FACING TROUBLES IN SCOTLAND.
The news of the unexpected arrival of the young Queen, who had come
unattended by armed force, and had committed herself to the chivalry of
the nation, awakened a degree of enthusiasm even in the stern
"professors" of the Congregation. Feelings of loyalty to a long line of
monarchs die hard in the human breast, and especially was this so in
those days when the monarch, in the estimation of his people, stood for
something more than the chairman of a national committee; and the mass
of the Scottish people, whether adherents of the old religion, or
professors of the new, saw in the fair Queen who had come amongst them
the representative of a line of brave Sovereigns, around whom their
forefathers had fought and died for national independence, and whose
deeds of bravery were fresh in Scottish song and tradition, indeed, the
influence which Mary wielded over the people was greater than could well
be expected. Shortly after her arrival, a number of the most zealous
nobles of the Congregation came to Edinburgh to help Knox banish the
Mass from her household. But, after a few visits to Holyrood, their
fierce fervour disappeared. "I have been here now for five days,"
remarked one of them to a friend, "and at the first I heard every man
say, 'Let us hang the priest,' but after that they had been twice or
thrice in the Abbey, all that fervency passed. I think there be some
enchantment whereby men are bewitched." And in truth it can be said
that, with scarcely an exception, no one ever came directly under the
influence of Mary Stewart without being, in some degree, impressed in
her favour.
But in spite of the favourable signs that were manifested on her
arrival, no grave observer could contemplate her environment and fail to
foresee discord, rebellion and her almost inevitable overthrow. There
were the fierce nobles who, a few months before, had been in arms
against her mother, and who were enjoying the property of the Church,
which it was now their interest to combat. There were the stern
"Professors" of the Congregation, of which Knox was the life and force,
who considered her an idolatress, and, consequently--according to the
Jewish criminal code, which they held in special esteem--deserving of
death. There was her half-brother, Lord James, gruff, reticent and
ambitious, watching for a turn of affairs that might bring him to the
throne; and there, too, was Elizabeth, with her able and unscrupulous
Secretary, Cecil, who had already fomented and supported rebellion in
Scotland, and even now had emissaries at work for the overthrow of the
young northern Queen. Worst, perhaps of all, Mary had very little
counsel on which she could rely. Allowing for poetical exaggeration, a
good deal of truth is contained in the words of the Jacobite bard:--
"She stood alone without a friend,
On whom her arm might lean,
No true and trusty counsellors
Were there to serve their Queen;
But moody men, with sullen looks,
And faces hard and keen."
Mary was not long in Scotland before her courage was put to the test.
It had been stipulated by Lord James that she should be free to have
Mass in her own house. It would seem, however, that the zealots of the
Congregation had little expected that in face of their strong opposition
to her religion, the young Queen would venture to practice it on her
return. If so, they miscalculated the extent to which she had inherited
the high spirit and unflinching courage of her bravest ancestors.
The first Sunday after her arrival, she ordered Mass to be celebrated in
the Chapel-Royal of Holyrood. A party of the Congregation, headed by
Patrick, Lord Lindsay, rushed into the apartment and attacked the
Chaplain. The Queen immediately published a proclamation to the effect
that she did not intend to interfere with the form of religion she had
found established in Scotland, and that she commanded her subjects not
to molest any of her servants or household. Shortly afterwards she made
a tour of the country, and on her return to Edinburgh, learned that the
Provost and his brethren in office had, in the meantime, issued a
proclamation commanding all Papists, under penalty of death for the
third offence, to depart from the town. She caused the bailies who were
responsible for this act to be removed from office, and issued a
counter-proclamation, permitting "All good and faithful subjects to
repair to, or leave Edinburgh, according to their pleasure or
convenience."
Knox was horrified at the Queen's action, and immediately predicted a
sudden plague. But what annoyed him most was, that certain Protestant
lords, who had professed strong opposition to the Mass, were now
inclined to tolerate it in the Queen's chapel. He took care, in his
weekly sermons, to make known his opinion of these "politick heads" and
to give the people timely warning of the chastisement with which God
would certainly visit the nation for permitting idolatry.
The young Queen, who was still in her teens, must have keenly felt the
reproaches that were being cast on herself and her religion, and,
although she succeeded in showing herself cheerful in company, we may be
sure her heart was sad and that memory often carried her back to earlier
days, in which she experienced nothing but gentle treatment and the
respectful homage of a nation of brave men, ready to draw the sword in
her defence. However, it would be unjust to the Scottish people to
think that the treatment which Mary received in Edinburgh was a correct
index to the feeling of the country at large. The hearts of the
Scottish people were with their Queen, and remained with her unto the
end. Her fiercest enemies were found in the extreme religious party led
by Knox. An amicable understanding with these was impossible. The
Protestant nobles--except those who were zealous followers of Knox--did
not, as far as I can see, care much what religious devotions the Queen
practised, so long as she took no steps towards restoring the old
religion. The fact that many of them had enriched themselves from church
property readily explains their opposition to every movement in that
direction.
But the turbulent section of the nobles and the Congregation controlled
by Knox, were not the people of Scotland. This is a fact it would be
well to note, for, it seems to me, many people fall into the error that
the friends and the enemies of Mary in Scotland were divided on purely
religious lines. It is true, the storm in which she was shipwrecked,
was mainly a religious one; yet all the Protestants were by no means
opposed to her. Many of her best friends, who stood by her in every
peril, and supported her cause until the last hope of her restoration
was dead, were Protestant nobles.
Early in Mary's reign there appears to have been some discontent among
certain Catholic nobles, who seemed disposed to attempt the restoration
of the old faith by force of arms. The Earl of Huntly said that, if the
Queen would "sanction him in it, he could set up the Mass again in the
three countries." She was as zealous in the cause of religion, and
willing to suffer as much for it as Huntly; but the prospect of
effecting any permanent good by such means, was extremely poor. If the
struggle would be left to Scotland itself, Huntly's project would be
more deserving of consideration. But Queen Elizabeth would never, while
she could prevent it, allow her adversaries to gain advantages in
Scotland; and in the event of the Scottish Catholics attempting to gain
freedom of worship for themselves her gold and her soldiers would soon
flow over the border, as they did in the regency of Mary of Lorraine.
But apart from this, Mary was opposed to civil strife. She had come to
the country in a peaceful manner, hoping, by a peaceful policy, to
conciliate the minds of her people and finally to obtain an alleviation
of the ills under which her Catholic subjects were suffering. But the
difficulties with which she had to contend were not fully understood by
her relations in France, nor, at the outset, even by the Pope; and it is
not improbable that for a while they feared she was not so industrious
as she should be in promoting the interests of her religion. And to this
day a number of her Protestant biographers--some of them enthusiastic
vindicators of her honour--speak of her leanings towards Protestantism,
either from policy or from conviction. Some say that early in her reign
she, through policy, openly favoured the Protestant cause, and as proof
of her favour overthrew--which she undoubtedly did--the powerful house
of Gordon, head of which was the Catholic Earl of Huntly. Others think
if the proper means had been employed, she would have become a
Protestant from conviction, and, in support of their opinion, they
adduce her readiness to read Protestant controversial works, and that
state of religious doubt which, they say, she manifested in a certain
conversation with Knox.
A distinguished Scottish biographer of Mary's, the late Sir John
Skelton, has thought that the uncharitable treatment she received from
Knox was the principal cause why she remained a Catholic. "Knox," he
writes, "was the foremost of the Reformers; yet Mary had found that Knox
was narrow-minded, superstitious, and fiercely intolerant,--so
narrow-minded, intolerant and superstitious that he had no difficulty in
believing that the orderly course of nature was interrupted because the
Queen dined on wild fowl and danced till midnight. If this was
Protestantism, she would have none of it. Nor can we blame her much.
The eccleciastical dictator at Edinburgh was as violent and irrational
(it might well appear to her) as the ecclesiastical dictator at Rome.
Was it worth her while to exchange the infallible Pope of the Vatican
for the infallible Pope of the High Street?"[#] (Maitland of Lethington,
Vol. II., Chap. I.)
[#] The inconsistency of those who, having appealed to private judgment
from the authority of the Pope, persecuted all who would not recognize
their own authority, is nowhere more conspicuous than in the case of the
early Scottish Reformers. By the end of the first six months of its
existence, the Congregation formulated the following anathema with which
to pursue rebellious subjects: "And this his sin, by virtue of our
ministry we bind, and pronounce the same to be bound in heaven and
earth. We further give over into the hands and power of the devil the
said A.B. of the destruction of his flesh; straitly charging all that
profess the Lord Jesus, to repute and to hold him accursed, and unworthy
of the familiar society of Christians; declaring unto all men that such
as hereafter, before his repentance, shall haunt or familiarly accompany
him are partakers of his impiety, and subject to the like condemnation."
In spite of all this, I venture to say there is no historical evidence
that Mary ever contemplated a change of religion. What answer does she
herself give to these statements? Just before her departure from
France, in conversation with Throckmorton, the English Ambassador, who
was probing her mind on the question of religion, she made what may be
called a formal declaration of her faith:--
"I will be plain with you; the religion which I profess I take to be the
most acceptable to God, and neither do I know, nor desire to know, any
other. Constancy becometh all folks well, but none better than princes,
and such as rule over realms, especially in matters of religion. I have
been brought up in this religion, and who might credit me in anything,
if I should show myself light in this case."
Her courageous opposition to every attempt to deprive her of Mass in the
Chapel-Royal of Holyrood, is well known to readers of history; and
furthermore it is evident that she continued her religious devotions
there as long as it was in her power to do so.
Four years after her return to Scotland, when Randolph, the Ambassador
of Elizabeth, who had been sent to her on business concerning her
contemplated marriage, suggested that she should change her religion and
thereby gain more favor from the English Queen, Mary indignantly
answered:--
"What would you that I should make merchandise of my religion! ... It
cannot be so."
Her words, in reply to those who, not long before her execution, strove
to prevail on her to renounce her former "follies and abominations,"
throw light, if that were necessary, on what her religious convictions
had all along been.
To Lord Buckhurst, who had informed her that sentence of death had been
passed upon her, and had urged her to accept the spiritual ministration
of the Anglican Bishop of Peterborough, she said:--
"I have never had the intention of changing my religion for any earthly
kingdom, or grandeur, or good, whatever, or of denying Jesus Christ, or
his name, nor will I now."
And again, the day before her execution, in answer to similar demands,
she said, amongst other things:--
"I have not only heard, or read, the words of the most learned men of
the Catholic religion, but also of the Protestant religion. I have
spoken with them and have heard them preach, but I have been unable to
find anything in them that could turn me from my first belief."
So much for Mary's own evidence. It is, to say the least, faulty
reasoning, to adduce the Queen's march against the Earl of Huntly as
proof that she wished, either from policy or from conviction, to support
the Protestant cause. In view of the firm and unequivocal stand she had
hitherto taken in defence of her religion, the presumption that she was
now prepared to sacrifice its interests, is unwarranted, and,
furthermore, is unnecessary, as other good and sufficient reasons for
her action can readily be found.
Being young and inexperienced in dealing with such turbulent nobles as
then surrounded her throne, and having extremely few persons in whom she
could venture to put her trust, she at first allowed herself to be
influenced in her method of government by her half-brother, the Lord
James. Now, Lord James, as is commonly admitted by the best historians,
hoped to work his way to the Scottish throne, despite his illegitimacy,
and naturally he was anxious to overthrow every power that would prove
an obstacle to the advancement of his cause. Besides, he had his eye
fixed on the Earldom of Moray, which had for some time been controlled
by Huntly. The obstacle could be removed, and the Earldom gained, if
Huntley could be "worried" into war, and then overthrown by the
authority of the Queen. Three most significant things are
certain,--that Lord James acquired the Earldom of Moray (hence his title
of Earl of Moray) immediately that Huntly and his house were ruined;
that he attempted, without Mary's knowledge, to procure the execution of
Huntly's son, George, whose life had been spared, but who had been
placed in ward at Stirling; and that the Gordons never after acted
towards the Queen as if they held her responsible for the injuries they
had suffered, but, on the contrary, gave ample proof that they
considered Moray the responsible party. However, if Mary thought no
danger threatened her from the Gordon country, she could not be excused
for allowing herself to be made the instrument of Lord James' ambition
in so grave a matter.
The fact is, the unfortunate tragedy was the result of an old and bitter
enmity between Huntly and the Lord James. The hated enemy came,
confident in the support of royal authority, which he almost fully
controlled, and committed acts that exasperated the proud Highland Earl,
and drove him into rebellion--for to oppose Lord James in these
circumstances was to resist the Queen. As far as Mary was concerned,
religion had as little to do with the overthrow of the Gordons as it had
to do with the execution of Chastellar.
Her conversation with Knox in which she is said to have revealed a state
of religious doubt, is, to my mind, a proof of her polemical cleverness.
She takes Knox on his own principle of private judgment and delicately
shows him that it cannot satisfy her mind--that it cannot raise her
above doubt. Knox tells her one thing; her uncle, the Cardinal, tells
her another; whom is she to believe? She was setting a snare for Knox,
which he could not escape, except by acknowledging an authority in
religion that rested on a sounder foundation than either his or the
Cardinal's opinion.
But why, it may be asked, did she not make her religious zeal more
evident at the outset, by sending Bishops to the Council of Trent, in
compliance with the request of the Pope, and by using her influence to
obtain at least religious toleration for her Catholic subjects? The
answer is simple,--because it was beyond her power to do either. She
had as much as she could do to save the life of her chaplain when he
said Mass in the Chapel-Royal; how could she take any steps publicly to
relieve her Catholic subjects?
The report of the Papal Nuncio, Nicholas Goudanus, who came to Edinburgh
in June, 1562, throws light on the helpless condition of the Queen, and
disposes us to sympathize with her in the miseries she was destined to
suffer at so early an age, rather than to nourish suspicions of her
sincerity and good conscience. He says he was in Edinburgh a month
before he could see the Queen, and even then he had to be received in
private, while the members of the court were out. Of all the Bishops,
the Bishop of Dunkeld alone ventured to receive him. The nuncio came to
the Bishop's house disguised as a banker's clerk, and, according to a
pre-arranged device to avert suspicion, the conversation during dinner
was limited to money matters.
Mary informed the nuncio that, in order to preserve some remains of the
Catholic faith, she had been obliged to do many things much against her
will. As regards the power exercised over her by the nobles, Goudanus
remarks: "The men in power acknowledge the Queen's title, but prevent
her from exercising any of the rights of sovereignty;[#] whenever her
opinion does not agree with theirs, they oppose her at once. Not only
that, but they deceive her as well, and frighten her with threats of an
English invasion, especially when she is meditating any steps in support
of her faith."
[#] This statement, however, is too sweeping.
As time advanced, Mary became more and more beloved by her people,
although the opposition to her religion never abated. When, in 1563,
she attended the opening of her first parliament, she was
enthusiastically hailed by the populace, whose applause grew all the
louder when they heard her address the assembly, not, as they had
expected she would, in a strange language, but in their own native
tongue, marked though it was by a foreign accent. Knox, who feared the
"politick heads" among the children of God might so far fall from grace
as to extend a degree of toleration to the outcast children of men, was
irritated by this display of affection for the Queen, and he took
revenge by denouncing the womanly vanity displayed by her and her
ladies, especially the "targetting of their tails"--whatever that meant.
We are, as a rule, so much occupied with the romantic and tragic
features of Mary's life, that we are apt to overlook her qualities as a
ruler and the works which she accomplished for the benefit of her
people. It may in brief be said, that she was deeply interested in every
measure that could promote their welfare, that during her reign the
country was comparatively peaceful and prosperous, and that the
beneficent influence of her government is attested by various public
records. Sir Thomas Craig, one of her Privy Councillors, has witnessed
to her sound judgment in these words: "I have often heard the most
serene Princess Mary Queen of Scotland discourse so appositely and
rationally in all affairs which were brought before the Privy Council
that she was admired by all.... She had not studied law; and yet, by
the natural light of her judgment, when she reasoned on matters of
equity and justice, she oftimes had the advantage of the ablest lawyer.
Her other discourses and actions were suitable to her great judgment.
No word ever dropped from her mouth that was not exactly weighed and
pondered. _As for her liberality and other virtues they are well
known._"