MATTHEW
62
MEAUX
declared judicially, the legislature, by laws becoming
effective in 1909 (see Personal Property Law, section
12; Real Property Law, section 113) has re-enacted
(with changes immaterial for our present purposes)
the statute of 1S93.
The reason on which Holland v. Alcock was based having thus ceased to exist, we might, perhaps, doubt whether the law of that case could be deemed to sur- vive. But in this connexion a case decided in 1907 ought to be noticed. This case (Johnston v. Hughes, 187 New York Court of Appeals Reports, p. 446) involved the validity of a bequest of proceeds of real estate to a hospital conducted by a corporation, "The Sisters of the Poor of St. Francis" incorporated for "the gratuitous care of the sick, aged, infirm and poor", the testator adding to the bequest these words "for the benefit and use of the Blessed Virgin Mary purgatorial fimd of said hospital". There had never been maintained any such fund in the hospital. But there was "a chapel", observes the court "connected with the hospital in which they have morning Mass and religious devotions during the day, in which prayers are offered for departed souls" (p. 452). And the court surmises that from knowledge of the observance of these religious practices, persons under the charge of the Sisters may derive "comfort and peace of mind", conducive to the physical welfare which the corporation had been chartered to promote (p. 453). The court holds that "an imperative in- tent on the part of the testator not to make the gift absolute" does not api)ear (p. 451), and that "the gift was absolute and valid", for the legal purposes of the corporation (p. 454). The Sisters, as individ- uals and apart from regard for the inmates of the hospital, might feel morally bound to pray for the dead; but the corporation was held to take the be- quest for the purposes of the corporate charter, and these were certainly Umited to the welfare of the liv- ing, "the sick, aged, infirm and poor". The bequest being thus sustained because deemed to be for pur- poses within the corporate functions of the legatee, the court intimates that if the legatee had not been a corporation, the decision might have been that the bequest was invalid, and invalid on the au- thority of the Holland case. " In this case ", remarks the court, "the bequest was to a corporation duly organized, and it is not therefore subject to the ob- jection that was made in the case of Holland vs. Alcock" (p. 453). The fact is not alluded to that the reason for sustaining this objection was the non- existence in New York of the Enghsh law of charities, a reason no longer tenable under the statute of 1893 as construed by the court. We may well regret that this recognition in 1907 of Holland vs. Alcock was unaccompanied by any reference to this intervening statute.
Incorporation of "Roman Catholic" Churches has been provided for by the statutes of New York since the year 1863 (see Laws of 1863, chapter 45; and Religious Corporations Law, in effect 1909). The views expressed in the Holland case, in conjunction with the statute of 1893, seem favourable to the legal competency of a church thus incorporated to accept a testamentary gift charged with a trust of offering public masses for the dead {In re Davidson, English Law Reports, 1 Chancery, page b72, anno 1909; of. Bowman v. Domestic and Foreign Missionary So- ciety svp.). By chapter 732 of the Laws of 1911, "any property devised or bequeathed for religious cere- monies, observances or commemorative services of or for the deceased donor" is exempted from transfer tax. This exemption seems to embrace devises and bequests whether to individuals or to coriJorations, and Masses for the repose of his soul might, perhaps, be considered to be "commemorative services . . . for the deceased donor" (chapter 795, Laws of 1913). And, possibly, some case involving a question of li-
ability to payment of this tax may cause the Court of
Appeals to settle the question whether, notwithstand-
ing the Statute of 1893, bequests and devises for
Masses are to be deemed void in the State of New
York in accord with the ruhngs of the Court in the
Holland case and the O'Conner case.
Charles W. Sloane.
Matthew, Saint, Gospel of. — Since the publica- tion of this article, the following answers have been given by the Biblical Commission (q. v.) to inquiries about the Gospel of St. Matthew: In view of the universal and constant agreement of the Church, as shown by the testimony of the Fathers, the inscrip- tion of Gospel codices, mo.st ancient versions of the Sacred Books and hsts handed down by the Holy Fathers, ecclesiastical writers, popes and councils, and finally by hturgical usage in the Eastern and Western Church, it may and should be held that Matthew, an Apostle of Christ, is really the author of the Gospel that goes by his name. The belief that Matthew preceded the other Evangehsts in writing, and that the first Gospel was written in the native language of the Jews then in Palestine, is to be con- sidered as based on Tradition.
The preparation of this original text was not de- ferred until after the destruction of Jerusalem, so that the prophecies it contains about this might be written after the event; nor is the alleged uncertain and much disputed testimony of Irenaeus convincing enough to do away with the opinion most conformed to Tradition, that their preparation was finished even before the coming of Paul to Rome. The opinion of certain Modernists is untenable, viz., that Matthew did not in a proper and strict sense compose the Gos- pel, as it has come down to us, but only a collection of some words and sayings of Christ, which, accord- ing to them, another anonymous author used as sources.
The fact that the Fathers and all ecclesiastical writers, and even the Church itself from the very be- ginning, have used as canonical the Greek text of the Gospel known as St. Matthew's, not even excepting those who have expressly handed down that the Apos- tle Matthew wrote in his native tongue, proves for certain that this very Greek Gospel is identical in sub- stance with the Gospel wi-itten by the same Apostle in his native language. Although the author of the first Gospel has the dogmatic and apologetic pur- pose of proving to the Jews that Jesus is the Messias foretold by the prophets and born of the house of David, and although he is not always chronological in arranging the facts or sayings which he records, his narration is not to be regarded as lacking truth. Nor can it be said that his accounts of the deeds and utterances of Christ have been altered and adapted by the influence of the prophecies of the Old Testa- ment and the condition of the growing Church, and that they do not therefore conform to historical truth. Notably unfounded are the opinions of those who cast doubt on the historical value of the first two chapters, treating of the genealogy and infancy of Christ, or on certain passages of much weight for certain dogmas, such as those which concern the primacy of Peter (xvi, 17-19), the form of baptism given to the Apostles with their universal missions (xxviii, 19-20), the Apostles' profession of faith in Christ (xiv, 33), and others of this cliaracter .specially emphasized by NIatthew.
Ada Aposlolicce Sedis (26 June, 1911); Rome (8 July, 1911).
Meauz (Melsa), a Cistercian abbey about four miles east of Beverley in the East Riding of Yorkshire. It was founded in the year 11.50 by William le Gros, Earl of Albemarle, and was dedicated to Our Lady. The history of the abbey is a sad one. On reading the
