Our Lord's miracles of healing : considered in relation to some modern objections and to medical science

Front matter

HE Miracles

OF Healing

Rev. Dr. Belcher

Introduction

Paucity of English works on this subject — Disease connected with Sin in the Gospels — Dr Mead’s ‘ Medica Sacra’ — Sir Risdon Bennet’s ‘ Diseases of the Bible,’ and other kindred Works — Archbishop Trench’s Classification followed in this Book — In what sense the Miracles of Healing are here treated, and for what classes of readers this book is not and is intended — Difference between unbelievers in Christ’s human lifetime and unbelievers now — St. Luke uses the technical language of a Physician — Undesigned coincidences — Tendency to unbelief in the Medical Profession — Bible-Class Instruction or Superior Catechizing of Old and Young v. Sermons — Bishop Dupanloup on the French System of Catechizing — Suggestion about St. Mary Magdalene’s and other cases not discussed in this book ; and about the Miracles in the Acts of the Apostles — The mental excitement theory as an explanation of some Miracles — Modern Roman Catholic Miracles, and those in Mrs Oliphant’s ‘ Life of Edward Irving’ — The German and French sceptical modes — Baur, Strauss, and Renan — Bishop Temple on apparent collision of Science with Supernatural Power — Dr Salmon’s refutation of the latest

PAGE

xiii

XV

VI

Contents, modes of attacking the genuineness and antiquity of the Four Gospels — Archbishop Whately’s ‘ Historic Doubts relative to Napoleon Bonaparte’ — Church Witness and Authority for the Gospels — Have Miracles ceased ?.....

Chapter I

Miracles of Healing narrated in the Four Gospels — Archbishop Trench’s List of Twenty-one — Diseases Nine in number — Fever — Paralysis — Leprosy — Demoniacal Possession — Dropsy — Menorrhagia— Ophthalmic Disease — Organic Defects of Organs of Sense — Surgical Injury — Best Mode of reading this Book — General Mention of Disease in the Gospels — Special Words and Expressions used — Medical Technology of St. Luke —Dr Hobart’s Work on that Subject commended by Archbishop Trench,

Chapter II. Fevers

The Healing of Simon’s Wife’s Mother— An Acute Disease — St. Luke’s Technical Language here — The ‘ Great ’ and the ‘ Little ’ Fever — ‘ Lying Sick of a Fever’ — Galen, Hippocrates, Aretasus, Hobart, and others quoted — Fever, definition of — St. Mark’s Verbiage of Fever and St. Matthew’s — Their Accounts of the Cure, especially St. Luke’s — Bengel’s Note on — Undesigned Coincidences — The Instantaneous Cure evident to the Senses — Newman on — Did Christ lay His hand on Demoniacs.? — Sacraments of Healing — Sacramental Miracles of Healing — Ten Conclusions from this Case, ....

The Healing of the Nobleman’s Son — St. John’s Account in undesigned coincidence with the three Synoptic accounts of the Flealing of Simon’s Wife’s Mother, ......

PAGE

Contents

vn

Chapter III. Paralysis

I'AGE

The Healing of the Paralytic — A chronic case, recorded by the three Synoptic Evangelists — R.V. translations— The Nature of the Paralysis in this Case — The Probable Cause of it — Various Expressions used by the Evangelists here — Was he a Young Man ? — Various Diseases included under the general term ‘Palsy’ in the New Testament — Different kinds of Paralysis in Modern Medical Practice— The Medical Aspect of the Healing in this Case — Various Greek Words used by the Evangelist, for ‘ Bed’ — St. Luke uses four different such Words — St. Luke uses Technical Language in describing these Cases, . . . . . .66

The Healing of the Centurion’s Servant, recorded by St. Matthew and St. Luke — Alleged Discrepancies in their Accounts, and Explanations of them — What was the form of Paralysis here ? — The Case of Alcimus in i Macc. ix. — Various Words used to denote the Cure or Healing, . . .96

The Healing of the Impotent Man at Beth- ESDA, recorded by St. John only — R.V. Variations in Translation — The Form of Paralysis here — The Bath of Bethesda — The Angel troubling the Water — Is St.

John V. ver. 3 (latter half) and ver. 4, part of the Original Text? — Whether it be so or not makes no difference as to the record of this Miracle — The Angelic Ministry in Health and Disease, and in the course of Nature — In what way this Cure cannot be confounded with any Cure by mere human skill — Objections of Paulus to the Supernatural here, . 108

The Man with a Withered Hand, recorded by the three Synoptic Evangelists — Variations of R.V. — St.

• • •

Contents.

Vlll

Luke only mentions the right hand palsy — A Case of Paralysis and not of Catalepsy as suggested by Jahn — Cannot be explained away on Grounds of Ordinary Medical Treatment, ....

The Woman with a Spirit of Infirmity, recorded only by St. Luke, who ascribes its origin to Satan — How we know that this Woman was paralysed — The Disease may have had a Mental Origin — A Perfect Cure, as we know from the words, ‘Was made straight,’ ......

Chapter IV. Leprosy

The Cleansing of. the Leper, recorded by the three Synoptists — St. Luke’s expression ‘ full of leprosy’ — Jewish or Hebrew Leprosy, what was it 1 — Definitions in Leviticus xiii. — Mason Good, Rhenferdius, Dr Mead, Sir Erasmus Wilson, and various other medical authorities — Was this Leprosy the Elephantiasis of the Greeks, and the ‘Leprosy’ of Father Damien? — Elephantiasis Grascorum unknown to the writer of Leviticus and to St. Luke — Was the Hebrew Leprosy contagious — Various arguments on both sides — Agreement and undesigned coincidence between the Old and New Testaments on Leprosy, ....

The Healing of the Ten Lepers, recorded only by St. Luke — Dr Greenhill’s list of references to Leprosy literature, .....

Chapter V. Demoniacal Possession

The Demoniacs in the Country of the Gadar- ENES, recorded by the three Synoptists — Note on ‘ Down a Steep Place ’ — St. Matthew and St. Mark

PAGE

I2I

‘34

Contents.

IX

PAGE

omit circumstances recorded by St. Luke — Manichasism and Pantheism, and the Scriptural doctrine of the kingdom of Evil and personality of Satan — Angels, Good and Bad, form one link in a great chain — The Jews and Magical Arts — Modern objections to existence or possibility of Demoniacal possession — Experience of Missionaries among the Heathen — Is there a connection between Insanity and Demoniacal Possession? — The Evangelists pledged to literal truth here — Belief of the Early Church — St. Luke’s deviation from Hippocrates very remarkable here — Rev. J. C. Crosthwaite’s Note on Apparent Discrepancies in the Gospel Accounts here, . . . . . . .170

The Demoniac in the Synagogue at Capernaum, recorded by St. Mark and St. Luke — The same Assertion of the Personality of Satan — Dr Hobart on this Case, . . . . . .192

The Daughter of the Syro-Phenician Woman, recorded by St. Matthew and St. Mark — The Gospels pledged to the Exact Truth of the (Miraculous) Narrative here, . . . . *195

The Healing of the Lunatic, or Epileptic, or Demoniac, Child, recorded by the three Synoptists — Special Symptoms of the Attack of the Disease in this Case — St. Luke does not call it Epileptic Mania, but directly ascribes it to Demoniacal Possession— What was a Lunatic in Gospel phraseology? 197

Chapter VI. Dropsy

The Man with the Dropsy, related by St. Luke only — His use of Medical Technology here — Dropsy,

X

Contents, what it is, and its causes — This man was probably water-logged, and his case a grave one — The Cure cannot be ascribed to Natural Causes,

Chapter VII. Menorrha G I A

Fhe Woman with the Issue of Blood — Related by the three Synoptists very minutely — Medical Language used here — Was this case one of Metrorrhagia? — Undesigned Coincidences and evident Truthfulness of the Narrators, . . . . .

Chapter VIII. Opthalmic Disease

The Opening of the Eyes of the Two Blind in THE House, recorded by St. Matthew — General Prevalence of Blindness in the East in our Saviour^s time — No Delusion possible in this Case — No Blind Man could fancy he saw when he did not — This a Case of Sacramental Healing,

The Opening of the Eyes of One Blind at Bethesda, recorded by St. Mark only — Was this Man born Blind ? — The Cure here Prog?'essive^ not Instantaneous, and Sacramental also — It was not Gradual but clearly Miraculous,

The Opening of the Eyes of Two Blind Men NEAR Jericho, recorded by the three Synoptists, a Clear Case of Miraculous Cure — Alleged Discre-

PAGH

Co7itents.

XI

PAGE

pencies in the Narratives — Rev. J. C. Crosthwaite’s Note on, ...... 225

Chapter IX. Organic Defects Of Organs Of Sense

The Opening of the Eyes of One Born Blind, related by St. John only, and at great length — A congenital case, and therefore quite hopeless as to recovery by human skill — Not healed altogether sacramentally, nor was the cure progressive, as in the last instance, nor yet instantaneous, as in cases in St, Matt. ix. — The only Gospel miracle of healing in which there was anything like a judicial inquiry as to its truth, and with the result that it could not be denied — The meaning of the Anointing and Washing in this Case — Not the work of a skilled Oculist, nor of Mesmeric or Magnetic Influence, . . 231

The Healing of One Deaf and Dumb, recorded by St. Mark only — The patient a deaf and stammering person, who had a defect of long standing in one of the organs of sense — Clear distinction between demoniacal possession and congenital deformity or disease here — The significance of our Lord’s manual acts in this Case, ..... 240

Chapter X. Surgical Injury

The Healing of Malchus’s Ear, related by St. Luke only — Was the ear clean cut off? — It could not be healed at once by any modern surgeon — Cases of ultimate union of cut-off members or portions of

• •

Xll

Contents.

members of the human body — No popular credulity possible here — Medical Times aiid Gazette on ‘What was healed?’ in this Case — Our Lord never 7^(2^ cured any one, . . . . .

PAGE

Conclusion

Sixteen propositions attempted to be proved in this book, 255

Preface To The First Edition

BY THE

AUTHOR OF ‘NOTES ON THE MIRACLES OF

OUR LORD.”

I HAVE been asked to prefix a few words of recommendation to a book which, in my judgment, needs none.

No one who reads the following pages will deny the large amount of interesting and instructive matter which the past training and special knowledge of the writer have enabled him to bring to bear on the illustration of the Miracles of our Lord. Questions which others, myself certainly included, have dealt with slightly and superficially, and with the want of a severe

’ The late Right Hon. and Most Rev. Richard Chenevix Trench, D.D., some time Lord Archbishop of Dublin.

XIV

Preface

accuracy, are here more thoroughly treated by one who speaks with a modesty, and at the same time an acquaintance with the points at issue, and a consequent authority which, I think, must inspire confidence in all.

I will not refuse myself the pleasure of adding that the writer was for some years honourably known to me in the diocese of Dublin as doing, at such times as he could rescue from other engagements, the work of an earnest layman in the Church ; until, being drawn still more closely to the Church’s work, he was

content to relinquish high professional pro- »

spects, and to exchange a ministry to the bodies of men for the harder, but more excellent, ministry to their souls.

RICHARD C. DUBLIN.

Dublin, September 1871.

Preface To The Second Edition

The original edition of this little work having been exhausted, this second edition is now published ; and so it is desirable to explain in what way the new book differs from the old.

Before its publication in 1872, there were so many as seven revisions in proof, each successive ‘ revise ' containing alterations and amendments suggested by various divines and scholars to whom this treatise had been submitted. After its publication it was reviewed in the British and Foreign Medico- Chirurgical Review^ Medical Times and Gazette^ Guardian^ Record^ Chttrch Times^ Church Review^ English Churchman^ Church Bells^ Church Herald, Penny Post, Public

XVI

Preface.

Opinion^ Wesleyan Methodist Magazine^ and Literary Churchman} I believe I may fairly say that all those periodicals in the above enumeration which claim to be representatives of the many-sided ‘ religious press,’ united in approving and commending it, and some of the most useful criticisms on it came from papers whose general views and policy were not my own.

For some few years afterwards, I occasionally received letters and papers, and MS. notes in suggested improvement of the work in a future edition, and most of these were from learned men with whom I had little or no personal acquaintance. I also received various medical criticisms and suggestions, sometimes at my own request. All of these helps have been used in this edition, which contains numerous revisions, corrections, enlargements, and anno-

’ It was also included by the late learned Dr Littledale among the books recommended as ‘ Christian Apologetics ’ in the ‘ Bibliotheca Sacerdotalis ’ in ‘ the Priest’s Prayer-Book.’

Preface.

xvii rations, so that the present volume, while including all the chapters and most of the words of the old one, has much additional matter, and many footnotes and references which bring it down to the present year.

When the first edition appeared, I had but recently given up medical practice and my librarian’s office at the College of Physicians in Dublin, and so any medical knowledge which I had was then fresh and modern. But years have rolled on, and have proved the truth of what the late Archbishop Tait told me at my ordination as deacon in 1869 — that no man can keep up at 19th century pace in two professions, and that I should soon begin to forget what I was not actively engaged in practising. And so it turned out. In the present edition I rely on others for practical medical knowledge of the present day ; my own being now, in important questions, medical book knowledge only.

Among those who have made most valu-

b

XVlll

Preface.

able criticisms I may specify the late learned Rev. J. C. Crosthwaite, Rector of St Mary-at-Hill, and Dr W. A. Greenhill, of Hastings. Mr Crosthwaite, who died soon after he sent me his MS. notes in 1872, was a valuable critic in regard to the text and translation of the New Testament, and on the general question of our Lord’s miracles.

Dr Greenhill, the well-known medical scholar, corrected some of my mistakes, and suggested various improvements, all, or nearly all, of which, I think, have been now adopted. Tlie late Archbishop Trench, not long before his death, commended to me Dr W. Kirk Hobart’s then newly-published standard work,

‘ The Medical Language of St. Luke,’ and it will be seen that frequent use has been made of that writer’s learned labours. To my former disciple, B. B. Joll, M.B. (Lond.), now of Woolton, Liverpool, I owe the recent recension of some of my medical statements of 1872, he having kindly annotated the old

Preface.

XIX edition with that view ; and to Reginald Eager, M.D. (Lond.), of North woods, in my present parish, I am also under obligation for his notes on the chapter on Paralysis, a subject with which his special daily practice makes him . familiar.

The criticisms of the British and Foreign Medico-Chirtirgical Review and of the Medical- Times and Gazette have been duly attended to, as also a long communication from an anxious, and, apparently, half-doubting divinity student, as to the force of the criticisms of Strauss, Renan, and others against the supernatural element in the Gospels, and in regard to the influence of mind on matter as an explanation of some of the Gospel miracles.

One of the Bampton Lectures of Bishop Temple bearing on this subject has been quoted from, and the now standard ‘ Introduction to the New Testament,’ by the Provost of Trinity College, Dublin, Dr Salmon, has been used, as has also the Revised Version

XX

P^'ejace.

of the New Testament, where there was anything to be gained from that translation, which, however, has not been used when the alterations were such as ‘ tiles ’ for ‘ tiling,’ ‘ the house of Simon’ for ‘Simon’s house,’ ‘thy hand’ for ‘thine hand,’ and such like, which have not commended the Revised Version to many who love the dignified language of the Authorized English Bible. To the present edition has been added a full table of contents, a list of books quoted, and an index of words and matters. Let me express a hope that all professing Christians who read this book may see in it an humble endeavour to confirm their faith.

T. W. BELCHER.

Frampton Cotterell Rectory, Bristol, May 1890.

LIST OF BOOKS,

IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE MEN- TIONED OR QUOTED IN THIS VOLUME.

Trench, R. C. (Archbishop of Dublin), Notes on the Miracles of Our Lord. 7th ed. Lond. 1862.

British and Foreign Medico-Chiriirgical Review 1873.

Medical Times and Gazette^ 1872.

Hobart, Dr W. K., The Medical Language of St. Luke. Dub. Univ. Press Series, 1882.

Scrivener, Notes on, A.V. of N.T.

Etheridge, Translation of Syriac Gospels.

Temple, F. (Bishop of London), Bampton Lectures. Lond. 1885.

Salmon, Dr Geo., Provost of (Trin. Coll. Dub.), Introduction to the New Testament. 4th ed. Lond. 1889.

Bennett, Sir Risdon, M.D., Diseases of the Bible. Lond. 1887.

Mead, W., M.D., Medica Sacra. Lond. 1755.

Harle, Jonathan, M.D., Essay on the State of Physic in the Old and New Testaments, etc. Lond. 1729.

Shapter, Thos., M.D., Medica Sacra. Lond. 1834.

Baxter, R., Saints’ Rest.

Dupanloup, F. (Bishop of Orleans), Entretiens sur le Catechisme, Paris 1868.

Revised Version of the New Testament.

Westcott, Dr F. W. (Bishop of Durham), Introduction to the Study of the Gospels. Cambridge, i860.

Douglas, Bishop, Criterion of Miracles — quoted second-hand.

Oliphant, Mrs, Life of Edward Irving — cjuoted second-hand.

XXll

List of Books.

Whately, Archbishop, Historic Doubts relative to Napoleon Bonaparte.

Freind, Dr, History of Physick. 2 vols. 8vo, Bond. 1725. Cornelius, A. Lapide, Commentarrii in Sacram Scripturam. Parisiis, 1869.

Smith (of Jordan Hill), Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul — quoted second-hand.

Hippocrates — Sacred Diseases — Notes on, in Sydenham Society's edition.

Ge7itlema?i s Magazine (June 1841), The Medical Style of St. Luke.

Conybeare and Howson, Life and Epistles of St. Paul. Ed. 1870.

Medicine, Article on, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible.

Bengel — Gnomon Novi Testamenti.

Newman, J. H. (Cardinal), Essays on Miracles. 2d ed. 1870. Keble, John, Eucharistical Adoration.

Liddon, D. H. P., University Sermons. 3d ed. 1869.

Neander, Life of Christ. Bohn’s ed. 1864.

Wordsworth (Bishop C.), Greek Testament.

Todd, Dr R. B., Clinical Lectures. Lond. 1861.

Jahn, Archaeologia Biblica. Oxford ed. 1836.

Alford, Dean, Greek Testament, and abridged Gro-dk Testament, and revised trans. of New Testament.

Liddell and Scott, Lexicon.

Belcher, T. W., Memoir of Dr Stearne. Dub. 1865.

Mason Good, John, M.D., Study of Medicine. 5 vols. 3d ed. Lond. 1829.

Williams, Isaac, Devotional Commentary on the Gospel Narrative.

Parkhurst’s Lexicon to the New Testament. Rose’s ed. of 1851. Ed. of 1870.

The Vulgate (Latin Bible).

List of Books.

XXlll

Celsus, De Medicina.

Reland, Hadrian, Palestina ex Monument. Vet. illustr.

Barrett, A. C., Companion to the Greek Testament. Lond. 1867. Bartholini, De Paralyticis in Nov. Test, (in Ugolini’s Thesaurus Antiquitatum Sacrarum, vol. xxx. p. 1505).

Paulus, Dr, Commentary on N.T. — 1800-1804, and Life of Jesus, 1828.

Biblical Psychology (Natural Demoniacal Sickness). Clark’s edition.

Gesenius, Hebrew Lexicon.

Farrar, Archdeacon, Life of Christ ; also Ephphatha (Sermons). 1880.

Leprosy, Article on, in Ree’s Cyclopaed.

Rhenferdius, De Lepra Cutis Hebraeorum (to be found in Meuschen’s Nov. Test. ex. Talm. illustr., pp. 1057, etc.). Schilling, De Lepra Commentationes. Leyden, 1778 (containing reprint of Ouselius on same subject).

Wilson, Sir Erasmus, Diseases of the Skin, various Editions. The Speaker’s Commentary.

Belcher, T. W., Leprosy of the Hebrews, in enlarged and revised edition of Neligan, on Diseases of the Skin (pp. 329, etc.). Dublin, 1866.

The Hebrew, Mediaeval, and Modern Leprosies, compared. Dtib. Quart. Journ. Med. Sci.^ May 1864.

Remarks on the Hebrew Catalogue of Skin Diseases.

Review of R. Coll, of Phys. Report on Leprosy. Ibid.

Notes on the Mediaeval Leper Hospitals of Ireland.

Review of Recent Works on Dermatology. Ibid., 1888.

Leprosy and Leper, Articles in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible. Leprosy as seen in India, Trans. Bombay Med. a?id Phys. Soc., 1862.

XXIV

List of Books.

Denton — on the Gospels.

Josephus, Antiquities ; and Jewish Wars.

Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine, quoted by Archbishop Trench.

Watson, Sir Thos., Lectures on the Principles and Practice of Medicine. 4th edition.

Wilson, Bishop, Sacra Privata.

List of Twelve Leprosy References, Dr Greenhill. Seepp. 167, 168.

Calmet, Nouvelles Dissertations. Paris, 1720.

Farmer, Essay on the Demoniacs of the N.T. Lond. 1775. Semler, Comm, de Demoniacis, etc. Halae, 1770-1779.

Hecker, Epidemics of the Middle Ages {Sydenham Society^ 1844). Esquirol, Des Maladies Mentales. Paris, 1838.

Belcher, T. W., Short Sketch of a Remarkable Case of Insanity (No. 3 in Tractatus Medici. Dubl. 1864).

Delitzsch, Biblical Psychology. Clark’s edition.

Ennemoser, History of Magic. Bohn’s Series.

Belcher, T. W., Epilepsy Real and Feigned. Diih. Quart.

Journ. Med. Sci.., vol. 34.

Blood, Issue of. Article in Smith’s D. B.

Lightfoot, Horse Hebraicae.

Clarke, Adam, Commentary on the Bible.

Cheselden, Anatomy. Lond. 1784.

Locke, John, Essay on the Understanding.

Cork Med. and Surg. Soc. Transactions, 1862, On the Curious Re-union of an Amputated Toe.

Hare, Archdeacon, Victory of Faith, and other Sermons (Ancient and Modern Theol. Library).

Lacordaire — Conferences. 2d edit., Lond. 1869.

I have not been able to give the exact Library reference to some books in the above list, which were more accessible to me in 1872 than they are now. But ahnost all of them are in the Library of the British Museum.

Our Lord^s Miracles of Healing.

INTRODUCTION.

Paucity of English works on this subject — Disease connected with Sin in the Gospels — Dr Mead’s ‘ Medica Sacra ’ — Sir Risdon Bennett’s ‘ Diseases of the Bible,’ and other Kindred Works — Archbishop Trench’s Classification followed in this book — In what sense the Miracles of Healing are here treated, and for what classes of readers this book is not and is intended — Difference between unbelievers in Christ’s human lifetime and unbelievers now — St. Luke uses the technical language of a Physician — Undesigned coincidences — Tendency to unbelief in the Medical Profession — Bible-Class Instruction or Superior Catechizing of Old and Young v. Sermons — Bishop Dupanloup on the French system of Catechizing — Suggestion about St. Mary Magdalene’s and other cases not discussed in this book ; and about the Miracles in the Acts of the Apostles — The mental excitement theory as an explanation of some Miracles — Modern Roman Catholic Miracles, and those in Mrs Oliphant’s ‘ Life of Edward Irving’ — The German and French sceptical modes — Baur, Strauss, and Renan — Bishop Temple on apparent collision of Science with Super-

A

Miracles of Healing.

natural Power — Dr Salmon’s refutation of the latest modes of attacking the genuineness and antiquity of the Four Gospels — Archbishop Whately’s ‘Historic Doubts relative to Napoleon Bonaparte’ — Church Witness and Authority for the Gospels — Have Miracles ceased?

It is a noteworthy fact that no English theological or medical writer has published a work on the miracles of healing performed by our blessed Lord, suited to the discoveries of modern medical science, and to the progress of modern thought/ And this is the more remarkable, because there is a much closer connection between medicine and theology in Holy Scripture than between theology and geography, natural history, and so forth.

To say nothing of the Old Testament, the reader of the Evangelical narratives cannot fail to perceive that throughout our Lord’s ministry disease is in many instances described as connected with sin ; that forgiveness and healing are frequently said to be conveyed by the same exercise of power to the one person ; and that the main earthly object of our Great Exemplar appears to have been the healing of ‘ all manner

^ This Introduction, except where it has been revised, altered, and added to in the present edition, was written in 1871.

Introduction.

of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.’

It will not, then, I trust, be deemed presumptuous in one who desires to see this want supplied, to attempt to step into the gap, and make some observations calculated to advance the study of Holy Scripture from a medical point of view. Nor should the imperfection of what follows be deemed an argument against this study, but rather an incentive to increased diligence in working a not over explored mine.

Until so recently as 1887, when the Religious Tract Society published a little book, entitled, ‘The D iseases of the Bible,’ by Sir Risdon Bennett, M.D., the only English treatise worthy of the name ‘Medica Sacra’ was the well-known work of the learned Dr Mead,^ who flourished as a London physician in the early part of the last century. But it is not too much to say, that, besides this work being generally inaccessible, it refers only to some four or five out of the twenty-one miracles of healing recorded in the Gospels as having been performed by our

^ ‘ Medica Sacra: Sive de Morbis insignioribus qui in Bibliis Memorantur Commentarius.’ Bond. 1749. An English translation, from which most modern quotations are made, was published in 1755, the year after the author’s death.

Archbishop TrencJis Classification.

Lord ; and these it treats in a way in many respects behind the medical science of the present day.

There have been indeed some other English publications on this subject ; ^ but while most of the more modern works relating to it are written in foreign languages, several of them, as well as all the Mediaeval and less modern French, German, and Italian works, are not only written in Latin, but are not particularly easy of access, even to readers in our public libraries.

In the present case I propose to give a nominal list of all the miracles of healing above referred to ; and herein I shall select the miracles in question from the classification prefixed to Archbishop Trench’s well-known work.^ Next, I hope to classify similar diseases together ; and, then, to discuss each

’ Harle (Rev.) Jonathan, M.D. ‘ Essay on the State of Physic in the Old and New Testaments, etc., with an account of cases mentioned in Scripture.’ Lond. 1729. ‘ Medica Sacra; or, Short Expositions of the more important Diseases mentioned in the Sacred Writings.’ By Thomas Shapter, M.D. Lond. 1834. I have not been able to get a sight of Harle’s Essay. It is not in the British Museum or the College of Physicians. Dr Shapter’s book refers only to four of the cases mentioned in the New Testament.

^ ‘ Notes on the Miracles.’ It is to the 7th edition that reference will be made.

For what this Book is not intended.

miracle separately. But it is to be noted that, as regards any particular disease, the greater part of the remarks on it will be found under mention of the first case, which should be read by any one desirous of fully studying a subsequently-mentioned miracle of the same kind.

It may be well to state for what this book is not intended. It is not intended as a treatise on miracles in the abstract, nor on the Gospel miracles as distinguished from the Apocryphal or the Ecclesiastical. Nor is it intended as an answer to the Pantheist, the Sceptic, the Rationalist, or to the more bold forms of unbelief which confront us in our own day. There is plenty of English theological literature suited to all these ends ; and several of such works need only to be put before the public in a modern and popular style to secure the attention of the candid inquirer. Nor does this book profess to be an exhaustive treatise ; but should be rather regarded as a body of notes^ which therefore may be added to by further study, or by the learning and research of others.

It is needless to say that these remarks are not intended for persons who consider their knowledge of creation to be so universal and

For what this Book is not intended.

infallible as to lead them to reject or doubt the existence of everything which passes the bounds of their own experience.

Furthermore, these pages are not intended to show all or even the strongest point from which to argue in favour of the miraculous. The general consent of the Church in all ages to the truth of the Gospel narratives, is an historical fact which commends itself most strongly to my own mind ; although it would not perhaps prove in the least degree convincing to those who require proof of revelation before they could believe in a Church in any sense of the term. For instance, the general consent of the Houses of Parliament for two hundred years back to the truth of certain generally-believed stories told of Cardinal Wolsey and of Oliver Cromwell, would be taken by every one as evidence of quite as strong a kind regarding those public men, as that which could be given by many in Paris at present, but by no one in one hundred years to come, that a statue of Napoleon once stood on the top of the column in the Place Vendome, and that they saw both pulled down during a time of popular excitement.