THE KING'S ASSEMBLIES
'Gold? . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
Ha, you gods! . . . Why, this
Will lug your priests and servants from your sides.'
_Timon of Athens._
Before we go on to the closing chapter of Melville's personal history,
we must glance at the course of events in Scotland from the time he and
his brethren were called to London, up to the Glasgow Assembly in 1610,
when the Church made a total surrender to the King, and 'Jericho was
buildit up againe in Scotland.'
The Invincibles of the Church having been put out of the way by
imprisonment or banishment, the King felt that he might safely call an
Assembly to execute his wishes, and to ratify in the Church's name the
restoration of Episcopacy as it had been decreed by the Parliament. So
in the beginning of December 1606, the Assembly was summoned to meet in
Linlithgow. Letters were sent by the King to every presbytery; and they
not only intimated the meeting, but named the representatives to be
sent. In the event of the presbyteries refusing to return the King's
nominees, these were instructed to appear without any presbyterial
mandate. The business was stated to be the suppression of Popery and the
healing of the jars of the Church. In this programme the former item was
the gilt on the pill of the latter. James Balfour--who was in London at
the time--exposed the real character of the Assembly's business when he
was told of it by Bishop Law of Orkney, who had come to Court to report
the proceedings to the King: '"_In nomine Domini incipit omne malum!_
This is pretendit bot the dint will lycht on the Kirk ..."--"They sall
call me a false knave," replied the Bishop, "and never to be believit
again, if the Papists be not sa handleit as they wer never in
Scotland."--"That may weill be,"' was Balfour's rejoinder.
When the House came to the matter which was the real occasion for the
Assembly being held, the question was put, What was the cause of the
jars of the Kirk? And the answer given was, The want of a free Assembly.
King's men as they were, the members had not yet been tamed to entire
servility; as was further shown by their agreeing to petition James on
behalf of the banished ministers, and by their appointing another
Assembly to be held in Edinburgh in the following year. The King's
Commissioner--the Earl of Dunbar--was surely in a compliant mood when he
allowed the House such liberty! But at this point the trump card he had
been concealing in his sleeve was thrown on the table. He proposed in
the King's name that until the business for which the Assembly had been
called was settled, _Constant_ Moderators should be appointed for the
presbyteries. As it was said at the time, these Constant Moderators were
to be thrust like little thieves into the windows to open the door to
the great thieves--the bishops. Strong objection was made to this fatal
innovation on Presbytery, and it was agreed to, only after cautions,
proposed by the House, had been accepted by the Commissioner.
That even such a tame Assembly was indisposed to yield up the liberties
of the Church at the demand of the King was shown by the passing of
resolutions intended to clip the wings of the bishops. These resolutions
declared, with the concurrence of the bishops themselves, that they were
subject to the discipline of the Church and amenable to their own
presbyteries.
The King was mightily displeased with his friends in the Assembly
because they had not 'proceedit frielyer'; he was enraged at the bishops
for submitting themselves to the courts of the Church. The Moderator,
Nicolson, Bishop of Dunkeld, at one time James Melville's bosom friend
and a standard-bearer of the Kirk, took the King's displeasure so much
to heart that he fell ill, and when it was proposed to send for a
doctor, replied, 'Send for King James; it is the digesting of his
Bishoprick that has wracked my stomack.'
The presbyteries rose up in arms against the Constant Moderators, as did
all the synods except Angus; and many scenes of violence took place at
the meetings, of these courts through the attempt made by the King's
Commissioner to force the adoption of the Acts of the Linlithgow
Assembly. The King had still some hard work to do before he could
accomplish his purposes. His next step was to propose a conference of
ministers, chosen from both sides of the House, to confer on the
questions at issue; and meanwhile all public discussion on these
questions was to be suspended. The ministers accepted the
proposal--another of these fatal concessions by which they were only
drawn further into the King's net. Confer and discuss as they might, the
King remained the final arbiter, and only one conclusion would be
accepted by him. By the suspension of hostilities between the two
parties in the Church, those who were opposed to the King gained
nothing, and he gained much. While the ministers were silent and
inactive, the bishops were as aggressive as ever; they openly avowed
their intention of conforming the Church to Episcopacy; and they brought
down from London the King's Commissioner and several dignitaries of the
English Church to assist them in the task.
At the next meeting of Parliament, July 1609, the only measure now
needed, so far as Parliament was concerned, to restore a full-blown
Episcopacy, was passed without opposition. There was no minister
present; while Episcopal dignitaries were again brought from London to
grace the proceedings and witness the surrender that was to be made to
their own ecclesiastical polity. At that Parliament 'thai rayd royallie
and Prelat lyk.' The measures that were passed restored the judicial
power of the bishops, their seats in the Court of Session, and their
lands and revenues. Authority was given to them to fix stipends and to
raise or lower them as they were minded, and so the ministers were made
to a large extent their dependants. One of the measures, the setting up
of a High Court of Commission, raised the bishops to a higher degree of
authority than they had ever possessed before. It was virtually a
bishop's court, and it was invested with extraordinary power; those who
sat in it could call before them any person in the kingdom who had
incurred their displeasure, and judge and punish him without law and
without appeal.
The Acts of this Parliament were the King's penultimate stroke against
Presbytery. They armed the bishops with such power, that the King felt
he might at length summon an Assembly which would make submission to
Episcopacy. An Assembly was accordingly held in Glasgow in June 1610;
and there the King's resolutions were carried with only two dissentient
voices. The House was again filled with the King's nominees; and bribes
were distributed among the members to the tune of 40,000 merks. The
bribes were paid in 'Angel' pieces, and so the Assembly came to be known
as the Angelical Assembly. It was money that did the King's 'turn';
'and sa at are stollen dint[28] in are day was overthrown are worke
seventie yeiris in building, and above twenty-four yeiris spacious and
most profitabill standing.'
[Footnote 28: Stolen opportunity.]