Talk:Cessationism/Archive 2

''Archived discussions from 2012 through 2018. Note: discussions may be refactored.''

Catholicism
Catholicism or Orthodoxy are not mentioned once in the article, albeit they are whence the view derives, and have a numerical strong majority of all Christians alive (1.2 billion Catholics, 350 million Orthodox, 750 million Protestants). All of the traditional communions and denominations - Catholic, Orthodox, Reformed/Calvinist, Anglican, and Lutheran - hold to a view of cessationism, yet none of those except for the Calvinists are mentioned herein. The article is written from a solely Protestant perspective, liberally sprinkled with and based on the doctrine of sola scriptura (as opposed to the Catholic/Orthodox/Anglican prima scriptura), as if sola scriptura was the only way to derive a view of cessationism. Needs a major rewrite from the bottom up. JohnChrysostom (talk) 12:59, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I think that the article does not need "a major rewrite from the bottom up", but only additional sections that would provide an account of cessationism not based upon Sola Scriptura. The article would be richer if there is additional sections providing cessationist perpsectives from Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians. I think that the problem with the article is not its neutrality, but completeness. I have, therefore, removed POV-template and replaced it with missing-information-template. Theophilius (talk) 02:16, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I have also changed the 1st heading, so that the reader is informed that the account of types of cessationism is within Protestantism. Theophilius (talk) 03:00, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Stories about Padre Pio - a Italian Franciscan - performing miracles in the 20th century are widely accepted and noone in the Roman Catholic establishment rules out the possibility of their being true on the grounds of cessationism. This is a tradition wholly unrelated to the Charismatic movement. Similarly stories of Orthodox monks being the means of miracles are also a continuing feature of that tradition. Ender&#39;s Shadow Snr (talk) 17:05, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I fail to see that there is an articulated formulation of cessationism in Catholic and Orthodox traditions. Moreover, both Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches are nowadays open for the occurences of charismatic gifts, such as the gift of healing, miracles, visions among the saints. I think that Cessationism never made much sense to Catholic or Orthodox Christians who continued to expect the saints to work miracles. We do see that among Roman Catholics there is a strong Charismatic movement, and certain Eastern Orthodox theologians are proContinuitionists (see Charismatic Movement in Eastern Orthodox Church, Orthodoxy and the Charismatic Movement, Charismatic Movement in Roman Catholic Church, Catholic Charismatic Renewal).

In Early Church, there were present both Cessationist and Continuationist groups. Therefore, historical arguments pro contra charismatic gifts are not conclusive. During Reformation, John Calvin turned the cessationist polemic against Roman Catholicism and the radical reformation, undercutting their claims to religious authority they based on miracles and revelations (see Benjamin Warfield’s Counterfeit Miracles). Calvin popularized the restriction of miracles to the accreditation of the apostles and specifically to their gospel, though he was less rigid about cessationism than most of his followers.

In the section Historical Evidence, there is a list of Cessationist explanations about why gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased. Those explanation are not based upon Sola Scriptura. Thus, we see, that the article covers all forms of Cessationism. Therefore, I have removed the missing-information-template. Theophilius (talk) 16:02, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Removing the heading "Original Purpose"
The heading "Original Purpose" was dealing with the purpose of the charismatic gifts, arguing that the purpose of the gifts were fullfilled with the completion of the Canon. In other words, it gives one of the main reasons for Cessationism. However, not all cessationists would agree with such rationale, e.g., empirical cessationism. We are more interested in all forms of cessationism. For this reason, the heading is not appropriate as a general account of Cessationism. (It is better to have it in an article which particularly deals with the dispute between Cessationists and Continuationists, such as Cessationism versus Continuationism, where one gives account of various reasons for Cessationism.) Therefore, it was removed. Theophilius (talk) 19:23, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Based on the discussion below, I have no objections. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:26, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I dissent, you have relegated important sourced references to the end and also completely removed the central argument used by widely cited and early users of the term 'cessationist'. Reference to the original purpose of the sign and revelatory gifts is an important part of the article, it ought to have a prominent place here. Many of the moderate or empirical 'cessationists' don't actually believe the gifts have 'ceased' at all, and have historically been reticent even to describe themselves as cessationist. This is not clarifying the issue, it has, inadvertently, lead to obfuscation. I have reverted material aspects of your edit of this section, and brought up some material from the end to the section on 'strong' cessationism, though I doubt the historical utility of the label. Cpsoper (talk) 21:14, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding back this important point under the heading of Strong Cessationism. That was a good solution!


 * However, I disagree with your view about moderate cessationism. A moderate cessationist would insist that the gifts have ceased precisely because the canon is now closed. Moderate cessationists put a great weight to the principle of sola scriptura, something that empirical cessationists do not. In some sense, a moderate cessationist could agree that the gifts have fulfilled their purpose at the completion of the canon, but with a strong qualification: The gifts have fulfilled their purpose, but only in this dispensation or in this age before the Great Tribulation. As said in the article, strong and moderate cessationists agree with each other in practical terms. Their disagreement is in eschatology.


 * You raise some valid point about empirical cessationism. It is actually a semi-continuationist view, since their view can allow for a reemergence of gifts at any time. However, I think that their view should be mentioned when dealing with cessationism in its generality, especially when we are interested in the rationale for cessationism. Empirical cessationism is interesting as a contrast to traditional forms, which are grounded on the principle. It was mentioned not to obfuscate the matter. Theophilius (talk) 00:11, 8 September 2016 (UTC)