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

RE: Steelites

Expand Messages
  • Edgar Ibarra
    Brethren, I decided to break the post up into two parts, just to avoid making one lengthy post. So here are John Anderson s assessment of the situation
    Message 1 of 11 , Nov 6 10:18 PM
      Brethren,
       
         I decided to break the post up into two parts, just to avoid making one lengthy post.  So here are John Anderson's assessment of the situation concerning the SL&C.
       
         He wrote a book entitled: Alexander and Rufus; or a series of Dialogues on Church Communion in 1862. The quotes will be taken from part one, which part he entitled, "Vindication of Scriptural Church Communion in Opposition to Latitudinarian Schemes".
       
        I love this book, it is a devestating work against the rampant pluralism, toleration of contrary doctrines, and the cancer of latitudinarianism that plagues the majority of Presbyterian & Reformed churches, for example, NAPARC and other such endeavors.
       
          Many of the opponents of the Reformed Presbyterians (Camerionians/"Steelites") state that the SL&C is no longer binding today and that the Westminster Standards were their fulfilment and therefore when one keeps the Westminster Standards, one is upholding the spirit and intent of the SL&C.  This is nothing but downright revisionism of history and putting words in the mouths of the Covenanters of the past.  A total recasting and redefintion of the Covenanters that sealed their Covenant keeping with their very blood.  The Church of Scotland of then sought Uniformity in religion and to bring this about, they entered into the SL&C.  "Our forefathers accounted the open avowal of contrary opinions and practise in matters of religion an evil not to be tolerated in the communion of the visible saints; but to be struggled against, and if possible, prevented or removed", John Anderson p.168.  Here then is the purpose of the SL&C:
       
         "This Covenant was an engagement to endeavor to bring the churches of God in the three kingdoms to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in religion, confession of faith, form of church government, directory for worship and catechizing, in order that they and their posterity, might, as brethren, in faith and love, and that the Lord might delight to dwell in the midst of them.  It was an engagement to endeavor, without respect of persons, the extirpation of popery, prelacy, superstition, schism, profaneness, and whatsoever should be found contrary to sound doctrine and the power of godliness, that they might not partake of other men's sins, nor be in danger to receive of their plagues, and that the Lord might be one and his name one, in the three kingdoms.  It was an engagement against neutrality and indifference in the cause of God, with respect to all those particulars", p.169. Bold emphasis mine.

       

         You see that the Covenant was understood to bind the posterity of the subscribers.  Now who are the posterity?  Well if one thinks of the physical flesh, then, hey I myself am not bound at all.  I am not Scot nor have a drop of blood from those islands.  I am of Mayan blood and of Spainard blood (and I think some Lebanese).  But that is the Pharisical view of Biblical covenants.  Jesus refuted that and so did the Apostle Paul.  If we are of the faith of Abraham, then we are the children of Abraham (though we are gentiles), even though physical Israel remains part and parcel of the Abrahamic covenant and promise, to this day.  That is the Biblical way to view Covenants.  So, when one sees that the Covenant bound the posterity, that was a triad posterity.  The physical offspring of the subjects of three kingdoms are bound (1), including the nations birthed by England/U.K. as England was bound and so was Scotland and Ireland and all of the king's dominions, plantations, & territories (including the 13 colonies) (2).  Moreover, the spiritual descendants of the Covenanted Church of Scotland are also bound to the covenant, when they swear to own the Westminster Standards, for they are part and parcel, no matter what modern day opponents may say (3).  The Westminster Standards were birthed by the SL&C. As a citizen by birth of this nation and having sworn to uphold the Westminster Standards as a Deacon in the PCA (back then I only knew of the original 1647, it blew my mind when I found out the PCA held to an unfaithful version of the Confession), I am part of that posterity.

       
        Though there were a few Independants/Congregationalists at the Westminster Assembly that swore the Covenant, later in 1648, the Independant form of church government is listed as a national sin, by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.
       
         "It may be added, that when the Church of Scotland renewed the Solemn League and Covenant in the year 1648, Independency is first mentioned in a catalogue of national sins, against which they engaged to contend and testify, as contrary to their covenanted uniformity, and the purity of religion; and therefore, it is not supposable, that the Church of Scotland would admit to sacramental communion, such as avowed their obstinate persisting in this evil", p.172.  Bold emphasis mine.
       
         Note that, contrary to modern day Presbyterian practice rampant in so many churches, in which just about anyone can come to the Lord's Table WITHOUT examination, and even then with just a bare minimum of a profession in Christ, in the time of Reformation, the Lord's Table was fenced and protected to keep out those that were ignorant of the Lord's body or walked disorderly.  Note that John Anderson, not I, called Independent Church Government "evil".
       
        Also note the author's correct term to describe the pursuit of the Church of Scotland, "purity of religion" NOT "perfection" as some of our opponents maintain.
       
        As to binding the spiritual posterity as I briefly laid out as #3 above, this should flesh it out some more.  Here Anderson argues from the greater (the SL&C) to the lesser (the Westminster Standards that came from that covenant), whereas the above in #3 was an argument from the lesser to the greater.  Then don't forget about the doctrine of the MORAL PERSON either.
       
         "When the Westminster Confession of Faith was formed, a considerable progress was made in the reformation of the church of God in England and Scotland: ministers and people were bound by the command of God, to hold fast what they had attained, and to carry on the good work they had begun.  These nations were also bound to all the reformation they had attained by the oath of God, into which they had entered.  Nothing could be more absurd than the attempts that were sometimes made to reconcile the Solemn League and Covenant to their complainces with the heirarchy and superstition which these nations were bound to the covenant to eradicate.  Some have said, that the Solemn League and Covenant could not bind any to an adherence to the Confession of Faith, form of presbyterial church government, and directory for public worship; because these formularies were not then composed.  This would have had some color of reason, if they had not precisely corresponded with what was sworn to; that is, if they had not actually exhibited the several parts of reformation mentioned in the covenant, a confession of faith, a form of church government, a directory for worship, according to the Word of God, and the example of the best reformed churches; in opposition to popery, prelacy, superstition, heresey, schism and profaneness.  But this correspondence was evident and undeniable; and therefore these nations were bound, by that covenant, to adhere to the whole of the Reformation described in these forms of sound words.  While that was the covenanted reformation, it is plain, that the falling away from any part of it, was an open violation of that covenant. " p. 192-193. Bold and underline emphasis mine.
       
        This should clearly up why we Camerionians or at times called "Steelites", are different from the RPCNA and the posterity of the Schismatic/Erastian Revolution Church.  Why we state that the SL&C is still for today, in addition to the rest of the Westminster Standards.  The Covenanters of old, did not fight for a generic religious freedom, as modern day revisionists claim, but for the Divine Rights and Royal Prerogatives of King Jesus Christ, the only Head of the Church.  It was for Presbyterial church government (which is of divine right and to be the ONLY form to govern the Church, all others being sinful and therefore unlawful), Biblical-Calvinistic Doctrine, the Regulative Principle of Worship (only the Lord's Day is to be kept holy and Xmas, Easter and such Popish and superstitious holy-days are to be banished; Exclusive Psalmody without instruments-man-made hymns being an innovation/idolatry and violation (therefore sinful) of the Word of God; the Lord's Supper is spiritual, no elements to be described in the Popish or Lutheran manner, and not just a mere memorial as the Baptists teach, one Common Cup and sitting around One Common Table, (none of this communion in the pew stuff), and faithful church discipline.
       
        Much more historical evidence from the Covenanters and those that understood that the SL&C is binding (as some may know M'Crie and Anderson were Seceders and not Camerionian Covenanters, which I think strengths our position that this view is not novel or confined to a few) can be quoted, but I do not have that luxury of time to type, having to go to rest and be with my 5 children in the AM and then go to work.
       
        Therefore I will refer to those interested, especialy my Colombian brethren to read the documents found at the following sites:
       
      The official web site of the RPNA
      Where one can listen to sermons by Pastor Greg Price in MP3 & on PDF
       
      The web site by our fellow Cameronian Covenanters, that are not part of the RPNA.
      This site has a multitude of source documents that are excellent and that demonstrate that the Covenanters held these views before David Steele was even born.    Not to bag on David Steele at all, just to squash the notion that our doctrines are novel and have their start from this faithful Pastor.
       
        Again this will disappoint, upset, or otherwise generate another thread of debate, hashed out, how many times here before?  If you need clarification on something I wrote, then I will respond, otherwise I think I will avoid another prolonged debate.
       
        Hermanos de Colombia, favor de preguntarme cual quier preguntas o decirme cual quier comentarios que venga a mente.  Estoy dispuesto de corresponder con Uds con todo gusto y placer.
       
       
      Para la corona
      y pacto de Cristo
      nuestro Rey,
       
      Edgar Ibarra
      RPNA
      Albany, NY


      www.espanol.albanycrpc.org       www.reformedpresbytery.org
       
                                    www.albanycrpc.org                      
         


      Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.
    • nodelink7
      Greg Barrow and Dr. Larry Birger, Jr. have provided a great service to the RPCNA by outlining a history of the RPCNA s Terms of Communion. This history is
      Message 2 of 11 , Nov 7 9:06 AM
        Greg Barrow and Dr. Larry Birger, Jr. have provided a great service to
        the RPCNA by outlining a history of the RPCNA's Terms of Communion.
        This history is provided in their paper: Reformation Principles
        Re-Exhibited: An Historical Witness & Brotherly Entreaty - Summary and
        Analysis of Changes within Terms of Communion of the Reformed
        Presbyterian Churches of Scotland and America from 1761 to the
        Present, and a Particular Analysis and Testimony Against the Present
        Day RPCNA. See: http://www.reformedpresbytery.org/books/rpcna/rpcna.pdf

        A series of changes in the RPCNA's Terms of Communion are described
        through to the latest changes around 1980. In the Constitution of the
        RPCNA (aka The Blue Book), there is a section called the History of
        the Standards. As I read this section, no clear date is given for the
        beginning of the RPCNA. Dates that are suggested include 1738, 1774,
        1798, and 1809. I want to suggest 1980 as another date for the
        beginning of the present-day RPCNA.

        The earlier Terms of Communion of the professing RPCNA were more
        restrictive than are the present terms of communion as expressed in
        the RPCNA's Covenant of Communicant Church Membership. Therefore,
        modern-day RPCNA members after 1980 could not be admitted to communion
        at the Lord's Supper with earlier generations of the RPCNA.

        Terms of Communion define the standards by which a church assembly
        define their union, communion, and fellowship. TOC's define the
        measure by which an assembly prepares itself to be "perfectly joined
        together in the same mind and in the same judgment" (1Co 1:10) that
        they may be obedient to the Word and with "one mind and one mouth
        glorify God" (Romans 15:6, See also 2Co 13:11; Phlp 1:27,2:2; 1 Peter 3:8.

        Presumably, different denominations exist because each denomination
        considers its worship, doctrine, discipline and government to be
        essential and that it would be sin to be joined together with any
        other assembly. Presumably, as Christians, we seek to love the Lord
        Jesus Christ and to seek oneness in obedience to John 17:11,21-23.
        Right administration of the sacraments is widely-recognized as an
        essential attribute of faithful churches. Right adminsistration is
        essential lest "he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and
        drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord's body" (1Co
        11:29). Even among churches professing themselves to be reformed, are
        there not many who are barren and unfruitful (2Pe 1:8) but also weak,
        sick, and sleepy (1CO 11:30)? Right discernment requires being one of
        one, right mind.

        Churches that are able to take the Lord's Supper with each other are
        essential proclaiming to each other that they are not in sin. Thus,
        when the psalm-singing RPCNA admits members of NAPARC churches such as
        the OPC, PCA, and RCUS to its Lord's Supper and its pulpits, it is
        essentially saying that their hymn-singing and use of musical
        instruments in worship is not a sin. If the varying practices of
        different denominations that take the Lord's Supper together are not
        sin, then existing sin may be the scandal of maintaining separate
        denominations when it's not necessary.

        Earlier generations calling themselves by the name of RPCNA subscribed
        to the Solemn League and Covenant. Earlier generations subscribed to
        historical testimony and practiced political dissent. Earlier
        generations required a more restrictive Terms of Communion to define
        their essential agreement. As described by Greg Barrow and Dr. Larry
        Birger, the requirements on members of the RPCNA have changed several
        times and become increasingly less restrictive. Today's RPCNA goes so
        far as to admit both members and non-members in their administration
        of the Lord's Supper. In administering the Lord's Supper, today's
        RPCNA applies one standard for admission to members and another to
        non-members. In practical application, the standards for non-members
        sometime fall as low as "credible profession of faith" in violation of
        WLC #173.

        Under the one name of the RPCNA, there have been different communions
        and essentially different denominations. Today's RPCNA members would
        not qualify to partake in the Lord's Supper under the Terms of
        Communion of earlier generations of the RPCNA. Earlier generations of
        the RPCNA would consider the practices of today's RPCNA to be sin.
        Today's RPCNA is a different denomination than the earlier RPCNA.

        The title of Barrow and Birger's paper (mention above) is clearly a
        play on the RPCNA's constitutional document of 1806 called
        "Reformation Principles Exhibited". See
        http://www.truecovenanter.com/reformedpresbyterian/rpe.html. This
        document is an essential resource for the early RPCNA. Reformation
        Principles Exhibited (RPE) of 1806 is included among the The Faithful
        Subordinate Standards of the RPNA. See
        http://www.reformedpresbytery.org/ss_order.html. Thus, RPE of 1806 is
        shared in the heritage of both the RPCNA and the RPNA of Edmonton,
        Albany, etc.

        FYi, Edgar Ibbara's history below is very helpful. The RPCNA moved
        away from adherence to the Scotish National Covenant and the Solemn
        League and Covenant when it declined to explicitly name these
        covenants in its Covenant of 1871. Other defections from earlier
        standards happened at other times.

        GG

        --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Edgar A. Ibarra
        Jr." <puritanpresbyterian@y...> wrote:
        >
        > ¡Bienvienido Hermano!
        >
        > The term "Steelites" was given to the Covenanters that continue
        > to adhere to the entire Second Reformation of 1638-1649 (inclusive)
        > and to the faithful Covenanters during the "Killing Times" of 1660-
        > 1688, of today. The few Covenanters that were left at the
        > Revolution of King William of Orange, refused to join the re-
        > established Church of Scotland, since it was re-established on the
        > King's terms and not on the terms of the Church. In 1650, when King
        > Charles II assumed the throne to Scotland, England, & Ireland, he
        > swore that he would uphold the Solemn League and Covenant and that
        > he would punish any who sought to overturn it. His taking the
        > throne to be King was dependant upon his faithfulness to the Solemn
        > League and Covenant. He swore that he would maintain it and to
        > break it meant he no longer could sit as King. Well, he broke it
        > and unleashed a brutal persecution against any that stood in his
        > way. King James II, his Papist brother, continued it. Richard
        > Cameron and other faithful Covenanters resisted the King and
        > continued to worship God as He had commanded and refused to go along
        > with the King's usurpation. The civil magistrates became ruthless
        > tyrants and used all means necessary (torturing the laypeople, taxes
        > (also known as the cess), confiscation of property, imprisonment,
        > rape of women, and murder) to hunt down and kill the ministers of
        > Christ that still held the Covenants. King Charles passed the Acts
        > Recissory stating that the Covenants were "seditious, treasonable,
        > and against his crown, the very covenant he had sworn to uphold, the
        > very covenant that defined him as a lawful civil magistrate and
        > allowed him to be lawfully on the throne. At the Revolution
        > Settlement, King William did not rescind the Acts Recessiory and he
        > set up the Church of Scotland on his terms. Only the Westminster
        > Confession of Faith was allowed to be the standard of the church
        > without allowance of the others. When he and parliament (most of
        > who were part of the persecution) had laid out how the Church of
        > Scotland was to be restored, he called a GA the following year and
        > told them how they were to be structured.
        >
        > The few remaining Covenanters protested and would not join the
        > vast majority of already sold out/indulged ministers (these were
        > those that made compromises to King Charles & King James to spare
        > their lives, in exchange they had to submit to the Bishops and state
        > that the Covenants were treasonable and they held no allegiance to
        > them, among other things). When 3 ministers from the Covenanters
        > tried to persuade the other ministers to press the King to rescind
        > the Acts Recissory and renew the Solemn League and Covenant and make
        > the Standards the charter of the Church as it was during 1638-1649,
        > the 3 were rebuked and scolded. The 3 submitted and joined the
        > Revolution Church and the most prolonged division in Presbyterian
        > history began. That being the Covenanters, that remained faithful
        > to the Church of Scotland and the Westminster Standards of 1638-1649
        > vs. the Revolution Church, which was a brand new Presbyterian church
        > with her own new constitution and charter.
        >
        > All but two Presbyterian churches in the United States descend
        > from this Revolution Settlement Church (In Europe it is a similar
        > situation). The two that do not are the Reformed Presbyterian
        > Church of North America (RPCNA) and the Reformed Presbytery of North
        > America (RPNA).
        >
        > Here is where we get to the heart of your question. The RPCNA
        > held to the Covenanters' testimony until they changed their
        > constitution in the mid-1800's and no longer held that the Solemn
        > League & Covenant was binding upon the United States of America,
        > although I am not sure if they still believe it is on the United
        > Kingdom. They also adopted other items that were contrary to the
        > Standards of Westminster and further broke their Covenanted oath.
        > They continue to believe in the ordinance of Covenanting, so
        > therefore they call themselves Covenanters because of that, but they
        > do not hold to what the original Covenanters held to. During this
        > defection of the RPCNA, one of their ministers along with some other
        > Church Officers protested this defection. When there was no desire
        > on the part of the Synod to repent of their Covenant breaking, they
        > left the RPCNA to continue the faithful Covenanted Church and formed
        > the Reformed Presbytery of North America (RPNA). The leading person
        > was David Steele. These officers sought to maintain the Covenanted
        > Testimony and to continue to uphold the Covenanted Reformation
        > against all defection and back-sliding.
        >
        > So, when the Puritan Reformed Church in Edmonton rediscovered
        > these Covenanted truths and decided to adopt them and thereby return
        > to the faithful paths of true Biblical Presbyterianism they repented
        > of their participation as a Church of being part of the schism of
        > the Revolution Church/Settlement and of having backslidden from the
        > Covenanted Second Reformation (1638-1649) and having adopted
        > doctrines contrary to the Covenanted Second Reformation Church.
        > Many decried them and wrote extensive papers against these Elders
        > and were named "Steelites" by their opponents for being followers of
        > David Steele. Many attributing the doctrinal distinctives as novel
        > and made up by David Steele. Only a very few of our opponents
        > recognize that we are Camerionian Covenanters, i.e. those who hold
        > still that the Solemn League and Covenant is binding upon the UK,
        > USA, Canada, and Australia (all of these being offspring of UK and
        > since the Solemn League & Covenant bound all of her posterity, so
        > then these nations are so bound). I have all of this (the Standards
        > of Westminster) translated into Spanish: www.espanol.albanycrpc.org
        >
        > I am a member of the RPNA and live in Albany NY. Our doctrine is
        > NOT new as even a brief glance of history pre-1700's will most
        > readily demonstrate. The main problem in Presbyterianism today is
        > the rampant mindset of American pluralism and toleration of other
        > religions. This is most visible in the revision of the Westminster
        > Standards in 1782, of ch. 23. In there it is not Presbyterianism
        > that is of divine right and to be the only recognized Church form of
        > government in the Country nor the Westminster doctrines either, per
        > se. Instead the new revision states that the government will
        > acknowledge ALL Christian denominations and protect them all. Now
        > the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, the Presbyterian Church in
        > America, and another (I cannot recall which) are the larger of the
        > Presbyterian Churches that hold to this. Most of the smaller
        > Presbyterian churches do not, including the RPNA, RPCNA, the PRC,
        > and other smaller ones. Although they are all offspring of the
        > Revolution Church (Except the RPCNA & RPNA).
        >
        > The RPNA seeks to promote unity in the body of Christ WITHOUT
        > compromising the Covenanted Reformation Attainments of 1638-1649.
        > The Church of then achieved a Covenanted Uniformity of religion
        > wherein all in the 3 kingdoms were of One Doctrine, One Worship, One
        > Government, and One Discipline and based on the Solemn League and
        > Covenant, which Covenant was in keeping with the Holy Scriptures.
        > Sure not ALL in the UK did join in this unity, but it was the brief
        > reality and fulfillment of John 17. This Covenant was promoted and
        > upheld by all the Westminster Divines, including the Scottish
        > Comissioners: Alexander Henderson, George Gillespie, Samuel
        > Rutherford & etc. One of the English Covenanters that is well
        > known, Christopher Love died in prison under Oliver Cromwell,
        > because he refused to renounce the Covenant. The King was about to
        > martyr Samuel Rutherford for the same, but God took him a few days
        > before the King could kill him.
        >
        > It is a hard stand for us to be separated from our brethren at
        > this time, but we believe, as did the Covenanters of old that
        > loyalty to God and His Truth is to be valued and upheld above calls
        > to compromise for the sake of a shaky and covenant breaking unity
        > NOT based on that maintaince of Truth, even if it means a low-
        > intensity persecution or ridiculing on the part of fellow brethren.
        > The Covenanters during the "Killing Times" suffered more from fellow
        > Indulged Presbyterians than by the ravenous King and his murderous
        > soldiers.
        >
        > Below are links to historical works written by ministers. The
        > first two are written by ministers of the Reformed Presbyterian
        > Church of Scotland, the sister church to the RPCNA, back in the
        > 1800's. The first is brief summary of the history and rise of the
        > Reformed Presbyterians (another term used to describe Covenanters)
        > and the second outlines the reality of the Revolution Settlement and
        > what it brought about. The third is a work written by Covenanters
        > in 1806 and what they stood for and why they remained separate (you
        > will find that what the RPNA holds to today is exactly what they did
        > in 1806 and this PRE-DATES David Steele). The last one is the
        > official history from the beginning of the First Reformation up to
        > and including the founding of the RPNA under David Steele. It is
        > one of the Covenanter's Standards today (I plan to translate this
        > late next year or early 2007, if the Lord wills and gives me the
        > ability).
        >
        > http://www.covenanter.org/RPScotland/Principles/lecture1.htm
        >
        > http://www.covenanter.org/RPScotland/Principles/lecture4.htm
        >
        > www.covenanter.org/RefPres/shortaccount.htm
        >
        > www.gutenberg.org/dirs/1/3/2/0/13200/13200.txt
        >
        > Now there is another Covenanter group, which the Moderador of this e-
        > group belongs too, but they do not have any Church Officers,
        > although we in the RPNA love these brethren very dearly and we are
        > friends. Gerry (the Moderator), I count as a friend and fellow
        > upholder of the Covenanter Testimony. Why were are not together, I
        > rather not touch that here, now. Suffice it to say we are a lot
        > closer than many think, IMO. I thought I would just mention that
        > however, to be fair that the RPNA are not the only Camerionian
        > Covenanters still around.
        >
        > I know that my post will generate many upset posts and make re-
        > stir debates long debated on this e-group once again. That seems to
        > be the legacy of the schism of the Revolution Church that plagues
        > the Covenanted Church of Scotland BIBLICALLY established and
        > promoted by faithful General Assemblies between 1638-1649, to this
        > day. Not until the decendents of the Revolution Church recognize
        > their continuing schism and covenant-breaking from the lawfully and
        > faithfully established Church, established upon Biblical examples of
        > true Covenanted Reformation, and repent of it and rejoin the
        > Covenanted Church of Scotland, as we of the RPNA have, will the
        > debate end.
        >
        > I hope that aids to answer your question. I am sure many more
        > will arise, however.
        >
        > Hermano, lo siento sí se oye duro mi carta, pero la Verdad sigue
        > siendo atacado, y soy firme en mantenerlo. Por otro tema, ¿conoce
        > Ud a Ismael Nova? Se comunicó conmigo, pero su correo electrónico
        > no fue aceptado cuando le conteste. Sí lo conoce, porque es de
        > Colombia y mencionó que es de una iglesia Presbiteriana pequeña,
        > como Ud lo mencionó, ¿favor de decirle que me escriba de nuevo?
        > También me encantaría tener díagolo con Ud y otros hermanos de
        > Colombia. He aquí mí correo personal: PuritanPresbyterian@y...
        >
        > No offense brethren, I am bilingual and always speak both
        > languages. I do not believe in American assimilation nor in keeping
        > my language and culture in my house alone and private. I reject
        > that part of the Right Wing rubbish (to put it mildly) that comes
        > across the talk radio and by other American Nationalists (and I was
        > a U.S. Marine for 8 yrs), I know who were the first immigrants here,
        > pilgrims.
        > Assimilation, HAH!!!
        >
        >
        > Yours in Christ Jesus,
        > in whom this Darwinian
        > separation of peoples
        > is null and void,
        >
        > Edgar Ibarra
        > Communicant Member
        > Reformed Presbytery of North America
        > Albany, New York
        >
        >
        > --- In
        > covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "theophilus_murray"
        > <theophilus_murray@y...> wrote:
        > >
        > > Hello, I am new here. I am from Colombia and I belong to a
        > > Presbyterian Church in my country.
        > >
        > > I would like to know what is the different between the Steelites
        > and
        > > the other covenanters?
        > >
        > > Thanks.
        > >
        >
      • Whit
        Charles II as King of Ireland? Jumping Jehosaphat! Charles II is nothing more than a Ursurper both regarding the Covenanted Reformation (after he broke the
        Message 3 of 11 , Nov 10 2:53 PM
          Charles II as King of Ireland? Jumping Jehosaphat! Charles II is
          nothing more than a Ursurper both regarding the Covenanted
          Reformation (after he broke the Covenants) and Ireland. I long for
          the day of a re-united Ireland (i.e, re-united under the Covenants)
          and a re-united Three Kingdoms.

          Whit

          --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Edgar A. Ibarra
          Jr." <puritanpresbyterian@y...> wrote:
          >
          > ¡Bienvienido Hermano!
          >
          > The term "Steelites" was given to the Covenanters that continue
          > to adhere to the entire Second Reformation of 1638-1649 (inclusive)
          > and to the faithful Covenanters during the "Killing Times" of 1660-
          > 1688, of today. The few Covenanters that were left at the
          > Revolution of King William of Orange, refused to join the re-
          > established Church of Scotland, since it was re-established on the
          > King's terms and not on the terms of the Church. In 1650, when
          King
          > Charles II assumed the throne to Scotland, England, & Ireland, he
          > swore that he would uphold the Solemn League and Covenant and that
          > he would punish any who sought to overturn it. His taking the
          > throne to be King was dependant upon his faithfulness to the Solemn
          > League and Covenant. He swore that he would maintain it and to
          > break it meant he no longer could sit as King. Well, he broke it
          > and unleashed a brutal persecution against any that stood in his
          > way. King James II, his Papist brother, continued it. Richard
          > Cameron and other faithful Covenanters resisted the King and
          > continued to worship God as He had commanded and refused to go
          along
          > with the King's usurpation. The civil magistrates became ruthless
          > tyrants and used all means necessary (torturing the laypeople,
          taxes
          > (also known as the cess), confiscation of property, imprisonment,
          > rape of women, and murder) to hunt down and kill the ministers of
          > Christ that still held the Covenants. King Charles passed the Acts
          > Recissory stating that the Covenants were "seditious, treasonable,
          > and against his crown, the very covenant he had sworn to uphold,
          the
          > very covenant that defined him as a lawful civil magistrate and
          > allowed him to be lawfully on the throne. At the Revolution
          > Settlement, King William did not rescind the Acts Recessiory and he
          > set up the Church of Scotland on his terms. Only the Westminster
          > Confession of Faith was allowed to be the standard of the church
          > without allowance of the others. When he and parliament (most of
          > who were part of the persecution) had laid out how the Church of
          > Scotland was to be restored, he called a GA the following year and
          > told them how they were to be structured.
          >
          > The few remaining Covenanters protested and would not join the
          > vast majority of already sold out/indulged ministers (these were
          > those that made compromises to King Charles & King James to spare
          > their lives, in exchange they had to submit to the Bishops and
          state
          > that the Covenants were treasonable and they held no allegiance to
          > them, among other things). When 3 ministers from the Covenanters
          > tried to persuade the other ministers to press the King to rescind
          > the Acts Recissory and renew the Solemn League and Covenant and
          make
          > the Standards the charter of the Church as it was during 1638-1649,
          > the 3 were rebuked and scolded. The 3 submitted and joined the
          > Revolution Church and the most prolonged division in Presbyterian
          > history began. That being the Covenanters, that remained faithful
          > to the Church of Scotland and the Westminster Standards of 1638-
          1649
          > vs. the Revolution Church, which was a brand new Presbyterian
          church
          > with her own new constitution and charter.
          >
          > All but two Presbyterian churches in the United States descend
          > from this Revolution Settlement Church (In Europe it is a similar
          > situation). The two that do not are the Reformed Presbyterian
          > Church of North America (RPCNA) and the Reformed Presbytery of
          North
          > America (RPNA).
          >
          > Here is where we get to the heart of your question. The RPCNA
          > held to the Covenanters' testimony until they changed their
          > constitution in the mid-1800's and no longer held that the Solemn
          > League & Covenant was binding upon the United States of America,
          > although I am not sure if they still believe it is on the United
          > Kingdom. They also adopted other items that were contrary to the
          > Standards of Westminster and further broke their Covenanted oath.
          > They continue to believe in the ordinance of Covenanting, so
          > therefore they call themselves Covenanters because of that, but
          they
          > do not hold to what the original Covenanters held to. During this
          > defection of the RPCNA, one of their ministers along with some
          other
          > Church Officers protested this defection. When there was no desire
          > on the part of the Synod to repent of their Covenant breaking, they
          > left the RPCNA to continue the faithful Covenanted Church and
          formed
          > the Reformed Presbytery of North America (RPNA). The leading
          person
          > was David Steele. These officers sought to maintain the Covenanted
          > Testimony and to continue to uphold the Covenanted Reformation
          > against all defection and back-sliding.
          >
          > So, when the Puritan Reformed Church in Edmonton rediscovered
          > these Covenanted truths and decided to adopt them and thereby
          return
          > to the faithful paths of true Biblical Presbyterianism they
          repented
          > of their participation as a Church of being part of the schism of
          > the Revolution Church/Settlement and of having backslidden from the
          > Covenanted Second Reformation (1638-1649) and having adopted
          > doctrines contrary to the Covenanted Second Reformation Church.
          > Many decried them and wrote extensive papers against these Elders
          > and were named "Steelites" by their opponents for being followers
          of
          > David Steele. Many attributing the doctrinal distinctives as novel
          > and made up by David Steele. Only a very few of our opponents
          > recognize that we are Camerionian Covenanters, i.e. those who hold
          > still that the Solemn League and Covenant is binding upon the UK,
          > USA, Canada, and Australia (all of these being offspring of UK and
          > since the Solemn League & Covenant bound all of her posterity, so
          > then these nations are so bound). I have all of this (the
          Standards
          > of Westminster) translated into Spanish: www.espanol.albanycrpc.org
          >
          > I am a member of the RPNA and live in Albany NY. Our doctrine is
          > NOT new as even a brief glance of history pre-1700's will most
          > readily demonstrate. The main problem in Presbyterianism today is
          > the rampant mindset of American pluralism and toleration of other
          > religions. This is most visible in the revision of the Westminster
          > Standards in 1782, of ch. 23. In there it is not Presbyterianism
          > that is of divine right and to be the only recognized Church form
          of
          > government in the Country nor the Westminster doctrines either, per
          > se. Instead the new revision states that the government will
          > acknowledge ALL Christian denominations and protect them all. Now
          > the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, the Presbyterian Church in
          > America, and another (I cannot recall which) are the larger of the
          > Presbyterian Churches that hold to this. Most of the smaller
          > Presbyterian churches do not, including the RPNA, RPCNA, the PRC,
          > and other smaller ones. Although they are all offspring of the
          > Revolution Church (Except the RPCNA & RPNA).
          >
          > The RPNA seeks to promote unity in the body of Christ WITHOUT
          > compromising the Covenanted Reformation Attainments of 1638-1649.
          > The Church of then achieved a Covenanted Uniformity of religion
          > wherein all in the 3 kingdoms were of One Doctrine, One Worship,
          One
          > Government, and One Discipline and based on the Solemn League and
          > Covenant, which Covenant was in keeping with the Holy Scriptures.
          > Sure not ALL in the UK did join in this unity, but it was the brief
          > reality and fulfillment of John 17. This Covenant was promoted and
          > upheld by all the Westminster Divines, including the Scottish
          > Comissioners: Alexander Henderson, George Gillespie, Samuel
          > Rutherford & etc. One of the English Covenanters that is well
          > known, Christopher Love died in prison under Oliver Cromwell,
          > because he refused to renounce the Covenant. The King was about to
          > martyr Samuel Rutherford for the same, but God took him a few days
          > before the King could kill him.
          >
          > It is a hard stand for us to be separated from our brethren at
          > this time, but we believe, as did the Covenanters of old that
          > loyalty to God and His Truth is to be valued and upheld above calls
          > to compromise for the sake of a shaky and covenant breaking unity
          > NOT based on that maintaince of Truth, even if it means a low-
          > intensity persecution or ridiculing on the part of fellow
          brethren.
          > The Covenanters during the "Killing Times" suffered more from
          fellow
          > Indulged Presbyterians than by the ravenous King and his murderous
          > soldiers.
          >
          > Below are links to historical works written by ministers. The
          > first two are written by ministers of the Reformed Presbyterian
          > Church of Scotland, the sister church to the RPCNA, back in the
          > 1800's. The first is brief summary of the history and rise of the
          > Reformed Presbyterians (another term used to describe Covenanters)
          > and the second outlines the reality of the Revolution Settlement
          and
          > what it brought about. The third is a work written by Covenanters
          > in 1806 and what they stood for and why they remained separate (you
          > will find that what the RPNA holds to today is exactly what they
          did
          > in 1806 and this PRE-DATES David Steele). The last one is the
          > official history from the beginning of the First Reformation up to
          > and including the founding of the RPNA under David Steele. It is
          > one of the Covenanter's Standards today (I plan to translate this
          > late next year or early 2007, if the Lord wills and gives me the
          > ability).
          >
          > http://www.covenanter.org/RPScotland/Principles/lecture1.htm
          >
          > http://www.covenanter.org/RPScotland/Principles/lecture4.htm
          >
          > www.covenanter.org/RefPres/shortaccount.htm
          >
          > www.gutenberg.org/dirs/1/3/2/0/13200/13200.txt
          >
          > Now there is another Covenanter group, which the Moderador of this
          e-
          > group belongs too, but they do not have any Church Officers,
          > although we in the RPNA love these brethren very dearly and we are
          > friends. Gerry (the Moderator), I count as a friend and fellow
          > upholder of the Covenanter Testimony. Why were are not together, I
          > rather not touch that here, now. Suffice it to say we are a lot
          > closer than many think, IMO. I thought I would just mention that
          > however, to be fair that the RPNA are not the only Camerionian
          > Covenanters still around.
          >
          > I know that my post will generate many upset posts and make re-
          > stir debates long debated on this e-group once again. That seems
          to
          > be the legacy of the schism of the Revolution Church that plagues
          > the Covenanted Church of Scotland BIBLICALLY established and
          > promoted by faithful General Assemblies between 1638-1649, to this
          > day. Not until the decendents of the Revolution Church recognize
          > their continuing schism and covenant-breaking from the lawfully and
          > faithfully established Church, established upon Biblical examples
          of
          > true Covenanted Reformation, and repent of it and rejoin the
          > Covenanted Church of Scotland, as we of the RPNA have, will the
          > debate end.
          >
          > I hope that aids to answer your question. I am sure many more
          > will arise, however.
          >
          > Hermano, lo siento sí se oye duro mi carta, pero la Verdad sigue
          > siendo atacado, y soy firme en mantenerlo. Por otro tema, ¿conoce
          > Ud a Ismael Nova? Se comunicó conmigo, pero su correo electrónico
          > no fue aceptado cuando le conteste. Sí lo conoce, porque es de
          > Colombia y mencionó que es de una iglesia Presbiteriana pequeña,
          > como Ud lo mencionó, ¿favor de decirle que me escriba de nuevo?
          > También me encantaría tener díagolo con Ud y otros hermanos de
          > Colombia. He aquí mí correo personal: PuritanPresbyterian@y...
          >
          > No offense brethren, I am bilingual and always speak both
          > languages. I do not believe in American assimilation nor in keeping
          > my language and culture in my house alone and private. I reject
          > that part of the Right Wing rubbish (to put it mildly) that comes
          > across the talk radio and by other American Nationalists (and I was
          > a U.S. Marine for 8 yrs), I know who were the first immigrants
          here,
          > pilgrims.
          > Assimilation, HAH!!!
          >
          >
          > Yours in Christ Jesus,
          > in whom this Darwinian
          > separation of peoples
          > is null and void,
          >
          > Edgar Ibarra
          > Communicant Member
          > Reformed Presbytery of North America
          > Albany, New York
          >
          >
          > --- In
          > covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "theophilus_murray"
          > <theophilus_murray@y...> wrote:
          > >
          > > Hello, I am new here. I am from Colombia and I belong to a
          > > Presbyterian Church in my country.
          > >
          > > I would like to know what is the different between the Steelites
          > and
          > > the other covenanters?
          > >
          > > Thanks.
          > >
          >
        • Whit
          ... Presbyterians of his day to John Knox, also the author of the History of the Reformation in Spain. Where can I purchase that book? SWRB? I have always
          Message 4 of 11 , Nov 10 3:03 PM
            > First Thomas M'Crie, the church biographer that re-introduced the
            Presbyterians of his day to John Knox, also the author of the History
            of the Reformation in Spain.

            Where can I purchase that book? SWRB? I have always wanted to read
            about Spain's relation to the reforming Church. (I was there last year
            and could not find any good Covenanter church or society. Hence, I
            elected for private worship and didn't attend church that Sunday.)

            Whit
          • Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
            Whit, SWRB and other stores as well. Try a Google search to get the best price. No Covenanters in Spain, the Protestant Reformation was totally squashed and
            Message 5 of 11 , Nov 10 3:24 PM
              Whit,

              SWRB and other stores as well. Try a Google search to get the best
              price.

              No Covenanters in Spain, the Protestant Reformation was totally
              squashed and short-lived. Protestantism is slowly coming into Spain,
              but mostly the Charismatics & Baptists. There is a small Prebyterian
              church there.

              Thanks,

              Edgar

              --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Whit"
              <covie_pres.1646@v...> wrote:
              >
              > > First Thomas M'Crie, the church biographer that re-introduced the
              > Presbyterians of his day to John Knox, also the author of the
              History
              > of the Reformation in Spain.
              >
              > Where can I purchase that book? SWRB? I have always wanted to read
              > about Spain's relation to the reforming Church. (I was there last
              year
              > and could not find any good Covenanter church or society. Hence, I
              > elected for private worship and didn't attend church that Sunday.)
              >
              > Whit
              >
            • Fred blahous
              G day Edgar! Yes, Spain was the home of the Vatican Inquisition and invented the Iron Maiden. Unfortunately for reformers there, Ferdinand and Isabella
              Message 6 of 11 , Nov 12 8:21 AM
                G'day Edgar!

                Yes, Spain was the home of the Vatican Inquisition and invented the
                Iron Maiden. Unfortunately for reformers there, Ferdinand and
                Isabella happened to be on the throne, and they were mad on
                uniformity in worship of the beast. Also in torturing Indians and
                extracting gold under the fictitious "Donation". Americans fought
                various wars against Spain, under the crown of London and later
                under the presidents, because of the brutal history towards the
                natives.

                Chris Columbus was the pirate "buccaneer" who made it all possible
                for the Castillians to claim the New World and even threaten the
                throne of Elizabeth, and yet Americans actually have a "holiday" to
                celebrate the man they fought against. Weird! At least the former
                Spanish and Portugese lands know better.

                What a pity their never was a reformation in Spain, Austria, or
                Italy. It would have been great to see Charles V side with Luther
                and claim all of Central Europe, the Balkans, Germania, Borgia lands
                and Castillian lands from the Popes and Ottomans. Rome would have
                been totally surrounded, and cut off from France and Poland. Oh
                well. Maybe next time!

                Towards a Covenanted Presbyterian Re-unified Western Church.
                Fred.

                --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Edgar A. Ibarra
                Jr." <puritanpresbyterian@y...> wrote:
                >
                > Whit,
                >
                > SWRB and other stores as well. Try a Google search to get the
                best
                > price.
                >
                > No Covenanters in Spain, the Protestant Reformation was totally
                > squashed and short-lived. Protestantism is slowly coming into
                Spain,
                > but mostly the Charismatics & Baptists. There is a small
                Prebyterian
                > church there.
                >
                > Thanks,
                >
                > Edgar
                >
                > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Whit"
                > <covie_pres.1646@v...> wrote:
                > >
                > > > First Thomas M'Crie, the church biographer that re-introduced
                the
                > > Presbyterians of his day to John Knox, also the author of the
                > History
                > > of the Reformation in Spain.
                > >
                > > Where can I purchase that book? SWRB? I have always wanted to
                read
                > > about Spain's relation to the reforming Church. (I was there
                last
                > year
                > > and could not find any good Covenanter church or society.
                Hence, I
                > > elected for private worship and didn't attend church that
                Sunday.)
                > >
                > > Whit
                > >
                >
              • Fred blahous
                Not likely to happen unless there is a major revival in the Southern lands. I just don t see Mad Dog Adair and Gerry Adams allowing anyone to live in peace
                Message 7 of 11 , Nov 12 8:31 AM
                  Not likely to happen unless there is a major revival in the Southern
                  lands. I just don't see "Mad Dog" Adair and Gerry Adams allowing
                  anyone to live in peace if they can help it. I wish they would both
                  follow the example of Bobby Sands and go on hungar strike. I don't
                  think either would be missed.

                  --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Whit"
                  <covie_pres.1646@v...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Charles II as King of Ireland? Jumping Jehosaphat! Charles II is
                  > nothing more than a Ursurper both regarding the Covenanted
                  > Reformation (after he broke the Covenants) and Ireland. I long
                  for
                  > the day of a re-united Ireland (i.e, re-united under the
                  Covenants)
                  > and a re-united Three Kingdoms.
                  >
                  > Whit
                  >
                  > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Edgar A. Ibarra
                  > Jr." <puritanpresbyterian@y...> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > ¡Bienvienido Hermano!
                  > >
                  > > The term "Steelites" was given to the Covenanters that
                  continue
                  > > to adhere to the entire Second Reformation of 1638-1649
                  (inclusive)
                  > > and to the faithful Covenanters during the "Killing Times" of
                  1660-
                  > > 1688, of today. The few Covenanters that were left at the
                  > > Revolution of King William of Orange, refused to join the re-
                  > > established Church of Scotland, since it was re-established on
                  the
                  > > King's terms and not on the terms of the Church. In 1650, when
                  > King
                  > > Charles II assumed the throne to Scotland, England, & Ireland,
                  he
                  > > swore that he would uphold the Solemn League and Covenant and
                  that
                  > > he would punish any who sought to overturn it. His taking the
                  > > throne to be King was dependant upon his faithfulness to the
                  Solemn
                  > > League and Covenant. He swore that he would maintain it and to
                  > > break it meant he no longer could sit as King. Well, he broke
                  it
                  > > and unleashed a brutal persecution against any that stood in his
                  > > way. King James II, his Papist brother, continued it. Richard
                  > > Cameron and other faithful Covenanters resisted the King and
                  > > continued to worship God as He had commanded and refused to go
                  > along
                  > > with the King's usurpation. The civil magistrates became
                  ruthless
                  > > tyrants and used all means necessary (torturing the laypeople,
                  > taxes
                  > > (also known as the cess), confiscation of property,
                  imprisonment,
                  > > rape of women, and murder) to hunt down and kill the ministers
                  of
                  > > Christ that still held the Covenants. King Charles passed the
                  Acts
                  > > Recissory stating that the Covenants were "seditious,
                  treasonable,
                  > > and against his crown, the very covenant he had sworn to uphold,
                  > the
                  > > very covenant that defined him as a lawful civil magistrate and
                  > > allowed him to be lawfully on the throne. At the Revolution
                  > > Settlement, King William did not rescind the Acts Recessiory and
                  he
                  > > set up the Church of Scotland on his terms. Only the
                  Westminster
                  > > Confession of Faith was allowed to be the standard of the church
                  > > without allowance of the others. When he and parliament (most
                  of
                  > > who were part of the persecution) had laid out how the Church of
                  > > Scotland was to be restored, he called a GA the following year
                  and
                  > > told them how they were to be structured.
                  > >
                  > > The few remaining Covenanters protested and would not join
                  the
                  > > vast majority of already sold out/indulged ministers (these were
                  > > those that made compromises to King Charles & King James to
                  spare
                  > > their lives, in exchange they had to submit to the Bishops and
                  > state
                  > > that the Covenants were treasonable and they held no allegiance
                  to
                  > > them, among other things). When 3 ministers from the
                  Covenanters
                  > > tried to persuade the other ministers to press the King to
                  rescind
                  > > the Acts Recissory and renew the Solemn League and Covenant and
                  > make
                  > > the Standards the charter of the Church as it was during 1638-
                  1649,
                  > > the 3 were rebuked and scolded. The 3 submitted and joined the
                  > > Revolution Church and the most prolonged division in
                  Presbyterian
                  > > history began. That being the Covenanters, that remained
                  faithful
                  > > to the Church of Scotland and the Westminster Standards of 1638-
                  > 1649
                  > > vs. the Revolution Church, which was a brand new Presbyterian
                  > church
                  > > with her own new constitution and charter.
                  > >
                  > > All but two Presbyterian churches in the United States
                  descend
                  > > from this Revolution Settlement Church (In Europe it is a
                  similar
                  > > situation). The two that do not are the Reformed Presbyterian
                  > > Church of North America (RPCNA) and the Reformed Presbytery of
                  > North
                  > > America (RPNA).
                  > >
                  > > Here is where we get to the heart of your question. The
                  RPCNA
                  > > held to the Covenanters' testimony until they changed their
                  > > constitution in the mid-1800's and no longer held that the
                  Solemn
                  > > League & Covenant was binding upon the United States of America,
                  > > although I am not sure if they still believe it is on the United
                  > > Kingdom. They also adopted other items that were contrary to
                  the
                  > > Standards of Westminster and further broke their Covenanted
                  oath.
                  > > They continue to believe in the ordinance of Covenanting, so
                  > > therefore they call themselves Covenanters because of that, but
                  > they
                  > > do not hold to what the original Covenanters held to. During
                  this
                  > > defection of the RPCNA, one of their ministers along with some
                  > other
                  > > Church Officers protested this defection. When there was no
                  desire
                  > > on the part of the Synod to repent of their Covenant breaking,
                  they
                  > > left the RPCNA to continue the faithful Covenanted Church and
                  > formed
                  > > the Reformed Presbytery of North America (RPNA). The leading
                  > person
                  > > was David Steele. These officers sought to maintain the
                  Covenanted
                  > > Testimony and to continue to uphold the Covenanted Reformation
                  > > against all defection and back-sliding.
                  > >
                  > > So, when the Puritan Reformed Church in Edmonton rediscovered
                  > > these Covenanted truths and decided to adopt them and thereby
                  > return
                  > > to the faithful paths of true Biblical Presbyterianism they
                  > repented
                  > > of their participation as a Church of being part of the schism
                  of
                  > > the Revolution Church/Settlement and of having backslidden from
                  the
                  > > Covenanted Second Reformation (1638-1649) and having adopted
                  > > doctrines contrary to the Covenanted Second Reformation Church.
                  > > Many decried them and wrote extensive papers against these
                  Elders
                  > > and were named "Steelites" by their opponents for being
                  followers
                  > of
                  > > David Steele. Many attributing the doctrinal distinctives as
                  novel
                  > > and made up by David Steele. Only a very few of our opponents
                  > > recognize that we are Camerionian Covenanters, i.e. those who
                  hold
                  > > still that the Solemn League and Covenant is binding upon the
                  UK,
                  > > USA, Canada, and Australia (all of these being offspring of UK
                  and
                  > > since the Solemn League & Covenant bound all of her posterity,
                  so
                  > > then these nations are so bound). I have all of this (the
                  > Standards
                  > > of Westminster) translated into Spanish:
                  www.espanol.albanycrpc.org
                  > >
                  > > I am a member of the RPNA and live in Albany NY. Our doctrine
                  is
                  > > NOT new as even a brief glance of history pre-1700's will most
                  > > readily demonstrate. The main problem in Presbyterianism today
                  is
                  > > the rampant mindset of American pluralism and toleration of
                  other
                  > > religions. This is most visible in the revision of the
                  Westminster
                  > > Standards in 1782, of ch. 23. In there it is not
                  Presbyterianism
                  > > that is of divine right and to be the only recognized Church
                  form
                  > of
                  > > government in the Country nor the Westminster doctrines either,
                  per
                  > > se. Instead the new revision states that the government will
                  > > acknowledge ALL Christian denominations and protect them all.
                  Now
                  > > the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, the Presbyterian Church in
                  > > America, and another (I cannot recall which) are the larger of
                  the
                  > > Presbyterian Churches that hold to this. Most of the smaller
                  > > Presbyterian churches do not, including the RPNA, RPCNA, the
                  PRC,
                  > > and other smaller ones. Although they are all offspring of the
                  > > Revolution Church (Except the RPCNA & RPNA).
                  > >
                  > > The RPNA seeks to promote unity in the body of Christ WITHOUT
                  > > compromising the Covenanted Reformation Attainments of 1638-
                  1649.
                  > > The Church of then achieved a Covenanted Uniformity of religion
                  > > wherein all in the 3 kingdoms were of One Doctrine, One Worship,
                  > One
                  > > Government, and One Discipline and based on the Solemn League
                  and
                  > > Covenant, which Covenant was in keeping with the Holy
                  Scriptures.
                  > > Sure not ALL in the UK did join in this unity, but it was the
                  brief
                  > > reality and fulfillment of John 17. This Covenant was promoted
                  and
                  > > upheld by all the Westminster Divines, including the Scottish
                  > > Comissioners: Alexander Henderson, George Gillespie, Samuel
                  > > Rutherford & etc. One of the English Covenanters that is well
                  > > known, Christopher Love died in prison under Oliver Cromwell,
                  > > because he refused to renounce the Covenant. The King was about
                  to
                  > > martyr Samuel Rutherford for the same, but God took him a few
                  days
                  > > before the King could kill him.
                  > >
                  > > It is a hard stand for us to be separated from our brethren
                  at
                  > > this time, but we believe, as did the Covenanters of old that
                  > > loyalty to God and His Truth is to be valued and upheld above
                  calls
                  > > to compromise for the sake of a shaky and covenant breaking
                  unity
                  > > NOT based on that maintaince of Truth, even if it means a low-
                  > > intensity persecution or ridiculing on the part of fellow
                  > brethren.
                  > > The Covenanters during the "Killing Times" suffered more from
                  > fellow
                  > > Indulged Presbyterians than by the ravenous King and his
                  murderous
                  > > soldiers.
                  > >
                  > > Below are links to historical works written by ministers.
                  The
                  > > first two are written by ministers of the Reformed Presbyterian
                  > > Church of Scotland, the sister church to the RPCNA, back in the
                  > > 1800's. The first is brief summary of the history and rise of
                  the
                  > > Reformed Presbyterians (another term used to describe
                  Covenanters)
                  > > and the second outlines the reality of the Revolution Settlement
                  > and
                  > > what it brought about. The third is a work written by
                  Covenanters
                  > > in 1806 and what they stood for and why they remained separate
                  (you
                  > > will find that what the RPNA holds to today is exactly what they
                  > did
                  > > in 1806 and this PRE-DATES David Steele). The last one is the
                  > > official history from the beginning of the First Reformation up
                  to
                  > > and including the founding of the RPNA under David Steele. It
                  is
                  > > one of the Covenanter's Standards today (I plan to translate
                  this
                  > > late next year or early 2007, if the Lord wills and gives me the
                  > > ability).
                  > >
                  > > http://www.covenanter.org/RPScotland/Principles/lecture1.htm
                  > >
                  > > http://www.covenanter.org/RPScotland/Principles/lecture4.htm
                  > >
                  > > www.covenanter.org/RefPres/shortaccount.htm
                  > >
                  > > www.gutenberg.org/dirs/1/3/2/0/13200/13200.txt
                  > >
                  > > Now there is another Covenanter group, which the Moderador of
                  this
                  > e-
                  > > group belongs too, but they do not have any Church Officers,
                  > > although we in the RPNA love these brethren very dearly and we
                  are
                  > > friends. Gerry (the Moderator), I count as a friend and fellow
                  > > upholder of the Covenanter Testimony. Why were are not
                  together, I
                  > > rather not touch that here, now. Suffice it to say we are a lot
                  > > closer than many think, IMO. I thought I would just mention
                  that
                  > > however, to be fair that the RPNA are not the only Camerionian
                  > > Covenanters still around.
                  > >
                  > > I know that my post will generate many upset posts and make re-
                  > > stir debates long debated on this e-group once again. That
                  seems
                  > to
                  > > be the legacy of the schism of the Revolution Church that
                  plagues
                  > > the Covenanted Church of Scotland BIBLICALLY established and
                  > > promoted by faithful General Assemblies between 1638-1649, to
                  this
                  > > day. Not until the decendents of the Revolution Church
                  recognize
                  > > their continuing schism and covenant-breaking from the lawfully
                  and
                  > > faithfully established Church, established upon Biblical
                  examples
                  > of
                  > > true Covenanted Reformation, and repent of it and rejoin the
                  > > Covenanted Church of Scotland, as we of the RPNA have, will the
                  > > debate end.
                  > >
                  > > I hope that aids to answer your question. I am sure many
                  more
                  > > will arise, however.
                  > >
                  > > Hermano, lo siento sí se oye duro mi carta, pero la Verdad
                  sigue
                  > > siendo atacado, y soy firme en mantenerlo. Por otro tema,
                  ¿conoce
                  > > Ud a Ismael Nova? Se comunicó conmigo, pero su correo
                  electrónico
                  > > no fue aceptado cuando le conteste. Sí lo conoce, porque es de
                  > > Colombia y mencionó que es de una iglesia Presbiteriana pequeña,
                  > > como Ud lo mencionó, ¿favor de decirle que me escriba de nuevo?
                  > > También me encantaría tener díagolo con Ud y otros hermanos de
                  > > Colombia. He aquí mí correo personal: PuritanPresbyterian@y...
                  > >
                  > > No offense brethren, I am bilingual and always speak both
                  > > languages. I do not believe in American assimilation nor in
                  keeping
                  > > my language and culture in my house alone and private. I reject
                  > > that part of the Right Wing rubbish (to put it mildly) that
                  comes
                  > > across the talk radio and by other American Nationalists (and I
                  was
                  > > a U.S. Marine for 8 yrs), I know who were the first immigrants
                  > here,
                  > > pilgrims.
                  > > Assimilation, HAH!!!
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Yours in Christ Jesus,
                  > > in whom this Darwinian
                  > > separation of peoples
                  > > is null and void,
                  > >
                  > > Edgar Ibarra
                  > > Communicant Member
                  > > Reformed Presbytery of North America
                  > > Albany, New York
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > --- In
                  > > covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "theophilus_murray"
                  > > <theophilus_murray@y...> wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > Hello, I am new here. I am from Colombia and I belong to a
                  > > > Presbyterian Church in my country.
                  > > >
                  > > > I would like to know what is the different between the
                  Steelites
                  > > and
                  > > > the other covenanters?
                  > > >
                  > > > Thanks.
                  > > >
                  > >
                  >
                • berean1993
                  ... Maybe SWRB. See also: How to Find a Book http://members.aol.com/lettermen2/findbook.html and Reformed Publishers Online
                  Message 8 of 11 , Nov 27 2:55 PM
                    --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Whit"
                    <covie_pres.1646@v...> wrote:
                    >
                    > > First Thomas M'Crie, the church biographer that re-introduced the
                    > Presbyterians of his day to John Knox, also the author of the History
                    > of the Reformation in Spain.
                    >
                    > Where can I purchase that book? SWRB?

                    Maybe SWRB.
                    See also:
                    How to Find a Book
                    http://members.aol.com/lettermen2/findbook.html

                    and

                    Reformed Publishers Online
                    http://members.aol.com/lettermen2/refpub.html





                    I have always wanted to read
                    > about Spain's relation to the reforming Church. (I was there last
                    year
                    > and could not find any good Covenanter church or society. Hence, I
                    > elected for private worship and didn't attend church that Sunday.)
                    >
                    > Whit
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.