It is perfectly true that at the present day all rational men, with few exceptions, concur in rejecting almost the entire mass of ecclesiastical miracles. They do this, however, not because they believe miracles to be impossible, but because they are persuaded that God will not work one on a light or trivial occasion, and because the great mass of such pretended miracles are characterised by marks which are inconsistent with the [pg 342] idea that they have been wrought by God. With our larger acquaintance with the order of nature, we no longer believe that it is possible for miracles to be wrought by any inherent virtue in things themselves, but that if performed at all, it can only be by the direct agency or permission of the Author of Nature. In a word, the general incredibility of the ecclesiastical miracles, and their repugnance to our conception of the mode of the divine acting is the reason why we reject them altogether.
It is also unquestionably true that at the present day a great majority even of religious persons would receive with no little incredulity the report of a miracle, while such incredulity would not have existed at a former period. This is due to two causes: first, our increased knowledge of the permanence of the forces of material Nature; and secondly, our belief that supernatural occurrences can only take place by the direct agency and permission of God, and not by means of my supernatural power inherent in particular persons. From this we draw the inference that almost all the alleged ecclesiastical miracles must be rejected as inconsistent with the divine character. We are of opinion, therefore, that a miracle wrought for any other purpose than the attestation of a revelation is not credible; and as from the nature of the case revelations must be rare, we summarily reject all reports of supernatural occurrences as impostures, or the offspring of a heated and undisciplined imagination.
Now although this is generally the case, yet it is unquestionable that if a miracle was reported to us with a pre-eminently strong attestation, no rational person would refuse to give a serious consideration to the evidence merely because the event was [pg 343] supernatural. A reported miracle would doubtless be attended with no inconsiderable degree of antecedent improbability; but if a man with whom we were intimately acquainted, of sound intellect, and high moral character were to allege that he had performed an act which, if real, must have been indisputably miraculous, it would be altogether irrational to reject his assertion summarily as unworthy of consideration merely because in all ages miraculous stories have been extensively believed. The application of such a principle would lead us into the grossest error.
This question has a very important bearing on the subject before us. It has been alleged that while nothing has been more common than the ascription of miracles to eminent men, it is impossible to find a man of sound judgment and high moral character who has deliberately affirmed that he has performed one himself. That such affirmations have been very rare is certain, and for the simple reason, that miracles have been very rare occurrences. But the assertion that no such cases are to be found is inaccurate. One, at all events, exists, although probably the only one, but it is that of a man of the most undoubted veracity, the Apostle Paul. As I have already observed, four of the most important writings which have been attributed to him are admitted by a vast majority of those unbelievers who are competent to form an opinion on the subject, to be his genuine productions. These are before us, and we can form from them a full judgment as to the character of the man. In them he distinctly tells us that he performed miracles. He writes: “I have therefore whereof I may glory in those things which pertain to God. For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me to [pg 344] make the Gentiles obedient by word and deed, through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the Gospel of Christ.” (Rom. xv. 18, 19.) Here at least we have a direct affirmation on the subject. It is not the only one made by him. But there is also one which is equivalent to another affirmation made by One whom unbelievers must admit to have been the greatest man who ever lived, Jesus Christ Himself. Those with whom I am reasoning allow that the discourses in the Synoptic Gospels are accounts of His real utterances. In them He directly affirms that He performed miracles.
Even those against whose opinions I am arguing, will concede that the characters of Christ and St. Paul stand at the greatest height of moral elevation. If there are any other persons whose utterances have been handed down to us, who have deliberately made this affirmation, their numbers are unquestionably few. Certainly no other thoroughly great and elevated character has done so. This is a remarkable fact and well worthy of consideration. While many of the Fathers have affirmed that miracles were performed by others, not one of them has affirmed that he has wrought any himself. The supernaturalism of the New Testament differs, as we have seen, from all other alleged kinds of supernatural occurrences. It differs moreover in this respect, that one of the persons through whose agency these miracles are declared to have been performed, has made a deliberate affirmation that he wrought them; and that the founder of Christianity, in recorded utterances which are admitted to be genuine, has likewise asserted that miracles were wrought by Him.
It follows, therefore, that our summary rejection of all the current supernaturalism which has been alleged to have taken place at various periods of history, is quite consistent with our accepting as true the series of supernatural events recorded in the New Testament, which are distinguished by characteristics of an entirely different order.
Chapter XVI. General Objections To Miracles As Credentials Of A Revelation.
While considering this subject, it will be necessary to keep steadily in view that miracles are not alleged in the New Testament to have been performed to prove the truth of doctrines, but that a particular person possesses a divine commission; or in attestation of particular facts, such as the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.