In this respect they are more consistent
than the other parties, though more visibly corrupt.
The Reformed Dissenters "prefix a _Narrative_ to their testimony," thus
rejecting _history_ from _testimony_. Some advocates for union in
conventions of reformed churches, have plead for a historical
introduction to their proposed _testimony_; but they have carefully
assured the public that this introduction shall constitute no _term_ of
union or communion. Thus, it is evident, that all the professed
followers of the British Reformers around us, have cast off this
reformation attainment from the standards of their professions
severally. We condemn this church-rending and soul-ruining sentiment,
and testify against all who maintain it, for the following reasons:
_First_, on their part it is inconsistent and self-contradictory. They
all say they are following the footsteps and holding the attainments of
the Scottish Reformers. But how do they discover these footsteps, or how
ascertain these attainments? Are they recorded in the Bible? No.
Pages:
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399