War not the preiching of the begging freiris, Tint war the faith among the seculeiris. Lyndsay, ut supra, i.343, comp.ii.101. | |
28— | Lord Hailes’s Notes on Ancient Scottish Poems, p.249, 250, 297,309. We need not appeal to the testimony of the reformers, nor to satirical poems published at that time, in proof of the extreme profligacy of the popish clergy. The truth is registered in the Acts of Parliament, and in the decrees of their own councils, (Wilkins, Concil. tom.iv. p.46–60. Keith’s Hist. pref.xiv. and p.14,) in the records of legitimation, (Lord Hailes, ut supra, p.249,250,) and in the confessions of their own writers. (Kennedy and Winzet, apud Keith, append. 202,205–7. Lesley, Hist.232. Father Alexander Baillie’s True Information of the Unhallowed Offspring, &c., of our Scottish Calvinian Gospel, p.15,16; Wirtzburg, anno1628.) |
29— | In consequence of a very powerful confederacy against the religious knight, called Templars, and upon charges of the most flagitious crimes, that order was suppressed by a general council, anno1312; but their possessions were conferred upon another order of sacred knights. The plenitude of papal power was stretched to the very utmost, in this dread attempt: “Quanquam (says his holiness in the bull) de jure non possumus, tamen ad plenitudinem potestatis dictum ordinem reprobamus.” Walsingham, Histor. Angl. p.99. When the Gilbertine monks retired from Scotland, because the air of the country did not agree with them, their revenues were, upon their resignation, transferred to the monastery of Paisley. Keith’s Scottish Bishops, p.266. |
30— | See Note F. |
31— | Fox, p.1153, printed anno1596. Chalmers’s Lyndsay, ii.62, 63,64. Lord Hailes, Provincial Councils of the Scottish Clergy, p.30. SirRalph Sadler’s testimony to the clergy, as the only men of learning about the court of JamesV., may seem to contradict what Ihave asserted. But Sadler speaks of their talents for political management, and in the same letters gives a proof of their ignorance in other respects. The clergy, at that time, made law their principal study, and endeavoured to qualify themselves for offices of state. This, however, engaged their whole attention, and they were grossly ignorant in their own profession. Sadler’s State Papers, i.47,48; Edin.1809. Knox, Historie, p.18. Andrew Forman, bishop of Murray, and papal legate for Scotland, being obliged to say grace, at an entertainment which he gave to the pope and cardinals in Rome, blundered so in his latinity, that his holiness and their eminences lost their gravity, which so disconcerted the bishop, that he concluded the blessing by giving all the false carles to the devil, in nomine patris, filii, et sancti spiritus; to which the company, not understanding his Scoto-Latin, said Amen. “The holy bishop,” says Pitscottie, “was not a good scholar, and had not good Latin.” History, p.106. |
32— | Wilkins, Concilia, tom.iv.72. Lord Hailes’s Provincial Councils of the Scottish Clergy, p.36. |
33— | Luther often mentioned to his familiar acquaintances the advantage which he derived from a visit to Rome in1510, and used to say that he would not exchange that journey for 1000florins; so much did it contribute to open his eyes to the corruptions of the Romish court, and to weaken his prejudices. Melchior. Adami, VitÆ Germ. Theol. p.104. Erasmus had a sensation of the same kind, although weaker. John Rough, one of the Scottish Reformers, felt in a similar way, after visiting Rome. Fox, p.1841. |
34— | Notwithstanding laws repeatedly made to restrain persons from going to Rome, to obtain benefices, the practice was greatly on the increase about the time of the Reformation. It is schort tyme sen ony benefice Was sped in Rome, except great bishoprics; But now, for ane unworthy vickarage, A priest will rin to Rome in Pilgrimage. Ane cavill quhilk was never at the scule Will rin to Rome, and keep ane bischopis mule: And syne cum hame with mony a colorit crack, With ane burdin of beneficis on his back. Chalmers’s Lyndsay, ii.60. |
35— | Knox, 14–16. Spotswood, 64,69. Keith, append.205. Dalyell’s Cursory Remarks, prefixed to Scottish Poems of the Sixteenth Century, i.16–18. Chalmers’s Lyndsay, i.211. |
36— | See Note G. |
37— | Knox, Historie, p.14. |
38— | Dalyell’s Cursory Remarks, ut supra, i.28. |
39— | Patriots have toil’d, and in their country’s cause Bled nobly; and their deeds, as they deserve, Receive proud recompense.———————— But fairer wreaths are due, though never paid, To those who, posted at the shrine of truth, Have fallen in her defence.———————— Yet few remember them.———————— ————————With their names No bard embalms and sanctifies his song: And history, so warm on meaner themes, Is cold on this. She execrates, indeed, The tyranny that doom’d them to the fire, But gives the glorious sufferers little praise. Cowper Task, Book V. In the margin, Cowper names Hume as chargeable with the injustice which he so feelingly upbraids. While it is painful to think that other historians, since Hume, have exposed themselves to the same censure, it is pleasing to reflect, that Cowper is not the only poet who has “sanctified,” and, Itrust, “embalmed his song,” with the praises of these patriots. The reader will easily perceive that Irefer to the author of The Sabbath. |
40— | His father, Sir Patrick Hamilton of Kincavil, was son of Lord Hamilton, who married a sister of King JamesIII. His mother was a daughter of John Duke of Albany, brother to the same monarch. Pinkerton’s Hist. of Scotland, ii.45, 46,289. |
41— | There was an act of parliament, as early as 17th July,1525, prohibiting ships from bringing any books of Luther or his disciples into Scotland, which had always “bene clene of all sic filth and vice.” Act. Parl. Scot., vol.ii. p.295. This renders it highly probable, that such books had already been introduced into this country. |
42— | F. Lamberti Avenionensis Comment. in Apocalypsin, prÆfat. anno1528. |
43— | Lambert, ut supra. BezÆ Icones, Ffj. Fox,888. Knox,4–6. Lindsay of Pitscottie’s History of Scotland, p.133–5; Edin.1728. This last author gives a very interesting account of Hamilton’s trial, but he is wrong as to the year of his martyrdom. |
44— | Pinkerton. |
45— | Cald. MS. i.69. |
46— | In 1546, Winram having spoken to the bishops in favour of George Wishart, cardinal Beatoun upbraided him, saying, “Well, sir, and you, we know what a man you are, seven years ago.” Pitscottie,189. |
47— | See Note H. |
48— | See Note I. |
49— | Wodrow’s MSS. in Bibl. Coll. Glas. vol.i. p.2. Calderwood’s MS. Hist. of the Church of Scotland, vol.i. p.35. Knox, Historie, p.22. |
50— | See Note K. |
51— | Cald. MS. i.103,119. Sadler, i.47. Knox,21,24. |
52— | Sadler, i.94. Knox,27,28. Pitscottie,164. Keith,22. SirJames Melvil’s Memoirs,2–4. Lond.1683. Knox says, that the roll contained “mo than ane hundreth landit men, besides utheris of meener degre, amongis quhome was the lord Hamiltoun, then second persoun of the realme.” Sadler says, “eighteen score noblemen and gentlemen, all well minded to God’s word, which then they durst not avow;” among whom were the earl of Arran, the earl of Cassils, and the earl Marishal. Pitscottie says, “seventeen score;” but he includes in his account, not only “earls, lords, barons, gentlemen,” but also “honest burgesses and craftsmen.” |
53— | The progress of opinion in Scotland, and the jealous measures adopted for checking it, may be traced in the variations introduced into the Act of Parliament, 17th July,1525, “For eschewing of Heresy,” as these are marked in the original record. The act, as originally drawn, in prohibiting the rehearsing of, or disputing about, the heresies of Luther or his disciples, has this exception: “gif” (i.e. unless) “it be to the confusioun thairof;” but this being thought too loose, the following clause is added on the margin, “and that be clerkis in the sculis alenarlie.” According to the tenour of the act when passed in1525, “na maner of persoun, strangear, that happenis to arrive with thare schip within ony part of this realme, bring with thame any bukis or workis of the said Luther his discipulis or servandis, disputis or rehersis his heresies, &c., under the pane of escheting of thare schipis and guidis, and putting of thaire personis in presoun.” But in1527, the chancellor and lords of council added this clause: “and all uther the kingis liegis assistaris to sic opunyeons be punist in semeible wise, and the effect of the said act to straik upon thaim.”—From this it appears, that, in1525, protestant books and opinions were circulated by strangers only, who came into Scotland for the purpose of trade; but that, in1527, it was found necessary to extend the penalties of the act to natives of the kingdom. Both these additions were embodied in the act, as renewed 12th June,1535. Acta Parliamentorum ScotiÆ, vol.ii. p.295, 341,342, published by the authority of his Majesty’s commissioners on the public records of the kingdom. This highly valuable and accurate work will afterwards be referred to under the title of Act. Parl. Scot. |
54— | BezÆ Icones, Ee. iij. |
55— | Act. Parl. Scot. ii.415,425. Sadler’s Letters,i.83. Crawfurd’s Officers of State,77,438. Keith,36,37. |
56— | Knox, 34. |
57— | Ibid. 33, 34. |
58— | Life of Knox, prefixed to his History of the Reformation, anno1644. |
59— | Cald. MS. i. 118. Calderwood says that he was provincial of the order of Dominicans, or Blackfriars, in Scotland. But a late author informs us, that the chartulary of the Blackfriars’ monastery at Perth mentions John Grierson as having been provincial from the year1525, to the time of the Reformation. Scott’s History of the Reformers, p.96. |
60— | See Note L. |
61— | Chalmers’s Caledonia, ii.526. comp. Knox. Historie,67. |
62— | In his progress through the kingdom with the governor, he instigated him “to hang (at Perth) four honest men, for eating of a goose on Friday; and drowned a young woman, because she refused to pray to our lady in her birth.” Pitscottie,188. Knox says, that the woman, “having an soucking babe upon hir briest, was drounit.” Historie,40. Petrie’s History of the Church of Scotland, partii. p.182. He had planned the destruction of the principal gentlemen of Fife, as appeared from documents found after his death. Knox,63,64. |
63— | Sadler’s State Papers, i.264,265. comp. p.128. SirJohn Borthwick (who fled to England in the year1540) ridicules the Scottish clergy for making it an article of accusation against him, that he had approved of “all those heresies, commonly called the heresies of England;” “Because,” says he, “what religion at that time was used in England, the like the whole realm of Scotland did embrace; in this point only the Englishmen differed from the Scottes, that they had cast off the yoke of Antichrist, the other not. Idols were worshipped of both nations; the prophanating of the supper and baptisme was like unto them both.—Truly, it is most false that Ihad subscribed unto such kinde of heresies.” Fox, 1149,1150. |
64— | Knox, Historie, p. 67. |
65— | Ibid. |
66— | Act. Parl. Scot. ii.471, 477–9. Keith, 50,51. Knox, 66,67. Buchanan, i.296. |
67— | This is done in a book, entitled, “The Image of both Churches, Hierusalem and Babell, Unitie and Confusion, Obedience and Sedition, by P.D.M.” (supposed to be SirTobie Matthews,) p.139,140, Torney,1623. In p.136, the author says, “Yet there is one aduise of Knox which is to be recorded with admiration, ‘It wear good, that rewards wear publicklie appointed by the peopl for such as kill tyrants, as well as for those that kill wolfs.’” In proof of this he refers to Knox’s Historie, p.372. The reader, who chooses to give himself the trouble, will probably search in vain (as Ihave done) for such a sentiment, either in that or in any other part of the History. |
68— | “Quorum se societate, non multo post, implicaret Joannes Knoxus, Calvinistarum minister, qui se evangelicÆ perfectionis cumulum assecutum non arbitrabatur nisi in cardinalis ac sacerdotis sanguine ac cÆde triumphasset.” LeslÆus de rebus gestis Scotorum, lib.x. The bishop should have recollected, that the violence of his popish brethren drove “the Calvinistic minister” to this “pinnacle of evangelical perfection.” |
69— | Principal Baillie’s Historical Vindication of the government of the church of Scotland, p.42. A.1646. Cald. MS. ad an.1590. |
70— | Historie, 86. |
71— | See Note M. |
72— | Spotswood says, that “seven-score persons entered into the castle the day after the slaughter” of the cardinal. History, p.84. |
73— | The coarseness of the age, and the strong temptation which he was under to gratify a voluptuous prince, will not excuse the gross indelicacies of Lindsay; and still less will the desire of preserving the ancient dialect of Scotland, and of gratifying an antiquarian passion, apologise for giving to the modern public a complete edition of his works, accompanied with a glossary and explanatory notes. |
74— | Heroes ex omni Historia Scotica lectissimi: Auctore Johan. Jonstono Abredonense Scoto, p.27,28. Lugduni Batavorum,1603. 4to. Chalmers’s Life of Lindsay, Works, vol.i. |
75— | Cald. MS. i. 119. |
76— | Lord Hailes, Catalogue of the Lords of Session, p.2. Act. Parl. Scot. ii.353. |
77— | Act. Parl. Scot. ii.409. Sadler’s State Papers, i.83. Knox,35. |
78— | Fox, p. 1840. He was born A.D.1510. |
79— | Fox, p. 1840. Knox, Historie, p.33, 36,67. |
80— | Knox, Historie, p. 68. |
81— | Whittingham, dean of Durham, was ordained in the English church at Geneva, of which Knox was pastor; and Travers, the opponent of Hooker, was ordained by a presbytery at Antwerp. Attempts were made by some highflyers to invalidate their orders, and induce them to submit to re-ordination; but they did not succeed. Strype’s Annals, vol. ii.520–4. In the year 1582, archbishop Grindal, by a formal deed, declared the validity of the orders of MrJohn Morrison, who had been ordained by the synod of Lothian, “according to the _laudable_ form and rite of the reformed church of Scotland,” says the instrument, “per generalem synodum sive congregationem illius comitatus, juxta laudabilem ecclesiÆ ScotiÆ ReformatÆ formam et ritum, ad sacros ordines et sacrosanctum ministerium per manuum impositionem admissus et ordinatus.—Nos igitur formam ordinationis et prÆfectionis tuÆ hujusmodi, modo prÆmisso factam, quantum in nos est, et de jure possumus, approbantes et ratificantes,”&c. Strype’s Life of Grindal. Append. Bookii. Numb.xvii. p.101. It has been objected, that archbishop Grindal was at this time under sequestration, and that the license was granted, not by him, but by DrAubrey, as vicar general. To this it is sufficient to reply, that MrStrype is of opinion that the sequestration was taken off from the time that the writs and instruments run in the name of Aubrey alone, without any mention of Clark, (Life of Grindal, p.271;) that, even during the period of the sequestration, “all licenses to preach,&c. were granted by these two civilians, with a deference to the archbishop, and consultation with him in what they did,” (Ibid. p.240;) and that the license in question bears, that it was granted “with the consent and express command of the most reverend father in Christ, the lord Edmund, by the divine providence, archbishop of Canterbury, to us signified;”—“de consensu et expresso mandato reverendiss. in Christo patris domini Edmundi,&c. nobis significato.” Ibid. p.271. Append. p.101. |
82— | Ninian Winzet, apud Keith’s History, App. p.212,213. Burne’s Disputation, p.128. Parise,1581. |
83— | In the former editions, Ihad spoken of Annand as probably a friar, who, according to the custom of the times, had assumed the honorary title of dean. But Ihave since ascertained, that he was a person of great note in the university. It appears from the Records, that he was principal of StLeonard’s College in1544, and continued to hold that office during several years subsequent to that period. |
84— | The doctrine which the preacher delivered at this time was afterwards put into “ornate meeter,” by one of his hearers, SirDavid Lindsay, who, in his “Monarchie,” finished in1553, has given a particular account of the rise and corruptions of popery, under the name of the “fifth spiritual and papal monarchie.” Chalmers’s Lindsay, iii.86–116. |
85— | “Sum said, utheris hued the branches of papistry, bot he straiketh at the rute, to destroye the whole. Utheris said, gif the doctors and magistri nostri defend not now the pope and his authoritie, which in their owin presence is so manifestlie impugnit, the devill have my part of him and his lawes bothe. Utheris said, MrGeorge Wischeart spak never so planelie, and yet he was brunt; even so will he be in the end. Utheris said, the tyrannie of the cardinal maid not his cause the better, neither yet the suffering of Godis servand maid his cause the wors.—And thairfoir we wald counsail yow and thame to provyde better defences than fyre and sword; for it may be that allis ye shall be disappointed: men now have uther eyes than they had then. This answer gave the laird of Nydrie.” Knox, Historie, p.70. |
86— | Knox, Historie, p.70–74. “Alexander Arbuckylle” was made Bachelor of Arts, Nov.3,1525. Act. Fac. Art. |
87— | Knox, Historie, 74, 75. |
88— | Buchanan, Hist. lib.xv. Oper. tom.i. 293,294. Pitscottie,189, folioedit. |
89— | Buchan. Oper. i.296. Pitscottie,191. Knox,76. |
90— | Rough continued to preach in England until the death of EdwardVI. when he retired to Norden in Friesland. There he was obliged to support himself and his wife (whom he had married in England) by knitting caps, stockings,&c. Having come over to London in the course of his trade, he heard of a congregation of protestants which met secretly in that city, to whom he joined himself, and was elected their pastor. A few weeks after this, the conventicle was discovered by the treachery of one of their own number, and Rough was carried before bishop Bonner, by whose orders he was committed to the flames, on the 22d of December1557. An account of his examination, and two of his letters breathing the true spirit of a martyr, may be seen in Fox, p.1840–1842. |
91— | Balnaves’s Confession, Epist. Dedic. Archibald Hamilton says that he was condemned to work at the oar;—“impellendis longarum navium remis, cum reliquis adjudicatur.” Dialogus de Confusione CalvinianÆ SectÆ, p.64,b. |
92— | Knox, Historie, p.83. |
93— | MS. Letters, p.53. |
94— | One of his most bitter adversaries has borne an involuntary but honourable testimony to his magnanimity at this time. “Ubi longo maris tÆdio, et laboris molestia extenuatum quidem, et subactum corpus fuit; sed animi elatio eum subinde rerum magnarum spe extimulans, nihilo magis tunc quam prius quiescere potuit.”—Hamiltonii Dialogus, p.64,b. |
95— | Knox, Historie, p. 74. |
96— | Psalm xlii. |
97— | See Note N. |
98— | Knox, Historie, p.74. This Treatise appears to have been lost. |
99— | MS. Letters, p.40. |
100— | The manuscript, there is reason to think, was conveyed to Scotland about that time, but it fell aside, and was long considered as lost. After the death of Knox, it was discovered by his servant, Richard Bannatyne, in the house of Ormiston, and was printed, anno1584, by Thomas Vaultrollier, in12mo, with the title of “Confession of Faith,&c. by Henry Balnaves of Hallhill, one of the Lords of Council and Session of Scotland.”—David Buchanan, in his edition of Knox’s History, anno1644, among his other alterations and interpolations, makes Knox to say that this work was published at the time he wrote his History; which may be numbered among the anachronisms in that edition, which, for some time, discredited the authenticity of the History, and led many to deny that Knox was its author. But in the genuine editions, Knox expresses the very reverse. “In the presoun, he (Balnaves) wrait a maist profitabill treatise of justificatioun, and of the warkis and conversatioun of a justifyed man: ‘but how it was suppressit we knaw not.’” Historie, p.83, Edin. anno1732. See also p.181, of the first edition, in8vo, printed at London by Vaultrollier in the year1586. |
101— | Ihave not adhered to the orthography of the printed work, which is evidently different from what it must have been in the MS. |
102— | It is “perfection” in the printed copy, which is evidently a mistake. |
103— | i.e. beyond. |
104— | Rouen, not Roanne, is the place meant. |
105— | i.e. genius or knowledge. |
106— | See Note O. |
107— | This is the man whom a high-church historian has represented as holding the principles of the ancient Zealots or Siccarii, and teaching that any person who met a papist might kill him! Collier, Eccles. Hist. ii.545. |
108— | Knox, Historie, p.84,85. |
109— | In one of his letters, preserved by Calderwood, Knox says, that he was nineteen months in the French galleys. Cald. MS. vol. i.256. In the printed Calderwood, the period of his confinement is limited to nine months, a mistake which has been copied by several writers. It is proper that the reader of that book should be aware, that it is an abridgement of a larger work, still in manuscript; and though there is reason to believe that it was drawn up by Calderwood himself, yet, having been printed after his death, and in a foreign country, it is often incorrect. Knox, in a conference with Mary of Scotland, told the queen that he was five years resident in England (Historie, p.289). Now, as he came to England immediately after he obtained his liberty, and left it (as we shall afterwards see) in the end of January or beginning of February,1554, this accords exactly with the date of his liberation, which is given above from Calderwood’sMS. |
110— | This is mentioned in a MS. in my possession; but little credit can be given to it, as it is written in a modern hand, and no authority is produced. |
111— | Petrie’s Church History, partii. p.184. |
112— | Hamiltonii Dialog. p.64. |
113— | Peter Martyr, in a letter, dated Oxford, 1st July,1650, laments the paucity of useful preachers in England, “Doleo plus quam dici possit, tanta ubique in Anglia verbi Dei penuria laborari; et eos qui oves Christi doctrina pascere tenentur, cum usque eo remisse agant, ut officium facere prorsus recusant, nescio quo fletu, quibusve lachrymis deplorari possit. Verum confido fore ut meliora simus visuri.” Martyri Epist. apud Loc. Commun. p.760. GenevÆ,1624. |
114— | Burnet’s Hist. of the Reformation, II.24. The suppression of the chantries, in the reign of EdwardVI. was attended with similar effects. Strype’s Memorials of the Reformation, ii.446. |
115— | Iomitted mentioning in the proper place, that the biographer of SirDavid Lindsay has stated, from the minutes of the English council, that Knox was in the pay of England as early as the year1547. Chalmers’s Lindsay, i.32. Icannot suppose that the learned author would confound the salary which Knox received during his residence in England, with a pension allotted to him when he was in his native country. But, on the other hand, Ithink it very unlikely that he should have been known to the English court before he entered the castle of StAndrews, and am inclined to suppose that any pension which he received from them did not commence until that period at soonest. MrChalmers’s language conveys the idea, that he was pensioned by England before he went to the castle. |
116— | Strype’s Memor. of the Reform. iii.235. Knox, Hist.85,289. |
117— | Knox, Historie, p. 289. |
118— | Sir Thomas More, in one of his letters to Erasmus, gives the following character of Tonstal: “Ut nemo est omnibus bonis literis instructior, nemo vita moribusque severior, ita nemo est usquam in convictu jucundior.” |
119— | Besides the great council which managed the affairs of the kingdom under the protector, a number of the privy-councillors who belonged to that part of the country, composed a subordinate board, called “the council of the north.” The members here referred to probably belonged to this council, and not to the town council of Newcastle. If Iam right in this conjecture, Knox might owe to them, and not to the bishop, the liberty of this public defence. |
120— | See Note P. |
121— | The compiler of the account of Knox, prefixed to the edition of his History printed in1732, says, that the MS. containing the defence, bears that it “quite silenced” the bishop and his doctors. But that writer does not appear to have ever seen the MS., which contains nothing of the kind. The fact, however, is attested by the bishop of Ossory, who had good opportunities of knowing the truth, and who is accurate in his account of other circumstances relative to it. His words are, “Et 4 die Aprilis ejusdem anni[1550] aperiens in concione opinionem, ejus idolatrias et horrendas blasphemias, tam solidis argumentis, abominationem esse probabat, ut, cum omnibus sciolis, Saturnius ille somniator [Dunelmensis] refragare non possit.” Baleus, De Script. Scot. et Hibern. Art.Knoxus. |
122— | John Harle or Harley, was afterwards made bishop of Hereford, May26,1553. Strype’s Cranmer, p.301. A late writer has confounded this Englishman with William Harlowe, who was minister of StCuthbert’s church, near Edinburgh. Scott’s History of the Reformers in Scotland, p.242. |
123— | King Edward’s Journal, apud Burnet,ii. Records, p.42. |
124— | Memorials of the Reformation, ii.297. Memor. of Cranmer, p.292. Burnet, iii.212. Records, 420,422. |
125— | Burnet, ii. 171. |
126— | Strype’s Memor. of Reform. ut supra. Life of Grindal, p.7. MrStrype says, that the number of chaplains was afterwards reduced to four, Bradford and Knox being dropped from the list. But both of these preached in their turn before the court, in the year1553. And in the council-book a warrant is granted, October27, 1552, to four gentlemen, to pay to Knox, “his majesty’s preacher in the north, forty pounds, as his majesty’s reward.” Strype’s Cranmer,292. This salary he retained until the death of Edward; for, in a letter written by him at the time he left England, he says: “Ather the queen’s majestie, or sum thesaurer, will be 40pounds rycher by me, sae meikle lack Iof the dutie of my patentis; but that littil trublis me.” MS. Letters, p.286. |
127— | See Note Q. |
128— | Fox, p. 1326. Strype questions the truth of Weston’s statement, and says that Knox “was hardly come into England (at least any farther than Newcastle) at this time.” Annals, iii.117. But we have already seen that he arrived in England as early as the beginning of 1549. |
129— | “October 2, (1552,) a letter was directed to Mess. Harley, Bill, Horn, Grindal, Pern, and Knox, to consider certain articles exhibited to the king’s majesty, to be subscribed by all such as shall be admitted to be preachers or ministers in any part of the realm; and to make report of their opinions touching the same.” Council-book, apud Strype’s Cranmer, p.273. Their report was returned before the 20th of November, ibid. p.301. Burnet says, the order was given Oct.20. History, iii.212. The articles agreed to at this time were forty-two. In1562, they were reduced to thirty-nine, their present number. |
130— | See the pedigree of the family of Bowes among the original papers at the end of the work. |
131— | From this appellation in the MS. letters, Iconcluded that Knox was married to MissBowes before he left Berwick, until Imet with one of his printed works, to which a letter from him to MrsBowes is added. On the margin of this, opposite to a place in which he had called her mother, is this note: “Ihad maid faithful promise, before witnes, to Mariorie Bowes her daughter, so as she took me for sone, Ihartly embrased her as my mother.” Knox’s Answer to Tyrie the Jesuit. F.ij. |
132— | MS. Letters, p.265,276. |
133— | Ibid, passim. |
134— | They wrote a letter in commendation of him, Dec.9, 1552, to Lord Wharton, deputy warden of the Borders. During the following year, when he was employed in Buckinghamshire, in order to secure greater acceptance and respect to him in that county, the council wrote in his favour to lords Russel and Windsor, to the justices of the peace, and to several other gentlemen. Strype’s Cranmer, p.292. |
135— | Strype’s Memor. of the Reformation, ii.533. |
136— | Bishop Burnet, and MrStrype, (Memor. of Reform, ii.299,) who have recorded this fact, conjectured that the patentee was a relation of our Reformer. That he was his brother, is evident from Knox’s letters, which mention his being in England about this time. In a letter written in1553, he says: “My brother, Williame Knox, is presentlie with me. What ye wald haif frome Scotland, let me knaw this Monunday at nicht; for hie must depart on Tyisday.” MS. Letters, p.271. Perhaps the same person is referred to in the following extract from another letter: “My brother hath communicat his haill hart with me, and Ipersave the mychtie operation of God. And sa let us be establissit in his infinit gudnes and maist sure promissis.” Ib.p.266. William Knox afterwards became a preacher, and was minister of Cockpen, in Mid-Lothian, after the establishment of the Reformation in Scotland. No fewer than fourteen ministers of the church of Scotland are numbered among his descendants. Genealogical Account of the Knoxes, apud Scott’s History of the Reformers in Scotland, p.152. |
137— | MS. Letters, p.193. Knox’s Admonition to the Professors of the Truth in England, p.61, apud History, Edin.1644,4to. |
138— | The earl of Warwick, now created duke of Northumberland, was appointed warden-general of the northern marches in Oct.1551. But being occupied in securing his interest at court, he got himself excused from going north until June1552. Strype’s Memor. of the Reformation, ii.282,339. |
139— | MS. Letters, p.112,173. Admonition, p.51, apud History, Edinburgh,1644. Knox considered that the papists had a secret hand in fomenting those dissensions which led to the condemnation and death of the protector. Nor were his suspicions ill-founded. See Strype’s Memor. of the Reform. ii.306–7. |
140— | The duke’s letter was dated Nov.23, 1552. Haynes, State Papers, p.136. Brand’s History of Newcastle, p.304. Redpath’s Border History, p.577. |
141— | A great number of his letters in the MS. are superscribed “To his sister.” It appears from internal evidence, that this was a daughter of MrsBowes; and, although Icannot be positive, Iam inclined to think that she was the young lady whom he married. One letter has this superscription, “To Mariorie Bowes, who was his first wife.” In it he addresses her by the name of Sister, and at the close, says, “Ithink this be the first letter that ever Iwrait to you.” MS. Letters, p.335. But there is no date by which to compare it with other letters. |
142— | Henry Nevyl, earl of Westmoreland, was, by the interest of the duke of Northumberland, admitted a member of the privy council in1552. He was also a member of the council for the north, and lord lieutenant of the bishopric of Durham. His private character was indifferent. Strype’s Memor. of the Reformation, ii.401, 457–9. |
143— | MS. Letters, p. 267–9. |
144— | MS. Letters, p.112. Melchior Adam, VitÆ Theolog. Ext. p.137. |
145— | The letter last quoted. MS. Letters, p.273–4, compared with p.268. |
146— | MS. Letters, p. 276. |
147— | MS. Letters, p. 260–1. |
148— | Ibid. p. 262. |
149— | Strype’s Cranmer, p. 292. |
150— | The account of his examination before the council is taken from a letter of Knox, the substance of which has been inserted by Calderwood, in his MS. History, and by Strype, in his Memorials of the Reformation, vol.ii. p.400. |
151— | Luther having rejected with disdain the great offers by which Alexander, the papal legate, attempted to gain him over to the court of Rome, “He is a ferocious brute,” exclaimed the legate, equally confounded and disappointed, “whom nothing can soften, and who regards riches and honours as mere dirt; otherwise the pope would long ago have loaded him with favours.”—Beausobre’s History of the Reformation, i.395,6. Macaulay’s Translation. |
152— | BezÆ Icones, Eeiij. See also Verheideni Effigies, p.92,93. Melch. Adam. p.137. |
153— | MS. Letters, p.73. The passage will afterwards be quoted. |
154— | History of Newcastle, p.304. Surtees’s Durham, vol.i. p.lxx. |
155— | The churches of Geneva and Scotland did not agree in all points. Though holidays were abolished in Geneva at the commencement of the Reformation, the observance of a number of them was very soon restored, and has always continued in that church; but this practice was wholly rejected by the church of Scotland, from the very first establishment of the Reformation, and its introduction has always been vigorously resisted by her. Other things in which they differed might easily be mentioned. |
156— | Knox, Historie, p.72–74, and this Life, p.63,64. |
157— | Cald. MS. i. 250. During the reign of Edward, and even the first years of that of his sister Elizabeth, absolute conformity to the liturgy was not pressed upon ministers. Strype’s Annals, i.419,432. Burnet, iii.305,311. Hutchinson’s Antiq. of Durham, i.453. Archbishop Parker, in the beginning of Elizabeth’s reign, administered the elements to the communicants standing, in the cathedral church of Canterbury. Her majesty’s commissioners appointed the communion to be received in the same posture in Coventry; and the practice was continued in that town as late, at least, as the year1608. Certain demands propounded unto Richard, archbishop of Canterbury, p.45, anno1605. Removal of Imputations laid upon the ministers of Devon and Cornwall, p.51, anno1606. Dispute upon the question of Kneeling, p.131, anno1608. |
158— | This statement of his sentiments is drawn from his Brief Exhortation to England for the speedy embracing of Christ’s gospel, printed at Geneva, anno1559, and at the end of his History, Edinburgh,1644, 4to; and from his letters to MrsLocke, dated 6thApril, and 15thOctober, 1559, in Cald. MS.i. p.380,491. |
159— | See Note R. |
160— | See Note S. |
161— | “We had,” says he in his Letter to the Faithful in London, Newcastle, and Berwick, “ane king of sa godlie disposition towardis vertew, and the treuth of God, that nane frome the beginning passit him, and (to my knawledge) none of his yeiris did ever mache him in that behalf; gif hie myght haif bene lord of his awn will.” MS. Letters, p.119. He has passed a fuller encomium on this prince, in his Historie, p.89. |
162— | See Note T. |
163— | MS. Letters, p.175–177, and Admonition, p.52,54, apud History, Edin. 1644,4to. |
164— | One of his letters to MrsBowes is dated London, 22dJune, 1553. MS. Letters, p.249. And from other letters it appears that he was there in the following month. |
165— | We have already seen (p.101–103) that this was not his sole reason for refusing preferment in the English church. |
166— | MS. Letters, p.73,74, also p.250. |
167— | In his “Letter to the Faithful in London,”&c. he puts them in mind of the premonitions which he had given on different occasions, and, among others, of “what was spoken in Londone in ma places nor ane, when fyreis of joy and ryatous banketting wer at the proclamation of Marie your quene.” MS. Letters, 112,113. |
168— | One of his letters is dated Carlisle, 26thJuly, 1553. MS. Letters, p.270. |
169— | See Note U. |
170— | Fox, 718, 748–9, 751–766. Knox, Admonition, p.67, appendix to History, Edin. 1644,4to. |
171— | MS. Letters, p. 289, 291. |
172— | His wife. |
173— | MS. Letters, p. 290, 291. |
174— | Ibid. p. 196. |
175— | MS. Letters, p. 293, 294. |
176— | Ibid. p. 265. |
177— | MS. Letters, p. 265. |
178— | MS. Letters, p. 284. |
179— | MS. Letters, p.318. Archibald Hamilton has trumped up a ridiculous story, respecting Knox’s flight from England. He says, that by teaching the unlawfulness of female government, he had excited a dangerous rebellion against queen Mary. But the queen, having marched against the rebels, defeated them with great slaughter; upon which Knox, stained with their blood, fled to Geneva, carrying along with him a rich noblewoman! Dialog. de Confus. Calv. Sect. p.65. |
180— | MS. Letters, p. 70, 71, 107,108. |
181— | MS. Letters, p. 308, 309. |
182— | MS. Letters, p.165–167. Admonition, p.46–48. |
183— | If. |
184— | Sun. |
185— | Much more. |
186— | Wit. |
187— | Hope. |
188— | Letter to the Faithful in London,&c. in MS. Letters, p.149–151,156. |
189— | His Exposition of the sixth Psalm concludes with these words: “Upon the very point of my journey, the last of February, 1553.” MS. Letters, p.109. The reader will recollect, that in our reformer’s time, they did not begin the year until the 25th of March; so that “February 1553,” according to the old reckoning, is “February 1554,” according to the modern. |
190— | His Letter to the Faithful in London,&c. concludes thus:—“From ane sore trubillit hart, upon my departure from Diep, 1553, whither God knaweth. In God is my trust through Jesus Chryst his sone; and thairfor Ifeir not the tyrannie of man, nether yet what the devill can invent against me. Rejoice, ye faithfull; for in joy shall we meit, wher deth may not dissever us.” MS. Letters, p.157,158. |
191— | In a letter, dated Dieppe, May10, 1554, he says, “My awin estait is this: since the 28of Januar,” counting from the time he came to France, “Ihave travellit throughout all the congregations of Helvetia, and has reasonit with all the pastoris and many other excellentlie learnit men, upon sic matters as now Icannot comit to wrytting.” MS. Letters, p.318. |
192— | MS. Letters, p. 313–315. |
193— | Ibid. p. 311. |
194— | MS. Letters, p. 106. |
195— | Ibid. p. 319. |
196— | Ibid. p. 310. |
197— | Strype’s Cranmer, p.413. Calvini Epist. et Respons. p.179, 245,248, Hanov.1597. |
198— | One of his letters to MrsBowes, is dated “At Diep the 20 of July, 1554, after Ihad visited Geneva and uther partis, and returned to Diep to learn the estait of Ingland and Scotland.” MS. Letters, p.255,256. This is the letter which was published by Knox, along with his answer to Tyrie, in1572, after the death of MrsBowes. |
199— | In the letter mentioned in last note, he refers his mother-in-law to “a general letter written,” says he, “be me in greit anguiss of hart, to the congregationis of whome Iheir say a greit part, under pretence that thai may keip faith secreitt in the hart, and yet do as idolaters do, beginnis now to fall before that idoll. But O, alas! blindit and desavit ar thai; as they sall knaw in the Lordis visitatioun, whilk, sa assuredlie as our God liveth, sall shortlie apprehend thai backstarteris amangis the middis of idolateris.” MS. Letters, p.252. On the margin of the printed copy is his note: “Frequent letters written by Johne Knox to decline from idolatrie.” |
200— | MS. Letters, p. 251–253. |
201— | Collier, Eccles. History, ii. 441. |
202— | MS. Letters, p. 322. Davidson’s Brief Commendatioun of Uprichtnes; reprinted in the Supplement. |
203— | MS. Letters, p. 256. |
204— | MS. Letters, 344, 373. |
205— | It is painful to observe, that many of the Lutherans, at this time, disgraced themselves by their illiberal inhospitality, refusing, in different instances, to admit those who fled from England into their harbours and towns, because they differed from them in their sentiments on the sacramental controversy. Melch. Adami VitÆ Exter. Theolog. p.20. Strype’s Cranmer, p.353,361. Gerdesii Hist. Reform. tom. iii.235–7. |
206— | The English exiles were greatly indebted for this favour to the friendly services of the French pastors. One of these, Valerandus Polanus, was a native of Flanders, and had been minister of a congregation in Strasburg. During the confusions produced in Germany by the Interim, he had retired along with his congregation to England, and obtained a settlement at Glastonbury. Upon the death of EdwardVI. he went to Frankfort. Strype’s Memor. of the Reform. ii.242. |
207— | See Note V. |
208— | Knox, Historie, p. 85. |
209— | Brieff Discours off the Troubles begonne at Franckford in Germany, Anno Domini 1554. Abowte the booke off Common Prayer, p.xviii–xxiv. Printed in1575. This work contains a full account of the transactions of the English church at Frankfort, confirmed by original papers. The author was a non-conformist, but his narrative was allowed to be accurate by the opposite party. To save repetition, Imay mention once for all, that, when no authority is referred to, my statement of these transactions is taken from this book. It was reprinted in1642, and is also to be found in the second volume of the Phenix, or a Revival of Scarce and Valuable Pieces. Lond.1707–8. But Ihave made use of the first edition. |
210— | This was the order of worship used by the church of Geneva, of which Calvin was minister. It had been lately translated into English. |
211— | Calvini Epist. p.28: Oper. tom.ix. AmstÆlodami. anno1667. |