The Fortnightly Review: No. CCCCLXIII, New Series [‎620r] (130/239)

SCOTLAND AND JOHN KNOX.
99
as that of the commander who leads on his men against terrible
odds. I his courage Knox possessed, and he himself was not wont
to claim the other. Had he been brought to the test, we may be
sure he would not have failed, even in the measure in which
Cranmer failed, and Cranmer was, after all, a brave man. Here,
surely, the matter might rest—if only Knox’s well-meaning
friends would give up distorting truth in order to show that their
hero declined a bishopric purely out of contempt for worldly
advancement.
The heroic courage of Knox has frequently been illustrated by
is interviews with Queen Mary. For our knowledge of what
passed at these interviews, we are almost entirely dependent upon
vnox s own version of the story, and his reputation as an historian
is, as we shall see, not sufficient to silence all questionings as to
his accuracy. But, accurate or not, they represent his general
attitude to the young Queen. The plain fact is that no courage
was required. Knox w T as one of the leaders of a successful party
who had brought about a religious revolution. The girl of nine
teen who came to rule Scotland found that her own religion had
been proscribed by Parliament, and that the celebration of its
central rite was regarded as a capital offence. It is true that this
law was not carried into execution : but that was no fault of Knox
who constantly urged that it should be; the idolaters who should
have died the death, and, in spite of Knox’s great influence, suc-
ceeded m escaping, can hardly have shared David Laing’s view
that freedom from a persecuting spirit is one of the noblest
ea ures in vnox s character.” It was as a representative of the
ru mg faction that Knox faced Mary, who had not a single true
ilend m Scotland, who could not even protect from imprisonment
the priests of her own faith, and whose own confessor was in
constant peril of his life. ” Why should the fair face of a gentle
woman affray me? ” Knox asked. There was certainly no good
ic^ason why it should, for he himself tells us that he had Mary
m hlS the beginning, and could have, had he chosen,
execued Gods judgments at once. Knox himself probably
though that he did his duty by Mary, but he would never have
called it heroism His duty, as he understood it, was to describe
the church in which the girl-Queen had been nurtured, in the
language common to the controversies of the time. When, later
on, he preached against her in public, she sent for him and said
mm ) y enough . If ye hear anything of myself that mislikes you
come to myself and tell me, and I shall hear you.” There have
been found men who thought that the tone of Knox’s reply did him
credit. ” I am not appointed,” he said, “to come to every man
m particular to show him his offences, for that were labour in-
H 2