Chapter XII: Royal Patronage, 1373-1405
We come upon the name of a new Abbot in 1384—John de Lithgw or Lithgow, so called probably, to distinguish him from his predecessor, who is always called John simply. He ruled the Monastery at least fifty years, and is the only Abbot whose name is to be found on any of the monastic buildings. [13] His accession to office was marked by an invasion of the privileges of the Monastery by Walter, Bishop of Glasgow, The relation between the Abbey and the Cathedral was of a varied character. At one time we find the Bishop, as in the case of Robert Wishart, interfering on behalf of the monks, at another meddling with their affairs in a way which provoked their resistance. It was only a phase of the strife which went on over all Europe between the regular and the secular clergy. It was certainly somewhat annoying to the Bishop to have a body of clergy in the heart of his diocese who were in most matters free from the exercise of his authority, while they drew the principal revenues of his churches, leaving only a miserable pittance to the clergy who were subject to him, and who looked naturally to him as their protector. The Bishop was, therefore, constantly seeking to extend the very few rights which the privileges of the order of Clugny allowed him in connection with the Abbey, and the Abbots were equally determined to allow him to interfere no more than they possibly could. Upon Abbot Lithgow's election, the Bishop of Glasgow summoned him to have his election confirmed, and to receive his episcopal blessing. This demand the Abbot did not comply with, and went elsewhere for the benediction: The Bishop complained of him to the Patron of the Abbey, King Robert II. [14] That King, with whom were his two sons, John and Robert Earl of Fife, heard parties at Dunbarton on the second of June, 1384. The Bishop put forth his claim in the royal presence, and Abbot Lithgow, on the other hand, asserted that he and his convent were specially exempt from all episcopal jurisdiction, by virtue of certain special privileges conferred upon them and the whole order of Clugny, which had existed from time immemorial. No judgment was pronounced; it was stated that the Bishop of Glasgow “was appointed ambassador on business of the King and kingdom in distant parts,” and, therefore, that no further proceedings could be taken at that time. The Bishop, Walter Wardlaw, was eminent as an ecclesiastic, a statesman, and a scholar. He became a cardinal of the Church, was frequently employed on embassies of importance, and taught philosophy with applause in the University of Paris. [15] The business that suspended the controversy between him and Abbot Lithgow was the negotiating in England of a truce between that country and Scotland. [16] In this he was successful,—more so than in any attempt to invade Abbot Lithgow's jurisdiction. That ecclesiastic had the support of the whole order of Clugny behind him, and no Bishop could tamper with its rights with much prospect of success. [17]
[13] On the porch, and on the tomb of Marjory Bruce.
My friend, Mr. David Semple, makes the following suggestion regarding him—“The sound of the Abbot's name brings to my recollection the name of John Lithgw, the stone engraver who was employed to make the stone lettering around the tomb erected in 1329 in the Abbey Church of Dunfermline to our Lord King Robert Bruce. The Abbot was probably the grandson of the engraver, and was probably taught the art of stone engraving and sculpture, memorials of which, particularly of the former, have remained, I presume, in Paisley Abbey for at least 438 years as sharp as when the chisel left them. The patron of the Abbey was the grandson of the King, and the Abbot may have been the grandson of the engraver of the King's tomb, and from that con-nection appointed Abbot of Paisley.”—Saint Mirin, p. 25.
[14] Reg. de Pas., p. 330.
[15] Burton's Hist., Vol. II., p. 348.
[16] Tytler, Vol. II., p. 334.
[17] Reg. de Pas., p. 328.