The Dominion. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 27,1909. THE HIGHER CRITICISM: LOSS AND GAIN.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 675, 27 November 1909, Page 4

The Dominion. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 27,1909. THE HIGHER CRITICISM: LOSS AND GAIN.

The publication of a thoughtful book by a New Zealander on a subject of high importance in a progressive department of modern thought is an event of much interest, for it is all too rarely that scholars in this young Dominion join the'men of learning / in Eurbpe and' America/ in grappling with the theological, scientific, literary, and philosophical problomß of the; age. Of course the facilities available in "a now, country , like this;'do not permit of much' original /documentary; research in somo branches of knowledge, and therefore! very rapid advancement cannot reasonably be expected; but the hopes of New Zealanders should bo stimulated and encouraged by the appearance of a careful and interesting book entitled Modern' Study of the Old Testament and Inspiration, written by the Rev. T. -H. Spsorr. vicar of St; Paul's,. Wellington, /which has just been/printed by the Cambridge University . Press./ Fresh /and. vigorous in its manner, and\conscientious and courageous in its, handling of the great difficulties/ of tho subject, iMr. Sprott's book is one of the most helpful works on the question that have so far been produced by writers in this part of and one that is in every way creditable to New Zealand scholarship; One of the disMnjguiabing'', featuroa! • of the intellectual life of the present ago if. the relentless application of the scientific method to all branches of knowledge, • and the results have beon so marvellously fruitful' that it is no ; exaggeration to ■declare, in the words of John Piskij, that " in their/mental habits, in their mothods of inquiry, and in the data at their command, tho men of tho .-'present day who have kept, pace with the scientific movement are separated : from the men. whose education ended in 1830 .by an immeasurably wider gulf than : ever before divided one progressive generation of men from their predecessors." When the/ new method of investigation was applied to history and literature it soon became evident that' tho authorship of ancient books' could not: be /decisively decided by their traditional titles, and / that myth arid legend have played a considerable part in the making of primitive history. Nothing could/save the Bible from the keenest scrutiny on these lines, nor could any, sense of reverence prevent it from being treated like any other book; but after it has gone through the most severe investigation to which any literature has over been subjected, the great majority of scholars, af; the present day would probably endorse the words of Dr. Jowett that " when interpreted liko: any other book, by the same rules of evidence and the same, canons- of criticism, tho Bible will still remain unlike any other book," and this, is" the conclusion arrived at, by Mr.' Sprott. Accepting frankly the, methods, of modern ■ histArical criticism, he\ estimates the loss and the gain, and 1 is of opinion that on the whole the gain predominates. Ono of. the great "merits of his book is that' it is mainly 'constructive and reconstructive, and not merely destructive;; • 'To many people who have been brought' up "in the older school, and taught to ■regard .the Bible as absolutely inorrant, from cover to cover, every, chapter and verifl being: equally- piedouß, eom of 1

tho opinions, oxprcssed by Mr. ' Sprott may como as a rather painful shock, and engendor a fooling of anxiety and uneasiness. t Evory. wise teaohlor will .do hiß utmost to roassuro theso. anxious. and timid people, who _ feel that the very ; foundations of religion are being undermined; but on tho other hand it is his duty' to welcome fresh truth, and now light.on old truths from whatever quarter they may come. ; This is the attitude, which the Vicar of-St.' Paul's takes up, and if justification wnro needed for it liri cart {joint to the following declaration of the bishops at the Lambcth Confcrenco of 1597:—' The critical study of the Bible by competent scholars is essential to the maintenance in the Church of a healthy faith. . A faith which is. alwayß or often attended by a secret fear that'wo dare not inquire lest inquiry should lead us to results inconsistent with what we believe is already infocted _ with a disease which may soon destroy, it.'' In these days even tho man-in-the-strcct talks about the Higher Criticism, though probably few people could give a satisfactory definition of tho term. Soma words of explanation are therefore necessary. Thoro are- two. branches of criticism, the." Lower " and tho ," Higher." The . Lower Criticism is purely: textual: that is tosay, in the words of Mb. Knight .'in. his. 'Omicitm ■ 'of the Old Testament, "it investigates, tho extant documents,, _ compares them, with one another, with versions of them in - different languages, - and with quotations from thom ;madq : by va-. rious authors, and thus tries, to ascertain the actual wording of the original," Here tho Higher ' Critic takes up the work. Taking tho most accurate text available "he passes, on to inquire into tho history of its original. When and by whom were these Hebrew and Greek documents composed 1 is the primary, question' which he attempts fo answer, He analyses the text, studies its contents as well as .its stylo and. language, and estimates its authoYship and date. Ho. trios to recount the,genesis of:tho Bible, to tell the story of its composition, and' to depict the conditions under which its books were originally brought into, existence." It is essential to distinguish between the_ methods and tho so-called results of scientific criticism.', For instance, a man may fully accept .the modern method and at the same timo decisively reject tho- theory of tho Dutch scholar mentioned. by Ms, ■ Sprott, who declares" that nono of tho Pauline epistles are genuine, a theory' which is scouted by the vast majority of experts both in 'Europe and America. The wiso man,'', says Mr. Spiiott, " pnly provisionally accepts what is offered to him. It is the honest work of the scholarship of today ; so ho accents it. It may :n somo respects be modified by the larger scholarship of to-morrow; so ho puts in a saving clause." ' '

■■■' One hears so much about the Higher Criticism in general and' so little of its particular'results that Mr. Sprott's brief summary of its main conclusions 'as regards the Old Testament, will be .very welcome to the average layman. Accord: ing td.tho goneral opinion ,of the critics the Pentateuch (that is to say the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Douteronomy) "as we havo ' it" 1 '- is,; '■ the work, 1 not of Moses; in the 13ih century uiOi, but of an unknown' author 'or authors''in the 6th. century b.c. It; is a' combination of documents of varying .antiquity, and this theory' accoupts -for' the' of duplicate, accounts; of the ?amo incidents, ; differing :ih : vocabulary, point of yiew i and r theology. David's connection with the rPsalter is rcduoed ji td : meagre limits anH so is Solomon's,, responsibility ; for the Book of' Proverbs. The ; Book'^lsaiab'jt)'regarded. as in .part Hicxxiy being credited, to Isaiaii and-' the' rest .to an' unknown author: of; latrfr date; while, the;work;,attributocl to Zechabiah is also thought to be in part anonymous. Two of tho books are said to be pseudonymous—Ecelesiaßtee, whichv pur-,, ports to give, tho experiences of Solomon ■ in. the' 10th 'fconcury 8.C., but which is really a work of the 3rd century; and Daniel;; whioh 1 is not regarded as the work of. Daniel of tho Exile (580—536 H. 0.), but is; assigned to 167 b.o. ' Undoubtedly such conclusions, carry;, with them: a;sense : of ; loss, for it' is a loss " to havo-ehorishod writings; separated from great. names -in ' the past, and. consigned to ; unknown authorship : and a less. venerable antiquity ": but this is.moro than' counterbalanced by the gain. The critics have mado the, Old Testament Jive again ; they haVe reconstructed-tho daily life of the people, and shown us that their, .national and, international, problems, and, their religious' arid intellectual difficuk ties were in many respects very, like'our owtii! As a writer already quoted points out, tho Higher, Criticism has .restored tho historical perspective of tho. Old 'Tcs t tamcnt. The figures; of Jewish history no longor. live . iri :; a world of shadows, but are soon to bo clothed in flesh and blood and the wholo book palpitates with vital ■. issues for to-day: ; ' ' The great religious principles taught in Israel's liter, ature are (writes Mn.-Sritorr) qui to, independent of.*■ any and evory critical theory; as •to tho litcfary origin and history of th? Bible."

Tbo nexfc (luestion which naturally suggests itself is: How do. tho methods and results 'of the ; Higher Criticism affect the question .of inspiration 1 Mr._ Sprott dfoals with this point in a yory \illumiriating way. Revelation,'he states, is. the Divine Self-unveiling in, nature, corisoionce, and' jiißtory; and inspiration .is not verbal dictation, but is the. ing; and heightening of man's powers whereby ,hb •is enabled to. apprehend revelation and to interpret it to.his fellows. Mn. Sprott points to Israel's moral and religious pre-eminence as compared, with other Semitic nations, and asks how is it that the- Biblical writers alorio arrived at the noble idea of ethical monotheism taught by tho <reat prophets and' attained to the full conccption of tho truth that we arc living in a rational,' purposeful, -moral-.universe!. "Inspiration," he says, "is certainly an adequate' explanation. Is "there," ho asks, "any other equally adequate!"