<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Superficial and dishonest analysis
Review: As a Catholic theologian and ordained clergyman, I am embarrassed by this sort of superficial analysis. This is not a sincere attempt at establishing a serious dialogue, but a cheap caricature. Moreover, the author's own views are presented as though they reflect Catholic tradition. Instead, they reflect Catholic modernism, thinly veiled. I accept historical criticism and the legitimate gains made by modern scholars, but the view of Scripture in this book is much closer to liberal protestantism than to the Church's official teaching. Fundamentalism serves as a convenient surrogate for attacking the Church's own high view of inspiration and inerrancy. What a shame. And a sham.
Rating:
Summary: A very shallow book
Review: Coming from a conservative evangelical Protestant viewpoint, I was really curious to see what a Catholic priest and seminary professor might say about fundamentalism. Unfortunately, I have to report not only that Witherup had nothing intelligent to say, he wasn't even intelligible. Indeed, to criticize something you haven't even taken the time to TRY to understand takes something truly special. And Witherup's ignorance and arrogance are truly special. After 86 pages, I know what Witherup thinks about lots of things, but I can't tell if he's ever read a single book by a fundamentalist. Apart from a passing reference to a fifteen-year-old title by Jerry Falwell, Witherup doesn't interact with -- or even show any awareness of -- even one of the many conservative fundamentalist or evangelical biblical scholars. Men like Don Carson, Greg Beale, Doug Moo, Gordon Hugenberger, Moises Silva, John Walton, Walter Elwell, Bruce Waltke, Walt Kaiser, Leon Morris, Gleason Archer, Scott Hafemann etc. may all uphold the highest and strictest views on biblical inspiration and inerrancy (not unlike Pope Leo XIII & Pius XII), but they also have doctorates from Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge, Tubingen, Yale, Princeton etc. And unlike Witherup's shallow and superficial output of 6 "pop" articles, these scholars have published serious commentaries and scholarly monographs. Sadly, the fact that Donald Senior would recommend this book may suggest that Witherup's combination of arrogance and ignorance may not be so rare, after all, at least within that narrow clerical clique of aging Catholic biblical dissidents. To imagine that the Sulpicians have sunk to this level -- Raymond Brown must be rolling over in his grave.
Rating: 
Summary: A good start: Here, private communication from author
Review: I read the other reviews and I succeeded in one email exchange with the author. The author's goal was an introduction, a brief but concise comparison of fundamentalist and Catholic views on the Bible. He has succeeded in making the basic distinction. I think and told him that he doesn't offer alternative interpretations to the texts of Scripture where the greatest differences exist with fundamentalists. Catholic biblical scholarship indeed comes across as a type of modernism, disrespecting centuries of Catholic Church teaching and precedent. He satisfies himself to paint a fairly accurate picture of the fundamentalists' view of scripture and then offers a thumbnail sketch of the Catholic view, without many specifics. By email, he referred me to the (mostly Catholic) bibliography of his book for further information. I take exception to one of his more controversial assertions, That fundamentalists tend to canonize social relationships in the bible that in fact were simply accidents of their historical context. In other words, the subservient position of women in the bible is not a precept of the bible, but just a reflection of the times of the writer. This idea is clearly stated as a difference of Catholics and Fundamentalists, but it is poorly motivated. By private communication he says: "The Bible does not contain fiction (as we moderns would define it) as such, but not everything in the Bible is history either. Your examples of Jonah or Ruth or Esther are narrative stories with various moral and/or heroic themes in them, and Genesis 1-11 is myth (not fiction) with an important theological perspective to it. "Myth" here does not mean an untrue story but a narrative with a profoundly true message, couched in ordinary story language. Fundamentalists, too, can recognize that some stories are not meant to be literally true (they are not all literalists), depending on the literary genre of the story, though they tend to read Gen 1-11 as historically and scientifically true, in contrast to non-fundamentalist approaches."
Rating: 
Summary: THIS BOOK IS REALLY WORTH READING
Review: This is an excellent book. It gives a good perspective of Fundamentalist and Catholic beliefs. It is for members of both faiths who want to learn more about the faith of each other.
It is well written by a highly educated man. I believe members of both faiths would benefit from reading this book. Greg
Danville Holy Family Parish
Rating:
Summary: A very shallow book
Review: This is an excellent summary of Fundamentalism vis-a-vis Catholic beliefs; I strongly recommend it for any interested layman or laywoman who wants a concise reference. The writing is intelligent, succinct, accessible for readers of all levels and experience. Would make a great gift.
Rating:
Summary: Educational for people who want to understand the Church
Review: This is one of the best books I've read that explains the Catholic view of the Bible and the difference from fundamentalists or Evangelical Christians. This book is especially informative to the educated, thinkers, and people who have a hard time with religion in the modern world. What I enjoyed most was that the book showed what the Bible is really about and portrays that not every Christian is ignorant and anti-science. Many people that use reason as part of their faith want to go to church without committing intellectual suicide. This book is a good place to start. ( Also check Marcus Borg)
<< 1 >>
| 
