of two parts, the one Historical and the other Doctrinal.”  This sounds orthodox; but, in the same page, when these two parts come to be defined, it is said, “when the church requires of those admitted into her fellowship, an acknowledgement of a work like the present, the approbation expressed has a reference to the principles embodied in it, and the proper application of them,” &c.  “So they wrap it up”—­better than our fathers succeeded in a similar enterprise in America.  The truth is what they call the historical part is largely argumentative; and both these parts are carefully and covertly excluded from the terms of fellowship!  We shall have occasion to recur to this subject, as there are many others likeminded with these innovators.

3.  These people are also deeply involved in the popular, so called, benevolent associations of the world, Sunday Schools, Bible Societies, Temperance Reforms, Missionary Enterprise, &c, evidencing a wide departure from our covenanted uniformity, based upon our covenanted Testimony.

SEC.  VI.  Those who in 1838, on account of sensible tyranny, growing out of defection on the part of the majority, declined the authority of Synod, have shared all along in our sympathies; and it has been our desire that they and we could see eye to eye in the doctrines and order of the house of God.

Although this party promised fair for a time, and apparently contended for “all the attainments of a covenanted reformation,” in process of time it became apparent that they possessed not intelligence sufficient to manage a consistent testimony for that cause.  They seem to have been under the influence of temporary impulse, arising from the experience of mal-administration; rather than to have discovered any constitutional defection in the body from which they separated.  This is apparent indeed if we have access to any credible source of information relative to the principles they profess, and their Christian practice.  More particularly,

1.  Although that paper which they designate “Safety League,” has the sound of orthodoxy; yet, as originated, and since interpreted by them, there is a lamentable falling off from the attainments and footsteps of the flock. First, so far as we can ascertain, that instrument had clandestine origin being framed and subscribed by those who were yet in fellowship with the Synod!  This might be earnest, but, we think, not honorable contending for the truth. Second, when this paper comes to be interpreted by its framers and signers, it seems to cover only the American Testimony and Terms, as remodeled by breach of presbyterial order.  At other times, it will conveniently extend to the Scottish Testimony, 1761, and the Auchensaugh Deed, 1712!  From which we infer that these people have no settled standards.

2.  We testify against these people for unwarrantable separation from us.  One of their elders co-operated in organizing the Reformed Presbytery in 1840; this in official, and, as then distinctly understood, representative capacity.  Yet, some time afterward, he and his brethren withdrew from said Presbytery, without assigning justifiable reasons.