When Patrick Hamilton came to that city, early in 1528, Ale-sius did not doubt that he would be able to convince him of his errors, and to bring him back to the true faith of the Church. He was personally acquainted with him, as Hamilton had often been a visitor at the priory, and he repeatedly conversed with him during the month which preceded his martyrdom. But instead of converting the Reformer he was himself converted; and the deep impression which Hamilton made upon him by his arguments, was made deeper still by the affecting spectacle of his, trial and death. Alesius, as before remarked, was a witness of these scenes, and afterwards penned the earliest account of them in one of his works. The applauded antagonist of Luther was now a Lutheran, and without hastily declaring his convictions, nothing could induce him to express approval of the proceedings which had been taken against Hamilton, or to pronounce any unfavourable judgment upon the articles for which he had been condemned.

This silence brought him under suspicion, and gave offence to his superior, Patrick Hepburn, the prior, who had taken an active part in Hamilton's prosecution; and it was probably with the view of entrapping him into some overt declaration of his new opinions, that he was appointed to preach before a provincial synod which met in St. Andrews in 1529. His sermon was in Latin, and was addressed exclusively to the clergy; it touched no points of doctrine or ecclesiastical prerogative : its sole and single aim was to enforce upon the clergy the duty of being faithful pastors, and setting a good example to their flocks; but it gave mortal offence notwithstanding. He had spoken plainly of the vices of the clergy, though he had said nothing of the doctrinal corruptions of the Church, and the prelates were indignant at the bold preacher. Beaton declared that the sermon smelt of Lutheranism, and the prior cried out in a rage that the whole of it was aimed against himself. Hepburn's conscience, in truth, was denied with numerous adulteries, and the conscious sting within made him imagine, that what Alesius had spoken in the general interest of clerical morality was directed as a deliberate result against himself. He vowed to have his revenge upon the heretical canon.

Not long after, it chanced that the canons of the priory were assembled in the chapter-house, to advise upon what steps they should take to obtain redress from certain grievances, which they were all suffering in common at the hand of their oppressive prior. On a sudden, Hepburn, hearing of their meeting and its design, presented himself at the door of the chapter-house with a band of armed attendants; and, casting his eye upon Alesius, went straight up to him and dragged him with violence from his seat. In a paroxysm of rage, he threw him down upon the pavement of the chapter-house, and kicked him upon the breast. It seemed as if he would have slain him upon the spot, if the other canons had not rushed to the rescue, and pulled the prior back by main force from his victim. Alesius's life was saved ; but the wrath of his superior was not appeased till he, and all the canons who had taken part with him, were cast into the prison of the monastery.

What a picture of the condition of monastic life, in the most dignified of all the monasteries of Scotland, in the sixteenth century! And what a scandal to the Church, that a man so dissolute and unprincipled as Patrick Hepburn should a few years after this have been made Bishop of Moray!

The story of Alesius's sufferings and repeated imprisonments, as told by himself, is a long one, and cannot be given in detail here. We can only relate, that when the young king interfered to obtain relief for the imprisoned canons, they were all set at liberty but Alesius; that when a rumour went through St. Andrews that he was dead, and the provost came to the priory to demand in the king's name that his body should be produced either dead or alive, he was taken out of his loathsome dungeon, and after being washed and dressed, was presented to the magistrate; but having disobeyed the prior's orders, in answering the provost's questions too frankly, he was taken back again to his prison, where he remained for many months. At last, the canons, having learned that Hepburn was concerting a design with Beaton to bring him to trial for heresy, advised and assisted him to make his escape, and he saved his life by a nocturnal flight from St. Andrews to Dundee. Next morning he made a narrow escape of being retaken by a band of horsemen whom Hepburn sent in pursuit, and succeeded in getting on board a ship which was setting sail for France. This was in 1530. His persecutions and sufferings had lasted nearly a whole year. He never returned to Scotland; but he never ceased throughout a long life to feel the deepest interest in the reformation of the Scottish Church. When he next comes before us, we shall find him at Wittemberg, an honoured disciple at the feet of Luther and Melancthon, and fighting upon German ground the noble battle of the spiritual emancipation of his native country.

A second disciple of Hamilton among the regular clergy of St. Andrews was Alexander Seyton. He was the son of Sir Alexander Seyton of Touch, and was educated at St. Andrews, where his name appears among the graduates of 1516. Having entered the dominican order, his talents and character raised him to a high place among its members, who at that time included many of the most learned and exemplary of the Scottish clergy; and he was appointed confessor to the young king. He is described as a man of tall stature, of quick genius, and of a bold and manly spirit. The date of his first public appearance as a reformed preacher is not exactly known, but it was probably in 1530 or 1531; when, having been appointed to preach during Lent in one of the churches of St Andrews, "he taught for the space of a whole lentran," says Knox, "the commandments of God only, ever beating into the ears of his auditors that the law of God had of many years not been truly taught, for men's traditions had obscured the purity of it These were his accustomed propositions. First:—Christ Jesus is the end and perfection of the law. Second:—there is no sin where God's law is not violated. Third :—to satisfy for sin lies not in man's power; but the remission thereof comes by unfeigned repentance and by faith, apprehending God the Father, merciful in Christ Jesus his Son. While oftentimes he puts his auditors in mind of these and the like heads, he makes no mention of purgatory, pardons, pilgrimages, prayer to saints, nor such trifles."

Till Lent was over, and Seyton had left' St. Andrews for Dundee, " the dumb doctors" of the University said and did nothing; but as soon as he was gone, they employed a more orthodox predicant to go into the same pulpit, and condemn every word of Seyton's preaching; "which coming to the ears of the said friar Alexander, without delay he returned to St. Andrews, and caused immediately to jow the bell and give signification that he would preach; as that he did indeed. In the which sermon he affirmed, and that more plainly than at any other time, whatsoever in his whole sermons he had taught during the whole Lent-tide preceding: adding that within Scotland there was no true bishop, if bishops were to be known by such notes and virtues as St Paul requires."

The archbishop of course soon heard of this bold speech, and sending immediately for Seyton, "began grievously to complain and sharply to accuse that he had so slanderously spoken of the dignity of the bishops, as to say that it behoved a bishop to be a preacher, or else he was but a dumb dog, and fed not the flock but his own belly. The man, being witty and mindful of that which was his most assured defence, replied : 'My lord, the reporters of such things are manifest liars.' Whereat the bishop rejoiced and said, 'Your answer pleases me well. I never could think of you that ye would be so foolish as to affirm such things. Where are those knaves that have brought me this tale? Who compearing and affirming the same that they did before, Seyton still replied that they were liars. At last, while more witnesses were being called, he turned him to the bishop and said, ' My lord, ye may see and consider what ears these asses have, who cannot discern betwixt Paul, Isaiah, Zechariah, and Malachi, and friar Alexander Seyton. In very deed, my lord, I said what Paul says, "It behoveth a bishop to be a teacher." Isaiah saith that they that feed not the flock are dumb dogs, and Zechariah saith they are idol pastors. I of my own head affirmed nothing, but declared what the Spirit of God had before pronounced, at whom, my lord, if ye be not offended, justly ye cannot be offended at me. And so yet again, my lord, I say that they are manifest liars that reported unto you that / said that ye and others that preach not are no bishops, but belly-gods.' "