« 



56 DK. LUDWIG TON GEEDTZLL, OX 



though the law is in a higher plane from that which can be 

 appreciated by mere human intellect. This is the deduction from 

 the follo\ving passages : Matt, xiii, 58; Mark ix, 23 ; Acts xiv. 10; 

 Matt, ix, 29 ; Mark ii, 5, x, 52 ; Luke xriii, 42. 



In all these instances a law is evident, that certain miracles could 

 only be performed when faith was present on the part of the 

 recipient. 



The Victoria Institute is to be congratulated on the widespread 

 sources from which its papers come. Within less than a year and 

 a half we have a paper from an American judge, afterwards another 

 from a Swiss professor, and now we are indebted to a distinguished 

 German author for the present valuable essay. 



Mr. J. 0. CORRIE wrote : Inductive reasoning is, as the 

 lecturer points out, not demonstration. But the presumption 

 against miracle, that arises from observed causality in nature 

 (notably in the domain of astronomy), is reinforced by the thought 

 that an exceptional interference by the Creator in His OAvn order 

 of things would be derogatory to His wisdom and dignity. 



This is met by the observation that the state of things on earth, 

 through all known history, cannot be regarded as being piu-ely of 

 His order. The villainies of mankind (to say nothing of the 

 cruelties of nature) e^-ince the action of some malign power. 



The deprivation of the divine order by such a power accounts 

 for, and justifies, miraculous interposition. 



Mr. AV. E. Leslie wrote : After carefully perusing Dr. Ludwig 

 von Gerdteil's interesting paper on Natural Law and Miracle I 

 cannot but feel that he errs in his treatment of the principle of 

 causation. 



Think for a moment of a few of the consequences of the denial 

 of the necessity of causation. History disappears, and with it the 

 historic Christ. The scriptures may have come into existence 

 fortuitously — without writers. The Xew Testament miracles may 

 have happened of themselves — in other words, did not happen, for a 

 fortuitous o-rjiiiiov is a contradiction in terms. Xay, the philo- 

 sophical basis of theism itself is destroyed. A first cause may be 

 dispensed with in a universe which, " considered with critical 

 accuracy," may have come into existence by chance. 



I cannot enter into a detailed examination of Dr. von Gerdteil's 

 arguments, but would like to make one or two remarks on his three 



