Treatise Letter To Dr Conyers Middleton
| Author | John Wesley |
|---|---|
| Type | treatise |
| Year | None |
| Passage ID | jw-treatise-letter-to-dr-conyers-middleton-067 |
| Words | 385 |
Those reasons have been
coolly examined. And now let every impartial man, every
person of true and unbiassed reason, calmly consider and judge,
whether you have made out one point of all that you took in
hand; and whether some miracles of each kind may not have
been wrought in the ancient Church, for anything you have
advanced to the contrary. 10. From page 127 to page 158, you relate miracles said to
be wrought in the fourth century. I have no concern with
these; but I must weigh an argument which you intermix
therewith again and again. It is in substance this: “If we
cannot believe the miracles attested by the later Fathers, then
we ought not to believe those which are attested by the earliest
writers of the Church.” I answer, The consequence is not
good; because the case is not the same with the one and with
the other. Several objections, which do not hold with regard
to the earlier, may lie against the later, miracles; drawn either
from the improbability of the facts themselves, such as we
have no precedent of in holy writ; from the incompetency of
the instruments said to perform them, such as bones, relics, or
departed saints; or from the gross “credulity of a prejudiced,
or the dishonesty of an interested, relater.” (Page 145.)
11. One or other of these objections holds against most of
the later, though not the earlier, miracles. And if only one
holds, it is enough; it is ground sufficient for making the
difference. If, therefore, it was true that there was not a
single Father of the fourth age, who was not equally pious
with the best of the more ancient, still we might consistently
reject most of the miracles of the fourth, while we allowed
those of the preceding ages; both because of the far greater
improbability of the facts themselves, and because of the
incompetency of the instruments. (Page 159.)
But it is not true, that “the Fathers of the fourth age,”
whom you mention, were equally pious with the best of the
preceding ages. Nay, according to your account, (which I
shall not now contest,) they were not pious at all. For you
say, “They were wilful, habitual liars.” And, if so, they
had not a grain of piety.