500 years after Martin Luther’s 95 theses, Sean G. Morris published an article titled « How Do You Solve a Problem like Maria (and Mary, and Mary, and Elizabeth)? Part II« . Under the title is stated: « This article by Sean Morris appeared in the May issue of Ad Fontes magazine« , and beneath: « The first part of this article appeared in the November, 2016 issue of Ad Fontes ». Ad Fontes being Latin and meaning « [back] to the sources », one of the mentioned Marys being Marie of Lorraine, and the main character being John Knox, I had to read on. Sean Morris writes in his short chapter on « Mary of Guise »:

Knox held out more hope for Mary of Guise, the queen regent governing Scotland (1554-1560). Initially, the Protestant church prospered under her reign. Much to his surprise, in 1555 when Knox was charged with heresy by the Catholic hierarchy on account of his popular and successful preaching tour of Scotland, Mary suppressed the trial.
Spurred on by this apparently favorable disposition, Knox wrote a letter urging her to reform the church. If she obeyed God’s will, God would ‘crown your battle with double benediction and reward you with wisdom, riches, glory, honor, and long life in this your [temporal rule], and with life everlasting.’.
Mary considered the letter a joke. Not only that, but after Knox had left Scotland, the bishops resuscitated his trial and concluded by burning him in effigy. Henceforth, Mary was the subject of Knox’s prophetic ire.

Several things struck me when reading this. For a start, Marie of Lorraine became Regent of Scotland in April 1554. How could « the Protestant church » prosper under her reign? There was no Protestant church during her reign, which ended with her death in June 1560. Furthermore, as a reference to Knox’s letter to the Regent, Morris refers to an article by Robert M. Healey [“Waiting for Deborah: John Knox and Four Ruling Queens”,The Sixteenth Century Journal vol. 25, 2/1994, pp. 371-386], and not to the Scottish Reformers’ original work.

So I went to JSTOR, started reading Healey’s article — and was in for another surprise! Turns out that Morris’ text has numerous similarities with Healey’s article. As an example, one of Morris’ paragraphs:

First, in 1547, the child Queen of Scots, Mary Stuart, after a short betrothal to the Prince of Wales, was taken instead to France as the betrothed of the Dauphin. Then, in 1553, Mary Tudor became monarch of England. Finally, in 1554, the dowager queen, Marie/Mary of Guise, or Lorraine, became regent of Scotland.

And here the paragraph from Healey’s 1994 article:

In 1547, the child Queen of Scots, Mary Stuart, after a short betrothal to the Prince of Wales, was taken instead to France as the betrothed of the Dauphin. In 1553, Mary Tudor became monarch of England. In 1554, the dowager queen, Marie of Guise, or Lorraine, became regent of Scotland. Female rule had appeared in strength in regimes hostile to the Reformation; it called for thought. (op. cit., p. 371).

Instead of using quotation marks, as is customary, Morris decided to add three words (First, Then and Finally) and to replace « Marie of Guise, or Lorraine » by « Marie/Mary of Guise, or Lorraine ». Cleary, this cannot be called inspiration or textual reference; it is something less classy. One more example (there are many more!). Healy writes p. 372: « Although he [Knox] was appalled that a Catholic [Mary I, queen of England] should inherit the throne, his immediate reaction was to perform his duty as subject, pastor, and royal chaplain. » Morris writes: « Though deeply vexed that a Catholic should inherit the throne, Knox dutifully performed his roles as subject, pastor, and royal chaplain ». Judge for yourself.

But back to the content of Morris’ article. He writes that in 1555, Marie of Lorraine Regent of Scotland « suppressed the trial » against John Knox initiated by the Catholic hierarchy (Who is this? John Hamilton, archbishop of St. Andrews?). Knox, who fled England in January 1554, had returned to Scotland in September 1555 when, according to Morris, « his popular and successful preaching tour of Scotland » must have taken place. As it happens, Knox was charged with heresy by the Catholic authorities and summoned to appear in Edinburgh on May 15, 1556 (see Healey, p. 374). Indeed, « the queen regent intervened, forbidding the bishops to proceed against Knox, and forcing a withdrawal of their order » (Healey, p. 374). Let’s be precise: a hierarchy is not an authority, and Scottish bishops do not have the same power as an archbishop such as John Hamilton. However, this was the occasion of John Knox’s first letter (1556) to the Queen Regent. Here is the complete quote of the extract of this letter mentioned above by Morris, and printed in Healey’s article:

Lay the Book of God before your eyes, and let it be judge to that which I say. Which if ye with fear and reverence obey, as did Josiah the admonitions of the Prophetess, then shall he, by whom kings do reign, crown your battle with double benediction and reward you with wisdom, riches, glory, honor, and long life in this your regiment temporal, and with life everlasting when the king of all kings — whose members now do cry for your help — the Lord Jesus shall appear to judgment.

Robert Healey writes in his article: « Knox heard that the queen had called it a ‘pasquil’, a joke, a lampoon » (p. 375). What comes next shows what happens when hearsay becomes fact. Morris writes: « Mary considered the letter a joke ». Where do we find the information that Marie of Lorraine considered his letter a joke? In John Knox’s History of the Reformation of the Church of Scotland. Let’s pause for a moment and reflect on that.

What happens next? John Knox returns to Geneva but the « bishops revived his trial for heresy, condemned him in absentia, and publicly burned him in effigy » (Healey, p. 375). Finally, both authors join in harmony in their respective conclusion: « Henceforth, Mary was the subject of Knox’s prophetic ire » (Morris) — « Knox never forgot that Marie of Lorraine had responded to his message of grace by ridiculing him and letting him be condemned to death » (Healey, p. 375-76).

But — there is a big but, yes — we don’t know if Marie de Lorraine has ever called this letter a pasquil. We don’t know because there are no sources other than John Knox’s History of the Reformation of the Church of Scotland, a manuscript written several years after the event and during the reign of her daughter Mary, Queen of Scots, by someone who despised his own sovereign. Plus, in the 1550s, the Regent had a close relationship with John Hamilton, archbishop of St Andrews, who tried to reform the Church of Scotland, the same way Marie’s brother Charles, cardinal of Lorraine, tried to reform the Church of France. Yes, sometimes it is very frustrating to be a historian but we musn’t forget what really matters: AD FONTES.