Customer Reviews

Complete Idiot's Guide to Understanding Catholicism

5 star:		(27)
4 star:		(20)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(8)
1 star:		(37)

 

 

When I opened this book, the first page I saw offered this information: upon entering Church, Catholics genuflect to show respect for the altar. Actually, we genuflect to show respect for the Eucharist, when it is present. Otherwise, we bow slightly to show respect for an empty altar.

While this example may seem minor, it is indicative of the general feeling I got as I moved through the book. In a nagging way, it seemed slightly inaccurate at times.

That's unfortunate, because I was impressed by the format and breadth of information - in a very readable form. That's a combination which is tough to find in any book about religion.

The book tries to introduce the reader to many of the cultural aspects of Catholicism such as meatless Fridays, ruler-wielding nuns, etc. This is the first time I've seen this much "Catholic trivia" in a book about Catholicism, which may be a large part of its appeal. The treatment of Catholic cultured seemed a bit cliched to me, but that's just one view. A person with a different (or non-Catholic) background may see it very differently.

Before you buy this book, you might take a look at Kevin Johnson's "Why Do Catholics Do That?" Johnson doesn't cover all the same information, particularly the cultural aspects, but his is also a very readable book which covers many of the doctrinal aspects in which Catholicism is different than most Christian traditions.

There's a lot of good material in this book, and the layout is attractive. Unfortunately, I can't recommend it, especially to beginners (its target audience). One problem, as mentioned by other reviewers, is the sprinkling of inaccuracies here and there. For instance, the authors claim that scapulars have been done away with in recent decades. Granted, scapulars may seem strange to most modern folks, but they're still officially encouraged, and worn by millions of Catholics.

A bigger concern is that the book consistently draws a false distinction between the "Pre-Vatican II Church" and the "Post-Vatican II Church", as if they were two different churches. In fact, there's only been one Catholic Church since the time of Christ. The Vatican II Council didn't define new doctrines, or do away with old ones; it only called for updates on the level of implementation (e.g. discipline and the liturgy).

Toward the end of the book, the authors take this concept to a more disturbing level, producing a list of terms contrasting the supposed "old and new paradigms" in the Church: "judgment" vs. "compassion", "heirarchy" vs. "community", etc. This is a false dichotomy. One Catholic scholar has noted that our faith tends to emphasize "both/and" rather than "either/or", and that's very true in this case. The Church is *both* a structured heirarchy and a community of the faithful, and Catholics are called to provide *both* sound judgment and gentle compassion. I'm not sure what the authors were trying to achieve by pitting these concepts against one another, but it doesn't give the whole truth about our faith.

If you're looking to learn more about Catholicism, by all means do so, but don't use the "Idiot's Guide" as a starting point. There are many better books available, like Peter Klein's "Catholic Source Book" or Liguori's "Essential Catholic Handbook". Or you could look for a basic catechism that's cross-referenced to the new official Catechism, the documents of Vatican II, and the Bible. (If you don't have these reference books, you can access them for free on the Internet.) Finally, if you're under age 35, I'd also recommend Mary Beth Bonacci's "We're on a Mission from God" for an fun and inspiring look at the Catholic faith.

Just read Bob's co-writer Mary's other book and you will see where her objectivity went. She is the "Earth Goddess" lady. Please read Catholicism for Dummies if you want a pretty accurate overview to Church teachings. Better yet, get the Catechism of the Catholic Church and read it yourself - I don't think you're an idiot and I think you are smart enough to be able to understand the Catechism. The Idiot's Guide is a misrepresentation of the Catholic Faith. It focuses on the authors' opinions and "Feelings" rather than official Church teachings. It wouldn't let me give it 0 stars, so I selected 1.

I bought the book expecting a down-to-earth explanation of Catholic beliefs and practices; was I ever disappointed.

Much of it isn't an explanation of the faith, but rather the authors' pushing of a liberal and politically correct version of Catholicism.

I can't list all the inaccuracies here -- but one glaring one occurs in Ch. 19, where one section heading reads "Abortion: A Tough Choice." A reader totally unfamiliar with Catholicism would get the idea that abortion is a valid choice for Catholics; it's not.

A little later, the authors claim that "the church allows abortions when they are necessary to preserve the mother's life." False; the Catholic Church disapproves of abortion in all cases.

There are numerous statements about the Church's roots to the Earth (is it about Catholicism or Gaia worship?) and about how Vatican II gave "shared power" to the people (it did no such thing; Vatican II reaffirmed the definitive authority of the pope and the bishops in communion with him).

There's also a claim that Christ never directed his teaching toward the authorities of his time, but only to the people. Again, false: there's more than one instance in the Gospels where Christ specifically directs his teachings toward the authorities, namely the Pharisees and teachers of the Law.

The authors give kid-gloves treatment to classic Catholic no-no's, such as abortion, homosexual acts, birth control, and the like. For instance, they write about how the Church "has not changed his view on homosexuality at the present time." Why would it? The Church's teachings on homosexual acts are definitive acts regarding a moral issue; it cannot be changed! Not to mention that such a change would not wash with the Bible. The book is littered with doctrinal errors of this sort.

The authors also assert that the Church's survival depends on its people; another "Catholic LIte" and "power to thee people" push. This directly contradicts Christ's promise that the gates of hell will not prevail against his Church.

For the authors Christ's words apparently mean nothing in their "power to the people" scheme.

In this case (and in several others too numerous to mention here), the authors are pushing "facts" that are entirely contradictory to Scripture.

In Ch. 25 the authors state that women have moved into the mainstream of society "with the exception of the Catholic Church." This is ridiculous; women are just as much a part of the Church as of any other institution.

They complain that all the "leadership positions" are filled by men. Wrong again; lots of leadership positions in the Church (Catholic hospital directors, school principals, social service agency directors, diocesan chancellors, etc.) are open to women.

In Ch 25 the authors complain about women not being priests, ignoring the fact that John Paul II and every other recent pope has stated definitely that the Church has no authority to ordain women. This isn't explaining; it's pushing an agenda -- one that's at odds with authoritative Church teaching no less. It has no place in a book that supposedly explains Catholicism to the uninitiated.

Much of this book is but a screed pushing the authors' "Catholic Lite" view of what the church should be; in so doing, they make numerous factual and even doctrinal errors. This book bears no bishop's imprimatur; plus the title page has a statement saying that the opinions in the book are solely those of the authors.

Want to buy a book on Catholicism that explains our faith (all of it) as it really is, rather than how the "progressives" want it to be? Make sure it has a bishop's imprimatur; ask the publisher or Amazon if it does, before you buy it.

Many problems in the Church, such as the sex-abuse scandal, are the direct result of the very sort of "Catholic LIte" version of the faith that the authors are pushing. The sort of agenda pushed by the authors, and those who share their opinions, has done estensive damage to the Church and its faithful.

The book's title is a misnomer; it's not a guide to true Catholicism. It's a guide to what the authors want Catholicism to be -- a feel-good, morally relative, politically correct, overly tolerant, "lite" religion that makes people feel better about their sins, rather than strive to turn from them. Do not buy nor read this book.

I bought this book as a new Catholic because I craved more information about the church and my new faith. It has disappointed me at almost every turn because the information given is so scanty, and often what I am looking for is not in the book. In one instance (wish I could specifically remember which subject), I found it to be incorrect. If you want a very broad overview of the faith, this book could work for you. If you want something with depth, steer clear of this one.

I fear this book with only help to stir anti-Ctholic sentiment and lead Catholics in the wrong direction. The author does not seem to fully understand some Catholic traditions, such as genuflecting in the presense of the Eucharist, and also has a shaky understanding of dogma and doctrine. It is not for the Catholic to decide what doctine to accept and not accept; by professing your Catholic faith, you profess to believe everything the Church teaches. This slips by this book. They also makes their biases known with their language on topics such as abortion.

Many people will read a book and accept what is in it as fact; I hope no one does that with this book. Please read Catholicism for Dummies. It is written by Catholic priests who understand doctrine and practices, agree with them, and present them truthfully.

WOW! I have been in therapy as an adult due to my religious background: Roman Catholic in the deep South! I ran from the church as quick as possible and while I have developed my own "brand," I really miss the fellowship and ritualism that the Church can offer. By reading this book, I have found a way to heal the wounds from the past by being able to forgive the Church--really the poor messengers it sent! This book is funny, informative, and timely. I am crazy for the way the authors explain years of theology in street terms. I found out alot more about being Catholic from this book than from all my years going to Catholic School and Church. Since I still cringe at the "male-ness" of religion, I found the presentation on Mary/Our Lady of Guadalupe soooo refreshing! I have a new perspective and respect for the institution of Catholicism. Thank you!

I paged through this book to see if it would be good for any of the RCIA folks I work with. Unfortunately, I would have to say that I have warned them against this book because it does not put forth the authentic faith. I paged through the typical areas of dissent and found that this book teaches falsely.

For example, it mentions the facts that after Vatican II some religious no longer wore habits and some priests would advise a person that in their circumstance it is okay to practice contraception. Neither was an intended reform, and in fact Vatican II empathetically proclaimed that we must be loyal to the teaching of the Magisterium. I found no reference to Vatican II's actual teaching on the subject.

This book caters to the American disobedience by inserting the irresponsible "Don't get caught up in the rules; it's love that matters." statements without the realization that it's those laws that teach us what love is. The law is the minimum, not the ideal that we can just break at our will.

If you want a better reading, go to Catholicism for Dummies. It is well-written and loyal to the faith.

I noticed that one of the authors of this book has taken time out of his (I am sure) busy schedule to haunt the Amazon customer reviews for the apparent purpose of quibbling with detractors. In order to avoid falling prey to this tactic, I feel the need to clarify a few things before expressing my opinion. To wit: I was born in the same year as Vatican II. I grew up in a very liberal (liturgically speaking) diocese. I have no memory of the Latin mass. I grew up with altar girls, folk masses, and the songs of the St. Louis Jesuits, and that's fine with me. I see Holy Communion received in the hand and Mass in the vernacular as part of a "back to basics" movement in the church, not as suspect innovations. In short, I do not fit the stereotype with which the aforementioned gentleman would seem to like to dismiss those who have objected to his book.

Now that that's off my chest, I can address the matter at hand. I'm afraid this review is rather long, because I actually read the whole book and am trying to cover it thoroughly. To its credit, the book is generally friendly and disarming in tone, particularly if the reader is one of those non-Catholics who regard the Church with suspicion. It does cover pretty much all the basic tenets of Catholicism, includes brief biogs of a number of saints and several popes, and outlines the main traditions and practices of the Church understandably. To its detriment, the book spends far and away too many pages on matters the authors seem to consider fundamental to Catholicism that actually have little to do with Catholicism or religion in general. A recurrent theme is that of "ethnic" or "tribal" Catholicism, and many of the experiences and perspectives put in the book by the authors are particular more to a certain Catholic demographic than to the Church at large. Not having grown up in the immediate pre-Vatican II period in an ethnic neighborhood in the urban Northeast, I really can't relate. Neither, I suspect, could the average post-Vat. II Catholic, Southern Catholic, Hispanic Catholic, foreign-born Catholic, or recent convert. Catholicism is about a relationship with God through Christ. Much described in this book is tangential but not essential. Most of it didn't really need to be covered in this book, either: that has been done (literally to death) in a large assortment of books, plays and movies.

One demographic that was shorted in this book was the non-Romans. While the Roman rite is the largest and best-known Catholic church, the fact that the Catholic Church includes a number of smaller Eastern Rite churches barely got a mention. This is a shame as the reader would never have a clue that different liturgical traditions (besides some fringe New Agers) flourish under the "One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic" mantle.

It is in the sections on social teaching and sexuality that this book really gets on shaky footing. The authors' personal biases were not difficult to spot. Repeatedly, when treating a subject of which they favored the Church's view (i.e. capital punishment) or just a subject with conclusions they favored (i. e. liberation theology) the authors were very positive and glossed over any controversy or objections to their position. Likewise, when treating subject matter on which they seemed to have fundamental disagreements with established Church doctrine (i. e. almost anything having to do with sex, or abortion) they tended to pile on the "nuances" to the Church's position or dismiss it altogether. Reading this book, one would never guess that there is as much (if not more) controversy among practicing Catholics with respect to the death penalty as there is with respect to abortion. (Sorry, pal, you lose the bet. I'm pretty much Seamless Garment.) These sections of the book and the final addendum on the clerical abuse scandal, moreover, relied rather heavily on opinion, speculation, and pop philosophy as far as I could see. I'd certainly like to see some documentation for the assertion that "there is no clear scientific agreement to determine when life begins." My background is in biology and that is balderdash.

Finally, I'll reiterate briefly a couple of objections raised by previous reviewers. First, it is true that the book got genuflection wrong. We genuflect before the tabernacle to acknowledge the presence of Christ in the Eucharist. In churches in which the tabernacle is kept in a separate chapel, we do not genuflect before the altar. We may, at our option, bow. Second, including Madonna in the section on well-known Catholics was a waste of paper. Madonna may be an ethnic Catholic, but as far as I can tell hasn't practiced either in ritual or in spirit in years. Though she employed the trappings of Catholicism in her act, it was just trappings and it was hardly done in a repectful way. As her spiritual journey has in recent years taken her to a New Age subset of Judaism, moreover, it's a bit presumptuous to keep trying to tag her with the Catholic brand.

It appears to me that the most gracious thing the authors could have done when presented with glaring evidence of their own error would be to muster a cheerful "My bad. We'll definitely fix that in the next edition." Instead, at least one of them seems to have opted for name-calling.

it seems designed to offend or slight practically everyone. It is too irreverent (literally!) for traditional American Catholics, too coy for R.C. liberals, yet too slighting of important matters even when playing up some relatively side-show stuff. And for this reader, not quite worth the price.

As many reviewers below have indicated, "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Understanding Catholicism" is not specifically Vatican-approved and thus does not bear the "Nihil Obstat" (no hindrance) imprimatur that would guarantee it the church's sanction. It couldn't possibly be because it takes issues with many of Rome's dicta--but then, for an "idiot" like me to understand American Roman Catholicism, he must understand that some of the Church's doctrines like abortion have been contrary to many of their American flocks' actual practices for decades. As others have said, if you want The Rules, buy the Catechism: it's cheap and not all that difficult.

The book gets off to an extremely poor start by blowing off the question of why Christianity exists, anyway. Concepts and individuals like "Resurrection," "Redemption" and "Mary" are completely ignored and do not receive their first mention until well inside the book--and even at that, the first mention is usually in passing.

One must ask: For whom was this book written? If for inquiring Protestants, the understanding that Prots and Catholics both depend on the dogma of Trinity, Judgment, Heaven, Hell and Resurrection is what unites us. The Vatican would tend to view a Presbyterian apostate but not beyond salvation because he subscribes to the same Trinitarian concepts. Also, as we encounter more and more non-Christians who ask us to briefly explain the basic tenets of Christianity--and the Trinity is not an easy equation for all of us to balance when caught off guard--this is a key omission.

So the Guide jumps into describing Roman Catholicism as a religion of ritual and ceremony. Begging the fact of what is being celebrated and for whom the rite is offered, that is not a bad beginning. Unfortunately, though, "The Complete Idiot's Guide" adopts a cheeky but cliche'd tone of Catholicism-as-individual quirk; the running subtext is Catholic-as-tribe, even to the point of "oh, those nutty Catholics" in the sense of Cheech & Chong's "Sister Mary Elephant" routine or those increasingly tiresome "Sister [Whoever] Explains It All For You" late night cabaret offerings. This strange mixture of loathing and love hint that the authors are telling us more about their opinions and history than offering a real objective overview of the faith. And with all due respect, I'm more interested in knowing about what concerns Catholics in 2003, not 1963.

Despite the jaded sophistication, and its tendency to give precedence to trivia over tenet, the "Idiot's Guide" isn't really as visitor-friendly as I had hoped. The "Our Father" (Lord's Prayer) is printed in the book along with the other familiar creeds, but the point is made elsewhere that a Catholic's congregation ceases the chant with "deliver us from Evil." Paying for this kind of book should specifically warn an idiot (like me) not to blurt out "For thine is the Kingdom . . ." when the only other person to do so is the priest! Also, what is the deal about fastings and weddings??? (If this book must be a book of trivia and etiquette rather than theology, at least let the etiquette be useful.)

On hot-button political issues, the authors have my sympathy. Simply to mention that matters like homosexuality, divorce and abortion exist among R.C.'s creates "an agenda" to some observers, opens up a reality to others, understates crisis topics to others. Matters such as this and ephebophilia (which most TV stations call "pedophilia") are inherently politicized and to say anything--or nothing--about them is to take a political stance. You've got the shaft automatically.

When they get further from home and detail how Catholicism has blended with ancient native cults to produce new rituals and celebrations, the authors' droll writing style combined with their new anthropological distance makes the book a much better read. Their take on Marianism (the veneration of Mary) is patiently and more logically explained than most I have seen, and without condescension.

On the whole, though, I think it's easier to do better than this one. If you really like the format of this series, I for one would prefer "Catholicism for Dummies." It isn't perfect, but it doesn't contain so many sins of omission.

x