Poll "Synopsis CriUcortsm" (fol. 4 vols, in 6, Lond. 1669-76, and several eds. since ; best ed. by Lensden, Ultr. 1684). — In this large work, the annotations df a great number of the older conmientators are collected and condensed, many of them fhmi the still more ex- tensive collection known as the Critici Sacri (q. v.), edited by Bp. Pearson and others (2d edit, with two supplemental vols. Frcft. a. M. 1696-1701, 9 vols. fol.). But they are seldom sifted and criticised, so that the reader is left to choose among them for himself.
(6.) H. Grotius {" AmotaUona^' on all the Bible and Apocr. in his 0pp., also ed. Moody, Lond. 1727, 2 vols. 4to). — ^This very learned writer investigates the literal sense of the Scriptures with great diligence and success. He had considerable exegetical tact, and a large acquaintance with the heathen classics, from which he was accustomed to adduce parallels. His taste was good, and his mode of unfolding the mean- ing of a t)assage snnple, direct, and brief. His judg- ment was sound, fk^ee from prejudice, and liberal be- yond the age in which he lived. As a commentator
COMMENTARY
430
COMMENTARY
he was distingnished for his nnifonnly good sense. It has been said without reason that he found Christ no- where in the Old Testament. It is true tliat he op- posed the Cocceian method, but in this he was often correct. His chief defect is in spiritual ditoemmeiU, Hence he rests in the literal meaning in many cases, where there is a higher or ulterior reference.
(6.) J. Le CI ere ("V. T. c. Paraphrcui, CommerUa- rio" etc. 4 vols. fol. Amst. 1710 sq.). — Excellent notes are interspersed throughout the commentaries of this author (his work by a similar title on the N. T. was based upon that of Hammond, 2 vols, in 1, fbl. Amst. 1699). His judgment was good, and his mode of in- terpretation perspicuous. From his richly-stored mind he could easily draw illustrations of the Bible both pertinent and just. Yet he was very defective in the- ological discrimination. Hence, in the prophetic and doctrinal books he is nnsatisfactor}'. It has been thought, not without truth, that he had a rationalistic tendency. It is certain that he exalted his own judg- ment too highly, and pronounced dogmatically where he ought to have manifested a modest diffidence.
(7.) A. Calmet Q* Conmentaire JMiraJC' on the entire Bible and Apocr. Par. 17*24, 8 vols, in 9, fol. ; transl. into Latin, with the dissertcUiofU by J. D. Manse, 19 vols. 4to, Wirceb. 1789). — Calmet is perhaps the most distinguished commentator on the Bible belonging to the Roman Catholic Church. In the higher qualities of commentary his voluminoos work is very deficient. It contains a good collection of historical materials, and presents the meaning of the original where it is already plain ; but his historical apparatus needs to be purified of its irrelevant, erroneous statements, while on the difficult portions no new light is thrown.
(8.) Patrick, Lowth, Arnald, and Whitby 0' Critical Commentary,'* etc. on the O. and N. T. and Apocr. 6 vols. 4to, Lend. 1822 ; 4 vols. 8vo, Phila. and N. T. 1846) Bishop Patrick had many of the ele- ments belonging to a good commentator. His learn- ing was great when we consider the time at which he lived, his method brief and perspicuous. Lowth is inferior to Patrick. Whitby presents a remarkable compound of excellences and imperfections. In phi- losophy he was a master. In critical elucidations of the text he was at home. Nor was he wanting in aqnteness or philosophical ability. His judgment was singularly clear, and his manner of annotating straightforward. Yet he had not much comprehen- siveness of intellect, nor a deep insight into the spirit- ual nature of revelation.
(9.) M. Henry {''Exposition of the 0. and N.Test" Lond. 1704 sq., 5 vols, fol., and various eds. since, latest Lond. 1849, 6 vols. 4to, condensed with Scott's Notes and Doddridge's Practical Observations, besides additions from other sources, in Jenks's Comprehensive Commentary, Brattleboro, V 1. 1836 sq., 6 vols. 8vo). — The name of this good man is venerable, and will be held in everlasting remembrance. His commentary does not contain much exposition. It is full of ser- monidnff. It is surprising, however, to see how far his good sense and simple piety led him into the doc- trine of the Bible, apart from many of the higher qualities belonging to a successfhl commentator. His prolixity is great. Practical preaching is the burden of his voluminous notes.
(10.) J. Gill ^'Exposition of the 0. and N. Test." Lond. 1763, 9 vols, fol., and several times since).— The prominent characteristic of Gill's commentary is heav- iness. It lacks condensation and brevity. The mean- ing of the inspired authors is often undeveloped, and more frequently distorted. Gill's chief merit was his Rabbinical learning.
(11.) P. Doddridge ("Family JErpositor of the N. T.," Lond. 1789, 6 vols. 4to, and often sipce ; Amherst, Biass. 1837, 1 vol. 8vo).— The taste of this pious com-
^tator was good, and his style remarkably pure. \d not much acumen or comprehension of mind ;
I but he had an excellent judgment, and a calm easiflt of inquiry. His paraphrase leaves macfa unexplaimd, while it dilutes the strength of the origisuML The prac- tical observations are excellent. The notes are few. and ordinarily correct.