Christine A Carty

Reader did a fine job. Story was crap.

Revisado: 03-07-24

Just liberal formula writing. No imagination, just stale rubbish. (The reader did a grand job, mind you.)

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Disappointing

Revisado: 07-04-21

I really like the Great Courses series. But, this was a disappointment – The first lecture starts of with a discussion of Dietrich Bonhoeffer; a discussion that is at once intellectually shallow and objectively misleading. Dr. Fears presents his very distorted account of Bonhoeffer’s morals, world-view and ethics, and apparently entirely fails to grasp that Hitler and Bonhoeffer were both cut from the same bolt of (German) cloth. Dr. Fears criticizes Hitler while lionizing Martin Luther as Bonhoeffer’s foundation of ethical greatness and clarity.

Perhaps Dr. Fears is unaware of the fact that Bonhoeffer’s great mentor and moral leader, Martin Luther, wrote “Von den Jüden und iren Lügen” and was, at least proximately, responsible for the death of some 400,000 people in the Sixteenth Century during the Peasant’s Revolt (not to mention the additional tens of thousands of Catholics who were slaughtered the Protestant Deformation in the years that followed).

It is through this bizarre and stilted lens that Dr. Fears tells us he is going to present his ideas on important literature. Not a context I can appreciate.

I suffered through the first lecture to give Dr. Fears a fair hearing, but when the second lecture started where the first left off, I decided my time was probably better spent listening to something else. Alas, history is becoming very subjective again.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

Performer ruins this product.

Revisado: 05-24-19

The speech patterns of the narrator makes it difficult to listen to this otherwise good novel. The narrator has a bad habit of "upspeak" (breaking sentences into fragments each ending with an high-rising terminal, also called "valley girl speech." Eventually one is focused on the annoying anticipated terminal instead of what is being said. Additionally, the narrator may begin with a slightly different intonation or "voice" for a different character, but then he gradually fades back to a baseline character voice. Ultimately listening to 22 hours of valley girl would probably detract from any novel.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

A terrible disappointment

Revisado: 11-08-18

For some reason, I had long been under the impression that His Grace was a faithful traditional Catholic. This book sadly dispelled that myth, and revealed a vapid, luke-warm, cookie-cutter Novus Ordo nothing. This is modern, empty formula writing at it's best.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 2 personas

Narration problems

Revisado: 03-10-18

What did you like best about The Lion of Münster? What did you like least?

The story is one of heroic bravery.

What didn’t you like about Kevin F. Spalding’s performance?

The presentation was marred by the narrator who insisted on attempting to pronounced German, Italian and Latin words in an affected voice and attempted accent that was amusing at first, but which quickly became not just annoying but down-right distracting. Whereas I would recommend purchasing the book, I would not recommend purchasing this presentation.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

A waste of time

Revisado: 07-17-16

This book wasn’t for you, but who do you think might enjoy it more?

Perhaps a nonthinking person who knows nothing of history, and doesn't care about facts.

Would you ever listen to anything by Eric Metaxas again?

No.

What about Malcolm Hillgartner’s performance did you like?

Excellent! The narrator did a fine jab and the book was very nicely produced.

If you could play editor, what scene or scenes would you have cut from Bonhoeffer?

Everything between the first and last page.

Any additional comments?

It is difficult to understand how this book gained any popularity. Poorly written, (being an hodge-podge of facts and fiction), the book portrays a terribly confused man. If the biographer is to be believed, Herr Bonhoeffer esteemed ecumenism, but railed against it unless it was his kind of ecumenism; he adored the bible, but rejected it’s foundational teachings, he glorified Christ, but rejected The Church Christ established for his glory; Herr Bonhoeffer extolled orthodoxy, and so, as an heretic, he invented a new religion.

Neither an original thinker, visionary, prophet nor defender of Christianity, Herr Bonhoeffer emerges as a mediocre sophist drowning in a swirl of self-centered modernist theology devoid of the very principles the biographer seems to believe were the foundation of his life.

The author’s inability to catch the plethora of his own contradictions and fictitious statements indicates the author’s intent was to invent a myth about a rather ordinary, muddled, and confused man who, like millions of other decent humans, hated the Nazis. I think the inspiration of the myth of Bonhoeffer was probably the life of Father Hugh O’Flaherty as described in Brian Fleming’s book “The Scarlet Pimpernel,” however, neither the real life of Bonoeffer nor the ability of the author re-tell it merit public acclaim.

Although the narrator did a fine job, and the production is of very high quality, the product stands as proof that one really cannot put lipstick on a pig.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Poorly prepared narrator

Revisado: 05-31-16

What could have made this a 4 or 5-star listening experience for you?

A different narrator.

What was one of the most memorable moments of The Vatican Pimpernel?

The continued mispronunciations and bad accents

Who would you have cast as narrator instead of Brian Troxell?

Any one who was willing to put in the time necessary to do a good job.

You didn’t love this book... but did it have any redeeming qualities?

Yes the story itself is intriguing and well written.

Any additional comments?

This otherwise good composition was undermined by the narrator who appears to have done little by way of study. Being an American, the narrator could be forgiven for mispronouncing “Taoiseach” or the “Oireachtas” however, in a book about a fellow named Hugh O’Flaherty, it is astonishing that the narrator could not pronounce “O’Flaherty.” Instead, like incessantly hitting a bad note on a piano during the recital of a piece of classical music, the narrator repeats “O’FLAIR-riddy” over and over and over.

Eventually one loses track of the point of the narrative and instead focuses on the narrator’s poor performance, and continued mispronunciations.

The narrator then compounds this problem with multiple attempts at what he apparently believes is an Irish accent – an accent that comes out more like a cross between a Somerset farmer and Australian drover. It is clear the narrator has never actually ever heard a Kerry accent, and has apparently taken his exemplar from US TV shows that purport to have Irish characters.

I have little doubt the author of the book is not at all happy with the sloppy work of the narrator. I would not recommend the selection to anyone; either buy the actual hard copy or wait for another narrator.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

excellent read

Revisado: 02-27-16

Excellent read for the serious student. The author deftly demolishes the ohhhh so tiring myths concerning several topics such as the myths of the Inquisition, the myths of the Crusades, the myths of the persecution of Galileo, the myth of church vs science, and the myth of church versus women.

Certainly a book that will be hated by the political left whose entire stance against the Catholic Church relies on the propagation of baseless myths.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 9 personas

Well done, very enlightening

Revisado: 08-27-15

What did you love best about The Modern Scholar: The Philosophy of Thomas Aquinas?

Prof. Kreeft has done an excellent job or taking one through the philosophy of St. Aquinas while on the one hand, expecting the audience to not be philosophers or theologians, and at the same time, not being complete dolts. The pace and level of delivery was just about right for my level of understanding of philosophy (which isn't much).

What does Peter Kreeft bring to the story that you wouldn’t experience if you just read the book?

A broad range of philosophical thought and experience in teaching.

What’s the most interesting tidbit you’ve picked up from this book?

Too many to mention.

Any additional comments?

Well done. I suspect I will be returning to this audio book over and again.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

The sting in the tail!

Revisado: 08-21-15

Would you recommend this audiobook to a friend? If so, why?

I would recommend the entire lecture series to those who are already familiar with The Church and her history. I would recommend only the first 27 lectures to those who want to learn about The Church - Lectures 28 through 36 (and especially 32 through 36) are heretical.

What was one of the most memorable moments of The Catholic Church: A History?

Lecture 32, when Professor Cook removes his laudable "Historian" hat and dons the hat of heretical Theologian.

Have you listened to any of Professor William R. Cook’s other performances before? How does this one compare?

I have not heard any other lectures by Prof. Cook.

Was this a book you wanted to listen to all in one sitting?

No

Any additional comments?

From Lecture 1 to Lecture 27, Prof. Cook does a great job of presenting the objective history in a passionate manner (with only a couple of eyebrow raising moments when discussing the Crusades, and the Great Schism). Then starting with Lecture 27 Prof. Cook dropped a couple of suspect statements that plant the seed of suspicion that all is not orthodox in the Cook classroom. Starting with Lecture 32, Prof. Cook completely abdicates his role as objective Historian and reveals himself as an adherent to the Modernist Heresy, and embarks on an enthusiastic anti-Catholic journey down the Novus Ordo road - I would, nevertheless recommend the series to anyone, but I would caution the uninformed listener that the last four lectures are NOT Catholic; instead, Prof. Cook advances the new-age religion known as "Novus Ordo." If the new student does listen to the last four lectures, they then should spend time listening to the excellent orthodox lectures of Bishop Sanborn, who proficiently lays out the heresy of Vatican II and includes wonderful insights into the Assisi Outrage that Prof. Cook believes is a masterpiece of the brand new religion that has invaded Rome.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona