20

CHAP. II.

THE FATHERS.

THE reason why the authority of the Fathers carries so little weight in controversy, is because, in most questions, being many and voluminous, they admit of being quoted on both sides. Nevertheless, if we wish to know what were the ecclesiastical events of the age in which they lived, or what were the ecclesiastical doctrines then held, we must come to them for information; and, whatever be their authority as a body, we seldom retire from consulting the more distinguished among them, without feelings of Christian affection and reverence. In attempting, on the present occasion, to ascertain their sentiments on the subject of miracles, I proceed on the plan already intimated; taking from the work of Mr. Noel the citations from the Fathers which it contains, and examining them. It will also be necessary to make a few further extracts.

Having enumerated various classes and individuals in the church of Christ, who, as he conceives, did not expect miracles, Mr. Noel thus proceeds:

"All these have agreed that it would be enthusiastic to expect the gifts. Nor was that expectation universally cherished, if it was cherished at all, in earlier and more superstitious times, except by some Roman-Catholic traffickers in wonders."-pp. 18, 19.

It is then added in a note:

"1. St. Augustine, in the 4th century.—' Modo caro cæca non aperit oculos miraculo Domini, at cor cæcum aperit oculos sermoni Domini. Modo non surgit mortale cadaver, resurgit anima quæ mortua jacebat in vivo cadavere. Modo aures corporis surdæ non aperiuntur, sed quam multi habent aures clausas cordis, quæ tamen (verbo Dei penetrante) patescunt.'-(Augustine, cited by Huss in his Commentary on 1st Epistle to the Corinthians.)

"Augustine certainly believed that miracles occasionally took place in his day, but not in virtue of the promises in Mark xvi. and elsewhere, nor by the communication of supernatural gifts to men, for he prefaces his narrative of miracles, in his work on the Church of God, thus: Cur, inquiunt, nunc illa miracula quæ prædicatis facta esse, non fiunt. Possem quidem dicere necessaria fuisse prius quam crederet mundus, ad hoc, ut crederet mundus.... etiam nunc fiunt miracula in ejus nomine, sive per sacramenta ejus, sive per orationes, vel memorias sanctorum ejus.'-(Augustine: de Civitate Dei.)

"2. St. Isidore, in the 5th century. - Quod nunc ecclesia Dei miracula non facit quæ sub Apostolis faciebat causa est, quia tunc oportebat mundum miraculis credere, nunc vero credentem oportet bonis operibus coruscare.' (St. Isidore, cited by Huss in his Defence of Wickliff.) "See also Du Pin, Bibliothéque des Auteurs Ecclesiastiques,' tom. iv. p. 3, &c."

6

Mr. Noel then goes on to say :

"St. Chrysostom, in his twenty-third Homily on St. John, as quoted by the historian Fuller, has these words:Και γαρ νυν εισιν οι ζητουντες και λεγοντες δια τι μη και νυν σημεία γενονται ; ει γαρ πιστος ει ὡς ειναι χρη και φιλεις τον Χριστον ὡς φιλειν δει ου χρειαν εχεις σημείων, ταυτα γαρ τοις απιστοις διδοται : Now also are there those who seek and say, Why are not miracles done now also? If you are a believer, as you ought to be, and love Christ as you ought to love him, you have no need of miracles; for miracles are given to unbelievers.' And Augustine ranked the miracles of his

age under two heads: 1. Figmenta mendacium hominum, Forgeries of lying men ;' 2. Portenta fallacium spirituum, Prodigies of deceitful devils.'"

Of the authorities thus cited by Mr. Noelnamely, St. Augustine, St. Isidore, and St. Chrysostom, the first to be considered by us is St. Augustine. As this eminent Father is quoted by our author, in a note upon his statement that the expectation (of the gifts) was not " universally cherished, if it was cherished at all, in earlier and more superstitious times, except by some Roman-Catholic traffickers in wonders," I presume the immediate design of the note to be, to shew that no such expectation was cherished by Augustine in particular. The passage first cited from Augustine may thus be rendered:-" The blind flesh does not now open its eyes by a miracle of the Lord, but the blind heart opens its eyes to the word of the Lord. The corpse does not now rise, but the soul experiences a resurrection, which was lying dead in the living corpse. The deaf ears of the body are not now opened, but how many persons have the ears of the heart closed, which nevertheless open, when the word of God penetrates them."

The second runs thus :-" Why, say they, are not those miracles wrought now, which, you allege, were wrought formerly? I might, indeed, answer, that they were necessary before the world. believed, in order that the world might believe..... Even now miracles are wrought in His name, whether by his sacraments (ordinances) or by prayers, or the tombs of his saints."

From this last sentence it is at once apparent,

that these passages would be useless, to prove that no miracles happened in St. Augustine's days: nor does Mr. Noel, indeed, quote them for that purpose. But are they of any service to prove that miraculous gifts were not conferred in St. Augustine's days, according to his judgment at least, "in virtue of the promises in Mark xvi. ?" The explanation is shortly this: that in Mark xvi., gifts are promised, to attest the preaching of the Gospel throughout the world; and, according to the idea of Augustine (as well as of some of the Reformers, a point to be considered hereafter), this general preaching of the Gospel was a transaction confined to the Apostolic age, and then completed; and, after that, the church ceased to be missionary. The end, then, being accomplished, the gifts' would not be wanted. For example: immediately before the passage (cited by Mr. Noel from Huss) "The blind flesh does not now open its eyes," &c., we find Augustine saying, respecting the miracles of the New Testament, "These things the Lord did, therefore, that he might draw men to faith. Now faith is fervent in the church, spread throughout the whole world*.

On this supposition, then, that the whole world had been evangelized in the beginning, once for all, miracles, in virtue of the promise of them in aid of evangelizing the world, were less to be looked for. But more on this subject, when we come to speak of the view of the Reformers. That some miracles were wrought in St. Augustine's

"Hæc ergo fecit Dominus ut invitaret ad fidem. Hæc fides nunc fervet in ecclesia, toto orbe diffușa."-De Verbis Domini, Sermo xviii. Op. Ed. Par. 1531. tom. x. p. 16. col. 4.

days, was evidently the opinion of that Father; and any one who carries away an opposite opinion from a cursory view of the above quotations, will fall into a great mistake, But a third reference to Augustine remains.

66

Augustine," it is said, "ranked the miracles of his age under two heads: 1. Figmenta mendacium hominum, Forgeries of lying men;' 2. Portenta fallacium spirituum, 'Prodigies of deceitful devils.'" And, in support of this assertion, Mr. Noel refers us, in a note, to "Fuller's Church History, p. 330." Now, as it is clear, even from the other quotations before us, that Augustine believed and alleged some miracles in his own days, one feels curious to know where, and under what circumstances, this Father can have made a classification, which apparently passes such a general sentence of condemnation on all the miracles of his times. The fact is, that Fuller, in the passage quoted, seems both to have fallen himself, and in some measure to have drawn Mr. Noel, into a great mistake.

The case stands thus. The words of Augustine (as Fuller correctly informs us in the place referred to by Mr. Noel) occur in his work On the Unity of the Church*. But what is the real character of this work? It is a work against the Donatists, especially written to impugn their exclusive claims to be the true churcht. He has occasion to mention the miracles vaunted by the Donatists; and of them he observes, and not, as Mr. Noel has been misled to think, of "the miracles

* De Unitate Ecclesiæ, cap. 16. Op. tom. vii. p. 104. col. 3. + See Cap. 2.