yet by the proper power of the sacraments only," so that it is exceedingly difficult to get from it a definite statement of what precisely the "grace" in the sacrament is; but that difficulty is felt, in our judgment, as seriously by those who desire to reduce to plain language the words of the Westminster standards on the same subject. In the section which treats of the authority of Scripture, there is no attempt to formulate any theory of inspiration, but simply a declaration that "in those books which of the ancients have been reputed canonical, all things necessary to be believed for the salvation of mankind are sufficiently expressed," and an affirmation that "such as allege the Scriptures to have no other authority, but that which is received from {138} the Kirk (Church) are blasphemous against God, and injurious to the true Kirk, which always heareth and obeyeth the voice of her own spouse and pastor, and taketh not on her to be mistress of the same." On the subject of the civil magistrate its words run thus: "That to kings, princes, rulers, and magistrates, we affirm that chiefly and most principally the reformation and purgation of the religion appertains; so that not only they are appointed for civil policy, but also for maintenance of the true religion, and for suppressing of idolatry and superstition, as in David, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, and others highly commended for their zeal, in that case may be espied," a statement which amply confirms what we have just said regarding the position taken by the Reformers on this matter. We ought to add, however, that according to Randolph, the representative of the English Court, who was present on the occasion of the ratification of the Confession, the section on the civil magistrate had been expunged by Maitland, to whose revision, as well as that of the Lord James Stuart, it had been submitted, and by whom certain strong phrases in other parts of the document had been softened. In Knox's history we have no word of anything like that, but simply the Confession as it was actually ratified, and in that a paragraph on the civil magistrate stands with the rest. But as there is in that paragraph a good deal about the prerogatives of rulers, and the duty of obedience to them, while there is no word of the limits of allegiance to them, and the right of {139} resisting them when they violate either the laws of the realm or the dictates of conscience, on both of which points we know that Knox and his brethren held strong convictions, it is probable that at first the article contained some things on these aspects of the question, which were afterwards stricken out, by the two men whom we have named, as being likely if retained to imperil the acceptance of the document as a whole. This is only a conjecture of our own, but it is not inherently improbable, and it serves to harmonize the statement of Randolph with the appearance in