The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1880-12-01
For the Central Presbyterian.
The Natural and Supernatural
BY REV. ]. A. wADDELL.

The distinction between the natural
and the Supernatural is fippantly used
by many rationalists in the interests of
unbelief. In consequence of its frequent
repetition, the idea very generally pre-
walls, among superficial thinkers, that
what is supernatural is mysterious, and
what is natural is Ineligible. 1t is a
serious and mischievous error.
The truth is, that the line between
the two is bounded on either side by the
domain of mystery. 1t is obvious, on a
moments reflection, that what is demon
mated Nature, is vast field, which,
though partially explored, includes a
thousand secret principles which we can
not expect ever to be revealed. Crawl
tation, Chemical Attraction, the Impon-
derable agents, Life, Instinct, Thought,
and conscience, are all so many terms
for the unknown and the inexplicable.
The distinction between natural and su-
pernatural, does not, therefore, imply
that the one is less mysterious than the
other. Its whole significance lies in the
fact that the phenomena of Nature are
more familiar, and the order of its pro-
cesses more clearly visible, to the natural
understanding.
This statement Of the facts seems to
furnish sufficient light to guide our in
quiries into the relative credibiLity of the
phenomena in the two domains. Human
reason, in its revolt against spiritual
truth, has long maintained that the nat
ural is credible, and the supernatural in
credible. But it is forgotten that we
know absolutely nothing of the mode of
existence of the secret principles of Ma
ture, and yet believe in their existence in
spite of every skeptical objection. The
only ground for this belief is the fact of
revelation of them through our senses.
We are compelled, for example, to accept
the existence of a principle of life, be-
cause we witness its effects. What it is
we know not. But. we do know that
this unknown cause of vital phenomena
lies beneath them.
If, then, we are assured of the exist
ence of principles in Nature which we
cannot understand, simply by virtue of
the testimony of our senses, nothing can
be incredible to which these senses tes-
tify. Mystery is no bar to belief. fit
were, we could not believe anything. If
we saw the dead rise from their graves
as frequent occurrence, the mysterious
ness of the fact would not in the least
prevent our belief of the reality. We
would simply conclude that some I'M
known power existed which was capable
of efecting it,
1t is plain that any valid argument
against the supernatural, necessarily de-
ponds upon some objection to the valid
ity of the testimony, and not upon the
incredibility Of the alleged facts. Mir
acles are not Incredible for they are be-
lieved in. The human mind not only
accepts the true, but the false. 1t is not
the nature of the fact, but the evidence
of the fact, that wins or repels the assent
of the mind The only question to be
discussed by reason is the suffciency of
the proof. Mr.. Hume saw this, when he
undertook to overthrow the rational argu-
ment for an external world. He per
ceived clearly that, if that argument were
admitted as sound, there could be no OBJ
lection to the analogous argument for
miracles. If the existence of matter can
be established on the testimony of the
senses, the reality of any mysterious
event can be proved in the same way.
The one is revelation as well as the
other.
Another source of confusion in refer
ence to the distinction between the nat
ural and the supernatural, is to be found
in the impression that we know the limits
of Nature. Now the common Limitation
is entirely arbitrary. If spiritual beings
exist, who has right to assert that they
cannot influence material objects and
human affairs? Our own minds act upon
our muscles. This is conceded to be
within the Bounds Of nature. IF mind of
a higher order be present, it is not in
credible that it also may exert an inAu-
ence upon material substances; and such
an influence would be natural-that is in
accordance with the nature of the agent.
The supernatural is therefore a conven-
lent expression for such an agency, but
cannot properly be understood in a sense
contrary to nature. Yet this is the sense
attached to it by rationalistic writers. It
creates the impression that unseen and
unfamiliar agencies must be opposed to
those which are better known; but this
is gratuitous assumption. There is no
more conflict between supernatural forces
and those called natural, than there is
between the vital force and that of gray
itation. The one supercedes the other in