Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Covenanted Reformation] RPCNA's Testimony

Expand Messages
  • Whit
    It does not make it British. Since though England and Scotland were united as the State of Great Britain (1707 Act of Union), Ireland was not part of the
    Message 1 of 13 , Aug 11, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      It does not make it British. Since though England and Scotland were
      united as the State of Great Britain (1707 Act of Union), Ireland
      was not part of the United Kingdom until the 1801 Act of Union
      (first attempt in the Irish Parliament to pass - it failed; the 2nd
      attempt won but only by bribery). Even after the 1801 Act of Union,
      the State of the United Kingdom still distinguished between Great
      Britain and Ireland in its official name. So, no, Ireland is not
      British and never has been. Hence, the SLC is a British AND Irish
      document, not just a British document.

      Despite the bribery involved in the passage of 1801 Act of Union,
      God in His Providence established through the Act that there be no
      Papist office holder and no "Catholic Emancipation" (I believe both
      of which is supported by the SLC and WCF).

      Also, I am still trying to find information on the delegates from
      Ireland or the Irish Parliament that signed the SLC on behalf of the
      whole State of Ireland. For the sake of Ireland's spiritual welfare
      and the larger cause of the Covenanted Reformation, I am hoping very
      much that she indeed was part of the SLC.

      Whit

      --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Fred blahous"
      <fritzbau@y...> wrote:
      > The SL&C is a Covenant for the reformation of religion in
      the "three
      > Kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland", according to its own
      > language. This sounds pretty British to me. Since Cornwall and
      Wales
      > were dominions, they were not specifically mentioned in the
      league.
      > Does this make it non-British?
      >
      > All the best,
      > Fred.
      >
      > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Larry Bump"
      > <lbump@b...> wrote:
      > > You keep interchanging the terms "English" and "British" as if
      > they are the
      > > same thing. They decidedly are not.
      > > The colonies were British, not English. The SL&C was to the
      > Kingdom of
      > > England, not the British Empire (such as it was).
      > >
      > > It is a critical distinction that is overlooked by too many
      today.
      > >
      > > Yes, the RPCNA hold the SL&C as binding upon the English, Irish
      > and Scottish
      > > nations. The Colonies never were any of the above; that was the
      > point of
      > > the Revolution in 1776, that Parliament (i.e. the English
      Kingdom)
      > had no
      > > authority over the Colonies. Read the Declaration of
      > Independence; the
      > > points are that the Sovereign had a duty to protect the Colonies
      > from a
      > > foreign (i.e. English) usurpation of power. As he abdicated
      this
      > Sovereign
      > > duty and surrendered the States to a foreign power; he was no
      > longer our
      > > King and Britain no longer had any right to the Colonies.
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: "Edgar Ibarra" <puritanpresbyterian@y...>
      > >
      > > > Truth is indeed glorious,
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.