cles recorded in history to the agency of evil spirits, does not detract from the evidence of Christianity, because our faith rests upon works whose distinguishing character, and whose manifest superiority to the power of evil spirits, are calculated to remove every degree of hesitation in applying the argument which miracles afford. One observation more shuts up the subject. 4. The uncertainty with regard to the duration of miracles in the Christian Church, does not invalidate the argument arising from the miracles of Jesus and his apostles. All Protestants, and many Catholics, believe, that the claim of working miracles which the Church of Rome advances as one mark of her being the true Church, is without foundation; and no impartial discerning person, who reads the history of the wonders which for many centuries have been recorded by that Church, can hesitate a moment in classing them with the tricks of heathen priests. Dr. Middleton, in his letter from Rome, has shown that many of the Popish are an imitation of the heathen miracles, and even those who do not admit that they have been borrowed, cannot deny the resemblance. On the other hand, every Christian believes, that real miracles were performed in the days of the Apostles; and the unanimous tradition. of the Christian Church has preserved the memory of many in succeeding ages. It is natural then to inquire at what period the true miracles ceased, and the fictitious commenced. Some mark is called for, to distinguish so important an era, and the imprudence of which some Christian writers have been guilty in their attempts to fix it, has afforded a kind of triumph to those who were willing to expose every weak quarter in the defence of Christianity. Dr. Middleton, in his book, entitled-A free Inquiry into the miraculous powers which have been supposed to subsist in the Christian Church, maintained this position, that after the days of the Apostles, the Church did not possess any standing power of working miracles. Those who were zealous for the honour of the early fathers, attacked, with much bitterness, a position which directly impugned their authority. Some of them very unadvisedly said, that if all the miracles, after the days of the Apostles, which were attested unanimously by the primitive fathers, are no better than enthusiasm and imposture, then we are deprived of our evidence for the truth of the Gospel miracles. Others undertook to defend the reality of the miracles in the first four centuries; and they weakened their defence by extending their frontier.The controversy was keenly agitated about the middle of the last century; and the attention of the world was lately drawn to it, by the fascinating language of Mr. Gibbon, who mixing truth and falsehood together, and colouring both with his masterly pencil, has contrived to reflect from the claims of the primitive Church, a degree of suspicion upon the Gospel miracles. No person who believes the Gospel will think it incredible, that miracles were performed during the whole of the first century, because the Apostle John lived about the end of it, and many of those to whom the Apostles had communicated spiritual gifts, probably survived it. All the Christian writers of the second and third centuries affirm, that miraculous gifts did, in certain measure, continue in the Christian Church, and were, at times, exerted in the cure of dis * eases, and the expulsion of demons. But those who have examined their writings with critical accuracy, have shown that there is much looseness and exaggeration in the language which Mr. Gibbon has employed with regard to these gifts. To satisfy you of this, I shall place a passage from that historian, over against passages from Irenæus, Origen, and Eusebius. Mr. Gibbon says, the Christian Church, from the times of the Apostles and their first disciples, has claimed an uninterrupted succession of miraculous powers. Amongst these he mentions the power of raising the dead. In the days of Irenæus, he affirms, about the end of the second century, the resurrection of the dead was far from being esteemed an uncommon event; the miracle was frequently performed on necessary occasions, by great fasting and the joint supplications of the church of the place, and the persons thus restored to their prayers, lived afterwards among them many years. Now hear Irenæus himself. The true disciples of Jesus, by a power derived from him, confer blessings upon other men, as each has been enabled. Some expel demons so effectually, that they who have been delivered from evil spirits, believe and become members of the church; others have knowledge of futurity, see visions, and utter prophecies; others cure diseases by the imposition of hands; and, as we have said, the dead too have been raised, and remained some years with us. Observe he changes the tense in the last clause; it is ηγέρθησαν, παρέμειναν. He does not speak of the power of raising the dead as present, but as having been exerted in some time past, so that the persons who were the objects of it reached to his own days. Mr. Gibbon himself has shown that the Bishop of Antioch did not know, in the second century, that the power of raising the dead existed in the Christian church; and no Christian writer, in the second or third century, mentions this miracle as performed in his time. You may judge from this specimen of the accuracy of Mr. Gibbon. Origen says, in the third century, signs of the Holy Spirit were shown where Jesus began to teach, more numerous after his ascension; and, in succeeding times, less numerous. But even at this day, there are traces of it in a few men who have had their souls cleansed. Eusebius, in the beginning of the fourth century, says, Our Lord himself, even at this day, is wont to manifest some small portions of his power in those whom he judges proper for it.§ If you give credit to these respectable testimonies, and they are entitled to respect both from the manner in which they are given, and from the characters of the authors, you will believe that the profusion of miraculous gifts which was poured forth in the days of the Apostles was gradually withdrawn in succeeding ages, and that the fathers were sensible of this gradual cessation, but boasted that some gifts did continue, and were occasionally exerted during the first three centuries. This gradual cessation is agreeable to the analogy of the divine procedure in other matters. It left an occasional support to the faith of Christians, so long as they were exposed to persecution under the heathen emperors; and it serves to account for what Mr. Gibbon calls the insensibility of the Christians with regard to the cessation of miraculous powers. If Gibbon's Rom. Hist. ch. 15. † Iren. lib. ii. cap. 32. these powers were withdrawn, one by one, and the display of them became gradually less frequent, the insensibility of Christians with regard to the cessation of miracles is not wonderful; and the writers whom I have quoted, have spoken of the subject in that manner which was most natural. Although it seems probable that miraculous powers did, in certain measure, continue in the Christian church during the first three centuries, yet it cannot be said that the testimony borne to all the miracles of that period, is unsuspicious. There probably was much credulity and inattention in the relaters, and their reports are destitute of many of those circumstances which are found in the testimony of the Apostles. But, it is always to be remembered, that the two are independent of one another. We do not receive the miracles of the Gospel upon the testimony of the fathers; and, although all the miracles said to be wrought after the days of the Apostles be rejected, the evidence of the works which Jesus and his Apostles did, would rest exactly upon that footing on which we placed it. It was to be expected, that miraculous gifts, which had perceptibly decreased till the days of Constantine, would cease entirely when the protection afforded by civil government to the Christians rendered them less necessary. Yet we find ecclesiastical history, after Christianity became the religion of the state, abounding with a diversity of the greatest miracles. No wise champion of Christianity will attempt to defend the reality of these wonders; at the same time, the extravagance of the later fictions will not discredit, with any wise inquirer, the miracles of former times. It is obvious to observe, that the Christian world was prepared by having been witnesses of real miracles, for receiving without suspicion such as were fictitious, that the effect which true miracles had produced, might induce vain or deceitful men to employ this engine in accomplishing their own purposes, and that after Christianity was the established religion, the use of this engine became as easy to the Christians, as it was to the heathen priests of old. The innumerable forgeries of this sort, says Dr. Middleton, strengthen the credibility of the Jewish and Christian miracles. For how could we account for a practice so universal, of forging miracles for the support of false religions, if on some occasions they had not actually been wrought for the confirmation of a true one? Or how is it possible that so many spurious copies should pass upon the world, without some genuine original from whence they were drawn, whose known existence and tried success might give an appearance of probability to the counterfeit? We may add, that if these counterfeits were at any time detected, the strong prejudice which would arise from the detection against that religion, in support of which they were adduced, could be counterbalanced only by the unquestionable evidence of the miracles of former times. It appears then, that the duration of miracles in the Christian church is a question of curiosity in no degree essential to the evidence of our religion. If no miracles were really performed after the days of the apostles, then every Christian receives all that ever were wrought upon unquestionable testimony. If there were some real miracles in aftertimes, they must stand upon their own evidence. We may receive them, or reject them, as they appear to us well or ill vouched; and we can draw no inference, from the multiplicity of imitations or forgeries, unfavourable to the truth and divinity of the original. Bonnet, in his philosophical and critical inquiries concerning Christianity, has given, besides much other valuable matter, the most satisfying statement that I have met with of the argument from miracles. Bonnet's work was written in French. An extract of the part of it most interesting to a student in divinity, was translated by a clergyman of this church, and published some years ago. Bishop Sherlock, in his first volume of sermons, which is chiefly occupied in stating tho superiority of revealed to natural religion, has two discourses, the ninth and tenth, upon miracles considered as the proof of revelation. He treats the subject in his usual luminous manner, and suggests many just and useful views. Newcombe, in his observations on the conduct of our Saviour, has written largely and delightfully of his miracles. Jortin also, in some of his essays or discourses, and in his remarks on ecclesiastical history, has very ably illustrated the fitness with which our Lord's miracles were adapted both to prove the truth of his religion, and to impress upon his followers the characteristical doctrines of the gospel. This view of the subject is also prosecuted by Ogden in his ILLUSTRATION OF THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. CHAPTER V. ILLUSTRATION OF THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 53 THOSE lectures upon Scripture are properly called critical, which are intended to elucidate the meaning of a difficult passage, and to bring out from the words of an author the sense which is not obvious to an ordinary reader. The sources of this elucidation are, such emendations upon the reading or the punctuation as may warrantably be made, an analysis of the particular words, a close attention to the manner of the author, to the scope of his reasoning, and to the circumstances of those for whom he writes; and, lastly, a comparison of the passage, which is the subject of the criticism, with other passages, in which the same matters are treated. There is great room for critical lectures of this kind, and my theological course abounds with specimens of them. Much has been done in this way since the beginning of the last century, by the application of sound criticism to the Holy Scriptures; and one great advantage to be derived from an intimate acquaintance with the learned languages, and from the habit of analysing the authors who wrote in them, is, that you are thereby prepared for receiving that rational exposition of the word of God, which is the true foundation of theological knowledge. There is another kind of critical lecture, which professes by a general comprehensive view of a passage of scripture, to illustrate some important points in the evidence or genius of our religion. This kind of lecture is applicable to those passages where there is not any obscurity in the expression, any recondite meaning, or any controverted. doctrine, but where there is a number of circumstances scattered throughout, the force of which may be missed by a careless or ignorant reader, but which by being arranged and placed clearly in view, may be made to bear upon one point, so as to bring conviction to the understanding, at the same time that they minister to the improvement of the heart. The inimitable manner of Scripture, so natural and artless, yet so pregnant with circumstances the most delicate and the most instructive, affords numberless subjects of this kind of lecture; and I do not know any method so well calculated to give a person of taste and sensibility a deep impression of the excellency and the divinity of the Scriptures. One is tempted by the peculiar fitness of the passages which occur to him, to adopt this mode of lecturing occasionally in speaking to an assembly of Christians, although it cannot be denied that the ordinary method of lecturing by suggesting remarks from particular verses, is more adapted to that measure of understanding, of attention, and of memory, which is found in the generality of hearers. |