DE LIBRI ISAIAE INDOLE ET AUCTORE. Propositis sequentibus dubiis Commissio Pontificia de re biblica sequenti modo respondit: Dubium I.-Utrum doceri possit, vaticinia quæ leguntur in libro Isaiæ,—et passim in Scripturis,-non esse veri nominis vaticinia, sed vel narrationes post eventum confictas, vel, si ante eventum prænuntiatum quidpiam agnosci opus sit, id prophetam non ex supernaturali Dei futurorum præscii revelatione, sed ex his quæ jam contigerunt, felici quadam sagacitate et naturalis ingenii acumine, conjiciendo prænuntiasse? Resp.-Negative. Dubium II.-Utrum sententia quæ tenet, Isaiam ceterosque prophetas vaticinia non edidisse nisi de his quæ in continenti vel post non grande temporis spatium eventura erant, conciliari possit cum vaticiniis, imprimis messianicis et eschatologicis, ab eisdem prophetis de longinquo certo editis, necnon cum communi SS. Patrum sententia concorditer asserentium, prophetas ea quoque prædixisse, quæ post multa sæcula essent implenda? Resp.-Negative. Dubium III.-Utrum admitti possit, prophetas non modo tanquam correctores pravitatis humanæ divinique verbi in profectum audientium præcones, verum etiam tanquam prænuntios eventuum futurorum, constanter alloqui debuisse auditores non quidem futuros, sed præsentes et sibi æquales, ita ut ab ipsis plane intelligi potuerint; proindeque secundam partem libri Isaia (cap. xl-lxvi), in qua vates non Judæos Isaiæ æquales, at Judæos in exsilio babylonico lugentes veluti inter ipsos vivens alloquitur et solatur, non posse ipsum Isaiam jamdiu emortuum auctorem habere, sed oportere eam ignoto cuidam vati inter exsules viventi assignare? Resp. Negative. Dubium IV.-Utrum ad impugnandam identitatem auctoris libri Isaiæ argumentum philologicum, ex lingua stiloque desumptum, tale sit censendum, ut virum gravem, critica artis et hebraicæ linguæ peritum, cogat in eodem pluralitatem auctorum agnoscere? Resp.-Negative. Dubium V.-Utrum solida prostent argumenta, etiam cumulative, sumpta, ad evincendum Isaiæ librum non ipsi soli Isiaæ, sed duobus, imo pluribus auctoribus esse tribuendum? Resp.-Negative. Die autem 28 junii anni 1908, in Audientia ambobus Rmis Consultoribus ab Actis benigne concessa, Sanctissimus prædicta Responsa rata habuit ac publici juris fieri mandavit. Romæ, die 29 junii 1908. FULCRANUS VIGOUROUX, P. S. S. Consultores ab Actis. The Life of Christ-by MGR. E. LE CAMUS, translated by REV. WM. A. HICKEY. Vol. iii. New York. The Cathedral Library Association. 1908. pp. xv-520. On two several occasions we have already called the attention of the readers of the NEW YORK REVIEW1 to the English translation of the late Bishop Le Camus' Vie de Notre Seigneur Jésus Christ. The present volume is the third and last instalment of this valuable publication, and it is marked by the same careful rendering on the part of the Rev. Translator, the same historical and critical insight on the part of the lamented Prelate, as we printed out in deference to the two preceding volumes. The first 160 pages of this third volume deal with the last days of Our Lord's public Ministry. In a vivid and accurate manner they describe Christ's going up to Jerusalem, His stay in Jericho and Bethany, His triumphal entrance into the Holy City on Palm Sunday, His words and deeds during the next three days, and close with an interesting chapter entitled: "The Final Result of Jesus' Ministry." The remainder of the volume forms Part Third of the whole work. Nearly all the questions, historical, critical, theological, etc., connected with the Last Supper are studied with a remarkable care in pp. 163-277. Then follows a detailed account of Our Lord's arrest, trial, crucifixion, death, and burial (pp. 278-411). The concluding chapters are taken up with a narrative of the resurrection, risen life, and ascension of the Son of God (pp. 412-501). Two valuable Indices to the three volumes, bring the whole work to an end. The value of this last volume of Bishop Le Camus' Life of Christ can hardly be exaggerated. The events therein narrated are obviously of paramount importance in the eyes of all believers in Christ's divinity. They are the crowning marks of the love of the Savior of the world, the undoubted proofs of His divine mission and character, the perennial springs of spiritual life for regenerated humanity. They are facts which naturally demand to be handled with the utmost care and reverence, and whoever peruses the volume before us will readily see that such is precisely the method of treatment pursued by its learned author. At each step, the Rt. Rev. Prelate avails himself of every possible source of information to set forth with 'Cf. Nov.-Dec. 1906, p, 399 sqq.; Nov.-Dec., 1907, p. 366 sqq. vividness and accuracy even the most minute details of the sacred narrative. He has too much respect for the Gospels, considered as historical documents, to think for a moment that their reliable character needs to be defended by winking at the difficulties suggested chiefly by a comparison of their parallel texts. In consequence, he frankly acknowledges all such difficulties, and with the honesty of a scholar who is not commited to any particular theory of Scriptural inspiration, he examines, modifies or even sets aside the various solutions, ancient or modern, which have been proposed in connection with them. He is indeed the "scribe instructed in the kingdom of heaven, [who] is like to a man that is a householder, who bringeth forth out of his treasure new things and old" (St. Matthew xiii, 52). He is closely accquainted both with ancient traditions and commentaries, and with the recent data of Palestine exploration, Biblical philology, textual and historical criticism, and turns everything to profit to draw a living picture of the last days of the God-Man, of His resurrection and ascension. It would therefore be difficult to imagine how he could have written a volume more interesting and instructive. As the English translation was made from the sixth edition of the French original and thus embodies the mature results of Bishop Le Camus' study of the Gospels, it may not be amiss to point out some of the scientific positions set forth in the present volume. Of course, the Rt. Rev. author distinctly professes his thorough belief in the fact of the inspiration of the Evangelical records, but this does not present him from acknowledging the compilatory manner in which they were composed (pp. 126, 414), and from referring repeatedly to the "documents" on which they are based and the use of which accounts for the variations noticeable in their redaction (pp. 88, 195, etc.) According to him, "these variations...have no dogmatic importance, but here (Parable of the wicked husbandman), as in many other passages, they seem to render untenable those theories which exclude from our sacred books every inaccuracy no matter how slight, as if the inspiration of the sacred writers had the prerogative of extending infallibility into the most insignificant details. Undoubtedly on certain points in the present parable the agreement is not perfect among the Synoptics, nor can it be made so, whatever skill in harmonizing one may employ....It must be admitted, then, that, while all three are equally inspired, at least two of our Synoptics do not reproduce the exact words of the Master. This phenomenon is repeated, moreover, in other passages, doubtless of no great importance but sufficiently numerous. It is with such passages, It is with such passages, it seems to us, that theologians in investigating the true conditions of inspiration, ought to occupy themselves, before putting forth doctrines which the texts seem finally to render untenable" (p. 65. Cf. also pp. 15, 208, 418). Consistently with these views, Bishop Le Camus admits a considerable freedom of redaction and varying degrees of exactitude on the part of the Evangelists. "One would say," he writes p. 445 sq., "that as they approached the end of their work, our Evangelists, like the author of the Acts, gave less care to their production, and that the end comes about, leaving the story somewhat unfinished." He tells us in p. 45, that "the prophecy of Zacharias is quoted both by St. John and St. Matthew with a liberty that is content with following the sense, without seeking either the words or even the phraseology;" and in p. 156, that "St. John quotes from memory (a passage from Isaias) without care for verbal exactitude." In reference to St. Mark xii, 3, as compared with St. Matthew xxiv, 3, and St. Luke xxi, 7, he writes (p. 117): "Really, it is St. Mark who seems the most exact, and, as always, the most dramatic;" whereas in another connection (p. 193) he says: "Here it is St. Luke who seems the more exact." In p. 192, he informs us that "inversions must be made in St. Luke's text in order to adapt badly classed documents to the ever faultless succession of St. John;" and in p. 451, he speaks of St. Luke's "inaccurate perspective with reference to the Ascension." In connection with the events of the Last Supper, he says: "St. Mark xiv, 18-22, and St. Matthew xxvi, 21-26, clearly prove that once again, in the history of that night, the third Synoptic has not preserved the exact order of events;" and in connection with those of the Resurrection, he writes: "The truth is that St. Luke sets down in this place, as if by chance, a detail which he has found in the documents he is using, but in which all the other details are wanting. One feels that there is a certain indecision and vagueness in his account, and verse 12 (of St. Luke xxiv) comes from a source different from verse 11. Verse 24 likewise suggests something not related. He stands by that scrupulous fidelity which, here as elsewhere, makes it a duty for him to write down everything he knows, even if it should contradict that which precedes. But St. John quite appropriately explains that which seems to be inexplicable." From among other noteworthy positions which Bishop Le Camus has adopted in the present volume, the following may be briefly mentioned. In his eyes, Christ's cursing of the fig-tree is a purely symboli cal act (p. 52 sqq.) The cleansing of the Temple recorded by the Synoptics he regards as distinct from the one described in St. John's Gospel (p. 56), while he identifies the sister of Martha and Lazarus, the Mary of the Fourth Gospel, with Mary Magdalen, "the woman who was a sinner" (p. 29). By means of a lengthy discussion, he shows to his own satisfaction that Jesus anticipated by one day the Paschal meal of the Jews, and that the four Evangelists agree in this regard (p. 173 sqq.) He strenuously maintains that Judas left the Paschal table before the institut on of the Holy Eucharist (p. 204), and thinks that Annas and Caiphas dwelt in one and the same place (p. 204). He devotes a long and valuable note to the proof that the traditional site of the Holy Sepulchre has in its favor a historical ground which the topographical discoveries up to the present have failed to disprove (p. 397 sqq.) According to him, the last twelve verses of our second Gospel are "not from St. Mark's own pen" (p. 413), and the last chapter of St. John's Gospel is an appendix added to that Gospel at a very early date and yet to be referred to St. John with the exception, however, of its two concluding verses (p. 457 sq.). Finally Bishop Le Camus assigns, in a passing remark, St. Peter's martyrdom to 64 A. D. By way of conclusion, we cannot do better than to quote the following endorsement of the whole work, from The Month, April, 1908, p. 433. This is "the very model of a book for study and reference. The Bishop has won the special commendation of the present Holy Father, in that he has managed to hold a middle course in his critical estimates between purblind conservatism and that reckless abandonment of sound positions that has brought disaster upon one school of Catholic exegesis. We cordially recommend this work for use in parish and school libraries, as well as in households of the faithful generally." FRANCIS E. GIGOT. Scholasticism Old and New: an Introduction to Scholastic Philosophy, Medieval and Modern-by M. DEWULF, D. Ph., Professor at Louvain; translated by P. COFFEY, D. Ph., Professor of Philosophy, Maynooth. Dublin, Gill and Son; New York, Benziger Bros. pp. 327. All who are seriously interested in the attempt to make the neoscholastic movement move have at times felt the need of some general |