Catholic University of America.

American ecclesiastical review, Volume 27 online

. (page 74 of 78)
Online LibraryCatholic University of AmericaAmerican ecclesiastical review, Volume 27 → online text (page 74 of 78)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

Dost thou not hear the pity of his plaint ?

(Longf. transl. Infem,, II, 97 — 105.)

In similar fashion she is represented by Sebastiano del Piombo
in the church of S. Chrysostom at Venice.

Of historical representations the most remarkable is probably
the series of paintings in San Giorgio at Padua from the brush of
Jacobo d*Avanzo. The collection includes the scenes of her con-
demnation by the Roman Pretor, her triumph over her tempters
who sought to remove her to an abode of evil, her martyrdom
and death ; and in a separate panel her exposition after death in
the church with the praying multitude around her.


The Latin text of the Apostolic Letter on the Study of the
Bible, which reached us too late for insertion in this issue of the
Review, will be published in our next number, together with sug-
gestions on the best method of making effective the instruction of
the Holy Father anent a more thorough study of the Bible.

Digitized by


6ccle9ia9ttcal Library XTable.


1, Gritieism. — In the field of textual criticism two proposed
emendations deserve the reader's attention. One of them refers
to Job 27, the other to i Timothy. It is Father Hontheim*
who suggests the division of Job 27 into two pairs of stanzas
separated by an intermediate strophe which must be taken from
Job 24: 18-20. According to the Reverend writer the first pair
of stanzas states that godless men can expect nothing from Grod ;
the intermediate strophe adds that the godless perish wretchedly,
and the last two stanzas describe this wretchedness. From a
metrical point of view, we have first a strophe. Job 27 : 2-7, and an-
tistrophe, verses 8-13; then an intermediate or alternating strophe,
Job 24: 18-20; finally, a concluding strophe. Job 27: 14-18, and
antistrophe, verses 19-23. — Prof. Paul Ewald, of Erlangen, is the
author of the second textual emendation.* Commentators have
complained repeatedly that there is no proper sequence of thought
in I Timothy ; Professor Ewald believes the evil can be remedied by
assuming that the pages of the original text have been misplaced.
According to the critic, the original p. 2, containing i Tim. i :
12-17, has been placed after the original p. 3, containing i Tim.
I : 3-1 1 ; similarly, the page containing i Tim. 3 : 14 to 4: 10
originally followed i Tim, 6 : 2 of the traditional text. Let then
the original order of parts be restored, and the Epistle will present
a proper sequence of thought. The hypothesis is certainly
tempting on account of its simplicity ; but it suffers from several
serious drawbacks. It implies that p. i contained only the
Apostle's greeting, i : 1-2 ; that p. 2 contained a much shorter pass-
age than p. 3 ; that the Epistle began with i : 12-17 in spite of the
inappropriate character of such an opening ; that 3 : 14 to 4 : 10

' Zeitschrift flir katkolische Theologie^ 3. Quartalbeft, 1902, p. 598 fE
* Probabilia betreffend den Text des ersten Timotheusbriefes. Leipzig : A.
Deichert Nachf. ; 8vo, p. 38.

Digitized by



must be placed after 6 : 2, although chapter 5 is thus cut off from
its proper context After all, Professor Ewald's cure is worse
than the disease, and his pamphlet is a critical failure.

The so-called results of Old Testament higher criticism have
been stated and reviewed by P. Hildebrand Hopfl, OS.B.* In
the first part of his pamphlet the writer states the critical views
concerning the different sources of the Pentateuch, the history of
the Jewish people, the religious development of Israel, the origin
and evolution of worship. In the second part, the author inquires
into the objective value of the foregoing views. In the third part,
he points out the ultimate reason of the destructive tendency
which characterizes Protestant Biblical criticism: it is apostasy
from the faith, and apostasy from Jesus Christ. We need not
state that the subject is too vast to be exhaustively treated
in a pamphlet of no pages ; but the importance of the
work may be inferred from the fact that it has been reviewed
in several of our leading periodicals, and that even Catholics
are not at one as to the soundness of its views. Those who
wish to compare some of the verdicts on the pamphlet uttered
by Catholic writers, may read Zapletal's article in the Deutsche
Litter aturzeitung^ Fr. Lagrange's review in the Revue bibliquef
and the notice in the Stimmen.* — ^The AUgemeine Kirchenzeitung''
summarizes the views of the leading critics concerning the origin
of Israel's religion. Wellhausen derives Israel's religion from
heathenism by a process of gradual development which runs
parallel with the advancement of the nation ; Professor Rothen-
stein, of Halle, believes that Jahveh grew with the great men in
Israel, not indeed as an independent, living, and absolute God,
but participating in the life of the people; Professor Nowack,
of Strassburg, declares that the ancient Israelites believed in
" Polydemonism," practised ancestral worship and the worship
of special objects and places, and adopted also the cult of a

* Die h6here Bibelkrittk. Studie ttber die modeni-rationalisdsche Behandlung
der hi. Schrift Paderbom : Ferd. Schdningh, 1902, 8to, p. 1 10.

* 1902, n. 21, col. 1296 ft*.

* 1902, IV, p. 602.

* 1902, Hft. 9, p. 452 f.
' Leipzig, n. 35.

Digitized by



certain tribal God Jahveh from a clan near Mount Sinai ; Professor
Budde, of Strassburg, sees in Jahveh the mountain God of the
Kenites, among whom Moses had been shepherd and who joined
the Israelites in their ascent into Palestine ; Professor Hommel, of
Munich, derives Israel's religion from the West Semitic worship
of the stars, and makes Moses transform into Jahveh the West
Semitic moon goddess Ai ; Professor Winckler, of Berlin, identi-
fies the patriarchs with Babylonian astral divinities, and the patri-
archal history with astral myths, so that in its origin Israel's reli-
gion is a star worship ; Professor Gunkel, of Berlin, derives the
narratives of Genesis from historical, ethnological, etiological,
etymological, and other myths. The writer in the Kirchenzeitung
points out that these views concerning the origin of Israel's reli-
gion cannot lay claim to scientific correctness, since they agree
only in their rejection of the traditional teaching. — Professor Cur-
tiss, of the Chicago Theological Seminary, publishes what he
considers as "Discoveries of a Vicarious Element in Primitive
Semitic Sacrifice."' The author endeavors to disprove W. Robert-
son Smith's hypothesis that the earliest form of sacrifice was the
sacrificial meal. He infers from a great number of examples that
slaughtering was the original form of sacrifice, the meal being
only incidental ; again, that the life taken is more or less the sub-
stitute of another, the victim dying that man or animal may live ;
moreover, the Bedouins even now show traces of a custom
received from the cradle of the Semitic race, the custom of shed-
ding substitute blood. Professor Curtiss does not appear to be
aware that his article defends a view of sacrifice that may be seen
fully developed in Catholic text-books of Dogmatic Theology. —
W. O. E. Oesterley contributes to the August number of the Ex-
positof^ a study on *' The Development of Monotheism in Israel."
The writer believes that the belief in One God was fully grasped
neither at the time of Abraham, nor at that of Moses, but became
" self-conscious and articulate " only about the eighth century B. C,
at the time of Amos, Osee, and Isaias. The reader remembers from
the foregoing paragraphs that the critical views concerning the
history of Israel's religion are mutually destructive ; the author,

* ExpoiitoTy August, 190a, pp. 128-134.
' 1902, pp. 98-105.

Digitized by



therefore, should have proved his assumptions instead of drawing
inferences from them.

The critics are not less active in the field of New Testament
questions than in theories referring to the Old Testament Profes-
sor Otto Schmiedel has published a summary of critical problems
concerning the life of Jesus Christ, intended not for theological
scholars, but for lay readers.** The author first briefly surveys the
*^history of his subject from Reimarus to Keim ; he rejects the
views of a few scholars who deny the existence of Jesus and the
genuineness of the principal Pauline Epistles. After this, he begins
the critical discussion of the sources, the four Gospels. His chap-
ter on the Fourth Gospel is a dream rather than a study ; the figure
of Christ as presented by the Fourth Gospel is said " to lack every
human feature " ; its narratives are treated as allegories ; the first
miracle shows how the old watery teaching of Judaism is to be
replaced by the fiery wine of the Gospel ; the Samaritan woman
represents Samaria ; her five husbands are five idols which the
Samaritans had worshipped in past ages ; Nathanael is Paul. And
then follows something worse than dreams ; it is either a bit of
crass ignorance or of historical misrepresentation. It is said to be
the unanimous view of all inquirers into the life of Jesus of the
present day, that the Fourth Gospel was written perhaps between
130 and 140 A. D. Now, not to mention others, Jiilicher places
the Gospel soon after 100 A. D., Hamack between 80 and 1 10
A. D. Though in his discussion of the synoptic problem the
author offers some good suggestions, this part of his treatise too is
marred by groundless assumptions. No real miracles are admit-
ted ; where hypnotic suggestion cannot do away with the mirac-
ulous, recourse is had to parables, symbols, and allegories. To
us It is quite unintelligible, how W. Soitau can recommend the
pamphlet indiscriminately to lay readers and theologians." — Under
pretence of helping on " the reform and development of our tradi-
tional ecclesiastical views," Rudolph Otto, of Gottingen, publishes
a sketch of the life of Christ which is not quite as radical as
Schmiedel's Hauptprobletne^ but is advanced enough to satisfy the

^^ Die Hauptprobleme der Leben Jesu Forschung, von Otto Schmiedel, Professor
am Gymnasium zu Eisenach. Tubingen und Leipzig : J. C. Mohr. 1902.
" Deutsche Litter eUurieitung^ 190a, n. 36, d. 2256 f.

Digitized by



rationalistic views of New Testament history." First, the author
studies his sources ; next, he outlines the external life of Christ,
finally he sketches the moral character of Christ, His religious
temperament, and His unresistible originality. — ^A. Bruckner, of
Basel, has published a study on the heretics mentioned in the New
Testament" The author believes that the Book of Acts was
written with the intention of reconciling different views and par-
ties ; he finds, therefore, that only once** heretics of the apostolic
age are referred to, and in the future tense at that. The facts
pertinent to his subject, occurring in other parts of the New Tes-
tament, the author groups under the heads of legal, eschatolog-
ical, and Christological controversies. The Catholic reader can
by no means agree with all of the writer's statements ; there is no
room in a paper like the present for a catalogue of his objectiona-
ble views. — Professor J. Weiss, of Marburg, has published a lec-
ture on Christian liberty according to the preaching of St. Paul."
He follows up the Apostle's view of liberty from the law, liberty
from sin, and liberty from the world and its sorrows and pleasures,
but he is intent rather upon the historical origin of the Apostle's
teaching than upon its real object. Instead of deriving it from
the teaching of Christ or the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, he
endeavors to trace it back to the tenets of the Stoics. — Here we
may mention Father V. Rose's Studies on the Gospels," though
it is really an apology for the truth of the Christian religion. The
apologist of the new school labors no longer to simply prove the
truth of the Christian religion or to refute the objections of its
adversaries ; this was the aim and purpose of the old apologetic
school. In our days the problem is, how to induce men to see
the truth and to admit its claims. This is surely a most com-
mendable method, provided it does not substitute mere sentiment
in place of solid argument, or make unnecessary concessions to

^ Leben und Wirken Jesu, nach historisch-kritischer AnfiEfissimg. Gdttingen :
Vandenboek & Ruprecht, 1902, Svo, pp. 76.

" Die Irrlchrcr im Neuen TesUment. Tubingen : J. C. B. Mohr, 1902, Svo,
pp. 40.

" Acts 20 : 29 f.

>^ Die christliche Freibeit nacb der Verkiindigung des Apostels Pkulus. Ein
Vortrag. Gdtdngen : Vandenboek & Ruprecbt, 1902, Svo, pp. 39.

»• fetudcs sur ]es fevangiles. Paris : H. Welter.

Digitized by



the enemy. We are afraid, Father Rose has not always avoided
the latter mistake. According to him, the prayer of the modem
Christian is no longer addressed to the heavenly Father revealed
by His Son, but it is frequently only a tender effusion before the
virgins and the Blessed of the pre-Raphaelites. — The Rev. Hugh
Pope, O.P., proves from the "undesigjned coincidences" in the
books of the Old Testament that the respective authors who thus
unconsciously agjree, not merely "knew some details of Jewish
history," but were thoroughly cognizant of it ; their knowledge
must have been either that of contemporaries or at least derived
from contemporary documents ; they were no party to a fraudulent
projection into the past of a fictitious history compiled for the pur-
pose of priestly aggrandizement*'

2. Introdnotloit — ^The London Quarterly Review^ contains the
greatest praise that has ever been given outside America to the
American Standard Edition of the Revised Version." The edition
is said to probably fulfil the various conditions that must be realized
in the ideal English Bible more nearly than any other existing
work ; it is destined to become the accepted Bible of the majority
of the Anglo-Saxon race. Time will show whether this oracle of
the Quarterly be a true prophecy. — The Rheims Version, which
was published in 1 582, is more than once alluded to in the Preface to
the Authorized Version, which appeared in 161 1, and was design-
edly a revision of former versions. It is true that the Catholic ver-
sion finds no mention among the rules laid down for the editors of
King James* version ; but even the scholars who are responsible
for the Revised Version of 1881 say that the work of the royal
translators shows evident traces of the influence of the Rhemish
version. In order " to estimate and define as accurately as pos-
sible the degree of that influence," Dr. James Carleton, who is
assistant lecturer in Divinity at the University of Dublin, has
closely compared the two versions, and published his results.*^ In
a series of tables covering over 160 pages he gives us passages

" Dublin Review^ October, 1902, pp. 314 ff.

"July, 1902, pp. 1 19-139.

^' New York : Thomas Nelson & Sons.

^ The Part of Rheims in the Making of the English Bible. Oxford : Qarendon

Digitized by



and words in which the Catholic version has evidently in one
way or another influenced its Protestant rival. The author believes
that " with respect to the distinctive touches which the Authorized
New Testament has derived from the earlier translations her debt
to Roman Catholic Rheims is hardly inferior to her debt to Puri-
tan Geneva." — Our readers may remember that Dr. Swete pub-
lished the Old Testament in Greek during the years 1887-94; it
was then announced that a large edition of the same work, with
a complete text-critical apparatus for the Septuagintwas in course
of preparation. Two Cambridge scholars, Messrs. A. E. Brooke
and N. McLean, have the extensive work in hand, and they now
hope to begin the printing within a short time.** — ^After the inves-
tigations of Dr. Scrivener, the Codex Bezae has been commonly
assigned to the sixth century. Now F. C. Burkitt, of Cambridge,
has gone over the ground again," and has come to the conclusion
that the Codex belongs to the fifth century. — Professor A. Hilgen-
feld, of Jena, reviews in the Deutsche Litteraturzeitun^ a work by
Dr. E. Lippelt on the Apomnemoneumata quoted by St Justin.**
To understand the state of the question, we must keep in mind
that Justin's quotations agree neither always with the text of our
Grospels nor with themselves. Hence the problem, — Where is the
text that was quoted by Justin ? H. E. G. Paulus answered, A. D.
1784, that there must have existed an ancient harmony of the
Gospels which was used by Justin. This theory won some
adherents, the last of whom was M. v. Engelhardt who wrote
A. D. 1878. Now, T. Zahn and W. Bousset agreed in declaring
this solution to be the worst of all; meanwhile, A. D. 1832,
C. A. Credner proposed the theory that Justin had made use of a
non-canonical Grospel which must have formed the transition
between the first and the third canonical Gospel, probably the so-
called Gospel of Peter, and Hilgenfeld himself elaborated this

^ The forthcoming Cambridge Septuagint ; Journal of Theological Studies^ July>
1902, pp. 601-621.

*» The Date of Codex Bezae ; Journal of Theological Studies ^ July, 1902, pp.

*« 1902, n. 35, col. 2194-9S.

** Quae fuerint lustini Martyris Apomnemoneumata, quaque ratione com fonna
eyangeliorum syro-latina cohaeserint. Halle: Max Niemeyer, 1901, 8vo, pp.

Digitized by



theory ever since 1850; as late as 1891, W. Bousset, Lippelt's
own teacher, endorsed the view that Justin must have quoted a
non -canonical gospel. And now, in spite of all the foregoing
facts, the youthful E. Lippelt dares to return substantially to the
solution given A. D. 1784, combining with it a solution proposed
A. D. 1848 by Carl von Semisch, that Justin must have quoted
from memory. But what is worse still, the young writer
acknowledges his obligations to Friedrich Blass, and shows
acquaintance with the work of Wilhelm Bousset, while he simply
ignores A. Hilgenfeld. This is hard to bear ; hence no wonder
that Hilgenfeld writes some four columns in the Deutsche Littera-
turzeitung to show Mr. Lippelt the evil of his ways. Our readers
know, however, that the critical essays of Hilgenfeld are well
worth reading, and that his reasons are better than his temper.—
Wilhelm Soltau * endeavors to popularize the results reached in
the field of Gospel study by Wdzsaecker, Holtzmann, v. Soden,
Hawkins, Wemle, and other writers of the same importance.
Mark is represented as the source of Matthew and Luke, but
no " Urmarcus " is admitted ; besides, Matthew and Luke had at
hand different editions of the Logia collection. They utilized no
other source except that of oral tradition, the genealogy in
Matthew and the history of the infancy in Luke forming the only
exceptions. The agreements of the First with the Third Gospel
are explained by the assumption of a Froto-Matthew and a
Deutero-Matthew. There is no need to say that this solution of
the synoptic problem is not at all satisfactory in itself and not
favorably received by scholars. But Soltau's position with regard
to the historical value of the Gospels is still more objectionable.
He believes the historical value of Mark has been overestimated,
while the Fourth Gospel cannot be considered as an historical source
at all. And of course, the less faith a writer has in the Gospels,
the more he has in himself; his fancy becomes the substitute for
facts. — ^An instance of this last defect is furnished us by Dr. Anton
Beck in his monograph on the prologue to the Third Gospel."

** Unsere Evangelien ; ihre Quellen und ihr QueUenwerth vom Standpunkt des
Historiken aos betrachtet. Leipiig : Dieterich, 1901, 8to, pp. yi-|-i49*

** Der Prolog des Lukas-Evangelranis : eine exegetische Studie. Ambeig :
Pnick von H. Boes ; 8to, pp. 47.

Digitized by



The writer betrays a simply superhuman knowledge of Theophi-
lus, concerning whom common mortals know little or nothing,
and he seems to know little of what other students consider as
most essential. — If the Apostle John never lived at Ephesus, he
cannot well be the author of any of the New Testament books
that bear his name. Schmiedel, MoflBitt, and Bacon have there-
fore been most eager to amass arguments against the Apostle's
Ephesian residence. It is against these scholars that Dr. W. F.
Adeney wrote an article entitled "Did St John ever live at
Ephesus T^ His refutation consists mainly in a truer interpreta-
tion of the patristic testimony, and of the New Testament pas-
sages bearing on the question. — Finally, we must draw the reader's
attention to Professor Ramsay's appreciation of St. Paul,* and to
Father de Hummelauer's Introduction to the Book of Josue, of
which we shall have more to say in a future number of the

^ London QuarUrly Review^ July, 1902, pp. 75-96.

*• Expositor^ August, 1902, pp. 81-92.

" Commentmrins in Librum Josue. Puisiis : P. Lethielleux, 1902, pp. 1-93.

Digitized by


Criticisms and f^otcs.

Leotures on Vatoral Beligion, deliyered at Edinbnigh in 1901-1902,
by William James, LL.D., Professor of Harvard Uniyersity. London
and Hew Tork : Longmans, ftreen fc Co. Pp. xii— 534. Prioe, 12s. net

Religion, according to Professor James, is something essentially
personal and subjective. ' It belongs wholly to the region of psychology.
He will have nothing to do with revelation, as distinct from himian
nature, of which the present volume professes to be a ** study." He
thus takes frankly an experimental basis for all religious phenomena.
By analyzing acutely the various forms of emotional belief he attempts
to remove theology, as such, from its throne, substituting for it a
naturalistic "science of religion'' that will not merely unify the
spiritual dualism, which he thinks is responsible for the manifold ener-
gizings of the soul after the unseen, but will even explain such funda-
mental postulates as the existence and being of God.

His object is sufficiently ambitious. Placing severely on one side
any hypothesis unverified by experience, he attempts to reduce every
religious emotion to a scientific basis. He divides the believing world
into two classes, the " healthy-minded " and the " sick. " Walt Whit-
man represents the first class, the prophets of pessimism the second.
The four chapters devoted to this classification are perhaps the most
brilliant in the book ; but Professor James shows his inability to appre-
ciate the Catholic type of sane, manly religion ; he wastes his time in
describing the Christian Scientist and votaries of kindred systems
which find so fruitful a soil in America, as the best representatives of
a false optimism that shuts its eyes upon suffering and sin, and is
synonymous with "healthy-mindedness.** * The same defect is ap-
parent in his discussion of saintliness and conversion. His instances,
in spite of a specious exhaustiveness, lack the note of moderation, which

' He defines it as ** The feelings, acts, and experiences of individual men in their
solitude, so £» as they apprehend themselves to stand in relation to whatever they
consider the Divine."

* In this connection there is an interesting analogy drawn by the author between
the mind-healing of Christian Science and the emotional conversions of Methodism.

Digitized by



is as characteristic of certain forms of sanctity founded on a super-
natural creed as the extremes which he takes in an exaggerated — we
might almost call it a neurotic — form to be typical of the saintly life.
Much is said about the outpourings of sensible devotion ; little, if any-
thing, of the secret and deeper forms of Christian piety — those intimate
communings of the soul with God which, without rising to the heights
of ecstasy, show their reality by the fruits of laborious self-sacrifice for
the welfare of men, and contain in themselves the best evidence of the
objective existence of the Fount of grace and of light. This point
is an important one in view of the author's elaborate chapters on
Mysticism. He marshals his facts imposingly and allows his arguments
to flow in their natural and orderly sequence from what appear to be

Online LibraryCatholic University of AmericaAmerican ecclesiastical review, Volume 27 → online text (page 74 of 78)