Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

face to face with an ancient faith, an ancient public and popular opinion. We observe its general consistent harmony-but it is quite another thing to assume its historic exactitude. We can only say, So they believed.

Nor does the case alter when we come down to the later historic period. We are aware that the accounts of the miracles given in the New Testament are in full harmony with the popular belief at the time, and under the circumstances, of their composition. For the more striking and important of these miracles precedents were to be found in the Hebrew Scriptures. The healing of the lepers, the revival of the dead-as they were held to be until restored to their friends-the ascension of the human body from the earth, the multiplication of food, the counteraction of the destructive energies of Nature, are all to be found in the Old Testament. The particular form of relief described as the healing of demoniacs is not therein to be found. But the Jews were familiar with that belief from the time of their return from Babylon. And its presence among the Egyptians nearly, or quite as far back as the date of the Exodus is proved by hieroglyphic records. So naturally was any prophetic mission held to be accompanied and attested by miracles, that the first Evangelist leans more on the argument of the fulfilment of certain prophetic passages of the Scriptures or rather of the Targums, than upon the miracles

which he relates.

At the same time, when we seek for direct evidence of a single miraculous occurrence, we find nothing beyond an anonymous belief. In only three or four instances is the subject of a miracle named or identified. In none is the name of the informant of the writer, or

that of the writer himself, given. It does not follow that the accounts are erroneous. But it does follow that evidence such as is demanded to establish a fact of the most ordinary occurrence, is altogether wanting with regard to any of these events. Unknown historians relate them, relate them in imperfect accordance with each other, and relate them without telling their reader of their sources of information. We may have our own opinions as to who these writers were; but the fact is undeniable that they have not thought fit to authenticate the works by the declaration of their own names.

But

Of only one writer of early Christian times we have numerous and undoubted writings. That he was, like his fellow students of the law, a firm believer in miracle, there is no doubt whatever. he has not supplied that direct evidence which we seek. From the expressions which he uses he appears to have held himself sedulously aloof from the twelve chosen witnesses of the life of Christ. The reasons which induced him to change his views as to Christianity appear to have been purely subjective. It is to the change wrought in his own inner conviction that he always refers; not to effect produced on him by external testimony. On the single occasion on which he alludes to those who had seen Jesus after the Resurrection, in an account which has not hitherto been reconciled with either of the other four contained in the New Testament, he speaks of an appearance to himself last of all, as if it were one of the same nature with the others. Whether he here refers to the occurrence on the road to Damascus, or to the vision in the Temple mentioned in the Acts of the

the

Apostles, is not clear. In either case he appears to place a sub

jective, on the same footing with an objective, appearance. Both are conceivable; and either might be quite convincing to the witness. But the testimony of the Evangelists is supposed to refer, not to visions, but to the distinct sight and touch, by the Apostles and the women, or some of them, of the actual human form that had been crucified and buried. When these pieces of direct evidence (if we only had them from the witnesses themselves) are put by a controversial writer of that day on the same level as a trance, vision, or dream of his own, we cannot but feel that he much damages the claim of the other writers to be speaking from positive evidence, at least among any but Semitic people. The Jewish indifference to what we consider essentials cannot be

more strikingly displayed than it is in this argument of the Epistle.

Again, then, we are brought face to face with the fact that while great and wonderful miracles were believed by many of the contemporaries of Jesus Christ to have attended his ministry, in full accordance with the national faith in such events, no single writer, disciple, or witness has been found to give such positive evidence of any fact as we find given, for example, by Herodotus of matters which came under his personal cognisance. This fact does not disprove the occurrence of the miracles. It does not, properly regarded, even throw doubt on their probability. But it does draw the exact line between the probable, or the generally believed, and the proven, or between public rumour and legal evidence.

Nor is this truth, which it is impossible to question, to be regarded as in any way hostile to a true acceptance of the teaching of Jesus Christ. If we had direct, signed,

personal testimony of eye witnesses to each of the thirty-five miracles mentioned by the Evangelists, the authority of the Law on the subject would remain unaltered. Of the permanence and authority of that Law, down to the very power of the crowns or horns of certain letters in the synagogue copies of the Roll, it is impossible to speak with more respect than in the words of Jesus himself. No miracle, however attested, was to save from lapidation any prophet who disowned that Law. No prophet ever spoke of its permanence in more precise terms than did Jesus himself. It is therefore clear that if we had that full body of testimony which would be demanded by those to whom miracles appeared something apart from the ordinary course of events, rather than a natural attribute of the prophetic function, we should be still unable to advance a single step beyond the inflexible limits laid down in the Pentateuch.

VIII.

It is a conceivable, and to the mind of the writer it is the most probable, theory, that in the earlier centuries of human history the communication between the visible and the invisible worlds was more free, certain, and palpable than in later times. The universal consensus of ancient history, sacred and profane, is to that effect. The only argument that is urged in opposition is that some learned menprincipally of the surgical craft— do not think it probable. On one side we have the testimony of all ancient history-that, be it observed, of hieroglyphics and cuneiform tablets, as well as of papyri and parchments. On the other hand, we have the opinion-it may be disrespectful to say of modern sciolists; but the mere fact of speaking dogmatically in

contempt of all the evidence which exists, be it more or less worthy of credence, can hardly deserve any name but that of sciolism. Nor would these opponents of the ancient creed have had the standing room accorded to them which they now hold, but for the distinction made by theologians, in equal contempt of the true sources of authoritative information, between the relations of the two worlds within and without the narrow limits of Palestine, or of the Jewish nation. But when we find that, at the earliest period to which we can trace sacred law, or written history, it was clearly laid down as a principle that the miraculous must be subservient to the right; that there is a truth and a justice which no sign or wonder could warrant any man in questioning or in perverting, and that whatever counsel or message man, in his utmost need, might seek or might obtain from powers invisible, human conduct must always be ultimately judged by a law written on human conscience, it is clear that we must acknowledge the existence of a Divine truth, and of a Divine word in the heart of man, compared to the vital energy of which it may well be said that signs are not for those who believe, but for those who believe not.

IX

In conclusion, the doctrine of attestation of Divine communication, by prediction or by marvel, is an essential feature of all ancient forms of religion. If Christianity claims to have inherited it from Judaism, she should the more carefully remember the wise limits imposed by the Jewish legislator on the acceptance of such testimony. The possibility of the miraculous can only be doubted by those who disbelieve in immaterial existence, in the immortality of the soul, and

in a Divine guidance of human affairs. On the other hand, the ignorant of every country, age, or creed, have substituted for a belief in the lofty guidance of miracles, the superstitious fear of magic. The substance has always its shadow: the true doctrine has ever its superstitious echo. The very central idea of the miraculous is lost in the vulgar notion of a miracle-the vulgar notion, not only of the devotee but of the materialist. A man in a certain stage of ignorance would accept from his priest, with equal assurance, the information that a circle can be miraculously made so that the circumference shall be exactly three times its diameter, or that an eclipse of the moon was foretold to happen at a given time. The welleducated man knows that the first statement is not that of a miracle, but of an absurdity-a contradiction in terms. As to the latter, he knows that such fore-knowledge can only be communicated by an intelligence superior to that of the peasant in question, whether that intelligence be human or otherwise. He will exhaust the possibilities of the first supposition, before he accepts the second. But he can offer no sound reason why the latter mode of enlightenment should not occur. It is rather in the wonderful economy of the Divine government; its avoidance of waste of power, as well as of waste of material; its habitual accomplishment of the grandest ends by the simplest means, than in the idea of difficulty as to mode of communication, that the religious man will find the most reason to hesitate as to the truth of any reasonably asserted miracle. It is in the assertion that events contrary to known principles of physical nature are accomplished by the Law-giver of nature on trivial occasions, or

for grotesque objects, that the really irreligious treatment of the subject consists. Peasants in Syria, in Italy, in Ireland, and doubtless in many other parts of the world, have a profound dread of the magical, or as they call it, the miraculous, power of the priest. The belief in weir-wolves is yet prevalent in Italy. The Irish peasant is said to believe-or very recently to have believed-in the power of the priest to turn a man into a hare. The belief in the curative or magical effect of certain rites performed by the priest is not confined to the peasantry of the countries cited. A certain flavour of that doctrine is found to pervade religious dogma to a remarkable extent. The devout feeling is not wounded by this dangerous tendency. On the contrary, that feeling, when carried to excess, and becoming devoteeism, nourishes and cherishes the error. But nothing can be more hostile to a vigorous and intelligent religion. Nothing is of more evil omen than the spread of a feeling of that nature among certain circles even in this country. To the grotesque caricature of 'faith which is presented by devout Superstition, is due the no less grotesque negativism which steals the more respectable name of

Scepticism. The growth, and the education, of all the qualities of the human mind, from age to age, correspond very closely to those of the mind of the individual in rising from infancy to manhood. The child receives all information as truth. Experience disenchants him, and enforces inquiry and research. The man who accepts all positive statements with the simplicity of a child is no other than a fool. There is nothing unphilosophical or irreligious in the idea that a larger amount of direct teaching, from an invisible source, may have been easy and good for men in the infancy of the human race, and that as time ran on, the sterner education of the boyhood of humanity lost the ancient whisper of unseen guides.. In life, as we see it to exist now, and in life as we conceive it to exist hereafter, knowledge is continually taking the place of faith... What we believed yesterday, we know to-day. That which is today obscure may to-morrow become clear. Knowledge, to the healthy mind, is ever growing. As it extends, it covers more and more of the horizon of speculation. Could knowledge become perfect, faith would be no more. It would be turned to sight. Love alone is imperishable and immortal.

F. R. CONDER..

IN THIS WORLD:

A NOVEL.

By MABEL COLLINS, Author of "An Innocent Sinner," &c.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]

"I never forget people's little odd ways and pet weaknesses,' said Mrs. Silburn, smiling. "Now Miss Vavasour has only lately taken her M.D. And you know she is one of the proudest women that ever existed. If I were in her place I should chatter to every one about my new dignity. But she wishes our sex to be viewed as entirely equal, if not superior to the other; so that of course becoming an M.D. is nothing at all to boast of. Consequently she never can be got to speak about it in society; and the best fun of all is to see

her with a real old-fashioned doctor, who regards her as an extraordinary new sort of animal when she shews medical knowledgewhich, in consequence, she can't often be got to do. Well, Coventry and I have had great amusement lately because several times she has met, at our little gatherings here, Dr. Doldy-you know his name, of course.'

[ocr errors]

"Yes, indeed," said Miss Armine, "everybody knows his name. He made his reputation ten years ago, I have heard, out of the Duchess of Dolldrum's kneecap. He's one of the doctors of fashion, is he not?"

"Just so, my dear, if not the most fashionable of all. Well, his presence acts like a refrigerator on Miss Dr. Vavasour. She has such a horror of being sneered at that she becomes the mere lady of fashion the moment she sees him; and the best of it all is that I believe our orthodox medico has fallen head over ears in love with her."

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]
« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »