Who knew Nicola Sturgeon was a devotee of Saint Augustine? Her message to the SNP conference yesterday was simple: Lord, grant me independence but not yet. And how the people cheered! The mere mention of independence was enough to send the nationalists into a state of millenarian rapture as they imagined the ecstasy to come.

Nothing else - not even the ritual pillorying of the hated Tories nor the now equally traditional concern trolling of Scottish Labour - excited Ms Sturgeon's audience. Only the thought and prospect of independence brought them to their feet, a-whoopin' and a-hollerin' like the Highland Light Infantry on a payday night out.

But it will not be coming for a while. That was not what the conference delegates thought they heard as the First Minister announced a new independence 'initiative' to be launched 'this summer' but it was what they were told nonetheless. There are no plans for IndyRef2, at least not yet. Ms Sturgeon prefers to bide her time, trusting that the arc of history bends in her direction. Patience, people.

All those things that were going to 'trigger' another referendum? Unmentioned. At least for now. Brexit? Not enough. At least not on its own. Not yet.

Of course the First Minister's speech also contained the now ritual nod to the result of the referendum and the equally platitudinous notion that it must be respected. It turns out that - gosh! - some people could disagree with the SNP in good faith. But this was, as I suggest, pro forma stuff. how could it be otherwise? The SNP exists to make the case for independence, regardless of circumstance. Asking it to respect something as trivial as a referendum result asks the party to cease being itself. You might as well wish for the moon. Without independence, or at least the idea of independence, there's no point to the SNP.

So the notable feature of Ms Sturgeon's speech was the manner in which she quietly shredded the SNP's prospectus for independence. The White Paper is no more. The SNP will, she said, have to question some of its assumptions and, in places, start again. Of course she did not put it quite so baldly as that - there's a limit to the number of home truths even the adoring faithful can be expected to tolerate, far less learn - but that was what she was saying nevertheless.

The process continues. No votes, it should be understood, are simply Yes votes deferred. If you don't like black, how about white? And if you don't like white, why don't you think of it as being just a shade of black? So, good economic numbers show that Scotland is subsidising 'Westminster' (ie, England) and more than wealthy enough to go it alone but bad economic numbers (such as this year's GERS figures) show that 'Westminster rule' is broken. If Scotland's deficit is twice the UK's doesn't that simply demonstrate we need a new approach? More urgently than ever! Heads we win; tails you lose.

(The Unionist corollary also stands, however. If Scotland is in deficit then the Union offers fiscal security; were Scotland in surplus - no tittering please - then independence might be reckoned unnecessary.)

Now, as I've written a hundred times before, the case for Union should not be reduced to a simple battle of accountancy. But it was, you may remember, the SNP who said we'd all be £500 better off each and every year after independence. Now these same people ask us to believe that independence can't be reduced to a simple battle of accountancy.

And that's fine! The poorer-but-free caucus position is a perfectly respectable one. It's just not the case the SNP spent years making. But - and who could have seen this coming? - it turns out that when you scratch a 'utilitarian' nationalist you find an 'existential' nationalist lurking beneath that calculating exterior.

If you want an apple, the SNP will promise you an apple. And if you want an orange, the SNP will promise you an orange. This remains the case even if they only have bananas in stock. But the party will, it should be clear now, say anything to get you on board the independence bandwagon. If that means contradicting positions they held as recently as, say, yesterday then so be it. Embrace those contradictions.

Which is also why the unacknowledged hero of yesterday's speech was Joel Barnett. The first Minister launched a flotilla of spending commitments, none of which would be possible in the current circumstances but for the consequences of Lord Barnett's now beatified formula. The SNP's popularity - at least in terms of the impact of policy giveaways - is, for the present, entirely dependent upon the largesse of a constitutional settlement they deplore. The SNP, paradoxically, have done very well from the Union.

Which is also why, at least for now, IndyRef2 must wait. It will come again, make no mistake about that, and the SNP will never cease agitating for it but, right now, it seems unlikely that the Scottish people are ready to pay the price of independence now that the price cannot be avoided or dismissed or wished away. Which is also why, in the longer-term, this debate will return to what it always was: a question of politics and of identity. That would have the happy quality of being a mildly more honest debate than the one we have endured - and in some cases enjoyed - these past few years.

Nicola Sturgeon told the SNP conference this yesterday even if that it not quite what the conference heard. It may be coming, lord, but it's not coming yet.