In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

658 BOOK REVIEWS not only is the scientific vision a partial one but it is also highly corrigible both in principle and in practice. In" Unless You Believe You Will Not Understand," James Ross explores the various meanings that can be given to the famous Augustinian directive. In "Irreducible Metaphors in Theology," William P. Alston argues that metaphorical language in theology, if it is to be meaningful, cannot be ultimately irreducible but must be grounded in literal predicability which may and can include analogy (in its Thomistic sense). In" Negative Theology and Affirmation of the Finite," Louis Dupre discusses the role of divine presence in religious knowledge and contrasts it with the traditional doctrines of analogy and the via negativa. Finally, in" Natural Imagery as a Discriminatory Element in Religious Knowledge," Kenneth L. Schmitz considers what role natural imagery has to play in religious discourse and demonstrates, among other things, how it is inextricably embedded in the scripture, liturgy, piety, and thought of biblical religion. While, in this reviewer's opinion, there is much in this volume that is interesting fare, there is also much to disagree with philosophically. Particularly distressing to this reader were Ferre's definition of knowledge (blatantly too narrow, since not all knowledge is an ideal goal and some knowledge, e.g., our knowledge of first principles, is incorrigible) and his stated criterion of descriptive scientific truth (viz., " intersubjective sensory verification," which presupposes knowledge of other subjects, which, in turn, presupposes the validity of one's senses) . Moreover, having raised the question, Do we have any demonstrations in the case of God? (cf. p. 6~), Crosson engages in a lengthy ignoratio elenchi type argument in which the reader is given much scientific information but not the answer to the question at issue. Finally, while the editor had promised the reader that all the contributors were one in opposing fideism, this reviewer did not find this statement particularly true in the case of Crosson or Dupre. THEODORE J. KoNDOLEON Villano·va University Villanova, Pennsylvania. The Theologia Germanica of Martin Luther. Translated and edited by BENGT R. HOFFMAN. New York and Toronto: Paulist Press, 1980. Pp. xiv + ~05. Toward the end of the year 1516 Martin Luther discovered a handwritten manuscript by an anonymous author, a short book of meditations dealing with the meaning of the Christian's life in God and in the world. Adding BOOK REVIEWS 659 a preface, describing this work as reflecting " the true solid teaching of Ho1y Writ," and some marginal notes as a commentary, he arranged for its printing and publication at Wittenberg. In the same preface Luther conjectured from the manuscript's content that the author was the " illumined Doctor Tauler of the Preaching Order." In 1518 Luther discovered another manuscript of the same work, a longer version, which he concluded was the complete work. His enthusiastic approval was no less intense, and he had this also printed at Wittenberg under the title Eyn Deutsch Theologia. Before Luther's death in 1546 his 1518 version ran !!O editions. The Latin title Theologia Germanica made its first appearance in the Swiss edition of 1557, and in the course of time became the commonly accepted title. Bengt R. Hoffman has translated into English Luther's 1518 version, and happily it has been included in the collection of the Classics of Western Spirituality published by the Paulist Press. His translation is smooth and readable. He also provides the reader with critical notes and commentary. The introduction to the translation is informative and especially helpful in solving some of the literary and historical problems connected with the Theologia Germanica. He dates its composition around the 1850's, describes the religious situation of the 14th Century, and identifies the author as a member of the Friends of God movement, and a disciple of Tauler. Luther's hi.tuition, therefore, was not far from the truth. He takes care in arguing the superiority of Luther's 1518 text over other extant manuscripts, particularly the 1497 Wiirt:i;burg manuscript, the source of previous English translations. To emphasize this point he titled his translation the Theologia Germanica of Martin Luther. Hoffman's main purpose, however, is theological. He...

pdf

Share