Book Description
Explores the common ground that Protestants and Catholics share against enemies such as pornography and abortion and whether the issues that originally separated the two groups are still relevant today. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (61)

Superb
I highly recommend this book, and have given copies to both Protestants and Roman Catholics.

White superbly demonstrates the difference between the true biblical gospel of grace and the false "gospel" of Rome.

Simply ignorant!
First of all, James White is not a "Dr." He does not have a valid doctorate degree. In this case he is simply dishonest. Secondly, why is it that when folks attempt to address the subject of Catholicism they just so happen to ignore all of the historical liturgies which overwhelmingly prove the Catholic Mass? Just a thought, maybe it would be a good idea to look into this.

Overall, Mr. White does an excellent job at making use of logical fallacies. This book would serve a student engaged in critical thinking, and what to avoid, quite well. Bravo James!

Great!
A great overview of the One False Church. Mother of Harlots and the Abominations of the Earth. I once read "If the Pope is not the antichrist then he is the Antichrist."

Poor writing and poor arguments
This book is not worth your time or money. All of the arguments presented are very amateur and shallow.

Rally the Troops
In the wake of the publication of Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT), there has been a lot of soul searching among Evangelical Protestants as they attempt to evaluate the proper stance that should be taken towards the Catholic Church.Among the most vocal critics of the ECT movement has been Protestant apologist James R. White who has a long record of debates and other confrontations with popular Catholic apologists.

White expresses his strong views on the Roman Church in The Roman Catholic Controversy.Among those often classified by Catholic apologists as "anti-Catholic", White certainly presents the most challenging arguments.Rather than take a "throw everything up and hope something sticks" approach common to Dave Hunt and others, he usually tries to key in on certain foundational issues and then further expand it to put forth a comprehensive critique of the Catholic system.While this approach may be sound as a general methodology, the question remains whether the critique holds up in its details.

One does have to read White carefully since his status as a controversial figure in disputes often clouds the analysis of his comments.Personally, I find many of the comments he makes in his apologetical work to be so severly strident and narrowly focused within the Reformed Baptist exegetical tradition that the usefulness of said comments in terms of gaining a proper perspective of the greatness of the Christian faith throughout history to be relatively useless.However, no matter what one makes of White's views in general, one should refrain from letting weaknesses in one area fail to allow one to see useful comments he may make elsewhere.

In the case of this book, White's critique is neither as irrelevant as his detractors claim nor does he deliver the great knockout blow his fans insist has been made.Rather what has happened is that he makes some very sharp and well placed citicisms of Rome that tend to be occasionally lost within an overall framework that is completely reliant upon an exegetical methodology that is largely a product of trends within Western culture in general and American culture in particular.This particular failure has the effect of drowning out more cogent points buried within the book's pages and opening White up to the criticism that he "doesn't get" Christian history.

White begins the book by acknowledging the recent phenomenon of Evangelical Protestants (including many pastors) leaving their churches for Catholicism.For most of the last few decades, most Evangelicals assumed the movement could only be in one direction - away from Rome.This has caught many Evangelicals off guard since they were not aware the Catholic Church had arguments in favor of their doctrines - including Biblical arguments!This was compounded by the fact that many Catholics were not familiar enough with their own faith to defend their doctrines.In White's view, the unfamiliarity with Catholic arguments and the unfamiliarity with how to counter them has left many Protestants open to being swayed by those Catholics that could defend their faith.Furthermore, this process has been accelerated by the closer ties established between Evangelicals and Catholics in such agreements as ECT.

Having established the need for a better Evangelical understanding of Catholic beliefs and practices and how to defend the Evangelical view, White begins his case strongly by trying to separate fundamental from peripheral issues.Seeing the ECT agreement and other Protestant/Catholic dialoges that blur the distinctions as compromising fundamental Christian beliefs, he then seeks to separate the nonnegotiable points from those items that believers may disagree upon while still recognizing each other as brothers in Christ.As examples, he points to various liturgical and rubrical practices as nonessential matters that have had devout believers and those without saving faith alike fall on either side. White also dismisses claims against Catholics (and others) based upon conspiracy theories that see "Jesuits behind every bush".Instead, the issue for White is not one of alien practices or plotting clerics but one of the Gospel itself and the peace it gives.Without this peace - a peace that comes solely from the grace of God - there is no Gospel and there is no true faith.

White then discusses the first of the issues that he believes negates any Catholic claims to presenting the true Gospel of Christ - the issue of authority and particularly the place of the authority of Holy Scripture.Evangelicals hold to a doctrine of sola scriptura and prior to defending it he first seeks to define it.In so doing, he first seeks to avoid misunderstandings by clarifying what sola scriptura is not and only then gives a proper definition.Thus White seeks to differentiate the doctrine from what is sometimes called solo scriptura - a position that removes the Scriptures from any contextual considerations.While this does correspond more closely to what the Protestant Reformers actually taught and what more traditional Protestants from Reformational traditions would support, it might be argued that this is not a definition commonly upheld by most Evangelical Protestants and that in practice the doctrine over time will by its nature deteriorate to the solo scriptura position.

Having given a defintion of sola scriptura defined the doctrine, White then seeks to defend it by providing a Scriptural basis.He cites a few passagesbut concentrates primarily on II Timothy 3:14-17 and attempts to sidestep the issue of the passage applying only to the Old Testament by emphasizing its application to defining the nature of Scripture.This strategy is highly questionable since even if White's assessment is correct (a reasonable assumption), his thesis is undercut since the sufficiency must hold at the time of the letter's composition.Furthermore, the use of the phrase "all scripture" is a case of universal quantification that would logically pass to each of the objects quantified on its own.It is far more reasonable to assume St. Paul was referring to the importance of Scripture and its role in the Church than of the sufficiency of a collection of writings - many of which did not yet exist.In his exegesis,White - like many of his Catholic opponents - attempts to seize upon Scriptural passages discussing Scripture and tradition and anachronistically apply them to settle debates they do not address.

White then moves on to explain the differences between two Catholic views of tradition - the older Catholic explanation he calls the "partim-partim" view (the deposit of faith is partly in Scripture, partly in tradition) and the more recent material sufficiency view (tradition interprets Scripture).He attempts to demonstrate the Protestant vs. Catholic debate defaults to a choice betweensola scriptura and sola ecclesia.He then counters Roman arguments for tradition using both concepts.The most interesting case is his analysis of the nature of the Canon of Scripture where he argues it is a function of the Scriptures' inspiration rather than an additional revelation and hence does not pertain to the existence of a divinely inspired tradition. While correct on this point, one is left to wonder how the Church is to know the canon the Church recognized is correct.Both Catholics and Orthodox Christian might easily counter that the assurance these books are correct is assured by the unbroken recognition of most of these books from the earliest days of the Church and the discernment of the rest later.The canon itself may not be a separate revelation, but a tradition of the Church's discernment process led by the Holy Spirit's guidance can be established.

Moving on to the topic of the papacy, White gives an alternate exegesis for passages that Rome uses as prooftexts.The chapter is one of the stronger in the book but its brevity in dealing with the topic leaves much unanswered.If there are future editions of this book, he should consider expanding this section to make his points clearer as many who move to Rome ultimately rest upon the authority of the Bishop of Rome.

With the issue of authority dealt with, White then moves to what the Reformers considered to be the heart of the Gospel - the issue of justification.He points out there is no controversy that sin is a rebellion against God and that grace is necessary for salvation.However, he is quite emphatic that Rome loses contact with Scripture over the issue of whether grace is sufficient.Here the presentation is rather muddled as he claims both that Rome teaches both faith and works to be outgrowths of God's grace but that the claim for the necessity of works subtracts from the sufficiency of grace.Yet if the works are consequences of grace, then is the grace not sufficient?Also, his claim that Catholic teaching implies that grace can be "gained and lost, gained and lost" is misleading.It is not the grace that can be gained and lost but the right standing with God - the state of grace and not the grace itself.The dispute is not over whether the grace exists but whether it can be resisted.However, this is not just an issue between Catholics and Protestants but between Protestants and Protestants as well as White's disputes with Arminian Protestants demonstrates.

The whole question of what makes us justified - whether it is by faith alone (sola fidei) as Protestants believe or by faith together with works as Catholic believe is an issue that entire volumes have been dedicated to but White does a credible job of presenting the standard Evangelical Protestant case in the restricted space available.One drawback is that he does not deal with the James 2:24.White undoubtedly has run across this arguement in his debates and must have his own interpretation but not dealing with the issue directly is such a glaring oversight that he might appear to be fudging the data.

Probably the weakest section on the book is White's analysis of the Catholic Mass.Although he gives a nice summary of what Catholics believe and where Evangelicals disagree, he presents these two views in a false dichotomy as if these were the only choices.The fact is that a good number of Protestants are closer to Rome than White's Evangelical interpretation and Christians outside the Roman/Protestant divide are as well.While it can be argued that Rome's defining transubstantiation as dogma went too far, the historic position of Christianity until modernity was that Christ became present to the believer in the celebration of the liturgy.This was no less true for Luther and Calvin as for their Catholic opponents.The Evangelical view of it as symbolic (in the modern western sense of the word) is an innovation that has little support in the historical context of the early Church.

White recovers a bit with his section on the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory and related issues such as indulgences and the "treasury of merits".He raises some interesting points on the use by Catholic apologists of such passages as I Corinthians 3:10-15.He makes a direct assault on the Catholic position (one where Catholicism not only differs with Protestants, but with the Orthodox as well) and rebuts the most common Catholic defenses.

Returning to the topic of sola scriptura, White gives some examples - all involving Catholic devotion to Mary and the Saints - that he contends are consequences of rejecting this foundational doctrine of Protestantism.Yet in his critique, he fails to mention that much of what he criticizes was accepted by the early Church and so could hardly be considered an invention of the papacy.This is important since this undermines his claim that the doctrine of sola scriptura is the historic postion of the Church.Yet in many key issues White discusses, the Church Fathers are usually closer to the Catholic position than White's own (although there are important distinctions between the details of Catholic and patristic thinking).

The assumption White makes is that he reads any historical figure claiming to find all they believe in Scripture to mean all they believed could be found using the exegetical methodology employed by modern Evangelical Protestants.He misses completely that the Church fathers greatly employed typological and mystical interpretations of Scriptural passages and their exegesis was not based upon modern histoical-critical exegesis.

White closes by returning to the original context of ECT and stating that nothing has changed in Rome seeks to rally the troops and avoid any weakening of resolve with regards to Catholicism.Whatever the validity of his claim that Rome has not moved, something has definitely changed in Protestantism and continues to do so and perhaps this failure to maintain any theological stability is what has begun to send disgruntled Evangelicals looking Romeward in the first place.

Despite reservations I have about White's comments elsewhere, I would recommend The Roman Catholic Controversy as a book to read on the differences between the two traditions and especially to apologists on both sides.As one of the most widely known critiques of Rome from the Evangelical side and one of the more clearly presented, the case made here will continue to be repeated (and opposed) in debates for years to come. ... Read more

Product Description
Reprint of the 1962 classic! All readings in English (Douay-Rheims translation) and Latin. All music in Gregorian notation. Ordinary with rubrics in red. Gilt edges it wont come off if it gets wet like some missals! 5 liturgically-colored non-fraying ribbons. Smythe Sewn, rounded back binding with durable, leather-like Skivertex polymer gold-embossed flexible cover Rounded corners on pages and cover Reinforced 80 lb. resin-impregnated endsheets for extreme durability. Printed and bound in the USA on the highest quality natural Bible paper imported from France especially for this missal. Fully and thoroughly indexed. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (16)

A remarkable and comprehensive Missal!
I don't want to repeat what others already have said, let me just say that this beautiful and reverent Missal and the fortunate circumstance of having a local parish that celebrates the Tridentine Mass less than 2 miles from my home, were instrumental my actively returning to the Church after a forty five year absence.

Having being raised in the Church, I was one of those Roman Catholics who felt betrayed by the changes in the Mass even at the ripe old age of 15!The Latin Rite had not changed appreciably in over 1,400 years and overnight it altered to such a degree that it more resembled a Protestant service, lots of "preaching", superficial glad handing around, and little introspective or meditative atmosphere.In the Latin Mass you feel united through the silence and the focus and concentration of the congregation.

I had forgotten how the terseness and economy of Latin is such a perfect vehicle for the Liturgy; the mystical nature of the Mass is so much more meaningfully conveyed.And there is the added attribute that Latin, being a so-called "dead" language, is not subject to the gradual changes in connotative and denotative word meanings which occur in spoken languages with the passage of time.

Check out any of the various websites that list local churches which serve a Tridentine Mass.If you are an old timer like me, the memories will rush back and perhaps you will find the tears hard to resist.It is a weekly reminder at least for me, though its eternal beauty and form, that the old Roman Catholic Church is the most spiritually complete, intellectually satisfying, beautiful and meaningful religion of all.

For those of you who have never seen a Latin Rite Mass, there are several on youtube and you might want to get a copy of the reprint of KNOW YOUR MASS offered from various Catholic websites.It is a an excellent introduction to aspects of the Mass of which many of you are unaware.

Good book
I like reading of historical rules and guidelines and find the logic and common sense behind them.This book has the nine ways of being accessory to another's sin and then can be simplified to know why the religion is called Catholic.I think the traditions and prayers are great for english and latin.The only thing other I would have liked to own was the latin exorcism rites. But that maybe there best kept secret.Some prayers against evil and persecution are left unended with just ... I don't exactly know why that is but can only guess.Overall the book has many of the prayers of the church along with songs and all of the masses for each day of the year.It also explains the prayers and significance of easter tide, pentecost and so on.

excellent product and I'm thrilled the textis available
I'm quite delighted with this text and very pleased that it now available to those of us who never had access to it (being born in 1970)

Nice option
When young (weren't we all) I learned the Mass using a St. Joseph's Sunday Missal. This does not instruct stand, kneel, or sit as we have become used to via the novo ordo, but is an accurate and complete daily/sunday missal. St. Joe's used to have a bold and red print for the server lines or thecongregation's responses. In this edition, these are not clear, one must keep going back to get it all right (no prob, eh?) Be prepared for Mass by spending a few minutes mapping out the prayers if you use for a daily Mass as there will be a lot of page flipping to keep up with Father (especially if your Latin is rusty) The book has 5 ribbons to help, but you might need a holy card or two. (for the old folks, just like your Grandma used to)

Highly recommended
As a "new" traditional Catholic, having just discovered the beauty of the Tridentine Mass, I needed a 1962 Missal to help me along.

Not only is this Missal extremely helpful for the Mass, it is a great resource for daily spirituality.

It has a multitude of prayers and a great explanation of the Mass. The ceremonies of the Sacraments are equally astounding. Maybe the part I like best, though, is the various devotions for before and after communion.

I can't go to daily mass, but I do follow along using this missal. I like to read the brief commentary on the particular day, be it a feast of a saint or Mary, or whatever. I never heard of some of these saints before!

The book itself is wonderfully crafted. The only negative is that the pages feel very fragile. No accidents so far though.

I can not picture my spiritual life without this book now. It is unfortunate that it took me so long to find it. ... Read more

Book Description
This comparative study shows that Protestants and Catholics are not as separated theologically as they may think. An excellent reference tool or textbook. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (17)

Worth studying
Catholics will likely find the second section of this book too critical, while Evangelicals will likely find the third section far too liberal.Imagine Catholicism is a house, and Dr.Geisler is an expert building inspector. He examines the house and concludes the foundation is sinking, the walls are infested with terminites, the water pipes leak, the roof is full of gaping holes, the wiring is exposed, the windows are broken, the sewer line is full of roots, and there's a gas leak. In fact the house is so dilapidated you might be safer in a cave or a tree house.He strongly warns, but still approves the permit and allows the house to be occupied---apparently on the theory that most people 500 years ago or more lived in lousy housing---so somehow it's acceptable today.

To understand Dr. Geisler's view, it might help to read his Systematic Theology, Vol. 3 on the fourteen explicit and implicit conditions to believe to be saved.For example, he states that one need not (explicitly or implicitly) believe in Christ's bodily ascension,
his present session (intercession), or his bodily second coming in order to be saved. Of the other conditions, he states one need not explicitly believe in Christ's virgin birth, his sinlessness, his humanity, or the Trinity, so long as one doesn't actually deny them. He affirms one must explicitly belive in the necessity of grace and faith, but denies one
must believe in their sufficiency---which explains how he ends up approving the house permit.

In other words, a bare minimal gospel, which both sides would likely find insufficient allows him to include believing Catholics. Essentially, he denies the necessity of belief in faith alone by grace alone in Christ alone (forensic justification), while absolutely believing this to be correct. He believes this is the way God actually saves whomever he
saves whether they believe it or not. If faith alone by grace alone in Christ alone is an essential part of the gospel as he admits, then how can belief in this be neither explicitly nor implicitly necessary to be saved? If it is absolutely true and essential, then how can anyone who explicitly denies it be saved?Logically it seems Dr. Geisler should acknowledge that forensic justification must implicitly be believed to be saved, or at an absolute minimum not be denied.Catholicism neither explicitly nor implicitly believes this but explicitly denied it at Trent, thus meriting it the title of an apostate church in the eyes of the Reformers.

Disappointment
For at least twenty five years, I have become increasingly aware of the damage to Christ's body due to the often bitter infighting between Catholics and Evangelicals.Although Christ cannot be crucified again, this has not stopped various Christian factions from drawing and quartering His body, the church.

Upon discovering this book in a local book store I was intrigued by the title.My interest was further piqued by the forward written by Howard Brown.Brown stated something I have known to be true for some time, namely, that orthodox Roman Catholics and conservative Evangelicals have more in common with each other than they have with their modernists, revisionists components within their own groups.He went further to point out that Catholics and Evangelicals often find themselves standing together fighting common enemies. Reading further into the introduction the authors state their purpose, "to examine some of our common spiritual roots and see if we have any theological or moral bridges upon which we can both travel."What a grand endeavor!I purchased the book and started to read it from cover to cover.My initial delight, however, was soon replaced with grief and sorrow.

My first hint that something was amiss can be found toward the end of the introduction, where the authors instruct Evangelicals to read through the whole book but they recommended that Catholic readers should skip the middle third of the book.This struck me as odd, since the implied purpose was to find common ground which implies a desire for open and frank discussion.I was later to discover why.

The first part of the book outlines very well areas of agreement between Catholics and Evangelicals.In this part are some very fundamental doctrines on faith and morals that are shared between Catholics and Evangelicals.

The second part is an entirely different matter.Instead of a balanced outline of the differences between Evangelicals and Roman Catholics it is a one-sided attack on various Catholic dogmas.Upon finishing this part of the book, I was convinced the whole purpose of the book was a veiled attempt to sugar coat a one-sided attack on Catholicism.This was no better than a highly polished version of the same anti-catholic comic books published by various Evangelical groups containing slanderous material. The authors entice Catholics who desire a union with other denominations to share a conversation with them, and then start shoveling upon them a pile of anti-catholic spite.I felt very much like an innocent child being invited into a car by dirty old man with promises of candy.

I expected instead a presentation of both sides of the issues to be placed in juxtaposition so that readers could understand the differences, in an even handed fashion.What I found instead were statements of Catholic dogma taken mostly out of a book by Dr. Ludwig Ott titled "The fundamentals of Catholic Dogma". Although a very good reference book, this is certainly not a current book of choice containing detailed explanations of various Catholic dogmas (it was first published in 1955). Nor is it the most complete source of `proof-text' from Scripture or Tradition.A more current and far better resource would be the most recent Catechism of the Catholic Church (first published in the USA in English in 1994).The most recent catechism was written not so much as a denial of other denominations nor as a defense of the Catholic beliefs, but instead provides a better description of what Catholics do believe.The principle task entrusted to those who wrote this book was `...not first of all to condemn the errors of the times, but above all to strive calmly to show the strength and beauty of the doctrine of faith..." (from the introduction by John Paul II).

The Catholic statements were followed by lengthy and often repetitious arguments against the Catholic viewpoint.(Does one really need to repeat for each examined dogma the sola scriptura argument, ignoring the fact that Catholics do not ascribe to this viewpoint, having a counter viewpoint of prima scriptura?)Many Catholic references attempt to discuss these matters with non-Catholics on their terms--by using scripture alone; this is done as a courtesy to find common grounds of discussion.The authors focus into Ott's book because it was one of the few attempts at the time to be more inclusive of writings of early church Fathers in a single book.

My main concern with this section is that there appears to be no real attempt to understand the Catholic viewpoint.If this section were a live conversation between the authors and a Catholic scholar, it would come across as if the authors have already formed a response to the Catholic's statement before even hearing him out.This is amazing since they obviously studied Ott's book in detail.The authors do not acknowledge that many honest, God-fearing, Catholics ascribe consciously to the Catholic faith.I shudder to think of the conversations had with one author's Catholic daughter-in-law.Statements like "we have examined carefully the catholic arguments...and found them all wanting" belie the authors stated attempt to `not be rancorous in spirit'.The authors would do well to ponder Paul's words: "Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand" (Romans 14:4).

The third section of the book does provide a more positive end to the book, outlining where both Catholics and Evangelicals can cooperate on a more personal and social level. However I'm not so sure the first and last sections prevail over the rancor of the middle section.

Pretends to be ecumenical, but...
...fails remarkably.Can two Protestants actually have an honest discussion of Roman Catholicism?Not, apparently, when they're Norman Geisler and Ralph MacKenzie.This book would be less offensive if it did not purport to be a fair dialogue between the opposing sides.

While I have some appreciation for the book's ultimate argument, that Christians must learn to set aside our differences in order to work towards our common goal, Geisler and MacKenzie could have, and should have, made that point without pretending to actually examine the issues which separate us.

The other reviews on this page deal well with the gaping holes in their discussion, but it is the nature of the discussion itself that is maddening.Geisler and MacKenzie present a bare-bones outline of a Catholic position, devoting the remainder of each chapter to refuting it.They never allow for a rebuttal, nor do they ever deal particularly adeptly or thoroughly with the Catholic position.Rather, they hang straw men and gleefully burn them, assuming the Protestant doctrines of sola scriptura and sola fide all the way.

As an evangelical Protestant, I read the book and knew it was often illogical and overwhelmingly unfair.I remember guiltily presenting its anti-Catholic arguments, aware that I was not offering good historical analysis and that the answers I gave, lifted straight from this book (it is probably best used as an apology for Protestantism), were incomplete.

Having come face-to-face with Sacred Scripture (particularly the verses Geisler and MacKenzie blithely ignore), historical fact, and the actualy beliefs of the Early Church, I converted to Catholicism.The sections of this book that used to cause guilt now stir up irritation, as I know they will be used to further the anti-authority, anti-Catholicism, under-informed attitude so prevalent in America.

Yes, the book has been recommended by prominent Catholics -- so long as it's read with the Catechism in the other hand.You'll need it, if you want to know what the Catholic Church actually believes, and why.

Take this book for what it is: a defense of modern American Protestantism.Look elsewhere, if you really desire ecumenical dialogue.

Scholarly, fair, excellent ground for an honest interdenominational discussion
Before I state my opinion about the book, allow me to swiftly present my background: I was born of an Eastern Orthodox father (thus I am officially an Orthodox), raised as a Catholic by my mother and my school, and I've recently getting quite acquainted with the Protestant doctrines. So I can safely say I am not blindly biased toward any of those three main Christian lines of thoughts, as I cherish them all and think each has a good reason why it exists.

As for this book, it was written by two highly respected "moderate" evangelicals in an effort to present the Catholic faith along side the Protestant one and compare them.

In the first part, the areas of doctrinal agreements are presented. This was a much needed part as people nowadays tend to only concentrate on the differences making the two faith seems like at a bitter war, neglecting the deep agreements on THE most essential doctrines such as the revelation of the bible, the notion of God and his character, the fall of mankind, Christ and his God-Man central place in our salvation, the role of the church, ethics, and the general thought about the last days. Plus it underlines their common heritage and common stand in our society. It was a pure pleasure to read this part, as it shows you that the foundation and basis of our Christian faith is ONE! I was even amazed at how much alike their doctrine of justification is, knowing that this is one of the crucial topics where the debate rages between Catholics and Evangelicals.

In the second part comes the area of doctrinal differences. Here the authors discuss the apocrypha (is it sound to include the apocrypha as canon of the old testament?), the scripture (what should dictate our doctrines: scripture alone or scripture plus tradition?), the infallibility of the Pope (is he the earthly head of the church with infallible decisions?), the doctrine of justification (are we saved by our faith alone, or by faith and works?), the sacraments (did Christ establish seven or two sacraments, and are they means of receiving grace or simply symbols of grace?), the system of the church (does the new testament establish priesthood or does it teach that all believers are priests and thus can approach God directly?) , Mariology (Is Mary our mediatrix, co-redemptrix, queen of heaven? Is it biblical to pray to her, to saints, to venerate relics?), and finally the purgatory (Heaven/Hell, or Heaven/Purgatory/Hell?). Each topic is first presented from the Catholic point of view with the corresponding scriptures to back their doctrine and the tradition and literature of some of the early church fathers as support. Then the authors present their refutation of each of the points then go to build a positive case for their evangelical doctrine. The presentation was honest and most importantly extremely gentlemanly; the authors talk with a sincere and appropriate language, avoiding any bashing or fanatic sarcasm. Although the book is biased (it's impossible for such a book to be neutral), it is really hard not to agree with the authors on many points. I am afraid a lot of the catholic doctrines have simply drifted from the scriptural truth and have been reshaped a lot along history especially with the accumulation of so called infallible decisions. Catholic doctrines do suffer a lot when faced with scripture. And also, contrary to what many people believe, many highly respected early church fathers taught contrary to the current catholic doctrines and were more along the evangelical line of thought.

The last part of the book deals with the areas of practical cooperation. Being divided along many areas shouldn't let us forget the many agreements and the single stand of both faiths: proclaiming the good news of our Lord Jesus Christ. Social action, educational goals, spiritual heritage and evangelism are but few of the points where both can work hand in hand.

At the end of the book, there is also many minor appendixes dealing with some subjects such as the churches of the east, liberalism, reformation,.....

This book deserves a 5 star for being so complete in its approach, so scholarly in its presentation and most importantly for being truly well spirited. It is such books that should be the basis of debating and discussion, not like many others that picture the other side as an ugly devil. The Christian faith is ONE with different toppings :).

Honest and moderate Author
As a Theologian myself, I see this book very moderate and good to read. .... But for those deeper, more serious, and for schoolar readers, I suggest these most briliant books listed below ...:

1. Catholicism and Fundamentalism by Karl Keating 2. What Catholic really believe by Karl Keating 3. Catholic for a reason by Scott Hahn 4. Refuting the Attack on Mary by Mateo

.... ... Read more

Book Description
Very often in the history of Christianity, "reformers", by whatever name, have aspired to return to "the early Church". The Church of their own day, for whatever reason, fails to live up to what they think Christianity should be: in their view there has been a falling away from the beautiful ideals of the early Church.

Kenneth Whitehead shows in this book how the early Church has, in fact, not disappeared, but rather has survived and persisted, and is with us still. "Reformers" are not so much the ones needed by this Church as are those who aspire to be saints—to follow Christ seriously and always to fulfill God's holy will by employing the means of sanctification which Christ continues to provide in the Church.

Whitehead shows how the visible body which today bears the name "the Catholic Church" is the same Church which Christ established to carry on and perpetuate in the world his Words and his Works—and his own divine Life—and to bring salvation and sanctification to all mankind. Despite superficial differences in certain appearances, the worldwide Catholic Church today remains the same Church that was originally founded by Jesus Christ on Peter and the other apostles back in the first century in the ancient Near East. The early Church, in other words, was always!—nothing else but—the Catholic Church. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (10)

A Good Introductory Apologetic
Whitehead aspires to write for the common believer who wishes to have an introduction into the validity of the Church's claim to be "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic" according to the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed.The text is a good introduction into this material, its development and history in Church thought.

The number of names and heresies is nearly head-spinning if one does not have a great grasp on early Church history.Because of this, I think that an extra index should exist with the names of the individuals written about along with a brief explanation of their stance (with textual cross references).Such cross-references would be nicely added to the already existing heresy index.This is mostly a nice addition, as an index does exist for the text.

I must also agree with the complaints of other reviewers about the lack of footnotes.However, this is a minor issue, as the text is not meant to be technical but to be an apologetic help.

I think the text is good for all who want to have a better view of the early Church and do not have a thorough knowledge thereof.It is an easy read, although a bit factually overwhelming for the non-historians, even if you are somewhat-experienced in theology.The author can be a bit pedantic, reminding the reader that what he is writing supports his thesis and also is a bit heavy on the proof for the primacy of Rome in the early Church, while neglecting other topics related to the creedal formula.Nonetheless, I suggest this book highly, as stated above!

Informative for me
I had purchased this book when it first came out, but just now got around to reading it.I thought it was going to be a rehash of Catholic apologetics that I pretty much have a handle on. This book would more appropriately be placed in the history section of your library.I already had a rudimentary knowledge of Church Councils and the various heresies, but after reading this book I am now more knowledgeable of how and why the Councils came about and why the heresies were so dangerous.Whitehead goes into quite a bit of detail on the Arian heresy and just how close Christianity came in denying Christ's divinity.

Only if your mind is closed or you have axes to grind with the Catholic Church will you NOT come away reading this with a better understanding of what the early Christian Church was and give you a better appreciation of what the Church is now.

Well-Structured Apologetics
The central premise of Kenneth Whitehead's 300+ page work is that, despite the protestations of "reformers," the early church was indeed the Catholic Church.The author carefully takes the reader through the early centuries of the Church, exploring the development of the institution and hierarchy from the time of the apostles and the early church fathers through the four great councils, establishing the primacy of Rome from the earliest of times.

The author's arguments are carefully laid out and full developed in a flowing narrative3, offering the reader a systematic exploration of doctrinal developments as well as evidence of papal primacy.One weakness, particularly for those of a more critical bent or for those with a greater intellectual curiosity, is the lack of footnotes to accompany the extensive bibliography.However, given the intended audience, this is a minor criticism, detracting only slightly from what is well-crafted prose.The combination of scriptural, doctrinal and traditional exposition provides a good overview of the Catholic Church's apostolic roots.

Destined to be a classic despite bias reviews of it
Keneth Whitehead historically based apologetic work on the early church, uses history to show the early church was in fact the Catholic church in all essential respects. I am writing this review to show how previous reviewers that maligned this book, on the basis of lacking footnoting is total bogus and has more to do with their own biases. I'm a former Graduate student in Political Science at the University of Central Oklahoma. Political Science scholarship often used Parethical text citation instead of footnoting. While it is true Mr. Whitehead's book does not use footnoting, his sources are well documented.
The structure of the book is composed of four chapters and a conclusion.
Chapter One is "Church of the Apostles". I hardly think footnoting is necessary when quoting the Apostle Paul the author merely documents this as (1 COR 10:17). Anyone even remotely familar with the Bible can recognize this.
Chapter two is the "Church of the early Fathers" in which sources are identified in the text such as the classic historians like Eusebius Ecclesiastical History and early church fathers such as Ignatius. Ignatius only wrote seven letters around 107 A.D which are well known even among Protestants, and the book identifies which letter he is quoting from in each case. Anyone with even most limited knowledge of early church fathers can look up the author's references. Similarly when Emperor Constantine Edict of Milan is quoted from, the parethical reference is sufficient.
Chapter three is on the "Church of the Four Great Councils"
It includes lengthly quotes from Great Church council offical documents. Consider on Pg. 84 of this book being reveiwed, the author quotes a statement made by the Arian Emperor Constantius in 355 A.D as saying "take my will for a canon".This source is cited in the text as (St. Athanasius, History of the Arians, 33). There are many similar examples to this one. This argument about footnoting to attack this book is totally bogus and without foundation. It is made by people with their own biases and agendas.
The reason is clear. The final chapter of book and much of the meat of the book on the "Primacy of Rome" in the early centuries is filled with historically damaging information. In particular, the documentary evidence is overwhelming (w/ Page Numbers!) of Eastern Christianity putting themselves to writing in Ecumenical councils recognizing the formal primacy of the Bishop of Rome despite what they and Protestants assert today.

The Development of theOne, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church
Mr. Whitehead provides a convincing case that the early Church was indeed the Catholic Church.Although lacking in footnotes or endnotes, Whitehead adequately describes his sources for his material.Further, he offers a fair critique of many of his sources in both their weaknesses and strengths.

To understand Whitehead's approach, the reader should have an understanding of the development of doctrine for the "kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed - when it is full grown, it becomes a tree."

In its essence, doctrine is not corrupted simply because it develops.Earch Church history is replete with instances whereby the early Church came to understand revelation largely as a result of reproofing heresies that developed in the early Church.

Whitehead's theme is largely developed on the primacy of the Bishop of Rome.Because doctrine develops as men gain a greater understanding of revelation (the Trinity is an excellent example) Whitehead does not make the mistake of arguing that what we know as the papacy today was fully understood or developed in the first four centuries of the Church.However, he provides a highly convincing argument that all the elements of what the Catholic Church claims were there from the beginning and accepted by the universal Church, both East and West.

For anyone seeking to understand the early Church, or the Catholic case for the papacy, this is an excellent resource.Following a read of this work, I encourage the reader to read the source documents themselves.

Highly recommended reading! ... Read more

Book Description
The history of the Roman Catholic Church is a gateway to understanding two thousand years of Western--and at times world--civilization. Edward Norman's lavishly illustrated, incisive account, sure to become a classic, tells the story of the multifarious ways in which the Church has shaped the lives and beliefs of Christians and non-Christians alike.
It is partly a story of remarkable people, from the greatest theologian of the early Church, St. Augustine, to one of the greatest figures of the modern age, Mother Teresa of Calcutta. It is also a story rich in symbols, not least the awe-inspiring basilica built over the tomb of St. Peter in Rome, the most recognizable church in the world. But the focus of the book is a historical account of epic proportions. Here we discover how Rome became the heart of the Roman Catholic religion and played a role in transforming Western Europe into Christendom. We gain a view of the Crusades undistorted by today's agendas, explore the Counter-Reformation as the fruit of the venerable Catholic reforming tradition, and witness the beginning of a new 500-year history, in which missionaries took their message to Latin America and the East. And, in this boldly uplifting account, we come to see how the Church, reflecting the vision of the Second Vatican Council in 1962, today embodies Christ's own injunction to "teach all nations."
Copub: Thames & Hudson ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

A pleasure from beginning to end.
I came upon Edward Norman's book quite by accident. I started to read it with some trepidation, expecting a set of variations on the usual misrepresentation that passes, in the Anglophone world, for a history of the Catholic Church. What a surprise, what a pleasure, to read a work at once scholarly (and brief)yet written in a very accessible style. Though the author does not concern himself primarily with theological matters, when he does touch upon these, he manages to discuss complex issues in a concise yet clear manner. On purely historical matters, he is not afraid to challenge current cultural orthodoxies. Example: "There are periodic demands...that apologies should be made by Christian bodies for the Crusades. Perhaps, however, a balance of remorse might be achieved if the Islamic bodies were, in turn, asked to apologize for their own invasions of the Byzantine provinces and the Holy Land some three-and-a-half centuries before. Then peaceful Christian populations were overrun amid scences of considerable violence, which had never been forgotten....Wisdom, however, would suggest allowing the past its own integrity; the point is that the Crusades today are evaluated in a context, and with a passion, which has departed from academic detachment." (pp. 56-57)

There is much more to stimulate the mind of the reader but limitations of space do not permit me to go into detail. A carefully written yet intellectually challenging book, beautifully produced. ... Read more

Book Description
This book asks:Is the question of being Roman Catholic the same as the question of how you like your roast beef cooked, or the same as the question of your being of some ethnic group, or the same as the question of your being Democrat or Republician? This book hopes that it is important as any of these questions. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (6)

Friendly and effective
This happened to be the first book I picked up on the subject and I'm glad I did. Having come from a strict Protestant upbringing and more than a decade of agnosticism, I am surprised and delighted to confess (ha ha!) that Fr. O'Malley's book helped to get me thinking positively about matters of Christianity again. It did that by being neither too strict nor too gushing, by appealing equally to both the intellect and the emotions. I'm not generally a fan of books which take complicated subjects and make them simple for the lazy or uneducated reader, so I admit I wasn't too well disposed to this book at first, since many readers seem to praise it for just these reasons. But in fact, it is both thoughtful and "heartful," appealing to the reader's better feelings yet not in such a way that it insults his/her intelligence. In all, a satisfying read.

My only nitpick: the crash course in church history in the book's final third, which seemed rushed and a little inappropriate.

excellent
The shortness of this book doesn't allow it to cover all aspects of Catholicism, and nor does it try to. Instead from reading Fr. William's book, we get an understanding of the beauty of God, not only to Catholics, but to all people who search for God, and celebrate the gifts we've received.
That being said, I can't imagine Fundamentalists liking this book, as their God fits in their pocket, and anyone who "searches" (or does the "Goldilocks" Method, as the book talks about) doesn't have their God in their pocket, and is therefore less than a Fundamentalist. (in their minds)
I think all people, Catholic or not, who will read this book can come away with a better understanding of why a thinking person is Catholic, and see the beauty of the tradition. It definitely strengthened my faith during my personal dark night of the soul.

Keep it simple, keep it real
Fr. O'Malley is a down-to-earth kind of guy!He writes in a style that feels like a conversation, not an essay.I enjoyed the discussion questions after each chapter which can make for excellent dinner conversation!

As a Catholic living in the South, my faith is constantly being challenged by Baptists, born-agains and other Protestant-type religions; each with their own particular way of interpreting the bible and each with their own version of Christianity which is absolutley 100% correct.We all have been trapped in these dead-end arguments.Fr. O'Malley's approach to answering the question, "Whose Got the Right Jesus?", is more "right-brain" than it is analytical.The intention is not to simply regurgitate bible verse after bible verse."Why Be Catholic?" reminds us that Catholicism makes sense in the world we live in today.

This is a good, thoughtfully written book.I recommend it for anyone with an open mind who is curious about Christianity.

Honest, easy-to-read, and insightful!
Fr.O'Malley's book, which explores religion and leads the reader to consider Catholicsm, is very interesting and a pleasure to read. He adds humor and a personal dimension to the book which makes you want to read on. Being a Catholic already, I found the book to be refreshing and worthwhile. I gave it only four stars because I though there could have been a better punch at the end, a climax that would say a little more. "Why be Catholic?" Because it's the awesomest religion in the world! Saints, sacraments, community, social justice, Trinity, ministries, growth with a personal God, beautiful art and rituals, and so many more aspects of the Catholic faith make it so attractive!!! I wish Fr.O'Malley could've played this up a little more.

Perfect for someone wondering about Catholicism
If you have an interest in Catholicism but feel you need to know moreabout it and why it's different and special, then this is a great book foryou.It is organized into readable, interesting chapters with thoughtfulquestions at the end.Though it works for beginners, I don't think itshirks the more difficult, intellectually stimulating issues.Igot a lotout of it.Thanks Father O'Malley! ... Read more

Book Description
The Catholic Reformation provides a comprehensive history of the Counter-Reformation in early modern Europe. Starting from the middle ages, Michael Mullett clearly traces the continuous transformation of the Catholic religion in its structures, bodies and doctrine. He discusses the gain in momentum of Catholic renewal from the time of the Council of Trent, and considers the profound effect of the Protestant Reformation in accelerating its renovation. The book also examines the Catholic Reformation's huge impact on the papacy, Church leaders and religious ritual and practice, as well as on the lives of ordinary people. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

A general overview of Catholic Reformation
Author of the book, Michael A. Mullett, is a senior lecturer in history at the University of Lancaster. Book is written to give a general overview of the religious, political, and cultural history of the time of Catholic Reformation that took place in early modern Europe (16th century). Whileacknowledging that transformation of Catholicism at this period was to agreat extent a response to the Protestant Reformation, he emphasizes anenduring tradition of reformism in the Catholic Church. This point isreflected in the title of the book as well - "Catholic Reformation" insteadof traditional "Counter-Reformation". The title he is using stresses thestimulative, accelerating effect of Protestant movement on Catholic reform,not the causative effect.First Mullett considers continuities of Catholicreform in a series of late-medieval councils, in papacy, epicopacy, andreligious orders. Then he examines the council of Trent, establishment ofnew religious orders, implementation of reforms in dioceses. In the secondpart he is showing how huge impact in various countries the Catholicrenewal had on the lives of ordinary people, their culture, arts,attitudes, and relationships. Book has notes rich with bibliographicalinformation, index with names of persons, places, and works mentioned. Thebook is suitable for a general educated reader. It is pretty readable. Someknowledge of Church history is required. Not a significant source onmissions and on Catholic reform in Eastern Europe, including Poland.Represents up to date modern scholarship.While reading this book I wassurprised how well it enlightens the processes in the modern Europe and thelife of the Church today.Do not get stuck in the beginning chapters!Chapters on popular culture are interesting and easier to read too.

A general overview of Catholic reformation
Author of the book, Michael A. Mullett, is a senior lecturer in history at the University of Lancaster. Book is written to give a general overview of the religious, political, and cultural history of the time of Catholic Reformation that took place in early modern Europe (16th century). Whileacknowledging that transformation of Catholicism at this period was to agreat extent a response to the Protestant Reformation, he emphasizes anenduring tradition of reformism in the Catholic Church. The title of thebook is "Catholic Reformation" instead of traditional "Counter-Reformation"to stresses the stimulative, accelerating effect of Protestant movement onCatholic reform, not the causative effect.First Mullett considerscontinuities of Catholic reform in a series of late-medieval councils, inpapacy, episcopacy, and religious orders. Then he examines the council ofTrent, establishment of new religious orders, implementation of reforms indioceses. In the second part he is showing how huge impact in variouscountries the Catholic renewal had on the lives of ordinary people, theirculture, arts, attitudes, and relationships. Book has notes rich withbibliographical information, index of names of persons, places, and works.The book is suitable for a general educated reader. It is pretty readable.Some knowledge of Church history is required. Not a significant source onmissions and on Catholic reform in Eastern Europe, including Poland.Reading it illuminates the processes in the modern Europe and in the lifeof the Church today. Do not get stuck in the beginning chapters! Chapterson popular culture are interesting and easier to read too! ... Read more

Customer Reviews (12)

Should be called "How Non-Catholic etiquette shapes white American Catholicism"
I bought this book for help in raising my own children.For this, I found it somewhat limited.There are a handful of useful bits of information to put into practice. But, mostly, in reading it, I was a bit put off by Kay Lynn Isca's strong opinions about proper and improper, opinions that I suspect were formed somewhere in her life and upbringing, but not inside the Church.From my perspective, this book is really an illustration about how the values, opinions, ethical ideas, and etiquette of a specific community in a time and place (oh, probably contemporary Indiana or somthing similar) have influenced a certain kind of mainstream middle class Catholicism.Throughout the book, Ms. Isca distinguishes between what she calls "ethnic churches" (generally, any Catholic community that doesn't conform to her standards of etiquette) and "mainstream churches".While in my family we attend a "mainstream" church (if by mainstream, she means, mass in English, majority of parish members are white, middle to upper class, in a parish located in a predominantly non-Catholic city), my wife and I each come from what Ms. Isca would consider fringe, marginal "ethnic churches" (her term) and have participated in parishes that are not islands surrounded by a sea of Protestantism, both in the US and abroad.As a result, I found myself over and over reading her descriptions of certain aspects of her experience in American catholicism and saying to myself "not so fast.Not necessarily." or "Not in my opinion"The important thing to keep in mind is that Catholicism is not an American church, but a universal church.From Italy, to Gabon, to Mexico, to Quebec to Australia, one is bound to find variations in what Ms. Isca calls "Catholic etiquette."The title of Ms. Isca's book is misleading, in that it suggests that what Ms. Isca describes as "right" is necessarily a "rite."Much of what Ms. Isca considers "right" catholicism is definitely note a rule of the Church but is rather a reflection of contemporary American social attitudes finding their way into the church itself (for example, her comments on children and the church).(Ms. Isca seems to acknowledge as much when she recognizes that some "ethnic churches" might tolerate some otherwise unacceptable etiquette, but it is definitely "wrong" in her Catholic etiquette.My point is that what Ms. Isca's notions of right and wrong in Church are much more a symptom and reflection of what self-identified "mainstream" Americans think about Catholicism than it is a reflection of what is universally "Catholic" about Catholic etiquette.

Catholic Etiquette
I was very pleased with the book.It helped me to understand what is going on and I didn't feel that everyone was watching me.

VERY DISAPPOINTED
I STARTED TO READ THE BOOK WITH MUCH ENTHUSIASM, WHICH QUICKLY CAME TO A HALT.THE AUTHOR BREEZED OVER THE REALLY IMPORTANT PARTS OF MASS SUCH AS THE EUCHARIST, COMMUNION, WHAT MASS IS ALL ABOUT AND EXTENDED THE CHAPTERS ON PLANNING WEDDINGS, AND PARTIES FOR WEDDINGS, BAPTISMS, COMMUNION, ETC.THE AUTHOR NEVER GOT INTO WHAT EACH RITE OF PASSAGE IS ALL ABOUT, WHY WE CELEBRATE THE RITE.I WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT WHY WE DO THE THINGS WE DO IN CHURCH, NOT HOW TO PLAN THE PARTY AFTER THE WEDDING OR BAPTISM.I WAS VERY DISAPPOINTED WITH THIS BOOK AND WISH I COULD GET MY MONEY BACK.IF YOU WANT A MORE IN DEPTH EXPLANATION FOR WHY WE DO THE THINGS WE DO IN CHURCH AND WHAT MASS IS ALL ABOUT, THIS IS NOT THE BOOK FOR YOU.

For Generation X
Catechesis in the seventies and eighties left out much of the reasons for our Catholic Traditions and this text helps fill in some of the gaps!It's light reading but very informative.
Karen Estock Yash, DIrector of Religous Education

Catholic Etiquette
As a converted Catholic, there were many things that were never explained to me. This book breaks it down in simple and understandable language. This book has been extremely helpful to me. ... Read more

Book Description
This text provides the student with an historical overview of the people and events that have shaped Roman Catholicism in the United States. It begins with a look at the roots of the American Catholic tradition during the time of Columbus and the arrival of missionaries to the New World. The chapters that follow trace the history of Catholicism from the colonial period to the present day. Fair minded and informative, this book will be useful to anyone teaching a course on Roman Catholicism or American Religion. ... Read more

Book Description
The Catholic Church through the Ages is a one-volume survey of the history of the Catholic Church from its beginning until (and including) the pontificate of John Paul II. The book explains the Church's progress by using Christopher Dawson's division of the Church's history into six distinct "ages," or 350-400 year periods of time, each cycle beginning with great enthusiasm and advancement and ending in decline and loss. Writing with the experience of twenty years of teaching, the author has fashioned an ideal text that combines substance with readability.

Undergraduates, graduates, and interested lay people have given the author an idea of what topics should be emphasized. As a result, he has emphasized such areas monasticism, the Crusades, medieval theology, the Inquisition, Reformation, French Revolution, the nineteenth century, and the Church in the United States.

As a supplement to each chapter, the author has included an annotated list of reading and audio-visual materials. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (11)

very one-sided
I bought this book due to the good reviews it received. I am sorry to disagree, it presents as far as I can judge a very one-sided view of history. It is one thing to put the inquisition into perspective, but another to distort the facts. "The medieval inquisition was actually a considerable advance in the treatment of criminals" (page 149). Well,I do not even see him as a Dominican mentioning the infamous "Malleus Maleficarum" written by members of his order, revealing the horrofic view behind the inquisition.

To Galilei he writes "what got him into trouble was not his scientific study of the solar system but rather his claim that the bible might be wrong" (page 258). This is absolutely distorting the facts: It was exactly Galilei's study of the solar system, seeing that the earth moves around the sun, which was seen to contradict the bible!

It is sad when Catholics feel the need to white-wash history in order to handle the negative aspects of history. This makes us Catholics loose all credibility.

ADMIRABLE OPENESS AND HONESTY IS A GOOD REFERENCE
This is a must read book! I am fascinated of how every detailed information, facts and figures, historical events surrounding the early Church has magnified the intensity in a reader, to really imagine and make assessment, the implications and challenges facing the Church today. I recommend this book not only as a "high average" rank among others, but a good source of material for students of medieval church history and the middle ages. Teachers of medieval history and Church studies will be able to benefit from its rich, balance, controversial open-minded style of the author's original handwork. Great!

The Catholic Church Through the Ages: A History
Book matches the text I was required to purchase for my college course.The Amazon price saved me a lot of money.

Excellent overall information of Christian history from the time of the ascension of Christ
This is an excellent book for study in a classroom.I appreciated the time lines that are in the beginning of each chapter.It gives you an overall view of what you are studying for that chapter.

Also, at the end of each chapter, it gives you recommended reading if you want to pursue a certain subject.The recommended reading is graded as A for easier reading, B for medium reading and C for harder reading.

This is especially good if there is one part of Christian history you are particularly interested in.I am a Catholic convert and used it in a five week course.It was exceptional.

Excellent Book - quick read
Vidmar's book on the Catholic Church is an excellent read.He takes you through the history ofChurch - the good and the bad - in a style that makes for light reading.This is a great introduction to the Church's history, but is intended only as a brief synopsis.The author provides a list of suggested additional books if the reader isinterested in delving more deeply in to a particular age or topic. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (16)

The new liturgy can and should be celebrated worthily and beautifully
Before the changes to the liturgy following the Second Vatican Council, rubrics (liturgical laws) were a serious matter. They were observed by clergy under pain of sin, and many manuals were available to assist their proper execution. This approach had its strengths in that priests generally did what they were supposed to, and its weaknesses - sometimes they were observed in a dry, legalistic way, without regard for common sense, or good taste.

Whatever their limitations, they were - and despite liturgical malpractice of some, they remain - an indispensable element of the Church's public worship. They give order to and protect the meaning of the ceremonies given to us by the Church for the celebration of the Mass, and the other Sacraments and rites.

It is from this standpoint that Monsignor Elliott, an Australian priest, offers his manual, the first extensive book on the ceremonial of the Modern Roman Rite, at least in the English language. He draws upon his wide range of pastoral experience in various countries and the advice of many others to put together a work that is more than just a rubrical manual. Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite is an authoritative and traditional guide to the post-conciliar liturgy written with common sense and in the light of the author's appreciation of good liturgical taste.

It could be objected that such a work is thereby subjective, and carries little real authority. Undoubtedly there are many of the author's opinions with which one could enter into dialogue. He himself would admit this, provided such dialogue respects the `givens' of the Rite, which he outlines clearly.

The book's abiding value is that it offers clergy, seminarians, and other liturgical ministers who wish to celebrate the modern liturgy well a point of reference from which to start. The author provides guidance on the setting for the liturgy, vessels and vestments, the various liturgical ministries, ceremonial actions, detailed descriptions of the various forms of the celebration of Mass, the worship of the Eucharist outside of Mass, and the Liturgy of the Hours. A number of appendixes supply practical guidance with regard to Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist, Mass Stipends, and other topics. Curiously, diagrams relevant to earlier chapters are grouped together in one appendix.

The second edition (2005) takes full account of the modifications of the 2002 editio typica of the Missale Romanum as well as of the 2004 Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum.

In 1918 the Westminster priest, Dr Adrian Fortescue, wrote of his own book on Ceremonies "I loathed writing it. I do not think I have ever yet undertaken a job that I so hated carrying out. I did it solely `turpis lucri gratia'" Monsignor Elliott's motivation is somewhat different. Those who use his manual will find that it is written from the profound conviction that the new liturgy can and should be celebrated worthily and beautifully, that is, according to the mind of the Church as specified in her liturgical books.

A Must for Anyone involved in Catholic Liturgy
This book is an excellent tool for all those involved in Liturgy.Based on Church teaching and recently revised to include instructions from recent documents.The book leaves no stone unturned when it comes to Mass, Adoration and Liturgy of the Hours.Not only is it a practical 'manual' down to every detail, but it contains sound theological and spiritual reflections on many elemnets of the Liturgy.

Better but still not complete
The ceremonies of the modern roman rite does have a lot of usefull information. I especialy enjoyed reading in black and white the proper placement of the tabernacle and the rules on saying mass. So many priests ignore the proper ways and opt for keeping taberbacles in seperate chapels and use glass chalices. The ceremonies of the modern roman rite detail guidelines for liturgical colors, linens, vessels and vestments, the altar, the church, and much more. What i found lacking is the ceremonies themselves, It contains rituals which are reference only, incomplete. Just like the ceremonial of bishops, this book will give an outline for a ritual but refer to other texts for the complete ceremony. I reccomend The Rites vol 2 if you want actual rites and rituals. All in all this book is worth the price, though personally I would rather the american curch follow Rome more closley and leave the modern stuff to the protestants.

Finally someone has figured it out
I have recently had the honor of finding this book. What a relief! After working at a Roman Catholic High School for ten years and witnessing a wide variety of Priests say Mass. I had rarely seen anyone who knew how to do the Mass with old Latin Mass dignity and respect. Often the services were interupted with applause and side shows and less than sacred music. This book should be in hands of all Catholic priests.

Useful beyond Rome
Msgr. Elliot has produced a classic liturgical work for the celebration of the Novus Ordo rite in Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite.

Though I am not a Roman Catholic, I found much to commend Elliot's suggestions and directions to me in a broader context as a joint-inheritor of the western liturgical tradition.

The book is laid out cleanly and is easy to read.While the book is a quick read, it is definately not a lightweight.Agree or disagree on points, but one must acknoweldge that Ellot knows his liturgy, and how to celebrate it.

I highly commend this book to those in and out of Rome who wish to celebrate the liturgy in a modern setting with reverence and respect. ... Read more

Book Description
In Roman Catholic Political Philosophy author James V. Schall tries to demonstrate that Roman Catholicism and political philosophy---revelation and reason--are not contradictory. It is his contention that political philosophy, the primary focus of the book, asks certain questions about human purpose and destiny that it cannot, by itself, answer. Revelation is the natural complement to these important questions about God, human being, and the world. Schall manages to avoid polemicism or triumphalism as he shows that revelation and political thought contribute to a fuller understanding of each other. ... Read more

Book Description
You don't have to remain silent anymore when Protestants and other non-Catholics tell you (or your kids) that Catholic teachings go against the Bible! When your Evangelical Protestant brother-in-law Larry visits, or Scripture-quoting Fundamentalists knock on your door, reach for Chantal Epie's The Scriptural Roots of Catholic Teaching, the comprehensive and user-friendly guide that shows you where to find all the Church's major teachings in Scripture — especially the ones that non-Catholics most often contradict.

Epie reveals the Scriptural foundations of all the most important and most often controverted teachings of the Church: the source of Divine Revelation, the founding of the Church by Christ Himself, His establishment of the Sacraments as means of grace, and the importance of devotion to Mary and the saints.

The Scriptural Roots of Catholic Teaching goes far beyond most Scripture guides and apologetics books for Catholics. Instead of simply listing the pertinent Scriptures for each doctrine, Epie shows you how to use them! She illuminates each doctrine with a clear, easy-to-follow narrative that shows how the Scriptures support and form the foundation for the Church's teachings. In doing so, she skillfully weaves together passages from the Gospels, the Epistles of St. Paul, and the Old Testament — illustrating the wonderful unity of Scripture, as well as God's loving Providence in planning from the beginning of time for the Church's flowering.

That makes this book not only a valuable apologetics tool for your conversations with non-Catholics — it's also an enlightening refresher course in Scripture and the teachings of the Church. Use it with your kids to show them that their Catholic Faith is on firm Scriptural ground, or just read it yourself to renew your gratitude for the unity and splendor of Divine Revelation! ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

A great book to brush up on Catholicism
Despite one of the negative reviews given to this book on Amazon.com, this one is by a Catholic. I have my own biases of course, but I believe Chantal Epie gives a sound defense of the Catholic faith using only the Bible as her support. This is not the book that converted me back to the Catholic faith, but it is a book I read after 2 years being back in the Catholic faith. It has re-vitalized my certainty of Catholic truth.

This would certainly be an interesting book to use as a textbook for a class post RCIA, since it is strictly Biblical. I enjoyed reading this book. It provides good scriptural parallels to understand obscure or ambiguous passages. Epie also expresses these timeless Catholic doctrines with traditional language, without the warm fuzzies and fluff which are common these days. I thank her for speaking to us as adults and giving us a presentation of the faith in "big people talk" and not as if we just learned to tie our shoes yesterday. Professor Epie has lent a hand, most definitely, with her authorship of this book in the "re-birth" of intellectual-Catholicism. God Bless her for that...

Pax Christi Vobiscum,
-Laurence

I wanted to like this book
I wanted to like this book; that's why I paid money for it.

There are many problems with this book.

The apologetics are not sound.

Take, for example, the proof that St. Peter is the foundation of the Church.The writer builds her argument on the words of the Lord, "This is the rock on which I build My Church."

Does she quote St. Paul in Ephesians 2:19-20, which states that the foundation of the Church is the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ being the Chief Cornerstone?No.

Does she quote Revelation 21:14 which states that the foundation stones of the New Jerusalem have the names of ALL twelve apostles?No.

Does she quote I Corinthians 3:11, which states that the only foundation is Jesus Christ?No.

The writer only quotes the Scriptures that she can apply to her argument.In this case, like many Roman Catholics, she takes "This is the rock" to somehow mean "You are the rock" to arrive at her conclusion.

This is not acceptable apologetics.

Likewise, she discusses the gift of tongues, though without understanding it.She goes as far as to say that the gift of tongues is not much needed today because people can go to school to learn foreign languages.

She does not understand that the gift of tongues is [1] the prayer language of the spirit (I Corinthians 14:14), [2] a sign for unbelievers (14:22), and [3] when coupled with the gift of interpretation, functions as the gift of prophecy (14:5).

God bless her heart.I don't judge her integrity.But this is "organ pump" stuff.

One of the Best out there
A beautifully written, detailed exploration of all major Catholic doctrines, intertwined throughout with scriptural text.Although Catholics base their faith on both Scripture and Oral Tradition - and are often knocked by non-Catholics for the latter - author Chantal Epie proves how all Catholic doctrine can be traced to Scripture.Far from being dry and tedious, the text is immensely readable; I had a hard time putting this book down.A must read for any Cat