. c '': , /"f^r^ ^l' LIBRARY OF THE Theological Seminary, PRINCETON, N. J. ^^^CI^L__ [division _^ Ud^.. ' Shelf, o o . \ r r A FULL arid FINAU E P L Y TO Mr. "ToWs Defence O F Dr. Middleton\ Free Inquiry. W I T H A N APPENDIX, In Answer to Every Particular in Dr. Mtddleton\ Vindication : AND A PREFACE, ON THE Credibility of Miracles, Occafioned by the M / Two Previous Qjj e s t i o n s,/y^- /pjiM By Wi L L I a M D o D w E L L, D. D. Reaor of Shottesbrook^ Berks, and Prebendary of Sarum, , LONDON: Printed for S. Birt, at the Bible and Ball m Ave-wary-Lane, M DCC LI. J PREFACE. JT is of no Importance to the Puhlich^ to he ac- quainted with the Accidents which prevented my feeing Mr. Toll'j Defence for fome "Time after it was publtfJoed, the Bomeftick Cares which engroffed my Attention at that Seafon, and the other Bufmefs zvhicb engaged the firjl Leifure that I could obtain for Appli- cation to Study. Upon a curjory Perufal of it., I laid it by., till I might fee whether Br. M. would think it worth while to vindicate Himfelf, or would be wil- ling to trtift his Caufe to this Defence ; for I did not think that either the Civility or Weight of the Per* formance reqiiired any immediate Notice. But having now recovered a little more Leifure., I have conjidered it more attentively r, and floall here offer my farther Re- JieSfions on it to the Publick. If there be any Part of the ^lefiion, which may be thought to deferve a more <^. particular Conjideration than is offered in this Reply, \|^ perhaps it is That., which relates to the general Cre- *, dibility of Miracles. It is eafy to raife difficulties on ftich a Point as this., and it may not be fo eafy to clear them all. The ah fur d Stories., which have been re- ported and received^ have raifed a Prejudice in Many againfi the Belief of all Miracles \ and a Regard to the good CharaBer of Witnefles, without an Examination cf the Fact in all its Circumftances, has betrayed others into grofs Superftitions and Follies ; fo that ge- nuine Miracles have often been reje5fed, and fpurious ones admitted; and InfidtXny or Credulity have too much divided the World. Some proper Marks of Di- a Jiin5lion li PREFACE. JlinBioft c.re jujlly called for ^ and may, I think, he af- Jigned to the SatisfoMion of every reafonable and careful Inquirer. I am the more inclined to look into this Sub- jeii, not only on Account of its near Conneflion with the main Point in Difpute, but hecaufe it has been con- ftdered by another Writer in fuch a Manner, as may be thought to ■prejudice the Evidence offered for the Con- tinuance of Miraculous Powers in the Primitive Church. // is indeed the Profeffed Defign of this Au- thor not to concern himfelf with the Controverfy between Dr. M. and his Adverfaries, but his Opinion ^ ana the Tendency of his Argument to fupport it, are eafily enough difcernible. 1 am obliged to this Gentleman for his . Approbation of the Manner in which I had treated this Argument, which I would not forfeit ; and I think his Attempt to Jhew the Superiority of the Gojpel- Miracles., and to guard againji Confequences which might reach too far, highly commendable. Neither would I be un- derjlood to be writing an Anfzver to his Sentiments and Reflections, but tofJjew that his State of the Cafe, as far as it appears to me to be right, which is in a great Part of it, does not overthrow the Evidence offered on our Side-, but that his Conceflions, in feveral Places, are all that are necejjary to fupport the Teflimony of the Primitive Fathers in this Particular. He has thrown in, however, occafionally, fome Remarks direElly cal- culated to weaken the Force of what had been offered by the Oppofers of Dr. M.*i new Scheme, which he will excufe jjty taking Notice of He begins, in his Preface to the previous Queftions, with obferving, that " No Two of the Dr^s Oppofers *' agree in the Point, How long after the Apofiolick " Age Miracles continued, but that fix upon the Hy- *' pothrfis of which of thefe Gentlemen you will, you. " are fur e to have Four out of¥'wQ againji the Scheme *' you pitch on^ I think the Reprefentation, which He hiwfelf has given of their Opinions^ may fhew the contrary ; PREFACE, III tontrciry ; and that if you fuppofe them to continue *tilt the Civil Eftablirtiment of Chrifiianity^ and to ceafe about that Time, you will have Four of thefe Five Gentlemen on your Side, The Firjl did not limit their Continuance to the Times of Origen, but added ex- prefsly, many more Teftimonies might be offered, iho' he had neither Leifure or Inclination, He fays, to proceed farther : If He had, it may be prejumed that He would have brought them down to the Period af- figned', efpecially as three fevere Perfecutions, zvhicb feemed to need them , interfered in that Interval. ' ' The " Second, it is faid, carried them to the End of the *' Third Century.^' This would be very near the Time of the Civil Eftablifhment of Chriftianity ; but in Reality this Gentleman went farther, to that very period exprefsly, calling on Dr. M. to prove that the Miracles of the Fourth Century were all forged (P. 3 1 J The Opinions of the Third and Fourth, as delivered in their own IVords^ were, that Miracles continued till the Civil Eftablifliment of Chriftianity •, that ** probably many wonderful Works were afterwards " wrought for fame great Funds'," and that '* zve *' have Reafon to think that they ceafed fome Time " after the Civil Eftablifi:3ment of cur Religion.** Here is as exaSl a Concurrence of Opinion as could be between thofe, ivho think that the withdrawing of thefe Gfts might be gradual, and who yet have affigned one common Period as the Conclufion of what might fir iEily he called the Age of Miracles ; and to which Period every one of them profeffedly confined his Vindication. This was as great an Agreement about the Time of this remarkable Incident, as could be expeSled •, and this Gentleman Himfelf cannot forbear the Reflexion which every one makes on the great Precifion and Exaclnefs with which Mr. Whifton has determined this Point .^ who has affigned the very Tear in which He fuppofes the Ictjl Miracle to have been wrought » Had the Dif* a 2 fen-m. iv PREFACE. ference of Opinion been great between the Acherfaricf of Dr. M. on this Article of the 'Time of their Conti- nuance, it would not at all have affected the rnain j^e- fiion, as J. have obferved inHhe enfuing Papers: But, in Reality, there is a remarhabk Agreement on this Head between Thoje Writers who are here fpoken of. " But the Firjl Queftion previous to this Contro- " vcrfy, which, as this Gentleman rightly obfervesy ' ' ought to be corjidered, and which feems to be of no *' fmall Confeqiience, is, "What are the Grounds upon " which the Credibility of Miracles in general is " foLirided?" Some Pages are fpent to prove what fhould readily be admitted, that We m:iy and ought to enquire inter thefe Grounds <9/ Credibility, a7id this Proof is made out from the Reafon of the 'Jhing, frotn the Authority of Scripture, and from the abfurd Stories which have beeyi propagated for Want of fiich free Inquiry. " It feems, ^^ fays 'This Author, " to be a fair ^eftion^ and not to be anfvcred with a Jeft, which St. Au- ftin puts as from fome Unbelievers, Why, fay They, are not Tlooje Miracles, which You fay were done formerly, now done ? His Anfwer was. He that requires Miracles to be done now, in Order to his Belief, is Himfef a ^reat Miracle, who does not believe when all the World believes.'* Notwith- flanding the Turn of Expreffion, this Anfivcr ef St. Auilin certainly contains much more than a Jeft, and refers td the very DiJtin5iion proper to be fuggefted upon this Enquiry. The World had then been newly con- verted to the Profcffion of the Gofpel by the Force of Miracles, in Oppofttion to all their Prepoffeffions and Jji'fis, and this Fa6t of fo univerfal a Converfion, which was not to be accounted Jor but from the Reality of the Evidence, might well be confidered as an Ar- gument of their Truth, might prevent the farther Neceffity of fuch extraordinary Inter pofitions, and might bs iPREFACE. V • h thought to render Him a furprizing hjlayice of \n- .credulity, who could withfiand the Force of fuch a -Confideration. 1 do not perceive ^that St. Auftin gave vihe leaftHint in this Phce againfi' the Reajonahlenejs cfexardning into them, hut referred to a very proper Point, the Succefs of thofe which had food the "T^ of ■thefiriaefi Exarninaticn, By thofe the moji inveterate Prejudices were already overcome, and Chrifianity fo far eftablifhed as to ftand no longer in Need of fuperna- tural Affifiance ; which was the right Anfwer, and a very fufacient one, to the ^eftion, which was put to him. 1'hat the Evidence of Miracles pr ope fed to our AJent ought to he exa/irinedinto, will admit ofnoDifpule among§i reafonahle Men. i:he Puhlick Offer of them to Examina- tion at the Tirae they zvere wrought, is a Circumfance of the ulmofi Confiquence to eftablfh their Credibility, Many may have been genuine, which had not that Advan- tage -, hut thofe, which were fo propofed to Enquiry, which pod that Tef, and turned Oppofers into Advocates, come recommended to Pofierity with the highcfi Tokens ofGenuinencf. P.eports of Stories, which were re- ported to the Writers of them, and which never flood the Tefi of indufirious and fagacious Enemies, are not to he paralleled with thofe in the forementioned Circum-. fiances ; and a Colkmon of a thoufand fuch Legends from Heathens and Papifts, will not lejfen the Credit bility offich Miracles as are related by many Witneffes in difiant Places, who d, then^ and not till then, arifes a Prefumption againfi the 'truth of the Report. Credibility, it fJjould be ohferved, relates to the Evidence by which any Report is confirmed to Us •■> and therefore when a Thing in its ozvn Nature poffible is cfferted, we cannot, from Any thing in the Nature of it, prefuppofe its Fat/hood. When we fay a Thing is incredible in itfelf, we mean, and ought to mean, that it is incapable of being proved by any Teftimony : und this canftri^ly, be f aid of Nothing but an Impofli- bility. To fay, therefore, that a FaU reported is, at firft Viev/, rather incredible than credible, is a Form of Speech neither warranted ly the common 7ior the philofophical life of the Words ; for if the Mean- ing be, that fuch Fa5is are rather unlikely than likely at firfi View, would it not be better to fay fo in plain Terms P and then the proper Anfwer will be, that Things, which at firft View may appear unufual and improbable, may, upon farther Examination, be con- firmed by fuch Teftimony as to be fnade unqueftionable ; and This is allowed by this Author i7i fever al Fiiiances, The Circumftances of the Fa6l, we readily allozv, are to be taken into Confideration, as well as the Charac- ter of the Witnefles, and the Reafon is, becaufe hy tbefe we may often determine, whether the Reporters a 4 ivcre vlil PREFACE. *ujere not deceived in the Cafe, and guided hy a falfe Judgment in their Report, 'This may well affe^ the Force of their Teikimony, but Jl ill, in this Light, the Credibility of the Fa5is depends on the external Evi- dence, and is admitted or rejedled according te our Opi' nion of the Wifdom and Integrity of the PFitneffes. *' A High Degree of Improbability," fays this Gentleman, '* in all common Cafes, except where '• Miracles are concerned, is allowed to produce the " fame Eff?M in decrying all Affent, as Impoffibility " itfclf; hut, in this Particular, 7/7^r*? Improbability *' of the Thing is not deemed fufficient to defiroy all *' Credit.''* {P. 3.) But why not equally in the one Cafe as in the other ? I have not met with this Di^ Jtin^ion amongff any Writers on this Subje5l, nor oh- ferved the Fatl in the Courfe of Life. The Improba- bility which excludes Affent in all common Cafes, is not that Improbability which appears at the firftView, ^ut that which is founded upon a Review of the ixhole Cafe ; and if the fame continues to appear upon a like thorough Examination of the Report of Miracles, why fhoiild it not have the fame Effetl? Lei not the Im- probability of Miracles arife merely from their being ilich, that is, from their being out of the common Courft' of Nature, but from any natural or moral In^ capacity in the PVitneffes, and This will be deemed fuf-, Jicient to defiroy their Credit in this Particular, as well as in any other. In all Cafes, where it appears more improbable that tht Thing fljculd be true, than that the IVitneffesfoouU, either thro* Fraud, or Self-Deceit^ concur to ir/ipofe upon us, there the Report, whether of a natural or fupernatural Kind, will of Courfe be Tcje^edt, and this Gentleman has remarked the FaB in the latter Cafe, even where the Attcflation has been attended with all the particular Qirciimjlances of Per- fonsy and Timesp end Places, PREFACE. k ^he In lent. He adds, of fuch Tales, and hh Re- fnarks on them, was to Jhew, '''■that the Hijlorian, *' who may he credited in ordinary Occurrences, yet is ** not to he trujtcd or lelieved, without ftritl Exami- *' nation, when He relates extraordinary Fa5is. (P. 12.) But zvhat Protejlant expels or defires that extraordi- nary Fa^s Jhoidd be credited without ftritl Examina- tion ? The Primitive Fathers did jwt, for they offered their Claims to the firiSieJl Scrutiny, nor do the ratio- nal Dtfenders of them at this 'Time, for They think there is a peculiar and extraordinary Concurrence of Circumflances to confirm thofe Claims, which cannot he Jhewn to have attended any Falfoood. On the other Hand this Gentleman cenfures BifJoop Atterbury'j Reflexion " on the Pretenders to Won- der-working in Ciiina or Japan, where there was no Fear of a Difcovery ; or fometimes in Spain or Italy, where there were many always ready to fa- vour fuch Pretences,'^* and fays, that '''' this Way of raifing a Difficulty or Ohje^ion will equally lie againjl ^ real Miracles wrought any where at a Difiance from us." I mufl here big Leave to diffent fro?n him, and to think that the Bij]:ofs Reflexion is a very jnfi one. For when Any pretend to have zvorked Miracles Gt a Difiance, zvhere we have no other Evidence than their PFord, that They made fuch Pretenfions at all-, or where, if They did make them, the People may he fuppofed not qualified to judge of them ♦, or zvhere, if they zvere qualified. They were prejudiced in their Fa- vour, and interefted in the Belief of them, if Thofe zvho pretend to have worked Miracles in fuch Circum- Jlances, refufe to repeat the fame, where there is the fame or greater Occafwn, before Thofe who are able and zpilling to examine them. This is a reafonahle Caufe of Sufpicion \ but this Refie^fion is not equally of Force a- ^ainfl all real Miracles done at a Difiance ; the Pre- ienflons to which zvere made openly, difperfcd in Wri- tinaj X PREFACE. ting at the Time, fiibmitted to the Examination of Enemies, in Times and Places of Literature ; and which, in thoje Circumftances, turned many of their Advcrfaries into Prcfejfors and Patrons of their Caufe. The former, which is refle^ed on by the Bifhop, is the Cafe of the Pretenfions of the Papiiis, which, for the Caufe s there fuggejied, may reafonahly bereje^ed: The Latter is the Cafe of the Claim of the Primitive Fa- thers, which, being propofed to the Wife and Learned Senate of Rome, as well as to the Governors and People of other Places, and profpering under the mojl publick Propofals of Enquiry, may on that Account be reafonably admitted. This D'ftinSlion may be of life, if applied to all the Injlances reported by this Gentleman. He Himfelf, af- ter having given up the Accounts of Miracles given by the Jcdnis, near Two Hundred Tears ago, as fabulous y proceeds to look backzvard Twelve or Tiiirreen Hun- dred 2'^ears, or a Century higher fill, and to enquire into *' the pofitive Evidence of Miracles done in thofe " Times, Miracles, fays He, wrought before goodMen, *' able to judge, and krme^ly difpofed to tell the whole " Truths* (Pag. lo.) S'lch a Chara£ler of the Wit- nejfes, different, lyy his own Confeffion, from that of the Jefuits, is a Preftimpiive Circumffance in Favour of their Reports, and will render them rather credible than incredible at the firft View. " But, fays He, " zvhether the Grounds of Credibility alter zvtth Agcs^ *' is the Point in Debate.^* I jhould apprehend that That could never be Matter of Debate betwixt fenfible Writers, What is credible at one Time mujl, if all the Circumftances he the fame, be credible at all Times : But Circumffances of Fa6t may vary, and may make particular Reports more or lefs credible in different Agesy tho\ the general Grounds of Credibility continue always the fame. That there was a very material Dfference of Circumffances in the Ages before the EJlabliJhment PREFACE. xi .£ports, and in Favour of the preceding ones ', andmay fhew, that tho* Credibility does not depend merely on the Diflance of Ages, yet it may depend much on the Circumjlances of limes, and that what may he very credible in one Situ-' ation, may be very much otherwife in a different one. However, we fhall very readily admit the next Reflec- tion offered by this Author in the Way of Reafaning^ that ' ' if fome Fatls are related which bear, about *' them evident Marks of Improbability, one cannot *' but fufpeft, or fufpend 07te''s Judgment, notwith- *' fianding the Confidence with which they are told, ** unlefs there be fome Circumflances more than com- " mon Teftimony, which may lead one to give Cre- *' dit to the Relation.'* {P. 26.) JVe think that fuch Circumflances did attend, and have beenfocwn to attend., the concurrent Report of the Primitive Fathers in the Cafe in View. We are next entertained with an Account, which particularly concerns the Adverfaries of Dr. M. as th.y have All laid fome Strefs upon it. It is here reprefjut- ed as a Miracle as well altefled as Any, and yet as certainly groimdlefs, and contradi^lory in the very Re- port of it : And it fcems introduced to floew, that ths Jirongcfl 'Teftimony cannot confirm fo improbable a Story ^ and that all After-Relations are the more to be fufpe^ed for the Miffake which is fome way fuppofed to have hap- pened in this fo early and foknin an At t eft at ion. It re- lates to the Prophecy of St. Poly carp, and the Com- pletion xii PREFACE. ■pletion of it^ concerning his being burnt ^ idhich this Gentleman fays happened otherwife than had been fore- told^ " as if it had happened on Purpofe to fjame all *' fuch as pretended to the Heavenly Gift of Prophe- "9', without having it P (P. 29.) — '■'- In Fa^^"" He fays, '■'• He ivas nothmntdXwc, but zvhen He was " Dead •, direBly contrary to his Prophecy.''* (P. 30.) ^is zvas an OljcSlion which had efcaped Dr. M. and his Defender, yet is here brought as an obvious Proof cf the Falfhood of the Report, or of his Preienfion to a Prophetick Spirit. Should I afk, What Connexion this Story, according to this Gentleman'' s own Reprefenta- tion of it^ has with the State cf the Cafe concerning the Credibility of Miracles in general, or how confift- ent this Account is with the profeffed Defgn of not en- iring into the Con tr over fy between Dr. M. and his Ad- verfaries, 1 might be thought rather to bring a Diffi- culty on thisGetitleman, than to clear that which is •propofed by Him. Let Us therefore conftder the Charge of Contradiction, which is here brought againji this Relation. ^o\ycz.v^ feeing in aVifion his Pillow, or what was under his Head, all on Fire, faid prophetically to thofe about him, I mufl: be burnt alive. The Event was, that he was foon after feized, and condemned to the Flames, which could not but Jlrongly affe^ thofe, who knew He had thus foretold the Manner of his Death, when other Methods of Execution were more probable, even in Cafe of a Perfcution. How then was this Prophecy, in Fa^, coniradi5led ? fVas this Sentence reverfed, and was He not put to the Fiejy Trial? No. This is not pretended. He was put on the Pile, the Hijlory tells us, and the Fire kindled around Him. Did He then efcape from it in any Method, and 'return alive and found to his Friends ? Neither is This pretended. He lojl his Life in the enduring of it, and, according to his Prayer at that very Seafon, zvas that very D^y accepted by God as a well-pkaring Sacri- fice, PREFACE. xiii Pxe, as He had fore-ordained it, and manifeiled k before-hand, and now fulfilled it. Hoiv then did his Prediulion fail of AccompUPoment ? IVhy the Fire^ it is olferved, ivas not the immediate Caufe of his Death, hut the Executioner'' s Sword. And is it not ufually fa among fl others that are Jentenced to this Kind of Deaths that the mortal IVound is received in feme other Me- thod? Does this Gentleman think that the Law is not executed^ or that we cannot^ zvith Propriety of Speech^ fay that fuch an One is burnt alive, becaufe a Coup de Grace is generally given, or that they are, through Favour, firangled at the Stake before the Torture of the Flames can much affeEi them ? Could it he foretold of any Perfons amongfl us, that come to this unhappy End, that they fhould he burnt alive, would Any other Perfon in the Kingdom except againSi the Completion of U, becaufe the Executioner was permitted or bribed to give a favourable Blow, which might 7nake the Suffe'- rer infenfihle of the ecut&r Pains of the Fire ? Com- mon Senfe, and the cuftomary Ufe of fuch Phrafes, af- ford a fuffuient Anfver to this OhjeSlion, and if the L'^gal Senfe, and popular Acceptation of the Meaning of fuch a Sentence as that of being burnt alive, be fully mfwered, as it was in this Cafe, 1 think we need not much diflurb ourfelves about Critical Ohfcrvaticns en the fVords, or fuch OhjeElions as ar if from them. Po- ]ycarp was committed alive to the Flames, He returned mt alive from them \ but was, in the End, burnt to Ajhes ', and thus the Sentence of his Pcrfecutors, and his civn Predi^ions zvere accomplifloed. But after all, the very Letter of this Prophecy, according to this Gentleman* s Account of it, was like- wife fulfilled, and Polycarp was really burnt alive, Jiotwithflanding his Death zvas^ immediately wrought by the Stroke of the Executioner. For He fecms to think that the Martyr really felt the Pains of the Fire, and, if He did, was not this literally a Completion cf, his Pre^ !kB PREFACE. Prcdi^iion? '■''If'* fays this Writer^ '* the Compd-* rifons ttfed in the Relation of his Martyrdom, convey any Idea to us, the Place where the Martyr was, was very hot, and would naturally have " ■put an End to " his Lfe ; and had it done fo, his Prophecy had been *' fulfilled:^ (Fag. 28.; And fo it was equally as the Cafe happened, efpecially as it is here reprefented: For thofe were not his very Words, that the Flames fhould put an End to his Life, and it is not fair to vary the Exprfffion, when the ^.eftion is, Whether the Prophecy was Jiterally compkated. 'The Martyr for e^ told, that He fhoiddbe burnt alive, and this Gentle- man thinks, that, by the Account given. He a^tially did burn, before the Ex^.cutioner was ordered to flab Him ; and iffo, was not the very Letter of the Pro- ph cy fulfilled? If this Gentleman infSs farther, that the Word K.cLr ** ture, noTeftimony, no Authority whatfoever is fuf- " ficient to make it be believed to be really done" (P. 35.^" 'This Rule is a mofl unqueftionahle one, hut Jfjculd not fome Caution be added under it concerning the Danger of our miftaking in forming too hafiily fuch a Judgment ? How many real Truths have been rejefled, without Examination, under the general No- tion of their Impoffibility, when the Error has lain only in the prejudiced Opinion of Thofe to whom fuch b " Truths xviii PREFACE. Truths have been prof ofed? Great Care Jhould therefore he taken to clear this Point of the real Impoflibility of the 'Thing reported^ before it befetafide on the Strength of this Rule : and I cannot think that the In/iance gi- ven under this Head does at all contribute to illujirate the Subje8. " JVloen the People of Egnatia, it is ** faid, pretended that They could at their Temple burn " and confume Incenfe without Fire, it was eafy to *' perceive a Trick.''* It might be fo, but not^ as far as I can fee., for the Reafon ajjigned under this Head. As the Occafion might be irjignificant., and the Cafe was not fubmitted to Examination^ fujficient Caufe of Sufpicion appears •, but how does it appear that the Thing was impoflible in itfelf? Could We fuppofe that the Caufe was worthy of a Divine In- terpojition., and that unanfwerable Evidence of fuch . an Interpojition was offered^ would it be beyond the Reach of Divine Power to confume the Incenfe ■without Fire ? Others will fay, that it is impojfible that Fuel., that a Bufli for In/iance, fhould not con- fume, when a Fire flames within it ; or that Human Bodies fhould not burn ivhen cajl into a fiery Furnace ; hut We Believers know better -, and that when the Aur thor of 'Nature has great Ends to ferve by reverfmg thofe Laws which Himfelf appointed and fixed. He can give fuch Dire5iion to the Elementary Parts of Nature as to work Effe^fs very different from their Jlated Influence, that in fuch Cafes He can fo order it, that the Fire may have Power in the Water, forget- ting his own Virtu:-, and that the Water may for- get his own quenching Nature ; or that on the other Hand the Flames may not wafle the Flefh of the corruptible Hving Things, tho' They walk- ed therein, neidier melt the Icy Kind of Heavenly Meat that was of Nature apt to melt. // mujl be as eafy to the Author of Nature to reverfe his own Laws as to continue them, and therefore the Charge 4 PREFACE. xix c/"ImpofI]biJIty will not hold merely from this Conji- deration, that the Effect reported is different from or contrary to the natural Power and Influence of the Elements. Let the "Thing reported be clearly /hewn to be impoffible, and it will readily be allowed, that This will preclude the Necefftty of examining the Wit-^ neffes. The fecond Rule laid down is this, that ^^ If a ' Thing be poflible, and yet We find by Experience^ * that it 72ever, or feldom happens ; or that We Our- ' fehes, or Others, have never, or fear ce ever heard, ' or found it to happen. We give our Affent to Wit- ' neffes, who atteft fuch a Thing, with great Diffi- ' culty." (P. 36.) We are, with Reafon, more careful in the Examination of fuch Witneffes, but yet if their Testimony can ft and the Ttft, it may be admitted -y and Unufual Things have in fever al In§fances been well attefied and generally credited, notwith^anding this Cir- cumifance of their happening but feldom. As Tully cbferves, " If This Circumftance of In frequency be " thought to conftitute a Prodigy, then A Wife Alaff " is fuch a Prodigy :^' and yet there have been Thofe, who have been univerfally effeemed fuch, notwithSiand" ing the Rarenefs of the Chara^er. The Infiances gi- ven under this Head are not of fuch Things as have feldom happened, but have never happened-, a7id therefore are no way parallel to the Cafe efign with his unerring Judgnient. It is added., " But the Probability of his not interpofing in fwh *' a Manner is fuch., that the Credit of V/itneffes " muji be able to counterbalance the Improbability of " fuch his Interpofition., before We can affent to it^ (P. 38.) If the former Part of this Sentence be fpoken of the preicnt Times, I fee not but that it may be admitted. The Probability that God will not in- terpofe r,:iracuhiijly in our Days is fo great., that the Credit of Witneffes miifl be great indeed to coun- terbalance it. We have Reafon to believe that fuch viiracidous Interpofitions have long been difconti- nued ; We have 7io Proniife to caufe Us to expe^ a Re- newal of them., and We fee no particular Exigencies which can require them. But this Argument concern- ing the Improbability of extraordinary InterpofJions ■ cannot fl and as a general Prejudice and Prefumption againjl all fuch, becaufe it depends upon Times and Circumjlances \ and the who's Force of it lay on the other Side in thofe Primitive Times ^ which We have now a Vteiv to. They hadfeen them in the Age imme- diately preceding ; They had a Promife, not limited^ for .PREFACE. xxi for the Continuance of them ^ and'T'hey faw the Occa^- Jim for them very fully continuing in their own Times. The Probability therefore of God*s continuing to in- t'rpofe in an extraordinary Manner in that Age^ is fich^ that the Common Credit of PVitncffes might well be thougfjt fufficient to effablijh it. The Ufe of this Obfervation^ that God may fee Reafons .for inter- pofing when We do not, is chiefly applicable to par- ticular Fa^s^ for We fee a general Reafon for it, in thofe Ages at leaf : and it is chiefly ferviceabk in ob- viating Prejudices from firfl Appearances^ and in pre- paring Us to look carefully into the whole Circwm^fances of the Affair ; for the Reafons do often open to Us upon the Enquiry, which lay hid upon a tranftent View of the Cafe. It may farther be obferved, that the In- tent of Miracles beflowed wight be either for the fole and immediate Ufe of thofe Perfons and Times to whom They were granted ; or, in Conjun^ion with this End, it tnight be for the farther Infiru5iion and Aimonition of future Ages, as an Evidence of fonie Truths in Favour and Support of which thofe Miracles were wrought. In the former Cafe, if they are mentioned at all in Hiftory, it is more than is neceffary with RefpeSi to Pofterity -, and if they are not fnentioned with all the Circuniiiances, which might have fupport- ed their Truth, they may notwithftanding be not the lefs genuine : and it is no infuperable Obje£iion, if they are well attefied, to fay that We do not fee the Reafon of them. But where They were intended as Ohje^fs of Faith to After-Times, there the Reafons of them are difcernible as well as the external Evidence of them inconteflable \ and None of them are preffed upon the Be- lief of Pofterity, but where the Importance of the Oc- cafion was vifibly worthy of fuch an extraordinary In- tcrpofltion. If the Eftablfmnmt of the Truth of a Di- vine Revelation be not an End deferving cf the Ufe of fuch Means ^ I know not zvhat higher can be b 3 afligned; xxii PREFACE. djfigned i and This is the End ajftgned for their Con- tinuance by Tbofe, who vindicate the Miracles of the Primitive Church. From the Credibility of Things We are very perti- nently led to con/ider that of the Perfons : and This is fummed up in very few and very proper Words. *' AWitnefs of any Fa^l mufl have Opportunity of " examining//; He miifi be 'i:!i\i\\[\A in relating it : *' He mufl not be biaffed by Intereft or. Party : He " mujl not be credulous: He mujl have Abilities to ** fearch out the 'Truth.** (P. 38.) Thefe are fo truly the jufl ayid neceffary Salifications of Witnefes, that where they concur^ We cannot reafonably refufe our Affent ; where Any of them are wanting^ there will proportionably arife fonie Ground for fufpeSling their Tef timony. But They All concurred in the Cafe of the primitive Apologifis for Chriftianity^ as I have fhewn in Anfwtr to Mr. Toll'j- Comparijon of their Tefiimony with that of the prefent Advocates for the Continuance of Mracles in the Romifh Church. It is rightly added, '''' If a Man be an Eye-Wit- * ' neis of any Fa5f, and has the ^alities jujl now men-^ " tioned., He deferves the fir ft Degree of Credit. If *' a P erf on relates what an Eye-Witnefs tells Him, He *' has a lefier Degree of Credit due to Him. He jlill *' has a lower Degree, who relates only what They '* fay, to whom Eye-Witneffcs have made a Report. *' And as for Thofe^ who collet from Others what They *' have faid, and thus compile a Hifiory of Fa£is, their '* Credit depends upon their Judgment in rejeBing or * ' relating, what has appeared to them to be true or *' falfe.** (P. 38.) Tbefe Rides appear to me to be fo reafonable andjufi, that the Application of ther/i will clear up many Difficulties, and anfwer many ^efiions propcfed by this Author in the farther Purfuit of his Argument -, particuhrly fuch as relate to the Criteria, by which We mcy difiinguifh which of the Mirfcles re- lated PREFACE. xxiii lated, are, and which are not to be credited. I will only ohferve at prefent, that according to this Account the 'Tefiimony of Thofe Apohgifts, who wrote before the Efiab li foment of Chnflianity^ defrves the firft Degree of Credit -, for 'They fpeak of 'Things of which Them' felves were Eye-WitnelTciS. The Manner in which They propofe the SiibjeSi of Miracles to the Enquiry of their Adverfaries implies it \ Their own Converfion by that Means demonjirates it \ and their 'Declarations of- ten clearly avow it. Origen, One of the latefi Apoi,0' gifts in that Interval, afjerts it eacprefsly in fo many JVords, injijis on the Convi£lion which had been extort- ed from Enemies by Means offuch Miracles, and fays exprefsly. Several of this Kind We ourfelves have fcen. Orig. cont. Celfum. Lib. I. P. 362. Ben. Ed. Again, " Another Rule is affgned of great Impor- *' tance to form our Notions of Credibility ; and that *' is, if Kncm'iss as well as Fiiends concur in relating *' the fame Fa^.''* {P. 39, j I may add, that if They do not deny the Fa5l, but attempt to evade ity This is likewife a Circumfiance of great Weight to efta- blifh the Belief of it. It was not to be expeSled that They fhould officioufly and unneceffarily relate the fame Fa^s ; but if, when preffed with them. They did not deny them. This muft be a fir ong Confirmation of them ; and Jo this Gentleman Himfelf acknowleges . Now This Advantage likewife holds with Refpe£i to the Miracles of the Primitive Church as well as Thofe of the Apofiolical Age. It appears by thofe Apologias, who fet Themfelves to anfwer all Obje£iions, that this of denying the FaSfs was not one -, and it appears by fome Tefiimonies of thofe Adverfaries themfelves, that the Reality of them was admitted by the very Evafions nfed to weaken the Force of the Argument arifing from them. b 4 - The xxiv PREFACE. 'The following Pages carry Us back again where We Jirji fet out, and feem calculated to JJoew that no Tejli- mony can he fufficient to make a Report cf the Inter- ruption or Reverfal of the Laws of Nature credible. I was in Hopes IVe had now gained thefe Preliminary Points, — that Miracles were pofliblc in themfelves ;— that they have been wrought on important Occa- fions -, — that it is credible that 'They may be wrought in other Inflames on Occ a/tons cf equal Moment ; — that there may be Reafons for them in the Counfels of Providence where We may not difcern at leaf all ihofe Reafons ; but that where We do difcern them, there their Credibility is the better efiablifhed\ — that .ivhere the Witneffes are faithful, difinterefled, cautious, wife, afid have Opportunities .£i related, improbable in itfelf, becaufe We *' have never found in our czvn Experience, or in *' that of Others, any fimilar Injiance ; Jior have ever *' heard or fecn any Man able to do, what is faid to be *' done: — A Sufpicion, // ii [aid, -prefently arifes, *' and lies againji the Man who relates it, however ** fliithful the Relator may be, and even credible in " all other Injlances. Nor will his Ability, or fup- *' pofed Plonefiy ^ or his being even an Eye-Witnels, *' totally remove the Jealoufy of Fraud, or Impojition «c or Trick',"* and then the Reafon follows, " Becaufe *' the ImprobabiHty of the Thing outweighs any Af ** furance that We can have of Perfonal Qualities." (P. ^9, 40.) Jf fo, were not thofe Obfervations on the Salifications of Witneffes unneccffary and fuperflu- CUSi fince^ according to this Account, no Tejiimony can PREFACE. XXV he fiifficient, to prove a Miracle ? For ii is to be oh ferved, that the Improbability of the FaEi related is not here charged on the 'Trijiingnefs of the Occafwn, or on the Want of Examination into it^ or on any appendant Circumfiances "dohich might fecni unlikely^ but fucrcly on its not anfwerifig to our own or others Experience in anyfunilar Infiance, or to what we have heard or feen Any Man able to do, that is, merely to its being miraculous: And This Improbability is faid to out- weigh any Ajfurance that We can have of Perfonal Qualities. We are then led again to the Mention of Miracles upon Tradition by Heathen Hijlorians-, where the Tefiimony of Eye-Witnefles is not pretended \ where no End or Ufe of them was affigned\ where no Examination of them was offered or admitted, all which may fecurely be rejeSied without fo dangerous a Propojition as this, that *' the Improbability of a *' Miracle outweighs any Affurance that We can have " of the Fcrion^l Qu^ditks of the Witnejfes.** Where- as fo great an Improbability as this mufi depend not on the Nature of a Miracle as fuch, but on the Cir- cumfiances attending it, which therefore ought to be [pecificd. It is improbable that a Miracle fljould be worked for no End, or for a trifling one ; hut it is not improbable that it fhould be worked on a weighty Occafton, nor is it improbable that We may upon En- quiry difcern fuch Occofion for it ; and therefore its not anfwering hitherto to our own or others Experience^ or to what We have feen or heard, is no infuperable Obje^ion againft it -, but if it be offered to our Enquiry, if it he found to anfwer fome great End, if the Wit- neffes were Many, and Honefi and Prudent ; and had all the other Salifications before fpoken of, fuch a Fa5i, thus attefted, tho^ it be miraculous, may well deferve and expe£i Credit. And indeed, notwithfianding the Want of Caution and Limitation in the general Propojition here referred tOy xxvi PREFACE. io^ this Gentleman himfelf thought fit^ in repeating the Subjlance of it, and laying dozvn this as the Rule of dif- tinguifhing Truth from Falfloood, to *' confider the Nature of the 'Thing told, to admit what is agreeable *' to Experience, and to reje^ what is contrary to *' zV," thought fit to add on the latter Cafe, " unlefs * ' there has been fuch Examination, as precludes all " Doubt." (P. 42 J Without Doubt This is a very neceffary Article ; and This, zvhich is thrown in in an incidental Claufe, was deferving ofthefirfl and prin- cipal Confideration. Should not the Rule therefore have been, '' Confider the Nature and the Circum- *' ftances of the Thing told;" for if the Nature of it only as a Miracle, and as fuch, not anfwering to Experience, befitfficient to defiroy its Credit, to whatPtir- fofe can be any After-Examination ? Or how can it pofji- hly prove fuch as to preclude all Doubt concerning the Reality of the Faoi reported ? Ifhould chufe therefore en fuch an Occafton to fay, Confider not only the Na^ ture ef the Thing told, but Confider the Circum- flances ^/ //, and of Him or of thofe who relate it. Confider whether the Miracle reported was wrought on any fuch Occafion as thofe were, which we believe Providence has heretofore wrought ; Confider what Opportunities the Relators had to judge of them ; whether They were imtneffes to them Themfelves; whether They were done in their Times \ whether They were then recorded when all might know the Truth cr Falfhood of them. Confider the Manner in which ^ They are faid to have been wrought ; whether They were done in private ; whether They were offered to Examination, efpecially to Thofe who were mojl concerned to difprove them. Confider the Conne(5lion of them, whether the Miracles reported by different Perfons have any Relation to Each Other; whether Sh?y ^^'"^ wrought in the fame Caufe ; whether there '^as any profe^'nd End for which th^ were wrought -, whclher PREFACE. xxvii whether that End was^ according to the Rule of Analogy, [uitable to the other Bifpenfations of Provi- dence, and worthy of fuch an Interpojition. Conftder the Effc6l-, whether the Caufe profpered in Favour of which They were wrought \ whether the Witneffes were always Favourers of that Caufe ; whether They were brought over to it by unavoidable Convi^ion wrought by the fame Means ; whether They openly propofed the fame Means of Convi^fion to Others, Conftder lajlly the View of Thofe who make the Report, whether ^hey have any temporal Interefi to ferve by propagating the Belief of them ; whether They have any Principles which might excufe their Pro- moting a Falfjood for the Service of fame fuppofed good End ; or whether it appears that their Confcience and their Security would both have obliged them to. have told the Truth, and deleted the Pretence if it had been groundlefs. If, upon a View of all thefe Circumjlances, there arifes greater Caufe of Sufpicion than Ground of Confirmation, the Report will be rejected', but the Reafon will be, not from confiderin? merely the Nature of the Thing told, its not anfwering to our Experience, or its being contrary to the flated Courfe of Nature, but from its Failure in forne other Particular necejfary to fupport its Credibility. This Gentleman goes on to take Notice of zvhat is ufually obferved in Favour of Miracles, " that an *' Interpojition cf Providence is fuppofed in fuch Cafes ^ " and thereby a Power is acknowledged fufficient to " bring about whatever is poffible •,'* (P, 40) and his Remarks on this are of Force againfi fuch. If fuch there are, as contend that the Report of a Miracle fldould be admitted, becaufe it may be true. But amongff the moft fanguine Advocates for this Caufe, I have not met with Any fo bold and fo weak as to refi the Point on that Ijfue, and to urge the Truth of any MiracU merely from the PolTibility of it. The xxviii PREFACE. The ohfervation referred to is intended as an Answer to the Ohje^iion ofThoJey who iyifift on the Incredi- bility of Miracles as fuch^ and fo far it is of Force ^ that the Interpofition of 'Providence being fiippofed in fuch Cafes^ there is Power fufRcienc to accompliflj the End^ if in other Refpe5is it be Credible. No One carries the Force of it farther., or pleads for the Be- lief of Miracles., merely becaufe God may Work them ; but every reafonable Believer vj'ill join with this Gen- tleman in defiring a Critical Enquiry into the Truth of them. They may not perhaps fo readily join with Him in another Part of the fame Sentence., that " if *' J^Fe do not ever fee a miraculous Interpofition., — We *' argue from the Improbability of the Thing as *' much out-weighing the Credit cf the Author -^^"^ (P. 44J becaufe This mufi depe?id on a critical Enquiry into the Credit of the Author ; // That zvill fland the Tefl^ and other Circumfiances appear worthy of fuch an Interpofition., the Improbability arifing merely from our never having feen a Miracle., will not outweigh the well fuppor ted Teflimony of a Competent Witnefs. I cannot help ohferving in this Place, that this Gentleman hitherto generally Speaks of one only Witnefs as attesting fuch miraculous Events., but hut tho' a Miracle fo attefled 'may be true., yet None that zvere intended for the Belief of PoSierity., were ever., I believe., left to refl on afingle Teflimony. It has been fugge^ed., fays this Gentleman, " that " // is not neceffary to believe every particular mira- *' culous Story which occurs either among the Ancients " or Moderns,'*' (P. 45.) This fe ems tome a very reafonable Suggefiion., and it was offered by me as zveil as by Others. " But then., fays he., if Miracles are " uniformly related., as done in different Ages., and *' different Places ; and This for a long Continuance \ " and Historians., and other good Men., concur in " the Report of fuch Fatls % what Credit is due to PREFACE. xxix *' filth a Concurrence of Attestations?" Some farther ^effions /hould, I think, be ajked, before a decijive Anfwer be given to this. Such a Concurrence is certainly a Prefumption in their Favour ; and if the FaSls attefled were fuch as fell within their own Knowlege, if they had particular Opportunities of looking into them, and particular Motives to induce them to tell the ^ruth, if the Claims to fuch Powers, and the Evidence of fuch Fa6ls, were made publick at the 'Time, and offered freely to All Enquirers, then, I think, the highefi Degree of Credit will be due to fuch concurring Alteflations, and they cannot be evaded but by fuch Exceptions as would hold equally againji the Belief of ^W miraculous Inlerpofitions . But if the farther Particulars now enquired prove unfa- vourable and fufpicious , if the Miracles reported were done only among themfelves, and calculated only to anfwer fome private Ends, if they afforded fome Temptations to them to prevaricate, and at the fame Time fome Motives to excufe the Crime and quiec their Confciences in fuch Prevarication, and principally if they were not offered to the free Examination of thofe, for whofe Conviction They were pretended to be wrought ; in the Report of Miracles thus circum- fianced, the mere Concurrence of many Witneffes in different Times and Places will not be fuffictent to fupport their Credit. But then, " Mujl we not look on fuch Witneffes *' as Fools or Knaves, All to concur without Con- ** tradition, and ailing as in Concert to propagate " what is falfe." (P. 46.; This likewife I had urged as an abfurd Confequence of reje5ltng the con- curring Tefiimony of the Primitive Fathers, in their Report of Miracles \ and the Charge will hold with Refpe£l to Others, jufl fo far as their Circumffances are parallel to theirs, and no farther. But XXX PREFACE. But this Gentleman attempts to fet afide the Force of both the foremenlioned Suggestions in the following Man- ner. " Let it be obferved^ fays he^ Firft, when it is " thought right to give up particular jniraculous Stories^ " fome Tefl or other miijl be given ^ by which One '* may judge ^ which are the dcfenfihle ones^ and which " the indefenfible."' (P. 46) Such has, I think, been gi- ven, by zvhich We rnayform a reafonahle thd* not an in- fallible Judgment, and fuch as, I believe, mojl rea finable Believers do ufually judge by. But this Author goes on, ' ' Are /^,?Popilli Miracles of any Century, Jince the Sixth *' or Seventh, to have Credit?^* I think not, for the Reafons here already ijttimated, and afftgned more at large in the enfuing Reply. Well then, fays he, " If the Jnfzvcr be in the Negative, 1 fhall AJk, " /fr^ 5/. Martin'j ? y^r^ Symeon Stylites'j.? Are " Hilarion'i/' Are St. Anthony'j.'"* Suppofe nozv, IVe fjould not be difpofcd with Mr. Toll, to reje^ all thefe together in a Bundle, but flmild fay that of thefe fome are more, fome lefs probable ; and that if Thofe Miracles, which are faid to be wrought in Publick and upon Occafions which appear worthy of them, were known to be true, '^fhis may eafily account for the Reception of other Stories which were told of them, and which never underwent any Examination ; When would be the Abfurdity of fuch a Suppojttion, or what Advantage could it give to Popery or any other Superjlition ? But granting that all the Miracles of thefe reputed Saints are to be given up as forged and groundlefs. What would be the Confcqucnce ? If thefe are " not to be credited,'* fays this Gentleman, " tho' " Hijlorians concur without Contradi^ion in them, " What is the Rule by which We can judge, which " are to be credited, or which not /*' / anfwer in the firjl Place, that this Cafe, which is ftated as if it was parallel with the Attejlation of thofe early Miracles, which were wrought before the Civil EftabUfment of Chriftianity, PREFACE. xxxi Chrijiianity ^ is very different from it. 'The life in- tended from this Parallel is eafy enough to be diftin- gnifi)ed, and will be fiifficiently obviated by obferving^ that thefe Reports Jiand upon very different Founda- tions. 'That Miracles continued in the Primitive Church, We have the concurring Teftimony R E F A C E. xxxiil •' even fuppofing the Fatis tobefalfe.^* I anfwer agaim 'Thi^ depends entirely on the Circumfiances of the Cafe- If the Fa5is zverejuch as happened frequently^ and All had puhlick Opportunities of examining \ if they were fuch^ as in various Injlances fell under their own Senfes, which common Senfe could not fail to judge of \ if they were fuch as that their prefent and future Wel- fare much depe?tded on their Judgment of the Reality of thejn ; if in fuch repeated, obvious, important Fa5iSy there was fo much Unanimity from many Witneffes, in different 'Times and Places, and yet the FaBs are fup- pofed to be grou?idlefs, I fee not how the Witneffes can be acquitted both of Folly dnd Knavery in fuch their concurring Teftimony of a Falfbood. The Circumfiances here fuggefed in their Vindication, of their ' ' attefiing " upon Report^'' their " taking for granted what *' They did not examine^* or their " aoiing upon Pre- *' judices, and imagining a Continuance of real Rowers^ *' in Oppofition to the fuppofed Rowers of Magic, or *' any fuch lllufion,^'' {P. 47.) Thefe can have no Room in the Cafe now fated, where They might have been Eye-Witnefies, and ajfert that they were, where there was no Room for fuch blinding Prejudices.^ and wild Imaginations -, where a jufi Examination could not but open the Truth \ where Folly mufi be the Charge, if They all uniformly negkuled fuch Examina- tion as mud afford them a right Information, and Kna- very, if They continued to attefi a Faljhood, which an Enquiry muft havejixwn to be fuch. The Mention of the Popifh Miracles is here domain introduced. It is faid that in this Cafe, " the Con- " ciirrence of Atteftations continues to this Day ; and *' whatever fully accounts for this Concurrence now^ " may poffihly help Us to account for the like Concur - " rence in Times paft.^^ (P. 47,) / think 1 have pewn the contrary ; that the fame Confiderations cannot poffibly account for both Cafes j but that the Reafons, c which xxxlv PREFACE. which induce the Papifts to carry on this Fraud, could 7iot by any Means hold with Refpe^ to the Primi- tive Fathers. I'he Remark, which this Gentleman Himfelf makes after the Repetition of feme more Po- pi(h 5/j, is fufficient to /hew the Difparity of thefe Cafes, and is of great Ufe informing a Judgment of all Cafes, where the Belief of Miracles is propofed to our jijfent. " Such Fa5is as thefe fhould be allowed to be " examined by Enemies as well as Friends, and by " that Means freed from Doubt •, for the mere Attef- *' tations of interejied Parties are not fufficient to re- " move Sufpicions, or to gain Credit to what is impro- *' bable in the Nature of the llbing" (P. 50 J The next Remark, which is offered to Us, is on the Manner in which, or Inflrument by which Miracles are reported to have been done. Thefe have fome times been objeSied to as trifling and ridiculous, and a very competent Anfwer has often been given, that if they are credible in other Refpe^s, They cannot be incredi- ble merely in this, becaufe herein They are fimilar to feveral Inflames recorded in the Scriptures, which are allowed to have been fiifficienily attefied : and if the At- Ifftation be fiifficient, thz Rower of God is the more confpicuous in the Meannefs of the Inflrument s by which He thinks fit to work. But, fays this Gentleman^ '^ tho* the modern Miracles may be like the fcriptural *' ones in many Circumflances, yet That is by no Means " an Evidence of Truth, ^^ (P. 52 J Was it ever pretended that it was ? Where are the Writers, who have argued the Truth of a Rati merely from its being faid to be brought about in the fame Manner as fome confeffed Miracles were, which are recorded in the Sa- cred Writings ? The Teftimony of the Witnefles is always referred to as the pofitive Evidence of the Fail, and this Confideration is introduced only to take off the Force of the Objection from the particular Manner in which it. is faid Jo be done j and to fherja that PREFACE. XXXV that the 'tlolng is capable of being proved^ if the Wit- neffes upon Examination are found to be both duly informed, and honejily difpofed. That indeed is a very dijlin5i ^lefion, but if their Tefiimony can ftand the Teji, then any Exception againjl a Form, which is thought mean or firange, is fufficiently removed, if it anfwers to the Method heretofore ufed by Providence in the Operation of Miraculous Works. If the Exception would have been as firong againfi the Manner or Inftru- ments of Miracles recorded in the Sacred Hiftory, and yet is allowed to be of no Force againfi them, then neither is it of Force againfi Others that are well at- tefied. This is a Way of Reafoning that mufi be con- clufive to all Believers, and the life of it is this, and no other, than to fhew that the Fa5l is not incredible in itfelf, but that it may admit of Proof. The Nature and Weight of the Proof ought to be examined^ and mufi be determined by other Confiderations . " The material Point,** continues this Gentleman, * * is, ifi. What Weight ought to be allowed to Tefii- " mony in Cafes of miractdous Reports? And, 2dly, *' When Miracles are related by different Writers^ " e. g. h^ Sulpitius Severus, and by a Sacred Wri- ** ter, why is the One defsnded at the fame Time that " the Other is rejected? Why fioould not both be con- *' demned as fictitious, or Both be admitted as true *' Fa5ls, fince Both depend upon Evidence to Us, " at this Diftance, well vouched by the bcfi Hmnan •' Authority ?" (P. 53. j This is putting the ^efiion in a very firong Light, and reminds me of a very pro- per Caution added afterwards in this very Treatife, that " it behoves all, who regard the Religion of *' Chrifi, fo to treat of the Miracles of other Times, " as not to throw infiipcrahle Difficulties on thofe of " our Saviour and his Apofiks** Some will be appre- henftve, that This is the Cafe here, and that the Ob' je5fion is here both clearer andfironger than the Solu- c 2 tion» xxxvi PREFACE. lion. 'The DifiinSiion in Favour of the Gofpel-Mira- cies is referred to its proper Head, the 2d previous Qiieftion : But I pouhi have been glad to have feen a clearer State, and more explicit Determination of the firfi Point in this its proper Place, namely, " What *' Weight ought to he allowed to 'Teftimony in Cafes of " Miraculous Reports F'* 'The whole Tenour of the Reflexions hitherto offered by this Gentleman feejjjs to be to fhew, that the Improbability of a Miracle is fo great as to outweigh any Affurance which We can have of the Perfonal Qualifications of Witnejfes ; and thd* We have now and then been favoured with a Conceffion to the contrary, yet this Ohjervaiion has Joon been re- peated, and our Memories have been refrefied zvith the Incredibility of every FaX, which does not anfwer to Experience, or which is contrary to the Courfe of Nature. Every Rule, which We might hope to take Advantage of for ejiablifhing the Belief of any Miracles propofed to Us, is weakened by fome Claufe, which de- feats the Effe£i ; and the Refiilt of this whole Vijfer- tation, asfummed up by the Author of it, is this, that " He has JJoewn, that Human Teftimony, how much *' foever it is valued in common Cafes, has not an " equal Deference paid to it in miraculous ones." (P. ^g.) Should He not have diftinguifbed, whether He here fpoke of the Fad, or of the Reafon of the Thing ? His Argument muji fuppofe Him tofpeak of the latter, that Men judge rightly in rejeXing all Human Tejlimony in miraculous Reports ; and then a Concern for the Credit of the Gcfpel might well fuggefi the En- quiries following that Obfervation. But then He ought likewife to be reminded of the Conceffions extorted from Him by Truth, that where extraordinary Reafons ap- pear for extraordinary Interpofitions \ or where a like Reafon appears for a Fa5i like to an extraordinary one, vf the Truth of which We are already convinced ; and where thcfe are efiablijhed by Witneffes unexceptionable both PREFACE. xxxvil both for their Abilities and Integrity, with Offers of Free Inquiry to all Oppofers^ there fuch Fa5ls may he- come credible \ when thefe Conceffions are thus colle^ed and applied^ iho* /^j Incredibility of a Miracle in itfelf be repeated to Us a thoufand Times, yet in any Senfe of it that is confijlent with thofe acknowleged Prin- ciples, We fJoad find no Caufe to he under any Apprehen- /tons for the Authority of the Miracles zvrought in the Apofiles Times, or in thofe immediately fucceeding them. But before He concludes this firft previous Queflion, He fays, that " there is another Cafe, zvhtch muji *' not he paffed over in Silence. Wc may eafily fup- " pofe it poffibk to have a Difference in the Narra- " tion of the fame Fa5i : That One may relate it fo, ^■^ as to make it all miraculous ; and Another may *' fpeak of it in fuch a Manner, as not to imply any " Miracle at all. Which Account then ought We to *''■ give the Preference to? Or what are We to be- '' lieve? Or how are We to ajent ?" {P. 54.) This was introduced only to invalidate the Account of a Mi' rack faid to be wrought in a later Age than Thofe which I am concerned with. The Cafe has many Tears ago been confidcred at large by a much abler Hand, and the OhjeSlions now offered againft it been obviated ; hut whether upon the zvhole it be thought to defervs . Cre- dit or not, it affects not the ^eftion of the Continuance of Miracles till the Civil EUabliJJytnent of Chrijlianity. As far as the Cafe 7iow fiated by this Gentleman, as zvorthy of fpecial Notice, can be thought to relate to the Grounds of the Credibility of" Miracles in ge- neral, I anfiver that it is a clear and acknowleged Rule, that all doubtful Paffages and Tefii?nomes are to he explained by thofe which are more plain and full, and are of equal Authority. If Two good Witnejfes report the fame Cafe, the One in fo ambiguous a Manner as that it may be interpreted either of a natural or fuper- c 3 natural xxxviii PREFACE. natural Evenly the Other in clear and exprefs 'Terms, incapable of Evajion^ confining the Account directly to a Miracle, if then he no Exception to Either of their Characters ^ there can be no Doubt hut that We muji explain the One Tefiimony conjifiently with the Other, and tmderjiand the Cafe of a miraculous Event. This is certainly the Rule in all like Cafes of Doubt, but this Qentleman thinks that it varies here. *' In two dif- " ferent Relations, fays He, of the fame Fa5i, Pro- *' hahility will always he on the Side of Reafon and *' Experience rather than on the Side of the ikff- *' rack." (P. S5') This again will depend entirely on the Circumflances of the Cafe. The Reafon of the Thing and the Experience of former Times may perhaps Jhew^ that the Occafion was important and worthy of a Divine Interpofuion, and then the Probability will lie rather on the Side of the Miracle. If the Caufe^ after the jiri5ieft Examination, appears to he trifling, the Objection will lie on that Conjideration, and not merely on the Incredibility (j/'rt Miracle in itfelf, as is continually infinuated. The Second Previous Queftion comes next under Confideration, " Upon what Grounds the Miracles of " the G of pel in particular are credible /**' The Difficul- ties thrown upon the Belief of all Miracles under the former ^eftion, made it highly nece(Jary to fecure the Faith of Chrifiians, and the Authority of the New Tejlament, by fhewing fome Diflindlion in Favour of the Miracles there recorded : and here this Author has a5ied a much better Part than Dr. M. did, and has endeavoured to point out a peculiar Circumjlance as ejlahlifhing the Belief of the Scriptural Miracles, tho^ all others fhould he given up as groundlefs. His own Account of the Difficulty arifing from his former State of the Cafe is as follows. " It appears, '* fays He, by what has been faid, that in order to ^' make the Evidence for any Fa5i in general credi- ** ble, PREFACE. xxxix " ble, there mujl not only be the Relator worthy of " Credit^ but the Thing, that He relates^ muft be " credible. If a Perfon be a Man of the greateji " Abilities, and of Integrity indifputabk, yet if the " Thino- reported be in its own Nature incredible, " either becaufe it is impoffible in it f elf, or becaufe it " is confirmed by no Experience of our own, or of that " of others , it is in Courfe either liable to be fuf- " peSfed, or perhaps to be entirely rejected. Upon " what Foundation then does the Credit of our Sa- " viour'^s Miracles Jiand ; fince they are improbable in *' their own Nature, as being Fa£fs beyond the Power " of any Mortal to do, and are fimilar to Nothing " that our common Experience teaches Us?" "This, " He fays, was the Subject which He had principally " in View.'' (P. sg, 60.) The Variety and the Reality of our Saviour's miraculous Works are then fet forth in a very fir ong, convincing and comprehenfive Method', but ftill this ObjeSlion remains againfi them in its full Force, that they are not fmiilar to Any 'Thing that our common Experience teaches Us. But " be- " fore this Objection is removed, and it isfhewn, that " the Miracles of the Gofpel are credible in them- " fehes, it is thought proper to enquire what Evi^ " dence they afford of the Truth of our Saviour'' s " being the Chrifl." The Reafon affigned for this is, " that Miracles, conjidered as fuch, are no Proof *' of any Thing, but of extraordinary Power ; or *' that the Perfon who does them, is cifffted by fome " Being fuperior to Man. But ?o\Ner, fays He, does " not imply Truth ; nor does it fclloiv, that He who " can exert the greatefl Strength, will therefore exert *' the greateft Veracity'' (P. 62.) This is the L/in- guage and Argument of Thofe, who have Dejigns in View very different from the Gentleman from whom I have copied them, who would abhor the Ufe to which this Method of Reafoning has been applied. And lap- c 4 prehend xl PREFACE, prehead that it is not only groundlefi in itfelf^ hut that it has carried Him into a more tedious^ more con- Jined, and lefs falisfa^ory Method of confirming our Sa- viour^ s Authority^ than might have been deduced imme- diately from the Confideration of his Miracles, '^hat Argument is more dire^, more perfpicuous, more uni- verfally convincing^ than fuch a Conne£fion as mufi fup- fofe Men to believe the Old 'Teftament before 'They can be brought thereby to believe the New. But^ fays this Gentleman, " Miracles^ confidered as fuchy are no ''^ Proof of any Thing but of extraordinary Pov/er; '* or that the Perfon^ who does them, is affijled by '* fome Being fuperior to Man J'' This But iJuhichHe makes fo light of, is all that is wanting to form a De- monjlrative Argument in Favour of Pretenfions fo fup- ported. The Acknowledgment of it as an undoubted Evi- dence of the AJJiflance of fome fuperior Being will end in a clear Proof of the Heavenly Authority of thofe who offered Miracles to the World. No, it is faid, '' Power does not imply Truth ; nor doss it follow^ '* that He who can exert the greatefl Strength, will '• therefore exert the greatefl Veracity.^* The con- trary Propojition feems to me demonftrable from the Moral Attributes of the Deity, and very clearly to be made good from the State of the ^leftion as propofed by this Author Himfdf. For the Cafe in Point is that of fupernatural Power, the Affiflance of fome Be- ing fuperior to Man in the extraordinary Operation. Nay fome Kind of Competition is implied in the Ex- preffion of their being able to exert the greatefl: Strength, who are fuppofed not to exert the greateft Veracity. Now This appears to me to be inconjijieni with the Belief of the Divine Wifdom and Provi- dence. For if miraculous Pozver without any Oppofi- tion, or a greater Dngree of it upon a Competition, may he exerted in Favour of a Falfhcod, then either there ipifi be fome Being independent of Qod^ who can thu^ fupport PREFACE, xU fiipport fuch a Caufe ; or God Himfelf muft he fup~ pcfed to permit fuch a Power ^ fuch a fuperior Power ^ to be exerted for the Confirmation of feigned Pretenftons to the unavoidable Deception of his Creatures. Now Either of thefe Suppofitions are too hard for my Faith, and much more incredible than many Articles which are daily charged with that Imputation. But if there be no Being equal to, or independent of the Author of Nature j if the Author of Nature be too wife, and goody and holy, to empower any othtr Beings to work Miracles on Purpofe to deceive Us j then an Acknow- ledgment, of our Saviour*s miraculous Works is a direSi and immediate Proof of his Preterfions without farther Argumentation. If the Origin of all Pov/er he likewife the Origin of all Truth, how can it be faid, that the former does not imply the latter, when JVe are [peak- ing of fuper natural hterpofitions ? If the Strefs be laid ■ on conjidering Miracles as fuch, that is, cut of all ConneoJion with the Pretenftons of I'hofe who are faid to he endued with them, and in this Light merely they are faid to be no Proof of any "Thing but of extraor- dinary Power, then We m.ay anfwer that this is an imaginary Cafe, which does not correfpond with Fa^-, and can he of no Uje in Speculation. Miracles never were, nor ever were pretended to be wrought for the Amufement of Mankind, tfierely to exhibit extraordina- ry Fewer -, and therefore why (loould We fiale Cafes which never exified, and which it is fo eafy to forefee will he made an ill life of, and perverted to the Preju- dice of real Fa£is ? A (landing Power of working Mi- racles never was claimed but in Support of fome Pretenftons, and if thofe Miracles were real, the Truth of thofe Pretenftons will he eftahlrjh^d. It is allowed that they are a Proof of the AJjiftance of fome Being fuperior to Man, and according as that Being is fup- pofed to be Good or Bad, the End may be fuppofed to he fo too, which is ferved by it; but a Superior Being 9f xlii PREFACE. of either CharaSler cannot he thought to lend fuch fuper- natural AJfifiance merely for the Diverfion of Human Creatures. Miracles then 'prove fomething more than extraordinary Power ; they prove the Interpofttion of afuperior intelligent Agent, who mufi be fuppofed to ah on fome Occqfion or other, fuitable to his own Nature^ and worthy his extraordinary Interpofttion. And then the plain ^lejiion will be^ whether the God of Truth would lend his fupernatural Power to fupport a Lie, or permit evil Beings to fupport it in that Manner y without rejiraining them in the Exercife of their Power, or overbalancing it by t^e Difplay of his fuperior Might. Now We Believers know from Revelation, what we might have prefuppofed by the Light of our own Reafon, that in FaSl God Almighty never did fuffer Evil Spirits to impofe upon Mankind by real Miracles, at leafl not without fuch a Manifejlation of his greater Glory, as might be a very .fufficient Guard againji the Dslufion. It is not necejjary on this Oc- cafion to determine whether the Egyptian Sorcerers alied tndy by the Affijlance of a fuperior Being, or whe- ther They only counterfeited Appearances, andplayed their Tricks by Legerdemain. On the latter Suppofition their Delufions were detedied by the farther and greater Injiances of real Miracles offered by Mofes, which could not be counterfeited : On the former, the Power of thofe Evil Spirits, by whofe Afjifiance They a5led, was fhewn to be limited and derived, and unable to withfiand, when the Finger of God interpofed in Support of his own Servants. Either Way the Con- nexion of Pov;er and Truth was very properly ejia- llifoed, and fufficient Remedy was offered againji all Pretenfions to Miracles in Favour of Fraud and Im- pojiurc. This Conne5lion is fo obvious, that I do not fee the Neceffity of proceeding in fo remote and diftant a Me- thod as this Gcntkman doss in his Enquiry what Evi- dence PREFACE. xliii dence Miracles afford of the Truth of our Saviour'' s Mffion. His RefleSlions are jujl and well adapted for the ConviSlion of a Jew, but, according to his own Scheme^ they are loaded with Difficulties, which will yield Matter af much ObjeSiion to Deifts. If Mira- cles prove Nothing but Power, and if We muji take in the Prophecies of the Old 'Teflament^ before We can urge our Savioufs fupernatural Works in Proof of his Mffion^ then We have a much wider Field of Con- troverfy, and more intricate CoUrfe of Argument to maintain, in order to convince Gainfayers, than I can apprehend to be necsffary. What our Bleffed Lord fays of Himfelf, The lame AFy Works plainly miraculous, is reprefented by our Lord as valid and unquejlionable^ and what the Spec- tators ought to acquiefce in\ and This alone was fuf- ficient, and was often urged alone to efiahlijh his Pre^ ten/ions. To the Jews who knew that the Coming of the Melliah had been foretold under fuch and fuch Circumjlances, Miracles might be of jome Ufe to ob' *viate their Objeffion from the appearing Contrariety of form Prophecies^ and the Want of Completion as yet of Others ; and They were at leaf of as much Force to Heathens, who lay not under thofe Difficidties^ to prove dire^ly the Divine Authority of the Perfon thus (ommiffioned. . Ifhallpafs over therefore the enfuing Pages on the Prophecies concerning Chrifl, and particularly the un^ fcripiural Account of the Strefs that is laid on his Death, as foreign to the Point of the Credibility of Miracles, end fhall proceed to the next Refi'Mion re- lating to that Subject. *' Be it fo then^"* fays this Gentleman^ " that Miracles^ in general, are no Ar~ " guments of any Thing but Power, yet when any *' particidar Miracle is applied in Attejiation of a " Perfon^ to whom many Characters belonged, and in *' whom Some were already fulfilled, and others would *' in due Courfe cf Time be fulfilled; the Miracle *' proves the htt-t^dition of fome Being, fuperwr to '* Man, to the Truth cf the Thing afferted.*' {P. 66^ 6y.) This Conctffion is material, and I would afk. Is this the only Cafe in which a Miracle proves fuch Ai-. iejiation ? ithis Cafe as fated in the Completion of fame Prophecies, and the Want of the Completion of Others, is attended with fome Advantages and feme Diffictdties ; and is it not equally true, that where there is neither cf ihefe with Refpeut to Prophecy, but where a Per- fin declares Himfelf commiffioned by God to reveal fome faluiary Truths to Mankind, and appeals to mi-^ racidous Powers for his Credentials, thofe Miracles, if PREFACE. xlv if true, will prove the Jttefiation of God Himfelf to the Truth of what is offer ted ? 'the Denial of this mujl end in Jome of the Ahjurdities before fpecified ; hut I ohferve that Mojlof thefe Gentlemen feem rather to avoid the ^ejiion than to give a dire5l Anfwer* There follow in this Paragraph, fome lefs explicit Remarks on the fuppofed Knowlege of the Re- vealer — on its feeming natural to conclude that Superior Beings have more extenfive Views, and more enlarged Capacities, ^c. and on the Proba- bility that They when they interpofe, will declare the Truth. To this it is obvious to anfwer that the mofi powerful Beings derive their Power from God, and are refrained by Him in the Exercife of it. They will not be permitted to work Miracles uncontroled in Support of Falfjood, and therefore, if their Miracles are genuine, it is more than a Probability that they declare the Truth, JVe now return once more to the main Point, " Are *' not^'' it is faid, " the Miracles of our Saviour ** as incredible in themlelves as any other Mi- " racks related in Hijiaryf^^ (P. 6g.) The Uncer- tainty of all Human Authority arifingfrom many dif- ferent Caufes^ the little Regard paid to Heathen and Popifh Writers in their Report of fuper natural Events are again remarked-^ and the Dijtin^iion is properly enquired after, why the Gofpel Miracles jhould be ad- mitted, and the others rejeif-ed, when both are very fully attefted. The fVords in which this ^ejiion is here Jiated by this Author, would "very fufficiently point out the Difference, and anfwer all the Difficul- ties, but thofe which Himfelf has farted from the Incredibility of Miracles as fuch, that is, as being contrary to the Courfe of Nature and of Experience. He fays in this Place, and Jays jujlly, that " the " Things faid to be done by Popi/}j IVriters are fuch, *• that No One can pay any Credit to them. They *■'' feem xlvi PREFACE. *' feem to he rather the frantic Follies of Madmen, in *' marr^ tnftances, than the ASiions of any ferioiis, rea- *' finable Creatures.^* (P. 'jo.) This certainly yields a 'uery Jirong Obje^ion againjl the Credibility of them ; but it is fuch an One as does not hold againfi the Miracles of our Saviour. They were calculated to do Good, and to teach others to do fo, and were every way reafonahle and worthy the Original Ihey pre- tended to. This therefore is a clear and manifefi Dif- tin^ion^ why the Miracles of our Saviour might well he admitted, tho* thofe of the Papifts he rejeSfed, even if the Credit of the PVitneJfes zvas equal in both Cafes ; which I can by no Means allow. Bui the Difficulty raifed by this Gentleman is not folved by this DiJlinBion, hut remains as yet in its full Force. Our Saviour's Miracles were as incredible in themfelves, as He terms it, that is, as contrary to Nature and Experience, as any others, and if fuch Incredibility outweighs any AJfurance that We can have of the Per- fonal Qualities of Witnefjes, as We were before taught, then this Objection will be an infuperahle Bar to our Belief, and We can never get over it but by unfayitig it again, and allowing that thefe Things incredible in themlelves are yet capable of being proved by pro- per Teflimeny. And this Courfe We fjall happily find taken in the enfuing Pages, where Every Thing is gi- ven up, which the Reflexions under the firft previous Queftion laboured to oppofe. In anfwer to thefe ^ejiions^ " Mufl: All Mira- ** cles be admitted, hecaufe they are well vouched ? Or * ' mufl they all be rejeXed, hecaufe they are incredible " in themfelves, notwithfianding they are well atteft- *' ed? — Or is there any Medium, by which We may ** diflinguifh between fuch as ought to be received, and *' fuch as ought to he rejected?'* This Gentleman offers the following Obfervations : " As PREFACE. xlvii *' As Miracles may fojjlbly be done hy the Interpofi- '* tion ofjome Being fuperior to Man, fo it muft he " owned, that they may be faithfully related, exaUly " as the Event was: And whenever they are faith- *' fully related, they become as much the proper Ob- " je^s of Belief, as any other hiflorical Fa5ts what- *' ever. 'The Power of our Saviour, or of his Apojlles^ " in Virtue of fupernatural AJfftances, tocureaSick^ *^ or a Lame Man, or to raife a Dead One, implies *'^ no Contradi^ion, nor is it an impojftble Conception ; ** and therefore fuch a Power may poffibly he exerted, *' And the Teftimony of an Eye-Witnefs may be " faithfully fet down in Words -, and what convinced " ^ Spectator of the Truth of ar^ extraordinary " Fa^, may be worthy of Credit. Suppofe then the '* Relator to he no ways credulous \ to he faithful; to *^ he a Man of Judgment and Integrity \ to he not " weak and fuperflitious ; nor to have any other Inte- ** reji to ferve, hut that of Right and Truth — Such " Teftimony may he credible in Matter of Miracle, *' as well as in common Cafes. For Miracles, how *' much foever above the Power of Man, are not ** above the Powers of Beings fuperior to Man; " and therefore may be done by fuch Interpojition.^* rp. 71.; This State of the Cafe appears to he not only right and true, hut to be a direol Reverfal of all that was before offered againjl the Credibility of Miracles as fuch, as not anfwering to any Thing which We Our- felves have feen or heard of, and as outweighing any AJfurance which We can have of the Perfonal Quali- ties of the Witneffes. It ts now allowed that Mracles may he done; that they may he fufficiently dijlinguifhed, recorded and attefted ♦, and that in fuch a Cafe they may be as credible as any common Fa£is. This is as favourable a Decifton of the previous Queftions as the Adverfarics of Dr, M. would defire, and will obviate xlvlil P R E F A C E» ohviate all the Difficulties which feemed to he tntended cgainft them. It is added ^ that " Circumjlances ma^ *' be fuck as to counierhallance the Incredibility of *' the ^hing'y* and that, " if the Incredibility of *' the Thing can he any ways removed, then the " Credibility of the Perlbn way hefuch, as to make " his Relation of any Fa5i credible." ^he re- moving the Incredibility of Things incredible in themfelves is a new Scheme to me ; however I am glad it can he done, if it he neceffary to efiahlifh the Miracles of the Gofpel ', and I will examine, if the fame Method that is ufed to that Purpofe, may not he of fome Ufe likewife to efiahlifh thofe which are faid to have been wrouzht in the Primitive Church. " Let " Us fuppofe," fays this PFr iter, " the Miracles of *' our Saviour to he Fa£is as incredible in them- *' felves as other Miracles are •, yet if fuch Circum- *' fiances can be fhewn in Favour of his Miracles, as " willfhew a Credibility of a fupernatural Interpo- ," fition, in Order to produce them \ then the Credi- *' bility of the Perfons relating them, will give them *' actual Credit ^^ {P. 72.) And then I add, that if fuch Circumfiances can he fhewn to continue in Fa- vour of the Miracles of his Apofiles, and their imme- diate Succeffors, as will fhew a Credibility of a fu- pernatural Interpofition in order to produce them^ then the Credibility of the Perfons relating them will likewife ^ive them actual Credit. Under this Head, the Credibility of thofe Perfons, who have given us the Hifiory of our Saviour^ s fniraculous Actions, is clearly illufirated and well exprejfed, and the concluding Re- mark upon it is, that " here the OhjeSlicn, if any^ *' m,ujt lie, not againfi the WitneiTes, who are Per- *' fons of Credit, who faw and examined what •'They ' ' reported, and were not impofed on •, but it m:fi he ** againfi the Miracle itfelf, as a Thing incredible *' in its own Nature." This Difficulty as yet remains PREFACE. xlk fimains in its full Force ; and it is added, that " if *' indeed the Miracles related are ridiculous them- *' fehes, or have no End, or a bad One, they may ^' juftly be rejc£ied, let the Hiftorian he otherwifi *' ever fo able and judicious ; becaufe in fuch Cafes " no Arguments can be brought, which will fernove " the Difficulty arifing from the Incredibility of tU «' "Thing itfelfr {P. 7A-) ^ fi>^^^ °^^b ^n this Oc- cafion repeat the Danger of our miftaking in our Judgment concerning Miracles which are reprefmted as ridiculous, or as having no End, or a bad one. For if^ according to the State of the Cafe before Us, " the *' Hiprians themfd'ues have all thofe ^alities^ " which are requi/Je to make them believed, F'iithful- " nefs, Ahilities, Refolution to fpeak the Truths and " a Deteflation of Falfhood, andwere EyeWitmffes of " what They relate,'' in fuch a Caf 1 jhould rather fufpe5l my own Judgment than theirs, and Jhould impute the Appearance of the Grounds for fuch Charges to ^ my own narrow and partial View, till a firi5i Examina- tion had convinced me of the contrary. The Point in View at prefent is, where the tVitneffes are in every RefptU unexceptionable, what Circumfiances fhall fa confirm the original Incredibility of a M^acle in itfelf, as to render it abfolutely and finally^ incredible. Its anfwering a bad End would indeed be an infu- perable Objemon, but this would be inccn0€nt with the ^lalities already fuppofed and fpecified of thefe competent IVitnejfes, and is therefore an imaginary 'Cafe. Its anfwering no End, may mean no more than none that IVe can fee, which is no unfurmount- able Difficulty, for They, who wrought it, might difcern a proper Occafion for it, tho* We do not ; and if They were fuch as claimed a Divine Commiffion to inflru5i and reform Mankind, Any AEf- of Power ex- erted under fuch a Claim, anfwered evidently a gene- (X ral 1 PREFACE. ral and very important End. The fuppofed Ridi- culoufnefs of a Miracle as diflinU from thofe Oh- je^iom already fpecified^ mufi relate to the Manner in which it is wrought •, and I would be glad to know^ where the End is worthy of a Divine In- terpojition, zvhere the IViineffes are every way qua- lified and difpofed to attejl the Truth, what Me- thod of interpojing fuper naturally fhall he thought to render the whole Account incredible, if it he attend- ed with no other Exception. Every Event is liable to be turned to Ridicule ', Unufual Ones, and fuch as are contrary to the Courfe of 'Nature, are fiill more liable than others \ and have been fo turned by Scepticks ; but Believers, who know that the Methods cf interpojing by Miracles have been various, and that fuch as have at firji born a furprizing Appearance, have yet upon Examination proved to be genuine, fhould he cautious how They give a Handle to ri- dicule the Truth, or to make Objections, which Unbe- lievers will retort upon the Matters of their Belief. The Truth of this Cafe feems to be this, that where a Miracle reported is really ridiculous in the Form or Manner of working it, it is always exceptionable likewife or defeftive in the Evidence \ and other Circumftances concur tojhew the Incredibility of it. The 2d Obfervation offered to remove the Incre- dibility of Things fo incredible in themfelves as all Miracles are reprefented to be, is this-, *' It mujl be " owned that God may at any Time, or in any Place, " interpofe ', and, if He thinks fit. He may cure Dif- *' eafes, heal the Sick, or rcjiore Eyes to the Blind, " or Feet to the Lame, or relieve any diftreffed Per- ** fin, and reflore Him to his Health with or with- '* out any vifible Means: And fuch Cafes as thefe *' may be faithfully related, and the Fa5ls may claim " Belief, if really done** This Conceffion of the Pol- fibilicy of Mracles is foon abated and ballanced by this PREFACE. li this Remark^ that they are " pofTible only^ and not " much confirmed by Experience, and that therefore " Other People have a Right to fufpe5f or douht " of the "Truth of them, how much foever the Party *' relieved may have Reafon to be thankful for the " Benefit received :" (P. 74.) x'^nd then enfiies this general Ohjervation as the Refult of the Whole ^ which 1 cannot think contributes to aid our Conceptions, or to obviate the Difficulties ufually fiarted on this Sub- je5l. " If the Credibility of the Relator outweighs " the Improbability of fuch extraordinary Interpofttion^ " the Fa5I will be admitted', but if the Reverfe hap- " pens, it will be rejected** (P. y^.) Compare this with the forementioned Affertion, that the " Impro- *' babilicy of miraculous Events outweighs any Jfju-t " ranee that We can have of Perlbnal Qi^ialities," and I am afraid We fhall gain but little towards efla- hlifhing the Belief of any Miracles from the Con- ceffion in the former Part of this Paragraph : At leafi We gam no Mark of Dijlin^ion^ by which We may determine what Particulars, when propofed to our AJfent, jhould be admitted or rejctled. I very readily agree ivith this Writer in his Reflec- tions on the unreafonable Confequences, which artful . or ignorant People annex to their Belief of Miracles ; and I have had Occafton to make the fame Reflections in the enfuing Papers ; but I cannot difcern the Ufe or Pertinence of them under this Head : I cannot perceive how they are conmSled with the Point in View., that is, how they point out the Diffi'^rence, why the Mira- cles of the Gofpel, as contrary to the Courfe of Nature, and therefore as incredible in themfelves as others, according to his State of the Cafe, fl:)ould be admitted, tho' all others be reje5fed. It is obferved, ^dly, that " the^n6i of a Miracle '* may be good, i. e, it may be conceived to an fiver a *' good Purpofe ; but yet this is not always fufpcient da to m PREFACE, " to wake it credible." (P. 76.; // isfiifficient is remove the Charge of Incredibility in the ^hing it- felf^ which is all the Purpdfe, which it is urged to ferve. Whether upon the Whole it deferves Credit, will depend on the Notoriety of the FaEl^ and the Tef- timony of competent PFitneffes •■, but if it is apparently calculated to anfwer fome good End, this will be a prefumptive Circumjlance at kaft in its Favour^ and willfJoew that it is capable of beingproved. This Gen- tleman goes on to add, that " it is hard/cr Us to fay, " {if it be pofiible at all) to how many, or to what " Degree, Good mufi be extended, in order to the " Belief of a Miracle** (P. 77.) I cannot apprehend that there is any Difficulty ai all in this Cafe, if it be rightly fiated. The Belief of a Miracle does not reft merely on the extenfive Good, zvhich it is faid to ferve, however necejjary this may be as a preliminary Article, but on the external Evidence with which it is offered to our Afjent. A Report of a fuper natural Interpofition may appear to anfver a very important Purpofe, and yet may fail in fome capital Point refpe^- ing the Witneffes, fo as to be finally and defervedly reje^ed. Another Report of the miraculous Kind may ferve a lefs extenfive Benefit, andyet may come fo well recommended by able, inqui/ilive, fagacious, faithful, difinterefied Witneffes, as to gain and almoft extort Affent. When therefore this Gentleman proceeds to afk, *' Will a Good done to a fingle Perfon be fufficient to •* make One give Credit to the Report?^* The reai^ Anfwer is, this Circumftance alone will not confirm it, hut it will Jhew that it may be confirmed, if the Evi- dence offered in Proof of it, does upon Examination of it, ftand unexceptionable. We Believers know that Providence has thought fuch an Occcfion deferving of his extraordinary Protection and Interpofition, and therefore We cannot confijiently fix our Objection on this Point, if ibe Alteration offered be unexceptionable in every other. T'bis PREFACE. liii ^his Remark will obviate the Force of the following ^ejlions and Anfwers. *' Is the Vindication of In- '* nocency in Jingle Pcrfons a fufficienl Good to aU' ' ' thorize^ or give Credit to fiich miraculous Accounts ? " No. Such Miracles done among the Heathens are " not credited." (P. 77, 78.) But vohy are they not credited? Not becaufe the Occafions are wrjoorthy of a Divine Interpofttion., hut becaufe they fail in Point of Evidence^ becaufe related by Hifiorians in After- Ages ^ againjl whofe TejUmony there lies a Variety of Exceptions. Again ^ *' Is the granting Health to the Sick^ and " Strength to the V/eak and Lame, an End fuffic lent " to give Credit to a Miracle done for fuch Purpofes ? *' We refufe Affent to a thoufand Stories of this Sort^ " zvhich Popifli Writers are conjiantly relating^ (P. 79.) Wedofo., but not as thinking the Fa£ls un- worthy of God to perform, but as defeolive in many Re- fpe5ls in the Evidence with which they are propofed to Us. The Relief of Innocent a7id Diftrefled Perfons by fupernatural Literpofition is fuch an End as can yield no Ohje^ion from the Nature of it, yet this Confldera- Hon alone will not authorize the Report, or entitle it to our Affent. It fheuus Nothing jnare than that it may be true -, the Authority, on which it is reported., remains to be examined, and muft ftand a firi^ Exami- nation before it can reafonably expe5i to he credited. It is added, A^thly, that " // has been fuggefled, " that as the Miracles done by Chrift and the Apofiles, " were done in Confirmation of the Truth of the Chrif- '* tian Religion, fo the Miracles done fince thofe 'times *' were done for the fame End. They were done to '* confirm the Truths of the Gofpel, andfince They ** were done to promote the (ame End as the Miracles " ofChrifi were, and They are related by Eye-Wifc- ** nefifes, or by Men of Abilities, and exaSl Enquirers *' into their Truth, they are all equally to he believed.''* (P. 78,) There follows as favourable an Ac know- d 3 ledgnient liv PREFACE. hdgment as could be deftred^ that if the Suggejlion he Jupported, the Inference would hold gcod \ that " if it " be proved that the Miracles done by the Saints, were " done to confirm the Old Religion, they ought to *' be equally credited with thofe of the Gofpel. For *' Fa^ 5 of the fame Sort, done for the fame End, are *• equally credible.** But fuppofing the FaUs to be done. How do We know, fays He, ' ' that they ivere done for *' the fame End?'* We can know this only from the Declaration of thofe, who clair/ied the Power, and that is explicit and clear enough to this Purpofe. Why, fays He, " Does it appear that St. Martin or Macarius, " or any other Saint, ever declared that this was the " End of their Miracles?'* {P. 79.) This is a pre- vious Queilion, which no way concerns thofe Ar.fwerers of Dr. M. who confined their Defence to thofe Miracles preceding the Civil Efiablifhment of Chriftidnty. If Thofe, who came after, did not ajfgn this ai the End for which they wrought fupernaiural Works, Thisfhews the great Difference of their Claims, and is a Djlinc- tion which, arnongfi others, may reafonably be inffledon, to tlluflrate the fupericr Credibility of thofe fupcriiatural Endowments, which are fo folemnly attcfled during the three frfi Centuries. For did not the Apologiffs in that Interval urge tbern as Arguments, in Confirmation of the Truth of the Gofpel? Did not Juiiin Martyr, Ter- tuUian, Minucius Pelix, Origen, and Ladlantius appeal to the Miraculous Powers of Ckiiftians in Proof of the Truth of their Prctenfions ? What :his Gentle- tleman cbferves, with Refpcci to our Bleffed Lord, is applicable lihwife to them ; that " there %vas no Oc- " cq/io,"?, or Neceffity, that They fhould, upon working " every Miracle that They did, exprefsly declare, *' for what End They did it.''* {P. 80.) Since in their Difcourfes profefjedly written in Vindication of their Re- ligion, They urge thefe fupernatural Works in Evidence of its Divine Authority, it could not be necejfary, when every PREFACE. Iv every one was wrought to fay, 'This is done to prove the Truth of Chriftianiiy. Their Claim being hiown^ each Miracle of Courfe was conftdered in that Light ; ana however true it may be with Refpe£l to the Saints of After- Ages ^ that " there is generally a profound Silence '"■ why or for what End all their Miracles were " done^^ (P, yg.) Tet it is not fo in Regard to the earlier Apologifts. They with one Confent fay that God had continued thefe miraculous Powers in the Church to confirm the Faith of Believers \ whereas Some of the later Writers own that the extraordinary Gifts given for this End were withdrawn. Since therefore the Miracles of the Primitive Church for the three firjl Centuries^ are faid to have been wrought for /^d" fame End aj thofe of the Gofpel, fo far they are^ as this Gentleman allows, equally credible. No Obje^ion, at leaf:, can lie againji them on this Account^ and if the Witneffes are in ether RefpeSis unexceptionable^ They will deferve and meet with Credit : For certainly the End alledged was well worthy cf a Divine Interpofition. The ^th Obfervation, after a Repetition of the Suc- cefs of many Impoftures, and the Improbability of all Miracles atfirft View, ends in thefe Inquiries. " Is " there any Tefi by which We may judge of the Mira- *' cles done by our Lord and his DifcipJes, and know *' that they were really done? Or can We point out any " Difference betwixt them and thoje that have been " done, or are pretended to have been done, fince thofe " Times, y^ as to make the One more credible than the '* Other ? Or, in fljort. How may We fairly point *' out the Difference betwixt what We are to believe, " and what we are to rejeB?" (P. 8i.) This is a laudable Attempt, and it will not, I hope, be thought a blameable one, if I attend to the Reafonings here ufed, and obfsrve how far they may jujlly be applied to ejiabli/h or to zveaken the Credibility of the Miracles of the Pri- hitive Church. d 4 It Ivi PREFACE, It IS /aid, * * that the ylrgument for the T'ruth or ^' Credibility of the Miracles of Chrijl and the Apofiks " not only has all the Advantages which the Argument '^^ for any other Hiflorical Fact has j but has likewife *' an additional Strength^ which almojl all other paji " Fa^s are deficient in." (P. 8 3. J // does not feem neceffary to me to depreciate the Evidence for the jS/Lra- cles in the Ages immediately fucceeding., in order to efta- llifh thofe of the Apojlolical Age ; or to affert this Defi- ciency in ahnoft all other paft Fads to fupport the additicnai Strength of thofe preceding ones. However^ let not an Affertion determine the Point., but let the Cafe le fairly examined and determined ; and God forbid that IJhould deny ajf}- Superiority of Evidence, which really ap- pears in Favour of the Miracles of the Gofpel. It is faid., " Firft, They have the Atteftation of *' Men of Probity and Integrity, that many Fa5is were *' done by them, which were fuperior to any Powers of ^' Men." CP. 83 ) This is mofi certainly true of the Miracles of the Gofpel ; but it will be no Prejudice to. that Truth to Jay, that thofe of the Primitive Church have likewife this Advantage, They are attejled by the unanimous Suffrage of Perfons every way qualified to judge of them. I mayjufily apply the well-chofen Words nf this Gentleman to this Purpofe. " ylll the Topics " taken from fufficient Information, Ability to know^ *' and Honefiy to relate-, the Perfecutions They under- *' wefit for the Truth of their Teftimonies ; their Con- " fcioufnefs of the heinous Crime of Lying -, their preach- *' ing confiantly their Accountablenefs to God for all *' their A^iions ; and their Senfe of the Juftice of their *' Damnation, who did'E,w\\th?iX. Good might come *' of it; their leaving all Things for the Truth of *' Chrift ; their expofing themfelves to Imprifonnunt, to *' Stripes, to be fioned, to bejhipwrecked, to all Sorts '' of Hazards and Inconveniences for the Sake ofChrifi ; ^? injhort^ every Topic that tends to corffirm the Truth '^ of PREFACE. Ivii f^ of the things which the firfl Vifcipki of Chrift " wrote or taught^ has here its fullefi Strength.*' "This Gentleman feemed confcious that this Reply would be made ; and therefore having fo urged it. He anfwers, *' Beitfo, 1 therefore add *' Secondly, khatthe Enemies to Chriftianity have ^* horn their Teftimonies to the Miracles of Chrifi, as " well as the Friends of the Gofpely and eonfequently " the Truth of the Gofpel does not depend folely upon the " 'Tefiimonies of Men that may be charged, or are pre- ^' tended to be charged with Credulity, or Folly, or " w^;z Forgery z7/^^." {P. 84.) In this Refpe5f like- wife the Miracles of the Primitive Church are ftrongly recommended to our Jffent. 'They are fupported by the Tefimony of Enemies as well as Friends. Some Proofs of this have been offered and more referred to in the en- fuing Sheets. Dr. M. indeed was pleafed to fay thai *' in the Performance of their Miracles they were al- " ways charged with Fraud and Impofiure by their ^' Jdverfaries.'* (Free Inquiry, P. 22 J Such a Charge, I ohferved, was likely enough to come from Ad- verfaries, and zvas of little Weight as coming from them ; And I farther obferved that this however was 7iot univerfallj brought, but that at other Times They fhifted the Qbje^ion, and chofe rather to fuppofe that their Miracles were wrought by the /iffifiance of D?B- mons. Some Inflames of this have been afjigned, and the proper Remark on them is that which this Gentleman has made on Julian'j Mention of our Blejjed L'^rd's Miracles, *' Let them treat them in their own Man- ** ner, Jince They exprefly allow fuch FaBs to be done,''* (P. 85,) Should other Pa-ffages be produced, wherein thefe Adverfanes feem to deriy the Reality of thefe Pauls, find to mention them as Fables, This Gentleman luilf fupply Us with another very pertinent Anfwer, that " This will fhew that They had no certain Scheme by • ^ which They could attack the Chriflians^ and that Iviii PREFACE. *' 'They faid an^ 'Thing either to lejfen^ or to calumniate *' imhat ^hey could not fairly refute.'* (P. 91.) But upon a Review of Dr. M'.f OhjcBion on this Head, which the Author of thefe previous Queftions feems to confirm by mentioning the Teflimony of Enemies as pecidiar to the Miracles ofChrifl and his Apoflles, I do not find thai He has made good his Affertion in a Jingle h fiance^ " that the Primitive Chrifiians in the " Performance of their Miracles were always charged *' with Fraud and Impofiure by their Adverfaries.** However true "This may have been, yet it does not ap- pear from any Proofs produced or referred to by Dr. M. Lucian is his firfi Author, and He is brought in as faying, that whenever any crafty Juggler, expert in his Trade, and who knew how to make a right Ufe of Things, went over to the Chriftians, He v/as fure to grow rich immediately, by making a Prey of their Simplicity. 'This might be, and was probably, inte?ided as a Reflexion on the Simplicity of the Chrifiians, who are often fo cenfured by their Ad- verfaries as an artlefs and unimproved Set of Men, but certainly it implies no Kind of Charge of their being prac- ticed and fuccefsfid 'Themfelves in exhibiting counterfeit Miracles. Had They been fo. They wculd cerlainly have been more apt to fufpe5i and more quick at delet- ing others that came into their Society withfuch Preten- /tons, fo that a crafty Juggler would not have thrived fo well among fi them. The Account iifelf was proba- bly an abufive Mifrcprefentation -, but fttppofmg it to be true. All that We could reafonably infer from it would he, that as They knew that many real Miracles were wrought amongfi them^ They were too apt to give Credit to all fetch Preterjions, and thereby to give En- couragement to Some who pretended to them without any Foundation. Such a Suppofttion muft imply their cwn Innocence in this Refpe£l -, for a Confcioufeiefs of a like Prevarication in themfelves would have made them more PREFACE. lix more fufpicious and more cautious in giving their own A^ent to Othen. JSJor is Celfus'j Tejlimony any more to the Ptirpofe. We are told thai " He reprefents all the Chrfftian *' Wonder-Workers as mere Vagabonds and common " Cheats'* (Free Inquiry, P. 23.) Andio fupport this We are prefented ivilh a Rotation from one Place, and a Reference and 'Tranjlation of another Place in OrigenV Book againfi Celiiis. But in neither of thefe Places is there a Word of any Chrijlian-Wonder -Wor- kers, as the Dr. mojl ingenioujly phrafes it. In thejirjl Place there quoted CdCus Jpeaks (as Dr. Church well cbferves) not of any particular Wonder -Workers, hut of Chriftians in general. * tie calls Us Deceivers, the Reafonfolloiz)s — otj (peuyo^w^v P(;agie.iyity' (P. 482.) kadi P R E F A C E. ixi had, and had made it good hy a Pajjage clear to ths Purpofe, it would only follow from hence that the Hea- thens were divided in their Opinion on this Subje5i, and were inconjijlent with Each Other, and fometimes with themfehes, in their Ohje^ions againjl their miraculous Deeds. This would not invalidate the other plain 'Tefii- monies of Jdverfaries allowing and accounting for the wonderful Works wrought amongft Chriflians ; but 'would onlyfhew that They had no certain Scheme, as this Gentleman ohferves, hy which They could Jt tack ths Chrifiians : Whereas Dr. M. at kajl has failed even in this Point of proving that Any of their Enemies denied the Reality of thefe extraordinary Fa£is. So far then the Miracles of the Primitive Church ap-- pear to have every Circumflance to eflabliflo their Credi- bility, which is as yet urged to efiablifh ihofe of the Gofpel. They have thepofitive Attsfiation of Witneffes every way qualified to judge of them, and they have the farther Advantage of the Acknowledgment of their Genu- inenefs even by Many of the Jdverfaries who were zeal- ous to oppofe the Caufe in which they were wrought. There remains one farther Olfervation, It is ajferted, *' Thirdly, that the Miracles of Chrifl have a peculiar *' Evidence which is piSily conchifive,— giving a De- " gne of Credibility which the Miracles of all " other Perfons are dcfef^rje in" (P. 93.) This Evi- dence is, that our Saviour and his Apofiles had the Power of foretelling fitture Events, which We fee by the Completion of their Predictions in fever al Infiances : And the Inference is that " when We are fare that *' Chri/l and his AfiOjVes were under the Influence of " fome Power fuper tor to that of Man, in one InfiancCy " of which We Ourfelves are competent Judges -, We " inay be fur e that the Miracles performed by them ought " to be looked upon as credible, fince the fuper natural *' PowiT that enabled them to foretell future Events^ " was fuMcicnt to enable them to work Mira- *' clcsr Ixii PREFACE. *' <:/(?5.'* (P. loi J ^he inkrmediate Pages on the Com- pletion cfinanyoftheProphecies recorded in the New Tefia- ment, are fo well drawn up that IJhould ejieem it more Honour to have been Author of them, than of all the Rhetorick of the 'Free Inqimj ; its Vindication and Defences. // is not a Matter of Choice that I differ info VMny other Particulars from a Gentleman, who, in my poor Judgment, has fo well treated this Part of the Argument. I fhall offer however fome Obfervations on this peculiar Circumfiance. In thefirfi Place it is no Part of the pofitive Evi- dence of the Miracles of the Gofpel that they were at- tended with fome prophetical Declarations. It is not urged fo in this Place, but only as a prefumptive Proof, as an Anfwer to, and Removal of a fuppofed Incredi- bility in all Reports of Miracles ; for it is argued, that " the Being that enabled them to foretell Events " at fuch diftant Periods, andfo minutely, might " enable them to do what credible IVitneffes have re- " hted concerning them'* But if there be no fuch abfolute Incredibility in all Miracles as is fuppofed -, if, in afofter Term, the general Improbability of them may be removed by other Circumftances, which may even raife a reafonable ExpeSlaticn of fuch an Inter- pojttion, and if very credible IVitneffes be produced, which pofitively relate thsm ; then they may very well deferve and demand our Affent, tho* they are not attend- ed with prophetic Impulfes ; the fuppofed ObjeMon be- ing as effectually removed another Way. Prophecies do not imply Miracles, for Some whom We know to have had the Gift of the former, 7nade no Preten- /tons to the latter. Neither do Miracles imply Pro- phecies, according to this Gentleman* s own Concefftons. He profffes that He " does not mean to affirm " that all other Miracles are fiditious ;" (P. C)^. or " that all Miracles are forged or counterfeit, that are " not attended with Prophecy -," (P, ^6.) If there- fore PREFACE. Ixlii fore the grand Difficulty concerning the Improbability of any miraculotts Interpofjion can be taken off by fome very pertinent andjirong Argument^ it will not be any Objehion to other well-attejled Miracles^ that it ivas not done exactly in the fame Method as in thofe of the Gofpel^ namely by the Concurrence of Predioiions. Now I conceive there is asflrong an Argument to be produced to remove any fuch fiippofcd Incredibility in Refpe5l to the Miracles of the Primitive Churchy as could poffibly be brought in fuch a Cafe ; and that is^ the confeffed Interpofition of the Deity in a miraculous Manner in Favour of the fame Caufe, in the Age im- mediately preceding. As this Gentleman argued from Prophecies to Miracles, fo argue I from the Miracles of the Apoftolick Age to thofe next fucceeding. — The fame Being that enabled the firfi Difciples of Chriji, to work fo many and fuch evident Miracles in Proof of his Religion., might enable their Converts to do the fame, whilfi the like Difficulties, or greater, ob- Jlrudled their Progrefs — and zvhen We are fure that Chriji and his Apoflles were under the Influence of fome Power fuperior to that of Man in the Per- formance of their wonderful fForks, which We Our- felves acknowledge. We may be fure likewife that the Miracles of their Succeffiors, if fufficiently attefled, are in this Refpe5i to be looked on as credible \ fince the fupernatural Power that enabled the former to work their Miracles, was fufficient to enable the Others to do the fame, in Vindication of the fame Do^rine. Thus the grand Obje^ion fo much injtjled on, from the Nature of miraculous Operations is fully removed, and there is Room to admit the Credibility of Witneffes. Thus the Prophecies tending to ejiablifh the Credibi- lity of the Gofpel- Miracles, do thereby concur in eflablijhing thofe of the Ages next fucceeding : And if the Witneffes in thofe Ages are unexceptionable in their Opportunities of knowing, judging, and report- Ixiv PREFACE. ing^ and in their Integrity -in making true Report^ fl4 Obje^iion can here lie againjl Miracles as fuch -, wheri We allow them to he vor ought for the fame Purpofe but jufi before^ and when no Circumfiances had happened to alter the Cafe^ at leaf not to alter it for the better^ and to ?nake Alracles lefs expedient than bfore. Whiljl fuch Occafion continued^ it is highly probable that fuch extraordinary AJfifiance fhould continue as We know to have been given in the like Situation \ and the Incredibility fpoken of all Miracles is not harely removed^ but an ExpeSfation is juftly raifed that here we floould find them well attefted. Where fuch Occafion for the Ufe and Application of Miracles ceafes, there this Argument no longer holds -, for tho* the Tower of God is ahvays the fame^ and equally able to lend fuch Affifiance^ yet the Credibiiicy that He will interpofe^ is not always the fame ^ but depends on Cir- cumfiances which may defcrve fuch an extraordinary In- terpofition. It is fufficient to the prefent Purpofe that this Credibility with Refpe£i to the Ufe and Expedi- ency of it continued in a good Degree of Force till the Civil Efiablipowent of Chriflianity . I would not be underfiood to fay that during that whole Period there was equal Necefftty for fuper- natural Interpofttions ; for the Occafion might vary in different 'times and different Places within that Interval, according as the Gofpel was more or lefs received in feveral Countries, and according as Per- fecutions did more or Ifs rage in them. Where this T)o6irine was newly preached and fevcrely threatned, there this Kind of Affijlance feemed moji to be want- ed, and is attefted mofi to have been given. Where it had farther prevailed, or was moji favourably tolera- ted; or where One of thefe Circumftances helped to take off the Difadvantage of the Other, there was the lefs pr effing JNeceffity for the Continuance of thefe Mira- culous Powers j whifh therefore^ thai* mi totally with- drawn PREFACE. IxT drawn, plight ix)ell he expe^ed gradually to decline even before the abfolute EJlabliJhment of Chrijiianiiy by the Civil Power : And to this Siippojition and Argument on the Rea- fcn of the ^hing^ Fa5l andHiJlory do remarkably correfpond. It may farther be ohfrved, that as the Credibility of the Gofpel- Miracles is here urged from the Certainty of the Prophecies delivered by the fame Perfons who are faid to have wrought them, fo the very Fa5l which I am fpeaking of^ the Continuance of miracidous Powers in the Church after the Days of Chrift and his Apoflles, is itfelf a Com- pletion of One of thofe Predi£iions, and thereby a Confir- mation in this Light of the 'Truth of their Pretenfions, That Prophetic Promife of our Jjord^ Mark xvi. 1 7, 18. that fuch fupernatural S\^n% fhould follow them that believe, was not limited either by the Expreffion, or the Context, or the Reafon of the Thing, or the life and Intent of the Gifts, to the Apoflolic Age, hut was in every Re- fpeEi applicable to Thofe who had the fame or heavier Diffi- culties and Perfecutions to flruggle with : And when JVe find fuch a full and unanimous Atteftation of their Continu- ance, This is a very ftrong Confirmation of the Arguments which might be raifed on it in Speculation -, and thus the Prophecy and the Completion of it reflet Light and Strength en each other. That this Pr edition was thus applicable to the perfecuted Members of the Church in the three firft Cen- turies, I have had Occafion to (hew in the enjuing Reply, and need not therefore review the Differtation of this Gen- tleman on this Subject. I cannot but obferve that however this whole Perfor- mance may appear calculated to ferve or fupport the Caufe of Br. M. and his Defenders, yet the Author of it differs from them in the firft fundamental Principle on which they fit out. Dr. M. had afferted that " iVi/ijls that they may be fo circuwjianced, as that a -proper Force of Tefiimcny may render them credible. It is not my Bujinefs to reconcile thefe Writers, hut it has been my Endeavour tofhew that thefe fame Circuwfiances, inhich^ according to this Gentleman can aU'er the Nature of Cre- dibility, cr can kaue Room for 1'eftimony to do it, are likewife of Weight in Favour of thofe Miracles, which are the SuhjelTt of the Free Inquiry ; and that the Rea- fonings ufed on the two previous Queriions, as far as they are conchifive a?id conjtftent, will not prejudice the Argu- ments on the remaining Queftion concerningthe Continuance of Miracles in the Primitive Church. To recapitulate in few Words the Arguments in Favour of them. — 'They are not incredible in tliemfelves, iinkfs all Miracles are fo, for they are claimed under no lefs Au- thority than that of the Author of 'Nature ; and his Row- er is allowed to be fufficient to the Purpofe. — They are not incredible on the Occafion, for the Caufe in which ihey are fald to have been wrought, was worthy of God, no other than the Gofpei of his Bkffed Son. — Ihey are not rncredible in Refpe5l o/Time, for they were not revived after a long Cejfation of them, but are /aid to have conti- nued, as they might well be expecied to do, from the Bays cf the Apoftles, who are owned to have performed the fame Wonders in Proof of the fame Religion. — They are not incredible with Regard to their Ufe, for whilft the Rulers cf this World perfecuted this Profffion, the Converfion oj Heathens and the Support of Believers needed this Afjijtance as much as in the Apojlolick Age. — TJ:>ey are not incredi- ble in the Manner in which it is faid they were wrought^ for they w'S^e offered to publick Ex-^minaton, and the Per- fenal Security of the Profefjors of Chrijlianity and the Suc- cefs cf their Religion were readily and openly faked upon the Reality of them. — They were -not incredible //^ /^' but this w^ould fall in with the forementioned Inter- pretation rejected by Mr. T. that " no Tef- " timony can make Falfehood to become " Truth ; " and therefore He foftens the Ufe of the Term, and fpeaks of thefe Things as iiicredible^ " becaufe They are Trifling, *' becaufe Ridiculous, becaufe to no Man- " ner of End or Purpofe ; and fever al fuch *' Dr. M. has produced," He fays, " from " the early Ages upon the Authority of the " Fathers." We may obferve however, that This is not pretended, or afierted of all^ or of the greater Fart of the Miracles of the Earliefl Ages, and therefore, upon Suppo- fition [ 7 ] fition of the Truth of it, would upon the Whole be of Uttle Service to his Argument. But I do not think either Dr. ilTs AfTer- tion, or Mr. T's Explanation of it in this Senfe to be clear of Difficulty, or free from Exception. There is not only great Inaccu- racy in the Expreffion in confidering any Thing as incredible^ without Regard to the Sufficiency or Infufficiency of the T^eftimony\ but great Confiifion in the Argument, and fome Danger in the Confequence. Tho' the Words are varied, yet I fuppofe that trifling and Ridiculous J and to no End or Piirpofe^ are all ufed to exprefs the fame Thing, for a real Miracle, in whatever Inflance it is exerted, cannot be fubje6t to the two former Charges, any otherwife than as it is liable to the latter. If the OccaJiGn be worthy of a Divine Inter- polition, it is no more Trijii?ig or Ridicu- lous to give a Human Voice to a Dumb Creature, than to fend an Angelical MefTen- ger from Heaven. The Purpofe therefore, for which the fuppofed Miracle is wrought, feems to be the Point to which the Queljion is to be reduced. And in this Senfe this Principle, that no Teftimony can confirm any Point, which antecedently to the Confidera- tion of that Teftimony, appeared to be Tri- fling, or Ridiculous^ or to tio End and Purpofe, was That which prevented tlie Reception of B 4 Chrif> [ 8 ] Chrlftianitv at the firfl: Publication of it, and has occafioned the Apofliacy of Many in later. Ages. The Docftrines of the Incarnation, and of the Crofs, were to the Jews a Stumbling Blocks and to the Greeks Foolijhnefs^, and there- fore They negle(fled to look into the Evi- dence, as not allowing that any Teilimony could confirm them. In the Judgment of our prefent Refined Reafoners, They are flill efteemed 'Trijimg and Ridiculous^ and there- fore They fuppofe fome Miftake in the Evidence, tho' They know not where to fix it. The Truth is. We are weak, fallible, Ihort-fighted Creatures, and often miftaken in our Apprehenfions and Judgments of Things, ^he Wifdom of Men is FooliJJmefs with God, and one End of Miracles was to roufe our Attention to Points, which other- wife might be thought not to deferve it, and thereby to open our Eyes to the Intent of Divine Providence, and to ihew Us our own Ignorance and Prefumption. When fuch a Claim was made and offered fairly to Exa- mination, it was eafier, upon Enquiry, to judge of the Reality of it, than to know from previous rational Difquifitions, what Doctrines God mufi: necefiarily teach, or on what Occafion He muft interpofe. If there- fore Dr. M. by faying that " no Teflimony " can alter the Nature of Things," did really mean [ 9 ] mean, that no Teftimony could prove the Truth of that v/hich did antecedently ap- pear unlikely and unworthy of the Divine Interpolition in the Judgment of Mankind, (for the Cafe of Impojjibility is given up) then the Miracles, v/hich He does admit, will refute his Principle, and We jQiall de- lire to recall Him to his firfl: State of the Cafe, to admit the joint Credibility of the Fads, and of the Witneffes. Whatever is not impojjible is capable of being proved. What appeaj's to be abfurd, may appear to be otherwife upon farther Examination, and often has proved fo in the Event. Divine Interpoiitions are not to be expected in com- mon Cafes, nor are Miracles ufually offered to prove fucli Points as are likely to be ad- mitted without them. If the Thing be im- probable, the Credibility of the Witnefles ought to be the greater, yet it may certainly be eftablifhed, if the Evidence prove unex- ceptionable. In this Senfe, therefore it is not true, that " no Force of Teftimony can " make a Thing credible that is in itfelf in- " credible j" for this internal Incredibility is afterwards explained into the Appearance of ^rijlingnefsy or Ridicidotiftiefsy or Ufefuhefs ; and fuch Appearances, I fay, may vanifli upon Examination ; and That which was highly improbable in itfelf (for This is Mr. T"s> [ 1° ] T's Senfe o£ Tncredibility) antecedently to give to the View of the Evidence, may upon that View become morally certain. But after all, tho' This be Mr. T^'s Senfe, I do not apprehend it to be Dr. M's Mean- ing in this Place. He may clear up this Point whenever He pleafes, but in the mean Time, as I am willing to fuppofe Him to be coherent and conjijient in this Paragraph, his Words feem to require a different Inter- pretation. Such an emphatical Phrafe as this, that " no Force of Teflimony can alter the " Nature of Things," ihould imply fome- thing much more, and much truer, than that Nothing can become credible upon the Proof of WitneiTes, which is not credible without it. But He Himfelf in the follow- ing Sentences afcertains, I think, his own Meaning, and explains that Incredibility^ which no Force of Teflimony can alter. He magnifies the Credibility of FaB^ beyond that of Witneffes^ in that the former. He fays, " cannot delude us, cannot fpeak any other *' Language, or give any other Information " but what flows from Nature and Truth." And that We might not mifapprehend Him, or be in Doubt what FaBs He was fpeaking of. He adds yet more explicitly, " The Tef- " timony therefore of Fadis, as it is offered "to our Senfes in this wonderful Fabrick and '' Con- [ II ] " Conflitutlon of Worldly Things, may " properly be called the Teftimony of God " Himfelf, as it carries with it the fureft In- " flrudion in all Cafes, and to all Nations, " which in the ordinary Courfe of his Pro- " vidence He has thought fit to appoint for " the Guidance of Human Life." This Sen- tence Mr. T. confelTes to have fome Obfcurity in it, and therefore drops it ; which is a very fhort Method of defending one of the moft exceptionable Paffages in the Performance. But pray let it be conlidered, that it is intro- duced as an Inference from what went before, " The Teftimony therefore of Fafts, &c" and that thefe Fadls are defcribed to be the Eifefts of Nature, exemplified in the Fabric and Conftitution of Worldly Things, in Con- tradiftinCtion to any fuppofed Reverfal of the Courfe of Nature j and then I fhould be glad to fee the Connection and Force of this Conclulion, from what He had afferted before, if He meant that Nothing that feem- ed Trifling or Ridiculous, or Ufelefs, could be proved by any Teftimony. But if He meant, that the Nature of Things, or the eftabliftied Courfe of it, was ftronger than any Tefti- mony could be of the Reverfal of it, then the intermediate Sentence, and this conclud- ing One, are All confiftent therewith, and the Confeqiience is true and juft from the fop- pofed [ 12 ] pofed Truth of the P7'emifes. But then it would be eafy to point to Paffages in feve- ral late Advocates for Infidelity, who have afferted the fame Thing almoft in the fame Words; and Nothing can be more obvious, than that fuch a Principle would fupport their Caufe, and undermine the Belief of all miraculous Interpofitions. Such Parallels Mr. T". will fay are invidious, for " He cannot " but think it great Want of Candor to fup- " pofe that Dr. M. had any Intention to in- ** validate the Teftimony of the Apoftles, " when He has fo many Times over, and " in fuch exprefs Terms admitted miraculous " Powers to have been exerted by them." One fhould have thought, that I had ob- viated this Refle(5lion by faying in the very Place referred to, that " I would not charge " this as the pofitive Dejjgn of the Author, " lince it is inconfiflent with his Coh- " ceflions in other Places ;" and therefore I only pointed out the Confequences of his Po- fition, as deftrucSlive of his Faith ; which Method muft charitably fuppofe Him to be a Believer, by fuppofing that fuch a View of the Argument would have its proper EfFed: on Him. The Intefition of any Writer any farther than it is openly avowed, or betrayed by unnecefTary and ftrong Indications, is a Point which I have neither Authority, nor Incli- [ 13 ] . . Inclination to judge of, Be that to his own Heart, and to the Searcher of it. But the Tendency of any Writing We have more Li- berty to judge of, and there can be no rea- dier Way to convince a Religious Perfon of his Millake, than by fhev^^ing, that it would end in fubverting the Principles, which He Himfelf maintains. Should I be fo Unhappy as to drop any thing, which Ihould by Others be efteemed inconfiftent with the Evidence, or the Dodrine of Chriflianity, I fhould by no Means call it Want of Candor to have this Inconfiftency pointed out to me, but fhould think Myfelf obliged either to dif- prove the Corifequence, or to retradl .the Principle. Such an Objedion fuppofes the Perfon, to whom it is objeded, to be in earnefl in the Profeffion of his Faith, and owes its v/hole Force to his prefumed Sin- cerity. However, neither muft Candor blind our Eyes, nor make Us difregard all fufpicious Paflages, unnecelTarily inferted, and frequent- ly repeated, becaufe inconfiflent with fome other Profeffions and Declarations. Some Caution muft be ufed againft Thofe, who write under Difguife -:, and tho' I earneftly hope, that Dr. M. is not a Perfon of this Charader, yet in an Age abounding with Writers of this Kind ; it is lVa?ii cf Pru- dence [ H ] dence in Him to give fuch Caufes of Sufpi- cion, not Want of Candor in Others to point them out. He choofes to diftinguifh Him- lelf as One " not fo fcrupulous with Regard " to Confequences, as Many of his Profeffion " are apt to be," (Pref. P. 6.) and there is fuch an inexcufable Levity of Expreffion, and fo profefTed a Difregard to any Confe- ouences, " how far focuer they may reach ^" in his After-Reply to the forefeen Obje<5lion of this Kind, (P. 192, 193.) as may well put every Man on his Guard, who has the Caufe of Chriftianity at Heart, and confiders the I?nportance, as well as the Evide7ice of it. Upon the Whole, I fee not the leaft Rea- fon to recede from the Charge, which I had advanced on this Article. The Sentence re- ferred to is either abfolutely falfe, or foreign to the Point. When He faid, that " The " Teftimony of Fads, as it is offered to our " Senfes in this wonderful Fabrick and Con- " ftitution of Things, may properly be call- " ed the Teftimony of God Himfelf, as it " carries with it the furefl Inftrudion in all '' Cafes, and to all Nations," had He Hop- ped here, or had only added, " which He " has thought fit to appoint for the Condud *' of Human Life," This had had a due Connedion in the Place it ftands in, and an immediate Relation to the Argument, as amount- [ \s ] amounting to a Denial of any fiipernatural Interpolition. If this Objedlion be thought to be removed by the Infertion of that Claufe, which God in the ordinary Courfe of his Pro- vidence has thought Jit, &c. then the Senfe will be, that the Courfe of Nature is the fureft Inftrudion, where no furer is offered by extraordinary Interpofitions ; which is at the beft a low and jejune Truth, does not fol- low from any Thing which He had advanced before, nor has any Connexion with the Argument, by which He was to prepare to difprove the Credibility of the Miracles of the Primitive Church. There is a moft unaccountable Confufion in the next Paragraph, and a Veil of Obfcu- rity thrown over a plain Argument, infomuch that a Reader, without an Attentive Re- view of that Part of the Free Anfwer, to which it feems to be intended as an Objec- tion, would fcarce know. What was af- firmed, or denied. Dr. M. had afTerted, (Pref P. 1 6.) tliat " if any Credit be due " to the Church Hiftorians in this Cafe, it " muft reach either to all, or none :" TheCon- fcquence of which, I added, would be, that if He could difprove any 07ie Relation of this Kind, the Reji would fall with it. But this I fliewcd to be unreafonable, becaufe when Miracles were known to be frequent, falfe Preten- [ i6 ] Pretenfions to them were of Courfe likely to be made, and might fometimes poflibly be admitted unwarily by Thofe, who had known many real Inftances ; (o that amongll many true Accounts feme falfe ones might gain Credit, and be recorded with the others. I went on to coniider the Reafon affigned by Dr. M. for giving Credit to all Hiftorians, or none, namely, that " the Charad:ers of " the Perfons attefting, and the Nature of " the Things atteiled, were of equal Force " in all Ages as in One." Whether Dr. M. by the Nature of t Joe 'Things attefted, meant the Whole of the Accounts as every Way circumftantiated, or only as being equally contrary to the Courfe of Nature, did not appear to me, and therefore I added, that the Occafion of a miraculous Interpofition was a Circumilance of Importance, which yet certainly was not the fame in all Inftances. More diredlly to the Point I obferved, that neither were the Charadlers of the Perfons attefiing abfolutely of equal For^e. The Foft- Nicene Fathers were in Point both of fudg- ment and Integrity lefs unexceptionable than their PredecefTors. So long a SuccefTion of Miracles might probably incline them more to Credulity j and befides, when Chriftianity was once eftablifhed by the Civil Power, there were more Temptations, more tempo- ral [ -7 ] ral Inducements to encourage a Belief of Mi- racles, than can be pretended, whilft the Powers of the World were a^ainil them. Whilft Perfecutions threatened the Church, a Man could have no View in claimino; mi- raculous Powers, but that of promoting dif- intereftedly the Caufe of Truth : He could have no Expedation in this World, but that of bringing down the Ipeedier and heavier Vengeance upon Himfelf. But when Ho~ 7iours and Profits attended the Profeffion of this Religion, the Good, the Bad, and Thofe of doubtful Chara6ters, not diflinguiflied by- Others, and perhaps fcarce known to Them- felves, promifcuoully joined in it : Other Influences, befides the Love of Truth, began to have their Weight. The Zeal of Many became more warm, but lefs pure, and the Deceitfulnefs of their Hearts gradually aife(5t- ed their Doiflrines. Whilft They were ferv- ing fo good a Caufe ^ They were fometimes lefs fcrupulous about the Mea?is, and They had apparently an Interefi to ferve, by this Caufe, which their poor perfecuted Anceftors had not. Thefe are abating Circumftances in the Characters of the After- Writers, and may well make Us more cautious and cirr cumfpeft in the Examination of their Re- ports. C But [ i8 ] But I added, that neither was the Nature of the lihmgs attefied the fame, in the only Senfe in which I apprehended it could affedt this Argument ; the former fpeaking of a conjiant^ a frequent Exercife at leaft of mi- raculous Powers reliding among them j the latter only attefting particular Fadls, which, if true, were undoubtedly miraculous. This made a great Difference in the Cafe, and the Confequence of this Difference was ftill more material, in that the former were of Courfe more eafy to be examined into, and were offered to View at a Time when the Power was on the Enemies Side, and They had all pofhble Advantages for Examination. What now does Mr. T. reply to thefe plain and important Diflindlions, invalidating Dr. il>f' s Alfertion, and fhewing that fome Cre- dit may be given to ^07ne of the Hiflorians afferting miraculous Claims, tho' not equally to All, or in all Particulars ? Why only,, that He wants to know, " which of the '* Hiflorians He is to give Credit to, and ^* which not I and to diflinguifh exadlly and " with Certainty between thofe true and falfe '* Miracles tranfmitted to Us upon the Cre- " dit of the fame Hiftorian." By Exa5lnefs and Certainty I fuppofe He does not miean more than the Nature of the Cafe will admit of, and then I anfwerj He mufl make Ufe ;. - of [ 19 ] of his Reafon^ and judge by the fame Rules that He would of other Hifhorical Teftimo- ny3 which will probably enable Him to diftinguifh betwixt the triie^ and thQfalfe, or the mijlaken Witnefs. But He adds, " if " Either the true or falfe Miracles related by " thefe Hiflorians are to make Part of " his Belief, He muft have fome fure Rule " and Method of difcerning them apart ; if " no fuch Pvule or Method be afforded Him, " He muft conclude it to be a Matter quite " indifferent, whether He believes any of " them." One fhould have thought by this Infinuation (which occurs again in the Per- formance) that He had been arguing againft One, who had made this Point a necejfary Article of Faith ; which is fuch a Mifrepre- fentation as is not eafily to be excufed; I have no where given any Ground for any fuch Charge. I am firmly perfuaded, that a Man may be, I have not the leafl: Doubt but that Mr. To// is, a fmcere and good Chrif- tiariy tho' He does not believe any of the Mi- racles of the Primitive Church ; but I am as fully perfuaded that He is mifiaken in this Point, and that He is unwarily engaged in the Defence of an Author, whofe Obje<^lions againft thefe Miracles are fo pointed, as to be equally fubverfive of the Belief of all Mi- racles, and are underftood to be fo equally C 2 by [ zo ] by moft of the Friends and Enemies of the Chriftian Caufe. This was the Reafon of my interpofing in this Difpute, believing the Continuance of Miraculous Powers in the Church to be a 7'eal Truth, tho' not 2. fun- damental one J and particularly apprehending Danger from the Manner in which Dr. M. has managed the Argument j being likewife more fcrupulous with Refped: to Confequences than the Dr. profeiTes Himfelf to be. All Trudis, as Mr. T. obferves afterwards, are I doubt not, coincident with Each Other ; and, I may add, do often contribute to the II- luftration and Support of Each Other, efpe- cially when relating fo nearly to the fame Subjedl; and therefore it may not be quite fo indifferent^ whether a Man believe any of thefe Miracles, the' it is not required of Him as any fiecejfary Article of Faith. But if any One does not difcern this Diflin(5lion, if He writes like a Chriftian, expreffing a Regard for the Importance of the Gofpel, not throwing out needlefs Grounds of Suf- picion, or advancing Principles deftrudtive of the Belief of all Miracles, but pointing to the Difference of the Evidence of thofe wrought in the Time of the Apoftles, and thofe attefled in After-Ages, far be it from me to call any Cenfure or remote Imputa- tion [ 2- ] tion on fuch a Writer, however I may differ from Him in Opinion. Mr. jT. goes on enquiring inftead o^ anfwe?'^ ing. He " would fain fee a clear and con- vincing Reafon afligned, why We are to " trufl the Writers of the firft or fecond Century, and rejeA thofe of the Third, or to admit the Teftimony of the Third, and rejed: that of the Fourth, and fo on thro* Every Age fucceflively down to the pre- fent, as it is deduced by the Romifli Church." Why the Writers of the F/r/? Century were to be credited in Oppolition to all Others, Dr. M. will teach Him, who in- fifts, that the Apojiles were the only Writers at all in that Century, who made any men- tion of Miracles j fo that this State of the Cafe in Mr. T"'s Inquiry betrays great Want of Caution, and of Attention to the Doc- trine of the Gentleman, whofe Principles He has been pleafed toefpoufe. The Distinc- tion demanded betwixt the fecond and third Century in this Refped: is likewife imaginary^ and feems to imply an entire Unacquainted- nefs with this Controverfys for I know of None, who have fixed on that Period for the CelTation of Miracles, admitting thofe of the fecojidj and rejeding thofe of the third Century. The Difference between thefe, and all After- Ages^ is very confiderable. Several C 3 Reafons [ 22 ] Reafofts may be affigned, and were affign- ed in feveral Parts of -the Free Anfwer^ why our Doubts might well commence from that Time, and why the Teftimonies of the former Writers might be trufted, tho' thofe of the fucceeding ones might well be called in Queflion. Whenever Worldly hi- tereji is concerned in the Claim to Miracu- lous Powers, We may reafonably begin to fi^fpeB the Truth of them, altho' fuch Suf- ficions will not overbalance pojitive Evidencey where it is offered to publick Examination amongft thofe, whofe equal Intereft it was to difprove it, and in fuch a Situation flood the Teft and was admitted. But when fuch publick Ex- amination is refufed, our Sufpicion of the Ti^uth of fuch Claim improves into a pofitive AJju- rayice of the Faljity of it, and We no long- er fcruple to pronounce againft thofe Mira- cles, which We are not permitted to in- quire into ; iince it would have been equally to their Credit and Succefs to have been of- fered to the Itridteft Scrutiny, if their Truth could have fupported them under it. By thefe obvious Diflincftions Mr. 7''s Inquiries may reafonably be anfwered, and He may be enabled to carry on his Inquiry, without Danger of Miftake in any material Inftance, thro' the feveral Ages of Chriflianity, down to the prefent Claims of the Romifli Church. [ 23 ] Church. The Teftimonies of thofe V/rl- ters preceding the Civil Eftablifhment of our Religion, when their Lives and their Salva- tion depended on the Truth of what They faid, and when They challenged their Ad- verfaries to look as narrowly as They pleafed into the Foundation of their Pretenfions, will be the more firmly eftabliHied ; whilll the modern Pretenfions of Papifts will in the fame View be immediately rejetfled ; and the principal Cafes of Difficulty will be in thofe Claims moft nearly fucceeding the Conver- iion of the Princes of the Earth j in which the Cafe will not be fo clear on either Side ; but Thofe, who agree in the main Point of Continuance of miraculous Powers in the Church, may reafonably be fuppofed to differ in their Judgment of particular In- ftances. Why thefe Diftindlions repeatedly urged before, were palTed over in Silence, and not fliewn to be erroneous^ or frivolous^ but are called for again, as if no Notice had been taken of this Part of the Subjed:, I mull leave Mr. T. to account for, and proceed with his Wifhes and Inquiries. " It is to be willi- " ed," he fays, " Mr. jD. would lay down " the Bar at any particular Period of Time, " and tell Us, Hitherto We are to proceed " and no farther." Mr. £). does not take C 4 upon [ 24 ] upon Him fo abfolutely to determine a Point, about which much wifer Men have differed : But as far as his Opinion is worth confider- ing, This Queftion was anfwered beforehand by an explicit Declaration, that " it feems " moll: probable, that this Pov/er gradually " decreafed, and that occafional Miracles for " particular Purpofes lafted much longer than " what may ftridly be called the Age of Mira- *' cles; (P. 8.) that the moft general Opinion " is, that they ceafed upon the Civil Ellablifli- " ment of Chrifhianity j [ibid.) and that it " was the Credit of Thofe Affertors alone of *' Miraculous Powers, .who wrote before the *' Civil Eflablifliment of Chriflianity, which " I was concerned to defend." (P. 136.) May I not reafonably enquire again in my Turn, Why this v/as not taken Notice of? or afk Any One who had only read Mr. T's Defence, Whether He could have believed, that I had been thus free and exprefs upon a Point, which this Gentleman's Wiihes mufl fuppofe me to have omitted? I had added, that " the precife Duration of Miracles was *' not in itfelf neceffary to the Queftion be- " fore Us, but might be determined diffe- " rently by Thofe, who believe the main *' Article." The Reafon of this was fo plain, that I did not think it necelTary to enlarge on it. For if we can prove that the TeflimQ- ny [ 25 ] ny given to fome Miraculous Powers after the Pays of the Apoftles is fiifficient to confirm the Belief of them, and that the Pretenfions of Others in later Times are ?iot fujicient to that Purpofe, the Queftion will be fafficiently eftablilhed againft Dr. M. tho' We may not be able to fix 4n what exa(fl: Part of the inter- mediate Interval, thofe Miraculous Powers were really withdrawn. Thofe who are of Opinion, that Miracles ceafed i7ninediatelyy when the Rulers of the Earth became Chrifti- ans ; and Thofe who think They continued for a Century or two longer in the Church, may equally make good their Point againft the Author of the Free Inquiry^ however they may differ in a lefs material Point among themfelves. But Dr. Af. it feems, thinks otherwife, and Mr. T". fays, " offers feveral " very good Reafons for his Opinion, which *' Reafons Mr. Z). has not attempted to an- ^^ fwer." As I was not confcious of any fuch wilful Omiffion of this Kind, I re-exa- mined the Paffage referred to with fome Cu- riofity, where I found thefe feveral very good Keafons flirink into one only, and that found- ed on a miftaken Suppofition of confirming all the Dodrines and Ufages of thofe Ages, in which thefe miraculous Powers were really continued. This likewife I had taken par- ticular Notice of on another Occafion, where it [ 26 ] it was repeated and afferted 'in a ftronger Manner, and had obferved, that " this fup- " pofed Connexion might be ferviceable to " the Caufe of Popery, but was a Conceflion *' in which I thought he would not be joined " by any rational Proteftant." (P. 56.) Dr. M. infifls on it as neceffary to fix the precife Point of the Duration of Miraluous Powers, that We may know, " how far the Hand of " God continued to co-operate vifibly with " the Saints of thofe Ages, by giving a Di- *' vine Sancftion to the Doctrines which they " taught, and the Rites which they eflabliih- " ed." (Pref P. 16, 17.) And had Thofe Saints Themfelves thus conned:ed their Opini- ons or Practices with their miraculous Powers, and offered fupernatural Evidence to confirm any new particular Dodrines or Rites, then the D's Arguments would have been fome- what to the Purpofe ; tho' not quite conclufive, unlefs they had likewife reprefented thofe Dodirines and Rites as necefiary to Salvation. But if they only pleaded their miraculous Powers in Confirmation of the Truth of the Gofpel J if they did not pretend, by Virtue of this Privilege, to be infallible or impecca- ble, then their Doctrines and Ufages will ftill be liable to the Tefl of Reafon and Revelation, a.nd there will be no Neceflity of afcertaining the precife Period of all the true Miracles, in order [ 27 ] order to difcern thofe Truths which God has ftamped with his Authority. Thofe Writers will ftiil, efpecially when They are unanimous^ be the befl WitnelTes what were the Do(frrines and Difcipline of the early Ages, (which is furely a Point deferving of Confideration) and their Teilimony will be of Weight, whilft it is found confifient with Scripture, tho' it v/ould be of no Force againft the plain Senfe of it. Miraculous Powers, as I obferved before on this Subjed:, did not pre- ferve all Thofe who were endowed with them from immoral Practices, yet neither did They juftify or extenuate themj but our Saviour fpeaks of fuch Perfons as finally condemned, Matt. vii. 23, and fhould inexcufable Super- fiitions as well as Immoralities be found in any fuch Perfons, the Anfwer and the Event would be the fame ; for thofe very Miracles, which enabled them to prove the Truth of their Religion, did thereby aggravate their Guilt in any unfuitable Practices. The Cafe in which Dr. AT. elfewhere chofe to illuftrate the Force of this Argument of a fuppofed Con- nexion betwixt their Miracles and their Doc- trines or Rites, was that of the Veneration of Reliques. " It is to thofe antient Tales" He fays, " fo gravely attefted, of Miracles " wrought by the Bones of Saints and Mar- " tyrs, that the Church of Rome owes all that " Trade [ 28 ] « Trade, which fhe flill draws from the fame " Fund and Treafure of her Wonder-working " Reliques: And if We can believe fuch " Stories, as they are delivered to Us by the " Primitive Writers, We cannot condemn *' a Practice which is evidently grounded " upon them." (P. 25.) Now in the Firft Place, the very earlieft Mention of Miracles, wrought by the Bones of Saints and Martyrs, is of fo late a Date, as will no way affe6l the Queftion as maintained by the Defenders of the Continuance of Miraculous Powers in the Church till the Eftablifhment of it by Civil Authority ; and therefore if his, fuppofed Con- nexion was never fo realy this Inllance could be of no Service to Him againft the greater Part of his Oppofers, But let us farther examine the Strength of the Connexion itfelf. Dr. M. fays, " If We " can believe fuch Stories, as they are de^ " livered to Us by the Primitive Writers, We " cannot condemn a Prad:ice, which is evi- " dently grounded upon them." That is, If We can credit thofe antient Tales, as He calls them, fo gravely attelled, of Miracles wrought by the Bones of Saints and Martyrs, We cannot blame the Church of Rome for the fuperjiitioiis Adoration of thofe Reliques, this Practice being evidendy grounded on that Belief. But fcarce any other Protellant I fup- pofe [ 29 ] pofe will join with Him in this, or think that the Church of Rome is not now to blame for the Worfhip of thofe old rotten Bones, as Dr. M. exprelTes it, tho' thofe Bones were fuppofed to be heretofore the Inftruments of working miraculous Cures. This was advancing a Step farther than he had done in the IntrodiiBory Difcoiirfe, or at leaft farther than his able Advo- cate, the Author of the View of the Co?jtroverfy\ chofe to underftand or to defend Him. When feveral Writers had fhewn the Unreafonable- nefs of inferring the Worfhip of Reliques from the Cures attributed to them, This Gentle- man endeavours to fliew that They mifunder- ftood or mifreprefented Dr. M. " The Thing " fays He, to be attended to at prefent, is not, " whether Miracles wrought in any Age, are " Confirmations of the concurrent Ufages or " Practices of that Age, nor whether the " Obligation to the Adoration of Reliques, " will follow from Miracles being wrought " by fuch Reliques. But whether Miracles " wrought in any Age, through, or by " Means of any Rite, upon Application to " God thro' that Rite ; whether Miracles fo " wrought are not to be confidered as Confir- " mations of the Divine Approbation of the " Innocence or Lawfulnefs of fuch Rite of *' Application." (P. ii.) Again, " To in- *' fer the WorlhJp of Reliques, in the high " Senfe [ 30 ] *' Senfe of Worfhip, merely from Miracles " being wrought by them, is an Inference " too large; But we may infer the Lawful- nefs and Innocence of that Rite fo far as it goes; which is all the Inference contended for (P. 15, 16.). This is repeated again and again, (P. 18, 34, 40, 43, 141.) as feveral Gentlemen had conlidered the Argument in the fame Light. But now this Diiftindlion and this Plea are waved by Dr. M, who here roundly aflerts, that He was fuppofed to mean before, that if We can believe thofe ancient Tales of Miracles wrought by the Bones of Saints and Martyrs, We cannot condemn the prefent Pra(5lice of the Church of Rome^ which is evidently (evidently He muft mean in Reafo?2y not in Fa5f only, otherwife We might condemn it) grounded upon them. Now the Grounds on which We think that tho* We fhould admit thofe ancient Tales, yet We may condemn the prefent Practice of the Church of Rome, that is as Dr. M. explains it, " The Trade which She ftill " draws from the fame Fund and Treafure " of her Wonder-working Reliques," are plainly thefe, that if ever Miracles were work- ed by fuch Reliques, yet they have long lince ceafed ; and that even if they had continued, yet they would not have juftified the fuperfti- tious and idolatrous Regard now paid by the Church [ 31 ] Church of Rome to the Reliques themfelves. The Author of the View thus limits his Afler- tion, that " Miracles wrought in any Age> ** through or by Means of any Rite, upon Ap- " plication to God thro' that Rite, are to be " confidered as Confirmations of the Divine " Approbation of the Innocence or Lawful- " nefs of fuch Rite of Application, provided " always that no Mark or Intimation of the " Difapprobation of the Rite be, or hath been " given (P. II.). This is certainly a very juft Diftin(5tion, and therefore a Difapprobation having been exprelTed in clear Terms, of all Creatiire-Worfiipy the Pracflice of the Romijlo Church muft be condemned, even tho' They had ftill miraculous Powers refiding among them to be wrought by Means of fuch Re- liques. This Argument therefore is of Weight againft Dr. M's unlimited AfTertion, tho' not againft his more wary Advocate ; who elfe- where adds, that " to fay that They cannot " defend by thefe Means, the Worfhip of " Reliques, in the high Senfe of Woriliip, " (a Pradiice They difelaim) is faying No- " thing, if We leave them in PofTeffion of " a Proof of that fuperftitious Veneration and " Mediatorial Application, the Practice of " which They acknowledge and contend for, "and which are Rites fufficiently unlawful." (P. 19.) As to their Difclaiming the high Senfe r 32 j Senfe of Worflilp, They do indeed difclaim it juft as the Wijer Heathens did, by Evafions and Diftinftions which They learned from them, and which would be of equal Force to acquit the former as the latter from the Charge of Idolatry ; for No One who has been amongft them, can I think be infen- fible, that They do as really and truly wor- fliip their Reliques and Images as their Pagan Ancefliors did. As to Sicperjfitious Veneration^ and Mediatorial Application^ which are pronounced to be Rites fufficiently un- lawful ; thefe are Words of more doubtful Signification, and iliould be more clearly af- certained, that Thofe, who agree in Opinion, may not difpute about Expreffions. I have no other or clearer Notion of Siiperjlition^ than that it is Mifplacing our Devotion on wrong Objedts without Authority, or over-valuing Right, but lefs important Praftices, farther than Reafon or Revelation will warrant. Whatever goes againji exprefs Dired:ion is ir- religious^ and deferves a worfe Name than Supcrjiition. Veneration is a more uncertain Term, and may mean a Refped: greater or lefs, faulty or innocent, juft according to the odier Words to which it is joined, or the Me- thods in which it is expreffed. This Gentle- man I obferve once ufes it to mean no more than the Application of the Relique for the fuppofed [ 33 .] fuppofed Cure to be wrought by it, 'vtrhich he calls " the Rite of touching or venerating " dead Mens Bones j" (P. i6.) Mediatorial Application founds high, and might feem to imply a forbidden Pradlice, but, as elfewhere explained by this Gentleman, it means no more than the Method of applyifig to God for a Cure by the life of fuch an Inftrument, as a fupernatural Power is fuppofed to be annexed to. Now This Gentleman, fays, and I think fays rightly, that from the fuppofed Reality of the Miracle We may infer the Lawfulnefs and Innocence of the Rite fo far as it goes, and therefore fay I, in fueh fuppofed Cafe, it would not be 2Lny fiiperjlitioiis Veneration^ that is not 2.ny groiindlefs RefpeB without Authority, nor 2iny faulty Mediatorial Application to make Ufe of fuch an Inftrument to our own Bene- fit, to which Providence had fo vifibly annex- ed fb fupernatural a Power. But this, fays this Author " appears to Him to be a diredl " Conceffion in Support of the like fuperili- " tious Rites ufed in the Church of Rome'' (P. 44.) It appears to me to be directly other- wife, becaufe whether Miracles were wrought or not by thefe Means in the early Ages, We are fatisfied that they are ;2i?/ wrought fo 7iow, and therefore thefe Rites and Applications are not eftabliAed now by the fame Authority that they are fuppofed to be then. D The [ 34 ] .^ ..IThe Whole of this Veneration and Appli- cation depends on the Evidence of the Reality of the Miracle ; It is Siiperjiition to apply to fuch a Method of Cure without exprefs War- rant, but with it, certified by fuch fupernatu- ral Interpoiition, fucn Application would - be fufficiently juftifiable. And what Advan- tage can Popery gain by this Conceflion ? It will refl on them to prove the Certainty of thofe pretended Miracles wrought by Re- liques j and could they prove that Point, all that would be allowed in Confequenc^ would be the Lawfidnefs of ufing and applying them, and fuch a Veneration, Regard, and Efteem for them as is anfwerable to the Va- lue that We put on any other injirumental Caufes of important Bleffings. But fince the Firft Point is the Proof of the Reality of the Miracles, here We may fecurely reft, and may challenge them to exhibit them to pub- lick Examination ; after which t;,his Gentle- man will agree with me, that the very Occa- iion of the Difpute will be cut off concerning the Degree of the Regard due to Reliques, on the Suppofition of miraculous Cufes being wrought by them. He prefents Us however with a parallel In- (lance, (P. 13,) which I chufe to eonfider as Inflances do ufually befl illullrate fuch Ar- guments, and becaufe the ve.ry fanie ha§ been [ 35 ] fefen introduced by Others on this Subje«ft. It relates to the Royal Touch for the Cure of the King's Evil. For my own Part, I am ready to own that I have no Faith in this as a fupernatural Endowment for this plain Rea- fon amongft others, that if fome Cures have indeed been wrought by it, yet in other Cafes it has moft certainly proved ineffedtual : Now the Succefs in fome Inftances may be ac- counted for without a Supernatural Interpofi- tion ; the Failure in j^y cannot I think be accounted for upon that Suppofition. — But admitting the Fads, He afks. Does God ap- prove of this Rite as lawful, or does He. not ? He has a Reply ready for the Determination on either Side j but I find no Difficulty in anfwering'ead Mem Bones. The Point of Saintjhip is out of the Queftion in this Cafe, fince We ought •not to worihip Any of what Characters fo'e- ver ; and befides We may be miftaken in Dead as well as Living Saint Sy or at leaft in the [37 ] tile Reliques belonging to them. I cannot fee therefore what Advantage Popery could make of this Con'ceffion, or how the Veneration^ that is the Vfe of Rites, to which miraculous Powers were annexed, could be proved to be unlawful, on Suppofition of the clear Evidence of the Fadl. In the forementioned Inftance I fhould not worjhip either the Kmgy or his Hand^ if I applied to his "Touch for the Cure of my Diftemper, nor would it be a fuperjiitious Veneration to refpec^ a Perfon endowed with fuch a Virtue, as an extraor- dinary Inflrument of Providence for the Bene- fit of his Fellow-Creatures. There is an incautious Phrafe ufed at firft by Dr. M. and repeated by the Author of the View, which feems to have given Rife to all the Difficulty that has been ftarted on this Point. " If," fays the Dr. " We admit the ■** Miracles, We muft neceffarily admit the " Rites, for the Sake of which they were " wrought." (P. 66. Introd. Difc.) Now I know no reafonable Senfe in which it can be faid that the Miracles were wrought for the ';'Sake of the Rites. On Suppofition again of the Fa(fl, the Affiflance was given for the Sake tf Mankind; It was given in this extraordina- ry Manner for the Sake of God's Glory, to cou- firm the Truth of a Revelation which He had gracioufly vouchfafed to the World. The D 3 Manner [ 38 ] Manner in which, and the Infirumentalify by which fuch Miracles were wrought, were equally eafy and indifferent to the Almighty Worker of them, who could with equal Facility work them inftantaneoufly, '^without any intermediate Caufes; but certainly the E^nd cannot in any Senfe be faid to be wrought for the ^ake of the Means. If in- deed there had been an 6xprefs declared Connecftion, that Miracles fhould be wrought by fuch Reliques, to prove that Adoration or Veneration was to be paid to them, then they- might have been faid to have been wrought for their Sakes, for in this Cafe the Miracles would have been the Means, and the Worship of Reliques the End y but no fuch Connedtion is pretended ; and the bare Allowance of the Lawftdnefs of a Rite no where prohibited, whilft miraculous Powers can be proved to be annexed to it, is a Con- ceffion from which I am not in the -leaft apprehenfive of any ill Confequence. Could undoubted Proof be given of the Working of Miracles by Reliques, I fhould be fo far from thinking it to be for their Sake, that I fliould rather fuppofe that fuch contemptible Inflruments were made Ufe of to prevent the Danger of anyAbufe of them, and to yield the clearer Proof of a miraculous Interpoftion, when fu'Ch unlikely Means were employed to - illuftrate f 39 ] jJluflrate the Divine Power, which muft be known to have no Virtue in Themfelves. Upon the whole, whether the Miracles faid to be wrought at the Tombs and by tht Reliques of Martyrs deferve Credit, is a Queflion which does not concern thofe who are defending the Miracles of the three iirft Centuries ; but it concerns the Argu- ment, as Dr. M. has managed it, to obferve, that fuppofing thofe Miracles to have been really wrought. This could no Way juftify the Worfliip of thofe Martyrs, or their Re- liques, any more than the Cures wrought by St. Paul's Handkerchief could be a Rea- ibn for worfliipping either St. Paul^ or his Handkerchief. Thofe, therefore, who admit the Truth of thofe Miracles, may not- withftanding very confiftently condemn the fuperftitious Pra(5tices of the Church of Rome, and rejed: her pretended Miracles ; it being no Objed:ion againfl the Reality of thofe early Miracles, that Weak or Wicked Men took Oecalioji from thence to introduce Superfti- tion and Idolatry, or to invent forged Mi- cades. I have been led into thefe Reflec- tions from Mr. To//*s Charge of a former OmiJJton, not from any officious Defire of oppoiing the Author of the View, &c. whom it would be more Pleafure to me to concur -with in Opinion. But I do not fee the ^jpjiBce of Dr* M*% Argument for fixing the D 4 precife [ 4^ ] precife Period of miraculous Powers, in order to confirm the Dodrines or Ufages of the feveral Ages, which mufl be judged of by other Rules, and mull ftand or fall by the Teft of Scripture or Reafon. In the Inftance affigned with Refpedt to Reliques^ the Wor- ihip or undue Veneration of them, as ObjeB^ of Devotion, was at all Times unlawful ; and the Ufe and Application of the.m as Means of Cure, were fo far innocent and allowable as, and no farther than miraculous Powers could be proved to be worked by them, whatever that precife Period may be fuppofed to be. Mr. T. chufes to pafs over the Objedipns to the rernainipg Parts of Dr. M's Preface, " becaufe every Thing material," He fays, i* will occafionally fall in the Courfe of his Re- " marks.", .(P. 9.) I cannot help thinking that it would have been material to have vindicated fonie other obnoxious PalTages which I had pointed to, and where the poor Plea of Obfcurity will not fatisfy ; where his Arguments mean Notliing, or worfe than Nothing ; and where the Belief of Miracles is reprefented as a Defertion of the Path of Na- ture and Experience, and a Contradiction to that " Revelation which the Creator made •^ of Himfelf from the Beginning placed " ' continually before our Eyes in the won- " derful [ 41 ] *' 'derflilr Works and beautiful Fabric of this " vifibie World." However fomewhat is here added, which I fhall not pafs over. I %vas arguing from Dr. M's own Concef- lions ; and in particular from his Account of the Delign of Miracles, that " they were " given to enable the firft Preachers more *' eafily to over-rule the inveterate Prejudices " both of the Jews and Qentiles, and to " bear up againft the difcouraging Shocks " of popular Rage and Perfecution," Mr. *r. replies, " Eh*. M. does; not allow, nor do *' I think that the rooting out inveterate Pre- " judices, without Reflrid:ion and Limita- *' tion to Times and Circumftances, is a fuf- " ficient Occafion for them" (P. ic). But the very Point which I had in View was ta fhew, that the Reftridiions and Limitations expreffed by Dr. M, were of no Advantage to his Argument, as not confijiing the Occa- fion for Miracles to the Apojiolical Age, lince according to Dr. M's own Words " Chrif- " tianity had not at that Time gained an *' Eftabli{hment in every Quarter of the ^* known World" j and in particular I ob- ferved, that the fevereji Perfections were af- ter the Days of the Apoftles, fo that in this Refped: Miracles might even feem more ne- cejfary in the fucceeding Ages, till the Civil Eftablifhment of this Religion, To this His Defender [ 42 ] JDefender anfwers Nothing, but goes onvg^j repeat an Obje(flion which I had exprefsly. obviated without vouchfafing to take any No?; tice that it had been anfwered beforehand-.? He fays, that " on the Suppofition that the*. " rooting out of inveterate Prejudices wer.e> " a fufficicnt Occalion for them. We ar^j " abfolutely fure, that the Reafon of Mirafj " cles, nor (I fuppofe He meant and) con- *^ .fequently Miracles themfeh'es, can never. ** ceafe as long as the World lafts." (ibid.) I had particularly fhewn, that this Way of Reafoning would not hold, for that We ea*j joy feveral Advantages at this Day for the Propagation of the Gofpel amongft the Hea- thens, which were wantijig at the firft Pub- lication of it, and that therefore We flood lefs in Need of fupernatural Affiflance for that Purpofe. This Gentleman does not fo much as attempt to invalidate thefe Diftinc- tions, but only fays, that " whatever We •* may in Speculation fancy poffible to be " done by the Force of Human Means, is " found in Fa(fl and Experience to be totally " inefFe(5lual" (P. ii,). Here again I muft take the Liberty to diflent from Him. All polTible Human Means have not been tried to propagate Chriftianity, and therefore We cannot pronounce upon the FaB^ that they are found to be totally ineffedtual. Were Men [ 43 ] Mfen half as much in earneft about the re^ ligious^ as They are about the political State of the World; were They as folicitous to extend the Knowledge and Pradlice of Chrif" tidn Duties^ as They are to promote Tirade end Commerce, much might probably be done this Way. The Succefs of the Endeavours of the Society for propagating the Go/pel has fliewn, that the Truths of the Gofpel, when faiiiy propofed, without Difguife or Addi- tlonv have been often able to make their Way into prejudiced Minds ; and were thole charitable Endeavours univerfal, the happy Eife^ might reafonably be hoped to be more general alfo. The prefent Darknefs and Ignorance of fo great a Part of Man- kind is owing very much to the NegleB of Human Means, and were there all proper Charity, Zeal and Diligence ufed in this Behalf, there would be much lefs Occafion for miraculous Affiftance than at prefent there may appear to be. Mr. T. adds, that .^*- there does not feem at prefent any Likeli- *f'*hood that the Converfion of all Thofc, ^ who rejed: Chriftianity, fhould be brought ^^i about by any Thing lefs than miraculous ^' Power." Nor do I think it probable, that the Converfion of all would be brought about by that. There were Thofe who re- jeded the Evidence of Miracles in oiir Sa- viour's L 44 ] viour's Time J and I make no doubt but that the fame Difpolitions would contrive to evade the fame Evidence, if it was now of- fered. But the Queftion is, Whether there are not more probable Hopes of Succefs, more Advantages on the Side of the MifTionaries, and fewer or lefs Impediments on the Part of the Hearers, in the prefent State of the World, than at any Time of the iirft Publi- cation of Chriftianity, before it was received and eftablifhed in any Country ? The Cri- minal Indolence and Indifference of Chriftian Nations, more ready to contend about fe- cular Interefts than to agree in promoting their Common Faith, will not fuffer Us to judge by Fa6i what can be done towards the Converfion of Unbelieving Nations by all pof- fible Human Means ; but We can only judge by Reafon, whether there are not more pro- bable Grounds to hope for Succefs without the Aid of Miracles noWj than before any Eftablifhment of Chriftianity. Here the Dif- tindions before offered come in full to the Point, but as they remain unconlidered by the Defender, they need not be repeated or reinforced. He adds however, inflead of a Confutation of my Reafons, or a Propofal of any contrary ones, his own Opinion as a po- iitive ArgumenjL. " So that no Arguments " Priori can I think be drawn for the Ne- '' cefTity i 45 i ?' cefiity of Miracles in the fecond and third " Centuries, with Refpe<5t to Unbelievers^ " but what is as Good and in as flill Force " Now as it was Then" (ibid.). If any At- tempt of a Proof of this had been offered in Oppofition to what I had before obferved, I fhould have taken it into Confideration ; but fhall now leave Mr. T. to enjoy his own Thought, and fhall only add, that my Arguments were founded on that Obferva- tion of Dr. M. which I take to be the beft in his whole Performance ; that " it is rafli " and prefumptuous to decide upon the "*' Views and Motives of the Deity by the " narrow Conceptions of Human Reafon." I have no Notion of putting Oiirfehes in the Place of our Maker, and determining what He muji do upon any Exigency. An Argument a Friori for the NeceJ/ity of Mira- racles was particularly guarded againft by an exprefs Declaration, that " We cannot in- ** deed determine antecedently concerning " the Necejjity of Miracles in fuch and fuch ** particular Cafes, but We may fubfequent- " ly offer fuch Arguments for the Propriety *^ of a Divi?ie hiterpofition, where there is " due Evidence for itj" (See Free Ajifwer, P. 12.) and therefore why Mr. T. chofe to exprefs Himfelf again in this Manner, I do not know. The [ 46 ] The whole of the State of this Cafe is thisj Dr. M. allows that Miracles were wrought by our Saviour, and his Apoftles, and fome of the firft Chriftians in the Apoftolical Age; He allows that they were wrought to enable the Firft Preachers to root out Prejudices, and bear up againft Perfecutions ; and He ac- knowledges it farther as a Pojlidatumy which all will grant, that thefe miraculous Powers lafted as long as they were necelTary to the Church. " But when the firft and principal ' ' Difficulties were conquered— when Churches " were planted in all the chief Cities of the " Roman Empire, it may reafonably be pre- ** fumed, that as the Benefit of miraculous " Powers began to be lefs and lefs wanted in " Proportion to the Increafe of thofe Churches, - fo the Ufe and Exercife of them began " gradually to decline ; and as foon as Chriftia- ^^nity had gained an Eftabliftiment in every <:*>Quarter of the knovi^n World, that they " were finally withdrawn ; and all this- He ** thinks may probably be thought to have *' happened whilft fome of the Apoftles were « ftiil Living." (Pref. P. 28, 29.) It feemed proper therefore to obferve, that this was a Miftake in Fadf, that this Occafion for mira- culous Powers was not peculiar to the Apojloli' cal Age, that there was no fuch Diftin(5tion in Favour of that particular Period to which he has [ 47 3 has confined them, nor any Prefumption againfl the Continuance of Miracles in fuc- ceeding Ages, if there fhould appear to be other Evidence of fuch Continuance of them ; but that this Diftindrion does very remarkably and forcibly return from the Time of the Civil Eftablifhment : after which it feemed reafonable to be lefs in Expecftation of Mi- racksy when Human Means grew more pow- erful and fufficient. Mr. "T. adds, " as to the Ufe of Miracles " for the Support and Encouragement of Be- " lievers, if their Trials were greater in " thofe Days of Perfecution, their Supports *' were fo too. They lived fo near the " Fountain-Head of Miracles, that fome of '' them no Queftion hadThemfelves been Eye- *' WitnelTes of feveral wonderful Works, many " more had converfed with thofe who had been " Eye-Witnefles of them, by which We may " fuppofe fo ftrong a Convidtion to be wrought " in their Hearts of the Divine Original of the " Religion they profefled, as, together with " the extraordinary Aids of God's Holy Spi- ^liTlli).' might enable them to undergo the " _mofl feverc Punifhments that could be in- ^\ flidled upon them with Steadinefs and Re- *' .folution." (P. II, 12.) Whatever Force there may be thought to be in this Obfervati- Qii,^ rt cannot affedt the chief Part of the Time c 48 i Time preceding the Civil Eftablifhment of Religion. Thro' more than half the Second Century, and all the Third, there could be None who had feen, or converfed with thofe who had {ggii any Miracle wrought, if they were really confined to the Apoftolical Age. But Mr. T. adds farther, that fome Perfons have in all Ages endured Martyrdom as cou- rageoully as the Primitive Sufferers could do : " Which known and inconteflable Fads, He *' fays, feem entirely to deflroy the Argument " for the Neceffity of Miracles with Regard " to Believers." This Obfervation again is jufl of as much Force againfl his Friend Dr. M's Opinion, as againfl his Oppofers -, for if Men have in all Ages been enabled to endure the feverefl Perfecutions even to the mofl cruel Deaths, without miraculous Afliflance, why was it neceffary that any Miracles fhould be wrought for their Support at miy 77;/Z£',and efpecially in the ApoJiolicalAgCy when according to Mr. 7"'s preceding Obfervation, they had fuch an Opportunity of feeing other Miracles, as might be fuppofed to work fuch a flrong Convi(ftion in their Hearts, as toge- ther with the extraordinary Aids of God's Holy Spirit, might be fufHcient to fupport them ? Yet the Dr. afligns this as one Rea- fon for the granting of miraculous Powers in the Apoflolical Age, " to enable the firfl " Preachers [ 49 ] ** Preachers to bear up againft the difcouraging " Shocks of popular Rage and Perfecution, " which they were taught to expeft in this « Noviciate of their Miniftry." (Pref, 28.) ConviBion was by no Means the only Point ne- cefTary to this Purpofe. Thofe who as firmly believed the Truth of the Gofpel, as Others who rejified unto Bloody ftrivingfor it, did yet fometimes fall away in the Day of Perfecution, Their Fears got the better of their Reafon ; They retained their Faith tho' they loft their Virtue, and v^tVQ Jelf -condemn d m their Want of Refolution. In fuch an Exigency an im- mediate Miracle might apparently be of great Service, not to connjince them of what they firmly Selie'ved before, but to remind them of the Importance of that Faith, to quicken their Thoughts and Affedlions, and to open Hea- ven to their View, v/hen the Terrors of the Earth were likely to engrofs their Attention, and overfet their better Defigns. Why God Almighty granted this Privilege \.ofome Per^ Jons, and not to others, why at fome 'Ti?neSy and not at others. We are not qualified to de- termine. He fees the Hearts of all his Ser- vants, and knows the Whole of their Difficul-^- ties and Advantages, and therefore is alone able to judge when fuch external Interpofiti* ons are ufeful and feafonable. It may be pro- per however to obferve, that his fuper?iaturcl E Affiilanc* [ 5° ] Affiftance of his faithful Difciples may be as real and effeSlual^ whether it be thus externally teftified or not ; which is what I fuppofe Mr. T". himfelf allows and intimates, when he fpeaks of Convid:ion, " together with the ex- " traordinary Aids of God's Holy Spirit," as fufficient to fupport the Martyrs. God Al- mighty may, by an extraordinary A5i of his Holy Spirity imprefs at once as ftrong and warm a Senfe of Heavenly Promifes and Com- forts on the Mind of the Sufferer, as fuch an outward Miracle^ if really wrought, would Occafion ; and in fuch Cafe the Ajjijiance and Ejvent would be the fame, as if He had open- ly wrought fuch a Miracle in their Favour. Why his infinite Wifdom chufes fometimcs to interpofe thus publickly and outwardly, fometimes inwardly and fecretly in Behalf of his Servants, is beft known to his own Coun- fels ; but in fuch fuppofed Cafes it is plain that the Martyrs may be equally dealt with, whilft to Spe6tators They are very unequally treated ; and We with equal Ignorance and Prefump- tion are examJning and v/ondering, why Mi- racles fhould be wrought in Favour of Some, and not of Others. This Difference of Dif- penfations is probably ordered fo as may befl: anfwer the farther Defigns of Providence; and the external Manifeffation at any Time of fupernatural . Affiftance, maybe intended as well [ SI ] well for the hijlniBion of Others, as the Sup- port of the Sufferers. What I would upon the Whole obferve from hence is, that as We cannot argue antecedently in this Cafe, any more than in the former, for the Necejfity of Miracles to fupport Believers under Perfe- cution, fo neither can We determine againft the Expediency of them to this Purpofe ; nor is this Confideration, that Some have endured Martyrdom without the Affiftance of Miracles, any Manner of Prejudice to the Evidence that may be offered, that Others in particular In- flances ha'ue been favoured vj\^ them. We are now come to the Re-examination of the Free-Inquiry. Dr. iif' s Firft Obfervation was, that " in all the feveral Pieces of the " Apoftolical Fathers there is not the leaft «' Claim or Pretenfion to any of thefe ex- " traordinary Gifts," to which I replied in the firft Place, that " the Plain Reafon " why the Apoflolical Fathers did not en- " large on tliis Subje(ft was, becaufe They " were not writing to Heathens who need- " ed Converfion^ but to their own Difcipks " who needed InJiruBicn or Admo?iition, fo " that if there be in their Epiflles any //-w/- " de7ital Mention of fuch fupernatural En- " dowments, it is as much as can reafona- " bly be expected, and more than could " necelTarily be demanded." Mr. "Tl with- E 2 ' out [ 52 1 out the leall Attempt of fliewlng that this DiftiiKftion was frivolous, and that the Mention of Miraculous Evidence was as proper and neceflary to be repeatedly made to thofe who believed it already, as to thofe v/ho oppofed it -, runs off to Ge- rals, and obferves (P. 14, &c.) that it is hard to conceive, that if Miracles continued, all the Writers for fo long a Space of Time could avoid taking fome particular Notice of them J that in the Adls of the Apoftles they are circumilantially fpecifled ; — that it is to be prefumed, that if God Almighty thought fit to continue a Power of working Miracles in his Church, that he would take Care to have fome Teftimony of the Exercife of this Power authentically recorded — that it is high- ly probable that Pie mufl intend fuch might)^ Works as an Ohjed: of Belief to Thofe that come after, and that this implies fomething of an infallible Diredlion to the Perfons who are to record them. — " But this," fays He, " is by no Body contended for in the " prefent Cafe." I think fo too, and there- fore do not fee the Force or Ufe of this Me- thod of Reafonrng. Mr. T. adds, that " He " does not (and I am glad that He does not) " lay down this Method of Realbning as *^ an abfolute and demon ftrative Proof, that " there were no fuch Powers exifting ; but *' this _ [ 53 ] *' this He will venture politively to infer *' from it, that 'tis of no Manner of Confe- " quence to Us whether there were or no." The Difference between making this Belief a necejfary Article of Faith, and reprefenting it as of no Manner of Confequence at all, is a Point that has been fpoken to already, and need not be repeated as often as thefe Inli- nuations oxur. Mr. T, then proceeds triumphantly, repeat- ing my Words, " Is then an incidental *' mention of thefe Powers as much as can *' be expected, and more than can be de- " manded ?" He goes on, " According to " this latter AiTertion, We had had Reafon *' to believe them, if no Mention at all liad *^ been made of them. This is carrying the " Matter a great Way indeed, ^cT What perplexed the Thoughts of this Gentleman, or what ftrange Connexion He had formed in his own Mind, when He wrote thefe Sen- tences, I cannot pretend to fay, or even to guefs : But how he could infer from my fay- ing, that in Pradlical Exhortations addrefied to profeiTed Believers to awaken them to a fuitable Life, it was as much as could reafona- bly be expected, and more than could necef- farily be demanded, that there fhould be an incidental Mention of Miracles, that therefore We fhould have had Reafon to believe E 3 them, [ 54 ] them, if no Mention at all had been made of them, I cannot in the kail conjecflure. The Grounds, on which We believe thefe Miracles, is the Teflimony of Thofe who had Occaiion to take Notice of the Evi- deuces of Chriftianity, but this was not the Point in View when They wrote to Dif- I ciples who already admitted all that could be faid on that Head, and needed Admoni- tions only to ftir them up to a Holy Prac- tice. With them, not the Evidence^ but the "Nature and Importance of their Religion, were the proper Subjedls of Difcourfe, and are accordingly chiefly treated of by the Apof- tolical Writers. Had Thofe who firft wrote profelTedly to eftablifh the T'ruth of this Religion, been Silent on this Article, This would have been a conflderable Prejudice againft the Teflimony of later Writers, with Refpecl to Miracles ; but it is no fuch Exception that T^hofe did not more expreflly mention them, whofe Subjed: did not lead them to this Point, and who had no Occa- iion to be continually telling Believers what They all knew already, and who were more likely to fail in PraBice than in Faith. In the earlieil Apologies that are ilill extant, there is an exprefs Claim to miraculous Powers, and We have fome Teflimony concerning the Tefli- mony in this Refped, of thofe v/hich are lofl, which [ 55 ] which is all that can be expeded in this Cafe. Et{febiuSy who had read them, aflures Us on their Authority, that the SuccefTors of the Apoftles did work Miracles. cTrel XAi Ts bii'd 'TCnufjLa.ro^ na-eri Tore ^i clvtcou rTtXHitCLl 'TCclL^A^'o^Ot ^Vvdf^ilS iVYIgyOVV' Oii re CL7V0 ^^c^v[A,a}$ Tyiv ti$ Tov tccv isXcov S'yjf^iB^yov tv^efiticLV cLrjTous '^v^ca$ xcLrA^e^i(^cLt. Eufeb. Ecclef. Hill. Lib. 3. c. 37. Since therefore They who wrote on Purpofe to convert Gainfayers, and to difarm Perfecutors, did challenge this Power, when it muft have been fatal to them to have made a falfe Claim, What can be in- ferred from the fuppofed Silence of thoJfe, who were writing praBical Advices and Ad- monitions to BelieverSf to perfuade them to live as becometh the Go/pel of Chrift ? All that I can infer from it is, that the primitive Writers knew and confidered well what they were about, addreffed themfelves very pro-- perly to the different Perfons whom They had Occalion to apply to, and mentioned thefe miraculous Gifts there, and there only, where they were of \J{e for the Conviction of Thofe who might be fuppofed to doubt of them. Let it be conlidered a little, how this Cafe would have ilood, and in what Manner the Objedions would have been formed, if tliefe E 4 firfl: [ 56 ] firil Epijlolary Writers had mentioned the Power of working Miracles amongfl their own Difciples, and the enfuing Apologifts had taken no Notice of them in their Con- tefts with Unbelievers and Gainfayers. Would not their Claim have been parallelled, (and with great Appearance of Reafon) with that of the prefent Romifi Churchy which talks loudly of Miracles amongil her own People, but does not vouchfafe to offer them to the Examination, and for the Converfion of re- puted Hereticks ? Whereas the Primitive Writers on the contrary addreffed themfelves very properly to all Men according to their own Principles, propoling direftly the befl Means of Convidion in the Examination of Miraculous Towers to their Enemies^ who needed fuch Convidlion, but paffing them over in Silence, or but incidentally mention- ing them to their Friends, who they knew agreed with them in this Point. And can it be thought an Argument j can it be thought a Prefumption againfl the politive Tellimony of the profelTed Defenders of the Faith, that the Epiftolary Writers in behalf of a fuitable Holinefs of Converfation, did not leave their Subjedt, and go out of their Way, to re- peat the Evidence over and over again, by which thefe Converts were at iirft brought over to the Acknov/ledgment of tlae Faith ? It [ 57 ] It has been very pertinently obferved by the Gentlemen who have v/rote before on this Point, that there is no Mention of thefe mi- raculous Gifts in any of the Epiilles except thofe of St. Patih and in feveral of his they are paffed over in Silence; and whatever Caufes may be affigned for this Omiffion, will be equally applicable to the Writings of St. Chfienty St. Polycarp, and the Others. It will plainly follow from hence, that no Pre- fumption lies againft their Knowledge of the Continuance of miraculous Powers, merely from their not infiiling upon them. I may add, that the Mention of them in thofe Epiilles, where they do occur, appears to have been owing chiefly to fome Enquiries made by the Converts in Relation to them, or to fome Cafes wherein They flood in ,need of Dired:ion concerning the Ufe of them; whereas thefe Queflions being an- fwered, and thefe Cafes refolved by an in- fpired Apoille, there was lefs Room for fu- ture Difficulties, and of Courfe lefs Occafion for refuming the Mention of thefe miracu- lous Gifts. Some of the Epiflles of the Apoftolical Fathers appear from their Contents and introduSiory Expreffions, to have been owing to 'Enquiries and Applications for Ad- 'vice in Points of a very different Kind ; Others to fome particular Exigencies ; All to Subjeds [ 58 ] Subjed:s of a very remote Nature from the Queilion of Mif'acles. A farther Remai-k may, I think, be offer- ed on this Point, which to me appears to be of fome Importance towards the Decifion of it. Had thefe Apofiolical Writers had any Occafion to introduce the SubjeSi of Miracles^ had They referred to thofe wrought by the Apojiles, or in their Himes^ and taken no Notice of the Continuance of the fame Powers among themfelves, this might v/ell have been thought to be fome Prejudice a- gainft their Knowledge of fuch Continuance ; but if They uniformly omitted all Mention of fupernatural Interpofition, and dwelt only on tlie pradlical Part of Chriftianity, then their Silence can be of no more Force a- gainfl their Belief of Miracles in their own Days, than of thofe in the Days of the Apoilles. Now it is very remarkable, that throughout the Epiftles fpoken of, this Part of the Evidence is totally palTed over in Si- lence. There is no Strefs laid upon; there is fcarce any incidental Reference to the ex- traordinary Gifts beftowed on the ApoJileSy and their Fellow Labourers in the fame Caufe ; and here again, whatever Reafons may be given for their Silence concerning the Jirji Miracles^ will be juft as ftrong for their continued Silence with Regard to the fucceed- [ 59 ] fucceeding ones. They often fpeak of the Apojlles^ and refer to them as eminent Ex- amples of Piety and Virtue ; They fpeak of the HoHnefs of their Lives, and of the Purity of their Precepts, v/hich were the proper Points of Conlideration to Thofe who ad- mitted their Authority, and needed not to be reminded . of their miraculous Gifts to fupport that Authority. By this Time perhaps the Impartial Reader may find it not " fo hard to conceive," why for the Space of fifty Years, as Dr. M, and Mr. Tl reprefent it, there may poflibly be no exprefs Teftimony concerning miracu- lous Powers, tho' they continued to be fre- quently exercifed in the Church. The Rea- fon is, becaufe there are no Writers, now extant, whofe Intent of Writing could lead them to mention fuch a Subjed:. It can- not indeed be proved, that there was fuch a total Sile?ice for the Interval of half a Cen- tury, as Dr. M. afiTerts ; for ^adratiis and Arifiides prefented their Apologies to the Emperor Adrian within about half that Time from the Death of St. 'John the Evangelift, and appear from Hiflory to have met with good Succefs in them. In fuch Apologies We might reafonably exped: to find fuch Claim mentioned, but their Apologies being loft, we cannot bring dired Proofs from them, [ 6o ] them, but can only fupply that Defed by the Account of Others concerning them, and to this Purpofe that exprefs Teftlmony of Eufebius forecited, who had Himfelf read them, appears to be very pertinent and con- fiderable. But fays Mr T. " Look back to the " Adls of the Apoftles, and We find the " Perfons, Time, Place and Occafion cir- " cumftantially denoted, but here in the " Times We are treating of, when the Re- " ligion became every Day more dilated, " Nothing of this Nature ever once happen- " ed that was thought worthy to be re- ** latedj a Suppofition that in my Appre- " henfion exceeds the Grounds of Credibi- " lity." (P. 14, 15.) Can this Gentleman in earnefl think, that the Occafion and In- tent of the ABs of the Apojiles, written to give an Account of the Propagation of Chrif- tianity, and of the Means that contributed to it, ferving equally to the Converfwn of Enemies^ and the Confirmation of Friends^ is to be parallel'd with that of prhate Epifiles^ directed only to Believers, to caution them againft Divifions among themfelves in Point of Church Communion, or to ftir them up to a Holinefs of Life fuitable to their Holy Profeflion ? Is it any Refledion on thofe Writers, that becaufe St. Luke wrote to the Purpofe, [ 6i ]' Purpofcj and mentioned the Miracles which fo much affilled the Labours of the Apof- tles in the Propagation of the Gofpel, they did not go out of their Way to do the fame, when They were writing with another View, or upon a different Delign ? As foon as Ec^ ckfiajiical Hijiories were written, Miracles were taken notice of in them likewife, which could not well be expedted in Advices and Direcftions concerning a Holy Life. The Difference with Refped: to the more circiim-' fiantial Account of the Miracles recorded in the Infpired Writings, is readily allowed, and is a diftinguifhing Advantage on their Side ; yet, perhaps, for that very Reafon fuch cir^ amijiantial Relations were the lefs necelfary afterwards, when the general Claim in the like Inflances was known to be continued and maintained. It does not therefore by any Means follow, that nothing happened worth relating, becaufe We are not favour- ed with more particular Relations of the fe^ veral Inilances. The known Declarations and Challenges of the Continuance of mira- culous Power in the fame Cafes, that had before been recorded, might well be thought fufficient. After all. It is by no Means admitted, that there is fo total a Silence in the Apof- tolical Writers as is pretended ; altho', if there [ 62 ] there had, it might reafonably be accounted for from the foregoing Confiderations. But Dr. M. allows, that They fpeak of fpiritiial G(ftsy as abounding among the Chriftians of that Age, adding, without affigning any Rea- fbn for it, that thefe cannot reafonably be interpreted to mean any Thing more than the ordmafj Gifts and Graces of the Gofpel. Such an unfupported AfTertion I called beg- ging the Queliion 5 but Mr. T'. obferves, in Supply of what the Dodor is thought to have omitted, that " if the Words will bear *^ this Interpretation, without Force or Dif~ " tortion, the Reafon of the Thing will de- " termine their Meaning to ordinary Gifts " rather than miraculous ones." (P. 17.) The Reafon for this is, that " it is not prov- " ed, or even made probable by other Ar- " guments, that there were any fuch Things " as miraculous Gifts then exifling, and that " the Probabilities, according to the Reafon- " ing juft now laid down, feem to lie pretty " ftrongly againft it." I fliall be very will- ing to reft the Queftion upon this Point, whe- ther there are not other clear Arguments to prove the Continuance of miraculous Powers at that Time; and whether Mr. T's Proba- bilities againft it will bear Examination. I have offered fomething on both thefe Points already, and forefee an Occafion of relum- ing [ 63 ] ing the Confideration of them, for which Reafon I fliall not farther enlarge on them in this Place. Dr. M next attempts, and Mr. 71 feconds Him in the Attempt, to fhew that thofe Teftimonies from thefe firft Writers, which Archbifhop JVake and my Father had laid fome Strefs on, as referring to the Conti- nuance of miraculous Powers amongft them, are nothing to the Purpofe. Dr. M. ob- ferves againft the Archbifhop, that " He at- ** tempts to confirm his Opinion, not by " any Fadls, or exprefs Teftimonies drawn " from Themfelves, but by Inferences only, " or Conjedures." Which, faid I, " for " the Reafon before given," (that is, be- caufe thefe Writers penned their Epiftles on another Occafion, and with another View than to reprefent the Rvidence of Chriftia- nity) was all the Evidence that the Nature of the Argument could reafonably admit. If whilft Hijlorians and Apologijls^ whofe proper Bulinefs it was, did All unanimoujly make exprefs mention of Miracles, the pi'a£fi- cal Writers had likewife fome References to the fame in their Epiftles, and " if it can " be fhewn by Inferences^ that They did thus " refer to them, this I thought might be *' fatisfatlory to every impartial Enquirer/' Mr. T. without the leaft Notice again of tbis [ 64 ] this Diflindllon declares Himfelf dliTatlsiied,. reprefents it, as if I had placed the whole Merits of the Caufe upon References and In- ferences, as the only Evidence to be expecfl- ed 'y and infifts upon better Authority before He yields his AlTent. Whereas I was ap- parently fpeaking, as the Subject led me, only of the Epiflolary Writers of the Apoflo- lical Age, who pioufly endeavoured to compofe fome rifing Differences, and to exhort all the Profeffors of Chriftianity, v/ithout Diftindion, to agree in making true Virtue and Holinefs the fincere Aim of all their Purfuits^ and mfuch Writers I thought fome References to the Continuance of jniracuhus Powers were ail that could reafonably be expeded, and might prove fatisfadory tQ eveiy impartial Enquirer. Mr. 7'. profefTes that his Senti- ments are diredtly oppofite ; that is, He ex- pedis fome Hiforical Accounts of the faper- natural Means by which the Gofpel was pub- lifhed, or fome Apologetical Vindication of the Truth of Chriftianity from the Miracles wrought in Support of it, in Writings penned on a very different Occafion, and addreffed to Thofe who knew and believed, and pro- feffed to believe all this already. This is the Sentiment diredly oppofite to mine, and I fhall freely leave it to Others to patro- nize. Dr, M, Himfelf had obferved, that " the i (>5 1 ** the whole Purport of the Writings of «* thefe Apoftolical Fathers was to illuftrate " the Excellence and Purity of the Chriftian " Dodtrine." (P. 3.) Which Obfervation was a fufficient Anfwer to All that He could infer from their Silence upon another Subjefto They wrote, according to his own Account of them, to illuflrate the internal Evidence of our Religion, and therefore it can be no Dif- advantage to the external Evidence that They did not enlarge upon that. Dr, M. gives a brief Account of the pre- vious Arguments ufed by Archbifliop Wake, to induce Us to believe the Continuance of Miraculous Powers amongfl the Writers of thofe Epiftles now under View, antecedent- ly to their fuppofed Teilimonies in Relation to it •, but the Dr, vouchfafes not a Word of Reply to them, and Mr. Tl adds that " in *' Truth it amounts to fo very little, that it *' is quite needlefs to fay any Thing to fet ** the Force of it afide." (P. 19.) This again is a very fliort Method of anfwering and defendii2g, but I fhall not follow the Pattern, but (hall take Leave to make a Re- mark on the only Point, which in this Argu- ment Mr. T. thought fit to take Notice of. He fays " what Juftin Martyr urges againft " T^ryphoth^ Jew, is entirely out of the pre- '• fent Queftion, as not coming within the F \l Compafs [ 66 ] '* Compafs of Time, the Teftimonles of " which We are now difcuffinor." This is in dired: Contradidiion to a Concefiion, which He had made but two Pages before, that " if it was proved, or even made probable " by other Arguments, that there were any " fuch Things as miraculous Gifts exifling, *' then Pie would be ready to admit, that " Expreffions of a doubtful Signification *^ might very fitly be applied in Confirmation " of thofe Arguments." (P. 17.) It was therefore very much to the Purpofe, for the Archbifhop to introduce the exprefs Tefti- mony of the firft Controverfial Writer in De- fence of the Truth of Chriftianity, and one fo very near to the Time of thefe Apoftolical Fathers, in Favour of the Continuance of miraculous Powers, to confirm the lefs expli- cit Phrafes of thefe Epiftolary Writers, which are thought to mean the fame. As it appears by the A3fs of the Apojiles^ and by fome of St. Pauh EpiAles, that thefe extraordinary Gifts were in Being juil: befo?-e thefe Epiilles were penned, and by the Teftimony of ytif- ti?i Marty?- y and tlie fubfequent Writers, that they continued in the Times itnmediately fol- lowing^ thefe are ilrong Proofs, that Expref- fions, otherwife doubtful, of Thofe who wrote in this lliort Interval, are to be inter- preted to the fame Senfe, and are very per- tinendy t 6/ ] tinently alledged as of Weight In this Con- necflion. This Confideration is, I think, of Force in itfelf, and is fo particularly accord- ing to Mr. T's own State of the Cafe ; and therefore the mention of 'Jujiin Martyrs Teftimony, was by no Means out of the prefent Queftion, becaufe not within the Compafs of Time, the Teftimonies of which were under Confideration : Tho' if the Half- Century fpoken of, be taken from the Death of the laft Apoftle, this Writer's Tefti- mony would jufh be included. After all, What the Archbifhop offered on this Head, as previous to the Teftimonies which He propofed to produce from thefe Writers themfelves, is by no Means fo incon- Uderable, as to be pafled over in fuch con- temptuous Silence. I had, after enumerating his Arguments, obferved, that " with thefe " Prefumptions in Favour of thefe Apoftolical " Writers, He proceeds to thofe Teftimonies, " wherein They do refer to thefe miracu- " lous Gifts," which gave Occafion to Mr. T. to fay, as if I had been fenfible that this was but of little Weight, that " all that this " learned Writer has thus far offered, Mr. " D. Himfelf allov/s to be only Prefumpti^ " ons'' (P, 19.) I am not fond, whatever Others may be, of calling every Thing Df- monjlration^ which appears convincing to me, F 2 efpecially [ 68 ] cfpecially when it depends on hiferences, and the Union of feveral collateral Circumftances j nor would it have added to the Streneth of thefe Indications of the Continuance of mira- culous GiftSi as the Archbifhop Himfelf calls them, if 1 had pronounced them to be con- clulive and unanfwerable. But prefumptive Arguments have their Weight and Ufe, efpe- cially when laid in the Ballance againft No- thitigj or with other Prefu??iptions amounting to Nothings fuch as I apprehend thofe of Dr. M. and Mr. T''s on this Point to be^ They prefume, that if miraculous Powers, were continued in the Church for the Converjion of Unbe- lieverSj Thofe, who wrote on another Sub- ject for the EdificatioJi of the Faithful^ would not have failed to take Notice of it i and that not iitcidentally only, but by full and exprefs Teftimonies, as if They had been writing for the CowviSlion o^ Injideh, Let Us now review the previouSy or,, if You pleafe, p7'e- fumptive Arguments offered by the Archbifhop on this Side of the Queflion* He obferved in the Firfl Place, that Qua- lifications of this Sort were confidered in the Choice of the inferior Officers of the Church, and therefore much more, 'tis likely, in the Defignation of Superiors to their Office j He confirmed the AfTertion from ABs vi. 3, where in the Choice of Deacons^ the People were I 69 ] were direded to look out Men full of the Holy Ghojl, and of Wifdom^ and that the extraordi- nary Affiflance of the Holy Spirit was here- by meant, appears from the 8th and loth Verfes of the fame Chapter ; where it is faid, that ^te^^lntn full of Faith and Power did great Wonders and Miracles among the People, — And They were not able to refijl the Wif- dom^ a7idthe Spirit by which Hefpake. " Now," fays the Archbifhop, " If fuch were the Care " which they took in the Choice of thofe, *' who were to be admitted into the loweft " Miniftry of the Church j We cannot doubt, *' but that They were certainly much more " careful not to admit Any into the highefl " Rank of Honour and Authority in it, " but what were in a yet more eminent ^'- Manner endued with the fame Gifts." (P. 167, 168.) And is there no Weight in this Conlideration ? According to the bed Judgment that We can form of the proper Occafion and Intent of Mi?'aculous Powers^ they muft be of mofl \5^q in the Hands of Thofe, who were called to the mofl fevere and mofl frequent Tryals in Defence of their Religion j and thefe were of Courfe the high- efl Officers and Governors of the Church, What One of the Apoflles faid of Them- felves, I Cor. iv. 9, is as applicable to their immediate SuccefTors, the firft Biihops and F 3 Pallors [ 70 ] Paflors of the Church, that God h(r.dfet forth them lafl^ that is, as the principal Sufferers to crown the Triumph and compleat the Shew, for they naere made a Spe5iacle to the Worlds and to Angels^ and to Men, Thefe were the principal Perfons fought after on all Occafions, as the Obie(5ls of the Enemies Malice, and the chief Glory and Pattern of Believers, and in both Refpefts had the heft Opportunity of exerting thefe miraculous - Gifts, to the Confufion of Gainfayers, and Confirmation of Believers. If therefore even Deacons were to be thus qualified, becaufe their Office, as Diftributers of the Churches Treafury, would bring them more into Notice, and render them confpicuous, it may wxU.be inferred, that Thofe in flill higher Stations, who were to be feled:ed as the chief Champions of the Chriflian Caufe, fhould be diftinguilhed by the fame Powers, which They would fo often be called on to exert. But the Archbifhop does not reft here. He proceeds to bring pofitive Evidence both from Clenmis Rom. and Clemens Alex, that the Apoftles were guided by the Holy Spi- rit in the Choice of the chief Rulei'^ and Bifhops of the Church ; and the moft obvious Senfe of their Teftimony amounts to a De- claration, not merely that they were chofen ty Thofe, who had the Gift of difcej-ning Spirits, [ 7' ] Spirits y but that they were therefore chofen, as fit Perfons for this Office, becaufe already diftingulfhed by the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit. It is then added, that '' the very " Impofition of Hands did in thofe Days con- '* fcr the Holy Spirit in an extraordinary '* Manner upon thofe, who were ordained " to the Miniftry ofthe Gofpel:" And a very pertinent Paffage of Holy Scripture is brought to prove it. And is this likevvife thought undeferving of all Notice and Anfwer ? T'he Sacred Writings do fo often join the laying on of Hands ^ and the immediate Effe6l in the Endowment of the Perfons, fo fet apart for the Miniftry, with extraordinary Gifts, that the infpired Hiilory may reafonably be admit- ted as the beft Comment on the Text referred to : And that Text thus interpreted v/ill ftand as a prefurnptroe Evidence, that Thofe, who were fet apart to the fame Office in the fame Manner, (the fame Occafion for extraordi- nary Affillance ftill continuing) were fa- voured with the fame miraculous Powers. The Ai-chbifhop adds, (P. 170,) that " if ^' We look to thofe Accounts, which ftiil " remain to Us of them, they will plainly *' ffiew Us, that they were endued, and " that in a very lingular Manner, with '' this Power and Gift of the BlelTed Spi- '' rit." He obferves that Three of them F 4 are [ 72 ] are by Name fpoken of in the New Teila« merit as Perfons of great Endowments ^ St, Barnabas is faid to be a good Ma?i, full of the Holy Ghofi and of Faith, Ads xi. 24. Her^ mas is mentioned by St. Paul among the firll and principal Converts to Chriillanity. Rom. xvi. 14, and Clement is honoured with this Teftimony from the fame Apollle, that He was his Fellcw^Labourer, and that his Name nms in the Book of Life, Phil iv. 3. M the Manner of mentioning the two latter be thought of little Weight, as containing No- thing more than might have been faid of them, tho' they had not been diflinguiihed hy fupernatural Gifts, it is to be obferved, that the Strefs is not laid on the bare Mention of them, but on the Mention of them as fuch chief Perfons, at a Time when Miraculous Powers confeffedly did abound. St. Pmih Epiflle to the Romans, wherein mention is made of Hennas, is One of thofe Epiftles wherein thefe ;)^ag/ff^aTa, or Spiritual Gifts, are fpoken of j and St. Clement was Bifhop of Rome near the fame Time ; and is it then a contemptible Prefumption, that thefe Perfons fo diftinguiflied by St. Paul, were favoured with thofe extraordinary Gifts pf the Spirit, which appear to have been not infrequent amongft inferior Perfons at that Time? Nay, according to Dr. M's own Opinions [ 73 ] Opinion, that Miracles ceafed with the Age of the Apoftles, thefe diftinguiihed Writers and Rulers in the Chriftian Church may rea- fonably be prefumed to be endued with them. For Ck?nent was martyred juft before St. John died, and tho' the Time and Manner of Hernias s Death be uncertain, yet from the Time of his Writing his Pajior, which feve- ral learned Men have from the Contents of it, judged to be about thirty Years before, k may well be fuppofed that He did not out- live the Apoftolical Age. The fame Method of Reafoning will hold in Part, tho' not in the Whole, in Favour of Ignatius and Poly- carp. The former was made Bifhop oiAnti^ 0chj the latter of Smyrna, many Years before the Deceafe of St. yohtiy in an Age therefore, when Miracles are allowed to have fubfifted j and when, if Any were favoured with them, their chief Bifhops and Rulers can fcarce be fuppofed to have been deilitute of them. And if They were favoured with them in the former Part of their Lives, Can it be fuppofed that there was a fudden Extindion of all fuch Gifts immediately upon the Death of the lad Apoftle ? Would it not have been of Prejudice to the Chriftian Caufe, if the fame Perfons, who had hitherto claimed the Power of working Miracles in its Defence, fhould all ^t once (the fame Perfecutionsftillragingagainft it) [ 74 ] it) be forced to own themselves deprived of any fuch Privilege ? Would not this have been a Refledion on their former Pretenfions, and have occafioned fome Sufpicions, that the Miracles heretofore faid to have been wrought by them, were received rather thro' Want of Examination, than real Evidence, fince the fame Perfons, on the fjjme Occallon, were not able to repeat them ? This is the Subilance of the prefimiptive Arguments offer- ed by Archbifhop Wake, which are more eaiily neglefted than anfwered. We are next to coniider the Senfe of thofe PaiTages in which He fuppofes a Reference to be made to miraculous Powers. The Firft and Principal is that of St. Clement to the Corinthians^ wherein he cau- tions them againft Pride and Vanity, on Ac- count of any extraordinary Endowments that they might be pofleifed of, fuch as the Faith of Miracles, Myftical Knowlege, or the Difcern- ment of Speeches -, for to thefe Endowments, fays the Archbifliop, the Expreffions manifeil- ly relate. Mr. T. replies, (P. 20.) that aMaa n)ay have Faith without the Power of work- ing Miracles, that there is no additional Word in the Original to confine the Knowledge fpo- ken of to myftical Knoniolege^ and that what- ever the Meaning of thefe Endowments was, it was fuch as they could attain by the Ufe of/ theif [ 7S ] their own Faculties, becaufe, as He fays. They are here exhorted to attain them. — I would obferve in the firft Place, in Anfwer to this, that if the Original Words had confined the Gifts fpoken of to the Faith cf Miracles^ to inyftical Kno^vvledge^ and the like, then This would have been produced as an exprefs and decifive Teftimony, whereas it was intro- duced only as a PaiTage, which had Reference to this Point -, and if from other Arguments it, can be fhewn, that it did refer to fuch^^- fer natural Endowments, this will be fufHcient to the Purpofe for which it was aliedged; and it is no Kind of Anfwer to infift merely^ -that it is capable of another Senfe, or that the Original does not corjine it to our Senfe, v/heii the contrary was never pretended. Why the Archbifhop did not explain at large the Grounds on which He thought tliefe Expreflions inanifejily related to fupernatural Gifts, may well be fuppofed to be, that He thought it not neceffary for Thofe, who read with Attention the Epiftles of the Apoftles, and of thefe their moil: immediate Succeffors, and obferved the Same?iefs of the Argument^ of the ^tyle^ and even of the Ferfom^ to whom thefe Exhortations v/ere addreffed. St. Cleme7it- wrote to the fame Difciples, at the fame Place, and on the fame Subjed, that St. Paul had done not many Years, not more thgin twelve Years before. That Apoflle's [ 76 ] Apoille's Epiflle to the Corinthians is, That, wherein He difcourfes more largely than in any other, oi thdcfupematural Gifts, and as St. Ckme?ifs Epillle to the fame People v/as written whilft fome of the Apoftles were ftill living, and therefore, according to Dr. M's own Scheme, whilf^ miraculous Powers did ftill fubfift, if his Expreflions are capable of the fame Meaning, they are mofl reafonably to be interpreted by it. The Occafion on v/hich their feveral Epiflles were written, were much the fame, and the Exhortations to Peace, Charity, and Humility are remax^kably fimi- lar. St. Paul enumerates the feveral miraculous Endowments, urges them as Motives to prac- tical Improvement, and reprefents them as of no Ufe or Value to the Perfon endowed with them without it. 'Thd I have the Gift of Prophecy, fays He, and imderftand all Myjle- ries, and all Knowledge, and thd I have all Faith, fo that I coidd remove Moiintaim, and have no Charity, I am nothing, i Cor. xiii. 2. ^x, Clement, on Occafion of the like Diffe- rences and Divifions in the Church, urges the like humble and condefcending Spirit of Cha- rity, as neceffary to make all Sorts of Gifts ufeful, and enumerating in the fame Manner the Endowments, which might be mofl likely to m.ake Men look oh Themfelves as impor- tant and confiderable, and which yet ought to [ 17 ] to make Them the more Humble and Be- neficent, exprelTes Himfelf thus, " Let a *' Man be Faithful, let Him be Powerful in " the Utterance of Knowledge, Let Him be ** Wife in making an exacft Judgment of " Words, Let him be pure in all his Adli- " ons. But ftill by how much the more he " feems to be above Others, by Reafon of " thefe Things, by fo much tl\e more will it " behove him to be Humble-minded j and " to feek what is profitable to All Men, and " not his own Advantage." Now Whoever obferves how exactly parallel thefe Expreffi- ons are to thofe of the Apoflle, how near- ly the fame Time they were written, how cri- tically on the fame Occafion, and to the fame Difciples, how pund:ually the fame Number and Kind of Endowments are alluded to, can fcarce helitate to interpret the One by the Other; and tho' Mr. Tl adds, that ** Whoever can find in thefe Words any " plain AUufion to Miraculous Powers as " then fubfifting, will do much more than " He pretends to/' yet I think there is no great Pvefumption in fuch Preteniions, and that the Comparifon of thefe Paifages, with all the Circumilances forementioned, may well be thought fufficient to afcertain the ^^vi{^ of that which is now before Us ; and to fliew that the Archbifhgp had fome Rea- foa [ 78 ] fon on Ills Side, when He aflerted, that to" this Senfe of miraculous Endowments, the Expreffion manifeftly related. Mr. T. inti- mates that That Claufe, " Let Him be Pure " in all his Adions," may Ihew that He was fpeaking of natural Endowments ; but it is obfervable that St. Paul^ in the forecited parallel Paffage, does like wife join moral Viv- tuts to fupernatttral GihSj and goes on to add, that tho' He Hiould difpenfe all that He had in the Relief of the Neceffities of Others, and fliould even fubmit to Martyrdom Himfelf, yet it would avail Nothing with- out the real Temper of Charity and Humility. This latter Verfe certainly does not prove, that the Apojile was not fpeaking of miraculous Powers in the former, and therefore nei- ther is the fame Method of fpeaking by St. Clement, any Difproof of his alluding to the fame in the firil Part of the Sentence : But the plain Meaning of Both was, that even the Union of extraordinary Gifts, and ordinary Graces, fliould but difpofe them to the deeper Humility, in Confideration of the Author of all their Endowments. But Mr. T". lays great Strefs on this Sen- tence's being an Exhort atio7i, that thefe En- *& dowments were to be acquired by a Man's own Endeavours, and were therefore no fu- pernatural Gifts. Were the Sentence certain- . Iv [ 79 ] ly to be underflood as he interprets it, his Inference would not follow. Does not St, Paul fpeaking in the clearefh Manner of Mi- raculous Gifts, dired: thefe very Corinthian Difciples to be fervent in the Purfuit of them ? Co'cet earnejlly the hefi Gifts ^ i Cor. xii. 3 1 . The Original is more full and determi- nate, to this Purpofe, ZvjAyre ^l tol ')(cLQi(TixcLrcL ra. x^ePi'r ovct -, and again, Covet eamejily fpiritual Gifts, but rather that Te may prophefy^ i Cor. xiv. I. Zi^X^Te ^i ra. ^viv^a.riyAj__ [/.cixXov S'i 'IvcL rxoofpyirtuTiri' The Means, by which thei^ own Endeavours could contribute to the At- tainment of thefe extraordinary Gifts, were probably Zeal for the Importance of Chriftia- nity, Diligence in the Propagation of it, and Conjlant Prayer to God that They might be Ufeful in his Service. Thefe were the proper Preparatives for the extraordinary Illapfes of the Divine Spirit upon the Faithful, and an Exhortation to cultivate and improve thofe Qualilications, was no Difproof, that the Fruits of the Spirit to be attained by them, were not fuper natural. St. Cleme?it might therefore in like Manner have repeated St. Paul's Advice, and have directed thefe Co- rinthian Difciples to covet eamejily thofe ex- traordinary fpiritual Gifts, without the leaft Degree of Abfurdity. But ^ [ 8o ] But tlie Sentence itfelf bears very plainly a different Senfe j The former Part of it is not an Exhortaiiony but a Suppoftion. " Let Any " One," fays this Father, " be endued with " Faith, Knowledge, the Difcernment of ** Speeches, ^c." that is, Be He never fo eminent in all thefe Gifts, " by how much ** the more He feems to excel Others, by fo " much the more will it behove Him to be " H-umble-minded." — The whole is but one compleat Sentence, the Beginning of it is plainly Hypothetical^ and the Ground of the Caution given in the Conclufion. There is no connecting Particle to join the Sentences, or to make Senfe of them -, as there muft have been, if the former had really been an 'Exhortation to attain thofe Qualifications. Whatever therefore Mr. T. argues concerning thefe Gifts being natural, as being recom- mended to Mens Purfuit, is founded on a Mijiake, and needs no other Anfwer. St. Clement's Advice was not a Dired:ion to pof- fefs themfelves of thefe Endowments, but to be Humble tho They were poirelTed of them. Mr. 7". adds that " the Caution that follow^s " is every whit as applicable upon his Interprc- ** tatlon J for that Humility and a right Ap- " plication of Talents to the Good of Others " are Virtues as needful to be recommended " tQ t 8i ] " to Men of great Learning and improved " Abilities as to a Perfon divinely infpired." (P. 21, 22.) Such Cautions indeed are ne- ver improper or unfeafonable j but fince the Occafiom of them are here brought into Competition, I cannot think that they were quite fo needful, on Suppofition that the Co- rinthians had jult loft thofe fupernatural Gifts, which a very little before abounded amongft them, and were now reduced to the com- mon State of all other Men ; as if they ftill flouriftied in thofe diftinguifliing Privileges of Miracles^ Prophecies, and other fupernatural Endowments. Such high Privileges were more likely to puif up all Minds, which were not on a conftant Guard. ; St. Paul had juft before found it ncceflary to give feveral Cautions on this Head; St. Chncjit repeats the fame Caution without any Intimation of any fuch material Alteration that had happen- ed in their Circumftances j and can this Cau- tion then be thought every Whit as appli- cable to the One Cafe as to the Other ? If the Corinthians had thus been deferted at once by the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit, whilft their Situation feemed to require them as much as before, they would probably have been dejeSled on fuch a Defertion, and would have been more likely to have needed fome Co?ifolatiom for their Support, than jidnioni^ Q ticns [ 82 ] fions againft Vain-Glory, in fuch Circum- ftances as could yield little Temptation to it. The Repetitio?i of this Caution, and efpecially in the Manner- in which it is repeated^ is a Erefumptive Proof, that they were under the fame Danger in this Refped:, that they were when St. Faul wrote to them to the fame Purpofe. This is a ftrong Inferejice, tho' it is no more ; and much ftronger than that, which prefumes the Gifts fpoken of to be common ones, becaufe the Corinthians were required, as Mr. T". fays, to improve Them- felves in a natural Way ; whereas no fuch Di- reftion appears at all in this Place ; and if it had appeared, might have been intended as a Preparation for the bell and highefl: En- dowments. Mr. T, adds, (P. 22.) as if by Way of Re- flexion on the Pofition, that " Mr. D. ak " lows that the Queftion is to be determined " by Inferences." What Queftion does Mr. D. allow is to be thus determined ? Not the Queftion, whether miraculous Powers were continued in the Church after the Death of the Apoftles ; He infifts, that there is ex- prefs and pofdive Evidence for that; but the Queftion, whether in particular thefe Apo- ftolical Writers have in their Epiftles taken any Notice of them : If This can be made out hy Infer e?iccy it will be a fufEcient An- fwer t 83 ] fwer to Dr. M's Objedlion from their fup-^ pofed Silence -, and the more critically the Cir- cumftances of the whole Cafe are examined, the more fatisfaSiory^ I am perfwaded, the Inference will appear. A Pallage very full to the Purpofe, which had been introduced by my Father^ comes next under Confideration. It occurs in the Beginning of St. Ignatius^ Epifhle to the Smyrnea?2s, which is thus addrefled, 'HAe»iA«£y>j €v TCcLvTi y^oLpia-fxcLTij '7re7rA»jgo(pog)jyU,gj/}j iu 'jri'fei x.aj oLyocTTM, oLvvq-tpy]rct) om30'8, x,ai oTTOTsto-o-gc^C!) 'ex.aL^(^ toj -ttAjj- Clem. Ep. I. ad Cor. §. 38. Mr. T. (P. 23.) " profefles ingenuoufly, that this PalTage " might have come before Him a thoufand " Times, and no Thought of fupernatural \[ Endowments would once have entered kito [ 90 1 '* into his Head." It may be ib, but Pie, who afterwards rightly infifts on ufing his own Reafon, excluding Human Authority in the Interpretation of fuch Quotations, and judging for Himfelf, fhould the more eafily excufe Another, who claims the fame Pri- vilege, and might have forborn that con- temptuous Method of treating One who happened to differ from Him in Opinion. For it may poffibly appear, that a Thought, which Mr. T. fays, never once entered into his Head, might yet, without any Abfurdity, come into Another Perfon's ; and with Refped: to the Point before us, I muft as ingenu- oufly profefs, that the Thought, which He fo w^armly explodes, was the very firfl that occurred to me on the Occafion. When I read St. Faul\ Inflrudtions and Exhortations to the Corinthians about fu- pernatural Gifts, and find Him appropria- tifig a particular Word to exprefs them by, when I iind Him fpecifying diflindly the Or- der of them, direding his Difciples to re- gard it, and to apply them all to a good \J{t ; when I obferve Him joining the Men- tion of Social Virtues widi thefe extraordina- ry E?idowme?itSj and illullrating the Union of all Belieycrs by the Coherence and mu- tual Ufe of the feveral Members in the jtat li- ra! Body 3 When I next turn to the Wri- tings [ 91 ] tings of One of his Contemporaries, addrefled to the fame People, on a like Occalion, with the Ufe of the fame Word known to be fo appropriated J when I obferve the Advice, the Connexion, and the Applica- tion to be exadly parallel^ the Thought of the fame Meaning, in the fame Phrafe and Method, and Delign of Writing, preffed unavoidably upon me as the moft obvious Interpretation; and the Review of the Argument has confirmed me in the fame Opinion. " Let therefore Our whole " Body be faved in Chrifi: Jefus: And " Let Every One befubje6t to Another accord- " ing to the Order in which He is placed by " the Gift of God," fays the Archbifliop's Tranflation. An E?igUfi Reader might ea- fily enough have pafTed over this without thinking of fiipernatural Endowments ; but when We are reminded, that the Word here tranflated the Gift, is the very fame by which St. Paul always expreffed an extraordinary Gift, where is the Difficulty or Abfurdity of Underflanding it then, with Relation to the DifiinBion made amongfi: them hy fupeniatu- ral Endowments, and the different Kinds and Degrees of them ? Would not this PalTage then bear a plain Allufion to the Doctrine and Precepts of St. Faul in the xiith Chapter of his firfl Epiflle to thefe Corinthiafis, and particularly [ 92 J particularly in Verfe 28, &c. and be very reafonably interpreted as a Repetition of the fame Advice ? Mr. T. I knov^^, v^ill fay, that this Pailage in St. Clement is explained by the fubfequent Part of the Paragraph, v^hich is wholly an Exhortation to the proper Ufc and Application of Talents natural, or na- turally acquired, fuch as Strength, Riches, Wifdom, Purity. But I fay again, that the Senfe will be juft as ratioiial and ftrong, if This be confidered as an Addition to rather than an Explanation of the forecited Exhortation in the Beginning of the Para- graph. The Method of the Difcourfe will be as regular and well connedled, and the Meaning of it as full and pertinent, if We fuppofe St. Clement firft to exhort them to Humility and mutual Subjection, according to the extraordinary Endowments with which They were diftinguifhed j and then to proceed to enforce on them the like fo- ber and benevolent Ufe of thofe ordinary Talents^ which might feem to be more owing to Themfelves, to their own Indullry and Merit. This is the Method which St. Faul in feveral Inftances has obferved, dire(fbing his Difciples to a wife and pious Application of all Talents extraordinary and ordinary; fpecifying firll the former as of fuperior Dig- nity, [ 93 ] nity, and then defcending v^ery regularly to the Mention of the latter, as St. Clement has done in the Paragraph before us. But I have a farther Reafon againft underllanding the After-Exhortation of St. Clement concerning the Ufe of ordinary 'Tale?its^ as an Explanation of the Paflage in Difpute. For tho' the Archbifhop has tranfla^ ted it, " Let every One be Subjedt to Ano- " ther according to the Order in which " He is placed by the Gift of Gody* yet the Original Words are h rai yyL^Ltyfjs^cLTt AUT^, by his Gift, that is plainly by the Gift of fefus Chrifl^ who Is exprelly mentioned in the firft Part of the Sentence. This Exhortation therefore relates to the right Management of that Gift, that peculiar Gift^ which was communicated to them by their Saviour, as Head of the Churchy whereas the Variety of thofe other co?nmon Tale?2ti, which He fpeaks of afterwards, fuch as Thofe of Strength, Riches, and the Like, were the ufual Difpenfations of Provide?ice, diftind: from and antecedent to the Covenant of Chrijhy and there is Nothing in all the fubfequent Parts of the Paragraph, but what might be as properly applied to Hcathem as to Believers, which does not therefore look like a Faraphrafe only on the introdu6tory Admonition addrelTed peculiarly to Chrifliam, St. t 94 3 St. Clement feems here, as if on Purpofe to prevent Miftake, to diftinguifli betwixt the peculiar Gift of Chrijl, and the general Gifts of God, and varies his Expreffions v^ith great Propriety in Relation to the different Sub- je(5t, mentioning our Saviour particularly, whilil He had a View to the extraordijiary Endowments conferred by Him on his chofen Difciples ; but referring exprelly to God 'only, when He comes to fpeak of the mutual Benefit of common Gifts, and enforcing the proper Application of them from Confide- rations relative only to the common Crea- tor of all. If Mr. Tl is difpofed again, upon this Corredlion of the Tranflation, to obferve that I have fometimes a very flender Re- gard to the Archbifhop's Authority, the old Apology of magis arnica Veritas might plead my Excufe ; but in Reality the Archbifhop has referred to tliis Senfe in the Marginal Tranflation, tho' not forefeeing any Con- troverfy about this particular FafTage, He thought the Alteration not material, and in fome Refped: or other more eafy to the Reader. That Paffage of St. Ignatius in his Epiflle to the Romans, wherein he defires them " not to prevent his Martyrdom by an unfea- " fonable Good-will," comes next under Review. My Father has interpreted this as a Proof, [ 95 1 a Proof, that " the Prayers of the Primi- " tive Chriftians had Power to difable the " wild Beafts from affaulting the Martyrs, " who were expofed to them." Dr. M, fays This meant no more, than that They fhould not ufe any Interceffion or Intereft at Rome to preferve Him, and adds that to this Senfe it is exprefly reflrained by the Relation of his Martyrdom, and by Dr. Caves Interpretation of it. Mr. T". approves of thefe Quotations as fpeaking full and exprefly to his Pur- pofe, and fays " Mr. D. has not offered " one Word to invalidate thefe hiilorical " Accounts that are given of it, and ittm. " natural and eafy." (P. 26.) What Kind of Anfwer is fit to be given to fuch an Affertion as this ? I had fpent at leafl four Pages on this Point, to invalidate that Senf& of thofe hiflorical Accounts, and to fhew that they could not admit of that Senfe of faving Him by their Interefi and Inte7xeJ]ion, Dr. Cave's Hiflory and Opinion are founded on the Relation of the Martyrdom of St. Ignatius^ and are allowed by Dr. M. to be only his Interpretation of that Paffage, and fo can give no additional Force to the Origi- nal Account. The Paflage itfelf I cited at large, and fhewed that the Words did not imply any more, and that the Circum- ftances both of the. Martyr, and of the other [ 96 ] Other Chriftian Brethren at that Time, could not poffibly admit them to imply any more, than that They fhould not endeavour to raife up the Populace in his Favour againft the Decifion of the Emperor ; vi^hich could do no Good and might do Harm. This might have been interpreted into Sedition by their Governors, and might have brought an Imputation on the Chriftian Caule, which the Primitive Patrons of it were always flu- dious to avoid. May I not, in my Turn, a£k, Does not This Account of this PalTage fcem natural and eafyf And was not this Interpretation of it, confirmed by feveral corroborating Circumftances, offering at leafl one Word to invalidate the Hiflorical Ac- counts cited by Dr. M. as exprefly reflrain- ing it to his Purpofe ? Mr. 'T. allows that " I have indeed taken a good deal of " Pains to fhew that Ignatius?^ Words can " be underflood of Nothing but Prayers" which I really thought was a very proper Way of proceeding, and another flrong Me- thod of invalidating thofe Hiflorical Ac- counts, as explicatory of this PafTage. Mr. y. prudently declines " following me thro' " the Particulars of my Reafoning, and con- " tents Himfelf with referring the Reader « to the Epiflle itfelf." If then He really thinks, that the Contents of an ancient Epiflle [ 97 ] Epiftle are beft to be judged of, by omit- ting all Information relative to the Circum- ftances of the Writers j and of the Perfons to whom it was "joritte?i, and that the Know- ledge of, and attentive Regard to fuch Par- ticulars, are more likely to miflead Us in the Senfe of it, I fhall leave Him to en- joy this Opinion likewife undifturbedj and fhall always Myfelf endeavour,,, to the beft of my Power, to get Information in fuch Circumftances, as the moft probable Means of afcertaining the true Senfe of the Au- thor. I fhould have thought it had been the proper Part of a Defender in this Place, to have followed me thro' the Particulars of this Reafoning, to have fhewn, what Autho- rity the People of Rome had to reverfe the Sentence palTed by the Emperor Himfelf, who was then abfent ; and what extraordinary Intereft the Chriftia?is then "had amongft the Governors of Rome^ to induce them to exert their Authority in fo high an Inftance. His Friend Dr. M. We know, thinks that a Century after, " when this Religion was " much more dilated," as Mr. 'T. exprefles it, the Friends of the Chriftian Caufe had not Intereft enough to get an Apology on their Behalf prefented to the Emperor or to the Senate. It refted on his Defimder to re- cpncile this, and to fhew what Probabilit)' H thefe [ 98 I there was of the Chriftian Brethren being- able to fave Ignatius by their Inter eji at RomCy which could thus raife his Apprehenfions of being ftill preferved, and induce Him ta write to them in this Manner^ Apparent- ly He thought Himfelf in Danger, as. He efteemed it, of being faved fome Way or other by their Endeavours, and therefore earneilly entreats them not to prevent his- Martyrdom by their unfeafonable Good- will. I have offered my Reafons, why I think it could not be by their Interejl, whic^h is Dr. ilf' s Solution of it ; and I may truly fay, that Mr. T. " has not offered one Word *' to invalidate them." _^^ The fame Arguments, which feem to hold ftrongly againft the Probability of their fa- ving Him by any Inter cejjion, feem of equal Force againff their doing it by any ordinary or Human Means. Force, They could not. They would not ufe on fuch an Occafion* Their Number at that Time, and their Doc- trine at all Times, exclude the Suppofition» The infuperable Difficulty then of accounting for this Requefh of tlie Martyr from any natu- ral Means, in which the Brethren at Rome, could preferve Him, ftrongly favours the In- ference drawn by my Father, concerning the fupernatural Effeds wrought by the Prayers .of the Primitive Chriflians. With this pre- vious [ 99 ] vious Inllruaion as to the Situation of Igm^ tins and his Fellow-Chriilians, I fhall readily join with Mr. T. in " defiring every One " to look over the Epiftle itfelf, and fee what « He can make of it." Here He will find Repeated Mention of their Pr^^'fTJ, but not a Word of their Inter eji, or of any other Hu- man Means, by which They could contribute to his Prefervation. He will find a remark- able ^//////'^■f, by which He defires them to pronwte his Martyrdom, namely, by their Prayers, by which We may very reafonably coaclude, what were the Means by which He was fearful, that They fhould prevent it. But in this Place Mr. T. charges me with a Sort of defigned Contrivance of impohng upon my Readers. " I obferve" fays He, « Mr. D. has brought down thefe Words, « Pray for me, that God ivould give me « .Strength, &c. out of the Place where they " ftand, and joined to the others, to make " them look like one entire Sentence." There could be little Danger of any Impofi- tion in this, as the Paffage now ftands, fince the Original was fo eafy to be confulted 5 and that it was not intended, may appear from that cautionary Remark, " Jlmoft immedi- " ately before He faid, Only Pray for me, " ^cv But in Reality This Omlflion was the ^ranfiribn, or the Printers, In my firft H 2 ^^^' [ 100 ] AIS. which I have now before me, I find the ufual Mark inferted, which diftinguifhed the' Sentences not to be immediately joined in the Original Author, and this Cenfure had been removed, if the printed Copy had anfwered the written one, which flands thus, " Pray for me that God would give " me Strength that I may not only be called a *' Chrijlian, but may alfo be found one~—I am ** willing to die for God, unlefs you hinder " me." However, no different Sub j eft is introduced by Ignatius, betwixt thefe Sen- tences, no Confideration but what is relative to the Cafe of his own Suffering. Both be- fore and after the Mention of their Pre- vention of his Martyrdom by an unfeafonabk Good-will, which He fo earneflly diffuades them from. He dedres their Pr^j^^ri to con- tribute towards it ; and if any Thing can be judged of at all from the Context, certainly this Connexion is a ftrong Indication, that He feared They would prevent by their Prayers, what He was fo vehemently defirous to accomplijh by that Means. Mr. T*. obferves, that Archbifliop Wake has in the Margin tranflated it, unlefs Y on for^ bid rat, inftead of hinder me, and thinks this Word " manifeflly implies fome other " Kind of Interpofition different and dif- ** tinft from that of Prayer" (P. 27.) I do not [ lOI ] not fee the DiiFerence. Either Word might very properly be ufed, if they crolled his ear- neft Delire of Martyrdom by any Method whatever ; and they might be faid to forbid his Departure at leaft as well by fervent Ap- plications to the Throne of Heaven^ as by their Inter cejjiojis to the Powers of the Earth, In the former They had good Intereft, in the Utter They had none at all, nor could at that Time have fufficient to that Pur- pofe. The Inconliftency of Dr. M's Inter- pretation is a Confirmation of this, and the Difficulty of putting any other Senfe upon it, flrengthens that, which moil obvioully arifes from the Import and Connection of the Epiftle itfelf. But Mr. T". has yet a farther Referve. He has learned of Dr. M. when He is prefled with the Evidence which lies before them, to go off from that and to call for other, which He knows or thinks cannot be had; and then to declare, that that only would be fatisfad:ory to him. Thus the Dr. infilled, that Thofe, who would anfwer Him, mufl add to the Accounts of the Primitive Writers, and that when They afTert, that many were raifed from the Dead, They mufl fpecify. Who the particular Perfons were, that were fo raifed : And thus Mr. Tl defires that " an ** Inilance may , be authentically vouched of H 3 ^' feme [ I02 ] '^ fome other Perfon, who was at that Time " actually delivered from apparent Death " by Virtue of Prayer^ and then He will " give up the Debate." If fuch an In- ftance had been upon Record, We need not have been arguing fo long upon the Cir- cumjlances of this, and from the Manner, in which this Controverfy has been ma- naged, I make no Doubt but Evafions would have been found in fuch a Cafe however authentically vouched. But if there are flrong Testimonies of fupernatural Effecfts wrought by the Prayers @£ the Faithful, This will be a ftrong Confirmation of -this. Interpretation of St. Ignatius^ Requeft, and the Want of other particular Infiances on Record will no more invalidate the Ge-r neral Evidence than in the Cafe of raifing the Dead mentioned by Dr. M. Now there is very remarkable Evidence both before and after this Epiftle of Ignatius to the Romans^ fetting forth the Power of the Prayers of tlie Church in the Preferva- lion of their Lives, whofe Continuance in .it was of Importance to the Chriftian Caufe, and which may reafonably be admitted as a Comment on his Requeft, who was fo zealous for Martyrdom. He appears not to have been without Grounds for his Ap^r .prehenfions of being preferved this Way, but has [ 1^3 1 lias a plain AUulion to the Reafoning and Determination of St. Paid on the fame Subjedt. That Apoftle plainly and repeat- edly aferibes his Deliverances, even his ex- traor dinar y ones, to the Supplications of the Faithful on his Behalf. In the ifl Chap, of his 2d Epiftle to the Corinthians^ ver. 8, &c. He fays. We would not^ Brethren, have Tou Ignorant of our 'Trouble^ which came to Us in Afia, that We were prejfed out of Mea- fure, above Strength, infomuch that We de- fpaired even of Life : But We had the Sen- tence of Death in Owfehes, that We fioidd not^'trufi in Ourfelves, but in God which raifeth the Dead, who delivered Us frojnfo great a Death, and doth deliver : In whom We truji that he will yet deliver Us : Tou alfo help- ing together by Prayer for Us, that for the Gift bejiowed on Us by the Meafis of mafiy Perfons. 'Thanks may be given by Many on our Behalf. Here the ;;^ctgjcrjtta, the extraordinary Gift of his Deliverance, in a Cafe quite de- fperate, is exprellly attributed to the united Prayers of the Church. In his Epiflle to the Philippians, wherein He mentions the Strait that He was wider, betwixt his Delire of Death for his own Sake, and his De- fire of Life for the farther Service, of the Church, readily determining like Ignatius, that for Himfelf it was far better to depart H 4 and [ 1^4 ] and to be with Chrifi^ yet declares his Fore^ fjght, that they would preferve Him longer in Life by their Devotion. I know ^ fays He, that this fiall turn to my Salvation^ or Deli- verance, as it fhould have been rendered, thro your Prayer and the Supply of the Spirit . of Jefas Chriji -y v. 19. That by cr^oTiig^ct, was here meant Salvation or Deliverance frorn his prefent Imprifonment is plain not only by the preceding Mention of his additional Affliction in Bonds, but alfo from tlie Re- petition of the fame Thing in the 25 th Verfe, juft after the Determination of the fore-mentioned Strait, I know that I fiall abide and_ continue with Toil all for your Further- ance and foy of Faith. He fays the fame Thing in his Epiftle to Philemon^ written during the fame , Confinement. Prepare me alfo a Lodging, for I truji that through your Prayers Ifallbe^iven unto you , v. 22. Might not this repeated Mention by St. Paul of his Prefervation and lono^er Continuance in Life, as. owing to the Prayers of the Faithful, very reafonably be thought to make Igna- fius apprehenfive, that He might meet with fome extraordinary Deliverance by the fanie MeanS;,.^ which therqfor^. He earneftly de-? pfecat^'s, as being defirous of the Honour of Requeft [ 105 ] Requeft in his Epiftle was natural and rati- onal, and fuch as He could fcarce avoid ma- king in that Cafe, when He was not delirous Himfelf of any fuch fupernatural Interpolition in his Favour, as Others might be delirous of for Him. How could He do otherwife, in fuch a Situation, than beg fervently of them, that They would not attempt his mi^ raculous Deliverance by particular Supplied^ tio?is on his Behalf ? The particular Injunc- tion of St. James ^ concerning the Ufe of Prayer in miraculous Interpofitions in the Cafe of Healingy is not foreign to this Point. The Interpofition was as fupernatural in the Cafe of a Deliverance from a defperate Dif- eafe, as from a defperate Perfecution, and Devotion was no more a natural Means of effeding the One than the Other. The Text referred to, I am fenfible, is not without fome Difficulty on every Interpretation, but it is fufficiently plain, that it related to the extraordinary Gift of Healing, to be effected by Praying and Anointing with Oyl. This is evident from the Phrafes, y\ gyp^»i ta^ 7riVe<»J o-acTej Toy v.ky.vavTcLy ■ — and ttoXu l<^vti J'ejjcjj ^iTcoLi-a m^yovfjLzvTi. Thefe Expreffions imply fuch Prayer as is founded on the Faith of Miraciesy or is uttered by the immediate Impulfe of the Spirit; and This Senfe of tiiem is confirmed by the Example immedi- iUii\y-iH ately [ io6 ] ately given of Elias, who by fuch Impuife iirft brought on a long Drought by his Prayers^ and at length reverfed it by the fame Me- thod. The joint Prefcription of Anointing with Oyly and efpecially the Doing it in the Name of the Lord, that is, of Chriji Jefus, ■ was an additional Proof, that the Cafe fpoken of was that of a miraculous Cure, and the Succefs is here exprefly afcribed to the De-^ motions of the Faithful. If the Perfon was delirous of fuch an extraordinary Interpofi- tion in his Favour, and the Elders of the Church being called together on the Occafion found themfelves endowed with the Faith of Miracles, or thought this Occafion worthy of fuch an extraordinary Interpofition, and that the General Promife was applicable to the particular Inftance before them, then They might proceed with Authority and Se- curity, and their Prayer fhould certainly prove effectual to the Recovery of the Perfon for whom They interceded. This Text is, I think, " an authentick Voucher, that Some " Perfons were at that Time actually delivered " from apparent Death by Virtue of Pray^ *.' vr ;" and tho' this was not in the Cafe of a Perfecution, yet where the Importance of the Perfon's Prefervation was thought worthy fuch an extraordinary Interpofition, there; in the Reafon of the Thing, the Ufe and [ 107 ] and Intent of the Faith of Miracles j and the Means of exerting it by Prayers, were juit as applicable in every Cafe, whether the apparent Death as Mr. T. calls it, wasp threatned by natural or 'violent Means. Ig- natius might well think Himfelf to be of Coniequence enough for the Elders of the Church to interpofe in this Manner on his Behalf, and therefore inftead of deliring fiipernaiural Affiftance on the Occafion, He delires rather, that the very Means of it might not then be ufed. It may perhaps be thought ftill more to the Purpofe, that the fame Means of mira- culoully preferving fome eminent Saints were fuccefsfully pra as then iub- fiiling, [ '15 ] fifting, but at leaft they exclude a Poffibility of proving the contrary from their Writings, without begging the Queftion, as to the Suf- ficiency of the fucceeding Evidence. Mr. T's own Conceffion, that if there are any other Arguments for the main Queftionj thefe Expreffions of doubtful Signification may very fitly be applied to the Confirmation of them, is all that We defire at prefent, and will obviate all the Force of Dr. M's prefump- tive Argumient from their fuppofed Omiffion of the Mention of them. It will alfo anfwer in Part his own Enquiry, " Can any Proof " be drawn from their Silence .?" Their Si- lence itfelf, will, by his own Account, remain a quejiionable Point, till it appears for certain, that the After-Claims were groundlefs, and therefore till their Validity is examined, no- thing can poflibly be proved on their Side, from a Silence, which is not, cannot yet be proved itfelf. But were that Point never fo clear, whatever is the Weight of this Enquiry, it is wholly applicable on our Side. " Can " any Proof be drawn from their Silence ?" Does the Omiffion of many Particulars by Three of the Evangelifts invalidate the exprefs Teftimony of the Fourth concerning them ? Would the Apoftolical Fathers not contradi6t- ing it, deftroy the Credibility of Others who affert it, who muft know the Truth of what I 2 they [ "6 ] they aflerted, had no Worldly Intereft to fup- port by this Means, and who mufl have been detected and brought to Shame, if They had groundleflly made fiich a Claim ? Parti- cularly could the Silence of Thofe, who had no particular Bufinefs or Occafion to mention miraculous Powers, be any Prejudice againft the Pojithe Claim of Thofe, whofe very Subjeft called them to the Mention of it, who did accordingly challenge them pub- lickly in the Face of their Enemies, and w^ho remarkably fupported Each Other's Teflimony by the Unanimity of their Claim in all Parts of the World ? What Mr. 71 adds of the Unreafonablenefs of expedling Belief without Evidence, is as applicable to every other Subjecft in the World, and to every other Part of this, and will occalion no Controverfy between Us. We defire no One to believe without Evidence, but we defire ftrong Reafons, why We jGbould not be- lieve Evidence fo ftrongly fupported, as is That of the Continuance of Miracles in the Primitive Church, both by the Credibility of the Fads, and of the Witnefles. The Hiftory of the Miracles attending St. Pclycarf^ Martyrdom is the next Point to be confidered. Mr. jT s firft Obfervation on it is, (P. 29.) that " it ftands at a great Dif- \' tance off In the Free Inquiry T .It does fo, .:- :^ /•,• .:f, ■ at at a much greater than in the Courfe of the Argument, and this has been properly cen- furedj as an undue Piece of Art and Manage- ment. But Mr. T. adds, that " it does not " fall in Point of Time within the profefled '' Delign and Method of the Dodor's Argu- " ment i" that is, the Dodlor chofe to Umit his Obfervations of the Silence of the Pri- mitive Writers to half a Century after the Apoftles, on Purpofe, I fuppofe, that this exprefs Teftimony might not be urged a- gainfl Him. But however it ought to have been introduced before feveral others, which ,fie has mentioned under this firft Head j and He Himfelf, tho' He deferred his choicefl Obfervations on it, till his Reader was better prepared for them, yet thought it to his Purpofe to mention this Narrative in this very Place, and to beftow a curfory Remark on it 'j which might well juftify any Anfwerer in taking the Whole of what He had offer- ed, into Conlideration in this as its proper Place. I had obferved, that the Do<5tor al- lows that this is " One of the moft authentic " and celebrated Pieces in all Primitive An- " tiquity," but Mr. T". will not grant that this Conceffion can turn againft Himfelf, for fays He, " I apprehend, tho' Dr. M. allows " this Letter to be genuine, that is, to be ^ really written from the Church of Sfnyrna^ I 1 " that [ "8 ] *' that yet He fuppofes it to be written by " a CoUedion of Men who were deceived, " and concurred in giving an Account that " was not true." (P. 29.) I am glad that the Evafion is not, that They intended to deceive^ and invented the Account for the Honour of their Martyr -, for iince the Charge only is, that They were deceived, then the other Obfervation which I had be- fore made, comes in full to the Purpofe, that the Miraculous Circumftances attending the Martyrdom were as much Matters of FaBs, tliat fell under the Senfes of the Spectators, as any Parts of the Account, and were as ftrongly attefled by them. Mr. T. proceeds to Particulars. '' The *' Voice from Pleaven," fays He, " Dr. M. " thinks may very eafily be fuppofed to " come from One amongft the Croud, and " will Any Body fay that it might not ? If a bare Pojjibility of a Fact's being other- wife than it is reprefented to be by Thofe who were prefent at it, and who do not ftand impeached of any fraudulent Defign in the Relation, be fufficient to evade their positive Evidence, then no Teiftimony can confirm any Fa(5t whatfoever. For are there any fufpicious Circumftances either in the Reporters Themfelves, or in this Part of their Report, which might ilrengthen the Suggeftion [ "9 ] Suggeftion of fuch a Poffibility ? Neither Dr. M, nor his Defender have laid any Thing more to their Charge than that Xhey. were deceived, and their Circum- ftances, and Docftrines, and Practices, would have been abundantly fufficient to have clear- ed them from any Imputation of Guile and Arty if That had been fixed on them, How then is it to be proved that they were de- ceived in their Account? Why, it feems, there was a Pojjibility of their being de- ceived. But what Reafon is there to be- lieve, that They were aSiually impofed upon in this Particular? Was there Any Thing in the Occafion unworthy of a Divine Interpo- .fition ? Was there Any Thing in this Man- ner of interpofing by a Voic€ from Heaven ridiculous, or new, or unfuitable to former Difpenfations r Neither of Thefe can be main- lined by Any One, who agrees with Dr. M's profelTed Principles. Why then Ihould We imagine, that They fhould make fb flrange a Miftake, as that of interpreting an Exclamation from One amongft the Crowd into a Voice from Heaven ? People may in Speculation imagine almoft any Thing, but would it be poffible, do tliefe Gentlemen think, that fuch another Miflake could hap- pen, and that a whole Crowd, who were prefent at an Execution, could be impofed I 4 upon. [ I20 ] upon, by any Contrivance or Accident, to in- terpret a Voice from among Themfelves,' to come really from Heaven ? When Mr. 7*. therefore afks, ** Will Any Body fay that " this Voice might not come from the " Crowed ?" I anfwer there is a jirong Pre- fumption upon the firil Face of the Account, and 2.fironger from the farther Confideration of the Thing, that it might noty and that it could not. The Caufe, the Method, the Rea- fon of the Thing, confirm the Credibility of the Fa(ft, and the Nature of the Thing, confirm the Credibility of the Fad:, and the Nature of the Thing, which the numerous Spectators could not All be miftaken in, fe- cures the Credibility of the Wit/ieJfeSy and obviates the Imputation of their being de- ceived in this Article. Dr. M. intimates an Objection from a Circumftance in the Ac- count, which indeed firongly makes againft Him, and excludes almoft a Foflibility of their Miflaking in this Particular. He firft obferves, that " the Voice pretended to '' come from Heaven was heard only by a < "Few." (P. 220.) I would defire to knowr . on what Authority This is faid. The Ori-^ ginal affirms that the Chrillians then prefqi^t;^ heard the Voice, who cannot well /, b^gj thought to be but a Few on fuch an Occa'^f* rxyiTcti/. [ 121 1 _ >i)cao-av. Eufebiiiss Account is more full to the Purpofe, for He fays expreflly that Ma- wy heard this Voice. Tcnv yiiA.trtt^ocv TroXAoi 'axbc-clv, {Eufeb, Ecci. Hift. Lib. IV. Cap. 15.) The Chronicon Akxandrimim fays the fame. Tiiv ^\ fmuation. [ J22 ] finuation, than for any other Purpofe which can well be affigned. Mr. T. next embraces and defends the weakeft Remark in the Free Inquiry^ in the Attempt to account by natural Caufes for the Arch formed by the Flames over the Head of St. Polycarp, which preferved him from being confumed by them. This has been fo handfomely expofed by another Writer, that They who perufe his Remarks on it, will I believe fcarce think it neceffary, if it werb poflible, to make fuch a Suppofition more ridiculous. (See 'Jackfori^ Remarks, P. 9, &c.) Mr. T, has added nothing new on this Point, or at leaft Nothing but what improves the Inconfiflency. " There might probably" He fays, " be fomething odd and uncom- " mon in the Difpofition of thefe Flames, " which the prodigious Zeal of thefe Spec- " tators that is known to be the Parent of " Credulity, prefently heighten'd into an " Interpofition from Heaven." (P. 30.) But pray confider the EffeB of this Something which was odd and uncommon in the Difpofi^ tion of thefe Flames. It was Somethings what- ever it was, that preferved the Martyr from perifhing by the Flames, and obliged his Perfecutors to difpatch Him in another Me- thod. Their Zeal and their Credulity could not occafion a Miftake in this Particular. They [ 123 ] They could not be deceived in fuch a Matter, of Facft, but they muft have told a wilful Lie,, if there was not really a miraculous Inter- pofition to preferve Him from the Flames, The Method of his Prefervation, by the For- mation of an Arch over his Head, was the moft probable one that can well be thought o^ and if their Zeal had not quite blinded them, was a^ much the Objecft of their Senfes as the very Attempt of Burning Him ; and no fuch Arch could poffibly have been formed by natural Caufes as could Anfwer to this Effed:. Why He was preferved from this Death only to be delivered to another, is a diftind: Queilion, not necellary now to be enlarged on, for tho' Dr. M. aimed at making an Obiedion of this Point, I do not find Him fupported in it by Mr. T. who may therefore be prefumed not to think it of any Force. But He is refolved however to defeat the Teftimony of this Miracle by conneding with it the Circumftance of the Dove^ which He thinks will hang as a Dead Weight on the Whole; and that it is an authentic Part of the Narrative, He argues from Dr. Af' s Obfervation, that " all " the oldefh Copies ftill extant, retain this " Paffage; which He thinks it lay upon " me to have difproved." But I think that Dr. M, had Himfelf faved an Anfwerer the Trouble [ 124 ] Trouble of difproving this by referring to what Archbifliop Wake and my Father had offered on this Point, and leaving their Ar- guments whole and unanfwered. They had Both exprefly given this Reafon for rejecting }t, that neither Eufebhis^ nor Rufimis, nor any other the moft early Writers had men- tioned it, who could not be fuppofed to have omitted fo remarkable a Circumflance^ if it had been reported and credited in their Time. The Infertion of it afterwards was not difficult to be accounted for, (fuch Ad- ditions and Interpolations having often hap- pened in the Tranfcribing of Hiftorical Accounts) but the OmiJJion of it by flich eminent Authors is much more than a bare Prefumption againft it. And fince Archbi- fhop UJJjers, MS. is confeffedly later than EuJebiuSy therefore the Dr's Argument from the oldeil: Copies turns againft Himfelf5 and He muft expert a great Degree of In- attention in his Readers, or a great Inclination to his Opinion, when He could thus ven- ture to fupport, by a mere poiitive Afler- tion, an Account which had been obviated by fuch confiderable Reafons, without any Attempt of weakening or replying to thofe Reafons. Neitlier could Dr. M. be Ignorant that another plaufible Solution at leaft was given of this Difficulty from a fuppofed Concurrence [ 125 ] Concurrence of the Words in the MS. where the Careleffnefs or Miftake of the Tranfcriber might, thro' a fmall Variation or two, reduce it from a very plain and intel- iieible Senfe to that which occafions the prefent Difficulty. Thefe Things at leafl deferved fome Notice, and are of more Weight than a magifterial Determination, that " all the oldeft Copies jftill extant, *' from which Archbifliop Ufier and other " Learned Men publifhed their feveral Edi- " tions, retain this PafTage." Thefe All prove upon Examination to be but One ©nly, from which the Other copied, and fo a fingle Error might eaiily be fpread into future Editions ; but if there were more ftill extant which retained this PafTage, yet if Thofe, who faw the earlieft Accounts, not now extant, have not retained it, may not this pafs as a very probable Argument at leaft, that there was no fuch Paflage in the Original Accounts, but that it was a Miftake fome way or other crept into the later Co- pies of it? For a full Account of this I fhall refer to Dr. Smith's Note on this PalTage, which I prefume Dr. M. could not but have icQUy from whom I fliall only cite this Sentence to balance the Opinion and Authority of Dr. M. " Quod nulli funda- *' mento innititur, 5c plane incertiffimum eft, *' vetufiis [ 1^6 ] " vetuftis five Grsecis, five Latlnis omnino *' obmutefcentibus, nullaq. Traditione, ne " leviffima quid em, de hoc Portento apud " illos fervata." Mr. T. thinks that the other Circumftance of the vaji Effiifion of Blood is little lefs in- credible than that of the Dove^ and is a Difficulty that w^ants a Solution. But as the Fire is reprefented to be fo near extinguiflied already, that the Perfecutors faw there v^as no farther Profped: of Folycarp\ being con- fumed by it, and that the Executioner could without Danger go clofe to Him to ilab Him ; and as Old Men as well as Others are fometimes apt to be Plethoricky (of which there are fome remarkable In- fiances in the E?igUJJj Hillory) there feems no Improbability, without the Suppolition of a Miracle, but that a great Stream of Blood ifluing from the Wound, and falling exadly upon the litde Remains of Fire, might eafily exdnguifh them. That the Veins of the Martyr fhould in his old Age be fo plentifully fupplied, and that the EfFufion of his Blood fhould fall diredlly on the Flames intended to confume Him, might feem Tro'uidentiaU tho' not fupernafiiral^ and mi^lit well occafion that Notice which the Fliftory tells Us it did, as diftinguifhing the Sufferings of tlie Faithful. Had Mr. 71 looked [ 127 ] looked a little farther into this Matter, He might poffibly have found foine reafonable Solution of his Difficulties, might have dif- tinguiflied the Genuine original Account from the Additions to it, or Mijreprefentatiom of it, and might not have been left fo reme- dilefs, as he reprefents Himfelf. " So that " I fee," fays He, " no Remedy, but We " muft fliut our Eyes, and fwallow all in •' a Lump together; No Objection can arife *' againft the Credibility of the Attejlers " from the Incredibility of the Things at- " tejled. This is the Dod:rine laid down " for Us to go by, and perhaps 'tis well " for Thofe, who can thus believe in the " Grofs." (P. 31, 32.) What Mr. T. intend- ed by this laft Sentence, He beft knows : If it was meant as a Reflecflion on me, as it muft be, to make it pertinent, I hope that I have given little Occalion for fo unhand- fome an Infinuation. I have elfewhere en- deavoured to afcertain the Nature and Ex- tent of a Ratio?jal Faith ^ and to guard it carefully againft the Extremes of Superfti- tion and Unbelief. And tho' 'tis as v/ell, -and better, for Thofe who can believe in the Grofsy as for Thofe who can dijbelie-ve in the Grofs^ and undermine the Foundation of all Faith, yet have I never attempted to exclude our Reafon from its proper Share in everv [ 1^8 ] every fucli Enquiry > but only defire to add this Caution, that our Rcafai is not the Rea- Jon of God y nor have We his infinite Wifdojn to judge of all his all-wife Proceedings. Mr. 1'. adds that " if this Miracle was " fairly made out to be true in all its Cir- " cumftances, yet it would prove Nothing " againfl the Free Inquiry." Dr. M's Pofi- tion, He fays, is, " that God Almighty did " not continue to work Miracles by the; " Agency or Inftrumentality of Man j that " He ceafed to inveft Men with any fuch " ilanding Powers, as He had done in " the Days of the Apoflles j but that it by no *' Means follows from hence, that He might " not fufpend or reverfe the Laws of Na- *' ture upon any Occafion, that in his Wif- *' dom He fhould think worthy of it." (P. 33.) Whether Dr. M. will approve of this Part of the Defence, or accept of this Diftindiion pointed out in his Favour, I cannot tell j but I rather conje(5lure that He will not J becaufe his Title-Page, and the whole Courfe of his enfuing Arguments, feem plainly levelled againfl all miraculous Interpoiitions whatfoever. Befides, Mr. T". fays the Diftind:ion is very obvious ^ and therefore I cannot think, that it could have efcaped the Dr. Himfelf, if He had intended it J or tliat He would have wafted his own Time, [ 129 ] Time, and put his Anfwerers into a wrong Method, by arguing Himfelf againfl the Truth of fuch Reports, as had, it feems, no Relation to the Queftion in Difpute. But whether Dr. M. will now adopt this Dif- tind:ion or not, the Impartial will judge w^hat is the Foundation or Force of it. If God Almighty thought fit to continue any fu- pernatural Interpofitions in the Church, for the Reafons before alTigned by Dr. M. of over-ruling the Prejudices of Gainfayers, or of fupporting the Minds of Believers, it will be hard to affign a Reafon, why the Agency and Inftrumentality of Mm Them- fehes fliould at that Interval be laid afide, and more immediate Interpofitions of the Deity be continued ; when, according to our beft Judgment, thefe in Conjundlion would beft anfwer the Purpofe, and were thus given in Conjund:ion by God Him- felf In the preceding Ages. I will readily allow, that God Almighty might have good Reafons to fupprefs the One and continue the Other, which We may not difcernj but it concerns Thofe, who exped to account for Every Thing by their Reafon, to point out fome Difference, and if They examine never fo critically the Caufe, the Credibili- ty, the EfFed:s, or any other Circumftance of the Divine Interposition by Himfelf^ ra- ther than by his Creatures^ no Advantage K will [ 130] will arife to their Caufe by the Comparifon. Thofe who pretend not to direct their Ma- ker, can form no better Judgment of fuch Cafes than by Analogy^ by Obfervations on the Proceedings of infinite Wifdom in pa- rallel Cafes, and this will lead us to believe that if he continued to favour his Church in thofe After-Ages, with fuch diflinguifli- ed Care, as Himfelf to fufpend or reverfe the Laws of Nature on their Behalf on fome important Occafons, He did likewife Favour the Perfons Themfelves with fupernatural Endowments on fuch like momentous Exi- gences. The Reafon is, that heretofore both under the Old and New Teflament,, We find thefe particular Favours granted together , and We can point out no particular Reafon why they fhould be feparated at the Time We are fpeaking of. This Kind of Argument is ufed by Mr. T. Himfelf, where He thought it of Service to his Caufe, and it is particularly applicable to the preferit Cafe. " This was the Method that God Almighty *' proceeded in with Refpe6t to the Mira- " cles of the Gofpel-Age, and may We *' not conjedure viath fome Shew of Pro- *' bability, that fo long as He faw it con- *' venient to continue thefe Powers, Some- " thing of the fame Method had been " continued alfo." (P. 15.) By this Way of Reafoning every Evidence of his having in- terpofed ['3' 1 terpofed by lrlimfelj\ will be a prefumptivd Proof of his continuing fo long to inter- pofe likewife by the Injlrumentality of Hu- man Agents } and therefore to Mr. ^"'8 Quef- tion, what the Proof of fuch a Miracle wrought immediately by Heaven would prove againjl the Free-Inquiry^ I anfwer dire(ftly, it will prove, againft that Author's Opinion, that Chriftianity was not yet fo well efta- blifhed, as to be left to make its Way merely by its own Reafonabienefs ; and will obviate every other Objedion againfl the NeceJJity, or the Expediency of the Con- tinuance of Miraculous Powers. Mr. T". after a Recapitulation, which I fhall readily leave to the Perufal and Judgment of the Reader, proceeds to what I had far- ther obferved on the fuppofed Silence of the Apoftolical Writers as to this Point. Dr. M. thought that their not infixing up- on miraculous Endowments was a prefump- tive Argument that They were not favour- ed with them j I obferved on the other Hand, that there were not only good Rea- fons to be affigned, why They might , not mention them in thofe epiftolary Writings, tho'. They were endowed with them j but thas ^his v€ry Gircumflance was a ftrong Prefumption, that thefe miraculous Gifts were continued to them j otherwife their Si- let^e^gvi fo important an Alteration in their K 2 Circumllances, [ 132 ] Circumftances, as the Withdrawing of thofe Gifts would occafion, was not to be ac^ counted for. I added the Reafons, that our Saviour's Promife was not limited in any fuch Manner as to confine it to the Perfons or Times of the Apoftles j that in Fadt thefe fupernatural Gifts were plentifully be- ftowed on common Believers, juft before they wrote ; that the Occafion and even Ne- cejjity for them continued or rather encreafed under the Perfecutions arifing in the next Age ; that it was natural for Them in the fame Circumftances to exped: the fame Af- fiftance, and that They could not well have avoided taking Notice of the great Difference in this Refped:, if They had been difappointed in their Expectations j efpe- cially as They were writing in a praBical Manner to Thofe, who were now to en- dure greater Hardihips with the Profped: of lefs Supports. Mr. T^'s Reply is, that " this " Argument feems to Him to fail in its " firft Principle; He thinks I have not " made it fufficiently appear, that They " mufl have entertained any fuch Expec-r- *' tation J nor can He confider any Thing " that is faid either by Chrifl or his Apof- f* ties, as fufficient to ground fuch a Con- " jedure upon." (P. 35.) But I fuppofe that the Reader expeded his Argument^ and not [ 133 ] not his Opinion^ otherwife according to this Method of anfwering, a politive AfTertion that any Book is nothing to the Purpofe, may be called a Reply. It became Mr. T. in this Place to lliew, either that the Wordi of our Saviour's Promife limited the Exped:a- tion of thefe extraordinary Gifts to the Times of the Apoftles, or that the Occafion for fuch Expectation ceafed^ and that the Circum- flances of their immediate SucceiTors being different did of Courfe limit the Promife, and cut off all Profped: of fupernatural Affiftance. If any fuch Alteration to their Advantage could be proved, fo as to fuper- fede the Ufe of Miracles, the Intent of the Promife might w^ell be thought to be al- ready fulfilled, and that it was confined by the Ufe and Defign, tho' not by the Phrafe of it. But the Cafe in Fad: was directly otherwife. Perfecutions grew more f7'eqiient, and more Jevere^ and the Affiftance of thefe fupernatural Gifts was at leaft as much wanted, when thefe Writers penned their Epiftles, as when St. Faul wrote his. They had feen the Completion of our Saviour's Pro- mife in all the feveral Inftances referred to it,^, and They had feen the Ufe and EfFedt of , it, iji the Support of Believers, and the Converfion of feveral of their Adverfaries. They faw and experienced that the fame K 3 Reafons t nA ] Realbns ftill lubfilled for their Coiitirmance, and therefore They could not but expedt them in that Situation, till the Event proved otherwife, and fome Interruption of them at leafl prevented the Hopes of Their Re- vival. And therefore tho' Mr. T. fays, " He " does not fee but We have as good a " Pretence to infer from hence a Right to " thefe Powers, as they had," Others, I prefume, w^ill think thefe Confiderations of fome Weight j and that tho' We, who have not fuch Occafion for fupernatural Afliftance, and who live after a long Interval in which We know it has been withdrawn, cannot claim it from our Saviour's general Pro- mife; yet that thofe Apoftolical Writers, who were in the very fame Situation with Thofe to whom the Promife was firft made, and who had feen them laft down to their own Times, could not but expert the Continuance of them in their Days. If they really continued, They had no parti- cular Occafion to take Notice of it in their pra(flical Writings j but if they ceafed, Thofe Writers had an efpecial Call to mention fuch an eminent Failure of their Hopes, and to introduce it as an Argument, why They ibould lay ftill more Strefs on their only re- maining Ornaments and Recommendations, their Piety and Virtue. But [ 135 ] But Mr. T. fays, " I look upon it, that " the Event of their Ceajing might be no " more extraordinary to Them, than it " mull be thought to appear to Thofe, who " lived at the Time that they actually did " ceafe, whenever that was, and who yet " have not expreifed any particular Surprife " at it." {ibid.) As it happens this Gentle- man is miftaken both in the Reafo?: and the FaB. The Event of the Ceafing of Miraculous Gifts muft have been much more extraordinary and furpriling, if it happened, whilft the fame, or greater Per- fecutions raged, as when they were iirft gi- ven, than if they ceafed after the Ceafing of all Perfecutions, when Chriftianity was pro- tedled and encouraged by the Civil Power. If this Event happened, as it is fuppofed to do, at this Period, then Wife Men might fee the Dejign of this Difpenfation in the Date of it, and might difcern the Wif- dom and Goodnefs of Providence in conti- nuing them fo long as the Powers of the Earth continued to oppofe the blelTed Gof- pel, and in withdrawing them, when Hu- man Supports might well feem fufficient. Yet it appears, that the hiattentive fometimes ftood in Need to be reminded of this plain Diftindion, and their Surprize, both con- ceived and expreifed, at the Ceafing of thefe K 4 miraculous [ 136 ] miraculous Powers in the Church, after fo long an Enjoyment of them, gave Occafion to feveral Writers to treat of this Subjed, and to point to the Difference already taken No- tice of, amongft fome other Reafons which They affign for this Event. I will pafs over Mr. T's Triumph and Congratulations to Himfelf on what He has performed on this Head, and pafs on to what 1 He next feemed to intend as an Argument. Tho' Dr. M. had Himfelf ranked Fi/iom and Prophetical Gifts amongfb the other fii- ■peniatiiral Powers, which He propofed to fhew had ceafed in the Church with the Apoflles, yet being well aware what Evi- dence might be brought againft Him on this Point, He endeavours to obviate it by faying, that " if it fhould appear probable *' to Any that They were favoured on fome " Occafions with extraordinary lUuminati- " ons, Vilions, or Divine Impreffions, yet " that Gifts of this Sort were vntvdy perfonaly " granted for their particular Comfort, and " reaching no farther than Themfelves." I obferved' that fuch an Evafion was as applica- ble to any other Kind of Endowments as thefe, and was indeed of Force ivy None ; for that all fuch Gifts were both Ads of Mercy ^ and Arguments of Authority^ and therefore un- lefs He could difprove the Hiftorical Account of I 137 ] of fuch fupernatural Illuminations, Thefe would be of Force againft his Main Queftion. I inftanced in the Hiftory of the Prediftions of St. Ignatius and Polycarp, as cited by Archbifhop Wake, and obferved that if it be real, (plainly referring to Dr. M's own Intimation, that there were fome fuch In- flances, and that it might appear probable to Some Perfons, that there were extraor- dinary Illuminations, Vifions, and Divine Impreffions continued in the Church) then They might be both a Support to them, and an Evidence to Others of the Truth of what They taught. As He had not dif- proved, as He feemed to admit, that fuch an Hiftory might probably be thought real, I obferved that if it was, his other Evafion would be of no Service j and thus I argued on a Conceffion, which Truth had almoft extorted from Him involuntarily 3 and the Manner in which I exprelTed Myfelf, was not owing, as Mr. T. interprets it, to my Diffidence of the Truth of thofe Fads, but to the Manner in which Dr. M. Himfelf has ftated the Cafe; as the leafh attentive Reader could not but have obferved. As to the extraordinary Illuminations granted to Ignatius, the Archbilliop referred to two Proofs of it, his Forefight of the Divifions, which adually happened amongil; the m [ 138 ] the PhiladelphianSj to whom He had giverl Notice of, and Caution againft themj and his immediate Knowledge, by the Spirit^ of thofe Strangers, who came to meet Him juft before his Martyrdom. Mr. T. only obferves, that " if I, or any other Perfon " will put 'it paft Doubt that thefe Words, '' Do Nothing without your Bifiop^ were " didlated to Ignatius by the Spirit of God, " it will be doing a fignal Piece of Ser- '' vice in the Controverfy between Us and *' the Prefbyterians." (P, 37.) This again is moil unaccountably confufed and foreign to the Point. The Prediction which the Archbifhop referred to in this PafTage, had Nothing to do with the Form of Church Government eftabliflied amongft them, but to the Divifions and Confufions, which were coming on amongil them. They did not want a Prophecy to tell them, that Epifcopacy was the right Inftitution, which They knew was already fetded and uni- verfally fubmitted to; but having a Fore- Knowledge, that Diflentions and Troubles I were coming on, the natural Did:ate of the (Spirit, without an immediate Revelation on the Occafion, would be this, as reprefent- ed by Ignatius -j " Do Nothing without '' your Biihop : Keep your Bodies as the '[ Temples of God ; Love Unity : Flee Di- '• vifions ; [ 139 ] *' vifioniS : Be ye Followers of Chrift, as He " was of the Father." This was not the Sentence referred to by the Archbiihop as the Proof of an extraordinary Illumination, but the Forefight of the Event, which made this Advice neceflary, was the Point, which fhewed fome higher Affiftance. The Ad- vice itfelf was no more than might be col- leded from the Didlate of the Spirit, as re- corded in the facred Writings, and explain- ed by the univerfal Eilabliihment of Epif- copacy in all Places j and fo I find it un- derflood by thofe, who have commented upon this Pafiage. It does by no Means follow, that becaufe any Perfon was favour- ed with a Prophetical Impulfe in o?ie In- flance, that therefore He had the fame ex- traordinary Afliftance in every Thing, or that He could not fpeak a Word on fuch an Occalion, but by immediate Infpiration. St. Paul diftinguifhes very often, in his Epif- tles, betwixt direift Suggeflions of the Holy Spirit, and thofe Counfels which proceed from flated Precepts, under the common habitual Influences of the fame Divine Guide, and takes Care that They fliould not mif- take every prudential Rule which He gave them, for the i?nmediate Did:ate of Infpira- tion. In like Manner the Primitive Wri- ters, under a due Senfe of the Neceffity of Divine I HO ] Divine Grace to help them, frequently make Mention of the Afliftance and Gui- dance of the Holy Spirit, where They did not mean to fpeak of fupernatural Affift- ance, or extraordinary Illuminations. Thus Ignatius may very reafonably be underftood to reprefent the fcriptural Holy Advice, which He gave them, as the DiBate of the Spirit:, which will prove a fufficient Tefti- mony to the Honour and Authority of Epif- copacy, and will fhew it to be, as I am firm- ly perfwaded it is, of Apojlolical^ if not ftri(5tly of Divi7te Inftitution. If it be flill thought, that the Original Phrafe mufl be underflcod of an immediate Infpiration^ I fee no Abfurdity in the Confequence, nor any Thing, in the Advice given, unworthy of fuch a Divine Author. " As to Polycarfs foretelling his Death," Mr. T*. fays, that Dr. M. veryjuftly obferves, " that the Forefight of fuch an Event, in *' the Time of cruel Perfecution, might be " no Proof of a Prophetick Spirit." But the T'ime at which He delivered this Pre- dication, the Manner in which He fpake of it to Thofe about Him, the particular iiTzW of Death, which he defcribed, and the Comple- tion of it, jfhew that this Forefight could not be the Effect of co77imon 'Prudence from the Circumftances which He was in, as Dr. M. [ 14" ] M. reprefents it. He interrupted his Devoti- ons at fuch a folemn Seafon to mention it as fomething extraordinary^ and no Reafon can be given, why from his Situation He fliould think particularly of being burnt alive, rather than of being thrown to the Beajis 'y or why He fliould fix on any One Kind of Death, and leave it in the Power of Events to hurt his Reputation, if his Con- jedure was only founded on the Probability of his lofing his Life in fo cruel a Perfecu- tion. The farther Teftimony of the Wri- ters of this Circular Letter, that he was a " truly Apoftolical and Prophetical Teacher, " and that Every Word that went out of " his Mouth either had then been already " fulfilled, or would in its due Time be ^* accompliilied," is a Confirmation of this particular Prophecy ; and tho' Mr. T. here again introduces the old Objedion, without ftrengthening it, that " the whole Account " of the Vifion ftands upon the fame Foot- *' ing with that of the Pigeon," yet others will probably be fatisfied by this Time, that This is a MifreprefeJitatioUy and that thefe two Circumftances are fupported by very dif- ferent Authorities. I will follow Mr. T's Example in this Place, to avoid Repetition, and pafs over Dr. M's Remark on the Improbability of the Revival - [ H2 ] Revival of thefe Gifts, after they are fup- pofed to have ceafed ; leaving the Proof of that Suppofition, and the Argument con- cerning the Sileiice of the Apoftolical Wri- ters, to depend on what has been already- offered. Dr. M's next Remark was on the Manner of exerting thefe miraculous Gifts, which He thought the more fufpicious in the Days after the Apoftles, becaufq then the Workers of them called on Others to come, and fee, and examine them, which was a more ofteiitatiom Method than Any that the Apoftles ufed. I obferved in Anfwer, that it was ftrange to interpret an Offer of publick Examination to be an Air of Im- pofture. A Readinefs and Defire that All fhould look into the Foundations of any Pre- tenfions, is a prefumpthe Argument of their Truth, that they will indeed bear Exami- nation J and the Want of this is as readily prefumed to be owing to a Confcioufnefs that they will not ftand the Teft, as We argue in the Cafe of the Church of Rome. I obferved farther, that if the Difference mentioned between the Miracles of the Apoftles, and of their Succeffors, had lain directly otherwife, Dr. M. would have known how to have turned that Confideration to the Service of his own Caufe. Mr. T. has here again made a Shift to mifunderftand me. [ H3 ] me, (which was, I think, no eafy Matter! and has intimated, as if I thought that Dr. M. would upon that State of the Cafe have objed:ed to the Apoftles Themfelves, Whereas that Queilion v/as out of my Thoughts at that Time. Dr. M. I knew, was fo good a Mailer of Argument, as not to have omitted to make the beft of fo ma- terial a Circumftance in his Favour, as that State of the Cafe would have afforded Him. He who profeffes to believe the Miracles of the Apoftles, and to reject thofe of their SuccelTors, would not have failed to have triumphed in this Difference between them ; if the former had, before they w^orked their Miracles, called on their Enemies and Per- fecutors to come and examine them, and the latter had only recorded them, after the Performance of them, without fuch previousi Challenge and Invitation. " How plaufi- " bly," faid I, " would this Gentleman " have declaimed upon this Rcprefentation ?" My Meaning plainly was, that He would in that Cafe have urged, that the SuccefTors not following fuch a Pattern betrayed a Con- fcioufnefs that They had not the fame real Power J and then I doubt not but He would have enlarged on the Importance, not only of admitting^ but of iwv}ittng Enquiries and [aminations, where Truth and Evidence can [ H4 ] can fupport the Caufe. Then He would, with the Reft of Mankind, have thought it of great Weight, in Refpedt of the Evidence, that fuch Notice ihould be given before- hand, as might prepare all Men thoroughly to examine and fift the Caufe, and thereby prevent any Evafions afterwards. Mr. T. is pleafed here to fay, that " I have entirely ^' mifapprehended the Grounds of theFacfl *' the Dr. has referred to, which He now " reprefents to be, as if the Objedion was, " that they are not pundually recorded." This Circumftance is indeed incidentally men- tioned, but the plain View of the Dr's Ex- ception in this Place was, the ojlentatioiis Method, as He efteems it, of proclaiming their Powers, and offering to exert them, whenever They iliould be called on. Whe- ther Mr. 7". found this too hard a Point to maintain, whether He was at a Lofs for a proper Medium^ to prove an Offer of Ex- amination to be a Mark of Impofture, and therefore chofe to wave it, and to carry our View to another Point, I fhall leave the attentive Reader to determine. The Arti- cle of pundually recording the Gofpel-Mi- racles has been already mentioned, and is allowed to be a Circumftance of peculiar Advantage to their Credibility, and had they been wrought after fuch previous Challenges and [ HS ] and Invitations, and the fucceeding ones had been more private and concealed, this would juflly have been efteemed another peculiar Advantage in their Favour. But be- caufe this Circumflance happened to lie on the Side of After- Ages, who having feen the Evafions of the Evidence of former Miracles, and being willing to prevent them, did there- fore call on the Magiftrates and People, be- ing then their Enemies, to come and fee, and bear Witnefs to their fupernatural Works, therefore This was in fome Method or other to be evaded, and even Dr. M's Elo- quence proved unequal to the arduous Tafk. For We defire to lay afide the Pomp of Words, and demand a plain Reafon, why a Challenge to Adverfaries to look into their Claim of fupernatural Gifts fhould be thought a Prefumption againft them. Why, fays Mr. 7". " Miracles fpeak for Them- ** felvesi They need no round-about- Way " of recommending them J They go immedi- " ately to the Senfes of Mankind without " any formal Procefs of Words." (P. 41, 42.) But what avails all this to Thofe, who are not Witnejfes to thofe Miracles ? The Intent of their publick Calls to their Perfecutors to fee their mighty Works, was to gain the Opportunity of working them in their Pre- f«nce. It was eafy to delpife Reports, and L IQ, t 146 ] to evade even thofe, which v^ere well-at- tefled, upon the general Prefumptions which ingenious Men can find out againft the Cre- dibility of fupernatural Interpofitions ; but when They were told, that the Miracles, which They had heard of, fliould readily be repeated before Themfelves, This was a proper Call on their Attention, and was more likely to end in their Convi52 ] fhall undertake at prefent to account for; We have feen them in all Ages refifl Evi- dence, which was next to irrefiftible, and I cannot attempt to prove, that They adted reafonably herein, becaufe I am much other wife perfuaded. But I apprehend that the Argument here made Ufe of, will hold with much greater Force on the other Side. The Single Point agreed on betwixt Dr. M. and his Advocates, and Thofe who have wrote againft Him, is that fuch Pre- tenfions were made by the Primitive Chrif- tians openly and univerfally, at all Times, and before all Perfons. Now could Theje have acted fo ftupid, fenfelefs, and fhamelefs a Part, , as to put the Iflue of their Caufe upon an Event, that was fo eafily to be decided againll them ? The Point, as Mr. 71 ob- ferves, might be demonftrated on the Evi- dence of their own Senfes : Whether it was true or falfe, it might be brought to a clear and fpeedy Conclufion ; and fo far the Friends and Enemies of the Chriftians Caufe were on a Level, and this Argument feems equally favourable to both Parties. To balance therefore and decide the Quef- tion. We mull: enquire farther, on which Side the greater Prejudices and Intereft lay, and what was the' Event of this Competi- tion betwixt fuch Claimants and their Op- ponents, [ 153 ] ponents. Folly and Effrontery — We will al- low there mufl be fomewhere, and the Cir- cuinftances of the Cafe will fufficiently fhew where they are chargeable. The Heathen Philofophers had all the Prepoireffions of Education, and all the Pride and Efteem acquired by their Science, belides the com- mon Temptations of the Power, and Profit, and Honour of the World, to influence them againfl the Pretenfions of Thofe who laid Claim to Miraculous Powers. The Princi- pal of thefe Chriftian Claimants had been in the very fame Situation Themfelves, had overcome thefe Prejudices thro' the mere Love of Truth and Force of Evidence, and had undertaken a new Religion upon Con- vi6lion, which promifed them Nothing but Perfecutions, and Tortures, and Death. They had no worldly Intereft to ferve by ma- king this Claim, but They might have made very great Advantage by renouncing it, by going over to their Adverfaries and detedling the Fraud of their Brethren. They be- came Converts to the Gofpel, and challenged the Power of working Miracles in their Majlers Name, when that Name was made a Term of Reproach, and They could ex- pecft to profefs it on no other Condition, than that of facrificing every Comfort in Life, and mofl probably their Life itfelf, in his [ '54 ] his Service. And is it credible, that Tliey could thus give up every reafonabie and defirable Profpedl both in this World, and in the next, to maintain what They knew to be a grofs Fraud and Impofmre? This then is one material Difference between Thofe, who rejeBed, and Thofe who mam- tained thefe Pretenfions, that the Former had great PrepoffeJ/ioits and Interefis to blind their Eyes againft the Evidence offered ; the Latter had no Reafon in the World to tempt them to Difguife and Falfification, but it would have anfwered the great Points of Security and Profperity, both here and hereafter, to have owned the Truth, and not to have charged their Confciences with fo heavy a Guilt, as that of making Pre- tenfions to extraordinary Gifts from Heaven, which They knew They were not favoured with. Again, The E'uent of this Difpute may well be thought to depend on the Evidence of it. The Heathens charged the Chriflians with Fraud and Impofiure^ and if They could have made good the Charge, would infalli- bly have prevented their Progrefs -, for They had already every other Difcouragement againfl them, and had Nothing to be hoped for, but from the E'vide?2ce which They offered. Yet in this Situation Hea- tbenijm [ ^55 ] thenifm daily decayed, and the Go/pel gsancd Ground ; The ProfefTors of the Former fell into that Negled; and Contempt which Per- fons ufually do, who advance Charges that They cannot make good j whilft the Latter had all the Succefs that could be exped:- ed from the cleareft Verification of their Pretenfions. And This appears to be ^no- ther Circumftance of Weight to fhew on which Side the Folly and Effrontery were to be charged. If it be thought, that the Succefs of the Gofj^l was owing to other Evidence, as particularly to the Teftimony concernino- thofe real Miracles, which were wrought by Chriji and his Apofiles, I ihall obferve with Mr. Tl that there was more Room to cavil at fuch Teilimony, with Refped: to the Tranfadions of a paji Age, than there could be with Refped to Thofe Miracles, which they had fuch Opportunities of be- ing Eye-Wttneffes of Themfelves. Had the fucceeding Chriftians claimed the Continu- ance of thefe miraculous Gifts without Foundation, They could not have done a greater Prejudice to the Evidence arifing from the real Miracles of their Predecef- fors J for Thofe Adverfaries, who could have difproiied the latter^ which were offered in the fame Caufe, would have prefumed the fame [ «56 ] fame of the former, and thought them un- worthy of their Notice. A late learned Writer has given this Solu- tion to the Difficulty raifed by Mr. 7*. and has offered this as the Hypothejisy why the Wifer Heathens rejecfled the Account of all Miracles wrought as well by the earlieft as the later Chriftians, namely, becaufe They looked on all Miracles as incredible, as Frauds of Courfe, and therefore did not think that any Pretenfions whatfoever deferved the leaft Attention. If this were the Cafe, Mr. 7*. may fee a Reafon, why Perfons of the higheft Charadlers among them, might lay the Charge of Fraud upon the Chrif- tians, without being guilty of fuch egregious Folly as He fpeaks of. For according to this Reprefentation, They did not " put the Iffue " of their Caufe upon the Truth or Fallhood " of an Event that was fo eafily to be de- " cided againft them," but They refzfed to join IJfue at all upon this Point. They re- jedled their Miracles, and charged them with Fraud, not thro' the Objedtion of any partiadar Infufficiency in their Evidence, but thro' this Opinion, that 720 Evidence whatfoe- ver could prove a Miracle. For my own Part I do not think that any fuch general Account can be given of all the Philofophers. They differed like other Perfons, and oppofed ^ the [ ^S7 1 the Miracles wrought in Favour of the Gof- pel, Some on one Principle and Some on Another. Some thought ?io Miracles could be proved at all > Others thought that no Miracles could prove fuch DoBrines as thofe of the Incarnation and Crofi-j and therefore agreed in rejedling the Pretenfions of the Chriftians, tho' on very different Grounds. Very probably the forementioned Reprefentation may hold with Refpedt to 7na- nyy or perhaps the greater Part of the Phi- lofophers j but I think there is plain Evi- dence, from the Accounts given by the Primitive Chriftians of the Objections made againft them, that it did not hold with Re- fpe(5l to AH. But whether They thought Miracles abfolutely incredible, or not, yet if, whilft They had the Power and Authority on their Side, They could have difproved the Pretenfions of Thofe, who had offered them in their Days, they would of Courfe have rejected the Accounts of the foj-mer Times, and fpared Themfelves the Trouble of look- ing into them at all. The Succefs therefore of Chriftianity, whilft thefe Pretenfions con- tinued, and whilft its ProfefTors lay under fo many other Difadvantages, which Nothing but clear Evidence could have overcome, is with me a ftrong Argument, that they were proved to be real to Thofe, who, in Oppofition _[ 158 ] Oppofition to their Intereft, became Converts to them. " But after all," fays Mr. T. " is it un^ " deniably certain, that thefe Oppofers of " Chriilianity did charge the Miracles of " our Saviour and his Apoflles v^ith Fraud " and Impoflure? Is Mr. D. (He fhould " have faid is Dr. M.) confident, this Quef- " tion may not be anfw^ered in the Nega- " tive?" Here He has deferted his Client, and come over to me, thro' a vehement Defire of oppofing me in every Thing. It is to be confidered then, that tho' thefe Gen- tlemen have made the Diflincflion, and laid great Strefs on it, between the Miracles wrought by our Saviour and his Apoftles, and thofe which were wrought by their immediate SuccefTors, yet the Enemies of the Gofpel at that Time had not found out this Diftindion, but by denying the Miracles of Chrijiiajis, meant to deny all that were wrought in that Caufe , or by admitting and evading them, meant to extend that Evajion to prefent as well as former Pretenfions. Whatever Inftances therefore may be offer- ed of their attempting to account for fuch Miracles by Art, Magick, and the like, are fo many Arguments again ft: Dr. M. that the Objedtors did not airways charge them with Fraud and Impojiiire^ as He has alTerted. To [ 159 ] To this Purpofe I obferved, that tho' Thofe, who would not own the Dod:rines of Chrilli- anity, muft have h^tn felf-condem?iedj if They had not denied the Miracles, (plainly mean- ing unlefs They had fome other Evalion) yet that " They did not think fit to truii ' their Caufe on this Point : For tho' They ' fometimes threw in fuch Hints as thefe ' yet that at other Times They fhifted the ' Objection, and chofe rather to fuppofe, ' that their Miracles were wrought by the ' Affijdance of Demojts." To this Mr. T. fays, " If Mr. D. had made it fairly ap- pear, that the Perfons We are fpeaking of, imputed the Miracles that were pretend- ed to be wrou2:ht in their own Times to any fuch Power, This indeed would have been fomething to his Purpofe ; and I fliould have been obliged to Him for the Information, but the Point is only in- timated, and not one Word faid in Proof of it." (P. 45.) As I was writing againft Dr. M. whofe intimate Acquaintance with tlie Primitive Writers could not fail of fur- nilhing Him with many Proofs of it, I thought it proper to reiiiiiid Him of this Circumflance, without thinking it necelTaiy to point to all the Inftances of it ; not fore- feeing that this would be made an Objedion by One, who was unacquainted with them. Very [ i6o ] Very exprefs is that almofl: in the En- trance of Ortgen% Difcourfe againft Celfiis : MeTcl TccuToc sv^cL 'Ttobiv %\vH(JLiv(^ 0 KeXo-@- e^iXcLvvovTccr (Orig. cont. Celf. P. 324. Ben. Ed.) Eufebiuss Citation from Porphyry a- mounts to a full Teftimony of the fame, that Chriftians had a Power over Evil Spirits. n«gj Sz TV f^y]')LiTi ^uvcL(Q'cti n jcotl 0 )tct9' >jjM.a5 t5i/ ^cLifJiovav TT^o^yo^os Iv T)ii 3tcc9* •/fjttav crutrjceu'Jil rSrov ^n Xiycov juctgTuggt toi/ t^o- XcLTli\Y\(pt TAV 'TCOXIV » VOai^y 'Ao-)tA>J7ri» f/,iV tnxi^yilAa.^ Jcctj ray ctWav Seai/ jw)jx,gT' acr);^* a){p£Aei'ot5 Mc^eTo. [Eiifeb. Prasp. Evang. Lib. V. C. I.* P. 181. Par. Ed. 1628.) There are other Evidences of this not a fev^^, but they are fo well coUeded, and the Enforce- ment of them is fo well exprefled by Mr. BrockCy that I fhall refer Mr. T. to Him for full Inftru(5tion and Satisfad:ion. (See Brookes Examin. P. 175, &c.) There are many Obfervations and Arguments to the fame Purpofe in my Father's Diflert. Cyprian. XII. § 45, &c. The [ i6i ] The fecond Head of Dr. M's Enquiry related to the Perfons endued with thefe extraordinary Gifts, whom He would re- prefent to be not th^ Rulers and Governors of the Church, but the Lowell of the People ; and He cites fome Paffages, wherein They fpeak of fome of the Meanefl Difciples, as polTelTed of this Gift. The ready Anfwer to this is, that They never exclude ThemfelveSj or confaie thefe fupernatural Endowments to thofe inconfiderable Perfons, but that their Argument implied their own Enjoyment of thefe Gifts, and was properly illuflrated in thofe Inftances, where there could be the leafl Sufpicion of Art; and where the mighty Power of God fhone the moft il- luftrioufly thro' the Meannefs of the Inflru- ments. Mr. T". has allowed, that Dr. M% Attempt of (hewing that Some of the earliefl Fathers difclaimed thefe Gifts, is weak and infufficient ; and if They are not exprejly ex- cluded by fome fuch plain Declaration, They muft of Courfe be underftood to be mcluded in thofe general Affertions, wherein They claimed the Continuance of thefe Miracu- lous Powers amongft them, for the very Reafon which thefe Gentlemen aflign, name- ly, that it is not probable, that the common People were favoured with fuch Privileges as were denied to their Teachers and M Rulers. [ l62 ]• Rulers. When therefore Mr. T. repeats Dr. M's Reprefentation, affifted with an Abfur- dlty of Mr. JVhiJio?is (who only is accounta- ble for it) and then cries out, " is This ra- " tional ? Is it credible ?" We may anfwer freely, that it is not, and therefore thefe Accounts that Private People were fome- times fo favoured, do plainly imply that their more eminent Bifhops and Apollles were likewife fo diftinguifhed. But it is very ra- tional and credible^ that They fhould make the beft of their Argument, fhould lay the Strefs of it, where it was moft incontefta- ble, and fpecify Thofe, who by their Age, or Sex, or Education, were the remoteft from any Sufpicion of great Attainments in Themfelves. Mr. T. thinks indeed, that " an inquifitive Man cannot be fatisfied " with this my Solution of the Matter, " That the Mention of thefe (the meaneft *' People) who were the leaft capable of " Craft or Fraud, muft be moft convincing ** to Gainfayers." But as This again is only his Opinion unfupported by Argument^ as He has not fliewn this Solution to be groundiefs and trifling, as I had obferved, that in all like Cafes it is ufual to fpecify thofe Perfbns, in whom the Force of the Argument will appear moft to Advantage, and They have therefore done no more in this [ i63 ] (his Account, than is cuftomary in other parallel Inftances^ the Solution as yet ap- pears rational and pertinent, and may be fa- tisfadlory to the inquifitive. But fays Mr. T. " Can Mr. D. produce " an Inftance of any one Gainfayer, who " was convinced by them ?" I anfwer, the Succefs of Chriftianity under thefe Preten- fions, as reprefented under the laft Head, contains a Proof of Thoufands of Inftances of Gainfayers, who were convinced by them. But the Names and Profeffions, and Habi- tations of thefe Perfons, the Time, and Oc- cafion, and Manner of their Convernon are not particularly recorded. — They are not, but whatever was the Reafon of their omit- ting to regifler thefe Ci?xu?njla72ces^ the FaB is equally fure and certain, that fuch Converts there were, that ProfefTors of the Gofpel in- creafed and multiplied j when fuch publick Claims were made and offered to Examina- tion j when, if They had been groundlels. They had been eafily proved to be fo; and fuch Proof muft of Courfe have put a Stop to the Progrefs of that Caufe. We muft argue on the Evidence as it lies before Us, and not as We may on either Side fancy that it fhould have been, to render it more fatisfadtory. For We may with more Reafon demand fome Inftance on Re- M 2 cord. [ ,64 ] cord, wherein this Challenge was publickly made, fairly accepted, and finally detected j or, where the Picblick Teachers of this Reli- gion renounced all Share in this Privilege Themfelves, and only infifted, that the in- ferior Part of their People, or their Women and Children^ could work Miracles, tho* T^hey could not. This would have been a ftrong Prefumption againfl the Reality of fuch Miraculous Powers remaining in any Perfons, but no fuch Inllances can be pro- duced, and therefore the pofitive Proofs of their Continuance fland free from any fuch Objedtions. The Evidence, as it appears in FaB^ and not in Correfpondence io our Wildes, or our Ciiriofity^ ftands thus. The Claims to mira- culous Powers were made publickly^ and Enemies were ifivited to look into them. In this Situation Chriflianity prevailed, when a Failure in fuch Pretenfions mull have proved fatal. The particular Perfons who wrought them, or who examined and were convinced by them, are not fet down in their Hiftories, but neither is there any Record of their being publickly detecfled; but on the con- trary thofe Apologies, wherein thefe Chal- lenges were fo openly made, feveral Times obtained favourable Refcripts from the Em- perors : The Claims are made in fuch gene- ral [ 1 65 J r4 Terms, that altho' it does not follow from Them that Every Individual Chriftian had a Supernatural Power, yet I think it does, that no particular Order or Station was excepted, fuppofing always the Neceffity of the Occafion. The Writers in faying that We do fuch Things, or fuch Things are ** done among Us, or by Us," plainly {peak of the Body of 'True Chrijiia?is in ge- neral, and cannot in common Senfe be fuppofed continually to except Themfelves. They fometimes indeed, to obviate all Ob- jecflion from any fuppofed Proficiency in themfelves, defcend to fpecify the Meanejl of their Brethren, and infift that They (on proper Occafions We may be fure) were able to do the fame. Thus Hertullian in the In- ftance, which I before referred to on this Point, did not appropriate to Himfelf, or to Any of the Principal Governours of the Church, that fupernatural Power which He was there fpeaking of, but inUfbed that Any Chrijiian whatfoe'ver^ that fhould be called on by the Magiftrate, fhould at the Peril of his Life undertake to perform the Miracle. In this Senfe I underftand that Teftimony oi Irenceiis^ that " All, who were " truly Difciples of 'J ejus ^ worked Miracles " in his Name," and that Other, that fuch Works were done by Exorcifts, by Ignorant M 3 Laymen^ [ «66 ] " Laymen, Women, Boys (or rather Youths) " and any iimple (that is, any plain and " unlearned) Chriftian whatfoever." Not that every Individual had the Power of working Miracles at large, or that any one trifed with fuch fupernatural Gifts as He had, and exerted them in any or no Occafion'; but that the Meanejl Jincere Chrijiian^ when He was called to a publick Confli(5l with Heathens^ was, on fuch an Exigency wor- thy fuch an Interpofition, endued with Power fufficient in and thro' the Name of Chrift, to work a Miracle for the Confir- mation of his Brethren, and the Convidiion of Adverfaries. This was fuitable to the mofl; rational Account of that Faith of Mi- racles^ which is fo often fpoken of in the New Teflament, the expected Completion of our Saviour'^ Promife to Thofe whojhould be- lieve on bis Name^ and entirely confonant to that Difpenfation of the fame Gift which We find defcribed in the Epiftles. For tho' Mr. 71 is pleafed to fay, that no ©ther Perfon whatfoever is fpoken of as work- ing Miracles juft after the Defcent of the Holy Ghoft, but the Apojiks Themfelves, yet it feems to me very plain, that Others were thereby endued with fupernatural Gifts 5 Of St. Peter could not have reprefented this Event as a Completion of the Prophecy which [ ,67 ] which He referred to ; This, fays He, is that which was fpokcn of by the Prophet Joel. Andit fiall come to pafs in the lafi Days^ faith Godj I will pour out of jny Spirit upon all Flejh : and your Sons and your T) aught er s flmll prophefyy ' a?id your young Men fhall fee Vifons, and your old Men fiall drea?n Dreams. And on my Servants^ and on my Hand-Maidens I will pour out in thofe Days of my Spirit^ and They fhall prophefy^ A(fls ii. i6, &c.' Could this Prophefy have been faid to be fulfilled, if only the Twelve Apoftles had been endued with thefe Gifts ? Or is it not a plain Account, that Some of them, in dif- ferent Kinds and .Degrees, abounded amongft Young and Old, and even amongft Thofe of different Sexes as well as Ages^ juft as they are defcribed to do in the following- Times? Mr. Tl. fays " He muft confefs, it does " appear probable from St. Faul\ Epiftles, " that fome Other Perfons were invefted " with thofe Powers j" If This be but a bare Probability, I fliall defpair of proving any Thing certain merely from his Autho- rity. The Apoftle does not barely hint '% or go about to eftablifh it as a difputedV omt, but He fpeaks of it as a v/ell-known Fad:, direds to the proper Ufe of fuch fuperna-- tural Endowments, and enters into Compa- M 4 rifj}?. [ i68 ] rifon concerning the Ufe and Excellency of thefe^ and of the ordinary Gifts and Graces of the Holy Spirit. Upon the Whole there appears no fuch Difference, as Dr. M. has reprefented, be- tween the Difpenfation of the Miracles as recorded in the I^ewTeffcament, and in the Writings of the earlieft Fathers. The for- mer is expreflly faid to be fuch as compleated the Prophecy of Joel^ and the latter is de- fcribed to be no more : For tho' Mr. T. by Way of Contempt, talks, as if the Account f)f thefe After- Writers was, that the Power of working Miracles was commonly exer- cifed by Women and Children, yet no fuch Account can be proved from their Wri- tings J We read in the Sacred Hiftory of Virgins that did prophecy^ and We read pa- rallel Accounts in Ecclefiaflical Hiftory : But Dr. M. knew how to make the Diftindiion, when it would ferve his Turn, between Pro- phecy and Miracles. Neither is there any fuch Declaration, that Children worked Mi- racles, but the Paffage fo perverted fpeaks plainly of Touthsy and of Illumination by Fi- fionsy in Allufion clearly to that forementioned Prophecy. Mr. T. concludes this Point with faying, that "it is much more confonant to his *5 Notions of the Matter, to fuppofe that no " Man [ i69 ] " Man ever did work a Miracle witliout " a fpecial CommifTion and De/ignation " from Heaven j and that it lies upon me " to lliew the contrary." I do not well underftand what is the Tafk here alTigned to me. If He means, as He feeois to do, in Support of Dr. ikT's Opinion tliat " thefe " Gifts were retrained to a Few of the " eminent Difciples, who were particularly " commiffioned to propagate the Gofpel, ^' and prelide in the Church of Chrifh," that None were favoured with them but Thofe of the Clerical Order, then I think the contrary very plain from St. Pmcl^ Epiftles, and particularly from thofe Paffages wherein He diftinguifhes, between Teachers and Workers of Miracles, and again between Miracles and Governments ; Not that thefe Offices were nol fometimes exercifed by the fame Perfons, but that they were not 72ecef- farily fo : That they were diJiinSi in their own Nature, and difpenfed to Believers with great Variety. In what other Senfe Mr. T. meant, that " No Man ever did " work a Miracle without a fpecial Com- " miffion and Delignation from Heaven," I do not know. None of them ever pre- tended to work Miracles in Virtue of their own Power and Holinefs, but in and thro' the Name of Chriji, The adtual Endowment of [ 170 ] of them with fuch Power from Heaven, and a proper Call to exercife it on an impor- tant Occafion, was in itfelf Commijjion and Defignation. fufficient. They could not work Miracles without fuch Affiftance from Hea- ven, and with it They certainly needed no other particular Warrant than a rational Judgment of the Weight of the Caufe on which They undertook to do it. Dr. M. under the Third Head attempted to invalidate the Credit of thofe Fathers, on whofe Teftimony the main Queflion con- cerning the Continuance of Miraculous Powers in the Church, depended. He began with Jujiin Martyr j and the Charge againft Him was, that He pretended to a Knowledge of the Scriptures by hifpirafion, which his ma- ny wrong Expofitions of it fhew He had not. My Anfwer was, that He made no fuch Pretenfions, and therefore his Want of fuch Gift was no juft Refle6tion on Him. I obferved that it was not clear that there was any fuch Claim at all in the Primitive Church, and that the Senfe of the Prophe- fying and the Interpretation of it, as fpoken of in the New Teilament, was lefs clear and determinate than That of any other ex- traordinary Gift. . But fays Mr. T^. " in the " Extrad Dr. M. has given Us from this " Father, I find thefe Words j Others had " the [ 17' 1 " the Knowledge of future Events, Vifions, " and Prophetical Sayings. Now by Propheti- " cal Sayings, I fhould naturally underftand " the S ay i figs of the Prophets, and the Sayings " of the Prophets I underftand to conftitute " a Part of the Holy Scriptures" I fhould think it much more natural to underftand it in its moft obvious Senfe as PrediSiions^ which might be, and moft probably were, ' thofe of their own Times, and not of thofe former infpired Writers, whofe Works confli- tute a Part of the Holy Scriptures. Had This been the Meaning, it is moft probable, that They would have ufed the very Words, of the Sayings of the Prophets, or in fome more determinate Phrafe, and not have fpoken merely of Prophetical Sayings in Conjuncftion with Vifons, both which were Gifts in Be- ing in their own Days, and therefore would of Courfe be underftood as fpoken of them : And it appears from the New Teftament that the Gift of Prophecy, and the Literpre- tafion of it, were diftindt Bleffings. Far- ther, if This had been meant of interpreting the Holy Scriptures, it might reafonably be expedted, that the Mention of this Gift would have occurred in other Places, and have been fupported by parallel corroborating Teftimonies. But We find no fuch Pail^^rcs, ^ iich [ 172 ] which is a ftrong Objedion againil this Interpretation of this ; However, if any fuch Gift did then fub- 11ft, yet I infifted that Juftin Martyr made no fuch Claim, and to this Purpofe I exa- mined particularly every PafTage, which Dr. M. had produced from Him, to fupport this Charge, and Ihewed that neither the Exprejions ufed, nor the Context would ad- mit of any fuch Senfe as a Claim to In- fpiratiofi. I obferved that He had not, in any one of the Places referred to, ufed the "Terniy which- could be interpreted of an ex~ traordinary Gift, but that He fpoke of the Grace of God in the common Style of every good Chriftian j that neither was He fpeak- ing of Himfelf in particular, but of the Bleffing and Privilege which all the ProfelTors of the Gofpel enjoyed in the Knowledge of this Revelation. What now might have been expedled from the Defender of Dr. M. on this Head ? Should He not have fupported the Charge, have reviewed the PalTages, and fhewn that the Phrafe or the Context con^ firmed Dr. M's Interpretation, ox vitrQ fa- vourable to it, or at leaft were capable of it, in Oppolition to what I had fliewn to the contrary ? But Nothing of this Kind is at- tempted. Mr. T". contents Himfelf with fay- ing that " He mull, ilill declare Himfelf " of [ 173 ] " of Opinion, that thofe Paffages look very " ilrongly that Way." Are We then to be guided by Looks and Appearancesy and to negle(5t an Examination into the cuftomary Meaning of the Expreffions ufed, the Occa- fion on which they are introduced, and the ConneBion of the preceding and fubfequent PafTages? Mr, 71 however offers a Reafon, fuch as it is, for his Omiffion in this Place. Whether, fays He, " thefe Expreffions are ** meant of ordinary or extraordinary Grace, I " fliall not fpend many Words in difputing, " becaufe 'tis not at all material to the Point " ia Hand." On the contrary, it was the mofi material Circumftance that He had here to confider ; It was the very Point in Quef- tion between Dr. M. and Myfelf The Dr. charged 'Juftin Martyr with Fraud fufficient to difqualify Him for a Witnefs, in that in this Inftance He made Pretenfions to a Power which He had not, and therefore might be fuppofed to do the fame in other Articles. I allowed that He had not this Gift of interpreting the Scriptures by Infpi- ratio7i'y but added, that He never claimed it; and therefore his Integrity ftands unim- peached, and He might be a very compe- tent Witnefs in Matters wherein He fpoke of his own Knowledge, tho' Pie had not other Talents, which He never pretended to. [ml to. Here then We joined IfTue, and the v6ry thing, on which this Part of the Con- troverfy turned, was this; whether it ap- peared from the PafTages produced, that yiiftin clainied the extraordinary Power of interpreting the Scriptures by InfpiratioiZi If He did, his Credit and Character muft certainly fujffer, and no Strefs could be laid on his Teftimony in other Matters, who muft have prevaricated wilfully in this ; for We all acknowledge, that he was often miftaken in his Expofitions of the facred Writings. But if He fpake only of the general Grace, and Favour, and Privilege, which all enjoy- ed, who were bleffed with the Knowledge of the Gofpel, then this has nO Relation to the Point in Queftion, which concerns fupernatural Gifts, and not the common Mercy of Revelation imparted to All who would receive it. The Conceflion of fome Errors in Interpretation hurt not his Repu- tation in the Capacity of a Witnefs^ unlefs He made falfe Pretenfions to Infallibility; but no fuch can be proved upon Him, and therefore his Reputation ftands clear in that Article, and no Exception lies againft Him for the Want of a Gift, which was nei- ther claimed by Himfelf, nor appears to have been granted frequently, if at all, to any Difciples. Nay to have rendered Dr. ikf's Objedion [ ^75 ] Objedion againft Jujim Martyr of any Force, it Ihould have been proved, that He claim- ed a conjiant {landing Power of giving an infpired Interpretation of Scripture, v^ith which a wrong one given at any Time would have been inconfiftent ; or that He claimed fuch a Power juft at the Time when He was giving a weak and foreign Expofition ; otherwife according to Dr. M's Suppofition that " all fuch fupernatural " Gifts were imparted only at the Moment " of their Exertion, and notified by fome " fpecial Impulfe to the Agent," He might, as I obferved, have been infpired with the Senfe of one particular PalTage, on fo im- portant an Occafion as the Conviction of a Jew, and yet have been left merely to his own Reafonings upon others. Mr. T. fays farther, " that Dr. Grabe, " Dr. Cave, . and the Editor of Jiiftin, ap- *' pear not to have rofe much higher in " their Veneration for Him as an Interpre- " ter of Scripture, than Dr. M. does, and " that to the Conceffions of thefe learned " Men Mr. £). is Silent." And what Occa- fion could I have to be otherwife if I was difpofed to write pertinently to the Point in Hand ? Neither my private Opinion, nor the Courfe of Argument that I was upon, could lead me in the lead to contradid: thofe [ '76 ] thoie learned Men, or to juftify every In- terpretation which Jiijiin has given of the Holy Scripture, My proper and only Bufi- nefs was to clear Him from the Charge of wilful Prevarication^ which might hurt his Teftimony in other Matters ; and this I did by {hewing that He never pretended to the extraordinary Gift of expounding the Scrip- tures by Infpirationy as Dr. M. reprefents Him to have done. His Mijiakes therefore, how many foever they may be fuppofed to be, cannot prove any Faljijication^ but He may flill remain a good Witnefs, tho' not an infallible Interpreter of Scripture. But Mr. Tl adds, that " the Conceffions of thefe " learned Men muft be looked upon as " fubftantial Teftimonies againft his being " under even the ordinary Influence of the " Holy Ghofl in expounding the Scrip- " tures." Have They then allowed, that He has fallen into any fundamental Errors, de- ftru(5live of the Chriilian Faith or Pradtice, which muft fuppofe Him to be deftitute of the ordinary Influence of the Holy Ghofl: ? J am not fenfible that They have made any fuch Conceflions, or that They had any Reafon to do fo ^ yet Nothing lefs than fuch Tenets, as are inconfifl;ent with the Ne- ceflfity of an Holy Life^ or with the ejfential Articles of the Creed, can reafonably be thought [ ^17 ] tliought to prove a Man thus deferted, or deprived of the common Affiftance of the BlefTed Spirit. The ordinary Influence of the Holy Ghofl will no more preferve Any One from all Millakes in expounding the Scripture, than in his Reafonings on other Matters; but whilfl: Fundamentals are pre- ferved, I hope We are All under the ordina- ry Influence of that BlefTed Spirit, tho' there are material Controverfies between Us, and confequently very confiderable Miflakes on One Side or the Other. If Any, if Many Errors w^ould prove the Confequence here urged by Mr. T. againfl Jujiin, the Cenfure would fall hard againfl all the Commen- tators. Mr. 71 IS fo far capable of miftaking the Point in Queflion, as hert to lay a Foun- dation for an imaginary Triumph. He thinks this ConcefTion, that the Martyr was defhitute of fupernatural Aid in under- ftanding and explaining the Scriptures, a Difproof of Irenceuss, Teftimony, that " All, " who were truly Difciples of Jefus, wrought " Miracles in his Name." " Behold here," fays he, " an Exception to the Univerfality of " Irenceuss AfTertion^ and an Exception, " not of a Boy^ a Woman^ or obfcure Lay- " many but of a Scholar, an eminent Writer ** and Champion j and at lafl a Martyr for N " the [ '78 1 : '^ the Chriftian Caufe. And this is in the " particular Cafe of underftanding the Scrip- " tures, or if Mr. D. likes it better, the « MyfteriesofGod." (P. 52.) Mr. D. He might have known, thinks thefe Cafes very diftindt from each other, and both very dif- ferent from that of working Miracles. But he goes on, *' Is it, I afk, fuppofeable, that " God Almighty fhould infufe a Know- " ledge of the Scriptures, or of any Myfbery ** whatfoever, into the very meaneft of the " People, and withhold it from a Perfon " of fuch an exalted Character in the " Church as Jujiin Martyr was ?" I would afk in Return, againft Whom this Gentle- man is arguing? If againft any One, I think it is againft Dr. M^ who has declared, in one Part at leaft, that extraordinary Illu- minations, Vifions, or Divine Impreffions^ do not in any Manner afFedt or relate to the Queftion now before Us. But where did Mr. T. find any fuch Reprefentation as He feems in this Place to be oppofing ? I never heard of any One, who thought that Jzijiifi was infpired in his Expofitions ©f Scriptures, or that tho' He was not, yet the common Pcopk were generally or often ib favoured. If Mr. Tl thinks that " this Cir- " cumftance (namely that Jujiifi Martyr ^* was not fo infpired) might induce a Map. [ 179 i f^Fh t<^ believe that no fuch extraordinary Gift .JV was at that Time beftowed upon any 3jf Body }" yet as it does not appear to have been claimed by Any Body, No ill Confequence can follow^ no Prejudice can arife againft the Teftimony of the Fathers in the Points which They did claim, and which cannot be difproved. I had obferved in the Free A?jfwer, that in all the PafTages cited by Dr. M. I found no fuch Claim as that of an extraordinary Power of expounding the Holy Scriptures i — that the Knowledge of Myfleries might fupernaturally be infufed without it; — that fuch Gifts feem to have been occafional only, and to have ceafed very early in the Church, the Neceffity of them ceafing after the very firfl: Exigency. ^t. Paul, • We know, being from Jerufalem at the Time of his Converfion, had the Knowledge of the Chriftian Dodtrines fuper- naturally infufed into Him by Revelation, and Others in the like Situation might be favoured with the like Bleffing, whilft Thofe, who had Opportunities of full Inftrudtion by Human Means y might well be left to them for Information. Such a Gift could be expedled no longer than fuch particu* lar Ufes could be ferved by it, and this in the fame Age might be more necejfary or itfeful at leaft to One Perfon than Another ; N 2 and [ i8o ] and it would be no Kind of Objediosi, that ,one Perfon could not be poffelTed of it, becaufe Another, of equal Eminence in other Refpedls, was not favoured with it. Thefe Gifts were given in great Variety, fo as might beJft Anfwer the Neceffities of the Difciples fo diilinguilhed, or the Ufes of the Church in general. 'Jujiin Martyr therefore might have this Talent and not Others 5 or Others, and not this, without any Appearance of Inconlillency with the Dif- penfation of Miracles as fet forth in the New Teftament. If indeed an irifpired Knowledge of the Senfe of the Scriptures had been tlie common Privilege of the Meaneil Difciples, it would not have been credible, that Jiijiin Martyr fhould have been deilitute of it ; but as no fuch Thing is pretended, Mr. 'T. in this Place is mere- ly combating with his own Mifhake. What the Propbetical Gifts were, which Jujlin fays were continued among them to his Time, it may not be eafy to fay certainly; but He does not fay, or intimate, that they were infpired Interpretations of the Old Teftament. . Moft probably they were: par- ticular Revelations on fudden Exigencies, or Diredions what Meafures or Perfons fliould be employed on th€ Occafion, fuch 2^ thofe recorded A5ls xi. 2-8, and xiii. a. Wl^atever [ i8i ] Whatever They were, They might be be- ftowed upon One upon a preffing Exigency, and not upon Another, tho' a Bifliop or Martyr, where no fuch Exigency appeared to require it. But the proper Queftion is, What is it to the prefent Purpofe, whether He had any of the Prophetical Gifts or not ? Might He not w^ant thofe, and yet be endued with the Power of worki?ig Miracles? St. Paul's Interrogation before alluded to, implies that thefe Gifts were commonly given to diftind: Perfons, and were lefs to be expe(5led in the fame Charader ? Are all Apojiles? fays He, Are All Prophets? Are All Teachers? Are All Workers of Miracles? i Cor. xii. 29. Dr. M. underflood his Argument better than to put his Objedion in this Manner. He charged Jujlin diredly with Falfification, in pretending to a Gift which He had not ; and this Charge, if fupported, would have hurt his Moral Charader, for We could not have depended on his Veracity in any In- ftance, who was deteded to falfify in One. But- the Defender has varied the Objedion, tias given up the Point, as not material, whether He made any fuch Pretenfions or not ; and has ftated the Cafe thus, that He confeifedly had not one particular Gift, and therefore could not have any other. He was N 3 not [ i82 ] not injpired in his Interpretation of the Scnp-» tureSj and therefore could not work a Mira- cle. This Reprefentation of his Objedtion, which is a juft one, will, I prefume, make ^ny other Anfwer needlefs. ■*'' Pr, M. proceeded farther, and charged yujiin with two fuch grofs Miilakes in piaiH md obvious FaBs^ as He called them, that no One, as He inferred, could be a competent Judge of other Matters, who was capable of being deceived in thefe. I took thefe into Conlideration, and fliewed what Reafon there was to think that He was not miftaken in thefe Cafes ; or that his Minakes^ if they were fuch, could no Way hurt b's Characfter, as a Wit?2efs of FaBs. Thefe Poin sMr. T. thought fit to pafs over in Silence, Jiri has neither gi- ven up, nor defended the Dr s Charge on this Head; fo that what I had offered on that Subjed, ftands as yet in its full Force. I had obferved upon the Whole, that fhould We admit all the falfe Opinions and weak Reafonings, which Dr. M. has charged upon this Father, yet they would not affeft hij Credit as a Witnefs of Matter ofFaB. '' Pray" fays Mr. T. " what Fad: "is He a Witnefs to ? Why He is a Wit- nefs to this Fadt, that Miraculous Powers w^ere continued and frequently exercifed a- niongft Chriflians in his Days, " But for my " Part, [ "83 ] "-Part, fays Mr. T. I fee nonej not a ** fingie Inftance produced." This again is a very diflind: Point, and a very plain Eva- fion. For what "Jujlin allerts of many He plainly afTerts of more than a ftngle Injiance, If I teftify, that I faw a Phylician cure an hundred Perfons in any peculiar Method, Am not I as much a Witnefe of a Matter of Fa(5l, as if I teftified the fame vi^ith Relped: to a lingle Inftance ? And would not my Qualifi- cations, as a Witnefsy of Courfe be canvaifed ? Or would Any One think it fufficient to fay, that He faw no Fad: that I was Witnefs to; not a lingle Inftance produced? If the Enquiry was made on fuch an Occalion, why I fpecified the whole Number rather than named any one particular Perfon, poffibly I might anfwer, that I thought this Method the mofl; fatisfadtory ; that fuch repeated In- ilances would be more convincing, and would cut off thofe Evafions, which might more plaufibly be offered in a Jingle Cafe, And perhaps the Primitive Writers might •have afligned the fame Reafon, could They have forefeen this Objed;ion to their Tefli- mony. But Mr. T. adds fomewhat, which feems niore to his Purpofe, '^ We do not find Juf- " tin Martyr affirming the Truth of any ^* One Miracle as adually having been the N 4 !' Objed [ i84 ] " Objed: of his own Senfes." If He means that He has not ufed thefe veiy Words, pOiTibly it may be true ; but if He means, that He does not fpeak of them as Matters of frequent Occurrence to the Senfes of Himfelf\ as well as of Others^ the contrary may eafily be proved. The very Teftimonies produced from Him by Dr. M. are fufficient to prove it ; and to thefe Some Others may be added. The Dr. obferves, that " He " frequently appeals to what Every One *' might fee with his own Eyes in every Part " of the World :" which does not look like the Sentence of a Man, who had not feen thefe Things with his own Eyes Himfelf ; and He particularly tells the Roman Senate, that thefe Cures not only had been done, but were even then done thro' the Name of the crucified Jefus. But fays, Mr. T, " Neither *' in his Apology, or his Difpute with the " JeWy is there one Event indifputably fu- ^' pernatural related or referred to :" That is again, not One Event, becaufe Many fuch are referred to, and made Matter of Tri- umph over the ^ews^ from whom thefe fu- pernatural Gifts confelfedly were departed. But Why, Mr. 7'. means to fay, was not One Inftance particularly recorded on this Occafion with all its Circumftances ? It is hard to write or to argue in fuch a Manner as [ i85 ] as to preclude all Objedions, but it feems very probable that had thefe Apologlfts fol- lowed the Mediod now prefcribed to them, and fpecified a particular Cafe, the Jews or Heathens in thofe Days would have drawn Matter of Sufpicion from that very Method, and have converted it into an Objedion. Why, might They, and probably would They have argued, is' a particular Inftance fingled out, in which there may be Circumftances which We are ignorant of, and cannot account for ? If This fuppofed Miracle was wrought in Vindication of their Religion, why are not fuch Miracles more commonly wrought, which might prevent this Objed:ion ? Why are not Appeals made to the frequent Exer- cife of this Power, and Why are We not called on to fee and examine them at any Time upon an important Occafion ? This, 'tis likely would have been the Courfe of their Objedion, if thefe Primitive Writers had only given particular hijlances j and would not This have been more plaufible than the pre- fent Exception of the Waitt of fingle In- flances ? Thofe Writers thoiight {o^ and I fee no Reafon to think that They did not judge right : or that this Method of chal- lenging aH Adverfaries to enquire, and ap- pealing to what All might fee v/ith their pwn Eyes in all Parts, of the "World, was not [ i86 ] not the moft convincing and fatisfactory that could be offered. Mr. T. fays, He hac done with Jufiin Mar- tyr^ and will proceed to Irenceus -, and here He finds himfelf " obliged to repeat the " Queftion, What are the Miraculous Fad:s " which He has attefled ? Does He fay, that " He ever performed One Himfelf? No fuch " Matter. — Does He fay, He had ever feen " a Miracle performed by Another? Not fo " much as this neither is affirmed." The Anfwer muft be repeated, that He has not faid this in theie V/ords, but He has faid what implies this and much more, and in a Manner much more fatisfad:ory and unex- ceptionable. One fhould be tempted to think, that Mr. T, not only had not read Iren^uSj but not even the Author whom he has attempted to defend. For the Extracft, which He has made from this Father, would unanfwerably have obviated all that is here fuggelled. All that '• are truly Difciples of " Jefus," fays Irem^eiis^ " receiving Grace *' from Him, wrought Miracles in his " Name ;" but that this general AfTertion might not be miflaken, as if thefe Gifts were exerted on trivial Occafions, or as if they WTre all given to the fame Perfon, fo that He, who had not One, might be prefumed to be deftitute of the Refl, He adds exprefllyi " for [ 18/ ] « for the Good of Mankind, according to " the Gift which Each Man had received} " Some call out Devils j — Others had Know- •^ ledge of future Events, Vifions, and Pro- *5C!phetical Sayings : Others healed the Sick " by Impofition of Hands: That even the •^'-.'Dead had been raifed up, and hved after- «^^"wards many Years among them, that it <^ 'was Impoflible to reckon up all the " mighty Works which the Church per- " formed every Day to the Benefit of Na- ** tions; neither deceiving, nor making a " Gain of Any, but freely beftov/ing what ^* it had freely received. And as to the par- " ticular Miracle of raifing the Dead, He " declares it to have been frequently per- •** formed on necellary Occaiions ; when by ^ great Failing, and the joint Supplication of ^^^ the Church of that Place, the Spirit of " the Dead Perfon returned into Him, and " the Man was given back to the Prayers of ^' the Saints. — And again. We hear Many, ^' fays He, in the Church indued with pro- " phetic Gifts, fpeaking with all Kind of " Tongues ; laying open the Secrets of Men "'^ for the Publick Good, and expounding the " Myfleries of God." Could Any Tefti- mony be more exprefs, that thefe Gifts had been the Objed: of his own Senfes ? He avoids the Mention of any particular Infiaiice^ becaufe [ 1^8 ] becaufe He lays the Strefs of his Argument: on the Frequency of them, on the Number, of the Perfons who were thus endowed, on the many and publick Occafions which They took to exert thefe Gifts, whenever They could ferve the Good of Mankind. He fpeaks in fuch a Manner, as to mclude Himfelf amoneft the Many^ but does not claim it as his pe- culiar Privilege, becaufe it was not fo, and becaufe He might well efteem it more con- vincing to Others, to inlift on the diffufive Communication of thefe Gifts to fo many of the ProfelTors of Chriilianity, on proper and important Occafions. Had he faid, " I " can perform fuch a Miracle, or I have " feen fuch an One performed," Would not fuch a Teftimony have been lefs fatisfad:o- ry thefiy and been more eafily ridiculed and evaded now, than fuch an explicit and pub- lick Appeal to the numerous Inflances, in which their Adverfaries mieht receive Satis- o faftion ? If They were favoured with fuch frequent Exercifes of thefe Gifts, Why fliould They forego the Advantage to their Argu- ment, which would arife from thus urging it ? Or why £hould it now be an Objection to their Teftimony, that They did not pur- fue a Method, which muft have been lefs proper, on Suppoiition of the Truth of what They have aiferted ? If thefe Confiderations have [ i89 1 have been repeated, die Repetition of the fame Objedion feemed to make it neceflary. It does not follow, that the Apologifts did not claim thefe Gifts Themfehes^ becaufe They did riot appropriate and confine this Claim to Themfelves. If They fpoke in fuch general Terms, as mufl be fuppofed to include Them- felves as well as Others ; and if the R^eafon of the Thing confirmed this Suppofition, (it not being credible, as thefe Gentlemen are ready to allow, that thefe Gifts fhould be difpenfed to the meaner People, and with- held from their Governors and Teachers) then no Inference can be drawn to their Difadvantage from this Method of Appeal 5 but a plain Benefit arifes from it, in the publick Offer of fuch frequent Means of Convicftion to all Oppofers, Thofe Primi- tive Writers were Wife enough to make the beil of theii* Argument, and if the Later Ones are not Wife enough to fee the Force oi^itj;. That ihall, I hope, be efteemed no Prejudice to die Prudence or Fidelity of the Teftimony of the Former. "' I had obferved that '' fcarce Any Thing "^ Hiore is laid to the Charge of Ire7iccus^ than "^.a'polledion of falfe Opinions, which, if *' All admitted, are Nothing to the Purpofe "^.,as to the Point in Queftion concerning his ". Atteflation of miraculous Fads." Mr. T. thinks tliinks This would be a good deal to the Pur- pofe, but alTigns no Reafon for it, nor makes any Attempt to prove that Infallibility is ne- celTary to the Character of a competent TVit- nefs of FaBs, But " tho' This, He fays, " would in Truth be a good Deal, yet it is " not quite all. Something more is laid to " his Charge, and the Words fcarce , imply *' Mr. D. was fenfible of it," Dr. M had not carried his Charge fo high again ft Irenceus as He had done againft fufiin. He had not brought any formal Accufation againft this Father of making any Pretenlions to a Gift which he had not, but only collects all the Mifdkes in Opinion which He could find in his Writings (and fome of them are inifrepre- fented) and accufes Him of fupporting them by Tradition : Which, if proved, I may ven- ture to fay again, will fcarce amount to more than an Error in Judgment. But Mr. T. at- tempts to make it out. " This," fays He, "is not only delivering down falfe Docftrines, " but a falfe Facft." How fo ? Does it ap- pear, that there was no fuch Tradition ? If there was, might not Iren^ns report it, and believe the Thing too which had been re- ported to Him, without being guilty of any Falfification in Facft? But fays Mr. Tl "Which " Fa6l He muft either have invented Himfelf, " or it muft have been impofed upon Flim "by [ 191 ] ^'%y Some Body elfe." ' I may here in my Turn afk, What Fad ? The Whole Charge relates to traditionary Opinions, and tho' I eafily fee there muft have been a Miftake fomewhere, yet I cannot fee any Reafon to conclude that any falfe Fatl was invented any where. Let Us inftance in the Opinion of the Age of our Saviour, or of the Millentumy or any other Point that is charged upon Irenaus. Suppofe Papias, or any other very early Chriilian, reading the Gofpel or the Re- 'Delation of St. Johriy and miftaking the Senfe of what that Evangelifl faid upon thofe Ar- ticles, fliould inftru(il: his Difciples that St. yohn taught fo and fo, might not They eafily ima- gine, that the Interpretation itfelf was that Apoftle's, and deliver it as fuch to their Suc- ceffors, who of Courfe would continue the Account to After-Times ? And might not Irenceus then make a very true Report, in faying that there was fuch a Tradition, tho* tlie Tradition itfelf was originally founded upon a Mijiake '^ This is the very Account that Eufebius, as cited by Dr. M. gives Us of it'3 and according to this Account there was no wilful Faljification in Any Perfon, but an Early Miftake was made and prevailed, till the Publication of it in Writing gave Occalion to look into the Foundation of it. This may well be thought a good Argument againll re- lying [ 192 ] lying too mucli on Oral Traditicfj^ but by n^ Means invalidates the Credit of One, who made a true Report of fuch a Tradition. A Man may be a moft unexceptionable Witneis of thofe Matters of Fadt, which come within his own Knowlege, tho' he might be impofed upon by an Account which had long conti- nued, and which was ov/ing to an Error at firil. The Poffibility, the great Probability that the Errors fpoken of did thus arife from the Miflake of fome very ancient Inflrudlor, is a fufficlent Anfwer to what Dr. M. urges^ that " if We abfolve Irencciis from the For- " g^T' ^^ niufl fall on Some Body elfe> more " ancient ftill, and of Authority enough to " impofe it upon Him" [Free Inquiry^ P. 59.) There is no Neceffity, no Reafon to fuppofe a Forgery any where. A Wrong Method of Reafoning, in a Perfon of Authority, might lay the Foundation of a wrong Dodtrine, and whilfl this paiTed in Oral Tradition only, it might gain Strength by Continuance, and All this might happen, in the Manner before re- prefented, Vvdthout any defigiied Fraud in Any One. To this Suppofition Fa<^l: correfponds, and it is remarkable, as I before obferved, that That, which was the moil palpable Mi- flake, funk upon the Mention of it by Ireftaus, becaufe fuch publick Mention of it moft pro- bably [ 193 ] bably gave Occalion to a publick Inquiry irito it. Mr. T. goes on to repeat Dr. M's Quota- tions from PhoiiuSj and Dr. Whitby, and Dr. Cave, concerning the falfe and fpurious Rea- fonings of Irenceus, and his being betrayed into Errors by falfe Reports : And then adds, " Now what does Mr. D. urge to juftify ^' Irenaus againft all thefe Accufations ? Why « not a Word." P. ^j. This, to fpeak the fofteft, is a great Miftake. I had obviated all that was urged on that Head, by obferving, tiiat falfe Opinions, or Miftakes in Reafoning are Nothing to the Purpofe in a Queftion concerning the Atteftation of miraculous Fafts. I enlarged on that Point ; and added farther both of Him and Jujiin Martyr, that the' the weakeft Parts of their Writings had been coUeded, on Purpofe to expofe them, yet that a thorough Perufal of them would yield many Inftances of folid Reafonings and cor- XQ&. Compofitions, &c. fuch as would give' Us no ill Opinion of their Judgment, much lefs of their Veracity. This, I humbly ap- prehend, was not only faying a Word, but a Word to the Purpofe, againft fuch general Charges as thofe oi falfe Reitfhnings, when the Point in Difpute v^as his Credit as a Witnefs of Fadls. But in Reality, the Inftances which Dr. M. has produced to hurt his Credit, are O not [ ^94 ] not properly fo much as thofe of falfe Rea'^ fining. They are no more than typical and Allegorical Kt^TdQ.nt2itions, which were ufed in Compliance with the Cuftom of thofe Times, and had their Ufe amongft Thofe who had been familiarized to thofe Sort of Arguments. They appeared not to them in the fame weak and feeble Light, as They do to Us who are accuftomed to a better Way of Reafoningj but I cannot think it any very material Objection to the Primitive Writers, that They conformed to the Times They lived in, and wrote in fuch a Manner as might be more ferviceable to their Contemfo* raries than to After-Ages. Mr. T. adds, " He lingles out the parti- " cular Miftake imputed to Irenaus con- " cerning the Old Age of our Saviour, which " with all his Skill is impofTible to be de- " fended, and drops all the Reft." All the Reft were obviated by the general Re- mark before-mentioned, but it feemed pro- per to iingle out this Inftance, becaufe it was the only one wherein the Charge amounted to Forgery. Dr. M. laid great Strefs on it ; He introduced it three Times, and on the laft obferved, that " Whoever forged the Reft of " the fpurious Traditions above recited, yet " that which relates to the Old Age of Jefus, [\ the moft folemnly attefted of them all, and ^* peculiar [ ^95 ] " peculiar to Irenceus^ may fairly be prefumed " to be his own Forgery, becaufe it was ne- *■' Ver embraced by Any Body elfe" {^Free Inquiry^ P. 59.) This gave it a Title to my particular Regard, and I took the whole Paf- fage into Conlideration. But Mr. T. fays^ " it is impoffible to be defended." Short and Peremptory, but no way fatisfa6lory, unlefs Mr. y's Opiniofi is to pafs for Argument. This I obferve is the Method which He has ufed throughout his whole Defe?ice. When He comes to any material PalTage, which was the Foundation of the Difpute between Us, He pronounces my Anfwer to be Nothing to the Purpofe, and then He thinks the Bufinefs is done. But Dr. M\ Defender had Occafion here, as well as elfewhere, for fomewhat more than a magijierial AJfertion. I had charged the Dr. with mifreprefenting trenaus in this Paflage, with dropping fome of his Words on Purpofe to mifreprefent Him, v/ith adding others to make his Argument appear ridiculous -, and I Ihewed from a View of the whole PalTage, how the Miftake might eafily arife without any wilful Forgery j and that as to the Plea of unanimous Tradition, That appeared, from the very Words ufed, to be meant rather of the ge?ieral Heads of the Dif- courfe, in which it was true^ than of this particular Circu77ijiance^ in v/hlch it muft have O 2 beea [ 196 1 been erroneous.— -To all this the Reply is, that it is Mr. T's Opinion, that ** it is impoffible « to be defended." But He adds, " Whe- " ther therefore We conlider Him as Impojing, *' or being impofed upon, the Refult will be " juft the fame. We can allow as little Cre- ** dit to his Teftimony upon one Suppofition " as the other." (P. 58.) This is extraordi- nary indeed. According to this Account, A Man convid:ed of wilful Falfioodi and one who innocently continues a Tradition origi- nally founded on a Mijlake, are on a Level with Refped to the Credit of their Tejftimony. Whereas I fhould imagine, that He who had wilfully falfified in one Inftance, was little to be depended upon in any other 5 but that He, who faithfully made the Report which was made to Him, tho' the Thing reported was ill-grounded, might yet be a very competent Witnefs, when He came to fpeak of Fadts within his own Knowlege. This Diftinftion will likewife afford that clear and diftindt Anfwer, which Mr. T, fays it would have been very much to my Purpofe to have given to the feveral Queftions cited by Dr. M. and repeated by Himfelf, from Mr. Chillingworth, " If Papias could either by " his own Error, or a Defire to deceive, cozen " the Fathers of the pureft Age, why not " alfo in other Things ? Why not in Twenty "as [ 197 ] ** as well as One ? And why might not •' Twenty Others do it as well as He ?" . I am far from thinking this One of the moft jhining Paffages in the excellent Author from whom it is cited, for all thefe PoJJibilities are of no Force againft real Evidence and pojitive Teftimony. If We take the moft favourable Suppolltion, as I think We ought, that the Miftake faid to be derived from Papias, was owing merely to his own Rrror^ , and not to a Dejire to deceive , then it is much lefs probable, that He fhould miftake in twenty Inftances than in One. Or if He was that Weak Man that He is reprefented to be, it is ftill much lefs probable, that 'Twenty Wifer Men Ihould miftake in like Manner. There is No End of putting fuch Suppoiitions as thefe, and when they are thus carried on, they ap- parently tend to deftroy all Credit in prefent Teftimony, and all Faith in paft Hiftory. All Mankind may be Knaves or Fools^ but the Queftion is not, what They may he^ but what They are j and We muft judge and a(5t upoft the beft Evidence that We can colle(ft of Mens Chara(n:ers j and a bare PoJJibility of the Contrary will not defeat or weaken the Proofs which We have of the Integrity and Under-^ ftanding of Many of our Fellow-Creatures. However this Argument may look in Contro- vjerfy, a Man would be thought Mad in Com-^ O 3 mon [ 198 ] mon Life, who fliould refufe to truft a Per- fon^ of experienced Honefly and Prudence, merely becaufe it was pojible that He might miftake or deceive in that particular Inftance. A Thoufand fuch Queftions therefore would not invalidate the Credit of the primitive Fa-^ thers, in their Atteflation of the miraculous Gifts, which continued amongft them in their own Time : And tho' fuch Confiderations were of fome Weight in Mr. Chillingivorth'^ Argument concerning the Uncertainty of Tra- dition, where the Miftake of a Perfon in former Ages might ealily be carried on by the Verbal Report of SuccelTors, and gain Credit for Want of Inclination or Opportunity to ex-s amine into it, yet what Connedtion have they with the Cafe of Thofe, who reported Mira- cles of which They were Themfelves the Workers or WitneJJ'es, who committed thefe Reports and Claims to Writing in their own Times, challenged their Enemies to look into them, flaked their Lives on their Veracity, and in this Situation continued to propagate their Religion, and bring over many Converts to it, of the Great and the Wife, as well as of the Meaner and more Unlearned. The Una- nimity of the Claimants in this Article, where- ever or however iituated, the uniform and concurrent Teftimony of all the earlieft Pri- jsnitive Writers in all Parts of the World, \vith I 199 1 with Refped: to the Continuanice of miracu* Jous Powers among them, is a Circumflance of great Weight 5 for fure there were fome Wife and Good Men amongft them, who could judge of fuch a Point, and w^ho would not falfify : Or can it be fuppofed that They would all hazard their Lives and their Salvation, by iniifting on a Claim, in which They knew yhey were prevaricating with God and Man ? Under the Fourth Head of the Free Inqiii- ry^ Dr. M. propofed to *' take a particular " Review of all the feveral Gifts or Miracu- " lous Powers which were actually claimed " and pretended to have been polTeiTed by " the Primitive Church." And the Firft that he inllanced in was that of raifing the Dead, which Irenceus fays was frequently performed on necejfary Occafions. I obferved that there was great Strefs to be laid on that Claufe, as obviating Dr. ilf' s Reprefenta- tion, as if it were performed in every Pariih or Place, where there was a Chrillian Church, on which He founds his Wonder, that no Inflance of it fliould be recorded* *^ One fingle Inftance however," fays Mr, y. " He has mentioned as flightly intimated " byr EufebiuSy from Papias^ and which He " teljs Us, Eufebius feems to rank among *' the other fabulops Stories delivered by " that weak Man. To this Circumflance O 4 '^ Mr, [ 200 ] « Mr. D. faye Nothing, tho* if a Church " Hiftorian of Reputation, who lived fo " near the Time as Eufebius did, rejeeady with this particular Injun(5tiQn, that as They had freely received^ fo They Jhould freely . give. It cannot be doubted, but that, in Obedience both to their Mafter's Precept, and in Good-will to their Fellow-Creatures, They exerted this Talent, communicated this BlefTing, and reftored Life to the Dead ; and yet there is not a fingle Inftance of it recorded. Thefe were the firft Inflances of this Kind that had happened amongft them, even before any that their Blefled Mafter had wrought, according to the Hiftory of the Gofpel, [ 205 ] Gofpel, and of Courfe occalioned the greateft Surprize and Aftonifhment, and yet the Names of the Perfom that received this high Benefit from them, and the Circum- ftances of the Cafes, are all pafled over in Silence as well by the Infpired Writers as by All Others. As This Power was exprefHy given to the Apoftles, whilft our Saviour was on Earth, it may reafonably be prefumed, that it was continued to them after his Afcen- Hon, and the Defcent of the Holy Ghoft upon them, and yet We find but one Inftance of any Perfon reftor'd to Life by any One of the Twelve throughout the New Teftament. I mean that of i'abitha, by St. Peter, and oi Eutychus only by St. Paul: Still have we Reafon to conclude that They All had the fame Gift, and exerted it on necefifary Oc- cafions, as Irenceus exprefifes it, tho' but one or two particular Cafes are tranfmitted to Us by the Apofiolical Writers, any more than by the Ecclejiajiical Ones ; and whatever Confi- derations may account for the OmifTion of the Former, may ferve as well for the Lat- ter. The Cafe oiAiitolycus comes next under Review, where Mr. T. inftead of defending Dr. M's Reprefentation, or invalidating mine, is pleafed again to give Us his Word, that All that I have faid on this Point only " fhews, f^ how weakly Any Man can argue, when «' He E 206 ] " He engages to defend the wrong Side of " a Queftion." But this is much eafier faid than proved. It became Dr. M'i Defen- der to fliew the Weak-nefs of my Arguing oh this Point, and to prove that I had the 'wrong Side of the Queftion. I pointed! to' feveral Miftakes in Dr. ikf' s Account of this' Matter. I fliewed that Aiitolycu^ made no fuch Offer of turning Chriftian on feeing i. Perfon raifed, as fhould induce Him td work fuch a Miracle j as is very plain from 1:heophiluss, Anfwer. I fliewed likewife, both from the Reafon of the Thing, and from another Part of Theophilus^ Anfwer, that Ail" tolyaiss Demand was not to fee One that had formerly been raifed, but to fee One raifed in his own Prefence-, and therefore there might be feveral Such then living, and ready to have been produced, for any Thing that appears to tlie contrary from this Paf- fage. This was the very Point on which Dr. M. introduced the Mention of this Cafe, and in which I acknowledged the Objection to be plaufible. Irenceus had faid, that " even " the Dead had been raifed, and lived af- ^' ter wards many Years among them." Dr. M. thought to difprove this by obferving, that " in the very fame Age, when Autoly- " cus^ an eminent Heathen, challenged ** I'heophihis, Bifhop of Antioch, to fhew Him « but [ 207 ] " but One Perfon, who had been raifed " from the Dead, He was not able to give " Him that Satisfadion." [Free Inquiry , P. 73.) In this Light this PalTage was pertinent to Dr. ilf s Purpofe, becaufe it inight well feem unlikely, that All the Perfons that Irenceus fpoke of, were al- ready Dead the fecond Time, and not an Inftance to be produced for Autolycuss Sa- tisfad:ion. It was therefore to the Purpofe to fhew, that this was not the Senfe of Autoly^ cuss Demand, that He fpoke of fome pre- fenty and not of 2,wf former Inftance 5 and that therefore Any or All of Thofe, of whom Ir'e- naus fpake, might yet be Living, there being no Occafion or Thought of producing or mentioning them in this Controverfy between Autolycus and Theophilus. Thus the Force pf Dr. M's Objed:ion was taken off, and the forementioned Teftimony of Irenceus juftified from any feeming Contradiction to it in any other Part of Hiftory : But the 'Defe7ider did not fee, or did not attend to it in this Light, but runs off to another Point, and is pleafed to call this moft excellent Anfwer of I'heophi- hs to his Friend's Demand, " Nothing but " Shuffle and Evalion, plainly demonflrating, "that He was not able to give Him the " Satisfadion He required, either by raifing " a Perfon Himfeif, by letting. Him fee " One [ 2o8 ] •* One railed by any other, or by fliewing " Him one now alive, whom He could " make fufficient Proof to have been once " Dead." Thefe Cafes are very different. He might be able to fhew Him One who had formerly been raifed from the Dead, and whom He could prove to have been fo raifed ; but Autolycus would have liftened to no Proof of that Kind, for He infifted on feeing One raifed himfelf ; and whether T^heophilus could, or could not do this, has no Relation to the Teftimony of Irencem^ that Others had been raifed, which Dr. M. endeavoured to im- peach. I'heophihis might pofTibly have this Gift, and yet not think this 2i proper Occafion to exert it, and the Reafonings, which He Ufes in his Anfwer, very much favour this Suppofition. Or fuppofe He had it not, Irenaus might have it ; or fuppofe Neither of them had. Others might have been favoured with it; or at leafl: Others might have met with more necejary Occafions and Calls to exert it. It is remarkable, that Irenceus re- prefents this particular Gift not fo properly as the Endowment of any Particular Ferfon, as the Endowment of the Churchy exercifed and obtained by the united Prayers of the Faithful. Now tho* Theophihis might know that fuch a Gift flill continued in the Churchy yet He might reafonably judge, that the Church [ 209 ] Church might not think this Exigency fuffici- ent to occafion them to procure fuch a mira- culous Work by particular Devotion, and efpecially as He Himfelf knew enough of Autolycus beforehand, to believe that even the Working of fuch a Miracle would be infufficient for his Conviction . This does not therefore feem to be One of thofe necejfary Occa/ionSi of which Irenceus fpeaks, on which fuch a Miracle was likely to be performed. Autolycus does not appear by the Account of Him to have been a Perfon of fuch extraor- dinary Worth, as to induce the Church to apply for fuch a fupernatural Interpofition merely for his particular Satisfaction. Nei- ther is it clear, that the Convidion of Ad- verfaries was the file or chief End of this Gift of raifing the Dead. Dr. M. allows,, that the Defign of thofe extraordinary Gifts, which He admits to have been beftowed upon the Difciples at iirft, was " to enable " them, not only more eaiily to over-rule " the inveterate Prejudices both of the Jews " and Gentiles^ but alfo, to bear up againft " the difcouraging Shocks of popular Rage *' and Perfecution, which They were taught " to expedt, in this Noviciate of their Mi- « niftry." (Pref P. 28.) Now This Miracle in particular might very probably be wrought chiefly for this latter End, It is certain it P had [ 210 ] had a ftrong Tendency to anfwer that Pur- pofe, and to fupport the Spirits of Difciples under the fevereft Perfecutions. The Ene- mies of the Gofpel, as Irencem obferves, thought the Thing impojjibk in itfelf, and therefore did not trouble themfelves to look, into any particular Reports about it. This might be one Reafon, why it was lefs fre- quently offered to them, and why We hear lefs of this Miracle in particular from other Writers, who make Mention of other fuper- natural Endowments. Yet ftill it might be of great Ufe in the Church, whenever it was wrought, for the Comfort and Encou- rap-ement of Believers^ tho' not for the Sa^ tisfaBion and Convidion of Gamfay^rs, The NeceJJity of the Occafon fpoken of moil pro- bably relates to the Ufefulnefs and Importance of the Perfon to be raifed^ whofe Continuance in Life was deemed of fo much Confe- quence to the Service of their Religion, that the Church thought fit to folicit it by united and extraordinary Devotion. This is another Reafon, why, tho' all that Irenceus had faid was true, and tho* the fame Power ftill con- tinued in the Church, yet Theophilus might not be able to give Autolycm the Satisfadtion that He demanded, there being no fuch emi- nent Perfon juil at that Time deceafed at Antioch, whom the Church might think fit to [ 211 ] t^^ recall by fo miraculous an Interpofition. But fuppofe farther, that the Power of raifmg the D.ead, had refted folely in Tifiigle Perfon, and that Theophilus had claimed to be that Perfon, his not exerting this Power to pleafe Autolycus, would be no Difproof of fuch his Pretenfion. He declares that if it was done, Autolycus would flill find fome Objection to it ', and whether We impute the Exertion of fuch a Power to ftidden Impulfe^ or to a rati- onal, "Judgment of the Cafe, in neither Light could this be a proper Occafion for fuch ^ Miraculous interpofition. Our Saviour di- reded them net to caft their Pearls before Swine ^ and He Himfelf, after all his Miracles, refufed to add one , more for the Sadsfadion ojf Thofe, who declared They would believe on Him, if he would then defcend from the Crofs at their Summons. Why fuch extra- ordinary Means of Convidion were granted to Some, and not to others, is another Quef- ti6n,, but it is no Objedion againfl the pofi- iive Evidence that is offered, that fome Mi- racles were wrought, that they were not wrought whenever they were called for 3 at leaft it is no Objedion, but what would hold as flrongly againll thofe Miracles recorded in Scripture^ as againfl thofe which are re- lated inyEcdefiaJiical Hijlory, This I had ''■''"" P 2 obferved [ 212 i bbferved before, tho' Mr. T. thought fit to take no Notice of it. Under the next Gift reviewed, That of Healing the Sick, Dr. M. Himfelf introduced the Mention of Proculuss curing the Em- peror Severus of a certain Diflemper by the Ufe of Oil, as related by 'TertuUian ; upon which I obferved, that " here the Method " prefcribed by Dr. M. to his Anfwerers, " had been ufed beforehand ^ the Perfons " Healing and Healed are fpecified, and fome " fpecial Benefit of the Miracle credibly " reported.'* Of the Miracle fays Mr. T, " I afk of what Miracle? TertuUian fays " Nothing of a Miracle in the Cafe, and " why We are to lay a greater Strefs up- " on it, and call it a Miracle when He does " not, there is no Reafon yet afligned." (P. 63.) He adds, " When a Man has once: " got his Head full of Miracles, the com- " moneft Events in Nature, the Rifing of " the Sun at Six o'Clock in the Morning, " may be deemed Miraculous." T'his, as this Gentleman elfewhere exprefles Himfelf, may, if Ton pleafe, be deemed Harangue and Declamation, but I will add that it is neither Wit, nor Reafon, nor Good-Breeding, It is a contemptuous Treatment of a Perfon differ- ing in Opinion, for which No Occafion was given, and a Triumph extremely un- fuitable [ 213 ] fuitable to that fuperficial View of the Ar- gument, and feeble Attempt to fupport it, difcernible throughout this Defence. — But to the Point. Whatever was the Intent and Force of this Reflecftion, it was fuch as in- volves Dr. M. in the intended Cenfure, as well as his Opponents. For He had got his Head fo full of MiracleSy that He underftood this as a Report meant by T^ertidlian of a miraculous Cure, and introduced it as fuch, tho' it was his Defign to prove that 'Ter- tuiltan was miftaken in reprefenting it as fuch. Had he not coniidered it as a Tlea of this Sort, it had not been to his Purpofe to have cited it under this Head j whereas He cited it here on Purpofe to fhew the Rrror of this Plea. But Mr. 7". goes fartherj and does not allow, that Tertullian Himfelf offered it as an Inftauce of a miraculous Cure, and afks, " Why we fhould lay a " greater Strefs on it than the Apologifl " Himfelf did?" We muft refer therefore to the Original Account ^ to know what Strefs the Author of it did really lay upon it, and from the Manner in which it is introdu- ced, and the Nature of the Argument of which it is a Part, it will be Eafy to difcern what He intended by it. If the ConneBim of it with other miraculous Cures, urged as a Reafon why the Magiftrates fhould ceafe P 3 to [ 214 1 to perfecute the Chriftians by whom They enjoyed fuch Benefits, be any Sort of Proof, that This was meant of a jniraculous Cure likewife. This Evidence of it plainly remains to Us from the PaiTage itfelf. 'Tertullian . refers the Prefident of Africa to fome Per- fons, who could give Him fuch Information, mentions a Cafe or two which They could point out to Him, of their own Knowlege, of Demo7tiacks who had been difpofTeifed by Chriftians, goes on to add, that Many con- fiderable Perfons, (to pafs over thofe of ^ meaner Station) had been by them delivered, from Demons, and other Dijlejnpers, and then introduces the Mention of the Cure of the Emperor Severus by Proculus, by the Ufe of Oil, whom the Emperor Himfelf well knew to be a Chriftian, and favoured both his Perfon and Caufe for that Purpofe. — Hac onmia 'Tibi & de Officio fuggeri pojfimt, & ab eifdem Advocatis, qui & ipf Be?2eficia habent. Chrijiianorum, licet adclament qiice volunt. Nam t§ cujufdam NotariuSy cum a Damone pre-r cipitaretur, liberatus eji : & quorundam Pro-- finqims & Puerulus. Et quanti Ho72eJli Viri, (de Vulgaribm enim non dicimus) aut a D^- moniis aut Valetudinibus remediati funt. Ipfe etiam Severus, Pater Ardonim, Chrifiianorum memor fait. Nam & Proculum Chrijlianum, qui Tor pad on cognominahatur Euhodcea Pro- curatoretn, [ 215 ] curatoreniy qui etim per Oleum aUquando cura^ *uerat^ reqidfivit^ & vz Palatiofuo habuit tifqiie ad Mortem ejus : Now when He mentions thus together the DifpoJJeJjion of Demons^ and the Cure of other Dijiempers, as the former was known to be a fupernatural Work, He muil mofl naturally be underflood to fpeak of the fame miraculous Power in the Heal- ing of Other Difenjpers^ unlefs He has him- felf made the Diftindion, and fliewn by fome other Circumflance, that He fpoke only of the common Medicinal Arts in Prad:ice amongft them. But no fuch Cir- cumftance appears; On the contrary He fpeaks of thefe Cures in Conjund:ion with the Diipofleflion of Demons, as the pecu- liar Benefits, which the Heathens Them- felves often received from Chriftians ; and it is well-known that the Power of Healing the Sick was One of the Claims of thefe Chriftians, and is frequently mentioned in all their Writings amongft other fupernatural Gifts. And furely there would have been much lefs Propriety in tlie Apology itfelf, and the Force of the Addrefs to Scapula ^ to fay. You lliould favour Us Chriftians, be- caufe We have Thofe among Us who can difpoffefs Demoniacs^ and Others who are good Phyfcians in natural Cafes, tlian if the Mean- ing was, You enjoy the Benefit of our fu- P 4 pernatural [ 2l6 ] pernatural Gifts, not only in ejedting De- mons, but in the Relief of all other Bodily Neceffities : And then comes in the Account of the Cure of the Emperor Severus hy Pro- culusj a Chriftian. But the Mention, of the Manner^ in which this Cure was perform- ed, is a more diflinguifhing Proof that it was meant of a miraculous Inftance of Heal^i ing. What Occafion could 'TertulUan have to fpecify the Remedy by which this hap- py EfFedt was wrought, but only to fhew that it was that which was appropriated by Apoftolical Authority and Primitive Pra6tice to the fupej^natural Cure of Difeafes ? Or what Argument could it be to the Heathens to fpare the Chriftians on this Account, if This was only meant of a natural Appli- cation, fince the Secret was now difcovered, the Remedy was eafy, and capable of being applied as well by Themfelves as by Any Gdiers. But when We conlider that there is a T^ext ftill in our Bible, which prefcribes the Anointing with Oyl in the Cafe of fuper- natural Cnxes^ that Tertullian had the Bible in his Hands, and has referred to this very Pradiice, it is not credible that He would have done this, if He had been fpeaking merely of a Phyjical Application in a natu- ral Way. He would rather have avoided the Mention of this Prefcription, left He /hould [ 217 ] fhould feem to refledt on the Manner of woYking fupernafural Cures, weaken thereby the Apodle's Authority, and the Claim fo often repeated of the Gift of Healing. It is remarkable that tho' He has mentioned the Remedy, He has taken no Notice of the Kind of the Dijlemper, which was veiy pro- per, if He was fpeaking of a Miracle, this Method of Cure by Oil in that Cafe be- ing equally applicable to all Diftempers; but is utterly unaccountable, if He fpoke of the Recovery as owing merely to the ;z^- tural Effed: of the 0/7. Dr. M. however, obferves on the Occafion, that the natural Power and Efficacy of Oil itfelf is found in our Days to be fufficient to cure the mofc threatning Effeds of the Bite of a Vi^ -per, and therefore might efFed: the other Cures fpoken of without any Miracle. But even This is a late Difcovery, and it will be a more furprizing Difcovery ftill, if Dj:. M. thinks that becaufe it may expel a par- ticular Poifon, therefore may cure all other Difeafes in a natural Way. Yet St. fames prefcribed it for the Healing of Sicknefs in general, without any Mention of the Bite of a Viper ^ and it is leaft of all probable, that That Ihould be the particular Cafe of the Emperor Severii$, Dr. [ 2l8 ] Dr. M's next Argument was this, that the Heathens pretended to the fame Gift, and that therefore the Pretence of Chriftians to a miraculous Power in healing Difeafes could have little Effedt towards making Pro- felytes amongft thofe who pretended to the fame' Power. I anfwered, that " nothing " could be more proper for their Convid:Ion " than a Claim of fuperior Power in the fame" l fubmijjive Deeds, The Power of the Devils over the Bodies of Men at that Time may properly be deemed fuper- natural; [ 236 ] natural 5 and therefore a Power ftill fuperior to theirs, reflraining and removing them, and extorting from them a Confeffion of their Nature and Subjedion, might well be con- fidered as the moft conliderable Miracle it-» felf, and as fuch be rr^ofl; frequently propofed for the Convicflion of Mankind. Another Reafon forfmgling out this Miracle from the Reft might be on Purpofe to detecfl: the vain Pretenfions of the Heathens in this very Refpeft, and to force them to a Competition, which could fcarce fail of ending in the Sa- tisfa(^ion of every impartial Enquirer. Dr. Jkf. fays, that " All the Fathers, who lay fo ** great a Strefs on this particular Gift of caft- ** ing out Devils, yet allow the fame Power ** both to the ^e'v:>s and Gentiles^ as well " before as after our Saviour's Coming." (Free Inquiry^ P. 84.) In Proof of this of the Fathers, He has only cited ^ufiin Martyr and Origen as faying, that the De'uils would fubmit to the Name of the God o/* Abraham. But to the former He has not done Juftice herein. Dr. M. with good Reafon dropped this Part in his Greek Citation, that it might not be obferved with what Caution Juflin fpake on this Subject. He faid 'leas v7CorcLyv[' ceTcti — I'hey would perhaps fubmit — which Dr. M. by his Tranflation turned into a poUtive Affertion. What Origen fays indeed is more exprefs, [ 237 ] exprefs, and might be true in fome particular Inftances, and yet even this appears by thofe Teftimonies to have been related upon Re^ port. But Nothing can be more plain than that the Fathers did not allow this Power to be the Privilege of the Heathen Exorcijis ; on the contrary, They iniift that Chrijiians dif- poffeffed Thofe who had failed of Help from all other Pretenders. Tertullian In particular reprefents the Whole as Collufion, as the Art of the Licemom Themlelves to give Coun- tenance to Magic and Sorcery j not that the Exorcifts had really any Power over the De- vils, but that thofe Evil Spirits themfelves taught fecret Rites, and then withdrew upon the Exercife of them, on Purpofe to raife the Credit of thofe Impoftors, and thereby to pro- mote Super ftition and Idolatry in the World. Ladunt enim primo^ dehinc Remedia pracipiunt ad Miracuhim no'ua. Jive co7itraria, poji qua dejinunt Icedere^ & ciirajfe credujitiir. Apol. C. 22. The Intelligence of much lefs fubtle Beings might be capable of this Manage- ment, and in this Situation No Claim could be urged with fo much Propriety by the Chriflians, as This of difpoffejjing the Devils, and forcing thern to own themfelves fuch. The Preteniions to other Miracles might be- evaded or balianced by Thofe Exorcijis,, who claimed tliis Power of ejeding Dx^mon§, but [ 238 ]_ but when their Claim was invalidated at the fahie Time, and in the fame Method by which the fuperior Power and Authority of the Chriftians was teftified, This carried the ftrongeft Force of Argument poffible, and was peculiarly fitted for the Converfion of thofe Heathens. The Apologifls with one Voice reprefent this Matter in this Light* They tell their Adverfaries, that the Objed:s of their Worfhip fliould, at an Injund:ion gi- ven in the Name of JefuSj own themfelves to be Devils^ not only O'eatureSj but rmpotmt and wicked Creatures, unable to ftand before even the Servants of Chrift. Now to thofe idolatrous Worfhippers of Devils, What Ar- gument could be in any Degree fo proper as This ? What Miracle could be of half that Force, or on that Account be fo fit to be the Subjed; of a conftant Claim as This, which flruck at the very Root of their Worfliip, and fhewxd them not only the Power of the Name of Chr'iji, but the deteftable Nature, and dhjeSi St^te of thofe Beings, which as yet They had adored ? A farther Reafon, why this of difpojfejfing Devils was the conftant Challenge and Foun- dation of Triumph with the Primitive Chrif- tians, may with great Probability be taken from the Nature of the Cafe, the frequent Opportunity which was offered them of ex- ercifing [ 239 ] erciling this Taleitt, and the great Benefit which tliereby redounded to the moft dif- tr#ed Part of Mankind. Mr. T, aiks, *5jiWhy fhould it be more in their Power *f^.,to drive out a Devil at a Moment's " Warning, than to raife the Dead at a " Moment's Warning ?" (P. 69.) The Men- tion of thefe two Cafes points to a plain Difference, which 'tis mofl likely was the real Caufe. It was in all Inflances proper fo; aflifl and relieve Thofe who were thus unhappily pofTeffed, when they were called on by their Adverfaries j but it could not by any Means be proper, that All who died fhould be raifed agam, whenever Unbelievers were pleafed to demand it. This was a Gift, which could not be fuppofed to be given promifcuoufly, or to be exerted in- difcriminately j The Charader and Situation of the Perfon to be reftored, was much to be conlidered in a Miracle of that Nature : Or if in One, or a Few Inflances, the Con- verfion of Heathens only was regarded, yet it would be morally impofhble that fuch a Gift could be a freqvMU^ much lefs a ftand- Wg: OnCy becaufe it wouid have perpetuated ttorfGeneration, and would in many Re- fpeds have been inconfifbent with the other Deiigns of Providence. The Time at which Mpn are called out of Life is One of th*? o r- mod [240] moft immediate Adls of our Maker and Prefei*ver, and is attended with the moft im- portant Confequences, not to be reverfed without a particular Commiffion and Di- re(5^ion. This was certainly a Cafe, if any, which needed ^fpecial Imptdfe, and was not to be undertaken in general, at all Events, without Refped to Perfons, and Times, and other Circumftances. The fame may be faid of healing thofe Difeafes, which lead to Death, which could not in all Cafes be pro- per for the fame Reafonsj whereas whilft fuch PofTeffions were permitted, they might, without any like Inconveniences, be removed at any Time 5 and if they were then permit- ted on Purpofe to demonftrate the fupreme Power of Chrift over all the Orders of Beings, then the more frequently the affli(fled Perfons were relieved, the more frequently was that Power manifefted : And the very Nature of this Gift furniflies Us with a Reafon, why this in particular fliould be offered to Examination every Day of the Week, or every Hour of the Day. One farther Reafon may flill be aifigned why This oi difpojejjing Devils^ was the ftand- ing Challenge of the firft Chriftians, becaufe This alone feems to have been the com7non Privilege of all Chrlftians at that Time. It was not only a Gift very proper to be exerted at all Times, but it is defcribed as ca- pable [ 241 ] pable of being exerted by every the meaneft Believer. It appears like the Privilege of their Baptifm, for the Name of Chrift pronounced by Any One, that was fcederally related to Him, was; fufficient to make the Devils quit their Station, and own the Authority of that powerful Name. Thus the Fathers reprefent it, and particularly take Notice, that any com- mon Chriflian was able to perform this, and would undertake it at the Hazard of his Life. It was of this Office efpecially that Of-igen ob- ferved, .that it was perforfned ge?icrally hy Pri- "vafe PerfonSj not intending certainly to exclude Others from the fame Power, but becaufe a Gift, common to All, was left to be exercifed by the Meaneil Believer, as in them, unaffift- ed by any outward Advantage, the Grace of God would fliine moil confpicuoufly -, and Or/^^« Himfelf, in the Pailage referred to, goes on exprelHy to affign this Reafon for it. This Account of this being the only, wii'uerfal -Gift, and therefore the only one univerfally claimed, is remarkably confirmed by what St. Paul has faid on the .SubjetSl of extraor- dinary Endowments in the I2th- Ch. of his %ft Ep. to the Cor. He- there fpeaivs of the Variety with which they were difpenfed to diiferent Perfons, Some to One, and Some to Another. He recounts every particular Gift (except this one of difpoiTeffing Devils) and R fays [ 242 ] fays that they were given feparately t6 Some,. but not to AIL Now why was this one par- ticular Gift omitted, but becaufe it was not true of this, as it was of all the reft, that ir was confined to particu-lar Perfons ? We have feen already, that it was a Gift of too much Importance to be paiTed over in Silence, and that there can be no Reafon to fuppofe that it ceafed fo early ; and therefore no Account can be given, why the Apoftle, who was fo mi- nute in enumerating every other particular Gift, fhould take no Notice at all of this j but only that this was not appropriated^ like the others^ to any diftinguiihed Saints in Exclufwn of their Brethren, but was the common Glory of every Profeflbr of Chriftianity. By one Spi- rit, as the Apoftle fays, in the fame Chapter,. They were All baptized into One Body, and were All made to drink into one Spirit^ v. 13. and this Spirity which was the Gift of the Church, and of every Member of it, was fufficient to put to Flight the Evil Spirits, and to extort from them the Acknowledgement of their Na.- tare and Condition. If then a Gift, which more immediately tended to the Honour of their Redeemer's Name, and on which particular Strefs is laid in Scripture, both by our Saviour and his Firjl Difciples j if a Gift, which in the Na- ture of it beft confounded the vain Preteniions ©f [ 243 ] df the Heathens, and overthrew the Founda- tion of their Worihip , if a Gift, which in the Benefit of it to Mankind, and its Service- ablenefs to the Glory of God, was at all Times proper to be exerted, without interfering with the other Deligns of Providence, but pro- moting the very End affigned for the Permif- lion of fqch PofTeffions -, if Laftly, a Gift, which was the mofl unconfined and general, and ]the common Lot of every baptized Per- fon, if This was the conftant Subjed of Claim ^nd Triumph amongft the Primitive Chri- ftians, It will, I truft, yield no reafonable Caufe of Sufpicion, but will rather fhew, that They underflood the Nature and Ufe of the Endowments that They were blelTed with, and made a wife and proper Application of them. On the Cafe of Prophetic Vifiom I had ob- ferved, that This, by Dr. M% own Confef- fion, was the lead to the Purpofe of any; " Gifts," fays the Dr. " of this Sort were " merely Perfonal, and do not therefore in any " Manner aifed: or relate to the Queftion now " before Us." Whether therefore thefe were proved or difproved, was not material accord- ing to his Account ; and fo They were pafled over with this Remark, that there was little more than Dr. ilf's Sufpicions to prove any of them to hQ falfi, much lefs to be defigned R 2 Frauds. [ 244 J Frauds. This Diftincflion feemed proper, for Thofe Stories which They related upon Re- forty They might be mijlaken in, without any Impeachment of their Veracity ^ which only could hurt the Credit of their Teflimony in thofe Matters which They reported upon their own Knowlege. And as to thofe Vifioria which They attefl as made to Themfelves, there is Nothing objeded to them, but what might equally have been objedted, if they were never fo true, and therefore cannot prove them to be otherwife. Mr. T. however takea one Gift in particular into Confideration, be- eaufe He did not find that Dr. M. entered at all into the DifcuiTion of it. It relates to the Difcovery of Mens Hearts ^ as given to fome in the Primitive Church, which He thinks not credible, becaufe " it was not vouchfafed to *•' the Apollles themfelves," but was, a3. He. reprefents it, peculiar to our Saviour, and *-* no weak Argument of his Divinity." He obferves that " there is Nothing of this Na- " ture in the CommifTion where their other " Powers are feverally delegated to them, " and where We might expert to have found *' this alfo inferted, had it been intended for " them." If the Gentleman means that Com- miifion in the forecited PafTage of St. Mark xvi. 17, 18. then I fay it is certain, that They jiad fome other extraordinary Gifts, belides thofe t 245 ] tkofe which are particularly fpecified in that Lift ; They had fome other diftindl Powers given them when they were iirft fent out to preach, Mat. x. 8. which no Doubt v/ere now continued to them. If Ke means, that thofe Ihould be prefuppofed, and added to thefe, to compleat the Lift of the Powers an- nexed to their Commiffion, then I fay farther, that it is certain that They had 11111 other Pow- ers, which were not enumerated in either of thofe Catalogues, St, Pmd in his ift Ep. to the Corinthians reckoning up the many extra- ordinary Endowments varioufly diftributed at that Time, takes Notice of fome, which were not particularly mentioned by our Saviour in either of thofe forecited PafTages : So that it is no Argument that the Apoftles had not this Gift, merely becaufe it was not peculiarly expreffed in their Commiffion, If it appears from any other Part of Scripture that They were favoured with it, it will be no Objedion that it is not mentioned in that Part. But it feems to be Mr. T's Endeavour to prove that it is not mentioned any where. It is plain, He fays, that the Apoflles had not this Gift, when they proceeded to the Choice of a Fel- low-Apoiile by Lot, and prayed to God as the only Searcher of Plearts, to direcfl the E- vent, This however is very little to the Pur- pofe, becaufe it w?i^ before the Defcent of the R 3 Holy [ 246 ] Holy Ghofi upon them, who was to fulfil the Promifes made unto them, to be the Principle of all extraordinary Endowinents in them, and particularly of fuch an one, as fhould enable them to difcover the Hearts of OthefSr " What looks mofl like this, He fay^^ is th^ -^^ Story of Ananias and Sapphira ; but as an " Eflate cannot be bought and fold, without " feveral Parties being privy to it, it is not " unreafonabld to fuppofe, that St. Peter " might come at the Truth of the Matter " without any Revelaticm more than was na-r " tural." This is h^itXy poj/ible, but extreme^ ly improbable^ and from the Circumftances of the Cafe it feems very uureajonable to fuppofe it. As They intended this Fraud, They would certainly be 2.sfecret as poffible in concealing the Terms of the Salej As the Purchafecs were Unbelievers, it was not likely St. Peter {hould have Intelligence from them ; and the very Manner y in which He reproves the Cri- minals, intimates the Method in which thei^ Crime was difcovered, in that They had dared to attempt to impofe upon the Blejfed Spirit y who could not be impofed upon, and who had now brought to Light the fecret Purpofes of their Heart. Why ^ath Satan filled thine Heart to lie to the Holy Ghofi ? fays the Apoflle to Ananias, — 'Thou haft not lied unto Men but unto God, And again to Sapphira^ How i} k [ 247 ] it that Te have agreed together to tempt the Sp- rit of the Lord? This feems pointed to (hew the Folly as well as Wickednefs of attempting to impofe upon Omnifiience, which could fo cafily exhibit the mofl private Frauds to publick View, and bring the Authors of them to Confufion and Punifhment. The fame Power, which could detedt, could punijh them, and the extraordinary Ad: of Difciphne enfuing was a Proof of the extraordinary Me- thod in which the Crime was difcovered. This Cafe was fo plain, that this is the firft Time that it has been miilaken, or that an Attempt has been made to evade the Miracle of the Difcovery by a Suggeftion of St.P^zVrs fecret Intelligence. There is another Inilancc, I think, of the fame Gift exercifed by the fame Apoftle, as recorded in the 8th Ch, of the ABs, in Relation to the Cafe of Simon Magm, He had profefTed Repentance and Faith, and had been admitted into the Church hy Baptifm-y but on feeing the extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft conferred by the Laying on of the Hands of the Apoflles, He offered them Money to be endowed with the fame Privilege. St.^ Peter not only reproves Him for the Error of thinking that the Gift of God might be pur chafed with Money, but goes on to tell Him, that He knew more of Him than perhaps He knew • of Himfelf ; He tells Him, that his Heart w/js R 4 ^i^i, [ 248 ] not 7'ight in the Sight of God. He diredls to Repentance and Prayer, that if his Offence was not yet beyond the Reach of Pardon, He might obtain it. For I perceive, fays He, the Original is ogS, I fee that Thou art in the Gall of Bitternefsj and in the Bond of Iniquity. This was more than appeared merely from tlie Overt- Al ] lous Endowments ftill fubiifled in their full Vigour. Natural Means might now be ufed for an Opportunity of fpeaking with Per- fons of all Languages, and thereby gaining an Opportunity of producing Credentials ; tho' Jiipernatural ones might flill be necef-^ fary to exhibit and confirm thofe Creden- tials. This is an eafy and rational Account according to the chief Ufe that is afligned for this Gift of Tongues, and I fee not wherein Mr. T. and I differ from Each Other, or from the prevailing Opinion, I fee no Reafon likewife, why I may not concur with Mr. T". in leaving it to the Reader to attend carefully to the Charge of Inconfifiency brought by Dr. M. again f I St. Chryfojiom and St. Auguftin, and the Diflindtion by which I obferved They cleared Tliem- felves from the Charge. They thought the Eftablifhment of Chriftianity prevented the Neceffity of their Continuance as a Means of cojiverting HeatJjenSy but they thought that they were flill fometimes wrought a- mongft the Belreve7-s for their Edification or Support. Suppofe that They were milla- ken or impofed upon in the latter, This however frees them from any Self-Cortra- diBioUy which wasthe Accufation here brought ^gainft them. On [ 266 ] On Dr. A/'s great Triumph over the Hiflory o^ Simeon Sty Ikes, lobferved that " it chiefly *"* depended upon a Connexion of his own, " that Simeons fuppofed Miracles were ^' wrought in Juflification of the Peculiari- " ties of his Hiflory, which I obferved " was not pretended by Thofe who be- " lieved and vindicated them." I entered not farther into the Confideration of that Cafe, becaufe it lay beyond the Limits in Point of Time, with which I propofed to concern Myfelf ; but if Dr. M. ftated the Principal Objedlion upon a Mifliake, this would be fome Sort of Prefumption, that other more material ones were wanting. Howe^ ver if Mr. T. is difpofed to rejecfl them in a Bundle, the Continuance of Miraculous Powers in the Primitive Church till the Eftablifliment of Chriftianity, is no ways affedled by it, and whether this be admit- ted or not, the former will not be the lefs fecure. Mr. Tl fays He " perceives, that I think " Myfelf likewife obliged to defend the " Truth of the Story on which Dr. Berri- " fnan has infifted, concerning the Ortho- ^' dox Chriftians of Africa, who are faid ** to have fpoke articulately and difiinBly, *^ after their Tongues had been cut out by ** the Order of Humieric the Fandai," But how [ 267 ] how does it appear that I thought MyfelF obliged to do fo ? Might not I ad: upon the fame Principle that Mr. T, did, who wrote a Book, not to decide the Queftion in Difpute, but merely to fliew that Another Perfon had in his Opinion faid Nothing to the Purpofe? Might not I therefore offer thofe Remarks to iliew, that Dr. M. at leafl had not difproved the Account, tho' I might not take upon me peremptorily to decide the Queftion ? Indeed I thought it a proper Inftance to fhew, how far Zeal and Preju- dice can carry Men of the greateft Abilities, when fo acute a Reafoner as Dr. M. could ferioufly mention a Report from the Acar demv of Sciences at Parisy of a Girl who was born without a Tongue, who yet talk- ed diftindly, as an entire Confutation of all the Evidence that Dr. Berriman had offered of the Miracle wrought on the African Confeflbrs. This was like wife particularly applicable to Dr. M. becaufe He was the reputed Author at leaft of the firft Anfwer to Dr. B. wherein this was called " a Mi- '' racle of Miracles;" whereas now it feems there was Nothins; at all Miraculous in the Cafe. ' Mr. T. does not attempt to defend this ObjedioUj but only anfwers, tliat the fame Hiftorians related others, which are as much to be believed as this. By the Way, thofe [ 268 ] thole other Miracles were not Co particular- ly examhied as this, and therefore are not fo ilrongly eflablifhed ; but if the Belief of them followed from this, what is the abfurd Con- fequence which would follow from thence ? They are not trifling, or ridiculous, or to no End and Purpofe, nor is there any Pre- fumption againfl their Credibility merely from the Nature of them. Mr. Tl has a farther Obje/^//??ns rejected by Many who pre- tend to believe the Scriptures; but Mr. T. will not dierefore fay that either the One or the Other were not fufficiently attefted. But [ 271 1 But if We cannot, nor do pretend to judge of the private Motives influencing the Hearts of Men, much lefs do We prefume to judge of all the Motives influencing the Deity in his Proceedings. We do not pretend to fay, that it vi^as necejary for Him to work Miracles in order to afcertain the Senfe of the Scriptures, becaufe We may have Evi- dence that He has done it in a particular Infl:ance. He is no necejfary Agents but dif- penfes all his Blefllngs vi^ith great Variety. He grants Favours, both with Refpedt to Kjjowlege and TraBke, to Some, which He denies to Others, and is Himfelf the only Proper Judge of Times, and Seafons, and Occafions of Interpofing : We cannot infer that He mufl: always do what He has once done, nor is it any Prejudice to the Evidence of that Interpofition, that the Oc- cafion was not prevented by irrefiflible Evi-* dence formerly given. If We can fliew that the Interpofition was not incredible, it is all that is necefl^ary on our Part j if We can point out the particular Vfe and Benefit of it. We do more than can be required of Us, and do ftrengthen and eftablifh the external Evidence: And if the ^riith and Importance of any Dodrine be a weighty Confideration, and worthy of the Divine Care and Protection, it cannot be urged with [ 272 ] with greater Force in any Cafe than in this. Mr. y. will obferve, that I have not entered into the Examination of the Witnejfes with Refped; to the Miracle before Us, (it being befide my prefent Queftion) but have only obviated his Objections againft the Credibility of the Miracle itfelf, and have fliewn, according to his own Expreffion, that " it may be true, for ought Any Thing He " has faid to difprove it." The Elegance of the Phrafe is very fuit- able to the Force of the Argument in the next Paragraph. " Mr. JD's next underta- " king, fays Mr. T". is to lick a famous " Paffage of T^ertiillian into Shape:" And the decifive Sentence is, " all the Plaflick " Art of ten Men more can never do it." He theil proceeds in a high Style of Con- tempt and Triumph on the Strength of his own declared Opinion. But Aiiertions prove Nothing. Let Us once more review the Paflage, and the Reflexions that on both Sides were palTed on it. Dr. M. had charged the Primitive Fathers with having " trained " the Ages, in which They lived, to blind " Credulity and Superftition, by teaching ** them to confider the ImpoJJibility of a ** Tubing as an Argument for the Belie j of it',* (P. 1 86.) To fupport this Charge He brings ^ fingle Sentence ^vQrxi2i fngk Father, which, if I 273 ] if it was as abfurd as He would reprefent it, could never juftify fuch a general Accu- fation. This Circumftance his Defender thought fit to drop J tho' if one incautious Sentence would fix fuch an Imputation upon a Whole Body of Men, No Characfters could be fecure; and this Charge in par- ticular might be as ftrongly brought againft the Modern as againft the Ancient Apologias for Chriftianity. The eminently Learned and Pious Bifhop Beveridge has fallen into the fame 'Train of Thought, and almoft the very fame Exprefjion that Tertullian did. Up- on the Subjed; of the Holy Trinity He has thefe remarkable Refledions. " This I con- " fefs is a Myftery, which I cannot pofiibly *' conceive, yet 'tis a Truth, which I can ** eafily believe ; yea, therefore it is fo true " that I can eafily believe it, becaufe it is fo " high that I cannot poffibly conceive it." Why becaufe ? Mr. T. will fay, How could his not conceiving it be any Argument for the Truth of it t Let Us hear Him out. " For it is impofTible, continues He, Any " Thing fhould be true of the Infinite " Creator, which can be fully exprefi^ed " to the Capacities of a Finite Creature ; " And for this Reafon, I ever did, and " ever (hall look upon thofe Apprehenfions « of God to be tiie trueft, whereby We T " appre- [ 274 ] " apprehend Him to be the mofl incom- " prehenfible, and that to be the moft true " of God, which feems moft impoffible unto " Us." (Private Thoughts, Part I. Ar- ticle 3.) Would it now be a juft and fair Reprefentation, from a View of this PafTage, to fay that the " Bifhops or Divines of the " Church of Englajid, in the Seventeenth ** Century, trained up that Age to blind " Credulity and Superftition by teaching " them to conlider the Impoilibility of a " Thing as an Argument for the Belief of " it ?" Or might not this be faid with ex- aAly the fame Truth and Reafon as Dr. M. faid it of the Primitive Fathers on the Strength of a like PafTage in Tertullian I' I do not fay that the Bifhop's is not an unguarded ExprefTion, but I fay that a Man muft take Pains to mifunderftand the Defign of it^ and to charge Him with the Abfurdity with which the Dr. has charged the forementioned Father. Bifhop Beveridge^ Intent plainly was to lignify, not that a real Impoffibility was an Argument of Truth, but that the Subje bat Mr. 7*. found it eafier peremptorily to pro- nounce I 279 ] munce the PalTage to be abfurd, than to proi^e it to be fo, either by fliewing that there was no fuch Antithefis and Connedipn as I had obferved in the Introdudion to it, or that they did not help to clear the Difficulty. He may now however find his Laconick Queftion, <^ Why Becaufe ?" more diftindly anfwered, and that there was not wanting a Medium, by which the Impojfibility of a Thing in theEftima- tion of an Unbeliever might be the very Rea- son why it was rendered more credible, and €ven more certain to a Believer, on the Au- thority of Revelation, which was the very Diftinaion that Tertullian infifted on. And now, whether fofter Terms than Shocking and egregious Nonfenfe, and a lefs invidious Turn than the Parallel of a bigottcd Adherer to the Pofifi Church, might not have fuited better with fo impotent an Attack on a plain and rational Expofition of TertuUians Difcourfe, without any Attempt of an Argument to inva- lidate it, I fhall leave to Mr. ^s Recolkaion. He begs Pardon, which He needs not, for infifting on the Liberty of judging for Him- felf, and He has my free Leave to judge not only /or Himfelf, but by Himfelf : For I have not met with a fingle Perfon that, on an at- tentive Review of that PafTage, has not ac- knowleged that the Senfe of T^ertulliaiis Ar- gument was upon the whole intelligible and ^ T 4 c^^- [ 28o ] eonfiftent, however flrange the ExpreJJion might appear by itfelf. The Laft Part of the Free Inquiry was in- tended to obviate the Objedions, which the Author forefaw would be made to his new Scheme.. The Firfl of thefe was that " the " Authority of the Books of the New Tefla- " ment, which were tranfmitted to Us thro' " their Hands, would thereby be rendered '' precarious and Uncertain." The Dr. makes two Replies on this Part of the Argument j the firft is, that " the Authority of thefe " Books does not depend on the Faith of the " Fathers J but on the general Credit and " Reception which they found with all the " private Chriftians of thofe Ages, whofe " Intereft it was to preferve them, and whofe " Religious Regard for them, befides the " Jealoufy of Parties, did excite their Care " to preferve them." I anfwered that the Exception would lie at lead as ftrong againft private People as againft the Publick Teachers, for if their Credulity and Superftition, or Craft, were fo great, as to difqualify them for Wit- nefTes in Matters of Fa(ft, and their concur- rent Teftimony was to be reje<5ted in a Cafe, in which they could not be deceived, the Objed:ion would recur with Refpecft to Thofe who were taught by them, whofe Principles ^nd Practices could not be fuppofed to be better [ 28i ] better than thofe of their Teachers, nor con- fequently their Teftiniony more worthy of Regard. I added particularly, that this Me- thod of refling the Authority of the Sacred Canon on the Reception of it by Private Per- fons, was in a great Meafure weakened by the Account of thofe Difficulties fuggefted by Himfelf, concerning the Circulation of Co- pies at that Time ; " when," fays Dr. M. " there were no Books in the Worlds but " what were written out by Hand, with " great Labour and Expence, the Method of " publifhing them was neceflarily very flow, " and the Price very dear^ fo that the Rich " only and Curious would be difpofed or able ** to purchafe them, and to fuch alfo it was " often difficult to procure them, or to know " even where they were to be bought." {Free Inquiry, P. 198.) This was his Ac- count, when it anfwered another Purpoie, and as far as it was true, would hold as ftrongly with Refpedt to the Scriptures as to the Apologies of the Primitive Fathers -, and if this was the Cafe, and if farther, the Chri- ftians were that poor, mean, defpicable People, even in the third Century, that Dr. M. re- prefents them to Tdc, then there could not be fuch numerous Copies of the New Teftament difperfed amongft private Believers, as might fecure their Authenticity and Purity, inde- pendently [ 282 ] pendently on the Teftimony of the Fa- thers. The chief Copies muft, according to this Account, be in the Hands of the chief Apologifts and Governors of the Church ; and if They were fo "credulous and fuper- " ftitious, and fo little fcrupulous of any Arts ** or Means to propagate their Opinions," as They are defer ibed to be, We can have no Security, that the Scriptures are tranfmitted to Us genuine and uncorrupted. Mr. T. fays here, it is proper to remind me of a Circum- ftance, which He thinks I feem to have for- got ; namely, " that Dr. M. has endeavoured '* to make it appear, that the immediate Suc- " ceffors of the Apoftles made no Pretenfions " at all to Miraculous Gifts j that the firft " Time We hear of any fuch Claim is in " ynjiin Martyrs firft Apology prefented a- " bout the Year of Chrift 140 ; confequently ** that there is a Vacancy of more than Half ** a Century, wherein the Fidelity of the ** Teachers and Governors of the Church is *' liable to no Sufpicion : And He prefumes that ** it is fhewn in the Beginning of his Papers, " that I have not evinced the Dr. of any « Miftake in this Article." (P. 85.) I will not repeat what has been faid on that Article, nor repeat, in Mr. ^"'8 Manner, my own Opinion by Way of Argument, but fhall leave that Matter to the Judgment of the Reader J [ 283 ] Reader ; it may however properly be added, that were this Obfervation true, yet the Diffi- culties urged by Dr. M. concerning the Dif- perfing of Copies in fo much later an Age, would be ftill of Force againft the Suppoii- tion of there being a fufficient Number of thofe Copies difperfed in half a Century, as that the fucceeding Fathers could not corrupt them, if They had fo much Craft and fo little Integrity as to attempt it 5 which is the Subftance of their Character as drawn by Dr. M. Farther, that Author lays great Strefs on the Credulity and Superjlition of the Fathers as difcrediting their Teflimony in any Cale, and He has not cleared even the Apoflolical Fathers from that Charge. Their Fidelity alone will not, on his Principles, fecure their Teftimony in fuch a Cafe, nor convince Us that They delivered down the genuine Books oi the New Teflament to Us. There is no exprefs Teftimony to their Advantage in this Point of Judgment, or Care to prevent Impo- fitions, and the Inlinuations thrown in fug- geft the contrary. " They appear, fays Dr. " M. to have been Men of great Piety, In- " tegrity, and Simplicity j and That is all I " think, which We need to declare of them " on this Occafion." (Free Inquiry^ P. 27.) The Reafon given for the Omiffion of the other Parts of their Charadler was, that They [ 284 ] They bore no direct Teftimony to the Quc- flion concerning Miracles ; fo that We do not know Dr. ikTs Opinion whether They were proper Judges to fettle and tranfmit the Ca- non of the New Teftament, or whether He will accept of this Suggeflion of Mr. T. in his Favour. This I think All mufl allowj that it muft be eafier to determine concern- ing the Reality of the Continuance of Mira- cles amongfl them, than concerning the Ge- niiinenefs of doubtful Books, when fpurious ones were adlually written, and fometimes received for a Time in particular Places. The latter Judgment mufl: require more Induftry and more Penetration than the former j and therefore if general Imputations of Credulity and SuperJlitio?i will invalidate pofltive Tefli- monies in the Cafe of Miracles^ much more in the T^radittonal Delivery of the Authenti- city of Books : And the Authority of the Sacred Canon and the Chara were renewed and repeated in the Patriar- chal Age, their Children likewife in their Education enjoyed the Benefit of fuch Knowlege, and thus All Nations defcended from them have had the Advantage of T'raditional Revelation to aid and affift their natural Reafon. The Intercourfe and Com- munication of Many People with the Chil- dren of Ijrael^ amongft whom thefe Revela- tions were continued, was a farther Help, and may fliew that it was not owing to a View of the Fabric of the World alone^ that Men retained any Senfe of God, or of their Duty to Him. It is added, " This Conftitution of Things " was ordained by God as an univerfal Law " or [ 327 ] " or Rule of Conduft to Man ; the Source " of all his Knowlege ; the Teft of all Truth ; " by which all fubfequent Revelations, " which are fuppofed to have been given " by God in any other Manner, muft be " tried, and cannot be received as Divine, " any farther than as they are found to " tally and coincide with this Original " Standard." This, inftead of clearing the fufpicious PafTages already cenfured, is Open- ing the Way to a new Controverfy^ new I mean in Relation to the prefent Queftion, tho* not many Years fince it was the Sub- jed: of a very conliderable Debate ; and was urged as the principal Objedion againft the NeceJ/ity or Expediency of any Revela^ tion. The Subftance of what is here ad- vanced is refuted by an Argument, which is ufually a favourite one with Dr. M. that of plain Experience. Men could not from a View of the Fabrick of the World trace out fuch a Syflem, as fhould be the Source of all Knowlege, and the Teft of all Truth ; and in Fad They did not. There is furely a great Impropriety in faying, that " This •** Conflitution of Things was ordained by God *^ as -an univerfal Law or Rule of Condud: " to Man." This wonderful Fabric and Conftitution of Worldly Things was No- thing more than the- ObjeSf of his Senfes^ Y 4 from [ 328 ] from whence He was by his Reafon to trace out the Will of God, which only could be called a Law or Rule of ConduSi to Him- felf : And here his Reafon^ whatever was the Occafion, prov'd infufficient to the Pur- pofe, and was not " enabled to trace out " the Divine Nature and Attributes, and by " a gradual Dedu Us, and if our Reafon cannot difcover, what [ 341 ] what are the feveral Relations which We ftand in to all other Beings, nor what is that Pro- priety of Adion, which refults from thofe Relations, We are not the Wifer for the Eternity and Immutability of that Law, which "Tuny fpeaks of, but ought thereby to be made the more fenfible of the Necef- fity of fome farther Light to point out to Us what is Jit and proper, or in other Words, what is the Will of God in our pre- fent Situation. But it muft be obferved farther, that even this Immutability of the Law of Nature is but Hypothetical, and depends on the fup- pofed Continuance of Mankind in the fame natural and moral Situation. Should They, by the Permiffion or Diredion of their Ma- ker, fall into any Alteration of Circum- flances, and Hand in any different Relation to the Author of their Being, or to other Beings, or to each Other, the Rule of Condud, which arifes irom Relations and Situations, muil vary likewife ; and That muft become fit and proper now, in a new Con- dition J which wr.s not fo before. It is ahvays fit and proper, that Reafonable Creatures Hiould ad fuitably to their Nature and Station , and in this Senfe Morality is eternal and immutable ; hut in ijchatlnftances it muft be expreffed, muft depend on its Suitablenefs to fuch their Nature and X 3 Station [ 342 ] Station, and cannot therefore be more un-^ changeable than they are. With this Caution and Limitation We may admit the Truth of what Cicero has here ad- vanced, but I fee not the leaft Advantage which it will yield to Dr. M's Caufe, or his Defence. A Man might acknowlege that whatever was reafonable was bindings and was to be conlidered as the Will of Him who made and fo difpofed the Conftitution of Nature, without pretending to point out what was reafonable in all Cafes j which was the great Point in which Mankind needed Infti udion, arjd therefore needed an exprefs Revelation. LaSfantius conlidered the forementioned Ac- knowledgment as an extraordinary Difcovery in a Heathen, but He as exprellly takes No- tice of his Defed; in the latter, and points to the very Diftindion here inculcated. " As," fays He, " Cicero clearly faw the Force and " the Ground of the Holy Law, fo, if He " had known or could have explained its " Precepts alfo. He would then have per- " formed the Part, not of a Philofopher, " but of a Prophet." This is the true State of tlie Cafe. Obedience to the Will of God i% the true Foundation of all Duty and Obliga- tion, and therefore l^iilly in fo reprefenting it, and in conlidering Reafoji as only the Means of arriving at the Knowlege of the Divine Will, [ 343 ] Will, fpoke like a Wife, ' as well as Goad Man. But his own great Share of Reafon was not equal to the Taik of determining what in all Cafes was fit and proper^ and therefore the Will of God-y and if it had, yet Others were little able to comprehend his Reafonings, and little difpofed to fubmit to his Authority j and therefore Revclatmi was in both Refped:s expedient^ if not abfolutely ne- cejfary. Let Us briefly review the Occalion, on which thefe Reafonings and Citations were introduced. Dr. M. in referring to the Fa- bric of the World as the furefl Inftruftion in all Cafes ; — in confining our View of what the Creator has actually done, to the Con- templation of the Revelation, which He has made of Himfelf in the wonderful Works and beautiful Fabric of this vilible World ; — and in cenfuring the Judgment of Thofe as fallacious, who defert this Path of Nature and Experience -, was thought to throw out flrong Hints ag^ainfl the Belief of all miraculous In- terpofitions ; and was defired to reconcile thefe PafTages with his Acknowledgment of the Miracles of the Gofpel. Thefe Iniinua- tions feemed to reach farther than He might intend, and to affed: all other Claims to fu- per natural Power as well as thofe, which were advanced in the Primitive Church. Z 4 Dr. [ 344 ] Dr. M. it feems thought this Objedion worth his Notice, and it was natural to exped; in his Defence fome fhrong and explicit Declarations of his Chrtfiian Faith, and fome Diftindtions, by which a View of the Fabric of the World might be fhewn to favour the Miracles of the Gqfpel more than thofe of the Primitive Church. Inftead of which We are favoured with a new Subjed;, concerning the Perfec- tion of the Law of Nature and Reafon, which is falfe in one Senfe and foreign in the other; and which, inftead of removing the former Inlinuations, is advanced dired:ly in the fame Manner, in which it was not long fince urged by a profeiTed Enemy of all Revelation. This was not always Dr. M's Strain ; in his Life of Cicero (2d Edit. 8vo. Vol. 3. p. 354.) He fpeaks of the Law of Nature — as written jn the Hearts of the Gentiles, to Guide Them thro' that State of Ignorance and Darknefs, of which They themfelves complained ; 'till ^beyfiould be Blefsd with a more perfe^ Re-^ relation of the Diijine Will : And again, p. 357. that the moft exalted State of Human Reafon is fo far from fuperfeding the Ufe, that it demonftrates ^he Benefit of a fuore ex-^ plicit Revelation ; — and that we miijl needs fee abundant Reafon to be T^hankfid to God for the Divine Light of his Gqfpel. How to recon- cile all This with the Sentiments and Ex- preffions [ 345 ] preffions of his Vindication, it is now too late to afk Dr. M. I fhall therefore leave the Cafe, without farther Remark to the Judgment of his Advocates as well as of his Oppofers. Dr. M. comes now to the Defence of the Free Liquiry, in which the Firft Head relates to the Silence of the Apoftolical Fathers on the Subjecft of thefe Miraculous Powers. And here Archbifhop JVakes Opinion was men- tioned as frivolous and ill-grounded, yet with- out any Attempt of difproving the principal Evidence offered for it. Mr. Toll attempted to fupply this Defed;, and to Him Dr. M, now refers for Satisfaction herein, fo that in this Point I need only refer to my Reply to Him. Dr. M. fays, that " the Reafons why He " omitted to take Notice of this PaiTage, " were firft the utter Infignificancy, which it " appeared to have, as to any Proof or Evi- " dence, relating to this Queflion ; and, *' fecondly, a Regard alfo for the Charafter " of that worthy Prelate, which made Kim " unwilling to recall into public Light a Pa- " raphrafe, which He took to be unworthv " of Him, &cr (P. 13.) Perhaps the Re- view, which has been offered of that PalTage, piay fliew that neither of thefe Reafons need have prevailed with Dr. M. for the former QmiiTion of it, nor for negled:ing to rein- force { 346 ] force his Defender on this Point. Poffibly the fame favourable Intention towards the Archbifliop's Chara(5ter led Him likewife to qualify and alter his Words in the Account which He has given of his Opinion in this Matter. He reprefents the Archbifhop as fpeaking with Diffidence and Vncertainty with Regard to the miraculous Gifts of the Apofto- lick Fathers. He does indeed fpeak with fome Caution of their having the Gift of Infpira- tion, and fays, that in all Probability they were endued with the extraordinary Affifiance of the Holy Spirit in what 'They teach Usy (C. x. §. II.) This Dr. M. changed into the extra- ordinary Gifts of the Holy Spirit, thus making the Archbifhop fpeak in general of all extra- ordinary Gifts, v/hereas He fpoke only of one, viz. immediate Infpiration. The Arch- bifhop Himfelf expreflly made this Diftinc- tion, and went on in the very next Section to fhew, that therefore They probably had the Gift of Infpiration, becaufe They certainly had other extraordinary Endov/ments ; ' and again in the Beginning of the 1 8th Section fays in thefe Words, " This will afford Us " juft Caufe to conclude that thefe Holy " Men were doubt lefs endued with a very " large Portion of the extraordinary Gifts of " the Holy Ghoft," from whence He infers, that [ 347 ] that They had their Share alio of the particu^- lar Gift which He was fpeaking of. Dr. M. did Him the Favour of fonae far- ther Mifreprefeiitations. Befides the ground- lefs Charge of his neglecting to bring Tefti- rnonies from the Writers themfelves (which perhaps may be evaded by faying that thofe Teftimonies were not exprefs, but to be made out by Inferences ; which however were di- ftind; from fuch as were drawn merely from external Circumftances : Belides this) when He is farther citing Him as arguing, that " the Apoftolical Fathers were themfelves " alfo in fome Meafure infpired too," He adds without any Authority from, and in exprefs Contradiction to his Author, or en- dued with the extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghojl : And again, when the Archbifliop al- lows, that the Gifts and Commiffion of the Fathers were inferior to thofe of the Apoftles, Dr. M. reprefents Him as faying that they \YQTtfar inferior^ and that both in their Kind and Degree j which Words, tho' put in Ita- licks^' as if they were the Archbiiliop's own, are no other than an Improvement of the Dr's. Thefe Alterations might be intended in Regard for the Charac^ler of that worthy Prelate 5 but I prefume, that All Ferfons would choofe rather to have Juftice done them by a fair Citation of their Works, than - the [ 348 ] the Favour of fuch Alterations as Others may happen to think more to their Credit. My Father, whom Dr. M. calls a Writer of a more fangidne Complexion than Archbi- fhop Wake^ (tho' the One had declared as peremptorily for th'^ Continuance of miracu- lous Powers in the Church as the Other, and Both had referred to the Evidence next conteft- ed) had appealed to the Title or Addrefs of j^- natiuss Epiftle to the Church of Smyrna as a plain Proof, that Miracles then continued. Dr. M. here again contents Himfelf with what He has already faid on this Point, and with referring again to Mr. Tolh Defence -y which, fuch as it is, I have already conlider- ed. He goes on however to eftablifh his own Senfe of the Word Charif-ma^ which, He fays, " as well in its Native and proper " Senfe, as in the Ufe, which has ever been " made of it both by the facred, and pri- " mitive^ Writers, figniiies nothing more " tlian a Gift, whether it be natural or fuper- " natural, ordinary or extraordinary." The dire<5t Anfwer to this Obfervation is, that the former Part of it is true, but Nothing to the Purpofe, and the latter Part of it is Nothing more than a Miftake. The native and pro- per Senfe of the Word means a Gift in ge- neral, but this cannot prove, that it m,ay not, or was not refrained and appropriated by Cuftom [ 349 ] Cuftom, to mean a particular Kind of Gift. The native and proper Senfe of the Word Apoflle means, We know, no more than a MeJJengery but will it therefore be faid, that it really means no more, and did not by Ufe contrad: a peculiar Senfe ? It is afTerted however in Fad:, that " Char if ma in the " Ufe, which has ever been made of it " both by the Sacred and the Primitive Wri- " ters fignifies nothing more than a Gift, " whether it be natural or fapernatural, " ordinary or extraordinary." This is a Point, which can only be determined by an Exa- mination of all the PaiTages wherein it oc- curs. And Firft, as to the Sacred Writers, upon a Review of all the Texts, in which the Word is ufed, I think I may re-alTert that it bears an appropriated Senfe, and is not ufed to fignify a Gift in general, or a natural and ordinary Gift. There is only One or Two PaiTages, which can occalion any Doubt, and they are not thofe cited by Dr. M on the Occalion. Would He fay that Eternal Life, or the Remiffion of many Of- fences unto Jullification, are natural and or- dinary Gifts ? The Term Charifma is almoll univerfaliy ufed to fignify the Gift peculiar- ly given to Chrillians thro' their Saviour, which, in whatever Senfe it is interpreted, is no Gift of Nature, If One Exception be thoueht [ 350 ] thought to be found, the Ahfwer will be,- that even that will be as rational, if under- ftood as the Gift of God our Saviour^ in Conformity to the Expreffion as elfewhere ufed J or that if it be not, one fmgle Inftance will not in this Cafe invalidate an appropriated Meaning, any more than in the other re- ferred to: For the Word Apofile is found once or twice ufed in a Senfe different from that, to which it is confeffed to be pe- culiarly applied. The whole Scheme of our Salvation is fometimes reprefented as the ex- traordinary Gift of God under this Term iri the fingular Number ; and the extraordinary Gifts which contributed as Means to promote this End, are always expreffed by the fame Term in the plural Number. Other Gifts not ftridly miraculous may poffibly be in- cluded with thofe, which are fo, under the fame Expreffion. But the Point and Strefs of this Obfervation is, that This Term is not ufed to fignify natural Gifts, or moral Virtues, or ordinary Grace exclufive of fupernatural Endowments. Whereas it is uniformly and conftantly ufed to ^igmiy fupernatural En- dowments in Contradiflindtion to natural Gifts throughout the firft Epiftle of St. Paul to the Cojinthiam^ where He treats profeffedly on this Subject. Here it cannot be faid that doremata^ or any other general Terfn, [ 351 ] Term, is ufed indifferently with this, to lig- nify thofe extraordinary Gifts ; but when the Apoflle confined Himfelf to thofe Gifts, He confined Himfelf likewife to this par- ticular Term. This was appropriating it as ftrongly to this precife Meaning, as the Prac- tice and Authority of an Apoflle could do it 5 .and this Appropriation was little lefs than neceffary to guard againfl Errors, which might happen in the Ufe of a Word of a more doubtful Signification. If We find this Appropriation of this Term retained by fuc- ceeding Writers, We have then all the Evi- dence, which can well be expeded upor^ fuch an Article, Dr. M. fays, that the Primitive Writers ever made ufe of it to fignify nothing more than a Gift, whether it be natural or fuper- natural, ordinary or extraordinary. Certain- ly it was a Tafk that properly lay on Him to prove this by the Indu6lion of feveral Particulars, by referring to fuch Paflages in the Primitive Writers, where the Word was ufed unqueftionably in this Senfe. But He contents Himfelf v/ith referring to two Paffages in St. ClemenSy wherein. He fays, He had before fhewn that " He had ap- " plied the Word Charifmata, or Gifts of " God, to denote the different Talents and 1! Abilities, natural and ac(]^uired, by which " the [ 352 ] " the Charaders of Men are lifually dif- " tinguifhed." Now in the iirft of thefe Paffages referred to, the Word Charifma is not mentioned at all, and in the fecond it is not mentioned in the Plural Number, fo that neither, of thefe PaiTages can poffibly prove what He now aflerts, that Charifmata was ufed by St. Clemens to denote different Talents and Abilities natural and acquired. He goes on with fo grofs a Miireprefenta- tion of my Affertion on this Occaiion, , as will exercife one's Charity to account for candidly. He fays that I " declare that the " very Gifts, or Charifmata here recited, fuch " as Strength, Riches, Wifdom, Humility, " Continence, may ftridly be interpreted " of fupernatural Endowments." Whereas I faid exprefHy that the Senfe of thofe Paf- fages is full as rational and as ftrong, if in both Places We interpret them^ (that is, the ExprelTion of a large Effufion of the Holy Spirity and of the Gift of GoJ, that called ^oLgiaficLj which I had recited in the pre- ceding; Sentence, and which Dr. M. had at- tempted to invalidate) ilriftly of fupernatural Endowments. I conlidered thefe as diflinSl fi-om the natural Gifts, and acquired Vir- tues afterwards mentioned, as I have iliewn more at large in the Review of the laft Paf- fage, where Charifma is the Term ufed, and which [ 353 ] which alone therefore at prefent concerns t;he Queftion. Of thefe I fpoke fo evidently that I know not how the Sentence could be miftaken, or how fo abfurd an Affertion could pofTibly be formed out of it, as Dr. M, has been pleafed to reprefent as mine. I had rather Hand convifted of many Mif- takes than of fuch a palpable _JVf//r^/?-c/^«- taticfi. If We go on to examine the Writers next fucceeding the Apoftles, this Term, wherever it occurs, bears plainly the Senfe of an extraordinary Gift. Dr. M. Himfelf has fo tranflated it in fome Places, and his Negled of pointing to other PalTages, where it muft be confined to common and or- dinary Endowments, is a ftrong prefump- tive Proof, that no fuch Paffages were to be found. Indeed had They ufed the Term in a Senfe different from that which St. Paul ufed it in juft before, without explaining that They intended it in another Senfe, This muft have occafioned great Confufion amongft Thofe, who were accuftomed to the Read- ing of that Apoftle's Writings: Whereas when the Context {hews, that They ufed the Word in the fame Meaning, This is a ftrong Proof, that 'They were convinced that the Apoftle had fo appropriated it. No- thing lefs than fome plain and pofitive In- A a ftancesj [ 354 I fiances, wherein the Term could meari Nothing but natural or acquired Gifts, would be fufficient to weaken the Force of this Obfervation. Some other Writers how^ever have en- deavoured to fupply the Dr's OmifTion in this Particular. The Author of the two pre- vious ^eftiojis efpecially obferves, that " it " muft not be inferred from fuch an Ex-r. *' preffion, that every One^ who is faid to " receive ^dpjfjLoL, a Gift, received one of " the miraculous Sortr (P. 114.) He feems indeed to differ fomewhat from Dr. M^ for He allows that ;v^ctgia/tia fignifies an extra^ ordinary E?tdowme?ity (P. 116.) which, I think, He explains to mean, in the lowefV Senfe, fuch Ads of Faith and good Life as in Kind or Degree are peculiar to the Profef- fors of the Gofpel. The Authority here re-- ferred to, to fliew the ambiguous and indif- criminate Ufe of this Word, is that of the Apofiolical Conftitutions, which Thofe, who have cited on this Occafion, have fufficiently fhewn that They efteem as a manifefl: Forge- ly. However, it is faid to be of good Au- thority in this Cafe, and I mean not to dif- pute it^ it being the Work of fome early Writer or Writers, who may very well in- form Us, in what Senfe this Term was ufed and underjfhood in their Time. And this Tef- timony [ 355 ] timony Is as full and decifive agalnil: Dr. il4^s AlTertion, that " the Word Charifrna^ in the *' Ufe made of it both by the Sacred and " Primitive Writers, fignifies nothing more " than a Gift, whether it be natural or fu- " pernatural, ordinary or extraordinary," as any that One would wifh to produce. The Chapter referred to, treats profelTedly of thofe Charifmata then fpoken of by Chriftian Writers, and abounding amongft them. And lirft it appropriates the Meaning of them to fuch Gifts as were beftowed on the Mem- bers of the Church, by Chriji the Head of it, and illuftrates this Meaning by that Pro- mife of fuch Powers as were unquestiona- bly miraculous in every Inilance. " Our " God and Saviour Jefus Chrift fpake thus to " Us; when we were All together, concern- " ing thofe Charifmata, v/hich were given " by Him thro' the Spirit : Thefe Signs Jhall " folloiii them that believe, in ??iy Name jlmll " l^hey caft out Devils, &c." * — " which Cha^ ^' rifmata were given firil to Us the Apoftles, *' who were to preach the Gofpel to every ". Creature ; and then of Neceffity were *'- imparted to thofe, who were brought over * 4>})(7X 'TTAtTtV CLIJ.A, TJ^f Ta'V 4^ din'i /v* Ts 'Tl'i.VUA- A a 2 *^ to [ 3S6 } " to the Faith by Us j not for any Advantage " thereby to Thofe, who wrought them, " but for the Convidion of Unbelievers, that " Thofe, whom the Preaching of the Word " could not influence, might be brought to " Shame by the Power of thofe Signs -t"." —-" It is not neceffary therefore that every " Believer iliould caft out Devils, or raife the " Dead, or fpeak with Tongues, but fuch " an One as fhall be thought worthy of a " Char if ma for any ufeful Caufe, for the " Salvation of a Believer \r — " We fay thefe " Things, that thofe, who have received " thefe Charifmata^ fhould not be lifted up " againft thofe who have not received them ; " for We fpeak of fuch Chafifmafa as relate '' to miraculous Powers ; for there is no One " who has believed in God thro' Chrift, but " what has receiv'd a fpiritual Charifma ||.'* -[■ TVt«v tg>v yjt^KTuciruv 'tt^qtz^ov /uec i^fntlv ^"0^19707 loli a/TTO^-'oKoii yAhKa^i 70 \vet^ykhtov KecTA^yiKhilV CTrtiXH t» Klisii' "iTTilTO, S'i Tolf J^ VUUV 'Xt^iVffAlTlV dyetyKAlUf '^o^nyayXiftiiy' ^>t \t<; rm' r tvi^yhruv d/piKHetv, aAA* 4/f Tt}V dTi^av iyoixtv, T« e Efficacy of their Prayers ? Let Us compare a, fev/ of his own Expreffions on the Occaiion.;!- At the Beginning of the Epiftle He fays, But I fear yotir Love, lefi it do me an Injury : For it is eafy for Tou to do 'what Ton pkafe. Thi6 could not poiTibly be true, unlefs He meant [366 ] meant it of their Interefl in the Court of Heavcii by their united Supplications. They could not eaiily do what They pleafed either with the Populace or the Magiftracy, nor has Dr. M. attempted to reconcile his Suppolition in diis Place with the contemptible Account of the Chriftians in the iirit Ages, which He has elfewhere given Us. Jgnatms in another Part fhews farther, that He fpoke not of any Application to the Emperor or to the People, but of the Power which They might have over the Wild Beafts themfelves, I befeech Tou that Tou fiew not an imjeafonahle Good Will to- wards me-y fuffer me to be Food to the Wild Beafts, YlcLpoLXcLXci) v/xa,?, p.y] \\nma^ a.jca,ip@- ygv^joS'g jttoi* 'A<^iTi fxt ^vpiav eivcLi Gofdp, and again, Rather encourage the Beafts^ that 'They may become my Sepulchre. WaAXci' xoA.-'x.guaa.Te Tex. ^yipia, *iW fA,oi rcL(p(^ yevavrcti' This Anti- thefis feems to imply (efpecially when con- fidered together with that PafTage following in the Epiftle, which fpeaks expreilly of the Wild Beafts having been reftrained in fome Inftances) that They might hope to prevent his Death, not by making Intereft for Him with the Powers above or below, but by a Method, which had already proved fuccefsful in fome Inftances, by praying to God to over-rule and rcftrain the Fury of thofe Wild Beafts to which He was to be expofed". Ignatius [ 3^7 ] Ignafms intreats them on the contrary rather to encourage thofe Devourers, that He might fall by them, than to endeavour by any Means to ftill their Rage. If We allow Him there- fore to be his own Interpreter, it is plain that He never thought of the Chriftian Brethren at Rome offering or ufing their Inter efi to preferve Him from that cruel Death which He was then going to fiffer^ which is Dr. W% Inter- pretation of it. Had This been his Appre- henfion, He would have exprelTed Himfelf much otherwife, and would have taken fome Notice qf. their Application to the Rulers to fave Him> In diiTwadin^ them from it, fome Phrafe or Intimation muft have oc- curred concerning fuch Kind of Interceffion. He would not have confined all his Difcourfe to their Influence over the Beajis, and to their Applications to Heaven by Prayer (as I have before fliewn that He has done) if He had only feared their Interefl amongfl: their Fel- low-Creatures. Upon the Whole, My Father inferred No- thing from the Writings o^ Ignatius, but what the Words produced from Him do plainly exprefs or imply, and what the Review of the whole Epiftle does more ftrongly con- firm. Dr. M's next Objedion is, that " the Mar- *' tyr acquaints the Romans, that He ha^. " writtea f 368 ] •' written to the other Churches, and ligni- " fied to them all, that He was willing to " die for God, unlefs They, the Romans, " Ihould hinder Him :" From whence He infers, that the Hindrance which He fo much ■ dreaded, was not to arife from Prayers, but from " fome other Means, which were pe- " culiarly pra6ticable to the Chriftians of " Rome, and of no other Church whatfoever." But this likewife is founded on fome Degree of Mifreprefentation. Ignatius did not write to all the other Churches, that He was fear- ful of being deprived of the Honour of Mar- tyrdom by Means of the Chriftian Brethren at Rome, for We find no fuch Fear expreffed in his Epiftles to Any of them. But He ivi'ote and Jignified fo them all, that He was *willi'ng to die for God ; and when He comes to mention this to the Romans, He inferts tliis Claufe, unlejs Ton hinder me. He ex- prefTes to them his Apprehenfions arifing from them, which He had omitted in his Letters to other Churches. But fays Dr. M, " If this Hindrance was to be effedted by " their Prayers, furely the Prayers of every " other Church muft have been as effeftual, " and as much to be apprehended by Ig7ia- " tilts as thofe of the Remans :" That they might have been as effectual, if the Mem- bers of each Church were equally pure and holy. [ 3^9 ] holy, We need not difpute j but that they were as much to be apprehended by Ignatius^ there is no certain or probable Reafon to con- clude. As Rome was appointed to be the Scene of his Execution, it was moft likely that the Chriftians of that Place would be moft deeply affeaed with it, and be moft follicitous, if poffible, to prevent it. They who were to be the forrowful Eye-Witneffes of his Martyrdom, if it took Effed, might for that very Reafon be more defirous than O*- tliers, to avoid the Spedacle, and to preferve his ufeful Life. The Enjoyment of his Pre- fence longer amongft them, and the Ad- vantage which They might hope to reap from fo eminent a miraculous Interpofition openly wrought amongft themfelves in a Place of fuch Eminence and Concourfe, might be farther Inducements to them to de- f^re and to attempt his Prefervation by fuper- natural Means. Thefe were Confiderations, in which the Ephefians, the Magnefians, the Tralliam, the Philadelphians, the Stnyrnaans^ and all abfent Churches were not concerned, and therefore Ignathis had not the fame Reafon to apprehend this Method of inter- pofmg from them as He had from the Ro- mam. He might perhaps from the Probabi- lity of the Cafe forefee, that thefe laft would thus apply themfelves to foUicit Heaven for ^^' Bb his [ 370 ] his Prefervation j or He might know from fure Intelligence that They were preparing Themfelves for this Service, and that P?'ayers were already made ^without ceafl'ng of that Church unto God for Him^ which He delires them rather to convert into Petitions for his Conftancy and Perfeverance under his Trial. On either Suppoiition the Manner of his Writing to them was Pious and Proper, and the Reafon is very clear, why He mentions this Ciixumftance to them, and to them only. He would not difTwade other Churches from that, which He had no particular Rea- fon to fuppofe that they would think of, (which might have been interpreted into a Hint of the Pradice) but where He either ftrongly prefumed, or was adlually affured, that They would fupernaturally attempt what could not be hoped for from any Human Means, there He earneftly cautions them againfl it, and entreats them to forward and not to hinder his much-wifhed for Martyr- dom. The Diftin(5tion is very obvious, and the Grounds of it were peculiar to the Place where He fuffered, not becaufe there only Any Intereil: could effedtually be made (for no fuch Intereft could any where be made) but becaufe there, where He was foon to be prefent, his Life would be thought moll: de- hrable, and liis Death moil afflidling, and of t 371 ] of Courfe all pofTible Endeavours would be moft likely to be ufed in his Behalf. It is farther to be added, that as He opens the Caufe of his Apprehenfions, in the Examples which had happened of this Kind before, and as He mentions this only in his Epiflle to the Romans^ and in a Manner which feems to imply that they well knew them before, it is moft probable, that thefe triumphant In- ftances had befallen fome eminent Chriftians at Rome ; and this might be another Reafon, why He who was fo zealous of the Honour of Martyrdom, might be particularly fearful of failing of it in the fame Place. The Whole of this Method of Reafoning is much confirmed by a Review of the £- pifiki of St. Ignatius^ and of the Account of his Martyrdom. He did not doubt the equal Efficacy of the Prayers of other Churches, and therefore He exprelTly follicits them in his own Behalf; that He might fpeedily attain the Honour He fo ardently delired : But not being apprehenfive of any extraordinary In- terpofition from them for his Prefervation, He fupprelTes any Intimation of it, and alks their Prayers in a more general Manner. In the Martyrdom of Ignatius We read that the Churches of Af^a honoured this Holy Man by the Attendance of their Bifliops, Priefts and Deacons at S?7iyrtia j and that He en^ B b 2 treated [ 372 ] treated them all, but more particularly Poly- carp, to contend with God in his Behalf, that being Juddenly taken by the Beajls from the World, He might appear before the Face of Chrifl. (Martyr. Ign. § 9.) In his Epiftle to the Ephfians He lays, for Chriji I bear about thefe Bonds, thofe fpiritual Jewels, in which I would to God that through your Prayers I might arife : Of which I intreat Ton to make me always Partaker, that I may be found in the Lot of the Chrifians (^/'Ephefus, and §11. In his Epiftle to the Magnefians He fays, Be mindful of me in your Prayers, that I may at- tain unto God — For I ft and in Need of your foijit-Prayers in God, &c. § 14. and again to the 'Tralliajts — Pray alfo for me ; who thro the Mercy of God ftafid in Need of your Prayers, that I may be worthy of the Portion, which lam about to obtain, that I be not found a Reprobate. § 12. Thefe PafTages fhew plainly that He did not undervalue the Prayers of other Churches, or think that there was a peculiar fuperior Efficacy in thofe of the Romans ; but that his particular Application to them not to prevent his Martyrdom by their Prayers, proceeded from fome fuch juft Grounds of Apprehenlion, as thofe foremen- tioned, particularly relative to them. I had obferved farther on this Head, that Ignatius having been fentenced to Death by the [ 373 ] the Emperor Himfelf, who was at this Time far abfent from Rojne^ there was no Autho- rity left fufficient to reverfe the Imperial De- cree ; and that therefore Ignatius^ Requeft could not refer to their making Intereft for Him, but to the Ufe of fome fupernatural Means in his Behalf. This Dr. M, cenfures as " trifling and declamatory, grounded on " loofe Conjed:ure and an imperfed: Know- " lege of the Hiftory of thofe Times," as He propofes to fhew. Should We not then exped: that He fhould have ihewn, that there were fome Limitations on the Em- peror's Power in this Cafe -, that there was fome farther Referve in favour of condemned Criminals ; or that there was fome Example of a Sentence being reverfed, which yet had been pafTed by the Emperor in Perfon ? But Nothing of this Kind is proved, or offered to be proved. We are amufed with the Ac- count of the Gladiators^ where the People had a Right, by Prefcription, to fave the Life of the conquered Party, which every One knows to be true, and equally fees to be Nothing to the prefent Purpofe : But Dr. M. fays, " the Cafe was the fame with Re- " gard to Perfons condemned to be thrown " to the Beafts, where, if the Mob had ta- " ken a Fancy to referve the Life of Any *' One in the fame Manner, They would B b 3 " cer- [ 374 ] " certainly have been gratified in it." This is a bare unfupported Aflertion, grounded on loofe Conjedlure, and, I will not fay, an im- perfeSi Kfiowkge of the Hiflory of thofe Times, but an hnperfeSl Reprefentation of it, The diftinguifhing Circumftance referred to is left entirely out of the Queilion, and not a Syllable is faid to the Cafe of this Martyr's having receiv'd his Sentence from an uncon- troulable Authority. Even the Aflertion it- felf as expreflfed by Dr. M. (hews his Con- fcioufnefs that this Cafe of condemned Cri- minals was not parallel to that of vthe Gladia- tors. He does not fay, as in the former In- flance, that " if a Clamor was raifed in Fa- " vour of the Life of the Perfon, who was " about to fufter, it was always granted to " the Demand of the Aflembly ;" but only, that " if the Mob had taken a Fancy to re- " ferve the Life of any One, (that was " thrown to the Beafls) in the fame Man- " ner. They would certainly have been gra- " tified in it." Now Every Circumflance, in which thefe Cafes differed, ihews the Un- certainty and the Improbability of what is here aflerted. In the firfl Place the Peformance of tlie Gladiators was a voluntary Exercife, under- taken for Hire for the Entertainment of the People, wherein They knew on what Terms They [ 375 ] They engaged, and that They were to ftand to the Courtefy of the People for their Lives, in Cafe They were vanquilhed. This pre- vailed with them to exert themfelves vigo- roLiily, to give Diveriion to the People by their Skill and Courage, that at the worft Event They might have their Favour for their Security. And as to the Slaves^ which were fold to this Service, which was chiefly when thefe Entertainments firft commenced. They had this Circumftance of their Servi- tude to recommend them farther to Compaf- fion, if They behaved well, and had pleafed the Spe(ftators by their Peformances. Where- as Criminals J as fuch, were juflly obnoxious to the People, and could have no Reafon to exped: to raife the Pity of the Mul- titude, and incline them to prevent their Sufferings, when They were no other than the juft Reward of their Deeds. The Gla- diators were innocent, except with Refpedl to their Profeffion, and in that They placed fome Merit as calculated for the Diveriion of the Public j fo that They had no Reafon to fear the Refentment of an injured Multitude, unlefs They offended them by a Cowardice or Ignorance unfuitable to their Order and Profefhon. Whereas Capital Offenders were of Courfe to be confidered as Enemies to the Public, and if fuch a Privilege had B b 4 been [ 376 ] been referved to the People, and had been as often pra(5lifed as in the other Cafe, it would have been inconfiflent with the Execution of Publick Juftice. Again, Thofe who in this Method fufFered the Penalty of their fuppofed Crimes, had not the fame Means of recommending them- felves to the Favour of the People. In the Combats between Man and Man, the dex- trous and refolute Ufe of their feveral Arms was what yielded the Satisfacftion, and ingra- tiated them with the Spe<5lators. Whereas the Criminals, who were exhibited only to be torn to Pieces and devoured by the Wild Beafls, were not always furnifhed with Arms for their ov/n Defence ; and if They had, yet unlefs They had been trained to the Ex- ercife of them, (which muft be quite acci- dental) They could give no Diverfion by their Feats of Skill, on which alone the Hopes of the vanquiflied Gladiator was founded. There were indeed Gladiators, who prepared for this Exercife, and undertook to combat with Wild Beafts ; but thefe are not the Perfons that Dr. M. fpeaks of, but fuch as were con-^ demned to be thrown to the Beafts : Nor could the fame Favour, for a peculiar Reafon, be fhewn to vanquifhed Gladiators of this Sort, as to Thofe who combated with their own Species. The Conqueror in that Cafe flood [ 377 ] flood attentive to the Signal of the People for the Prefervation or Dellrudion of his Foe; whereas This was not to be expedted of Beafts kept wild for the very Parpofe, and enraged by Affaults, but He, who failed of Vidiory, muft of Courfe expe(ft to perifh in the Attempt. Again, This Method of throwing fuppofed Criminals to the Wild Beafts, was then a new or a very unufual Sort of Punilhment. We have no Account of it before it was ap- plied by Perfecutors to Chriftians, for whole Deflrudion it feems by malicious Cruelty to have been devifed. It was never ufed to Any but Thofe who were fuppofed to be the Worft of Men, in whofe Favour the Inter- ceflion of the People could not be expedled, and in this very Light it was applied for the Martyrdom of Many of the Profeflbrs of the Gofpel. Dr. M. Himfelf allows that the Perfecutions of the Church were frequently brought on and forced as it were upon the Government by the Rage and Clamors of the Populace, and therefore as this Punifhment was then as it were appropriated to the Name and Title of Chrijiiam^ it cannot well be fup- pofed that there had been a lingle Inftance, in which the Mob had taken a Fancy, as Dr. M. expreffes it, to preferve the Life of any Perfon fo condemned, or from whence it can be [ 378 ] be inferred that They would certainly have been gratified in it, if They had defired it. The Reafon, which Dr. M. has affigned, why the People might be moved to Compaflion in this particular Cafe, is founded on a Mif- reprefentation of the Nature of the Sentence paffed on Ignatius^ and an entire OmifTion of the Authority of it, which was the very Point which had here been urged againll; Him. When Pie reprefents the People as capable of being moved by the Sight of "an " infirm Old Man, incapable of giving them " any Diverfion by any Sort of Refiftance to " the Beafls," (P. 24.) He feems to have forgot, that this was the very Sight which the People expected. They did not look for Him in a Gladiatorial Capacity, or imagine that the Ancient Prelate was to enter the Lifts with Arms of Self-Defence. His Sen- tence was not to combat with the Wild Beafts, which would have been ridiculous in itfelf 5 but to be thrown to them to be deflroyed j and the Delight of the Roman People^ which as the Dr. obferves, the Emperor propofed in it^ was not in the Sight of fo unfuitable a Battle, but in the Deilrudion of fo eminent a Patron of the Chriflian Caufe. This would be fure to gratify the Populace in their Rage and Malice againfl this Caufe, before repre- fented > and This apparently was the Reafon, why ft [ 379 ] why He fent the Martyr fo far to his Ex- ecution. But there is not a Word faid, by Way of Argument, to the main Point of the Impoffi- bihty of an inferior Magiftrate's feverling the Sentence of the Efnferor Himfelf in a Capital Cafe. The AfTertion indeed is repeated, that " the prefiding Magiil:rate from the Nature of his Office was intrufled always of Courfe with a difcretionary Power of gratifying ^' the People in any Demand of that Soif, *' that is, when they petitioned for the Life " of any Perfon." This, however true in the Cafe of Gladiato?^s^ is more than has yet been proved, where the Putiifiment of the Criminals, for Capital Offences, was intended in thefe Spectacles, as well as the Entertain- ment of the Publick. And if This was proved likewife, the Difficulty would yet re- main in its full Force in the prefent Cafe, where, the Emperor in Perfon had fat in Judg- ment, had paiTed a definitive Sentence, and tranfmitted it to fubordinate Officers at a Di- ftance to be put in Execution. The Supreme Authority of the Emperors in judicial Cafes, as well as Others, is fo clearly eflablifhed in the Hifliory of them All, and Ignatius % Cafe was fo fmgular, in having been heard and condemned by 'Trajan Himfelf, that He could have no Thought of being faved by Intereft [ 38° ] Intereft made afterwards to inferior Magi- ftrates at Rome : Nor could Any Thing make this Suppofition probable or poffible, but fome Claufe in fome Conftitution relating to ity or fome exprefs Example to the Point in Hand j neither of which Dr. M. thought fit to produce. It may farther be obferved, that Trajan appears by this Relation to have been at this Time highly incenfed againft the Chriftians, and particularly againfl Ignatius for his bold Confeffion, on wliich Account the Reverfal of that Sentence would have been more dangerous, and therefore lefs pro- bable. I have been the longer on this Head, becaufe Dr. M. has treated it with peculiar Scorn, and a moft groundlefs Triumph ; w'hereas the flridlefc Review of every Cir- cumilance will, I believe, confirm the Point at firft inferred from hence, that Ignatius in the Paifage fpoken of had certainly a View to a miraculous Deliverance. On die Subject of Vifions and Revelations Dr. M. has been forced to alter the State of the Queftion, and to do, as He has charged his Oppofers with doing, change Hands on the Occafion. At firfl his Attempt was to iliew that no miraculous Powers were con- tinued to the Church after the Days of the Apoftles, and He Himfelf reckoned Prophe- tic Vijions as One of thofe miraculous Gifts, which [ 38i ] which He attempted to difprove. But being aware what Evidence would be offered againfl Him on this Head, He feemed in one Place to give up this Point, by faying, that ''if it *' Ihould appear probable to Any, that They " were favoured on fome Occafions with ex- " traordinary Illuminations, Vifions, or Divine " Impreffions, yet the Gifts of this Sort were *' merely perfonal, granted for their particular " Comfort, and reaching no farther than " themfelves." The contrary of this was fhewn, and no Sort of Anfwer is offered to it. " If, iaid I, the Hiftory of the Predic- " tions of St. Ignatius and St. Poly carp be " real," (as Dr. Af's Diftindion calculated to evade them, feemed to allow) " then they " might be both a Support to thty?2j and' an " Evidence to Others of the Truth of what " They taught ; for Nothing can be a Wronger " Proof of Divine Affiflance than a Spirit " of Prophecy." A Gentleman, who feems fufficiently difpofed to favour Dr. M's Argu- ment, has laid great Strefs upon this Point, and feems to think Nothing can render Mi- racles credible at all, but the Conjundion of prophetical Gifts with them. In this Light there is ftill a more immediate Connexion betwixt this Endowment and the Others, and if it be Ihewn that They had Divine Affiftance in this Inftance, it mil be more ealily prefamed and [ 38M and more readily credited that They had tlie fame fupernatiiral Support in other Inftances, Here therefore Dr. M. appears to be in fome Diftrefs, whether He fhould give up his firfl Defign, or his laft-mentioned Conceffion, and endeavours ftill to reconcile them, which was beyond his Power. " Whether, fays *' He, the Prediiftions fpoken of be real or " not, it is certain that they are nothing to " the Purpofe of our prefent Controverfy, as " not being the EfFedl of any {landing Power " granted to the Church for the Converlion " of Heathens." (P. 26.) Well then, the State of the Controverfy is now quite altered; and He fliould I think have altered his Tide- Page too. He fhould have told Us there, as well as in the Middle of this his Vindica- tion, that " whether God has wrought any " Miracles or not fmce the Days of the A- " poftles, is an Inquiry, which He does not " at all enter into ; and that the fingle Point " which He maintains, is, that the Church " had no Handing Power of working any.'' (P. 33.) This however certainly was not the' Propofal which at firft He oitered to the World. That profeiTedly was to fhew, that " We have no fufficient Reafon to believe " upon the Authority of the Primitive Fa- " thers, that any fuch (miraculous) Powers " were continued to the Church after the " Days [ 3B3 ] " Days of the Apoftles." He was fuppofed to mean what He faid, and was therefore underftood to be arguing againft all miracu- lous Interpofitions. His Management of the Argument confirmed this Notion of it, for He particularly allowed prophetical Gifts to be a Species of miraculous Gifts, and argued ao-ainft them as fach : Whereas now it feems they may be given up as nothing to the Pur- pofe of the prefent Controverfy, as not being, He fays, the EfFed; of any ftanding Power granted to the Church for the Con- verfion of Heathens. But why was not fome Proof added like- wife for this Opinion ? Why may not Pr(5- fhetical Gifts as well as any Others be con- fidered as the Effedl of a Handing Power granted to the Church for " the Converfioii " of the Heathens?" Some, We fee, think them more convincing than any other Species of miraculous Gifts, at leaft they mufl be allowed to be moil convincing in Conjunc- tion. For having explained the Hypothetical Manner of putting this Argument, I will ufe it again. If St. Polycarfs Predidtion of his own Death was real, muft not the Fore- Knowlege of it by Thofe to whom He com- municated it, and their View of the fpeedy Completion of it, be a very fatisfadory Proof to them of his Pretenfions, and of a fuperna- tural [ 384 ] _ tural AfTillance attending Him ? Can this Gift be faid to have been merely Perlbnal, granted only for his particular Comfort, and reaching no farther than Himfelf ? The Con- firmation of Thofe who were already Difci- ples, and the Converfion of fuch Gainfayers as were acquainted with it, were Ends which it feems moil immediately calculated to pro- mote. I do not fee what particular Comfort it could be to St. Polycarp to forefee that He ihould be burnt alive ; but it was certainly to the Comfort of the Church, and might probably tend to the Enlargement of it, to obferve that Chrift had not yet left his Dif- ciples without fuch extraordinary Endow- ments as thofe of Prophetical Vifions and Revelations. The fame is to be obferved, and was obferved by me in other Inftances, where fuch Gifts did anfwer fome perfonal End, that they anfwered likewife the farther Purpofe of an Evidence of the CommilTion and Support given them by Heaven. Per- haps We may judge the better of this by fup- poling it to be a prefent Cafe. Should Pro- vidence think fit to grant miraculous Powers again for the Converfion of Unbelievers of i)ur Times, would Any be more likely to prove effectual than that of Prophecy ? I que- ftion whether after all the Difficulties which have been raifed amongfl Us, concerning the Powers [ 385 ] , _ powers of Natute, and the Obfcurity of Caufes and Effedls, This might not be the mofl convincing of Any. Prophecy is a fo- lemn Call to Men to conlider and examine the Event; and when it plainly anfwers, may lefs admit of Evafion, than a Miracle ftridily fo called, which is wrought imme- diately in Any One's Prefence. At leaft We could not fay, that This had no Connection with the Claim to other Miracles, for This would clearly prove that Providence faw fome fupernatural Gifts ftill necefTary or ex- pedient; and if fome are eftablifhed, This will obviate all Objecftions againfl; the Credi- bility of the Reft. For it will be difficult to affign a Reafon, why thofe Gifts, which were merely perfonal, and granted for the particu- lar Comfort of fome few Individuals, reach- ing no farther than to themfelves, Ihould be continued; and yet thofe, which were of more general Ufe for the Convidlion of Un- believers, and Confirmation of Chriftians in the Faith, fhould be totally withdrawn. Dr. M. feems now to be aware of this, and to think that He had given too much Ad- vantage by the forementioned Sentence. He now retrad:s the feeming Conceffion, and choofes to fay with his Defender, Let it be underjhod, that We difpute the FaBs. The only adilitional Argument here ufed to inva- C c lidatc [ 386 ] iidate them, is, that " the very Matter of " thefe Prophecies would render the Notion *' contemptible to all Men of Judgment.'* "In one of thefe PaiTages St. Ignatius inti- *' mates, that He had been inflruc^led by the " Holy Spirit, concerning the Divijions of the " Church of Philadelphia. And in another " St. Polycarp^ by Means of a Vilion, is faid " to have foretold his own Death, and the *' Manner of it, three Days before it hap- " pened." (P. 26, 27.) And What is there in the Matter of Either of thefe Prophecies that fliould render them contemptible ? Are They not parallel to others, which, if We believe the Scriptures, We know w-ere given by Divine Impulfe ? Does not St. Paul fore- tell fuch Divifions and Corruptions in the Church of Ephefus, where He is fpeaking exprellly of what the Holy Ghoft witneffed in an extraordinary Manner ? A5ls xx. Does He not very little before his Death, prophe- tically warn them of it, by faying that the 'Time of his Departure 'was at Ha7id^ 2 Tim. iv. 6. Or if This be thought to have been eafily forefeen from his Situation at that Time, the Teftimony of St. Peter is more decilive. Knowing this that fiof^tly I mufi put off this my Tabernacle^ even as our Lord fefus Chrijl has fiewed me, 2 Pet. i. 14, Now does the Matter pf tliefe Pi^sdi^^ions render them con- temptibk? [ 387 ] temptible ? If not, why is the very fame. Thing contemptible in another like Inftance ? And why are fuch Objedtions introduced on all Occalions by a profefTed Believer, as are of equal Force, if of any, againfl the Au- thority of the Gofpel ? Farther, He fliould have remembred that He was arguing here from the Silence of thefc Apoftolical Winters. If therefore They claim- ed any of the Gifts of the Apoftolick Age, this overthrows his Argument, even tho' We fhould fuppofe thofe Claims to be groundlefs. If They reprefent themfelves, or others their Contemporaries, as favoured with extraor- dinary Illnminatiom or Vijions, 'tis plain that they tliought that Some at leaft of the Gifts of the Apoftolick Age ftill fubfifted, and that they were not all adlually withdrawn. Let lis review that whole PalTage referred to in Ignatius, of which Dr. M. has given Us only one Claufe, and that with a very vifible Air of Contempt. He might poffibly have a very contemptible Notion of the Obedience due to Bifhops, and might not think Himfelf obliged to treat them with Refpeft, or even with common Decency, but very good Rea- fons may be and have been afligned, why Obedience to Bifhops was then fo particularly infifted on. — The whole Faffage runs thus: — For although Some would have deceived me acr- C c 2 cording [ 3B8 1 wording to the FJefi ; yet the Spirit hchigfrOiTt God is not deceived. For it knows both whence it comes y and whither it goes, and reproves the Secrets of the Heart. I cried whiljl I was with Tou ; I fpake with a hud Voice^ Attend to the Bijhop^ and to the Prejbytery, and to the Deaco?is. Now Some fuppofed that I fpake this as forefeeing the Divifion that fiould come a^ mong Tou. But Me is my Witnefs^ for whofe Sake I am itt Bonds , that I knew Nothi?ig from any Man. But the Spirit fpake, faying on this wife, &c. We fee here that Ignatius re- prefents Himfelf as incapable of being de- ceived by the Seducers of thofe Times, be- caufe aflifted by the Spirit of God 3 that this Spirit of God was able to reprove the Secrets of the Heart -, that He forefaw the Divifions that fhould come amongft the Bhiladelphians, not by Information of Man, but by the Spi- rit J and that it was by this Spirit He had forewarned and inflrufted them in their Duty. The Admonitions and Inftrudions then given did indeed, as I have before obferved, re- quire no particular Infpiration, being Ad- vices, which might properly have been ap- plied on any Occafion \ but the Forefight of the Occafion, was that which here fhewed the extraordinary Affiflance. Juftly then from this Paflage does Archbifhop Wake in- fer that Ignatius was endued with a large Portion [ 389] Portion of the Spirit : And with Him con- curs the learned Dr. Smith, who gives the fame Interpretation of this Place. What then becomes of this boafted Argument from the Silence of thefe Apoftolical Fathers ? Dr. M. offers a farther Diftind:ion to ex- cufe his Confufion and Inconfiftency on this Head. Firft He fays, that " it is allowed " on all Sides, that the Apoftolic Fathers *' make no Mention of any {landing mira- " culous Powers as indulged to the Church " in their Days." How can this be faid, after the Attempts which were made to Ihew, that They fpoke of the Church as flill bkjfcd with every extraordinary Gift, without any Diftindion with Refped: to the preceding Age, when fuch {landing Powers are con- feffed to have been given ? The Reafon why They were not more explicit and large on this Subjedl, was obferved, I think, by Every Writer that appeared againft Dr. M, namely, that the Apofloiick Fathers wrote only frac^ tical Exhortations to Believers, not argu- mentative Difcourfes for the Convicflion of Ad- verfaries ; but this plain and weighty Reafon Dr. M. thought fit to pafs over in Silence, neither difproving nor evading it, but ftill arguing on their fuppofed OmifTion of it as a Proof that They knew Nothing of any fuch miraculous powers amongfl: them. But C c 3 what- [ 39^ 1 whatever was his own Opinion in this Matter," it was not fair, to reprefent this as allowed by all^ v/hich He knew was difputed by Several > that is, that They make no Mention of any ftanding miraculous Powers in their Days. This however He gives as a Reafon, why Vifions in thofe Days could not in any Sort belong to the Queftion in Difpute : re- peating again that they were merely Perfonal, which is not true of fuch Vilions as were prophetic. But, He adds, when miraculous Powers were pubUckly claimed and offered to Examination, and thefe were particularly enumerated in the Catalogue, " then they " became the proper Subject of his Work, " and required an Examination as well as " any other Gifts." (P. 29.) But why fo, if ftill they were merely perfonal ? or how came They to be lefs Perfonal, in the Time of thefe Fathers, than they were a Century before ? iThere mufl be a Millake in fome Part of the Argument or Other. Either thefe may be conlidered as of fome Ufe in the Church for the Converlion of Heathens, or they have no Relation to his Queftion, as it is ftated at prefent ; and on this Suppolition He wafted his own Time, and mifemployed that of his Anfwerers, in arguing fo long againft them. Indeed if there was any Difference in the Cafe, it was more to his Purpofe to have difproved [ 391 ] dirproved thofe earlieft Accounts of Viiio»s and Prophecies, which He once feemed dif- pofed to allow, than thofe later Reports of particular Revelations, which He took fo much Pains to invalidate. For if the former were genuine, if Prophetical Gifts continued in the Church, This will be a ftrong Argu- ment, not only from the Reafon of the Thing, that other miraculous Endowments continued likewife, but alfo from the Expreffions ufed by the Apoflolical Fathers, for They could not, vvith any Truth or Propriety, have talked of being bleffed with every extraordinary Giffy if They had one amongft them, and not the refti nor could They well avoid fpecifying the Diflind:ion on fuch an Occafion. Where- as the Power of working Miracles may be fuppofed to have continued in the Church, notwithftanding feveral of the After-Accounts of Viiions and Revelations fliould be thought not to deferve Credit. Several of thefe have been mifreprefented, and have been found, upon Examination, not to relate to extraordi- nary and particular Revelations ; (fee Dr. Church's Find. P. 240, &c.) and of Thofe which are really fpoken of as fuch, fcarce any pretend to be Prophetical j Many of them are delivered merely upon Hearfay j Few of them were upon important Occafions, anfwerable to fuch as we read of in the Bible j None of C c 4 .. them [ 39^ ] them are offered to Examination like the Mi- racles claimed in Evidence of the Truth of Chriftianity : And therefore thefe latter may fland the Teft, if the Former do not ; for it will not follow, that becaufe fome Miflakes might happen in Cafes in which Men were liable to be impofed upon, therefore They were guilty of wilful Fraud in Cafes which They could not but be fufficientjy informed in. Dr, M. next charges his Oppofers with changing Hands, taking up the contrary Side of the Queflion, and attempting to confute Him by that very Silence of thefe Fathers with which He had been prefTing them. If He meant to hint any Thing of Inconfiftency in this Manner of Arguing, it is a plain Mifre- prefentation. They do not allow that the Si-, lence of the Apoflolic Fathers on this Head can be proved ; for They think that as much may be produced from them on this Head as can well be expefted from their Subjedt and Manner of Writing, But They inlift farther, that Dr. ikT's own Suppofition of their Silence on this Article would not turn out to the Adr vantage of his Argument, but as far as it is of any Weight, may ftrongly be urged on the other Side. We can, in fuch Cafes only, judge from Circumftances, what might be the Oc- Cafion of the Juppofed Silence. Dr. M. fup- pofes [ 393 ] pofes that if Miracles had continued , the Apo~. flolical Writers would have mentioned it ; I fuppofe that if Miracles had ceafed. They would have mentioned it: Which now, as his Defender fays, has the beft Right 'and Claim to the Conclulion ? I anfwer as before. They who give the beft Reafons for their Opinion, In the firft Place then, it is not clear, (to fay the loweft) that They have not mentioned the Continuance of miraculous Powers amongfl: them; but it is very clear that They have not mentioned their Ceafing. Mr. Toll gave up their Difclaiming fuch Pow- ers, and Dr. M. has not offered to vindicate what He fuggefted before on this Point; fo that We argue on an uncontefted Silence in this Particular ; whereas much is offered to fhew that there is fome Mention in thofe Writers, of the Continuance of Miraculous Powers. Again, their Silence in the former Cafe, if real, might be accounted for from the FraBi- cal Nature of their Writings, wherein They had no Occafion or Call to mention thtjiand- ing Evidence of their Religion ; whereas this fame Pradical Intent would have led them to mention the Ceajing of Miracles, if they had ceafed, in order to quicken them to higher Degrees of Virtue, which, on this Suppofition, was now the only remaining Recommend^- ijori and Proof of their Religion. Pa [ 394 ] Dr. M. cites Part of my Reafoning on this Head. "It is fcarce credible, faid I, that " They fhould no where take any Notice of '^ fo great and fudden an Alteration, as muft *^ have happened, if the principal Leaders of " the Chriftian Caufe, and Governors of the " Church, had all at once been deprived,.,!^, " thofe Times of Adverfity, of the Privileges *' and Succours, which common Converts en- '^ joyed in the Generation immediately pre- *' ceding." Dr. M. having obferved, that " it is granted by all Proteflants, that the Gor, " vernours of the Church were, in fome Age " or other, actually deprived of thofe miracu- *^ lous Succours, which their PredecelTors en-, "joyed, ^c. adds, thus Dr. DodweW^ Argu- " ment is utterly confuted by Fad: and Expe- " rience, as well as their own Conceffions." (P. 31.) But certainly, the Conceffion that they ceafed in fome Age or other ^ even on the Suppofition that the Time was not mentioned by any Writer, would no way affecft or con-r fute my Argument as before reprefented. For there the Strefs was laid on the Improbability of their taking no Notice of fuch an Event, if the principal Leaders of the Chriflian Caufe, and Governors of the Church, had all at once been deprived, in thofe 'Times of Adverfity^ of the Privileges and Succours, which common Converts enjoyed in the Age immediately pre- ceding. [ 395 ] ceding. Whereas if miraculous Powers ceafcA not, till thofe Times of Adt^erfty were paft, and then ceafed gradually, as they were lefs and lefs wanted, then it would be no Won- der, that a particular Account fhould not be given of the exad Time when they were fi- nally withdrawn, tho' the Argument would flill hold in its full Force with Refped to the Days of the Apoflolic Fathers ; when Perfe- cutions raged, when the Enemies of the Gof- pel were triumphant, when Miracles were as much wanted as ever, for the Convidion of Gainfayers, and the Support of Believers. In fuch a Cafe, if Miracles had .ceafed all at once, when they were as much wanted as ever;^ it is not credible that They fliould pafs over fuch an Event in total Silence, without any Expreffions of Lamentation, or Profefr fions of Refignation, or Exhortations and Prayers fuitable to the Occafion. Whereas if the Cafe was, as We fuppofe it to be, that they ceafed after the Civil Eftablifhment of this- Religion, when Perfecutions ceafed j when other Encouragements concurred with the Evidence already offered to make Way for the Reception of Chriflianity 5 when Favours, when Honours and Profits attended the Pro- fefTion ; then if We find no particular Notice taken of the Period when they ceafed, yet We may very well account for it. The Ends, for vvhich [ 396 ] which they were originally given, being new no more, the Occafion of their Ceafing being vifible ; This might prevent any great Degree of Surprize, and any Notion of the Neceffity of recording it as an extraordinary Event. This Cafe was fo apparently different from the for- mer, that no Conceffion of their having ceafed in fome After-Time, without any diftinguifh- 5ng Confeffion of it, when it might reafona* bly be expe(5ted that they fliould ceafe, can affed the Argument from the Silence of Thofe who could not fail to have taken Notice of it, if They had fuddenly been deprived of all fu- pernatural Affiilance, when They had all imaginable Occafion for it, and all the Reafon in the World to expedl it. Neither therefore is this Argument con^" futed by Fa6t and Experience, for as the Situ- ation was not the fame with the Profeffors of Chrif^ianity after the Rulers of the World were become of that Number, their Silence or their Account of the Difcontinuance of Mi- racles amongft them, does no way reach the main and principal Confideration. Dr. M. however adds, as the moft remarkable Cir- cumftance in the prefent Queftion, that in all the " fucceeding Ages, there is not a fmgle " Leader or Governor of the Church, who " either owns any fuch Ceffation, or does not *' in the mofl grave and folemn Manner at- " teft [ 397 ] ■" teil the Continuance of them in great Abun- <* daiice to his own Age." Had He then for- got his own Charge againft St. Chryfojiom and St. Aujiin^ whom He reprefented as Guilty of Inconfiftency for reporting fome Miracles, when in other PafTages which He cited from them, They owned and endeavoured to ac- count for the CelTatlon of miraculous Powers amongft them ? In what Manner foever This is to be reconciled, yet They are Both exprefs WitnelTes againit what is here alTerted. And to them fome others^ may be added. Some of them argue upon the Suppolition j Others at- tempt to account for the Faft j and Several are exprefs in the Acknowledgment of it. I "will only cite Ifidore Pekiijiota, who fays in fb many Words, that Miracles were ceafed in his Time; (^./.IV.Epift.80.) Thofe who would fee more Teftimonies to this Purpofe, may confult Mr. B}'ooke\ Examination, (P. 369.) Some of thefe cannot be faid to have contra- di(5led Themfelves in this Article, and Thofe who lie under this Charge, appear to me to be jull as much involved in it as Dr. M. Him- felf, who once at lead feemed willing to grant, that there mieht be fome Inftances of miracu- lous Interpofitions from Heaven, when yet the ftanding Power of working Miracles for the Converfion of Heathens was withdrawn. This, which is his new State of the Cafe, was, as [393 ] as I apprehend, their Old Diftin6lionj and that by which They reconciled the foremen- tioned Declaration of the Ceffation of Miracles with their After-Report of fome fupernatural Events. . Their Reafonings and Accounts fhew their Meaning in thefe feemingly repugnant Affertions. They argue, that Miracles being granted for the Converfion of Heathens, they were now no longer neceffary on that Ac- count, when Chriflianity was now eftabliflied amongft them, by which They refer to the ftanding Power; and thofe Stories which They do relate, whether They were impofed upon them or not, happened amongft the Chriftians Themfelves, for their fuppofed In- ftrudion or Support, which, as Dr. M. now allows, is a very different Queftion. Dr. M. proceeds to mention an Objedion, which would veiy obviouily be raifed againft his former Management of this Argument, and his prefent State of it j namely, for what Reafon He introduced Miracles into the Dif- pute, which, by his own Confeffion, have no Relation to it ? His Anfwer is, that " it was *' for no other, than to expofe the trifling and *' frivolous Nature of them," and to fhew how fondly the Chriftians of this early Age were difpofcd to give a " miraculous Turn to every " unufual Incident, which might happen to '^ take Place on any important and aftedting «' Oc- [ 399 I *' Occaiion/* (P. 35.) This very Attempt then implies, that if They were not fo fondly difpofed, but v/ere competent Judges of Mi- racles wrought amongft themfelves, tho' not by a {landing Power for the Converiion of Heathens, much more muft They be pre- fumed to be Judges of thofe Powers which They claimed and offered to the Examination of Adverlaries 5 and therefore, if Dr. M, has failed even in this Attempt, it will turn ffa'ong- ly againft Him ; and Every Inflance which is otfered of a miraculous Interpolition from Hea- . ven, will be a prefumptive Argument that the fupernatural Gifts which They claimed, were really continued to them. Nay, the very Manner in which thefe Miracles were related, (thofe for Inflance, attending the Martyrdom of St. Folycarp) whether true or falfe them- felves, are yet a flrong and full Teflimony of ^ the Opinion and Perfwaiion of the Chriflians - of thofe Times. Had They known that Mi- racles had ceafed many Years before, (and they could not but have known it, if it had been fo) that Poly carp Himfelf was endued with no miraculous Powers, and difclaimed all Fretenfions to them, They could not have ufed fuch Language, as They do throughout this Epiflle. Dr. M. feems next to charge his Oppofers with a grofs Mifreprcfentati-on of Him. He f'iVS. [ 400 ] fays. They " have ftill the Confidence to af^ *' firm, that He does not difpute the Reality " of them, but leaves Them in Poffeffion of " Miracles as great and wonderful as any in " the Chriftian Church ; that He ftands con* ^' vicfted by his own Conceffions, and by ac- J* knowkdging the Genuinenefs of the Epiftle, " confirms the Genuinenefs of the Fadls re- " lated in it ; than which, fays He, nothing *' can be more fenfelefs and abfurd*" I fhall have Occafion prefently to refer to, and to re- tort tlie Acknowledgment in this laft Claule 5 I fhall hear only obferve, that as yet no un- warrantable Confidence appears in his Adver- faries, except that They prefumed to differ from Him. They did not alTert that Dr. M, did not difpute the Reality of thefe Miracles, but that He had not difproved them, and that in fome Places He argued upon a Suppofition of the Truth of them ; that his Reafonings were inconfiftent ; and that in the Particular Inflance referred to, He was convi7 ] not biU know, that there are frequent Dif- putes and Complaints, among the Learned, of Marginal Notes creeping into the Text,— of the Carelefsnefs of Tranfcribers ;— and, what is ftill more, of their adding Comments and Fidtions of their own. But We are told that all the Greek Copies retain this Article of the Dove (ail which are two; or' at the mofl three) and that from a Collation of thefe, the learned Cotelerius and Ruinart publijhed their federal Editions. Thefe learned Men are very much obliged to the Dr. for the Candor, Judgment and Dili- gence that He has complimented them with. Far be it from me to detradt from their Praifes j - but in the prefent Cafe it happens unfortunately that Cotelerius Himfelf tells Us^ He had not the good Fortune to meet with any MS. of this Epiftle ; and therefore He publiflied his Edition from that of Ufher. The fame did Ruinart by the Greek Original. He compared indeed the Latin Verfion with two MSS. one in the Colbertine Library, the other in that of the Monaftery of Preaux, the latter of which omits this Article of the Dove, and the other ends before the PafTage where this Article occurs. None of thefe Editors indeed thought themfclves at Liberty to alter the Copy from whence They pub- lifhed ; and therefore They All of them re- D d 4 tain [ 4^S ] tain this. Article; but They All, UJher, Rut-. ?iarf, CoiekrmSy an4 Le Clerc pafs this R&- fledlion upon it, that it was not to be found either. - iri^ .. J^ufebiiis or Ruffinus. Archbiihop /^"^z/^,- in- -;his Trandation thouo;ht Himfelf more at Liberty, and . therefore He omitted what -lie judged to. .^e . , fpurious. But it feems the Archbillipp :.fliould have given U-s the Story entire ; for *' He obferves upon the " Authority pf Mr. Z/^iV%'?/£', that Z/Z/r/t?;^ is ^' fuppofed, under thp Character of the Vulv " /^z^r^,;afcending ,fr9m the funerd Pile of " Pei'cgrimSy to ridicule the Pigeon of Poly- '"^ carp" (P. 38.) ,.'Tis true, that the Arch- biihop. mentions this ,^s a Conjedure of Mr. ZjC Moyjie •,: \m\. 'tis fuch a Conjedure, as neither -Hf : nor he Moyne Himfelf paid any Regard to .(Var. Sac. Proleg, ad Tom. I.) Le MoyJie, as well as the Archbifliop, denies the Genui^enefs of tlv;^,Pafrage, and argues ilrenuoufly againit it;: 9^t then He adds, that if ;t were genuine. He Should then have ^bought that Luciaii, alluded to it. But Dr. ^. Himfelf has taught Us how to. give ano^ ther i\.ccouni; of this Fancy of Lucian, He might pifobabiy allude to the Eagles which was ufu^i^lly let out, of the, Funeral-Piles of the Rnman- Emperors. However, to ftrengthen tl^^s EyAdenc.^, We are, tQld that X«n^/z was aa. Ajpb^.at&^f(Ojm C?hriftianity, This again. ,? ' •■ ; i u appears. [ 4^9 ] appears to be a Miftake, for it has no othcf Foundation than this only, that Siiidas calls Him ^vifjiyiyozp's (in other Copies ^ixy\yo^o5'\ which Some have tranflated a Preacher. Another Confirmation of the Genuinenefs of this Paffage the Dr. draws from a like Miracle mentioned by Trudcntius in one of his Hymns, where He makes a Dcuf to fly out of the Mouth of Eulalia at the Time of her Martyrdom. (P. 39.) But how does it appear that Prudentius ever knew or heard of St. Polycarfs Dove ? And why may We not as well fuppofe, that the Interpolator of this Epillle took the Hint from Priidenthis^ as that Prudentius took the Hint from this Epiftle ? — But *' a Fidion of fo ft range a " Kind would hardly have been hazarded, " He thinks, by fo pious a Writer, if there " had not been a Precedent for it.*' And which is moft likely to have made the Pre- cedent, and to have hazarded a Fid:ion of fo ftrange a Kind, the whole Church of Smyrna, in the fecond Century, . or Prudentius, a Poet in the fifth Century, an Age in the Dr's own Judgment, abounding ftill more in Fables and Fid:ions ?• We have already feen the Dr's Skill in amplifying theTeftimonies for this his favourite Dove. We fhall find Him full as well (killed in the Art of diminishing. In his Free. [ 4IO ] Tree Inquiry He had told Us that " Mr. " Dodwell and Biihop Wake profefs to have " dropt this Circumftance for the Sake of " rendring the Narrative the lefs fufpedled j" whereas They Both exprellly fpeciiied, that they did not drop it barely for the Improba- bility of the Fad:, but for Want of proper Authority to fupport it. He has now in his Vindication done the Archbiiliop the Juflice to cite his Words on this Occafion. " And *' indeed befides the Strangenefs of fuch an *' Adventure, I cannot think, had any fuch ** Thing truly happened at his Death, that *' not only Eufebius fhould be ignorant of it, *' but that neither St. Hierom^ nor Ruffinm^ *' nor the Mencea of the Greek Church fhould ** have made the leail Mention of it." — All this the Dr. with one Stroke of his Pen refolves into the Silence of Eufebius only. And why fo ? — Why, " the Silence of thefe *' later Writers is, it feems, of no Weight at •* all : They followed only the Tranfcript f' of Eufebius.'' (P. 41.) But how does it appear, that They followed only the Tran- fcript of Eufebius ? None of them, I think, tell Us fo, nor does Any of them refer to Eufebius. " But They were glad to get rid " of fo ridiculous a Fidion." This is ali again the Dr's own Imagination, and quite inconfiilept with what the fame fertile Ima- gination [4" ] glnation has elfewhere attributed to thefe very Fathers. Thefe fame Men, who dif- carded this as a ridiculous Fiction, were (if you will believe Dr. M.) " extremely credu-r- " lous and fuperftitious, fcrupling no Art or " Means, whereby they might propagate " their Principles j— of a Charadler from " which Nothing could be expeded that *' was candid and impartial, nothing but " what a weak or crafty Underftanding " could fupply towards confirming the Pre- *' judices with which They happened to be " polTelTed ; — roundly affirming s true, ^' Things evidently falfe and fidlitious." (Pref. P. 31, 32.) And in this very Interval, it feems, when Chriflians were Such as are here defcribed, fcrupling Nothing, and ^- fhamed of Nothing, yet endeavouring to get rid of this as a ridiculous Fiction, ftill, ac- cording to this fame contradidloiy Account, it fo happened that this very Fiction was at that Time in fuch good Credit among them as to give Occafion and afford a Precedent for Priide?ithi5 to hazard another of the fame Kind. The later Writers being thus ealily dif- miffed, and their Omiffion of this Article accounted for by a Suppofition, which is not grounded on the leaft Reafon or Authority, ^d which is incopfi^ent with the main Ob- jedion [ 4^2 ] jedloii elfewhere made againft them, Euje- hiuss Evidence is endeavoured to be taken off by telling Us, that Etffebius does not give Us here the entire Narrative, but an Abflraft of it only, or an Abridgment. (P. 39.) It is ftrange that the Dr. could fail of obferving the Difference between an Abridgment and m'Extradf. Evfchhis Himfclf tells Us, that He gives Us this Narrative v.aj:di Xe^tv — Ji'^drd for Woi'd. And We find accordinglv that He left out only the Beginning and End of this Epiflle ; the Reft of it We have here entire ; and -it agrees exacftly, bating fome flight Variations, with the other Copies of this Epiftle, excepting only this Article of the Dove, and that other Claufe, v/hich compares St. Polycarp"^ Body in the Flames to Bread, which is baked j which probably are both Interpolations, and proceeded from the fame Hand. The Advertifement annexed at the End in the Name of Pmiim, is, as I before obferved, allov/ed t-o be a Fidlion ; and 'tis no improbable Suppofition, that the Author of this Fidion might tamper alfo with the Epiftle itfelf There are fome farther Circumflances which feem much to favour this Opinion. An Obfervation may be ofl^r'd even on the Account itfelf, independently of thefe Re- flc(^ons on the external Evidence relating to it. [ 413 ] it, wliich may iliew the great Probability of the Interpolation of the Paflage in Queflion. The Circumftance referred to comes in here very abruptly and breaks in upon the Narra- tive : Here is a Story of a Dove coming out, and not a Word faid afterwards of it, whi- ther it Went, or what became of it Had the Authors of this Epiftle mentioned fuch a furprizing Thing, whether true or falfe. They would probably have dwelt longer upon it. They could fcarce have avoided taking: Notice of the Manner, or End, or Ufe of its appearing, or making fome Kind of Reiiedion or other upon it. Whereas if it crept in by the Miftake of a Letter, thro* the Ignorance or CareleiTnefs of the Tran- fcriber, or was defignedly inferted as the flight Mention of a CIrcumftance, v/hich was elfe- where to be enlarged on, on either Suppofi- tion We may account for the Manner in which it is introduced, which is exadily fuch, as We fhould naturally fuppofe it to be in the one or the other of thefe Cafes. Again, this Article of the Dove is no where repeated, as far as appears, by any ancient Author, except in the Life of St. Pe- lycarpy faid to be wrote by one Pionius. This very Perfon may poflibly be the Author of the Copy in the Bocila'cm, who has added the P. S. at the End, pretending that He tran- fcribed- [ 4H 1 fcribed it from an ancient Copy, which He found out by a Revelation from St. Polycarp. And if fo, He might be the Author of this Interpolation too, which He might foift in to confirm his own Story, which He had added of his own Invention in the Life of this Saint. Who this Pionius was, no Body can tell, nor when He lived. Eufebius men- tions a Perfon of this Name, who fuffered Martyrdom at the fame Time with St. Poly^ carp. But this Life of St. Polycarp is of much later Date, the Work of fome fabulous Author, who might pofTibly borrow this Name of Pionius, defigning moft abfurdly to father his fpurious Oifspring on Him men- tioned by Eufebius, But this is offered only as a Conjed:ure. Dr. M. proceeds to tell Us that " the Co- " pies of this Narrative appear in Eufebiuss " Time to have been very rare." (P. 40.) But how this appears, or what Proof He has for it. He does not inform Us. We muft be content to take it on his Word. " We can- " not doubt therefore, fays He, but that He " wilfully dropt it out of his Abftrad:, be- " caufe Every Body would fee it to be a moft " flagrant and fliameful Forgery." It is not eafy to find what Premifes this Conclufion is founded upon. Did He judge of Eufebius from his own Manner of quoting Authors ? Or [ 415 ] Or was It for his Purpofe that it fhould be (b, and therefore We muft not doubt of it^ Were the Firft Ages of Chriftianity the moft fabulous ? And did They in Ei{febius\ Time begin to be aflmmed of the Ficftions of former Ages? Or is this Eufebhiss ufual Way of quoting Authors ? Does He bear the Charac- ter of a fabulous and faithlefs Hiftorian ? And does He ftand convidled of fuch Forgeries in other Inftances ? If None of thefe Things can be faid, We mull: beg Leave to acquit Him of fo foul a Charge, and to difmifs all thefe idle Surmifes as the Ficftion of Dr. ikT's own Brain. In reciting the Teftimonies of the follow- ing Writers in Relation to fupernatural Gifts, Dr, M. rightly obferves that He is charged with " having added one to the Lift, which ^* does not belong to it, and which None of ** the Fathers have any where claimed, " namely, the Gift of expounding the Scrips <' tures." (P. 44.) His Defign in afcribing fuch a Claim to them was obvious, in that He thought thereby to prove them Guilty of Forgery, by pointing to fome weak Expofi- tions of Scripture v\^hich could not be fup- pofed to proceed from Infpiration. He was told therefore that this was faid without any Foundation, for that tho' there was Mention made of expounding tlie Myfleries oi God, there I 416 ] there was not a Word faid of the Holy Scrip- tures. This He is pleafed to call a pitiful Way of quibbling j " the Word Scriptures^ is " not exprelTly mentioned in the Teflimony, " therefore, the Gift of expounding them " cannot be implied in it." Truly I think this is a very material Obfervation, and very forcible Inference, that thofe Writers Them- felves have not mentioned any Thing at all about the Scriptures^ and therefore did not mean any thing about them. But Dr. M. enquires what other Meaning the Gift of expounding the Myfteries of God can have, and charges his Oppofers with " having gi- " ven no other in its Place, but leaving the " Words to fliift for Themfelves." Whereas I had faid clearly and expreflly, " Certainly " a Man might have a Knowlege of the " Chriflian Myfteries fupernaturally infufed " into Him, or a happy Talent of explaining " them particularly communicated to Him, " without an Infallibility of interpreting all " the Pailages of the Old Teftament." I know not what Gifts could be more diflindi than an immediate Knowlege of the Chriflian Syftem infufed by Infpiration, independent of the written Accounts of it; and a certain Knowlege of the Senfe and Connexion of thofe written Accounts, by which even T^hey might be offered in Evidence to Others. A Man [ 417 ] Man might have the former in a fupernatural Manner for particular Purpofes, as St. Paid tells Us, He Himfelf had, who yet might not have the latter, nor might make any Pretenfions to it. The Myfteries of God, as they are mentioned by Irenaus^ may be al- lov^ed to refer, as the Dr. fays, to the fame Myfleries, which are affirmed by Chrift and his Apoftles to be revealed to Us in the Holy Scriptures, but his Inference will by no Means follow, that therefore "the Gift of " expounding them cannot poffibly fignify ** any Thing elfe than the Gift of expound- " ing the moft abftrufe and difficult Pailages " of the Scriptures, both of the Old and " New Teflament." The Myfleries here, fpoken of, are as He Himfelf fays, the fame with the Dodrlnes taught by the Gofpel> that is, thofe revealed Truths which relate to the End and the Means of our Redemp- tion. The Gift of expounding them was that of teaching them with Truth, Con- fiflency and Perfpicuity, and Thic Gift in different Perfons might be the Effed of natu- ral or fupernatufal Attainments. Where the Knowlege of thefe faving Truths v^as learnt by Inftrudiion from Others, or by a diligent Study of the Holy Scriptures, there a Man might attain this Gift without any Kind or IJiegree of Miracle j but where it was imme- E e [. 4i8 ] diately infufed from Heaven, there it was. juftly ranked amongft fupernatural Endow- ments. But tho' in either Method a Man might know all that was necelTary to Salva- tion, and might juftly be efteemed an able Expounder of the Myfteries of God, it would not follow that He muil: therefore be an in- fallible Interpreter of all the Hiflorical and Prophetical Parts of the Old Teftament, or all the argumentative Parts of the New; which related perhaps particularly to the People to whom they w^ere written, and de- pended on fome Local Cufloms, or Opinions,, or Phrafes, or even Methods of Reafoning. It does not follow that becaufe a Man had one Gift, therefore He had every One, yet it can only be by this Connection that it can be inferred, that becaufe a Perfon was taught in a very diiferent Method, namely, by Infpi- ration, the fame Dodrines which Others are taught in the Gofpel, therefore He muft ne- ceflarity likewife underftand every difficult PafTage in the Bible from One End of it to the Other. This Diftindion is fo obvious and was fo clearly exprefTed before, that un- lefs Dr. M, expected an implicit Refignation of our Underflandings to his pofitive AiTer- tions, it might have deferved fome Notice and Attempt of Evafion. I had C 419 1 i had obferved likewlfe that the Gift fpokeu of in the New Teftament underftood by In- terpreters to' mean an hifpired Knowlege of the true Senfe of a particular PafTage of the ProphetSy for confirming or explaining fome particular Do(5lrine of the Gofpel, was occa^ Jional only ) and owing tofudden Lnpulfes. To this Dr. M. attempted no Anfwer, and yet if this be admitted, Nothing can be inferred to his Purpofe from the Teftimony before Us* For though other Chriftians, befides the Apoftles, v/ere fometimes occafionally infpiredj in praying, prophefying, or expounding the^ Scriptures in their religious Aflemblies, yet No One, that I know of, iince the Times o^ the Apoftles has pretended to claim the Gift of expounding the Scriptures in that exten- five Senfe defcribed by Dr. M. viz. the Gift of expounding the Scriptures by a Divine In- fpiration, (Inqu. P. 1 16.) a divine and infallible Interpretation of the Scriptures, (Pref. P. 33.) and that of the mofl abfhrufe and difficult Palfases of the Scriptures, both of the Old O J. ' and New Teftament (Vind. P. 47.) This I fay has been claimed by None, excepting the Popes of Rome^ and perhaps fome wild En-*' thufiafts. The Gift of prophefying or preach- ing, and That of expounding the Scriptures, were diftin(ft Gifts, and are plainly diftin- guiflied by Sti Fatd. The Words of Irencem E e 2 relate f 420 1 relate to the former, which He affirms io have continued till his Time ; If it be thought probable that the other alfo fubfifted at the fame Time, and if Any One fhould think that Irenceus intended to include both, it would . not be neceflary to difpute it with Him. I would only obferve that Irena;m does not affirm this of Himfelf. In the Apoftles Days All were not Prophets-, and therefore this Gift might be granted to O- thers, and not to Irencsus, But what I mean principally to infift on here, is, that if 7r^- natis had affirmed this of Himfelf, it would not follow, that becaufe He had fometimes cccafwnally been favoured with fuch Impulfes, therefore He was infpired in every Thing that He preached or wrote. Does He ever in any Part of his Works pretend to Infpira- tion ? Or does He deliver his Expolitions of the Scriptures as infallible Interpretations ? In his Preface He fpeaks quite another Lan- guage. He tells Us that He defigns to ex- pofe the Errors of the Hereticks to the beft of his Power, and that according to his mo- derate Talent H^e fliall give Occafion to O- tliers more fully to confute them. He ex- cufes his Want of Art and Skill, and tells the Perfon that He addreffed Himfelf. to, that He doubts not but He will improve upon what He has obferved, as being more able than [ 421 ] than Himfelf. And yet this is the Man, whom the Dr. would reprefent (and that on the Strength of a Tingle Expreffion no way relating to Himfelf) as fetting up for a Pope, and pretending to be an infallible Interpreter , of Scripture. But He adds, that " befides the PalTage of « Irefiaiis, from which alone the Thing it- " felf may fairly be inferred, We learn from " the exprefs and dired Teftimony of Gre^ " go^y^ called the Wonder-Worker, that the « Gift of expounding the Holy Scriptures « was adtually claimed, and reckoned as one « of the moft efleemed and excellent Gifts " of thofe primitive Times ; and was poured « out in the largeft Meafure, upon his Ma- " fter Origen" (P. 54.) But this Tefti- mony does not come up to th? Point, nor anfwer to his Account of it in feveral Particu- lars. It is not the Claim of a Perfon, who pretended Himfelf to be poiTefted of this En- dowment, but a Compliment from a Scholar in a Panegyrical Oration on his Mafter at leaving Him. Neither do the Words, how- ever high, neceilarily imply that He thought Him infpired ; nor muft We always lay the higheft literal Senfe on the ExprelTions in a Panegyric. He fays, Origen " has received ^^ this greateft Gift from God, with an « abundant Share of it from Heaven, to be E e 3 !' tlic [ 422 3 '' the Interpreter of the Words of God tq " Men, as if God Himfelf were fpeaking, " and to expound them to Men, that Men " alfo might hear them." (P, 46.) Now as Gregory Thaiimaturgus certainly believed, that the Grace of God was neceifary to alTift Men in the Difcovery of Truth, and parti- cularly in the Study of the Holy Scriptures, (however Dr. M. may ridicule that Doctrine) there is Notliing here which He might not. ftridlly fay, as believing that Gpd had par- ticularly blefled his Endeavours, and en- lightned his Underflanding with his Holy Spirit, without meaning that his Interpreta- tions of Scripture were immediately didated to Him by Revelation. Some late Expolitors have excelled this Way, and Ihould I fay of them, that God had blefled them with the . greateft and befl* Talent, that of expounding his Holy Word, and had granted them his gracious Afllftanc? to that Purpofe, I fhpuld fay no more than the Language of the Gof-^ pel would juflify, and fhould not fufpeft that Any One would believe, that I thought theni really infpired. Or if I was thought an En- thuflaft, or was really fo, and did believe tha^ They were favoured with Jlevelations, yet fince They did not mak^ any fuch Prctenfions Themfelves, the moft high-flown Expref-r fions from an Adrnirer of them would be nq Proofj t 423 ] Proof, that the Gift of an infpired Interpre* tation was claimed in our Days. It ought therefore principally to be added that Origeti Himfelf not only never claims fuch a Gift, but on the contrary difclaims it in many Parts of his Commentaries, and other Works, particularly Lib. con. Celf. 7. P. 70 1 . 3en. Ed. * But Dr. M. proceeded to fhew, that Jiijlin Martyr in particular lays Claim to this Gift of expounding the Scriptuns as indulged Him in 4Ln extraordinary Mantier^ by the fpecial Grace of God 'j ^nd in his Vindication He fays, in a contemptuous Manner, that '' thefe more " learned Dodors infifl that He has wholly *' miftaken the Matter, thro' his Ignorance " of the proper Senfe of the Words, &cJ' (P. 47.) I charged Him indeed with putting a wrong Senfe on fuflin\ Words, but whe- ther through Ignorance, or not, I pretended not to fay. But what mufl We charge Him with, when He profeffes not to know the proper Senfe of thefe Expreffions, the ordinary Grace and the ordinary Afjijlance of the Holy Tov YJiMoy, Kelt iv-ym? rdi T^o-pnTiiui- IlKriy kaI ny.ii4 KATCL TO S'VVa.rlv tmiV, •Tn'TrOlilKU.lMV, 7!*, ai ^HJ/ KeAfTOf, E^ 4 Gbpft^ [ 424 1 Ghojl^ and to have looked after it without re- ceiving Satisfaction, in the Writings of his Oppofers ? He reprefents me in particular as w^riting with great Perplexity and Confu/ion on this Subjed:. He cites me as faying that " the " Word x^tgij or Grace is never ufed to de- ^' fcribe a fupernatural Gift, but known to ^^ mean that ordinary Co-operation of thp " Holy Spirit with our beft Endeavours, ^' which is common to all Believers ;" and then He reprefents me as treating it in the next Words as having no Meaning at all, but as " a common Way of fpeaking, which Pious " P^rfons accuilom themfelves to, of afcribing " every good Thing which They poflefs to «* the Grace of God ;" But I added expreilly what the Dr. thought fit to omit, that they accuftomed themfelves to this Way of fpeak- ing, according to the plain DoBrine of Scrip- ture^ and therefore I could not poflibly treat it as a Way of fpeaking that had no Mean- ing at all, unlefs I meant to fpeak in that ir- reverent Manner, of the Holy Scripture. I fpoke not of well-meaning, tho' ill-inflruded Chrillianr, who nyght ufe a Word of Courre without underflanding it ; but I fpoke of " all Perfons of true Piety, as accuftoming \y themfelves to fpeak of every Kind and De- 1* gree of their Proficiency as owing to the "■}. Grace of God, according to the plain Doc^ */. trine [425] " trine of Scripture f" And is not tills the plain Do(ftnne of Scripture ? Are We not therein exprellly told, that the Power both of difcerning and pradliling our Duty is owing to the affifting Grace of God ? Are We not therein reminded of a Truth, which We for- rowfully experience, that our Nature is cor- rupt, and unable by its own Strength to turn to God, and to do Works acceptable to Him ? Are We not taught that the Reparation of this loft Strength, that the Poffibility and the effedlual Endeavour of pleafing our Maker, is owing to the Operation of his Holy Spirit within Us ? Let us attend to fome Paffages of the Holy Writings, which prove this Point. ^be Preparatio7is of the Heart in Man^ fays "Solomon, are froiti the Lo?^d, Prov. xvi. i. I will put my Spirit within Tbu, aizd caufe Tou to walk in my Statutes^ and Te fall keep my fudgments and do them, fays God Himfelf by the Prophet Ezekiel, xxxvi. 26. The Prayers in the Pfalms of David are founded upon this Principle and exprelTed in this Manner, He applies continually for Divine Afliftance to enable Him to difcern the Truth, and to live according to it. In particular He fays, O Give me the Comfort of thine Help again and^ efablifj me with thy free Spij'it. St. Paul tells Us, that We are not fuficient of Ourfelves^ to think any Thing as of OurfelveSy ' - ^ but [ 4^6 ] hit our Sufficiency is of Godj 2 Cor. 111. 5, that PTe are Jire?igthened with Might by his Spirit in the inner Many Ephef. lii. 16. that JVe abound in Hope thro the Power of the Holy 'Ghoft-, Rom. XV. 13. that thro the Spirit of JVifdom the Eyes of our Vnderftanding are en-- light ncd^ Ephef. i. 18. that the Spirit of God dwelleth inXJs^ Rom. viii. 11. that the Spirit helpeth our Infirmities y Rom. viii. 26. that We are the l^emple of God , and that the Spirit pf God dwelleth in Usy ^ i Cor. lii. 6. that the Manife/lation of the Spirit is given to every Ma/i to profit withal^ i Cor. xii. 7. that God hath fealed Us and given Us the Earnefi of his Spirit in our Hearts^ z Cor- i. 22. that ac^ (or ding to his Mercy He faved Us by the wag- ing of Regejieration, and renewing of the Holy Ghofiy Tit. iii. 5. with many other Expref- iions to the fame Purpofe. St. Peter adds, that our Soids are purified in obeying the Truth thro the Spirit ^ i Pet. i. 22. Neither is this mere Peterifm and Paulifm^ as a late Writer was pleafed to call fuch Proofs drawn from the EpifJeSy as if they were of lefs Authority than the Gofpels, but it is the Podrine like- wife of our BleiTed Saviour Himfelf. He tells. Us, that without Him We can do Nothingy John XV. 5. that Except a Man be born of Water and of the Spirit, He cannot enter into the Kingdom of God , John iii. 5. that He that hlievetk [ 427 1 ^elieveth on Him, out of his Belly ficuld flow Rivers of living Water ; and this tlie Evange- lift fays, fpake He of the Spirit, ivhich they that believe on Him f'ould receive, John vii. 38, 39. that if miy Man love Him and keep his Words, his Father woidd love Him, and ^hey wQidd come unto Him and make their Abode with Him, John xlv. 23, and how this Divine Refidence and Abode was to be iin- dgrftood is explained, v. 17. ^he Spirit of T^ruth, He dwelleth with Y^ou atid fiall be iri Toil : And finally He afllires us, that God will not fail to give the Holy Spirit to them that ajk Him, Luke xi, 13. And as We have Scriptural Authority for the Subftance of this Poc^trine, that the Spirit pf God is affifting to Us in every good Thought, and Word, and Work, fo We have- the fame Authority for the T^m by which it is exprelTed. V/g know that x^t^^ ^^ ^^^ original Meaning iignifies no more than any Grace or Favour in general, but We find it applied in the Sacred Writings tp fignify par-. ticularly that Affiftance granted by the Spirit to fupply the Defe<5ts and correct the Faults of our corrupt Nature, and to enable Us ftiH to difchargp all that is required pf Us. When St. Paul lay under fome partigiilar tempta- tion, which He ftiles the Mejj'enger of Satan^ ^nd from which He thrice prayed to be dc- liyercd. [ 4^8 3 Hvered, The Anfwer was, that inilead of being delivered from it, He fliould be fup- ported under it -f* -, My Grace is fufficie?it for tljeCy for my Strength is made perfedi in Weak- Tiefsy 2 Cor. xii. 9. And to omit many other Inflances, the Author of the Epiftle to the Hebrews^ where He is fpeaking of the Aid of Infirmities, ufes this very Expreffion, Let TJs. therefore cmne boldly to the 'Throne of Grace y that We may obtain Mercy and find Grace to help it! Time of Need^ Heb. iv. 16. Dr. M. fays " He knows thefe Terms, of ** the ordinary Grace and the ordi?iary Affijiance ** of the Holy Ghofi^ are frequently ufed among •* Chriftians, but chiefly by that Sort, who *' know not what they mean, or rather mean •^ nothing at all by them." But fince They only ufe herein the Language of the Sacred Writings, and profefs to mean hereby the feme Thing which is fo often repeated there- in, namely, the Help given by the Holy Spirit to our natural Infirmities, They cannot be liable to the Charge here brought again ft them, without Confequences which will fhock every ferious Chriftian. — Dr. M. goes on to reprefent me as contradid:ing Myfelf for fpeaking of this ordinary Grace as conliftent with the Ufe of a Man's own Reafon, and yet allowing that as it is a Power added to our i 4^9 ] our Nature, it may in fome Senfe be called fupernatural. As not the Truth but the Con- fiftency of this Dodrine is here made the Que- ftion, it may be fufficient to refer to the tenth Article of our Church, wherein We are thus ihftruded. " The Condition of Man after " the Fall of Adam is fuch, that He cannot ** turn and prepare Himfelf by his own na- " tural Strength and good Works to Faith *« and Calling upon God. Wherefore We « have no Power to do good Works pleafant " and acceptable to God without the Grace " of God by Chrift preventing Us, that We " have a good Will, and v/orking with Us '»' when We have that good Will." I refer not to this at prefent as a decifive Authority, tho' methinks it fhould have fome Weight with All who have fubfcribed to the Truth of it J but to jQiew that Ignorance and Non- fenfe are not chargeable on thofe pious Chri- ftians, who ufe this Style, and that there is no Contradiaion in the Manner in which I had expreifed it. For the Compilers of this Article have not told Us, that We are merely pafiive in the Work of our Converfion, or that the Grace of God takes away the Ufe of our ownReafon, or the Exercife of our own Choice. They teach Us rather that it has. reftored -thefe to Us, and that thro' the pre- venting and affifling Grace of God, We no vv ha'/e [ 430 ] have it In our Power to know and obey our Maker as effeftually for his Acceptance as if* We had never loft that Capacity. Whether this Power of returning to our Duty was the! Privilege of Nature, or of the affifting In- fluence of the Divine Spirit, added fince the Corruption of our Nature, We could not perhaps by our own Reafon have determined^ but when the Scripture has determined this. Point for Us, and has alTured Us that it is owing to the latter, We muft not prefume to be Wifer than our Maker, and infift that it is the former, that is, that it is our own original unforfeited Gift. As being then an additional Strength communicated to Us .be- yond what was left to Us after the Fall of our firft Parent, it may in fome Senfe be. rolled fupeniatural, but as the Method of com- municating it is fuch as We do not outwardly diftinguifli from the Workings of our Nature, and experience only by the Happy EfFedls of it, and is offered to all ^ it is therefore rightly termed the ordi?iary Grace of God, and di- ftinguiilied from every Thing which is vilibly Jiipcrnatural and miraculous. This prevents a Poflibility of that Confufion and different \5itt which Dr. M. fuppofes may be made of this Principle in Theological Difputes ; where He has fo ridiculed the great Dodrine of our San5fiJicatio?i by the BlelTed Spirit, as muft, I [ 431 ] I fliould hope, open the Eyes of all his well-* difpofed Advocates. I miiil do Mr. Toll the Juftice to obferve, that He has ufed this Chriilian Style and Way of fpeaking, which Dr. M, reprefents as " ufed chiefly by thofe, " who know not what They mean, or ra-* ** ther mean Nothing at all by them." Nay He has gone farther, and fpoken exprefHy of* the extraordinary Aids of God's Holy Spirits (P. 12.) even where He mentioned them in Contradiilind:ion to any Thing fupernatural or miraculous, and meant no other than a great Degree of Divine Afliftance concurring with rational Convi(5lion. This Way of fpeak- ing is fcriptural and juft, whatever Offence it may give to Gainfayers ; and fince there is this fundamental Difference between Dr. M, and his Defender, it may be of fome Ufe to admonifli the latter what Caufe He is en- gaged in, that He may not contribute to ferve an Interefb which is very far from his Intention. Dr. M. proceeds to review the PalTages, from whence He had inferred that 'Jujiiti Martyr claimed the fupernatural Gift of ex- pounding the Scriptures. And here I fland charged v/ith two Blunders in giving a wrong Senfe and a wrong Tenfe to the Verb Tctgx- xaA^. But it is not pretended, that Either of them does any way aftcd or alter the Force t 432 ] Force of the Argument, and therefore It Is very little material either Way to infifl on or to defend them. However both Points are, I think, fufficiently defenfible, if it was worth while to dwell tnuch upbn it. The Word «n'agctx.cL,\5 is often ufed in the Senfe of pray^ ing both by Sacred and Prophane Writers, as the firft Lexicon that is confulted, may con- vince Us. And it is principally fo ufed in the New Teftament, which feems mofl to the prefent Purpofe. Thus Mark i. 40. Kctt ^iXyiSj S'uva.aa.i y.i xci3"a§i(jaf Again Mark vii. 32. Kctt (pie^awhyjcti y.a>(pov fjioyi?\. fays Dr. M. now. He did not defire that They might have the fame Gift which He had, but that They might make a good Ufe of that extraordinary Talent, which He had of interpreting the Scriptures by attending to his Interpretations^ and embracing that true Senfe of them which he was now qualified to teach them. The Reafon affigned for this new Conflrud:ionk and entire Alteration of the Martyr's Sentence and Meaning, is, that " He could not on ^ any other Account be apprehenfive of any ** Puniihment from God at the laft Day, *' but for the Neglecl of imparting and com- " municating to Others the Benefit of that *' extraordinary Gift, ^^." (P. 52.) Cer- tainly He would be anfwerable for the Neg- \tdi of his Gift, whatever it was, whether attainable by the common Grace offered to All, or the fupernatural Afliftance afforded only to- ibme, and He mufl think it his Duty to enforce earneftly on all that Knowlege of the Scriptures which was necefTary to Salva- tion, tho' He did not attain to it Himfelf by particular Infpiration. This Manner of Con- clufion was very proper to fliew them his Senfe of the Importance of coming to a right Under- t 43^ ] tfndierflanding of the Sacred Writings, and of the Duty which He lay under of contributing to it to the bell of his Power j but has no Relation to any miraculous Method of in- terpreting it. He goes upon the Suppofition that the Grace of underftanding the Scriptures was offered to All, and therefore exhorts all to be Partakers of it 3 whereas if He had fpoken only of his particular Expofitions to be received by thofe who compofed his Audience, his Expreffions had certainly been more con^ fined. Neither would He in this Manner have fpoken of the Caufe, and have fpecified the Grace to which He attributed his owii Underflanding of the Scriptures, and exhort-^ ed Ail to be Partakers of that Grace 5 but He would certainly have faid what Pie meant 5 He would have fpecified the EffeB. and infilled on their receiving thofe Expofitions, which He was infpired to deliverj Whereas his Words are clear and exprefs, that H^ exhorted All to partake of the Grace which He had partaken of; which was no other than that of interpreting the Prophecies of the Old Teflamcnt by the Revelation offered to all the World by Chrifl and his Apoflies in the New. He was hot fpeaking tO Chriftian Brethren, who might perhaps h^ve owned his Authority, but Pie was holding a Controverfy with Jewijh Adverfaries, who F f ^ eould i 436 ] could not be fuppofed to pay any Regard to his Pretence to Infpiration, if That had been his Meaning. He addrefTes Himfelf very properly to them upon their own Prin- ciples, reafons with them out of the Scrip- tures which They acknowleged, and pro- fefles to owe his own Proficiency herein to the Grace of God^ by which Title the Gofpel itfelf is fometimes diftinguiflied in the New Teftament. He exhorts all the Jews to be guided by the fame Light, and to embrace the fame Grace, which in .other Words was exhorting them to turn Chriflians. And as this Exhortation was founded on Argument, on a View of many Types and Prophecies which the Jews ad- mitted, and which He fhews to be both explained and fulfilled in the Hiflory of our Saviour's Adions and Do(5lrines, in this Light it was rational and pertinent, and might be hoped to have fome good Eife(5l. Whereas had He foUicited them to receive his parti- cular Expofitions as infpired, when They did not fo much as acknowlege the general Faith, which He profefTed, This had been abfurd and inconfiftent, and his Propofal could exped no other Reception tlian that of Contempt and Ridicule. There are two other Paflages of Jujiin Martyr, which He had before produced> to prove [ 437 ] prove this Claim to Inrpiration in his Inter- pretation of the Holy Scriptures j which were both particularly fliewn by the Con- text to mean no fuch Thing, but to refer to • the general Dodrines of the Gofpel made' known to Us by the gracious Revelation of Chrift : Dr. M. in his Vindication attempts only to obviate the Objecflion from the ' Ufe of the Plural Number in thofe Paf- fages, from whence it was inferred, that Jiiftin was not fpeaking of any Gift pecu- liar to Himfelf, but of fome Privilege com- mon to all the Profeffors of Chriftianity. Dr. Af' s firft Remark is, that " They might " have obferved, that One of thefe fame " Teflimonies begins with a Plural Verb, *^ which yet cannot admit any other In- " terpretation than of the Singular Num- " ber, as being addreffed only to the lingle " Perfon of TryphoT (P. 53.) This again is a MiHake in Fad:, and would have been filled great Ignorance, or Negligence, or by fome harflier Name, had it occurred in the Performance of an Adverfary j The Paf- fage referred to is the lafl; of Thofe which were cited by Dr. M. on this Occafion, and which begins thus, "Q\^^^ dv y^[x,cii '7tQr\^ 6cCi Can ye ever think, &c. Now this the Dr. fays, w^as addreffed to the fingle Perfon of Trypljo, whereas Nothing can be more clear and ex~ F f 3 prefs. [438 ] prefs, than that this was addreffed to Him and his Company. He had told Hrypho ir> the Words immediately preceding, that " He had endeavoured to reprefent thofe Things with as much Brevity and Concifenefs, as the Cafe ivotild bear for the Sake of Thofe who had at^ tended Him that Day^ To which Trypko re^ turns, that He had done well^ yet He would have him iinderfland that fhbuld He repeat them again more at large y it would he a Pleafure to Him and Thofe that were with Him, to hear them. To which Jujlin replies in the PalTage refer- red to, but beginning it expreilly with an Addrefs to them AH- '^Oi^^i civ yifjLa.^ 'TCore^ 2 cLv^pi?^ &c. Dr. M's next Remark is, that *' this indeed is a common Cuftom with all «^ Writers to Ufe the Plural Number PFe " and Usj when they expecft to be under- *' flood as fpeaking only of themfelves j'^ and he is pleafed to exemplify his Remark in fome Quotations from my Anfwer to Him. And here He diverts Himfelf with fome pretty intelligible Hints, as if He thought me not the Author of my own Letter, and novv^ calls that the true Synodical Stile^ which He had juft before told Us was a com- mon and cuilomary Way of Speaking. The Infinuation perhaps had not deferved Notice, liad not the Cafe been circumftanced as it js s but I m_uft have been guilty of grofs Pre-r varication [ 439 ] varication, and a wilful Lye, had I publiilied the Colleaion of Others in that Manner, with that Account which I gave of it in the preface. The Truth was, as it was there reprefentedj It was a private Letter^ com- municated to No One till it was finifhed, and was altered only in a fingle Sen- tence after it was communicated. This Alteration came from a Perfon whofe Appro- bation of it much induced me to make it publick, whofe Name it would be an Ho- nour to me to mention; and who is fince taken to the Reward of his exemplary Life and Labours. But neither is the Re- mark itfelf flriaiy true, as Dr. M. has ftated it, that it is a common Cuftom with Writers to ufe the Plural Number, when they ex- ped to be underftood as fpeaking only of themfelves. They certainly mean in fuch Cafes to exprefs what They conceive to be the Sentiments of thofe who concur with them in the general Opinion, and do not ufe the regal ov fyiiodical Stile, to exprefs the. Importance of their own Perfons, but in Expectation of being underftood to explain the Notion or Principle of thofe, who avow the fame Caufe. Thus when his Defender faid, " Let it be underftood that We dif- " pute the Fadts." (P. 38.) I do not ima- gine that He intended to fignify merely his F f 4 ^ own [ 440 ] own Opinion, nor dp I infer from hence that He had Dr. M. or any other Coadjutor at his Elbow ; but I fuppofe that He meant by this Kind of Expreffion to fix the Foun- dation on, which, as He apprehended, the Reft of Dr. M's Advocates, as well as Him- felf, intended to maintain the Argument. Such Phfafes from private Perfons are, I think, always fo underftood ; nor can the iVrgument from the Ufe of the Plural Number be fo evaded. Tho' the Writer or Speaker be jingle, He is fuppofed in fuch Cafes tQ fpeak of more than Himfelf, and would talk in a new and unintelligible Stile, if He did not. Dr. M. feems fenfible of this, and there- fore after labouring the Point in vain. He determines that " it is Nothing to the Pur- '' pofe, whether yuftin fpeaks here only of ** Himfelf, or of a Number of Chriftians : *' For if He affirms either of Himfelf or of ^^ Ail, that They were infpired by God with *^ the right Interpretation of his Scriptures, *' that is the whale which He contends for." (P. 54.) He had before reprefented the Mar- tyr as challenging this as his peculiar Privi- lege, as granted by the fpecial Grace of God to Himfelf; but when it was fliewn that He fpoke of fome Grace and Favour common to sill Christian i>5 now tlie Anfwer is, that it is thQ [ 441 ] the fame Thing if He alTerted that They were all infpired. But this very Circumftance would have been a Proof, that He could not fpeak of Infpiration, if the Expreffion had been doubtful; and much more when the Term itfelf is that which fignifies common and ordinary Grace, this of the Unherfa- lity of the Diftribution of it is a Confirma-. tion of that Senfe of it. It was not credible that All Chriftians were infpired in the In- terpretation of the Old Teftament, and there- fore when He fpeaks in the Plural Number of Himfelf and the Whole Body of Belie- vers w^ithout Limitation, as coming by Grace to underfland the Scriptures, it is very plain that He meant of that general Light, which the Belief of Chriftianity threw upon the for- mer Writings both Hiftorlcal and Prophe- tical. Dr. M. however " thinks that it will ap- " pear unqueftionably to every Man unpre- " judiced, who conliders the joint Force of " the three Teftimonies which He has " produced in Proof of it, that Jujiin fpoke " of Chriftians being infpired by God with " the right Interpretation of the Scriptures." (P. 54.) As this is entirely an unfupported Opinion, not founded on a Review of thofe Teftimonies themfelves, nor on any Anfwer given to the plain Expofitions of them which were [ 442 ] ■were before ofFered, it can be of no Weight with any who do not pay implicit Regard to Dr. ilf' s Authority and AlTertions ; arid I {hall take the Liberty to fiippofe the contrary, that all unprejudiced Perfons will fee that in thofe PafTages He did not, and could not fpeak of particular Infpiiration. Dr. M, however adds, that " 'jttft^n is hot in thefe " Teflimonies talking of any common or " ordinary Points of the Scriptures, but of " the mofi: abftrufe and recondite PalTages *' of the Old Teftament, in which, as in " a Veil, the chief Evidences of the Mejjiah *' were fuppofed to have been wrapped up.'* (P. 54, ^5.) This, as far as it is true, is not of the leaft Service to the Dr's Inter- pretation. For yiijiin does not undertake to explain a particular dark PaiTage or two by immediate Infpiration, but He is fhewing aifgumentatively, that the whole Tenour of the Jewifi Difpenfation was predidtive of the Evangelical. He illuftrates many PafTages by their Completion under the Gofpel, and iliews how thofe Revelations, which God at jhidry Times, and in diverfe Manners had made in Times pafi unto the Fathers by the TrophetSy were preparatory to that clearer Revelation, which at length He had made mito all Men by his SoJi. In this View He refers to fome Predidions which before were [ 443 ] were unintelligible, and fome Inftitutions which were unaccountable, and points to their real Meaning and life as introdudory to the great Scheme of our Redemption by Chrifl. And when He has done this, and given a better Account of the JewiJJj Wri- tings and Ceremonies, than They could do Themfelves, He goes on very properly to improve this into an Argument of the Truth of that Revelation which He profelTed. He appeals to the yews with whom He was converling, whether in their own Judgment thefe Difpenfations could have born fuch an exad Analogy and Relation to each Other, if Both had not had the fame Divine Author. And here I fhall ufe Dr. M's own Tranfla- tion, only retaining the P/zf^r^/ Number, as it is in the Original, which will fhev/ that jtijlin fpoke as a Member of the Church -, as One of the whole Society of Chriilians. Do Te thinks that We could ever have been able to under/land thefe Things from the Scriptures, if by the Will of their Author, We had not re- ceived the Grace to undetfiand them. He plainly infers that this rational Interpretation of the Old Teftament (with which the Jews profelTed themfelves pleafed, tho' They did not yet own themfelves convinced) which Chriilians by their farther Light were ena- bled to offer^ was a Proof that the fame Holy t 444 ] Holy Spirit, which didated the Writings of the Old Teflament, had likewife infpired the Authors of the New. The Explanation of the One by the Other, was fo eafy and natu- ral, and the View and Defign of the Whole Scheme in Both fo confiftent and impor- tant, that Each was illuftrated and confirmed by Each, and the Author of the Former might from hence be concluded to be the Inflrudlor of the latter. The Inference was ftrong and conclufive, and particularly appli- cable to the 'JewSy but has no Relation to, or Connection with the fuppofed Claim of In- fpiration in the particular Perfon then fpeak- ing; but depends on the Knowlege which Every Chriftian had, or might have from the Revelation of the Gofpel. There is no doubt- ful Term ufed which might give Occafion to any fuch Miftake about a fupernatural Gift of expounding the Scriptures, nor is there any Thing in the Context which can exprefs or imply it j but there are feveral Circumftances which apparently exclude it. Dr. M\ laft Refuge on this Head is fuch again as He would have derided in an Oppo- fer. Some learned Men, it feems, amongft the Papifts have fo underflood it, and inter- preted this PafTage of 'Jiijihi^ fupernatural Ta^. lent in interpreting the Scriptures. But J thought Dr. M. had waved the Point of Authority [ 445 1 Authority in the prefent Queftlon, and had referred the Decifion of it to our own Judg- ments, and to the Reafon of the Thing, This was becaufe He well knew that the Weight of Authority would caft the Scale againft Him -, yet ftill when it feemed to fa- vour his Purpofe, He could condefcend to call in the Teilimony of Members of the Ro- mijh Communion, whofe Superftitions and received Opinions, in Spite of all their Learn- ing, led them into many fuch Errors. But All, as far as I can perceive, are now for a Free Inquiry^ as well as Dr. M. and will not have their Judgment precluded by the Sen- tence of two Popilh Writers. The fame Reafons, which prevail againft Dr. M's In- terpretationo are of as much Force againft theirs^ and tho' They and He intended to make a very different \5{q of their Opinioa in this Point, yet We need not fcruple to pronounce them all equally miftaken in it. The next Miracle brought under Review in the Vindicatioriy is that of raifing the Dead. Dr. M. quotes me as faying that on thir Ar- ticle there is great Strefs to he laidy and con- fents that the liTue of the Whole may reft upon it. But whatever my Opinion might be of the Importance or Evidence of this Article, I did not exprefs it in this Place. I had repeated his Quotation from Ireno^.us, that " the [ 44^ ] *' the Miracle of railing the Dead was fre-» " quently performed on ?iecejfa?y Occafionsl* Thefe lafi: Words I diftinguiilied by putting them in Italicks, and went on to obferve that tliere was great Strefs to be laid on them. By the Error of the Printer indeed it is, *' there is great Strefs to be laid on this *' Caufe^' but the Impropriety of that Word in that Place, and the Connection of the following Sentences might eafily have fhewn that the true Copy was, on this Claufe. For I argued from hence, that Dr. ikf's Account of the great Frequency of this Miracle in every Pariih, &c. muil be a Mifreprefenta- tion ; that as Irenaus here limited it to ne- cejfmj Occafimis^ the Frequency fpoken of could only be comparati'ue^ 6cc. The Strefs that I laid on this Claiife was fo apparent that I can fcarce think it could be miftaken without Wilfulnefs. What was probably meant by the Limitation of this Miracle to neceffary Occafmis^ I have already endeavoured to fhew, and Dr. M. has offered Nothing new on it in this Place *» The * Dr. M. had In his Free Inquiry put a fdlfe Conjiruclion on Irenxus'i Words. He had interpreted the Words — th? tcLTATQ' Tov \n.KK\](jict<; '7rx " Faith [ 454 ] *' Faith and Convii5 Qdrny eoi V Xtyii Kvpiov Tov 0eo!/ 'AQ[>u,cL[/., 3tcu tov Qiov laoLcL'A., Jcctj Toy ©jo; I^oOo^ ©eoj ^i y-x gV* Now that the Dead are raijed^ even Mofes fieived at the Bufi, when he calleth the Lord, the God of Abraha7n^ and the God of Ifaac, and the God of Jacob. For he is not a God of the Dead, but of the Living, for All live unto Km, Luke xx. 37, 38. Here both the Context [ 4^4 ] Context dnd tBe Nature of the Argument ufed fliew unqueflionably that he fpoke of the future Refurredion of the whole Species, yet He iifes the fame Phrafe that he did in the other Cafe, and has here that very Word, which as Dr. M. fays, and every School knows, indicates a prefent Senfe. Again,- fays the fame divine Author. coc-7rep o YIcltv\^ eytipzi T»$ viTtpy^y 'John V. 25. St. ■ P^2<:/ fol- lows his Mafter's Example. Ti Itcitov ^pm- Tcti TtcLp viMV \i 0 0eo$ j/ex-p85 eyiipzi, A5^s xxvi. 8. and elfewhere within a few Verfes He ufes this prefenf Tenfe three Times, tho' he is clearly and profeiTedly treating of the future Refurredtion at the End of the World, I Cor. XV. 29, Cyc. The laft of thefe Ver- fes is the moft remarkable, and therefore I will cite it at length. 'AX>C Ipum tt^j lyiU fOVTcLl 01 ViXpOly X.CLI 'TtOiCC cooy-OLn ipy^OVTcil ; Bt/f fome Man 'will fa)\ How are the Dead j-aifed^ a?id with what Body do they come .? This could not be fpoken of thofe, who were reftored to the fame mortal Condition in this Life, but of thofe who were to be raifed again v/ith glorified Bodies hereafter. The Apoflle goes on in the fame Style to fpeak of the great Diffe- rence which lliall then pafs on this mortal Part of Us, uling ftill the prefent Tenfe, but moft certainly intending to be underftood in the future. X-TCeipiTon iv (p^opiZ, lyuptrai a ot(p92tpcn'c6. [ 4% ] acpSctpo-fctj &c. If is fown i?i corruption, tt is raifed in Incorruption, &c. v. 42, ^c. It will be allowed, I fuppofe, that St. Faul was not fpeaking of what was then doing, but of the Alteration that there would be in this Part of our Compofition at the Day of Judg- ment. Whether We can account for this Manner of fpeaking or not, it is plain that it was ufed on this particular Subjed: ; and tho' a School-Boy may know the prefent Tenfe of a Verb, He may not know enough to affign the Reafon why it was ufed, where it can have no other than a future Significa- tion. Some particular Reafons might, I think, have been affigned for this Manner of fpeak- ing upon this very Article, if it had been pe- culiar to it 5 but it is fo frequent upon many different Subjedls, that there is no Neceflity of juflifying it by any diflinguifhing Confide- rations. It is common in the New Tefla- ment in many Inflances to ufe the prefent for the future. — aupwj/ yoLp a'7ro3"i'»cr>to^aev occurs in this very Chapter, v. 32. (For farther Sa- tisfadion fee Glafhus Grammat. Sacr. Lib. III. Trad:. III. Can. 47. §. 2.) It is flill farther to the Purpofe, that T^heo^ philus Himfelf, in the former Part of this very Book, ufes the fame Expreflion in the fame Senfe, and where it cannot pofTibly admit of any other. He tells Autofycm, He H h will [ 466 ] will then underftand thefe Things, when He fliall come to experience thenij when He {hall have laid ailde his mortal Body, and iliall have put on Immortality*. For God raifes your Body imniortal together 'with your Sold. ^heophihis goes on in Words and Reafon- ings which cannot be mifunderftoodjand which confine his Meaning to the great Time andScene of Retribution. Tho' He had ufed this Verb in the prefent Tenfe after the fore-mentioned Pattern, yet He ufes others in the future, on Purpofe as it were to afcertain his Meaning "f** Afidtheriy if Tcu ?iow believe in Him^ being made im?ncrtal Tour f elf ^ Ton will fee Him that is immortalj mid then Tou will be fenfible how impious was that which Tou have fpoken againfi Him. And then follows a Sentence which is quite decilive upon the Point in Queilion, and (hews indifputably in what Senfe He charged Him with denying the Refui-rec- tiori. -He ufes here the very fame Words as He doe's 'afterv/ards in the Pailage which oc- caiioned thefe Refle(ftions. " KWa. kis^^t^^ n)cf8$ lyiipi^cLi, on eV*', Tore TTiTivaus B^eXm xai ■ * Ay iy it ft I yaf (Ta rnv aJ^KO. ti^dvctrov avv 7« 4^%? ^ ^jof. • (iib. 1. P. 22. Edit. Oxon.) .. •)■ Krf} rQTt'p-\.u yivo^zv©" ff'^ava.T©- r'ov eiS:/5f? iiVTa. \ {A.)i ^i\(oy. But Tou do not believe that the Dedf are raifed\ when itfiallbe, then Tou /hall be^ lieve^ -whether* Tou will or no. Here the Mean- ing certainly was not doubtful, but the Whole PafTage relates very evidently to the Refur- reftion of Mankind to Judgment. After fome few Pages He refumes the Subje(fl, and returns to the Mention of Aiitolycuss Denial of this Article, repeating the fame Expreffion. 'AaAoI x,ctj TO cLpnl:^cLi a vixpsi lyupic^oLt, Farther j Tou deny that the Dead are raifed. Now if He meant here a Thing quite different from what He meant when he ufed the fame Words before, could He have avoided alter- ing or adding fome Word which might have given a Hint of the Defign ? If inftead of fpeaking of the general Refurrediion, which it muft be confeffed He had fpoken of in thefe very Terms in the preceding Part of the Difcourfe, He meant now to fpeak of the mi- raculous Power of railing the Dead as then continuing in the Church, would He not have fpecified the Diftin6lion, and taken fome Notice that He now referred not to the Dodrine of a Refurredion to Immortality with Refpedt to all Mankind, but of a Return from Death again to this Life, by Virtue of a fupernatural Endowment? There is not a Word, nor a Hint to this Purpofe throughout this whole Book, but there is very plain Evi- H h 2 dence [ 468 I ^dcncc from Theophikiss Anfweiv- that what- ever was the ' Method in which Autolycm required Satisfajff oivQpa^i, '^PC^*5 J[;??o;;otex^ 6.) He goes on in the following Paragraph^ if not with a pofitive Charge of many heinous Immoralities, yet in fuch a Manner as ta fbew that He thought He could not clear Himfelf of them, and with an exprefs Decla^ ration in the Conclufion, that his Blindnefs in this Particular was owing to the Influence pf his Vices over Him. The Paragraph is (o much to the Purpofe, that I will tran- fcribe and tranflate it at length -j-. " There- fore: ^ui'eiy.ivoy otp^xh^-oii cafKivoi^ o^ec^nvctr ■f- ^f.lBov vV Kdii cO CiAVroV, «/ »A ^ (JLOf/Oi, it kk « « l^y'iK©-, iti p^ovifoiy it B)c ahei^coy, u kk vTifoTTTni, it « TA/i/jTwf, it K v{)7nv TtV oA oLTTiT'eTf <5u"ct(r3"otj ere x,cd jueTct^u TTctiio-cti; (P. 25.) This fhews plainly in what Senfe He denied that the Dead, could be raifed, not in Oppofition merely to any Pretenfions of working fuch a Miracle [ 490 1 Miracle at that Time, but from the Nature of the Thing at all Times, which He efl:eeme4 beyond the Power of any Deity that He own- ed ; and TheophiluSj to confine it to this Senfe, after having referred to proper Emblems and Illuftrations in the Courfe of Nature, of luch a Reftoration of the Human Species, is fo ingenuous as to confefs that He Himfelf formerly did not believe this futu?'e Refurrec- tion, but was now brought to this Faith by a ferious Contemplation of thefe Things which He had mentioned, confirmed like- wife by farther Evidence, which He goes on to fpecify. Kai yctp zyo) ViTtiq^zv ThTO 'iata^oii, plXX<4. vZv K.cLrcLvo-A(nt4 oLVTcL 'Tfifj^ivca, &C. (p. ^g.) There remains nothing farther on this Head, for as all Dr. M's Reafonings ai'e founded on a Suppofition o{ Autolycui% de- manding the Sight of a Perfon formerly raifed, they fall of Courfe with the Difproof of that Point. He has objeded indeed to me particulaily the Authority of my Father, which would have been of great Weight with me, if the Force of Truth had not been of greater j for which I ihall hope to ftand ex- cufed. Why Jheophilus might not think fit to work fuch a Miracle at prefent for his Convidion, according to my Interpretation of the Demand, I have before fliewn; and fiiall only defire the Reader to recollect, how wick- ed 1 [ 491 J ed a Man, how abfurd a Reafoner, how grof§ an Idolater, Autolycus is here reprefented to be by his intimate Acquaintance -, and then He will probably think that Theophiluss Judg- ment was not ill founded, when He ven- tured to fay before-hand, that even this Mi- racle would not certainly convince Him. He will farther fee, that He took the right Me- thod of arguing with the Perfon that He had to deal with, by beginning to prove from the Courfe of Nature, the Being, the Provi- dence, the Power of God, and thereby lead- ing Him gradually to, and preparing Him properly for the real Evidences of Divine Revelation. Dr. M, had " farther obferved, that in " the earlier Times alfo, after the Days of ** the Apoftles, there is no Intimation of the " Subfifbence of this Miracle in the Church, " except in a iingle Inilance, found in the " Writings of Papias, which Enfebius^ who " ilightly touches it, feems to rank among ** the other fabulous Stories reeorded by that ** JVeak Man" Several of his Anfwerers juftly obferved that this was faid without the leaft Authority, and that Etifebius caft no fuch Imputation on this Report. Neither the Words ufed concerning it, nor the Man- ner in which it is introduced, give any Reafon to think that he efleemed ^le Re- port [ 492 ] port of this Miracle unworthy of Credit. Dr.' M. now undertakes to fhew this chiefly from the laft, from the Paragraph in which the Account is mentioned, of which He has given all thofe Parts which might feem to confirm his Opinion, leaving out, as ufual, thofe Circumftances, which may well be in- terpreted to imply the contrary. Euftbius begins with obferving, that Papias was a very diligent Colle)(TCO S^l cot KCf) oca Tori TTO,^ 7hV T^ia'CtiTifat ia [ 495 ] in one Specimen, which likewife He accounts for, and fhews how the Miftake had arifen *. Now all the Charge v/hich is here brought againil Pcipias, is, that He had not a Head to fee thro' the myftical Senfe of Prophecies, but Was apt to interpret every Thing literally ^ which, however true, was no, Prejudice to his Underflanding, and reporting miraculous Fadts, they being certainly to be underllood iiterally. Since therefore Eufebitis applied this Obfervation concerning Him, particularly to F arables and DoBrineSy fince He reported Miracles from Hifn without any Appearance of Doubt and Dlllruft, and brought in this DiftiniSiion, where it might be expected, in Matters of Speculation and Argument, there is no Appearance of his ranking the Miracle now^ referred to amongfh other fabulous Sto- ties, but there is the ftrongefl: Prefumption imaginable againfl his doing fo. Dr. M. returns to the old Objedlion, that this Miracle ftands upon the iingle Teftimo- ny of Irenaiis. This Exception would have been of as much Force sgainfl St. yohtzz Teftimony in fome Inflances, and St. PWs in ethers, but is indeed of no Force in any Cafe. ' If 1 496 ] If the Witnefs be unexceptionable, tile Si- lence of Others cannot difprove fuch politive. Evidence. However there are collateral Cir- cumftances to fupport the Credibility of it^ This Gift w^as promifed and bfeftbwed at firft amongft Others; that Others Continued We have the concurrent Teffirriony of all the Primitive Writers, and therefore it may be prefumed that this did not entirely ceafe du- ring the Continuance of thfe reft, unlefs there be fome pofitive Evidence to the contrary, or unlefs fome Reafon can be affigned from the Nature of the Thing, why this Ihould be withdrawn fooner than the others. Now neither of thefe is attempted; fome Reafons may be and have been given, why this Mi- racle might not be fo frequent, and of Courfe not fo frequently mentioned as fome others^ but None can be offered, why this, whilft others were ft ill abounding, fhould not be Performed on necejfary OccafiofiSy to which Irenceus expreflly limits it. There is ncft therefore the leaft Ground to call his Tefti- mony in Queftion as to this Article, if He was Himfelf a competent Witnefs and Judge of fuch a Miracle. This Point, it was forefeen, the Queftion might be reduced to at laft, and therefore Dr. M. fays, that " He has ftiewn Irenceus to '' be of fo credulous, fuperftitious and en- " diufiaftical t 497 ] *' thufiaftical a Turn as would difpofe Him " to embrace and aflert any fabulous Tale *' which tended, as He thought, in any " Manner to advance the Credit of the Gof- " pel, of to confute an Heretickj" (P. 8i.) He ig pleafed to add, that the Champions on the other Side have not attempted to give any particular Anfwer to his Exceptions of this Sort, and then, after a Compliment to his own Judgment, ventures to pronounce that ^* there is not a Grain of Truth in Ire7iaus% '^ Report, nor a lingle Circumflance belong- ^' ing to it make it probable," (?. 82.) But here He has been Guilty of a grofs Miftake in Fa6t, as well as in Judgment, which is more than He could juftly lay to the Charg© of Irericeiis. His AnRverers took into Confi- deration his Objedions to the Chara6ter of that Pious arid Primitive Father. They All obferved that a Miflake in Opinion could not inca- pacitate a Man for a Witnefs of Fadl, and that whether He reafoned well or not on the Senfe of ancient Writings, He could not but know the Truth of prefent TranfacStions, which are reported as done frequently o?i tiecejfary Occafions, by arid before the whole Church. The fevereft Cenfurers of the Fa- thers always made this Diflindlion, and aW lowed their Teiliniony in Cafes which felt lArider their own Senfes, tho' they did not K k allow [ 498 ] allow their Authority or Capacity in the Way of Argumentation or Judgment. It lay on Dr. M, in Reply to this, to fhew why Er- rors in Speculation mufl neceiTarily blind a Mans Eyes in Matters of Fad:, or why a Man could not judge of a Miracle, efpecially fo circumftaneed as this, becaufe perhaps He mifapprehended Points of a very different Na- ture. This He has not attempted now,^ nor had He offered any Thing before to prove that Irenaus would knowingly embrace and affert any fabulous Tale to ferve a pre- fent Purpofe. The only Inftahce in whieh He expreffly charged Him with wilful For- gery, in relation to his Report of the Age of Cbrifly I took- particularly into Confideration, and fhewed that there was not the leall- Ground for fuch a Gharge. I fliewed that Dr. M. had added to, and m.ifreprefented hii Account ; that He might well be underftood as referring to the general Heads of his Dif- courfe and not to this Particular Point, when He laid Claim to a general Apoffolical Tra-* dition J and that the Moft which could be made of it was a Mifmterpretation, eafy to be' accounted for, of a Paffage of Scripture 5 and that not originally his, but received by Report, which prefently funk upon a proper Examination of it. Dr. M. attempts not to renew and vindicate this Charge, but, as confcious t 499 J iconfcioiis of the Infufficiency of it, pafTes it pver, and favours us only with his own Opi- nion, without any farther Argument to fup- port it. I fhkll take the Liberty therefore to bonclude again, in Oppofition to Him, that the Miracle in this Cafe was probablej and the Witnefs credible; that when We are aiTured by fuch concur^rent Teflimony, that other fupernatural Gifts Continued at that Time, 'tis likely at leaft that This fhould do fo too ; that Ireiicsm mull know whether the Church did on fuch necejfary Occafions apply in joint Prayer for fuch a Miracle, and whe« ther they fucceeded in it ; and that He un^ derftdod and praftifed Chriftianity too well> to have been guilty of a v/iiful Fraud on any Occafion i much more on this, in which all the Chriftian Brethren could fo eafily have dete(5led Him, Here again I cannot avoid the farther Com-" f)laint of Mifreprefentation. Dr. M. not only pafles over what I had faid on this Head, but ac~ cufes me of faying what I never faid. He char- ges his Adverfaries as afErming with one Voice^ that Irenseus'i Tejiimonyisfuperiorto all Exception, and laying it down as an indifputable Maxim ^ that the pofitive Evidence of a Wit?i'efs, fo pious a?2d fo fmcerely devoted to the Cbrifiian Caufe^ mufi necejfarily demand our Belief in all Cafes ^ bow extraordinary or incredible foever they may jK. k 2 he { 50Q 1 h^ m their own Nature. (P. 8i.) Thefe V/ords again are printed in Italich^ tlid* whence they are taken I know not. None of his Adverfiiries have either ufed thefe Ex- preffions, or fpoken to this Purpofe 3 or at^ tempted to defend the primitive Fathers by fo unwife and ia unliniiited a Pofition. But it will be eafy to write Vindications^ if a Mail may take the Liberty of making his Oppo- nents fay what he pleafes, as well as of faying what he pleafes againft them. Dr. M. proceeds to charge his Anfwerers with giving a different Account of the Gift cf Tongues from all who wrote before them, but has failed as much in the Proof of it, a^ his Defetider had done before Him, All for- mer Writers He reprefents as affirming this Gift to have been abfolutely neceffary to the Propagation of the Gofpel, and without which no Succefs could be expected : But they do not reprefent it as an Evidence to thofe whom they Taught, of the Truth of what they Taught, nor could it be, un* lefs, as in the Cafe of the Apoftles, They knew their Circum fiances before-hand, and could therefore be fure that They had not at- tained this Knowlegc and Ufe of various Lan* guages by Human Means. But They all reprefent it as neceilary to introduce them to the CoTiverfation of the Nations and People to be converted, without which their other Mi- racles [ SOI ] raclos could have been of no Avail, and They raufi: have fpent their Time in qualifying themfelves to preach, inftead of a6tually preaching to the World. Nor do fbeje Doc^ tQrs fpeak in a different 'Tone^ as he is pleafed to exprefs it, for They allow this great Ufe of this Gift, as much as Any who wrote be- fore them. But it was .obvious to obferve, that when this Opportunity of converling with the feveral Nations in their refpe<5tive Languages, could be brought about by Hu- man Means, it was not to be expected that Providence fhould work Miracles unneceffa- rily,. but that this End being otherwife fup- plied in gaining a Method of Intercourie with thofe who were to be converted, other Kind of fupernatural Gifts might better be offered in the Way of Evidence j and were therefore more likely to be continued : And it was as obvious to obferve in the next Place, that this End of gaining AdmifTion in- tp Difcourfe with them was effesftually an-. fJA^ered by the Converlion of fome of the- Natives, who could fpeak to their Brethren in their own Language j who, tho' . they might fland in Need of other Sort of Mi- racles to convince them, yet could not want this to enable them to talk with them. If therefore We find little Mention of this after |;he Days of the Apoilles, or lefs Mention of it, K k 3 a? [ 5^2 ] at leaft, than of other fupernatural Gifts, this ig juft what might be expeded from the Nature and Reafon of the Thing. Dr. M. however is pleafed to call this a mere imaginary SchemCy without the leaji Foundation in Reafon, Hijiory, or 'Experience, Its Foundation in Reafon may be feen in what has been already offered. The Hiftory of the Propagation of the Gofpel and of the Labours of the Apoflles, inftead of contradi6ting, does much confirm it. Had They not made Ufe of the Afliflance of Som_e /oa>) enim fignificat quod vul'g6 iuKcueiii dicitur. i. e. tempus a negotiis vacuum. Suidas.— - ^Aa')(o\ia. » "TtokKy) ^Te* it (maJ^n, xj irwiyjti cmy.iheict. Pha- vorin. — ^Aay^oKia., l/i^iKzyjt) nroMixivT a.^ (;,euvi&a.t ot'yaSaj* £/piM/j;v .070!^\a.^ Toi^uett. Philofophias non vaco. PIuV ap. Steph. W/pe7i Dr. M. therefore tells us that cla^oKioy.a,t implies a Lsifure farticularly de'voted to literary Studiet, He contradiBs all the Lexicons ancient and modern, a?id the beji Greek Authors, n.vho often ife the Word in a Senfe directly con- trary. It is indeed vo better than a Blunder^ a Mijlake of o.a^jiKkco for ^^jiKciCj-y — And yet this is the Man, nvho nvould fend his Jnf