Appendix A: The Westminster Divines

Earlier in this book I mentioned that there were a minority of fathers in the early church who believed that prophecy had not passed away. Yet those same authors seem to affirm a kind of cessationism that parallels that held to by the delegates to the Westminster Assembly. This appendix is added lest Roman Catholics interpret this concession as a concession to any kind of authoritative revelation continuing. It is my belief that the catholic faith definitively rejected the idea of continuing authoritative revelation during the Montanist controversy (see chapter 10) just as all the delegates to the Westminster Assembly definitively rejected the idea of continuing authoritative revelation. It is my belief that the fathers of the first millennium would have been able to sign on to the following declaration:

I.1 ALTHOUGH the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence, do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet they are not sufficient to give that knowledge of God, and of his will, which is necessary unto salvation: therefore it pleased the Lord, at sundry times, and in divers manners, to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church; and afterwards, for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the Church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which maketh the holy scripture to be most necessary; those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.

I.2. Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the word of God written, are now contained all the Books of the Old and New Testaments, which are these: (WCF 1:1-2)

Then comes a listing of the sixty-six books of the Bible.

With such a solid declaration of the cessation of authoritative revelation, one might suppose that all experiences of remarkable guidance that some early church fathers had would be dismissed, but it is not so. It appears that one can be a cessationist without denying these non-authoritative experiences of God’s guidance. This parallel between the delegates to the Westminster Assembly and the early fathers should help to explain why the affirmation of prophecy by a minority of church fathers does not in any way endorse the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox view of continuing authoritative revelation.

Cessationist author Garnet Howard Milne has written a groundbreaking book on the subject entitled, The Westminster Confession of Faith and the Cessation of Special Revelation: The Majority Puritan Viewpoint on Whether Extra-biblical Prophecy is Still Possible. The goal of his book is to argue that the Westminster divines were indeed Cessationist, and he seeks to answer claims to the opposite.

It is admitted by Milne that there were disagreements among the majority on the nature and scope of the Cessationism, with a small minority even using the term “prophecy”⁸²³ to describe non-authoritative illumination by the Spirit. Nevertheless, all the framers of the confession were very zealous to guard the integrity of the Scripture and to affirm the cessation of all authoritative revelation in any form. Milne argues that the majority also made a clear distinction between immediate revelation and mediate revelation:

Scott Murphy, in his dissertation on the Westminster doctrine of Scripture, defines “immediate” revelation as “an act occurring directly without an intervening agency and apart from all human means or cooperation.” “Mediate” revelation, on the other hand, is by definition, illumination through some means, understood by Reformed orthodoxy to involve at least human agency and the Scriptures. Westminster orthodoxy repeatedly denied that “immediate” revelation was still possible.⁸²⁴

However, even on this point, the Puritans were not always the most careful in their use of terms.

Puritan writings are also replete with mystical claims concerning the ‘immediate work’ of the Spirit, a term which potentially renders the ‘immediate/mediate’ distinction confusing. It appears that the Reformed orthodox generally understood the “immediate work” of the Spirit and “immediate revelation” to be two distinct processes.⁸²⁵

This book has sought to articulate a clearer exegetical basis for the Westminster’s Cessationism. It is admitted that it is only one possible defense of the Cessationism articulated in chapter 1 of the Westminster Confession of Faith. Nevertheless, what is beyond dispute is that all the divines believed that infallible inspiration had ceased with the apostles. They also denied that there could be any non-infallible revelation that purported to be authoritative, normative, or directive for the church. There are no authoritative revelations to be had today.

Beyond this consensus, there was a bewildering range of viewpoints at the Westminster Assembly.

1. Though not representative of the divines as a whole, Westminster delegate John Lightfoot not only said that the supernatural working of the Spirit had ceased, but also denied the need for “any work of the Spirit in the mind and heart for daily living,”⁸²⁶ and denied guidance beyond the propositional statements of Scripture.⁸²⁷ Most at the assembly took a more moderate position and distinguished between extraordinary and ordinary gifts, and affirmed at least that ordinary gifts continue to function.
2. Of those who distinguished between ordinary and extraordinary, Lazarus Seaman would be representative of those who believed that there have been no apostles, evangelists, or prophets for sixteen hundred years (whether ordinary or extraordinary).⁸²⁸
3. Others spoke of extraordinary apostles, prophets, and evangelists as having ceased, but not ordinary apostles, prophets, and evangelists.⁸²⁹
4. Others like Thomas Baylie believed that the gift of faith ceased along with all other miraculous gifts.⁸³⁰ There were many delegates who had various nuances of disagreement on miraculous gifts.
5. Though not a delegate himself, John Owen is representative of at least some delegates in believing “that some gifts analogous to those miraculous gifts of the Spirit continue in the contemporary church,”⁸³¹ and that God can even give premonitions and communications to believers through angels.⁸³² This may be one of the reasons for the vigorous debates that occurred on 1 Corinthians 14:3. Interestingly, during the debates for proof texts, only a minority of the delegates argued that “prophecy” in 1 Corinthians 14:3 applied exclusively to extraordinary prophecy, most wishing a bit more fluidity.⁸³³ Thomas Manton might fit in this category, speaking of “secret suggestions,” “motions,” “instincts,” and “impulses,” but not being willing to speak of these as prophecy.⁸³⁴
6. Some, like William Perkins, were “open but cautious” about extra-biblical revelation (mainly in the area of forewarning and guidance).⁸³⁵
7. Others like William Strong, George Gillespie, Alexander Henderson, and Robert Blair believed strongly in predictive prophecy, and were willing to speak of Luther as an apostle and to speak of Knox, Wishart, and Scottish reformers as prophets, though of course going to great pains to distinguish such from the inspired prophets of the Bible.⁸³⁶ Samuel Rutherford said that “these extraordinary Prophets, and our ordinary Prophets and Pastors differ not in specie and nature,” and therefore the rules applying to prophets in the New Testament could with general equity be applied to ordinary gifts.⁸³⁷
8. Finally, Milne cites William Bridge as an example of a Continuationist minority. However, there is evidence that even William Bridge considered himself a Cessationist. Milne himself points out that the Minutes of the debates show that Bridges believed that the “extraordinary” gifts of the Spirit had ceased.⁸³⁸ So it is clear that there was a wide range of opinion on how to interpret the gifts and offices listed in the New Testament.

Things get even more confusing when discussions are made of angelic communications, lots, visions, and miracles. Milne complains, “The question of ongoing prophecy in the seventeenth-century Puritan milieu is complicated by the prevalent idea that God communicated in a variety of ways that sometimes bordered on revelational prophecy and sometimes did not.”⁸³⁹ We will seek to give brief illustrations of some of these modes of guidance used by even some of the strictest Cessationists.

Milne says that “it is not hard to find examples of Westminster divines who admitted the ongoing ministry of revelation from the elect angels.”⁸⁴⁰ Obviously there were some like Lightfoot who would have rejected any communication from angels as the delusions of “enthusiasts.” Other Puritans were open but extremely cautious. They spoke of “secret suggestions” of angels as occurring, but pointed out that these suggestions were so hard to distinguish from our own imagination, that we ought to be cautious. For example, William Spurstowe describes in great detail the way in which both Satanic angels and elect angels can give “suggestions” and “motions” to man’s faculty, which man dimly picks up and uses.⁸⁴¹ However, he warns that satanic suggestions often cannot be distinguished from heaven-sent “illapses,” and that it is also hard to distinguish the difference between demonic temptations and the temptations that arise from “the lustings and ebullations of depraved nature.”⁸⁴² His exposition would tend to lead to a downplaying of these communications.

Others, while still cautious, were much more open to the communications of angels. John Maynard said, “For I cannot conceive, but that the good Angels should as well suggest good thoughts, as the evil Angels do evil thoughts… As for the godly, I am perswaded, they are many times directed strongly, by the secret suggestions of the Angels, for the avoiding of dangers, and the obtaining of good.”⁸⁴³ William Strong, who advocated the cessation of extraordinary prophets among men (though not ordinary prophets),⁸⁴⁴ saw angels as having a “spirit of Prophecy from Christ for the Churches’ sake.”⁸⁴⁵ Milne says, “The secret suggestion of angels, part of God’s special providence towards his church, was the usual and received explanation for the discovery of the Gunpowder Plot… Puritans frequently attributed the plan’s thwarting to angelic”⁸⁴⁶ warnings of some sort. Yet many of those who affirmed angelic communication were among the most vigorous of Cessationists when it came to apostles, prophets, and evangelists. Milne summarizes their position as being that “The angels’ role in providence still continues, and even if angelic visions and appearances have ceased, angels still communicate with human beings.”

Of course, not all believed that angelic visions and appearances had ceased. This again illustrates that the Cessationism of the delegates cannot be simplistically evaluated.

Milne gives at least three quite different viewpoints among the Westminster divines on the subject of God-given dreams, though others have discerned a wider variation. Indeed, the quotations gathered by Milne suggest a wider variation of viewpoint:

1. William Gouge and John Arrowsmith said that all revelatory dreams had ceased.
2. William Carter was open to their continuation, but skeptical.⁸⁴⁷
3. Though John Hacket believed that God continues to give dreams, he seemed to think that since there is no longer any inspired prophet to interpret the dreams, we ought to be hesitant about the interpretation. Nevertheless, he endorsed the dream of Augustine’s mother Monica as being genuine.⁸⁴⁸
4. John Ley’s endorsement of the dreams of Jerome and Zwingli may fit into the previous category, but his statement that God can clarify doctrine by means of a dream,⁸⁴⁹ makes him less skeptical than Hackett. Nevertheless, Ley insisted that in comparison with the “light” of Scripture, these dreams are like smoke.
5. Samuel Rutherford believed that dreams “provide sanctifying grace rather than revelation.”⁸⁵⁰
6. Archibald Johnston (also called Lord Warriston), who took a leading part in drawing up the 1638 National Covenant, enthusiastically believed that God used dreams to provide guidance, and regarded dreams as both “providences” and “impressions” from God.⁸⁵¹ Though he always tested dreams against the Scripture, and expected that God would confirm a dream through Scripture, yet he “was sure that God mediated his grace through dreams to provide concrete divine guidance.”⁸⁵² Yet Milne argues that each of these positions was still consistent with Cessationism, “even though they continue to regard dreams as relevant for the contemporary Christian.”⁸⁵³
7. Milne presents the views of William Bridge as being Continuationist rather than Cessationist, and says that “Bridge held a minority position in the debate concerning whether or not God still communicates his will through dreams, visions and voices.”⁸⁵⁴ Bridge saw eight “lights” in the Christian experience. “The ‘lights’ are respectively revelations or visions, dreams, impressions made upon the heart with or without the Word, experience, the law and light within, providence, reason and astrology.”⁸⁵⁵ Nevertheless, Bridge insisted that “there is no more light in them than what they do borrow” from the Scriptures.⁸⁵⁶ He also strongly warned that the Scriptures alone were authoritative, and cautioned about putting too much emphasis on these “lights.”⁸⁵⁷ Though Milne cites Bridges as a Continuationist, the Minutes of the debates show that Bridges believed that the “extraordinary” gifts of the Spirit had ceased.⁸⁵⁸ Also, it should be noted that for the next 100 years or so, there were many strict subscriptionist Scottish Presbyterians who believed that God continued to guide his people through dreams, and who did not see this as inconsistent with the Confession’s Cessationism. For example, Milne describes Thomas Gillespie (of a generation later) as “a strict Cessationist” Presbyterian,⁸⁵⁹ yet Gillespie affirmed that “divine dreams that excite to duty, and are premonitions of dangers to be avoided” are still available to contemporaries.⁸⁶⁰

A similar range of opinion can be found with regard to the use of lots. Some like Thomas Gataker saw the use of lots as completely passing away with the Urim and Thummim,⁸⁶¹ but many (most?) Puritans regularly sought guidance by means of lots. Milne says, “Lots were generally held to be a more acceptable form of discerning God’s will…”⁸⁶² Milne points out that Archibald Johnston used the casting of lots for guidance, “although the answers he obtained seldom helped to solve the perplexities of life, especially in matters that directly involved his family.”⁸⁶³ While this use of lots is mystifying to modern Cessationists, Milne does a good job of showing how the Westminster divines who used lots never divorced their use from the guidance of the sufficient Scripture.

A similar range of opinion can be found on miracles or signs.

1. Francis Cheynell represents many when he limited miracles to the foundational stage of the church, calling both tongues and miracles “extraordinary gifts.”⁸⁶⁴ Thomas Baylie phrased it that “miraculous faith ceased long ago.”⁸⁶⁵
2. On the other hand, George Gillespie believed that miracles continued, but said that the “gift” of healing had ceased, and implied that the gift of miracles had ceased as well.⁸⁶⁶ In another place he describes this gift of miracles by the title “workers of miracles.”⁸⁶⁷ This distinction between a “gift” of miracles and/or healing and God’s occasional and sovereign giving of miracles may be one answer to the puzzlement Milne has expressed over why some delegates claimed to be Cessationist yet continued to believe in miracles.⁸⁶⁸ Perhaps they believed that no one is presently gifted to do miracles or healings on demand, but had no problem in affirming that a miracle could occur.
3. Others like Samuel Rutherford, William Bridge, Alexander Henderson, and Robert Blair spoke unambiguously about miracles. They were self-proclaimed Cessationists even though they did not believe all miracles had ceased.

When one turns to current Reformed scholarship among self-proclaimed Cessationists, there is just as much variety.

1. There are “Cessationists” who (like Lightfoot) have said that all spiritual gifts (whether ordinary or extraordinary) have ceased.⁸⁶⁹
2. There are others who have argued that all “extraordinary gifts” or manifestations of revelation or miracles have ceased.⁸⁷⁰
3. Others who might generally agree with the foregoing conclusion would be hesitant in ruling out all modern miracles or healing, though they would question any gift of miracles or gift of healing.⁸⁷¹
4. Like John Owen, some believe that the supernatural gifts and offices have ceased but they also affirm that God can do something analogous to those gifts.⁸⁷²
5. Others have argued for “concentric Cessationism.”⁸⁷³
6. Still others say that authoritative (infallible) revelation has ceased but not the five-fold gifts of Ephesians 4:11.⁸⁷⁴
7. Others believe that apostleship has ceased but not prophecy.⁸⁷⁵
8. Others affirm that both apostleship and prophecy have ceased, but not necessarily other miraculous gifts.
9. There are yet others who believe that apostleship, prophecy, tongues, and anything analogous has ceased, but not necessarily miracles.

The literature is strewn with a bewildering variety of “Cessationists.”

Some have misused the emerging evidence from the writings of the Westminster delegates to argue for the acceptability of full-fledged charismatic experience. Others have ignored the evidence and argued that the Confession does not allow for anything other than a B.B. Warfield type of interpretation of the gifts. Milne does a magnificent job of sorting through the evidence and defending a core (and essential) Cessationism without forcing every Westminster delegate into the same box. While this book has presented one exegetical defense of the core Cessationism of the Westminster divines, it is by no means the only acceptable one. The quotes from the fathers in chapter 10 shows that however the charismatic views of the Westminster divines are interpreted, they are closer to the church of the first thousand years than Rome is.