Theophilos |  | Author: Michael O'Brien
Label: Ignatius Press
Category: Book
List Price: $24.95
Buy New: $15.63
as of 9/6/2010 01:37 EDT details
You Save: $9.32 (37%)
New (24) Used (6) from $15.63
Seller: pbshop
Rating:  4 reviews
Sales Rank: 19447
Media: Hardcover
Pages: 448
Number Of Discs: 1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.4
Dimensions (in): 8.1 x 5.1 x 1.5
MPN: THEO-H
ISBN: 1586173685
Dewey Decimal Number: 813
EAN: 9781586173685
Publication Date: March 1, 2010
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Tell A Friend
Add to Wishlist
Add to Wedding Registry
Add to Baby Registry
| |
| Features:
| • | ISBN13: 9781586173685 | | • | Condition: New | | • | Notes: BUY WITH CONFIDENCE, Over one million books sold! 98% Positive feedback. Compare our books, prices and service to the competition. 100% Satisfaction Guaranteed |
|
| Similar Items:
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Theophilos, A Novel, by Michael D. O'Brien St. Luke addressed his Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles to a man named Theophilos. Who was Theophilos? Scripture scholars do not know, making him a fit subject for Michael O'Brien's vivid imagination. In this fictional narrative, Theophilos is the skeptical but beloved adoptive father of St. Luke. Challenged by the startling account of the “Christos” received in the chronicle from his beloved son Luke and concerned for the newly zealous young man's fate, Theophilos, a Greek physician and an agnostic, embarks on a search for Luke to bring him home. He is gravely concerned about the deadly illusions Luke has succumbed to regarding the incredible stories surrounding Jesus of Nazareth, a man of contradictions who has caused so much controversy throughout the Roman Empire. Thus begins a long journey that will take
|
| Customer Reviews:
 Another work of art by Michael D. O'Brien. June 27, 2010
Teófilo de Jesús (USA)
4 out of 4 found this review helpful
Yes, Theophilos, by Canadian author and painter Michael O'Brien is a multi-levered, erudite, yet very human story reaching back to the First Century. It is a literary exploration of the oral traditions - and of the Tradition - that gave rise to the Gospel According to St. Luke in particular and the New Testament in general.
Theophilos is different from O'Brien's standard fare. He has written a lot about Christianity at the end times, but this book is about the very beginning of the Church.
In this Gospel "according to Theophilos," O'Brien presents to us a wide panorama extending from Crete, into Greece, and then into Judea, to Nazareth and Jerusalem, of an investigation into the person and character of a certain "Yeshua," acclaimed as "Mashiach" or "Christos "by some, and ridiculed and rejected by others. But no one was left unaffected.
In this story, "Theophilos"- to whom St. Luke dedicated his Gospel and Acts of the Apostles - is "Loukas'" uncle, stepfather, and the one who taught the medicinal arts to the evangelist. Theophilos engages in his own exploration of the Nazarene, conducts interviews, and in the process we get to know him, as well as his life, family, friends, dreams and aspirations. We get an insight into Theophilos' highly rational intellect, not unlike that of modern man and yet, placed in the context of his age without anachronisms. We also get a sweet profile of Loukas, the physician-evangelist who described Yeshua at the most humane.
We also find a Church that was Catholic, and very charismatic, and I mean charismatic in the sense of Pentecostal, filled with the Holy Spirit, brimming with charismata, liturgical, centered on the Eucharist, and proto-Marian. It was also a Church with dissenters, gossips, people who meant evil, and people who meant well.
It was also a Jewish-Church, but one already opened to the gentiles in equality of membership. You see, like I like to say, Yeshua had torn down everything that separated men from the God of Israel. He had erased the boundaries. The election was Israel's became now the heritage of every man who believed in Yeshua as God, Savior, and Messiah.
The novel is also a tour-de-force into classical studies in the context of the First Century Roman Empire. Several Greek myths are explored as well as the art of ancient medicine. Dark magical arts are also explored, but more in the context of the psyches that gave them birth, not the arts themselves. Also, Theophilos/O'Brien gives us a report on the state of mathematics, astronomy, navigation, weather prediction, wardrobes, and even cuisine in the First Century Levant. Types of cursive handwriting are also mentioned and, did you know there were seven qualities of papyri for sale in ancient stationery stores? I didn't until I read this novel.
I highly recommend Theophilos. I don't know any other way to say it! Like all his works, it's full of light, wisdom, and peace. Read it, and become Theophilos yourself as He who is the Way, the Truth, and Life, comes to your encounter.
 LOST ON THE WAY TO JERUSALEM May 26, 2010
James E Geoffrey II (Falls Church, Virginia United States)
9 out of 13 found this review helpful
Michael O'Brien is an exceptionally talented author whose works bring a subtle and complex depth to profound religious questions, specifically in a Catholic context. In Theophilos, O'Brien turns his attention to the question of modernity set against faith. However, unlike in many of his other works, where O'Brien's touch is sure and his intellectual direction is clear, this time he loses his way and leaves the reader with a deep but ultimately unsatisfying exploration of one of the central questions facing men of faith in a world of rationalism.
To start, kudos to O'Brien in evoking brilliantly the feel of the period about which he is writing. The reader gets a real sense that he is reading documents that were written in the time of the first century AD. From his use of original Greek, Latin and Hebrew place names to references to the historical events of the period to his colorful evocations of life in the Middle East and around Jerusalem, O'Brien hits it out of the ballpark. Even more fascinating is his description of the lives of people in different classes and the interaction of cultures in occupied societies. He neatly contrasts the life of the poor and the rich, the Greek and the Hebrew and - to a lesser degree - the Roman and leaves you with an acute sense of the motivations and viewpoints of an era long gone.
O'Brien tends to lose this a little bit toward the end when the book takes a decidedly mystical turn - more about which anon - and in his portrayal of the early Christians. (It seems like they are always praying and singing, but surely there one has to imagine that even in the ancient Holy Land they must have taken a break every now and then to go out for burgers or something and certainly they talked about things other than religion.) Yet, for all of that, he manages to keep an authentic tone throughout.
Even O'Brien's use of dates, it turns out, adds to the book's authenticity. The book is written as a series of letters and journal entries written by between Theophilos and Luke. The story then revolves around Theophilo's travel to the Holy Land which is provoked by his rising concern over Luke's sudden interest in what, to Theophilos, appears to be a cult. In the story, the journal entries and letters are dated "AD," and at first this looks like a rookie mistake by O'Brien. However, two clues suggest otherwise - 1) the dates are in brackets, suggesting that the reader is supposed to see himself as a contemporary individual examining ancient manuscripts. The reader is not sure of this though until almost the end, when Theophilos reads a letter from his friend and that letter is dated according to the usage of the time. Nice move and compliments to O'Brien, who does not treat his readers like dummies by explaining everything to them up front (i.e., "You are now a reader examining an ancient manuscript..")
Indeed, in writing the book in this way, O'Brien places the reader at an intellectual vantage point that allows him to judge the relative merits of Theophilos' and Luke's positions as an almost omnicient judge. (Though O'Brien is not neutral between Theophilos and Luke.) A contemporary reader lives in a world that exists with the consequences and implications of the debate between Theophilos and Luke and from that vantage point he is able to see more clearly the merits and demerits of the story's thematic direction.
Beyond that discussion, O'Brien brings to the book a deep spirituality and religious sensibility. This not only adds to the book's authenticity - the 1st century Holy Land is, after all, a world suffused in such a sensibility - it makes the experience of reading it much more emotionally stimulating and engrossing. Yet the book is not at all preachy, and in fact, like a number of his characters, O'Brien seems to bend over backward not to be preachy. It is quite refreshing and makes the book more appealing to readers of a secular bent.
In terms of characterization, O'Brien's depiction of Theophilos is the strongest of any character in the book. Theophilos is the quintessential modern man. Practical, humane, temperate, intellectual, pragmatic, superficially tolerant, and skeptical. Though when his worldview is challenged Theophilos becomes, like many such thinkers, remarkably intemperate - he wants the Emperor killed - and intolerant - toward the Christians he meets to whom he expresses a sort of patronizing condescension. Theoliphilos is meant to represent modernity and O'Brien brilliantly captures both the strengths and weaknesses of the modernist mindset. Indeed, O'Brien is quite balanced in this and it is therefore hard not to like Theophilos. He is a good husband and father, his intentions are benevolent, his humanitarianism genuine. Indeed, it is possible in Theophilos to see the attractiveness of the purely rationalist viewpoint. However,this also causes Theophilos to assume his own virtue and blinds him to the shortcomings and narrowness of his ostensibly pragmatic thinking.
Luke, on the other hand, is not well developed. We have a doctor and historian - as historically we know was the case - with a conspicuous but not overbearing faith, but otherwise it is hard to define him. This is not a mistake, however, as O'Brien is very shrewd here. With Theophilos, O'Brien has a "tabula rasa" on which he can write whatever he wants. Indeed, Theophilos may not have even really existed, but may have been for Luke a literary convention not unlike Burke's or Disraeli's "Letter to a Noble Lord..." in which the author writes an essay in the form of a letter to a fictional character in order to make it more readable and give it momentum for respect.
Although we do not know a lot about Luke, we know enough and we are sure of his Christianity. Which is as it should be. Milton in "Paradise Lost" or Dante in "The Divine Comedy" famously described Hell in great detail because no matter how bad it was described, an author could never describe it as bad enough. By contrast, heaven barely gets a mention because, no matter how good an author makes it sound, he could not make it sound good enough, and that failure would be a blasphemy. O'Brien, although dealing with a mortal man, has a similar problem with Luke. He cannot greatly detail Luke's character because, in so doing, he runs the risk of either defaming or deifying a saint.
The other characters in the book are less well defined, but are essentially foils or props for what is the central purpose of the book - a debate between the modernist sensibility and the Christian ethos. So while the characters are not vivid, they set the stage for both intellectually stimulating discussion and, at times, some heartfelt and dramatic scenes. The reader is both touched intellectually and emotionally - and thence spiritually by the combination of the two.
Unfortunately, in its last act, the book loses its way. First, like many a Hollywood movie, O'Brien does not seem to know how to end his book so he gives it two endings. Neither ending is intellectually satisfying, but the second is worse. Having Theoliphilos die in a fire in his house trying to save others may be an example of Christian self-sacrifice, but it also "over the top" melodrama. If that were all that it was, it would be bad enough.
The idea of self-sacrifice, specifically in the Christian context, is certainly not ignored in the book, but it is not a central flaw in Theophilos'character and to suggest it as a demonstration of his "born again" soul simply does not fly. For all his flaws, Theophilos is not a selfish man, so having him die in a supreme act of self-sacrifice after his conversion is simply superfluous. Also, why a fire? Theophilos is a doctor. It would have made much more sense to have him die from a disease he contracts while treating patients on a slave ship. Such a conclusion would have been far more in character and dramatically powerful than the super-heroics we see performed by the, by that point in the story, geriatric Theophilos.
Worse still, the image of his burning library as Theophilos makes his sacrifice is, in the context of the book, counterintuitive to say the least. The symbolic message - that the life of the mind is shed in order to manifest true Christian virtue - undermines the book's central thrust and certainly flies in the face of Catholic teaching which emphasizes the ultimate compatibility of faith and reason.
Which brings the reader back to the first ending. The author sets up throughout the book a dichotomy between faith and reason that is resolved in the person of Luke. Luke is both modern man and man of faith and he is the bridge between Theophilos and the faith which is an irreducible component of Christianity. Luke uses reason to transcend reason and glimpse, as much as any man can, the life of faith - hence establishing the fundamental compatibility of the two. Catholic teaching, coming especially out of Thomistic philosophy, is that if man's reason were perfect it would confirm and prove faith.
This is in contrast to the dichotomy between many mainline Protestants, who are modernist and rationalist, and who see religion as essentially an ethical doctrine, and many fundamentalists, (accidentally and incorrectly called Evangelicals), who believe that man's reason is the product of an utterly depraved nature and therefore all knowledge that contradicts faith must be false. Hence, why many of the mainline Protestants - such as many Anglicans - have no problem with gay marriage and why many fundamentalists reject the theory of evolution.
So what does O'Brien do? He has Theophilos come to his faith not by reason and philosophical reflection, but by revelation and dreams. Revelation has its place in Catholic teaching, but that is not the theme of the book. The result, hammered home without subtlety in the burning of the library, is to utterly abandon the idea that reason, properly understood, leads man to faith. Theophilos has the crabbed narrow reason of the modernist. Luke has the transcendent reason of the Christian. Yet Theophilos comes to Christianity via neither, but rather by the very superstitions he so rightly denigrates among the pagans. This is a man who does not transcend reason, but ultimately rejects it in accepting a dream as dispositive proof of Christianity. He could as easily have gone to the Oracle at Delphi to come to his faith.
In fairness to O'Brien, he has two problems. 1) It is not very dramatic from a purely artistic viewpoint to "reason" it out as opposed to portraying a climactic epiphany. (Though Sherlock Holmes might beg to differ.) 2) It is possible that O'Brien is relying on the reader to glean from the various vignettes in the book the "reason" that Theophilos is clearly missing. However, if that is true, it is a mistake in this instance to trust the reader. Not because the reader is not be trusted, but because the climax so thoroughly contradicts where O'Brien's vignettes seem to lead. One would hardly blame readers for suffering a case of intellectual whiplash as they they try to come to grips with O'Brien's thoroughly unforeshadowed - and frankly thematically inconsistent - turn.
T.S. Eliot once wrote, "The great mistake made about Christianity is to suppose it primarily a religion and emotional when in truth it is primarily dogma and intellectual. We are not, then, to be concerned with Christianity as pietistic feeling but with Christianity as a precise view of man and the world, which implies a social form."
O'Brien seemed to start out there - or at least to be heading in that direction - but somehow did not end up there. That does not, by any means, ruin the book, which has much to offer. However, it does make it less than it might have been.
The Catholic Novel of the Year May 6, 2010
Randall Beeler (Bryan, TX United States)
10 out of 10 found this review helpful
At first glance, Theophilos appears to be a work of historical fiction--yet, in a much more profound sense, it is an examination of conscience for the present age: an examen of original sin and salvo of original grace.
The protagonist is Theophilos, the correspondent whom Luke mentions at the beginning of Luke's Gospel and Acts. The Greek-born son of a man freed from slavery, Theophilos seems free of both the slavery his father endured and the delusions imposed by the world and the excesses of passion.
A practicing physician on the Isle of Crete, Theophilos is every bit the modern rationalist--but with the soul of a virtuous pagan. In fact, Theophilos is an archetype of the best that the world and human effort, intellect, and technos have to offer. A fitting Virgil to lead us through the ancient world in the decades immediately following the Death and Resurrection of Iesous the Christos, he guides us pilgrim readers through the follies and glories of humankind in a journey that stretches beyond a particular age. The suspense of the plot is evoked in our--and Theophilos'--haunting doubt as to whether ours is the path to Inferno or Purgatorio.
Rescuing Loukas (Luke) from a plague that has wasted Loukas' mother (Theophilos' sister), father, and city (Thessalonika), Theophilos takes the boy to his home on Crete, raising the child as his own and training him in medicine, a labor and science that Theophilos again and again heroically and vainly wields against the forces of chaos.
For, outside Theophilos' well-stocked library and even the walls of his home town lurks man's capacity for evil. Repeatedly, the good physician struggles to snatch a few more years of life for one of his patients, only to witness humanity's thirst for death. This book is a meditation on the physician who cannot heal himself and the worldly agonies that tear open his heart.
Like Aeneas carrying his father from burning Troy, Theophilos is Antique pagan man--and the best of contemporary man--struggling to save from the burning ruins of human civilization something that marks our dignity and purpose in the cosmos. Theophilos dialogues with the young Loukas upon the latter's interpretation of the Aeneid, both physicians assenting to the vanity of human effort, even that of the greatest empire in history:
"the dream of noble Rome, the forgiving and just Rome, is an illusion ... the sword is always thrust into those whom she conquers." (47)
But Loukas adds an important coda that foreshadows his--and the pagan world's--embracing an unforeseen hope: the resurrected Christos, who carries us out of the flames:
"There is a scene I love most of all ... when Troy is burning and Aeneas ... escapes carrying his aged father on his back--and with his little son clinging to his hand." (47-48)
I will not tell you here whether Theophilos is saved from the burning ruins of the City of Man ... for that story is our own story--the story of our age, which is yet in the telling. In the meantime, O'Brien invites our age to dare believe that we are not "shameless apes" deserving to die in our burning cities.
Read Theophilos to discover why.
A Journey of Discovery and Hope April 28, 2010
Corban Storm
21 out of 22 found this review helpful
'Theophilos' by Michael O'Brien is a fictional depiction of the lives of St. Luke (author of the Gospel bearing his name as well as the Acts of the Apostles) and the individual to whom he addressed these writings, Theophilos. O'Brien establishes Theophilos as a dear uncle who had the responsibility of raising the young "Loukas" from the age of twelve. The book is written primarily in first person from the perspective of Theophilos--a physician steeped in the belief system of the Greek Gods though who still is more effectively an agnostic--who has now become quite disturbed by his nephew's sudden belief in the cult of "the Christos"---The Way of Jesus Christ. The book is a "present" narrative (mostly in 65 A.D.) with a collection of letters, journal entries, and examinations (interviews) woven into it, along with many reminiscences of the childhood years of not only St. Luke, but Jesus of Nazareth.
I think the first question that most O'Brien fans would ask is, "How does Theophilos measure up to the `Children of the Last Days' series?" To this, I would say that it is more a change of venue than a change of pace. The familiar elements of the author's craft: well-developed multi-dimensional characters, poetic dialogue (both interior and spoken), and thought-provoking scenarios--are not only intact, but I would even suggest further honed. The second question is, "Is 'Theophilos' more the high-action, overtly Catholic/Theological thriller (the likes of 'Fr. Elijah' or 'Plague Journal')... or is it more the evenly-paced, thoughtful novel--rich in Catholic philosophy though more subtle in its presentation (the likes of 'A Cry of Stone')?" I would honestly say this book bridges the gap between the two, with a slight lean towards the latter, yet full of intriguing happenings as we traverse a familiar historical landscape where peripheral biblical "acquaintances" are given depth and personality in very compelling and believable ways.
The historical research is so meticulous, the cultural understanding so cohesive, and the biblical exegesis so sound, that this story becomes more than just plausible; the reader could easily be led to believe that the author had a profound mystical experience of the lives of Theophilos and St. Luke. The change of time period permits O'Brien to delve more deeply into the mystery of the human person, exploring interior realities that transcend culture and time yet which are no doubt influenced by both in how they are manifest. One example is when the adolescent Loukas approaches Theophilos, wrestling with the idea of cutting his hair (he has left it long in emulation of the ancient Greek philosophers). The boy wonders if this act would dilute his "Greekness". In a beautiful exchange between the two, his uncle agrees that, though a man's exterior and interior should "be as one", this is only in the "essentials" (his character, actions, and words), not necessarily in the "accidentals" (physical appearance). An astute Catholic can draw from this exchange not only a reflection on the common--if not universal--experience of adolescent angst (NOT rebellion), but also an even more profound reflection on our understanding of the Eucharist.
Once again, Michael O'Brien has created a masterpiece that I believe affirms his place as one of the top fiction writers of our time. At this point, I find that there are two realities which I lament: first, that Ignatius Press is not the large powerhouse publisher with the marketing machine to get this book in front of more people, and second, that it will most likely be at least a year before I will have the joy of reading a new Michael O'Brien novel.
Other books readers of this book and others by Michael O'Brien may enjoy:
A Canticle for Leibowitz (A post-apocalyptic saga rooted in sound Catholic theology and in excellent literary form)
Christ the Lord: The Road to Cana (***Caveat! I include this with "fear and trepidation". No claims to theological soundness here -- I only include it because it is in the same genre as 'Theophilos' and Fr. Richard John Neuhaus found it to have literary merit nonetheless)
Dominion I: Seed (Those who enjoyed the genre of 'Father Elijah' may find this Catholic apocalyptic series intriguing)
|
|
|
