"On the 1st of March, 1756, Hugh McDonald, brother of Donald of Morra, was tried at Edinburgh before the High Court of Judiciary, at the instance of the Lord Advocate, for refusing to purge himself of Popery. Being asked whether he was willing to take the formula prescribed by Act 1700- he declared, that he was not at freedom of conscience to do it. He was then found guilty in terms of libel, and sentenced to be banished from the kingdom, never to return under pain of death.

Edwin Muir’s, John Knox.
I found a copy of Edwin Muir’s book ( John Knox ) at The Andersonian Library within Strathclyde University where I was studying Scottish History.
I tried to obtain this book from City of Glasgow Libraries to no avail.
First published by Lowe and Brydone Ltd. London in 1929 “The Life and Letters Series No. 12.”
( John Knox: Portrait of a Calvinist. )
I find much of Muir’s work sympathetic to Knox, Robert Burns is quoted on the opening pages as writing;
‘ Orthodox ! orthodox, wha believe in John Knox, Let me sound an alarm to your conscience’.
Edwin Muir wrote his preface;
‘ For this biography I have gone chiefly to the writings of Knox himself, and to the usual contemporary records. The Reverend Dr. M’ Crie’s and Professor Hume Brown’s Lives have also been of help, but my particular gratitude is due to Andrew Lang’s ( John Knox and the Reformation ) the one biography I have found which attempts to be critical.
My reading of Knox’s life disagrees with that of most of his other biographers since M’Crie. It is on the whole supported, however, by the eighteenth century estimate represented by David Hume and Burns.
If I show bias it is not, at any rate, theological bias.
The object of this book is somewhat different from that of the biographies which I have mentioned: it is to give a critical account of a representative Calvinist and Puritan.
The temper in which I have attempted this may perhaps best be described as realistic; I have attempted to tell in contemporary terms how a typical Calvinist and Puritan lived, felt and thought.
With the historical figure I am not particularly concerned’.
As one may note the date of publication was similar to D. H. Lawrence’ banned book and at the height of Catholic persecution in Scotland at the hands of John White the Church of Scotland’s sectarian and racist moderator.
I will relate to a few examples from Muir he writes about Knox;
‘ Between 1540 and 1543 we find him engaged as an ecclesiastical notary, and up to March of 1543 he was certainly in the Catholic Church.
Of the life he led during this time his fellow reformers tell us not a word, but the Catholics maintain that he was notorious for his immorality, and even assert that he was guilty of committing adultery with his step-mother ( his father’s second wife ). Such is the early Knox as history and scandal disclose him.
Archibald Hamilton claimed that Knox was distinguished as a young man by his licentiousness; that he had always three whores at his heels; and that moreover, he committed adultery with his step-mother.
There is finally the question whether or not Knox had any hand in the Rizzio murder.
The evidence that he had is once more contained in one letter from Randolph to Cecil. In this letter Randolph gives a list of the accomplices of the murderers, and another marked ‘ all at the death of Davy and privy thereunto’.
At the bottom of this is written ‘ John Knox, John Craig, preachers’. It has been adduced as a confirmation of Knox’s guilt that he fled from Edinburgh on the same day as the murderers’.
Muir describes what was a new development in the life of Knox;
‘ At Berwick, too, one of those friendships with women began, which were to play such a great part in Knox’s life. In his congregation was a certain “ Mrs. Bowes”, the wife of Richard Bowes of Norham Castle, a fort about six miles up the Tweed.
She was the mother of five sons and ten daughters.
Her husband was not in favour of the new doctrines; her family, too, were in the main cold.
Her fifth daughter, Marjory, (13) came with her to hear the sermon, and presently the preacher ( Knox ) and the young girl became engaged.
She ( Mrs. Bowes ) was probably about fifty when Knox became intimate with her, till then Knox had thought that no creature had ever been as tempted as he; the beloved mother ( of fifteen children ) pursued him wherever he went with vivid descriptions of her fleshly weaknesses’.
I know I have related to these subjects on earlier passages by other writers though I feel that I must introduce Muir’s work and perhaps draw some conclusions as to why the Church of Scotland’s appointed fault finder Harry Reid takes pain to advise readers of (Outside Verdict) not to read Edwin Muir’s ( John Knox ) biography.
Harry Reid was a director with the Sunday Herald’s ‘Book Review’.
Strangely one has to search for this book as there doesn’t seem to be many copies around Glasgow libraries perhaps the publishers should re-print and let the world see why the former editor of the Glasgow based broadsheet the Herald advises censorship.
Edwin Muir writes about letters from Knox to Mrs. Bowes and vice-versa ;
‘ When he was deprived of the comfort of her ‘ corporal presence’ Mrs Bowes fulfilled the conditions to perfection. She was older than he, she was already his prospective mother-in-law.
His pride would have recoiled from an intimacy in which he received reassurance and gave none.
He could luxuriate in the voluptuous relief which her weakness provided’.
The Protestant Church that Knox founded; chained people by the neck and castigated them in the most horrendous manner for sexual discrepancies…. yet Scotland’s greatest hero as Harry Reid calls him….
Muir continues his examination of Knox’s correspondence;
‘ My wicked heart loveth the self, and cannot refrain from vain imaginations’.
Writing to Mrs. Bowes that his heart was ‘ infected with foul lusts’ she was beset by the recondite sins of Sodom and Gomorra, was a strange repository for Knox’s imperative confessions.
Fear was to become an instrument in his hands, an instrument which he rarely laid aside, and which sometimes got beyond his control.
He threatened when he could make good his threats; he threatened still more wildly when he could not.
He threatened his friends when they disagreed with him; he threatened his enemies when they could afford to laugh at him. He threatened Mary ( Tudor ) of England when he was flying from her; he threatened Elizabeth when he hoped to get a favour out of her.
Where insensibility was shown in his threatenings, he took refuge in hatred.
Three women, Mary of England, Mary of Guise, and Mary Stuart, were unimpressed by his lightenings; he revenged himself by slander and prophecies of plagues where he could not by civil wars’.
The more I research the life of John Knox I continuously have to reassure myself that Protestants and Presbyterians really believe that this man was a Christian?
Muir goes on ;
‘ Ever since he had met Wishart nine years before Knox had been in the habit of prophesying. He prophesied on grave and on trifling occasions; he prophesied reasonably and unreasonably; he prophesied above all wherever he could not get his own way; he prophesied against Sir Robert Bowes because Sir Robert would not accept him as a suitor for 13 year old Marjory’s hand.
The prophecies arose to wild heights of fantasy; in ideal conditions he contemplated an orderly and exhaustive slaughter of the Catholics.
Then the prophet had become the man; now all the passions, all the envies, the hatreds, the cruelties of the man were triumphantly subsumed in the prophet.
These passions, envies hatreds, cruelties, by the same transmutation became the passions, envies, hatred, cruelties of God.
His search for God and for comfort, his perplexity over why he had fled ( from England ) his rage of resentment tipped him sheer into abysses of self-deception touched with Sadism which no other reformer had plumbed.
At their most grandiose his prophecies about the future of England were almost like the ravings of a madman.
Edwin Muir was an academic, novelist, poet, Norton Professor of English at Harvard University, he had also been Director of the British Council at Prague in 1946 and Rome in 1949, he has a long list of distinguished works to his credit with major book publishers which can be viewed on the web.
His book on John Knox should be read by anyone wishing to investigate Reformation history particularly the mis-doings of Knox’s philosophies.
Professor Muir wrote;
‘ The instrument ( Knox ) had cursed Mary Tudor ( the Queen of England ) and had publicly advised her assassination, Calvin and Bullinger, however, had refused to back him’.
He narrates about Knox at Frankfurt then moves to 1556 Knox had been in Scotland to marry Marjory for the purpose of concealing his affair with her mother Sir Robert Bowes was hunting for them.
Muir goes on;
‘ He arrived in Geneva with Mrs. Knox, Mrs. Bowes a servant, and a pupil called Patrick. He was now married to Marjory, and accordingly we hear nothing more of her, except that she bore him two children, ‘ and then she died’.
The same silence henceforth covers the irrepressible Mrs. Bowes ?’
It seemed that Knox had found a safe haven in Geneva with his wife and her mother for a while;
‘ Yet, in spite of all this, in spite of his power in the congregation and the solace of Mrs. Bowes and Mrs Knox’s company, he still longed for the comfort which only other men’s wives, it seemed, could give him in full measure.
‘Ye wrote that your desire is earnest to see me’ he said in a letter to Mrs. Locke in London, a few months after he had settled in Geneva with his family.
‘ Dear sister, ( he addressed Marjory the same in his letter to her ) if I could express the thirst and languor which I have for your presence, I shall appear to pass measure.
Yea, I weep and rejoice in remembrance of you; but that would evanish by the comfort of your presence, which I assure you is so dear to evanish by the comfort of your presence’.
What was the comfort which he longed for so earnestly ? It was the same which he had found once in
Mrs. Bowes’ friendship, a friendship which, it was clear, however, no longer quite satisfied his needs.
His urgent necessity during these years, in fact, seems to have been to surround himself with mothers.
He secured Mrs. Bowes already; to secure another a trifling relaxation of principle would surely be justifiable’.
Unfortunately for the millions who have been indoctrinated into Presbyterianism who have had to suffer severe consequences over hundreds of years for any relaxation of principles, as this was a luxury only for their great leader and his disciples.
Muir continues;
‘Mrs. Locke came to Geneva in the following May, in spite of the opposition of her ‘ head’ who was left behind in London.
She appeared with her son Harry, her daughter Anne, and a maid called Katherine. The adventure began disastrously.
Anne died a few days after arriving’.
Knox was about to write his book ( The first blast of the trumpet against the monstrous regiment of women )
Professor Muir quotes him;
‘ How abominable before God is the empire and rule of a wicked woman, yea, of a traitoress and bastard’.
In this passage Knox is referring to Mary Tudor the Queen of England obviously he saw her as illegitimate.
Actually Mary Tudor’s mother was Catherine of Aragon the first queen of Henry V111, she had previously been married to Henry’s elder brother, Prince Arthur, in 1501 ( the marriage allegedly being unconsummated ) and on his death in 1502 she was betrothed to Henry and married him on his accession to the throne in 1509.
Of the six children she bore only Mary survived, desirous of a male heir Henry divorced Catherine contrary to the law of the land regardless if it was also the law of the church.
Perhaps Knox is referring to Henry and Catherine’s marriage as illegitimate because she had been married to his brother which was also illegal then and the only legitimate heir to the English throne was Mary Stuart whose grand-mother was Henry’s sister.
Professor Muir describes some of Knox’s views on women from his book;
‘ Knox began to look about him anxiously for all those proofs of woman’s infamy which the exordium promised.
Man, he found, drawing on his knowledge, was strong and discreet.
Woman, on the other hand , was mad and phrenetic.
Was it reasonable that the passionate should rule the calm and the strong?
Women, moreover, had been known to die of sudden joy, to commit suicide, to betray their country to strangers, and to be so avid of domination that they murdered their husbands and children.
Knox reasoned ( about women ) ‘ where there was no head eminent above the rest, but that the eyes were in the hands, the tongue and mouth beneath the belly, and the ears in the feet’.
These are the writings of John Knox if a modern day psychiatrist were to examine these works and not know who the writer was, he could easily be seduced into thinking perhaps this was Adolph Hitler’s ‘struggle’.
Edwin Muir continues his narrative;
‘ Knox’s attitude to woman, it will be seen, sometimes changed with extraordinary rapidity. On Mary Tudor’s accession to the throne he had begged God to illuminate her heart with pregnant gifts of the Holy Ghost and to repress the pride of those who would rebel; after his flight his prayer was to send a Jehu to cut off her days.
When Mary of Guise was behaving with great toleration to the Protestants in Scotland she had been ‘ a princess honourable, endowed with wisdom and graces singularly,’ but now that he had heard about the pasquil she, like all other queens was a monster.
His mother had perhaps died when he was young; he had ‘ known’ his stepmother.
Two mothers were at present waiting for him in Geneva.
Mrs. Bowes and Mrs. Locke ( and his child bride ) were obviously not real mothers.
Mary of England and Mary of Guise ( and later Mary Stuart ), he was equally convinced, could not be real queens’.
It seems quite clear that Knox betrayed everyone around him including his own father by having an affair with his stepmother and anyone that he came into contact with including Wishart who he was with on the night of his capture, Knox was carrying his sword, Cardinal Beaton, Rizzio, Lord Darnley, Mary Stuart and the women who surrounded him in a Charles Manson maniacal devotion.
Calvin was also betrayed by him on the publication of the ‘First Blast’ as Knox had it secretly printed in Geneva with no writer or publisher’s names Calvin was outraged as condemnation poured upon reformers in Europe.
Professor Muir goes on to report the ideology of ‘Der Fuhrer’ of Scotland’s Presbyterian’s;
‘ Any Protestant had obviously, therefore, the right to kill any Catholic; it was the collective duty of the Protestants, however, to exterminate the Catholics ‘en masse’.
His letters from Dieppe showed an ungovernable temper and an imagination delighting in cruelty.
His Appellation from Geneva could only be the work of a mind corrupted by a monstrous doctrine.
His letter showed not merely an extreme insensibility to human sufferings; it lingered sickeningly in a delighted contemplation of them.
To the powerful he counselled violence and cruelty’.
After some months in Dieppe, Knox returned to Scotland when Elizabeth had taken the English throne after Mary Tudor died, and he found himself in the midst of turmoil.
Muir creates a vivid picture of the nobles who were to work with Knox, the professor wrote;
‘ If one were to accept the description of the sexes in ‘The First Blast’, she (Mary of Guise) might stand as the masculine type and Knox himself as the feminine.
In the battle between them calmness, self-control, reason, dignity were all on Mary’s side….. frenzy, vituperation and back-biting all on the side of Knox who was a man of notorious probity’.
Muir goes on about the destruction of the Catholic Churches and monasteries after Knox’s return to Scotland he wrote;
‘ The destruction of the religious buildings and works of art in Scotland has been debated by ( Protestant ) historians, antiquarians and theologians at length and with acrimony. Two examples, showing the fluctuations of opinion among Knox’s admirers, may be cited.
Dr. M’Crie’s apology is perhaps the most extra-ordinary.
He begins by treating the matter with elephantine facetiousness.
‘ Antiquarians,’ he said, ‘ have no reason to complain of the ravages of the reformers, who have left them such valuable remains, ( ruins ) and placed them in that very state which awakens in their minds the most lovely sentiments of the sublime and beautiful by reducing them to-ruins.
The liberty which the Protestants demanded from the Regent ( Mary of Guise ), in fact, was twofold; they asked leave to worship as they liked, and to pull down monasteries and churches.
By open profession they considered both these claims equally legitimate.
It was only by the grace of God that British Protestants especially Scottish Presbyterians never ruled Italy, France, Spain, Prague, Austria, Russia, Greece etc. with all their wonderful ancient monuments and churches which would have been obliterated and destroyed by the serial Protestant culture wreckers who make the Barbarians and Huns look like pacifists.
Professor Hume Brown wrote about the desecration of Scotland’s heritage;
‘ In these blind outbursts, ‘ he said, ‘there was no expression of real religious feeling; it was simply the instinct of plunder, the natural delight in unlicensed action which in ordinary times is kept in check by the steady pressure of law’.
Muir disagrees with Hume Brown by writing;
‘ ( Hume Brown ) contradicts himself in another passage, for those blind outbursts had, he admitted, Knox’s ‘cordial approval’.
The destruction, then was essentially a policy rather than a blind outburst.
It began as early as 1540; it was continued by Paul Methuen, the first man in Scotland to set up a purified Church, Knox set the work going on a large scale.
Andrew Lang says bitterly: ‘The fragments of things beautiful that the Reformers overlooked were destroyed by the ( deranged ) Covenanters’.
A monument to Robert the Bruce among other things was destroyed in the religious frenzy.
Knox was the only reformer of great reputation who encouraged a general destruction of works of art, and he felt his isolation.
Calvin was severe enough in his reprobation of beauty, but robbery and pillage, even of Catholic property, his orderly mind could not abide’.
Professor Muir pursues the Knoxite desecrations;
‘ In his letter to Mrs. Locke he told, as we have seen, how the ‘ brethern had sacked the religious houses in Perth and threatened the priests with death.
In his ‘History’ the priests were not threatened, and the looting was the work of the ‘rascal multitude’, not of the brethern.
His mind refused to rest under such a monstrous accusation; the whole business in Perth now seemed more confused than ever, but the probability steadily grew that the mob had destroyed the monasteries.
When he took up the pen they had destroyed the monasteries’.
The examination of the works, deeds and mind of Knox has baffled Scottish historians on how they could best present a picture of the ‘demented one’ into a picture of a responsible and Christian man whom so many of them depend upon as the founder of the Scottish Presbyterian movement, that they have staked their reputations on because of their involvement within Protestantism and the bitterness and hatred that it requires to keep its leaders in their mansions and palaces that they inhabit, not to forget their dedication to nepotism.
Edwin Muir explains about the (Book of Discipline) and some of his findings he wrote;
‘ Its most fundamental idea was the corruption of man’s nature, and its policy had necessarily, therefore, to be a policy of espionage and repression.
Its sole instrument for keeping or reclaiming its members was punishment.
It was to show its dual qualities to the full in the next century of Scottish history, with its ‘prophets’, its sadistic Kirk Sessions, its instances of intrepid constancy, its intolerance, its murders smiled on, its deeds of moderation execrated, its array of villains and of martyrs, but, above all, its stiff-necked blindness to the more spacious ideas which were moving mankind.
It is symbolical that the Book opened with a command to persecute, and almost closed with a plea for the extension of the scope of Capital punishment, its faults were a lack of understanding, an incapacity for human charity, and, above all, a consciously virtuous determination to compel and humiliate people for the greater glory of God’.
I ploughed my way through mountains of reference books and documents while attending Strathclyde University with other ‘mature’ students of various religious persuasions, I was shocked to hear that in the year 2003 many reasonable Protestants have been led to believe even in recent years that Roman Catholics had an inferior education, and many thought that was the reason why so many Catholics were refused employment with Protestant employers.
One could easily point the finger at Rangers Football club and the many world class Scottish Catholic footballers who were forced to ply their trade in England and abroad, who could have been performing and passing their talents on to Scottish kids, many of these great’s such as Billy Bremner, Joe Jordan, Lou Macari etc. would have been a bonus to Scotland if sectarianism was wiped out not only on sporting arenas, but in the general society where there are countless highly intelligent and well educated Catholics.
How can any nation on earth be successful when a large percentage of its population are discriminated against we have seen the brain drain from Scotland for centuries and the nation is impoverished in so many walks of life.
Professor Muir continues;
‘ As idolatry and adultery became feebler in Scotland, however, adultery rose in importance.
In the next few years there is scarcely a remonstrance of the ministers which does not contain a despairing injunction to Parliament to punish adultery with death’.
There is something that Muir wrote that intrigues me, he wrote that Knox arrived in Geneva with a student named Patrick on another page he writes this statement by John Knox;
‘ That great abuser of this commonwealth, that poltroon and vile knave Davie ( Rizzio ), was justly punished ( stabbed to death in front of 6 months pregnant Mary. Queen of Scots) for abusing of the commonwealth and for his other villainy, which we list not to express, by the council and hands of James Douglas, Earl of Morton, Patrick, Lord Lindsay, and the Lord Ruthven, with other assistors in their company, who all for their just act, and most worthy of praise’.
Was this the Patrick who was with Knox at Geneva that he congratulates for the heinous murder of Rizzio, who as one can clearly see from Knox’s pen that even after Rizzio was dead, the venomous hatred boiling and spitting from the mind of Knox.
If this was the same Patrick then this verifies Randolph’s letter to Cecil over Knox’s guilt in the murder.
Muir concludes his biography of Knox and notes these items after he explained his last days he wrote;
‘ The man ( Knox ) who in England proclaimed that subjects were bound to obey their prince; who in Dieppe incited subjects to murder their prince; who in Geneva exhorted the faithful in Scotland to depose their prince; who in Scotland helped to drive one prince after another from the throne while loudly proclaiming his loyalty; who maintained that two brutal murders were admirable in the sight of God, and that a third, less brutal, must be wiped out by the execution of an unfortunate woman ( Mary Stuart ) who had no direct part in it, and whose guilt could not be proved; who pursued that woman to disgrace and destruction.
This man was clearly not that model of consistency and strength which history and his biographers have set before us.
He was rather a man who, when his object required it, was always ready to contradict himself, and used any means which suited him’.
Edwin Muir’s biography of John Knox is not well known in Scotland but thanks to Harry Reid highlighting his name in ( Outside Verdict ) and my determination of finding the copy that I have scrutinised from the Andersonian Library at Strathclyde University.
Professor Muir goes on;
‘ Another thing which may be reasonably attributed to Knox is the Kirk Session.
To describe the sordid and general tyranny which this fearful institution wielded for over two hundred years would be wearisome and would take too long.
It is only necessary to say that the time-honoured Scottish tradition of fornication triumphantly survived all its terrors’.
I have endeavoured to describe the sordid and general tyranny which the fearful institution wielded over Scotland for over four hundred years, along with the lies and propaganda that they have perfected to art form.
On the last pages of his informative biography Muir questions about the first hundred years of Presbyterianism in Scotland he writes that;
‘The ‘nearest-lying country’ could show Shakespeare, Spencer, Jonson, Marlowe, Donne, Milton, in poetry and the drama; Bacon, Browne, Taylor, Claredon, in prose; the beginnings of modern science; and music, architecture, philosophy, theology, oratory in abundance’
Caustically Muir asks;
‘ Was it the influence of Calvinism which preserved Scotland from that infection’ ?
The infection of culture, arts, academia and every form of human enjoyment and liberty had been obliterated from Scottish society except for those who maintained the evil philosophies such as the leaders of Presbyterianism who are still trying to enforce these doctrines of oppression.
Edwin Muir continues with his conclusion;
‘ Calvinism, in the first place, was a “faith” which insisted with exclusive force on certain human interests, and banned all the rest.
It lopped off from religion music, painting and sculpture, and pruned architecture to a minimum; it frowned on all prose and poetry which was not sacred.
Calvinism in short, was a narrow specialised “kind of religion”, but it was also a peculiar religion- a religion which outraged the imagination, and no doubt helped, therefore, to produce that captivity of the imagination in Scotland.
Looking down on the island of Great Britain in the century which followed Knox’s death, the Almighty, it seemed, had rejected Shakespeare, Spencer, and Donne, and chosen Andrew Melville, Donald Cargill and Sandy Peden ( John White, Ian Paisley and Jack Glass ).
And if His choice was restricted to the godly, it was equally strange, for He liked the translators of the Scots version of the Psalms, and rejected Herbert, Vaughan and Crashaw’.
Trying to understand Calvinists is a difficult chore especially in the 21st century where it is the Catholics that have all the pressure upon them over divorce, abortion, the birth pill and celibacy yet these issues are enshrined within the Catholic faith, and I don’t notice droves of Catholics flocking to join Protestant Churches which allow all of these questions to be freely accepted, while the Roman Catholics have to deal with the consequences of their conscience.
Protestantism is a follower of fashion and we all realise that there are so many different fashions and tastes as can be witnessed by the hundreds of Protestant sects who claim to be Christian and no doubt the ‘latest’ Jedi-Knights will soon be demanding recognition.
Professor Muir continues;
‘How could the country have avoided its fate of becoming for over a century an object-lesson in savage provincialism?
Hume, Burns, and men like them, it is true, lifted it from its isolation for a time during the next hundred years.What Knox really did was to rob Scotland of all the benefits of the Renaissance.
Scotland never enjoyed these as England did, and no doubt the lack of that immense advantage has had a permanent effect.
It can be felt, I imagine, even at the present day’.
The quotes from Dr. Muir’s biography of John Knox were written during the 1920s when Catholics were being persecuted on the streets of Scotland therefore I feel confident to credit him with first hand on site experience.
The work of Edwin Muir terrifies Presbyterian’s such as Harry Reid even though it was written during the 1920s, this shows the desperation that people such as he and his collaborators are in, because they know that their evil tyranny and subjugation of the Roman Catholic faithful, is about to be trampled into the annuls of extinction.

The Omega of the Kirk.
From a book edited by William Forbes-Leith, S.J. ( Narratives of Scottish Catholics under Mary Stuart and James V1. )
Published by William Paterson, Edinburgh 1885.
Stating; “Now first printed from the original Manuscripts in the secret archives of the Vatican and other collections”.
The final chapter is titled;
‘The present state of the nobility in Scotland, 1st. July 1592’.
( State-Paper Office. ” Scotland Eliz,” vol. xliii. No. 53 indorsed: ” Of the Nobility in Scotland.” Burghley had studied the paper, and marked the names of the Papists. Quoted by Tytler, vol. ix. P. 376. )
List of the Catholic Nobility.
Earls.
Huntly ( Gordon ) Of thirty-three years. His mother, daughter to the Duke of Hamilton. Married the now Duke of Lennox’s sister. His house, Strathbogy.
Crawford ( Lindsay ). Of thirty-five years. His mother daughter to the Earl Marshall. Married first the Lord Drummonds daughter, and now the Earl of Athol’s sister. His house, Finhaven.
Errol ( Hay ). Of thirty-one years. His mother, Keith, daughter to the Earl Marshall. Married first the Regent Murray’s daughter, next Athol’s sister, and now hath to wife Morton’s daughter. His house, Slanes.’
These people mentioned above were the rulers of Scotland yet we are expected to believe Protestant
propaganda that the Scots became Protestants overnight in 1560.
The three Earls above had been brought up in Protestant Scotland/ England.
The narrative continues;
‘ After James’ accession to the throne of England, at the instigation of the crafty Cecil, a fearful storm of religious persecution burst forth against Catholics.
Errol was imprisoned in the castle of Edinburgh, acquiring great merit, and bequeathing to others a bright example of constancy in confessing the true faith. He was still alive in 1628.–( Conn. De Duplici Statu Religionis apud Scotos, p. 153. )
Montrose ( Graham ). Of forty-nine years. His mother, daughter of the Lord Fleming. Married the Lord Drummond’s sister. Auld Montrose, in Angus.
Lords.
Seaton. Of forty years. His mother, daughter to Sir Wm. Hamilton (of Sanquhar ). His wife is Montgomery, the Earl’s aunt. His house Seaton.
Livingston ( surname Leveingston ). Of sixty-one years his mother, daughter of umquhile Earl of Morton. His wife, the Lord Fleming’s sister. Calendar.
Maxwell ( surname, Maxwell ). Of forty-seven years. His mother, daughter of the Earl of Morton that preceded the Regent. His wife, Douglas, sister to the Earl of Angus.
Harris ( surname Maxwell ). Of thirty-seven years. His mother, Harris, by whom he had the lordship. His wife is the sister of Newbottle. His house, Terragles.
Sanquhar ( surname, Chrichton ). Of twenty-four years. His mother, daughter of Drumlanrig. Unmarried. His house, Sanquhar.
Gray. Of fifty-four years. His mother, the Lord Ogilvy’s daughter. His wife Lord Ruthven’s sister. Fowlis
Andrew, eighth Lord Grey, was lieutenant of the Gens-d’armes Ecossais in France, under Lord Gordon, 1624.
Ogilvy. Of fifty-one years. His mother, Campbell of Caddell, His wife the Lord Forbe’s daughter.
Fleming. Of twenty-five years. His mother, daughter of the Master of Ross. His wife, the Earl of Montrose’s daughter. Bigger.
Urquhart ( surname, Seaton ). Of thirty-five years. The Lord Seaton’s brother. His wife, the Lord Drummond’s daughter. Founded on the Priory of Pluscardy.
To Burghley’s list should be added the following names of Catholic Noblemen.
Earl of Angus…..Earl of Argyll…..Lord Robert Semple, Colonel Semple.
Colonel Semple, it seems was a great Scottish adventurer according to W. Forbes-Leith who paints a clear picture of the Colonel’s escapades in his book, he also founded a Catholic Collage in Spain.
Continuing with the list;
‘ Lord Claud Hamilton, son and Heir apparent of Claud Hamilton 1st Lord of Paisley, by Margaret, daughter of Geroge Seton, 6th Lord Seton.
‘ Lord John Hume. In September 1565 a letter from Pope Pius 1V was sent to Lord Hume congratulating his stance for the faith. ( p373)
Lord James Elphinston. Described in Burghley’s list as “neutral”, became a Catholic before 1605.
Lord Eglinton was also a Catholic.
Sir Charles Cornwallis in his letter to the Privy Council, 10th June 1609, refers to a list of Scottish Catholics “containing 27 Earls and Barons, and 240 Knights and Gentlemen, Lords of Signories and Tenants that are of that Affection.”
( Sir Ralph Winwood’s Memorials, vol. iii p. 52; cf. Registers of Privy Council of Scotland, vol. vi. Spotiswood, 502-13.)
In 1603. Lord Hume (il baron di Hume ) is described as a zealous Catholic by the Nuntio in Paris.
( Archiv. Vatic. Francia, vol. Xlviii. p. 31. )
Many Primary sources are quoted by William Forbes-Leith, S.J. throughout his volume especially his search through Vatican Archives, he describes Buchanan as godless, with detailed analysis of the persecution of Catholics, along with first-hand letters.
The copy of ( Narrative of Scottish Catholics ) that I have used was borrowed from Strathclyde University
Andersonian Library.
This book is a wealth of information for anyone interested in the period of the Reformation.
Forbes-Leith informs his reader;
‘ There is preserved among the Cecil Papers a full list of all the ” fortresses, abbeys, friar houses, market towns,….burnt, razed, and cast down by the Earl of Hertford, between the 8th of September and the 23rd of the same, 1545.
It chronicles the destruction of 7 monasteries, 16 castles, 5 market towns, 243 villages, 13 mills, and 3 hospitals.” ( “R.O. Scotland,” Henry V111., vol. viii. No. 86 )
‘As many as ” 192 towns, parish churches, castle-houses, and 243 villages were cast down or burnt, and the country was reduced to a desert.”
( Haynes State Papers, 43 and 52, July-November 1544. Cf. Tytler, vol. v. p 310, footnote. )
Forbes-Leith points to the Earl of Lennox who was in command of English forces and the atrocities perpetuated by them;
‘ Dundee was taken and the Church destroyed, Dryfe’s Dale was laid waste, above five hundred Scots were taken, slain, or drowned in the Nith; the prisoners, priests and friars, were dragged along with halters round their necks.’
( The Warden of the Grey Friars was executed. MS. letter from Lennox and Wharton to the Earl of Somerset, 25th Feb. 1547-8. — ” R.O. Scotland,” Edward V1., vol. iii. No 53, 25th Feb. 1548, fol. 939. )
I spoke with Peter Kearny the director of the Scottish Catholic Media Office in Glasgow, he kindly furnished me with a report entitled;
” Response by the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland to ‘ Tackling Religious Hatred’.
10th. March 2003″.
I will relate some of this Response such as;
“The divisions and hatred which threaten to impoverish our society by distorting or suppressing the authentic spirit of religion must be overcome and we welcome the Scottish Executive’s willingness to face up to this issue.”
The Catholic Bishops Response continues to highlight the discrimination in Scotland especially against the Roman Catholics by writing thus;
“A historical understanding of religious intolerance however, is a fundamental pre-requisite to progress.
Legislation which forms the constitution of the UK has traditionally discriminated against Catholics; e.g. the Act of Settlement.
Once the State concedes that discrimination against a particular group (in this case Catholics) is acceptable, it is difficult to see how it can regain the moral authority needed to criticise religious hatred and intolerance wherever it is found”.
They emphasise the currant sectarianism in Scotland.
” Education is a vital element in overcoming the resentment of those from different communities but on its own does not produce people free of resentment and hatred.
The task of creating a harmonious society is always one requiring considerable effort.
In responding to the friction’s which arise in society because of the different constituent ethnic or religious communities attempts to eradicate differences are counter-productive and often unjust; rather it is our view that religious tolerance should be pursued by fully promoting religious freedom. This right is an essential requirement of the dignity of every person and necessary for the personal fulfilment of each individual and as such is necessary for peaceful human co-existence.
In recognising that religious intolerance is evident in Scotland (against Roman Catholics in particular) we propose the following principles as the foundation of understanding and practising religious tolerance”.
The Bishops display a list of six proposals;
” 1. The right to religious freedom is grounded in respect for human dignity.

  1. Individuals should not be forced to act in a manner contrary to their religious beliefs, nor should they be restrained from acting in accordance with their religious beliefs.
  2. Religious bodies have a right to manifest and teach the social relevance of their religious beliefs.
  3. Religious bodies have a right to establish and maintain corporate institutions and services and
    conduct them in accordance with their religious beliefs and values.
  4. Because the right to religious freedom is exercised within society, it ought to be subject to the laws which ordinarily safeguard justice and civil order.
  5. Civil authorities do not have the right to command or inhibit acts of religion which are outside their proper competence”.
    Concluding the Response by the Bishops’ Conference they note;
    “Promoting such principles contributes to the recognition of the dignity of each individual, which is a necessary condition for creating a free and just society”.
    These papers were written for the Scottish Executive in Edinburgh because of the present day sectarianism that still has a stranglehold over the nation.
    It’s a long and difficult process and as you have seen throughout this essay I have endeavoured to shed light on this evil.
    There are some more highlights from another book by the Open University, ( Modern Scottish History 1707 to the Present Volume 4) Readings 1850 to the present, edited by, Anthony Cooke, Ian Donnachie, Ann MacSween and Christopher A. Whatley.
    Published by Tuckwell Press 1998.
    Article thirty-five.
    Protestant Extremism in urban Scotland 1930-1939. Its growth and contraction.
    By Tom Gallagher 1985. ” The Scottish Historical Review 64, 143-67″.
    Throughout this chapter Tom Gallagher brings an in-depth view on the hatred displayed and performed by Presbyterian leaders especially during the period dated above.
    He notes the victimisation against Irish and Scottish Catholics by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland and the report they produced entitled; The Menace of the Irish Race on Our Scottish Nationality.
    He writes;
    “George Malcolm Thomson (later a notable journalist and long-standing aide to Lord Beaverbrook) and Andrew Dewar Gibb, (Founder of the SNP) professor of Scots law at Glasgow University were two nationalists who by the end of the 1920s, were writing about the menace from within posed by the ‘Irish’ in Scotland”.
    He names Annie S. Swan and R. W. Campbell as amongst the worst by writing;
    “The arch-imperialist R. W. Campbell, of whom it has been said that he seemed to despise anyone who was not a white, Scottish, Boys Brigade member”.
    Tom Gallagher writes about Alexander Ratcliffe and the sectarian newspaper he produced The Vanguard and his viscous political party The Scottish Protestant League (SPL).
    Gallagher writes about Catholic schools and notes;
    The ‘religious’ matter which chiefly preoccupied the SPL was the fact that Catholic schools were now maintained by the state under Section 18 of the 1918 Education (Scotland) Act. Previously largely financed from the meagre resources of the 650,000 strong (and mainly working class) Catholic community”.
    Ratcliffe and his followers in the SPL were demanding the abolition of Catholic schools and crying that it was ” Rome on the rates”.
    Gallagher writes;
    “This slogan conveniently over looked the fact that up to 1918, Catholic ratepayers had been obliged to subsidise non-Catholic schools while having to make other provisions for their own”.
    These facts that Gallagher brings were these same scenario with Catholic Churches and properties robbed from the Scottish Catholics from 1560.
    Ratcliffe was also a contributor to the labour party weekly ‘The Forward’ which Gallagher claims was the premier paper of the Scottish left from 1906 to the 1950s.
    Tom Gallagher continues;
    “Ratcliffe belonged to the Scottish Fascists whose leader Weir Gilmour, maintained his anti-Catholicism well into the post-war years.
    Gallagher writes that Ratcliffe had close ties with militant Protestants in Northern Ireland and referrers to an incident at the newly opened ‘parliament’ at Stormont.
    “On 2nd of May 1933 when a picture depicting King William of Orange being blessed by an ecclesiastical figure resting on a cloud was attacked by an SPL contingent, The painting was daubed by in paint by Mrs. Mary Ratcliffe and then slashed by councillor Forrester”.
    Actually this has always been part and parcel of Presbyterian philosophy as we have seen in recent years
    the same crimes being committed by their followers, who carried out the slashing of Salvador Dali’s masterpiece St. John of the Cross in a Glasgow museum, not to forget the hundred of churches, monasteries and works of art that they have destroyed throughout the past four hundred and forty years, in Scotland, England, Ireland and Wales.
    Gallagher informs his reader that Lord Scone, Tory MP for Perth had been honorary president of the Scottish Protestant League.
    Tom Gallagher goes on about Ratcliffe’s visit to nazi-Germany in August 1939 and his support for the Hitler regime he wrote;
    “By 1940, the Jews had replaced Roman Catholics as his main bugbear and he contemptuously referred to the Gorbals district of Glasgow as ‘Jew-land’.
    Articles entitled in The Vanguard ‘Our Jewish Usurers’, ‘the Jews and crime’ and ‘Why Germany put out the Jews’ and a piece entitled ‘Britain’s Pro-Jew Menace’.
    He wrote in Vanguard ‘we are very kind to Roman Catholics in Scotland, of course the reason being that we have no Hitler in our midst to eject Popery.
    Ratcliffe, a Protestant iconoclast to the last, wanted to see the triumph of Hitler”.
    Gallagher introduces John Cormack a Protestant extremist who had been accused of stealing mail from the General Post Office where he worked in Edinburgh in 1932, details are listed by Gallagher of the sectarian violence and hatred by Cormack and his followers known as Protestant Action.
    The Hope Trust is pointed out by Gallagher as having given out anti-Catholic literature to Bible classes and the Boys’ Brigade for many years.
    During this period Cormack no doubt spurred on by John White the sectarian moderator of the Church of Scotland, the Protestant Action group were standing for elections and Tom Gallagher notes a bold black headline from the Edinburgh and Leith Observer stating;
    “Sectarianism Dominating Municipal Election, Wild Ward Meetings, Protestant Storm Troops Adopt Un-Christian Tactics.”
    Cormack represented South Leith without interruption from 1938 till 1962.
    Gallagher wrote that Cormack formed ‘Kormack’s Kaledonian Klan’ he notes;
    “A paramilitary body derived from the Ku Klux Klan.”
    He continues to inform his reader;
    “At the 1935 general election William Fullerton, the leader of the Protestant ‘Billy Boy’ gang came from this part of Glasgow and was a section leader in the British Union of Fascists.”
    Gallagher points out the evil in these organisations;
    “On two separate occasions at the Mound (Edinburgh) in June 1940 he (Cormack) was reported as saying that ‘ when Protestants went “over the top”(as in the war) with Roman Catholics, the Protestants should shoot them’, but no action was taken (by the authorities).
    Cormack was elected as a baillie 1955 by his fellow councillors”.
    I would like to know the statistics about any Roman Catholics who had the mis-fortune to be tried in a court with Cormack as the magistrate, though this only lends ammunition to my argument that these types of religious maniacs should not be empowered to decide the fate of the proletariat.
    Gallagher wrote;
    “The Rev. D. M. McGregor spoke out against the linking of Protestantism with mob violence: “If Protestantism can only be vindicated in such crude ways, its day is nearly done.”
    From volume 5 of the Open University book ( University of Dundee ) entitled “Major Documents”, published by Tuckwell Press Ltd. 1998.
    Edited by Anthony Cooke, Ian Donnachie, Ann MacSween and Christopher A. Whatley.
    I will highlight some of their findings on Document 24 ‘Lord Kames’ Statute Law abridged’.
    “All seminary priests found in the realm, all receptors of these if found a third time in fault, all sayers of mass, and all wilful hearers of mass and concealers of the same, are subjected to the pains of death, and the confiscation of their moveables.
    A Protestant servant, if he became a Papist, is to be punished, and must be dismissed his service.
    If a Papist purchase land, the deed of sale is declared null, and the seller is entitled to retain both the land and the price.
    No professed Papist shall be capable of succeeding to an estate; and if a Protestant becomes a Papist he forfeits his estate.
    Neither shall it be allowed to any professed, or even suspected Papist, to teach any art, science, or exercise of any sort, under pain of 500 merks; and the above penalties may be sued for by any Protestant subject for his own behoof as his reward.
    That no adjudication or real diligence shall be competent at the instance of a Papist; neither shall a Papist be capable of becoming tutor, curator, or factor; and if any person or persons presume to employ a Papist, or such as are suspected of Popery, in any of the above trusts, they must purge themselves of Popery, under the penalty of a year’s valued rent, or a fine of 1000 merks.
    No Papist past the age of 15 shall be capable to succeed as heir, nor bruik, nor enjoy any estate by
    disposition or conveyance from any person to whom the said Papist is apparent heir, until he purge himself of Popery.
    The heir under 15 must purge himself of Popery before succeeding as heir, and if he refuse to do so his right shall go to the next Protestant heir.
    Presbyterians are appointed to summon before them all Papists, and those suspected of Papistry, in order to satisfy the Kirk; and if Papists do not produce sufficient certificates of their having given due satisfaction to the Kirk, they shall be declared rebels, put to the horn, and both their single and life-rent escheated.
    Further, that whoever receipts, supplies or entertains, such persons after denunciation aforesaid, shall incur the penalty of single and life-rent escheat.”
    Source: Lord Kames, Statute Law Abridged, quoted in Senex (psued) 1884 Glasgow Past and Present Vol. 11, Glasgow, 163-4.
    On the same page of this document listed as Notes 2, ( Scots Magazine 1756, 100 ) it states;
    “On the 1st of March, 1756, Hugh M’Donald, brother of M’Donald of Morra, was tried at Edinburgh before the High Court of Judiciary, at the instance of the Lord Advocate, for refusing to purge himself of Popery.
    Being asked ‘whether he was willing to take the formula prescribed by Act 1700-3’ he declared, ‘that he was not at freedom of conscience to do it.’
    He was then found guilty in terms of libel, and sentenced to be banished from the kingdom, never to return under pain of death.’
    From the same book Document 25, Religion, entitled (The Encrease of Popery in the Highlands) the writer examines the Church of Scotland documents from ministers;
    “This is one of a number of reports written by groups of Highland ministers of the Church of Scotland concerning the growth of Roman Catholicism in the Highlands.
    In much of the area, Presbyterianism had never been fully established, but during the first half of the eighteenth century the attempt to Presbyterianise the people was seen as the key to the ‘hearts and minds’ element of suppressing Jacobitism.
    These accounts show how Catholicism was relatively flourishing and how the work of the Presbyterian clergy was difficult.
    Dated 19 May, 1714.
    I will show some of the findings of this document such as;
    “Priest Frazer is entertained in The Duke of Gordon’s family.”
    “There are above six hundred Papists in the paroch of Bellie, & in Kinnore & Dumbennan the Papists are equal in numbers to the Protestants.”
    “The Papists in the said bounds have of late set up private schools which are taught bt Popish women.”
    ” There are in the paroch of Inveraven two hundred and seventy Papists.”
    “In the paroch of Lochaber the priests swarm like Locusts.”
    “There are four large tracts of ground in the presbytery of Lorne upon the continent vizt: Muirdart, Arasaig, Morhirr & Knoidart contiguous to one another, which are altogether Popish.”
    “The Isles of Rum, Egg & Canna are all Popish. The Isle of South Uist is all Popish.”
    “These Countreys and Islands were never Reformed from Popery.
    And generally all the relations followers & tennants of Clanronald, through all his Lands both in the Continent & Isles are all Papists.”
    “In these countreys there are to the number of two thousand Papists.”
    One must take into account how many Scottish historians have claimed that the Reformation was an overnight success yet we see from this document that there were thousands of Catholics and many priests, this was over 150 years after the Reformation.
    Today in the 21st-century Scotland still has desperate problems, especially when a man such as Pope John Paul II accused the nation of being non-Christian.
    I cannot recall recent Pope’s describing Scotland in a manner that the present Pope has made, however this declaration is of no great surprise considering the atrocities and abuses that have been performed by Protestant/Presbyterian’s over the past centuries.
    Written and researched by; Frank J Dougan

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.