To assert, as some do, that a miraculous intervention implies change or contradiction in God, is inaccurate; for in His works surely He may exercise that liberty which is one of His perfections. Were man’s range of vision wider than it is, the working of a miracle might be found to be, after all, only the realization and carrying out of God’s original design and primary purpose. Again, from the point of view of another objection, to maintain that we cannot know what a miracle is, or whether any miracle has been ever wrought, without being acquainted with all the laws of nature, is likewise inaccurate; for we know enough, both of the natural and supernatural, to be perfectly certain that it is out of the ordinary course of nature for a dead man to come to life again. While, then, such a miracle teaches us to acknowledge the power of God, it may, at the same time, serve to let the Materialist realize his own possible ignorance of the laws of nature. For after all there may be some hidden law, as yet unknown, which may contradict a known law, and so modify it—a probability which is at least deserving of the consideration of those who altogether deny the Supernatural.
As regards miracles, let the well-known argument of the great S. Augustine of Hippo be considered: “Christianity,” he writes, “was either founded by miracles, or it was not. If it was, then miracles exist. If it was not, then this is the greatest of all miracles, viz. that a religion so radically contrarient to all human prejudices, and so much resisted by all human influence, should, without the aid of miracles, have made its place and assured its progress in the world.” If, again, the only evidence that a person will admit is that of his own personal experience, that he must himself witness a miracle; that, like S. Thomas, he will maintain, “Except I shall see … I will not believe,” has he not power of mind enough to appreciate the fact that he is in every way unreasonable, by demanding for himself that which he altogether refuses to admit in others?
But, in truth, the miracles of our Blessed Lord, and more particularly the miracle of His Resurrection, were so striking and convincing, being testified to, both as regards their act and consequences, by so many, that they produced both conviction and triumph. Not universally, but with a sufficient number of persons to ensure the steady increase of the infant Church—though the very miracles which wrought such a vast moral and religious change, were rejected by the unbelievers of the day.
In the Church of the primitive, as well as in later, ages, the Supernatural was being constantly manifested. The apostles proved the divinity of their mission by the power of their works. The miracles recorded in the “Acts of the Apostles” were followed by others equally marvellous and remarkable in succeeding periods—a feature that might have been most reasonably looked for in the history of Christianity, for the very life and spirit of the Church are supernatural.[14] Persecuted in every age, she has risen again. After being cast down, driven from this place in one century, she has made still greater progress elsewhere in another. For the first three hundred years of her existence, and in the very heart of the world’s civilization, Rome, every patriarchal primate of that Holy See died a witness to the truths of Christianity. The ordinary supernatural powers of our Lord’s first followers were duly inherited by those formally set apart to fill their place and office. Men freely testified to what they had seen and heard. As occasion seemed to need it, the divine power was duly manifested in outward, notable, and noted acts—to the truth and reality of which even Profane History has abundantly witnessed.
While in the records of the Christian Church there is an almost constant tradition of miraculous facts. The tale of every century is rife with them. They were to have been anticipated, because He had spoken Whose Word shall never fail, and His promise seems to have been always remembered: “Verily, verily I say unto you, He that believeth on Me, the works that I do he shall do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto My Father.”[15] Consequently it is found that many of the later miracles, those termed “ecclesiastical,” in distinction to scriptural, are even more remarkable than those wrought by our Blessed Lord Himself—a fact which, instead of deserving ridicule and contempt, merits, from persons of a Christian habit of mind, patient consideration, and a careful, if not a ready, acceptance. For in such the faithful will only perceive a perfect realization of their Master’s divine pledge.
To take a notable example of the miraculous occurring towards the close of the second century (A.D. 174), testified to, as far as the fact of the miracle is concerned, by at least four independent Pagan writers, Dionysius Cassius, Julius Capitolinus, Ælius Lampridius, and Claudian.
Eusebius, in his “Ecclesiastical History,”[16] puts on record the following account of a most remarkable event:[17]—“It is said that when Marcus Aurelius Cæsar was forming his troops in order of battle against the Germans and Sarmatians, he was reduced to extremities by a failure of water. Meanwhile the soldiers in the so-called ‘Melitene legion,’ which for its faith remains to this day, knelt down upon the ground, as we are accustomed to do, in prayer, and betook themselves to supplication. And whereas this sight was strange to the enemy, another still more strange happened immediately—thunderbolts which caused the enemy’s flight and overthrow; and upon the army to which the men were attached, who had called upon God, a rain, which restored it entirely when it was all but perishing by thirst.” This fact had been previously put on record by Claudius Apollinaris,[18] Bishop of Hierapolis, in his “Apology for Christianity,” addressed about the year 176 to the Emperor Marcus. Tertullian, about fifteen years later, affirms the truth of the same fact when addressing the Proconsul of Africa. Each of these writers gives point to the narrative, the first by recording that henceforth the term “Thundering Legion” was applied to that in which the Christian soldiers had prayed: the second by his statement that the Emperor had, in consequence, promulgated an edict in favour of the Christians. It is clear from Eusebius, likewise, that the Pagans acknowledged the miracle, as they could not fail to do, wrought as it was in the presence of so many; but, of course, they denied that it was to be attributed to the prayers of the Christians. Julius Capitolinus attributed it to the prayers of the Emperor;[19] Dionysius Cassius to the operations of Arnuphis, an Egyptian magician.[20] A record of the unquestioned fact, however, is sculptured on the Antonine column at Rome;[21] a medal, struck the very year of the occurrence, likewise commemorates the event. Here, then, we find on record an occurrence which ordinary people will call a miracle; here we obtain a distinct example of the Supernatural. In answer to the prayers of certain Roman soldiers, sons and servants of the Crucified, palpable benefits are vouchsafed, and marvellous deliverances effected. The foe is destroyed, and they are rescued. And this fact is testified to by Pagans worthy of credit as well as by Christians, and is put on record in the modes already set forth.
Another example, the appearance of a luminous Cross to Constantine (A.D. 312), must here be given, because of its inherent importance; because the testimony to its having occurred before so many is very general; and because the moral and religious changes consequent upon it, results that both immediately and eventually followed, have been at once great and notorious:—
The conversion of the Roman empire, in the person of its head, was the most remarkable event in the early pages of Christian history. “Constantine’s submission of his power to the Church,” writes Dr. Newman, “has been a pattern for all Christian monarchs since, and the commencement of our state establishment to this day; and, on the other hand, the fortunes of the Roman Empire are in prophecy apparently connected with her in a very intimate manner, which we are not yet able fully to comprehend. If any event might be said to call for a miracle it was this; whether to signalize it, or to bring it about. Thus it was that the fate of Babylon was written on the wall of the banqueting-hall; also portents in the sky preceded the final destruction of Jerusalem, and are predicted in Scripture as forerunners of the last great day. Moreover our Lord’s prophecy of ‘the Sign of the Son of Man in Heaven’ was anciently understood of the Cross. And further, the sign of the Cross was at the time, and had been from the beginning, a received symbol and instrument of Christian devotion, and cannot be ascribed to a then rising superstition. Tertullian speaks of it as an ordinary rite for sanctifying all the ordinary events of the day; it was used in exorcisms; and, what is still more to the point, it is regarded by S. Justin, Tertullian, and Minucius as impressed with a providential meaning upon natural forms and human works, as well as introduced by divine authority into the types of the Old Testament.”[22]
The