47Q THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



either did not know of this utterance, so often quoted as charac- 

 teristic of Jesus, or did not believe it had been uttered. 



Many years ago, I received an anonymous letter, which abused 

 me heartily for my want of moral courage in not speaking out. I 

 thought that one of the oddest charges an anonymous letter- 

 writer could bring. But I am not sure that the plentiful sowing 

 of the pages of the article with which I am dealing with accusa- 

 tions of evasion, may not seem odder to those who consider that 

 the main strength of the answers with which I have been favored 

 (in this review and elsewhere) is devoted not to anything in the 

 text of my first paper, but to a note which occurs at page 171.* 

 In this I say : 



Dr. "Wace tells us : " It may be asked how far we can rely on the accounts we 

 possess of our Lord's teaching on these subjects." And he seems to think the 

 question appropriately answered by the assertion that it " ought to be regarded as 

 settled by M. Eenan's practical surrender of the adverse case." 



I requested Dr. "Wace to point out the passages of M. Kenan's 

 works in which, as he affirms, this " practical surrender " (not 

 merely as to the age and authorship of the Gospels, be it observed, 

 but as to their historical value) is made, and he has been so good 

 as to do so. Now let us consider the parts of Dr. Wace's citation 

 from Renan which are relevant to the issue : 



The author of this Gospel [Luke] is certainly the same as the author of the 

 Acts of the Apostles. Now the author of the Acts seems to be a companion of 

 St. Paul — a character which accords completely with St. Luke. 1 know that 

 more than one objection may be opposed to this reasoning; but one thing, at all 

 events, is beyond doubt, namely, that the author of the third Gospel and of the 

 Acts is a man who belonged to the second apostolic generation ; and this suffices 

 for our purpose. 



This is a curious "practical surrender of the adverse case." 

 M. Renan thinks that there is no doubt that the author of the 

 third Gospel is the author of the Acts — a conclusion in which I 

 suppose critics generally agree. He goes on to remark that this 

 person seems to be a companion of St. Paul, and adds that Luke 

 was a companion of St. Paul. Then, somewhat needlessly, M. 

 Renan points out that there is more than one objection to jump- 

 ing, from such data as these, to the conclusion that " Luke " is the 

 writer of the third Gospel. And, finally, M. Renan is content to 

 reduce that which is " beyond doubt " to the fact that the author 

 of the two books is a man of the second apostolic generation. 

 Well, it seems to me that I could agree with all that M. Renan 

 considers " beyond doubt " here, without surrendering anything, 

 either " practically " or theoretically. 



Dr. Wace ("Nineteenth Century," March, p. 363) f states that 



* " Popular Science Monthly," April, 1889, p. 752. f Ibid., May, 1889, p. 11. 



