John Knox

by William M. Taylor

But while Knox's manner toward her Majesty has been most microscopically examined, very little attention has been given to Mary's manner toward Knox; and on this particular occasion, in the presence of the council and the nobles, sitting too as a kind of court before which he was on trial for high treason, it was flippant and unmannerly in the extreme, and was besides entirely incompatible with the presence in her of a judicial spirit. When she entered the chamber and took her seat, she first smiled, and then burst into a loud guffaw, saying, "This is a good beginning, but wot you whereat I laugh? That man made me weep, and shed never a tear himself. I will see now if I can make him weep." Then after his letter had been read, and he was defending himself, she cried, "What is this? Methinks you trifle with him. Who gave him authority to make convocation of my lieges? Is not that treason?" There spake the despot, for beneath the velvet of her glove there was always a hand of iron; but she touched a chord that vibrated to a note which she had not thought to sound when she used these words, for Ruthven said boldly and categorically, "No, madame!" The gruff nobleman was immediately commanded by her Majesty to "hold his peace," and Knox went on with his defence in such a way that he successfully vindicated his right to call and hold a meeting of his friends for any lawful purpose when and where he chose. He was next questioned about the statement in his letter to the effect that he feared the prosecution of these men would open a door for the infliction of cruelty upon a greater number; and as he was proceeding to enlarge upon the deeds of the papists in France, and denouncing those who had done them, he was interrupted by the ejaculation of one of the nobles, "You forget yourself; you are not in the pulpit." This called forth the often quoted words, "I am in the place where I am demanded of my conscience to speak the truth; and, therefore, the truth I speak; impugn it who so list." The Queen now felt that a defeat was imminent, and as a last resort, she tried to work on the sympathy of her lords by referring once more, but this time in another fashion, to the fact that Knox had made her weep. That, however, only gave him an opportunity of rehearsing all that had occurred on the occasion to which she had referred, and thereby made his victory the more sure. But what is to be said of her conduct throughout on this trial? "Heard you ever, my lords, a more despiteful and treasonable letter?" "You shall not escape so." "Is it not treason to accuse a prince of cruelty?" "Lo! what say you to all that?" These are a few of her expressions when she was sitting as a judge, and with these, and others already quoted, before us, is it not idle to speak of justice, far less of mannerliness or gentlewomanliness in the case? Ungentlemanliness is bad enough,—though even of that we maintain that there was nothing in Knox's treatment of his queen,—but to seek to overbear a court as Mary did at this time, by the manifestation of her eagerness to have the accused condemned, either by fair means or foul, is infinitely worse. The spirit of Mary here was that of Jeffreys long after. It was indeed far from being so coarsely and brutally expressed, but it is worthy of all reprobation, and in view of the facts which we have here presented, it is little wonder that Hume, in writing to the historian Robertson, should have said, "I am afraid that you, as well as myself, have drawn Mary's character with too great softenings. She was undoubtedly a violent woman at all times." But he never altered his representation in his work, and to him, perhaps, more than to all others, the prevalent misconception of our Reformer's character, manner, and motives is to be traced.

The result of this trial was announced by Secretary Maitland, when he said to Knox that he was at liberty to return home for that night. But though his voice was smooth, his soul was full of wrath, and Mary's mortification vented itself in taunting the very man who had given her the letter, for voting for the acquittal of him who wrote it. Thus again the Reformer triumphed, and it is with a glow of satisfaction akin to that with which Nehemiah recounts his escape from Sanballat, that he finishes the record thus: "That night was neither dancing nor fiddling in the court, for madame was disappointed of her purpose, which was to have had John Knox in her will, by vote of her nobility."

[[1]] McCrie's "Works," vol. i. pp. 206-8.

CHAPTER XII.

MINISTRY AT EDINBURGH, 1564-1570.

In the month of March, 1564, Knox, who had been a widower for now rather more than three years, was united in marriage to Margaret Stewart, daughter of Lord Ochiltree, and the room in the old baronial residence where the ceremony was performed is still pointed out to visitors. Despite their dissimilarity in age, the union seems to have been a very happy one, and such as brightened the last days of the Reformer's home life. This year passed with little to make it memorable save a long discussion between Knox and Secretary Maitland, which originated in an attempt to restrain the freedom of the Reformer's utterances on public questions in the pulpit, and wandered over a great variety of topics, touching, among others, the duties of magistrates and their subjects, but led to no immediate practical result. The calm, however, was not of long continuance, for we come now to those troublous times and dark doings which have made the reign of Mary Queen of Scots the great debating ground of modern history. She determined to marry Lord Henry Darnley, the son of the Earl of Lennox, a Catholic and an empty-headed fool. The knowledge of her purpose provoked the project of an insurrection among some of her nobles, who were headed by the Earl of Murray; but though they had the promise of assistance from Elizabeth, she failed them when it came to the point, and the result was that all who had been concerned in it were proclaimed as outlaws and banished from the kingdom. In this affair Knox took no part whatever, though Lord Ochiltree, his father-in-law, was implicated in it, and was one of the exiles. But though he did not compromise himself by proposing to join in the meditated appeal to arms, he was as strongly opposed to Mary's marriage as any of them, and as was his wont he liberated his conscience in the pulpit, but it was not until after the nuptials had been consummated that his words were especially regarded. The marriage was celebrated on the 29th of July, 1565, and on the 19th of August, Darnley, for some reason, chose to attend the public services in St. Giles' Cathedral, where a great throne had been prepared for his reception. Whether Knox had received any intimation of his intention to be present we are unable to say, but in his sermon there were two things which gave great offence to this prominent hearer. The first was his quotation of the passage, "I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them; children are their oppressors, and women rule over them"; and the second, his declaration that "God had punished Ahab because he did not correct his idolatrous wife Jezebel." Darnley believed that these words were meant for him, and went home in the sulks, making his likeness to Ahab only the more striking by refusing to eat his dinner. The preacher was immediately summoned before the Privy Council, by whom he was told that he must desist from preaching as long as their majesties were in the city. For his own exoneration Knox printed the sermon for the preaching of which he was thus condemned, and it remains the only specimen of his pulpit work proper which has come down to us. It is founded on Isaiah xxvi. 13-21, and is of the nature of an expository discourse, bringing out the primary signification and reference of the words, and making application of the principles evolved by that process to the characters and circumstances of his hearers. It gives evidence of considerable scholarship, of immense familiarity with Scripture, of good acquaintance with ancient history, and of great fervour of spirit. It is neither a hasty nor ill digested production, and it impresses us a good deal more by its solidity than by its invective. Indeed, there are in it no passages that one could put into comparison for that with others which have been already mentioned by us; and it is a little difficult for the modern reader to wed in his imagination a style so calm and weighty as that which he finds here, with a manner so vehement as the Reformer's is usually described to have been. But no printer can reproduce the man, or the surroundings; here are the wood and the lamb indeed; but in these others were the fire—from heaven too in a sense—which flamed forth with its energizing and consuming power, and made his discourse a thing of might. Such difference as there is between a bugle, and a bugle blown by a living martial musician, there is between a printed sermon and the same discourse preached by its author with the glow of spiritual enthusiasm in his heart and on his face. The one is a thing of curious study to the professional man, the other is a trumpet call which puts heart and heroism into hundreds in a moment.

Knox showed his law-abiding spirit by obeying the injunction of the authorities. His biographer, indeed, says that "it does not appear that he continued any time suspended from preaching," but Dr. Laing believes that he did not resume his usual ministrations at Edinburgh, unless at occasional intervals, until after Queen Mary had been deprived of her authority. He was not idle, however, in those months, for he was employed not only in the preparation of his "History of the Reformation in Scotland," but also in the visitation of churches in the south of Scotland, and in a journey into England, specially undertaken to look after his two boys whom he had sent thither for education.

In this interval occurred the murder of David Rizzio, on the 9th March, 1566, in the palace of Holyrood. That wretched man was an Italian adventurer, whose knowledge of foreign languages made him useful to Mary in her correspondence with the other members of the Anti-Protestant League to which she belonged. His acquaintance with her political designs thence derived opened the way for his becoming one of the most confidential of her advisers. That roused against him the enmity of the Scottish nobles, and Darnley became jealous of his intimacy with the Queen; so with his assistance and approval David was foully slain almost before the eyes of his mistress. Attempts have been made to implicate Knox with this affair, but though he does not conceal his satisfaction at David's "removal," he was in no wise accessory to his death. The very next day after this tragedy the exiled lords returned to Edinburgh, and then followed thick and fast upon each other events of great and lasting importance to the land. These were the birth of James VI. on the 19th of June, 1566; the murder of Darnley, on the night between the 9th and 10th of February, 1567, a deed which was planned and carried out by Bothwell and his agents, not without dark grounds for the suspicion, to say the very least, that he and they were acting with the knowledge and consent of Mary herself; the marriage on the 15th May, 1567, of Mary to Bothwell, that black-hearted villain who was the evil genius of her life; the surrender of Mary to the opposing Lords at Carberry Hill on the 15th of June; the imprisonment of Mary in Loch Leven Castle, where, on the 24th of July, she signed a deed abdicating the crown in favour of her infant son, and appointing Murray regent during his minority; the escape of Mary from her place of confinement on the 2nd of May, 1568; and the defeat on May 13th of her forces at Langside, whence she fled to seek from Elizabeth refuge in England, with the Fotheringay block as the ultimate result. For full details regarding all of these we must refer our readers to the Scottish histories, and we content ourselves with mentioning them thus in a group in order that we may carry in our hands the clue for the intelligent following out of our Reformer's career.