The Reception of Fathers in West.From Carolingians to Maurists. Edited by Irena Backus. 2 vols. (Leiden: E.J. Brill. 1997. Pp. xxix, 469; vii, 470-1078. $338.50.) It would be impossible to write a comprehensive history of reception of Fathers from Carolingians to Maurists in two volumes. What this work gives, rather, is studies of select subjects by an international group of scholars. Each of its twenty-six articles is written in or translated into English. The translations are sometimes infelicitous, fairly often have bad grammar and typographical and spelling errors, and are not always aware of English conventions. All have a bibliography. Some of articles cover large topics, some are more modest in ambition. Their quality ranges from pedestrian to truly clarifying and permanently useful. The editor's introduction, which summarizes separate chapters, is not fully in command of either English or some of materials it describes. One frequently puzzles over whether mistakes are of fact or expression: on page xii, Backus follows Willemien Otten (p. 12) in ascribing adoration of images to Second Council of Nicaea. Then, summarizing Jean Werckmeister, she writes in regard to period before 1200 of existence of several canon laws given that each [sic] possessed its own legislature.Werckmeister's translated language (p. 51), however, is not of each (presumably regional) Church having its own legislature, but its own law. Backus also (p. xix) follows Manfred Schulze's statement (p. 625) that Luther performed inestimable scholarly service of showing that the Fathers. . . could be mistaken, as if this were not a commonplace in Middle Ages. Part One, on use of patristic sources until 1200, begins with a wellinformed but not always precise and sometimes superficial study by Willemien Otten of place of Fathers in Carolingian theology. Otten usefully examines Carolingian anthropology. An essay by Jean Werckmeister summarizes, especially in regard to question of marriage, reception of Fathers into canon law. Perhaps vagueness of remarks such as that Gratian did not consider union of Mary and Joseph a true marriage (p. 71) due to lack of a sensual dimension is to be attributed to translator. The better part of a century ago, Rudolph Sohm thought he saw canon law after Gratian shifting from categories of sacrament and mystery to that of legislation. Intentionally or not (the discussion could be clearer), Werckmeister shows by contrast that what Sohm labelled altkatholisch or theological law was not in fact ancient but a creation of period from eighth to twelfth century, during which writings of Fathers played a greater role in law than they did before or after. Except for an undefended dating of Codex Sinaiticus to second century, E. Ann Matter gives an informed discussion of Glossa ordinaria. Jacques-Guy Bougerol does same for Sentences of Peter Lombard, and returns in Part Two to continue story with a fine article on The Fathers and Auctoritates in Scholastic Theology to Bonaventure. Burcht Pranger's study of Anselm's, Abelard's, and Bernard's views of patristic authority, with its comparisons of what is common to these thinkers, and what distinctive to each, is especially thought-provoking. …
Search from 250 M+ research papersSearch from 250 M+ research papers
Mar 21, 2007
Ekkehard Henschke 
Open Access