3 comments about Martin Luther: A Guided Tour of His Life and Thought.

1. Nichols uses sound scholarship to make an easily accessible book that is an easy read in providing some of Luther's basics.



2. First of all, please see my rebuttal to the awful one star reveiw in close proximity to mine.
   
   And on to my reveiw...
   Though this is certainly not the best work on Luther, I would venture to say that it is the best popular introduction. The book is layed out nicely. It reads quickly. Covers all of Luther's major epochs and works in a compact fashion. Having read the book, the average high schooler will have a reasonable amount of knowledge about Luther and a desire to learn more. My only complaint is that it would have been nice to have more than two chapters of biography at the front end. Nichol's is a good scholar and is doing a service to the church by writing history in a way that is easy for the layman to digest and enjoy. If you are mildly interested in understanding Luther, I would get this book, a good biography (Bainton or Kittelson), and Martin Luther's Basic Theological Writings edited by Lull. Nichol's also has great suggested reading sections and a good bibliography for further study.



3. This is the worst book I have ever read on the topic of Martin Luther by a person claiming to be Reformed.
   
   The book is littered with historical and theological mistakes from start to finish.
   
   Nichols asserts that Luther himself wrote "Table Talk" in one part of the book. Nichols writes, "Luther, in one of his table talk entries..." page 162. Any novice of church history knows that Luther did not author "Table Talk." This is poor scholarship.
   
   Another mistake is seen when Nichols asserts that the 5-Solas are Protestant presuppositions. This is the type of mistake we expect someone from a completely different religion to make, not one who is supposed to be Calvinistic. Nichols writes, "Perhaps more than any other person, Luther shaped the presuppositions that define Protestantism. Theologians use a series of Latin expressions to capture these concepts. Known as the "Reformation Solas," they include: sola Scriptura, Scripture Alone; sola fide, faith alone; sola gratia, grace alone; solus Christus, Christ alone; and soli Deo gloria, to the glory of God alone. These ideas all take root in Martin Luther's thinking" page 16.
   
   Sola Scriptura is the Axiom of Christianity. It is the belief that the Bible alone is the word of God. It is the only "Sola" that is presupposed. The other 4 are either explicitly stated or logically deduced from the Bible alone. Nichols is therefore wrong. For Nichols to make the absurd claim that all of the "Solas" are presupposed by Protestants is to completely misrepresent Protestant theology. Furthermore, the "Solas" do not take their root in Martin Luther's thinking. Luther merely rediscovered these principles and published them openly. He did not come up with them. John Wycliffe and John Huss, for example, each asserted the Protestant principle of Scripture Alone. Both were persecuted for their profession, and Huss even died the martyr's death for it.
   
   These are two mistakes I came across in my reading of this book. There are many more.

3 comments about Edith Stein: A Biography/the Untold Story of the Philosopher and Mystic Who Lost Her Life in the Death Camps of Auschwitz.

1. Edith Stien was a Jew who in the 1920's of Germany converted to Catholicism and then became a nun much to the dismay of her orthodox mother. Those who are have heard of Edith Stien know that ultimately she was martyred in Auschwitz because of her outspokenness against the Nazi's as well as the fact that the Catholic Church in occupied Holland was the only large church organization willing to preach against the nazi regeim.

   What must people don't know about Edith Stien was what an incredibly couragous and brillant woman she was even long before she was martyred. As this book tells the story , often in her own words and in the words of those that were close to her, she was a college professer, philosopher, and political activist at a time when a professional woman was at best a grade school teacher or nurse. Even as a nun she worked on her philosophy and her writing.

   Waltraud Herbstrith does an excellent job portraying the complete Edith Stien, Her faith Her family and her intellect. An excellent book.




2. I consider this a "must read" for anyone interested in great women in history. The spiritual insights, life story, and heroic sacrifices of this brilliant woman, who was both a Jew and a Carmellite nun are amazing. Look closely at the cover art, as my interpretation was that Edith Stein possessed the "ear of God." The only complaint I have is the print was far too small. If it comes in a large print edition, you might be wise to order it. My eyesight is fairly normal.



3. This book is an excellent introduction to the life and thought of Edith Stein (St. Theresa Benedicta). Waltraud Herbstrith presents a biography that encompases the philosophical, spiritual, and personal aspects of her subject with great care. I came away from this book with a true appreciation for Edith Stein, in particular her writings on women and her deep love of God.

1 comments about Saint Monica: C. 332-387 : Model of Christian Mothers.

1. Having just really appreciated the story of Saints Monica and Augustine, this was an excellent short read on the mother/son story of two of heavens greatest saints. This delicate little book will make you appreciate and ponder on her inspiration.
   
   This paperback tells of the infinite faith of Saint Monica and her unceasing cries and prayers to heaven for the redemption of the body and soul of her son, Augustine, whose youth was being spent in paganistic ways, much like his father, Patricius. But just as her prayers were in earnest for her son, likewise were they for her husband, who eventually became a Christian, being affected by the love, patience and purity of his wife's life and example.
   
   Monica's being also became a profound influence on her mother-in-law, who made Monica's life miserable, along with Patricius. But in her elder years, she began to take notice of her spiritual daughter-in-law, who always showed her the utmost respect, despite the reproaches thrown against her.
   
   And of course, the most touching and profound story of conversion due to a mother's plea, is that of Saint Augustine. He is considered by many to be one of the most gifted saints, due to his natural insights and blessings, that he initially fought against during his early years, but which brought him such gifts of witness and teaching, in his later years.
   
   The conversion stories of her mother-in-law, her husband, and then most profoundly her son, Monica is a wonderful example for anyone struggling with a yearning and desire to bring their loved ones attention to Our Lord. At the same time, you realize that her journey of truth for her family, took years of patience and blind faith, and it is then that we once again understand, that everything is in God's time, and not ours. And for those who have the true understanding of His love for us, we become grateful servants as we wait for the Master's Word.
   
   This would be a most treasured pocket-size book for those who admire the faith and perserverance of St. Monica, as well as something to give to a struggling wife or mother, in need of encouragement.
   
   God bless and peace in Christ!
   
   Addendum: Located in the second to the last section of this book is the description of, and information for, "The Confraternity of Christian Mothers" which is a society in which Christian mothers and wives "offer mutual prayers for husbands and children who have gone astray" as well as "frequent and regular prayers with other women in the same vocation, talks, discussions, frequency of the Sacraments, as well as the edifying examples of other members".
   
   The last section offers the prayers to St. Monica (The Litany, Novena, Mother's Prayer for the Intercession of St. Augustine, and the Daily Prayer for the Children).

5 comments about Do You Believe?: Conversations on God and Religion (Vintage).

1. Although Monda lined up an interesting group of subjects,
   he is hardly an unbaised interviewer. It is one thing to
   have strong feelings about your subject matter - why else
   do the book-- but I felt many of his questions were slanted
   and influenced by his own conservative Catholic beliefs.



2. The author allows people from all beliefs to express their views and it was very illuminating to learn how much we all have in common on our thoughts of a creator or grand design.The articles were concise enabling me to read each one at my leisure and to have the time to ponder what i had just read.Ther is nothing judgemental here. The author expresses his deeply held beliefs but is able to converse civily with with those whom are of different points of view. Refreshing to say the least in a world full of people that seem to feel if they shout the loudest and talk over you to force you to convert to their way of thinking....Amen



3. "Do You Believe?" is a nice collection of interviews with famous artists about their religious beliefs. It is full of fascinating tidbits, such as David Lynch's assertion that he believes in "a divine being... who is omnipotent and eternal." I wouldn't have guessed that! There are agnostic, atheist, and general non-believers, along with those who believe. Few seem to adhere to one tradition. What I love about the collection is that it takes the form of a general philosophical discussion, not just a conversation about beliefs. I like Paul Auster's comment that "there are things we miss in every choice we make." Simple but profound. The interviewer, Antonio Monda, is a Roman Catholic and the interviews lean towards discussion of the Abrahamic God. I don't remember any discussion of polytheism or Eastern philosophies and traditions.
   
   I read the interviews about three in a sitting, and that worked really well. More than that and the sequencing starts to feel slightly repetitive since Monda is basically interviewing from a boilerplate. This book is shorter than "Stars of David" which touches on some similar themes (although that book is strictly about Judaism) and more interesting than "A Place at the Table." It reminds me of the kind of interviews you hear on NPR... I wonder if this may be where it got its start.



4. Rather than write my own review, let me share with you a review by Lawrence Joseph that was published in Commonweal magazine (31 Jan 2008):
   
   In an essay titled "Monda's World" in the July 29 edition of the New York Times Book Review, Rachel Donadio introduced "arguably the most well-connected New York cultural figure you've never heard of." Antonio Monda: forty-six years old; Italian; a resident of New York City since 1994; author; film and literary critic; award-winning filmmaker and curator; artistic director of Le Conversazioni, a festival of prominent Anglophone fiction writers held annually on the island of Capri; professor of film and television studies at New York University. Antonio Monda, Donadio announced, is "a one-man Italian cultural institute." He is also "a practicing Catholic," Donadio noted in passing, "who sends his three children to parochial school."
   
   Do You Believe? (originally published in Italy as Tu Credi? in 2006) consists of an introductory essay by Monda followed by conversations with some of America's most prominent cultural and artistic figures. Monda speaks with writers Toni Morrison, Saul Bellow, Elie Wiesel, Grace Paley, Derek Wolcott, Salman Rushdie, Paul Auster, Jonathan Franzen, Richard Ford, Michael Cunningham, Paula Fox, and Nathan Englander; actress Jane Fonda; filmmakers Martin Scorsese, Spike Lee, and David Lynch; architect Daniel Libeskind; and historian Arthur Scheslinger Jr. Deeply moving, Do You Believe? is a truly compelling book, bound to become a classic.
   
   In his introduction, Monda notes that religion "obviously has played a central role in the important and often dramatic political and social choices of recent years." Do You Believe? is not, however, intended as a sociopolitical analysis. Monda's emphasis is on how every choice -- existential, artistic, political -- has its origin in the answer to "the great question" that he asked all those with whom he spoke: Does he or she believe in the existence of God?
   
   Monda's own faith is grounded in an orthodoxy that he describes as an aurea mediocritus -- a "golden mean." For Monda, true religious orthodoxy rejects religious extremes. One extreme is "every type of fundamentalist aberration." Another extreme is Gnosticism and "New Age spiritual tendencies ... constructed for the use of the individual worshiper." Monda's orthodoxy is religious "in the sense of the etymon religio: `bond.'" The aurea mediocritus of religious orthodoxy is what binds believers to their faith: "the fundamental genetic makeup of the believer includes not only the choice of the golden mean but its celebration."
   
   Monda believes in a Catholic Church bound by essential, central beliefs. He also believes in a church bound to the all-too-human. Monda quotes from G. K. Chesterton's book Heretics: "This one thing, the historic Christian Church, was founded on a weak man, and for that reason it is indestructible. For no chain is stronger than its weakest link." Monda adds: "I don't think that anyone ... can help feeling a sense of mystery before the central place still occupied by this two-thousand-year-old institution constructed by weak men who have often cursed and betrayed its message.
   
   And the sense of mystery can only conceal a doubt: Is there something truly divine behind it?" Monda often refers to the Letter to the Hebrews: "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen" (11:1) -- which, to Monda, "seems a paradox, and perhaps it is. But what else is faith?"
   
   With the hope that it may "prove to be a good traveling companion on the most important journey of every life," Monda devotes the rest of Do You Believe? to a series of conversations. When Monda asks the novelist Michael Cunningham if he believes in God, he responds, "Well, we're starting off with the big one, aren't we?" Nathan Englander says, "I'd be inclined to say no if I didn't feel God's wrath." Jonathan Franzen answers by asking Monda, "What do you mean by God? What's your definition?" Monda quotes Luis Buñuel, who said he was "an atheist by the grace of God." Nathan Englander replies, "I share that feeling, and I'm ready to steal the remark." Monda asks Englander if he believes in life after death. "It's a question that brings me to a point of crisis," Englander says. "Yet again I would be tempted to say no, that it's an illusion and also perhaps a joke, but if you ask me where I think my grandfather is at this moment I would answer: in Paradise."
   
   Another of Monda's favorite questions: "What artists do you admire in whom you feel a strong religious presence?" "Most prominently, Flannery O'Connor," Michael Cunningham answers. "She was an utterly orthodox Catholic, and one of the greatest writers of the twentieth century.... O'Connor, in her fiction and her letters and essays, is the best argument I know against dismissing Catholicism outright." Daniel Libeskind invites those who don't believe in God to listen to Bach.
   
   Salman Rushdie explains to Monda that he can't get over a tragic fact that is intimately bound up with every religion, "the blood that's been shed in the name of God." Monda asks, "You don't think that this is one of the many tragic events to be attributed to men who exploit, betray, and blaspheme the will of God?" Rushdie responds, "When you don't believe, it's difficult to separate the two things, and little remains."
   
   Saul Bellow simply answers "yes" when asked if he believes in God. How does he imagine God? "I don't want to talk about that," Bellow answers. "I'm afraid of banality, and I think it's a subject whose importance is diminished by conversation." Monda then quotes, from Bellow's great novel Mr. Sammler's Planet, Mr. Sammler's declaration, "Very often, and almost daily, I have strong impressions of eternity." Bellow elaborates: "There are moments when God shadows existence." Monda: "What do you think happens at death?" Bellow: "This I don't know, but I don't think everything is resolved with the destruction of the body. What science has to say seems to me insufficient and unsatisfying."
   
   Martin Scorsese tells Monda that "Catholicism has been extraordinarily important in my life, and I would say that my films would be inconceivable without the presence of religion." Catholicism "is part of my innermost self, and I'm sure it will always be that way." When Monda asks, "Do you believe in God?" Scorsese says, "I don't think I can give a precise answer. I think that my faith in God lies in my constant searching. But certainly I call myself Catholic." Monda: "How can you be a Catholic and not be sure if you believe in God?" Scorsese: "I didn't say that. What I'm trying to explain is that I distrust definitions, and I think there are questions that I personally find it difficult to respond to directly." Monda: "For a Catholic, God is made flesh, is born of a virgin, and saves the world." Scorsese: "I would say that everything you've said is part of my culture, of what I try to express in my films, and so of my being."
   
   Grace Paley asks Monda if he's serious after he tells her that he considers his subject the most important subject not only of our time but of all times. "Do you think life after death exists?" Monda asks her. "Obviously, no," Paley answers. "And an eighty-three-year-old is telling you this, aware that she doesn't have much longer to live. The moment I take my last breath everything will end." What are her thoughts about that? "That it's sad," Paley says, "but life is wonderful."
   
   Paley then asks Monda whether he believes. His response: "I am Catholic, Apostolic, Roman." Paley: "And what is there for you after death?" Monda: "The true life." Paley: "And what is the life that we're living at this moment?" Monda: "A passage and a gift." Paley: "Do you feel that you are better as a result of your faith?" Monda: "I would feel useless without it. And even more useless without charity." Paley: "I'm ahead of you. I know you're quoting the hymn to charity -- it's a passage from Paul. And I would add, on charity I am in total agreement. One of the most beautiful, gratifying, and enriching experiences of my life was my involvement with the Catholic Worker Movement. One can say what one likes about faith, but what I saw done by its members daily and by all who were the heirs of Dorothy Day is simply marvelous: an extraordinary lesson for us all on what it means to love and to work to make the world a better place with determination and a spirit of service. It was an experience that formed my social, political, and even artistic conscience."
   
   The final conversation of Do You Believe? is with Elie Wiesel. Monda asks Wiesel if he believes in God. "Yes, of course," Wiesel answers. "May I ask what your image of him is?" Wiesel: "You can certainly ask, but I have to answer that I don't have an image of him.... I think that every image represents a limitation, and that mystery is part of his infinite greatness." Monda then turns to the problem of theodicy: "You believe firmly in God, but you live in a world where suffering, injustice, and tyranny exist." Wiesel: "It's the great torment of my entire existence. The question I don't know how to answer and that I don't think anyone can answer. But even in these terrible moments I see not an absence but an eclipse." How would Wiesel define his faith today? "I would use the adjective wounded, which I believe may be valid for everyone in my generation."
   
   Finally, Wiesel remembers the example of a friend and mentor. "When I am thinking of my personal experience, there comes to mind, as a luminous example, François Mauriac. I, a Jew, owe to the fervent Catholic Mauriac, who declared himself in love with Christ, the fact of having become a writer." Monda asks, "Do you think that the God Mauriac believed in is different from the one you believe in?" Wiesel: "No. But I know how different our views can be, and our approach. Once Mauriac dedicated a book to me and he wrote: `To Elie Wiesel, a Jewish child who was crucified.' At first I took it badly, but then I understood that it was his way of letting me feel his love."
   
   * * *



5. Dear Mr. Monda,
   
   After reading your Do You Believe? twice, I write to thank you for your remarkable effort. As a daily practitioner of the Socratic method in my rhetoric classes, your prepared and spontaneous follow-up questions explain why your interviews are so revealing and why your book is so readable.
   
   Your book must have babies. I hope that you follow it up with a sequel of interviews of equally important cultural icons. Your book will also help me revise the introduction of my Advanced Placement Unit on How Important Is God in Your Life?
   
   Your interviews evoked a series of related quotations that have shaped my thinking and values the last forty years. The personal witnesses of faith in your interviews bolster my own fragile faith. Again, thank you, profoundly.
   
   Sincerely,
   Victor J. Moeller

2 comments about Life Sentences: Discover the Key Themes of 63 Bible Characters.

1. I hate to sound critical, but...Dr. Wiersbe is probably one of the top ten bible scholars in the world; he has 50 years of ministry experience and has written 150 books. I think this book is a little too "safe and secure" for such an author. It's a nice read but I would rather see him take a little risk and write about important issues going on in the church today. With all the problems, confusion and ignorance within the church I think something more substantive would have been better. I would encourage him to open up a little and share his views on the crucial issues of the day, and suggest solutions.



2. This is a different way to look at Biblical characters. It summs up the charater's life in a sentence. That sentence is from the Bible. In the back there is a reading chart for nine weeks of reading through that book.
   Therefore it a great tool for the overview of the Bible.

5 comments about Milestones: Memoirs 1927-1977.

1. The first 50 years of Joseph Ratzinger's life. I liked Joseph Ratzinger very much prior to 2005, and have loved him very much since he's been Pope.
   
   Not being an intellectual myself, I can only marvel at the life and character of this man. Maybe the reading of this small book is a little dry, but if you are interested in learning about him - it is well worth the reading. However, because it is written by himself, there is a lot about the man that I would like to know that isn't covered.
   
   I like the fact that the love for his family and his Bavaria is very evident - almost tangible - all throughout the book, but it is difficult to "crack the code" of his obviously deep and complex personality. Yet, I can understand that unwillingness to expose the deeper self in a book.
   
   For me the book is gratifying, if only for getting the basics but a biography would be better.



2. Milestones is a highly readable, name-dropping autobiography that illuminates some of the life and thinking of the current pope. Our church chose this for one of the selections of our book club. We reviewed it just after Benedict XVI's controversial talk at the University of Regensburg, which we read in its entirety. The consistency of the sentiment of that talk (advocating, basically, for a repudiation of violence in the practice of religion, and a dialogue with other religions and with science) with Benedict's early life is very clear. He is an actor on the world's stage, but also an important religious leader, whose vision directly affects nearly a billion people and indirectly the entire world. Important, easy-to-read and gentlemanly book.



3. When Cardinal Ratzinger became Pope Benedict XVI over a year ago, many journalists quipped that "Ratzi the Nazi" is now Pope. Indeed, the image of the German Pope being an ex-Nazi will probably never be lost for the remainder of his life, and though this extremely learned and dignified man shouldn't for a second be upset over the attacks made on him by people whose learning amounts to no more than a tiny fraction of his own, addressing the "Ratzi the Nazi" myth is worthwhile, if for no other reason than that it may teach some people to read something instead of making judgments on the basis of the lies and leftist clichés their brains are inculcated with in modern "schools."
   
   So what evidence can you find in Ratzinger's memoirs that he came from an anti-Nazi family and himself disdains Nazism?
   
   He wrote that "time and again, in public meetings" his father took "a position against the violence of the Nazis" (p. 12), that after the January 30, 1933 "seizure of power" in which Hindenburg transferred to Hitler the position of chancellor of the Reich his father was "mortified...to have to work...for a government whose representatives he considered to be criminals" (p. 14), that his father "would warn and aid priests he knew were in danger" due to the Nazi practice of spying and informing on priests who behaved as "enemies of the Reich" (p. 14), that his father "saw that a victory of Hitler's (in World War II) would not be a victory for Germany but rather a victory of the Antichrist that would surely usher in apocalyptic times for all believers, and not only for them" (p. 27), and that his father "voiced all his ire against Hitler" to the faces of two SS men given shelter in the Ratzinger house (in either April or May of 1945), an action which "as a rule should have had deadly consequences for him," or, in other words, an action that put his life in danger (p. 36-37). In September of 1944 Ratzinger was assigned to a Nazi forced-labor camp run by Nazis who Ratzinger described as "fanatical ideologues who tyrannized us without respite" (p. 32-33); and, in either late April or early May of 1945 (Ratzinger doesn't remember precisely) he risked his life to escape the Nazi forced-labor camp; he made the escape attempt with the knowledge that soldiers "had orders to shoot deserters on the spot" (p. 36). On page 42 he refers to Nazism as a "destructive ideology."
   
   On lewrockwell.com Paul Gottfried briefly explained that the "Ratzi the Nazi" charge is entirely grotesque:
   
   "Except for a forced membership in the Hitlerjugend and a minor role protecting German cities against the Allied bombing of German civilians, Ratzinger had no links to the Third Reich. Before the War's end, he surrendered to American forces, which allowed him to return to a Catholic seminary. He and his brother Georg, who also became a priest, came from a staunchly anti-Nazi Bavarian family, which made only the smallest necessary compromises to survive in a regime they plainly disliked."



4. Like most people, I read this book, to see what the new Pope had to say about his own life. This book is most interesting when he talks of his childhood. Once he goes off to his theological studies, it's less so. The biggest drawback is that the book was written years ago, it stops at 1977. What we would have loved was to have a memoir encompassing his years with JPII and as the Prefect. Considering the very moving speech he gave at JPII's funeral, I would have loved to read something about those years. I truly hope he will have time to put those down.



5. "As a rural policeman, my father was transferred frequently, so we were continually on the road." That is, until 1937 "when my father turned sixty and retired." Ratzinger was "born on Holy Saturday, April 16" only ten years earlier; on the eve of Easter, a time of "not yet standing in the full light but walking toward it full of trust." In his twelth year, aso at Easter time, he enters the minor seminary, but Ratzinger doesn't go into much by way of detail on this 'milestone' of his. Of course, Hitler was on the war path during this time. "At first," Ratzinger remembers, "the war appeared to be almost unreal." His brother was not drafted until 1942. The following year Joseph was himself drafted, not into the German army, but into "a very peculiar kind of boarding school in Munich." Then on September 10, 1944, having reached military age we [Joseph & his boarding school cadets] were released from the FLAK in which we had actually served as students." (FLAK is an acronym for batteries of the anti-aircraft defense.) "When I arrived home, the draft notice of the Reichsarbeitsdienst [work service of the Reich] already lay on the table." After some weeks spent in the labor detail he was finally assigned to infantry barracks in Traunstein, his home town. Basic training began in mid-Jauary 1945 & not long after its completion Joseph found himself a POW in American hands. He was a free man again on June 19; his brother reappearing the following month. At this point we are at page 40 of the 113 pages of text. The balance of this "biographical sketch" (as Ratzinger refers to these memoirs) touches upon a two-year study of philosophy, followed by theological studies in Munich; and the conferment of his theology degree in July 1953. Not long after this milestone Ratzinger loses his father. ("I sensed that the world was emptier for me and that a portion of my home had been transferred to the other world.") Then, having developed a good relationship with the archbishop of Cologne (Cardinal Frings), Ratzinger accompanies him to the Second Vatican Council proceedings in Rome as the cardinal's theological advisor. Ratzinger does not at all, however, enter "into a detailed portrayal of these very special years;" not believing that "the theological and ecclesial drama of those years belong in these memoir." The story thus jumps to Munster where Ratzinger takes a position lecturing as he begins to divide his time between this locale and his ongoing advisory role in Rome. 3 years later he ditches Munster for Tubingen during a time of turmoil, a time when "at almost a moment's notice, there was a change in the ideological 'paradigm' by which the students and a part the teachers thought." It was 1967 when "almost overnight the existentialist model collapsed and was replaced by the Marxist." By 1969 he moves yet again, this time to Regensburg (where he brother was then living) to work in a "less agitated environent." But the "waves of Marxist revolt...pounded there too." The crisis in theology, though, had a cause; having emerged out of a crisis in culture and, indeed, out of a cultural revolution." Out of this turmoil came the idea to start an international journal; a project that "was to gather together all those who did not want to do theology on the basis of the pre-set goals of ecclesial politics..." Ratzinger's book ends with his appointment as archbishop of Munich, but many more 'Milestones' were still to come, thank God. (06Jul) Cheers!

5 comments about Teresa of Avila: The Book of My Life.

1. I am no Bible scholar nor am I a Catholic. I am of the Evangelical corner of Christianity. This is the first biography of any Catholic saint that I've ever read. To me, Teresa's story is very personal and is certainly no coincidence that I read it at this particular time in my life. I have no idea how much of her writing in anguish about how she feels she failed the Lord has been edited out, but after reading the book, I have an understanding that she must have been quite severe on herself. That is often my own struggle. Her story has given me a tremendous amount of encouragement in pleasing the Lord which was my hope when I picked up the book. How you approach this book may depend entirely on the condition of your heart and whether or not you were lead to read about Teresa's life.



2. The beauty and art of Mirabai Starr's translations of St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross is her ability to convey their lives and souls and consciousness for today's seeker. The place and time in which Teresa lived is so completely different from even the monastics of our day that to render her every word, including her copious remarks of self-deprecation, would be an injustice to her spirit. She was a free thinker of her day and powerful in a way that was almost unknown for a nun in medieval Spain, but her world was significantly different than anything any of us would experience today, whether we are a monastic or a lay person. Mirabai's greatest triumph is her ability to communicate with the saints through her meditative and prayerful listening heart and to convey their spirit and message to seekers who come from diverse traditions. What comes to mind are the renderings of Rumi by Coleman Barks, the original language, metaphors and nuances of which are simply impossible to translate into contemporary English. It is only by becoming a "drinking buddy" with Rumi that Coleman has been able to bring Rumi's ecstatic poetry into our world. This, i feel, is a genius that Mirabai Starr possesses, to bridge the world of these Spanish mystics and ours so that their aspirations ignite ours. For such a glimpse into the souls of these saints, i am deeply grateful.



3. Mirabai Starr's review makes Teresa of Avila come alive for the twenty-first century spiritual seeker. Faithfulness to spiritual teachers of the past requires us to hear their voices in the language and images that they would use were they alive today as well as the voice of their own time. The Book of My Life is an invitation to the reader to explore the book of her or his own life and experience God's presence in the ordinary as well as extraordinary moments of life. Mirabai Starr has the gift of enabling the voices of the past to resonate in new and exciting ways for our time. This translation of the Book of My life will awaken today's readers to the spiritual insights of an earlier era and inspire their own spiritual adventures in our time.



4. Mirabai Starr is a gifted interpreter of the Spanish mystics--John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila. In her newest endeavor, "The Book of My Life" by Teresa of Avila, Starr reclaims some of Teresa's original passion and integrity as a woman and a powerbroker in the Church at the time. Starr's approach of reading deeply into the original text and liberating it from the bonds of historical patriarchal and doctrinal rectitude allows the reader to know Teresa as the courageous spiritual and social innovator that she was. Starr's window into how Teresa internalizes her visions in prayer and embodies the wounds of Christ will be immediately recognizable to women readers--as will Starr's rendering of how Teresa struggles with authority and power. This is a must read book for women who are rooted in faith and seek to engage the powers of the world.



5. Mirabai Starr is a genius once again. Having read her previous translations, "Dark Night of the Soul" by John of the Cross, and Interior Castle by St. Teresa of Avila--I expected "The Book of My Life" to be compelling. But I didn't expect it to knock my socks off. Teresa's Book of Lives paints a portrait of a mystic in the making, and over time we begin to see where Teresa is headed---the unitive state.
   
   With one eye on precise translation and the other on the meaning behind every word--Starr sees clearly not only what Teresa was saying but also the mystery to which her words point. Starr introduces us to a Teresa who is down to earth but capable of soaring, nevertheless. Through her open translation Miabai Starr opens the eye of our understanding as to the unitive state toward which Teresa is headed. When Teresa longs for the unitive state, Mirabai Starr helps us get in touch with that longing.
   
   This ability to bring Teresa close, to make her live, to make her breathe, to ask her what it means to be human--to find ourselves in Teresa and find her in us--this is the greatest gift of "The Book of My Life."

5 comments about Muhammad: A Prophet for Our Time.

1. It would be too much to expect that the founder of any of the world's major religions could be understood from one book, even at the introductory level (not counting sacred scripture, direct exposure to which may be essential). Consider Christianity, consider Buddhism. In the U.S., especialy after 9/11, it may be especially difficult to understand the life of Muhammad. Even before 9/11, even from the early times of Islam, Christian sources were critical of Islam and Muhammad. It is difficult to get a balanced read from any single source: if such a source exists, how to know which it is?
   
   I had read the Qu'ran years ago but recently have read criticisms of Muhammad from conservative Christians. I had been impressed from my own reading of the Qu'ran and by my Muslim friends so was more than skeptical of the criticisms I read of both Islam and Muhammad. Not expecting to get to an answer easily but not wanting to spend too much time to get some perspective, I opted for this portrait which, by intent, set out to present Muhammad in a "balanced way". I had not read Karen Armstrong before. I knew she did not have a scholarly background in Islam ( excepting self-made), but that she seemed respected in the area of comparative religions, although not without critics. So I chose this book expecting it to have introductory value and to offset or put into perspective some criticisms of Muhammad I had heard from conservative Christians.
   
   This is an exceptionally well-written book and it does not seem to dodge some of those aspects of Muhammad's life that others were critical of. It does, as Armstrong intended, appear to attest well to his contributions. I expect it will serve me well as I learn more about Muhammad and the formative history of Islam, which I mean to do.
   
   Armstrong does bring alive the conditions under which Muhammad responded to challenges and made key decisions. The success of early Islam was far from a "done deal". On the other hand, it by no means seems that Islam was nearing any final form when Muhammad died [of course, think how far from any final form that was of Christianity or Buddhism when Jesus and the Buddha died].
   
   Any impressions of Muhammad I have at this point are tentative but having read this book I feel better equipped to consider the impact of Muhammad on how women were treated in Islam, of the expectations on Muslims to care for one another, of how Muslims should treat others (Armstrong emphasizes the pluralism of early Islam), of how the fight for survival was mingled in to the efforts to reveal the sacred. Armstrong presents a complex and dynamic Muhammad, who changed and developed, leading his people while at the same time experience the revelations of the Qu'ran]. There is a lot to take in here and, for me, re-reading the Qu'ran seems on inevitable step.
   
   It does seem most remarkable, as Armstrong makes quite clear, that Muhammad so strongly discouraged that he himself be regarded as divine. Armstrong writes, echoing Abu Bakr, who was close to Muhammad about a warning from Muhammad: "He was a mere mortal, no different from anybody else." Armstrong quotes Abu Bakr: "O people, if anyone worships Muhammad, Muhammad is dead. If anyone worships God, God is alive, immortal." [ Ibn Ishaaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, 1012 in Guillaume, Life of Muhammad]. How different Christianity would have been with such an understanding: the nearest Christian teaching have been as that of Arius and rejected by 4th century Christian orthodoxy.
   
   There is plenty of information about historical events, revelations from the Qu'ran as they occurred, historical context that helped give me at the least a side of the picture of Muhammad's life. Is Armstrong's depiction too sympathetic? I can't decide yet. It will undoubtedly take time. There seems to be a struggle to control how we view Muhammad and early Islam: it would be surprising if I were otherwise but makes it difficult to expose biases and factor them out to the extent they can be.
   
   As for the current situation, I plan to read Carl Ernst's Following Muhammad: Rethinking Islam in the Contemporary World (Islamic Civilization and Muslim Networks) soon. I recently read Alaa Al Aswany's Chicago: A Novel, an outstanding novel about Egyptian Muslims adjusting to life in the post 9/11 U.S. It provided me at least some sense of how Muhammad and Islam guide the day to day life of U.S. Muslims, fictional characters but perhaps seeming all too real.



2. Karen Armstrong, noted religious historian, writes here her second biography of the prophet Muhammad, this time with the explicit intention of combating the rampant Islamophobia of the West.
   
   I knew almost nothing of the prophet before reading this book, and so Armstrong's is a welcome (if not scintillating - she can be a bit dry) introduction. I appreciated the historical and cultural context she placed him in, the stories from his life, and her non-condescension towards the spiritual. That said, her bias seems clear by the end: This is a favorable portrayal. Muhammad eschews luxury ("not simply a waste of money, but ingratitude, a thankless squandering of Allah's precious bounty"), he champions religious tolerance, non-violence, and women's rights (the veil was only for his wives, to protect them from his enemies). Armstrong seeks to put his repeated marrying and his sometimes brutal actions (beheading several hundred Jews, for example) into an - again, sympathetic - cultural context. Of course, with books like The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion on the market, a sympathetic portrayal from a learned outsider is perhaps welcome. Yet I would have appreciated a more balanced-feeling book. And Armstrong gives no clues to the gap between the Muhammad she portrays and the perceptions of Islam by the West today (oppression of women, religious intolerance and violence among certain subpopulations). That said, as Laurie Goodstein writes, this may be a good way "to glimpse how the vast majority of the world's Muslims understand their prophet and their faith" [1].
   
   With those caveats: I would recommend this to a novice desiring to learn of the prophet; but of course, since I haven't read any others, perhaps I'm not the one to ask. (Once I tried Introducing Muhammad but drifted on to other books.)
   
   I located three professional reviews easily available on-line. One is positive: "Ms. Armstrong argues that he [Muhammad] prevailed by compassion, wisdom and steadfast submission to God. This is the power of his story and the reason that more parents around the world name their children Muhammad than any other name" [1]. The other two are negative, one on content (the book "is a thinly veiled hagiography" [2]) and the other on style ("Readers will find her style stilted" [3]).
   
   [1] Laurie Goodstein, "Seeing Muhammad as Both a Prophet and a Politician," New York Times, 20 Dec 2006. [Also published in the International Herald Tribune.]
   [2] Efraim Karsh, "The Perfect Surrender," The New York Sun, 25 Sep 2006.
   [3] Ilan Stavans, "The path of the prophet," Boston Globe, 29 Oct 2006.
   
   * I listened to the unabridged audiobook, narrated by the author. It was only six discs but took me a while, as this isn't exactly a page-turner (or track-turner, if you will).
   
   ** One aspect I found particularly interesting was that some stories paralleled stories from my own faith tradition, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. For example, when one antagonist went to attach Muhammad and was instead converted, followed by another; this is evocative of a story about early Mormon apostle Wilford Woodruff. And when an army of Muslims is slaughtered but their bravery leads to the conversion of many of the attackers, the story of the Anti-Nephi-Lehis in the Book of Mormon comes to mind.



3. Karen Armstrong's Muhammad: A Prophet for Our Time directly addresses the central conflict of our times, "Some Muslim thinkers regard the jihad against Mecca as the climax of Muhammad's career and fail to note that he eventually abjured warfare and adopted a nonviolent policy. Western critics also persist in seeing the Prophet of Islam as a man of war, and fail to see that from the very first he was opposed to the jahili arrogance and egotism that not only fueled the aggression of his time but is much in evidence in some leaders, Western and Muslim alike, today."
   
   Karen goes out of her way to present a balanced and fair perspective on the life of Muhammad. She does this by basing her biography on the Prophet's response to al-Jahiliyah: commonly translated as "an Islamic concept of 'ignorance of divine guidance.'" Karen examinees more than Jahiliyah's theological significance, going into its practical impact on the culture of the Arabian peninsula. The dominant jahili spirit of the time was arrogant, quick to take a offense, warlike and vengeful. Islam, as practiced and taught by the Prophet, Karen makes clear, was a rejection of all of these traits - usually to the great consternation of his followers:
   
   "And the servants of Allah, Most Gracious are those who walk on the earth in humility, and when the ignorant (jahilun) address them, they say, `Peace!' " (Sura The Criterion 25:63 - translation from The Qur'an: Text, Translation & Commentary.)
   
   The revelations that form the Qur'an came to Muhammad not always in dreams or trances, but were sometimes aggressive even terrifying experiences. Muhammad describes the nature of revelation as gently falling like rain" and, at other times, traumatically, where he feels his "soul ripped away."
   
   After revelation, even the Prophet needed to take time to understand what had been revealed. Karen writes, "[Allah] instructed Muhammad to listen to intently to each revelation as it emerged; he must be careful not to impose a meaning on a verse prematurely, before it's full significance had become entirely clear."
   
   "High above all is Allah, the King, the Truth! Be not in haste with the Qur'an before its revelation to thee is completed, but say, "O my Lord! advance me in knowledge." (Sura Ta-ha, 20:114)
   
   Karen, like others, notes that the Qur'an itself has been structured as high-level Arabic poetry, a concept central to the impact of the Qur'an on its Arabic audiences. This is a point entirely missed by Western audiences. You can get some sense of it by listening to a good chanter reciting the verses, but it's a shallow appreciation at best. Karen describes how listening to "the rich, allusive language and rhythms of the Qur'an helped [the Muslims] to slow down their mental processes and enter a different mode of consciousness."
   
   Karen portrays, through the biography, the Qur'an's shared vision of the "people of the book" - the Islamic concept of a shared heritage of monotheism between Muslim, Christian and Jew:
   
   "Say: `We believe in Allah, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and in (the Books) given to Moses, Jesus, and the prophets, from their Lord: We make no distinction between one and another among them, and to Allah do we bow our will [lahu muslimun].' " (Sura The Family Of 'Imran 3:84)
   
   In addition to the creed that there's "no God but God" these three great religions believe in a similar destiny and consequently all deserve both tolerance and freedom to practice their faith:
   
   "Those who believe (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians and the Christians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness,- on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve." (Sura The Table 5:69)
   
   "To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah. It is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute[.]" (Sura The Table, 5:48)
   
   I have a couple of minor complaints. I wish that Karen had used the Qur'anic names for the characters that both the Holy Bible and the Holy Qur'an have in common. For example, Jibrl for Gabriel; Ibrahim for Abraham; Isa for Jesus; Musa for Moses, and so on. After all, Karen is telling the story of Muhammad and quotes extensively from the Qur'an. It just would have seemed more natural and less distracting to me.
   
   Another problem is that the book is edited sloppily in a couple of places: for example on page 43 (of my paper bound edition) a footnote starts out explaining that "Arabs customarily take an honorary title known as the kunya [...] Muhammad was known as"
   
   And the footnote ends right there. Whatever Muhammad was known as, was lost somewhere between Karen's word-processor and the printing press.
   
   Karen's biography of Muhammad reveals a very human prophet; a man who struggled with his faith, culture, peers and enemies. She strikes a balance between the "easy" teachings of Islam (tolerance, generosity, etc.) and the "hard" teachings, contrasting "jihad" to Augustine's "just war" is a comparison most Christian minds would prefer to avoid.
   
   Karen ends the book with some good advice, "If we are to avoid catastrophe, the Muslim and Western worlds must learn not merely to tolerate but to appreciate one another. A good place to start is with the figure of Muhammad [...]"
   
   All in all, this was an interesting read, only occasionally "preachy" and a good introduction for those who may want to pursue deeper studies in Islam or the Islamic culture that has so dramatically shaped the Middle East. I wish I'd read it before tackling In the Footsteps of the Prophet: Lessons from the Life of Muhammad. It would have made that book a lot clearer.



4. "Islamic Sex Laws Are Easy to Break, Impossible to Enforce"
   Los Angeles Daily Journal
   
   August 5, 1999
   
   By Khaled Abou El Fadl
   
   Laws endeavor to resolve conflicts and regulate human behavior. However, often the real force of law is in making moral points, educating and indoctrinating. Some legal systems moralize explicitly, while other legal systems indulge in the fiction of moral neutrality. But all legal systems say something about the morality of right and wrong.
   
   For example, in Islamic law, one of the world's oldest and perhaps most significant legal systems, sometimes morality is the only point - which is hardly surprising considering that Islamic law is also a religious system. But what is fascinating about Islamic law is the way it balances competing moralities at the expense of the possibility of enforcement.
   
   For instance, Islamic law is reputed to be a rather strict, puritan legal system. This is both true and false. Consider the way Islamic law punishes illicit sexual relations. The punishment for fornication or adultery in Islam is rather harsh. A fornicator is flogged 100 lashes, and an adulterer is stoned to death. However, adultery or fornication can only be proven in two ways.
   
   First, it can be proven by a free, uncoerced confession that is repeated three times on three separate occasions. If the alleged perpetrator confesses twice but recants on the third time, he or she cannot be punished.
   
   The second way fornication or adultery can be proven is by the testimony of four adult males who witness the actual act of penetration. It is not sufficient for the witnesses to catch the couple naked in bed. Likewise, if the witnesses see an act of oral copulation, that is not sufficient. A videotape or pregnancy is also inadequate to prove fornication or adultery. Furthermore, the evidence is excluded if the witnesses violate the defendant's privacy. In other words, spying will not do.
   
   A false accusation of adultery or fornication will result in punishment for sexual slander, which is 60 hard lashes. For example, if three witnesses say they saw the act of penetration while the fourth witness changes his mind at the last minute saying, "I am not sure I saw the penetration," then the first three witnesses are punished for slander.
   
   Obviously, in Islamic law the crime of fornication or adultery is hard, if not impossible, to prove. So why have the punishment at all? There are two competing values here.
   
   Illicit sexual relations must be condemned. At the same time, people should mind their own business, and spying or slandering cannot be tolerated. The solution was to make the moral point that fornication and adultery are terrible crimes, and only if they could be proven would they be punished severely. Nevertheless, the issue is generally between a person and God. Societal interests are implicated when these crimes are committed openly and publicly.
   
   At the same time, an accusatory culture in which people spy and slander is reprehensible, and that will be punished as well. Unlike our legal system, making the moral point is a sufficient justification for the law, even with practically no chance of enforcement.



5. Read the Koran. It is a short book. There is no need to rely on Karen Armstrong to tell you what it says. Her omission of the parts of the Koran which call for violence and intolerance makes her book a truly one-sided affair. To her credit, she warns you of her agenda right up front. She wants to convince you that a particular point of view is correct. What she does not say is that she omits passages from the Koran, Muhammad's utterances, and other facts inconsistent with that point of view.
   
   She says nothing of the passages in the Koran which tell Muslims not to help unbelievers and not to be their friends. She ignores the parts of the Koran which mandate violence against unbelievers (Suras 8 and 9, for example). She does not mention the Hadith relating Muhammad's statement that, before the Final Day, the Muslims will kill the Jews (If you think such things have no relevance to Muslim's today, you will find reference to this Hadith in Article 7 of the Charter of Hamas, the present ruling party in Palestine). To read Armstrong's book, you would not guess that most Muslim scholars teach - based on Muhammad's statements - that unbelievers should not be allowed to set foot on the Arabian peninsula.
   
   Armstrong also fails to take into account the principle of Koranic interpretation which requires that later suras be given more weight than earlier ones. Muhammad's earlier suras tend to sound more tolerant and peaceful - he was part of a small minority in Mecca when he uttered them. The later suras are more intolerant and violent because they are from the time when Muhammad was in power in Medina, raiding Meccan caravans for a living. "Raiding" means killing people (Armstrong says killing people was not really the point), taking their property, and enslaving survivors. Armstrong says Muhammad did these things to get the Meccans' "attention." No doubt. These later suras are given more weight by Muslim scholars.
   
   Armstrong does relate some facts which reflect badly on Muhammad. That is unavoidable in even the most pro-Muhammad account. When she does so, however, she consistently makes excuses or tries to explain them away. She does a truly remarkable job of telling the story of the Muslims' execution (by beheading) of 700 male captives in one day, the selling into slavery of their families, and Muhammad's approval in advance of these actions. It is clear these executions could not have happened if he had opposed them. Muhammad is a "prophet for our time" anyway.
   
   Armstrong also blurs the distinctions between Islam and other religions. For example, she says that Muslims believe in Jesus, but does not point out that the Koran clearly denies the Christian belief that Jesus was the son of God and also denies he was crucified. While it may be fair to point out that Muhammad believed in Jesus, it seems misleading not to add this information.
   
   Because you must read several other books - including at least the Koran - to disabuse yourself of the silly notions Armstrong states as fact, her book seems a waste of time.

5 comments about The Hand of God: A Journey from Death to Life by the Abortion Doctor Who Changed His Mind.

1. Being a pro-life college student in a liberal university has its challenges. But after reading Dr. Nathanson's book I am no longer at a loss for words when it comes to arguing the abortion issue. I have written many 15-20 page papers on this issue ranging from its moral significance to its relationship with our government, (federal & state). I used much of the information that was in this book. Nathanson gave so much insight and honesty to the history of the issue that it would be impossible not to question any pro-choice stance. I challenge any pro-choicer to read this book. You might find that it is much more challenging to agrue with Nathanson; if it weren't for him you wouldn't have an argument.



2. I think that this is a great and true story by an abortion doctor. It would be good for all, pro-life and pro-choice.



3. As the title explains, Dr. Nathanson was once a bona fide abortion doctor. In fact, as the back cover explains, he "was co-founder in 1969 of the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws (NARAL, later renamed the National Abortion Rights Action League), and was director of the Center for Reproductive and Sexual Health, then the largest abortion clinic of the world. In the late 1970's he turned against abortion to become a prominent pro-life advocate."
   
   
   
   This semi-autobiographical work provides a look behind the sterile abortion clinic doors that populate our country. He openly talks of how the abortion movement intentionally manipulated the public to repeal the once restrictive laws concerning this barbaric practice. This included providing bogus statistics to the media and exaggerating existing reproductive problems. He carefully details the history of abortion, explains the many different techniques of performing abortions, and explains what convinced him to forsake his livelihood and give up his lucrative work.
   
   
   
   What to like: Nathanson is intimately familiar with the abortion industry and goes into great detail about what actually goes on at a clinic. He also provides an insider's view on the machinations behind the early abortion movement.
   
   
   
   As I was writing my extensive series on abortion, his book proved to be invaluable. He systematically explores each and every credible pro-choice argument and points out their faulty logic and shortcomings. Believing himself to be a man of science, he increasingly found himself questioning his abortion practice as ultrasound and sonogram technology developed. Soon these fledgling concerns grew to absolute horror as the overwhelming evidence that life begins at conception and not birth, convinced him to abandon his position as the director of New York's largest abortion clinic.
   
   
   
   Nathanson carefully explores the scientific data that clearly shows life begins at conception, not at birth. He also works through the different definitions which philosophy has given to personhood, and details the dangers behind "endowing" a more exclusive group to "personhood". At the end of the book he also talks about proper and improper responses to abortion.
   
   
   
   What not to like: The book starts out a little tedious. I am pretty sure the readers of this book are going to be interested in Nathanson's story only as far as it relates to abortion. Yet the first three and a half chapters of the book barely breach the subject. Instead he goes into painstaking detail on his childhood and upbringing. These do help us understand why he first entered the medical field and later started performing abortions, but they do not warrant the attention he gives them.
   
   
   
   Memorable Quote: "It was ultrasound, which for the first time threw open a window into the womb. We also began to observe the fetal heart on electronic fetal heart monitors. For the first time, I began to think about what we really had been doing at the clinic. Ultrasound opened up a new world. For the first time, we could really see the human fetus, measure it, observe it, watch it, and indeed bond with it and love it. I began to do that."
   
   
   
   Conclusion: For the American grieved by abortion, this book is a valuable resource. Its chronicles of the early abortion rights movement help the reader understand how the practice was legalized in the first place. Nathanson's arguments for the pro-life cause are damning to the abortion movement. His clear scientific analysis of the beginning of life is, perhaps, the best I've ever read and leaves the reader with no doubt that life does, indeed, begin at conception. This book is essential for anyone who wants to learn more about the abortion debate embroiling our country today.



4. This book is a truly fascinating account of one mans journey from the heights (if indeed it can be called that) of abortion fame as a well known abortionis who performed many, many abortions in his time as well as one of those who was instrumental in helping make abortion legal. Now, to see that turnaround, that has to be something. I was interested to see how he began to change his mind and just how difficult that in itself can be when your fame and career (not to mention your self-esteem) is built on it. I admire this man for his courage in coming out and speaking up.



5. Many people, mostly pro-life advocates, see the abortion issue as the modern equivalent of the fight to put an end to slavery. Dr. Bernard N. Nathanson, a founder of NARAL and once one of America's premier abortion providers until he saw the light and changed sides, draws parallels between pre-Civil War America, specifically the Dred Scott decision, and Roe v. Wade in "The Hand of God: A Journey from Death to Life by the Abortion Doctor Who Changed His Mind." Those are heady claims indeed. To argue that abortion could bring the country to civil war seems a bit melodramatic. Certainly the other side, the pro-abortion advocates, don't see the issue this way. To them Roe v. Wade and subsequent court rulings expanding the ability of a woman to terminate her pregnancy is a right, pure and simple. It's a right that grows out of the Supreme Court's recognition of an inherent privacy right guaranteed by many of the amendments contained in the Bill of Rights. Any effort to curtail or roll back abortion, they argue, would not only allow the government to exercise control over a woman's body, it would also strike at the heart of the gender equality feminists have worked so hard to achieve over the past four decades.
   
   Don't expect Bernard Nathanson to resolve the issue in this slim book. This is no "Uncle Tom's Cabin" for the pro-life crowd. It's close, though. "The Hand of God" tells the story of how a lowly physician came to embrace abortion, how he began to question what he did for a living, and how he found God when he embraced the pro-life movement. According to the author, his early life played a big role in his later decision to become an abortionist. His father, a Jewish physician with misanthropic tendencies, dominated most aspects of his son's life until his death at the age of ninety-four. An imposing presence with a keen intellect and a hardscrabble background, Nathanson's father passed on to his son a suspicion of the Jewish religion and a distrust of women. For example, he encouraged his son to disrespect his mother. The father also dominated Bernard's sister, interfering in her marriage and all other aspects of her life until she committed suicide in her forties. It's obvious we're not dealing with a kindly soul here, yet Nathanson's father did do a few things to help his son. He secured him a place in medical school, for instance, and passed on a love of learning that, if this book is any indication, served Bernard Nathanson well.
   
   Unfortunately, the Hippocratic Oath Nathanson took after completing medical school didn't quite make the desired impression. His specialization in obstetrics and gynecology coupled with the tumult of the 1960s soon brought the good doctor into contact with several physicians interested in overturning the nation's abortion laws. The author plunged in with both feet, and soon found himself overseeing a clinic in New York that performed tens of thousands of abortions. Before his conversion to the pro-life movement, Nathanson went through a couple of marriages and even personally performed an abortion on a woman pregnant with his own child. The last several chapters of the book move beyond the personal into philosophical and medical discussions on life, death, and the ethics of the abortion debate. Nathanson convincingly argues that new medical techniques prove that life begins much earlier than previously believed. He also contends that abortion is a gateway that could, if it continues to be the law of the land, lead to legalized euthanasia and the establishment of third world "fetus farms" that would supply stem cells and organs for those suffering from various diseases in this country. "The Hand of God" paints a pretty bleak picture of the abortion scene.
   
   By far the most effect part of "The Hand of God" deals with Nathanson's discussions of the types of medical doctors that inhabit abortion clinics. Think alcoholics, drug users, quacks, and bottom of the class physicians. It's ugly beyond belief. He provides a few names and cases concerning doctors who had their licenses yanked for maiming and/or killing patients while performing abortions. One surgeon actually quit performing the procedure at the halfway point and sent the woman home because her husband didn't have enough money to pay for the operation. She later died. We tend to think of these things happening in the bad old days before Roe v. Wade turned the back alley butcher into a white coat wearing surgeon in a licensed clinic, but Nathanson's carefully documented accounts show the fallacy of that sort of thinking. Abortion clinics still draw the bottom feeders because of the morals involved. Most doctors don't want anything to do with terminating pregnancies unless the mother's life is in imminent danger. Perhaps most physicians still take the Hippocratic Oath seriously. Whatever the case, ethics still play a big role in who will or will not perform abortions in the nation's clinics.
   
   I decided to read Nathanson's book after reading about his conversion to Roman Catholicism in Dave Shiflett's "Exodus: Why Americans Are Fleeing Liberal Churches for Conservative Christianity." I'm glad I did. I've never been a knee jerk pro-lifer despite being a strident conservative, but this book has moved me further in that direction. There is something seriously wrong with a culture that endorses abortion as a means of birth control, and there is definitely something amiss about allowing a minor to terminate a pregnancy without parental consent. I won't even get into the immorality of partial-birth abortion; I was against that procedure long before I read this book. I heartily recommend "The Hand of God." Prepare yourself, however. You might just find yourself agreeing with the good doctor by the time you turn the final page.

5 comments about Stormie: A Story of Forgiveness and Healing.

1. This book is absolutely amazing! I've read it twice and could hardly put it down both times. Stormie lays it all out, and this book is so honest and real. Thank you Stormie, for being willing to share your story with the world. It helped me tremendously!



2. Stormie's story is truly a story of what a great Redeemer and Savior we have in Jesus Christ!! The bible says that where sin abounds, grace abounds even more. AMEN!! Thank you for writing this story. I have read the other books of Stormie ... the power of a praying woman, wife, parent, the prayer that changes everything: Stormie's story gives the rest of her books a little more hope. Because who she was, wasn't who she remained. There is complete and 150% hope in the Lord. Thank you STormie, from the bottom of my heart. Thank you.



3. Even for those who have been brought up in a loving family, this book will be deeply moving. To those who have experienced an unhappy childhood, lacking love and perhaps experiencing abuse, this book will surely encourage one to believe that Jesus is indeed the one who is anointed to heal the broken hearted and bring hope, healing and wholeness to any who turn to him.
   
   Stormie tells her story with amazing frankness and honesty. Truly this is a book that cannot be put down. The pain, trauma and emotion flow from each page with heart rending effect. In the final chapter where she tells of sharing her story in a women's prison, its impact on the inmates reflects its moving power as she relates how Jesus Christ took the broken pieces of her life and made her whole. If you know anybody who has suffered abuse and broken relationships this book is a must read for them, but it is highly recommended to all readers whatever their background.



4. One of the best, authentic Christian biographies on how God delivers us from evil into the light of His Son, Jesus. A truly inspiring story of forgiveness and healing. I could not put this book down until I finished it! This is absolutely a "must read" for all Christians who need to understand the power of God and the process of sanctification.



5. I feel blessed to have had the opportunity to have a look into Stormie Omartian's life and heart. It was easy to relate to the open way she told her story, through pain and loss, through mistakes and fear, through faith and triumph. She got real, more real than I even expected, and she truly touched my heart. As I read, I felt the grace of God covering her writing and allowing her to express the truth of her faith and her experiences in a way that could heal and bless others. When you read this book, no doubt, your heart will connect with Stormie's story and feel just as blessed as mine did. God bless you, Stormie. And thank you for your courage...