did not believe on the Infallibility of your Church their Faith was but a kind of guilded and splendid infidelity and none of them Christians because not Jesuits And doth not this principle then fairly advance Christianity in the world when the belief of it comes to be settled on Foundations never heard of in the best and purest times of it nay such Foundations as for want of their believing them their Faith must be all in vain and Christ dyed in vain for them And what now saith E. W. to all this First he saith I do not bring Instances enough Secondly That I bring too many 1. That I do not bring enough for he much wonders I omit to touch upon an instance far more difficult than any of these concerning rude and illiterate persons which I and all others are bound to solve Meâ— thinks he might have been contented with those I had brought unless he had answered them better and should not have blamed me for omitting that which I purposely take notice of and give a sufficient answer to in these words Although the Ignorance and carelesness of men in a matter of so great consequence be so great in all Ages as is not to be justified because all men ought to endeavour aster the highest ways of satisfaction in a matter so nearly concerning them and it is none of the least things to be blamed in your Church that she doth so much countenance this ignorance and neglect of the Scripture yet for such persons who either morally or invincibly are hindred from this capacity of examining Scripture there may be sufficient means for their Faith to be built upon For although such illiterate persons cannot themselves see and read the Scripture yet as many as do believe do receive the Doctrine of it by that sense by which Faith is conveyed and by that means they have so great certainty as excludes all doubting that such Doctrines and such matters of Fact are contained in these Books by which they come to the understanding of the nature of this Doctrine and are capable of judging concerning the Divinity of it For the Light spoken of in Scripture is not a light to the eye but to the mind now the mind is capable of this light as well by the ear as by the eyes The case then of such honest illiterate persons as are not capable of reading Scripture but diligently and devoutly hear it read to them is much of the same nature with those who heard the Apostles Preach this Doctrine before it was writ For whatever was an Argument to such to believe the Apostles in what they spake becomes an Argument to such who hear the same things which are certainly conveyed to us by an unquestionable Tradition So that nothing hinders but such illiterate persons may resolve their Faith into the same Doctrine and Motives which others do only those are conveyed to them by the ear which are conveyed to others by the eyes But if you suppose persons so rude and illiterate as not to understand any thing but that they are to believe as the Church believes do you if you can resolve their Faith for them for my part I cannot and am so far from it that I have no reason to believe they can have any Judge now Reader what measure I am like to meet with from such men who can so impudently charge me with omitting a difficulty which I give so punctual an answer to 2. But those instances I have brought are too many for him as will easily appear by the shuffling answers he makes to them My design was from them to prove that the Churches Infallibity was not necessary in order to Faith he puts it thus If the Infallibility of the Church be a sure Foundation of Faith c. Is not this a good beginning to put Sure in stead of Necessary or only sure For that may be sure which is not necessary and it was the necessity I disproved by these Instances To them however he attempts to give an Answer 1. In general That none make the Roman Catholick Church in all circumstances the only sure Foundation of Divine Faith For the first man that believed in Christ our Lord before the compleat establishment of his Church had perfect faith resting on that great Master of Truth without dependance on the Christian Church for Christ alone was not the Church but the Head of it Faith therefore in general requires no more but only to rely upon God the first verity speaking by this or that Oracle by one or more men lawfully sent to teach who prove their mission and make the doctrine proposed by them evidently credible In like manner the Apostles preached no doctrine in the name of the new Christian Church whilst our Saviour lived here on earth but testified that he was the true Messias by vertue of those signs and miracles which had been already wrought above the force of Nature A very fair concession which plainly destroys the necessity of the Churches infallibility in order to Faith For if no more be necessary in order to faith but to rely upon God the first verity speaking by this or that Oracle c. how comes the infallible testimony of the Church to be in any Age necessary to faith For God spake by Christ and his Apostles as his Oracles by whom his word is declared to us therefore nothing can be necessary to faith but to rely upon God the first Truth speaking by them And this we assert as well as they But he must prove that we cannot rely on God as speaking by them unless he hath an insallible Church in every Age if he will make this infallible testimony of the Church necessary to faith which I despair of ever seeing done while the world stands 2. In particular 1. To the instance of the disciples of Christ believing the divine Authority of the old Testament without any infallible testimony of the Jewish Church only upon the rational evidence they had to convince them that those Prophesies came from God he answers that it is hard to say where the force of it lies seeing there were innumerable Jews then dispersed all Jury over and the other parts of the world who most firmly believed the Divine Authority of those Books upon whose Testimony the Apostles might believe those Books to be divine A most excellent answer if we well consider it Have not they of the Church of Rome proved the necessity of infallibility in the Church from Deut. 17. 10 11 12. of which abundant instances might be produced and particularly the Considerator of my Principles which words if they imply any Infallibility at all do necessarily prove that it is lodged in the supream Ecclesiastical Judges and no where else so that if there were no infallibility in them it could not be supposed to be any where else therefore I proposed the case at that time when these Ecclesiastical Judges consented
Power in the cure of diseases at the memories of the Mariyrs or upon the prayers of the faithful of which he there gives several examples but elsewhere he shews that the miâ—acles wrought by Christ and his Apostles were â—rought for the benefit and satisfaction of future Ages as well as their own that so none might complain for want of a power of miracles And when the Donatists aftewards appealed to the miracles wrought by Donatus and Pontius and to visions and revelations St. Augustin very smartly bids them lay aside those feigned miracles or Diabolical impostures for either they were not true or if they were we have so much the more reason to beware of them because our Saviour hath foretold that false Prophets should arise working signs and wonders that if it were possible they should deceive the very Elect. But it may be said that in all this St. Augustin doth only upbraid the Schismatical Donatists witâ— lying miracles and not take away the evidence of miracles from the true Church 〈◊〉 that St. Augustin himself answers that the Catholicks do not bring the evidence of miracles to prove the true Church by nor yet oâ— Visions and Revelations for saith he 〈◊〉 such things are to be approved because they are done in the Catholick Church and nâ—â— that the Church is proved to be Catholicâ— because such things are done in it and therefore saith that controversie of the Church must be ended by the Scriptures From whence it necessarily follows that St. Augustin could never think the miracles done in his time were to be compared with those wrought by Christ or his Apostles or could give equal evidence of credibility either concerning the Doctrine or the Church which delivered it Never did two men more plainly contradict each other in this point than St. Augustin and E. W. who appeals to miracles for proof of the Catholick and infallible Church and such as are equal to those of Christ and his Apostles but whether St. Augustin or E. W. deserve the greater credit that is another controversie which I am not now at leisure to engage in To the same purpose St. Augustin speaks in another place viz that miracles are no proof of the true Church for though Pontius and Doâ—atus might do wonders and see visions yet Christ hath now forewarned us quia miraculis decipi non debemus we ought not now to be deceived by miracles The force of which argument from our Saviours caution depends upon this viz. that the Christian Religion being once established by plain and evident miracles there would be no necessity in after ages to have recourse to miracles again For if no new Doctrine be delivered what need can there be of new miracles Let no man therefore now complain saith the same St. Augustin because Christ doth not work the same miracles now that he did in former times for he hath said Blessed are they which have not seen and yet have believed whom doth he mean saith he but us and those who are to come after us But those miracles were wrought by Christ to draw men to faith and this faith is now spread over the world And now although he does not work the same cures he does greater now the blind eyes do not receive sight by a miracle of Christ but the blind hearts do see by the doctrine of Christ now dead bodies are not raised but souls that are dead in living bodies do rise again Now deaf ears are not opened but deaf minds are by the power of Gods word so that they believe and live well who were unbelievers and wicked and disobedient Could any man of common sense have used these expressions if he had thought there was either any necessity of miracles being wrought in his time or that there were such miracles then wrought which might be compared with those of Christ and his Apostles and as he elsewhere fully speaks to this purpose Signâ— and Miracles were wrought by the Apostles to bring men from infidelity to faith that men seeing those things done which are impossible with men may acknowledge that the preaching is from God by which power they were to prove that there was reason to believe Among believers then signs and miracles are not not necessary but only a firm hope From these Testimonies of St. Augustin thus laid together we observe these things 1. That the main intention of miracles was to convince unbelievers 2. That the Christian faith being established there was no longer any necessity of the power of miracles 3. That though there were not any such necessity yet God out of his abundant kindness was pleased to do some extraordinary things among them in their time 4. That in disputes about the true Church they never appealed to the Power of miracles but to the Scriptures whose Doctrine was already confirmed by Miracles 5. That those out of the true Church might make as great a pretence to miracles visions and revelations as those who were in it as appears by the Donatists 6. That some kind of miracles were wholly ceased then in the Church as the gift of tongues and the common miraculous cures of diseases by those that preached 7. That those which did then remain were not in any respect for number or quality to be compared with those of Christ and his Apostles as the cure of one blind man at Miâ—â—n or those other cures of a Cancer a Fistula or the two shaking persons in Africa for when himself speaks most favourably of the miracles then wrought he saith they were not so great nor so many as those done by Christ or his Apostles § 10. But what shall we now say to the succeeding Ages of the Church For after the first 600 years were passed and there were no more St. Chrysostoms or St. Augustins and one of the greatest Prodigies as Tully said of old was a wise man the pretence of the common working of miracles was again started by those who undertook to give an account of the lives of the Saints for they thought they said nothing in effect of them if they did not attribute the power of miracles upon any occasion to them Then St. Gregory and St. Bede shewed the way to the rest and by their own credulity and want of judgement gave a pattern and encouragement to all the Monkish Tales and impostures afterwards But we must acknowledge our obligation to some more ingenuous and judicious men in the Roman Church who in several Ages have blasted the credit and discovered the Impostures of these Legendary Writers which is the next thing I am to prove viz. 2. That the credibility of their miracles in the Church of Rome is destroyed by the Testimony of their own more judicious Writers Ludovicus Vives after he hath discoursed of all other Histories comes to that of the Church and particularly the Lives of the Saints of which he saith that they are generally corrupted with
he never attempts either not understanding what was fit to be proved or knowing it impossible to be done But if the infallible certainty of Faith doth depend upon inward illumination and divine concurrence the Infallibility of Faith may be had without an external Infallible Proponent And so all his first principles signify nothing to his purpose for supposing an Infallible assent of Faith necessary to an Infallible Revelation yet that doth not prove the necessity of Infallible teachers unless it can be had no other way But here he tells us That Infallible certainty is derived from supernatural principles concurring to the act of Faith which he elsewhere calls The interior illustration of Grace imparted to a Soul which he saith is wholly necessary to make faith certain and after saith we come to an absolute certainty of Faith upon tbis interiour sacred Language of God or his internal illumination the necessity of which he proves from Scripture and Fathers But when he hath done all he hath most effectually confuted himself For if this inward illumination can as he saith supply the inefficacy of external motives How comes the Infallibility of an external proponent to be necessary in order to that certainty of Faith which may be obtained by divinâ— Grace making up what is wanting in the outward motives Did ever any man shew more kindness to his Adversary in helping him with weapons to destroy himself than this E. W. doth When after a most tedious endeavour to prove the necessity of an externaâ— Infallible Proponent in order to the certainty of Faith he sets down these words Now what we assert in this particular is that the Infallible certainty of faith comes from thâ— interior illumination as it more lively setâ— forth the formal object assented to or helpâ— to a clearer proposal of the divine mysteries Doth the Infallible certainty of Faith indeed come from this interior illumination What then becomes of the necessity of an Infallible Church We often hear of the great Assistance the Jesuits have in writing their Books I should rather have thought some enemy of E. W's had put in these things to overthrow all he had spent so many impertinent words about before But lest such expressions should be thought to have dropt from him unawares observe with what care he sums up the whole progress of Faith in this State First A natural Proposition of the mysteries precedes this begets a natural apprehension of their credibility after some consideration there may arise an imperfect judgement of credibility but should the will offer as yet to incline the mind to assent only upon what appears hitherto it could not move to a Faith which is an assent super omnia or most certain Therefore the illustration or powerful invitation of Grace by which as I said the object appears another way and more clearly is infused whereof the soul is recipient The Will now after other Preparatives thus strengthned a new commands boldly the understanding to Assert upon the safest Principles imaginable viz. upon Gods infallible Revelation accompanied with his own Divine Light which makes faith to grow higher in certainty than all the reason or knowledge in this life can arise to For as S. Thomas observes humane knowledge derives its certitude from mans natural Reason which may err but faith hath its infallibility ex lumine divinae scientiae from the light of divine wisdom which cannot deceive and therefore is most certain Who upon reading these words would not have thought this E. W. more conversant in Calvins Institutions than Aquinas his Sums For in all this Resolution of Faith how can a man edge in the necessity of an infallible Church in order to the certainty of Faith I will not say E. W. was wholly inapprehensive of this snare he had brought himself into but he takes the worst way imaginable to get out of it For to shew the difference between this way and that of Hereticks he makes the exterior humane proposition of Divine Revelation necessarily preceding the true light of Faith which cannoâ— be made but by one that makes the Proposition good by a Miracle or some supernatural wonder but no Protestant is able to do thus much And is any Papist think we I would withal my heart see some of the miracles wrought by their Preachers to convince me I profess the greatest readiness of mind to be perswaded by them in case they do but work such miracles as Christ and his Apostles did But of this subject at large afterwards At present it may suffice to take notice 1. That no proposition of Faith is supposed sufficient by E. W. but where the Proponent doth work Miracles and therefore we may safely question the Churches Proposition till we see such Miracles wrought by her as were by Christ and his Apostles For thus saith he Christ our Lord Sent by his Eternal Father thus the Apostles sent by Christ and the Church ever since all shewing wonders above the force of Nature proved their mission and withal evinced that God only impowred them to teach as they did And because the poor Protestant doth not pretend to miracles therefore the light he pretends to is a meer ignis fatuus vain and void of all reality I must say that of my Adversary that he puts the controversie upon the fairest issue that can be desired For if their Church work such miracles as Christ and his Apostles did to attest their divine commission the evidence from thence to believe her infallibility ought to over rule the opinions of such who say she hath erred in case the doctrine attested by Christ and his Apostles and that of the Roman Church do not directly contradict each other 2. Although this exterior Proponent prove himself so commissioned yet by the Progress of Faith laid down by E. W. this is not enough to beget an infallible certainty of Faith For he saith after the exteriour proposition only a natural apprehension of their credibility succeeds then a judgement of credibility then the inclination of the Will but yet no infallible certainty till the illustration of Divine Grace comes So that it evidently follows according to E. W. that an infallible Proponent cannot beget an infallible Assent of Faith but that doth arise from the inward illumination of the mind by the Holy Ghost Which I have already shewed doth lay men open to all the absurditieâ— the highest Calvinists were charged with in resolving Faith and is withal impertinent to our dispute which relates to the necessity of an external infallible Proponent in order to the Certainty of Faith But surely the Jesuiâ— are not so berest of all their subtilty to comply with their greatest Adversaries without some advantage to be gained by it Yes E. W. will shake hands with some old enemies the better to assault some later Protestants who seem to attribute he saith no other certainty to the very act of Faith than what is
and is the ground of believing and not where it is a meer condition of understanding If a Prince sends an Ambassadour about a match to a foraign Princess declaring that he will wholly rely upon his Testimony of her in this case there needs the greatest judgement and veracity in the Person trusted because the Prince resolves his judgement into his Ambassadours Testimony but if he only imploys a Person to bring her into the Room where he may see her and judge of her himself in this case there is no necessity of any other quality thâ—â— only obedience and fidelity So we say as the Church if the Churches Testimony to be relied upon as the Foundation of oâ— belief of the Scriptures then it is necessaâ— the Church should be infallible if there câ—â— be no faith without such a Testimony bâ— if all the office of the Church be only to prâ— pose the object of faith to be viewed and coâ— sidered by us then a common veracity mâ— be sufficient for it And in this case I granâ— faith is not to be resolved into the conditioâ— of applying the object of faith any moâ— than love is into the light whereby a mâ— sees Beauty or the burning of Fire into thâ— laying near of the fuel but if it be assertâ— that there can be no divine faith without â— infallible Testimony that this Testimony iâ— that of the Church and therefore upon thiâ— infallible Testimony we must build our saith he is blind that doth not see in this case thaâ— it must be resolved into this infallible testimony And therefore E. W. very impertinently charges me with this constant errour viz. making the motives of faith the Foundation of it and that hereby I confound thâ— judgement of credibility with the assent of faith by making the infallible testimony of the Church to those who believe it the formal object of faith For although the common motives of faith should do no more than â—ake the object of faith appear evidently â—edible and so the faith of such persons be â—eâ—olved into a further reason than those moâ—ves yet they who do believe upon the acâ—ount of the infallibility of the Churches â—estimony must resolve their faith into that which to them is the only infallible and adaequate Ground of Faith § 6. 2. To lay open the Foundation of all these mistakes about the nature of Faith I shall inquire into the influence which the motives of credibility have upon believing And therein give an account of these three things 1. What the motives of credibility are 2. How far they are necessary to faith 3. What influence they have upon the assent of Faith 1. What these motives of credibility are Suarez brings them under four heads 1. From the qualities of the Christian doctrine and those are 1. It s truth without any mixture of falshood but faith he if there be many things true and some false it is a sufficient sign that doctrine is not from God as it was among the Philosophers of old The way to judge of this quality he thus laies down those things which the Christian Religion speaks of which may be knowâ— by natural light are very agreeable to thâ— common reason of mankind those otheâ— things which are above it are not repugnanâ— to any principle of it but are agreeable tâ— the infinite and incomprehensible Majesty oâ— God 2. The sanctity and purity of this doctrine as appears by the excellency of the precepts of it the moral precepts not only agreeable to the Law of nature but tend much to the improvement of it the spiritual precepts have nothing contrary to the rules of morality and are suitable to the perfections of the Divine Nature 3. The efficacy of it which is seen by the strange and miraculous ways of its propagation by such instruments as were never like to effect their design without a Divine Power 2. The second Motive is from the number of witnesses of the whole Trinity at the Baptism of Christ of Christ himself in his holy and innocent life of Moses and the Prophets before him of the Apostles after him of the Devils themselves of the multitude of Martyrs of all kinds suffering with so much patience and courage and Christian Religion increasing by it 3. From the Testimony God gave to the truth of it by the Miracles which were wrought in confirmation of the Doctrine preached in which ought to be considered the nature the effects the frequency the manner of working them and the end for which they were wrought which must be not meerly for the benefit of the person on whom they are wrought but for a testimony to the truth of the Doctrine delivered otherwise he grants a Deceiver may work Miracles 4. From the continuance of this Doctrine in the world being so hard to believe the Doctrine and practice the precepts of it meeting with such multitudes of enemies of all kinds out of all which the credibility of the Christian Religion may be demonstrated a Divine Providence being supposed to take care of the affairs of mankind Greg. de Valentiâ reckons up these motives to 19. Michael Medina follows â—cotus and makes 10. or 11. of them on which he largely insists viz. the fulfilling of Prophesies the consent of Scriptures their Authority and truth the care and diligence of the first Christians in examining the Doctrine of Christianity the excellency of it in all its parts the propagation of it in the world the Miracles wrought for the confirmation of it the testimony of enemies the justice of providence and the destruction of its Adversaries To the same purpose Cardinal Lugo and others of the Schoolmen make an enumeration of theâ— motives of credibility but a late Jesuit haâ— reduced them all to the four chief Attribute of God His Wisdom Goodness Poweâ— and Providence but inlarges upon theâ— much in the same way that Suarez had donâ— Thus much may suffice for understandinâ— what these motives of credibility are whâ—â— are acknowledged to make up a demonstrâ—tion for the credibility of the Christian Religion 2. How far these are necessary to faith for that we are to consider that faith beinâ— an assent of the rational faculty in man muâ— proceed upon such grounds as may justifie thâ— assent to be a rational act which cannot bâ— unless sufficient reason appear to induce thâ— mind to assent which reason appearing â— all one with the creâ—â—bility of the object which doth not imply here what may be believed either with or without reason but whaâ— all circumstances considered ought to be believed by every prudent person And in thiâ— sense Suarez asserts the necessity of the evidence of credibility to the act of faith for saith he it is not enough that the object oâ— faith be proposed as revealed by God but iâ— is necessary that it be proposed with such circumstances as make it appear prudently crâ—dible in that way it is proposed For levilâ—
known Miracles of those two admirable Saints Blessed St. Dominick and the Seraphical St. Francis and St. Vincentius Ferrerius reported by the pious and learned St. Antoninus Arch-Bishop of Florence From whence he infers that the Miracles wrought in the Roman-Catholick Church are not inferiour to those done by the Apostles and a little after Iâ— the Miracles of Christ and the Apostles rationally proved against Jews and Gentiles the credibility of Apostolical Doctrine the very like signs and supernatural effects most evident in the Roman-Catholick Church as rationally prove against Sectaries the credibility of our now professed Catholick-Doctrine for which he gives this reason The same signs and marks of Truth when equal in Majesty worth quality and number ever discover to reason the same Truth wherefore if the Roman-Catholick Church most clearly gives in evidence of her Miracles equal in worth quality and number with those wrought by Christ and his Apostles it follows that as those first Apostolical wonders were sufficient to convice Jews and Gentiles of the Truth of Christianity so these later also wrought in the Church are of like force and no less efficacious to convince Sectaries of whatever Doctrine she teaches Now ponder well what the Apostoles did they cured the sick dispossed Devils raised the dead converted nations c. but these very Miracles have been done in the Roman-Catholick Church yea and greater too Ergo we have the like evidence of Truth in both the Primitive Age and this consequently with it the same Truth The sequel is undeniable After this for particular instances he appeals to the undeniably authentick monuments and testimonies of that one sacred house of Loreto to the continual Miracles done at the Reliques of St. James at Compostella in Spain to the Sacred Vial of St. Mary Magdalen in France wherein saith he very gravely the precious blood gathered by that penitent Saint at our Saviours passion is yet preserved and visibly boyls up on the very day he suffered after the reading of the Passion to the undoubted Miracles wrought by the intercession of our Blessed Lady at Montaigu for which he calls in the testimonies of Lipsius and Putean and at large relates a Miracle wrought by St. Xaverius upon F. Marcellus a Jesuit at Naples and then answers some few Objections and concludes with the vindication of the Miracle at Zaragosa in Spain This is the substance of E. W's discourse upon this subject which in the proper consequence of it doth more really enervate the proofs of Christianity than establish the infallibility of the Roman Church For I do not think an Atheist would desire more advantage against the Christian Religion than to have it granted that the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles were no other than such as are wrought in the Roman Church and that the proofs of them are no more authentick and undeniable than those of the Miracles done at Loreto Compostella or Montaigu and that Christ and his Apostles gave no more illustrious evidences of their being sent from God than St. Dominick or St. Francis and that there was no greater evidence of Christs Resurrection from the dead than there is of the boyling up of the blood of Christ in the Vial of St. Mary Magdalen in the Church of St. Maximin in France Therefore not only to invalidate the Testimony drawn from hence for the Roman Churches Infallibility but to preserve the honour of Christianity I am obliged to enquire into these two things 1. Whether the Testimony upon which the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles and those of the Roman Church are delivered be equally credible 2. Whether the Miracles of the Roman Church be so equal to abate him what he saith of greater in worth quality and number with those of Christ and his Apostles that the Roman Churches Infallibility is as much attested by them as Christ and his Apostles was by theirs 1. I shall enquire into the credibility of the Testimony on both sides Two things are agreed to make up sufficient credibility in a Testimony viz. the knowledge and fidelity of the persons who deliver it If they speak nothing but what they were certain witnesses of and never gave suspicion of fraud and deceit and offered the highest ways of proof concerning their own fidelity then it is an unreasonable thing to disbelieve them This is the case of those who recorded our Saviours and his Apostles Miracles they were persons who either saw them wrought themselves or had them delivered to them immediately by them who saw them they published them to the world in that Age wherein they werecapable of being disproved by persons then living in the same places where they were wrought and were notorious enemies to the persons who did them who were concerned to discover for their own justification the least fraud or imposture in those matters But besides this to take away all suspicion of design the â—nesses of these things freely quitted all exâ—ectations of worldly advantages they ran themselves upon the greatest hazards to attest the truth of what they said and at last sacrificed their lives to confirm the truth of their own Testimony But on the other side if I can prove 1. That the greatest number of the Miracles in the Roman Church have been believed upon the credit of Fables and uncertain reports 2. That the Testimony of those who deliver them hath been contradicted by men of greater Authority than themselves 3. If upon strict and careful examination notorious forgeries and impostures have been discovered and never any persons laid down their lives to attest the truth of any of their Miracles then it can be nothing but the greatest impudence in any to parallel the Testimony of the Primitive Church concerning the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles with that of the Miracles wrought in the Church of Rome 1. That the greatest number of Miracles in the Roman Church have been believed upon the credit of Fables and uncertain reports For the proof of this I shall make choice of his own instances of Loreto in Italy Compostella in Spain St. Maximins Church in France and the lives of his two admirable Saints to which I shall add some nearer home that we may have a proof of the credibility of these miracles in the most considerable places of Europe § 2. Let us first go on pilgrimage to our Lady of Loreto to view the undeniably Authentick publick monuments and Testimonies of Miracles there wrought The first to be seen there in a Table hanging up for that purpose is the wonderful Miracle in the translation of that Chappel first from Nazareth to Dalmatia and from Dalmatia into those parts of Italy where it now stands The story cannot be better told than it is in the Authentick Table it self which may be thus Translated The Church of our B. Lady of Loreto was a Chamber of the House of the B. Virgin Mary Mother of our Lord Jesus
thing I desire may be observed viz. that I have not raked their Kennels nor made use of the Authorities of Jacobus de Voragine Petrus de Natalibus Claudius Rota Cantiprataâ—us and such like no nor yet of Caesarius ab Heisterbach Dauroultius Marulus Gononus or such as have made Collections to my hands but have taken their most approved and late writers and such whose Authorities themselves make use of in other things Capgrave is supposed to have taken most of his lives out of John of Tinmouths Sanctilogiâ—â— whom Pits commends for his excellent learning and that work particularly for his diligence exactness wit and judgement which he shewed in it that he cut off many superfluous things with discretion and if Capgrave took out of him we may suppose that aftâ—â— so many strainings we have only the best left considering the Character that is given of Capgrave an excellent Divine saith Possevin the chief of his time for piety and learning saith Harpsfield the most learned man that ever was of his order in England say Josephus Pamphilus and others in Pits a man of such excellent parts and wit saith Pits himself that he had scarce any equal none superiour in England in his time and among other things he commends him for his judgement and therefore his Authority will not be rejected as mean and contemptible among themselves Colganus his first Tome of the Acts of the Saints of Ireland which I have only made use of was published at Lovain A. D. 1645. with great approbations from the General of his order at Rome from the Professors of Lovain from the Ordinary Censor Librorum from four Jesuits and by commendatory Epistles from Vernulaeus and Erycius Puteanus who highly applauds him for his industry piety and faithfulness therefore my Adversaries cannot pretend that I have picked up some old wormâ—aten stories with which to disgrace their miracles No they are such as are thought fit to be published with as great approbation as ever any Books come forth among them And for the Jesuits Collection at Antwerp which I have sometimes made use of begun by Bollandus and continued by Henschenius and Papebrochius it was published since A. D. 1642. and with as much ostentation of care and judgement as ever any thing was set forth in that kind the last volume I have yet seen came forth A. D. 1668. with sufficient approbations So that whatever judgement be passed upon the miracles they cannot deny the Books I have made use of to be of greatest Authority of any extant in this kind and yet after all I am apt to think they will meet with a great deal of infidelity from all that have not captivated their understandings to the obedience of the Roman Faith § 9. Having thus far shewed how much the miracles boasted of in the Roman Church fall short in point of credibility of those of Christ and his Apostles from the different nature of the testimonies and of the miracles themselves I now proceed to the second thing viz to shew that the credibility of the Wilnesses in the Roman Church is taken away by the Testimony of persons much more credible than themselves For if the most impartial Witnesses utterly deny that there is any comparison to be made between the miracles wrought in the Church in latter-ages with those wrought by Christ and hls Apostles If persons living in the communion of that Church have asserted such things concerning their miracles as sufficiently discover that their Testimony is not to be relied upon then I appeal to the judgement of any man whether it be not intolerable impudence in any to parallel the mlracles of that Church with those of Christ and his Apostles 1. The most impartial Witnesses have asserted the direct contrary to E. W. viz. by affirming that no comparison is to be made between the miracles of after-ages of the Church and those of Christ and his Apostles The most impartial Witnesses in this case must be men of approved sanctity on both sides persons of great judgement and experience and that lived at such a time when no interest could byass them to favour one side more than the other And such in all respects were St. Chrysostom and St. Augustin to them therefore we appeal in this matter St. Chrysostom not once or twice but several times and upon very different occasions delivers his opinion upon this subject In his Commentaries upon the first Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians and the five first verses puts this Question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for whose sake is the power of miracles now forbidden which he at large discusses in that place The substance of his answer is this either the persons who put that Question do believe the miracles wrought by Christ or his Apostles or they do not if not let them give an account how the Christian Religian which is so contrary to the present interests of men should prevail so much in the world as it hath done for if they believed without miracles that would appear to be a far greater miracle But saith he because no miracles are wrought now make not that an evidence that none were wrought then for then it was useful there should be miracles and now it is useful there should not Can any Testimony be plainer and more express than this Is it possible he should believe as great miracles were done in the Church afterwards as by Christ and his Apostles that not only asserts that there were none but saith it would not be useful to the Church there should be any Because as he adds immediately after those who preach now do not preachly Inspiration as the Apostle did but only that doctrine which they receivâ—d from them and therefore make use of their miracles to confirm the truth of what they spake But why saith he were miracles useful then and not now because the continual working of miracles would lessen faith and our Saviour saith Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed But if thou wilt not be convinced without signs thou maist see signs although not such as Christ and his Apostles wrought viz. the accomplishment of prophesies several of which he there mentions Why then saith he do not all believe now to which he gives this answer that the first Christians did not believe only on the account of the miracles they saw but by seeing the holy and exemplary lives of those who wrought them It is saith he therefore the want of the primitive sanctity rather than miracles which makes men yet continue in their insidelity let those that have a mind to be saved search the Scriptures wherein they will find both the miracles they wrought and the holy conversations which they led But if a man be found that hath any foot-steps left of the ancient wisdom he presently leaves the City and conversation and betakes himself to the mountains a fair pretence is made for this to
abundance of lies while the Writer indulges his own passion and sets down not what the Saints did but what he would have had him done so that in their lives we see the mind of the Writer and not the truth For there have been those who thought it a piecâ— of pieâ—y to tell lies for Religion which is a very dangerous thing lest by that means the true be rejected for the sake of the false This saying of Vives Melchior Canus a man highly esteemed in the Church of Rome recites and approves with a great deal more to the same purpose wherein he saith that the lives of the Philosophers are more severely written by Laertius than the Lives of the Saints by Christians and that Suetonius hath with more honesty and integrity delivered the acts of the Caesars than the Catholicks have done the Acts of Martyrs Virgins and Confessors And afterwards he charges them with wilful falsefying either only to deceive or to gain by it of which the one is sordid and the other pernicious and he produces some instances of such miracles which he saith are without number Neither doth he only understand this of such men as the Author of the Golden Legend or of the speculum exemplorum but he plainly confesses that their most grave Writers in reporting the miracles of Saints have followed uncertain reports and conveyed them to Posterity In which they either gave great liberty to themselves or yeilded too much to the desires of the People whom they found not only ready to believe these miracles but to be fond and greedy of them Therefore saith he they have reported some signs and miracles not that they did willingly believe them themselves but because they would not be wanting to the pious desire of the people which was it seems that they should tell lies to please them And if they had not their desires fully answered in this they were very insatiable After this he particularly instances in Bede and Gregory the one of which in his History the other in his Dialogues he charges with relating miracles upon common reports which the Criticks of thâ—â— Age will judge to be uncertain And we may be sure Canus who tells us what an excellent wit his Master Victoria said he had was one of them But is now the credibility of the miracles in the Roman Church to be compared with that of Christ and his Apostles Did they who writ the miracles recorded of them indulge their own affections and make Tales to please the people as we see Canus saith their gravest Writers of Miracles did Or did they take up things upon common rumors and from thence divulge them to posterity as we see Canus charges even St. Gregory and St. Bede with doing What would become of our Christianity if we had no better grounds to believe the miracles of Christ and his Apostles If any should say so of the reporters of their miracles they would be justly charged with betraying the Doctrine of Christianity and making it suspectd to be a fourb an Imposture a fabulous story as E. W. speaks in the case of the miracles related by St. Antonin And yet Mâ—lchior Canus expresly saith of him that he did not make it his business to wriâ—â— what wâ—â— true and certain but to let nothing pass that he could meet with And that he and Vincentius Belovacensis were so far from weighing what they writ in an exact ballance that they did not so much as make use of a common judgement Whereas our Critical E. W. saith And who dares say that so great a Doctor and most modest Prelate as St. Antonin was so frontless as to write that we read without assurance and certainty We see Melchior Canus dares say it and that not only of St. Antonin whom he looks on as far inferior to the other but of his venerable Bede too whom E. W. calls a great Scholar and a man highly esteemed the whole Christian world over I shall not go about to diminish his reputation in other things but he had need of a good easie faith that can swallow the miracles related by him whether those of St. Cuthbert which E. W. mentions or others What must we think of the Angels appearing to S. Cuthbert a horseback when he was a boy and prescribing him a Poultess to cure his sore knee and of his seeing the Gates of Heaven opened and the soul of St. Aidan conveyed through them by a troop of Angels Of his receiving three hot loaves from an Angel that were whiter than lillies smelt beyond roses and tasted sweeter than hony Of his frighting the crows from stealing the thatch off from the Covent and the penance they submitted to for the injury they had done and the satisfaction they made by bringing him a good piece of Lard with which he used afterwards to grease his Boots Of the vertue of his shoo 's in curing a man of a Palsie after St. Cuâ—â—bert's death being put on upon his feet Of these I shall only ask E. W's Question An any such sâ—en now a days wrought among Protestant Bishops No God knows their faith is a stranger to such kind of miracles But what shall we say to Canus who takes away the Authority of St. Gregory too as well as Bede in this matter of miracles I know Baronius falls very soul upon Canus for speaking so freely of St. Gregory in this particular especially because he doth not mention those miracles which he looks on as undeserving credit but I think he ought to have thanked him for his modesty and silence herein in not exposing Gregories credulity to contempt by insisting upon them But in truth St. Gregory in those Books of Dialogues for I see no reason to deny them to be his own was the Father of Legends and most of the others afterwards were made in imitation of his as might be particularly made appear by many Instances And Bede followed the Copy which Gregory had set him and from hence such a swarm of Legends arose that in the succeeding Ages it is hard to say whether there were more Ignorance or Wonders To give only a tast of some of the miracles reported by Gregory the first is of Honoratus the Abbot that stopt a great stone in the middle of its falling from a great mountain by making the sign of the cross towards it and there it is seen hanging as it were in the air But in my opinion St. Dunstan out-did him who not only saith Capgrave stopt a piece of Timber so falling but with the sign of the cross made it return back to the place from whence it sell. This was the greater miracle although the other had more to shew for it if the stone had hung quite in the air which I confess I do a little question Libertinus raised one from the dead by Honoratus his shoe being laid upon his breast saith Gregory as St. Cuthberts shoo 's in Bede
excuse for their Insidelity that his works did bear witness of him And his Evangelist declares that this was the end for which these miracles are recorded that men might believe that Jesus was the son of God Afterwards when he was risen from the dead and he sent abroad his Disciples to preach the Gospel he told them that God would bear them witness by divers signs and miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost of which we have a full account in the Books of the new Testament As to all which miracles we have not the least ground of suspicion of any fraud or imposture being publickly done in the presence of enemies and written in a time when the Testimony of Writers might be easily contradicted and when all imaginable way 's were used to make the first Witnesses of these things to recant their Testimonies by the greatest severities and persecutions in stead of which they persisted with great resolution and laid down their lives rather than weaken the Testimony which they had given Thus we see such great and extraordinary effects of Divine Power which we ought to call miracles were wrought by Christ and his Apostles on purpose to confirm their own Authority that they were Persons sent from God and therefore could not deceive the World in the doctrine delivered by them 2. The Authority and Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles being thus confirmed by the miracles wrought by them there cannot be any such necessity in succeeding Ages to confirm the same doctrine by miracles For if it were once fully proved by those miracles then wrought there can want nothing further to establish the faith of succeeding Ages than a certain conveyance of those miracles to them Those miracles being wrought for the benefit of succeeding Ages as well as of that present Age And if those miracles would not serve for the Ages following as well as that present time it might with as much reason be said that then they did serve only for those who saw them For on the same ground that Persons then in regard of distance of Place were bound to believe although they did not see them wrought so likewise are others in regard of distance of time only supposing the certainty of conveyance to be equal But it is with much advantage to us by the concurrent Testimony of so many Ages and the effects of the doctrine confirmed by those miracles upon so many nations of the World not with standing all the Power and subtility which were used against it 3. The less the necessity and the greater the pretence to miracles so much more reason there is to suspect them Because God we are certain doth not imploy his Power in going beyond the common effects of nature to little or no purpose When we see that in all the writings of Scripture miracles were very sparingly wrought unless it were for the confirmation of a new Religion as that of Moses and Christ if asterwards we find such abundance of miracles pretended to that no Age or Country of one sort of men but give out that multitudes of these are done among them what must we think that God hath changed the Method of his Providence and not rather that God is true but such men are liars or through ignorance and credulity take those for miracles which are not so 4. Those cannot be true miracles which are pretended to be wrought to confirm a doctrine contrary to what is already confirmed by miracles For God will never imploy his power to contradict himself he may in the establishing of one Religion foretel the comming of another afterwards in its room by his own appointment as in the Gospel succeeding the Law but the latter miracles in this case do not contradict but rather confirm the doctrine of the former but when he hath declared that no other Religion shall come into the world after that which is confirmed by miracles as it is with the Christian Religion then to suppose miracles wrought to confirm any doctrine contrary to that is to suppose that God by miracles should contradict himself Therefore although in the beginning of a Religion the doctrine is to be proved by miracles yet that being once supposed miracles afterwards are to be tryed by the doctrine And then though an Angel from heaven should preach or offer to confirm any other doctrine by miracles than that which was first confirmed by Christ and his Apostles we are bound to reject that doctrine and to suspect those miracles not to be from God 5. Where false and lying miracles are foretold by a doctrine confirmed by true miracles there can be no reason to believe upon such miracles till they are evidently distinguished from such as are deceitful Now this is plainly the case in the Christian Religion Christ himself hath foretold that men shall arise doing such great wonders in imitation of him as should deceive if it were possible the very elect and his Apostles that his greatest enemies should appear with all power and signs and lying wonders Can any thing be now more reasonable than after such forewarnings for us to examine all pretences of miracles by trying whether they can be evidently distinguished from all deceitfull appearances of miracles which may be wrought by a power less than divine For in this case the evidence must be such as the persons concerned are to judge by to tell them any distinctions which they cannot proceed by in the judgement of miracles is to speak impertinently where rules of Judgement are required 6. If the continuance of the power of miracles be asserted to prove the Churches infallibility in every Age there must not only evident proof be given that such miracles are wrought but that they are wrought for this very end For if God may work miracles for another end either to shew his Providence in general or particular Regard to some men then the meer proving miracles cannot be sufficient but it must be shewed that these miracles could be wrought for no other end but to prove the Church infallible These things being premised I now come to shew 1. That in the Roman Church they cannot give any evident distinction between the miracles they pretend to and such which we are bid to beware of 2. That they can never prove that the miracles wrought in their Church could be wrought for no other end than to prove the infallibility of their Church 1. That in the Roman Church they cannot give any evident distinction between their miracles and such as we are bid to beware of For which we are to consider that scarce any Religion or superstition hath obtained in the world but it hath pretended to be confirmed by some kind of miracâ—es which in it self is no more a prejudice to true miracles than sophistical arguments are to true reasoning But those who pretend to miracles in a Church which is founded on a doctrine confirmed by undoubted miracles must give such
and Hieronymus Brizids and the rest of the subscribers as great Friends to the Church of Rome and as much conceâ—ned for the honour of it as Soâ—rates could be for the Novatians why then should their testimony for the restored Legat Zâ—ragosa be more creditable than Socrates his for Paulus the Novatian Bishop So that if interest takes away all authority in these matters then we cannot safely believe the Testimony of any in the Church of Rome for the miracles wrought in it if notwithstanding that the Authority of witnesses stands good then miracles may be wrought in heretical or schismatical Churches and consequently can prove nothing as to the truth or infallibility of the Church But neither the Novatians nor Arians nor Donatists were convicted of so many forgeries in this matter of miracles as those of the Church of Rome have been they never thoâ—ght it lawful that we can find to teâ—l lies for the honour of their Church both which we have already proved concerning the reporters of miracles in the Roman Church and therefore their Testimony ought more to be suspected in this matter than that of honest Heathens or Hereticks 2. They answer that notwithstanding all the outward appearance of miracles the things done by them might be no true miracles So Malderus goes on saying that the pretended miracle of Paulus the Novatian Bishop was not such as did exceed the power of the Devil And Bellarmin grants that there can be no infallible certainty of the truth of a miracle before the approbation of the Church the reason he gives is this because though the Devil can do no true miracles yet he can do the greatest to appearance Now I would sain understand this how miracles can prove the truth and infallibility of the Church if the truth of miracles depends upon the Churches approbation i. e. whether I must not first believe the Church to be true before I can possibly be certain whether a miracle be true or not I know Bellarmin saith that the Church is proved by miracles not as to infallible certainty but as to the evidence of credibility But what evidence of credibility can there be from miracles where no one can be certain whether they be miraclâ—s or not For the making faith credible by miracles doth suppose those miracles to be first certainly known to be such but in this case if the power of the Devil can extend so far as that no certain difference can be assigned between true and apparent miracles but from the Churches approbation how is it possible the Church should be certainly known by miracles if the miracles cannot be certainly known but by the Church So that for us to distinguish the miracles done by Hereticks and those in the Catholick Church we must appeal to the judgement of the Catholick Church and yet our way to know which is the Catholick Church saith E. W. and his Brethren must be by miracles i. e. we must know a man by such marks which we cannot know to be the marks of such a man till we first know the man But it may be others speak more consistently and reasonably in this matter and therefore 3. They answer that although Hereticks may do real miracles yet not for the confirmation of their heresie but of some common truth So the same Malderus saith that the Novatian miracle being granted to be true doth not confirm the errour of the Novatians but the truth of the Sacrament for the Jew was baptized before by the Arians and Macedonians So 〈◊〉 Medina salves the miracles wrought among the Pagans that they did give testimony to divine providence and not to their particular superstitions Fevardentius confesses the Church hath never determined that Hereticks cannot work true miracles and that those who hold the affimative have plain Testimonies of Fathers for them which he there mentions If this be true then miracles now can prove nothing as to the Truth or infallibility of the Church when the communions of Christians are different from each other for the miracles wrought may only be for the attestation of some common truths received among all Christians or to manifest the Providence of God to the world Among their late writers none hath considered this difficulty with more care and diligence than Father Lingendes hath done both with a respect to the miracles of Heathens and Hereticks To which he thus answers 1. That for the most paâ—t they were false and counterseit at least they were not true miracles if the name of miracle be taken strictly and properly for saith he either they were meer illusions of the senses or they did not exceed any created power either in the substance or the manner of them and therefore the Devils might easily effâ—ct them 2. That some circumstances did discover the imposture when true miracles were wrought in opposition to them as in Pharaohs Magicians and Simon Magus otherwise God would not permit evil men to work miracles 3. That God hath given a most certain rule for the tryal of miracles viz. God is faithful and cannot deny himself and therefore he cannot be the Author of miracles whereby things contrary to each other are confirmed Wherefore saith he if a saith once established by miracles be impugned by other miracles we are to believe the latter miracles to be meer imposture For the Apostle tells us that Jesus Christ is not yea and nay but a Yea and Amen and although we or an Angel from heaven preach another Gospel let him be Anathema See the wisdom of the Apostle He brings us back to the first preaching which was not lightly established but with innumerable miracles which were most certain and most manifest from whence he concludes that all others that are brought to confirm any doctrine contrary to this ought to be rejected But of what sort even though an Angel or an Apostle should preach another doctrine for saith he among things impossible that is the most impossible that God should lie which is far more impossible than that an Angel should and consequently what God hath once attested by miracles can be less salse than when an Angel hath attested or the Apostle spake this that by this means we may discover the Devil when he transforms himself into an Angel of light 4. If any true miracles were wrought among Heathens and Infidels as it may be some were yet none were ever wrought to confirm any falshood or error but for some truth or some benefit to mankind among which he reckons the miracles of Claudia the Roman Lady and of the vestal virgin to give testimony to their innocency After this he descends to a more particular examination of the miracles of Hereticks and false Christians and as to these he lays down these propositions 1. That miracles are of two kinds some strictly and properly so called which are effects exceeding all created Powers either as to the substance or the manner of them as the curing a
Leg cut off and strangely restored or that some persons were suddenly cured of a dangerous disease by the vision of an Apostle would this have ever satisfied the world that the Apostles were Persons sent from God and assisted by an infallible Spirit Supposing the matters of Fact were true it might be reasonably demanded why God might not do such extraordinary cures in some rare cases without making that Company of men infallible among whom they are done For we see their own Writers acknowledge that God may do real miracles even among Pagans and Infidels to give testimony to his universal Providence And Suarez particularly distinguisheth in this case of miracles saying that a miracle may be wrought two ways 1. Without respect to any truth at all to be confirmed by it but only for the benefit of him that receives it as in case of a miraculous cure or such like 2. When it is wrought purposely to confirm the truth of a doctrine Now I say supposing I should grant all that E. W. contends for as to the truth of the two miracles he insists so much upon viz. the cure of F. Marcellus and the restored Leg at Zaragosa what can this prove as to their Churches infallibility if according to Suarez such miracles may be wrought only for the benefit of those who receive them Del-Rio saith this is no good consequence such a one wrought miracles therefore his faith is true because God may work miracles by Insidels but this consequence he saith is good such a one wrought miracles to confirm the faith which he professed therefore his saith is true because God cannot work miracles purposely to confirm a falshood But withall he saith elsewhere that the faith being now established there is little or no necessity of miracles to confirm it Supposing then some true miracles to be wrought in the Roman Church what consequence can be thence drawn for that Churches infallibility in doctrine if those miracles are not wrought for that end as E. W. never undertook to prove that they were And if the consequence will not hold as to a particular person for the truth of his faith from the bare working of miracles neither can it for the truth or infallibility of a Church for the same reason for if God may work miracles by Infidels he may likewise in a false or corrupt Church Maldonat another Jesuit confesseth that since the Christian Religion hath been confirmed by miracles in the Churches beginning there is no necessity of miracles for that end and quotes Gregory and Bede for it who compare the power of miracles to the watering of a plant which is only needâ—ul at first and is given over when it hath taken root So that whatever miracles they suppose to remain in the Church they do not look on them as wrought for the confirmation of any necessary part of Christian faith such as the Churches Infallibility is asserted to be by E. W. Andradius saith that miracles are oftimes false but always weak proofs of a true Church Ferus that the doctrine of a Church is not to be proved by miracles but miracles by the doctrine viz. because Christ hath forewarned us of false Prophets doing so many signs and wonders So that Acosta saith that in the time of Antichrist it will be a hard matter to discern true and false signs when these later shall be many and great and very like the true and he quotes it from Hippolytus whom he calls an antient Writer that Antichrist shall do far greater miracles than the cure of Marcellus or the restored Leg at Zaragosa viz. that be shall raise the dead as well as cure the diseased and have command over all the elements And I would understand from E. W. whether Antichrists Church will not then be proved as insallible in this way as the Church of Rome Cajetan determines that the Church hath no ground to determine any matter of doctrine now on the account of miracles because the Dâ—vil may do such things which we cannot distinguish from true miracles as in great cures c. and because signs were given for unbelievers but the Church â—ow hath the Revelation of Prophets and Apostles to proceed by and because miracles prove only a personal faith i. e. of one that saith he is sent from God and because the doctrine of the Scripture is delivered to us with so much certainty that if an Angel from Heaven should deliver any thing contrary to it we are not to believe him and lastly because the most authentick testimonies of miracles among them viz. in the Canonization of Saints are not altogether certain because it is written every man is a lyer and he supposes that faith must stand on a more infallible certainty than that of their miracles And many of their most learned Writers do assert that there can be no certainty of the truth of any miracles among them but from the Churches approbation which is in effect to say they do not believe the Church infallible because of their miracles but they believe their miracles to be true because they believe their Church to be infallible For which Paulus Zacchias gives this reason because wicked men and Devils may not only do miracles in appearance but such as are really so as the instruments of divine Power and because credulous people are very apt to be deceived with false miracles instead of true And after he hath laid down the conditions of a true miracle he hath a chapter on purpose to enquire why since miracles very rarely happen yet so many are still pretended to in the Roman Church One cause he assigns of it is the monstrous credulity of their people in this matter of miracles who make so many that he saith if they were to be believed miracles would be almost as common as the ordinary effects of nature for no odd or unusual accident happens but among them passes for a miracle no man escapes out of a dangerous disease especially if by the disturbance of his Fancy he imagines he had a vision of some Saint as Xaverius or the like but he gives out he obtained his recovery by a miracle no man avoids any great danger or trouble if he chanced to think of the Blessed Virgin in it or made any addresses to some Saint for I do not find that praying to God or Christ is so effectual for miracles as praying to the Saints is but this is cryed up for a miracle Riolanus gives the relation of a man that was hanged and his body delivered to the Physitians to be dissected who found there was some lise in him and by letting blood and other means they recovered him who afterwards returning to his own Country Oetingen where there was a celebrated image of the Blessed Virgin this very recovery was there painted for a substantial miracle But to return to Zacchias miracles saith he are made so common among