Turks are virtuous; many orthodox Hebrews, Saints, and Patriarchs
occasionally slipped; the Corinthians, though of a "trew Kirk," were
notoriously profligate. Meanwhile union and virtue are especially
desirable; for Satan "fiercely stirreth his terrible tail." We do not
know what back-slidings of the brethren prompted this letter.

The Lords, in the other letter, are reminded that they had resolved to
hazard life, rank, and fortune for the delivery of the brethren: the
first step must be to achieve a godly frame of mind. Knox hears rumours
"that contradiction and rebellion is made by some to the Authority" in
Scotland. He advises "that none do suddenly disobey or displease the
established authority in things lawful," nor rebel from private motives.
By "things lawful" does he mean the command of the Regent to invade
England, which the nobles refused to do? They may "lawfully attempt the
extremity," if Authority will not cease to persecute, and permit
Protestant preaching and administration of the Sacraments (which usually
ended in riot and church-wrecking). Above all, they are not to back the
Hamiltons, whose chief, Chatelherault, had been a professor, had fallen
back, and become a persecutor. "Flee all confederacy with that
generation," the Hamiltons; with whom, after all, Knox was presently to
be allied, though by no means fully believing in the "unfeigned and
speedy repentance" of their chief. {80a}

All the movements of that time are not very clear. Apparently Lorne,
Lord James, and the rest, in their letter of March 10, 1557, intended an
armed rising: they were "ready to jeopardise lives and goods" for "the
glory of God." If no more than an appeal to "the Authority" for
tolerance was meant, why did Knox consult the learned so long, on the
question of conscience? Yet, in December 1557, he bids his allies first
of all seek the favour of "the Authority," for bare toleration of