page_title: Conventicle
section_title: Scotland under the Stuarts
hierarchical_section_title: Conventicle / Scotland under the Stuarts
caption_attribution_description: English: Depiction of a conventicle in progress, from H E Marshall's 'Scotland's Story', published in 1906
context_page_description: A conventicle originally signified no more than an assembly, and was frequently used by ancient writers for a church. At a semantic level conventicle is only a good Latinized synonym of the Greek word church, and points to Jesus' promise in Matthew 18:20, "Where two or three are met together in my name." It came to be applied specifically to meetings of religious associations, particularly private and secret gatherings for worship. Later it became a term of depreciation or reproach, implying that those of whom it was used were in opposition to the ruling ecclesiastical authorities; for example, it was applied to a cabal of mutinous monks in a convent or monastery. Ultimately it came to mean religious meetings of dissenters from an Established Church, held in places that were not recognized as specially intended for public worship or for the exercise of religious functions. It implied that a condition of affairs obtained in which the State made a distinction between a form or forms of religion whose practice and propagation were authorized by statute, and such as were expressly prohibited by enactment. This usage has received legal sanction in Britain.
context_section_description: There were various answers given in Scotland as how to react to the persecution of Presbyterian Christianity under James VII and Charles I. Scottish ministers did not regard complete separation from the Church of Scotland as an option.
  Identical measures were taken in Scotland under Charles II as had been taken in England only now it was to secure the suppression of Presbyterianism 
  in Scotland, where it had been the popular and dominant form of religion since the Reformation. From 1662 to 1678 various Acts were passed by the Privy Council and the Court of High Commission, prohibiting conventicles and imposing penalties of increasing severity upon those who attended them, masters being made responsible for their servants, landlords for their tenants, magistrates for the citizens of the burghs over which they presided. It was forbidden to supply denounced persons with meat or drink, or to harbour or have intercourse of any kind with them. These measures proving unavailing to effect their purpose, it was ultimately enacted that attendance should incur the penalty of death. Those in command of the military, and even the common soldiers themselves, were given authority to inflict it immediately on the spot of capture, without the formality of a legal trial — an authority which was used without scruple or mercy in numerous instances by such as Claverhouse. This policy proved, however, quite abortive. The bulk of the religious population in the south and south-west districts continued to attend the conventicles, which were arranged and conducted by the outed ministers. Where the congregation was too large for any suitable private house, resort was had to barns, granaries, or such like commodious buildings. Frequently, however, the number of those who flocked to these illegal gatherings amounted to thousands, and the result was the institution of field-conventicles — meetings held, sometimes under cover of night, in the open air, on moors or hills, or in glens and ravines, or wherever safety and suitability could be combined.
  These frequently lasted for hours, the preaching taking up a large portion of the time. At such 
  conventicles, the ordinances of the Church according to Presbyterianism were faithfully observed. 
  Baptism was administered, and Communion was dispensed, often to hundreds together, and even 
  thousands, the rite taking days to celebrate, several ministers officiating in turn. When repressive measures became more severe and attendance at these gatherings was enacted to be a capital 
  offence, the men came armed with such rude weapons as were obtainable — scythes, flails, etc. 
  A Presbyterian theology covering amongst other topics conventicles and even armed resistance to tyranny was given in Alexander Shields' work A Hind let Loose. It is (says MacPherson) in the second half of the book that Shields’ power as a thinker is manifested. Under seven heads, he discusses the fundamental social, political, and ecclesiastical questions of the day. These heads are concerning (i) hearing of curates, (ii) owning of tyrants’ authority, (iii) unlawful imposed oaths, (iv) field meetings, (v) defensive arms vindicated, (vi) the extraordinary execution of judgment by private persons, and (vii) refusing to pay wicked taxations vindicated. The last-named section was added, Shields tells us, as an afterthought.
  Sentinels were posted at look-out points; for the royalist soldiery, aided by spies and informers, 
  often succeeded in surprising these meetings. It was the attack upon such a conventicle that precipitated the battle of Drumclog, 11 June 1679, which issued in the only victory gained by the 
  Covenanters (as the upholders of Presbyterianism were called), and the only defeat sustained by 
  Claverhouse (known in song as 'Bonnie Dundee'), the most zealous and efficient of the military persecutors. During the years of persecution culminating in the 'Killing Times,' it is calculated 
  that some 18,000 people suffered in one way or another for attending these conventicles.
  Conventicles of believers in Reform were held in Scotland in t
caption: Imaginary depiction of a conventicle in progress, from H. E. Marshall's Scotland's Story (1906)
exif: {}