Archive for August, 2015

Why I Do Not and Cannot Vote In the Present State and Nature of Our Nation

August 27, 2015

Elections in this nations are rapidly coming up. As a Covenanter I do not vote. I am a Political Dissenter because of the state and nature of our nation. Why? Here are my Systematic summary run down of why I can’t vote..

1. Civil Government Instituted (Ex. 18)

2. Civil Government Set Up by Four Covenants (Ex. 18; Joshua 24:25; II Kings 11:17; Jeremiah 50:5; II Chronicles 15:15)

3. Qualifications of Magistrates Set by Election (Ex. 18:21; Nehemiah 7:2; 2 Sam. 23:2-3; Deut. 13:1,17; Jer. 30:21)

4. Laws Given to National Israel were a sight (model) for all nations (Deuteronomy 4:6)

5. Those Laws are for ever (Deuteronomy 5:29; Deuteronomy 11:1; Deuteronomy 29:29; Psalm 119:159-160)

6. The Messiah never abrogated these laws and even states emphatically twice that till heaven and earth pass away His laws will stand. (Matthew 5:17-19)

7. Those Laws are established by Him as King and is founded in equality and righteousness (Psalm 99:4)

8. There shall be ONE law for both Israel and the Stranger (Numbers 15:16,29; Lev 24:22; Ex. 12:49)

9. Gentiles Nations were judged for disobedience to that Laws (Genesis 18; Jonah)

10. The Messiah is King Over All the Earth and over All the Nations (Psalm 47:2,3,7,8; Psalm 72:11)

11. Over all is His Dominion and He is King (Psalm 103:19)

12. The Messiah has been given authority over all the judges, rulers and kings of the Earth and they must submit to Him and His laws. (Psalm 2; Psalm 76:12)

13. Believers are required to warn and testify God’s laws before unlawful and wicked kings of nations (Psalm 119:46)

14 Believers are required to warn and testify against those people who obey and walk willingly after usurpers and tyrants (Isaiah 10:1, Hosea 5:11)

15. Wicked rulers are not ordained ministers of God and are not to be recognized as such and are unlawful (Hosea 8:4, Romans 13, Exodus 18)

16. We are commanded not to fellowship with wicked rulers nor work for or in anyway recognize their title as lawful. We are not permitted to take oaths to them in anyway (Is. 8:12, Psalm 94:20-21, 2 Chronicles 19.2, Ephesians 5:11, 2 Corinthians 6:14-15, Jer. 2:28, Psalm 106:35, Hos. 5:13, and 7:8,11)

17. If those kings of the Earth do not qualify or disqualify themselves by performing wickedness then they are not lawful ordain magistrates and must be removed. (Judges 3:12-27; Judges 4:21&22-23; II Chronicles 15:16; I Kings 15:13; II Chronicles 21:10; Hos. 8:4; Luke 20:25; Romans 13)

18. And We are to Pray and Sing that God might remove them as He did as Sisera. With Jabin at the river of Kishon. They perished at En Dor, and were dung for the earth. Make them, even their princes, like Oreb and like Zeeb: yea, all their princes like Zebah and like Zalmunna. (Psalm 83:9-12)

19. Those kings that do not qualify or are disqualified are an abomination. (Proverbs 16:12)

All Authority and All power is given unto the Messiah in heaven and in earth. (Matthew 28) and we are to pray for an Earthly Manifestation of His Kingdom (Matthew 6:10)

A Big problem would be taking an oath to an unlawful and anti-christian government and constitution and thus legitimatizing that government and constitution which is unlawful and sinful in the first place.

And if I vote for someone (that would recognize the government as lawful and legitimate) and they win and they take an Oath to affirm a blasphemous constitution and uphold all the unjust laws in the nation, and not obey God’s law then I become an accomplice in their sin.

“He shall cut off the spirit of princes; he is terrible to the kings of the earth. (Psalm 76:12), Be wise now therefore, ye kings: be learned ye judges of the earth. Serve the Lord in fear, and rejoice in trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish in the way, when his wrath shall suddenly burn. (Psalm 2:10-12), Do thou to them as unto the Midianites: as to Sisera and as to Jabin at the river of Kishon. hey perished at En Dor, and were dung for the earth. Make them, even their princes, like Oreb and like Zeeb: yea, all their princes like Zebah and like Zalmunna, Which have said, Let us take for our possession the habitations of God. (Psalm 83:9-12), For the Lord is high, and terrible; a great King over all the earth. He hath subdued the people under us, and the nations under our feet. (Psalm 47:1-2)

These are my reasons in a systematic summary way.

Let God Arise, and let his Enemies be scattered.


Medieval Scholastics on Exclusive Psalmody and No Musical Instruments in Worship

August 27, 2015

When discussing Exclusive Psalmody and No Musical Instruments in Worship the Early Church and the Reformers always are brought up with skipping the Medieval Scholastics. Now there is good reason for this. That is when much error entered the Church through The Roman Church but there were still orthodox defenders during the time that was trying to fight off the errors that crept in. So I will start with Augustine and the ending of the Early Church Period and into the Middle Ages of the Church.

Nolite cantare, nisi quod legitis esse cantandum. Quod autem non ita Scriptum est ut cantetur, non cantetur. “do not sing but what you read is to be sung, but that which is not written that it should be sung, let it not be sung. -Augustine, First Tome, Third Rule

Augustine, in his confessions (ix., 4), speaking of the Psalms, says, “toto orbe cantanter”—”they are sung through the whole world.”

“Praise the Lord with Harp; sing unto Him with the Psaltery of ten strings, … the name of Christ brought it to pass that harps should be banished out of this place. … Let none turn his heart to instruments …”-Augustine of Hippo

The Council of Laodicea of 367 forbid the use of musical instruments.

The Council of Carthage of 416 addressed the issue and declared, “On the Lord’s Day, let all instruments of music be silenced.”

”Ut extra psalmos vel canoni-carum Scripturarum Novi et Vctcris Tcstamenti nihil podice compositum in ecdesia psallatur.” first Council of Braga, held A. D. 563, no poetic composition be sung in the Church except the Psalms of the sacred canon..

“What a marvelous beauty flows from them [the psalms] into our singing. They rival the sweet-sounding organ with human voices, they render the sound of the trumpet with mighty shouts, they construct a vocal kithara by combining living strings, and whatever instruments seemed to do formerly, now can be witnessed and demonstrated in rational beings.” -Cassiodorus, Expositio psalmorum, (A.D. 485 – 585)

“Our own cantors grasp neither cymbals, nor lyre, nor kithara nor any other kind of musical instrument in their hands, but rather in their hearts. For in so far as the heart is superior to the body, to that extent does what takes place in the heart better manifest devotion to God, than what is done by the body. These very cantors are the trumpet, they are the psalterium, they the kithara, they the tympana, they the chorus, they the strings and the body of the instrument, they the cymbals. Wherefore Augustine said of the last psalm in his book on the psalms. . .” -Amalarius, De ecclesiasticis officiis libri IV (A.D. 780 – 850)

“Our church does not use musical instruments, as harps and psalteries, to praise God withal, that she may not seem to Judaize.” (Thomas Aquinas, Bingham’s Antiquities, Vol. 3, page 137)

A Woman Should always have a Downcast Look and Not Wandering Eyes

August 24, 2015

“And walk with stretched forth neck. First, then, he justly declares pride to be the source of the evil, and points it out by the sign, that is, by their gait; that the women walk with stretched-forth neck For as it is a sign of modesty to have a down-cast look, (as even heathen writers have declared,) so to have excessively holy looks is a sign of insolence; and when a woman lifts up her head it can betoken nothing but pride. … And wandering eyes. What he adds about wandering eyes denotes shameless lust, which for the most part is expressed by the eyes; for unchaste eyes are the heralds of an unchaste heart; but the eyes of chaste women are sedate, and not wandering or unsteady.”

John Calvin, Commentary on Isaiah 3

Uniformity In Religion

August 7, 2015

They say in our culture that diversity is something to be praised. I find it lamentable and unpleasant. No, I do not believe in diversity and do not believe we should pursue it! When it comes to matters of religion (and politics which is nothing more then a subset of religion and doctrine) we should seek the highest uniformity and union. For that is like sweet incense and savor before the Lord. There is nothing so strong then faith and nothing so strong to unite us as unity in religion! They say that Blood is thicker then Water and that may be true but Faith is thicker then Blood and Water combined. It is not boring to be of the same mind. There is a joy and a zeal when two comes together in unity.

The Scriptures say “Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” Amos 3:3


“Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!” Psalm 133:1

It is after all a foretaste of Heaven where we will all be united in Uniformity and Unity in all important matters. And Heaven is not going to be boring.

In matters of all things important, in all things religion we seek uniformity and unity. In worship, in government of the church, in doctrine of the church as well as in the state and in the way God has commanded Magistrates. So important was this once considered that we had a Uniformity of Religion throughout England, Scotland and Ireland and all their colonies with a Directory of Public and Private Worship, A Confession of Faith with Shorter and Larger Catechism, a Form of Church Government, and a bind Solemn League and Covenant with a National Covenant and in the book (Psalms) of what we sing from in Church.

Our Spiritual forefathers did not believe in Diversity of Religion or Politics (a subset of Religion).

The Solemn League and Covenant reads,

“That we shall sincerely, really, and constantly, through the grace of GOD, endeavor, in our several places and callings, the preservation of the reformed religion in the Church of Scotland, in doctrine, worship, discipline, and government, against our common enemies; the reformation of religion in the kingdoms of England and Ireland, in doctrine, worship, discipline, and government, according to the Word of GOD, and the example of the best reformed Churches; and shall endeavour 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 Catechising; that we, and our posterity after us, may, as brethren, live in faith and love, and the Lord may delight to dwell in the midst of us.”

Alexander Henderson, Moderator (elected 3 times) of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland and one of the Commissioners sent to the Westminster Assembly from Scotland said,

“Nothing so powerful to divide the hearts of people as division in religion; nothing so strong to unite them as unity in religion; but the more zeal in one religion the more firm union. In the paradise of nature the diversity of flowers and herbs is pleasant and useful; but in the paradise of the Church different and contrary religions are unpleasant and hurtful. It is therefore to be wished that there were one Confession of Faith, one form of Catechism, one Directory for all the parts of the public worship of God, and for prayer, preaching, administration of sacraments, etc., and one form of Church government, in all the Churches of his majesty’s dominions.” Alexander Henderson

Reformed pastor at Middelburg, Johannes Seu, declare as he urges the local ruler to “do his duty” by enforcing religious uniformity,

“How can there be a quiet and a peaceful life and how can a country flourish if its citizenry is divided by diverse conceptions of religion? There is nothing so baneful for the community as disunity, diversity, and contention in matters religious. Therefore a magistrate must stand guard diligently that false doctrine and heresy are precluded and eliminated, for these are the well-springs of all disunity among the citizens . . . . It is as clear as the noon-day sun that unity achieved by the sword of the magistrate is the one and only beginning, the middle, and the end, of peace and prosperity in the land.” [Quoted in No. 1172 of the Knuttel Collection of Dutch Historical Tracts (Copy in general Library of the University of Michigan).]

Covenanter John Guthrie said, “The Covenant did directly bind all following generations, “that our children after us be found walking in faith and love, that the Lord may dwell among us.” These are the very words of the Covenant. For what end were these words put in? Was it not to bind our posterity, and to keep uniformity and unity, and to bind them to the Word of God? But you will say, ‘there is no mention of the posterity.’ There was no mention of the posterity of Israel, when the people of Israel made that covenant with the Gibeonites, neither was there mention made of the Gibeonites’ posterity; yet you may see the covenant binding upon their posterity.”

Again Alexander Henderson wrote in the Minutes of the Westminster Assembly,

“We had a psalme booke offered to our church made by Lord Sterling, but we would preferre this [Rous’ Psalter] to that, for I have seene it. Well done to revise the booke & if it come to a directory of worship, that there might be uniformity in that in the whole Island….” As quoted in Chad Van Dixhoorn, “Reforming the Reformation: Theological debate at the Westminster Assembly, 1643-1652,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge, 2004, Volume 4 [Appendix B: Minutes of the Westminster Assembly volume 1, Folios 198v-441v (17 November 1643 to 11 April 1644)], page 344.

May we once again see such Uniformity and Unity in Religion. Not some false ecumenicalism but a True Uniformity and where Brethren dwell together in Unity wherein they agree.

And all Private Christians should read and study the Standards of our Faith, they would benefit largely for understanding a clear and systematic conception of the Scriptures for “No Scripture is of Private Interpretation” (2 Peter 1:20), as Robert Shaw once said,

“No private Christian could fail to benefit largely from a deliberate and studious perusal and re-perusal of the [Westminster] Confession of Faith, for the express purpose of obtaining a clear and systematic conception of sacred truth, both as a whole, and with all its parts so arranged as to display their relative importance, and their mutual bearing upon, and illustration of, each other.” — Robert Shaw

It is also true that there is nothing small or trivial in matters of Religion. We must talked about them and discuss them. Everything is open for discussion although not all should be used for division. There are degrees of when we should divide but nothing is to small to discuss or debate. Iron Sharpens Iron.

The great Reformed commentator Matthew Poole said, “What Galen said of Physics is even truer of religion. There is nothing small and trivial in it.”, he continues elsewhere, “God esteems nothing small in his worship and service, and … he expects his will should be observed in the minutest circumstances.”

If they are small matters we still must study them and do them. Nothing is to small or trivial when it comes to what the Triune God commands. As His royal subjects, what He decrees we are to do for we are His servants and “woe to these who break them and teach men so!” (Matthew 5:19) Man cannot dictate to His Maker and God and say, “But why Lord?” or “My God would never command such” or “No, Lord I will not”.

As the Great Puritan Richard Rogers (1551-1618) said, “Sir, I serve Precise God”.

Alexander Craighead: Sower of Sedition “The First American Covenanter Minister”

August 4, 2015

Alexander Craighead: Sower of Sedition “The First American Covenanter Minister”

by Michael Daniels

Alexander Craighead was born in Donegal, Ulster, Ireland in 1705. His schooling and education is not known but was a son and grandson of Presbyterian ministers. He came to America with his father as a young boy and had migrated to Lancaster County Pennsylvania where his father became a Presbyterian minister..

In 1735, Alexander himself was ordained as a minister in the Donegal Presbytery At first he was a New Light Minister and even traveled through Pennsylvania with George Whitfield but slowly and steadily he started to become convince of the binding nature of the Solemn League and Covenant and full subscription to the Westminster Standards of Faith. He started to sympathize with the surrounding Covenanter population of Lancaster County.

Sometimes around 1740-41 Frances Alison complained to the Presbytery that Craighead required parents to accept the Solemn League and Covenant at the baptism of their children. Craighead was suspended by the Presbytery which allowed the matter to come before the Synod of Philadelphia. That in turn led to the division in 1741 when Craighead and others were ejected from the Synod.

After the ejection, he joined the Presbytery of New Brunswick but they refused to except the National and Solemn League and Covenant. He later withdrew from New Brunswick and published the reasons for his withdrawal which was later published by Benjamin Franklin.
His pamphlet on his reasons for withdrawling from the Presbytery can be found here at,

At such a point he joined up with the Cameronian Covenanters where more then 5000 had settled throughout Lancaster County and surround territory. They were without a minister and were organized into lay meetings called societies.

In January of 1742 Alexander Craighead through the publisher Benjamin Franklin published ‘A Discourse Concerning the Covenants, containing the Substance of Two Sermons, preached at Middle-Octorara, Janurary 10, and 17, 1742. Unfortunately, Pages 9-17 are missing and apprently they dealt with to some extent with Civil Government. It also was published by Benjamin Franklin

‘A Discourse Concerning the Covenant’ can be found here,

In May 1743, Thomas Cookson who was an Episcopalian who surveyed for the Pennsylvania proprietaries and a justice of the peace in Lancaster County, presented an anonymous pamphlet that was supposed written by Alexander Craighead to the Synod of Philadelphia in the name of the governor.

They decided unanimously, “That it is full of treason, sedition, and distraction, and grievous, perverting of the sacred oracles to the ruin of all societies and civil government and directly and diametrically opposed to our religious principles, as we have on all occasions openly and publicly declared to the world; and we hereby unanimously, with the greatest sincerity, declare that we detest this paper, and with all principles and practices that tend to destroy the civil or religious rights of mankind, or to foment or encourage sedition of dissatisfaction with the civil government that we are mow under, or rebellion, treason, or anything that is disloyal.”

Alexander Craighead never denied that he wrote it. But the Synod further declared, “And if Mr. Alexander Craighead be the author we know nothing of the matter. And we hereby declare, that he hath been no member of our society for some time past, nor do we acknowledge him as such, though we cannot but heartily lament that any man that was ever called a Presbyterian should be guilty of this paper.”

It is extremely sad and disheartening to see how far Presbyterians such as the Synod of Philadelphia had declensioned so far from their historic views and beliefs. It is also either extremely arrogant or extremely ignorant that they did not know Presbyterian history and that they should say that they “lament that any man that was ever called a Presbyterian should be guilty of this paper.” Clearly they have no read the writings of John Knox or of George and Patrick Gillespie. They have not read the Western Remonstrance or the writings of Richard Cameron and Donald Cargill. James Renwick and many other Scottish Presbyterians.

This paper that was regarded by Thomas Cookson as to be so dangerous that had to be presented to the Synod of Philadelphia late in May of 1743 is completely gone as far as I can tell at the moment. Vanished along with the pages that are missing from his work on a Discourse on the Covenants.

Sadly, according to J.A. Craighead in 1895 that the work in question, “no trace of it remains”.
At this point Alexander Craighead became an Itinerant minister to the surrounding Cameronian Covenanters nearly serving 5000 Covenanters and continued this for 7 years..

On November 11, 1743, Alexander Craighead had gathered a large gathering of Cameronian Covenanter at Middle Octorara where they drew their swords and with uplifting their swords they Renewed the Covenants, National and Solemn League, along with a Confession of Sins, and Engagement to duties. Along with a Testimony. This book was also published by Benjamin Franklin in 1748.

This Renewal of the National and Solemn League and Covenant traces the history of the Scottish Covenants and of their violations by the Stuarts and Hanoverians. In shearing language he renoucned all allegiance to every one of those sovereigns, including George II.

One can only image Craighead himself standing with his Cameronian brethren with naked sword upraised, denouncing them all as covenant breakers. Who, he said, are “ranked by the Spirit of God amonst the viest of sinners.”.

With the swords upraised he spoke of their ancestors who were forced to take up arms against “that cruel tyrant Charles the Second” and continued, “our drawing the Sword, is to testify to the world, that we are one in judgement with them, and that we are to this day willing to maintain the same defensive war in defending our Religion, and ourselves against all opposers thereof, altho the defense of these should cost us our lives or anything that is most dear to us.”

The section called Confession of Sin and the Declaration, Protestation and Testimony are more dramatic,

“We find ourselves under a necessity from the Word of God, and from a true covenanted Reformation and our baptismal vows, to declare a defensive war against all usurpers of the royal prerogative of the glorious Lamb of God … We also declare, that we look upon ourselves as bound both by the Law of God, and the Law of Nature, to endeavour to defend our religious liberties wherewith Christ hath made us free and our bodies and goods, from all kind of false impositions, intrigues, snares, treacherous deceitfulness … with our best skill, power, bodily strength and activity.”

The Declaration laid out the American Covenanters’ duty to separate themselves from the corrupt constitutions of both Church and State and lays out a biblical necessity to declare a defensive war against all usurpers of the Royal prerogative of Christ Jesus.

The entire Renewal of the Covenants of 1743 can be read at,

Such was the firebrand who would come to Sugaw Creek in a few short years.

Late in 1751, Craighead and a number of his parishioners, due to opposition from the government, relocated and settled in Cow Pasture, Augusta County, Virginia And in 1745 Governor Gooch sent a complaint to the Synod of Philadelphia.

There again, he fell foul to the government. Someone presented the Renewal of the Covenants from Octorara to the governor of Virginia inveighing against troublesome folk whose favorite pastime was “railing against our religious establishment- it is not freedom of conscience, but freedom of speech they so earnestly prosecute.” -Minutes of the Synod of Philadelphia, 180

In April, 1747, action was taken against these men and their propagation of their “shocking doctrines.”

The council ordered that a “proclamation forthwith issue requiring all Magistrates and Officers to discourage and prohibite as far as legally they can all Itinerant Preachers … or holding any meeting in this Colony and that all people be injoined to be aiding and assisting to that purpose.” -Executive Journal of the Council of Colonial Virginia, V, 227-228

A year later complaint was made to the council by some vestrymen of Augusta, it was ordered to the justices “Requiring them not to suffer any Dissenters to preach who don’t conform themselves to the directions of the law.” Executive Journal of the Council of Colonial Virginia, V, 249

Apparently, Craighead and other men with him continued to trouble the authorities for in 1750 Governor Gooch ordered that the next Gazette carry the following “No minister do presume to preach in this colony ’til he has appear’d before the Commander in Chief and qualify’d himself according to the law.” Executive Journal of the Council of Colonial Virginia, V, 227-228

But Craighead found friends as well in the government. Richard Woods, a magistrate of Augusta County permitted Craighead to preach after an examination which did not meet the full requirements of the law.

In June of 1752, two justices of the peace, Robert McClanahan and James Lockhard, complained to the Council that “the Revd Mr.Alexander Craighead has taught and maintained treasonable positions and pteached and published pernicious doctrines in the county of Augusta and that Richard Woods one of the Magistrates of the said County administered the oaths of Allegiance to the said Craighead, and allowed him to omit what part of them he thought fit.”

The council forthwith ordered the sheriff of Augusta County to “apprehend and secure in safe custody the said Craighead, and immediately bring him before the Governor at Williamsburg to answer to the said information, and to summon to appear before his Honour at the same time Richard Woods to answer the complain made against him, and also Stephen Arnold and John Ramsay to testify and declare what they know concerning the premisses.” -Executive Journals of the Council of Virginia, V 407-408.

In 1755 because of the dangers he faced, he and a large part of his new parish migrated once more, this time to Sugaw Creek, North Carolina.

Here is the end of his migrating story. Here he lived and taught until his death in 1766, ministering to at least seven congregations in Mecklenburg and adjacent counties. And his influence here is attested by the part that Mecklenburg played in the Revolutionary War.

In July 1766, a Reverend Mr. Reed a missionary wrote that he was well informed “that the inhabitants of Mecklenburg are entire dissenters of the most rigid kind, and they had a Solemn League and Covenant teacher settled among them; that they were in general greatly averse to the Church of England, and that they looked upon a law lately enacted in this providence for the better establishment of the Church as oppressive as the Stamp Act, and were determined to prevent it taking place here. …” -D.A. Tompkins, History of Mecklenburg County and the City of Charlotte (Charlotte, 1903), 106-107; H.E.C. Bryant, “Alexander Craighead, Pioneer, Preacher, Patriot,” articles in Beasley’s Farm and Home Weekly

Within a single month, a Reverend Mr. Morton made much the same statement and consequence decided to take another charge.

Because of Alexander Craighead and his influence among the county of Mecklenburg and surrounding counties, and the Sugaw Creek Covenanters. Craighead played a crucial role in the Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence from England which was written in 1775, a whole year before the now famous July 4th Declaration of Independence. The Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence was sign May 20, 1775. The first public voice in America for dissolving all connections with Great Britain came not from the Puritans of New England, the Dutch of New York, nor the planters of Virginia, but from the Scotch-Irish Presbyterians of the Carolinas and by the influence of Rev. Alexander Craighead.


Such is the root of the American revolution. By the influence of the Covenanters and of one man Alexander Craighead, the American revolution was in essence a Presbyterian rebellion.

A Hessian captain, fighting on behalf of the British, told a friend in Germany in 1778, “call this war, dearest friend, by whatsoever name you may, only call it not an American Revolution, it is nothing more nor less than an Irish-Scotch Presbyterian Rebellion.”

Covenanters enthusiastically signed on to the Declaration of Independence, which, as William Martin asserted, was “but a reiteration of what our Covenanting forefathers have always maintained.”

But the Constitutional battles after the Revolutionary was a completely different matter. And the outcome required us Covenanters to once again dissent from the illegitimate government that has reined since the days of the Articles of the Confederation.

In Conclusion, it is my deepest honest belief that every Presbyterian should be well acquainted and own to themselves not only the Solemn League and Covenant with the whole of the Westminster Standards but also the Renewal of the Solemn League and Covenant of 1743 that was renewed in Octorara Pennsylvania with Alexander Craighead at the lead. As well as to the Act, Declaration and Testimony of 1761.

Alexander Craighead was a great American Cameronian Covenanter who held to the Covenants and ministered to our people when they were scattered and without the church. He should be remembered and his works read. His name should be honored by us all.

Also, If anybody has absolutely any other information regarding the missing work of Alexander Craighead that was presented to the Synod of Philadelphia in 1743 and condemned by it. Please get in touch with me.