“Treuth it is, parliaments have been conveened, and acts have bene made, for providing ministers of competent livinges; for reparaling of parish kirkes, for trayning up the youth in schooles of theologie. It hath bene also promised, and subscribed in writte, by a great parte of the nobilitie, that the poore labourers of the grounde, should have an ease and reliefe of the rigorous exacting of their teindes: and many other good thinges have been devised, tending to the advancement of the glorie of God, and establishingof Christ his kingdome. Amongst us, namely, in time of the governemente of that good regente (whome for honoures cause I name) who, although he could not doe all that hee would have done, (having so manie hinderances and enemies,) yet his dooings might have been a perfite patterne of godlinesse to the reste of the nobilitie, to make thame bene content to live uppon their owne rentes, and to cease from robbing and spoyling the patrimonie of the kirke.” Having proposed the objection, that the Levitical law of Moses is abrogated, and that therefore his authorities from the Old Testament had no force under the gospel, he adds: “I aunswere concerning these lands or annual rentes, out of landes delated and given to the kirke, that although the Leviticall lawe, with the ceremonies thereof, concerning the outwarde observation, hath taken an ende, and is fulfilled in Christ; yet the substance of the policie, concerning interteinment of the service of God, and uphold of religion, still remaines. And it is no lesse necessarie, that the ministerie of God amongst us be mainteined; and that sufficient provision be made to serve other godlie uses, whereunto the kirke‑rentes ought to be applyed, nor it was that the priestes and levites shoulde bene upholden in the time of the olde law. And as to the holinesse or unholines of these landes and revenues: albeit in their owne nature (as I said in the former sermon) they be like other earthly possessiones; yet, in so far as they were applyed to an holy use, they may wel be called holy possessions and rents, as the kirk is holy, to whose use they are appointed.—I will not deny but the teindes might be possibly changed, in other meanes of sufficient provision for the kirke, if such godly zeale were now amongst men, as was of olde time. But in so farre as we see the plane contrarie, that men are now readier to take away, than ever our predecessors were to give; it were a foolish thing to loose the certaine for the uncertaine, and that which is never likely to come to passe.” Pont’s Sermons against Sacrilege. B, 8. C, 2. C, 8. E, 6. Waldegrave, 1599.
It appears from the following extract, that Pont undertook this work at the desire of the General Assembly.—“July 3, 1591. Mr Robert Pont is ordained to writ against sacrilege, and show his travells to the next assembly.” Matthew Crawfurd’s MS. History of the Church of Scotland, vol. i. p. 161.
Of John Row, and the introduction of Hebrew Literature into Scotland.—The following notices of Row’s employment at Rome are furnished by a very curious and valuable manuscript in the possession of Thomas Thomson, Esquire. Besides papal bulls relating to bishoprics and benefices in Scotland about the middle of the sixteenth century, it contains a number of important documents as to the correspondence between the Scottish primate and the Roman court, together with accounts of receipts and disbursements by the agent at Rome for the earl of Arran, governor of Scotland, John Hamilton, archbishop of St Andrews, and Gavin and Claud Hamilton. John Row was employed as their procurator. In “Ane Recollectioun of my lord of Sanct Andros missives to my lord of Kilwinning,” (MS. p. 324,) is the following article:—
“And is content M. Johne Row was put in charge of his l[ordship’s] affairs in Rome, xi Martii, 1554.”
In “Ane memoir of all things left wt M. Johne Row be Gavin, commendator of Kilwinning, at his departing of Rome, 20 mēssis Martii, 1555,” (MS. p. 240,) is the following:—
“Item, apointed wt M. Johne Row for the provestrie of Kirkfield, and caus M. Alexr Forres send his mandat to ratify the xxli pension reservit to the said M. Jhone.”
In a variety of letters to the pope, “concerning my lord duckis bairnis, my lord archbishope of Sanctandros, bischope Argile, my lord Kilwinning self, and uttheris thair frends,” to cardinal Sermonet, “regni Scotiæ promotori,” and to other members of the sacred college, from John, archbishop of St Andrews, Gavin, coadjutor to the archbishop, James earl of Arran, and Mary dowager queen and regent of the kingdom; written during the years 1555 and 1556, and inserted in the same manuscript, John Row is recognised and recommended as “procurator for the see of St Andrews.” At the close of the book is a table of ciphers, with an explanation, to which this title is prefixed, “Ciphre send be my l. of Sanct andros of Edr xiij May, 1555, to M. Johne Row in Rome.”
One great object of the negotiation with Rome, in which Row was employed, was the obtaining of a confirmation and extension ofthe powers formerly granted to the archbishop of St Andrews as primate and legatus natus of Scotland, from which Gavin Dunbar, late archbishop of Glasgow, had procured an exemption. In support of his claim, the primate urges, that “there had always been a great number of heretics in the diocese of Glasgow;” that its proximity to England “gave easy ingress and egress to persons of bad manners and opinions;” that various scandals and enormities, such as “the burning of the images of God and the saints, the contempt of prelates, the beating of priests and monks, and the eating of forbidden meats,” were committed within its bounds, and that the archbishop could not suppress these evils in his diocese, and at the same time hindered the primate from exerting his power for this purpose. The following passage, in one of the informations presented to the court of Rome, throws light on the fate of two individuals whom we have already (vol. i. p. [162], [373]) had occasion to mention. “Insuper cum magna pars dioc̄ Glasguen̄ nuper fuerat heresibus infecta, et tam durante vita dicti quondam Gavini vltimi archiepiscopi Glasguen̄ quam sede vacante, maxima scandala contra Catholicam fidem perpetrabantur. nec in potestate sedis Glasguen̄ et suorum suffraganeorum erat eorum potentie resistere. Sed D. Archiepiscopus Sancti andree modernus metropolitano ac jure prouinciali eandem diocesin visitavit, et repurgavit malis hominibus heresiarchis. In cuius testimonium ipse sua propria persona expugnavit locum de Ochiltre, et inde inuito domino ejusdem detrusit ad carceres et vincula quendam apostatam nomine Macbraire heresiarcham, et eiusdem fautores gravibus penis mulctauit. Et similiter alterum Vallasium nuncupatum in sua heresi perseuerantem in eadem diocesi Glasguen̄ natum hereticas opiniones profitentem publica omnium regni ordinum prelatorum conuentione de heresi conuictum et condemnatum curie traditit seculari ad comburendum. Et ita curavit heresis pestem puniri quod sedes Glasguen̄ minime potuit facere. que res cum sic notissima probationi vlteriori non multum indigens que si esset necessaria omnibus Scotis Rome satis innotescit.” [MS. fol. 179, comp. fo. 185–187.]