Geneva. In the beginning of
the religious movement, and while the contest between the
queen-regent and the Congregation was yet undecided, the
English Book of Common Prayer was used by many of the
Scottish Protestants. But, when the struggle was over, and
the Reformed had acquired ascendency, the preference was
naturally given to a formulary much more in accordance with
the opinions and tastes of their leaders, and the English Order
was gradually superseded by that of Geneva. The latter was
originally compiled for the use of the English congregation at
Geneva, while Knox was their minister.
The Book of Common Order contained a form of prayer
for the ordinary assemblies of the congregation. It began
with a Confession of Sins, said by the minister alone, but the
people were enjoined to follow in their hearts the tenor of his
words. The people then sung a psalm to a plain tune, after
which the minister, having first prayed for the assistance of
God's Holy Spirit in words of his own selection, proceeded to
the sermon. When the sermon was over, the minister said
the appointed prayer for the whole state of Christ's Church,
concluding with the Lord's Prayer. A short prayer followed
for continuance and increase in faith, and after it the Apostles'
Creed was repeated. The people then sung another^psalm,
and the minister pronounced a short blessing, either in the
form contained in the sixth chapter of tlie Book of Numbers,
or in that in the thirteenth chapter of the Second Epistle of
St. Paul to the Corinthians, the first person plural being sub-
stituted for the second in the words of blessing. Forms were
also prescribed for the administration of the sacraments.
Baptism was forbidden to be administered by women, or in
1 Knox, vol. ii. p. 181-260. Spottiswood, vol. i. p. 331-372.
VOL. II.] o
98 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. XXXIII.
private. After an exhortation by the minister, the father or
godfather was ordered to rehearse the Apostles' Creed, the
meaning of which was explained by the minister. A
prayer followed, concluding with the Lord's Prayer. The
name of the child was then asked, and baptism was ad-
ministered by sprinkling water on its forehead, in the Name
of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The ser-
vice was finished by the minister giving thanks to God. In
the form of administering the Lord's Supper, the minister first
recited St. Paul's account of its institution, from the First
Epistle to the Corinthians. He then proceeded to an exhorta-
tion on the subject of the sacrament, after which he came down
from the pulpit, and seated himself at the table with the con-
gregation. He next took bread, and gave thanks in the form
prescribed ; and this done, he broke the bread, and delivered
it to the people, who distributed and divided it among them-
selves : and so also in regard to the cup. During this time,
certain places of the Scripture, setting forth the death of
Christ, were ordered to be read. A prayer of thanksgiving
was then said by the minister ; the people sung the hundred-
and-third psalm ; and one of the benedictions before-mentioned
was recited.
A form of Marriage was also given, and a prayer to be said
at the Visitation of the Sick. The Book concluded with some
instructions on the order of Ecclesiastical Discipline.
The systems of doctrine and church government laid down
in the Confession of Faith and the Book of Discipline are
sufficiently distinct, and require little illustration. The Scot-
tish reformers adopted no doctrines, except what they held to
be revealed in the Scriptures ; and in the interpretation of the
Scriptures they rejected all authority whatever, except the text
of the Bible itself, neither the ancient nor the existing Church
being appealed to as a witness or intei-preter of the faith. The
Church itself was held to exist, not in virtue of any life of its
own, derived from its Lord through the Apostles, but in con-
sequence of the belief of its members in the system of doctrine
revealed in the Scriptures. The visible Church was not tied
down to any one rule of divine polity. Government and discip-
line in themselves were necessary, but no particular form was
prescribed. As to this the Congregation could judge what was
A.D. 1560.] OF SCOTLAND. 99
best. As all religious truth was derived from the Scriptures,
so all ecclesiastical power proceeded from the people ; aud
from them directly, not from any divine commission or
descent, the office-bearers of the Church derived tlieir autho-
rity. Ordination of ministers by the laying on of hands was
rejected as needless and superstitious.
As the primitive doctrine of the Christian ministry was thus
utterly thrown aside, so also the old ritual in which the Church
had commemorated the life and actions of our Saviour was
renounced. There was no distinction of seasons; even the
great feast of Easter was no longer observed. The Sunday
alone remained, and was ordered to be kept as a day of religi-
ous worship ; but it does not clearly appear in what light it
was viewed at the commencement of the Eeformation, and at
the tim.e of its first establishment by the civil power. At the
date of the Confession of Faith and the Book of Discipline, it
was still known by its ancient name, and it is probable that
the gradual adoption of the new title of Sabbath marked a
change in the opinion which was taking place regarding it.
Both in faith and in ritual, the change was a mixture of
good and evil. The papal supremacy, and, with it, many
erroneous opinions and superstitions, usages and ceremonies,
were abolished ; the Bible was made freely accessible ; and
the common prayers were offered in a language understood by
the people. But, on the other hand, in matters of doctrine,
the ancient truth was obscured or disregarded in various ways ;
and, in ritual, the daily service and the frequent communion,
the hallowed buildings, the return of fast and festival, the
ordered hierarchy, and the consecrated priesthood, found no
place.
It has been contended by some writers that, in two impor-
tant points, tlie difference between the old and the new system
was more apparent than real — that the episcopal government of
the Church was kept up in the persons of the superintendents,
and that the liturgical offices were continued under another
form. This opinion seems to be erroneous. The superin-
tendent scheme was never fully carried out, and doubts have
been raised whether it was regarded by its promoters as more
than a temporary arrangement ; but, had it been otherwise, it
bore only a faint external resemblance to the hierarchy. Un-
100 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIII.
ordained themselves, the superintendents could not ordain
others ; appointed by the ministers and people, and liable to
be deposed by them, they neither possessed nor claimed dis-
tinct independent jurisdiction. So also it was in regard to
liturgical forms. Except in name, the new service bore little
resemblance to the old. There was no distinction of morning
or evening, of day or season ; no alternation of suffrage and
response, psalm, and hymn, and lesson ; no absolution, or
consecration, or authoritative blessing: even the form, such
as it was, partook more of the character of a directory than of
a liturgy. The minister was not restricted to the words of
the book before him, but was expressly allowed to substitute
his own language where the alteration might seem desirable.
Such were the changes in belief, and discipline, and ritual,
which marked the commencement of the Eeformation. The
practical bearings of those changes on the condition of the
Scottish people will be learned from the course of events which
followed.
On the twentieth day of December, 1560, the ministers and
commissioners of the Reformed communion met at Edinburgh.
This meeting is generally referred to as the first General
Assembly. A considerable number of lay commissioners
appeared ; of the superintendents, Erskine alone was present ;
the only persons bearing the name of ministers were Knox,
Goodman, Row, Lindsay, Harlaw, and Christison.
On the twenty-first of December, two resolutions were
agreed to. By tlie first, the people of the parish of Restalrig
were ordered to resort to Leith for the ministry of the word
and sacraments, and the church of Restalrig was appointed to
be cast down and utterly destroyed, as a monument of idolatry.
Restalrig was a collegiate church for secular priests, entirely
unconnected with the monastic orders ; and no reason can be
given for its demolition which would not equally apply to any
parish church in the kingdom. It was perhaps singled out on
this occasion, because its dean, John Sinclair, was one of the
ablest opponents of the Reformation. The second resolution
declared that, by the law of God, marriage might be solem-
nized between parties being of tlie second, third, and fourth
degrees of consanguinity or affinity, and all others not ex-
pressly forbidden by the Scriptures j and the estates were
A.D. 1560.] OF SCOTLAND. 101
requested to interpose their authority to this ordinance. Of the
many practical abuses prevalent in the Scottish Church at the
time of the Reformation, none was attended with worse results
to the morals of the people than the enforcement of the rules
of the canon law regarding consanguinity and affinity in mar-
riage, and the liability of marriages contracted within the
forbidden degrees to be dissolved as absolutely null. This
rule, strict in appearance, led in reality to the most shameful
laxity, and to an almost unlimited freedom of divorce to those
who were able to afford the expense of an action in the con-
sistorial court. The decree of the assembly of 1560, and the
rule regarding divorce contained in the Book of Discipline,
were the first steps towards the restoration of .greater domestic
purity.
On the twenty-seventh of December, it was agreed to peti-
tion parliament to punish as idolaters certain persons who
celebrated mass, or were present at its celebration. The indi-
viduals named resided in Nithsdale, Galloway, Kyle, Carrick,
Cunningham, Ettrick Forest, East Lothian, and Fife ; and
among them were the Earls of Eglinton and Cassillis, the
Abbot of Crossraguel, and the Prior of Whithorn. It is stated
that mass was openly said in the parish churches of Maybole,
Girvan, Kirk-Oswald, and Dailly.
The assembly was adjourned to the fifteenth of January, at
which time parliament was to meet.^
On the fifteenth of January, 1561, a convention of the
estates, or at least of the nobility, met at Edinburgh, and it
is probable that the ministers and commissioners of the Con-
gregation assembled at the same time, though no record of
their meeting has been preserved. It was to this convention,
as already mentioned, that the Book of Discipline was pre-
sented. Several members of the Roman Chui'ch were sum-
moned to appear before the estates, four from the diocese of
Aberdeen being particularly specified — Alexander Anderson,
Principal of the King's College, John Leslie, Official of the
diocese, Patrick Myrton, Treasurer, and James Strachan, one
of the canons of the cathedral. These divines were ques-
tioned as to their faith, especially in regard to the mass,
by Knox, Willock, and Goodman. According to Leslie's
^ Book of the Universal Kirk, Peterkin's ed. p. 1-5. Keith, vol. iii. p. 25-31.
Vj2 ECX'LESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chai'. XXXIII.
narrative^ Anderson discoursed with such learning on the sac-
rifice of the altar, that the Catholics were confirmed in their
opinions, and the Protestants were unable to gainsay him.
Knox, on the other hand, mentions that Anderson denied a pro-
pitiatory sacrifice in the mass, affirming that there was one of
commemoration only, but was unable to defend even the latter
proposition, while LesHe declined to offer any argument
whatever. Knox not only claims the advantage in contro-
versy, but, as usual, ridicules the personal character of his
opponents. With more reason, he appeals to this conference
as a proof that the Reformed, although they now had the as-
cendency in the state, were not unwilling to listen to the
arguments of their adversaries.^
Another assembly of the Reformed met within the Tolbootli
at Edinburgh, on the twenty-seventh of May. The names of
the members present are not mentioned. The record bears
that a complaint was laid before the privy council, and the
convention of the estates, touching the suppression of idolatry
and other points. The document bore, that the pestilent
generation of the Roman Antichrist were endeavouring anew
to erect their idolatry ; and it craved that such attempts should
be repressed, otherwise the brethren would be obliged to take
the sword themselves for that purpose. The lords of the
council made an act agi-eeing to their request. ^
In the convention of the estates which met in May, an act
was passed for demolishing such abbey churches and cloisters
as yet remained. Its execution was intrusted, in the West,
to the Earls of Arran^ Argyll, and Glencairn ; in the North,
to the Prior of St. Andrews ; and, in other parts of the king-
dom, to various nobles. Paisley was burned, its commen-
dator, the Archbishop of St. Andrews, escaping with diffi-
culty ; and Failford, Kilwinning, and Crossraguel, were
wholly or partially demolished. Spottiswood mentions that,
under colour of this act, a miserable devastation ensued of all
churches without distinction, the multitude readily following
the example which had been given them by persons in au-
1 Leslie, p. 530. Knox, vol. ii. p. 138-142. Keith, vol. iii. p. 31-33.
Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 63.
- Book of the LTniversal Kirk, pp. 5, C. Knox, vol. ii. p. 161-164. Keith,
vol. iii. p. 33-36.
A.D. 1561.] OP SCOTLAND. 103
thority. The buildings themselves were destroyed ; their
whole furniture, the liolj vessels, and bells, and whatever
else could be made gain of, were sold ; books and registers
were burned ; and even the graves of the dead did not escape
violation. 1 It was probably at this time that St. Andrews,
and the other churches in the midland counties, which had
formerly escaped, or only been partially injured, were entirely
ruined. The act could not be strictly enforced in the remote
provinces of the North and West, where some of tlie great
nobles yet maintained the ancient ritual.
During all these events, the members of the hierarchy seem
to have abstained from any open assertion of their authority.
The only proper ecclesiastical act, mentioned at this time, is
the nomination of William Chisholm, as coadjutor and suc-
cessor to his uncle of the same name in the see of Dunblane.
The brief of Pope Pius IV., by which the appointment took
place, was dated on the second of June, 1561.^
After the dissolution of the parliament of August, 1560, Sir
James Sandilands, Prior of the Knights of St. John, was sent
to France, to give an account of what had been transacted to
the King and Queen of the Scots. His reception was such as
was probably anticipated. The Cardinal of Lorraine ex-
pressed the feeling of the French court in a conversation with
the English ambassador, Throckmorton. '' I will tell you
frankly," he said, '' the Scots, the king's subjects, do perform
no part of their duties ; the king and the queen have the name
of their sovereigns, and your mistress hath the effect and the
obedience. They would bring the realm to a republic, and
say in their words, they are the king's subjects." The Prior
of St. John was received personally with courtesy, but Francis
and Mary refused to ratify the treaty of Edinburgh.
The death of Francis, in the beginning of December, ma-
terially altered the position of matters in Scotland. The
interests of the widowed queen were no longer necessarily
bound up with those of France, and there was reason to be-
^ Buchanan, vol. i. p. 328. Knox, vol. ii. pp. 167, 168. Spottiswood, vol. i.
pp. 372, 373. Spottiswood is evidently mistaken in ascribing this act to the
same convention to which the Book, of Discipline was submitted — that is, the
convention of January, 1561. Knox states that the act was passed by the privy
counciL
2 Keith's Catalogue, p. 180.
104 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIIL
lieve that many who had opposed her mother^ and courted the
English alliance from the dread of French supremacy, would
now heartily return to their allegiance. This opinion was
fondly cherished by Mary herself. In the month of February,
commissioners arrived in Scotland, intrusted with a conciliatory
message from the queen to the estates, assuring them of her
forgiveness for all that was past, and announcing her speedy
return. They were also the bearers of a commission to the
Duke of Chatel-herault, the Primate, the Earls of Atholl,
Huntly, Argyll, and Bothwell, and the Prior of St. Andrews,
containing authority to summon a parliament in the queen's
name.
At the meeting of the convention in January, the Prior of
St. Andrews had received instructions to repair to the queen,
and tender to her their duty and allegiance. He passed
through England, and on the way had an interview with
Elizabeth and Cecil. John Leslie, Official of Aberdeen, left
Scotland about the same time, intrusted with a message to the
queen from the- Earls of Huntly, Atholl, Crawford, and Suther-
land, the Bishops of Murray and Eoss, and other chief persons
of the nobility and clergy, opposed to the ruling party in the
convention. Leslie anticipated the Prior in obtaining an
interview with Mary. On the fourteenth of April, he was
admitted to her presence at Vitry, in Champagne. On the
part of Huntly and his associates, he warned her to beware of
the Prior of St. Andrews, advising her to detain him in France
till after her arrival in Scotland ; at all events that she herself
should knd at Aberdeen, where her faithful subjects in the
North would meet her with an army of twenty thousand men,
and conduct her to Edinburgh. The queen received Leslie
kindly, but refused to accede to liis proposals. She was
anxious to secure the obedience of all her subjects, and was
determined not to be the mere sovereign of a party. She
also suspected the fidelity of Huntly, knowing the doubtful
policy which he had pursued during the contest between her
mother and the Congregation. On the following day, the Prior
of St. Andrews met her at St. Dizier. He was welcomed by
his sister with great affection, and soon admitted to her con-
fidence, but she still peremptorily refused to ratify the treaty
of Edinburgh. Mary's trust was ill repaid. Her designs
^•^- 1^61.] OF SCOTLAN]). iQr^
were betrayed by the Prior to Elizabeth, and, when preparing
to sail for Scotland she applied to the English queen for a
passport, her request was refused, and secret preparations were
made to intercept her on the voyage. She embarked at
Calais, and, escaping from the English ships, arrived in safety
at Leith, on the nineteenth of August. ^
' Leslie, p. 531-535. Knox, vol. ii. p. 125-143. Spottiswood, vol. i. p. 328-
331. Keith, vol. ii. p. 1-62. Tytler, vol. vi. p. 191-235. I have followed the
narrative of Leslie himself, in regard to the proceedings connected with his mis-
sion to France. Spottiswood mentions (vol. i. p. 329) that the letter which
he carried was suhscribed by the Archbishop of St. Andrews, and the Bishop of
Aberdeen, as well as by the other peers and prelates named in the text, and
with this, Keith (vol. ii. p. 13), and Tytler (vol. vi. p. 207), agree. The state-
ment may be correct, but I am not aware of any earlier authority for it than that
of Spottiswood,
106 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIV.
CHAPTEE XXXTV.
FROM THE RETURN OF QUEEN MARY TO SCOTLAND, IN AUGUST, 1561, TO
THE REASONING BETWEEN THE ABBOT OF CROSSRAGUEL AND JOHN
KNOX, IN SEPTEMBER, 1662.
Difficulties of Queen Mary — Her prudent government — Her
"inter vieio with Knox — Efforts of the Protestant ministers
to obtain a competent maintenance — John Craig^ minister
at Edinburgh — Controversial discussions between the clergy
and the ministers — Ninian Winzet^ schoolmaster at Lin-
lithgow — His Tractate addressed to the Queen — His eighty-
three questio72S delivered to Knox — He is obliged to leave
Scotland — Reasoning between Quintin Kennedy and John
Knox.
When Maiy Stewart returned to assume in person the
government of her kingdom, she was only in her nineteenth
year. The enthusiastic welcome, which she received from her
subjects on her arrival at Edinburgh, seemed to warrant a
hope that the factions into which Scotland was divided were
to be united in one feeling of attachment to their young
sovereign. A few days, however, showed that any expecta-
tions of this kind were fallacious. Other difficulties in the
queen's position might have been overcome, but one was insur-
mountable. Mary, by education and conviction, was zealously
attached to tlie Church of Rome ; the most numerous and
influential portion of her subjects were determined to maintain
the principles of the Reformation. The first untoward circum-
stance which occurred arose from this difference in religion.
The queen had been accompanied to Scotland by three of
her uncles, princes of the house of Lorraine, by a son of the
Constable Montmorency, and other nobles and gentlemen of
France, and by a Parisian doctor of the Sorbonne, besides her
own ladies and domestics. On the Sunday after her arrival,
being St. Bartholomew's day, preparations were made to cele-
brate mass in the queen's private chapel at Holyrood. This
proceeding was denounced by the more zealous of the
A.D. 1561.] OF SCOTLAND. 107
Keformed. Some said, '^ Shall that idol be suffered again
within the realm T And the Master of Lindsay exclaimed,
" The idolatrous priest shall die the death, according to God's
law." The Prior of St. Andrews, placing himself before the
chapel door, succeeded in preventing violence, and, when the
service was over, got tlie officiating priest conveyed away in
safety. In the afternoon, the Reformed, assembling before
the abbey in great numbers, repeated their threats of vengeance,
and the terrified attendants of the queen began to speak of
returning to France, since their religion was not tolerated in
Scotland.
The privy council having assembled on the following day,
proclamation was made, that the queen was soon to take the
advice of the estates in regard to the differences in religion,
but, in the meantime, that no one should attempt to alter what
was at present established. Farther, all persons were forbidden
to disturb her majesty's domestic servants, or those who had
come from France, on any pretence whatever. The privy
council was at this time composed exclusively of Protestants,
and this act indicated the line of conduct which its leading
members had resolved to adopt — the protection of the Eeformed
religion as established by the convention of the preceding year,
and toleration to the queen and her attendants to worship God
agreeably to the ritual of their Church. According to a fashion
not unusual in Scotland, and which in after times became
very common, the Earl of Arran publicly protested against
the royal proclamation, declaring that the queen's servants
who were guilty of idolatry were no more to be tolerated than
if they were guilty ot murder. This open defiance of authority
encouraged other chief men of the Congregation to resort to
Edinburgh, for the purpose of giving their assistance in the
same cause ; but the queen's measures were so prudent, and
her conduct was so conciliatory, that no outrage took place.
Many even of the Eeformed leaders were won over to submis-
sion. " My lord," said Campbell of Kingzeancleuch, a
zealous Protestant, to the Lord Ochiltree, " You are come and
almost last of all, and I perceive you are yet warm ; but,
when the holy water of the court is sprinkled upon you, you
will become temperate like the rest. I have been here five
days, and at first 1 heard every man say, ' Hang the priest ;'
108 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIV.
but after they have been twice or thrice at the abbey, all their
fervency is past. I think there be some enchantment where-
by men are bewitched." Knox, who relates this, adds, that
the queen's flattering words, ever crying, " Conscience, con-
science, it is a sore thing to constrain the conscience," and the
pretences of her chief supporters among the Eeformed that she
might be won to their opinions, kept the people in quietness.
Alarmed at the turn which affairs were taking, Knox himself
attempted to rouse the multitude to a sense of what he
believed to be their duty. On the following Sunday, he
preached against idolatry ; affirming that one mass was more
fearful to him than the landing of ten thousand armed ene-
mies to suppress religion. Whether by the advice of her
counsellors, or hoping that her persuasions might win the
reformer, as they had gained the nobles, Mary sent for
him, and admitted him to an interview, none being pre-
sent except the Prior of St. Andrews, and two of her ladies.
Knox has left an account of what took place. The queen
charged him with stirring up her subjects against her
mother, and with writing his book against the government of
women. Knox answered that, if to rebuke idolatry was to
stir up subjects against their princes, then he had done wrong.
He defended the doctrine of his book. An Englishman, he
understood, had written against it ; but he thought himself
better able to maintain what was there affirmed, than any ten
in Europe to confute it ; and he added that, if the realm found
no inconvenience from her government, he would be as content
to live under her grace, as St. Paul was to live under Nero.
The queen asked how his doctrine could be from God, seeing
he had taught the people to receive another religion than
that which their princes allowed, although God commands
subjects to obey their princes. Knox answered that, as reli-
gion did not derive its authority from princes, so subjects
were not bound to frame their religion according to the
appetite of their sovereigns. Had it been otherwise, Daniel
and the three Children would have been of the religion of
Nebuchadnezzar and Darius, and the Apostles of that of the
Roman emperors. " But," added the queen, '^ none of these
men raised the sword against their princes." " Madam," said
Knox, " you cannot deny but that they resisted ; for those
A.D. 1561.] OF SCOTLAND. 109
that obey not the commandments which are given in some sort
resist." " But yet," said the queen, " they resisted not by the
sword." " Madam," replied Knox, " God had not given unto
them the power and the means." " Think you," said Mary,
" that subjects, having power, may resist their princes ?" " If
princes," answered Knox, " exceed their bounds, and do
against that for which they should be obeyed, no doubt, they
may be resisted even by power. For there is neither greater
honour nor greater obedience to be given to kings or princes,
than God has commanded to be given to father or mother.
But so it is. Madam, that the father may be stricken with a
frenzy, in the which he would slay his own children. Now,
Madam, if the children arise, join themselves together, appre-
hend the father, take the sword or other weapon from him,
and, finally, bind his hands and keep him in prison till his
frenzy be overpast ; think you Madam, that the children do
any wrong, or think you that God will be offended with them
that have stayed their father from committing wickedness ?
It is even so. Madam, with princes that would murder the
children of God that are subject unto them. Their blind zeal
is nothing but frenzy, and therefore to take the sword from
them, to bind their hands, and to cast them into prison till
they be brought to a more sober mind, is no disobedience
against princes, but just obedience, because it agrees with the
will of God."
The queen stood for some time amazed. On the con-
versation being resumed, Knox alluded to God's com-
mand that kings should be nursing fathers of the Church,
and queens its nursing mothers. " Yes," said Mary, " but
ye are not the Church which I will nourish. I will de-
fend the Church of Rome, for I think it is the true Church
of God." Knox asserted that the Roman harlot was not the
true and immaculate spouse of Christ. The queen answered
that the Scriptures were interpreted one way by the Pope and
cardinals, and another by the reformers. " Whom shall I
believe, and who shall be judge ?" Knox replied, " Ye shall
believe God that plainly speaketh in his word ; and farther
than the word teaches you, ye neither shall believe one nor
the other."
After some farther remarks they parted, Knox saying, as he
110 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIV.
went away, ^' I pray God, Madam, that ye may be as blessed
within this commonwealth of Scotland, if it be the pleasure
of God, as ever Deborah was in the commonwealth of Israel."
What Knox's real mind was regarding the queen, appears from
the answer which he himself tells us he gave to one who
asked the question : " If there be not in her a proud mind, a
crafty wit, and an indurate heart against God and his truth,
my judgment faileth me."^
The nobility having met .at Edinburgh, a new privy
council was formally constituted on the sixth of September.
The members were the Duke of Chatel-herault, the Earls of
Huntly, Argyll, Bothwell, Errol, Marischal, Atholl, Morton,
Montrose, and Glencaim, the Prior of St. Andrews, the Lord
Erskine, and the Treasurer, Secretary, Clerk-Register, and
Justice-Clerk. Several of these were Roman Catholics, but
neither the primate nor any of the bishops were members, and
it was soon observed that the chief direction of affairs was in-
trusted to the prior, and the secretary, Maitland. The queen
could only expect to govern quietly by conciliating the Pro-
testants, and this line of policy was further necessary for
obtaining, what for some time had been her most cherished
object, the recognition of her right of succession to the English
crown, failing the lawful issue of Elizabeth. In the endeavour
to attain that wish, the prior and the secretary served their
mistress with zeal and fidelity, and the negotiation appeared
so hopeful, that the two parties in the Scottish kingdom most
opposed to each other became alarmed. The zealous adherents
of the Roman see were afraid that the queen would forsake
her religion, in order to gain the object of her ambition, and
the Reformed ministers, apprehensive that the change would
be of a kind for which they were by no means anxious, began
to denounce the English Church in the same language which
they had formerly applied to that of Rome.-
During the month of September, the queen went on a pro-
gress to Linlithgow, Stirling, Perth, Dundee, and St. Andrews;
all which places, Knox tells us, she polluted with her idolatry.
1 Knox, vol. ii. p. 267-286. Keith, vol. iii. p. 39-43. Tytler, vol. vi. p. 236-
241.
2 Knox, vol ii. p. 286. Keith, vol.ii. pp. 78, 79. Tytlev, vol. vi. p. 243-254.
Calendar of State Papers relating to Scoland, vol. i. p. 178.
A.D. 1661.] OF SCOTLAND.
Ill
The statement evidently means that the rites of her relio-ion
were celebrated in lier own presence, during her journey. The
Congregation were indignant, and when, after her return to
Mmburgh, mass was said at Holyrood on the feast of All
bamts, another effort was made to prohibit it. Some of the
leadmg persons among the Protestants met at the house of
MakgiU, the clerk-register, to discuss the question, whether
subjects were entitled to suppress the idolatry of their prince
Ihe ministers argued in the affirmative, but the Prior of St
Andrews, the secretary, the Earl of Morton, and other states-
men, raaintmned that they could not lawfully do so. It was
finally resolved to refer the matter to the Church of Geneva
Knox offered his services to write for an answer, but the
secretary said he would do so himself
The general assembly of the Eeformed Church met at Edin-
burgh, for the third time, in the month of December The
members of the queen's council and their friends among the
barons declined to attend, and questioned the lawfulness of such
conventions without the sovereign's permission. The assembly
requested that the Book of Discipline should be ratified by the
queen but this was refused. A supplication was thereupon pre-
sented to the privy council by the lay commissioners, cravino-
that idolatry should be suppressed, the churches planted with
true ministers, and some fixed provision made for the preach-
ers. 1 Inslast request was judged reasonable, and the council
after advising with the nobility and clergy, finally enacted
that one third of the ecclesiastical benefices should be be-
stowed on the ministers and the crown, the other two thirds
remaining with the beneficiaries. «
A moiety of one third of the revenues of the Church would
have been amply sufficient for the needs of the small number
of superintendents, ministers, exhorters, and readers of the
new establishment, but they never received even that propor-
' Knox, vol. ii. pp. 291, 292. Buchanan, vol. i. p. 332. It appears that
Knox had already wntten to Calvin on the subject ; and, as he does not mention
the fact m his H.story, it may be presumed that the answer was unfavourable to
his views See the letter, as quoted from the Papers edited for the Ban-
natyne Club by M. Teulet, in the Scottish Ecclesiastical Journal, vol. vii.
^ Knox, vol. ii. p. 294-313. Keith, vol. iii. p. 43-47. See also Keith's appen-
dix, vol. 111. p. 360 390. ^^
112 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIV.
tion, and they long vainly importuned their friends among the
laity to make some better provision for them. The state of
ecclesiastical property at this time was very singular. During
the civil war, considerable portions of it had been made over
by the prelates and other beneficiaries to their own friends and
dependants, and part had been appropriated, without any
title whatever, by the most powerful of the nobility and
barons. What still nominally belonged to the Church was
in the hands of the bishops, abbots, priors, deans, provosts,
parsons, and other holders of ecclesiastical benefices ; many of
whom had never received holy orders at all, or had embraced
the Reformed opinions. These were the parties who were now
allowed to retain two thirds of their revenues. It may easily
be supposed that the account given of the other third to the
royal collectors was not a very faithful one ; and, when the
proportion falling to the sovereign was deducted, little re-
mained for the Eeformed ministers, and that little was dealt
out to them in the most niggardly manner by the Protestant
barons to whom its distribution was intrusted.
The general assembly again met at Edinburgh, on the
twenty-ninth of June, 1562. The five superintendents, Win-
ram, Willock, Spottiswood, Carsewell, and Erskine, and
Knox, Lindsay, Goodman, and other ministers and commis-
sioners, were present. The members continued their sittings
till the fourth of July.
A petition was presented to this assembly by the Bishop of
Galloway, in which he craved to be recognized as the super-
intendent of his diocese. The assembly answered, that they
were not aware he had been named to that office, either by
the privy council, or by the province of Galloway, and, in
any event, that the order appointed in regard to the election of
a superintendent had not been observed by him, and there-
fore, at present, he could not be recognized in that capacity ;
but they offered their assistance, if the churches in Galloway
should solicit his appointment, and the lords of the council
should grant him a presentation. He was at the same time
called upon to subscribe the Book of Discipline, but it is not
stated whether he did so.
As Galloway was not by itself one of the districts assigned
to a superintendent, but formed part of the district of Dum-
^■^■'^^B2.] OF SCOTLAND. j23
fries, it would rather seem that Bishop Gordon claimed the
office of supenntendent of Galloway, as being bishop of the
in r"f "'^^''^''^ '^^ Protestant opinions, he pro-
bably thought that his former ecclesiastical anointment en-
tit d Inm, without any other election or formality, to a similar
position in the Eeformed Church.
At this assembly John Craig was appointed to assist Knox
as minister at Edinburgh. 1
Knox's new colleague soon became a leading person in
the Congregation. He was bom in the beginning of the
century, and, like many eminent Scotsmen of that day, was
lef an orphan by the death of his father on Flodden field.
After completing his education at St. Andrews, he resided for
ToZT '^^^"8''?'^'^' ^"'i. on his return to his own countiy,
Cf .^.°'»"^[<=^" order. Being suspected of holding
hims If nfT°"u' ' T '''' '"*° P"^°"' ''"'' »>=^-"S «l«-^e^
waids to Italy, where he acquired the favour of Cardinal Pole,
by whose recommendation he was appointed master of the
novices m the Dominican convent at Bologna. His diligence
and attention to his duties attracted the notice of his superiors,
and he was intrusted with the management of various impor-
tant matters among others, with a commission to reform a
monastery of the order in the isle of Chios. On his return to
Italy, he was led to doubt the doctrines of his Church, by
perusing a copy of Calvin's Institutions. Having expressed
his opinions too freely, he was delated of heresy, and, after a
confinement of some weeks, was tried by the Inquisition at
Rome, and condemned to be burned. The day appointed for
his execution was the nineteenth of August, 1559. On the
evening before, Pope Paul IV. died; and the people, who
detested his stern rule, broke out into tumult, set fire to the
buildings of the Inquisition, and liberated the prisoners.
Craig escaped with the rest, and with great difiiculty reached
the dominions of the Emperor. After residing for some time
a Vienna, where he was favourably noticed by the Archduke
Max.mil.an, he returned through Germany and England to
his native country. He at once joined himself to the
■BookoftheUni.emlKirk, p 8-11. Knox, vol. ii. p. 337.343. Calder
wood, vol. „. p. 183-194. Keitb, vol. iii. p. 51-59.
VOL. H.J
114 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIV.
Reformed, but was at first, on account of bis long residence
abroad, unable to preach in bis mother tongue. He therefore
preached in Latin, in St. Magdalen's chapel at Edinburgh,
and was afterwards minister of the Canongate for a short time
previous to his appointment as colleague to Knox.^
While the Keformed, in their assemblies and by their indi-
vidual efforts, were endeavouring to confirm the ascendency
which they had acquired, the Eoman Catholic prelates, con-
tent with securing the greater portion of their estates, appear
to have made no systematic effort to regain the influence they
had lost, or to supply the ordinances of the Church to those
who still adhered to it. There was, no doubt, some danger in
the attempt, and they were not disposed to incur much risk.
So far indeed as theological controversy was necessary, few of
them were qualified to take any part in it. Some exceptions,
however, there were, even among the prelates ; and, in the
ranks of the inferior clergy, a considerable number were not
deterred by the apathy of their rulers, or by the hazards to
which they were exposed, from exerting themselves in defence
of their Churcli. The conference between the Protestant
ministers and the clergy of Aberdeen has already been re-
ferred to. Other controversial discussions took place at
various times, though the details, in most cases, have not been
preserved. A short time before the queen's return, there was
a public disputation at Edinburgh on the sacrament of the
altar, between Willock and a Dominican named John Black.
It lasted two days, but without any advantage on either side.
In the course of the same year, Ninian Winzet, a priest and
schoolmaster at Linlithgow, disputed in that town, first with
^ Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 91-94. Craig appears to have told marvellous stories
about his adventures subsequent to his escape from the Inquisition. These are
singular enough, as related by Spottiswood on the authority of persons to whom
Craig was in the way of mentioning them ; but the archbishop's narrative is
surpassed by that of the author of the Coronis to Eow's History, and the latter
again by what is stated in the additions to the Coronis in the same work. The
marvels become greater at every stage ; yet Dr. M'Crie smooths away small
difficulties, harmonises the whole narrative, and expresses no disbelief as to any
part, beyond quoting an expression of doubt by Spottiswood. See Row, pp. 415-
417, 457-461 ; and Life of Knox, p. 237-240. It is worth observing that the
author of the most wonderful edition of the story of the dog and the purse of gold,
by whose assistance Craig effected his escape, is also the sole voucher for the
conversion of Row by means of the pretended miracle at Loretto.
A.D. 1562.] OF SCOTLAND. 115
Knox, and afterwards with Spottiswood and a minister
named Kinlochy; and another schoolmaster, Eobert Maxwell,
encountered Willock at Glasgow. About the end of the year,
a discussion took place at Edinburgh, between the Reformed
ministers and a doctor of the Sorbonne, in attendance on the
queen. ^
Ninian Winzet was undoubtedly the most able controversial
writer on the Roman side. He was born at Renfrew in the
year 1518, and was appointed master of the grammar school
at Linlithgow, about the year 1551. He himself tells us that,
after spending about ten years of his most flourishing age in
the discharge of tlie duties of this office, he was expelled from
his " kindly town," because he refused to subscribe the new
Confession. This event took place soon after his dispute with
Spottiswood and Kinlochy. He appears to have subsequently
resided at Edinburgh, where he devoted himself to the com-
position of a series of works in defence of the Roman Catholic
Church.
On the fifteenth of February, 1562, Winzet presented to
the queen a Tractate addressed to her Majesty, the Prelates,
and the Nobility. In this treatise, he asks the queen's
license to propose in writing to the Protestant ministers
certain articles touching doctrine, order, and manners. He
then addresses himself to the bishops, and other pastors of
the Church, and denounces in the strongest terms their evil
lives and erroneous doctrines, whereby they had wellnigh
destroyed the flock intrusted to their keeping.
It was no ordinary ignorance and neglect which could have
called forth such language as the following, from one who had
laboured faithfully, and was prepared to sufi'er patiently, in
the cause of his Church : — " Your dumb doctrine, in exalting
ceremonies only without any declaration of the same, and, far
more, keeping in silence the true word of God, necessary to
^ Leslie, pp. 533, 538. Keith, vol. ii. p. 124. The last mentioned dispute
is referred to in a letter from Randolph to Cecil, dated 7th December, 1561.
The doctor of the Sorbonne was, no doubt, Rene Benoist, who accompanied the
queen to Scotland. In December, 1561, Benoist addressed a letter to Knox,
■which was translated from the Latin by a Scottish friar, and answered by David
Ferguson, minister of Dunfermline ; see Life of Winzet, prefixed to the Alaitland
Club edition of his Tractates, as quoted by Dr. Irving, in his Lives of Scottish
Writers, vol. i. p. 106.
116 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIV.
all men's salvation, and not resisting manifest errors, to the
world is knoAYn. What part of the true religion, by your
slothful dominion and princely estate, is not corrupted and
obscured ? Have not many, through lack of instruction, in
mad ignorance misknown their duty, which we all owe to our
Lord God, and so in their perfect belief -have sorely stumbled ?
Were not the sacraments of Christ Jesus profaned by ignorant
and wicked persons, neither able to persuade to godliness by
learning nor by living? Of the which number we confess
the most part of us of the ecclesiastical state to have been, in
our ignorant and inexpert youth, unworthily by you admitted
to the ministration thereof. If these things most special,
through ignorance and avarice, be brought from their purity,
what marvel is it that matters of less price, as of Images, the
Invocation of Saints to pray for us, the Prayer for the souls
departed, and many such like things in sobriety and learned
simplicity lawful, be at this time corrupted and profaned from
the mind of our ancient elders by the same vices ? Were ye
commanded in vain of God by the mouths of his Prophets and
Apostles to watch carefully and continually on your flock, and
know diligently the same by face ? Or gave the princes of
the earth to you yearly rents, (as the disciples in the begin-
ning sold their land and gave the prices thereof to the
Apostles,) to the end that every one of you might spend the
same upon his dame Dalila, and base-born offspring ? And
albeit it chance oft to the infirmity of man, that he fall asleep
when he should chiefly watch, and be given to pastime when
he should most diligently labour, yet, O merciful God, what
deadly sleep is this that has oppressed you, that in so great
uproar, tumult, and terrible clamour, ye waken not forth of
your dream, and in so great danger of death ye have no
regard of your own lives or others ? Awake, awake, and put
to your hands stoutly to save Peter's ship j for He neither
sleeps nor slumbers who beholds all your doings, and sees
your thoughts, but shall require the blood at your hands
of the smallest one that shall perish through your negli-
gence."
Then addressing himself to the nobles in a like indignant
strain, he attacks the simoniacal abuse of ecclesiastical patron-
age which had prevailed for the last hundred years, the conse-
A.D. 1562.] OF SCOTLAND. 117
quences of which^ he tells them, were now visited on them-
selves : for some great houses had of late been utterly ruined ;
others of the nobility lived like Epicureans without faith in
God, or love for man ; and others, who gloried in the name of
Gospellers, made of the Gospel a craft, urging a reformation
from idolatry, but making no attempt to reform themselves
from the idolatry of avarice.
About the twentieth of February, Winzet delivered to
Knox a treatise containing eighty-three questions touching
doctrine, order, and manners. Among the questions put are
the following : — Whether the Protestants believe the judg-
ment of the Holy Church to be set forth most truly by the
primitive doctors and general councils, or by John Calvin and
his associates? Why they have taken away the true meaning
of the article of the Creed, that Christ descended into hell, sub-
stituting for it Calvin's private opinion that the words signify
only the anguish which Christ suffered? Why they make
their two sacraments signs only of salvation whereby men are
assured of God's grace, and not rather efficacious means where-
by God works his grace in them ? Why, since they admit of
no ceremonies except such as are expressly commanded in
Scripture, they notwithstanding refuse to baptize children,
unless their father holds them up before the pulpit ,* why
they baptize in the church only, and not in the field, or by a
river side, like St. John the Baptist and St. Philip ; why they
baptize not, unless the child then receive a name ; why their
table is covered with a white cloth at the communion ; why
they cause others than the minister to distribute the bread and
the wine, when our Saviour alone did so to the Apostles, com-
manding them as his ministers to do the same; why they
make their communion before dinner, when the sacrament was
instituted after supper; why they refuse to solemnize matri-
mony, unless the banns are first proclaimed ; why they cause
persons about to be married take each other by the hand, and
sometimes a ring to be given ? Why they say that in the
communion nothing is present except bread and wine, when
our Saviour says expressly, " This is my Body ; This is my
Blood ?" Why they do not minister the communion to the
sick before they depart out of this life ? Why, when their
sovereign lady, Mary, has shown such humility, gentleness,
118 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXY.
and wisdom, as should soften the heart of every true Scot,
they exhort her subjects so fervently to rebellion, unless she
accept the opinions of Calvin ? Since by elders in the New
Testament are meant bishops and priests, whose office it is to
preach and minister the sacraments, why they have invented
a new order of elders, who are forbidden to discharge those
offices? Since the sacrament of Confirmation was used by
the Apostles, why do they esteem it a thing of no importance,
and but Papistical superstition ? Since the priests of the
Church should come to the sick and anoint them with oil, and
pray for them, as our Saviour teaches by the mouth of St.
James, why have they abolished Extreme Unction, and
deprived it of the name of a sacrament ? Although it is well
known that in the primitive Church married persons were
ordained bishops, priests, and deacons, where was it ever heard
in that Church, that men, unmarried at the time of their ordi-
nation, were allowed to marry afterwards, without reproof?
Since in the Scriptures we read of care bestowed on the funerals
of the Patriarchs, of our Lord, of St. John the Baptist, and of
St. Stephen, why have they dishonoured the bodies and
sepulchres of the princes and nobles of Scotland ? Since they
admit no unwritten tradition, why do they celebrate their
Sabbath day with the Catholics on Sunday, and not with the
Jews on Saturday ? Why do they use, as Catholics do, to
sing Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy
Ghost, at the end of every Psalm, when that godly form was
commanded to be sung by Pope Damasus for the rebuke of
heretics ? What can they shew expressly written to confute
the Anabaptists of error, who deny that children should be
baptized in infancy ? What Scripture have they for receiving
so many Gospels and Epistles in the New Testament, and no
more ? If the Church be invisible, how can men shew their
complaints to the Church, according to our Saviour's command,
and how in that case can the Church be the pillar and ground
of the truth ? Since Fasting was practised by Moses, Elias,
and the Ninevites, by St. John the Baptist, and by our
Saviour, who also foretold that his disciples should fast when
the BridegTOom was removed, why is the Church guilty of
idolatry in observing the yearly fast of Lent, and the weekly
fasts of Friday, and Wednesday or Saturday ? Why have
A.D. 1562.] OF SCOTLAND. 119
they rejected the monastic life, which was held in such estima-
tion by the primitive Church ; why have they thrown down
the monasteries which by a godly reformation might have
nourished men given to prayer, and been colleges of learning
for the support of poor students ; or, if the monasteries were
polluted with idolatry, why have they not destroyed wholly,
as they have actually done in part, the parish churches and
cathedrals ? Since the Scriptures mention the frequent
prayers of our Lord and his Apostles, of David, and of Daniel,
was it not a godly rule of the Church that prayers should be
sung or read seven times daily l)y able ministers chosen
thereto, and why do they in their reformed order pray only by
one minister, once only every day in the best churches, in
many places thrice a week, and in far more not once in a
month ?
These eighty-three questions were delivered to Knox pri-
vately, through one of the Reformed, who had exhorted the
adherents of E-ome to unite with the Protestants ; and a
private answer in writing was requested. Knox gave no
written answer, but discussed them in his public sermon,
alluding particularly to three of the questions which referred
to the lawful calling of himself and the Protestant ministers ;
and to these three Winzet again directed his special attention,
in a letter dated the third of March. They were the following :
— " Since we read that none should take the honour of the
ministration of God's word and sacraments on him, except he
be lawfully called thereto, either by God immediately, or by
men having power to promote him to that office, and since we
read of none called by God only, except such as shew their
power given to them by Him by the power of the Spirit, or in
signs and wonders ; therefore if you John Knox be called
immediately by God, where are your marvels wrought by the
Holy Spirit? For the marvels of overturning of realms to
ungodly sedition and discord we number not to be of his gifts.
But if you be called by men, you must shew them to have had
lawful power thereto, as the Apostles ordained St. Paul and
Barnabas, albeit chosen by God before, and they such like
others, in the fourteenth of the Acts ; and as St. Paul ordained
Timothy and Titus, giving them power and command to
ordain others ; wherein appears the lawful ordination of
120 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. XXXIY.
ministers. Tour lawful ordination by one of these two ways
we desire you to shew, since you renounce and esteem that
ordination null, or rather wicked, by the which sometime you
were called Sir John."
'^ If he cannot shew himself a lawfully ordained bishop, not
merely a priest or inferior minister, how can you superinten-
dents, or other inferior preachers, ordained and elected by him
not having power thereto, judge yourselves to be lawful
ministers in the Church of God ?"
" If John Knox and you affirm yourselves lawful by reason
of your knowledge, and that you are permitted, if you be not
admitted, by those Churches which you serve, why have you
taught manifestly a great eri'or and schism in your Congrega-
tion, contending with tooth and nail, (as is the proverb,) that
some lords and gentlemen have grievously erred in minister-
ing your communion in times by-past to their own household-
servants and tenants; since the said lords and gentlemen,
being men of knowledge by their own judgment, in that case
were permitted by their said servants to that office, who affirm
themselves to be a Church of God ?"
Winzet's next letter to Knox was written on the tenth of
March. The reformer had, in the interval, attempted to defend
his calling by appealing to the example -of the prophet Amos.
Winzet's reply was, that Amos had been sent by God to
deliver a special message, and that he had not usurped the
authority of the high-priest at Jerusalem, as Knox did that of
the primate of Scotland. He farther requested his opponent
to notice three things— first, the terrible punishment of Korah,
Dathan, and Abiram, who said, " All the congregation are
holy every one of them, and the Lord is among them ;" just
as he said, " Thou hast made us unto our God kings and
priests :" secondly, " that the wisdom, which is from above, is
first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated,
full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without
hypocrisy ;" " and the servant of the Lord must not strive,
but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness
instructing those that oppose themselves :" and, thirdly, to
shew at once some proof of his vocation, either mediate or im-
mediate, for otherwise his own scholars will think that one
mistuned string confounds all his harmony.
A.D. 1562.] OF SCOTLAND. 121
In a third letter, dated the twelfth of March, Winzet again
exhorted Knox to give a proof of his calling, or else to renounce
his usurped office.
At Easter, some disturbances took place in Edinburgh,
caused by an attempt of the magistrates to prevent the obser-
vance of the festival. Winzet wrote a short treatise on the
subject, not for publication, but as an exercise, he tells us,
such as he used to teach his scholars in his happy days at
Linlithgow. Copies of this paper were distributed without
his knowledge, and, on the twenty-fourth of May, he admitted
it to be his, explaining the true circumstances of its composi-
tion, and adding that he had nothing to regret in its being
made public, except that it had not been more carefully pre-
pared. It is a defence of the ecclesiastical festivals against the
arguments of Knox, who denounced them as superstitious and
idolatrous. He refers to the example of the Jewish Church,
the feast of the Dedication of the Temple by King Solomon,
and the thanksgiving for the deliverances from Holofernes and
Haman ; asks on what principle the observance of the Sunday
can be required, if other festivals are abolished ; and appeals
to the natural feelings of the human heart, and the universal
practice of mankind. " 0 madman and most foolish," he
exclaims, " would he persuade a faithful Christian that the
whole Universal Chui'ch is more unthankful and less mindful
of the birth of her Spouse and King, the Son of God, than
any realm is of its temporal king, whose day of nativity no
country forgets during his lifetime ? But our King and most
sweet Spouse lives for ever. Wherefore ever shall the day of
his blessed Nativity, Circumcision, Passion, Resurrection,
Ascension, and his Manifestation to the world called the
Epiphany, in despite of the devil and all his furious members,
(who ever have laboured to abolish his name out of this world,)
be in fresh memory of his dear beloved spouse, his Holy
Chmxh Universal."
His repeated challenges called forth no answer from Knox,
and, about the end of July, Winzet sent to the press another
work, called " The last Blast of the Trumpet of God's word
against the usurped authority of John Knox, and his Calvinian
brethren." Unable, or unwilling to meet him in argument,
the leaders of the Reformed had recourse to other weapons.
122 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. XXXIV.
The Edinburgh magistrates caused the printing office to be
forced open, seized and imprisoned the printer, and carried off
all the copies of the work which thej could find. It was
intended to apprehend Winzet himself, but he was leaving the
house at the very time the officers entered, and succeeded in
making his escape. He retired to the Low Countries, and
appears to have resided for some time at Louvaine and Antwerp.
At the latter city, his book of eighty-three questions was
published in October, 1563.
Winzet was never allowed to return to his native country.
In December, 1563, he published at Antwerp a Scottish
translation of the Commonitorium of Vincent of Lerins, which
he dedicated to Queen Mary. He seems also to have trans-
lated into the same language portions of the works of TertuUian
and St. Optatus. In 1565, he published at Paris a translation
of Eend Benoist's treatise on the "Method of composing
discords in Religion." In the year 1576, he was, on the
recommendation as is supposed of Bishop Leslie, appointed by
fope Gregory XIII. abbot of the Scottish Benedictine mon-
astery of St. James at Eatisbon, and after his elevation to that
office he wrote in Latin his "Flagellum Sectariorum," to which
was appended an answer to Buchanan's treatise "De Jure
Regni apud Scotos." Winzet died at Ratisbon, on the twenty-
first of September, 1592, being then seventy-four years of
age.i
In the assembly of June, 1562, commission was given to
George Hay to preach in Carrick and Cunningham, while
Knox was sent to Kyle and Galloway. The former, having
proceeded to the scene of his labours, was encountered by the
Abbot of Crossraguel. A controversy took place between
them, and a book, which was written by Kennedy on the
^ See Winzet's Exhortation to the Queen, Letters to Knox, Address to
the Magistrates of Edinburgli, and Book of four-score and three Questions,
in the appendix to Keith, vol. iii. p. 413-607. See also Leslie, p. 538-
540 ; Mackenzie's Lives of Scottish Writers, vol. iii. p. 148-156 ; M'Crie's
Life of Knox, pp. 249, 250, 453, 454 ; and Irving's Lives of Scottish
Writers, vol. i. p. 98-121. Some interesting details are given by Irving from a
manuscript in the Advocates' Library, containing an account of the monastery
of Ratisbon, written by a Scotsman, named Boniface Strachan. Winzet's earlier
works were reprinted for the Maitland Club in 1835, with a Life of the author
prefixed.
A.D. 1562.] OF SCOTLAND. 123
subject of the Mass, was answered by Hay, in a work publisbed
in the course of the following year.^
In the beginning of September, Knox was at Ayr. The
queen had already set out on her northern expedition ;
rumours were abroad that the Hamiltons were preparing to
assist Huntly in an attempt to overthrow the existing esta-
blishment; and, conscious how much the influence of the
Reformed opinions was dependent on the political supremacy
of those by whom they were held, Knox persuaded many of
the barons of Kyle, Cunningham, and Carrick, to unite in a
bond, by which they solemnly engaged to assist each other,
and to maintain the preaching of the Gospel and its minis-
ters against all persons, power, and* authority, that should
oppose the same. From Ayr he went to Nithsdale and Gal-
loway on a similar errand, using his endeavours successfully
to prevent a rising among the friends of the Gordons. ^
The districts which Knox visited at this time still contained
numerous adherents of the Roman Church, who were en-
couraged to preserve their allegiance by the exertions of the
zealous abbot of Crossraguel. During the year 1561, Ken-
nedy had published a work bearing the following title : —
" An Oration in favour of all those of the Congregation, ex-
horting them to espy how wonderfully they are abused by
their deceitful preachers." In this treatise, he alluded, among
other points, to the argument of the preachers, that because
God commanded the Israelites to destroy idolaters and the
places wherein idols were had in reverence, therefore all places,
wherein mass had been said, were to be destroyed by the
Congregation. The abbot maintained that Christian men
never built a temple, church, or place of prayer, but for the
purpose that the living God should be worshipped therein ;
and even if those places were any Avay profaned, the abuse
was to be corrected without destruction of the buildings, even
as our Saviour purified the Temple without destroying it.
Had this, he said, been rightly understood, such proceedings
as lately had brought disgrace on Scotland would never have
occurred, and the antiquities and monuments of the realm,
^ Leslie, p. 540. Knox, vol. ii. pp. 347, 352. M'Crie's Life of Knox, pp.
242, 452, 453. Miscellany of the Wodrow Society, vol. i. p. 94.
2 Knox, vol. ii. p. 347-351.
124 ECCLESIASTIC Ali HISTORY [Chap. XXXIV.
which in other kino^doms are so highly prized, would not have
been shamefully destroyed.
On Sunday the thirtieth of August, 1562, the abbot de-
livered a controversial discourse in the church of Kirk-Oswald
— the parish in which Crossraguel is situated — and this he
promised to continue on the following Sunday, and to main-
tain against all opposition. Knox, hearing what had taken
place, repaired to Kirk-Oswald on the sixth of September, with
the intention of answering the arguments of Kennedy. The
latter, dreading a tumult, did not appear, but wrote to Knox,
proposing that on the Sunday after they should discuss the
points in dispute in any house he might name at Maybole,
with a limited number of persons present on each side, and
assuring him, in his own name, and that of his nephew and
chief, the Earl of Cassillis, that he would receive a fair and
gentle hearing. Knox's answer was expressed in terms of
sufficient courtesy. Refusing to the abbot the title of lord in
respect of his office, he willingly conceded it by reason of his
birth, stating that he doubted not the earl's word, but that he
was in the hands of the Almighty, and feared nothing for him-
self. He then proposed that the conference should be in the
church of St. John the Baptist, at Ayr, rather than in a pri-
vate house, and mentioned that he could not attend on the day
named, because he was about to visit Nithsdale and Galloway.
The Earl of Cassillis dissuaded them from going on with the
discussion, as being likely to produce no good ; but neither
party was willing to draw back, and it was finally agreed that
the disputation should take place on the twenty-eighth of
September, at the house belonging to the provost of the col-
legiate church of Maybole.
They met accordingly, and the discussion was carried on
during three days. Knox began the proceedings with a
prayer, with which, it is said, the abbot was at first offended,
but afterwards remarked, " By my faith, it is well said." Ken-
nedy then desired one of his scribes to read a paper, in which
he protested that, while ready to speak on the points in ques-
tion, he did not hold them really disputable, inasmuch as they
were already determined by the Church. To this protestation
Knox afterwards gave in a written answer, in which he denied
the authority of the Church to be of more avail among Chris-
A.D. 1562.] OF SCOTLAND. 125
tians, than it was among the Jews of old. "If my lord
thinketh," he said, " that the Holy Catholic Church is suffi-
cient assurance for his conscience, let him understand that the
same buckler had the false prophets against Jeremiah, for they
cried, ' The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the
temple of the Lord ! ' But as he with one stroke did burst
their buckler asunder, saying, ' Put not your trust in lying
words,' so say we, that how Catholic, that is, universal, their
Church hath ever been, holy are they never able to prove it,
neither in life, making of laws, nor in soundness of doctrine,
as in my answer given by mouth I have more plainly shewn."
He then proceeded to state that, as Elijah, Jeremiah, Amos,
and the rest of the prophets, had been raised up in former
times, so those whom the abbot called heretics were now
raised up. " But," he added, " my lord perchance requireth
miracles to prove our lawful vocation, for so doth Winzet,
procurator for the Papists. To both I answer, that a truth by
itself, without miracles, hath sufficient strength to prove the
lawful vocation of the teachers thereof, but miracles, destitute
of truth, have efficacy to deceive, but never to bring to God.
But this, by the grace of God, shall be more fully entreated
in the answer to Winzet's questions thereupon."
Having proceeded to discuss orally the chief question in
dispute — that regarding the Mass — the abbot, being asked by
Knox to define it, answered, " I define the Mass, as concern-
ing the substance and effect, to be the sacrifice and oblation of
the Lord's body and blood, given and offered by Him in the
Last Supper." Knox replied, that in the Scriptures various
kinds of sacrifices were mentioned — as sacrifices of thanksgiv-
ing, of mortification, of obedience, of prayer, and of almsgiv-
ing, but there was one sacrifice above all others, called propi-
tiatory, whereby satisfaction was made to the justice of God ;
and he desired to know under which description of sacrifices
the Mass was to be reckoned. Kennedy answered, that he
held the sacrifice upon the cross to be the only sacrifice of re-
demption, and the Mass to be the sacrifice of commemoration
of Christ's death and passion. Knox observed, '^ So far as I
can conceive of my lord's answer, he maketh no sacrifice pro-
pitiatory in the Mass, which is the chief head I intend to
impugn. For as for the commemoration of Christ's death and
126 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIY.
passion, that 1 grant and publicly do confess to be celebrated
in the right use of the Lord's Supper, which I deny the Mass
to be." The abbot having referred to the offering of Mel-
chisedec in proof of his proposition, Knox denied that Mel-
chisedec made any sacrifice of bread and wine unto God.
The abbot refen-ed for proof to the text of the Scriptures, and
asked, if the bringing forth of the bread and wine was not for
sacrifice, what its purpose really was. Knox said that he was
not bound to answer this question, because the Scripture
was silent, but if conjecture were allowable, it was to refresh
Abraham and his weary soldiers. He also denied that Christ
in the Last Supper made any sacrifice of his Body and Blood,
under the forms of bread and wine, to God the Father.
Some farther arguments and illustrations were brought
forward on each side, but the conference terminated without
any definite result.^
The discussion between the abbot and Kn^ was conducted
by both parties with temper and courtesy. The reformer had
the advantage in the argument. Kennedy, believing devoutly
what was taught by his Church, was yet unable to explain
and defend it with sufficient clearness to others — perhaps had
hardly realized its precise import to himself. Knox, on the
other hand, spoke like one who had fully mastered his subject,
meeting his opponent's arguments fairly, and putting forward
his own views without ambiguity or hesitation.
It had been proposed by Kennedy and Knox to renew the
controversy at Edinburgh, if the consent of the queen and the
privy council should be obtained. It does not appear that
farther discussion took place, or that the abbot again came
forward in any public disputation. He was advanced in years
before he became known as an author or a controversialist ;
and the fatigues and anxieties of that harassing time exhausted
his strength. He was threatened with prosecution by the
' In 1563, Knox published at Edinburgh an account of the conference, under
the title of " The Copy of the Eeasoning which was betwixt the Abbot of
Crossraguel and John Knox in Maybole, concerning the Mass, in the year of God
1562." It was reprinted by Sir Alexander Boswell, to whom we are also in-
debted for an impression of Kennedy's Oration. Both the Oration and the
Reasoning are inserted in the appendix to M'Gavin's edition of Knox's History.
See also Knox, vol. ii. pp. 351, 352 ; Leslie, p. 540 ; and M'Crie's Life of Knox,
p. 242-249.
A.D. 1562.] OF SCOTLAND.
12
Reformed, but his nephew's rank and influence were still
sufficient to protect him. He died in peace at his own
monaster}^, on the twenty-second of August, 1564. i
^ Had all the Scottish prelates possessed the learning and the
virtues of the last consecrated abbot of Crossraguel, the refor-
mation of the Church might have been effected in a very
different manner.
^ Miscellany of the Wodrow Society, vol. i. p. 94.
128 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXV.
CHAPTEE XXXV.
FROM THE REASONING BETWEEN THE ABBOT OF CROSSRAGUEL AND JOHN
KNOX, IN SEPTEMBER, 1562, TO QUEEN MARY'S IIARRIAGE WITH
DARNLEY, IN JULY, 1565.
Rebellion of the Earl of Huntly — Second IntervieiD of Mary with
Knox — Meeting of the General Assembly — Excomniunica-
tion of Paul Methven — Pi^osecution of the Primate and
other ecclesiastics — Knox's sermon on the Queeyi's marriage
— Riot at Holyrood — Knox summoned before the Council
— Discussion between Lethington and Knox — Marriage of
Mary ivith Darnley.
The Earls of Huntly, the chiefs of the house of Gordon,
had for many years occupied the foremost place among the
nobility of the north of Scotland. The power of that great
family had been still farther increased by George, the fourth
earl, who held the office of chancellor of the kingdom, and
ruled with an authority, virtually independent, most of the
provinces beyond the Dee. His conduct, as already men-
tioned, had been very suspicious during the contest between
the queen-regent and the Congregation, and had lost him the
confidence of his sovereign, without securing the good-will of
the successful party. He was both feared and disliked by the
Protestants, and it could hardly have been otherwise; for,
however he may have wavered in his political measures, there
is no reason to suspect the consistent sincerity of his religious
belief, which he had shewn by maintaining the cause of the
Church, and upholding its ritual, at a time when few others
dared even avow their opinions. It has been seen that his
offer to restore the ancient system, if Mary would unite
her cause with his, was rejected by the queen, and, though he
had since occupied a high rank in her government, he had
never in reality been trusted.
During the year 1562, various circumstances occurred
which excited the indignation of Huntly. The earldom of
Murray, of which he was in possession, was taken from him,
A.D. 1562.] OF SCOTLAND.
129
and bestowed on the rival who filled the place in the counsels
of his sovereign, which he himself, as the chief of the Koman
Cathohc nobihtj, had expected to hold. In the course of the
summer, his son, Sir John Gordon, was thrown into prison
on account of a feudal affray with the house of Ogilvie and
when he effected his escape, was exposed to the penalties of
forfeiture. The fidelity of the earl was suspected, and Marv
with a view, perhaps, of preventing any outbreak, chose this
time for a progress to the northern parts of her kingdom
Just before she set out, a foreign bishop arrived at Edin-
burgh, sent by the Pope with a secret message to the queen
It was with difficulty that Lethington succeeded in brino-ing
him into her presence, and, when it was ascertained that such
an envoy was witliin Scotland, the Protestants determined to
put him to death, and were only prevented from doino- so by
the exertions of the Earl of Murray. It was supposed^hat he
.had been sent to keep the queen firm to her religion, and to
ascertain whether she would send an ambassador to the Coun-
cil of Trent. Nothing more is mentioned regarding this mat-
ter, which IS only known to us through a letter of Randolph's
Whatever may have been the object of the envoy, the result
shewed that his mission had no effect in altering the line of
policy adopted by the queen.
Mary left Edinburgh on the eleventh of August, and on the
twenty-seventh of that month arrived at Aberdeen, where
Huntly met her. He entreated her to visit him at his castle
of Strathbogie; but she refused to honour him so far, and
proceeding westward through Strathisla reached Inverness on
the eleventh of September. The castle of Inverness was held
by one of Huntly's vassals, who refused to admit the queen
but was obliged to surrender, and was put to death as a rebel'
After some vam attempts to conciliate his sovereign, Huntly
actuated as it would seem by a sudden impulse of resent-
ment, appeared openly in arms against the royal authority
Mary had returned to Aberdeen, where she remained, while
her army, under the Earl of Murray, advanced to 'attack
Huntly at Corrichie. The Gordons were defeated, and their
chief perished in the battle. The authors of the rebellion
were severely punished. Sir John Gordon was immediately
beheaded at Aberdeen ; his eldest brother, the Lord Gordon
VOL II.J 1 A
130 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXV.
was thrown into prison ; and, in a parliament held at Edin-
burgh in May of the following year, the deceased earl, his
kinsman the Earl of Sutherland, and eleven barons of the
house of Gordon, were attainted, and their estates forfeited to
the crown. ^
The forfeiture of the Earl of Huntly was the just and legal
punishment of an undeniable crime, but the queen's conduct,
in utterly destroying the power of his family, was at once
harsh and imprudent. His insurrection was the first act of
open treason which Mary had encountered. Had she known
all that her most trusted counsellors had already done, could
she have suspected what they were soon to do, the punish-
ment of the Gordons would have been less severe, and their
ruin less complete.
The queen returned to Holyrood on the twenty-first of No-
vember. The fall of their most dreaded enemy did not tend
to make the Protestant ministers more mild and tolerant. On .
Sunday the thirteenth of December, Knox in his sermon de-
nounced the ignorance, vanity, and hatred of all virtue, for
which princes were distinguished, and made particular allusion
to the queen's indulgence in excessive dancing. Mary, dis-
liking such liberties, again sent for the reformer. The Earls
of ]\Iurray and Morton, and the secretary, were present at the
interview. She accused Knox of endeavouring to bring her
into hatred and contempt with the people. He answered, that
the stubborn of this world often hear false reports to their own
great displeasure. " I doubt not," he said, " but that it came
to the ears of proud Herod, that our master, Christ Jesus,
called him a fox ; but they told him not how odious a thing it
was before God to murder an innocent, as he had lately done
before, causing to behead John the Baptist to reward the
dancing of a harlot's daughter. Madam, if the reporters of
my words had been honest men, they would have reported my
words and the circumstances of the same." In reference to
his denunciations of the queen's conduct, he explained that,
1 Knox, vol. ii. pp. 345, 346, 352-360, 380, 381. Buchanan, vol. i. p. 334-
339. Keith, vol, ii. p. 154-173. Tytler, vol. vi. p. 262-268. Perhaps the
statements o^ Buchanan (p. 336), in regard to communications from the Pope
and the Cardinal of Lorraine to the queen, are founded on the mission of the
Papal envoy mentioned in the text.
A.D. 1562.] OF SCOTLAND.
131
while he disliked dancing, he did not condemn it absolutely,
but only when indulged in to the neglect of proper duties, and
for pleasure in the calamities of God's people. This was an
allusion to the reports which had lately come of the successes
of the princes of Lorraine in their contest with the Huguenots.
The queen said, " Your words are sharp enough, as you have
spoken them, but yet they were told to me in another manner.
I know that my uncles and you are not of one religion, and
therefore I cannot blame you, albeit you have no good opinion
of them. But if ye hear anything of myself that mislikes
you, come to myself and tell me, and I shall hear you."
"Madam," said Knox, "I would be glad to do all that I
could to your grace's contentment, provided that I exceed not
the bounds of my vocation. I am called to a public function
within the Church of God, and am appointed by God to re-
buke the sins and vices of all. I am not appointed to come
, to every man in particular to shew him his offence ; for that
labour were infinite. If your grace please to frequent the
public sermons, then doubt I not but that ye shall fully un-
derstand both what I like and mislike, as well in your majesty
as in all others. Or, if your grace will assign unto me a cer-
tain day and hour when it will please you to hear the form
and substance of doctrine which is proponed in public to the
churches of this realm, I will most gladly await upon your
grace's pleasure, time, and place. But to wait at your cham-
ber door or elsewhere, and then to have no farther liberty but
to whisper my mind in your grace's ear, or to tell you what
others think and speak of you, neither will my conscience, nor
the vocation whereto God hath called me, suffer it. For
albeit, at your grace's commandment, I am here now, yet can-
not I tell what other men shall judge of me, that at this time
of day am absent from my book, and waiting upon the court."
The queen remarked, " You will not always be at your book,"
and so turned away. As Knox was departing ^' with a rea-
sonable merry countenance," some of the courtiers exclaimed,
" He is not afraid." ^' Why," said he, ^' should the pleasing
face of a gentlewoman affray me ? I have looked in the face
of many angry men, and yet have not been affrayed above
measure."^
' Knox, vol. ii. p. 330-335.
132 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOHY [Chap. XXXV.
The general assembly met at Edinburgh on the twentj-fifth
of December. Reports were abroad seriously affecting the
moral character of Paul Methven, minister at Jedburgh, and
commission was given to Knox and certain others to repair to
the residence of the accused, and investigate the matter.
After careful enquiry, it was ascertained that Methven had
been guilty of adultery ; and he was in consequence excom-
municated, and deprived of his office.^ Methven had been
one of the most eminent of the Reformed preachers, and his
offence necessarily produced great scandal, and called for
severe punishment. On this occasion the Protestants shewed
that their rebukes of immorality, and their censures of one of
the worst vices of the Roman clergy, had been called forth by
a sincere hatred of sin, and that they were determined, so far
as lay in their power, to prevent the occurrence of such
offences among themselves.
In the spring of 1563, the scattered adherents of the Roman
communion still attempted to keep up the solemnities of the
Paschal season. Their priests ventured in a few places to
appear in the churches, but they were now obliged, for the
most part, to celebrate the holy rites in private houses, or
in the forests, apart from any human dwelling. Even there
they were followed by the persecution of the triumphant
Protestants. Some ecclesiastics of high station came for-
ward more boldly in the West, hoping, probably, that their
rank and noble birth would protect them. The primate
himself, the Abbot of Crossraguel, and Malcolm Fleming,
Prior of Whithorn, are particularly mentioned. The Re-
formed apprehended some of the priests, and intimated to
others that they would not trouble themselves by complaining
to the queen in council, but would, at their own hand, exe-
cute the punishments ordered by God to be inflicted on idola-
ters. Mary, alarmed for the safety of those who held her own
religious opinions, and indignant that her authority in putting
the laws in execution should be invaded, again sent for Knox.
1 Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 11-13. Knox, vol. ii. p. 363-367. Calder-
wood, vol. ii. p. 205-210. Keith, vol. iii. p. 61-68. Methven retired to Eng-
land, but came back in 1566, and, at his own entreaty, it was agreed that the
excommunication should be removed, on his performing public penance. He
went through part of the penance, but before it was finished again left Scotland.
A.D. 1563.] OF SCOTLAND. 133
She was at this time residing at Lochleven Castle^ and there
her interview with the reformer took place. She requested
him to use his influence with the people and the gentlemen
of the West not to put to their hands to punish any one
simply on account of religion. Knox answered, that if she
would take care that the laws should be enforced, he could
promise quietness, but not otherwise. " Will you," she said,
" allow that they shall take my sword into their hands ? "
" Madam," replied Knox, " the sword of justice is God's, and
is given to princes and rulers for one end, which, if they
transgress, sparing the wicked and oppressing innocents,
they that in the fear of God execute judgment where God has
commanded offend not God, although kings do it not ;
neither yet sin they that bridle kings from striking innocent
men in their rage. The examples are evident ; for Samuel
feared not to slay Agag, the fat and delicate king of Amalek,
whom King Saul had saved. Neither spared Elias Jezebel's
false prophets and Baal's priests, albeit that King Ahab was
present. Phineas was no magistrate, and yet feared he not to
strike Cosbi and Zimri in the very act of filthy fornication.
And so, Madam, your grace may see that others than chief
magistrates may lawfully punish, and have punished, the vice
and crimes which God commands to be punished. And in
this case, I would earnestly pray your majesty to take good
advisement, and that your grace should let the Papists under-
stand that their attempts will not be suffered unpunished.
For power by act of parliament is given to all judges within
their own bounds to search mass-mongers or the hearers of the
same, and to punish them according to the law. And there-
fore it shall be profitable to your majesty to consider what is
the thing your grace's subjects look to receive of your majesty,
and what it is that ye ought to do unto them by mutual con-
tract. They are bound to obey you, and that not but in God.
You are bound to keep laws unto them. You crave of them
service ; they crave of you protection and defence against
wicked doers. Now, Madam, if you shall deny your duty
unto them, (which especially craves that you punish malefac-
tors,) think you to receive full obedience of them ? I fear,
Madam, you shall not."
The queen left Knox in displeasure, but next morning the
134 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXV.
reformer again met her while she was hawking near Kinross.
She cautioned him against trusting in the Bishop of Galloway,
who wished to be chosen superintendent. In this, Knox tells
us, the queen was not deceived, for the bishop had attempted to
gain the office by bribery, but was unsuccessful in the attempt.
Mary, in parting, declared that she would cause all offenders
against the laws to be summoned, and so let it be seen that
she would minister justice.
The royal promise was faithfully kept. On the nineteenth
of May, the Archbishop of St. Andrews, the Prior of Whit-
horn, and forty-six other persons, were tried before the Court
of Justiciary at Edinburgh, on charges of hearing auricular
confession, and assisting at the celebration of mass. The
accused, for the most part, submitted to the queen's mercy,
and were committed to ward in various places. The proceed-
ings against the Homan Catholics at this time must have been
very severe, since we find Eandolph writing to Cecil, on the
third of June, that the priests were fleeing for refuge to Eng-
landi
While the parliament, which met in May, was sitting, Knox
preached before the assembled nobles, and took the oppor-
tunity of alluding to the negotiations which were then going on
with various foreign princes relative to the queen's marriage.
" My lords," he said, " I hear of the queen's marriage. Dukes,
brethren to emperors, and kings, strive all for the best game ;
but this will I say, (note the day and bear witness after,)
whensoever the nobility of Scotland, professing the Lord Jesus,
consent that an infidel, (and all Papists are infidels,) shall be
head to your sovereign, ye do so far as in you lieth to banish
Christ Jesus from this realm ; ye bring God's vengeance
upon the country, a plague upon yourselves, and perchance
ye shall do small comfort to your sovereign." Both Pro-
testants and Papists, he himself tells us, were offended by
his discourse, and he was once more summoned before the
queen.
Knox, on this occasion, was accompanied by Erskine of
Dun. Mary reproached him with the language which he
^ Knox, vol. ii. p. 370-380. Keith, vol. ii. p. 197-199. Tytler, vol. vi. p.
278-280. Pitcairn's Criminal Trials, vol. i. part i. p. * 427-* 431. Diurnal of
Occurrents, p. 75. Calendar of State Papers relating to Scotland, vol. i. p. 190.
A.D. 1563.] OF SCOTLAND. 135
had used, and burst into tears. " What have you to do with
my marriage," she asked, " and what are you within this
commonwealth?" " A subject born within the same, Madam,"
answered Knox, " and albeit I neither be earl, lord, nor baron,
yet has God made me (how abject that ever I be in your
eyes) a profitable member within the same. Yea, Madam, to
me it appertains no less to forewarn of such things as may hurt
it, if I foresee them, than it does to any of the nobility ; for
both my vocation and conscience crave plainness of me. And
therefore. Madam, to yourself I say that which I speak in
public place. Whensoever that the nobility of this realm
shall consent that ye be subject to an unfaithful husband, they
do as much as in them lieth to renounce Christ, to banish his
truth from them, to betray the freedom of this realm, and per-
chance shall, in the end, do small comfort to yourself." Mary
again wept. Erskine endeavoured to soothe her, and, after a
pause, Knox continued, " Madam, in God's presence I speak ;
I never delighted in the weeping of any of God's creatures ;
yea I can scarcely well abide the tears of my own boys whom
my own hand corrects, much less can I rejoice in your majesty's
weeping. But seeing that I have offered to you no just occa-
sion to be offended, but have spoken the truth, as my vocation
craves of me, I must sustain, albeit unwillingly, your majesty's
tears, rather than I dare hurt my conscience, or betray my
commonwealth through my silence."
Knox was ordered to retire to the ante-chamber, and
Erskine and the Prior of Coldingham remained in consultation
with the queen. While he waited the issue of their delibera-
tions, he conversed with the ladies of the court who were in
attendance. " O fair ladies," he said, " how pleasing were
this life of yours if it should ever abide, and then in the end
that we might pass to heaven with all this gay gear. But
fie upon that knave Death, that will come whether we will or
not. And when he has laid on his arrest, the foul worms will
be busy with this flesh, be it never so fair and so tender ; and
the silly soul, I fear, shall be so feeble, that it can neither carry
with it gold, garnishing, pearls, nor precious stones." Mary's
wrath, as usual, was soon appeased, and no farther steps were
taken against the reformer. ^
^ Knox, vol. ii. p. 35i 389.
136 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXV.
On the twenty-fifth of June, the general assembly met at
Perth. Commission was given to the Bishops of Galloway,
Orkney, and Caithness, to plant churches within the bounds of
their dioceses. Similar commissions were granted to John
Hepburn, minister at Brechin, for Murray, Banff, and the
adjacent districts ; to Eobert Pont, for Inverness ; and to
Donald Munro, for Eoss. All these commissions were to
last only for a year. It was ordained that no work touch-
ing on religion should be set forth in print, or published
in manuscript, until it was approved by the superinten-
dent of the diocese, and such persons as he might call to his
assistance.*
On Sunday, the fifteenth of August, while the queen was
at Stirling, a disturbance took place in her chapel at Holy-
rood. The Protestants of Edinburgh, indignant that some of
their Eoman Catholic fellow-citizens had resorted thither to
mass on the previous Sunday, burst open the doors, and found
the altar covered, and the priest ready for the celebration.
One of the rioters, Patrick Cranston, exclaimed, " The queen's
majesty is not here. How dare you then be so malapert
as openly to do against the law?" A French lady, the
mistress of the maids, hastened to the comptroller, Wishart
of Pitarro, who was attending sermon at St. Giles', and
implored his protection. Pitarro and the magistrates of the
city immediately went to the abbey, and prevented farther
disturbance.
An enquiry regarding this occurrence was instituted by the
queen's order, and the proceedings which followed mark the
even-handed justice which hitherto had uniformly distinguished
the reign of Mary. Cranston and another of the rioters were
ordered to appear and answer for their ofience, but, at the
same time, twenty-two persons, several of whom were females,
were prosecuted on the charge of attending mass on the eighth
of August. The parties accused of the latter ofience were
evidently inhabitants of the city, who had no right to partici-
pate in the special immunity conferred on the queen's house-
hold. Knox, displeased that two of his friends should be
called to account for what he held to be a religious and
1 Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 14-16. Calderwood, vol. ii. p. 223-229.
Keith, vol. iii. p. 71-77.
-^•I>- 1563.] OF SCOTLAND. I37
commendable act, wrote and circulated letters requesting the
presence of the Eeformed at Edinburgh on the day appointed
for the trial. They prepared to obey the call, but the trial
was postponed, and no farther record of the judicial proceedings
has been preserved.
A copy of Knox's letter having fallen into the hands of
Henry Sinclair, Bishop of Eoss, and President of the Court
of Session, it was shewn by him to the queen, and the
reformer was summoned before the council on a charge of
illegally convocating the lieges. He appeared before them
about the middle of December, accompanied by a large body
of his supporters who crowded the passages and stairs of the
council-chamber. He was asked if he acknowledged the
letter to be his, and he at once admitted it. " You have done
more than I would have done," was the remark of Lethington.
He was then asked if he was sorry for having written it. He
answered that his offence in doing so must first be explained.
" If there were no more," said Lethington, " than the con-
vocation of the queen's lieges, the offence cannot be denied."
" Kemember yourself, my lord," said Knox, " there is a differ-
ence betwixt a lawful convocation, and an unlawful. If I
have been guilty in this, I have oft offended since I came last
to Scotland ; for what convocation of the brethren has ever
been to this day to which my pen served not. Before this, no
man laid it to my charge as a crime." " Then was then,"
said Lethington, " and now is now. We have no need of
such convocations as some times we have had." Knox
answered, " The time that has been is even now before my
eyes ; for I see the poor flock in no less danger than it has
been at any time before, except that the devil has got a visor
upon his face. Before, he came in with his own face, dis-
covered by open tyranny, seeking the destraction of all that
had refused idolatry : and then, I think you will confess, the
brethren lawfully assembled themselves for defence of their
lives. And now, the devil comes under the cloak of justice
to do that which God would not suffer him to do by strength."
The examination went on, and Knox was finally acquitted,
the queen and Lethington expressing great indignation at the
result. According to his own account, the sentence was
unanimous, even the Bishop of Eoss concun'ing, and the
138 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap, XXXV.
nobles praising God for his modesty, and for his plain and
sensible answers.^
The council, sitting almost in the sight of Knox's ardent
adherents, could hardly have pronounced an unbiassed judg-
ment. But the chief motive which influenced them was
probably the consciousness of the good reason that Knox had
to appeal to their former proceedings in justification of his
conduct. The nobles present were the Duke of Chatel-
herault, the Earls of Argyll, Murray, Glencairn, and Marischal,
and the Lord Kuthven. They had not the assurance to
concur in the reasoning of the secretary.
The usual half-yearly meeting of the general assembly took
place at Edinburgh, on the twenty-fifth of December. At its
first session, Knox, with evident allusion to his recent appear-
ance before the queen, asked whether he had received charge
from the whole Church convened at Edinburgh, after the
beginning of the Keformation, to advertise the brethren to
assemble and give counsel when any of their number should
chance to be troubled. The Lord Lindsay, several of the
barons and ministers, the Superintendents of Angus, Fife,
Lothian, Glasgow, and Galloway, and the majority of the
members, answered in the affirmative. It was agreed at
this meeting that a moderator should be appointed to keep
order in the assembly, and John Willock, the Superinteadent
of Glasgow, was the first who was named to that office.
In the fourth session a circumstance occurred, which, though
relating rather to a civil than an ecclesiastical matter, deserves
to be noticed, as marking the first communication between the
assembly and the authorities of the English Church. One of
the members having complained that his wife had deserted
him and fled to England, the assembly ordered letters to be
directed to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, sub-
scribed by the Superintendent of Lothian, and Knox and
Craig, requesting the archbishops to cause the wife to be cited
to appear before the Superintendent of Lothian, and the ses-
sion of the church of Edinburgh.
At the same assembly, Eobert Eamsay was accused of
^ Knox, vol. ii. p. 393-412. Pitcairn's Criminal Trials, vol. i. part i. pp.
*434, 435. Keith, vol. ii. pp. 210, 211. Knox takes no notice of the proceed-
ings against the Roman Catholics for attending mass.
A.D. 1563.] OF SCOTLAND. 139
entering the ministiy within the bounds of the Superinten-
dent of Angus, without election, or admission by the
superintendent, and of having affirmed that there was a
midway between Papistry and the religion now established.
For these, and other charges of borrowing money to buy
books without repaying it, he was suspended from the minis-
try till further trial should be taken. ^ This was the first open
avowal, in the new establishment, of a wish for that middle
way which afterwards so many sought to find. The person
referred to could hardly, even at this time, have stood alone in
cherishhig such a wish. It must have been entertained by
others of that numerous party, which, while within the Eoman
Church, earnestly desired a reformation, and, though now
belonging to the Protestant communion, could not be satisfied
with the many changes that had been adopted.
In the interval between the assembly of December, 1563,
and June, 1564, John Knox contracted a second marriage.
His first wife, Marjory Bowes, had died in the end of the
year 1560, and in March, 1564, he was married to Margaret
Stewart, the youthful daughter of Lord Ochiltree, one of his
chief supporters among the nobility. ^
The general assembly met at Edinburgh, on the twenty-fifth
of June. None of its proceedings call for particular notice,
with the exception of a discussion between Lethington and
Knox, in regard to language used by the latter in his prayers
and speeches about the queen, and his doctrine as to the
duties of subjects and sovereigns. This discussion took place
at a conference between the lords of the council and some of
the members of the assembly. Knox justified his words and
opinions, by appealing to the language used by the prophets
to the sovereigns of Israel, and by referring to the slaughter of
King Joash, and of King Amaziah, by their subjects, as righte-
ous acts ; and argued that, while by the ordinance of God
authority and government are to be maintained, the persons
* Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 17-19. Knox, vol. ii. p. 412-415. Calder-
wood, vol. ii. p. 241-247. Keith, vol. iii. p. 79-89.
2 Knox, at the time of his marriage, was in his sixtieth year. More than a
twelvemonth before, Randolph, in a letter to Cecil, referred to Knox's approaching
marriage " to a young lass of sixteen." (Calendar of State Papers relating to
Scotland, vol. i. p. 187.)
140 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Cuap. XXXV.
by whom the authority is administered may lawfully be resisted,
and, if the sovereign be an idolater, he ought to die the death
at the hands of his own people. ^
The ministers were allowed without much opposition to
preach what doctrines they pleased, but their efforts to obtain
a larger share of the Church's spoils were successfully re-
sisted by the Protestant nobles. They had still no more than
the portion of the thirds which they could rescue from the
comptroller, although the holders of ecclesiastical property
were daily becoming farther secularized. It was remarked by
John Craig, that the abbot could no longer be distinguished
from the earl, nor the nun from the noble-woman. It was no
consolation to the ministers that individuals among their sup-
porters were enriched. In October, 1564, George Buchanan
received from the queen a grant of the temporalities of the
abbacy of Crossraguel, lately vacant by the death of Quintin
Kennedy. 2
The general assembly met at Edinburgh, on the twenty-
fifth of December. It was enjoined that every minister,
exhorter, and reader, should have a copy of the Psalm-book
lately printed at Edinburgh, and use the order contained
therein in Prayers, Marriages, and the administration of the
Sacraments. 2 This was the Book of Common Order, which,
it is probable, now entirely superseded the English Book of
'Common Prayer. The assembly again met at Edinburgh on
the twenty-fifth of June, 1565. The usual remonstrances
were made regarding the toleration of idolatry, and the poverty
of the ministers.^
The attention of tlie Scottish people was now chiefly
directed to the approaching marriage of their sovereign.
Within a short time after her return from France, the expedi-
ency of such a step became obvious to her wisest counsellors,
and Mary herself affected no indifference towards it. The
difficulty was in the choice of a husband. She would fain
^ Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 19-24. Knox, vol. ii. p. 421-461. Calder-
wood, vol. ii. p. 250-282. Keith, vol, iii. p. 89-96.
2 Keith, vol. ii. p. 242. Irving's Life of Buchanan, p. 135.
3 Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 24-27. Knox, vol. ii. p. 471. Calderwood,
vol. ii. p. 282-285. Keith, vol. iii. p. 97-102.
* Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 27-32. Knox, vol. ii. p. 484-486. Calder-
wood,36l. ii. p. 287-291. Keith, vol. iii. p. 105-115.
A.B. 1565.] OF SCOTLAND.
141
have consulted at once her own inclinations, and the wishes
of Elizabeth, whose approbation was of so much importance in
relation to the succession to the English crown. But Eliza-
beth's policy, in this as in every thing else regarding Scotland,
was selfish and insincere. She would have prevented Mary's
mamage altogether, had it been in her power : finding herself
unable to accomplish this, she threw obstacles in the way of
every match which would have brought her kinswoman again
mto connection with the royal houses of the Continent When
the queen of the Scots rejected the Earl of Leicester, who had
been recommended by Elizabeth, and fixed her affections on
her own cousin, Henry Stewart, Lord Darnlev, son of the
Earl of Lennox, it has been conjectured, with grek probability,
that the English sovereign was not at heart ill pleased. In
several respects the choice of Mary appeared to be a good
one, but the advantages which might have been expected from
her union with a husband of illustrious descent, personal
and mtellectual accomplishments, and common religious
belief, were never realized. The weakness and vices which
marred the character of Darnley were unknown to Mary, or
were disregarded by her ; and, notwithstanding the opposition
of Ehzabeth, and the urgent remonstrances of the Earl of
MuiTay, who dreaded the loss of the political influence which
he had hitherto enjoyed, the marriage was formally resolved
on.
William Chisholm, Bishop-coadjutor of Dunblane, had been
sent to Eome, to obtain the papal bulls which were necessary
m consequence of the relationship between Mary and Darnley.
On his return, the marriage was celebrated, according to the
ritual of the Boman Church, by John Sinclair, Dean of Kes-
talrig, within the chapel at Holyrood, on Sunday the twenty-
ninth of July, 1565.1 On the following day, Darnley, who
1 Letter from Randolph to the Earl of Leicester-Robertson's Histoir of Scot-
o?. ;^ t/ ^°^- "'■ P- ^^'^'^^^' ^"°'^' ^«^- "• P- 495. Keith, vol. ii. pp. 320
344-347. The chapel at Holyrood, where the marriage was celebrated, and in
which divine service had been performed according to the Roman ritual from the
time of the queen's return from France, was not the abbey church, as some
wnters have supposed, but a private chapel in the palace. This would appear
probable from the various circumstances mentioned in connection with the at-
tempts of the Protestants to suppress the Roman service, and is rendered certain
by what is mentioned in a letter of Randolph to Cecil, dated 24th July, 1565 in
142 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXV.
had now received the royal title, was proclaimed King of the
Scots, at the market cross of Edinburgh.
which he makes a marked distinction between the abbey church and the queen's
chapel. After having mentioned that the banns were proclaimed in St. Giles's
church, he adds, " Upon Sunday next, without all doubt, the marriage goeth
forward, but yet uncertain whether it shall be in the church where the banns
were asked, in the abbey church, or in her own chapel." (Ellis's Original Let-
ters, 2d ed. vol. ii. p. 199.) The abbey church, as well as that of St. Giles, was
in possession of the Protestants.
A.D. 1565.] OF SCOTLAND. 143
CHAPTER XXXYL
FROM QUEEN MARY'S MARRIAGE WITH DARNLEY IN JULY, 1565, TO HER
ABDICATION IN JULY, 1567.
Rebellion of the Earl of Murray — Knox's sermon at St. Giles''
— Attemjyts of the Queen to restore the Roman Church —
John Sinclair J Bishoi) of Brechin — John Leslie^ Bishop of
Ross — Murder of Riccio — Question as to Knox^s 'partici-
pation in the crime — Proposal to send a Nuncio to Scot-
land— Baptism of Prince James — Murder of Darnley —
Meeting of Parliament — The Queen'' s Marriage with
Bothwell — Her Imprisonment — Her Abdication.
The marriage of the queen was the signal of open revolt to a
powerful faction of the nobility. Murray and his friends saw
that their political ascendency was at an end ; the Hamiltons
hated their feudal rivals of the house of Lennox ; and, en-
couraged by the promised assistance of Elizabeth, the Duke
of Chatel-herault, the Earls of Murray, Argyll, Glencairn,
and Rothes, the Lords Boyd and Ochiltree, Kirkaldy of
Grange, and other barons, assembled their followers, and ap-
peared in arms against their sovereign. They attempted to
gain the support of the people by representing that the Pro-
testant religion was in danger, and their efforts were zealously
seconded by the ministers, but the great body of the nation
remained faithful to the queen. Mary appeared in person at
the head of her troops, and her vigorous measures compelled
the insurgent leaders to seek refuge in England. Parliament
was summoned to meet, and the rebel lords were ordered to
appear and answer on a charge of treason. The Duke of
Chatel-herault, with some difficulty, obtained a pardon on
condition of his retiring to France, but the others remained ex-
posed to all the penalties of an attainder.^
During these proceedings, Knox continued at his post in
the capital, and made no secret of his sympathy with the
* Knox, vol. ii. p. 496-515. Keith, vol. ii. p. 348-381. Tjtler, vol. vii. p.
144 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Chap. XXXVI.
rebels. On Sunday, the nineteenth of August, Darnley at-
tended the Protestant service in the church of St. Giles. The
conduct of the young king, in regard to the external obser-
vances of religion, was deficient in the consistency and firm-
ness which his consort had shewn in that respect. At his
marriage he retired before mass was celebrated, and he now
sought to conciliate the good wishes of the Eeformed by
frequenting their churches. Knox preached on this occasion,
and took for his text the words of Isaiah, " 0 Lord our
God, other lords beside Thee have had dominion over us."
"Whereupon," as he himself tells us in his History, "he took
occasion to speak of the government of wicked princes, who,
for the sins of the people, are sent as tyrants and scourges to
plague them. And amongst other things he said, ' That God
sets in that room, for the offences and ingratitude of the people,
boys and women.' And some other words which appeared
bitter in the king's ears, as ^ That God justly punished Ahab
and his posterity, because he would not take order with that
harlot Jezebel.' " In consequence of this language, Knox was
summoned before the council. The answer which he made to
the charge was characteristic of the man, and of tlie principles
on which he professed to act. He said, " That he had spoken
nothing but according to the text, and, if the Church would
command him either to speak or abstain, he would obey so far
as the word of God would permit him." The only censure
which he incurred was an injunction to abstain from preaching
for some days. ^
The general assembly met at Edinburgh, on the twenty-fifth
of December. At its fourth session, the question was put
whether Baptism administered by a Roman Catholic priest
was to be reiterated. It was agreed that such baptism was
valid, inasmuch as it was celebrated with water, and the due
form of words; but persons so baptized were ordered, when they
attained the proper age, to be instructed in the true religion,
and to make a public renunciation of the corruptions of Popery
before being admitted to communion. ^
Knox tells us that in the months of November and Decem-
^ Knox, vol. ii. pp. 497, 498.
2 Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 32-42. Calderwood, vol. ii. p. 294-310.
Keith, vol. iii. p. 118-133.
A.D. 1565.] OF SCOTLAND.
145
ber the queen began more openly to shew her favour to the
Papists. The Earls of Lennox, AthoU, Cassillis, and others,
went to mass m her chapel, and certain friars requested her
license to preach, which was granted to them. At Christmas,
the king and queen went to mass and the friars preached pub-
licly, which they had not done during the seven years before.
Knox adds that they were so little esteemed that their preach-
ing did not continue long, i
There is probably no exaggeration in the statements of Knox,
so far as they refer to the queen's more open avowal of her
attachment to her own religion, and the marks of favour which
she bestowed on those who adhered to it. The rebellion and
banishment of Murray and his associates had weakened the
influence of the Protestants, and the violent language of the
preachers had brought discredit on their cause. Supported
by some of the most powerful of the nobility, and urged on by
her relatives of the house of Lorraine, there can hardly be a
doubt that Mary was considering the best method of securino-
a legal position for the ancient Church, perhaps a restoration of
some of its former privileges. She had uniformly refused to
ratify the proceedings of the convention of 1560 ; and the
Keformed^ system had no other legal sanction than the royal
proclamations securing in the meantime the execution of those
laws which were in force at the queen's return. The whole
ecclesiastical constitution might be reviewed and altered at
the ensuing parliament.
One of the most effectual means of restoring the Koman
Church was the filling up of the vacant sees with prelates of
character and ability, attached from conviction to the doctrines
of their communion, and invested with the proper apostolical
authonty. Several of the bishops had openly joined the Ee-
formed, but, as they retained the political dignity which their
ecclesiastical office had given them, no change could be made
m the government of their dioceses so long as they lived
Two sees, however, were vacant at this time. Donald Camp-
bell, Bishop-elect of Brechin, had died about the end of the
year 1562 ; and a much more distinguished prelate, Henry
Sinclair, Bishop of Boss, and President of the Court of Ses-
sion, having gone to France to obtain medical advice for a
^ Knox, vol. ii. p. 514-516.
VOL. II.] ..
146 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXVI.
painful disease, died at Paris on the second of January, 1565.
On the thirteenth of November, John Sinclair, Dean of Eestal-
rig, was appointed to succeed his brother, as President of the
Court of Session, and his nomination to the see of Brechin
appears to have followed soon afterwards. Emulating his
predecessor's merits as a judge, the new prelate was equally
fitted for the discharge of his episcopal duties. For many
years he had taken a leading part in the counsels of the
Church. He belonged to the ecclesiastical party which was
anxious for a reformation of abuses, and had shewn his mode-
ration and charity in his intercourse with the Protestant
martyr, Adam Wallace. He had exerted himself to win back
the affections of the people by his sermons, and had been mis-
construed on both sides to such a degree, that the Reformed
said he was not far from the kingdom of God, and some of
the friars asserted that if he took not heed to his doctrine, he
would be the destruction of the whole estate of the Churchi
The queen had testified her regard for the Dean of Restabig,
by selecting him to celebrate her marriage with Darnley, and
she now expected, from his zeal and ability, the most efiiectual
assistance in the promotion of her designs. ^
The successor of Bishop Henry Sinclair in the diocese of
Ross was John Leslie, Official of Aberdeen. Leslie had for
some time held a distinguished place among the defenders of
the hierarchy. His origin has not been clearly ascertained,
but it is supposed that he was the illegitimate son of a priest.
He was born in the year 1527, and in 1550 was a prebendary
of the cathedral church of Aberdeen. His dispute with the
Reformed ministers at Edinburgh, and his mission to the
queen previous to her return to Scotland, have already been
mentioned. In 1565, he was promoted to the abbacy
of Lindores, and it is probable that he was appointed to
the see of Ross about the end of that year, although some
months elapsed before he was put in possession of the tem-
poralities. ^
There does not seem to be any record which mentions the
^ Knox, vol. i. pp. 265, 266, 274, 275 ; vol. ii. p. 398. Keith's Catalogue,
pp. 165, 194. Tytler's Life of Craig, p. 74-87. Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 79.
2 Keith's Catalogue, pp. 194, 198-200. Knox, vol, ii. appendix, pp. 600,
601. living's Scottish Writers, vol. i. p. 122-127.
A.D. 1565.] OF SCOTLAND. 147
consecration either of Bishop John Sinclair^ or of Bishop
Leslie. That the latter was consecrated is certain from the
subsequent events of his life ; and it is probable that the
former also was duly ordained to the episcopate. The want of
positive information is easily explained by the peculiar position
of Scotland at that time. The temporal rank and emoluments
of the episcopal office might be openly conferred ; but the
religious rite could be celebrated only in private.
That Mary was contemplating some design for restoring the
Church or relieving its members from the penalties to which
they were exposed may therefore be held as certain ; but it has
been frequently stated that for this purpose she had asked the
assistance of the great Eoman Catholic powers on the Continent,
and that she had actually joined the League which they had
formed against the Protestants. I have seen no proof of this
beyond the assertion of Eandolph, who does not mention the
source of his information, and whose individual word, in a
matter of this kind, is not much to be relied on. What
the English envoy states in one letter is contradicted in
another, and there is the distinct evidence of the papal nuncio,
the Bishop of Mondovi, afterwards Cardinal Laurea, that
Mary had either never joined the League, or had refused to
regulate her proceedings in accordance with its objects.^
The correspondence carried on between the Queen of the
Scots and her friends in Italy, France, and Spain, was pro-
bably conducted by David Riccio, who acted as her French
secretary, and his services in this matter were known or sus-
pected by the Protestant leaders. They were aware that he
had persuaded Mary to refuse her pardon to the exiled lords,
and they feared that the forfeiture of those nobles would be
the first step towards a restoration of Popery. They were
also displeased that a person of Riccio's humble origin should
possess any share of that power which they held to be then-
own exclusive right. The same complaints were heard which
had been so common in the reign of James III., and they
were now aggravated by the circumstance that the object of
^ Compare Randolph's letter to Cecil, Tth February, 1566 (Robertson, vol.
iii. p. 315), with his letter of the 14th of the same month, and the nuncio's
letter to the Grand Duke of Tuscany, both quoted by Miss Strickland (Lives
of the Queens of Scotland, vol. iv. p. 246, and vol. v. p. 214).
148 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXVI.
aristocratic hatred and suspicion was a foreigner by birth, and
an alien in religion. Mary was aware of these murmurs, but
disregarded and despised them. '' If the sovereign," she said,
" finds a man of low estate, poor in means but generous in
mind, faithful in heart, and well adapted to fill an office in his
service, will he not dare to intrust him with any authority,
because the nobles who already possess power are ever craving
for more?"
The meeting of parliament had been postponed from
February to March, and, on the twelfth of that month, it was
proposed to carry through the forfeiture of Murray and his
associates. There was no way of preventing this result except
one of those violent measures which had been too frequent
in Scottish history. The friends of the banished nobles and
the zealous supporters of the Reformation might have been
unable to execute their plans had they not found an ally in
Damley, who was jealous of R-iccio's influence with the queen,
and indignant that she had refused him the crown-matrimonial.
A conspiracy was formed by those various parties, and bonds
were interchanged, according to the Scottish fashion, by which
they engaged to put Riccio to death, to confer the crown-
matrimonial on Damley, and to place the queen under restraint.
The chief persons concerned, besides Darnley himself, were
the Earl of Morton, and the Lords Euthven and Lindsay, but
the plans of the conspirators were approved by Lennox,
Murray, Argyll, Lethington, and Grange, and by the Earl of
Bedford and Randolph, by whom they were communicated to
Elizabeth, Cecil, and Leicester.
A fast had been ordered by the last general assembly, and
Knox and Craig had been enjoined to set forth the form of it.
It began on Sunday, the third of March, 1566, and the
Protestants resorted to Edinburgh in large numbers. The
subjects selected from the Scriptures for the prayers and
sermons were the slaying of Oreb and Zeb, the death of
Sisera, the hanging of Haman, and similar events in the Old
Testament history. On Thursday, the seventh, the Lords of
the Articles were chosen for the parliament, and everything
was prepared for the process of attainder on the twelfth. On
the evening of the following Saturday, Riccio was murdered
at Holyrood. The queen's friends escaped from the palace,
A.D. 1566.] OF SCOTLAND. 149
but Black, the Dominican friar who had on several occasions
come forward as a champion of the Koman Church, was killed
in the tumult. Mary was detained a prisoner in her chamber ;
andj on Sunday, Darnley caused proclamation to be made,
commanding the lords of parliament to leave Edinburgh. On
the evening of that day, Murray and the banished nobles
arrived in the capital.
It was proposed to imprison the queen until she should
agree to confer the crown-matrimonial on Darnley, establish
the Keformed religion, and ratify in parliament the proceed-
ings of the nobles, but she prevailed on her husband to
separate his cause from that of the conspirators, and to retire
with her to Dunbar. There she was soon joined by the Arch-
bishop of St. Andrews, by the Earl of Huntly, who had been
restored to his father's title and estates, by the Earls of Both well
and Atholl, and others. By their advice she pardoned Murray
and tlie banished lords, and turned her whole attention to the
punishment of Kiccio's muiderers. The conspirators, unable
to offer any resistance, fled to England, and Knox sought
refuge among his supporters in Kyle. The office of chan-
cellor of the kingdom, which had been bestowed on Morton
after the battle of Corrichie, was now conferred on the Earl
of Huntly. 1
The circumstances relating to E-iccio's murder and the con-
spiracy which led to it are now for the most part clearly
ascertained. One important point remains undecided —
whether Knox was aware of the plot. The direct evidence
against the reformer was first discovered by Mr. Tytler. It
consists of a list of the names of those who were implicated,
transmitted by Randolph to Cecil twelve days after the
murder. In this list the names of Knox and Craig appear ;
and, taken along with the other circumstances of the case,
^ Knox, vol. ii. p. 519-526, and appendix, p. 592-598. Sir James Melville's
Memoirs, Bannatyne Club ed. p. 130-149. Keith, vol. ii, p. 380-424 ; vol. iii. p.
260-278. Tytler, vol. vii. p. 14-36. Labanoff, vol. vii. pp. 298, 299. as quoted
in Mignet's History of Queen Mary, English Translation, vol. i. p. 210. The
death of Black is mentioned in a letter from Parkhurst, Bishop of Norwich, to
Bullinger, dated 21st August, 1566, referred to by Mr. David Laing in his ap-
pendix to Knox, vol. ii. pp. 594, 595, and printed in Burnet's History of the
Reformation, vol. iv. p. 594, and in the Zurich Letters, Parker Society ed. vol.
i. pp. 98, 99, and translation, p. 165-167
150 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Chap. XXXVI.
it is, in Mr. Ty tier's opinion, conclusive as to the minis-
ters' guilt. So far as Knox is concerned, it would not require
direct evidence of a very strong description to establish his
complicity. The presumptions which go so far to render
improbable a similar accusation against George Wishart lean
entirely in the opposite way in regard to Knox. It was an
opinion of his, and one which he openly avowed, that every
idolater should be put to death. He could have little scruple
in acting on this in the case of a foreigner whose life was
believed to be inconsistent with the safety of the Reformed
cause. He formerly boasted that no great attempt in support
of the Protestant religion had ever been made without his
assistance; and on this occasion his father-in-law, Lord
Ochiltree, and his principal friends among the nobility and
barons, were cognisant of the plot. His course of proceeding
during the fast, and his flight to Kyle — a circumstance so
different from his usual bold confronting of danger — are sus-
picious. The portion of his History of the Reformation, in
which the murder is related, cannot be entirely relied on as
genuine, but in another passage of undoubted authenticity he
thus expresses himself:—" That great abuse of this common-
wealth, that poltroon and vile knave, Davie, was justly
punished, the ninth of March, in the year of God, 1565, for
abusing of the commonwealth, and for his other villany which
we list not to express, by the counsel and hands of James
Douglas, Earl of Morton, Patrick, Lord Lindsay, and the
Lord Ruthven, with other assisters in their company, who all,
for their just act, and most worthy of all praise, are now un-
worthily left of their brethren, and suffer the bitterness of
banishment and exile."
Suspicious, however, as these circumstances are, and shew-
ing, as they do, the reformer's deliberate approbation of the
murder, I do not think that the evidence brought foi-ward by
Mr. Tytler, and the arguments by which he supports it,
are sufficient to prove that Knox was aware of the conspiracy.
There is no reason to doubt the genuineness of the list
transmitted by Randolph, though it is not in his own hand-
writing ; but the information which he received might have
been erroneous, and it would seem that the subsequent list,
sent to the English council by Bedford and Randolph, in
A.D 1566.] OF SCOTLAND, 151
which the names of Craig and Knox do not appear, was the
result of more accurate investigation, rather than a document
prepared for the purpose of concealing the guilt of the re-
formers. ^
John, Bishop of Brechin, died on the ninth of April, 1566,
and in him Mary lost one of the wisest and most faithful of
her counsellors.. The nomination of his successor reflects no
credit on the queen. Through the influence of the Earl of
Argyll, Alexander Campbell, a young man of the family of
Ardkinlas, was appointed to the see on the sixteenth of May.
The new prelate was never consecrated. He was a supporter
of the Reformed opinions, and fulfilled what was expected of
him, by alienating the possessions of the bishopric to his
patron the earl.^
The district of Carrick had hitherto been one of the strong-
holds of the ancient Church, but it ceased to be so in the
autumn of this year. The Earl of Cassillis, having married a
sister of Lord Glammis, by her persuasion became a Pro-
testant, and, as Knox expresses it, caused " reform his
churches in Can*ick, and promised to maintain the doctrine of
the Evangel." 3
In the month of September, the superintendents and the
most influential ministers assembled at St. Andrews, to con-
sider the confession drawn up by the E-eformed in Switzer-
land. This confession was sent by its compilers to the Scot-
tish Protestants, with a request to know whether they agreed
with it, because it was alleged that in some points they differed
from their brethren on the Continent. After due consulta-
tion, the superintendents and ministers, in an answer ad-
dressed to Beza, stated that they agreed on all points, except
in regard to the observance of festivals : " This one thing,
however, we can scarcely refrain from mentioning, with regard
to what is written in the twenty-fourth chapter of the aforesaid
^ Compare the statements and arguments in the seventh volume of Tjtler,
Proofs and Illustrations, p. 353-3G2, with the remarks of Dr. M'Crie, son
of Knox's biographer, appended to his Sketches of Scottish Church History, 4th
ed. vol. i. p. 309-320. See also Knox, vol. i. p. 235, and Ellis's Original
Letters, vol. ii. p. 220-222.
2 Knox, vol. ii- p. 528. Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 98. Keith's Catalogue,
p. 166.
3 Knox, vol. ii. p. 533.
152 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXVL
confession, concerning the ' festivals of our Lord's Nativity,
Circumcision, Passion, Resurrection, Ascension, and sending
the Holy Ghost upon his disciples,' that these festivals at the
present time obtain no place among us ; for we dare not reli-
giously celebrate any other feast day than what the divine
oracles have prescribed. Everything else, as we have said, we
teach, approve, and most willingly embrace." ^
During this autumn, a formal attempt was made to induce
the queen to consent to the reception of a nuncio in Scotland.
Soon after her marriage, Mary had opened a communication
with the King of Spain. An English gentleman, named
Francis Yaxley, formerly in the service of Queen Mary of
England, now in attendance on Darnley, was sent to notify
the marriage to Philip, to assure him of their attachment to
the Church of Rome, and to ask his assistance in maintaining
their rights. Philip gave the envoy a favourable answer,
and wrote to the Pope, requesting his co-operation in the cause
of the King and Queen of Scotland. Nothing farther seems
to have been done during the pontificate of Pius IV., but his
successor, Pius Y., on the sixteenth of June, 1566, wrote to
the queen with a supply of money, recommending the Bishop
of Mondovi as nuncio to Scotland, and promising all the as-
sistance in his power to aid her design of bringing back her
kingdom to the obedience of the holy see. "When the nuncio
arrived at Paris, he received a communication from the queen,
through the Archbishop of Glasgow, expressing her wish that
he might come to Scotland as soon as practicable, but advising
delay till matters should be prepared for his reception. The
nuncio praised her zeal, sent over a Jesuit named Edmund
Hay, to assist her secretly with his counsels, and urged her to
dismiss Lethington, who, he said, was a secret adherent of
the Earl of Murray.
On the ninth of October, Mary wrote to the Pope, acknow-
ledging his bounty, mentioning that she had succeeded, with
considerable difficulty, in obtaining the consent of her nobility
to the public baptism of her son according to the ritual of the
Church, and expressing a hope that this would be a beginning
towards the restoration of the right use of the sacraments in
lier dominions. Meanwhile, the nuncio again urged her,
^ Knox, vol. ii. p. 534. ZuiicL Letters, vol. ii. p. 362-365.
A.D. 1566.] OF SCOTLAND. 153
througli the Bishop of Dunblane who was then at Paris, to
allow of his coming to Scotland. Marj held a secret meeting
of the nobles and prelates of her own communion, to consider
the propriety of sending Lord Seaton with a convoy of ships
to bring the nuncio over. The prelates are said to have
offered to defray the whole expense, but Mary still declined
to give her sanction, alleging that she could not warrant the
nuncio's safety from the violence of the Protestants. Farther
proceedings were stopped by the king's murder ; and the
nuncio, who was prepared to come over at all hazards, severely
blamed the queen's lukewarmness, attributing her subsequent
misfortunes to her refusal of his visit, and to her not following
the counsels of the League. Of Mary's zeal in the cause of
her religion there can be no doubt, but these circumstances
shew that it was tempered with prudence and discretion.
She knew much better than the Italian prelate what dangers
would attend the open appearance of a papal envoy in Scot-
land, and, rather than incur these, she chose to expose her-
self to the censures and misconstructions of the ardent ad-
herents of Eome. ^
The baptism of the infant son of Mary and Darnley has
been alluded to in the preceding remarks. The Prince of
Scotland was born at Edinburgh, on the nineteenth of June,
1566. His baptism was long delayed, probably to enable
the queen to make the necessary arrangements for its public
celebration. All things having finally been prepared, he
was baptized by the name of Charles James by the Arch-
bishop of St. Andrews, in the chapel-royal at Stirling Castle,
on the seventeenth of December, in presence of the queen, the
Bishops of Dunkeld, Dunblane, and Boss, the Prior of Whit-
horn, and various nobles who adhered to the communion of
Bome. The sponsors were the King of France, the Duke of
Savoy, and the Queen of England, who were represented by
their several proxies. The Countess of Argyll, who acted
^ In regard to Mary's negotiations with Spain and Rome, see Mignet, vol. i.
p. 191-193, vol. ii. p. 432-437 ; Burnet's History of the Reformation, vol. iii. p.
487-489 ; Keith, vol. ii. pp. 600, 601, vol. iii. pp. 311, 341, 342 ; Miss Strick-
land's Lives of the Queens of Scotland, vol. v. p. 212-215 ; and the original
authorities referred to by these writers. After her maniage with Bothwell,
Mary blamed the nuncio for not coming to Scotland, though, as she said, he was
invited by her ; but the statement made by her at that time cannot be relied on.
154 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXVI.
for Elizabeth, was afterwards obliged to do penance for
assisting at a Popish sacrament. The English ambassador,
the Earl of Bedford, and the Scottish Protestant nobles,
remained outside the chapel door. This was the last public
ceremonial in which the Scottish bishops of the Roman com-
munion took part.i
Soon after the baptism of her son, Mary, yielding to the
entreaties of the Earls of Murray and Bothwell, granted a
pardon to the Earl of Morton, the Lord Lindsay, and the
chief conspirators against Riccio. On the other hand, she re-
stored to the Archbishop of St. Andrews the consistorial
jurisdiction which he had lost in the year 1560. This was
not now looked upon as an ecclesiastical privilege, but it may
have been intended as a beginning towards the re-establish-
ment of other rights. ^
The general assembly met at Edinburgh on the twenty-
fifth of December. The members agreed to present a re-
monstrance to the privy council against the late grant in
favour of the primate. Kjiox had not resumed his former
office in the capital, and, as his sons were pursuing their edu-
cation in England, he obtained leave from the assembly to go
to that country for the purpose of visiting them, and for other
business. The assembly furnished him with testimonials of
character, and also intrusted him with a letter to the English
bishops, in which they were requested to deal gently with
their brethren who scrupled to wear the ecclesiastical vest-
ments.^
The temporary reconciliation between the queen and
Darnley had not continued long. The conduct of the latter
grew daily more capricious and unbecoming. Mary strove
for some time to win her husband to a better disposition, but
at last seems to have abandoned him to his own sullen
humour and evil courses. Darnley was encouraged in his way-
wardness by his father, and, deserted by almost all others,
sought support among the most bigoted adherents of the
^ Knox, vol. ii. pp. 536, 537. Diurnal of Occurrents, pp. 103, 104. Keith,
vol. i. pp. xcvii. xcviii. ; vol. ii. p. 485-489.
2 Knox, vol. ii. p. 548. Tytler, vol. vii. pp. 56, 57. Laing's History of Scot-
land, 2nd ed. vol. ii. pp. 75, 76.
' Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 46-54. Knox, vol. ii. p. 537-547. Calder-
vood, vol. ii. p. 328-340. Keith, vol. iii. p. 146-159.
A.D. 1567,] OF SCOTLAND. I55
Koman Chureh, who were offended by the queen's refusal to
incur the hazard of an attempt to restore the influence of
the papacy. Soon after the baptism of the prince, he went
to visit the Earl of Lennox at Glasgow, and while in that
city was taken dangerously ill of the small-pox. Mary sent
her own physician to attend him, and when he began to
recover went herself to Glasgow, where a reconciliation, to
all appearance full and sincere, took place between them.
In the end of January, Darnley was able to be removed to
Edinburgh. A house belonging to the provost of the col-
legiate church of St. Mary-in-the-Fields was fitted up for his
reception. At an early hour in the morning of Monday, the
tenth of February, that house was blown up with gunpowder,
and the dead body of Darnley, unscathed by fire, was found
lying in an adjoining garden.
The immediate agents in this horrible crime were the
retainers of the Earl of Bothwell, and, from the first, public
suspicion was directed towards them and their master. The
queen was earnestly advised by her best friends to use every
effort for the discovery and punishment of the murderers.
The Archbishop of Glasgow, writing from Paris, did not
conceal the reports which pointed to herself as implicated in
the conspiracy, and told her plainly that it was better for her
to lose life and all, rather than not take vengeance on those
who were really guilty. Bothwell was formally accused by
the Earl of Lennox, and a day was appointed for his trial, but,
as he continued to direct all public proceedings in the queen's
name, no one ventured to appear against him, and he was
acquitted by the jury. There cannot be a doubt as to Both-
well's guilt. Whether Mary was cognisant of the murder
still remains a subject of dispute. The positive evidence
against her is quite insufficient to establish her guilt, but her
conduct in regard to Bothwell exposes her to very grievous
suspicion. ^
The parliament met at Edinburgh immediately after the
trial of Bothwell. The three estates appear under the ancient
form. The record bears that the parliament was holden and
begun at Edinburgh, on the fourteenth day of April, by the
' Knox, vol. ii. p. 549-552. Keith, vol. i. pp. civ. cv.; vol. ii. p. 496-562.
Tytler, vol. vii. p. 56-84.
156 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Chap. XXXVL
most reverend, and reverend fathers in Christ, John, Arch-
bishop of St. Andrews, Primate of all Scotland, and legatus
natus, Alexander, Bishop of Galloway, William, Bishop of
Dunblane, Adam, Bishop of Orkney, John, Bishop of the
Isles, and by the earls, barons, and others there specified.
In the course of the proceedings, the Bishops of Dunkeld,
Brechin, Aberdeen, and Eoss, and various abbots and priors
were also present. The Bishop of the Isles was John
Carsewell, the Protestant superintendent of Argyll, who had
been nominated to the see of the Isles and the abbacy of
lona on the twenty-fourth day of March preceding, the
queen's presentation bearing that he was appointed in the
same form, and as freely in all respects as if he had been
provided thereto by the court of Rome. Nothing is men-
tioned respecting the death of Carsewell's predecessor. Bishop
John, but it appears that on the twenty-first of May, 1567,
a person named Lachlan 3I^Lean renounced all right which
he had to the bishopric of the Isles and abbacy of lona,
and became bound not to molest John Carsewell in the poses-
sion of the same. At this parliament various acts were passed
ratifying the grants which had been made to several of the
nobility and barons, and the repeal of the penal statutes
formerly enacted against the Protestants was confirmed. ^
On the evening of the day on which parliament rose, the
Earl of Bothwell entertained a large number of the chief
nobility at supper. During the banquet, the guests were
requested to subscribe a bond, in which they declared their
belief of the earl's innocence of the murder of Darnley, and
recommended him as a suitable husband for the queen. It
is said that the house was surrounded by his armed retainers,
but the subscription of such a paper, under any circumstances,
is one of the most disgraceful incidents in Scottish history.
The course of events now hurried rapidly on. The queen
was seized by Bothwell on the twenty-fourth of April, and
carried to his castle of Dunbar. As he was already mar-
ried to a sister of the Earl of Huntly, a divorce was urged
forward, both in the Protestant consistorial court, and in that
of the primate, and on the fifteenth of May he attained the
' Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 545-590. Keith's Catalogue,
pp. 307, 308. Collectanea de rebus Albanicis, p. 5.
A.D. 1567.] OF SCOTLAND. 157
object of his ambition by his marriage with the queen. The
ceremony was performed within the presence chamber of
Holyrood by the Bishop of Orkney, after sermon, according
to the Protestant mode. None of the excuses which have been
made for Mary's conduct at this time are of any avail. What-
ever threats or violence may have been used, death itself
ought to have been welcome to her rather than such dishonour.
During these transactions a powerful confederacy of the
nobles, strengthened by the promised support of England and
France, was forming against the queen and Both well. Mary,
finding that she could not rely on the fidelity of her troops,
surrendered to Kirkaldy of Grange, on his promise that she
would be treated by the associated barons as their sovereign.
Bothwell was allowed to depart in safety. The condition
agreed to by Kirkaldy was disregarded. Mary was carried to
Edinburgh, and, after being exposed to the insults of the
soldiers and populace, was shut up in prison within the castle
of Lochleven, on the sixteenth of June. ^
On the twenty-fourth of June, the Earl of Glencairn,
accompanied by his own domestics, went to the queen's chapel
at Holyrood, and destroyed the altars, images, and other fur-
niture. This act was well-pleasing to the ministers and
zealous Protestants, but was not approved of by most of the
nobility. ^
On the twenty-fifth of the same month, the general assembly
met at Edinburgh, and George Buchanan was chosen
moderator. Buchanan was neither a superintendent nor a
minister, and his appointment to preside in the highest court
of the Reformed communion shews the privileges possessed
by the lay members of that body. It was agi*eed that another
assembly should be held at Edinburgh on the twentieth of
July, an endeavour being made in the meantime to prevail
on the Earls of Huntly and Argyll, and other Protestant
nobles favourable to the queen, to concur with the party of
the associated barons in measures for the welfare of the
Beformed religion.
^ Knox, vol. ii. p. 552-562. Keith, vol. ii. p. 562-647. Laing, vol. ii. p. 106-
115. Tytler, vol. vii. p. 85-113.
2 Knox, vol. ii. p. 562. Calderwood, vol. ii. p. 366. Keith, vol. ii, pp. 654,
655.
158 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXVI.
The assembly met on the twenty-first of July, but the
queen's lords refused to appear. Among the barons present
were the Earls of Morton, Mar, and Glencairn, the Lords
Euthven, Lindsay, and Ochiltree, the secretary, Maitland, and
Kirkaldy of Grange. The Earl of Murray had left Scotland
a short time before the trial of Bothwell. All the members of
the assembly agreed to maintain and confirm the acts in
favour of the Protestant religion which were made by the
parliament of 1560, to use their endeavours to obtain the
patrimony of the Church for the Reformed ministers, to avenge
the murder of the late king, to commit the prince to the care
of wise and godly men, and utterly to take away all idolatry
without respect of place or person. It was also agreed that,
in time to come, the sovereign should, before his coronation,
take an oath to maintain the true religion now professed in
Scotland. The assistance of the ministers was of the utmost
importance to Morton and his friends, who were threatened at
this time by a powerful combination of the party of Huntly,
Argyll, and the Hamiltons, with those who had always re-
mained faithful to the queen. They were therefore ready to
make any engagements which the zealous Protestants might
desire. ^
In the meantime, the associated barons were deliberating
about the fate of Mary. With few exceptions, they were
resolved on her deposition, and several of them proposed to
bring her to a public trial and put her to death, as accessory
to the conspiracy against Darnley. This last measure was
supported by the influence of the Protestant ministers, and
vehemently urged on by Knox, who had returned from Eng-
land before the first meeting of the assembly. The deposition
and imprisonment of the queen were finally resolved on, and
three instruments were prepared for her signature. By these,
she resigned the government in favour of her infant son, con-
ferring the regency, during his minority, on the Earl of
Murray, and, till that nobleman's return from France, or in
the event of his decease or his declining to act, on the Duke
of Chatel-herault, and the Earls of Lennox, Argyll, Atholl,
Morton, Glencairn, and Mar. The Lord Lindsay and Sir
* Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 54-69. Knox, vol. ii. p. 563-565. Calder-
wood, vol. ii. pp. 368-371, 377-384. Keith, vol. iii. p. 164-184.
A.D. 1567.] OF SCOTLAND. I59
Kobert Melville were sent to Lochleven to demand the signa-
ture of the queen to these papers. For some time she refused
to^ subscribe them, but, overawed at length by the violence of
Lindsay, and the fear of an ignominious death if she persisted
in her refusal, she gave her consent. The instruments of
Mary's abdication were signed on the twenty-fourth of Julv
1567.1 ^'
» Keith, vol i. p. ex. cxv. ; vol. ii. p. 655-716. Tytler, vol. vii. p. 113-138.
160 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXVIL
CHAPTER XXXVII.
FROM QUEEN MARY'S ABDICATION IN JULY, 1567, TO THE DEATH OF
ARCHBISHOP HAMILTON IN APRIL, 1571.
Coronation of James VI. — Regency of the Earl of Murray—
Escape of Queen Mary from Lochleven — Her defeat at
Langside — Her flight to England — Deprivation of the
Principal and regents of King^s College, Aberdeen —
Negotiations between Murray and Elizabeth — Murder of
the Earl of Murray — Regency of the Earl oj Lennox —
Death of John Hamilton, Archbishop of St. Andrews,
The associated barons cared little how Mary's abdication was
obtained, and proceeded at once to act upon it. They
assembled at Stirling for the coronation of the prince, and the
place appointed for the ceremony was the parish church of
that town. It was the wish of the nobles, on this occasion,
to conform as far as possible to ancient usage, and, when
Knox and the ministers objected to the unction as a Jewish
practice, their scruples were disregarded. The deeds of abdi-
cation were read, and Lindsay and Ruthven swore that they
were signed by the free act of the queen. Knox preached the
sermon ; the prince was crowjied and anointed by the Bishop
of Orkney ; and the Earl of Morton, laying his hand on the
Bible, engaged on behalf of the infant sovereign, that he would
maintain the true Reformed religion as now received within
the realm, and extirpate all heresy from his dominions. This
inauguration took place on the twenty-ninth of July.^
The English ambassador. Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, by
order of his mistress, kept aloof from these proceedings.
Elizabeth's hatred to Mary was qualified by another feeling
which on various occasions affected her policy towards Scot-
land— a dislike and dread of the example shewn by the
associated lords in deposing and imprisoning their sovereign.
Throckmorton even interceded in favour of Mary, and in his
^ Knox, vol. ii. p. 566. Calderwood, vol. ii. p. 384, Keith, vol. ii. p. 719-
726. Tytler, vol. vii. pp. 138, 139.
A.D. 1567.] OF SCOTLAND. 161
coiTespondence with Elizabeth he states that, when he did so,
the secretary, Lethington, and the comptroller, Tullibardine,
answered him with the startling averment that the Earl
of Huntly, the Archbishop of St. Andrews, and the Abbot
of Kilwinning, were ready to support the barons in all their
designs, if they would at once put the queen to death, and so
prevent the risk of her marrying again and postponing the
claims of the Hamiltons to the crown. This stran^re state-
ment has met with the too ready belief of Mr. Tytler, by
whom, the letter in which it is contained was first discovered.
Throckmorton's veracity is less suspicious than that of any
other of the English envoys, but no reliance can be placed on
the unsupported averment of Lethington and Tullibardine.
Such a proceeding on the part of the queen's lords is very
improbable, and, in regard to the primate particularly, there
is nothing which we know of his conduct that would entitle
us to judge him so harshly. ^
The return of Murray was now anxiously expected by all
parties. On his arrival, he declined to accept the regency
until he should have a personal inteiwiew with the queen.
At Lochleven he was welcomed by Mary as the only one on
whose wish and power to assist her she could now rely. He
answered her affectionate entreaties for support by a formal
recital of all the evil deeds she had done since her marriage
with Darnley, and by setting before her the punishment with
which she was threatened by so many of her subjects. The
queen was alarmed, and implored him, for her sake, to accept
the regency. Murray had now gained his object in the
manner which he wished. He returned to Edinburgh, and
on the twenty-second of August was proclaimed regent. '-^
A parliament was convened at Edinburgh on the fifteenth
of December. The proceedings were very important. The
queen's abdication, the coronation of the prince, and the ap-
pointment of Murray to the regency, were confirmed. The
ecclesiastical acts of the convention of 1560 — tlie abolition of
the Pope's authority, the abrogation of all laws opposed to the
Reformed religion, and the establishment of the Protestant
1 T^'tler, vol. vii. p. 140-144.
2 Knox, vol. ii. p. 566. Keith, vo\ ii p. 730-754. Tjtier, vol. vii. p.
144-154.
VOL. II.] 12
162 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Chap. XXXVII.
Confession of Faith^ were ratified. It was enacted that all
succeeding kings at their coronation should take an oath to
maintain the true Church, and to extirpate heresy. These
statutes were passed in fulfilment of the promise made to the
general assembly in July. The estates also declared that no
other ecclesiastical jurisdiction, save that of the Reformed
communion, should be acknowledged within the realm ; but
they still refused to bestow on the ministers a greater share of
the patrimony of the Church than that which they had already
received, and no notice whatever was taken of the provisions of
the Book of Discipline.^
The general assembly met at Edinburgh on the twenty-
fifth of December. Various charges of neglect in the visita-
tion of churches, and other complaints, were brought against
the Superintendent of Fife, and the Bishops of Orkney and
Galloway. The Bishop of Orkney was farther accused of
celebrating the queen's marriage with Bothwell. This prelate
thought, perhaps, that he had sufficiently atoned for his offence
by sailing with Kirkaldy to his island diocese in pursuit of
the earl, and displaying an eagerness to apprehend him, more
befitting a soldier than a priest. He was deprived of his office
in the ministry till he should make satisfaction to the assem-
bly.2
The government of the regent was conducted with vigour,
and, where his own interests and those of his party were not
concerned, with justice. The associated barons had taken up
arms and dethroned and imprisoned their sovereign, chiefly
under the pretext of avenging Darnley's murder. Murray
had now the most ample opportunity of ascertaining who were
guilty, and of bringing them to punishment. But, instead of
doing so, he only proceeded against the subordinate actors,
while he connived at the suppression of the evidence against
persons of higher rank, and granted a remission to one of those
most deeply implicated — Sir James Balfour — as a considera-
tion for the surrender of Edinburgh Castle, with the keeping
^ Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. iii. p. 3-25. Calderwood, vol. ii.
p. 388-392. Keith, vol. iii. p. 184-186. Tytler, vol. vii. p. 162-167.
2 Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 70-73. Calderwood, vol. ii. p. 392-401.
Keith, vol. iii. p. 186-198. As to the Bishop of Orkney's share in Kirkaldy's
expedition, see the interesting narrative of Mr. Mark Napier, in a note to Spot-
tiswood's Hibtory, vol. ii. pp. 74, 75.
A.D. 1568.] OF SCOTLAND. 163
of which he had been intrusted by Bothwell. These circum-
stances were openly commented on, and the popularity which
the regent had at first enjoyed was fast abating, when the
tenure of his office and the authority of his party were brought
into most imminent danger by the escape of the queen from
Lochleven. That event took place on the second of May, 1568 ;
and within a few days Mary was joined by a large number of
the chief nobility, and was at the head of an army of six thou-
sand men. She formally declared her abdication void, as
having been extorted by force, and annulled all the proceed-
ings which had taken place in consequence of it. She was
not, however, elated by returning prosperity, but made offers
of reconciliation to Murray. The regent declined her pro-
posals, and determined to hazard all on the issue of an en-
gagement. The battle of Langside was fatal to the cause of
Mary. She fled southwards towards the Solway frith, and,
in the dread of her own rebellious subjects, forgetting all which
experience might have taught her of the character of Eliza-
beth, formed the resolution of seeking protection in Eng-
land. On Sunday the sixteenth of May, she landed at
Workington, in Cumberland, and soon afterwards was con-
ducted to Carlisle.^
Mary had expected that Elizabeth would not only protect
her, but assist in the recovery of her kingdom. When these
hopes were dispelled, and when the Queen of England as-
sumed the character of a judge instead of that of a kinswoman,
Mary endeavoured to escape from captivity, and appealed for
aid to the Roman Catholic subjects of Elizabeth, and to all
who were favourable to her cause, whether in England or in
Scotland. Her plans were discovered and her hopes of escape
frustrated, first, by the ill success of the E-ising in the North,
and afterwards by the imprisonment and execution of the
Duke of Norfolk.
The general assembly met at Edinburgh on the first of
July, 1568. It was enacted that no one should have place
or vote in that body except superintendents, commissioners
appointed for the visitation of churches, and such fit ministers
as they might bring with them, and the commissioners for
counties, burghs, and universities. A printer, named Thomas
1 Keith, vol. ii. p. 782-823. Tytler, vol. vii. p. 167-182.
164 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXYIL
Bassandine, was commanded to call in a book printed by
him, called " The Fall of the Koman Kirk," in which the
king was styled Supreme Head of the Primitive Church.
The Bishop of Orkney was restored to the ministry, but
enjoined to make public confession of his offence in solem-
nizing the queen's marriage with Both well. The assembly
again met, as usual, on the twenty-fifth of December, but
on account of the tempestuous weather and the apprehensions
of the plague, adjourned to the twenty-fifth of Februaiy.
None of the proceedings at the latter meeting call for
notice.^
' The assembly of July, 1568, had petitioned the regent to
take order for the reformation of the University of Aberdeen,
and he had promised to comply with their request. Murray
found no opportunity of carrying this into effect till his expe-
dition to the north in June, 1569. At that time he summoned
the Principal of King's College and several of the regents
before the council, and required them to subscribe an appro-
bation of the Confession of Faith, and the acts concerning
religion of the parliaments of 1560 and 1567, and to join
themselves to the Eeformed Church, and submit to its juris-
diction. They refused to comply with these demands, and
were in consequence deprived of their offices. This decree
of the civil power was soon followed by an ecclesiastical
sentence, in like terms, pronounced by John Erskine of Dun,
Superintendent of Angus and Mearns, with the advice and
consent of the ministers, elders, and commissioners present
on the occasion. The members of the university named in
the sentence are Alexander Anderson, Principal of the college,
Andrew Galloway, Sub-principal, Andrew Anderson, Thomas
Austen, and Duncan Norrie, regents. These proceedings were
confirmed by the assembly which met on the fifth of July,
3569. Alexander Anderson, the deprived principal, was dis-
tinguished for his learning and virtues. He was succeeded by
Alexander Arbuthnot, one of the most accomplished of the
Protestant ministers. At the same assembly of July, 1569,
John Carsewell was rebuked for accepting the bishopric of the
Isles without permission of the Reformed communion, and
^ Book of the Universal Kirk, p 99-111. Calderwood, vol. ii. pp. 421-427,
470, 477-486.
A.D. 1569.] OF SCOTLAND. 165
for assisting at the parliament held after the king's murder. ^
During the regency of Murray, the requests of the assembly
were listened to with respect. In this, the earl consulted at
once his inclinations and his interest. The Eeformed on their
part gave his government their most strenuous support, but
all the assistance of his friends, and his own ability, were
scarcely sufficient to maintain his power. The Hamiltons and
the greater part of the nobility were still opposed to him ; and
to these were now added two of the ablest among the persons
who had hith-^rto acted with him — Maitland and Kirkaldy.
His enemies accused him of a design to set the young king
aside, and usurp the throne, and, about the beginning of the
year 1570, a satirical paper appeared, in which his various
projects were alluded to and advocated by Knox and others
of his confidential supporters in a series of fictitious speeches.
The authorship was not avowed, but it was afterwards known
that the paper was written by Thomas Maitland, brother of the
secretary, who shared the hereditary genius of his family.
The real character of the dialogue is sufficiently obvious, but
it is said that at first many persons supposed the speeches to
be genuine. Knox, who Avas always exceedingly sensitive in
regard to any remark on himself, was very indignant. In a
sermon preached at Edinburgh, he attacked the author of the
paper, and foretold that he would perish in a strange land,
without a friend to support his head. As Maitland soon
afterwards died in Italy, the prediction was believed to be ac-
complished. 2
^ Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 111-117. Calderwood, vol. ii. p. 490-504.
Preface to the Fasti Aberdonenses, p. xxvii.-xxxii.
2 Calderwood, vol. ii. p. 515-525. M'Crie's Life of Knox, pp. 311, 312.
Calderwood asserts that this paper came out immediately after the regent's
murder, and Dr. M'Crie thinks its object was to blacken his memory, and lessen
the odium of the assassination. It is more probable that it was written and cir-
culated before the murder. According to Spottiswood (vol. ii. pp. 121, 122),
the judgment denounced on Maitland was caused by a subsequent and less ex-
cusable offence against the reformer — his throwing into Knox's pulpit, the day
after Murray's death, a paper containing the following words : — " Take up the
man whom you accounted another God, and consider the end whereto his ambi-
tion hath brought him." When the archbishop recorded the fulfilment of
Knox's prophesy, he forgot what he mentions in another place (vol. ii. p. 320),
that Maitland was accompanied in his Italian journey by Thomas Smeaton,
afterwards Principal of the College of Glasgow. It is possible that Calderwood
has confounded two distinct transactions— the circulation of the dialogue prior
166 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXVII.
The regent endeavoured to secure his authority by persuad-
ing Elizabeth to deliver Mary into his hands. He accom-
panied his request with an assurance that no improper means
should be taken to shorten his sister's life. A negotiation was
commenced for this purpose, and, on the second of January,
1570, a confidential friend, Nicholas Elphinstone, was sent by
Murray to the English court, to urge his proposal, and to offer,
if the queen were delivered up, to surrender the Earl of Nor-
thumberland, who had fled for refuge to Scotland. On the
same day Knox addressed a letter to Cecil, written in the
mystical style which he frequently used. "If ye strike not
at the root," he said, " the branches that appear to be broken
will bud again, and that more quickly than men believe, with
greater force than we would wish." It is not clear, how-
ever, whether this points to Mary's death, or to some other
object.
The regent's proceedings were discovered by Mary's faithful
counsellor, the Bishop of Ross, who presented to Elizabeth an
indignant protest against what he said was equivalent to the
death warrant of his sovereign, and called on the ambassadors
of France and Spain to remonstrate on the point. Several of
the Scottish nobles also interfered to oppose the base purpose
of surrendering Northumberland. The farther progress of the
negotiation was stopped by the death of Murray. On the
twenty-third of January, while passing through Linlithgow,
he was shot by Hamilton of Bothwell-haugh.^ It is to be
feared that the assassination of the regent was not solely the
act of private revenge. Many among the nobles were anxious
to rid themselves of their most formidable enemy, and were
utterly unscrupulous as to the means. As in the case of the
conspiracy against Eiccio, the crime may have been hastened
by the knowledge of negotiations, which, if successful, would
be fatal to the existence of their party.
The friends of Mary would now have acquired complete
ascendency, had not their opponents been supported by an
English army. On the twelfth of July, the Earl of Lennox
to the regent's death, and the placing of the paper in Knox's pulpit immediately
after it. It is evident that either his narrative, or that of Spottiswood, is
erroneous. Dr. M 'Crie attempts to avail himself of both.
' Tytler, vol. vii. p. 243-255.
A.D. 1570.] OF SCOTLAND. 167
was chosen regent by the lords of the opposite faction, but his
authority was disowned and set at defiance by the queen's
adherents.
The general assembly should have sat at Stirling on the
twenty-fifth of February, but, on account of the troubled state
of the country, it adjourned to the first of March, when
the members met at Edinburgh. The Bishop of Orkney
had been charged with the simoniacal exchange of his
bishopric for the abbacy of Holyrood ; with leaving off
preaching, and giving himself to the office of a lord of Session ;
with assuming the title of reverend Father in God, which
belongs not to a minister of Christ ; with negligence in the
planting of churches, and in sustaining those already planted ;
with allowing the buildings of his churches to fall into decay,
especially that of Holyrood, although in the times of Popery
the Archbishop of St. Andrews sequestrated the whole rents
of the abbacy because the glass windows were not kept in
repair ; and with other offences. In answer to these com-
plaints, the bishop alleged to the assembly that he had been
compelled by the violence of Eobert, Abbot of Holyrood, to
accept of that abbacy in place of his bishopric ; he denied that
he had left off preaching, justified his acceptance of the office
of a temporal judge, and asserted that most of the churches
belonging to Holyrood had been pulled down in the beginning
of the Reformation, and had never been repaired since.
Knox and some others were directed to enquire into these
charges.^
In the month of August, an act of horrible cruelty was
perpetrated, which marks the lawless state of Scotland at this
time. A person of the name of Allan Stewart had been
appointed commendator of the abbey of Crossraguel by a
grant from the queen, while Buchanan still claimed the rights
which had formerly been conferred upon him over the same
benefice. The Earl of Cassillis, who was popularly styled the
King of Carrick, disregarded the pretensions of both, and acted
as if the abbacy was his own property. As Stewart refused
to give up his rights, the earl caused him to be seized, and
imprisoned in the castle of Dunure, where he was roasted over
^ Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 117-120. Caldcrwood, vol. ii. p. 529-544.
168 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. XXXVIL
a fire till he subscribed the papers which were placed before
him. Stewart and his friends afterwards complained to the
regent, and Cassillis was ordered to find security not to molest
either the commendator or Buchanan in person or property ;
but little other satisfaction was obtained for this outrage.^
From the commencement of the war, the castle of Dunbar-
ton had been held for Mary by her faithful adherent, Lord
Fleming. On the second of April, 1571, it was surprised by
one of the regent's officers. The governor escaped, but among
the prisoners was the Archbishop of St. Andrews. In his
character of primate, the archbishop was hated by the Refor-
med ; as the real leader of the Hamiltons, and one of the
most formidable opponents of the regency, he was feared and
disliked by Lennox. Religious and political animosity
prompted the measures which followed, but the pretexts used
were his alleged knowledge of the conspiracies which led to
the murder of Darnley and Murray.
Some contemporary writers assert that he admitted his
knowledge of the plot for assassinating Murray, and that he
expressed his sorrow on that account. Buchanan tells us that
his share in Darnley's murder was known through the evi-
dence of a priest, to whom one of the assassins, a retainer of the
primate, had revealed it in confession, and this statement is
supported by the account given in the contemporary Diurnal
of Occurrents : the archbishop maintained his innocence in this
matter to the last. Having been refused a regular trial, he was
condemned by the regent, in terms of a former attainder, and
was hanged at Stirling on the sixth of April. ^
^ Bannatyne's Transactions in Scotland, ed. 1S06, p. 55-67. Calderwood, vol.
iii. p. 68-70.
2 Buchanan, vol. i. p. 394-397. Bannatyne, pp. 120, 121, Dinrnal of Occur-
rents, pp. 204, 205. Spottiswood, vol. ii. pp. 155, 156. Calderwood, vol. iii.
p. 54-59. Cook's History of the Church of Scotland, vol. i. p. 122-129. Tytler,
vol. vii. p. 288-291. Buchanan says that the priest who gave evidence against
the primate adhered to his statement more than fifteen monthsf afterwards, when
about to suffer punishment according to the laws for saying mass a third time.
This must mean that the priest was put to death in terms of the act of the con-
vention of 1560, as renewed by the parliament of 1567, imposing capital punish-
ment in such cases ; and it shews that the statement made by some writers, that
no Roman Catholic in Scotland suffered death by judicial sentence on account of
religion, is erroneous. Another instance of capital punishment inflicted for
saying mass is mentioned, under the date of 4th May, 1574. in the Diurnal of
A.D. 1571.] OF SCOTLAND. 169
Archbishop Hamilton was a prelate of great ability and of
respectable learning. His private life, like that of too many
of his order, was irregular. He bore a distinguished part in
all the remarkable transactions of his time, and, if we could
forget that he was primate of Scotland, his conduct would
contrast favourably with that of most of the other political
leaders. Although strongly attached to the interests of his
family, there is no proof that he ever allowed his feelings as a
Hamilton to involve him in treasonable attempts against the
crown. Sharing in the persecuting measures by which the
clergy endeavoured to check the Eeformation, it docs not
appear that he was prominent in urging them on ; and under
ordinary circumstances he seems to have been mild and
generous in his disposition. The sentence by which he died
was cruel and unjust, and the manner in which it was executed
was disgraceful to Lennox and his supporters.
John Hamilton was the last archbishop of St. Andrews of
the ancient line. He had never ceased to assert his ecclesias-
tical rights, although their exercise had in a great measure
ceased since the convention of 1560. The Roman Catholic
members of the chapter of St. Andrews made an attempt to
fill the vacancy in the primatial throne. An ecclesiastic,
named Robert Hay, was elected to the see. He was never
consecrated, but it is said that during several years he con-
tinued to perform various acts of jurisdiction, not only in
his own province but in that of Glasgow. It is not stated
that either the Scottish bishops or the see of Rome acknow-
ledged his metropolitan title, and no other endeavour was
made to keep up the succession of the hierarchy, or to main-
tain the metropolitan and diocesan system of the Roman
Catholic Church.^
Occurrents (p. 341). The name of the priest is not given, and it is possible,
making allowance for some inaccuracy in Buchanan's date, that he may have
been the same person who bore evidence against the archbishop. That person
•was called Thomas Robison, and was at one time master of the school of Paisley.
^ See the preface to Blackhall's Brief Narrative, p. xxvii.
170 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Chap. XXXVIII.
CHAPTEE XXXVIII.
FROM THE DEATH OF ARCHBISHOP HAMILTON IN APRIL, 1571, TO THE
DEATH OF JOHN KNOX IN NOVEMBER, 1572.
Regency of the Earl of Mar — Letter of Ershine of Dun to the
Regent — Ershine'' s Opinions as to Ecclesiastical Polity and
the Episcopal Office — His remonstrances against the usur-
pations of the State — Ecclesiastical Convention at Leith —
Sermon preached at the Convention hy David Ferguson —
Ecclesiastical Polity agreed to hy the Commissioners of the
Convention and of the Privy Council — John Douglas ap-
pointed Archbishop of St. Andreios — General Assembly at
St. Andrews — General Assembly at Perth — Residence of
John Knox at St. Andrews — His return to Edinburgh —
His illness — His parting interviews with his friends — His
death and character.
Five months after the capture of Dunbarton Castle, the Earl
of Lennox was surprised and slain at Stirling by a body of
the queen's adherents, under the command of the Earl of
Huntly and Lord Claud Hamilton. On the day following —
the fifth of September — the Earl of Mar was chosen regent by
the nobles of the king's faction. His rule, like that of his
predecessors, was disowned by the other party, who opposed
him on equal terms in the southern parts of the kingdom, and
in the north obtained a complete predominance under their
able leader. Sir Adam Gordon, brother of the Earl of Huntly.
The regency of Mar was of short duration, but it was
marked by an infamous attempt on the life of Mary. The pro-
posal came from Elizabeth, and none in England were privy to
it except her ministers Burleigh and Leicester, and Killigrew,
the envoy sent to Scotland. The English queen offered to sur-
render Mary to the regent, on condition that she should be im-
mediately put to death. Killigrew found a ready instrument
for the actual execution of the deed in Nicholas Elphinstone,
the same person who had before been employed by the Earl of
Murray to negotiate the surrender of Mary. The consent of
^•D. 1571.] OF SCOTLAND. I7I
Mar and Morton was next obtained, and the conditions were
in the course of being arranged, when the regent became
suddenly ill. He died on the twenty-eighth of October, 1572,
and, on the twenty-fourth of November, the Earl of Morton
was chosen his successor. ^
In a parliament, which met at Stirling a few days before
the death of Lennox, a petition was presented by the com-
missioners of the general assembly, requesting that benefices
should be conferred only on qualified persons, duly admitted
by the Church. The petition was rejected, and the Earl of
Morton spoke of the ministers with great contempt. 2
Through the influence of Morton, John Douglas, Kector of
the University of St. Andrews and Provost of St. Mary's
College there, had been presented to the vacant primatial see,
and sat as archbishop in the parliament at Stirling. Other
bishoprics were also conferred on various persons without con-
sulting the assembly, and there was reason to apprehend that
the higher benefices of the Church, with the right of represent-
ing the spiritual estate in parliament and other privileges,
would be given to - individuals not recognized by those to
whom the actual ecclesiastical government was intrusted. This
must have led to a separation or hostility between Church and
State, and, to guard against such evils, Erskine of Dun, on
the tenth of November, 1571, wrote a letter to the regent.
The opinions expressed by the Superintendent of Angus are
on several accounts worthy of attention. " As to the provision
of benefices," he says, " this is my judgment ,• all benefices of
tithes, or having tithes joined or annexed thereto, which are
taken out of the people's labours, have the offices joined to
them, which ofiice is the preaching of the Gospel, and minis-
tration of the sacraments j and this office is spiritual, and
therefore belongs to the Church, which only has the distribu-
tion and ministration of spiritual things. So by the Church
spiritual offices are distributed, and men received and admitted
thereto, and the administration of the power is committed by
the Church to bishops or superintendents : wherefore to the
bishops and superintendents pertains the examination and
admission of men unto benefices and offices of spiritual cure
^ Tytler, vol. vii. pp. 296-328, 384-388.
' Bannatyue, p. 285. Calderwood, vol. iii. pp. 137, 138.
172 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXVIII.
whatsoever benefice it be, as well bishoprics, abbacies, and
priories, as other inferior benefices. That this pertains by the
Scriptures of God to the bishop or superintendent is mani-
fest ; for the Apostle Paul writes in the Second Epistle to
Timothy, second chapter, and second verse : ^ The things that
thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same
commit thou to faithful men who shall be able to teach others
also.' Here the Apostle refers the examination to Timothy
of the quality and ability of the person, when he says ^ to
men able to teach others.' And also the admission he refers,
where he bids '■ commit to him the same that is able to
teach others.' And in another place, First Epistle to Timothy,
fifth chapter, and twenty-second verse : ^ Lay hands sud-
denly on no man, neither be partakers of other men's sins.
Keep thyself pure.' By laying on of hands is understood
admission to spiritual of&ces, the which the Apostle will not
that Timothy do suddenly, without just examination of their
manners and doctrine. The Apostle also writing to Titus,
Bishop of Crete, puts him in remembrance of his office, which
was to admit and appoint ministers in every city and congre-
gation. And that he should not do the same rashly without
examination, he expressed the qualities and conditions of all
men that should be admitted, as at length is contained in the
first chapter of the Epistle foresaid. The deacons that were
chosen at Jerusalem by the whole congregation were received
and admitted by the Apostles, and that by laying on of their
hands, as St. Luke writes in the sixth chapter of the Acts of
the Apostles. Thus we have expressed plainly by Scripture,
that to the office of a bishop pertain examination and admis-
sion into spiritual cure and office, and also to oversee them
that are admitted, that they walk uprightly, and exercise
their office faithfully and purely. To take this power from
the bishop or superintendent is to take away the office of a
bishop, that no bishop be in the Church. There is a spiritual
jurisdiction and power which God has given unto his Church,
and to them that bear office therein ; and there is a temporal
jurisdiction and power given by God to kings and civil magis-
trates. Both the powers are of God, and most agreeing to
the fortifying one of the other, if they be rightly used. But
when the corruption of man enters in, confounding the offices,
A.D. 1571.] OF SCOTLAND. 173
usurping to himself what he pleases, nothing regarding the
good order appointed by God, then confusion follows in all
estates. In the twelfth chapter of the First Book of Kings, it
is written that King Jeroboam, in presumption of his authority,
made priests in his realm expressly against the order that the
Lord in those days had appointed touching the priesthood,
whereupon followed destruction of that king and his seed ;
and likewise of all other kings that followed him in that
wickedness. For the better understanding of that matter,
Christ has given forth a rule which ought to be weighed by
magistrates and by all people, saying, ^ Render unto Caesar
the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which
be God's.' The Church of God should fortify all lawful
power and authority that pertains to the civil magistrate,
because it is the ordinance of God : but if he pass the
bounds of his office, and enter within the sanctuary of the
Lord, meddling with such things as appertain to the ministers
of God's Church, as Uzziah, the King of Judah, did (Second
Chronicles xxvi. 16), entering into the Temple to burn incense,
the which pertained not to his office, then the servants of God
should withstand his unjust enterprise, as did the bishop at
that time withstand the King of Judah ; for so are they
commanded of God. The servants of God, when such wicked-
ness occurs, should not keep silence, flattering princes in vain
pride, but withstand and reprove them in their iniquity ;
and who does otherwise is unworthy to bear in God's Church
any office. A greater offence and contempt of God and his
Church can no prince do, than to set up by his authority
men in spiritual offices, as to create bishops and pastors of
the Church : for so to do is to conclude no Church of God
to be ; for the Church cannot it be, without it have its own
proper jurisdiction and liberty, with the ministration of such
offices as God hath appointed. In speaking this touching the
liberty of the Church, I mean not the hurt of the king or
others in their patronages, but that they have those privileges
of presentation according to the laws j provided always that
the examination and admission pertain only to the Church of
all benefices having cure of souls.
" As to the question," continues Erskine, " if it be expedient
that a superintendent should be where a qualified bishop is, I
174 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXVIIL
understand a bishop or superintendent to be but one office, and
where the one is, the other is. But having some respect to
the case whereupon the question is moved, I answer, the
superintendents that are placed ought to continue in their
office, notwithstanding any others that intrude themselves, or
are placed by such as have no power in such offices. They
may be called bishops, but are no bishops but idols (Zechariah,
xi. 17), saith the Prophet, and therefore the superintendents,
who are called and placed orderly by the Church, have the
office and jurisdiction, and the other bishops, so called, have
no office or jurisdiction in the Church of God, for they enter
not by the door, but by another way, and therefore are not
pastors, as sayeth Christ, but thieves and robbers."
On the fourteenth of November, Erskine again wrote to the
regent about the oppressive proceedings of the civil power.
Mar answered both letters, mentioning that he had redressed
one particular grievance of a temporary character, and entreat-
ing a charitable construction of the rest of his conduct. " Our
meaning was," he says, " and still is, to procure the reforming
of things disordered in all sorts, as far as may be, retaining
the privilege of the king, crown, and patronage. The default
of the whole stands in this, that the policy of the Church of
Scotland is not perfect, nor any solid conference among godly
men that are well willed and of judgment how the same may
be helped. And for corruption which daily increases, when-
soever the circumstances of things shall be well considered by
the good ministers that are neither busy nor over-desirous of
promotion to them and theirs, it will be found that some have
been authors and procurers of things that no good policy in
the Church can allow. Whereanent we thought to have con-
ferred specially with yourself, and to have yielded to you
in things reasonable, and craved satisfaction of other things
alike reasonable at your hands, and by your procurement."^
It was probably owing to the efforts of the regent himself
on the one side, and of his kinsman, the Superintendent of
Angus, on the other, that an attempt was made to arrange
the differences between the civil and ecclesiastical powers.
During the month of December, several conferences were held
at Leith, between the regent and council, and the superin-
* Bannatyne, p. 279-293. Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 156-165.
A.D. 1572.] OF SCOTLAND. 175
tendents and ministers. On the twelfth of January, 1572, a
meeting of superintendents, commissioners, and ministers, was
held at Leitli. This meeting was styled a convention, be-
cause those only met who were specially warned to attend,
but it was agreed that its acts should have equal authority
with those of a proper assembly. The state of feeling pre-
valent among the members may be judged of from a sermon
preached before them by David Ferguson, minister at Dun-
fermline. Keferring to his text from the third chapter of
Malachi, the preacher remarked — '^ The same accusations and
complaints that God used of old by his prophets against the
Jews, serve this day against them that are like the Jews in
transgression ; yea, they serve against us. For, this day,
Christ is spoiled amongst us, while that which ought to main-
tain the ministry of the Church and the poor is given to pro-
fane men, flatterers in court, ruffians, and hirelings ; the poor
in the meantime oppressed with hunger, the churches and
temples decaying for the lack of ministers and upholding, and
the schools utterly neglected. But now to speak of your
temples where the word of God should be preached and the
sacraments administered, all men see to what miserable ruin
and decay they are come ; yea, they are so profaned, that in
my conscience, if I had been brought up in Germany, or in
any other country where Christ is truly preached, and all
things done decently and in order, according to God's word,
and had heard of that purity of religion which is among you,
and for the love thereof had taken travel to visit this land,
and then should have seen the foul deformity and desolation
of your churches and temples, which are more like sheep-cots
than the house of God, I could not have judged that there had
been any fear of God, or right religion in the most part of
this realm. And as for the ministers of the word, they are
utterly neglected, and come in manifest contempt among you.
Ye rail upon them at your pleasure. Of their doctrine, if it
serve not your turn, and agree not with your appetites, ye are
become impatient. And to be short, we are now made your
table-talk, whom ye mock in your mirth, and threaten in your
anger. This is what moves me (let men judge as they list) to
lay before your eyes the miserable state of the poor Church of
Scotland, that thereby ye may be provoked to pity it, and to
176 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXYIIL
restore the things that unjustly you spoiled it of. Cleanse
then your hand of all impiety, specially of sacrilege, whereby
ye spoiled the poor, the schools, the temples, and the ministers
of God's word, yea Christ Himself. I grant that our fathers,
out of their immoderate zeal, besides the tithes and necessary
rents of the Church, gave thereto superfluously, and more than
enough. What then is to be done, but that the preachers
of God's word be reasonably sustained (seeing that there is
enough and too much for that purpose), the schools and the
poor be well provided as they ought, and the temples honestly
and reverently repaired; that the people may, without injury
from wind and weather, sit and hear God's word, and partici-
pate in the holy sacraments. And if there rest anything un-
spent when this is done, (as no doubt there will,) in the name of
God let it be spent on the most necessary affairs of the com-
monwealth, and not on any man's private commodity."
The convention having proceeded to business, commission
was granted to John Erskine, Superintendent of Angus, John
Winram, Superintendent of Fife, William Lundie of that ilk,
Andrew Hay, commissioner of Clydesdale, David Lindsay,
commissioner of Kyle, Robert Pont, commissioner of Murray,
and John Craig, one of the ministers of Edinburgh, to meet
with the lords of the council, and, on behalf of the Church, to
arrange in regard to the ecclesiastical polity and the sustenta-
tion of ministers, and to report to the next assembly. These
commissioners accordingly met with a committee of the coun-
cil, consisting of the Earl of Morton, the Bishop of Orkney,
the Commendator of Dunfermline, and others, and agreed as
to various points, of which the following are the most im-
portant : —
In regard to archbishoprics and bishoprics, it was thought
good, in consideration of the present state, that the names
and titles of archbishops and bishops, and the boundaries of
dioceses, should not be altered, but that the same should con-
tinue as before the Reformation of religion, at the least till
the king's majesty, on attaining majority, or till the parliament,
should otherwise determine; that the persons presented to
archbishoprics and bishoprics should be endued, as far as might
"be, with the qualities mentioned in the examples of Timothy
and Titus ; that an assembly or chapter of learned ministers
A.D. 1572.] OF RCOTLAND. 177
should be annexed to every metropolitan or cathedral see ;
that all archbishoprics and bishoprics, vacant or to become
vacant, should within a year and day after the vacancy be
filled up with qualified persons, thirty years of age at least ;
that the dean, or, failing him, the next in dignity in the
chapter, should be vicar-general during a vacancy ; that
archbishops and bishops should in the meantime have no
farther jurisdiction than superintendents ; that they should
be subject to the Church and general assembly in matters
spiritual, as to the king in matters temporal, and that' they
should follow the advice of the best learned of their chapter
in the admission to spiritual offices.
In regard to abbacies, priories, and nunneries, it was agreed
that no appointment to any vacancies in these benefices should
take place, nor any grants be conferred out of the same, till
provision were made for the ministers belonging thereto ; that
the person holding the title, and possessing the remaining
fruits thereof, as representing the ecclesiastical estate in par-
liament, and bearing the style of abbot, prior, or commendator,
should be well learned, and qualified for his office, and for
that purpose, on the king's letters commendatory, should be
tried and admitted by the archbishop or bishop ; that, on
the failure of the present convents, the ministers of the
churches belonging to the abbey or priory should act as the
chapter of the commendator in the administration of the
temporalities ; that persons so named as commendators should
be capable of acting as senators for the spiritual estate in the
College of Justice, and of serving the king in the affairs of
the commonwealth.
In regard to benefices having a cure of souls, it was agreed
that the king, the universities, and the lay patrons, should
possess their several rights of patronage ; that only qualified
persons, twenty-three years of age, should be admitted as
ministers ; that readers, found qualified by the bishop or
superintendent, and duly admitted, should be entitled to solem-
nize marriages, and minister the sacrament of baptism, and to
hold vicarages not exceeding the yearly value of forty pounds ;
that all ministers and beneficed persons should subscribe the
Confession of Faith, and acknowledge . the king's authority ;
and that pluralities of such benefices should be forbidden.
VOL. H.] 13
178 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXVIII.
In regard to deaneries, provostries of collegiate churches,
prebends, and chaplainries, it was in like manner agreed that
no appointment to the same should take place, till provision
were made for the ministers of their several churches, and that
all provostries, prebends, and chaplainries, founded on tem-
poral lands, should be bestowed on students in grammar, the
arts, theology, law, and medicine.
As to the manner of creating a bishop, a letter under the
great seal was to be directed to the dean and chapter of the
cathedral church, setting forth the decease of the last bishop,
the king's license to proceed to a new election, and his re-
quisition to choose a faithful pastor, along with a recom-
mendation of a person fit to be elected. The chapter were to
meet accordingly, and, in the event of their finding the person
nominated and recommended to be duly qualified, were to
return their testimonial to that effect, certifying his election,
and requesting the king's approbation of the same ; but, if
they found him to be not duly qualified, the testimonial was
to specify the fact, and request the king to make another
nomination. On the chapter's certificate of the election being
returned, a letter under the great seal was to be directed to
the most reverend father in God, the archbishop of tlie pro-
vince, or the bishop to whom it appertained, setting forth the
election, ratifying the same, and requiring the archbishop or
bishop to consecrate the bishop-elect, as bishop and pastor of
the church to which he was appointed, and to confirm the
election. If the bishop-elect were already a bishop, and
translated from another see, the election was simply to be
confirmed. The new made bishop was to take the following
oath in presence of the king : — " I, A. B. now elected Bishop
of S. utterly testify and declare, in my conscience, that your
majesty is the only lawful and supreme governor of this realm,
as well in things temporal, as in the conservation and purga-
tion of religion ; and that no foreign prince, prelate, state, or
potentate, hath or ought to have any jurisdiction, power, su-
periority, pre-eminency, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual,
within this realm. And therefore I utterly renounce and for-
sake all foreign jurisdictions, powers, superiorities, and authori-
ties ; and promise, that from this forth I shall and will bear
faith and true allegiance to your majesty, your heii'S and law-
A.D. 1572] OF SCOTLAND. 179
ful successors ; and to my power shall assist and defend all
jurisdictions, privileges, pre-eminency, and authorities, granted
and belonging to your highness, your heirs and lawful succes-
sors, as united and annexed to your royal crown. And
further, I acknowledge and confess to have and hold the said
bishopric, and possessions of the same, under God, only of
your majesty and crown royal of this your realm : and for
the said possessions I do my homage presently unto your
majesty ; and unto the same, your heirs and lawful successors,
shall be faithful and true. So help me God." The bishop
thereupon was to receive letters under the privy seal, restoring
his temporalities.
As several of the deaneries, canonries, and prebends of the
cathedral churches, were still possessed by members of the
Church of Rome, or by individuals who were not lawful minis-
ters of the Eeformed communion, a temporary arrangement
was ordered till the chapters should be properly constituted.
Eules were also laid down for the admission of abbots, priors,
and bursars. All persons admitted to benefices having cure
of souls were to promise obedience to their ordinary, and
bursars in schools and colleges to the master or principal of
the school or college.
These articles and conditions were approved by the regent
on the first of February, and it was agreed to obtain a parlia-
mentary ratification of the whole. ^
The system thus proposed to be established is remarkable
for its general resemblance to the external polity of the Church,
as it existed before the Reformation in Scotland, and as it was
at that time sanctioned by law in England. It was expressly
required that bishops should be consecrated, and, in the
admission of ministers and readers, it was probably intended
that forms of ordination analogous to those previously observed
in making priests and deacons should be used. . Even the
principles and scriptural precedents, by which these cere-
monies, and the jurisdiction of the prelates, and the inherent
rights and independence of the spiritual power, were supported
by Erskine of Dun in his correspondence with the regent, bear a
1 Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 168-196. Bannatyne, p. 296. See also Book of the
Universal Kirk, p. 130; Spottiswood, vol. ii. p. 170-172; and note by Mr.
Lyon in Keith's History , vol. iii. pp. 197, 198.
180 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY Chav. XXXVIIL
wonderful similarity to the old ecclesiastical teaching. But
there was one fatal deficiency, which made the new polity,
however outwardly fair and regular, a mere empty form. The
persons to whom the office of consecration was intrusted had
not themselves the gift which they were required to bestow on
others.
No time was lost in carrying out the arrangements made at
Leith. The chapter oC the metropolitan see was ordered to
meet at St. Andrews, on the sixth of February, for the pur-
pose of electing a bishop and pastor for that church, and, on
the day appointed, John Douglas was chosen archbishop.
His inauguration took place on the following Sunday. An
exhortation on the duties of a bishop was made by Winram,
from the first chapter of the Epistle to Titus ; the questions in
the form used at the admission of a superintendent were put
and answered ; and the archbishop-elect was admitted to his
office by the laying on of the hands of the Bishop of Caith-
ness, the Superintendent of Lotliian, and David Lindsay,
minister at Leith. ^ The Bishop of Caithness, a brother of
the late regent, the Earl of Lennox, appears never to have
been consecrated, and it is probable that none of the three had
even received orders as a priest. This seems to have been
the first time at which the laying on of hands in ordination
was used by the Reformed in Scotland.
The general assembly met within St. Leonard's College,
St. Andrews, on the sixth of March. Winram resigned into
their hands the superintendency of Fife, and asked that a
successor should be appointed. He was requested, however,
to continue the exercise of his jurisdiction in those parts which
were not subject to the Archbishop of St. Andrews, and to assist
the archbishop in his visitations or otherwise, when required
by him. Similar injunctions were given to the Superintendents
of Angus and Lothian. Douglas was allowed, in the mean-
time, to retain his office of provost of St. Mary's, in addition to
the rectorship of the universit]^ and. the archbishopric. Knox,
1 Bannatyne, p. 321-324. Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 205-207. John Douglas,
Eector of the University and Principal of St. Mary's College, has been supposed
by Keith and others to be the same person vrith Douglas the Carmelite friar,
who was chaplain for some time to the Earl of Argyll. This mistake is pointed
out by Dr. M'Crie (Life of Melville, vol. i. p. 229), and by Mr. David Laing
(Knox, vol. i. p.
A.D. 1572.] OF SCOTLAND. 181
who had declmed to assist at his inauguration, now protested
against this accumulation of offices. His objection appears to
have been, not to the episcopal office itself, but to its being-
bestowed on an unfit person, whose duties were already more
than he was able to discharge.
The assembly again met at Perth, on the sixth of August.
The Superintendent of Angus was chosen moderator. It was
declared that the visitation and plantation of churches in the
whole diocese of St. Andrews belonged to the archbishop, and
to no other superintendent ; but the Superintendents of Angus
and Lothian, and three other persons, were, at his own desire,
appointed to assist him. At this assembly the proceedings
agreed to at Leith were reviewed. Objections were made to
certain of the ecclesiastical titles which had been recognised
on that occasion, as appearing to have a Popish tendency. It
was enacted that, so far as the functions of the Church were
concerned, the name of Archbishop should not be used, but
that of Bishop only ; in regard to the names of Chapter, Dean,
Archdeacon, and Chancellor, a desire was expressed that they
should be changed to others of the same purport — the chapter,
for instance, to be called the bishop's assembly, and the dean, the
moderator of that assembly ; and it was also ordered that some
persons should be appointed by the general assembly to consider
the nature and extent of the functions of Deans, Archdeacons,
Chancellors, Abbots, and Priors, and the propriety of changing
their names to others more agreeable to God's word, and the
practice of the best reformed Churches. A letter and certain
articles were addressed to the assembly by Knox, and de-
livered by his friends, Winram and Pont. In these docu-
ments, he exhorted them to contend for the truth, to endea-
vour to recover the patrimony of the Church, and to petition
the regent to have all bishoprics filled up in terms of the
agreement at Leith. ^
John Carsewell, Bishop of the Isles, and Superintendent of
Argyll, died in the autumn of this year. He translated
Knox's Liturgy into Gaelic, and his work is remarkable as
being the first which was printed in that language. In the
1 Bannatync, pp. 329-331, 364-369. Calderwood, vol. iii. pp. 208-210, 210-
223, 765-768. Book of the Universal Kirk, pp. 131-133. Spottiswood, vol. ii.
p. 172.
182 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Cuap. XXXVIII.
end of 1572, or the beginning of 1573, the bishopric of the
Isles was bestowed on John Campbell, uncle of the laird of
Calder.i
For a considerable time back, Knox had been in feeble
health. In October, 1570, he had an attack of apoplexy,
which affected his speech for several days, and led to ex-
aggerated stories among his opponents, not unlike some of
those which he himself tells about the Roman Catholic pre-
lates. Early in the summer of the following year, when the
strife between the two political parties became very much
embittered, and his residence at Edinburgh was thought unsafe
on account of the enmity of the Hamiltons and the garrison in
the castle, he left that city, and retired to St. Andrews. His
style of preaching was not so acceptable there as it had been
in Edinburgh. The members of the university were a very
different audience from the citizens of the capital. Many of
them also held political opinions quite contrary to those which
were maintained by the reformer, and some, it is probable,
secretly adhered to the doctrines of the Roman Church. One
of his chief opponents in the university was Archibald Hamil-
ton, who afterwards abandoned the Reformed communion.
While Knox resided at St. Andrews, he published a treatise
in defence of the Protestant opinions, which he had formerly
composed in answer to a letter written by a Jesuit, named
James Tyrie. This letter was addressed by Tyrie to his own
brother, a gentleman of good family in the north of Scotland,
for the purpose of bringing him back to the Church of Rome.
The advertisement to Knox's treatise is dated at St. An-
drews, the twelfth of July, 1571. In 1573, Tyrie published
a reply at Paris, having his own original letter and Knox's
answer prefixed. ^
When a cessation of hostilities took place between the con-
^ Keith's Catalogue, p. 308. Collectanea de rebus Albanicis, pp. 6, 7.
Origines Parochiales Scotise, vol. ii. part i. p. 293. Wodrow Miscellany, vol.
i. p. 281-283. Book of the Thanes of Cawdor, p. 186-188.
2 M'Crie's Life of Knox, p. 313-332. Keferring to the answer to Tyrie,
Bishop Keith remarks (vol. iii. p. 507),' " Mr. Knox makes some good and solid
observations, from which, in my opinion, the Jesuit has not handsomely extri-
cated himself" Bishop Leslie, as might be expected, gives a very different
opinion ; see his History, pp. 540, 541. See also on this subject Mackenzie's
Lives, vol. iii. p. 424-432.
A.D. 1572.] OF SCOTLAND. 183
tending factions in the summer of 1572, Knox was invited
back to Edinburgh. He returned thither in the month of
August, and resumed his duties as a minister, although, in
preaching, his infirmities obliged him to use a smaller church
than that in which he had formerly officiated. Neither age
nor sickness abated his zeal in the cause of the Ileformation,
or prevented his unceasing efforts to maintain it. When
Killigrew came to Scotland to treat with the regent about the
surrender of the queen, he had repeated conferences with
Knox. The reformer was deeply affected by the intelligence
which had been received of the massacre of the twenty-fourth
of August at Paris, and a convention of the Protestants was
summoned, in the regent's name, to meet at Edinburgh on the
twentieth of October. When the day appointed came, whether
owing to Mar's illness or some other cause, not a single
nobleman appeared ; but the ministers and several commis-
sioners met, and presented certain articles to the regent and
council, in which, among various measures, they recommended
that a fast should begin on the twenty-third of November,
to continue till the end of the month, and proposed that a
league should be made with England and other Reformed
countries for the maintenance of the true religion. These
proceedings were encouraged by the English envoy for the
furtherance of his own objects.^
On Sunday, the ninth of November, Knox officiated at the
installation of James Lawson as his colleague and successor
at Edinburgh, and this was the last occasion on which he
appeared in public. On the following Tuesday, he was seized
with a severe cough, which obliged him to give up his daily
readings in the Old and New Testament. On Friday, sup-
posing that it was Sunday, he wished to go to the church and
preach, saying that he had been meditating all night on the
Resurrection of Christ, which was to have been the subject of
his next discourse. On Saturday, he was visited by John
Durie, minister at Leith, and by another of his fi'iends. He
sat at table for the last time, ordered a hogshead of wine to be
pierced, and cheerfully told one of his visitors to send for it so
long as it lasted, as he could not tarry till it was consumed.
» Bannatyne, p. 385-411. Tytler, vol. vii. p. 316-321. M'Crie's Life of
Knox, pp. 333, 334.
184 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. XXXVIIL
On Sunday the sixteenth, forgetting the day appointed for the
fast, and thinking it had begun, he declined to take any food,
till his mistake was pointed out. On Monday, he sent for his
new colleague, Lawson, and the elders and deacons of his con-
gregation, and bade them farewell, protesting that he had
taught nothing but true and sound doctrine, and, however he
had been against any mail, that it was never for hatred of his
person, but only for suppression of his wickedness. The
Prayer for the Sick, as contained in the Psalm Book or
Liturgy used at that time, was then read, and Lawson and
the others departed. On Wednesday, he was visited by the
Earl of Morton, Lord Boyd, and the laird of Drumlanrig ;
but what passed between them was not known at the time, no
one else being present. Morton afterwards mentioned, that
Knox then enquired whether he knew of the design to murder
Darnley, and that he exhorted him to use the gifts which God
had given him to better purpose than he had done in time
past, threatening him with the divine vengeance if he •did
otherwise. On Thursday, when the Lord Lindsay, the
Bishop of Caithness, and others, came to see him, he earnestly
advised them to continue in the truth, and to have nothing to
do with Kirkaldy and the defenders of the castle. On Friday,
he requested his attendant, Bannatyne, to prepare the coffin
for his funeral.
On Sunday the twenty-third, being the first day of the fast,
he lay quiet for a considerable time, after which he said, " I
have been in meditation these last two nights on the troubled
Church of God, the spouse of Jesus Christ, despised of the
world, but precious in his sight ; I have called to God for her,
and have committed her to her head, Jesus Christ j I have
been fighting against Satan, who is ever ready to assault ;
yea, 1 have fought against spiritual wickedness in heavenly
things, and have prevailed ; I have been in heaven and have
possession, and I have tasted of the heavenly joys where
presently I am." He then repeated the Lord's Prayer and
the Creed, with some words in explanation of the different
petitions and articles, and, on saying " Our Father which art
in heaven," added, "Who can pronounce so holy words?"
After the evening sermon, many came to see him, and he spent •
the rest of the day in repeating devout prayers and ejaculations.
A.D. 1572.] OF SCOTLAND. v 185
On Monday morning, he insisted on rising from bed, and
sat up for half-an-hour. During the afternoon, he requested
his wife to read the fifteenth chapter of the First Epistle to the
Corinthians. Other passages of the Scripture, and portions of
Calvin's sermons, were also read to him. When the usual
evening prayers were said, one of those present asked whether
he had heard them. He answered, " I would to God, that
you and all men heard them as I have heard them, and I
praise God for that heavenly sound." About eleven o'clock,
he gave a deep sigh, and Bannatyne, sitting down beside him,
reminded him of the comfortable promises of our Saviour
which he had so often declared to others, and asked him to
make some sign that he heard what was said. He lifted up
his hand, and immediately afterwards expired.
Knox died on the twenty-fourth of November, being then
in the sixty-seventh year of his age. On the twenty-sixth,
he was buried in the church-yard of St. Giles. His funeral
was attended by Morton, who had been elected regent on the
very day the reformer died. When his body was laid in the
grave, the earl said, " Here lieth a man, who in his life never
feared the face of man ; who hath been often threatened with
pistol and dagger, but yet hath ended his days in peace and
honour. For he had God's providence watching over him in
a special manner when his very life was sought." ^
The character of Knox, like that of the other leading per-
sons of the age in which he lived, has continued from his own
time to the present to be a subject of much discussion. The
political and ecclesiastical party in Scotland which looked
upon him as the chief supporter of their cause, and those who
held similar principles in England, naturally venerated his
memory and defended his opinions. But, in the former coun-
try, the same veneration, to a certain extent, was entertained
for some time by those who, like Archbishop Spottiswood,
belonged to a different school. Viewing the Reformation on
the whole as a great blessing, they were unwilling to examine
minutely the life and character of the man whose name was
identified with it in Scotland. This reverence could hardly have
existed along with a belief in the genuineness of Knox's his-
^ Bannatyne, pp. 413-429, 508, 509. Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 230-242.
SpoUiswood, vol. ii. p. 179-184. M'Crie's Life of Knox, p. 335-347. Dr.
186 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXVIII.
torical work ; and that circumstance must never be lost sight
of when Spottiswood's panegyric on the reformer is mentioned.
Had the primate known, that '^ the scurril discourses we find
in it, more fitting a comedian on the stage than a divine or
minister," " the ridiculous toys and malicious detractions
contained in that book," were not, as he supposed, the in-
vention of another, but the undoubted composition of Knox
himself, he would have found better materials for appreciating
his true character than the tradition of the Scottish Pro-
testants.
It is of course by his actions and his authentic writings
that we are best able to judge of Knox's character ; and these
afibrd ample information for the purpose. The libels of his
enemies may be passed by with contempt, but the panegyrics
of his friends are equally worthless as evidence. His ability
and courage, and the wonderful sway which he exercised over
his followers, have never been disputed. His conviction of
the truth and importance of the principles for which he con-
tended is equally undeniable. Imputations have been thrown
on the purity of his moral character, but no proof, so far as I
am aware, has ever been brought of these charges ; and on
such a point mere suspicion, or the scandalous stories of op-
ponents unsubstantiated at the time, should be absolutely
disregarded. His opinions were avowed and acted on with
stem uprightness and independence. Neither fear nor favour,
flattery nor corruption, ever induced Knox to deviate from
what he thought to be the path of duty.
M'Crie states that, when Knox was buried, " the regent emphatically
pronounced his eulogium in these words, ' There lies he who never feared the
face of man.' " The substitution of this epigramraatic remark, for the whole
speech as given by Calderwood, has been almost universal among writers
subsequent to the publication of Knox's Life. I have made no allusion in the
text to the prophecy ofKirkaldy's death, said to have been made by Knox a
week before his own decease. That he predicted the downfall of his old
associate is certain, but the details given by James Melville and Spottiswood
are not to be relied on. Bannatyne, who mentions the reference to Grange,
would hardly have failed to relate the words ascribed to his master had they
really been spoken. The subject bears a great resemblance to "Wishart's
alleged prophecy of the death of Beaton. It is probable that a general
dejiunciation was, after the event, converted into a particular and distinct
prediction. Knox, by his first wife, left two sons, who were both educated at
Cambridge, and one of whom became a clergyman in the English Church. By
his second wife he had three daughters.
A.D. 1572.] OF SCOTLAND. 187
On the other hand, believing, as he did, that his opinions
were not only true, but essentially necessary for the welfare of
the Church and kingdom, he was as ready to compel others to
adopt them, as he was prepared himself to suffer for them.
The persecuting tenets and assumptions of infallibility,
which he denounced in the Church of Rome, he defended and
sought to cany out for the maintenance of the Protestant
cause. It was the prudence and caution of the nobility, not
the toleration of the preachers, which moderated the execu-
tion of the penal laws enacted against the Roman Catholics.
But Knox had recourse to worse weapons in defence of
the Reformation. He corresponded with the rulers of a
foreign state ; abetted plots and conspiracies against his own
sovereign ; and did not scruple to postpone the true interests
of his country to the supremacy of a party.
Another deep stain in his character was the harsh and
uncharitable language, the false and slanderous accusations,
which he systematically used against his opponents, and this,
not merely in the heat of controversy, but calmly and deli-
berately in the closet. In some instances his language admits
of palliation, if not of excuse. It was not easy for one who
had seen his dearest friends put to death for their religious
opinions, who himself had pined for many months in the
French galleys, to speak with calmness of his persecutors.
But in other cases this apology will be of no avail. Mary of
Lorraine, if she had sanctioned, had never encouraged per-
secution, and her unfortunate daughter was scarcely able to
obtain toleration for herself ; yet towards both Knox cherished
a feeling of malignity which no persuasions could appease, and
no sufferings in the objects of his hatred could diminish. This
feeling could hardly have been caused by political or theologi-
cal differences alone ; some personal injury or slight would
rather seem to be connected with it. The angiy passions and
words of hatred, which he encouraged in himself and in others,
were as much opposed to the plain rules of the Gospel, as were
the crimes and vices which he so justly rebuked. And the evil
of which he was thus guilty lived after him. Some of the
worst deeds which stained the history of our country in the
following age were justified by an appeal to the principles and
example of Knox.
188 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXVIII.
The History of the Reformation in Scotland has been
referred to in connection with the character of its author, but
it is proper to say a few words in regard to the literary merits
of the work itself. The defects which have been alluded to
necessarily lessen its value as a correct and impartial narrative
of facts. In other respects, its merits have never been esti-
mated at their true worth. Its style is remarkable for clearness
and vigour, and its picturesque descriptions, its humourous
illustrations of character, its dramatic reports of speeches and
conversations, are superior to any thing previously to be found
in the prose literature of Britain, and unequalled by any work
which appeared in Scotland before the middle of the eighteenth
century.
A.D. 1572] OF SCOTLAND. 189
CHAPTER XXXIX.
FROM THE DEATH OF JOHN KNOX IN NOVEMBER, 1572, TO THE RESIGNA-
TION OF THE REGENCY BY THE EARL OF MORTON IN MARCH, 1578.
Regency of the Earl of Morton — Proceedings of the General
Assembly — Protestant ministers appointed to the vacant
bishoprics — Objections made to the office of Bishop —
Andreio Melville^ Principal of the College of Glasgow —
Limitations of the poive.rs of the Bishops — Patrich Adamson^
Archbishop of St. Andrews — Resignatioji of the Regency
by the Earl of Morton — Ecclesiastical condition of Scot-
land— Intellectual and moral results of the Reformation.
The Earl of Morton governed the kingdom with vigour and
success. He effected a reconciliation with Huntly and the
Hamiltons, who agreed to acknowledge his authority on
condition that the forfeitures which had passed against them
should be rescinded. Others of the queen's adherents made
their submission soon afterwards : in the spring of 1573, the
only persons of note who still maintained the cause of Mary
were Sir Adam Gordon in the north, and Lethington and
Grange in the castle of Edinburgh. Morton resolved to put
an end to the contest by obtaining possession of the fortress
which had so long overawed the capital. Supported by a
body of English soldiers he laid siege to the castle, and, after
a desperate resistance, the garrison, fearing an assault, com-
pelled their governor to surrender. The regent rejected the
solicitations whicli were made to him to spare tlie lives of
Lethington and Grange. The former escaped the ignominy
of a public execution by dying in prison — as some said, by his
own hand, though the report was never sufficiently confirmed.
Kirkaldy was hanged on the third of August. Such was the
miserable end of the brave soldier, and of the accomplished
statesman and scholar, who had long occupied a distinguished
place in the Scottish kingdom. Stained as their characters
were by many crimes, their death cannot be regarded with-
out pity. Lethington, in particular, appears amid all his
190 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIX.
treasons to have cherished a sincere admiration for his sove-
reign, whom he repeatedly shielded from the cruel designs of
his associates, and to whose cause his last years were devoted
with unswerving fidelity, when almost every one else had for-
saken her.^
The general assembly met at Edinburgh on the sixth of
March, 1573, and David Ferguson, minister at Dunfermline,
was chosen moderator. Complaints having been made against
the Bishop of St. Andrews for neglect of his duties, that
prelate excused himself on account of ill health. The Superin-
tendent of Angus protested that he should not be obliged to
visit within the bounds of the diocese of St. Andrews, inas-
much as it was wholly assigned to the bishop, nor within that
of Dunkeld, when it should be filled up. The Superintendent
of Lothian made a similar protestation, and both the docu-
ments were remitted to certain commissioners who were ap-
pointed to confer with the regent and council touching the
affairs of the Church. Among the members of that commis-
sion were the Bishop of St. Andrews, the Superintendent of
Angus, Winram, now styled Superintendent of Stratherne,
John E-ow, and David Lindsay. It was ordered that in future
no minister should act as a senator of the College of Justice,
except Robert Pont, who had already been allowed to hold
that office. It was also enjoined that collections for the poor
should be made, not during the administration of the com-
munion or in the time of the sermon, but only at the church
door. 2
The next meeting of the assembly began at Edinburgh on
the sixth of August. Alexander Arbuthnot, Principal of
King's College, Aberdeen, was moderator. A complaint w^as
presented against James Paton, Bishop of Dunkeld, that he
used the name without exercising the office of a bishop, and
that he had made a simoniacal agreement with the Earl of
Argyll in regard to the revenues of his bishopric, and had
committed other offences. Paton had been appointed to his
see by the civil power in the year 1571, on the forfeiture
of the canonical prelate, Robert Crichton, for adherence to
the queen. After the agreement at Leith, he was elected
» Tytler, vol. vii. p. 335-349.
« Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 272-281. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 134-136.
^•^- ^573.] OF SCOTLAND jt^j
bishop, and a letter was issued to the Archbishop of St
Andrews and the Superintendents of Fife, Lothian, and
Angus, enjoining them to proceed with his consecration. In
April, 1573, he was restored to the temporalities, being then
legally confirmed.
The Bishop of Galloway was accused of intruding himself
into the office of- the ministry at Edinburgh, and of having
acknowledged the queen's authority. He admitted the latter
charge, but pleaded in defence the pacification made between
the regent and the Earl of Huntly. He justified his preadi-
mg at Edinburgh by alleging that lie had been elected and
admitted to the office by the professors of the word in that
city. He was ordered to perform public penance, and failino-
his doing so to be excommunicated. ^
Certain articles were laid before the assembly by the regent,
in which he promised to redress the complaints that had been
made regarding the payment of the ministers' stipends, and to
fill up all vacant sees forthwith, the superintendents or com-
missioners to continue to do the duties so long as there were
no bishops ,♦ in particular, a day was to be named for filling
the sees of Glasgow, Murray, Eoss, and Dunblane, and
for electing a suffragan to the Bishop of St. Andrews in
Lothian.
The arch-diocese of Glasgow and the dioceses of Eoss and
Dunblane were held to be vacant by the forfeiture of the
canonical prelates, Beaton, Leslie, and Chisholm. Muiray
was vacant by the decease of Bishop Hepburn, which took
place at his castle of Spynie, on the twentieth of June preced-
ing. The archbishopric of Glasgow had been bestowed, in
1571, on a minister named John Porterfield, but after the
agreement at Leith, this nomination was net confirmed, and
the see was now conferred on James Boyd, a kinsman of the
Lord Boyd. On the third of November, a letter for his
consecration was directed to the Bishops of Dunkeld, Orkney,
and the Isles, and the Superintendent of Lothian, and he was
afterwards confirmed. Alexander Hepburn was raised to the
see of Eoss. George Douglas, a natural son of Archibald,
Earl of Angus, was promoted to the bishopric of Murray, and
after election by the chapter was consecrated in the Protestant
manner on the fifth of February, 1574. Andrew Graham,
192 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [OnAP. XXXIX.
son to the laird of Morphie, was elected and consecrated in the
same form to the see of Dmiblane, in the summer of 1575.^
The general assembly met at Edinburgh on the sixth of
March, 1574, and again at the same place on the seventh of
August following. The proceedings were of the usual charac-
ter. Calderwood has preserved the form of a commission
given at the latter of these meetings to the persons appointed
to visit the counties of Caithness and Sutherland. It is valu-
able as shewing distinctly what were the duties and powers of
such commissioners, and as proving that the general assembly
still exercised the right of bestowing the highest ecclesiastical
functions on persons who were neither bishops nor superin-
tendents. This particular commission was probably granted
because the Bishop of Caithness, though a Protestant and a
member of the assembly, had not been admitted as one of the
Keformed bishops. Its tenor was as follows : — '' At Edin-
burgh, the eleventh day of August, in the year of God 1574,
the whole kirk presently assembled, in one voice and mind,
giveth full commission, special power and charge, to their
loved brethren, Mr. Robert Graham, Archdeacon of Ross, and
Mr. John Robertson, Treasurer thereof, conjointly and sever-
ally, to pass to the counties of Caithness and Sutherland, and
there to visit kirks, colleges, and schools, and other places
needful within the said bounds ; and in tlie same to plant
ministers, readers, elders, and deacons, schoolmasters, and
other members necessary and requisite for erecting a perfect
reformed kirk ; suspend for a time, or simpliciter deprive such
as they shall find unworthy or not apt for their office, whether
it be for crimes committed or ignorance ; abolish, eradicate,
and destroy all monuments of idolatry ; establish and set up
the true worship of the eternal God, as well in cathedral and
college kirks, as in other places within the said bounds, con-
form to the order taken and agreed upon in the Book of Dis-
cipline ; and also to search and enquire the names of all those
that possess benefices within the said bounds, and at whose pro-
vision they have been ; and if any are vacant, or happen to be
^ Calderwood, vol. iii. pp. 287-301, 302, 341, 342, 359. Book of the Universal
Kirk, p. 137-139. Keith's Catalogue, pp. 96, 97, 150, 151, 180, 181, 261.
Preface to Original Letters relating to the Ecclesiastical affairs of Scotland in the
reign of James the Sixth, p. xi.-xiv.
A.D. 1575.] OF SCOTLAND. 193
vacant within the commissionary, to confer and give the same
to the persons qualified, and being presented by the just patrons
of the same, due examination preceding ; to reject and refuse
such as they shall find unable and not apt thereto, as they
will answer to God and the Kirk thereupon ; their diligence
to be done therein with these presents to report to the next
assembly general, where it shall happen to be for the time.
Given in the general assembly, and ninth session thereof, sub-
scribed by the clerk of the same, day, year, and place fore-
said."^
The assembly met at Edinburgh on the seventh of March,
1575, when the Bishop of Glasgow was chosen moderator. It
was declared that no dramatic entertainments, founded on the
canonical Scriptures, should be allowed in time to come on any
day whatever ; and it was recommended that other plays
should be examined before being performed in public, and
should not be acted at all on the Lord's day.^
The assembly again met at the same place on the sixth of
August, and Robert Pont was moderator. The proceedings
shew that certain usages of the ancient Church were still
cherished, both by the ministers and the people, in some dis-
tricts of the country. A complaint was given in against the
commissioner of Aberdeen, that the ministers and readers in
that diocese kept patron and festival days ; and the commis-
sioner of Nithsdale brought a charge against the citizens of
Dumfries, that finding neither he nor the reader would officiate
at Christmas, they got another reader, who said prayers during
the festival.
The meeting of this assembly is remarkable, as being the
first occasion on which objections were made to the lawfulness
of the episcopal form of government. At the commencement
of the proceedings, John Durie protested, that the usual
examination regarding the manner in which the bishops dis-
charged their duties should not prejudge the reasons which he
and others had against the name and office of a bishop. The
question was afterwards formally put, whether the functions
of bishops as then existing in Scotland were grounded on the
^ Calderwood, vol, iii. pp. 302-309, 330-339. Book of the Universal Kirk, p.
139-145.
' Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 339 34G. Book of the Universal Kirk, pp. 146, 147,
VOL. II.] l^
194 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIX.
word of God, and whether the chapters appointed for electing
them should be tolerated in that reformed Church. The
members appointed John Craig, now minister at Aberdeen,
James Lawson, minister at Edinbm-gh, and Andrew Melville,
Principal of the College of Glasgow, on the one side, and
George Hay, commissioner of Caithness, John Row, minister
at Perth, and David Lindsay, minister at Leith, on the other,
to confer on these questions, and report their judgment to the
assembly. They reported that they did not think it expedient
at present to answer the first question directly, but that if
any bishop were found who had not such qualities as the word
of God requires, he should be tried by the assembly anew,
and so deposed. They farther reported the following as their
joint opinion concerning the ofiice of a. bishop : — " The name
of bishop is common to aU those who have a particular flock
over the which they have a peculiar charge, as well to preach
the word, as to minister the sacraments, and execute ecclesias-
tical discipline with consent of their elders. And this is their
chief function by the word of God. Also out of this number
may be chosen some to have power to oversee and visit such
reasonable bounds, besides their own flock, as the general
Church shall appoint, and in these bounds to appoint minis-
ters, with consent of the ministers of that province, and with
consent of the flock to whom they shall be appointed ; also to
appoint elders and deacons in every particular congregation
where there are none, with consent of the people thereof ; and
to suspend ministers, for reasonable causes, with consent of the
ministers foresaid."^
This discussion regarding Episcopacy was contemporaneous
with the first appearance of Andrew Melville as a leading
member of the assembly, although he had sat in that body at
its meeting in the spring preceding ; and it was he, according
to Spottiswood, who prevailed on Durie to raise the question.
Melville was bom at Baldovy, near Montrose, on the first of
August, 1545. He was the youngest son of Richard Melville,
a gentleman of good family, who was slain at the battle of
Pinkie. He was only two years old at the time of his father's
death, but he was carefully educated at Montrose, under the
^ Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 347-357. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 148-163.
Spottiswood, vol. ii. pp. 200, 201.
A.D. 1575] OF SCOTLAND. 195
superintendence of his mother, and was afterwards sent to St.
Mary's College, St. Andrews, where he attracted the attention
and regard of John Douglas, rector of the university. Leaving
his native country when approaching to manhood, he went to
the Continent to pursue his studies, and attended the lectures
of the most distinguished teachers in the University of Paris,
among others, those of Turnebus and Eamus. He subse-
quently resorted to Poitiers, for the purpose of acquiring a
knowledge of the civil law, and his reputation was already
such, that, on his arrival there, he was made a regent in one
of the colleges. The disturbed state of the kingdom obliged
him to leave France ; and, proceeding to Geneva, he obtained
the friendship of Beza, by whose recommendation he was
appointed professor of Humanity in the academy of that city.
While teaching others, he continued to improve himself, par-
ticularly in the knowledge of the eastern languages.
In the beginning of 1574, Melville left Geneva along with
Alexander Campbell, Bishop of Brechin. After a short resi-
dence at Paris, where he had a public dispute with Knox's
opponent Tyrie, he embarked at Dieppe, and passing through
England arrived at Edinburgh. His character as a scholar
soon became known, and the regent would have given him a
situation in his own family ; but what he most anxiously
desired was to pursue the academical career to which he had
devoted himself on the Continent. The Scottish universities
at this time were by no means in a flourishing condition, and
their improvement afforded ample scope for the zeal and ability"
of Melville. In the autumn after his return, he accepted an
invitation to be Principal of the College of Glasgow ; and,
under his superintendence, and by means of those whom he
trained up as his assistants, and imbued with his own ardent
love of knowledge, the western university, from being the
most depressed of the Scottish schools, became distinguished
for the learning and attainments of its members. *
The attack on episcopal government having begun, Melville
1 James Melville's Autobiography and Diary, Wodrow Society ed. p, 38-50.
M'Crie's Life of Andrew Melville, ed. 1819, vol. i. p. 2-75. There are some
inaccuracies in Dr. M'Crie's account of the early life of Melville, owing probably
to the circumstance that James Melville's Diary could then be consulted only in
manuscript.
19.6 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXI X.
was not of a disposition to allow the subject to be forgotten.
In private he conversed with the leading persons in the
Church, urging his own views upon them with a zeal and
learning which thej were unable or unwilling to resist ; and
in every successive assembly he renewed the assault, till the
system established in 1572 was finally overthrown.
In the general assembly which met at Edinburgh on the
twenty-fourth of April, 1576, John Kow was chosen
moderator. The Bishops of Glasgow, Dunblane, Murray,
and Ross, were censured on various grounds. The Bishop of
Dunkeld was charged with dilapidating his benefice, and was
deprived, but appealed to the lords of parliament. Spottis-
wood, the Superintendent of Lothian, was complained of,
because he had inaugurated the Bishop of Ross in the abbey
of Holyrood. The opinion expressed at last assembly re-
garding the office of a bishop was formally affirmed, and all
the members of that order, who had not yet received the
charge of a particular congregation, were enjoined to make
choice of one. The cathedral of Dunblane was set apart for
the bishop of that see, and the church of Canonry in Eoss,
which also was the cathedral of the diocese, for the Bishop of
Eoss. The Bishop of Murray agreed to accept any particular
flock which the assembly might point out ; and the Bishop of
Glasgow made general professions of submission, but did not
become bound to confine himself to one charge. ^
The assembly again met at Edinburgh on the twenty-
fourth of October, and John Craig was chosen moderator.
The Bishop of Glasgow was asked if he was now ready to
accept the charge of a particular flock, and to visit within
such bounds as the assembly might point out. He answered
by referring them to the agreement between the regent and
the assembly at Leith, which was to remain efiectual during
the king's minority, or at least till parliament should decide
otherwise, and stated that, if he opposed the arrangement in
virtue of which he had been appointed to his see, he would
be guilty of perjury, and liable to be punished by the king's
majesty ; but he was prepared, without binding himself
1 Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 358-368. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 153-155.
Spottiswood, vol. ii. pp. 201, 202. James Melville's Diary, pp. 54, 55. M'Crie's
Life of Melville, vol. i. pp. 161, 162.
A-D. 1576.] OF SCOTLAND. 197
in any way or prejudging his episcopal jurisdiction, to take
charge of some particular church, while residing in the
sheriffdom of Ayr, and of another while at Glasgow. In this
the assembly acquiesced till its next meeting.
■ A discussion also took place regarding the see of St.
Andrews. John Douglas had died on the twenty-first of
July, 1574, and Patrick Adamson, lately minister at Paisley,
was presented to the bishopric by the regent. An ordinance
had been made that all bishops should be tried by the as-
sembly, before being admitted by the chapter, and in the
present case the chapter of St. Andrews delayed proceeding
till the assembly should be satisfied. Adamson, being asked
whether he would submit to trial and examination by the
assembly, and so receive the office of a bishop, answered that
he could not.
At this assembly, a minister, named Thomas Hepburn, was
accused of maintaining that no soul is admitted to heaven,
where Christ is glorified, till the judgment of the last day.
After several of his brethren had been appointed to reason
with him, he still declared that he was not satisfied, but said
he would abandon his opinion if the assembly condemned it
as erroneous and heretical. The opinion was condemned as
false and heretical, and repugnant to the plain meaning of the
Scriptures. ^
The next meeting of the assembly was at Edinburgh, on the
first of April, 1577. Alexander Arbuthnot was moderator.
A question was put as to what should be done with those who
would not receive the communion except in Lent, and it was
enjoined that their superstition should no way be sanctioned.
An order was also made that all ministers and readers who
persisted, after due admonition, in reading, preaching, or ad-
ministering the communion, at Christmas or Easter, during
Lent, on Saints' days, or at such superstitious times, should be
deprived.
Notwithstanding the proceedings of last assembly, the
regent persisted in filling up the see of St. Andrews. The
members of the chapter abandoned their scruples, and Adam-
son was elected in the legal form. He was afterwards con-
' Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 369-377. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 155-162.
Spottiswood, vol. ii. p. 202.
198 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIX.
secrated and confirmed, in virtue of a letter addressed on the
twenty-first of December, 1576, to the Bishops of Caithness
and Orkney, and other bishops and superintendents. The
new archbishop left his ordinary office of the ministry, entered
on the discharge of his duties, and claimed the right of visita-
tion within his diocese. The assembly, in consequence,
empowered a commission of their number to summon him
before them, and examine into the whole matter, with authority
also to cite the members of the chapter who had taken part in
his inauguration, and to report to the next meeting of their
body. ^
Patrick Adamson, or Constantine, as he was sometimes also
called, was one of the most distinguished of the Scottish
ministers, irreproachable in his private character, and enjoying
as high a reputation as Melville himself for learning and ele-
gant scholarship. He was the son of a burgess of Perth, and
was educated at St. Mary's College, St. Andrews. He
became a preacher in the Keformed Church, but soon after-
wards went abroad, and studied in the universities of France.
On his return to Scotland, he practised for some time at the
bar, but, having resumed his former vocation in the ministry,
acquired the favour of the regent, by whom he was esteemed
a fit person to be raised to the archiepiscopal see.
The promotion of Adamson exposed him to the enmity of
the party which was now most powerful in the ecclesiastical
courts, and most influential among the people. Morton had
been accused of obtaining the election of John Douglas in
order to secure the revenues of the see of St. Andrews to him-
self, and the charge of simony was now renewed. It was also
subsequently alleged that Adamson accepted an office which,
on a former occasion, he had denounced and held up to
ridicule. It was said that, having been disappointed of the
see when Douglas was elected, he preached a sermon, in
which he told the people that there were three sorts of bishops,
my lord bishop, my lord's bishop, and the Lord's bishop :
*^ My lord bishop was in the Papistry ; my lord's bishop is
now, when my lord gets the benefice, and the bishop serves
^ Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 378-384. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 162-167.
Spottiswood, vol. ii. p. 203. Preface to Original Letters of the reign of James
the Sixth, p. xiv.
A.D. 1577.] OF SCOTLAND.
199
for nothing but to make his title sure ; and the Lord's bishop
is the true minister of the Gospel." This statement has been
disputed by Mackenzie and others, who maintain that Adamson
was not in Scotland at the time. There can be no doubt, how-
ever, that he really preached at St. Andrews on the occasion
referred to, such circumstance being distinctly related both
by Bannatyne and James Melville, the latter of whom was
present at the sermon. But Bannatyne makes no allusion to
the words which have been mentioned : the only authority for
them is Melville, who was then not sixteen years old, and
who wrote after an interval of many years, when it was the
object of his party to blacken the character of the archbishop,
and to make the titular episcopacy as odious as possible.
The assertion that Adamson was disappointed of the see rests
also on the authority of Melville. If, on the subject of Epis-
copacy, he held principles similar to those of Erskine, as he
probably did, it may easily be understood how words, intended
to censure the corrupt system prevalent before the agreement
at Leith, were wrested to condemn what the preacher really
believed to be a great ecclesiastical reform, i
The next assembly was held at Edinburgh, on the twenty-
fifth of October. David Lindsay was moderator. The regent
was asked to attend in person or by a commissioner. He
excused himself in respect of his being otherwise occupied ;
but, either at this time, or at the assembly held in October in
the preceding year, he caused certain questions to be Laid
before the members for their consideration. These questions
related for the most part to the government, discipline, and
revenue of the Church. They were apparently intended to
perplex the assembly, by bringing under their notice various
points of difficulty which would necessarily have to be dis-
cussed in any new arrangement of the ecclesiastical system ;
and it was believed that they had been suggested by the
Archbishop of St. Andrews. The questions were referred
to a select number of the members, who had for some time
been engaged, by order of the assembly, in drawing up a
Book of Policy for the Church.
The archbishop presented to the assembly a letter addressed
' See Mackenzie's Lives, vol. iii. p. 364-366; M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol i
pp. 122, 445-448 ; Bannatyne, p. 323 ; and James Melville's Diaiy, pp. 31, 32.'
200 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIX.
by Queen Elizabeth to Morton, regarding a Protestant synod
which was to meet at Magdeburg, with a request from the regent
to send some of their members to attend it, if they thought such
a step advisable. The assembly approved of the suggestion,
and, from among those named by them, Morton selected
Melville, Arbuthnot, and George Hay. It was suspected
that the regent wished to have Melville and his friends out of
the country for some time, but, whether this was the case or
not, the parties appointed never left Scotland. ^
During this and the preceding year, the two bishops of
the house of Gordon, who filled the sees of Galloway and
Aberdeen, were removed by death. Alexander, Bishop of
Galloway, died in 1576. There is no evidence that he was
ever consecrated. In the year 1567, he had resigned the see
in favour of his son John, afterwards Dean of Salisbury.
This resignation does not seem to have taken effect, and
another son, George, obtained possession of the benefice, and
held the title of Bishop of Galloway after his father's decease.
Had it not been for the agreement at Leith, the Scottish
bishoprics would probably, as a general rule, have been viewed
as patrimonial rights, and descended from father to son like
the see of Candida Casa in this instance. William, Bishop
of Aberdeen, died on the sixth of August, 1577, and was
buried within his cathedral church. David Cunningham,
Sub-dean of Glasgow, was nominated to the see by the
regent, and, on the eleventh of November, was consecrated
at Aberdeen by the Archbishop of St. Andrews, assisted by
Johji Craig and another minister. ^
While the discussions were going on regarding ecclesias-
tical government. Lord Glammis, Chancellor of Scotland, a
nobleman who was respected by all parties, wrote a letter to
Theodore Beza, asking his opinion as to certain doubtful
J Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 385-393. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 167-172.
2 Gordon's History of the Earldom of Sutherland, pp. 143, 172, 181, 290, 291.
Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. i. pp. 426, 427. Miscellany of
the Spalding Club, vol. ii. pp. 46, 47. James Melville's Diary, p. 57. The historian
of the Earldom of Sutherland states that "William Gordon, one of the sons of the
Earl of Huntly who fell at Corrichie, " was designed Bishop of Aberdeen, and
died at Paris, in the College of Bons-enfans," The date of his death is not
mentioned, and I am not aware of any other notice of this William Gordon. It
was perhaps intended that he should succeed his uncle in the see of Aberdeen.
A.D. 1578.] OF SCOTLAND. 201
points. His questions, six in number, were the following :—
Whether the episcopal function is necessary in the Church,
in order that bishops may, as circumstances require, provide
that ministers be called to assemblies, admitted to their office,
and removed therefrom ; or ought rather all the ministers^
bemg equal m power, and subject to no bishop, to choose fit
persons, with consent of the patron and people, and correct
them and remove them from their office ? Whether the
general assemblies should be gathered together without the
commandment or will of the Prince ? By whom, that is,
whether by the King or by the Bishops, should ecclesiastical
assemblies be convened, and, when convened, on what points
are they entitled to make laws ? Should Papists be excom-
municated as apostates are, or should they be visited with
a lighter punishment ? For what causes may excommuni-
cation be pronounced ? What may lawfully be done with
property which in former times was "Sedicated to the Church ?
Beza answered the questions put to him, and wrote a
treatise entitled, " De Triplici Episcopatu," which was soon
afterwards translated into English, and published as " The
Judgment of a most reverend and learned man from beyond
the seas, concerning a threefold order of Bishops, with a
Declaration of certain other weighty points concerning the
Discipline and Government of the Church." The threefold
order was the Divine, the Human, and the Satanic. The
first was that which was recognized in the Scriptures; the
second that which the ancient Fathers submitted to, but only
as a human invention ; the third that which existed under the
Papacy, and into which the second was very apt to degenerate.
This treatise seems to have contained an absolute condem-
nation of the form of episcopal polity then established in
Scotland. It was welcomed by the opponents of the bishops,
and contributed greatly to the success of Melville in the
struggle in which he was engaged. That reformer himself
was m frequent correspondence with Beza. One of his letters
written in November, 1579, seems to refer to the points men-
tioned by Lord Glammis. " For five years," he says, " we
have now maintained a warfare against pseudo-episcopacy,
and have not ceased to urge the adoption of a strict discipline.
We have presented to his majesty and the three estates of the
202 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIX.
kingdom at diiFerent times, and recently at the parliament
which is now sitting, a form of discipline to be enacted and
confirmed by public authority. The king is favourably in-
clined to us ; almost all the nobility are adverse. They com-
plain that, if pseudo-episcopacy be abolished, the state of the
kingdom will be overturned ; if presbyteries be established, the
royal authority will be diminished ; if the ecclesiastical goods
are restored to their legitimate use, the royal treasury will be
exhausted. They plead that bishops, with abbots and priors,
form the third estate in parliament; that all jurisdiction,
ecclesiastical as well as civil, pertains solely to the king and
his council, and that all the ecclesiastical property should go
into the exchequer. In many this way of speaking and
thinking may be imputed to ignorance ; in more to a flagitious
life and bad morals ; in almost all to a desire of seizing such
of the church property as yet remains, and the dread of losing
what they have already got into their possession. They also
insist that the sentence of excommunication shall not be valid
until it has been approved by the king's council after taking
cognizance of the cause. For, being conscious of their own
vices, they are afraid of the sentence of the presbyteiy, not
so much from the awe in which they stand of the divine judg-
ment, as from terror of the civil penalties, which, according to
the laws and custom of our country, accompany the sentence
of excommunication. In fine, while they judge according to
the dictates of the carnal mind instead of the revealed will of
God, they desire to have everything done by the authority of
a single bishop and perpetual overseer of the churches, rather
than by the common sentence of presbyters possessing equal
authority. May God shew mercy to his Church, and remove
these evils." ^
In March, 1578, an alteration took place in the government
of Scotland. The Earl of Morton had never been popular,
and for some time back the disafiection towards him had been
increasing among all classes. By the advice of the Earls of
^ See James Melville's Diary, p. 55 ; Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 397 ; Spottiswood,
vol. ii. p. 221 ; Sage's Works, voli. p. 275-278 ; M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. i.
pp. 199-202, 463. The six qaestions of Lord Glammis, as given in Saravia's
Works, are printed at full length by Bishop Sage's editor. Neither Sage nor
his editor had seen Beza's treatise ; even Dr. M'Crie had been able to consult it
only in the English translation.
A.D. 1578.] OF SCOTLAND. 203
Argyll and Atholl, the young king, then in his twelfth year,
called on the regent to resign his office ; and, finding resistance
hopeless, he at once obeyed. The administration was com-
mitted to a council of twelve, at the head of which were the two
earls who had mainly assisted in bringing about the change.*
At the conclusion of Morton's regency, the Scottish Church,
as recognized by the state, was still conformed to the model
agreed to at Leith in 1572 ; but, as it was soon to experience
another alteration, a brief account may be given of its condi-
tion at this time.
The thirteen dioceses of the ancient Church continued to
exist in name, and most of them were filled by Protestant
ministers, bearing the style of bishops, although none of them,
except Adamson and Boyd, and perhaps Cunningham, now
ventured to exercise their episcopal jurisdiction. They sat in
parliament, managed the cathedral property with the advice
of their chapters, and discharged the various duties, partly of
an ecclesiastical, partly of a secular character, which devolved
on them as prelates. In these respects they differed little from
their Roman Catholic predecessors, who had continued to
perform the same duties except so far as hindered by individual
forfeiture. As late as June, 1577, we find William, Bishop
of Aberdeen, giving collation of the vicarage of that city by
the symbol of a ring to Walter Cullen, the Protestant reader.
The superintendents, Winrara, Erskine, and Spottiswood,
still presided over the districts, or parts of the districts, to
which they had been originally appointed ; and the rest of the
kingdom was under the inspection of temporary commissioners,
named by the assembly, and removable at pleasure. But the
real ecclesiastical chiefs were the ministers and teachers most
distinguished by their eloquence and ability. Among these
Melville already held the foremost place, although he never
acquired the supremacy which had been wielded by Knox.
The old parochial divisions also subsisted, and happily no
attempt was ever made to effect any alteration in that respect.
Through all the changes which took place, they remained the
single territorial link connecting the Church of King David's
time with the ecclesiastical system of the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries. The parishes were about a thousand
^ Tytler, vol. viii. p. 22-30.
204 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIX.
in number, and it was long after the Reformation before each
was supplied with a minister of its own. In 1567, there were
only two hundred and fifty-seven ministers, assisted by one
hundred and fifty-one exhorters, and four hundred and fifty-
five readers. Under the polity established during the regency
of Morton, the parochial benefices were arranged in districts,
containing generally three or four parishes, having only one
minister for the whole, but each provided with a separate
reader. The order of exhorters had gradually been given up,
or had merged in the common denomination of readers. In
the year 1574, there were two hundred and eighty-nine
ministers, and seven hundred and fifteen readers. The chief
fund from which tliey were supported was the thirds of the
old benefices.^
Most of the readers, and a considerable proportion of the
ministers, had probably little learning, but they were con-
scious how much the success of the Keformation had been
owing to the ignorance of the Roman clergy, and they zeal-
ously endeavoured to promote as high a standard of attainments
as the circumstances of the country and their slender endow-
ments would allow. The number possessed of respectable
qualifications in this respect was daily increasing, and some of
their leading men, especially those educated on the Continent,
were persons of erudition, and not unworthy to bear a part in
the movement, then in progress among the various portions of
the Reformed communion, for the revival of theological learn-
ing. Buchanan held an influential position in the state, and
was high in the confidence of the ruling ecclesiastical party.
The genius of Melville and Adamson was already known
beyond the bounds of their own country; and Arbuthnot,
Smeaton, and others, had attained considerable fame, or were
in the course of acquiring distinction, either by their writings,
or by their exertions in the cause of education.
It is more difficult to ascertain what influence the Refor-
mation had on the moral character of the Scottish people.
There can be no doubt, however, that a great change had
taken place for the better among those classes, and in those
parts of the country, where the Protestant doctrines had been
generally received. The nobility and the higher ranks of the
^ Miscellany of the Wodrow Society, vol. i. p. 321-396.
A.D. 1578.] OF SCOTLAND. 205
gentry remained, it is to be feared, much tlie same as before,
but, throughout the Lowland districts, the inferior gentry and
the burgesses of the towns had wakened to a new spiritual
and intellectual life. The Reformed tenets were gladly listened
to by them, and, when once thoroughly embraced, were main-
tained with the fervent devotion which marked the character
of the nation. The ministers themselves belonged, for the
most part, to those classes, and the austere morality by which
they were distinguished was shared by the more earnest por-
tion of their congregations. The vices and crimes which
appear so frequently in the records of the time, even in
quarters where they could hardly be expected, are no proof to
the contrary of what has just been stated. They only shew
what would appear at all times, if an equally rigorous inqui-
sition prevailed. In the greater part of the Highlands and
Isles the Reformation was less beneficial, or rather led to
results of an entirely opposite character. Even the old ec-
clesiastical system had never been properly established in
those districts, and the change of religion and ritual, and the
confiscation of church endowments, nearly destroyed what-
ever discipline or refinement there was. Among the peasantry
of the Lowlands also the change appears to have been for the
worse. Many years elapsed before the Reformed ministers
were able to counteract the mischief caused by the overtlirow
of the ancient Church, and the suppression of the monastic
orders. And when the new doctrines reached this class, they
were mingled in many parts of the country with so much
superstition, that the ignorance and lawlessness of the High-
landers were hardly more opposed to the true principles of the
Christian religion, than the fanaticism which marked a large
proportion of the Lowland peasants.
While the Reformed system was acquiring strength and
consistency, the Roman Catholic communion had fallen into
a state of seemingly hopeless decay. The few bishops who
survived had deserted their flocks, or been obliged to abandon
them. The Archbishop of Glasgow had remained abroad
since the year 1560 ; the Bishops of Ross and Dunblane were
almost constantly employed in the political service of the
queen in England or in foreign parts ; the Bishop of Dunkeld
alone continued to reside in Scotland. The inferior ecclesias-
206 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XXXIX.
tics most distin^ished for their learning and zeal had
embraced a voluntary exile on the Continent, or had fled
thither to escape the persecutions of the Keformed. The
greater number of the clergy who remained in Scotland, par-
ticularly those of the regular orders, had conformed to the
Protestant doctrines, and were frequently to be found dis-
charging the office of readers in the new establishment.
Several of the nobles, and a considerable proportion of the
higher gentry, still professed allegiance to the Eoman see,
which had also numerous adherents of all classes in the north-
em and western districts of the kingdom ; but the attachment
of the barons seemed to be merely nominal, and the others,
without ecclesiastical rulers, and forsaken by their political
leaders, disheartened by repeated defeats, and intimidated by
persecuting laws, did not venture to come forward openly in
defence of their religion.
A.D. 1578.] OF SCOTLAND. 207
CHAPTER XL.
FROM THE RESIGNATION OF THE REGENCY BY MORTON IN MARCH, 1578,
TO THE RAID OF RUTHVEN IN AUGUST, 1582.
Influence of the Duke of Lennox—Bis designs in favour of the
Roman Church— Boman Catholic Missionaries in Scot-
land—Sermon of Walter Balcanquhal— Meetings of the
General Assembly— General Assembly at Dundee— Con-
demnation of the titular Episcopacy — Subscription of the
King's Confession— Second Book of Discipline— Differences
between the First and Second Book of Discipline— The
Tulchan bishops— Distinction between them and the titular
bishops— Conflict between the Church and tlie State— List
of grievances drawn up by the General Assembly— Andrew
Melville at Perth— Raid of Ruthven,
The government of the nobles, which succeeded that of
Morton, was of short duration. By a union with the young
Earl of Mar, the late regent recovered his ascendency, and,
although he did not again assume his former title, he once
more possessed the chief rule in the kingdom. He secured his
authority by depriving the Hamiltons of all their possessions,
and compelling their leaders, John, Commendator of Arbroath,
next heir to the throne, and his brother Claud, Commendator
of Paisley, to leave Scotland. In September, 1579, Esme
Stewart, Lord of Aubigny, nephew of the late Earl of Lennox,
came over from France, and was affectionately received by
the young king. As he had been brought up in the Church
of Rome and professed to belong to that communion, he
was suspected of being an emissary of the Pope and the house
of Lorraine, and his proceedings were jealously watched by
the ministers. Aubigny, however, continued to rise in favour
with the king, who bestowed on him the earldom of Lennox;
and, as his influence increased, that of Morton again began to
decline. The distrust with which he was regarded was little
diminished by his making a public profession of the Reformed
religion in the beginning of the year 1580.
208 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XL.
Acting chiefly by the advice of Lennox, and that of James
Stewart, a younger son of Lord Ochiltree, the king broke off
his intercourse with England, and entered into a correspon-
dence with his mother. The Earl of Morton was en-
couraged by Elizabeth to rise against the government, but on
this occasion his enemies were more prompt than himself. He
was accused of participation in the murder of Darnley, and
committed a prisoner to Dunbarton Castle. Elizabeth inter-
ceded in his favour, and, when she found that her remonstran-
ces had no effect, endeavoured by means of Randolph, now
employed in his former congenial occupation, to stir up a party
of the nobles to make the king a prisoner. The plot was
discovered ; Eandolph fled to England ; and Morton was
beheaded at Edinburgh, on the second of June, 1581. Lennox
was soon afterwards created a duke, and the earldom of
Arran, which the forfeiture of the Hamiltons had placed at
the disposal of the crown, was bestowed on Stewart. ^
The Duke of Lennox continued to be the most intimate
friend and the chief adviser of his sovereign, but he was never
able to allay the suspicions of the ministers. They en-
deavoured in every way to injure his character and diminish
his power, and their efforts were eagerly seconded by the
agents of Elizabeth. The imputations which were made
against his personal conduct were evidently the result of party
animosity, and may be entirely disregarded. The doubts
which were entertained of the sincerity of his religious pro-
fession deserve more consideration. The most learned and
temperate of our historians have generally entertained a
favourable opinion of Lennox's honesty in this respect, but
documents which have recently been discovered shew that
the distrust of the Reformed was well founded. There can
hardly now be a question that he acted from the beginning in
concert with the princes of Lon-aine ; and it is certain that he
was soon engaged in confidential communications with the
envoys of Spain, and the Pope, for the purpose of delivering
Mary from captivity, and re-establishing the Roman Catholic
religion. He proposed to unite the two parties in Scotland, by
associating the queen and her son in the government of the
kingdom, and in this Lennox acted with the consent of James
» Tytler, vol. viii. p. 31-87.
A.D. 1578.] OF SCOTLAND. 209
and the co-operation of Arran : but there is no evidence that
his designs in favour of the Roman Church were known to
the king or the Protestant members of the council ; he himself
in a confidential letter to Mary implies the reverse. His
Scottish associates in that more dangerous enterprise were the
deprived bishops, and the missionaries who were now coming
over in considerable numbers from the Continent.
As already mentioned, a short time before Lennox came
over from France, the Eoman communion was in a very
depressed condition ; but the revival of spiritual zeal and
discipline, which had turned back the cause of the Reforma-
tion on the Continent, was now beginning to produce its effects
in the Scottish kingdom. The most ardent and accomplished
of those who had fled from the persecution of the Protestants
had joined the regular orders, especially the institute of the
Jesuits. Among the members of that body were Edmund
Hay, who had formerly acted as a confidential agent at the
court of Mary, Tyrie, the opponent of Knox, and James
Gordon, brother of the Earl of Huntly. Most of the Scottish
missionaries were Jesuits. They were ready to encounter any
peril for the purpose of bringing back their country to the
Roman Catholic Church, and they had already converted
several of the Protestant teachers.
There can scarcely be a doubt that the attempt to bring about
a counter-reformation in Scotland was mainly owing to the
exertions and tlie influence of Lennox. In a sermon preached
at Edinburgh, on the seventh of December, 1580, one of the
Protestant ministers, Walter Balcanqual, pointed out the
sudden change which had occurred. ^' Within these two
years and less," he said, ^' our Papists stood in such awe of
the laws of the realm, and discipline of the Church of God,
that they durst not plainly profess their Papistry, but were
constrained either to depart the realm, or subscribe to the
religion ; which sundry of them did hypocritically, and against
their heart, and yet excuse their hypocrisy and dissimulation
with this doctrine of the Papists, that it is lawful to a
Catholic to deny his religion, being amongst heretics and
Calvinists. But now, with the dolour of our hearts, we that
fear God perceive that the Papists have cast off their wonted
dissimulation and fear, and have taken such hardine.s and
VOL. II.] 15
210 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XL.
boldness unto themselves, that not only were they bold in
Paris, and other parts out of the country, plainly to preach
Papistry, to impugn the truth of the Gospel, to quarrel and
persecute their own countrymen for the same ; but also, when
they are come home here in Scotland, they dare not only
profess their foresaid Papistry and impugn the truth, but like-
wise debate their quarrels upon the streets of Edinburgh,
which for the religion they had begun in Paris. . . . Be-
fore this French court came to Scotland, there were either
few or none that durst avow themselves for Papists, neither
yet publicly in the country, neither in Reformed cities, neither
in the king's palace. But since that time, not only begin the
Papists within the realm to lift up their heads, but also our
Scottish Papists that were out of the realm swarm home from
all places like locusts ; and have taken such hardihood unto
them, that' not only have they had access to the French
court, but also in the king's palace, in the particular sessions
of our kirks, and general assemblies thereof, durst plainly
avow their Papistry, and impugn the truth, both against the
laws of the realm and discipline of the Church, contrary to all
practice that we have had before."^
In a general assembly held at Edinburgh on the twenty-
fourth of April, 1578, at which Andrew Melville was chosen
moderator, it was ordered that all bishops, and others bearing
ecclesiastical functions, should be called by their own names,
or simply brethren ; and the chapters were prohibited from
making further elections of bishops till the next assembly.
At an assembly held at Stirling on the eleventh of June, this
last regulation was made perpetual, and bishops already elected
were required to make their submission. ^
The assembly again met at Edinburgh on the twenty-fourth
of October. The Bishop of Glasgow was called on to submit,
and was accused of neglecting his duty in various points. He
gave the following answer in writing : — " I understand the
name, office, and modest reverence borne to a bishop, to be
' Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 773-775 ; vol. iv. p. 397-400. Spottiswood, vol. ii.
p. 267. Mignet, vol ii. p 207-216, and appendix, p. 461-465. The evidence
of the real character and objects of Lennox is to be found in the documents in
the Spanish archives at Simancas, quoted by Mignet.
3 Calderwood, vol. iii. pp. 398-405, 410-413. Book of the Universal Kirk, p.
172-181.
A.D. 1578.] OF SCOTLAND. 211
lawful and allowable by the Scriptures of God ; and, being
elected by the Church and king to be Bishop of Glasgow, I
esteem my calling and office lawful. As touching the exe-
cution of the charge committed to me, I am content to
endeavour, at my uttermost ability, to perform the same, and
every point thereof, and to abide the honourable judgment of
the Church from time to time of my offending, seeing the
charge is weighty ; and in laying anything to be laid to my
charge, to be examined by the canon left by the Apostle to
Timothy, First Epistle, chapter iii., seeing that place was ap-
pointed to me at my receiving, to understand therefrom the
duties of a bishop. As towards my livings and rents, and
other things granted by the prince to me and my antecessors
for my serving of that charge, I reckon the same lawful. As
to my duty to the supreme magistrate in assisting his grace in
council or parliament, being craved thereto, I esteem I am
bound to obey the same ; and that it is no hurt, but a weal to
the Church, that some of our number be at the making of
good laws and ordinances. In doing whereof I protest,
before God, I intend never to do any thing but that which I
believe shall stand with the purity of the Scriptures, and a
well reformed country; as also a good part of the livings
which I possess hath been given for that cause." This
answer was judged not to be satisfactory. The bishop after-
wards submitted unconditionally to the assembly held at
Edinburgh, on the seventh of July, 1579.
At the assembly of October, 1578, the bishops were
specially called on to make their submission as to certain
points, and farther to promise, " that, if the general assembly
hereafter shall find farther corruption in the said estate than
is hitherto expressed, they be content to be reformed by the
said assembly, according to the word of God, when they shall
be required thereto." The particular points mentioned were
the following : — '^ That they be content to be pastors and
ministers of one flock ; that they usurp no criminal jurisdic-
tion ; that they vote not in parliament, in name of the Church,
without advice from the assembly ; that they take not up for
maintenance of their ambition and riotousness the emoluments
of the Church, which may sustain many pastors, the schools
and the poor, but be content with reasonable livings, accordino-
212 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Chap. XL.
to their office ; that they claim not to themselves the titles of
lords temporal, neither usurp temporal jurisdiction, whereby
they may be abstracted from their office ; that they aspire not
above the particular elderships, but be subject to the same ; that
they usurp not the power of presbyteries ; that they take no
farther bounds of visitation than the assembly committeth
to them." ^
It is manifest that the opponents of the titular Episcopacy,
though determined to press their victory to the utmost, had
not yet agreed, or were unwilling to let it be known, what
actual measures were still to be adopted.
The assembly met at Dundee on the twelfth of July, 1580,
and James Lawson was chosen moderator. At the fourth
session of this assembly an act was passed, by which the
Episcopacy then established in Scotland was formally con-
demned. It was to the following effect : — " Forasmuch as the
office of a Bishop, as it is now used and commonly taken
within this realm, hath no sure warrant, authority, or good
ground out of the Book and Scriptures of God, but was
brought in by the folly and corruption of men's invention
to the great overthrow of the true Church of God, the whole
assembly of the Church in one voice, after liberty given to
all men to reason in the matter, none opposing themselves in
defence of the said pretended office, findeth and declareth the
same pretended office, used and termed as is above said,
unlawful in itself, as having neither foundation, ground, nor
warrant in the word of God ; and ordaineth that all such
persons as enjoy, or hereafter shall enjoy, the said office, be
charged simpliciter to demit, quit, and leave off the same,
as an office whereunto they are not called by God, and also to
desist and cease from all preaching, ministration of the sacra-
ments, or using any way the office of pastors, until they
receive de novo admission from the general assembly of the
Church, under the pain of excommunication to be used against
them ; wherein if they be found disobedient, or contravene
this act in any point, the sentence of excommunication, after
due admonition, to be executed against them." ^
1 Calderwood, vol.iii.pp. 426-433, 445. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 181-185.
' Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 463-473. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 193-201.
Spottiswood, vol. ii. p. 272.
^■^- ^581.] OF SCOTLAND,
213
It is said that in January, 1581, certain papal dispensations
were intercepted, by which the Roman Catholics in Scotland
were allowed to subscribe or swear whatever should be re-
quired of them, provided they remained faithful to their
religion, and ready to advance its interests. This circumstance,
we are told by Spottiswood, gave occasion to what was called
the King's Confession— a document prepared by Craig at the
request of the king, and subscribed by James himself, and by
the Duke of Lennox and others of his council and household;
and which soon afterwards, by royal proclamation, was ordered
to be signed by all the people. The following is the tenor of
this document : —
" We, all and every one of us underwritten, protest that
after long and due examination of our own consciences, in
matters of true and false religion, we are now thoroughly
resolved in the truth by the word and Spirit of God. And
therefore we believe with our hearts, confess with our mouths,
subscribe with our hands, and constantly affirm before God
and the whole world, that this only is the true Christian faith
and religion, pleasing to God and bringing salvation to man,
which is now by the mercy of Gbd revealed to the world
by the preaching of the blessed Evangel, and is received,
believed, and defended by many and sundry notable Churches
and realms, but chiefly by the Church of Scotland, the king's
majesty, and three estates of this realm, as God's eternal
truth and only ground of our salvation j as more particularly
is expressed in the Confession of our Faith, stablished and
publicly confirmed by sundry acts of parliament, and which
now of a long time hath been openly professed by the king's
majesty and whole body of his realm both in burgh and
land. To the which Confession and form of religion we
willingly agree in our consciences in all points, as unto God's
undoubted truth and verity, grounded only upon his written
word.
^' And therefore we abhor and detest all contrary relio-ion
and doctrine, but chiefly all kind of Papistry in general ^'and
particular heads, even as they are now condemned and confuted
by the word of God and Church of Scotland. But in special
we detest and refuse the usurped authority of the Roman
Antichrist upon the Scriptures of God, upon the Church, tlie
214 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XL.
civil magistrate, and consciences of men ; all his tyrannous laws
made upon indifferent things against our Christian liberty ; his
erroneous doctrine against the sufficiency of the written word, the
perfection of the law, the offices of Christ, and his blessed Evan-
gel ; his corrupted doctrine concerning original sin, our natural
inability, and rebellion to God's law, our justification by faith
only, our imperfect sanctification and obedience to the law ; the
nature, number, and use of the holy sacraments ; his five bastard
sacraments, with all his rites, ceremonies, and false doctrine,
added to the ministration of the true sacraments, without the
word of God ; his cruel judgment against infants departing
without the sacrament ; his absolute necessity of Baptism ;
his blasphemous opinion of Transubstantiation, or real pre-
sence of Christ's body in the elements, and receiving the
same by the wicked for bodies of men ,* his dispensation with
oaths, perjuries, and degrees of marriage forbidden in the
word ; his cruelty against the innocent divorced, his devilish
mass, his blasphemous priesthood, his profane sacrifice for the
sins of the dead and quick, his canonization of men, calling
upon angels and saints departed, worshipping of imagery,
relics, and crosses, dedicating of churches, altars, days, vows
to creatures ; his purgatory, prayers for the dead, praying or
speaking in a strange language ; his processions, and blasphem-
ous litany, and multitude of advocates or mediators ; his mani-
fold orders ; auricular confession ; his desperate and uncertain
repentance, his general and doubtful faith, his satisfaction of men
for their sins ; his justification by works, opus operatum, works
of supererogation, merits, pardons, peregrinations, and stations ;
his holy water, baptizing of bells, conjuring of spirits, crossing,
saining, anointing, conjuring, hallowing of God's good crea-
tures, with the superstitious opinion joined therewith ; his
worldly monarchy and wicked hierarchy ; his three solemn
vows, with all his shavelings of sundiy sorts ; his erroneous
and bloody decrees made at Trent, with all the subscribers
and approvers of that cruel and bloody bond conjured against
the Church of God : and, finally, we detest all his vain alle-
gories, rites, signs, and traditions, brought into the Church
without or against the word of God, and doctrine of this true
reformed Church, to the which we join ourselves willingly in
doctrine, faith, religion, discipline, and use of the holy sacra-
A.D. 1581.] OF SCOTLAND. 215
ments, as lively members of the same, in Christ our Head :
promising and swearing, by the great name of the Lord
our God, that we shall continue in the obedience of the
doctrine and discipline of this Church, and shall defend
the same, according to our vocation and power, all the
days of our lives, under the pains contained in the law,
and danger both of body and soul in the day of God's fear-
ful judgment.
" And seeing that many are stirred up by Satan and that
Boman Antichrist to promise, swear, subscribe, and for a time
use the holy sacraments in the Church deceitfully, against
their own conscience, minding thereby, first, under the exter-
nal cloak of religion, to corrupt and subvert secretly God's
true religion within the Church, and afterward, when time
may serve, to become open enemies and persecutors of the
same, under vain hope of the Pope's dispensation, devised
against the word of God, to his greater confusion, and their
double condemnation in the day of the Lord Jesus ; we,
therefore, willing to take away all suspicion of hypocrisy, and
of such double dealing with God and his Church, protest, and
call the Searcher of all hearts to* witness, that our minds
and hearts do fully agree with this our confession, promise,
oath, and subscription, so that we are not moved for any
worldly respect, but are persuaded only in our consciences,
through the knowledge and love of God's true religion,
printed in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, as we shall an-
swer to Him in the day when the secrets of all hearts shall
be disclosed.
" And because we perceive that the greatness and stability
of our religion and Church doth depend upon the safety and
good behaviour of the king's majesty, as upon a comfortable
instrument of God's mercy, granted to this country for the
maintaining of his Church and ministration of justice among
us, we protest and promise with our hearts, under the same
oath, hand-writ, and pains, that we shall defend his person
and authority with our goods, bodies, and lives, in the defence
of Christ's Evangel, liberty of our country, ministration of jus-
tice, and punishment of iniquity, against all enemies within
this realm or without, as we desire our God to be a strong and
merciful defender to us in the day of our death, and coming
216 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. XL.
of our Lord Jesus Christ ; to whom, with the Father and the
Holy Spirit, be all honour and glory eternally. Amen."^
James lived long enough to regret that he had heen induced
by the counsellors of his boyhood to encourage such violent
and indiscriminate protests against the doctrines of Rome.
Soon after the promulgation of the King's Confession, a
document appeared, bearing to proceed from the archbishops
and bishops, chief heads of the ecclesiastical estate of Scot-
land, and having the signatures affixed of the Archbishops of
St. Andrews and Glasgow, and the Bishop of Aberdeen.
Grave and temperate in its language, and appealing to the
Scripture for the proof of its statements, it contrasts favourably
in various respects with the King's Confession, to which it
was evidently meant to be an answer. But the shape in which
it appeared was unjustifiable. Calderwood, to whom we are
indebted for its preservation, says, that it was a forger}^ ; and
such undoubtedly it was, so far as it professed to come from
the prelates whose names were attached to it. There can be
little hesitation in agreeing with the opinion expressed in a
document preserved by the same historian, that it was the pro-
duction of some of those ^ho acted in concert with the Duke
of Lennox. 2
The general assembly met at Glasgow on the twenty-fourth
of April, and Robert Pont was chosen moderator. King
James and' his advisers, whatever their precise motives may
have been, were anxious at this time to conciliate the ruling
party in the Church. A royal letter was presented to the as-
sembly, in which the sovereign expressed his desire to make
better provision for the stipends of the ministers, and the exer-
cise of ecclesiastical discipline, recommending for those pur-
poses the erection of presbyteries throughout the kingdom.
This proposal was gladly acceded to by the assembly, and
presbyteries were ordered to be set up at Edinburgh, St. An-
drews, Dundee, Perth, Stirling, Glasgow, Ayr, Irvine, Had-
dington, Dunbar, Chimside, Linlithgow, and Dunfermline ;
^ Calderwood, -vol iii. p. 501-505. Spottiswood, vol. ii. p. 268. M'Crie's
Life of Melville, vol. i. pp. 262, 263. Dr. M'Crie styles this Confession the
" National Covenant,'' a name which it does not appear to have received at the
time when it was pat forth, although the writers of the following century call
it " the Covenant."
' Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 511-515 ; vol iv. p. 398.
A.D. 1581.] OF SCOTLAND. 217
and it was declared that these should serve as an example for
others. This was tlie first establishment of presbyteries in
Scotland, although the measure now agreed to had probably-
been contemplated for some time. The way to it had been
prepared by an act of the assembly of October, 1576, by
which the meetings of the exercise, which had ceased in most
places, were restored and made obligatory, and by an answer
of the assembly of July, 1579, to a proposal of the provincial
assembly of Lothian for the erection of presbyteries, to the
effect that the exercise might be held to be a presbytery.
The act against Episcopacy agreed to at Dundee was ex-
plained and ratified by the Glasgow assembly ; the King's
Confession was approved of ; and the office of reader, which on
a former occasion had been declared not to be an ordinary func-
tion in the Church, was now forbidden to be conferred on any
one in time coming. Still more important than those mea-
sures was the act whereby the Book of Policy, which had been
long in preparation, and which in its essential parts had al-
ready been approved of by various assemblies, now received
a formal sanction. The state still refused to confirm it, but
Melville's scheme for a reform in*the ecclesiastical govern-
ment, so carefully planned, and so laboriously and skilfully
carried on, was thus brought to a successful termination in the
highest court of the Church.
The Second Book of Discipline was divided into thirteen
chapters.
The first chapter related to the Church and its policy in
general, and to those points in which it differed from the civil
policy. The Church of God, it was declared, is sometimes
taken in a large sense for all who profess the Gospel of Christ,
and so is a company and fellowship not only of the godly, but
also of hypocrites professing outwardly a true religion. At
other times it is taken for the godly and elect only, and some-
times for those who exercise spiritual authority in the congre-
gation. In this last sense, the Church has a certain power
granted by God, according to which it uses a proper jurisdic-
tion and government for the comfort of the whole Church, and
this power is to be put in execution by those to whom the
spiritual government of the Church by lawful calling is com-
mitted. The policy of the Church, flowing from this power,
218 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XL.
is an order or form of spiritual government, exercised by the
members appointed thereto by the word of God, and therefore
is ^iven immediately to the office-bearers, by whom it is exer-
cised to the weal of the whole body. This power and policy
ecclesiastical is different in its nature from the civil power,
although they are both from God. For the power ecclesiasti-
cal flows immediately from God, and the Mediator, Jesus
Christ, and is spiritual, not having a temporal head on earth,
but only Christ, the sole spiritual King and Governor of his
Church. Kings, princes, and magistrates, are properly called
lords, but Christ alone is Lord and Master in the Church, and
others who bear office therein ought only to be called minis-
ters, disciples, and servants. As the ministers and others of
the ecclesiastical state are subject to the civil magistrate, so
ought the person of the civil magistrate to be subject to the
Church spiritually, and in ecclesiastical government. The
civil magistrate enforces obedience by the sword and other
external means; the ministers by the spiritual sword and
spiritual means. The magistrate ought neither to preach,
minister the sacraments, nor execute the censures of the
Church, nor yet prescribe any rule how it should be done ;
but should command the ministers to observe the rules en-
joined in the Scriptures, and punish the transgressors by civil
means. The ministers exercise not the civil jurisdiction, but
teach the magistrate how it should be' exercised according to
the word.
The second chapter treated of the Policy of the Church
and the persons or office-bearers to whom its admini-
stration was committed. As in the civil policy the whole
commonwealth consists of those that are governors or magis-
trates, and those that are governed or subjects, so in the poKcy
of the Church some are appointed to be rulers, and the rest to
be ruled and obey. The policy of the Church consists of three
things — doctrine, to which is annexed the administration of
the sacraments ; discipline ; and distribution. And so there
arises a threefold sort of office-bearers — ministers or preachers,
elders or governors, and deacons or distributors ; and all these
may in a general sense be called ministers of the Church. In
the times of the New Testament, our Lord used the ministry
of the apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and doctors, in
A.D. 1581.] OF SCOTLAND. 219
the administration of the word ; the eldership for good order
and tlie exercise of discipline ; and the deaconship to have the
care of the ecclesiastical goods. The offices of apostle, evan-
gelist, and prophet, are extraordinary, and now have ceased in
the Church, except when God is pleased to stir some of them
up extraordinarily. There are four ordinary functions — that
of pastor, minister, or bishop ; of doctor ; of presbyter or elder ;
and of deacon. These offices are perpetual in the Church,
and are necessary for the government of the same, and no
others ought to be received in the true Church of God.
The third chapter explained how persons bearing ecclesias-
tical functions were admitted to their office. Vocation or call-
ing is common to all who bear office in the Church, and with-
out lawful calling no one is entitled to enter on any ecclesias-
tical function. There are two sorts of calling, extraordinary
and immediate by God Himself, as in the case of the prophets
and apostles, which has no place in Churches established and
completely reformed ; and ordinary, which, besides the calling
of God and the testimony of a good conscience, has the lawful
approbation and outward judgment of men, according to God's
word, and order established in his Church. This ordinary
calling has two parts, election and ordination. Election is the
choosing of a fit person by the judgment of the eldership, and
consent of the congregation to which the person chosen is to
be appointed. No one ought to be intruded into any office
contrary to the will of the congregation, or without the voice
of the eldership. Ordination is the separation and sanctifying
of the person appointed by God and his Church, after he is
tried and found qualified. The ceremonies of ordination are
fasting, earnest prayer, and imposition of hands of the elder-
ship.
The fourth chapter related to the office-bearers in particular,
and first to the Pastors or Ministers. Pastors or ministers are
they who are appointed to particular congregations, which
they rule by the word of God, and over which they watch.
In respect of this they receive the names of pastors, episcopi
or bishops, ministers, and presbyters or seniors. To the
pastor appertains the preaching of the word of God, and the
administration of the sacraments, both of which are appointed
by God as means to teach us, the one by the ear, the otlier by
220 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XL.
the eye and the senses generally, that by both knowledge may
be transferred to the mind. To the pastor also it appertains
to pray for the flock committed to his charge, and to bless
them in the name of the Lord ; to watch over them ; after
lawful proceeding of the eldership to pronounce the sentence
of binding and loosing on any one according to the power of
the keys granted to the Church ; and after like lawful pro-
ceeding to solemnize marriages.
The fifth chapter treated of Doctors and their office, and of
the Schools. One of the two ordinary and perpetual functions
that travail in the word is the office of the doctor, who also may
be called prophet, bishop, elder, and catechizer. His office is to
open up the mind of the Spirit of God in the Scriptures
simply, without such applications as the minister uses, to the
end that the faithful may be instructed, sound doctrine taught,
and the purity of the Gospel preserved from corruption. Under
this name and office is comprehended the order in schools,
colleges, and universities. The doctor, being an elder, should
assist the pastor in the government of the Church, and concur
with the elders his brethren in all assemblies, but it pertains
not to him to preach, minister the sacraments, and celebrate
marriages, unless he also be orderly called thereto. The
pastor, however, may teach in the schools, as the example of
Polycarp and others testifies.
The sixth chapter treated of Elders and their office. The
word elder in the Scriptures is sometimes the name of age,
sometimes of office. When it is the name of an office, it is
sometimes taken largely, and comprehends pastors and doctors,
as well as those who are called seniors or elders. Here those
are called elders whom the Apostle calls presidents or gover-
nors. The office is ordinary, perpetual, and always necessary
in the Church. The eldership is a spiritual function like the
ministry, and those once lawfully called to the office, and
having the proper gifts for the same, may not leave it again.
The number of elders in each congregation should be accord-
ing to the number and necessity of the people. It is not
necessary that all elders should be ^Iso teachers of the word,
although they chiefly ought to be so, and so worthy of double
honour. It pertains to them to watch over the flock, and to
assist the pastor in the examination of those who come to the
A.D. 1581.] OF SCOTLAND. 221
Lord's Table, and in visiting the sick. Their principal office
is to hold assemblies with the pastors and doctors, who are
also of their number, for establishing of good order, and
execution of discipline. To those assemblies all persons are
subject that remain within their bounds.
The seventh chapter treated of the Elderships and Assem-
blies, and Discipline. Elderships and assemblies are com-
monly constituted of pastors, doctors, and those elders who la-
bour not in the word and doctrine. Assemblies are of four sorts
— of particular congregations, one or more ; of a province ; of
a whole nation ; or of all nations professing obedience to Christ.
In all assemblies a moderator should be chosen by common
consent, to keep order, and to see that ecclesiastical matters
only are discussed. It is not intended that every particular
congregation shall have its own particular eldership, but three
or four may have an eldership common to all. This may be
gathered from the practice of the primitive Church, where
elders or colleges of seniors were constituted in cities and large
places. This kind of assembly has the general care of ecclesi-
astical discipline, and to it belongs the duty of seeing that the
ordinances of provincial, national, and general assemblies, are
put in execution. It has the power of electing and deposing
those who hold ecclesiastical charges within its bounds. Pro-
vincial assemblies are the lawful conventions of the pastors,
doctors, and other elders of a province, gathered for the com-
mon affairs of the churches thereof. The national assembly is
a lawful convention of the whole churches of a realm or nation.
No persons may vote in this assembly except ecclesiastical
persons, in such numbers as may be agreed on, though others
may be present to propose, hear, and reason. The fourth sort
of assembly is of all nations and estates of persons within the
Church, representing the Universal Church of Christ, and may
be called the general assembly or council of the whole Church
of God. These assemblies were called together specially on
the occasion of any great schism or controversy, and were
convened by the order of godly emperors.
The eighth chapter treated of Deacons and their office. The
word deacon is here taken for those to whom belong the
collection and distribution of the alms of the faithful, and the
ecclesiastical goods. It is an ordinary and perpetual function
222 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XL.
of the Church of Christ, and persons ought to be called and
elected to it, as to other spiritual offices. They ought to make
distribution according to the judgment of the elderships, of
the which they themselves are not.
The ninth chapter treated of the Patrimony of the Church,
and the distribution thereof. By the patrimony of the Church
is meant whatever hath been or shall be granted by consent
or universal custom to ecclesiastical uses, such as lands, build-
ings, the interest of money, and the like, given by kings or
inferior persons, together with the continual oblations of the
faithful ; and also tithes, manses, glebes, and the like, which
are possessed by universal usage. To take away any part of
this patrimony by unlawful means, and convert it to particular
or profane uses, is detestable sacrilege. In the apostolical
Church, ecclesiastical goods were collected and distributed
by the deacons ; and the ancient canons also mention the
four-fold distribution of this patrimony, one part to the pastor
or bishop, another to the elders, deacons, and all the clergy, a
third to the poor, the sick, and strangers, and the fourth to
the upholding of the fabric of the church and other uses.
The tenth chapter related to the office of a Christian Magis-
trate in the Church. Though all members of the Church,
according to their several vocations, are bound to advance the
kingdom of Christ, Christian princes and other magistrates
are chiefly called upon to do so. Thus it is the duty of a
Christian magistrate to assist and defend the Church ; to see
that its ministers are properly sustained, and that it is not in-
vaded by false teachers or hirelings ; to maintain its discipline,
and to punish civilly those who will not submit to ecclesiasti-
cal censure, without confounding the two jurisdictions ; and to
make laws and constitutions, agreeable to God's word, for the
advancement of the Church, without usurping anything be-
longing to ecclesiastical offices, or any part of the power of the
spiritual keys, which our Master gave to the apostles and their
true successors. For although godly kings and princes, when
the Church was corrupted, sometimes restored the true service
of God, after the example of the godly kings of Judah, and
divers emperors and kings under the Gospel, yet where the
ministers are lawfully constituted, and discharge their duties
faithfully, princes and magistrates ought to hear and obey
^■'^' 1581.] OF SCOTLAND.
223
their voice, and reverence the majesty of the Son of God,
speaking by them.
The eleventh chapter referred to the abuses remaining in the
Church, which it was desired should be reformed. As the
godly magistrate should maintain the liberty which God has
now granted to the preaching of His word, so he should take
away what abuses still remain, among which may be reckoned
the admission of men to Papistical titles and benefices which
have no function in the Eeformed Church, as those of abbots,
coramendators, priors, and the like ; the offices of chapters'
and convents in abbey, cathedral, and other churches ; deans,
archdeacons, chanters, treasurers, chancellors, and others;
the annexation of benefices ; the possession of two thirds of
the rents by persons coming in the place of the old bene-
ficiaries; also the chapters of the new bishops, because
true bishops should confine themselves to one particular flock,
and ^ should not usurp lordship over their brethren ; the
criminal jurisdiction of pastors, and sitting in council, or
parliament, in the Church's name, without commission from
the Church.
The twelfth chapter contained certain special heads of
reformation which were craved. One or more pastors ought
to be placed in every parish, and no pastor should be burdened
with more flocks than one ; doctors should be provided in uni-
versities, colleges, and other needful places ; elderships and
provincial assemblies should be properly constituted ; general
assemblies ought to be maintained in their true liberty, and all
persons subjected to their judgment in ecclesiastical causes
without appeal to any judge, civil or ecclesiastical ; the liberty
of election of persons holding ecclesiastical functions should be
restored, so that none be intruded on any congregation, either
by the prince or inferior persons, without lawful election, and
the assent of the people, as the practice of the apostolical and
primitive Church, and good order craves. And because this
order cannot stand with patronages and presentations to
benefices having cure of souls, as used in the Pope's Church,
it ought to be considered by all, whether these should now
have place in the light of the Keformation. The ecclesiastical
goods ought to be distributed by the deacons, according to the
four-fold division already mentioned.
224 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XL.
The thirteenth chapter made some remarks on the utility
which would flow from this reformation of all estates. ^
The Second Book of Discipline diflfered from the First in
several important details, and still more in the character which
it was intended and fitted to impress on the polity of the Re-
formed Church. Matters of doctrine are only incidentally
alluded to. While the sacraments are spoken of with less
reverence than in the older book, a higher view is taken of
ordination : imposition of hands, which had before been re-
jected as unnecessary, is now required to be used, and declared
to be one of the appointed ceremonies for conferring the minis-
terial character. The most marked distinction, however, be-
tween the two books, is the change of opinion in regard to the
authority of the civil power, and of the people, in matters
ecclesiastical. Knox and his associates permitted, and even
enjoined the sovereign to take a chief part in the counsels of
the Church, though undoubtedly they were ready enough to
resist when the royal authority was directed against them-
selves ; and to the people they gave almost unlimited influ-
ence. According to their theory, the people were not only
the source of all ecclesiastical power, but had also a chief part
in its immediate exercise ; and, in conformity with this, the
office-bearers of the Church were subjected to the control of
those whom nominally they ruled, the minister being periodi-
cally examined as to his life and the discharge of his duties
by the kirk-session, and the superintendent by his provincial
assembly. Knox's system was not expressly set aside by
Melville, but the manifest purpose of the new discipline was
to establish a hierarchy of ecclesiastical courts, resting on the
will of the people as its foundation, but controlling that will in
its actual exercise, and independent altogether of the civil
magistrate. The right of patronage was taken from the crown
and the nobility, and conferred on the eldership and the con-
gregation, the consent of the latter being requisite to the ap-
pointment of a minister, but the former having the judicial
power, both in election and deposition. It was also declared
to be the duty of the magistrate to enforce the decisions of the
^ Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 515-555. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 206-220.
James Melville's Diary, p. 86-116. Spottiswood, vol. ii. p. 233-256. Cook,
vol. i. p. 283-288. M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. i. p. 166-171.
A.D. 1581.] OF SCOTLAND. 225
ecclesiastical tribunals by civil penalties, but, in doing so, he
was simplj to execute the decrees of the spiritual estate. The
discipline itself was held to be enjoined by the Scriptures,
and to be in conformity with the example of the primitive
Church ; and its various offices were held to be of ordinary
and perpetual authority in the Church, and therefore un-
alterable under any circumstances whatever. This was en-
tirely opposed to the opinions held by the compilers of the
First Book of Discipline, in common with most of the English
and continental reformers.
It cannot, however, be said that the divine right of the
Presbyterian system was even now distinctly set forth. A
scriptural and apostolical sanction was claimed for the dis-
cipline, but the essential feature of Presbyterianism was still
imperfectly developed. The Presbytery itself was not yet in
actual existence, though its establishment in certain places
had been agreed to ; nor was such a body recognized, even in
theory, as essential to the constitution of the Church. It formed
no part of Knox's polity, where what was called the exercise
bore less resemblance to the presbytery, than the superin-
tendent did to the bishop ; and in the new discipline there was
but one sort of assembly subordinate to the provincial synod,
and that assembly partook more of the nature of a kirk-ses-
sion than of a presbytery, though it combined the functions of
both. Melville and his friends had hitherto been unable to
convert the exercise into the presbytery, and several drafts of
the Second Book of Discipline had been approved of, before
the presbytery or classical assembly was set up. Hence arose
the incongruity of all notice of the presbytery being omitted
in the very charter of the ecclesiastical polity of which that
court was afterwards held to be the most essential part.
James Boyd, titular archbishop of Glasgow, died in the
month of June, and was buried within the choir of his cathe-
dral church, in the sepulchre of Archbishop Dunbar. Spottis-
wood describes him, and apparently with justice, as " a wise,
learned, and religious prelate, and worthy to have lived in bet-
ter times than he fell into." According to the same historian,
during his last illness he professed his sorrow for having con-
demned episcopal government at the bidding of the assembly. ^
^ Spottiswood, vol. ii. p. 257.
VOL. II.] IQ
226 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XL.
The Duke of Lennox thought this to be a fitting oppor-
tunity for obtaining the revenues of the bishopric of Glasgow,
by means of an arrangement with some minister, who would
accept the see on condition of making over its emoluments,
with the exception of a small pension, to himself. After
offering the appointment to various persons who refused to
enter into such a compact, he at last found a fit instrument for
his purpose in Robert Montgomery, minister at Stirling,
hitherto a vehement supporter of the anti-episcopal party, but
who now consented to accept the bishopric on the duke's
terms. This is the most open and flagrant instance that had
yet occurred of those simoniacal compacts, which earned for the
ecclesiastics concerned in them the opprobrious name, so
well known in our history, of Tulchan bishops. That epithet
has erroneously, or with an intentional disregard of facts,
been connected by many writers with the titular episco-
pacy established at Leith. Had the system which was then
agreed to been allowed to continue, it would have tended, as
was the design of its authors, to check such improper appoint-
ments. Nominations of that kind had been made previous to
the agreement at Leith, and they continued to take place
after Melville had succeeded in overturning it. It is well
known, however, that similar abuses have existed in different
ages, and under all varieties of external circumstances, where-
ever the state has encouraged or permitted the making mer-
chandize of ecclesiastical benefices.
The nomination to the see of Glasgow was intimated to
the general assembly, which met at Edinburgh on the seven-
teenth of October. The members reftised to sanction it, and
ordered Montgomery to remain at his proper church of
Stirling, without seeking any higher function, under the
penalty of excommunication. At this assembly, certain
brethren were appointed to labour diligently for the erection
of presbyteries throughout the kingdom. ^
1 Oalderwood, vol. iii. p. 281-284. Book of the Universal Kirk, p.
220-234. Spottiswood, vol. ii. p. 281-284. The meaning of the expression,
" Tulchan bishops," may best be given in a passage from the report of the
proceedings of the Edinburgh Assembly of 1639: "The moderator [David
Dickson] craved liberty to expone what was meant by Tulchan bishops. It was
a Scots word used in their common language. "When a cow will not let down
her milk, they stuff a calf a skin full of straw, and set it down before the cow.
A.D. 1582.] OF SCOTLAND. 227
The general assembly met in St. Mary's College, St.
Andrews, on the twenty-fourth of April, 1582, and Andrew
Melville, who, in December, 1580, had been appointed prin-
cipal of that college, was chosen moderator. Montgomery
made his submission, and agreed to give up all claim to the
bishopric of Glasgow. Soon after this, however, he again
endeavoured, with the assistance of the civil power, to retain
possession of his see, and the sentence of excommunication
was in consequence pronounced against him by the Presbytery
of Edinburgh. An extraordinary meeting of the assembly
was convened at Edinburgh, on the twenty-seventh of June,
and Melville was continued as moderator. The post which
he held in the assembly was no longer one of mere dignity.
The ruling powers in Church and State were now openly
opposed to each other. The dispute regarding the see of
Glasgow still continued, and John Durie had been summoned
before the council for language which he had used in a
sermon preached during, the month of May. He had de-
nounced Montgomery as an apostate, asserted that Lennox
wished to turn away the king from the true religion, and
prayed, after his sermon, that God would either convert or
confound the duke. On account of this discourse, Durie was
ordered to leave Edinburgh.
The opening of the assembly was ominous of what was
to follow. Melville preached, and his words, as given by
Calderwood, mark the spirit which now animated the eccle-
siastical courts of Scotland: — "He inveighed against the
bloody knife of absolute authority, whereby men intended
to pull the crown off Christ's head, and to wring the sceptre
out of his hand." Durie appeared before the assembly, and
craved their advice how to act. Under the circumstances, it
was not thought advisable that he should remain at Edinburgh
in defiance of the royal authority, and he therefore left the
city, after publicly protesting against the lawfulness of his
expulsion. The assembly drew up a list of their grievances
to be presented to the king, and appointed certain of their
number to wait upon him for that purpose. These commis-
and that was called a Tnlchan. So these bishops possessing the title and the
benefice, without the ofi&ce, they wist not what name to give them, and so they
called them Tulchan bishops." (Peterkiu's Records of the Kirk, p. 248.)
228 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. XL.
sioners went to Perth, where James then was, to present the
document. When it was read, Arran exclaimed, " What !
Who dare subscribe these treasonable articles ? " Melville
answered, " We dare and will subscribe them, and give our
lives in the cause." Encouraged by his example, the other
commissioners put their names to the paper. They were
allowed to depart without molestation. In the meantime,
however, Montgomery had been proclaimed Bishop of Glasgow
at the cross of Edinburgh, and his excommunication declared
null.i
. Melville was never wanting in courage, but, when he defied
Arran, he knew that he would be supported, if necessary, by
a powerful party. The intrigues of Lennox had been disco-
vered by Elizabeth, and her envoys encoui-aged the discon-
tented nobles to prevent the execution of a design, as prejudicial
to the influence of England, as it was to the independence of
the Scottish barons, and the interests of the Eeformed Church.
The Earls of Mar and Gowrie, the Master of Glammis, and
others, entered into a bond for the purpose of putting an end
to the authority of Lennox. On the twenty-second of August,
while the king was residing at Gowrie's castle of Euthven,
he was seized by the associated barons, and soon afterwards
carried to Stirling Castle. The Earl of Arran was made
prisoner while attempting to rescue his sovereign, and Gowrie
and his friends, having assumed the direction of the govern-
ment, sent a message to Lennox, in name of the captive king,
ordering him to leave Scotland within fourteen days.^
1 Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 598-631. Book of the Universal Eark, p. 235-258.
James Melville's Diary, p. 128-133. Spottiswood, vol. ii. p. 284-289. Tytler,
vol. viii. pp. 382, 383.
2 Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 637-647. Tytler, vol. viii. p. 104-115. Mignet,
vol. ii. p. 220 223.
A.D. 1582.] OF SCOTLAND. 229
CHAPTEE XLL
FROM THE RAID OF RUTHVEN IN AUGUST, 1582, TO THE DEATH OF QUEEN
MARY IN FEBRUARY, 1587.
Meetings of the General Assembly — Execution of the Earl of
Gowrie — Rohert Brown^ the English sectary^ in Scot-
land— Flight of Andrew Melville and other ministers —
Archbishop Adamson''s intercourse with the English bishops
— His opposition to the Presbyterian discipline- — Ecclesias-
tical Supremacy of the King ratified by Parliament — Royal
declaration regarding the Supremacy — The Earl of Arran
driven from power — Return of the ministers from exile —
Archbishop Adamson excommunicated by the Synod of
Fife — His appeal to the King and Parliament — Declara-
tion by the General Assembly — Proceedings of the Fniglish
Government against Queen Mary — Her trial and condem-
nation— Remonstrances of King James — Death of Mary,
The Eaid of Euthven secured the complete ascendency of
Melville and his party. The sentence against Durie was
immediately recalled. He preached before the king at Stir-
ling, on the second of September, and, on the fourth, he
entered Edinburgh in triumph, a great crowd accompanying
him from the Netherbow to St. Giles', singing the hundred
and twenty-fourth Psalm. Before the end of the same month
the decease took place of John Winram, who, as Sub-prior of
St. Andrews, and as one of the Protestant superintendents, had
taken an important part in so many ecclesiastical changes.^
The general assembly met at Edinburgh on the ninth of
October. David Lindsay was chosen moderator, and two
commissioners from the king were present. The members
formally approved of what had been done by Gowrie and his
associates ; every minister was ordered to explain and recom-
mend their proceedings in his own congregation ; and all who
opposed them by word or deed were declared liable to ecclesias-
' Calderwood, vol. iii. pp. 646, 647. Lee's Lectures on the History of tbo
CLurch of Scotland, vol. i. p. 345.
230 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLI.
tical censure. Injunctions were issued for the erection of pres-
byteries in the northern parts of the kingdom, and commission
was given to certain specified presbyteries to call before them
the Bishops of Murray, Aberdeen, Brechin, Dunkeld, St. An-
drews, Dunblane, and the Isles, with instructions to accuse
them of various offences, and after trial and conviction to take
order with every one of them before the next assembly. Com-
mission was also given to Melville and Smeaton to confer with
the Bishop of Orkney, who had ceased altogether to exercise
his office as a minister on the ground of sickness and in-
firmity.
The assembly again met on the twenty-fourth of April,
1583. Farther instructions were given about the bishops, as
nothing definite had been done in the interval ; and it was
declared that baptism administered by lay persons, and such
as had no ordinary function in the ministry, was no baptism,
and that those so baptized should be baptized anew.i
The king was obliged to acquiesce for the most part in
whatever was recommended by the Protestant nobles and
their allies in the assembly of the Church, but he watched
for an opportunity of freeing himself from the thraldom in
which he was kept, and of recalling Lennox, towards whom
he continued to cherish the most affectionate regard. His
hopes in this last respect were frustrated by the death of that
nobleman at Paris, in the month of May. Lennox, on his
death-bed, recommended his children to the care of James,
and requested that his heart should he embalmed and sent to
the king. The duke had many amiable qualities. His
devotion to the cause of Mary was chivalrous and sincere ;
and at the same time his loyalty and personal attachment to
James are proved by his confidential letters, and the whole
tenor of his actions, while engaged in his project of associating
the queen and her son in the government of Scotland. But
his pretended conversion to the Protestant religion cannot be
too severely condemned. ^
In the end of June, the king was successfal in escaping
1 Calderwood, vol. iii. pp. 675-689, 705-713. Book of the Universal Kirk, p.
259-277.
2 Calderwood, vol. iii. pp. 714, 715. Tytler, vol. viii. pp. 386i 387. Mignet,
vol. ii. pp. 464, 465.
A.D. 1583. OF SCOTLAND 231
from restraint. Arran was recalled to court, and a proclama-
tion was issued, in which the Eaid of Euthven was declared
to be treason. Before the end of the year, the Protestant
lords made their submission, but in the spring of 1584 a new
plot was devised by them and the agents of Elizabeth. Their
plans, however, were discovered, and when their treasonable
intentions had been openly manifested, the Earl of Gowrie
was seized, and soon afterwards beheaded. The other con-
spirators were compelled to flee to England.^
The apprehensions of the ministers were now renewed, but
it was not the interest of James to quarrel with so formidable
a body. The only person who suiFered at first in any way
was Durie, who was ordered to retire beyond the Tay, and to
fix his residence at Montrose.
In January, 1584, the English sectary, Robert Brown,
came over from Flanders, and landed at Dundee. At St.
Andrews he received from Melville a letter of commendation
to Lawson, and went on to Edinburgh, where he remained for
some time. It is probable that Melville, when he gave him
the letter, knew little more of him than that he was at variance
with the English bishops, and that he had been obliged to
leave his own country on that account. He soon exhibited
the true character of his opinions, by attacking the Scottish
discipline, refusing to submit to the Edinburgh presbytery,
and threatening to appeal from them to the civil magistrate.
In the beginning of February, Melville was summoned
before the council, on account of a sermon which he had
preached at St. Andrews, in June of the preceding year. He
declined to answer, maintaining that whatever charge might
be brought against a preacher for words spoken in his sermon,
even although they sliould be alleged to be treasonable, he
was entitled, in the first place, to be tried by the ecclesiastical
court. He was in consequence ordered to enter himself to
ward within the castle of Blackness, but, apprehensive that
still more severe measures were intended, he fled to Berwick.
After the execution of the Earl of Gowrie, several ministers
followed Melville's example, and retired to England.
The general assembly met at St. Andrews on the twenty-
fourth of April. The king called upon them to retract their
^ Tjtler, vol. viii. p. 149-173.
232 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. XLI.
approbation of the Kaid of Ruthven, but they waived consider-
ing the question on account of the small number of the
members present, i
About this time, Archbishop Adamson returned from an
embassy on which he had been sent to England. Calderwood
mentions that he was well received by the English bishops,
who were glad to see a brother of their order from Scotland,
and accuses him of endeavouring to make the new discipline
odious to Elizabeth and the Church of England, and to the
Eeformed communions on the Continent, by giving false
representations of it. A person of Adamson's learning and
accomplishments, holding the position he did, and professing
ecclesiastical opinions similar to those maintained by most of
the bishops, was sure of a welcome reception in England,
where Whitgift had lately been raised to the see of Canter-
bury. He, no doubt, gave a sufficiently unfavourable account
of the proceedings of Melville's party, and brought prominently
forward those parts of the discipline which were most opposed
to royal and episcopal authority. But the extracts from the
writings which he circulated, as preserved by James Melville
and Calderwood, clearly shew that there was no misrepresen-
tation in the matter. It required nothing more than the
enunciation of the principles of the new polity to make it
offensive to the English queen and primate.
In opposition to the discipline, Adamson also put forth the
following articles : —
"L FOR THE PRINCE.
"1. It is one of the greatest parts of the princely office to
appoint a godly order to the Church, and to take heed that
the same should be maintained and kept.
*' 2. It proceed eth from the tyranny of the Pope to arrogate
to the clergy the whole government of the Church, and to
exclude therefrom Christian princes and godly magistrates,
who should be nourishers of the Church, and keepers of both
the Tables.
" 3. Princes in their own countries are chief heads under
^ Calderwood, vol. in. p. 764 ; vol. iv. pp. 1-14, 37, 38. Spottiswood, vol. ii.
pp. 308, 309. M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. i. p. 286-294.
A.D. 1584.] OF SCOTLAND. 233
Christ, as well in ecclesiastical polity as temporal, and their
judgment in both is sovereign.
" 4. If the rulers of the Chm-ch have done wrong, appella-
tion is lawful to the princely power, by whose authority the
same should be redressed.
"II. FOR THE MINISTRY.
"1. It is most necessary that a good order and form be
prescribed in the Church, as well in the service of God, as in
public doctrine, that all things may be done orderly, and no
man transgress the limits and bounds appointed in the Scrip-
ture, under pretext of the liberty of the Spirit of God.
" 2. The government of the Church does consist in the
authority and power of the bishops, to whom ai*e committed
the dioceses and provinces in government.
" 3. The office of bishop is of the apostolic institution, and
most agreeable to the primitive purity of the Church of God.
" 4. The ordination and ordinary judgment of pastors be-
longeth to the bishop, without whose authority whosoever
does presume to the pastoral cure enters not at the door but
over the wall.
"5. Doctors have no power to preach but by the appoint-
ment of bishops ,* neither have they any farther power in
governing the Church.
^'6. Seniors or elders of the laic sort are not agreeable with
the Scriptures or ancient purity of the primitive Church.
" 7. Presbyteries to be appointed of gentlemen, lords of the
ground, and others associated with the ministers, do nothing
else but induce a great confusion in the Church, and give
occasion to continual sedition.
" 8. The order of appointing moderators in presbyteries
or assemblies, to be altered at their meeting, is neither
canonical after the Scripture, nor agreeable to the order of the
primitive Church, in the which it has been local in the
bishop's seat, and not elective and variable as were the wardens
of the friars.
"9. The synodal assembly should be moderated and go-
verned by the bishop in every province and diocese ; and by
him should order be taken that the churches be well served.
" 10. The general assembly of a realm has no power to
234 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLL
convene itself, but upon a gi-eat and weighty occasion, inti-
mated to tlie Prince, and license granted thereto.
"11. There is no assembly that has power to establish laws
and constitutions within the realm, but such as are allowed of
the Prince and his estate.
"12. The resort of the prelates of the Church to the king's
parliament and great council for the weighty affairs of the
realm is most necessary ; and that ministers shall presume to
direct certain of their own number to the council and parlia-
ment, is an intolerable annoyance.
" 13. Visitation is an office necessary in the Church, and
proper to the function of a bishop, and such as are appointed
by him for that effect.
" 14. Benefices and patronages have been zealously and
godly appointed by our antecessors, and Christian pastors
may with a safe conscience enjoy the same ; and the deacons
to be appointed over the Church rents are a preposterous
imitation of the primitive Church, without any kind of reason.
" 15. The patrimony of the Church is that which by the
laws and estates of countries belongs to the Church and enter-
tainment thereof; and not that abundance wherewith the
Koman Church did overflow."
These articles, we are told, were presented to the Archbishop
of Canterbury and the Bishop of London, to the ministers of
the French congregations at London, and to sundry other
learned persons, as warranted by the Scriptures and primitive
antiquity, with a request, in virtue of the commission which
Adamson had from King James, that they would consider
the same, and confirm them by their subscription and
approval. The result of this application is not mentioned.
Melville watched these proceedings, and apprized his friends
in Scotland of what was going on to their prejudice. He
afterwards wrote to the Churches of Geneva and Zurich,
giving his own account of Scottish affairs, and denouncing
the archbishop in language most offensive and unbecom-
ing. The contrast is very great between the calm ecclesiastical
propositions of Adamson, and the personal invective, and poli-
tical discussions of Melville.^
^ Caldcrwood, vol. iv. pp. 49-55, 157-167. James Melville's Diary, pp. 141,
148-164.
A.D. 1584.] OF SCOTLAND. 235
A parliament was held at Edinburgh on the nineteenth of
May. In the roll of members present there appear the names
of the Archbishop of St. Andrews, and the Bishops of Dunkeld,
Aberdeen, Brechin, Orkney, Dunblane, Argyll, and the Isles.
The royal authority over all estates, spiritual as well as tem-
poral, was confirmed ; to decline the jurisdiction of the king
and council was declared to be treason; all conventions,
whether civil or ecclesiastical, held without the sovereign's
license, were forbidden ; and power was given to the Arch-
bishop of St. Andrews, the bishops, and other commissioners,
to take order in matters ecclesiastical within their dioceses, to
visit the churches and ministers of the same, to reform the
colleges, and to give collation of benefices. The excommuni-
cation pronounced against the Archbishop of Glasgow was
declared to be irregular and invalid, and the bishops and com-
missioners to be appointed by the king for the deprivation of
unworthy persons were ordered to investigate the charges
brought against him. The general nature of these acts had
previously become known, and David Lindsay was ready to pro-
test against them ; but he was seized, and imprisoned in Black-
ness Castle, on a charge of illegal correspondence with Eng-
land. When they were proclaimed at the cross of Edinburgh,
Pont and Balcanqual openly protested against their validity,
in so far as they were prejudicial to the former liberties of the
Church. Soon afterwards the latter of these two ministers,
Lawson, James Melville, and others, fled to Berwick.^
In a parliament held at Edinburgh in the month of August,
it was ordered, for the better observance of the statutes above-
mentioned, that all beneficed persons, ministers, readers, mas-
ters of colleges and schools, being required by their ordinary
bishop or commissioner, should subscribe the following pro-
mise and obligation: — "We the beneficed men, ministers,
readers, and masters of colleges and schools underwritten,
testify and faithfully promise, by these our subscriptions, our
humble and dutiful submission and fidelity to our sovereign
lord the king's majesty, and to obey with all humility his
highness' acts of his late parliament ; and that according to
the same we shall shew our obedience to our ordinary bishop or
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. iii. p. 290-312. Calderwood, vol.
iv. p. 62-73. Tytler, vol. viii. p. 177-179.
236 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLI.
commissioner, appointed or to be appointed by his majesty
to have the exercise of the spiritual jurisdiction in our diocese ;"
and that under the pain of forfeiting their benefices.
In terms of this act, all the ministers between Stirling
and Berwick were summoned to make their subscription at
Edinburgh, on the sixteenth of November. A number of
those who were called did not appear, and, according to
Calderwood, of the others only eleven subscribed, with several
readers who had formerly been priests. The stipends of those
who refused were immediately withdrawn. Various ministers,
however, were ready to subscribe, provided they were allowed
to add to the formula, ^' according to the word of God ;" and
the king having expressed his willingness to accept of this
qualification, Craig and others signed during the month of
December. ^
In the beginning of the year 1585, a very able paper, the
composition of Archbishop Adamson, and containing a decla-
ration of the king's intentions and meaning in regard to the
late acts of parliament, was published by the royal command.
It claimed for the sovereign the authority given in the Old
and New Testament, and in the primitive Church, to godly
kings and emperors, in virtue of which it was his duty to see
that all estates discharged their several offices aright. It de-
nounced the opinion that the king had no authority in matters
ecclesiastical, as one of the chief errors of Rome, and accused
Melville and his party of imitating the Pope in claiming ex-
emption from all civil jurisdiction, and of creating a spiritual
tyranny by means of the newly invented presbyteries. It
defended the episcopal office now established, as a form of
government continued in the Church from the Apostles' times
by regular succession, and maintained in Scotland from the
introduction of Christianity into the kingdom, until within a
few years back when some curious and busy men laboured to
introduce parity among the ministers. It was his majesty's
intention that the bishops should hold their synodical assem-
blies twice every year, and that general assemblies should be
allowed to meet, provided they were called with his knowledge
and license, but he was determined not to permit the exercise
^ Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. iii. p. 347. Calderwood, vol. iv.
pp. 209-211, 246, 247.
A.D. 1585.] OF SCOTLAND. 237
of jurisdiction by presbyteries, consisting of a mixed body of
ministers and laymen.
This paper was extensively circulated, and was reprinted in
England, where it produced a great eflfect. Several answers
to it were written by Melville and the members of his party.
They maintained that the desire which the writer put forward
of upholding good order in the realm was only an artifice for
introducing a new popedom in the person of the king, who,
being chief judge in all causes, might cast down religion at
his pleasure; and that for this purpose the ecclesiastical
jurisdiction given by God immediately to the Church was
transferred to the bishops, who were the king's creatures. ^
The answers to the king's declaration were skilfully written,
but they were disfigured by the most unscmpulous personal
charges, and by denunciations of divine vengeance against
those whose measures they were intended to oppose. JSTo
adequate provocation to such language had been given by
Adamson. "An ambitious man of a salt and fiery humour,"
is the severest expression which he uses of Melville; "a
juggler, a Howliglass, a drunkard, a vile Epicurean," are but
samples of the names which were applied to himself. There
was much truth, however, in the accusations brought by each
party against the principles maintained by the other. In
what was now taking place, and in the proceedings for many
years afterwards, the old contest between the Popes and the
Emperors, with the faults on either side, seemed to be re-
vived. The king, in virtue of his ecclesiastical supremacy,
claimed a right to control the whole external system of the
Church; the ministers denied that the sovereign had any
ecclesiastical authority whatever, and, while refusing to sit in
his civil courts, even at his own request, interfered in every
political matter, on the pretence that spiritual interests were
involved. The tendency of the one system was to make the
Church wholly subservient to the State, and to allow it to act
merely as the instrument of the temporal power; that of the
other, to create within the kingdom an independent jurisdic-
tion, checking the civil magistrate in the lawful use of his own
authority, and exercising a domestic tyranny over eveiy
household. The contest at this time was farther aggravated
^ Calderwood, vol. iv. p. 254-339.
238 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLI.
by the circumstance that the king and his counsellors were
endeavouring to free the royal authority from those limitations
to which it had hitherto been subjected in Scotland, and that
Melville and several of the leading ministers disliked the
kingly office altogether, and were desirous of establishing a
political system unknown to the ancient constitution of the
realm, and opposed to the wishes of the great body of the
people.
In the month of January, a commission was granted to
various bishops, noblemen, and others, to call before them
those ministers who had not yet submitted, and to require
their subscription to the promise of obedience. The prelates
named in the commission were the Archbishops of St.
Andrews and Glasgow, and the Bishops of Argyll, the Isles,
and Aberdeen; and these appear to have been the whole
bishops at this time exercising ecclesiastical jurisdiction in
the Eeformed Church. The Bishop of Argyll was Neil
Campbell, who had been appointed to that see about the year
1580, in room of James Hamilton. The commissioner for the
diocese of Brechin was John Erskine of Dun, who thus
shewed his steady adherence to the form of Episcopacy which
had been established in a great measure by his exertions. He
was accused, indeed, by the adherents of the banished minis-
ters, of being particularly active in urging subscription. Thus
matters went on during the greater part of the year 1585.
Many of the ministers signed the obligation required of them ;
but in so doing a considerable number undoubtedly acted
against their real belief. ^
Another revolution was now approaching which was again
to change the position of affairs in Scotland. The Master of
Gray, a favourite of James yet more unscrupulous than Arran,
and jealous of the superior influence of that nobleman, formed
a plan for overturning the government, to which the English
ambassador gave his strenuous support, and which was com-
municated to the banished nobles and ministers, and to Lord
John and Lord Claud Hamilton. The Earls of Angus and Mar,
the Master of Glammis, Lord John Hamilton, Melville, Balcan-
qual, and others, met at Berwick and arranged their proceedings.
^ Calderwood, vol. iv. pp. 339-343, 351. Miscellany of the Wodrow Society,
ToL i. pp. 432, 433.
A.D. 1585.] OF SCOTLAND. 239
The noblemen entered Scotland, where they were joined by
the Earl of Both well, Lord Maxwell, and other barons; and
James, unprepared to oppose them, and betrayed by the
Master of Gray, was obliged to suiTender at Stirling. Arran
escaped with difficulty, and the associated lords assumed the
chief direction of the government. This revolution took place
in the beginning of November. ^
These proceedings were fatal to the scheme which Arran
had formed, and which, with the assistance of Archbishop
Adamson, he had almost carried through, of assimilating the
Scottish monarchy to that of England, and making the power
of the crown supreme both in Church and State. There is no
evidence that this design was connected with any plan for restor-
ing the Koman Catholic religion. The reverse indeed is shewn
by the whole course of Arran's policy, and by the character of
the combination which overthrew his power. That combina-
tion was formed by a union of the exiled Protestant barons
and ministers with the Hamiltons and other personal enemies
of Arran, among whom were some of the leading Eoman
Catholic nobles, the Lord Claud Hamilton, the Lord Maxwell,
and the Earl of Huntly.
The ministers expected that the change of government would
immediately lead to a corresponding alteration in the condition
of the Church. In this, however, they were disappointed. The
nobles, having gained their own ends, had no wish to provoke
the king further by an attack on Episcopacy, and the ministers
who had signed the obligation defended the lawfulness of sub-
scription, and even denounced the conduct of their brethren
who had been in exile. The statutes were enforced both
against the Koman Catholics, and the Protestants who denied
the king's supremacy. The Lord Maxwell was warded in
Edmburgh Castle for causing mass to be sung in the church of
Lincluden,and James Gibson, minister at Pencaitland, was com-
mitted a prisoner to the same place for comparing the king to
Jeroboam, and styling him a persecutor of the Church. All that
the ministers could obtain was a declaration from the king expla-
natory of the acts of parliament complained of, and the restitu-
tion of their livings to those who had returned from England. 2
* Tytler, vol. viii. p. 229-242.
2 Calderwood, vol.iv. pp. 448-465, 484, 491.
240 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Chap. XLI.
In April, 1586, the provincial assembly of Fife met at St.
Andrews, and Robert Wilkie, one of the professors of St.
Leonard's College, was elected moderator. James Melville,
as moderator of the last assembly, delivered a discourse, in
which he animadverted severely on the conduct of Archbishop
Adamson. Certain charges having also been brought against
the archbishop, that prelate gave in answers, protesting at the
same time both against the authority of the assembly, and
the presence among its members of the Master of Lindsay and
the two Melvilles, who were his personal enemies. His
answers were not thought satisfactory, and a sentence of ex-
communication was pronounced against him. Some of the
archbishop's retainers, on the other hand, excommunicated
the two Melvilles and several of the brethren.
Adamson appealed to the king, the parliament, the privy
council, and a lawful general assembly, and continued to
preach notwithstanding the excommunication. In his appeal,
he denied the authority of the convention at St. Andrews, be-
cause it was called without the sanction of the king or the
bishop of the diocese ; because a layman presided, and it was
composed for the most part of barons, gentlemen, and masters
of schools or colleges, who had no function in the ecclesiasti-
cal state ; because even if composed of ministers, they were
not lawful judges of their bishop, but he of them ; because
the sentence was pronounced irregularly and for insufficient
reasons ; and because it was doubtful whether synods could
excommunicate, where the prince was a Christian.*
The general assembly, whose sittings were now resumed,
met at Edinburgh on the tenth of May. The king attended
in person at the election of a moderator, and gave his vote
in favour of David Lindsay, who was accordingly chosen.
When the proceedings at St. Andrews came before them,
Adamson disclaimed seeking supremacy over the Church or
its courts, promised to claim no more authority than was al-
lowed by God's word, and to shew himself in all respects a
moderate pastor, according to the definition of Paul, and
offered to submit his life and doctrine to the judgment of the
assembly. When this submission was made, the assembly,
^ CalderwooJ, vol. iv. p. 494 547. James Melville's Diary, p. 245-247.
Spottiswood, vol ii. p. 337-340.
A.D. 1586.] OF SCOTLAND.
241
out of respect to the king and to promote quietness in the
Church, and without condemning what was done by the synod
of Fife, declared that the excommunication should be ac-
counted as not pronounced. Against this sentence a protest
was entered by Melville and some of his supporters.
The members of assembly were divided in opinion, and
were evidently desirous to avoid coming to a positive resolu-
tion on the one side or the other. Some time before, a confer-
ence had been held by the king's advisers and the minis-
ters, at which an attempt was made to establish a sort of
middle system between the Episcopacy recognized by law and
the discipline sanctioned by the assembly ; and, in conformity
with this policy, Adamson had no doubt received the com-
mand of James to make the modified submission which led to
the resolution agreed to by the majority of the ecclesiastical
court. It was probably part of this compromise, that no op-
position should now be made by the king to a decree of the
assembly, by which the kingdom was formally divided into
a specified number of provincial synods and presbyteries. It
was also proposed to subject the bishops to the censure of
these courts, but the king refused to agree to this, insisting
that they should be tried only by the general assembly. ^
^ The proceedings of this assembly were not satisfactory i
either to Melville or to his opponents, but the submission of
Adamson, and the change of policy adopted by the court,
were m their result fatal to the cause of titular Episcopacy.
During the latter part of the year 1586, the attention of
the Scottish nation was directed to circumstances in the neigh-
bouring kingdom in which they were deeply interested.
Queen Mary had now been a prisoner for eighteen vears, and
every attempt to obtain her release had been unsuccessful.
Depressed as she was by misfortune, worn out with infirmities
and premature old age, she was still as much feared by Eliza-
beth, as when, in her youth, she was the sovereign of an inde-
pendent kingdom, and the wife of one of the most powerful
monarchs of Europe. The feelings of the English queen
were shared by her Protestant subjects, who hated Mary for
her rebgion, and as the cause of all the plots and conspiracies
' Calderwood vol. iv. p. 547-583. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 289-313.
.SpoUjswood. vol. I,, p. 341-343. M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. i. p. 351-360.
242 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLI.
to which her imprisonment had given rise. They never
seem to have thought that her detention was cruel and
unjust, and that the wise course to prevent the evils they
complained of would have been to restore her to freedom.
The only remedies which occurred to them were increasing
watchfalness and harsher captivity ; and, when these were
found to be ineffectual, her trial and execution were demanded
by the popular voice. Although Elizabeth had connived at
schemes for delivering Mary to certain death, she had
hitherto refused to bring her to public trial in England, but,
when Babington's conspiracy was discovered, she acquiesced
in the course which was recommended by the majority of her
council.
On the fifth of October a commission was issued for the
trial of Mary as accessory to the plot against the Queen of
England, and, nine days afterwards, the court met in the great
hall of Fotheringay Castle. When the commission was read,
Mary, addressing the court, said that she was a free princess,
an anointed queen, subject to God only; and she therefore
protested against the legality of the proceedings, and that
under that protest her answers to the charges were to be
given. She maintained her innocence, and argued against
the sufficiency of the evidence which was brought against her.
But conscious how little weight her assertions would have
with her judges, she appealed to other motives. ^^ Think,"
she said, " of the royal majesty which is wounded through
me : think of the precedent you are creating. ... I came
into England, relying on the friendship and promises of the
Queen of England. I came relying on that token which she
sent me." Drawing a ring from her finger, she continued,
" Trusting to this pledge of love and protection I came
amongst you. You can tell me how it has been redeemed.
. . . I desire that I may have another day of hearing. I
claim the privilege of having an advocate to plead my
cause ; or, being a queen, that I may be believed on the
word of a queen." Her entreaties and her pleas were disre-
garded. The court, after adjourning to Westminster, found
her guilty of the crime of which she had been accused.
The intelligence of these proceedings excited a feeling of
deep indignation among all in Scotland whose hearts were not
A D. lose..] OF SCOTLAND. 243
hardened by fanaticism and political rancour. James had been
separated from his mother in infancy, and been educated by those
who had driven her from the throne, and who had used every
endeavour to blacken her reputation. In such circumstances,
it is rather matter of wonder that lie had not lost altogether
the feelings of a son, than that they were sometimes forgotten
in his supposed duty or interest as a sovereign. So long as
he thought his mother's life was not aimed at, he shewed
little interest in her trial, but, when the true object of Eliza-
beth became apparent, his conduct was altered, and he
remonstrated in the warmest manner against the threatened
outrage. Unhappily for his good name, he still allowed him-
self to be influenced by the fear of losing the succession to the
English crown, and sent, as one of his envoys to Elizabeth, the
Master of Gray, who had already betrayed Mary, and whose
true character he ought to have known. Full of anxiety,
he also requested the ministers to pray for his mother. Many of
them, especially those in Edinburgh, refused. In the king's
own presence, and in the church of St. Giles, a minister,
named Cowper, took possession of the pulpit to prevent the
Archbishop of St. Andrews from officiating, and was hardly
persuaded to come down.
After long hesitation, Elizabeth signed the warrant for the
death of Mary. It was neither conscience nor pity that caused
the delay, but dread of the consequences to herself j and she
would have avoided a public execution, could she have per-
suaded Mary's keeper, Sir Amias Paulet, to assassinate her.
A letter was written, at Elizabeth's request, urging him to
shew his zeal for his sovereign by freeing her from her
enemy; but Paulet, a stern Puritan, who believed that in
putting Mary to death according to the forms of law he was
doing a righteous act, at once refused to commit the base
crime to which he was prompted.
On the seventh of February, 1587, the Earls of Kent and
Shrewsbuiy repaired to Fotheringay, and intimated to Mary
that she was to die on the morning of the following day.
When the warrant for her execution was read to her, she made
the sign of the cross, and exclaimed, " God be praised for the
news you brijig me. I could leceive none better, for it an-
nounces to me the conclusion of my miseries, and the grace
244 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLI.
which God has granted me to die for the honour of his name,
and of his Church, Catholic, Apostolic, and Roman. I did
not expect such a happy end." She entreated to be allowed
the assistance of her confessor, who had not been permitted to
see her for some time. Her request was refused, and she
declined to accept the services of the Dean of Peterborough,
who had accompanied the earls.
She rose early next morning, and, entering her oratory,
continued for some time in prayer before the altar. After
taking a little food, she again proceeded with her devotions,
till she was interrupted by a message that the lords were
waiting for her. She was conducted to the great hall where
the scaffold was erected, and, after urgent entreaty, some of
her attendants were allowed to accompany her. While the
Dean of Peterborough prayed in English, Mary, kneeling
apart, repeated portions of the thirty-first, fifty-first, and
ninety-first Psalms, in Latin, and afterwards continued her
devotions in the English tongue. Then kissing the crucifix
which she held in her hands, she said, " As thine arms,
O my God, were spread out upon the cross, so receive me
within the arms of thy mercy : extend thy pity, and forgive
my sins !" The last words she was heard to utter as' she
knelt by the block were those of the thirty-first Psalm : " Into
thy hands I commend my spirit, for Thou hast redeemed me
O Lord, Thou God of Truth." i
* See Letters in Eilis, second series, vol. iii. p. 113-118, and in Robertson's
appendix, vol. iii. p. 435-440 ; Tytler, vol. viii. p. 306-358 ; Mignet, vol. ii. p.
301-368 ; Jebb, De vita et rebus gestis Marite Scotorum Reginse, vol. ii.
p. 611-641. The account which Spottiswood gives (vol. ii. pp. 355, 356) of the
general disobedience of the ministers to the injunctions of King James in
regard to praying for his mother is perhaps exaggerated ; but the arguments and
statements of Dr. Lee, (Lectures on the History of the Church of Scotland, vol.
ii. p. 91-95) do not shew that it is substantially inaccurate. English writers,
knowing how dangerous the life of Mary was to the civil and ecclesiastical con-
stitution of their country, frequently attempt to defend or palliate her execution.
With more truth, Mr. Keble (Preface to Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity, p. Ixiv.)
says that " the chief hope of the Romanist party" was removed, "though at the
cost of a great national crime."
A.D. 1587.] OF SCOTLAND. 245
CHAPTER XLII.
FROM THE DEA.TH OF QUEEN MARY IN FEBRUARY, 1587, TO THE ESTA-
BLISHMENT OF PRE3BYTERIANISM IN JUNE, 1592.
Indignation of the Scots on the death of Mary — TJie Spanish
Armada -^— Insurrection of the Roman Catholic nobles —
Marriage of King Ja7nes with Anne of Denmark — Death
of John Er shine of Dun — Letter from Elizabeth to James
— General Assembly of August^ 1590 — Sermon of James
Melville — Speech attributed to King James — Relations be-
tween the English and Scottish Churches — Rise of Puri-
tanism— Bancrofts sermon at Paul's Cross — Irritation
of the Scottish Presbyterians — Illness of Archhishop Adam-
son — His retractation — Sis death — General Assembly of
May^ 1592 — Parliamentary ratification of the Presbyterian
Church.
"While the bells were ringing in London for the death of
Mary, Elizabeth pretended that the execution had taken
place without her knowledge and against her wishes, and
censured the ministers who had simply obeyed her orders.
No one was deceived by these [proceedings, but they afforded
an excuse for continuing her previous intercourse with other
kingdoms. Henry III. of France heard with anger of what
had taken place in England, but was soon obliged to accept
Elizabeth's apologies, in order to secure her assistance against
the League and the princes of Lorraine. The English queen
had a more difficult task to accomplish in appeasing the
Scots. James was indignant; and all, except the more
violent members of the Presbyterian party, were ready to
support their sovereign in avenging what they thought
an unpardonable insult to the Scottish nation. The Earl
of Bothwell declared that the best mourning apparel on such
an occasion was a coat of steel ; and the border clans of the
Scotts and Kers, without waiting for any formal declaration
of war, ravaged the English marches. The trial and condenv-
nation of the Master of Gray for various acts of treason, espe-
246 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Chap. XLII.
cially for his conduct during his late embassy to England,
rendered the state of matters yet more threatening.
The position of Elizabeth, at this time, was very perilous.
She had hoped to secm-e her throne by the death of her kins-
woman, and that event had excited almost every nation in
Europe against her. The King of Spain took advantage of
this feeling to liasten the preparations which he had been
making for the invasion of England, and, if James could be
induced to open the Scottish ports to his fleet, and declare war
against England, the expedition seemed assured of success.
To this course the King of the Scots was urgently advised by
a powerful party among his subjects. The Koman Catholics
were now united, and were once more a formidable body.
Their chief leaders were the Earls of Huntly, Errol, and
Crawford, the Lord Maxwell, and Lord Claud Hamilton.
Huntly, the grandson of the earl who fell at Corrichie, had
subscribed the Protestant Confession, in order to avoid per-
secution, but now avowed his opinions, and promised to be
stedfast to his faith. Errol and Crawford had lately been
converted, the former by the Jesuit Edmund Hay, the latter
by William Crichton, a priest of the same order. All these,
as well as many who held Protestant opinions, were vehemently
desirous of hostilities with England. The king was doubtful
how to act, and, had he possessed greater resolution and
higher principles than he did, his perplexity would not have
been removed. He might have disregarded the risk of losing
the succession to the English crown, but other considerations
of the utmost importance were also to be kept in view. James
had good reason to believe that the success of the Spanish in-
vasion would be fatal alike to the E-eformed Churches and the
independence of the British kingdoms ; and, when he finally
yielded to the persuasions of Elizabeth, and resolved to assist
her, he adopted the course which duty as well as interest
pointed out.
It was fortunate for Britain that Huntly and his friends
remained quiet till after the Armada was dispersed, but, in the
spring of 1589, encouraged by promises of support from Spain,
they broke out into open insurrection. The king exerted him-
self with unexpected vigour. Accompanied by tlie young
Duke of Lennox, the chancellor Maitland, and others of his
A.D. 1589.] OF SCOTLAND. 247
nobles, he advanced as far as Aberdeen. The northern lords,
finding theraselv^es unable to resist, were obliged to submit.
Huntly and Crawford were committed to prison, and the same
punishment was awarded to the Earl of Bothwell, who, though
a Protestant, had joined in the rebellion, i
Soon after the restoration of tranquillity, James sent an
embassy to request in marriage the princess Anne, daughter
of Frederick II., King of Denmark. His suit was accepted.
The princess sailed for Scotland, but was driven back by a
hurricane, and James, impatient of tlie delay, embarked at
Leith, and after a prosperous voyage arrived in Norway. On
the twenty-fourth of November, 1589, the marriage was cele-
brated at Upslo, by David Lindsay, the royal chaplain. The
king proceeded to Zealand, and remained there till the end of
April, when he returned to Scotland. During his absence the
kingdom had continued in a state of unusual tranquillity,
under the administration of the nobles to whom he had en-
trusted the government. On Sunday the seventeenth of May,
the queen was crowned in the abbey church of Holyrood. A
dispute took place, similar to that which had occurred at the
coronation of James himself. Several of the ministers ob-
jected to the unction as Judaical, Popish, and superstitious.
The king insisted on its being used, and their scruples were
at last overcome. The queen was anointed by Eobert Bruce,
one of the ministers of Edinburgh, and the crown was placed
on her head either by the ministers, or by the Duke of Lennox
and Lord Hamilton. ^
John Erskine of Dun died on the twenty-second of March,
1590, having survived all his brethren who were appointed to
the office of Superintendent on the establishment of the Re-
formed Church. This distinguished baron was one of the
most estimable men of his time. Steadily attached to the
Protestant opinions, and maintaining them consistently and
courageously, he was always opposed to violent and extreme
measures. The part which he took in connection with the agree-
ment at Leith — a circumstance which many writers overlook
or abstain from noticing — is sufficient to shew that the popular
^ Tytler, vol. ix. p 1-27. Calderwood, vol. v. pp. 17, 25.
2 Tytler, vol. ix. p. 27-34. Calderwood, vol. v. pp. 67, 72, 94-90. Spottis-
wood, vol. ii. p. 399-408.
248 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIl.
opinion is mistaken which ascribes that arrangement solely to
the covetousness of the regent and the nobility. When the
nominal Episcopacy then established had been overthrown by
Melville, and partially restored by King James and Arch-
bishop Adamson, Erskine persevered in the same line of con-
duct, supporting the prelatical system, and enforcing obedience
to it on the reluctant ministers of Angus and Mearns.
When, in 1571, the superintendent complained of certain
bishops being intruded on the Church, it was not episcopal
authority to wliich he objected, but the improper interference
of the state in appointing bishops, and its sacrilegious invasion
of ecclesiastical property. He held that the episcopal office
was of divine institution, and to be conferred by the laying-on
of hands of the pastors, but that individual bishops derived
their powers from the Church, and were therefore responsible
in the exercise of their function to the whole body of the faith-
ful assembled in synod. He entertained a very high and
reverential opinion of the authority of the Church and its
ministers. This was an opinion which he did not acquire
from the school of Knox, and which was distinctly promul-
gated by him before Melville's return to Scotland. Whence
it was immediately derived cannot now be ascertained. If it
were true, as is affirmed by Dr. M'Crie, that in his youth
Erskine studied under Melancthon at Wittenberg, the origin
of these opinions, and of his ecclesiastical principles generally,
would admit of explanation. But the statement is erroneous ;
it was the superintendent's son, James Erskine, who was the
scholar of Melancthon. ^
^ As to Erskine's ecclesiastical principles, see his letter to the regent Mar
(Bannatyne, p. 279-288), and his " epistle written to a faithful brother," dated
13th December, 1571 (Miscellany of the Spalding Club, vol. iv. p. 92-101).
The epistle is a very favourable specimen of the theological writings of the time. In
regard to Dr. M'Crie's mistake above alluded to, compare Life of Melville, vol. i.
pp. 10, 11, with James Melville's Diary, p. 14. The same writer (Life of Mel-
ville, vol. ii. pp. 21, 22) gives the 16th of October, 1592, as the date of Erskine's
death, and states that Spottiswood is in error in fixing it on the 12th of March,
1592. Both are wrong, as appears from a contemporary obituary of the family
of Dun (Miscellany of the Spalding Club, vol. iv. pp. Ixxvii. Ixxviii.), which is
the authority for the date given in the text. The mistakes on the point are very ex-
cusable, being caused by confounding the superintendent with others of his family
of the same Christian name. He attained a patriarchal age, and saw around
him, grown up to manhood, a son named Robert, and a grandson and great-
A.D. 1590.] OF SCOTLAND. 249
Penry, the English Puritan, had taken refuge in Scotland,
and the ministers there expressed their sympathy with his
cause by praying for those who were persecuted in England.
Some of them also seem to have made personal reflections on
Queen Elizabeth, of the same character as those which they
were in the way of using in regard to their own sovereign.
Elizabeth was not disposed to tolerate such proceedings. On
the sixth of July, 1590, she wrote a letter to James, in
which, after referring to the good understanding existing be-
tween them, she said, '"'■ Lest fair semblances, that easily may
beguile, do breed your ignorance of such persons as either
pretend religion or dissemble devotion, let me warn you that
there is risen, both in your realm and mine, a sect of perilous
consequence, such as would have no kings, but a presby-
tery, and take our place, while they enjoy our privilege, with
a shade of God's word, which none is judged to follow right,
without by their censure they be so deemed. Yea, look we
well unto them. When they have made in our people's hearts
a doubt of our religion — and that we err if they say so —
what perilous issue they may make I rather think than mind
to write. Sapienti pauca. I pray you stop the mouths, or
make shorter the tongues of such ministers as dare presume to
make oraisons in their pulpits for the persecuted in England
for the Gospel. Suppose you, my dear brother, that I can
tolerate such scandals of my sincere government? No: I
hope, however you be pleased to bear with their audacity
towards yourself, yet you will not suffer a strange king re-
ceive that indignity at such caterpillars' hands, that instead of
fruit I am afraid will stuff your realm with venom : of this I
have particularized more to this bearer, together with other
answers to his charge, beseeching you to hear them, and not
to give more harbour to vagabond traitors and seditious
inventors, but to return them to me, or banish them your
grandson, both named John, who all died within less than three years after him-
self; see Miscellany of the Spalding Club, vol. iv. pp. ixxvii. Ixxviii., and two
documents in the same volume, pp. 74, 75, 76, dated in the years 1586 and 1588,
in the former of which "John Erskine of Dun, Superintendent of Angus and
Mearns," alludes to his "oy, John Erskine of Logic," and in the latter of which
"John Erskine. fiar of Dun, son and apparent heir to John Erskine of Logic,"
alludes to " John Erskine, elder, franktenementer of Dun," as his "grandsire,"
and to " Kobert Erskine, fiar of Dun," as his '"goodsire."
250 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLII.
land." James willingly complied with the request of the
English queen. The ministers were ordered to forbear pray-
ing for the Puritans, and Penry was commanded to leave
Scotland. ^
The struggle between the titular Episcopacy and Presby-
terianism still continued, but the bishops, no longer supported
by the court, were unable to check the measures of their
opponents. In the general assembly which met at Edm-
burgh, on the twentieth of June, 1587, Melville was chosen
moderator, and renewed instructions were given to proceed
against the Archbishops of St. Andrews and Glasgow, and
the Bishops of Aberdeen and Diinkeld. The Bishop of
Dunkeld was Peter Bollock. He had succeeded, probably on
the see becoming vacant by the death of Bobert Crichton, the
last canonical prelate, who had been restored to his temporali-
ties during the administration of the Duke of Lennox. A
question was also brought before this assembly in regard to
the bishopric of Caithness. Bobert, brother of Matthew
Earl of Lennox, had held that see for many years. At the
Beformation he conformed to the established religion, and in
the year 1576 succeeded his nephew Charles as Earl of
Lennox, a dignity which, at the king's request, he resigned
in favour of Esme Stewart, in exchange for the earldom of
March. He died in 1586, and Bobert Pont was presented by
the king to the vacant see. Before accepting the appointment,
he craved the judgment of the assembly, offering to act as
minister of Dornoch, and to take the office of visitation only
at the command of the Church.
The royal letter of nomination having been laid before the as-
sembly, the following answer was transmitted to the king : —
" We have received your letter willing us to elect our brother,
Mr. Bobert Pont, to the bishopric of Caithness, vacant by the
decease of umquhile Bobert, Earl of March, your highness'
uncle. We praise God that your majesty hath a good
opinion and estimation of such a person as we judge the said
Mr. Bobert to be, whom we acknowledge indeed to be already
a bishop according to the doctrine of St. Paul, and qualified to
use the function of a pastor or minister at the church of
^ Tytler, vol. ix. p. 46-48. Calendar of State Papers relating to Scotland,
vol. ii. p. 579-581.
A.D. 1590.] OF SCOTLAND. 251
Dornoch, or any other church within your highness' realm,
where he is lawfully called, and worthy to have a competent
living appointed to him therefor, as also to use the office of
a visitor or commissioner within the bounds or diocese of
Caithness, if he be burdened therewith. But as to that cor-
rupt estate or office of them who have been termed bishops
heretofore, we find it not agreeable to the word of God, and it
hath been condemned in divers others our assemblies : neither
is the said Mr. Robert willing to accept the same in that
manner: the which we thought good to signify unto your
majesty, for answer of your highness' letter of nomination,
and have ordained our brethren to be appointed commission-
ers to wait upon the next parliament to confer with your
highness and council at more length, if need shall be, here-
upon. Thus, after offering of our humble obedience, we
earnestly wish the Spirit of the Lord to assist your highness
in all good affairs." ^
In the general assembly which met at Edinburgh on the
fourth of August, 1590, it was agreed to discontinue the
yearly election of commissioners for those districts in which
presbyteries were properly constituted. The language used
by James Melville, in a sermon preached at the commence-
ment of this assembly, marks the complete victory which the
new discipline had acquired. " Are we," said he, '^ the true
Church? Are we the lawful ministry? Have we the
authority and power of his sceptre ? Have we that fire that
devours the adversary, and that hammer that breaks the
rocks ? Yea, and have we not that sharp two-edged sword ?
Or is it sharp and drawn only against the poor and mean
ones, and not potent in God for overthrowing of strongholds,
for doing vengeance on whole nations, chastising of peoples,
yea binding of kings in chains, and the most honourable
^ Calderwood, vol. iv. pp. 398, 615-634. Book of the Universal ELirk, p.
314-322. Keith's Catalogue, pp. 215, 216. Acts of the Parliaments of Scot-
land, vol. iii. p. 373. The exact date of Bishop Crichton's decease is uncertain.
He was alive, but very old, in 1585, and died probably before the 31st of July
in that year, when Peter RoUock is styled bishop. In 1592, he is spoken ot as
"umquhile Robert, Bishop of Dunkeld." Compare the Acts of the Parliaments
of Scotland, vol. iii. pp. 381, 625, and Calderwood, vol. iv, p. 338. The Christian
name "Robert" given to the Bishop of Dunkeld in the third volume of the
Acts, p. 423, is evidently a mistake for " Peter ;" see p. 424 of the same volume.
252 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLII.
princes in fetters of iron, to execute upon them the judgment
written?"
It was at this assembly that the king is said to have con-
cluded a speech, in which he professed his zeal for the welfare
of the Church, by praising God "that he was born in such
a time as the time of the light of the Gospel, to such a place
as to be king in such a kirk, the sincerest kirk in the world.
^ The Kirk of Geneva,' said he, ' keepeth Pasch and Yule :
what have they for them? they have no institution. As for
our neighbour kirk in England, it is an evil said mass in
English, wanting nothing but the liftings. I charge you my
good people, ministers, doctors, elders, nobles, gentlemen, and
barons, to stand to your purity, and to exhort the people to do
the same : and I, forsooth, so long as I possess my life and
crown, shall maintain the same against all deadly.' " ^
Neither the absurdity of this speech, nor its manifest in-
sincerity, is a sufficient argument against its genuineness. It
is very unlikely, however, that James would have affected sen-
timents which he did not feel, and proclaimed them in words
which must have been offensive in England, while he was
endeavouring, at Elizabeth's request, to repress the unbecom-
ing language of the ministers. The earliest authority for his
having thus spoken is Scot, who is copied, almost word for word,
by Calderwood ; and their statements are rendered suspicious
by the silence, not of Spottiswood only, who would not have
been unwilling to allow such a circumstance to be forgotten,
but of James Melville, who would hardly have left the speech
unrecorded. Melville's silence is the more marked from the
circumstance that in his sermon he had referred to attempts on
the part of the English bishops to bring about a conformity
between the two realms, and to pervert the Scottish Kirk.
At the very time that the Presbyterian polity was acquir-
ing a complete ascendency in Scotland, it came into direct and
open collision with the Episcopacy of England. When the
Confession of Faith received the sanction of parliament in
1560, most of the supporters of the Protestant opinions in
the two British kingdoms looked on the communions to which
1 Calderwood, vol. v. p. 100-111. Book of tbe Universal Kirk, p. 338-351.
James Melville's Diary, p. 280-285. Scot's Apologetical Narration, p. 57.
Spottiswood, vol. ii. pp. 409, 410.
A.D. 1590.] OF SCOTLAND. 253
they belonged as portions of the same Reformed Church,
holding alike the great doctrines of the Gospel. So long as the
superintendent system was maintained in Scotland, and the
English bishoprics were chiefly filled by the exiles of Mary's
reign, little occurred to disturb this harmonious feeling. Several
of the English divines would even have preferred the northern
establishment to their own. "The Scots," said Parkhurst,
writing to Bullinger in August, 1560, " have made greater
progress in true religion in a few months, than we have done
in many years." Those who did not go so far still heartily
rejoiced in the prosperity of the Scottish Reformation. Allud-
ing to Scotland, in a letter to the same Swiss minister, dated
in February, 1562, Bishop Jewel said, " Religion is most
favourably received, firmly maintained, and daily making
progress in that country."
By degrees, the difierent spirit which, though unknown to
many of the chief actors, influenced the course of reformation
in the two kingdoms, began to make itself felt. The re-
bellious tendencies of the Scottish system first excited sus-
picion among the more moderate of the English prelates.
Parkhurst could describe the death of Riccio almost in the
style of Knox himself, while Grindal, as became a Christian
bishop, spoke of it as an atrocious act. When the vestment
controversy began, the Scottish Protestants warmly sympa-
thized with the clergy who scrupled to use the habits. But
still there was no abatement in the general feeling of good-
will between the Reformed of the two countries. The fact
that Knox sent his sons to England for their education, though
it does not prove that he had any reverence for Episcopacy,
shews that he had no serious objection to the system of the
English Church as a whole. ^
More serious differences, however, soon arose. When the
English Puritans began to maintain the necessity of parity
among the ministers of the Church, and to attack the Book of
Common Prayer, the whole episcopal bench were seriously
alarmed. When the supremacy of the sovereign in matters
ecclesiastical was also denied, and when it was found that, on
this point as well as on the others, the recusants in England
were supported by the sympathy of a powerful party in the
^ See Zurich Letters, vol. i. English Translation, pp, 91, 104, 166, 167, 170.
254 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLII.
Scottish Church, the alienation between the two systems be-
came apparent. It could not have been otherwise ; for the
changes in ecclesiastical polity, which Cartwright was at-
tempting to introduce into England, were almost identical with
those which Melville was successfully establishing in Scotland.
There can be no doubt that the writings of Archbishop Adam-
son, and his personal intercourse with the English prelates,
contributed to increase the jealousy with which the northern
Presbyterians were now regarded. The ministers of ^lelville's
party complained of the hospitable reception given to the
archbishop as an injury to themselves ; but, during their own
banishment in England, their chief associates were the leaders
of the Puritan faction, and when they recovered their ascen-
dency at home, they shewed no wish to keep on good terms
with the English Church. They openly proclaimed that the
communion which they recognized in the southern kingdom
was not the Church established by law, but the party which
disregarded episcopal jurisdiction, and denounced the royal
supremacy. The residence of Penry in Scotland has already
been alluded to. Both he and Udall found refuge in that
kingdom, though their connection with the Mar-prelate libels
was notorious. The latter was treated with marked respect,
sitting as an honoured spectator at the general assemblies, and
preaching before the king in the church of St. Giles ; and it
was from Edinburgh that the former disseminated the writings
for which he was afterwards executed.^
In 1589, an event had occurred which gave the controversy
a new form. On the ninth of February, in that year. Dr.
Bancroft preached his famous sermon at St. Paul's Cross, on
the text, ^' Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the
spirits whether they are of God ; because many false prophets
are gone out into the world." In this discourse, he contrasted
the excellence of the Book of Common Prayer with the absur-
dities and irreverence of extemporary w^orship ; pointed out
the essential distinction between bishops and presbyters ; and
maintained that the Puritan discipline was opposed to the
Scriptures, and that it had never been heard of in the Church
till the time of Calvin. The Scottish system and its founders
^ Calderwood, vol. iv. p. 637 ; vol. v. p. 58. Collier's Ecclesiastical History,
Lathbury's ed. vol. vii. p. 175-179.
A.D. 1590.] OF SCOTLAND. 255
were assailed. The opposition of Knox to the English
Liturgy was censured, and an account was given of the man-
ner in which the discipline had been established in the nor-
thern kingdom, chiefly on the authority of the royal declara-
tion drawn up by Archbishop Adamson, and of a treatise
written by Brown the Independent.
The opinions put forth in this sermon imtated the Presby-
terians in both kingdoms, but in Scotland particularly the
indignation which they excited was very great. The Presby-
tery of Edinburgh, at a meeting held in April, appointed three
of the brethren to draw up an answer to the discourse, and,
in the month of December following, they agreed to direct a
supplication to Queen Elizabeth, requesting her to " take order
with Mr. Doctor Bancroft for that infamous sermon preached
by him at Paul's Cross, traducing in it the whole discipline of
the Church of Scotland." Two different supplications were
prepared accordingly, but it would appear that neither of
them was sent. They perhaps discovered how absurd it
would be in those who refused to their own king the least
authority in matters ecclesiastical, to call on a foreign sove-
reign to interfere with the clergy in the discharge of their
religious functions. A formal answer to the sermon was
written by a minister named John Davidson, and pub-
lished at Edinburgh in 1590. Davidson denied the charges
which Bancroft had brought against the loyalty of the Pres-
byterians, and blamed him in no measured language for rely-
ing on the declaration which the king had since disowned,
and on the reports of such a person as Brown. ^
Dr. Bancroft was no way intimidated by the clamour which
his sermon excited. He afterwards put forth the same views
in two other publications, " A Survey of the pretended Holy
Discipline," and " Dangerous Positions and Proceedings, pub-
lished and practised within this island of Britain, under pre-
tence of Keformation, and for the Presbyterial Discipline."
It was probably in order to obtain information regarding the
subject of these works, that he caused certain inquiries to be
made in Scotland. In February, 1590, an English stationer,
of the name of Norton, then residing in Edinburgh, was ap-
^ Miscellany of the Wodrow Society, vol. i. p. 469-520. Calderwood, vol. v.
pp. 5, 6, 72-77,
256 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLII.
prehended at the instance of Bruce and others of the minis-
ters, on a charge of secret intelligence with Bancroft. He
delivered up a paper containing several questions put bj that
divine in regard to Scottish ecclesiastical affairs. Among
these inquiries were the following : — Why, notwithstanding
the king's declaration, presbyteries had again been set up ?
What was the number of presbyteries, and of how many mem-
bers they consisted ? By whom children were baptized, and
what was the form of public prayer on Sundays and week
days ? What kind of discipline was observed in their consis-
tories ? Whether dioceses were still kept up ? What autho-
rity the king had in matters ecclesiastical ? How the minis-
ters were maintained and churches kept in repair ? How
ecclesiastical censures were respected, and what reformation of
manners had proceeded therefrom, especially in prayer, fast-
ing, obedience to superiors, humility, brotherly love, and
patience ? What had been done in regard to the Archbishop
of St. Andrews, and whether Buchanan's treatise, " De jure
regni apud Scotos," was approved of by the consistories ?
These questions shew an honest and intelligent desire to
ascertain the truth as to some points of great importance ; and,
had the ministers themselves furnished the desired informa-
tion, instead of endeavouring to suppress all knowledge of
their proceedings, they would have served their cause better,
than by usurping the office of the civil magistrate.
In the beginning of the following year, a letter from Dr.
Bancroft to Archbishop Adamson was intercepted, but the
contents were not what was probably expected. Bancroft
said that he had read the archbishop's works on the Apo-
calypse and on Job ; advised him to bestow more honour-
able titles on Queen Elizabeth, and to praise the English
Church above all others ; and expressed his astonishment that
he had not come to England, where he was expected, and
where he would be well received by the Archbishop of Can-
terbury. The only account we have of these proceedings is
the narrative of Calderwood.^
' Caldenvood, vol. v. pp. 77-81, 118. Dr. M'Cn'e (Life of Melville, vol. i. p.
391) speaks of Bancroft's employing " an English bookseller at Edinburgh as a spy
on the ministers," and transmitting to him " a string of officious queries respecting
the conduct of the preachers, and the procedure of the church courts." The copy
of the paper, as given by Calderwood, will certainly not bear out this interpretation.
A.D. 1591.] OF SCOTLAND. 257
Even if the Presbyterians had allowed the letter of Ban-
croft to reach its destination, it is not likely that Adamson
could have availed himself of the generous offers of his English
friends, as he was then oppressed with severe sickness. The
king is said to have granted the revenues of the archbishopric
to the Duke of Lennox, and had, at all events, with a forget-
fulness of past services which deserves the severest condem-
nation, allowed Adamson to fall into a state of abject poverty.
The unhappy prelate could ill bear the misery to which he
was reduced, and which was aggravated by the liberal, or
rather profuse disposition, which he had shewn during his
prosperity. His bodily illness affected his mind, and, not
knowing where to look for support, he applied for aid to
Melville. We have no account of the circumstances of this
application, except what is given by his enemies, but the
main facts are sufficiently clear.
Adamson was visited by Melville, who gave him some
relief, and, at his own urgent entreaty, he was afterwards
loosed by the Presbytery of St Andrews from the sentence of
excommunication which had been pronounced against him.
At a meeting of the provincial assembly of Fife, held in April,
certain articles were presented, written in the Latin language,
in which the archbishop retracted his former opinions. These
articles were not thought satisfactory, and a more clear and
ample recantation in the vulgar tongue was demanded. To
obtain this, Andrew Melville, Robert Wilkie, who had pre-
sided at the meeting of the presbytery which pronounced
the excommunication, and Ferguson and Dalgleish, two
ministers of the same party, were sent to the archbishop.
They returned with the paper, signed by him, and attested by
the persons who were present at his subscription. It set forth
that, as he was unable from sickness to present himself before
them, and because he wished to depart in the unity of the
Christian faith, he therefore made his written confession. He
declared that, since the time when it had pleased God to give
him a knowledge of the truth, he had always held the true
doctrine then taught in Scotland, in which he had walked
uprightly till seduced by ambition, vain glory, and covetous-
ness. He owned that he undertook the office of an archbishop,
although it had been justly condemned, erroneously believing
VOL. II.] Ig
258 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLII.
that the government of the Church was like to the kingdoms
of the world ; that he had laboured to subject churchmen to
the king's ordinance in matters ecclesiastical ; that he had
believed and taught that presbyteries, the ordinance of Christ,
were an invention of men ; that he had written the declaration
by order of the chancellor and secretary ; that he had been
the author of the statute by which the stipends of the ministers
who refused subscription to the acts of parliament were taken
away ; that he had been more busy than became him with
some bishops in England, while he was in that kingdom, and
by his correspondence since; and that he had deceived the
Church by confessions, subscriptions, and protestations.
An addition to the paper farther bore an answer to certain
questions which seem to have been specially put to him,
chiefly regarding the books which he had composed, and the
opinions which they contained. He denied having any share
in SutclifFe's treatise against the form and order of presbyteries,
and condemned the commentary which he himself had written
on the First Epistle of St. Paul to Timothy, as containing
divers offensive matters, and tending to allow the estate of
bishops otherwise than God's word sanctioned it. In a second
paper, dated the twelfth of May, he particularly retracted the
declaration, admitting that it was false ; confessing that he
had wrongfully accused Melville as factious and seditious, and
unadvisedly attributed to him a fiery and salt humour, and
that he had condemned presbyteries, though their authority
was recognized by the Gospel, and approved of bishops,
whose office had no warrant in the Scriptures. He concluded
with stating that, if he had omitted anything, it was not inten-
tionally, but on account of weakness of memory, and his pre-
sent sickness. The ministers seem to have been apprehensive
that the reality of his confession would be called in question,
for, in the month of June, they obtained from him a declaration
of its genuineness, signed in the presence of several witnesses, i
Spottiswood asserts that Adamson complained of the wrong
done to him in publishing his recantation. Whether this was
the case or not, he never formally disavowed it, and there
cannot be a doubt that the papers were signed by him. The
1 Calderwood, vol v. p. 118-127. James Melville's Diary, p. 288-293. Row,
p. 117-131. Spottiswood, vol. ii. p. 415.
A.D. 1591.] OF SCOTLAND. 259
whole proceeding is as little to the honour of the parties con-
cerned, as were any of the forced retractations made at an
earlier period by Protestants accused of heresy. The conduct
of Melville, in particular, is very unbecoming. He urged his
fallen enemy to a confession, the sincerity of which he must
have doubted, and even allowed him to retract the supposed
injurious expressions which he had used towards himself.
There is in this an utter want of true magnanimity, and an evi-
dence that he partook in one of Knox's worst faults — an
extreme sensitiveness as to what was spoken of himself, al-
though he habitually used the most reckless license of speech
in regard to others.
The archbishop never recovered from his sickness. He died
on the nineteenth of February, 1592, James IMelville men-
tions that David Black, minister at St Andrews, visited him
on his death-bed, but that he died as he had lived, " senseless
of spiritual sanctification." The presence of Black could give
little comfort. The dying prelate found better consolation in
writing the Latin verses on his departing soul, which have so
often been quoted.^
The memory of Archbishop Adamson has suffered from a
cause which has been fatal to the character of many others in
periods of controversy — the circumstance that his actions have
come down to us chiefly in the writings of his opponents.
His greatest fault was a want of firmness and sincerity in
maintaining his ecclesiastical principles. The doctrine of
Episcopacy, even in the imperfect form in which he believed
it, should have been upheld with more consistency and
courage. His moral character comes out unsullied by any one
definite accusation, notwithstanding the ribald attacks to
which he was subjected, so disgraceful to all who any way
partook in them or encouraged them. His learning and
literary accomplishments, his ability as a statesman, and his
eloquence as a preacher, have seldom been disputed. His
writings in opposition to Presbyterianism produced a great
effect, and it is evident that his opponents dreaded their influ-
ence, although well aware of the advantage he gave by his
1 Calderwood, vol. v. p. 147. James Melville's Diary, pp. 293, 294. Spot-
tiswood, vol. ii. p. 415, Mackenzie's Lives, vol. iii. p. 376.
260 ECCLESIASTICAL HTSTOEY Chap. XLII.
exaggerated opinion as to the ecclesiastical supremacy of the
sovereign. ^
The general assembly, which met on the twenty-first of
May, 1592, agreed to take steps for obtaining a repeal of the
acts of parliament made against the discipline in the year
1584, and a ratification of the liberties of the Church. They
had chosen a favourable time for the purpose. The country
was distracted by the turbulent conduct of Francis, Earl of
±)Othwell, and the king had become unpopular in consequence
of the suspicions entertained regarding the murder of the
young Earl of MuiTay. James, anxious to secure the stability
of his government, yielded to the advice of those counsellors
who thought that this would best be efi'ected by conceding some
of the chief demands of the ministers.
The parliament assembled at Edinburgh in the beginning^ of
June, and an act was passed by which the liberties, privileges,
and immunities of the Church were ratified. General assem-
blies were allowed to meet once a-year, or oftener if there was
occasion, the time and place of the next meeting to be fixed
at each assembly by the king or his commissioner, and, failing
their being present, by the members themselves. The pro-
vincial assemblies, presbyteries, and parochial sessions, were
confirmed. It was farther declared that the second act of the
parliament held at Edinburgh on the twenty-second day of
May, 1584, should not derogate from the rights of the office-
bearers of the Church concerning heads of religion, and mat-
ters of heresy, excommunication, collation, and deprivation of
ministers. The twentieth act of the same parliament, granting
commission to bishops and other judges in ecclesiastical causes,
was expressly repealed, and presentations to benefices were
ordered to be directed to the particular presbyteries, to whom
full powers were given to grant collation, under the condition
that they should be bound to receive and admit whatever
qualified ministers were presented by his majesty, or other
laic patrons. 2
^ A collection of the archbishop's works, with an account of his life written by
his son-in-law, Thomas Wilson, was published at London, in 1619. Spottiswood
mentions (vol. ii. p. 415) that *' his prelections upon the Epistles to Timothy,
which were most desired, falling into the hands of his adversaries, were sup-
pressed."
" Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. iii. pp. 541, 542. Calderwood, vol.
V. p. 156-166. James Melville's Diary, p. 294-298.
A.D. 1592.] OF SCOTLAND.
261
Such were the ample terms in which the privileges of the
Church were ratified. In several important points, however
the triumph of Melville's party was incomplete. The Book
of Discipline itself was not alluded to, and its provisions, as
a whole, remained destitute of parliamentary sanction ; the
civil rights of the bishops and other prelates continued as
before ; and the law regarding the patronage of ecclesiastical
benefices was expressly confirmed.
262 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIII.
CHAPTEK XLIII.
FROM THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PRESBYTERIANISM IN JUNE, 1592, TO THE
ACCESSION OF KING JAMES TO THE GROWTH OF ENGLAND IN MARCH, 1603
Renewed insurrection of the Roman Catholic nohles — They are
excommunicated hy the Provincial Assembly of Fife —
Suppression of the insurrection — Death of John Leslie^
Bishop of Ross — Sermon of David Blach-^Turtndt of the
seventeenth of December at Edinburgh — Robert Bruce^
minister at Edinburgh — Account of his conversion — Ec-
clesiastical convention at Perth — General Assembly at
Dundee — Publication of the Basilicon Dor on — General As-
sembly at Montrose — The Goivrie conspiracy — Vacant
bishoprics filled up — Accession of James to the crown of
England — Death oj Archbishop Beaton.
The connection between the ecclesiastical dignitaries in par-
liament and the actual office-bearers of the Church was now
again as completely severed, as it was after the convention of
1560. The authority of the presbyteries, so long rejected by
the king, was ratified as an essential part of the Church's
system, but the prelates retained their civil rank and privi-
leges. In the very parliament which established Presby-
terianism, there appear as Lords of the Articles " pro clero"
the Bishops of Orkney and Dunkeld, the Abbots of Culross,
Lindores, Tungland, Kinloss, and InchafFray, and the Prior
of Blantyre ; and subsequent parliaments were attended by
various bishops, abbots, and priors, representing the spiritual
estate, although the assembly of May, 1592, had declared
that the prelates pretending to vote in name of the Church
should not be allowed to do so in time coming. With the
exception of some of the bishoprics, almost all the other
higher dignities, and many of the inferior benefices, were
enjoyed by persons who, without performing any spiritual
function whatever, bore the old titles of abbots and priors,
archdeacons, provosts, and parsons. This was the very state
of matters wdiich the agreement at Leith was intended to
prevent.
A.D. 1593.] OF SCOTLAND. 26'S
The year 1593 beheld a renewal of the civil broils which
had so often distracted Scotland. The great E-oman Catholic
lords, Huntly, Errol, and Angus, again broke out into
rebellion, and were only suppressed by unusual exertions
on the part of the king. James was urged by the min-
isters to subject all^ Koman Catholics, and especially the
insurgent earls, to the penalties of treason, but he refused to
adopt a measure so dangerous and so cruel. To have pro-
scribed the whole adherents of the ancient religion would at
this time liave been a formidable attempt. Their leaders were
persons of approved ability and resolution, and were encour-
aged by promises of support from Spain. In the northern
provinces of the kingdom they had acquired the predominance,
and it appears from a contemporary paper, of undoubted
authority, that a third part of the whole Scottish nobility
professed the Roman Catholic religion.^
The more zealous of the ministers were greatly dissatisfied
with the king's moderation. At a meeting of the provincial
assembly of Fife, held in the month of September, the mem-
bers present claimed jurisdiction over the Roman Catholic
leaders, because some of them had studied at the University
of St. Andrews, and for other reasons, and solemnly excom-
municated the Earls of Huntly, Angus, and Errol, the Lord
Home, Sir Patrick Gordon of Auchindown, and Sir James
Chisholm of Cromlix. The sentence so pronounced was
ratified by the general assembly which met in the following
year. Soon after this, Andrew Melville rebuked the king for
speaking evil of his best friends, the regent Murray, Knox,
and Buchanan ; and requested that those who advised
gentle measures towards Huntly and the Papists should be
ordered to appear before the estates, offering to go to the
gibbet if he did not convict them of treasonable and pernicious
dealing against the Church and kingdom, provided they, if
convicted, should be subjected to the same punishment. His
nepliew, James Melville, tells us, that on hearing this the king
and his courtiers smiled, and said that the man was more
zealous and choleric than wise.^
1 Tytler, vol. ix. pp. 65-111, 376-382.
2 Calderwood, vol. v. pp. 261-268, 288, 289, 309. James Melville's Diary,
p. 313.
264 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLITI.
Adam Both well, Bishop of Orkney, died on the twenty-third
of August, 1593.^ On the twenty-sixth of September follow-
ing, William Chisholm, Bishop of Dunblane, died at Kome.
He had been appointed Bishop of Vaison by the Pope, but
resigned his see, and joined the Carthusian order. After lie
became a monk, he was for some time irt Scotland, aiding the
adherents of the Koman Catholic religion with his counsels.
When he resigned the bishopric of Yaison, his nephew, of the
same name, was appointed his successor in that see. The
latter prelate also took an active part in Scottish affairs,
and the well-known letter addressed by Lord Balmerino
to the Pope, in name of King James, contained a request
that he should be made a cardinal. He died in the year
1629.2
On the nineteenth of February, 1594, Queen Anne gave
birth to a son, who was baptized in the chapel-royal at Stir-
ling, on the thirtieth of August, by the name of Frederick
Henry. Notwithstanding the remonstrances of the Presbytery
of Edinburgh, the baptism was celebrated by Cunningham,
Bishop of Aberdeen. 3
In the autumn of 1594, hostilities again commenced between
the king and the Eoman Catholic nobles. The Earl of Argyll
marched northwards at the head of the royal army, but was
defeated at Glenlivat by the troops of Huntly and Errol.
When the king himself advanced as- far as Aberdeen, the
rebels offered no resistance, and Strathbogie, Slains, and other
castles belonging to the insurgent chiefs, were levelled to the
ground. In this expedition James was accompanied by the
two Melvilles and others of the ministers. After a second
vain attempt to rouse their followers, the northern earls lost
heart, and prepared to leave the country. The Jesuit priest,
James Gordon, Huntly's uncle, endeavoured to dissuade them.
Mass was said, for the last time, within the cathedral of Elgin,
and Gordon, ascending the pulpit, implored his kinsmen and
1 Keith's Catalogue, p. 227. Note by Mr. Mark Napier, in Spottiswood'g
History, vol. ii. p. 79.
2 Note by Bishop Russell, in Keith's Catalogue, p. 563. Calderwood, vol. iv.
p. 663 ; vol. V. pp. 208, 209, 226, 740-744. Tytler, vol. ix. p. 350-353.
3 Calderwood, vol. v. pp. 343, 346. Spottiswood, vol. ii. pp. 455, 456. Tytler,
vol. ix. pp. 130, 140.
AD. 1596.] OF SCOTLAND. 265
friends to risk all for the faith. His entreaties were vain. [In
March, 1595, the earls embarked for the Continent.^
On the thirty-first of May, 159G, John Leslie, Bishop of
Ross, died at Brussels, in the sixty-ninth year of his age.
This eminent prelate had long been absent from Scotland.
He was one of the chief counsellors and defenders of Mary
during her captivity, and was himself imprisoned, first in the
Tower of London, and afterwards in milder confinement at
Farnham Castle, under the custody of the Bishop of Winches-
ter, on a charge of being implicated in Norfolk's conspiracy.
While in prison, he wrote two devotional treatises for the use
of his sovereign. Soon after his release he went to Eome,
where his History of Scotland was published in 1578. He
held for some time a commission as nuncio in Germany, and
exerted himself in procuring the restoration of the old Scottish
monasteries there, and securing them for his countrymen, in
preference to the Irish who claimed them with more justice as
the true representatives of the Celtic Scots. He afterwards
resided in France, and was successively appointed vicar-
general of the arch-diocese of Rouen, and Bishop of Coutances.
Having taken part with the princes of Lorraine in the wars of
the League, he was obliged to retire to the Low Countries,
where he was treated with great honour by the command of
King Philip, to whose protection he had been specially recom-
mended by Mary immediately before her execution. Like
other ecclesiastics of the day, Leslie appears more prominent
as a statesman than as a bishop. But he deserves the highest
praise, not only for his learning and ability, but for his zeal,
piety, and worth, and for his uniform unswerving attachment
to the religious and political principles which he maintained. ^
James now directed his efforts with considerable success to
the restoration of order and ti-anquillity in his kingdom. But
whenever any of his measures were likely to soften the rigour
of the laws against theKora an Catholics, or were even suspected
of such a tendency, he was encountered by the violent opposi-
tion of the ministers. He was determined, however, to main-
tain his authority, and the old struggle for supremacy was
1 Tytler, vol. ix. pp. 145-154, 165-167. James Melville's Diary, pp. 318, 319.
2 Keith's Catalogue, p. 195197. Spottiswood, vol. iii. pp. 55, 56- Irving's
Scottish Writers, vol. i. p. 129146.
266 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIII.
renewed. In the month of October, 1596, David Black,
minister at St. Andrews, preached a sermon in which he
denounced Queen Elizabeth as an atheist, and the religion
professed in her kingdom as an empty show ; and asserted
that all kings were the devil's children, that the lords of
Session were miscreants and bribers, the nobility cormorants,
and Anne of Denmark a woman, whom for fashion's sake they
might pray for, but in whose time it was vain to expect any
good. A complaint was made by the English ambassador on
behalf of his mistress, and Black was summoned before the
privy council. He declined to appear, claiming the right to
be first judged in the ecclesiastical court. A committee of
ministers, which now sat permanently in the metropolis, con-
sisting of commissioners from various parts of the kingdom and
certain members of the Presbytery of Edinburgh, approved of
Black's proceedings, and ordered a copy of his declinature to
be sent to every presbytery, with a request that the members
would subscribe it. In consequence of this, a royal proclama-
tion was set forth, declaring the sittings of the committee
to be illegal, and ordering the commissioners to leave Edin-
burgh, and return to their own abodes. The commissioners,
having met, agi'ced in thinking that " it was lawful to disobey
any such unlawful charge, but, in respect of divers circum-
stances, it was not expedient to disobey for the present, namely
because other good brethren might succeed to such as were
discharged, and so the work go forward."
After some ineffectual attempts to bring about an accommo-
dation, twenty-four burgesses of Edinburgh, distinguished for
their zeal in the cause of the ministers, were also ordered to
leave the capital. One of these went to Walter Balcanqual,
who was then on his way to preach. In his sermon, Balcan-
qual attacked the measures of the court, and, when the dis-
course was finished, requested the noblemen, gentlemen, and
others well affected to the cause, to assemble in the Little
Kirk — as the chancel of St. Giles was then called — explaining
that he had a warrant from his brethren to that efiect. A
large number of persons assembled accordingly, and Robert
Bruce declared the great danger they were in from the Popish
lords, who had been allowed to return home, and desired
them, since they were met together, to hold up their hands
A-I>- 159G ] OF SCOTLAND. 267
and swear to defend the present state of religion against all
opponents whatsoever. After this exhortation, two noblemen,
two barons, two of the magistrates, and two ministers, were
sent as a deputation to the king, who was then sitting in the
Tolbooth, along with the lords of Session. James asked who
they were that durst assemble against his proclamations.
Lord Lindsay answered that they durst do more than that,
and that they would not suffer religion to be overthrown. The
king made no reply, but, as the people thronged in, commanded
the doors to be shut. The deputies returned to their brethren
in the church, where, in the meantime, one of the ministers
had been reading the history of Haman and Mordecai, and
similar passages from the Scriptures. It was now asked what
course was to be taken. " There is no course," cried Lindsay,
'^ but one ; let us stay together that are here, and promise to
take one part, and advertise our friends and the favourers of
religion to come unto us; so it shall be either theirs or ours."
The multitude now became furious. Some called to bring out
Haman ; others exclaimed, ^' The sword of the Lord and of
Gideon." A person, who is alleged to have been an agent of
a party of the courtiers that had all along inflamed the quarrel
out of jealousy of the king's chief counsellors, cried out, " Ar-
mour, armour! " Part of the crowd went to the Tolbooth door,
and demanded that the obnoxious counsellors should be delivered
up, while the noblemen and barons appeared in arms out-
side the church. James sent some of those who were with him
to remonstrate, and angry words passed between the Earl of
Mar and Lord Lindsay, but it was agreed that another depu-
tation should wait on the king, and request that he would
rescind his late proceedings, and refuse any voice in ecclesias-
tical matters to certain counsellors whose religion was sus-
pected. The king asked them to lay their wishes before a
meeting of his council, and, tranquillity having now been
restored by the assistance of the provost of the city, he went
down to Holyrood.
These events took place in the forenoon of the seventeenth
of December. In the afternoon, the noblemen, barons, and
ministers, renewed their request, but James declined to receive
it, and the next day departed for Linlithgow, after command-
ing a proclamation to be made, in which the ministers were
268 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIII.
denounced as the authors of the treasonable disturbance which
had taken place, and the courts of law were ordered to remove
from Edinburgh. The citizens were alarmed, but the minis-
ters endeavoured to keep their supporters together, and for
this purpose prepared a bond for their signature. A fast was
also proclaimed, and sermons of preparation were enjoined to
be made tliat afternoon. A minister, named John Welsh,
preached in tlie church of St. Giles, and declared that the king
had been possessed with a devil ; that this one devil having
been put out, seven worse spirits had entered in its place ; and
that his subjects might lawfully rise and take the sword out of
his hand. This he confirmed by the example of a father, who,
falling into a frenzy, may be seized by his children and ser-
vants, and bound hand and foot. '^ A most execrable doc-
trine," says Spottiswood, " and directly repugnant to Holy
Scripture, which yet was taken by many of the hearers as a
sound and free application." The preacher had married one
of Knox's daughters, and the illustration he used was the same
which that reformer had employed in defending his doctrine of
resistance in his first interview with the king's mother.
Those who had inherited the political principles of Knox at no
time formed a majority of the ministers, but they were formida-
ble by their zeal and union, and their unceasing efforts to make
the person of the sovereign, and monarchy itself, hateful and
contemptible to the people. It was only in times of great
excitement that they came forward as a distinct party, but
their continued existence requires to be kept in mind, in order
to the due understanding of many important events in Scottish
history.
On the day after the tumult, a letter, signed by Bruce, Bal-
canquhal, and two other ministers, was sent to Lord Hamilton,
next heir to the crown after Prince Henry, in which they
informed him that the godly barons and other gentlemen, who
had undertaken the patronage of the Church's cause, lacked a
chief nobleman to countenance them, and that his lordship was
thought fittest for that honour. Hamilton, after some hesita-
tion, carried the letter to the king. James heard of this pro-
posal with deep indignation. He ordered the magistrates of
Edinburgh to apprehend several of the ministers and their
chief abettors ; and Bruce and his friends, finding that they
A.D. 1597.] OF SCOTLAND. 269
could expect no support from the burgesses, fled from the city.
On the first of January, 1597, the king returned to Edinburgh,
and was welcomed with professions of devoted loyalty. ^
The tumult of the seventeenth of December has been excused
as an accidental outburst of popular fury ; but there were cir-
cumstances connected with it which plainly shewed a deliberate
purpose of resistance to the royal authority. Its apologists
have been able to speak of it as unimportant, only because it
was an entire failure. Had the ministers, the citizens, and
their supporters among the barons, been joined by the higher
nobility, the insurrection in the capital might have ended in a
revolution such as had occurred in the reign of Mary, or that
which took place in the following century.
The suppression of the tumult enabled James to resume
with better prospects of success his attempt to restore episco-
pal government in the Church; and the supporters of the
Presbyterian discipline speak of the year t596 as the time
when it had attained its greatest purity and influence. " The
Church of Scotland," says Calderwood, in commencing his
narrative of the transactions of that year, " was now come to
her perfection, and the greatest purity that she ever attained
unto, both in doctrine and discipline, so that her beauty was
admirable to foreign Churches. The assemblies of the saints
were never so glorious nor profitable to every one of the true
members thereof, as in the beginning of this year." The
description is just, so far as it applies to the ascendency of the
ecclesiastical opinions held by the historian, but, if it is under-
stood to refer also to the religious and moral condition of the
people, it can hardly be reconciled Avith wliat he relates a few
pages farther on in the very words of the general assembly
which met on the twenty-fourth of March, 1596. A more
frightful state of corruption in a Christian nation has hardly
ever been recorded, and, making every reasonable allowance
for the exaggeration and mere words of form not unusual in
such documents, the general faithfulness of the picture is
attested by other writings of the time. ^
One of the most suspicious circumstances connected with the
1 Calderwood, vol. v. p. 447-536. Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 10-37. Tytler,
vol. ix. p. 204-225.
2 Calderwood, vol. v. pp. 387, 388, 408-411.
270 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIII.
events in the capital which have just been mentioned was the
letter addressed by the ministers to Lord Hamilton. Bruce,
instead of expressing regret for what he had done, wrote to
Hamilton from the place of his concealment, upbraiding him for
having laid his communication before the king, and assuring
him that his sister's son, the Earl of Huntly, would not have
done the like.^ Next to Melville, Bruce was now the most
distinguished among the Presbyterian leaders. He was
descended from the ancient family of Bruce of Airth, and was
born about the year 1559. He studied at St. Andrews, and
afterwards at several of the continental universities, with the
intention of adopting the profession of an advocate. On his
return to Scotland, he practised for some time before the
courts, but his mind gradually became averse to his occu-
pation. It was his wish to study theology, and, having
with considerable difficulty obtained permission from his
parents, he went t^ St. Andrews, where he attended the lectures
of the two Melvilles and other teachers.
The account which Bruce himself gives of his conversion
deserves to be mentioned, as illustrating the state of religious
feeling and opinion then prevalent among the Scottish Pro-
testants. " As touching my vocation to the ministry," he
says, " I was first called to my grace before I obeyed my
calling to the ministry. He made me first a Christian before
He made me a minister. I repugned long to my calling to
the ministry ; ten years at least I never leaped on horseback,
nor lighted, but with a repugning and justly accusing con-
science. At last it pleased God, in the fifteen hundred and
eighty-first year of God, in the month of August, in the last
night thereof, being in the place of Airth, lying in a chamber
called the new loft chamber, in the very night while I lay,
to smite me inwardly and judicially in my conscience, and to
present all my sins before me in such sort, that He omitted
not a circumstance, but made my conscience to see time,
place, and persons, as vividly as the hour I did them. He
made the devil accuse me so audibly, that I heard his voice
as vividly as ever I heard any thing, not being sleeping but
waking. So far as he spoke true, my conscience bare him re-
cord, and testified against me very clearly ; but when he came
' Calderwood, vol. v. pp. 534, 535.
A.D. 1597.] OF SCOTLAND. 271
to be a false accuser, and laid things to my charge which I
never had done, then my conscience failed him, and would
not testify with him ; but in those things which were
true, my conscience condemned me, and the condemnator
tormented me, and made me feel the wrath of God pres-
sing me down as it were to the lower hell. Yea, I was so
fearfully and extremely tormented, that I would have been
content to have been cast into a cauldron of hot melted lead,
to have had my soul relieved of that insupportable weight.
Always so far as he spoke true, I confessed, restored God to
his glory, and cried God's mercy for the merits of Christ ;
yea, I appealed ever to his mercy, purchased to me by the
blood, death, and passion of Christ. This court of justice
holden upon my soul, it turned of the bottomless mercy of
God to a court of mercy to me ; for that same night, ere
ever the day dawned, or ever the sun rose. He restrained those
furies and those outcries of my just accusing conscience, and
enabled me to rise in the morning."
The zeal and acquirements of Bruce having become known
he was requested to accept the office of minister at Edinburgh,
vacant by the death of James Lawson while in exile in Eng-
land. He was at first unwilling to comply, and, when he did
agree, it was by a temporary arrangement, and without being
ordained as was required by the Book of Discipline. He
preached for some time without administering the communion
and it is mentioned, on the authority of Livingstone, that it
was only by an artifice of his brethren in the ministry that he
was induced to dispense the sacrament. He was on one occa-
sion purposely left alone in the middle of the communion
and, as no one else was present to officiate, he completed the
celebration. Although he finally agreed to accept a sort of
conditional ordination, he declined to do so for a number of
years, alleging that he had the material part of it — the ap-
proval of all the ministers — and that he would not, by receiv-
ing it, alarm the people who had already partaken of the com-
munion at his hands.
As one of the ministers of Edinburgh, Bruce took a
leading part in all ecclesiastical proceedings. His advice and
assistance were very useful to the noblemen whom James
had intrusted with the government of the kingdom dur-
272 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIII.
iug his absence in Denmark, and for this he received the
thanks of the king, and was selected to anoint Queen Anne
at her coronation. When he was obliged to leave Edinburgh
in December, 1596, he found refuge among those friendly to
his cause in the north of England.^
King James ordered a meeting of the estates, and an ec-
clesiastical synod, to be held at Perth on the last day of
February, 1597, in order to advise with them in regard to the
jurisdiction and polity of the Church. That all persons might
be the better prepared, he caused a number of questions to be
previously circulated, embracing the chief points as to which
he wished an answer. These questions were fifty-five in
number. The most important of them were the following: —
May not matters affecting the external government of the
Church be disputed, salva fide et religione ? Is it the king
severally, or the pastors severally, or both conjunctly, who
should establish the government of the Church, and what is
the form of their conjunction in the making of laws ? Is not
the consent of the most part of the flock, and also of the
patron, necessary in electing pastors ? Is he a lawful pastor
who wanteth imposition of hands ? Is it lawful to pastors to
express particular men's names in the pulpit, or to describe
them so clearly that the people may understand who are
meant, unless in the case of notorious declared vices, with
private admonition preceding ? Is it lawful to call the general
assembly without the king's license, he being pius et Christi-
anus magistratus? May any thing be enacted in the as-
sembly to which the king does not consent? Is simple
contumacy without probation of a crime, or is any crime with-
out contumacy, a sufficient cause of excommunication ? Is
summary excommunication lawful in any case, without ad-
monition and citation preceding ? Have any others than the
pastors of the Church a voice in excommunication ? Is it
lawful to excommunicate such Papists as never professed the
Keformed religion? Has not a Christian king power to
annul a notoriously unjust sentence of excommunication ?
^ Wodrow's Life of Bruce, prefixed to the Wodrow Society edition of his
Sermons, p. 4-21. James Melville's Diary, pp. 147, 148, 254, 255. Calderwood,
vol. iv. p. 634-638. See also Select Biographies, edited for the Wodrow Society,
vol. i. pp. 305, 306.
A.D. 1597.] OF SCOTLAND 273
When the pastors do not their duty, or when one jurisdiction
usurps upon another, or when any other schism falleth out,
should not a Christian king amend such disorders ? Should
any thing be treated in the ecclesiastical judgment prejudicial
to the civil jurisdiction or private men's rights, and may not
the civil magistrate lawfully stay all such proceedings ?
It was evident from the nature of these questions that the
king contemplated some change in the jurisdiction of the
Church. The synods and presbyteries most zealously
attached to the discipline were alarmed, and objections were
made to the proposed ecclesiastical convention, because it was
to be held at a different time and place from those which had
been fixed at last general assembly. The provincial assembly
of Fife ordered two members from every presbytery to meet at
St. Andrews, on the twenty-first of February, to resolve on
proper answers to the questions. They met accordingly, and,
as Melville's adherents had the entire ascendency in this
synod, the answers, which they agreed to, shew the opinions
entertained by that party regarding the subjects under dis-
cussion. In every point of disputed jurisdiction between the
Church and the State, their decision was in favour of the
former. ^
The brethren of the ministry met at Perth on the day ap-
pointed. From the commencement of the proceedings, the
ministers of the northern districts shewed their jealousy of
their southern brethren, especially of " the Popes of Edin-
burgh," who had hitherto taken a leading part in ecclesiastical
affairs. The former, according to Calderwood, assembled in
great numbers, having been well prepared beforehand for the
part they were to take ; and the same views were supported
by the ministers of Angus. It is very likely that the royal
influence had been freely used, but, independently of this,
there were other causes sufficient to explain the differences in
the assembly. The ministers in the diocese of Aberdeen were
not averse to portions of the ancient system, and their inclina-
tions in that direction were increased by the deference enter-
tained by many of them to the house of Gordon. . Those of
Angus were no doubt favourably disposed towards Episco-
1 Calderwoo'], vol. v. p. 577-596. James Melville's Diary, p. 390-4G3. Spot-
tiswood, vol. iii. p. 40-45.
VOL. II.] ig
274 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. XLIII.
pacy, in consequence of tlieir long connection with Erskine of
Dun. In the absence of Andrew Melville, who was unable to
attend the synod, his nephew, James, supplied his place as
leader of the zealous Presbyterians. They endeavoured to
prevent the adoption of any dangerous measures, by contend-
ing that the meeting was no proper assembly ; but it was car-
ried by the votes of eleven presbyteries to eight, that it should
be recognized as an extraordinary general assembly of the
Church. The king laid before them thirteen articles, most of
which, after considerable discussion, were agreed to by a ma-
jority of the members. The principal of these were the fol-
lowing : — That ministers should not be allowed to meddle
with matters of state in the pulpit ; that they should not
name or describe individual persons in their sermons, except
in the case of notorious guilt, proved by a civil judgment or
ecclesiastical excommunication ; that no meetings of pastors
should be held without the king's consent, except the ordinary
sessions, presbyteries, and synods ; that in all the chief towns
the consent of the congregation and of the king should be re-
quisite in the appointment of a minister ; and that commission
should be granted to seven or eight ministers to consider the
remaining questions. On the other hand, the king, at the re-
quest of the assembly, agreed to allow Bruce and his friends
to return, on their finding security to answer any charge which
might be brought against them.^
In terms of special powers given to him at Perth, King
James summoned an ordinary meeting of the general assembly
at Dundee, on the tenth of May. Robert Hollock, Principal
of the College of Edinburgh, who was highly esteemed by all
on account of his learning and piety, was chosen moderator,
and zealously supported the measures recommended by the
king. At this assembly, the Earls of Huntly, Errol, and
Angus, having professed their sorrow for former offences, and
declared their adherence to the established religion, were ab-
solved from the sentence of excommunication, notwithstanding
tlie opposition of Melville's party. The assembly held at
Perth was declared to be a lawful one ; its proceedings were
ratified ; and it was provided that the king's assent should be
1 Calderwood, vol. v. p. 606-622. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 439-449.
James Melville's Diary, p. 403-410. Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 45-55.
A.D. 1597.] OF SCOTLAND. 275
required to every form of assembly, either general or special
permitted by the laws, and authorised by the word of God.
The members agreed to various regulations connected with
the rest of the king's questions. One of the most important
of these was that all ministers should be ordained by imposi-
tion of hands. It was also agreed that commission should be
given to a certain number of ministers to meet with the king
and consult as to matters ecclesiastical, at such time and place
as his majesty might fix. This regulation was particularly
offensive to Melville's party, who saw clearly to what it
tended. While it prepared the way for Episcopacy, it took
out of their hands the very instrument which they had them-
selves used with such success in governing the whole Church
by means of a permanent committee. ^
At a parliament held in December, it was agreed, on the
petition of the new commissioners of the Church, that any
ministers provided by the king to the office of bishop or abbot,
should have a vote in parliament as freely as any other prelates
in times past, and that all bishopricks, vacant or to become
vacant, should be bestowed only on ministers. At a meetino-
of the synod of Fife, both the Melvilles denounced this mea-
sure. David Ferguson compared it to the wooden horse by
means of which Troy was taken ; and John Davidson re-
marked, " Busk, busk, busk him as bonnily as you can, and
bring him in as fairly as you will, we see him well enough,
we see the horns of his mitre." In a general assembly held
at Dundee in March, 1598, it was agreed that the ministers,
as one of the three estates, ought to have a vote in parliament •
but this was only carried by a small majority, the northern
members, as before, strongly supporting the views of the
king.^
In the following year an event occurred which shewed the
feeling of dislike entertained by the zealous party towards the
king, and the unscrupulous character of its leader. James
had finished the composition of the Basilicon Doron, but, be-
^ Calderwood, vol. v. p. 628-64:7. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 450-463.
Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 58-60.
2 Calderwood, vol. v. pp. 668-670, 680, 681, 695, 696. James Melville's
Diary, pp. 436, 437. Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 67-G9. Acts of the Parliaments of
Scotland, vol. iv. pp. 130, 131.
276 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIIL
fore he had resolved on its publication, one of his attendants,
whom he had employed to transcribe the work, shewed it to
Melville, who caused several copies to be made and circulated
among his friends. Certain passages were extracted and laid
before the synod of Fife, as the work of an unknown author,
in which the ecclesiastical authority of the king was main-
tained, parity declared to be the mother of confusion and
inconsistent with monarchy, the restoration of Episcopacy
advised as necessary for the welfare both of Church and
State, and Puritans were denounced as pests in the common-
wealth. The synod held these propositions to be seditious,
wicked, and treasonable, and tlie king, much offended, endea-
voured to discover by what means they had been laid before
the meeting. The members disclaimed all knowledge of the
matter — with what sincerity does not appear — but one of their
number, named Dykes, by whom the articles had been pre-
sented, on being summoned before the council, failed to
attend, and was proclaimed a rebel. The king himself, to
prevent all farther rumours on the subject, published the book
soon afterwards.^
At a general assembly summoned by royal proclamation to
meet at Montrose, on the twenty-eighth of March, 1600, it
was agreed, in regard to the ministers who were to have a vote
in parliament, that each one of their number should be chosen
by the king out of six to be named by the Church. Various
restrictions were imposed upon them, among which were the
following : — The persons selected were to receive their instruc-
tions from the assembly, and to give account to it of their pro-
ceedings ; they were to have no more power in presbyteries,
and provincial and general assemblies, and in the ecclesiastical
government generally, than any other ministers ; they were
to attend to their own particular congregations, and, in the
event of their being deposed by the ecclesiastical courts, were
ipso facto to lose their vote in parliament, and their benefice;
they were to be styled commissioners of the particular place
to which they were appointed, and every year were to lay
down their office at the meeting of the general assembly, and
* Spottiswood, vol, iii. pp. 80, 81. Calderwood, vol. v. pp. 744, 745. James
Melville's Diary, p. 444-446.
A.D. 1600.] OF SCOTLAND. 277
to continue, or be removed, as the assembly, with the king's
consent, should judge most expedient.
In connection with the restrictions thus imposed. Archbishop
Spottiswood remarks, " It was neither the king's intention,
nor the mind of the wiser sort, to have these cautions stand
in force ; but, to have matters peaceably ended
and the reformation of the policy made without any noise, the
king gave way to these conceits, knowing that with time the
utility of the government which he purposed to have estab-
lished would appear, and trusting that they whom he should
place in these rooms would, by their care for the Church, and
their wise and good behaviour, purchase to themselves the
authority which appertained." That such was the king's in-
tention there can be no doubt, but the line of policy thus
adopted for the re-establishment of Episcopacy was as blame-
able as that which Melville had used for its abolition. ^
The month of August, in the last year of the sixteenth
century, became memorable in Scottish history for the event
known by the name of the Gowrie conspiracy. John, Earl of
Gowrie, was a son of the earl who was beheaded in 1584, and
grandson of Lord Euthven, one of the chief actors in the mur-
der of Eiccio. In May, 1600, he returned to Scotland, after
a residence abroad for several years, in the course of which he
had made great proficiency in his studies, and distinguished
himself by his ardour for the Protestant religion. During the
previous year he had resided for three months at Geneva, in
the house of Beza, and in passing through Paris was furnished
by the English ambassador with letters of recommendation to
Queen Elizabeth. He remained at her court for some time,
and was admitted to frequent and confidential interviews with
her. At this time the English and Scottish sovereigns viewed
each other with feelings of mutual suspicion and dislike.
There can be little doubt that the object of Gowrie's plot was
to make the king a prisoner, and to administer the govern-
ment in his name, with the assistance of Elizabeth and the
violent Presbyterian party. The Edinburgh ministers shewed
their sympathy with the earl by refusing to admit that there
was a conspiracy at all, and even charging James with a plot
' Calderwood, vol. vi. p. 1-26. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 477-490
Spottiswood, vol. iii. pp. 73-75, 82.
278 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIIL
against the Ruthvens. The other preachers finally acknow-
ledged their error, but Bruce persisted in maintaining that
the king's narrative was untrue, and was banished from Scot-
land. Sometime afterwards, however, he was permitted by
the king to return to his own country. ^
Before the end of this year, several of the vacant bishopricks
were filled up. The king had power by act of parliament to
name bishops and other prelates, although the persons so
appointed could not vote in behalf of the Chuixh without its
sanction. At the date of the rising of the Montrose assembly,
the revenues of the archiepiscopal see of St. Andrews were in
the possession of the Duke of Lennox, and those of Glasgow
were divided between the duke and Archbishop Beaton.
Lord Spynie had Murray ; Orkney had been acquired by the
Earl of Orkney ; Dunkeld, Dunblane, and Brechin, were still
held by the titular bishops, Rollock, Graham, and Campbell,
though none of them at that time acted as ministers. David
Cunningham was Bishop of Aberdeen, and Neil Campbell of
Argyll. The dioceses of Galloway and the Isles were vacant,
and their endowments had been entirely dilapidated. Boss
and Caithness still retained a part of their revenues, and David
Lindsay was now appointed to the former see, and George
Gladstones, to the latter, both of these prelates, however, con-
tinuing to perform their ordinary^ duties as ministers at Leith
and St. Andrews. On Bishop Cunningham's decease, Peter
Blackburn, minister at Aberdeen, was appointed in his place,
and he, along with Lindsay and Gladstones, received commis-
sion in the month of October to vote on behalf of the Church.
They took their seats in the parliament which met in Novem-
ber, along with Alexander Douglas, who had then been named
to the see of Murray. ^
On the nineteenth of November, the queen gave birth, in
the palace of Dunfermline, to a son, who was baptized on the
thirtieth of December by the Bishop of Boss, and received the
name of Charles.^
1 Tytler, vol. ix. p. 271-321. Calderwood, vol. vi. pp. 56-59, 82-99. Spottis-
wood, vol. iii. p. 84-90.
2 Calderwood, vol. vi. pp. 96, 99, 100. Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 82. Preface
to Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, p. xvii.
3 Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 91. Tytler, vol. ix. p. 327. Keith's Catalogue, p.
201.
A.D. 1603.] OF SCOTLAND. 279
Queen Elizabeth died on the twenty-fourth of March, 1603,
and the King of the Scots was immediately acknowledged as
her successor. On Sunday, the third of April, James attended
divine service in the church of St. Giles, at Edinburgh. When
tlie sermon was finished, he addressed the congregation in a
homely and affectionate manner, bidding them think of him as
a king going from one part of the isle to another, and express-
ing a wish that, as God had joined the right of both kingdoms
in his person, so they might be "joined in wealth, in religion,
in hearts and affections." Two days afterwards he began his
journey southwards, and on the sixth of May entered London,
amid the joyful acclamations of his English subjects. ^
On the twenty-fourth of April, while the king was on his
progress towards London, James Beaton, Archbishop of Glas-
gow, died at Paris, in the eighty-sixth year of his age ; and thus,
at the very time that the British kingdoms were united under
one sovereign, the last member of the old Scottish hierarchy,
the last of those bishops who had exercised canonical jurisdic-
tion under the authority of the Koman see, was taken away.
Beaton had remained abroad since the year 1560, but he had
all along been the faithful servant of Mary and her son. In
1598, a special act of parliament had been passed in his favour,
restoring and confirming his honours, dignities, and possessions,
and dispensing with his acknowledgment of the established
religion. Archbishop Beaton was a munificent benefactor of
the Scottish College at Paris, and was reverenced as its second
founder. ^
^ Tytler, vol. ix. p. 360-362. C<aclerwood, vol. vi. pp. 215, 216.
2 Keith's Catalogue, pp. 259, 260. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol.
iv. pp. 169, 170. Spottiswood, vol. iii. pp. 139, 140. Mackenzie's Lives, vol.
iii. p. 466.
280 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Cuap. XLIV.
CHAPTER XLIV.
FROM THE ACCESSION OF KING JAMES TO THE CROWN OF ENGLAND IN
MARCH, 1603, TO THE CONSECRATION OF THE THREE SCOTTISH BISHOPS
IN OCTOBER, 1610,
Coronation of King James — Conference at Hampton Co^irt —
Convocation of 1604 — Jolm Sjpottiswoodj Arclibishop of
Glasgow — General Assembly at Aberdeen — Imprisonment
of John ForheSj and other Ministers — Treatise hy James
Melville — Trial of the Ministers — Parliament at Perth —
Scottish Ministers summoned to London — Imprisonment of
Andrew Melville — General Assemblies at Linlithgow —
Court of High Commission erected — General Assembly
at Glasgow — Episcopal Government restored — Consecra-
tion of the Scottish Bishops at London.
On the twenty-fifth day of July, 1603, King James was
enthroned on the royal chair at Westminster Abbey, and, with
his queen, Anne of Denmark, was anointed and crowned by
the Archbishop of Canterbury. James, thus acknowledged
King of England in right of his great-grandmother Margaret
Tudor, was also, through his descent from Malcolm Canmore
and St Margaret, the representative both of the Saxcn line,
and of the royal Celtic race, which had received the blessing
of St Columba. The sovereign of the two British kingdoms
was desirous of effecting a still closer union between them.
Had he been successful in this design, the union would proba-
bly have been carried through in a manner much more satisfac-
tory than it afterwards was in the reign of Queen Anne ; but
the mutual jealousies of the English and Scots defeated his
intentions.
Intimately connected with the proposed measure for a civil
union was the assimilation of the ecclesiastical institutions of
the two kingdoms, and the restoration of religious unity
in both. The differences between the Eeformed and the
Roman Catholics seemed to be hardly capable of reconciliation,
but there was some hope of agreement among the Protestants
A.D. 1603. OF SCOTLAND. 281
themselves. Towards such a result nothing seemed more
important than the establishment of a common system of
church government in England and Scotland. In this opinion
the supporters of the hierarchy and of Puritanism were agreed,
although each party wished to extend its own system over the
whole island. James was not more anxious for the introduc-
tion of Episcopacy into Scotland, than the zealous Presby-
terians of that country were for the overthrow of prelacy in
England. Row expresses the feelings, not only of the Cove-
nanters of his own day, but also of the Presbyterian
party at the time of James's accession to the English crown,
when he regrets that the king made no effort to establish the
Scottish sessions, presbyteries, and assemblies in Southern
Britain— a change, he says, ^' which all the well affected in
England both looked and longed for," and towards which,
" means were essayed, and the sincerest pastors and professors
of the truth of God in both kingdoms, opposed to prelatical
government, made all the help they could." ^
The Presbyterians in Scotland must have been aware that
their system would receive no support from the king, but the
English Puritans expected that a sovereign, who came from a
country in which Episcopacy was only recognized as a part of
the civil constitution, would give his assistance to relieve them
from subjection to the hierarchy, and their enforced obedience
to the Book of Common Prayer. The result of the Hampton
Court conference, held in January, 1604, shewed that James
was resolved to maintain the Church of England as then
established by law. The king expressed his ecclesiastical
opinions at great length in a speech before the parliament,
which met soon after the conference. He concluded by de-
claring his love of unity, and stating that, as his faith,
founded on the Scriptures, was truly Catholic and Apostolic,
so he should ever be ready to give all imaginable deference to
antiquity in points of discipline and government, and thus
hope, by the grace of God, always to preserve himself from
heresy and schism. ^
The convocation of the province of Canterbury met at the
same time with the parliament, and Dr Bancroft, now Bishop of
1 History of the Kirk of Scotland, pp. 220, 221.
2 Collier, vol. vii. p. 273-318.
282 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIV.
London, presided, in consequence of the death of Archbishop
Whitgift. Among other canons agreed to by the synod, and
ratified by the king, was one regarding the form of prayer to
be used before sermons. Preachers were enjoined to move the
people to join in prayer " for Christ's holy Catholic Church,
that is, for the whole congregation of Christian people dis-
persed throughout the whole world, and especially for the
Churches of England, Scotland, and Ireland," and for the
king, " supreme governor in these his realms, and all other his
dominions and countries, over all persons in all causes, as well
ecclesiastical as temporal." Much needless controversy has
taken place regarding the meaning of this canon, so far as
applicable to the Church of Scotland. There can be no doubt
that its framers meant to acknowledge the northern ecclesiasti-
cal establishment as a Christian Church ; and such was the
opinion held by Bancroft and most of the English prelates,
although they believed the Scottish system to be defective in
its ritual, in the ordination of its ministers, and in other points.
With the exception of the Koman Catholics, it was the only
Christian communion then existing in Scotland, and questions
regarding any other state of matters than that actually before
them could not have occurred to the convocation.
To the preference which James had always entertained for
Episcopacy, as most suitable to a monarchical form of
government in the state, was now added the belief that with-
out it there was no regular and duly authorised polity in the
Church. His accession to the crown of England enabled him
to proceed with more confidence and vigour in the reform of
the ecclesiastical system of his native kingdom. The distance
to which he was removed was of itself conducive to success in
this design. It saved him from the rude and violent attacks
of the ministers, and it protected him also from what was one
of his chief faults — an undignified familiarity with those among
whom he had long resided, and a fondness for attempting to
convince opponents by personal argument and persuasion.
The two points to which the attention of James was chiefly
directed were the filling up of the vacant episcopal sees, and the
regulation of the proceedings in the general assemblies. Soon
after the death of Archbishop Beaton, he nominated John
Spottiswood, minister at Calder, to the see of Glasgow. The
A.D. 1604.] OF SCOTLAND. 283
letter of nomination, which is dated at Hampton Court, the
twentieth day of July, 1603, mentions that the archbishoprick
w^as vacant by the decease of " James Beaton, late lawful
archbishop thereof;" and, in respect of the learning, loyalty,
and good life of Spottiswood, appoints him to the benefice.
The language used shews how completely the office was
viewed as a civil dignity, to be bestowed indeed in time to
come, as provided by the laws, on Protestant ministers only,
but capable, in itself, of being held by a Roman Catholic
prelate.^
John Spottiswood, thus named to the archiepiscopal see of
Glasgow, soon became the king's chief ecclesiastical adviser,
and the most vigorous supporter of his measures for the re-
establishment of the hierarchy in Scotland. He was the son
of John Spottiswood, Superintendent of Lothian, and was
born in the year 1565. On his father's death he succeeded
him as minister at Calder, and in 1601 was selected to act as
chaplain to the Duke of Lennox, during his embassy to
France. Calderwood asserts that he was at one time a zealous
champion of Melville's party among the ministers, but on this
point the statement of a violent personal enemy must be re-
ceived with caution. 2
Andrew Graham having resigned the see of Dunblane,
George Graham, minister at Scone, was appointed to that
bishoprick in 1604. Before the end of the same year. Bishop
Gladstones was translated to the metropolitan see of St.
Andrews, and, in his place, Alexander Forbes, minister at
Fettercaim, was named Bishop of Caithness. ^
A meeting of the general assembly had been appointed to
take place at Aberdeen, on the last Tuesday of July, 1604,
^ Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 140- Preface to Original Letters of the reign of
James the Sixth, pp. xxiii. xxiv.
2 Bishop Russell's Life of Spottiswood, prefixed to his edition of the arch-
bishop's History, pp. xxxii. xxxiii. Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 100. Calderwood,
vol. V. p. 560. Dr. M'Crie asserts (Life of Melville, vol. ii, p. 95) that, "ac-
cording to the accounts of different writers," Spottiswood had shewn more than
ordinary zeal for the party of the ministers ; but the only authorities which he
quotes are Calderwood, and a dubious passage from the MS. Annals of Archibald
Simson.
3 Preface to Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, p. xxxvii.
Calderwood, vol. vi. p. 272.
284 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Chap. XLIV.
but it was adjourned by the king's command. On the day,
however, which had been fixed, James Melville and two other
ministers, commissioners from the Presbytery of St. Andrews,
appeared within the church of St. Nicholas in Aberdeen, and
solemnly protested that, as they were present and ready to
attend to their duty, whatever loss the Church should sustain
should not be attributed to them, or to the presbytery whose
commission they bore. ^
The assembly having been continued to the second day of
July, 1605, but having again been forbidden to sit, a small
number of the ministers met at Aberdeen on the day ap-
pointed, and, notwithstanding the absence of the moderator of
last assembly, commenced proceedings by electing John
Forbes, minister at Alford, to be moderator. Being ordered
to depart by royal proclamation, they separated for the time,
but agreed to assemble again at the same place on the last
Tuesday of September ensuing. For this act of disobedience
to the royal authority, Forbes, Welsh, and several other
ministers, were committed prisoners to Blackness. ^
These proceedings gave rise to an important ecclesiastical
question — whether a general assembly could lawfully meet in
opposition to the express injunction of the king. The impri-
soned ministers asserted that they had not actually been for-
bidden to meet, but the real point at issue was apparent to
every one. Under the title of " An Apology for the prisoners
of the Lord Jesus, presently in the castle of Blackness," the
whole question was discussed by James Melville; and the
line of argument, by which he contended for the right to meet
in general assembly without the royal authority, or even if
necessary in opposition to it, deserves to be carefully con-
sidered. He maintained that the members of the late assembly
were entitled to meet at Aberdeen, first, by the express
warrant of the word of God ; secondly, by the laws of their
country ; and, thirdly, by the constitution, practice, and disci-
pline of the Reformed Church.
First, he says, our Lord, having received from the Father
* James Melville's Diary, p. 560-565. Calderwood, vol. vi. p. 264-268.
2 Forbes's Records touching the estate of the Kirk, p. 386-407. James
Melville's Diary, p. 570-575. Calderwood, vol. vi. p. 279-291. Spottiswood,
vol. iii. p. 157-159.
A.D. 1605.] OF SCOTLAND. 285
all power in heaven and in earth, in like manner gave au-
thority to the apostles to govern the Church, and promised to
he with them to the end of the world. He breathed on them,
saying, "Eeceive ye the Holy Ghost: whosesoever sins ye
remit, they are remitted to them, and whosesoever sins ye
retain, they are retained." He conversed with them forty
days after his Resurrection, instructing them in the matters
pertaining to his kingdom, and on the day of Pentecost sent
upon them the Holy Spirit, the Comforter. When He had
founded the Church by the apostles. He gave it pastors,
doctors, and elders, who also had the keys of the kingdom of
heaven, and the power of binding and loosing ; and all these
ministers are bound to discharge their offices, not only as
individuals, but conjunctly in their courts and synods, for the
preservation of sound doctrine and discipline. And this
power, so given, no mortal man, no king, prince, or magistrate,
should any way impede. Therefore, the faithful men who
assembled at Aberdeen had the power and warrant of Jesus
Christ for so doing, and the attempt to hinder them was like
that of the tyrant Licinius, who, in order to effect the over-
throw of the Church, prevented the bishops from meeting in
council.
Secondly, the freedom of the holy Church is expressly
protected by various acts of parliament in the reigns of the first,
second, third, fourth, and fifth James, and it was ever one of
the special points of her freedom to meet in synod. And if
this was granted to the Popish Church, much more should it
be possessed by the true Church of Christ, as is shewn by the
statutes made subsequently to the Reformation, especially by
that golden act of the parliament held at Edinburgh, in the
year 1592, by which general assemblies of the Church are
ratified and approved, and it is declared lawful for them to
meet every year at the least, or oftener if occasion requires.
Therefore, had the brethren acted otherwise than they did,
they would have betrayed the cause of Christ, and the liberties
of the Church.
Thirdly, from the year 1560, when the Reformed religion
was established, to the departure of the king from Scotland, it
was the continual practice of the Church to meet in general
assembly almost twice every year and sometimes thrice. And
286 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIV.
if it be said that it was wrong to contend with the king for a
precise day, he having no intention to take away general
assemblies, the answer is, there was great reason for so doing,
unless another day had been appointed, because, failing that,
the right to hold assemblies would be interrupted, and their
possession broken by prescription. Therefore, the meeting in
assembly is an essential part of the office of the ministry, which
they have from no earthly king, but from Him who is King of
kings and Lord of lords. ^
The ministers in Blackness, having been summoned before
the council to answer for the unlawful keeping of the assem-
bly, gave in a declinature of its jurisdiction, on the ground
that the approbation or the disallowance of a general assem-
bly was a spiritual matter, to be judged of by the Church.
For this they were indicted before the court of Justiciary, on a
charge of treason. At the trial, they stated that they declined
not to appear before his majesty and council in any case where-
in their jurisdiction was lawful, neither did they decline his
majesty as judge in matters ecclesiastical, provided he judged
along with the general assembly, but it was never heard in any
nation, Protestant or Papist, that the king and his council
were judges in spiritual matters. The court having declared
that a declinature, such as had been presented by the accused,
was treasonable in point of law, the assize, by a majority,
found them guilty ; and they were remitted to prison till the
king's pleasure should be known as to their punishment. ^
The harsh and unjust sentence thus pronounced may be ex-
plained, but cannot be justified, by the conduct of the ministers,
on former occasions, in declining the civil jurisdiction respect-
ing matters plainly within its cognizance. . The original offence
— the holding of the assembly — might be imprudent or factious,
but it could not be criminal, so long as the act of 1592 was un-
repealed. The ministers did not probably expect that the meet-
ing at Aberdeen would be attended with consequences so serious
to themselves. There is no reason to doubt that they had
received secret promises of support from some of the nobles,
particularly from the chancellor, the Earl of Dunfermline,
^ James Melville's Diary, p. 593-612. Calderwood, vol. vi. p. 297-322.
2 Forbes's Records, p. 463-496. Calderwood, vol. vi. p. 342-391. Spottis-
vood, vol. iii. p. 161-163.
A.D. 1605.] OF SCOTLAND. 287
a Eoman Catholic, and the possessor of extensive church
lands, whom they promised not to call in question on account
of his religion. Mutual recriminations afterwards passed be-
tween them and the earl, which caused the king to remark
^' that none of the two deserved credit, and that he saw the
ministers would betray religion, rather than submit themselves
to government, and that the chancellor would betray the king
for the malice he carried to the bishops." i
A parliament was held at Perth in July, 1606, by the Earl
of Montrose, as the king's commissioner. On this occasion,
the bishops rode between the earls and the lords, clothed in
silk and velvet. First came the two archbishops, and after
them the Bishops of Dunkeld and Galloway, Eoss and Dun-
blane, Murray and Caithness, Orkney and the Isles. Peter
Blackburn, Bishop of Aberdeen, esteeming it unbecoming the
simplicity of a minister to use such pomp, weift on foot to the
parliament house. The Bishops of Galloway, Orkney, and
the Isles, had been appointed to their sees during the preced-
ing year. The first of these prelates was Gavin Hamilton,
minister at Bothwell ; the second, James Law, minister at
Kirkliston ; and the third, Andrew Knox, minister at Paisley.
At the parliament of Perth a statute was passed, abrogating
the act of 1587, in so far as the estates of the bishops were
thereby annexed to the crown, but confirming the grants
which had been made of other prelacies and benefices. 2
Soon after the dissolution of parliament, the king sum-
moned to London the Archbishops of St. Andrews and Glas-
gow, the Bishops of Orkney and Galloway, and James ^ii^icol-
son, minister at Meigle, on the one side, and Andrew and
James Melville, and six ministers of their party, on the other
side, in order to consult with them about the ecclesiastical
affairs of Scotland. They waited on the king at Hampton
Court, and various conferences took place. By the command
of James, the Presbyterian ministers attended a course of
sermons, preached by four English divines, on the rights of
the episcopate, the supremacy of the crown, and the want of
all authority in Scripture and antiquity for the ofiice of lay-
* Spottiswood, vol. iii, pp. 157, 174, 175.
2 Calderwood, vol. vi. pp. 493, 494. Preface to Original Letters of the reign
of James the Sixth, pp. xxxix. xl. xlii. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
vol. iv. p. 281-284.
288 ECCLESIASTICAL mSTORY. [Chap. XLIV.
elders. The forced attendance of the Melvilles and their
friends on such an occasion was an absurd and ill-advised
measure. Spottiswood was aware of this, at least in after
times. He says that the king took this coui'se, ^' as conceiv-
ing that some of the ministers should be moved by force of
reason to quit their opinions, and give place to the truth ; but
that seldom happeneth, especially where the mind is prepos-
sessed with prejudice either against person or matter."
During the conferences, James asked the opinion of those
present regarding the lawfulness of the Aberdeen assembly
and other points. All the bishops condemned the assembly
as turbulent, factious, and illegal. Melville and his friends
declined to express a similar opinion, and craved that the
questions might be put to them specifically and in writing,
and that time should be allowed to answer them. This was
agreed to, but, in the meantime, they were forbidden to return
to Scotland without the royal license.
The ministers could not have given a direct and conscien-
tious answer to the king's enquiries without compromising their
own safety. It was otherwise, however, with the following
questions put in private to two of their number by Bancroft,
who had succeeded Whitgift in the see of Canterbury: — "Whe-
ther in any of the ancients the name of presbyter was found given
to any that taught not the word, and ministered not the sacra-
ments? Whether the name of Bishop in the ancients was found
given to any one who had not superiority above the presbyters
and the rest of the clergy ? Whether ever among the ancients
we read of a presbytery, or ecclesiastical senate, that had not in
and above it a Bishop?" These questions the archbishop
offered to give them in writing, but they declined to receive
them, lest, says James Melville, they should be drawn into
dispute. This can hardly be reconciled with what he imme-
diately adds, that the archbishop " found these two brethren so
hard of his learning, that he despaired to call for them again,
or for any more of us."
Wearied with the delay, the ministers earnestly entreated
permission to return home, or to be put to lawful trial for any
crime which they had committed. They were all finally
allowed to depart, except the two Melvilles. The younger of
the kinsmen, though prohibited from returning to Scotland,
A.D. 1606.] OF SCOTLAND. 289
was permitted to reside, first at Newcastle, and afterwards at
Berwick, but his uncle suffered a more severe punishment.
Andrew Melville having been summoned before the English
privy council on account of his well-known verses on the altar
in the chapel royal, his fierce ungovernable temper overpowered
all sense of prudence and decency. He accused the Archbishop
of Canterbury of encouraging Popery and superstition, of pro-
faning the Sabbath, and of silencing faithful ministers. Seiz-
ing the sleeves of his rochet and shaking them, he told the
primate that he esteemed him the capital enemy of all the
Eeformed Churches in Europe, and that he would oppose him
and his proceedings to the last drop of his blood. He railed
against Dr Barlow in similar terms, and only stopped when
he was removed to another part of the room. The Lord
Chancellor Egerton admonished Melville to join wisdom,
gravity, modesty, and discretion to his learning and years.
This rebuke would have been a sufficient punishment for Mel-
ville's verses and unbecoming language ; but it did not satisfy
the king, who caused him to be committed to custody with
the Dean of St Paul's, and subsequently in the Tower. ^
The whole proceedings of James in regard to these ministers
gave reasonable ground for supposing that they had been sum-
moned to England merely to prevent their resisting the ecclesias-
tical measures in progress in their own country. The detention
of the others, and still more the imprisonment of Melville, was
illegal and unjust. Their coming to England at the king's com-
mand should have protected them from all punishment for opin-
ions expressed by them, or for mere ebullitions of temper.
James was equally severe in the sentences pronounced against
the ministers in Scotland who had been tried for assisting at
the Aberdeen assembly. Forbes, Welsh, and their four com-
panions in Blackness, were condemned to perpetual banish-
ment from the king's dominions, with the threat of capital
punishment if they should presume to return without leave ;
and several of their supporters were ordered to be confined in
various islands, or in remote parts of the kingdom.
^ James Melville's Diary, pp. 644-683, 688-700, 705-711. Calderwood, vol,
vi. pp. 477-480, 556-560, 567-583, 586-600. Spottiswood, vol. iii. pp. 176-183,
190. M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. ii. pp, 22 1-247, 250, 260.
2 Calderwood, vol. vi. pp. 590,591. Spottiswood, vol. iii. pp. 181^ 182.
VOL. II. 20
290 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIV.
The long promised general assembly was at last held at
Linlithgow, on the tenth of December, 1606. The Earl of
Dunbar was the royal commissioner ; one hundred and thirty-
six ministers, and thirty-three noblemen, barons, and others of
the laity, were present ,• and James Nicolson was elected mode-
rator. It was proposed, on the king's recommendation, that in
every presbytery one of the members should be appointed to
act as permanent moderator till the present dissensions should
be at an end, the bishops to be moderators in the places of
their residence; and that the bishops should be moderators in the
diocesan synods. These proposals were agreed to, under certain
conditions restricting the powers of moderators, and subjecting
the moderators of presbyteries to the censure of the synods, and
the moderators of synods to the censure of the general assembly.^
At a parliament held at Edinburgh, in August, 1607, a
statute was passed, authorising the Archbishop of St Andrews
to select the ministers of seven parishes within his diocese to
act as the chapter of the archbishopric, in room of the Prior
and canons, whose dignities were now secularised. 2
In April, 1607, Alexander Campbell, who had so long held
the titular office of Bishop of Brechin, resigned that dignity,
and was immediately succeeded by Andrew Lamb, minister of
the chapel royal. Peter Eollock, titular Bishop of Dunkeld,
also resigned his see, and was succeeded by James Nicolson.
The latter died in Aug-ust, 1607, after holding the bishopric
for a very short time, and, in December following, Alexander
Lindsay, minister at St Madoes, was appointed in his room.
In June, 1608, John Campbell succeeded his father Neil
Campbell as Bishop of Argyll. 3
On the twenty-sixth of July, 1608, another general assem-
bly met at Linlithgow. The Earl of Dunbar was commis-
sioner for the king, and the Bishop of Orkney, by a majority
of votes, was elected moderator. At this assembly, the Mar-
quis of Huntly was again excommunicated on account of his
repeated relapses to Popery. The members were of opinion that
' Calderwood, vol. vi. p. 601-624. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 567-574.
Spottiswood, vol, iii. p. 183-189.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, voliv. p. 372.
3 Preface to Original Letters of the Reign of James the Sixth, pp. xxxvi.
xxxviii. xxxix.
A.D. 1608.] OF SCOTLAND. 291
the increase of Roman errors was owing in part to the negli-
gence of ministers in catechizing the young, and therefore
ordered that all children of the age of six years should be care-
fully instructed in the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten
Commandments. ^
At a parliament held in June, 1609, the consistorial juris-
diction was restored to the bishops, and an act was passed
giving power to the king to regulate the habits to be worn by
judges, magistrates, and churchmen. In virtue of the power
so conferred, directions were soon afterwards issued that mini-
sters should wear black gowns in the pulpit, and that bishops
and doctors of divinity should wear black cassocks, with black
gowns in the English form, and tippets. ^
In February, 1610, a court of High Commission was erected
by the king in each of the provinces of St. Andrews and Glas-
gow, the members of which, or any five of their number, the
archbishop being always one, had power to call before them and
try all scandalous offenders in life or religion, and to enforce
their sentences by fine and imprisonment, and also by excom-
munication, to be pronounced by the minister of the parish
where the criminal resided under pain of suspension and de-
privation. The first person named in the Commission for the
province of St Andrews was the archbishop, therein styled
Primate and Metropolitan of the kingdom ; and the Archbishop
of Glasgow was the first person named in the Commission for
that province. All the bishops were members in their respec-
tive provinces, and the other commissioners consisted of peers,
barons, judges, and ministers.^
James Melville and Calderwood remark with justice on the
arbitrary powers of these illegal courts, now first introduced
into Scotland on the model of the similar institution in Eng-
land, and on the anomaly that one archbishop, though himself,
by the rules of the system then established, only a simple
minister without spiritual authority over his brethren, could,
* Calderwood, vol. vi. p. 751-776. Book of tlie Universal Kirk, p. 575-587.
Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 193-195.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. iv. pp. 430, 431, 435, 436. Calder-
wood, vol. vii. pp. 54, 55.
3 James Melville's Diary, p. 786-792. Calderwood, vol. vii, p. 57-63. Ori-
ginal Letters of the Rcigii of James the Sixth, vol. i. pp. 242, 243.
292 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIV.
along with four secular persons, suspend or deprive ministers.
The erection of the court of High Commission was, indeed, a
restoration of metropolitan jurisdiction, and a formal re-estab-
lishment of the old provinces and dioceses, by means of the
royal prerogative. This and similar measures of the king could
only be justified on the ground that the crown was the fountain
of all ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; and hence the opinion be-
came common, both among the supporters and opponents of
the hierarchy, that as episcopal authority had been conferred,
so also it could be taken away by the civil power.
The Presbyterian form of church government was now in
reality subverted, although the name and outward appearance
remained. In a letter addressed to the Bishop of Orkney,
Hume of Godscroft remarked, " If some shadow of old forms
be yet left, as in the alteration of the Roman government
when with Julius monarchy re-entered, though the people con-
vened and had their form of comitia, though the senate was
yet on foot, though consuls were chosen and had name and
countenance, yet the force of authority and government, the
liberty in choice of persons restrained from free choice to the
recommendation of the emperor, and the truth of the old estate
taken away, none denies but the government was altered from
popular to monarchical. So, though presbyteries remain,
though synods did, though general assemblies also, shadows
and shows of our discipline, not the less that parity, freedom,
and vicissitude taken away, or the force thereof broken and
restrained, the essence and essential points thereof are also
altered, or to be altered."^
It was obvious, however, to the bishops themselves, that
the powers conferred upon them would be greatly strengthen-
ed by the sanction of the highest ecclesiastical authority
recognized by the Scottish people, and it was probably at
their suggestion that the king summoned a general assembly
to meet at Glasgow, on the eighth of June, 1610. The
influence of the crown was openly used in directing the choice
of members, the king's desires in that respect being made
known through the Archbishop of St. Andrews to the presby-
teries. The Earl of Dunbar was again the royal commissioner,
and various noblemen, barons, and commissioners of burghs,
^ Calderwood, vol. vii, p. 68.
A.D. 1610.] OF SCOTLAND. 293
were present. The Archbishop of Glasgow preached at the
opening of the assembly. He denounced the sin of sacrilege,
blaming also the proceedings of lay patrons of benefices, and
concluded by stating that religion ought not to be maintained
after the manner in which it had been introduced into the
kingdom. " It was brought in by confusion," he said, " it must
be maintained by order ; it was brought in against authority,
it must be maintained by authority." In another discourse,
the Bishop of Orkney undertook to prove the lawfulness of
episcopal government. Without alluding to the jus divinum,
he supported his argument by the three grounds of antiquity,
universality, and perpetuity, appealing for his authorities to
the continual practice of the Church, and the consent of the
Fathers. In the afternoon. Dr. Hudson, an English divine
who had accompanied the Earl of Dunbar, preached on the
superiority of bishops over presbyters.
The Archbishop of Glasgow having been chosen moderator,
after various discussions continued during three days, eleven
articles were agreed to with little opposition from any of the
members. By the first, it was acknowledged that the calling
of general assemblies belonged to the king, and that all other-
wise summoned, specially the conventicle at Aberdeen in
1605, were unlawful. By the second, it was agreed that
synods should be held in every diocese twice in the year, in
April and October, at which the bishop was to moderate.
By the third, it was declared that no sentence of excommuni-
cation, or of absolution from excommunication, should be
pronounced without the knowledge and approbation of the
bishop of the diocese, and if he stayed the pronouncing of
sentence, where the proceedings were just and regular, on his
being convicted thereof in the general assembly, intimation
was to be made to the king, that another might be appointed
in his room. By the fourth, all presentations to benefices
were to be directed to the bishop of the diocese ; and by him,
with the assistance of some of the ministers, the persons pre-
sented were, after due examination, to be ordained. By the
fifth, in the suspension and deprivation of ministers, the
bishop of the diocese was to associate with himself some of the
ministers within the bounds where the delinquent served, and
after just trial to pronounce sentence. By the sixth, every
294 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. XLIV,
minister, at his ordination, was to swear obedience to the king
and his ordinary, according to the form agreed upon in the
year 1572. By the seventh, visitations of the diocese were to
be made by_ the bishop himself, or, where the extent was too
great, by one of the ministers acting under his commission. By
the eighth, the bishop, or in his absence a minister to be
named by him in diocesan synod, was to moderate at all
meetings of the ministers for the exercise — the name of pres-
bytery being pm-posely not used. By the ninth, it was
declared that bishops should be subject in all matters regard-
ing their life, conversation, office, and benefice, to the censure
of the general assembly, and, if found culpable, should, with
the king's advice and consent, be deprived. By the tenth,
no bishop was to be elected till he was past the age of forty
years at least, and till he had officiated as a minister for ten
years. By the eleventh, it was ordered that no minister
should speak in public against any of the foresaid articles, nor
dispute the question of the equality or inequality of ministers.
When the proceedings were over, a sum of five thousand
pounds Scots was distributed by the Earl of Dunbar among
those ministers who had acted as moderators of presbyteries.
The opponents of the synod asserted that the money was
given to secure the votes of the members. There can be little
doubt that its distribution was entrusted to the earl, for the
purpose, at least, of rewarding the ministers who supported
the measures recommended by the sovereign. ^
Thus, after an interval of forty years, a polity similar to
that which had been agreed to at Leith during the regency of
Mar was again established. The chief features of that system
were evidently copied by James, and express reference was
made to one of them in the articles. A leading object with
the king and his ecclesiastical advisers, as formerly with
Erskine of Dun and the better part of the ministers, was the
^ Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 91-103. Book of the Universal Kirk, p. 587-589.
Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 205-207. Cook, vol. ii. p. 227-237. Original Letters
of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. i. p. 425. The articles, as given by Spottis-
wood, are not those agreed to by the assembly, but are substantially the same with
the articles amended and ratified by the parliament of 1612. This can hardly
have been unintentional on the part of the historian, and the suppression of
those portions which limited the powers of the episcopate deserves the severe
censure which Dr. Cook has bestowed upon it.
A.D. ICIO.] OF SCOTLAND. 295
wish to rescue church property from lay spoliation, and to
restore it to its proper use, and hence, at this time also, a
powerful party among the nobility and barons were opposed
to the re-establishment of Episcopacy, although they did not
venture to make any open resistance.
At the Glasgow assembly, a petition was presented from
the Marquis of Huntly, and the Earls of Angus and Errol,
requesting to be freed from the excommunication which
had been pronounced against them. These noblemen were
in confinement, and liable to the severe civil penalties which fol-
lowed the ecclesiastical sentence. The Marquis of Huntly,
having subscribed the Confession of Faith, and professed his re-
pentance, was absolved. TheEarl of Angus, rather than conform,
went beyond seas, and died in exile. The Earl of Errol was
at first willing to submit, but, on the very night after he had
offered to sign the Confession, he fell into such trouble of
mind, that in despair he was about to kill himself. Early in
the morning, on the Archbishop of Glasgow being sent for, he
acknowledged his dissimulation with many tears, and be-
seeched those who were present to witness his remorse. This
nobleman, says Spottiswood, who himself relates the circum-
stance in a. manner honourable to his feelings, " was of a tender
heart, and of all I have known the most conscientious in his
profession ; and thereupon to his dying was used by the
Church with greater lenity than were others of that sect."^
The restoration of episcopal government and the civil
rights of the bishops had now been accomplished. But
there was yet wanting that without which, so far as the
Church was concerned, all the rest was comparatively unim-
portant. The king was anxious that the bishops should re-
ceive a valid consecration, and the English prelates zealously
assisted in carrying out his wishes. The Scottish prelates also,
on their part, were desirous to receive consecration, although
it is not easy to ascertain in what light they regarded the
gift. The general feeling among them and those of the
ministers who shared their sentiments was probably what
Bishop Law had expressed at the late synod — that Episco-
pacy was both lawful and expedient, and most in accordance
with the practice of the Apostles and the ancient Church, but
^ Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 208.
29(3 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIV.
that it was not absolutely necessary as a form of ecclesiastical
government, and that holy orders, and the grace of the
Eucharist, might exist independently of episcopal ordination.
Among the ministers, a large party looked on the proposed
step as superstitious and antichristian, while others, thougli
averse to it, were willing to submit. The great body of the
people appear at this time to have been entirely indifferent,
and ready to acquiesce in whatever measures of the kind the
royal authority might prescribe.
Soon after the assembly, the Archbishop of Glasgow, and
the Bishops of Brechin and Galloway, were summoned to
court. They arrived in the middle of September^ and, at their
first audience, the king told them that he had now recovered
the bishoprics out of the hands of those who possessed them,
and bestowed them on such as he hoped would be worthy of
their places ; but, since he could not make them bishops, nor
they assume that honour to themselves, and as no consecra-
tion could be obtained for them in Scotland, he had called
them to England, that being consecrated themselves they
might, on their return, give ordination to those at home, and
so stop the mouths of the adversaries, who said that he took
upon himself to create bishops, and bestow spiritual offices,
which he could not presume to do, knowing that that authority
belonged to Christ alone, and those on whom He had con-
ferred the power. Spottiswood answered that they were
willing to obey his majesty's desire, and only feared that the
Church of Scotland might thereby be subjected to the Church
of England, in consequence of similar usurpations of old.
James assured them that he had guarded against that danger,
by providing that neither of the English metropolitans should
assist at the consecration.
Another question, however, was raised by Dr. Andrews,
Bishop of Ely. He said that the Scottish prelates ought first
to be ordained presbyters, as they had never received episcopal
ordination. The English primate, Dr. Bancroft, answered
that there was no necessity for this, because, where bishops
were not to be had, ordination given by presbyters must be
esteemed valid, otherwise it might be doubted whether there
was any lawful vocation in most of the Reformed Churches.
He farther mentioned that there was no necessity for the
A.D. 1610.] OF SCOTLAND. 297
Scottish prelates passing through the intermediate orders of
priest and deacon, because the episcopal character could be
given by one consecration, as was shewn by several examples
in the ancient Church.
All difficulties being thus removed, the three prelates were
consecrated, according to the form in the English ordinal, in
the chapel of London House, on Sunday the twenty-first day
of October, 1610, by the Bishops of London, Ely, Eochester,
and Worcester. 1
' Spottiswood, vol iii. pp. 208, 209. Wilkins's Concilia, vol. iv. p. 443.
Collier, vol. vii. p. 363-365. Balfour's Historical Works, vol. ii. pp. 35, 36.
Andrew Melville wrote some verses on the consecration, in his usual style. A
scholar of far higher name, a personal friend of Melville, who was present on
the occasion, was very differently affected. On the day of the consecration,
Isaac Casaubon made the following entry in his diary : " This Lord's day, by
God's blessing, was not ill spent. For I was invited to be present at the
consecration of two bishops and an archbishop of Scotland. I witnessed that
ceremony, and the imposition of hands, and the whole service. 0 God, how
great was my delight. Do Thou 0 Lord Jesus preserve this Church, and give
to our Puritans who ridicule such things a better mind." See Calderwood,
vol. vii. p. 151, and Scottish Ecclesiastical Journal, vol. i. p. 9.
298 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLV.
CHAP TEE XLV.
FROM THE CONSECRATION OF THE THREE SCOTTISH BISHOPS IN OCTOBER,
1610, TO THE PERTH ASSEMBLY OF AUGUST, 1618.
Consecration of the other Bishojys — Directions issued hy the
King — Acts of the Glasgow Assemhly ratified hy Parlia-
ment— William Gowper^ Bishop of Galloway — Execution
of John Ogilvie — Death of Archhishop Gladstones — John
Spottiswood appointed Archhishop of St. Andrews —
Absolution of the Marquis of Huntly — Creation of Doctors
of Divinity — General Assemhly at Aberdeen — New Con-
fession of Faith — King James visits Scotland — Imprison-
ment of David Calderwood — Neio erection of Cathedral
Chapters — General Assemhly at St. Andrews — Patrick
Forbes^ Bishop of Aberdeen — His letter to Archhishop
Spottisioood — General Assemhly at Perth — Sermon of
Archbishop) Sp>ottiswood — Five Articles agreed to hy the
Assembly.
Soon after the return of the three prelates to Scotland, the
other bishops were consecrated. The first consecration was
that of the Archbishop of St. Andrews, which took place at
his own primatial city in the month of December, the con-
secrating prelates being the three newly ordained bishops.
On the fifteenth of March, the Bishop of Murray was con-
secrated at Edinburgh by his metropolitan, the Archbishop of
St. Andrews, assisted, there can be no doubt, by other bishops.
The Bishops of Aberdeen and Caithness were consecrated in
the cathedral church of Brechin by Archbishop Gladstones
and the Bishops of Dunkeld and Brechin ; and the primate,
in a letter dated the third of May, 1611, mentions to the
king that all the bishops of his province had then been
consecrated. ^
Certain directions were sent by the king to the clergy, and
approved of at a meeting of the bishops and some of the lead-
* James Melville's Diary, p. 804. Original Letters of the reign of James the
Sixth, vol. i. pp. 265, 270.
A.D. 1611.] OF SCOTLAND. 299
ing ministers held at Edinburgh in the month of February,
1611. Among the chief of these instructions were the follow-
ing : — That every archbishop and bishop should reside at the
cathedral church of his diocese, and endeavour, as far as he
could, to repair the same ; that bishops should make a visita-
tion of their dioceses every three years, and archbishops of
their provinces every seven years at least ; that, inasmuch as
lay elders were not sanctioned by the Scriptures or the
primitive Church, but it was not the less necessary that fit
persons should assist the minister in repairing the fabric of
the church, providing the elements for the Holy Communion,
collecting contributions for the poor, and such like services,
the ministers should therefore make choice of wise and discreet
persons within the parish, for the performance of those duties,
and present their names to the ordinary for his approbation ;
that no minister should be admitted without trial and imposi-
tion of hands by the bishop and two or three ministers called
in by him to assist, and that a form should be printed for
that purpose and strictly adhered to ; that the election of
bishops should be made in the manner agreed to at the con-
ference of 1572, and that the dean of the chapter should be
vicar during a vacancy in the bishopric ; that, when it was
thought expedient to call a general assembly, a supplication
should be made for his majesty's license to meet, and that the
assembly should consist of bishops, deans, archdeacons, and of
ministers to be elected by their brethren ; that, to check the abuse
of young men preaching before attaining years of discretion or
receiving ordination, none should be permitted to preach
except those who had received orders.^
At a parliament held at Edinburgh in October, 1612, the
acts of the Glasgow assembly were ratified, with some im-
portant modifications. Nothing was said as to the new ap-
pointment in room of a bishop who impeded excommunication.
The form of the oath of obedience to the ordinary was now
prescribed. It was as follows : — " I A. B., now admitted to
the church of C, promise and swear to E. F., Bishop of that
diocese, obedience, and to his successors, in all lawful things.
So help me God." The articles regarding the censure of
bishops by the general assembly and their age before election
1 Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 210-212.
300 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLV.
were omitted. The act of parliament of 1592, and all other
statutes opposed to the articles so ratified, were repealed.^
Gavin Hamilton, Bishop of Galloway, died in July, 1612,
and was succeeded by William Cowper, minister at Perth.
Cowper was distinguished for his learning and piety, but
he had at one time opposed the restoration of Episcopacy,
and was now severely attacked by his former friends, parti-
cularly by Hume of Godscroft. He published two treatises
in defence of his conduct, and in a letter addressed to Hume,
marked by great candour and humility, and in which he
thanked him for putting his name to what he had written,
instead of assailing him anonymously like others, the bishop
called God to witness the sincerity of the change in his
opinions. He was consecrated in the cathedral church of
Glasgow, on the fourth of October, 1612.^
John Campbell, Bishop of Argyll, died in January, 1613,
and was succeeded by Andrew Boyd, parson of Eaglesham,
a natural son of the Lord Boyd.^
On the fourteenth of August, 1613, David Lindsay, Bishop
of Ross, died at Leith, where he had officiated as minister
since the year 1560. He was the last survivor of the original
Reformed ministers. His successor in the see of Ross was
Patrick Lindsay, minister at St. Vigeans, who was consecrated
at Leith on the first of December.^
On the fourth of March, 1614, a royal proclamation was
made at the cross of Edinburgh, enjoining all ministers to
celebrate the Communion on Easter-day following, and the
people to communicate at that time in their own parish
churches. This was justly supposed to be a preparation
for other measures which were soon to follow.^
Towards the end of the same year, a Jesuit priest, named
* Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. iv. pp. 469, 470. Calderwood,
vol. vii. p. 165-173.
^ Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. i. pp. 346, 347, and
preface, p. xxxix. Calderwood, vol. vii. pp. 179, 180. Note by Mr. David
Laing, in Row's History, p. 259.
3 Preface to Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, p. xxxvi.
Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 176.
* Preface to Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, p. xli. Spot-
tiswood, vol. iii. p. 220. Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 178.
* Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 191.
A.D. 1614.] OP SCOTLAND. 301
John Ogilvie, who head lately come over from Gratz, was
apprehended at Glasgow. He was examined before Arch-
bishop Spottiswood and others, and, on his declining to
mention with whom he had resided since his arrival in
Scotland, was ordered to be kept from sleep for several
nights. The sufferings which he thus underwent made him
discover various circumstances ; but, as soon as he was
allowed to take any rest, he denied the whole. By the
king's express desire, certain questions were put to him,
through the archbishop, concerning the power of the Pope
to excommunicate and depose princes, and to loose their
subjects from their oaths of allegiance ; particularly, whether
he had such power in the case of the King of Great Britain,
and whether it was murder to slay his majesty, if so excpm-
municated and deposed. Ogilvie said that he thought the
Pope had power to excommunicate the king, but declined to
give his opinion as to the other questions, unless to the Pope,
as judge of controversies in religion.
In consequence of this declinature, on the twenty-eighth
of February, 1615, Ogilvie was tried at Glasgow for high
treason, under the acts establishing the king's supremacy.
On being warned of the danger to which he exposed himself,
he answered, " I am a subject as free as the king is a king ;
I came by commandment of my superior into this kingdom,
and, if I were even now forth of it, I would return j neither
do I repent any thing, but that I have not been so busy as I
should in that which you call perverting of subjects. I am
accused for declining the king's authority, and will do it still
in matters of religion, for with such matters he hath nothing
to do ; and this which I say the best of your ministers do
maintain, and, if they be wise, will continue of the same
mind. Some questions were moved to me which I refused
to answer, because the proposers were not judges in contro-
versies of religion, and therefore I trust you cannot infer
anything against me." " But I hope," said the archbishop,
" you will not make this a controversy of religion, whether
the king, being deposed by the Pope, may be lawfully killed."
Ogilvie answered, " It is a question among the doctors of the
Church : many hold the afl&rmative not improbably ; but as
that point is not yet determined, so, if it shall be concluded,
302 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLV-
I will give my life in defence of it ; and to call it unlawful I
will not, though I should save my life by saying it."
Ogilvie was found guilty by the jury, and condemned to
be hanged and quartered. When sentence was pronounced,
he asked if he might speak to the people. The archbishop
answered that he might, if he would acknowledge the justice
of his condemnation, and request the king's pardon for his
treasonable speeches, but that otherwise he could not be allowed.
" Then," said the priest, " God have mercy upon me ; " and
added, with a loud voice, " If there be here any hidden
Catholics, let them pray for me ; but the prayers of heretics I
will not have."
He was allowed a few hours to prepare for death, and was
then led to the scaffold. Two ministers, who were in attend-
ance, exhorted him to disburden his conscience, if anything
troubled him, and to seek mercy of God through Jesus
Christ, but did not enter on disputed points of religion.
He answered that he was prepared and resolved. After
ascending the scaffold, he said in a low voice, so that there
was some difficulty in hearing him, " Maria, mater gratige, ora
pro me ; omnes angeli, orate pro me ; omnes sancti sanctaeque,
orate pro me." He then commended his soul to God, and
suffered death in terms of his sentence. The quartering of
his body was dispensed with.
In the account of the execution published by the govern-
ment, it was correctly stated that Ogilvie died for maintaining
an erroneous and dangerous opinion regarding the authority of
the Pope, not for saying mass, or for any direct point of reli-
gion. But to punish capitally a mere expression of opinion,
given in answer to questions put by his judges, was a cruel
and wicked act ; and the whole proceedings connected with
the trial were disgraceful to all concerned, especially to Arch-
bishop Spottiswood, who took so active a part in them. An-
other Jesuit, named Moffat, who had been apprehended at St.
Andrews about the same time, is said to have disclaimed the
temporal authority of the Pope, and was allowed to depart from
the kingdom.^
' Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 222-227. Pitcairn's Criminal Trials, vol. iii. p.
33a-354. Calderwood, vol. vii. pp. 193, 196. Original Letters of the reign of
James the Sixth, vol. ii. pp. 385-391, 399-401, 424, 446 448, 795-797. I have
A.D. 1615.J OF SCOTLAND. 303
On the second of May, 1615, Archbishop Gladstones died
at St. Andrews. He was a prelate of a good life and bene-
volent disposition, but not distinguished in any particular way
for learning or ability. To guard against the calumnies which
the Puritans systematically spread abroad regarding the death-
bed of their opponents, he left in writing a declaration of his
opinions respecting ecclesiastical government, and a statement
that his conscience had never accused him for what he had
done. Archbishop Spottiswood was appointed his successor
in the primacy, and was inaugurated at St. Andrews, on Sun-
day the sixth of August, in presence of most of the suffragan
bishops. The Bishop of Orkney was translated to Glasgow,
and the Bishop of Dunblane to Orkney ; and Adam Bellen-
den, parson of Falkirk, was elected and consecrated Bishop of
Dunblane. ^
Peter Blackburn, Bishop of Aberdeen, died on the four-
teenth of June, 1616, and was succeeded by Bishop Alexander
Forbes, who was translated from Caithness. John Abernethy,
minister at Jedburgh, was appointed to the see of Caithness. ^
In December, 1615, the two courts of High Commission
were united, five members, including one of the archbishops,
continuing to be a quorum. ^
The Marquis of Huntly, having again relapsed to Popery,
and having again been excommunicated, was committed to
ward by the court of High Commission, but after a short im-
prisonment was released in virtue of a warrant from the Chan-
cellor. The prelates remonstrated against this proceeding,
and sent Bishop Forbes of Caithness to explain their views to
the king. The marquis also went to London, and professed
not seen the Eoman Catholic account of Ogilyie's trial and execution, published
at Douay before the end of 1615. It has been conjectured that the
narrative published at Edinburgh in Mhe same year, and reprinted by
Mr. Pitcairn, was the composition of Archbishop Spottiswood ; see Original
Letters, vol. ii. p. 424. Calderwood, who condemns so severely and so justly
the imprisonment and banishment of the Presbyterian ministers, speaks with
scornful indifference of the death of the Jesuit.
^ Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. ii, p. 437, and preface
p. xxxvii. Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 227. Calderwood, vol. vii. pp. 197, 201, 203.
" Preface to Original Letters of the Reign of James the Sixth, pp. xxxvi.
xxxvii. Calderwood, vol. vii. pp. 216, 217. Selections from the Ecclesiastical
Records of Aberdeen, p. 84.
3 Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 204-210.
304 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLV.
his readiness to communicate witli the Church of England.
James wished to avoid extreme measures against so powerful
a nobleman, to whom personally he was much attached, but
was also anxious not to encroach on the rights of the Scottish
Church, by allowing the English bishops to absolve a person
who lay under a sentence of excommunication in Scotland.
The Bishop of Caithness, however, having expressed his assent
on the part of the Scottish prelates, although he had no autho-
rity to do so, in July, 1616, the marquis was absolved in the
chapel of Lambeth palace by Dr Abbot, Archbishop of Canter-
bury. The form used on that occasion was the following : —
" Whereas the purpose and intendment of the whole Church
of Christ is to win men unto God, and frame their souls for
heaven, and that there is such an agreement and correspondency
betwixt the Churches of Scotland and England, that what the
bishops and pastors in the one, without any earthly or worldly
respect, shall accomplish to satisfy the Christian and charitable
end and desire of the other, cannot be distasteful to either ;
I, therefore, finding your earnest entreaty to be loosed from
the bond of excommunication, wherewith you stand bound in
the Church of Scotland, and well considering the reason and
cause of that censure, and also considering your desire on this
present day to communicate here with us, for the better effect-
ing of this work of participation of the holy sacrament of Christ
our Saviour his blessed Body and Blood, do absolve you from
the said excommunication, in the Name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; and beseech Almighty God,
that you may be so directed by the Holy Spirit, that you may
continue in the truths of his Gospel unto your life's end, and
then be made partaker of his everlasting kingdom."
The king and the Archbishop of Canterbury wrote to Arch-
bishop Spottiswood, explaining the reason for this proceeding,
and mentioning their anxious wish to avoid doing anything
which might interfere with the just rights of the Scottish
Church. 1
On the twenty-ninth of July, the principals of the three
colleges at St Andrews, and some other ministers, were inau-
gurated as doctors of divinity in that university, Dr Young,
Dean of Winchester, assisting on the occasion. Degrees in
^ Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 230-235. Calderwood, vol. vii. pp. 212, 218, 219.
AD. 1616.] OF SCOTLAND. 305
theology had been given up by the Scottish reformers as tend-
ing to Popery and superstition, and this was the first time
they were again used. ^
The king and his advisers had for some years contemplated
the restoration of certain important points of primitive order
and ritual, and, in 1612, a draft of a new Confession of Faith
had been submitted to the two archbishops. The following
articles, apparently drawn up by Spottiswood while absent in
England in the year 1615, shew what were then considered to
be the chief defects of the Scottish Church : —
'^ There is lacking in our Cliurch a form of Divine Service ;
and while every minister is left to the framing of public prayer
by himself, both the people are neglected, and their prayers
prove often impertinent.
" A public Confession of Faith must be formed, agreeing as
near as can be with the Confession of the English Church.
" An order for election of Archbishops and Bishops in time
hereafter must be established by law ; and, in the meanwhile,
if his majesty propose the translation of any by occasion of
this vacancy of St Andrews, the form used in the translating
of Bishops here in England should be kept.
" A uniform order for electing of ministers and their receiv-
ing.
" The forms of Marriage, Baptism, and Administration of
the Holy Supper, must be in some points amended.
" Confirmation is wanting in our Church, whereof the use
for children is most profitable.
" Canons and Constitutions must be concluded and set forth,
for keeping both the clergy and churches in order.
" These things must be advised and agreed upon in a gene-
ral assembly of the clergy, which must be drawn to the form
of the convocation house here in England,"
At the request of the bishops, a general assembly was sum-
moned to meet at Aberdeen on the thirteenth of August, 1616.
The Archbishop of St Andrews presided, in virtue of his
metropolitan authority, and the Earl of Montrose was the royal
commissioner. Among the recommendations submitted to the
assembly, and agreed to by them, were the following : — That
a true and simple Confession of Faith should be prepared, to
^ Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 222.
VOL. II.] 21
306 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLV.
which all should swear before being admitted to any office in
the Church or commonwealth ; that a short Catechism should
be jeompiled*^for the instruction of children previous to Com-
munion ; that a Liturgy and form of Divine Service should
be made, to be said by the Reader before the Sermon every
Sabbath, or, where there was no Reader, by the Minister
before conceiving his own prayer, that the common people
might learn it and by custom serve God rightly ; that the
Communion should be celebrated four times in the year in
towns, and twice in country parishes, one of these times to be
at Easter ; that, to promote uniformity of discipline, the
canons of former councils and assemblies should be collected,
and their deficiencies supplied ; that all ministers, under the
pain of deposition, should administer the sacrament of Baptism
whenever required so to do, the godfather promising to instruct
the infant in the faith.
The new Confession of Faith was presented to the assembly
and approved of, after being revised by a committee of the
members. This Confession was subscribed by the Marquis of
Huntly, who was thereupon formally loosed from his excom-
munication. Calderwood states that he subscribed it without
reading it over, on being assured that it was all one with the
old Confession. If such was the case, the assertion was
substantially correct. The new Confession agrees with the
old one in all important points ; the chief difference being in
its more marked enunciation of the doctrine of Calvin in
regard to election and predestination. It is not easy to see
what was the precise object in bringing it forward. The old
Confession was not abrogated, but it was perhaps intended
that both that formulary, and* the Negative Confession of
Craig, should gradually be set aside. ^
The king soon afterwards expressed his desire that five
articles should be received by the Church, by which kneeling
at the reception of the Communion, private Communion to the
sick, private Baptism in cases of necessity, the Commemora-
tion of the Birth, Passion, Resurrection, and Ascension of
our Lord, and of the Descent of the Holy Ghost, and ^he
^ Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. i. p. 293 ; vol. ii. pp.
445, 446, 481-488. Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 220-242. Book of the Universal
Kirk, p. 589-699. Spottiswood, vol. iii. pp. 235, 236.
A.D. 1617.] OF SCOTLAND. 307
Confirmation of children, were to be restored. The Arch-
bishop of St. Andrews remonstrated against this, pointing out
that these articles had never been sanctioned by the clergy ;
and the king agreed to withdraw them in the meantime.^
James had long intended to visit his native kingdom, and
in the year 1617 he was enabled to do so. Great prepara-
tions were made for his reception, and, by his own express
command, directions were given to fit up the chapel royal at
Holyrood for the celebration of divine service in the English
form. Organs were sent for that purpose; and sculptured
figures of the twelve Apostles and four Evangelists were
prepared, in order to be placed as ornaments in the stalls,
but, at the request of the Bishop of Galloway, who in virtue
of the ancient privilege of his see was now dean of the chapel,
the king reluctantly consented to forbear setting them up.
He was accompanied in his journey by several English
prelates and divines, among others, by Bishop Andrews, and
by Dr. Laud, then Dean of Gloucester. He entered Edin-
burgh on the sixteenth of May, and, on Saturday the
seventeenth, the service of the Church, according to the
English rite, was celebrated in the chapel royal. On the
eighth of June, being the feast of Whitsunday, Bishop
Andrews preached, and the Holy Communion was celebrated
in the English form, the Archbishops of St. Andrews and
Glasgow and several of the bishops being present. ^
The parliament met at Edinburgh on the seventeenth of
June. The Lords of the Articles having agreed to an act,
by which whatever the king, with the advice of the arch-
bishops, bishops, and a competent number of the ministers,
should determine regarding the external government of the
Church was to have the force of law, if not repugnant to the
word of God, a protestation was drawn up and presented in
name of several of the ministers who had assembled for the
purpose. Three of those who took a leading part in this
matter were summoned before the court of High Commission.
1 Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 23G-238.
2 Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. ii. p. 496-500.
Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 242-247. Spottiswood, vol. iii. pp. 238, 239. Law-
son's History of the Episcopal Church of Scotland from the Reformation to the
Revolution, p. 365-368.
308 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLV.
Two of them were deprived ; tlie third, David Calderwood,
minister at Crailing, who on former occasions had distin-
guished himself bj his opposition to the bishops, was treated
with more severity. The king himself was present at his
examination, and asked what moved him to protest. He
answered that it was the article conferring the new powers on
the king. ^' What fault was there in that ?" asked James.
" It cutteth off our general assemblies," was the answer.
" Hear me, Mr. Calderwood," continued James, " I have been
an older keeper of general assemblies than you. A general
assembly serves to preserve doctrine in purity from error and
heresy, the Church from schism, to make confessions of faith,
to put up petitions to the king and parliament. But as for
matters of order, rites, and things indifferent in church policy,
they may be concluded by the king, with advice of the bishops,
and a chosen number of ministers. Next, what is a general
assembly but a competent number of ministers?" Calder-
wood answered, " As to the first point, Sir, a general assembly
should serve, and our general assemblies have served, these
fifty-six years, not only for preserving doctrine from error and
heresy, the Church from schism, to make confessions of faith,
and to put up petitions to the king or parliament, but also to
make canons and constitutions of all rites and orders belonging
to church policy. As for the second point — as by a competent
number of ministers may be meant a general assembly, so
also may be meant a fewer number of ministers convened
than may make up a general assembly. It was ordained in a
general assembly, with your majesty's own consent, your
majesty being present, that there should be commissioners
chosen out of every presbytery, not exceeding the number of
three, to be sent to a general assembly, and so the competent
number of ministers is already defined." " What needed far-
ther," said the king, " but to have protested for a declarator
what was meant by a competent number?" Calderwood
answered, " In pleading for the liberty of the general assem-
bly, we did that in effect." He was deprived, and ordered to
be confined in the tolbooth of St. Andrews, till he should find
caution to leave the kingdom. ^
When the other acts were submitted to the estates for their
1 Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 249-282. Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 240-247.
A.D. 1617.] OF SCOTLAND. 309
ratification, the king, afraid of farther opposition, withdrew the
obnoxious article. Several of the statutes agi-eed to at this
parliament were of importance in connection with ecclesiastical
matters. One of them regulated the mode of election of arch-
bishops and bishops. It was declared that, when any see be-
came vacant, the king should grant license to the dean and
chapter to proceed to the election of a bishop, and that they
should be bound to choose the person nominated by the king,
such person being always an actual minister of the Church.
On the election being assented to by his majesty, a mandate
was to be issued to a competent number of the bishops of the
province to proceed with the consecration of the bishop-elect.
This act, which gave the absolute right of nomination to
tlie king, took away the ecclesiastical control over the appoint-
ment of bishops which had been secured by the agreement at
Leith.
By another act, the deans and members of cathedral chap-
ters were restored to their ancient manses, glebes, and posses-
sions, which were for that purpose given up, so far as they re-
mained with the crown. The same statute provided that the
chapter of St. Andrews should consist of the Prior of Port-
moak, who was also Principal of St. Leonard's College, as
dean, the archdeacon, and the ministers of twenty-two parishes
of the diocese therein specified, who were to discharge the
functions of the former Prior and canons, except in regard to
the election of an archbishop, which privilege was conferred on
the eight bishops of the province, the Dean and Archdeacon
of St. Andrews, and three other members of the chapter, the
Bishop of Dunkeld being vicar-general for convening the elec-
tors. It was also declared that the Archbishop of Glasgow-
should be elected by the three bishops of his province — viz.,
the Bishops of Galloway, Argyll, and the Isles, and by tlie or-
dinary chapter of the metropolitan see, the Bishop of Galloway
being convener of the electors, and the ancient and ordinary
chapter of Glasgow retaining all its former rights and privi-
leges, except that of election.
By another statute, a new chapter was established for the
see of the Isles. The preamble bore that the ancient writs of
the bishopric had been lost, so that it was not known how
many dignitaries there were, or who were the members of the
310 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLV.
chapter, whereby a new foundation was rendered necessary.
It was therefore enacted that the parson of Sorbie in Tyree,
who was also vicar of lona, should be dean, the parson of
Eothsay, sub-dean, and that they, along with the parsons of
four other churches in the diocese, should be the members of
the convent and chapter.
Another act of the same parliament declared that the
Principal of King's College, Aberdeen, should be dean, and
the Sub-principal sub-chanter of the cathedral church of
Aberdeen.^
After arranging that a general assembly should be called
for the pui'pose of giving its sanction to the five articles which
he had formerly agreed to withdraw, James returned to Eng-
land in the beginning of August. The assembly met at St.
Andrews on the twenty-fifth of November, and Lord Binning
and others acted as royal commissioners in place of the Earl of
Montrose, who excused himself on the ground of sickness.
More opposition was made than the king and the bishops ex-
pected. The majority of the members resolved to delay
coming to a final determination till another assembly, but they
agreed to allow private Communion in cases of urgent neces-
sity, and it was ordered that, in the administration of that
sacrament, the ministers should give the bread and wine out of
their own hands directly to the people.
When these proceedings were reported to the king, he was
much displeased, and wrote angry letters to the two arch-
bishops, commanding them to preach on Christmas-day, and
enjoin the bishops also to do so, and forbidding any stipend
to be paid to those ministers who had opposed the articles.
This prohibition, however, was suspended at the request of the
bishops, who promised to use every exertion at their diocesan
synods to prevail on the ministers to comply with the king's
wishes.^
The observance of the five holy-days having been enjoined
by royal proclamation, on Easter-day, 1618, several of the
bishops administered the Holy Communion in their cathedral
churches, the people kneeling to receive the sacrament ; and
^ Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. iv. pp. 529, 530, 554, 555, 577.
^ Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. ii. p. 520-526. Cal-
derwood, vol. vii. p. 284-286. Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 248-252.
A.D. 1618.] OF SCOTLAND. 311
on Whitsunday some members of the privy council communi-
cated at the chapel royal of Holyrood.^
Alexander Forbes, Bishop of Aberdeen, died on the four-
teenth of December, 1617, and the king intimated his inten-
tion of appointing Patrick Forbes, minister at Keith, to the
vacant see. The person thus selected was one of the most
distinguished of the Scottish clergy. He was the eldest son of
William Forbes, laird of Corse in Aberdeenshire, and was born
at the castle of Corse on the twenty-fourth of August, 1564. He'
was educated at the grammar school of Stirling under Thomas
Buchanan, a nephew of the celebrated poet, and afterwards at
the University of Glasgow under Andrew Melville, who was his
relative. When Melville removed to St Andrews, Forbes accom-
panied him, and, in common with most of the young students,
zealously adopted tlip opinions of his master. He was with
him during his banishment to England in 1584, and returned
with him to Scotland in the following year. In 1589, he was
married to Lucretia Spense, a daughter of the laird of Wor-
miston, and resided for some time in the neighbourhood of
Montrose. On his father's death in 1598, he removed to the
castle of Corse, where he continued to abide, pursuing his
theological and literary studies, and discharging at the same
time his duties as a Scottish baron.
During the course of years, the opinions of Forbes regarding
ecclesiastical government were greatly modified. Eetaining
his strong attachment to the Protestant doctrines, he was dis-
posed, like many other good men of that time, to acquiesce in
the sovereign's claim to regulate the external polity of the
Church, differing in this from his brother John, who was
minister at Alford, and was banished for the part which he .
took in the Aberdeen assembly of 1605. In the beginning of
the seventeenth century many parishes in the diocese of Aber-
deen were destitute of ministers, and the barbarism of the
people increased from the want of religious instruction. At
the request of Bishop Blackburn and others, the laird of Corse
preached for some time in the parish church near his own resi-
dence, to the great edification of the people, but declined to
accept the office of pastor. On this being reported to Arch-
^ Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. ii. p. 562, Calder-
wood, vol. vil pp. 297, 298. *
312 ECCLESIASTICAL HTSTOKY Chap. XLV.
bishop Gladstones, he ordered Forbes to abstain from preach-
ing until he should be regularly admitted as a minister ; and
the primate's injunction was immediately obeyed. In
February, 1610, Forbes wrote to King James, explaining the
motives of his conduct ; and the prudence and moderation with
which he expressed himself laid the foundation of the favour-
able opinion which the king ever afterwards entertained of him.
In the following year, Forbes was induced to accept ordina-
tion, and to undertake the office of a parish minister by
a circumstance which he viewed as a providential call.
The minister at Keith, in the diocese of Murray, attempted to
kill himself, and a wound which he inflicted proved mortal,
but he survived for some time, and expressed deep penitence for
his crime. Having been visited by the laird of Corse, the
dying minister, who received much comfort from his exhorta-
tions, entreated him to become his successor in the parish, and
so prevent, as far as possible, the evil consequences of the act
which he himself had committed. The people and the neigh-
bouring ministers earnestly joined in this request, and Forbes,
yielding to their entreaties, was ordained, and became minis-
ter at Keith, being then in the forty-seventh year of his age.
On the death of Bishop Blackburn, the clergy and people
of the diocese of Aberdeen were anxious to have Forbes for
their bishop. They were disappointed at the time, but, at the
next vacancy, he was judged by all the fittest person to suc-
ceed. On the twenty-seventh of January, 1618, the king in-
timated his choice to the Scottish bishops, by whom the intel-
ligence was joyfully communicated to Forbes. He was as re-
luctant to accept the episcopal office as he had formerly been
to become a parochial minister, and, in a letter addressed to
Archbishop Spottiswood, mentioned his scruples and unwill-
ingness. The letter is evidently the sincere expression of his
feelings and convictions. It contains a reference to the opin-
ions which he held respecting the episcopate, and the position
of ecclesiastical affairs in Scotland at that time. " I am so
far," he says, " from disallowing the office and degree of a
bishop (as hereupon men might apprehend), that they being
rightly elected, and defined with such moderation of place and
power as may put restraint to excessive usurpation, and prac-
tising accordingly, I think it not only a tolerable, but even a
A.D. 1618.1 OF SCOTLAND. 313
laudable and expedient policy in the Church, and very well
consisting with God's written word, the only rule whereto all
the affairs of his house should be levelled." He then ex-
plained the cause of his refusal : ** This is that, my good lord,
which maketh all my scruple, the present condition and course
of things (and we cannot tell how far a further novation in
our Church is intended) so peremptorily and impetuously urged
on the one part, and so hardly received on the other, as be-
twixt these extremities and the undertaking of a bishopric, I
see no option left to me but either to incur his majesty's dis-
pleasure, which is the rock under Christ I am loathest to strike
on, or then to drive both myself and my ministry in such
common distaste as I see not how henceforth it can be any
more fruitful. I dispute not here of the points themselves ;
but I am persuaded, if so wise, so learned, and so religious a
king, as God hath blessed us with, were fully and freely in-
formed, or did thoroughly conceive the sad sequel of enforcing
our Church, that neither in the points already proponed, nor
in any which we fear yet to ensue for this intended conformity,
would his majesty esteem any of such fruit or effect as there-
fore the state of a quiet Church should be marred, the minds
of brethren, who for any bygone distraction were beginning
again to warm in mutual love, should be of new again and
almost desperately distracted, the hearts of many good Chris-
tians discouraged, the resolution of many weak ones shaken,
matter of insulting ministered to Eomanists, and to profane
epicureans of a disdainful deriding of our whole profession.
If wherein our Church seemeth defective his
majesty would so far pity our weakness, and tender our peace,
as to enforce nothing but what iirst in a free and national coun-
cil were determined, wherein his highness would neither make
any man afraid with terror, nor pervert the judgment of any
with hope of favour, then men may adventure to do service.
But if things be so violently carried as no end may appear of
bitter contention, neither any place left to men in office, but
instead of procuring peace and reuniting the hearts of the
brethren, to stir the coals of detestable debate ; for me, I have
no courage to be a partner in that work. I wish my heart's
blood might extinguish the ungracious rising flame in our
Church. But if I can do nothing for the quenching of
314 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLV.
it, then I would be heartily sorry to add fuel thereto. And
this it is, my very good lord, which only terrifieth me from
undertaking that which otherwise, for the zeal of God's house,
with all hazard and with all my heart I would embrace."
The Archbishop of St. Andrews entreated Forbes to accept
the bishopric ; and, his election having taken place, the dean
and chapter, and the commissioners of presbyteries within the
diocese, added their solicitations that he would obey the call
which they had unanimously given. He finally yielded to
their wishes, and, on the seventeenth of May, was consecrated
at St. Andrews by the primate and the Bishops of Dunkeld
and Brechin. ^
The bishops, having found the clergy more conformable to
their wishes at their several diocesan synods than when last
convened in one body, obtained the king's license to summon
another general assembly. It met at Perth, on the twenty-
fifth of August, 1618. The Lord Binning, secretary of state,
Lord Scone, and Lord Carnegie, were the royal commission-
ers, assisted by four assessors. The bishops, the ministers
who were commissioners for presbyteries, a minister represent-
ing the University of St. Andrews, and several noblemen,
barons, and commissioners of burghs, were present. The
Bishop of Aberdeen preached on the morning of the first day
of the assembly, and the Archbishop of St. Andrews on the
forenoon. The sermon of the latter has been preserved. The
text was from the sixteenth verse of the eleventh chapter of
the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, " But if any
man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither
the Churches of God." Its subject was the consideration of
the five articles for the establishment of which the assembly
had been convened. In the very beginning of his discourse
the primate admitted that the introduction of those changes
was ordered by royal authority, that they were in themselves
^ See Mr. C. Farquhar Shand's Biographical Memoir of Bishop Forbes, prefixed
to the Spottiswood Society edition of his Funerals, p. xxv.-lxv,, and the autl;orities
there cited. See also the Funerals, p. 193-216, where the various documents con-
nected with the election and consecration of Bishop Forbes shew how the recent
statute regarding episcopal elections was carried out in practice. It appears from
one of these records that a shadow of the ancient form of enthroning was kept up,
but the only ceremony used was the delivery of a Bible by the archdeacon to the
bishop.
A.D. 1618.] OF SCOTLAND. 315
indifferent^ and that many persons, not without cause, were
doubtful as to their expediency at that time. He added that
himself and the other bishops would, if in their power, have
avoided proposing such alterations, but that the choice now lay
between the evil of introducing new rites and ceremonies, and
the far gi-eater evil of disobeying lawful authority ; and what
the Apostle says of contention he would say of disobedience —
'* We have no such custom, neither the Churches of God."
Men ought to contend for the faith, and that earnestly, but to
contend for matters of ceremony, as for some main point of
religion, is to injure the truth of God.
After defining the nature of ecclesiastical ceremonies
generally, and enforcing the duty of conformity to them when
once established by authority, he entered upon an explanation
and defence of the five articles. He observed that, as it was
the duty of ministers to visit the sick and comfort them in
other' respects, there could be no reason why the Holy Com-
munion, which is the seal of God's promises and a special
means of binding up our communion with Christ, should be
denied to them. It was now proposed that it should be given,
not to all the sick, but to those only whose recovery was
desperate, and as a comfort to the dying, not superstitiously as
a viaticum. Baptism was to be administered in private in
certain cases, not from an opinion of the absolute necessity of
that sacrament, but because to withhold it was to bring Christ's
ordinance into contempt. Confirmation was one of the most
ancient customs of the Church, and had continued from the
days of the Apostles. It was evident from all antiquity that
the power of confirming had always belonged to the Bishop,
although it did not follow from this that Confirmation was a
greater sacrament than Baptism. In regard to the holy days
which were to be enjoined, they were originally observed by
all the Reformed Churches, and still were observed by most
of them. Many objections had been made to the article which
required kneeling as the most reverent gesture at receiving the
Communion, but without any good cause. It was not meant
by this to agree with the Papists ; but some of those who
opposed it seemed to differ little from the Arians. As
Christians, they had learned to honour the Son as they
honoured the Father, and he that honoured not the Son in
316 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLV.
every place, especially in the participation of the Holy Supper,
should be to thera as a Jew or a Pagan. " It is an excellent
passage, that of St. Augustine upon the ninety-eighth Psalm,
' Nemo carnem illam manducat, nisi prius adoraverit' : that is,
no man can eat that flesh, unless first he have adored. For
myself, I think sitting in the beginning was not evilly in-
stituted, and since by our Church continued, for we may
adore while we are sitting as well as kneeling ; yet the
gesture which becometh adoration best is that of bowing of
the knee, and the irreligion of these times craves that we
should put men more unto it than we do."
On the commencement of the proceedings, the primate
assumed the moderator's chair, and, when one of the ministers
requested that a free election to that office should take place,
he answered that the S3niod was convened within his pro-
vince, wherein he trusted, so long as he served, no man should
take his place. It was asked whether all noblemen, borons,
and ministers, who were present, had a right to vote. The
archbishop answered that no minister could vote without a
commission, but that a voice could not be denied to noblemen
and barons who had come in obedience to his majesty's
missives. The king's letter to the assembly was then read
by Dr. Young, Dean of Winchester. It blamed the ministers
severely for their proceedings at St. Andrews, declared that
the king by his own authority alone had a right to enjoin the
observance of the articles, and stated that he would be content
with nothing save a direct simple acceptance of them. Much
discussion took place which was continued during three days,
partly in presence of the whole assembly, partly at a con-
ference of particular members appointed to consider the
articles. When the vote was taken, the question was put
whether the assembly would receive or refuse the articles, and
a proposal of one of the members that they should be voted
for separately was rejected. The royal commissioners and
their assessors, the bishops, the noblemen except one, the
barons and commissioners of burghs, and a considerable number
of ministers, agreed to the articles, the whole number of those
so agreeing being eighty-six ; one nobleman and forty-one
ministers, or, according to another account, forty-five, voted
against the articles ; and four declined to express an opinion.
A.D. 1618.] OP SCOTLAND. 317
The five articles were the following : —
" 1. Seeing we are commanded by God Himself, that, when
we come to worship Him, we fall down and kneel before the
Lord our Maker, and considering withal that there is no part
of divine worship more heavenly and spiritual than is the
holy receiving of the blessed Body and Blood of our Lord
and Saviour, Jesus Christ, like as the most humble and re-
verent gesture of our body in our meditation and the lifting
up of our hearts best becometh so divine and sacred an
action ; therefore, notwithstanding that our Church hath used
since the Eeformation of religion to celebrate the Holy Com-
munion to the people sitting, by reason of the great abuse of
kneeling used in the idolatrous worship of the sacrament by
the Papists, yet seeing all memory of by-past superstitions is
past, in reverence of God, and in due regard of so divine a
mystery, and in remembrance of so mystical an union as we
are made partakers of, the assembly thinketh good that the
blessed sacrament be celebrated hereafter meekly and reverently
upon their knees.
" 2. If any good Christian visited with long sickness, and
known to the pastor by reason of his present infirmity to be
unable to resort to the church for receiving the Holy Com-
munion, or, being sick, shall declare to his pastor upon his
conscience that he thinks his sickness to be deadly, and shall
earnestly desire to receive the same in his house, the minister
shall not deny him so great a comfort, lawful warning
being given to him the night before, and that there be three
or four of good religion and conversation, free of all law-
ful impediments, present with the sick person to com-
municate with him, who must also provide a convenient
place in his house, and all things necessary for the reverent
administration thereof, according to the order prescribed in the
Church.
" 3. The minister shall often admonish the people that they
defer not the baptizing of infants any longer than the next
Lord's day after the child be born, unless, upon a great and
reasonable cause declared to the minister and by him approved,
the same be continued. As also they shall warn them that,
without great cause, they procure not their children to be
baptized at home in their houses ; but where great need shall
318 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLV.
compel them to baptize in private houses, (in which case the
minister shall not refuse to do it upon the knowledge of the
great need, and being timely required thereto,) then baptism
shall be administered after the same form as it should have
been in the congregation: and the minister shall, the next
Lord's-daj after any such private baptism, declare in the
church that the infant was so baptized, and therefore ought to
be received as one of the true flock of Christ's fold.
" 4. Forasmuch as one of the special means for staying the
increase of Popery and settling of true religion in the hearts
of people is, that a special care be taken of young children,
their education, and how they are catechized, which in time of
the primitive Church most carefully was attended, as being
most profitable to cause young children in their tender years
drink in the knowledge of God and his religion, but is now
altogether neglected in respect of the great abuse and errors
which crept into the Popish Church by making thereof a
sacrament of Confirmation ; therefore, that all superstition
built thereupon may be rescinded, and that the matter itself,
being most necessary for the education of youth, may be re-
duced to the primitive integrity, it is thought good that the
minister in every parish shall catechize all young children of
eight years of age, and see that they have the knowledge, and
be able to make the rehearsal of the Lord's Prayer, Belief, and
Ten Commandments, with answers to the questions in the
small Catechism used in our Church, and that every
bishop, in his visitation, shall censure the minister whd
shall be found remiss therein; and the said bishops shall
cause the said children to be presented before them, and
bless them with prayer for the increase of their knowledge,
and the continuance of God's heavenly graces with every one
of them.
" 5. As we abhor the superstitious observation of festival
days by the Papists, and detest all licentious and profane
abuses thereof by the common sort of professors, so we think
that the inestimable benefits received from God, by our Lord
Jesus Christ, his Birth, Passion, Eesurrection, Ascension, and
sending down of the Holy Ghost, were commendably and
godly remembered at certain particular days and times by the
whole Church of the world, and may also be now ; therefore.
A.D. 1618.] OF SCOTLAND. 319
the assembly ordaineth that every minister should upon these
days have the commemoration of the foresaid inestimable
benefits, and make choice of several and pertinent texts of
Scripture, and frame their doctrine and exhortations thereto ;
and rebuke all superstitious observation and licentious pro-
fanation thereof."
On the twenty-first of October, the acts of the Perth as-
sembly were ratified by the privy council^
1 Lindsays True Narrative of the Proceedings in the Perth Assembly, p. 19-
72. Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 252.257. Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 303-339.
Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. ii. p. 567-583. The
primate's sermon is reprinted from Dr. Lindsay's work in the Spottiswood
Miscellany, vol. i. p. 65.87.
320 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVL
CHAPTEE XLYL
FROM THE PERTH ASSEMBLY OF AUGUST, 1618, TO THE DEATH OF
KING JAMES VI. IN MARCH, 1625.
Synod of Dort — Death of Bisliop Cowper — Scottish Ordinal
of 1620 — The Perth Articles ratified in Parliament —
Dissatisfaction in consequence of the Perth Articles —
Popular feeling at Edinburgh — John Cameron^ Principal
of the College of Glasgow — Death of Andrew Melville —
His character — Death of John Welsh — English Service
introduced at St. Andrews — Dr, William Forbes — His
teaching at Aberdeen — His removal to Edinburgh — His
dispute with the Puritans there — His return to Aberdeen —
Death of King James — His character and ecclesiastical
policy.
The Synod of Dort, which had been called together to settle
the controversies between the Calvinists and Arminians, met
in November, 1618, and continued its sittings till April in the
following year. It was attended by deputies fi-om all the
Churches of the Reformed, strictly so called, except those of
France. King James sent thither four English divines, and
Walter Balcanquhal, son of the minister of Edinburgh of the
same name, as representatives of the British Churches, but
these envoys had no commission of any kind beyond the sove-
reign's appointment. 1
William Cowper, Bishop of Galloway, died on the fifteenth
of February, 1619. He was an eloquent preacher, and, in the
opinion of Dr. M'Crie, his discourses are probably superior to
any sermons of that age. He never recovered the popularity
which he enjoyed before he accepted the bishopric ; and this
circumstance, and the libels with which the Puritans un-
ceasingly attacked him, weighed too much on his mind.
Spottiswood, while recording his ability and his goodness,
condemns his anxiety for popular applause. He left an ac-
count of his own life, in which he mentions his deliberate
1 Collier, vol. vii. p. 408-416.
A-D. 1619.] OF SCOTLAND.
321
opinion regarding the episcopal office, and speaks of his trials
m the discharge of it. " I esteem it," he said, ^' a lawful
ancient, and necessary government. I see not, nor have I
read of any Church which wanted it before our time j only
the abuses of it by pride, tyranny, and idleness, have brought
It mto mishkmg. From those evils I pray the Lord preserve
his servants that now are, or hereafter shall be called to these
places. But there is no reason why a thing good in itself
should be condemned or rejected for the evil of abuse, for no
good thing at all would be retained in the Church ; and in
this calling, how I have walked, and what my care was to
advance the Gospel, I trust I shall not nor do want wit-
nesses. In this estate I now live, my soul alway in my hand
ready to be offered to my God. Where or what kind of
death God hath prepared for me I know not, but sure I am
there can be no evil death to him that liveth in Christ, nor
sudden death to a Christian pilgrim, who, as Job says, ^ every
day waits for his change.' Tea many a day have I sought it
with tears, not out of impatience, distrust, or perturbation
but being weary of sin, and fearful to fall into it. Concerning
those who have been my enemies without cause, and charged
me with many wrongful imputations from which my con-
science clears me, excusing me of these things, love of gain
and glory, and such like, whereof they accused me, the Lord
lay It not to their charge. I go to my Father, and seek his
blessing to them, to rectify their judgments, and moderate
their affections, with true piety from faith and love."
On Bishop Cowper's death, the Bishop of Brechin was
translated to Galloway, and Dr. David Lindsay, minister at
Dundee, was nominated to the see of Brechin, and consecrated
at St. Andrews, on the twenty-third of November, i
During the vacancy of the bishopric of Galloway, the
deanery of the chapel royal was transferred from that see to
Dunblane. This alteration was ratified by parliament in
162L The emoluments of the dean and prebendaries were
1 See Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 258; Calderwood, vol. vii. pp. 349-351 396-
Preface to Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, pp. xxxvii. xLxix •
Keiths Catalogue, pp. 167, 280; M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. ii. p. 316*
See also Lawsons History, p. 324-334, where an aceount is given of Bishop
Oowper denved from his own memoir and the writings of Mr. Scott of Perth
VOL. ii.j 22
322 ECCLESIASTICAL mSTOEY [Chap. XLVI.
derived from the remains of the magnificent foundation of
King James IV. The chapel itself, however, was no longer
at Stirling, but within the palace of Holyrood — in the same
place, probably, which had been used as a private chapel from
the time of Queen Mary's return to Scotland. ^
In 1610, Andrew Knox, Bishop of the Isles,^ had been
translated to the see of Raphoe, in the province of Armagh,
but it is supposed that he continued to retain both bishoprics
for some years. His son, Thomas Knox, was appointed to
the see of the Isles in February, 1619.2
Among the directions issued by the king, and approved of
by the bishops and others of the clergy in 1611, one was, that
an uniform order should be observed in the admission of minis-
ters, and that a form thereof should be printed and followed by
every bishop. It was probably in consequence of this resolution
that an Ordinal was printed by authority in 1620, entitled,
" The form and manner of ordaining Ministers, and consecrat-
ing Archbishops, and Bishops, used in the Church of Scot-
land." As the order of Deacon had not yet been restored in
Scotland, those known by that name being mere laymen, pro-
vision was only made for the ordination of the two highest
degrees of the clergy.
The form for the ordination of ministers was similar to the
English office for the ordering of priests, and was evidently
framed on its model. After sufficient trial cf the qualifications
of the person to be admitted, on the day appointed for the
ordination a sermon was to be preached declaring the duties
and office of ministers, their necessity in the Church, and how
the people ought to esteem them and their vocation. After
the sermon, the Archdeacon, or his deputy, was to present the
person to be admitted to the Bishop, who was then directed to
enquire into his qualifications, and to address the people in
words almost the same as those of the English ordinal.
The oath of the king's supremacy having been administered,
questions were put to the person to be ordained, and answers
were required, also similar to the English form. In giving
* Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. ii. p. 721, note.
Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. iv. p. 649.
2 Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. i. pp. 427, 428, and
preface, p. xlii. Book of the Thanes of Cawdor, p. 246.
A.D. 1620.] OF SCOTLAND. 323
ordination, the Bishop and the ministers present were to lay
their hands on the head of the person to be admitted, kneeling
before them, and the Bishop was then to say, " In the Name
of God, and by the authority committed unto us by the Lord
Jesus Christ, we give unto thee power and authority to preach
the word of God, to minister his holy sacraments, and exercise
discipline in such sort as is committed unto ministers by the
order of our Church ; and God, the Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ, who has called thee to the office of a watchman over
his people, multiply his graces with thee, illuminate thee with
his Holy Spirit, comfort and strengthen thee in all^virtue,
govern and guide thy ministiy, to the praise of his holy name,
to the propagation of Christ's kingdom, to the comfort of his
Church, and to the discharge of thy own conscience in the
day of the Lord Jesus ; to whom, with the Father and the
Holy Ghost, be all honour, praise, and glory, now and ever,
Amen." The Bishop was next to deliver the Bible into the
hands of the person admitted, saying, ^^ This is the Book of
Scripture, which thou must study continually, and make the
ground and rule of thy doctrine and living."
The office was concluded with an exhortation by the Bishop,
the singing of the twenty-third Psalm, and a prayer of thanks-
giving. Before the ordination, an oath of canonical obedience
to the ordinary, an oath against simony, an oath of residence,
and an oath against granting leases of the benefice, were to
be administered. Neither the hymn Yeni Creator Spiritus, nor
the Litany was used, and there was no celebration of the Holy
Communion.
At the consecration of a Bishop, three bishops at least were
to be present, and four at the consecration of an Archbishop.
After public prayers, and a sermon on the office and duty of a
Bishop, and a call to those to come forward who had any
objections to the life or doctrine of the prelate to be ordained,
the bishop elect was to be presented to the Archbishop, or
to another bishop acting by his commission. The king's
mandate for the consecration was then read, and the oath of
the king's supremacy, and, in the case of a bishop, the oath
of obedience to the ]\Ietropolitan, were administered. The
Archbishop, sitting in his chair, was then to put questions to
the bishop-elect, and to require answers, similar to those in
324 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVI.
the English ordinal. The Archbishop was next to say a
prayer^ the same as in that formulary, and the Veni Creator
Spiritus was to be sung. An address by the Archbishop to
the congregation followed, after which the Archbishop and
bishops present were to lay their hands on the head of the
elected bishop, the Archbishop saying, " We, by the authority
given us of God, and of his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, give
unto thee the power of ordination, imposition of hands, and
correction of manners, within the dioceses whereunto thou art
or hereafter shalt be called. And God Almighty be with thee
in all thy ways, increase his grace unto thee, and guide thy
ministry to the praise of his holy name, and the comfort of his
Church, Amen." After this, the Archbishop was to deliver
the Bible to the bishop-elect, using words almost the same
as those in the English office. The Archbishop and bishops,
the newly consecrated bishop, and others present, were then
to receive the Holy Communion.
There was appended to the form an advertisement regarding
the translation of bishops, setting forth that in such a case no
new consecration was to be made, but the bishop or arch-
bishop elect was to be confirmed, and an order given to the
archdeacon of the diocese for his induction. ^
A considerable number of the ministers refused to obey the
Perth articles, and several of those who were most active in
resisting were suspended or deprived by the court of High
Commission. The dispute was carried on in a series of
controversial works, the chief writer on one side being
Calderwood, on the other, the Bishop of Brechin. The
king, finding that every effort was made by the opponents
of the articles to stir up the nation against them, resolved
to have their authority confirmed by parliament. The
estates of the kingdom met at Edinburgh, in July, 1621.
The Marquis of Hamilton was the royal commissioner, and
succeeded, with some difficulty, in obtaining the desired
ratification, seventy-eight voting for it, and fifty-one against
it. In the minority were a considerable number of the lesser
barons and the burgesses ; all the bishops and most of the
peers were in the majority. But though the articles were
1 See the Ordinal, as reprinted in the Miscellany of the Wodrow Society,
vol. i. p. 697-615.
A.D. 1620.] OF SCOTLAND. 325
now sanctioned by the highest civil as well as ecclesiastical
authority, the opposition still continued, and the bishops were
obliged in many cases to connive at their partial observance,
or their entire disuse. The recusant ministers shewed them-
selves prepared to undergo any suffering in defence of
their principles. Their conduct would call forth more
sympathy, if it had not frequently been marked by the
want of Christian charity, and even of the ordinary courtesies
of society. ^
The measures of King James had all along been opposed
by the party of which Melville was formerly the leader, but,
for many years, the nation generally acquiesced in them with-
out shewing much feeling on the one side or the other. This
admits of an easy explanation. There was no attempt to
interfere either with doctrine or worship ; and in regard to
church government the people were indifferent, sometimes
even shewing a preference for the supremacy of the sovereign to
{hat of the ecclesiastical courts. A great change, however,
had begun with the enactment of the Perth articles. There
was now for the first time an alteration in the forms of
worship to which the people had become accustomed. Three
of the articles gave little offence. Private Baptism and
Private Communion were simply privileges to those who were
willing to avail themselves of them, and Confirmation seems
never to have been insisted on. But the observance of the
five holy-days was enjoined by the privy council, and caused
much discontent. Still more offensive was the article which
required kneeling at the Communion. The posture thus
commanded was new to all, and, in the opinion of many
who did not belong to the extreme Presbyterian party, it
was supposed to be connected with the Eoman doctrine of
Transubstantiation. Religious persons were offended during
the most sacred part of Christian worship, and those who
were anxious to find an opportunity of assailing royal and
episcopal authority were now able to identify themselves with
' Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 261-263. Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 488-504. Original
Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. ii. p. 656-662. Acts of the Par-
liaments of Scotland, vol. iv. pp. 596, 597. Most of the works written in con-
nection with the Perth articles are mentioned in a list appended to Dr. Trving's
Life of Calderwood— Lives of Scottish Writers, vol. i. p. 318 322.
326 ECCLESIASTICAL HTSTOKY [Chap. XLVI.
some of the most devout and conscientious of their coun-
trymen.
Edinburgh continued to be the head-quarters of Presbj-
terianism, although the ministers were now obedient to the
sovereign ; and there the changes excited much dissatisfaction.
At Easter, 1619, many persons deserted the churches in the
town, and resorted to those in the neighbourhood. Calder-
wood asserts that the ministers had promised to allow the people
to sit, stand, or kneel, at the Communion, as they might think
best, but that at the celebration they used all means in their
power to make them kneel. '' Some," he says, " kneeled, but
with shedding of tears for grief. Cold and graceless were the
Communions, and few were the communicants." " In some
churches," he adds, " the people went out, and left the minis-
ter alone ; in some, when the minister would have them to
kneel, the ignorant and simple sort cried out, ^ The danger,
if any be, light upon your own soul, and not upon ours.'
Some, when they could not get the sacrament sitting, de-
parted, and besought God to be judge between them and the
minister."
The discontented party at Edinburgh, not satisfied with
deserting the churches during the celebration of the Com-
munion, or with refusing to kneel when present, began to
hold private meetings at other times, at which the deprived
and suspended ministers officiated. These meetings were
denounced by the clergy as conventicles, and their supporters
as Brownists and Anabaptists ; and the frequenting of them
was forbidden by royal proclamation.
The feeling so prevalent in the capital was shared by many
in the south-western counties and in Fife. In the other
principal towns, and in the central and northern provinces
generally, there was little resistance to the articles. The
citizens of Perth and Dundee appear to have made no com-
plaints ; those of St Andrews were gradually becoming
attached to the hierarchy, the restoration of which added to
their importance; and at Aberdeen the influence of the
bishop and the university, aided by old prepossessions, caused
the changes not only to be submitted to but to be welcomed.
Even in the West the prevalence of extreme Presbyterian
opinions was not universal. At Glasgow, except in the
A.D. 1621.] OF SCOTLAND. 327
university, there was no marked opposition ; while Paisley,
at this time, is described as " a nest of Papists." ^
King James took a great interest in the universities, and
endeavoured to prevail on men of ability to fill the highest
offices in them. He had another motive for this in addition
to his love of learning; he was thereby enabled to select those
who were most disposed to aid in carrying out his ecclesiasti-
cal reforms. St. Andrews was safely left to the superinten-
dence of the primate, and Aberdeen to that of Bishop Forbes.
At the time of the Perth assembly, Eobert Boyd, son of
James Boyd, titular Archbishop of Glasgow, was Principal of
the College of Glasgow. He was a learned and good man,
but he had not inherited his father's love for Episcopacy. He
was compelled to resign his office in 1622, and John Cameron
was appointed in his place. The new principal was a native
of Glasgow, and was educated in that city, but had long
resided in France. His knowledge was very great, especially
in the Greek and Latin languages, and none of the many
Scotsmen in the continental universities possessed a higher^
character as a scholar and a theologian. He was a zealous
advocate of the royal prerogative, was favourably disposed to
Episcopacy and the Perth articles, and had even begun to
question the authority of Calvin on grace and free-will. It was
unfortunate for the objects which James had so much at heart,
that Cameron, who appears to have been of a restless disposi-
tion, resigned his office within a twelvemonth, and returned to
France, where he died in 1625. He had the gift of attracting
the wannest devotion of his pupils, and, brief as his sojourn
^ See Calderwood, vol. vii. pp. 359, 360, 4444-47, 449, 611-614 ; Original
Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. ii. pp. 626, 627 ; Kow, p. 438.
The Autobiography of Robert Blair throws considerable light on the state of
Scotland in the latter years of the reign of James. Referring to the period after the
Glasgow assembly of 1610, the writer says (Life of Robert Blair, Wodrow Society
ed. p. 12), " At this time I observed little controversy in religion in the Kirk of
Scotland ; for though there were bishops, yet they took little upon them, and eo
were very little opposed until Perth assembly." It was not uncommon for
persons to receive the Communion at an early age. Blair was a communicant
in his twelfth year, and Livingstone communicated for the first time when at
school, between his tenth and fourteenth year ; see Life of Robert Blair, pp.
6, 7, and Select Biographies, edited for the Wodrow Society, vol. i. p. 132. In
connection with the same circumstance, Blair mentions that " it was then a
generally received opinion that the sacrament behoved to be received fasting.''
328 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVL
was at the Scottish university, it appears to have left a
permanent impression on many. It was from him that Baillie
derived those opinions in regard to royal and episcopal
authority, which made him shrink for a considerable time
from fully adopting the principles of the Covenanters.^
In the year 1622, when the cause of Presbyterianism
seemed most hopeless, Andrew Melville died in exile. He
had been released from the Tower in 1611, through the inter-
cession of the Duke of Bouillon, but not being allowed to
return to Scotland, he accepted the office of professor of
divinity in the University of Sedan. At that place he spent
the rest of his life. The exact date of his decease, and the
particular events of his later years, have not been accurately
ascertained. His nephew James had died at Berwick, in 1614.^
The political and ecclesiastical character of Andrew Melville
can best be judged from the part he took in the transactions
of the time. He was more fitted to be the head of a college
than the chief of a great party. The influence which he had
acquired by his zeal and ability was frequently lost by his
arrogance and want of temper. In prosperity he shewed little
moderation, but in adversity he was patient, constant, and
courageous. His private life was upright and irreproachable,
and, in his intercourse with his nephew and the familiar
friends who shared his opinions, he shewed a tenderness of
feeling, and a hearty, cheerful sympathy, contrasting strongly
with his austere bearing towards others.
^ See Irving's Lives of Scottish Writers, voL i. p. 333-340 ; Original Letters
of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. ii. p. 692 ; Life of Kobert Blair, p. 37-46 i
Baillie's Letters, Laing's ed, vol. i. pp. 53, 189.
2 M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. ii. pp. 411-421, 440, 458. Archbishop
Spottiswood, after mentioning the death of Melville (History, vol. iii. p. 183)i
adds, " Whilst I am writing this, there cometh to my mind the hard and un-
charitable dealing that he and his faction used towards Patrick, sometime
Archbishop of St. Andrews, who not content to have persecuted that worthy man
in his life, made him. a long time after his death, the subject of their sermons ;
interpreting tlie miseries whereunto he was brought to be the judgment of God
inflicted upon him for withstanding their courses of discipline. If now one
should take the like liberty, and say, that God, to whom the bishop at his dying
did commend his cause, had taken revenge of him who was the chief instrument
of his trouble, it might be as probably spoken, and with some more likelihood,
than that which they blasted forth against the dead bishop. But away with
such rash and bold conceits ; the love of God either to causes or persons is not
to be measured by the external and outward accidents."
A.D. 1622. OF SCOTLAND. 329
The Presbyterian party seemed now to be left without a
leader. Their chief men had been removed by death, impri-
sonment, or banishment. Walter Balcanqual died in 1616.
The decease of John Welsh, who had come over from the
Continent, took place at London, in the same year with that of
Melville. A story, first published by Dr. M^Crie, containing
a minute account of an interview between King James and
Welsh's wife, a daughter of John Knox, at which she is said
to have petitioned the king to permit her husband's return to
Scotland, rests on very doubtful authority. John Forbes was
still in exile. Calderwood, on being released from confine-
ment, lurked for some years in Scotland, and afterwards
retired to Holland, where he wrote his largest controversial
treatise, the " Altare Damascenum." Bruce was allowed to
remain in Scotland sometimes at his own house, at other
times in a mitigated form of banishment at Inverness. ^
In January ,^1623, in terms of an order sent by the king,
the regular use of the Morning and Evening Service of the
» See Calderwood, vol. vii. pp. 219, 511, 583 ; M'Crie's Life of Knox, p. 372 ;
Life of John Forbes, prefixed to bis Records touching the estate of the Kirk, p.
xlix.— lii. ; Wodrow's Life of Bruce, p. 124-133. The earliest, and what really
seems to be the only authority, for the alleged conversation between King James
and the wife of Welsh, is a manuscript " account of several passages in the lives
of some eminent men in the nation, not recorded in any history," written by a
minister, named Eobert Trail, and "inserted in the heart of a common-place
book, containing notes of sermons, &c., written by him when a student of divinity
at St. Andrews between 1659 and 1663." " He received the account from aged
persons, and says that the conference between King James and Mrs. Welsh ' is
current to this day in the mouths of many.' » Dr. M'Crie adds, that he had seen
the same story in Wodrow's MS. Collections. Calderwood, who was careful in
collecting every story to the discredit of King James, says nothing on this sub-
ject; and Kirkton, who wrote a Life of Welsh, and was himself connected with
Knox's family, is also silent. Compare M'Crie's Life of Knox, p. 372 ; Calder-
wood, vol. vii. p.511 ; and Select Biographies, edited for the Wodrow Society,
vol. i. pp. 41, 42. There is an evident mis-statement in the narrative. Knox
is there said to have left only three children, all daughters. It is well known
that he left also two sons, but, if that circumstance had been mentioned, a chief
point of the story would have been lost. Legends of this description are very
common in the ecclesiastical history of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries-
Dr. M'Crie, who has given currency to a considerable number of them, is almost
always careful to mention the sources of his information ; but ihose who copy
from him generally convert a tradition of more or less probability into a well as-
certained and undoubted fact, and suppress the references which would enable
their readers to judge for themselves.
330 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVI.
Church of England began in the cliapel of St. Mary's College,
St. Andrews, where the students of the university attended. ^
Alexander Douglas, Bishop of Murray, died in May, 1623,
and was succeeded by John Guthrie, one of the ministers
of Edinbui-gh, who was consecrated during the following
autumn. 2
A short time before Easter, 1624, a commotion arose at Edin-
burgh, originating in the Perth articles, but mixed up with the
dissatisfaction excited among the Puritans of that city by the
doctrines of one of their ministers. Dr. William Forbes. It
could hardly have failed that the teaching of this eminent
theologian should have displeased the inhabitants of the
capital, to whose opinions he was in every respect so much
opposed. This will best be explained by a brief account
of his previous life. His father was Thomas Forbes, a
burgess of Aberdeen, descended from the family of Cor-
sindae ; his mother was sister to Dr. James Cargill, an
eminent physician in the same city. He was born at
Aberdeen in the year 1585, and educated at the grammar
school, and afterwards at the'coUege there, recently founded
by George, Earl Marischal. In his twenty-first year he
went abroad in order to complete his education, and, after
residing for some time in Poland, studied in several of the
universities of Germany and Holland, where he acquired
the friendship of Scaliger, Grotius, and other distinguished
scholars. Leaving the Continent, he paid a visit to Oxford,
and then returned at the end of five years to his native city.
Having been ordained, probably by Bishop Blackburn, he
became minister, first at Alford and afterwards at Monymusk,
and in November, 1616, was appointed one of the ministers
of St. Nicholas' church, in the burgh of Aberdeen. In the
following year he was created doctor of divinity, and in 1618
was present at the Perth assembly, where he was selected to
defend the lawfulness of kneeling at the Communion against
the objections of its opponents.
The opinions of Dr. Forbes went far beyond those main-
tained by most of the bishops. He was favourable to the
^ Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 669.
' Keith's Catalogue, p. 152. Original Letters of tlie reign of James the
Sixth, vol. ii. p. 714. Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 580.
A.D. 1624.] OF SCOTLAND. 331
restoration of various primitive doctrines and practices which
hitherto had found few supporters in Scotland. He even believ-
ed that the differences between the Church of Eome and the
Protestants, in some important points, were more nominal
than real, and capable of being reconciled without much
difficulty. During the year 1618, a formal dispute took
place at Aberdeen between him and Andrew Aidie, Principal
of Marischal College, regarding the lawfulness of prayers for
the dead ; and it shews how far the ancient doctrines had
already been received in the theological schools of Aberdeen,
that Aidie was looked upon with suspicion for maintaining
the negative opinion in the controversy. In connection with
this discussion, the Bishop of Aberdeen wrote to the king,
that his majesty had not " a more learned, sound, sanctified,
and diligent divine " in his kingdom than Dr. Forbes. Aidie,
being in various respects not well qualified for the office
which he held, was induced to resign, and Forbes was
appointed his successor as principal of the college.
In the end of the year 1621, Dr. Forbes was chosen one
of the ministers of Edinburgh. He was reluctant to leave
Aberdeen, and his fellow-citizens were as unwilling to lose
their pastor ; but it was thought expedient for the good of
the Church that divines of approved ecclesiastical principles
should be placed in the congregations of the capital, which
had so long furnished leaders to the Presbyterian party. He
therefore submitted, and was duly instituted to his new office.
His doctrines, which were received with favour or without
opposition at Aberdeen, excited the strongest dislike among
many of the citizens of Edinburgh, and he became involved
in frequent controversies with the disaffected, which finally
excited general attention on the occasion which has been
referred to.^
Dr. Forbes had strenuously enforced the duty of submission
to the Perth articles, not only as enjoined by authority, but
as sanctioned by the practice of the universal Church. He
1 See Life of Bishop William Forbes, prefixed to his Considerationes Modestse
et Pacificae, ed. 1658 ; Garden's Life of Dr. John Forbes, in the Amsterdam
edition of that author's works, p. 19; Original Letters of the reign of James the
Sixth, vol. ii. pp. 589, 590, 634 ; Selections from the Ecclesiastical Records of
Aberdeen, p. 85 ; Lindsay's Perth Assembly, p. 62 ; and Calderwood, vol. vii.
pp. 516, 542, 543, 571, 572.
332 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVI.
had taught that Episcopacy was not an institution of
human appointment, but a divine ordinance, founded on the
word of God, the practice of the Apostles, and the authority
of the primitive Church. These doctrines must have been
very displeasing to many of his hearers, but, when he also
maintained that several of the points in dispute with the
Roman Catholics, especially those regarding Justification,
were capable of being reconciled with the doctrines of the
Reformed Church, the popular feeling became excited. The
usage of making periodical inquisition into the character and
teaching of the ministers was still kept up at Edinburgh. The
town council, the kirk session, and the citizens, assembled for
that purpose in March, 1624, and two burgesses, a butcher
and a merchant, objected to the teaching of Dr. Forbes. He
peremptorily refused to submit to the judgment of his own
flock ; and the other ministers, encouraged probably by his
example, denied that the people had any right to examine
into their doctrine, although they had hitherto, for form's
sake, allowed the old custom to continue. The citizens, on
the other hand, maintained that, as God's people, they had a
right to try the doctrine of their pastors, even as the inha-
bitants of Berea had tried the teaching of St. Paul and
compared it with the Scriptures. They farther proceeded
to demand that the Communion should be administered in
the manner used before the Perth assembly.
The Communion was to be celebrated on Easter-day, the
twenty-eighth of March ; and, on the previous Thursday, Dr.
Forbes censured some of the elders and deacons who had
intimated their intention not to be present. The conversation
which took place between them is mentioned by Calderwood,
but the accuracy of his report cannot be relied on. It is very
probable, however, that Forbes rebuked his parishioners with
considerable severity. The chief person among them was
William Rigg, one of the magistrates of the town, to whom
Forbes said that he had need to be catechized himself in place
of admonishing his teacher.
The ministers having complained of the disorderly proceed-
ings of the people, Rigg and five other burgesses were sum-
moned before a committee of the privy council, consisting of
the Chancellor, the Archbishop of St. Andrews, and others
A.D. 1624.] OF SCOTLAND. 333
specially named by the king to inquire into the matter. Rigg
was ordered to be warded in Blackness, and various punish-
ments were inflicted on his associates.
It was the wish of Forbes to convince opponents by gentler
methods than those which were used to vindicate his authority.
His learning and eloquence proved insufficient for the purpose,
and, finding also that his health was suffering, he resigned his
charge, and returned to Aberdeen, where he resumed his for-
mer pastoral office, to the great joy of the clergy and people. ^
On the twenty-seventh of March, 1625, King James died
at Theobald's. The unfavourable points of this sovereign's
character are very obvious, and have been dwelt upon by
most historians. His good qualities have also been ad-
mitted both by the writers of his own day and by those of
succeeding times. But the great improvement which his go-
vernment effected in the condition of Scotland has seldom
been sufficiently acknowledged. When he grew up to man-
hood, he found his kingdom torn by civil dissensions, his
people discontented and miserable, and the authority of the
law utterly set at nought. At his death he left his subjects
quiet and prosperous, and the country accustomed to the
steady administration of justice. The wild borderers had be-
come an obedient and orderly peasantry ; the inhabitants of
the Highlands and the remotest Isles had begun to learn that
there was a power above their chiefs by which they could be
protected or punished ; the clergy no longer claimed exemp-
tion from obedience to the laws by which their fellow sub-
jects were governed ; and the proudest nobles had been taught
by severe examples that rank was not an immunity for
crime. On the other hand, much evil had been done for
which the king himself was chiefly responsible. Having been
successful in repressing aristocratical tyranny, he had exceeded
his lawful prerogatives, and assumed to himself and his coun-
cil an authority which he had no right to exercise without the
consent of parliament. So also in the government of the
Church, in room of the ecclesiastical democracy of the minis-
ters, he had claimed for the crown a sort of metropolitan au-
1 Calderwood, vol. vii. p. 596-620. Spottiswood, vol. iii. pp. 268, 269. Ori-
ginal Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, pp. 740-745, 748-756. Life of
Bishop William Forbes, prefixed to the Considerationes Modestae et Pacificee.
334 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVI.
thority, by virtue of which all matters of external order, the
regulation of rites and ceremonies, and the appointment of
offices for divine worship, were subjected to the control of the
sovereign. It was through this usurped power that some of
the most important of the ecclesiastical changes were effected ;
and so it came about that the very restorations, which in
themselves were good and praiseworthy, became inseparably
connected, in the minds of the Scottish people, with the uncon-
stitutional means by which they were introduced.
A.D. 1625.] OF SCOTLAND. 335
CHAPTEE XLVII.
FROM THE DEATH OF KING JAMES VI. IN MARCH, 1625, TO THE RATIFICA-
TION OF THE BOOK OF CANONS IN MAY, 1635.
Accession of Charles I. — Ecclesiastical instructions issued hy
the King — Arrangement in regard to Tithes — David
Dickson — Religious movement in the West of Scotland —
Robert Blair — John Livingstone — Voyage of Blair and
Livingstone — Tlie King'' s journey to Scotland — His Coro-
nation— Meeting of Parliament — Service at the Chapel
Royal — Foundation of the see of Edinburgh — Dr. William
Forbes, Bishop of Edinburgh — His sermon before the King
— His death — His character and opinions — His writings —
Archbishop Spottiswood appointed Chancellor of Scotland
— I^atrich Forbes, Bishop of Aberdeen — His diocesan ad-
ministration— His restoration of the University of Aber-
deen— His illness and death — His character — Ratification
of the Booh of Canons.
Charles, the only surviving son of James YI., was pro-
claimed King of Scotland at the cross of Edinburgh, on the
thirty-first of March.
Before the late king's decease, arrangements had been made
for dividing the town of Edinburgh into four parishes, each
to be provided with two ministers ; and these were carried
through and received the royal sanction soon after the acces-
sion of Charles. The ministers were to be chosen, not by the
people, but by the magistrates and town council ; and they were
to be presented to the Archbishop of St. Andrews, the ordinary
of the diocese, for collation. The king having required that the
usage of the people to try and censure their ministers
should be given up, the magistrates and town council ex-
pressed their willingness to obey, but remarked that the
practice had been introduced at the Reformation, and enjoined
by the superintendents. The written note made on this by
the king might have been sufficient to dispel the hopes which
the Presbyterians entertained of a change of ecclesiastical
336 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Chap. XLVII.
policy in the new reign. It was in these words : — '^ The con-
clusion of this answer satisfies the article, but the narrative, if
it be true, sheweth what a Reformation that was, and how evil
advised ; yet we believe not that either superintendent or
minister would ever subject their doctrine to the trial of the
popular voice : this is an Anabaptistical frenzy." ^
In July, 1626, the king sent to the archbishops and bishops
certain instructions regarding ecclesiastical affairs, chiefly
in reference to the Perth articles. By these, permission
was to be given to such ministers as had scruples about the
articles, and had been admitted before the Perth assembly, to
forbear observing them, provided they did not openly speak
against them, or dissuade others from their observance, or
refuse the Communion to any who wished to partake of it
kneeling, or receive any from other congregations without
testimonials from their pastors. The banished, imprisoned,
and suspended ministers were to be restored on similar condi-
tions, but all who had been admitted subsequently to the
synod were to be obliged to observe the articles. The bishops
were enjoined to plant schools in every parish, and to cause
the ministers catechize the people weekly. ^
King Charles continued in other respects to pursue his
father's ecclesiastical policy ; nor did he neglect to attend
carefully to Scottish affairs, even during the distraction caused
in the early years of his reign by his disputes with the English
House of Commons. James had greatly improved the tem-
poral condition of the clergy, and had secured moderate
endowments for several of the bishops by purchasing portions
of the alienated church lands with his own money. Charles
restored to the two metropolitan sees a farther share of their
old endowments, by acquiring the abbacy of Arbroath from the
Marquis of Hamilton, and the lordship of Glasgow from the
Duke of Lennox. Various estates were bought in the same
way and given to others of the bishoprics ; and it is said
that, encouraged by these voluntary surrenders, he contem-
plated a formal revocation of all the grants of church lands
made during his father's minority. Burnet states that, in the
third year of the king's reign, the Earl of Nithsdale was
* Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, vol. ii. p. 780-791.
* Balfour, vol. ii. p. 142-145.
AD. 1627.] OF SCOTLAND. 837
sent down to Scotland, with a commission to obtain gratuitous
surrenders, but that he was intimidated by the threatened
opposition of the chief impropriators, and returned to court
without executing his instructions. The historian adds that,
if Nithsdale had persevered, it was the intention of the nobles
opposed to him to massacre him and his friends. This last
statement, however, would require better evidence, than he
gives, to support it. ^
The king was more successful in accomplishing his design
of procuring a better maintenance for the clergy and relieving
the smaller landholders of the kingdom from the exactions of
the impropriators. The tithes at this time were more
rigidly exacted by their lay-owners, than ever they had
been during the most corrupt times of the hierarchy; yet
these persons grudged the small portion which the law com-
pelled them to bestow on the clergy. This grievance gave
rise to many complaints, and the king obliged the impropria-
tors, as well as the other parties concerned, to enter into an
arbitration, by which they agreed to abide by the judgment to
be pronounced by himself in the matter. After long and de-
liberate consideration, he gave forth his sentence in a series of
decrees, which still continue to regulate the right to tithes,
and the payment of the stipends to the ministers of the
established Church in Scotland. By these judgments, re-
lief was given to the persons aggrieved, and the clergy were
provided with a regular permanent endowment, derived from
the fund set apart for their maintenance in former days ; but
many of the nobility were indignant at being deprived of a por-
tion of their sacrilegious gains, and thenceforth watched for an
opportunity of requiting the fancied injury on their sovereign.
The arrangement as to the tithes was ratified by parliament in
1630 ; and its justice and benevolence are now acknowledged
by all parties. 2
Thomas Knox, Bishop of the Isles, died in 1628, and was
succeeded by Dr John Leslie, a descendant of the house of
Balquhain in Aberdeenshire, and at that time rector of St
Faith's, London. In 1633, Dr. Leslie was translated to the
1 Burnet's History of his Own Time, Routh's ed. vol. i. pp. 34, 35.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. v. pp. 189-207, 218, 219. Cook,
vol. ii. p. 330-332. Napier's Montrose and the Covenanters, vol. i. p. 78-91.
VOL. II.] 23
338 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLYII.
see of Eaphoe, vacant by the decease of Andrew Knox, for-
merly Bishop of the Isles ; and, on the seventeenth of October
in that year, the usual royal license to elect was issued to the
chapter of the Isles, accompanied by a recommendation of
Neil Campbell, minister at Kilmichael, in the deanery of
Glassery, and son of Neil Campbell, sometime Bishop of
Argyll, who was accordingly chosen. During the episcopate
of Bishop Campbell, King Charles gave directions for restor-
ing the cathedral of lona, but the execution of this pious
design was prevented by the breaking out of the rebellion. ^
James Law, Archbishop of Glasgow, died in the beginning
of November, 1632, and was succeeded by Patrick Lindsay,
Bishop of Hoss. Dr. John Maxwell, one of the ministers of
Edinburgh, was nominated to the see of Eoss.^
During the earlier years of the reign of Charles, the practi-
cal toleration in regard to the Perth articles, which prevailed
in most of the dioceses, was producing a good effect. Kneeling
at the Communion became more common, and the holy-days
were better observed ; and, if the people had not been alarmed
by the dread of farther innovations, the articles might gradu-
ally have been established. But they had good reason to
believe that a wish was still entertained by the king and his
advisers of bringing the Scottish Church to an entire con-
formity with that of England ; and a numerous and increasing
political party, which was dissatisfied with the government,
eagerly strove to inflame the ecclesiastical controversies.
There seemed, however, but little prospect of successful oppo-
sition to royal and episcopal authority.
The decease of Bruce took place in August, 1631 ; and John
Forbes, formerly minister at Alford, died in Holland, about
the year 1634. ^ The most learned men in the Church were
^ Original Letters of the reign of James the Sixth, preface, p. xlii. Keith's
Catalogue, p. 308-310. Calendar of State Papers, Domestic Series, of the
reign of Charles the First, 1628-29, p. 211. Collectanea de rebus Albanicis, pp.
184, 188. In one of the documents printed in the Collectanea, the king orders
Sir Lachlan Maclean of Duart to restore to the see of the Isles the island of lona,
which his family had unjustly seized. In another he enjoins the Bishop of
Eaphoe to deliver to Bishop Campbell two bells which Bishop Andrew Knox had
carried with him from lona to Ireland.
2 Keith's Catalogue, pp. 202, 264, 265. Balfour, vol. ii. p. 192.
• Wodrow's Life of Bruce, p. 140. M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. ii. p. 448.
A.D. 1632.] OF SCOTLAND. 339
now arrayed among the defenders of Episcopacy and the Perth
articles, and very few of those who opposed them had much
reputation for ability. One name, however, was now attract-
ing attention. David Dickson, the son of a merchant in
Glasgow, after teaching for some years in the university of that
city, had been appointed minister at Irvine in 1618. His re-
sistance to the ceremonies, as the Perth articles were called,
brought him under the notice of his diocesan, the Archbishop
of Glasgow. In the year 1622, he was summoned before the
court of High Commission, deprived of his benefice, and or-
dered to reside at Turriff in Aberdeenshire. This sentence
was remitted, within little more than a year, at the interces-
sion of his congregation at Irvine and of the Earl of Eglin-
ton, and he was allowed to return to his former ministry.
The account which Wodrow gives of the effects of Dick-
son's teaching was written nearly a century afterwards, and is
marked by the phraseology of the school to which its author
belonged, but there is no reason to question its substantial
accuracy. " At Irvine," he says, " Mr. Dickson's ministry
was singularly countenanced of God. Multitudes were con-
vijiced and converted; and few that lived in his day were
more honoured to be instruments of conversion than he.
People, under exercise and soul concern, came from every
place about Irvine, and attended upon his sermons ; and the
most eminent and serious Christians, from all corners of the
Church, came and joined with him at his communions, which
were indeed times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord
of these amiable institutions ; yea, not a few came from dis-
tant places and settled in Irvine, that they might be under the
drop of his ministry. Yet he himself used to observe, that
the vintage of Irvine was not equal to the gleanings, and not
once to be compared to the harvest at Ayr, in John Welsh's
time, when indeed the Gospel had wonderful success, in con-
viction, conversion, and confirmation. "^
The people of the south-western counties which formed of
old a portion of the British kingdom of Cumbria were now
developing that peculiar ecclesiastical character by which they
were long distinguished. They were ardently attached to the
1 Wodrow's Life of Dickson — Select Biographies, edited for the Wodrow
Society, vol. ii. p. 5-8. Calderwood, vol. vii. pp. 530-542, 567, 56S.
340 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVII.
Presbyterian discipline and worship, and their devotional feel-
ings were easily excited to fanaticism. Dickson preached on
Mondays as well as on Sundays, and many persons came to
hear him, not only from the town of Irvine, but from the
neighbouring country. The inhabitants of Stewarton, a parish
near Irvine, were particularly affected by his sermons and
those of other ministers who sympathized with him; and hence
the state of mind and feeling, which was thus produced, re-
ceived the name of the Stewarton sickness, and those
who shared in it were called by their opponents the mad
people of Stewarton. The excitement appears to have reached
a height in June, 1630, at a great gathering on the occa-
sion of a communion in the parish of Shotts, in Clydes-
dale, which was attended by Bruce and others. The com-
munions were the chief seasons of preaching among the Pres-
byterians, and they were used as opportunities for collecting
together the adherents of the party, not only ministers, but
professors also, as the lay people were styled. Archbishop
Law did what he could to discourage these proceedings in his
diocese, which were dangerous in a political, as well as in an
ecclesiastical point of view, but it does not appear that he at-
tempted actually to prohibit them. The preachers were, sup-
ported, not only by the popular feeling, but by the encourage-
ment of several men of high rank, and still more by that of
the female members of various noble families.^
Among those present at the communion at Shotts were two
ministers, Robert Blair and John Livingstone. The former,
the son of a gentleman of good family residing at Irvine,
was bom in 1593. He was educated at the University of
Glasgow, and was afterwards one of the regents in the college
there. He was a diligent student ; and a careful examination
of the controversies of the day confirmed the Presbyterian
opinions in which he had been brought up. His zeal was in-
creased by a journey which he made to the North in order to
confer with Bruce and Dickson, then in their temporary exile
at Inverness and Turriff. He was intimate with Robert
Boyd, the principal of his college ; but on Cameron being ap-
* Wodrow's Life of Dickson — Select Biographies, edited for the Wodrow
Society, vol. ii. p. 8- Life of John Livingstone, ibid. vol. i. pp. 138, 145.
Wodrow's Life of Bruce, p. 140. . Life of Robert Blair, p. 19.
A.D. 1632.] OF SCOTLAND. 341
pointed in room of Boyd, a dispute arose between them, and
Blair resigned his office.
A Scottish gentleman of the name of Hamilton had, through
the favour of King James, acquired large possessions in Ire-
land, and had been ennobled in that country by the title of
Viscount Claneboy. By him Blair was invited to come over
to Ulster, and to take an appointment as minister at Bangor.
After hesitating for some time, he accepted the invitation.
The sea-coast of Ulster was at that time filled with Scottish
colonists, most of them adventurers of broken fortune and dis-
solute character, and whose religion, so far as they had any,
was the Presbyterianism of their own country. Blair was
willing to labour among them, but he informed his patron
that he could not submit to episcopal government, or use any
part of the English Liturgy. According to his own account,
he was equally plain with Bishop Echlin of Down, in whose
diocese his new residence was. That prelate, who was a
Scotsman by birth, made no objection. '^ I hear good of you,"
he said, " and will impose no conditions upon you ; I am old,
and can teach you ceremonies, and you can teach me sub-
stance. Only I must ordain you, else neither I nor you can
answer the law, or enjoy the land." Blair answered that that
was contrary to his principles, to which the bishop replied,
" Whatever you account of Episcopacy, yet I know you account
a presbyter to have divine warrant ; will you not receive ordi-
nation from Mr. Cunningham and the adjacent brethren, and
let me come in amongst them in no other relation than a pres-
byter ?" " This," Blair says, " I could not refuse, and so the
matter was performed."
Blair appears to have seen nothing wrong in obtaining ad-
mission to a cure in the Irish Church in this manner ; but he
went still farther, and endeavoured to impose his own Presby-
terian usages on others. He mentions that, at his first cele-
bration of the Lord's Supper at Bangor, the noble lord his
patron, and his lady, wished to communicate kneeling ; that
he endeavoured, in vain, to dissuade them ; and that he finally
arranged the matter by a sort of compromise.
In 1630, Blair made a visit to Scotland, and assisted at the
communion at Shotts. His presence there having become
known. Bishop Echlin suspended him from his office on that
342 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XL VII.
account, or for some other irregularity. The suspension,
lie says, was taken off at the request of Archbishop Usher ;
but he was soon afterwards cited before his diocesan and de-
posed. He attempted to obtain a reversal of the sentence by
a personal application to the king. He succeeded in procur-
ing a temporary relaxation, but was finally deposed a second
time in 1634. On this occasion, he says, " I cited the bishop
to appear before the tribunal of Jesus Christ, to answer for
that wicked deed. To which he replied, ' I appeal from jus-
tice to mercy.' ^ But,' said I, ' your appellation is like to be
rejected, seeing you act against the light of your conscience.' "
The bishop died in the following year, and was succeeded by
Henry Leslie, Dean of Down, also a Scotsman by birth, but
whose ecclesiastical principles were very difierent from those
of his predecessor. 1
John Livingstone, like Blair, wrote an account of his own
life. He was the son of William Livingstone, minister at
Kilsyth, who could trace his descent from the chief branch
of the family whose name he bore. Livingstone was born
in 1603, and was educated at the grammar school of Stirling
and the University of Glasgow. He was brought up in strong
aversion to Episcopacy and the ceremonies, and, when a stu-
dent at Glasgow, refused to kneel at the communion, though
enjoined to do so by Archbishop Law. He began to preach in
1625, and, having been prevented by the bishops from obtaining
a parochial charge, officiated for some time at the house of
Cumbernauld, under the protection of the Earl and Countess
of Wigton. Soon after the communion at Shotts, he was
invited by Lord Claneboy to accept a call to the parish of
Killinshie, in the diocese of Down. As Bishop Echlin
required that he should be ordained, and was now more
strict than he was some years before, Livingstone applied
to Andrew Knox, Bishop of Raphoe, formerly Bishop of
the Isles. He states that he brought letters to the bishop
from Lord Claneboy, the Earl of Wigton, and others^ ; and
that he was ordained in the same irregular fashion as Blair,
Knox saying that he thought his old age was prolonged
^ Life of Eobert Blair, pp. 7, 16, 39-46, 51, 54, 58-60, 90,91, 101, 102, 112.
See also M'Crie's Life of Melville, vol. ii. p. 293, and Mant's History of the
Cburcb of Leland, vol. i. p. 514.
A.D. 1632.] OF SCOTLAND. 343
for little other purpose than to do such offices, and desiring
him to draw a line through any passage in the Ordinal which
he objected to.
At Killinshie Livingstone conducted everything in the
Presbyterian manner, even appointing elders and deacons,
and going to Antrim once a month to attend a sort of pres-
bytery which met there, consisting of ministers who held
similar opinions. He was suspended at the same time with
Blair ; and he confirms the statement of the latter that the
suspension was taken off by means of Archbishop Usher,
whom he calls " not only a learned but a godly man, though
a bishop." When Blair was deposed for the first time, the
same sentence was pronounced against Livingstone. He says
that they were accused both of non-conformity, and of stir-
ring up the people to " extasies and enthusianisms." He
denies the latter charge, stating that he and his friends did
not encourage such practices, because they suspected that
they did not proceed from the Spirit of God ; adding that
few of those so affected made any solid increase in religion,
but continued ignorant and profane. While application was
made to the king for a reversal of the sentence, Livingstone
went to Scotland and preached in various places, sometimes
in the parish churches, at other times at the private meetings
of the Presbyterians in Edinburgh, being supported by pe-
cuniary assistance which he received from the Countesses
of Wigton and Eglinton, and two other ladies. In November,
1635, he was finally deposed by Bishop Henry Leslie. *
Blair and Livingstone, having been deprived of their bene-
fices in Ireland, and seeing no prospect of a change of eccle-
siastical policy in Scotland, agreed, along with several of
* Life of John Livingstone — Select Biographies, edited for the Wodrow Society,
vol. i. pp. 129, 130, 133, 134, 136-138, 141-143, 145-148, 152. Bishop Mant
Bays (History of the Church of Ireland, vol. i. p. 453), "Among the records of
the Sovereign's Court of Prerogative in Duhlin, is deposited a regal Visitation
Book of the diocese of Down and Connor in the year 1633. From this it appears
that amongst several other clergymen, ordained by Kobert Echlin, the bishop of
the diocese at that period, Kobert Blair had been admitted by him in 1623 to
the holy orders of deacon and of priest, and John Livingstone had been admitted
in 1630 to the same orders, by Andrew, Bishop of Raphoe. This authentic
document takes no notice of any deviation from the regular form of ordination
prescribed by law." He expresses a doubt, in consequence, how far the narratives
of Blair and Livingstone are to be trusted on this point.
344 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVU.
their friends, to emigrate to New England, whither they were
invited by letters from the governor and council. They
built a ship near Belfast, to which they gave the name of the
Eagle Wing, and sailed in September, 1636, accompanied by
their wives and families. After being detained for some time,
they had a favourable gale which carried them so far across
the Atlantic that they were nearer Newfoundland than any
part of Europe ; but they were then driven back by a hurricane,
and obliged to return to Ireland. " We could not imagine,"
says Livingstone, ^' what to make of such a dispensation, yet
we were confident that the Lord would let us see something
that would abundantly satisfy us." ^
The king, who had proposed to visit Scotland in the begin-
ning of his reign, but had been prevented by various causes
from doing so, was able to carry out his intention in the
summer of 1633. He was accompanied by Dr. Laud, Bishop
of London, Dr. White, Bishop of Ely, and a numerous retinue
of English and Scottish nobles and gentlemen, and arrived at
Edinburgh on Saturday the fifteenth of June. On the follow-
ing day he attended divine service at the chapel royal, when
the Bishop of Dunblane officiated. On Tuesday the eighteenth,
his coronation took place in the abbey church of Hol3n:ood.
It was celebrated with the greatest solemnity and magnifi-
cence. The king was received at the western door of the church
by the Archbishop of St. Andrews and other prelates, and the
choristers of the chapel royal, and was conducted into the nave
by the dean of the chapel. The sermon was preached by the
Bishop of Brechin, and the coronation oath was administered
by the archbishop, after which the hymn Veni Creator Spiritus
was sung. The Litany having been said by the Bishops of
Murray and Ross, the king was anointed by the archbishop,
and invested with the royal robes, and girt with the sword.
The archbishop then placed the crown on the king's head, and
the sceptre in his hand, and blessed and enthronized him, while
the peers and bishops did homage, and the people promised
obedience. The ceremony was concluded with the celebration
of the Eucharist, the king receiving the Communion with
great reverence. The whole ritual resembled that used in
^ Life of Robert Blair, p 104-108. Life of John Livingstone— Select Biogra-
phies, edited for the Wodrow Society, vol. i. p. 153-156.
AD. 1633.] OF 6C0TLAND. 345
England, from which it was no doubt taken ; but it is probable
that in this office, as in others, the ancient Scottish use dififered
little from the English form, and that the coronation of King
Charles was in its chief circumstances similar to the cere-
monial used in crowning his royal predecessors from the time
of David 11. 1
The parliament met immediately after the coronation, and
various acts were passed, among others, a statute ratifying the
powers formerly conferred on the sovereign to regulate the
apparel of churchmen. This provision was opposed by a
considerable number of the members. Burnet asserts that
a majority actually voted against it, and that the king, though
aware of this, forbade the contrary declaration of the Clerk
Register to be questioned, unless those who did so would
undertake to prove that the record was falsified — an aver-
ment which, if proved, inferred a capital offence in the official
accused, and, if not proved, a like crime in the person accu-
sing him. Row mentions that the negative votes were
thought by some to equal the affirmative, and, without ques-
tioning the king's sincerity, adds a statement about his for-
bidding all inquiry, A rumour to a similar effect was circu-
1 Balfour, vol. ii. p. 193-198. See also Balfour, vol, iv. p. 383403, where a
minute and most interesting account is given of the coronation of King Charles
— the only occasion on which a Scottish sovereign was crowned by a primate of
the Keformed Church. Balfour was present at the solemnity as Lord Lion,
King-at-Arms. Compare the English offices of Coronation in the third volume
of Mr. Maskell's Monumenta Ritualia. Rushworth mentions (Historical
Collections, vol, ii. p. 182) that at the coronation Laud was "high in his
carriage, taking upon him the order and management of the ceremonies ;" and,
in particular, that the Archbishop of St. Andrews being placed at the king's
right hand, and the Archbishop of Glasgow at his left, he thrust the latter
away, saying, " Are you a churchman, and want the coat of your order?" and
put the Bishop of Ross in his place. There can be no doubt that the Bishop of
London had been consulted in regard to the whole arrangements , and the special
circumstance mentioned is not improbable in itself. Laud's hasty temper and
his love of ceremonial are sufficient to explain it. But it does not appear what
authority Rushworth had for his statement, and it may only have been one of
those untrue or exaggerated stories so frequently circulated at the time. In Sir
James Balfour's minute narrative of the coronation it does not appear that any
special place was assigned to Archbishop Lindsay ; and Spalding (Memorials of
the Troubles, Spalding Club ed. vol, i. pp. 36, 37), after referrmg to those bishops
who took part in the ceremony, adds that "the Archbishop of Glasgow and
remanent of the bishops there present, who were not in service, changed not
their habit, but wore their black gowns without rochets or white sleeves,"
346 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVII.
lated after the king's return to England by the party in
opposition to the court, and the accusation called forth an
indignant denial from Charles. Even had he been capable of
doing such a thing, it is improbable that the attempt would
have been made in the face of a hostile majority to whom the
fact must have been known. Under the powers conferred by
the statute, the king, in the month of October following, sent
an order to Scotland, by which the archbishops and bishops
were enjoined to wear in church a rochet and lawn-sleeves,
as they had done at the coronation, and the inferior clergy
to preach in their black gowns, but to wear the surplice when
reading divine service, christening, burying, or celebrating
the Communion. So far as the inferior clergy were concerned,
there is no appearance of any attempt having been made to
enforce this order. ^
On Sunday, the twenty-third of June, when the king
attended the church of St. Giles, two of his English chap-
lains read the service in the Book of Common Prayer, and
the Bishop of ]\Iurray preached in his episcopal habit. On
the following day, being the feast of St. John the Bap-
tist, he went in state to the chapel royal, and, after making
his offering, touched more than a hundred persons for the
king's evil. On Sunday, the thirtieth of June, Dr. Laud,
Bishop of London, preached in the chapel royal. His dis-
course. Clarendon says, was chiefly "upon the benefit of
conformity, and the reverend ceremonies of the Church, and
was received with all the marks of approbation and applause
imaginable." On the first of July, Charles left Edinburgh,
and made a progress as far as Perth. While he was on this
journey, the Bishop of London visited St. Andrews and
Dunblane. The king returned to England about the middle
of July, and soon afterwards, on the death of Archbishop
Abbot, Laud was translated to the see of Canterbury. ^
^ Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. v. pp. 20, 21. Burnet, vol. i. pp.
36, 37. Row, p. 367. King Charles's Large Declaration, p. 12. The charge
against the king is examined by Mr. Napier (Montrose and the Covenanters,
vol. i. p. 521-526), who shews that Burnet's version of the story, which has
so often been repeated, has no authority whatever.
2 Balfour, vol. ii. p. 201-204. Laud's Works, Anglo-Catholic Library, vol,
iii.p. 218. Clarendon, ed. 1826, -vol. i. p. 147. Row, pp. 363, 369. Row men-
tions that Laud was made a burgess of Perth, but tliat he relused to4:ake the usual
^'^' 1633.] OF SCOTLAND. 347
On the eighth of October, certain articles were issued bj
the king regarding the mode of celebrating divine service in
the chapel royal. This was done, according to Kushworth, at
the request of the newly appointed Archbishop of Canterbury.
The articles ordered that the dean of the chapel should always
assist the Archbishop of St. Andrews at the coronation of the
kings of Scotland, and that the form recently used should be
carefully preserved by him. Choral service was to be said
twice a day according to the English Liturgy, until a Scottish
office should be prepared. The Communion was to be cele-
brated the first Sunday of every month; communicants were
to receive the sacrament kneeling; and copes were to be used
at the celebration.^
One important ecclesiastical occurrence is connected with
the visit of King Charles to Scotland. More than four
hundred years had elapsed since a bishopric had been founded
in the northern kingdom. That portion of the diocese of St.
Andrews, which was fonnerly the archdeaconry of Lothian,
was now erected by the king into a separate diocese, having
for its cathedral the collegiate church of St. Giles in Edin-
burgh. By the charter of erection and endowment, which is
dated the twenty-ninth day of September, 1633, he declared
that, at the request of the Archbishop of St. Andrews, he had
established the new diocese for the glory of God, and the good
of the Church, in his ancient and native kingdom of Scotland.
burgher oath " to defend the true Protestant Eefonned religion," saying that it
was his part rather to exact of them an oath for religion. The historian adds
that, when the archbishop visited the cathedral of Dunblane, he said it was a
goodly church ; and, on a bystander adding, "Yes, my lord, this was a brave
church before the Reformation," Laud exclaimed, " What, fellow ! Deforma-
tion, not Reformation."
1 Rushworth, vol. ii. p. 205. In regard to the arrangements of the choir of
the chapel royal, the following information is given in a document presented to
the king, dated, Whitehall, 24th January, 1632, and printed from the ori-
ginal ^ in the Register House :— " In time of service within the chapel, the
organist and all the singing men are in black gowns, the boys are in sad
coloured coats, and the usher, and sexton, and vestry keeper, are in brown
gowns. The singing men do sit in seats, lately made, before the noblemen, and
the boys before them, with their books laid as in your majesty's chapel here.
One of the great Bibles is placed in the middle of the chapel for the reader, the
other before the dean. There is sung before sermon a full anthem, and after
sermon an anthem alone in versus with the organ." See Dauney's Ancient
Sottish Melodies p. 365-367.
MS ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Cuap. XLVIL
Its bishop was to be styled Bishop of Edinburgh, and to be
one of the suffragans of the primatial see. He was to give
special assistance in matters ecclesiastical to his metropolitan,
and to discharge in some measure the office of Chancellor to
him, and on that account was to have precedence among the
prelates, immediately after the two archbishops. In the same
way the Bishop of Galloway was to assist the Metropolitan of
Glasgow, and to take precedence next to the Bishop of Edin-
burgh. The principal minister of the church of {St. Giles as
dean, and twelve other ministers of the diocese as prebendaries,
were to form the chapter of the bishopric. ^
In order that the church of St. Giles might be better fitted
to be the cathedral of the new see, the magistrates of Edin-
burgh received special injunctions from the king to cast down
the partition wall between the chancel and the nave, by means
of which, according to the common Presbyterian fashion, it had
been divided into two portions, called the Great and the Little
Kirk. The prescribed restoration took place accordingly. ^
Soon after the erection, Charles intimated the choice which he
had made in the nomination of a bishop. Dr. William Forbes
had preached before him at Edinburgh. An abstract of the
sermon has been preserved, and it is important, not only on
account of the solemnity of the occasion, but also as marking
the character which Scottish theology was now beginning to
assume. The text was from the twenty-seventh verse of the
fourteenth chapter of St. John's Gospel, '' Peace I leave
with you ; my peace I give unto you : not as the world
givethj'give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled,
neither let it be afraid." The preacher described the
nature of that peace which our Lord left to his Church,
and then alluded to the grievous change which had come
over Christendom in his own day — to the disputes among
princes, the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome, and the quar-
rels of the Reformed with each other. Referring to par-
ticular matters of controversy, he condemned the eagerness
with 'which positive opinions were laid down regarding Pre-
destination, and Divine Grace, and the manner in which the
Body of Christ was present in the Eucharist. He pointed
* See charter of erection in Keith's Catalogue, p. 44-60.
Row, pp. 369, 370.
A.D. 1633.] OF BCOTLAND. 349
out the folly of resisting the voice of the universal Church,
and the decrees of lawful authority, in respect of rites and
ceremonies, and the absurdity of opposing a uniform Liturgy,
and prescribed form of administering the sacraments, especially
where the offices thus set at nought were derived from the
ancient Liturgies of the Christian Church. He denounced the
prevalence of sacrilege, and the covetousness of those who,
professing to abhor idolatry, robbed the Church and the
poor of their property ; declaring that such conduct was like
the persecution of Julian, which was worse than that of
Diocletian, inasmuch as the one destroyed priests, while the
other overthrew the priesthood.^
The king was much pleased with this sermon, and, as the
high attainments and eminent virtues of the preacher were
well known to his ecclesiastical advisers. Dr. Forbes was
nominated to the see of Edinburgh. His appointment took
place in January, 1634 ; and, once more leaving Aberdeen,
he repaired to his cathedral city, and, in the beginning
of February, was consecrated in the chapel royal at Holy-
rood.
The first bishop of Edinburgh had hardly an opportunity
of shewing how far he possessed the qualities necessary for
the episcopate at that trying period. In the beginning of
March he sent a mandate to his clergy to celebrate the Com-
munion on the Easter day following, enjoining them to take it
themselves on their knees and so give a good example to the
people, and to minister the elements out of their own hands to
every one of the communicants. He was soon afterwards
seized with a severe illness, for which the skill of his physicians
could find no remedy. He prepared himself for his departure
by confession of his sins with priestly absolution, and by the
reception of the Eucharist, and expired on the twelfth of
April, being the Saturday after Easter. He was buried with-
in the cathedral church of St. Giles, near the place where the
^ See the abstract of the sermon, printed by Dr. Garden as an appendix to
his Life of Dr. John Forbes, p. 290-294. It was preached in the chapel royal,
on the twenty-fifth of June : and Spalding mentions (Memorials of the Troubles,
vol. i. pp. 39, 40) that he preached in his black gown ; that the English service
was said before and after the sermon ; that the chaplains and novices wore their
surplices ; that the Bishop of Dunblane, as dean of the chapel, had his rochet
and lawn sleeves ; and that the other Scottish bishops wore their black gowns.
350 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVII.
altar formerly stood, and his faneral sermon was preached by
his friend Thomas Sydserf, then Dean of Edinburgh. ^
Few, except the Puritans of his own day, have spoken of
this prelate otherwise than in terms of the highest commenda-
tion. Often as his character by Bishop Burnet has been
quoted, no notice of his life can be complete without it.
" William Forbes," he states, " was promoted by the late
king, while he was in Scotland in the year 1633, to the
bishopric of Edinburgh, that was then founded by him, so that
that glorious king said on good ground, that he had found out
a bishop that deserved that a see should be made for him. He
was a grave and eminent divine ; my father that knew him
long, and being of counsel for him in his law matters had
occasion to know him well, has often told me that he never
saw him but he thought his heart was in heaven, and he was
never alone with him, but he felt within himself a commentary
on these words of the Apostle, ' Did not our hearts burn within
us while He yet talked with us, and opened to us the Scrip-
tures ?' He preached with a zeal and vehemence that made
him often forget all the measures of time ; two or three hours
was no extraordinary thing for him ; those sermons wasted his
strength so fast, and his ascetical course of life was such, that
he supplied it so scantily that he died within a year after his
promotion ; so he only appeared there long enough to be
known, but not long enough to do what might have been other-
wise expected from so great a prelate. That little remnant of
his that is in print shews how learned he was. I do not deny
but his earnest desire of a general peace and union among all
Christians has made him too favourable to many of the cor-
ruptions in the Church of Rome ; but, though a charity that
is not well balanced may carry one to very indiscreet things,
yet the principle from whence they flowed in him was so truly
good, that the eiTors to which it carried him ought to be either
excused, or at least to be very gently censured." ^
^ Life of Bishop William Forbes, prefixed to the Considerationes Modestae et
Pacificse. Garden's Life of Dr. John Forbes, p. 19. Spalding, vol. i. p. 45.
Row, p. 370-373. According to the writers of the Lives, Bishop Forbes died on
the first of April ; but the twelfth of April is the true date, as is evident from Row
and Spalding.
' Preface to the Life of Bishop Bedell. The opinions of various writers re-
garding Bishop Forbes are collected by Mr. Joseph Robertson and myself, in a
A.D. 1634.] OF SCOTLAND. 351
Allusion is made in this passage to a work written by
Bishop Forbes. Its full title is " Considerationes Modestse
et Pacificae Controversiarum de Justificatione, Purgatorio,
Invocatione Sanctorum et Christo Mediatore, Eucharistia.^'
It formed a part of his divinity lectures at Marischal Col-
lege, and was first published at London in 1658, with a
Life of the author, by Sydserf, Bishop of Galloway. The
opinions maintained in this work were in several respects
peculiar to the writer, and not shared by the rest of the Aber-
deen divines. There is no reason whatever to suppose that
he thought of joining the Church of Kome, and the charge is
denied in the strongest manner by his biographer ; but it is
probable that he allowed himself in some points to extenuate
the errors of that communion, and to speak of a reconciliation
with it in terms much more hopeful than the circumstances
warranted. We know that he disapproved altogether of the
manner in which the Eeformation had been carried on. He
often said that if there had been more like Cassander and
Wicelius, there would have been no need for Luther and
Calvin.
Bishop Forbes's treatise was the first Scottish theological
work in which the writings of the Anglican divines were
constantly appealed to as authorities. Among those repeatedly
quoted are Andrews, Field, Jackson, White, and Montague.
The opinions of Forbes himself, on some important points,
may be understood from the high terms in which he speaks of
the first Prayer Book of King Edward VI., and the regret
note to Gordon's History of Scots Affairs, vol. iii. p. 241-243- The account
Bishop Forbes, given by Burnet in the History of his Own Time, is one of the many
instances of the different spirit evinced by that writer in his earlier and later works.
It is as follows : — " While the king was in Scotland, be erected a new bishopric
at Edinburgh, and made one Forbes bishop, who was a very learned and pious
man ; he had a strange faculty of preaching five or six hours at a time ; his way
of life and devotion was thought monastic, and his learning lay in antiquity ; he
studied to be a reconciler between the Papists and Protestants, leaning rather to
the first, as appears by his Considerationes Modestse ; he was a very simple man
and knew little of the world: so he fell into several errors in conduct, but died
soon after, suspected of Popery, which suspicion was increased by his son's turn-
ing Papist." (History, vol. i. p. 38.) What the errors of conduct were into
which Bishop Forbes fell, Burnet leaves his readers to conjecture. Even in mat-
ters of small importance the difference between the Preface to Bedell's Life and
the History is apparent. The two or three hours' sermons of the former become
five or six in the latter.
S52 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap XLVII.
whicii he expresses that the English bishops had yielded to
the suggestions of Bucer in the adoption of a less primitive
Liturgy. 1
Bishop Forbes's biographer and Dr. Garden mention that,
besides the Considerationes, he wrote Animadversions on the
works of Bellarmine. These Animadversions, written on
the margins of a copy of the cardinal's works, were, after
the author's death, in possession of Dr. Baron, who thought
them superior to any other answers to the great Roman
doctor, and intended to prepare them for the press, but
was prevented by the troubles which ensued. Garden adds
that it was not known what had become of them. It is
probable that they were carried off by the Covenanters when
they took possession of Dr. Baron's papers. 2
* The orthodoxy and impartiality of Bishop Forbes's work are defended in the
preface to it, written by Bishop Sydserf, and in the Life of the aiithor, which
probably iwas also the composition of the same prelate; and by Dr. Garden in his
Life of Dr. John Forbes. The following is the judgment of a vehement adver-
sary regarding the opinions maintained by Dr. Forbes : — " If this man had left
in legacy a confession of his faith, ye would have seen a strange miscellany, far-
rago, and hotch-potch of Popery, Arminianism, Lutheranism, and what not.
Maxwell, Sydserf, and Mitchell, were never heard to utter any unsound hetero-
dox doctrine, except in relation to prelacy and the ceremonies, till Forbes came
to Edinburgh. But then it was taught — the Pope is not Antichrist — a Papist
living and dying such may be saved— Christ descended locally to hell — Christ
died for all, intentionally to redeem all — there is universal grace — the saints
may fall from grace finally and totally — Christ is really present in the Sacra-
ment; verbum audimus, motum sentimus, modum nescimus; so they would
neither as yet speak out Consubstantiation or Transubstantiation — in honorem
sacerdotii, why not a minister meddle with secular affairs, be on parliament,
court, council, session, exchequer, commission, &c. ? — ministers' doctrine should
not be examined by the people, but seeing they watch for their souls, as they
that must give account, the people should believe what they preach to them.
All these doctrines and many more, we heard with our ears uttered in that most
eminent watch-tower of this kirk." (Row, pp. 371, 372.) A writer, well quali-
fied to appreciate both the strength and the weakness of Bishop Forbes's
arguments, expresses the following opinion : — " William Forbes wrote his Disser-
tations, and Herbert Thomdike his Weights and Measures, with the prospect
of effecting such a measure [reunion with the Roman Catholic Churchj on terms
not wholly inconsistent with their Church-of-England feelings. This, however,
was visionary ; it was, in tnith, the fruit of despair, and, perhaps, cherished by
insidious assurances from Roman Catholic emissaries." (Remains of Alexander
Knox, second ed. vol. i. p. 62.)
2 Life of Bishop William Forbes, prefixed to the Considerationes Modestae et
Pacific^. Garden's Life of Dr. John Forbes, p. 20. Gordon's Scots Affairs,
Tol. iii. p. 235-237.
A.D. 1635.] OF SCOTLAND. 353
The successor of Bishop Forbes in the diocese of Edin-
burgh was Dr. Lindsay, Bishop of Brechin ; and ' Thomas
Sjdserf, Dean of Edinburgh, was appointed to the see of
Brechin. The installation of Bishop Lindsay, and the conse-
cration of Bishop Sydserf, took place at Edinburgh on the
same day — the twenty-ninth of July. *
On the decease of the Earl of Kinnoul, Chancellor of Scot-
land, the Archbishop of St. Andrews was named Chancellor,
in January, 1635. No churchman had held that dignity since
the Reformation ; and the promotion of Spottiswood excited
great murmurs, not only among the Presbyterians, who pro-
fessed to condemn the union of ecclesiastical and secular func-
tions in the same person, but also among the nobles, who had
become accustomed to regard the high offices of state as
exclusively their own. The chancellors had frequently
thwarted the ecclesiastical policy of the sovereign, and hin-
dered the execution of measures which were thought condu-
cive to the good of the Church. The new appointment was
probably made to obviate such evils, but the dissatisfaction
which it caused was much more than sufficient to counterbal-
ance any good that could have resulted in this respect. No
one knew the prevalent feeling of the country better than the
primate himself. On a former occasion he had expressed his
reluctance to accept the office, and in consenting to take
it at a more advanced age, and in a more perilous time, he
either allowed his usual prudence to be overmastered by his
ambition, or yielded to what the command of his sovereign
left him no means of avoiding. ^
Andrew Lamb, Bishop of Galloway, died in the beginning
of the year 1635. In the month of June, Bishop Sydserf was
translated to Galloway, and Dr. Walter Whitford, Sub-dean
of Glasgow, was appointed Bishop of Brechin.^
Patrick Forbes, Bishop of Aberdeen, died in the same year.
From the time of his appointment, this eminent prelate de-
voted his whole attention to the government of his diocese.
He exerted himself to obtain fit persons for the vacant bene-
1 Row, p. 375.
2 Balfour, vol. ii. p. 222. Row, p. 385. See also Original Letters of the reign
of James the Sixth, vol. ii. p. 690.
3 Row, p. 388.
VOL. II.] 24
334 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVII.
fices, and to disjoin the parishes which had been united to
gratify the avarice of the gentry. In order to ascertain how
his clergy discharged their duties, it was his practice to visit
the various cures without previous notice, the first intimation
being generally his appearance in church on the Sunday. He
held his diocesan synods twice in the year ; and on these occa-
sions, before any other business was taken up, he requested
his clergy, if they knew anything wrong in his conduct, to use
all freedom with him, to warn him in private of secret errors,
and, if they were public, to mention them openly. He de-
voted particular attention to the restoration of the University
of Aberdeen, and of Bishop Elphinstone's foundation of King's
College. The ancient usages of the university had been
abolished by the reformers, and it had become a mere school
for the teaching of languages and philosophy. The bishop, in
virtue of his office of chancellor of the university, re-established
its former constitution, so far as compatible with the change of
religion, and used his influence to procure the most eminent
scholars and divines to fill the various offices both in the uni-
versity and in the churches of his cathedral city.
The personal conduct of Bishop Forbes was in all respects
a model to the clergy and people of his diocese. He was par-
ticularly careful to preach every Sunday, knowing how im-
portant that duty was, and how much harm was done by the
remissness of those prelates who neglected it. His original
opinions in matters of doctrine remained for the most part un-
changed. He was averse to any alterations in litual, but,
when they had once been established by authority, he
strenuously enforced submission to them throughout his
diocese, and supported their observance by his influence in
the Church.
The approach of old age did not abate the vigorous exer-
tions of Bishop Forbes. Even after being struck with
paralysis, which disabled him entirely on one side, and made
it necessary for him to be carried from place to place in a
chair, he continued to preach, and to preside at the meetings
of his diocesan synod. He was afterwards entirely confined
to bed, but retained the power of speech and the full use of
his mental faculties to the last. Although suffering great
pain, he allowed no impatient word to escape his lips, but
A.D. 1635.] -OF SCOTLAND.
35o
conversed cheerfully with all who came to him, exhorting
them, as their father and pastor, to do their duty. In March,
1635, when he saw that his last hour was approaching, he
expressed his desire that the " health-giving viaticum of the
Holy Eucharist" should be ministered to him. His son. Dr.
John Forbes, who received the Communion with him, asked
whether he fully tasted the life-giving sweetness of the bread
of life. He answered, that he could say with Simeon, " Lord
now lettest Thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy
word, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation." When the
clergy and his family and domestics who wer^ present implored
his blessing, he laid the hand which he could still use on the
head of each of them, and, as they knelt, blessed them, and
commended them to God, in brief and fervent prayer. When
he was told of the general supplications that were made for
his restoration to health, he answered in the words of St. Am-
brose, " I have not so long lived among you, that I am
ashamed to live, nor do I fear to die, since we have a lust
God." "^
On Good Friday, while they were engaged in meditating on
the Passion, his son reminded him of the prayer of our Lord,
'' Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit," and re-
marked that Christ not only commended to the Father his
own spirit, hypostatically united to his Godhead, but also the
soul of every faithful dying Christian. The bishop lifted up
his eyes, and said, '^Without doubt, this is the ti'ue interpre-
tation, and the very sense of the Lord's words, who prays for
us, and is always heard by the Father."
These circumstances are related by Dr. John Forbes ; and
what follows may best be told in his very words—" The even-
ing before his death I said to him, ' Father, your soul now
hears these most grateful words of our Saviour, Well done,
thou good and faithful servant, enter thou into the joy of thy
Lord. He will now give you the rest of the blessed, and will
put upon your head the unfading garland of glory. ^ He
answered in a very few words, for he had not strength to speak
much, ' May God grant this.' I then reminded him of
the words of Scripture, ^ Rise up my love, my fair one, and
come away.' I said, with this dearest call, and most gracious
invitation, his Saviour now called him, that he might hasten
356 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVII.
from this world of sin and sorrow to heaven, the atode of the
happiness and glory of God, that this night he would be with
Christ in Paradise. I earnestly besought him to rest and rely
upon this so consolatory and precious invitation now, as he
had often done before, when the journey to his house, to the
Lord Jesus, throu.s^h the valley of death, was drawing to a
close. He answered, ^ Best of journeys, the blessedness of
which so far beyond comparison transcends that of all others.'
" Subsequently, when the use of speech failed him, as long
as he was able to follow our words, while we spake of the
mercy of God, of the blessed death of those who die in the
Lord, of the heavenly mansions prepared for him by Christ, in
which he would soon be, and join the company of angels
and patriarchs, and apostles and martyrs, and of the other
blessed saints, and of the plenitude of joy which is there in the
presence of God, and of the eternal pleasure at his right hand
— as long, I say, as he was able to perceive our voices, he
shewed how much he was gratified by our meditations on
such heavenly subjects, whither his mind and all his wishes
were then tending, and how constantly he trusted in God, by
frequently lifting up the hand which was free from paralysis,
and raising his eyes to heaven. When I asked him, if we
who were present might kneel down, and together pour out
our souls before our heavenly Father, that He, of his bound-
less grace and unchangeable love of his servants in Christ,
would render his departure, which we all now saw was near,
a happy one, he raised himself as well as he was able, and
lifting his hand and his quivering eyes to heaven, he shewed
us by the most anxious and evident signs how agreeable and
acceptable this was to him, how deeply grateful our prayers
on his behalf were to him. We could clearly perceive by the
motion of his hand and eyes, and by the whole expression of
his countenance, that he joined in our prayers. After prayer
was ended, when we spoke close to his ear, he raised his hand
and eyes a little, but soon his sense of hearing, and all power
of motion left him. We stood around, looking on in tears,
and pouring out our whole souls to God, in prayer to God
having the consoling assurance, from what we had seen and
heard, of the certain happiness of his change. He most
placidly, as if in sleep, breathed out his blessed spirit, already
AD, 1635] OF SCOTLAND. S57
ripe for heaven, into the hands of his heavenly Father. 1
myself, as if I had looked on the dying patriarch Jacob of
old, kissed his soulless body, and moistening it with my tears
closed his eyes. There only remained for me the care of his
funeral obsequies."
Bishop Forbes died on the morning of Easter Eve, the
twenty-eighth day of March, 1635, being then in the seventy-
first year of his age. According to the usage of Aberdeen at
that time, his body was removed from the episcopal palace to
St. Ninian's chapel on the Castle-hill, where it lay in state for
some days. It was then carried back to Old Aberdeen, and
interred within the south transept of the cathedral, close by
the grave of Bishop Dunbar.^
It is almost needless to add anything regarding the charac-
ter of Bishop Forbes. His good deeds and his holy life have
been an abiding memorial. A volume was published at Aber-
deen soon after his decease, containing funeral sermons and other
tributes of regard and affection in Latin and English, in prose
and verse, by the most distinguished Scottish divines and
scholars of the time. Among these, no one spoke with more
sincerity than the primate, who knew that in the Bishop of
Aberdeen he had lost a counsellor and a friend, who shared his
opinions, and was ever ready to afford his sympathy and sup-
port. On the second of April, he thus wrote to Dr. John
Forbes — " In so necessary a time, to be bereaved of such
counsel and comfort as God had furnished him with — I mean
your worthy father — for the directing of some and the
strengthening of others, I know not what it portendeth to
our Church. When Bishop Elphinstone, the founder of
your college, was laid in his grave, the tradition is, that a
voice was heard cry, * Tecum, Gulielme, mitra sepelienda,' and
that the pastoral staff brake in pieces. He was certainly an
excellent man, and I may truly say, since him, unto your
father, there arose not the like in that church. What, say I,
in that church ? Every man can speak of that he hath known
and seen ; and for myself I speak truth — so wise, judicious, so
^ Garden's Life of Dr. John Forbes, p. 3-6. Burnet's Preface to the Life of
Bishop Bedell. Funerals of Bishop Patrick Forbes, Spottiswood Society ed, p.
297-302, and Biographical Memoir by Mr. C. Farquhar Shand, p. Ixxv.-xciv, Mr.
Shand s translation of the Latin sermon by Dr. John Forbes, containing the
account of the bishop's death, has been used in the text
358 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVIL
grave and graceful a pastor, I have not known in all my time,
in an J church."^
Bishop Forbes wrote several works on theological subjects,
and chiefly in connection with the Roman controversy, but
his merits as an author are of little account in comparison with
his high reputation as a prelate. ^ He was succeeded in the see
of Aberdeen by Adam Bellenden, Bishop of Dunblane. Dr.
James Wedderburn was appointed to the bishopric of Dun-
blane, and was consecrated in the beginning of the year 1636.
He was a native of Dundee, but was educated in England.
He resided for a long time with Isaac Casaubon, afterwards
taught divinity in St. Mary's College, St. Andrews, and was
made a prebendary of Ely by Bishop Andrews. 3
On the twenty-third day of May, 1635, the king granted
his royal waiTant, authorizing and enjoining a new Book of
Canons for the government of the Church of Scotland. These
canons were not published till the following year, but their
ratification was the first step in the series of ecclesiastical
measures which have become so memorable in the history of
our country.
* Funerals of Bishop Patrick Forbes, pp. 217, 218.
2 See an account of these works in Mr. Shand's Biographical Memoir, p.
xcviii.-cxvi.
3 Keith's Catalogue, p. 133. Heylin's Life of Archbishop Laud, ed. 1719,
part ii. p. 49. Laud's Works, vol. iii. p. 374; vol. vi. p. 455. Baillie's Can-
terburian's Self- Conviction, ed. 1641, p. 11.
A.D. 1635.] OF SCOTLAND. 359
CHAPTEE XLVIII.
FROM THE RATIFICATION OF THE BOOK OF CANONS IN MAY, 1635, TO THE
ACT OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL REGARDING THE BOOK OF COMMON
PRAYER IN DECEMBER, 1636.
State of the Scottish Church — Its Government^ Ritual^ and
Doctrines — The cathedral and parish churches — The
Book of Canons — Objections to the Canons — The Or-
dinal of 1636 — New warrant for the Court of High
Commission — Alleged diocesan Commission Courts —
Samuel Rutherford — Andrew Boyd, Bishop of Argyll —
John Burie^s attempt to unite the Lutheran and the
Reformed — Judgment of the Theological Facxdty of Aber-
deen on this subject — The divines of Aberdeen — Dr.
Alexander Scroggie — Dr. William Leslie — Dr. James
Sibbald — Dr. Alexander Ross — Dr. Robert Baron — Dr.
John Forbes — Education of Dr. John Forbes — His ordina-
tion— His theological teaching — PMication of his Ireni-
cum — Act of the Privy Council regarding the Booh of
Common Prayer.
A VALID episcopate liad now been established in Scotland for
twenty-five jears^ and various portions of the English ritual
had been introduced, but the ecclesiastical system still re-
tained many traces of the institutions of Knox and Melville.
The government of the Church was a mixture of Episcopacy
and Presbyterianism. In outward appearance the hierarchy
was again what it had been of old. The two archbishops
presided in their provinces over the same suffragan sees, and
the chapters discharged their former functions in the election
of bishops and the administration of the temporalities of the
cathedrals. But it was rather as the chief ecclesiastical
ministers under the king, than in virtue of their metropolitan
authority, that the archbishops claimed any peculiar rights ;
the clergy did not meet in provincial council ; and the privi-
lege of the chapters in the election of bishops was merely a
matter of form, the nomination belonging to the crown. The
titles of Dean and Archdeacon, and of the other capitular
360 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVIII.
dignitaries, had been restored, but the persons who held these
offices appeared in the ecclesiastical courts as mere parish
ministers : the bishops were the only prelates in the Keformed
communion.
Along with the archbishops and bishops, the deans and
chapters of the ancient Church, the new hierarchy of ec-
clesiastical synods, established by Melville, continued to exist.
The lowest of these was the Parochial Consistory or Kirk
Session, composed of the minister and his lay elders and
deacons. Above them was the Presbytery or Exercise, which
was justly regarded as the distinguishing feature of this sys-
tem. It had been proposed to take away the powers, and
even to suppress the name of the presbyteries, but these
courts remained as before, except that the bishop had the
right of appointing the moderator who presided at their
meetings, and that their members were the ministers of the
parishes which formed the presbytery, without lay elders.
The court immediately above the presbytery was that which
was formerly called the Provincial Assembly, but which was
now known as the Diocesan Synod. It was composed of all
the parochial ministers within the diocese, and the bishop
presided, either in person, or through a moderator specially
appointed by him. It was chiefly by means of this court that
the episcopal authority was maintained among the clergy and
laity. Highest of all was the General Assembly, which
could only meet when summoned by the king. The sup-
porters of Episcopacy held that the Primate was entitled to
act as moderator of the assembly, and that the bishops were
not subject to its jurisdiction. They were also desirous to
restrict its members to ecclesiastics, but, except in so far as
lay elders from the presbyteries were concerned, this could
hardly be reconciled with the constitution of the last assembly
at Perth, at which noblemen, barons, and the representatives
of burghs, had voted. Their opponents, on the other hand,
maintained that the members of the assembly were entitled to
choose their own moderator ; that its authority over the
bishops was expressly reserved, even by the acts of the
Glasgow synod of 1610 ; and that lay elders from the presby-
teries had as much a right to vote as ministers.
The ritual of the Reformed Church partook still less of the
A.D. 1635. OF SCOTLAND. 301
ancient forms. The only proper liturgical office which had
been introduced was the Ordinal, and, as its use was a matter
entirely within the power of the bishops, it w^as no doubt
strictly enforced. The daily offices, and the order for the
ministration of the Holy Communion, in the Book of Common
Prayer, were regularly observed in the chapel royal at Holy-
rood, and the former at least in St. Mary's College, St.
Andrews. The English Liturgy had also been used for some
time by Bishop Maxwell at Fortrose, and probably by some
others of the bishops in their cathedrals, but it does not appear
that it had been introduced into any of the parish churches.
The Book of Common Order, or what was called Knox's
Liturgy, was still in general use, though now in less esteem,
from the knowledge of its manifold deficiences on the one side,
and the increasing aversion to forms of prayer on the other.
The ancient ecclesiastical music was unknown, except in the
chapel royal, and the Psalter was only used in the shape of a
metrical translation.
The five articles of Perth had been established both by the
ecclesiastical and the secular authority, but they were still far
from being universally adopted. In certain cases the non-
observance of the two articles regarding holy-days and kneeling
at the Communion was expressly permitted 5 in many more it
was connived at by the bishops. It does not distinctly appear
how far the other articles were in use. Private Baptism was
probably not uncommon ; but Confirmation was entirely
neglected by the bishops themselves,^ and private Communion
seems to have been sought only in those cases where it was
recommended by individual clergymen, as it is known to have
been by Dr William Forbes, and the other divines of Aber-
deen.
A change of opinion, in a direction opposed to the Calvin-
istic views, had already begun regarding various matters of
doctrine, but the general belief both of the clergy and the
people was still in conformity with the Confession of Faith
agreed to at the beginning of the Keformation. That formu-
lary continued to be the established rule of faith, the Confes-
^ This is expressly asserted by the Covenanting ministers in their Answer to
the Keplies of the Doctors of Aberdeen, and its correctness is admitted by the
Doctors in their Duply.
362 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. XLVIIL
sion approved by the assembly at Aberdeen having apparently
never superseded it. The new opinions were condemned by
the Puritans under the name of Arrainianism. They were
known to be favoured by the English primate, and, in Scot-
land, those who carried on an intimate correspondence with
him now openly avowed their dislike to the prevailing
Calvinism.
The cathedral and monastic churches still remained in the
state of desolation to which the excesses of Knox and his
followers had reduced them, and those which were capable of
being used were fitted up in the Presbyterian fashion. The
parish churches had been miserably neglected. The lay
beneficiaries paid no attention to the obligations incumbent
upon them as coming in place of the old parsons, and time
had done its work as effectually as violence. An attempt
had been made by Archbishop Spottiswood to begin the work
of restoration by rebuilding the church of Dairsie, which was
situated on his own estates in Fifeshire. Its division into
nave and chancel, and its internal decorations, approached as
nearly as circumstances would allow to the ancient rule.
Such was the state of matters which Charles and Laud
beheld when they visited Scotland, and, however much they
may have been prepared for it by their former knowledge
and experience, it excited a deep feeling of disappointment.
There can be no doubt that, after their return, the king and
the primate devoted themselves, with the ardent zeal which
marked their character, to the task of completing the resto-
ration of the Scottish Church. The bishops w^re exhorted
to encourage orthodox principles, and to uphold conformity ;
Puritanical practices, such as fasting on the Sunday, were
forbidden ; the liturgical worship in the chapel royal was
carefully maintained; and the king's intention was announced
of rebuilding the once venerated cathedrals of lona and St.
Andrews. Above all, the preparations were urged on for
completing a Book of Canons and a Liturgy.
The Book of Canons, which had been ratified by the king
in May, 1635, was printed at Aberdeen, and published in the
beginning of the year 1636. It bore the following title ; —
" Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical, gathered and put in
form for the government of the Church of Scotland, ratified
A.D. 1636.] OF SCOTLAND. 363
and approved by liis majesty's royal warrant, and ordained
to be observed by the clergy, and all others whom they
concern." ^
The book was divided into nineteen chapters. The first
chapter, under the title '^ Of the Church of Scotland," related
chiefly to the king's supremacy, and contained the following
declarations : — " Whosoever shall hereafter affirm that the
king's majesty hath not the sam.e authority in causes eccle-
siastical that tlie godly kings had amongst the Jews, and
Christian emperors in the primitive Church, or impeach in
any part his royal supremacy in causes ecclesiastical, let him
be excommunicated, and not restored but only by the arch-
bishop of the province, after his repentance, and public
revocation of these his wicked errors." '^ Whosoever shall
hereafter affirm that the doctrine of th^ Church of Scotland,
the form of worship contained in the Book of Common Prayer
and Administration of the Sacraments, the rites and ceremo-
nies of the Church, the government of the Church under his
majesty by archbishops, bishops, and others which bear office
in the same, the form of making and consecrating archbishops,
bishops, presbyters, and deacons, as they are now estab-
lished under his majesty's authority, do contain in them any
thing repugnant to the Scriptures, or are corrupt, superstitious,
or unlawful, in the service and worship of God, let him be
excommunicated, and not restored but by the bishop of the
place, or archbishop of the province, after his repentance, and
public revocation of such his wicked errors."
The second chapter was entitled, ^' Of Presbyters and
Deacons, their nomination, ordination, function, and charge.'^
It enjoined that no person should be ordained without having
been educated in some university or college, and taken a
degree there, and without examination by the bishop of the
diocese or his chaplains. No one was to be ordained deacon
till he was twenty-one years of age, or presbyter till he was
twenty-five. Bishops were forbidden to ordain any out of
their own diocese, except on letters diraissory, and a certifi-
cate of honest conversation ; and the persons ordained were
in all cases to have a particular place or charge, where they
^ The Scottish canons are reprinted in the fifth volume of Archbishop Laud's
Works.
S64 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Chap. XLVIII.
were to exercise their functions. Orders were to be conferred
according to the form in the Book of Ordination, at four seasons
in the year, the first weeks of March, June, September, and
December.
The third chapter was, ^' Of residence and preaching."
Divine service was to be celebrated according to the Book
of Common Prayer in all cases before sermons. No person
of the laity, whatever might be his gifts of learning, know-
ledge, or holiness, was to exercise any of the functions of
Presbyters or Deacons without previous ordination, and the
licence of the ordinary. Preachers were not to impugn the
doctrine of neighbouring preachers, unless with permission
of the bishop ; they were not to speak against his majesty
or his laws, or allude reproachfully to any one by name,
except in the case of notorious offenders. All presbyters,
as their text should give occasion, were to urge on their
hearers the necessity of good works. They were to visit
the sick according to the form in the Book of Common Prayer ;
and, when any person was passing out of this life, a bell was
to be tolled, that the people might pray for him as a fellow-
member of Christ's body, and the presbyter was not then to
neglect to do his last duty. Every presbyter was to be care-
ful to provide himself with good books, especially the Holy
Scriptures and the writings of the ancient Fathers and Doctors
of the Church. All presbyters and preachers were to move
the people to join with them in prayer, using few and conve-
nient words, and were always to conclude with the Lord's
Prayer.
The fourth chapter, " Of the conversation of Presbyters,"
contained various rules similar to those in the canons of other
Christian Churches.
The fifth chapter, '' Of Translation," forbade translation to
another benefice, except with consent of the ordinary.
The sixth chapter, " Of the Sacraments," forbade all lay per-
sons to minister the sacraments under the pain of excommuni-
cation, and enjoined presbyters to give private Baptism in
cases of necessity. The sacrament of the Lord's Supper was
to be celebrated four times every year, the feast of Easter
being always one, and every person was to communicate with
his own presbyter once in the year at least. In the ministra-
A.D. 1636.] . OF SCOTLAND. 365
tion of that sacrament, what was reserved of the elements was
to be distributed to the poorer persons among the communi-
cants, to be consumed by them before leaving the church. The
sacrament was to be received with bowing of the knee, xo
testify the devotion and thankfulness of the receivers for that
most excellent gift.
The seventh chapter, " Of Marriage," laid down rules re-
garding marriage and divorce.
The eighth chapter, " Of Synods," ordered diocesan synods
of the clergy to be held twice a year ; forbade all conventicles
and secret meetings of churchmen ; and declared that national
synods, called by the king's authority, should bind all per-
sons, whether absent or present, to obedience to their decrees
in matters ecclesiastical.
The ninth chapter, " Of meetings to Divine Service," en-
joined reverence in time of divine service. All persons were
to kneel when the confession and other prayers were read, and
to stand up at the saying of the Creed. ISTo presbyter or
reader was to conceive prayers extempore, or to use any other
form in the public Liturgy than that which was prescribed,
under the pain of deprivation.
The tenth, eleventh, and twelfth chapters, contained brief
rules regarding Schoolmasters, Curates and Readers, and
Printers. The last of these forbade any thing to be printed
till allowed by visitors appointed for the purpose.
The thirteenth chapter ordered that all Christenings, Wed-
dings, and Burials, should be registered.
The fourteenth chapter, " Of Public Fasts," forbade any
solemn fasts to be kept by clergymen, except with consent of
their ordinary, and declared it unlawful to keep fasts on
Sundays.
The fifteenth chapter enjoined the clergy and members of
the universities to use apparel beseeming their degrees.
The sixteenth chapter, "Of things pertaining to the
Church," ordered that every church should be provided at the
expense of the parish with a Bible and a Book of Common
Prayer, and with a Font, to be placed near the door, and a
cloth of fine linen for Baptism ; with a comely and decent
Table for the Holy Communion, to be placed at the upper
end of the church or chancel, and to b"" covered during divine
'366 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVIII.
service with a carpet of decent stuff, and during ministration
with a white linen cloth ; with basins, cups or chalices of
some pure metal to be set on the Table, and reserved to that
use only, and with a pulpit and an alms chest. All these
were to be carefully preserved by the ministers and church
wardens. The church and churchyard were to be kept in
careful repair. Visitations were to be held by the archdeacon
once every year, and by the bishop once every three years ;
the archbishop was to be entitled to visit his province metro-
politically, but only once during his life, and that at such
times as the ordinaries might think best for the good of the
Church.
The seventeenth chapter laid down regulations regarding
tithes, and lands dedicated to churches.
The eighteenth chapter was entitled, " Of Censures Ecclesi-
astical." It forbade ecclesiastical judicatories to meddle witli
anything beyond their jurisdiction. It declared that excom-
munication was only to be pronounced after lawful citation and
due admonition preceding, and with the knowledge and con-
sent of the ordinary. If any person wished to unburden his
conscience by confession to a bishop or presbyter, he was to
receive all spiritual consolations, and absolution after the man-
ner prescribed in the Visitation of the Sick, if truly penitent
and desirous to be absolved. Any person injured by his me-
tropolitan was entitled to appeal to delegates, or immediately
to the king.
The nineteenth chapter was entitled, '' Of Commissaries and
their Courts ;" and the book concluded with a declaration that
" wheresoever there is no penalty expressly set down, it is to
be understood that (so the crime or offence be proved) the
punishment shall be arbitrary, as the ordinary shall think
fittest."
Such were the Scottish canons of 1636. It had been pro-
posed on several occasions, and especially at the Aberdeen
assembly of 1616, to compile a body of canons from the acts
of the general assembly, and from other sources ; but the new
constitutions bore little resemblance to any Scottish ecclesias-
tical enactments subsequent to the Reformation. .They are
said to have been drawn up by the Bishops of Galloway,
Aberdeen, Ross, and Dunblane. Nothing certain, however,
A.D. 1636.J OF .SCOTLAND. 3G7
is known as to this. They were revised by Archbishop
Laud, and by Dr. Juxon, Bishop of London, and were evi-
dently framed on the model of the English canons of 1604.
They were not, so far as appears, discussed at any synod,
nor were they promulgated with any sanction whatever ex-
cept that of the king. Their whole authority, therefore,
depended on the royal supremacy, and on such right as the
bishops might have to enjoin their observance in their own
dioceses.
The canons made express reference to the Book of Common
Prayer, and the Book of Ordination, neither of which was yet
published. Attention was called at the time to the singular
circumstance, that obedience was required to a Liturgy which
was still in the course of preparation. This has never been
satisfactorily explained. It was quite reasonable in itself that
a Code of Canons should be issued before a Service Book, but
it was a proceeding equally absurd and tyrannical to denounce
the penalty of excommunication against the infringers of a
book, the contents of which were not yet known. Had the
Scottish Church been reformed on the same principle as that
of England, there would have been little to object to in the
canons themselves, but, as it was, they established a system,
both of ecclesiastical government and of ritual, very different
from that which was then in existence and recognized by law.
The change in the former respect is thus stated by a con-
temporary Presbyterian writer, in langniage which, no doubt,
faithfully represents the prevalent feeling of his party : — " In
all the canons, not one mention of a ruling elder, an office
which bishops detest, because they love to see profanity grow,
increase, abound, that theirs may be the less taken notice of;
no word of a session or congregational consistory ; no word of a
presbytery, or classical judicatory ; yea now also the breth-
ren of the exercise are buried in deep oblivion ; instead of a
provincial free synod, ye have twice a year a bishop's court,
where he not only usurped moderation, but also a negative
voice, and many times would command the whole to write
what he pleased though the voices had carried otherwise, yea
often would not refer the matter to voicing ; and, lastly, the
general assembly, the great bulwark under God of this kirk,
from which only ecclesiastical canons can by the law of this
368 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVIIl.
land flow, and not from some particular persons, is in effect
abolished."!
Some of the persons concerned in framing the canons appear
to have expected opposition when their contents became
known. Considerable alarm was certainly excited, but no
public demonstration of any kind took place. ^ Those who
afterwards took a leading part against the king and the pre-
lates were not prepared for resistance, and the canons them-
selves did not afford a sufficient ground for an appeal to
popular feeling. They were as yet mere written rules, not
practically enforced in any way; and, on more than one
occasion in late years, royal injunctions issued in matters
ecclesiastical had been quietly recalled, or allowed to become
an empty form.
Before the end of the year 1636, a Book of Ordination was
printed. It appears to have differed from the book of 1620
in containing a form for the ordering of Deacons. ^
In October, 1634, a new warrant had been granted for
establishing the High Commission, in virtue of which any
seven of the members, an archbishop or bishop being one,
w^ere empowered to exercise the jurisdiction conferred upon
the court.*
It is asserted by Burnet that the bishops, not satisfied with
the general High Commission court, procured warrants from
Row, pp. 394, 395. Strange accounts of the canons have been given by
some historians. Their ignorance of ecclesiastical language may have led to
misapprehensions, but various statements have been made, which can only be
explained by supposing that the authors never read the book which they were
condemning ; see, for instance, the remarks of Mr. Brodie in his History of the
British Empire from the Accession of Charles I. to the Restoration, vol. ii. p.
439. Dr. Cook, while censuring the canons themselves, gives a very fair
account of their contents ; see his History of the Church of Scotland, vol. ii. p.
358-364.
- Compare Baillie's Letters, vol, i. p. 4, and appendix, pp. 438, 439.
3 Row, p. 391. Gordon's Scots Affairs, vol. ii. pp. 92, 93. The king's
instructions, quoted by Heylin (Life of Archbishop Laud, ed. 1719, part ii. p.
50), shew that the Ordinal was not published till after the middle of October.
I have not been able to discover the existence of any copy of this Book of Or-
dination. Heylin mentions (Life of Archbishop Laud, ibid.) that Bishop Wed-
derburn had brought under the notice of the English primate certain defects
in the Ordinal of 1620, viz "That the order of Deacons was made but a lay
office at the best, as by that book might be understood, and that at the admis-
sion to the priesthood the very essential words of conferring orders were left out."
* Baillie, vol. i. appendix, p. 424-428.
A.D. 1636.] OF SCOTLAND. 3(59
the king for setting up commissions in their several dioceses,
in which, with ministers and gentlemen of their own nomina-
tion as assessors, they might punish offenders ; and he adds
that the Bishop of Galloway was the only prelate who availed
himself of the powers thereby confeiTcd. This statement has
frequently been repeated ; but I am not aware of any record
which supports it, and it seems to be a mistake arising from
the circumstance that any bishop, with six other members,
was entitled to exercise the powers of the High Commis-
sion.^
In July, 1636, Samuel Kutherford, minister of Anwoth,
was summoned before the High Commission at Edinburgh,
at the instance of his ordinary, the Bishop of Galloway. The
bishop had in vain previously endeavoured at various private
conferences to prevail upon him to submit to the ecclesiastical
laws. He was ordered by the court to leave his parish, and take
up his residence at Aberdeen. Eutherford, one of the most
learned of the Puritan ministers, had for some time been
a regent in the College of Edinburgh, and was afterwards
appointed minister of Anwoth, at least as early as the year
1624. In that remote parish, and in the immediate neigh-
bourhood, he was as popular as Dickson was at Irvine. He
was an especial favourite with the female sex, his chief
patroness in the first years of his ministry being the Viscountess
of Kenmure, a daughter of the Earl of Argyll.
J See Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton, ed. 1677, pp. 30, 31. Burnet
makes the same assertion in the History of his Own Time, and mentions, in con-
nection with the diocesan court set up by Sydserf in Galloway, that the Earl of
Argyll having complained in council of his proceedings, the bishop gave him the
lie. According to Buillie, however, it was a court of High Commission which
Bishop Sydserf held on this occasion for punishing the laird of Earlston and
other Nonconformists ; and that writer gives it as his own opinion that Argyll,
or, as he more correctly designates him, the Lord Lorn, exaggerated for his own
purposes a hasty expression of Sydserf. In regard to its being a court of
High Commission, we have the authority of Earlston and Argyll themselves.
Compare Burnet's History, voh i. p. 44 ; Baillie, vol. i. p. 16 ; and Peterkin's
Records of the Kirk, p. 150. The only contemporary authority of any kind
which I have found, in the least degree resembling the statement of Burnet, is a
notice in the Life of Robert Blair (p. 107), made in connection with the proceed-
ings of Sydserf, that *' now every bishop, having got up a High Commission,
with a small quorum of their own creatures, could, in one harvest (for no one
-was excepted), fine and confine at their pleasure (no limits being set to them),
in an arbitrary way, the lieges throughout the whole kingdom."
VOL. II.] 25
370 ECCLESIASTICAL HTSTOEY [Chap. XLYHI.
While at Anwoth, Eutherford wrote and published a Latin
work on divine grace, in opposition to the Arrainian opinions ;
and that publication was asserted by his friends to be the true
cause of Sjdserf's enmitj. At Aberdeen, he had several dis-
cussions with the divines of that city regarding the disputed
points of belief, but he found much more congenial occupation
in writing a portion of that extraordinary series of letters,
chiefly addressed to his female disciples in the South, which
excited great attention at the time, and in connection with
which his name is now chiefly remembered. There is no rea-
sonable ground to question the sincerity of the excited feelings
described in these compositions, but there is as little doubt as
to the presumptuous fanaticism which dictated them, and the
gross impropriety of the language in which they are written. ^
Andrew Boyd, Bishop of Argyll, died on the twenty-second
of December, 1636. Bm-net gives the following character of
this prelate: — ^' He found his diocese overrun with ignorance
and barbarity, so that in many places the name of Christ was not
known ; but he went about that apostolical work of planting
the Gospel, with a particular industry, and almost with equal
success. He got churches and schools to be raised and en-
dowed everywhere, and lived to see a great blessing on his
endeavom'S ; so that he is not so much as named in that
country to this day but with a particular veneration, even by
those who are otherwise no way equitable to that order. The
only answer that our angry people in Scotland used to make,
when they were pressed with such instances, was, that there
were too few of them ; but some of the severest of them have
owned to me, that if there were many such bishops they would
all be Episcopal." ^
Boyd's successor in the see of Argyll was James Fairley,
one of the ministers of Edinburgh, who was consecrated in the
chapel royal at Holyrood, on the eighth day of August 1637.^
No other bishop was consecrated in Scotland till after the
Restoration.
In a letter from Rutherford to a friend in Ireland, written
from his place of banishment at Aberdeen in the beginning of
1 Kow, pp. 396, 397. Select Biograpliies, edited for the Wodrow Society, vol.
i. pp. 320, 321.
2 Preface to the Life of Bedell. Keith's Catalogue, p. 291.
* Row, p. 410.
A.D. 1636.] OF SCOTLAND. 371
the year 1637, and containing reference to a proclamation
regarding the Liturgy, which will afterwards be mentioned,
the following information is given : " Our Service Book is
ordained, by open proclamation and sound of trumpet, to be
read in all the kirks of this kingdom. Our prelates are to
meet this month for it and our canons, and for a reconciliation
betwixt us and the Lutherans. The professors of Aberdeen
University are charged to draw up the articles of an uniform
confession, but reconciliation with Popery is intended."^
Rutherford here alludes to the attempt which was going on at
this time to bring about a reconciliation between the Lutherans
and the Reformed. The person who chiefly endeavoured to
effect this object was John Durie, son of Robert Durie one of
the ministers who had been banished by King James on
account of the Aberdeen assembly of 1605. Durie devoted
his life to the task. He came over to England soon after
Laud was appointed to the primacy, and was favourably
received by the archbishop and other English prelates. He
applied also to the Scottish bishops, and, by the advice of
Archbishop Spottiswood, wrote to the divines of Aberdeen,
requesting their opinion as to the points in dispute. On the
twentieth of February, 1637, the members of the theological
faculty in the University of Aberdeen sent a paper to the
Scottish primate, containing their formal judgment. Drawing
a distinction between absolute consent in every thing, and
agreement in essential points, they declared that both the
Lutherans and the Reformed, rightly understood, agreed in
those matters of faith as to which the ancient Church had been
of one opinion. 2
This judgment was subscribed by six doctors, John Forbes,
Robert Baron, Alexander Scroggie, William Leslie, James
Sibbald, and Alexander Ross. The names of all these
* Rutherford's Letters, Aberdeen ed. p. 362.
2 See Garden's Life of Dr. John Forbes, pp. 28, 29, and the Instructiones
Historico-Theologicae, p. 673-682. Baillie entertained a very diflferent opiDion
of these proceedings from that which was expressed by Rutherford. He ap-
proved of the charitable attempt, and commended the prudence of Archbishop
Spottiswood in keeping the matter quiet in Scotland, where it would be misin-
terpreted as a proposal to yield, first to the Lutherans, and after that to the
Papists — the very charge made by theminiater of Anwoth. (Baillie, vol i. pp.
9, 10.)
372 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVIIL
divines were already well-known in Scotland, and the repu-
tation of two of them had extended to other Churches. Dr.
Scroggie was minister of the cathedral church of St. Machar,
to which he had bsen translated from the cure of Drumoak, in
the same diocese, by Bishop Patrick Forbes. Dr. Leslie, who
is said to have been brother of John Leslie, formerly Bishop
of the Isles, and at this time Bishop of Raphoe, was succes-
sively one of the regents, sub-principal, and principal of
Kin2"'s Colles-e. Dr. Sibbald, a descendant of the ancient
family of that name in the Mearns, was for some time a regent
at Marischal College, and afterwards one of the ministers of
the church of St. Nicholas in Aberdeen. Dr. Ross was first
minister at Insch, in the diocese of Aberdeen, afterwards at
St. Clement's chapel in the burgh of Aberdeen, and finally
colleague to Dr. Sibbald in the church of St. Nicholas. He
has sometimes been confounded with another Scottish divine
of the same name, who wrote the View of all Religions and
many other works. Dr. Baron was still more widely
distinguished. He was of the house of Kinnaird in Fife,
and was educated at St. Andrews. After having taught for
some time in that university, he succeeded Bishop Patrick
Forbes as minister at Keith, and afterwards became one of the
ministers of the church of St. Nicholas, and professor of
divinity in the Marischal College, Aberdeen. ^
But of all the northern divines. Dr. John Forbes was the
one who was best known in his own day, and whose name
has still the highest reputation. He was the second son of
Bishop Patrick Forbes, and was born on the second of May,
1593. His boyhood was passed under the care of his father,
and in 1607 he was sent to the University of Aberdeen. He
afterwards went abroad, and studied at Heidelberg, Sedan,
and other Protestant universities, devoting his particular
attention to theology. His opinions were at first those of
the schools which he frequented, and, though they underwent
a gradual change cs his studies in the writings of the Fathers
drew him more towards the model of the ancient Church,
he never ceased to identify himself in all essential points
with the continental Protestants. His views regarding Epis-
1 See notices of these divines by the editors of Gordon's Scots Affairs, vol. iii.
pp. 209, 227, 230, 231, 232, 235, 236.
A.D. 1636.] OF SCOTLAND. 373
copacy and Holy Orders were no doubt affected by the cir-
cumstancCj that he himself had received only Presbyterian or-
dination. He was called to the ministry at Middleburg, on
the fourth of April, 1619, and, among those who subscribed
the certificate of his call, was his uncle, John Forbes, the
deprived minister of Alford, at that time preacher to the
English factory at Middleburg. He returned soon afterwards
to his own country, and in the following year was appointed
professor of divinity in King's College, Aberdeen.
In the discharge of his important duties as a teacher in the
university. Dr. Forbes laboured to bring up those entrusted
to his care in a strict religious life as well as in the knowledge
of theology. The Bishop and clergy of Aberdeen made it
their particular request that he would carefully instruct his
scholars in ecclesiastical history. They were especially in-
duced to do so, from observing that the adherents of the Koman
see made many converts by claiming for their doctrine the
support of the Fathers, and that others disregarded altogether
the voice of Christian antiquity as contrary to the Scriptures.
Forbes diligently attended to this request, and the learned
works which he left behind him shew how well qualified
he was for the required course of instruction.
In the year 1629, he published at Aberdeen his Irenicum,
a treatise addressed to all lovers of truth and peace in the Scot-
tish Church. It was dedicated to his father, and contained a
defence of the lawfulness of the Perth articles, of Episcopacy,
and of prescribed forms of prayer. In a letter written
to the author in December, 1632, Archbishop Usher spoke
of this treatise in the highest terms, esteeming his countiy
happy that in him it had produced a second Irenaaus, whose
task it was, like that of the ancient Bishop of Lyons, to
appease the strife which had arisen in the Church. The
eldest son of Bishop Forbes having died before his father,
Dr. Forbes, on the decease of the latter, became laird of
Corse, and from that time was frequently referred to under
his baronial title. ^
The assistance which the doctors of Aberdeen gave to the
attempt to restore concord in the Protestant communions of
' GarJen's Life of Dr John Forbes, p. 6-16. Gordon's Scots Affairs, vol. iii.
p. 234, note.
374 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLVIIL
the Continent was their last peaeeM labour. The conflict
was now approaching which was to end in the overthrow
of the ecclesiastical system they had endeavoured with such
zeal to build up in their own land. On the eighteenth of
October, 1636, the king had signed a warrant to the Scottish
privy council, containing his instructions regarding the Li-
turgy. In terms thereof, on the twentieth of December, the
council made an act ordering his majesty's subjects to conform
themselves to the new Service Book, and enjoining all arch-
bishops, bishops, presbyters, and other churchmen to take
care that it should be observed, and especially that every
parish should provide two copies before the following Easter. ^
^ Baillie, vol. i. appendix, pp. 440, 441 .
A.D. 1636.] OF SCOTLAND, 375
CHAPTER XLIX.
FROM THE ACT OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL REGARDING THE BOOK OF COM-
MON PRAYER IN DECEMBER, 1636, TO THE THREE PROCLAMATIONS
OF 17Ta OCTOBER, 1637.
Difficulties in the introduction of a Liturgy — Alleged abandon-
ment of such a design hy King James — Proposal to intro-
duce the English Liturgy — Resolution to prepare a Liturgy
for Scotland — Delays in its puhlication — Supposed differ-
ences of opinion among the Bishops — The Scottish Service
Booh — The Communion Office — Tlie reading of the Service
Booh — The tumult at Edinburgh — Tlie authors of the
tumult — Proceedings of the Privy Council — Diocesan Synod
of Glasgow — Petitions against the Service Booh — Conver-
sation between the Primate and the Earl of Rothes — In-
creased agitation — Proclamations of the seventeenth of
October,
At the Aberdeen assembly of 1616, it had been agreed that
a uniform order of Liturgy or Divine Service should be pre-
pared for the use of the Scottish Church , and certain ministers
were appointed to revise the Book of Common Order for that
purpose. This resolution was agreed to at the king's express
recommendation. There can be no doubt that James intended
to introduce the English Liturgy, or a form as near to it as
possible ; but it is equally evident that many of the members
of the assembly merely contemplated a book on the model of
that which had been used since the Keformation. We hear
of no steps taken by the ministers as a body ; but the bishops
and others in the king's confidence prepared a Book of Common
Prayer, which was submitted to James by Archbishop Spot-
tiswood, and afterwards returned to the primate with several
alterations and additions. Nothing farther was done during
the reign of James. It is probable that he saw the great
difficulties which had to be overcome before his object could
be carried out, and that he hesitated again to disturb the
prejudices of his Scottish subjects ; but there is no good
376 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. XLIX.
reason to believe that he ever wholly abandoned a design
which he had so much at heart. ^
A story, indeed, is told, which, if true, would shew that
James had relinquished all intention of introducing a Liturgy
into Scotland. Bishop Hacket, in his Life of Archbishop
Williams, relates a conversation between King James and
Williams, in which the former excused himself from promoting
Laud to the see of St. David's, on account of the restless spirit
of that divine, and his love to bring things to an ideal pitch
of reformation ; giving as an example that he had himself
been urged by Laud to assimilate the Liturgy and canons
of the Scottish Church to those of England, although he
had promised after the Perth assembly to force no more
changes upon the Scots. It is certain, however, that James
made no promise at the Perth assembly. Such a pro-
mise was undoubtedly made by the Marquis of Hamilton,
the royal commissioner, at the parliament of 1621, when the
Perth articles were ratified ; and to the latter circumstance
accordingly Bishop Hacket makes express reference in proof
of the statement given in his book. But it could not have
been to Hamilton's promise that James alluded, for Laud was
presented to the see of St. David's on the twenty-ninth of
June, 1621, while the Scottish parliament did not meet till
the end of July. The only authority for the statement was
evidently Williams's own report. The hostility of that prelate
to Laud, and his well-known practice of attributing words to
others which they never used, joined to the improbability of
the narrative itself, render the authenticity of the conversation
as reported extremely suspicious. It has often been quoted as
a proof of James's sagacity : it appears rather to be an illus-
tration of the unscrupulous ingenuity of Williams. ^
King Charles, after his accession, resumed his father's
design, examined the book which had been prepared, and
^ Large Declaration by King Charles the First, pp. 16, 17. Baillie, vol. i.
appendix, pp. 443, 444.
2 See Hacket's Life of Archbishop Williams, part i. pp. 63, 64 ; Calderwood,
vol. vii. pp. 488, 489 ; Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 263. Compare what Clarendon
says of Williams (History, vol. ii. p. 105) : "He had a faculty of making relation
of things done in his own presence, or discoveries made to himself or in his own
hearing, with all the circumstances of answers and replies, and upon arguments
of great moment, all which upon examination were still found to have nothing in
them that was real, but to be the pure efiect of his own invention."
A.D. 1636.] OF SCOTLAND. 377
gave instructions regarding it to the Archbishop of St. Andrews,
and througli him to others of the clergy. In the year 1629,
Dr. Maxwell, then one of the ministers of Edinburgh, waited
by the king's command on Bishop Laud, and explained to
him what was proposed in regard to the Liturgy. On that
occasion, Laud expressed his opinion that the English Book
of Common Prayer should be adopted without any variation,
that so the same Service Book might be used in all his ma-
jesty's dominions. Maxwell answered that the Scottish bishops
thought differently; that they believed their countrymen
would be better satisfied with a Liturgy framed by their own
clergy; but that they had no objection that it should be
drawn up on the English model. The king was of the same
opinion as Laud, and for a considerable time entertained
the design of introducing the English Liturgy. Afterwards,
however, on the urgent remonstrances of the Scottish prelates,
this plan was given up, and it was agreed that a Liturgy
should be prepared in Scotland, similar, on the whole, to that
used in England, but differing in some particular points.
Laud received the king's command to give his assistance in
framing the book on this principle.
It is probable that the new Liturgy was drawn up chiefly
by Dr. Maxwell and Dr. Wedderburn, Bishops of Boss and
Dunblane. The latter prelate appears to have been mainly
instrumental in obtaining the restoration, in the order for the
ministration of the Holy Communion, of portions of the office
which had been lost in the Church of England since the first
Liturgy of King Edward VI. The whole was entrusted for
revisal to Archbishop Laud, Dr. Juxon, Bishop of London,
and Dr. Wren, Bishop of Norwich. There can be no doubt
that the English primate was one of the chief promoters of
the book. He himself tells us that, after it had been finally
agreed to give up the literal adoption of the English Liturgy,
he gave the matter the best help he could.
On the eighteenth of October, 1636 — the same day on
which warrant was given to the privy council for enjoining
the use of the Service Book — the king sent certain special
instructions regarding it to the archbishops and bishops in
Scotland. One of these was, that in the Calendar they
should retain such Catholic saints as were in the English
378 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Chap. XLIX.
Calendar, adding the Scottish saints, especially those of the
royal blood, and some of the most holy bishops, and in no case
omitting St. George and St. Patrick, i
It is probable that, at the date of the proclamation following
the act of the privy council in December enjoining the use of
the Liturgy, the printing of the book was completed; but various
circumstances occurred, which did not allow of its distribution
so early as was intended. In order to prepare the way for its
reception, the king had enjoined the archbishops and bishops
to cause the English Book of Common Prayer to be read in
their cathedrals, and to be said daily in their own houses, and in
the colleges, according to the practice in the chapel royal ; but,
on their requesting that everything should remain as before
till their own book was published, the order was withdrawn.
When proclamation was made at the market crosses of the
various burghs in terms of the act of council, considerable
alarm was caused. As copies of the Liturgy were not yet
given out, strange rumours were circulated regarding its con-
tents ; and the national and religious feelmgs of the people were
excited also by assertions that it differed in no respect from the
English book, except in the addition of other Popish rites.
Persons of more moderate views were startled by its promul-
gation without any synodical authority. Kobert Baillie, then
minister at Kilwiiming, and as yet favourably disposed to
Episcopacy though averse to ritual changes, in a letter written
at the time, speaks of this as contrary to the English rule,
by which the convocation was always consulted, and quotes the
opinion of Bishop Andrews, " the semigod of the new
faction," that all church laws and canons ecclesiastical should
always be made in church assemblies and not elsewhere.
Before Easter, copies of the book were ready for distribu-
tion. A letter, addressed about this time by the Scottish
primate to the Bishop of Norwich, indicates the opinion of
Spottiswood regarding the Liturgy. " I was desired," he
says, " to present your lordship with one of the copies of our
Scottish Liturgy, which is formed so nigh to the English as we
could, that it might be known how we are nothing different
1 Laud's Works, vol. iii. pp. 356-359, 427-429 ; vol. vi. p. 456-459. Heylin'a
Life of Laud, part ii. pp. 49, 50. Large Declaration, p. 17-19. Baillie, vol. i.
appendix, pp. 443, 444.
A.D. 1637.] OF SCOTLAND. 379
in substance from that Chiircli. And God I beseech to keep
us one, and free us from those that crave divisions. Your
lordship will be pleased to accept this little present as a testi-
mony of our Church's love, and sent by him who truly loveth
your lordship." Certain circumstances, which are not
explained, prevented the Bishop of Edinburgh from beginning
the use of the Liturgy at the time appointed, and it also
appeared that a number of the ministers had not provided
copies for the parish churches, as ordered by the proclamation.
Easter accordingly passed over without the Liturgy being
used. In the end of April, the Bishop of Edinburgh wrote to
the ministers of his diocese, warning them to attend his
diocesan synod on the last Wednesday of May, and informing
them that he was then to make a communication regarding
the Service Book, which, in the meantime, he enjoined them
to purchase. Several of the other bishops, about the same time,
laid the book before their synods, and finally, on the thirteenth
of June, the privy council ordered letters to be issued,
charging all presbyters and ministers to provide themselves
with copies of the Service Book for the use of their parishes
within fifteen days, under the pain of rebellion. At a
meeting of the bishops, it was agreed that the public read-
ing of the Liturgy should be^n at Edinburgh, on Sunday,
the twenty-third of July, and intimation to that efiect was
accordingly made on the previous Sunday in all the churches
of the capital. The prelates were empowered, however, in
virtue of instructions from the king, to dispense with the
practice of some portions of the book in those cases where
they found the ministers doubtful as to using it, and willing
to be better informed regarding it.^
Such were the circumstances connected with the introduc-
tion of the Liturgy, as derived from the official records and
other contemporary authorities. Several points are obscure
and, in particular, the reasons for the delay which occurred
are not very clearly stated. But an account has been given
by Bishop Guthrie in his Memoirs, which, if correct, would
explain these difficulties. According to that writer, the
1 Baillie, vol. i. pp. 1, 2, 4, 16, 17, and appendix, p. 441-447. Large Decla-
ration, p. 21. Gordon's Scots Affairs, vol. i. p. 3-6. The Bishop of Norwich,
to whom Archbishop Spottiswood's letter was written, was not Bishop Hall, as
mentioned in the appendix to Baillie, but Bishop Wren.
380 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIX.
bishops were misled and betrayed by several of the lay coun-
sellors, and the prelates themselves were divided in opinion, a
considerable number of them being wholly averse to introdu-
cing the Liturgy at this time. It is sufficiently evident that
most of the noblemen in the privy council disliked the bishops,
and bore no good-will to the proposed ecclesiastical changes,
and it is also certain that among the bishops there were some
differences of opinion; but there appears to be much exaggera-
tion in Guthrie's narrative. He tells us that it was the
practice of king James, when a bishopric fell void, to order
the Archbishop of St. Andrews to convoke the prelates, and
name to him three or four persons whom they thought qualified
for the vacant dignity, out of whom his majesty chose one,
whereby the Church was always supplied with able bishops :
but that this was altered in the reign of Charles who, without
consulting the bishops, preferred those clergymen to the vacant
sees who were recommended by some powerful courtier or
statesman; and of those so appointed, that none were esteemed
fit for the office, except Bishop Maxwell, whose great parts
were rendered useless by as great ambition. The statement
regarding King James's mode of selecting bishops is not borne
out by the original ecclesiastical documents which have been
preserved ; and the prelates appointed in his time were
certainly not superior either in learning or ability to those
promoted in the reign of Charles. A similar inaccuracy
prevails in the statement respecting the alienation between
the elder and the younger bishops, and the marked depen-
dence of the latter on the Archbishop of Canterbury. It
is very probable that some of the bishops were opposed to a
Liturgy altogether, and that others may have wished for a
different method of introducing it ; but there is no sufficient
ground for believing that there were two parties, one com-
posed of the elder bishops, averse to the changes, the other
of the younger bishops, desirous to hurry on these changes,
and relying on the support of Laud. There were political
divisions among the prelates, as among the lay counsellors,
immediately before the introduction of the Liturgy, but in
these we find Maxwell and Sydserf, the two most strongly
opposed to the Puritans, taking opposite sides.
Guthrie also asserts that, when the Litui'gy was completed,
A.D. 1637.J OF SCOTLAND. 881
an entirely different line of proceeding was recommended by
the two parties ; that Spottiswood and the elder bishops,
alarmed by the symptoms of popular hostility, wrote to the
Archbishop of Canterbury, requesting that the book should be
kept back till the nation was better prepared to receive it ;
while the younger bishops, encouraged by the treasurer, the
Earl of Traquair, insisted that there was no danger, and that
the work should go on. He adds that the latter furnished
Traquair with letters to the English primate, and that that
nobleman, whose real object was to ruin the prelates, has-
tened to court, and, on his representations. Laud obtained
for himself a warrant from the king, commanding the bishops
to go on at all hazards, and threatening, if they delayed
longer, to turn them out of their places, and appoint resolute
persons who would not fear to do their duty. When this order
was brought to Scotland, the elder bishops, we are told, seeing
that no other course was left to them, now threw all moderation
aside, and acted as recklessly and imprudently as the others.
How far Traquair deserved tlie great trust reposed in him
by the king and the Archbishop of Canterbury has frequently
been questioned, and, perhaps, cannot now be ascertained.
Laud himself afterwards suspected him : Clarendon believed
in his constant loyalty. But however this may have been,
the narrative of Guthrie is improbable in itself, and unsup-
ported by evidence. Had such a warrant as he speaks of been
obtained by Laud, it could hardly have escaped the notice
of those who subsequently preferred the charges against him.
In estimating the value of Guthrie's testimony, it should be
kept in mind that, though favourable to Episcopacy, and a
member of the court of High Commissson, and himself a
bishop after the Eestoration, he subscribed the Covenant, and
for a number of years acted with the prevailing party. And
in weighing the whole circumstances connected with the intro-
duction of the Liturgy, caution must be used in giving belief
to accusations of treachery or incapacity regarding particular
proceedings, which were perhaps well considered at the time, and
only condemned when they were found to be unsuccessful. ^
The Scottish Service Book of 1637 was framed on the
model of the English Book of Common Prayer, from which it
^ See Guthrie's Memoirs, p. 13-18.
382 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIX.
did not differ in any material respect, except in the office for
the Holy Communion. Prefixed to it was the royal proclama-
tion enjoining its use, as ordered in council on the twentieth of
December, 1636. A preface followed, which made reference
to the constant use of some prescribed order of prayer in the
Church; to the desirableness of uniformity ; and to the propriety
of adhering to the English form, even as to some festivals and
rites which were not yet received in Scotland. Next came,
in terms for the most part similar to those used in the present
English Prayer Book, remarks on Ceremonies — why some
should be abolished and some retained ; the order how the
Psalter was appointed to be read ; the order how the rest
of Holy Scripture was appointed to be read ; a Table of pro-
per Psalms and Lessons for Sundays and other Holy-days ;
a Table for the order of the Psalms at Daily Prayer; an
Almanac for thirty-four years, commencing with 1637 ; a
Table and Calendar for the daily Psalms and Lessons ; and a
list of Holy-days which were to be observed. In the Calendar,
the king's instructions had been attended to regarding the
insertion of the principal Scottish saints. Among these were
St. David, St. Kentigern, St. Colman, St. Patrick, St.
Gilbert, St. Columba, St. Palladius, St. Ninian, St. Adamnan,
and St. Margaret. In the Table of daily Lessons the
Apocryphal books were omitted, and the place which they oc-
cupy in the English Table was supplied by additional Lessons
from the Pentateuch, the Prophets, and the Books of Chro-
nicles, the Lessons from Isaiah being read in the order of
the Books in the Old Testament, and not during Advent.
Prefixed to the Daily Service was a rubric that Morning
and Evening Prayer should be used in the accustomed place
of the church, chapel, or chancel, except it should be other-
wise determined by the Ordinary ; that the chancels should
remain as in times past ; and that presbyters or ministers,
at the time of the Communion and at other times in their
ministrations, should use such ornaments in the church as
were or should be prescribed by his majesty and his successors,
according to the act of parliament in that behalf.
After these came the Order for Morning and Evening
Prayer daily throughout the year. The Daily Services
hardly differed in anything from those in the English Book
A.D. 1637.] OF SCOTLAND. 383
of Common Prayer, except in the substitution of "Presbyter"
for " Priest " in the rubrics, and of the Psalm Dominus
regit me for the Benedicite. The Creed of St. Athanasius
and the Litany followed, and after these the Collects, Epistles,
and Gospels to be used throughout the year.
The Order of the administration of the Holy Communion
differed in several important respects from the present English
office, and still more from the office as it stood in the Book of
Common Prayer before the Kestoration. By the rubric, it
was enjoined that " the Holy Table, having at the Commu-
nion time a carpet and a fair white linen cloth upon it, with
other decent furniture meet for the high mysteries there to
be celebrated," should stand at the uppermost part of the
chancel or church. The Presbyter, standing at the north
side or end of the Table, was to say the Lord's Prayer and
the collect of preparation ; and afterwards, turning to the peo-
ple, was to rehearse the Ten Commandments, the people kneel-
ing, and asking God's mercy for the transgression of every
duty therein, either according to the letter, or the mystical
import of the commandment. After the Nicene Creed, if
there was no sermon, there was to follow one of the Homilies
afterwards to be set forth by authority. In the offertory
sentences, there were none from the Apocryphal books. A
commemoration of the faithful departed was inserted at the
end of the prayer for the Church militant. In the prayer
of Consecration there was an express Invocation of the Holy
Spirit. The Memorial or prayer of Oblation followed, after
which came the Lord's Prayer, and the collect of humble
access. In the benedictions to be said at delivering the Bread
and the Cup, the latter part of the English form was omitted.
After the Order for the Communion, came the Fonn of
ministration of Public Baptism. The first prayer contained
the following words : — " Sanctify this fountain of Baptism,
Thou which art the Sanctifier of all things : " and a rubric
ordered the water in the font to be changed twice in the month
at least; and the words above mentioned were to be said before
any child was baptized in the water so changed.
The Order for Private Baptism followed; then the Office for
Confirmation and the Catechism ; and the Form of Solemniza-
tion of Matrimony. By a rubric at the end of the Marriage
384 ECCLESIASTICAL UISTOKY [Chap. KLIX.
Service, the newly married persons were enjoined to receive
the Holy Communion on the day of the marriage. Next after
these came the Order for the Visitation and Communion of
the Sick, and for the Burial of the Dead. In the Burial
Office, the Psalms were omitted, and the Lesson was to be
read beside the grave. The Office for the Churching of
Women followed, the Psalms appointed for it being the
hundred and twenty-first, and the twenty-seventh. The
book concluded with the Commination. The edition of the
Psalter to be used along with the Prayer Book had' been
printed in 1636, and in it, as well as throughout the book
itself, the Psalms and Hymns were according to the translation
of the Bible made in the reign of King James. ^
As already mentioned, it was finally agreed that the Service
Book should be read in the various churches at Edinburgh
on Sunday the twenty-third of July. When intimation was
made on the previous Sunday, there was no appearance of
any opposition. On the day appointed, being the seventh
Sunday after Trinity, in order that the service should be
celebrated with the utmost solemnity, the Archbishop of St.
Andrews, chancellor of the kingdom, the Archbishop of
Glasgow, the Bishop of Edinburgh, with several other bishops,
lords of the privy council, and judges of the supreme court,
and the magistrates of the city, attended at ten in the forenoon,
^ The rumours spread abroad at the time regarding the contents of the Liturgy
were not more absurd than some accounts of it which have been given since. Mr.
Brodie's remarks upon it (History, vol. ii. p. 445-449), are as extraordinary as
his observations on the Canons. He adds, in reference to the meeting of the
privy council on the twentieth of December when the Liturgy was enjoined —
" The council, though a lay meeting, was in reality composed of the bishops.
Eleven members constituted a quorum, and that number was expressly selected
for the occasion. Nino of them were ecclesiastics, and the other two were
unprepared to vote, as they had not even seen the book which the meeting
authorized and enforced." Those present were indeed eleven in number, but
they were all laymen except the chancellor and the Archbishop of Glasgow ; see
the names given in the appendix to Baillie, vol. i. p. 440. A contemporary
Covenanting pamphlet, entitled, " A short relation of the State of the Kirk of
Scotland," which was chiefly intended for circulation in England, contains a
similar assertion, though not in such specific terms, that approbation was
given to the Book of Common Prayer, " when few but bishops were present at
Council." Many statements, made at the time in this way by unscrupulous
partizans, have since been repeated, as if they possessed all the weight due to
impartial authority.
A.D. 1637.J OF SCOTLAND. 885
at the cathedral chiu'ch of St. Giles. The old service had
already been used at an earlier hour. As soon as Dr. Hanna,
Dean of Edinburgh, began the new service in the reading
deskj a tumult arose among the meaner sort of the congrega-
tion, especially the women ; and, when the dean continued to
read, the noise and confusion increased, so that the prayers
could not be heard. The Bishop of Edinburgh, who was to
preach on the occasion, ascended the pulpit, and endeavoured
to appease the uproar, putting the people in mind of the place
where they were, and of the solemn duty for which they had
come together. His address only caused further hootings and
confusion, in the course of which a stool was thrown at him,
which might have inflicted serious injury if the blow had not
been diverted by one of the by-standers. The primate and
others of the council then interposed, but to no purpose, till the
magistrates descended from the gallery set apart for them,
and with considerable difficulty thrust out the rioters. The
dean then proceeded with the service, and the bishop preached,
although the noise still continued outside. When the congre-
gation were dismissed. Bishop Lindsay, on his way home, was
surrounded by the rabble, and was only rescued by the
intervention of the Earl of Wemyss.
Similar disturbances took place in the other churches of the
city, especially in the Greyfriars' Church, where Bishop
Fairley, elect of Argyll, was obliged to give up reading the
service after finishing the absolution. Between the hours of
service, the privy counsellors assembled in the chancellor's
lodging ,and, sending for the magistrates, took such precau-
tions that the Evening Service was said at St. Giles, and
some of the other churches, without interruption. The Bishop
of Edinburgh, however, was again attacked while returning
from church in the Earl of Roxburgh's coach, and his life
would have been in danger had he not been protected by the
armed servants of that nobleman. ^
^ Large Declaration, p. 23-25. Row, pp. 408,409. Baillie, vol. i. p. 18.
Gordon's Scots Affairs, vol. i. p. 7-12. Appendix to Rothes's Relation, p. 198-
200. Brodie, vol. ii. p. 452-456. The *' Brief and true relation of the Broil
which fell out on the Lord's day, the 23d of July, 1637, through the occasion
of a black, Popish, and superstitious Service Book, which was then illegally
introduced and impudently vented within the churches of Edinburgh," printed
in the appendix to the Earl of Rothes's Relation of Proceedings concerning the
VOL. II.] 26
386 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIX.
It was suspected at the time, and it has frequently "been
maintained since, that the riot of the twenty-third of July
was no accidental explosion of popular feeling, but the result
of a deliberate plan, contrived by the leaders of the Presby-
terian party. Nothing certain can be known as to this, for
the privy council and the magistrates of Edinburgh never
made any proper attempt to discover who were the real
authors of the tumult. But the conjecture is probable in
itself, and affords the best explanation of the events which
took place. There would be no room for doubt if the accounts
given by Spalding and Guthrie could be relied on. The
former writer mentions that the whole was arranged by the
Lords Lindsay, Loudon, Balmerino, Cupar, and other noble-
men, including the Marquis of Hamilton, and "a menzie of
miscontented Puritans," of whom Henderson, Dickson, and
Cant, were the ring-leaders. Guthrie tells us that a consulta-
tion was held at Edinburgh, in the month of April, at which
Henderson attended on behalf of his brethren in Fife, and
Dickson for those in the West ; that they communicated with
Sir Thomas Hope, and Lord Balmerino, and, having obtained
their approbation, afterwards met in the house of Nicholas
Balfour in the Cowgate, with several matrons whose names
are given, one of them being Elspet Craig, the mother of
Johnstone of Warriston. All this may be correct, except in
regard to the participation of the Marquis of Hamilton, but
there is little to support it beyond the assertions of the writers
themselves. Spalding may always be trusted in his narrative
of what took place in the neighbourhood of Aberdeen, but his
information regarding events at a distance ^ frequently inaccu-
aflfairs of the Kirk of Scotland, from August, 1637, to July, 1638, is the
narrative which Mr. Brodie quotes under the name of *' Stouie-field-day," and
which he erroneously ascribes to Sir James Balfour ; see appendix to Kothes, p.
201. It bears to be dated " From Stonefield, at the sign of the Flaming Fire
which might have burned up the Bishop of Argyll's house the day of his solemn
festival consecration, being the eighth of August, 1637." It is a scurrilous and
indecent account of what is alleged to have taken place, written by some
Puritan at the time, and its accuracy has been too much relied upon. Bad as
the tumult was, the details of this narrative are evidently exaggerated. It is
composed in the very spirit of Knox's account of the murder of Cardinal Beaton,
and, if Sir James Balfour bad really been the author, it would form a strange
contrast to his recital of the gorgeous ceremonial of the Coronation of King
Charles.
A.D. 1637.] OF SCOTLAND. 887
rate ; while Guthrie's statements, on this as on some other
points, must be received with caution.^
The privy council met on the twenty-fourth of July, and
issued a proclamation denouncing the rioters. The magis-
trates of Edinburgh made a submissive apology for what
had occurred, apprehended some persons suspected to be
implicated, and professed their readiness to do everything in
their power to promote the quiet establishment of the Service
Book. At a meeting on the twenty-ninth of July, the
chancellor, in his own name and that of the other bishops,
reported that, on account of the late tumults and for other
reasons, it was thought good to forbear reading the Service
Book till his majesty's pleasure should be known, and that, in
the meantime, orders had been given that sermons should be
preached in all the churches of the city at the accustomed
hours, with a prayer before and after, but without either the
old or the new service. This report was approved of by the
council.
Baillie, evidently referring to this proceeding, mentions that
Edinburgh was put under an episcopal interdict, that there
was no preaching or prayers on the week days, and no reading
or prayers on Sunday ; and Spalding asserts that after the
tumult all the church doors were locked, and no more preaching
heard, and that the zealous Puritans flocked every Sunday
for their devotions to Fife. The latter statement is exag-
gerated. What the bishops suspended was the use both of
the old Book of Common Order and of the new Liturgy, but
not the accustomed preaching. ^
On the fourth of August, a letter from the king, dated the
thirtieth of* July, was laid before the council. The letter
exhorted them to search for and punish the authors of the late
tumult, and to support the clergy in establishing the Service
Book. The council again met on the following day, and
agreed that the use of the Liturgy should be resumed on
Sunday, the thirteenth of August, and that, in the meantime,
the ministers should preach on the ordinary days without
service. Notwithstanding this resolution, the Liturgy was
^ See Spalding, vol. i. pp. 78, 79, and Guthrie, pp. 20, 21.
2 Large Declaration, p. 26. Baillie, vol. i. p. 18, and appendix, p. 448.
Spalding, vol. i. p. 80.
388 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIX.
not used on the day named, the difficulty in finding readers
to officiate, and other reasons, being alleged in excuse.
On the nineteenth of August, the magistrates of Edinburgh
wrote to Archbishop Laud, expressing their regret on account
of the tumult, mentioning their readiness to concur with their
ordinary and ministers for settling the Service Book, appeal-
ing for their justification to the Lord Treasurer, and the
Bishops of Galloway and Dunblane, and soliciting the arch-
bishop's good offices with the king.^
Dififerences, in the meantime, had arisen between the bishops
and the lay members of the privy council. Li stead of using
their united endeavours to restore tranquillity, they wrote
separately to the king, each blaming the other for what had
occurred— the prelates complaining of the want of hearty
support from the noblemen, and referring to tHe absence of
the treasurer from Edinburgh on the twenty-third of July,
with no better pretext than the marriage of a kinsman ; while
Traquair and the others accused the bishops of precipitation,
and of not giving due notice of their intentions to the lay
lords. On the seventh of August, Archbishop Laud wrote to
Traquair, blaming both the nobles and the bishops for their
conduct, and especially censuring the latter for having put an
interdict on divine service. The Earl of Traquair was the
person on whom Laud placed his chief reliance, and this letter
contains an exposition of the principles on which the archbishop
professed to act in the afi'airs of the Scottish Church. " I
think you know," he says, " my opinion how I would have
church business carried, were I as great a master of men as, I
thank God, I am of things. It is true the Church, as well there
as elsewhere, hath been overborne by violence both in matters
of maintenance and jurisdiction. But if the Church will
recover in either of these, she and her governors must proceed
not as she was proceeded against, but by a constant temper
she must make the world see she had the wrong, but offer
none. And since law hath followed in that kingdom, perhaps
to make good that which was ill done ; yet, since a law it is,
such a reformation or restitution would be sought for, as might
stand with the law, and some expedient be found out how
^ Peterkin's Records of the Kirk of Scotland, pp. 52, 53. Large Declaration-
pp. 28, 29.'
A.D. 1637.] OF SCOTLAND. 389
the law may be by some just exposition helped, till the state
shall see cause to abolish it." ^
The bishops now proceeded to enjoin the use of the Liturgy
in other dioceses, and for that purpose to order copies to be
purchased by the ministers. Little is known of what took
place in the North. Some ministers in the diocese of St.
Andrews disregarded the injunction, and in consequence were
charged to obey under the pain of rebellion. One of these
was Alexander Henderson, whose proceedings in consequence
of the charge will immediately be adverted to. The corre-
spondence of Baillie supplies full details of what took place at
Glasgow. The diocesan synod had been appointed by Arch-
bishop Lindsay to be held on the last Wednesday of August,
and Baillie himself was requested to preach on the occasion,
and to urge on his hearers the duty of conforming to the
canons and the Service Book. Baillie, in answer, thanked
the archbishop for the honour proposed to be conferred upon
him, and for his many past favours, but asked to be excused
fi'om the duty imposed, in respect of his not being at all satis-
fied with the new formularies, so far as he had yet been able
to examine them. T'he archbishop, in reply, commanded him
on his canonical obedience to preach, but left the subject of
the sermon to his own discretion. He prepared to submit,
but was relieved from the disagreeable task by the archbishop
altering his arrangements, and requesting William Annand,
minister at Ayr, to preach at the opening of the synod.
Annand, a learned and orthodox divine, defended the Liturgy
in his sermon, as well, according to Baillie's own testimony,
as any man in Britain could have done under the circum-
stances. The discourse excited the wrath of the female
Puritans of Glasgow, and on the following evening Annand
was attacked by a large number of them, and hardly escaped
with his life. Next day, to prevent a threatened renewal of
the outrage, the magistrates and some of his friends conducted
him out of the city. " This tumult," says Baillie, " was so
great, that it was not thought meet to search either in plotters
1 Baillie, vol. i. pp. 18, 19. Eushworth, vol. ii. pp. 389, 390. See also the
letter of 27th August, from the Earl of Traquair to the Marquis of Hamilton, in
Burnet's Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton, pp. 31, 32.
390 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIX.
or actors of it, for numbers of the best quality would have
been found guilty."^
On the twenty-third of August, a petition from Henderson
and two other ministers in Fife, and several petitions from the
West, were presented to the council. The supplication of
Henderson and his associates set forth, that they had been
required by the moderator of their presbytery to accept two
copies of the Book of Common Prayer ; that they had de-
clared their willingness to receive one copy in order that they
might know its contents before promising to use it ; that this
proposal had not been agreed to ; and that, in consequence,
they had been charged to provide themselves with two copies.
They therefore prayed the lords of council to suspend the
charge against them for the following reasons : — first, because
the book was warranted neither by the general assembly nor
by act of parliament ; secondly, because the liberties of the true
Church, and the form of worship and religion received at the
Heformation, and universally practised since, were warranted
by various acts of assembly and acts of parliament ; thirdly,
because the Church of Scotland was a free and independent
Church, and its pastors were best able to provide what was for
the good of the people ; fourthly, because it was well known
what disputes there had been respecting a few of the many
ceremonies contained in that book, which, when examined,
would be found to depart from the established form of wor-
ship, and to draw near to the antichristian Church of Rome ;
fifthly, because the people had been always taught a difie-
rent doctrine since the Reformation, and would not agree to
such changes, even if their pastors were willing to submit.
These petitions were supported by the written and personal
solicitations of many noblemen and gentlemen. On the
twenty-fifth of August, the council declared that their inten-
tion regarding the former acts had been mistaken, and that
they had only meant that ministers should buy copies of the
Liturgy. This interpretation could not be reconciled with the
plain meaning of the act of the twentieth of December, and the
proclamation prefixed to the Service Book. In a letter
written to the king the same day, the council represented the
discontent which prevailed even among those formerly obedient
1 Baillie, vol. i. p. 19-21.
A.D. 1637.] OF SCOTLAND. 391
to the civil and ecclesiastical authority, and the clamours and
fears of all parts of the kingdom ; and stated that they had
therefore agreed to let the matter rest till they had his
majesty's instructions, after he sliould have summoned to his
presence some of their own number, both clergy and laity, or
otherwise, as to his majesty might seem proper, and that they
had also agreed to meet again on the twentieth of September.
The letter, which w^as signed not only by Traquair and other
lay counsellors, but also by the Archbishop of St Andrews and
several of the prelates, said nothing of the interpretation put
on the former acts.
The king answered this letter on the tenth of September.
He declined to call up any of the council to London, and ex-
pressed his dissatisfaction with the delay in causing the Ser-
vice Book to be read, and the remissness in discovering and
punishing those who had been accessory to the tumult in July.
He farther intimated his pleasure that every bishop should
cause the Liturgy to be read in his own diocese, as had
already been done by the Bishops of Ross and Dunblane.
Meanwhile the popular agitation continued to increase.
Petitions against the Liturgy had been circulated through the
kingdom, and, on the twentieth of September, were presented
to the council. A general supplication to the same effect was
given in by the Earl of Sutherland, in name of the nobility,
barons, ministers, and burgesses, v/ho had assembled in great
numbers at Edinburgh. The council were much perplexed
how to act. They finally agreed to decline answering the
supplications till they heard from the king. This resolution
they communicated to the Earls of Sutherland and Wemyss
on behalf of the petitioners. They farther appointed a com-
mittee of their own number to attend to what was necessary
to be done during the vacation of the courts, and requested
the Duke of Lennox, who had come down to Scotland to
attend his mother's funeral, to represent to his majesty the
actual state of matters, and the great difficulties which had
arisen. In a letter to the king, they mentioned that more
than sixty-eight petitions had been presented against the
Service Book.^
' Baillie,-vol. i. pp. 21, 22, and appendix, p. 449-454. Balfour, vol. ii. p.
233-235.
392 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIX.
The Earl of Kothes, one of the leading persons among the
petitioners, in his narrative of these proceedings, gives an
account of a conversation which he had with the Archbishop
of St. Andrews on the twentieth of September. On his men-
tioning that the Liturgy was irregularly brought in, and that
it was unsound, the archbishop asked what evidence he had
of the latter charge. Rothes referred to the Communion
Office, and also to the Office for Baptism, in which it was
asserted that all baptized infants were regenerated. Spottis-
wood maintained that the book was not fairly interpreted, and
stated that the Bishop of Deny had approved of it, declaring
that Scotland had therein the advantage of England ; and that
it was commended also by the prince's tutor, both he and the
bishop saying that there had been no such Liturgy since the
first six hundred years after Christ. Kothes answered that
the Bishop of Derry was reputed to be the most unsound man
in Ireland, and that he and the prince's tutor were known
Arminians. In conclusion, Spottiswood asked, with a smile,
" What needed this resistance ? If the king would turn
Papist we behoved to obey. Who could resist princes ? When
King Edward was a Protestant and made a reformation.
Queen Mary changed it, and Queen Elizabeth altered it again.
And so there was no resisting of princes, and there was no
Church without troubles." Rothes replied, " They got it
soon changed in England ; the two professions were nearly
equally divided ; but there were few here to concur in such
a change, all being reformed, and would never yield. The
reformation of England was not so complete as that of Scot-
land, and had not so much law for it ; it was but half
reformed."^
On the twenty-sixth of September, the magistrates of Edin-
burgh again wrote to Archbishop Laud, mentioning the great
^ Rothes's Relation, p. 10. The Bishop of Derry was Dr. Bramhall ; the
tutor of the Prince of Wales was Dr. Duppa. Spottiswood had sent a copy of
the Book of Common Prayer to Bramhall ; and it is probable that besides that
prelate and Wren, other bishops in England and Ireland had also received
copies. Bramhall, writing to Spottiswood on the 13th oi August, says, "I
humbly thank your grace for your high favour, the Book of Common Prayer ;
glad I was to see it, and more glad to see it such as it is ; to be envied in some
things perhaps if one owned.'' (Bramhall's Works, Anglo-Catholic Library,
vol. i. p. Ixxxvi.)
A.D. 1637.] OF SCOTLAND. 393
change for the worse which had taken place since the date
of their former letter ; tlie confluence of large numbers both
of clergy and laity to the capital ; and the necessity they
had finally been under of petitioning the council not to urge
the Service Book upon them, farther than upon the rest of
the kingdom. The state of matters had now indeed become
alarming. The w^hole of the south of Scotland was roused to
a degree of excitement which had not been known since the
early days of the Reformation. The persons whose task it
had been to stir up the passions of the people were completely
successful. The exhortations of the nobles, the sermons of
the preachers, the deputations sent through the country, the
tracts which were busily circulated, had done their work, and
made a great part of the nation indifferent to all the horrors
of rebellion and civil war. The Canons and Liturgy had
been introduced without legal authority ; and now authority
of every kind was to be set at defiance in resisting them.
Baillie, who had himself taken an active part in the agitation
and cannot be supposed to exaggerate the evil, tells his cor-
respondent in Holland what was going on, in language which
marks his foreboding consciousness of the issue towards which
he and others were allowing themselves to be hurried. " What
shall be the event," he says, " God knows. There was never in
our land such an appearance of a stir : the whole people think
Popery at the doors ; the scandalous pamphlets which come
daily new from England, add oil to this flame ; no man may
speak anything in public for the king's part, except he would
have himself marked for a sacrifice to be killed one day. I
think our people possessed with a bloody devil, far above any
thing that ever I could have imagined, though the Mass in
Latin had been presented. The ministers who have the com-
mand of their mind do disavow their unchristian humour, but
are noways so zealous against the devil of their fury, as they
are against the seducing spirit of the bishops. For myself,
I think, God, to revenge the crying sins of all estates and
professions, which no example of our neighbours' calamities
would move us to repent, is going to execute his long de-
nounced threatenings, and to give us over unto madness, that
we may every one shoot our swords in our neighbours' hearts.
Our dregs are like to be more bitter than was tlie brim of God's
394 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. XLIX.
cup either to the French or to the Dutch ; ye and all your
neighbours had much need to pray for us, as we have oft done
for you, in your dangers. The barricades of Paris, the Catho-
lic League of France is much before my eyes, but I hope the
devil shall never find a Duke of Guise to lead the bands." ^
On the ninth of October, the king wrote to the council,
postponing an answer to their petitions ; and, the lords having
met on the seventeenth of that month, three proclamations
were issued. By the first of these, it was declared that no-
thing would be done that day regarding church matters ; and
the petitioners, who had assembled in great numbers in ex-
pectation of an answer, were ordered to leave Edinburgh
within twenty-four hours, unless they could show just cause,
in connection with their private afiairs, for remaining. By the
second, the courts of justice were ordered to be removed first
to Linlithgow, and afterwards to Dundee. By the third, all
copies of a book entitled '^A Dispute against the English
Popish Ceremonies obtruded upon the Church of Scotland,"
were ordered to be brought to the council, and publicly
burned. 2
^ Large Declaration, pp. 29, 30. Baillie, vol. i. p. 23.
2 Balfour, vol. ii. p. 236. Large Declaration, p. 32-34.
A.D. 1637.] OF SCOTLAND. 395
CHAPTEE L.
FROM THE THREE TROCLAMATIONS OF 17th OCTOBER, 1637, TO THE
PROCLAilATION OF 19th FEBRUARY, 1638.
Gillespie^ s Booh against the English Ceremonies — Oljections to
the Liturgy — Unreasonable expectations of the King —
Causes of the opp>osition to the Liturgy — Opi7iions of the
Clergy — Conduct and Character of the Bishops — TJie
Nobility — Riot at Edinburgh — Complaint against the
Bishops — Proceedings of the Privy Council — The King's
determination to adhere to the Service Booh — Proclamation
of the nineteenth of February.
The book against the English ceremonies, which was pro-
hibited by the third of the proclamations of the seventeenth of
October, was published without the author's name, and is sup-
posed to have been printed in Holland. It was afterwards
known to be the composition of George Gillespie, a young
man then living in the family of the Earl of Cassillis, and sub-
sequently one of the ministers of Edinburgh. Its object was
to prove that the Perth articles and certain other ceremonies
were neither necessary, expedient, nor lawful. It is a dull,
tedious work, but, though sufficiently severe in its language,
is not composed in the offensive tone which distinguishes some
of the books written by the English Puritans, at this time,
against the government and ritual of the Church. Except
that it was the latest work on the subject, there appears to
have been no sufficient reason why it should have been singled
out in the proclamation. As it was, the prohibition caused it
to be more eagerly read, and gave it an importance much be-
yond its real merits.
The objections which now began to be circulated against
the Liturgy were more calculated to produce an injurious effect
on the popular mind. They generally assumed the form of
two assertions — first, that the Service Book was mainly taken
from the English Book of Common Prayer, which was itself
in various respects eiToneous and superstitious j secondly, that
396 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. L.
in the points wherein it differed from the English form, the
differences were such as to bring it nearer to the offices of the
Church of Rome, or, as the common expression was, to the
Mass.
In so far as the objections applied both to the English and
Scottish books, they were of that kind which had all along
been maintained by the Puritans of both kingdoms ; and, if
even the arguments of Hooker had failed to convince his
countrymen, it was still less probable that any attempt to
persuade the Presbyterians of Scotland would be successful.
The accusation that the changes introduced into the Scottish
Service Book brought it nearer to the Eoman forms and doc-
trines was unjust ; and, so far as the daily offices were con-
cerned, its injustice must have been obvious even to the ob-
jectors themselves. The changes were manifestly in the
opposite direction, and were intended to conciliate the popu-
lar feeling. Such was the substitution of " Presbyter " for
" Priest " in the rubrics, and the omission of the Benedicite,
and!]of the Apocryphal Lessons except on a few holy-days.
There was, however, one important difference between the two
books, in which it need excite no surprise that the Puritans of
the seventeenth century could only see an approach to the
teaching of Rome. The Scottish office for the ministration of
the Holy Communion varied considerably, both in words and
arrangement, from the English Liturgy, and the change un-
doubtedly indicated an opinion regarding the Eucharist,
different from that which had generally prevailed in England.
Laud and the Scottish bishops, who introduced the alteration,
must have foreseen that the charge of departing from the
established doctrine would be brought against them, but they
were content to encounter the danger, for the sake of accom-
plishing a practical restoration of the belief once held by the
universal Church on a subject of so much importance.
King Charles was not prepared for the determined opposi-
tion which the Liturgy encountered. In the Large Declara-
tion he mentions the reasons which he had for believing that
his injunctions would be obeyed, and that the Book of Com-
mon Prayer would be received. These were that the nobility
and gentry, and his Scottish subjects generally, who resorted
to England, attended the churches in that country without
A.D. 1637.] OF SCOTLAND. 397
ever objecting to the Liturgy as unlawful and anticliristian ;
that the English Service had been regularly celebrated in the
chapel royal at Holyrood since the year 1617, and had been
attended by all classes without dislike ; that it had been used
by the bishops while conferring orders, and for several years
back had been also read in some cathedral churches, and in
the New College at St Andrews ; that many families had used
it in private ; and that, during his visit to Scotland, it had
been publicly read in all churches where he was present, and
many of the people had then resorted to it. He also states
that, inasmuch as the Scottish Service Book was in substance
the same with that of England, he never expected a charge of
Popery or superstition would be brought against a Liturgy,
which had been compiled by the bishops and other divines who
in Queen Mary's reign had preferred banishment and death
to submission to Rome, and which had since been cherished by
the English clergy who had done so much to oppose Popery.^
Expectations founded on such reasons ought not to have
deceived Charles and his counsellors. They should have been
aware that a powerful, unscrupulous party would raise the cry
of Popery against any ecclesiastical measure supported by the
court ; and, knowing how difficult it was to maintain the Book
of Common Prayer in England, they should have been pre-
pared for much more formidable obstacles to the introduction
of a new liturgy in Scotland. But, independently of mere
political adversaries, resistance of another kind might have
been anticipated, from the manner in which the Liturgy was
introduced, and from the character of the book itself. Not
only the Presbyterians who refused to acknowledge any
ecclesiastical supremacy in the sovereign, but all who held
that the crown was not entitled to exercise its prerogative
without the concurrence of the Church, would naturally be
averse to so important an alteration introduced by the autho-
rity of the king. If the very words in which the clergy were
to minister the sacraments and offer the daily prayers of the
Church were to be dictated by the crown, it was not easy to
see why the temporal authority might not also proceed to
define articles of faith.
Farther, the new Liturgy itself contained doctrines very
^ Large Declaration, p. 19-21.
898 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOKY [Chap. L.
different from those which hitherto had been generally received
in Scotland, The king and his advisers believed in the truth
of these doctrines; but the majority of the Scottish people were
of a different opinion, and it was very unlikely that they
would be willing to abandon their convictions at the bidding
of an authority which they did not recognise. The king
thought that, because the Scots in England frequented the
churches there, and because in Scotland the English Service
had been used in a few particular places, and on some solemn
occasions, without objection, the Liturgy would therefore be
willingly received as the only authorized form of public wor-
ship in the kiagdom. The expectation was an unreasonable
one. Although individual Scotsmen had made no objection
to a foreign ritual which they were at liberty to attend or not
as they pleased, it did not follow that the nation would sub-
mit to the same ritual when made obligatory on all. The
change sought to be introduced was very great. It was not,
indeed, as has frequently been supposed, an alteration from a
form of worship wholly extemporaneous ; but it was the sub-
stitution of a Liturgy with its rubrics, and calendar, and ser-
vices, adapted to the course of the Christian year, its offices in
which priests and people took part, and from which they were
not allowed to deviate, for a meagre form, in which the prayers
and confession were said by the minister alone, and might be
varied by him at his own discretion, and the people took no
part except in the singing of some metrical psalms. Those
who like Charles and Laud loved the Church's ritual, and to
whom it was a never-failing well-spring of the deepest and
most fervent devotion, could hardly understand how any rea-
sonable persons to whose knowledge it was brought could fail
to appreciate so excellent a gift. They did not make allow-
ance for the effects of the peculiar religious system which had
grown up in Scotland in the course of eighty years, and which
had now alienated the national mind from what had been the
common heritage of Christendom for fifteen centuries. They
utterly disregarded the lesson which they might have learned
from the establishment of the Perth articles. If it was hardly
possible to reconcile the people to a few ceremonies only occa-
sionally used, what was to be expected from an absolute sub-
version of their whole system of worship ?
A.D. 1637.] OF SCOTLAND. 899
The introduction of the English Liturgy in Scotland must,
under any circumstances, have been a work of difficulty, but
it was perilous to an extreme degree at the time chosen by
King Charles. During the latter years of his father's reign, a
zealous and powerful party had opposed the measures of the
sovereign ; and the influence and numbers of that party were
now greatly increased. It was composed of those who from
whatever motive were hostile to the royal supremacy, and to
the restoration of Episcopacy. A considerable proportion of
the gentry and burgesses had always belonged to that party,
although the authority of the king had repeatedly protected
them from the tyranny of the nobles. The ministers had for-
merly been its chief supporters, and among them some of its
most zealous champions were still to be found, but a great
change had taken place in that respect. The strenuous exer-
tions made by the sovereign to recover the alienated possessions
of the Church, and the influence acquired by the bishops since
the restoration of episcopal government, had won over many
of the ministers who would otherwise have opposed their mea-
sures. Had the clergy been left to themselves, the majority
of them, though opposed to ritual innovations, and submitting
to Episcopacy rather than heartily embracing it, would not
have taken active steps against the king and their ecclesiasti-
cal superiors. The discontented minority, however, were pre-
pared to encounter all dangers in order to overthrow a ceremo-
nial and government which they detested. They were encou-
raged by the sympathy of those of their countrymen who now
formed a powerful colony in Ireland, and they were in frequent
communication with the English Puritans. Their authority
was great among the lower classes of the people in the southern
districts of the kingdom, and they had been particularly suc-
cessful in acquiring an influence over the women of all ranks.
While most of the clergy were either faint defenders or
vehement adversaries of the established system, there was,
however, an increasing, though still comparatively small party,
who loved Episcopacy and liturgical forms, and who appealed
to the practice and authority of the ancient Church in support
of their views. Such were the doctors of Aberdeen, and
many of the clergy of that diocese ; and such generally were
the members of the theological faculties in the other univer-
400 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. L.
sities, and some of the ministers in almost every diocese of the
kingdom.
There is some difficulty in arriving at a true estimate of the
conduct and character of the Scottish bishops themselves at
this time. Many writers, even among those attached to the
cause of royalty and Episcopacy, relying on the authority
of Guthrie and Burnet, have spoken in very unfavourable
terms of the prelates. If what is mentioned by the former
of these historians be correct, the blame should chiefly be
bestowed on the younger bishops, who are said to have owned
a dependence on Laud. The doubtful character of Guthrie's
assertions has already been referred to ; and there seems to be
no reason, so far as the canons and Liturgy are concerned, for
excusing one portion of the hierarchy at the expense of
another. Burnet's remarks are still more severe. He speaks
of the prelates in the time of King James in the following
language : — " The bishops themselves did their part very ill.
They generally grew haughty : they neglected their functions,
and were often at court, and lost all esteem with the people.
Some few that were stricter and more learned did lean so grossly
to Popery that the heat and violence of the Eeformation
became the main subject of their sermons and discourses." He
describes them in the reign of Charles as lenient to the errors of
Rome ; as generally favourable to Arminianism ; as neglecting
the due observance of the Lord's day, not careful to prevent
simony, proud, ambitious, and overbearing ; and he farther
speaks of them, immediately before the commencement of the
civil war, as so lifted up with the king's zeal, and encouraged
by Archbishop Laud, that they lost all temper, as was ac-
knowledged, he says, by Sydserf himself in his old age. ^
There is some truth in these remarks, but the statement
as a whole is greatly exaggerated. The charge of a gross
leaning to Popery is a manifest calumny. Not one of the
Scottish bishops joined the Church of Rome • and, unless
William Forbes and Sydserf be exceptions, not one of them
expressed himself favourably towards the Roman doctrines.
There is reason to believe that some of them lost temper in
their discussions with the nobility ; but, in their intercourse
^ Burnet's History of his Own Time, vol. i. pp. 17, 18, 44, and Memoirs of
the Dukes of Hamilton, pp. 29, 30.
A.D. 1637.] OF SCOTLAND. 401
with the clergy, they were generally mild and conciliatory,
and, unless when the law was openly and systematically
defied, were far from severe in enforcing the penalties on
non-conformity. Had they been as tjrrannical as they are
frequently represented, some of the most distinguished Puri-
tans would not haye been allowed to retain the parochial
cures of which we find them in possession at the com-
mencement of the revolution. In the discharge of their
religious duties, the bishops appear for the most part to have
been careful and attentive ; some of them, as has been seen,
were models of humility and devotion.
The charge of ambition is the one most commonly brought
against the episcopal order. In evidence of its truth, reference is
generally made to the appointment of Archbishop Spottiswood
as Chancellor on the death of the Earl of Kinnoul, and to the pro-
posal to confer the office of Treasurer on Bishop Maxwell on the
resignation of the Earl of Morton ; to the large number of
prelates who held seats in the privy council ; to their contro-
versies with the nobility for power and precedence ; to their
attempts to recover the lands belonging to their sees ; and to
the plan for re-establishing the ancient abbacies and priories in
the persons of ecclesiastics, and restoring the original consti-
tution of the College of Justice, under which half of the judges
were churchmen. How far some of these specific accusations
are correct it is not easy to ascertain. Most of them rest on
mere conjecture, and on the reports of adversaries, rendered more
or less probable by the circumstances of the time. Thus the
intention of naming Maxwell to be Treasurer is mentioned by
Baillie, Burnet, and Guthrie ; yet there does not seem to be
sufficient authority for it, although the report was readily
believed by those who saw Juxon holding the same office in
England, and Spottiswood a yet higher one in Scotland. The
only secular offices of any importance held by the bishops, in
addition to the chancellorship, were the seats in the privy
council ; and these conferred more dignity than power. But
such appointments were unfortunate and impolitic. It was
not that the bishops were unfit for those duties, or inferior in
ability and experience to their lay rivals ,* but offices of that
description were now rightly held, as a general rule, to be in-
consistent with spiritual functions, and the giving them to the
VOL. II.] 27
402 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. L.
clergy was sure to provoke the jealousy and opposition of the
nobles.
That the bishops wished to recover the lands which had
belonged to their predecessors, and the other ecclesiastical pro-
perty which had been alienated at the Reformation, is certain ;
but they only proposed doing so by lawful purchase or volun-
tary resignation, and even to this extent the attempt appears
to have been abandoned when it was discovered to be very
unpopular. The proposal to restore the other ecclesiastical
prelacies and to nominate churchmen to fill them is mentioned
by Row ; and also by Baillie and Burnet in connection with
the presentation of a person named Learmonth to the abbacy
of Lindores. There is no certainty, however, that such a plan
was really contemplated. Learmonth was not appointed to
the abbacy ; and it is evident that Laud, the supposed prime
mover of all these schemes, was entirely ignorant of this great
contrivance, and only sought to procure the restoration of some
particular abbey lands for specific ecclesiastical purposes. It
is possible that the nobles may have believed in the existence
of such a design ; it is more probable that they spread the report
in order to increase popular feeling against the bishops. ^
The nobles, during the reign of Charles, were the chief
opponents of the king and the Church. Had they supported
the measures of the sovereign, as they did for a considerable
time after the accession of James to the English crown, the
Puritanical party among the ministers and people could not
have attempted open resistance with any prospect of success.
But various circumstances had contributed to make the
nobility the most discontented portion of the king's subjects ;
and they were now ready, as at the era of the Reformation, to
make common cause with those who were hostile to the esta-
blished Church. Their power was not so great as it had
been during the minority of James, but it was still very for-
^ See Row, pp. 389, 395 ; Baillie, vol. i. pp. 6, 7 ; Burnet's Memoirs of the
Dukes of Hamilton, p. 30, and History, vol. i. p. 34 ; Guthrie, p. 14 ; and
Laud's Works, vol. iii. p, 312-314. King James had allowed his right to nomi-
nate ministers to abbacies and priories to fall into disuse. The last person who
held such an ofSce seems to have been Peter Hewat, Abbot of Crossraguel,
one of the two ministers who were deprived for their concurrence in the protest-
ation to parliament in 1617. See Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. iv.
pp. 523, 524, and Spottiswood, vol. iii. p. 244.
A.D. 1637.] OF SCOTLAND. 403
midable, and sufficient to check the designs of a sovereign,
who,^ within Scotland, had nothing to rely on for the support
of his authority except the reverence which the royal name
could command.
The party among the nobility opposed to the court had
acquired greater strength in consequence of the proceedings
regarding the tithes, and the apprehended revocation of
church lands. The former of these measures, however bene-
ficial to others, was disadvantageous to the nobles, and, if the
latter had been carried out, many of them would have lost the
best part of their property. They looked on the ecclesiastics
as rivals who were seeking both to deprive them of their pos-
sessions, and to share with them those political offices and
emoluments which for many years they had regarded as ex-
clusively their own. They dreaded also the influence of the
bishops in parliament. The race of lay commendators was
extinct, their abbacies and priories having been converted into
temporal baronies ; and the bishops, who now formed the
whole estate of the clergy, were able, while acting in a body,
to be the real electors of the Lords of the Articles. All these
circumstances drew the discontented nobles into a close alli-
ance with the Puritans, and at least from the time of the king's
visit the two parties had been acting in concert. Their com-
mon object was the ruin of the bishops, and the overthrow of
the existing ecclesiastical establishment.
The dislike to the bishops, and to everything which tended
to increase the authority of the Church, was not confined to
the nobles who appeared in opposition to the measures of the
court. It was shared by many of those who made zealous
professions of loyalty, and even by the majority of the
members of the privy council. Although the charge of actual
treacheiy should be disregarded, there can be no doubt that this
hostile feeling prevented the adoption of the proceedings best
calculated to restore confidence and tranquillity after the
tumults about the Liturgy. Had the council been really
anxious to obey the king's injunctions, month after month
would not have been wasted in inaction, while their opponents
were openly preparing for the conflict. Many of the nobles
did not see, till it was too late, that the struggle was for
something more than church lands and ecclesiastical ceremonies.
404 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOEY [Chap. L.
The narrative of events may now be resumed. The first of
the three proclamations of the seventeenth of October had
commanded all strangers to leave Edinburgh. On the morn-
ing of the eighteenth, the Bishop of Galloway, while on his
way to the council-house to discharge some judicial duties,
was surromided by the rabble, who followed him to the door,
and who would have torn him to pieces had he not been defended
by Francis Stewart, son of the Earl of Bothwell. A report
had been spread abroad that the bishop wore a crucifix
beneath his vest, and this added to the fury of the people.
After he had found refuge within the council-house, Traquair
and other lords of the council sent to the magistrates of
Edinburgh, requiring them to disperse the rioters. These
officials answered that they were beset by the multitude within
their own place of meeting, and that they had been obliged for
their safety to sign a paper against the Service Book. The
treasurer, upon this, repaired to the magistrates, but, on his
return, was attacked by the rabble, and thrown down on the
street, and his white staff was pulled from him. With great
difficulty he reached the council-house, and it was only by
the assistance of some lords of the popular party that he and
the Bishop of Galloway were enabled to return to their lodg-
ings. The council met at Holyrood in the afternoon, and
issued another proclamation against unlawful meetings, which
was as little regarded as the former.^
In the meantime, a considerable number of the nobility,
gentry, and ministers opposed to the Service Book, ^ad
assembled to deliberate regarding the terms of a complaint
against the bishops, which was to be presented to the council.
Baillie's narrative supplies an interesting detail of the pro-
ceedings. He had been requested to come to Edinburgh at
this time by his patron. Lord Montgomery, eldest son of the
Earl of Eglinton. The resolution to prepare the complaint
was taken after the three proclamations were issued on the
seventeenth. The nobles, and a few of the ministers in whom
they confided, were the devisers of this step, the rest of the
ministers and the gentry being kept in ignorance of the purport
of the paper till it was ready. Two forms were prepared, one
by Henderson and Lord Balmerino, the other by Dickson and
^ Large Declaration, p. 34-39. Baillie, vol. i. pp. 37, 38.
A.D. 1637.] OF SCOTLAND. ' 405
Lord Loudon. The latter was preferred, and, without farther
deliberation, was immediately signed by about twenty-four
earls and lords, and by more than a hundred gentlemen.
Some of the ministers were. in the act of subscribing when
Baillie entered the room. He asked what they had signed,
but they could give him no answer. " It seems," he says,
'^ too many went in fide implicita." He requested that
it should be read over, and he finally brought himself to
subscribe it, because he agreed in its general import though
not in all the particulars. He admits, however, that there
was also another reason — that, had he refused his signature, he
would have been as infamous that day by marring a good
cause through his example, as he had been famous the day
before, by furthering it by his discourse. He adds that he
had not repented of his subscription, and that after much
study he thought he could defend every word of the paper.
Baillie belonged to that numerous class among the clergy
who disliked the canons and the Service Book, without any
wish to alter the established government in Church or
State, but who, once induced to join with the violent faction,
continued in a downward course, till they had taken part in
deeds which at first they would have shrunk from with
abhorrence.
The supplication, thus drawn up, set forth in name of the
noblemen, barons, ministers, burgesses, and commons, who
signed it, that they were constrained by the tenor of the late
proclamation to remonstrate against the archbishops and
bishops of the realm, who, being entrusted by his majesty
with the government of the Church, had drawn up and
enjoined two books ; in one of which — the Book of Common
Prayer — not only were sown the seeds of divers superstitions,
idolatry, and false doctrine, but also the English Service Book
was abused, especially in the Communion, in a manner quite
contrary to the intentions of the blessed reformers of religion
in England ; while in the other — the Book of Canons — the
Liturgy was enforced under the pain of excommunication, and
many regulations were enacted tending to foster superstition
and error ; that they were satisfied these proceedings were con-
trary to the pious intentions of their gracious sovereign, who
had been much wronged by the prelates : therefore, out of
406 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. L.
their bounden duty to God, their king and their country, they
craved that the matter should be put to trial, and those parties
taken order with according to the laws of the realm, and that
they should not in the meantime be suffered to sit as judges.
At the same time, another petition was presented to the
chancellor, in name of the men, women, children, and servants
in Edinburgh, stating that, being urged with the Service
Book, and having considered the same, they had found many
things therein different from the form of public worship pro-
fessed within the kingdom, and craving that his lordship would
find some way of delivering them from this and similar inno-
vations.
In answer to the first of these supplications, the council
intimated that they would communicate it to the king, and
report his answer. In the Large Declaration, the insincere
expressions used regarding the English Liturgy in the former
paper, and the circumstance that in the latter even the child-
dren are stated to have considered the Service Book, are
pointed out. These things are sufficiently obvious, but the
language of the appeals was really addressed to the people
themselves, rather than to the sovereign or his counsellors.^^
Before parting, the petitioners agreed to meet again on the
fifteenth of November. On the fourteenth of that month, the
privy council having assembled at Linlithgow, some of their
number had a conference with the leading persons among the
petitioners. Complaints were made by the counsellors regard-
ing the multitudes congregated at Edinburgh, which threatened
the peace of the kingdom ; and the petitioners suggested that,
to obviate this inconvenience, certain commissioners of their
number, as representing the whole body, should receive any
communication from the council, and report the result to their
constituents. This proposal was most imprudently agreed to,
and the consent thus given eventually led to the appointment
of the committee, which became known by the name of the
Tables. In all these matters, Baillie tells us, the ministers,
generally, were not consulted. The persons who managed
every thing were three or four noblemen, along with Hender-
son and Dickson, whom he styles the '' two archbishops." ^
^ Baillie, vol. i. p. 34-38. Large Declaration, p. 41-44.
2 Baillie, vol. i. p. 38-42.
A.D. 1637.] OF SCOTLAND. 407
On the seventh of December, the council issued a proclama-
tion at Linlithgow, which announced that the king had delayed
giving an answer to the petitioners, and set forth his majesty's
abhorrence of Popery, and his determination to allow nothing
which was opposed to the true religion then professed in his
ancient kingdom of Scotland. About the same time the Earl
of Koxburgh, Lord Privy Seal, returned from England with
instructions from the king, in consequence of which the courts
of justice were ordered to be removed from Linlithgow to
Stirling on the first of February, and the council, till then, to
sit at Dalkeith.
In the meantime, the petitioners continued to pursue their
measures with increased boldness. They resolved to admonish
the universities to beware of the Service Book, and not to suffer
any corrupt doctrine to be taught, lest parents should be forced
to remove their children. They had recourse also to an old
device of their party — the appointing of a day of fasting.
They did not, however, yet venture to usurp the supreme
authority by ordering an universal public fast, but agreed that
each minister, with consent of his session, should fix a day in
his own parish. On the twenty-first of December, the
petitioners were admitted to the presence of the council, and
Lord Loudon, in a formal speech, recapitulated their griev-
ances in connection with the Books of Canons, Ordination,
and Common Prayer, and the court of High Commission,
and again requested that order should be taken with the
prelates, the authors of all these innovations ; mentioning that
they did not crave the bishops' blood, nor revenge on their
persons, but only that the wrongs done by them should be
remedied. None of the bishops were present on this occasion,
and, by permitting such language to be used without censure,
the lay lords of the council shewed plainly enough that they
sympathized to a considerable extent with the petitioners. ^
The king, more and more perplexed, ordered Traquair to
come up to court. Anxious consultations took place regard-
ing what was next to be done, and it was finally resolved to
adhere to the Service Book. It is very doubtful whether any
concession would now have restored tranquillity to Scotland,
^ Large Declaration, p. 45 47. Baillie, vol. i. pp. 25-27, 42-46, and appen-
dix, p. 454-458.
408 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY [Chap. L.
and prevented the meditated attack on the Perth articles and
Episcopacy, but the king's determination was certainly an
unfortunate one. Had he declared his willingness not to urge
the Liturgy and canons, till duly sanctioned by law, and
announced his resolution to maintain firmly the ecclesiastical
government and the ceremonies then established, although he
would neither have conciliated the Puritans, nor have won
back the disaffected nobility, he would have obtained the
sympathy of the ,2:reater number of the clergy, and secured
the support of all whose opposition to the obnoxious measures
was not a mere cloak for other designs.
The treasurer returned to Scotland, and a proclamation
in accordance with the royal opinion was signed at Stirling
on the nineteenth of February, 1638. This proclamation
declared that the Liturgy had been compiled with the full
and deliberate sanction of the king ; censured severely the
conduct of the petitiojiers, both in respect of the matter of
their complaints, and the manner in which they had been
brought forward ; but promised to excuse the same in all
who should now conduct themselves as faithful subjects, and
forbade unlawful convocations of the people under the pain
of treason, specially commanding all strangers to leave Stir-
ling.
The petitioners, having contrived to learn both the import
of the proclamation and the day on which it was to be made,
immediately prepared a protestation against it. This docu-
ment bore to be in name of the noblemen, barons, ministers,
and burgesses appointed to attend his majesty's answer to
their humble petitions, and to bring forward new grievances,
and to do whatever else might lawfully conduce to their
humble desires. It refen-ed to their former supplications
and complaints, and to their declinature of the bishops as
their judges till the matters objected against them should be
tried : and it contained a protest that, as these requests had
been rejected, they should have immediate recourse to their
sovereign, to present and prosecute their grievances in a
legal way ; that the bishops should not be esteemed their
lawful judges, till they should purge themselves judicially
of the crimes laid to their charge ; that no act or proclamation
made in presence of the bishops should be prejudicial to the
A.D. 1638.] OF SCOTLAND. 409
petitioners ; and that neither they, nor any others whom the
Lord should move to join with them, should incur any penalty
or danger for not observing the unlawful acts, books, or pro-
clamations, and that any evil consequences which might follow
should not be attributed to them.
When the proclamation was made at kStirling, and after-
wards at Linlithgow, this protestation was publicly taken
against it ; and at Edinburgh, when the royal heralds and
pursuivants attended in their coats of arms at the market-cross,
to announce the king's resolution by sound of trumpet and
with all the formalities observed on such occasions, the procla-
mation was received with jeering and laughter, and the officers
were compelled to remain till the protestation was read in
presence of a large number of noblemen, barons, ministers, and
others. ^
This open defiance of the royal authority, and the other
measures which the petitioners immediately adopted, shewed
that they were now determined to persist in their course at all
hazards.
^ Large Declaration, p. 47-52.
Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Librai
1 1012 01127 2319
^
DATE DUE
GAYLORD #3523PI Printed in USA
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11