C *°o ) 



Rousseau's doctrine concerning miracles. 



Methinks it is not Hume, as is commonly 

 imagined, but John James RourTeau, who, with a 

 firm attachment to the eternal maxims of reafon, united 

 a profound reverence for the gofpel, and the perfon 

 of its exalted founder, has written the -moft forcibly, 

 of all that has appeared in our times, in refutation of 

 miracles. 



He has hitherto been confuted by no man, at leaft 

 certainly not in a way at all fatisfa&ory to perfons ac- 

 cuftomed to reflection. 



A miracle, according to Roufteau's definition # , is 

 an immediate effedl of omnipotence, an obvious alte- 

 ration of the order of nature, a real and vilible excep- 

 tion from her laws. 



He flrft examines the queftion : Can God work mi- 

 racles ? To which he anfwers, Who can deny it ? A 

 man muft be a Hebrew for being able to alk, Can God 

 prepare a table in the wildernefs ? 



The fecond queftion is : Will God work miracfes ? 

 For folving this queftion with certainty, we muft be 

 able, fays RomTeau, to read in the eternal decrees. 

 For by fadts it is not to be decided. Neither have we, 

 according to this writer's own confeffion, any more 

 ground for the negative. It is pride alone that makes 

 us difpofed to believe that miracles have occasionally 



* In the Lettres ecrites de la Montagne ; which compare 

 with the letter to M. de Beaumont, archbifhop of Paris, 



