Do Reformed writings explain the basis for using "natural order" to decide religious claims?

Calvin emphasized the importance of the natural order.

I. John Hesselink writes in Calvin's Concept of the Law:

In close conjunction with the law of nature and natural law, Calvin uses expressions such as: "the order of nature"; the "sense of nature" ; the "voice of nature itself"; "nature itself dictates; and simply by nature, or variant forms such as the law engraven or implanted on all by nature.
...
That the concepts of natural law, the order of nature, conscience, common sense, etc. assume an important place in Calvin's theology is incontrovertible. .... As is commonly recognized, the majority of these expressions are of pagan, not Christian origin. The notions of law, nature, and conscience in particular were central to Stoic thought. ... Calvin's high evaluation of natural law and his acknowledgment of natural human achievement in several significant areas is not based on humanity's inherent goodness or worth but on God's grace.
...
The order of nature also refers to the "orderliness or constancy of God's will within nature."
...
[Calvin writes] "that law of nature which common sense declares to be inviolable," Comm Gen 1:23 (Co 23, 29). On the relationship of natural law, conscience, common sense, and experence cf. further Milner, op. cit., 33-35
...
"Calvin appeals to the order of nature in many ways. He, of course, admits that God never binds himself or us to act entirely according to the law of nature. But he frequently points out that God's dealings with men throgh the Gospel conform to the natural order of things...." Wallace, op. cit., 143

Click to expand...

I am not aware of anyplace that Calvin says that miracles can't happen because they violate the laws of nature. However, he seems very skeptical of miracles, and when he considers miracle claims in his era to be "absurd", it looks like his motivation for doing so, or rather the aspect of the miracles that he sees as absurd, is their violation of natural order.

Calvin forbade Genevans from making customary pilgrimages to a nearby body of water that a female saint had made holy.

I don't think this is the same as the shrine in Einsiedeln, where Zwingli had lived. The Sun Chronicle reports about that shrine:

The waters from a fountain on the square are believed to be from the same source Meinrad found. People come to drink from the 14 faucets, each dedicated to a different saint. Many claim to have been cured by the waters of this sacred spring, which are said to provide good health throughout the year.

Click to expand...

http://www.thesunchronicle.com/feat...cle_e21d26fc-9610-55c2-a368-669c5ac3c148.html

Thomas A.Thompson, S.M. writes in PILGRIMAGES AND SHRINES: A RECOGNITION LONG DELAYED

Calvin denounced pilgrimage as a type of "false piety," and Zwingli forbade pilgrimage to
the shrine of the Black Virgin at Einsiedeln, where he was oncechaplain. Many shrines, especially those associated with the veneration of relics and images of the saints, suffered from the iconoclastic outbursts of some parts of the Reformation.

Click to expand...

Fountain of Our Lady, Einsiedeln

History of the Christian Church says:

Einsiedeln31 is a village with a Benedictine convent in the Catholic canton Schwyz. It was then, and is to this day, a very famous resort of pilgrims to the shrine of a wonder-working black image of the Virgin Mary, which is supposed to have fallen from heaven. The number of annual pilgrims from Switzerland, Germany, France, and Italy exceeds a hundred thousand.

Click to expand...

John Broome writes that Zwingli actually intentionally accepted Einsedeln to preach from because there were so many pilgrims, and it gave him an opportunity to reach large numbers of people and tell them about the "futility" of the spring, and that the Catholic Bishop and Pope allowed him to do this:

In 1516 Zwingli was offered the post of Preacher at the monastery of Einsiedeln. This contained one of the most famous shrines in Switzerland to which thousands came every year on pilgrimage to obtain the indulgences secured by a visit to the statue of the Virgin Mary, Our Lady of Einsedeln, said to perform miracles. The monastery was near lake Zurich and the Abbot was strangely a man set on removing superstition from his Abbey. Zwingli was in some doubt whether to accept the offer as he could see himself being shut away in this mountain retreat... But on consideration he realized that in such a place he could spread the truth to the thousands of pilgrims who came to Einsedeln each year. So he accepted the offer and from the shrine of Our Lady of Einsedeln pilgrims heard the Gospel, were warned of the futility of coming to the statue of Our Lady for indulgences .... the shrine of Our Lady of Einsedeln became a centre for the propagation of the Reformed Truth. ... The Pope did not interfere. Zwingli's Bishop was only too well aware what was going on....

Click to expand...

https://books.google.com/books?id=BqhH0IR4skYC&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=Einsiedeln+calvin&source=bl&ots=wbRhBawfCD&sig=FI7GcDbq3Pbyy32mdvvp5_5kpSc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiLo_jl-v_LAhWLOxoKHX2ABOQQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=Einsiedeln calvin&f=false

For Calvin, it was not just pilgrimages to these particular waters, but pilgrimages in general that were futile. As a matter of materialistic rationality, I sympathize with Calvin's and Zwinglis disbeliefs that the waters were holy or had healing properties.

However, as a matter of pure logic, once I accept the supernatural or paranormal premises that the all-powerful God, or a miracleworker whom he endows with energy or power, can imbue a body of water with healing propeties, then as a matter of simple logic, it seems to me that it can, and may on rare occasion happen. So the basis for doubt is materialistic and reflects a certain perception of the "natural order", ie. a doubt that it happens in the real world that saints ever appear or give objects themselves miraculous properties.

So my question is: Have Reformed have spelled out the premises for their use of the natural order and this aspect of their view of reasonableness to judge religious claims?

If you would feel more comfortable answering this elsewhere, I made a thread on the Ask a Calvinist section:
http://www.christianforums.com/thre...ecide-christian-claims.7941245/#post-69481140