Who are Steelites?

[ZackF]

I know the heresy goes back to the 19th century from a figure by the name of David Steele. I generally don't ask questions like this but I can't find an answer in the forums or on the web. All I can find are accusations and debates of someone being a "Steelite" or not. I can gather it has to do with separation but that is all.

 

[RamistThomist]

Hard-core Covenanters. I'll PM you.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Calling them hard core covenanters is misleading. It is the view that a church is not a properly, truly, biblically constituted church if it has not formally adopted and sworn to uphold the Solemn League and Covenant (the covenant between Scotland and England which essentially gave the marching orders to the Westminster Assembly). From I guess the late 90s-early 2000s, my old church was the main sparing partner with the modern Steelites since they split from a micro Presbytery all were members of. The main face of the Steelites has and continues to be I think Still Waters Revival Books. All the Steelite material at the old fpcr.org site is gone now since, as is usual with all Separatists, they turned on each other and it was not needed we thought. I have the old material in archive if you "really" want to read more. Some material authored by PB's own Revs. Matthew Winzer and Jerrold Lewis I thought tackled the question of any descending obligation of the covenant pretty well. I can't put my hands on it though. If you search for Steelites and look on older threads you may find links that still may be active; I think the posts were in an old Yahoo Group.

 

[bookslover]

So, aren't the Steelites behind the Puritan hard drive that one sees ads for all over the place and being endorsed by several regular orthodox Presbyterian or Reformed types? I would feel uncomfortable buying it, knowing that I'd be giving money to...well...alleged separatist fanatics.

 

[N. Eshelman]

So, aren't the Steelites behind the Puritan hard drive that one sees ads for all over the place and being endorsed by several regular orthodox Presbyterian or Reformed types? I would feel uncomfortable buying it, knowing that I'd be giving money to...well...alleged separatist fanatics.

Agreed.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Rather than turn this into "shame on them" let's count this sufficient shaming and stick to the subject of the OP. If someone wants to start a counter argument why we should fund separatists and errorists by purchasing their materials, feel free to start a different thread.

So, aren't the Steelites behind the Puritan hard drive that one sees ads for all over the place and being endorsed by several regular orthodox Presbyterian or Reformed types? I would feel uncomfortable buying it, knowing that I'd be giving money to...well...alleged separatist fanatics.

Indeed, the recommendations include some of our own. PURITAN HARD DRIVE REVIEWS - Still Waters Revival Books (and let's not do any favors by linking to them either)

So, aren't the Steelites behind the Puritan hard drive that one sees ads for all over the place and being endorsed by several regular orthodox Presbyterian or Reformed types? I would feel uncomfortable buying it, knowing that I'd be giving money to...well...alleged separatist fanatics.

Agreed.

So, aren't the Steelites behind the Puritan hard drive that one sees ads for all over the place and being endorsed by several regular orthodox Presbyterian or Reformed types? I would feel uncomfortable buying it, knowing that I'd be giving money to...well...alleged separatist fanatics.

 

[MW]

The covenants should be an unifying asset, but Steelites turn them into a divisive liability. They are used for the purpose of unchurching true churches and to set up the Steelites as the only true church.

 

[One Little Nail]

I know the heresy goes back to the 19th century from a figure by the name of David Steele. I generally don't ask questions like this but I can't find an answer in the forums or on the web. All I can find are accusations and debates of someone being a "Steelite" or not. I can gather it has to do with separation but that is all.

Zack there was a debate between James M. Willson, editor of the Covenanter magazine, and David Steele, who's writing appeared in the pages of the Reformed Presbyterian magazine, edited by Moses Roney.
One of the points that David Steele ( from whom the name Steelites comes from, if you haven't guessed already ) had made was that a certain Reformed Presbyterian publication, "Reformation Principles Exhibited" which he believed
"has rejected history and argument from being any part of the judicial testimony of the Reformed Church, and so sapped the foundation of her Covenanted constitution" so basically there was a disagreement among the Covenanters on an interpretation of a Term of Communion namely Term No V. The owning of all the Scriptural Testimonies, and earnest contendings of Christ's faithful witnesses; whether martyrs, under the late persecution, or such as have succeeded them, in maintaining the same cause; and especially of the Judicial Act, Declaration and Testimony, emitted by the Reformed Presbytery.

James M. Willson basically believed, and Rightly so that Steele was in Error, (5.) Here is the writer’s great error. He holds "history" to be "testimony." But how much "history?" We have some sketches of the primitive church. We learn that there was a man called, "Arius," another called "Nestorius," another "Pelagius." Now, is it faith—a divine faith—to believe that such men lived, and held such and such opinions? Must their names, their doctrines, and their lives, be recorded in a "history" prepared by the church, and then, as thus sanctioned, imposed upon every church member as an article of faith? But, we must not stop here. There have been, perhaps, hundreds of heretics of less note, whose names are recorded in voluminous histories. Are we to take them out of the ashes, and then require as a condition of church membership, that all our findings, or rather supposed findings—for much would be very obscure—be received as God’s own truth, just as we receive the inspired histories of Joshua and Kings, &c.? But, still more. What are we to do about the witnesses of the middle ages, and their contendings? Are these to be minutely exhibited? We say "minutely;" for if "history" is "testimony," who dare draw the line, and say, "So much is to be taken, and no more?" Alas for the church, if all this be required of her; if, besides the Bible, which we thought a sufficient rule of faith and guide to the duty and profession of the church, we must know with absolute certainty, every heretic, every heresy, every enemy of the church, against whom she has ever contended, or else live and die without a proper "Testimony."

the debate can be found here Steele's Communications with JM Willson.

a copy of Reformation Principles Exhibited, which Steele disputed, can be found here TrueCovenanter.com: Reformation Principles Exhibited

For Christ's Crown & Covenant.

 

[ZackF]

Thanks for this information. All of you. What an utterly draining subject.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Sad doesn't begin to describe it (speaking of the modern proponents). In the end the only real hurt was to those closest to them, destroying the families and lives of those they loved. Separatists always turn on themselves because they've driven everyone else away. That's the price of admission for going down that road.

 

[Poimen]

Just to add a 'joyful' addendum: I know many former Steelites who are members in the Reformed Presbyterian denomination. I am thankful that God preserved true faith in their midst and that these brothers and sisters are serving the Lord and His people with joy and gladness.