The title is unfortunate; the subtitle not quite accurate. "Modern Turkey" usually means starting in about 1800 and trailing off somewhere in the last generation; this appears to be another once-over that familiar ground, but it is not. Instead, the Popes (a wife-husband time), in a well-written and reliable account, devote three quarters of their study to the years since 1960. Chapters deal, in a sympathetic but always critical manner, with such issues as the military coups, the Cyprus issue, the Kurdish problem, domestic economic developments, the newly-liberated Turkic republics, the Tansu Çiller fiasco, and the Islamist phenomenon. Throughout, the Popes blame much that they find in Turkey on the modern state's founder, Kemal Atatürk, including the "repression, the intense national paranoia, the shortcomings of its democracy and the over-reliance on the army."

Perhaps most interesting is their account of Türgut Özal, the man who dominated Turkish politics between 1983 and his death in 1993. He was "the catalyst for much of the breathless pace of change that revolutionized Turkey" during that decade-long period. His influence extended to much of Turkish public life: "Undermining the Kemalist bastions of state dominance of business and the media, flamboyantly popularizing a new ideology of the market and international trade, irreverently breaking taboos about the military, Islam and the Kurds, Türgut Özal became Turkey's most influential political personality since Atatürk." The authors catch his contradictions ("for all his Muslim piety, [he] liked to finish off a bottle of his favorite Courvoisier brandy") and his foibles ("He is like a piece of soft iron. Whatever magnet he sees, he sticks to"), without undermining his outsized and constructive role.

Middle East Quarterly, December 1999

It is not the easiest thing to write a book on Turkey that is balanced and attentive to detail while at the same time helpful to the general reader. As earlier reviews indicate, Turkey often arouses strong emotions abroad. But the Popes do a good job. They are enthusiastic about the country they live in and believe it has a promising future. Perhaps they should say more about the darker sides of Turkish history in the 20th century. But it is clearly their aim to strip away the more extreme stereotypes that persist in Western perceptions of modern Turkey. Overall, a very illuminating book in a field short of good introductions to the subject.

Very insightful and informative of modern Turkish politics. Perhaps not critical enough of Adnan Menderes and Turgut Özal, and could have been more objective about Necmettin Erbakan and his Refah, now Fazilet party. I would have liked to learn more about Turkish society since the birth of the republic. Very good reading for anyone interested in Turkey. I highly recommend this book!

This is one of those books I picked up because the plot appeared interesting. It is a good plot and I think many of us wonder what the next conclave will do, but this is not the book I was looking for. Pope Bill is a likeable man and I woudn't mind having him as our next Pope but much of what he does is just plain silly. I was amazed at how he could say the most offensive things to different groups and have them love him. I was also amazed at how his allies did the same thing: on a trip to Africa he is greeted by Cardinal Motupu at the airport with the words: "Your humble spearchucker welcomes you to Africa, Bill!" No kidding; it's on page 276.

I also wearied of Ray Flynn's ax to grind with the diplomatic corps. Nobody would deny that there is tension between ambassadors (particularly ones like himself who did not rise through the ranks) and their staff and the State Department. But he goes overboard; in one case the American Ambassador to the Vatican has a beer with a friend in Ireland. He says something indiscrete that is picked up by a spy a thte next table and has to answer to it the next day. Of course he fixes it with a few phone calls. This is on pages 345-350.

Finally, it was almost humorous the way Pope Bill gets it all right, from negotiating the Curia to pulling a pint of beer at an Irish pub to winning at darts.

A much better book is The Vicar of Christ by Walter Murphy, which is, alas, out of print.

John Paul II has died, the College of Cardinals is locked in a contentious conclave, an Irish cardinal tells a story about a friend of his, and suddenly a former priest, a widower fisherman from Massachusetts is elected pope, and takes the name Peter II! If you can accept that premise, you'll probably enjoy this interesting, but poorly written, book about the first American pope and his family.
The idea is interesting, and it's worth reading to see where the authors intend to take the title character, and the Church. It's unfortunate that the characters are so poorly drawn, to the point that some of them are like stick figures. Events happen that have no basis in reality, and characters act, and react, in ways for which the authors have not prepared the readers, so that you're left scratching your head at times. The religious feeling of the authors comes through quite clearly, but they have taken a good idea and packaged it in a poor wrapping.

Sometimes you pick up a book because it looks interesting, or because you read everything a particular author has written. Sometimes books suprise you, sometimes they disappoint. I bought this book because of its unlikely (and seemingly humorous) premise, and kept reading because it turned out to be a good read.

The book, co-authored by the former U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican, examines the papacy of Pope Peter II, who just happens to be an American fisherman who happens to be a laicized Catholic priest. While on the surface the premise seems almost ludicrous, by the middle of the book it no longer seems to be outside of the realm of the possible. Pope Bill, as he likes to be called, has to deal with the scrutiny of the world press, a stunned curia which cannot believe that they elected him, and, of all things, his children living at the Vatican. The authors use the new pope to examine the role and position of the Catholic Church as it moves into the third millenium. Pope Bill's actions and proclamations, while disturbing to the traditional-bound cardinals in the book, "play well in Peoria" and reflect the type of progressive thinking that the authors (not to mention many contemporary Catholics) seem to believe should prevail in the church today.

While the story moves along well for the most part, the authors do get bogged down in a few places and miss several opportunities for an interesting expansion of the story. For example, the pope's oldest daughter, who had been agnostic (at best) since her mother's death, has a sudden and stunning conversion in the story. Unfortunately, there is virtually nothing said about this change nor how it affects the father-daughter relationship. In addition, there are superfluous plot devices (the romance between Colleen and Jan, for instance) that seem to be tossed in a fillers while other issues--such as the novelty of an American pope--are left almost unexplored. Most disconcerting, however, is the irregular and maddening way in which the authors discuss but never fully reveal the contents of the letter from Bill's predecessor. At times, it seems that the authors simply forgot where they had left off in the story and started writing anew, leaving out key details that result in plot holes. But beyond these minor quibbles, the book is very entertaining.

This book will definitely be of interest to those interested in the inner workings of the Vatican and to those wondering what role the Catholic Church might be able to play as the new century begins.

This is not a 'how-to' book, more an interesting (IMHO) setof facts and opinions about a couple of dozen films in particular.

In some ways, to me it's like eavesdropping on a couple of friends having a film-related conversation one evening. Sure, it's a little one-sided, but for the most part I agreed with the basic points for each script.

The neat thing (too) I think is that any one of us would have seen several (if not all) of these films, so talking about structure and character-development won't be an academic exercise... you'll know exactly what they're talking about (and can agree, disagree...)

This is an easy read, manageable chapters and not hard-work by any stretch. In fact, it was an enjoyable pick-it-up when you have spare time, rather than have to slog through a lecture (syd field, please note)

A clever book that dissects the scripts to twenty-five popular or classic films. Unlike other screenwriting books that teach theory in a strictly generic fashion, Pope teaches by EXAMPLE. He systematically breaks down each script showing exactly why it works, or why it doesn't. A valuable aid that I only wish was in print when I was in film school.

This is a great book. So many screenwriting books either dive deep into complex theory OR give us a Paint by Numbers formula to writing the new Hollywood blockbuster. Pope looks at 25 differing scripts and shows BY EXAMPLE what makes some work, some fail, and why no script is 100% PERFECT.

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.

I, too, am disappointed in this book and will be returning it. I bought it as a gift thinking it was a collection of the Pope's prayers to God. Instead, I have a found a collection of speeches/papers/instructions to Secular Institutes asking them to "Love the Church" and "Challenge the Young." In the last chapter of the book, there were three actual prayers. Perhaps I allowed the book's title to misguide my expectations. The writing is lovely if you are looking for secular instruction, but don't expect to find the Pope's private prayers.

These are not prayers, but speaches.
You'll need to be very spiritually advanced to listen to them.
Valuable CD's under incorrect title.
I bought this based on an newspaper ad by publisher.

i found the book to be different from other Pope publications. to follow the Pope through out his journey as a great spirtual leader and the head of the vatican. To read his thoughts through out his travels and time as the Popei find to be very interesting and very englightening. i find the lay out of the book to be beautiful...........i'm glad i have it on my shelf and a bought a few for christmas presents.

This is a great book if you're curious about the basics of the life of a particular pontiff, or about papal statistics (i.e., shortest reign, longest reign, dates of reigns, etc.). It is not a history, and does not advertise to be one. It is a reference book from which history can be extracted (there are sections on papal history and the book is divided up into sections or epochs). You can literally pull up the name of a pope and get a glimpse of what his rule was like, as well as the highlights and relevant dates for each pope.

This book was perfect for me, coming from a non-catholic background. Since it does not read like a book laden with catholicism, I wasn't turned away by the language or structure of the book. Not once did I feel the author was trying to proselytize me (something sadly lacking in some other books about the catholic church). What I found was an honest, objective look at the papacy: there have clearly been good and bad popes (some, though very few, have been downright loathsome people), and there have been popes who were incredible men. This book is honest in its appraisal of the men who held the highest earthly order of the catholic church.

There is a slant, and the author hits you in the face with it, but not until the very end of the book. It is not laced throughout the text. Depending upon your perspective, it will either horribly offend you or surprise you with its candor. I personally found it refreshing.

In short, if you're curious about the papacy from a historical perspective, this is a good place to start.

This book is the most important among my vast library of papal history books because McBrien includes many facts about the popes that I have only been able to find in obscure books. He lets us know who is favorite and least favorite popes are, but that helps to give a more personal approach to this topic, which is refreshing in that most informational (particularly historical) books tend to be so dry. This is an excellent sourcebook for those interested in papal history and can easily be read from cover to cover without the reader ever getting bored with the text. McBrien is an excellent writer and this is by far the most well-written, interesting, and informative books on the subject of popes that is readily available.

Apparently the author is a dissenter in the catholic church, unbeknowngst to me. I picked this up in Italy to read about all the popes(most of which I knew nothing about). This book, with its short synopsis on each pope is a great read. It also illustrates the marvelous variety of personalities that inherited the throne of peter. From the smiling Pope John Paul I to the warrior pope Julious II. It details the roman persecutions and shows how few popes were killed in the period, details the schisms and also the sexual adventures of the popes. Shows how many popes were murdered, and how many had short periods in power. It also details the papal election process and its developments. A must read for those interested in a history of the Popes without the usual tenderness associated with some publications and the usual wordiness of academics.

In response to the papal encyclical "Ut Unum Sint" (May 25, 1995) John R. Quinn examines the necessity of reform in the papacy as a prerequisite for serious consideration of union between the Roman Catholic church and other Christian churches. The retired Archbishop of San Francisco stresses the need for decentralization, greater collegiality, and reform of the way bishops are appointed. He also recommends changes in the college of cardinals, whcih have become an elite group within the college of bishops, and in the way the Pope is chosen. Finally, he calls for reform of the Roman Curia. Written in a clear informative manner, the book displays acquaintance with current scholarship and avoids polemics. It might be a bit esoteric for many readers. Quinn could have given greater attention to the system of Roman colleges for the training of clergy, a vestige of the imperial Roman practice of taking the children of royalty in subject countries, educating them in Rome, and , once imbued with the Roman mentality, sending them back to rule in their own countries. Quinn, a gratuate of the North American College (class of 1954) is a product of this system but does not seem to realize the implications of "Romanita'"- both for reform of the papacy and for church union. Well worth reading and, hopefully, a contribution to ecumenism.

This book, like Archbishop Quinn's lecture at Oxford the previous year is an attempt to answer a call for advice given by Pope John Paul II in his encyclical "Ut Unum Sint." The charge that Quinn is somehow disaffected and rebellious simply does not wash. This book is a detailed historical study of various aspects of papal governance. Acting on the principle "Ecclesia semper reformanda" Quinn advocates changes in areas of church administration where change is truly required and NO doctrinal barriers exist for effecting such change. The outcome of such change, in my view, would be a purer and more effecacious proclamation of the Gospel, not a diminishment of the Catholic Church.

Acknowledging that the way the papacy currently functions is an obstacle to Christian unity, John Paul II in 1995 invited suggestions for change, and John Quinn took him at his word. Quinn, former Archbishop of San Francisco, is a man who knows whereof he speaks and a man deeply concerned for the welfare of the Catholic Church. He points out in nuanced and respectful terms that the centralizing of power in the Church, the lack of subsidiarity in the appointment of bishops and in many other things, and the aggrandizement (and ordination) of the Roman Curia and college of cardinals - all changeable aspects of the way the papacy functions -- have undermined the exercise of real collegiality in church synods and national conferences, and deprived the local churches and bishops of rightful authority and power. Other Christian groups have no incentive to unite to such a church. Drawing on history and the ideas of Vatican II, Quinn makes suggestions pointing the way to a much needed reform, and not just for the sake of ecumenism. This is recommended reading for thoughtful Christians of all persuasions.

Some works of literature wear well with time, and some do not.

Understandably, The Deputy was quite a red-hot item 40 years ago, when there was a certain frisson in criticizing a recently-deceased Pope, and not a great deal of historical work had been done to analyze the opposition of the Catholic Church against Hitlerism.

But now, at the beginning of the 21st Century, a wealth of actual documentary evidence can take the place of the fictitious imaginings, sceptical conjectures, and whole-cloth fabrications which make up the basis of this play.

At the time of its writing, it must havce seemed daring and challenging in a disturbing but healthy sense. Now it looks more like, at best, sophomoric propaganda, and at worst, like a new and deeply unattractive variation on Blood Libel.

I first read The Deputy in 1963 and saw a truncated version of the play in Los Angeles. I have subsequently read the play several times and I believe that the reviewers who think that this is an anti-Catholic polemic miss Hochhuth's purpose in writing the book.

In The Deputy, the Catholic Church is not blamed for the holocaust; the reader understands that the Germans were perpetrators (by the way, Hochhuth is Swiss, not German). And he does not excuse Protestants and others for their refusal to act during this terrible time. Students of the Holocaust know that there was more than enough blame to go around in terms of those who did not speak.

What Hochhuth does is to state historical truth regarding Pope Pius XII's refusal to speak. Pius XII was the Deputy of Christ from 1939 to 1958. Between 1939 and 1945, though the Pope was completely aware of what the Germans were doing (mass murders), he never once spoke to criticize the Germans or ask them to stop the murders. This is uncontrovertible fact.

Riccardo Fontana, the fictitious priest (and hero) in The Deputy, represents the finest qualities in man. He is that rarest of creatures, a truly good man. His passion for truth and justice leads to his numerous efforts to persuade Pius XII to action. That he is unable to reach the Pope makes his efforts heart-breakingly tragic.

Riccardo is a Catholic who cannot understand why the Pope (whom he knows personally) does not speak out against one of the worst horrors in the history of mankind. For Riccardo, speaking out is not enough. He demonstrates through action (he is willing to die and actually does) that words of condemnation alone are not enough. That is why Pius XII's unwillingness to speak (much less to act) is seen as such a devastating moral lapse.

I suggest that the reviewers who feel that The Deputy is blatantly anti-Catholic read the play again, in its entirety!

"The Deputy" is stunning and still relevant, despite the acidic reviews you might find here contesting the pertinence of this play. It's more than probable the negative ratings in regards to this piece belong to the pious who, instead of looking at the objective facts, hide behind their own grandiose illusions regarding the dogmas into which they have been indoctrinated.

Afterall, is there any historical doubt that Pope Pius XII did not publicly condemn the wholesale slaughter of Jews by the Nazi regime? I haven't seen any document stating otherwise. Sure, he made blanket condemnations pronounced in the garb of generalities, but that's not what Hochhuth's play addresses. It's a simple question we must ask: should, as some consider, the highest moral authority on the planet straddle the fence in an attempt not to offend anyone, or should we expect a public condemnation of evil on such a grand scale? This, in my view, and in sum, is the dilemma the play poses to each reader.

This is by far the worst book on the UFO craze I have ever read. I'm up to page 100 and have yet to learn anything about this phenomina that I don't already know. It is poorly written and I have fallen asleep twice while reading it. I'm not going to go any further with this one. I feel like I was cheated out of 5 bucks.

Nick Pope's only claim to fame was that he was the civil servant at the MOD charged with the investigation of UFO reports there. A book that reviewed that time, with a look at the processes and in-depth coverage of one or two cases that happened during his time could have been quite entertaining and quaintly British. Unfortunately Pope believes he was not only the best person EVER in his job, but that it also gave him the authority to pronounce sagely on UFO cases through the ages, from Ezekiel to the Roswell film footage. Littered with inaccuracies of all kinds this book is badly written and a huge missed opportunity. In his desire to be sensational he ignores the lure of the mundane, a subject that, as a low ranking civil servant, he is surely most knowledgeable about.

This book should be required reading for anyone even mildly interested in UFOs. In this book, Pope tells us the story of what he himself calls his three year "voyage of discovery" during which he came to the conclusion that the "Extraterrestrial Hypothesis" was the best (and, possibly, the only) explanation for the twenty percent or so of cases that could not be explained otherwise.

To come to this conclusion, however, Pope had to start with an "open mind." Given the title, the reader should be instantly aware that this is not the way most of officialdom approaches this topic. But, Pope does something most Civil Servants would never do: he takes his new responsibility as the Ministry of Defense's (MoD's) UFO Desk Officer SERIOUSLY! He reads into the topic (which shows up clearly in his knowledge of the history of the phenomenon). To extend his capability to investigate sightings, He develops good relations with civilian UFO investigation groups like the British UFO Research Association (BUFORA) and QUEST International, and actually shares data with them. Not only that, but Pope actually tries to help and comfort witnesses and abductees. When he says "I'm with the Ministry and I'm here to help you," he actually means it!

So, what we have thus far is an MoD Civil Servant who, after three years of dealing with civilian and military close encounters, has come to the conclusion that some significant percentage of these events involve extraterrestrial craft piloted by some form of extraterrestrial intelligence. I cannot stress how important this publically stated conclusion is. It has, insofar as I can tell, happened only once before and that was in the first edition of Edward Ruppelt's book "The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects." In that case, though, so much pressure was placed on Ruppelt's employer that he was forced very quickly to write a second edition with a new chapter that contradicted the conclusion of the previous edition. So far, at least, no such pressure has been placed on Nick Pope. And, that, too, is also extraordinary.

Also like Ruppelt, Pope seems unaware that there may be a UFO cover-up going on in the UK. As we finally learned in America, the best cases never went to Blue Book. Instead, they went directly to Air Intelligence Service Squadrons. And, there is evidence that the best cases in the U.K. did not go to Mr. Pope's office at Whitehall but, instead, went to a secret group at RAF Rudloe Manor in Wiltshire. Yet, despite the evidence, Mr. Pope insists that there is no cover-up in Britain. I am certain that Mr. Pope is not party to one and is not knowingly telling a lie. But, I cannot bring myself to believe that there is none - especially given the close relationship between the U.S. (which seems to follow a strict code of secrecy) and the UK, which would have to agree to follow the same policy if it expected U.S. cooperation and support.

Finally, being objective, Pope broaches the issue no one seems willing to confront. Being a defense analyst, Pope cannot fall in with the "Space Brothers" view of extraterrestrials. He views their deeds objectively, and doesn't like what he sees. They violate our airspace (including restricted military airspace) without our permission. They can, at least at times, completely evade detection by our air defense radar systems. They land on our sovereign territory and proceed to kidnap our citizens and subject them to "medical examinations" that only Dr. Mengele could appreciate. And, last but not least, they kill and mutilate our farm animals and pets in an especially gruesome manner. If people from another nation on earth did all this, we would treat it as an act of war. And so, being logical (another extraordinary trait in a Civil Servant), Pope draws the appropriate conclusion: we are at war right now. According to Pope, it's currently a very secret and quite one-sided war. It's one-sided because we don't seem to know that we are at war. Pope advocates the development of appropriate military contingency plans for use if and when we can't make the Aliens stop these practices by any other means. What's extraordinary about this is that Pope is, again, the first high-ranking Civil Servant I have ever heard draw the logical conclusion regarding the objective implications of Alien activities on this planet, and do so publicly. This conclusion will come as a shock to those who have heard nothing but the apologists for the Aliens, but it's about time they woke up.

An ordinarily boring and implausible plot is rendered even more absurd by the author's amateurish attempts to portray much of the story as factual. If the perpetrators of this "conspiracy" were the people alleged by Szulc, the Vatican would have released all of the details in a heartbeat.

Thankfully, this author's attempt to calumniate one of the most important prelates of the 20th century is mitigated by the plethora of factual errors rampant throughout the story.

Rubbish.

First of all, the most rediculous fictional mystery plot ever. The protagonist's investigation is unbelievebly lucky each step of the way. Second of all, the statement by the author "that all events prior to 1950 are accurate", causes the book to present a horribly distorted view of history as truthful. Last, it totally slanders both the Society of St. Pius V and the late Archbishop Lefebvre. Whatever the society's faults, this is absurd. Also, to really make matters worse, the Society of St. Pius V is referred to as the Fraternity of St Pius V throughout the book. This way, the author can also condem the Fraternity of St. Peter at the same time. Total Garbage!!!

It depends on how you feel towards the Catholic Church , it is obvious that some of the fiction may have mistakes , but who cares , the point is the factual plot to kill the pope , and the simple conclusion that it must come from someone that will benefit from it and is very displeased with the ongoing dramas ,mysteries and others surrounding the Catholic Church , in short , if you are a church follower , you do not want this written down, if you are not , go for it , a very interesting plot , and very real.... leave the fanatism aside.