This is a book of wisdom and insight that explains how providential are the trials through which the Catholic Church is now passing. The need of the Papal Primacy to ensure Christian unity; the true meaning of the Priesthood as a sacrament and not a mere ministry; the necessity of the Eucharist as the Sacrifice of the Savior now offering Himself on our altars; the role of the Bishops as successors of the Apostles; united with the successor of St. Peter; the Bishop of Rome; the value of suffering in union with Christ crucified; the indispensable service of the laity in the apostolate - all these themes receive from Cardinal Ratzinger new clarity and depth.
#1628993 in Books John F Blair Pub 1996-09Ingredients: Example IngredientsOriginal language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.25 x 6.25 x 1.50l; #File Name: 0895871505452 pages
Review
0 of 1 people found the following review helpful. A great addition to any Civil War buffs' libraryBy Jonathan WellerGeneral Robert F. Hoke: Lee's Modest Warrior; by Daniel Barefoot; is a rather comprehensive biography on the youngest major general in the Confederacy during the American Civil War. Barefoot’s work is the first full-length treatment for Robert Hoke; and all things considered it is one of the best that I have ever read. The book flows nicely and keeps the reader engaged and engrossed along the way; and the author; though his intense writing skills does a tremendous justice to Hoke with this work. Barefoot—who shares a common birth locale with Hoke—does lean heavily toward Southern perspectives of the war; and at times seems a little too neo-Confederate for my tastes. If the reader; however; can overlook this pitfall; the book is definitely one of the better Civil War biographies.The first thing that many readers will gather from Daniel Barefoot’s biographical treatment of Hoke is the skillful writing that the author us able to employ (not surprising considering he is a lawyer). This work is thoroughly entertaining from start to finish; and really has only a few flaws that offer any detraction from the book. The first; and most noticeable; is that the reader is never able to really ascertain Hoke’s true feelings and emotions at any time throughout the book. Robert Hoke apparently never wrote anything about his escapades during the war; kept no personal diary chronicling the battles and scrapes that he endured; and apparently there are no personal letters that have survived to tell us much of anything. Therefore; Barefoot is forced to rely most often on speculation (I am guessing here) or secondary opinions of Hoke by other soldiers.Though the first issue never really takes the reader’s eyes to far from the pages; it does tend to make one wonder what Hoke was actually feelings at various times throughout the story. The most interesting incident to have had Hoke’s most intimate feelings reveled would have been during the Gettysburg campaign of 1863. I often felt myself wondering aloud what Hoke felt like while the Army of Northern Virginia was traversing its way North into enemy territory; and he was left behind convalescing. Hoke—wounded at Chancellorsville in May—was forced to miss the most pivotal battle ever waged on North American soil; yet surprisingly; he left no recollections of how this impacted him. I imagined what I would have felt like; but who actually knows how Hoke felt. Examples like this one are just some of the issues that readers may face when reading Barefoot’s book.My other big issue with Barefoot’s work is one that is fairly typical of all writers of biographies regardless of time and historical persuasion: subjectivity. Barefoot quite obviously from the opening pages is a Robert F. Hoke fan; and accordingly centers his work upon this premise. To Barefoot; Hoke always seems to be the wisest and most scrupulous general on the field at any one time; he is only ever not successful in operations because of his superior’s blunders and mismanagements on the field (George Pickett and Braxton Bragg come to mind). Also to Barefoot; Hoke often times takes on a demi-god type of persona: Hoke is always so modest and gracious throughout the work. Even when others offered criticisms of Hokes performances during the war; Barefoot works around them quite skillfully and quickly. I am not doubting Hoke’s skill and ability as a field commander; but Barefoot’s unquestioning bias does convolute the writing at various locations.Though my last observation of the book may only pertain to Civil War buffs who value the most intricate detail when writing about the war; the book does have some pretty glaring errors encompassed within its pages. The author knows his stuff when discussing the various battles and commanders for the most part; however; and rather inexplicably; the author makes mistakes that even amateur Civil War fans could point out. For instance; the author refers quite often throughout his book to E. Porter Alexander as William Porter Alexander. Why? I would be willing to guess that even the most layman of the genre know his name was E. Porter Alexander and not William. Other mistakes are as follows: at Cold Harbor the Federals lost over 10;000 men on June 3; 1864 (that’s high even for neo-confederates); James P. Anderson commanded a brigade of Georgia troops in Virginia (it was George T. Anderson; James P. was out in the western theater); and the most controversial of all claims was that Robert F. Hoke was Lee’s handpicked successor as commander of the Army of Northern Virginia. This is thoroughly entertaining in theory; but Barefoot never presents any conclusive evidence that both Lee and Jefferson Davis desired for Hoke to command the Army of Northern Virginia if something should happen to Lee. In fact; what about military protocol that the army would have had to abide by? It is highly questionable that Davis--or even Lee for that matter; could have simply willed Hoke to command the army when men like Longstreet; Hill; Jubal Early and even Richard Anderson would have been his senior and had more upper level command experience. interesting claim; but little evidence to back up such a claim.Looking at my critique of the book one may ask how I found anything useful from reading it. In fact; there is an immense amount to like about this book. Without the use of many primary Hoke sources; Barefoot presents a first-rate biography on one of the Confederacy’s least known major general’s. This; in itself; must have been a task; and Barefoot handled it well. The writing style is free and easy to follow for everyone—regardless of interest level in the Civil War. Lastly the reader is able to see the war from another perspective; one that started from a lieutenant and worked his way all the way up to major general. All these things combine to make Daniel Barefoot’s work on Robert F. Hoke one of the better Civil War biographies that could be read.1 of 2 people found the following review helpful. Great Read!By Leslie M NobleHave not yet finished the book but I have thoroughly enjoyed it. Well written; detailed; concise and icludes many first hand accounts of the events. Was not a big Civil War buff previously but definitely want to read and learn more about this important part of our history.2 of 3 people found the following review helpful. Great resource for family history; plus interesting topic.By Marlene ForsytheGeneral Hoke was an interesting person and I enjoyed learning about his life and career. I also consulted it for family genealogy.
