ings have certainly
arisen. The two Books of Discipline have been too much read apart,
instead of being regarded as complementary each of the other; and while
all that is liberal and progressive tends, I think, more and more to
rally round the one, I believe that much that is narrower, but still
earnest and resolutely Christian, will continue to draw its inspiration
from the other.

[Sidenote: Its Theory of the Church.]

The Second Book of Discipline, as well as the First, failed to commend
itself to the ruling powers, and to obtain a place in its full form on
the statute book. Those of its clauses relating to the functions of the
several church courts were inserted almost word for word in the Act of
the Scottish Parliament of 1592, reckoned the charter of the
presbyterian church. It was, however, several times ratified by the
General Assembly, and was partially carried out by its authority from
the time of its ratification; and to this extent it, as well as the
First Book of Discipline, appears to have been fully recognised. The
question of its authority was very fully argued in the famous
Auchterarder case. The counsel for the presbytery and the minority of
the judges did not venture to argue, however, that as a whole the Second
Book of Discipline had received the sanction of the state save in
irregular times; but they contended that the notes, contained in
Spottiswoode's History, of the clauses respecting which the king and the
commissioners of Parliament had come to agreement with the ministers,
should be accepted as determining the extent to which it was law. It was
affirmed, however, by the majority of the judges that only the clauses
actually inserted in the Act of Parliament could be so regarded, and it
has since been maintained by Mr Peterkin that the alleged notes of
agreement between the king and the church's commissioners are not
actually found in the manuscript copy of the History which is preserved
in the Advocate's Library.[272] The general theory of the church,
however, which may be said to underlie the most important statement of
the Second Book of Discipline, is not materially different from that
which finds expression in the First. "The kirk of God," it is said, "is
sumtymes largelie takin for all them that professe the Evangill of Jesus
Christ, and so it is a company and fellowship, not onely of the godly,
but also of hypocrites professing alwayis outwardly ane true religion.
Uther tymes it is taki