own wise
and reasonable additions to the recovered statute-book of Scripture?
Lastly, if such a new Church shone already in 'devout imagination'
before Knox, he must have also had some forecast of its new relations to
feudal and royal Scotland. Was he to plead merely for freedom, under a
neutral civil authority? Or in the event of the chiefs of the nation, or
some of them, individually adopting the new faith, were they to adopt it
for themselves alone; or for subjects and vassals too, as under the
former regime? And were they to enforce it, by feudal or royal or even
legislative authority, on unwilling subjects and unwilling vassals too?

I think it clear that all these questions must have passed before the
mind of Knox during that week of agitated seclusion within the castle
walls. Not only so. There is evidence in his own writings that when at
the close of that time he came forth to take up the public work, he
had already formed his conclusions as to all the main principles on
which it was to proceed. And from these he never afterwards varied.
Thirteen years were still to elapse before they resulted in Scotland
in a religious revolution; and during those years of wandering and
exile Knox learned much from the wisest and best of the new
leaders--much from them; and much, too, from his own experience, which
he was in the future to reduce to details of practice. But his
principles were the same from the first. He believed fundamentally in
the gracious Word of God revealed to man, as overriding and
over-ruling all other authorities. His first sermon denounced the
whole existing church system as an Anti-Christian substitute,
interposed between man and that original message. But, strange to say,
the part of the discourse which at once aroused controversy was his
sweeping denial of the Church's right to institute ceremonies, the
ground of denial being that 'man may neither make nor devise a
religion that is acceptable to God.' He was thus Protestant and
Puritan[18] from the first, as his master Wishart was before him, and
his choice had now to be made according to his convictions. We,
looking back upon the past at our ease, may recognise that on some of
these matters he was too hasty in his conclusions--especially in his
conclusions as to his opponents, and the duty towards them which the
party now oppressed would have, in the unlikely event of its coming
into power. But we are bound to remember--Knox himself insists upon