1499 
 M6A21
 
 A N 
 
 ESSAY 
 
 In ANSWER to 
 
 Mr. HUME's ESSAY 
 
 O N 
 
 MIRACLES. 
 
 By W I L L I A M ADAMS, D. D. 
 
 Minifter of S T. C H A D 's, SALOP, 
 And Chaplain to the Lord Bifhop of ST. As A PH. 
 
 The THIRD EDITION, with Additions. 
 i it fumus ad auras. VJRG. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 Printed for B. WHIT E, at Horace's Head, in Fleet-Street; 
 and T. C A D E L L in the Strand. 
 
 MDCCLXVII.
 
 
 
 ERRATA. 
 
 Page 8. line 19. for of read or. 
 
 16 5. for events read the events. 
 32 9. for whoever read who ever. 
 
 47 2 3- <* an - 
 
 77 25. /or miraculo read miracula. 
 
 115. in the Note of reference, for afcal read Pafcal. 
 
 Lately pullijhed* Price i s. 
 By the AUTHOR of this EfTay, 
 
 rpH E N A T u R E and OBLIGATION of VIRTUE. 
 * A Sermon preached in the Parifh-Church of St. 
 Chad, Salop, at the primary Vifuation of the Lord 
 Bifhop of Litchfield ; and publifhed at his Lordfhip'a 
 Requeft. With an Appendix, containing Notes on 
 the fame Subject. 
 
 Price 6 d. The Suond Edition, 
 
 The DUTIES of INDUSTRY, FRUGALITY, 
 and SOBRIETY. A Sermon preached before a 
 Society of Tradefmen and Artificers, in the Parifti- 
 Church of St. Chad, Salop, on Eafter-Monday, 
 1766. Published at the Requeft of the Society. 

 
 *Z 
 
 fe 
 
 AN 
 
 
 ESSAY, 
 
 . HUME hath many of the talents 
 of a fine writer, and hath juftly ob- 
 tained that character by the agree- 
 able Ejfays moral and political '*, 
 with which he has obliged the world. What 
 he hath wrote well will create a prejudice in 
 favour of his errors ; and thefe will have all 
 their bad influence, when recommended by 
 fo able an advocate. The prefent is a fubjed: 
 of the greateft importance, and the author 
 expreffes a particular fatisfaction in his per- 
 formance. Thefe are reafons for confidering 
 
 * The reader is defired to diftinguifli betwixt this 
 and the metaphyfical eflays of this author, which is the 
 book referred to throughout this treatife. 
 
 B it 
 
 
 921865
 
 k carefully, and for guarding ourfelves againft 
 being deceived by the artifice or eloquence of 
 the writer. 
 
 He begins with challenging, a little indi- 
 rectly, the thanks of the public, for a dif- 
 covery, which, he apprehends, will be of uni- 
 verfal fervice to mankind. This is nothing lefs 
 than an infallible cure for fuperflition. " I 
 " flatter myfelf," fays he, " that I have dif- 
 " covered an argument, which, if juft, will, 
 " with the wife and learned, be an everlafting 
 " check to all kinds of fuperftitious delufion, 
 " and, confequently, will be ufeful as long as 
 <c the world endures ; for fo long, I fuppofe, 
 " will the accounts of miracles and prodigies 
 " be found in all profane hiftory *." The 
 virtues of this fpecifick are fuch, that it exter- 
 minates all religions alike ; as he (hews, by 
 trying its ftrength upon the Chrtftian y which, 
 where it prevails, is, perhaps, more obftinate and 
 hard of cure than any other. Here, however, 
 it has been known to fail. I have given it a 
 fair trial, and known it tried by others, with- 
 out the leaft effect, and think I can prove that 
 
 * Pbilofopbical EJJays concerning human underflow 1 'v,, 
 p. 174, firft edition, 
 
 there
 
 [ 3 ] 
 
 there is no one ingredient of any virtue or 
 efficacy in it. 
 
 The fecret itfelf is contained in the compafs 
 of a few lines : and therefore, to give fome 
 port and figure to it, the author has thought 
 neceflary to introduce it with fome preliminary 
 obfervations. 
 
 In the firft of thefe, his meaning feems to be 
 to lay down this as a principle - that all our 
 reafonings concerning matter of fact are found- 
 ed wholly on experience : " Tho' experience 
 " be our only guide in reafoning concerning 
 " matters of fact, it muft be acknowledged, 
 " that this guide is not altogether infallible, 
 <c but in fome cafes is apt to lead us into errors 
 " and miftakes. One, who in our climate 
 < mould expect better weather in any week of 
 " "June than in one of December, would reafon 
 <c juftly and conformable to experience ; but 
 " 'tis certain, that he may happen in the event 
 " to find himfelf miftaken. However, we may 
 " obferve, that in fuch a cafe he would have 
 * c no caufe to complain of experience > be- 
 " caufe it commonly informs us before-hand 
 " of the uncertainty, by that contrariety of 
 B 2 " events
 
 [ 4 ] 
 
 " events which we may learn from a diligent 
 " obfervation *." In illuftrating this obferva- 
 tion, both here and elfewhere, he feems to con- 
 fine it to fuch events as are future : "An 
 " hundred inftances or experiments on one 
 " fide, and fifty on another, afford a very 
 " doubtful expectation of any event ; tho' an 
 " hundred uniform experiments, with only 
 " one contradictory one, do reafonably beget 
 " a very ftrong degree of affurance -f ." Here 
 then I readily allow, that in reafoning concern- 
 ing future contingencies experience is the beft 
 guide we have, tho' in many cafes, as will here- 
 after be feen, a very uncertain one. 
 
 This obfervation is followed by a prudent 
 caution. " A wife man," he tells us, " pro- 
 " portions his belief to the evidence. In fuch 
 " conclufions as are founded on an infallible 
 ic experience he expects the event with the laft 
 <c degree of affurance, and regards his paft ex- 
 " perience as a full proof of the future ex- 
 " iftence of tliat event. In other cafes he pro- 
 " ceeds with more caution : he weighs the 
 f oppofite experiments} he confiders which 
 " fide is fupported by the greatefl number of 
 
 * Pbilofopkical E/ays, p. 174. f P. 175. 
 
 " experi-
 
 C 5 ] 
 
 " experiments j to that fide he inclines, with 
 " doubt and hesitation ; and, when at laft he 
 " fixes his judgment, the evidence exceeds not 
 " what we properly call probability. In all 
 <c cafes we muft ballance the oppofite experi- 
 " ments, where they are oppofite, and deduct 
 " the lefTer number from the greater, in order 
 " to know the exact force of the fuperior evi- 
 <{ dence *." This logick is very juft, and what, 
 I am perfuaded, every man of the plaineft un- 
 derftanding knows how to praclife, without 
 learning it from the fchools, or from the au- 
 thor's refinements on the curious and fublime 
 fubjetf (as he calls it) of probability f. 
 
 He then proceeds " To apply thefe prin- 
 
 " ciples to a particular inflance : We may ob- 
 
 cc ferve, there is no fpecies of reafbning more 
 
 " common, more ufeful, and even neceflary to 
 
 <c human life, than that derived from the tefti- 
 
 <c mony of men, and the reports of eye-wit- 
 
 " nelTes and fpectators. This fpecies of reafon- 
 
 <c ing perhaps one may deny to be founded on 
 
 " the relation of caufe and efFect. I (hall not 
 
 <{ difpute about a word. 'Twill be furficient 
 
 P. 175, t EJfay m Probability , p. 97. 
 
 33 "to
 
 [ 6 ] 
 
 " to obferve, that our affurance, in any argu- 
 " ment of this kind, is derived from no other 
 " principle than our obfervation of the veracity 
 " of human testimony, and of the ufual con- 
 " formity of fads to the reports of witneffes*." 
 'Tis difficult to fay what the author would here 
 exemplify, there being no clear connection be- 
 twixt this and the preceding paragraphs. But, 
 if I may prefume to explain it, his argument 
 ftands thus: The principle he fet out with, 
 was, that our reafoning about matters of fact 
 depends wholly upon experience. This he hath 
 proved concerning fuch events as are future : 
 he now wants to prove the fame concerning 
 fads that are paft. Here he is aware, that, 
 betides experience, we have another guide, 
 which is the teftimony of hiftory, that of wit- 
 neffes, &c. Thefe he does not chufe to diftin- 
 guifh from the former, but infinuates, that the 
 evidence of teftimony is included in that of 
 experience, or that every argument from tefti- 
 mony is only an argument from experience, 
 for as much as the truth of that depends 
 ultimately uponthisf . "The ultimate ftandard," 
 
 he 
 
 * P. 176. 
 
 f It may with more propriety be faid, that the evi- 
 dence of experience is included in that of teftimony, 
 
 than
 
 [ 7 ] 
 
 he tells us below, " by which we determine 
 " difputes of this kind, is always derived from 
 <{ experience and obfervation." Now it is true, 
 that the evidence of teftimony mutt be refolved 
 at laft into experience :" but this experience is 
 of a fpecies entirely diftindfc from that on which 
 the natural probability of any fad attefted refts : 
 nor does it confift, as this author aflerts, in our 
 obfervation of the veracity of human teftimony t and 
 of the ufual conformity offaSts <with the reports of 
 witneffes. It is built upon other principles, to 
 which the author himfelf leads us in the words 
 that follow : " Did not men's imagination na- 
 " turally follow their memory had they not 
 <c commonly an inclination to truth, and a fenti- 
 ct ment of probity were they not fenfible to 
 " iliame, when detected in afalfehood Were 
 " not theie, I fay, difcovered by experience to 
 C be qualities inherent in human nature, we 
 
 than the contrary. Our own experience reaches around 
 and goes back but a little way. But the experience of 
 others, upon which we chiefly depend, is derived to us 
 wholly from hiftory and tradition, that is, from tefti- 
 mony. And it is obvious to obferve, that, in a queftion 
 of fal, the teftimony of negative witneffes how many 
 foever, is, for the moft part, no evidence at all ; while 
 pofitive teftimony muft, more or lefs, have its weight. 
 
 B 4 " fhould
 
 t 8 ] 
 
 " fhould never repofe the lead confidence in 
 " human teftimony *." The firft of thefe mo- 
 tives I do not underftand. Of the reft I (hall 
 obferve, that their force we collect, not fo 
 much from our obfervaticn of other men, as 
 from our own feeling, and a confcioufnefs of 
 what paffes within our own breaft. We per- 
 ceive in ourfelves, that a love and reverence 
 for truth is natural to the mind of man : and 
 the fame felf-experience teaches us, that there 
 are certain other principles in human nature, 
 by which the veracity of men may be tried, 
 and the truth of teftimony be often put out of 
 doubt, as will be hereafter feen. 
 
 The next obfervation is, that, " as the evi- 
 cc dence derived from witnefles and human tefti- 
 " mony is founded on pafl experience, fo it 
 tc varies with the experience, and is regarded 
 " either as a proof of probability, according as 
 cc the conjunction betwixt any particular kind 
 " of report and any kind of objects has been 
 " found to be conftant or variable -(-." Here 
 again the author's meaning is loft in a thicket 
 of words, which it is difficult for a common 
 eye to penetrate. Let the reader try what he 
 
 * P. 177- t Ibid. 
 
 can
 
 [ 9 1 
 
 can make of the conjunction varying betwixt any 
 particular report and any kind of objects. The 
 credibility of an hiftorical fact depends upon 
 the credibility of the fact itfelf, and that of the 
 hiftorian or witneffes who relate it. Thefc 
 fhould be always confidered diftindtly ; tho* 
 the author, for reafons of his own, chufes to 
 confound them. The latter of thefe depends 
 in part upon principles that are fixed and in- 
 variable, fuch as thofe the author has juft men- 
 tioned, which are general principles of human 
 nature; and in part too on the perfonal character 
 of the relator, the intereft he has in the fact re- 
 lated, and other circumstances. As thefe cir- 
 cumftances vary, the evidence varies, and the 
 fact becomes more or lefs credible. And fo, 
 concerning the natural credibility of the fact, 
 this is greater or lefs, according as our own, 
 and the obfervation of others, in cafes of a 
 fimilar nature, has been more or lefs uniform. 
 Something like this I take to be the author's 
 meaning in this place : and this is the amount 
 of all that follows in this and the next para- 
 graph. My defign, therefore, in this remark, 
 is, not to conteft the author's principles, which, 
 as far as I underftand them, are right enough ; 
 but to fliew that his ftyle and manner of writ- 
 
 4 ing
 
 f 10 ] 
 
 ing tend to embarrafs the fubjed, and perplex 
 the reader. 
 
 We are now coming nearer to the matter in 
 queftion. " Suppofe," fays the author, " that 
 " the fad, which the teftimony endeavours to 
 " eftablifh, partakes of the extraordinary and 
 " the marvellous ; in that cafe, the evidence 
 " refulcing from the teftimony receives a dimi- 
 " nution, greater or lefs, in proportion as the 
 
 " fact is more or lefs unufual. When the 
 
 " fad: attefted is fuch a one as has feldom fallen 
 " under our obfervation, here is a conteft of 
 " two oppofite experiences -, of which the one 
 " deftroys the other, as far as its force goes, 
 <f and v the fuperior can only operate on the 
 " mind by the force which remains. The very 
 (< fame principle of experience, which gives 
 " us a certain degree of afiurance in the tefti- 
 <c mony of witneffes, gives us alfo, in this cafe, 
 " another degree of affurance againft the fad 
 " which they endeavour to eftablifh *.'* Here 
 the author feems to fuppofe, that a want of ex- 
 perience, in any cafe, is the fame with experi- 
 encing the contrary. When afatt attefted bath 
 feidom fallen under our obfervation ', " here is>" fays 
 
 * P. 179- 
 
 he,
 
 [ II ] 
 
 he, cc a contefl of two oppofite experiences:" but, 
 in reality, here is no experience at all ; only a 
 fact not obferved on one fide, and pofitive evi- 
 dence, or the fact attefted, on the other a 
 very unequal conteft ! as we fhall prefently fee ; 
 the flighteft pofitive teftimony being, for the 
 moft part, an over-ball ance to the ftrongeft 
 negative evidence that can be produced. I 
 grant, however, all that the author's argument 
 requires, viz. that experience teaches us, of 
 many things, that they are improbable, and not 
 to be haftily believed -, of others, that they are 
 naturally incredible : but thefe are fo, not be- 
 caufe they are unufual or unobferved, but be- 
 caufe there is a known difproportion betwixt the 
 caufe affigned and the effect, or becaufe the 
 fact aflerted is a contradiction to fome known 
 and univerfal truth. 
 
 Thefe premifes he now draws to a point, 
 and makes them center in one conclufive ar- 
 gument againft miracles : " To increafe the 
 u probability againft the teftimony of witnef- 
 " fes, let us fuppofe, that the fact which they 
 " affirm, inftead of being only marvellous, is 
 " really miraculous j and fuppofe alfo, that 
 " the teftimony, confidered apart and in itfelf, 
 
 " amounts
 
 r I* 3 
 
 cc amounts to an entire proof: in that cafe, 
 " there is proof againft proof, of which the 
 c ftrongeft muft prevail, but ftill with a di- 
 " minution of its force in proportion to that of 
 c< its antagonift *." I havejuft allowed, that 
 there are facts which experience afTures us are 
 wholly incredible : but of theie I (ball afTert, 
 that-no good teflimony can be produced in their 
 favour. Truth is always confident with itfelf ; 
 and no one truth can ever be contradicted by 
 another. The author is, therefore, too kind in 
 fuppofing that miracles may admit of full proof 
 from teilimony. I mall take no advantage of 
 this conceffion, but readily acknowledge, that, 
 if they are proved a priori to be incredible, it 
 will be a vain attempt to prove them by tefti- 
 mony. Let us fee, then, what the author al- 
 ledges in bar of this proof. His batteries are 
 now mounted, and he begins the attack. 
 
 cc A miracle," fays he, et is a violation of 
 et the laws of nature j and, as a firm and un- 
 " alterable experience hath eftablifhed thefe 
 " laws, the proof againft a miracle, from the 
 c * nature of the fact, is as entire as any ar- 
 " gument from experience can pofftbly be 
 
 * P. 179. 
 
 " imagined.
 
 [ '3 1 
 
 44 imagined. Why is it more than probable, 
 ' that all men muft die that lead cannot by 
 11 itfelf remain fufpended in the air that fire 
 " confumes wood, and is extinguimed by water 
 " unlefs it be, that thefe events are found 
 " agreeable to the laws of nature, and there is 
 " required a violation of thefe laws, or, in 
 <{ other words, a miracle, to prevent them ? 
 " Nothing is efteemed a miracle, if it ever hap- 
 " pens in the common courfe of nature. 'Tis 
 " no miracle, that a man in feeming good 
 <c health mould die of a fudden ; becaufe fuch 
 " a kind of death, tho' more unufual than any 
 lc other, has yet been frequently obferved to 
 ** happen : but 'tis a miracle, that a dead man 
 " mould come to life j becaufe that hath ne- 
 " ver been obferved in any age or country. 
 " There muft, therefore, bean uniform expe- 
 ' rience againft every miraculous event, other- 
 <c wife the event would not merit the appella- 
 " tion. And, as an uniform experience amounts 
 <c to a proof, there is here a direct and full 
 " proof, from the nature of the fact, againft 
 " the exiftence of any miracle: nor can fuch 
 " a proof be deftroyed, or the miracle ren- 
 cc der'd credible, but by an oppofite proof that 
 
 <c is fuperior *." 
 
 * P. 180. 
 
 I have
 
 [ 14 J 
 
 I have endeavoured to preferve the ftrength 
 of this argument entire, by collecting every 
 thing that is of any import to it in the obfer- 
 vations that precede it : and, that the reader 
 may fee it in its ftrongeft light, I fhall here 
 repeat it, as it is again fumm'd up by the 
 author at the end of his Eflay : 
 
 " It appears, that no teftimony for any kind 
 " of miracle can ever amount to a probability, 
 " much lefs to a proof; and that, even fup- 
 " pofing it amounted to a proof, 'twould be 
 c oppofed by another proof, derived from the 
 <c very nature of the fact which it would en- 
 " deavour to eftablifh. 'Tis experience alone 
 c< which gives authority to human teftimony ; 
 " and 'tis the fame experience which aflures us 
 *' of the laws of nature. When, therefore, 
 " thefe two kinds of experience are contrary, 
 <c we have nothing to do but fubtracl the one 
 " from the other, and embrace an opinion, 
 <l either on the one fide or the other, with 
 " that afTurance which arifes from the re- 
 *' mainder. But, according to the principle 
 " here explained, this fubtraction, with regard 
 " to all popular religions, amounts to an entire 
 " annihilation : and therefore we may eftablifh 
 4 " it
 
 [ '5 ] 
 
 " it as a maxim, that no human teftimony can 
 " have fuch force as to prove a miracle, and 
 '* make it a juft foundation for any fuchiyftem 
 " of religion *." 
 
 This is the author's great difcovery. The 
 \vhole fecret is out. And here one cannot 
 but wonder to fee a pofition, which is laid 
 down by all that write in defence of miracles, 
 pleaded as a decifive argument againft them, 
 and to find the experience of all mankind 
 brought in evidence againft all the religions 
 of the world. An experienced uniformity in 
 the courfe of nature hath been always thought 
 neceffary to the belief and ufe of miracles. 
 Thefe are indeed relative ideas. There muft 
 be an ordinary regular courfe of nature, before 
 there can be any thing extraordinary. A river 
 muft flow, before its ftream can be interrupted. 
 It is ftrange, therefore, that this uniformity, 
 which is implied in the nature of a miracle, 
 fhould at the fame time be inconfiftent with it. 
 This is to fuppofe, that the exiftence of a miracle 
 is a contradi&ion in terms -, and as fuch indeed 
 the author feems to treat it : " A miracle fup- 
 " ported by any human teftimony is more 
 
 * P. 198. 
 
 cc properly
 
 [ '6 ] 
 
 " properly a fubjed of derifion than of argu- 
 " ment * :" And again, " What have we 
 *' to oppofe to fuch a cloud of witnefles, but the 
 " ablolute impombility or miraculous nature of 
 " events -j- ? " A modeft reader can Icarce 
 look fuch afliirance as this in the face : he will 
 be apt to miftrufl his own apprehenfion, and 
 think there is more in thele big words than he 
 readily fees. The firft reading gave me fufpi- 
 cions of this kind ; but, having recovered my- 
 felf, and taken courage to review it, I fear not 
 to aflert, that all the experience the author can 
 bring will amount to neither proof nor argu- 
 ment again ft the belief of miracles. Let him, 
 if he pleafes, plead his own experience that 
 he has never feen or been witnefs to any mi- 
 racle that he has always found the courfe of 
 nature to be the fame and unchanged: but 
 \ does this experience teach him, that the laws 
 1 of nature are necefTary and immutable that 
 -there is no power in being fufficient to fufpend 
 / or alter them or that there can be no reafons 
 I to induce fuch a power to acl ? 'Till one or 
 Vother of thefe can be proved from experience, 
 it is no evidence in the prefent cafe, and, in- 
 ftead of deciding the matter in queftion, is 
 
 * P. 194. t P. 195- 
 
 wholly
 
 [ 17 ] 
 
 wholly impertinent and foreign to it. Can 
 the fouthern climates experience that there is 
 no frofl in the north ? Or, can Mr. Hume ex- 
 perience that I have never feen fire kindled by 
 a touch from ice ? This negative evidence, 
 tho' multiplied infinitely, would ftill be ne- 
 gative : and the fad laft mentioned might be 
 true, and capable of very eafy proof from 
 teftimony, as I (hall prefently {hew, though all 
 the world mould agree that they had never feen 
 the like. 
 
 The uniformity of nature is no way impeach- 
 ed or brought in queftion by the fuppofition of 
 miracles. The concurring teftimony of mankind 
 to the courfe of nature is not contradicted by 
 thole who have experienced contrary appear- 
 ances in a few inftances. The idea of a miracle 
 unites and reconciles thefe feeming differences. 
 By fuppofing the fadls in queftion to be mira- 
 culous, the uniformity of nature is preferved, 
 and the fads are accounted for upon another 
 principle entirely confident with it. Thus, ex- 
 perience teacheth us that lead and iron are hea- 
 vier than water : but a man, by projecting thefe 
 heavy bodies, may make them iwim in water, 
 or fly in air. Should the fame be done by any 
 C invifible
 
 invifible power, it would be a miracle. But 
 the uniformity of nature is no more difturbed 
 in this cafe than the former: nor is the general 
 experience, which witnefles to the luperior gra- 
 vity of thefe bodies, any proof that they may 
 not be raifed in air and water by fome invifible 
 agent, as well as by the power of man. All that 
 experience teaches is the comparative weight of 
 thefe bodies. If, therefore, they are feen to float 
 in mediums lighter than themfelves, this muft 
 be the effect of art or ftrength : but, if it be 
 done without any vifible art or power, it muft 
 be done then by fome art or power that is invi- 
 fible ; that is, it muft be miraculous. This is 
 the procefs by which we infer the exiftence of 
 miracles ; which is, therefore, fo far from be- 
 ing contradicted by that experience upon which 
 the laws of nature are eftablifhed, that it is 
 clofely connected and ftands in the faireft agree- 
 ment with it. 
 
 The queftion then will remain Whether any 
 fuch invifible agents have ever interpofed in pro- 
 ducing vifible effects? Againft the poffibility of 
 this,tho' the authorispleafed to pronounce itim- 
 poffible, he hath offered no argument (and, in- 
 deed, none can poffibly be offered) : Again/I the 
 4 credibility
 
 [ 19 ] 
 
 credibility of it, the experience which he pleads 
 is no argument at all. This experience proves 
 a courfe of nature j but, whether this is ever in- 
 terrupted, is ftill a queftion. This experi- 
 ence teaches what may be ordinarily expect- 
 ed from common caufes, and in the com- 
 mon courfe of things: but miraculous in- 
 terpofitions, which we are enquiring after, are, 
 by their nature and elTence, extraordinary and 
 out of the common courfe of nature. Miracles, 
 if at all, are effects of an extraordinary power 
 upon extraordinary occafions : confequently, 
 common experience can determine nothing con- 
 cerning them. That fuch occafions may arife, 
 both in the natural and moral world, is eafy to 
 conceive. The greateft of natural philofo- 
 phers * hath thought, that the frame of the 
 world will want, in a courfe of time, the hand 
 that made to retouch and refit it. The greateft 
 of moral philofophers -(- hath thought it a rea- 
 fonable hope, that God would fome time fend 
 a meffenger from heaven to inftruct men in the 
 great duties of religion and morality. 
 
 * Newton Opt. ed. Lat. p. 346. 
 
 t Socrates in Platonis Alcibiade 2, fub finem. 
 
 C 2 As
 
 [ 20 ] 
 
 As to the queftion of fatt Whether any 
 fuch interpofitions have been ever known or 
 obferved ? this muft be tried, like all other hif- 
 torical fads, by the teftimony of thofe who re- 
 late it, and the credit of the firft witneffes who 
 have vouched it ; and not, as this author would 
 have it, by theteftimony of others of thofe 
 who lived in diftant times and places. There 
 is mention of a comet, a little before the 
 Achaian war, which appeared as big as the 
 fun *. If this were well attefted by the aftro- 
 nomers of that time, it would be trifling to ob- 
 ject againft it that the like had never been ob- 
 ferved before or lince. And juft as pertinent is 
 it to alledge the experience of ages and coun- 
 tries againft miracles which are faid to be 
 wrought in other times and other countries. 
 
 But, in truth, were the world to give evidence 
 in the prefent queftion, they would, I am per- 
 fuaded, depofe very differently from what this 
 author expects. A great part of mankind have 
 given their teftimony to the credibility of mi- 
 racles : they have actually believed them. By 
 this author's account, all the religions in the 
 
 * Seneca Nat. Quajl. lib. 7. cap. 15. 
 
 world
 
 world have been founded upon this belief. If 
 this be true, we have univerfal teftimony to the 
 credibility of miracles. How then can there be 
 univerfal experience againft them ? The author 
 tell us that we muft judge of teftimony by ex- 
 perience. It is more certain that we muft judge 
 of the experience of men by their teftimony. 
 
 It is far from true that all religions have been 
 founded on miracles. None but the Chriftian 
 and "Jewijh appear to be fo founded. But there --^ 
 is a fort of miracles, which men of all religions 
 have agreed in believing. " A miracle," as this 
 author fays, " may be either difcoverable by 
 " men, or not. This alters not its nature and 
 * c effence *." Many things appear to us to be 
 effeded by natural means, the firft fprings of 
 which may be moved by the immediate hand 
 of God. But every fuch interpofition, in over- 
 ruling or giving a new direction to the courfe of 
 nature, is, as the author allows, miraculous. 
 If then Providence ever interpofes in punifhing 
 exemplary wickednefs, or in the fupport of 
 eminent virtue in averting evil, or beftowing 
 good thefe are miracles. But thefe have been \ 
 
 * P. 181. 
 
 C 3 univerfally
 
 [ 22 ] 
 
 univerfally believed. Thefe bleffings of heaven 
 have been implored and acknowledged, and 
 thefe judgments deprecated, in the publick and 
 private prayers of mankind, from the begin- 
 ning of the world to this time. 
 
 We cannot indeed argue, from thefe fuppofed 
 interpofitions, that therefore Providence will in- 
 terpofe in a vifible and fenfible manner. But it 
 follows, that fuch interpofitions are poflible ; it 
 follows, that they are credible. If we believe 
 thefe miraculous interpofitions, when they do 
 not appear to our fenfes, what mould hinder us 
 from believing the like upon the report of our 
 fenfes, or of credible perfons who give witnels 
 to them ? If there are general reafons for con- 
 cealing thefe interpofitions, may there not too 
 be fpecial reafons for fignalizing them at times 
 to the fenfes and notice of mankind ? It is cer- 
 tain, that, if any fuch reafons can be affigned, 
 all that is difficult of belief in miracles will be 
 removed. Now, tho' we cannot indeed look 
 into the counfels of Providence, nor, without 
 prefumption, pronounce what is fit for God, in, 
 any fuppofed circumftance, to do -, yet, in judg- 
 ing of paft fads or miracles that are queftioned, 
 we can readily fee whether any great end, wor- 
 thy
 
 [ 23 ] 
 
 thy of God, hath been anfwered by them : and 
 if this appear to be. the cafe, it will create a pre- 
 fumption in their favour : and if, farther, it 
 {hall feem that this end could not have been 
 compaffed by any other means, this will amount 
 to fome proof of their reality. 
 
 To fee this matter in the cleareft light, it may 
 be proper to confider more diftindly the grounds 
 of that credibility, which we allow, in different 
 degrees, to hifbrical fadts. This depends, as I 
 have faid, on the credibility of the facts them- 
 felves, and on that of the hiftorian or witneffes 
 who relate them. / 
 
 The credibility of any facl: in itfelf, as this 
 author frequently tells us, depends upon its ana- 
 logy with the known courfe of nature *. But 
 the powers of nature are fo imperfectly known 
 to us, that in moft cafes we argue with great un- 
 certainty from this principle. A confequence of 
 this is, that teftimony is, for the moft part, of 
 much greater force to eftablifh the truth of paft 
 fa&s, than experience. It would have been 
 thought highly incredible a few years ago, that 
 
 * P. 165. 
 04 an
 
 an animal might be propagated by cutting it in 
 pieces that you might, by dividing one living 
 creature, give life to an hundred of the fame 
 fpecies. Yet this fort of Hydra has been difco- 
 vered ; and the fad, tho' contrary to the whole 
 analogy of nature, was readily believed, when it 
 had been experienced and teftified by very few. 
 In like manner, I have no doubt that the mag- 
 net lofes its polarity in very cold latitudes. I 
 believe this upon the teflimony of one man *, 
 tho' the experience of travellers in all climates 
 before attefts the contrary. Here the moft 
 uniform experience is outweighed by a tingle 
 evidence. The reafon is, that the experience 
 of other countries is only a negative evidence 
 in the queftion. The experience was indeed, 
 before the fact was tried, a very ftrong pre- 
 fumption againfl it. The moft cautious failor 
 would have ventured his fortune and life upon 
 it. Yet is this prefumption of no weight in 
 the queftion of paft fact, when compared with 
 the flighteft teftimony f . 
 
 In 
 
 * Mr. Ellis, in his account of the North-weft 
 Pafiage. 
 
 f Every propofition or f^ct afierted is certainly true or 
 falfe. By credible or probable we mean, not any thing 
 real in the character of the propofition or fat, but only 
 
 its 
 
 * !^*;
 
 In cafes where a fufficient caufe is affigned, an 
 effect, however new and ftrange, may become 
 credible, or even probable, in itfelf, without 
 any teftimony to fupport it. That fire fhould 
 
 be 
 
 its appearance to us, or to the perfon who eftimates this 
 credibility. A thing is faid to be credible, when it 
 wants and is thought capable of proof to be pro- 
 bable, when there appear more reafons for than againft 
 believing it. Credible is more than poffible> and impojjibk 
 more than incredible. Again, probable is more than 
 credible^ and incredible is more than improbable. But 
 thefe words are ufed in common language fomewhat 
 promifcuoufly. Thus, what is highly probable is faid 
 to be highly credible', and what is very improbable to 
 be very incredible. Hence, there are all degrees of 
 incredible and credible, before you arrive at probability. 
 After this, credible and probable are the fame, and ad- 
 mit again of all degrees, 'till you arrive at moral cer- 
 tainty. The fame thing then may be credible in all 
 thefe different degrees to different perfons. That the 
 earth is round that it is conftantly fpinning about like 
 a tap, and travelling with a very fwift motion, while 
 the fun and the heavens ftand ftill This to one part 
 of mankind is wholly incredible, and to another 
 morally certain. The credibility, therefore, or com- 
 parative incredibility of any fa6t is, for the moft part, 
 too loofe a bottom to ground any argument or inference 
 upon. The fame teftimony may likewife bevarioufly 
 credible to different perfons. But the evidence of this 
 is far more diftin&, and its force more eafily afcertain- 
 ed. The truth of teftimony, where it is doubtful, 
 
 may
 
 be kindled by a touch from ice, is contrary to 
 the experience of fome thoufand years. But 
 ele&ricity is a caufe given equal to the effe<ft. 
 
 From 
 
 may be proved many different ways : that of doubtful 
 facts can be made clear only by teftimony, which is 
 indeed,, after all,, the proper proof of facts. 
 
 Experience is the general teftimony of mankind to- 
 general truths. Teftimony, as it is here oppofed to 
 experience, is the atteftation of particular perfons to 
 particular facts ; the former of thefe witnefles to the 
 credibility of facts ; the latter gives evidence directly 
 to their reality or exiftence. From the former we col- 
 lect, that May is on this fide the line a warmer month 
 than December : but the certainty of this in particular 
 inftances is only to be proved, and the contrary may be 
 proved, from the latter. We may indeed, as I have 
 granted, in fome cafes, infer from the former of thefe 
 the certainty or impoflibility of facts. But even here 
 this limitation or condition is always underftood that 
 we know the whole of the cafe that no caufe inter- 
 venes, which is unknown or does not appear to us. 
 And therefore, in the ftrongeft cafes that can be fup- 
 pofed, experience is no bar to the evidence of teftimo- 
 ny i becaufe it is very poflible, in almoft all cafes, that 
 fuch caufe may intervene. Should I fee a ftone climb 
 up hill, or a piece of folid iron fwim in water, I could 
 not doubt the fact, how incredible foever in itfelf. Sup- 
 pofe the fame to reft upon the teftimony of others : I 
 cannot, indeed, fee with the eyes of other men j but 
 I can fee that they have eyes, as well as myfelf : and, 
 
 if
 
 From this time then the fact becomes credible, 
 and even probable, tho' it were not tried and 
 proved by any one witnefs. 
 
 In 
 
 if their veracity is proved,. as I afiert it may, even to 
 our eyes and fenfes, (I mean, by fenfible and vifible 
 fails) I have then nearly as good evidence for the fact, 
 as if I had feen it myfelf. I might perhaps conclude, 
 that the effect was produced by fome invifible agent ; 
 but, whether this can be difcovered or not, the fa& 
 muft ftill be admitted. All this is unwarily allowed by 
 the author himfelf, in terms as ftrong as can be defired : 
 " Suppofe all authors in all languages agree, that from 
 " the firft of January ^ 1600, there was a total dark- 
 ".nefs over the whole earth for eight days : Suppofe 
 " that the tradition of this extraordinary event is ftill 
 ** ftrong and lively among the people ; that all travel- 
 " lers, who return from foreign countries, bring us ac- 
 " counts of the fame tradition, without the leaft va- 
 " riation or contradiction : 'Tis evident, that our pre- 
 " fent philofophers, inftead of doubting of that fa&, 
 11 ought to receive it for certain, and ought to fearch 
 " for the caufes whence it might be derived." P. 199. 
 
 The author of the Free Inquiry into the miraculous 
 Powers of the primitive Church has ftated this matter in 
 a very different light. He fuppofes, that we have the 
 evidence of fenfe for the natural credibility of fa&s, 
 and feems to infer, that, when we argue from hence, 
 we go upon furer ground than when we argue from 
 teftimony, which he reprefents as ever dark and doubt- 
 ful, and amounting only to a reafonable prefumption, 
 
 at
 
 In moral or intelligent agents we look for 
 moral caufes for reafons or motives to induce 
 them to at, as well as for the natural powers 
 
 of 
 
 at beft : the contrary to which, in almoft every parti- 
 cular, is, I think, the truth. As the principles laid 
 down by this author are very general, and may be eafily 
 mifapplied, beyond his intention, in the prefent quef- 
 tion, it will not be improper to compare them with 
 what has been (aid. " The queftion concerning thefe 
 tc miraculous powers depends," fays he, " upon the 
 * e joint credibility of the fails pretended to have been 
 " produced, and of the witnefies who atteft them : if 
 " either part be infirm, their credit muft fink in pro- 
 * c portion, and, if the facts efpecially be incredible, muft 
 " of courfe fall to the ground, becaufe no force of tef- 
 ** timony can alter the nature of things. The credibi- 
 " lity of fafts lies open to the trial of our reafon and 
 " fenfes : but the credibility of witnefles depends on a 
 " variety of principles wholly concealed from us ; and, 
 " tho' in many cafes it may reafonably be prefumed, 
 " yet in none can it certainly be known : for it is com- 
 " mon with men, cut of crafty and felfifli views, to 
 " difTemble and deceive : but plain facts cannot delude 
 " us cannot fpeak any other language, or give any 
 4< other information, than that of truth. The tefti- 
 " mony, therefore, of fals, as it is ofFer'd to our fenfes, 
 " carries with it the fureft inftruction in all cafes, 
 <s which Gou, in the ordinary courfe of his providence, 
 " has thought fit to appoint for the guidance of human 
 
 " life.
 
 of ading. And, where both a final and effici- 
 ent caufe appear equal to the effect, the effect, 
 however ftrange in itfelf, will become credible 
 
 by 
 
 " life *." In anfwer to which, I fhall not deny that 
 the credibility of facts may in many cafes be tried by 
 our fenfes ; but this is generally learnt from experience, 
 or the common teftimony of mankind : And, 2dly, 
 this credibility, however learnt or proved, is no direct 
 evidence of the reality or exiftence of any doubtful fact ; 
 fince the fail may be highly credible, and yet never exift 
 may be in a great degree incredible, and yet certainly 
 true. What the author calls the teftimony offafts offered 
 to our fenfes is in this cafe only the teftimony of our 
 fenfes, or that of other men, to the exiftence, not of 
 the fact in queftion, but of other fails that are fuppofed 
 analogous or fimilar to it ; which, tho' in many cafes it 
 may amount to a very high prefumption, yet is in none 
 a dire ft proof of any doubtful fatt : Whereas,' 3dly, tefti- 
 mony is a direct evidence to the exiftence or reality, not 
 of fimilar facts, but of the fact itfelf : and therefore, in 
 judging of paft or diftant facts, where we cannot have 
 the evidence of our fenfes, the teftimony of thofe who 
 have this evidence is, not only the fureft, but the only 
 method of injlruflion which Providence has appointed for our 
 guidance thro 1 life. All that we certainly know of fuch 
 facts is derived from this fource. The truth of tefti- 
 mony is always prefumed, where there are no parti- 
 cular reafons to fufpedt it. This prefumption alone 
 will give more weight, as we have feen, to a fingletef- 
 
 * Preface, p 9. 
 
 timony,
 
 [ 3 1 
 
 by teftimony, if not probable without it. It is 
 poflible for a man to fwim acrofs the Hellefpont. 
 The poffibility of this faft will make it credible 
 upon fufficient teftimony: but, if a competent 
 reaibn is affigned for this hazardous enterprize 
 (fuch as the efcaping certain death) this will 
 make it credible upon the flighteft teftimony, 
 or even probable without any. 
 
 The refult then is that whatever is pof- 
 fible, or in the loweft degree credible, is ca- 
 pable of a proof from teftimony that the 
 ftrongeft prefumption from experience is of 
 
 timony, and make it better 'evidence for the truth of 
 facts, than a very high degree of prefumption drawn 
 from analogy is againft it. 4thly, This prefumption 
 may be increafed to any degree by the concurrence of 
 other teftimony ; which concurrence too is itfelf a dif- 
 tin& proof of the fact attefted. Laftly, The veracity 
 of every fingle witnefs may be proved by plain and in- 
 difputable facts, as will be feen more fully hereafter. 
 If then improbable or incredible facts require ftronger 
 evidence to fupport them, the weight of teftimony may 
 be increafed, and the proofs that fupport it multiplied, 
 infinitely ; and, confequently, whatever is not abfo- 
 lutely impoffible may be thus proved. The force of 
 teftimony cannot indeed alter the nature of things : but it 
 can make things improbable become probable it can 
 give credibility, and even certainty, to things that were 
 before incredible. 
 
 little
 
 [ 3- 1 
 
 little force againft pofitive evidence and that, 
 where a caufe is affigned equal to any effect, 
 the event is rendered credible upon common 
 teftimony, and fometimes probable without 
 any. 
 
 But there are, it is granted, many cafes, which, 
 we may, from nature and experience, pronounce 
 to be impoffible. It is impoflible that a facl or 
 proportion mould be true, when the caufe af- 
 figned 'is unequal to the effect. Now, the 
 proportion of caufes to effects, the natural 
 powers of agents, and the force of moral caufes 
 on the mind, we know to a good degree, from 
 experience. If we cannot precifely determine the 
 force of natural agents, we can, in moft cafes, 
 affign limits which they cannot pafs. For in- 
 ftance : We cannot precifely mark out the 
 bounds of human power j but we can, in all 
 cafes, fay to what it does not extend. If the 
 ftrength of men, at a medium, be equal to one, 
 that of king Auguftus or Hercules may be equal 
 to two ; but it cannot be equal to two hundred. 
 A phyfician may reftore a dying man to health ; 
 but he cannot reftore a dead man to life. Of all 
 fuch events, as railing the dead, calming the 
 winds or feas, curing difeafes with a word, we 
 
 may
 
 f 3* ] 
 
 may fairly pronounce, that they are impoffible 
 to human ftrength, and therefore, when imputed 
 to it, are incredible ; becaufe a force equal to 
 two cannot produce an effect equal to two hun- 
 dred. In this cafe experience decides with fuffi- 
 cient authority againft the fact. And this, I 
 fuppofe, the author miftook for an argument 
 againft miracles. 
 
 But whoever attributed thefe fads to human 
 power ? Thofe who record, and thofe who be- 
 lieve, miracles, univerfally afcribe them to a 
 power fuperior to man. They agree, that they 
 far exceed all human ftrength, and therefore are 
 an argument of the concurrence and agency of 
 fome fuperior power. Againft the interpolation 
 of fuch fuperior power, experience, as we have 
 feen, can determine nothing. If common expe- 
 rience does not atteft or acknowledge fuch in- 
 terpolations, the anfwer is given common oc- 
 cafions do not call for them. The common 
 wants of nature are provided for by the com- 
 mon courfe of nature. Extraordinary occa- 
 fions only can call for extraordinary interpofi- 
 tions. Of thefe occafions we are not the pro- 
 per judges : but, that many fuch may arife in 
 
 the 
 4
 
 [ 33 ] 
 
 the government of free agents, feems obvious 
 even to us. 
 
 If men, by a bad ufe of their liberty, mould 
 fink themfelves into a moral incapacity of an- 
 fwering the ends of their creation If they 
 mould lofe fight of God and religion and all 
 the great motives to holinefs and virtue, and 
 this evil fhould become general and pad all na- 
 tural hopes of recovery it is very fuppofeable 
 that God may interpofe, by a fpecial act of his 
 Providence, in reftoring them to a capacity of 
 ferving him, and of attaining that happinefs for 
 which they were created. If virtue, and that 
 knowledge which is neceflary to it, are worthy 
 the care of Providence and if thefe were in 
 
 danger of periming out of the world why 
 
 fhould it be thought incredible that God mould 
 fend a righteous man to teach the doctrines and 
 enforce the duties of religion, with a clear and 
 exprefs authority ? This miffion of a prophet 
 would be miraculous : but the miracle would 
 not appear ; and therefore other miracles would 
 be neceflary to attefr. its truth. Superior know- 
 ledge and virtue are not fufficient to charac- 
 terize a prophet : he muft do fuch things as 
 no man can do, except God were with him, 
 D before
 
 [ 34 J 
 
 before his miffion or character will be acknow- 
 ledged for divine. Here then is a reafon, 
 which, whenever it can be pleaded, will make 
 miracles every way credible, and as capable of 
 proof from teftimony as any matter of fact 
 whatfoever. 
 
 In the examination of paft facts, if no fucli 
 end appears to have been anfwered by the mi- 
 racles alledged, this will be a ftrong prefump- 
 tion againft them. On the other hand, if any 
 great confequences have followed if, for in- 
 ftance, it mould appear from hiftory, that na- 
 tural religion had, when loft, by the help of 
 thefe miracles, been revived in all its purity, 
 and eftablifhed in many nations as the will of 
 God this will be a ftrong preemption in their 
 favour : And, if there appear no other affign- 
 able caufe, which could give birth to this great 
 event, but the miracles pretended, this will be 
 a good proof of their reality. 
 
 We come next to confider the credibility de- 
 rived to fads from teftimony. This depends in 
 general upon the principles of human nature, 
 which we can argue with the more certainty 
 from, bccaufe we experience them in ourfelves,
 
 [ 35 1 
 
 as well as obferve them in others. We are made 
 naturally to love truth, and to hate and abhor 
 falmood and deceit. The fhame of being de- 
 tedled in a lye, and the reproach that ever fol 
 lows it, is a full proof of this. Even in mat- 
 ters of no moment, in the moft tranfient dif- 
 courfe, where men think it unnecefiary to at- 
 tend to what they fay, were there no temptation 
 from vanity or a defire of pleafing, they would 
 never deviate from truth. But this principle 
 will operate far more ftrongly, where men are 
 called upon to attend, have leifure to confider, 
 and give their teftimony deliberately : it will 
 operate more ftrongly on good men than bad 
 in cafes of great moment than in matters of 
 indifference. 
 
 Could we be abfolutely certain, in any cafe, 
 that a man had no intereft, real or fuppofed, in 
 deceiving that he had no motive to deceive 
 we might depend with abfolute certainty upon 
 the truth of his evidence. Now, this aflurance 
 we may have from circumftances that cannot 
 deceive us. Incapable as we are of penetrating 
 into all the referves and recefTes of the human 
 mind, there is yet a certain and infallible teft, 
 by which the veracity of men may in many 
 D 2 cafe
 
 [ 36 ] 
 
 cafes be tried. For example : If the perfon at- 
 tefting gives up every known intereft for the 
 fake of his teftimony, without any known pro- 
 fpeft of advantage if he is expofed by it to 
 prefent fufferings, and is threaten'd with yet 
 greater if he perfifts under all the difcourage- 
 ments that can be thought of, and goes through 
 a long feries of evils, which, by receding from 
 his teftimony, he might prevent and, Iaftly 9 
 if he gives up life itfelf for a painful and igno- 
 minious death this is fuch a proof of fincerity 
 as cannot be refitted. In this cafe, we are not 
 only allured that the witnefs is free from every 
 corrupt biafs, but that he has thehigheft regard 
 for truth. Nothing but a confcious fenfe of 
 this, with the hope of a future reward from the 
 God of truth, can fupport men under a lofs of 
 all things, and under the actual fuffering of all 
 the evils of life. A good man may give up his 
 intereft for the fake of truth : a bad man will 
 facrihce truth to intereft : but no man will give 
 up intereft and truth together for nothing, or 
 for the fake of falmood, which is worfe than 
 nothing. 
 
 The maxims we here argue from are the 
 moft certain and uncontroverted of any in mo- 
 rality
 
 t 37 1 
 
 rality That men act from motives, and that 
 good, real or apparent, is the object, the motive 
 and aim of every action. The laws by which 
 the moral world is governed are as certain and 
 infallible as thofe of the natural. The paffions, 
 appetites, and fenfes of mankind act, and are 
 acted upon, with as much uniformity as any 
 powers and principles in nature. That men 
 mould love falmood rather than truth that 
 they mould chufe labour and travail, mame and 
 mifery, before pleafure, eafe, and efteem is 
 as much a violation of the laws of nature, as it 
 is for lead or iron to hang unsupported in the 
 air, or for the voice of a man to raife the dead 
 to life : but this, I have granted to the author, 
 is, not miraculous, but impoffible, and mall 
 therefore have his leave, I hope, to affert, that 
 falmood, thus attefted, is impoffible' in other 
 words, that teftimony, thus tried and proved, 
 is infallible and certain. 
 
 It remains, indeed, that witnefles the mod 
 upright and unfufpected may be miftaken in 
 their teftimony : they may be deceived them- 
 felves ; and therefore their teftimony, even thus 
 proved, is not to be fecurely relied on. But, 
 happily, miracles, at leaft all that we difpute 
 D 3 with
 
 [ 38 ] 
 
 with this author, are of fuch a nature, that it 
 is impoffible to be deceived about them. Fails 
 that are vifible and palpable to the fenfes of 
 mankind, that are done in open day-light, that 
 lie open to fcrutiny and obfervation for a long 
 time together, prefent witnefles muft know 
 whether they fee or not. They who report 
 them as eye-witnefles cannot be deceived 
 themfelves in the belief of them, however 
 they may intend to deceive others. 
 
 I conclude then, that miracles, when there 
 appears a fufficient caufe for working them, 
 are credible in themfelves that, when they 
 come under the cognizance of our fenfes, they 
 are proper matter of teftimony, and, when at^ 
 tefted by witnefles who have fufficient oppor- 
 tunities of convincing themfelves, and give fuf- 
 ficient proof of their conviction, have a right 
 to command our faith.. 
 
 And here I accept the author's alternative, 
 without complaining of the infidious terms in 
 which it is expreffed. <c The plain confe- 
 " quence," fays he, " is (and 'tis a general 
 ' maxim worthy of our attention) that no tef- 
 " timony is fufficient to eftablifh a miracle, 
 
 un-
 
 [ 39 ] 
 
 " unlefs the teftimony be of fuch a kind, that 
 " its faldiood would be more miraculous than 
 u the fact which it endeavours to eftablim : 
 " and even in that cafe there is a mutual de- 
 <{ ftruction of arguments, and the fuperior 
 " only gives us an afTurance fuitable to that 
 " degree of force which remains after deduct- 
 <c ing the inferior. If the falmood of any 
 " perfon's teftimony would be more iniracu- 
 * c lous than the event which he relates, then, 
 11 and not 'till then, can he pretend to com- 
 ' mand my belief or opinion *." By miracu- 
 lous it is plain that the author here means, in 
 the popular fenfe of the word, wonderful or in- 
 credible. I afTert then, that miracles may be 
 made fo credible by circumftances and con- 
 curring facts, and fo fupported by teftimony, 
 that, if we reject them, we muft believe things 
 more incredible, or, as the author would have 
 us fpeak, more miraculous than the miracles 
 themfelves. 
 
 The miracles I mail mention are thofe in 
 the Chriflian Gofpel healing the fick without 
 any vifible means, giving fight to the blind, 
 raifing the dead to life, Gfc. all which are faid 
 
 * P. 182. 
 D 4 to
 
 L 40 ] 
 
 to be performed by the power of God for ends 
 the moft worthy of himfelf, viz. to reftore re- 
 ligion and morality to their true principles, and 
 to eftablim the practice of them in the world. 
 The character of thofe who were appointed to 
 this work, and the doctrines which they 
 taught, correfpond perfectly with this defign : 
 great as it was, they undertook it with alacri- 
 ty and confidence, declaring from the begin- 
 ning that their commiffion was to go and teach 
 all nations : the miracles which they atteft, as 
 giving authority to their doctrine, they affert 
 from their own knowledge, as what they faw 
 with their eyes, and handled with their hands : 
 the number of thefe facts, and the numbers at- 
 tefting them, were very great : they concur- 
 red, without variation, in the fame doctrine, 
 and in the fame teftimony : they fubmitted, 
 with the fame courage and conftancy, to the 
 greateft perfecutions and afflictions, in confir- 
 mation of their truth ; and, when called to it 
 (as many of them were) laid down their lives 
 for its fake : they forefaw from the beginning 
 the oppofition they met with, and foretold, 
 with the fulleft aflurance, their fuccefs againft 
 it : and the event juftified their predictions ; 
 
 the
 
 the religion they taught was in a ftiort time 
 eftablimed in a great part of the world. 
 
 Here, now, the attempt itfelf, if not fpirit- 
 ed and fupported by truth, is wholly ftrange 
 and unaccountable. That men of low birth 
 and education Ihould conceive a defign of new- 
 modelling the religion of all nations, and re- 
 forming their manners, by the laws of temper- 
 ance, purity, and chanty that bad men 
 fhould concur in an end fo great and godlike, 
 or good men in means fo impious as fraud and 
 impofture that men of craft or addrefs mould 
 chufe for the hero of their ftory one who was 
 chronicled as a malefactor, and who had been 
 put to death by the confent of a whole people 
 one, too, that had abufed their confidence, 
 and milled them by falfe hopes into an endlefs 
 train of miferies all this is contrary to na- 
 ture, and therefore, by the author's rule, im- 
 poffible. 
 
 The zeal with which they carried on this de- 
 ftgn, traverfing feas and kingdoms, without reft, 
 and without wearinefs a zeal which could not 
 be exceeded by the moft righteous men in the 
 mofl righteous caufe this, if not prompted by 
 4 duty
 
 [ 4* ] 
 
 duty and a ftrong conviftion of the truths they 
 taught,, is ftill more incredible. 
 
 The excellency of the religion they taught, 
 in its worship and morality far furpaffing all 
 human wifdom and philofophy, and the fole 
 end of which is to make men honeft, iincere, 
 and virtuous, if it be the work of ignorance 
 and fraud, is equally ftrange and myfte- 
 rious. 
 
 The fuccefs of this defign is yet a greater 
 miracle. In this chain of wonders the event is 
 the moft miraculous part. The eftablimment of 
 the Gofpel in an hundred different nations, its 
 victory over Jews and Gentiles, over the power 
 and policy of the wifeft and greateft people, 
 over the pride of learning and the obftinacy 
 of ignorance, over the prejudices of religion 
 and thofe of fin and irreligion, is an event the 
 moft wonderful of any in hiftory. But this is a 
 miracle which we fee before our eyes : it is a 
 miraculous fadl that muft be afcribed to a mi- 
 raculous caufe. Even granting the truth of the 
 Gofpel miracles, the inftruments in propagating 
 it were fo unequal to the work, that nothing 
 but the power of God, accompanying and 
 
 working
 
 [ 43 ] 
 
 working with them, can account for its fuccefs. 
 It was ftill a miracle that it mould profper in 
 their hands. But, without either truth or 
 providence to fupport it, this fuccefs would 
 be more than miraculous it would be im- 
 poffible. 
 
 The teftimony directly given to thefe miracles 
 is ftrongly confirmed by the character of the 
 witnefles, who, as far as appears even from 'the 
 teftimony of their enemies, were unblameable 
 in their lives and manners men of confcience 
 and religion. Their writings breathe a fpirit of 
 piety, a zeal for God and good works, that is 
 not equalled by any writings in the world : they 
 carry in them fuch marks of candor, truth, and 
 iimplicity, as cannot be imitated : all which 
 can never confift with the daring impiety of 
 ufurping the moft facred of all characters, and 
 preaching a falfe religion to the world. 
 
 The numbers that engaged in this defign, 
 tho' difperfed in different regions, agreed per- 
 fectly in the fame report. It was in the power 
 of any of thefe, or of the accomplices that 
 muft be concerned with them, to defeat the 
 whole by difcovering the fraud : and it cannot 
 
 be,
 
 [ 44 ] 
 
 be, that not one {hould, by fear or intereft, per- 
 fuafion or torture, be prevailed on to difco- 
 ver it. 
 
 They put their teftimony to the trial, by 
 claiming a power of working miracles them- 
 felves: they difplayed this power frequently 
 and publickly, and fo fubmitted their truth 
 to the eyes and fenfes of all about them. This 
 pretence, if falfe, muft have defeated the moft 
 probable and hopeful fcheme ; if true, it was no 
 more than neceffary to the difficulties of this. 
 The event was great numbers were every 
 day converted to the faith. But this conduct 
 cannot, any more than the event, be reconciled 
 to the character or fuppolition of impofture. 
 
 Laftly, they gave the higheft proof that 
 can be given to the veracity of teftimony, by 
 going thro' the fiery trial of perfecution, in all 
 its various forms of imprifonment, torture, and 
 death. This began with the very beginning of 
 Chriftianity. They faw it evidently before their 
 eyes, and plainly devoted themfelves from the 
 firft to a life of fufFerings and affliction. They 
 gave up eafe and fecurity, country, kindred, 
 family, and friends, to be treated every- where 
 
 with
 
 [ 45 ] 
 
 with contempt and contumely, to conflict with 
 poverty and want, to be perfecuted from city 
 to city, fentenced to imprifonment and ftripes, 
 and, at laft, to die by ftoning, by the fword, 
 or the crofs. But this, in fupport of fallhood 
 and wrong, is fo contrary to human nature, 
 that it is abfolutely incredible. 
 
 The fuppofition then, that the miracles of 
 the Gofpel are falfe, is full of wonders, prodi- 
 gies, things unnatural, and which experience, 
 the author's criterion in matters of fact, pro- 
 nounces to be impoffible. 
 
 And what now is that contrariety to nature, 
 which is pleaded againft the poffibility of mi- 
 racles ? "A miracle," the author tells us, 
 " may be accurately defined a tranfgreffton of 
 " a law of nature by a particular volition of the 
 ct Deity or by the interposal of fome invitibie 
 <c agent *." But this definition is neither ac- 
 curate nor confident with itfelf. The laws of 
 nature are the laws of God: and, if God (hould 
 occafionally change or invert any of thefe, there 
 is no law, that I know of, againft it no law 
 of God or nature broken by it. But, in fact, 
 
 * P. 181. 
 
 where
 
 [ 46 ] 
 
 where miracles are fuppofed, there is no change 
 made in thefe laws. I have (hewn, that all 
 that is unnatural in miracles is only appearance. 
 There is nothing contrary to nature in fuppofing 
 the dead to be raifed, or the winds controlled 
 by a power equal to the effed. It was no way 
 contrary to the nature of God to reveal his 
 will to mankind, in order to reform their cor- 
 ruptions, and to conduct them to virtue and 
 happinefs. On the contrary, this might be pi- 
 oufly hoped for from his wifdom and goodnefs. 
 It was no way contrary to the nature and con- 
 dition of men. It appears from the hiftory of 
 mankind, that natural religion was at this time 
 univerfally corrupted, and that no other pro- 
 bable means were left of reftoring it. Reafon 
 and philofophy had tried their flrength in vain. 
 It was, therefore, on the part of man, highly 
 expedient and defireable, In fact, to this re- 
 velation, whether real or pretended, and to 
 no other caufe, it is owing, that the great 
 truths of nature, concerning God, a Provi- 
 dence, and a future ftate, are now ib widely 
 fpread, and that half the world, inftead of dumb 
 idols, are ferving the living God : and, if all 
 the good ends, that might be expected, are not 
 yet anfwered by it, yet the feed of the word is 
 4 fown,
 
 t 47 ] 
 
 fown, the foundations of true religion are laid, 
 and there is hope that it will in time enlarge 
 its borders, and prevail, where it is received, 
 with more effect and influence. It cannot be 
 denied, that the Gofpel is an adequate provi- 
 fion for the wants, a remedy for all the infir- 
 mities of mankind. There is nothing, that can 
 be wiflied for in a rule of duty, that is not 
 comprehended in it. The miracles, then, that 
 atteft it, are accounted for to our reafon : we 
 have God, the caufe of all things, for their 
 author : and a fufficient reafbn is afligned for 
 the divine interpolation. And this will, at the 
 fame time, account for all the wonders that 
 followed : the actions, fufferings, and fuccefs 
 of the Apoftles will, upon this fcheme, appear 
 eafy, confiftent, and natural. 
 
 But, if this account be not admitted, thefe 
 will remain fo many contradictions to nature 
 and experience, and it will lie upon the author 
 to reconcile them to our belief. If the common 
 motives to human actions, intereft, paffion, and 
 prejudice, cannot be pleaded in an anfwer to 
 thefe difficulties, what other account can be 
 given of them ? Some caufe muft bs affigned 
 adequate to the effect. For men to act without 
 
 motives
 
 [ 48 ] 
 
 motives is as unnatural, as it is for a body to 
 fink without weight to act againft the force 
 of motives is as contrary to nature, as it is 
 for a ftone to afcend again ft the laws of gra- 
 vity. Hear what this author fays himfelf in 
 another Effay : " We cannot make ufe of a 
 ** more convincing argument, than to prove 
 " that the actions afcribed to any perfon are 
 <c directly contrary to the courfe of nature, and 
 < that no human motives, in fuch circum- 
 e ftances,. could ever induce him to fuch a 
 " conduct *." 
 
 The author tells us, that in this cafe we mufl 
 reject the greater miracle. But miracle is too 
 foft a name for thefe inconfiftencies. Could he 
 {hew, that God, or fome invifible agent, had 
 interpofed in confounding the reafon and under- 
 flanding of all that preached or believed the 
 Gofpel, in changing their nature, and giving a 
 contrary direction to their paffions, affections, 
 and inftincts, they would then be miracles, and 
 proper objects of our belief. But this I {hall 
 prefume impoffible to be proved, becaufe no 
 end can be affigned for fuch interpofition, but 
 merely to deceive mankind an end fo unwor- 
 
 * P. 135- 
 
 thy
 
 [ 49 ] 
 
 thy of God, and contrary to the perfections of 
 his nature, that we may pronounce it impoflible 
 for him to promote, or even to permit it to 
 
 take effect. 
 
 Here, then, I may call upon the author, in 
 his own words, to lay his hand upon his heart, 
 and declare, whether the miracles of the Gofpel 
 could poffibly have been better attefted, if 
 true whether there is any one condition want- 
 ing that can add credibility to them whether 
 there is any thing fo contrary to nature in thefe 
 miracles, as in the teflimony given, and the 
 belief gained, to them, if falfe whether it 
 is not eafier to believe the miracles true, than 
 that fo many miraculous confequences (a na- 
 tural effect of true miracles) mould arife from 
 them, if falfe or, laftly, whether it be not 
 more credible that God mould work thefe mi- 
 racles for fo great an end as that of giving birth 
 and eftablifhment to Chriftianity, than that he 
 fhould work more and greater miracles to con- 
 found and deceive mankind. When he has bal- 
 lanced his account of the impoflibility of mira- 
 cles with the evidence for thofe of the Gofpel, 
 and fubtracted the former from the latter, this 
 E fubtraftion
 
 [ 5 1 
 
 Jubtratfion will certainly amount to an entire 
 annihilation. 
 
 Let us now fee the poor cafe which the au- 
 thor puts at laft to illuftrate and crown his argu- 
 ment, " When any one tells me, that he faw 
 " a dead man reftored to life, I immediately 
 < consider with myfelf, whether it be more pro- 
 <{ bable that this perfon {hould either deceive 
 " or be deceived, or that the fact he relates 
 <c (hould really have happened : I weigh the one 
 <c miracle againft the other, and, according to 
 c< the fuperiority which I difcover, I pronounce 
 <c my decifion, and always reject the greater 
 c< miracle *." The author's argument requires 
 him to prove, that no miracles, however cir- 
 curaftanced, can be made credible by any tefti- 
 mony whatfoever. But, in the cafe fuppofed, 
 the miracle has not one circumftance to make 
 it credible, nor the teflimony one condition to 
 confirm its truth. A dead man we may fup- 
 pofe raifed to life without any reafon, ufe, 
 or end whatfoever : and a dead man may be 
 railed for fome extraordinary purpofe of Pro- 
 vidence, as to give authority and character 
 to the fpecial meflengers of God. Now, tho' 
 
 * P. 182. 
 
 the
 
 [ 5' 1 
 
 the former of thefe cannot be made cre- 
 dible by the naked teftimony of one man, the 
 latter may be made credible by the atteftation 
 of many, efpecially, if they give proof, that 
 they were neither deceived themfelves, nor 
 intended to deceive others, Though one man, 
 unaffifted, cannot lift a weight of twenty tuns, 
 twenty men, with the help of engines, may 
 lift the weight of one. I agree with the 
 author, that, when a man is laid to rife, like 
 the ghoft in Prince Edward*, only to fet again, 
 it is more credible, that the teftimony is falfe, 
 than the miracle true : but, when I fee an effect 
 worthy of Providence, in which the religion, 
 virtue, and morality of a great part of man- 
 kind are concerned, brought about by the be- 
 lief of this or fuch-like miracles, and find, upon 
 inquiry, that this miracle is attefted by a great 
 number of perfons who lived and died confef- 
 fors and martyrs to it, the falihood of fuch 
 teftimony appears to me far more miraculous 
 than fuch a miracle. 
 
 The author puts the fame cafe, with the 
 addition of fome particulars, in the fecond part 
 
 * A late play, called Edward the Black Prince, 
 
 E 2
 
 I 52 I 
 
 of his Effay : " Suppofe that all the hiftoriana 
 " who treat of England mould agree, that, on 
 " the firftof January ', i6oo r queen Elizabeth 
 died that, both before and after her death, 
 " (he was feen by her phyficians and the whole 
 M court, as is u-fual with perfons of her rank 
 " that her fucceffor was acknowledged and 
 " proclaimed by parliament and that, after 
 " having been interred a month, (he again ap- 
 * peared, took poneffion of the throne, and 
 " governed England three years : I nauft confefs 
 "' I mould be furprized at the concurrence of 
 c fo many odd circumftances, but mould not 
 " have the leaft inclinadon to believe fo mira- 
 " culous an event *." Here, again, the facl: 
 fuppofed is the ftrangefl: and moft unac- 
 countabk that the author could well conceive, 
 becaufe no final caufe appears to make it in any 
 degree credible. But when was any fuch facl at- 
 tefted by hiftorians ? If the author thinks the 
 ory incredible, I think it as incredible thatany 
 good hiftorian mould relate it : if he thinks it 
 incredible, becaufe it is a miracle, I think it in- 
 credible that God mould work fuch, a miracle 
 for nothing. , 
 
 * P., 
 
 But
 
 [ 53 1 
 
 But the importance of miracles is, it feems, 
 with the author, a thing of no con federation: 
 this, which we confidered as a circumftance 
 that gives the higheft credibility to the Gofpel 
 miracles, is, at laft, the very reafon why he 
 rejects them as incredible. <c I beg," fays he, 
 " that the limitation here made may be re- 
 " marked, when I fay, that a miracle can never 
 " be proved, fo as to be a foundation of a fy- 
 <c ftem of religion ; for I own, that, otherwife, 
 c< there may poffibly be miracles, or violations 
 cc of the ufual courfe of nature, of fuch a 
 * { kind, as to admit of proof from human tefti- 
 * c mony, tho' perhaps it will be impoflible to 
 " find any fuch in all the records of hiftory *" 
 This conceffion is very remarkable, and appears 
 to me to be fairly giving up the argument : for, 
 if miracles may be wrought in cafes of lefs mo- 
 ment, why may they not in greater ? or, is re- 
 ligion the laft and leaft of all things in the opi- 
 nion of this author? I confefs myfelf at a 
 lofs to guefs what can be his intention in this 
 place, If, in compromife for the other mi- 
 racles which he here grants us unafked, he ex- 
 pects us to give up all that have religion for 
 
 * P. 199. 
 E their
 
 [ 54 1 
 
 their object, it will indeed anfwer his purpofe 
 very well. He may grant other miracles pof- 
 fible, and yet make good his argument againft 
 them. But thefe are not fo eafily dealt with. 
 The lureft way not to believe them is not to 
 examine them. And this he wiiely recom- 
 mends as the beft expedient that has been tried 
 againft them. " If a miracle," fays he, c< be 
 < afcribed to any new fyftem of religion, men, 
 <c in all ages, have been fo much impofed on 
 " by ridiculous ftories of that kind, that this 
 *' very circumftance would be a full proof of a 
 " cheat, and fufficient, with all men of fenfe, 
 <c not only to make them rejeft the fad:, but 
 " even rejecl: it without farther examination *." 
 This, indeed, is a fhort way with religion and 
 miracles ; and we muft own, that the author 
 hath found out at laft a deciiive argument 
 againft them. 
 
 * P. 200. 
 
 PART
 
 [ 55 ] 
 
 ^ 
 
 ##*# <()>##*>## # 
 
 PART II. 
 
 T ITTLE as it is that the author has done 
 i J in the firft part of his EiTay, he feems to 
 think it more than enough, and that half 
 his pains might have been fpared : "In the 
 " foregoing reafoning, we have fuppofed, that 
 " the teftimony upon which a miracle is found- 
 " ed may poffibly amount to an entire proof, 
 " and that the falfhood of that teftimony would 
 " be a kind of prodigy. But 'tis eafy to (hew, 
 u that we have been a great deal too liberal in 
 11 our conceffions, and that there never was a 
 " miraculous event, in any hiftory, eftabliihed 
 " on fo full an evidence*." But, if the author 
 was fo fure of his ftrength, why this corps de 
 re/erve, a body of troops that have been for 
 ever harrafled, and are yet untired, in the fer- 
 vice of infidelity ? 
 
 The firft of thefe veteran bands is drawn up 
 as follows : " There is not/' fays he, tf to be 
 * P. 183. 
 
 E 4 <c found,
 
 [ 56 ] 
 
 found, in all hiftory, any miracle attefted t>y 
 " a fufficient number of men of fuch unquef- 
 '* tioned good fenfe, education, and learning, 
 " as to fecure us againft all delufion in them~ 
 " felves of fuch undoubted integrity, as to 
 < place them beyond aUfufpicion of any defign 
 <{ to deceive others of fuch credit and repu- 
 " tation in the eyes of mankind, as to have a 
 " great deal to lofe, in cafe of being detected 
 <c in a falmood and, at the fame time, atteft- 
 <{ ing facts performed in fuch a publick man~ 
 <e ner, and in fo celebrated a part of the world, 
 as to render the detection unavoidable : all 
 ft which circumftances are requiiite to give us 
 " a full affurance in the teftimony of men *." 
 The reader will allow me to fuppofe, that the 
 author has in view, both here and throughout 
 his Effay, the Cbrijlian miracles, which we 
 have been confidering. Now, the objections 
 here made have been fo frequently and fully 
 anfwered by the advocates of Chriftianity, that 
 it is quite piteous to fee the author, after pro- 
 claiming a victory, calling in fuch poor 
 his relief. 
 
 * P. 183, 
 
 As
 
 [ 57 1 
 
 As to the firft condition here required, there 
 never was perhaps a fact directly attefted by fo 
 many witneffes as the miracles in queftion. We 
 have ftill upon record the exprefs depofitions of 
 many in the writings of the Apoftles. The con- 
 verfion of every fmgle perfon to Cbriftianity 
 was, in truth, a clear and precife teftimony to 
 thefe fadls ; for this religion was wholly built 
 upon them. Now, betides the twelve Apoftles 
 and feventy Difciples chofen to preach the Gof- 
 pel, a great number more were converted by the 
 miracles and refurreftion of Chrifl. But thofe 
 that gave this witnefs to the miracles of the 
 Apoftles were without number. Never was there 
 a doctrine that fpread fo fwiftly through the 
 world, or that gained fo many prefent and im 
 mediate witnefles to its truth. 
 
 The Apoftles and firft Difciples had not, ma- 
 ny of them, the advantages of education and 
 learning. But what learning is required to en- 
 able men to fee with their eyes and hear with 
 their ears ? The miracles they atteft were plain 
 fads, the obje&s of fenfe. Folly itfelf could 
 not be deceived in them : and fure folly could 
 never fo fuccefsfully deceive. Thefe men, 
 illiterate as they were and void of art or elo- 
 3 quence
 
 [ 58 ] 
 
 quence, did what this author, with all his 
 arguments, will never be able to do : they got 
 the better of all the religions in the world 
 about them, and eftablifhed their own in dif- 
 ferent and diftant countries. They had, there- 
 fore, we may hope, fenfe enough to teftify 
 what their eyes had feen and their hands had 
 handled. 
 
 They had not perhaps any great reputation 
 to lofe. But the good name of a poor man is 
 as dear to him as that of the greateft. If they 
 had no publick chara&er to lofe, they had pub- 
 lick infamy to dread : . and this they incurred, 
 not by being detected in a falfhood, but by per- 
 fevering in the truth. If it was little that they 
 gave up to follow Chrift> it was, however, all 
 that they had. And what they gained was a 
 negative quantity, and muft be put to the fide 
 of their lofles ; they gained hunger and thirft, 
 toil and labour, watchings and fallings, fcorn 
 and reproach, fcourgings and death. They 
 loft, then, enough to evidence their fincerity. 
 They gave every proof, that ever was given 
 by man, to the truth of their teftimony. 
 
 As
 
 [ 59 1 
 
 As to the notoriety of the fads, they were 
 done in the moft publick manner--in places of 
 conftant refort many of them in yerufalem, 
 at times of the greateft concourfe : and, what is 
 more, they were done in direct: opposition to the 
 prejudices of all that faw them before the 
 moft vigilant and powerful enemies, who did 
 not, as this author tells us wife men commonly 
 do, " think the matter too inconfiderable to de- 
 " ferve their attention*," but exerted their 
 utmoft induftry and authority in fuppreffing 
 this new religion ; putting its head and leader 
 to death, fuborning falfe witnefTes to difcredit 
 him and his miracles, and proceeding immedi- 
 ately, by imprifoning fome, and killing others, 
 to deter and difperfe his followers. Thefe mira- 
 cles, therefore, were wrought in the very place 
 where their detection was moft certain and 
 unavoidable ; and the teftimony given to them 
 was given in the fame publick manner and in 
 the fame place. 
 
 * 
 
 The author is well aware, that the teftimony 
 of the Apoftles and firft Chriftians, if the mira- 
 cles were falfe (I mean, the facl of giving fuch 
 
 * P. 198. 
 
 teftimony)
 
 [ 6 ] 
 
 teftimony) and the miraculous events that fol- 
 lowed in confequence of them, will be thought, 
 upon reflection, at leaft as incredible as the mi- 
 racles themfelves : and therefore, to abate our 
 wonder on this head, he obferves, " fecondly, 
 " that there is a principle in human nature, 
 tc which, if ftrictly examined, will be found 
 u to diminim extremely the aflurance we might 
 " have from human teftimony in any kind of 
 " prodigy. The maxim, by which we com- 
 " monly conduct ourfelves in cur reafonings, 
 rt is, that the objects of which we have no ex- 
 l< perience refemble thcfe of which we have 
 " that what we have found to be moft ufual is 
 * e always moft probable. But, tho', in pro- 
 c< ceeding by this rule, we readily reject any 
 " fact that is unufual or incredible in an ordi- 
 " nary degree, yet, in advancing farther, the 
 " mind obferves not always the fame rule ; but, 
 " when any thing is affirmed utterly abfurd and 
 Cf miraculous, it rather the more readily admits 
 ct fuch a fact upon account of that very cir- 
 *' cumftance which ought to deflroy all its au- 
 " thority. The paffion of furprize and wonder 
 " arifing from miracles, being an agreeable 
 * emotion, gives a fenfible tendency towards 
 
 c the
 
 ct the belief of thofe events from which it is 
 " derived *." 
 
 The love of novelty is, indeed, a natural 
 paflion 5 it is no other than the love of know- 
 ledge, which God hath implanted in the 
 mind for the wifeft reafons : and for the fame 
 reafons we may be allured that he hath not laid 
 fnares to betray us into error, and much lefs hath 
 placed in us a principle, as the author here 
 fuppofes, the tendency of which is to make 
 us believe things, merely becaufe they are in- 
 credible. " With what greedinefs," faith he, 
 " are the miraculous accounts of travellers re- 
 < ceived, their defcriptions of fea and land 
 " monfters, their relations of wonderful ad- 
 ee ventures, ftrange men, and uncouth man- 
 " ners !" It is true that every new difcove- 
 ry gratifies our love of knowledge, and gives 
 pleafure to the mind : but it muft have the 
 appearance of truth to do fo. Tho' we love 
 to be informed, we do not love to be deceived. 
 A fingle miracle would rifk the credit of the 
 beft-efteetned travels. But, according to this 
 author's principle, the voyage to Lilliput or 
 
 * P. 184, 
 
 Lafuta
 
 [ 63 ] 
 
 jLaputa muft meet with more credit than that 
 of Anfon or Ellis. 
 
 But, if the love of novelty will not re- 
 concile us to miracles, that of religion will 
 make us believe any thing. " If the fpirit of 
 " religion joins itfelf to the love of wonder, 
 " there is an end of common fenfe *.*' If 
 the author means, that men are more apt to 
 believe miracles in the caufe of religion than 
 in any other cafe^ he is fo far in the right* 
 Where mould men expect or believe miracu- 
 lous interpolations, but where it is mofl wor- 
 thy of God to interpofe? But it does not 
 follow, that religion is a friend to falfe mi- 
 racles, or an enemy to common fenfe. On the 
 contrary, right notions of the divine nature 
 and perfections, which religion teaches, are a 
 neceffary help to diftinguifh true miracles from 
 falfe. Now, the Jews, in general, were bet- 
 ter inftructed in thefe points than the wifeft of 
 the Heathens. The men of Athens were far 
 more fuperftitious than the moft ignorant of the 
 Hebrews. The falfe wonders of magick, witch- 
 craft, and necromancy, thefe were taught by 
 
 * P. 185. 
 
 their
 
 C 63 ] 
 
 their law to hold in contempt, and, confe- 
 quently, were lefs liable to be pradifed upon 
 by appearances of this fort. And, of the 
 Apoftles and firft Chriftians. it is certain, that 
 they had all the fecurity againft delufion and 
 error of this kind, that a rational piety and the 
 nobleft fentiments of God and a Providence 
 could give them. 
 
 But " a religionift may be an enthufiaft, and 
 " imagine he fees what has no reality : he may 
 ' know his narration to be falfe, and yet per- 
 <c fevere in it, with the beft intentions in the 
 <e world, for the fake of promoting fo holy a 
 " caufe : or, even where this delufion has no 
 " place, vanity, excited by fo ftrong a tempta- 
 " tion, operates on him more powerfully than 
 " on the reft of mankind in any other circum- 
 " fiances, and felf-intereft with equal force : 
 <f his auditors may not have, and commonly 
 * e have not, fufficient judgment to canvas his 
 " evidence ; wlkt judgment they have they re- 
 " nounce upon . principle in thcfe fublime and 
 " myfterious fubjecls *." Here, it is confefTed, 
 the author has touched upon a very powerful 
 
 * P. 185, 
 
 and
 
 [ 64 ] 
 
 and fruitful fource of error. Men, whofe pa 
 lions arc Wronger than their reafon, will be guil- 
 ty of excefs in religion as well as in other 
 things. A zeal for opinions frequently makes 
 men conclude their own caufe to be the caufe 
 of God ; and, from wifhing that Heaven may 
 declare in their favour, they are eafily led to 
 believe fuch interpositions upon the flighted 
 teftimony. But, tho* this principle will make 
 men believe falfe miracles, it will not overpower 
 their fenfes, or make them fee what has no rea- 
 lity. The French prophets were extravagant 
 enough to expeft that one of their principal 
 teachers would come to life again j but, with 
 all their enthufiafm, none could believe that he 
 faw this miracle : on the contrary, this difap- 
 pointment opened their eyes, and the pretence 
 to miracle ruined their caufe. Nor can I allow, 
 with the author, that men of the beft inten- 
 tions can propagate a known falfhood for the 
 fake of truth. An honeft man may be hafty 
 in believing j but he cannot 82 a deceiver or 
 importer. It is certain, the religion of Chrift 
 difdains fuch pious frauds, and his Apoftles 
 have forbad and condemned them in terms as 
 fevere as language can exprefs : nor is it a prin- 
 ciple in this religion, as this writer would in- 
 
 finuate
 
 finuate, that men mould renounce their judg- 
 ment in inquiries of ihis fort : on the contrary, 
 they areinjoined carefully to examine the truth 
 of miracles and doctrines, before they believe 
 them. 
 
 But, granting the author's principles in their 
 full extent, the miracles of the Gofpel will be 
 no way affected by them : For, firft, the Apo- 
 flles are free from all tincture and appearance 
 of enthufiafm; witnefs the writings which they 
 have left behind them, and that fyftem of doc- 
 trines and morals contained in them : in their 
 piety nothing over paffionate, rapturous, or ec- 
 ftatick appears, but all is rational fober, and 
 temperate : their zeal for their matter and his 
 religion never tranfports them into complaints 
 or invectives againft his enemies or their own, 
 or into any ftrained elogiums or panegyricks 
 upon his character : they recite all that is won- 
 derful in his actions, without exclamation, with- 
 out vehement afleveration, with an undoubting, 
 unguarded fimplicity, that is highly fingular 
 and remarkable : their whole conduct, in like 
 manner, was void of oftentation, fteady, uni- 
 form, and regular throughout : they were not 
 only confident each with himfelf (which a fa- 
 F natick
 
 [ 66 ] 
 
 natick fpirit feldom is) but all purfued the fame 
 plan, without varying or change, with the moft 
 perfed harmony and agreement. And, fecond- 
 ly, whatever influence, from paffion or preju- 
 dice, the witneiTes to Chriftianity were under, 
 this operated the contrary way, and muft dif- 
 pofe them to reject, rather than receive, the mi- 
 racles: the Apoftles themfelves were Jews, and 
 zealous of the traditions and cuftoms of their 
 anceftors : the other converts, whether Jews or 
 Pagans, were prejudiced, as ftrongly as they 
 could be, by religion, againft the Gofpel: bigot- 
 ry and enthufiafm rofe up every- where in perfe- 
 cution againft it ; nothing but reafon and con- 
 viclion could induce men to declare for it : every 
 paffion, every intereft, and every prejudice per- 
 fuaded againft this belief: and, in fad, every 
 tingle converfion to it was not barely the tefti- 
 mony of an unprejudiced judge, but the tefti- 
 mony of an enemy to its truth. 
 
 " The wife," fays the 'author, in another 
 place, tc lend a very academick faith to every 
 <c report which favours the paffion of the repor- 
 " ter, whether it magnifies his country, hisfa- 
 cc mily, or himfelf, or in any other way ftrikes 
 " in with his natural inclinations and propcn- 
 
 " fities.
 
 t 6 7 i 
 
 ei Titles. But what greater temptation than to 
 " appear a mifilonary, a prophet, an ambaffador' 
 tl from heaven ? Who would not encountef 
 <c many dangers and difficulties to attain fo fu- 
 11 blime a character * ?" Where this character 
 is indeed attended with honour and refpect, it 
 will be natural for ambitious men to defire it. 
 But the head and leader of this feet had been 
 every- where reviled and perfecuted, and was 
 crucified as a malefactor : his followers every- 
 where fhared the fame fate. What temptation 
 was there to appear his prophet or ambaflador ? 
 What vanity' or felf-intereft was gratified 
 by it ? 
 
 But thirdly, the author tells us, < e it forms 
 u a very ftrong preemption againft all fuperna- 
 " tural and miraculous relations, that they are 
 (l always found chiefly to abound amongft ig- 
 ec norant and barbarous nations ; or, if a civi- 
 " lized people has ever given admiffion to any 1 
 <c of them, that people will be found to have 
 " received them from ignorant and barbarous 
 " anceftors, who tranfmitted them with that 
 " inviolable fanclion and authority which al- 
 tf ways attends ancient and received opinions-f-." 
 
 * P. 196. t P. 186. 
 
 F 2 This
 
 [ 68 ] 
 
 This argument we prefume, has been already 
 anfwered. The miracles of the Gofpel were, as 
 wehavefaid, performed where they were mod 
 fufpected. The yews were by no means a bar- 
 barous people, and they were freer from fuper- 
 flition than any other nation in the world. 
 Thefe miracles were immediately canvaffed 
 with all the feverity that the prejudice of enemies 
 could fugged. Some who were healed of their 
 difeafes were fent immediately to the prjefts, on 
 purpofe, as it feems, that they might undergo 
 the ftricteft inquifition. Others were called before 
 the council, examined, and threatened, and eve- 
 ry means tried to refute and filence them. This 
 religion did not get ftrength in the dark, and 
 then adventure itfelf by degrees into the light : 
 it was openly proclaimed, from the firft, in the 
 temple, and in the fynagogue, where the Jews 
 always reforted : and, when the Apoftles had 
 filled Jerufalem zndjttd<za with their doctrines, 
 Rome and Athens were fome of the next fcenes 
 of their miniftry. 
 
 Under this head we are entertained with a 
 long ftory from the Pjeitdomantis of Lucian. 
 " It was," faith the author, " a wife policy 
 " in that cunning importer, Alexander, who, 
 
 " tho'
 
 "" tho' now forgotten, was once fo famous, 
 c to lay the firft fcene of his impoftures in 
 <f Paphlagonici) where, as Lucian tells us, the 
 " people were extremely ignorant and ftupid, 
 " and ready to fwallow even the grofleft de- 
 c< lufion. People at a diftance, who are weak 
 " enough to think the matter at all worth 
 " inquiry, have no opportunity of receiving 
 c< better information. The (lories come mag- 
 " nified to them by an hundred circumftances, 
 " Fools are induftrious to propagate the delu- 
 " fion ; while the wife and learned are con- 
 " tented, in general, to deride its abfurdity, 
 " without mforming themfelves of the parti- 
 <l cular fads, by which it may be diftindly 
 t( refuted. And thus the importer above-men- 
 " tioned was enabled to proceed, from his ig- 
 <c norant PapUagonians, to the inlifting votaries 
 <f even among the Grecian philofophers and 
 " men of the moft eminent rank and dif- 
 
 <c tindtion in Rome nay, could engage the 
 
 " attention of that fage emperor, Marcus 
 ct AurelhtSy fo far as to make him truft the 
 " fuccefs of a military expedition to his delu- 
 " five prophecies*." But what, if this famous 
 importer never pretended to miracles ? It is 
 
 * P, 1 88. 
 
 F 3 laid,
 
 [ 70 ] 
 
 faid, indeed, that he had his emiffaries in dif- 
 tant countries, who reported this, among other 
 things, to his honour: but there is no appear- 
 ance in his hiftory of his ever counterfeiting or 
 pretending to this power. It was his policy not 
 to hazard his reputation on fo dangerous an 
 iiTue. Ignorant and flupid as his Papblagonians 
 were, it might have been too much for all 
 his art to impoie falfe fads upon their eyes 
 and fenfes. He had, by a bold and fuccefs- 
 ful cheat of another kind, eftablilhed his cha- 
 ra&er among this people, who, Lucian tells us, 
 differed from brutes in nothing but their out- 
 ward form. He had the fortune too to gain 
 the ear of a famous Roman general, who, by 
 the fame author's account, was formed to be 
 the dupe of every pretender. This feems to 
 have got him fome name in Rome. But I find 
 none, that deferved to be called philofophers, 
 among his votaries. It is certain, that the fight 
 of a Chrijlian or an Epicurean difconcerted all 
 his management. They were always drove 
 from his prefence, having the confidence, no 
 doubt, to deride the prophet and his oracles. 
 Every one muft believe, upon the reprefentation 
 here made, that the emperor Antqnme had un- 
 dertaken the expedition mentioned at the infti- 
 5 gation
 
 [ 7' ] 
 
 gation of this importer, or, at leaft, had con- 
 certed meafures with him for purfuing it. But 
 the oracle given out by this pretended prophet 
 was voluntary and unafked, in order, if the 
 event had happened, as was probable, to increale 
 his own credit. And, fuperftitious as this great 
 emperor and philofopher was, he did nothing, 
 in purfuance of it, but what the wifeft general 
 might have done to humour the fuperftition and 
 folly of his foldiers, and to infpire them with a 
 confidence of victory. It no-where appears that 
 he hazarded the leaft point, or altered any one 
 of his meafures, in confequence of it. But, if 
 it were true that this impudent importer had 
 this learned emperor and the fchools of Greece 
 among his admirers, this would only prove 
 how much the wifeft part of mankind were en- 
 llaved by fuperftition, before Chriftianity re- 
 leafed them from it. 
 
 The author adds, as a fourth reafon which 
 diminilhes the authority of prodigies, " that 
 " there is no teftimony for any, even thofe 
 <c which have not been exprefsly detected, that 
 " is not oppofed by an infinite number of wit-t 
 " nefles ; fo that not only the miracle deftroys 
 { the credit of the teftimony, but even thetefti- 
 F 4 moriy
 
 [ 72 ] 
 
 " mony deflroys itfelf. To make this the bet- 
 
 ter underftoqd, let us confider, that, in mat- 
 
 " ters of religion, whatever is different is con r 
 
 <c trary, and that 'tis impoffible the religions of 
 
 <f antient Rome, of Turfy, of Siam, and of 
 
 <( China mould, all of them, be eftabliihed on 
 
 ec any folid foundation. Every miracle, there- 
 
 " fore, pretended to have been wrought in any 
 
 t of thefe religions (and all of them abound 
 
 " in miracles) as its dired fcope is to eftablifh 
 
 " the particular fyftem to which it is attri- 
 
 " buted, fo it has the fame force, ' tho' more 
 
 " indirectly, to overthrow every other fyftem : 
 
 *' in deftroying a rjval-fyftem, it likewife de- 
 
 ** flroys the credit of thole miracles on which 
 
 " that fyftem was eftablifhed : fo that all the 
 
 " prodigies of different religions are to be re- 
 
 <{ garded as contrary fads, and the evidence of 
 
 <{ th'efe prodigies, whether weak or ftrong, 33 
 
 " oppofite to each other *." This argument, 
 
 he is apprehenfive, will appear too fubtle and 
 
 refined : but the only fault of it is, that it has 
 
 fio foundation in truth. The author cannot 
 
 name a fingle miracle, that was ever offered a 
 
 a teft of any of thefe religions, before their efta- 
 
 tlifhnient, or to authorize any pretended pro- 
 
 * P. 190. 
 
 phet
 
 [ 73 1 
 
 phet to teach fuch religion. Mahomet exprefs- 
 ly difclaims this power in many places of his 
 Koran. It appears from his manner of fpeak- 
 ing of it, that he knew what advantage this pre- 
 tence would give to his caufe, and even felt the 
 want of it : yet, with all the affiftance that art 
 and power could give him, he durft not hazard 
 fo dangerous an experiment. There is a wide 
 difference betwixt eftablifhing falfe miracles, by 
 the help of a falfe religion, andeftabliming a falfe 
 religion by the help of falfe miracles. Nothing 
 is more eafy than the former of thefe, or more 
 difficult than the latter. The author would 
 make us believe that miracles are to be met 
 with in almoft every page of antient hiftory : 
 tc When we perufe the firft hiftories of all na- 
 ^ tions, we are apt to imagine ourfelves tran- 
 " fported into fome new world, where the whole 
 <e frame of nature is disjointed, and every ele- 
 " ment performs its operations in a different 
 "manner from what it does at prefent. Battles, 
 < revolutions., peflilences, famines, and deaths, 
 " are never the effedts of thofe natural caufes 
 <c which we experience *." But the truth is, 
 they are very thinly fown in the writings of the 
 heathens. Portents and prodigies I call not by 
 
 * P. 187. 
 
 that
 
 [ 74 ] 
 
 that name. Thefeare to be accounted for from 
 natural caufes, or owe their exigence to a fright- 
 ed or difturbed imagination. Of miracles, pro- 
 perly fpeaking, there are very few upon record : 
 moft of thefe are given up, by the hifbrians 
 who relate them, as vulgar fables, unworthy of 
 belief, and none are fo attefted as to make them 
 in any degree credible. Of this the author has 
 undefignedly given us a full proof in the flory 
 which immediately follows : 
 
 tl One of the beft-attefted miracles in all 
 tc profane hiftory is that which Tacitus reports 
 11 of Fefpa/ian, who cured a blind man in Alex- 
 < andria by means of his fpittle, and a lame 
 <c man by the mere touch of his foot, in obedi- 
 ct ence to a vifion of the god Serapis, who had 
 " injoined them to have recourfe to the emperor 
 " for thefe miraculous and extraordinary 
 cf cures*." This, the author feems to infi- 
 cuate, is as well attefted as any Cbnftian mira- 
 cle, and may be made as good an argument 
 for the religion of the antient Egyptians as any 
 miracle for any religion whatfoever : " Every 
 " circumftance," fays he, C adds weight to the 
 testimony, and might be difplayed at large 
 
 * P. 192. 
 
 C{ with
 
 [ 75 ] 
 
 " with all the force of argument and eloquence, 
 " if any one were now concerned to enforce the 
 " evidence of that exploded and idolatrous fu- 
 " perftition." The occafion being fo tempting, 
 he has tried his hand, and (hewn us how far this 
 miracle may be parallell'd with thofe of the Gof- 
 pel : <c The gravity, folidity, age, and probity of 
 <c fo great an emperor, who, thro' the whole 
 " courfe of his life, converfed in a familiar way 
 " with his friends and courtiers, and never af- 
 e< fected thofe extraordinary airs of divinity af- 
 ." fumed by Alexander and Demetrius The 
 Ct hiftorian a cotemporary writer, noted for 
 " candor and veracity, and, withal, the great- 
 " eft and moft penetrating genius, perhaps, of 
 " all antiquity, and fo free from any tendency 
 , <c to fuperftition and credulity, that he even 
 tc lies under the contrary imputation of atheifm 
 cc and profanenefs The perfons, from whofe ' 
 " teftimony he related the miracle, ofeftabliflied 
 " character for judgment and veracity (as we 
 " may well fuppofe) eye-witneffes of the facl, 
 " and confirming their verdict, after the Flavian 
 <c family were defpoiled of the empire, and 
 " could no longer give any reward, as the 
 " price of a lye: Utrumque, qui interfile re, nunc 
 c< quoque memorant, poftquam nullum mendach 
 
 " fretium.
 
 [ 76 3 
 
 " prctitufl. To which if we add the publick 
 " nature of the facl, as related, it will appear, 
 " that no evidence can well be fuppofed ftronger 
 " for fo grofs and fo palpable a falfhood." As 
 to the character of this wife emperor, Sueto- 
 ititts, who has wrote his life, tells us, that he 
 had long before this conceived hopes of the 
 empire, from certain idle dreams and omens, 
 of which he has reckoned up eight or ten, as 
 ridiculous as any in hiftory : that immediately 
 before this, when he was now proclaimed em- 
 peror by fome of the legions, andhadftrengthen- 
 ed himlelf by feveral alliances, he condefcend- 
 ed, notwithstanding his probity and gravity, to 
 give out a miracle upon his own authority, to 
 make himfelf confiderable in the eyes of the 
 people ; pretending that, in the temple of Sera- 
 pis, where he went alone, defrmltate imperil 
 cujpiciumfafturus, one Bo/Hides, who was known 
 at the time to be far diftant a4id unable to tra- 
 vel, had appeared to him, offering him crowns 
 and garlands a certain omen (as he and his 
 courtiers interpreted the word Bafilides) of the 
 royal dignity. As for the credit of the hiftorian, 
 he was no witnefs of the fad, nor, for ought 
 we know, ever converfed with thofe that faw 
 it ; and the teftimony he gives to it does by no 
 
 means
 
 [ 77 1 
 
 means amount to a proof that he believed it 
 himfelf. To what purpofe, then, is the cha- 
 racter he gives us of his veracity, penetrating 
 genius, and incredulous turn of mind ? But, 
 if the teftimony of the hiftorian be not ad- 
 mitted, the witnefies, from whofe teftimony 
 he related it, were of eftablimed character for 
 veracity and judgment. This, indeed, is to the 
 purpofe. On this point the whole merits of the 
 caufe muft reft. How, then, is this proved to 
 us ? Why, the author fays it may well be fup- 
 pofedy and the hiftorian tells us that they per* 
 lifted in the report, when they could gain no- 
 thing by the fraud. But how does it appear 
 that they had never received any reward for 
 their verdict ? The emperor, tho* he affected 
 not the airs of divinity, yet was well pleafed 
 with his new title, and, no doubt, was well 
 underftood to look with a favourable eye on 
 thofe who contributed to fupport it. The 
 good ufes to which this miracle ferved are 
 honeftly told us both by Suetonius and Tacitus : 
 Auloritas t et quafi majeftas qua dam, utfcilicet 
 inopinato et adhuc novoprincipi deer at, hezcquoque 
 acceffit, Suet. Miraculo evenere, queiscekflisfa^ 
 vor etquaedam in Vefpafianum mclinationuminwn 
 qftcnderetur, Tacit. The Alexandrians could not 
 5 but
 
 [ 78 ] 
 
 but have an intereft in gaining the favour of 
 this prince : the perfons cured are faid to be 
 eplebe Alexandria, probably unknown to thefe 
 witnefles and to all the Romans about Vefpafian : 
 the partifans of the new emperor were prepared 
 to welcome and improve every thing that look- 
 ed in his favour : the phyficians, who were con- 
 fulted whether theie diforders were curable, de- 
 clared that they were : Where, then, is the 
 wonder that two men mould be inftrudted to act 
 the part of lame and blind, when they were 
 fure of fucceeding in the fraud, and of being 
 well rewarded (as we may well fuppofe] for their 
 pains ? 
 
 This ftory is followed by two others, as re- 
 markable proofs of the credulity of mankind, 
 which, having obtained in Chrijlian countries, 
 may perhaps be thought more appofite to the 
 author's purpofe of difcrediting the Chrijlian 
 miracles. " There is alfo," faith he, "a very 
 <c memorable ftory related by cardinal de Retz t 
 " and which may well deferve our confide- 
 " ration : When that intriguing politician fled 
 <c into Spain, to avoid the perfecution of his 
 " enemies, he palled thro' Saragoffa, the ca- 
 " pital of drragcn, where he was fhewn, in 
 
 " the
 
 [ 79 ] 
 
 u the cathedral church, a man who had ferved 
 " twenty years as a door-keeper of the church, 
 " and was well known to every body in town 
 <c who had ever paid their devotions at that 
 " cathedral : he had been feen for fo long a 
 " time wanting a leg, but recovered that limb 
 " by the rubbing of holy oyl upon the ftump ; 
 " and, when the cardinal examined it, he found 
 " it to be a true natural leg, like the other. 
 " This miracle was vouched by all the ca- 
 <e nons of the church ; and the whole com- 
 <c pany of the town was appealed to for a 
 " confirmation of the fact, whom the cardi- 
 " nal found, by their zealous devotion, to be 
 " thorough believers of the miracle. Here 
 " the relater was alfo contemporary with the 
 " fuppofed prodigy, of an incredulous and 
 <c libertine character, as well as of great ge- 
 < nius the miracle of fo fingular a nature 
 " as could fcarce admit of a counterfeit 
 " and the witneffes very numerous, and all 
 " of them, in a manner, fpectators of the 
 " fact: of which they gave their teftimony : 
 " and what adds mightily to the force of the 
 <{ evidence, and may double our furprife on 
 " this occafion, is, that the cardinal himfelf, 
 " who relates the ftory, feems not to give 
 
 " any
 
 [ 8 ] 
 
 " any credit to it, and, confequently, cannot 
 " be fufpecled of any concurrence in the holy 
 < fraud *.'' The ftory is, indeed, remarkable, 
 as the author has told it. Firft, the rela- 
 ter was a cardinal and a man of great ge- 
 nius -, and, tho' he had never feen the wooden 
 leg, yet he fatisfied himfelf that the man had 
 now two natural legs, like anot/jer man. It does 
 not, indeed, appear, that he examined all or 
 any of the canons, or that he difcourfed with 
 any body in town about it : but he found, by 
 the devotion of the people, that they believed 
 the man to have had a wooden leg. Then 
 the cardinal was a man of a libertine cha- 
 racter, and, 'which is Jlill more wonderful, and 
 adds mightily to the evidence, he did not believe 
 thejiory himfelf. This climax of evidence and 
 wonder flili rifing upon us is very extraordi- 
 nary. The relater of the flory was a cardinal, 
 and therefore a good evidence of a Rotnijk 
 miracle : he was of a libertine character ^ and 
 therefore had the better right to be believed 5 
 but, what puts the evidence out of queftionj 
 be did not believe the flory himfelf', which, 
 again, is doubly fur prizing, as the author ob- 
 ferves, becaufe he was naturally of an incre* 
 
 * P 193. 
 
 duloui
 
 [ 8' ] 
 
 dulous temper. This is the firft ftory. The 
 fecond deferves a more ferious attention. 
 
 " There, furely, never was fo great a num- 
 ct her of miracles afcribed to one perfon, as 
 " thofe which were lately laid to have been 
 " wrought in France upon the tomb of Abbe 
 " Paris, the famous Janfenift y with whofe 
 " fandity the people were fo long deluded. 
 " The curing of the tick, giving hearing to 
 " the deaf and fight to the blind, were every- 
 " where talked of as the ufual effects of that 
 " holy fepulchre. But, what is more extra- 
 " ordinary, many of the miracles were im- 
 " mediately proved, upon the fpot, before 
 " judges of unqueftioned integrity, attefted by 
 " witnefles of credit and diftinclion, in a 
 " learned age, and on the moft eminent the- 
 '* atre that is now in the world. Nor is this 
 " all : a relation of them was publimed and 
 <f difperfed every-where: nor were thejefutts, 
 " tho' a learned body, fupported by the civil 
 c< magiftrate, and determined enemies to thofe 
 cc opinions in whofe favour the miracles were 
 <c faid to have been wrought, ever able di- 
 " ftindlly to refute or detect them. Where 
 " mall we find fuch a number of circum- 
 G " fiances
 
 " fiances agreeing to the corroboration of one 
 " fact ? And what have we to oppofe to fuch 
 * c a cloud of witnefles, but the abfolute im- 
 " poflibility or miraculous nature of the events 
 " which they relate ? And this, furely, in the 
 " eyes of all reafonable people, will alone be 
 " regarded as a fufficient refutation *." 
 
 The author has here afferted many things 
 that he will not be able to fupport. The mi- 
 racles pretended were, many of them, refuted 
 upon the fpot : a judicial inqueft was made 
 by the archbimop of Paris into one of the 
 moft celebrated, and the cheat was fully de- 
 tected : the lieutenant of the police brought 
 many to confefs that the part they had aded 
 was all artifice and pretence j and an ordon- 
 nance was hereupon iflued from the court for 
 apprehending all that were concerned in fuch 
 frauds : the archbifhop of Sens exhibited a pub- 
 lick charge againft more than twenty, as pal- 
 pable and difcovered cheats : and Mr. Mont- 
 geron, the profefled advocate of thefe miracles, 
 of whom we mall have more to fay hereafter, 
 does not, in his anfwer, pretend to defend a 
 fourth part of thefe : and the author may fee 
 
 * P. 195- 
 
 his
 
 [ 3 ] 
 
 his defence' of thefe, and of all the other mi- 
 racles he defends, dijlinftly refuted in the Cri- 
 tique generale of Mr. Des Vceux. The moft 
 ufual effects of this fepulchre were not cures, 
 but diflempers a fort of convulfions, which 
 feized alike the found and the fick, and were 
 attended with fuch ftrange appearances as 
 brought great contempt and ridicule upon 
 the other miracles of this faint. Thefe con- 
 vulfions, we are told by fkilful phyficians, are 
 eafily counterfeited, and, from being counter- 
 feited, frequently become real and habitual: 
 they are too fo communicable, by a fort of 
 fympathy, to perfons of weak nerves, that this 
 diftemper, it is well known, is for this rea- 
 fon excluded fome of our great hofpitals ; it 
 having been found that, when one is feized, 
 it fpreads, like infection, thro' a whole ward. 
 This will account for the great numbers who 
 are faid to have felt this extraordinary effect 
 from vifiting the Abbes tomb. 
 
 I deny not that there were real cures wrought 
 upon the fick that were brought there : but 
 the fame, I dare pronounce, would happen, 
 if a thoufand people, taken at a venture, were 
 at any time removed from their fick cham- 
 G 2 bers
 
 [ 4 ] 
 
 bers in London to St. Paul's Churchyard or the 
 Park, efpecially, if they went with any ftrong 
 hope of a cure : in fuch a number, fome are 
 
 always upon the point of recovery many 
 
 only want to fancy themfelves well others may 
 be flattered for a time into this belief, while 
 
 they are ill and many more, by frem air 
 
 and motion, and efpecially by forbearing the 
 ufe of other means, will find a change for 
 the better : but, that the blind received their 
 fight, or the deaf were reftored to hearing, 
 by thefe vifits, I deny that we have any com- 
 petent or tolerable evidence. This fanguine 
 writer does, indeed, take upon him to ani'wer 
 for the credit of the witneffes and the integrity 
 of the judges. But thefe miracles were never 
 proved in a judicial way. The vouchers pro- 
 duced for them are only certificates collected 
 from all forts of perfons, who were neither 
 interrogated by judge or council, nor con- 
 fronted by other. witnefTes : they only left their 
 depofitions or affidavits in the hands of a no- 
 tary, who was not concerned to examine, or 
 even to know, the perfons who made them, 
 or whether they gave in their own or ficti- 
 tious names. The credit, therefore, of the 
 
 witncffes
 
 witneffes was never proved by any trial what- 
 
 foever *. 
 
 Doctor 
 
 * In the fecond edition of the Metaphyfical EJfiys there 
 is an additional note to p. 195, &c. in which the author 
 obferves, that " the Molinljl party had tried to difcre- 
 " dit thefe miracles in one inftance, that of Madamoi- 
 " felle le Franc. But, befides that their proceedings 
 " were the moft irregular in the world, particularly in 
 " citing only a few of the Janfenifts' witneffes, whom 
 " they tampered with : befides this, I fay, they foon 
 " found themfelves overwhelmed by a cloud of new 
 " witneffes, one hundred and twenty in number, moft 
 " of them perfons of credit and fubftance in Paris, who 
 " gave oath (for whal? not for the miracle in queftion, 
 *' but] for the miracles." 
 
 The pretended cure of Anne le Franc was the moft 
 celebrated and beft-attefted of all the firft miracles of 
 this faint ; and was, therefore, very fitly pitched upon 
 for examination, in order to give all the advantage to 
 the miracles that could be wifhed, and to put the trial 
 of them upon the faireft iffue. It was tried by a judi- 
 cial procefs directed for that purpofe ; and, whatever 
 formalities the author may think wanting in the pro- 
 ceedings, it was fo clearly convicted of irnpofture, that 
 one of the ableft advocates for thefe miracles, M. le 
 Gros, could find nothing to reply in its defence ; nor 
 does M. de Montgeron himfelf pretend to defend it. It 
 was proved, by five of the witneffes to this miracle, 
 that the certificates, which they had given into the hands 
 of the notary, and which were counterfigned by Ma- 
 G 3 damoifelle 
 
 t.
 
 [ 86 ] 
 
 Do&or Middleton, who has likewife fet out 
 the evidence of thefe miracles with great pa- 
 rade, is pleafed to tell us that " the reality of 
 
 " them 
 
 damoifelle h Franc herfelf, were afterwards falfified, 
 and many material circumftances added which they had 
 never attefted : by others, that (he was, in great mea- 
 fure, recovered before fhe vifited the tomb ; and that 
 many of the disorders alledged as cured were entirely 
 chimerical : and by others, that (he returned from the 
 tomb in the fame condition that fhe went there, and 
 ftill wanted the help of farther medicines : which laft 
 circumftance may feem confirmed by the non-appear- 
 ance of k Franc herfelf, who was not to be found at the 
 trial. 
 
 The author goes on, after celebrating the vigilance, 
 activity, penetration, and extenfive intelligence of 
 Monf. Hcraut, then lieutenant de police^ to obferve, that 
 " this magiftrate, who by the nature of his office is al- 
 " moft abfolute, was inverted with full powers, on 
 " purpofe to fupprefs or difcredit thefe miracles > and 
 " he frequently feized immediately and examined the 
 " witneffes and fubje&s of them; but never could 
 * 4 reach any thing fatisfactory againft them." But the 
 nature of this magiftrate's office was fo far from mak- 
 ing him abfolute in the prefent cafe, that it gave him 
 no power at all to examine the truth of thefe miracles. 
 This was the province of the archbifhop alone, and not 
 to be invaded : accordingly, in the ordonnance of the 
 king, dated January 27, 1732, by which Mr. Heraut 
 wasimpowered to arreft and confine the moft obftinate of 
 
 thefe
 
 c< them is attefted by fome of the principal 
 " phylicians and furgeons in France, as well 
 " as the clergy of the firft dignity, feveral of 
 " whom were eye-witnefles of them, who 
 " prefented a verbal procefs of each to the 
 " archbimop, with a petition, fjgned by above 
 " twenty cures or rectors of the parities of 
 < Paris, defiring that they might be authen- 
 ?< tically regiftered, and iblemnly published to 
 
 thefe miraculized cheats, after the conviction of Anne 
 le Franc, and after he had brought many to a voluntary 
 confeffion of the fraud, this power is particularly referved 
 to the archbiftiop. 
 
 Soon after this the tomb was inclofed and fhut up ; 
 but the fame farce ftill continued in many parts of the 
 city, fome hundreds pretending to thefe miraculous con- 
 vulfions ; moft of them poor girls, who got a liveli- 
 hood by the bufinefs. So that the author might have 
 fpared his remark, " No Jajifenift was ever embarra/Ted 
 *' to account for the cefiation of the miracles when the 
 *' church-yard was fhut up. 'Twas the touch of the 
 " tomb that operated thefe extraordinary effects > and 
 " when no one could approach the tomb, no effects 
 " could be expected, &V." As he might too his con- 
 cern for the poor Molinifls that rejected thefe miracles ; 
 who were never put, as he reprefents, to the hard necef- 
 fity of accounting for them from witchcraft and the 
 power of the devil, but always refolved them into their 
 proper caufes. 
 
 04 the
 
 [ 88 ] 
 
 " the people, as true miracles*.'' Anyone, 
 who reads this in connection with what goes 
 before it, will be led to believe that a great 
 nun) her of thefe miracles had been confirmed 
 by this verbal procefs -\* : but there never were, 
 as far as I can inform myfelf, more than four 
 or five thus proved by order of the cardinal 
 Noailles. Whether the petition mentioned was 
 prefented by phyficians and clergy of the firft 
 dignity, as the doctor's words feem to import, 
 I will not take upon me to controvert : but, 
 in all that I have read, I find only that it was 
 prefented by the twenty-two cures who figned 
 it J. The doctor might have told us too that 
 
 it 
 
 * Free Inquiry, p. 225. 
 
 f The verbal procefs I take to be a narrative of the 
 fact drawn up on the fpot by a magiftrate (in the pre- 
 fent cafe, by a commifTary appointed for that purpofe) 
 upon a view of the place and circumftances, an exami- 
 nation of the parcies, and the depofition of witnefles. 
 
 J Mr. Hume, in the additional note to page 196, 
 fpeaking of Mr. de Ventlmille, who was fucceflbr to 
 cardinal Noailles in the archbifhoprick of Paris, tells 
 us, that twenty-two reclors or cures of that city, whofe 
 general character, for ftri&nefs of life and manners, he 
 celebrates very juftly, but very little to the purpofe, 
 
 did,
 
 it was rejected as well as preferred, and the 
 archbimop's reafons for rejecting it, which were 
 nothing lefs than palpable falmoods and con- 
 tradictions, legally proved, par des informations 
 juridiques, on the witnefTes, and even in the de- 
 pofitions taken by order of the cardinal deNoailles: 
 he might have told us that thirty of the moft 
 eminent Janfenift doctors, who were fuppofed 
 to have an intereft in fupporting thefe miracles, 
 protefted againll the abufe that was made of 
 them, and published many good reafons for 
 not believing them that, if fome phyiicians 
 of note pronounced the cures in queftion to 
 be miraculous, many more, who had better 
 opportunities of informing themfelves, judged 
 the contrary that one of the faculty published 
 a treatife to account for the phenomenon of 
 the convulfions in a natural way, and feveral, 
 
 who 
 
 did, c< with infinite earneftnefs, prefs him to examine 
 " thefe miracles, which they afiert to be known to the 
 " whole world, and indifputably certain : but he wife- 
 *' ly forbore." But it is certain, that this prelate was 
 fo far from forbearing or declining this tafk, that he 
 caufed a publiclc judicial inqueft to be made into them ; 
 and, in an ordonnance of November 8, 1735, has pub- 
 Jifhed the moft convincing proofs, that the miracles, fo 
 ftrongly warranted by thefe cures, were forged and 
 counterfeited.
 
 [ 90 ] 
 
 who were confulted on the other pretended 
 
 cures, declared the whole to be fiction and 
 impofture *. 
 
 All that was real in thefe phenomena may 
 be accounted for from nature: but a great 
 part was certainly appearance, and owing to 
 art. The Abbe Paris, as doctor Middleton has 
 told us, " was a zealous Janfenifl, and a warm 
 " oppofer of the bull or conftitution Umge?iitus y 
 " by which the doctrines of this feet were ex- 
 " prefsly condemned : he died in 1/25, and 
 *' was buried in the churchyard of St. Medard 
 
 * See letter yth of the Critique ef Mr. Des Vceux. 
 This judicious writer, who is now minirter of the French 
 church in Dublin^ was himfelf a Janfenift and an inha- 
 bitant of Pans at the time when thefe miracles were 
 celebrated. This circumftance, which adds to the 
 credit of his verdict, doctor Middleton^ who had feen 
 liis book, and therefore muft know it, chufes to con- 
 ceal, and to reprefent him only as a Proteftant writer. 
 This may be excufe<J. But it is too much to aflert that 
 ** he does not deny the facts, but only endeavours to 
 * f make the miraculous nature of them fufpedted :" for 
 near a fourth part of this book, which confifts of nine 
 letters, in two volumes, I2mo, is taken up in difprov- 
 ing thefe fadls, and the title at the head of one of the 
 longeft letters is Ou Yon fait voir, far les pieces menu que 
 Mr. de Montgeron produit 9 que lesfaits quil public ne font 
 pas vrais. 
 
 " in
 
 [ 9' ] 
 
 * c in PartSy whither the great reputation of his 
 <c fan&ity drew many people to vifit his tomb, 
 " and pay their devotions to him as a faint ; 
 " and this concourfe, gradually increafmg, made 
 <c him foon be confidered as a fubject proper 
 " to revive the credit of that party, now 
 " utterly depreffed by the power of the Jefuits, 
 <c fupported by the authority of the court *." 
 Half the city of Paris, and many among them 
 of rank, took part with the appellants againft 
 this bull. The faint was, therefore, fure to 
 have juftice done him. Moft of thefe, if they 
 did not believe, yet wimed well to his miracles, 
 for the fake of mortifying the Jejuits and their 
 party. 
 
 " But the evidence of thefe miracles is {till 
 ^* preferved in a pompous volume of Mon 
 <{ de Montgeron, a perfon of eminent rank in 
 " Parity who, Dr. Middkton tells us, dedicated 
 <c and prefented it to the king in perfon, be- 
 <c ing induced, as the author declares, by the 
 " incontestable evidence of the fats, by which 
 '" he himfelf from a libertine and profefled 
 " Deift, became a fincere convert to the Cbrif- 
 " tian faith f." As the credit of thefe boafted 
 
 * Free Inquiry, p. 223. 
 -j- Free Inquiry ^ p. 224. 
 
 miracles
 
 [ 9* ] . 
 
 miracles refts alrnoft wholly on this book of 
 Mr. Montgeron, the reader will not be difpleafed, 
 if we flop a little to confider the character of 
 the work and its author. 
 
 This book was published, as we are adver- 
 tifed at the beginning, to demonftrate, among 
 other things, the juftice of the caufe of the 
 appellants againft the bull Unigenitus : but it 
 was fo far from anfwering the purpofe of re- 
 viving the credit of the Janfenifts or their 
 miracles, that from this time they funk into 
 'greater difgrace than ever ; while the author 
 was cafhiered from his employment, fent firft 
 to the Bafiile, and afterwards into banimment. 
 The author declares himfelf converted to Chri- 
 ftianity by the evidence of thefe fads : but it 
 is ftrange to obferve, from his own hiftory 
 of this converfion, that it was wrought with- 
 out his either feeing or examining the evi- 
 dence of any one of thefe miracles. It ap- 
 pears, from this hiftory, that the author was 
 early imprefTed with a fenfe of religion that, 
 having given himfelf up to a life of pleafure 
 and debauch, he was, on a certain occafion, 
 fo ftruck with remorfe, as to fhut himfelf up 
 in a convent, with defign to fpend his days in 
 
 penitence
 
 [ 93 ] 
 
 penitence and retirement that, returning again 
 to his former life, he endeavoured to free him- 
 felf from the checks of confcience by reading 
 the books of Deifts, and perfuading himfelf 
 that religion was a cheat that the famous bull 
 Unigenitus, which juft then appeared, helped 
 much to confirm him in this belief: But the 
 fears of religion ftill kept hold of him, and, 
 particularly, on the firft report of our dbbcs 
 miracles, his confcience took the alarm, and put 
 him upon inquiring in earneft into the truth 
 of religion that, upon hearing a fecond time 
 of thefe miracles, he refolved to vifit the tomb, 
 and make a ftricT: inquiry into their truth that, 
 coming there, he was immediately ftruck with 
 the ardor that appeared in the devotion of the 
 people ; ftrongly impreffed with which, he 
 fell himfelf on his knees, and addrefled a 
 fhort prayer to the faint, befeeching him, 
 c< That, if indeed he ftill lived, and had any 
 " power with the Almighty, he would pity 
 " his blindnefs, and intercede for him, that 
 " his mind might be enlightened, and the 
 <e cloud removed which held him in dark- 
 " nefs !" Upon which, immediately, while 
 he continued fome hours on his knees, all 
 the arguments for religion, which he had ever 
 
 heard
 
 [ 9* ] 
 
 heard or read, prefented themfelves to his mind, 
 and pafled in review before him, with fuch 
 force and conviction, that he became from that 
 moment a zealous and confirmed Chriftian. 
 Here, you fee, the author, without waiting for 
 any miracle, or inquiring into thofe which he 
 had heard, was not only converted to Chri- 
 ftianity, but became a determined believer of 
 all the miracles of this faint. And from 
 this (hort fketch we may eafily make out his 
 character, which was plainly that of a wrong- 
 headed and violent man, that could think 
 coolly about nothing, changing, as fancy or 
 temper led him, from one opinion, from one 
 extreme, to another, and governed throughout 
 by paffion or prejudice, and not by reafon. 
 
 His book was published ten (or according 
 to Dr. Middleton, twelve) years after the Abbes 
 death ; and 'tis a collection of only nine cures, 
 felected out of the great number which are 
 faid to have been wrought in all this time; 
 the firft of which I mall prefent my reader 
 with, in a few words, as a fpecimen of the 
 reft : A Spanijh youth, at the age often years, 
 loft entirely the fight of the left eye by a vio- 
 lent rheum and inflammation: a fewyears after, 
 
 receiving
 
 [ 95 ] 
 
 receiving a blow upon the right eye, he became 
 almoft blind for fome days, but, by proper 
 remedies, recovered his fight again : at the age 
 of fixteen, this eye was attacked with a fluxion 
 and inflammation like to that which had d&- 
 ftroyed the other, but was foon recovered, by 
 the application of a certain water, fo far as to 
 allow him for two or three months after to pro- 
 fecute his ftudies : but, the diforder then re- 
 turning, and the fame remedy being found in- 
 effectual, he continued in this ftate, without the 
 application of any remedy, near two months ; 
 at the end of which, hearing of fa& Abbe Paris* 
 miracles, he refolved, with the confent of his 
 governors, who were zealous Janfentfts, to ap- 
 ply to the Abbes tomb : he entered upon a neu- 
 vaine, or nine-days devotion, in honour of the 
 faint, and to fupplicate his affiftance : the effect 
 was, that his pains redoubled, and the inflam- 
 mation increafed j but towards the end of the 
 term thefe bad fymptoms abated, and his eye at 
 laft became ftrong enough to bear the light, and 
 to permit him to return to his ftudies : and all 
 this without the ule of any other means than 
 faving the eye from reading for three months, 
 (hutting out the lieht, and bathing it the two 
 laft days with a little decoction of mallow-roots 
 4 with
 
 [ 96 ] 
 
 with laudanum, prefcribed by an oculift; and 
 this too owed all its virtue to the manner of ap- 
 plying it, which was not with a common linen 
 rag, but a piece of the fhirt in which the Abbe 
 died, and fome of the earth in which he was 
 buried. A certain Janfenijl phyfician, who faw 
 this eye two days before the cure, judging it to 
 be a diforder of the optick nerve, exprefTed 
 fome doubt whether it were curable, and, being 
 told afterwards that no human means had been 
 ufed, inclined to think the cure miraculous. 
 This, I fuppoie, is one of the principal phy- 
 licians, who, Dr. Middleton tells us, attefted 
 the truth of thefe miracles. But it is certain 
 that many other phyficians and oculifts, both 
 .in France and Spain, thought otherwife, and 
 prefcribed bleeding, bathing, and the ufe of dif- 
 ferent medicines for it. The left eye, in the 
 mean time, remained in its former ftate, un- 
 cured ; and the eye which was healed relapfed 
 fome time after, and was again cured by bleed- 
 ing. This is the firft miracle, as it is related 
 by this author, and attefted by many vouchers 
 and certificates printed along with it a ftory 
 too contemptible for argument or remark. But, 
 if the reader defires to fee the falfe colouring 
 in which the writer has dreffed it, and the 
 4 incon-
 
 [ 97 1 
 
 inconfiftencies and prevarication of the witnefles 
 detected, he may find this done, to his entire 
 fatisfaction, in the letters above-mentioned, and 
 in the nineteenth and twentieth tomes of the 
 Bibliotheque raifonee j from which, and Mr. 
 Fernet 's Traite de la Verite de la Religion Chre- 
 tienne, moft of thefe remarks are taken. 
 
 The evidence then, for thefe miracles, tho* 
 fet out with fo much eloquent pomp, when 
 examined, is found to amount to very little.' 
 But this is acknowledged, that the credulity 
 of mankind is very fully proved by this and 
 the other legendary miracles of Popery, and 
 that hence an argument of feeming weight ftill 
 lies againft the miracles of the Gofpel : for, if 
 fo many other miracles have been believed rafh- 
 ly and without reafon, it is poffible that thefe 
 may likewife have been received upon incom- 
 petent teftimony : and, if this be poffible, mufl 
 it not alfo be allowed more probable, than that 
 events fo ftrange and contrary to the common 
 courfe of nature mould be true ? This is the 
 inference, we may prefume, the author would 
 have us make from the ftories he hath related; 
 and this objection he has incidentally dropped 
 in feveral parts of his Eflay : ** The many in- 
 H !! flance g
 
 " ftances of forged miracles, and prophecies, 
 " and fupernatural events, which, in all ages, 
 " have either been detected by contrary evi- 
 " dence, or which detect themfelves by their 
 <{ abfurdity, mark fufficiently the ftrong pro- 
 " penfity of mankind to the extraordinary and 
 " the marvellous, and ought reafonably to be- 
 <c get a fufpicion againft all relations of this 
 <{ . kind * :" And again, in the place above 
 cited, " Should a miracle be afcribed to any 
 " new fyftem of religion, men in all ages have 
 t been fo much impofed on by ridiculous {lories 
 " of that kind, that this very circumftance 
 <f would be fufficient, with all men of fenfe, 
 " not only to make them reject the fact, but 
 c< even reject it without farther examina- 
 " tion -f-/' As this is one of the moft fpe- 
 cious and prevailing arguments againft the 
 miracles of religion, it will deferve a diftinct 
 anfwer. 
 
 To the firft confequence, then, which the 
 author here draws from the credulity of men, I 
 readily agree That miracles and facts of an 
 extraordinary nature may be juftly fufpected, 
 'till lufficient evidence of their reality is pro- 
 
 * P. 186. f P. 200. 
 
 duced,
 
 { 99 ] 
 
 duced 3 and ought never to be received, 'till after 
 a previous examination had into this evidence* 
 But, that all miracles mould be rejected without 
 examination, becaufe a great number have been 
 forged, is, fure, a mofl illogical conclufion. 
 The truth of the Gofpel miracles does not im- 
 ply that all the miracles upon record are true : 
 how then does the falmood of other miracles 
 affect the truth of thefe ? If fome men are 
 cheats and impoftors, is there no truth in the 
 world ? If fome have believed upon too flight 
 evidence, mult we, therefore, reject all tefti- 
 mony, and difbelieve or doubt about every 
 thing ? Is the currency of bad coin a proof 
 that there is none good ? The teft and aflay 
 will always diftinguifh the true from the falfe : 
 and it is our own fault, if we are impofed upon 
 by counterfeits. God hath given us reafon and 
 underftanding to know good and evil, truth and 
 falmood, and, in all things pertaining to life or 
 duty, hath made the difference between them 
 fufficiently clear and difcernible. If he fpeaks 
 to us by miracles, he will, doubtlefs, caufe his 
 voice to be known, and give full evidence of his 
 authority. To thofe, who are not prefent wit- 
 nefles of his power, this evidence will be tranf- 
 mitted with fuch testimony as cannot be im- 
 PI 2 peached
 
 peached * fuch as will ftand every fair and 
 equitable trial. With fuch teftimony, we affert, 
 the Scripture miracles are delivered down to us. 
 Let them be brought to the trial, and, if they 
 are found wanting, be rejected ; but not be con- 
 demned, as this fupercilious writer would have 
 them, unheard. 
 
 I obferve, that this author, in common with, 
 many others, feems to think every proof of the 
 credulity of mankind a fort of argument againft 
 the evidence of the Gofpel: they think this fuf- 
 ficient to account for the belief of all miracles, 
 and that it is, therefore, needlefs and folly to 
 look for any evidence in their favour: " When 
 " fuch reports fly about, the folution of the 
 " phenomenon is obvious; and we judge in 
 " conformity to experience and oblervation, 
 cf when we account for it by the known prin- 
 " ciples of credulity and delufion. And mall 
 " we, rather than have recourfe to fo natural a 
 " folution, allow of a miraculous violation of 
 " the mofl known and moft eftablifhed laws of 
 <c nature * ?" But I muft deny that there is 
 any fuch caufe or principle in human nature as 
 credulity. If fome are more credulous than 
 
 * P. 197- 
 
 others
 
 I ioi ] 
 
 others if the fame perfon be more credulous 
 in fome points than other this depends upon 
 other principles : it is a natural effect, and al- 
 ways to be accounted for from natural caufes. 
 Intereft, when it is oppofed by truth, will biafs 
 the mind to error: ignorance and indolence will 
 difpofe men, the one of neceffity, the other of 
 choice, to follow the judgment of others, and 
 to believe as the world about them does : a de- 
 ference to authority, whether publick or pri- 
 vate a prejudice to opinions in which we 
 have been educated, or which we have long 
 entertained has the like effect : where men 
 are, as is frequent, divided into parties by opi- 
 nion, this prejudice will be heightened by pride 
 and refentment; they will hearken greedily to 
 every thing that favours their fyftem, and be 
 obftinately deaf to every thing that oppofes it. 
 Thefe are principles in human nature of great 
 force and extent ; and, where they induce to 
 the belief of any thing, there we may fufpect 
 credulity, and that men will be prepared to be- 
 lieve, without evidence, even things the moft 
 difficult of belief. If, in thefe circumftances, it 
 happen, that not the factitfelf, but the miracu- 
 lous nature of it only, is the point that gratifies 
 our wimes, there, the greater the miracle is, the 
 H 3 greater
 
 t I" ] 
 
 greater are thefe corrupt reafons for believing it, 
 and, the more ftrange and incredible it is, the 
 more eafily ibmetirnes will it obtain belief: as 
 a ftone, the heavier it is, and the more unapt 
 to motion, will defcend the fwifter, if the 
 plane be fufficiently inclined, upon which it 
 moves. 
 
 But, on the other hand, where thefe or fuch-r 
 like principles have no influence, truth will be 
 fairly heard, and the faith of men will be ge- 
 nerally proportioned to the evidence that ap- 
 pears: and, where men believe and maintain 
 opinions contrary to the influence of thefe prin- 
 ciples, it is a fair prefumption that their faith 
 is well grounded, and that their aflent is ex- 
 torted by the force of truth. The principles, 
 therefore, of credulity will by no means ac- 
 count for all belief alike. Tho' a flone will 
 defcend by its own weight, it does not follow 
 that it can move itfelf upon even ground ; and, 
 if it be feen, contrary to its natural gravity, to 
 afcend a fleep acclivity, we are fure that there 
 muft be fome competent power to impell it. 
 Where miracles are wimed for or wanted, the 
 ftrangeft and moftunfupported may be believed: 
 but, in other circumftances, the miraculous na- 
 ture
 
 [ "3 1 
 
 ture of the fad: will hang as a weight upon it, 
 and retard its progrefs ; and, if it make its way, 
 in oppofition to the withes, paffions, and pre- 
 judices of mankind, there muft be truth and 
 evidence to fupport it. 
 
 I have already afTerted that it required a 
 ftronger faith and more credulity to believe the 
 evidence of the Gofpel falfe, than to believe 
 the miracles true. All the principles that can 
 make men credulous confpired to make the 
 firft Chriftians dilbelieve the Gofpel. It was 
 not, therefore, credulity, butconvidtion, which 
 wrought this belief in them. But thefe prin- 
 ciples very naturally account for the miracles of 
 the Romifi church. Intereft, authority, and all 
 the powers of enthufiafm, fuperftition, and pre- 
 judice, forward the belief of thefe : the power 
 of the church is fupported by them, and the 
 countenance of the church, in the opinion of 
 the believer, gives certainty and infallibility to 
 them. 
 
 The difparity, then, betwixt thefe and the 
 
 Gofpel miracles is infinite. The end for which 
 
 the Scripture miracles were wrought is the 
 
 greateft that can be thought of, and the tefti- 
 
 H 4 mony
 
 mony by which they are fupported is confirmed 
 by the fureft teft of truth. If miracles, there- 
 fore, are in any cafe credible, they are in this 5 
 if teftimony is in any cafe to be relied on, it is 
 in this. But what are the ends propofed or 
 anfwered by the miracles of Popery? More 
 offerings are, perhaps, brought to the (hrine at 
 Loretto, more gain is made of the relicks of the 
 faints. But are any nations brought to the faith, 
 or is any fingle infidel converted, by them ? 
 Then, the teftimony which vouches them is 
 implicitly received, and the veracity of the wit- 
 nefles confirmed by no proof or trial. There 
 is no one condition here to make miracles cre- 
 dible no one cirumftance to credit the evi- 
 dence that fupports them. There is, therefore, 
 no confequence to be drawn from thefe to die 
 miracles of the Gofpel. 
 
 And the fame obfervation will hold, tho J not 
 xvith equal force, of the miracles recorded in 
 the church before the times of Popery : there 
 were not the fame antecedent reafons for work- 
 ing jthem, nor the fame great confequences at- 
 tending them : and when were any called, at 
 the hazard of their fortunes and lives, to attefl 
 ? We are not, therefore, to be alarmed,, 
 
 if
 
 t 
 
 If the truth of thefe miracles is fometimes 
 brought in queftion, or even if many of them 
 mould be proved to be falfe ; fmce the miracles 
 of Chrijl and his Apoftles are no way affected 
 by this, and the Gofpel wants no miracles, but 
 its own, to fupport it : nor, indeed, can we 
 do a greater injury to the cauie of Chriftianity, 
 than to parallel thefe, even fuppofing them true, 
 with the canonical miracles of Scripture; flnce, 
 tho' both may be equally true, yet the evidence 
 upon which we receive them, and, confequently, 
 the reafons for believing them, are not equal, 
 but the one, in its weight and force, infinitely 
 tranfcends the other. Nor is it any reproach to 
 Chriftianity, or any juft caufe of offence to 
 pious Chriftians, if the fathers^ of the church, 
 men juftly celebrated for their piety and virtue, 
 and even for their learning and abilities, are 
 found to have given too eafy credit to thefe mi- 
 racles. Learning and piety are no fecurity 
 againft errors of this kind. On the contrary, 
 men of this character, as they are often lefs 
 pradlifed in the arts of men, and lefs apt to fuf- 
 pedl defign and fraud in others, may lie more 
 open to be deceived. Men may be prejudiced, 
 even by piety and virtue, to fuch opinions as 
 are thought favourable to piety and virtue, and, 
 
 where
 
 [ "6 ] 
 
 where any thing is thought of good tendency, 
 may think it good to believe it. A little ac- 
 quaintance with hiftory will teach us, if our 
 own obfervation does not, that men of great 
 abilities and of the moft upright intentions may 
 be hafty in believing and zealous in fupporting 
 the belief of fables, efpecially where the caufe 
 of virtue or religion is fuppofed to be promoted 
 by them. 
 
 We may, therefore, retain our veneration 
 for the piety and good works of thefe eminent 
 lights of the church, without believing every 
 thing that they believed : we may believe many 
 of the fads which they have recorded to be 
 falfe, without hurting Chriftianity, or in the 
 leaft impairing the evidence of the Gofpel. 
 
 I might, under this head, have obferved that 
 falfe miracles are almoft a natural confequence 
 of true, and, therefore their prevalence and re- 
 ception is rather a prefumption of the exiftence 
 of true miracles than an argument againft them. 
 Could we forefee that a feries of miracles would 
 be wrought in any country, and a publick wor- 
 fhip and religion be eftablifhed in confequence 
 of it, we might prefume that miracles would be 
 2 there
 
 t 107 3 
 
 there more frequently pretended and counter- 
 feited than in any other place. True miracles, 
 like true money, will give a currency to falfe; 
 and the authority and character, which they 
 give to thofe that work them, will excite the 
 crafty and ambitious to imitate them. On the 
 other hand, where no prior miracles are ac- 
 knowledged, there is lefs temptation to coun- 
 terfeit this power, and more difficulty of fuc- 
 ceedinginit. In fact, the falfe pretences of mi- 
 racles among Chriftians are no more than might 
 be expected, in confequence of the truth and 
 certainty of the firft miracles of Chriftianity ; 
 and, if the number of thefe has been far 
 greater in the Cbriflian world than elfewhere, 
 it is an argument that there, if any-where, true 
 miracles have been wrought. The reader will 
 be pleafed to fee this argument in the words of 
 Dr. Mlddleton : " The innumerable forgeries 
 of this fort, which have been impofed upon 
 ? { mankind in all ages, are fofar from weaken- 
 ing the credibility of the Jewtfh and Cbrijlian 
 miracles, that they ftrengthen it : for how 
 c could we account for a practice fo univerfal, 
 " of forging miracles for the fupport of falfe 
 ' religions, if on fome occafions they had not 
 f ' actually been wrought for the confirmation of 
 
 " a true
 
 " a true one ? or, how is it poffible that fo 
 tf many fpurious copies fhould pafs upon the 
 <c world, without ibme genuine original from 
 " which they were drawn, whofe known ex- 
 <e iftence and tried fuccefs might give an ap- 
 * f pearance of probability to the counterfeit ? 
 *' Now, of all the miracles of antiquity, there 
 * c are none that can pretend to the character of 
 
 " originals, but thofe of the Old and New 
 
 & * 
 
 " Teftament, which, though the oldeft by 
 <c far of all others of which any monuments 
 ts now remain in the world, have yet main-* 
 " tained their credit to this day, through the 
 " perpetual oppofition and fcrutiny of ages ; 
 <{ whilft all the rival productions of fraud and 
 < craft have long ago been fucceffively explod- 
 cc ed, and funk into utter contempt an event 
 * c that cannot reafonably be afcribed to any 
 *' other caufe, but to the natural force and 
 " effect of truth, which, though defaced for 
 *' a time by the wit, or depreffed by the power, 
 te of man, is fure ftill to triumph in the end 
 <l ever all the falfe mimickry of art and the 
 J c vain efforts of human policy *." 
 
 * Prefatory Difcourfe to a Letter from Rcmf, p. 88. 
 
 The
 
 The remainder of this EfTay is little more 
 than a rude infult on the Scriptures and the 
 Cbriflian religion. For fear his readers mould 
 miftake his meaning, and not apply his argu- 
 ment where he intended, the author proceeds, 
 with a fmiling grimace, to tell us, " that our 
 " moft holy religion is founded on faith, not 
 <c on reafon ; and 'tis a fure method of ex- 
 <c poling it, to put it to fuch a trial as it is by 
 " no means fitted to endure." This he pre- 
 tends to make evident by examining the mi- 
 racles related in the Pentateuch : { Here," fays 
 he, " we are to confider a book prefented to. 
 " us by a barbarous and ignorant people, wrote 
 " in an age when they were ftill more bar- 
 <{ barous, and, in all probability, long after the 
 tf facts it relates, corroborated by no concurring 
 " teftimony, and refembling thole fabulous ac- 
 " counts which every nation gives of its origin. 
 <c Upon reading this book we find it full of pro- 
 ** digies and miracles : it gives an account of a 
 11 ftate of the world and of human nature en- 
 " tirely different from the prefent of our fill 
 *' from that ftate of the age of man extended 
 " to near a thoufand years of the deftruction 
 *' of the world by a deluge of the arbitrary 
 * l choice of one people as the favourites of hea- 
 2 " ven,
 
 [ no ] 
 
 " ven, and that people the countrymen of the 
 cc author of their deliverance from bondage by 
 (t prodigies the moft aftonifhing imaginable t I 
 " delire any one to lay his hand upon his heart, 
 <c and, after ferious confideration, declare, whe- 
 " ther he thinks that the falfhood of fuch a 
 ** book, fupported by fuch a teftimony, would 
 " be more extraordinary and miraculous than 
 <c all the miracles it relates; which is, however, 
 " neceflary to make it be received, accord- 
 " ing to the meafures of probability above efta- 
 ' blimed *." 
 
 If the yews were thus more than barbarous 
 at the time when thefe books were wrote,whence, 
 without a miracle, could they learn all the great 
 truths relating to the being and attributes of 
 God, which the moft learned part of the world 
 were for many ages after in total ignorance 
 about ? Whence could the religion and laws of 
 this people fo far exceed thofe of the wifeft Hea- 
 then, and come out at once, in their firft in- 
 fancy, thus perfect and entire j when all human 
 fyftems are found to grow up by degrees, and 
 to ripen, after many improvements, into per- 
 fection ? The Jews had but little commerce 
 
 * P. 201,
 
 t III ] 
 
 with other nations, and, therefore, did not ex- 
 cel in the literary and other arts of Greece : but 
 the fame Scriptures, which prove that they were 
 earlierinpofleffion of the moftufefulandfublime 
 parts of knowlege, fecured them likewife from 
 ever finking into that barbarity which the author 
 charges upon them. Let any one compare the 
 book of Genefts y which he treats with fo much 
 freedom, and which is by many centuries the 
 oldeft book in the world, with any of the earliefl 
 heathen hiftorians let him compare the pfalms 
 of David with the hymns of Callimachus or Or- 
 pbeus let him read the hiftory ofjfofefAuf t who 
 wasjuft cotemporary with Chrljl and his Apoftles 
 and he will incline to judge more favourably 
 of this people. 
 
 The great events recorded in this hiftory havs 
 no connection with the argument of miracles, 
 and, therefore, do not belong to this place. But 
 thefe are corroborated by the ftrongeft concurring 
 teftimony that can be defired to facts that are, 
 mod of them, older than the ufe of letters itfelf. 
 The traditions of every country fee m all to point 
 to one and the fame original. The late inven- 
 tion of arts and fciences, the foundation of cities 
 and empires, the manner of peopling the world, 
 
 and
 
 and the number of its prefent inhabitants, feem 
 all to prove that the world had its beginning no 
 earlier than the period affigned by Mofes, and 
 agree perfectly with the account of the deluge. 
 There are no monuments of antiquity which 
 give room to fufped the world of earlier ori- 
 ginal. The firft authors of Greece and Egypt 
 fpeak of the chaos, of the abyfs of waters that 
 covered the earth, of man's being formed out 
 of the ground, and of his firft innocence. 
 From thefe, one of the Latin poets has de- 
 fcribed the creation, the ftate of innocence, 
 the gradual corruption of mankind, and the 
 deluge, in a manner very nearly refembling 
 that of Mofes. The memory of a general 
 flood, which deftroyed the whole race of men 
 and animals, except one family, feems to have 
 been preferved for fome ages among almoft all 
 nations. Lucian tells us, the tradition among 
 both the Greeks and Syrians was, that this 
 was a judgment from heaven on the wicked- 
 ne(s of mankind : he defcribes the manner 
 of the flood, the ark in which fome of every 
 kind were preferved, and many other particu- 
 lars, juft as we have them in the book of Ge-> 
 nefis. Plutarch, alluding to the fame tradition, 
 mentions the ark, and even the dove that was 
 
 feat
 
 L "3 ] 
 
 fent forth to fee if the waters were abated. A 
 great number of antient authors, who mention 
 the deluge, and give witnefs to the building of 
 Babel, the burning of Sodom, and many other 
 great events in the Mofaic hiftory, are reckon'd 
 up by Jofephus, Grotius, and others. The prelent 
 furface of the earth, the fhells of fim that are 
 found in midland countries, and even on the tops 
 of mountains, and the remains of land-animals 
 at very great depths in the earth, are Hill furviv- 
 ing monuments of the deluge *. It is aimed 
 
 certain 
 
 * An univerfal deluge will, I fuppofe, be allowed 
 one of the moft miraculous fails in the hiftory of the 
 Old Teftament. The difficulties that on all fides fur- 
 round it are as great as can eafily be conceived. And 
 hence fDxny'Chriftian writers (among whom is the learned 
 Mr. Wollajlon) have thought it fufficient to believe that 
 this flood was topical, confined to a fmall part of Afia 5 
 and that the genius of the language in which the rela- 
 tion is delivered, and the manner of writing hiftory in 
 it, will account for all the reft. But, the more we im- 
 prove in natural knowledge, the more reafons we fee 
 for believing this hiftory in the literal and largeft fenfe. 
 One of the lateft and ableft writers upon this fubjedl 
 confirms what the beft natural hiftorians have obferved 
 that the fhells of fifh are found in great quantities in 
 all parts of the world that the Lapides Judaici, which 
 are gathered on the top of mount Carmel, are evidently 
 the remains of a fea-animal that the Alps and Pyrenaan 
 
 mountains abound with others and that there is not 
 
 a mountain in the world, in which there have been 
 I tolerable
 
 t "4 ] 
 
 certain that the world began to be peopled about 
 the plains of Babylon and near where the ark is 
 faid to have refted. From the eaft colonies of 
 men were fent weftward : and from thence we 
 can trace pretty diftindlly the progrefs of arts and 
 fciences. The long lives of the firft men are 
 
 tolerable opportunities of inquiring, where remains of 
 fea-animals have not been found : he tells us, that 
 many of thofe which are found in great abundance in 
 
 our ifiand are natives of other fcas that the horns of 
 
 Indian deer are found in great clufters, and always at 
 conllderable depths, in many parts of England, and fome- 
 times under a flratum of fea-fhells : and hence, though- 
 writing upon another queftion, he concludes, <e it is 
 " equally certain, that, wherever they are found, 
 " water muft have at one time overflowed, fmce there 
 * e is no other poflible means of their being brought 
 " there ; and, fmce they are found in every part of 
 " the earth, the tops of the higheft mountains not 
 * excepted, that overflowing of water muft have been 
 " univerfal." tfilFi Remarks on Phil. Tranf. p. 53. 
 Here, then, we have one of the moft difputable parts 
 of the Bible-hiftory confirmed and proved by indifput- 
 able fact and experiment. In the mean time, it muft be 
 obferved that the miracles upon which the Cbrijnan and 
 yewifi religions were built have an evidence of their 
 own, diftinft from that of the other parts of this hif- 
 tory ; and that, tho' it were allowed that many errors 
 may have crept into the hiftorical parts of this book, 
 yet the truth of thefe religions, and the faith of thofe 
 miracles upon which they are built, would remain 
 unfhaken. 
 
 fpoken
 
 t "5 ] 
 
 fpoken of by all the Heathens. This fact is fo 
 far from difcrediting the Mofalc hiftory, that 
 Moniieur Pafcal reckons it a full proof of the 
 fidelity of the author : " This hiftorian," fays 
 he, cc has brought the deluge, and even the 
 <l creation, fo near his own time, by means of 
 " the few generations which he counts between 
 " them, that the memory of them could not 
 but be ftill frefh and lively in the minds of all 
 <c the Jewifli nation." In the line of tradition 
 there are but five fleps betwixt Mofes and the 
 firft man. " Therefore, the creation and the 
 " deluge are indubitably true. This argument," 
 fays he, " muft be acknowledged for conclufive 
 ft by thofe who apprehend its procefs *." The 
 longevity of men in the firft ages feems neceffary 
 for the better peopling the world, the invention 
 and improvement of arts, and for propagating 
 religious and all ufeful knowledge, when they 
 depended wholly on tradition. And I am per- 
 iuaded that this author cannot even invent a 
 more probable or rational account of peopling 
 the world than this which he aiFecls to deride. 
 
 The other infinuations, which he has thrown 
 out to difcredit thefe books, have been fo often 
 rduted, that it is tedious to go over them again. 
 
 *PafcaI's Thoughts, p. 86. 
 
 J 2 ' The
 
 t "6 ] 
 
 The authority of an hiftorian is not, fure, the 
 worfe for his being the countryman of thofe 
 \vhofe hiftory he writes. The character ofMofes 
 is remarkably free from all partiality to hini- 
 felf and his countrymen : he faithfully records 
 all the obftinacy and perverfe behaviour of the 
 latter, and frequently reproaches them with it in 
 the fevereft terms : he fpares not his own fail- 
 ings, or thofe of his neareft friends, and omits 
 many things, which are recorded by others, to 
 his honour: the future government of the 
 Ifraelites he left not to his own tribe, but to 
 that of yudah, and, in the appointment of his 
 immediate fuccefibr, had no regard to his own 
 family, but left them undiftinguifhed and 
 mixed with the common Levttes. 
 
 As to the arbitrary preference of this people, 
 a diftinction in religious privileges is perfectly 
 agreeable to the analogy of God's difpenfations 
 to mankind, both natural and moral. But the 
 yemjh difpenfation ought not to be considered 
 apart, but in connection with the CbHJlian, in 
 which it ended. Thefe are but different parts 
 of one and the fame fcheme, which naturally 
 illuftrate and confirm each other's authority. 
 " And, from this view of them," fays Dr. Mld- 
 " we fee the weaknefs of that objection 
 2 " com-
 
 [ "7 J 
 
 u commonly made to the Mofaic part, on the 
 " account of its being calculated for theufe only 
 t( of a peculiar people ; whereas, in truth, it 
 <c was the beginning of an univerfal fyftem, 
 " which, from the time of Mofes, was gradually 
 " manifested to the world by the fucceffive 
 " miffions of the Prophets, 'till that fulnefs of 
 tf time, or coming of the Meffjah, when life 
 < and immortality were brought to light by the 
 cc Gofpel, or the chief good and happinefs of 
 " man perfectly revealed to him *." 
 
 The origin of this people is fo far from refem- 
 bling the fabulous accounts of other nations, 
 that it is quite fingtilar, and in all refpecls dif- 
 ferent from any other. They are a numerous 
 people, fprung from the loins of one man, and 
 have continued unmixed with the reft of the 
 world, if we reckon from the time of Abraham, 
 when they were firft marked out by the promife 
 of God to his pofterity, near 4000 years 
 a great part of the age of the world, and 
 approaching very near to the time when it was 
 laft peopled by the pofterity of Noah. Their 
 very exiftence at this time, taken with all its 
 circumftances, is a miracle, which gives cre- 
 dit to all the miracles of Mofes. 
 
 * Prefatory Difcourfe to the Letter from Rome, p. 88. 
 
 I 3 The
 
 The books, which record thefe miracles, were 
 certainly wrote foon after the fads ; fince the 
 religion, laws, and polity of the yews were 
 wholly built upon them. Thefe books are the 
 great charter by which they were incorporated 
 into a nation. Thefe miracles are the only 
 fanclion which gives authority to the laws they 
 contain. The miracles were wrought in the face 
 of all Ifraelj and many of them under cbferva- 
 tion for a long time together. The books, that 
 record them, were of publick authority and 
 daily refort. It was, therefore, impoffible, if 
 falfe, that they mould obtain credit for a day. 
 The very being of thefe laws is a proof of the 
 miracles connected with them j fince the latter, 
 if falfe, mull have difcovered thefalmood of the 
 former. By appealing to thefe facts, it was put 
 in the power of every one to fee through, or, 
 rather, it was put out of their power not to fee 
 through, the impofture. The memory of thefe 
 fads was not only preferved in thefe records, but 
 they were written, if I may fo fpeak, and re- 
 corded in the daily cuftoms and religious cere- 
 monies of the Jews. The Paffiruer was inftituted 
 in memory of their coming out of Egypt the 
 feaft oiPentecoft in token of the law being given 
 upon mount Sinai fifty days after that of Taber- 
 nacles in remembrance of their encamping in the 
 2 defart
 
 [ "9 ] 
 
 defart and, in the form of dedicating or offer- 
 ing their firft-fruits, a folemn commemoration 
 was injoined of the figns and wonders by which 
 they were delivered out of Egypt. The belief, 
 therefore, of the miracles muft of neceffity be as 
 antient as their religion ; and indeed, without 
 thefe, their religion, government, and even their 
 prefent exiilence, as a people, would be more 
 miraculous than all the miracles recorded in 
 the Pentateuch. 
 
 We are now come to the conclusion of this 
 celebrated EfTay : " Upon the whole," fays he, 
 " we may conclude, that the Cbriftian religion 
 " not only was at firft attended with miracles, 
 < { but even at this day cannot be believed by any 
 " reafonable perfon without one. Mere reafon 
 " is infufficient to convince us of its veracity : 
 " and whoever is moved by faith to aflfent to it, 
 " is confcious of a continued miracle in his own 
 " perfon, which fubverts all the principles of 
 <c his understanding, and gives him a determi- 
 " nation to believe what is moft contrary to 
 " cuftom and experience *." 
 
 The author in one of his EfTays, complains 
 of a want of politenefs and civility in thofe who 
 
 * P. 203. 
 1 4. defend
 
 defend religion againft the attacks of the Free- 
 thinkers, " whole moderation and good man- 
 " ners," he tells us, " are very confpicuous, 
 " when compared with the furious zeal and 
 " fcurrility of their adverfaries *." But who 
 can, without fome impatience, fee a religion 
 which he holds facred, and which hath efta- 
 blifhed itfelf purely by reafon and argument, 
 treated with this open fcorn and abuie ? Has 
 this author lived in the time of Sir Ifaac Newton, 
 Mr. Locke } and Mr. Addifon? Can he know tha^ 
 thefe men gloried in the name of Chriftians, 
 that the firft of them employed many of his 
 beft hours in ftudying and illuftrating the 
 Scriptures, and that the other two have wrote 
 profefTedly in the defence of this religion, and 
 yet think himfelf at liberty to treat all that be- 
 lieve it as men that are incapable of reafoning 
 or thinking ? The charge, which he has here 
 brought againft: the advocates of Chriftianity, 
 is fo far from being true, that I dare reft the 
 whole merits of the controverfy upon this 
 ifTue. Let any one read the authors he men- 
 tions, Collins and Ttndal, with Morgan, Gor- 
 don> and the later writers in this caufe, and 
 compare them with their antagonifts, Chandler, 
 Cony bear e, Iceland, Fojler, and judge on which 
 
 * EJJays moral and political^ p. 62. 
 
 fide
 
 fide the temper and moderation lies. And 
 yet, if men claim fome authority to opinions 
 which have the publick voice on their fide, 
 where is the wonder or the blame ? It is nothing 
 unnatural for men thus fupported to affume a 
 confidence, and to expect fome deference and 
 modefty from their adverfaries. But, when men 
 oppofe eftablimed opinions with an air of autho- 
 rity, and decide againft the publick when they 
 profefs to doubt, and yet didlate, about every 
 thing, and a<ft at once the Sceptick and the Dog- 
 matift this is a character, which, however it 
 may be accounted for, can never be excufed *. 
 
 And 
 
 * The author tells us, that, " in all controverfics, 
 c< thofe who oppofe the eftablifhed and popular opinions 
 " affect a moft extraordinary gentlenefs and modcra- 
 " tion, in order to foften, as much as poflible, any 
 " prejudices that may lie againft them *." But 
 the facl: is notoriously otherwife. In eftablifhments 
 of every kind, the party which forms the oppofition, if 
 they have the liberty to fpeak out, is ufually the moft 
 furious and loud in inve&ive. The reafon is, the moft 
 furious and vehement fpirits are the moft impatient of 
 control, and the moft forward to oppofe. A man that 
 is a tyrant in his own temper is fure to complain of 
 tyranny in his fuperiors ; and a proud man will always 
 think you proud, if you differ from him, whatever au- 
 thority and whatever modefty you may have on your fide. 
 Thus the celebrated author of the Patriot King pro- 
 nounces the moft candid of all writers to be a/>;v- 
 * EJJ'ajt Kurql and fclitical, p. 6z, 
 
 fumptuous
 
 [ 122 ] 
 
 And I here afk my reader, whether he has any- 
 where met with either a more fceptical, difpu- 
 tatious turn of mind, or a more imperious, dog- 
 matical ftyle, than in the writings of this author? 
 
 It 
 
 famptucus Dogmatift for daring to differ from his opinion, 
 even before it was known. This confummate writer, 
 not content to fhine in his own fphere, aflumes the 
 no'd, and will give the law in metaphyficks as well as 
 politicks. " I would not fay," fays he, " that God 
 *' governs by a rule that we know or may know as well 
 * c as he, and upon our knowledge of which he appeals 
 " to men for the juftice of his proceedings towards 
 ** them, which a famous divine has impioufly advanced 
 " in a pretended demonftration of his being and attri- 
 " butes : God forbid * !" I learn from hence, that 
 the famous divine fpoken of has the misfortune to have 
 fallen under the difpleafure of this author, and that he 
 has a fovereign contempt for all that do fo. But, what 
 his offence is, I am ftill at a lofs to conjecture. I think 
 myfelf certain, that he has no-where faid what the 
 author charges him with, " that we know or may 
 " know the rule by which God governs as well as he." 
 He has indeed, faid, " that God himfelf, tho' he has no 
 " fuperior, from whofe will to receive any law of his 
 tc actions, yetdifdains not to obferve the rule of equity 
 " and goodnefs as the law of all his actions in the 
 " government of the world, and condefcends to appeal 
 " even to men for the righteoufnefs and equity of his 
 " judgments (as in Ezek. xviii.) ; that (not barely his 
 " infinite power, but) the rules of this eternal law are 
 " the true foundation and the meafure of his dominion 
 
 * Patriot King, p, 94, 
 
 over
 
 [ 3 1 
 
 It is remarkable with what eafe and alacrity he 
 hath aflerted the fad: before us. But this cava- 
 lier manner is familiar to him. He tells us, in 
 another EfTay, " that the Quakers are perhaps 
 
 " the 
 
 " over his creatures *." But what is this more than 
 the author himfelf has faid, in terms as free, in the very 
 page that is ftained with this cenfure ? " That God is 
 " not an arbitrary, but a limited monarch, limited 
 " by the rule which infinite wifdom prefcribes to infinite 
 " power that he does always that which is fitteft to 
 " be done and that this fitnefs, of which no created 
 " power is a competent judge, refults from the various 
 " natures and the more various relations of things." He 
 adds, " So that, as creator of all fy (terns by which 
 " thofe natures and relations are constituted, he pre- 
 *' fcribed to himfelf the rule which he follows as 
 " governor of every fyftem of being." This, though 
 no candid reader will complain of it, is more crude and 
 perplexed than any thing I remember in the author here 
 arraigned. God does always what is right and fit. But 
 right and fit were not made what they are, when this 
 or any other fyftem of beings was made. The fitnefs of 
 every action, the fame circumftances fuppofed, was al- 
 ways and ever will be the fame. This rule is eternal 
 and immutable as truth itfelf, and its authority is as 
 univerfal, extending to all beings and to all poflible 
 fyftems of beings ; as the author we are fpealcing of 
 has, with equal modefty and clearnefs, aflertcd and 
 proved immediately before the paflage here cited. If 
 he has faid, farther, that God appeals to men for the 
 juftice of his proceedings, he has given his authority 
 for this an authority which a Chrijtian divine muft 
 * Demonftration of the being and attribute?, &t. gth edit. p. ziS. 
 
 think
 
 cc the only regular body of Deifts in the uni- 
 " verfe :" And again, " that the leading Whigs 
 " have always been either Deifts or profeffed 
 <c Latitudinarians in their principles, that is," 
 
 fays 
 
 think decifive. And what doth this amount to more 
 than faying that God hath implanted in men a fenfe of 
 what isjuft, merciful, and good, and that all his dif- 
 penfations are agreeable to our ideas of juftice, mercy, 
 and goodnefs ? Does not the aftronomer try the works 
 of God by the laws of mechanifm and geometry, when 
 he pronounces that they are done in number, weight, 
 and meafure ? And muft we not have fome meafure of 
 juftice, mercy, and goodnefs, when we attribute thefe 
 to the Deity ? To fay that we can fee the wifdom of 
 God in his works is not faying that we are as wife as 
 God himfelf : nor does our feeing the fitnefs and equity 
 of his proceedings in fome inftances imply that we are 
 competent judges of or can fee the reafon of his pro- 
 ceedings in all. As the author has not pointed out the 
 paffages in the writer he excepts againft, I can only 
 guefs this to be the place. But, if he has any-where 
 dropped an expreffion that may feem lefs accurate or 
 proper upon this fubje<5t, the author might have par- 
 doned it, who confefies, in the fame page, that he 
 cannot exprefs himfelf on this fubjecl: properly, and 
 that, when our ideas are inadequate, our expreffion 
 muft needs be improper. To return : We have here a 
 phenomenon, which, to thofe who have not ftuclied 
 human nature, will appear altogether fingular : Lord 
 
 B e complaining of the impiety, pride, and pre- 
 
 fumption of Dr. Clarke. Eftablifhed opinions and an 
 eftablifhed character provoke his refentment: rather than 
 fubmit to another, he will contradict himfelf. And this, 
 
 I take
 
 t 125 1 
 
 fays he, cc friends to toleration, and indifferent 
 <c to any particular feet of Chriftians *." Now, 
 it is certain that the Quakers profefs the belief 
 of Chriftianity as univerfally as any fe<5t what- 
 foever. And what right has the author to 
 charge a whole body of men with fuch fla- 
 grant infincerity ? As to the Whigs, the 
 principles of toleration are certainly Chriftian 
 principles, and do by no means imply an in- 
 difference to any fedt, much lefs a coldnefs to 
 religion in general : and, if the bcft Chriftians 
 are ufually the beft fubjeclis and citizens 
 (which I think an indifputable truth) I mould 
 hope their principles would be no impedi- 
 ment to their faith. I am fure, however, 
 they have no reafon to thank this author for his 
 compliment. 
 
 They who believe religion muft think that 
 the caufe of virtue and the happinefs of man- 
 kind are bound up in it : and this will juftify a 
 
 * EJJap moral and political^ p. 1 1 1 . 
 
 I take it, is the principle from which moft of Mr. 
 Humes philofophy is derived ; to whofe extraordinary 
 gentlenefs and modefty that of this writer (to fpeak in 
 the curious phrafe of the latter) * is but as the politive 
 degree to the fuperlative. 
 
 Eft genus lominum, qui ejfcprimosfe omnium rerum volunt, 
 
 Necfunt. 
 
 * Patrist KiKjr, p. 148, 
 
 decree
 
 [ '26 ] 
 
 degree of zeal and ardor in its defence. But 
 what is there to call for or excufe this fpirit in 
 thofe who oppofe it ? If the author be a friend 
 to virtue, which, from his elegance of mind 
 and tafte, I fcarce can doubt if he be a friend 
 to natural religion, which a perfon of fo much 
 thought and reflection fure muft be what 
 principles has he in referve for the fupport of 
 thefe, when Chriftianity is taken away ? The 
 beft philofophy, as I have already faid, availed 
 but little in reforming the religions or morals of 
 mankind : and, as to the philofophy of this 
 author, it is,, as far as I underftand it, as ill 
 calculated for this purpofe as any I have met 
 with *. But, indeed, religion can never be 
 fupported, or virtue taught, with any force or 
 effect, by the reafonings of philofophers. The 
 world will never be governed by metaphyfical 
 ideas of honour and beauty, decency of action, 
 and the fitnefs of things. It is the author's own 
 
 * The character of this author's philofophical writ- 
 J ngs, which I (hould not otherwife have attempted, may 
 be given in his own words, where he fpeaks of the^/- 
 ciphron and other works of the ingenious and good Bifliop 
 Berkeley: " They admit of no anfwer, and produce no 
 " conviction : their only effect is to caufe that mo- 
 * { mentary amazement and irrefolution and coafufion, 
 u which is the refult of Scepticifm." EJJays moral and 
 political) p. 240. 
 
 obferva-
 
 [ "7 1 
 
 obfervation, that " an abftraded, invifible ob- 
 " je<5t, like that which natural religion alone 
 " prefents to us, cannot long actuate the mind, 
 tc or be of any moment in life. To render the 
 <c paffion of continuance, we muft find fome 
 4< method of affecting the fenfes and imagina- 
 <{ tion, and muft embrace fome hiflorical as 
 " well as philofophical accounts of the Divi- 
 " nity. Popular fuperftitions," fays he, " and 
 " obfervances are even found to be of ufe in this 
 " particular *." The great thing to be wifhed, 
 then, for the intereft of virtue and the good of 
 mankind, is, that the maxims of natural reli- 
 gion mould be fixed and aflured by an autho- 
 rity that is decifive that a rule of duty mould 
 be taught as the will and law of God that 
 the fanctions of this law, a future ftate and a 
 judgment to come, mould be known alike to 
 all, both fmall and great that the hopes of 
 pardon fhould be aflured to the penitent (inner 
 that there mould be an inftitution to propa- 
 gate this knowledge, and to Ipread it thro' 
 the world that there mould be a publick 
 worfhip fet up, and a difcipline and ceconomy 
 preicribed, to train men to piety and virtue : 
 but all this, and much more to the advantage 
 of virtue, we have in the Chriftian religion. 
 
 * EJJayt moral a nd polit ical, p. 231, 
 
 Can
 
 Can the author tell us where elfe they are to 
 be found ? If he is looking out a cure for 
 fuperftition, I venture to affure him, that, with 
 nil his refearches into metaphyficks and morals, 
 he will never find any equal to that religion 
 which he endeavours to explode ; which in a 
 few years did infinitely more towards freeing 
 the world from the fear and folly of prodigies, 
 omens, dreams, and oracles, than all the phi- 
 lofophy in the world had done in many ages. 
 If, unhappily, this religion is flill corrupted 
 by fuperftitious mixtures, thefe I freely com- 
 mit to the mercy of the author. But Chri- 
 ftianity is not to anfwer for thefe any more 
 than for the other errors and vices of mankind, 
 which, however it aims to correct, it does not 
 pretend to eradicate. And even thefe will be 
 better and more fuccefsfully oppofed by fair 
 argument and civility than with iniult and re- 
 
 o J 
 
 proach. Where a liberty of debate and free 
 inquiry is allowed, it is unpardonable to infult 
 the publick that allows it. " There is a degree 
 <c of doubt and caution and modefty, which, 
 " in all kinds of fcrutiny and deciiion, ought 
 " for ever to accompany a juil reafoner *.'* 
 
 * Philojopblcal EjjuySi p. 250. 
 
 F I N I S.
 
 R 
 
 M; 
 
 Form LI 
 
 University of California 
 
 SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1388 
 
 Return this material to the library 
 
 from which It was borrowed. 
 
 QL APR15 1996 
 
 REC'D ID-URL 
 HAR221996
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY 
 
 69; 
 
 B 
 
 3A99 
 M6A21 
 
 1767