There are two forms of Socialism with which Liberalism has nothing to do. These I will call the mechanical and the official. Mechanical Socialism is founded on a false interpretation of history. It attributes the phenomena of social life and development to the sole operation of the economic factor, whereas the beginning of sound sociology is to conceive society as a whole in which all the parts interact. The economic factor, to take a single point, is at least as much the effect as it is the cause of scientific invention. There would be no world-wide system of telegraphy if there was no need of world-wide inter-communication. But there would be no electric telegraph at all but for the scientific interest which determined the experiments of Gauss and Weber. Mechanical Socialism, further, is founded on a false economic analysis which attributes all value to labour, denying, confounding or distorting the distinct functions of the direction of enterprise, the unavoidable payment for the use of capital, the productivity of nature, and the very complex social forces which, by determining the movements of demand and supply actually fix the rates at which goods exchange with one another. Politically, mechanical Socialism supposes a class war, resting on a clear-cut distinction of classes which does not exist.

We have seen something of the principle underlying the Liberal idea and of its various applications. We have now to put the test question. Are these different applications compatible? Will they work together to make that harmonious whole of which it is easy enough to talk in abstract terms? Are they themselves really harmonious in theory and in practice? Does scope for individual development, for example, consort with the idea of equality? Is popular sovereignty a practicable basis of personal freedom, or does it open an avenue to the tyranny of the mob? Will the sentiment of nationality dwell in unison with the ideal of peace? Is the love of liberty compatible with the full realization of the common will? If reconcilable in theory, may not these ideals collide in practice? Are there not clearly occasions demonstrable in history when development in one direction involves retrogression in another? If so, how are we to strike the balance of gain and loss? Does political progress offer us nothing but a choice of evils, or may we have some confidence that, in solving the most pressing problem of the moment, we shall in the end be in a better position for grappling with the obstacles that come next in turn?

I shall deal with these questions as far as limits of space allow, and I will take first the question of liberty and the common will upon which everything turns.

TO THE NOBILITY AND ESTATES of Scotland John Knox wisheth grace, mercy and peace from God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ with the spirit of righteous judgement.

Every man ought to confess and reverence God's truth

It is not only the love of life temporal (Right Honourable), neither yet the fear of corporal death, that moveth me at this present to expone unto you the injuries done against me and to crave of you, as of lawful powers by God appointed, redress of the same. But partly it proceedeth from that reverence which every man oweth to God's eternal truth, and partly from a love which I bear to your salvation, and to the salvation of my brethren abused in that realm by such as have no fear of God before their eyes.

It hath pleased God of His infinite mercy not only so to illuminate the eyes of my mind and so to touch my dull heart that clearly I see, and by His grace unfeignedly believe, that ‘there is no other name given to men under the heaven in which salvation consisteth save the name of Jesus alone’, ‘who by that sacrifice which he did once offer upon the cross hath sanctified forever those that shall inherit the kingdom promised’. But also it hath pleased Him of His superabundant grace to make and appoint me, most wretched of many thousands, a witness, minister and preacher of the same doctrine.

[By October 1559, while the regent continued to fortify Leith, the Congregation – reinforced by the accession of the duke of Châtelherault to their ranks – were in possession of Edinburgh and contemplating military action against the regent's French troops. The following extract from Knox's History (Laing MS, fos. 163r–167r; Laing, vol. I, pp. 441–9; Dickinson, vol. I, pp. 249–55) gives details of the debate among the Congregation preceding their decision formally to ‘suspend’ the regent's authority. In fact, the subsequent siege of Leith proved wholly abortive and the Congregation were never in a position to enforce their deposition.]

The order the suspension of the Queen Regent from the authority within Scotland

The whole nobility, barons and burghs then present were commanded to convene in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh the same 21 day of October for deliberation of these matters. Where the whole cause being exponed by the Lord Ruthven, the question was proponed: ‘Whether she that so contemptuously refused the most humble request of the born counsellors of the realm, being also but a regent, whose pretences threatened the bondage of the whole common wealth, ought to be suffered so tyrannously to empire above them?’ And because that this question had not been before disputed in open assembly, it was thought expedient that the judgement of the preachers should be required; who being called and instructed in the case, John Willock, who before had sustained the burden of the church in Edinburgh, commanded to speak, made discourse as followeth, affirming:

The discourse of John Willock.

1. ‘First, that albeit magistrates be God's ordinance, having of Him power and authority, yet is not their power so largely extended but that [it] is bounded and limited by God in His Word.

2. […]

[Mary Stewart's arrival in Scotland on 19 August 1561 prompted Knox to preach a series of sermons inveighing against the queen's idolatry and the reintroduction of the mass to the very heart of the realm. As a result, on Thursday 4 September, he was summoned to the queen's presence for the first of several personal ‘reasonings’ or interviews. The following extract from the History (Laing MS, fos. 305r–308r; Laing, vol. II, pp. 277–86; Dickinson, vol. II, pp. 13–20) is Knox's own summary of a long interview ‘whereof we only touch a part’.]

The first reasoning betweixt the Queen and John Knox

Whether it was by counsel of others, or of the Queen's own desire, we know not; but the Queen spake with John Knox, and had long reasoning with him, none being present except the Lord James (two gentlewomen stood in the other end of the house). The sum of their reasoning was this. The Queen accused him that he had raised a part of her subjects against her mother, and against herself; that he had written a book against her just authority (she meant the treatise against the Regiment of Women), which she had, and should cause the most learned in Europe to write against it; that he was the cause of great sedition and great slaughter in England; and that it was said to her that all which he did was by necromancy, etc.

[THE PREFACE]

THE KINGDOM APPERTAINETH TO OUR GOD.

Wonder it is that amongst so many pregnant wits as the Isle of Great Britanny hath produced, so many godly and zealous preachers as England did sometime nourish, and amongst so many learned and men of grave judgement as this day by Jezebel are exiled, none is found so stout of courage, so faithful to God, nor loving to their native country, that they dare admonish the inhabitants of that Isle how abominable before God is the empire or rule of a wicked woman, yea, of a traitress and bastard, and what may a people or nation, left destitute of a lawful head, do by the authority of God's Word in electing and appointing common rulers and magistrates. That Isle, alas, for the contempt and horrible abuse of God's mercies offered, and for the shameful revolting to Satan from Christ Jesus and from His Gospel once professed, doth justly merit to be left in the hands of their own counsel and so to come to confusion and bondage of strangers.

Negligence of watchmen

But yet I fear that this universal negligence of such as sometimes were esteemed watchmen shall rather aggravate our former ingratitude than excuse this our universal and ungodly silence in so weighty a matter.

As the introduction makes clear, to talk of the ‘political works’ of John Knox is to give a misleading impression of the style and substance of the writings of a man who saw himself, first and foremost, as a preacher and a prophet. Nevertheless, Knox did write extensively on the theme of resistance to political authority and the purpose of this edition is to bring together in a single volume those of his works in which the problem of rebellion is discussed at length. Part I, therefore, contains the four tracts of 1558 – The First Blast of the Trumpet against the Monstrous Regiment of Women, The Letter to the Regent of Scotland, The Appellation to the Scottish Nobility and Estates and The Letter to the Commonalty of Scotland – in which he addressed the issue most directly. Part II contains a body of related material, mostly drawn from Knox's History of the Reformation in Scotland, which sheds light both on the development of Knox's ideas before 1558 and on how they were applied in the context of the Scottish ‘Reformation-Rebellion’ of 1559 and its aftermath.

It is a great pleasure to be able to acknowledge here the numerous debts I have accumulated in compiling this edition. It would not have been possible without the help of the staff of the National Library of Scotland, Edinburgh University Library and St Andrews University Library.

[After his successful mission to Scotland in the winter of 1555–6, Knox returned to Geneva from where he continued to correspond with the Protestant nobility with whom he had made contact in his homeland. The following extract from his History of the Reformation (Laing MS. fos. 90v–94r; Laing, vol. I, pp. 267–74; Dickinson, vol. I, pp. 131–7) begins with a letter from the Protestant nobility of 10 March 1557 inviting Knox to return to Scotland, continues with Knox's response to discovering that by October they had changed their minds and culminates with the signing of the First Band or Covenant on 3 December 1557.]

At this same time, some of the nobility directed their letters to call John Knox from Geneva, for their comfort, and for the comfort of their brethren the preachers, and others that then courageously fought against the enemies of God's truth. The tenor of their letter is this:

The second vocation of John Knox by letters of the lords

Grace, Mercy and Peace, for Salutation, etc.

Dearly beloved in the Lord, the faithful that are of your acquaintance in these parts (thanks be unto God) are steadfast in the belief whereunto ye left them and has a godly thirst and desire, day by day, of your presence again; which, if the spirit of God will so move and permit time unto you, we will heartily desire you, in the name of the Lord, that ye will return again in these parts, where ye shall find all faithful that ye left behind you, not only glad to hear your doctrine, but will be ready to jeopard lives and goods in the forward setting of the glory of God, as He will permit time.

TO THE EXCELLENT LADY MARY,

Dowager Regent of Scotland.

The cause moving me, Right Honourable, to present this my supplication unto your Grace, enlarged and in some places explained (which being in the realm of Scotland in the month of May 1556, I caused to be presented to your Grace), is the incredible rage of such as bear the title of bishops who against all justice and equity have pronounced against me a most cruel sentence, condemning my body to fire, my soul to damnation and all doctrine taught by me to be false, deceivable and heretical. If this injury did tend to me alone, having the testimony of a good conscience, with silence I could pass the matter, being assured that such as they curse and expel their synagogues for such causes shall God bless and Christ Jesus receive in His eternal society. But considering that this their blasphemy is vomited forth against the eternal truth of Christ's Evangel (whereof it hath pleased the great mercy of God to make me a minister), I cannot cease to notify, as well to your Grace as unto them, that so little I am afraid of their tyrannical and surmised sentence that in place of the picture (if God impede not my purpose) they shall have the body to justify that doctrine which they (members of Satan) blasphemously do condemn.

[Knox remained in Dieppe for some months before returning to Geneva in the spring of 1558. He presumably did not know of the drawing up of the First Band when he penned the following letter (Laing, vol. IV, pp. 276–86) two weeks later on 17 December 1557.]

To the Lords and Others Professing the Truth in Scotland.

The secrets of the Lord are revealed to those that fear Him.

The Holy Ghost, by the mouth of David and Solomon (Right Honourable Lords), for two reasons calleth ‘the fear of the Lord the beginning of all wisdom’. First, because without the same, all that appeareth to be wisdom perisheth, and most commonly turneth to the perdition of those that are esteemed and do esteem themselves most wise. For wisdom natural, not ruled nor bridled by the fear of God, as it is but extreme foolishness, so is it a poison and venom most deadly, which in the end commonly bringeth the worldly wise to worldly confusion, as the experience of all ages has taught us; where, by the contrary, the fear of the Lord preserveth His servants in their greatest extremities even before the world. But this is not the chief cause why the fear of the Lord hath the forenamed title.