Wesley Corpus

But the most marvellous part is still behind. For you add, “To come more close to the point: If we should allow that the tongues of these Confessors were cut away to the very roots, what will the learned Doctor say, if this boasted miracle should be found at last to be no miracle at all ?” (Page 184.) “Say?” Why, that you have more skill than all the “strolling wonder-workers” of the three first centuries put together. But to the point: Let us see how you will set about it. Why, thus: “The tongue” (as you justly, though keenly, observe) “has generally been considered as absolutely neces sary to the use of speech; so that, to hear men talk without it, might easily pass for a miracle in that credulous age. Yet there was always room to doubt, whether there was anything miraculous in it or not. But we have an instance in the present century, which clears up all our doubts, and entirely decides the question: I mean, the case of a girl born without a tongue, who talked as easily and distinctly as if she had had one; an account of which is given in the Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences at Paris.” (Ibid.) 14. And can you really believe this, that a girl “spoke distinctly and easily” without any tongue at all? And, after avowing this belief, do you gravely talk of other men's credulity? I wonder that such a volunteer in faith should stagger at anything. Doubtless, were it related as natural only, not miraculous, you could believe that a man might see without eyes. Surely there is something very peculiar in this; something extraordinary, though not miraculous; that a man who is too wise to believe the Bible, should believe everything but the Bible! should swallow any tale, so God be out of the question, though ever so improbable, ever so impossible ! 15.