Thread: Puritan Word for "Charistmatic"

Is there a 16th-18th Century word or phrase for "Charismatic"?

(wondering how a person can "own" a confession and be charismatic)

Thanks!

What would your criteria for "Charismatic" be? Owen talks about Quakers and Enthusiasts a lot which might qualify depending on what marks of "charismatic" you're working with.

The Anabaptists were a charismatic sect.

Yep, after i posted i thought of Anabaptists and Quakers.

Never heard of "Enthusiasts"

From my limited knowledge, the term enthusiasts was not exactly a technical term but rather one said in jest or an insult, that came out of how they viewed such groups.

I'm not sure if this is exactly the Charismatics you were looking for, but the New Lights that Edwards faced were sure "Charismatic" in those days.

Originally Posted by eqdj

Yep, after i posted i thought of Anabaptists and Quakers.

Never heard of "Enthusiasts"

It could be a cover-all word for both groups, which would make sense if I'm remembering the context of where I read, that would make sense... though again, the meaning of "charismatic" is vague here...

@Jacob,

By "Charismatic" I'm specifically referring to current "Reformed Charismatics" (Grudem, Piper, Driscoll, PDI/SGM Acts 29, etc.), some of whom refer to themselves as "Continuationists".

It's a pet peeve of mine that they, generally speaking, "hold" the Westminster Confession while also holding to Amyraldianism, congregationalism, credobaptism, and are charismatics!

So i was just wondering if there were "Continuationists" in the 16th - 18th Centuries. Then I remembered the Anabaptists.

Originally Posted by eqdj

Is there a 16th-18th Century word or phrase for "Charismatic"?

"Epileptic"

Originally Posted by eqdj

@Jacob,

By "Charismatic" I'm specifically referring to current "Reformed Charismatics" (Grudem, Piper, Driscoll, PDI/SGM Acts 29, etc.), some of whom refer to themselves as "Continuationists".

It's a pet peeve of mine that they, generally speaking, "hold" the Westminster Confession while also holding to Amyraldianism, congregationalism, credobaptism, and are charismatics!

So i was just wondering if there were "Continuationists" in the 16th - 18th Centuries. Then I remembered the Anabaptists.

Luther had to contend with the Zwickau Prophets in his day:

Zwickau Prophets

Zwickau Prophets, the name given to three men, Nicholas Storch, Thomas Drechsel, and Marcus (Thomae) Stübner, who came to Wittenberg from Zwickau, Saxony (Germany), about Christmas time in 1521, professing a special message through their study of the Scriptures and through direct revelation from God through the Holy Spirit. They had been influenced by Thomas Müntzer, a Lutheran preacher in Zwickau from 1520 to April 1521

Today, C. Samuel Storms might fit into such a category. Twenty years ago there was the Reformed and Renewed movement in England.

Such men, it seems, shall always turn up even in Reformed bodies and always have to be contended with.

Originally Posted by eqdj

@Jacob,

By "Charismatic" I'm specifically referring to current "Reformed Charismatics" (Grudem, Piper, Driscoll, PDI/SGM Acts 29, etc.), some of whom refer to themselves as "Continuationists".

It's a pet peeve of mine that they, generally speaking, "hold" the Westminster Confession while also holding to Amyraldianism, congregationalism, credobaptism, and are charismatics!

So i was just wondering if there were "Continuationists" in the 16th - 18th Centuries. Then I remembered the Anabaptists.

Ah, I see. (I'd consider myself in that category you're describing, though I lean more on the 1689.) I think you might find the appendix in Grudem's book on prophesy discussing Richard Baxter's view of the gift of prophesy to be interesting along these lines. I would identify the Quaker/Anabaptist theology more with modern Pentecostals, and some Charismatics and not make a blanket category. But then again, I'm tainted goods, what can I say...

"Enthusiast" is the usual term employed by the Puritans. Its equivalent derived from Latin is "Fanatic." David Dickson's Truth's Victory over Error contains various refutations of the Enthusiasts. According to the glossary of errors appended to Truth's Victory, it basically means to be inspired by or to act with a prophetical or divine fury.

Seriously, why the need for gifts of knowledge when you have the PB and men like Rev. Winzer.

Of course I jest.

Originally Posted by eqdj

@Jacob,

By "Charismatic" I'm specifically referring to current "Reformed Charismatics" (Grudem, Piper, Driscoll, PDI/SGM Acts 29, etc.), some of whom refer to themselves as "Continuationists".

It's a pet peeve of mine that they, generally speaking, "hold" the Westminster Confession while also holding to Amyraldianism, congregationalism, credobaptism, and are charismatics!

So i was just wondering if there were "Continuationists" in the 16th - 18th Centuries. Then I remembered the Anabaptists.

I don't think the gentlemen you mention (Piper, Grudem) would refer to themselves as "charismatics" in any form.

They might say they believe speaking in other tongues and interpretation continues, but hopefully distinguish not as a source of revelation equal to or above that of Scripture (as charismatics/pentecostals do in practice assume if not teach directly).

As best I can tell, they would not denominate themselves that way because the term is:

1) too narrow
2) carries too much theological baggage

Scott,

I think you're right on the spot. All of us must be charismatic in terms of giftedness. Unfortunately it has been used to characterize those of the continuity of spiritual gifts/divine revelation stuff. It certainly does carry too much theological baggage.

John Owen used the term 'fanatics' to describe those who elevated experience over Scripture or claimed that the Spirit speaks apart from the word. This is closely related to the term 'enthusiasts.' My favorite word though is the one Luther used: 'schwarmerei,' which literally means those who swarm--quite descriptive, eh?

Originally Posted by Sven

John Owen used the term 'fanatics' to describe those who elevated experience over Scripture or claimed that the Spirit speaks apart from the word. This is closely related to the term 'enthusiasts.' My favorite word though is the one Luther used: 'schwarmerei,' which literally means those who swarm--quite descriptive, eh?

I've learnt a new jesting term! Schwarmerei.

Originally Posted by ewenlin

All of us must be charismatic in terms of giftedness. Unfortunately it has been used to characterize those of the continuity of spiritual gifts/divine revelation stuff.

My RC (Reformed Charismatic) friends seemed surprised to find out that we Reformed Non-Charismatic believe in the operation of the Holy Spirit through the Preaching of the Word and Sacraments (or "Ordinances" for you American Baptists).

I was offended - as if we have no place for the third person of the Trinity

Sadly that's the case most of the time.

Originally Posted by eqdj

Originally Posted by ewenlin

All of us must be charismatic in terms of giftedness. Unfortunately it has been used to characterize those of the continuity of spiritual gifts/divine revelation stuff.

My RC (Reformed Charismatic) friends seemed surprised to find out that we Reformed Non-Charismatic believe in the operation of the Holy Spirit through the Preaching of the Word and Sacraments (or "Ordinances" for you American Baptists).

I was offended - as if we have no place for the third person of the Trinity

Not to get off the topic eqdj, but that shouldn't be an over-arching characterization of your RC friends. I know in our church (and family of churches) we insistently teach on the active work of the Holy Spirit in the preached Word as the normal activity of the Spirit in a healthy local church (even rebuking those who insist "waves of the Spirit" are the indication of the presence of the HS). Moreover, the men you've mentioned uphold the same thing (hence T4G, The Gospel Coalition, etc.). As Scott1 noted, there are reasons to not associate "Charismatic" with the men/groups you mentioned, at least until the word itself is clarified and defined (hence my original question). Anyhow, all that said, I appreciate Rev. Winzer's note on "enthusiast" and it's use in Puritan writing.

Jonathan Edwards had much to say on this in "Religious Affections". He rebukes those who said certain behaviors were the proof of God's particular presence in their congregations and he rebuked those who said it was proof of his absence. His precision and support from Scripture make it a good read.
I cite Edwards because he is often referred to as the last of the Puritan preachers. I know some have applied this title to Spurgeon, but in that case I think it is a bit of hyperbole.

Greg

Many of the very same arguments made by the modern charismatic movement were first made by the 16th-century Anabaptists. Guy de Bres, the author of the Belgic Confession wrote an extensive response to them and dealt specifically with these questions. See RRC for more on this.

Originally Posted by R. Scott Clark

Many of the very same arguments made by the modern charismatic movement were first made by the 16th-century Anabaptists. Guy de Bres, the author of the Belgic Confession wrote an extensive response to them and dealt specifically with these questions. See RRC for more on this.

Ever promoting your book, eh? I'm suddenly reminded of Dr. Leo Marvin when he hands Bob his book, Baby Steps.

Yes, I'm sorry about that. I need to stop.

Just one more time:

READ THE BOOK!!! okay. no more. I'm done. I promise.

Originally Posted by eqdj

Originally Posted by ewenlin

All of us must be charismatic in terms of giftedness. Unfortunately it has been used to characterize those of the continuity of spiritual gifts/divine revelation stuff.

My RC (Reformed Charismatic) friends seemed surprised to find out that we Reformed Non-Charismatic believe in the operation of the Holy Spirit through the Preaching of the Word and Sacraments (or "Ordinances" for you American Baptists).

I was offended - as if we have no place for the third person of the Trinity

A couple things might be helpful in understanding this:

Reformed theology is, at minimum:

Doctrines of grace ("five points") + covenant theology + confession

A group denominating itself as "reformed charismatic" is not the same thing if they are only Calvinist in their soteriology, unclear on their dispensationalism and have no binding confession of faith. They may be trending toward reformed theology, but they are not there yet.

God may use it to get them there, but they are not there yet.

That before one gets to their emphasis on two or three of the spiritual gifts. Believing that new revelation equal to or above that of Scripture comes, ordinarily at least, outside of Scripture (through these two or three gifts) is not reformed. It's not biblical either, and leads to all sorts of confusion.

It's also significant error, standard charismatic/pentecostal doctrine that the baptism of the Holy Spirit and the salvation are two separate events. The distinction of charismatics that it is not necessarily followed by a gift of speaking in other tongues (compared to pentecostal) is only a difference based on the same error, not a difference of substance.

So to say that extrabiblical revelation equal or above Scripture ordinarily comes through spiritual gifts or that the Holy Spirit comes in an insufficient manner at salvation is a major misunderstanding of the Holy Spirit...

and a major misunderstanding of what reformed theology teaches, and the Bible teaches.

Enthusiast was an epithet most often applied to early Methodists. Wesley and his group are also the group from which Pentecostalism and Holiness movements descended.

I'd put the Enthusiasts on the level with Charismatics, EXCEPT that there is no mention of exercises of Spiritual gifts.

Originally Posted by strangecharm

Enthusiast was an epithet most often applied to early Methodists. Wesley and his group are also the group from which Pentecostalism and Holiness movements descended.

I'd put the Enthusiasts on the level with Charismatics, EXCEPT that there is no mention of exercises of Spiritual gifts.

In John Wesley's Journal entry for August 15, 1750, he wrote, "I was fully convinced of what I had long suspected, 1. That the Montanists, in the second and third centuries, were real, scriptural Christians; and, 2. that the grand reason why the miraculous gifts were so soon withdrawn, was not only that faith and holiness were well nigh lost; but that dry, formal, orthodox men began even then to ridicule whatever gifts they had not themselves, and to decry them all as either madness or imposture."

This is an interesting (and short) article on the subject entitled "John Wesley and the Gifts of the Holy Spirit" :

John Wesley and the Gifts of the Holy Spirit