§ 88. MTEACLES OF THE NICENE AGE. 461
the negative side on tbe question of the genuineness of the church miracles in a contribution to the Encj'clopaedia Metropolitana, 1830.
In the face of such witnesses as Ambrose and Augustine, who must be accounted in any event the noblest and most Iionorable men of the earlj church, it is venturesome absolute- V to deny all the relic-miracles, and to ascribe them to illusion and pious fraud. But, on the other hand, we should not be bribed or blinded by the character and authority of such witnesses, since experience sufficiently proves that even the best and most enlightened men cannot wholly divest themselves of superstition and of the prejudices of their age.' Hence, too, we should not ascribe to this whole question of the credibility of the ISTicene miracles an undue dogmatic weight, nor mako the much wider issue between Catholicism and Protestantism dependent on it.' In every age, as in every man, light and
' Recall, e. g., Luther and the apparitions of the devil, the Magnalia of Cotton Mather, the old Puritans and their trials for witchcraft, as w ell as the modem supep stitions of spiritual rappings and table-turnings by which many eminent and intelligent persons have been carried along.
- As is done by many Roman Catholic historians and apologists in the cause of Catholicism, and by Isaac Taylor in the interest of Protestantism. The latter saya in his oft-quoted work, vol. ii. p. 239 : " The question before us [on the genuineness (;f the Nicene miracles] is therefore in the strictest sense conclusive as to the modern controversy concerning church principles and the authority of tradition. If the miracles of the fourth century, and those which follow in the same track, were real, then Protestantism is altogether indefensible, and ought to be denounced as an impiety of the most flagrant kind. But if these miracles were wicked frauds ; and if they were the first series of a system of impious delusion — then, not only is the modern Papacy to be condemned, but the church of the fourth century must be condemned with it ; and for the same reasons ; and the Reformation is to be adhered to as the emancipation of Christendom from the thraldom of him who is the 'father of lies.' " Taylor accordingly sees in the old Catholic miracles sheer lying wonders of Satan, and signs of the apostasy of the church predicted in the Epistles of St. Paul. From the same point of view he treats also the phenomena of asceticism and monasticism, putting them with the unchristian hatred of the creature and the ascription of nature to the devil, which characterized the Gnostics. But he thus involves not only the Nicene age, but the ante-Nicene also, up to Irenaeus and Ignatias, in this apostasy, and virtually gives up the unbroken continuity of true Christianity. H« Is, moreover, not consistent in making the church fathers, on the one hand, the chief originators of monkish asceticism and false miracles, while, on the other hand, he sincerely reveres them and eloquently lauds them for their Christian earnestness and their immortal services. f')mp. his beautiful concession in vol. i. p. 87 (cited bi the 1st vol. of this Hist § 46 note 2).
462 TIiraD PERIOD. A.T>. bll-590
eliadc in fact are mingled, that no flesh should exalt itself above measure. Even the most important periods of church liistory, among which the Nicene age, with all its faults, mu&t be numbered, have the heavenly treasure in earthen vessels, and reflect the spotless glory of the Redeemer in broken colors.
The most notorious and the most striking of the miracles of the fourth centurj^ are Constantine's vision of the cross (a. d. 312), the finding of the holy cross (a. d. 326), the frustration of Julian's building of the temple (a. d. 363), the discovery of tho relics of Protasius and Gervasius (a. d. 386), and subsequently (a. d. 415) of the bones of St. Stephen, with a countless multitude of miraculous cures in its train. Respecting the most important we have already spoken at large in the proper places.
We here ofi'er some general remarks on this difficult subject.
The possibility of miracles in general he only can deny who docs not believe in a living God and Almighty Maker of heaven and earth. The laws of nature are organs of the free will of God ; not chains by which He has bound Himself forever, but elastic threads which He can extend and contract at His pleasure. The actual occurrence of miracles is certain to every believer from Holy Scripture, and there is no passage in the New Testament to limit it to the apostolic age. The reasons which made miracles necessary as outward proofs of the divine mission of Christ and the apostles for the unbelieving Jews of their time, may reappear from time to time in the unbelieving heathen and the skeptical Christian world; whih3 spiritual miracles are continually taking place in regeneration and conversion. In itself, it is by no means unworthy and incredible that God should sometimes condescend to the weakness of the uneducated mass, and should actually vouchsafe that which was implored through the mediation of saints and their relics.
But the following weighty considerations rise against the miracles of the Nicene and post-Nicene age ; not warranting, indeed, the rejection of all, yet making us at least very cautious and doubtful of receiving them in particular:
1. These miracles have a inuch lower moral tone than tliose of the Bible, while in some cases thev far exceed them in