6. The Hebrew Text: The foregoing study of the versions gives as a result the greater value of the Hebrew and Aramaic, though the errors ass numer‑
269 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Ezra and Nehemiah
ous. For errors and omissions in the text the pseudo‑Ezra is sometimes serviceable (Ezra v. 15). Many of the lacunte in the text are evident, and occasionally the evident completion of the sense may be gathered from the context (Ezra iii. 12‑13). It is quite likely that the lacuna between Ezra iv. 23 and 24 is not to be laid to the charge of the author, but to carelessness or to arbitrariness on the part of copyists. That changes have taken place in the person of the verb, particularly from the first to the third, is one of the matters of which note must be taken in a critical discussion of the text.
II. Composition of the Books: This is understood both by the arrangement of the material and by its nature. The one book Ezra‑Nehemiah is the second half of a large work, of which I and II Chronicles are the first half. The divisions of Ezra‑Nehemiah are Ezra i.‑vi., vii.‑x., Nehemiah i.‑xiii. These three parts are constructed on the
1. Analysis same plan, each narrating the story of the of a return of the Jews under special Books. authority and with grants from the Persian kings under Zerubbabel and Joshua, Ezra and Nehemiah, and telling the weighty consequences for the temple community in the Holy Land. There resulted the completion of the temple, the restoration of the public service, the binding together of the community by prohibition of foreign marriages, the securing of political independence of the neighboring peoples through completion of the wall of the repeopled capital, and adoption by the community of the law‑book of Moses (Ezra vi., x.; Neh. iii. sqq., viii.).
These results are interwoven into the history of the times. The first step was taken under Cyrus and continued under Darius, the second in the seventh year of Artaxerxes, the third in the twentieth and thirty‑second year of the same Artaxerxes. The Persian succession was well known to the author, who in Ezra iv. rr7 names successively Cyrus, Darius, Xerxes, and Artaxerxes. During that period fell the decrees which were the legal basis of the Jewish community and the contests the successful issue of which consolidated that community and impressed upon it a distinctive character. The seventh year of the Artaxerxes of Ezra vii.
can not be regarded as the seventh
2. The year of an Artaxerxes who lived some
Employed. years later under whom the
events of Neh. i.‑xiii. happened.
Nor may it be held that the author dealt with fic
titious dates and decrees. Such suspicions are ex
cluded by the quality of the material, which the
writer has brought together and made to serve his
purpose. The books are a mosaic. The author
doubtless obtained the list of the returning exiles
from the Books of the Kings of Israel and Judah.
He also employed the " Memoirs " of Ezra, those of
Nehemiah, and a reputed report of Tabeel and his com
panions (Ezra iv. 7) directed to Artaxerxes. Here the
Masoretic text is the result of a complete misunder
standing. The author of it made out of the original
"with the permission of Mithredath "the series" Bish
lam, Mithredath," producing a triple authorship for
a document which is only referred to and not given,
since the document in Ezra iv. 11‑16 is specifically
stated to be by others (verses 8‑9). It is to be noted also that iv. 12 refers to the building of the city and iv. 24 to the building of the temple, and that if the traditional theory were correct, the author would have confused entirely different events and blended the accounts as though they referred to one and the same thing. Similarly out of the reports of Nehemiah, narrated in the first person, the writer built up a story in which seven successive steps in the progress of the work of rebuilding the wall appear, which is a reconstruction by the Chronicler of the order of events as they probably lay in the original documents. Into this is woven an account of the introduction of the lawbook, explained by the union of efforts by Ezra and Nehemiah for that purpose. This part is probably taken as an excerpt from ,ths memoirs of Ezra.
In defense of the author's stylistic method it must be remembered that he was writing for his contemporaries, probably using documents stored in the Jewish archives; that he was not concerned with historical matters of detail the interest in which is
8. The great to modems; and that he had Author's a comprehensive view of the whole
pose. work of restoration of the Jewish
commonwealth, which he put for
ward in the shape of a mosaic the joining of which
is not always close and the parts of which are not
well coordinated. It was his idea to set forth that
as the Samaritans of the time of Zerubbabel
hindered the work commanded by Cyrus, so they
continued their attempts at hindrance in the days
of Artaxerxes. He desired in his notes of time
(Ezra vii. 1; Neh. i. 1, ii. 1, viii.‑xiii.) to indicate
the cooperation of Ezra and Nehemiah in the work.
The question has been raised whether the narrative
as it stands is the result of wilful perversion of the
sources, or of misunderstanding, or whether it
conforms to the facts. Nehemiah reports that to
him had come sad accounts of the ruinous state of
the walls and city of Jerusalem; the apology of
Tabeel narrates that the work of reconstruction
had been prohibited and forcibly prevented through
a denunciation to the Artaxerxes who sent Jews
back to Jerusalem. But who could be so influen
tial and so secure in bringing about the restoration
of Jerusalem as those who had come with letters
missive from the king directed to the accomplish
ment of this task of restoration? The general out
line of history as made out by the author agrees
with the facts as presented by his sources.
131BLIOGRAPHY: Texts are issued by $. Baer in the Baer and Delitsech series, Leipsic, 1882; in the Polychrome Bible. by H. Guthe, New York, 1901; and a new text is by M. L&hr in the new Biblia Rebraica begun by R. Kittel, Leipsic, 1905. The best commentaries are by J. D. Michaelis, Frankfort, 1720; C. F. Keil, Leipeic, 1870, Eng. tranal., Edinburgh, 1873; G. Rawlinson and others in Pulpit Commentary, 1880; E. Berthesu and V. Ryssel, Leipsie, 1887; H. E. Ry:a, in Cambridge Bible, 1893. Discussions on special topics are: R, smend, Die Listen den Biixher Ears and Nehemiah, Basel, 1881; A. van Hoonacker, N&tsnie et EBdras, nouvelle hypothdse Bur la chronolopie, Gand, 1890; idem, Nekemie en t'an .80 d'Artaxerxes 1. et EBdras en Van 7 d'Artaxerxes ll., ib. 1892; idem, Zorobabel el Is second temple, ib. 1892; idem, Nouvelle itudessur la reetauration juive, Paris, 1896 (a reply to Hostere, be‑
low); p. H. Hunter, After the Bsiie• nbur~h. 18~: G. 13awlineon, in Men of the Bible Series, London, 1891; W. H. Koctere. Het Herstel van Israel, Leyden, 1893: A. H. Sayse. ltrod.Mon to . . . Esro. Nehemiah a"l Either, London, 1893; idem, Higher Uria^d the Monuments, ib. 1894; E. Meyer, BntatehurW des J~S^' fume, Halle, 1898 (cf. J. Wellhausen in OGA, 1897• ii. 89 eqq.); C. C. Torrey, COftipositi°n and Historic Valr•‑ ^f Ezra and Nehemiah. in ZATW. Giessen, 1898; T.
C Jewish RsisPious life after the Exile, New York,
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
lggg; p. W. H. Kettlewell, Books of Esra a~ Nelwmiah, London, 1901; E. Schrader, in TSK, 1867, pp. 4~"b04; idem, KAT, i. 294‑297: DB i. 821‑824; BB, ii. 147814g8, Consult also the works on the history of Israel and on introduction to the Old Testament, especially Driver, Introduction, pp. 507 eqq.
EZRA, RON‑CANO14ICAL BOOKS OF. See
APOCRYPHA, A, IV., 1; P8EUDEPIOR.APHA, OLD TESTAMENT, IL, 7‑8 F.
FABER, fd'ber, BASILIUS: Teacher and writer;
b. at Sorau (56 m. s.s.e. of Frankfort), Lower
Lusatia, c. 1520; d. at Erfurt 1575 or 1576. He
studied at Wittenberg after 1538; was private
tutor in the house of Johannes SpanBenberg>
preacher in Nordhausen; then rector of the Latin
school in that place; and later held 9, similar posi
tion at Frankfort, and from 1557 to 1560 at Magde
burg. For the next ten years he directed the abbey
school at Quedlinburg. On account of his refusal
to subacribethe Corpus doctrince Philippicum, he was
genberg and Johannes Caeelius, qq.v.) and as author.
His grammatical works enjoyed great acceptance;
likewise his Libellua de diaciplina aciwlastica (Leip
aic, 1572, 1579); but above all the Thesaurus
eruditionia sc)tolasticce (1571 and often), which was
intended to be more than a mere dictionary,
veritable treasury of helps to a knowledge of the
Latin tongue and the interpretation of the Latin
writers. It was repeatedly revised and was used
even into the eighteenth century. As theologian,
Faber was a devoted supporter of Luther and his
doctrine; he translated into German Luther's
commentary on Genesis, chaps. i: xxv.; was col
laborator in the first four " Magdeburg Centuries "
(q.v.); and wrote certain edifying, in part eschato
logical works. He also issued in 1583 a German edi
tion of Saxania, by Albert Krantz (q.v.).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ereah and Gruber, Allgesui'>M Eneyldo‑
pedie, I. al. 2, pp. 12‑13 Leipeic, 1844: ADB, vi. 488490: J. Janssen, Cleschitlate des dautaehen i'oikea, ed. L. Pastor, vii. 56 eqq., 220, Freiburg, 1893.
FABER, f5'ber, FREDERICK WILLIAM: English Roman Catholic; b. of Huguenot ancestry at the vicarage of Calverley (5 m. w.n.w. of Leeds), Yorkshire, June 28,1814; d. at the Brompton oratory, London, Sept. 26, 1863. He studied at BaIliol College, Oxford, and won the Newdigate prize in 1836 for his poem The Knights °/ St. John. He was made fellow of University College in 1837 and was ordained priest in the English Church in 1839. In 1842 he accepted the rectory of Elton, Huntingdonshire. 1n Oxford he because an ardent admirer of John Henry Newman and an earnest advocate of the Tractarian movement (see TRACTARIANIBM)• The greater part of the years from 1840 to 1844 he spent with a pupil on the Continent, and during this time his feelings changed
with reference to the Roman Catholic Church; ha impressions are recorded in Sights and Thoughts in IT orChurches and among Foreign Peoples (London, 1842). He visited the Continent in 1843 with the distinct purpose of observing Roman Catholicism and furnished with letters from Cardinal
'iseman. Hia Life of St. Wilfrid (London, 1844)
lowed clearly his Roman tendencies, and in 1845 e abjured Protestantism and was reordained in 347. He formed a religious society at Birmingham with the name Brothers of the Will of God, and again visit ed the Continent, being received at Rome by Gregory XVI. In 1848 he joined the Oratory of
It. Philip Neri in London (see PHILIP NERI, SAINT) and in 1849 became head of the congregation, re‑
naining in this position till his death. He was ;rested 17.D. by Plus IX. in 1854.
Faber and Keble were the chief religious poets >f the Oxford movement and the former's permanent fame rests upon his hymns; which are marked by fervid piety and grace of language. The moat beautiful, perhaps, are " O gift of gifts, O grace of
faith" (from a longer poem, Conversion), Workman of God, O lose not heart " (from The Right Must Win), and " Paradise, O Paradise." He was a prolific author of religious and devotional works, including An Essay on Beatification, Canonization, and the Processes o f the Congregation o f Rites (London, 1848); The Spirit and Genius of St. Philip Neri (1850); The Blessed Sacrament (1855); Lives ° f the Canonized Saints and Servants ° f God (42 vols., 1847‑56, continued by the brothers of the Oratory); Devotional Notes on Doctrinal and Spiritual Subjects, ed. J. E. Bowden (2 vole., 1866). His hymns were first published in a small collection in 1848, enlarged editions appeared in 1849 and 1852, and the final edition (150 hymns) in 1862.
D. s. Scse>!P.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. E. Bowden, Life and Letters of F. TV.
Faber, London, 1889, new ed., 1888: F. A. Faber, Brief
Sketch of the Early Life of F. W. Faber, ib. 1889 (by his
brother); 9. W. Duffield, English Hymns. pp. ~~•
New York, 1888; Julian, H7nn, pp. 381‑382; DNB, aviii. 108‑111.
FABER, GEORGE STARLEY ~ English controversialist, uncle of Frederick William Faber (q.v.): b. at Calverley (5 m. w.n.w. of Leeds),
Yorkshire, Oct. 25, 1773; d. at Sherburn Hospital, near Durham, Jan. 27, 1854. He studied at University College, Oxford (B.A., 1793; M.A., 1796; B.D., 1803), and was fellow from 1793 to 1803, when he became his father's curate at Calverley. In 1805 he received the vicarage of Stockton‑upon‑
Tees, in 1808 the rectory of Redmarshall, and in 1811 that of Long Newton, which he held till 1832,
281 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Faber
when he was made master of Sherburn Hospital. In 1830 he was given a prebendal stall in Salisbury Cathedral. His voluminous works, devoted largely to prophecy, belong to the apocalyptic school of Biblical interpretation and are now of little importance. To be mentioned are, Home Mosaic (Oxford, 1801), Bampton Lectures delivered in 1801; The Origin of Pagan Idolatry (3 vols., London, 1816); and The Sacred Calendar of Prophecy (3 vols., 1828).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A Memoir by his nephew, F. A. Faber, is prefixed to an edition of The Many Mansions, London, 1854. Consult also: Gentleman's Magazine, May and June, 1854; G. V. Cox, Recollections of Oxford, p. 203, London, 1870; DNB, xviii. 111‑112.
FABER, f 8'ber, JOHANNES: The name of three Roman Catholic theologians of the sixteeLth century.
x. Johannes Faber of Augsburg was born in the
second half of the fifteenth century at Freiburg,
and died c.1530; the place of his death is unknown.
About 1515 he was prior of a Dominican monastery
at Augsburg, and in 1516 was instructor in theology
at Bologna, but was soon appointed court‑preacher
and confessor of the Emperor Maximilian I. At
the recommendation of Erasmus he became court
preacher to Charles V., and sought to further a
policy of mediation in the Lutheran controversy.
Erasmus seems later to have become hostile to him.
The only writing known to have been composed by
him is a funeral oration over Maximilian (Augs
burg, 1519). (J. A. WAGFxnsArlrrt.)
BIalrIOGRAPHY: J. Echard and J. Quetif, 3criptoras ordinie prtediomtorum, ii. 80, Paris, 1721; C. Khamm, Hierarchia Aupuatana chronologica, dipartita, i. 308, Mains, 1709; HL, iv. 1170‑1171.
Z. Johannes Faber of Leutkirch was born at Leutkirch (40 m. a. of Uhn) in 1478, and died at Baden (12 m. s.a.w. of Vienna) May 21, 1541. He studied theology and canon law at Tobingen and Freiburg, and was successively vicar and rector at Lindau, rector of Leutkirch, and canon and episcopal official at Basel. In 1518 he was appointed vicar‑general of the diocese of Constance and received the title of prothonotary from Pope Leo X. The course of events forced him gradually to break with such humanists and Reformers as Erasmus, (Ecolampadius, Zwingh, and Melanchthon, and to change from their friend to their opponent. He disapproved of the preaching of indulgences by Bernhardin Sanson in Switzerland, and was in communication with Zwingli (1519‑20) and even with Luther, while his condemnation of Eck was undisguised. A radical change took place in his attitude, however, and though he had not yet broken with Luther, he was planning polemics against him and Carlstadt in 1519. His attitude was strengthened by a journey to Rome in the autumn of 1521, when he dedicated to the new pope, Adrian VI., his Opus adversus nova qumdam dogmala Lutheri (Rome, 1522). Faber returned to Germany a firm opponent of the new movement. On Jan. 29, 1523, he attended the disputation of Zurich as a delegate of the bishop of Constance, but was unable to prove the doctrines of the mass or the invocation of saints either from the Bible or tradition to the
satisfaction of Zwingli and his adherents. In the
same year he attended the Diet of Nuremberg,
where he seems to have met the Archduke Ferdinand,
and in 1524 he was a delegate of his bishop at
Regensburg, where he and Eck were the chief
representatives of the projected Counterreformation.
At the same time he republished his polemic against
Luther under the title Mdlleus in hceresin Luthe
ranam (Cologne, 1524), and was invited to the court
of Ferdinand as chaplain, counselor, and confessor.
In September of the same year he took part in the
heresy trial of Kaspar Tauber at Vienna, and was
later employed in various affairs of state, endeavor
ing in 1525 and the following years to win the Ro
Catholic cause, taking part in the burning of Bal
thasar Hiibmaier (Mar. 10, 1528), defending the
execution in his anonymous Ursach warum Bal
thasar Hubmaier verbrannt sei (Dresden, 1528), and
urging the theological faculty of the University of
Vienna to action against Lutheran heresy. As the
court‑chaplain of Ferdinand he attended the Diets
of Speyer and Augsburg. On the death of Johannes
de Revellie in 1531, Faber succeeded him as bishop
of Vienna, and was also administrator of the dio
cese of Neustadt until 1538. In the midst of his
episcopal duties, rendered doubly difficult by
Protestantism and Turkish invasion, he found
time to establish an institution for impoverished
theological students and to attempt to improve
the university and theological faculty of Vienna.
He was an author of note, his works including, in
addition to those already mentioned, De Moscovi
tarum religions at juxta mare glaciale religio (Basel,
1526) and De fade et bonis operxbus (Cologne, 1536).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A collection of his smaller polemical writings appeared, Leipsic, 1537; another collection, principally of polemical works, 3 vols., Cologne, 1537‑41. Consult: C. E. Kettner, De J. Fabri rift aeriptisque, Leipaio, 1737; J. Echard and J. Quetif, $criptores ordinia prmdiaatonum, ii. 111, Paris, 1721; R. Roth. Geachichte der . .
Reichastadt Leutkiroh, i. 200, ii. 90 eqq., Leutkirch, 1872; A. Horawita, J. Heigerlin, Vienna, 1884; BL, iv. 1172‑75.
3. Johannes Faber of Heilbronn was born at Heilbronn (26 m. n. of Stuttgart) about 1504, and died at Augsburg after 1557. He was a Dominican of the monastery of Wimpfen and was educated at Cologne at the expense of his city. He was later called to Augsburg as preacher at the cathedral and was a zealous opponent of the Reformation. The most of his writings are polemics against Protestantism and include the following: Ricardi Pampolitani Anglo‑Samonis enarratio in Psalmos (Cologne, 1536); Quod fides esse possit sine caritote (Augsburg, 1548); Enchiridion bi7bliorum (1549); Fructus qut&us dignoscuntur hwretici (Ingolatadt, 1551); Testimonium PetrumRomw fuisse (Antwerp, 1553); Der rechte Weg (Dillingen, 1553); Was die evangelische Mess sei. (Augsburg, 1553); and Johe1 in Predigten ausgelegt (1557).
(J. A. WAaaMLAxNt.)
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Echsrd and J• Q~tif• Rcrripw°° ordtnis Faber fled with his friend Gtsrard Roussel (q.V.)