John Knox and the Reformation

102

Forbes, 97; Throckmorton to Cecil, May 18.

103

For. Cal. Eliz., 1558-59, 272.

104

Melville, 80.

105

Statuta, &c. Robertson, vol. i. clv-clxii.

106

Book of Discipline. Knox, ii. 253, 254.

107

M‘Crie, 360.

108

The Regent’s account of the whole affair, as given by Francis and Mary to the Pope, is vague and mistily apologetic. (Published in French by Prof. Hume Brown, ii. 300-302.) The Regent wrote from Dunbar, July 1559, that she had in vain implored the Pope to aid her in reforming the lives of the clergy (as in 1556-57). Their negligence had favoured, though she did not know it (and she says nothing about it in 1556-57), the secret growth of heresy. Next, a public preacher arose in one town (probably Paul Methuen in Dundee) introducing the Genevan Church. The Regent next caused the bishops to assemble the clergy, bidding them reform their lives, and then repress heresy. She also called an assembly of the Estates, when most of the Lords, hors du conseil et à part, demanded “a partial establishment of the new religion.” This was refused, and the Provincial Council (of March 1559) was called for reform of the clergy. Nothing resulted but scandal and popular agitation. Public preachers arose in the towns. The Regent assembled her forces, and the Lords and Congregation began their career of violence.

109

As to Knox’s account of this reforming Provincial Council (Knox, i. 291, 292), Lord Hailes calls it “exceedingly partial and erroneous.. no zeal can justify a man for misrepresenting an adversary.” Bold language for a judge to use in 1769! Cf. Robertson, Statuta, i. clxii, note I.

110

Knox, v. 15-17.

111

Knox, v. 207, 208.

112

Ibid., v. 229.

113

Ibid., v. 420, 421.

Ibid., v. 495-523. [This footnote is provided in the original book but isn’t referenced in the text. DP.]

114

John Knox and the Church of England, 215-218.

115

Knox, ii. 460, 461. We return to this point.

116

Bale, Scriptorum Illustrium Majoris Brit. Catalogus Poster., p. 219 (1559). Knox, i. 258-261.

117

Dieppe, April 10-April 22, 1559. Knox, vi. 15-21.

118

Desmarquets, Mem. Chronol. Jour. l’Hist, de Dieppe, i. 210.

119

Corp. Ref., xlv. (Calv., xvii.) 541.

120

Naissance de l’Hérésie à Dieppe, Rouen, 1877, ed. Lesens.

121

Knox, i. 321-323.

122

Knox, vi. 23.

123

Corpus Reformatorum, xlvi. 609, xlvii. 409-411, August 13, 1561.

124

The learned Dr. M‘Crie does not refer to this letter to Mrs. Locke, but observes: “None of the gentry or sober part of the congregation were concerned in this unpremeditated tumult; it was wholly confined to the lowest of the inhabitants” (M‘Crie’s Life of Knox, 127, 1855). Yet an authority dear to Dr. M‘Crie, “The Historie of the Estate of Scotland,” gives the glory, not to the lowest of the inhabitants, but to “the brethren.” Professor Hume Brown blames “the Perth mob,” and says nothing of the action of the “brethren,” as described to Mrs. Locke by Knox. John Knox, ii. 8.

125

Theses of Erastus. Rev. Robert Lee. Edinburgh, 1844.

126