COMMENTARIES
KU
COMMENTARIES
berg, Meignan, Reithmayr, Patrizi, Loch, Bisping
(his commentary on the New Testament styled "ex-
cellent" by VigouroiLx), Corluy, Fillion, Lesotrc, Tro-
chon (Introductions and Comm. on Old and Now
Test., "La .Sainte Bible", 27 vols.), Schegg, Bacuez,
Kenrick, McEvilly, Arnauld, Schanz (a most valuable
work, in German, on the Gospels), Fouard, Maas,
Vigouroux (works of Introduction), Ward, McIntjTe,
etc. Catholics have also published important scientif-
ical books. There is the great Latin " Cursus" on the
whole of the Bible by the Jesuit Fathers, Cornely,
Knabenbauer, and Hummelauer. The writings of
Lagrange (Lcs .luges), Condamin (Isaie).Calmes (Saint
Jean), Van Hoonacker (Les Douze Petits Prophetes),
etc., are all valuable works. For a list of modern
Catholic publications on the Scripture, the reader
may be referred to the "'Revue biblique", edited by
Lagrange (.Jerusalem and Paris), and the "Biblische
Zeitschrif t ", published by Herder (Freiburg im
Breisgau). For further information concerning the
principal Catholic commentators see respective
irticles.
V. NoN-C.'VTHOLic Commentaries. — (1) In Gen- ial. — The commeiitaries of the first Reformers, Luther, Melanchthon, Calvin, Zwingli, etc., are mostly
- ontroversial, and are now seldom quoted by scholars,
rheir immediate successors were too energetically en- gaged in polemics among themselves to devote much time to regular works of exegesis. The following wrote on Holy Scripture during the 17th and 18th cen- turies. Lutherans : Gerhard ; Geier ; Calov ; S. Sehmid ; I. H. Michaelis; Lange. Cal\'inists: Drusius; Louis de Dieu (great Oriental scholar) ; Cappel ; Bochart ; Coc- 3eius; Vitringa. Socinians: John Crell and Jonas Schlichting. Arminians: Hugo Grotius (a man of ^eat erudition); Litnbroch; John le Clerc (rationalis- tic). English Writers: Brian Walton (London Poly-
- lot), John Lightfoot (Hora» Heb. et Talm.), both
nines of learning; Pearson, etc., editors of "Critici 3acri ' ' (compiled from the best Continental writers, Catholic and Protestant); Mayer; S. Clarke (brief udicious notes); Wells; Gill; John Wesley; Dodd; W. Lowth ; R. Lowth ; and the editors of the Reformer's Bible. During the nineteenth century: Priestly 180.3); Burder (1809); D'Oyly and Mant (1820); A. larke (1826, learned); Boothroyd (182.3, Hebrew icholar); Thomas Scott (1822, popular); Matthew Senry (1827, a practical comm. on Old and New Test.); Bloomfield (Greek Test., with Eng. notes, 1832, good for the time) ; Kuinoel (Philological Comm. )n New Test., 1828) ; Oldshausen (18.39); Haevernick
- i.S4.5); Baumgarten (1859); Tholuck (1.S43); Trench
Parables. Sermon on the Mount, Miracles, N. T. Syn. —very useful); "The Speakers Commentary" (still valuable); Alford (Greek Test., with critical and xeg. comm., 1856, good); Franz Delitzsch (1870), 3brard Hengstenberg (1869); Wordsworth (The "reek Test., with notes, 1877); Keil; Ellicott (Epp. )f St. Paul, highly esteemed); Conybeare and lowson (St. Paul, containing much useful informa- tion) ; Lange, together with Schroeder, Fay, Cassel, Bacher, Zoeckler, Moll, etc. (Old and N. Test., 1864- rS); Lewin (.St. Paul, 1878); Beet; Cook; Gloag; Perowne; Bishop Lightfoot (Epp. of St. Paul); West- ott. There were many commentaries published at ^mbridge, Oxford, London, etc. (.see publishers' latalogues, and notices in "Expositor", "Expository rime.s", and "Journal of Theological Studies"). Dther writers are Farrar, A. B. Davidson, Fausset, Plummer, Plumptre, Salmon, Swete, Bruce, Dods, itanley, Driver, Kirkpatrick, .Sanday, Green, Hovey, Sobinson, Schaff. Briggs, Moore, Gould, etc. "The nternational Critical Commentary" is a work by nany distinguished American and English scholars. rhere are also the Bible dictionaries of Kitto, Smith. ind Hastings. Many of these works, especially the ater ones, are valuable for their scientific method, lY— 11
though not of equal value for their views or conclusions.
[See below (3) The best modern (non-C.) Commentaries
in English.]
(2) Rationalistic Commentaries. — The English deists. Lord Herbert of Cherbury (d. 1648), Hobbes, Blount, Toland, Lord Shaftesbury (d. 1713), Mande- ville, Collins, Woolston (1731), Tindal, Morgan, Chubb, Lord Bolingbroke (d. 1751), Annet, and Da\id Hume (d. 1776), while admitting the existence of God, rejected the supernatiu-al, and made desperate at- tacks on different parts of the Old and the New Testa- ment. They were ably refuted by such men as New- ton, Cudworth, Boyle, Bentley, Lesley, Locke, Ibbot, Whiston, S. Clarke, Sherlock, Chandler, Gilbert West, George Lord Lytton, Waterland, Foster, Warburton, Leland, Law, Lardner, Watt, Butler. These replies were so effective that in England deism practically died with Hume. In the meantime, unfortunately, the opinions of the English rationalists were dissemi- nated on the Continent by Voltaire and others. In Germany the ground was prepared by the philosophy of Christian Wolff and the writings of his disciple Semler. Great scandal was caused by the posthu- mous WTitings of Raimarus, which were published by Lessing between 1774-78 (The Fragments of Wolfen- buttel). Lessing pretended that he discovered the manuscript in the ducal library of Wolfenbiittel and that the author was unknown. According to the "Fragments", Moses, Christ, and the Apostles were impostors. Lessing was vigorously attacked, especially by Gotze ; but Lessing, instead of meeting his opponent's arguments, with great literary skill turned him to ridicule. The rationalists, however, soon realized that the Scriptures had too genuine a ring to be treated as the results of imposture. Eich- horn, in his "Introd. to the Old Test." (1789), main- tained that the Scriptures were genuine productions, but that, as the Jews saw the intervention of God in the most ordinary natural occurrences, the miracles should be explained naturally, and he proceeded to show how. Paulus (1761-1850), following the lead of Eichhorn, applied to the Gospels the naturalistic method of explaining miracles. When Paulus was a boy, his father's mind became deranged, he constantly saw his deceased wife and other ministering angels, and he perceived miracles everywhere. After a time the young Paulus began to shake off this nightmare and amused himself by taking advantage of his fath- er's weakness, and playing practical jokes upon him. He grew up with the most bitter dislike for every- thing supernatural, and his judgment became almost as warped as that of his father, but in the opposite direction. The Apostles and early Christians ap- peared to him to be people just like his worthy parent, and he thought that they distorted natural facts through the medium of their excited imaginations. This led him to give a naturalistic explanation of the Gospel miracles.
The common sense of the German rationalists soon perceived, however, that if the authenticity of the Sacred Books were admitted, with Eichhorn and Paulus, the naturalistic explanation of these two writers was quite as absurd as the impostor system of Raimarus. In order to do away with the superna- tural it was necessary to get rid of the authenticity of the books; and to this the observations of Richard Simon and Astruc readily lent themselves. G. L Bauer, Heyne (d. 1812), and Creuzer denied the au- thenticity of the greater portion of the Pentateuch and compared it to the mythology of the Greeks and Romans. The greatest advocate of such views was de Wette (1780-1849), a pupil of Paulus, of the hol- lowness of whose method he soon became convinced. In his "Introd. to the Old Test." (1806) he main- tained that the miraculous narratives of the Old Testa- ment were but popular legends, which, in passing from mouth to mouth, in the course of centuries, be-
