• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

SCS STes/.fy-S CATHOLIC TRACTATES OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY 1573-1600 TYRIE’S REFUTATION, 1573 HAY’S DEMANDES, 1580 HAMILTON’S CATHOLIK TRAICTISE, 1581 BURNE’S DISPUTATION, 1581 CANISIUS’ CATECHISM, 1588 HAMILTON’S FACILE TRAICTISE, 1600 ANE SCHORT CATHOLIK CONFESSION, MS, SELECTIONS EDITED, WITH INTRODUCTION AND GLOSSARY, BY THOMAS GRAVES LAW, LL.D. Iktnteti for tl)e Sacietg^bg WILLIAM BLACKWOOD AND SONS EDINBURGH AND LONDON 1901 All Rights reserved CONTENTS PAGE Introduction vu Tyrie’s Refutation (1573) 1 Hay’s Demandes (15 Bo) . ; • 31 Hamilton’s Catholik Traictise (1581) . 71 Certane Orthodox Conclusions • • • 93 Nicol Burne’s Disputation (1581) .... 107 Adam King’s Canisius (1588) 173 Kalendar 17 5 Catechism 2°8 Hamilton’s Facile Traictise (1600) . .217 Ane Schort Catholik Confession, MS. ( C.; 1588) . 247 Appendix :— Anderson’s Ground of the Catholike Religion (1623) ........ 260 Baillie’s True Information (1628) . 269 Indexes :— Glossarial Index 281 Index to Kalendar 294 General Index 3°2 b FACSIMILE TITLE-PAGES. PAGE tyrie’s refutation (1573) . I hay’s demandes (1580) . .31 Hamilton’s catholik traictise (1581) . .71 Hamilton’s certane orthodox conclusions (1581) . 93 NICOL BURNE’s DISPUTATION (1581) . 107 ADAM king’s CANISIUS (1588) . *173 Hamilton’s facile traictise (1600) . .217 INTRODUCTION The controversial and catechetical tracts written by Scottish Roman Catholics and issued from foreign presses during the reign of James VI. cannot claim to take rank as classics of the language. They cannot be compared from a literary point of view with the famous catechism set forth by the authority of Archbishop Hamilton in 1552; nor do they possess the idiomatic vigour or his- toric interest which distinguish the writings of Ninian Winzet, or, in a less degree, of Quintine Kennedy, com- posed in the heat of the Reformation struggle. Yet these curious tracts cannot be passed over in any complete survey of the Scottish literature of the sixteenth century. When the vernacular literature, in the hands of the dominant ecclesiastical party after 1560, was becoming rapidly Anglicised, mainly under the influence of the English Bible, the remnant of the old Church maintained or affected a certain linguistic conservatism, and made it a point of honour to adhere to their mother tongue. Already, in 1563, Ninian Winzet was sarcastically declar- ing that he could not understand Knox’s southern speech, and that henceforward he must write his mind to him in Latin ;1 and in one of the passages here printed {infra, 1 “ Giv you throw curiositie of novationis hes foryet our auld plane Scottis quhilk your mother lerit you, in tymes cuming I sail wryte to you my mynd in Latin; for I am not acquynted with your Southeroun.”—Buke of Four Scoirthre Questions. vii Vlll INTRODUCTION. p. 105), we have John Hamilton amusingly taunting his theological adversaries as triple traitors, seeing that they not only “ knappis suddrone ” in their “ Negative Confes- sion,” but had had that document printed in London in contempt of their native language. Yet apart from their linguistic colour these writings have a character and interest of their own. Their authors were men of mark in their own community. Some had held good positions in the Scottish universities, and had suffered persecution, imprisonment, and exile on account of their change of creed. The works of such men, courageous and earnest, command respect, if not also a certain sympathy, which, when theological passions are no longer excited, will naturally be accorded to the -weaker or the losing side. Their own sympathies too were not anti-national; but while they attacked with the greatest violence, and with unbridled tongues, established institu- tions and officials which the mass of their countrymen regarded as most sacred, they arrogated to themselves an exclusive patriotism; and personal disloyalty to their sovereign was a charge which they delighted to throw in the faces of their adversaries. Their outlook upon the events and personages around them is quite peculiar to themselves, and has at least the interest which attaches to what in Scottish literature is exceptional and novel. Yet on account of the prevailing controversial character and the comparatively slight literary value of a large part of their contents, it appeared to the Council of the Scottish Text Society unnecessary to reproduce all these texts in extenso. It was thought sufficient to print substantial extracts which should give fair examples of the vocabu- lary, style, and mode of thought of the several authors, INTRODUCTION. ix and enable the reader to judge of the extent to which the Scottish element in these writings subsisted or de- clined during the last quarter of the century. In the selection of passages appropriate for this purpose, pre- ference has been given, where possible, to those which contain allusions to contemporary persons and events, or which have any autobiographical interest. All the pre- faces and dedicatory epistles have been reproduced in their entirety. The text of Hay’s “ Demandes,” as it is com- paratively brief; and the Kalendar1 prefixed by Adam King to the translation of Canisius’s Catechism, on account of its quaintness, are printed in full; and finally some pas- sages from Patrick Anderson’s “ Ground of the Catholike and Roman Religion” (1623), and Alexander Baillie’s “True Information” (1628), are added in an appendix, by way of contrast to the productions of the preceding century. Before giving any detailed account of the authors, or a description of their several books, a few words may be said in explanation of the historical circumstances out of which they arose. I.—HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. One of the distinguishing features of the religious con- flict in Scotland at the moment of the Reformation was the intellectual apathy or helplessness displayed by the natural leaders of the old Church. Archbishop Hamilton and the Provincial Council of 1551 made indeed some show of fore- thought and energy in the preparation of the Catechism issued in the following year. But the effort came too late, 1 This Kalendar was reprinted by Bishop Forbes in his Calendars of Scottish Saints, Edinb. 1872. X INTRODUCTION. and the preachers promised by the Primate never appeared at all. After the crash of 1560, Hamilton and the bishops played but a poor part. On the political side Queen Mary found loyal support from such men as Leslie, afterwards Bishop of Ross, and Archbishop Beaton, who became her ambassador at Paris; but almost the only theologians to lift up pen or voice in protest against the change of religion were the Abbot of Crosraguel and the Linlithgow school- master.1 Black, a Dominican friar, was bold enough, in August 1561, to maintain a public conference extending over two days with Willock, a seceder from the same order; and four officials of Aberdeen University held a disputation before the Town Council of Edinburgh ; but these have left no literary remains.2 The Scottish Jesuits, in a report made to Pope Clement VIIL in 1594, mention, in addition, as worthy champions of their faith, the clerical author of a work on the mass, Sir David “ Sewrotius,” who, with his name thus obscured in the manuscript, cannot be identified ; and another priest, a Sir John Watson, of whose existence Father Stevenson could find no trace.3 The lack of courage on the part of the Catholic prelates 1 Quintine Kennedy’s “Ane Compendius Tractive” (58 leaves) was pub- lished in 1558, and was reprinted by David Laing in the Wodrow Miscellany, i. 95. His controversy with Knox concerning the mass, at Maybole in 1562, was published in the following year, and reprinted by Sir Alexander Boswell in 1812. “Ane Oratioune ... set furth be Master Quintine Kennedy, Com- mendatour of Corsraguell ye zeir of Code, 1561,” was also printed (apparently for the first time) by Boswell, from an Auchinleck MS., in 1812. The vernacular works of Ninian Winzet were excellently edited for the Scottish Text Society by the Rev. J. King Hewison (2 vols., 1888-90). 2 Keith, iii. 31-33. 3 “ Report upon the state of Scotland in the reign of Queen Mary, written in a. D. 1594, and sent to Pope Clement the Eighth by the Jesuit priests in Scotland.” Translated from the early Latin copy among the Barberini MSS. by Joseph Stevenson, S.J., and printed as an Appendix to his “ History of Mary Stewart” (1883), p. 113. INTRODUCTION. xi was as conspicuous as their lack of intellectual activity. A quite dramatic picture of the contrast between the attitude of these shrinking, timid, and despairing prelates and that of the new men—sanguine, aggressive, and fearless—now springing up elsewhere under the influence of the counter- reformation, is drawn for us unconsciously in the simple but striking narrative of the Jesuit, Nicolas de Gouda, who was sent by the Pope as envoy to Queen Mary in 1562.1 His comments, too, upon the situation are note- worthy. He finds in the frightened, silent bishops, who “live but for themselves,” no qualifications “requisite for meeting the foe and standing firm in the day of battle.” “ There are,” he says, “ some Catholic preachers, but they are few in number and such as venture not to moot the questions which are now controverted, or are unable to explain them fittingly.” He attributes the present calamity to “ the scandalous and licentious lives of priests and clerics,” and to “ the absolutely supine negligence of the bishops.” “No wonder,” he exclaims, “that with such shepherds the wolves invade the flock of the Lord and ruin all! ” Among the remedies recommended is the establishment of “ some college where good and learned men should be ready to give pious and Catholic instruction to the young who are the hope of the commonwealth.” That now, or for many years to come, there was no attempt made to reorganise the scattered clergy, or found houses of refuge for the exiles and seminaries for the young, may be in part explained by the want of money at home and the absence of adequate papal aid ; for Rome, con- 1 Printed with an English translation and notes by Father J.

Load more

  397

Copy Link