V. Baptist Noel Discusses the Phenomenon

1. MIRACULOUS GIFTS WITHDRAWN FOR CENTURIES

In 1831, at the time of the “tongues” manifestation in Irving’s church, which became the theme of considerable discussion in religious circles, Baptist Noel wrote Remarks on the Revival of Miraculous Powers in the Church. He was then minister of St. John’s Chapel, Bedford Row. In this he contended that “miraculous powers have for many ages been withdrawn from the church.” He said that supernatural answers to prayer had often occurred as the “immediate and sovereign work of God,” but that this was “totally distinct from the effect of a gift to be habitually exercised by men.” In apostolic days the miraculous powers were constantly exercised. But for centuries any miracles had been “insulated cases,” “wrought immediately by God,” and not “systematically,” with men receiving the power to work them. ^{59Baptist W. Noel, Remarks on the Revival of Miraculous Powers in the Church, p. 3.} fPFF3 526.2

2. ARGUMENT FROM Joel 2 EXAMINED

Discussing the argument from Joel 2:28, 29, Noel refers to the partial fulfillment at Pentecost but stresses the fact that it was not universal, though the text might seem to imply it. ^{60Ibid., p. 10.} Not all received the gift of prophecy, but it was limited to “some.” ^{61Ibid., pp.10,11} The promise was therefore limited, and not unconditional. Stressing the fact also that the early gifts were limited to the gifted persons, Noel shows that among the most eminent Christians of the centuries-the Waldenses, Wyclif, Huss, Luther, Calvin, Bullinger-none believed miraculous gifts were operative in their day. ^{62Ibid., pp. 16-18.} Only “Roman-Catholic traffickers in wonders” were the exception. ^{63Ibid., pp. 18, 19.}PFF3 527.1

3. DELUDED BY RELIGIOUS EXCITEMENT

Noel felt that nothing, therefore, in the history of the gifts, in the promises of Scripture, or in the circumstances of the church warranted the position now taken by some. What they called faith was more properly called “enthusiasm.” ^{64Ibid., p. 28.} Not denying the possibility, he nevertheless declined to accept the so-called “gift of tongues,” for God “never yet set the seal of miracles to error.” The “foreign tongues spoken in the primitive church were always intelligible to the speakers,” ^{65Ibid., p. 29.} were a sign to unbelievers, and none exercised the gift of tongues without an interpretation. Noel therefore concluded:PFF3 527.2

“All that has happened, therefore, among these pious persons, so far from justifying an expectation of the gifts, only proves how completely even the most pious persons may be deluded by an enthusiastic excitement. I am very far from the disposition to hold them up to scorn, feeling more sympathy with an honest though hurtful enthusiasm, than I can with a sour and supercilious orthodoxy.” ^66Ibid.PFF3 527.3