Society Books

This is an excellent commentary and translation of the 1983 Code of Canon Law. Prepared under the auspices of the Canon Law Society of Great Britain and Ireland, it contains all the canons of the 1983 Code in a fresh English translation (approved by eight Bishops' Conferences worldwide) and a canon-by-canon commentary with footnotes and cross-references. The translation is accurate and clear, and the commentary is good, easy to understand and practical.

This volume is not overly verbose, unlike some commentaries, yet it packs in a lot of material to help even the lay-reader understand and apply the canon in his/her life/situation. It is a highly practical and pastoral commentary, that seeks to help the reader understand the canons in the light of the tradition of the Catholic Church enunciated through the teachings of Vatican II. Strong theology and ecclesiology permeates through the entire commentary, and in my opinion, it does a far better job than other American commentaries I have read. A fresh approach of this commentary is its views of canon laws as guides on the path to salvation, rather than as the ecclesiastical counterpart to civil laws aimed at restricting freedom.

Pope John Paul II described the 1983 Code as "the final document of Vatican II." This commentary can be described as permeating with the authentic teachings and thoughts of Vatican II. You need not agree with all the commentaries of the canons, but it has done an overall excellent job with providing a scholarly and faithful interpretation of this venerable tradition of the Catholic Church called Canon Law.

This is a Commentary on the revised Code of Canon Law, which was promulgated by the Roman Catholic Church in 1983. This particular Commentary is a joint endeavor by the Canon Law Society of Great Britain and Ireland, and the Canadian Canon Law Society. The writers are some of the finest canonists in the English speaking world. Their approach is both pastoral and scholarly. That is, every commentator makes an educated and obvious effort to provide practical answers to contemporary problems of the Christian Faithful today. This is not the first Commentary on the revised Code, but that has its advantage. It includes the benefit of twelve years of public reaction to the Code, once it was enacted to succeed the previous Code of 1917. The word "Catholic" means universal. To provide an organized and comprehensive Commentary on such a Code is a work of staggering proportion. These professional and learned Societies have completed this work and made a tremendous contribution to Catholic Church intellect.

A detailed and extensive, but still quite readable, commentary on all 1,752 canons of the 1983 Code of Canon Law. Already highly-regarded by practicing canon lawyers, this book is finding an increasing audience among laity who appreciate its accessible language and obvious commitment to accuracy. Written some ten years after the new Code went into effect, this book benefits by having allowed some post-Vatican II dust to settle and by being able to watch how some of the newer canons were going to be applied in actual Church life. I consider this work one of staples of canonical practice, and I use it on a nearly daily basis.

This commentary of the Canon Law Society of Great Britain and Ireland reminds me of the Homeletic and Pastoral Review -- a magazine which strives to be simultaneously orthodox, pastoral and accessible to the average reader. In my opinion, this commentary is a success for these reasons.

As a canonist who does freelance writing on the side for a variety of popular Catholic publications, and who often finds himself teaching canon law to non-canonists, this is the commentary I most often cite when doing so. Again, because it is orthodox, pastoral and written at a level most Catholics can understand. Its larger print layout only facilitates the ease with which one reads it. For those seeking a commentary for reference purposes, this is the way to go. It is very much like the family Bible one keeps on one's bookshelf.

John Ebert's remarkable book, Celluloid Heroes & Mechanical Dragons, does to movies what Joseph Campbell's Hero With a Thousand Faces did to myths. This is a mouthful, I know, but Ebert delivers. Armed with vast knowledge of our cultural past and a profound understanding of our present, he ventures into the world of "celluloid myths" (that Campbell pretty much dismissed until, as pointed out in the book, George Lucas turned him on to his Star Wars trilogy) and comes back with the boon. And what an incredibly rich and enriching boon it is.
Ebert uses his vast knowledge of myths, and practically everything else, to reveal the mythic dimension of some our most popular movies. As he maintains in the book, the first conscious incorporation of myths in movies, what he calls celluloid myths, was initiated by Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, which (according to the author) was inspired by Campbell's Hero. All the films discussed in the book are heirs to Kubrick's 1968 masterpiece: "2001 was the first major presentation of a theme that would come to be reiterated in film over and over again, namely that of the battle of an individual human being against an impersonal system that is threatening to dehumanize him, whether that system is defined as the megalopolitan city, the meta-national corporation, or technology in general . . .All are reworkings of Bowman's battle with HAL."
What I really liked about the book is that it doesn't dissect the movies to death, but rather provided enough insight so that I wanted to see many of these movies again. Before finishing the book, I couldn't wait to get the DVD's of the first two covered movies, Apocalypse Now (Redux) and 2001. The "guided tour of the films of David Cronenberg" even got me to the point where I want to take a second look at his movies, which (the ones I saw) I generally find hard to watch. I guess this best describes what the book did for me. Somewhat like the shield in Perseus and the Gorgon Medusa, it functions as a mirror that allows us to see the Mechanical Dragons that have become such a prevalent part of our movies (and our lives) and how they're slain by our Celluloid Heroes. It updates many of our most popular myths as never before.

With a white-hot strike to the center of the frozen, sterile and inert films that typifies modern Hollywood, John David Ebert reignites the passion, grandeur and vision that make film the most compelling, and relevant form of mass entertainment today. By distilling the great films of yesterday and today, Ebert manages in clear, distinct and entertaining prose to explain and explore why film has surpassed the novel as the preeminent purveyor of myth and wonder in our society.

His journey is precise and with an overall purpose, however, one may skip to chapters that hold special interest, for me, I found that reading the entire book was far more satisfying, even when I arrived at dissimilar conclusions than Ebert. For example, Ebert has long been an admirer of David Croenenberg, a director I find distasteful and vulgar in many respects, but in reading Ebert's exploration of Croenenberg's films, I found a new prism in which to view the director, and upon seeing his latest work A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE, watched the film with a deeper sense of what he was trying to achieve.

For me, myth has always been the cornerstone of all great art, whether it be visual art (painting), films, novels, I find that all such works are enriched by a foundation that embraces the great mysteries and universal connections which are the lynchpin of myth. Ebert's gift is the uncanny ability to take interesting films and dissect them at a historical, mythological and sociological level, deepening our understanding and appreciation of what makes certain films imprint the mind with images that recur and haunt and amaze us. What's even more interesting is that many of us watch these films with only a subconscious understanding of why they grip us in their web, which is actually the point. Myth is anything but conscious, it's wellspring is the imagination, the realm of dreams and nightmares and visions, and as such, need not be fully understood to be effective. Ebert's gift is to be able to show us all the facets that arise from the world's myths, whether rooted in Western or Eastern culture, his erudition, knowledge and ability to make them all cohesive is amazing. He's a good writer, a better thinker, a good critic, a better scholar.

One would assume that such an examination of myth and films would be dry and turgid, but just take a look at chapter 3, which is an interview Ebert did for a magazine. The discussions range from APOCALYPSE NOW to GODFATHER 3 to 2001 A SPACE ODYSSEY, and the way Ebert breaks them down is incredible. On APOCALYPSE NOW, he describes the film as a hero's descent into the underworld, mirroring some of Dante's INFERNO, and then in the same sentence, makes a segue to the Egyptian Book of the Dead, where the sun god Ra, journeys down a river through a kingdom of the dead, encountering obstacles until he reaches the Lord of the Dead, Osiris. Sounds convuluted? You're wrong. Ebert makes the transition so seamless and obvious that I actually started laughing with sheer intellectual enjoyment at what he was saying. In the same chapter, Ebert takes on the notion that many of these mythological symbols are accidental and not planned by the creative artist, and again provided brilliant analysis. For some, Ebert agrees, these symbols are certainly not always intentional, but he goes on to say that they spring for a universal source of creativity that is tied directly into the mythological wonder that occurs when the creative spirit is open to anything. So, though Kubrick certainly knew what he was doing when the ape throws the bone that becomes a spaceship, other artists arrive at the same powerful symbols through their own inward journey, which manifests itself as something that has existed for thousands of years. If you're confused by this, don't worry. Ebert breaks it down far more eloquently than I can, that's why he writes about myth and I try to tap into them in my day-job as a screenwriter.

A few nitpicky comments so as not to give the impression that I agree with EVERYTHING Ebert writes, that would make me a less-than critical thinker, which I hope I will always be. I wish he'd gone more into the Western and its mythic underpinnings, specifically films like THE WILD BUNCH, THE SEARCHERS, RED RIVER, ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST, and THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE, all of which seethe with classical mythological symbols and images (John Wayne standing in the open doorway at the end of the Searchers as civilization occurs within the house, while he's forever isolated from such comforts). Also, Ebert has a list of films he considers notable, and while "best ever" lists are always subjective, it's still a fun way to measure your tastes against others to see what you have in common and more importantly, what you don't agree on. Ebert has a top 16 of his generation, topped by 2001, and including JAWS and TITANIC. Every film on the list has been at least tangentially or substantively discussed in the book, but as with any list, there are some head-scratchers for me. I wouldn't include all 3 original STAR WARS films, I would only include EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, and leave it at that. I would drop VIDEODROME, AI, and SCHINDLER'S LIST (Ebert has a great affinity for SPIELBERG, a director I think is visually brilliant, but intellectually facile). Other than that, the list isn't bad, considering Ebert limited himself to "my generation" freeing himself from having to go back to a number of other great films. He pretty much starts his list from 1968 and moves forward, leaving the omission of WILD BUNCH (1969) as a puzzler, but subject to lively debate. That's what makes the book great, Ebert lays out the foundation of these visionary films and their directors and then invites you to do your own investigation and arrive at your own conclusions. His, he states with force and logic and conviction, no getting around that. But the whole point is for you to leave the book wanting more and going back to favorite films and having a second, third of fourth look, seeing new symbols, new connections, previously unnoticed.

The idea that visionary films have replaced great novels as the preeminent creative force of our time is one that bears more exploration. In the old days, you had great writers like MANN, JOYCE, PROUST and HESSE. Now, you have prose stylists masquerading as "serious" writers, with nothing visionary and interesting to contribute. they write mostly to impress their brethren, the audience be damned. I'm no Thomas Wolfe fan, but I agree with his manifesto years ago, that today's writers have abandoned great, realist stories in favor of fancy prose and post-modern angst that makes for empty reading. Films admittedly have their share of bad writers and bad directors, but on the other hand, there are more interesting and talented and risk-taking artists in filmmaking today than in literature. You have SPIELBERG, TYWKER, VINTERBERG, CUARON, SALLES, COPPOLA (he has one last masterpiece, trust me), SCORSCESE, JACKSON, CARO, CAMERON, et al. They represent a vital, powerful force that is driving the great films of today and tomorrow. If nothing else, Ebert's book leaves you awaiting the next, great work of these artists, knowing it will draw on symbols and touchstones that go back thousands of years, to our universal connection. And that's all we really care about when we view art. We want to be moved, touched, transported, entertained, frightened.

Awed.

Ebert knows this.

So should you

In the introduction to his "Understanding Media," McLuhan wrote that his editor "noted in dismay that `seventy-five percent of your material is new. A successful book cannot venture to be more than ten percent new.'" Ebert's "Celluloid Heroes & Mechanical Dragons" presents a lot of new material, but when the world has changed and few have noticed, there's a lot to cover.

To understand Ebert's book we have to address change, as in technology (biotech, computing, nanotech, quantum theory, etc.) is about to change us as a species. And a lot of the traditions that used to help us with change, like European intellectuals, the literary novel, and academia, are nowhere to be found.

Europe has left the scene. Today, looking at European/American culture wars, one is tempted to think of a quiet retirement community disturbed by rowdy teenagers with noisy motorcycles. The bikers can be dangerous, but we are not going to hear anything new from the retirees.

Academia has collapsed. We might have hoped that in a period of profound change academia would be on the case. Not. The contemporary PhD thesis, article, and book in cultural studies is typically written by putting poststructuralist jargon in a word randomizer and printing out the results to signal that one is a member of the tribe. (One such randomizer, Pixmaven's Instant Art Critique Phrase Generator, is available online) Which leaves it to the nonacademic "independent public intellectual" to analyze our culture. John Ebert is a leading member of this vital group.

And the literary novel has ended. Myers' "A Reader's Manifesto" looks at the state of the contemporary literary novel, the pretentious kind that wins awards and gets reviewed in literary magazines, and finds that it has degenerated into gibberish-"some of the most acclaimed contemporary prose is the product of mediocre writers availing themselves of trendy stylistic gimmicks." Ebert makes a related point at the beginning of "Celluloid Heroes" where he writes: "Surveying at a glace the current states of western literature ... compared to its state in, say the first half of the twentieth century, what strikes one is an appalling decline in overall quality."

Ebert's conclusion? A culture chooses an art form in which to invest its energy. That art form has a period of vitality and then falls into decline. The literary novel has fallen into such a decline, and has been replaced by movies.

Ebert's interest is in what he calls the "visionary movie" since 1968 (think Speilberg, Kubrick, Coppola, Lucas, Cronenberg, Tarkovsky, Scott, Cameron, etc.), and its focus on the impact of technology on our culture and ourselves as human beings. His approach is to treat movies as mythologically informed literature.

Despite the rejection of mythology in much of academia, it appears that our filmmakers have retained their mythological literacy, whether through subliminally absorbing the classics, or actually reading them. Ebert observes that in "Apocalypse Now," Coppola shows Kurtz reading Eliot's "The Hollow Men," which was inspired by Conrad's "Heart of Darkness," also the source of the plot of the movie, while the camera picks up Frazer's "Golden Bough" and Weston's "From Ritual to Romance" on Kurtz's desk.

What do we mean by mythology? We might describe a mythological position, particularly as taken by Joseph Campbell, as the notion that the structures and patterns of the energies of the cosmos that pour into the phenomenal realm are revealed in our myths, literatures, and arts.

Ortega y Gasset wrote:
"[T]he political or cultural aspects of history are... the mere surface of history; that in preference to, and deeper than these, the reality of history lies in biological power, in pure vitality, in what is in man of cosmic energy, not identical with, but related to, the energy which agitates the sea, fecundates the beast, causes the tree to flower and the star to shine."

It is this cosmic energy that Ebert identifies in the great visionary movies of our time. Thus Visionary movies are mythologically based and assume that there are archetypal patterns in the course of empires and nations, in our becoming fully human, in the human/technology interface, and in the cosmos itself. Academia today, with its poststructuralist viewpoint, takes Locke's "tabula rasa" position and is profoundly anti-essentialist, vehemently denying transcendence and archetypal patterns. Ebert's book is a refutation of this position.

From Ebert's point of view, the role of the movie critic becomes to approach movies with a background of literacy adequate to unpacking them and helping us in our readings of them. Ebert does this. Few other movie critics can.

So, should you buy this book? Here is how to decide: Write down a list of your top sixteen films. If five or more overlap with Ebert's list, order the book immediately. Here is Ebert's list.

1. 2001: A Space Odyssey
2. Apocalypse Now
3. The Star Wars movies
4. The Godfather movies
5. Close Encounters of the Third Kind
6. Alien
7. Blade Runner
8. Videodrome
9. Raiders of the Lost Ark
10. The Shining
11. The Exorcist
12. A.I,
13. Schindler's List
14. The Road Warrior
15. Titanic
16. Jaws

Another test is that if you enjoy the books of Joseph Campbell or William Irwin Thompson, you will love this book. You can see more of Ebert's work at the website, CinemaDiscourse.

John Ebert's book is essential reading for anyone even slightly interested in "visionary" film-- that genre of film that explores the imaginative and mythic possibilities of film, pioneered all the way back with George Melies, and carried on by such modern proponents as Kubrick, Coppola, Lynch, etc (where Ebert's focus predominates). He offers his keen scholarly insight into the mythic and sociological undercurrents of this still-evolving trend, which I found to be fresh and original. While one will inevitably disagree with some of his assessments ("The Matrix" as garbage?), that's actually some of the fun--and value--of works like this, since it forces one to formulate one's own views in response more clearly, and stimulate one's thinking in ways that straight consensus wouldn't.

There are a few notable omissions from his overview---horror films and experimental cinema surely deserve an seat at this visionary table--but then, a work covering every conceivable facet of this subject would have required a series of volumes rather than just one, so that may actually be a blessing in disguise. All in all, an important work on the premier art of our time--cinema.

Ché Guevara Speaks to Youth
The titles of these speeches are enough to tell why this should be every rebel's handbook.

As a physician, he explained that being good people is not enough to become a revolutionary doctor - one must make a revolution. Once that revolution had won through, he explained the tasks communist youth face. This advice may be taken well to heart, because there are too many people who try to be good persons, and leave it at that.

Read el Ché in his own voice, so you can make up your own mind. This is what Pathfinder Press stands out for: offering space for revolutionaries to speak for themselves. And well earned is this addition to the "...Speaks" "series."

Historically, this individual's intellectual development may be traced in this volume. The reader can see how the ideas gelled into what was to become the first experiment in the socialism of solidarity, which was retaken in 1985, just in time before the USSR began to quaver.

...as an equal.Too many books are out there "interpreting" Che Guevara ; most often by academics who fear and hate revolution.Here Che speaks for himself : how the Cuban revolution discovered the "road of Marx" by breaking out of the Yanqui Empire fror good; how "lone wolf" individualists do NOT make social revolutions; how to be a revolutionary MD or anything else "first a revolution must be made"; the need for a disciplined revolutionary youth organization;how to learn from fighting workers and peasants while fighting alongside them;internationalism as a necessity and a duty; the fight against postrevolution bureaucracy.These ideas as guide to action are how revolutionary Cuba has survived and will survive.Young and not-so-young fighters REQUIRE THIS BOOK as "globalized capitalism" tears our lives apart.To fight back "intelligently, as Malcolm X would say.Read "Cuba And The Coming American Revolution" by Jack Barnes side by side with this gem of a book.

Even if you are not so young person like myself, you can find your youth and your belief in the future,through Che's vision in these speeches. Whether speaking to a group of medical students in Havana, or a Latin American Youth Congress, or to anti-imperialist youth from around the world gathered in Algeria, Che's message to young people was not watered down. These speeches are a serious charge to young people to take the present and the future in their hands, and follow his vision of struggle for socialism, for the needs of working people, the oppressed, around the world. The ideas in this book are just as, or perhaps, even more valid than when Che lived.


While this book may not be directly available from Amazon at times, they are available from the booksfrompathfinder on Amazon that you can find by clicking on the new and used books on this page.

Che Guevara was an Argentinean-born revolutionary who helped lead the first socialist revolution in the Americas and initiate the renewal of Marxism. In Che Guevara Talks To Young People, he speaks as an equal with the youth of Cuba and the world as he challenges them to work, become disciplined, and join in the struggles for justice at home and abroad. Guevara excites youth to read, study, aspire to become revolutionary combatants, politicize the organizations and institutions they are part of, and in the process to politicize themselves. The talks collected in this single volume are prefaced by Armando Hart, and were compiled with the cooperation of Casa Editora Abril in Cuba. Che Guevara Talks To Young People is highly recommended reading for students of Marxism, the Socialist struggle in the Americas, as well as the life and thought of Che Guevara.

Hello, I just unpacked my copy today and I'm already hooked, ironically enough.

Great book. I'd highly recommend it!

This is an extremely valuable book which provides something not many other sources can: an unbiased, scientifically grounded analysis of psychoactives which also includes realistic cultural context, fascinating history, a sense of whimsy, and subjective descriptions of effects. This makes it of use to all kinds of people: those interested in psychopharmacology, drug therapy for mental illness, ritualistic and spiritual drug use, the mechanisms of the brain, safe and informed recreational drug use, and simply being informed about a broad and complicated social reality.

The book spends about equal time on the mechanism of action and chemical structure of the substances described, and the various uses to which they have been put throughout global human history. In these descriptions, it thoroughly cites studies and explains why said studies are the most useful, making it rather unbiased. That said, it is occasionally critical of drug laws, though any objective analysis is likely to come to the same conclusion, and included are very subjective quotations, though these are never stated as fact and give the book a page-turning, fascinating sense of narrative unexpected from a textbook. Overall, the work's scientific rigor is unquestionable and unlikely to meet critique but from opponents of drug use so strong in their fervor that they would deny objective truth.

Having been last updated in 1996, there are a few missing pieces of information regarding current drugs of abuse. For example, dextromethorphan is mentioned, but in very little detail compared to it's fairly widespread use in the current underground drug culture (and it is categorized mysteriously in the opioid section, despite being fairly well-recognized as a ketamine-like dissociative at higher doses). Another curious omission is Salvia divinorum, not recreationally popular until about the time of publication, but having been in shamanic use in Mexico for a very long time, and written about in scholarly literature as early as the 1960s. One other drawback for certain uses is that this is not a practical handbook: there is not much in the way of dosage information, and durations when present are a bit buried in the text rather than presented up-front. Luckily, the book, as stated earlier, is very well-referenced, and exploration of the works of cited authors/researchers (Huxley, Hoffman, Shulgin, et al) will provide far more depth into many of these areas. Hopefully future editions will be updated to include these and any other important omissions.

This book has it all, chemistry, cultural context, use, abuse, past, present and future. Is geared toward someone who has at least taken some o-chem, although non-science types could still get something out of it. The synthesis explanations can be a bit in depth, I have a degree in chemistry and a bit of that was way over my head. Book is also well refrenced, so should you ever get the urge to make some of these drugs you know where to go.

While I would not say that the merit of the book lies in its non-committal stance, I was certainly convinced that the author knew his chemistry. My reading was facilitated by the poetic interludes and anecdotes, which seem to have become a genre within science writing. Mr. Perrine should write another book, non-technical, and I am sure he will be as entertaining and informative. Inspired by his book I have released my newsletter with this theme this time.

Not to put too fine a point on it, the book is mind-altering itself. It changed the way I looked at my erstwhile indulgences.

This book published in 1950 was Erikson's breakthrough book, the first one by which he became known to a wide popular audience. Certain of the ideas formulated in this book have become part of the language of our general culture, most notably the concept of 'identity- crisis'.
At the heart of the theoretical framework of this work is Erikson's conception of eight- stages of life.
The first of these stages he calls the 'oral- sensory'.It involves the conflict between basic trust and mistrust.
The second is called the muscular- anal involving the confluct between Autonomy and Shame and Doubt.
The third is the Locomotor Genital involving the conflict between Initiative and Guilt.
The fourth is the Latent involving the conflict between Industry and Inferiority.
The fifth is Adolescence where the Identity- Crisis comes into play at a time of Role- confusion.
The sixth is Young Adulthood in which Intimacy is in conflict with Isolation.
The seventh is Adulthood where Generativity conflicts with Stagnation.
The final is 'Maturity' or "Old Age' where Despair threatens Ego Integrity.
In this work Erikson brings case - history, comparitive anthropological data in showing how the human personality is transformed during the person's lifetime also through its encounters with Society . A pioneering work of great importance.

Mr. Erikson wrote a thought-provoking book, but it is certainly a product of his times. Such notions as homosexuality being deviant (his word, not mine) behavior and was more of a symptom of a psychologically damaged individual has not held up to present scientific evidence. Overall, the book is a fascinating dissection of childhood development and how it possibly manifests itself in adulthood. But reading this material wasn't exactly a cake walk. I doubt many casual readers could wade through Mr. Erikson's book without developing MEGO (My Eyes Glaze Over) Syndrome. For what it's worth, I enjoyed most of it.

An Uber-Classic--Required reading for anyone in psychology. No! make that anyone, period.

Read it just because it's a classic or read it because it has interesting things to say for today. Read it because it's so well written. The narrative just flows, and before you know it you've absorbed some pretty important concepts.

Erikson addresses nothing less than the role of psychology in the world, and the role of childhood in our social worlds. It's a combination of the clinical, the social, and the developmental, a combination of psychology and history. Case studies are presented and large themes are addressed.

"...we are also forced to recognize a universal blind spot in the makers and interpreters of history," writes Erikson, "... they ignore the fateful function of childhood in the fabric of society" (p. 404).

Whether or not you agree with all Erikson says, you will find it food for thought.

This is a nice quality Bible in traditional characters. It is a sturdy hardcover with two red ribbon attached bookmarks, and begins at what we English readers would consider the "back" of the book (which threw me when I first opened it and found the index and the maps!). The text is vertical and moves from right to left, and the font is nice and large. God is referred to as "Shangdi" (with reference to the previous Bible review). This was published in Hong Kong.

It is illustrated throughout with simple line drawings, which are identical to those in my father's 1976 Today's English Version (TEV). It appears to be the exact same bible (also published by United Bible Societies), only in a different language. This will help me in my attempt to read it, since I have an English translation of the same book handy! I regret that I have only learned Simplified Chinese so far, but working with this will force me to learn Traditional too.

This appears to be ISBN 9622936016 Chinese Red Letter Edition Bible - Union Version (Shen Edition)

But check to see that ISBN matches your requirements

ISBN 9622934579 - TCV Traditional script Hardback
ISBN 9622934773 - TCV Simplified script Paperback
ISBN 9622937772 - TCV Traditional script TEV bilingual Hardback
ISBN 9622930093 - Union Traditional script [Shangti edition]
ISBN 9813099917 - Union Simplified script Paperback
ISBN 9813099844 - Union Simplified script Hardbackk

NOTE:

There are three main versions
- Chinese Union Version CU [hehe-ben] published by the Chinese Govt inside China
- Chinese Union Version New Punctuation CUNP [xinbiaodian hehe-ben] published by UBS
- Today's Chinese Version TCV [xiandai-ben] published by UBS in HK, Taiwan and Singapore
- Chinese Living Bible CLB [tangdai-ben] published by IBS in America
These versions are equivalent to RSV, TEV, and Living Bible respectively. The `new punctuation' version of the Union is not significantly different from the old Union version. PRC Christians tend to strongly prefer the old CU, which is freely available throughout China, but the TCV is a lot easier to read. The CLB is a paraphrase. There are also specialist editions such as NIV-CU, TEV-TCV parallel texts, New Testaments with pinyin superscript and CU or TCV Study Bibles.

There are two scripts
- traditional [fanti hanzi] used in Hong Kong and Taiwan and by overseas Chinese communities.
- simplified [jianti hanzi] used in the PRC and being introduced in Singapore.
Both script types may be printed vertically (read top-to-bottom) or horizontally (left-to-right).

Chinese Bibles are available as Shen Editions or Shangti Editions. Shangti means an edition printed with two characters 'Shang Di' for "God", a Shen Edition means an edition printed with a blank space followed by one character 'Shen' for "God". If not specified it will usually be a Shen Edition. What the difference is between the two terms is open to debate.

Fortunately at least there is no written difference between Cantonese and Mandarin. This distinction is only relevant to audio tapes. Hong Kong Cantonese read traditional script. Over the border in Guangzhou PRC Cantonese read simplified script. Likewise in Beijing they speak Putonghua (their name for Mandarin) but read the same simplified scipt as Guangzhou, and Taiwanese speak Kuoyu (another name for Mandarin) but read the traditional script like Hong Kong. Confusingly the Union Version is sometimes known as the `Kuoyu Bible' in Hong Kong even though there it is usually read out loud as Cantonese.

The picture is up side down!

Buying a Chinese Bible can be complicated:
Check to see that ISBN matches your requirements

ISBN 9622934579 - TCV Traditional script Hardback
ISBN 9622934773 - TCV Simplified script Paperback
ISBN 9622937772 - TCV Traditional script TEV bilingual Hardback
ISBN 9622930093 - Union Traditional script [Shangti edition]
ISBN 9813099917 - Union Simplified script Paperback
ISBN 9813099844 - Union Simplified script Hardbackk

NOTE:

There are three main versions
- Chinese Union Version CU [hehe-ben] published by the Chinese Govt inside China
- Chinese Union Version New Punctuation CUNP [xinbiaodian hehe-ben] published by UBS
- Today's Chinese Version TCV [xiandai-ben] published by UBS in HK, Taiwan and Singapore
- Chinese Living Bible CLB [tangdai-ben] published by IBS in America
These versions are equivalent to RSV, TEV, and Living Bible respectively. The `new punctuation' version of the Union is not significantly different from the old Union version. PRC Christians tend to strongly prefer the old CU, which is freely available throughout China, but the TCV is a lot easier to read. The CLB is a paraphrase. There are also specialist editions such as NIV-CU, TEV-TCV parallel texts, New Testaments with pinyin superscript and CU or TCV Study Bibles.

There are two scripts
- traditional [fanti hanzi] used in Hong Kong and Taiwan and by overseas Chinese communities.
- simplified [jianti hanzi] used in the PRC and being introduced in Singapore.
Both script types may be printed vertically (read top-to-bottom) or horizontally (left-to-right).

Chinese Bibles are available as Shen Editions or Shangti Editions. Shangti means an edition printed with two characters 'Shang Di' for "God", a Shen Edition means an edition printed with a blank space followed by one character 'Shen' for "God". If not specified it will usually be a Shen Edition. What the difference is between the two terms is open to debate.

Fortunately at least there is no written difference between Cantonese and Mandarin. This distinction is only relevant to audio tapes. Hong Kong Cantonese read traditional script. Over the border in Guangzhou PRC Cantonese read simplified script. Likewise in Beijing they speak Putonghua (their name for Mandarin) but read the same simplified scipt as Guangzhou, and Taiwanese speak Kuoyu (another name for Mandarin) but read the traditional script like Hong Kong. Confusingly the Union Version is sometimes known as the `Kuoyu Bible' in Hong Kong even though there it is usually read out loud as Cantonese.

the book was in excellent condition. and i would recommend the seller to others. i am satisfied with the service i got.

Frances Densmore lived with and studied the Chippewa people of Minnesota for several years. Her research has proved an invaluable resource for anyone wishing to know more about this fascinating cultural group. This book is chock full of information, from naming ceremonies to marriage customs to burial rites. If it were not for Mrs. Densmore, many valuable facts on an important people group would be lost

Chippewa Customs is a detailed and facinating book, containing extensive information that will assist in my research on the history of the Chippewa tribe. This is my first tool to begin my search for distant ancestors. God bless the Author Frances Densmore.

I wasn't sure what I was expecting when I picked up "Chippewa Customs" by Frances Densmore. Written in the early part of the 20th century, it's a book that has remained readable and certainly enjoyable throughout the years.

Frances Densmore paints a very vivid picture of the Chippewa/Ojibwe people, from how they picked their names, to what they wore in winter, to the fact that they liked fish-heads as a delicacy, or the sleeping arrangements inside the family wigwam. It's absolutely screaming-full of all those little details that you're constantly trying to find but never can seem to put your finger on.

They're right here, of course! My only complaint is that the ceremonies (Marriage, births, etc) are only touched upon barely. I would have liked to hear more about those particular aspects.

R. P. Kraynak, who teaches political science at Colgate, reminds us of Augustine's Doctrine of the Two Cities, meaning that the state's sphere is political and economic management and the church's sphere is salvation of souls. The two realms or swords are distinct but not separate. Indeed, the effective implementation of the Augustinian proposal, Prof. Kraynak maintains, preserves us, on the one hand, from the danger of totalitarian politics and, on the other, from the danger of theocracy. In an effective and even elegant argument, he warns us, however, that the church's (or, perhaps, churches') embrace of Kant's "personalism"--that we are people and not things--is, after a point, incompatible with Christianity, for Kantianism is rooted in naturalism, denyiny our eternal destiny and supernatural duties. Christianity has become so suffused with the liberal language of "rights" that it is increasingly given to the kind of sociological leveling and mass taste which are the poisoned fruit of the Modern Project but are finally destructive of political order. The Gospel, Kraynak suggests, tells us not only of the law of love but also of the fact of sin. Recognition of those eternal realities are at the heart of prudent statecraft and of Christian faith. We witness today a secular chiliasm which, to use Moynihan's apt phrase, "defines deviancy down" (238-242) and leads to moral relativism, nihilism, and emotivism which deny the transcendent and exalt ungrounded and unbounded "rights." Kraynak's insights into the ideas of freedom and dignity (61; cf. Rom 7:22 and 1 Pt 3:4), of proper Christian resistance to human rights (153), and of the roles of the secular state (189, 228-229; cf. 1 Pt 2:13-17) are simply superb. Although he might have mined Voegelin's works more effectively--and should have learned the proper spelling of "supersede" (!)--he cogently marshals the work of Solzhenitsyn, Goerner, Niemeyer, O'Donovan, Maritain, Novak, John Courtney Murray, John Finnis, MacIntyre, Strauss, and Lasch, in addition to John Paul II and Reinhold Niebuhr, while standing in principled opposition to Ackerman, Dworkin, Rawls, and Rorty. "Modern culture has cut out the highest part of the human soul," he writes, "the part that longs for eternity and for spiritual transcendence of the here and now, the part that seeks the presence of the Incarnate God . . ." (270). Warmly recommended!

This book takes a hard look at some of our most cherished notions; namely human rights and the notion of personal and political freedom. While claiming that Kant is the main culprit in giving birth to the current backslide of society into a self-destroying autonomy, the author questions even those movements (namely Christian personalism) that have tried to baptize Kant's notions of autonomy and turn them into a force for good and for God. While this criticism of Christian Personalism is not entirely warranted, it does raise a very serious question that needs to be considered; namely, what will be the final outcome of the Church's project of meeting the world on many of its own terms (terms redefined and redirected towards God)and bringing it to conversion? When we look at St. Paul and his appeal to the Unknown God of the Greeks, we realize that perhaps there is some precedent for success with the Church's current approach.

It appears that the author's reason for the criticism of Christian Personalism is fairly understandable. Regardless of how rights and freedom are metaphysically grounded, if those particularly modern political and personal notions are so extraordinarily liberating, then why (to ironically borrow a famous phrase) do we everywhere in modern democracies find ourselves more and more in chains? Why do we see so many atrocities committed (and turned into law) in the name of rights and freedom?

One cannot walk away from this book without gaining a profound sense of the limitations of our current form of democracy and of our cherished notions of personal freedom, human dignity and human rights. We really do have to place our hope in God and not in democracy or freedom. Those latter notions can too easily turn against us. It is an extremely sobering read to say the least.

This is a genuine 21st century article. Liberalism--based on the idea of the sovereign individual--has no future.

R. P. Kraynak, who teaches political science at Colgate, reminds us of Augustine's Doctrine of the Two Cities, meaning that the state's sphere is political and economic management and the church's sphere is salvation of souls. The two realms or swords are distinct but not separate. Indeed, the effective implementation of the Augustinian proposal, Prof. Kraynak maintains, preserves us, on the one hand, from the danger of a totalitarian politics and, on the other, from the danger of theocracy. In an effective and even elegant argument, he warns us, however, that the church's (or, perhaps, churches') embrace of Kant's "personalism"--that we are people and not things--is, after a point, incompatible with Christianity, for Kantianism is rooted in naturalism, denyiny our eternal destiny and supernatural duties. Christianity has become so suffused with the liberal language of "rights" that it is increasingly given to the kind of sociological leveling and mass taste which are the poisoned fruit of the Modern Project but are finally destructive of political order. The Gospel, Kraynak suggests, tells us not only of the law of love but also of the fact of sin. Recognition of those eternal realities are at the heart of prudent statecraft and of Christian faith. We witness today a secular chiliasm which "defines deviancy down" (238-242) and leads to moral relativism, nihilism, and emotivism which deny the transcendent and exalt ungrounded and unbounded "rights." Kraynak's insights into the ideas of freedom and dignity (61; cf. Rom 7:22 and 1 Pt 3:4), of proper Christian resistance to human rights (153), and of the roles of the secular state (189, 228-229; cf. 1 Pt 2:13-17) are simply superb. Although he might have mined Voegelin's works more effectively--and should have learned the proper spelling of "supersede" (!)--he cogently marshals the work of Solzhenitsyn, Goerner, Niemeyer, O'Donovan, Maritain, Novak, John Courtney Murray, John Finnis, MacIntyre, Strauss, and Lasch, in addition to John Paul II and Reinhold Niebuhr, while standing in principled opposition to Ackerman, Dworkin, Rawls, and Rorty. "Modern culture has cut out the highest part of the human soul," he writes, "the part that longs for eternity and for spiritual transcendence of the here and now, the part that seeks the presence of the Incarnate God . . ." (270). Warmly recommended!

From a personal background experience, Betsy Leondar-Wright very effectively candidly and honestly communicates "the politics of class and what gets in the way of cross-class alliances." She provides convincing evidence from very interesting and inspiring individual experiences from people from various classes to support what she says about inequality and the struggle for social justice in America. Harold L. Carter, Retired History Teacher, Dayton, Ohio

I found this book very helpful in understanding how movements for social change could be strengthened if participants could more naturally acknowledge and bridge class differences. The writing is clear and engaging, and the photos, cartoons and sidebars make it "user friendly." I highly recommend it to anyone involved in work for social change, regardless of economic persuasion.

Class Matters is such a great crystallization of things I've heard about class in little bits and pieces; Leander-Wright's models brings all the parts together. The format is really wonderful. I found myself picking it up, reading a story, putting it down to think for a while, and then flipping to another section for new inspiration. I so appreciated that the stories highlighted showed both the challenges and the successes of working across class lines.

This is the best book I've read on class--after looking at dozens of them. It's full of stories, photos, cartoons, and full of tips of obvious use to activists who want to work well with people of different class backgrounds and to educators who care about one of the most important and least comfortable issues in our society. I've already brought it to a social change gathering with other literature and it was the most sought-after book.

I had heard rumors that this book existed for close to two decades.
Reading the book itself killed me! I feel that I have learned enough from this book to sit down with Nebuchadnezzar at Starbucks in Mesopotamia and chat away! The recent buzz online is that Tomback and his wife were collaborating on a sequel but that somehow the manuscript got all wet in a work related accident. To summarize my review in one word: PARVVVVVVVE!!!!

Can you imagine living your life without knowing the in-depth meanings of a dead language? I certainly could not! This is a must have for any home, especially with younger children. To not understand the correct pronunciations of words like - nemuch, chesed, rachamim, basar vbadam is a crime. I can not wait for part 2. Well worth the small loan needed to purchase this novel. J.K. Rowling and Shakespeare have met their match!

The author of this book Dr. Richard Tomback was my teacher in High School. We always wondered why his forehead was so big. While taking a bath with my wife, I realized the brilliance of this mans brain. His brain is so enlarged that his forehead became bigger.

This gripping, edge of your seat turnpager had me reading it again and again just for the sheer punic pleasure of it. It is PAAAAAAAARRRRRRRVVE!