J. Gresham Machen Bibliography

672 THE PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL REVIEW On p. 225 O. Holtzmann is represented as regarding “Christ’s verdict on this woman as an incident at the beginning of the Monday when he ate the passover meal with his disciples”, etc. Of course, Holtz- mann does not place the eating of the passover meal on Monday. He is arguing to show the accuracy of the Johannine tradition in dating Jesus’ death on Friday Nisan 14 and in definitely fixing the time of the supper in Bethany on Monday Nisan 10. Again on p. 259 the Gospel according to the Hebrews is said to represent Jesus as refusing “at first to accompany his father and mother” to John’s baptism, but the passage in question, which is preserved by Jerome (contra Pelag. iii. 2) speaks only of the mother of the Lord and his brethren (Ecce mater domini et fratres eius). Princeton. WILLIAM P. ARMSTRONG.

THE CHILDHOOD OF JESUS CHRIST according to the Canonical Gospels. With an Historical Essay on the Brethren of the Lord. By A. DURAND, S.J. An Authorized Translation from the French, Edited by Rev. JOSEPH BRUNEAU, S.S., D.D. Philadelphia: John Jos. McVey. 1910. Pp. xxv, 316. $1.50 net, prepaid.

The Modernist movement is helping to bring Roman Catholic scholar- ship to bear upon historical questions relating to the Bible. Startled by division within their own ranks, scholars of the Roman Church have rallied to the support of supernatural Christianity. The book of Père Durand is an example of this activity. It is a sensible de- fence of the historicity of the Virgin Birth, with full reference to recent discussion both Catholic and Protestant. The last chapter, on the Lord’s Brethren, brings a defence of the perpetual virginity of Mary. Though probably inferior to the contributions of Bardenhewer and Steinmetzer, the book should not be neglected. Detailed criticism would consume too much space. When Père Durand concludes (p. 61) from the well-known passage, Justin Martyr, dial 48, that most Christians even in Palestine believed in the Virgin Birth, the conclusion is correct, but it is insufficiently grounded. On pp. 86f., Harnack is quoted in favor of the view that Lk. i. 34, 35 was in- serted by Luke himself into a Judaeo-Christian document; whereas even in the article which Père Durand is here referring to (1901), and even more decidedly in his later contributions, Harnack represents the two verses as an interpolation into the completed Gospel, and favors the view that in the first two chapters of the Gospel Luke was employ- ing merely oral tradition. On p. 100, the articles of T. Allen Hoben in the American Journal of Theology for 1902 are apparently included (erroneously) among treatises in defence of the Virgin Birth. On p. 179, in speaking of the “Hebrew ring” of Lk. i-ii, Harnack’s in- vestigations of the style of the two chapters should have been at least noticed if not refuted in detail. Although the reviewer has not been able to examine the book in