I found this book from a footnote of another book I was reading. Since then I've bought all her books. The Great Angel is perhaps her best written work and best argued. Her hypothesis is that Elohim refers to the Most High God and that Jehovah (Yahweh) was one of his sons. There were 70 Sons that ruled the 70 nations and Jehovah was the God of Israel. After Jerusalem fell in 600 BC, the Jews had problems reconciling their God of Israel as being superior to the other Gods while being held captive in Babylon. Over the centuries, one brand of Judaism had confusion between the Most High and Jehovah and eventually Jehovah was elevated to the position of the Most High in their minds and superior to all others. The Angel of Yahweh is seen as a second God that would eventually lead to threatening a form of monotheism that was growing more and more exclusively strict. Another brand of Judism (Enochic Judaism)in contrast tried to preserve the ancient beliefs of the Davidic Temple Cult. It was this brand from which Essenes and Christians sprang. By the second Century CE the other Jews would put a label on this heresy as the TWO POWERS in Heaven. Sound far fetched? Not after you read her documentation and reasoning. It's a very convincing argument especially when you read the works of Philo and others. I would have given this a higher rating but some arguments she assumes the audience understands without building them. ...

This is wonderful book with lots of groundbreaking ideas that every Christian should read to understand the New Testament. Barker posits (based on extensive textual and historical evidence) that Israelite theology placed two powers in heaven, Elohim and his representative Jehovah (Yahweh). She shows that the first christians could accept christ as God because he was Jehovah, and Elohim was his father. While it may challenge some preconceived ideas, this book sheds lots of bright non-secular light on the Bible.

I found the book helpful, simple, and beautiful. Its format is to guide one through the prayers with short, easy to understand instructions and descriptions. While I have used it alone, I would recommend it more for a group. Music is printed in the several forms: chant, four part hymns, and melodies. The accompanying CD includes all of the music, sung either by a soloist or small vocal ensemble. While the CD is designed as a guide through the book, it might well be left playing while one is doing other things. It is lovely.

The book beautifly fulfills its purpose of providing worshippers with "a user friendly foundational structure for the Liturgy of the Hours." I recommend it without hesitiation.

This volume, an update of an earlier work by the late Peter Bebblewaite, is little more than an obsolete exercise in wishful thinking by the Catholic radical left. For the book to be at all relevant, it needs to be updated again, to reflect the changes in the College of Cardinals (fairly significant in the last few years). Even such an update would do little to further recommend it, as there are other, more recent and less biased works on the same subject.

Give this one a miss.

The most interesting part of the book for me was the first half where past conclaves in history are discussed. Some of the history is really fascinating. Although the tone of the book optimistically predicts a less severe papacy next time around, there is little evidence presented to back this up. The criticisms of John Paul II, while quite accurate, do little to help us understand who we might expect as the next pope. It is a well written book and very readable, but as time continues to go by and the current pope continues to live, the latter section on potential popes becomes less and less relevant due to the age restriction and deaths. Still, there is enough here to recommend a read.

"The Next Pope", though quite out of date now, is a very good and comprehensive study of the Catholic Church and how Popes are elected, and an attempt to give an idea of who the next Pope will in fact be.

It covers, very well and in quite clear language, a history of the papacy from the time of Pius VIII (1829 to 1830) up to John Paul II's historically crucial letter "Ordinatio Sacerdotalis". Each conclave in that period is discussed very well and with quite reasonable language that I have found very helpful in gaining an understanding of where the papacy has travelled in recent centuries.

The next part of the book looks at John Paull II and explains his thought. It does an easy-to-understand job that could, I feel, give a better understanding of his Polish nature.

The last part written before Peter's death deals with "Ordinatio Sacerdotalis" and the reaction to it, however it fails unfortunately to reach the notes of Ratzinger about the infallibility of the document and to explain in simple, if for many harsh, language what this will mean for the next centuries of the Catholic Church.

Margaret's article is a very detailed (compared to her late husband's) analysis of the College Of Cardinals as it was comprised in 2000.

Though this is now completely out-of-date, contrary to what others have said about Margaret's writings, I find her very balanced in her exceedingly sensible admission that the next Pope can only be just as conservative as Wojtyla. She is very willing to face and accept the fact that many cardinal want an even more conservative papacy in the future, and looks at such cardinals as Dario Castrillon Hoyos and Rouco Vadela as possibilities for the next Pope.

My main criticism of Margaret is that her language is so unclear and that she seem incomplete - it is as if one would need a detailed analysis of those cardinals who nobody, outside or inside the Vatican, would consider as possibilities for the papacy.

Though out of date, this contains some useful information.

The book offers a series of essays on reform in the Church. Unfortunately the book is a subjective approach to reform that does not take into account the actual teachings of the various Christian denominations.The Catholic Church for example teaches that all Churches "subsist" in the Catholic Church. O'Gara,who is a professed Catholic, does not support this teaching in the book. Without acceptance of this teaching there can be no authentic unity. O'Gara's seeks primarily to advance her own views and not those of the various Christian denominations.The book is not for those serious about reform.

Margaret O'Gara writing as a Catholic theologian strangely misrepresents the Catholic position in her book. Misinterpretations of key theological terms, for example, such as "reception" leads O'Gara to denounce the Catholic view that the bishops are the true successors of the apostles.The book ultimately ends up being little more than an exercise in empty rhetoric.Those serious about ecumenical dialogue will be disappointed at O'Gara's efforts at relativizing religion.It seems she is not really interested in the true teachings of the various Christian denominations as much as she is intent on bringing them together under a common denominator - regardless of what that may mean. Those interested in learning what the Catholic church really teaches should read the numerous papal encyclicals on the various topics.

In this work, Ms. O'Gara, a widely-read and well-informed author, provides glimpses of the path that the Spirit may use to effect the Christian unity for which Christ prayed so fervently. No obstacle as difficult at the role of the papacy has ever surfaced, and yet, even this role is examined in ways and from points of view through which the final achievement of unity -- one witness in solidarity with the Gospel among all Christians -- can be imagined and, God willing, actualized. This is a particular must read for Roman Catholics. God bless Ms. O'Gara in her continuing work in ecumenism. I hope to read more from her.
-- Fr. James I. Colburn, Chancellor, Mar Thoma Orthodox Church, Fresno, CA.

The book attempts to redefine the catholic meaning of infallibility as taught at Vatican I in order to strike a balance of authority within the Catholic Church. Unfortunately, O'Gara's thesis rests on a flawed interpretation of the documents of Vatican II.The book is little more than a misguided attempt at reform meant to disproportionately empower the laity.