Why Study The Past?: The Quest For The Historical Church

Why Study The Past?: The Quest For The Historical Church
Average customer rating:

A Discerning Overview of Church History

R U Ready?

History repeats itself

Faithful Narration

Why Study The Past?: The Quest For The Historical Church
Rowan Williams
Manufacturer: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Church History | Christianity | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books
General | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books
General | Theology | Religious Studies | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Where God Happens: Discovering Christ in One Another and Other Lessons from the Desert Fathers

Anglican Identities

Grace And Necessity: Reflections on Art And Love

Resurrection: Interpreting the Easter Gospel

Wound of Knowledge: Christian Spirituality from the New Testament to St. John of the Cross

ASIN: 0802829902

Book Description

The well-worn saying about being condemned to repeat the history we do not know applies to church history as much as to any other kind. But how are Christians supposed to discern what lessons from history need to be learned?

In this small but thoughtful volume, respected theologian and churchman Rowan Williams opens up a theological approach to history, an approach that is both nonpartisan and relevant to the church's present needs. As he reflects on how we consider the past in general, Williams suggests that how we consider church history in particular remains important not so much for winning arguments as for clarifying who we are as time-bound human beings. Good history is a moral affair, he advises, because it opens up a point of reference that is distinct from us yet not wholly alien. The past can then enable us to think with more varied and resourceful analogies about our identity in the often confusing present.

Customer Reviews:

A Discerning Overview of Church History.......2007-05-13

In 4 chapters and only 114 pages Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams gives a penetrating and discerning theology of church history. How has the church described what is unique to itself from the first early centuries, through the Middle Ages, the Reformation and modern times? Williams traces deep patterns of how the church has struggled through the pressures of different historical eras to witness to the unique community that is created by the work of God in Christ. A discerning look at the past will discover something strange and different from ourselves but in a way that helps us discover our community with the past in ways that will change how we see ourselves in the present and so face new challenges as we move into the future.

R U Ready?.......2007-01-10

Everyone will increase their knowledge of early Christian Churches. There
were significant diferences, culturaly, theological, and socialy to
understand. For those not knowledgable of the causes for those diferences
it may be slow going. The author should be acquainted with what WSC
calls the power of the English simple sentence, Unfortunately because
of the complex subject very few are present.

History repeats itself.......2007-01-03

The Archbishop does a fine job presenting the imortance of studying the past. Our history must be understood (actually learned) in order to wisely interpret our present spirituality and worship life. Many of us live a myopic spirituality, liking what we know and mostly only what we know. Rowan Williams pastors a large church (the Anglican communion) that is presented with divisions and is paying the price for the revisionist segment of the communion. The concept of via media is just one of the frames of reference that has come about due to an abismal lack of knowledge of Christian worship history. Hopefully this text will bring light into dark corners, not on specifics of theology but certainly on the importance of knowing our own history.

Faithful Narration.......2005-10-15

This is a must read for historians, and should be required reading for students entering Divinity School. Archbishop Williams gifts us with a candid picture of ecclesial scholarship from its inception on. It is not a detailed investigation into specific movements in church history, but reveals to the reader how specific movements tailored history in such a way that the 'winners' articulation of these occurrences prevailed--leaving us with a less than honest narration of that history. Williams presents an argument, much like Alisdair MacIntyre does in "Who's Justice? Which Rationality?," stating that 'we need to understand the other on the other's own grounds.' And in Williams' case, we need to do the grunt work necessary for doing history so to contextualize each period, as best as we can, as the events and language would have been understood to those who actually lived them. (As MacIntyre put it, 'languages can be learned, but they cannot be translated'). This does not mean that tradition and doctrine cannot be timeless. It does, however, mean that they must undergo constant renewal in the community through, as Williams puts it (using the language of Georges Florovsky), the "charismatic memory" as it is located in the liturgical activity of the church.

The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory: Why An Invented Past Will Not Give Women a Future

Average customer rating:

unscholarly, unreadable
The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory
Generally Misunderstood
Unscholarly and Lame
Excellent in Every Respect

The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory: Why An Invented Past Will Not Give Women a Future
Cynthia Eller
Manufacturer: Beacon Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Feminist Theory | Women's Studies | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Women's Studies | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

Living in the Lap of the Goddess
The Creation of Patriarchy (Women & History)
Being a Pagan: Druids, Wiccans, and Witches Today
Comparative Mythology
Women and Goddesses in Myth and Sacred Text

ASIN: 080706792X

Book Description

In this lucide and fascinating volume, Eller traces the emergence of feminist matriarchal myth, explicates its functions, and examines the evidence for and against a matriarchal prehistory. Finally, she explains why this vision of peaceful, women-centered prehistory is something feminists should be wary of.

Customer Reviews:

unscholarly, unreadable.......2007-03-18

i couldn't read this book for a number of reasons--principly the lack of scholarship (some inter-disciplinary research would have been nice) and the bias of the author. really, how many sunday schools are teaching children that a golden age of matriarchy existed?

there are many demonstrable facts showing that women in the ancient near east and elsewhere owned property, ran businesses, worked in public, paid taxes and ruled independently. there are demonstrable examples of cultures (including many american indian nations)that were matrilineal, matrilocal, and matriarchal. before the christians, irish and gaulic women had the right to bear arms--and they used them to good effect against the romans. that ignorant people choose to create an unrealistic picture of the past does not mean that that actual past did not exist.

eller sets up straw men, ridicules any position not her own, and, in the manner of bigots, ignores or twists anything that contradicts her opinion.

there are far too many errors and arguable conclusions to mention in a book review. any analysis of eller's attitudes would also be too space consuming. also, another reviewer has done a very good job of critiquing the book on several points.

it is a great disappoinment to see an increasing number of supposedly educated women writing books that undermine what progress for women this country has seen. it is not surprising that her book would be enjoyed by people who, in typical american fashion, assume that everywhere else and every-when else is and was exactly like their perception of their immediate surroundings. and who revel in the supposed proof that women, again, are in the wrong.

The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory.......2006-06-17

I first want to say that I feel that the author is intelligent, and that she did her research and knows her topic. She seems to be a feminist who understands women's and feminist issues in modern America.
This book is worth reading for anyone who has read a lot of the feminist pre-history Goddess material but has not read those who argue against it. It's good to read another side.
There is definitely not actual proof that there was worldwide Goddess worship and that women had higher status in ancient times, and since some women act as if the evidence is proof, it's good to have books like this that point out that the evidence can be interpreted in other ways.
That said, though, it seemed that Ms. Eller was bent on proving that the feminist Goddess theories are quite far- fetched and ridiculous. I believe I read the book with an open mind, and at times she almost had me agreeing with her. But in the end I felt that she stretched her ideas as much as she accuses those she is writing about of doing.
I didn't like her derisive tone that began with the title. There are very few women who espouse the ancient Goddess material who call that time a "matriarchy", and over time that term has been quite rejected. It is a slap in the face, first of all, to, right in the title, call the Theory a "Myth" and then to call the myth one of "Matriarchal Prehistory", since that is NOT what those she is directly arguing against call it. In fact, ther writers she is railing against also reject the term "Prehistory".
Then, throughout the books, she lumps these theorists together constantly, calling them "feminist matriarchalists". This seems like a deliberate insult, since she seems quite familiar with their writings and must know that they reject this term! And many of the women she writes of have different theories and at times disagree with each other.

Then she starts off the book hinting that it's possible that Jesus really lived and that the Jews were once slaves in Egypt,without actually saying, as she does about Feminist Spirituality, that there is actually no real evidence that Jesus actually lived or that the Jews were slaves in Egypt. But she has a hands-off approach to their religions, because they are faiths. Yet, there are some women who have taken on Goddess worship as a religion, some because of theories of ancient history and some independent of it, and others who simply believe in a history of Goddess worship but haven't made a religion of it. She lumps these three groups together and throws in some examples that would sound far out to mainstream people, making fun of the religious beliefs, which she said she wouldn't do in regard to people of other faiths.
This is a bit unfair. In every religion there are people whose behavior would seem strange to those outside of it, but that is a different matter than the history of the religion.
(I want to add that I think she is incorrect in assuming that most Christians know that there is no real evidence that Jesus lived, or that most Jews know that there is no real evidence that they were once slaves in Egypt. Most people just do not really study the true history of their religions.)

She is correct when she speaks of Marija Gimbutas in that Marija's ideas of what she uncovered are theories, and Marija, in the style of most archaeologists of her time, speaks as if her ideas are facts. Of course in Marija's details there were probably quite a few that are not correct, and she expected them to be built upon. But her general theories about Old Europe are as plausible as any others.

And I think Ms. Eller is incorrect in saying that Maria was influenced by all the support she received from those in the women's spirituality movement. Even the feminists who were closest to her said that Maria was a bit put off by all the attention, even though she was very gracious, and what she really wanted was the respect of her colleagues on her new ideas. (Before that time she had been highly respected, and still was in general.)

Brian Swimme, in an interview by Bellini productions, points out that Albert Einstein, regarded by many as the greatest scientist of the 20th century, came up with his theories before there was any data. When questioned about how he came up with them, he became quite adamant that "imagination is more important than knowledge." He had a feeling about things. I once read that Einstein said to his friend Charles Hapgood, "you know, Charlie, if I told the world how I really got my theory of relativity, they would lock me up.... I was sitting in my garden and my flowers told me." Of course Einstein had years and years of study and scholarship behind him before his flowers told him this. And so did Marija Gimbutas, before the figurines began to speak to her of history.

She had years of the study of folklore, mythology, but most of all, she was a very respected expert in archaeology and linguistics, reading 20 languages. If anyone had the mind to sort out symbols found archaeologically, it was her. But I think she also just had incredible intuition, as if the pieces spoke to her of the past.

I realize that Cynthia Eller probably doesn't think this way, and I respect that. I respect that she doesn't believe that the Goddess theories have enough evidence to even make them plausible. But I think that they do. And in addition to that, in the last decades there have been so many of us who have had dreams and begun doing art (including myself, in both respects) that had the same ancient Goddess symbols that appeared in archaeology, long before we had read any of the history and theories. I began to have an urge to pray to the Goddess, and had dreams and painted symbolism YEARS before I began to discover books by Merlin Stone, Monica Sjoo, Eliane Eisler, Carol, Christ, Marija Gimbutas, etc., etc. When I read the first book, I was AMAZED at how this all tied in with my personal dream work. And I know that many, many others have had similar experiences. So, it's not just that we read these theories and then based a religion on them. As Vicki Noble says, she and her women's group were doing rituals before they had ever read Marija's work, and they were amazed that she gave them historical evidence of what they were doing.

But I know that many people in our culture do not believe in this type of coincidence and in the power of dreams and symbols, etc., and I respect that stories of this nature will not convince them.

There were so many, many things in Cynthia's book that I felt did not prove her point, or that showed that it was more important to her to make fun of the feminist beliefs than to allow any possibility that they might be possible.

She claims that certain things are central to feminist Goddess beliefs, that are actually not the least bit central, for example, that men were ignorant of their role in conception. This has been acknowledged as one of many possible explanations, but is absolutely not central.

On page 49 of the paperback, she makes great fun of the fact that the supposed origin of the Kurgan or Indo-European people was the Russian steppes. She is very sarcastic about this being on the fringes of the globe and then says that she doubts that the "narrators of the myth" even know where the Russian steppes are. She says that maps are rare in "feminist matriarchal literature". This is so far from the truth that it seems she chose to just state a lie. (There are correct maps in almost all of the books. The women who write them are very knowledgeable scholars, most with their PhD and years of scholarship, many university professors like herself.) But then later in her book, in chapter 8, she herself builds quite the case that the original speakers of the proto Indo European language, who later spread them it many parts of the world, were from the Russian steppes. And that the domestication of the horse and the wheel both came from that area originally, also. She then quotes Colin Renfrew to support her thesis, which seems somewhat irrelevant, because he, unlike Ms. Eller, believes that Indo-European language came from Turkey with agriculture, which she basically refuted.

Where I think Ms. Eller's argument was the weakest was about feminists' claims about mythology showing some history. Her one main anecdotal example about a myth that had formed in recent times did nothing to weaken the hypothesis of Goddess feminists. She ignored evidence that often older mythology shows the goddesses in these myths WERE considered more to be all powerful before the new gods came in and showed that they were evil and needed to be put down.

I do respect that Ms. Eller does not find enough evidence to believe the feminist goddess theories and chooses not to believe them herself. And I think she is right that arguing with those who do not think the evidence is strong is not helpful. What is necessary is that we truly give women equal power, and that we protect our planet. I do think the two are connected, because as long as some men think that they have the right to dominate nature or women or anyone, we are in big trouble. (I don't like how Ms. Eller made fun of the "dire environmental consequences" that eco -feminists predict in their books, because the scientific facts are definitely there for that!!) It is also very important, though, as has been pointed out by all of the feminist scholars that Ms. Eller is referring to, that we do not assume patriarchy when we look at other cultures or the past, because then we often miss a truth we might not see.

Feminist Goddess spirituality is not for all feminists, nor does it need to be. There is room for all types of personalities in feminism. And Carol Christ points out in Rebirth of the Goddess, as Cynthia Eller does in this book, that labeling certain traits as "masculine" and some as "feminine" may not be helpful, as both women and men run the gamut on all traits.

Generally Misunderstood.......2005-08-24

It seems that there has been a lot of recent confusion about Mz. Eller's books, "The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory" in both its stated objective as well as its scientific accomplishment. This short review is an attempt to rectify and refute any such questions posed by reviewers who didn't seem to understand the aims of this work.

Firstly, it must be understood that Mz. Eller was not out to prove that prehistory was in any way universally patriarchal. Mz. Eller is certainly aware of the many matriarchal, matrilineal and matrifocal prehistorical societies. Rather, this book is an attempt to disprove the "Universal Matriarchy" theory presented by many authors who lack that scholastic ability and scientific methodology to prove or disprove the theory. As such, Mz. Eller doesn't need to address the myriad of "matri" prefixed societies in prehistory, all she needs to do is present a few very well-researched patriarchal societies.

Secondly, Mz. Eller's work is centered around providing solid footing for feminism in the modern context. She seems to believe, and rightly to my thinking, that so long as the majority of spiritual feminist authors rely on unsound claims of a universal matriarchy that they cannot be taken seriously by either the scholastic community or the public at large. By grounding the modern feminist movement in strict scientific methodology, she is attempting to provide a secure footing for further scholarship into the realm of women's studies.

Third and lastly, there also seem to be a lot of attacks, both personal and professional, against Mz. Eller and her work. These often come from the same people who then critique the acidic or condescending tone of her writing style. While objections to her writing style are, of course, the prerogative of the reviewer, accusing Mz. Eller of being mean then attacking her personally and professionally seems hypocritical at best. Though I also found her tone sarcastic, and at times off-putting, this didn't devalue the information presented.

In praise to Mz. Eller's book, many of the reviews already present do great justice. The methodology is sound, the information provocative and the conclusions she comes to are startling. I for one have fond hopes that this book will make great leaps in overcoming the stigma present around scholarly and spiritual feminism both.

Unscholarly and Lame.......2005-06-24

The majority of people think that in prehistoric societies, men beat women over the head with clubs and would drag them to their caves. (Calling a man a "Neanderthal" usually means he's a sexist pig).
This is the general consensus, and yet there is NO historical evidence for this. So when feminists look at the archeological facts of prehistoric eras, and use real evidence, THIS is dismissed eagerly as a feminist "fantasy"!

The title of this book is inaccurate. No feminists believe there was a "matriarcy", with women in power over men. Matrileneal and matrifocal are the accurate terms. Family lines were traces through the mother, not the father, and women weren't subordinate to men. Eller denies these existed, and yet only up until a few hundred years ago in America these societies DID exist for thousands of years. Does Eller consider this fanasy too?

Among the rights which women held among the
Native American tribes:

Children belonged to the mother's tribe, not the
father's tribe.

If a marriage proves to be an unhappy one, each
person is at liberty to divorce and to marry
again. What each person brought into the
marriage, each person takes out of the marriage.
Women get custody of children.

When a man brought the products of the hunt home
and gave it to his wife, it was hers to dispose
of as she saw fit. Her decisions were absolute,
even to the sale of skins.

A woman retains control of her possessions at all
times, even after marriage. They are hers to
sell, give away, or bequeath as she sees fit. Her
husband, father, brothers, and sons have no claim
on her property.

Women ruled the house and stores were held in
common.

Rape and wife-battering were almost unknown.

Women had the right to vote.

Treaties had to be ratified by 3/4 of all voters
and 3/4 of all mothers.

Women had the power to impeach a chief (they
"removed his horns," the deer's antlers he wore
which signified his position.)

Women spoke in council meetings and were listened
to respectfully.

Women could forbid braves from going to war.

Law, religious beliefs, and family supported
these traditions.

Because white men refused to deal with Native
American women, Native American men became
responsible for communicating officially with the
white man's world. Many of those men were among
some of the earliest supporters of women's
rights. "A Tuscarora chief, Elias Johnson,
writing about the absence of rape among Iroquois
men in his popular 1881 book, Legends, Traditions
and Laws, of the Iroquois, or Six Nations. . . ,
commented wryly that European men had held the
same respect for women "until they became
civilized. A Cayuga chief, Dr. peter Wilson,
addressing the New York Historical Society in
1866, encouraged white men to use the occasion of
Southern reconstruction to establish universal
suffrage, "even of the women, as in his nation."

Unfortunately, white American feminists have
neglected this resource for envisioning the
future. "In her important work, The Sacred Hoop:
Recovering the Feminine In American Indian
Traditions, Paula Gunn Allen writes: "Beliefs,
attitudes, and laws such as these [the Iroquois
Confederation] became part of the vision of
American feminists and of other human liberation
movements around the world. Yet feminists too
often believe that no one has ever experienced
the kind of society that empowered women and made
that empowerment the basis of its rules and
civilization. The price the feminist community
must pay because it is not aware of the recent
presence of gynarchical societies on this
continent is necessary confusion, division, and
much lost time."

Feminists and Archeologists have lost a lot of time and have had to deal with these "debunking 'authorities'" like Eller because they've not paid attention to this important data that totally supports the position that matriliny and matrifocal societies have existed not only in prehistory but in recent history.

Excellent in Every Respect.......2005-02-24

"The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory: Why An Invented Past Won't Give Women a Future" is that rarest of things: a scholarly book that is as easy and fun to read as it is informative and profound. I recommend this book without reservation. I just wish all scholarly books were as well-written and socially engaged as this one is.

Cynthia Eller's work was cut out for her. She had to debunk a very popular myth that has given comfort to thousands of women beaten into the mud by misogyny.

Everywhere women turn, they are told that they just aren't as good as men, and, further, that their very status as women makes them frivolous and good for one thing and one thing only: to support and please men, including giving men lots of children.

We've been told that women's status is so debased that she can't function fully as a spiritual being. Even God, who is meant to represent peace, justice, and transcendence, cares so much women's anatomy, that God *him*self discriminates against women, and does not want women in his pulpits. Or, so we are told.

The Goddess Myth -- the idea that "once upon a time" all humanity worshipped a female deity and life was bliss -- came along and offered women salvation from misogyny's most pernicious form, the denigration of women in the eyes of God -- a denigration that paves the way for, and supports, everything from battery to rape.

Eller has the courage to point out that no matter how good a falsehood makes us feel, it is still a falsehood, and lies have their price.

Eller also manifests the grace and sensitivity to speak these difficult truths with care and concern for women like her who are invested in freedom and dignity for women. She points out the flaws in the Goddess theory with expertise, not with arrogance, cruelty, or mockery.

Eller's command of the scholarship of a variety of fields -- the classics, folklore, archaeology -- is impressive. She introduces the information the non-academic reader needs to know to assess evidence, but she never does this with alienating academic jargon. The average educated reader should have no problem with this quite scholarly text.

Eller does the job of debunking the Goddess myth with admirable thoroughness, but she does more. She writes a fascinating book about ancient peoples and their cultures.

The final word about the Goddess myth has not yet been spoken. Eller's book, given its combination of thoroughness, accessibility, wit, and decent concern for readers with a variety of belief systems, will continue to be a key contribution to the ongoing conversation.

Why Should Jews Survive?: Looking Past the Holocaust toward a Jewish Future

Average customer rating:

Why Should Jews Survive?: Looking Past the Holocaust toward a Jewish Future
Michael Goldberg
Manufacturer: Oxford University Press, USA
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Organizational Behavior | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Judaism | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

Theology | Judaism | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

God Is Not: Religious, Nice, One of Us, An American, A Capitalist
Silence

ASIN: 0195111265

Book Description

In the fifty years since the Holocaust, the Jewish People have felt one overriding concern: survival. The ghosts of the murdered six million, along with the living generation of survivors, have called out the unifying chant, "never again." In 1948, this concern found a second focus in the state of Israel, the ultimate refuge of Jews worldwide. But Rabbi Michael Goldberg finds that these twin pillars of Jewish identity are brittle, and have already begun to crumble; they will not be enough to support or sustain the next generation. The time has come to answer the question: Why should Jews survive? In this provocative book, Goldberg launches a bold attack on what he calls the "Holocaust cult," challenging Jews to return to a deeper, richer sense of purpose. He argues that this cult--with shrines like the U.S. Holocaust Museum, high priests such as Elie Wiesel, and rites like UJA death camp pilgrimages--is deeply destructive of Jewish identity. As the current "master story" of Judaism, Goldberg writes, the Holocaust has been used to depict Jews as uniquely victimized in human history--transforming them from God's chosen to those who manage to survive despite God's silent complicity in their persecution. This Holocaust-centered, survival-for-survival's-sake Judaism is already showing its emptiness, Goldberg contends; the generation that survived Hitler and founded Israel is dying, and the new generation seems adrift (for instance, one recent survey predicts that 70% of American Jewish marriages will be intermarriages by the turn of the century). Jews need positive reasons for remaining Jewish, he argues; they need to return to the Exodus as their master story--the story of God leading the Jews out of slavery and making with them an eternal covenant that gave the Jews a unique place in God's plan. The Jews should survive, Goldberg concludes, because they are the linchpin in God's redemption of the world. Rabbi Michael Goldberg has long wrestled with the crisis of identity facing today's Jewish community. In Why Should Jews Survive?, he provides a provocative and powerfully argued challenge to the dominant theme of modern Jewish thought.

Average customer rating:

Running Away From Secrets
Unspeakable Reality
From a supportive husband
4 Stars!
A must read.

Why I Kept My Past A Secret
Teresa Mason Browning
Manufacturer: Seaburn Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

African-American & Black | Ethnic & National | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

General | Ethnic & National | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

General | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

Women | Specific Groups | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

Book Description

Story of a black woman's struggle to maintain her dignity... her efforts to overcome the psychologican effects of indifferent parents, rape, physical abuse and a broken marriage, while struggling to raise her four children.

Customer Reviews:

Running Away From Secrets.......2003-01-28

Ronda is a young woman with a lot of secrets, who is trying to get beyond her past and develop a closer relationship with God. However, her relationship with God seems to get repeatedly put on hold because of her need to have a relationship with a man at whatever cost. As a result, she has had several unhealthy relationships that add additional weight to the trunk of secrets she carries around with her. But most of us know that all secrets eventually become exposed and so as you read Why I Kept My Past a Secret you may find yourself wondering if Ronda and her fragile relationships can handle such exposure.

This book was an interesting read that shows how you may be haunted later, when you try to bury the past without dealing with it. I felt at times the story could have been sequenced better and there were certain aspects of the story that could have been explored in greater detail. Still, the author did a good job at helping you understand the turmoil that Ronda experienced, and the overall concept of the book was good. While this book may leave you wanting more, it is still a quick and compelling read.

Reviewed by Stacey Seay
The RAWSISTAZ Reviewers

Unspeakable Reality.......2002-03-28

Oh my God...I did not know all this could happen to one woman and she still remains "sane"...but with God in your life we can do all things...I felt what Rhonda went through, and wanted to cry, laugh, shout, and all the emotions that came with her. Knowing the author, I never knew things could happen like that. I am so proud of you Teresa!!! I love you and keep up the good work. ...

From a supportive husband.......2002-02-10

This book is very enlightening. Why? Well, A lot of men really don't have a clue to some of the things that there women have been through, which cause them not to be able to understand them at times. Women seem to hide those deep secrets which causes an major impact on their individual character. Why I Kept My Past a Secret helps you not to competely understand a woman, but it helps you to understand some of the everyday struggles that accure in the lives of not only black women, but all women. Which makes this book enlightening to men, because the more men can learn about the emotions of women, the more we can be better Kings to our QUEENS!!! I suggest all men to read this book, and for those women that have men that are not into reading, read it to them!
Thank You!!

4 Stars!.......2002-02-10

Great first book for Ms Browning.
Her characters really come alive.
I think, I may have grown up with a few of them.
I highly recommend this book.

A must read........2002-01-24

I read this book in a day and a half, once I started I could not put it down. This book is a true example of the old saying, "you never miss what you have until it's gone." Ryan thought that he could speak to Ronda in a negative manner and she would accept it, I am glad Ronda realized she deserved better. The author did an excellent job of explaining why Ronda did the things she did as a mother first and a woman second. A lot of women would say I wouldn't take that off of him but you can never say what you would or wouldn't do, until you are in the situation. I was glad that Ronda was strong enough to leave Ryan and not go back. I am looking forward to a sequel. Ronda was indeed a srong woman.

Average customer rating:

WHY STUDY THE PAST?
ROWAN WILLIAMS
Manufacturer: Darton Longman and Todd
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
ASIN: B000OQ8368

Is God in the Details? The Archbishop of Canterbury looks backward.(Why Study the Past?: The Quest for the Historical Church)(Book review) : An article from: The Weekly Standard

Average customer rating:

Is God in the Details? The Archbishop of Canterbury looks backward.(Why Study the Past?: The Quest for the Historical Church)(Book review) : An article from: The Weekly Standard
Edward Short
Manufacturer: Thomson Gale
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Digital
ASIN: B000F8OGUM
Release Date: 2006-03-31

Book Description

This digital document is an article from The Weekly Standard, published by Thomson Gale on December 12, 2005. The length of the article is 2563 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Digital Locker immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.

Citation Details
Title: Is God in the Details? The Archbishop of Canterbury looks backward.(Why Study the Past?: The Quest for the Historical Church)(Book review)
Author: Edward Short
Publication: The Weekly Standard (Magazine/Journal)
Date: December 12, 2005
Publisher: Thomson Gale
Volume: 11 Issue: 13 Page: NA

Article Type: Book review

Distributed by Thomson Gale

Satan - His past present and future: Why doesn't God destroy him? (Christian-Study course series)

Average customer rating:

Satan - His past present and future: Why doesn't God destroy him? (Christian-Study course series)
Fred H Wight
Manufacturer: Robertson Pub. Co
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Unknown Binding

Book Description

In September 1946, the Soviet ambassador to the United States, Nikolai Novikov, sent a 19-page cable to Foreign Minister Molotov describing the likely direction of U.S. foreign policy in the postwar period. Recently discovered in the Soviet archives, the Novikov telegram parallels the famous "Long Telegram" of U.S. diplomat George Kennan. Published here for the first time in English, Novikov's telegram is presented alongside Kennan's cable and a similar telegram by British diplomat Frank Roberts.

Customer Reviews:

The Limits of Diplomatic Reporting.......2007-05-16

This interesting but limited book reprints three diplomatic cables from 1946 that analyzed the collapse of the Anglo-American-Soviet alliance of World War II and the outbreak of the Cold War: George Kennan's famous "long telegram" from Moscow; a cable from Soviet Ambassador Novikov in Washington; and a cable sent by the British charge in Moscow. Unlike most diplomatic reports, these cables dealt with huge questions of policy and were read by top officials of the home governments. They underscore how differently London, Washington and Moscow saw the world.

The British analysis was the most nuanced and non-apocalyptic; it still instructs and reads well in 2007. In contrast, Kennan's report was surprisingly shallow, even though it had a big impact in Washington; it came close to reducing Soviet foreign policy to neurotic anxiety, as if Moscow had no legitimate interest in secure borders. The analysis sent by the Soviet embassy was a curious document, mixing paranoia about American military preparations with shrewd observations of global politics. None of the cables displayed a deep understanding of the inner workings of the host government. Each served mainly to reinforce inclinations already prevalent in foreign policy circles back home.

Connoisseurs of diplomatic reporting will enjoy this book, but there's little reason for others to bother with it. The short commentaries do not -- contrary to the title -- add up to a history of the origins of the Cold War, though they do serve as good examples of how historians analyze documents. For specialists only.

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books