Franciscan Studies

2i6Book Rievews true, will make still stronger the opinion of Father FUas that Jesus was also conceived within the virginal marriage. Father Filas follows the lead of other scholars in thinking that some of the titles given to Joseph (as adoptive Father, foster father, putative father, legal father, vicarious father, and others), though true in what they express, do not express the full truth sufficiently. Rightly, we think, he settles for the title virginal father. This gives expression to the idea that Joseph is a father in the true sense, but also that he is father, not by physical cooperation, but by his virginal marriage to the Virgin Mother. We can but highly recommend this concise and correct study on the Great St. Joseph's supreme dignity of being the virginal father of the Incarnate Son of God. Dominic J. Unger, O. F. M. Cap. St. Conrad Friary Annapolis, Md. Landgraf, Artur Michael (Edit.), Der Sentenzenkommentar des Kardinals Stephan Langton. (Beiträge zur Geschichte der Phüosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters, Bd. XXXII, Heft i) Münster Westfalen: Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1952. Pp. XXXIX+158. It is deplorable that only a few theological works, dating from the early XIIIth century, have been published, since this is an important period in the evolution of theology. To help remedy this situation is an intention of Landgraf in editing Stephen Langton's Commentary on the Sentences (Foreword, p. VII). The volume contains an Introduction (p. XI—XXXIX), the text of Stephen's work (p. 1—153) and a short Index (p. 155—158). The edition is based on the only known manuscript, which is analysed in the Introduction (p. XI—XVII). It is a manuscript of the early XIIIth century, containing various glosses, mostly on the Sentences of Peter Lombard . The work chosen for pubUcation is not ascribed to any author. Consequently , Landgraf is faced with the task of proving its authenticity (p. XVIII—XXXIV). He first shows that it is a work of the early XIIIth century , chiefly by stating that it already has our division of the Bible into chapters, but is without our division of the Sentences into Distinctions. Landgraf then attempts to prove further that it is a work of Langton. His main argument is based on a comparison between certain texts of the Gloss and two authentic works of Stephen: the Quaestiones and the Commentary on St. Paul. Landgraf also mentions a few problems encountered in preparing the present edition: identifying the citations, finding the exact text of the Sentences explained, and working out a good reading of the text itself. The latter difficulty was not easy to manage with only one manuscript on hand (p. XXXIV—XXXIX). As far as the text of the Gloss is concerned, it should be noted that it ends abruptly with Sentences IV, D. II c. 6. There is no obvious reason Book Reviews217 why. But is does not seem that the fact is due to the copyist of the manuscript . Apparently, he did not find any more in his model. The Index lists the manuscripts and authors quoted by Landgraf, as well as the sources and contents of the Gloss. No distinction, however, is made between these various items. Both the Introduction and the text-edition meet the ordinary scientific norms of this type of work. But the present reviewer would make the following critical observations. First, it is hard to see how Landgraf's arguments in favor of the authenticity surpass the stage of great probabiUty. Secondly , one cannot readily understand why the Editor calls the work a Commentary on the Sentences, and even considers it is "the first Commentary on the Sentences" ever written (p. XXXVIII). Surely, the work is somewhat longer than the earliest glosses on the Sentences; but if the famous writing of Alexander of Hales is still a Gloss (see edit, of Quaracchi, vol. I and II, igsi—1952), a fortiori, this one, which covers only 150 pages. Actually Landgraf contradicts himself. He maintains that there is no doubtthat the work ofStephen was born as a marginal gloss,written originallyin the rand of a copy of the Sentences, and transcribed independently later (p. XVII). According to the...