‘Christ,’ says Paul in his Letter to the Ephesians (Eph 4:11f), ‘gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up.’

Most Christian teachers would agree that the office of apostle was limited to those who were the first witnesses of Christ’s resurrection.  On the other hand, they would take it for granted that evangelists and pastor-teachers are found in every era and place.

But what about prophets?

Calvin expressed doubt about the continuance of the prophetic office, and yet did not close the door completely to it:-

‘Paul applies the name “prophets” not to all those who were interpreters of God’s will, but to those who excelled in a particular revelation. (Eph 4:11) This class either does not exist today or is less commonly seen.’

(Calvin, Institutes, IVIII4)

Some others, standing within the evangelical and even the reformed tradition, have had less doubts:-

‘It is ordinary with God to give his servants whom he stirres up and employes in extraordinary employments with extraordinar gifts and endewments, such as the gift of prophecie. Such prophets there were many in Scotland, about and shortlie after the tyme of the reformation, viz., Messrs Wishart, Knox, Welsh…They foirprophecied many things, whereof some were fulfilled in their own dayes, and all of them after their death.’

(In Gardner, Healing miracles)

The Scottish reformer Robert Bruce was renowned for his extraordinary spiritual powers. He himself said:-

‘There comes never thing to me, trouble or alteration, but he gives me warning before.’

The following is an example:-

‘One might, when the affair of Gowrie was bringing on him much trouble, he had a very supporting discovery in his sleep. He thought he saw in his sleep ‘great difficulties represented to him in his way, and that he behoved either to pass through them, or die by the way. At last he resolved to hazard all in following what he thought obedience to God; and when passing on he felt a strong emotion on his spirit to say, In and through Michael, the captain of the Lord’s host, I shall prevail; O Michael, Michael, who is like the strong God!’ We see the fulness of his heart even in his dreams, and how the Lord refreshed and revived his warriors, while he gave them the sleep of his beloved.’

(Gillies, Historical Collections, 178.)

An evaluation of Robert Bruce dating from 1843 plays down the miraculous element, leaving it to us to try to judge to what what extent Bruce’s powers were natural, and to what extent supernatural:-

‘The people of the land felt his holiness so deeply, that it was usually believed he had prophetic endowments, and that miraculous occurences took place in regard to him. Men felt his heavenliness; and an interpretation was put upon providences that regarded him, which they would not have put on those that befell other men. It was easy to believe that such a man would receive special marks of favour from above.’

(in Gillies, Historical Collections, 179.)

When Kennedy wrote his book, The Days of the Fathers in Ross-shire (1861), he was conscious of the opinion which some would form:-

‘I expected that many would count me credulous and some call me superstitious and a few denounce me as fanatical, because of some anecdotes I gave, to prove how near to God were the godly of former days.’

(Kennedy, The Days of the Fathers in Ross-shire, 13)

These anecdotes included instances when God vouchsafed to believers intimations of his will. Kennedy quotes favourably from Christopher Love:-

‘They are little acquainted with the ways of God, who imagine God has ceased to give his people assurance as to future events. God has not bound himself in this manner; and there have been many things intimated to, and known by the most eminent saints, before such things came to pass.’

(in Kennedy, The Days of the Fathers in Ross-shire, 209.)

Kennedy himself continues as follows:-

‘It is not difficult to find the reason why those, who are themselves strangers to communion with God, are so ready to denounce as superstitious all faith in the reality of information from heaven, besides that which is given in the direct teachings if Scripture…”It is pretending to know,” they say, “what is not revealed in Scripture.” This sounds well. It seems, at first sight, due to the Word of God, as the only complete revelation of his will, that we should at once regard as false all information regarding the mind of God not derived from the plain import of Scripture. They have never gone beneath the surface in their thinking on this matter, who have not discovered the extremeness of this view. But, backed by this false assumption, some will quote, with an air of triumph, the pretensions to inspiration, the claims of the gift of prophecy, the faith in dreams and visions, of those whom all acknowledge to have been deceivers and deceived. To minds that have always kept far off from the realities of a life of godliness, that look from a distance on the communion of his people with the Lord, the difference between the baseless pretensions of deceivers and the God-given privilege of the righteous is utterly impalpable. All kinds of intercourse with the Invisible are classed by these together, and to them all who claim the privilege of communion with the Lord appear as deluded fanatics. More triumphant still is their air, when they can quote, in support of their position, the mistakes of those who were truly godly. but, surely, it is not difficult to discover a very good reason why the Lord should allow even these to be sometimes deceived in their anticipations, and in their readings of the page of Providence. Such mistakes only prove that they are always prone to error, when the correctness of their information specially depends upon their own spirituality. They need to learn this, and their falls will teach them.’

(Kennedy, The Days of the Fathers in Ross-shire, 211f.)

David Morgan exercised unusual abilities for quite a short period during the 1859 revival in Wales. He had been seeking revival for some years, and had become very unhappy with the state of his own ministry. One Tuesday night, he went to bed as usual:-

‘He awoke about 4 am, and was instantly conscious that some strange, mysterious changes had come over him. He became aware with awe of a marvellous illumination of his faculties, especially of his memory. “I awoke about four in the morning,’ said he himself, ‘remembering everything of a religious nature that I had ever learnt or heard.”‘

(Evans, Revival Comes to Wales, 54.)

This enhancement of mental faculties gave Morgan an unusual facility when dealing with enquirers:-

‘All the converts who ‘stayed behind’ with the church members would be invited to come forward to the front seat. Here the Revivalist would converse with them individually, inquiring with friendly interest about their family connections and responsibilities, and after winning their confidence he would proceed, like a skilful surgeon, to probe their spiritual wounds, and administer the cordial of corrective which his diagnosis of the case enjoined as necessary. Then he would kneel and commend the converts to God, individually and by name however numerous they might be, his petitions moulded with minuteness and detail upon his conversations with them.’

in Evans, Two Welsh Revivalists, 42.

Here is another example from David Morgan’s ministry:-

‘In the middle of his sermon, he startled his audience by suddenly exclaiming, ‘If any of you here tonight deny the deity of the Son, I have nothing better to tell you than what Morgan Howell, Newport, shouted on Lampeter bridge, “Though he was rich, yet for our sakes he became poor. He became poor when he came to Bethlehem; tell me, when was he rich?”‘ This remark was utterly irrelevant to the preacher’s subject-matter, and no one could conjecture whence it came, and whither it went. The mystery was solved in the after-meeting, for among the converts were three Unitarians…who presence in the service was quite accidental, and certainly unknown to the preacher.’

Evans, Revival Comes to Wales, 63.

Preaching at the time of the centenary of the 1859 Revival, D.M. Lloyd-Jones asserted:-

‘In revival there is very often a gift of prophecy given. I mean by that, literally an ability to foretell the future…I knew a man whose minister had this gift…in the revival of 1904 and 1905. It disappeared completely afterwards, but while the revival lasted he was told beforehand of something that was going to happen in his Church, not once, but morning by morning. He would be awakened out of his sleep at half past two in the morning, and be given direct and exact information of something that was going to happen during that day, and it did happen. You find knowledge given to people, which is quite inexplicable. There were cases in Northern Ireland, for instance, of people who could not read and could not write…but suddenly…they were given an ability to find places in the Bible and to make known the contents. It happened to the mill girls in Northern Ireland. Poor girls who had been brought up in poverty and penury, who were ignorant and who had had practically no education, they suddenly began to prophesy. They displayed amazing knowledge and were able to speak in an unusual manner.’

(Lloyd-Jones, Revival, 135ff.)

Concerning the nature of prophecy within the Pentecostal/charismatic tradition, Grossman observes:-

‘Prophecies are in the form either of words or of visions; they…are often given in the first person. Some groups have introduced a recognised method by which the gathered congregation can test the prophecy; in others there is no testing whatever. Prophecies which are original in language, imagery or form, and which are compelling to listen to, seem to be rare. Often the same cliches of language and imagery are found as in ordinary preaching.’

(S. Grossmann, Stewards of God’s Grace, 38)

Arthur Wallis speaks to those who fear latter-day prophecy because it seems to undermine belief in the authority and sufficiency of Scripture:-

‘Some are afraid to accept the validity of prophetic utterance today because, in their view, that would be to put such utterance on a par with inspired Scripture – to add in fact to the Word of God. This is based on a misunderstanding. The canon of Holy Scripture is of course complete; by it every other utterance must be judged. But this does not mean that all inspired utterance has now come to an end. What about the discourses of Jesus that Scripture has not recorded? Were they any less inspired by the Holy Spirit because God did not see fit to enshrine them in Holy Writ? When the Spirit came down upon the twelve disciples at Ephesus the ‘prophesied’. Philip the evangelist had four daughters who ‘prophesied’. There were many others in the churches who also prophesied. Though their utterances have not been recorded in Scripture they were none the less inspired by the Spirit. Only a very small proportion of what the Spirit has inspired was needed for the written record of God’s revealed truth. The rest was simply for immediate use and application.’

(Wallis, Rain from heaven, 69f.)

Wallis was one of the most eirenic and balanced writers on revival to emerge from the ‘charismatic renewal’ wing.  Although we might not want to go as far as he does, for example in his use of the term ‘inspiration’ as applied to latter-day prophecy. But the point is well taken: has not God actually promised to accompany spiritual renewal with signs and wonders? And should we not grant him this prerogative? –

‘If a God-sent revival is characterised by elements altogether new to our experience, and which we cannot understand, if there are dreams and visions, revelations and trances, prophesyings and healings, tremblings and prostrations, let us remember that God said, “signs and wonders” would accompany the outpouring of the Spirit (Ac 2:17-19) and that it has always been so.’

(Wallis, In the Day of thy Power, 74)