Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
38 of 52 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
What did Jesus do in History?, February 9, 2008
"Christ the King,Lord of History" has a few positive aspects (it's the seminal text for many Catholic homeschoolers). It doesn't secularize history. It acknowledges the Catholic contribution to world history. It doesn't have the political correctness of public school history textbooks- but,like them,it is biased,and the bias leads inevitably to inaccuracies.
"Christ the King,Lord of History" sanitizes and sugar-coats abuses Catholics have engaged in throughout history. Carroll rationalizes the restrictions placed on Jews after Christianity was made the official religion of the Roman Empire. According to her reasoning, Jews' freedom of movement (esp. during Holy Week&Easter)&freedom of religion presented a tremendous danger to Christians. Jewish men HAD to wear special clothing to protect the virtue of Christian women. Carroll rationalizes the oppression of the Roma (Gypsies),saying they basically deserved it,since they're thieves and kidnappers anyhow. So,when Carroll condemns the second-class citizen treatment of Jews in Islamic countries,it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black. She rationalizes the oppression of heretics and non-Catholics,saying it was to protect the Faith. In her view,it's okay to execute heretics,because it's all about saving souls. So much for an open mind... If her faith is so strong,why does she think it was great that people who think differently were once killed for their ideas? It sounds like Orwellian thoughtcrimes to me.
"Christ the King,Lord of History" gets outrageous when Carroll condemns Martin Luther King,Jr and Nelson Mandela. Carroll views the movement for de-segregation as a vast Communist conspiracy to cause chaos in the US and the battle against apartheid as a Communist conspiracy to destroy South Africa. Yet Carroll has the audacity to say racism is wrong. Huh? Never mind Martin Luther King praised natural law&was a Christian minister.
When it comes to WWII,Carroll praises Spanish dictator Francisco Franco as a great Catholic. Never mind the fact he was a fascist,and that non-Catholics/non-Christians couldn't engage in public worship (sounds a lot like Saudi Arabia,where non-Muslims can't worship publicly)
"Christ the King,Lord of History" is a meta-narrative,full of propaganda. It sugarcoats and sanitized oppression,further promoting the view that history is written by the winners&those who have the power. Carroll's ideology can be summed up as- might makes right,and power is everything. In a sense,her book reads like a mirror-image of Marxist histories,and just as accurate (NOT!) as the history textbooks in the former Soviet Union. Carroll's ideal world is reminiscent of "1984" (she does praise Joe McCarthy's red-baiting),except it's Big Church,not Big Brother. What's tragic is that this book would further fuel anti-Catholicism&give militant atheists like Philip Pullman more reasons for what they believe. Her worship of power is insulting to Jesus,who embraced the Cross&taught love for all. What would Jesus do? He wouldn't oppress.
|
|
|
51 of 74 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Readable but problematical, July 3, 2003
As a traditionalist Catholic and a professional historian, I cannot recommend this book whole heartedly.
This book is a passable Catholic introduction to world history. Maybe I should say, a Catholic tweak on world history. By trying to Catholicize history, the author provides a fresh look but makes no contribution and actually distorts many issues.
There are major advantages to this book. It gives a point of view not normally found in other texts. It covers history in a readable style. It is primarily a survey book.
There are major cons. The author ignores the contributions of major civilizations or glosses oevr them. The author also attributes ideas to time periods where they did not enter into play. Take, for example, the idea of distributism.
I would recommend this book as additional reading but not as the main textbook in schools or hoemschool history programs.
|
|
|
17 of 26 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
"World history" is a very misleading description, October 6, 1999
By A Customer
It was only after buying the book that I noticed on the back cover that it was a mostly Western European history. Hardly any mention was made of Asia, the largest continent in the world. Many events occurred there that had far reaching influence on the rest of the world. Yes, this book is very biased and not one I would use if I really wanted to know about the whole world. The author is a talented writer in the sense that it's a book you feel compelled to keep reading till the end.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Belinda Mooney
by Rachel Szilagyi
by Dr Anne Carroll
by Bishop Furlong
by Bishop Furlong
