Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 11.djvu/718

 PENTATEUCH

654

PENTATEUCH

The post -Mosaic additions and modifications al- lowed by the Biblical Coniniission in the Pentateuch without removing it from the ranp:e of substantial integrity and Mosaic authenticity- are variously inter- preted by Catholic scliolars. (1) We should have to understand them in a rather wide sense, if we were to defend the views of von Hummelauer or Vetter. This latter writer admits legal and historical documents b'lsed on Mosaic tradition, but written only in the times of the Judges; he places the first redaction of the Pentateuch in the time of the erection of Solo- mon's temple, and its last redaction in the time of Esdras. \etter died in 1906, the year in which the Biblical Ctimniission issued the above Decree; it is an interesting question, whether and how the scholar wouUl have modified his theory, if time had been granted him to do so. (2) A less liberal interpretation of the Decree is implied in the Pentateuchal hypoth- eses advanced by Hoberg ("Moses und der Penta- teuch; Die Pentateuch Frage" in "BibUsche Stu- dicn", X, 4, Freiburg, 1907; "Erkliirung der Genesis", 1908, Freiburg, I-L), Schopfer (Geschichte des Alten Testamentes, 4th ed., 226 sqq.), Hopfl (Die hohere Bibelkritik, 2nd ed., Paderborn, 1906), Brueker ("L'eglise et la critique", Paris, 1907, 103 sqq.), and Selbst (Schuster and Holzammer's "Handbuch zur Biblischen Gescliichte", 7th ed., Freiburg, 1910, II, 94, 96). The last-named writer believes that Moses left a writ tin law-book to which Josue and Samuel added Mipplrinciitary sections and regulations, while David and Solcinuni supplied new statutes concerning worship and priesthood, and other kings introduced certain reUgious reforms, until Esdras promulgated the whole law and made it the basis of Israel's restora- tion after the Exile. Our present Pentateuch is, therefore, an Esdrine edition of the work. Dr. Selbst feels convinced that his admission of both textual changes and material additions in the Pentateuch agrees with the law of historical development and with the results of literary criticism. Historical develop- ment adapts laws and regulations to the religious, civil, and social conditions of successive ages, while literary criticism discovers in our actual Pentateuch peculiarities of words and phrases which can hardly have been original, and also historical additions or notices, legal modifications, and signs of more recent administration of justice and of later forms of wor- ship. But Dr. Selbst believes that these peculiarities do not offer a sufficient basis for a distinction of dif- ferent sources in the Pentateuch. (3) A strict inter- pretation of the words of the Decree is implied in the views of Kaulen (Einleitung, n. 193 sqq.), Kley ("Die Pentateuchfrage, ilire Geschichte und ihre Systeme", Munster, 1903), Flunk (Kirchenlexicon, IX, 1782 sqq.), and Mangenot ("L'authenticitfi mosaique du Pentateuque", Paris, 1907; Idem, "Diet, de la Bible", V, 50-119). With the exception of those por- tions that belong to the time after the death of Moses, and of certain accidental changes of the text due to transcribers, the whole of the Pentateuch is the work of Moses who composed the work in one of the ways suggested by the Biblical Commission.

Finally, there is the question as to the theological certainty of the thesis maintaining the Mosaic au- thenticity of tlie Pentateuch. (1) Certain Catholic scholars who wrote between 1887 and 1906 expressed their opinion that the thesis in question is not revealed in Scripture nor taught by the Church; that it ex- presses a truth not contained in Revelation, but a tenet which may be freely contested and discussed. At that time, ecclesiastical authority had issued no pronouncement on the (juestion. (2) Other writers grant that the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch is not explicitly revealed, but they consider it as a truth revealed formally implicitly, being derived from the revealed formula; not by a syllogism in the strict sense of the word, but by a simple explanation of the

terms. The denial of the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch is an error, and the contradictory of the thesis maintaining the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch is considered crroneti in fide (cS. M6chi- neau, "L'origine mosaique du Pentateuque", p. 34). (3) A third class of scholars considers the INIosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch neither as a freely debatable tenet, nor as a truth formally implicitly re- vealed; they believe it has been virtually revealed, or that it is inferred from revealed truth by truly sj'llo- gistic deduction. It is, therefore, a theologically cer- tain truth, and its contradictory is a rash (temeraria) or even erroneous proposition (cf. Brueker, "Authen- ticity des livres de Moise" in "Etudes", March, 1888, p. 327; ihid., January, 1897, p. 122-3; Mangenot, " L'authenticitfi mosaique du Pentateuque", pp. 267- 310).

Whatever effect the ecclesiastical decision concern- ing the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch may have had, or will have, on the opinion of students of the Pentateuchal question, it cannot be said to have occasioned the conservative attitude of scholars who wrote before the promulgation of the Decree. The following list contains the names of the principal recent defenders of Mosaic authenticity: Hengsten- berg, "Die Biicher Moses und Aegypten", Berlin, 1841; Smith, "The Book of Moses or the Pentateuch in its Authorship, Credibility, and Civilisation", Lon- don, 1868; C. Schobel, "Demonstration de I'authen- ticit6 du Deut6ronome", Paris, 1868; Idem, "Demon- stration de 1 'authenticity mosaique de I'Exode", Paris, 1871; Idem, "Demonstration de I'authenticitfi mosaique du Levitique et des Nombres", Paris, 1869; Idem, "Demonstration de I'authenticite de la Ge- nese', Paris, 1872; Idem, "Le Moise historique et la redaction mosaique du Pentateuque", Paris, 1875; Knabenbauer, "Der Pentateuch imd die unglaubige Bibelkritik" in "Stimmen aus Maria-I.aach", 1873, IV; Bredenkamp, "Gesetz und Pni]ih(ten", Er- langen, 1881; Green, "Moses and the I'rophets", New York, 1883; Idem, "The H<.bn.w I'casts", New York, 1885; Idem, "The Pentateuchal C^u<'stion" in "He- braica", 1889-92; Idem, "The Higher Criticism of the Pentateuch", New York, 1895; Idem, "The Unity of the Book of Genesis", New York, 1895; C. Elliot, "Vindication of the Mosaic Authorship of the Pentateuch", Cincinnati, 1884; Bi.ssel, "The Penta- teuch, its Origin and Structure", New York, 1885; Ubaldi, "Introductio in Sacram Scripturam", 2nd ed., Rome, 1882, I, 452-509; Comely, "Introductio specialis in historicos V. T. hbros", Paris, 1887, pp. 19-160; Vos, "Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuchal Codes", London, 1886; Bohl, "Zum Gesetz und zum Zeugniss", Vienna, 1883; Zahn, "Ernste Blicke in den Wahn der modernen Kritik des A. T.", Giitersloh, 1893; Idem, "Das Deuteronomium", 1890; Idem, "Israelitische und jiidische Geschichte", 1895; Rup- precht, "Die Anschauung der kritischen Schule Well- hausens vom Pentateuch", Leipzig, 1893; Idem, "Das Rathsel des Flinfbuches Mose und seine falsche Losung", Giitersloh, 1894; Idem, "Des Rathsels Losung oder Beitriige zur richtigen Losung des Pen- tateuchriithsels", 1897; Idem, "Die Kritik nach ihrem Recht und Unrecht", 1897; "Lex Mosaica, or the Law of Moses and the Higher Criticism (by Sayce, Rawlinson, Trench, Lias, Wace, etc.), London, 1894; Card. Meignan, "De I'Eden k Moise", Paris, 1895, 1-88; Baxter, "Sanctuary and Sacrifice", London, 1896; Abbfi de Broglie, "Ques- tions bibliques", Paris, 1897, pp. 89-169; Pelt, "His- tou-e de I'A. T.", 3rd ed., Paris, 1901, I, pp. 291-326; Vigouroux, "Les Livres Saints et la critique ration- aliste", Paris, 1902, III, 1-226; IV, 239-53, 405-15; Idem, "Manuel biblique", 12th ed., Paris, 1906, I, 397-478; Kley, " Die Pentateuchfrage, ihre Geschichte und ihre Systeme", Miinster, 1903; Hopfl, "Die hohere Bibelkritik", Paderborn, 1902; Thomas, "The