CHAPTER III
DAVIDSON AT LIBERTON (1579-1584)
DAVIDSON, shortly after his return to Scotland,
was appointed, in 1579, minister of Liberton, a place of "commanding
and noble prospects "near Edinburgh. It is first mentioned in
a charter to Holyrood Abbey by King David I in 1143 to 1147,
but the precise date of the foundation of its church is not
known. Evidently it had its beginnings as a chapel which, previous
to 1143, belonged to the Parish ofSt. Cuthbert, from which it
was disjoined in 1240 and constituted into a rectory under the
Abbey of Holyrood. 1 Davidson seems to have been the third in
a distinguished succession of post-Reformation ministers which
included Andrew Cant, the " Apostle of the Covenant ,', and
the famous Principal Adamson.
Beyond the date, we have no information concerning Davidson's
admission to the charge of Liberton, but early in his ministry
there he was called to take a prominent part in the affairs
ofthe Church of Scotland. An early mention of him in the Assembly
records is under the year I~8i, when he was appointed one of
the commissioners to examine into accusations made against certain
ministers said to be leading scandalous lives. 2. The following
year he was presented to King James, who had now assumed the
reins of government, and so we have the first of many interviews
which the |
| 54 |
minister was to have with the monarch. What led to this meeting
has been recorded by Wodrow.' The King was still largely at
the mercy of whatever party for the time being prevailed. Lennox
and Arran' had now been reconciled after a period of enmity
and their joint influence on James was bad both for him and
the cause of the Reformation. The country was ,n a very unsettled
state with the Guises and the Papists busy for their own ends
even at court, and with a design on foot to get the young king
to resign the crown to his mother and have it back from her
with her consent and blessing. Had such a scheme matured, it
would have meant the nullifying of the parliamentary ratification
of the Reformation and the wiping out of all that the Reformers
had contended for and won. A conversation between certain ministers,
of whom Davidson was one, and the Earl of Argyle and Lord Ruthven,
regarding the dangers of the time and the folly of leaving the
King at Dalkeith with no company save a stranger suspect of
Popery, evidently spurred Mr.John to action. Perplexed over
the awful national confusion, he obtained access to his Majesty
and delivered his soul on the matter. In a speech singular for
its choice of language as well as its perfect frankness, he
entreated the monarch to deal decisively with the troublers
of the nation. There were three jewels, he said, precious to
all who feared God in the realm true religion, the common weal
and the King's person and estate. The first two were bound up
in the third. He warned his Majesty against two sorts of men
first those who feared him now because in his minority, they
had committed such offences as made it impossible
|
| 55 |
for them to underly the law" ; and also
those who were" the conjured enemeis to religioun both at home
and a-field ',. He concluded by offering to name certain godly
and loving subjects who would show his Grace whom they thought
to be of those two ranks, that, knowing them, he might discharge
them from his company.1 James had nothing to say in reply. One
of his ministers, John Duncanson, who was present said " his
counsell, Sir, is verie good." "Indeed," answered the King,
" his counseil is verie good " and with that he started away,
according to his manner.2
In this same year there arose the most notable controversy in
which Davidson was concerned during his Liberton ministry. Since
the Convention of Leith In 1572 there had existed in Scotland
a rather weak and very unpopular form of Episcopacy which the
court upheld, while the Church, established by law, remained
presbyterian. As has been already indicated, Andrew Melville
ever since his return from the Continent in 1574 had used all
his influence and eloquence to overthrow the new hierarchy,
and the Assembly, after setting many restrictions upon the episcopal
office, abolished it-as far as it could set aside the statute
law-in r58o.- The Second Book of Discipline also expressed disapproval
of the " fashion of these new bishops".
While matters thus stood, widespread indignation was caused
by a most glaring "Tulchan "appointment.
|
| 56 |
After the death of James Boyd, titular
archbishop of Glasgow in 1581, the Earl of Lennox had obtained
disposal of the see and from it he was resolved to enrich himself.
He had considerable difficulty in finding a minister who would
accept the office on his conditions, but at length Mr. Robert
Montgomery of Stirling agreed to do so. It soon transpired that
Montgomery was to hand over the revenues to the Duke on the
promise of an annual pension equal to one-fourth of the whole.
Spottiswood describes the arrangement as a vile bargain"' and
so it was both In respect of its simony and because it set Church
and government in sharp opposition.
In October 1581, the matter was brought before the Assembly,
which censured Montgomery for accepting the appointment and
interdicted him from undertaking it. The King and Council took
up his defence and James intimated to the Assembly that, while
he had no objection to their proceeding against Montgomery for
faults of life or doctrine, he could not permit them to prosecute
him on account of the bishopric. Thereupon Melville submitted
fifteen articles against the obnoxious bishop, some of them
of a most singular nature and none of them having any connection
with his chief offcnce. Though proof was ordered it does not
seem to have been led and the charges were referred to the Presbytery
of Stirling whose decision was to be reported to the Synod of
Lothian who were empowered to pronounce sentence if so justified.
Meanwhile Montgomery was commanded to remain at Stirling, and
not to aspire to the |
| 57 |
Bishopric of Glasgow under the pain of
the highest censures of the Kirk. This order he soon disobeyed,
for, in the month of March following, he entered the Church
of Glasgow with a band of the royal guard and ordered the officiating
minister to come down from the pulpit. The minister, however,
held his ground and it was only by the prompt intervention of
the magistrates that a tumult was prevented.2 Nobody seemed
to want the Duke's nominee the ministers composing the chapter
would not elect him and the students of the University were
summoned before the Council for causing riots in opposition
to him. 3.
The Presbytery of Stirling, whose jurisdiction he declined,
now suspended Montgomery from the exercise of his pastoral functions,
but he disregarded the sentence. The ministers, feeling that
the existence of the Presbyterian polity was implicated in the
contest, resolved on more decisive steps. The Synod of Lothian
summoned the defaulter to hear the sentence pronounced against
him, but was stayed from further procedure by the interposition
of the King, who summoned the members before the Privy Council.
They appeared and protested, as they had previously arranged,
through Robert Pont, that they were ready to yield all lawful
obedience to his Majesty, but declined the jurisdiction of his
Council4 in a matter so purely ecclesiastical. They were quite
willing, however, that his Majesty and any of the Council he
pleased, should hear the whole affair extra judiciurn.3
|
| 58 |
The ministers fearing that their appearance
before the Council might be taken as meaning submission to its
judgment sent John Durie and Davidson in the afternoon to request
of the clerk an extract of the verbal declinature which Pont
had made. This was refused as not having been craved at the
time.
Then," said Davidson, we must declare our parts in time and
place, where God hath appointed us to speak, and how we are
hand1cd.'~r This utterance was, doubtless, reported to the King,
for, on the next day, when Davidson and some others got access
to him, he quite readily granted the request as a reasonable
one. Not quite so agreeable was he, however, when later in the
same interview, the ministers informed him that godly people
were grieved at the present procedure and at the declaration
of the Council claiming power to "dispone bishopricks, spirituallie
and temporallie, pleno jure, as they terme it, at their owne
pleasure ". To Dune's bold statement that it behoved the Church
to proceed to Montgomery's excommunication, his Majesty replied
with vigour that he would not suffer them, to be met with that
rejoinder so loved of the ministers of those days.
We must obey God rather than men.'' That declaration and the
affectionate warning given him as to the evil company with which
he was surrounded, moved him much, at least for the time being.2
The Kirk was now resolved to proceed with the severe sentence,
unless Montgomery desisted from his purpose, and accordingly
he was summoned to the General Assembly to be held at St. Andrews
on
|
| 59 |
April 24th. He appeared, protested that
the proceedings were not legal, declined their jurisdiction
and appealed to the Privy Council. The King, anxious to save
him, sent a letter to the Assembly requesting them not to trouble
him concerning the bishopric, and a little later a messenger-at-arms
entered the reverend court and discharged the brethren from
all further interference with the prelate, under pain of being
proclaimed rebels Unmoved by this threat, however, the Assembly,
after sending a respectful letter to his Majesty vindicating
the course they were taking, found Montgomery guilty of new
and more serious charges and declared him to have incurred the
censures of deposition and excommunication. They were about
to pronounce sentence, when he appeared, yielded to the Assembly,
confessed his faults and promised not only to relinquish the
bishopric but to accept no office without the Assembly's permission.
1.
Davidson had laboured hard to bring Montgomery to this seemingly
happy act of submission. When the Assembly had been on the point
of proceeding to the sentence of a communication it was he who
moved for delay to allow of Galloway, himself and others dealing
further with him. In a rather difficult interview Davidson spoke
to him very affectingly and pressed him to submit absolutely
to the Assembly. He also proposed seeking Divine guidance in
prayer, and when the brethren accompanying him desired that
he himself should lead them, Davidson did so with such liberty
and fervency as to deeply move them all. Montgomery was so melted
down in tears and seeming seriousness " that he resolved there
and then
|
| 60 |
to accompany them to the Assembly and
make his entire submission. When approaching the place of meeting,
however, he changed his mind again and after some further dealing
by Davidson, the ministers left him and went in. When the Moderator
asked for a report on the matter, Davidson would say no more
than that there was some ground of hope. Later that hope was
realized and Montgomery came in and, as we saw, made his submission
to the great admiration and contentment of all.'
Several members of Assembly, notably Andrew Melville and David
Ferguson, were displeased with Davidson for his lenity in this
matter and complained that he was protecting a man who would
only later reveal his unworthiness. Such disapproval on the
part of his friends grieved Davidson much, but it disproves
the groundless accusation of his harshness to Montgomery. Surely
no one had done more than he to bring the man to a sense of
his guilt and a confession of it. His conscience was clear on
the matter, and before the Assembly he justified himself in
these noble words " I see sundrie of the brethrein offended
with that which is done in this mater. Therefore, for my own
part, I wiH protest, that I have done nothing in this case,
but in the feare of God, and for the quietness of His Kirk,
and salvatioun of yon 'dead' man, if it be possible. And howsoever
men judge of it, I am sure God will jutsifie my part of it at
lenth. Ye have heard what I have said of him, now ye have heard
your selves. If you see anie signes of repentance, cast him
not off. But if your hearts beare you witnesse, that ye see
no signes thereof (as
|
| 61 |
for my part I see them not), heree will I give my vote that
he be excommunicat within a quarter of an houre."'
Montgomery's submission lacked reality. While some ministers,
formerly his strong opponents, were so convinced of his sincerity
as to cordially embrace him, the majority were not so emotionally
impressed. The Assembly, as a safeguard, passed an act to this
effect.
The General Assembly ordains the brethren of the Presbytery
of Glasgow to try and examine diligently if Mr. Robert Montgomerie
any wise meddles with the Bishopric of Glasgow or proceeds further
in using thereof, against his promise made openly in public
Assembly, and if they find him to meddle therewith in any wise,
to discern him to have contravened the Act of Assembly and his
promise; and to report their process and decree thereupon to
the Eldership of Edinburgh to whom the Assembly giveth power
in that case to nominate a brother to excommunicate the said
Mr, Robert out of the Kirk 0£ God and society of the faithful."2
The precaution was not without justification, for soon after
Montgomery violated his promise, doubtless under the influence
of Lennox, who with an eye to the temporalities, urged him to
insist that the King had granted him the archbishopric pleno
jure. He taught in the Duke's house at Dalkeith and elsewhere
in defiance of his suspension and when Davidson went to confer
with him he found him "so drunken that he was chassing his servants
with a drawin whinger ".~ The Presbytery of Glasgow, in
|
| 62 |
terms of the recent Act of Assembly, cited him to compear and
he entered the house where they were meeting, accompanied by
the Provost of Glasgow, the magistrates and an armed force,
and commanded them to desist in the King's name. On their refusal
some violence was shown, especially to the Moderator, John Howieson
of Cambuslang, who was pulled from his chair and hustled off
to prison. Nothing daunted by such disgraceful intrusion the
Presbytery carried out the decree and sent it to the Presbytery
of Edinburgh which duly excommunicated Montgomery on June 9th
and unanimously appointed John Davidson to pronounce the sentence
in his own church at Liberton.' This he did on the following
Sabbath before a great congregation. It was intimated on Wednesday
at Edinburgh, and on the Lord's Day thereafter at Glasgow, and
in most kirks of the south, despite the threatening and storming
of the Duke and the court.
Injustice to Davidson it must be emphasized that he did not
undertake such a solemn duty without the express command of
his presbytery, nor did he do it with a light heart. Andrew
Lang dismisses the event somewhat scornfully, saying that Davidson
" did the curse ''' as if the minister had been pleased to do
it. The Editor of Satirical Poems of the Time of the Reformation
" states erroneously that he did it " with evident satisfaction".
Spottiswood, who takes every opportunity of setting the good
man in an unfavourable light, affirms that he had pronounced
the sentence "pretending a warrant from the church" and that
|
| 63 |
it was " done against all form ". It is difficult to understand
how anyone with the registers of the Kirk before him, as presumably
the Archbishop had, could make such a statement. It is an evident
case of gross misrepresentation and a proof of the writer's
insincerity and unfairness. Not only did Davidson act according
to ecclesiastical law, but, as we have seen, he had sought hard
to avert the taking of such a serious step. With a heavy heart
he obeyed his presbytery's instructions. Wodrow 2 tells us that
he expressed to the people his great sorrow at having to do
such a thing but he could do it, he said, "with as safe a conscience
as any minister of the Kirk ", for he had laboured hard to stay
the Assembly upon the slightest hope of amendment. He described
an incident that took place in the course of the proceedings.
Montgomery, on leaving the Assembly on one occasion had expressed
to him his sorrow at troubling the Kirk so much and had declared
that he would not repeat the anguish of recent days for all
the fear in the world. Davidson had made answer; "if you continue
in this way, you shall be a dear man to me, if not I shall be
a sore witness against you ". The evidence is plain that Montgomery
did not long continue in so excellent a state of mind.
Lennox was enraged when he saw that, despite his threatening,
Davidson had carried out the excommunication and also preached
at Liberton on the Sabbath subsequent, and he publicly exclaimed,
"C'est un petit diable! "3 The preacher was kept in fear
of his life by the Duke and for ten successive |
| 64 |
Sabbaths was accompanied to church by- an armed escort of his
friends.' The next move of Lennox was to secure the royal permission
to hold and preside over an assize where all concerned in the
excommunication would be brought to trial. Meantime the Privy
Council declared the sentence null and void insults were heaped
upon the ministers who had condemned the late measures of tile
court ; an interdict was laid on the Glasgow College for its
opposition to the new bishop ; a decree of the Council confirmed
him in all the emoluments of the Archbishopric, and payment
of the Episcopal rents to him was demanded under pain of imprisonment
at Inverness2 ; and John Dune for abusing the Duke in his sermons
was ordered to leave Edinburgh and cease preaching.3
Montgomery's appointment had led to the first clash in a contest
between King and Kirk which was to last through many long years,
and the burning question was whether the civil power was to
be allowed to interfere with ecclesiastical rights and the Church
give up her spiritual freedom. Other matters, how-ever, increased
the excitement of the time. The conviction that Lennox, despite
his avowal of Protestantism, was working on Rome's behalf, as
well as rumours and fears of Popish plots, French intrigues,
the advent of priest or Jesuit from abroad, led to great plainness
of speech in the pulpits. Particularly outspoken was the utterance
of Durie, who, in the High Church denounced Montgomery as" an
apostate and man-sworn traitor to God and His Church" and spoke
very strongly against the King for receiving a
|
| 65 |
gift of horses from the Duke of Guise, " that cruel murderer
of the saints of God ".' His discourse caused a great stir,
and he was summoned before the Council with the result already
stated.
Dune sought guidance from the Assembly as to what he ought to
do and it was thought fit that two of their number should
be sent to the King both to lament the summoning of the brethren
of the Glasgow Presbytery to compear at Perth for opposing the
Bishop, and also to desire his Majesty to exculpate Dune from
the charge.2 Davidson thought that this last matter had not
been examined as fully as it ought and when the deputation was
on the point of leaving, he rose and, in a vigorous speech,
dissented from their going. He said that another method of replacing
the minister might have been found, instead of seeking it at
the hands of one who had no power of displacing him, though
his flock had foolishly and wickedly yielded.3 What flesh,"
he asked, "may or sould displace the Great King's ambassader,
he keeping the bounds of his commissioun? and who gave kings
especially power to meddle in that matter? and if they may not
displace, should we in this Assembly give power to them to repone,
which as little belongs to them? "' Some of the brethren said
that they must beware of thinking evil of the King, to which
Davidson replied that he did not think evil of the King but
of their own childish yielding, and he was sure that wrongs
were committed not by his Majesty '
|
| 66 |
but by the ungodly men about him. The Moderator, Mr. Andrew
Melville, desired him to moderate his zeal. Davidson went on
to say that he had no objection to the brethren compearing at
Perth, but he would have them compear as became them there,
meaning that so many of the faithful should accompany them to
afford them protection from " cruell murtherers " that there
might be no recurrence of what had happened in that town at
the beginning of the Reformation.' Wodrow fittingly comments
thus on Davidson's speech " If in this Mr. Davidson exceeded,
it flowed from his great concern lest the ministry should be
gradually debarred from all reproving of vice from the pulpit
which afterwards in a great measure was brought about."2
The Assembly bore the amplest testimony to Dune's upright character
and sound doctrine, and he was authorized to preach the Gospel
wherever he might be placed. After mature deliberation they
advised him only to quit the City when forced, but if forced,
to go peaceably.3 The King had, however3 returned an evasive
answer to the commissioners and had not relinquished his purpose,
so the magistrates were reluctantly compelled to insist upon
Dune's departure.4 The same evening about nine o'clock, in the
company of Davidson two notaries and some other friends, he
proceeded along the High Street to the Cross of Edinburgh, where
he made his protest and, according
|
| 67 |
to legal form, took instruments ".' Davidson " desired likewise
an instrument upon his protestatioun which was this that as
that was the most sorrowfull sight to Edinburgh that ever he
saw, in that they had removed their pastor speeking the truthe,
for pleasure of fieshe and blood, so the plague and fearefull
judgements of God sould light upon the devisers, inventers and
procurers, actors, authors, consenters and rejoicers at the
banishment of Christ in that man's person, except they speedilie
repented." 2
The expulsion of Dune from the city was keenly resented by his
brethren, particularly Andrew Melville andjames Lawson as well
as Davidson himself. They considered it exceedingly unfair and
saw in it danger to the whole question of a minister's freedom
in the pulpit. Davidson, preaching on three consecutive days,
referred to it at some length and moved the auditors mervelouslie".
He said that he doubted not but God would dash the devil in
his own devices, meaning that he would C supplee John Durie
his rowme'5 and make him an instrument to stir up others wherever
he went.3 The Ministers were specially incensed against the
Provost and Magistrates for their part in the affair, and when
the former, in an interview, sought to justify them, Davidson
turned upon him with passionate words. " What brasen faces,"
he asked, are these that ye have, to despise the threatenings
of the servants of God, who arc sent furth from his throne ?
" He ventured to say, that if
|
| 68 |
they did not repent of their treatment of God's servant, the
Lord would pull them out of their thrones with shame and confusion.'
The evil intentions of Lennox toward the Church were frustrated
by the incident known in Scottish history as the Raid of Ruthven.
Some of the nobles, exasperated by his conduct as well as by
that of Arran, and determined to separate the King from these
base favourites decoyed James to Ruthven Castle, where they
kept him a prisoner and compelled him to send the Duke out of
the country. Protestantism was, through this event, rescued
from a great danger and the Church triumphed over the State.
A royal proclamation was soon issued declaring that it had never
been his Majesty's intention to restrain the freedom of the
pulpit or to curtail the jurisdiction and liberty of the Church
courts.2 The exiled Dune now returned to Edinburgh amid a great
procession of people singing the 124th Psalm, which, when Lennox
beheld from his window, he tore his beard, cursed John Dune,
hastened out of the town and afterwards escaped to France.3
It was about this time that James Lawson and Davidson, with
some other ministers, appeared, by request, before the Council
at Stirling4 where their advice was sought regarding the preservation
of quietness in the country and they were also requested to
prepare a list of the wrongs done to the Kirk by Lennox and
Arran. Davidson, at the desire of the others, discoursed to
the Lords with much fervency
|
| 69 |
upon the necessity of reforming themselves
and their houses. He exhorted them to put a stop to banning,
swearing, filthy talk, whoredom and oppression. Above all, he
urged them to obey the Word of God, which in the past they had
not done, by denuding their hands of the teinds and applying
them to the maintenance of the Gospel as soon as peace and tranquillity
would allow. If they would do so, God would bless them but otherwise
He would not, while in another way He would provide for His
own cause. Later the ministers indicated several enormities
needing reformation in the Church, especially that every congregation
should have a minister, which they promised to Sec to as soon
as the times would permit. Further, a Band" to maintain the
King and true religion was appointed to be subscribed by the
nobility, gentry and presbyterics, and the ministers were very
active in securing signatures, so Wodrow' tells us especially
Mr. Davidson, who prevailed upon many to append their names
to it.2
For a while the Church breathed freely, but its peace was short-lived.
Fresh anxiety arose with the arrival of Fenelon, the French
ambassador, on New Year's Day 1583. 3 Bowes, the English ambassador,
solicited the aid of Davidson to secure the silence of the preachers
on this event till the Frenchman s purpose should be known,
venturing the opinion that that gentleman would probably welcome
a difference between the King and the ministers at the beginning
|
| 70 |
of his visit.1 The King himself, fearing the clergy's outspokenness
in the pulpit, by a message to the Presbytery of Edinburgh,
communicated his desire that they should say nothing with regard
to the ambassador and the King of France. The members, marvelling
that his Majesty should suspect their discretion, resented such
a request and replied that it was their sacred duty to warn
their flocks of all approaching dangers to religion, and this
was the time of danger, as they gathered, from the sender, the
person sent, the time of his sending and the particular occasion
". Davidson was appointed with one of his brethren to deliver
this reply to the King and humbly admonish him to be on his
guard with the ambassador3-a warning which events proved to
have been well warranted.
That the French were ready to make every effort to recover the
ground lost through the expulsion of Lennox was made clear when
a second French ambassador, Meynville, landed at Leith only
three weeks later.4 His arrival gave such offence to the ministers
that the Presbytery of Edinburgh appointed several of their
brethren to wait upon James and speak with much plainness upon
the evils to be apprehended from the continued residence of
men sent by a King who was an idolater and a court which had
so actively persecuted the Protestant religion. His Majesty
said that ambassadors did not meddle
|
| 71 |
with religion, and if they did they should be soon answered.
It was pointed out to him in reply that such visitors, though
they pretended to be concerned only with matters civil and political,
yet had the advancement of their religion in view ; and that
they sought, though indirectly, the overthrow of the Protestant
faith.' Davidson was included in this deputation also, but,
according to Wodrow, "had no commission to reason ".2 He could
not, however remain altogether silent. In the course of the
conversation one of the ministers remarked that if they
did not speak, the Chronicles would yet declare the truth. Chronicles,"
said the King, ye write not histories when ye preach." Davidson
replied, "Preachers have more authority to declare the truth
in preaching than any historian in the world."1 When the ministers
took their leave, he remained for a moment behind, and said
privately to the King, Sir, I thot it my duty to advertise your
Grace in your ear and not before the rest, that you swore, and
in your fervour took God's name too aft in vaine in your discourse."
4. The King received the reproof quite graciously and, with
a little laughter, thanked Mr. Davidson for the prudent manner
in which it had been given.
The next conference which the ministers had with the King was
one in which Davidson had a large share. His Majesty having
now parted with the lords and counsellors concerned in the Ruthven
Raid, was
|
| 72 |
again under undesirable influences.1. The Presbytery of Edinburgh
sent a strong deputation~ to meet with him at Falkland in the
month of August. They began by warning him against innovations
at court and by beseeching him not to hold his good subjects
in suspicion but to test all reports before giving them credence.
Complaint was made of the favour he had shown to Holt~ the English
Jesuit. James did not take kindly the straight words of the
preachers, and the aged and witty David Ferguson sought to mollify
him by pleasant and facetious conversation. Davidson spoke at
some length and his replies td the King show a remarkable combination
of courtesy and frankness. He began with a tribute of affection
to his Majesty's person and an acknowledgment of the blessings
of his government. These, he said, caused the ministers to be
the more careful of his Grace's welfare especially when obvious
dangers were around him and they who companied with him were
not all our wife's sons", as the proverb had it. When the King
answered that he saw no danger and few of the nobility to be
preferred to others for godliness, he was met with this rejoinder
from Davidson " True it is and to be lamented that there is
so little godlinesse in anie of them as there is. But yitt,
Sir, there is great difference betuixt them that, with their
infirmiteis,
|
| 73 |
alwise have professed the truthe and defended your authoritie
and betweene them that never loved the truthe and have fitted
the feild to pull the crowne off your head."' At this point,
Ferguson, fearing that his friend, with his fiery spirit, would
go too far, made an interruption, but Davidson, asking liberty
to proceed, continued with great boldness to utter the following
stern and solemn warning. "It will appeare, if your deeds be
agreeable to your words, if yee love not them that hate the
Lord, as the prophet said to Jehosaphat otherwise, we will looke
no more to your words but to your deeds and behaviour; and if
they agree not, which God forbid, we must damne sinne in whatsoever
person. Nather is that face upon flesh that we may, or will
spaire, incace we find rebellioun to our God, whose message
we carie. Nather ought your Grace to mak light accompt of our
threatenings for there was never one yitt in this realme, in
cheef authoritie, that ever prospered after the ministers began
to threattin them."2 At these words the King was observed to
smile but he made no reply.
Davidson's freedom and boldness with the King is characteristic
of the sixteenth century, when access to the royal presence
was easy and the utmost plainness of speech was common among
all who availed themselves of the privilege. It has been said
of the ministers of the Reformed Church that "they saw no special
virtue in a royal argument and never dreamt they were bound
to yield to it ; they saw no particular apology for a royal
sin but thought it their duty to |
| 74 |
rebuik it on the spot" 1. A very striking example of this is
afforded by one of Davidson's pulpit utterances. By the end
of the year 1583 most of those who had been concerned in the
Ruthven Raid were prosecuted and forced to fly the country.
The King and Court falsely alleged that the ministers approved
of this procedure. Davidson felt it to be his duty to undeceive
the people and let them know that, on the contrary, the prosecution
gave the preachers grave displeasure. Preaching in Edinburgh
on December 14th: with the evil character of Manasseh3 for his
subject, he bore a very full testimony against what he regarded
as evil in the King and the courtiers and, deducing all he had
to say from the Scripture passage he was expounding, he maintained
that the King, unless he repented and departed from his recent
evil courses, would close his race. This was, probably, the
first time that James had been publicly and directly threatened.4
Hitherto it had been usual to blame his evil companions for
the wrongs of which he was guilty, but Davidson considered that
he was flow of an age to assume responsibility for himself.
The preacher, nevertheless, is said to have spoken In such a
way that none, save an enemy, could have regarded his words
other than for his Majesty's good. That his motive might be
plain and that he might appear perfectly free from personal
animus, he declared himself a loving friend and subject to the
King, though his office and the Cause demanded him, from the
Word, to publicly reprove his public faults. For honey,"
|
| 75 |
said he, "is sweete and yitt, being layed to a sore, it byteth
vehementlie."' It was feared that the bold preacher might get
into trouble over so outspoken a sermon, and, on the advice
of some of his friends, lie lay low for a time at Liberton.2
However, no untoward consequence followed.
The Liberton years were very busy ones for Davidson as he was
engaged in many enterprises besides those just narrated Though
doubtless not so prominent in history they are not without importance
or interest. The young minister, as we have seen, very quickly
attained to a high place in the affairs of the Kirk and right
from the beginning his name is absent from few committees of
either Presbytery or Assembly. The high esteem in which he was
held by his brethren finds evidence in his being recommended
by the Assembly to the Commissioners of Perth on their request
for a good minister after the death of the celebrated John Row.3
We find him on a commission for collecting acts of Assembly4
examining evidence regarding a charge against the Bishop of
Aberdeen5 ; consulting with the Moderator as one of his assessors
on fit subjects to be considered in the Assemb1y~ ; visiting
and counselling the newly-formed Presbyteries in the South and
West.~ Later, he is again in company of Dune, protesting against
certian
|
| 76 |
ministers being sent to Berwick to persuade
those concerned in the Raid to return to Scotland and submit
to the King' whereas the quieter occupation of examining a student
on the doctrine of the Church engages his attention at another
time. 2.
At the beginning of that fateful year for the Church, 1584,
the Presbytery of Edinburgh had a conference with Robert Browne,1
the founder of the sect of Brownists which took its rise a few
years earlier. He alleged that the whole discipline of the Church
of Scotland was wrong, that he and his company had justly withdrawn
themselves and would no longer be subject to it. If censured
they would appeal from the Church to the magistrate. Davidson
and James Lawson were appointed to examine his writings, to
find out his own and his followers' practice and such opinions
as they perceived or suspected them to err in. This done, Browne
was cited before the Presbytery, where he " boldly avowed his
books and opinions". The matter was referred to the King, who
did not interfere, however, and who, it was suspected, favoured
and entertained the man and his followers simply for annoyance
of the Kirk.
It must not be thought that one so occupied in the Courts of
tile Church failed in diligence where his own parishioners were
concerned. On the contrary, Davidson was most conscientious
in his pastoral work and in his preaching. Wodrow sums up his
estimate of the ministry at Liberton thus "There he continued
many years zealously and faithfully preaching the |
| 77 |
Gospel ; a most constant zealous affecter of the doctrine and
discipline of this Church and great enemy to all ungodliness,
profaneness, corruptions and innovations ; a serious convincing
preacher and a mighty wrestler in prayer.'5
Nor was Davidson mindful of the obligations of friendship amid
those busy and exciting years. In September 1582, soon after
the Ruthven enterprise, George Buchanan, that illustrious Scottish
scholar, passed to his rest. As the end drew near, he was visited
by Davidson who was anxious to strengthen the faith of his old
Principal and confirm him in the doctrine of the Reformed Church.
Buchanan gave him his assurance that he believed in salvation
through the atoning sacrifice of Christ, and also pleased the
sturdy reformer with a caustic humorous remark on the absurd
Romish doctrine of the Mass.2
With the King's regaining of his liberty in the middle of 1583,
the tide again turned against the Church. The Earl of Arran
regained his old ascendancy over James ; the Earl of Gowrie
was condemned to death and other nobles who had engaged in the"
raid "were banished. Early in 1584 Melville was summoned before
the Privy Council to answer for some treasonable expressions
which he was said to have used in a sermon; and being ordered
to enter himself a prisoner in Blackness Castle, on the advice
of his friends fled to Berwick. A cloud descended on the Church;
the passing of the infamous "Black Acts" followed. A second
attempt to control the King's person had failed, and Davidson,
though
|
| 78 |
not privy to it, now made common cause with the Protestant lords
and along with several of his brethren who were aware of a design
against them because of their defence of discipline and their
zeal against dangerous courses, followed Melville into exile
in England. Thus the Liberton ministry came to a somewhat sudden
close.
|
| 79 |
|
Back 