CHAPTER I
THE PERIOD IN WHICH DAVIDSON LIVED AND WORKED
The sixteenth century was a period of expansion.
It witnessed a new flowering of the human spirit, and great
personalities, destined to influence the whole world, were constantly
appearing on the scene. Predominant in its history, however,
is the greatest religious upheaval of all times. For it was
then that Martin Luther nailed his thesis to the door of Wittenberg
Church and became the great guiding spirit of the Reformation
movement. Somewhat later Calvin published his Institutes and
gave to the Reformed Church a basis and a banner. It was a time
of revolution, political and religious-the birthday of light
and freedom.
The second half of this century is one of the most interesting
and epoch-making periods, as it is one of the stormiest, in
the history of Europe. Everywhere men were sternly resisting
the menace to their liberty both civil and religious, and their
sincerity gave life to a movement in which they were prepared
to struggle and suffer and, if need be, die for their convictions.
The upheaval had different results in different countries according
to the circumstances In each. In the Netherlands, for example,
the period marked a crisis in the long struggle of the Protestants
with their Spanish. oppressors. Against the absolute government
of Philip II was set the resistance of William of Orange which
resulted in securing the independence of the Dutch people and
the triumph of Calvinism in the Church of Holland. Then the
struggle of the Huguenots in France ran concurrently with less
happy results, as the French monarchy was growing strong, and
the Protestant tide rolled back in Germany owing to unhappy
divisions between the Lutheran and Reformed churches. Elizabeth
was on the throne of England, though with dubious title, and
for a time there was much uncertainty as to the religious future
of that country. During her reign, however, England became a
great Protestant power, standing with Holland against Spain
and the Pope, although Tudor despotism was growing. In England
the Reformation was thus imposed by a strong Crown, whereas
in Scotland it was quite different there it was brought about
by ministers of religion, not ministers of state ". By this
time Scotland had sprung into significance in the religious
life of Europe. Hitherto her contribution to that life had been
of little or no account, but now, through the tangle of dynastic
successions, most of the countries were looking on at her struggle
and were concerned in her success or failure.
This was the period of what is known as the Counter-Reformation.
Besides the drive for absolute monarchy, the Reformers had to
contend also with the efforts of the Church of Rome to recover
the ground lost to the Reformation and her challenge to the
Reformed Faith wherever it supplanted medieval dogmas and practices.
Scotland had to face an intensive counter-propaganda. The greatest
menace of the movement was Spain, where Philip II had political
ambitions to annex Britain to his dominion and consequently
bring her under that universal Romanism and absolutism which
he so much desired. Many were the plots and intrigues toward
that end and, although these constituted a real menace to the
Reformed Faith through many years, yet the Reformers eventually
triumphed. As a well-known Romanist writer has admitted, " Scottish
Catholicism seemed hopelessly destroyed and in effect never
rose again.
As time passed the Reformers came to regard their Protestantism
less as a revolutionary achievement than as a part of the nature
of things. What mattered supremely to them was the sanction
of the Spirit. In later years entrance to the ministry may have
become more formal, but at this stage faith and a sense of vocation
meant everything. The faith had spread ~il, in the Lowlands
at least, it had gripped the minds of most thinking people.
The earlier years up to the time of Morton had been years of
distracting civil war in which queen Mary and her foreign advisers
had played a prominent part, and yet years, despite all, in
which the Reformation had made wonderful progress. The ministcrs
by their sturdy preaching were training their people to think
sturdily and independently. The parish schools were growing
in numbers and were spreading education and intelligence. The
people came to know their rights and in consequence felt their
strength. The middle classes were rising in importance. Public
opinion had been born and had grown into power. The Church of
Scotland, however, instead of being given freedom to |
| 13 |
do the work for which God had called her into being, was constantly
on the defensive. She had to fight on two fronts, political
and religious, resisting efforts to make her a mere department
of the State, and attempts to rob her of the Presbyterian liberty
which she had chosen to enjoy, and force upon her the Episcopal
system.
This last persisted through almost the whole period, and at
the beginning it seemed doubtful what exactly the new Church
was to be like. It has sometimes been maintained that at the
beginning the Reformed Church was really Episcopal but it is
not difficult to see that this is an entirely mistaken view.
Doubtless it is due partly to a misunderstanding of the office
of superintendent as instituted by the first Reformers, and
partly to an erroneous construction put upon a concordat settled
at Leith in 1572. We must look at each of these in turn.
The people had gradually thrown off the Papal yoke in the first
half of the century and the cause of Rome was lost, when in
'560, the Scottish Parliament adopted almost with unanimity
a Confession framed on substantially the same lines as the later
Westminster one and drawn up by six notable men, and proceeded
to abolish the Papal jurisdiction, to forbid the celebration
of the Mass and to rescind all the laws formerly made in favour
of the Roman Catholic religion and against the Reformation.
Much, however, had still to be done for extending and consolidating
the work of the Reformed Church. A new ecclesiastical system
had to be organized, and to that end a Book of Discipline
was prepared at the request of the Privy Council by a committee
of ministers, Knox being the
|
| 14 |
| controlling mind. Row' declares that its
principles were not taken from the teaching of any Church but
from the Word of God alone. While that may be, in the main,
admitted, nevertheless it may be inferred that Knox must have
brought to it some influences from his intercourse with the
greatest English and Continental thinkers of his time. It is
also obvious that some sort of guidance had to be sought elsewhere
than at home. Within two years of the organization of the first
Protestant congregations then, the Reformers had to draw up
a constitution for a National Church at the request of the secular
government. Their experience being very limited, they simply
had to make use of the example of foreign Protestant Churches
and their own experiences abroad, although these were not blindly
followed. Dr. Janet Macgregor says The only originality, observable
in the Scottish Church polity, lay in adapting to the peculiar
and temporary needs of Scotland the two offices of superintendent
and reader." 2 It is with the first of these we arc concerned.
Possibly the greatest necessity confronting Knox was the establishing
of a reformed ministry in place of the old priesthood. His plan
was to set up a temporary order of officials. The country was
divided into ten or twelve districts and over these were placed
superintendents. In the First Book of Discipline these are named
as one of the four kinds of office-bearers in the Church, the
others being ministers, elders and deacons. The duties expected
of the superintendents are thus summarized by Cunningham-" to
erect kirks, appoint pastors in |
| 15 |
places hitherto unprovided, and give occasional
benefit of a learned ministry in localities which could not
otherwise enjoy that privilege at all. Their labours were minutely
chalked out. They must preach at least thrice every week they
must not remain in the chief town of the diocese, where their
own church and residence were, longer than twenty days they
must not only preach but examine the life, diligence and behaviour
of the ministers, the order of the churches and the manners
of the people they must see how the youth were instructed and
the poor provided for and finally take cognisance of any crimes
which called for the correction of the Kirk."'
It will be seen from this, that the superintendents were not
simply special preachers. Joined to their office as preachers
was the duty 0£ government which the other parochial ministers
did not have. They had prima facie a suspicious resemblance
to bishops and undoubtedly there was something in their office
which suggested Prelacy. The superintendent discharged many
of the functions of a bishop but, despite a strong external
resemblance between them, they were as far apart as a priestly
and non-priestly church. The idea of consecration to holy orders
was not covered by the office. The superintendent was subject
both to the trial of the Assembly and censure of his own Synod
; he possessed no exclusive power of ordination; he himself
was ordained by ordinary ministers and was not necessarily a
minister at all. That good old baron, Erskine of Dun, for example,
was among the first who were appointed. The office arose out
of a necessity which Knox greatly felt; the diffusion of
|
| 16 |
the new faith in districts where it was
so far unknown, demanded something of the kind Scotland required
to be evangelized. MacEwen says that such an office was in line
with the ideas of Luther and Melanchthon and had been erected
in some districts of Germany.' It was evidently never intended
to be permanent, however, for the Book of Discipline describes
it as expedient for this time ", while careful regulations were
made to prevent superintendents from claiming or gaining such
powers as those of Roman bishops. There might have been a possibility
of the office developing into a kind of Episcopacy, for the
early Reformers did not hold the divine right of Presbytery
advocated later by Melville. But they were strongly opposed
to anything that suggested "Papistry" and were always on their
guard against it.
Alongside the growing operations of the superintendents was
the framework of the old Church from which Scotland had been
delivered. The bishops were still enjoying two-thirds of the
revenues as decided in 1561 and priests were still in possession
of churches and manses where Protestant preachers should have
been. While the Confession had been accepted without difficulty,
it was different with the Book of Discipline which raised other
issues - the patrimony of the Church particularly. It led to
a break with the nobility on the part of the Church. As the
dignitaries of the old " days passed away, the Reformed Church
laid claim to the rentals and teinds as their inheritance, much
to the annoyance of the nobles who hoped to annex a considerable
pro-portion for themselves. According to the law, |
| 17 |
| episcopal revenues could be drawn only
by bishops and rents of abbeys only by abbots. To destroy these
orders would have meant the extinction of the Third Estate,
and to the lay mind that seemed to disturb the balance of the
Constitution and to annihilate the tenure by which much of the
kingdom's property was held. The nobles, on the other hand,
were not anxious for the erection of bishops because they were
desirous of appropriating the revenues of the sees. The Reformation
clergy disliked bishops, but, as has been said, 'they disliked
sacrilegious laymen still more ".' The feeling of both parties,
as well as Morton's desire to have the matter amicably settled,
led to the Convention of Leith which was held on February 1st,
1572, between six members of the Government and six leading
churchmen. According to the Concordat then drawn up, archbishops
and bishops, abbots and priors, were to be continued as parts
of the Spiritual Estate, these last being eligible for seats
both in Parliament and Courts of Session. Many were of opinion
that several of the titles introduced were too like the form
of Rome's corrupt hierarchy, but notwithstanding they were permitted.
The Assembly in consenting may be regarded as confirming Episcopacy
but the new episcopate had very restricted powers and was to
be subject to the Assembly's jurisdiction. It was agreed to
with cordiality by some of the clergy, probably because they
were assured that the way was open for other changes and that
the articles were received only till farther and more perfect
order might be obtained at the hands of the King's Majesty's
Regent and the |
| 18 |
nobility". Morton saw the possibility of
a union of Scotland and England under James, and its consummation
he believed, would be hastened if the Protestant countries had
the same kind of church government. There was nothing in the
mongrel scheme for the advancement of living religion or the
well-being of the Church. Mere financial or political considerations
brought it about and the General Assembly's reluctant consent
was merely given as an interim". The arrangement was not even
calculated to bring in prelates after the old fashion. It was
simply a device for getting possession of ecclesiastical endowment.
The " bishop " would obtain his see on promise to hand over
the greater portion of the revenue to his patron. As is easily
understood, only weak or ambitious men were willing to become
instruments of so dishonest a policy. Men like Douglas and Montgomery
and others who lent themselves to this system of" Tulohan"1
bishops were a source of weakness to the Church and were held
in the greatest derision. They had no ecclesiastical standing
as the Assembly refused to recognize them. Yet there was in
their acceptance of the office sufficient evidence of the idea
of episcopacy to form a battle-centre for a whole century to
come.
What was the view of Knox on all that-Knox who was so soon to
quit the scene of his labours for ever? He did not like it,
but, as far from declaring against it, he assented to the change
of polity, advised the Assembly to accept the bargain for the
time being and expressed a hope that the bishoprics would be
|
| 19 |
filled with qualified persons according to the order taken
at Leith. He evidently desired that the Church should make the
most of the new situation. At this stage he did not raise any
objection on principle to the office or title of bishop, finding
warrant for both in the New Testament Church. Yet he feared
that the bishops might become creatures of the State. Proud,
prelatical pretensions were obnoxious to him. In A Brief Exhortation
published in 1559, he had objected to the " yearly coming of
bishops to Parliament" and had derided the glorious titles of
lords and the devilish pomp of prelates". In agreeing to the
Concordat of Leith he was, therefore, sacrificing no principle
though he had grave apprehensions about it. He could not but
be influenced by his old friend Beza, who, in a letter reminded
him (probably with the Leith agreement in view) that " the papal
supremacy had arisen out of episcopacy " and strongly urged
him never to give way to its readmission, however specious might
be the arguments by which such a revolution was supported. It
was not long till the Reformer's worst fears were realized and
the long struggle between Church and State began. Doubtless
the simony which followed the Leith Convention filled Knox with
disgust. Re was opposed to the election of Douglas, Morton's
nominee, to the see of St. Andrews, finding in it the first
attack upon the Book of Discipline of whose polity he was so
jealous. The choice of Douglas, he felt, would be subservient
to that robbery "- as he usually called it - of the church's
patrimony, which he had uniformly reprobated. He preached at
St. Andrews on February 10th 1572, but refused Morton's invitation
to inaugurate
|
| 20 |
the new prelate. In open audience of many then present he denounced
anathema to the giver, anathema to the receiver ". It was not
that he believed Episcopacy to be without Scriptural sanction,
but he was so concerned about the purity of the Scottish Church
that he would not concur in anything that might impair it. He
declared that it was for the discharge of his conscience that
the Church of Scotland should not be subject to the order of
bishops that he publicly expressed his dissatisfaction with
the election of a primate.
It was in the second generation of the Reformed Church when
Divine Right was becoming a watchword that the Episcopal polity
was swept away and the full pattern of kirk sessions, presbyteries,
synods and assemblies was worked out. The Church was determined
to take to herself the form of organization which she liked
best, which she believed to be suited to her and which, she
felt convinced, was founded on the Word of God. That form, it
has been said, was a definite challenge to all civil government
- a challenge inescapable because the new organization was closer
to the whole body of the faithful than the government of the
time could even attempt to be. To Andrew Melville belongs the
honour of leading the Church at this momentous period, and through
his influence it gradually departed from the fatal compromise
of the Leith Convention. He believed that the Presbyterian system
was the right thing not only for Scotland, but for the whole
world. It had he maintained, a jus divinum, because it was the
only Church government with, in his judgment, an unmistakable
warrant in Holy Scripture ; he could not
|
| 21 |
find in the New Testament anything suggesting the office of
a" Lord Bishop ". By his learned arguments almost all his brethren
were won to his view he threw all his gifts and influence into
the Presbyterian scale, and after several conflicts attained
to success In 1580, when the Assembly declared the office of
bishop unlawful. The following year it adopted the Second Book
of Discipline, in the preparing of which he had a large share
and which drew a well-marked distinction between the civil power
and the Church's ecclesiastical jurisdiction received directly
from her Lord, as well as affirming the principle of Spiritual
Independence and the Church's adhesion to the doctrine of the
Headship of Christ. Presbyteries were now fully developed and,
with the completion of the hierarchy of her courts, great was
the influence which the Church wielded throughout the country.
It was soon very evident that the King had already a strong
antipathy to Presbyterianism. That was not to be wondered at,
since he was obsessed by the doctrine of the Divine Right of
Kings and believed Episcopacy to be essential to the promotion
of absolute monarchy. The influence of his favourites also -
Lennox and Arran - was all against the Presbyterian system.
They hated tile Reformed Church with its pure and strict discipline
and they gave to the King a prejudice against it which he never
lost. He was their ready pupil and was quick to see that a compliant
Episcopacy would be more likely to advance his interests than
an uncompromising Presbyterianism. It was natural for the crown
to support bishops, for by them Church and State would be closely
interwoven Church government by bishops whom he himself had
|
| 22 |
chosen would be an immense help to the kind of kingship James
believed in. If; on the other hand, the Church were successful
in obtaining the liberty it claimed in spiritual matters, it
would be a blow to his theory of absolute monarchy. Besides,
he was anxious to conciliate his Roman Catholic subjects, and
add to the strength of the crown. Above all he must be friendly
with all parties in England, to whose throne he hoped one day
to succeed. His feelings were deepened by the outspoken deliverances
of the preachers and especially by the incident known as the
Raid of Ruthven, when he was snatched from the influence of
his base favourites by a faction of nobles. Believing that the
raid had been inspired by the ministers, from this time he stiffened
his resolution to weaken and destroy the Presbyterian system.
If; in the years following he was sometimes diverted from his
plan, yet he never lost sight of it but returned to it from
time to time with increased vigour. He never forgot that his
only barrier to autocracy was the Presbyterian Kirk and he was
eager for revenge. An opportunity to weaken it soon presented
itself to him and he seized it in a parliamentary way. In 1584
the "Black Acts were passed by the Estates, declaring the King
supreme in all causes and over all persons, and placing the
chief ecclesiastical authority in the hands of bishops. Freedom
of Assemblies, freedom of speech, freedom of spiritual jurisdiction
were all destroyed, and Episcopacy stood revealed as the ally
and tool of civil and religious despotism. This was a terrible
blow to the Reformed Church. Many of the ministers had to leave
the country and for the next eight years there was in Scotland
a confused medley
|
| 23 |
of Episcopacy and Presbyterianism, which caused some consternation
and suffering. The Court party however, could make no impression
against the loyalty of ministers and people to Presbyterianism.
The Black Acts did nothing more than confirm the nation in its
hatred of Episcopacy, and the opposition which had formerly
been justified mainly on Scriptural grounds, had now good practical
reasons.
It was just at this critical juncture in the fortunes of the
Church that Parliament passed the Act of Annexation which attached
the temporalities of all benefices to the crown. This first
direct act of disendowment connected with the Reformation rendered
a dignified episcopate for ever impossible in Scotland and so
was less objectionable to Presbyterians than otherwise it would
have been. News of invasion tended to bind together the Crown
and the Church. With the defeat of the Armada the fortunes of
Romanism had failed. James had recently been married and in
the pleasure of the people's welcome to his bride, as well as
by the wise guidance of Lord Thirlestane, he praised the Church
as never before, calling it "the sincerest Kirk in the World
". The Church's prospects were again bright. Two years later,
in 1592, an Act was passed which has come to be known as the
Magna Charta of the Church, ratifying the liberty of the Church,
recognizing a legal jurisdiction in its courts, repealing the
Acts of 1584 in so far as they impinged upon ecclesiastical
authority in matters of religion, and providing that presentations
to benefices by patrons should henceforth be directed not by
the bishops but to the Presbyteries within whose bounds the
vacancies lay. The anxiety of Thirlestane
to clear the Court of suspicion prompted him to the passing
of the Act, and James was coming to move away from the Catholics
and lean upon the Protestants. Thus, without naming the Second
Book of Discipline, its principles were accepted and the
Church established on a Presbyterian basis. Though it was not
quite satisfactory to all parties and had certain obvious defects,
yet it was the foundation on which the Church of Scotland built
in later days.'
The Reformed Church from the beginning has gloried in and jealously
guarded her spiritual independence. Kings and Parliaments have
from time to time sought its overthrow but without success.
It has been expressed as the Headship of Christ and the final
jurisdiction of ecclesiastical courts in things sacred as distinct
from things civil. Melville stated this clearly and emphatically
to King James at Falkland in the well known passage on the two
Kings and two Kingdoms in Scotland". Unfortunately, so sound
a principle was not easy of application, with, on the one hand,
a King who had an inordinate notion of absolute monarchy and,
on the other, a Church so fully persuaded in her own position.
If the King's claims were high, so also were those of the Reformed
ministry. Great and vital as the principle of Spiritual independence
is, possibly in the conflict of those days the Church made too
great a claim. At any rate the Presbyterian victory of 1592
was soon enveloped in dark clouds and perhaps both parties were
to blame. The Protestant ministers had always dreaded the plots
of the Roman Catholics who were eager to win Scotland back to
the
|
| 25 |
old faith. Some of their fears were well founded, as the attempt
of the Spanish Armada to conquer England and the incident of
the "Spanish Blanks" had proved. If the Spaniards had landed
in Scotland they would have found a party of Popish plotters
(headed by Huntly and Errol) ready to take part with them. 'The
situation was darkened by the belief that the King was not unconcerned
in these nefarious practices. Some have blamed the preachers
for utterances which, they say, wrecked the fair promise of
1592, but it may be said in reply that it was highly distasteful
to the ministers to find that James was always on the side of
toleration where the Popish nobles were concerned. The vain
and vacillating character of Scotland's King was well known
to those who were plotting in France and Spain and elsewhere
for the restoration of the Papal supremacy. His failure to handle
effectively a widespread conspiracy and rebellion of well-known
Roman Catholic earls In the North brought forth some vehement
denunciation from the preachers. The rising was suppressed,
it is true, but James would do nothing to enforce the extreme
penalty of the law against these plotting Papists. It became
known also that he meant to recall certain of them, and that
fanned the flame of discontent. The ministers were convinced
that dangerous reactionaries should not be welcomed at Holyrood,
and the refusal of the King to " extirpate popery and idolatry"
goaded them into violent and unmeasured statements. The General
Assembly " thundered its denunciations," and one minister, David
Black of St. Andrews, was prosecuted before the Privy Council
for a somewhat furious utterance. He declined the jurisdiction
|
| 26 |
of the Council and so raised the whole question of jurisdiction
between Crown and Kirk. The royal reply was the dissolution
of the Commission of Assembly then sitting, a command to the
leading ministers to leave the city, and the prohibition of
all future gatherings of clergy by Presbyterial authority. The
outcome of the agitation was a foolish riot" at Edinburgh in
1596 on the rumour of a Popish plot. That alarmed the King,
caused him to remove the Court for a time to Linlithgow and
confirmed him in his hatred of Presbytery. He saw in it limits
to his absolute rule and was determined to reintroduce an Episcopacy
which would suit his purposes. His view was expressed at a later
time when he said, To have matters ruled as they have been in
your General Assemblies, I will never agree ; for the bishops
must rule the ministers and the King both, in things indifferent
and not repugnant to the Word of God." The English succession,
too, was always in his mind and he would leave no stone unturned
to secure that end. With Queen Elizabeth's advancing years he
saw it was wise to promote friendship with the English clergy,
and that could be done best by introducing to Scotland something
in the nature of Episcopacy even if it were but superimposed
on the existing Presbyterianism. It will be our business to
relate how James gradually followed the advantage afforded by
the riot", with what kingcraft he went about this new effort
to advance his polity, and with what success he managed to browbeat
the Church. He was careful not to push matters too hastily or
to extremes, and ere he had
|
| 27 |
succeeded to the throne of England, victory seemed to be within
his grasp. Yet the leaders of the Church delayed and limited
a triumph which in later days was to be turned into defeat.
One cannot but admire the devotion and courage of the ministers
of the early Scottish Reformed Church. They played a valiant
part in the struggle between a people of intense conviction
wishing to realize itself, eager to be free to follow the dictates
of conscience, and a King with a party greedy of wealth and
power, whose only consideration was the promotion of their own
interests. They have been blamed for meddling too much with
political matters and failing to keep to their own religious
province. We find an effective answer to that in the following
words of a noble Duke
"There were no affairs of politics at that time which were not
pre-eminently affairs of religion. If the Assemblies and pulpits
of Presbytery had been silent on the factions of the time, they
would have been silent on the dearest interests of the Church.
On their vigilance, activity, and resolution depended the religious
and civil liberties of the people, exposed as they were to the
combined danger of Romish intrigue, of senile Parliaments, and
of an ambitious, deceitful King."'
Though their statements were sometimes rash and intemperate,
yet the Reformers rendered a great service to their fellow-men
They taught them to use that democratic freedom which claims
the right to criticize the conduct even of a ruler. The courts
of the Church, set up in this period, afford us the earliest
example of constitutional opposition to the measures
|
| 28 |
of arbitrary power. The men who resisted the policy of a self-seeking
and foolish monarch, broke for ever that power in Scotland and
won for the nation its birthright of glorious freedom. Among
these John Davidson (1549 ?-1604) occupies an honoured place.
At the time of the Reformation he was but a lad of ten and doubtless
was familiar with the story of what led up to the overthrow
of the Roman hierarchy. Well known to him would be the contributions
of Patrick Hamilton, herald of Lutheran doctrine, and George
Wishart - both martyred for their faith. We know that he was
mightily impressed by the advent of Knox, whose praises he was
afterwards to sing. He felt that, in the hour of Scotland's
need, the strong man had providentially arrived. The interest
of Davidson's life, however, is that it coincides with the momentous
changes of the early Reformed Church and the beginning of the
contest between the Crown and the Kirk, which was to last for
over a hundred years. From about 1574 when he first came into
public notice, to the end of his days in 1604, he played many
parts in the affairs of the Church, but particularly in opposition
to Prelacy and in defence of the liberties of Presbyterianism.
|
| 29 |
|
Back 