The influence of the Lollard movement on the Scottish Reformation was pointed out by John Knox in the sixteenth century; and in the latter part of the nineteenth century the same point was stressed by the Historiographer Royal for Scotland, P. Hume Brown. Yet in spite of such illustrious advocacy, with one or two minor exceptions, little attention has been paid to the Wycliffite tradition in fifteenth century Scotland. It has generally been taken for granted that the Lollards were unimportant and possessed little or no influence. When all the information on the movement which we possess, however, is brought together, one cannot but feel that they had a greater influence on their own time than has heretofore been allowed: Not only did the early reformers consider them very important, but today also, in spite of predilections for economic interpretations of history, they must be regarded as one of the important sources of the Scottish Reformation.

The growing tension between the American colonies and England in the decade preceding the Revolution confronted conscientious colonists with the necessity of making a difficult decision. Pressure to reach a decision was immeasurably increased when friction developed into war. It was relatively easy for some colonists to make up their minds as to whether or not they should remain loyal to the British crown. Those who were called Whigs or Tories recognized no serious problem; political ideals and allegiances, considerations of self-interest, and long standing prejudices united in various ways to make them zealous patriots or ardent loyalists. But these extremists were in a decided minority at the beginning of the Revolution. The majority of the colonists occupied ground somewhere in between; they were conservatives who hoped for a compromise solution of the differences between England and America, or wavered in distrustful indecision, or had no conviction whatsoever in the matter. It would be unjust lightly to prejudge their motives as of necessity either nobler or baser than those of the patriots and loyalists. Particularly unhappy was the lot of those who were unable to reach a conscientious decision either for or against the struggle for independence.

The non-intrusion controversy in the Church of Scotland grew out of a demand of the evangelical group in that Church that the intrusion of ministers on unwilling congregations be stopped. The patrons, who had been accused of intruding unsatisfactory ministers on parishes, insisted that the presentee must be accepted by the parish unless valid objections were raised to his theology, literary style, or moral character. On the other hand, the more zealous of the Scottish clergy and laity vehemently insisted that the presentee, in addition to possessing those qualifications, must be personally “acceptable” to the congregation. In fact, many insisted that when the presbytery was moderating in the call, the question of the presentee's “acceptability” outweighed all other considerations.