462 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



miracles by putting them, on a level with the remarkable story 

 about the fire which stopped the rebuilding of the temple, or that 

 about the death of Arius — but Dr. Newman is above suspicion. 

 The pity is that his list of what he delicately terms " difficult " 

 instances is so short. Why omit the manufacture of Eve out of 

 Adam's rib, on the strict historical accuracy of which the chief 

 argument of the defenders of an iniquitous portion of our pres- 

 ent marriage law depends ? Why leave out the account of the 

 " Bene Elohim " and their gallantries, on which a large part of 

 the worst practices of the mediaeval inquisitors into witchcraft 

 was based ? Why forget the angel who wrestled with Jacob, 

 and, as the account suggests, somewhat overstepped the bounds 

 of fair play at the end of the struggle ? Surely we must agree 

 with Dr. Newman that, if all these camels have gone down, it 

 savors of affectation to strain at such gnats as the sudden ail- 

 ment of Arius in the midst of his deadly, if prayerful,* enemies ; 

 and the fiery explosion which stopped the Julian building opera- 

 tions. Though the words of the " Conclusion " of the " Essay on 

 Miracles " may, perhaps, be quoted against me, I may express my 

 satisfaction at finding myself in substantial accordance with a 

 theologian above all suspicion of heterodoxy. With all my 

 heart, I can declare my belief that there is just as good reason 

 for believing in the miraculous slaying of the man who fell short 

 of the Athanasian power of affirming contradictories, with re- 

 spect to the nature of the Godhead, as there is for believing in 

 the stories of the serpent and the ark told in Genesis, the speak- 

 ing of Balaam's ass in Numbers, or the floating of the axe, at 

 Elisha's order, in the second book of Kings. 



It is one of the peculiarities of a really sound argument that 

 it is susceptible of the fullest development; and that it some- 

 times leads to conclusions unexpected by those who employ it. 

 To my mind it is impossible to refuse to follow Dr. Newman 

 when he extends his reasoning from the miracles of the patristic 

 and mediaeval ages backward in time as far as miracles are 

 recorded. But, if the rules of logic are valid, I feel compelled 

 to extend the argument forward to the alleged Roman miracles 

 of the present day, which Dr. Newman might not have admitted. 



* According to Dr. Newman, "This prayer [that of Bishop Alexander, who begged 

 God to ' take Arius away '] is said to have been offered about 3 p. m. on the Saturday ; 

 that same evening Arius was in the great square of Constantine, when he was suddenly 

 seized with indisposition " (p. clxx). The " infidel " Gibbon seems to have dared to sug- 

 gest that " an option between poison and miracle " is presented by this case ; and it must 

 be admitted, that if the bishop had been within reach of a modern police magistrate, things 

 might have gone hardly with him. Modern " infidels," possessed of a slight knowledge of 

 chemistry, are not unlikely, with no less audacity, to suggest an " option between fire-damp 

 and miracle " in seeking for the cause of the fiery outburst at Jerusalem. 



