[1] "History of Scotland," vol. iii. p. 354.
[2] "An Essay on the Portraits of John Knox," pp. 139-140. "Works," vol. xii.
[3] "Works," vol. vi. p. 90.
[4] Froude's "History of England," vol. vi. p. 273.
[5] McCrie's "Works," vol. i. p. 149.
[6] "De Historia Gentis Scotorum," book iv. chap. 22. I am indebted for these citations to my late friend, Dr. J. M. Ross, whose researches into the literature of Scotland have been recently published, and whose early death is mourned by all who knew his worth. His work on the Pre-reformation Literature of Scotland is a perfect thesaurus of precious things, and has attracted the widest attention.
CHAPTER X.
THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE SCOTTISH CHURCH, 1560.
The meeting of Parliament, provided for in the Treaty of Leith, was opened with great ceremony on the 1st of August, 1560, and was attended by an unusually large number of members. Knox "improved" the occasion by preaching from the cathedral pulpit a series of expository sermons on the prophecies of Haggai, with special application to the circumstances of the country at the time. On his own showing he was "vehement," and as he inveighed strongly against those who had been enriched with the revenues of the Church, his words gave great offence to many. Maitland sneeringly said, "What! we must now forget ourselves and bear the barrow to build the house of God,"—words which already showed that spirit of insincerity which afterwards took him into the opposite camp. The great matter before this Parliament, after it had approved the articles of the treaty, was the settlement of religion, and as a preliminary to that the ministers were requested to draw up a summary statement of "that doctrine which they would maintain as wholesome and true, and only necessary to be believed." This work was done by them in four days, at the end of which they produced the Confession which Knox has given at full length in his history. It is all but certain that he had a considerable hand in its preparation, and it has been described by the younger McCrie as "remarkably free from metaphysical distinctions and minutiae," and as "running in an easy style, and in fact reading like a good sermon in old Scotch." It is, of course, Calvinistic, but in the article on election, there is nothing of either reprobation or preterition. In that on the Lord's Supper it repudiates alike the doctrine of transubstantiation, and that of those who believe it to be "nothing else but a naked and bare sign," insisting on some mystical influence as connected with it, but yet confessing that such influence is given "neither at that only time, nor yet by the proper power of the sacraments only," so that it is exceedingly difficult to get from it a definite statement of what precisely the "grace" in the sacrament is; but that difficulty is felt, in our judgment, as seriously by those who desire to reduce to plain language the words of the Westminster standards on the same subject. In the section which treats of the authority of Scripture, there is no attempt to formulate any theory of inspiration, but simply a declaration that "in those books which of the ancients have been reputed canonical, all things necessary to be believed for the salvation of mankind are sufficiently expressed," and an affirmation that "such as allege the Scriptures to have no other authority, but that which is received from the Kirk (Church) are blasphemous against God, and injurious to the true Kirk, which always heareth and obeyeth the voice of her own spouse and pastor, and taketh not on her to be mistress of the same." On the subject of the civil magistrate its words run thus: "That to kings, princes, rulers, and magistrates, we affirm that chiefly and most principally the reformation and purgation of the religion appertains; so that not only they are appointed for civil policy, but also for maintenance of the true religion, and for suppressing of idolatry and superstition, as in David, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, and others highly commended for their zeal, in that case may be espied," a statement which amply confirms what we have just said regarding the position taken by the Reformers on this matter. We ought to add, however, that according to Randolph, the representative of the English Court, who was present on the occasion of the ratification of the Confession, the section on the civil magistrate had been expunged by Maitland, to whose revision, as well as that of the Lord James Stuart, it had been submitted, and by whom certain strong phrases in other parts of the document had been softened. In Knox's history we have no word of anything like that, but simply the Confession as it was actually ratified, and in that a paragraph on the civil magistrate stands with the rest. But as there is in that paragraph a good deal about the prerogatives of rulers, and the duty of obedience to them, while there is no word of the limits of allegiance to them, and the right of resisting them when they violate either the laws of the realm or the dictates of conscience, on both of which points we know that Knox and his brethren held strong convictions, it is probable that at first the article contained some things on these aspects of the question, which were afterwards stricken out, by the two men whom we have named, as being likely if retained to imperil the acceptance of the document as a whole. This is only a conjecture of our own, but it is not inherently improbable, and it serves to harmonize the statement of Randolph with the appearance in Knox's history of a chapter on the civil magistrate in the Confession as adopted.
This summary of doctrine was laid before Parliament, and carefully read over article by article. Then, that no one should have a pretext for complaining of undue haste, its further consideration was adjourned to another day, the 17th of August, on which it was almost unanimously accepted, and "ratified by the three estates of the realm." This was followed on the 24th of the same month by the passing of Acts abolishing the jurisdiction of the Pope in Scotland, repealing all former statutes passed in favour of the Roman Catholic Church, and ordaining that all who said mass, or heard mass, should for the first offence be punished with confiscation of goods, for the second with banishment, and for the third with death. Thus on the very threshold of their undertaking they manifested the same intolerance from which they had themselves suffered so much.
With a view to the proper organization of the Protestant Church, the Lords of the Privy Council appointed Knox, along with five other ministers, to draw up a plan of reconstruction which in their judgment should be both agreeable to Scripture and practicable in the circumstances of the country at the time. The outcome of their labours was that scheme of Church government and order, which is known in Scottish ecclesiastical history as "The First Book of Discipline." It specifies the officers of the Church, permanent and temporary, describes the manner of their election and appointment, particularizes their duties, and gives principles for guidance as to general discipline, while it also furnishes directions as to the celebration of marriages and the conducting of funerals. At the same time it outlines with great fulness a magnificent system of national education, such as Scotland is only now beginning to realize, though for centuries it has enjoyed something of an approximation to it.
This "Book" is one of extreme interest, and is worthy of far more attention from the mass of the people in these days than it has received, or perhaps is likely to receive; but to whet the appetites of our readers for the enjoyment of the work itself, we shall give some general notion of its contents. The permanent officers in the Church were ministers, elders, and deacons. The ministers were to be elected by the people, but in case they neglected to do that duty within forty days the Church of the superintendent with his council was to "present" to them a man whom they judged apt to feed the flock, yet it was always to be avoided "that any man be violently intruded or thrust in upon any congregation." Thus Knox and his brethren were "non-intrusionists;" yet we doubt if in the famous controversy which ended in 1843, they would have come up to the party standard, for the "Book" says: "But violent intrusion we call not, when the council of the Kirk, in the fear of God, and for the salvation of the people, offereth unto them a sufficient man to instruct them, whom they shall not be forced to admit before examination." Then elsewhere it is said, "If his doctrine is wholesome and able to instruct the simple, and if the Kirk can justly reprehend nothing in his life, doctrine, or utterance, then we judge the Kirk which before was destitute unreasonable if they refuse him whom the Kirk did offer, and they should be compelled by the censure of the council and Kirk, to receive the person appointed and approved by the judgment of the godly and learned." Where was "the veto without reasons" then? And on whose side was the First Book of Discipline? or was it on both sides? The minister so chosen or appointed was to give proof of his gifts by interpreting before the men of soundest judgment in the neighbourhood, some place of Scripture selected by his brethren in office. He was also to be examined openly "before all that list to hear," by the ministers and elders of the Kirk, "in all the chief points that now lie in controversy betwixt us and the Papists, Anabaptists, Arians, or other such enemies of the Christian religion." Next he was to preach to the congregation calling him, that in open audience of his flock he might give confession of his faith in full. Then public "edict" was to be proclaimed, not only in the church where he was to serve, but also in other places, especially in those in which he had formerly lived, that if there was known any reason why he should not be appointed to the ministry it should be shown. If everything were satisfactory, the manner of his installation to office was to consist in the consent of the people to whom he was appointed and the approbation of the learned ministers by whom he was examined. The admission was to be "in open audience." After a sermon by some "especial minister" on the duty and office of ministers, exhortations were to be given to minister and people, and this paragraph follows: "Other ceremony than the public approbation of the people and declaration of the chief minister, that the person there presented is appointed to serve that Kirk, we cannot approve; for albeit the apostles used the imposition of hands, yet seeing the miracle is ceased, the using of the ceremony we judge is not necessary." Most evidently John Knox believed in "order," but just as evidently he did not believe in "orders," and there is no place here for the doctrine of "succession."
The elders and deacons were to be chosen by the people annually, from among a list given by the minister, and if Churches be of smaller number than that such office-bearers can be chosen from among them, they may be joined to the next adjacent Church. We have here therefore the "rotatory" eldership, as it has been called by some in America, recognised in principle, and the reason given for it is "lest that by long continuance of such officials men presume upon the liberty of the Church." Those holding the office were eligible for re-election, but they must be appointed yearly "by common and free election." In another place he says: "This order has been ever observed since that time in the Kirk of Edinburgh, that is that the old session before their departure nominate twenty-four in election for elders, of whom twelve are to be chosen, and thirty-two for deacons, of whom sixteen are to be elected, which persons are publicly proclaimed in the audience of the whole Kirk, upon a Sunday before noon, after sermon, with admonition to the Kirk, that if any man know any notorious crime or cause that might unfit any of these persons to enter in such vocation they should notify the same unto the session the next Thursday; or if any know any persons more able for that charge, they should notify the same unto the session, to the end that no man, either present or absent, being one of the Kirk, should complain that he was spoiled of his liberty in election." The duty of the elders was to assist the minister in the oversight and discipline of the flock; and that of the deacons was to superintend the revenues of the Church and to take care of the poor.
Besides these permanent offices, two others were recommended for the meeting of present emergencies. There were first a class of men called Readers, whose duty it was to read the Common Prayers and the Scriptures, in places still destitute of properly qualified ministers, and which otherwise would have had no service of any sort for public worship or instruction. They were restricted to the function of reading, and hence their name; but they were encouraged to prosecute their studies, and if they advanced satisfactorily they were permitted, after examination, to append some exhortations to their readings, and then they were called Exhorters. In addition to these, and at the other end of the scale, the Book recommended the appointment of ten Superintendents, each of whom was to have the supervision of a district over which he was required regularly to travel for the purpose of preaching, planting Churches, and inspecting the conduct of ministers, exhorters, and readers. Some have maintained that in this there was a recognition of Episcopacy, but as Dr. Laing has shown, the office was merely temporary, and the number never exceeded the five who were first appointed. Like other ministers the superintendent was subject to the Assembly, and might be censured, superseded, or deprived of his office by its decision. These office-bearers were to be appointed in the first instance by the Privy Council, or by a commission appointed by that body for the purpose; but, afterwards, by the whole ministers of the district to be superintended, from a list of names already proclaimed by the ministers, elders, and deacons with the magistrates and council of the chief town in the province; and for his installation a form is given, with a list of the questions to be proposed to him, and the answers to be given by him. It is added that "the superintendent being elected and appointed to his charge, must be subjected to the censure and correction of the ministers and elders, not only of his chief town, but also of the whole province over the which he is appointed overseer."
It may be added here, that "The Book of Common Order" makes mention of still another class of office-bearers, called Teachers or Doctors, who were to be men of learning for the exposition of God's word, and whose nearest modern equivalent seems to us to be the professors in theological seminaries, but it is said "for lack of opportunity we cannot well have the use thereof."
In regard to the sacraments the "Book of Discipline" lays down that the Lord's Supper should be observed after the manner already described by us when we were treating of Knox's ministry in Berwick. In great towns it was recommended that it should be observed four times in the year, and in order to keep off Easter, the first Sundays in March, June, September, and December are suggested, because "we study to suppress superstition." It was also specified that in large towns there should be daily sermon, or else common prayer, with some exercise of reading the Scriptures; and in smaller places there should be at least one day besides the Sunday appointed for sermon and prayer. Baptism might be administered wherever the word was preached, but it is alleged to be more expedient that it be on the Sunday, and never in private unless accompanied by the preaching of the word; for as the Book of Common Order says, "The sacraments are not ordained of God to be used in private corners as charms or sorceries, but left to the congregation and necessarily annexed to God's word as seals of the same." We admit the clause about "charms," but with the household baptisms of the Scriptures before us, and the other baptisms, which were administered—as it were "extempore"—by the apostles in the house of the jailer and the house of Cornelius, we are not quite so sure about the rest of "the rubric." Marriages were not to be entered into secretly, but in open face and audience of the church; the place for their celebration, therefore, was the church, and the time recommended was Sunday before sermon. It was suggested that there should be no service of any sort at funerals; but it is added, "Yet we are not so precise but that we are content that particular kirks use services in that behalf, with the consent of the ministry of the same, as they shall answer to God, and to the assembly of the Church gathered within the realm."
But the most interesting portion of the Book of Discipline, perhaps, to us in these days, is that which refers to education, contemplating as it did the erection of a school in every parish for the instruction of the young in the grammar of their own language, in the Latin tongue, and in the principles of religion; the setting up in every notable town of a "college" for the teaching of "the arts, at least, logic and rhetoric, and the tongues;" and finally the establishment in the "towns accustomed,"—that is Aberdeen, St. Andrews, and Glasgow,—of Universities with full appointments which are minutely described. These were to be supported, stipends were to be furnished for the superintendents, ministers, and readers, and suitable provision made for ministers' widows, and orphan children, out of the confiscated revenues of the Church, the bishops, and the cathedral establishments, together with the rents arising from the endowments of monasteries and other religious foundations.
The "Common Prayer" so frequently referred to was no doubt "the order of Geneva which is now used in some of our kirks," as the words within inverted commas quoted from the Book of Discipline make clear. That book had been prepared for the English congregation of Geneva during Knox's pastorate there; and with such changes as the difference of circumstances made necessary, it came to be adopted by the Scottish General Assembly in 1564. Our reference to it here, therefore, is a little premature, as we are now writing of events that occurred in 1560; but it may be convenient, as we are treating of the organization of the Scottish Church, to dispose of the matter, once for all, in this place. As we have already incidentally recorded, it was agreed by those who entered into the "Godly Band," that "common prayers" be read in the parish churches on Sundays by the curates if they consented, or if they refused, by such persons within the bounds as were best qualified to do so. This probably was meant to specify the second Prayer-Book of King Edward VI., yet as Dr. Laing remarks, and the reasoning of Dr. McCrie on the subject tends to confirm his statement, "the adoption of that book could only have been to a partial extent, and of no long continuance." He proceeds thus: "But this, after all, is a question of very little importance, although it has been keenly disputed, for it is well to remember that at this period there were no settled parish churches, and as there were no special congregations either in Edinburgh or in any of the principal towns throughout the country, no ministers had been appointed. The lords of the congregation and their adherents were much too seriously concerned in defending themselves from the Queen Regent and her French auxiliaries, and more intent for that purpose on obtaining the necessary aid from England, than to be at all concerned about points of ritual importance. In the following year, when the French troops were expelled from Scotland, and the Protestant cause was ultimately triumphant, we may conjecture that, in some measure swayed by the avowed dislike of Knox to the English service book, the preference was given to the forms of Geneva. We hear at least no more word of the English Prayer-Book, and in the "Book of Discipline," prepared in December, 1560, the only form mentioned is "Our Book of Common Order," and "The Book of our Common Order, called the Order of Geneva." There is also in existence a copy of an edition of that book printed in Edinburgh in 1562, which shows its actual use at that time. Afterwards it was found needful to have it enlarged, and the metrical version of the Psalms, taken in large proportion from Sternhold and Hopkins, and accompanied with appropriate tunes, was appended to it. We cannot go into all the details of each part of the service here, but will content ourselves with giving the order which it follows. It begins with a confession of faith of considerable extent, but following the lines of the Apostles' Creed of which it is an expansion; then come sections in the order in which we name them, and respectively entitled—Of the Ministers and their Election, Of the Elders and as Touching their Office and Election; Of the Weekly Assembly of the Ministers, Elders and Deacons; Of the Interpretation of the Scriptures. After these comes the sanctuary service proper, consisting first of a prayer of confession, of which a choice of one or other of three forms is given, or perhaps it may have been intended that all three should be used, for the book is not so explicit here as elsewhere; second, a psalm to a plain tune sung by the people; third, a prayer by the minister for the assistance of God's Holy Spirit, for which no form is given, and the minister is to offer it as the Holy Spirit shall move his heart; fourth, the sermon; fifth, a prayer for the whole state of Christ's Church, and for the Queen and her council, and the whole body of the commonwealth; sixth, the Apostles' Creed; seventh, a psalm sung by the people; eighth, the Benediction, after one or other of two forms, to wit, that of Aaron and his sons, or that of the apostle at the end of the first Epistle to the Corinthians, but in both instances "us" is substituted for "you;" and so the congregation departeth. To this are appended the Genevan form of prayer after sermon; and another form to be used after sermon, on the week-day appointed for common prayer; prayers used in the churches of Scotland during the time of their persecution by the French; the thanksgiving after their departure; and a prayer for the general assemblies of the Church. It will be observed that nothing is here said of the reading of the Scriptures, but this was not because that was under-valued, but because the reader, who was in many cases the minister's assistant, had already, before the commencement of the service proper, attended to that duty in the hearing of the people. So far were Knox and his friends from slurring over that exercise, that in the Book of Discipline this characteristic passage occurs: "Further, we think it a thing most expedient and necessary that every church have a Bible in English, and that the people be commanded to convene to hear the plain reading or interpretation of the Scriptures as the Church shall appoint, that by frequent reading this gross ignorance, which in the accursed papistry hath overflown all, may partly be removed. We think it most expedient that the Scriptures be read in order, that is, that some one book of the Old and the New Testament be begun and orderly read to the end. And the same we judge of preaching, where the minister for the most part remaineth in one place; for this skipping and divagation from place to place, be it in reading, be it in preaching, we judge not so profitable to edify the Church, as the continual following of one text."
The order for baptism follows: the father, or in his absence the godfather, is to rehearse the articles of his faith (this mention of the godfather is interesting, and some may be surprised to learn, that at the baptisms in Geneva of Knox's two sons, who were born there, Whittingham was godfather to the one and Miles Coverdale to the other); the minister follows with an exposition of the Creed; after that comes a prayer; then the minister taketh water in his hand, layeth it on the child's forehead, repeating the words of the formula of baptism, and closes with an offering of thanks. The Book of Discipline had already disallowed the sign of the cross, all anointings, and the like. This is followed by "the manner of the Lord's Supper," into which we need not go, as that has been already described. Then there is a single sentence on burial, discouraging services at the grave; but after burial "the minister, if he be present and required, goeth to the church if it be not far off, and maketh some comfortable exhortation to the people touching death and resurrection." The book concludes with "The Order of Ecclesiastical Discipline," pointing out the three causes of discipline—the two kinds of discipline private and public, and the like. There is in it no form for marriage; but that could be supplied from the "Order of Geneva," which in this respect follows the lines of other ecclesiastical books.
This "Book of Common Order" has often been called "John Knox's Liturgy," and within due limitations it is not inaccurately so denominated; but the term is apt to be misleading, and it needs to be added that the forms contained in it are not prescribed for constant and exclusive use, but are given more in the way of a directory to ministers as to the conduct of the service. The "Readers" of course were restricted to them; but ministers were left free to use them or not at their discretion. Thus we find in what we may call the "rubrics" such expressions as these: "When the congregation is assembled at the hour appointed, the minister useth one of these two confessions, or like in effect;" "the minister after the sermon useth this prayer following, or such like." Similar liberty is given as to the prayers in the forms for baptism and the Lord's Supper; and at the end of the form for the service on the Sunday we have this general statement: "It shall not be necessary for the minister daily to repeat all these things before mentioned; but beginning with some manner of confession, to proceed to the sermon, which ended, he useth either the prayer for all estates before mentioned, or else prayeth as the Spirit of God shall move his heart, framing the same according to the time and manner which he hath entreated of." Thus the position of the book, as concerns the debate between liturgy proper and free prayer, is one of liberty, furnishing forms to those who wished to use them, and leaving those who did not to pray as the Spirit moved them; but showing to both alike what order was to be observed in the service as a whole, what subjects were to be introduced into the prayers, and in what order and connection they were to be brought into them. It ought to be noted also that this book gave a great impulse to congregational singing of psalms, which was adopted instead of that of choral anthems; and the fashion now so universal, of printing the tunes in connection with the Psalms, was followed, if not indeed introduced, so far as Scotland is concerned by it. But though Knox had undoubtedly a hand in the preparation and sanction of this so-called Liturgy, Dr. Laing has unqualifiedly affirmed "that in no instance do we find himself using set forms of prayer." The importance of the subject in itself, and the general interest now felt in it by most of the Presbyterian and Congregational Churches alike in Great Britain and America, must be our apology for going so fully into this interesting history, and for setting, as far as we may, the exact truth about it before the reader.
But we must now resume the thread of our narrative. The Book of Discipline never was so ratified as to become the law of the land. Its general outlines, indeed, were followed in the organization of the Church; but though it received the signatures of many members of the Privy Council, it was bitterly opposed by others—by some because they were unwilling to disgorge the share of the Church's patrimony of which they had taken possession, and by others because of their aversion to the strict moral surveillance to which it would have subjected them. Knox puts the matter in a nutshell when he says: "Everything that impugned to their corrupt affections was called in their mockage a 'devout imagination.' The cause we have already declared: some were licentious; some had greedily gripped to the possessions of the Kirk; and others thought that they would not lack their part of Christ's coat, and that before ever He was hanged, as by the preachers they were oft rebuked." The final arrangement of the temporalities was made later, when the ecclesiastical revenues were divided into three parts, two of which were given to the ejected popish clergy for their lives; and the other was divided between the court and the Protestant ministers.
As to the conduct of public worship the General Assembly of the Church passed an Act in December, 1562, which enacted that "one uniform order shall be taken in the administration of the sacraments, solemnization of marriages, and burial of the dead, according to the Book of Geneva"; and in December, 1564, it was ordained by the same body "that minister, exhorter, and reader shall have one of the psalm books lately printed in Edinburgh and use the order contained therein, in prayers, marriage, and ministration of the sacraments."
In the latter part of 1560 Knox entered upon his ministry in Edinburgh, with the Cathedral of St. Giles as his parish church, and John Cairns as his assistant or reader. The city council provided for his lodging a house at the Netherbow Port, which had been that of the Abbot of Dunfermline, and which is now the property of the Free Church of Scotland, by whom it is preserved as a memorial of the Reformer. The council assigned him at first a stipend of £200, besides discharging his house rent. After the settlement by the Privy Council above alluded to, he received at least a part of his stipend from the common fund of the ministers—for there was an "equal dividend" of the portion given to the Protestant clergy—and the city council added to that what was necessary to bring it up to the sum originally given. An interesting illustration of their care for his comfort is furnished in the Act of council of date 30th October, 1561, which runs thus: "The same day the provost, bailies, and council ordains the Dean of Guild with all diligence to make a warm study of deals to the minister John Knox, within his house above the hall of the same, with light and windows thereunto, and all other necessaries." But before that time a dark shadow had fallen upon his dwelling, for toward the end of December, 1560, his wife died, leaving him with his two boys to mourn her loss.
Public affairs just then also had a threatening aspect. Mary and her husband, the King of France, persistently refused either to ratify the Treaty of Leith, or to confirm the settlement of the Reformed Church, and were preparing a French army for the invasion of Scotland; while agents of the Roman Catholic Church were sent over to rally the adherents of the old faith. But "man proposes and God disposes," for before the projected invasion could be carried out Francis II. died (on December 5th, 1560), and Lord James Stuart was sent by a convention of the nobility to France, not, as some have alleged, to invite Mary to Scotland, but as Lord James himself wrote to Cecil, "for declaration of our duty and devotion to her highness." Before his departure he was—we quote from Knox's "History"'—"plainly premonished that if ever he condescended that she should have mass publicly or privately said within the realm of Scotland, that then betrayed he the cause of God, and exposed the religion even to the uttermost danger that he could do. That she should have mass publicly, he affirmed that he never should consent, but to have it secretly in her chamber, who could stop her? The danger was shown, and so he departed." He left Edinburgh on the 18th of March, and on the 19th of August, 1561, Mary arrived in Scotland, where she was received with every demonstration of enthusiastic welcome.
CHAPTER XI.
KNOX AND QUEEN MARY STUART, 1561-1563.
Beautiful in person, attractive in manner, able, acute, brilliant even, in intellect, Mary Stuart had many qualities which might have been turned to good account for the welfare of her country. But, brought up in a French court, her moral code was neither of the highest nor the purest; educated under the supervision of her uncles of Lorraine, she was taught to believe that the one great object of her life was to advance the interests of the Roman Catholic Church; and sister-in-law to him whose name is for ever blackened by the massacre of St. Bartholomew, she was not likely to be over scrupulous as to the means which she would employ to gain her end. So far as she had shaped a policy to herself, when she came to Scotland, it would seem to have been to temporize with the Protestants, until she had time either to fascinate them by the spell of her personal magnetism or to crush them by her power; then to make the throne of Scotland a stepping-stone to that of England, to which she claimed to be the lawful heir, and so to bring that realm also back to its allegiance to the Pope. This made her and Elizabeth implacable enemies. They were neighbours; they were cousins; they were queens, these two, and the struggle between them was to the death. One or other must go down. Each played a deep and deceitful game, but Elizabeth was moved by ambition for herself, while Mary was devoted to a cause, and so it is that as she lays her head upon the block at Fotheringay it is encircled with the halo of a kind of martyrdom, and the eye of the sternest judge is for the moment blinded to the guilt of her life by the tear of pity which dims it as he looks upon the manner of its close.
Knox and she from the very first seem to have singled each other out for a conflict hand to hand. He saw that everything which he counted dear depended on the manner in which she was dealt with; and she perceived that he was the moving spirit in that religious revolt which it was her mission to put down. He feared the effect of her blandishments upon others, and she recognised the magnitude of his influence upon the people. He saw that if she could be baffled in her efforts to re-establish popery in the land, the victory would be finally won; and she felt that so long as he had the opportunity of swaying the multitude by the fervour of his eloquence, there was no hope of gaining the end on which her heart was fixed. He was afraid of the effect of what his friend Campbell of Kingzeancleugh called "the sprinkling of the holy water of the court" upon the less reliable of his adherents; and she feared the fervour of his prayers to God, and the power of his appeals to his fellow-men. So there came to be for some time a kind of duel between them, and the issue was at last a victory for Knox. We need not approve unqualifiedly of everything which he did or said in the course of the struggle, yet we must rejoice in the result, for Knox "builded better than he knew," and secured, not immediately but ultimately, the triumph of a larger liberty than that which he at the time believed in; while she was the representative of absolute power, and of a feudalism which looked upon the common people as existing for her convenience and aggrandisement rather than upon herself as the servant of the state. "What are you in this commonwealth?" was her haughty question to him on one occasion. "A subject born within the same," was his ever-memorable answer, and the outcome of it has been that now in the land he loved the sovereign is for the subjects, and not the subjects for the sovereign; it is a little difference verbally, but in reality the gulf between the two is that which divides freedom from slavery.
The first collision between them occurred a few days after her landing. Naturally enough, as some may think, she gave orders for the celebration of a solemn mass in the chapel of Holyrood on the first Sabbath after her arrival. She knew of the law passed by the Parliament in 1560; she had probably heard from Lord James Stuart the warning which had been given to him when he went to France, and therefore this act on her part was a virtual throwing down of the gauge of battle at the feet of the Protestants. And thus they themselves interpreted it. Some may imagine that they attached undue importance to it; yet as Protestantism is still insisted on as a sine quâ non to succession to the British throne, those who approve the continuance of the Revolution settlement cannot consistently condemn them. Moreover, it is not to be forgotten that to the Reformers the mass was more than even an idolatrous service. It was a sign of many other things: thumbscrews, racks, galley chains, gibbets and the like, which were inseparably connected with papal supremacy, and in truth, as one has said, "A man sent to row in French galleys and such like for teaching the truth in his own land, cannot always be in the mildest humour." When therefore her purpose became known, great excitement was created among the Protestants, and some spoke of preventing her by force from carrying it out; but Knox used his influence in private, against such a proposal. On the following Sunday, however, from his pulpit he showed his sense of the gravity of the crisis, when, after exposing the idolatry that was in the mass, he alleged that "one mass was more fearful unto him than if ten thousand armed enemies were landed in any part of our realm of purpose to suppress the whole religion." Hearing of this outburst Mary sent for him to the palace, whether of her own motive or at the suggestion of others is not known, and he had then, in the presence of Lord James Stuart, the first of those interviews which have been so harped upon by his vituperators. We must refer our readers for the details to Knox's own account in his "History," which has been little more than simply modernised by McCrie, and must content ourselves with a mere summary of what occurred. She began by attacking him for the writing of the "First Blast," and after he had vindicated himself as best he could for that, she charged him with having taught the people to receive a religion different from that which was allowed by their princes. This brought out his views as to the limits of obedience to civil rulers, and on her interpreting his words to mean that her subjects should obey him and not her, he vehemently repudiated that misapprehension, and alleged that both rulers and subjects should obey God, and that kings should be foster-fathers, and queens nursing-mothers to His Church. That elicited the question from her which is the Church of God? and for answer thereto he referred her to the Scriptures. This in its turn raised the inquiry whose interpretation of Scripture was to be accepted? which he answered by laying down the duty of private judgment and of the comparing of one part of Scripture with another. At length she very humbly remarked that she was not able to contend with him, but that if she had those present with her whom she had heard they could answer him, and he expressed his readiness to meet before her in argument "the learnedest papist in Europe." To this she somewhat tartly retorted, "You may perchance get that sooner than you believe," and he replied a little sarcastically to the effect that if he ever got it, then indeed it would be sooner than he believed. He took his leave in this courtly yet scriptural fashion, "Madame, I pray God that you may be as blessed within the commonwealth of Scotland as ever Deborah was in the commonwealth of Israel."
Thus for the first time they measured their strength, and the result was, in common speech, a draw. Mary found that Knox was made of more unyielding stuff than those whom heretofore she had been in the habit of meeting; and John formed an estimate of Mary's ability which his subsequent experience only served to confirm. It was to be no child's play between them. He could not afford to give so subtle and ready an adversary the least advantage. Writing to Cecil after this interview he says, "The Queen neither is, neither shall be of our opinion, and in very deed her whole proceedings do declare that the cardinal's lessons are so deeply printed in her heart that the substance and the quality are like to perish together. I would be glad to be deceived, but I fear I shall not. In communication with her I espied such craft as I have not found in such age."
Matters went on after this with tolerable quietness for months, and Knox kept up his stated labours as the minister of Edinburgh. What these were seem now to be surprising. He preached twice every Sunday, and thrice besides during the week on other days. He met regularly once a week with his elders for the oversight of the flock; and attended weekly the assembly of the ministers, for what was called "the exercise on the Scriptures." These stated and constant labours, with the addition of frequent journeyings by appointment of the General Assembly to perform in distant parts of the country very much the duty of a superintendent for the time, were exceedingly exhausting; and the city council, wishing to relieve him of some of his duties, came (in April, 1562) to a resolution to call the minister of the Canongate to undertake the half of his charge; but their object was not accomplished till June of the following year, when John Craig became his colleague.
Meanwhile the Reformer came again into collision with the court. In the beginning of March, 1562, the Duke of Guise and the Cardinal Lorraine made that assault on a peaceable and defenceless congregation of Huguenots, which is known in French history as the Massacre of Vassy; and when the report of that was received by Mary, she was so delighted that she gave in honour of the occasion a splendid ball in the palace to her foreign servants, by whom dancing was kept up to a very late hour. This act of hers was exceedingly painful to Knox, for he had many warm friends among the Protestants of France, and his heart was saddened by the tidings of the treatment to which they had been subjected. Accordingly he gave vent to his feelings in his pulpit on the following Sunday, when he preached from the text, "Be wise now, ye kings; be instructed, ye judges of the earth." After discoursing on the dignity of magistrates and the obedience which was due to them, he lamented and condemned the vices to which they were too commonly addicted, and made some severe strictures on their conduct, affirming, among other things, "that they were more exercised in fiddling and flinging, than in reading or hearing God's word," and that "fiddlers and flatterers" (John was evidently fond of alliteration) "were more precious in their eyes than men of wisdom and gravity." The report of his discourse was carried by some one to Mary; and though he had made no direct assault upon her, he was summoned on the next day to the palace. Introduced to a chamber in which she sat, surrounded by her maids of honour and principal courtiers, he was treated to a long "harangue," as he calls it (but it was no doubt a proper scolding), on the enormity of his conduct. Very wisely he heard that out without interruption; then, when his "innings" came, he complained that he had evidently been misreported to her, and craved leave to repeat to her precisely what he had said, thus adroitly contriving that for that time at least she should listen to a sermon. Beginning with the text, he went over the main points of his discourse, which, among other things, had in it this piece of sound sense: "And of dancing, madame, I said that albeit in Scripture I find no praise of it, and in profane writers that it is termed the gesture rather of those that are mad and in frenzy than of sober men; yet do I not utterly condemn it, providing that two vices be avoided: the former, that the principal vocation of those that use that exercise be not neglected for the pleasure of dancing; and the second, that they dance not as the Philistines their fathers, for the pleasure they take in the displeasure of God's people." The accuracy of his rehearsal of his sermon having been confirmed by those who had heard it when it was originally given, the Queen said it was bad enough, but admitted that it had not been so reported to her; and then very naively asked, that if he heard anything of her that "misliked" him, he would come to herself and speak of it to her privately. But Knox believed that publicity was one great means of securing the vigilance, and through that the safety, of the people, and therefore he declined to accede to her request, on the ostensible ground that with the multiplicity of his labours he had not the time for running about the court and his congregation individually to deal with them for what he saw amiss. On this occasion Knox was the champion of "free speech," and "scored" a victory, so that he departed "with a reasonable merry countenance;" and when some of the bystanders said, "He is not afraid," he made reply, "Why should the pleasing face of a gentle woman affray me? I have looked on the faces of many angry men, and yet have not been afraid above measure," and so he left the Queen and the court for that time.
The Romanists, encouraged by the hope of success, began now to put forth strenuous exertions, both military and controversial, to recover their lost ground; but the rising of the Earl of Huntly in the north was put down by the vigour of Lord James Stuart, who was now known as the Earl of Murray; and the success of the abbot of Crossraguel, in debate with Knox, was not such as to encourage others to follow in his footsteps. That dignitary, in his chapel in Kirkoswald, had, on August 30th, 1562, read a series of articles on the mass and kindred subjects, which he offered to defend against all comers; and on the following Sunday Knox, who happened to be in the neighbourhood and heard of the challenge, came to the church to meet him. But though he had courteously intimated to the abbot that he would be present, that dignitary did not put in an appearance, and Knox himself preached in the chapel. At the close of the service a letter from the abbot was put into his hand; and, after negotiations, they met on the 28th of September in the house of the provost of Maybole, where forty persons on each side were admitted as witnesses. The debate lasted for three days, and strangely enough was made by the abbot to turn mainly on the significance of the act of Melchizedek in bringing forth bread and wine when he went out to meet Abraham returning from his victories over the five kings, which Knox averred "appertained nothing to the purpose." At the end of the third day Knox, on the ground of the scanty accommodation at Maybole, proposed that they should adjourn to Ayr to finish the discussion; but this was declined by the abbot, who promised to come to Edinburgh and resume it there if the Queen would permit. But he never came to the metropolis, though Knox alleges that he himself had applied to the Privy Council for the necessary permission. As usual in such cases, the victory was claimed for each by his own partisans; but to counteract the false reports that were circulated, Knox prepared and published the curious tract, purporting to be an accurate account of the debate, which Dr. Laing has reprinted in the sixth volume of the Reformer's works; and though the discussion itself was on an entirely irrelevant issue, Knox dealt with the very heart of the question in the prologue of his pamphlet, which is written in his most vigorous and trenchant style. One extract will show how sarcastic he could sometimes be, and with what grim humour he could occasionally treat even the most sacred subjects. He has been comparing the making of the "wafer-god" to that of the idols so witheringly described by Isaiah in the 40th and 41st chapters of his prophecies, and then proceeds as follows: "These are the artificers and workmen that travail in making of this god, I think as many in number as the prophet reciteth to have travailed in making of the idols; and if the power of both shall be compared, I think they shall be found in all things equal, except that the god of bread is subject unto more dangers than were the idols of the Gentiles. Men made them: men make it. They were deaf and dumb: it cannot speak, hear, or see. Briefly, in infirmity they wholly agree, except that (as I have said) the poor god of bread is most miserable of all other idols; for according to their matter whereof they are made, they will remain without corruption for many years; but within one year that god will putrefy, and then he must be burned. They can abide the vehemency of the wind, frost, rain, or snow; but the wind will blow that god to sea, the rain or the snow will make it dough again; yea, which is most of all to be feared, that god is a prey (if he be not well kept) to rats and mice; for they will desire no better dinner than white round gods enow. But, oh then, what becometh of Christ's natural body? By miracle it flies to heaven again, if the papists teach truly; for how soon soever the mouse takes hold, so soon flieth Christ away, and letteth her gnaw the bread. A bold and puissant mouse! but a feeble and miserable god! Yet would I ask a question: 'Whether hath the priest or the mouse greater power?' By his words it is made a god; by her teeth it ceaseth to be a god: let them advise and answer." Truly there is a ring of honest old Hugh Latimer in all this; and if there were many such passages in Knox's sermons, it is not difficult to explain how it was that "the common people heard him gladly."
In the May of the following year (1563), Knox was sent for by Mary to Loch Leven, where she was at the time residing, and treated to another "interview," in which she endeavoured to induce him to use his influence to put a stop to the prosecution of certain parties for their celebration or countenancing of the mass. But nothing of importance resulted, though from his own showing it is apparent that on this occasion he was very nearly thrown off his guard by the skill of her acting and the "glamour" of her presence.
In this same month Parliament met for the first time since Mary's arrival in Scotland, and Knox confidently expected that the Treaty of Leith would be ratified, and the establishment of religion by the Parliament of 1560 would be put beyond all question by its action. But he was doomed to disappointment. The "holy water of the court" had not been without effect; the Protestant leaders had slackened in their enthusiasm, and what he regarded as a great opportunity was lost. He expostulated with many of the principal men of the party on the subject, but his efforts were in vain; and the "contention" between him and Murray over it was "so sharp" that there was a breach of friendship between them which lasted for more than a year. The effect of all this upon him was exceeding depressing; and on a Sunday before the dissolution of Parliament he took occasion to unburden his soul to his congregation. He expressed his sadness at the thought that those who had in their hands the opportunity to establish God's cause had actually betrayed it; he affirmed that the Parliament by which the Protestant Confession was adopted and the Church reformed was as free and lawful as any ever held in Scotland; and as reports of the Queen's marriage were now in circulation, he warned them of the consequences that would ensue if she should marry a papist. His words gave great offence to many Protestants as well as Romanists; and when the Queen heard of them he was again summoned into her presence. This was the occasion on which the much talked of "tears" were so plentifully shed, and therefore we may reproduce the account of it given by McCrie, which is itself only a condensation into the language of to-day of the narrative given by Knox in his History.
"Her Majesty received him in a very different manner from what she had done at Loch Leven. Never had prince been handled (she passionately exclaimed) as she was: she had borne with him in all his rigorous speeches against herself and her uncles; she had offered unto him audience whenever he pleased to admonish her. 'And yet,' said she, 'I cannot be quit of you. I vow to God I shall be once revenged.' On pronouncing these words with great violence she burst into a flood of tears which interrupted her speech. When the Queen had composed herself, he proceeded calmly to make his defence. Her grace and he had (he said) at different times been engaged in controversy, and he never before perceived her offended with him. When it should please God to deliver her from the bondage of error in which she had been trained, through want of instruction in the truth, he trusted that her Majesty would not find the liberty of his tongue offensive. Out of the pulpit, he thought, few had occasion to be offended with him; but there he was not master of himself, but bound to obey Him who commanded him to speak plainly, and to flatter no flesh on the face of the earth.
"'But what have you do with my marriage?' said the Queen. He was proceeding to state the extent of his commission as a preacher, and the reasons which led him to touch on that delicate subject; but she interrupted him by repeating her question: 'What have ye to do with my marriage? Or what are you in this commonwealth?' 'A subject born within the same, madame,' replied the Reformer, piqued by the last question, and the contemptuous tone in which it was proposed. 'And albeit I be neither earl, lord, nor baron in it, yet has God made me (how abject that ever I be in your eyes) a profitable member within the same. Yea, madame, to me it appertains no less to forewarn of such things as may hurt it, if I foresee them, than it doth to any of the nobility; for both my vocation and conscience requires plainness of me. And therefore, madame, to yourself I say that which I spake in public place: whensoever 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 perchance shall in the end do small comfort to yourself.' At these words the Queen began again to weep and sob with great bitterness. The superintendent (Erskine of Dun, who was present), who was a man of mild and gentle spirit, tried to mitigate her grief and resentment: he praised her beauty and her accomplishments, and told her that there was not a prince in Europe who would not reckon himself happy in gaining her hand. During this scene, the severe and inflexible mind of the Reformer displayed itself. He continued silent, and with unaltered countenance, until the Queen had given vent to her feelings. He then protested that he never took delight in the distress of any creature; it was with great difficulty that he could see his own boys weep when he corrected them for their faults, far less could he rejoice in her Majesty's tears; but seeing he had given her no just reason of offence, and had only discharged his duty, he was constrained, though unwillingly, to sustain her tears, rather than hurt his conscience and betray the commonwealth through his silence.
"This apology inflamed the Queen still more: she ordered him immediately to leave her presence, and wait the signification of her pleasure in the adjoining room. There he stood as 'one whom men had never seen'; all his friends (Lord Ochiltree excepted) being afraid to show him the smallest countenance. In this situation he addressed himself to the court ladies, who sat in their richest dress in the chamber. 'O fair ladies, 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!' Having engaged them in a conversation, he passed the time till Erskine came and informed him that he was allowed to go home until her Majesty had taken further advice. The Queen insisted to have the judgment of the Lords of Articles, whether the words he had used in the pulpit were not actionable; but she was persuaded to desist from a prosecution. 'And so that storm quieted in appearance, but never in the heart.'"[1]
At this time, when many of his friends were cold toward him, an effort was made by some of his enemies to blacken his moral character by accusing him of a vile offence, but the lie had nothing in it to make it formidable. It was "a lie that was all a lie," and so it could be "met and fought with outright." The vindication was so complete that now very few remember that the allegation was ever made, and we refer to it here only to show that he too was made an illustration of the poet's words: "Be thou as chaste as ice, as pure as snow, thou shalt not escape calumny."
Much more serious was the attempt made about this same time to convict him of high treason. During the absence of Mary in Stirling, and on the day of the observance of the communion in the Protestant churches, her servants at Holyrood had taken measures for having the mass celebrated with more than usual publicity and splendour. The result was a scene of confusion and "brawling," almost indeed of riot, which was caused by the interference of some Protestants who were present. Two of these were afterwards indicted for their offence, which was called in the technical language of the country and the time, "forethought felony, hame-sucken, and invasion of the palace." Knox had been empowered by a general commission from the Church to ask the presence of the Protestant leaders in Edinburgh for consultation and assistance in any emergency which in his judgment might require the same; and believing that the prosecution of these men might issue in very serious consequences, he drew up under the advice of the friends with whom he usually acted a circular letter, which he sent to the principal gentlemen of the "congregation," stating the circumstances, and asking them without fail to come to Edinburgh for the trial. A copy of this letter found its way into the hands of Mary, who laid it before the Privy Council, by whom it was pronounced to be treasonable. The Queen was exultant. Now was her opportunity, and she resolved to turn it to the best advantage. An extraordinary meeting of the councillors and other noblemen was convened to be held at Edinburgh about the middle of December, 1563, to try the cause. Some urged Knox to acknowledge that he had done wrong, and cast himself on the Queen's mercy, but that he absolutely refused to do, because he did not believe that he had committed an offence; and when Secretary Maitland and Murray called upon him, and somewhat ungenerously sought to get out of him the nature of the defence which he meant to set up, he very wisely put an end to the conversation with them, and resolved to keep his own counsel until he was actually called to vindicate his conduct.
When the day came, he stood forth as the champion of the liberty of assembly, as before he had appeared in vindication of free speech; and so admirably did he plead his cause that he was acquitted, if not unanimously at least nem. con., of the charge which had been brought against him.
Much has been said of the bearing of Knox towards Queen Mary, and said, as we believe, most unjustly, for though he felt himself constrained to oppose her course, and would not yield to her wishes, yet he was never rude, or irreverent, or ungentlemanly. As Carlyle says, "he was never in the least ill-tempered with her Majesty;" and most of those who accuse him in this matter, we shrewdly suspect, have never read the accounts of his interviews with her, but have simply accepted the common babblement which has been so long current regarding them. No candid student of the rehearsal of these interviews in Knox's History, we are sure, could refuse to endorse the accuracy of Carlyle's statement of the case when he says "Mary often enough bursts into tears, oftener than once into passionate long continued fits of weeping, Knox standing with mild and pitying visage, but without the least hair's-breadth of recanting or recoiling, waiting till the fit pass, and then with all softness but with all inexorability taking up his theme again."
But while Knox's manner toward her Majesty has been most microscopically examined, very little attention has been given to Mary's manner toward Knox; and on this particular occasion, in the presence of the council and the nobles, sitting too as a kind of court before which he was on trial for high treason, it was flippant and unmannerly in the extreme, and was besides entirely incompatible with the presence in her of a judicial spirit. When she entered the chamber and took her seat, she first smiled, and then burst into a loud guffaw, saying, "This is a good beginning, but wot you whereat I laugh? That man made me weep, and shed never a tear himself. I will see now if I can make him weep." Then after his letter had been read, and he was defending himself, she cried, "What is this? Methinks you trifle with him. Who gave him authority to make convocation of my lieges? Is not that treason?" There spake the despot, for beneath the velvet of her glove there was always a hand of iron; but she touched a chord that vibrated to a note which she had not thought to sound when she used these words, for Ruthven said boldly and categorically, "No, madame!" The gruff nobleman was immediately commanded by her Majesty to "hold his peace," and Knox went on with his defence in such a way that he successfully vindicated his right to call and hold a meeting of his friends for any lawful purpose when and where he chose. He was next questioned about the statement in his letter to the effect that he feared the prosecution of these men would open a door for the infliction of cruelty upon a greater number; and as he was proceeding to enlarge upon the deeds of the papists in France, and denouncing those who had done them, he was interrupted by the ejaculation of one of the nobles, "You forget yourself; you are not in the pulpit." This called forth the often quoted words, "I am in the place where I am demanded of my conscience to speak the truth; and, therefore, the truth I speak; impugn it who so list." The Queen now felt that a defeat was imminent, and as a last resort, she tried to work on the sympathy of her lords by referring once more, but this time in another fashion, to the fact that Knox had made her weep. That, however, only gave him an opportunity of rehearsing all that had occurred on the occasion to which she had referred, and thereby made his victory the more sure. But what is to be said of her conduct throughout on this trial? "Heard you ever, my lords, a more despiteful and treasonable letter?" "You shall not escape so." "Is it not treason to accuse a prince of cruelty?" "Lo! what say you to all that?" These are a few of her expressions when she was sitting as a judge, and with these, and others already quoted, before us, is it not idle to speak of justice, far less of mannerliness or gentlewomanliness in the case? Ungentlemanliness is bad enough,—though even of that we maintain that there was nothing in Knox's treatment of his queen,—but to seek to overbear a court as Mary did at this time, by the manifestation of her eagerness to have the accused condemned, either by fair means or foul, is infinitely worse. The spirit of Mary here was that of Jeffreys long after. It was indeed far from being so coarsely and brutally expressed, but it is worthy of all reprobation, and in view of the facts which we have here presented, it is little wonder that Hume, in writing to the historian Robertson, should have said, "I am afraid that you, as well as myself, have drawn Mary's character with too great softenings. She was undoubtedly a violent woman at all times." But he never altered his representation in his work, and to him, perhaps, more than to all others, the prevalent misconception of our Reformer's character, manner, and motives is to be traced.
The result of this trial was announced by Secretary Maitland, when he said to Knox that he was at liberty to return home for that night. But though his voice was smooth, his soul was full of wrath, and Mary's mortification vented itself in taunting the very man who had given her the letter, for voting for the acquittal of him who wrote it. Thus again the Reformer triumphed, and it is with a glow of satisfaction akin to that with which Nehemiah recounts his escape from Sanballat, that he finishes the record thus: "That night was neither dancing nor fiddling in the court, for madame was disappointed of her purpose, which was to have had John Knox in her will, by vote of her nobility."