dling up that degree of vital energy, which the gospel is exhibiting in our day, as well as the principal source of those reforming tendencies, which are beginning to be developed, and which are casting upon the future the cheering light of a better hope. It would be interesting did our limits permit-and certainly it would be easy to trace up many of these catholic and hopeful tendencies to their origin in the great missionary enterprise. But while we joyfully thank God for the executive energy which the church is exhibiting, we must urge that she enter immediately on that indispensable intellectual work, which she has too long neglected. One thing seems to be settled by experiment-the church can not obtain the moral empire of the world with her present conceptions of the gospel and forms of organization. She must readjust them, or give up her enterprise. Does she shrink from this work of readjustment? Why? Has she no Bible? No Holy Spirit? Or has she lost confidence in them both? That even Protestant Christianity is too deficient in respect to confidence in the word and Spirit of God, can not be denied, without shutting our eyes to a thousand facts which lie on the very surface both of her history and of her actual condition. The Papacy taught men to put no confidence in the Bible, and all confidence in a supposed infallible and unchangeable human authority; and Christianity under the forms of Protestantism has not yet fully unlearned the baleful lesson. There has always been a tendency in Protestant ism, from the very beginning, to ste reotype each existing form of doc. trine and of organization, to write even the details in bronze, that nothing may be changed by subsequent investigation. Hence the sectarian divisions among those who agree in holding the head. It is time this great stumbling block were taken out of the way. Let the church rise and be doing her whole work. Let her open an unobstructed pathway for her ministers and her members quite up to the fountains of revealed truth. Let her no longer depend for the permanency either of her opinions or her forms, on any thing else than their demonstrable agreement with the word of God. Let the fires of argument and investigation play upon them, and if they are thus proved to be wood, hay, stubble, let them burn. Let us give up the chimerical attempt to secure a detailed and absolute uniformity. We have a common Bible, a common fountain of religious truth; and where men show us that they love the Bible and form their opinions by its dictation, there to insist on speculative uniformity as essential to unity in Christ, or as a condition of coöperation or communion, is absurd and wicked as well as visionary. Perhaps the question will here be raised,-What? would you throw away all our creeds and formularies of doctrine, and cut us loose from all our "standards?" Far be it from us to cut the church loose from her standard: that is the Bible. To what extent and for what purposes particular churches, or confederacies of churches, may usefully and lawfully employ creeds, our limits will not permit us here to discuss. But whatever opinions we may form on that subject, one principle is certain. Any use of a creed, or a constitution, or a church court, or a council, tending to discountenance the free investigation of the Bible on any and every article whether of belief or of practice, or to shield any portion of the church against those changes to which she ever has been and still is constantly liable from the progressive advancement of biblical knowledge, is a usurpation of the rights of God over the consciences and understandings of men. It is religious despotism under whatever specious forms it may be exercised, and with whatever sem blance of earnest contention for the faith once delivered to the saints, it may be advocated. And we call on the man whoever he may be, and on the body of men whatever they may be called, who are doing this (and let every one interrogate his own conscience in the presence of God) to desist from these unholy deeds. They are not only lording it over God's heritage, and depriving their brethren-nay their own souls-of rights guarantied to them by the eternal constitution of God's empire; but they are arresting the river of the water of life in its course to bless the nations. They are shutting out the beams of the sun of righteousness from the darkened human mind. They have taken away the key of knowledge; they neither go in themselves, nor suffer them who are entering to go in. Of crimes like these let the church of Christ no longer be guilty. May the bygone ages of her darkness and corruption suffice and more than suffice-fill her with shame and sorrow. May she now let in the light-and become herself bright and polished mirror without one dark spot or stain, to reflect that light on earth's benighted millions. May the Lord be her everlasting light and her God her glory. MIRACLES. MIRACLES have ever been considered a fundamental proof of divine revelation. Those who claim to have been inspired, appeal to miracles as infallible testimonials of their divine commission. Thus Moses, when he demanded of Pharaoh the emancipation of the Israelites from bondage, appealed to the miracles which he wrought, as evidence that he was sent by God. Thus, also, Elijah, in the controversy between him and the prophets of Baal, called upon the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, in the presence of the people, to let it be known that he was his servant, by miraculously consuming the sacrifice prepared. He thus put the reality of his mission to the test. If the miracle had failed, he would by his own implied acknowledg. ment, have been deservedly considered a vile impostor. Christ and his apostles also appealed to miracles, in proof of their divine commission. When John sent two of his disciples to Christ, to inquire whether he were indeed the Messiah, instead of replying directly to their inquiry, he pointed them to his works, as the most conclusive and satisfactory evidence of his Messiahship, which could possibly be given them. "In that same hour," the evangelist informs us, "he cured many of their infirmities, and plagues, and evil spirits, and unto many that were blind, he gave sight." And he said to the messengers of John, "Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and unto the poor the gospel is preached." On another occasion, when the Jews accused him of blasphemy, for claiming to be the Son of God; he said, "If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not; but if I do, though ye believe not me, yet believe the works." Again he said, "Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me; or else believe me for the very works' sake." Other instan ces might be mentioned, in which he appealed to his miracles, as decisive proof of his Messiahship. Peter and John also appealed to the miracle wrought by them on the impotent man at the gate of the temple, as evidence of their commission from the Lord Jesus. "Peter filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, if we be examined this day, of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole, be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him, doth this man stand before you whole." Paul also, appealed to the miracles wrought by him, as decisive evidence of his apostleship. To the Romans he said, "I will not dare to speak of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me to make the gentiles obedient by word and deed, through mighty signs, and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God." And to the Corinthians he said, "For in nothing am I behind the very chiefest apostles, though I am nothing. Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you, in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds." We see, therefore, that those who profess to have been inspired, did appeal to the miracles which they wrought, or rather which God wrought by them, as infallible proof of their divine commission. It will be the object of this article, to examine this source of evidence. Assuming for the present, the genuineness and authenticity of the books of the Old and New Testaments, we propose 1. To inquire, what is a miracle? II. To show that miracles are pos sible. an effect which is produced, or an event which takes place, contrary to the laws of nature. By the laws of nature are meant those stated rules of operation, according to which God governs the world. That there are such laws, agreeably to which, all ordinary events take place, will not be denied; as for instance, that all bodies gravitate towards the center of the earth-that matter will continue in a state of rest, or uniform motion, unless compelled to change that state by some foreign force-that fire will consume combustible substances, when it comes in contact with them—that the sun which seems to rise in the morning, will appear to continue its course through the heavens, till it sets at night-that human bodies, when once deprived of life, will not revive, but remain senseless till they moulder into dust; are uniform facts, which indicate an established course of proceeding in the government of the world. Effects which are produced according to this established course, are called natural; those which are contrary to it, are styled supernatural, or miraculous. For example, if a bush should be on fire, and not be consumed-if the sun should appear to stand still, or to move backward in its diurnal course -or if a dead person should be restored to life-these things would be miracles; because they are directly contrary to the established course of God's providence. Another characteristic of miracles, by which they are distinguished from all other events, is, that they are effects of immediate divine agency, and can not be traced to the operation of any natural or secondary causes. We know that God, in the government of the world, does make use of secondary causes. Both in the natural and moral world, he employs the instrumentality of means, and he has established a connection between means and ends. But none of those events which can be traced to natural causes, however strange, or unusual, are to be considered miraculous. Nor, indeed, is it certain that all events are miraculous, which we can not trace to natural causes; because from the limited faculties of our minds, we can have but an imperfect knowledge of the laws of nature. Events which are natural, may take place, the causes of which lie beyond our observation. But here the question arises, how then shall we know whether any event is miraculous, or whether there has ever been such a thing as a miracle? How can we know that all those wonders which have been supposed to be miracles, were not brought about by some natural causes which lie beyond our view, and were conformable to some law of nature with which we are unacquainted? To this we reply, It is undoubtedly true, that there might be instances in which we should be unable to determine whether a miracle was wrought or not; and this would be the case in all those instances in which the event was of such a kind, that we were ignorant of all the laws and operations of nature which have any reference to it. Thus, for example, a person unacquainted with astronomy, on beholding for the first time an eclipse of the sun, must be unable to determine whether it is a miracle or not. It is an event for which he is unable to account. Yet it does not contravene any known law of nature, and it must be impossible for him to know that it is not a natural event, and perfectly consistent with those fixed laws which regulate the motions of the heavenly bodies. In like manner, a person who had been brought up under the torrid zone, the first time he should see water congealed into ice, would be unable to account for the fact, and would be in doubt whether it was a miracle or not. But there are instances when we may know for certainty whether a miracle is wrought; and this is true in those cases where the event is such that we know the laws of nature to which it stands related. Although our knowledge of nature is very limited, yet some of its laws we do know. We know, for instance, that all bodies gravitate towards the center of the earth, with as much certainty as we know that there is such a thing as matter. The same is true of many other laws of nature. We may also lay it down as a maxim, that all the laws of nature are consistent with each other. To suppose that God has established laws which conflict one with another, and mutually subvert each other, is both irrational and impious. It hence follows, that if any event takes place which we know to be contrary to any of the laws of nature, we may know it to be miraculous. Now in regard to the miracles recorded in the Scriptures, there can be no doubt. If the accounts are true, miracles were wrought be yond all question. The facts are of such a nature, that it is impossi ble to regard them in any other light. To heal instantly incurable diseases to restore sight to those who were born blind--and to raise the dead to life, are certainly mirac ulous works, if any works can be supposed to be such. We proceed to show, XII. That miracles are possible. If miracles are not possible, it is idle to pretend that any have been wrought, or to argue from them in support of Divine revelation. One would hardly suppose, that any per son who professed to believe in the existence of a God, would deny his power to work miracles. Such however, is the fact. Some of those who deny the inspiration of the Scriptures, have strenuously main tained that miracles are impossible. But, "is any thing too hard for the Lord ?" If God is almighty, he is able to do any thing which does not imply a contradiction. And does it imply a contradiction, to suppose him able to suspend or counteract the laws of nature? Is it a contradiction to say, that a rod was changed into a serpent, that a blind man instantly received his sight, or that a dead person was restored to life? To say that the same substance was at the same time, both a rod and a serpent, or that a person was at the same time, both dead and alive, would indeed be a contradiction. But to say that a substance was instantly changed, and that life was communicated to the dead, does no more imply a contradiction, than to say, that God formed man, at first, of the dust of the earth, and breathed into him the breath of life. Has not he who with a word created all substances, power to change and modify them as he pleases? Has not he who is the author of life, power to restore it when taken. Has the artist who constructed the watch, power to vary its operations, to quicken or retard its motions, to take it to pieces, and alter it as he pleases; and has not the great Architect of nature power to stop, in the twinkling of an eye, all the wheels of his providence; to counteract, or suspend the operation of those laws which he has established, according to his pleasure? But, perhaps, it may be said, that although it should be admitted, that God has power to work a miracle, yet it is impossible, because it is inconsistent with his other perfections, particularly his immutability and wisdom. It may be supposed by some, that if God has established certain laws for the government of the world, he can not suspend them, or act contrary to them, without changing his mind, and acting differently from what he intended when he planned his system of op erations. But this by no means necessarily follows. God might have foreseen, when he established the laws of nature, that on certain occasions, and for certain reasons, it would be wise to suspend or counteract them; and he may have determined to do it. Every miraculous event, therefore, may be considered a part of God's eternal and immutable counsel, as much as the most ordinary events which occur. Nor do such miraculous interpositions, argue any imperfection in the system of divine government, or any want of wisdom in planning it. If there are wise and important reasons why miracles should be wrought, then, they must have a place in a perfect system; and if God is a being of infinite wisdom, he has so planned the system as to give them a place, and the very place, which it is desirable that they should occupy, that they may answer the end for which they were designed. We proposed to show, III. That if God gave a revelation to man, it is probable that he would attest it by miracles. We can not suppose that God would give a revelation to mankind which was to be the rule of their conduct, and by which they must be judged at the final day, without, at the same time, giving abundant evidence of its divine original. But in what way could this be done, but by miracles? How could any man prove that he was divinely inspired, and commissioned to deliver messages from heaven, without miraculous attestations? Prophecy, which by the way, is of the nature of a miracle, is indeed a sure evidence of inspiration, when fulfilled; but it is not an immediate evidence, and could not, therefore, be any attestation to a revealed truth, when first published. The nature of the doc trines and precepts contained in the revelation, would it is true, afford strong evidence of their divine original; yet, by degenerate minds, who are blind to the beauties of holiness, this evidence would not be duly appreciated. Some other |