Bibliothèque de l'Eglise apostolique arménienne - Paris - GORE , Charles     Retour à l'Index des auteurs en anglais    Accueil des catalogues en ligne

Bibliothèque de l'Église apostolique arménienne - Paris
15, rue Jean-Goujon - 75008 Paris || Père Jirayr Tashjian, Directeur
Téléphone : 01 43 59 67 03
Consultation sur place du mardi au jeudi, de 14 heures à 17 heures

Charles GORE
( 1853 - 1932 )

Charles GORE --- Cliquer pour agrandir

Rangement général
Cliquer pour agrandir

 A new commentary on Holy Scripture, including the Apocryphia
Titre : A new commentary on Holy Scripture, including the Apocryphia / auteur(s) : Charles GORE - Edited by Charles Gore, Henry Leighton Goudge, Alfred Guillaume
Editeur : Society for promoting Christian knowledge
Année : 1929
Imprimeur/Fabricant : Billing and Sons, Great-Britain
Description : 15 x 23 cm, 744 pages
Collection :
Notes :
Autres auteurs :
Sujets : Religion
Lecture On-line : non disponible

Commentaire :

This Commentary is written by Anglican scholars who, while holding their faith, are determined in approaching the books to give their critical faculty, instructed by all the means within their power, its full and rightful freedom. It is hardly necessary to say that they have not found the results of legitimate criticism to conflict with the Catholic faith, though, believing, as they do, that criticism is a progressive science, and in the main a new science, their conclusions do very often differ widely from those which have been traditional. It will perhaps hardly be doubted that a Commentary on the whole Bible, written from this particular point of view, has been for many years both wanted and lacking; so that we need not apologize for endeavouring to supply the need. But it should be added that on no portion of the books was a new Commentary more obviously required than on the Apocrypha. It is not easy to exaggerate the importance of the books comprised under this ambiguous title in supplying the mental background necessary for understanding the New Testament.
Two further general explanations seem to be necessary, i. The Bible should be read from the point of view from which it was written; and there can be no doubt that from end to end the original writers wrote, and later editors, where such there were, edited and adapted the original documents for the purpose of edification, not of pure science. Thus, though, the historical and archaeological importance of the books is immense, it is the spiritual use of them which is their proper use, and it is principally to this spiritual use of the Bible that we intend our Commentary to minister. We shall have fallen quite short of our aim if it does not lead all those who study it onwards from ' reading, marking, and learning ' to ' inwardly digesting' the Holy Scriptures; and in particular if it is not of service to the ministers of religion in that ' daily reading and weighing of the Scriptures ' to which they are pledged, and by which alone they can hope to wax riper and stronger in their ministry. But it must be confessed that, especially in parts of the Old Testament, it will be found that the critical and archaeological aspects of the books are the most prominent in this Commentary. In the present condition of biblical criticism this is inevitable. A commentator on any book must explain his view of the book, his reasons for so regarding it, and his relation to current criticism. His readers would demand this of him. Hence the large place inevitably held by critical discussions.
It must be remembered, however, that sound criticism involves appreciation. There is a great deal of modern biblical criticism which is inspired by a spirit so obviously hostile to the Christian faith as to leave no room for real appreciation of the books. But it is not this sort of criticism which readers will find in this Commentary.
2. The contributors to this volume are almost all united in their general point of view, but this is not held to preclude considerable differences of opinion on particular points. Each contributor is alone responsible for the opinions which he expresses; but where considerable differences appear, attention is directed by cross references from one opinion to another. Where, however, as in the case of Kings and Chronicles, or of the Synoptic Gospels, we have two or more parallel accounts of the same events, it has not been thought necessary constantly to insert cross references. It is assumed that the student will read the different accounts side by side. Sometimes also the editors have added a footnote, either supplying a judgement different from that expressed in the text, for comparison with it, or supplementing the information there supplied. No attempt, however, has been made to provide a full compendium of theology; we have only sought to give what is needed for the understanding of the books.
It should be observed that all the footnotes throughout the Commentary are by the editors. Where the Old Testament or New Testament editor and the final editor have both had a hand in the footnote, or it expresses the judgement of both, it is signed ' ED.' Where only one has been concerned in it, it is signed by initials. Some further details should be noted.
(1) The name ' Jehovah ' has been retained throughout, and not altered into ' Jahveh ' or ' Yahweh,' first because the old word has been hallowed by centuries of use in English, and secondly because the new forms are only hypothetical constructions which many scholars (including the Old Testament editor of this Commentary) believe to be artificial and not the name by which the God of the Hebrews was actually invoked.
(2) As we have written with the ordinary reader or elementary student always in view, we have not assumed that he will have access to complete libraries. But we have assumed that he will possess the Revised Version, with full references and some maps. We recommend the S.P.C.K. Bible Atlas (price is.). Like all English Bible Atlases, it contains some site identifications which are inaccurate or doubtful; but the Commentary will generally correct errors of this kind. Those who desire more exact information should consult the Encyclopedia Biblica, and especially Driver's Samuel and Burney's Judges, to which frequent reference is made in the commentaries.
(3) As knowledge of the original language of the Bible is not taken for granted in those who use this Commentary, where Hebrew or Greek words must be cited, they are transliterated.
(4) To save space, certain well-known works of reference are referred to by initials. A list of such abbreviations follows this Preface.
(5) The paging of the book is in three parts—Old Testament—Apocrypha— New Testament. This is to make it easier at some future date to publish the parts separately, but there is no present intention of doing so. The references therefore are given thus: OT, 533a, Apoc., ijb, NT, 2ja—the a and b indicating the left-hand and right-hand columns of each page.
The order of books in this Commentary follows that of the English Bible, with two exceptions: St. Mark's Gospel is given precedence over the others, and the Epistle to Philemon is attached to Colossians. The reasons for these two exceptions will be sufficiently obvious.
Probably none of the editors, when they embarked on this work, had any idea how much labour and difficulty it would involve, and now that they are sending the Commentary out on its career, they can only do so with the modest hope that it will be found—not perfect, but useful.
They are bound to express their gratitude to all their contributors, especially to those who sent in their contributions speedily and have had to wait a long time before seeing them published, and to those who cut down their contributions, or submitted to such cutting down, to the required limit—a matter in which we must confess that strict impartiality has not been observed. With so large a team of contributors, absolute uniformity in technical details of scholarly method is neither possible nor, in view of the variety of subject-matter, always desirable; but the editors have done as much as was feasible in this respect. We also owe a great debt to the Rev. Dr. C. Harris, to whose vision and initiative the inception of the Commentary, and the overcoming of various difficulties that arose during its preparation, were largely due; and to the Rev. Dr. W. K. Lowther Clarke, the secretary of the S.P.C.K., for the labour he has bestowed upon the book, and to the printers for the skill with which they have dealt with the material submitted to them. Not least do they desire to express their gratitude for the work of Arthur James Mason and Andrew Ewbank Burn, who passed away while the volume was still in preparation.
May the good Lord prosper our undertaking!

Charles GORE --- Cliquer pour agrandir

Rangement général
Cliquer pour agrandir

 The Body of Christ
Titre : The Body of Christ / auteur(s) : Charles GORE - An enquiry into the institution and doctrine of Holy Communion
Editeur : John Murray
Année : 1920
Imprimeur/Fabricant : London
Description : 12,5 x 19,5 cm, 333 pages
Collection :
Notes : Fourth ediiton
Autres auteurs :
Sujets : Religion
Lecture On-line : Cliquer ici

Commentaire :


This book is being reprinted at a time when the Report of the Royal Commission on ecclesiastical discipline has seemed to incriminate a certain type of teaching about the sacramental presence of Christ. The Report condemns certain practices—for instance "the reservation of the sacrament under conditions which lead to its adoration"—as " clearly inconsistent with and subversive of the teaching of the Church of England," or again as " significant of doctrine or teaching contrary or repugnant to the Articles or formularies of the Church of England."
This book contains a good deal not acceptable to those whose teaching is incriminated by the Commissioners. It contains considerations which I desire to press upon their attention. And I notice that some of these considerations are being urged from many quarters both in the Anglican and Roman communions. But I am sure that nothing but free enquiry—certainly not ecclesiastical discipline—will serve to correct what needs to be corrected in current catholic ideas of the real presence and the purpose of the holy sacrament. Thus, so far as ecclesiastical discipline is concerned, I wish to maintain the fullest possible liberty of opinion and teaching on the subject within the limits of the Anglican communion.
In this book I take my stand at starting upon the teaching which is plainly given in the doctrinal standards of the English Church: the doctrine which Hooker declared to be agreed upon by all schools of thought in his time (p. 50). I express a fear (p. 53) which subsequent experience has confirmed, that there are teachers of the Evangelical school among us to-day who do not accept this teaching; and this constitutes undoubtedly a serious divergence from our standards.
But I believe that the practical devotional attitude of such teachers goes far to rectify the doctrinal defect: and I am most anxious not to scrutinise too closely the type of teaching in question.
But the main object of this book is to set the specifically Anglican teaching of our formularies on a larger background, by going back behind the Reformation and the middle age upon the ancient catholic teaching and upon the Bible. I seek to elaborate the eucharistic doctrine in what I think the truest and completest form. I have to admit that Anglican standards are in certain respects defective, and even misleading when taken by themselves (see chapter V., and esp. p. 284). But after all the Anglican Church does not claim to stand by itself. It refers back behind itself to the ancient and catholic church. Thus I am most thankful to believe that it admits a great deal which it does not, in its present formularies, explicitly teach. It admits the doctrine of Dr. Bright's popular hymn, " And now, O Father," though it assuredly does not explicitly teach it; though, in fact, our liturgy, more perhaps than any other, leaves out of regard the heavenly altar. Moreover, in the direction of mediaeval teaching, it has no careful definitions such as might easily enough have excluded approximations to the teaching of the Roman schools. The "anti-Roman" utterances of the Articles1 are, as is well known, so vaguely or ambiguously worded, that, as weapons of discipline, they would break in our hands. Thus it came about that the Judicial Committee acquitted Mr. Bennett of teaching what the Church of England could be said positively to reject. But it is quite certain that Mr. Bennett's teaching, even in its revised form, was so similar to current Roman teaching as to afford a perfectly natural background for those practices in connection with the sacrament which the Commissioners claim should be " promptly made to cease" because they are significant of doctrine condemned by the Church of England.
Now it is precisely this that I believe to be untrue. I believe that some practices connected with the Tabernacle and the Monstrance involve an extension of the use of the sacrament which diverges so widely from Christ's intention as to be illegitimate. I would prohibit them in the Church of England for this reason ; and every Bishop can legitimately prohibit any rite or service or prayer which is not in the Prayer Book. I should be, there-tore, quite prepared, apart from any suggestion oi a Royal Commission, to cause to cease almost all the practices scheduled. But not—precisely not —on the ground that they involve a doctrine which the Church of England excludes. It does not exclude Mr. Bennett's doctrine. So the Commissioners recognise. And I am sure Mr. Bennett's doctrine, neither more nor less, affords a natural basis for these (devotionally most attractive) practices, unless indeed the devotional logic is restrained by reverent adherence to the purpose of Christ in the institution of the sacrament. I am quite sure that nothing could be more disastrous than that it should come to be believed that the ecclesiastical authorities of the Church oi England were ready to brand as disloyal or unallowable the type of teaching about the sacrament which, for example, has found a learned defender in Mr. Stone of the Pusey House. There is, I am persuaded, nothing in Anglican formularies which can be held to preclude Mr. Stone's doctrine. It is quite true that if we take a typical Anglican teacher and a typical Roman we may find " a line of deep cleavage " between them. But if we take the least Protestant types of Anglican teaching and the most moderate Roman types, the line is hardly apparent; and if we take the doctrinal requirement of Rome at its minimum, and at the same time recognise how vague are the limits of Anglican eucharistic theology, we shall come to the conclusion that no such line of deep cleavage exists at all.
For my own part I am most thankful that we stand in this position : that the Anglican Church positively teaches only what is true; that it has positively excluded hardly any prevalent type of eucharistic teaching; that it throws us back to reconstruct our teaching upon Scripture and the ancient or catholic church; and that in this process of reconstruction ecclesiastical discipline is not effective either to help or to hinder.
This book is simply reprinted from the third edition. But I should wish to call attention to three points.
I. With reference to the first occurrence of the term transubstantiatio, M. Batiffol (Etudes, 2me sen, Paris, 1905, p. 381, n. 3) doubts the authenticity of the treatise ascribed to Peter Damian, cited by me (p. 116, n. 2) as the first authority for the term, and thinks Hildebert of Lavardin (+1133) the first author known to use it.
2. In evidence that the modern Roman use of the holy sacrament as a normal object of worship in the churches, outside the celebration of the eucharist, was not the use of the early or even of the mediaeval church, I should wish to refer to Mr. Edmund Bishop " On the History of the Christian Altar," in the Downside Review for July, 1905.
3. I would add to the note on " the treatment of the sacrament after communion " (p. 298 ff.) a reference to Mr. Atchley's edition of the Ordo Romanus Primus (De La More Press, 1905), pp. in—2.
C. B,
St. Peter's Day, 007.

    Retour à l'Index des auteurs en anglais    Accueil des catalogues en ligne