WHEN John Knox had passed to his rest it pleased the Lord to raise up faithful and able men who in face of much opposition unfurled the banner of Reformation truth. Among these were Andrew Melville, Robert Bruce, James Melville, John Welsh, John Davidson, etc. All these have had their story told in biographies by competent writers with the exception of James Melville but as long as we have his famous Diary with its graphic sketches of men and events it will keep his memory green. If Davidson may not stand beside the first three—Andrew Melville, Robert Bruce, and John Welsh—yet he has a high and honourable place among the defenders of our Presbyterian faith when a trifling and at times vindictive King endeavoured to barter the liberties so dearly won. John Davidson had to wait long for a biographer but at last he has found one* who has done full justice to his memory. It is the fashion of the day to belittle our Reformers and if now and again their work is recognised it receives but scant praise and they themselves are referred to with an air of condescension that is worse than no praise at all. Dr. Gillon belongs to another school and one has not to go very far through his book to find that he is in hearty sympathy with his subject. This does not mean that Dr. Gillon sees no fault in Davidson’s words and actions for he is quite wide awake to the worthy man’s failings. In his zeal for the good cause John Davidson of Prestonpans: Reformer, Preacher, Poet in the Generation after Knox, by R. Moffat Gillon, M.A., Ph.D. London: James Clarke & Co. Ltd., 5 Wardrobe Place, London, E.C.4. Price 6/-. Davidson had not always Discretion and Prudence as his companions and lest any one may think we are doing him injustice attention is called to the fact that Andrew Melville had on more than one occasion to lay a restraint on Mr. John’s exuberance and when “Mr. Andro’s” vehement nature is remembered nothing more need be said on this subject. Dr. Gillon has given us an excellent biography and a comprehensive account of the stirring events in which Davidson figured.
The Divine Right of Kings and the Crown Rights of Jesus Christ were to come into clash before Knox was long in his grave. The insistence of the Divine Right of Kings was ultimately to smash the Stewart dynasty while the defence of the Crown Rights of Christ was to produce a noble band of men whose names will be held in memory as long as religious liberty is prized. It was a tremendous struggle and cost our forefathers tears and blood before it became the heritage of their children. Andrew Melville was Knox’s successor and he proved a worthy successor of the great Reformer. He was out and out against the mongrel Episcopacy set up by Morton with his Tulchan Bishops and when James began his manoeuvres in setting up an Episcopacy of his own kind in Scotland he found in Andrew Melville a man who spoke as straight to him as ever kings were accustomed to listen to. In John Davidson Andrew Melville had one as unbending and as zealous as himself—as unbending in setting aside every pretext for Episcopacy—and as zealous for the maintenance of the Reformation cause. James’s leniency to the Popish lords until their disloyal activities forced him to take action was a great grief to the Presbyterian ministers.
In 1592 the General Assembly petitioned the Scottish Parliament for the repeal of the Acts of Parliament which were against the liberties of the Church and asked that the polity of the Church should be recognised and ratified. The horror awakened in the country by the murder of the Good Regent, the Earl of Moray, made the Court party anxious by every means to conciliate the ministers and pass measures favourable to the Church. When Parliament met it passed an Act ratifying the Presbyterian government and discipline and abrogating the Acts in favour of Popery. This Act was recognised as the Magna Charta of the Scottish Church. But it was not long until the Church was in deep waters and without referring to the events in which Davidson played an important part we pass on to the eventful Assembly of 1596. This was one of the most remarkable Assemblies ever held mainly in view of the extraordinary confession of sins made by the ministers and the signs of contrition and sorrow that accompanied the confessions. The Presbytery of Haddington had sent up a proposal to the Assembly that the gross sins of all Estates should be inquired into. A memorial was accordingly drawn up probably from the pen of Davidson himself. When the Assembly met in St. Giles a resolution was agreed to that Davidson be asked to “give up the particular catalogue of the chief offences and corruptions in all Estates” and as one reads it in the Booke of the Universal Kirk it certainly was a black enough indictment. King, ministers and people all had their sins set before them. It was decided that all the ministers meet on a certain day to make confession. Davidson was the preacher and the chapters read were the 13th and 34th of Ezekiel. Unfortunately we have only scraps of his sermon as recorded by Calderwood. When the preacher pressed home his message in his own effective way and called upon his hearers to confess their sins with promise and purpose of amendment a wave of emotion passed over the audience and for a quarter of an hour the building resounded with weeping. Calderwood says: “There were sighs and sobs, with shedding of tears among the most part of all Estates that were present, every one provoking another by their example, that the kirk resounded, so that the place might worthily have been called Bochim; for the like of that day was never seen in Scotland since the Reformation, as every man confessed. There have been many days of humiliation for present or imminent dangers, but the like for sin and defection was there never seen” (Hist. of the Kirk of Scotland, V. 407). After public confession was made, prayer was engaged in, and Davidson preached again; this time with the purpose of “building up” as his first sermon aimed at “casting down.” He called upon his hearers to enter into a new covenant with the Lord and with uplifted hands they did so. As many of the ministers were not present on the occasion the Assembly enjoined the Synods to engage in a like solemn humiliation. Some presbyteries also and congregations met for a like purpose.
Notwithstanding all this dark clouds were gathering for the Kirk in high places. James was scheming to have Episcopacy set up in Scotland and his plans were all the easier to accomplish inasmuch as, according to Hume Brown, “there was not a single noble of ability and authority who took his stand on the side of the Presbyterian party.” By a series of cunningly devised questions which were meant to entrap the ministers the King asked the Assembly’s answers to the same and received answers from the Assembly which, though not quite satisfactory to him, were stepping stones to his objective. When the next Assembly met James found that the ministers resented his encroachments on the laws and liberties of the Kirk. Notwithstanding the cunning plausibilities of James there were some among the ministers who saw clearly enough his objective; among these was John Davidson. The Scottish Parliament passed an Act decreeing that such ministers as the crown provided to the place and dignity of a bishop should have a place in Parliament. When the matter came before the Synod of Fife James Melville and others argued against the proposal on the ground that ministers could not have a place in Parliament without first being made bishops. Davidson also followed in the same strain and in doing so gave utterance to one of those deliverances so characteristic of leading Scottish ministers at this date and so full of meaning. He laid bare the King’s cunningly devised plan and in doing so he exclaimed with cutting irony: “Busk [dress], busk him, busk him as bonnlie as ye can and bring him in as fairlie as ye will, we see him well enough, we see the horns of his mitre.” Davidson faithfully opposed the schemes of the King to the end and for his faithfulness received the King’s hate as a return. James never forgave Davidson but that did not turn John Davidson from doing his duty. His closing days were clouded and troubled. Ill health hindered him from taking part in the Church’s work. The royal restraint also kept him from being heard in the church courts though he still continued to address letters to the General Assembly. He died in 1604.
It is well that such men who fought nobly for the truth should be remembered and it is gratifying, as in the biography before us, to know that the story of their lives and work should be appreciatively told. There is a school of writers risen in Scotland who seem to consider it their bounden duty to throw a stone at these worthy men instead of adding it to their cairn. What if they said and did things at times which might have been better not said and not done who among us is so perfect that we may cast a stone at them?