Superstition and Irreverence by T. F. O’Meara, O. P., M. J. Duffy, O. P. (review)

BOOK REVIEWS 181 sophy of History is science or not, it seems that he is talking about History as such, and the need to add " Philosophy of- " is not seen. A similar difficulty arises in Chapters VI and VII: are the laws he points out something else than merely historical laws? The last two chapters are rather concerned with a Theology of History, but some of the statements Cardinal Gonz:ilez makes and which Fr. Diaz quotes without criticism are wrong from a purely historical viewpoint. Dominican HOWle of Studiea Washington, D. C. Luis CAMACHO, 0. P. Superstition and Irreverence. Trans. by T. F. O'MEARA, 0. P. and M. J. DuFFY, O.P. Volume 40 (9la9lae, qq. 99l-100) Summa Theologiae. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968. Pp. 169. $6.75. Every journey has its desert places, and McGraw-Hill's pilgrimage through the Summa must pass through less endearing sections. So it is that O'Meara and Duffy of the Midwest Dominicans try their hand at "de vitiis religioni oppositis." The translation of the text measures up to the usual high standards of this series. Thomistic jargon and Latin syntax do not get in the way of the meaning. Indeed, some sentences become rhetorical questions and the overworked " Socrates " is retired in favor of "John Doe." Over and above the Summa text, however, this volume does not have a great deal to offer. Angels, much less devils, have a bad press today, so the editors' preference for " demonic " over " demon " is understandable. They do succeed in suggesting points of contact between this tract and contemporary discussions. What is sadly lacking is an historical interpretation of the text. How does St. Thomas compare with other medieval writers on the subject, and what were the lines of development up to the 13th century and since then? The scholar will have to look to the appendices of other volumes, hopefully not in vain. Dominican House of Studies Washington, D. C. MATTHEW RzEczKowsKI, 0. P. ...