MODERNISM AND THE BIBLE.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXXVI, Issue 2, 9 January 1908, Page 12

MODERNISM AND THE BIBLE.

It may not be the fault of the average Catholic layman if recent non-Catholic newspaper talk lias somewhat confused and bewildered him as to the Pope's recent Encyclical on ' Modernism.' In this rushing age the average layman can hardly be expected to make a profound and exhaustive study of the Encyclical itself and the history of nineteenth-century thought which led up to it, which would be necessary to reach any -clear and well-defined idea as to what ' Modernism ' really means. The thing meant seems, in fact, to be rather a diffused taint in the intellectual atmosphere than any " compact body of doctrine ; the Modernists, says the Holy Father, ' present their doctrines without order and systematic arrangement into one whole, scattered. . and disjointed. '„ And yet there is a sod id nucleus to this impalpable noxious vapor of Modernism. The nebula seems to thicken round and about the field of sacred" letters, ~ where the exegesis of some Catholic scholars has been far too accommodating to the modern spirit of scepti-.' cism. The new volume (the Second) of ' The ■ Catholic Encyclopedia,' just published in New -York, comes opportunely to summarise and to illustrate our position in the matter of Pius X. and ' Modernism.' Those whose function it is to - watch over -the safety of God's flocks have long since perceived that here was a danger for which the Chief Shepherd must immediately find a remedy. The article ' Biblical Commission,' in this volume, tells, within the relatively small compass of one page, how that body was constituted by Papal authority in 1901, to investigate the menacing conditions and to suggest a - remedy ; it tells of the' personnel, the official authority, and the work of the.commission, and a perusal of that one,, clearly and, tersely written page is as the - beam of a great searchlight striking through the fog which our non-Catholic con- ■ temporaries have raised. So much for clear instruc- ' tion ; for illustration the same volume gives us, amongothers of similar scope, an article entitled '. Biblical Antiquities '—eight pages— which in years to comeyWill"' serve to mark the degree" of enlightened - freedom fairly sanctioned by the Church, in Old-Testament exegesis. Let no' good Catholic with this volume before him be afraid that Pius X. is going tor 'turn off 'the light' which modem research has afforded to Christian scholarship ; the last-named article and those on ' Assyria,' ' Babylonia,' and ' Baal ' (all by the same author, the Rev." Dr. Gabriel Oussani) give ample assurance that in ■ our day, as heretofore, the .Catholic Church can afford to tolerate a proper freedom of criticism in her exegetes in perfect consistency with her own inflexible • principles. A BANKRUPT'S MORAL OBLIGATION. Another article of a very practical nature is treated instructively and interestingly by the well-known English Jesuit, Rev. Thomas Slater, of St. Beuno's College, in the Second Volume of ' The Catholic Encyclo- . pedia. ' In this article, which sets forth what the Catholic Church teaches in regard to the' moral obligation of paying one's just debts,- Father -Slater says, among other things :—: — ' If, as is usually the case, "the creditors only receive a portion of what is due to them," they have suffered loss through the action of the bankrupt, and if he is the voluntary cause of that loss he is morally to blame as the cause- of injustice*, to his neigh/bior. There is no moral blaane attributable to a man who through misfortune and by no fault of his own has become bankrupt and unable to pay his debts. But if bankruptcy has been brought about by the debtor's own fault, he must be condemned in the court of -morals, even if he escape without punishment in a court of

law. Bankruptcy may be the result of one's own fault in a .great variety of ways. Living beyond one's means, negligence or imprudence in the conduct of busi- '■ ness, spending rroney whfch is due to creditors in betting and gambling, are' frequent- causes of debtors appearing in the bankruptcy court. All such causes are accompanied with more or less of moral guilt, in proportion to the bankrupt's ad\ertence to their probable consequences, and the voluntariness of his action. Breaches of the moral law arc also committed in a great variety of ways in connection with the bankruptcy itself. The benefit of the law is extended to the bankrupt debtor if he faithfully complies ' with all its just requirements. To do this then is a matter cf conscience. He is bound to make a full disclosure of all his property, and to surrender it for the benefit of his creditors. He may indeed retain what the law allows him to retain, but nothing else, unless , the law makes no provision at all for him-, and the result of surrendering everything would be to reduce himself and those dependent on him to destitution. Such a result, however, must • not be readily presumed in the case of modern bankruptcy law which is humane in its treatment of the unfortunate debtor, and m«Ves what provision is - necessary for him. It is obvious that it is against the lights of creditors and agiainst justice for an- insolvent debtor to transfer same of his property to his wife or to a friend who will keep it for him till the storm blows over, so that the creditors cannot get at it. In the same way a debtor is guilty of dishonesty and fraud if he hide or remove some of his property, or if he allow a fictitious debt to be proved against the estate. ' Loss is caused the creditors and injustice is committed by an insolvent debtor who continues to trade after the time when he fully recognises -that he is insolvent, and that there is no reasonable hope of recovering himself. He may continue to pay what debts he can as they become due if payment is demanded by his creditors, and he may make current, payments for value received. But if in contemplation of bankruptcy he pays some creditor in full with a view to giving that creditor a preference over the others, he becomes guilty of a fraudulent preference ' Lawyers and theologians are agreed that in most countries the effect of a discharge is merely to bar legal proceedings for debt against the bankrupt, His moral obligation to pay all his debts in full when he is alls still remains ; he may put off payment till such time as ne can conveniently fulfil his obligations, and in the moan while he is guaranter-d freedom from molestation. This seems to be the effect of the National Bankruptcy Law of the United States. « Since the discharge is personal to the bankrupt, he may waive it, and since it VO6V 06 . 53 ..? 101 «estroy the debt but merely releases him from lSl? i t hat >' s . removes the legal obaigation to pay the debt, leaving the moral obligation unaffected, such moral obligation is a sufficient consideration to support anew promise » (Brandenburg, The Law of Bankruptcy, 891)7 + i + «,* e ,. contrar y. a n absolute discharge, W.n granted to the honest bankrupt according to English law frees the bankrupt from his debts, with certain excepted n hv a PnJi?3 f a ClCal ' man again ' ™ s is a(lniitthe PfLt + lf ¥?? 7 ?\ and by theologians who treat of the eftect of the English law of bankruptcy. When therecha e re a e n in .T n S V )a r kl , UPt hh f S Ms absolute disStKn w L ' n £ llsh ?°" rt , he is under no strict o' lifhoS rte So 1 ?™? 1 * f° pay his past debts in full > win hi % °° Se - to do so « his scrupulous rectitude n??o™ ™ + PP - X , CS also to expositions or scn-mes of 5 tJf 2SSir th ff 0?0 ?i elB crer i itors when thQ y have recei '- ect tne sanction of the court.

tt . The ' e nd -° f -the-season sale is now proceeding at the kS ce H Mlll ',f ry ? tofe ' Stuart strec *> Dunedin. All trimmed rmlhnery is being sold at half price & r^g the tourist, traveller, and holiday-maker .? Ce - Sary to