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

710BOOK REVIEWS gians had ranked [Augustine] among the embarrassments of church history" [!] (p. 625). The editor contributes an essay on Ulrich Zwingli and Martin Bucer, and Johannes van Oort a chapter on John Calvin. Ralph Keen's fine article on pre-Tridentine Counter-Reformation theology clearly lays out the issues, though occasionally making statements one would like to query or qualify. The latter could also be said of Enrico Norelli's study ofthe Centuriators and Caesar Baronius . Keen is only one of the scholars of the post-medieval period who seem to forget that Abelard had already questioned the identity of Dionysius the Areopagite . Mark Vessey describes translations of the Latin Fathers into English from 1517 to 1611. Part Four, on the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, begins with another article by the editor, this a good study on patristic scholarship in Calvinist orthodoxy which makes many illuminating comparisons between sixteenthand seventeenth-century scholarship. E. P Meijering follows with a precise description of the Fathers in Calvinist systematic theology. Dominique Bertrand then considers the contribution of 154 Jesuits to patristics. In two very illuminating chapters, Jean-Louis Quantin treats the place of the Fathers in Roman Catholic and in Anglican theology. Finally, Daniel-Odon Hurel concludes with the Maurists. Glenn W Olsen University of Utah Monuments of Endlese Labours: English Canonists and Their Work, 13001900 . ByJ. H. Baker. (Rio Grande, Ohio: Hambledon Press with the Ecclesiastical Law Society. 1998. Pp. xx, 188. $45.00.) English lawyers have not been known for their contributions to canonical jurisprudence . Apart from a relatively brief period during the twelfth century, they have been largely dependent upon works imported from the Continent for their knowledge of the canon and Roman laws. There was no English Hostiensis , no English Bartolus. This attractively produced new book will not upset this generalization. Indeed, it does not attempt to do so. However, it does demonstrate that there is an interesting history to be told about men whose careers were devoted to the ecclesiastical law in England. After an overview of the subject and a word about the importance of the collection of papal decretals during the twelfth century, the author traces the careers and the contributions of writers on the Church's law who lived between 1300 and the eclipse of Doctors' Commons in 1865. Included from the medieval period are William Pauli (de Pagula), William Bateman, John Ayton, and William Lyndwood. Their work was of two basic kinds. The first, best represented by Pauli,was meant to distill the complex learning ofthe Continental ius commune down to a level where it could be used with profit by practicing BOOK REVIEWS711 lawyers and parochial clergy. Pauli banished from his text the elaborate distinctions , doubts, and dissensiones characteristic of the learned laws. He put the communis opinio into a form that was easy to use. The second, best represented by Lyndwood, was designed to integrate the local law of provincial and synodal constitutions with the law ofthe Western Church. Its object was to harmonize , insofar as possible, local practice with the general canon law. After the Reformation, English canonists, or civilians as they were more normally called, followed the path their medieval predecessors had laid out. Henry Swinburne, Francis Clarke, John Godolphin were the immediate successors. The first integrated the traditional law of wills and marriage with more recent English developments. The second wrote a procedural treatise on court practice , simplifying or eliminating most of the disputed points from the learned laws. The third did both. During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, most writers on English ecclesiastical law were busy men—judges, bishops, members of Parliament rather than academics—but few of them deviated from this pattern. Richard Burn's popular Ecclesiastical Law (4 vols., 1763),for example, both summarized existing practice and sought to harmonize it with the general law, although for him this was the English common law. The author pays Burn a high compliment by comparing his work with that ofWilliam Blackstone. This is not a book that presents wholly new material. Many of the chapters have already appeared as articles, and Professor Baker has drawn upon research by other scholars. Nonetheless, his book adds real value...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 710-711
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.