Volume II Part 19 (1/2)

Upone the quhilk requeist and Articles, the Lordis of Counsall foirsaid maid ane act and ordinance answering to everie heid of the foirsaid Articles,[333] and commandit letteris to be answerit thairupon, quhilk diverse ministeris raysit, as in the buykis of Secreit Counsall is yit to be found. And thus gat Sathan the secund fall, efter that he haid begun to truble the estait of the religioun, ones establissit by law. His first a.s.sault wes by the raschall mult.i.tude, opponying thame selfis to the punischement of vice: The secound wes, by the Bischoppis and thair bandis, in quhilk he thocht uterly to haif triumphit; and yit he in the end prospered wer[334]

then ye haif herd.

[333] According to the ”Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland,”

containing the Acts and Proceedings of the a.s.sembly, the meeting was held on the 26th of May; and the persons above-named were appointed on the 28th to present the Supplication and Articles ”tuitching the Suppressioun of Idolatrie.” The result of the application is thus recorded:--

”Upoun the whilk Supplicatioun, Articles and sute thairof was grant.i.t, and followit be the Lords of Secreit Counsell, and Act and Ordinance thairupon, with letters therupon, answering to every head of the said Articles and Supplicatioun, at length specified in the Act of Secreit Counsell made therupon; whilk is to be had in the hands of John Johnstone, scrybe therof, and letters and publicatioun past therupon.”

[334] In MS. G, &c. ”prosperit worse.”

For in this meyntyme, returnit fra France the Lord James,[335] quha, besyid his greit expensis, and the lose of ane box quhairin wes his secreit poise, eschapit a desparit danger in Pareise: for, his returning from our Soverane (quha then lay with the Cardinall of Lorane at Reims) understood[336] of the Papistis at Pareise, thai haid conspired some tresonable act aganis him; for thai intendit ather to besett his hous by nycht, or ellis to have a.s.saulted him and his company as thai walkit upoun the streittis. Quhairof the said Lord James advertist by the Ryngrave,[337] by ressone of auld familiaritie quhilk wes betwix thame in Scotland, he tuke purpoise suddenlie and in gude ordour to depart from Pareise; as that he did, the secund day efter that he arrived thair. And yit culd he not depart sa secreitlie, bot that the Papistis haid thair prevy ambusches; for upone the Pont of Change[338] thai haid prepared ane processioun, quhilk met the said Lord and his c.u.mpany evin in the teith; and knawing that thai wald not do the accustumat reverence unto thame and thair idolis, thai thocht thairupone to haif picked a quarrell; and sa as ane part pa.s.sed by, without moving of hatt to ony thing that wes thair, thai haid suborned some to crye ”Hugenottis,” and to cast stanis. Bot G.o.d disapoynted thair interpryse; for the said Ryngraife, with other gentilmen, being with the Lord James, rebuykit the fulische mult.i.tude, and over raid some of the formaist; and sa the rest war dispersit; and he and his c.u.mpany saiflie eschapit, and come with expeditioun to Edinburgh, quhill that yit the Lordis and a.s.semblie wer togither, to the greit comfort of many G.o.dlie hertis, and to na litile astonischement of the wicked: for, fra the Quene oure Soverane he brocht letteris to the Lordis, praying thame to intertenye quyetnes, and to suffer na thing to be attempt.i.t aganis the Contract of peace quhilk wes maid at Leyth, till her awin hame-c.u.ming, and to suffer the religioun publictlie establissit to go fordward, &c. Quhairupone the saidis Lordis gaif answer to the Frenche Amba.s.sadour, a negatyve to everie ane of his pet.i.tiouns.[339]

[335] Lord James Stewart (see page 142, note 3.) Queen Mary, in a letter to Throkmorton, dated at Nancy 22d April 1561, declares that Lord James who was then with her, had come without any special mission: ”Quant a Lord James qui est devers moy, il y est venue pour son devoir, comme devers sa souveraine Dame, que je suis, sans charge ou commission qui concerne autre chose que son droit.” She was anxious he should not return through England; and there can be no doubt, his conduct was too much influenced by the English Court. See the letters quoted by Mr. Tytler, vol. vi. pages 218 to 225. Lord James returned from France before the end of May 1561. The Diurnal of Occurrents (p.

283) has the 19th of May; but according to a letter quoted by Mr.

Tytler, it appears that Lord James was in London on the 20th of that month, but had reached Edinburgh on the 3d of June. (History, vol. vi.

p. 225.)

[336] In MS. 1566, ”at Reins) understand.”

[337] The Count Rheingrave had the command of the German troops which formed one of the divisions of the French forces sent to Scotland in 1548. He distinguished himself at the sieges of Haddington and Dundee.

(Lesley's History, pp. 206, 207, 219, 223.) He returned to France in 1549, but it seems doubtful whether he again visited this country. He appears to have settled in France. John Philip Rheingrave, Count Palatine of the Rhine, before 1554, married an heiress, Jean de Genouillac, the widow of Charles Seigneur de Crussol, Vicomte d'Uzes.

(Anselme, Hist. Geneal. vol. iii. p. 768.) In December 1562, ”the Rhyngrave lost fourscore of his hors.e.m.e.n,” or, ”reisters,” when Harfleur was taken by the English. (Wright's Queen Elizabeth, vol. i.

pp. 119-120.)

[338] In MS. G, ”upon the Change-brig;” Vautrollier's edition makes it, ”upon the point of change.” The place referred to was the princ.i.p.al bridge in Paris, across the river Seine, formerly known as the _Grand Pont_. It takes its name, _Pont au Change_, from the _changeurs_ or money-brokers who resided there, so early as the 12th century; but the houses upon the bridge were finally removed in 1788, by order of Louis XVI.

[339] See _supra_, page 156.

And First, That France haid not deserved at thair handis, that ather thai or thair posteritie, suld enter with thame agane in ony league or confideracie, offensive or defensive, seying that sa tratrouslie and crewallie, thai haid persecuted thame, thair Realme and liberteis, under pretense of amitie and mariage.

Secundlie, That besydis thair conscience, thai culd not tak suche a warldlie scheme, as without offence committ.i.t, to breke the league, quhilk in G.o.ddis name thai haid maid with thame, quhom he haid maid instrumentis to set Scotland at fredome from the tyranny of the Frenche, at the leist of the Guisians and thair factioun.

And last, That suche as thai callit Bischoppis and Kirkmen, thai knew nather for pastouris of the Kirk, nather yit for ony just possessouris of the patrimonye thairof; bot understude thame perfitlie to be wolves, theaves, murtheraris, and idill-belleis: And thairfoir, as Scotland haid forsakin the Pape and Papistrie, sa culd thai not be debttouris to his fore-sworne va.s.sallis.

With thir answeris depart.i.t the said Amba.s.sadour.[340] And the Lordis of Secreit Counsall maid ane act, that all places and monumentis of ydolatrie suld be destroyit.[341] And for that purpose wes directed to the West, the Erle of Arrane, having joyned with him the Erlis of Argyle and Glencarne, togidder with the Protestantes of the West: quha burnt Paislay,[342] (the Bischope [of Sanctandrois, quha was Abbot thareof,][343] narrowlie eschapit,) kest doun Failfurd,[344]

Kilwynnyng,[345] and a part of Corsragwell.[346] The Lord James wes appointed to the North, quhair he maid sick reformatioun, as nathing content.i.t the Erie of Huntlie, and yet seemed he to approve all thingis. And thus G.o.d sa potentlie wrocht with us, sa lang as we dependit upone him, that all the warld mycht se his potent hand to mayntene us, and to feght aganis oure ennemeis; yea, most to confound thame, quhen that thay promest to thame selfis victory without resistance. ”Oh! that we suld rychtlie considder the wonderouse werkis of the Lord oure G.o.d.”

[340] Monsieur de Nouailles left Edinburgh on the 7th June 1561.

(Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 64.)

[341] As Knox has enjoyed more than his full share of credit for destroying the ecclesiastical buildings of this country, I may be permitted to call the reader's attention to Dr. M'Crie's remarks on the ”Alleged Excesses of the Reformers,” in his notes to the Life of Knox, vol. ii. pages 450-456. But it might not be difficult to show that the actual devastations committed by the Reformers have been greatly exaggerated. The object they had in view was not to destroy the buildings, but to remove objects of idolatrous wors.h.i.+p and superst.i.tion. It should also be remembered, that the revenues appropriated for keeping such buildings in repair, being diverted to other channels, these large and imposing edifices, more suited for the services of the Romish Church than the simpler forms of Presbyterian wors.h.i.+p, were allowed to fall into utter ruin. When portions were restored to serve as parish churches, this was too often done but little in accordance with their original richly decorated style of architecture.

[342] The Monastery of Paisley, in the s.h.i.+re of Renfrew, was not wholly destroyed, as the nave of the church, with its aisles, remain very entire, and have continued to be used as the collegiate church of the Abbey Parish.

[343] The words inclosed within brackets, omitted in the MS. 1566, and in Vautr. edit., are supplied from MS. G.--In vol. i.p. 124, it is mentioned, that John Hamilton, who afterwards became Archbishop of St.