|
THE time had now
arrived when the two chief persons in the State were to be brought
face to face. Queen Mary landed at Leith on the 20th of August 1561,
and shortly afterwards she was to have her first interview with the
man who for the next six years was to be her chief opponent. Knox
and she had been studying each other's characters at a distance.
When it became clear that the time could not be long delayed for her
appearance in Scotland, she began in her French home to study the
political situation in her native country, and the leading men with
or against whom she would have to act; and Knox, who had succeeded
after a supreme effort in establishing the Protestant religion, had
grave suspicions that the advent of the young Queen would interfere
with all his plans and hopes.
Mary's idea of
government was radically opposed to that of Knox. She believed
firmly in the divine right of princes, and expressed her views to
the English Ambassador, Throgmorton, when she said, "God doth
command subjects to be obedient to their princes, and commands
princes to read His law and govern thereby, themselves and the
people committed to their charge." Knox's conception of the
authority of princes and of the obedience due unto them by their
subjects was, as we know, very different. "Princes," he declared in
Mary's own hearing, "were often the most ignorant of God's true
religion," and subjects are only bound to obey them when their
commands are in accordance with God's holy law. We are not,
therefore, surprised in learning that she regarded the Reformer as
the most dangerous man in her kingdom, and vowed before she put a
foot in it that she would either banish hint from Scotland or refuse
to dwell there herself. She even went the length of trying to
prejudice him in the eyes of Elizabeth by sending her a copy of his
First Blast; while Knox attempted to do a similar disservice to her
by warning Elizabeth against Mary's overtures, hinting that her
object was not so much to have his book refuted as to make her path
easy to the English throne. "Mary," he says, "would not take so much
pains unless her craft in so doing shot at a further mark."
The question of the
Queen's religion was discussed by the Protestant chiefs before her
arrival in Scotland. Knox foresaw very serious trouble on this head,
and was firmly convinced that the peace and welfare of the country
could only be secured by compelling the Queen to conform to the laws
of the land. The politicians among the Protestant party, however,
even at this early date, contemplated a compromise, and the Lord
James, while opposed to her celebrating Mass, publicly declared that
they could not prevent her having it "secretly in her chamber." Knox
foresaw the social and religious upheaval that would follow from
even so seemingly modest a compromise, but being unable to see his
own views carried out he was forced to submit and wait.
In his History of the
Reformation he gives a graphic account of the Queen's landing at
Leith and her arrival at Holyrood. It was a dull and dismal morning.
"The very face of heaven did manifestly speak what comfort was
brought unto this country with her, to wit, sorrow, dolour, darkness
and all impiety, for in the memory of man that day of the year was
never seen a more dolorous face of the heaven than was at her
arrival." Knox's forebodings were not without reason. The Queen and
he were two antagonistic forces, and however powerful each might be,
ultimate success depended very largely upon the attitude that would
be taken up by Knox's old friends, the Lords of the Congregation.
Prior even to this time he was conscious of a growing slackness on
their part. In the closing stages of the revolution, which ended in
the establishment of the new religion, those who at one time put the
cause of Protestantism in the front substituted for it
political reasons.
They declared that they were fighting for the liberty of the nation,
for just government, and for the expulsion of the French from the
country. Knox, while naturally accepting the new situation thus
created, for the purpose, it was alleged, of securing the support of
England, never wavered in his conviction that religion was the
ground of contention, and that it would be a betrayal of his highest
trust to say or do anything that would endanger its sure progress.
As events developed,
this breach between him and the Protestant Lords became wider, and,
as final results showed, he was right and they were wrong. The
policy which they pursued ended in failure, and Knox's cause
triumphed. Mary's great object even from the very first was to
secure the English throne, and this ambition was her undoing. She
was not many days in the country until she saw that the men of most
weight were the Protestant Lords, and she deemed it diplomatic to be
friendly with them and to use them in carrying out her schemes. The
Lord James and Maitland of Lethington, in particular, became her
chief advisers. They, too, were anxious for a union with England,
and although they did not anticipate its accomplishment by the means
which Mary cherished, they made use of her to further their plans.
Knox would have none of this deception and double dealing. He could
not believe that any good could come of it, and he censured the weak
compromises of the Protestant politicians, but they, confident in
their own wisdom, heeded hint not.
The very first Sunday
after her arrival saw matters brought to a crisis. On that day
preparations were made for the celebration of the Mass in Holyrood
Chapel. The news spread quickly, and men began openly to speak,
"'Shall that idol be suffered again to take place within this realm?
It shall not.' The Lord Lindsay, with the gentlemen of Fife and
others, plainly cried in the close, I The idolater priest shall die
the death according to God's law." A tumult was imminent, and were
it not for the Lord James, "the man whom all the godly did most
reverence," the tumult might have ended in a riot and rebellion. He
took it upon him to keep the chapel door, and assured the mob that
no Scotsman would be allowed to enter. Mary and her French courtiers
and servants might please themselves, but no countryman of his would
touch the idol. His two brothers, the Lord John and the Lord Robert,
took the frightened priest under their protection and conveyed him
safely to his chamber.
This was surely an
indication of what would ultimately happen unless the Queen and her
advisers acted reasonably. But Mary Stuart, like the rest of her
race, was not so disposed. She carried her fortunes in her own
hands, and, by rushing wildly against the most cherished convictions
of the best portion of her subjects, courted ultimate ruin. On the
very next day, at a meeting of her Secret Council, composed mainly
of Protestants, an Act was passed to the effect that in religion
things were to remain as the Queen had found them. This meant that
the Court religion was to be Roman Catholicism and that of the
nation Protestantism. No compromise on the part of her advisers
could possibly be weaker. It meant one of two things: an open
conflict between the Queen and Knox and their respective parties, or
the thin end of the wedge for the ousting of the Protestant religion
and the introduction of Popery. The one man among the Protestant
aristocracy who took a firm stand in this matter was the Earl of
Arran. He made a public protestation to the effect that "no liberty
should be given to the Court to offend God's Majesty and to violate
the laws of the land," but the Earl stood practically alone.
The supporters of the
Protestant religion, the Lords "called of the Congregation" as Knox
sarcastically terms them, were coming at this particular time in
considerable numbers to Edinburgh to present themselves to the
Queen. On hearing that the Mass was permitted they professed at
first "great indignation, but after that they had remained a certain
space they were as quiet as the former." The Queen was evidently
bewitching them. Her youth, beauty, and vivacity, her charm of mind
and manner, the novelty of having as their monarch this fair
princess, were evidently more than the Scottish lords and barons
could withstand. They yielded to her influence, and were prepared to
sacrifice even their religious convictions for her favour. Mary knew
her power and made the most of it. Knox's old and tried friend,
Robert Campbell of Kinyeancleuch, graphically and forcibly stated
the situation when he said to Lord Ochiltree, who was one of the
latest arrivals, " My lord, now ye are come and almost the last of
all the rest, and I perceive by your anger that the fire edge is not
off you yet, but I fear that after that the holy water of the Court
be sprinkled upon you that ye shall become as temperate as the rest;
for I have been here now five days, 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 was past. I think there be
some enchantment whereby men are bewitched."
But there was one man
who was not bewitched, and that man was John Knox. He immediately
prepared himself for battle. There was no public press in those
days, but there was the pulpit; and the pulpit of St. Giles', over
which Knox had supreme control, was the best rostrum in the country.
He was the one man to be reckoned with, and, grasping at once the
significance of the situation, he inveighed in the strongest
possible manner against the conduct of the Queen and the Court, and
declared that "one Mass was more fearful to him than if ten thousand
armed enemies were landed in any part of the realm, of purpose to
suppress the whole religion."
Knox, in afterwards
referring to this occasion, expresses regret that he did not act
with more firmness and courage and put his thoughts and words into
force. He had great influence in the country, and the commons and
peasants would have rallied round him, but his sober judgment saved
him. The whole power of the Court and nobility would have been
against him, and the conflict could only have had one end. He must
have seen that at the time, and it was characteristic of him, then
as always, that however vehement his words might be his conduct was
always prudent and cautious. Many of the Protestant Lords must have
heard this sermon, and reports of it would speedily be carried to
the Queen. Whether it was on her own initiative or by the advice of
her Council is not quite clear, but Knox was summoned to Holyrood to
have his first interview with Mary Stuart.
This invitation was a
direct tribute to the power and influence of Knox, for its real
object was to win him over. The Lord James, who was the only other
person present at the interview, and who must have been privy to the
command sent to Knox, ought to have known the character of the
Reformer better than to have believed that even the Queen could
seduce him from his convictions. The interview that followed has
drawn to it the eyes of men from then till now, because of the
important subject discussed and of the conflicting opinions
expressed, but chiefly on account of the two great personages who
took part in it. In Mary and Knox we have two types. The former was
animated by what may be termed the Hellenistic spirit, and the
latter by the Hebraistic. Mary was a child of nature, fond of
pleasure, with no serious earnestness or strong feeling about
religion. Knox, on the other hand, felt that he was acting not on
his own responsibility, but as a servant of the Divine; that the
truth committed to him must be held sacred at all hazards, and that
not only was he bound to declare it on every occasion, but to resist
to the death any who might dare to impugn it. These two forces have,
in the history of the world, frequently come into conflict, and the
victory has invariably been on the side of the Hebraistic spirit.
Moral earnestness, sincerity, the fear of God and no other fear,
have never failed to give purpose, strength, and endurance to those
who have fought the battle of the eternal verities.
Mary began by
accusing Knox of disloyalty and encouraging rebellion against her
mother, and took him to task for his authorship of The First Blast.
She declared that in England he had been a disturber of the peace,
and hinted that he was even in league with the powers of darkness.
Knox defended himself against these charges, and explained that if
Scotland was satisfied with a female ruler he was "as content to
live under her Grace as Paul was to live under Nero." But the heart
of the subject was only reached when she charged him with denying to
princes the right to dictate to their subjects the religion which
they should believe. "Ye have taught the people," she said, "to
receive another religion than princes can allow, nor can that
doctrine be of God seeing God commands subjects to obey their
princes."
Knox's opinion of
princes was not of the highest, for, with the exception of Edward
vi., he had not come into contact with any who impressed him very
favourably, so he replied " princes were often the most ignorant of
God's true religion"; and as for obedience to them, that is only
lawful when they issue such commands as are conformable to the law
of God; indeed, if they act contrary to that law it is the duty of
subjects not only to disobey but forcibly to restrain them. "For
there is neither greater honour," he added, "nor greater obedience
to be given to kings or princes than God has commanded to be given
unto father and mother; but so it is, Madam, that a father may be
stricken with a frenzy in the which he would slay his own children.
Now, Madam, if the children arise, join themselves together,
apprehend the father, take the sword or other weapons from him, and
finally bind his hands and keep him in prison till that his frenzy
be overpast, think ye, Madam, that the children do any wrong? It is
even so, Madam, with princes that would murder the children of God
that are subject unto them." These views are commonplaces now, but
they were certainly very revolutionary then, and we are not
surprised when Knox tells us that on hearing them Mary stood aghast.
"At these words," he says, "the Queen stood as it were amazed for a
quarter of an hour."
It must now have
become perfectly clear, not only to the Lord James but to the
disputants themselves, that reconciliation between views so
antagonistic was utterly impossible. Mary on recovering from her
angry surprise said, "Well then, I perceive that my subjects shall
obey you and not me." "God forbid," he answered in words which
conveyed his inmost convictions, "that ever I take upon me to
command any to obey me, or yet to set subjects at liberty to do what
pleaseth them, but my travel is that both princes and subjects obey
God, who commands Queens to be nurses unto His people. And this
subjection," he added, "unto God and unto His troubled Church, is
the greatest dignity that flesh can get upon earth." "Yea," said
she, "but ye are not the Church that I will nourish, I will defend
the Kirk of Rome, for I think it is the true Kirk of God. Ye
interpret the Scripture in one manner and they in another, whom
shall I believe?" "Ye shall believe God that plainly speaketh in His
Word," answered Knox; and at the close of his exposition of how the
Scriptures condemned, among other things, the Mass, she struck in,
"Ye are too hard for me, but if they were here that I have heard
they would answer you."
If Mary's object was
to gain Knox to her side, she took the wrong way of doing it.
Whatever diplomacy she may have had she certainly managed to conceal
it on this occasion. In truth her diplomacy was neither very deep
nor far-seeing. It was clever but not convincing. The gulf between
her and the Reformer must now have seemed to both impassable. She
may have taken Knox's measure. He certainly took hers, for on being
asked by several of his intimates what he thought of the Queen, he
answered "If there be not in her a proud mind, a crafty wit and an
indurate heart against God and His truth, my judgment faileth me."
The "crafty wit," we have to acknowledge, is not very conspicuous in
her management of the interview, and as for her "indurate heart" it
was certainly invulnerable to the doctrines of the Reformed
religion. There was something metallic in the charm of Queen Mary
which robbed it of much of its power. That "softness" in woman which
Goethe and Byron maintain to be her distinctive trait was certainly
not the outstanding feature in the character of Mary Stuart. |
