# Why do we refer to the authors of the WCF as "The Divines?"



## Montanablue (Nov 4, 2009)

I hope this is the right forum for this thread - if not, feel free to move it.

I've noticed in a couple of threads in the past week or so that people are referring to "The Divines." After some puzzling and investigation, I've concluded that that is a reference to the authors of the WCF. (Someone please correct me if I am wrong)

Why is this done? What is the reasoning behind it? What is the meaning of the word "Divine" in this context.

I'll be forthright and say that I have a rather visceral reaction to calling any human individual "Divine." That seems like a term that should only be reserved for God. I'd like to hear the history and reasoning behind the usage though - perhaps you can change my mind.


----------



## py3ak (Nov 4, 2009)

divine - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

Main Entry: 2 divine
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Medieval Latin _divinus_, from Latin, soothsayer, from _divinus_, adjective
Date: 14th century

1 : clergyman
2 : theologian


----------



## Prufrock (Nov 4, 2009)

Kathleen, it is not a term reserved for the authors of the WCF, but for theologians in general. Mechanics, for instance, are so termed because their business is mechanical things: not because they are, themselves, "mechanical creatures." So those whose business concerns Divine things or the study of Divinity are known as Divines.


----------



## passingpilgrim (Nov 4, 2009)

because Diva would have given the wrong impression


----------



## Montanablue (Nov 4, 2009)

Prufrock said:


> Kathleen, it is not a term reserved for the authors of the WCF, but for theologians in general. Mechanics, for instance, are so termed because their business is mechanical things: not because they are, themselves, "mechanical creatures." So those whose business concerns Divine things or the study of Divinity are known as Divines.



Ah ha. This makes so much more sense than the direction my mind was going. I was starting to get concerned that the title was an elevating one. 

Ruben, I actually looked up the definition earlier, but it still seemed elevating - the dictionary I used had both "supremely good" and "proceeding directly from God" which seemed problematic to me. 

Thank you. 

-----Added 11/4/2009 at 05:47:32 EST-----



Joshua said:


> Because they were men who studied Divinity. The historical context would have thrown out any allusion to these men being more than men.



Right - this was part of my confusion. The use of the word "divine" to describe a person seemed a direct contradiction to their beliefs.


----------



## Amazing Grace (Nov 4, 2009)

Prufrock said:


> Kathleen, it is not a term reserved for the authors of the WCF, but for theologians in general. Mechanics, for instance, are so termed because their business is mechanical things: not because they are, themselves, "mechanical creatures." So those whose business concerns Divine things or the study of Divinity are known as Divines.



Paul, what credentials does one must hold to be called a divine? I know anyone with a ratchet set can be called a mechanic, so I am assuming it takes more than study of the scriptures. It does seem to fall on those who were part of the WCF more than any others though. I have never heard anyone called a divine prior or after.


----------



## DMcFadden (Nov 4, 2009)

> Paul, what credentials does one must hold to be called a divine? I know anyone with a ratchet set can be called a mechanic, so I am assuming it takes more than study of the scriptures. It does seem to fall on those who were part of the WCF more than any others though. I have never heard anyone called a divine prior or after.



Oh, sure you have. Most pastors today obtain a_* Master of Divinity *_degree. Along the lines of Kathleen's original concern, that is pretty exalted too. Most godly pastors I know would be horrified to think that they were called to be masters of "divinity" in the sense that Kathleen originally suggested. 

Although, few (if any) holders of the M.Div. are actually people who have "mastered" the subject of theology either! Puritan theologians were often referenced as "Puritan Divines."


----------



## Prufrock (Nov 4, 2009)

Amazing Grace said:


> Prufrock said:
> 
> 
> > Kathleen, it is not a term reserved for the authors of the WCF, but for theologians in general. Mechanics, for instance, are so termed because their business is mechanical things: not because they are, themselves, "mechanical creatures." So those whose business concerns Divine things or the study of Divinity are known as Divines.
> ...



Mr. Harrington, I'm not sure there is really a specific answer to that question (that of qualifications). If the study and profession of Divinity (i.e., if they are a Theologian or perhaps minister -- one who teaches theology/divinity), they are a divine. I am unaware of any more technical or precise meaning than this, though this by no means indicates that there isn't one.


----------



## Brian Withnell (Nov 5, 2009)

Prufrock said:


> Amazing Grace said:
> 
> 
> > Prufrock said:
> ...



A "shade tree mechanic" is a guy that works out of his house on cars as a hobby, so I suppose a "shade tree divine" would be someone that studies theology at home.


----------



## Matthew1034 (Nov 5, 2009)

The early church had no qualms to say we are deified when we are baptized into Christ.


----------



## Pergamum (Nov 5, 2009)

I always thought that Jesus was Da Vine and we were only Da Branches.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Nov 5, 2009)

Sure, 350 years ago the word was used to refer to someone who studied theology, but as you note, we seem to use that term a lot more in respect to the authors of the WCF than with anyone else.

My gut tells me we use it because we reverence them.


----------



## Galatians220 (Nov 5, 2009)

Pergamum said:


> I always thought that Jesus was Da Vine and we were only Da Branches.


 

When Bill Hybels welcomes to Willow Creek a visiting delegation from the South Side, that's true. 

Said delegation cannot hang long, for some of them likely have tickets to see Da Bears.



Margaret


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Nov 5, 2009)

They are called divines maybe more than others or maybe even almost exclusively now, because they served on _The Westminster Assembly *OF DIVINES! *_

That role and that official name are the reason for the retention of the term regarding the Westminster assemblymen; not some idolizing exaltation of them. 



SolaScriptura said:


> Sure, 350 years ago the word was used to refer to someone who studied theology, but as you note, we seem to use that term a lot more in respect to the authors of the WCF than with anyone else.
> 
> My gut tells me we use it because we reverence them.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Nov 5, 2009)

NaphtaliPress said:


> They are called divines maybe more than others or maybe even almost exclusively now, because they served on _The Westminster Assembly *OF DIVINES! *_
> 
> That role and that official name are the reason for the retention of the term regarding the Westminster assemblymen; not some idolizing exaltation of them.



I don't buy it. Not after the fawning after them as being almost supermen - superholy, super pious, super smart, super everything - that can be read in countless posts. Certainly the official name of the Assembly is, as you point out, the Westminster Assembly of Divines. But usually in modern parlance people speak of the members of the assembly as "members" not "Divines." Well... everywhere but here. Nowadays we speak of theologians and Biblical scholars.

But be that as it may, I believe that their work reflects Scripture.


----------



## KMK (Nov 5, 2009)

SolaScriptura said:


> Sure, 350 years ago the word was used to refer to someone who studied theology, but as you note, we seem to use that term a lot more in respect to the authors of the WCF than with anyone else.
> 
> My gut tells me we use it because we reverence them.



I take it you do not call them 'Divines'. What then do you call them?


----------



## SolaScriptura (Nov 5, 2009)

KMK said:


> SolaScriptura said:
> 
> 
> > Sure, 350 years ago the word was used to refer to someone who studied theology, but as you note, we seem to use that term a lot more in respect to the authors of the WCF than with anyone else.
> ...



It depends upon the context. When I'm speaking before a crowd and I want to reference them I'll say something like, "... the authors of the Westminster Confession wrote..." or "the consensus at the Westminster Assembly was..." or "the members of the Westminster Assembly agreed that..." or "in the confessional documents produced by the Westminster Assembly, the studied opinion of the assemblymen was..."
Etc.

Only here will I occasionaly refer to them as divines, but even then it is a part of my ongoing effort to connect with others and speak their language. 
I'm sure this totally dissatisfies some, but oh well.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Nov 5, 2009)

Ben,
Members of "what"? Oh Gillespie, he was a member of the Westminster Assembly of members? 

Fawning? Your disdain of others on this board is duly noted. 

Only here? I'm sorry, but that simply reflects your ignorance. 



SolaScriptura said:


> NaphtaliPress said:
> 
> 
> > They are called divines maybe more than others or maybe even almost exclusively now, because they served on _The Westminster Assembly *OF DIVINES! *_
> ...


----------



## SolaScriptura (Nov 5, 2009)

NaphtaliPress said:


> Ben,
> Members of "what"? Oh Gillespie, he was a member of the Westminster Assembly of members?



I don't get it. In modern parlance, when we speak of puritans we say "puritans" not puritan divines (as is common here, as if we are still in the 16th century). In modern parlance, most people don't talk about the Westminster Assembly at all, but when the authors come up and are being spoken of apart from the name of the assembly, they are not simply refered to as "divines."



> Fawning? Your disdain of others on this board is duly noted.


Please do note with careful diligence that I believe the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms are accurate reflections of Scripture. But that said, this in no way implies that I do - or anyone should - engage in de facto hero worship, which is idolatry. As is the case with any niche group, people on this Board come from all over and they live with the acute realization that they are a distinct minority. So when we come together there is a temptation to inadvertently construe our admiration and respect as borderline reverence. I begrudge no one of the freedom to respect and appreciate the work of the theologians, pastors, and biblical scholars of the Westminster Assembly... but as a Reformed minister, it is my duty to warn others and caution them against the temptation in every human heart to idolize any man or group of men. You can say my concern is unfounded, but the last I heard, you are not an officer of any church and I am, so I'd appreciate if you'd give me the benefit of the doubt and perhaps recognize that sometimes my comments are intended as observations or tongue-in-cheek admonitions and not indications of "disdain of others on this board" as you put it.



> Only here? I'm sorry, but that simply reflects your ignorance.



Not really.


----------



## ReadBavinck (Nov 5, 2009)

According to the OED "divine" as a noun can refer either to:

1. A diviner, soothsayer, augur; a prophet, seer.

2. One who has officially to do with ‘divine things’; formerly, any ecclesiastic, clergyman, or priest; now, one skilled in divinity; a theologian.

_The first citation for the word given is as far back as Wyclif ca.1380._

3. Applied to non-Christian writers on theology, and to the priests of heathen religions.​


----------

