are the great factors to-day in blessing society and lifting up the race. The Providence of God is general, not special. Not only the facts warrant, but it seems reasonable that special miracles should have been confined to the Apostolic Age, and were for the confirmation of the facts of the gospel. If miracles were to become universal, then the Church of Christ everywhere would have power to heal the sick, cleanse the leper, give sight to the blind, and raise the dead. If no limit were placed upon miracles, especially the resurrection of the dead, would they not have power to prolong life and perpetuate it, and destroy God's natural order and man's volition? But affliction, persecution, suffering, and death were predicted. "It is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh the judgment."

That miracles should cease after the establishment of the system of redemption is in accordance with reason as well as revelation. This also harmonizes with God's mode in creation, which began in miracle, but is continued in all departments by natural order or law.

In the first place, the gospel could not have been established without miracles, for a supernatural proposition requires supernatural proof. In the second place, the facts proved were of such a nature that they could not occur over and over again, and the proof was required at the place and in the age in which they occurred. It would be impossible for people in all ages to see Jesus, be with Him in His personal ministry, hear Him talk, witness His death, and attest His burial

and resurrection. These facts once proven and recorded were proved and established for all ages and all time. Miracles worked in one age would not be satisfactory proof of facts which occurred in another age. Would miracles worked to-day be satisfactory proof of the resurrection of Jesus which occurred nineteen hundred years ago?

In the third place, if miracles have ceased in the Church, are not worked by its members, if they do not form one department of the gospel, we have no right to expect them in another department. If they can not now be worked to confirm the faith of believers, as they were in the apostolic age, we have no right to infer that they can now be wrought to produce faith, or to convert unbelievers.

Again, we could not expect one of the various religious bodies to-day to possess the power to work miracles. If miracles were an evidence of the Messiahship of Jesus and were confined to the Apostolic Age, it is plainly evident that it would be absurd to expect them to be performed now, or by one of the existing religious bodies and not by the others. If one alone could perform miracles, as they were performed in the primitive Church, it would give it divine sanction, as they would be performed by the authority of Christ, or in His name. Again, if they could be performed by the multitude of religious bodies as they now exist, while they are teaching opposing and contradictory doctrine, it would make God the author of division, contradiction, and confusion, and would prove them all divinely appointed. Nicodemus said, "No

man can do these miracles, except God be with him." a

Again, there is a class of pretended miracles, which are claimed to be performed to-day through the influence of shrines, bones, relics, and things blessed, which is most unreasonable and absurd. If miracles were to follow the Church they would be universal and not local, and only the credulous or ignorant could believe that miracles would be performed in one locality and not in another, on a certain few who alone could reach a sacred spot and be healed by assumed merit in a relic or a shrine, or receive a specific blessing in one temple and not another. "God is no respecter of persons.' The gospel promises no blessing on conditions that can be fulfilled by one and not by another, in one place and not in another. Such pretensions are contrary to the whole spirit and genius of Christ's religion.

In the fourth place then we will remark, that after the establishment of the gospel we have no warrant for assuming that God would grant the working of miracles for the conversion of some and not for conversion of others. The great majority of believers in all ages have been converted by hearing the word and testimony concerning Jesus, and did not hear or see anything supernatural to convince them of the truth of Jesus or assure them of pardon. Shall we then believe the testimony of the favored few in regard to their supernatural conversion, and that, too, when they can not confirm it with a single proof? "God is no a John iii. 2.

respecter of persons." When the testimony is presented all may hear, believe, and obey on terms of perfect equality. There is no case of conversion given in any land or any age where the gospel has not been heard. "Faith comes by hearing.'

In the fifth place, no one was ever pardoned by a miracle. Miracles were performed by apostles, evangelists, and others to convince persons of the truth of their mission and the facts of the gospel, and to produce obedience, but never to convey pardon. No vision, no angel, no miracle of any kind anywhere ever communicated pardon directly to any one. It is not the province of miracle to pardon, but to direct to the means of pardon.

After the death of Jesus there are only two miracles recorded which were performed directly or without any human intervention to convince persons who were not believers. These are both connected with the introduction of the gospel to the Gentile world. The first one is where the Lord spoke to Paul, and the other is where the angel spoke to Cornelius. But the Lord did not pardon Paul when He appeared to him on the way, nor did the angel pardon Cornelius. The Lord told Paul to "Arise and go into Damascus, and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do."a The angel said to Cornelius: "Send men to Joppa and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter, who shall tell thee words whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved."b Remarkable as the fact may seem to some, after the death of Christ, Acts xi. 13, 14.

a Acts xxii. 10.

in the age of miracles (which ceased with the apostles), there is no divine record that there was ever given directly by Jesus, God, angel, or the Holy Spirit, the blessing of pardon to any son or daughter of Adam's race, but all had to comply with the established terms of pardon in order to receive the blessing. This is

the truth of history.

Finally, the conclusion to be drawn from all this is that those who look to dreams, visions, or even angels as speaking peace and pardon to their souls, have no divine warrant that pardon ever was or ever will be conveyed in such a manner. If an angel of light should approach and preach or speak pardon to a sinner, his evidence of sins forgiven would be infinitely below the evidence of those who have obeyed the requirements of the gospel, for such rest their faith on a sure foundation, not on dreams, visions, nor even the voice of an angel, but the word of God which liveth and abideth forever-on words which shall finally judge them. Jesus says, "The word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day." There can be no stronger evidence of pardon given than to be declared pardoned by the King and the Judge. These conclusions turn our attention back from the modern abuses and wonder-workers "to the law and to the testimony. If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." a Paul says: "Though we or an angel from heaven preached any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." b Gal. i, 8.

a Isa. viii. 20.