as they have power to perform these duties at any time, they feel not the urgency of the obligation, and rely upon their own ability to secure the boon, whenever they shall choose. We do not say this is the instruction given them, but we do affirm, that such is the use; or, if it better please a certain class of teachers, the abuse of such philosophy. By the way, the abuse is not so great as many apprehend; nor is it so great an abuse of their preaching, as is their abuse of the doctrine of power. The abuse to which we allude is this: after dividing man's power into natural and moral, they represent him as capable of accomplishing, with one division, that which appropriately belongs to the other; and that which God requires to be performed by both. It is not at all strange that such a perversion of true philosophy, should be followed by greater aberrations from truth.

There are some other evils connected with the use of this philosophy; but our intention is, in a subsequent article, to examine, more at length, the different parts .of this system, misnamed philosophy. We have only room to say here, that the advocates of the pretended improvement in mental science tell us, that it subserves an important purpose in bringing men to a consciousness of their responsibility. They set out with the principle, that men are not bound to do what they have not power to perform; or in other words, man's ability is the measure of his responsibility. Hence the necessity of the distinction between natural and moral power. Men must have natural power to perform all that God commands, or the commands are unjust. This, if we do not mistake, is a candid statement of the principle, in its most plausible form. But plausible as it may seem, we think it unsound. Physical ability is not the measure of man's responsible

ness to God, because he owes to his Maker feelings which involve no such ability. The highest act of obedience is love, is moral, and proceeds exclusively from a moral source. The plausibility of the statement consists, in the truth of its application to those actions which are appropriate to natural ability; and its fallacy in its application to feelings of the heart, in which there is no employment of natural power. There is still another fallacy; it implies that all moral good and evil belongs exclusively to volition. This is sometimes considered as an inference from the maxim above stated; but by some it is considered as a primary principle, and the doctrine of responsibleness, measured by power, derived from the voluntary nature of all that is moral. It is immaterial whether one or the other be primary or inferential, both principles are involved. We have not room, in the present article, to pursue this topick. In our next number we hope to set this matter in its proper light.

(To be continued.)

F.

MODERN MIRACLES, AND PHRENOLOGICAL INTERPRETATIONS.

A series of extended and very interesting papers has lately appeared in the Christian Observer; and was still to be continued, when the number of that work from which we have made the following extract was published-The papers bear the title of "A Visit to a Cathedral." The erudite and elegant writer of these papers, makes the historical recollections, awakened by the monuments of antiquity in the cathedral church of Winchester, the starting point of a variety of religious, moral, and literary observations, of much interest and considerable instruction.

Among the rest, we find the following discussion on the subjects of modern miracles, and the science of Craniology. In regard to the former, we think it of some importance to the whole religious publick, to know the wonderful effects which excitement may produce on the human frame. This knowledge is useful and necessary, in order to judge correctly of many religious appearances, beside the pretension to miraclesIt is the source and fountain of all fanaticism. As to Craniology or Phrenology, we have always thought it was only fit to be laughed at; and this writer treats it according to its merits.

"So much, at present, my dear friend, for Wintonensian cardinals and popish saints. Most of these alleged saints in Winchester, as elsewhere, were in their day great workers of miracles, if we may be lieve the distich which was inscribed on 'the Holy Hole,' where reposed their mortal relics:

Corpora sanctorum sunt hic in pace sepulta,

Ex meritis quorum fulgent miracula multa.

"Papists have always maintained the uninterrupted succession of miracles in their church, and have urged, in proof of the unscriptural character of Protestantism, that it cannot boast of this mark of divine approbation. The general, and I think the fair and scriptural, reply has been, that miracles are no test of a true church; that there is no promise of their continuance, or any necessity for their continuance, at the present moment; and that the alleged miracles of the Church of Rome are either impostures, or mere contingencies, or to be accounted for by natural causes. Recently, however, a sect has arisen among us, the members of which assert that miracles have never ceased, that they are in visible action now, and that Protes

tantism claims her full share of them. In proof of these positions, alleged miracles, old and new, have been brought forward; and, in particular, several recent cases of remarkable cures, which, it is stated, have been wrought supernaturally by a lively faith in Christ, and in answer to fervent prayer. The facts and discussions which have taken place on the subject, appear to me to have opened a new chapter in the spiritual and physiological history of our species. It was formerly the habit of writers, either to deny such alleged extraordinary facts, or to feel themselves called upon to admit the inference of miraculous interposition. In this respect, the Church of Rome has been too hardly dealt with; and some of her alleged miracles have been attributed to imposture, where not a shadow of candid reason existed for such an inference. I need not go beyond Winchester for an apposite example; for Bishop Milner, the well-known Roman Catholick historian and antiquary of that place, published, in 1805, a pamphlet entitled Authentick Documents of the Miraculous Cure of W. White, July 25th, 1805;' in alluding to which he says, 'I have daily evidence before my eyes of a cure as supernatural and sudden as any upon record.' The usual Protestant reply to such allegations has been, What juggling and mendacious impostors are these Papists! And lamentably true is the charge, in innumerable instances; as, for example, the liquefaction of the blood of Januarius, which no Papist of common understanding but must see to be a trick of priestcraft. But this, I am persuaded, was not -a fair reply, in such cases as that alluded to by Bishop Milner, or in those Roman Catholick cases mentioned in the pamphlet entitled 'Documents on the Cure of Miss Fancourt.' The reply was unphi

6

losophical, and arose from not knowing the vast surface over which cures of this nature may extend; and the Roman Catholicks had just cause to be displeased, that Protestants viewed all such cases as fraudulent, and refused to listen to the most solemn attestations of their authenticity.

"Now the late discussions, as I have said, have assisted to open up the truth on this interesting question. It is now generally admitted, by well-judging persons, who have not the slightest belief in modern miracles, that such extraordinary cures have again and again taken place; but they generalize the principle of them, and show that this undoubted fact is not confined to any one sect or nation; that cases of this extraordinary character are to be found among Papists and Protestants; nay, among Pagans and Mohammedans. They therefore trace them to some general principle, not of necessity connected with doctrinal faith, or the personal piety of the individual. The Protestant advocates for modern miracles are divided upon the subject: some are so perfectly convinced of the analogy which has been traced between the Protestant cases which have recently occurred, and similar ones in the Church of Rome, that they have admitted that the Popish cases were good miracles, wrought through faith in the common Saviour, and have embraced the Church of Rome as an auxiliary against those of their fellow Protestants who are not convinced that miracles were intended to be perpetual in the church. These advocates for modern miracles act fairly and consistently; but some of their brethren, shocked that the Church of Rome should be allowed as good miracles as our own, deny the former, while they admit the latter; and were much offended with the Christian Observer for

pointing out the analogy, and placing the cure of Miss Stuart, or the cures effected by Hohenlohe, side by side with the recent cures among ourselves. But, though they have been much displeased at this juxta-position, they have not attempted to show in what way the analogy failed; or to account for the Roman Catholick cures, while they vindicated the exclusive miraculousness of the Protestant. Their only reply was, that it was impious to think for a moment that there could be any parallel between the Protestant case and the Catholick; between the healing of a pious Scotchwoman, and that of an Irish idolater. But such a reply could convince no person; and it seems to have been tacitly abandoned by all the writers on the subject, who begin to acknowledge that there is no reason why the Church of Rome should be excluded in this question; but, on the contrary, say the vouchers for the miraculous nature of the present dispensation, the attestation of that church is a standing testimony to the truth of the doctrine.

"A new chapter, I said, had been opened by these facts and discussions upon the physical and spiritual parts of our nature; for neither divines nor physicians, I am persuaded, were fully aware of the extent to which the principle of excitement might be carried. Its efficacy generally they knew and acknowledged, but they had so little practical experience on the subject, that they were not aware of its latitude. Cases of alleged modern miraculous cures were encountered with strong symptoms of incredulity as to the actual facts: there, was deception, it was said, or mistake, in the matter; and if the circumstance happened within the precincts of the Church of Rome, then there was one ready answer, Oh, it is all a Popish juggle. But recent exam

ples prove that such facts may and do exist; that they are not of necessity juggles, though some of them may be so, impostors taking advantage of truth, to imitate it for interested purposes. For myself, I do not deny the facts of the Winchester case of W. White, or the late Scotch cases, or the cases attested by Mr. Irving, or the Morning Watch, or other post-apostolical cases which I could produce from the pages of history; but it appears to me most indubitable, that they may be all traced to one cause, call it excitement, or what we will; and that this cause is more powerful, and more contagious, (if I may so speak) and applicable to more diseases, than either divines or physicians have generally suspected: in a word, that our ignorance of what was within the rule of God's ordinary laws, has led persons either to deny facts because they could not account for them, or to make miracles because they saw the facts and did not understand the solution.

"There is one remarkable circumstance, which I could respectfully wish the advocates for modern miracles impartially to consider-namely, that the only subject upon which these recent alleged miracles have been wrought, is that most sensitive and complicated fabrick, the living human frame, and chiefly in the case of women. I do not at least recollect an instance of any alleged miraculous cures, in the case of an individual of the less susceptible sex. Now this appears to me very much to favour the doctrine of excitement. In no one of these modern cases is the alleged miraculous action carried beyond the frame of the recipient; in no one has it occurred, that a supposed miracle has been wrought, except in connexion with the operation of mind upon a living body. One miracle is as easy as another to

Omnipotence; and, accordingly, we find in the Bible narratives, not only miracles of healing (which, however, stand on totally different grounds to these alleged modern miracles), but effects produced upon dead, and irrational, and inorganick matter. An ass spake, the sun stood still, the shadow on the dial went back, the sea was quelled, the dead were raised. In none of these cases could excitement produce such an effect; for there was no mind, no basis for excitement: but in all the modern instances mind has acted upon body; there is not one case that can be taken out of this range; and though the extent to which the effect may have occurred, is perhaps greater than many persons might have conceived possible, yet every case is but a magnified illustration of the comon adage, that conceit can kill and conceit can cure.'

"The whole, I say, of these cases, come under the peculiar and illunderstood phenomena of the action of mind upon the living body. I know of none of these alleged miracles which go beyond a profession of speaking unknown tongues, or bodily healing. The former is, I fear, so direct a result of mental disorder, so clear a case of over-excitement of mind, fitter for a physician than a divine, that I should feel pain to dwell upon it: I can only heartily pity the victim. The latter, in all its modifications, still involves the same principle of the effect of mind upon body. I am not ashamed to say, that some of these effects are more powerful than I had conceived likely, perhaps, or possible; so that I can now receive, and account for, many of the facts in the church of Rome, which before I thought incredible. I can believe Hohenlohism, just as I believe Irvingism. In order to make a distinction between the class of cases which it is supposed

mind might operate on, and those which it could not affect, it has been attempted to draw a clear line between functional and organick disorder; but it is very possible that the physiologist may find that he has presumed too far, upon his supposed knowledge of the workings of the human frame, so fearfully and wonderfully made; that his definitions of what constitutes these two classes of case have not been sufficiently established; and that some diseases may possibly be cured by the operation of mind, which he might have been disposed to consider as not capable of being thus affected. But, be this as it may, the general position is the same: it is mind upon body; the etherial principle on the living fibre: and till our asserters of modern miracles will bring me a case out of this range, I shall not suppose a miracle, though I may be unable to account for the facts; as I cannot tell how my own mind guides my pen, or dictates to my tongue, though I am sure that it does so. I put it to our friends, seriously to ask why they have no one modern instance, to produce of alleged miraculous effects upon matter not connected with mind; upon a dead body, for example. Some persons, it is said, lately tried to raise one in Scotland, but they failed, as might be expected; for the exciting mind, the enthusiastick impulse, actuating the material frame, was wanting. In general, the cures effected have been, obviously, cases connected with the nervous system. I am not aware of any one clearly out of even this limited range. But, grant, that, in the enthusiasm which prevails in certain quarters, one apparently anomalous should occur, it would only convince me that the action of the soul on the body may be more powerful than I had anticipated; that strong nervous influences may affect cases hitherto considered beyond their

reach, but still within the sphere of the operation of the mind upon the body. Give me a case beyond this category, and I shall feel staggered. If it were said, that Mr. Irving, to prove his doctrine, had hurled a stone of a hundred pounds. weight over the pinnacles of the Caledonian chapel, I should doubt the fact; but if it were irrefragably attested, I should still see no miracle, as I have seen Belzoni perform wonderful feats of strength, and I am not assured how far muscular energy, under very extraordinary excitement might be carried. It is still a case of the mind influencing the bodily organs, stimulating the nerves, and stringing every muscle and fibre to action. But if he moved but a pebble in my garden, while he himself was several miles off; if he turned back the shadow on the sundial, or clave the sea, or raised the dead, or healed another who is unconscious of his operations, the miracle would be obvious. What I wish in these remarks, is simply to suggest the turning fact, that all the cases referred to as proofs of modern miracles, are cases of an excited mind operating upon a person's own body. In some of these cases the excitement happens to be connected with certain theological opinions, whether those now inculcated by Mr. Boys, Mr. M'Neile, and Mr. Erskine, or those current in the church of Rome, or any other modification of sentiment; but in others the excitement has nothing to do with matters of religious faith, but is wholly secular. How then, in fairness, can the cases be separated, so as to make a miracle in the one and not in the other?

"For my own part, my dear friend, I feel no desire to suppose myself living in an age of miracles. Far more consoling is it to my spirit, to know that I am under the unceasing guidance of Him who is full of kindness and full of