In 1578 the young king demanded Morton"s resignation. A council of twelve was appointed in his place, at the head of which stood the Earls of Argyll and Atholl. Elizabeth was annoyed at the fall of her minion, and took no pains to conceal her annoyance from the young king. It looked as if friendly relations between the two courts might be broken, and the Catholic party both at home and on the Continent were filled with new hopes. In 1579 Esme Stuart, Lord d"Aubigny, a nephew of the former Earl of Lennox, arrived from France, where he had been educated as a Catholic. He was welcomed at court by the king and created Earl of Lennox. James fell completely under his sway, though the preachers regarded d"Aubigny as a Catholic spy. Regardless of Elizabeth"s friendship, James was induced to open communications with his mother, and when the Earl of Morton rose in rebellion against such a policy he was arrested and put to death (1582). Though apparently Lennox made profession of accepting the established religion in Scotland, he was endeavouring secretly to bring about an understanding between Mary and her son, to secure the release of the former from captivity, and to a.s.sist the Catholic cause. The preachers took alarm at the sudden and unexpected increase of Popery. "Before this French court came to Scotland," said Walter Belcanqual in one of his sermons in 1580 "there were either few or none that durst avow themselves Papists, neither yet publicly in the country, neither in the reformed cities, neither in the king"s palace. But since that time, not only begin the Papists within the realm to lift up their heads, but also our Scottish Papists that were outside the realm swarm home from all places like locusts, and have taken such hardihood unto them that not only have they access to the French court, but also in the king"s palace, in the particular sessions of our kirks, and general a.s.semblies thereof, durst plainly avow their Papistry, and impugn the truth, both against the laws of the realm and discipline of the Church, contrary to all practice that we have had before."[36]
The members of the General a.s.sembly, annoyed at the attempt of the king to support the episcopal system of government, were determined to remove Lennox, whom they regarded as an emissary of Rome. Elizabeth"s agents, too, were busy stirring up discontent. A plot formed by Ruthven Earl of Gowrie, the Earl of Mar, and others, for the capture of the king, was carried out successfully during a visit paid by James to Ruthven"s castle at Gowrie (The Gowrie Plot). He was seized and lodged safely in Stirling. The Earl of Arran who attempted to rescue his sovereign was made prisoner, and Lennox was obliged to flee to France (1582).
For a time Melville and the preachers, who gloried in Gowrie"s successful machinations, held the king in bondage. The General a.s.sembly of 1582 expressed its approval of what had been done,[37] and renewed its attacks upon the episcopal system. James, however, succeeded in making his escape from confinement; the Earl of Arran was recalled to court; Ruthven was declared a traitor and was beheaded, and the other conspirators were obliged to make their escape to England. James entered into close correspondence with some of the Catholic powers abroad, and even went so far as to appeal to the Pope for a.s.sistance against the enemies who surrounded him (1584). For a time it seemed as if a great Catholic reaction was about to set in.
Priests who had escaped from England were labouring with success in the Scottish mission-fields; a few Jesuits had arrived from the Continent, and France, Spain, and the Pope were in correspondence regarding the a.s.sistance that might be given to James and his mother.
But the spies of Elizabeth soon obtained knowledge of what was in contemplation. France and Spain were too jealous of one another to undertake an armed expedition, without which success was impossible.
Negotiations were opened up with a view of detaching James from the Catholic party, and of inspiring him with distrust for his mother. As he was always more anxious to secure his accession to the English throne than to defend either his mother"s life or her religion, he succ.u.mbed completely to English influence.
Not even the execution of his mother in 1587 was sufficient to rouse him to take serious action. Though he was urged by many of the Scottish n.o.bles to declare war he contented himself with angry speeches and protests that pa.s.sed unheeded. Even many of the Presbyterian lords were ready to support him had he declared war, and Catholic n.o.blemen like the Earls of Huntly, Erroll, and Crawford, Lord Maxwell, and Lord Hamilton, offered their a.s.sistance. It was well- known, too, that Philip II. was preparing at the time for an invasion of England. Had Scotland declared war the results might have been disastrous for England, but James, instead of taking the offensive, accepted a pension from Elizabeth and offered to a.s.sist in the defence of the kingdom. He endeavoured at first to conciliate the Catholic party by restoring John Leslie Bishop of Ross, who had been for years a most zealous defender of Mary Queen of Scots, to his See and his possessions, and by appointing the exiled Archbishop of Glasgow to be his amba.s.sador at the French court. The General a.s.semblies, however, backed up by Elizabeth forced him to take strong measures against the adherents of the old religion. In 1593 a proclamation was issued ordering all Jesuits and seminary priests to leave Edinburgh within two hours under pain of death, and a violent campaign was begun in nearly every part of Scotland against the Catholic n.o.bles and clergy.
The Catholic lords who were in close communication with Spain were forced to take up arms. Their forces were mustered under the Earls of Huntly and Erroll, and gained a complete victory at Glenlivet over the Earl of Argyll who was dispatched against them. When the news of this defeat reached the king at Dundee he displayed unwonted activity. He a.s.sembled a large army to punish his rebellious subjects, and the Catholic lords were at last forced to make their escape from the country. With the flight of Huntly and Erroll (1595) and the dispersal of their troops the triumph of Protestantism in Scotland was a.s.sured.
The great leader in the attack on the Catholic Church in Scotland was John Knox who belonged to the Geneva school, and who worked hard for the introduction of the Calvinist system of Church government. The state of affairs in Scotland at the time was very favourable to his designs. Obviously there could be no question of royal supremacy or of a State Church being established after the English model, since the Queen of Scotland was a staunch supporter of the Roman Church. Neither could the principle of parliamentary control be accepted since the Scottish Parliament was comparatively powerless. Had the revenues and possessions of the Scottish bishoprics and ecclesiastical benefices been left untouched the democratic form of government would have been impossible, but as the hungry lords of Scotland had appropriated already the wealth of the Church they had no special interest in the ecclesiastical appointments. The result was that the General a.s.semblies, composed of both preachers and laymen, became the recognised governing body of the new religion, and they arrogated to themselves full control of ecclesiastical affairs. The bishops who were willing to conform were not, however, removed from office. They were subjected to the control of the General a.s.sembly, and were placed on the same level as the recently named superintendents.
But the regents who governed Scotland during the minority of James VI.
were not inclined to receive with favour the idea of ecclesiastical independence. In 1571 the Earl of Mar insisted on appointing an archbishop to St. Andrew"s without reference to the General a.s.sembly, and immediately the preachers were up in arms. They were handicapped in their resistance by the fact that their great leader Knox was too ill to afford them much a.s.sistance, and at last they were forced to accept a compromise according to which the old system of ecclesiastical government was left practically untouched. Archbishops, bishops, deans and chapters were retained; the bishops were to be elected by the chapters with the permission and approval of the king and were to receive the temporalities by royal grant; and all persons admitted to benefices were to promise obedience to their bishops. At the same time it was agreed that the bishops should be subject to the General a.s.semblies in spiritual matters, as they were subject to the king in temporals. It was hoped that by means of this compromise peace might be secured, but in a short time the attack on episcopal government was renewed with still greater vigour. A new leader had appeared in the person of Andrew Melville, the Princ.i.p.al of the College of Glasgow, and the friend of the great Swiss Reformer, Beza.
Despite the fact that the regent espoused the cause of episcopacy the General a.s.semblies were determined to continue the struggle for its overthrow. The adoption in 1580 of the /Second Book of Discipline/, involving as it did the overthrow of episcopal authority, the rejection of state interference and the a.s.sertion that spiritual authority was derived only from the people, was a severe blow to the young king and his advisers; but they found some consolation in the fact that the Scottish Parliament re-a.s.serted the principle of royal supremacy and recognised the authority of the bishops (1584).
A form of declaration was drawn up which all preachers were required to sign under threat of dismissal. During the years 1585 and 1586 serious attempts were made by the government to reduce them to subjection, but without any important result. In fact, at the suggestion of Melville, the General a.s.sembly p.r.o.nounced sentence of excommunication against Archbishop Adamson (1586), and the archbishop was obliged to submit himself to the judgment of that body. From that time things went from bad to worse till in 1592 Parliament gave its formal sanction to Presbyterianism, though the /Second Book of Discipline/ was not approved, nor were the bishops deprived of their civil positions. Hardly had James been seated on the English throne than he determined to make another effort to force episcopacy and royal supremacy on the Scottish Church. He appointed several new bishops to the vacant Sees (1603). As the preachers still offered a strong opposition Melville was invited to a conference at Hampton Court (1606) where a warm debate took place between the representatives of the Presbyterians and their opponents. Melville and his friends refused to yield, and when the former was summoned to appear before the privy council to answer for certain verses he had composed, he seized the Archbishop of Canterbury by the sleeves of his rochet, denounced him as an enemy of the gospel truth, and a.s.sured him that he would oppose his schemes to the last drop of blood. He was arrested and thrown into prison. Parliament supported the king (1609); a High Commission Court was established in 1610 to deal with the preachers, and in the same year the nominees of James were consecrated by English prelates. But despite the efforts of James and of his successor Charles I., Presbyterianism still continued to flourish in Scotland.
Though the flight of the Earls of Huntly and Erroll (1595) had a.s.sured the triumph of Presbyterianism many of the people of Scotland, particularly of those in the north, still remained devoted to the old religion. The Jesuit Fathers had been untiring in their efforts, and the labours of men like Fathers Creighton, Hay, Gordon, and Abercromby were far from being unfruitful. Still the ecclesiastical organisation had broken down; the supply of priests was likely to become exhausted, and, unless some attempt was made to maintain unity and authority, as well as provide means of education for clerical students, there was grave danger that Catholicism might soon be extinguished. In 1598 George Blackwell received faculties as archpriest or superior of the Scotch mission, and was provided with a number of consultors to a.s.sist him in his difficult task. A Scotch college was established at Rome by Clement VIII. to supply Scotland with priests (1600). Another college of a similar kind was founded at Tournai in 1576 by Dr. James Cheyne.
Later on it was removed to Pont-a-Mousson and placed under the control of the Jesuits, and finally it was brought to Douay. The old Irish foundations at Wurzburg and Regensburg were taken over by the Scotch, and utilised for the education of priests. Scottish colleges were also established at Paris and at Madrid (transferred to Valladolid).
The Catholics of Scotland expected some toleration from James I., but they were doomed to disappointment. The king was unable and unwilling to put an end to the violent persecution carried on by the kirk, which aimed at wiping out every trace of Catholicity by directing its attackings against the Catholic n.o.bility of the north and against the Jesuits, one of whom, Father Ogilvie was put to death (1516).
Similarly under Charles I. the persecution continued unabated, but, notwithstanding all the penalties levelled against the clergy, many priests were found willing and ready to help their co-religionists in Scotland. Jesuits, Benedictines, Franciscans from Ireland, Capuchins, and Vincentians[38] vied with each other in their efforts to confirm the faith of those who remained true and to win back those who had fallen away. During the Protectorate the Catholics could hope for no mercy, nor did the accession of Charles II. make much change in their sad condition. Under James II. they enjoyed a brief spell of liberty.
The chapel at Holyrood was opened once again, and some provision was made from the private resources of the king for the support of the missions, and of the foreign colleges.
But the favour of James II. led to still greater persecutions once he had been overthrown to make way for William of Orange. During the reigns of William and Mary, of Anne and of George I. the position of the Scotch Catholics was even worse than that of their brethren in England or Ireland. In his anxiety to encourage both the priests and the laity Innocent XII. appointed Bishop Thomas Nicholson as vicar- apostolic of Scotland in 1694, and, as it was impossible for him to give sufficient attention to the districts in the north and west where Catholics were still fairly numerous, Dr. Hugh MacDonald was appointed vicar-apostolic of the Highlands in 1726. When the Pretender arrived in Scotland the Catholics flocked to his standard, and when he was defeated at Culloden (1746) they were obliged to pay a heavy penalty for their loyalty to the old rulers. The Highland clans were either cut up in battle or deported; the Catholic chapels were closed, and so violent was the persecution that ensued that it seemed as if the wishes of the kirk were about to be realised. But events soon showed that those who imagined they had seen the extinction of Catholicism in Scotland were doomed to disappointment.
[1] Theiner, /Vet. Mon. Scot./, 8.
[2] Id., 465-68.
[3] Robertson, /Concilia Scotiae (1225-1559)/, cclxx.-cclx.x.xv.
[4] Pollen, /Papal Negotiations/, etc., 525-30.
[5] Forneron, /Les ducs de Guise et lour epoque/, 1877.
[6] Herkless, /Cardinal Beaton/, 263 sqq.
[7] Id., 289-301.
[8] /Cambridge Modern History/, ii., 556.
[9] Robertson, /Concilia Scotiae/.
[10] Law, /Archbishop Hamilton"s Catechism/, 1884.
[11] Pollen, op. cit., xxv., xxiv.-vi.
[12] For a reliable account of Knox, cf. Lang, /John Knox and the Reformation/, 1905.
[13] Grub, /Ecc. Hist. of Scotland/, ii., 45-6.
[14] Bellesheim, i., 389.
[15] Grub, op. cit., ii., 53-54.
[16] Wilkins, /Concilia/, iv., 204 sqq.
[17] Published in 1558. Dedicated to the writer"s nephew, "Gilbert Maister of Ca.s.sillis."
[18] Pollen, op. cit., x.x.xii. sqq.
[19] Pollen, op. cit., 56.
[20] Bellesheim, op. cit., i., 424-32.
[21] Grub, op. cit., ii., 89 sqq.
[22] Pollen, op. cit., xlix. sqq.
[23] On the mission of Gouda, cf. Pollen, op. cit., liv.
[24] Pollen, op. cit., 162-76.
[25] Pollen, op. cit., lx.x.xv.-xcviii.
[26] Lang, /The Mystery of Mary Stuart/, 54-9.
[27] Lang, /The Mystery of Mary Stuart/, 74 sqq.
[28] Lang, op. cit., 148 sqq.
[29] Pollen, op. cit., 293, cxxvi.-x.x.xiii.
[30] /Political History of England/, vi., 272.
[31] Rait, /Mary Queen of Scots/, 145.
[32] Cf. Hosack, /Mary Stuart and her Accusers/, 2 vols., 1870-4.
Henderson, /Casket Letters/, 2nd edition, 1890. Id., /Mary Queen of Scots/, 2 vols., 1905. Fleming, /Mary Queen of Scots/, 2 vols., 1897-8. Nau-Stephenson, /History of Mary Stuart/, 1883. Lang, /Mystery of Mary Stuart/, 1904.
[33] Lang, /The Mystery of Mary Stuart/, 160-1.
[34] Bellesheim, ii., 129.
[35] Pollen, /Mary Stuart and the Babington Plot/ (/Month/, 1907).