Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 4.djvu/521

 COVENANTERS

46 1

COVENANTERS

them defeat. The extremists, under such leaders as Johnston of Warristoun, James (iuthrie, and Patrick Gillespie, attril)utiiig their dcfcMt to the unlioly alli- ance with tlie Malisnants grew in vehemence and pre- sented to the Committee (>f Estates (:J0 Oct., 16.50) a "Remonstrance" arraigning the whole policy of Ar- gyll's government and refusing to accept Charles as their king " till he should give satisfactory evidence of bis real change" (ibid.). Seeing his power gone with the "Remonstrants" or "Protesters", Argyll deter- mined definitely to go over to the king; Malignant and [Vncnantor had joined hands. In answer to the Re- monstrance the Committee of Estates passed, 25 No- vember, a re.solution condemning it and resolved to crown Charles at .Scone. On 1 .lanuary, IGol the coro- nation took place. Cromwell's answer was the battle sf Worcester, 3 September, 10.51. For nine years Scotland was a conquered country kept under by the military saints. It was a sad time for the Presbyter- ians. The English soldiers allowed all Protestants, as long as they did not disturb the peace, to worship in their own way. In October, 1G51, Monk forbade the preachers to impose oaths and covenants on the lieges, and prohibited the civil magistrates from molesting excommunicated persons, or seizing their goods, or boycotting them. Lest the Remonstrants and Revolu- tio'ners, who all the while with ever increasing bitter- oess quarrelled as to which was the true inlieritor of the Covenants, should cause trouble to the common- wealth, the General Assembly was broken up (July, 16.53), and all such assemblies forbidden for the future (Kirkton, Secret and True History of the Church of Scotland, p. .54).

Dunbar, Worcester, and the Cromwellian domi- nation destroyed the ascendancy of the Covenanters. But not on tliat account did the extreme wing, the Remonstrants, abate a jot of their pretensions; they still believed in the eternally binding force of the two Covenants. On the other hand neither had the king fully learnt the lesson from his father's fate. Like him he considered it his right to force liLs ecclesiastical views upon his people. Episcopacy was restored, but without the prayer book, and the meetings of synods were forbidden. Partly because he had the support of the nobility and gentry, partly because even many Presbyterians had wearied of the strife, and partly be- cause of his dishonesty Charles succeeded in gaining his ends, but at the cost of straining to the utmost his relations with his subjects. It only required the at- tempt of James II to introduce hated Catholicism into the country to sweep the Stuarts forever from the throne of Scotland. The history of the Covenanters from the Restoration to the Revolution is the history of a fierce persecution varied with occasional milder treatment to win the weaker members to the moderate side. As the Covenanters would no longer meet in the churches they now began to meet in their own homes and have private conventicles. Against these pro- ceedings an Act was passed (1663) declaring preaching by "ousted" ministers seditious, and it was rigor- ously enforced by quartering soldiers under Sir James Turner in the houses of recusants. (For Turner's methods sec Lauderdale Papers, II, 82.) Driven from their homes the Covenanters took to holding their gatherings in the open air, in distant glens, known as field-meetings or conventicles. The Pentland Ris- ing ( 1666) was the result of these measures and proved to the Government that its severities had been unsuc- cessful. On the advice of Lauderdale Charles issued Letters of Indulgence, June, 1669, and again in Au- gust, 1672, allowing such "ottstcd" ministers as had lived peacealjly and orderly to return to their livings (Wodrow, Hist, of the Sufferings, etc., II, 130). These indulgences were disastrous to the Conventiclers, for many of the ministers yielded and conformed. Stung bv the secessions the remnant became more irreconcil- aljle; their sermons were simply political party ora-

tions denimciatory of king and bishops. They were especially wroth against the indulged ministers; they broke into their houses, f)ullicd ajid tortured tliriii to force them to .swear that IIk'Y wdmIiI cease from tlicir ininistratioiis. These Laudcrdidcdclrrmined to crush by a persecution of the utiuost sfvcrity. Soldiers were quartered in the disatf ectctl d ist ricls (the West and South- West), ministers were imprisoned, and finally, as conventicles still increased, a band of half-savage Highlanders, "The Highland Host" (Lauderdale Pa- pers, III, 93 sqq.), was let loose on the wretched inhab- itants of the Western Lowlands, where they marauded and plundered at will.

The Covenanters now became reckless and wild, for again torn asunder by the "cess" controversy (a dis- pute arose as to whether it was lawful to pay the tax or "cess" raised for an unlawful object, the carrying on of a Government persecuting the true Kirk) they were but a remnant of the once powerful Ivirk, and every year became less capable of effectual resistance. They patrolled the country in arms protecting conventicles ; and their leaders, Welsh, Cameron, and others, went about as "soldiers of Christ", organizing rebellion, even murdering the soldiers of Claverhouse, who was engaged in dispersing the conventicles. The murder of Archbishop Sharpe (2 May, 1679), regarded by them as a glorious action and inspired by the spirit of God, was the signal for a general rising in the Western Lowlands. At Rutherglen they publicly burnt the Acts of the Government which had overthrown the Covenants, and at Loudoun Hill, or Drumclog, de- feated the troops under Claverhouse. It was there- fore deemed necessary to send a strong force inuler Monmouth to suppress the rebellion. At Bothwell Bridge (22 June, 1679) the insurgents were utterly de- feated. There followed a third Act of Indulgence which again cut deep into the ranks of the Covenant- ers. But in spite of persecution and secessions a mi- nority contiinied faithful to the Covenant and the fun- damental jirinciples of Presbyterianism. Under the leadership of Richard Cameron and Donald Cargill, and styling themselves the "Society People", they con- tinued to defy the royal authority. At Sanquhar they published a declaration, 22 June, 1680 (Wodrow, III, 213) disowning the king on the ground of "his perjury and breach of covenant to God and his Kirk". At a conventicle held at Torwood (1680) Cargill solenndy excommunicated the king, the Duke of York, Mon- mouth, and others (ibid., Ill, 219). These proceed- ings served no further purpose than to embitter par- ties and make the Government all the more determined to extirpate the sect. But what roused the Govern- ment more than anything else was the "Apologetical Declaration" (ibid., IV, 148) of October, 1684, in- spired by Renwick who had taken up the standard of Cameron. The document threatened that anyone connected with the Government, if oaught, would be judged and punished according to his offences. These threats were carried out by the Cameronians or Ren- wickites; they attacked and slew dragoons, ami jiun- ished such of the conformist ministers as they coidd get hold of. It was at this period that the "killing time" properly began. Courts of justice were dis- pensed with and officers having commissions from the Council were empowered to execute anyone who refused to take the oath of abjuration of the Declaration. With the accession of James II to the English throne the persecution waxed fiercer. An Act was passed which made attendance at field-conventicles a ca|)ital offence. Claverhouse carried out his instructions faithfully, many were summarily executed, while many more were shipped off to the American planta- tions. The last victim for the Covenant w'as James Renwick (Jan., 1688). His followers kept to their principles and even at the Revolution they refused to accept an imcovenanted king; one last brief day of triumph and of vengeance they had, when they "rab-