:'

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

TWO ESSAYS
ON BIBLICAL AND ON ECCLESIASTICAL
MIRACLES

TWO ESSAYS

BIBLICAL AND ON ECCLESIASTICAL
MIRACLES

JOHN HENRY NEWMAN

SOMETIME FELLOW OF ORIEL COLLEGE

FOURTH EDITION

LONDON
BASIL MONTAGU PICKERING
196 PICCADILLY
1875

' TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE
LORD BLACHFORD, K.C.M.G., P.C,
IN LOVING REMEMBRANCE
OP OLD DAYS
OF PLEASANT INTIMATE COMPANIONSHIP,
FROM HIS AFFECTIONATE FRIEND,
JOHN H. NEWMAN.

ADVERTISEMENT.
T) OTH these Essays were written when the author
¦*-' was Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford.
The former of them, on the Miracles of Scrip
ture, was written in 1825-26 for the "Encyclopaedia
Metropolitana," being the sequel, to a Life of Apollo
nius Tyana^us.
The latter, on the Miracles of the first age of
Christianity, was written in 1842-43, as a Preface to
a Translation of a portion of Fleury's Ecclesiastical
History. In the first of the two, the Miracles of Scripture are
regarded as mainly addressed to religious inquirers,
of an evidential nature, the instruments of conversion,
and the subjects of an inspired record. In the
second, the Ecclesiastical Miracles are regarded as
addressed to Christians, the rewards of faith, and the
matter of devotion, varying in their character from
simple providences to distinct innovations upon phy
sical order, and coming to us by tradition or in
legend, trustworthy or not, as it may happen in the
particular case.

viii Advertisement
These distinct views of miraculous agency, thus
contrasted, involve no inconsistency with each other;
but it must be owned that, in the Essay upon the
Scripture Miracles, the Author goes beyond both the
needs and the claims of his argument, when, in order
to show their special dignity and beauty, he depre
ciates the purpose and value of the Miracles of
Church History. To meet this undue disparagement,
in his first Essay, of facts which have their definite
place in the Divine Dispensation, he points out, in
his second, the essential resemblance which exists
between many of the Miracles of Scripture and those
of later times ; and it is with the same drift that,
in this Edition, a few remarks at the foot of the page
have been added in brackets.
With the exception of these bracketed additions
in both Essays, and of a Memorandum at the end of
the volume, the alterations made, whether in text or
notes, are simply of a literary character. As to the
latter, no verification has been made of the references
which they contain, much pains having been bestowed
on them, as it is believed, in the. original Edition.
June 29, 1870.

CONTENTS. ESSAY I.
THE MIRACLES OF SCRIPTURE.
PAGE
Introduction . . . . .3
Section l
On the Idea and Scope of a Miracle . . 4
SECTION II.
On the Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle . 13
SECTION III.
On the Criterion of a Miracle . . . -49
SECTION IV.
On the Evidence for the Christian Miracles . 70

x Contents.

ESSAY II.
THE MIRACLES OF EARLY ECCLESIASTICAL
HISTORY.
CHAPTER I. PAGE
Introduction . . . . -97
CHAPTER II.
On the Antecedent Probability of the Eccle
siastical Miracles .... ioi
CHAPTER III.
On the Internal Character of the Ecclesias
tical Miracles ..... 115
CHAPTER IV.
On the State of the Argument in behalf cf
the Ecclesiastical Miracles . . . 175
CHAPTER V.
On the Evidence for particular alleged Mira
cles ...... 228
Section I — The Thundering Legion . . . . s . 241
Section II. — Change of Water into Oil by St. Narcissus 255
Section III. — Change of the Course of the Lycus by St.
Gregory  261
Section IV. — Appearance of the Cross to Constantine . 271

Contents. xi
PAGE
Section V.— Discovery of the Holy Cross by St. Helena 287
Section VI. — The Sudden Death of Arius , . , .327
Section VII.— Fiery Eruption on Julian's attempt to
Rebuild the Temple .  334
Section VIII. — Recovery of the Blind Man by the Relics
of the Martyrs ...  348
Section IX.— Speech without Tongues in the instance of
the African Confessors  369

ESSAY I.

THE MIRACLES OF SCRIPTURE
COMPARED WITH THOSE REPORTED ELSEWHERE,

AS REGARDS

THEIR NATURE, CREDIBILITY, AND EVIDENCE.

INTRODUCTION.
ON THE MIRACLES OF SCRIPTURE.
I PROPOSE to attempt an extended comparison
between the Miracles of Scripture and those
elsewhere related, as regards their nature, credibility,
and evidence. I shall divide my observations under
the following heads : —
§ r. On the Idea and Scope of a Miracle.
§ 2. On the antecedent Credibility of a Miracle,
considered as a Divine Interposition.
§ 3. On the Criterion of a Miracle, considered as a
Divine Interposition.
§ 4. On the direct Evidence for the Christian
Miracles.

Section I.
ON THE IDEA AND SCOPE OF A MIRACLE.
A MIRACLE may be considered as an event in
consistent with the constitution of nature, that
is, with the established course of things in which it is
found. Or, again, an event in a given system which
cannot be referred to any law, or accounted for by
the operation of any principle, in that system. It
does not necessarily imply a violation of nature, as
some have supposed, — merely the interposition of an
external cause, which, we shall hereafter show, can be
no other than the agency of the Deity. And the
effect produced is that of unusual or increased action
in the parts of the system.
It is then a relative term, not only as it presupposes
an assemblage of laws from which it is a deviation,
but also as it has reference to some one particular
system ; for the same event which is anomalous in one,
may be quite regular when observed in connexion
with another. The Miracles of Scripture, for instance,
are irregularities in the economy of nature, but with

Idea and Scope of a Mit ade. 5
a moral end ; forming one instance out of many, of
the providence of God, that is, an instance of occur
rences in the natural world with a final cause. Thus,
while they are exceptions to the laws of one system,
they may coincide with those of another. They pro- i
fess to be the evidence of a Revelation, the criterion I '1
of a divine message. To consider them as mere, f
exceptions to physical order, is to take a very incom-j
piete view of them. It is to degrade them from the
station which they hold in the plans and provisions of;
the Divine Mind, and to strip them of their real use
and dignity ; for as naked and isolated facts they do
but deform an harmonious system.
From this account of a Miracle, it is evident, that it
may often be, difficult exactly to draw the line between
uncommon and strictly miraculous events. Thus the
production of ice might have seemed at first sight
miraculous to the Siamese ; for it was a phenomenon
referable to none of those laws of nature which are in
ordinary action in tropical climates. Such, again,
might magnetic attraction appear, in ages familiar
only with the attraction of gravity." On the other
hand, the extraordinary works of Moses or St. Paul
appear miraculous, even when referred to those simple
and elementary principles of nature which the widest
experience has confirmed. As far as this affects the
discrimination of supernatural facts, it will be con-
» Campbell, On Miracles, Part i. Sec. 2.

6 Idea and Scope of a Miracle.
sidered in its proper place ; meanwhile let it suffice to
state, that those events only are connected with our
present subject which have no assignable second cause
pr antecedent._ari.d which, on that account, are from
the nature of the case referred to the immediate
agency of the Deity.
A Revelation, that is, a direct message from God tc
man, itself bears in some degree a miraculous cha
racter; inasmuch as it supposes the Deity actually to
present Himself before His creatures, and to interpose
in the affairs of life in a way above, the reach of those
settled arrangements of nature, to the existence of
which universal experience bears witness. And as a
Revelation itself, so again the evidences of a Revela
tion may all more or less be considered miraculous.
Prophecy is an evidence only so far as foreseeing
future events is above the known powers of the human
mind, or miraculous. In like manner, if the rapid
extension of Christianity be urged in favour of its
divine origin, it is because such extension, under such
circumstances, is supposed to be inconsistent with the
known principles and capacity of human nature. And
the pure morality of the Gospel, as taught by illiterate
fishermen of Galilee, is an evidence, in proportion as
the phenomenon disagrees with the conclusions of
general experience, which leads us to believe that a
high state of mental cultivation is ordinarily requisite
for the production of such moral teachers. It might

Idea and Scope of a Miracle. 7
even be said that, strictly speaking, no evidence of a
Revelation is conceivable which does not partake of
the character of a Miracle ; since nothing but a dis
play of power over the existing system of things can
attest the immediate presence of Him by whom it was
originally established; or, again, because no event
which results entirely from the ordinary operation
of nature can be the criterion of one that is extra
ordinary.1" In the present argument I confine myself to the
consideration of Miracles commonly so called ; such
events^ that is, for the most part, as are inconsistent
with the constitution of the physical world.
Miracles, thus defined, hold a very prominent place
in the evidence of the Jewish and Christian Revelations.
They are the most striking and conclusive evidence ;
because, the laws of matter being better understood
than those to which mind is conformed, the trans
gression of them is more easily recognised. They are
the most simple and obvious ; because, whereas the
freedom of the human will resists the imposition of
undeviating laws, the material creation, on the con
trary, being strictly subjected to the regulation of its
b Hence it is that in the Scripture accounts of Revelations
to the Prophets, etc., a sensible Miracle is so often asked and
given; as if the vision itself, which was the medium of the
Revelation, was not a sufficient evidence of it, as being perhaps
resolvable into the ordinary powers of an excited imagination ;
e.g., Judg. vi. 36— 40, etc.

8 Idea and Scope of a Miracle.
Maker, looks to Him alone for a change in its constitu
tion. Yet Miracles are but a branch of the evidences,
and other branches have their respective advantages.
Prophecy, as has been often observed, is a growing
evidence, and appeals more forcibly than Miracles to
those who are acquainted with the Miracles only
through testimony. A philosophical mind will per
haps be most strongly affected by the fact of the very
existence of the Jewish polity, or of the revolution
effected by Christianity. While the beautiful moral
teaching and evident honesty of the New Testament
writer's is the most persuasive argument to the un
learned but single-hearted inquirer. Nor must it be
forgotten that the evidences of Revelation are cumu
lative, that they gain strength from each other ; and
that, in consequence, the argument from Miracles is
immensely stronger when viewed in conjunction with
the rest, than when considered separately, as in an
inquiry of the present nature.
As the relative force of the separate evidences is
different under different circumstances, so again has
one class of Miracles more or less weight than another,
according to the accidental change of times, places,
and persons addressed. As our knowledge of the
system of nature, and of the circumstances of the
particular case varies, so of course varies our con
viction. Walking on the sea, for instance, or giving
sight to one born blind, would to us perhaps be a

Idea and Scope of a Miracle. g
Miracle even more astonishing than it was to the Jews;
the laws of nature being at the present day better
understood than formerly, and the fables concerning
magical power being no longer credited. On the other
hand, stilling the wind and waves with a word may by all
but eye-witnesses be set .down to accident or exaggera
tion without the possibility of a full confutation ; yet
to eye-witnesses it would carry with it an overpower
ing evidence of supernatural agency by the voice and
manner that accompanied the command, the violence
of the wind at the moment, the instantaneous effect
produced, and other circumstances, the force of which
a narrative cannot fully convey. The same remark
applies to the Miracle of changing water into wine, to
the cure of demoniacal possessions, and of diesases
generally. From a variety of causes, then, it happens
that Miracles which produced a rational conviction at
the time when they took place, have ever since proved
rather an objection to Revelation than an evidence for
it, and have depended on the rest for support ; while
others, which once were of a dubious and perplexing
character, have in succeeding ages come forward in
its defence. It is by a process similar to this that the
anomalous nature of the Mosaic polity, which might
once be an obstacle to its reception, is now justly
alleged in proof of the very Miracles by which it was
then supported.0 It is important to keep this remark
0 See Sumner's " Records of Creation," Vol. i.

io Idea and Scope of a Miracle.
in view, as it is no uncommon practice with those who
are ill-affected to the cause of Revealed Religion to
dwell upon such Miracles as at the present day rather
require than contribute evidence, as if they formed a
part of the present proof on which it rests its preten-
sions.d In the foregoing remarks, the being of an intelli
gent Maker has been throughout assumed ; and,
indeed, if the peculiar object of a Miracle be to
evidence a message from God, it is plain that it
implies, the admission _of_the fundamerrtal truth, and
demajids_ass^nt_tojjiojther_bey:o.nd it. (His particular
interference it directly proves, while it only reminds
of His existence. J It professes to be the signature of
God to a message delivered by human instruments ;
and therefore supposes that signature in some degree;
already known, from His ordinary works. It appeals
to that moral sense and that experience of human
affairs which already bear witness to His ordinary
presence. Considered by itself, it is at most but the
token of a superhuman being. Hence, though an
additional instance, it is not a distinct species of
a See Hume, On Miracles : " Let us examine those Miracles
related in Scripture, and, not to lose ourselves in too wide a
field, let us confine ourselves to such as we find in the Penta
teuch, etc. It gives an account of the state of the world and
of human nature entirely different from the present ; of our fall
from that state ; of the age of man extended to near a thou
sand years," etc. See Berkeley's "Minute Philosopher,"
DiaL vi. Sec. 30.

Idea and Scope of a Miracle. 1 1
evidence for a Creator from that contained in the
general marks of order and design in the universe.
A proof drawn from an interruption in the course of
nature is in the same line of argument as one deduced
from the existence of that course, and in point of
cogency is inferior to it. Were a being who had ex
perience only of a chaotic world suddenly introduced
into this orderly system of things, he would have an
infinitely more powerful argument for the existence
of a designing Mind, than a mere interruption of that
system can afford. A Miracle is no argument to one
who is deliberately, and on principle, an atheist.
Yet, though not abstractedly the more convincing,
it is often so in effect, as being of a more striking and
imposing character. The mind, habituated to the
regularity of nature, is blunted to the overwhelming
evidence it conveys ; whereas by a Miracle it may be
roused to reflection, till mere conviction of a super
human being becomes the first step towards the
acknowledgment of a Supreme Power. While, more
over, it surveys nature as a whole, it is not capacious
enough to embrace its bearings, and to comprehend
what it implies. In miraculous displays of power the
field of view is narrowed ; a detached portion of the
divine operations is, taken as an instance, and the final
cause is distinctly pointed out. A Miracle, besides,
is more striking, inasmuch as it displays the Deity in
action ; evidence of which is not supplied in the

12 Idea and Scope of a Miracle.
system of nature. It may then accidentally bring ?
conviction of an intelligent Creator; for it voluntarily|
proffers a testimony which we have ourselves to extort
from the ordinary course of things, and forces upon
the attention a truth which otherwise is not discovered,' -1
except upon examination.
And as it affords a more striking evidence of a
Creator than that conveyed in the order and estab- j
lished laws of the Universe, still more so does it of a
Moral Governor. For, while nature attests the being
of God more distinctly than it does His moral govern- 4
ment, a miraculous event, on the contrary, bears more
directly on the fact of His moral government, of .which j
it is an immediate instance, while it only implies His
existence. Hence, besides banishing ideas of Fate \
and Necessity, Miracles have a tendency to rouse
conscience, to awaken to a sense of responsibility, to
remind of duty, and to direct the attention to those J
marks of divine government already contained in the
ordinary course of events.15
Hitherto, however, I have spoken of solitary Mira
cles ; a system of miraculous interpositior s, conducted
with reference to a final cause, supplies a still more
beautiful and convincing argument for the moral?
government of God.
6 Farmer, On Miracles, Chap. i. Sec. 2.

SECTION II.
ON THE ANTECEDENT CREDIBILITY OF A MIRACLE,
CONSIDERED AS A DIVINE INTERPOSITION.
T N proof of miraculous occurrences, we must have
•*¦ recourse to the same kind of evidence as that by
which we determine the truth of historical accounts
in general. For though Miracles, in consequence of
their extraordinary nature, challenge a fuller and more
accurate investigation, still they do not admit an in
vestigation conducted on different principles, — Testi
mony being the main assignable medium of proof for
past events of any kind. And this being indisputable,
it is almost equally so that the Christian Miracles are
attested by evidence even stronger than can be pro
duced for any of those historical facts which we most
firmly believe. This has been felt by unbelievers ;
who have been, in consequence, led to deny the
admissibility of even the strongest testimony, if
offered in behalf of miraculous events, and thus to
get rid of the only means by which they can be proved
to have taken place. It has accordingly been asserted,

14 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
that all events inconsistent with the course of nature
bear in their very front such strong and decisive
marks of falsehood and absurdity, that it is needless
to examine the evidence adduced for them/ " Where
men are heated by zeal and enthusiasm," says Hume,
with a distant but evident allusion to the Christian
Miracles, " there is no degree of human testimony so
strong as may not be procured for the greatest absur* .
dity; and those who will be so silly as to examine the ,
affair by that medium, and seek particular flaws in
the testimony, are almost sure to be confounded."5
Of these antecedent objections, which are supposed
to decide the question, the most popular is founded
on the frequent occurrence of wonderful tales in every
age and country — generally, too, connected with Reli
gion ; and since the more we are in a situation to
examine these accounts, the more fabulous they are
proved to be, there would certainly be hence a fair
presumption against the Scripture narrative, did it
resemble them in its circumstances and proposed
object. A more refined argument is that advanced
by Hume, in the first part of his Essay on Miracles,
in which it is maintained against the credibility of
a Miracle, that it is more probable that the tes-
1 I.e., it is pretended to try past events on the principles
used in conjecturing future; viz., on antecedent probability
and examples. (Whately's Treatise on Rhetoric.) See Le-
land's " Supplement to View of Deistical Writers," Let. 3.
g Essays, Vol. ii. Note 1.

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 15
timony should be false than that the Miracle should
be true.
This latter objection has been so ably met by va
rious writers, that, though prior in the order of the
argument to the former, it need not be considered
here. It derives its force from the assumption, that a
Miracle, is strictly a causeless phenomemon, a self- .
originating violation of nature ; and is solved by refer
ring the event to divine agency, a principle which (it
cannot be denied) has originated works -indicative of
power at least as great as any Miracle requires. An
adequate cause being thus found for the production
of a Miracle, the objection vanishes, as far as the
mere question of power is concerned ; and it remains
to be considered whether the anomalous fact be of
such a character as to admit of being referred to the
Supreme Being. For if it cannot with propriety, be
referred to Him, it remains as improbable as if no such
agent were known to exist. At this point, then, I
propose taking up the argument ; and by examining
what Miracles are in their nature and circumstances
referable to Divine agency, I shall be providing a
reply to the former of the objections just noticed, in
which the alleged similarity of all miraculous narra
tives one to another, is made a reason for a common
rejection of all.
In examining what Miracles may properlybe ascribed
to the Deity, Hume supplies us with an observation so

1 6 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
just, when taken in its full extent, that I shall make it
the groundwork of the inquiry on which I am entering.
As the Deity, he says, discovers Himself to us by His.
works, we have no rational grounds for ascribing to
Him attributes or actions dissimilar from those which
His works convey. It follows, then, that in discrimi
nating between those Miracles which can and those
which cannot be ascribed to God, we must be guided
by the information with which experience furnishes
us concerning His wisdom, goodness, and other attri
butes. Since a Miracle is an act out of the known
track of Divine agency, as regards the physical sys
tem, it is almost indispensable to show its consistency
with the Divine agency, at least, in some other point
of view ; if, that is, it is recognised as the work of the
same power. Now, I contend that this reasonable
demand is satisfied in the Jewish and Christian Scrip
tures, in which we find a narrative of Miracles alto
gether answering in their character and circumstances
to those general ideas which the ordinary course of
Divine Providence enables us to form concerning the
attributes and actions of God.
While writers expatiate so largely on the laws of
nature, they altogether forget the existence of a moral
system : a system which, though but partially under
stood, and but general in its appointments as acting
upon free agents, is as intelligible in its laws and pro
visions as the material world. Connected with this

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 17
moral government, we find certain instincts of mind ;
such as conscience, a sense of responsibility, and an
approbation of virtue ; an innate desire of knowledge,
and an almost universal feeling of the necessity of
religious observances ; while, in fact, Virtue is, on the
whole, rewarded, and Vice punished. And though
we meet with many and striking anomalies, yet it is
evident they are but anomalies, and possibly but
in appearance so, and with reference to our partial
i nformation.
, These two systems, the Physical and the Moral,
sometimes act in union, and sometimes in opposi
tion to each other; and as the order of nature certainly
does in many cases interfere with the operation of
moral laws (as, for instance, when good men die pre
maturely, or the gifts of nature are lavished on the
bad), there is nothing to shock probability in the idea
that a great moral object should be effected by an
interruption of physical order. But, further than this,
however physical laws may embarrass the operation of
the moral system, still on the whole they are subser- :
vient to it f contributing, as is evident, to the welfare
and convenience of man, providing for his mental
gratification as well as animal enjoyment, sometimes
even supplying correctives to his moral disorders. ) If,
then, the economy of nature has so constant a refer
ence to an ulterior plan, a Miracle is a deviation from
» See Butler's " Analogy," Part i. Chap. iii. 2

1 8 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
the subordinate for the sake of the superior system,]
and is very far indeed from improbable, when a great
moral end cannot be effected except at the expense of
physical regularity. Nor can it be fairly said to argue
an imperfection in the Divine plans, that this inter
ference should be necessary. For we must view the
system of Providence as a whole ; which is not more
imperfect because of the mutual action of its parts,
than a machine, the separate wheels of which effect
each other's movements.
Now the Miracles of the Jewish and Christian
Religions must be considered as immediate effects
of Divine Power beyond the action of nature, for
an important moral end ; and are in consequence
accounted for by producing, not a physical, but a
final cause.' We are not left to contemplate the bare
anomalies, and from the mere necessity of the case
to refer them to the supposed agency of the Deity.
The power of displaying them is, according to the
Scripture narrative, intrusted to certain individuals,
who stand forward as their interpreters, giving them
a voice and language, and a dignity demanding our
regard ; who set them forth as evidences of the
greatest of moral ends, a Revelation from God,—
as instruments in His hand of effecting a direct in
tercourse between Himself and His creatures, which
' Divine Legation, Book ix. Chap. v. Vince, On Miracles,
Sermon i.

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 21
those of the violation of the laws of nature by
Miracles, in order to judge which of them is most
likely and probable." Here the moral government
of God, with the course of which the Miracle entirely
accords, is altogether kept out of sight. With a like
heedlessness of the moral character of a Miracle,
another writer, notorious for his irreligion,™ objects
that it argues mutability in the Deity, and implies
that the physical system was not created good, as
needing improvement. And a recent author adopts
a similarly partial and inconclusive mode of reason
ing, when he confuses the Christian Miracles with
fables of apparitions and witches, and would examine
them on the strict principle of those legal forms which
from their secular object go far to exclude all reli
gious discussion of the question." Such reasoners
seem to suppose, that when the agency of the Deity
1 is introduced to account for Miracles, it is the illogical
^introduction of an unknown cause, a reference to a
*ne ere name, the offspring, perhaps, of popular super-
k Aion ; or, if more than a name, to a cause that can
.-¦ _nown only by means of the physical creation ;
24; xviience they consider Religion as founded in the
xxvm. IS-=aicness or eccentricity of the intellect, not in
— 24; Marl.
vii. 15 16 ; i^mations of a Divine government as con-
x. 24—38 ; xi. e moral world. From an apparent impa-
30, 31 ; Acts i. 8 .
x. 38 ; xiii. 8 — 12 ;ire.
2 Cor. xii. 12 ; Heb. n, Preuves Judiciaires, Liv. viii.

22 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
tience of investigating a system which is but partially
revealed, they esteem the laws of the material system
alone worthy the notice of a scientific mind ; and rid
themselves of the annoyance which the importunity
of a claim to miraculous power occasions them, by
discarding all the circumstances which fix its antece
dent probability, all in which one Miracle differs from
another, the professed author, object, design, charac
ter, and human instruments.
When this partial procedure is resisted, the a priori
objections of sceptical writers at once lose their force.
Facts are only so far improbable as they fall under no
general rule ; whereas it is as parts of an existing
system that the Miracles of Scripture demand our
attention, as resulting from known attributes of God,
and corresponding to the ordinary arrangements of
His providence. Even as detached events they might
excite a rational awe towards the mysterious Author
of nature. But they are presented to us, not as un- ¦
connected and unmeaning occurrences, but as holding
a place in an extensive plan of Divine government, ;
completing the moral system, connecting Man and his
Maker, and introducing him to the means of securing
his happiness in another and eternal state of being.
That such is the professed object of the , body of
Christian Miracles, can hardly be denied. In the
earlier Religion it was substantially the same, though,
from the preparatory nature of the Dispensation, a

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 23
less enlarged view was given of the Divine counsels.
The express purpose of the Jewish Miracles is to con
firm the natural evidence of one God, the Creator of
all things, to display His attributes and will with dis
tinctness and authority, and to enforce the obligation
of religious observances, and the sinfulness of idolatrous
worship.0 Whether we turn to the earlier or later ages
of Judaism, in the plagues of Egypt, in the parting
of Jordan, and the arresting of the sun's course by
Joshua, in the harvest thunder at the prayer of
Samuel, in the rending of the altar at Bethel, in
Elijah's sacrifice on Mount Carmel, and in the cure of
Naaman by Elisha, we recognise this one grand object
throughout. Not even in the earliest ages of the
Scripture history are Miracles wrought at random, or
causelessly, or to amuse the fancy, or for the sake of
mere display ; nor prodigally, for the mere conviction
of individuals, but for the most part on a grand scale,
in the face of the world, to supply whole nations with
evidence concerning the Deity. Nor are they strewn
confusedly over the face of the history, being with few
exceptions reducible to three eras ; the formation of
the Hebrew Church and polity, the reformation in
the times of the idolatrous Kings of Israel, and the
0 Exod. iii. xiv. ; xx. 22, 23 ; xxxiv. 6 — 17 ; Deut. iv. 32—
40; Josh. ii. 10, 11; iv. 23, 24; 1 Sam. v. 3, 4; xii. 18; 2
¦ Sam. vii. 23 ; 1 Kings viii. 59, 60 ; xviii. 36, 37 ; xx. 28 ; 2
Kings xix. 15—19, 35; 2 Chron. xx. 29; Isaiah vi, 1—5; xix.
1 ; xliii. 10 — 12.

24 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
promulgation of the Gospel. Let it be observed,
moreover, that the power of working them, instead of
being assumed by any classes of men indiscriminately,
is described as a prerogative of the occasional Pro
phets, to the exclusion of the Priests and Kings ; a ¦
circumstance which, not to mention its remarkable \
contrast to the natural course of an imposture, is de
serving attention from its consistency with the lead
ing design of Miracles already specified. For the
respective claims of the Kings and Priests were
already ascertained, when once the sacred office was
limited to the family of Aaron, and the regal power
to David and his descendants ; whereas extraordinary
messengers, as Moses, Samuel, and Elijah, needed
some supernatural display of power to authenticate
their pretensions. In corroboration of this remark I
might observe upon the unembarrassed manner of the
Prophets in the exercise of their professed gift ; their
disdain of argument or persuasion, and the confidence
with which they appeal to those before whom they are
said to have worked their Miracles.
,• These and similar observations do more than invest
the separate Miracles with a dignity worthy of the
Supreme Being ; they show the coincidence of them
all in one common and consistent object. As parts
of a system, the Miracles recommend and attest each
other, evidencing not only general wisdom, but a
digested and extended plan. And while this appear-

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 25
ance of design connects them with the acknowledged
works of a Creator, who is in the natural world
chiefly known to us by the presence of. final causes,
so, again, a plan conducted as this was, through a
series of ages, evinces not the varying will of suc
cessive individuals, but the steady and sustaining
purpose of one Sovereign Mind. And this remark
especially applies to the coincidence of views observ
able between the Old and New Testament ; the latter
of which, though written after a long interval of silence,
the breaking up of the former system, a revolution in
religious discipline, and the introduction of Oriental
tenets into the popular Theology, still unhesitatingly
takes up and maintains the ancient principles of
miraculous interposition.
An additional recommendation of the Scripture
Miracles is their appositeness to the times and places
in which they were wrought ; as, for instance, in the
case of the plagues of Egypt, which, it has been
shown,0 were directed against the prevalent supersti
tions of that country. Their originality, beauty, and
immediate utility, are further properties falling in with
our conceptions of Divine agency. In their general
character we discover nothing indecorous, light, or
ridiculous ; they are grave, simple, unambiguous,
majestic. Many of them, especially those of the later
Dispensation, are remarkable for their benevolent and
p See Bryant.

26 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
merciful character ; others are useful for a variety of
subordinate purposes, as a pledge of the certainty of
particular promises, or as comforting good men, or as
edifying the Church. Nor must we overlook the moral
instruction conveyed in many, particularly in those
ascribed to Christ, the spiritual interpretation which
they will often bear, and the exemplification which
they afford of particular doctrines. *«
Accepting, then, what may be called Hume's canon,
that no work can be reasonably ascribed to the agency of
God, which is altogether different from those ordinary
works from which our knowledge of Him is originally
obtained, I have shown that the Miracles of Scripture,
far from being exceptionable on that account, are
strongly recommended by their coincidence with what
we know from nature of His Providence and Moral
Attributes. That there are some few among them in
which this coincidence cannot be traced, it is not ne
cessary to deny. As a whole they bear a determinate
and consistent character, being great and extraordi
nary means for attaining a great, momentous, and
extraordinary object
I shall not, however, dismiss this criterion of the
antecedent probability of a Miracle with which Hume
has furnished us, without showing that it is more or
less detrimental to the pretensions of all professed
4 Jones, On the Figurative Language oi Scripture, Lecture x.
Farmer, On Miracles, Chap. iii. Sec. 6, 2.

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 27
Miracles but those of the Jewish and Christian Reve
lations ; in other words, that none else are likely to
have occurred, because none else can with any proba
bility be referred to the agency of the'Deity, the only
known cause of miraculous interposition. We exclude
then

1. Those which are not even referred by the workers of
them to Divine Agency.
Such are the extraordinary works attributed by
some to Zoroaster ; and, again, to Pythagoras, Empe-
docles, Apollonius, and others of their School ; which
only claim to be the result of their superior wisdom,
and were quite independent of a Supreme Being.r
Such are the supposed effects of witchcraft or of
magical charms, which profess to originate with Spirits
and Demons ; for, as these agents, supposing them
to exist, did not make the world, there is every reason
for thinking they cannot of themselves alter its ar
rangements.5 And those, as in some accounts of
r See, in contrast, Gen. xl. 8 ; xli. 16 ; Dan. ii. 27 — 30, 47 ;
Acts iii. 12 — 16; xiv. 11 — 18; a contrast sustained, as these
passages show, for 1 500 years.
8 Sometimes charms are represented as having an inherent
virtue, independent of invisible agents, as in the account given
by Josephus of Eleazar's drawing out a devil through the nos
trils of a patient by means of a ring, which contained in it a
drug prescribed by Solomon. Josephus, Antiq. viii. 2, Sec. 5.
See Acts viii. 19.

28 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
apparitions, which are silent respecting their origin,
and are referred to God from the mere necessity of
the case.
2. Those which are unworthy of an All-wise Author. *¦
I. As, for example, the Miracles of Simon Magus, '
who pretended he could assume the appearance of a
serpent, exhibit himself with two faces, and transform J.;
himself into whatever shape he pleased.' Such are
most of the Miracles recorded in the apocryphal
accounts of Christ ;u e.g., the sudden ceasing of all
kinds of motion at His birth, birds stopping in the
midst of their flight, men at table with their hands to
their mouths, yet unable to eat, etc. ; His changing,
when a child, His playmates into kids, and animating
clay figures of beasts and birds ; the practice attri
buted to Him of appearing to His disciples sometimes
as a youth, sometimes as an old man, sometimes as a
child, sometimes large, sometimes less, sometimes so
tall as to reach the Heavens ; and the obeisance paid
Him by the military standards when He was brought
before Pilate. Of the same cast is the story of His
picture presented by Nicodemus to Gamaliel, which, ¦.';¦.
when pierced by the Jews, gave forth blood and
water.

t Lavington, Enthusiasm of Meth. and Papists comp.
Part iii. Sec. 43 .
" Jones, On the Canon, Part iii.

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 29
2. Under this head of exception fall many of the
Miracles related by the Fathers ; v e.g., that of the con
secrated bread changing into a live coal in the hands
of a woman, who came to the Lord's supper after
offering incense to an idol ; of the dove issuing from
the body of Polycarp at his martyrdom ; of the petri
faction of a fowl dressed by a person under a vow
of abstinence; of the exorcism of the demoniac
camel ; of the stones shedding tears at the barbarity
of the persecutions ; of inundations rising up to the
roofs of churches without entering the open doors ;
and of pieces of gold, as fresh as from the mint, dropt
from heaven into the laps of the Italian Monks.1
3. Of the same character are the Miracles of the
Romish Breviary f as the prostration of wild beasts
before the martyrs they were about to devour ; the
miraculous uniting of two chains with which St.
Peter had been at different times bound ; and the
burial of Paul the Hermit by lions.
4. Such again are the Rabbinical Miracles, as that
of the flies killed by lightning for settling on a rabbi's
¦ paper. And the Miracles ascribed by some to Ma-
¦ hornet, as that the trees went out to meet him, the
stones saluted him, and a camel complained to him.x
T Middleton, Free Enquiry.
1 [Vide, however, Essay ii., infra, n. 48 — 50, 54, 58, etc.]
8 [Vide ibid.]
1 The offensiveness of these, and many others above in-

30 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
The exorcism in the Book of Tobit must here be
mentioned, in which the Evil Spirit who is in love
with Sara is driven away by the smell of certain
perfumes/ 5 . Hence the Scripture accounts of Eve's temptation ;
by the serpent ; of the speaking of Balaam's ass ; of
Jonah and the whale ; and of the devils sent into, the
herd of swine, are by themselves more or less impro
bable, being unequal in dignity to the rest. They are
then supported by the system in which they are found, '
as being a few out of a multitude, and therefore but
exceptions (and, as we suppose, but apparent excep
tions) to the general rule. In some of them, too, a
further purpose is discernible, which of itself recon
ciles us to the strangeness of their first appearance,
and suggests the possibility of similar reasons, though
unknown, being assigned in explanation of the rest.
As the Miracle of the swine, the object of which may
have been to prove to us the reality of demoniacal
possessions.2 6. Miracles of mere power, even when connected
with some ultimate object, are often improbable for
stanced, consists in attributing moral feelings to inanimate or
irrational beings.
1 [So the Protestant version.] It seems to have been a com
mon notion that possessed persons were beloved by the Spirit
possessing them. See Philostr. iv. 25. Gospel of the Infancy,
xiv. — xvi., xxxiii. Justin Martyr, Apol. p. 113, Ed. Thirlb. We
find nothing of this kind in the account of Scripture demoniacs
1 Divine Legation, Book ix. Chap. v.

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 31
the same general reason, viz., as unworthy of an All-
wise Author. Such as that ascribed to Zoroaster,2 of
suffering melted brass to be poured upon his breast
without injury to himself. Unless indeed their imme
diate design be to exemplify the greatness of God, as
in the descent of fire from heaven upon Elijah's sacri
fice, and in Christ's walking on the sea,b which evidently
possess a dignity fitting them to be works of the Su
preme Being. The propriety indeed of the Christian
Miracles, contrasted with the want of decorum observ
able in those elsewhere related, forms a most striking
evidence of their divinity.
7. Here, too, ambiguous Miracles find a place, it
being antecedently improbable that the Almighty
should rest the credit of His Revelation upon events
which but obscurely implied His immediate presence.
a Brucker, Vol. i. p. 147.
J> Power over the elements conveyed the most striking proof
of Christ's mission from the God of nature, who in the Old
Testament is frequently characterized as ruling the sea, winds,
etc. Psalm Ixv. 7 ; lxxvii. 19 ; Job xxxviii. 1 1, etc. It is said,
that a drawing of feet upon the water was the hieroglyphic for
impossibility. Christ moreover designed, it appears, to make
trial of His disciples' faith by this miracle. See Matt. xiv. 28
— 31 ; Mark vi. 52. We read of the power to "move moun
tains," but evidently as a proverbial expression. The transfi
guration, if it need be mentioned, has a doctrinal sense, and
seems besides to have been intended to lead the minds of the
Apostles to the consideration of the Spiritual Kingdom. One
of Satan's temptations was to induce our Lord to work a
Miracle of mere power. Matt. iv. 6, 7. See Acts x. 38, fer
the general character of the Miracles.

32 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
8. And, for the same reason, those are in some mea
sure improbable which are professed by different Reli
gions; because from a Divine Agent may be expected'
distinct and peculiar specimens of divine agency.
Hence the claims to supernatural power in the primi
tive Church are in general questionable,8" as resting
upon the exorcism of evil spirits, and the cure of
diseases ; works, not only less satisfactory than others,
as evidence of a miraculous interposition, but suspi
cious, from the circumstance that they were exhibited
also by Jews and Gentiles of the same age.c In the
plagues of Egypt and Elijah's sacrifice, which seem
to be of this class, there is a direct contest between
two parties ; and the object of the divine messenger.
is to show his own superiority in the very point in
which his adversaries try their powers. Our Saviour's
use of the clay in restoring sight has been accounted
for on a similar principle, such external means being
in repute among the Heathen in their pretended
cures. 3. Those which have no professed Object.
1. Hence a suspicion is thrown on all miracles
ascribed by the Apocryphal Gospels to Christ in His
infancy ; for, being prior to His preaching, they seem
8 [Vide Essay ii. infra, n. 81, etc.]
0 Middleton, Stillingfleet, Orig. Saer. ii. 9, Sec. 1.

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 33
to attest no doctrine, and are but distantly connected
with any object.
2. Those again on which an object seems to be
forced. Hence many harmonizing in one plan arrest
the attention more powerfully than a detached and
solitary miracle, as converging to one point, and
pressing upon our notice the end for which they are
wrought. This remark, as far as it goes, is prejudicial
to the miracle wrought (as it is said) in Hunneric's
persecution, long after the real age of Miracles was
past ; when the Athanasian confessors are reported
to have retained the power of speech after the loss
of their tongues.
3. Those, too, must be viewed with suspicion which
are disjoined from human instruments, and are made
the vehicle of no message ;d since, according to our
foregoing view, Miracles are only then divested of
their a priori improbability when furthering some
great moral end, such as authenticating a divine com
munication. It is an objection then to those ascribed
to relics generally, and in particular to those attri
buted to the tomb of the Abbe Paris, that they are
left to tell their own story, and are but distantly con
nected with any object whatever. As it is, again, to
many tales of apparitions, that they do not admit of
a meaning, and consequently demand at most only
an otiose assent, as Paley terms it. Hence there is a
d Farmer, On Miracles, Chap. v. 3

34 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
difficulty in the narrative contained in the first verses
of John v. ; because we cannot reduce the account oi
the descent of the Angel into the water to give it a
healing power under any known arrangement of the
divine economy. We receive it, then, on the general
credit of the Revelation of which it forms part.e
4. For the same reason, viz., the want of a declared
object, a prejudice is excited when the professed worker
is silent, or diffident as to his own power ; since our
general experience of Providence leads us to suppose
that miraculous powers will not be committed to an
individual who is not also prepared for his office by
secret inspiration. This speaks strongly against the
cures ascribed by Tacitus to Vespasian, and would be
an objection to our crediting the prediction uttered by
Caiaphas, if separated from its context, or prominently
brought forward to rest an argument upon. It is in
general a characteristic of the Scripture system, that
Miracles and inspiration go together/
5. With a view to specify the object distinctly, some
have required that the Miracle should be wrought after
the delivery of the message.8' A message delivered
an indefinite time after the Miracle, while it cannot
* The verse containing the account of the Angel is wanting
in many MSS. of authority, and is marked as suspicious by
Griesbach. The mineral spring of Bethesda is mentioned by
Eusebius as celebrated even in his day.
f Douglas, Criterion. Warburton, Sermon on Resurrection.
Fleetwood, Farmer, and others.

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 35
but excite attention from the general reputation of
the messenger for an extraordinary gift, is not so
expressly stamped with divine authority, as when it
is ushered in by his claiming, and followed by his dis- .
playing, supernatural powers. For if a Miracle, once
wrought, ever after sanctions the doctrines taught by
the person exhibiting it, it must be attended by the
gift of infallibility, — a sustained miracle, which is
inconsistent with that frugality in the application of
power which is observable in the general course of Pro
vidence.11 On the other hand, when an unambiguous
Miracle having been first distinctly announced, is
wrought with the professed object of sanctioning a mes
sage from God, it conveys an irresistible evidence of
its divine origin. Accident is thus excluded, and the
final cause indissolubly connected with the super
natural event. I may remark that the Miracles of
Scripture were generally wrought on this plan.' In
conformity to which we find moreover that the
Apostles, etc., could not work miracles when they
pleased ; k a circumstance more consistent with our
11 The idea is accordingly discountenanced, Matt. vii. 22, 23 ;
Heb. vi. 4 — 6 ; Gal. ii. 11 — 14.
1 St. Mark ends his Gospel by saying, that the Apostles
" went forth and preached everywhere, the Lord working with
them, and confirming the word, by signs following," chap.
xvi. 20. See also Exodus iv. 29, 30 ; 1 Kings xiii. 2, 3 ; 2
Kings xx. 8 — 11 ; Acts xiv. 3, etc.
k E.g., Acts xx. 22, 23 ; Phil. ii. 27 ; 2 Tim. iv. 20. In the
Book of Acts we have not a few instances of the Apostles

36 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
ideas of the Divine government, and connecting the
extraordinary acts more clearly with specific objects,
than if the supernatural gifts were unlimited and
irrevocable. 6. Lastly, under this head I may notice professed,
miracles which, as those attributed' to Apollonius,
may be separated from a narrative without detriment
to it. The prodigies of Livy, for instance, form no
part in the action of the history, which is equally
intelligible without them.1 The miraculous events of
the Pentateuch, on the contrary, or of the Gospels
and Acts, though of course they may be rejected
together with the rest of the narrative, can be rejected
in no other way ; since they form its substance and
groundwork, and, like the figure of Phidias on
acting under the immediate direction of the Holy Spirit. The
gift of tongues is an exception to the general remark, as we
know it was abused ; but this from its nature was, when once
given, possessed as an ordinary talent, and needed no fresh
divine influence for subsequent exercise of it. It may besides
be viewed as a medium of conveying the. message, as well as
being the seal of its divinity, and as such needed not in every
instance to be marked out as a supernatural gift. Miracles in
Scripture are not done by wholesale, i.e., indiscriminately and ,
at once, without the particular will and act of the individual!
the contrary was the case with the cures at the tomb of the
Abb6 Paris. Acts xix. ii, 12, perhaps forms an exception?!
but the . Miracles there mentioned are expressly said to be
special, and were intended to put particular honour on the
Apostle ; Cf. Luke vi. 19 ; viii. 46, which seem to illustrate-
John Hi. 34. [But vide Essay ii., n. 83 — 85.]
1 E.g., he says, " Alijiciunt miracula huic pugna," ii. 7.

\ Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 37
¦Minerva's shield, cannot be erased without spoiling
the entire composition.111
4. Those which are exceptionable as regards their
Object.
1. If the professed object be trifling and unim
portant ; as in many related by the Fathers, e.g.,
Tertullian's account of the vision of an Angel to pre
scribe to a female the exact length and measure of
her veil, or the divine admonition which Cyprian pro
fesses to have received to mix water with wine in the
Eucharist, in order to render it efficacious." Among
these would be reckoned the directions given to Moses
relative to the furnishing of the Tabernacle, and other
regulations of the ceremonial law, were not further
and important objects thereby effected ; such as, sepa
rating the Israelites from the surrounding nations,
impressing upon them the doctrine of a particular
Providence, prefiguring future events, etc.
m Whereas other extraordinary accounts are like the statue
of the Goddess herself, which could readily be taken to pieces,
and resolved into its constituent parts, the precious metal and
the stone. For the Jewish Miracles, see Graves, On the
Pentateuch, Part i. It has been observed that the discourses
of Christ so constantly grow out of His Miracles, that we can
hardly admit the former without admitting the latter also.
But His discourses form His character, which is by no means
an obvious or easy one to imagine, had it never existed.
n Middleton, Free Inquiry. [No question relative to the
Eucharistic rite can be unimportant.]

38 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
2. Miracles wrought for the gratification of mere
curiosity are referable to this head of objection.,
Hence the triumphant invitations which some of the
Fathers make to their heathen opponents to attend
their exorcisms excite an unpleasant feeling in the
mind, as degrading a solemn spectacle into a mere
popular exhibition.
3. Those, again, which have a. political or party object,
as the cures ascribed to Vespasian, or as those attri
buted to the tomb of the Abbe" Paris, and the Eclectic
prodigies, all which, viewed in their best light, tend to
the. mere aggrandizement of a particular Sect, and
have little or no reference to the good of Mankind at
large. It tells in favour of the Christian Miracles,
that the Apostles, generally speaking, were not en
abled to work them for their own personal conveni
ence, to avoid danger, escape suffering, or save life.
St. Paul's preservation from the effects of the viper's
bite on the Isle of Melita is a solitary exception to
this remark, no mention being made of his availing
himself of this Miracle to convert the natives to the
Christian faith.0
4. For a similar reason, those bear a less appear
ance of probability which are wrought for the con
viction of individuals. I have already noticed the
° Rev. J. Blanco White, Against Catholicism, Let. 6. The
Breviary Miracles form a striking contrast to the Christian in
this point. [Not surely on the point of their benefiting the
worker.]

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 39
contrary character of the Scripture Miracles in this
respect; for instance, St. Paul's miraculous conversion
did not end with itself, but was followed by moment
ous and inestimable consequences.p Again, Miracles
attended the conversion of the ^Ethiopian Eunuch,
Cornelius, and Sergius Paulus ; but these were heads
and firstfruits of different classes of men who were in
time to be brought into the Church.i .
5. Miracles with a bad or vicious object are laden
with an extreme antecedent improbability ; for they
cannot at all be referred to the only known cause of
supernatural power, the agency of God. Such are
most of the fables concerning the heathen deities ;
not a few of the professed Miracles of the primitive
Church, which are wrought to sanction doctrines op
posed not only to Scriptural truth, but to the light of
nature ; r and some related in the Apocryphal Gospels,
especially Christ's inflicting death upon a schoolmas
ter who threatened to strike Him, and on a boy who
happened to run violently against Him.s Here must
be noticed several passages in Scripture, in which a
miraculous gift seems at first sight to be exercised to
p Acts xxvi. 16.
q Ibid. viii. 26, 39; x. 3, etc. ; xiii. 12. These three classes
are mentioned together in prophecy. Isa. lvi. 4 — 8.
r E.g., to establish Monachism, etc. [Monachism is not
unnatural, unless we are prepared to maintain that an un
natural state of life has the sanction of our Lord and St. Paul.]
8 Jones, On the Canon, Part iii.

40 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
gratify revengeful feelings, and which are, therefore,
received on the credit of the system.1
6. Unnecessary Miracles are improbable ; as those
wrought for an object attainable without an exertion,
or with less exertion, of extraordinary power." Of
this kind, we contend, would be the writing of the
Gospel on the skies, which some unbelievers have pro
posed as but an adequate attestation to a Revelation;
for, supposing the recorded fact of their once occur
ring be sufficient for a rational conviction, a perpetual
Miracle becomes superfluous/ Such, again, would
be the preservation of the text of Scripture in its
verbal correctness, which many have supposed neces
sary for its infallibility as a standard of Truth.
7. The same antecedent objection presses on Mi
racles wrought in attestation of truths already known.
We do not, for instance, require a Miracle to convince
t Gen. ix. 24 — 27 ; Judges xvi. 28 — 30 ; 2 Kings ii. 24 ;
2 Chron. xxiv. 22.
n It does not follow, because all Miracles are equally easy to
an Almighty Author, that all are equally probable; for, as has
been often remarked, a frugality in the application of power is
observable throughout His works.
v Dr. Graves observes, of the miraculous agency in the age
of Moses and Joshua, that " God continued it only so long as
was indispensably necessary to introduce and settle the Jewish
nation in the land of their inheritance, and establish this dis
pensation so as to answer the purposes of the divine economy.
After this, He gradually withdrew His supernatural assistance!
He left the nation collectively and individually to act according
to their own choice," etc. — Lectures on the Pentateuch, Part
iii. Lecture 2.

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 41
us the Sun shines, or that Vice. is blameable. The
Socinian scheme is in a great measure chargeable with
bringing the Miracles of the Gospel under this cen
sure : for it prunes away the Christian system till
little is left for the Miracles to attest. On this ground
an objection has been taken to the Miracle wrought
in favour of the Athanasians in Hunneric's persecu
tion, as above mentioned ; inasmuch as it merely pro
fesses to authorize a comment on the sacred text, i.e.,
to sanction a truth which is not new, unless Scripture
be obscure." Here, too, may be noticed Miracles
wrought in evidence of doctrines already established ;
such as those of the Papists, who seem desirous of
answering the unbeliever's demand for a perpetual
Miracle. Popish Miracles, as has often been observed,
occur in Popish countries, where they are least
wanted ; whereas, if real, they would be invaluable
among Protestants.4 Hence the primitive Miracles
become suspicious, in proportion as we find Christi
anity established, not only from the increasing facility
of fraud, but moreover from the apparent Heedless
ness of the extraordinary display. And hence, ad
mitting the Miracles of Christ and His followers,
future Miracles with the same end are somewhat
improbable. For enough have been wrought to attest
x See Maclaine's Note on the subject, Mosheim, Eccl. Hist.
Cent. v. Part ii. Chap. v. [Vide Essay ii., n. 220, etc.]
4 [This is answered infra, Essay ii., n. 97, etc.]

42 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
the doctrine ; and attention, when once excited by
supernatural means, may be kept alive by a standing
Ministry, just as inspiration is supplied by human
learning. 8. I proceed to notice inconsistency in the objects
proposed, as creating a just prejudice against the
validity of miraculous pretensions. This applies to
the claims of the Romish Church, in which Miracles
are wrought by hostile sects in support of discordant
tenets.y It constitutes some objection to the bulk of
the Miracles of the primitive Church, when viewed as
a continuation of the original gift, that they differ so
much in manner, design, and attendant circumstances,
from those recorded in Scripture.^ "We see," says
Middleton (in the ages subsequent to the Christian
era) " a dispensation of things ascribed to God, quite
different from that which we meet with in the New
Testament. For in those days the power of working
Miracles was committed to none but the Apostles,
and to a few of the most eminent of the other dis
ciples, who were particularly commissioned to propa
gate the Gospel and preside in the Church of Christ.
But, upon the pretended revival of the same powers
in the following Ages, we find the administration of
them committed, not to those who were intrusted with
the government of the Church, not to the successors
y Douglas, Criterion, p. 105, Note (8vo. edit. 1807).
5 [AU this is answered infra, Essay ii., n. 96, 101.]

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 43
of the Apostles, to the Bishops, the Martyrs, nor to
the principal champions of the Christian cause ; but
to boys, to women, and, above all, to private and
obscure laymen, not only of an inferior but sometimes
also of a bad character! '2
9. Hence, to avoid the charge of inconsistency in the
respective objects of the Jewish and Christian Miracles,
it is incumbent upon believers in them to show that
the difference between the two systems is a difference
in appearance only, and that Christ came not to de
stroy but to fulfil the Law. Here, as far as its antece
dent appearance is concerned, the Miracle said to have
occurred on Julian's attempt to rebuild the Jewish
Temple is seen to great advantage. The object was
great, the time critical, its consequences harmonize
very happily with the economy of the Mosaic Dispen
sation, and the general spirit of the Prophetical
z Scripture sometimes attributes miraculous gifts to men of
bad character ; but we have no reason for supposing such could
work miracles at pleasure (see Numb. xxii. 18 ; xxiii. 3, 8, 12,
20; xxiv. 10 — 13), or attest any doctrine but that which Christ
and His Apostles taught ; nor is our faith grounded upon their
preaching. Moreover, their power may have been given them
for some further purpose ; for though to attest a divine message
be the primary object of Miracles, it need not be the only ob
ject. "It would be highly ridiculous," says Mr. Penrose in
his recent work on Miracles, " to erect a steam engine for the
mere purpose of opening and shutting a valve ; but the engine
being erected is very wisely employed both for this and for
many other purposes, which, comparatively speaking, are of very
little significance." [This applies to ecclesiastical miracles.]

44 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
writings, and the fact itself has some correspondence
with the prodigies which preceded the final destruction
of Jerusalem.a10. Again, Miracles which do not tend to the ac
complishment of their proposed end are open to
objection ; and those which have not effected what
they had in view. Hence some kind of argument
might be derived against the Christian Miracles, were
they not accompanied by a prediction of their tempo
rary failure in effecting their object ; or, to speak
more correctly, were it not their proposed object
gradually to spread the doctrines which they authen
ticate.11 There is nothing, however, to break the
force of this objection when directed against the
Miracles ascribed to the Abbe Paris ; since the Jan-
senist interest, instead of being advanced in conse
quence of them, soon after lost ground, and was
ultimately ruined.0
n. These Miracles are also suspicious, as having
been stopped by human authority ; it being impro
bable that a Divine Agent should permit any such
interference with His plan. The same objection ap
plies to the professed gift of exorcising demoniacs
in the pi-iinitive Church ; which was gradually lost
after the decree of the Council of Laodicea confined
a See Warburton's Julian.
b See Parables in Matt. xiii. 3, 24, 31, 33, 47; xxiv. 12;
Acts xx. 29, 30 ; 2 Thess. ii. 3 ; 2 Tim. iii. 1 — 5, etc.
c Paley, Evidences, Part i. Prop. 2.

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 45
the exercise of it to such as were licensed by the
Bishop. d And lastly, to the supernatural character
of Prince Hohenlohe's cures, which were stopped at
Bamberg by an order from authority, that "ncne
should be wrought except in the presence of Magis
trates and medical practitioners." e
These are the most obvious objections which may
be fairly made to the antecedent probability of mira
culous narratives. It will be observed, however, that
none of them go so far as to deprive testimony for
them of the privilege of being heard. Even where
the nature of the facts related forbids us to refer the
Miracle to divine agency, as when it is wrought to
establish some immoral principle, still it is not more
than extremely improbable and to be. viewed with
strong suspicion. Christians at least must acknowledge
that the a priori view which Reason takes would in
some cases lead to an erroneous conclusion. A Mira
cle, for instance, ascribed to an Evil Spirit is, prior to
d It had hitherto been in the hands of the meaner sort of the
Christian laity. After that time, " few or none of the clergy,
nor indeed of the laity, were any longer able to cast out devils ;
so that the old Christian exorcism or prayer for the energumens
in the church began soon after to be omitted as useless."
Whiston, in Middleton. [Vid. Essay ii., n. 59.]
0 Bentham, Preuves Judiciaires, Liv. viii. Chap. x. [This
fact requires testimony stronger than Bentham's. However, as
to the Abb£ Paris, the epigram is well known,
" De par Ie roi, defense a Dieu,
De faire miracles en ce lieu. "J

46 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
the information of Scripture, improbable ; and if it
stood on its own merits would require very strong
testimony to establish it, as being referred to an un
known cause. Yet, on the authority of Scripture, we
admit the occasional interference of agents short of
divine with the course of nature. This, however,
only shows that these a priori tests are not decisive.
Yet if we cannot always ascertain what Miracles are
improbable, at least we can determine what are
not so ; moreover, it will still be true that the more
objections lie against any professed Miracle, the
greater suspicion justly attaches to it, and the less
important is the fact, even if capable of proof.
On the other hand, even when the external appear
ance is altogether in favour of the Miracle, it must
be recollected, nothing is thereby proved concerning
the fact of its occurrence. We have done no more
than recommend to notice the evidence, whatever it
may be, which is offered in its behalf. Even, then,
could Miracles be found with as strong an antecedent
case as those of Scripture, still direct testimony must
be produced to substantiate their claims on our belief.
At the same time, since there are none such, a fair
prepossession is indirectly created in favour of the
latter, over and above their intrinsic claims on our
attention. Some few indeed of the Scripture Miracles are open
to exception; and have accordingly been noticed in the

Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle. 47
course of the above remarks as by themselves impro
bable. These, however, are seldom such in more than
one respect ; whereas the other Miracles which came
before us were open to several or all of the specified
objections at the same time. And, further, as they
are but a few in the midst of an overpowering ma
jority pointing consistently to one grand object, they ¦
must not be torn from their moral context, but, on
the credit of the rest, they must be considered but
apparent exceptions to the rule. It is obvious that
a large system must consist of various parts of un
equal utility and excellence ; and to expect each par
ticular occurrence to be complete in itself, is as un
reasonable as to require the parts of some complicated
machine, separately taken, to be all equally finished
and fit for display/
Let these remarks suffice on the question of the
antecedentprobability or improbability of a miraculous
f In thus refusing to admit the existence of real exceptions
to the general rule, in spite of appearances, we are not expos
ing ourselves to that charge of excessive systematizing which
may justly be brought against those who, with Hume, reject
the very notion of a Miracle, as implying an interruption of
physical regularity. For the Revelation which we admit, on
the authority of the general system of Miracles, imparts such
accurate and extended information concerning the attributes
of God, over and about the partial and imperfect view of them
which the world affords, as precludes the supposition of any
work of His being evil or useless. Whereas there is no voice
in the mere analogy of nature which expressly denies the
possibility of real exceptions to its general course.

48 Antecedent Credibility of a Miracle.
narrative. Enough, it may be hoped, has been said
to separate the Miracles of Scripture from those else
where related, and to invest them with an importance
exciting in an unprejudiced mind a just interest in
their behalf, and a candid attention to the historical
testimony on which they rest ; inasmuch as they are
ascribed to an adequate cause, recommended by an
intrinsic dignity, and connected with an important
object, while all others are more or less unaccount
able, unmeaning, extravagant, and useless. And thus,
viz., on the ground of this utter dissimilarity between
the Miracles of Scripture and those reported elsewhere,
we are enabled to account for the incredulity with
which believers in Revelation listen to any extraor
dinary account at the present day ; and which some
times is urged against them as inconsistent with their
assent to the former. It is because they admit the Scrip
ture Miracles. Belief in these has pre-occupied their
minds, and created a fair presumption against those
of a different class ; — the prospect of a recurrence of
supernatural agency being in some measure dis
countenanced by the Revelation already given ; and
again, the weakness and insipidity, the want of system
and connexion, the deficiency in the evidence, andtfye
transient repute of marvellous stories ever since, ,¦¦¦
creating ' a strong and just prejudice against those '
similar accounts which now from time to time are
noised abroad.

Section III.
ON THE CRITERION OF A MIRACLE, CONSIDERED
AS A DIVINE INTERPOSITION.
T T has sometimes been asked, whether Miracles are
¦*- a sufficient evidence of the interposition of the
Deity? under the idea that other causes, besides
divine agency, might be assigned for their production.
This is obviously the reverse objection to that I have
as yet considered, which was founded on the assump
tion that they could be referred to no known cause
whatever. After showing, then, that the Scripture
Miracles may be ascribed to the Supreme Being, I
proceed to show that they cannot reasonably be
ascribed to those other causes which have been some
times assigned for them, for instance, to unknown laws
of nature, or to the secret agency of Spirits.
I. Now it is evidently unphilosophical to attribute
them to the power of invisible Beings, short of God ;
because, independently of Scripture (the truth of
which, of course, must not be assumed in this ques
tion), we have no evidence of the existence of such
4

50 Criterion of a Miracle.
beings. Nature, attests, indeed, the being of a God,
but not of a race of intelligent creatures between Him
and Man. In assigning a Miracle, therefore, to the
influence of Spirits, an hypothetical cause is intro
duced merely to remove* a difficulty. And even did
analogy lead us to admit their possible existence, yet
it would tend rather to disprove than to prove
their power over the visible creation. They may be
confined to their own province, and though superior
to Man, still may be unable to do many things which
he can effect ; just as Man in turn is superior to birds
and fishes, without having, in consequence, the power
of flying or of inhabiting the water.s
Still it may be necessary to show that on our own
principles we are not open to any charge of incon
sistency. That is, it has been questioned, whether, in
admitting the existence and power of Spirits on the
authority of Revelation, we are not in danger of in
validating the evidence upon which that authority
rests. For the cogency of the argument from Miracles
depends on the assumption, that interruptions in the
course of nature must ultimately proceed from God ;
which is not true, if they may be effected by other
beings without His sanction. And it must be con
ceded that, explicit as Scripture is in considering
Miracles as signs of divine agency, it still does seem
e Campbell, On Miracles, Part ii. Sec. 3. Farmer, Ch. ii.
Sec. 1.

Criterion of a Miracle. 51
to give created Spirits some power of working them ;
and even, in its most literal sense, intimates the possi
bility of their working them in opposition to the true '
doctrine.11 With a view of meeting this difficulty,
some writers have attempted to make a distinction
between great and small, many and few Miracles ;
and have thus inadvertently destroyed the intelligi
bility of any, as the criterion of a divine interposition.'
Others, by referring to the nature of the doctrine at
tested, in 'order to determine the author of the Miracle,
have exposed themselves to the plausible charge of
adducing, first, the Miracle to attest the divinity of
the doctrine, and then, the doctrine to prove the
divinity of the Miracle.k Others, on the contrary,
11 Deut. xiii. 1 — 3; Matt. xxiv. 24; 2 Thess. ii. 9 — 11.
i More or less, Sherlock, Clarke, Locke, and others.
k Prideaux, Clarke, Chandler, etc., seem hardly to have
guarded sufficiently against the charge here noticed. There
is an appearance of doing honour to the Christian doctrines
in representing them as intrinsically credible, which leads
many into supporting opinions which, carried to their full ex
tent (as they were by Middleton), supersede the need of
Miracles altogether. It must be recollected, too, that they
who are allowed to praise have the privilege of finding fault,
and may reject, according to their a priori notions, as well as
receive. Doubtless the divinity of a clearly immoral doctrine
could not be evidenced by Miracles ; for our belief in the moral
attributes of God is much stronger than our conviction of the
negative proposition, that none but He can interfere with the
system of nature. But there is always the danger of extend
ing this admission beyond its proper limits, of supposing our
selves adequate judges of the tendency of doctrines, and be
cause unassisted Reason informs us what is moral and immoral

52 Criterion of a Miracle.
have thought themselves obliged to deny the power
of Spirits altogether, and to explain away the Scrip
ture accounts of demoniacal possessions, and the
narrative of our Lord's Temptation.i Without, how
ever, having recourse to any of these dangerous modes
of answering the objection, it may be sufficient to
reply, that since, agreeably to the antecedent senti
ment of reason, God has adopted Miracles as the seal
of a divine message, we believe He will never suffer
them to be so counterfeited as to deceive the humble
inquirer. Thus the information given by Scripture in
nowise undoes the original conclusions of Reason ; for
it anticipates the objection which itself furnishes, and
by revealing the express intention of God in miracu-
in our. own case, of attempting to decide on the abstract mo
rality of actions ; for many have rejected the miraculous nar
rative of the Pentateuch, from an unfounded and ail unwarrant
able opinion, that the means employed in settling the Jews in
Canaan were in themselves immoral. These remarks are in
nowise inconsistent with using (as was done in a former section).
our actual knowledge of God's attributes, obtained from a
survey of nature and human affairs, in determining the proba
bility of certain professed Miracles having proceeded from
Him. It is one thing to infer from the experience of life,
another to imagine the character of God from the gratuitous
conceptions of our own minds. From experience we gain but
general and imperfect ideas of wisdom, goodness, etc., enough
(that is) to bear witness to a Revelation when given, not enough
to supersede it. On the contrary, our speculations concerning
the Divine Attributes and designs, professing, as they do, to
decide on the truth of revealed doctrines, in fact go to super
sede the necessity of a Revelation altogether.
1 Especially Farmer.

Criterion of a Miracle. 53
lous displays, guarantees to us that He will allow no
interference of created power to embarrass the proof
thence resulting, of His special interposition.™ It is
unnecessary to say more on this subject ; and ques
tions concerning the existence, nature, and limits of
spiritual agency will find their place when Christians
are engaged in settling among themselves the doctrines
of Scripture. We take it, therefore, for granted, as an j
obvious and almost undeniable principle, that real/
Miracles, i.e., interruptions in the course of nature,
cannot reasonably be referred to any power but divine, ,
because it is natural to refer an alteration in the system
to its original author, and because Reason does not
inform us of any other being but God exterior to
nature ; and lastly, because in the particular case of
the Scripture Miracles, the workers of them confirm
our previous judgment by expressly attributing them
to Him.
2. A more subtle question remains, respecting the
possible existence of causes in nature, to us unknown,
by the supposed operation of which the. apparent
anomalies may be reconciled to the ordinary laws of
the system. It has already been admitted that some
difficulty will at times attend the discrimination of
miraculous from merely uncommon events ; and it
must be borne in mind that in this, as in all questions
m Fleetwood, On Miracles, Disc. ii. p. 201. Van Mildert's
Boyle Lectures, Serm. xxi.

54 Criterion of a Miracle.
from which demonstration is excluded, it is impos
sible, from the nature of the case, absolutely to dis
prove any, even the wildest, hypothesis which may be
framed. It may freely be granted, moreover, that
some of the Scripture Miracles, if they stood alone,
might reasonably be referred to natural principles of
which we were ignorant, or resolved into some happy
combination of accidental circumstances. For our
purpose, it is quite sufficient if there be a considerable
number which .no sober judgment would attempt to
deprive of their supernatural character by any suppo
sition of our ignorance of natural laws, or of exagge
ration in the narrative. Raising the dead and giving
sight to the blind by a word, feeding a multitude with
the casual provisions which one individual among them
had with him, healing persons at a distance, and walk
ing on the water, are facts, even separately taken, far
beyond the conceivable effects of artifice or accident ;
and -much more so when they meet together in one
and the same history. And here Hume's argument
from general experience is in point, which at least
proves that the ordinary powers of nature are unequal
to the production of works of this kind. It becomes,
then, a balance of opposite probabilities, whether gra
tuitously to suppose a multitude of perfectly unknown
causes, and these, moreover, meeting in one and the
same history, or to have recourse to one, and that a
known power, then miraculously exerted for an extra-

Criterion of a Miracle. 55
ordinary and worthy object. We may safely say no
sound reasoner will hesitate on which alternative to
decide. While, then, a fair proportion of the Scrip
ture Miracles are indisputably deserving of their
name, but a weak objection can be derived from the
case of the few which, owing to accidental circum
stances, bear at the present day less decisive marks of
supernatural agency. For, be it remembered (and it
is a strong confirmatory proof that the Jewish and
Christian Miracles are really what they profess to be)
that though the miraculous character of some of
them is more doubtful in one age than in another, yet
the progress of Science has made no approximation
to a general explication of them on natural principles.
While discoveries in Optics and Chemistry have ac
counted for a host of apparent miracles, they hardly,
touch upon those of the Jewish and Christian systems.1.
Here is no phantasmagoria to be detected, no analysis)
or synthesis of substances, ignitions, explosions, and
other customary resources of the juggler's art.11 But,j
as before, we shall best be able to estimate their cha- 1
racter in this respect by contrasting them with other
occurrences which have sometimes been considered
miraculous. Thus, too, a second line of difference
will be drawn between them and the mass of rival
prodigies, whether religious or otherwise, to which
they are often compared. n See Farmer, Ch. i. Sec. 3.

56 Criterion of a Miracle.
A Miracle, then, as far as it is an evidence of Divine
interposition, being an ascertained anomaly in an
established system, or an event without assignable
physical cause, those facts, of course, have no title to
the name —

1. Which may be referred to misstatement in the
testimony.
1. Such are many of the prodigies of the Heathen
Mythology and History, which have been satisfactorily
traced to an exaggeration of natural events. For in
stance, the fables of the Cyclops, Centaurs, of the
annual transformation of a Scythian nation into
wolves, as related by Herodotus, etc. Or natural
facts allegorized, as in the fable of Scylla and Cha-
rybdis. Or where the fact may be explained by sup
plying a probable omission ; as we should account for
a story of a man sailing in the air by supposing a
balloon described.0
2. Or where the Miracle is but verbal, as the poeti
cal prodigy of thunder, without clouds, which is little
better than a play upon words ; for, supposing it to
occur, it would not be called thunder. Or as when
Herodotus speaks of wool growing on trees ; for, even
were it in substance the same as wool, it could not be
called so without a contradiction in terms.
0 Bentham, Preuves Judiciaires, Liv. viii. Ch. x.

Criterion of a Miracle. 57
3. Or where the Miracle is one simply of degree,
for then exaggeration is more easily conceivable ; —
thus many supposed visions may have been but
natural dreams.
4. Or where it depends on the combination of a
multitude of distinct circumstances, each of which is
necessary for the proof of its supernatural character,
and where, as in fine experiments, a small mistake is
of vast consequence. As those which depend on a
coincidence of time, which it is difficult for any person
to have ascertained. For instance, the exclamation
which Apollonius is said to have uttered concerning
the assassination of Domitian at the time of its taking
place ; and, again, the alleged fact of his appearing at
Puteoli on the same morning in which he was tried at
Rome. Such, too, in some degree, is the professed
revelation made to St. Basil, who is said to have
been miraculously informed of the death of the Em
peror Julian at the very moment that it took place.?
Here we may instance many stories of apparitions ;
as the popular one concerning the appearance of a
man to the club which he used to frequent at the
moment after his death, who was afterwards dis
covered to have escaped from his nurses in a fit of
delirium shortly before it took place, and actually
to have joined his friends. We may add the case
related to M. Bonnet, of a woman who pretended to
p Middleton, Free Inquiry.

58 Criterion of a Miracle.
know what was passing at a given time at any part ot
the globe, and who was detected by the simple expe
dient of accurately marking the time, and comparing
her account with the fact.? In the same class must
be reckoned not a few of the answers of the Heathen
Oracles, if it be worth while to allude to them ; as
that which informed Croesus of his occupation at a
certain time agreed upon. In the Gospel, the noble
man's son begins to amend at the very time that
Christ speaks the word ; but this circumstance does
not constitute, it merely increases the Miracle. The
argument from Prophecy is, in this point of view,
somewhat deficient in simplicity and clearness, as
implying the decision of many previous questions :
such, for instance, as to the existence of the professed
prediction before the event, the interval between the
prediction and its accomplishment, the completeness
of its accomplishment, etc. Hence Prophecy affords
a more learned and less popular proof of Divine in
terposition than physical Miracles, and, except in
cases where it contributes a very strong evidence, is
commonly of inferior cogency.
2. Those which, from suspicious circumstances attend
ing them, may not unfairly be referred to an unknown
cause. 1. As those which take place in departments of
1 Bentham, Preuves Judiciaires, Liv. viii. Ch. x.

Criterion of a Miracle. 59
nature little understood ; for instance, Miracles of
Electricity. — Again, an assemblage of Miracles con
fined to one line of extraordinary exertion in some
measure suggests the idea of a cause short of divine^
For while their repetition looks like the profession, their
similarity argues a want, of power. This remark is
disadvantageous to the Miracles of the primitive
Church, which consisted almost entirely of exorcisms
and cures ;6 to the Pythagorean, which were principally
Miracles of sagacity; and, again, to those occurring at
the tomb of the Abbe Paris, which were limited to
cures, and cures, too, of particular diseases. While
the Miracles of Scripture are frugally dispensed as
regards their object and seasons, they are carefully
varied in their nature ; like the work of One who is
not wasteful of His riches, yet can be munificent when
occasion calls for it.
2. Here we may notice tentative Miracles, as Paley
terms them ; that is, where out of many trials only
some succeed ; for inequality of success seems to
imply accident, in other words, the combination of
unknown physical causes. Such are the cures of
scrofula by the King's touch, and those effected in
the Heathen Temples ;r and, again, those at the tomb
of the Abbe Paris, there being but eight or nine well-
authenticated cures out of the multitude of trials that
6 [Vide, however, infra, Essay ii., n. 82, etc.]
r Stillingfleet, Orig. Saer. Book ii. Ch. x. Sec. 9.

60 Criterion of a Miracle.
were made.5 One of the peculiarities of the cures
ascribed to Christ is their invariable success.'
3. Here, for a second reason, diffidence in the agent
casts suspicion on the reality of professed Miracles ;
for at least we have the sanction of his own opinion
for supposing them to be the effect of accident or un
known causes.
4. Temporary Miracles also, as many of the Jansen-
ist and other extraordinary cures," may be similarly
accounted for ; for, if ordinary causes can undo, it is
not improbable they may be able originally to effect.
The restoration of Lazarus and the others was a re
storation to their former condition, which was mor
tal ; their subsequent dissolution, then, in the course
of nature, does not interfere with the completeness of
the previous Miracle.
5. The Jansenist cures are also unsatisfactory, as
being gradual, and, for the same reason, the professed
liquefaction of St. Januarius's blood ; a progressive
effect being a characteristic, as it seems, of the opera
tions of nature. Hence those Miracles are most per
spicuous which are wrought at the word of command ;
as those of Christ and His Apostles. For this as well
as other reasons, incomplete Miracles, as imperfect
8 Douglas, Criterion, p. 133.
4 Ibid. p. 260, cites the following texts : Matt. iv. 23, 24 ;
viii. 16 ; ix. 35 ; xii. 15 ; xiv. 12 ; Luke iv. 40 ; vi. 19.
u Douglas, Criterion, p. 190. Middleton, Free Inquiry, iv.
Sec. 3.

Criterion of a Miracle. 6 1
cures, are no evidence of supernatural agency ; and
here, again, we have to instance the cures effected at
the tomb of the Abb6 Paris.
6. Again, the use of means is suspicious ; for a
Miracle may almost be defined to be an event without
means. Hence, however miraculous the production
of ice might appear to the Siamese, considered ab
stractedly, they would hardly so account it in an
actual experiment, when they saw the preparation of
nitre, etc., which in that climate must have been used
for the purpose. In the case of the Steam-vessel or the
Balloon, which, it has been sometimes said, would ap
pear miraculous to persons unacquainted with Science,
the chemical and mechanical apparatus employed
could not fail to rouse suspicion in intelligent minds.
Hence professed Miracles are open to suspicion, if
confined to one spot ; as were the Jansenist cures.
For'they thereby became connected with a necessary
condition, which is all we understand by a means :
for instance, such may often be imputed to a con
federacy, which (as is evident) can from its nature
seldom shift the scene of action. "The Cock-lane
ghost could only knock and scratch in one place. "v
The Apostles, on the contrary, are represented as dis-
. persed about, and working Miracles in various parts
of the world." These remarks are, of course, inappli-
T Hey's Lectures, Book i. Ch. xvi. Sec. io.
x Douglas, Criterion, p. 337.

62 Criterion of a Miracle.
cable in a case where the apparent means are known
to be inadequate, and are not constantly used ; as our
Lord's occasional application of clay to the eyes,
which, while it proves that He did not need such instru
mentality, conveys also an intimation that all the effi
cacy of means is derived from His appointment.
3. Those which may be referred to the supposed
operation of a cause known to exist.
1. Professed Miracles of knowledge or mental
ability are often unsatisfactory for this reason ; being
in many cases referable to the ordinary powers of the
intellect, Of this kind is the boasted elegance of the
style of the Koran, alleged by Mahomet in evidence
of his divine mission. Hence most of the Miracles
of Apollonius, consisting, as they do, in knowing the
thoughts of others, and predicting the common events
of life, are no criterion of a supernatural gift; it
being only under certain circumstances that such
power can clearly be discriminated from the natural
exercise of acuteness and sagacity. Accordingly,
though a knowledge of the hearts of men is claimed
by Christ, it seems to be claimed rather with a view
to prove to Christians the doctrine of His Divine
Nature than to attest to the world His authority as a
messenger from God. Again, St. Paul's prediction of
shipwreck on his voyage to Rome was intended to
prevent it; and so was the prediction of Agabus

Criterion of a Miracle. 63
concerning the same Apostle's approaching perils at
Jerusalem.y 2. For a second reason, then, the argument from
Prophecy is a less simple and striking proof of divine
agency than a display of Miracles ; it being impos
sible, 'in all cases, to show that the things foretold
were certainly beyond the ordinary faculties of the
mind to have discovered. Yet when this is shown,
Prophecy is one of the most powerful of conceivable
evidences ; strict foreknowledge being a faculty not
only above the powers, but even above the compre
hension of the human mind.
3. And much more fairly may apparent Miracles
be attributed to the supposed operation of an existing
physical cause, when they are parallel to its known
effects ; as chemical, meteorological, etc, phenomena.
For though the cause may not, perhaps, appear in the
particular case, yet it is known to have acted in
others similar to it. For this reason, no stress can be
laid on accounts of luminous crosses in the air, human
shadows in the clouds, appearances of men and
horses on hills, and spectres when they are speech
less, as is commonly the case, ordinary causes being
assignable in all of these ; or, again, on the pretended
liquefaction of the blood of St. Januarius, or on the
exorcism of demoniacs, which is the. most frequent
Miracle in the Primitive Church.
y Acts xxi. 10 — 14; xxvii. 10, 21.

64 Criterion of a Miracle.
4. The remark applies, moreover, to cases of heal
ing, so far as they are not instantaneous, complete,
etc. : conditions which exclude the supposition of
natural means being employed, and which are strictly
fulfilled in the Gospel narrative.
5. Again, some cures are known as possible effects
of an excited imagination ; particularly when the dis
ease arises from obstruction and other disorders of the
blood and spirits, as the cures which took place at the
tomb of the Abbe Paris.2
6. We should be required to add those cases of
healing in Scripture where the faith of the petitioners.
was a necessary condition of the cure, were not these
comparatively few, and some of them such as no ima
gination could have effected (for instance, the restora
tion of sight), and some wrought on persons absent ;
and were not faith often required, not of the patient, but
of the relative or friend who brought him to be healed.3
7. The force of imagination may also be alleged to
account for the supposed visions and voices which
some enthusiasts have believed they saw and heard ;
for instance, the trances of Montanus and his fol-
z Douglas, Criterion, p. 172.
a Markx. 51, 52 ; Matt. viii. 5 — 13. See Douglas, Criterion,
p. 258. "Where persons petitioned themselves for a cure, a
declaration of their faith was often required, that none might
be encouraged to try experiments out of curiosity, in a manner
which would have been very indecent, and have tended to
many bad consequences." Doddridge on Acts ix. 34.

Criterion of a Miracle. 65
lowers, the visions related by some of the Fathers,
and those of the Romish saints ; 7 lastly, Mahomet's
pretended night-journey to heaven : all which, grant
ing the sincerity of the reporters, may not unreason
ably be referred to the effects of disease or of an
excited imagination.
8. Such, it is obvious, might be some of the Scrip
ture Miracles ; for instance, the various appearances
of Angels to individuals, the vision of St. Paul when
he was transported to the third heaven, etc., which
accordingly were wrought, as Scripture professes, for
purposes distinct from that of evidencing the doctrine,
viz., in order to become the medium of a revelation,
or to confirm faith, etc. In other cases, however, the
supposition of imagination is excluded by the vision
having been witnessed by more than one person, as
the Transfiguration ; or by its correspondence with
distinct visions seen by others, as in the circumstances
which attended the conversion of Cornelius ; or by
its connection with a permanent Miracle, as the ap
pearance of Christ to St. Paul in his conversion, is
connected with his blindness in consequence, which
remained three days.b
9. Much more inconclusive are those which are ac-
1 [The visions of Catholic saints were granted to them, as is
said in the next sentence about Scripture visions, " for purposes
distinct from that of evidencing the doctrine."]
b Paley's Evidences, Part i. Prop. 2. S

66 Criterion of a Miracle.
tually attended by a physical cause known or suspected
to be adequate to their production. Some of those
who were cured at the tomb of the Abbe' Paris were
at the time making use of the usual remedies ; the
person whose inflamed eye was relieved was, during
his attendance at the sepulchre, under the care of an
eminent oculist ; another was cured of a lameness in
the knee by the mere effort to kneel at the tomb:c
Arnobius challenges the Heathens to produce one of
the pretended miracles of their gods performed with
out the application of some prescription."1
io. Again, Hilarion's cures of wounds, as mentioned
by Jerome, were accompanied by the application of
consecrated oil.e The Apostles indeed made use of
oil in some of their cures/ but they more frequently
healed without a medium of any kind. A similar
objection might be urged against the narrative of
Hezekiah's recovery from sickness, both on account
of the application of the figs, and the slowness of the
cure, were it anywhere stated to have been miraculous.8
Again, the dividing of the Red Sea, accompanied as
it was by a strong east wind, would not have been
clearly miraculous, had it not been effected at the
word of Moses. » Douglas, Criterion, pp. 143, 184, Note.
d Stillingfleet, Book ii. Ch. x. Sec. 9.
e Middleton, Free Inquiry, iv. Sec. 2.
' Mark vi. 13.
£ 2 Kings xx. 4 — 7.

Criterion of a Miracle. 67
1 1. Much suspicion, too, is (as some think) cast up
on the miraculous nature of the fire, etc., which put a
stop to Julian's attempt to rebuild the Temple at Jeru
salem, by the possibility of referring it to the opera
tion of chemical causes.
12. Lastly, answers to prayer, however providential,
are not miraculous ; for in granting them, God acts
by means of, not out of, His usual system, making the
ordinary course of things subservient to a gracious
-purpose. Such events, then, instead of evidencing- the
Divine approbation to a certain cause, must be proved
from the goodness of the cause to be what they
are interpreted to be. Yet by supposed answers to
prayer, appeals to Heaven, pretended judgments, etc.,
enthusiasts in most ages have wished to sanction their
claims to divine inspiration. By similar means the
pretensions of the Romish hierarchy have been sup
ported.8 Here we close our remarks on the criterion of a
Miracle ; which, it has been seen, is no one definite
peculiarity, applicable to all cases, but the combined
force of a number of varying circumstances deter
mining our judgment in each particular instance. It
might even be said, that a determinate criterion is
almost inconceivable. For when once settled, it might
b [But not ultimately founded and rested upon them, as has
been the way with enthusiasts.]

68 Criterion of a Miracle.
appear, as was above remarked, to be merely the phy
sical antecedent of the extraordinary fact ; while, on
the other hand, from the direction thus given to the
ingenuity of impostors, it would soon itself need a cri
terion to distinguish it from its imitations. Certain it
is, that the great variety of circumstances under which
the Christian Miracles were wrought, furnishes an
evidence for their divine origin, in addition to that
derived from their publicity, clearness, ajumber, instan
taneous production, and completeness.
The exorcism of demoniacs, however, has already
been noticed as being, perhaps, in every case deficient
in the proof of its miraculous nature. Accordingly,
this class of Miracles seems not to have been intended
as a primary evidence of a divine mission, but to be
addressed to those who already admitted the existence
of evil spirits, in proof of the power of Christ and
His followers over them.h To us, then, it is rather a
doctrine than an evidence, manifesting our Lord's .
power, as other doctrines instance His mercy.
With regard to "the argument from Prophecy, which
some have been disposed to abandon on account of
the number of conditions necessary for the proof of
its supernatural character, it should be remembered,
h See Div. Leg. Book ix. Ch. v. Hence the exercise of this
gift seems almost to have been confined to Palestine. At
Philippi St. Paul casts out a spirit of divination in self-
defence (Acts xvi. 16— 18).. Ih the transaction related Acts
xix. ii — 17, Jews are principally concerned.

Criterion of a Miracle. 69
that inability to fix the exact boundary of natural
sagacity is no objection to such prophecies as are un
deniably beyond it ; and that the mere inconclusive-
ness of some of those in Scripture, as proofs of Divine
Prescience, has no positive force against others con-
• tained in it, which furnishes a full, lasting, , and, in
many cases, growing evidence of its inspiration.1
' Some unbelievers have urged the irrelevancy of St. Mat
thew's citations from the Old Testament Prophecies in illustra
tion of the events of Christ's life, e.g. ch. ii. 15. It must be
recollected, however, that what is evidence in one age is often
not so in another. That certain of the texts adduced by the
Evangelist furnish at the present day no proof of Divine
Prescience, is very true ; but unless some kind of argument
could have been drawn from them at the time the Gospel was
written, from' traditional interpretations of their sense, we can
scarcely account for St. Matthew's introducing them. The
question is,, has there been a loss of what was evidence for
merly, (as is often the case,) or did St. Matthew bring forward
as a prophetical evidence what was manifestly not so, as if to
hurt the effect of those other passages, as ch. xxvii. 35, which
have every appearance of being real predictions ? It has been
observed, that Prophecy in general must be obscure, in order
that the events spoken of may not be understood before their
accomplishment.

Section IV.
ON THE DIRECT EVIDENCE FOR THE CHRISTIAN
MIRACLES.
TM PORTA NT as are the inquiries which I have
¦*- hitherto prosecuted, it is obvious that they do not
lead to any positive conclusion, whether certain mira
culous accounts are true or not. However necessary a
direct anomaly in the course of nature may be to rouse
attention, and an important final cause to excite interest
and reverence, still the quality of the testimony on which
the accounts rest can alone determine our belief in
them. The preliminary points, however, have been
principally dwelt upon, because objections founded on
them form the strong ground of unbelievers, who
seem in some degree to allow the strength of the di
rect evidence for the Scripture Miracles. Again, an
examination of the direct evidence is less necessary
here, because, though antecedent questions have not
been neglected by Christian writers,k yet the evidence
k Especially by Vince, in his valuable Treatise on the Chris
tian Miracles ; and Hey, in his Lectures.

Evidence for the Christian Miracles. 7 1
itself, as might be expected, has chiefly engaged their
attention.1 Without entering, then, into a minute con
sideration of the facts and arguments on which the
credibility of the Sacred History rests, I proceed to
contrast its evidence generally with that produced for
other miraculous narratives ; and thus to complete a
comparison which has been already instituted, as re
gards the antecedent probability and the criterion of
Miracles, For the present, then, I forego the advantage
which the Scripture Miracles have gained in the pre
ceding Sections over all professed facts of a similar
nature. In reality, indeed, the very same evidence
which would suffice to prove the former, might be in
adequate when offered in behalf of those of the
Eclectic School or the Romish Church. For the
Miracles of Scripture, and no other, are unexception
able, and worthy of a Divine Agent ; and Bishop Butler
has clearly shown, that, in a practical question, as the
divinity of a professed Revelation must be considered,
even the weakest reasons are decisive when not
counteracted by any opposite arguments."1 Whatever
1 As of Paley, Lyttelton, Leslie, etc.
m The only fair objection that can be made to this statement
is, that it is antecedently improbable that the Almighty should
work Miracles with a view to ^general conviction, without fur
nishing strong evidence that they really occurred. This was
noticed above, when the antecedent probability of Miracles
was discussed. That it is unsatisfactory to decide on scanty

72 Evidence for the Christian Miracles.
evidence, then, is offered for them is entirely available
to the proof of their actual occurrence ; whereas evi
dence for the truth of other similar accounts, supposing
it to exist, would be first employed in overcoming, the
objections which attach to them all from their very
character, circumstances, or object. If, however, it can
be shown that the Miracles of Scripture as far surpass all
others in their direct evidence, as they excel them in
their a priori probability, a much stronger case will be
made out in their favour, and an additional line of
distinction drawn between them and others.
The credibility of testimony arises from the belief
we entertain of the character and competency of the
witnesses ; and this is true, not only in the case of
Miracles, but when facts of any kind are examined
into. It is obvious that we should be induced to dis
trust the most natural and plausible statement when
made by a person whom we suspected of a wish
to deceive, or of relating facts which he had no suffi
cient means of knowing. Or if we credited his nar
rative, we should do so, not from dependence on the
reporter, but from its intrinsic likelihood, or from cir
cumstantial evidence. In the case of ordinary facts,
therefore, we think it needless, as indeed it would be
endless, to inquire rigidly into the credibility of the
evidence is no objection, as in other most important practical
questions we are constantly obliged to make up our minds and
determine our course of action on insufficient evidence.

Evidence for the Christian Miracles. 73
testimony by which they are conveyed to us, because
they in a manner speak for themselves. When, how
ever, the information is unexpected, or extraordinary,
or improbable, our only means of determining its
truth is by considering the credit due to the witnesses ;
and then, of course, we exercise that right of scrutiny
which we before indeed possessed, but did not think
it worth while to claim. A Miracle, then, calls for no
distinct species of testimony from that ¦ offered for
other events, but for a testimony strong in proportion
to the improbability of the particular fact attested ;
and it is as impossible to draw any line, or to deter
mine how much is required, as to define the quantity
and quality of evidence necessary to prove the occur
rence of an earthquake, or the appearance of any
meteoric phenomenon. Everything depends on those
attendant circumstances, of which I have already I
spoken, — the object of the Miracle, the occasion, man-/
ner, and human agent employed. If, for instance, a
Miracle were said to be wrought for an immoral
object, then of course the fact would rest on the
credibility of the testimony alone, and would chal
lenge the most rigid examination. Again, if the
object be highly interesting to us, as that professed
by the Scripture Miracles, we shall naturally be care
ful in our inquiry, from an anxious fear of being
biassed. But in any case the testimony cannot turn
Out to be more than that of competent and honest

74 Evidence for the Christian Miracles.
men ; and an inquiry must not be prosecuted under
the idea of finding something beyond this, but to
obtain proofs of this.
And since the existence of competency and
honesty may be established in various ways, it follows
that the credibility of a given story may be proved
by distinct considerations, each of which, separately
taken, might be sufficient for the purpose. It is obvi
ous, moreover, as indeed is implied by the very nature
of moral evidence, that the proof of its credibility
may be weaker or stronger, and yet in both cases be
a proof; and hence, that no limit can be put to the
conceivable accumulation of evidence in its behalf; •
Provided, then, the existing evidence be sufficient to
produce a rational conviction, it is nothing to the
purpose to urge, as has sometimes been alleged against
the Scripture Miracles, that the extraordinary facts
might have been proved by different or more over
powering evidence. It has been said, for instance,
that no testimony can fairly be trusted which has not
passed the ordeal of a legal examination. Yet, caU
culated as that mode of examination undoubtedly is
to elicit truth, surely truth may be elicited by other
ways also. Independent and circumstantial writers
may confirm a fact as satisfactorily as witnesses in
Court. They may be questioned and cross-questioned,
and, moreover, brought up for re-examination in any
succeeding age ; whereas, however great may be the

Evidence for the Christian Miracles. 75
talents and experience of the men who conduct the
legal investigation, yet when they have once closed it,
and given in their verdict, we believe upon their credit,
and we have no means of examining for ourselves.
To say, however, that this kind of evidence might
have been added to the other, in the case of the
Christian Miracles," is merely to assert that the proof
of the credibility of Scriptufe might have been stronger
than it is ; which I have already allowed it might
have been, without assignable limit.
The credibility, then, of Testimony depending on
the evidence of honesty and competency in those
who give it, it is prejudicial, first, to their character
for honesty —
1. If desire of gain, power, or other temporal ad
vantage may be imputed to them. This would de
tract materially from the authority of Philostratus,
even supposing him to have been in a situation for
ascertaining the truth of his own narrative, as he pro
fesses to write his account of Apollonius at the in
stance of his patroness, the Empress Julia, who is
known to have favoured the Eclectic cause. Again,
the account of the Miracle performed on the door-

" Some of our Saviour's Miracles, however, were subjected to
judicial examination. (See John v. and ix.) In v. 16, the
measures of the Pharisees are described by the technical word
eUwuov.

76 Evidence for the Christian Miracles.
keeper at the cathedral at Saragossa, on which Hume
insists, rests principally upon the credit of the Canons,
whose interest was concerned in its establishment.
This remark, indeed, obviously applies to the Romish
Miracles generally.9 The Christian Miracles, on the
contrary, were attested by the Apostles, not only
', without the prospect of assignable worldly advantage,
' but with the certainty and after the experience of
actual suffering.
2. When there is room for suspecting party spirit
or rivalry, as in the miraculous biographies of the
Eclectic philosophers ; in those of Loyola and other
saints of the rival orders in the Romish Church ; and
in the present Mahometan accounts of the Miracles
of Mahomet, which, not to mention other objections
to them, are composed with an evident design of
rivalling those of Christ.0
3. Again, a tale once told maybe persisted in from
shame of retracting, after the motives which first gave
rise to it have ceased to act, even at the risk of suffer
ing. This remark cannot apply to the case of the
Apostles, until some reason is assigned for their get
ting up their miraculous story in the first instance.
If necessary, however, it could be brought with force
against any argument drawn from the perseverance of
9 [The Miracles of Catholic Saints as little benefited their
workers as the Miracles of the Apostles.]
° See Professor Lee's Persian Tracts, pp. 446, 447.

Evidence for the Christian Miracles. 77
the witnesses for the cures professedly wrought by
Vespasian, " postquam nullum mendacio pretium ; "
for, as they did not suffer for persisting in their story,
had they retracted, they would have gratuitously con
fessed their own want of principle.
4. A previous character for falsehood is almost
fatal to the credibility of a witness of an extraordinary
narrative ; for instance, the notorious insincerity and
frauds of the Church of Rome in other things are in
themselves enough to throw a strong suspicion on its
testimony to its own Miracles.10 The primitive Church
is in some degree open to a charge of a similar
nature.P Or an intimacy with suspicious characters ;
for instance, Prince Hohenlohe's connection with the
Romish Church, and that of Philostratus with the
Eclectics, since both the Eclectic and Romish Schools
have countenanced the practice of what are called
pious frauds.p
5. Inconsistencies or prevarications in the testi
mony, marks of unfairness, exaggeration, suppression
of particulars, etc. Of all these, Philostratus stands .
convicted, whose memoir forms a remarkable contrast
10 [There have been frauds among Catholics, and for gain, as
among Protestants, whether churchmen or dissenters, or among
antiquarians, or transcribers of MSS., or picture-dealers, or
horse-dealers ; for the " Net gathers of every kind ; " but that
does not prove the Church to be fraudulent, unless geological or
chemical frauds are slurs upon the character of the British
Association.] p Hey, Lectures, book i. ch. xii. sec. 15.

78 Evidence for the Christian Miracles.
to the artless and candid narratives of the Evangelists.
The Books of the New Testament, containing as they
do separate accounts of the same transactions, admit
of a minute cross-examination, which terminates so
decidedly in favour of their fidelity, as to recommend
them highly on the score of honesty, even indepen
dently of the known sufferings of the writers.
6. Lastly, objection may be taken to witnesses who
have the opportunity of being dishonest ; as those who
write at a distance from the time and place of the
professed Miracle, or without mentioning particulars,
etc. But on these points I shall speak immediately
in a different connection.
Secondly, witnesses must be not only honest, but
competent also ; that is, such as have ascertained the
facts which they attest, or who report after examina-.
tion. Here then I notice —
I. Deficiency of examination implied in the cir
cumstances of the case. As when it is first published
in an age or country remote from the professed time
and scene of action ; for in that case room is given to
suspect failure of memory, imperfect information, etc.,
whereas to write in the presence of those who know
the circumstances of the transactions is an appeal
which increases the force of the testimony by asso
ciating them in it. Accounts, however, whether
miraculous or otherwise, possess very little intrinsic
authority, when written so far from the time or place

Evidence for the Christian Miracles. 79
'of the transactions recorded, as the biographies of
Pythagoras, Apollonius, Gregory ¦ Thaumaturgus,
Mahomet, Loyola, or Xavier.i The opposite circum
stances of the Christian Testimony have often been
pointed out. Here we may particularly notice the
providential dispersion of the Jews over the Roman
Empire before the age of Christ ; by which means the
Apostles' testimony was given in heathen countries, as
well as in Palestine, in the face of those who had both
the will and the power to contradict it, if incorrect.
While the testimony of contemporaries is necessary
to guarantee the truth of ordinary history, Miracles
require the testimony of eye-witnesses. For ordinary
events are believed in part from their being natural,
but testimony being the main support of a miraculous
narrative, must in that case be the best of its kind.
Again, we may require the testimony to be circum
stantial in reference to dates, places, persons, etc. ; for
the absence of these seems to imply an imperfect
knowledge, and at least gives less opportunity of in
quiry to those who wish to ascertain its fidelity/
Miracles which are not lasting do not admit of ade
quate examination ; as visions, extraordinary voices,
etc. The cure of diseases, on the other hand, is a
q Paley, Evidences, Part i. Prop. 2.
r The vagueness of the accounts of miraculous- interpositions
related by the Fathers is pointed out by Middleton. (Free
Inquiry, ii. p. 22.) [Vide infra, Essay ii., n. 137, 138.]

8o Evidence for the Christian Miracles.
permanent evidence of a divine interposition ; par
ticularly such cures of bodily imperfections as are
undeniably miraculous in their nature, as well as per
manent ; to these, then, our Lord especially appeals in
evidence of His divine mission.s Lastly, statements
are unsatisfactory in which the miracle is described as
wrought before a very few ; for room is allowed for
suspecting mistake, or an understanding between the
witnesses. Or, on the other hand, those wrought in
a confused crowd ; such are many standing miracles of
the Romanists, which are exhibited with the accom
paniment of imposing pageants, or on a stage, or at
a distance, or in the midst of candles and incense.11
Our Saviour, on the contrary, bids the lepers He had
cleansed show themselves to the Priests, and make the
customary offering as a memorial of their cures.' And
when He appeared to the Apostles after His Resurrec
tion, He allowed them to examine His hands and feet.u
Those of the Scripture Miracles which were wrought
before few, or in a crowd, were permanent ; as cures,v
and the raising of Jairus's daughter ; or were of so
vast a nature, that a crowd could not prevent the wit-
s Matt. xi. 5.
11 [Candles and incense are commonly used in the daytime ;
and our Lord wrought many of His miracles in a throng which
was pressing upon Him.]
* Luke v. 14 ; xvii. 14.
u Luke xxiv. 39, 40.
Y Mark viii. 22 — 26.

Evidence for the Christian Miracles. 81
nesses from ascertaining the fact, as the standing
still of the Sun at the word of Joshua.
2. Deficiency of examination implied in the cha
racter, etc., of the witnesses : (i) for instance, if there be
any suspicion of their derangement, or if there be an
evident defect in those bodily or mental faculties
which are necessary for examining the Miracle, as
when the intellect or senses are impaired. Number
in the witnesses refutes charges of this nature ; for
it is not conceivable that many should be deranged
or mistaken at once, and in the same way.
(2) Enthusiasm, ignorance, and habitual credulity,
are defects which no number of witnesses removes.
The Jansenist Miracles took place in the most ignorant
and superstitious district of Paris." Alexander Pseudo-
mantis practised his arts among the Paphlagonians, a
barbarous people. Popish Miracles and the juggles
of the Heathen Priests have been most successful
in times of ignorance.12
Yet, while we reasonably object to gross ignorance
or besotted credulity in witnesses for a miraculous
story, we must guard against the opposite extreme of
requiring the testimony of men of science and general
knowledge. Men of philosophical minds are often
*¦ The Faubourg St. Marcel. Less.
K [Might not the same insinuations be thrown out against
the miracles of Elisha ? On the other hand, was the age of St.
Ambrose and St. Augustine ignorant? or that of St. Philip
Neri?] 6

82 Evidence for the Christian Miracles.
too fond of inquiring into the causes and mutual de
pendence of events, of arranging, theorizing, and refin
ing, to be accurate and straightforward in their account
of extraordinary occurrences. Instead of giving a
plain statement of facts, they are insensibly led to cor
rect the evidence of their senses with a view to account
for the strange phenomenon ; as Chinese painters, who,
instead of drawing in perspective, give lights and
shadows their supposed meaning, and depict the pros
pect as they think it should be, not as it is.y As
Miracles differ from other events only when considered,
relatively to a general system, it is obvious that the
same persons are competent to attest miraculous facts
who are suitable witnesses of corresponding natural
ones. If a peasant's testimony be admitted to the
phenomenon of meteoric stones, he may evidence the
fact of an unusual and unaccountable darkness. A
physician's certificate is not needed to assure us of the
illness of a friend ; nor is it necessary for attesting the
simple fact that he has instantaneously recovered.
It is important to bear this in mind, for some writers
argue as if there were something intrinsically defective
in the testimony given by ignorant persons to miracu
lous occurrences.2 To say that unlearned persons are
y It is well known, that those persons are accounted the best
transcribers of MSS. who are ignorant of the language trans
cribed ; the habit of correcting being almost involuntary in
men of letters.
z Hume, On Miracles, Part ii. Reason i.

Evidence for the Christian Miracles. 83
not judges of the fact of a miraculous event, is only
so far true as all testimony is fallible and liable
to be distorted by predjudice. Every one, not only
superstitious persons, is apt to interpret facts in his
own way ; if the superstitious see too many prodigies,
men of science may see too few. The facility with which
the Japanese ascribed the ascent of a balloon, which
they witnessed at St. Petersburgh, to the powers of
magic, (a circumstance which has been sometimes urged
against the admission of unlearned testimony,3) is
only the conduct of theorists accounting for a novel
phenomenon on the principles of their own system.
It may be said, that ignorance prevents a witness
from discriminating between natural and supernatural
events, and thus weakens the authority of his judgment
concerning the miraculous nature of a fact. It is true ;
but if the fact be recorded, we may judge for ourselves
on that point. Yet it may be safely said, that not
even before persons in the lowest state of ignorance
could any great variety of professed Miracles be dis
played without their distinguishing rightly, on the
whole, between the effects of nature and those of a
power exterior to it ; though in particular instances
they doubtless might be mistaken. Much more would
this be the case with the lower ranks of a civilized
people. Practical intelligence is insensibly diffused
from class to class ; if the upper ranks are educated,

Bentham, Preuves Judiciaires, Liv. viii. Ch. i

f

84 Evidence for the Christian Miracles.
numbers besides them, without any formal and sys
tematic knowledge, almost instinctively discriminate
between natural and supernatural events. Here
science has little advantage over common sense ; a
peasant is quite as certain that a resurrection from
the dead is miraculous as the most able physiologist.13
The original witnesses of our Saviour's Miracles
were very far from a dull or ignorant race. The inhabi
tants of a maritime and border country, as Galilee was,
engaged, moreover, in commerce, composed of natives
of various countries, and, therefore, from the nature of
the case,-acquainted with more than one language, have
necessarily their intellects sharpened and their minds
considerably enlarged, and are of all men least disposed
to acquiesce in marvellous tales.0 Such a people must
have examined before they suffered themselves to be
excited in the degree which the Evangelists describe.11
b It has been observed, that more suitable witnesses could
not be selected of the fact of a miraculous draught of fishes
than the fishermen of the lake wherein it took place.
c See Less, Opuscul.
d If, on the other hand, we would see with how unmoved an
unconcern men receive accounts of miracles, when tbey be
lieve them to be events of every-day occurrence, we may turn
to the conduct of the African Christians in the Age of Austin,
whom that Father in vain endeavoured to interest in miraculous
stories of relics, etc., by formal accounts and , certificates of
the cures wrought by them. (See Middleton, p. 138.) The stir,
then, which the miracles of Christ made in Galilee implies,
that they were not received with an indolent belief. It must
be noticed, moreover, in opposition to the statement of some

Evidence for the Christian Miracles. 85
But even supposing those among them who were in
consequence convinced of the divine mission of Christ,
were of a more superstitious turn of mind than the
rest, still this is not sufficient to account for their con
viction. For superstition, while it might facilitate the
bare admission of miraculous events, would at the
same time weaken their practical influence. Miracles
ceasing, to be accounted strange, would cease to be
striking also. Whereas the conviction wrought in the
minds of these men was no bare and indolent assent
to facts which they might have thought antecedently
probable or not improbable, but a conversion in prin
ciples and mode of life, and a consequent sacrifice of
all that nature holds dear, to which none would submit
except after the fullest examination of the authority
enjoining it. If additional evidence be required, ap
peal may be made to the multitude of Gentiles in
Greece and Asia, in whose principles and mode of-
living belief in the Miracles made a change even more
striking and complete than was effected in the case of
the Jews. In a word, then, the conversion which
Christ and His Apostles effected invalidates the charge
of blind credulity in the witnesses ; the practical
nature of the belief wrought in them proving that
it was founded on an examination of the, Miracles.
unbelievers, that great numbers of the Jews were converted
(Acts ii. 41 ; iv. 4 ; v. 13, 14 ; vi. 7 ; ix. 35 ; xv. 5 ; xxi. 20). On
this subject, see Jenkin, On the Christian Religion, Vol. ii.
Ch. xxxii.

86 Evidence for the Christian Miracles.
(3) Again) it weakens the authority of the witnesses,
if their belief can be shown to have been promoted
by the influence of superiors ; for then they virtually
cease to be themselves witnesses, and report the facts
on the authority (as it were) of their patrons. It is
observable, that the national conversions of the Middle
Ages generally began with the princes, and descended
to their subjects ; those of the Apostolic Age obvi
ously proceeded in the reverse order. e
(4) It is almost fatal to the validity of the testimony,
if the miracle which is attested coincides with a pre
vious system, or supports a cause already embraced by
the witnesses. Men are always ready to believe what
flatters their own opinions, and of all prepossessions
those of Religion are the strongest. There is so much
in the principle of all Religion that is true and good,
so much conformable to the best feelings of our nature,
which perceives itself to be weak and guilty, and looks
out for an unseen and superior being for guidance and
support ; ^and the particular worship in which each in
dividual is brought up is so familiarized to him by
habit, so endeared to his affections by the associations
of place and the recollections of past years, so con
nected too with the ordinary transactions and most
interesting events of life,/ that even should that form
be irrational and degrading, still it will in most cases
preserve a strong influence over his mind, and dispose
e Mosheim, Eccl. Hist. Cent. vi. viii. ix.

Evidence for the Christian Miracles. 87
him to credit upon slight examination any arguments
adduced in its defence. Hence an account of Miracles
in confirmation of their own Religion Will always be
favourably received by men whose creed has already
led them to expect such interpositions of superior
beings. This consideration invalidates at once the
testimony commonly offered for Pagan and Popish
Miracles, and in no small degree that for the Miracles
of the primitive Church.13 The professed cures of
Vespasian were performed in honour of Serapis in
the midst of his worshippers ; and the people of Sara
gossa, who attested the Miracle wrought in the case
of the door-keeper of the Cathedral, had previous
faith in the virtues of holy oil.f
Here the evidence for the Scripture Miracles is
unique. In other cases the previous system has sup-
13 [Vide Essay ii. n. 36 — 45. Ecclesiastical Miracles are
mainly the rewards of faith ; not, strictly speaking, evidence.]
f It has been noticed as a suspicious circumstance in the
testimony to the reported miracle wrought in the case of the
Confessors in the persecution of the Arian Hunneric, that
Victor Vitensis, one of the principal witnesses, though writing
in Africa, where it professedly took place, and where the in
dividuals thus distinguished were then living, yet refers only
to one of them, who was then living at the Athanasian Court
at Constantinople, and held in particular honour by Zeno and
the Empress. — " If any one doubt the fact, let him go to Con
stantinople." See the whole evidence in Milner's Church
History, Cent. v. Ch. xi. ; who, however, strongly defends the
miracle. Gibbon pretends to do the same, with a view to
¦ irovide a rival to the Gospel Miracles.

88 Evidence for the Christian Miracles.
ported the Miracles, but here the Miracles introduced
and upheld the system. The Christian Miracles in
particulars were received on their own merits ; and the
admission of them became the turning-point in the
creed and life of the witnesses, which thenceforth took
a new and altogether different direction. But, more
over, as if their own belief in them were not enough,
the Apostles went out of their way to debar any one
from the Christian Church who did not believe them
as well as themselves.11 Not content that men should
be converted on any ground, they fearlessly challenged
refutation, by excluding from their fellowship of suf
fering any who did not formally assent, as a necessary
condition of admittance and a first article of faith, to
one of the most stupendous of all the miracles, their
Master's Resurrection from the dead ; — a procedure
this, which at once evinces their own unqualified con
viction of the fact, and associates, too, all their con
verts with them as believers in a miracle contemporary
with themselves. Nor is this all ; a religious creed
necessarily prejudices the mind against admitting
the miracles of hostile sects, in the very same pro
portion in which it leads it to acquiesce in such as
support its own dogmas.1 The Christian Miracles,
then, have the strongest of conceivable attestations,
8 Not to mention those of Moses and Elijah.
h Campbell, On Miracles, Part ii. Sec. I.
1 Ibid. Part i. Sec. 4.

Evidence for the Christian Miracles. 89
in the conversion of many who at first were prejudiced .
against them, and in the extorted confession of
enemies, who by the embarrassment which the admis
sion occasioned them, at least showed that they had not
made it till after a full and accurate investigation of
the extraordinary facts.
(5) It has been sometimes objected, that the minds of
the first converts might be wrought upon by the doc
trine of a future state which the Apostles preached,
and be thus persuaded to admit the miracles without
a rigorous examination.11 But, as Paley well replies,
evidence of the truth of the promise would still be
necessary ; especially as men rather demand than
dispense with proof when some great and unexpected
good is reported to them. Yet it is more than doubt
ful whether the promise of a future life would excite
this interest ; for the desire of immortality, though a
natural, is no permanent or powerful feeling, and
furnishes no principle of action. Most men, even in aj
Christian country, are too well satisfied with thisi
world to look forward to another with any great and
settled anxiety. Supposing immortality to be a good,
it is one too distant to warm or influence them. Much
less are they disposed to sacrifice present comfort,
and strip themselves of former opinions and habits,
for the mere contingency of future bliss. The hope of
another life, grateful as it is under affliction, will not
k Gibbon, particularly Ch. xv.

90 Evidence for the Christian Miracles.
induce a man to rush into affliction for the sake of it.
The inconvenience of a severe complaint is not out
balanced by the pleasure of a remedy. On the other
hand, though we know that gratuitous declarations of
coming judgments and divine wrath may for a time
frighten weak minds, they will neither have effect up
on strong ones, nor produce a permanent and consist
ent effect upon any. Persons who are thus wrought
upon in the present day believe the denunciations be
cause they are in Scripture, not Christianity because
Scripture contains them. The authority of Revealed
Religion is taken for granted both by the preacher and
his hearers. On the whole, then, it seems inconceiv
able that the promise or threat of a future life should
have supplied the place of previous belief in Chris
tianity, or have led the witnesses to admit the Miracles
on a slight examination.
(6) Lastly, love of the marvellous, of novelty, etc.,
may be mentioned as a principle influencing the mind
to acquiesce in professed miracles without full exami
nation. Yet such feelings are more adapted to exagge
rate and circulate a story than to invent it. We can
trace their influence very clearly in the instances of
Apollonius and the Abbe Paris, both of whom had
"excited attention by their eccentricities, before they
gained reputation for extraordinary power.1 Such
1 See the Author's memoir of Apollonius. — Of the Abbe,
Mosheim says, "Diem vix obierat, voluntariis cruciatibus et

Evidence for the Christian Miracles. g i
principles, moreover, are not in general practical, and
have little power to sustain the mind under continued
opposition and suffering."1

These are some of the obvious points which will
come into consideration in deciding upon the authority
of testimony offered for miracles ; and they enable
us at once to discriminate the Christian story from all
others which have been set up against it. With a
view of simplifying the argument, the evidence for
the Jewish miracles has been left out of the question;*1
because, though strong and satisfactory, it is not at
the present day so directly conclusive as that on which
poenis exhaustus, mirabilis iste homo, quum immensa hominum
multitudo ad ejus corpus conflueret ; quorum alii pedes ejus
osculabantur, alii partem capillorum abscindebant, quam
sancti loco pignoris ad mala quasvis averruncanda servarent,
alii libros et lintea quaa attulerant, cadaveri admovebant
quod virtute quadam divina plenum esse putabant. Et statim
vis ilia mirifica, qua. omne, quod in terra hac reliquit, pra?-
ditum esse fertur, apparebat,'' etc. Inquisit. in verit. Mira-
culor. F. de Paris, Sec. I.
m Paley, Evidences, Part i. Prop. 2.
n The truth of the Mosaic narrative is proved from the
genuineness of the Pentateuch, as written to contemporaries
and eye-witnesses of the miracles ; from the predictions con
tained in the Pentateuch ; from the very existence of the
Jewish system (Sumner's Records) ; and from the declarations
of the New Testament writers. The miracles of Elijah and
Elisha are proved to us by the authority of the Books in which
they are related, and by means of the New Testament.

92 Evidence for the Christian Miracles.
the Christian rest Nor is it necessary, I conceive,
to bring evidence for more than a fair proportion of
the Miracles ; supposing, that is, those which remain
unproved are shown to be similar to them, and indis-
solubly connected with the same system. It may be
' even said, that if the single fact of the Resurrection
be established, quite enough will have been proved for
believing all the Miracles of Scripture.
Of course, however, the argument becomes far
stronger when it is shown that there is evidence for
the great bulk of the miracles, though not equally
strong for some as for others ; and that the Jewish,
sanctioned as they are by the New Testament, may
also be established on distinct and peculiar grounds.
Nor let it be forgotten, that the Christian story itself
is supported, over and above the evidence that might
fairly be required for it, by several bodies of testimony
quite independent of each other.0 By separate pro-
° The fact of the Christian miracles may be proved, first, by
the sufferings and consistent story of the original witnesses ;
secondly, from the actual conversion of large bodies of men
in the age in which they are said to have been wrougnt ;
thirdly, from the institution, at the time, of a day commemora
tive of the Resurrection, which has been observed ever since ;
fourthly, by collateral considerations, such as the tacit assent
given to the miracles by the adversaries of Christianity, the
Eclectic imitations of them, and the pretensions to miraculous
power in the primitive Church. These are distinct arguments :
no one of them absolutely presupposes the genuineness of the
Scripture narrative, though the force of the whole is much in
creased when it is proved.

Evidence for the Christian Miracles. 93
cesses of reasoning it may be shown, that if Chris
tianity was established without miracles, it was, to say
the least, an altogether singular and unique event in
the history of mankind ; and the extreme improba
bility of so many distinct and striking peculiarities
uniting, as it were, by chance in one and the same
Case, raises the proof of its divine origin to a moral
certainty. In short, it is only by being made un
natural that the Christian narrative can be deprived '
of a supernatural character ; and we may safely affirm
that the strongest evidence we possess for the most
certain facts of other history, is weak compared to
that on which we believe that the first preachers of
the Gospel were gifted with miraculous powers.
And thus a case is establishedso strong, that even
were there an antecedent improbability in the facts
attested, in most judgments it would be sufficient to
overcome it. On the contrary, we have already shown
their intrinsic character to be exactly such as our pre
vious knowledge of the attributes and government of
the Almighty would lead us to expect in works ascribed
to Him. Their grandeur, beauty, and consistency; the
clear and unequivocal marks they bear of superhuman
agency ; the importance and desirableness of the
object they propose to effect, are in correspondence
with the variety and force of the evidence itself.
Such, then, is the contrast they present to all other
professed miracles, from those of Apollonius down-

94 Evidence for the Christian Miracles.
wards — which have been shown, more or less, to
be improbable from the circumstances of the case,
inconclusive when considered as marks of divine in
terference, and quite destitute of good evidence for
their having really occurred.
Lastly, it must be observed, that the proof derived
from interruptions in the course of nature, though a
principal, is yet but one out of many proofs on which
the cause of Revealed Religion rests ; and that even
supposing (for the sake of argument) it were altogether
inconclusive at the present day, still the other evi
dences,5 as they are called, would be fully equal to
prove to us the divine origin of Christianity.
p Such as the system of doctrine, marks of design, gradual
disclosure of unknown truths, etc., connecting together the
whole Bible as the work of one mind : — Prophecy : — the
character of Christ :— the morality of the Gospel : — the wis
dom of its doctrines, displaying at once knowledge of the
human heart, and skill in engaging its affections, etc.

ESSAY II.

THE MIRACLES OF EARLY ECCLESIASTICAL
HISTORY,
COMPARED WITH THOSE OF SCRIPTURE,
AS REGARDS
THEIR NATURE, CREDIBILITY, AND EVIDENCE.

ON ECCLESIASTICAL MIRACLES.

Chapter I.
INTRODUCTION.

I. O ACRED History is distinguished from Profane
w-' by the nature of the facts which enter into
its composition, and which are not always such as
occur in the ordinary course of things, but are extra
ordinary and divine. Miracles are its characteristic,
whether it be viewed as biblical or ecclesiastical : as
(the history of a reign or dynasty more or less approxi
mates to biography, as the history of a wandering
tribe passes into romance or poetry, as a constitu
tional history borders on a philosophical dissertation,
so the history of Religion is necessarily of a theolo
gical cast, and is occupied with the supernatural. / It
is a record of "the kingdom of heaven," a manifesta
tion of the Hand of God ; and, " the temple of God
being opened," and "the ark of His testament," there
are " lightnings and voices," the momentary yet re-
7

98 Introduction.
curring tokens of that conflict between good and evil,
which is waging in the world of spirits from age to
age. This supernatural agency, as far as it is really
revealed to us, is from its very nature the most im
portant of the characteristics of sacred history, and
the mere rumour of its manifestation excites interest
In consequence of the certainty of its existence. But
since the miraculous statements which are presented
to us are often not mere rumours or surmises, but in
fact essential to the narrative, it is plain that to treat
any such series of events, (for instance, the history
of the Jews, or of the rise of Christianity, or of the
Catholic Church,) without taking them into account,
is to profess to write the annals ot a reign, yet to be
silent about the monarch, — to overlook, as it were,
his personal character and professed principles, his
indirect influence and immediate acts.
2. Among the subjects, then, which the history of
the early centuries of Christianity brings before us,
and which are apt more or less to startle those who
with modern ideas commence the study of Church
History generally, (such as the monastic rule, trie
honour paid to celibacy, and the belief in the power
of the keys,) it seems right to bestow attention in the
first place on the supernatural narratives which occur
in the course of it, and of which various specimens
will be found in any portion of it which a reader
takes in hand. It will naturally suggest itself to him

Introduction.

99

to form some judgment upon them, and a perplexity,
perhaps a painful perplexity, may ensue from the
difficulty of doing so. This being the case, it is in
considerate and almost wanton to bring such subjects
before him, without making at least the attempt to
assist him in disposing of them. Accordingly, the
following remarks have been written in discharge of a
sort of duty which a work of Ecclesiastical History in
volves,1 — not indeed without a deep sense of the ardu-
ousness of such an essay, or of the incompleteness
and other great defects of its execution, but at the
same time, as the writer is bound to add, without any
apology at all for discussing in his own way a subject
which demands discussion, and which, if any other, is
an open question in the English Church, and has only
during the last century been viewed in a light which
he believes to be both false in itself, and dangerous
altogether to Revealed Religion.
3. It may be advisable to state in the commence
ment the conclusions to which the remarks which
follow will be found to tend ; they are such as
these : — that Ecclesiastical Miracles, that is, Miracles
posterior to the Apostolic age, are on the whole dif
ferent in object, character, and evidence, from those
of Scripture on the whole, so that the pne series or
family ought never to be confounded with the other ;
1 [The occasion of this Essay was the publication of a p6rtion
of Fleury-s Ecclesiastical History in English.]

1 00 Introduction.
yet that the former are not therefore at once to be
rejected ; that there was no Age of Miracles, after
which miracles ceased ; that there have been at all
times true miracles and false miracles, true accounts
and false accounts ; that no authoritative guide is
supplied to us for drawing the line between the two ;
that some of the miracles reported were true miracles;
that we cannot be certain how many were not true ;
and that under these circumstances the decision in
particular cases is left to each individual, according to
his opportunities of judging.

Chapter II.
ON THE ANTECEDENT PROBABILITY OF THE
ECCLESIASTICAL MIRACLES.
4. A FACT is properly called " improbable," only
-*¦*- when it has some quality or circumstance
attached to it which operates to the disadvantage of
evidence adduced in its behalf. We can scarcely
avoid forming an opinion for or against any statement
which meets us ; we feel well-disposed towards some
accounts or reports, averse from others, sometimes on
no reason whatever beyond our accidental frame of
mind at the moment, sometimes because the facts
averred flatter or thwart our wishes, coincide or inter
fere with the view of things familiar to us, please or
startle our imagination, or on other grounds equally
vague and untrustworthy. Such anticipations about
facts are as little blameable as the fancies which spon
taneously rise in the mind about a person's stature
and appearance before seeing him ; and, like such
fancies, they are dissipated at once when the real
state of the case is in any way ascertained. They

102 Antecedent Probability of
are simply notional ; and form no presumption in
reason, for or against the facts, or the evidence of the
facts, to which they relate.
5. An antecedent improbability, then, in certain
facts, to be really such, must avail to prejudice the
evidence which is offered in their behalf, and must be
of a nature to diminish or destroy its force. Thus it
is improbable, in the highest degree, that our friend
should have done an act of fraud or injustice ; and im- '
probable again, but in a slight degree, that our next-
door neighbour should have been highly promoted,
or that he should have died suddenly. We do not
acquiesce in any evidence whatever that comes to
hand even for the latter occurrence, and in none but
the very best for the former. Again, there is a general
improbability attaching to the notion that the mem
bers of certain sects or of certain political parties
should commit themselves to this or that cast of
opinions, or line of conduct ; and, on the other hand,
though there is no general improbability that indivi
duals of the poorest class should make large fortunes,
yet a strong probability may lie against certain given
persons of that class in particular.
6. Now it may be asserted that there is no pre
sumption whatever against miracles generally in the
ages after the Apostles, though there may be and is a
certain antecedent improbability in this or that parti
cular miracle.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 103
There is no presumption against Ecclesiastical
Miracles generally, because inspiration has stood the
brunt of any such antecedent objection, whatever it
be worth, by its own supernatural histories, and in
establishing their certainty in fact, has disproved their
impossibility in the abstract. If miracles are ante
cedently improbable, it is either from want of a cause
to which they may be referred, or of experience of
similar events in other times and places. What neither
has been before, nor can be attributed to an existing
cause, is not to be expected, or is improbable. But
Ecclesiastical Miracles are occurrences not without a
parallel ; for they follow upon Apostolic Miracles, and
they are referable to the Author of the Apostolic as an
All-sufficient Cause. Whatever be the regularity and
stability of nature, interference with it can be, because
it has been ; there is One who both has power over
His own work, and who before now has not been un
willing to exercise it. In this point of view, then,
Ecclesiastical Miracles are more advantageously cir
cumstanced than those of Scripture.
7. What has happened once, may happen again ;
the force of the presumption against Miracles lies in
the opinion entertained of the inviolability of nature,
to which the Creator seems to " have given a law
which shall not be broken." When once that law is
shown to be but general, not necessary, and (if the
word may be used) when its prestige is once destroyed,

1 04 Antecedent Probability of
there is nothing to shock the imagination in a mira
culous interference twice or thrice, as well as once.
What never has yet happened is improbable in a sense
quite distinct from that in which a thing is improbable
which has before now happened ; the improbability of
the latter class of facts may be greater or less, it may
be very great ; but whatever the strength of the im
probability, it is different in kind from the improba
bility attaching to such as admit of being called
impossible by those who reject them.
8. It may be urged in reply, that the precedent of
Scripture is no special recommendation of Ecclesias
tical Miracles; for the abstract argument against
miracles, as such, has little or no force, as soon as the
mere doctrine of a Creator and Supreme Governor is
admitted, and even prior to any reference to inspired
history ; that there is no question among religious
men of the existence of a Cause adequate to the
production of miracles anywhere or at any period;
the question rather is whether He will work them ;
whether the Ecclesiastical Miracles themselves, being
what and when they were, are probable, not whether
there is a general presumption against them all simply
as miracles ; on the other hand, that while the Scrip
ture Miracles avail little as a precedent for subsequent
miracles, as miracles, for no precedent is wanted, they
do actually tend to discredit them, as being subsequent,
for from the nature of the case irregularities can be

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 105
but rarely allowed in any system. It is at first sight
not to be expected that the Author of nature should
interrupt His own harmonious order at all, though He
is powerful to do so ; and therefore the fact of His
having done so once makes it only less probable that
He will do so again. Moreover, if any recurrence
of miraculous action is to be anticipated, it is the
recurrence of a similar action, not a manifestation of
power, ever so different from it ; whereas the miracles
of the ages subsequent to the Apostles are on the
whole so very unlike those of which we read in
Scripture, in their object, circumstances, nature, and
evidence, as even to be disproved by the very con
trast. This is what may be objected.
9. Now as far as this representation involves the
discussion of the special character and circumstances
of the Ecclesiastical Miracles, it will come under con
sideration In the next Chapter ; here we are only en
gaged with the abstract question, whether the fact
that miracles have once occurred, and that under cer
tain circumstances and with certain characteristics,
does or does not prejudice a proof, when offered, of
their having occurred again, and that under other cir
cumstances and with other characteristics.
10. On this point many writers have expressed
opinions which it is difficult to justify. Thus Bishop
Warburton, in the course of some excellent remarks
on the Christian miracles, is led to propose a eer-

106 Antecedent Probability of
tain test of true miracles, founded on their professed
object, and suggests that this will furnish us with
means of drawing the line of supernatural agency
in the early Church. " If [the final cause]," he says,
" be so important as to make the miracle necessary to
the ends of the dispensation, this is all that can be
reasonably required to entitle it to our belief ; " so far
he is vindicating the Apostolic Miracles, and his rea
soning is unexceptionable ; but he adds in a note,
" Here, by the way, let me observe, that what is now
said gives that criterion which Dr. Middleton and his
opponents, in a late controversy concerning miracles,
demanded of one another, and which yet both parties,
for some reasons or other, declined to give ; namely,
some certain mark to enable men to distinguish, for
all the purposes of religion, between true and certain
miracles, and those which were false or doubtful."8.
He begins by saying that miracles which subserve a
certain object deserve our consideration, he ends by
saying that those which do not subserve it do not
deserve our consideration, and he makes himself the
judge whether they subserve it or not.
n. Bishop Douglas, too, after observing that the
miracles of the second and third centuries have a
character less clearly supernatural and an evidence
less cogent than those of the New Testament, and
that the fourth and fifth are " ages of credulity and
a Div. Leg. ix. 5.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 107
superstition," and the miracles which belong to them
are "wild and ridiculous," proceeds to lay down a
decisive criterion between true miracles and their
counterfeits, and this criterion he considers to be the
gift of inspiration in their professed workers. " Though
it may be a matter more of curiosity than of use, to en
deavour to determine the exact time when miraculous
powers were withdrawn from the Church, yet I think
that it may be determined with some degree of exactness.
The various opinions of learned Protestants, who
have extended them at all after the Apostles, show
how much they have been at a loss with regard to
this, which has been urged by Papists with an air of
triumph, as if, Protestants not being able to agree
when the age of miracles was closed, this were an
argument of its not being closed as yet. If there be
anything in this objection, though perhaps there is
not, / think I Jiave it in my power to obviate it, by
fixing upon a period, beyond which we may be cer
tain that miraculous powers did not subsist." Then
he refers to his argument in favour of the New Testa
ment miracles, that "what we know of the attributes
of the Deity, and of the usual methods of His
government, inclines us to believe that miracles will
never be performed by the agency and instrumentality
of men, but when these men are set apart and chosen
by God to be His ambassadors, as it were, to the
world, to deliver some message or to preach some

108 Antecedent Probability of
doctrine as a law from heaven ; and in this case their
being vested with a power of working miracles is the
best credential of the divinity of their mission." So
far, as Warburton, this author keeps within bounds ;
but next he proceeds, as Warburton also, to extend
his argument from a defence of what is true to a test
of what is false. " If we set out with this as a princi
ple, then shall we easily determine when it was that
miracles ceased to be performed by Christians ; for
we shall be led to conclude that the age of Christian
miracles must have ceased with the age of Christian
inspiration. So long as Heaven thought proper to
set apart any particular set of men to be the author
ized preachers of the new religion revealed to man
kind, so long, may we rest satisfied, miraculous powers
were continued. But whenever this purpose was
answered, and inspiration ceased to be any longer
necessary, by the complete publication of the Gospel,
then would the miraculous powers, whose end was to
prove the truth of inspiration, be of course withdrawn."b
12. Here he determines a priori va. the most posU
tive manner the " end " or object of miracles in the
designs of Providence. That it is very natural and
quite consistent with humility to form antecedent
notions of what is likely and what not likely, as in
other matters, so as regards the Divine dealings with
us, has been implied above ; but it is neither reverent
b Pp. 239—241, Edit. 4,

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 109
nor philosophical in a writer to "think he has it in
his power " to dispense with good evidence in behalf
of what professes to be a work of God, by means of
a summary criterion of his own framing. His very
mode of speech, as well as his procedure, reminds us
of Hume, who in like manner, when engaged in in
validating the evidence for all miracles whatever, ob
serves that " nothing is so convenient as a decisive
argument," (such as Archbishop Tillotson's against
the Real Presence,) " which must at least- silence the
most arrogant bigotry and superstition, and free us
from their impertinent solicitations," and then "flatters
himself that he has discovered an argument of a like
nature, which, if just, will, with the wise and learned,
be an everlasting check to all kinds of superstitious
delusion, and, consequently, will be useful as long as
the world endures."
13. It is observable that in another place Douglas
had said, that " though we may be certain that God
will never reverse the course of nature but for im
portant ends, (the course of nature being the plan of
government laid down by Himself,) Infinite Wisdom
may see ends highly worthy of a miraculous inter
position, the importance of which may lie hid from
our shallow comprehension. Were, therefore, the mira
cles, about the credibility of which we now dispute,
events brought about by invisible agency, though our
being able to discover an important end served by a

1 10 Antecedent Probability of
miracle would be no weak additional motive to our
believing it ; yet our not being able to discover any
such end could be no motive to induce us to reject it, if
the testimony produced to confirm it be unexception
able."0 The author is here speaking of the miracles
of the Old and New Testaments, which he believes ;
and, like a religious man, he feels, contrariwise to
Hume, that it is not " convenient," but dangerous, to
allow of an antecedent test, which, for what he knows,
and before he is aware, may be applied in disproof of
one or other instance of those gracious manifesta
tions. But it is far otherwise when he comes to speak
of Ecclesiastical Miracles, which he begins with dis
believing without much regard to their evidence, and
is engaged, not in examining or confuting, but in bur
dening with some test or criterion which may avail,, in
Hume's words, "to silence bigotry and superstition,
and to free us from their impertinent solicitations."
He acts towards the miracles of the Church, as Hume
towards the miracles of Scripture.
14. And surely with less reason than Hume, from
a consideration already suggested ; because, in being
a believer in the miracles of Scripture, he deprives
himself of that strong antecedent ground against all
miracles whatever, both Scriptural and Ecclesiastical,
on which Hume took his stand. Allowing, as he is
obliged to allow, that the ecclesiastical miracles are
0 Page 217.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles.

in

possible, because the Scripture miracles are true,
he rejects ecclesiastical miracles as not subserving
the object which he arbitrarily assigns for miracles
under the Gospel, while he protects the miracles
of Scripture by the cautious proviso, that " Infinite
Wisdom may see ends " for an interposition, " the
importance of which may lie hid from our shal
low comprehension." Yet it is a fairer argument
against miraculous agency in a particular instance,
before it is known in any case to have been employed,
that its object is apparently unimportant, than after
such agency has once been manifested. What has
been introduced for greater ends may, when once
introduced, be made subservient to secondary ones.
Parallel cases are of daily occurrence in matters of
this world ; and if it is allowable, as it is generally
understood to be, to argue from final causes in behalf
of the being of a God — that is, to apply the analogy of
a human framer and work to the relation subsisting
between the physical world and a Creator — surely it is
allowable also to illustrate the course of Divine Provi
dence and Governance by the methods and procedures
of human agents. Now, nothing is more common in
scientific and social arrangements than that works be
gun for one purpose should, in the course of operation,
be made subservient, as a matter of course, to lesser
ones. A mechanical contrivance or a political orga
nization is continued for secondary objects, when the

112 Antecedent Probability of
primary has been attained ; and thus miracles begun
either for Warburton's object or Douglas's may be
continued for others, "the importance of which," in
the language of the latter, " may lie hid from our
shallow comprehension."
15. Hume judges of professedly Divine acts by
experience ; Bishops Warburton and Douglas by the
probable objects which a Divine Agent must pursue.
Both parties draw extravagant conclusions, and that
unphilosophically ; but surely we know much less of
the designs and purposes of Divine Providence, on
which Warburton and Douglas insist, than we know
of that physical course of things on which Hume
takes his stand. Facts actually come before us ; the
All-wise Mind is hidden from us. We have a right
to form anticipations about facts ; we may not, except
very reverently and humbly, attempt to trace, and
we dare not prescribe, the rules on which Providence
conducts the government of the world. The Apostle
warns us, " Who hath known the mind of the Lord ?
and who hath been His counsellor ? " And surely, a
fresh or additional object in the course of Providence
presents a less startling difficulty to the mind than
an interposition in the laws of nature. If we conquer
our indisposition towards the news of such an inter
position by reflecting on the Sovereignty of the Creator,
let us not be religious by halves, let us submit our
imaginations to the full idea of that inscrutable

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 113
Sovereignty, nor presume to confine it within bounds
narrower than are prescribed by His own attributes.
16. This, then, is the proper answer to the objection
urged against the post-apostolic miracles, on the
ground that the first occurrence of miracles does in
itself discredit their recurrence, and that the miracles
subsequent to those of Scripture differ, in fact, from
the Scripture miracles in their objects and cir
cumstances. The ordinary Providence of God is con
ducted upon a system ; and as even the act of crea
tion is now contemplated by some philosophers as
possibly subject to law, so it is more probable than
not that there is also a law of supernatural manifesta
tions. And thus the occurrence of miracles is rather
a presumption for than against their recurrence ;
such events being not isolated acts, but the indications
of the presence of an agency. And again, since
every system consists of parts varying in importance
and value, so also as regards a dispensation of
miracles, " God hath set every one of them in the
body as it hath pleased Him ; " and even " those
members which seem to be more feeble" and less
"comely" are "necessary," and are sustained by their
fellowship with the more honourable.
17. It may be added that Scripture, as in Mark
xvi. 17, 18, certainly does give aprimd facie counte
nance to the idea that miracles are a privilege accorded
to true believers, and that where is faith, there will
8

1 14 Antecedent Probability of Miracles.
be the manifested signs of its invisible Author.
Hence it was the opinion of Grotius,d who is here
quoted from his connection with English Theology,
and of Barrow, Dodwell, and others, that miracles
are at least to be expected as attendants on the
labours of Missionaries. Now this Scripture intima
tion, whether fainter or stronger, does, as far as it
goes, add to the presumption in favour of the
miracles of ecclesiastical history, by authoritatively
assigning them a place in the scheme of Christianity.
But this subject, as well as others touched upon in
this Chapter, will more distinctly come into review
in those which follow.
d On Mark xvi. 17, Grotius avows his belief in the continu
ance of a miraculous agency down to this day. He illustrates
that text from St. Justin, St. Irenasus, Origen, Tertullian,
Minucius Felix, and Lactantius, as regards the power of
exorcism, and refers to the acts of Victor of Cilicia in the
Martyrology of Ado, and to the history of Sabinus, Bishop of
Canusium, in Greg. Turon., for instances of miraculous pro
tection against poison. As to missions, he asserts that the
presence of miraculous agency is even a test whether the
doctrine preached is Christ's. " Si quis etiam nunc gentibus
Christi ignaris, (illis enim proprie miracula inserviunt, 1 Cor.
xiv. 22), ita ut ipse annunciari voluit, annunciat, promissionis
vim duraturam arbitror. Sunt enim d^era/iA^Ta 1-08 6e.au dwpa.
Sed nos, cujus rei culpa est in nostra ignavia aut diffidentia,
id solemus in Deum rejicere." Elsewhere he professes his
belief in the miracle wrought upon the Confessors under Hun-
neric, who spoke after their tongues were cut out ; and in the
ordeals of hot iron in the middle ages (De Verit. i. 17) ; and
in the miracles wrought at the tombs of the Martyrs. Ibid.
iii. 7, fin. Vide also De Antichr. p. 502, col. 2.

Chapter III.
ON THE INTERNAL CHARACTER OF THE
ECCLESIASTICAL MIRACLES.
1 8. ' I "*HE miracles wrought in times subsequent to
-*- the Apostles are of a very different cha
racter, viewed as a whole, from those of Scripture
viewed as a whole ; so much so, that some writers
have not scrupled to say that, if they really took place,
they must be considered as forming another dispensa
tion;6 and at least they are in some sense supplement
ary to the Apostolic. This will be evident both on
a survey of some of them, and by referring to the
language used by the Fathers of the Church concern
ing them. i.
19. The Scripture miracles are for the most part
evidence of a Divine Revelation, and that for the sake
of those who have not yet been instructed in it, and
in order to the instruction of multitudes : but the
e Vide Middleton's Inquiry, p. 24. et alib. Campbell on
Miracles, p. 121.

1 1 6 Internal Character of
miracles which follow have sometimes no discoverable
or direct object, or but a slight object ; they happen
for the sake of individuals, and of those who are
already Christians, or for purposes already effected,
as far as we can judge, by the miracles of Scripture.
The Scripture miracles are wrought by persons con
sciously exercising under Divine guidance a power
committed to them for definite ends, professing to be
immediate messengers from heaven, and to be evi
dencing their mission by their miracles : whereas
Ecclesiastical miracles are not so much wrought as
displayed, being effected by Divine Power without
any visible media of operation at all, or by inanimate
or material media, as relics and shrines, or by instru
ments who did not know at the time what they were
effecting, or, if they were hoping and praying for such
supernatural blessing, at least did not know when
they were to be used as instruments, when not The
miracles of Scripture are, as a whole, grave, simple,
and majestic : those of Ecclesiastical History often
partake of what may not unfitly be called a romantic
character, and of that wildness and inequality which
enters into the notion of romance. The miracles of
Scripture are undeniably beyond nature: those of
Ecclesiastical History are often scarcely more than
extraordinary accidents or coincidences, or events
which seem to betray exaggerations or errors in the
statement. The miracles of Scripture are definite and

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 117
whole transactions, drawn out and carried through
from first to last, with beginning and ending, clear,
complete, and compact in the narrative, separated
from extraneous matter, and consigned to authentic
statements : whereas the Ecclesiastical, for the most
part, are not contained in any authoritative form or
original document ; at best they need to be extracted
from merely historical works, and often are only
floating rumours, popular traditions, vague, various,
inconsistent in detail, tales which only happen to have
survived, or which in the course of years obtained a
permanent place in local usages or in particular rites
or on certain spots, recorded at a distance from the
time and country when and where they profess to
have occurred, and brought into shape only by the
juxta-position and comparison of distinct informa
tions. Moreover, in Ecclesiastical History true and
false miracles are mixed : whereas in Scripture in
spiration has selected the true to the exclusion of all
others. 2.
20. The peculiarity of these miracles, as far as
their nature and character are concerned, which is the
subject immediately before us at present, will be best
understood by an enumeration of some of them,
taken almost at random, in the order in which they
occur in the authors who report them.
The Life of St. Gregory of Neocaesarea in Pontus

1 1 8 Internal Character of
(A.D. 250), is written by his namesake of Nyssa, who
lived about 120 years after him, and who, being a
native and inhabitant of the same country, wrote
from the traditions extant in it. He is called Thau-
maturgus, from the miraculous gift ascribed to him,
and it is not unimportant to observe that he was the
original Apostle of the heathen among whom he was
placed. He found at first but seventeen Christians in
his diocese, and he was the instrument of converting
the whole population both of town and country. St.
Basil (a.d. 370), whose see was in the neighbourhood,
states this circumstance, and adds, " Great is the
admiration which still attends on him among the
people of that country, and his memory resides in
the Churches new and ever fresh, impaired by no
length of time. And therefore no usage, no word,
no mystic rite of any sort, have they added to the
Church beyond those which he left. Hence many of
their observances seem imperfect, on account of the
ancient manner in which they are conducted. For
his successors in the government of the Churches did
not endure the introduction of anything which has
been brought into use since his date."f
21. St. Gregory of Nyssa tells us that, when he
was first coming into his heathen and idolatrous
diocese, being overtaken by night and rain, he was
obliged, with his companions, to seek refuge in a
f De Spir. S. 74.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 119
temple which was famous for its oracles. On enter
ing he invoked the name of Christ, and made the
sign of the cross, and continued till morning in
prayer and psalmody, as was his custom. He then
went forward, but was pursued by the Priest of the
temple, who threatened to bring him before the
magistrates, as having driven the evil spirit from the
building, who was unable to return. Gregory tore off
a small portion of the book he had with him, and
wrote on it the words, " Satan, enter." The Priest, on
returning, finding that the permission took effect as
well as the former prohibition, came to him a second
time, and asked to be instructed about that. God who
had such power over the demons. Gregory unfolded
to him the mystery of the Incarnation ; and the
pagan, stumbling at it, asked to see a miracle.
Nyssen, who has spoken all along as relating the
popular account, now says that he has to relate what is
"of all the most incredible." A stone of great size lay
before them ; the Priest asked that it might be made
to move by Gregory's faith, and Gregory wrought the
miracle. This was followed by the Priest's conver
sion, but not as an isolated event ; for, on his entry
into the city, all the inhabitants went out to meet
him, and enough were converted on the first day by
his preaching to form a church. In no long time he
was in a condition to call upon his flock to build a
place of worship, the first public Christian edifice on

120 Internal Character of
record ; which remained to Nyssen's time, in spite of
the serious earthquakes which had visited the city.
22. St. Gregory's fame extended into the neighbour
ing districts, and secular causes were brought for his
determination. Among those who came to him were
two brothers, who had come into their father's large
property, and litigated about the possession of a lake
which formed part of it. When his efforts to accom
modate their difference failed, and the disputants,
being strong in adherents and dependants, were even
proceeding to decide the matter by force of arms,
Gregory the day before the engagement betook him
self to the lake, and passed the night there in prayer.
The lake was dried up, and in Nyssen's time its bed
was covered with woods, pasture and corn land, and
dwellings. Another miracle is attributed to him of a
similar character. A large and violent stream, which
was fed by the mountains of Armenia, from time to
time broke through the mounds which were erected
along its course in the flat country, and flooded the
whole plain. The inhabitants, who were heathen, hav
ing heard the fame of Gregory's miracles, made appli
cation to him for relief. He journeyed on foot to the
place, and stationed himself at the very opening
which the stream had made in the mound. Then in
voking Christ, he took his staff, and fixed it in the
mud ; and then returned home. The staff budded,
grew, and became a tree, and the stream never passed

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 121
it henceforth : since it was planted by Gregory at the
very time when the mound had burst, and was ap
pealed to by the inhabitants,^ who were converted in
consequence, and was still living in Nyssen's time, it
became a sort of monument of the miracle. On one
of his journeys two Jews attempted to deceive him ;
the one lay down as if dead, and the other pretended
to lament him, and asked alms of Gregory for a
shroud. Gregory threw his garment upon him, and
walked on. His companion called on him to rise,
but found him really dead. One day when he was
preaching, a boy cried out that some one else was
standing by Gregory, and speaking instead of him ;
at the end of the discourse Gregory observed to the
bystanders that the boy was possessed, and taking
off the covering which was on his own shoulders,
breathed on it, and cast it on the youth, who forth
with showed all the usual symptoms of demoniacs.
He then put his hand on him, and his agitation
ceased, and his delusion with it.
23. Now, concerning these and similar accounts, it
is obvious to remark, on the one hand, that the
alleged miracles were wrought in order to the con
version of idolaters ; on the other hand, when we read
of stones changing their places, rivers restrained, and
B Mejflji roi vvv rots emxwpiois $ia/ia ylverai to (fivTov Kal Bf/ryrjua. . .
onofia Si liexpl tou vSv idTi tui SeiiSpu. ij fSaKrypla, fiv-rifiotrwov ttjs Tp-rr/optov
X^piTos /ecu Swapieas, rois iyxupiots & *inri t$> xpova o-in$bp.tvov. T. ii.
pp. 991, 992.

1 2 2 Internal Character of
lakes dried up, and, at the same time, of buildings
remaining in spite of earthquakes, we are reminded,
as in the case of the Scripture miracle upon the cities
of the plain, that a volcanic country is in question, in '
which such phenomena are to a great extent coin
cident with the course of nature. It may be added,
that the biographer not only is frequent in the phrases
"it is said," "it is still reported," but he assigns as a
reason for not relating more of St. Gregory's miracles,
that he may be taxing the belief of his readers more
than is fitting, and he throughout writes in a tone of
apology as well as of panegyric.
24. Next, let us turn to St. Athanasius's biogra
phical notice of St. Antony, who began the solitary
life A.D. 270. Athanasius knew him personally, and
writes whatever he was able to learn from himself ;
for " I followed him," he says, " no small time, and
poured water upon his hands ; " and he adds, that
" everywhere he has had an anxious regard to truth."
The following are some of the supernatural or extra
ordinary portions of his narrative. He relates that
the enemy of souls appeared to Antony, first like a
woman, then like a black child, when he confessed
himself to be the spirit of lewdness, and to have been
vanquished by the young hermit. Afterwards, when
he was passing the night in the tombs, he was at
tacked by evil spirits, and so severely stricken that
he lay speechless till a friend found him next

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 123
day.h When he was on his first journey into the desert,
a large plate of silver lay in his way ; he soliloquized
thus, " Whence this in the desert ? This is no beaten
path, no track of travellers; it is too large to be
dropped without being missed ; or if dropped, it
would have been sought after and found, for there
is no one else to take it. This is a snare of the
devil; thou shalt not, O devil, hinder thus my
earnest purpose ; unto perdition be it with thee ! "
As he spoke, the plate vanished. He exhorted
his friends not to fear the evil spirits : " They
conjure up phantoms to terrify cowards ; but sign
yourselves with the cross, and go forth in confi
dence." "Once there appeared to me," he says, on
another occasion, "a spirit very tall, with a great
show, and presumed to say, ' I am the Power of God,'
and ' I am Providence ; what favour shall I do thee ? '
But I the rather spit upon him, naming the Christ,
and essayed to strike him, and I think I did ; and
straightway this great personage vanished with all his
spirits at Christ's name. Once he came, the crafty
one, when I was fasting, and as a Monk, with the
appearance of loaves, and bade me eat : ' Eat, and
b Eusebius relates of one Natalis, a Confessor of the end of
the second century, that he fell into the heresy of Theodotus,
a sort of Unitarianism, and was warned by our Lord in visions.
On neglecting these, he was severely scourged by angels all
through the night. Hist. v. 28. Vide Hieron. adv. Rufin.
p. 414.

1 24 Internal Character of
have over thy many pains ; thou too art a man, and
art like to be sick ; ' I, perceiving his craft, rose up
to pray. He could not bear it, but vanished through
the door, like smoke. Listen to another thing, and
that securely and fearlessly ; and trust me, for I lie '
not. One time some one knocked at my door in the
monastery ; I went out, and saw a person tall and
high. ' Who art thou ? ' says I ; he answers, ' I am
Satan.' Then I asked, ' Why art thou here ? ' He
says, 'Why do the Monks, and all other Christians,
so unjustly blame me ? Why do they curse me
hourly ? ' ' Why troublest thou them ? ' I rejoin. He,
' I trouble them not ; they harass themselves ; I have
become weak. I have no place left, no weapon, no
city. Christians are now everywhere ; at last even
the desert is filled with Monks. Let them attend to
themselves, and not curse me, when they should not'
Then I said to him, admiring the grace of the Lord,
'A true word against thy will, who art ever a liar, and
never speakest truth ; for Christ hath come and made
thee weak, and overthrown thee and stripped thee.'
At the Saviour's name he vanished ; it burned him,
and he could not bear it."
25. Once, when travelling to some brethren across
the desert, water failed them ; they sat down in de
spair, and let the camel wander. Antony knelt down
and spread out his hands in prayer, when a spring of
water burst from the place where he was praying. A

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 125
person came to him, who was afflicted with madness
or epilepsy, and begged his prayers ; he prayed for
him, and then said, " Go, and be healed." The man
refusing to go, Antony said, " If thou remainest here,
thou canst not be healed ; but go to Egypt, and thy
cure shall be wrought in thee." He believed, went,
and was cured as soon as he got sight of Egypt. At
another time he was made aware that two brothers
were overtaken in the desert by want of water ; that
one was dead, and the other dying ; he sent two
Monks, who buried the one and restored the other.
Once, on entering a vessel, he complained of a most
loathsome stench ; the boatmen said that there was
fish in it, but without satisfying Antony, when sud
denly a cry was heard from a youth on board, who
was possessed by a spirit. Antony used the name
of our Lord, and the sick person was restored. St.
Athanasius relates a similar instance of Antony's
power, which took place in his presence. When the
old man left Alexandria, whither he had gone to
assist the Church against the Arians, Athanasius
accompanied him as far as the gate. A woman cried
after him, " Stop, thou man of God ; my daughter is
miserably troubled by a spirit." Athanasius besought
him too, and he turned round. The girl, in a fit, lay
on the grouffd ; but on Antony praying, and naming
the name of Christ, she rose restored. It should be
observed, that Alexandria was at this time still in a

126 Internal Character of
great measure a heathen city. Athanasius says that,
while Antony was there, as many became Christians
in a few days as were commonly converted in the
course of the year. This fact is important, not only
as showing us the purpose which his miracles answered,
but as informing us by implication that pretensions
such as Antony's were not of every day's occurrence
then, but arrested attention and curiosity at the time.
26. We have a similar proof of the comparative
rareness of such miraculous power in St. Jerome's
Life of Hilarion. When the latter visited Sicily, one
of his disciples, who was seeking him, heard in
Greece from a Jew that " a Prophet of the Christians
had appeared in Sicily, and was doing so many
miracles and signs, that men thought him one of the
old Saints." Hilarion was the first solitary in Pales
tine, and a disciple of St. Antony. St. Jerome
enumerates various miracles which were wrought by
him, such as his giving sight to a woman who had
been ten years blind, restoring a paralytic, procuring
rain by his prayers, healing the bites of serpents with
consecrated oil, curing a dropsy, curbing the violence
of the sea upon a shore, exorcising the possessed, and
among these a camel which had killed many persons
in its fury. When he was solemnly buried, ten
months after his death, his Monk's dress was quite
whole upon him, and his body was entire as if he had
been alive, and sent forth a most exquisite fragrance*

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 127
27. Sulpicius gives us an account of his master St.
Martin's miracles, which encountered much incredulity
when he first published it. "I am shocked to say
what I lately heard," says his friend to him in his
Dialogues ; " but an unhappy man has asserted that
you tell many lies in your book." As St. Martin was
the Apostle of Gaul, the purpose effected by his
miracles is equally clear and sufficient, as in the
instance of Thaumaturgus ; and they are even more
extraordinary and startling than his. Sulpicius in his
Dialogues solemnly appeals to our Lord that he has
stated nothing but what he saw himself, or knew, if
not on St. Martin's own word, at least on sure testi
mony. He also appeals to living witnesses. The
following are instances taken from the first of his two
works. 28. Before Martin was a Bishop, while he was near
St. Hilary at Poictiers, a certain Catechumen, who
lived in his monastery, died of a fever, in Martin's
absence, without baptism. On his return, the Saint
went by himself into the cell where the body lay,
threw himself upon it, prayed, and then raising him
self with his eyes fixed on it, patiently waited his
restoration, which took place before the end of two
hours. The man, thus miraculously brought to life,
lived many years, and was known to Sulpicius, though
not till after the miracle. At the same period of his
life he also restored a servant in a family, who had

128 Internal Character of
hung himself, and in the same way. Near Tours,
which was his See, a certain spot was commonly
considered to be the tomb of Martyrs, and former
Bishops had placed an altar there. No name or time
was known, and Martin found reason to suspect that
the tradition was unfounded. For a while he re
mained undecided, as being afraid of encouraging
either superstition or irreverence ; at length he went to
the tomb, and prayed to Christ to be told who was
buried there, and what his character. On this a dis
mal shade appeared, who, on being commanded to
speak, confessed that he was a robber who had been
executed for his crimes, and was in punishment.
Martin's attendants heard the voice, but saw nothing.
Once, when he was on a journey, he saw at a distance
a heathen funeral procession, and mistook it for some
idolatrous ceremonial, the country people of Gaul
being in the practice of carrying their gods about their
fields. He made the sign of the cross, and bade
them stop and set down the body ; this they were
constrained to do. When he discovered their real
business, he suffered them to proceed At another
time, on his giving orders for cutting down a pine to
which idolatrous honour was paid, a heathen said, " If
thou hast confidence in thy God, let us hew the tree,
and do thou receive it as it falls ; if thy Lord is with
thee, thou wilt escape harm." Martin accepted the
condition, and when the tree was falling upon him,

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 129
made the sign of the cross ; the tree reeled round
and fell on the other side. This miracle converted
the vast multitude who were spectators of it.1 About
the same time, when he had set on fire a heathen
temple, the flames spread to a house which joined it.
Martin mounted on to the roof of the building that
was in peril, and by his presence warned off the fire,
and obliged it to confine itself to the work intended
for it. At Paris a leper was stationed at the gate of
the city ; Martin went up and kissed and blessed him,
and his leprosy disappeared.
29. St. Augustine, again, enumerates at the end of
his De Civitate Dei, certain miracles which he himself
had witnessed, or had on good authority, such as these.
An actor of the town of Curulis was cured of the
paralysis in the act of baptism ; this Augustine knew,
on what he considered the best authority. A person
known to Augustine, who had received earth from the
Holy Sepulchre, asked him and another Bishop to
place it in some oratory for the profit of worshippers.
They did so, and a country youth, who was paralytic,
hearing of it, asked to be carried to the spot. After
praying there, he found himself recovered, and walked
home. By the relics of St. Stephen one man was
1 Sulpicius adds, " Et vere ante Martinum pauci admodum,
imo pasne nulli, in illis regionibus Christi nomen receperant ;
quod adeo virtutibus illius exemploque convaluit, ut jam ibi
nullus locus sit, qui non aut ecclesiis frequentissimis aut
monasteriis sit repletus.'' V. Mart. 10. 9

130 Internal Character of
cured of a fistula, another of the stone, another of the
gout ; a child who had been crushed to death by a
wheel was restored to life ; also a nun, by means of
a garment which had been taken to his shrine and
thrown over her corpse ; and another female by the
same means ; and another by the oil used at the
shrine ; and a dead infant who was brought, to it. In
less than two years even the formal statements given
in of miracles wrought at St. Stephen's shrine at
Hippo were almost seventy. 3-
30. These miracles are recorded by writers of the
fourth century, though they belong, in one case
wholly, in another partially, to the history of the
third. When we turn to earlier writers, we find similar
assertions of the presence of a miraculous agency in
the Church, and its manifestations have the same
general character. Exorcisms, cures, visions, are the
chief miracles of the fourth century ; and they are
equally so of the second and third, so that the former
have a natural claim to be considered the continuation
of the latter. But there are these very important
differences between the two, — that the accounts in the
fourth century are much more in detail than those of
the second and third, which are commonly vague and
general ; and next, that in the second and third those
kinds of miraculous operations which are the most

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 131
decisive proofs of a supernatural presence are but
sparingly or scarcely mentioned.
31. Middleton 's enumeration of these primitive
miracles, which on the whole may be considered to be
correct, is as follows : " The power of raising the
dead, of healing the sick, of casting out devils, of
prophesying, of seeing visions, of discovering the
secrets of men, of expounding the Scriptures, of speak
ing with tongues."k Of these the only two which are
in their nature distinctly miraculous are the first and
last ; and for both of these we depend mainly on the
testimony of St Irenaeus, who lived immediately after
the Apostolical Fathers, that is, close upon the period
when even modern writers are disposed to allow that
miracles were wrought in the Church. Douglas
observes, " If we except the testimonies of Papias
and Irenaeus, who speak of raising the dead, . . .
I can find no instances of miracles mentioned by the
Fathers before the fourth century, as what were per
formed by Christians in their times, but the cures of
liseases, particularly the cures of demoniacs, by exor
cising them ; which last indeed seems to be their
favourite standing miracle, and the only one which I
find (after having turned over their writings carefully,
and with a view to this point,) they challenged their
adversaries to come and see them perform." '
32. It must be observed, however, that though
k Page 72. Page 232.

132 Internal Character of
certain occurrences are in their character more mira
culous than others, yet that a miracle of degree may, in
the particular case, be quite as clearly beyond the ordi
nary course of nature. Imagination can cure the sick
in certain cases, in certain cases it cannot ; and we
shall have a very imperfect view of the alleged
miracles of the second and third centuries, if, instead
of patiently contemplating the instances recorded, in
their circumstances and details, we content ourselves
with their abstract character, and suffer a definition
to stand in place of examination. Thus if we take
St. Cyprian's description of the demoniacs, in which he
is far from solitary,1" we shall find that while it is quite
open to accuse him and others of misstatement, we
cannot accept his description as it stands, without
acknowledging that the conflict between the powers
of heaven and the evil spirit was then visibly proceed
ing as in the time of Christ and His Apostles. " 0
would you listen to them," he says to the heathen
Demetrian, "and see them, when they are adjured
and tormented by us with spiritual lashes, hurled with
words of torture out of bodies they have possessed,
when shrieking and groaning at a human voice, and
beneath a power divine laid under lash and stripe, they
m For ancient testimonies to the power of exorcism, vid.
Middleton, pp. 80 — 90. Douglas's Criterion, p. 232, Note 1.
Farmer, On Miracles, pp. 241, 242. Whitby's Preface to Epp.
§ 10.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 133
confess the judgment to come. You will find that
we are entreated of them whom you entreat, feared by
them whom you fear, and whom you adore. Surely
thus, at least, will you be brought to confusion in
these your errors, when you behold and hear your
gods at once, upon our questioning, betraying what
they are, and unable, even in your presence, to conceal
their tricks and deceptions."11 Again, " You may see
them by our voice, and through the operation of the
unseen Majesty, lashed with stripes, and scorched with
fire ; stretched out under the increase of their multi
plying penalty, shrieking, groaning, entreating, con
fessing from whence they came, and when they depart,
even in the hearing, of their own worshippers ; and
either leaping out suddenly, or gradually vanishing, as
faith in the sufferer aids, or grace in the eurer con
spires."0 Passages equally strong might be cited
from writers of the same period.
33. And there are other occurrences of a distinctly
miraculous character in the earlier centuries, which
come under none of Middleton's or Douglas's classes,
but which ought not to be overlooked. For instance,
a fragrance issued from St. Polycarp when burning at
the stake, and on his being pierced with a sword a
dove flew out Narcissus, Bishop of Jerusalem, about
the end of the second century, when oil failed for the
" Treat, viii. 8. Oxford tr.
Treat ii. 4. Oxford tr.

134 Internal Character of
lamps on the vigil of Easter, sent persons to draw
water instead ; which, on his praying over it, was
changed into oil. Eusebius, who relates this miracle,
says that small quantities of the oil were preserved
even to his time. St. Cyprian speaks of a person
who had lapsed in persecution, attempting to commu
nicate ; when on opening the area, or receptacle in
which the consecrated Bread was reserved, fire burst
out from it and prevented her. Another, on attending
at church with the same purpose, found that he had
received from the priest nothing but a cinder.
34. Lastly, in this review of the miracles belonging
to the early Church, it will be right to include certain
isolated ones which have an historical character, and
are accordingly more celebrated than the rest. Such
is the miracle of the thundering Legion, that is, of
the rain accorded to the prayers of Christian soldiers
in the army of Marcus Antoninus, when they were
perishing by thirst ; the appearance of a Cross in the
sky to Constantine's army, with the inscription, " In
hoc signo vinces ; " the sudden death of Arius, close
upon his proposed re-admission into the Church, at
the prayers of Alexander of Constantinople ; the dis
covery of the Cross, the multiplication of its wood, and
the miracles wrought by it ; the fire bursting forth from
the foundations of the Jewish temple, which hindered
its rebuilding ; the restoration of the blind man on
the discovery of the relics of St Gervasius and St.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 135
Protasius ; and the power of speech granted to the
African confessors who had lost their tongues in the
Vandal persecution.? These and other such shall be
considered separately, before I conclude.
35. Imperfect as is this survey of the miracles
ascribed to the ages later than the Apostolic, it is quite
sufficient for the purpose for which it has been made ;
viz., to show that those miracles are on the whole very
different in their character and attendant circum
stances from the Gospel miracles, which certainly are
very far from preparing us for them, or rather at first
sight indispose us for their receptions

4-
36. And in the next place this important circum
stance must be considered, which is as clear as it is de
cisive, that the Fathers speak of miracles as having in
one sense ceased with the Apostolic period ; — that is
to say, whereas they sometimes speak of miracles as
p For other ancient testimonies to the ecclesiastical miracles,
vid. DodwelL Dissert, in Irenasum. ii. 41 — 60. Middleton's
Inquiry, pp. 2—19. Brook's Defens. Miracl. Eccl. pp. 16 — 22.
Mr. Isaac Taylor's Anc. Christ, part 7.
On the difference between the miracles of Scripture and
of Ecclesiastical History, vid. Douglas's Crit. pp. 221 — 237.
Paley's Evidences, Part i. Prop. 2. Middl. pp. 21 — 26, 91 —
96, etc. Bishop Blomfield's Sermons, note on p. 82. Dodwell
attempts to draw a line between the Ante-Nicene and the later
miracles, in favour of the former (Dissert, in Iren. ii. 62—66),
as regards testimony, nature, instrument, and object.

136 Internal Character of
existing in their own times, still they say also that
Apostolic miracles, or miracles like the Apostles',
whether in their object, cogency, impressiveness, or
character, were no longer of occurrence in the Church;
an interpretation which they themselves in some pas
sages give to their own testimony. "Argue not," says
St. Chrysostom, " because miracles do not happen now,
that they did not happen then. ... In those times
they were profitable, and now they are not." He
proceeds to say that, in spite of this difference, the
mode of conviction was substantially the same. " We
persuade not by philosophical reasonings, but from
Divine Scripture, and we recommend what we say by
the miracles then done. And then, too, they persuaded
not by miracles only, but by discussion." And pre
sently he adds, " The more evident and constraining
are the things which happen, the less room there is
for faith."r And again in another passage, " Why
are there not those now who raise the dead and per
form cures ? I will not say why not ; rather, why are
there not those now who despise the present life ?
why serve we God for hire ? When, however, nature
was weak, when faith had to be planted, then there
were many such ; but now He wills not that we should
hang on these miracles, but be ready for death."s
37. In like manner St. Augustine introduces his
r Horn, in 1 Cor. vi. 2 and 3.
8 Horn. 8, in CoL § 5.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 137
catalogue of contemporary miracles, which has been
partly given above, by stating and allowing the ob
jection that miracles were not then as they had been.
" Why, say they, do not these miracles take place now,
which, as you preach to us, took place once ? I might
answer that they were necessary before the world be
lieved, that it might believe."' He then goes on to'
say that miracles were wrought in his time, only they
were not so public and well-attested as the miracles
of the Gospel.
38. St. Ambrose, on the discovery of the bodies of
the two Martyrs, uses the language of surprise ; which is
quite in accordance with the feelings which the mira
cles of Antony and Hilarion seem to have roused in
Alexandria and in Sicily. "You know, you yourselves
saw, that many were cleansed from evil spirits ; very
many, on touching with their hands the garment of
the Saints, were delivered from the infirmities which
oppressed them. The miracles of the old lime are
come again, when by the advent of the Lord Jesus
a fuller grace was shed upon the earth." Under a
similar feeling11 he speaks of the two corpses, which
happened to be of large size, as " mirae magnitudinis,
ut prisca aetas ferebat"v
4 De Civ. Dei, xxii. 8, § 1.
n Ep. i. 22, § 9. The same feeling of reverence for times
past must be taken partly to account for the expressions ?x«"l
and iiroW\e«rTcu in Origen, Eusebius, etc., below note a.
' Ibid. § 2.

138 Internal Character of
39. And Isidore of Pelusium; after observing that in
the Apostles holiness of life and power of miracles
went together, adds, " Now, too, if the life of teachers,
rivalled the Apostolic bearing, perhaps miracles would
take place ; though if they did not, such life would
suffice for the enlightening of those who beheld it."*
40. The doctrine, thus witnessed by the great writers
of the end of the fourth century, is supported by as
clear a testimony two centuries before and two cen
turies after. Pope Gregory, at the end of the sixth, in
commenting on the text, " And these signs shall fol
low those that believe," says, " Is it so, my brethren,
that, because ye do not these signs, ye do not believe ?
On the contrary, they were necessary in the, begin
ning of the Church : for, that faith might grow, it re
quired miracles to cherish it withal ; just as when we
plant shrubs, we water them till they seem to thrive
in the ground, and as soon as they are well rooted
we cease our irrigation. This is what Paul teaches,
' Tongues are a sign, not for those who believe, but for
those who believe not ; ' and there is something yet
to be said of these signs and powers of a more recon
dite nature. For Holy Church doth spiritually every
day, what she then did through the Apostles, cor
porally. For when the Priests by the grace of exor
cism lay hands on believers, and forbid evil spirits to
* Ep. iv. 8ol

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 139
inhabit their minds, what do they but cast out devils ?
And any believers soever who henceforth abandon the
secular words of the old life, and utter holy mysteries,
and rehearse, as best they can, the praise and power
of their Maker, what do they but speak with new
tongues ? Moreover, while by their good exhortations
they remove evil from the hearts of others, they are
taking up serpents, etc. ; . . . which miracles are the
greater, because they are the more spiritual : the
greater, because they are the means of raising, not
bodies, but souls ; these signs, then, dearest brethren,
by God's aid, ye do if ye will."? And St. Clement of
Alexandria, at the end of the second century : " If it
was imputed to Abraham for righteousness on his
believing, and we are the seed of Abraham, we too
must believe by hearing. For Israelites we are, who
are obedient, not through signs,2 but through hearing." a
y In Evang. ii. 29.
z Strom, ii. 6, p. 444. So Mr. Osburn, (Errors Apost. Fathers,
p. 12,) and I think rightly. The Bishop of Lincoln, however,
observes, " I find only one passage in the writings of Clement
which has any bearing on the question of the existence of
miraculous powers in the Church ; " and proceeds to refer to
the Extracts from the writings of Theodotus. Kaye's Clement,
p. 468. The Bishop argues, in his work upon TertuUian, that
miracles had then ceased, from a passage in the De Pudicitia,
in which, after saying that the Apostles had spiritual powers
peculiar to themselves, TertuUian adds, " Nam et mortuos
suscitaverunt, quod Deus solus ; et debiles redintegraverunt,
quod nemo nisi Christus ; immo et plagas inflixerunt, quod
voluit Christus." c. 21.
a The following passages will be found to testify to the same

140 Internal Character of
5-
41. What the distinctions are between the Apostolic
and the later miracles, which allow of the Fathers
saying in a true sense that miracles ceased with the
first age, has in many ways appeared from what has
already come before us. For instance, it has appeared
that the Ecclesiastical Miracles were but locally
known, or were done in private ; or were so like occur
rences which are not miraculous as to give rise to
general fact, that the special miraculous powers possessed by
the Apostles did not continue in the Church after them.
Eusebius says that, according to St. Irenaeus, instances of
miraculous powers, iv iKKkyo-lavs nalv iiroKfKan-To, Hist. v. "]. 1xvi\,
of the miracles still remain, says Origen contra Cels. i. 2, fin.
*X"Vi Ka' Tlv"- 7e ixeifyva. Ibid. ii. 8. t/yi t<»/5 6M701S. Ibid.
vii. 8, fin. In two of these passages the gift is connected
with holiness of life, a doctrine which Dodwell denies to have
existed till the middle ages, Dissert, in Iren. ii. 64, though he
is aware of these passages. oiSi fy"05 iToWXenmu, Chrysost.
de Sacerd. iv. 3, fin. oi Si vvv iravres i/iov cannot do as much
as St. Paul's handkerchiefs. Ibid. iv. 6. He implies that the
dead were not raised in his day. " If God saw that the
raising of the dead would profit the living, He would not
have omitted it." De Lazar. iv. 3. "Where is the Holy
Spirit now ? a man may ask ; for then it was appropriate to
speak of Him, when miracles took place, and the dead were
raised, and all lepers were cleansed ; but now,'' etc. De
Sanct. Pent. i. 3. He adds that now we have the sanctifying
gifts instead. So, again, "The Apostles indeed enjoyed the
grace of God in abundance ; but if we were bid raise the dead,
or open the eyes of the blind, or cleanse lepers, or straighten
the lame, or cast out devils, and heal the like disorders," etc.
Ad Demetr. i. 8. " When the knowledge of Him as yet was

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 141
doubt and perplexity, at the time or afterwards, as to
their real character; or they were so unlike the Scrip
ture Miracles, so strange arid startling in their nature
and circumstances, as to need support and sanctioi.
rather themselves than to supply it to Christianity; 01
they were difficult from their drift, or their instruments
or agents, or the doctrine connected with them. In a
word, they are not primarily and directly evidence of
Revelation, though they may become so accidentally,

not spread abroad, then miracles used to take place ; but now
there is no need of that teaching, the facts themselves pro
claiming and manifesting the Lord." In Psalm cxlii. 5. Vid.
also Inscript. Act. ii. 3. Speaking of the miracles in the
wilderness, he says, " In our case also, when we came out of
error, many wonders were displayed ; but after that they
stopped, when religion was planted everywhere. And if sub
sequently they happened [to the Jews], they were few and
scattered, as when the sun stood, etc., and this too has ap
peared in our case ; " and then he goes on to mention the
"fiery eruption at the temple," etc., in Matth. Hom. iv. 1. And
ibid. Hom. xxxii. 7, after mentioning the Apostolic miracles of
cleansing lepers, exorcising spirits, and raising the dead, he
says, "This is the greatest proof of. your nobleness and love,
to believe God without pledges ; for this is one reason, among
others, why God ceased miracles. . . Seek not miracles, then,
but health of soul." And then he contrasts with visible mira
cles the " greater " ones of beneficence, self-command, etc., to
the end of the Homily. And in Joan. " Now, too, there are
those who seek and say, Why are there not miracles now ? If
thou art faithful as behoveth, and love Christ as thou shouldest,
miracles thou needest not." Hom. xxiv. 1. Elsewhere, after
speaking of the gift of the Spirit dwelling in us, he adds,
" Not that we may raise the dead, nor cleanse lepers, but that

142 Internal Character of
or to certain persons, or in the way of confirmation.
That they are not the direct evidence of revealed
truth, is fully granted by St. Augustine in the follow
ing striking passage from one of his works against the
Donatists : —
42. " Let him prove that we must hold to the Church
in Africa only, to the loss of the nations, or again that
we must restore and complete it in all nations from
Africa ; and prove it, not by saying ' It is true, be
cause I say it,' or 'because my associate says it,' or

we show forth the greatest miracle of all, charity," in Rom.
Hom. viii. 7. After quoting the text, " We are changed into
the same image from glory to glory," he adds, " This was
shown more manifestly when the gifts of miracles were in
operation ; but even now it is not difficult to discern it when
a man has believing eyes,'' etc., in 2 Cor. Hom. vii. 5. In
like manner, St. Augustine, after mentioning the Apostolic
miracles, " Sanati languidi, mundati leprosi, incessus claudis,
caecis visus, surdis auditus est redditus," and the changing of
water into wine, the multiplication of the loaves, etc., con
tinues, " Cur, inquis, ista modo non fiunt ? quia non moverent,
nisi mira essent : at si solita essent, mira non essent." De
Util. cred. 16. He adds, in his Retractations, " Hoc dixi, quia
non tanta, nee omnia modo, non quia nulla fiunt etiam modo."
Again, " Cum Ecclesia Catholica per totum orbem diffusa
atque fundata sit, nee miracula ilia in nostra tempora durare
permissa sunt, ne animus semper visibilia quasreret," etc. De
Ver. Rel. 25. He adds, in his Retractations, " Non sic acci-
piendum est quod dixi, ut nunc in Christi nomine fieri miracula
nulla credantur. Nam ego ipse, quando istum ipsum librum
scripsi, ad Mediolanensium corpora Martyrum in eadem
civitate caecum illuminatum fuisse jam -noveram," etc. Vid.
also Pope Greg. Mor. xxvii. 18.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 1 4 3
' my associates,' or ' these our Bishops,' ' Clerks,' or
' people ; ' or ' it is true because Donatus, or Pontius,
or any one else, did these or those marvellous acts,'
or 'because men pray at the shrines of our dead
brethren, and are heard,' or ' because this or that
happens there,' or ' because this brother of ours,' or
' that our sister,' ' saw such and such a vision when he
was awake,' or 'dreamed such and such a vision
when he was asleep.' Put away what are either the
fictions of men who lie, or the wonders of spirits who
deceive. For either what is reported is not true, or, if
among heretics wonders happen, we have still greater
cause for caution, inasmuch as our Lord, after declar
ing that certain deceivers were to be, who should work
some miracles, and deceive thereby, were it possible,
even the elect, added an earnest charge, in the words,
' Behold, I have told you before.' Whence also the
Apostle warns us that ' the Spirit speaketh expressly,
in the latter times some shall depart from the faith,
giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.'
Moreover, if any one is heard who prays at the shrines
of heretics, what he receives, whether good or bad, is
consequent not upon the merit of the place, but upon
the merit of his own earnest desire. For ' the Spirit
of the Lord,' as it is written, ' hath filled the whole
world,' and ' the ear of His zeal heareth all things.'
And many are heard by God in anger ; of whom saith
the Apostle, 'God gave them up to the desires of their

1 44 Internal Character of
own hearts.' And to many God in favour gives nof
what they wish, that He may give what is profitable.
. . . Read we not that some were heard by the Lord
God Himself in the high places of Judah, which high
places notwithstanding were so displeasing to Him,
that the kings who overthrew them not were blamed.
and those who overthrew them were praised ? Thus
it appears that the state of heart of the suppliant is
of more avail than the place of supplicating.
43. " Concerning deceitful visions, they should read'
what Scripture says, that ' Satan himself transforms
himself into an angel of light,' and that ' dreams have
deceived many.' And they should listen, too, to what
the Pagans relate, as regards their temples and gods,
of wonders either in deed or vision ; and yet ' the gods
of the heathen are but devils, but it is the Lord that
made the heavens.' Therefore many are heard and in
many ways, not only Catholic Christians, but Pagans
and Jews and heretics, involved in various errors and
superstitions ; but they are heard either by seducing
spirits, (who do nothing, however, but by God's per
mission, judging in a sublime and ineffable way what
is to be bestowed upon each ;) or by God Himself,
whether for the punishment of their wickedness, or for
the solace of their misery, or as a warning to them to
seek eternal salvation. But salvation itself and life
eternal no one attains, unless he hath Christ the Head.
Nor can any one have Christ the Head, who is not in

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 145
His body, which is the Church ; which, as the Head
Himself, we are bound to discern in holy canonical
Scripture, not to seek in the various rumours of men,
and opinions, and acts, and sayings, and sights.
44. " Let no one therefore object such facts who is
prepared to answer me ; for I too am far from claim
ing credit for my position, that the communion of
Donatus is not the Church of Christ, on the ground
that certain bishops in it are convicted, in records
ecclesiastical, and municipal, and judicial, of burning
the sacred books, ... or that the Circumcelliones
have committed so much evil, or that some of them
cast themselves down precipices, or throw themselves
into the fire, ... or that at their sepulchres herds of
strollers, men and women, in a state of drunkenness
and abandonment, bury themselves in wine day and
night, or pollute themselves with deeds of profligacy.
Let all this be considered merely as their chaff, with
out prejudice to the Church, if they themselves are
really holding to the Church. But whether this be
so, let them prove only from canonical Scripture; just
as we do not claim to be recognized as in the Church
of Christ, because the body to which we hold has
been graced by Optatus of Milevis or Ambrose of
' Milan, or other innumerable Bishops of our commu
nion, or because it is set forth in the Councils of onr
• colleagues, or because through the whole world in holy
places, which are frequented by our communion, so
10
\

146 Internal Character of
great marvels take place, whether answers to prayer,
or cures ; so that the bodies of Martyrs, which had
lain concealed so many years, (as they may hear from
many if they do but ask,) were revealed to Ambrose,
and in presence of those bodies a man long blind and
perfectly well known to the citizens of Milan re
covered his eyes and sight ; or because one man has
seen a vision, or because another has been taken up
in spirit, and heard either that he should not join, or
that he should leave, the party of Donatus. All such
things which happen in the Catholic Church, are to
be approved because they are in the Catholic Church;
not she manifested to be Catholic, because these things
happen in her."b

45. So far St. Augustine ; it being granted, how
ever, that the object of Ecclesiastical Miracles is not,
strictly speaking, that of evidencing Christianity, still
they may have other uses, known or unknown, besides
that of being the argumentative basis of revealed
truth ; and therefore it does not at once destroy the
credibility of such miraculous narratives, vouched to
us on good authority, that they have no assignable
object, or an object different from those which are
specified in Scripture, as was observed in the fore
going Chapter. b De Unit. Eccl. 49, 50.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 147
46. Here we are immediately considering the inter
nal character of the miracles later than the Apostolic
period : and what real prejudice ought to attach to
them from the dissimilarity or even contrariety
of many of them to the Scripture Miracles will be
best ascertained by betaking ourselves to the argu
ment from Analogy, and attempting to measure
these occurrences by such rules and suggestions as
the works of God, brought before us whether in
the visible creation. or in Scripture, may be found to
supply. And first of the natural world as it meets
our senses : —
47. "All the works of the Lord are exceeding
good," says the son of Sirach ; " a man need not to
say, What is this ? Wherefore is that ? for He hath
made all things for their uses." Yet an exuberance
and variety, a seeming profusion and disorder, a
neglect of severe exactness in the prosecution of its
objects, and of delicate adjustment in the details of its
system, are characteristics of the world both physical
and moral, and characteristics of Scripture also ; but
still the Wise Man assures us, that the purposes of the
Creator are not forgotten by Him, or missed because
they are hidden, or the work faulty because it is sub
ordinate or incomplete. All things are not equally
good in themselves, because they are diverse, yet
everything is good in its place. " All the works of the
Lord are good, and He will give every needful thing in

148 Internal Character of
due season. So that a man cannot say, This is worse
than that ; for in time they shall all be well approved."0
To persons who have not commonly the opportunity
of witnessing for themselves this great variety of the
Divine works, there is something very strange and
startling, — it may even be said, unsettling — in the first
view of nature as it is. To take, for instance, the case
of animal nature, let us consider the effect produced
upon the mind on seeing for the first time the many
tribes of the animal world, as we find them brought
together for the purposes of science or exhibition in
our own country. We are accustomed, indeed, to see
wild beasts more or less from our youth, or at least to
read of them ; but even with this partial preparation,
many persons will be moved in a very singular way
on going for the first time, or after some interval, to a
menagerie. They have been accustomed insensibly
to identify the wonder-working Hand of God with
the specimens of its exercise which they see about
them ; the forms of tame and domestic animals,
which are necessary for us, and which surround us,
are familiar to them, and they learn to take these as
a sort of rule on which to frame their ideas of the
animated works of the Creator generally. When an
eye thus habituated to certain forms, colours, motions,
and habits in the inferior animals, is suddenly brought
into the full assemblage of those mysterious beings,
- Ecclus. xxxix. 16 — 35

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 149
with which it has pleased Almighty Wisdom to people
the earth, a sort of dizziness comes over it, from the
impossibility of our reducing all at once the multitude
of new ideas poured in upon us to the centre of view
habitual to us ; the mind loses its balance, and it is
not too much to say, that in some cases it even falls
into a sort of scepticism. Nature seems to be too
powerful and various, or at least too strange, to be the
work of God, according to that Image which our
imbecility has set up within us for the Infinite and
Eternal, and as we have framed to ourselves our con
tracted notions of His attributes and acts ; and if we
do not submit ourselves in awe to His great myste-
riousness, and chasten our hearts and keep silence,
we shall be in danger of losing our belief in His
presence and providence altogether.
48. We have hitherto known enough of Him for
our personal guidance, but we have not understood
that only thus muchhas been the1 extent of our know
ledge of Him. Religion we know to be a grave and
solemn subject, and some few vague ideas of great
ness, sublimity, and majesty, have constituted for us
our whole image of Him whom the Seraphim adore.
And then we are suddenly brought into the vast
family of His works, hardly one of which is a speci
men of those particular and human ideas with which
we have identified the Ineffable. First, the endless
number of wild animals, their independence of man,

150 Internal Character of
and uselessness to him ; then their exhaustless variety ;
then their strangeness in shape, colour, size, motions,
and countenance ; not to enlarge on the still more
mysterious phenomena of their natural propensities
and passions ; all these things throng upon us, and
are in danger of overpowering us, tempting us to view
the Physical Cause of all as disconnected from the
Moral, and that, from the impression borne in upon
us, that nothing we see in this vast assemblage is
religious in our sense of the word "religious." We
see full evidence there of an Author, — of power,
wisdom, goodness ; but not of a Principle or Agent
correlative to our religious ideas. But without pushing
this remark to an extreme point, or dwelling on it
further than our present purpose requires, let two
qualities of the works of nature be observed before
leaving the subject, which (whatever explanation is
to be given of them, and certainly some explanation
is not beyond even our limited powers) are at first
sight very perplexing. One is that principle of
deformity, whether hideousness or mere homeliness,
which exists in the animal word; and the other (if
the word may be used with due soberness) is the
ludicrous ; — that is, judging of things, as we are here
judging of them, by their impression upon our minds.
49. It is obvious to apply what has been said to
the case of the miracles of the Church, as compared
with those in Scripture. Scripture is to us a garden

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 151
of Eden, and its creations are beautiful as well as
" very good ; " but when we pass from the Apostolic
to the following ages, it is as if we left the choicest
valleys of the earth, the quietest and most harmonious
scenery, and the most cultivated soil, for the luxurianl
wildernesses of Africa or Asia, the natural home 01
kingdom of brute nature, uninfluenced by man. Or
rather, it is a great injustice to the times of the Church,
to represent the contrast as so vast a one ; and Adam
might much more justly have been startled at the
various forms of life which were brought before him to
be named, than we may rationally presume to decide
that certain alleged miracles in the Church are not
really such, on the ground that they are unlike those
to which our eyes have been accustomed in Scripture.
There is far greater difference between the appearance
of a horse or an eagle and a monkey, or a lion and a
mouse, as they meet our eye, than between even the most
august of the Divine manifestations in Scripture and
the meanest and most fanciful of those legends which
we are accustomed without further examination to cast
aside. Such contrary properties, or rather such impres
sions of them on our minds, may be the necessary
consequence of Divine Agency moving on a system,
and not by isolated acts ; or the necessary conse
quence of its deigning to work with or through the
eccentricities, the weaknesses, nay, the wilfulness, of
the human mind. As, then, birds are different from

1 5 2 Internal Character of
beasts, as tropical plants differ from the productions
of the north, as one scene is severely beautiful, and
another rich or romantic, as the excellence of colours
is incommensurate with excellence of form, as plea
sures of sight have nothing in common with pleasures
of scent, except that they are pleasures ; so also in
the case of those works and productions which are
above or beside the ordinary course of nature, in spite
of their variety, "to every thing there is a season,
and a time to every purpose under the heaven," and
" He hath made every thing beautiful in His time."
And, as one description of miracles may be neces
sary for evidence, viz., such as are at once majestic
and undeniable, so for those other and manifold objects
which the economy of the Gospel kingdom may in
volve, a more hidden and intricate path, a more com
plex exhibition, a more exuberant method, a more
versatile rule, may be essential; and it may be as
shallow a philosophy to reject them merely because
they are not such as we should have expected from
God's hand, or as we find in Scripture, as to judge of
universal nature by the standard of our own home, or
again, with the ancient heretics, to refuse to admit
that the Creator of the physical world is also the
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
50. Nay, it may even be urged that the variety of
nature is antecedently a reason for expecting variety
in a supernatural agency, if such be introduced ; or,

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 153
again, (as has been already observed,) if such agency
is conducted on a system, it must even necessarily
involve diversity and inequality in its separate parts ;
and, granting it was intended to continue after the
Apostolic age, the want of uniformity between the
miracles first wrought and those which followed, as far
as it is found, might have been almost foretold with
out the gift of prophecy in that age, or at least may
be fully vindicated in this, — nay, even the inferiority
of the Ecclesiastical Miracles to the Apostolic ; for, if
Divine Wisdom had determined, as is not difficult to
believe, that the wonderful works which illuminate
the history of the first days of the Church should be
the best and highest, what was left to subsequent
times, by the very terms of the proposition, but
miracles which are but second best, which must ne
cessarily have belonged to some other and independent
system if they too were the best, and which admit
of belonging to the same system for the very reason
that they are not the best ?
7-
51. So much, then, on the general correspondence
between' the works of nature, on the one hand, and
the Miracles of sacred history, whether Biblical or
Ecclesiastical, viewed as one whole, on the other.
And while the physical system bears such an analogy
to the supernatural system, viewed in its Biblical and

154 Internal Character of
Ecclesiastical portions together, as forms a strong
argument in defence of the supernatural, it is, on the
other hand, so far unlike the Biblical portion of that
supernatural, when that portion is taken by itself, as to
protect the portion not Biblical from objections drawn
from any differences observable between it and the
portion which is Biblical. If it be true that the
Ecclesiastical Miracles are in some sense an innova
tion upon the idea of the Divine Economy, as im
pressed upon us by the Miracles of Scripture, it is at
least equally true that the Scripture Miracles also
innovate upon the impressions which are made upon
us by the order and the laws of the natural world ;
and as we reconcile our imagination, nevertheless,
to such deviation from the course of nature in the
Economy of Revelation, so surely we may bear with
out impatience or perplexity that the subsequent
history of Revelation should in turn diverge from
the path in which it originally commenced.11
d This is Middleton's ground in the following passage, with
which should be compared the passages from Hume in the
text : " The present question concerning the reality of the
miraculous powers of the primitive Church depends on the
joint credibility of the facts, pretended to have been produced
by those powers, and of the witnesses who attest them. If
either part be infirm, their credit must sink in proportion ; and
if the facts especially be incredible, must of course fall to the
ground, because no force of testimony can alter the nature of
things. The credibility of facts lies open to the trial of our
reason and senses, but the credibility of witnesses depends on

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 155
52. Hume argues against miracles generally,
" Though the Being to whom the miracle is ascribed
be, in this case, Almighty, it does not, upon that
account, become a whit more probable ; since it is
impossible for us to know the attributes or actions of
such a Being, otherwise than from the experience
which we have of His productions in the usual course
a variety of principles wholly concealed from us ; and though
in many cases it may reasonably be presumed, yet in none can
it certainly be known. For it is common with men, out of
crafty and selfish views, to dissemble and deceive ; or out of
weakness and credulity to embrace and defend with zeal what
the craft of others had imposed upon them ; but plain facts
cannot delude us — cannot speak any other language, or give
any other information but what flows from nature and truth.
The testimony, therefore, of facts, as it is offered to our senses
in this wonderful fabric and constitution of worldly things, may
properly be called the testimony of God Ifimself, as it carries
with it the surest instruction in all cases, and to all nations,
which in the ordinary course of His providence He has thought
fit to appoint for the guidance of human life.'' Pp. ix. x.
Again, " Our .first care should be to inform ourselves of the
proper nature and condition of those miraculous powers, . . .
as they are represented to us in the history of the Gospel ; for
till we have learned from those sacred records what they really
were, for what purposes granted, and in what manner exerted
by the Apostles and first possessors of them, we cannot form
a proper judgment on those evidences which are brought either
to confirm or confute their continuance in the Church, and
must dispute consequently at random, as chance or prejudice
may prompt us, about things unknown to us." P. xi.
Again, "The whole which the wit of man can possibly discover,
either of the ways or will of the Creator, must be acquired . . .
not by imagining vainly within ourselves what may be proper
or improper for Him to do, but by looking abroad and contem-

156 Internal Character of
of nature. "e And elsewhere he says, " The Deity is
known to us only by His productions. ... As
the universe shows wisdom and goodness, we infer
wisdom and goodness. As it shows a particular
degree of these perfections, we infer a particular
degree of them, precisely adapted to the effect
which we examine. But further attributes, or further
degrees of the same attributes, we can never be
authorized to infer or suppose, by any rules of just
reasoning."f And in a note he adds, " In general, it
may, I think, be established as a maxim, that where
any cause is known only by its particular effects, it
must be impossible to infer any new effects from that
cause. ... To say that the new effects proceed
only from a continuation of the same energy, which
is already known from the first effects, will not re
move the difficulty. For even granting this to be the
case, (which can seldom be supposed,) the very con
tinuation and exertion of a like energy, (for it is im
possible it can be absolutely the same,) I say, this
exertion of a like energy, in a different period of
space and time, is a very arbitrary supposition, and
what there cannot possibly be any traces of in the
plating what He has actitally done ; and attending seriously
to that revelation which He made of Himself from the begin
ning, and placed continually before our eyes, in the wonderful
works and beautiful fabric of this visible world." P. xxii.
6 Essay on Miracles, Part ii. cire. fin.
Essay on Providence.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 157
effects, from which all our knowledge of the cause is
originally derived. Let the inferred cause be exactly
proportioned, as it should be, to the known effect ;
and it is impossible that it can possess any qualities,
from which new or different effects can be inferred."
53. This is not the place to analyze a paradox
which is sufficiently refuted by the common sense of
a religious mind ; but the point which concerns us to
consider is, whether persons who, not merely question;
but prejudge the Ecclesiastical Miracles on the ground
of their want of resemblance, whatever that be, to
those contained in Scripture, — as if the Almighty
could not do in the Christian Church anything but
what He had already done at the time of its founda
tion, or under the Mosaic Covenant,- — whether such
reasoners are not siding with the sceptic who in the
above passages denies that the First Cause can act
supernaturally at all, because in nature He can but
act naturally, and whether it is not a happy incon
sistency by which they continue to believe the Scrip
ture record, while they reject the records of the
Church. 54. Indeed, it would not be difficult to show that
the miracles of Scripture are a far greater innovation
upon the economy of nature than the miracles of the
Church upon the economy of Scripture. There is
nothing, for instance, in nature at all to parallel and
mitigate the wonderful history of the assemblage of

158 Internal Character of
all animals in the Ark, or the multiplication of an
artificially prepared substance, such as bread. Walk
ing on the sea, or the resurrection of the dead, is a
plain reversal of its laws. On the other hand, the
narrative of the combats of St. Antony with evil
spirits is a development rather than a contradiction
of Revelation ; viz., as illustrating such texts as speak
of Satan being cast out by prayer and fasting. To be
shocked then at the miracles of Ecclesiastical History,
or to ridicule them for their strangeness, is no part of
a scriptural philosophy.
55. Nor can the argument from d priori ideas of
propriety be made available against Ecclesiastical
Miracles with more safety than the argument from
experience. This method of refutation, as well as the
other, (to use the common phrase,) proves too much.
Those who have condemned the miracles of the Church
by such a rule, have before now included in their con
demnation the very notion of a miracle altogether, as
the creation of barbarous and unphilosophical minds,
who knew nothing of the beautiful order of nature,
and as unworthy to be introduced into our contempla
tion of the providences of Divine Wisdom. A miracle
has been considered to argue a defect in the system of
moral governance, as if it were a correction or improve
ment of what is in itself imperfect or faulty, like a
patch of new cloth upon an old garment. The Pla-
tonists of old were influenced by something like this

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 159
feeling, as. if none but low and sordid persons would
either attempt or credit miracles truly such, and none
but quacks and impostors would profess them. The
only true miracles, in the conception of such a school,
are miracles of knowledge ; — words or deeds which
are the result of a greater insight into, or foresight of,
the course of nature, and are proofs of a liberal educa
tion and a cultivated and reflective mind.s It is easy
to see how a habit of this sort may grow upon scien
tific men, especially at this day, unless they are on
their guard against it. There is so much beauty,
majesty, and harmony in the order of nature, so much
to fill, satisfy, and tranquillize the mind, that by those
who are accustomed to the contemplation, the notion
of an infringement of it will at length be viewed as a
sort of profanation, and as even shocking, as the mere
dream of ignorance, the wild and atrocious absurdity
g Hence the charge against the Christians of magic, or
¦yoriTcla. Tertull. Apol. 23. Origen in Cels. i. 38, ii. 9.
Arnob. contr. Gent. i. Euseb. Dem. Ev. iii. 5 and 6, pp. 112,
130. August. Serm. xliii. 4, contr. Faust, xii. 45, Ep. cxxxviii.
fin. Julian calls St. Paul the greatest of rogues and conjurors,
tov ir6.vra.s Trdvraxov tous 7rw7rore yor/ras ko.1 6.ira.TeGiva.s inrep^aXKbfxevov
Jlavkov. Ap. Cyr. iii. p. 100. Apollonius professed a knowledge
of nature as the secret of his miracles. Vid. Philostr. Vit. Ap.
v. 12. Also Quaest. ad Orthod. 24, where Apollonius is said to
have done his miracles /card ttjv iiniTT-fip.-qv tCjv cpvaiKuiv Svvdp.ecnv,
not /card ttjv Bdav aiSevTiav. Philostratus illustrates this when he
seems to doubt whether the young woman was really dead,
whom Apollonius raised, iv. 45. [Vid. Kortholt. de Vit. et
Mor. Christ, c. 3, 4.]

160 Internal Character of
of superstition and enthusiasm, (if it is right to use
such language even in order to describe the thoughts
of others,) and as if analogous, to take another and
less serious subject, to some gross solecism, or inde
corum, or wanton violation of social usages or feelings.
We should be very sure, if we resolve on rejecting the
Ecclesiastical Miracles, that our reasons are better
than that false zeal for our Master's honour, which
such philosophers express for the honour of the Crea
tor, and which reminds us of the exclamation, " Be it
far from Thee, Lord: this shall not be unto Thee !" as
uttered by one who heard for the first time that doc
trine which to the world is foolishness.
8.
56. The question has hitherto been argued on the
admission, that a distinct line can be drawn in point of
character and circumstances between the Miracles of
Scripture and those of Church History ; but this is
by no means the case. It is true, indeed, that the
Miracles of Scripture, viewed as a whole, recommend
themselves to our reason, and claim our veneration,
beyond all others, by a peculiar dignity and beauty ;
but still it is only as a whole that they make this
impression upon us. Some of them, on the contrary,
fall short of the attributes which attach to them in
general, nay, are inferior in these respects to certain
ecclesiastical miracles, and are received only on the

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 1 6 1
credit of the system, of which they form part. Again,
specimens are not wanting in the history of the Church,
of miracles as awful in their character and as mo
mentous in their effects, as those which are recorded
in Scripture. The fire interrupting the rebuilding of
the Jewish temple, and the death of Arius, are in
stances, in Ecclesiastical History, of such solemn events.
On the other hand, difficult facts in the Scripture
history are such as these : — the serpent in Eden, the
Ark, Jacob's vision for the multiplication of his sheep,
the speaking of Balaam's ass, the axe swimming at
Elisha's word, the miracle on the swine, and various
instances of prayers or prophecies* in which, as in that
of Noah's blessing and curse, words which seem the
result of private feeling are expressly or virtually
ascribed to a Divine suggestion.
57. And thus, it would seem, there exists in matter
of fact that very connection and intermixture between
ecclesiastical and Scripture miracles, which, according
to— the analogy suggested in a former page, the rich
ness and variety of physical nature rendered probable.
Scripture history, far from being broadly separated
from ecclesiastical, does in part countenance what is
strange in the miraculous narratives of the latter, by
affording patterns and precedents for them itself. It
begins a series which has, indeed, its higher specimens
and its lower, but which still proceeds in the way of a
series, with a progress and continuation, without any
11

162 Internal Character of
sudden breaks and changes, or even any exact law of
variation according to the succession of periods. As
in the natural world the animal and vegetable king
doms imperceptibly melt into each other, so are there
mutual affinities and correspondences between the two
families of miracles as found in inspired' and uninspired
history, which show that, whatever may be their
separate peculiarities, yet as far as concerns their in
ternal characteristics, they admit of being parts of one
system. 58. For instance, there is not a more startling, yet
a more ordinary gift in the history of the first ages of
the Church than the power of exorcism ; while at the
same time it is open to much suspicion, both from
the comparative facility of imposture and the intrinsic
strangeness of the doctrine it inculcates. Yet, here
Scripture has anticipated the Church in all respects,
even going the length of testifying to the diabolical pos
session of brutes, which appears so extravagant when
introduced, as instanced above, into the life of Hila
rion by St. Jerome. Again, that relics should be the
instruments of exorcism is an aggravation of a doc
trine already difficult; yet we read in Scripture, "And
God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul,
so that from his body were brought unto the sick
handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed
from them, and the evil spirits went out of them."h
h Acts xix. 11, 12.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 1 63
Similar precedents for a supernatural presence in
things inanimate are found in the miracles wrought
by the touch of our Saviour's garments, not to insist
on what is told us about St. Peter's shadow. Again,
we have to take into account the resurrection of the
corpse which touched Elisha's bones, a work of
Divine Power, which, whether considered in its appal
ling greatness, the absence of apparent object, and
the means through which it was accomplished, we
should think incredible, with the now prevailing
notions of miraculous agency, were we not familiar
with it. Elijah's mantle is another instance of a
relic endued with miraculous power. Again, the
multiplication of the wood of the Cross (the fact of
which is not here determined, but must depend on
the testimony and other evidence producible) is but
parallel to Elisha's multiplication of the oil, and of
the bread and barley, and to our Lord's multiplica
tion of the loaves and fishes. Again, the account of
the consecrated host becoming a cinder in unworthy
hands is not so strange as the very first miracle
wrought by Moses, the first evidential miracle re
corded in Scripture, when his rod became a serpent,
and then a rod again ; nor stranger than our Lord's
first miracle, when water was turned into wine.
When the tree was falling upon St. Martin, he is said
to have caused it to whirl round and fall elsewhere
by the sign of the Cross ; is this more startling than

164 Internal Character of
Elisha's causing the iron axe-head to swim by throw
ing a stick into the water ?
59. It is objected by Middleton, that after the
decree of the Council of Laodicea, restricting exor
cism to such as were licensed by the Bishop, the
practice died away;1 this, indeed, implies a very re
markable committal or almost abandonment of a
Divine gift, supposing it such, to the discretion of its
human instruments ; but how does it imply more than
we read of in the Apostolic history of the Corinthian
Christians, who had so absolute a possession of their
supernatural powers that they could use them dis
orderly, or pervert them to personal ends ? The
miracles in Ecclesiastical History are often wrought
without human instruments, or by instruments but
partially apprehensive that they are such ; but did
not the rushing mighty wind, at Pentecost, come
down " suddenly" and unexpectedly ? and were not
the Apostles forthwith carried away by it, not in any
true sense using the gift, but compelled to speak
as the Spirit gave them utterance ? It is objected
that ecclesiastical miracles are not so distinct and
unequivocal as to have a claim to be accounted true,
but admit of being plausibly attributed to fraud,
collusion, or misstatement in narrators ; yet, in like
manner, St. Matthew tells us that the Jews persisted
in maintaining that the disciples had stolen away
1 Inquiry, pp. 95, 96.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 165
our Lord's Body, and He did not show Himself,
when risen, to the Jews ; and various other objec
tions, to which it is painful to do more than allude,
have been made to other parts of the sacred nar
rative. It is objected that St. Gregory's, St. Mar
tin's, or St. Hilarion's miracles were not believed
when first formally published to the world by
Nyssen, Sulpicius, and St. Jerome ; but it must be
recollected that Gibbon observes scoffingly, that
"the contemporaries of Moses and Joshua beheld
v/ith careless indifference the most amazing miracles,"
that even an Apostle, who had attended our Lord
through His ministry, did not believe his brethren's
Veport of His resurrection, and that St. Paul's super
natural power of punishing offenders was doubted at
Corinth by the very parties who had seen his miracles
and had been his converts. That alleged miracles,
then, should admit of doubt, or be what is called
" suspicious," is not at all inconsistent with their title
to be considered the immediate operation of Divine
Power. 60. It' is observable also, that this intercommunion
of miracles, if the expression may be used, which
exists between the respective supernatural agencies
contained in Scripture and in Church history, is seen
also in the separate portions of Scripture history. The
miracles of Scripture may be distributed into the
Mosaic, the Prophetical, and the Evangelical ; of which

1 66 Internal Character of
the first are mainly of a judicial and retributive cha
racter, and wrought on a large field ; the last . are
miracles of mercy ; and the intermediate are more or
less of a romantic or poetical cast. Yet, among .the
Mosaic we find the changing of the rod into a serpent,
and the sweetening of the water by a branch, which
belong rather to the second period ; and arnong the
Christian are the deaths of Ananias and Sapphira,
which resemble the awful acts of the first ; while
Philip's transportation by the Spirit, and the ship's
sudden arrival at the shore, might be ranked among
those of the second. 9-
61. And moreover this circumstance is worth con
sidering, that a sort of analogy exists between the
Ecclesiastical and Evangelical histories, and the Pro
phetical and Mosaic. The Prophetical and Ecclesias
tical are, each in its place, a sort of supplement to the
supernatural manifestations with which the respective
Dispensations open, and present to us a similar internal
character. And, whereas there was an interval be
tween the age of Moses and the revival of miraculous
power in the Prophets, though extraordinary provi
dences were never wholly suspended, so the Eccle
siastical gift is restricted in its operation in the
first centuries compared with the exuberant exercise
recorded of it in the fourth and fifth; and as the

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. ¦. 1 67
Prophetical miracles in a great measure belong to
the schools of Elijah and Elisha, so the Ecclesiastical
have a special connection with the ascetics and soli
taries, and the orders of families of which they were
patriarchs, with St. Antony, St. Martin, and St. Bene
dict, and other great confessors or reformers, who are
the antitypes of the Prophets. Moreover, much might
be said concerning the romantic character of the
Prophetical miracles. Those of Elisha in particular
are related, not as if parts of the history, but rathei
as his " Acta ; " as illustrations indeed of that double
portion of power gained for him by Elijah's prayer, and
perhaps with some typical reference to the times of
the Gospel, but still with a profusion and Variety very
like the luxuriance which offends us in the miraculous
narratives of ecclesiastical authors. Elisha begins by
parting Jordan with Elijah's mantle ; then he curses
the children, and bears destroy forty-two of them ;
then he supplies the kings of Judah, Israel, and Edom
with water in the wilderness, and gives them victory
over Moab ; then he multiplies the oil ; then he raises
the Shunammite's son ; then he renders the poisonous
pottage harmless by casting meal into it ; then he
multiplies the bread and barley ; then he directs
Naaman to a cure of his leprosy ; then he reads
Gehazi's heart, follows him throughout his act of
covetousness, and inflicts on him Naaman's leprosy;
then he makes the iron swim ; then he reveals to the

1 68 Internal Character of
king of Israel the counsels of Syria, and casts an
illusion before the eyes of his army ; then he pro
phesies plenty in the siege ; then he foretells Hazael's
future course. These wonderful acts are strung to
gether as the direct and formal subjects of the chapters
in which they occur : they have no continuity ; they
carry on no action or course of Providence. At length
Elisha falls sick, and, on the king's visiting him, pro
mises him a series of victories over the Syrians ; then
he dies and is buried, and by accident a corpse is
thrown into his grave ; and " when the man was let
down, and touched the bones of Elisha, he revived,
and stood up on his feet."k Surely it is not too
much to say, that after this inspired precedent there
is little in ecclesiastical legends of a nature to
offend as regards their matter ; their credibility turn
ing first on whether they are to be expected at all,
and next whether they are avouched on sufficient
evidence. 62. Or take again the history of Samson ; what
a mysterious wildness and eccentricity is impressed
upon it, upon the miracles which occur in it, and upon
its highly favoured though wayward subject! "At
this juncture," says a recent writer, speaking of the
low estate of the chosen people when Samson was
born, "the most extraordinary of the Jewish heroes
appeared ; a man of prodigious physical power, which
k 2 Kings xiii. 21.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 1 69
he displayed, not in any vigorous and consistent plan
of defence against the enemy, but in the wildest feats
of personal daring. It was his amusement to plunge
headlong into peril, from which he extricated himself
by his individual strength. Samson never appears at
the head of an army, his campaigns are conducted
in his own single person. As in those of the Grecian
Hercules and the Arabian Antar, a kind of comic vein
runs through the early adventures of the stout-hearted
warrior, in which love of women, of riddles, and of
slaying Philistines out of mere wantonness, vie for the
mastery. Yet his life began with marvel, and ended
in the deepest tragedy."1 The tone of this extract
cannot be defended ; yet what else has the writer done
towards the inspired narrative, but invest it in those
showy human colours which legendary writers from
infirmity, and enemies from malice, have thrown over
the miracles of the Church ? There is certainly an
aspect of romance in which Samson may be viewed,
though he was withal the instrument of a Divine Pre
sence ; and so again there may have been a divinity in
the acts and fortunes, and a spiritual perfection in the
lives, of the ancient Catholic hermits and mission
aries, in spite of whatever is wild, uncouth, and ex
travagant in their personal demeanour and conduct,
or rather in the record of them. Once more ; the
books of Daniel and Esther are very different in com-
Milman's History of the Jews, vol. i. p. 204.

1 70 Internal Character of
position and style from the earlier portions of the
sacred volume, and present a view of the miraculous
dealings of the Almighty with His Church, very much
resembling what we disparage in ecclesiastical legends,
or again in the historical portions of the so-called
Apocrypha, as if poetical or dramatic.
63. The two Economies then, the Prophetical and
the Ecclesiastical, thus resembling each other in their
character as well as their position in their two Cove
nants respectively, should any one urge, as was stated
in a former place,m that the Ecclesiastical Miracles
virtually form a new dispensation, we need not deny
it in the sense in which the Prophetical Miracles are
distinct from the Mosaic ; that is, not as if the Law
was in any respect or in any part repealed by the
Prophetical Schools, but that they, as well as other
works of God, had a character of their own, and,
as in other things, so in their miracles, were a new
exhibition of that Supernatural Presence which over
shadowed Israel from first to last. And it may be
added, that, as a gradual revelation of Gospel truth
accompanied the miracles of the Prophets, so to those
who admit the Catholic doctrines as enunciated in
the Creed, and commented on by the Fathers, the
subsequent expansion and variation of supernatural
agency in the Church, instead of suggesting difficul
ties, will seem to be in correspondence, as they are
m Supra, p. 115.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 171
contemporaneous, with the developments and addi
tions in dogmatic statements which have occurred
between the Apostolic and the present age, and which
are but a result and an evidence of spiritual life.
10.
64. Nor, lastly, is it any real argument against
admitting the Ecclesiastical Miracles on the whole, or
against admitting certain of them, that certain others
are rejected on all hands as fictitious or pretended.
It happens as a matter of course, on many accounts,
that where miracles are really wrought, miracles will
also be attempted, or simulated, or imitated, or fabled ;
and such counterfeits become, not a disproof, but a
proof of the existence of their prototypes, just as
hypocrisy and extravagant profession are an argument
for, and not against, the reality of virtue.11 It is
doubtless the tendency of religious minds' to imagine
mysteries and wonders where there are none; and
much more, where causes of awe really exist, will
they unintentionally misstate, exaggerate, and em
bellish, when they set themselves to relate what they
have witnessed or have heard.0 A fact is not dis
proved because the testimony is confused or insuffi*
'cient ; it is only unproved. And further, the imagi
nation, as is well known, is a fruitful cause of apparent
n Douglas' Crit. p. 19.
Camp. Miracl. p. 122. Jenkins' Christ. Rel. vol. ii. p. 455.

1 7 2 Internal Character of
miracles ; p and hence, wherever there are works
wrought which absolutely surpass the powers of na
ture, there are likely to be others which surpass its
ordinary action. It would be no cause for surprise
if, as the destruction of Sodom is said to have arisen
from volcanic influence, so in the multitude of cures
which the Apostles effected some were solely attribu
table to natural, but unusual, effects of faith. And if
Providence sometimes makes use of natural principles
even when miracles seem intended as evidence of His
immediate presence, much more is He likely to inter
mingle the ordinary and the extraordinary, when His
object is not to prove a revelation, to accredit a
messenger, or to certify a doctrine, but to confirm or
encourage the faithful, or to rouse the attention of un
believers. And it will be impossible to draw the line
between the two ; and the possibility of explaining-
some of th^m on natural principles will unjustly pre
judice the mind against accounts of those which cannot
be so explained.
65. Moreover, as Scripture expressly shows us,
wherever there is miraculous power, there will be
curious and interested bystanders who would fain
" purchase the gift of God " for their own aggrandise
ment, and " cast out devils in the Name of Jesus," and
who counterfeit what they have not really to exhibit,
and gain credit and followers among the ignorant and
p Le Moyne Miracl. pp. 486, 502. Douglas' Crit. p. 93, etc.

the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 173
perverse. The impostures, then, of various kinds which
from the first hour abounded in the Church 1 prove as
little against the truth of her miracles as against the
canonicity of her Scriptures. Yet here too pretensions
on the part of worthless men will be sure to scandalize
inquirers, and the more so if, as is not unlikely, such
pretenders manage to ally themselves with the Saints,
and have an historical position in the fight which is
made for the integrity or purity of the faith ; yet, St.
Paul was not less an Apostle, nor have Confessors
and Doctors been less his successors, because " as they
have gone to prayer " a spirit of Python has borne
witness to them as "the servants of the most high
God," and the teachers of " the way of salvation."
66. Nor is it any fair argument against Ecclesiastical
miracles, that for the most part they have a legendary
air, while the miracles contained in Scripture are on
the contrary so soberly, so gravely, so exactly stated ;
unless indeed it is an absurdity to contemplate a
gift of miracles without an attendant gift of inspiration
to record them. Were it not that the Evangelists
were divinely guided, doubtless we should have in
Scripture that confused mass of truth and fiction to
gether, which the Apocryphal Gospels exhibit, and to
which St. Luke seems to allude. I repeat, the cha
racter of facts is not changed because they are incor-
q Vid. Acts viii. 9; xvi. 17; xix. 13. Vid. Lucian. Peregr.
etc. ap. Middlct. Inqu. p. 23.

174 Internal Character of Ecclesiastical Mira
rectly reported ; distance of time and place only does
injury to the record of them. The Scripture miracles
were in themselves what they are to us now, at the
very time that the world was associating them with
the prodigies of Jewish strollers, heathen magicians
and astrologers, and idolatrous rites ; they would, have
been thus associated to this day, had not inspira
tion interposed ; yet, in spite of this, they would have
been deserving our serious attention as now, so far as we
were able to separate the truth from the falsehood.
And such is the state in which Ecclesiastical miracles
actually do come to us, because inspiration was nof
continued ; they are dimly seen in twilight and amid
shadows ; — let us not, then, quarrel with them on ac
count of a characteristic which is but the necessary
consequence of external circumstances.

Chapter IV.
ON THE STATE OF THE ARGUMENT IN BEHALF
OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL MIRACLES.
6y. ~\ 7ARIOUS able writers, Leslie, Paley, and
* Douglas, have laid down certain tests or
criteria of matters of fact, which may serve as guaran
tees that the miracles really took place which are
recorded in Scripture. They consider these criteria to
be of so rigid a nature that an alleged event which
satisfies them must necessarily have occurred, and that,
as their argument seems to imply, however great its
antecedent improbability. Thus they reply to objec
tions such as Hume's drawn from the uniformity of
nature ; not meeting them directly, but rather super
seding the necessity of considering them ; for what is
proved to be true, need not be proved to be pos
sible. Hume scruples not to use " miracle *' and " im
possibility " as convertible terms ; r Leslie before him,
r " What have we to oppose to such a cloud of witnesses
but the absolute impossibility or miraculoiis nature of the
events which they relate?" (Essay on Miracles.)

1 76 State of the Argument.
and Douglas after him, seem to answer, " Would you"
believe a miracle if you saw it? Now we are prepared
to offer evidence, if not as strong, still as convincing,
as ocular demonstration." Thus they escape from
the abstract argument by a controversial method of a
singularly practical, and as it may be called, English
character. 68. It would be well if such writers stopped here,
but it was hardly to be expected. Disputants are always
exposed to the temptation of being over-candid
towards objections which they think they have outrun;
they admit as facts or truths what they have shown
to be irrelevant as arguments. Thus, even were there
nothing of a kindred tone of mind in Hume, who has
assailed the Scripture miracles, and in some of our
friends who have defended them, it might have been
anticipated that the consciousness of possessing an
irresistible weapon in the contest would have led us to
treat the arguments of our opponents with a dangerous
generosity. But, unhappily, there is much in Protes
tant habits of thought actually to dispose our writers
to defer to a rationalistic principle of reasoning, the
force of which they have managed to evade in the
particular case. Hence, though they are earnest in
their protest against Hume's summary rejection of
all miraculous histories whatever, they make admis
sions, which only do not directly tell against the prin
cipal Scripture miracles, and do tell against all others,

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 177
They tacitly grant that the antecedent improbability
of miracles is at least so great that it can only be
overcome by the strongest and most overpowering
evidence ; that second-best evidence does not even
tend to prove them ; that they are absolutely incredi
ble up to the very moment that all doubt is decisively
set at rest ; that there can be no degrees of proof, no
incipient and accumulating arguments to recommend
them ; that no relentings of mind or suspense of judg
ment is justifiable, as various fainter evidences are
found to conspire in their favour; that they may be
scorned as fictions, if they are not to be venerated as
truths. 69. It looks like a mere truism to say that a fact is
not disproved, because it is not proved ; ten thousand
occurrences are ever passing, which leave no record
behind them, and do not cease to have been because
they are forgotten. Yet Bishop Douglas, in his de
fence of the New Testament Miracles in answer to
Hume, certainly assumes that no miracle is true which
has not been proved so, or that it is safe to treat all
miracles as false which are not recommended by evi
dence as strong as that which is adducible for the
Miracles of Scripture.
70. In estimating statements of fact, it is usual to
allow that various occurrences may be all true, which
rest upon very different degrees of evidence. It does
not prove that this passage of history is false and the
12

178 State of the Argument
fabrication of impostors, because that passage is
attested more distinctly and fully. Writers, however,
like Douglas, are constantly reminding us that we
need not receive the Ecclesiastical miracles, though we
receive those of the New Testament. But the question
is not whether we need not, but whether we ought not
to receive the former, as well as the latter ; and if it
really is the case that we ought not, surely this must
be in consequence of some positive reasons, not of a
mere inferiority in the evidence. It is plain, then, that
such reasoners, though they deny that an a priori
ground can be maintained in fact against the miracles
of Scripture, still at least agree with Hume in thinking
such a ground does exist, and that it is' conclusive
against ecclesiastical miracles even antecedent to the
evidence. 71. In the title of his Dissertation, Douglas pro
mises -us " a criterion by which the true miracles re
corded in the New Testament are distinguished from
the spurious miracles of the Pagans and Papists ;" yet,
when he proceeds to state in the body of the work the
real object to which he addresses himself, we find that
it relates quite as much to the evidence for either class
of miracles as to the fact itself of their occurrence.
He says, that whereas " the accounts which have been
published to the world of miracles in general," are
concerned with events which are supernatural either
in themselves or under their circumstances, while the

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 179
latter class can be explained on natural principles, the
former " may, from the insufficiency of the evidence
produced in support of them, be justly suspectedto have
never happened. "s But how does insufficiency in the
evidence create a positive prejudice against an alleged
fact ? How can things depend on our knowledge of
them ? This writer must mean that evidence of an
inferior kind is insufficient to overcome a certain pre
existing objection which attaches to the very notion
of these miracles ; otherwise even slight evidence is
sufficient to influence our minds, as Bishop Butler
would tell us, so far as it is positive, and evidence of
this defective kind may constitute the very trial of
our obedience.
72. Douglas continues : " I flatter myself, that the
evidence produced in their support," — in support of
the miracles of " Pagans and Papists," — " will appear
to be so very defective and insufficient, as justly to
warrant our rejecting them as idle tales that never
happened, and the inventions of bold and interested
deceivers'.'* There are many reasons to warrant our
disbelieving alleged facts, and ascribing them to im
posture; for instance, if the evidence is contradictory,
or attended by suspicious circumstances ; if the
witnesses are of bad character, or strong inducements
to fraud exist ; but it is difficult to see how its mere
s Page 25.
' Page 26.

180 State of the Argument
insufficiency or defectiveness is a justification of so de
cided a step. The direct effect of evidence is to create
a presumption, according to its strength, in favour of
the fact attested ; it does not appear how it can create
a presumption the other way. The real explanation
of this mode of writing certainly must be, that the
writer takes it for granted that all miraculous ac
counts are already in a manner self-condemned, as
being miraculous, till they are proved ; and that
evidence offered for them, which does not amount to
a proof, is but involved in that existing prejudice.
There is no medium then ; the testimony must either
prevail or be scouted ; it is certainly a fraud, if it is
not an overpowering demonstration.
73. But the author in question scarcely leaves us in
doubt of his meaning, when he avails himself of the
following maxim of Dr. Middleton's : " I have already
observed," he says, " that the testimony supporting
[miracles] must be free from every suspicion of fraud
and imposture. And the reason is this : the history
of miracles (to make use of the words of an author
whose authority you will think of some weight) is of
a kind totally different from that of common events ;
the one to be suspected always of course without the
strongest evidence to confirm it ; the other to be ad
mitted of course without as strong reason to suspect
it. So that, wherever the evidence urged for miracles
leaves grounds for a suspicion of fraud and imposition,

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles.

181

the very suspicion furnishes sufficient reasons for disbe
lieving them. And what I shall offer under this head
will make it evident,, that those miracles which the
Protestant Christian thinks himself at liberty to reject
have always- been so insufficiently attested as to leave
full scope for fraud and imposition."" That is, we
may ascribe a story to fraud,, whenever it is not abso
lutely impossible so to ascribe it ; we may summarily
reject and vilify all evidence up to such evidence
as is a moral demonstration, though to such we must
immediately yield, because we cannot help it ; and
this as a matter " of course." All this surely implies
the existence of some deep latent prejudice in the
writer's mind- against miraculous occurrences, consi
dered in themselves ;. else it is not a reasonable mode
of arguing.
74. The Bishop continues in the same strain to "lay
down a few general rules by which we may try those
pretended miracles, one and all, wherever they occur,
and which may set forth the grounds on which we sus-
" How much more cautious is Jortin ! " Though miracles,"
he says, " may be wrought in secret, and cannot be disproved
only because they were seen by few, yet they often afford
motives for suspicion, and a wise inquirer would perhaps sus
pend his assent in such cases, and pass no judgment about
them." (Eccl. History, Works, vol. ii. p. 3, ed. 1810.) Again,
" As far as the subsequent miracles mentioned by Christian
writers fall short of the distinguishing characters belonging to
the works of Christ and His Apostles, so far they must fail
of giving us the same full persuasion and satisfaction."
(P. 20.)

1 82 State of the Argument
pect them false!' v And then, " by way of illustration,"
he selects three, telling us that we suspect them false,
or "we may suspect them false," when the existing
accounts of miracles were not published till long after
the time when, or not at the place where, they are said
to have occurred ; or, at least, if it seems probable that.
they were suffered to get into circulation without ex
amination at the time and place. Here of course he
does but act up to Middleton's bold principle which
he has adopted ; he considers himself at liberty to bid
defiance and offer resistance to all evidence, till he is
fairly subdued by it, till it is impossible to doubt, and
no merit to believe ; while he would never reject or
impute fraud to a record of ordinary events, merely
because it was published in a foreign country, or a
hundred years after the events in question, however he
might justly consider such circumstances to weaken
the force of the evidence.
75. In a subsequent page of his work he speaks still
more pointedly : " When the reporters of miracles,"
he says, " content themselves with general assertions
and vague claims to a miraculous power, without ever
attempting to corroborate them by descending to par
ticular facts, and leave us strangely in the dark as to
the persons by whom, the witnesses before whom, and
the objects upon whom these miraculous powers are
said to be ' exercised, omitting every circumstance
'' Page 27.

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 1 83
necessary to be related by them before any inquiry
can be made into the truth of ' the pretension ; when
miracles, I say, are reported in this imsatisfactory
manner, (and instances of miracles reported on the spot
by contemporary writers, in such a manner, might be
mentioned,) in this case it would be the height of credu
lity to pay any regard to them in a distant age, because
no regard could possibly be paid to them in their
own."1 Yet it does not appear how this " unsatisfac
tory manner " in the report can touch the events re
ported ; if they took place, they were before and quite
independent of the evidence at present existing for
them, be it greater or less ; our knowledge or igno
rance does not create or annihilate facts.
16. Now these passages from Bishop Douglas have
been drawn out, not simply with a view of criticising
him, but in order to direct attention to the fact which
he illustrates, viz., that our feeling towards the Eccle-
sisatical Miracles turns much less on the evidence pro
ducible for them, than on our view concerning their
antecedent probability. If we think such interposi
tions of Providence likely or not unlikely, there is quite
enough evidence existing to convince us that they
really do occur ; if we think them as unlikely as they
appear to Douglas, Middleton, and others, then even
evidence as great as that which is producible for
the miracles of Scripture would not be too much,
* Page 50.

1 84 State of the Argument
nay, perhaps not enough, to conquer an inveterate,
deep-rooted, and (as it may be called) ethical incre
dulity. yj. It shall here be assumed that this incredulity
is a fault ; and it is the result of a state of mind which
has been prevalent among us for some generations,
and from which we are now but slowly extricating
ourselves. We have been accustomed to believe that
Christianity is little more than a creed or doctrine,
introduced into the world once for all, and then left
to itself, after the manner of human institutions, and
under the same ordinary governance with them, stored
indeed with hopes and fears for the future, and con
taining certain general promises of aid for this life, but
unattended by any special Divine Presence or any im
mediately supernatural gift. To minds habituated to
such a view of Revealed Religion, the miracles of eccle
siastical history must needs be a shock, and almost an
outrage, disturbing their feelings and unsettling their
most elementary notions and thoroughly received
opinions. They are eager to find defects in the evi
dence, or appearances of fraud in the witnesses, as a
relief to their perplexity, and as an excuse for rejecting,
as if on the score of reason, what their heart and
imagination have rejected already. Or they are too
firmly persuaded of the absurdity, as they consider it,
which such pretensions on the part of the Church in
volve, to be moved by them at all ; and they content

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 185
themselves with coldly demanding to know points
which cannot now be known, or to be satisfied about
difficulties which never will be cleared up, before they
can be asked to take interest in statements which they
consider so unreasonable. And certainly they are
both philosophical and religious in thus acting, grant
ing that the Lord of all is present with Christians only
in the way of nature, as with His creatures all over
the earth. On the other hand, if we believe that
Christians are under an extraordinary Dispensation,
such as Judaism was, and that the Church is a super
natural ordinance, we shall in mere consistency be
disposed to treat even the report of miraculous occur
rences with seriousness, from our faith in a Present
Power adequate to their production. Nay, if we only
go so far as to realize what Christianity is, when con
sidered merely as a creed, and what stupendous over
powering facts are involved in the doctrine of a Divine
Incarnation, we shall feel that no miracle can be great
after it, nothing strange or marvellous, nothing beyond
expectation.

yS. All this applies to- the view we shall take of the
nature of the facts which are laid before us, as well as
of the character of the evidence. If we disbelieve the
divinity of the Church, then we shall do our best to
deny that the facts attested are miraculous, evea

1 86 State of the Argument
admitting them to be true. " Though our not know
ing on whom, or by whom, or before whom, the mira
cles recorded by the Fathers of the second and third
centuries were wrought," says Douglas, "should be
allowed not to destroy their credit (though this is a
concession which very few will make . . . ), yet the
facts appealed to are of so ambiguous a kind, that,
granting they did happen, it will remain to be decided,
by a consideration of the circumstances attending the
performance of them, whether there was any miracle
in the case or no." y Certainly it is a rule of philoso
phy to refer effects, if possible, to known causes, rather
than to imagine a cause for the occasion ; and, on the
other hand, to be suspicious of alleged facts for which
no cause can be assigned, or which are unaccountable.
If, then, there is nothing in the Church more than in
any other society of men, it is natural to attribute
the miracles alleged to have been wrought in it to
natural causes, where that is possible, and to disparage
the evidence where it is not so. But if the Church be
possessed of supernatural powers, it is not unnatural
to refer to these the facts reported, and to feel the
same disposition to heighten their marvellousness as
otherwise is felt to explain it away. Thus our view of
the evidence will practically be decided by our views
of theology. There are two providential systems in
operation among us, the visible and the invisible, in-
y Page 228.

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 187
tersecting, as it were, each other, and having a certain
territory in common ; and in many cases we do not
know the exact boundaries of each, as again we do not
know the minute details of those facts which are as
cribed by their reporters to a miraculous agency. For
instance, faith may sometimes be a natural cause of
recovery from sickness, sometimes a miraculous instru
ment ; the application of oil may be a mere expedient
of medical art, or parallel to the application of water
in Baptism. The Martyrs have before now found red-
hot iron, on its second application, even grateful to
their seared limbs ; on the other hand, cases of a similar
kind are said to have occurred where religion was not
in question, and where a divine interposition cannot
be conjectured. Sudden storms and as sudden calms
on the lake of Gennesareth might be of common occur
rence ; yet the particular circumstances under which
the waters were quieted at our Lord's word may have
been sufficient to convince beholders that it was a
miracle. The Red Sea may have been ordinarily
exposed to the influence of the East Wind, and never
theless the separation of its waters, as described in
the Book of Exodus, may have required a super
natural influence. In these and numberless other
instances men will systematize facts in their own
way, according to their knowledge, opinions, and
wishes, as they are used to do in all matters which
come before them ; and they will refer them to

1 88 State of the Argument
causes which they see or believe, in spite of their
being referable to other causes about which they
are ignorant or sceptical.
79. When, then, controversialists go through the ex
isting accounts of ecclesiastical miracles, and explain
one after another on the hypothesis of natural causes;
when they resolve a professed vision into a dream, a
possession into epilepsy or madness, a prophecy into
a sagacious conjecture, a recovery into the force of
imagination, they are but expressing their own dis
belief in the Grace committed to the Church ; and of
course they are consistent in denying its outward
triumphs, when they have no true apprehension of its
inward power. Those, on the other hand, who realize
that the bodies of the Saints were in their lifetime the
Temples of the Holiest, and are hereafter to rise again,
will feel no offence at the report- of miracles wrought
through them ; nor ought those who believe, in the
existence of evil spirits to have any difficulty at the
notion of demoniacal possession and exorcism. And
it may be taken as a general truth, that where there is
an admission of Catholic doctrines, there no prejudice
will exist against the Ecclesiastical Miracles ; while
those who disbelieve the existence among us of the
hidden Power, will eagerly avail themselves of every
plea for explaining away its open manifestations. All
that can be objected here is, that miracles which admit
of this double reference to causes natural and super-

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 1 89 .
natural, taken by themselves and in the first instance,
are not evidence of Revealed Religion ; but I have
nowhere maintained that they are. Yet, though not
part of the philosophical basis of Christianity, they
may be evidence still to those who admit the Divine
Presence in the. Church, and in proportion as they
realize it ; they may be evidence in combination with
more explicit miracles, or when viewed all together in
their cumulative force ; they may confirm or remind
of the Apostolic miracles ; they may startle, they may
spread an indefinite awe over certain transactions or
doctrines ; they may in various ways subserve the pro
bation of individuals to whom they are addressed,
more fully than occurrences of a more marked charac
ter. The mere circumstance that they do not carry
their own explanation with them is no argument
against them, unless we would surrender the most
sacred and awful events of our religion to the un
believers As the admission of a Creator is necessary
for the argumentative force of the miracles of Moses
or St. Paul, so does the doctrine of a Divine Presence
in the Church supply what is ambiguous in the mira
cles of St. Gregory Thaumaturgus or St. Martin.
z Mera Tavra irpoffajTro-jroiet lovScuov ai5r$ dia\eybp.eiiov tQ. 'Iijctou kclI
i\£yXovTa avrbv . . (is ir\ao-a.iUvov avrou tt\v e/c Trapdenov yiveffi.ii ....
tp'/jffi Si avT-fiv KCtl virb tov y^p.avTos, riKTOvos T-qv rixvy\v ^(/7"°?» e^edtrdaL,
i\eyxOelo-ati uis p.ep.ot.xevl1^v fiv' e^ra ^T64, &s eK[3\7jdelja. v-rrb tov avSpbs,
nai Tr\avup.ivr) dW/xws o-kotiov eyivvt\ae rbv \-qaovv. Orig. contr. Cels.

1 90 State of the Argument
3-
80. The course of these remarks has now sufficiently
shown that in drawing out the argument in behalf of
ecclesiastical miracles, the main point to which atten
tion must be paid is the proof of their antecedent pro-
bability.a If that is established, trie task is nearly
accomplished. If the miracles alleged are in harmony
with the course of Divine Providence in the world, and
with the analogy of faith as contained in Scripture, if it
is possible to account for them, if they are referable to
a known cause or system, and especially if it can be
shown that they are recognized, promised, or predicted
in Scripture, very little positive evidence is necessary
to induce us to listen to them or even accept them, if
not one by one, at least viewed as a collective body.
In that case they are but the natural effects of super
natural agency, and Middleton's canon, which Douglas,
a " Men will be inclined to determine this controverted ques
tion according to their preconceived notions and their accus
tomed way of thinking ; for there appears to be a sort of
fatality in opinions of this kind, which, when once taken up,
are seldom laid down." (Jortin, ibid. p. 24.) Yet he says
elsewhere of Theophilus, an Arian missionary, " I blame not
Tillemont for rejecting all these miracles, which seem to have
been rumours raised and spread to serve a party ; but the true
reason of his disbelief is, that they were Arian miracles ; and
if they had been reported concerning Athanasius, all difficul
ties- would have been smoothed over and accounted of small
moment." (P. 219.) As if a miracle wrought by Athanasius
was not more likely than miracles wrought by an Arian, • though
a missionary.

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 191
as above quoted, adopts to their disadvantage, becomes
their protection. Then "the history of miracles,"
instead of being "suspected always of course, without
the strongest evidence to confirm it," is at first sight
almost "to be admitted of course, without a strong
reason to suspect it ; " such suspicions as attach to it
arising from our actual experience of fraud, not from
difficulties in its subject matter. If " the tabernacle of
God is with men, and He will dwell with them;" if the
Church is " the kingdom of heaven ; " if our Lord is
with His disciples "alway, even unto the end of the
world ; " if He promised His Holy Spirit to be to them
what He Himself was when visibly present, and if
miracles were one special token of His Presence when
on earth; if moreover miracles are expressly mentioned
as tokens of the promised Comforter ; if St. Paul
speaks of " mighty signs and wonders by the power of
the Spirit of God," and of his "speech and preaching"
being " in demonstration of the Spirit and of power,"
and of " diversities of gifts but the same Spirit," and
of " healing," " working of miracles," and "prophecy,"
as among His gifts ; surely we have no cause to be
surprised at hearing supernatural events reported in
any age, and though we may freely exercise our best
powers of inquiry and judgment on such and such re
ports, as they come before us, yet this is very different
from hearing them with prejudice, and examining them
with contempt or insult.

192 Slate of the Argument
81. This Essay, indeed, is not the place for doctrinal
discussions : there is one text, however, to which
attention may be drawn, without deviating into
theology, in consequence of what may be called its
historical .character, which on other accounts also
makes it more to our purpose, — our Lord's charge to
His disciples at the end of St. Mark's Gospel. It
might in truth have been anticipated that, among the
promises with which He animated His desponding
disciples when He was leaving them, some mention
would be made of those supernatural powers which
had been the most ready proof of His own divinity,
and the most awful of the endowments with which
during His ministry He had invested them. Nor does
He disappoint the expectation ; for in the passage
alluded to He distinctly announces a continuation of
these pledges of His favour, and that without fixing
the term of it. At the very time apparently when He
said to them, "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the
end of the world," He also made two announcements,
one for this life, the other for the life to come. " He
that believeth and is baptized shall be saved," was for
the future ; and the present promise, which concerns
us here, ran thus : " These signs shall follow them that
believe ; In My Name shall they cast out devils ; they
shall speak with new tongues ; they shall take up ser
pents ; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not
hurt them ; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 193
shall recover." Now let us see what presumption is
created or suggested by this passage in behalf of the
miraculous passages of Ecclesiastical History as we
have received them.
82. First, let it be observed, five gifts are here men
tioned as specimens of our Lord's bequest to His dis
ciples on His departure : exorcism, speaking with new
tongues, handling serpents, drinking poison without
harm, and healing the sick. When our Lord first sent
out the Apostles to preach during His ministry, He
had specified four : " Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers,
raise the dead, cast out devils." Comparing these two
passages together, we find that two gifts are common
to both of them, and thereby stand out as the most
characteristic and prominent constituents of the super
natural endowment. It is observable, again, that these
two gifts, of which there is this repeated mention, are
not so wonderful or so decisively miraculous as those
of which mention only occurs in one of the two texts.
The power of exorcism and of healing is committed
by our Lord to the Apostles, both when He first calls
them, and when He is leaving them ; but they are
promised the gift of tongues only on their second mis
sion, and that of raising the dead only on the first. This
does not prove that they could not raise the dead when
our Lord had left them ; indeed, we know in matter of
fact that they had, and that they exercised, the power;
but it is natural to suppose that a stress is laid on what is
13

194 State of the Argument
mentioned twice, and to form thence some idea, in con
sequence, of the predominant character of their mira
culous endowment, when it was actually brought into
exercise. In accordance with this anticipation, what
ever it is worth in itself, St. Matthew heads his report
of our Lord's charge to His Apostles on their first
mission with mention of these very two gifts, and these
only : " And when He had called unto Him His
twelve Disciples, He gave them power against unclean
spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sick
ness and all manner of disease!' And in like manner
when the Seventy are sent, these two gifts, and these
only, are specified by St. Luke as imparted to them ;
our Lord saying to them, " Heal the sick," and they
answering, " Lord, even the devils are subject unto us
through Thy Name."
83. Further, when we turn to the history of the Book
of Acts we find the general tenor of the Apostles'
miracles to be just such as these passages in the Gospels
would lead us to expect; that is, were a Jew or heathen
of the day, who had a fair opportunity of witnessing
their miracles, to be asked what those miracles con
sisted in, the general impression left by them on his
mind, and the best account which he could give of
them would be, that they were the healing the sick and
casting out devils. We have indeed instances recorded
of their raising the dead, but only two in the whole
book, those of Tabitha and Eutychus ; and of these

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 195
the latter was almost a private act, and wrought ex
pressly for the comfort of the brethren, not for the con
viction of unbelievers ; and though the former was the
means of converting many in the neighbourhood, yet it
was wrought at Joppa, among a number of " widows"
and "saints," not in Jerusalem, where the jealous eyes
of enemies would have been directed upon it. In
the same book there are three instances of the gift of
tongues, at Pentecost, in Cornelius's house, and at Ephe-
sus on the confirmation of St. John's disciples. There
is one instance of protection from the bite of serpents,
that of St. Paul at Melita. There is no instance of
cleansing leprosy, or of drinking poison without harm.
With this frugality in the display of their highest gifts
is singularly contrasted the bountifulness of the Apos
tles in exercising their powers of healing and exorcising.
" They brought forth the sick into the streets, and laid
them on beds and couches, that at the least the shadow
of Peter passing by might overshadow some of them.
There came also a multitude out of the cities round
about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and them that
were vexed with unclean spirits ; and they were healed
every one!' Again, when St. Philip went down to Sa
maria, and " the people with one accord gave heed unto
those things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing
the miracles which he did," what were the particular
gifts which he exercised ? the inspired writer continues,
" For unclean spirits, crying with loud voice, came out

196 State of the Argument
of many that were possessed with them ; and many
taken with, palsies, and that were lame, were healed.
And there was great joy in that city." Again, we read
of St. Paul, in a later part of the same book, as has been
already quoted in another connection, that " from his
body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or
aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the
evil spirits went out of them."b
84. If there is one other characteristic gift in the
Book of Acts in addition to these, it is the gift of visions
and divine intimations. And, as if to make up for our
Lord's silence concerning it in the Gospel of St. Mark,
St. Peter opens the sacred history of the Acts with a re
ference to the Prophet Joel's promise of the time, when
" their sons and their daughters should prophesy, and
their young men should see visions, and their old men
should dream dreams ;'' an announcement of which the
narrative which follows abundantly records the fulfil
ment. St. Stephen sees our Lord before his martyr
dom ; the Angel directs St. Philip to go towards Gaza,
and the Holy Spirit Himself bids him join himself to
the Ethiopian's chariot ; St. Paul is converted by a
vision of our Lord ; St. Peter has the vision of the clean
and unclean beasts, and Cornelius is addressed by an
Angel ; Angels release first the Apostles, then St. Peter
from prison ; " a vision appeared to Paul in the night,
there stood a man of Macedonia ; " at Corinth Christ
b Acts v. 15, 16 ; viii. 6 — 8 ; xix. 12.

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 197
"spake to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid ;"
A-gabus and St. Philip's four daughters prophesy ; in
prison " the Lord stood by Paul, and said, Be of good
cheer ; " on board ship an Angel stood by him, saying,
"Fear not, Paul, thou must be brought before Caesar." c
85. Such is the general character of the miracles of
the Book of Acts ; and next let it be observed, such is
the character of our Lord's miracles also, as they would
strike the bulk of spectators. He raises indeed the dead
three times, He feeds the multitude in the desert, He
cleanses the leprosy, He gives sight to the blind, oh
various but still definite occasions ; but how different
is the language used by the Evangelists when His
powers of healing and exorcising are spoken of ! We
read of " a great midtitude of people out of all Judea
and Jerusalem, and from the sea coast of Tyre and
Sidon, which came to hear Him and to be healed of
their diseases ; and they that were vexed with unclean
spirits ; and they were healed. And the whole mul
titude sought to touch Him ; for there went virtue out
of Him, and healed them all!' Again, " Whitherso
ever He entered, into villages, or cities, or country, they
laid the sick in the streets, and besought Him that they
might touch if it were but the corner of His garment ;
and as many as touched Him were made whole"
Again, " They brought unto Him all sick people that
were taken with divers diseases and torments, and
c Acts vii. 56 ; viii. 26, 29 ; ix. 3 — 6 ; x. 3, 10, etc.

ig8 Stale of the Argument
those that were possessed with devils, and those that
were lunatic, and those that had the palsy ; and He
healed them."d It may be added that of other mi
raculous occurrences in the Gospels none are more
frequent than visions and voices, from the Angel which
appeared to Zacharias to the vision of Angels seen by
the women after our Lord's resurrection ; as is obvious
without proof.
86. It appears, then, that the two special powers
which were characteristic, as of our Lord's miraculous
working, so also of His Apostles after Him, were ex
orcism and healing ; and moreover that these were in
matter of fact the two gifts especially promised to the
Apostles above other gifts. It appears, also, that if
one other gift must be selected from the Gospels and
Book of Acts as of greater prominence than the rest
it will be the gift of visions ; so that cures, exorcisms,
and visions are on the whole the three distinguishing
specimens of Divine Power, by which our Lord
authenticated to the world the Religion He bestowed
upon it. Now it has already been observed2 that
these are the very three especially claimed by the
Primitive Church ; while, as to the more stupendous
miracles of raising the dead, giving sight to the blind,
cleansing lepers, and the like, of these certainly she
affords instances also, but very rarely, as if after the
d Luke vi. 17—19 ; Mark vi. 56 ; Matt. iv. 24.
2 [N. 30, supra.]

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 199
manner of Scripture. This surely is a remarkable coin
cidence ; and is the rather to be dwelt upon, because
those who consider the vagueness of the language with
which the ecclesiastical miracles are attested, as a proof
that they were merely the fabrication of fraud or credu
lity, have to explain how it was that, while the parties
accused were exercising their powers of imagination or
imposture, they did not embellish their pages with
similar vague statements of miracles of a more awful
character, even from the mere love of variety, instead of
confining themselves to those which in appearance
at least were shared with them by Jews and heathen.
87. Nor can it reasonably be urged that their ac
quaintance with Scripture suggested to them in this
matter an imitation of the Divine procedure as there
recorded ; because Scripture does not on the face of it
impress upon the reader the fact which has been here
pointed out. The actual course of the events which
Scripture relates is one thing, and the course of the
narrative is another; for the sacred writers do not
state events with that relative prominence in which
they severally occurred in fact. Inspiration has inter
fered to select and bring into the foreground the most
cogent instances of Divine interposition, and has iden
tified them by a number of distinct details ; on the
other hand, it has cdvered up from us the " many
other signs " which "Jesus did in the presence of His
disciples," " the which, if they should be written every

200 State of the Argument
one, even the world itself," as St. John speaks, "could
not contain the books that should be written." And
doubtless there are doctrinal reasons also for this cir
cumstance, if we had means of ascertaining them. But
so it is, that the prima facie appearance of the Gospel
Miraclesdoesnot so correspond to that of the Ecclesias
tical Miracles, as probably it would have corresponded,
had St. John, for instance, given us a description of
the second and third centuries, instead of St. Justin
and Origen, or had Sulpicius described the Miracles
of the Apostles at Jerusalem or Ephesus.
4-
88. And now, if this representation has any truth in
it, if our Lord, in the passage of St. Mark in question,
promised five gifts to His disciples, two of which were
those of exorcism and healing; if these same two, dis
tinguished in other places of the Gospels above the
rest, are the prominent external signs of power in the
history both of our Lord and of His Apostles ; if these
particular Miracles are the special instruments of the
conversion of whole multitudes ; if on account of the
cures and exorcisms wrought by the twelve Apostles
" believers were the more added to the Lord, multi
tudes both of men and women ;" if on St. Philip's cast
ing out devils, and curing palsy and lameness, " the
people with one accord gave heed," and " there was
great joy in. that city ;" if when an evil spirit had con-

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 201
fessed, " Jesus I know, and Paul I know, but who are
ye ? " " fear fell on them all," and " the Name of the
Lord Jesus was magnified," and "the word of God
grew mightily and prevailed ;" what is to be said of
those modern Apologists for Christianity who do their
best to prove that these phenomena have nothing neces
sarily miraculous in them at all ? So much is evident
at once, that had they been the persons encountered
by these miracles of the Apostles, had they been the
Samaritans to whom St. Philip came, or the Ephesians
who were addressed by St. Paul, they would have
thought it their duty to have felt neither " much joy"
with the one, nor " fear" with the other ; and that, if
Samaritans and Ephesians had acted on the modern
view of what is rational and what is evidence, what
sound judgment and what credulity, Christianity
would not have made way and prospered, but we all
should have been heathen at this day.
89. Bishop Douglas, for instance, observes, that the
circumstance that the Fathers allow that " cures of
diseases, particularly of demoniacs by exorcising
them," " were exercised by pagans with the assistance
of their demons and gods," and admit that " there were
exorcists among the Jews and Gentiles, who by the
use of certain forms of words, used as charms, and by
the practice of certain rites, cast out devils, as well as
the Christian exorcists," that this circumstance " some
may think puts these feats of jugglers and impostors.

! I I

202 State of the Argument
upon the same footing of credibility with the works
ascribed to Christians"6: — why not with the works
ascribed to Apostles ? Again he urges, that " the
cures ascribed to the prayers of Christians, to the im- '
position of their hands, etc., in those early times, might,
for aught we know, be really brought about in a natural i
way, and be accounted for in the same way in which
we have accounted for those ascribed to the Abbe
Paris, and those attributed by the superstitious Papists
to the intercession of the Saints" : — perhaps the acute
unbelievers of Corinth or Ephesus by a parallel argu
ment justified their rejection of St. Paul. At Ephesus,
when the demoniac leapt on the Jewish exorcists, " and
overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that
they fled out of that house naked and wounded,"
" fear" in consequence "fell on all the Jews and Greeks
also dwelling at Ephesus ;" but the Bishop would have
taught them that " a few grimaces, wild gestures, dis
ordered agitations, and blasphemous exclamations,
suited to the character of the supposed infernal in
habitants, constitute all we know of their disease; and
consequently, as all these symptoms are ambiguous,
and may be assumed at pleasure by an impostor, a
collusion between the exorcist and the person exor
cised will account for the whole transaction, and every
one who would avoid the character of being super-
stitiously credulous will naturally account for it in
- Page 233—236.

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 203
this manner, rather than by supposing that any su
pernatural cause intervened." f Such is this author's
judgment of one of the two exhibitions of miraculous
power with which our Saviour specially and singularly
gifted His Apostles, and by which they, in matter
of fact, converted the world. The question is not,
whether in particular cases its apparent exercise may
not be suspicious and inconclusive, for Douglas is
speaking against the gift as such ; so that a heathen
of Ephesus would have been justified on his principles
in demanding of St. Paul to see a man raised from the
dead, before he believed in Christ. And such was
the nature of the demand made by Autolycus upon
St. Theophilus at the end of the second century, and
Middleton and Gibbon justify it, and seem moreover
to consider the mere silence of Theophilus to be a
proof that such a miracle was utterly unknown in his
days, as if resurrections abounded in the Acts.s
90. Again, St. Peter cured ^Eneas of the palsy,
" and all that dwelt at Lydda and Saron saw him,
and turned to the Lord ; '' but the Bishop would have
1 Page 146. Douglas is speaking here primarily of the
Church of Rome ; afterwards he apparently refers to the pas
sage when speaking of the Primitive Church, p. 236.
g Defecere etiam mortuorum excitationes . Certe Autolyco
roganti ut vel unum ostenderet qui fuisset e mortuis revocatus,
ita respondit Theophilus quasi vel unum demonstrare minime
potuerit. Dodw. in Iren. Dissert, ii. 44. Jortin is more cau
tious. "It is probable," h.e says, " from his [Theophilus's]
silence, that he had heard of no instance of such a miracle in

204 State of the Argument
advised them to wait till they had seen Tabitha
raised ; because " palsies, it is well known, arise from
obstructions of the spirits that circulate in the nerves,
so that their influx into the muscles is impeded, or
from obstructions of the arterious blood. Nothing
more, therefore, was required here than to remove
that obstruction."11
91. We read in Scripture of the sudden cure of the
dropsy ; but the Bishop observes, " That enthusiasm
should warm its votaries to a holy madness, and ex
cite the wildest transports and agitations throughout
their whole frame, is an effect which, in a country so
fruitful of this production as is ours (though enthu
siasm be the product of every soil and of every re
ligion), must be consistent with the experience of
many."1 Then he adds, speaking of some particular
cases : " As one of the curative indications of a
dropsy is an evacuation of the water by perspiration,
and as the medicines administered by the physician
aim to' produce this effect, . . . what could be more
his days ; probable, I say, but not certain ; because, though
he had heard of it, he might possibly have thought it to no
purpose to tell his friend that there were Christians who
affirmed such things, and he might suspect that Autolycus
would not have admitted the testimony of persons with whom
he had no acquaintance, and for whom he had little regard."
Eccl. Hist. (Works, vol. ii. p. 92, ed. 1810). Vid. the striking
statement of Origen. contr. Cels. i. 46. Greg. Nyss. tam. ii.
p. 1009. 11 Page 82. 1 Page 104.

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 205
likely to excite such copious perspiration than the
enthusiastic transport with which they prayed, and
the convulsive struggles which shook their whole
frame ?"k
92. Peter's wife's mother was raised from her fever
at once, so as even to be able to " minister " to the
holy company ; but Bishop Douglas would have sug
gested to the Pharisees that, had there been more
raising of the dead, more restoring of sight to the
blind, such cures might have been dispensed with,
because, where minds are "heated and inflamed, and
every faculty of their souls burning with the raptures
of devout joy and enthusiastic confidence," it is "far
from being impossible . . . that in some cases a
change might be wrought on the habit of the body ; "'
for " in this case the nervous system is strongly acted
upon, and fresh and violent motions are communi
cated to the fluids;"111 and "such agitations neces
sarily suppose that the velocity of the fluids " is
"greatly accelerated ; "n and " gouts, palsies, fevers of
all kinds, and even ruptures, have been thus cured."0
It certainly does not appear why a class of miracles
which was, in matter of fact, the principal means of
the conversion of the world in the age of the Apostles,
should, when professed in the second and third centu-
k Page 107. n Ibid.
1 Page 102. ° Page 101.
m Page 106.

206 State of the Argument
ries, be put aside by our Apologists on the excuse that
" powers were not appealed to, less ambiguous in their
nature," nor " other works performed, which admit of
no solution from natural causes, and were incapable
of being the effects of fraud and collusion."p
93. This being the language of so respectable a
writer as Bishop Douglas, the following sentiments
from Middleton cannot surprise us. Of miracles of
healing he says : " In truth, this particular claim of
curing diseases miraculously affords great room for
. . . delusion and a wide field for the exercise of
craft. Every man's experience has taught him that
diseases thought fatal and desperate are oft sur
prisingly healed of themselves, by some secret and
sudden effort of nature impenetrable to the skill of
man ; but to ascribe this presently to a miracle, as
weak and superstitious minds are apt to do, to the
prayers of the living or the intercessions of the dead,
is what neither sound reason nor true religion will
justify. "1 Of exorcisms : that certain circumstances
" concerning the speeches and confessions of the
devils, their answering to all questions, owning them
selves to be wicked spirits, etc., . . . may not impro
bably be accounted for, either by the disordered state
of the patient, answering wildly and at random to
any questions proposed, or by the arts of imposture
and contrivance between the parties concerned in the
P Page 236. 1 Page 79,

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 207
act"r And of visions : " To declare freely what I
think, whatever ground there might be in those pri
mitive ages either to reject or to allow the authority
of those visions, yet, from all the accounts of them
that remain to us in these days, there seems to be the
greatest reason to suspect that they were all con
trived, or authorized at least, by the leading men of
the Church! 's
94. Such, then, is the opinion of Christian Apolo
gists concerning the nature of those miracles to which
our Lord mainly entrusted the cause of His sacred
truth ; for, however great the differences may be
between the Scripture and Ecclesiastical miracles,
viewed as a whole, so far is certain, that the actual
and immediate instruments by which the world was
convinced of the Gospel were those which these
writers distinctly discredit as of an ambiguous and
suspicious character. And, if it be asked whether,
after all, such miracles are not suspicious, whatever
be the consequence of admitting it, I answer, that
they are suspicious to read of, but not to see. The
particular circumstances of an exorcism, which no
narrative can convey, might bring home to the mind
a conviction that it was a divine work, quite suffi
cient for conversion ; and much more a number of
such awful exhibitions. Generalized statements and
abstract arguments are poor representations of fact ;
r Page 82. s Page 109.

208 State of the Argument
but, as they are used to serve the purpose of those
who would disparage Saints, it is necessary to show
that they can be turned by unbelievers as plausibly,
though as sophistically, against Apostles.
5-
95. To proceed. The same words of our Saviour
which have introduced these remarks in defence of
the nature of the ecclesiastical gifts will suggest an
explanation of certain difficulties in the mode of their
exercise. Christ says, first, " He that believeth shall
be saved ; " and then, " These signs shall follow them
that believe." Here it is obvious to remark, that the
power of working miracles is not promised in these
words to the preachers of the Gospel merely, but to
the converts! It is not said, " Preach the Gospel to ,
t " Nee enim praedicantes ilia secutura signa pollicetur, sed
credentes ; nee eos qui jam antea credidissent, sed qui essent
postea deinde credituri. Responditque eventus accuratissime ;
conversis enim, non conversoribus, gratias illas donatas esse
constat de quibus legimus in primis Ecclesiarum conversioni-
bus." Dodw. in Iren. Dissert, ii. 28. This is so fully taken
for granted by St. Bernard, that he thinks it necessary to
answer the objection why "credentes" did not work miracles
in his day : " Quis enim ea, qua; in prasenti loco scripta sunt,
signa videtur habere credulitatis, sine qua nemo poterit salvari ?
quoniam qui non crediderit condemnabitur, et sine fide im-
possibile est placere Deo." Serm. i. de Ascens. 2. He
answers to the question as St. Gregory does in the passage
quoted, supra, n. 40, making the miracles now wrought by the
faithful to be moral ones. Kuinoel says : " Per ™>s irurTeftwras
non omnes Christi sectatores intelligendi sunt, nam non

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 209
every creature, and these signs shall follow your
preaching," but "these signs shall follow them that
believe," the same persons to whom salvation is pro
mised in the verse preceding." And further, whereas
final salvation is there represented as a personal gift,
the gift of miracles is not granted here to " him that
believeth," but to " them that believe." And the
omnes Christiani ejusmodi miracula patrabant, qualia hoc
loco describuntur, sed agit Christus hoc loco ut locis parallelis,
Luc. 24, 48. John 20, 19, cum legatis suis, atque adeo sig-
nificantur imprimis Apostoli, et prater eos alii tunc temporis
praesentes, qui haud dubie e numero septuaginta discipulorum
erant. Vid. Luc. 24, 33, coll. Luc. 10, 1 ; 9, 17, Etiam infra
v. 20, diserte commemorantur &«tax, illi Christi discipuli,
quibus ea dixit, qua; hoc loco leguntur, et ad hos arnteia re-
feruntur. Monuit praeterea Storrius articulum tovs saepe
certos, quosdam, non omnes universos significare. Vid. Luc.
18, 15. Coll. Marc. 10, 13. Matt. 21, 34. 36. 27, 62. 28, 12.
Insignivit autem, ut opinor, Christus discipulos suos, futuros
religionis suae doctores, tunc temporis prassentes, voce ™s
Tnareiaaai, quoniam paulo ante eorum incredulitatem vitu-
perarat : " in loc. This is such strange reasoning, that it is
the best argument for showing how futile the attempt is to
w-rest our Lord's words from their plain meaning. The elder
school of Protestants was more candid. " Non omnibus
omnia," says Grotius, "ita tamen ut cuilibet, ut oportet, cre-
denti, aliqua tunc data sit admirabilis facultas, qua; se non
semper quidem, sed data occasione, explicaret."
u Sulpicius almost grounds his defence of St. Martin's
miracles on the antecedent force of this text. He says of those
who deny them, " Nee Martino in hac parte detrahitur, sed
fidei Evangelii derogatur. Nam cum Dominus ipse testatus
sit istiusmodi opera, qua; Martinus implevit, ab omnibus fideli-
bus esse facienda, qui Martinum non credit ista fecisse, non
credit Christum ista dixisse." Dial. i. 18. 14

2 1 o State of the Argument
particular word used, which the Authorized Version
translates " follow," suggests or encourages the notion
that the miracles promised were to attend upon or to
be collateral with their faith, as general indications and
tokens ;v not indeed that they were to be the result
of every act of faith and in every person, but that on
the whole, where men were united together by faith
in the name of Christ, there miracles would also be
wrought by Him who was " in the ,. midst of them."
Thus the gift was rather in the Church than of the
Church. 96. An important text already quoted teaches us
the same thing : " I will pour out My Spirit upon all
flesh ; and your sons and your daughters shall pro
phesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young
men shall see visions : and also upon the servants and
upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out
My Spirit." The young, the old, the bond and the
free, all flesh, all conditions of men, were to be the
recipients of the miraculous illuminations of the
Gospel. The event exactly accomplished the predic
tion. In the very opening of the New Dispensation,
not only Zacharias' the Priest, but Mary the young
T S^eia toSto. irapaKoXovB-f/aei. " Stephanus in Thes. haec
citat ex Dioscoride in prajf. lib. 6. to irapaKo\ov9ovvra o-qp.e'm
credo-Tip tQv tj>a.piidK.wv." Raphe]. Annot. in loc. Vid. ibid, in
Luc. i. 3. In ,the last words of the Gospel, where the " signs
following" are wrought by the Apostles, and in confirmation
the word is iiraKo\ov6oivTUV.

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 211
maiden, Elizabeth the matron, Anna the widow of
fourscore and four years, and just and aged Simeon,
were inspired to bear witness to it. Again, in the
Book of Acts, while Peter was preaching to Cornelius,
" the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the
word." At Ephesus, when St. Paul had laid his hands
on John's disciples, the Holy Ghost came on them,
" and all the men were about twelve." Moreover, we
hear of St. Philip's " four daughters, virgins, which
did prophesy." And the disorders of the Church of
Corinth plainly show that the miraculous gifts were
not confined to one or two principal persons of high
station or spiritual attainments, but were " dispersed
abroad" with a bountiful hand over all the faithful.
The same inference may be drawn from St. Peter's
direction, " As every man hath received the gift, even
so minister the same one to another, as good stewards
of the manifold grace of God." Such, then, is the
Scripture account of the bestowal of the miraculous
powers in the Apostolic age ; and, I repeat, it serves
to refhove certain misapprehensions and objections
which have been made to their exhibition as instanced
in the times that follow.
97. For instance, there seems a fallacy in the mode
in which a phrase is used, which often occurs in the
controversy. It has been contended that there is no
" standing gift of miracles" in the Church ; and then
it is concluded that tlierefore no manifestation of

212 State of the Argument
Divine Power takes place in it, but those rare and
solemn interpositions which we have reason to think
actually occur even in heathen countries. " The posi
tion which I affirm," says Middleton, " is that, after
the days of the Apostles, no standing power of mira
cles was continued to the Church, to which they
might perpetually appeal for the conviction of un
believers. Yet all my antagonists treat my argument
as if it absolutely rejected everything of a miraculous
kind, whether wrought within the Church by the
agency of men, or on any other, occasion by the im
mediate hand of God."x Now, there is an ambiguity
in the words " standing power," according as we take
it to mean a capacity committed to particular persons
and exercised by them, or a Divine Agency generally
operating in the Church and among Christians, as its
Almighty Author wills. Middleton denies the stand
ing power in its former sense ; but in our Lord's
promise, as well as in St. Paul's description of the
presence of the Holy Spirit in the Church, the latter
is the prominent idea. Middleton speaks, just after
the passage above quoted, of " the Church having no
standing power of working" miracles, and elsewhere
of a " standing power of working miracles, as exerted
openly in the Church, for the conviction of unbe
lievers." y Again, he speaks of the "opinion that after
* Vindic;p. 37, as quoted by Douglas, p. 224.
y Inquiry, p. 9.

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 213
the days of the Apostles there resided still in the
primitive Church, through several successive ages, a
divine and extraordinary power of working miracles,
which was frequently and openly exerted, in confirma
tion of the truth of the Gospel, and for the conviction
of unbelievers."2 In like manner Douglas says of
Middleton that " his Free Inquiry is not, whether any
miracles were performed after the times of the Apos
tles, but whether, after that period, miraculous powers
subsisted in the Church ; not whether God interposed
at all, but whether He interposed by making use of
men as His instruments." a Here he makes "the sub
sistence of miraculous powers " equivalent with " the
instrumentality of men in their operation ; " meaning
by the latter the conscious exercise of them by in
spired persons in proof of a divine mission, as a
former passage of his work shows.b The present
Bishop of Lincoln (Kaye) takes the same view of the
controversy, observing that Middleton 's object "was
to prove that, after the Apostolic age, no standing
power of working miracles existed in the Church, that
there was no regular succession of favoured individuals
upon whom God conferred supernatural powers, which
they could exercise for the benefit of the Church of
Christ, whenever their judgment, guided by the in-
z Introd. Disc. init. ; but in Pref. p. xxxii. he speaks more
to the purpose .
"Page 224. b Page 216.

214 State of the Argument
fluence of the Holy Spirit, told them that it was
expedient so to do."c Certainly, if this is what
Middleton set about to do, he had not a difficult task
before him.
98. Yet Lord Barrington, before Middleton, had
implied that the question lay between the same two
issues. "There cannot be much doubt," he says, "of
these gifts lasting as much longer as the oldest of
those lived, to Whom St. John imparted them. . . .
Irenaeus, speaking of the prophetic gifts, mentions the
gift of tongues and the discernment of spirits. And
that these did not last longer seems to have been the
case in fact, since Irenaeus, who died about the year
190, in a very old age, speaks of his having seen these
gifts, but says nothing of his own having them."d That
is, Barrington makes no medium between a definite
transmission of the gift from Christian to Christian
by imposition of hands or similar formal act, such as
would involve Irenaeus's own possession of it, and on
the other hand its having utterly failed. Irenaeus saw
the gift, he had it not, therefore it was failing in his
time ; else he would have had it
99. What ecclesiastical history rather inculcates is
the doctrine of an abiding presence of Divinity such
as dwelt upon the Ark, showing itself as it would,
and when it would, and without fixed rules; which
c Kaye's Tertull. p. 104.
d Vol. i. pp. 221, 222, ed. 1828.

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 2 1 5
was seated primarily in the body of Christians, and
manifested itself sometimes in persons, sometimes in
places, as the case might be, in saintly men, or in
" babes and sucklings," or in the very stones of the
Temple ; which for a while was latent, and then be
came manifest again ; which to some persons, places,
or generations was an evidence, and to others was
not.e The ideas of "regular succession," conscious
"exercise" of power, objects deliberately contem
plated, discretionary use of a gift, and the like, are
quite foreign to a theory of miraculous agency of
this kind ; yet, at the same time, it cannot surely be
denied that in one sense such an appointment may
- Dodwell has a theory (which agrees with what is said in
the text, except that he applies it only to the first ages) that
miracles abounded or became scarce according to the need,
the conversion of the nations being the chief object. " Pro-
misit Dominus majora editurum, qui in ilium postea crediderit,
miracula quam qua; ipse Dominus ediderit. Quod ego facile
moderandum esse concessero, ut et de certis Evangelii pro-
pagandi temporibus promissio ilia fuerit intelligenda. . . Sed
nee ita adimpleta est quin superesset adhuc satis amplus
locus futuris postea conversionibus, futurisque adeo miraculis.
. . Trajano Imperante novas Evangelii propagandi causa sus-
ceptas expeditiones memorat Eusebius, et quidem id nova. Dei
comitante gratia atque o-wepyelg.. r . Ortis jam sub Hadriano
Haereticis, . . factum est ut miracula infidelium hasretico-
rum causa praestanda fuerint etiam et ipsa frequentiora. . . A
Marci temporibus deficere coeperunt, . . ciim nullas aut raras
admodum per ea sascula expeditiones obirent Christiani ad
gentes ex professo convertendas ; . . satis tamen liberalem ad
huc fuisse Deum multa ostendunt," etc. , etc. Dissert, in Iren.
ii. 28 — 45, etc.

2 1 6 State of the Argument
rightly be called a " standing power," and that it is
very much more than such rare "interpositions of
Providence," and such " miracles of invisible agency,"
as the above writers seem to consider the only alter
native to the admission of a discretionary, and con
scious, and transmitted gift.
ioo. The Ark was a standing instrument of mira
culous operation, yet it did not send forth its virtue at
all times, nor at the will of man. What was the nature
of its mysterious powers we learn from the beginning
of the First Book of Samuel ; where we read of it first
as stationed in the tabernacle, and of the Almighty
speaking from it to the child Samuel ; next it is cap
tured in battle by the Philistines ; but next, when it is
-set up in the house of Dagon, the idol, without visible
cause, falls down before it, and its worshippers are
smitten. Next, the cattle which are yoked to it are
constrained against their natural instinct to carry it
back to Israel. And then the men of Bethshemeth
are smitten for looking into it. W7as there, or was
there not, then, a standing power of miracles in the
Jewish Church ? There was not, in the sense in which
Middleton understands the phrase ; there was no
" regular succession " of " individuals " who exercised
supernatural gifts with a divinely enlightened discre
tion ; even the Prophets were not such a body ; yet
the Divine Presence consisted in much more than an
occasional and extraordinary visitation or intervention

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 217
in the course of events. That such too should be the
nature of the Presence in the Christian Church is at
least quite consistent with the tenor of the new Testa
ment ; and is almost implied when, in the text which
has given rise to these remarks, our Lord bestows its
miraculous manifestations upon the body at large.
The supernatural glory might abide, and yet be mani
fold, variable, uncertain, inscrutable, uncontrollable,
like the natural atmosphere ; dispensing gleams,
shadows, traces of Almighty Power, but giving no
such clear and perfect vision of it as one might gaze
upon and record distinctly in its details for controver
sial purposes. Thus we are told, " The wind bloweth
where it listeth ; " "a little while, and ye shall not see
Me : and again, a little while, and ye shall see Me ; "
" their eyes were holden," and " they knew Him, and
He vanished ; " " suddenly there came a sound from
heaven ; " when they had prayed, the place was shaken
where they were assembled together ; " all these
worketh that One and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to
every man severally as He will." At one time our
Lord connects the gift with special holiness, as when
He says that certain exorcisms require " prayer and
fasting ; " at another He allows it to the reprobate, as
when He says that those whom He never knew will in
the last day appeal to the wonderful works they did
in His Name. At one time St. Paul, in evidence of
his divine mission, says, " Truly the signs of an

2 1 8 State of the Argument
Apostle were wrought among you ; " at another he
seems to ascribe the power to an imposture : " Though
an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel unto
you, let him be accursed." 6.
ioi. Another difficulty which the text in question
enables us to meet is the indiscriminate bestowal of
the miraculous gift, as we read of it in ecclesiastical
history. Its being in the Church, not of the Church,
implies this apparent disorder and want of method in
its manifestations, as has been already observed. Yet
Middleton objects, speaking of the Fathers, "None of
these venerable Saints have anywhere affirmed, that
either they themselves, or the Apostolic Fathers be
fore them, were endued with any power of working
miracles, but declare only in general, that such powers
were actually subsisting in their days and openly
existed in the Church ; that they had often seen the
wonderful effects of them ; and that everybody else
might see the same, whenever they pleased ; but as
to the persons who wrought them, they leave us
strangely in the dark ; for instead of specifying
names, conditions, and characters, their general style
is, Such and such works are done among us or by us ;
by our people ; by a few ; by many ; by our exor
cists ; by ignorant laymen, women, boys, and any
simple Christian whatsoever." f That is, his objection
f Page 22 .

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 219
is against the very idea of a gift, committed to the
body of the Church, or abiding in the Church. Ob
jectors are hard to please ; sometimes they imply
dislike of the notion of the gift as delegated to a
ministerial succession, and formally transmitted from
individual to individual, and then, on the contrary, of
its belonging to the Church itself without the inter
vention of rites of appropriation or definite recipients :
what is this but saying that they will not entertain
the notion of a continuance of miracles at all ? As
to Middleton's objection, it seems directed against
the prophetic anticipation of the times of the Gospel
made to the Jews, as quoted already, that " their sons
and daughters should prophesy, their young men see
visions, and their old men dream dreams," quite as
much as against any seeming incongruities and ano
malies which are found in the early Church.
102. Middleton's complaint, that the Fathers do
not themselves profess a miraculous gift, is echoed
by Gibbon. " It may seem somewhat remarkable,"
he says, " that Bernard of Clairvaux, who records so
many miracles of his friend St. Malachi, never takes
any notice of his own, which, in their turn, however,
are carefully related by his companions and disciples.
In the long series of ecclesiastical history, does there
exist a single instance of a Saint asserting that he
himself possessed the gift of miracles ? "s The con-
e Ch. xv. note s.

220 State of the Argument
eluding question concerns our present subject, though
St. Bernard himself is far removed from the period of
history on which we are engaged. I observe then,
first, that it is not often that the gift of miracles is
even ascribed to a Sainth In many cases miracles
are only ascribed to their tombs or relics ; or when
miracles are ascribed to them when living, these are
but single and occasional, not parts of a series. More
over, they are commonly what Paley calls tentative
miracles, or some out of many which have been
attempted, and have been done accordingly without
any previous confidence in their power to effect them.
Moses and Elijah could predict the result ; but the
miracles in question were scarcely more than experi
ments and trials, even though success had been
granted, them many times before.1 Under these cir-
h " Hoc intercedit discrimen inter sanctos antiqui et Novi
Testamenti, quod Deus, intercessione Sanctorum V. T., mira
cula operari dignatus est saspius in vita, et rarius post obitum
eorum ; et quoad Sanctos N . T. saspius post obitum et rarius
in vita, ipsorum ; cum Sancti V. T. utpote a Deo ipso canoni-
zati, miraculis post obitum non indigerent ; sancti autem
N. T. ab Ecclesia canonizandi, miraculis post obitum indi-
geant . . . Ciim nulla [S. Joannes B.] in vita miracula fecisset,
putavit Herodes eum post suam in Christo resurrectionem
miracula fuisse editurum, ' Ait pueris suis, Hie est Joannes
Baptista, etc., et ideo'virtutes operantur in eo.' " Bened. xiv.
de Canon. Sanct. iv. I. § 26.
1 The present Bishop of London argues from Origen's ex
pression, 08s 6 0ebs fSotiXeTcu, (Contr. Cels. ii. 33), "that the
attempts, which no doubt were made to effect miraculous
cures, were not always successful;" vid. Athan. Vit. Ant. 56

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 2 2 1
cumstances, how could the individual men who wrought
them appeal to them themselves ? It was not till
afterwards, when their friends and disciples could
calmly look back upon their life, and review the vari
ous actions and providences which occurred in the
course of it, that they would be able to put together
the scattered tokens of Divine favour, none or few of
which might in themselves be a certain evidence of a
miraculous power. As well might we expect men in
their lifetime to be called Saints, as workers of mira
cles. But this is not all ; the objection serves to sug
gest a very observable distinction, which holds good
between the conduct of those whose miracles are de
signed to be evidence of the truth of religion, and that
of others though similarly gifted. The Apostles, for
instance, did their miracles openly, because these were
intended to be instruments of conversion ; but when
the supernatural Power took up its abode in the
Church, and manifested itself as it would, and not for
definite objects which it signified at the time of its
manifestation, it could not but seem to imply some
personal privilege, when operating in an individual,
who would in consequence be as little inclined to pro
claim it aloud as to make a boast of his graces.
where this very thing is confessed : then he continues : " and
if so, we may safely infer that where they ¦ did succeed, they
were to be ascribed to the ordinary means of healing under
the Divine blessing." Bishop Blomfield's Sermons, p. 434. I
cannot follow his Lordship in calling this inference a safe one.

222 State of the Argument
7-
103. The same peculiarity in the gift will also account
for that deficiency in the evidence, and other unsatis
factory circumstances of a like nature, which have
already been spoken of. Since the Divine manifesta
tion was arbitrary, the testimony would necessarily be
casual. What else could be expected in the case of
occurrences of which there was no notice beforehand,
and often no trace after, and where we are obliged
to be contented with such witnesses as happened
to be present, or, if they cannot be found, with the
mere report which has circulated from them ? and
when perhaps, as was noticed in the last paragraph,
the principal parties felt it to be wrong to court pub
licity, after our Lord's pattern, and perhaps shrank
from examination ? '" There is no man," said His
brethren to Him, "that doeth anything in secret, and
he himself seeketh to be known openly ; if Thou do
these things, show Thyself to the world." In our
Lord's own case there was a time for concealment
and a time for display ; and, as it was a time for
evidence when miracles were wrought by the Apostles,
so afterwards there was a time for other objects and
other uses, when miracles were wrought through the
Church ; and as our Lord's miracles were true, though
the Jews complained that He " made them so long
to doubt," so it is no disproof of the miracles of the
Church, that those who do not wish them true have

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 223
room to criticise the character or the matter of the
testimony which at this day is offered in their behalf.
8.
104. One more remark is in point. Middleton, in
the extract above quoted, finds fault with the Fathers
for "declaring only in general" that miracles con
tinued, that they had seen them themselves, and that
any one else might see them who would, while they
made no attempt to specify the names, conditions,
and characters of the persons working them. Yet
surely this is but natural, if such miracles were as
frequent as ecclesiastical history represents. Instead
of its being an objection to them, it is just the state
of things which must necessarily follow, supposing
they were such and so wrought as is described.
When we are speaking of what is obvious, and
allowed on all hands, we do not go about to prove
it. We only argue when there is doubt ; we only
consult documents, and weigh evidence, and draw out
proofs, when we are not eye-witnesses. If the Fathers
had seen miracles of healing or exorcisms not unfre-
quently, and were writing to others who had seen the
like, they would use the confident yet vague language
which we actually find in their accounts. The state
of the testimony is but in keeping with the alleged
facts. 105. For instance, St. Justin speaks of the Incarna-

224 State of the Argument
tion as having taken place " for the sake of believers,
and for the overthrow of evil spirits ; " and "you may
know this now" he continues, "from what passes before
your eyes ; for many demoniacs all over the world, and
in your own metropolis, whom none other exorcists,
conjurers, or sorcerers have cured, these have many of
our Christians cured, adjuring by the Name of Christ,
and still do cure." Again : " With us even hitherto
are prophetical gifts, from which you Jews ought to
gather that what formerly belonged to your race is
transferred to us ; " and soon after, quoting the pas
sage from the prophet Joel, he adds, "and with us may
be seen females and males with gifts from the Spirit of
God." And St. Irenaeus : '' In His Name His true
disciples, receiving the grace from Himself, work for
the benefit of other men, as each has received the gift
from Him. For some cast out devils certainly and
truly, so that oftentimes the cleansed persons them
selves become believers, and join the Church. Others
have foreknowledge of things future, visions, and pro
phetical announcements. Others by imposition of
hands heal the sick, and restore them to health.
Moreover, as I have said, before now even the dead
have been restored to life, and have continued with
us for many years. Indeed, it is not possible to tell
the number of gifts which the Church throughout the
world has received from God in the Name of Christ
Jesus, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 225
exercises day by day for the benefit of the nations,
neither seducing nor taking money of any.'' Shortly
before he observes, that the heretics could not raise
the dead, " as our Lord did, and the Apostles by
prayer ; and in the brotherhood frequently for some
necessary object, (the whole Church in the place ask
ing it with much fasting and supplication,) the spirit
of the dead has returned, and the man has been
granted to the prayers of the Saints." And again, he
speaks of his " hearing many brothers in the Church
who had prophetical gifts, and spoke by the Spirit in
all tongues, and brought to light the hidden things of
men for a profitable purpose, and related the mysteries
of God." And in like manner TertuUian: "Place
some possessed person before your tribunals ; any Chris
tian shall command that spirit to speak, who shall as
surely confess himself to be a devil with truth, as
elsewhere he will call himself a god with falsehood.
. . . What work can be clearer ? . . . there
will be no room for suspicion ; you would say that
it is magic, or some other deceit, if your eyes and
ears allowed you, for what is there to urge against
that which is proved by its naked sincerity ?" Again
Origen speaks of persons healing, " with no invocation
over those who need a cure, but that of the God of all
and the Name of Jesus, with some narrative concern-
irig Him. By these," he adds, "we, too, have seen
many set free from severe complaints, and loss of
IS

226 State of the Argumetit
mind, and madness, and numberless other such evils,
which neither men nor devils had cured ."k
106. This is the very language which we are accuse
tomed to use, when facts are so notorious that the
onus dubitandi may fairly be thrown upon those who
question them. All that can be said is, that the facts
are not notorious to us ; certainly not, but the Fathers
wrote for contemporaries, not for the eighteenth or
nineteenth century, not for modern notions and theo
ries, for distant countries, for a degenerate people and
a disunited Church. They did not foresee that evi
dence would become a science, that doubt would be
thought a merit, and disbelief a privilege ; that it
would be in favour and condescension to them if they
were credited, and in charity that they were accounted
honest. They did not feel that man was so self-suffi
cient, and so happy in his prospects for the future, that
he might reasonably sit at home closing his ears to all
reports of Divine interpositions till they were actually
brought before his eyes, and faith was superseded by
sense ; they did not so disparage the Spouse of Christ
k Justin, Apol. ii. 6. Tryph. 82, 88. Iren. Haer. ii. 32, § 4,
31, § 2, v. 6, § 1. Tertull. Apol. 23. Origen, contr. Cels. iii. 24.
Vid. also Justin, Apol. 1, 40. Tryph. 30, 39, 76, and 85.
Tertull. Apol. 37,43. Scorp. 1. Test. Anim. 3 Ad. Scap. 4.
Minuc. F. 27. Theoph. ad Autol. ii. 8. Origen, contr. Cels.
i. 46, 67, ii. 33, iii. 36. Cyprian, Ep. 76, fin. ad. Magn. circa
fin. vid. supr. n. 32. [Vid. also note and passages in Mur
doch's Mosheim, t. i. p. 128.]

for the Ecclesiastical Miracles. 227
as to imagine that she could be accounted by profess
ing Christians a school of error, and a workshop of
fraud and imposture. They wrote with the confidence
that they were Christians, and that those to whom
they transmitted the Gospel would not call them the
mTnistpr.s of Antichrist.

Chapter V.
ON THE EVIDENCE FOR PARTICULAR ALLEGED
MIRACLES.
107. T T does not strictly fall within the scope of
-"- this Essay to pronounce upon the truth or
falsehood of this or that miraculous narrative as it
occurs in Ecclesiastical History ; but only to furnish
such general considerations as may be useful in form
ing a decision in particular cases. Yet considering the
painful perplexity which many feel when left entirely
to their own judgments in important matters, it may
be allowable to go a step further, and without ruling
open questions this way or that, to throw off the
abstract and unreal character which attends a course
of reasoning, by setting down the evidence for and
against certain miracles as we meet with them. More
over, so much has been said in the foregoing pages in
behalf of the Ecclesiastical Miracles, antecedently
considered, that it may be hastily inferred that all
miraculous relations and reports should be admitted
unhesitatingly and indiscriminately, without any at
tempt at separating truth from falsehood, or suspense

Evidence for Particular Miracles. 229
of judgment, or variation in the reliance placed in
them one with another, or reserve or measure in the
open acknowledgment of them. And such an exami
nation of particular instances, as is proposed, may
give opportunity to one or two additional remarks of
a general character for which no place has hitherto
been found.
108. An inquirer, then, should not enter upon the
subject of the miracles reported or alleged in ecclesi
astical history, without being prepared for fiction and
exaggeration in the narrative, to an indefinite extent.
This cannot be insisted on too often ; nothing but
the gift of inspiration could have hindered it. Nay,
he must not expect that more than a few can be
exhibited with evidence of so cogent and complete a
character as to demand his acceptance ; while a great
number of them, as far as the evidence goes, are
neither certainly true nor certainly false, but have
very various degrees of probability viewed one with
another ; all of them recommended to his devout at
tention by the circumstance that others of the same
family have been proved to be true, and all prejudiced
by his knowledge that so many others on the contrary
are certainly not true. It will be his wisdom, then,
not to reject or scorn accounts of miracles, where
there is a fair chance of their being true ; but to allow
himself to be in suspense, to raise his mind to Him of
whom they may possibly be telling to " stand in awe,

230 Evidence for Particular
and sin not," and to ask for light, — yet to do no more;
not boldly to put forward what, if it be from God,
yet has not been put forward by Him. What He
does in secret, we must think over in secret ; what He
has '• openly showed in the sight of the heathen," we
must publish abroad, " crying aloud, and sparing not."
An alleged miracle is not untrue because it is un
proved ; nor is it excluded from our faith because it
is not admitted into our controversy. Some are for
our conviction, and these we are to " confess with the
mouth" as well as "believe with the heart;" others
are for our comfort and encouragement, and these we
are to " keep, and ponder them in our heart," without
urging them upon unwilling ears.
109. No one should be surprised at the admission
that few of the Ecclesiastical Miracles are attended
with an evidence sufficient to subdue our reason,
because few of the Scripture Miracles are furnished
with such an evidence. When a fact comes recom
mended to us by arguments which do not admit of
an answer, when plain and great difficulties are in the
way of denying it, and none, or none of comparative
importance, in the way of admitting it, it may be said
to subdue our reason. Thus Apologists for Christianity
challenge unbelievers to produce an hypothesis suf
ficient to account for its doctrines, its rise, and its
success, short of its truth ; thus Lord Lyttelton ana
lyses the possible motives and principles of the human

Alleged Miracles. 231
mind, in order to show that St. Paul's conversion
admits of but one explanation, viz., that it was super
natural ; thus writers on Prophecy appeal to its ful
filment, which they say can be accounted for by
referring it to a Divine inspiration, and in no other
way. Leslie, Paley, and others have employed them
selves on similar arguments in defence of Revealed
Religion. I am not saying how far arguments of a
bold, decisive, and apparently demonstrative character,
however great their value, are always the deepest and
most satisfactory ; but they are those which in this
day are the most popular ; they are those, the absence
of which is made an objection to the Ecclesiastical
Miracles. It is right then to remind those who con
sider this objection as fatal to these miracles, that the
Miracles of Scripture are for the most part exposed
to the same. If the miracles of Church History can
not be defended by the arguments of Leslie, Lyttelton,
Paley, or Douglas, how many of the Scripture mira
cles satisfy their conditions ? Some infidel authors
advise us to accept no miracles which would not have
a verdict in their favour in a court of justice ; that is,
they employ against, Scripture a weapon which Pro
testants would confine to attacks upon the Church ;
as if moral and religious questions required legal
proofs, and evidence were the test of truth.
1 10. It is true that the Scripture miracles were, for
the most part, evidence of a Divine Revelation at the

22,2 Evidence for Particular
time when they were wrought ; but they are not so at
this day. Only a few of them fulfil this purpose
now ; and the rest are sustained and authenticated by
these few.1 The many never have been evidence ex
cept to those who saw them, and have but held the
place of doctrine ever since ; like the truths revealed
to us about the unseen world, which are matters of
faith, not means of conviction. They have no exist
ence, as it were, out of the record in which they are
found ; they are not found as facts in the world, in
fluencing its course, and proving their reality by their
power, but as sacred truths taught us by inspiration.
Such are the greater number of our Lord's miracles
viewed individually ; we believe His restoration of the
widow's son, or His changing water into wine, as we
believe His transfiguration, on the word of His Evan
gelists. We believe the miracles of Elisha, because
our Lord has Himself recognised the book containing
the record of them. The great arguments by which
unbelievers are silenced do not reach as far as these
particular instances. As was just now noticed, one
of the most cogent proofs of the miracles of Christ
and His Apostles is drawn from their effects ; it being
inconceivable that a rival power to Caesar should have
started out of so obscure and ignorant a spot as Gali
lee, and have prevailed, without some such extraor
dinary and divine gifts : yet this argument, it will be
1 Vid. supr. Essay i. pp. 9, 55, 91, 92 ; also pp. 187, 207,

Alleged Miracles. 233
observed, proves nothing about the miracles one by
one as reported in the Gospels, but only that the
Christian story was miraculous, or that miracles at
tended it. Paley's argument goes little beyond prov
ing the fact of the Resurrection, or, at most, that there
were certain sensible miracles wrought by our Lord,
such as cures, to which St. Peter alludes in his speech
to Cornelius, yet without specifying what. Again,
Douglas considers that " we may suspect miracles to
be false," the account of which was not published at
the time or place of their alleged occurrence, or if so
published, yet without careful attention being called
to them ; yet St. Mark is said to have written at
Rome, St. Luke in Rome or Greece, and St. John at
Ephesus ; and the earliest of the Evangelists wrote
some years after the events recorded, while the latest
did not write for sixty years ; and, moreover, true
though it be that attention was called to Christianity
from the first, yet it is true also that it did not succeed
at the spot where it arose, but principally at a distance
from it. Once more, Leslie almost confines his tests
to the Mosaic miracles, or rather to certain of them ;
and though he is unwilling to exclude those of the
Gospel from the benefit of his argument, yet it is not
easy to see. how he brings them under it at all.
ill. On the whole, then, it will be found that the
greater part of the Miracles of Revelation are as little
evidence for Revelation at this day, as the Miracles

234 Evidence for Particular
of the Church are now evidence for the Church. In
both cases the number of those which carry with
them their own proof now, and are believed for their
own sake, is small ; and these furnish the grounds on
which we receive the rest. The difference between the
two cases is this : — that, since an authentic document
has been provided for the miracles by which Revealed
Religion was introduced, which are thus connected
together into one whole, we know here exactly what
miracles are to be received on warrant of those which
are already proved ; but since the Church has never cata
logued her miracles, those which are known to be such
do but create an indefinite presumption in favour of
others, but cannot be taken in proof of any in particular.
112. On the other hand, that fables have ever been
in circulation, some vague and isolated, others attached
to particular spots or to particular persons, is too no
torious to need dwelling on : it is more to the purpose to
observe that the fact of such pretences has ever been
acknowledged even by those who have been believers
or reporters of miraculous occurrences. We have seen
above™ that one of St. Martin's first miracles in his epis
copate, as recorded by Sulpicius, was the detection of a
pretended Saint and Martyr, whose tomb had been an
object of veneration to the ignorant people. And in the
very beginning of Christianity St. Luke, in speaking
of the " many" who had " taken in hand to set forth in
mN.28.

Alleged Miracles. 235
order a declaration of those things which are most
surely believed among us," seems to allude to the Apo
cryphal Gospels," which ascribe a number of trifling as
well as fictitious miracles to our Lord. And when St.
Paul cautions the Thessalonians against being " soon
shaken in mind or troubled, by spirit or by letter, as
from himself, as that the day of Christ was at hand,"
he testifies both to the fact that spurious writings
were then ascribed to him, and that they contained
professedly supernatural matter.
1 1 3. What is confessed by Apostles and Evange
lists in the first century, and by Martyrologists in the
fourth, would naturally happen both in the interval
and afterwards. Hence Pope Gelasius, while warn
ing the faithful against several Apocryphal works,
mentions among them the Acts of St. George, the
Martyr under Dioclesian, which had been so inter
polated by the Arians, that to this day, though he is
the patron of England, and in Chapters of the Garter
is commemorated with honours which even Apostles
do not gain from us, nothing whatever is known for
certain of his life, sufferings, or miracles.0 Again, we
are told by St. John Damascene, and in the Revela
tions of St. Bridget and St. Mathildis, that the Em-
"- Jones, On the Canon, part i. ch. 2, has collected the
ancient and modern authorities in proof that St. Luke was
alluding to the Apocryphal, writings. Wolf denies it, Cur.
Phil, in loc.
0 Baron, Annal: 290. 35: Martyrol. Apr. 23.

236 Evidence for Particular
peror Trajan was delivered from theplace of punishment
at the prayers of St. Gregory the First ; but Baronius
says, concerning this and similar stories, "Away with
idle tales ; silence once for all on empty fables; be they
buried in eternal silence. We excuse those who, ac
counting true what they received as fact, committed it
to writing ; praise to their zeal, who, when they found
it asserted, discussed in scholastic fashion how it might
be ; but more praise to them who, scenting the false
hood, detected the error."? Melchior Canus, again, a
Dominican and a Divine of Trent, uses the same
language even of St. Gregory's Dialogues and the
Ecclesiastical History of Bede. "They are most
eminent persons," he says, " but still men ; they relate
certain miracles as commonly reported and believed, .
which critics, especially of this age, will consider un
certain. Indeed, I should like those histories better,
if their authors had joined more care in selection
to severity in judgment ; " 1 though he adds that far
more was to be retained in their works than was
to be rejected. He does not, however, speak even in
these measured terms of the Speculum Exemplorum,
and the Aurea Legenda of Jacobus de Voragine ; the
former of which, he says, contains " monsters of
miracles rather than truths;" and the latter is the
production of " an iron mouth, a leaden heart, and an
p Emunctis naribus odorati. Annal. 604. 49.
q Loc. Theol. xi. 6.

A lleged Miracles. 237
Intellect without exactness or discretion." Avowals
such as these from the first century to the sixteenth,
from inspired writers to the schools of St. Dominic
and the Oratory, may serve to prepare us for fictitious
miracles in ecclesiastical history in no small measure,
and to show us at the same time that such fictions are
no fair prejudice to others which possess the characters
of truth.r And in like manner, if it be necessary,
exceptions might be taken to certain of the miracles
recorded by Palladius in his Lausiac, and by Theo-
doret in his Religious History, and by the unknown
collector of the miracles of St. Stephen, which a late
writer has brought forward with the hope of thereby
r The illustration of this subject might be pursued without
limit. Tillemont quotes from a writer of the thirteenth cen
tury the broad maxim : " Quand la raison se trouve contraire
a l'usage, il faut que l'usage cede a la raison ; " and proceeds
to quote Papebrok as saying that we cannot too often repeat
this excellent rule, "k ceux qui trouvent mauvais qu'on ac
cuse de faussetd diverses choses qui se sont introduites dans
I'Eglise par l'ignorance de l'histoire." vol. vii; p. 640. The
Bollandists say, " Nimia profecto simplicitate peccant qui
scandalizantur quoties audiunt aliquid ex jam olim creditis, et
juxta Breviarii prasscriptum hodiedum recitandis, in disputa-
tionem adduci." Dissert. Bolland. tom. ii. p. 140. Vid. also
Alban Butler's Saints, Introd. Disc. p. xlvii., etc., ed: 1833.
Bauer's Theolog. tom. i. art. ii. p. 487, and works there re
ferred to. Benedict. XIV. de Canon. Sanct. iv. p. 1. c. 5, etc.
Farmer, On Miracles, p. 320 ; also the passages from various
authors quoted in Geddes' Tracts, vol. iii. pp. 115, — 118, ed.
1 730 ; who also furnishes, though not in a good spirit, a num
ber of specimens of the sort of miracles which such authors
condemn.

238 Evidence for Particular
involving all the supernatural histories of antiquity in
a general suspicion and contempt. That Palladius
has put in writing a report of a hyena's asking
pardon of a solitary for killing sheep, and of a
female turned by magic into a mare, or that one of
the Clergy of Uzalis speaks of a serpent that was seen
in the sky, will appear no reason, except to vexed
and heated minds, for accusing the holy Ambrose of
imposture, or the keen, practised, and experienced
intellect of Augustine of abject credulity.5
1 14. Nor is there anything strange or startling in
this mixture of fable with truth, as appeared from
what was said on the subject in a former page. It as
little derogates from the supernatural gift residing in
the Church that miracles should have been fabricated
or exaggerated, as it prejudices her holiness that
within her pale good men are mixed with bad.
8 " Ambrose occupies a high position among the Fathers ;
and there was a vigour and dignity in his character, as well
as a vivid intelligence, which must command respect ,' but in
proportion as we assign praise to the man individually, we
condemn the system which could so far vitiate a noble mind,
and impel one so lofty in temper to act a part which heathen
philosophers would utterly have abhorred. . . . Under the
Nicene system, Bishops in the great cities could stand up in
crowded churches, without shame, and with uplifted hands
appeal to Almighty God in attestation of that, as a miracle,
which themselves had brought about by trickery, bribes, and
secret instructions." Ancient Christ, part vii. pp. 270, 271.
" He [Augustine] was the dupe of his own credulity, not the
machinator of fraud." P. 318.

Alleged Miracles. 239
Fiction and pretence follow truth as its shadows ;
the Church is at all times in the midst of corruption,
because she is in the midst of the world, and is framed
out of human hearts ; and as the elect are fewer than
the reprobate, and hard to find amid the chaff, so
false miracles at once exceed and conceal and pre
judice those which are genuine. Nor would the dif
ficulty be overcome, even if we took on ourselves to
reject all the Ecclesiastical Miracles altogether; for
the fictions which startle us must in fairness be viewed
as connected, not only with the Ghurch and her more
authentic histories, but with Christianity, as such.
Superstition is a corruption of Christianity, not merely
of the Church ; and if it discredits the divine origin
of the Church, it discredits the divine origin of Chris
tianity also. Those who talk even most loudly of the
corruptions of the fourth and fifth centuries, seem,
when closely questioned, still to admit that Christianity
was not extinct, but overlaid by corruptions. If, then,
the Church herself, and her miracles in toto, are to be
included in that corruption, then of course the cor
ruption was only deeper and broader, than if she is to
be accounted as in herself a ' portion of Apostolic
Christianity; and if such greater corruption does
not compromise the divinity of Christianity, so the
lesser surely does not compromise the real power
and gifts of the Church. On both sides fanaticism,
':.mposture, and superstition are admitted as existing

240 Evidence for Particular Miracles.
in the history of miracles ; and on neither side
must these evil agents be held to throw suspicion on
particular miracles which have no direct or probable
connection with them.
And now, after these preliminary considerations, let
us proceed to inquire into the evidence and character
of several of the miracles in particular, which we,
meet with in the first centuries of Christianity,

Section I.
THE THUNDERING LEGION.
115. f^LAUDIUS APOLLINARIS, Bishop of
^-^ Hierapolis, addressed an Apology for
Christianity to the Emperor Marcus, about a.d. 176.
It is lost but reference to it, as it would appear, or
at least to one of his works, is made by Eusebius/
in which ApoUinaris bore witness to a remarkable
answer to prayer received a year or two before by
the Christian soldiers of that very Emperor's army
in the celebrated war with the Quadri. TertuUian,
writing about A.D. 200, and also in a public Apology,
urges the same fact upon the Proconsul of Africa
whom he is addressing.
116. The words of Eusebius, introductory of the
evidence of ApoUinaris and TertuUian, are these : " It
is said that when Marcus Aurelius Caesar was forming
his troops in order of battle against the Germans and
Sarmatians, he was reduced to extremities by a
failure of water. Meanwhile the soldiers in the so-
rHist. v. 5. 16

242 The Thundering Legion.
called Melitenes legion, which for its faith remains td
this day, knelt down upon the ground, as we are
accustomed to do in prayer, and betook themselves
to supplication. And whereas this sight was strange
to the enemy, another still more strange happened
immediately, — thunderbolts, which caused the enemy's
flight and overthrow ; and upon the army to which
the men were attached, who had called upon God, a
rain, which restored it entirely when it was all but
perishing by thirst." He adds, that this account was
given by heathens as well as by Christians, though
they did not allow that the prayers of Christians were
concerned in the event. Then he quotes ApoUinaris
for the fact that in consequence the legion received
from the Emperor the name of " Thundering." Again,
TertuUian speaks of " the letters of Marcus Aurelius,
an Emperor of great character, in which he testifies
to the quenching of that German thirst by the shower
gained by the prayers of soldiers who happened to be
Christians."1 He adds that, "while the Emperor did
not openly remove the legal punishment from persons
of that description, yet he did in fact dispense with it
by placing a penalty, and that a more fearful one, on
their accusers." And in his Ad Scapulam : " Marcus
Aurelius in the German expedition obtained showers
s On the question of this Melitine or Melitene legion, vid.
Vales, in loc. Euseb.
'Apol. c. 5.

The Thundering Legion. 243
in that thirst by the prayers offered up. to God by
Christian soldiers."" The statement, then, as given
by two writers, one writing at the very time, the other
about twenty years later, is this : that the soldiers in or
of one of the Roman legions, gained by their prayers
a seasonable storm of rain and thunder and lightning,
when the army was perishing by thirst, and was sur
rounded by an enemy ; and they add two evidences
of it — ApoUinaris, that the legion in which these
soldiers were found was thenceforth called the
Thundering Legion ; and TertuUian, that the Em
peror in consequence passed an edict in favour of the
Christians. 117. Here we are only concerned with the fact, not
with its alleged evidences ; and this is worth noticing,
for it so happens that the fact is true, but the evi
dences, as evidences, are not true ; that is, there is
just enough incorrectness in the statement to hinder
their availing as evidences. This, I say, is worth
noticing, because it may serve in other cases to make
us cautious of rejecting facts stated by the Fathers
because we discredit (rightly or wrongly is not the
question) the grounds on which they rest them. Did
we know no other evidence than what ApoUinaris and
TertuUian allege for the sudden relief of the Roman
legions in Germany, we should have rejected the fact
when we had invalidated the evidence ; but this, as
u Ad Scap. c.4.

244 The Thundering Legion.
the event shows, would have been a hasty proceeding.
Sometimes facts are so notorious that proof is ex
abundanti ; and sometimes writers like those in ques
tion hurt a good cause by not leaving it to itself.
1 1 8. Now, as to the corroborative statement made
by ApoUinaris, writers of great authority assume
that he, or other early writers, speak as if a legion in
the Roman army was composed wholly of Christians."
Yet even Eusebius does but speak of " the soldiers in
the Melitene legion," which is an ambiguous form of
expression ; while TertuUian uses the phrase, " Chris-
tianorum/ortemilitum precationibus," " Christianorum
militum orationibus," no mention being made of a
legion at all, and the word " forte " strongly opposing
the idea that the Christians formed an entire body of
troops. As to ApoUinaris, he, it is true, stated in his
lost work, that in consequence of the miracle a legion
was called " Thundering " ; but we may not assume
that he said more than that the Christians who
prayed were in the legion, since there is nothing
strange in the idea of a whole body obtaining a name
from the good deed of some of them, nor strange,
again, considering that bodies of troops were drawn,
then as now, from particular places, and were open
to various local or other influences, that Christians
should have been numerous enough in one particular
y Vales, in Euseb. Hist. v. 5. Moyle's Posthumous Works,
Vol. ii. p. 82. Jablonski's Opusc. Tom. iv. p. 9.

The Thundering Legion. 245
legion to give a character to it. This difficulty, how
ever, being disposed of, a more important objection
remains ; there was indeed a Thundering Legion, as
ApoUinaris says, but then it was as old as the time of
Trajan, nay, of Augustus." This circumstance, of
course, is fatal to his argument. Moyle, upon this,
observes that "ApoUinaris, the first broacher of the
miracle, was grossly mistaken, to say no worse;"y but,
though it was a mistake, it surely is not grosser than
if a country clergyman at this day were to commit a
blunder in speaking of the Queen's regiments serving
^Moyle's Posthumous Works, Vol. ii. p. 90, and Scaliger
and Valesius before him. Baronius accounts for the fact by
supposing that the Christian soldiers were in all parts of the
army, and after this were incorporated into the existing
Thundering Legion. "Par est credere, ipsum eosdem ob
tam egregium atque mirandum facinus Fulminantium nomine
nobilitasse, ac eosdem simul ejusdem nominis legioni pariter
aggregasse." Ann. 176, 20; vid. also Witsius, Diatrib. 46.
Mr. King, too, observes that Xiphilin is the only.author who
"absolutely affirms the soldiers of the Melitenian Legion to
be all Christians." Ap. Moyle, p. 116 ; vid. also Milman, Christ.
Vol. ii. p. 190. Moyle answers that King is the first person
who has interpreted Eusebius, etc., otherwise, p. 212. Lard-
ner, Testim. Vol. ii. Ch. 15 ; and Mosheim, ant. Constant. Sec 2.
Ch. 17, side with Moyle. Mosheim connects "forte" with
" precationibus impetrato." [Lumper, t. 7, p. 510 note, says
that "forte" is African Latin for " fortuito ;" he seems to
agree with Mosheim in the construction. He gives a list of
authors who have treated of the occurrence, p. 5I5-]
yHe retracts and throws the blame on Eusebius, p. 221,
almost denying that ApoUinaris made the statement imputed to
him. So does Neander, Church Hist., Vol. i. 1, 2.

246 The Thundering Legion.
in India or Canada. In spite of our advantages from
the present diffusion of knowledge, certainly our
parish priests do not know much more of the con
stitution or history of the British army than the
Bishop of Hierapolis of the military establishments
of Rome.
119. TertuUian, on the other hand, tells us that the
Emperor, in a formal document, acknowledged the
miracle as obtained by the prayers of the Christians,
and favoured the whole body in consequence ; not,
indeed, repealing the laws against them, but putting
a heavier punishment on informers against them
than on themselves. And it would appear that the
Emperor did issue a rescript in their favour in an
earlier period of his reign, which Eusebius has pre
served,2 to the effect that "the parties accused of
Christianity shall be pardoned, though it be proved
against them, and the informer shall undergo the
penalty instead ; " and in the reign of Commodus,
the son of Marcus, a Pagan actually had his legs
broken, and was put to death, for bringing an accusa
tion against a Christians And, further, that the Em-
z Moyle denies the genuineness of this Rescript, and Dod
well suspects it. Dissert. Cypr. xi. 34, fin. Moyle adds, p.
337, that G. Vossius wrote a Dissertation to prove it a forgery.
Pagi and Valesius maintain it ; so does Jablonski, 1. c, as
signing it with Pagi to the ninth year of Antoninus, while
Valesius assigns it to the first.
a Jablonski, ibid. p. 18. Moyle suspects the story, yet
without strong grounds, p. 249. It is found in Eusebius.

The Thundering Legion. 247
peror, about the time of the German war, showed a
leaning towards " foreign rites," which might easily
be mistaken by the Christians to include or even to
imply Christianity, is made clear by one of the
authors to whom reference has just been made at the
foot of the page.b Moreover, that the Emperor re
cognized the miracle is very certain, as will appear
directly ; but, all this being undeniable, still there is
no evidence for the very point on which the force of
Tertullian's proof depends, viz., that his act of grace
towards the Christians was in consequence of his belief
in the miracle, and his belief that they were the cause
of it.c So far from it, he was in a course of persecu
tion against the Church, both before and after its
date. How severely that persecution raged a few
years afterwards, the well-known epistle of the
Churches of Gaul informs us;d though its force must
at least have been suspended as regards Asia Minor,
otherwise ApoUinaris, writing at the time, could not
b Jablonski, ibid. Moyle, with a different purpose, gives
instances of the Emperor's leaning towards Chaldeans, ma
gicians, etc., p. 235 ; vid. also p. 356.
c Moyle maintains, p. 244, that TertuUian does not assert
this connection of Antoninus's acknowledgment of the
miracle with his edict, nor any other ancient writer.
d Witsius, to evade the difficulty, maintains that the perse
cution was the consequence of a riot, and the hostility of local
governors, Diatrib. c. 66. King maintains the same, ap.
Moyle, p. 309. Eusebius certainly speaks of it as <?£ imOeo-eon
tQv 5-qp.av. Hist. v. procem.

248 The Thundering Legion.
have fancied that the Emperor had recognized the
miracle as the result of Christian prayer.
120. Dismissing, however, these two statements,
which, though they cannot be maintained as they
stand, still are not necessary conditions of the alleged
miracle, and which admit, as we have seen, of a very
ready explanation, we have, nevertheless, the following
decisive evidence in proof of the occurrence of some
extraordinary and providential storm, when the
Roman army was in very critical circumstances in
the course of the German war.
121. Eusebius observes that even the Pagans con
fessed the miracle, though they did not allow that it
was attributable to the prayers of the Christians;
and what is left of antiquity sufficiently confirms his
statement. Indeed, so certain was the fact, that no
thing was left to the Pagans but to record it and to
account for it. They accounted for it by referring it
to their own divinities ; they recorded it on medals
and on monuments. Dio Cassius calk it a " wonder
ful and providential" preservation, and attributes it
to an Egyptian magician, of the name of Arnuphis,
who invoked " Mercury, who is in the air, and other
spirits." Julius Capitolinus attributes it to the Em
peror's prayers. Themistius, who says the same,
adds that he had seen a picture, " in the middle of
which the Emperor was praying in the line of battle,
and his soldiers were catching the rain in their hel-

The Thundering Legion. 249-
rriets, and quenching their thirst with the draught
thus providentially granted." Moreover, the memo
rial of it is sculptured on the celebrated Antonine
column at Rome, where is a figure of Jupiter Pluvius
scattering lightning and rain, the enemy and their
horses lying prostrate, and the Romans, sword in
hand, rushing on them. A medal, too, is or was
extant, of the very year of the occurrence, with the
head of Antoninus crowned with laurel on one side,
and a figure of Mercury on the reverse.
122. The very fact of this event being recorded
with such formality on the column of Antoninus, is of
itself a sufficient proof of its importance ; but perhaps
the reader w"ill be more impressed by the pagan Dio's
description of it, which runs as follows : " When the
Barbarians would not give them battle, in hopes of
their perishing by heat and thirst, since they had
so surrounded them that they had no possible means
of getting water, and when they were in the
utmost distress from sickness, wounds, sun, and thirst,
and could neither fight, nor retreat, but remained in
order of battle and at their posts in this parched con
dition, suddenly clouds gathered, and a copious rain
fell, not without the mercy of God. And when it first
began to fall, the Romans, raising their mouths towards
heaven, received it upon them ; next, turning up their
shields and helmets, they drank largely out of them,
and gave to their horses. And when the Barbarians,

250 The Thundering Legion.
charged them, they drank as they fought ; and num
bers of them were wounded, and drank out of their
helmets water and blood mixed. And while they
were thus incurring heavy loss from the assault of
the enemy, because most of them were engaged in
drinking, a violent hail-storm and much lightning were
discharged upon the enemy. And thus water and
fire might be seen in the same place falling from
heaven, that some might drink refreshment, and others
be burned to death ; for the fire did not touch the
Romans, or if so, it was at once extinguished ; nor did
the wet help the Barbarians, but burned like oil ; so
that, drenched with rain, they still needed moisture,
and they wounded their own selves, that blood might
put out the fire."e This of course is rhetorically
written, but men do not write rhetorically without a
cause, and the effort of the composition shows the
marvellousness of the occurrence.
123. We are sure, then, of the providential deliver
ance of the army, as Eusebius and the others state it.
And that there were Christians in the army we may
be quite sure, from what we gather from the general
history of the times, feven independently of what these
" This is translated from Baronius ; but it agrees with the
original in all important points, though not always literal.
Dion. Hist. lxxi. p. 805. Vid. also Themist. Orat. 15.
f Moyle indeed contends " that there were few or none at
all in the army," and observes, " Considering the passive
principles of the age, I would as soon believe my Lord Marl-

The Thundering Legion. 251
writers state. And further, we may be sure also, even
before we have definite authority for the fact, that
they offered up prayers for deliverance.
124. Under these circumstances I do not see what
remains to be proved. Here is an army in extreme
jeopardy, with Christians in it; the enemy is de
stroyed and they are delivered. And ApoUinaris,
TertuUian, and Eusebius, attest g that these Christians
borough had a whole regiment of Quakers in his army as that
Antoninus had a whole legion of Christians in his." pp . 84,
85. He argues from the testimonies of the early Fathers, of
Celsus, etc., and from the oaths and other idolatrous acts to
which soldiers were obliged to submit, adding, " that it was
impossible for a Christian to serve in them unless it were by
the help of Occasional Conformity. At least in such a case
the prayers of such mock Christians would hardly work won
ders." p. 87. This is an objection which, if valid, strikes
deeper than any of those which I have noticed in the text.
Mr. Milman observes of the alleged apparition of the Cross to
Constantine, " This irreconcilable incongruity between the
symbol of universal peace and the horrors of war, in my judg
ment, is conclusive against the miraculous or supernatural
character of the transaction." Hist, of Christ, Vol.ii.p. 354.
He adds, "This was the first advance to the military Chris
tianity of the middle ages." He refers in a note to Mosheim
for similar sentiments, '' for which," he says, " I will readily
encounter the charge of Quakerism." He then refers to the
Empress Helena's turning the nails of the Cross into a helmet
and bits for Constantine's war-horse. " True or false," he
observes, " this story is characteristic of the Christian senti
ment then prevalent." [Vid. also Lupus, Opp. t. xi. p. 94,
etc. Pusey on TertuUian, p. 184. Gibbon, MisceUan. Works,
p. 759, ed. 1837.]
g Moyle indeed maintains that the Christians in general did
not believe it to be a miracle : he argues from the silence of

252 The Thundering Legion.
in the army prayed, and that the deliverance was felt
at the time to be an answer to their prayers ; what
remains but to accept their statement ? We, who are
Christians as well as they, can feel no hesitation on the
score that pagan writers attribute the occurrence to
another cause, to magic or to false gods. Surely we
may accept the evidence of the latter to the fact,
without taking their hypothetical explanation of it.
And we may give our own explanation to it for our
own edification, in accordance with what we believe to
be divine truth, without being obliged to go on to use it
in argument for the conversion of unbelievers. It may
be a miracle, though not one of evidence, but of
confirmation, encouragement, mercy, for the sake of
Christians. 125. Nor does it concern us much to answer the ob
jection that there is nothing strictly miraculous in such
an occurrence, because sudden thunder-clouds after
drought are not unfrequent ; for in addition to other
answers which have been made to such a remark
in other parts of this Essay, I would answer, Grant
me such miracles ordinarily in the early Church, and
I will ask no other ; grant that upon prayer benefits
are vouchsafed, deliverances are effected, unhoped-for
St. Theophilus, St. Clement, Origen, St. Cyprian, Arnobius,
and Lactantius, p. 277. W. Lowth, however, refers to a pas
sage in St. Cyprian, ad Demetrian. Routh, t. i. p. 153. It
really seems unreasonable to demand that every Father should
write about everything.

The Thimdering Legion. 253
success obtained, sickness cured, tempests laid, pes
tilences put to flight, famines remedied, judgments
inflicted, and there will be no need of inquiring into
the causes, whether supernatural or natural, to which
they are to be referred.11 They may or they may not,
in this or that case, follow or surpass the laws of
nature, and they may surpass them plainly or doubt
fully, but the common sense of mankind will call them
miraculous ; for by a miracle, whatever be its formal
definition, is popularly meant an event which im
presses upon the mind the immediate presence of the'.
Moral Governor of the world. He may sometimes'
act through nature, sometimes beyond or against it,
but those who admit the fact of such interferences
will have little difficulty in admitting also their strictly
miraculous character, if the circumstances of the case
require it, and those who deny miracles to the early
Church will be equally strenuous against allowing
her the grace of such intimate influence (if we may
so speak upon the course of Divine Providence, as
t Moyle is obliged to allow so much as this, saying of the
defeat of the Philistines by a storm on Samuel's prayers,
" This fact, though it cannot properly, in the strict and genu
ine sense of the word, be called a miracle, yet well deserves a
place in the lower form of miracles, because it was preter
natural, and not performed by the ordinary concurrence of
second causes, but by the immediate hand of God." p. 286.
Vid. Benedict, xiv. de Can. Sanct. iv. part i. 11, who instances
the hail-stones in Joshua's battle as " praster naturam." Vid.
infr. n. 143, 193.

254 The Thundering Legion.
is here in question, even though it be not miracu
lous. 126. On the whole then we may conclude that the
facts of this memorable occurrence are as the early
Christian writers state them ; that Christian soldiers
did ask, and did receive, in a great distress, rain for
their own supply, and lightning against their enemies ;
whether through miracle or not we cannot say for
certain, but more probably not through miracle in the
philosophical sense of the word. All we know, and
all we need know is, that " He made darkness His
secret place, His pavilion round about Him, with dark
water and thick clouds to cover Him ; the Lord
thundered out of heaven, and the Highest gave His
thunder ; hail- stones and coals of fire. He sent out
His arrows, and scattered them ; He sent forth light
nings, and destroyed them."

Section II.
THE CHANGE OF WATER INTO OIL AT THE PRAYER
OF ST. NARCISSUS OF JERUSALEM.
127. XTARCISSUS, Bishop of Jerusalem, when
*¦ ^ oil failed for the lamps on the vigil of
Easter, sent the persons who had the care of them
to the neighbouring well for water. When they
brought it, he prayed over it, and it was changed
into oil.1 Narcissus was made Bishop about a.d. 180,
at the age of eighty-four ; he was at a Council on the
question of Easter 195, and lived through some years
of the third century, dying at the extraordinary age
of a hundred and sixteen, or more.
128. It is favourable to the truth of this account,
that the instrument of the miracle was an aged, and, as
also was the case, a very holy man. It may be added
that he was born in the first century, before St. John's
death, and was in some sense an Apostolical Father,
as Jortin observes.
129. But there are certain Eemarkable circumstances
connected with him, which, as persons regard them,
¦ Euseb. Hist. vi. 9.

256 Change by Narcissus
will be viewed in contrary lights, as making the mira- '
cle more or as less probable. Eusebius informs us
that Narcissus was for some years the victim of a
malignant calumny. Three men, disliking his strict
ness and the discipline he exercised, accused him of
some great crime, with an imprecation on themselves
if they spoke falsely ; the first that he might perish
by fire, the second that he might be smitten with dis
ease, and the third that he might lose his eyesight.
Narcissus fled from his Church, and lived many years
in the wild parts of the country, as a solitary. At
length the first of his three accusers was burned in
his house, with all his family; the second was covered
from head to foot with the disease which he had
named ; and the third confessed his crime, but, over
come with shame and remorse, lost his eyes by weep
ing. Narcissus was restored, and died in possession
of his see.
130. Now it may be said that the extraordinary
nature of this history only increases the improbability
of the miracle. It reads like a made story ; there is
a completeness about it ; and there is an extravagance
in the notion of the loss of sight by weeping. Yet the
same thing happened to St. Francis. " His eyes,"
says Butler, " seemed two fountains of tears, which
were almost continually falling from them, insomuch
that at length he almost lost his sight." He was
seared with red-hot iron from the ear to the eye-brow,

of Water into Oil. 257
with the hope of saving it. In his last illness "he
scarce allowed himself any intermission from prayer,
and would not check his tears, though the physician
thought it necessary for the preservation of his sight ;
which he entirely lost upon his death-bed." k How
ever, even though we allow that the history in ques
tion is embellished, still the general outline may
remain, that Narcissus was unjustly accused and by
a wonderful providence vindicated. In this point of
view it surely adds to the probability of the miracle
before us, that it is attributed to a man, not only so
close upon Apostolic times and persons, so holy, so
aged, but in addition so strangely tried, so strangely
righted. It removes the abruptness and marvellous-
ness of what at first sight looks like " naked history,"
as Paley calls it, or what we commonly understand by
a legend. Such a man may well be accounted " wor
thy for whom Christ should do this." And if the
foregoing circumstances are true, not only in outline,
but in detail, then still greater probability is added to
the miracle.
131. Jortin objects that "the change of water into
oil to supply the church lamps has the air of a miracle
performed upon an occasion rather too slender."1 But
Dodwell"1 had already observed that the mystical idea
connected with the sacred lights gives a meaning to
k Lives of the Saints, Oct. 4. 1 Dissert, in Iren. ii. 49.
m Vol. ii. p. 103. 17

258 Change by Narcissus
it, and particularly at that season ; and Eusebius
tells us that the people were much troubled" at their
failure. 132. Jortin also observes that "in the time of Au
gustus a fountain of oil burst out at Rome, and flowed
for a whole day. In natural history there are accounts
of greasy and bituminous springs, when something
like oil has floated on the water. Pliny, and Har-
douin in his notes, mention many such fountains,
' qui explent olei vicem,' and ' quorum aqua lucernae
ardeant.'" This circumstance perhaps adds proba
bility to the miracle, both as lessening its violence,
(if the word may be used,) as the accompanying his
tory of the Bishop's- trials lessens it in another way,
and because in matter of fact Almighty Wisdom
seems, as appears from Scripture, not unfrequently to
work miracles beyond, rather than against nature.
133. Eusebius notices pointedly that it was the
tradition of the Church of Jerusalem.0 It should be
recollected, however, that the tradition had but a
narrow interval to pass from Narcissus to Eusebius, —
not above fifty or sixty years, as the latter was born
about A.D. 264.
134. On the whole then there seems sufficient
ground to justify us in accepting this narrative as
in truth an instance of our Lord's gracious presence
n Actios &6vp.tas 5£aXa/3oiVi;s rb irav lrXijffos.
0 'J2s ix irapaBbo-ews tOiv Kara SiaSoxTC iSe\<pdv.

of Water into Oil, 259
with His Church, though the evidence is not so defi
nite or minute as to enable us to realize the miracle.
This is a remark which is often in point; belief, in any
true sense of the word, requires a certain familiarity
or intimacy of the mind with the thing believed. Till
it is in some way brought home to us and made our
own, we cannot properly say we believe it, even when
our reason receives it. This occurs constantly as re
gards matters of opinion and doctrine. Take any
characteristic point of detail in the religious views
of a person whom we revere and follow on the whole ;
do we believe this particular doctrine or opinion of
his, or do we not ? We do not like to pledge our
selves to it, yet we shrink from saying that it is
not true, and we defend it when we hear it attacked.
We have no doubt about it, yet we cannot bring
ourselves to say positively that we believe it, because
belief implies an habitual presence and abidance of
the matter believed in our thoughts, and a familiar
acquaintance with the ideas it involves, which we
.. cannot profess in the instance in question. Here we
see the use of reading and studying the Gospels in
order to true belief in our Lord ; and, again, of acting
upon His words, in order to true belief in them 8
This being considered, I do not see that we can be
said actually to believe in a miracle like that now in
question, of which so little is known in detail, and
8 [Vid. Essay towards a Grammar of Assent, Ch. iv. § 2.]

260 Change of Water into Oil.
which is so little personally interesting to us ; but we
cannot be said to disbelieve it, there being sufficient
grounds for conviction in the sense in which we be
lieve the greater part of the accounts of general
history.

Section III.
THE MIRACLE WROUGHT ON THE COURSE OF THE
RIVER LYCUS BY ST. GREGORY THAUMATURGUS.
135- T^\OUGLAS, in his great earnestness to prove
-*— that no real miracles were wrought by the
Fathers and Saints of the second and third centuries,
tells us that the miracles of St. Gregory Thauma-
turgus, some of which have been detailed above, " are
justly rejected as inventions of a later age, and can
be believed by those only who can admit the miracles
ascribed to Apollonius, or those reported so long after
his death to Ignatius. Gregory of Nyssa," the bio
grapher of Thaumaturgus, " according to Dr. Cave's
character of him, was apt to be too credulous. No
wonder, therefore, he gave too much credit to old
women's tales, as the anecdotes of the Wonder-worker
must be allowed to be, when related, as we learn from
St. Basil, by his aged grandmother Macrina."p This
is not respectful either to St. Macrina or to St.
Gregory Thaumaturgus, to say nothing of his treat
s' Page 327, note.

262 Change by Gregory
ment of St. Gregory Nyssen ; plainly, it can mean
nothing else but that St. Gregory did no miracles, and
that it is weak, nay, even heathenish, to believe he did.
Otherwise thinks a very careful and learned writer,
not a member of our Church, and his statement may
fitly be placed in contrast with the opinion of one
who was a Bishop in it. " His history," says Larckier,
speaking of Thaumaturgus, " as delivered by authors
of the fourth and following centuries, particularly by
Nyssen, it is to be feared, has in it somewhat of fic
tion ; but there can be no reasonable doubt made but
he was very successful in making converts to Chris
tianity in the country of Pontus about the middle of
the third century ; and that, beside his natural and
acquired abilities, he was favoured with extraordinary
gifts of the Spirit, and wrought miracles of surprising
power. The plain and express testimonies of Basil
and others, at no great distance of time or place from
Gregory, must be reckoned sufficient grounds of credit
with regard to these things. Theodoret, mentioning
Gregory, and his brother, and Firmilian, and Helenus,
all together, ascribes miracles to none but him alone.
They were all Bishops of the first rank ; nevertheless
Gregory had a distinction even among them. It is
the same thing in Jerome's letter to Magnus ; there
are mentioned Hippolytus, Julius Africanus, Diony-
sius of Alexandria, and many others, of great note
and eminence for learning and piety. But Theodore,

of the Course of the Lycus. 263
afterwards called Gregory, is the only one who is
called a man of Apostolical signs and wonders."«
136. These remarks of Lardner should be kept in
mind by those who would examine the miracles attri
buted to St. Gregory. For it is obvious to reflect,
that if we once believe that he did work miracles, it
is the height of improbability that in the course of a
century all of these should be forgotten, and a set of
pretended miracles substituted in their place, and
that among a people who are noted for a particular
attachment to their old customs, and especially to the
rites and usages introduced by St. Gregory. " The
people of Neocaesarea," says Lardner, " retained for a
long while remarkable impressions of religion ; and
they had an affection for the primitive simplicity, very
rare and uncommon, almost singular, at that time,
when innovations came into the Church apace." r And
if reasons can be given for believing one of the mi
racles, a favourable hearing will be gained for the rest,
which belong to one family with it, and are conveyed
to us through the same channels. All are of the
romantic kind, all come to us on tradition committed
to writing by St. Gregory Nyssen. That is, we shall
have reason for believing his narrative in its substance,
for still there is nothing to prevent misstatement in its
detail. Against this, indeed, inspiration alone could
secure us.
4 Credib. ii. 42, § 5. 'Vid. also above, n. 20.

264 Change by Gregory
137. This absence of a perfection which only at
taches to inspired documents, has often been made an
objection to receiving the miracles which ecclesiastical
history records.s But there is another peculiarity
about its existing materials, which applies in particular
to Nyssen's Life of Thaumaturgus. That Life does
not answer the purpose for which critics and contro
versialists require it at this day ; it is very unsatisfac
tory as an attestation of miracles, and would not read
well in a process of canonization. For in truth the
author did not set himself to attest them at all ; he
wrote a sacred panegyrical discourse, and from the
nature of the composition he left out names, dates,
places, particulars, all of them necessary indeed for
critical proof, had he been engaged in furnishing
evidence. But, on the contrary, he was only an
encomiast of a departed Saint ; and why not, if he
found it fitting for his people? He even omits par
ticulars which he certainly knew well, and every one
else ; as the name of Gregory's see, and of the Em-
"The miracles of Christ and His Apostles have not es- .
caped the adulterations of monkery ; and if this were sufficient
to discredit truth, there is not a fact in civil history that would
stand its ground. As to those who expect a certain innate
virtue in it, of force to extrude all heterogeneous mixture, they
expect a quality in truth which was never yet found in it, nor,
I fear, ever will. Nay, the more notorious a fact of this kind
is, that is to say, the more eye-witnesses there are of it, the
more subject it is to undesigned depravation," etc. War
burton, Julian, § 2, n. 3, p. 96, ed. 1750.

of the Course of the Lycus. 265
peror under whose persecution he fled from it ; why
then need we be suspicious of other omissions, as if
they necessarily reflected on the general authenticity
of his narrative ? why may he not put off a secular
style and manner, when he is treating a religious sub
ject ? Why is he to be compelled to turn the Church
into a court of law, and to introduce a prosaic phrase
ology into the hymns, the anthems, and the lessons of
the Euchology ? He wrote for the faithful and devout,
and he had a right to do so.
1 38. Dr. Lardner, a calm and impartial critic, as we
have seen, here loses himself. He seems to forget that
a Bishop may, if he pleases, write homilies and pane
gyrics, and read martyrologies, and that inspired Scrip
ture itself is not over-careful in dating, locating, and
naming the sacred persons and sacred things which it
introduces. Would not then St. Gregory's simple an
swer to such criticism as the following be, that he did
not write for Dr. Lardner? That candid writer seems
to forget this, when, he makes the following additional
remarks on his Oration i — " It is plain it is a panegyric,
not a history. Nyssen is so intent upon the marvellous,
that he has scarce any regard to common things ; he
relates distinctly the mysterious faith which Gregory
received one night from John the Evangelist, but he
despatches in a very few words the instructions which
Gregory received from Origen, though he was five
years under his tuition, and had before him excellent

266 Change by Gregory
materials to enlarge upon concerning that part of out
Bishop's history. Then he takes little or no notice of
circumstances of time and place, or the names of per
sons ; these he omits as things of no moment. In
deed, he has been so good as to inform us of Gregory's
native city and country, and that he studied some
time, as he says, at Alexandria ; but he does not let
us know where Gregory was acquainted with Origen,
whether at Alexandria or at Caesarea. He does not
inform us of the Temple where Gregory lodged and
silenced the demon ; neither where it stood, nor to
what god it was dedicated. He has not so much as
once mentioned the name of the Priest who was con
verted in so extraordinary a manner ; nor has he
mentioned the name of any one of the many persons,
subjects of Gregory's miraculous works." " Possibly
it will be said," he continues, " that it was contrary to
the rules of rhetoric to be more particular in an ora
tion. If that be so, and all that Nyssen aimed at was
to entertain his hearers or readers with a fine piece of
oratory, we must consider it as such ; but then, though
it may afford us some good entertainment, it will
hardly be a ground for much faith ; for a story to be
amusing is one thing, to be credible is another." But
is there no refuge from the rostrum on the one hand,
and the witness-box on the other ? Must a style be
either rhetorical or controversial ? May it not be eccle
siastical ? However, Lardner grants that the miracle

of the Course of the Lycus. 267
wrought upon the Lycus is at least particularized by
the name of the river ; and as some may think that it
even approaches to fulfil Leslie's celebrated criterion
of a miracle, a few words shall be given to it here.
139. Leslie's tests of the truth of a miracle are
these : that it should be sensible ; public ; verified by
some monument and observance ; and that set up at
the very time when it was wrought. Now St. Gregory
is said by his biographer, as we have seen above,' to
have restrained a mountain-stream within its mounds,
which had been accustomed to flood the plain country
into which it descended. He tells us the place, as
well as the river, and the mountains from which it
flowed ; he describes its impetuosity as recurring, ac
cording as it was swollen by the waters from the
mountains, and its ravages as very serious. But he
adds, that, after Gregory had visited the spot and
prayed, the calamity was stopped onqe for all, though
the stream descended with fury as before, and came
up to the very place which St. Gregory had marked
as its limit. He specifies this place by referring his
readers to a monument standing upon it, and that
from the time of the miracle, and moreover, a monu
ment which in its history involves an additional mira
cle. He says that the Saint took his staff, and fixed
it at the opening of the mound which the current had
forced ; that the staff grew into a tree, and that the
n. 22.

268 Change by Gregory
waters swept it, but never passed it, and that it re
mained to his own day, being known by the people ot
the country as " the staff." Moreover, it may be said
there was an observance, as well as a monument, which
dates from the time of the miracle; for surely the
conversion of the people benefited, upon their receipt
of the benefit, is, in its results, of the nature of a
standing observance, and weU fitted to preserve and
continue the knowledge of the supernatural act. And
further, as some immediate extraordinary occurrence
is necessary to enable us to account for so extraor
dinary an event as the conversion of a whole people,
but the success of St. Gregory's restraint upon the
stream could not be known till after an interval, or
rather only in a course of years, some probability is
thereby added to the idea that in the manner or cir
cumstances of his action itself there was something im
pressive and convincing, and such the miracle wrought
upon the staff would have been in an eminent way.
140. Further, Nyssen not only lived too near the
times to allow of a spurious tradition fastening itself
on the history, whether of the tree or of the people,
but he was a native and inhabitant of that part of
Asia Minor, and his family before him. His grand
mother, Macrina, was brought up at Neocaesarea,
Gregory's see, by his immediate disciples. Should
the account be false, it will be somewhat of a parallel
to suppose a person, at this day, in high ecclesiastical

of the Course of the Lycus. 269
station, born and educated and writing in the Isle of
Man, and assuring us that Bishop Wilson once laid a
storm in behalf of the fishermen, and that a lighthouse
was built at the time, and still remains, in commemora
tion of the event ; and writers, moreover, of this day, in
England, Scotland, and Ireland, confirming the testi
mony, by incidentally observing, without allusion to
the particular story, that Bishop Wilson had the gift
of miracles. We should say it was impossible that
such evidence could be offered in behalf of a fiction
now ; and why not say the same of a similar case
then ? " But a fiction was possible then," it may be
argued, " because the age was more superstitious than
now." I answer, " And so was a miracle possible, be
cause Christendom was more Catholic and Apostolic."
141. Of course, an objection may be raised, on the
score of the miracle not being of such a kind as to
preclude the possibility of our referring it to physical
causes, in a country where earthquakes were not
uncommon. But miracles of degree, which admit
abstractedly and hypothetically of being explained
by the joint operation of nature and of exaggeration
in the informant, are among the most common in
/ Scripture, and may nevertheless be cogent and con
vincing in the particular case, as has been already
observed. No east wind could raise the waters of the
Red Sea, as Scripture describes them to be raised at
the time of the Exodus ; no supposition of earth-

270 Change of the Course of the Lycus.
quake or other physical disturbance will suffice to
deprive Nyssen's narrative, as it stands, of its mira
culous character. Nor may we take on ourselves to
mutilate or deface either it or the Book of Exodus,
or any other professed statement of fact, without first
assigning reasons for our proceeding.

Section IV.
APPEARANCE OF THE CROSS IN THE SKY TO
CONSTANTINE.
142. \~\ THEN Constantine was on his march to
* ' Rome to attack Maxentius, at a time
when he was as yet undecided about the truth of
Christianity, a luminous Cross is said to have ap
peared in the sky at mid-day, in sight of himself and
his army, with the inscription, " In this conquer." u
His victory and his conversion followed. The date
of these transactions is A.D. 311 and 312.
143. Now, here the fact reported is plainly mira
culous. No known physical cause could have formed
a sentence of Greek or Latin in the air. It has
Philostorgius, Nicephorus, and Zonaras say that the in
scription was in Latin. Eusebius gives the impression that it
was in Greek. So says the Emperor Leo expressly ; vid.
Grets. de Crue. tom. ii. p. 37, who, mentioning this difference
of statement, ibid., also determines against Brentius that the
apparition was that of the Cross with the monogram of XP, and
not merely of the monogram. Rivetus too contends for the
monogram only. Cath. Orth. ii. 19, p. 168-

272 Appearance of the Cross
sometimes been supposed, indeed, that letters were
not really exhibited, but only some emblem, such as
a crown, which denoted conquest ;v and that then
what remains of the phenomenon may be resolved
into meteoric effects. But since any extraordinary
appearance at such a juncture, whatever be its physi
cal cause, or whether it have one or no, is undeniably
the result of an immediate Divine superintendence, it
is not easy to see what is gained by an hypothesis of
this nature. If in matter of fact our Lord was then
really addressing Constantine, it seems trifling to
make it a grave point to prove that He did so in this
way, and not in that In such a case nature either
would be made to minister, or would be no impedi
ment, to His Will ; and His Will to address Con
stantine is sufficient surely by itself to account for a
contravention or suspension of the laws of nature,
and to overcome the presumption which primd facie
lies against the miracle. That He should address
Constantine intelligibly is a miracle already. And
surely to sway and overrule the physical system
towards a moral object, is a miracle only different in
degree from an interference with it for such an object.
For this is to impose on nature a constraint beyond and
above itself, i.e. a supernatural constraint ; and if it is
subordinate to moral laws, why should it not some
times give way to them ? In short, does the case
T Fabric. Dissert, de Cruce io.

to Constantine. 273
'ever stand thus, if it may be reverently said that the
Almighty would address man, unless nature stood in
the way? Does He fetter Himself with its laws,
who, even in the days of His flesh, did but submit to
them, in order in the event to dispense with them ?
Such explanations, then, either imply that the invio
lability of creation is more sacred than a Purpose of
the Creator, or they tamper with historical evidence
for an insufficient end. To mutilate the evidence is
to incur all the difficulty of denying it, with none of
the gain. So this question may be passed over.
144 In the next place the a priori aspect of the re
ported miracle, if it is so to be called* is in its favour.
The approaching conversion of the Roman empire, in
the person of its head, was as great an event as any
in Christian history. Constantine's submission of his
power to the Church has been a pattern for all Chris
tian monarchs since, and the commencement of her
state establishment to this day; and, on the other
hand, the fortunes of the Roman empire are in
prophecy apparently connected with her in a very
intimate manner, which we are not yet able fully to
comprehend. If any event might be said to call for
* " Confudit Dana;us apparitiones Crucis cum miraculis
Crucis ; etsi enim apparitiones Crucis possunt miracula ap-
pellari, Bellarminus tamen apparitiones a miraculis distinxit,
miracula vocans ea, quas per Crucem supra naturae vim et or-
dinem patrata sunt." Gretzer de Cruce, iv. 12, p. 253, ed.
1734- 18

274 Appearance of the Cross
a miracle, it was this ; whether to signalize it or to
bring it about. Thus it was that the fate of Babylon
was written on the wall of the banqueting hall ; also
portents in the sky preceded the final destruction of
Jerusalem, and are predicted in Scripture as fore
runners of the last day. Moreover our Lord's pro
phecy of "the Sign of the Son of Man in heaven"*
was anciently understood of the Cross. And, further,
the sign of the cross was at the time, and had been
from the beginning, a received symbol and instru
ment of Christian devotion, and cannot be ascribed
to a then rising superstition. TertuUian speaks of it
as an ordinary rite for sanctifying all the ordinary
events of the day ; it was used in exorcisms ; and,
what is still more to the point, it is regarded by St.
Justin, TertuUian, and Minucius as impressed with a
providential meaning upon natural forms and human
works, as well as introduced by divine authority into
the types of the Old Testament.
One would be inclined then to receive the wonder
ful event in question on very slight evidence, if that
evidence were good as far as it went ; and now let us
see what, and of what kind, is producible in its behalf.
It is on the whole sufficient, yet not without its diffi
culties. y On the sign of the Son of Man being understood of the
Cross by the Fathers, vid. G. Voss. Thes. Theolog. xvi. 9.
Cornel, a Lapid. in loc. Matt, and Maldonat. in loc.

to Constantine. 275
145. In the panegyrical oration delivered imme
diately upon the victory, the speaker, who is a Pagan,
asks, " What God, what Divine Presence encouraged
thee, that when nearly all thy companions in arms
and commanders not only had secret misgivings but
had open fears of the omen, yet against the counsels of
men, against the warnings of the diviners, thou didst
by thyself perceive that the time of delivering the city
was come?"2 Now here an omen is mentioned of a
public nature, which dismayed the heathen priests and
soldiers ; it is remarkable too that what it was is not
mentioned. All this would be sufficiently accounted
for, if it was the sign of the Cross which they had seen ;
a spectacle of all others of bad augury with the hie
rarchy of the pagan city.a And in corroboration of
this interpretation, Eusebius, in his own account of
the miracle, tells us that on sight of the apparition
Constantine, who was still fluctuating between Chris
tianity and Paganism, was at first much distressed
from a doubt what it portended.
146. Next, about the year 314 or 315, that is, three
years after the event, Constantine erected his tri-
z Baron. Ann. 312, 14.
a Julian is said to have found a cross upon the entrails of a
victim he was offering in sacrifice ; the sight <j>pmiv irapia-xe ko.1
dywvlav. Naz. Orat. iv. 54. He upbraids the Christians with
their worship of the wood of the Cross, and signing it upon
their foreheads and sculpturing it upon their dwellings . Cyril
contr: Julian, p. 194.

276 Appearance of the Cross
umphal arch at Rome, which still remains, with an
inscription testifying that he had gained the victory
" instinctu divinitatis, mentis magnitudine."b
147. Further, before0 314, Lactantius or Csecilius,
as we determine the author, published his De Morti-
bus Persecutorum ; in which he asserts, not in a rhe
torical tone or in the form of panegyric, but in the
grave style of history, that Constantine, in conse
quence of a dream, caused the initial letter of the word
Christ to be inscribed on the shields of his soldiers,
and that he thereby gained the victory. " Constan
tine," he says, " was admonished in sleep to mark the
heavenly sign of God on the shields, and so to engage
the enemy. He did as he was bidden, and marks the
name of Christ on the shields, by the letter ^ drawn
across them, with the top circumflexed. Armed with
this sign, his troops take up arms. The enemy
marches tc' meet them without their imperial Com
mander, and passes over the bridge," etc.d Here is no
mention of an apparition, but still the author speaks
of the " heavenly sign."
148. On the ist of March, 321, Nazarius, apagan
'" Burton, however, tells us that "the words instinctu divi
nitatis are supposed to have been added afterwards, as. the
marble is there rather sunk in, and the holes for the bronze
letters are confused." Rome, p. 215. Yet the inscription
ieads oddly without them.
<- i.e. Before the first breach between Constantine and
Licinius. Vid. Gibbon, Ch. xy.. note 40.
a De M. P. §44.

to Constantine. 277
orator of celebrity, pronounced, apparently at Rome,
and not in Constantine's presence, a panegyrical ora
tion upon the Emperor. In this he speaks of the
assistance which the latter had received against Max-
entius in the following terms,: — "Thou didst fight,
O Emperor, by compulsion ; but it was thy best claim
upon victory, that thou didst not seek it. Peace was
denied to him for whom victory was destined. ... In
short, it is the talk of all the Gallic provinces, that
hosts were seen, who bore on them the character of
divine messengers. And though heavenly things use
not to come to sight of man, in that the simple
and uncompounded substance of their subtle nature
escapes his heavy and dim perception, yet those, thy
auxiliaries, bore to be seen and to be heard ; and when
they had testified to thy high merit, they fled from the
contagion of mortal eyes. And what accounts are
given of that vision, of the vigour of their frames, the
size of their limbs, the eagerness of their zeal ! Their
flashing bosses shot an awful radiance, and their
heavenly arms burned with a fearful light ; such did
they come, that they might be understood to be
thine. And thus they spoke, thus they were heard to
say, 'We seek Constantine; we go to aid Constantine.'
Even divine natures have their boastings, and hea
venly natures are touched by ambition. Warriors
who had glided down from heaven, warriors who were
divinely sent, even they did glory that they were

278 Appearance of the Cross
marching with thee. Their leader, I suppose, was thy
father Constantius," etcc
149. It is impossible to doubt from these con
temporaneous witnesses, witnesses more exactly con
temporaneous than are commonly producible, that
some remarkable portent appeared, or was gene
rally believed in, when Constantine was in antici
pation of his engagement with Maxentius, and about
the time that he first professed Christianity. After
all allowances for the rhetoric of Nazarius, his story
surely must have had some foundation ; by it he
is virtually doing homage to a religion which he
disowns, though he adroitly converts it to the service
of Paganism, by recurring to the old heathen prodigies,
such as the appearance of Castor and Pollux, and
seeking to authenticate them by the recent apparition.
Even if the Cross appeared, he could not be expected
to mention it ; he could not have done more than he
has done. The same may be said for the still earlier
orator, who is obliged to allude to the Emperor's
Christianity, while he is complimenting him. on having
rightly interpreted what his friends thought an omen
of evil. Lactantius, though he adds nothing to the
evidence of the apparition in the sky,f testifies to the
e Ap. Baron. Ann. 312. 11.
f Socrates, Philostorgius, Gelasius, Nicephorus, say that
the Cross was in the sky. Sozomen first speaks of it as seen
in a dream, and then, on the authority of Eusebius, describes
the apparition in the sky. Rufinus also gives both accounts.

to Constantine. 279
general idea of some wonderful occurrence having
attended the conversion of the Emperor. He testifies
also to a fact which from its boldness requires ac
counting for, Constantine's marking the symbol of
the Cross upon the arms of his soldiers.
150. Nor is this the only indication of some extra
ordinary influence then exerted upon the Emperor's
mind. Not to dwell on the words already quoted
from his arch, which make no express mention of the
Cross, we find him even going so far as to form a
new military standard, and that is the Labarum, or
Standard of the Cross. And on his entering Rome in
triumph, he forthwith erected a statue of himself with
a Cross in his hand, and an inscription to the effect
that " with that saving sign " he had delivered the
city from a tyrant. But the most remarkable evidence
in point is a medal, extant in the last century, which
bears the figure of the Labarum with the very words,
" In this sign thou shalt conquer." s Thus his assaults
upon Paganism and the supernatural explanation of
them go together ; one and the same auspicious omen
is repeated, whether in ensigns, medals, or monuments.
And indeed, if we may dare to judge of the course of
g So says Gibbon, referring to the Abbe du Voisin and a
Jesuit, the Pere de Grainville. Such a medal is not described
in Baronius, Gretser, or Lipsius. Fabricius says, "Nullus
extat nummus, nullum vetus monumentum, quo crux, in ccelo
a Constantino visa, diserte confirmatur." Script. Graec. lib;
v. c. 40. (t. 6. p. 706, ed. Harles.)

280 Appearance of the Cross
Providence in this instance by its general laws, it is
scarcely possible to think that no divine direction was
given to such an instrument of its purposes on so great
an occasion. In junctures of such awful moment, nay,
in far inferior ones, men are not left alone, but strange
impressions come over them, without which they
would not have nerve for bold deeds. It was an act
surely of no ordinary courage in Constantine to ,
introduce the Labarum into the Roman armies to the
virtual disparagement of those standards which had
carried them to victory through so many fights,
whether we regard the feelings of his soldiers or the
misgivings of his own mind.
151. From this strictly contemporaneous testimony
little or no part of which can be called ecclesiastical,
we seem to gather thus much, that an omen happened
to Constantine and his army, which most men thought
bad, but which he trusted ; — there was some appearance
in the heavens visible to all ; — some vision granted to
himself; — and a Cross, — but where seen does not
appear, whether in his dream, or as part of the visible
appearance, and in connection with the omen spoken
of ; we are but able to discern it in its reflection, —
upon the shields, helmets, and standards of his forces,
and in his public commemorations of his Victory.
t 152. Thus rests the evidence of the miracle in Con-
stantine's lifetime ; after his death Eusebius gives the
Emperor's own account of it, which certainly does in

to Constantine.

281

a remarkable way explain those acts of his which
we have been recounting, and combine the scattered
rumours which accompanied them. Eusebius declares
on the word of Constantine, who confirmed it with an
oath, that Constantine on his march saw, together
with his whole army, a luminous Cross in the sky
above the mid-day sun, with the inscription, " In this
conquer ; " and that in the ensuing night he had a
dream, in which our Lord appeared with the Cross,
and directed him to frame a standard like it as a
means of victory in his contest with Maxentius. Such
is the statement ascribed by Eusebius to Constantine;
and it must be added that the historian had no leaning
towards over-easiness of belief, as many passages of
his history show.h
153. This then is the state of the argument in
behalf of the miracle ; on the other hand, there are
these two difficulties in the way of receiving it. First,
Constantine's testimony, which alone is direct and
trustworthy, is not given till many years after the
event ; moreover, it is given with an oath and in
private, though it concerns an occurrence of public
h E.g. He omits mention of the dove in the martyrdom of
St. Polycarp, of the miracles of St. Gregory Thaumaturgus,
etc. In such miracles as he does record, he is careful not to
commit himself to an absolute assent to them, but commonly
•introduces qualifying phrases; And his answer to Hierocles
is written in a very sober tone. Vid. Kestner. de Euseb. Auct.
et Fid. § 56, 57-

282 Appearance of the Cross
notoriety ; and it is not published in his lifetime, nor
till twenty-six years after the time to which it refers.'
And next, it is supported by no independent and by
no ecclesiastical testimony. " The advocates for the
vision," says Gibbon, " are unableto produce a single
testimony from the Fathers of the fourth and fifth
centuries, who in their voluminous writings repeatedly
celebrate the triumph of the Church and of Constan-
tine."k It is remarkable too that even Eusebius does
not mention it in his History, but in his Life of Con
stantine, as if, instead of its being a public event, it
were but a visitation or providence personal to the
Emperor. 154. This, however, maybe said in reply: It has
already been shown that rumours of some or other ex
traordinary occurrence abounded from almost the time
of the Gallic march ; l Nazarius says that it was the
talk of the whole of Gaul ; and we see from his own
account of it that it was mixed up with fiction, as such
popular reports are sure to be. An army is not like
1 This objection is urged by Gibbon, Ch. 20. Lardner,
Credib. ii. 70. § 3. Hoornebeek ap. Noris. Hist. Donat.
App. 8.
k Ch. xx. note 52:
1 It is remarkable, however, as is observed by Gothofred.
Diss, in Philostorg. i. 6, that Optatianus Porphyrius, in his
Panegyric, ad Constant, written in the year 326, does not
mention the apparition, except that he calls the Cross " cceleste
signum." He wrote, however, from banishment, though the
place is not known.

to Constantine. 283
a neighbourhood, or a class of society; it is cut off from
the world, it has no home, it acts as one man, it is of
an incommunicative nature, or at least does not admit
of questioning. The troops of Constantine saw the
vision, and marched on ; they left behind them a vague
testimony, which would fall misshapen and distorted
on the very ears that heard it, which would soon be
filled out with fictitious details because the true were
not forthcoming, and which took a pagan form in a
country of Pagans. It was not unnatural that under
such circumstances Constantine should have been led
formally to impart to Eusebius the fact as it really
took place ; nor, considering the misstatements that
abounded, and the apparent unbelief of intelligent
Pagans,m that he should have confirmed his account
of it with an oath. Nor is it wonderful that Eusebius
should not appeal to living witnesses of it, an omission
which Gibbon urges, as if an army, or the constituent
parts of an army, had a residence and an address, and
. that at the distance of twenty-six years ; or as if an
ecclesiastic, a native of Palestine, must have had
many acquaintances among the veterans of Gaul.n
Nor is it any great difficulty that, in a work profess
edly panegyrical, and not historical, and written with
m Vid. Gelas. Cone. Nie. i. 4.
- n Eusebius says that he once or sometimes happened to see
the Labarum. 8 Sr] xai i)uS.s 6<p9akp.o?s irori w^ irapa,\a§etv.
V. Const, i. 30.

284 Appearance of the Cross
much oratory of phrase and circumlocution, and con
tinual vagueness and indeterminateness in statement,0
the writer should not have mentioned the time and
place of the miraculous occurrence.
155. It is a more serious difficulty that Eusebius's
statement is not supported by other Fathers of his
own and the following century ; yet this is not so
great as at first sight appears. It is not pretended
that any of them contradicts or interferes with his
account of the matter ; and at the very time, there
were no great ecclesiastical writers to speak one way
or the other. The miracle is said to have taken place
in 3 1 1 or 3 1 2 ; the only writer of note extant during
the first fifty years of the century, besides Eusebius
is Athanasius ; and his writings are taken up with
later transactions and a far different subject. Nor
does there seem any special reason why later writers
should mention it,p The real miracle was encom
passed with even heathen fables ; the classical or phi
losophical description contained in the panegyric of
0 Vid. infr. n. 157. note t.
p Columbus, however, in Lactant. de Mort. Pers. 44, refers
to St. Gregory Nazianzen's second invective against Julian,
where he speaks of the Cross seen in the air when the works
at the Temple were miraculously stopped, and observes that
he certainly would have alluded to Constantine's Cross, had
he known of it. Yet surely he would have been going out of
his way to do so, considering it was but one portent out of
many which he was recounting, and another Cross had been
seen over Jerusalem in St. Cyril's time.

to Constantine. 285
Nazarius had been almost coeval with its occurrence,
and was not likely to prejudice- the Church in its
favour, and yet was, as far as we know, the only tes
timony by which it was conveyed to the Fathers of
the fourth century. At least Gibbon himself grants
that they were not acquainted with Eusebius's state
ment, and grants it for the very reason that they did not
avail themselves of it. He confirms this opinion by
the fact of St. Jerome's ignorance of the Life of Con
stantine, in which Eusebius reports the miracle, a work
which he considers " was recovered by the diligence
of those who translated or continued his Ecclesiastical
History." 1 Nor does it appear why the Fathers of the
Church should have mentioned the miracle, even had
they known it. It was not a miracle especially ad
dressed to them, or wrought for the uses of the Church
at large. It was, first, a fitting rite of inauguration
when Christianity was about to take its place among
the powers to whom God has given rule over the
earth ; next, it was an encouragement and direction
to Constantine himself and to the Christians who
marched with him ; but it neither seems to have been
intended, nor to have operated, as a display of Divine
power to the confusion of infidelity or error. In like
manner, while the Fathers appeal to the fiery eruption
at the Jewish Temple, because it was the means of a
signal triumph over an enemy, on the other hand,
1 Ibid. Ch. xx. note 52. [Vid. Danz. de Euseb. Caesar, p. 71.]

286 Appearance of the Cross.
they refer to the destruction of Jerusalem without
mentioning the prodigies which attended it. The
distinction is clear. First, the taking of Jerusalem and
the conversion of Constantine were events of a past
day ; Julian's antichristian attempt was of their own
day. Again, the portents in the sky and the luminous
Cross did but concur with and, as it were, illustrate
the march of events, which was evident to all men
without them ; but the fire which burst forth when
Julian would rebuild the Temple, was in opposition to
the apparent course of things, and arrested them
and defeated them. It did a deed, whereas the lumi
nous Cross did but herald one.
156. It may be added, that there is a beautiful har
mony and contrast in the omens by which the over
throw of Judaism and Paganism were respectively
preceded. The omens in the former instance were
only evil, for the chosen people was falling away ;
but since the nations were to be brought into the
Church who had hitherto been outcasts, the sign in
the heavens in the latter case was the Cross itself, a
terror indeed and dismay at first sight to the ignorant
Pagan beholders, but their redemption and salvation
under the awful compulsion of Him who suffered
on it.

Section V.
THE DISCOVERY OF THE HOLY CROSS.
157. T N the year after the Nicene Council, A.D. 326,
-*¦ St. Helena, mother of Constantine, and then
nearly eighty years of age, went on a pilgrimage, as
it was afterwards called, to the Holy Land, and espe
cially to Jerusalem. Her purpose was to visit the
scene of the wonderful events recorded in Scripture,
and the spots consecrated by the presence of our
Lord. Among other objects of her pious search was
the Cross upon which He suffered. It was the cus
tom of the Jews to bury the instruments of death
with the corpses of the malefactors ;r and, consider
ing their eagerness to remove the bodies both of
Christ and of His two companions before the ap
proaching Feast, there seemed no reason to doubt
that, after Joseph had begged His body of Pilate, and
placed it in the neighbouring tomb, His Cross, and
r "Accedit consuetudo Judaeorum quibus solemne instrumenta
suppliciorum juxta cadavera sontium obruere." Gretser de S.
Crue. tom. 1 . i. 37, he refers to Baronius and Velser. S. Bas-
nage agrees, Annal. 326. g. [Vid. also Aringhi Rom. Subterr.
p. 98, ed. 1 659 .J

288 St. Helena 's Discovery
those of the two thieves, as well as their corpses, had
hastily been thrown into the ground on the very
place of crucifixion. But where that place was, at
first sight, was not so easy to determine. The city
had been destroyed, and its soil (it is said) ploughed
up, in punishment of the very deeds, of which Helena
was seeking to recover the memorial. Our Lord had
suffered outside the walls ; but the population, driven
beyond Mounts Sion and Acra, which it had hitherto
occupied, had overflowed toward the north, and,
without as yet covering Calvary itself,s had oblite
rated the features of the immediate neighbourhood.
And Hadrian, by erecting statues of the Pagan
divinities over the sacred spots which were in ques
tion,' had driven away worshippers, and at length
s St Cyril says of Calvary, that " it was a garden before,
and the tokens and traces thereof remain." Catech. xiv. 5.
* St. Jerome mentions Hadrian by name. Eusebius, in the
vague way which he adopts on other occasions (as not writing
a history but a panegyric, V. Const, i. 11), says, "Ungodly
men formerly, or rather the whole race of demons by means
of them." V. Const, iii. 26. In like manner he speaks of
" tyrants of our days who essayed to fight against the God of
all, and oppressed His Church," i. 12, meaning Dioclesian;
" the Emperor who had first rank," i. 14, meaning the same ;
" tyrannical slavery," i. 26, i.e., the sovereignty of Maxentius ;
vid. also i. 33, etc., "news came that some dreadful beast was
attacking," etc. viz. Licinius. i. 49, " news came of no small
disturbance having possessed the Churches," ii. 61, meaning
the Arian controversy ; " a man well approved by Constantine
for the sobriety of faith," etc., meaning Hosius, ii. 63 ; " the
ruling city of Bithynia," meaning Nicomedia, iii. 50, etc., etc.

of the Cross. 289
effaced all general recollections of their respective
localities. But what had destroyed the tradition about
them with the many might reasonably be expected
to be the means of preserving it with the few ; nor
did it seem difficult, even without such accidental
advantage, to recover, with proper pains, at least the
general position of the spot, where so great and
memorable a deed had been done. The Empress
availed herself of the assistance of the most learned
both of Christians and of Jews," and she seems to have
been animated by a hope, surely not presumptuous,
that she was under a guidance greater than human."
At length there is said to have been a general agree
ment as to the place ; it was covered, first with a vast
quantity of earth, next with the Pagan edifices ; the
place of Crucifixion and Burial lay beneath. Helena
gave the word, and the soldiers who attended her
began to clear away both buildings and soil.
158. Hitherto the main outlines of the history are
confirmed by Eusebius, though he speaks of Con
stantine, his Imperial Patron, instead of St. Helena,
and only of the Holy Sepulchre, not of the Holy
u This consideration answers, as far as the present question
is concerned, Professor Robinson's remark, that " the Fathers
of the Church in Palestine, and their imitators the Monks,
were themselves for the most part not natives of the country."
Palestine, Vol. i. p. 373.
T Calvin, however, considers that St. Helena was urged by
" stulta curiositas," or " ineptus religioms zelus." De Reliqu,
p. 276. 19

290 St. Helena's Discovery
Cross. And though Constantine seems, during the
years 326, 327, to have remained in the parts of his
Empire between Thessalonica, Sirmium, and Rome,
yet under his direction or authority Helena doubtless
acted. Eusebius attests the intention of Constantine
to build a church over the Holy Sepulchre ; its dese
crated state ; the huge mound and stone-work which
covered it ; the shrine of Venus which had been
raised at the top ; and then the demolition of the
whole mass of heathenism at the Emperor's com
mand, statues, altars, buildings, mound, and the earth
which lay under it. He then continues thus: "And
when another level appeared instead of the former,
viz., the ground which lay below, then at length the
solemn and all-holy memorial of the Saviour's Resur
rection appeared beyond all hope ; and thus the cave,
a holy of holies, imaged the Saviour's revival, and,
after being sunk in darkness, came to light again, ard
to those who came to the sight presented a manifest
history of the wonders which had there been done,
witnessing by facts more eloquently than by any
voice the Resurrection of the Saviour."x Here
Eusebius ends his narrative ; he proceeds, indeed, to
speak of the church which Constantine built upon the
spot, but he says nothing of any discovery besides that •
of the Sepulchre itself. As to the Cross on which our
Lord suffered, judging from the course of his narra-
" V. Const, iii. 28.

of the Cross. 2,91
tive, we should conclude, not only that it was not found,
but that it was not even sought after, nay, according
to his literal statements, that St. Helena did not come
to Jerusalem, only to Mount Olivet and Bethlehem, y
159. Yet, though he is silent himself, he has pre
served Constantine's Letter to Macarius, Bishop of
that see, on occasion of the proposed Martyry or
Church of the Resurrection. This letter does not
contain any express mention of the Cross ; and yet,
did we read it without knowing the fact of the his
torian's silence when writing in his own person, we cer
tainly should have the impression that it is of the Cross
that Constantine was speaking. He says that "the token
of the Saviour's most holy passion " had been " buried
under the earth for many years ;" and he speaks of it
as a discovery " surpassing all human calculation and
all amazement" and again and again of the miracle
which it involved or had effected.2
y Dallseus objects that St. Cyril " nihil addit de Helena."
Rel. Cult. Obj. v. 1. p. 709. Yet we shall see Professor Robin
son's reluctant admission presently, note d. As to Eusebius,
his object was to praise Constantine. In V. Const, iii. 41, he
first speaks as if Constantine founded the Churches at Beth
lehem and Mount Olivet, and then corrects himself. [It is re
markable, moreover, that the Bourdeaux Pilgrim, A. D. 333,
vid. Wesseling Itinerarium, pp. 589 — -596, whose silence about
the Cross is sometimes brought in corroboration, (vid. Gibbon,
Hist. Ch. xxiii., note 63), is also silent about St. Helena's Church
on Olivet, which no one doubts about ; vid. Euseb. V. Const.
iii. 42, 43.]
z V. Const, iii. 30. Mr. Taylor says, that "the phrases he

292 St. Helena's Discovery
160. It is remarkable, too, that Eusebius also,
though silent about the Cross, makes mention of
miracles as attending the discovery of the Sepulchre,
in a passage of his Commentary upon the Psalms.
Treating of the words, " Dost Thou show wonders
among the dead ? " he says, " If any one will give
his attention to the marvels which in our time have
been performed at the Sepulchre and the Martyry of
our Saviour, truly he will perceive how the prediction
has been fulfilled in the event." a Yet, commenting
on the 108th (109th) Psalm, he mentions the honours
paid to " the Sepulchre of Him who was delivered
over to the Cross and death," without saying a word
of honours paid to the Cross itself. Eusebius died
about A.D. 338, i.e. eleven years after St. Helena's
visit to Jerusalem ; and this is all the evidence which
[Eusebius] employs [i.e. in Constantine's Letter] clearly imply
the invention of the Cross, although apart from other evidence
they would leave us in the dark as to the facts." Anc. Christ.
Part vii. p. 296. I should say the same ; but it is not granted
by the Centuriators (who say that St. Ambrose is the first to
mention the discovery), nor by Dallasus, S. Basnage (who speaks
of the " intoleranda Bellarmini sive inscitia sive audacia" in
maintaining it, Annal. 326, 9), Hospinian, etc. The elder Pro
testants wish to put the " cultus reliquiarum " as late as pos
sible ; Mr. Taylor as early. Tillemont understands Constan
tine to speak of the Cross, but Zaccaria, Dissert, t. 1. v. 4.
§ 5, is disposed, at least for argument's sake, to give up the
point. a Psalm lxxxvii. 13. Thus Montfaucon, but Zaccaria strangely
denies the allusion.

of the Cross. 293
we have on the subject, whatever is its value, for
about the first twenty years.
161. St. Cyril of Jerusalem is our next informant
concerning the discovery of the Cross. He was one
of the Clergy of the Church of Jerusalem, and de
livered his Catechetical Lectures about A.D. 347, in
the very Church of the Resurrection which by that
time Constantine had built ; and in the first year of
his Episcopate, A.D. 351, he wrote his letter to Con-
stantius concerning a luminous Cross which had just
then appeared in the air over Jerusalem. As he died
A.D. 386, and was a Priest and (as St. Jerome says) a
young man in 347, he must have been in his boyhood
at the time of St. Helena's visit ; whether in Jerusa
lem is not known. In his Catechetical Lectures he
speaks of the Holy Cross as discovered, though he
does not mention the circumstances or the time of its
discovery. Speaking of our Lord's crucifixion, he
says, "Shouldest thou be disposed to deny it, the
very place which all can see refutes thee, even this
blessed Golgotha, in which, on account of Him who
was crucified on it, we are now assembled ; and further,
the whole world is filled with the portions of the Wood
of the Cross." Again, speaking of the witness borne
in such manifold ways to Christ, he says, " The Holy
Wood of the Cross is His witness, which is seen
among us to this day, and by means of those who
have in faith taken thereof, has from this place now

294 St. Helena's Discovery
almost filled the whole world." Once more, speaking
against the heretics who denied the reality of our
Lord's passion, " Though I should now deny it, this
Golgotha confutes me, near which we are now as
sembled ; the wood of the Cross confutes rne, which
has from hence been distributed piecemeal to all the
world." b Considering then that we hear nothing of
the Wood of the Cross in Ecclesiastical history before
this date, and that this date follows close upon the
discovery of the Holy Sepulchre, it does not need
further proof, though St. Cyril said nothing else, that
there is some connection between this alleged disco
very of the Cross, and that of the Sepulchre. It does
not need St. Cyril's express statement to that effect
in his Letter to Constantius a few years later, as we
there read it ; and it does not matter, even though
that letter be spurious, as some Protestant critics,
though without strong reason, contend.0 His words
are these : " In the time of thy father, the divinely fa
voured Constantine of blessed memory, the salutary
b Cat. iv. io ; x. 19 ; xiii. 4.
" The authenticity of this Epistle is denied from its omission
in St. Jerome's list of his works, and its mention of the bp.ooiai.eiv ;
e.g., by Dallasus, Rel. Cult. Obj. v. 1. p. 707. J. Basnage
Hist, de I'Eglise, p. 3. xviii. 13. § 2. Mr. Taylor seems to
grant it, Anc. Christ. Part vii. p. 292. The mention of the
bp.006c1.ov would be decisive against it, did it not occur at the
end, in a sort of doxology which will admit of being considered
an addition. The question is discussed at length by Zaccaria,
ibid, in answer to Oudinus.

of the Cross. 295
Wood of the Cross was found in Jerusalem, divine
grace granting the discovery of the hidden holy places
to one who laudably pursued religious objects."
162. From the evidence of St. Cyril and the pas
sages of Eusebius, we gain, then, as much as this ; that
the discovery of the Holy Cross was a received fact
twenty years after St. Helena's search for the Holy
Sepulchre ; that it was by that time notorious through
out the world, because portions of the Cross had been
sent in all directions ; hence, that the professed dis
covery must have taken place some years before the
end of the twenty years when St. Cyril mentions it, to
allow of such a general publication and dispersion of
it ; and that it must have been well known to Euse
bius, who wrote his Life of Constantine A.D. 337,
only ten years before St. Cyril's Lectures, whether he
believed it or not ; further, that his silence about it
did not necessarily proceed from disbelief, because he
is silent about St. Helena's search after it, nay, as I
have said above, even about her visiting Jerusalem,
an historical fact which cannot be gainsaid/ and
d " Such is the account which Eusebius, the contemporary
and eye-witness, gives of the Churches erected in Palestine
by Helena and her son Constantine. Not a word, not a hint,
by which the reader would be led to suppose that the mother
of the Emperor had anything to do with "the discovery of the
Holy Sepulchre, or the building of a Church upon the spot.
But ... all the writers of the following century relate as
with one/^.ce that the mother of Constantine," etc. Robinson,

296 St. Helena's Discovery
again, because, in his Comment on the Psalms, he
speaks also of miracles wrought at the Sepulchre, of
which nevertheless he says nothing at a later date, in
his Life of Constantine ; lastly, that Constantine recog
nized the discovery of the Cross at the very time,
because, while the terms e he employs in his Letter to
Macarius are more suitable to denote the Cross than
the Sepulchre, the strong expressions of his amazement
are also more suitable to the discovery of the former
than of the latter, a discovery which, as we have seen,
was certainly reported and generally believed a few
years later.
163. I conceive, then, that the evidence already
brought together is conclusive of the fact of the
alleged discovery of the Cross about the time of St.
Helena's visit to Jerusalem, and in connection with
that visit. Eusebius's silence is of course a difficulty,
and, as it would appear, cannot satisfactorily be
accounted for.f Yet he is silent at other times about
Palestine, Vol. ii. p. 14. Yet this same writer says in the
very next page, " Leaving out of view the obviously legendary
portions of this story, it would seem not improbable, that
Helena was the prime mover in searching for and discover
ing the sacred Sepulchre ! "
« TviJipLo-p.a. tov Trddovs, V. C. iii. 30 ; whereas Eusebius calls the
Sepulchre tt)s d8avao-la.s p.vr)p.a, 26 J tyjs dvao-Tdo-eo)s. p.aprijpiov, 28.
f "Notwithstanding the silence of Eusebius, there would seem
to be hardly any fact of history better accredited than this
alleged discovery of the True Cross." Rob'nson's Palest. Vol.
ii. pp. 15, 16 ; vid. also, " However difficult," etc., p. 76.

of the Cross. 297
facts which he cannot be said to disbelieves We
should also ask ourselves what it is that his silence is
to be taken to prove ; not that he had not heard of
the alleged discovery, for that it was alleged is unde
niable ; it can only be taken to show that he did not
believe in it.h Yet his statement elsewhere, that
certain miracles occurred at the Sepulchre, while it
suggests some further story which he does not relate,
is favourable, as far as it goes, to his belief in the
received one. Moreover, if the discovery was not
really made, there was imposture in the proceeding ;'
an imputation upon the Church of Jerusalem, nay, in
the event on the whole Christian world, so heavy, as
« He does not mention St. Antony, or Methodius of Tyre, or
the Martyrdoms of Perpetua and Felicitas, etc., etc.
h Dallasus contends Eusebium nescivisse quod tacet. Rel.
Cult. Obj. v. 1. p. 706. The Centuriators are vague, so is J.
Basnage, Hist, de 1'Egl. p. 3. xviii. 13. § 2. S. Basnage implies
Eusebius's knowledge but disbelief oi the story. Annal. 326. 9.
Jortin says that Eusebius " either knew nothing or believed
nothing of it." Eccles. Hist. Vol. ii. p. 223.
1 S. Basnage considers it a pious fraud of St. Cyril's.
Annal. 326. 9. Mr. Taylor prefers to impute it to Macarius
to imagining " Cyril and his colleagues to have hatched the
fraud coolly and at leisure twenty years afterwards." Anc.
Christ. Part vii. p. 297. " Cyril of Jerusalem and Augustine
are the two Fathers who may be believed to have been the
dupes of, rather than the actors in, the frauds of their times.
Ibid. p. 292. " It would perhaps not be doing injustice to the
Bishop Macarius and his clergy," says Professor Robinson, " if
we regard the whole as a well-laid and successful plan for
restoring to Jerusalem its former consideration, and elevating
his see to a higher degree of influence and dignity." p. 80.

298 St. Helena's Discovery
to lead us to weigh well which is the more probable
hypothesis of the two, so systematic and sustained a
fraud, or the discovery of a relic, or in human language
an antiquity, three hundred years old.
164. Now let it be observed that hitherto this pas
sage of history has had nothing definitely miraculous
in it. It does but relate to the discovery, by ordinary
methods of inquiry, of an instrument of death used
by Roman executioners three centuries before. And
perhaps it is right to draw a line between the above
testimony and the evidence which follows at a later
date, and which is next to be considered, except so
far as the later evidence happens to be confirmatory
of the earlier. It would seem impossible that the
original story should not receive a colour or an ex
aggeration11 when taken up as a matter of popular
belief, and that in countries far removed from the '
scene to which it belongs. While, then, we may be
prepared for additions which will not compromise the
original evidence, those additions, when we find them
in subsequent writers, whether true or false, are ex
posed primd facie to a suspicion which does not
k We have an instance of such exaggeration in the report
of the Samaritan woman, " Come, see a man which told me
all things that ever I did." If the men of her city had been
instructed in Protestant divinity, they would have cross-ex
amined her as to what she meant by all, and then said that
there was evident inaccuracy, and grounds for suspicion, that
they were not called upon to stir, that they were not obliged
to believe her, etc., etc.

of the Cross'. 299
attach to the particulars which we have hitherto been
reviewing. 165. Now St. Ambrose, in his discourse upon the
death of Theodosius, (A.D. 395,) and St. Chrysostom,
in his Homilies upon St. John, (about A.D. 394,) speak
of three Crosses, not one ; and say that the True
Cross was known by the title which Pilate fixed
on it.
166. St. Paulinus, St. Sulpicius, and Theodoret,
agreeing in the main in the additional circumstances
related by St. Ambrose and St. Chrysostom, differ
from them in assigning a miracle as the test by which
our Lord's Cross was ascertained. Paulinus writes to
Sulpicius, and the latter reports in his history, that it
was distinguished from the other two by its resto
ration of a corpse to life. These two authors write
about A.D. 400, Paulinus in Italy, Sulpicius in Gaul.
Theodoret, who wrote his Church History, about A.D.
440, in Syria, speaks, not of a corpse restored to life,
but of a sick woman restored to health.
. 167. Again, Rufinus, (about A.D. 400,) and Socrates
and Sozomen, (both about A.D. 440,) say that the in
scription was detached from the Cross, and that the
female, who was the subject of the miracle, was only
on the point of death. Moreover St. Ambrose, Ru
finus, Theodoret, Socrates, and Sozomen speak of the
nails as found at the same time. A further miracle is
spoken of by Paulinus ; that the portion of the Cross

300 St. Helena's Discovery
kept at Jerusalem gave off fragments of itself without
diminishing ;l and he adds, that " it has imbibed this
undecaying virtue and this unwasting solidity from
the blood of that Flesh, which underwent death, yet
saw not corruption."111 This is mentioned here, as
being one of the alleged miracles which followed upon
the discovery of the Cross, though it has no connec
tion with the discovery itself, which is our proper
subject. 168. Such is the evidence arranged in order of time,
in behalf of this most solemn and arresting occur
rence,11 which is kept in memory, even to this distant
generation, in the Greek, Latin, and English Calendars
on the 3rd of May and the 14th of September. It
seems hardly safe absolutely to deny what is thus
affirmed by the whole Church ;° whether however
1 Jortin, Eccles. Hist. (Works, Vol. ii. p. 222), translates
Tillemont as believing this miracle, and as saying that "St.
Paulinus relates a very singular thing," putting the words
in italics, and prefacing his extract with observing that " the
words of Tillemont are full of what the French call unction,
and the English canting ; " whereas in fact Tillemont at the
least doubts Paulinus's account. Mem. Eccles. Vol. vii. p. 8.
m Ep. 31. fin.
n St. Jerome too says of St. Paula, A.D. 386, " Prostrataque
ante Crucem, quasi pendentem Dominum cerneret, adorabat."
Ep. 108. n. 9.
0 " This history of the discovery of the Holy Cross," says
W. Lowth in Socr. i. 17. ed. Read., " is not found in Eusebius.
But Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, who lived in the same age,
openly witnesses that the Wood of the Holy Cross was divinely
shown to the Emperor Constantine ; also in his Catechetical

of the Cross. 301
miracles accompanied the discovery, must ever re
main uncertain. That a sick, dying, or dead person
was restored by means of the Cross, rests on the
authority of Latins writing at the distance of seventy
years after the discovery, and of Greek authors of
forty years later still ; not on any testimony given
with particularity or at the time. Moreover, such an
occurrence is inconsistent with the account, taken in
the letter, of St. Ambrose and St. Chrysostom, who
say that the True Cross was recognized by its title.
On the other hand, whether there was one Cross or
three,? some mode of recognizing it is implied in the
very idea of recognition ; and a miraculous recogni
tion is perhaps the most natural and obvious hypo
thesis. Nay, the very fact that a beam of wood should
be found undecayed after so long a continuance in the
earth would in some cases be a miracle.i And per-
Lectures he speaks of its discovery, as of a thing known to
aU. Wherefore of the faith of this history we cannot doubt."
Upon this Jortin asks, "What did this Protestant Divine of
ours mean ? Could he believe that the True Cross was found ?
or would he only say that a pretended one was discovered ? "
Ibid. p S. Basnage urges, however, "vero non esse proximum,
latronum cruces cum iUa Christi, uno eodemque loco fuisse
conditas ; " Annal. 326. 9. because crosses were always buried
with the bodies, but no bones were found with the Cross, — an
assumption. There were too many bones surely in " the place
of a skull," to discriminate, or to mention the fact.
4 " Quasri et illud potest, num annis pasne trecentis in solo
absque putredine cessante mirac'ulo," etc. S. Basnag. Ann.
326. 9.

302 St. Helena's Discovery
haps there are few imaginations, which are once able
to surmount the shock of hearing that the very Cross
on which our Lord suffered was really recovered, but
will be little sensitive of difficulty in the additional
statement, that miracles were wrought by means of it.
It must not be forgotten too, that Eusebius himself,
though silent about the Cross, alludes to the occur
rence of miracles at the Sepulchre ; and these of
course become more credible, if we suppose some
great object, such as the recognition of the Cross, to
account for them.
169. An objection, however, has from time to time
been urged with much earnestness by several writers,
which, if substantiated, would altogether overthrow
the history of the discovery of the Cross ; viz., that
Helena chose a wrong site for the Holy Sepulchre.
This was Dr. Clarke's opinion, whose reasons were
discussed and answered by a writer, it is believed
Bishop Heber, in the Quarterly Review for March,
181 3. It has lately been revived with some addi
tional considerations by one or two controversialists,
one of them at least, with the view, not simply of dis
proving the fact, which is a point of secondary impor
tance, but of fixing upon the Fathers and Church of
the fourth century the imputation of deliberate impos
ture, and that for selfish ends. Indeed, a drift of this
kind is the only intelligible explanation of the earnest-

of the Cross. 303
ness which such writers manifest/ It might not seem
to be worth any great exertion to construct a proof
that the Holy Sepulchre was not found by St. Helena,
if no conclusion is to follow but that we need not pay
attention to the festivals of the Cross, or to the claims
of particular pieces of wood professing to be fragments
of it. Even admitting the True Cross was discovered,
it would be still open to Protestants to treat it with
neglect or disrespect, and they would doubtless exer
cise their right. The Cross on which Christ suffered
would be in their eyes but a piece of wood ; or again,
as they sometimes speak both of it and of the sign
of it, it would be a something loathsome and hateful,
bringing our Lord under the curse rather than sancti
fied by Him ; and that the more, because, like the
Brazen Serpent, it had been the occasion of supersti
tion and idolatry. When then writers set themselves
to oppose passages of history such as that now before
us, it is for a far bolder purpose than is directly im
plied in their opposition ; it is of course in order to
depreciate or destroy the authority of the Church. It
is an attempt to transfer the quarrel between her reli-
' The Quarterly Reviewer of December, 1841, professes to
consider it only a question of "poetic statement," "fond
reminiscences," " reverential feelings," " pleasing visions," and
the like ; and contrasts with them " the stern voice of truth,"
etc., etc., whereas the simple question is whether we shall con
sider the Church of the fourth century very credulous or very
profligate. Mr. Taylor is far more perspicacious.

304 St. Helena s Discovery
gion and their own, from the province of opinion to
the ground of matter of fact ; nor can there be in itself
a fairer procedure towards the Church, or one of which
her children have less cause to complain, however
they may be pained at the spirit in which it originates.
170. Nay, perhaps such controversialists are fairer
to the Church than to themselves ; and though un
doubtedly, if they once prove their point, they will
but gain the greater credit and the more decisive
victory, by so frank a procedure, yet it is plain there
is at first sight a very strong probability against their
proving it. The chance is, that they have under
taken more than they can accomplish. For it stands
to reason, which of two parties is the more likely
to be right in a question of topographical fact, men
who lived three hundred years after it and on the
spot, or those who live at a distance of eighteen
hundred, and at the Antipodes ? Granting that the
fourth century had very poor means of information, it
does not appear why the nineteenth should have more
ample. There are indeed branches of knowledge in
which we have decidedly the advantage of the early
Church. If it were a point of philology which was
under review ; or a question about the critical inter
pretation of the Hebrew text, or the etymological
force or derivation of a Greek term ; or a problem in
physics, such as whether or not such and such an oc
currence were beyond, or beside, or according to the

of the Cross. 305
laws of nature, and properly miraculous ; or if it re
quired some subtle analysis, and could only be wrought
out by a mathematical formula ; or if, though a ques
tion of history, or chronology, or topography, it was dis
puted by writers of the fourth century one with another,
so that we must oppose this great name or that, and
choose a side ; or if it was advanced by some one
Father, and by him unsupported, and in himself of no
great authority, then the attempt to contradict him
would be plausible ; but in' such a matter and under
such circumstances as the present, when Calvary is the
spot and Eusebius the informant, when a very learned
and not over-credulous writer, whose silence about the
Cross is thought so ominous of his disbelief, reports
and assents to the unanimous decision of the local
Church in favour of the discovery of the Sepulchre,
and is supported, not merely by the silent assent, but
by the concurrence of the literature of his own cen
tury,5 the presumption is very great, before going into
s The main authority for the present site of the Holy Sepul
chre is Eusebius ; and the warrant for its preservation or
recovery is the Pagan Temple raised over it upon the destruc
tion of the city by Hadrian, which became a lasting record of
the spot. What is to be urged against Eusebius I know not ;
but it is urged against the argument from the Pagan Temple,
first, that only St. Jerome, and not Eusebius, attributes its
erection to Hadrian. But why is not St. Jerome, a learned
Father, weU acquainted with Palestine, and no friend at all (as
Mr. Taylor allows) to the superstitions and pollutions of which
in his time Jerusalem was the scene, why is he not a sufficient
20

306 St. Helena's Discovery
the case, that such acute and ingenious persons, as now
for the first and last time in their lives traverse Jeru
salem with their measuring tape, are wrong, and those
who were natives of the place fifteen hundred years
ago are right. Of course such presumption consti
tutes no plea at all for declining to examine their
arguments ; it weighs nothing against an overwhelming
proof, when they have brought it ; but, to use the
language of their school, when speaking of the
miracles of the Church, unless the proof is overwhelm-
authority? whereas Eusebius {after his manner) does but say
" ungodly men ; " vid. supr. n. 1 57, note t. Next, it is ob
jected that there was no recognized tradition of the spot, be
cause St. Helena had to search for it, and to summon learned
Jews and Christians to her assistance : but it does not follow,
because there was no popular tradition, that therefore there
was no historical and antiquarian knowledge of the fact, or,
again, no means of recovering it, though forgotten. Further,
it is urged that it was unlike Hadrian's character to insult the
Christians, when he was but punishing the Jews. But, grant
ing his general leniency towards the former, what Sulpicius
says, Hist. Saer. ii. 45, suggests the conjecture, that, from the
circumstance of the Jewish Bishops not only being natives
and inhabitants of the place, but practising circumcision, he,
confused them and their flocks and the objects of their vene
ration with the Jews. From these three considerations, (1)
that St. Jerome is the first informant that Hadrian placed a
Temple over the Sepulchre ; (2) that there was no continuous
public local tradition to that effect ; and (3) that it is a deed
unlike Hadrian, it is proposed to infer that a place was pitched
upon at random as the site of the Sepulchre, and that, among
all places in Jerusalem, a heathen temple. As to the actual
Sepulchre found under the mound, that of course is the work
oifraud.

of the Cross. 307
ing we are not " obliged " to accept it ; when there is
but a balance of arguments, " we may suspect it " to
be fallacious, and may pronounce it "unsatisfactory."
It may be entered upon with a just prejudice, listened
to with suspicion, criticized with fastidious precision,
and rejected on the ground of counter-arguments in
themselves of inferior cogency.
171. Let it carefully be observed that a point of
evidence like this has nothing to do with the question
of honesty or dishonesty in the parties who give it.
Were Macarius or St. Cyril and the Clergy of Jeru
salem the most covetous and unprincipled of hypo
crites, why should this lead them to fix on a false site
for our Lord's crucifixion and burial ? Why should
they not do their best to fix on the right one ? why
should they subject themselves to an additional
chance of detection, and give to persons like their
present impugners a gratuitous advantage, as if it
were not enough to fabricate a Cross, but they must
hazard a superfluous mistake in fabricating a Sepul
chre ? Were they then knaves and impostors of the
deepest dye, this would be no reason for their omit
ting, nay, the strongest reason for their taking, all
possible pains to find the very and true spot where
our Lord suffered. And therefore the question re
turns to the issue on which it has already been put —
which is the more likely, that inhabitants of Jeru
salem in the fourth century, or of New York in the

308 St. Helena's Discovery
nineteenth, should be able rightly to determine Cal
vary and the Holy Sepulchre.' I mean no disrespect
to the traveller to whom I allude, which is not due
to one who accuses the Church of Jerusalem of the
fourth century of deliberate fraud. And I make a
great distinction between a learned person like him
self, who writes with gravity and temper, and the
English writer who has made use of his statements
in a work to which reference has been several times
made at the foot of the page. Yet I do not see why
4 As if to meet this presumption, Dr. Robinson and Mr.
Taylor set themselves to prove incontrovertibly that St. Helena
did fix the site of the Ascension on Mount Olivet wrongly ; and
if she was wrong in one case, she might be in another. And
their proof is as follows : ist, St. Luke in his Gospel says that
our Lord led out His disciples as far as Bethany, therefore He
ascended from Bethany (in spite of his saying in the Acts,
that they returned from Olivet) ; 2nd, St. Luke says that
from Mount Olivet to Jerusalem is a Sabbath-day's journey;
but the Church of the Ascension is only half a mile from Jeru
salem. It has been usual to say in answer (i) that Bethany
was not only a village, but a district which extended over
a portion of Olivet. Thus Bethany is considered by Lightfoot,
Chorogr. in Matt. 37 ; ibid. 4 ; Chorogr. in Marc. 4 ; Hor.
Hebr. in Luc. xxiv. 50. and in Act. Ap. i. 12. In a previous
work he had thought otherwise, vid. Comment, in Act. Ap. on
the ground that names of towns and names compounded with
" Beth " never were extended to a district. He gets over this
difficulty, in his later work, by saying that the town was called
from the district, not the district from the town. The same
explanation of " Bethany " is given by Beza, Grotius, Sanctius,
and De Dieu in Poole's Synopsis. Again, Spanheim calls it
"tractus montis Oliveti." Geogr. Saer. part i. fin. (2) As
to the alleged difficulty of the Sabbatical distance, it is not

of the Cross. 309
weak arguments should be treated with indulgence
because they are directed against sacred persons and
better times. In order to form a due estimate of
them, we must now consider with some attention the
site of Jerusalem.
172. Jerusalem in our Lord's time occupied four
hills : Sion, on which was the city of David, or the
upper city, on the south (a) ; on the north of it,
Acra, the site of Jerusalem proper, or the lower city
(B) ; to the east of Acra, Moriah, on which was the
really such, till critics are agreed what that distance is. " Iter
Sabbaticum octo stadia excepit aut totum milliare." Light-
foot, Chorogr. in Matt. 40. Elsewhere he says, " Iter Sab
baticum ex septem et dimidio," in Luc. xxiv. 50, adding, that
it was "bis mille cubitorum." Yet, Comment, in Act. i. 12.
he says that, while the Sabbatical distance is nine stadia if the
cubit is three feet, it is but four and a half if the cubit be a foot
and a half ; and that the latter is the true calculation. " What
space is a Sabbatical journey?" says Drusius in Poole's Sy
nopsis ; " in the number two thousand most agree ; but some
say cubits, others paces, Jerome feet, Origen ells, which
Origen's translator calls cubits." De Dieu (ibid.) with Light-
foot in Act. makes the cubit a foot and a half, or the Sabbati
cal journey about five stadia, which is the distance of Mount
Olivet, according to Josephus, and the actual distance of the
Church of the Ascension, from Jerusalem. Grotius considers
it eight stadia. Reland quotes Origen for its being eight
(Palasst. i. 52. fin.), but thinks this too much ; and quotes Epi
phanius for its being six, which according to him (vid. Wolf in
Act. Ap. i. 12.) would make the Sabbatical journey a quarter
of an hour's walk. It must be added that, if the Church
of the Ascension is short of the Sabbatical distance (which, as
we see, it is not proved to be), at all events Bethany is in
excess of it.

310 St. Helena' s Discovery
Temple (c) ; and to the north of Moriah, Bezetha (d),
on which lay the new city, containing the overflow
ings of the population, which were at that time very
considerable. Denoting them by the four letters,
A, B, C, and D, we shall have the nearest idea of their
relative position by considering B and C on a line
running from west to east ; A under B, and D above
C. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre is in the space
between B and D, and the question, roughly stated, is
whether the city wall which went across from B to
D fell within or without its site.
173. The first and most ancient wall, which in
cluded A and C, Mounts Sion and Moriah, ran nearly
in a straight line, on its north side, which alone it
concerns us here to consider, from the north-west
corner of Sion, where Herod afterwards built a tower
called Hippicus, to the western portico of the Temple
on Moriah. Accordingly the lower city (b) was exterior
to it, or, if any part was included, it was whatever lay
in the angle between Sion and Moriah, A and C. This
wall is supposed to be as early as David's time ; and
in its northern line, which thus divided Sion and Acra
(a and B), stood the gate Gennath, from which in
process of time was drawn a second wall, across or
around Acra, terminating in the tower Antonia, which
stood at the north-west corner of the Temple, opposite
Bezetha (d). After our Lord's death a third wall was
drawn by Agrippa, which inclosed Bezetha also ; but

of the Cross. 311
with this we are not concerned. At the time of His
crucifixion the second wall was the limit of the city;
and the question -in controversy is whether that
second wall went across Acra or outside it. Our Lord
suffered and was buried outside the wall : now St.
Helena's traditionary site is nearly upon the descent
of Acra on the north." If, then, the wall traversed the
hill, that site falls without the wall ; if it inclosed the
hill, within it.
174. The argument advanced by the learned writer
in question for the latter of these alternatives is of
the following kind : he admits that a straight line
drawn from Gennath to Antonia would fall short of
the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, but he observes
truly that Josephus expressly says that the wall had a
curvature in the interval between its extreme points.
Next he draws attention to a certain pool called the
pool of Hezekiah, which is situated only a little to
the south-west of the Church of the Sepulchre, and
which he remarks Hezekiah formed inside the city.
If, then, the pool was within the wall, the Church
must have been within the wall too ; for the wall
could not include the former and exclude the latter
without making a short turn at their point of contact,
which we have no warrant in supposing. Further,
u Clarke and Maundrell make it on the edge of Mount
Moriah ; but Dr. Robinson " directly on the ridge of Acra."
Vol. i. p. 391.

312 St. Helena's Discovery
unless we suffer the wall to extend beyond the
alleged site of the Holy Sepulchre, we shall not allow
room enough for the lower city, which in our Saviour's
time was extensive and populous. And, lastly, there
are certain circumstances in the ground which inter
fere with the supposition of a narrower circuit ; and
there are some large hewn stones far to the north,
near the gate of Damascus, which, being masonry
probably of an age long anterior to that of our Lord,
cannot belong to the third, and therefore are probably
a part of the second wall.
175. Now, of these arguments it is obvious that
not much stress can be laid upon the last. The
ground on which Jerusalem stands has gone through
many alterations at various times : valleys have been
filled up, summits have been levelled. If the surface
was so much changed that Helena could not at once
find the Holy Sepulchre, surely its changes are great
enough to hinder a modern traveller from deter
mining, by its present appearance, the course of the
second wall. Nor does it follow, though the ruins at
the Damascus gate are as early as the date of the
Jewish Kings, as this writer implies, that therefore
they belong to the second wall, for he does not prove
that the second wall existed so early as that time, as
will be noticed presently ; and they may be remains
of some other ancient work, even if it did.
176. Nor surely is it any great objection that the

of the Cross. 313
lower city will be much straitened if we draw its
boundary short of the present Holy Sepulchre ; for
Josephus expressly speaks of the scantiness of the
limits of the city, and of the population exceeding
them in consequence. The population covered the
north side of the Temple Mount, and then crossing
the deep trench which bounded it, overflowed upon
the opposite hill Bezetha, where it formed two large
suburbs, one or both of which were called the " New
City,"T and both of which were external to the then
walls. Mount Sion itself also contained ample room
for a population, the original city of David being but
a citadel upon it. And, for what appears, the emi
nence or ridge Ophel to the south of Moriah afforded
additional accommodation.* But however this be,
' Josephus in one place speaks of " Bezetha and the new
city;" Bell. Jud. ii. 19. § 4; at another of "y K-aTuripu Kmvb-iroXis,"
v. 12. § 2. If this second suburb was to the west of Bezetha,
it must occupy the north of the present Sepulchre ; which
would almost be a proof that the present Sepulchre was with
out the second wall.
x Sion seems to have been covered with streets and private
houses, in spite of its public buildings. Josephus says that
" the houses " on Sion and on Acra " ended in the ravine
between them : " v. 4 ; and says that Sion was called " the
Upper Agora," which implies a population. De Bell. Jud. v.
4. In the sacking of Sion, he speaks of small houses on it
(Sap.dTia), and lanes or alleys, o-Tevairol, ibid. vi. 8. § 5.
Indeed, we might infer a population from the length of the
hill, which was far beyond the needs of a citadel, palace, and
public buildings. Manasseh, too, seems to have taken in a
space beyond the city of David to the south ; 2 Chron. xxxiii.

314 St. Helena' s Discovery
the simple question for us to consider is whether the
deduction from the supposed larger area of the city .
which adherence to the present site of the Sepulchre
requires, will materially lessen that area. I conceive
14. Bezetha seems to have been very thickly inhabited ;
Josephus speaks of the shops of mercers and braziers, the
clothes-market, and the alleys running upon the city wall. De
Bell. Jud. v. 7. fin. The lower city, too, was full of alleys or
narrow lanes, as appears by the following chapter. The Tyro-
pceum, or deep valley between Acra and Sion [and Acra and
Moriah], was "asdificiis densa." Spanheim's Geograph. p.
49. The height of the houses, too, in such localities should be
considered. At Rome a law was passed by Augustus, that
houses should not be above seventy feet high. The poor in
habited them in floors. Vid. Gibbon, Ch. xxxi. [vid. also
Merivale, Rom. Empire, Vol. 5. Ch. 40.] It is a question, too,
whether a portion of the inhabitants did not live in the ex
cavations under Sion and Moriah. The deeper caves were
used for the purposes of concealment in the sack of the city
by Titus. Lightfoot tells us, Chorogr. in Luc. 1. § 6, that both
Iturea and Idumaea were remarkable for their caverns, and he
even derives the name of the former from this circumstance.
Suabo speaks of two caverned mountains, one of which would
hold four thousand men ; Lib. xvi. p. 1074. The cave of Zede-
kiah, according to a Rabbinical authority, whom Lightfoot
quotes, held eighteen thousand. And according to William
of Tyre there was a cave on the other side of Jordan, sixteen
miles from Tiberias, with different stories in it. Vid. also
Joseph. Antiqu. xv. 10. § i. It is the Ecclesiastical tradition
that a cave was the place of the Nativity ; S. Justin Martyr
notices it, and Origen says that in his day it was visited by
pilgrims. However, Dr. Robinson brings this tradition specially
as a sample of the spuriousness of traditions about sacred
history in general, because a cave or grotto is introduced.
Nothing, he says, is done without grottoes. As if, too, some
traditions might not be true and some false ; the latter imita
tions of the earlier.

of the Cross. 315
not.y If the area be too scanty for the population
with this reservation, will it be sufficient without it ?
Sion, the greater part of Acra, and Moriah, within
the walls, and Bezetha outside oi' them, remain ; and
if we suppose the wall which is in question, on start
ing from Gennath, first to run north, and then to curve
round, when it came over against the site of the pre
sent Latin convent, very little of Acra will be lost.
Dr. Robinson refers to a passage in Josephus, in
which that historian speaks of a northern and a
southern portion of the second wall, a mode of ex
pression which requires some such change of direction
to account for it.
177. Nor is it easy to see how the New City can be
altogether excluded from the second wall, as we know
it to have been, if the second wall is extended any
great way beyond the present Holy Sepulchre ; and
if it is not extended, how any great increase of room
will be obtained merely by including the Holy Sepul-
, ehre. Nor is it natural in Josephus to speak of the
population overflowing across the trench of Moriah
upon Bezetha, if it lay all along the west of the latter
y The Quarterly Reviewer for December, 1841, says : "One
argument appears to us absolutely insuperable. To exclude
the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the ancient city, that is,
the part between the western wall and the hill of the Temple,
must be narrowed to less than a quarter of a mile." This is
an inexplicable statement. It assumes that the second wall
always continued at the same distance from the Temple Mount
which it had over against the Sepulchre.

3 16 St. Helena' s Discovery
hill already, and had thence extended itself upon
Bezetha eastward. In short, if there be a difficulty
in accommodating the population, it lies in this, that
the hill of Acra, from Hippicus, on the north-west
corner of Sion, to the east side of the Temple, is
little more than the third of a mile across, as Dr.
Robinson measures it.2 No theory about the north
wall of the city can dispose of this fact.a
178. Putting aside, then, considerations such as these,
which might be useful to corroborate a proof, but
have very little intrinsic force to create one, we come
to the main circumstance on which the author's argu-
z Dr. Robinson says that "the breadth of the city is the
same now as anciently," Vol. ii. p. 67 ; i.e., to show that it
could spare nothing in length ; now he says elsewhere that
the breadth from the brow of the valley of Hinnom near the
Yaffa gate to the brink of the valley of Jehoshaphat is 1,020
yards ; while the length, measured on his map, from Herod's
Gate to the limit of the ancient city on the south, is 1,700 yards,
or short of a mile. Therefore an area of a mile by i of a1
mile is greater than the site of the old city, and makes no
allowance for the Temple, fort, etc., etc., yet even this is little
more than half a square mile. Here then is a fixed limit
agreed on by all who do not adopt the random hypothesis of
Dr. Clarke, that the Hill of Evil Counsel is Sion. Might not an
objection be made to the smallness of even such an area by
those who do not consider how the population of fortified cities
packs ? Nothing seems known for certain about the ordinary
population of Jerusalem. Mr. Greswell makes several calcu
lations, Dissert, xxiii., which exceed what at first sight the
space could seem possibly to admit.
a Such difficulties are of frequent occurrence in history;
e.g., Oxford in the middle ages is said to have had 30,000
students.

of the Cross. 317
ment depends, and which certainly deserves a careful
consideration, — viz., the position of the pool of Heze
kiah. To judge from his plan, this pool nearly joins
the Holy Sepulchre on the south-west ; and was once
even considered as attached to it, and was called from
it. Now Hezekiah formed his pool or reservoir within
the city ; either, then, the Holy Sepulchre lay within
the city also, or the wall ran between the pool and the
Sepulchre. 179. Now, first I would observe that there is no
absurdity in the latter supposition. Let us allow that
it would involve a sharp bend in the second wall,b
which is our author's objection to it ; yet Josephus,
as we have seen, expressly speaks of a northern and
southern portion of the wall, which implies a change
of direction somewhere ; and even though a range be
supposed for the wall beyond the present Sepulchre, it
could not materially change its direction without con
siderable abruptness. Dr. Robinson observes that the
wall could not exclude the Holy Sepulchre, unless it
b Mr. [Dr.] Milman has no difficulty in such a supposition ;
" the second wall," he says, " began at a gate in the old or
inner one, called Gennath, the gate of the gardens ; it inter
sected the lower city, and having struck northward for some
distance, turned to the east, and joined the north-west corner
of the town of Antonia." Hist, of Jews, Vol. iii. p. 16. And
he even represents it on his plan of the city as turning at an
acute angle. Dr. Robinson himself, as is said over-leaf, cannot
escape a bend. When he has brought his supposed second
wall near Bezetha, he speaks of its " bending southward to the
corner of Antonia." Vol. i . p. 468.

318 St. Helena' s Discovery
" made an angle expressly in order to exclude" it ; but
let it.be observed, the angle must be made anyhow in
order to arrive at Antonia ; nay, and such an angle he
himself makes in his own conjectural description of it.
1 80. Again, it is obvious to remark that, supposing
Calvary was a place used for the execution and burial
of criminals, as is not unnatural to suppose, and as its
name may be taken to mean, there was a reason why
the second wall, whenever drawn, should avoid it.
And we know that, wherever it was, it was close upon
the wall, both from the Apostle's saying that it was
" without the gate," and from the custom of the Jews
fixing their places of execution outside their cities.c
181. But, next, dismissing this question, we come
to this most important and remarkable circumstance,
which will strike most readers even at first sight ; viz.,
that the author under review, whose learning none can
question, and whose zeal for Scripture all must hon
our, has fixed the site of Hezekiah's pool by tradition,
and tradition alone. He says that Hezekiah " built
c Deut. xvii. 5 ; Luke iv. 29 ; also 2 Kings x. 8 ; vid. also
Lev. xxiv. 14 ; Numb. xv. 35. Zorn. Opusc. Saer. Vol.-ii. p. 193,
upon Heb. xiii. 12, refers to 1 Kings xxi. 13 ; Acts vii. 59. And
for the like custom among the Romans, to Plaut. Mil. Act. ii.
sc. 4 ; Tac. Ann. ii. 32 ; Hor. Epod. 5. 99. On the Jewish
cemeteries as without the cities, vid. Lightfoot, Chorograph. in
Matt. 100. However, they were far enough to be out of
sight of the inhabitants. The cemeteries of the Levitical
cities were two thousand cubits off. Ibid. Chorograph. in
Marc. 8. § 8.

of the Cross. 319
within the city a pool, apparently the same which now
exists under his name ;" and upon this traditionary
determination of the pool of Hezekiah he proceeds
to deny the faithfulness of the tradition concerning
the site of the Holy Sepulchre. Yet it does not at
all appear why the latter tradition is not as good as
the former, especially since far greater pains have
been taken to ascertain the site of the Sepulchre
than that of the pool. Nor can it here be urged that
springs of water are not of a nature to be formed at
will ; that they have a perpetuity and a possession of
the soil which mounds, or walls, or sepulchres have
not ; that they are not of common occurrence in Jeru
salem, and that there is no great choice of pools be
tween which the tradition might err. This, indeed,
would be an argument if the pool were any more
than a reservoir ; and that too, as Dr. Robinson him
self observes, in part at least of modern workman
ship ; but as the case stands, of course it is quite in
applicable. Nor can he intend to make a distinction
between Christian tradition and Jewish, as if the Jews
were deserving of more consideration and credit than
the interested clergy or the superstitious laity of the
Christian Church. For he candidly admits that the
destruction of Jerusalem by Hadrian involved the
destruction of all their local recollections. " It may
perhaps be asked," he says, "whether there does not
exist a Jewish tradition, which would also be trust-

320 St. Helena' s Discovery
worthy ? not in respect to Jerusalem itself ; for the Jews
for centuries could approach the Holy City only to
weep over it"d By a law of Hadrian they were for
bidden to approach within some miles of the city, and
Constantine did but permit them to view it from the
neighbouring hills.
182. It seems, then, that our author's argument
against the alleged site of the Holy Sepulchre de
pends on a definite and single fact, and for that
single fact he offers no proof whatever, except that
very kind of proof, and that not so good in its kind
as that on which the site of the Holy Sepulchre is at
present received. He cannot tell how long the reser
voir has been called Hezekiah's pool, though he does
tell us that it used to be called by the Monks the Pool
of the Sepulchre ; while we know, on the other hand,
that the Sepulchre was fixed in its present site as
much as fifteen hundred years ago. He does not
know under what circumstances the pool was deter
mined to be Hezekiah's ; whereas we do know that
the site of the Sepulchre was settled after a public
formal examination, and, as it is reported, with the
united aid of learned Jews and Christians, and with a
unanimous decision. Yet, if the real pool was within
the wall, and the real Sepulchre without it, and if
their professed sites are so close to each other that
d Vol. i. p. 376, note ; vid. also p. 350 ; [vid. Lumper, P. H.
t. 6. p. 660.]

of the Cross. 321
both must have been without or both within (a point
which itself, as we have seen, is not at all clear), he
asserts that the tradition concerning the Sepulchre
must be the false, and the tradition concerning the
pool must be the true.e
183. To proceed: it will be observed that Dr.
Robinson takes for granted another point, besides
that of the existing pool being really Hezekiah's ;
viz., that Hezekiah's pool was within the second wall.
Certainly it was within the city wall, as it ran in
Hezekiah's time ; but it is obvious to ask, why was
it only within the second wall, and not within the
8 Professor Robinson, after speaking of Hippicus, Antonia,
and Hezekiah's pool, says : " We have then three points for
determining the probable course of this wall " (the second) ;
"we repaired personally to each of these three points j' etc.
Vol. ii. p . 67. Now of the first he does but say himself, " it
early occurred to us that [the tower of David] was very pro
bably a remnant of the tower of Hippicus," Vol. i. p. 455 ;
" this impression was strengthened," etc. ; of the second
Lami says, " I have set down several places in the map,
whose true situation is not known; as, for instance, the castle
Antonia;" App. Bibl. p. 76, ed. 1723, London; though Dr.
Robinson considers he has ascertained it. And what reliance
is to be placed on the site of the pool we have seen in the
text. In like manner Dr. Robinson can but say of Gennath
"-apparently near Hippicus," p. 411 ; "doubtless near Hippi
cus," p. 461. And of the second wall, "Josephus's descrip
tion of the second wall is very short and unsatisfactory" p. 461.
And he locates the Tyropceum differently from other writers.
Yet on these private inferences from doubtful conjectures on
probable assumptions from unsatisfactory testimony, the Catho
lic Church is to be convicted of fraud and folly. 21

322 St. Helena' s Discovery
first, which was drawn short of the second ? Did the
second wall exist as early as Hezekiah ? But if
Hezekiah's pool was within the first wall, and the
existing pool is Hezekiah's, then Dr. Robinson will
have proved too much ; for he will have brought up
the city of David all across the valley of the Tyro-
pceum to the ridge of Acra on which the Holy Se
pulchre stands, and within " less than a quarter of an
English mile " of the north-west corner of the Temple.
184. It is necessary then for his argument that he
should clearly show, not only that the pool really was
Hezekiah's, but also that the second wall was built,
and bounded the city, in Hezekiah's time. On this
point, however, he does but speak as follows ; " Of
the date of this erection," i.e. the second wall, " we
are notvhere informed ; but it must probably have
been older than the time of Hezekiah, who built
within the city a pool, apparently the same which now
exists under his name."f That is, on the one hand,
Hezekiah's pool was within the second wall, not with
in the first, because the second wall, not the first, was
in Hezekiah's time the boundary of the city ; and on
the other hand, the second wall, not the first, was in
Hezekiah's time the boundary of the city, because
Hezekiah's pool is within, not the first wall, but the
second. Such is the author's proof of the second fact
f Vol. ii. p. 67.

of the Cross. 323
by which he shows that the Church of the Sepulchre
was built upon a pretended site.
185. But it may be asked whether Scripture throws
no light upon the position of the pool ; for in this way
perhaps the tradition respecting it may gain an autho
rity which it has not in itself. No tradition certainly
is tenable which contradicts Scripture ; but many a
tradition deserves attention or commands assent about
which Scripture is silent, or to which it devotes but
a few words or a passing allusion. Dr. Robinson is
more rigorous on this point than I should be myself;
"This is the point," he says, "to which I would parti
cularly direct the reader's attention, that all Eccle
siastical tradition respecting the ancient places in and
around Jerusalem and throughout Palestine is of no
value" (and he prints the words in capitals,) "except
so far as it is supported by circumstances known to us
from the Scriptures or from other contemporary testi
mony." s It would seem, then, as if according to his
deliberate principle, distinctly and formally avowed,
some Scriptural argument ought to be forthcoming in
favour of the traditionary settlement of the site of
Hezekiah's pool ; — what Scripture does say, may be
told in a very few words.
1 86. In the Second Book of Chronicles we simply
read as follows : " This same Hezekiah also stopped
the upper water-course of Gihon, and brought it
g Vol. i. p. 374,

324 St. Helena's Discovery
straight down to the west side of the city of David. "h
Now, what Gihon is, and where, is not here the ques
tion ; Dr. Robinson has some very interesting remarks
on the subject, on its concealment by Hezekiah, and
on the subterraneous channels by which he fed the
reservoirs in Jerusalem. All that here concerns us to
observe in this passage are two distinct statements,
each of them quite inconsistent with the tradition that
the supposed pool of Hezekiah is really the work of
that king. First, the inspired writer tells us above
that Hezekiah brought the water to the city of
David, and the pretended pool is not in that city ;
and next, that he brought it to the west side of the
city, and the pool is on the north of it. What then
can be said, but that this author's argument against
the truth of the alleged site of the Holy Sepulchre is
based, not, only on a blind Jewish tradition, the like
of which he elsewhere reprobates, but on a disregard
of the sacred text which it is the special object of his
work to exalt ?
187. In conclusion, I will but draw attention to the
light which this discussion has thrown upon the ex-
k 2 Chron. xxxii. 30. If it is necessary to appeal to authority,
Calmet considers Hezekiah's pool to have been in the western
quarter of the city of David, in 2 Paralip. xxxii. 30, and fed
by Gihon, in 2 Esdr. ii. 14. So does Lightfoot, Chorograph. in
Matt. 25, and in Joan. 5. §§ 2, 3. Reland places the fount of
Gihon, from which it was fed, at the south-west. Palest, iii.
p. 859.

of the Cross. 325
treme improbability, which was noticed before enter
ing into it, that the parties who aided St. Helena in
her search should have placed the Sepulchre where
we find it, unless it were the true site. If facts are as
clear as Dr. Robinson would consider them, they were
too clear for any one to miss them.1 If the present
pool of Hezekiah was then acknowledged to be such,
close upon the present Sepulchre, is it credible that,
with that intimate knowledge of the letter of the in
spired writings which no one denies to their times, the
clergy of Jerusalem should have fixed on a site for
the Sepulchre which, according to Dr. Robinson, they
would be confessing to be, not only within the lower
city, but even within the city of David ? Did the
pool escape their eyes, or its title their ears, or the
sacred text their memory, or the conclusion from
1 Dr. Robinson begins by speaking of the " difficulty arising
from the present location " of the Sepulchre " in the heart of
the city," which "has been felt by many pious minds." Yet
what so natural, as Maundrell observes, as that the Sepulchre,
when found, should attract the city round it? Again, why is
it not a difficulty that Sion is now so deserted ? Is not this
extension, if not change, of site, what happens to all cities of
any standing ? Was Dr. Robinson sceptical about St. Giles's in
the Fields when he came to London ? Pope Gregory was per
fectly aware of the change of site of the city. " Hoc quoque
quod additur," he says, " Non relinquent in te lapidem super
'lapidem,' etiam ipsa jam ejusdem civitatis transmigratio
testatur ; quia dum nunc in eo loco constructa est, ubi extra
pertain fuerat Dominus crucifixus, prior ilia Jerusalem, ut
dicitur, funditus est eversa." Hom. in Evang. 39. init.

326 Discovery of the Cross.
these data their reason ? Could it be that a pool,
which Scripture says was within the walls, should be
situated upon a place of execution which Scripture as
surely places without them ? And in like manner we
might ask, were it worth while, if the stones near the
Damascus gate wear an antique look now, were they
not likely to tell their own story better, if they were
on the spot then ? and have traces of the old wall
become fainter or stronger in the course of years? and
had the disposition of the ground undergone more
alteration then than now, or less, considering Hadrian
rebuilt the city on the site on which he found it ?k
But it is needless to dwell on the improbability of
an hypothesis which has been shown to be altogether
gratuitous. 188. On the whole, then, I cannot doubt that the
Holy Sepulchre was really discovered as Eusebius
declares it to have been ; and I am as little disposed
to deny that the Cross was discovered also, as that
the relics of St. Cuthbert or the coffin of Bishop
Coverdale have been found here in England, in our
own day.
* Those who deny that the Pagan Temple was built on the
site of the Sepulchre, have to account for the utter oblivion to
which, on their hypothesis, the place of our Lord's crucifixion
was consigned ; whereas the circumstances attendant on that
profanation which the Temple occasioned wiU explain such
partial ignorance concerning it as seems to have obtained
among the Christians of Jerusalem.

Section VI.
THE DEATH OF ARIUS.
189. S~* ONSTANTINE, being gained over by the
^— / Arian party, called Arius to Constanti
nople, with the intention of obliging Alexander, the
Bishop of that see, to restore him to the communion
of the Church. The old man, who was at that time
ninety-seven years of age, betook himself with his
people to prayer and fasting. He shut himself up in
the church, and continued in supplication for several
days and nights. The coming Sunday was appointed
for the reception of Arius, and on the preceding day
Alexander was summoned before Constantine, and
commanded to comply with his wish. On his refusal
the Emperor grew angry, and Alexander withdrew
in silence to urge the cause of Catholic truth with
greater earnestness in a more suitable Presence. He
fell on his face before the altar, and he conjured
Christ, the Lord of all and King of kings, to deliver
the Church from the danger and disgrace which
threatened it One of the persons attendant on him
was Macarius, from whom St. Athanasius relates it.

328 The Death of Arius.
Macarius followed his prayer as he spoke it, and it
ran thus : " If Arius communicates to-morrow, then
let Thy servant depart, and destroy not the righteous
with the wicked. But if Thou sparest Thy Church,
and I know Thou sparest it, have respect unto the
words of the Eusebians, and give not Thine heritage
unto ruin and reproach ; and take Arius away, lest if
he enter into the Church his heresy seem to enter
with him, and henceforth religion be counted as irre-
ligion."1 This prayer is said to have been offered
about three p.m. on the Saturday ; that same evening
Arius was in the great square of Constantine when he
was suddenly seized with indisposition. On retiring,
he was overtaken by what is commonly considered to
be the fate of Judas, as described in the Book of Acts.
The building where this event took place became a
record of it to future times, and, as Socrates tells us,
" rendered the manner of his death ever memorable,
all passers-by pointing the finger at it."m
190. Now of this occurrence it is obvious to remark,
first of all, that it is strictly of an historical character.
It enters into the public transactions of the times, and
is one of a chain of events which are linked together,
and form a whole. It has a meaning, and gives a
meaning to the cours'e of action in which it is found.
It is in no sense what Paley calls " naked history,"
and in this respect differs from certain other extraor-
1 De Mort. Ar. m Hist. i. 38.

The Death of Arius. 329
dinary occurrences, such, for instance, as are recorded
in the lives of the Monks ; nay, from certain miracles
of Scripture, such as St. Paul's preservation from the
viper, of which nothing comes, and still more the re
surrection wrought by Elisha's bones. " It has been
said," says Paley, " that if the prodigies of the Jewish
history had been found only in fragments of Manetho
or Berosus, we should have paid no regard to them ;
and I am willing to admit this. If we knew nothing
of the facts but from the fragment ; if we possessed
no proof that these accounts have been credited and
acted upon from times, probably, as ancient as the
accounts themselves ; if we had no visible effects con
nected with the history, no subsequent or collateral
testimony to confirm it ; under these circumstances I
think that it would be undeserving of credit." He
goes on to say that this is not the case as regards the
introduction of Christianity ; nor, as we may add, as
regards the history of Arius.
191. Again, it must be observed that this is more
strictly a miracle of the Church than many which
occur within her pale and among her members ; that
is, it is done by the Church as the Church. Though
it bears a tentative character, it is the result of a
solemn intercession, a solemn anathema, of the
Church. Miracles happened in the kingdom of Israel,
where there was no Church ; but here is a contest
between an Emperor and a heresy on the one side,

3 3 o The Death of A rius.
and the Church on the other; the Church speaks
through her constituted authorities, and the judgment
which is inflicted on her enemy is an attestation to
her divinity.
192. Further, it was done in the presence of hostile
power, which was awed by it, and altered its line of
action in consequence. Paley observes, when arguing
for the miracles of the Gospel, " We lay out of the case
those which come merely in affirmance of opinions
already formed. It has long been observed that
Popish miracles happen in Popish countries, that
they make no converts. In the moral as in the natural
world, it is change which requires a cause. Men are
easily fortified in their old opinions, driven from them
with great difficulty."11 Now the event in question
was a Catholic miracle in an Arian city, before an
Arian court, amid a prevalent Arianism extending
itself all through the East
193. " But after all, was it a miracle ? for if not, we
are labouring at a proof of which nothing comes."
The more immediate answer to this question has
already been suggested several times. When a
Bishop with his flock prays night and day against a
heretic, and at length begs of God to take him away,
and when he is suddenly taken away almost at the
moment of his triumph, and that by a death awfully
significant, from its likeness to one recorded in Scrip-
" Evidences, Part ii. Ch. i.

The Death of Arius. 331
ture, is it not trifling to ask whether such an occurrence
eomes up to the definition of a miracle ? The ques
tion is not whether it is formally a miracle, but whe
ther it is an event, the like of which persons who deny
that miracles continue will consent that the Church
should be considered still able to perform. If they
are willing to allow to the Church such extraordinary
protection, it is for them to draw the line, to the satis
faction of people in general, between these and strictly
miraculous events ; if, on the other hand, they deny
their occurrence in the times of the Church, then
there is sufficient reason for our appealing here to the
history of Arius in proof of the affirmative. This is
what suggests itself at first sight ; however, that it
was really miraculous, Gibbon surely is a sufficient
voucher. " Those," he says, " who press the literal
narrative of the death of Arius, must make their
option between poison and miracle." Now, consider
ing that this awful occurrence took place in an Arian
city and court, and in the face of powerful and quick-
sighted adversaries, who had every means and every
interest to detect an act of such dreadful wickedness
as Gibbon insinuates, surely, putting aside all higher
considerations, there are insuperable difficulties in the
theory of poison ; while those who do not deny the
moral governance of God, and the heretical and un
godly character of Arianism, will have no difficulty, in
referring the catastrophe to miracle.

332 The Death of Arius.
194. One other question may be asked, though it is
of a doctrinal nature, and therefore hardly needs to
be considered here ; whether so solemn a denunciation
as that adopted by Alexander, and so positive a re
ference of the event which followed to that denuncia
tion as a cause, are not mod'es of acting and judging
uncongenial to the Christian religion. One passage
there certainly is in the New Testament which at first
sight seems in opposition to it. When James and
John wished to be allowed to call down fire from
heaven upon the Samaritans, as Elijah had done upon
Ahaziah's messengers, Christ answered, "Ye know not
what manner of spirit ye are of : for the Son of man
is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them."
However, it is obvious to reply, first, that Elijah, in the
passage in questi'on, called down a miraculous punish
ment on the soldiers of Ahaziah mainly in his own
defence * and it is observable that the Apostles asked
leave to do the same, when the Samaritans had
refused to receive their Lord and them ; whereas the
great rule of the Gospel is to " avenge not ourselves,
but rather give place unto wrath," as our Lord
exemplified when " they went to another village."
But whether there be any force in this distinction or
not, certain it is that in the Acts, in which we surely
have the principles of the Gospel drawn out into
action, two precedents occur in justification of the
conduct of St. Alexander, one given us by St. Peter

The Death of Arius. 333
and the other by St. Paul. St. Peter's denunciation
of Ananias and Sapphira was followed by their instan
taneous deaths ; St. Paul's denunciation of Elymas,
by his immediate blindness. These instances, more
over, suggest that our Lord's earthly ministry might
probably be Conducted on different laws from those
which belonged to His risen power, When the Spirit
had descended, and light was spread abroad ; ac
cording to the text in which blasphemy against the
Son of man and blasphemy against the Spirit are
contrasted. Hence St. Paul calls Elymas, who was
" seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith," an
" enemy of all righteousness," and a "perverter of the
right ways of the Lord ; " and St. Peter still more
expressly accuses Ananias and his wife of " lying
against the Holy Ghost," and " tempting the Spirit of
the Lord." It is obvious also to refer to St. Paul's
imprecation on Alexander the copper-smith, that the
Lord would reward him according to his works. Here
St. Paul, who had the gift of inspiration, speaks of
Alexander personally ; but the Bishops of the Church
did not venture so much as this ; they did but con
template her enemies in their opposition, as heretics
or rebels, and dealt with them accordingly, without
any direct reference to their real and absolute state
in the sight of God.

Section VII.
THE FIERY ERUPTION ON JULIAN'S ATTEMPT TO
REBUILD THE JEWISH TEMPLE.
195. T)ISHOP WARBURTON, as is well known,
-*-' has written in defence of the miraculous
character of the earthquake and fiery eruption which
defeated the attempt of the Emperor Julian to rebuild
the Jewish Temple. Though in many most important.
respects he shows his dissent from the view of the
Ecclesiastical Miracles taken in these pages, yet the
propositions which he lays down in the commence
ment of his work are precisely those which it has
been here attempted to maintain ; first, " that not all
the miracles recorded in Church history are forgeries
or delusions ; " next, " that their evidence doth not
stand on the same foot of credit with the miracles re
corded in Gospel history." In drawing out the facts
and the evidence of the miracle in question, I shall
avail myself of the work of this learned and able
writer, with which I agree in the main, though of
course there is room for difference ot opinion, both as
regards the details of the one and the other, and as
regards the view to be taken of them.

Fiery Eruption at the Temple. 335
196. In the year 363, Julian, in the course of his
systematic hostilities against Christianity, determined
to rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem. The undertaking
was conducted on a magnificent scale, large sums
being assigned out of the public revenue for its exe
cution. Alypius, an intimate friend of Julian, was set
over the work; the Jews aided him with a vast collec
tion of materials and of workmen. Both sexes, all
ranks, took part in the labour, entering upon the ruins,
clearing away the rubbish, and laying bare the foun
dations." What followed is attested by a number of
authorities, who agree with each other in all substan
tial respects, though, as was to be expected, no single
writer relates every one of the particulars. First, we
have the contemporary testimony of the Pagan his
torian Ammianus Marcellinus, and we may add of
Julian himself; then of St. Gregory Nazianzen,p St.
Ambrose, and St. Chrysostom, who were more or less
contemporaries ; and of Rufinus, Socrates, Sozomen,
and Theodoret, of the century following. They de
clare as follows. The work was interrupted by a vio
lent whirlwind, says Theodoret, which scattered about
vast quantities of lime, sand, and other loose materials
collected for the building. A storm of thunder and
0 It was quite an enthusiastic movement. We are told that
the spades and pickaxes were of silver, and the rubbish was
removed in mantles of silk and purple. Vid. Gibbon, Ch. xxiii.
p Orat. v. 4—7. The Oration was composed the very year
of the miracle. [Vid. Fabric. Salutaris Lux. p. 124, Gothofr.
in Philostorg. p. 296.!

336 Fiery Eruption on Julian's attempt
lightning followed ; fire fell, says Socrates ; and the
workmen's tools, the spades, the axes, and the saws,
were melted down. Then came an earthquake, which
threw up the stones of the old foundations of the
Temple, says Socrates ; filled up the excavation, says
Theodoret, which had been made for the new foun
dations ; and, as Rufinus adds, threw down the build
ings in the neighbourhood, and especially the public
porticoes, in which were numbers of the Jews who
had been aiding the undertaking, and who were buried
in the ruins. The workmen returned to their work ;
but from the recesses laid open by the earthquake,
balls of fire burst out, says Ammianus ; and that
again and again, so often as they renewed the
attempt. The fiery mass, says Rufinus, ranged up and
down the street for hours ; and St. Gregory, that
when some fled to a neighbouring Church for safety,
the fire met them at the door, and forced them back
with the loss either of life or of their 'extremities. At
length the commotion ceased ; a calm succeeded ;
and, as St. Gregory adds, in the sky appeared a lu
minous Cross surrounded by a circle. Nay, upon the
garments and upon the bodies of the persons present
Crosses were impressed, says St. Gregory; .which
were luminous by night, says Rufinus ; and at other
times of a dark colour, says Theodoret ; and would
not wash out, adds Socrates. In consequence, the
attempt was abandoned.

to Rebuild the Jewish Temple. 337
197. There is no reason for doubting any part of
this narrative ; however, enough will remain if we ac
cept only the account given us by Ammianus, who, to
use the words of Warburton, was " a contemporary
writer, of noble extraction, a friend and admirer of
Julian, and his companion in arms, a man of affairs,
learned, candid, and impartial, a lover of truth, and
the best historian of his times," and "a Pagan professed
and declared." " Though Julian," says this writer,
"with anxious anticipation of contingencies of every
kind, was keenly engaged in the prosecution of the
numberless arrangements incident to his [Persian] ex
pedition, yet that no place might be without its share
in his energy, and that the memory of his reign might
continue in the greatness of his works, he thought
of rebuilding at an extravagant expense the proud
Temple once at Jerusalem, which after many conflicts
and much bloodshed, in the siege under Vespasian
first, and then Titus, was with difficulty taken ; and
he committed the accomplishment of this task to
Alypius of Antioch, who had before that been
Lieutenant of Britain. Alypius therefore set himself
vigorously to the work, and was seconded by the
governor of the province ; when fearful balls of fire,
breaking out near the foundations, continued their
attacks, till the workmen, after repeated scorchings,
could approach no more ; and thus, the fierce element
obstinately repelling them, he gave over his attempt." 22

338 Fiery Eruption on Julian' s attempt
198. Julian, too, seems awkwardly to allude to it in
a fragment of a letter or oration, which Warburton
has pointed out, and which is so curious an evidence
of his defeat and its extraordinary circumstances that
it may be fitly introduced in this place. He is encou
raging the zeal of the Pagans for the honour of their
divinities, and he says : " Let no one disbelieve the
gods, from seeing and hearing that their statues and
their temples have been insulted in some quarters.
Let no one beguile us by his speeches, or unsettle us
on the score of providence ; for those who reproach us
on this head, I mean the Prophets of the Jews, what
will they say about their own Temple, which has been
thrice overthrown, and is not even now rising ?i This
I have said with no wish to reproach them, inasmuch
4 Fabricius and De la Bleterie consider the "three times"
to include Julian's own attempt to rebuild ; yet it is harsh, as
Warburton observes, to call a hindrance in rebuilding an ac
tual destruction of the building, though the hindrance was a
destruction as far as it went. But Lardner and Warburton
seem to mistake when they argue against Fabricius that <ty«-
popivov Si oiSi vvv means " not raised again to this day," whereas
it must rather be construed " not rising " or " in course of
building." Warburton reckons the alterations and additions
under Herod as by implication a destruction of the second
1 emple ; and as another hypothesis he suggests the profana
tion under Antiochus. Lardner thinks Julian spoke vaguely
or rhetorically, or that he referred to the calamities which came
upon Jerusalem in the time of Adrian. " Juiien loin de con
clure de ce qui dtoit arrivd a Jerusalem la ventd de la religion
Chretienne, en inferoit que la revelation judai'que dtoit fausse."
De la Bleterie. Julian, v. p. 399.

to Rebuild the Jewish Temple. 339
as I myself, at so late a day, had in purpose to rebuild
it for the honour of Him who was worshipped there.
Here I have alluded to it, with the purpose of shewing
that of human things nothing is imperishable, and
that the Prophets who wrote as I have mentioned,
raved, and were but the gossips of canting old women.
Nothing, indeed, contradicts the notion of that God
being great, but He is unfortunate in His Prophets'
and interpreters ; I say that they did not take care to
purify their souls by a course of education, nor to
open their fast-closed eyes, nor to dissipate the dark
ness which lay on them. And, like men who see a
great light through a mist, not clearly nor distinctly,
and take it not for pure light, but for fire, and are
blind to all things around about it, they cry out
loudly, ' Shudder and fear ; fire, flame, death, sword,
lance,' expressing by many words that one destruc
tive property of fire."1 When it is considered that
Julian was, as it were, defeated by the prophets of
that very people he was aiding ; that he desired to re
build the Jewish Temple, and the Christians declared
that he could not, for the Jewish Prophets themselves
had made it impossible ; we surely may believe, that
r Page 295. Ed. Spanh. Lardner contends that this letter
from its tone must have been written before any attempt to
rebuild the Temple ; which indeed he considers Julian .never to
have put into execution. This is a paradox more in the style
of Warburton, whom he is opposing, than of so sensible and
sober a writer.

34° Fiery Eruption on Julian' s attempt
in the foregoing passage this was the thought which
was passing in his mind, while* the prophetic emblem
of fire haunted him, which had been so recently ex
hibited in the catastrophe by which he had been
baffled. 199. The fact then cannot be doubted ;s it may be
asked, however, whether the perpetual ruin of the
Temple was actually predicted in the Prophets ; and
if not, what was the drift of this miracle, and how it
was connected with the Church. It is connected with
the Church and the Prophets by one circumstance, if
by no other, and that a remarkable one ; that, before
the actual attempt to rebuild, a Bishop of the Church
had denounced it, prophesied its failure, and that
It is objected by Lardner that St. Jerome, Prudentius, and
Orosius are silent about the miracle. Others have alleged
the silence of St. Cyril of Jerusalem. But if, as a matter of
course, good testimony is to be overborne because other good
testimony is wanting, there will be few facts of history certain.
Why should Ammianus be untrue because Jerome is silent?
Sometimes the notoriety of a fact leads to its being passed over.
Moyle is "unwiUing to reject all [miracles since the days of
the Apostles] without reserve, for the sake of a very remarkable
one which happened at the rebuilding of the Temple," etc.
Posth. Works, Vol. i. p. 101. He professes to be influenced by
the testimony and the antecedent probability. Douglas speaks
of Warburton's defence of it as " a work written with a solidity
of argument which might always have been expected from the
author, and with a spirit of candour which his enemies thought
him incapable of." These admissions are very strong, consi
dering the authors. Mosheim takes the same side. J. Basnage,
Lardner, Hey, etc., take the contrary.

to Rebuild the Jewish Temple. 341
from the light thrown upon the subject by the
Prophets of the OH Testament. " Cyril, Bishop of
Jerusalem," says Socrates, " bearing in mind the
words of the Prophet Daniel, which Christ had con
firmed in the Holy Gospels, declared to many before
hand, that now the time was come, when stone should
not remain upon stone for that Temple, but the
Saviour's prophecy should be fulfilled."' St. Cyril
seems to have argued that since our Lord prophesied
the utter destruction of the Temple, and since that
destruction was not yet fully accomplished, but only
in course of accomplishment, for the old foundations
at that time still remained, therefore Julian was re
versing the Divine order of things, and building up
when God was engaged in casting down, and in con
sequence was sure to fail. And as Julian probably
understood Daniel's and our Lord's words in the same
way, and did set himself deliberately and professedly
to contravene them, viewed as fulfilled in the for-
' Hist. iii. 20. Lardner (Testimonies, Ch. 46. 3), says, that
"it is very absurd for any Christians to talk in this manner.
Christ's words had been fulfilled almost 300 years before ; "
and refers to Rufinus as giving the true account of St. Cyril's
words, viz., that "it could not be that the Jews should be able
to lay them stone upon stone ; " but St. Cyril himself expressly
says what Socrates reports of him, Catech. xv. 15 : "Antichrist
shall come at a time when there shall not be left one stone
upon another in the Temple." This was written before Julian's
attempt ; and St. Chrysostom, after it, pronounces the pro
phecy of " not one stone upon another " not fulfilled even then.
Hom. 75. in Matth.

342 Fiery Eruption on Julian ' s attempt
tunes of the Temple, he was evidently placing himself
in open hostility to Christ and His Prophet, and chal
lenging Him to the encounter. No circumstances
then could be more fitting for the interposition of a
miracle in frustration of his undertaking.
200. The same conclusion may be argued from our
Lord's words to the Samaritan woman. He does not
indeed mention the Temple by name, but he must be
considered to allude to it, when He says that men
should not " worship at Jerusalem." They were in
deed to worship there, as everywhere, but to worship
without the Temple ; and that because they were to
worship " in spirit and in truth." A spiritual worship
was incompatible with the Judaic services ; so that
when Christianity appeared the Temple was de
stroyed. Julian then, in building again the Temple,
was doing what he could to falsify Christianity.
201. But, again, the Jewish Temple was confessedly
the centre of the Jewish worship and polity ; to rebuild
the Temple, then, was to establish the Jews, as Jews,
in their own land, an event which, if prophecy is sure,
never is to be. " The building of [the Temple]," says
Mr. Davison, " was directed for this reason, that God
had given ' rest to His people,' and henceforth would
not suffer them to wander or be disturbed ; so long as
they enjoyed the privilege of being His people at all.
' Moreover, I will appoint a place 'for my people Israel,
and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place

to Rebuild the Jewish Temple. 343
of their own, and move no more! This promise of rest
was connected with the Temple, for it was spoken
when God confirmed and commanded the design of
building it." He continues presently, " Their national
estate was henceforth attached to this Temple. It
fell with them; when they returned and'became a
people again, it rose also. . . Excepting around this
Temple, they have never been able to settle them
selves, as a people, nor find a public home for their
nation or their religion. . . So that the long desolation
of their Temple, and their lasting removal from the
seat of it, are no inconsiderable proofs that their polity
and peculiar law are come to an end in the purposes
of Providence, and according to the intention of the
Temple-appointment, as well as in the fact."u Julian
then, in proposing to rebuild the Jewish Temple,
aimed at the re-establishment of Judaism, — of that
ceremonial religion which in its day indeed had been
the instrument of Divine Providence towards higher
blessings in store, and those for all men, but which,
when those blessings were come, forthwith was disan
nulled in the Divine counsels " for the weakness, and
unprofitableness thereof."
202. And next the question may be asked whether
there was after all any miracle in the case, as in the
instance of most of the other extraordinary occur
rences which have passed under review. The luminous
u Discourses on Prophecy, v. 2. § 2.

344 Fiery Eruption on Julian' s attempt
Crosses upon the garments and bodies of the persons
present were apparently of a phosphoric nature ; the
Cross in the air resembled meteoric phenomena ; the
earthquake and balls of fire had a volcanic origin ;
and other marvellous circumstances are referable to
electricity.* This all may be very true, and yet it
may be true also that the immediate cause, which set
all these various agents in motion, and combined them
for one work, was supernatural ; just as the agency of
mind on matter, in speaking, walking, writing, eating,
and the like, is not subject to physical laws, though
manifesting itself through them.v Again, even sup
posing that these phenomena were not in themselves
miraculous, yet surely their concurrence with the
T " The mineral and metallic substances which, by their acci
dental fermentation, are wont to take fire and burst out in
flame, were the native contents of the place from which they
issued ; but in all likelihood they would have there slept, and
still continued in the quiet innoxious state in which they had so
long remained, had not the breath of the Lord awoke and
kindled them. But when the Divine Power had thus miracu
lously interposed to stir up the rage of these fiery elements,
and yet to restrain their fury to the objects of His vengeance,
He then again suffered them to do their oi'dinary office;
because nature, thus directed, would, by the exertion of its
own laws, answer all the ends of the moral designation." War-
burt. Julian, p. 246. Again, " We see why fire was the scourge
employed ; as we may be sure water would have been, were
the region of Judea naturally subject to inundations. For
miracles, not being an ostentatious, but a necessary instrument
of God's moral government, we cannot conceive it probable
that He would create the elements for this purpose, but use
those which already lay stored up against the day of visitation."
Ibid. p. 250.

to Rebuild the Jewish Temple. 345
moral system of things, their happening at that time
and place and in that subserviency to the declarations
of ancient prophecy, is in itself of the nature of a mi
racle. It is observable too, that though the Cross in
the air be attributable to meteoric causes, yet such
an occurrence is after all very unusual ; now we read
of three such occurrences in the course of the fifty
years between Constantine's accession to power and
Julian, during which period Christianity was effecting
its visible triumph and establishment in the world ; —
viz., the Cross at the conversion of Constantine, that
which hung over Jerusalem in the reign of Constan-
tius, and the Cross which forms part of the awful
events now in question ; and while any accumulation
of extraordinary phenomena creates a difficulty in
finding a cause in nature adequate to their produc
tion, the recurrence of the same phenomena argues
design, or the interference of agency beyond nature.
It must be added, too, that the occurrence of a
whirlwind, an earthquake, and a fire, especially re
minds us of Elijah's vision in Horeb, and again of the
manifestation of the Divine Presence in the first and
fourth of the Acts, yet it does not appear as if the
writers to whom we have referred had these events
in their mind ; rather it is only by the union of their
separate testimonies, each incomplete in itself, that
the parallel is formed.31
* It should be observed that the order in which the miracu
lous phenomena have been arranged above is not found in the

346 Fiery Eruption on Julian' s attempt
203. Moreover the events in question did the work
of a miracle ; they defeated powerful enemies, who
would not have been unwilling to detect imposture,
and who would not have been deterred from their
purpose by interruptions which are extraordinary
only in a relation. If the purpose of the Scripture
miracles be to enforce on the minds of men an im
pression of the present agency and of the will of God,
His approval of one man or doctrine, and His disap
proval of another, not even the clearest of those re
corded in the Gospel could have secured this object
more effectually than did the wonderful occurrence in
question. And did we see at this day a great attempt
made to reinstate the Jews as Jews in their own land,
to build their Temple, and to recommence their sacri
fices, did the enemies of the Catholic Church forward
it, did heretical bodies and their officials on the spot
take part in it, and did some catastrophe, as sudden
and unexpected as the fiery eruption, befall the at
tempt, I conceive, whatever became of abstract defini
tions, we should feel it to be a Divine interference,
bringing with it its own evidence, and needing no
interpretation. It must be recollected, too, that cer
tain of the miracles of Scripture, such as the de
struction of Sodom, may be plausibly attributed to
physical causes, yet without disparagement of their
original authorities ; Warburton has Deen followed except in
one instance.

to Rebuild the Jewish Temple. 347
Divine character. And lastly, as to the extravagance
of some writers who have considered the miracle an
artifice of the Christian body, the same scepticism
which has wantonly ascribed it to combustibles of the
nature of gunpowder, has at other times suggested a
like explanation of the thunders and lightnings when
the Law was given, and of the deaths of Korah,
Dathan, and Abiram.

Section VIII.
RECOVERY OF THE BLIND MAN BY THE RELICS OF
ST. GERVASIUS AND ST. PROTASIUS AT MILAN.
204. * I ^HE broad facts connected with this memo-
-*¦ rable interposition of Divine Power are
these : St. Ambrose, with a large portion of the popu
lation of Milan, was resisting the Empress Justina in
her attempt to seize on one of the churches of the
city for Arian worship. In the course of the contest
he had occasion to seek for the relics of Martyrs, to
be used in the dedication of a new church, and he
found two skeletons, with a quantity of fresh blood,
the miraculous token of martyrdom. Miracles fol
lowed, both cures and exorcisms ; and at length, as
he was moving the relics to a neighbouring church, a
blind man touched the cloth which covered them, and
regained his sight. The Empress in consequence re
linquished the contest ; and the subject of the miracle
dedicated himself to religious service in the Church,
of the Martyrs, where he seems to have remained till
his death. These facts are attested by St. Ambrose'
himself, several times by St. Augustine, and by Pau-

Recovery of the Blind Man. 349
linus, secretary to St. Ambrose, in his Life of the
Saint addressed to St. Augustine.
205. This miracle, it is to be presumed, will satisfy
the tests which Douglas provides for verifying events
of that nature. That author lays down, as we have
already seen, that miracles are to be suspected, when-
the accounts of them were first published long after
the time or far from the place of their alleged occur
rence ; or, if not, yet at least were not then and there
subjected to examination. Now in the instance
before us we have the direct testimony of three con
temporaries, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, and Pau
linus ; two of whom at the least were present at the
very time and place, while one of those two wrote his
account immediately upon or during the events, as
they proceeded. These three witnesses agree to
gether in all substantial matters ; and the third, who
writes twenty-six years after the miracle, when St.
Ambrose was dead, unlike many reporters of miracles,
adds nothing to the narrative, as St. Ambrose and St.
Augustine left it. Douglas observes in explanation
of the third of his conditions, that we may suspect
miracles of having "been admitted without exami
nation, first, if they coincided with the favourite opi
nions and superstitious prejudices of those to whom
they were reported, and who on that account might
be eager to receive them without evidence ; secondly,
if they were set on foot, or at least were encouraged

35° Recovery of the Blind Man
and supported, by those who alone had the power of
detecting the fraud, and who could prevent any ex
amination which might tend to undeceive the world.")'
Now here all the power was on the side of those
against whom the miracle was wrought ; and, though
the popular feeling was with St. Ambrose, yet the
whole city had had an Arian clergy for nearly twenty
years, and could not but be in a measure under Arian
influence. But however this might be, at least Am
brose had to cope with Arian princes armed with des
potic power, an Arian court, an Arian communion
lately dominant and still organised, with a bishop at
its head. His enemies had already made attempts to
assassinate him ; and again, to seize his person, and
to carry him off from the city. They had hitherto
been the assailants, and he had remained passive.
Now, however, he had at last ventured on what in its
effects was an aggressive act. As I have said, he has
to dedicate a Church, and he searches for relics of
Martyrs. He is said to find them ; miracles follow ;
the sick and possessed are cured ; at length in the
public street, in broad day, while the relics are
passing, a blind man, well known in the place by
name, by trade, by person, and by his calamity, pro
fesses to recover his sight by means of them.
206. Here surely is a plain challenge made to the
enemies of the Church, almost as direct as Elijah's to
y Pages 28, 52.

by the Relics of the Martyrs. 351
the idolatrous court and false prophets of Israel.
St. Ambrose supplies them with materials, nor do
they want the good-will to detect a fraud, if fraud
there be. Yet they are utterly unable to cope with
him. They denied the miracle indeed, and they could
not do otherwise, if they were to remain Arians ; as
Protestant writers deny it now, that they may not be
forced to be Catholics. They denied the miracle, and
St. Ambrose, in a sermon preached at the time,
plainly tells us that they did ; but they did not
hazard any counter statement or distinct explanation
of the facts of the case. They did not so much as the
Jews, who, on the Resurrection, at least said that our
Lord's Body was stolen away by night. They did
nothing but deny, — except indeed we let their actions
speak for them. One thing then they did ; they gave
over the contest. The Miracle was successful.
207. This miracle answers to Leslie's criteria also.
It was sensible ; it was public ; and the subject of it
became a monument of it, and that with a profession
that he was so. He remained on the spot, and dedi
cated himself to God's service in the Church of the
Martyrs who had been the means of his cure ; thus
by his mode of life proclaiming the mercy which had
been displayed in his behalf, and by his presence
challenging examination.
208. An attempt has lately been made to resolve
this miracle into a mere trick of priestcraft; but

3 5 2 Recovery of the Blind Man
doubtless the Arians would have been beforehand
with the present objector, could a case have been
made out with any plausibility. This anticipation is
confirmed by an inspection of the inferences or con
jectures of which he makes the historical facts the
subject. The blood, he says, was furnished by the
blind Severus, who had been a butcher, and might still
have relations in the trade. And since St. Ambrose
translated the relics at once, instead of waiting for the
next Sunday, this is supposed to argue that he was
afraid, had the ceremony been postponed, of the fraud
being detected by the natural consequence of the
delay. 209. But all facts admit of two interpretations ;
there is not the transaction or occurrence, consisting
of many parts, but some of them may be fixed upon
as means of forcing upon it a meaning contrary to the
true one, as is shewn by the ingenuity exercised in
defence of clients in the courts of law. What has
been attempted by the writer to whom I allude, as
regards St. Ambrose, has been done better, though
more wickedly, by the infidel author of the New Trial
of the Witnesses as regards the History of the Resur
rection. In such cases inquirers will decide according
to their prepossessions ;z if they are prepared to
2 This has been dwelt on at length, supr. n. 71 to n. 80.
Gibbon gives us a curious illustration of it in his remark on the
miracle of the Confessors, which is presently to be related. He

by the Relics of the Martyrs. 353
believe that the Fathers and Doctors of the Church
would introduce the blood of the shambles into a
grave, and pretend that it was the blood of God's
saints, and hire men first to feign themselves demoni
acs and then to profess themselves dispossessed on ap
proaching the counterfeit relics, they will be convinced
in the particular case by very slight evidence, and will
catch at any circumstances which may be taken as
indications of what they think antecedently probable;
but if they think such proceedings to be too blasphe
mous, too frightful, too provocative even of an im
mediate judgment, for any but the most callous hearts
and the most reckless consciences to conceive and
carry out, they would not believe even plausible evi
dence in their behalf. If it appears to them not un
likely that miracles continue in the Church, they will
find that it is easier to admit than to reject what
comes to them on such weighty testimony; but if
they think miracles as improbable after a revelation
is given, as they appeared to Hume before it, then
they will judge with him that "a religionist may know
his narration to be false, and yet persevere in it, with
says : "This supernatural gift of the African Confessors, who
spoke without tongues, will command the assent of those, and
of those only, who already believe that their language was
pure and orthodox. But the stubborn mind of the infidel is
guarded by secret .incurable suspicion; and the Arian or
Socinian, who has seriously rejected the doctrine of the
Trinity, will not be shaken by the most plausible evidence of
an Athanasian miracle." Ch. xxxvii. 23

354 Recovery of the Blind Man
the best intentions in the world, for the sake of pro
moting so holy a cause ; or even where this delusion
has no place, vanity, excited by so strong a temptation,
operates' on him more powerfully than on the rest of
mankind in any other circumstances, and self-interest
with equal force."a
210. There are circumstances, however, in this mi
racle, which may be felt as difficulties by those who
neither deny the continuance of a Divine Presence in
the Church, nor accuse her Pastors and Teachers of
impious imposture. Yet it is difficult to treat of them,
without entering upon doctrinal questions which are
not in place in the present Essay. One or two of
them, which extend to the case of other alleged mira
cles of the early Church, besides the one immediately
before us, shall here be briefly considered, and that in
the light which the analogy or the pattern of Scrip
ture throws upon them, which is the main view I have
taken of objections all along.
211. Now, first it may be urged that the discovery
of the blood of the Martyrs is not after the prece
dent of anything we meet with in Scripture, which
says very little of relics, and nothing of relics of
such a character as this, involving as it does a miracle.
What is the true doctrine about relics, how they are
to be regarded, what is their use and their abuse, is
no question before us. If it could be shown that the
a Essay on Miracles.

by the Relics of the Martyrs. '355
doctrine involved in the discovery of the Martyrs, is
on Scriptural grounds such as plainly to prove either
that it did not take place, or that it cannot be referred
to Divine Agency, this of course would supersede all
other considerations. Meanwhile I will but observe,
as far as the silence of Scripture is concerned, that
Scripture could not afford a pattern of the alleged
miracle, from the nature of the case. The resurrection
of the body is only a Christian dogma ; and martyr
dom, that is, dying for a creed, is a peculiarity of the
Gospel, and was instanced among the Jews, only in
proportion as the Gospel was anticipated. The blood
was the relic of those whose bodies had been the
temple of the Spirit, and who were believed to be
in the presence of Christ. Miracles were not to be
expected by such instruments, till Christ came ; nor
afterwards, till a sufficient time had elapsed for Saints
to be matured and offered up, and f®r pious offices
and assiduous attentions to be paid by others towards
the tabernacles which they left behind them. Prece
dents then to our purpose, whether in Old or in New
Testament, are as little to be expected, as precedents
to guide us in determining the relations of the Church
to the State, or the question of infant baptism, or the
duty of having buildings for worship. Time alone could
determine what the Divine purpose was concerning the
earthly shrines in which a Divine Presence had dwelt :
whether, as in the case of Moses and Elijah, they were

356 Recovery of the Blind Man
to be withdrawn from the Church, or, as in the case of
Elisha, to fulfil some purpose, even though the soul
had departed ; and if the latter, whether their bones
were to be employed, — or whether their bodies would
be preserved incorrupt, as St. Jerome reports of Hila
rion, — or whether the Levitical sacrifices,- which as
types were once for all fulfilled when our Lord's blood
was shed, were nevertheless to furnish part of the ana
logy existing between the Christian and the Mosaic
Dispensations. Nor is there anything that ought to
shock us in the idea that blood, which had become
coagulate, should miraculously be made to flow. A
very remarkable prototype of such an event seems to
be granted to us in Scripture, in our Lord's own his
tory. The last act of His humiliation was, after His
death, to be pierced in His side, when blood and water
issued from it. A stream of blood from a corpse can
hardly be considered to be other than supernatural.
And it so happens that St. Ambrose is the writer to
remark upon this solemn occurrence in his comment
on St. Luke, assigning at the same time its typical
meaning. " Blood," he says, " undoubtedly congeals
after death in our bodies ; but in that Body, though
incorrupt, yet dead, the life of all welled forth. There
issued water and blood ; water to wash, blood to re
deem. Let us drink then what is our price, that by
drinking we may be redeemed." b
b In. Luc. lib. x. § 135. Euthymius Zigab. says the same in

by the Relics of the Martyrs. 357
212. Another objection which has been made to
the miracles ascribed by St. Ambrose to the relics
which he discovered, is the encouragement which they
are supposed to give to a kind of creature-worship,
unknown to Scripture. This is strongly urged by the
objector whom I just now had occasion to notice.
He observes that miracles can be of no avail against
the great principles of religious truth, such as the
Being and Attributes of Almighty God ; that no mi
racles can sanction and justify idolatry ; if then the
Nicene Miracles (so he calls them), " when regarded
in the calmest and most comprehensive manner,"
"have constantly operated to debauch the religious
sentiments of mankind, if they have confirmed idola
trous practices, if they have enhanced that infatuation
which has hurried men into the degrading worship
of subordinate divinities, we then boldly say that,
whether natural or preternatural, such miracles are
loc. Joan. Theophylact. in loc. says that in order to place the
miracle beyond doubt the water issued also. That the flowing
of the blood was miraculous would appear from the description
St. John gives of it, "forthwith came there out;" which
implies a stream, and not a few drops. Calov. in Joan. xix.
35. Nor is there any reason to suppose that the water came
forth by drops ; yet the words just quoted are common to the
blood and to the water. Again, the water was miraculous
- (for " medical men tell us that the fluid of the pericardium is
yellow in colour, bitter in taste, and therefore different from
what we mean by water," S. Basnag. Ann. 33. § 126; and the
wound was most probably on the right side, as St. Augustine
and the most ancient pictures and coins represent it, and the
Arabic or Ethiopic version, vid. Grets. de Crue. t. 1. i. 35.

358 Recovery of the Blind Man
not from God, but from ' the enemy.' "c " Do you'
choose," he continues, "to affirm the supernatural
reality of the Nicene Miracles ? you then mark the
Nicene Church as the slave and agent of the Father
of Lies ; " and then he proceeds to quote the charge
of Moses to his people : " If there arise among you
a prophet or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a
sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to
pass, whereof he spoke unto thee, saying, ' Let us go
after other gods which thou hast not known, and let us
serve them,' thou shalt not hearken unto the words of
that prophet or that dreamer of dreams ; for the Lord
your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the
Lord your God with all your heart and with all your
soul." Lamp, in loc. Joan.), and therefore there is no reason for a
strained interpretation only to escape believing that the blood
was miraculous. Further, St. John's solemn asseverations, " He
who saw it bare record," etc., which seems to intimate some
thing miraculous, applies to the blood as well as the water. And
moreover, in 1 John v. 6, the blood is insisted on even more than
the water ; " not by water only," etc. Another paraUel to this
miracle is to be found in the reported instances of blood flow
ing from a corpse at the approach of the murderer ; vid. an
instance introduced into a Scotch court as late as 1688, in the
notes to the Waverley Novels, vol. xliii. p. 127. It is scarcely
necessary to say that, whatever truth there may be in any such
stories, or in certain others of which the blood of Martyrs is
the subject, they are so encompassed by fictions and supersti
tions, that it seems hopeless at this day to trace the Divine
Agency, as and when It really wrought, though we may believe
in Its presence generally.
c Anc. Christ. Part vii. p. 361.

by the Relics of the Martyrs. 359
213. But the objection, which of course demands a
careful consideration, admits of being met, perhaps of
being overcome, by reference to an analogy' contained
in the Old Testament, to which the appeal is made.
It is well known that the Divine revelations concerning
Angels received a great development in the course of
the Jewish Dispensation. When the people had lately
come out of Egypt, with all the forms of idolatry fa
miliar to their imaginations, and impressed upon their
hearts, it did not seem safe, if we may dare to trace
the Divine dealings in this matter, to do much more
than to set before them the great doctrine of the
Unity and Sovereignty of God. To have disclosed
to them truths concerning angelic natures, except in
the strictest subserviency to this fundamental Verity,
might have been the occasion of their withdrawing
their heart from Him who claimed it whole and undi
vided.4 Hence, though St. Stephen tells us that they
" received the Law by the disposition of Angels," and
St. Paul that " it was ordained by Angels," in the Old
Testament we do but read of "the voice of the trumpet
exceeding loud," and its "waxing louder and louder,"
and " Moses speaking, and God answering him by a
voice," and of " the Lord talking with them face to
face in the mount." In like manner, when Angels ap
peared, it was for the most part in the shape of men ;
• [Eusebius says this, contrasting Genesis with Daniel, Eccl.
Theol. ii. p. 20, and vid. Suicer de Symb. Nie. pp. 89—91.]

360 Recovery of the Blind Man
or if their heavenly nature was disclosed, still they
are called " wind " or " flame," or represented as a
glory of the Lord, and so intimately and mysteriously
connected with His Presence that it was impossible
that God should be forgotten, and a creature wor
shipped. Thus it is said of the Angel who went
before the Israelites, " Obey his voice, for My Name
is in him ; " and it was the belief of the early Church
that the Second Person of the Holy Trinity did really
condescend to manifest Himself in such angelic
natures. Again, the title of "the Lord of hosts" does
not occur till the times of Samuel, who uses it when
he sends Saul against the Amalekites, whereas it is
the ordinary designation of Almighty God in the
Prophets who lived after the captivity."1 And so
again, in the Book of Daniel, Angels are made the
ordinary instruments of Divine illumination to the
Prophet, and are represented as the guardians of the
kingdoms of the world, and that without any mention
of the Divine Presence at all, which, on the contrary,
had been awfully signified in the vision of Isaiah,
when the Seraph touched his lips.
214. Still more striking is the difference of language
in different parts of the inspired volume as to the
doctrine of an Evil Spirit, whom even to name might
have been to create a rival to the All-Holy Creator
in carnal minds which had just left the house of
d Vid. e.g. Hagg. ii. 4—9 ; Zech. viii.

by the Relics of the Martyrs. 361
spiritual as well as temporal bondage. The contrast
between the earlier and later books of the Old Tes
tament in this point has often been observed. Satan
is described in the Book of Job and in Micaiah's
vision as appearing before God, and acting under
His direction. Again, while in the Second Book of
Samuel we are merely told that " the anger of the
Lord was kindled against Israel, and He moved
David against them to say, Go number Israel and
Judah ;" in the First Book of Chronicles we read that
" Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David
to number Israel."
• 215. Yet, in spite of this merciful provision on
the part of Almighty God, it would appear that the
revelation of Angels, when made, did lead many of
the Jews into an idolatrous dependence upon them.
It is the very remark of Theodoret upon St. Paul's
mention of Angel-worship in his Epistle to the Colos-
sians, that "the advocates of the Law induced, men
to worship Angels, because the Law was given by
them, and for humility-sake, and because the God of
all is invisible and inaccessible and incomprehensible,
so that it was fitting to procure the Divine favour
through the Angels." e The Essenes, too, are said to
e In Col. ii. 18. Vid. also the passage from the Prasdic.
Petr. in Clem. Strom, vi. 5. and Origen. in Joann. tom. xiii. 17 ;
also contr. Cels. v. 6, etc., Hieron. ad. Algas. Ep. 121. § 10 :
vid. references to Rabbinical and other writings, Calmet.
Dissert. 2. in Luc.

362 Recovery of the Blind Man
have paid to the Angels an excessive honour, and
several of the early heresies, which did the same,
sprang from the Jews. What place afterwards the
invocation of Angels for magical purposes held in
the practical Cabbala, as Brucker calls it, is well
known. 216. Such is the history of the revelation of the
doctrine of Angels among the Jews ; and it is scarcely
necessary to draw out at length its correspondence
with the history of the introduction and abuse of
several of the tenets and usages which characterize
the Christian Church. In its origin, the Jewish as
well as the Pagan institutions with which the Apostles
were surrounded, suggested to them a cautious
economy in the mode in which they set Divine truth
before their disciples, lest a resemblance of external
rites and offices, or of phraseology, between Chris
tianity and the prevailing religions, should be the
means of introducing into their minds views less holy
and divine than those which they were inspired to
reveal. It is on this supposition that some English
divines even account for the omission in the New
Testament of the words " priest," " sacrifice," and the
like, in their plain Christian sense ; as if the Jewish
associations which attached to them would not cease
till the Jewish worship had come to an end. The
remark may obviously be extended to the miracle
under review, so far as no parallel is found for it in

by the Relics of the Martyrs. 363
the New Testament. As the doctrine of priesthood
might be almost necessarily Judaic in the minds of
the Jewish converts, so that of piety towards Saints
and Martyrs was in the minds of Pagans necessarily
idolatrous ; and it may be for this, as well as other
reasons, that so little explicit mention is made in the
New Testament of the honours due to Saints, as also
of the Christian Priesthood, after the pattern of that
silence, which has been above noticed, about the offices
of good Angels and about the Author of Evil in the
earlier books of the Old ; and it may be as rash to
say that a miracle was not from God because it was
wrought by a Martyr's relics, or because such relics
have in other instances been idolatrously regarded, as
to say that the Prophet Daniel was not divinely in
spired, because we hear nothing of Michael or Gabriel
in the Books of Moses, or because the names of those
Angels were afterwards superstitiously used in the
charms of the Cabbalists. The holy Daniel's pro
found obeisance and prostrations before the Angel
are a greater innovation, if it must so be called, on
the simplicity of the Mosaic ritual, than the treasuring
the blood of the Martyrs upon the ecclesiastical ob
servances of the Apostles ; and as no one would say
that Daniel's conduct incurred the condemnation pro
nounced by Moses on those who introduced the wor
ship of other gods, so much less was the reverence
paid by St. Ambrose and other Saints to the relics of

364 Recovery of the Blind Man
the Martyrs inconsistent with precepts which in their
direct force belong to an earlier Dispensation.
217. There is a third difficulty, which may be
raised upon the passage of history before us, not
arising, however, out of the miracle, but out of the
circumstances under which it took place. It may be
represented as giving a sanction to a subject's playing
the part of a demagogue, and heading a mob (as we
may speak) against his lawful sovereign. The crowds
which attended Ambrose, whether in the church which
the Empress had seized, or on occasion of the trans
lation of the relics, whold have been dispersed at this
day among ourselves by the officers of the peace ; and
with our present notions of law and of municipal and'
national order, not to say of the subserviency of the
Church to the State, and ' our interpretations of the
Scripture precepts concerning civil obedience, there
is something strange and painful to us in the sight of a
Christian Bishop placed in opposition to the powers
that be. But it must be recollected, according to a
former remark, that everything that happens has two
aspects ; and the outside or political aspect is often
the reverse of its inward or true meaning. We are
used to put together the particulars which meet our
eye, to parallel them with other transactions which
bear a similar appearance, to suggest for them such
motives of action as our own principles or disposition
suggests, and thus to form what seems to us a philo-

by the Relics of the Martyrs. 365
sophical view of the whole case. And if our own
habitual feelings and opinions, and the parallels to
which we betake ourselves, are not of a very exalted
nature, as may easily happen, while the subject con
templated, be it a person, or an act, or a work, is of
such a nature, then we produce a theory as shallow,
and as far from the truth, as a naturalist, who, judging
of men by their anatomical peculiarities, should rank
them among the brute creation. Every day brings
evidence in great things or little, how incapable the
run of men are of doing justice to minds of even or
dinary refinement and sincerity, and how, rather than
ascribe to them the honesty and purity of purpose
which is the most natural and straightforward
account of their actions, they will even go out of
their way, and distort facts, thereby to be at liberty
to impute petty motives ; and much more will they
catch at any circumstances which admit of being
plausibly perverted into an evidence of such motives.
Indeed, of such continual occurrence are instances of
this sort, that in tales of fiction nothing is more com
monly taken as a plot of the story than the troubles in
which an innocent person is involved by an ingenious
but perverse selection and collocation of his actions
or of circumstances connected with him, to the detri
ment of his character.
218. As to the case immediately before us, it is
enough to observe that an imputation of disloyalty, if

366 Recovery of the Blind Man
preferred against St. Ambrose, is only what the noto- ¦
rious Paine, I believe, throws out against the Jewish
Prophets ; and it is obvious what plausible materials
are afforded by the history of Elijah and Elisha, in the
hands of irreligious persons, for such a charge. Nor
is it to be doubted that a secular historian, who heard
the Prophet Jeremiah's public declaration on Nebu
chadnezzar's invasion, " He that abideth in this city
shall die, but he that goeth out, and falleth to the
Chaldeans, shall live," would have decided that he
was in the pay of the King of Babylon, and justified
the Jews in their treatment of him. It must be recol
lected, too, that one charge against our Lord was that
He " stirred up the people." We indeed have learned
from the Gospel that He withdrew Himself from the
multitude " when He perceived that they would come
and take Him by force to make Him a king ; " but a
secular historian either would not know the fact, or
might not believe the sincerity of His withdrawal, if
He did. A more exact instance in point is afforded
us in the history of St. John Baptist. No man surely
has less of a political character upon him than this
holy ascetic, as described in the Gospel ; but it
seems, according to Josephus, that Herod was of an
other mind, and the view he took of him as a popular
leader is so curious that I will quote the words
of a recent writer on the subject. " Herod," says Mr.
Milman, "having formed an incestuous connection

by the Relics of the Martyrs. 367
with the wife of his brother Herod Philip, his Arabian
queen indignantly fled to her father, who took up
arms to revenge her wrongs against her guilty hus
band. How far Herod could depend in this contest
on the loyalty of his subjects was extremely doubtful
It is possible he might entertain hopes that the repu
diation of a foreign alliance, ever hateful to the Jews,
and the union with a branch of the Asmonean line
(for Herodias was the daughter of Herod the Great
by Mariamne), might counterbalance in the popular
estimation the injustice and criminality of his mar
riage with his brother's wife. The influence of John,
according to Josephus, was almost unlimited. The
subjects, and even the soldiery, of. the tetrarch
crowded with devout submission around the Prophet.
On his decision might depend the wavering loyalty of
the whole province. But John denounced with open
indignation the royal incest, and declared the mar
riage with a brother's wife to 'be a flagrant violation
of the law. Herod, before long, ordered him to be
seized and imprisoned in the strong fortress of Ma-
chaerus, on the remote border of his trans-Jordanic
territory."f 219. Such was the light thrown upon the Holy
Baptist by the secular events in which he was encom
passed, in the opinion of one who nevertheless, as we
know, "feared him, knowing he was a just man." And
f Hist. Christ. Vol. i. p. 176.

368 Recovery of the Blind Man.
as St. John seemed to be a demagogue and a mere
organ of the popular voice, yet spoke from heaven, so
in like manner it need not take from the sanctity of
St. Ambrose, or the truth of his cause, that the people
sided with him, even tumultuously, and the Imperial
Court accused him of insubordination.

Section IX.
THE POWER OF SPEECH CONTINUED TO THE AFRI
CAN CONFESSORS DEPRIVED OF THEIR TONGUES.
220. A RIANISM, though speedily exterminated
¦**- from the Roman Empire, had taken
refuge among the Barbarians of the North, who were
then hanging over it, and soon to overwhelm it.
Among these nations were the Vandals, who in the
early part of the fifth century took possession of the
Roman provinces on the African coast. Genseric
forthwith commenced, and his successors continued, a
terrible persecution of the Catholic Church, which they
found there. Hunneric his son, to whose reign the
miracle which is to be related belongs, began his series
of cruelties by stationing officers violently to assault
and drag off all Vandals whom they found attending
the Churches, and by sending off the dependents of his
court who were Catholics to work in the country as
agricultural labourers. Others he deprived of their
civil functions, stripped of their property, and banished
24

370 Power of Speech in the Confessors
to Sicily and Sardinia. Next he summoned the nuns
out of their convents, accused them of the vilest crimes,
and submitted them to the most miserable indigni
ties. Further, he caused them to be hung up without
clothes, with weights to their feet, and to be tortured
with red-hot irons in various parts of the body, in order
to make them admit the charges he brought against
them. His next measure was the wholesale cruelty of
banishing a number of bishops, priests, deacons, and
others, as many as four thousand nine hundred and
sixty-one,s to the desert. He began by assembling
them in the two towns of Sicca and Laribus ; and
in one or other of these places Victor, who has pre
served the history of the transaction, saw them. His
account is too horrible to be translated. They had been
shut up, how long does not appear, in a small prison,
and when Victor entered he sank up to his knees in the
filth of the place. At length they set forth for the
desert, with their faces and clothes in this defiled con
dition, chaunting1 the words, "Such glory have all His
saints." They journeyed chiefly by night, on account
of the heat of the days ; when they flagged, their
conductors goaded them and pelted them, or if this
did not quicken them, they tied them by the feet,
and dragged them after them along the rocky roads.
g The number is given differently ; Gibbon says four thousand
and ninety-six ; Fleury four thousand nine hundred and sixty-
six ; that in the text is as it stands in the Bibl. Patr. Par.
1624.

deprived of their Tongues. 371
Those who survived the journey found themselves in
places abounding in venomous reptiles, and the food
given them was the barley provided for the beasts of
burden. 221. In the beginning of 484 Hunneric convened
four hundred and sixty-six Catholic Bishops at Car
thage, for the purpose of holding a disputation on the
faith of Nicaea ; and, to intimidate them, he began
by burning Laetus alive, who was one of their most '
learned members. This not succeeding, he dismissed
them again to their homes, allowing them neither the
beasts of burden on which they had come, nor their
servants, nor their clothes, and forbidding all persons
to lodge or feed them ; when they remonstrated, he
set his cavalry to charge them. Jealous of their or
thodoxy as a bond of union with the Catholic world,
he next proposed to them to swear allegiance to his
son and successor, and abstention from all ecclesias
tical correspondence beyond sea. Forty-six refused
it on the plea of our Lord's prohibition in the Sermon
on the Mount ; three hundred and two, on the stipula
tion that their flocks and themselves should be restored
to their churches, took it. The latter he distributed
as serfs up and down the country, as having broken
the Gospel precept against swearing ; the former he
transported to Corsica to cut timber for his navy. Of
the rest, twenty-eight had succeeded in escaping from
Carthage, and eighty-eight conformed. A general

372 Power of Speech in the Confessors
persecution followed, in which neither sex nor age
was pitied, nor torture, mutilation, nor death was
spared. 222. These particulars, which form but a portion of
the atrocities which this savage was permitted to per
petrate, have here been mentioned, because they form
a suitable antecedent, and (if the word may be used) a
justification of the miracle which followed. It was no
common occasion that called forth what was no com
mon manifestation of the wonderful power of God.
The facts, as stated by one who in such a case cannot
be called a top favourable witness, were as follows :
" Tipasa," says Gibbon, " a maritime colony of Mauri
tania, sixteen miles to the east of Caesarea, had been
distinguished in every age by the orthodox zCal of its
inhabitants. They had braved the fury of the Dona-
tists ; they resisted, or eluded, the tyranny of the Arians.
The town was deserted on the approach of an heretical
Bishop ; most of the inhabitants who could procure
ships passed over to the coast of Spain ; and the
unhappy remnant, refusing all communion with the
usurper, still presumed to hold their pious, but illegal,
assemblies. Their disobedience exasperated the cru
elty of Hunneric. A military Count was despatched
from Carthage to Tipasa ; he collected the Catho
lics in the Forum, and, in the presence of the whole
province, deprived the guilty of their right hands and
their tongues. But the holy Confessors continued

deprived of their Tongues. 373
to speak without tongues."h "The gift continued
through their lives. Their number is not mentioned
by any of the original witnesses ; but is fixed by
an old Menology at sixty."1 Such was the miracle ;
the evidence on which it rests shall next be stated.
223. Victor, Bishop of Vite, who has been already
mentioned, published in Africa his history of the per
secution only two years after it took place. He says,
" The King in wrath sent a certain Count with direc
tions to hold a meeting in the forum of the whole pro
vince, and there to cut out their tongues by the roots,
and their right hands. When this was done, by the gift of
the Holy Ghost, they so spoke and speak, as they used
to speak before. If however any one will be incredu
lous, let him now go to Constantinople, and there he
will find one of them, a sub-deacon, by name Re-
paratus, speaking like an educated man without any
impediment. On which account he is. regarded with
exceeding veneration in the court of the Emperor
Zeno, and especially by the Empress."k It has been
asked why Victor refers his readers to Constantinople,
instead of pointing out instances of the miracle in the
country in which it is said to have taken place.1 But
h Hist. Ch. xxxvii. ' Ibid.
k Hist. Pers. Vand. iii. p. 613.
1 This is suggested in the article on Miracles in the Encycl.
Metrop. [i.e. Essay i. supr. p. 87, note f], in which I could wish
some correction of opinion, but more of tone, in my treatment
of the primitive miracles. The Essay aims, indeed, at bringing

374 Power of Speech in the Confessors
persecution scattered the Catholics far and wide, as
St. Gregory observes in a passage which is to follow ;
many fled the country ; others concealed themselves.
Under such circumstances, a writer would not know
even where his nearest friends were to be found ; and
in this case Victor specified one of the Confessors who
had been welcomed by an orthodox capital and court,
and had the opportunity of exhibiting in security the
miraculous gift wrought in him.
224. ^Eneas of Gaza was the contemporary of
Victor. When a Gentile, he had been a philosopher
and rhetorician, and did not altogether throw off his pro
fession of Platonism when he became a Christian. He
wrote a Dialogue on the Immortality of the Soul and
the Resurrection of the Body ; and in it, after giving
various instances of miracles, he proceeds, in the
character of Axitheus, to speak of the miracle of the
African Confessors : " Other such things have been
and will be ; but what took place the other day, I
suppose you have seen yourself. A bitter tyranny is
oppressing the greater Africa ; and humanity and or
thodoxy have no influence over tyranny. Accordingly
this tyrant takes offence at the piety of his subjects,
and commands the priests to deny their glorious
dogma. When they refuse, O the impiety ! he cuts
out the characteristics of the evidence for the Scripture Mira
cles, in contrast with all others so considered ; but Middleton
and Douglas are unsafe guides, and it is.no exaltation- of Christ
to lower His Saints.

deprived of their Tongues. 375
out that religious tongue, as Tereus in the fable. But
the damsel wove the deed upon the robe, and di
vulged it by her skill, when nature no longer gave her
power to speak; they, on the other hand, needing
neither robe nor skill, call upon nature's Maker, who
vouchsafes to them a new nature on the third day, not
giving them another tongue, but the faculty to dis
course without a tongue more plainly than before. I
had thought it was impossible for a piper to show his
skill without his pipes, or harper to play his music
without his harp ; but now this novel sight forces me
to change my mind, and to account nothing fixed that
is seen, if it be God's will to alter it. I myself saw
the men, and heard them speak ; and wondering at
the articulateness of the sound, I began to inquire
what its organ was ; and distrusting my ears, I com
mitted the decision to my eyes. And opening their
mouth, I perceived the tongue entirely gone from the
roots. And astounded I fell to wonder, not how they
could talk, but how they had not died." He saw them
at Constantinople.
225. Procopius of Caesarea was secretary to Belisa-
rius, whom he accompanied into Africa, Sicily, and
Italy, and to Constantinople, in the years between
527 and 542. By Belisarius he was employed in
various political matters of great moment, and was at
one time at the head of the commissariat and the
fleet. He seems to have conformed to Christianity,

376 Power of Speech in the Confessors
but Cave observes, from his tone of writing, that he
was no real believer in it, nay, preferred the old
Paganism, though he despised its rites and fables.™
He wrote the History of the Persian, Vandalic, and
Gothic War, of which Gibbon speaks in the following
terms : " His facts are collected from the personal
experience and free conversation of a soldier, a states
man, and a traveller ; his style continually aspires,
and often attains, to the merit of strength and ele
gance ; his reflections, more especially in the speeches
which he too frequently inserts, contain a rich fund of
political knowledge ; and the historian, excited by the
generous ambition of pleasing and instructing pos
terity, appears to disdain the prejudices of the people
and the flattery of courts."11 Such is Procopius, and
thus he speaks on the subject of this stupendous mi
racle : " Hunneric became the most savage and ini
quitous of men towards the African Christians. For,
forcing them to Arianize, whomever he found unwill
ing to comply, he burnt and otherwise put to death.
And of many he cut out the tongue as low down as
the throat,0 who, even as late as my time, were alive
in Byzantium, and talked without any impediment,
feeling no effects whatever of the punishment. But
two of them, having allowed themselves to hold con
verse with abandoned women, ceased to speak."?
m Cave, Hist. Liter. Procop. ° 'At aiVoB <pdpvyyos.
" Hist. Ch. xl. p BeU. Vand. i. io.

deprived of their Tongues. 377
226. Our next witness, and of the same date, is
the Emperor Justinian, who, in an edict addressed to
Archelaus, Praetorian Praefect of Africa, on the subject
of his office, after Belisarius had recovered the country
to the Roman Empire, writes as follows : " The
present mercy, which Almighty God has deigned to
manifest through us for His praise and His Name's
sake, exceeds all the wonderful works which have
happened in the world ; viz., that Africa should
through us recover in so short a time its liberty, after
being in captivity under the Vandals for ninety-five
years, those enemies alike of soul and body. For
such souls as could not sustain their various tortures
and punishments, by rebaptizing they translated into
their own misbelief ; and the bodies of free men they
subjected to the hardships of a barbaric yoke. Nay,
the very churches sacred to God did they defile with
their deeds of misbelief; some they turned into
stables. We have seen the venerable men, who, when
their tongues had been cut off at the roots, yet
piteously recounted their pains. Others after diverse
tortures were dispersed through diverse provinces,
and ended their days in exile. "1
227. Count Marcellinus, Chancellor to Justinian
before he came to the throne, is the fourth layman to
whose testimony we are able to appeal. He too, as
two of the former, speaks as an eye-witness, and the
1 Cod. Just. Ub. i. tit. 30, ed. 1553.

378 Power of Speech in the Confessors
additional circumstances, with which he commences
seem to throw light upon ^Eneas's singular account
that the Confessors spoke " more plainly than before."
" Through the whole of Africa," he says in his
Chronicon, under the date 484, " the cruel persecution
of Hunneric, King of the Vandals, was inflicted upon
our Catholics. For after the expulsion and disper
sion of more than 334 Bishops of the orthodox, and
the shutting of their churches, the flocks of the faith
ful, afflicted by various punishments, consummated
their blessed conflict. Then it was that the same
King Hunneric ordered the tongue to be cut out of a
Catholic youth, who from his birth had lived without
speech at all ; soon after he spoke, and gave glory to
God with the first sounds of his voice. In short, I
myself have seen at Byzantium a few out of this com
pany of the faithful, religious men, with their tongues
cut off, and their hands amputated, speaking with per
fect voice."
228. Victor, Bishop of Tonno in Africa Proconsu-
laris, another contemporary, and a strenuous defender
of the Tria Capitula, which were condemned in the
Fifth Ecumenical Council, has left behind him a
Chronicon also ; which at the same date runs as fol
lows : " Hunneric, King of the Vandals, urging a
furious persecution through the whole of Africa,
banishes to Tubunnae, Macrinippi, and other parts of
the desert, not only Catholic Clerks of every order,

deprived of their Tongues. 379
but even Monks and laymen, to the number of about
four thousand ; and makes Confessors and Martyrs ;
and cuts off the tongues of the Confessors. As to
which Confessors, the royal city, where their bodies
lie, attests that after their tongues were cut out they
spoke perfectly even to the end. Then Laetus,
Bishop of the Church of Nepte, is crowned with Mar
tyrdom, etc." It is observable from this statement
that the miracle was recorded for the instruction of
posterity at the place of their burial.
229. Lastly, Pope Gregory the First thus speaks in
his Dialogues : " In the time of Justinian Augustus/
when the Arian persecution raised by the Vandals
against the faith of Catholics was raging violently in
Africa, some Bishops, courageously persisting in the
defence of the truth, were brought under notice ;
whom the King of the Vandals, failing to persuade
to his misbelief with words and offers, thought he
could break with torture. For when, in the midst of
their defence of the truth, he bade them be silent, but
they would not bear the misbelief quietly, lest it
might be interpreted as assent, breaking out into rage
he had their tongues cut off from the roots. A won
derful thing, and known to many senior persons ; for
afterwards, even without tongue, they spoke for the
defence of the truth, just as they had been accus-
r This date is a mistake of St. Gregory's ; also he calls them
Bishops.

3 80 Power of Speech in the Confessors
tomed before to speak by means of it. . . . These then,
being fugitives at that time, came to Constantinople.
At the time, moreover, that I was myself sent to the
Emperor to conduct the business of the Church, I fell
in with a certain senior, a Bishop, who attested that
he had seen their mouths speaking, though without
tongues, so that with open mouths they cried out,
' Behold and see ; for we have not tongues, and we
speak.' And it appeared to those who inspected, as it
was said, as if, their tongues being cut off from the
roots, there was a sort of open depth in their throat,
and yet in that empty mouth the words were formed
full and perfect. Of whom one, having fallen into
licentiousness, was soon after deprived of the gift of
miracle." s
230. Little observation is necessary on evidence
such as this. What is perhaps most striking in it is
the variety of the witnesses, both in their persons and
the details of their testimony, together with the con
sistency and unity of that testimony in all material
points. Out of the seven writers adduced, six are
contemporaries ; ' three, if not four, are eye-witnesses
of the miracle ; one reports from an eye-witness, and
one testifies to a permanent record at the burial-place
of the subjects of it. All seven were living, or had
been staying, at one or other of the two places which
are mentioned as their abode. One is a Pope ; a
s Dial. iii. 32.

deprived of their Tongues. 381
second a Catholic Bishop; a third a Bishop of a schis-
matical party ; a fourth an Emperor ; a fifth a soldier,
a politician, and a suspected infidel ; a sixth a states
man and courtier ; a seventh a rhetorician and philo
sopher. "He cut out the tongues by the roots," says
Victor, Bishop of Vite ; " I perceived the tongue en
tirely gone by the roots," says .-Eneas ; " as low down
as the throat," says Procopius ; " at the roots," say
Justinian and St. Gregory. " He spoke like an edu
cated man, without impediment," says Victor of Vite;
with "articulateness," says ^Eneas, "better than be
fore ; " " they talked without any impediment," says
Procopius ; " speaking with perfect voice," says Mar
cellinus ; " they spoke perfectly even to the end," says
the second Victor ; " the words were formed full and
perfect," says St. Gregory.
231. One of the striking points then in this miracle,
as contained in the foregoing evidence, is obviously its
completeness. We know that even deaf and dumb per
sons can be made in some sense to utter words ; and
there may be attempts far superior to theirs, yet want
ing in that ease and precision which characterize the
ordinary gift of speech. But the articulateness, nay, the
educated accent of these Confessors is especially in
sisted on in the testimony. " A cure left thus imper
fect," says Douglas, speaking of a Jansenist miracle,
'" has but little pretension to be looked upon as miracu
lous ; because its being so imperfect naturally points

382 Power of Speech in the Confessors
out a' failure of power in the cause which brought it
about."1 Whatever be the truth of this position, it
cannot be applied to the miracle under review.
232. The number on which it was wrought is
another most important circumstance, distinguishing
this history from others of a miraculous character.
It both increases opportunities for testimony, and it
prevents the interposition of what is commonly called
chance, which could not operate upon many persons
at once in one and the same way. This is the proper
answer to Middleton's objection, that cases are on
record of speech without a tongue, when no special
intervention of Providence could be supposed. Not
to say that a person born without a tongue, as in the
instance to which he refers, may more easily be sup
posed to have found a compensation for her defect
by a natural provision or guidance, than men who
had ever spoken by the ordinary organ till they came
suddenly to lose it. " If we should allow after all,"
says he, " that the tongues of these Confessors were
cut away to the 'very roots, what will the learned
Doctor [Berriman] say if this boasted miracle, which
he so strenuously defends, should be found at last
to be no miracle at all ? The tongue, indeed, has
generally been considered as absolutely necessary to
the use of speech ; so that to hear men talk without it
might easily pass for a miracle in that credulous
* Page in.

deprived of their Tongues. 383
age."u And then he mentions the case of a girl born
without a tongue, who yet talked as distinctly and
easily as if she had enjoyed the full benefit of that
organ, according to the report of a French physician
who had carefully examined her mouth and throat,
and who refers at the same time to another instance
published about eighty years before, of a boy who at
the age of eight or nine years lost his tongue by an
ulcer after the small-pox, yet retained his speech, —
whether as perfectly as before, does not appear.5
233. Now, taking these instances at their greatest
force, does he mean to say that if a certain number
of men lost their tongues at the command of a
tyrant, for the sake of their religion, and then spoke
as plainly as before, nay, if only one person was so
mutilated and so gifted, it would not be a miracle ? if
not, why does he not believe the history of these Con
fessors ? At least he might believe that some of them
had the gift of speech continued to them, though
the numbers be an exaggeration. It is his canon, as
Douglas assures us, that while the history of miracles
is "to be suspected always of course, without the
strongest evidence to confirm it," the history of com
mon events is " to be admitted of course, without as
strong reason to suspect it."v Now here all the
reason or evidence is on the side of believing ; yet he
u Page 184. 6 [Vid. Note at the end.]
T Page 26. vid. supr. n. 73.

3 84 Power of Speech in the Confessors
does not believe it ; why ? simply because, as com
mon sense tells us, and as he feels, it is a miraculous
story. It is far more difficult to believe that a num
ber of men were forbidden to profess orthodoxy, did
continue to profess it, were brought into the forum,
had their tongues cut out from the roots, survived it,
and spoke ever afterwards as they did before, without
a miracle than with it. But Middleton would secure
two weapons at once for his warfare against the
claims of the Catholic Church : — it is a miracle, and
therefore it is incredible as a fact ; it is not a miracle,
and therefore it is irrelevant as an argument.
234. Another remarkable peculiarity of this miracle
is what may be called its entireness, by which I mean
that it carried its whole case with it to every beholder.
When a blind man has been restored to sight, there
must be one witness to prove he has been blind, and
another, that he now sees ; when a cure has been
effected, we need a third to assure us that no medi
cines were administered to the subject of it ; but here
the miracle is condensed in the fact that there is no
tongue, and yet a voice. The function of witnessing
is far narrower and more definite, yet more perfect,
than in other cases.
235. A further characteristic of this miracle is its
permanence ; and in this respect it throws light upon '
a remark made in a former page to account for the
deficiency of evidence which generally attaches to the

deprived of their Tongues. 385
Ecclesiastical Miracles. It was there observed that
they commonly took place without notice beforehand,
and left no trace after them ; and we could not have
better or fuller testimony than that which happened
to be found on the spot where they occurred.* The
instance before us, however, being of a permanent
character, and carrying its miraculousness in the very
sight of it, admitted of being witnessed in a higher
way, and so it is witnessed. Supposing the miracles of
St. Gregory Thaumaturgus or St. Martin to have had
advantage of similar publicity, at least they would
have been disengaged from the misstatements and.
exaggerations which at present prejudice them ; — are
we sure they would not have gained, instead, a body
of testimony to their substantial truth ?
236. It may be thought a drawback on this miracle
that it produced no impression on the brutal Prince
who was the occasion of it. He continued the per
secution. Yet it must be recollected that his death
followed in no long time ; and that, under that hor
rible and loathsome infliction with which it has in
other cases pleased Almighty God to visit those who
have used their power, committed to them by Him,
in cruelties towards His Church.
237. And now, after considering this miracle, or that
of the recovery of the blind Severus by the relics, as
described in its place, or the death of Arius, how un-
x n. 103. 25

386 Power of Speech in the Confessors
real does the remark appear with which Douglas con
cludes his review of the alleged miracles of the first
ages ! " I shall only add," he says, " that if ever time
were any accounts of miracles, which passed current
without being examined into at the first publication,
and which consequently will not bear the test of the
third rule which I laid down in this treatise, this may
be affirmed of the miracles recorded by writers of the
fourth and fifth ages, when Christianity, now freed
from the terrors of persecution, and aided by civil magis
trates, began to be corrupted by its credulous or ill-
designing professors, and the foundation was laid of
those inventions which have gathered like a snow-ball
in every succeeding age of superstitious ignorance, till
at last the sunshine of the Reformation began to melt
the monstrous heap."y Surely, if there are miracles
prominent above others in those times, in that num
ber are the three which I have- just specified ; they
are great in themselves and in their fame. What then
is meant by saying that in Arius's death the Church
was "aided by the civil magistrate?" or that she
was " freed from the terrors of persecution " when
Severus was restored to sight ? or that the report
of the power of speaking given to Reparatus and
his brethren " passed current without being examined
into ? " But if these are true, why should not others
be true also, whether at this day they have evidence
y Page 239.

deprived of their Tongues. 387
sufficient for our conviction or not ? That supersti
tions and imposture accompanied the civil establish
ment of Christianity, all will allow; but they could
but obscure, — they could not reverse or undo, — and
why should they prejudice ? — that true work of God
in His Church, of which they were but the mockery.

Conclusion.
238. TV /T UCH stress has been laid throughout
-L» J- this Essay on the differences existing
between the Miracles recorded in Scripture, and those
which are found in Ecclesiastical History ; but from
what has come before us in the course of it, it would
seem that those differences are for the most part merely
such as necessarily attend the introduction of a religion
to the world compared with its subsequent course, the
miraculous agency itself being for the most part the
same throughout. For instance, the miracles of Scripture
are wrought by persons conscious of their power and of
their exercise of it; for these persons are the very heralds
of Almighty God, whom He has commissioned, whom
He has instructed, and whom He has gifted for their
work. The Scripture miracles are wrought as evidence
of revealed truth, because they are wrought before that
truth had as yet been received. They are grave and
simple in their circumstances, because they are
wrought by persons who know their gift, and who, as
being under immediate Divine direction, use it without
alloy of human infirmity or personal peculiarity. They

Conclusion. 389
are definite and certain, drawn out in an orderly form,
and finished in their parts, because they are found in
that authoritative Document which was intended by
God's Providence to be the pattern of His dealings
and the rule of our thoughts and actions. They
are undeniably of a supernatural character, not only
• • because it is natural that the most cogent miracles
should be wrought in the beginning of the Dispensa
tion, but because the sacred writers have been guided
to put into the foreground those works of power which
are the clearest tokens of a Divine Presence, and to
throw the rest into the distance. They have no marks
of exaggeration about them, and are none of them false
or suspicious, because Inspiration had dispersed the
mists of popular error, and the colouring of individual
feeling, and has enabled the writers to set down what
took place, and nothing else. But when once Inspira
tion was withdrawn, whether as regards those who
wrought or those who recorded, then a Power which
henceforth was mysterious and inscrutable in opera
tion, became doubly obscure in report ; and fiction in
the testimony was made to compensate for incomplete
ness in the manifestation.
239. In conclusion I will but observe what, indeed,
is very obvious, but still may require a distinct
acknowledgment ; that the view here taken of the
primitive miracles is applicable in defence of those
of the medieval period also. If the occurrence of

3 90 Conclusion.
miraculous interpositions depends upon the presence
of the Catholic Church, and if that Church is to remain
on earth until the end of the world, it follows, of course,
that what will be vouchsafed to Christians at all
times, was vouchsafed to them in the middle ages in
clusively. Whether this or that alleged miracle be in
fact what it professes to be, must be determined, as in
the instances already taken, by the particular case;
but it stands to reason, that, where the views and re
presentations drawn out in the foregoing pages are
admitted, no prejudice will attend the medieval mira
cles at first hearing, though no distinct opinion can be
formed about them before examination.
240. On the other hand, I am quite prepared to
find those views themselves condemned by many
readers as subtle and sophistical. This is ever the
language men use concerning the arguments of others,
when they dissent from their first principles, — which
take them by surprise, and which they have not
mastered.

Note on Page 383.
March, 1870. Since the date of these Essays facts have
been published, bearing upon the apparent miracle wrought
in favour of the African confessors in the Vandal persecu
tion, which have led me, in my "Apologia" (p. 306, ed. 2),
to write as follows :
" Their tongues were cut out by the Arian tyrant, and yet
they spoke as before. I insisted2 on this fact as being
strictly miraculous. Among other remarks (referring to the
instances adduced by Middleton and others in disparagement
of the miracle, viz., of 'A girl born without a tongue, who
yet talked as distinctly and easily as if she had enjoyed the
full benefit of that organ,' and of a boy who lost his tongue ,
at the age of eight or nine, yet retained his speech, whether
perfectly or not,) I said, 'Does Middleton mean to say that, if
a certain number of men lost their tongues at the command of a
tyrant, for the sake of their religion, and then spoke as plainly
as before, nay, if only one person was so mutilated and so
gifted, it would not be a miracle?' — p. 210. And I enlarged
upon the minute details of the fact as reported to us by eye
witnesses and contemporaries.
" However, a few years ago an article appeared in Notes
and Queries (No. for May 22, 1858), in which various evi
dence was adduced to show that the tongue is not necessary
for articulate speech.
" 1. Colonel Churchill, in his ' Lebanon,' speaking of the
cruelties of Djezzar Pacha, in extracting to the root the
* That is, in my Second Essay, as supr. Ch. v. Sec. 9,
especially at p. 383.

392 Note on p. 383.
tongues of some Emirs, adds, ' It is a curious fact, however,
that the tongues grow again sufficiently for the purposes of
speech.' " 2. Sir John Malcolm, in his ' Sketches of Persia,' speak
ing of Zab, Khan of Khisht, who was condemned to lose his
tongue, 'This mandate,' he says, 'was imperfectly executed,
and the loss of half this member deprived him of speech.
Being afterwards persuaded that its being cut close to the
root would enable him to speak so as to be understood, he
submitted to the operation ; and the effect has been that
his voice, though indistinct and thick, is yet intelligible to
persons accustomed to converse with him. ... I am
not an anatomist, and I cannot therefore give a reason why
a man, who could not articulate with half a tongue, should
speak when he had none at all; but the facts are as stated.'
" 3. And Sir John McNeil says, ' In answer to your in
quiries about the powers of speech retained by persons who
have had their tongues cut out, I can state from personal
observation that several persons whom I knew in Persia,
who had been subjected to that punishment, spoke so in
telligibly as to be able to transact important business. . . .
The conviction in Persia is universal, that the power of
speech is destroyed by merely cutting off the tip of the
tongue; and is to a useful extent restored by cutting off
another portion as far back as a perpendicular section can
be made of the portion that is free from attachment at the
lower surface. ... I never had to meet with a person
who had suffered this punishment, who could not speak so
as to be quite intelligible to his familiar associates.' So far
these writers.
" I should not, however, be honest, if I professed to be
simply converted by their testimony, to the belief that there
was nothing miraculous in the case of the African confessors.
It is quite as fair to be sceptical on one side of the question

Note on p. 383. 393
as on the other ; and if Gibbon is considered worthy of praise
for his ' stubborn incredulity ' in receiving the evidence for
the miracle, I do not see why I am to be blamed, if I wish to
be quite sure of the full appositeness of the recent evidence
which is brought to its disadvantage. Questions of fact can
not be disproved by analogies or presumptions ; the inquiry
must be made into the particular case in all its parts, as it
comes before us. Meanwhile, I fully allow that the points
of evidence brought in disparagement of the miracle are
primcl, facie of such cogency, that, till they are proved to be
irrelevant, Catholics are prevented from appealing to it for
controversial purposes."

395

INDEX

Abbe Paris, cures at the tomb of, 33, 38, 44, 45, 59, 61, 64, 66, 90.
.dlneas of Gaza, testifies to the miracle of the Confessors retaining the power
of speech, 374.
African Confessors, miracle of the, 369 ; its completeness, 381 ; number on
whom it was wrought 382.
Alexander Pseudomantis, 81.
Alexander the coppersmith, 333.
Alypius, 335.
Ambrose, St., on the discovery of the two martyrs' bodies, 137; his
character, 238; resists the Empress Justina in her attempt to enforce
Arian worship, 348; discovers the relics of St. Gervasius and St.
Protasius, ib.
Ammianus, his account of Julian's attempt to rebuild the Temple, 337.
Ananias and Sapphira, 166, 333.
Angel-worship, 361.
Antonine Column at Rome, 249.
Antony, St., 122 ; his combats with evil spirits, 158.
Apocryphal Accounts of Christ, 28.
Apollonius, miracles attributed to, 27, 36, 57, 62, 90, 159.
Arius, sudden death of, 134, 327.
Arnobius, his challenge to the heathen as to miracles, 66.
Athanasius, St., Life of St. Antony, 122.
Augustine, St., \us,De Civitate Dei, 129; passage against the Donatists, 142;
keenness of his intellect, 238.
Aurea Legenda of Jacob de Voragine, 236.
Austin, 84.
Balaam's ass, 30.
Barrington, Lord, on the duration of the gift of miracles, 214.
Basil, St., miraculously informed of the death of the Emperor Julian, 57 ;
on St. Gregory Thaumaturgus, 118.
Bede's Ecclesiastical History, 236.
Bentham, Jeremy, Preuves Judiciaires, 21, 45, 56, 58, 83.
Berkeley (Bishop) his Akiphron, 10.
Bernard, St., quoted, 208 ; his miracles, 219.
Bethesda, 34.
Blomfield, Bishop, Sermons, 135 ; quoted, 221.

396 Index.
Bryant, 25.
Butler, Alban, Lives of the Saints, 257.
Butler, Bishop, Analogy, 17, 71.
Calvin, on Saint Helena, 289.
Campbell on Miracles, 5, 50.
Chinese painters, their method of drawing, 82.
Chrysostom, St., on Miracles, 136.
Clarke, Dr., on the site of the Holy Sepulchre, 302.
Claudius ApoUinaris, his Apology for Christianity lost, 24L
Clement, St., of Alexandria, quoted, 139.
Cock-lane ghost, 61.
Constantine's Luminous Cross, 134, 271 ; his letter to Macarius, 291.
Cyprian, divine admonition to, 37; his description of the demoniacs, 132;
account of a lapsed communicant, 134.
Cyril, St., of Jerusalem, on the discovery of the Cross, 293.
Davison's Discourses on Prophecy, quoted, 343.
Demetrian, 132.
Dio Cassius, on the miracle of the Thundering Legion, 248.
Doddridge on Acts, quoted, 64.
Dcmitian, assassination ofi 57.
Donatus, 143.
Douglas, Bishop, his Criterion, 34, 42, 60, 61, 64, 106, 177.
Ecclesiastical Miracles, 97.
Eleazar, charm wrought by, 27.
Elijah's sacrifice, 31, 32; miracles, 88, 91, 332.
Elisha's miracles, 81, 91, 161, 163, 167, 232.
Elymas, 333.
Empedocles, 27.
Essenes, the, 361.
Eusebius, 123, 134, 241 ; his account of Narcissus, 256; of Constantine's
Luminous Cross, 281 ; of the discovery of the Holy Cross, 290; and
Sepulchre, 305.
Eve's temptation by the serpent, 30.
t
Fabricius, quoted, 279.
Fanner on Miracles, 12, 26, 33, 50, 55.
Fleetwood on Miracles, 53.
Fleury's Ecclesiastical History, 99.
Francis, St., tears of, 256.
Gelasius, Pope, his warning to the faithful against apocryphal works, 235.
Genseric, 369.
Gervasius, St. , discovery of the relics of, 134 ; miracles wrought by them, 348.
Gibbon, his mock defence of the miracle wrought in the case of the Con
fessors, 87 ; on the first converts, 89 ; on the miracles of Moses and
Joshua, 165 ; bn the silence of the Saints as to their gift of miracles,
219 ; on the appearance of the Cross to Constantine, 282, 285 ; on the
death of Arius, 331 ; on the miracle of the African Confessors, 352;
on the persecution of Hunneric, 372 ; on Procopius, 376.

Index. 397
Graves, Dr., Lectures on the Pentateuch, 37 ; quoted, 40.
Gregory, St., of Neocaasarea (Thaumaturgus), 117, 236; miracle on the
course of the Lycus, 261.
Gregory, St., of Nyssa, u8; his account of St. Gregory Thaumaturgus, 261.
Gretzer, de Cruce, quoted, 273.
Grotius, Hugo, 114.
Heber, Bishop, his article in the Quarterly Review on the site of the Holy
Sepulchre, 302. *
Helena, Saint, her discovery of the Holy Cross, 287.
Herod, 366.
Herodotus, fables related by, 56.
Hezekiah, recovery of, 66 ; site of the pool of, 311, 317-323.
Hilarion, his cures of wounds, 66 ; various miracles wrought by him, 126.
Hohenlohe, Prince, his cures stopped by authority, 45.
Hume on Miracles, 10 ; quoted, 14, 16, 20, 26 ; his argument from general
experience, 54; argument against miracles generally, 155 ; their im
possibility, 175; quoted, 354.
Hunneric's persecution, 33, 87, 369-372.
Jansenists, ruin of, 44 ; their cures unsatisfactory, 60, 81.
Januarius, St., liquefaction of the blood of, 60, 63.
Jeremiah, his public declaration on Nebuchadnezzar's invasion, 366.
Jerome, St., his Life of Hilarion, 126, 162.
Jerusalem, site of, considered, 309.
Jesus, the Son of Sirach, 147.
Jewish Miracles, express purpose and one grand object of, 23 ; evidence
for, 91.
Jonah and the whale, 30.
Jones on the Figurative Language of Scripture, 26; on the Canon, 28, 39, 235.
Jortin on the Ecclesiastical Miracles, 181, 190, 257.
Josephus, 27, 366.
Joshua, commands the Sun to stand still, 81.
Irenaeus, St., 131, 140, 214, 224.
Isidore of Pelusium, 138.
Julian, Emperor, 57, 67; upbraids the Christians with their worship of the
wood of the Cross, 275 ; Fiery Eruption on his attempt to rebuild the
Jewish Temple, 334.
Justina, Empress, 348.
Justinian, Emperor, edict to Archelaus, 377.
Justin, St., on the Incarnation, 224.
Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, 347.
Koran, boasted elegance of the, 62.
Lardner, Dr., on St. Gregory Thaumaturgus, 262 ; on the Emperor Juhan's
attempt to rebuild the Temple, 339-341.
Lavington's Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists, 28.
Lazarus, restoration of, 60.
Lee, Professor, Persian Tracts, 76.
Leland's View of Deistical Writers, 14.

398 Index.
Livy, prodigies of, no part in the action of his history, 36.
Loyola, 76.
Lycus, changed in its course by St. Gregory, 261.
Lyttelton, Lord, on St. Paul's conversion, 231.
Macrina, St., 261, 268.
Mahomet's night-journey to heaven, 65 ; miracles of, 76.
Marcellinus, Count, testifies to the miracle of the Confessors retaining their
power of speech, 378.
Marcus Antoninus, 134, 242.
Martin, St., miracles of, 127, 163, 209.
Maxentius, Constantine's engagement with, 271, 278, 281.
MelchioaCanus, 236.
Middleton's Free Enquiry, 29, 42, 57, 60, 79, 131, 154, 164, 206, 384.
Milman, Dean, on the history of Samson, 168 ; on the apparition of the
Cross to Constantine, 25 1 ; on Herod and John the Baptist, 367.
Milner's Church History, 87.
Miracle, idea and scope of a, 4; antecedent credibility of considered as a
Divine interposition, 13; criterion of, 49; et scepius.
Miracles of Scripture, characterized, 388.
Montanus, trances of, 64.
Moses, divides the Red Sea, 66; miracles of, 88, 163.
Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History; 41, 86, 90, 245.
Moyle, on the miracle of the Thundering Legion, 245-247, 250.
Narcissus, Bishop of Jerusalem, changes water into oil, 134, 255.
Natalis, 123.
Nazarius, his panegyrical oration upon the Emperor Constantine, 277.
Neander's Church History, 245.
Newman, Dr., "Apologia," passage quoted from, 391-393.
Optatus of Milevis, 145.
Origen, 137, 140; quoted, 189, 220.
Osburn's Errors of the Apostolic Fathers, 139.
Paine, the notorious, 366.
Paley's Evidences, 44, 59, 79, 89, 91 ; quoted, 329-330.
Palladius, 237, 238.
Papias, 131.
Paulinus, St., on the discovery of the Cross, 299.
Paul the Hermit, buried by lions, 29.
Penrose on Miracles, quoted, 43.
Phidias, figure of on Minerva's shield, 37.
Philostratus, his account of Apollonius, 75, 159.
Pliny, on fountains of oil, 258.
Polycarp, St., martyrdom of, 29 ; fragrance issues from, 133.
Procopius of Ca:sarea, testifies to the miracle of the Confessors retaining their
power of speech, 375.
Protasius, St., discovery of the relies of, 135 ; miracles wrought by, 348.
Protestant habits of thought, 176.
Pythagoras, 27.

Index. 399
Quarterly Review, on the discovery and site of the Holy Sepulchre, 302,
Recovery of the Blind Man, Severus, by the Relics of St. Gervasius and St.
Protasius, 348.
Religion, its prepossessions always the strongest, 86.
Robinson, Professor, quoted, 289, 295-297, 321-325.
Sabbath-day's journey, space of, 308-309.
Samson, history of, 168.
Samuel, invokes a storm to defeat the Philistines, 253.
Saragossa, Cathedral of, 87.
Scripture, compared to a garden of Eden, 151.
Serapis, worshippers of, 87.
Sergius Paulus, 39.
Simon Magus, miracles of, 28.
Socrates, Ecclesiastical History, quoted, 341.
Sodom, destruction of, 1 72.
Speculum. Exemplorum, 236.
Stephen, St., miracles at his shrine at Hippo, 130.
St. George, the patron Saint of England, 235.
Stillingfleet, 32, 59.
Sulpicius, his account of St. Martin, 127, 209, 234.
Sumner, Archbishop, Records of Creation, 9.
Tacitus, 34.
Taylor, Isaac, his Ancient Christianity, 135 ; on St. Ambrose, 238; quoted,
292, 297 ; on the Nicene miracles, 358.
Tentative Miracles, 220.
Tereus, 375.
TertuUian, his account of the vision of an Angel, 37 ; his De Pudiciiid, 1 39 ,
quoted, 225, 242.
Theodoret's Religious History, 237.
Theodotus, heresy of, 123 ; writings of, 139.
Theophilus, St., 203.
Thundering Legion, the, 241.
Tillemont, 237, 300.
Tillotson, Archbishop, his decisive argument against the Real Presence, 109.
Tongue, the, recent instances of its growing again after extraction, sufficiently
for purposes of speech, 392.
Van Mildert's Boyle Lectures, 53.
Vespasian, cures ascribed to, 34, 38, 77, 87.
Victor, Bishop of Vite, testifies to the miracle of the Confessors retaining
their power of speech, 373.
Victor, Bishop of Tonno, testifies to the miracle of the Confessors, 378.
Vince on Miracles, 18, 20 ; a valuable treatise, 70.
Voltaire, his objection to miracles as arguing mutability in the Deity, 21.
Warburton, Bishop, Divine Legation, 18, 30; Sermon on Resurrection, 34;
quoted, 44 ; his test of true miracles, 106 ; writes in defence of the
miraculous character of the fiery eruption which defeated Julian's
attempt to rebuild the Temple, 334.

400 Index.
Water changed into oil at the prayer of St. Narcissus, 255.
Whately, Archbishop, his Treatise on Rhetoric, 14.
Whiston, quoted, 45.
White, Blanco, Against Catholicism, 38.
Xavier, 79.
Zeno, 87, 373.
Zoroaster, extraordinary works attnbuted to, 27, 31.

PUBLICATIONS OF JOHN HENRY NEWMAN, D.D.

1 — 8. Paeochial and Plain Seemons. (Rivingtons.)
9. Seemons on Subjects of the Day. (Rivingtons.)
10. Univeesity Seemons. (Rivingtons.)
11. Docteine of Justification. {Rivingtons.)
12. Discussions and Aeguments. 1. How to accomplish it.
2. The Antichrist of the Fathers. 3. Scripture and the
Creed. 4 Tamworth Keading-Eoom. 5. Who's to blame?
6. An Argument for Christianity. (Pickering.)
13. Two Essays on Mieacles. 1. Of Scripture. 2. Of Eccle
siastical History. (Pickering)
14, 15. Essays Critical and Histoeical, Two Volumes with
Notes. 1. Poetry. 2. Eationalism. 3. De la Mennais.
4. Palmer on Eaith and Unity. 5. St. Ignatius. 6. Pro
spects of the Anglican Church. 7. The Anglo-American
Church. 8. Countess of Huntingdon. 9. Catholicity of
the Anglican Church. 10. The Antichrist of Protestants.
11. Milman's Christianity. 12. Reformation of the Eleventh
Century. 13. Private Judgment. 14. Davison. 15.
Kettle. (Pickering.)
16, 17. Via Media, Two Volumes with Notes. 1. Vol. Pro
phetical Office of the Church. 2. Vol. Occasional Letters and
Tracts. (Pickering.)
18.. Essay on the Development of Cheistian Docteine.
(Pickering.)
19, 20. Difficulties of Anglicans, Two Volumes. 1. Vol.
Twelve Lectures. 2. Vol. Letters to Dr. Pusey, and to the
Duke of Norfolk. (Burns and Oates, and Pickering.)

publications [continued).
21. Peesent Position of Catholics in England. (Burns
and Oates.)
22. Seemons to Mixed Congbegations. (Burns and Oates.)
23. Occasional Seemons. (Burns and Oates.)
24. Idea of a Univeesity. 1. Nine Discourses. 2. Occasional
Lectures and Essays. (Pickering.)
25. Essay on Assent. (Burns and Oates.)

26. Annotated Translation of Athanasius. (Parker.)
27. Theological Teacts. 1. Dissertatiuneula?. 2. Doctrinal
Causes of Arianism. 3. Apollmarianism. 4. St. Cyril's
Formula. 5. Ordo de Tempore. 6. Douay Version of
Scripture. (Pickering.)
28. The Aeians of the Foubth Centuey. (Pickering.)
29 — 31. Histoeical Sketches. Theee Volumes. 1. The Turks.
2. Cicero. 3. Apollonius. 4. Primitive Christianity.
5. Church of the Fathers. 6. St. Chrysostom. 7. Theo
doret. 8. St. Benedict. 9. Benedictine Schools. 10.
Universities. 11. Northmen and Normans. 12. Medieval
Oxford. 13. Convocation of Canterbury. (Pickering.)

32. Loss and Gain. (Burns and Oates, and Pickering)
33. Callista. (Burns and Oates, and Pickering.)
34. Veeses on Vaeious Occasions. (Burns and Oates.)
35. Apologia pro Vita. Sua. (Longman)

Important TOorltsi
PUBLISHED BY
PICKERING & Co.,
ip6, Piccadilly, London, W.

ACROSTICS, a Hundred new, on Old Subjects, written
by Two Poor Women, with a Preface by Mrs. Gre-
ville. i2mo, 2s 6d
ACROSTICS. — Corn and Chaff, or Double Acrostics.
Square i2mo, frontispiece, cloth, gilt leaves, 3s 6d
ALTAR SERVICE.— The Second Year of the Reign
of King Edward VI. ; the Altar Service of the Church
of England for that Year, with that of the Third Year,
1549. Edited by W. J. Blew. i6mo, is 6d
BALL (F. J.) S. Augustine upon Fasting Communion.
8vo, 6d.
— — Our Fears and our Confidence, a Sermon at S.
Lawrence's, Reading, June 26th, 1877. 8vo, sewed,
6d
TJAYNE (Emily) Sighs of Hope. (Verse.) i2mo,
B ELANEY (R.) Mr. Gladstone Himself Reviewed and
Analysed. Crown 8vo, sewed, 2s
BISHOPS.— Are the Bishops Mad ? a Letter to the Rt.
Hon. J. Bright, by a Clergyman. 8vo, is
LEW (W.) Privy Council Infallibility ; the Mere Mis
take in the Knightsbridge Judgment, excused by Mr.
Fremantle, explained by Dr. Cardwell, exposed by
Wm. Blew. 8vo, sewed, is
ONN RE-UNION.— Report of the Proceedings of
the Re-Union Conference held at Bonn (1875), trans
lated from German, with a Preface by Canon Lid-
don, edited by M. MacColl. Crown 8vo, 3s 6d

BB

BLAKE (William) Poems : comprising Songs of Inno
cence and of Experience, together with Poetical
Sketches and some Copyright Poems not in any other
Edition. i2mo, 2s 6d
" The songs only require to be known to be loved with a tenderness
and enthusiasm which it is not given to many poets to arouse.'' — The
Saturday Review.
" The admirers of W. Blake ?s a poet-cand they are rapidly increas
ing in number— owe much to Mr. Pickering for this reprint." — Notes
and Quo ies.
 Songs of Innocence and Experience, new edition,
printed from the text of the Original Volumes pub
lished in 1789 and 1794, with Miscellaneous Poems,
now first printed from the Author's MSS. i2mo, 4s
Poetical Sketches. Now first reprinted from the

Original Edition of 1783, with a short Critical Pre
face. i2mo, 3s 6d
"A charming reprint of a most musical and dainty little book of songs.
Turn where we will, throughout its hundred pages, we are sure to light
on something that sparkles up into the light, as the sound of rippling
water, the songs of birds, amid the breath of spring." — The Standard.
"HOOKER (E.) Parthenia, a Drama. i2mo, 3s
BOURNE (V.) Poems, Latin and English, with Memoir
and Notes by the Rev. J. MlTFORD. i2mo, printed
with ornamental head and tail 'pieces, cloth, 5 s
Kept in various styles of binding.
cr I love the memory of Vinny Bourne ; I think him a better Latiu
poet than Tibullus, Propertius, Ausonius, or any of the writers in his
way, except Ovid, and not at all inferior to him." — Cowper.
"Vincent Bourne's Latin translations in sweetness of numbers and
elegant expression are at least equal to the originals, and scarce inferior
to anything in Ovid or Tibullus. — Dr. Beattie.
B RITTLEBANK (W.) Persia during the Famine of
1872, a Personal Narrative of Travel in the East.
Crown 8vo, frontispiece, 7s 6d
" It is long since we have read a book of travel with so much satisfac
tion as that of Mr. Brittlebank's short narrative affords."— The Exa
miner. " These pages evince the adventurous spirit of a true traveller." —
The Atheiueum.
BURIAL SERVICE.— The Order for the Burial of the
Dead. 1 6mo, printed in red and black from the seal
ed Copy of the Book of Common Prayer. In limp
cloth, for the use of " Mourners," £2 ios per hun
dred. This little book can be made to answer the purpose of a memorial
card by having the name of the departed person printed on the back of
the title.

BURKE (U. R.) Spanish Salt : a Collection of all the
Proverbs which are to be found in Don Quixote, with
a literal English Translation, Notes and Introduc
tion, by Ulick Ralph Burke. i2mo, cloth, 3s 6d
" We cordially recommend this little daintily-printed volume to those
who care to con in a concentrated form those wise saws which, in con
nection with Squire Sancho, the shield-bearer of the immortal Don, have
made him and his master immortal. The translations are adequate and
satisfactory, the work has evidently been a labour of love," &c, &c. —
The Athencenm.
CALCOEN (CALICUT) Facsimile of a Dutch Narrative
of the Second Voyage of Vasco da Gama to Calicut.
Printed at Antwerp, circa 1504, with Introduction
and Translation, by J. Ph. Berjeau. Small 4to,
5s This book, unnoticed by both biographers and bibliographers, is in
the British Museum. Although the name of the great navigator to
India is not mentioned in it, the dates, events, and places recorded per
fectly agree with the second voyage of Vasco de Gama round the Cape
of Good Hope. This valuable narrative supplies a number of interest
ing details of the voyage which will be looked for in vain in Galvao,
Ramusio, Castanheda, Faria, Barros, &c.
CAPEL (Monsignore) and the Ritualists, a Review of
a Recent Controversy, by a English Catholic.
8vo, sewed, is
C ASWALL (E., of the Oratory, Birmingham) Poems
and Hymns, original and translated, comprising
Hymns for the Week, the Christian Seasons, and
Saints' Days, translated from the Breviary, the Mis
sal, and other sources : Original Meditative Pieces
and Hymns : also upwards of Seventy Poems and
Odes. i2mo, 5s.
From the above Poems and Hymns, originally published under the
titles, Lyra Catholica, Masque of Angels, and in other works, now for
the first time collected iu one volume, it is not too much to say that the
compilers of all the best known Hymn books during the last twenty
years have borrowed, and in some cases very largely.
 Tale of Tintem ; a May Pageant. Second Edi
tion, square i6mo, 2s
CAS WALL (M. E.) Old Man's Review of his Past Life
(a Fragment). Crown 8vo, sewed, 6d
CATECHISM, The CHURCH, from the Book of Com
mon Prayer ; with Pictures and Explanations. Se
cond Edition, i6mo, with 42 cuts, single copies, is 3d
each ; for distribution, lis 6d per dozen
The above-named Manual has been react and approved by the Vener
able Archdeacon Denison and other eminent clergy of the Church.

CEREMONIAL for Servers at Choral and Plain Cele
brations of the Holy Eucharist. i8mo, is
 Notes on Ceremonial, Sarum Use. i2mo, cuts,
4s 6d
" A very useful manual." — The Church Times.
Containing directions for the Celebrant and Ministers of the Altar
and the Communion Service, with the Secreta translated from the Sa- ,
rum Missal.
CERVANTES.— Sancho Panza's Proverbs, with others
which occur in Don Quixote ; with literal translation,
Notes, and Introduction, by Ulick Ralph Burke.
i2mo, 3s ; Large Paper, crown 8vo, 8s 6d
CHAMBERS (J. D.) The Principles of Divine Worship,
the Book of Common Prayer, Illustrated by refe
rences to the Sarum Rites and Ceremonies. With
numerous Illustrations, new edition, revised, with
additions, 4to, ^i is
C HATELAIN (Chevalier de) L'Hostellerie des Sept
Pe"ches Capitaux. Crown 8vo, sewed, is
 (Le Chevalier de) Les Noces de la Lune. Crown
8vo, sewed, is
 (Clara de) Photographs of Familiar Faces, edited
by the Chevalier de Chatelain. Crown 8vo, ss
CHAUCER (G.) La Fleur et la Feuille ; poeme avec le
Texte Anglais en Regard, traduit en vers Frangais
par le Chevalier de Chatelain. i2mo, cloth, gilt
leaves, 2s
" A very clever translation of Chaucer's ' Floure and the Leafe.' "—
English journal of Education.
 Contes de Cantorbery traduits en vers Frangais,
par le Chevalier de Chatlain. 3 vols, i2mo,
printed in the old style, portrait and cuts, £1 5s
" There are evidences of great industry in it, and still more of sound
judgment and good taste." — Atkenceum.
CHRISTMAS CHIMES and New Year Rhymes, Seri
ous and Comic, with a gallery of not-ables drawn
and quartered in various verse, sense, and non-sense.
Square 8vo, 3s
*' There is badinage, sarcasm brilliant and telling, and wit at once
scholarly, tender, but biting, on almost each page, such as will delight
everybody who owns the power to appreciate the clever satire of an un
usually original and pointed writer." — Morning Post.
CHURTON (E.) The Early English Church. New
edition, i2mo, maps and woodcuts, 4s

CHURCH SERVICE, The Adult's; being the
Liturgy according to the use of the Church of Eng
land, for use in Church ; with Homely Explanations,
Forms of Self-Examination and Confession, &c, &c.
Fourth Thousand, i6mo, with 22 cuts, is 3d each,
us 6d per dozen.
" Our readers will be good enough to consider all that we have said
of the first issue (the Child's Church Service) said also of this. We
trust and believe that it will be very widely circulated." — The Church
Tiues.
CHURCH SERVICE, The Child's ; being the Liturgy
according to the use of the Church of England, for
use in Church, with Homely Explanations to be read
at Home or at School. Third edition (6th thousand)
i8mo, with 22 cuts, in cloth, is 3d each, us 6d per
dozen nett.
" That admirable little manual." — The Church Times.
" This is really a miracle of beauty and cheapness ! It is only is. 3d..
and each of the twenty-two woodcuts would be cheap at the money ! " —
TJte Illustrated Review.
C LAUDET (A., F.R.S) A Memoir reprinted from
" The Scientific Review." 8vo, sewed, 2s
COLERIDGE (S. T.) The Poetical and Dramatic
Works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge. An entirely
new edition, revised and enlarged, founded on that
published in three volumes by the late William
Pickering in 1834. 4 vols, fcap. 8vo, 30s
Large Paper Copies (only 100 printed) £2 12s 6d.
While containing everything which appeared in the earlier Edition,
the present Re-issue includes a number of pieces of considerable value
and interest, now for the first time collected.
CONSTABLE (Henry) Diana, Spiritual Sonnets, and
other Poems, now first collected, with some Account
of the Author, by W. C. Hazlitt, and Notes by
Thomas Park. 1859, crown 8vo, only 230 copies
prmted, 6s
— — Ditto, Large Paper, only 20 copies printed,
uncut, 15s
OX (F. E.) Hymns from the German, the Originals
and Translations side by side, translated and edited
by F. E. Cox. Second edition, revised and enlarged
i2mo, 5s
Hymns in the original German, accompanied with English verse
translation, selected from Gerhard, Angelus. and several hundred diffe
rent collections, most of the Hymns were pointed out as "National
Treasures" by the learned and famous collector of German Hymns,
Baron Eunsen, on whose authority the names and dates of the authors
are given.

0

C OPINGER (W. A.) A Testimony of Antiquity, showing
the Ancient Faith in the Church of England touching
the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ.
i8mo, is
DANIEL (George) Love's Last Labour Not Lost.
i2mo, pp. 300, cloth, 7s 6d
Contents : — Recollections of Charles Lamb ; Samuel Johnson ; Father
Christmas ; The Loving Cup and Horace Walpole ; New Year's Eve ;
The Presumed Disinterment of Milton ; Moorfields in the Olden Time ;
Dreams ; Recollections of Siddons and John Kemble ; Tom Durfey ;
Old Ballads ; Robert Cruikshank ; A Book of Fools, etc., etc.
DAWSON (A.) Theory of Gravity, and of the Solar
Process. 8vo, sewed, 6d
 English Landscape Art in the year 1877. Crown
8vo, is
E VERE (SIR Aubrey) Julian the Apostate, the Duke
of Mercia ; two Dramas. 1 vol, i2mo, 8s 6d
— Irish Odes and other Poems. Crown 8vo, 6s
— Sonnets. New edition, i2mo, 3s 6d

D

DORE (J. R.) Old Bibles ; or an Account of the various
Versions of the English Bible. Crown 8vo, 2s 6d
" Mr. Dore in the volume before us has endeavoured to give a plain,
unvarnished account of the English Bible. In the account of Tvndale's
work Mr. Dore is careful and succinct. ... It is beautifully printed."
— Saturday Review.
DUNN (Rev. James) The Honesty of our Position, a
Paper read before the Clifton Branch of the E. C. U.
8vo, sewed, 6d
EDEN (Robert) Some Thoughts on the Inspiration
of the Holy Scriptures. i2mo, pp. 294, handsomely
printed in the old style, 5s
ELLIS (Edward) The Two Ysondes and other Verses.
Crown 8vo, 2s 6d
EWALD (Alex. Chas.) The Public Records, a Brief
Handbook to the National Archives, by Alex. Chas.
Ewald, one of the Senior Clerks of Her Majesty's
Public Records. 8vo, 9s
This book is an Alphabetical Index of the Principal Matters contained
in the Public Records, with a reference directing the student of history
under what heading they may be found, and a Glossary of Words to
be found in the Public Records, with a Prefatory Essay on the most re
markable of these Records.
" For the students of the Public Records and the National Archives.
Mr. Ewald's New Hand-Book will be found extremely useful. . . . " —
Westminste Review.

ELLIS (Joseph) Meletse : Poems by Joseph Ellis. Cr.
8vo, 6s
Caesar in Egypt, Costanza, and other Poems. Cr

8vo, 9s
"Csesar in Egypt" comprises the history of the Alexandrine War,
also the Journey of Caius Julius Casar with Queen Cleopatra up the
Nile.
FAN SH AWE (C. M.) The Literary Remains of Cathe
rine Maria Fanshawe, with Notes, by the late Rev.
Wm. Harness. Fcap. 8vo, only 250 printed, 3s
FISHER (Richard Trott) Lays of Ancient Babyland,
to which are added divers small Histories not known
to the Ancients. Square l2mo, printed in the old
style, with head and grotesque tail pieces, cloth, gilt
leaves, 4s 6d
Suitable for a Christmas present to a child, containing many of the
old popular stories versified, with the addition of several tales.
 The Travellers, an Argument in three parts —
1. The Night Watch ; 2. The Day Watch ; 3. The
Repose. Crown 8vo, 5 s
 The Minster, with some common Flowers picked
in the Close. i2mo, 4s 6d
" Contains many good verses carefully written." — Atlienceum.
Rakings over Many Seasons. Crown 8vo, cloth,

8s 6d
FONBLANQUE (E. Barrington) Cluck Cluck; a
Fairy Tale, with 1 1 illustrations by T. W. Y. Sq.
8vo, 3s 6d
 Account of a New System of Elementary Teach
ing. 8vo, is
FRANKUM (R.) The Bee and the Wasp, a Fable in
Verse. Square i2mo, with etchings by George Cruik-
shank, executed in early life and in his best manner,
5s
 The Same. Square ismo, with the plates on
India paper, only fifty copies so printed, 7s 6d
FRERE (J. H.) The Works in Prose and Verse of the
Right Honourable John Hookham Frere. Now first
collected with a Memoir by W. E. and Sir Bartle
Frere. Second edition, 3 vols, crown 8vo, with two
portraits engraved by C. H. Jeens, 24s
 Large Paper, 3 vols, 8vo, £2 2s

FULLER (Morris, M.A.) A Voice in the Wilderness,
being Sermons preached at Dartmoor. Crown 8vo,
7s 6d
 Our Established Church, its History, Philosophy,
Advantages, and Claims. Crown 8vo,
FULLER (T.) David's Hainous Sinne, Heartie Repen
tance, Heavie Punishment. Crown 8vo, 7s 6d

 Life, with Notices of his Books, his Kinsmen, and
his Friends, by J. Eglington Bailey. Thick 8vo,
pp. 826, numerous illustrations, £1 5 s
"If ever there was an amusing writer in this world, the facetious
Thomas Fuller was one. There was in him a combination of those
qualities which minister to our entertainment, such as few have possessed
in an equal degree." — Retrospective Review.
G UILEVILLE (Guillaume de) The Ancient Poem
entitled "Le Pelerinage del'Homme,"by Guillaume
DE Guileville (1330), compared with " The Pilgrim's
Progress" of JOHN Bunyan, with Illustrations, and
an Appendix containing the English Version, by John
Lydgate. Crown 4to, with numerous illustrations,
15s "A volume full of deep interest to the admirers of John Bunyan, and
of no small value in illustrating the history of religious allegories." —
Notes and Queries.
 A Modern Prose Translation of the Ancient Poem
of G. de Guileville, entitled the Pylgrymage of Man,
with Appendix. Crown 4to, twenty-six illustrations,
5s
 The Booke of the Pylgrymage of the Sowie, trans
lated from the French, printed by Caxton, 1483, with
illustrations taken from a MS. copy in the British
Museum, edited by K. I. CUST. Crown 4to, coloured
plates, 15s
HOBSON (W. F.) Church Innovations, an Examina
tion and Plea for Tolerance. 8vo, is
 Letter to the Right Hon. Montague Bernard.
l2mo, 4d
 The Ridsdale Judgement on Vestments. i2mo,
6d.
HOME (F. Wyville) Songs of a Wayfarer. Extra
fcap, 7s 6d

H3 (p- H.) Explanation of Ancient Terms and
Measures of Land, with some Account of Old Te
nures. 8vo, 4s
HUGO (T.) Prayers before and after a Chapter of
Order of S. John of Jerusalem in England. Crown
8vo, 2s 6d
 Large Paper, 4tp, only 12 so printed, 10s 6d
HURCOMB (F. B.) Sermons with Memoirby F.Arnold.
8vo, ios 6d
HYETT (W. H.) Flowers of the South from the Hortus
Siccus of an old Collector. 4to, 12s
JESSE (GEORGE R., Author of " Researches into the
History of the British Dog" &°c.) Unabridged Evi
dence given before the Royal Commission on Vivisec
tion, on the ist and 6th November, and 20th Decem
ber, 1875. Crown 8vo, 2s 6d
N.B. — The Blue Book Report, issued by the Royal Commission,
presents the above evidence in a mutilated condition only.
K ARSLAKE (W. H., Preacher at Lincoln's Inn, Vicar
of Westcott, late Fellow and Tutor of Merton College,
Oxford) The Litany of the English Church considered
in its History, its Plan, and the Manner in which it is
intended to be used. 8vo, 8s 6d
KEBLE (J.) The Christian Year ; Thoughts in Verse for
the Sundays and Holy Days' throughout the Year.
8vo, beautifully printed, 9s
EN (BISHOP) Christian Year ; or Hymns and Poems
for the Holy Days and Festivals of the Church. 8vo,
pp. 478, every page surrounded by an elaborate wood
cut border in the style of Geoffrey Tory. ^1 is
These borders are entirely new, never having been used |in any
other work. They are larger and more elaborate than those used in
the " Elizabeth Prayer," or the other bordered Prayer Book.
Bishop Ken was the author of "Awake my soul and with the Sun !'
and of " Glory to Thee, my God, this nieht."
" Bishop Ken's ' Christian Year,' published by Mr. Pickering, is an
exquisite edition of a book which would have been welcome in any
shape." — Times.
 Christian Year ; Hymns and Poems for the Festi
vals and Holidays of the Church. Third edition, fcap.
8vo, 6s, and may be had in various bindings

K

KERSHAW (S. W., Librarian of Lambeth Library) The
Art Treasures of Lambeth Library : a Description of
the Illuminated MSS. and Illustrated Books, with
Outline Illustrations from the most remarkable MSS.
8vo, uniform with Maitland's Catalogues of the Early
Printed Books, only 225 copies printed, 14s
- 4to size, on hand-made paper, plates on India paper,

half Roxburghe morocco, only 25 copies -printed,
£2 12s 6d
LAMB (Charles and Mary) Poetry for Children,
Edited and Prefaced by R. H. Shepherd. i2mo,
106 pp. with woodcut initials, head, and tail-pieces, a
pretty volume, 3s 6d
"These delightful poems for children, in spite of their extraordinary
merit, and marked superiority to other productions of a similar class,
seem altogether to have escaped the notices of modern readers, and
even of those lovers of Lamb's genius who have during late years
rescued 'from oblivion all the waifs and strays of which the authorship
is traceable to him."
L ENDRUM (Rev. Alexander) The Reformation and
Deformation, their Principles and Results as Affecting
Doctrine, Worship, and Discipline, a Letter to the
Archbishop of Canterbury. Thick 8vo, 15s
T ONGFELLOW (Henry Wadsworth) Early Poems
JL now first collected and edited by R. H. Shepherd.
i2mo, 3s
"Seldom, if ever, have verses fuller of rich promise or of actual
fulfilment been composed by a boy of seventeen." — Examiner.
T OVE'S TRIUMPH : a Play, ismo, 3s 6d
" A light dramatic five-act play, cast rather in the style of thought
and expression which belong to the age succeeding that of Shakespeare.
The author is evidently a man of poetic taste, as well as a great admirer
of those golden days and golden writers, and tells his light and pleasant
ove-story in a quiet and simple fashion." — The Morning Herald.
T YRICS OF LIGHT AND LIFE.— Original Poems,
J_, by Dr. John Henry Newman, Alexander Lord Bishop
of Derry, Miss Christiana G. Rossetti, Rev. Gerard
Moultrie, Rev. J. S. B. Monsell, Rev. W. J. Blew,
Aubrey de Vere, Rev. H. N. Oxenham, Rev. Ed. Cas-
wall, &c, &c, edited by Dr. F. G. Lee. S econd edi
tion, revised and enlarged, handsomely printed with
head and tail-pieces, fcap. 8vo, 6s
 Large Paper. Crown 8vo, printed on hand-made
paper, only 24 so printed, ^1 is

II
MACGILL (Hamilton M., D.D.) Songs of the Christian
Creed and Life, selected from Eighteen Centuries.
Crown 8vo, 7s
Tne representative hymns included in this volume range from the
becond Century_ to the Nineteenth. In each case the original and a.
translation are given, and where the hymn was originally in English, a
Latin rendering is given. A lew are Greek and English ; all the others
have the Latin and English side by side. Among the authors may be
enumerated Clement of Alexandria, Hilary, Ambrose, Augustine,
Gregory of Nazianzus, Anselm, Thomas A. Kenvpis, Xavier, Watts.
Toplady, Cowper, Heber, Keble, Newman, Bonar, and many others.
1WT ACKENZIE (J.) An Appeal for a New Nation. 8vo,
 Mainoc Evline, and other Poems. i2mo, 5s
MANNING (Cardinal) and History : An Answer to
the Cardinal's Appeal to the History of the Venerable
Bede, by Two PRIESTS. Sewed, is 6d
MANUEL (Prince Don Juan, the Spanish Boccaccio)
Count Lucanor, or the Fifty Pleasant Stories of Pa-
tronio, written by the Prince Don Juan Manuel, A.D.
1335 — 1347, and now first translated from the Spanish
into English, by James York, M.D. i2mo (pp. xvi.
246), 6s
" This curious collection of ' Pleasant Stories,' composed a century
before the invention of printing, has already been translated into French
and German, and was well worth putting into an English dress. . . .
In his brief account of Don Juan Manuel, Dr. James York'has told the
readers of ' Fifty Pleasant Stories ' as much, perhaps, as they will require
to know of them. . . . The notes explanatory or illustrative of the
stories are, as notes should be, brief, instructive, and to the point." — The
Saturday Review.
MARTYN (Rev. Thomas, M.A.) Greek Testament
Studies ; or, aRevision of the Translation for Private
Use. 8vo, 2 s 6d
MARY (Queen) Two Plays by Dekker, Webster, and
by Thos. Heywood, newly edited, with Essay on the
Relation of the Old and Modern Dramas in this
Chapter of History, by W. J. Blew. i2mo, 4s 6d
MILTON'S PARADISE LOST, in Ten Books, the text
exactly reproduced from the First Edition of 1667,
with Appendix, containing the additions made fn
later Issues, and a Monograph on the original publi
cation of the Poem. Crown 4to, 18s
 Large Paper, £1 4s
The reproduction of Milton's " Paradise Lost" has an interest supe
rior to that of most reprints, as no edition subsequent to the first has
preserved the system of emphasis adopted by Milton.

NEWMAN (Dr. John Henry) The Arians of the Fourth
Century, third edition. Crown 8vo, 6s
 Callista ; a Sketch of the Thjrd Century. Crown
8vo, 5 s 6d
— — — Certain Difficulties felt by Anglicans in Catholic
Teaching Considered, in a Letter addressed to the
Rev. E. B. Pusey, D.D., on occasion of his Eirenicon
of 1864 ; and in a Letter addressed to the Duke of
Norfolk on occasion of Mr. Gladstone's Expostulation
of 1874. Crown 8vo, 5 s 6d

Discussions, 6s

Containing : I. — The celebrated " Letters of Catholicus " on Educa
tion (The Tamworth Reading Room). II. — An Internal Argument for
Christianity. III.— On English Jealousy of "The Army" and "The
Church." IV. — On the Relation between Scripture and the Catholic
Creed, &c.
 The Miscellaneous and Critical Essays of John
Henry Newman (formerly Fellow of Oriel College,
Oxford, now D.D., and of the Oratory, Birmingham),
now first collected ; comprising Articles on Poetical,
Historical, and Biographical subjects, written 1829 —
71. 2 vols, crown 8vo, 12s
I.— The Nature of Poetry. IL— Rationalism. Ill,— Fall of De la
Mennais. IV. — Palmer's View of the Church. V. — Epistles of Saint
Ignatius. VI. — Anglican Prospects. VII, — The Anglo-American Church.
VIII. — The Countess of Huntingdon. IX. — Catholicity of Anglican
Church. X. — Antichrist. XI. — Milman's View of Christianity. XII.
— The Reformation of the Eleventh Century. XIII. — Private Judgment.
XIV.— John Davison. XV.— John Keble.

Historical Sketches. Vol. I., 6s

Containing : I. — The" History of the Turks in their relation to Europe.
II. — Life of Apollonius of Tyana. III. — The Personal and Literary
Character of Cicero. IV. — Of Primitive Christianity.

Historical Sketches. Vol. 1 1., 6s

Containing: I. — A Sketch of the Life of Theodoret {now first printed).
II.— A Sketch of the Life of St. Chrysostom. III.— Of the Mission of
St. Benedict. IV.— Of the Benedictine Schools. V.— The Church of
the Fathers, containing Sketches of St. Basil, St. Gregory, St. Anthony,
St. Augustine, Demetrius, and St. Martin.

Historical Sketches. Vol. III., 6s

Containing : I.-pA Sketch of the Rise and Progress of Universities.
II. — An Essay on the Northmen and Normans in England and Ireland.
III.— A Review of Mediaeval Oxford. IV.— An Historical Sketch of
the Convocation of Canterbury.

13
NEWMAN (Dr. John Henry) An Essay on the De
velopment of Christian Doctrine, new edition, revised
by the author. Crown 8vo, 6s
 Loss and Gain ; the Story of a Convert, sixth edi
tion, with a New Advertisement. Crown 8vo, pp. 442,
Ss 6d
 On Miracles. — Two Essays on Scripture Miracles,
and on Ecclesiastical. Crown 8vo, pp. 406, 6s
 Tracts, Theological and Ecclesiastical, Crown
8vo, 8s
Containing : I.— Dissertatiunculae. II. —The Doctrinal Causes ol
Arianism. III. — Apollonarianism. IV. — St. Cyril's Formula. V.—
Ordo de Tempore. VI. — On the various revisions of the Douay Versions
of Scripture.
Several of the above have never been previously printed, others
are from periodicals now inaccessible.
 The Via Media of the Anglican Church. Vol. I.
containing the whole of the "Lectures on the Prophet
ical Office of the Church Viewed Relatively to Roman
ism and Popular Protestantism," as published in
1837 ; with New Preface and Notes [1877]. Vol. II.,
containing Occasional Letters and Tracts written
between 1830 and 1841. 2 vols, crown 8vo, 6s each

 Idea of a University, Considered in Nine Dis
courses, Occasional Lectures, and Essays. Crown 8vo„
uniform in cloth (double volume), 7 s
N OWELL (T. W.) Sacrifice or no Sacrifice? John
Wesley an Unconscious Romanist: Notes on a Sug
gested Alteration in the English Communion Office.
8vo, sewed, 2s
PANIZZI (Antonio) Chi Era Francesco da Bologna?
Seconda edizione con nuova appendice. i2mo, only
265 copies printed, with five facsimiles of the types
used by Francesco da Bologna, 2s 6d
 Large Hand-made Paper, only 12 printed,
ios 6d
This essay is written to establish the identity of Francesco da Bologna,
who designed and cut the Aldine cursive type, with the celebrated sculp
tor and artist Francesco Raibolini, usually called II Francia, the con
temporary of Leonardo da Vinci, Rafaelle, and Michael Angelo.

14
PAYNE (John) The Masque of Shadows, and other
Poems. Fcap. 8vo, cloth, 7s
 Intaglios, Sonnets. i2mo, finely printed with head
and tail-pieces, ornamented with initial letters, 3s 6d
" Excellent scholar's work in poetry. The spirit of his work is much
akin to the earlier writings of Mr. Rossetti and Mr. Morris."— The
Academy.

 Lautrec, a Poem. i2mo
PEARCE (M.) Philip of Konigsmarkt, and Poems.
i2mo, 8s 6d
POCOCK (N.) The Principles of the Reformation shown
to be in Contradiction to the Book of Common
Prayer. 8vo, is
¦ Recovery from the Principles of the Reformation.

8vo, is
POETS.— Birthdays with the Poets, a birthday book of
quotations from the poets. Square i6mo, ornamented
cloth, gilt leaves, 3s
PRAYER, A Service of, A Litany and an Office of the
Holy Communion. i6mo, is
PUN CHARD (E. G.) King Saul and other Poems.
i2mo, 2s 6d
Seven Times a Day : a Manual of the Hours of

Prayer, with Notes thereon. i8mo, is
RALEIGH (Sir Walter) Poems, edited by J. Hannah.
i2mo, handsomely printed, with ornamental head and
tail-pieces, 5 s
SANDYS (R. H.) In the Beginning, Remarks on Certain
Modern Views of the Creation. 8vo. Part I. is ;
Part II. is 6d ; Part III. is 6d ; Part IV. is 6d
SCOTT (Patrick) Christianity and a Personal Devil.
Second Edition, revised and re-arranged. i2mo, 5s
" We think every impartial inquirer will agree with Mr. Scott."— Pall
Mall Gazette.
SHIPLEY (Obby) Ought we to obey the New Court
created by the Public Worship Regulation Act?
Second Edition. 8vo, 6d

is
SHIRLEY (E. P.) A History of the County of Monaghan.
Part I. Folio, with numerous Illustrations, Anti
quarian and Heraldic, only 250 copies printed, 12s
 Part II. 16s
 Part III. 12s
 Part IV. In the Press.
SINGLETON (LUCY) Some Statistics to Show the
Necessity for more Bishops and Clergy. Royal 8vo,
sewed, is
SKETCHES OF NONCONFORMITY chiefly taken
from the Old Testament. 8vo, sewed, 6d
TENNYSONIANA.— Notes Critical and Bibliographi
cal on the Works of Alfred Tennyson, D.C.L., Poet
Laureate, Second Edition, revised and enlarged.
i2mo
TONES, Sad, for Sick Times, by the Author of " Hints
of Horace." Crown 8vo, 3s
TONDINI (C.) Anglicanism, Old Catholicism, and the
Union of the Christian Episcopal Churches. 8vo,
sewed, is 6d
 The Future of the Russian Church. 8vo, sewed,

is
T OWNSEND.— Sunday Utterances of Prayer and
Praise. Square i8mo, sewed, is
TRACTS.— Privy Council. 4s 6d
No. 1 — Dr. Stephens on the Ornaments Rubric,
Dedicated to His Grace the Archbishop of York,
is No. 2— The Case of " The Seven Bishops "—The
Case of " The 4,700," dedicated to the Lord Bishop
of London, is
No. 3 — A Handy Book of Privy Council Law. — I.
Ecclesiastical Cases. — II. Patent Cases. — Dedicated
to the Right Honourable Baron Hatherley, royal
8vo, pp. 75, is 6d
"This is No. III. of a series of which the first two are already well
known, and duly appreciated wherever they are known."— The Church
Review.

i6

W

T RELAWNY (E. J.) Records of Shelley, Byron, and the
Author, New edition, greatly enlarged. 2 vols, crown
8vo, with portraits and plates, 12s
ACE (H.) Christianity and Morality: being the Boyle
Lectures for 1874-5, by Henry Wace, M.A., Chaplain
of Lincoln's Inn, Professor of Ecclesiastical History,
King's College, London, Bampton Lecturer for 1879
in the Univ. of Oxford, &c. Fourth Edition. Crown
8vo, 6s
WALKER (C.) An Order for Matins and Evensong, and
the Celebration of the Holy Communion, commonly
called the Mass, chiefly after the First Prayer, Book
of Edward VI. i6mo, 2s
ALTON (Izaak) Reliquiae Waltoniana?: Inedited
Remains of Izaak Walton, Author of " The Complete
Angler," edited by R. H. Shepherd. i2mo, 6s
WARBURTON (R. E. Egerton) Poems and Epi
grams. Crown 8vo, only 250 printed, 7s 6d
Hunting Songs, Sixth Edition. i2mo, with vig-

W

nette title, uncut, 5s
" We have to thank Mr. Egerton 'Warburton, a sportsman of the best
stamp, for the agreeable collection of hunting songs before us. They
are fresh, lively, not deficient in point, and frequently characterized by
a healthy and genial humour." — Vide review of two columns, in the
" Saturday Review" of Jan. 24,1874.
WILBERFORCE (R. T.) The Five Empires ; an Out
line of Ancient History, Fifteenth Edition. i2mo,
maps and plates, 3s 6d
WINSCOM (CAVE) Tsoe", and other Poems. i2mo,
3s 6d Waves and Caves, and other Poems i2mo,

3s 6d
— Camden, and other Poems. i2mo, 3s 6d

PICKERING & CO.,,
196, PICCADILLY, LONDON, W;

YALE UNIVERSITY

3 9 00 2_Q030Q2330h.

¦