The Scottish Government says it will “fully support any plans” that are put forward for a celebration of the Scottish Reformation at its 450th anniversary next summer.
Alex Salmond has added that it is not for the government to tell churches how to remember the anniversary.
This is not good enough. I can appreciate that, sadly if understandably, the government is wary of anything that might smack of sectarian triumphalism. But any sensible celebration of our Reformation would be utterly devoid of any such taint. Alex Salmond says: “This is a matter for churches.” It is more than that.
The Scottish Reformation was, of course, first and foremost about our national religious settlement; but it also amounted to a political, social, cultural and educational revolution. In political terms, its most crucial aspect was that it ended centuries of constant strife and regular welfare with England. It heralded a new era of peace and friendship with our southern neighbour. It also guaranteed Scotland’s independence as a nation state, a country that could sort out its own religious settlement and work out what sort of society it wanted to be.
And, my goodness, how visionary – indeed, utopian – was the blueprint for what the new Scotland should be. John Knox and five of his colleagues drew up, in 1560, a stirring manifesto for a better society, informed by a noble and democratic aspiration for the structured provision of social welfare, poor relief and, above all, education that was decades – indeed, centuries – ahead of its time.
All this was only possible because the English had helped us secure our status as a genuinely independent state.
In 1559, Scotland was, in effect, a country occupied by the French and ruled by the Catholic regent Mary of Guise (who, to be fair, was generally a sensitive and politically astute woman – unlike her ill-starred daughter, Mary, Queen of Scots).
When the tyro English Queen Elizabeth sent her navy and then her army north to assist the Scots in driving out the French in the winter of 1559-60 she was taking a huge gamble. She was aiding rebels in their fight against a legitimate ruler; she was taking on the might of France, then four or five times richer, and altogether much more powerful, than England. She was also aiding a man she loathed, John Knox, who had just written an ill-judged tirade against the rule of women. It was an incredibly brave decision by the young queen, but it paid off. The Treaty of Edinburgh, ratified by France, England and Scotland in the summer of 1560, was a total triumph for Scotland and its new ally, England. The French were to withdraw completely from Scotland and the Scots could at last work out their own destiny, free form French and, indeed, English interference.
Why all this should not be celebrated with enthusiasm and commitment is quite beyond me. There seems to be a curious caution around, even some of kind of misguided embarrassment. Surely we have matured enough to have grown away from the nonsensical caricature of Knox as a demented fanatic of whom we should be ashamed.
Yet embarrassment seems to be affecting even the Church of Scotland itself. There is still time, but it is currently curiously reluctant to announce what, if anything, it intends to do. (Fifty years ago it organised a special assembly to mark the 400th anniversary.)
Meanwhile, I have it on the best authority that the Catholic Church in Scotland would be delighted to take part in any celebrations to mark the 450th anniversary of our Reformation. This is good and important; it would be sufficient to remove any misguided fears about possible Protestant triumphalism.
To return to the secular: our Reformation at last placed our relations with England on a secure and mutually beneficial footing. And it gave our nation an educational and social legacy that is something to be enormously proud of. Why on earth is our government not showing more commitment at this time? Is it lazy, or is it feart?
