This, then, is the theory: that, miracles having been given for the purpose of founding the church, they con- tinued so long as they were needed for that purpose ; grow- ing gradually fewer as they were less needed, and ceasing altogether when the church having, so to speak, been firmly put upon its feet, was able to stand on its own legs. There is much that is attractive in this theory and much that is plausible: so much that is both attractive and plausible that it has won the suffrages of these historians and scholars though it contradicts the whole drift of the evidence of the facts, and the entire weight of probability as well. For it is only simple truth to say that both the ascertained facts and the precedent presumptions array themselves in oppo- sition to this construction of the history of the charismata in the church.
The facts are not in accordance with it. The view re- quires us to believe that the rich manifestations of spiritual
10 COUNTERFEIT MIRACLES
gifts present in the Apostolic Church, gradually grew less through the succeeding centuries until they finally dwin- dled away by the end of the third century or a little later. Whereas the direct evidence for miracle-working in the church is actually of precisely the contrary tenor. There is little or no evidence at all for miracle-working during the first fifty years of the post- Apostolic church ; it is slight and unimportant for the next fifty years ; it grows more abun- dant during the next century (the third) ; and it becomes abundant and precise only in the fourth century, to in- crease still further in the fifth and beyond. Thus, if the evidence is worth anything at all, instead of a regularly progressing decrease, there was a steadily growing increase of miracle-working from the beginning on. This is doubt- less the meaning of the inability of certain of the scholars whom we have quoted, after having allowed that the Apos- tolic miracles continued through the first three centuries, to stop there; there is a much greater abundance and pre- cision of evidence, such as it is, for miracles in the fourth and the succeeding centuries, than for the preceding ones. The matter is of sufficient interest to warrant the state- ment of the facts as to the evidence somewhat more in detail. The writings of the so-called Apostolic Fathers contain no clear and certain allusions to miracle-working or to the exercise of the charismatic gifts, contemporane- ously with themselves.13 These writers inculcate the ele- ments of Christian living in a spirit so simple and sober as to be worthy of their place as the immediate followers of the Apostles. Their anxiety with reference to themselves seems to be lest they should be esteemed overmuch and confounded in their pretensions with the Apostles, rather than to press claims to station, dignity, or powers similar to theirs.14 So characteristic is this sobriety of attitude of their age, that the occurrence of accounts of miracles in the letter of the church of Smyrna narrating the story of the martyrdom of Polycarp is a recognized difficulty in the way
INDEFINITE TESTIMONY 11
of admitting the genuineness of that letter.15 Polycarp was martyred in 155 A. D. Already by that date, we meet with the beginnings of general assertions of the presence of miraculous powers in the church. These occur in some passages of the writings of Justin Martyr. The exact na- ture of Justin's testimony is summed up by Bishop John Kaye as follows:16 "Living so nearly as Justin did to the Apostolic age, it will naturally be asked whether, among other causes of the diffusion of Christianity, he specifies the exercise of miraculous powers by the Christians. He says in general terms that such powers subsisted in the church {Dial., pp. 254 ff.) — that Christians were endowed with the gift of prophecy {Dial., p. 308 B, see also p. 315 B) — and in an enumeration of supernatural gifts conferred on Christians, he mentions that of healing {Dial., p. 258 A). We have seen also, in a former chapter, that he ascribes to Christians the power of exorcising demons (chap. viii). But he produces no particular instance of an exercise of miraculous power, and 'therefore affords us no opportunity of applying those tests by which the credibility of miracles must be tried." And then the bishop adds, by way of quickening our sense of the meaning of these facts: "Had it only been generally stated by the Evangelists that Christ performed miracles, and had no particular miracle been re- corded, how much less satisfactory would the Gospel nar- ratives have appeared! how greatly their evidence in sup- port of our Saviour's divine mission been diminished!"