19 January 2023

John Davidson and the General Assembly of 1596

Abstract

In this article we consider one of the most remarkable post-Reformation revivals in Scottish Church history. It concerns what happened at the General Assembly of the Scottish Reformed Church in 1596. It is little known by Christians today, even in Scotland. Yet one contemporary historian, David Calderwood (1575-1650), was to write that “This year [1596] is a remarkable year in the history of the Kirk of Scotland.”^[1] We do need to bear in mind that the Word of God is the same, that the Lord Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today and forever, that sin is the same, essentially, in every generation, and the overwhelming need for sinners to be saved is the same in the twenty-first century as it was in the sixteenth. It is a modern arrogance that because we are in such a supposedly advanced society, we have somehow left such things as religion behind. We are in a secular world which holds out no hope for eternity, and has no recognition of answerability to God, or serious thought of judgement to come. We should therefore be moved by the experience of the Church even as far back as 1596 and, after all, the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity, is undiminished in His power to quicken those who by nature are dead in trespasses and sins. We are always invited to believe that what He did then, He can do again in His sovereign grace. Besides this, here is a vital tenet for the Church to maintain: Christ, who has all authority in heaven and earth, is building His church so that the gates of hell will not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18). In this reconnoitre in Scottish Church history, we can therefore learn many things of timeless value.

I.The Post-Reformation Struggles in The Scottish Reformed Church

This is background to our visit to the General Assembly of 1596, thirty-six years after the first Assembly of the Reformed Church in Scotland. A right understanding of the Reformation of the sixteenth century recognises it as a work of the Holy Spirit. Yet the twenty years following the Reformation (1560) were turbulent years for the emerging Scottish Reformed Church. Certainly, the Scots Confession and the First Book of Discipline had been adopted by the Kirk. The Parliament had ratified the Scots Confession and had legislated in August 1560 that the Pope would have no jurisdiction in the kingdom. The Parliament of 1567 recognised the Reformed Church, though the Bishops retained their seats in Parliament and continued to draw their revenues, most of which, however, lined the purses of one or other of the nobility.

In 1572 John Knox passed to his eternal rest. With his passing the Church lost a powerful leader. The Lord, however, had his man to take up the reins. Andrew Melville (1545-1622) returned from the continent in 1574 and the tide began to turn for the Reformed Church in Scotland. 1578 saw the introduction of the 2^nd Book of Discipline, largely his doing. This strongly advocated a clear-cut distinction between civil and ecclesiastical government. It set forth strongly the principles of the divine right of Presbytery, over against Episcopacy (called in those days, ‘Prelacy’). This Book was adopted at the General Assembly of 1581. But as long as James VI was king^[2], after he assumed the kingly powers in 1581, there would be an ebbing and flowing of forces which favoured Presbytery and forces which sought to displace it by Episcopacy and the attendant authority of the King and the Bishops, over whom he had a considerable degree of influence.

In 1592 things seemed finally to be settled with the passing of the so called ‘Golden Act’^[3] which came to be considered the magna carta of the Reformed Church in Scotland. It seemed decisively to settle once and for all the government and jurisdiction of the Church in the nation. It would be Presbyterian, governed under the Assembly through Synods, Presbyteries and Kirk Sessions. But things would not be so settled as long as James was on the throne, both before and after the Union of Crowns in 1603. Meanwhile those who had experienced the days of Reformation life had passed from the scene and the Church and country were afflicted by spiritual doldrums. There was, however, a bright light in the general darkness of the late sixteenth century church north of the border. It related to an ‘ordinary’ minister and an extraordinary General Assembly of the Kirk in Edinburgh in May 1596.

II. John Davidson And the General Assembly Of 1596

A generation had passed since the Reformation. But it was only 36 years on from the stirring events of 1560 when a Reformed Church was established in the nation. It was a time of spiritual awakening. With the passage of time, however, there had been a growing carelessness in the church and indifference among the people. Standards had slipped. There was a feeling among some of growing apostacy from the Reformed Faith and life. The Reformation had brought life and a new enthusiasm for the great gospel truths rediscovered. But Church life had largely grown cold and was in urgent need of a revival by the Holy Spirit from above. Of course, in the interim there had been struggles not only from outside forces antagonistic to Reformed doctrine and Presbyterian church government, but also from within – not least ministers and elders in the Kirk growing cold or becoming formal and lifeless. This often repeats itself in the history of the Church. But there were some who were exercised about the situation. One such minister in Scotland was John Davidson.

John had been born in Dunfermline in Fife in 1549. So, he had memories of these exciting times when the Lord had visited the land with Reformation. He had been converted as a young boy. After graduating from St Andrews University in 1570, he had the wonderful experience of enjoying the ministry and fellowship there of John Knox in his declining years, physically speaking (the great Reformer passed away in 1572). We are told that “From July 1571 to August 1572 the venerable Reformer preached every Sunday and taught the prophecies of Daniel, ‘always applying his text according to the time and state of the people.’”^[4] Knox, and other Reformers too, had made a deep impression on young John Davidson. However, the impression he made on others meant his exile more than once in England and the continent between 1574 and 1589. Entering the ministry of the Church of Scotland, Davidson ministered in several congregations in Edinburgh before being settled in Prestonpans (on the southern coast of the Firth of Forth, 11 miles east of Edinburgh). It is with this place and parish that Davidson’s name is invariably associated. He was there from 1595 until his passing in 1604.

It is clear that John Davidson was one of these men who would not go with the flow or remain silent on what he perceived to be corruptions in church and state, whatever discomfort it meant for himself through ill-will towards him. He felt so exercised about decline in spiritual religious life that he was not slow to speak out in the courts of the Church. His supreme conviction was that a spiritual awakening was needed in the Kirk. After all, the principal concern in life is surely to have peace with God through the Lord Jesus Christ! Is this not a great need of the present day? As for Davidson, he sought the guidance of his own Presbytery of Haddington about it.

III. The Overture Presented

The Presbytery decided that a proposal (overture) be made to the annual General Assembly^[5], when ministers and elders gathered from all over the Church, that the gross sins of Church and State should be inquired into and addressed. Why? Because of the spiritual peril facing the nation! But what could be proposed? Just this: “Universal Repentance and earnest turning to God; and of order-taking for resisting the enemies and maintenance of the liberty of religion and country.”^[6] The Presbytery was convicted that there was little good in discussing means of resisting the country’s enemies (specifically Spain) without first giving attention to the relations of the people to the King of kings and Lord of lords (‘order taking’, or ‘prioritising’ in that sense). The priority is for people to be submissive to God! All else is really unimportant by comparison. The proposal (overture) to the forthcoming Assembly (1596) dealt, not with the “structural sins of society” or purported political or economic vices so beloved of the modern church, but with three main things:

• “The gross sins of all estates which procure this present wrath of God be agreed upon by name, severally, and acknowledged by the Assembly, for the more easy provocation of the whole body of this realm to earnest repentance, and speedy turning away from sins foresaid.”^[7]
• “The Assembly agrees upon the true and right taking up the sins of our princes and magistrates, superior and inferior, and on the sound means to deal with them dutifully and faithfully, without all flattery, for their true amendment.”^[8]
• “That the most notorious sins of the whole body of the people, in burgh and land, be given in and acknowledged, and order taken for the speedy amendment thereof.”^[9]

In this spiritual exercise of self-examination, no one was spared, though there was a concern to focus on ministers and their sin and faults: “to begin at ourselves of the ministry.”

We acknowledge our public transgressions, in our persons and office particularly, whereof the catalogue is in readiness to be seen, according to the admonition of the Lord by his prophet, saying, “Let the priests, the ministers of the Lord, weep between the porch and the altar, and let them say, Spare thy people O Lord,” etc., lest it be found, according to the saying of the apostle, that we that teach others teach not ourselves and so be found reprobates (Joel 2:17; Romans 2:21)!^[10]

The overture does proceed to address the sins of the princes, magistrates, nobility and people in a way that did not flatter nor deceive. The purpose? “For their true amendment” and for the “provocation of the whole body of the realm to earnest repentance.”^[11]

IV. The Reaction in The General Assembly

What would the ministers and elders make of this when they gathered for the General Assembly in the High Kirk of St Giles on 24 March 1596? There were some good and godly men in the Assembly. Andrew Melville and his nephew, James (1556-1614), were there, as were Robert Bruce (1554-1631), Robert Rollock (1555-1599) and Patrick Simson (1556-1618). These were all good and godly ministers and committed Presbyterians. There were around 400 ministers and elders in all. A challenge arose at the outset. What place was going to be given to the overture presented by John Davidson on behalf of the Presbytery of Haddington? At that point Britain (not yet united of course, either by crown [1603] or Parliament [1707]) was under threat from Spain and the Scottish state authorities were looking for the approval of the Church to the levying of a tax to enable co-operation with England in order to resist the threat of Spain. The danger was reckoned, after all, to be a manifestation of God’s wrath for the sins of the nation. So, was that not the chief purpose of the Assembly? After discussion it was agreed that the overture to be presented by the minister of Prestonpans^[12] should be given due consideration: “More important meantime than how the enemy might be resisted, was the necessity for universal repentance and earnestly turning to God – the best preparation against national disaster.”^[13] So, what did the Assembly do?

The Assembly asked Davidson to expound the catalogue of perceived chief offences and corruptions in all estates (kirk and government).^[14] A couple of days later (the Wednesday) Davidson presented the catalogue of offences in ministers to which Andrew Melville wished to have the censures added to offences.^[15] Terrible was the indictment made before the Assembly (we are told^[16]). No one was spared, from the King down to the meanest subjects. We would not take this well. We would be deeply offended. But then, there was this profound conviction of the displeasure of the Lord at the slackness and downright corruptions in Church and society. It was shocking for ministers to hear. First,

• Sins of omission: negligence of ministers not giving themselves to their books and the study of the Scriptures; not giving themselves to sanctification and prayer; not studying to be powerful and spiritual; not applying the word to corruptions, being too obscure and too scholastic, cold and wanting zeal, negligent in visiting the sick or caring for the poor; choosing parts of the word not relevant for the people; flattering and ‘dissembling public sins’ – how guilty of this is the Church of our day! Then there were,
• The positive sins (that is to say, sins of commission). One said of these: “if only the merest fraction were true, one can appreciate the anxiety of good men like Davidson to see something in the nature of amendment and revival.” What were they? Light and wanton behaviour, as in gorgeous and light apparel and in speech; light and profane company, unlawful gaming; dancing, card-playing, etc.; swearers, profaners of the Sabbath, drunkards, fighters; lewd, flatterers, promise-breakers, etc. Those found guilty of such things were to be duly disciplined!

We might say, “How does that apply to us? Evangelicals do not behave anything like that way today, surely.” Yet, we have to be careful. There is nothing new under the sun. We have advanced technologies which can lead us down the garden path of sin and can be real time-wasters. We have the internet to contend with and access to all sorts of deviant and corrupt morality and covetousness and acquisitiveness. These things are not morally or spiritually neutral. We can easily, if we are not watchful, be sucked in to a secular and liberal frame of mind, not least by watching main news programmes! The fact is, it is easy to be a liberal (small ‘l’) because it is a ‘go with the flow’ laissez faire attitude to life. No restrains if you do not want them! Such a thing can so easily blunt spiritual life. It clearly did then, and it clearly does today. Our hearts can be a melting pot of declension and sin, even when all seems fine on the outside. But back to Davidson and the 1596 Assembly. What happened next? What was the result of all these indictments spelled out by Davidson in his submissions to the Assembly?

V. A Day of Humiliation Was Appointed

The matter came before the Assembly on Friday, 26^th March.^[17] The result? A day of humiliation. The ordinance passed was this:

Concerning the defections in the ministry, the same being at length read out, reasoned, and considered, the brethren concluded the same, agreeing therewith. And in respect that, by God’s grace, they intend reformation, and to see the kirk and ministry purged, to the effect the work may have the better success, they think it necessary that this Assembly be humbled for wanting such care as became, in such points as are set down, and some zealous and godly brother in doctrine to lay them out for their better humiliation; and that they make solemn promise before the Majesty of God, and make new covenant with him, for a more careful and reverent discharge of their ministry. To the which effect was chosen Mr. John Davidson, and Tuesday next, at nine [o’clock] in the morning, appointed in the New Kirk [part of St Giles, Edinburgh] for that effect, whereunto none is to resort but the ministry.^[18]

This procedure was set on the Friday for the following Tuesday. None but those who were entitled to be present were admitted. The company consisted of 400 souls, all ministers or elders. So, how did the service go? Begun with prayer, Ezekiel chapters 13 and 34 were read, whereupon Davidson delivered a sermon/exhortation.^[19]

He was very moving in application to the present times, so that within an hour after they entered in the kirk, they looked with another countenance than that wherewith they entered. He exhorted them to enter into their private meditations, and to acknowledge their sins, with promise and purpose of amendment.^[20]

It was, by all accounts, solemn – you do not hear so much these days of solemn services. People are more comfortable with joyful themes, and certainly there is no joy like the Christian’s joy; the joy of the Lord is our strength (Nehemiah 8:10)! But there is a place to be humbled before the Lord (James 4:7-10). So, what did Davidson urge? The purpose was confession of sin and promise of change. They were to enter a new covenant with the Lord [consecration] that by a spirit of repentance they might provoke others to follow their example. Davidson urged his hearers to examine themselves – you do not hear much of self-examination these days! Yet it is a constant need for the professing Christian.

Apparently, Davidson was moving in his appeals. That should always be an aspiration of preachers! An hour into the service he saw clearly that his hearers were moved and he exhorted to “private meditation and confession with promise and purpose of amendment.”^[21] But then a remarkable spirit fell upon the gathering. A sudden outburst of emotion overcame many. For a quarter of an hour – just imagine it! – “the building resounded with the sobbing of strong men.” Sighs, sobs, shedding of tears, “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.” This was no emotionless day or formal exercise of humiliation. Here was a gathering humbled on account of sin and lukewarmness.^[22] After public confession and prayer Davidson continued. This was concerned with action, with a determination on their part for consecration to the service of the gospel. Rising from their seats and lifting up their right hands, with one voice they renewed their Covenant with God, “protesting to walk more warily in their ways and to be more diligent in their charges.” We are told that the exercise continued till one o’clock in the afternoon (it had begun at 9 o’clock in the morning!).^[23]

The whole exercise of humiliation, confession, and determination to amendment was enjoined from the Assembly upon the other Church courts, Synods and Presbyteries and congregations. This seems to have been taken up with enthusiasm. This was a sure sign of the reviving work of the Holy Spirit. One historian was to say: “this ordinance was obeyed with an alacrity and ardour which spread from synod to synod, from presbytery to presbytery, and from parish to parish, the inhabitants of one city saying to another, ‘Come, and let us join ourselves to the Lord in a perpetual covenant that shalt not be forgotten,’ till all Scotland, like Judah of old ‘rejoiced at the oath.’”^[24]

VI. The Wider Impact Resulting

What about the effects of this among ministers and people? The Church historian David Calderwood was to say that 1596 was a remarkable year in the life of the Scottish Kirk. We can believe that the repentance and confession expressed at that Assembly had a transforming effect in the ministry of many and consequently impacted on the spiritual life of many individuals and congregations. Calderwood wrote that:

The Kirk of Scotland was now come to her perfection, and the greatest purity that ever she attained unto, both in doctrine and discipline, so that her beauty was admirable to foreign Kirks. The assemblies of the saints were never so glorious nor profitable to every one of the true members thereof, than in the beginning of this year.^[25]

“There have been many days,” he wrote, “of present or imminent dangers, but the like for sin and defection was there never since the Reformation.”^[26] Though the initial application of the 1596 overture was directed at ministers, the call to self-examination, repentance, confession and sanctification, with the blessing of the Spirit of the Living God, was a catalyst for the transformation of many individuals and congregations in Churches truly and deeply exercised in such things. Thus, this will not just be a great story from the past, but a personal call for the present for us to be likewise seriously exercised before the Lord.

As for John Davidson, he continued as faithful pastor of the congregation at Prestonpans until his passing in August 1604. Though largely unknown today, his biographer Moffat Gillon said of him (admittedly with just a touch of hyperbole) that “it is true that the Scottish Church has had few greater men and few who have been listened to with greater respect and greater purpose by their brethren…It can be affirmed with confidence that no braver or more disinterested man has ever championed the rights of Christ’s Kirk and of the Kingdom of God in Scotland.”^[27]

VII. John Davidson Redivivus?

We move to Edinburgh again, this time to the annual Free Church Assembly meeting towards the end of May in 1844. It was another remarkable occasion akin to what had happened two hundred and forty-eight years earlier. There had been an awareness at the Disruption the previous year of awakenings touching many parts of the country. Overtures came in to that second Free Church Assembly to take up the matter of personal religion as a priority amongst the proceedings. Consequently, it was decided to set apart Tuesday, 21^st May, as a day of humiliation and prayer, with a sermon to be preached by Charles J. Brown of Edinburgh. Members of Assembly were to engage in a religious conference. “I shall deeply regret,” said R. S. Candlish, “if we enter into any consultation as to what ought to be done before we have thoroughly and truly humbled ourselves in the sight of God, and spread out before Him our sins and failings.”^[28]

Brown in his introductory remarks set the scene:

[The] conference [was] not so much to speak to one another as to speak to the Lord our God, and pour out our hearts before Him in sorrowful confession of our many, many shortcomings and sins, in order that, betaking ourselves to the fountain of Immanuel’s blood, and taking hold of the strength of the good and holy Spirit of Christ, we may humbly and heartily offer ourselves to the Lord, that if He have any delight in us, and if we have found grace in His sight, it may please Him in infinite mercy to make some use of us as His instruments in the great work on which His heart is set, and for which the Son of God died.^[29]

I dare say such a thing should be the primary feature of all our Church courts and meetings! The sermon of Brown’s was memorable and moving. He preached from Habakkuk, chapter 2, verse 1: “I will stand upon my watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to see what he will say unto me, and what I shall answer when I am reproved.” There was heart-searching for all in the Assembly: “Oh, it were well if we this day heard the great and gracious One addressing to each of us the inquiry: ‘Lovest thou Me?’ Blessed if we are able in humble hope to answer. ‘Lord, Thou knowest all things, Thou knowest that I love Thee!’” He went on to lay open the low state of their souls and of religion in their own hearts. Among other things, “How is a minister to teach to others the ways of God unless he is walking close and straight in them himself? How shall he lay open the sins of others, not harshly, but tenderly, unless he is seeing and mourning in secret over his own?”^[30] Brown was direct, and did not leave himself out:

“The Word of God is the weapon we must wield, but the only way to get to the very heart of the Word is nothing else than living on it ourselves in secret. What guilt lies on us in this matter. We who ought to have been ensamples to the flock, who have had so many and peculiar advantages for walking with God, alas, our distance from Him has all but paralysed our ministry. We have not dealt in the secret place of the Most High. His Word has not dwelt richly within us.”

This was John Davidson redivivus (=alive again!). “What mischief have we thus done to souls – what good have we failed to do – what endless opportunities have we lost! ‘Have mercy on us, O God!’” His sermon was unsparing and searched out the secrecies of the heart, as well as the course of life and work in the ministry of the Gospel. It produced a reaction – and a good one among the fathers and brethren. There was, we are told, “a deep, solemn melting of heart on his own part, and that of his audience.”^[31] “Many a head was bowed, and here and there amidst the Assembly men were silently seeking relief in tears.” “Men’s hearts were full; the Assembly remained for a time hushed in silence. It seemed as if members were afraid to disturb the solemnity of the scene; as if it would be best for each to retire and enter into his closet, and shut the door behind him.”^[32]

VIII. Conclusion

What does this do for those who are supportive of the ministry of the Word and Gospel these days? Does it not send us to the secret place and to our knees before the great God of Heaven, and the exalted Saviour to plead for such penitence and humility before Him, preachers and hearers, and for experiences of the Spirit’s quickening in these days – in our churches, in our ministries and in our families and communities – and in our divinity faculties! It amounts to a longing for revival – personal revival in our souls and in our ministries and churches. In Psalm 85 the Psalmist cries: “Wilt thou not revive us again, that thy people may rejoice in thee?” (v6). We read in Habakkuk: “O LORD, I have heard thy speech and was afraid; O LORD, revive thy work in the midst of the years! In the midst of the years make it known; in wrath remember mercy” (3:2). Thousands were saved at Pentecost (Acts 2:41, 47; 4:4). “Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria and preached Christ to them. And the multitudes with one accord heeded the things spoken by Philip” (8:5-6). This is what God can do! We will know something is happening spiritually when preaching, prayer and Scripture stir us to a renewed piety and devotion to Christ, and fill us with a zeal for God, for truth and for the salvation of souls. We will know something is happening spiritually in the churches when Christ and His Word are once again accorded authority by them in all matters of faith and life. Let us pray for such an anointing of the Holy Spirit in our lives and in our day! What can we cry but: “Lord Jesus, hasten such a day!”

About the author

John W Keddie is a retired minister of the Free Church of Scotland Continuing and Lecturer in Church History in the Free Church Seminary (Inverness).

---

FOOTNOTES:

[1] David Calderwood, The History of the Kirk of Scotland, Volume V, Edinburgh, 1845, p. 387. The language of these quotations has been modernised in these sources.

[2] James (19 June 1566 – 27 March 1625) was King of Scots from 1567 to 1625, and King of England and Ireland as James I from 1603 to 1625. He became King of Scots as James VI on 24 July 1567, when he was just thirteen months old, succeeding his mother Mary, Queen of Scots. Regents governed during his minority, which ended officially in 1578, though he did not gain full control of his government until 1581. On 24 March 1603, as James I, he succeeded the last Tudor monarch of England and Ireland, Elizabeth I, who died without issue. He then ruled the united kingdom of England, Scotland, and Ireland for 22 years, often using the title King of Great Britain, until his death at the age of 58.

[3] This was the so-called ‘Golden Act’: Act for abolisheing of the actis contrair the trew religion. See: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aosp/1592/8. (Accessed 23 January 2018).

[4] R Moffat Gillon, John Davidson of Prestonpans, London, 1936, p. 32.

[5] Presbytery comprises all the ministers from a designated geographical area together with a ruling elder representing each congregation within that area. This collective body of men has responsibility of oversight of such congregations, though congregations in a Presbyterian system have a measure of independence. Synods comprise all the members of every Presbytery within a wider area. General Assembly is the highest court in a Presbyterian Church. It comprised a certain number (often one-third) of all ministers throughout the whole country with one elder for each minister appointed by Presbyteries.

[6] Gillon, op. cit., p. 148. The language of quotations has been slightly modernized from the contemporary sources.

[7] Calderwood, op. cit., p. 395.

[8] ibid., p. 395.

[9] ibid., p. 396.

[10] ibid., p. 396; Gillon, op. cit., p. 148.

[11] ibid., p. 396; Gillon, op. cit., pp. 148-9.

[12] Saltprestown, or Salt Preston, as it was known then.

[13] Gillon, op. cit., p. 149.

[14] Calderwood, op. cit., p. 396.

[15] Among a committee of men appointed to consider this was the father of Walter Balcanquhal (1586-1645) who, an episcopalian and not a presbyterian like his father of the same name, was later appointed by James VI & I as a commissioner from the UK to the Synod of Dort (1618-1619).

[16] Calderwood, op. cit., pp. 401ff.

[17] ibid., p. 400.

[18] ibid., p. 401. See also, Gillon, op. cit., p. 154.

[19] ibid., p. 155. Calderwood gives a ‘merest outline’ of it in his History, pp. 406-7.

[20] ibid., p. 407.

[21] Gillon, op. cit., pp. 156-7.

[22] The scene is beautifully described by David Calderwood in page 407 of his History. See also Gillon, p. 157. For the significance of ‘Bochim’, see Judges 2:1-6.

[23] Calderwood, op. cit., p. 407.

[24] Gillon, op. cit., p. 159. See, Thomas M‘Crie, The Story of the Scottish Church, London, 1875, p. 87.

[25] Calderwood, op. cit., pp. 387-8.

[26] ibid., p. 407.

[27] Gillon, op. cit., p. 251. Gillon (1883-1954) was a Church of Scotland minister and was a long-serving Secretary of the Scottish Reformation Society. His earthly remains were interred in the Grange Cemetery in Edinburgh.

[28] Thomas Brown, Annals of the Disruption, Edinburgh, 1893, p. 628.

[29] ibid., p. 628. Italicised words in the original.

[30] ibid., p. 629.

[31] ibid., p. 629.

[32] ibid., p. 630.