Open main menu

Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 53.djvu/419

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.


strictest type, and in ecclesiastical matters acted simply as the king's servant. In 1610 he was moderator of the assembly at which presbytery was abolished, and on 21 Oct. of the same year he and two other Scottish bishops were at the special desire of the king consecrated to the episcopal office by the bishops of London, Ely, and Bath (ib. pp. 208–9). On 15 Nov. he was also named one of the commissioners of the exchequer known as the new Octavians (Reg. P. C. Scotl. x. 85). On the death of Archbishop Gledstanes in 1615, he was on 31 May translated to the see of St. Andrews. Shortly after his consecration the two courts of high commission for the trial of ecclesiastical offences were united. In June of the following year George Gordon, sixth earl and first marquis of Huntly [q. v.], was summoned before this commission for adhesion to popery, and, on refusing to subscribe the confession of faith, he was for a time warded in the castle of Edinburgh. By warrant of King James he was, however, freed from prison and sent to London, where he was absolved by the archbishop of Canterbury, and received the communion at Lambeth (Calderwood, vii. 218). On 12 July Spottiswood, in a sermon in St. Giles's Church, endeavoured to quiet the excitement of the Scottish kirk at this seeming usurpation of its disciplinary prerogatives by asserting that the king had promised that ‘the like should not fall out hereafter’ (ib. p. 219); but naturally he also resented the slight put upon himself, and wrote a remonstrance to the king, which drew from the king the explanation that all had been done ‘with due acknowledgment of the independent authority of the church of Scotland,’ in testimony of which the archbishop of Canterbury had agreed that his remonstrances should be put on record. The archbishop moreover wrote a private letter to Spottiswood giving a full explanation of his procedure, and stating that, as Huntley had expressed his willingness to communicate when and where the king pleased, it was deemed advisable to give him an opportunity of making good his promise (Ecclesiastical Letters in the Bannatyne Club, pp. 477–8).

At the opening of parliament during the king's visit to Scotland in 1617, Spottiswood, in his sermon, took occasion to praise ‘the king for his great zeal and care to settle the estate of the kirk, and exhorted the estates to hold hand to him’ (Calderwood, vii. 250); and although, along with the other prelates, he opposed the enactment that ‘whatever his majesty should determine in external government of the church with the advice of archbishops, bishops, and a competent number of the ministry, should have the force of law,’ he appears to have induced the king to forego the measure only by undertaking that the special ceremonial reforms which he wished to introduce would receive the imprimatur of the general assembly of the kirk. At that assembly, held at Perth in August 1618, Spottiswood placed himself in the moderator's chair, and, on the ground that the assembly was ‘convened within the bounds of his charge,’ took upon him the office of moderator without election (ib. p. 307). He had thus an opportunity in the opening sermon of expounding the proposals of the king, of explaining his own attitude towards them, and of using all his powers of persuasion—which were great—on their behalf. With real or affected candour—and in any case with admirable tact—he admitted that in yielding to the wishes of the king he was in a sense acting against his own better judgment; and that had it been in his ‘power to have dissuaded or declined them,’ he most certainly would. He, however, argued that ‘in things indifferent we must always esteem that to be the best and most seemly which appears so in the eye of public authority’ (Sermon quoted in ‘Life of the Author,’ prefixed to Spottiswoode Society's edition of his History, p. xci), and that the evil which might here result from ‘innovation’ was not so great as that which might result from ‘disobedience’ (ib. p. xc; see also Calderwood, vii. 311). The appeal was entirely successful. The five articles, thenceforth known as the Five Articles of Perth, ordained (1) that the communion must be taken kneeling; (2) that in case of sickness communion might be administered privately; (3) that baptism should, under similar circumstances, be administered in the same way; (4) that children should be brought to the bishop for a blessing; and (5) that festival days should be revived. On 25 Oct. the articles were sanctioned by an act of the privy council, and on the 26th the king's proclamation ratifying and confirming them was published at the cross of Edinburgh. And now that they were sanctioned, Spottiswood was determined that they should not remain a dead letter. Preaching in the great church (St. Giles) of Edinburgh, 14 May 1619, before the officers of state, he exhorted councillors and magistrates not only to set a good example to the people by complying with the articles, but to compel them to obey (ib. p. 355). At a diocesan synod held at Edinburgh on 26 Oct. he also threatened the utmost penalties against those ministers who refused to conform to the new articles (ib. p. 395). Nevertheless a conference of bishops