Bishop Books

Witch is a story based upon the life of Bridget Bishop. Bridget Bishop was the first woman executed for witchcraft in Salem in 1692. This book depicts the woman's life from her education as a teenager in London where she meets, falls in love, and marries her first husband, George Wasselbe. The book also describes Bridget's converts to Puritan beliefs, her sea journey to the United States, and her life in Salem. The author even includes the testimony of Bridget's trial at the end of the book.

I enjoyed this story as both a work of historical fiction and as the testimony of the life of Bridget Bishop. The author has obviously done a good deal of research not only into the life of the characters but also into the culture, norms, and daily lives of those living in Britain and in the Puritan colonies of the 1600's. These aspects intermesh perfectly allowing the reader to travel back in time to experience life as if he or she were a dear friend to Bridget Bishop, a friend who saw both her kind creative qualities and her manic destructive tendencies.

"The novel is a well-crafted story of Bridget's downfall. The author writes skillfully of the time period and sheds light on some of the feelings a woman of that time may have had...Wilson tells a story of one woman's life as an outcast in a society of outcasts. Most of the story deals with the times, the woman, and her society; the witchcraft theme is hinted at almost from the beginning, and prejudice and man's inhumanity to man is at the core of the novel." - Naomi Theye, Historical Novel Society

"Bridget's story is as important for the backdrop it presents as it is for the telling of her life. The harsh sterility of the Puritans in the colonies stoked a powder keg of repression lit by the anxiety of economic and political pressures. Witch hunts have become more sophisticated since then - McCarthy went after godless Communists, not dabblers in the paranormal, for instance - but are still around in one form or another. As long as powerful people promote a culture of fear and dare name the bogeyman of the hour, and as long as society at large allows itself to be sucked in by exaggerations and lies, Bridget Bishop's story will ever be repeated, the only difference in the details. The only way we can combat such hysteria is through, as Frances Hill's A Delusion of Satan suggests, 'constant reminders of common humanity.' " - Curled Up With A Good Book Reviews, 2005

"I enjoyed this story as both a work of historical fiction and as the testimony of the life of Bridget Bishop. The author has obviously done a good deal of research not only into the life of the characters but also into the culture, norms, and daily lives of those living in Britain and in the Puritan colonies of the 1600's. These aspects intermesh perfectly allowing the reader to travel back in time to experience life as if he or she were a dear friend to Bridget Bishop, a friend who saw both her kind creative qualities and her manic destructive tendencies. " - Tami Brady, TCM Reviews, Jan. 2006

While being a well researched book about Salem, this novel goes much further than a simple re-hash of the witchtrials. It examines women's issues, interpersonal power struggles, and takes a closer look at elements of religious fundamentalism.
The main character starts out quite naive and wide eyed and is swept up in the Puritan movement, later finding herself disillusioned and eventually persecuted when she decides to break away. There are a few typos, as is the case with some pod imprints, but nothing worth passing on the content for.
I recommend it for anyone who enjoys women's literature, or the sort of historical fiction that really makes you think.

If you're looking for over the top writing that would be better suited for a monologue on a stage--in an elementary school gymnasium--complete with velvety dress and a pointed hat with foil stars. I've lived in Salem, MA and seen ridiculous displays of foolery, and this fits right in with the rest of the kitsch. A useless waste of time for any reader older than 10.

Also, the author spent a bit of time living in Seattle, where the first five-star review hails from; anyone want to bet they know one another?

I thoroughly enjoyed Ms Wilson's writing. Finally we have a book that represents this long over-looked figure in American history. Bridget Bishop was a woman unfairly persecuted in a wave of colonial histeria. Now her story can be told.

I've read each of the Jecks "Templar" books in order, so this is my 10th one and the weakest so far. It is so convoluted, with so many characters milling about, that it's hard to keep track of the multiple plot lines. Jecks also appears to have tried to fit in every detail he'd learned about Cathedral life -- much of it irrelevant to the story.

Of course, it's important for writers to research their subject, but they need to know which material to discard as well as which to include. Jecks piles up minutae until it overwhelms the characterization and plot.

There is a repetitiveness about the book, too, with the main characters going over (and over and over) the same information and questions. He probably could have told the same story in half the length.

I've also noticed that, in the last few books, the focus is placed less and less on the main series characters -- Baldwin and Simon, and their respective families. Having invested so much time in getting to know these protagonists, it's annoying to have them play background roles.

Yes, I'll go on and read number 11, but I'm not sure how many more volumes I'll wade through if things don't improve.

Sir Baldwin Furnshill, Keeper of the King's Peace and ex Templar knight and his friend Bailiff Simon Puttock have been summoned to Exeter to receive a prestigious award. Within hours of arriving they find there has been a savage murder and then another person dies a suspicious death, but was it murder or suicide. The Dean and the city Coroner ask the pair to solve the riddles surrounding the deaths. As they dig for the truth they find that many of Exeter's prominent citizens are not what, or who they seem to be. Excellent plots, read them all, you won't regret it.

There is always two things that you can count on when you pick up a Sir Baldwin Furnshill & Bailiff Simon Puttock West Country mystery: an exquisitely well crafted and cunning murder mystery; and that Michael Jecks has peppered the novel with all kinds of interesting bits of medieval facts and history. This latest Furnshill & Puttock murder mystery, "The Boy-Bishop's Glovemaker" takes place during the Christmas festivities of 1321 in the cathedral city of Exeter, and chronicles one of the most chilling and deadliest of cases that Sir Baldwin and Simon Puttock have ever taken on.

One of the many festivities celebrated during the Christmas season, is the election of one of the choristers to be "Bishop" for a day. Discipline is relaxed, and the Boy-Bishop and his friends are given some money, food and allowed to wonder about in the city, and to take part in harmless bits of mischief and mayhem. It is also on this day that leading members of the community are presented with special gem studded gloves to mark their service to Church and city. Both Sir Baldwin and Simon Puttock are to awarded these gloves; and when they first enter the city, they little expect that such a festive and joyous occasion would lead them to cross paths with one of the most ruthless of killers that they will ever come across!

Within hours of their arrival, they are summoned to the cathedral by the Dean. It turns out that the cathedral's glovemaker, Ralph, had been robbed and murdered a few days before. Ralph's apprentice, Elias, had been arrested for the crime mainly because it was Elias's knife that had been used to murder Ralph. Elias of course proclaims his innocence -- not that any one believes him. Now however, a Secondary from the cathedral, Peter Golloc, who had dealt with Ralph in the commissioning of the special gloves (he delivered the money and jewels for the gloves) has been found poisoned. The Coroner of the city cannot help but wonder if perhaps Elias is innocent afterall, and that Peter, and an unknown accomplice, may have robbed and murdered Ralph, with Peter in turn being murdered by his confederate. The Dean is appalled by the Coroner's allegations, and asks Sir Baldwin and Simon to investigate. Both men reluctantly agree since they both believe that the two murders are unconnected. However the more they dig, the more deaths they uncover, and it isn't too long before both men realise that they are after a truly cunning, cold blooded and single-minded killer. Will Sir Baldwin and Simon Puttock be able to successfully unmask the murderer before (s)he strikes again?

"The Boy-Bishop's Glovemaker" is a really riveting read, full of twists and turns and red herrings that will keep you guessing until the very end! The novel is a well crafted and well written one, and the level of suspense and tension was well maintained and sustained. I enjoyed this latest Sir Baldwin & Simon Puttock murder mystery immensely, and recommend it as a great read, esp if you are an avid reader of medieval mystery novels. A truly fantastic read!!

I'll probabley go back and finish reading it at some point but it didn't grab me in the same way that the previous stories had. I think part of it was that the the sexual tension between baldwin and his wife is gone. They seem to have settled into a comfortable groove and that made it kind of boring. Also I like to have some idea of what's going on but from reading this it seemed so random and I hadn't a clue as to why the man was killed. I must say I was disappointed.

The Ceremonial of Bishops is not a liturgical rites book, as a Sacramentary or the Rite of Baptism would be. Rather, it is like a "how to" guide for priests, deacons and other liturgical ministers when participating at a Mass or other liturgical events where a bishop presides. It is particulary helpful for deacons and acolytes, they who would interact with the bishop most frequently during a particular liturgy, especially the Mass.

Documents like the General Instruction on the Roman Missal (GIRM) and the General Instruction on the Liturgy of the Hours (GILH) would tell you why it is theologically and liturgically important for the bishop, as chief shepherd and liturgist, to preside at the liturgy. The Ceremonial of Bishops is great because it says, given the GIRM and GILH, here is what you do.

The Ceremonial of Bishops is the most complete book of its kind, which is somewhat unfortunate. As another review has noted, it does not contain a complete ceremonial, but frequently refers the reader to other texts (e.g., GIRM, Rites, etc.); however, for a liturgist/MC/archdeacon, these should all be handy and familiar, making the omission more an inconvenience than a serious flaw. Having said that, the user of this book MUST have and be familiar with these references.

The overall format will be familiar to anyone who has picked up a standard Roman Catholic book of this type (paragraphs are numbered for easy reference). The book review those items, actions, and liturgies that are proper to a bishop. This means that services which are also performed by a priest are not covered in their entirety, but only where the pontifical rites differ. Thus, there is no full discussion on the celebration of Holy Eucharist, but there are specific differences noted (the full discussion can be found in other rituals).

The audience of this books is necessarily narrow, as it is really useful only to those who are Bishops, those who will become bishops, those who serve bishops, and those researching things about bishops. It really does not need to be in every parish sacristy, although it would not be a bad addition. It need not be reviewed by all clergy either; they would be better served by reading St. Gregory's "Pastoral Care" (Vol. 11 in Ancient Christian Writers series), or the letters of St. Ignatius (vol. 1 in the same), which will be more practical.

I bought this book with the hope that it would be an actual ceremonial, its not. This book only contains parts of ceremonies and prayers and then refers to other texts for the complete ceremony. I did like certain parts of this text but all in all it really lacks the information which the title boasts. If you are looking for a true ceremonial then buy The Rites vol. 2 that particular text has most of the complete ceremonies which the ceremonial of bishops begins. The Rites vol 2 also costs half of this one.

This typical volume is for all who are interested in the proper way to conduct liturgical celebrations. Eventhough the title is 'Ceremonial of Bishops', the contents of this book can also be applied to liturgies at which the bishop does not preside over. Very practical. After studying it, I have learnt just how taken for granted a properly conducted liturgy is in many churches in where I live.

steve bishop has an amazing grasp of old testament theology. my family and i have not been able to stop talking about his insights into the complex world of the old testament. it makes for great dinner time conversation!

I read this book as compulsary course literature at the university. What I found interesting was the presentation - and the comparison - between the different coventants in the Old Testament. What I question, and disagree with, is that the author seems to believe in the Documentary Hypothesis, and that he believes there are three authors to the book of Isaiah. There are also other examples of liberal theology, but some facts are interesting. However, I would not have bought, or read, the book if it was not course literature.

Anderson provides a helpful and much-needed introduction to Old Testament theology. The book is particularly well suited to the church or college classroom. Laity and students will find the writing style generally accessible and the shortish chapters very manageable. Anderson's outline, based around yet not limited to a scheme of three successive covenants, allows him to balance a forthright accounting for the diversity of Old Testament literature with an emphasis on the common themes that unite the literature. The breadth of Anderson's treatment is impressive. Biblical specialists and theologians, however, are likely to wish for more depth in the treatment of various topics and more justification for some unusual moves (like treating "holiness" as per Rudolf Otto rather than as per Leviticus). If approached as an introduction and invitation to further study rather than as a digest of results or conclusions, the book renders a great service.

Please note that the author is not Steve Bishop (he is assistant) but Bernhard W. Anderson, emeriatus professor of Old Testament Theology, Princeton Theological Seminary

The book was delicately arranged as a project to fight against hunger. In doing so, the result could certainly make the readers feel the pang of appetite with mentions and recipes of scrumptious dishes. It absolutely was a superb idea to bring a group of thematic authors together for a great cause. The food varies from appetizers to desserts. It is not mandatory to finish the volume from first page to last. A summary of each author and their short stories are provided at the back of the compilation. One could pick and choose if desired. Some of the proses invite the mystery lovers to determine the killers and others ascertain the murderers from the beginning. In a way, the latter challenges the readers to establish the proof along with the writer. It is all fun and good.

A sumptuous literary repast.A delectable array of mysteries. An excellent anthology. The stories are for the most part excellent. From an Amish innkeeper to homeless New Yorkers from humourous to serious mysteries this book runs the gamut. A great read. A quick read. A fun read. And it had the added bonus of introducing me to some new mystery authors whose works I wish to explore. Well done and rare a feat almost as impossible in mysteries as in steaks. And the good news is that the profits go to charity to feed the hungry. Presumably without the poison.

An excellent anthology. The stories are for the most part excellent. From an Amish innkeeper to homeless New Yorkers from humourous to serious mysteries this book runs the gamut. A great read. A quick read. A fun read. And it had the added bonus of introducing me to some new mystery authors whose works I wish to explore. Well done and rare a feat almost as impossible in mysteries as in steaks. A sumptuous literary repast.

I really enjoyed this collection of short stories with a culinary theme. There is a recipe at the end of each story. I found great stories by old favorites like Claudia Bishop and Tamar Myers, and some stories by authors I am going to look for in the future. Myer's story was pretty good but not the best of the lot. I really enjoyed Just One Bite Won't Kill You, by Valerie Wolzien and Steak Tartare, by Barbara D'Amato. Quite honestly, there isn't one story in this collection that isn't worth reading. I love short story collections. It's like a buffet of different author's offerings, you get a little taste of each author's works. This collection left me wanting more of all of them.

"We shook hands once, but I never knew him personally, and I have mixed feelings about that. I would have liked to argue with him over cheap cigars and good tequila by a blazing river campfire under a sky full of stars. But then, this would have been a different book, more of a personal memoir." James Bishop, Jr. Despite misgivings of not knowing Edward Abbey personally, Bishop has written a superb book on the legend of desert anarchist Cactus Ed. It is a well-researched, no-holds-barred, truthful expose of the mind, musings and legacy of an outrageous, outspoken man who was devoted to preserving the American Southwest wilderness for himself and a select few who would truly understand, preserve and love it unequivocally. Bishop, a polished and professional writer of many years with Newsweek, leaves no saguaro thorn or blossom untouched in his thorough and objective rendering of the subjects life, personality, writings and still living legacy. Often labeled the "Thoreau of the American West," the talented and tenacious Abbey was the promoter of ecodefense and ecosabotage; advocating anarchy to prevent the government and tourist industry from ruining the wilderness. In his twenty-one published books, the most popular being "The Monkey Wrench Gang" and "Desert Solitaire", Abbey shows to have been a determined, cantankerous, frustrated and angry, yet unique and colorful persona. Many detested him; especially those who were to receive financial gain from developing, paving or civilizing the west for tourism or the development of power plants at the cost of damning nature, pun intended. Abbey, certainly a master wordsmith as well, expounds a continuous theme: a surly hatred of progress and dogmatic devotion to wilderness preservation. If the admirable and perplexing Abbey could be summed up in one word, it would have to be curmudgeon; applying his wrath and logic at will depending upon mood and provocation, yet one with a delight of stirring motions within others and then impishly standing back to watch the results. Abbey's theme and writing niche was discovered early in life; the constant rebellion to progress, pomp and formality were seemingly intentional. Despite his denial and distaste for finances, both theme and writing paid well. "Love of wilderness" Abbey wrote in Desert Solitaire, "is an expression of loyalty to the earth which bore us and sustains us, the only home we will ever know, the only paradise we ever need --- if we only have eyes to see." In his constant struggle to protect the environment from the government, developers and ourselves, Abbey's The Monkey Wrench Gang implies his fictional delight in openly seeking to enrage others to the point of "monkey wrenching" the governments Glen Canyon Dam Project by damaging equipment or floating dynamite-filled boats to the dam while the ribbon cutting ceremony was taking place. As long as no one got hurt and he, admittedly the one who didn't have the courage to pull the plug or press the handle setting off the dynamite, it was fine with him. So open was Abbey in his determination of stopping progress that the FBI had agents assigned to watch and report on him for most of his adult life. Alas, the struggle of Abbey and his devotees to prevent what many called necessary "growth and progress" was as futile as those who in present day blame Columbus for the genocide of native Americans and eventual take over of two entire continents by Europeans and others. It was and is, inevitable. If Columbus didn't do it, someone else would have. The environs of Abbey's Southeast Utah stomping grounds of the 1950s, resembles little of what it is today, and, regretfully, nothing of what "growth and progress" will deem its state and existence a hundred years from now. We come, we see and, for environments demise, we conquer. Anyone interested in understanding more of Edward Abbey, need only read Desert Solitaire, written in 1968 from essays he wrote in the mid-50s while working as an isolated National Parks employee in Arches National Monument near Moab, Utah. "This is the most beautiful place on earth." Abbey wrote, yet he ended his employment there after two seasons due to the monument becoming "developed and improved so well that I had to leave." The reader seeking complete insight of the unique and complex Edward Abbey should read Epitaph of a Desert Anarchist. "Any writer who is dead and still raises hackles must have done his work properly," eulogized fellow writer and friend Chuck Bowden. Abbey and Bishop have both done their work well.

I am sorry that the money was spent to give this book to me as a gift. It is not well researched and not well written. If you have bought everything that Abbey wrote, read it all, bought everything else, read them all, gone back and read at least Desert Solitare and Down the River again, then have to be able to say "I've read everything by and about Abbey"; well then you might, but only might, consider this book. Even then try to borrow it. In fact, I'll send you mine if I haven't tossed it. I have been an Abbey fan for years, not always agreeing but always admiring the point of view. This book was truely not worth my time, I am somewhat amazed that three other people thought it was. Oh well, just as you can say this about me I'll say it about them, there's no accounting for taste.

What a wonderful book! Reading it was like sitting with the author and talking about Ed Abbey over a couple of beers. Bishop's style is so smooth and relaxing. He could give a lesson to all current biographers: we don't need to know everytime the subject had tea with someone or tied his tie over the course of 800 pages! It was just the right mix of disscussion of his life and his books. The last chapter, "Farewell..." was very moving. Edward Abbey was a man I would have loved to have known personally because he was so interesting and caustic, and especially because I don't always agree with him, which makes an interesting mix. I have read 2 novels and 1 book of essays of Abbey's and look forward to reading everything else he has written. A real nice job by the author.

James P. Bishop, Jr. has created a vivid and real picture of a great man who was as human as the rest of us. I most enjoyed how Abbey's contrariness has been captured. After reading this book, not only do I feel I've come to know of Abbey in some small way, it has given me a greater appreciation for the American Southwest and the need to speak out against government intervention. Written with frank truth and compassion ... a rare combination.

I must admit, I did not become interested in the life of Joey Bishop until after his recent death. I was not yet born when the Rat Pack was at their peak, nor was I old enough to know what a great comedian Mr. Bishop was.

I found this book to be an excellent read. It was not very lenghty and repetitive and it was extremenly informative. I had to admire Mr. Bishop's charitable contributions. I did not however, admire the way he treated his staff. Unlike his fellow Rat Packers, Mr. Bishop remained married to the same woman for 58 years and raised a son, Larry with her.

The author included some really cool photos of Mr. Bishop as a very young man along with some archival photos of the Rat Pack. I would recommend this book for any Joey Bishop fan.

Mr. Starr should be complemented for taking the time to write a book about a comedian that has been long forgotten. I would have preferred a longer book but perhaps Mr. Starr was afraid of being redundant. One reason that the book is not longer, I assume, is that Joey's career does not really lend itself to a study of a body of work.

Joey--when he was at his best--had the ability to snap a very witty one-liner. However, while not stated in Mr. Starr's book--I believe that Joey's real downfall was the laziness he exhibited on his late-night talk show. He never really took the time to do a monologue or prepare any post-monologue comedy bit. Instead, he let Regis share the opening spot with him and then he went right to his guests. That would never sell today and it didn't sell in the sixties.

Mr. Starr takes the time to indicate how Joey was unbearable to much of his staff, somewhat reminiscent of various accounts of how Eddie Cantor treated his radio staff. But Joey and Eddie do share one extremely admirable trait--a dedication to charitable causes (as set forth by Mr. Starr) and for that alone, Joey deserves our respect.

Incidentally, Mr. Starr's recounting of one Joey Bishop joke about the Texan who goes to Israel is one that I'll be telling people for a while.

If your a big fan of Joey Bishop you will devour this book. Michael Seth Starr does an outstanding job chronicling the life and career of this legendary entertainer. You will join Joey as he climbs the show biz ladder from small clubs in Philadelphia, to the Copacabana and the Sands, to movie sets, tv studios, and to Broadway. Frank Sinatra dubed him as the "hub of the wheel" performing with the Rat Pack. You will not be able to put this book down. "Mouse in the Rat Pack:The Joey Bishop Story" is a great read and a must have for his fans.

Ask anyone under 45 about Joey Bishop, and the response you'll get will be "Who?" Michael Seth Starr aims to change that, although you'll be wondering by the end of the book why he bothers. Bishop was, at best, a marginal figure in the annals of American entertainment. During the 60's, he somehow managed to share the stage with superstars like Frank, Dean and Sammy despite having none of their charisma. And although Starr often describes him as the "top comedian of the 1960's," he also has to admit that Johnny Carson thrashed him in the late-night ratings, and Bishop's early 1960's sitcom was an utter flop.

Still, the book is readable. Bishop comes off as a hard-working, but demanding comic, with few friends. I hope he truly got good audience response in the 60's, because the lines quoted in this book fall flat on the printed page. I guess you had to be there. Starr is a good writer....perhaps he will choose a more intriguing subject for his next bio.

Good book, but it was halfway over before the mystery began. The book did hold my interest, however.

I've read every book written to date and I'm anxiously awaiting the next one. This series is EXCELLENT. Claudia Bishop makes her readers salivate while anxiously awaiting the next installment. Thanks Claudia.

Claudia Bishop adds another good book to her Hemlock Falls Mystery series. In this episode former senator Alphonse Santini has come to the Inn for his wedding. His overbearing attitude aggravates Sarah Quilliam who runs the Inn, and her sister Meg, who is the chef. At the same time, the former members of the Hemlock Chamber of Commerce have split and formed two new groups which are organized by gender. The men take mysterious trips into the woods to play on drums and find their true nature while the women are beginning to have real feminist leanings. An inquisitive tv reporter named Nora Cahill comes to cover the proceedings. During the course of the book several murders occur and Sarah becomes a chief suspect. One of the delightful fringe benefits of reading Claudia Bishop is her extensive vocabulary which sends me scurrying to my dictionary a time or two during the reading of a book. The word this time was "tatterdemalion". I am looking forward to reading more of this author's work.

I love this series. 2 sisters (Meg and Quill) run an Inn in upstate NY. A senator's daughter is to be married in the Inn. The Inn gets turned upside down when the wedding party arrives. After a murder in the Inn, Quill investigates.

Compelling and unforgettable historical account of ancient Hawai`i from pre-Captain Cook up to the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, by prominent historian and Native Hawaiian Lilikala Kame`eleihiwa. Moving and detailed description of the devastating impact American imperialism exacts upon the minds, culture, and lives of the Native Hawaiian people. A must for those interested in a true history of Hawai`i.

In response to: "Then, in a display of conspicuous consumption well-grounded in traditional Polynesian culture, most of them splurged their new wealth and went bust." -- a reader

Actually, traditionally, splurging wealth is a much westernized approach to living life. Self-interest is a concept that does not even exist in the Hawaiian language. Don't forget that Native Hawaiians inhabited the islands for thousands of years before good ol' Cap'n Cook even set his stinky, white feet on the sand of Kealakekua. You cry conspiracy, I pronounce truth. Indeed, the land WAS STOLEN BY GUNPOINT (annexed) under President Benjamin Harrison, by, you guessed it, conspirators. Namely, Lorrin Thurston and John L. Stevens.

For you, maybe no grand conspiracy is relevant because the way you see life is just as you describe... "people act in their own self-interest." Sorry, that is not the Hawaiian way, but the haole way.

native land and foreign desires is the best book i've ever read on hawaiian history and the history of the mahele. using hawaiian language sources, lilikala kame'eleihiwa opens the book with several chapters that introduce the reader to hawaiian cosmology. she clearly and eloquently explains how hawaiian society was politically, culturally, spiritually, economically, and socially structured by reciprocal relationships among the land, animals, plants, and people. given this understanding, she describes how that system was transformed by relationships with US colonizers, businessmen, and missionaries and analyzes its dramatic consequences. this book is one of the few books that offers history from a native hawaiian perspective. it is an absolute treasure and a brilliant contribution to critical historical scholarship.

Prof. Kame`eleihiwa did a lot of donkey work in the archives but advances an implausible explanation of the privatization of land in Hawaii in the mid-19th century. Her thesis of a vast multi-generational conspiracy is no more plausible than any other conspiratorial explanation of complex historical events. Never explain by conspiracy what can be explained by stupidity. The theory that foreign conspirators "stole" Hawaiian land is not improved by combining it with the claim that hereditary aristocrats who had spent decades ruthlessly pursuing their self-interest suddenly and generously gave up wealth and power. The Hawaiian king and aristocracy decided to privatize the land of Hawaii because the old system based on forced peasant labor was collapsing as the peasants died or left the land to take better jobs. By privatizing and partitioning the land among themselves, the king and aristocrats made themselves rich: they converted undevelopable land into valuable private property in their own hands. Then, in a display of conspicuous consumption well-grounded in traditional Polynesian culture, most of them splurged their new wealth and went bust. On the other hand, people, including peasants, who wanted to invest in land could buy plenty of land cheap. Those who invested wisely for the long term generally did well. No grand conspiracy theory is needed to explain that people act in their own self-interest and that people who act in their long-run self-interest usually do better than those who seek immediate gratification.

Congressman Ron Paul stated in one of the early 2008 presidential debates that the most serious moral crisis facing America was the recent adoption by the Bush administration and the Congress of the evil doctrine of preemptive war and the abandonment of the centuries old Christian doctrine of Just War.

Read this excellent book to find out the reasons why this is such an important moral issue.

The right of war is hateful, and its punishment is most grave; therefore it is to be restricted as far as can be.
- Francisco Suarez, S.J.

All modern war is to be forbidden.
- Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani.

_Neo-Conned!: Just War Principles: A Condemnation of War in Iraq_, published in 2007 by Light in the Darkness Publications, an imprint of IHS Press, is a collection of essays and writings of various anti-war Catholic intellectuals and philosophers, paleo-conservative commentators, and others. The book maintains that it is "Asserting the traditional, Christian just war doctrine against the neoconservative caricature that masks violence and aggression." It is frequently maintained by those on the left that the war has been fought by the "far right wing"; however, as these essays show, not only are the categories of right and left no longer useful in our modern age, but the reasons given for fighting the War in Iraq were anything but conservative and not in keeping with Just War doctrine. The Catholic Church regards war as a great evil and prays that man may be delivered from war along with hunger and pestilence. The church has condemned radical pacifism (in the sense that one is unjustified to use force in direct self-defence); however the church maintains that a war may only be fought provided it has a just cause. As explained by Romano Amerio, a war is just if: it is declared by a competent authority, it is aimed at righting a wrong, there is reasonable hope of actually righting a wrong, and it is conducted with moderation. The just war doctrine goes back to St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas and was further developed by later scholars. The authors appearing in this volume maintain that the Iraq War (a pre-emptive war) does not meet these criteria and that further, as some maintain, no modern war may indeed meet these criteria. As such the war is to be condemned by Catholics and can be seen as an integral feature of the "culture of death", including abortion, euthanasia, and the death penalty. Further, it should be noted that both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have condemned this war.

The book begins with a foreword by Bishop Hilarion Capucci and an introduction by Prof. George Lopez.

The first section of this book is entitled "The Statesmen Speak: A War Both Unnecessary and Vain". This includes essays by Jude Wanniski (explaining how he believes the case made against Sadaam to be bogus), Marc Bossuyt (explaining the issue of economic sanctions against Iraq - the callous remarks of Madeleine Albright that the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children were worth the price should be noted here and certainly refute the claims made by some that "No one died while Clinton lied"), Joy Gordon (explaining the real "oil-for food" scandal), and Patrick Buchanan (explaining the role of the "War Party" and Jewish neoconservatives in fighting the war against Iraq to further Israeli interests).

The second section of this book is entitled "Conservative and Anti-War: Patriotism, Prudence, and the Moral Law". This section includes authors writing from the perspective of paleo-conservativism, showing the phoney nature of the neoconservative imposters. This section includes essays by Samuel Francis (arguing that "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel", showing how a false patriotism has been used by the neoconservatives, and illustrating the fundamental difference between the goals of the neoconservatives and those of genuine conservatives and the "Old Right" particularly as they concern the State), Joseph Sobran (showing the immorality of the war and arguing that the war is murder), Charley Reese (arguing that "legal nonsense" has been used to justify the war), Thomas Fleming (showing the history of the Middle East and the role of American imperialism), Wendell Berry (arguing that war is ultimately a failure and that the importation of globalist culture is destroying traditional ways of life and the environment), and Paul Gottfried (showing how the neoconservatives are not genuine conservatives at all and that their zealous lust for global democracy is anything but a conservative program).

The third section of this book is entitled "The Venerable Tradition: Putting the Brakes on Aggression and Securing Justice for Iraq". This includes essays by the following: Fr. Juan Carlos Iscara (explaining that "might is not right" and arguing for the just war tradition), Thomas Ryba (explaining the role of epistemic adequacy in the just war criteria), David Gordon (exposing the fallacies used by neoconservative Catholics to defend the war in Iraq and their abuse of the just war theory for their own ends), and James Hanink (arguing for the role of Iraqi sovereignity and conscience).

The fourth section in this book is entitled "Judgment and Inspiration: The Church Still Speaks with Authority". This section includes essays by the following: William T. Cavanaugh (arguing that we must turn to the church for moral guidance and that further if not the church then we have nowhere to turn - this applies particularly to pro-war Catholics who claim that we should turn to the president for guidance first), Bishop John Michael Botean (a Lenten letter issued to Romanian Catholics arguing that participation in the war was a mortal sin), an explanation of this same letter by Bishop Botean, Edward Peters (a canonist comments on the letter from Bishop Botean), and Deacon Keith Fournier (arguing for peace).

The fifth section in this book is entitled "Higher Law: Conscience, Morality, and the Transcendent Vision". This section includes essays by the following: John Rao (showing the decadent nature of modern Western and American civilization and arguing that the spread of pluralism is behind this war), Robert Hickson (arguing that limits must be set on just war criteria as they apply to the modern world), Paul Likoudis (arguing that new weapons have made a new understanding of warfare necessary), Laurence M. Vance (showing the failure of nerve of Christians to oppose the war), Peter E. Chojnowski (arguing for conscientious objection), Army Staff Sgt. Camilo Mejia (arguing for conscientious objection), and an appendix by Eric Gill (the distributist writer who opposed the Second World War). It should also be noted that many Catholics also opposed the Second World War including such figures as Catholic philosopher Elizabeth Anscombe.

The final section of this book is entitled "Speaking with Authority: The True Just-War Doctrine as a Light for Our Time". This includes essays by Fr. Franzisko Stratmann (explaining why wars are unnecessary, that warfare may be outgrown just as slavery has been despite man's fallen nature, and cannot be justified with reference to Old Testament wars - this essay is particularly interesting in this respect), Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani (an opponent to certain aspects of the Second Vatican Council notes that modern warfare cannot be just), and Romano Amerio (a chapter from the book _Iota Unum_ showing the Catholic position on just war and the need for a confederation of Christian nations).

These essays (along with the companion volume _Neo-CONNED! Again_) offer an excellent introduction to the social teachings of the Catholic church concerning warfare. As it turns out, the just war criteria are not met by those who have pushed for the Iraq War. As such, this war is to be condemned by Catholics. The fact that many Catholics retain allegiance to neoconservativism only shows how deeply in need of an understanding of church tradition they are. Further and finally it should be pointed out that much left wing opposition to war is not truly anti-war in that many of those on the left who opposed the War in Iraq did support the wars of Clinton or others.

Is the war in Iraq a great idea? Oh, probably not. But these folks are hardly the ones to preach to us about it! Instead of seeing reasons why we ought to have handled Saddam Hussein's Iraq in some other way, we see outright apologies for Saddam Hussein's behavior! We're told that the case against him is bogus!

I'm against war. I think war is destructive and hurts everyone. And most folks who are against war get some sympathy from me. But not always! In 1945, when the German National Socialists were on the verge of defeat, the Allies could have simply quit fighting, claiming that they were ending the war early. Instead, they continued until they got an unconditional surrender. I think it was wise to do that, and in the long run, such a policy was of significant benefit to quite a few people.

Whenever there is a war, there will be some people who are genuinely for peace, and may be willing to help do things to defend attacked civilians but not willing to be aggressors. But there will also be those who simply side with the thugs: they are more than willing to help aggressors, they're just not willing to help the victims. When they advise the victims to refuse to defend themselves, they are simply part of the problem.

Do the contributors in this volume really appear to me to be against war? Um, no. I think many of them might be rather willing to start a war, an aggressive war no less, in the Middle East, as long as that war were against Israel rather than against some other state. We see a one page introduction from Bishop Hilarion Capucci. And there are articles by Patrick Buchanan, Joseph Sobran, Charley Reese, and a bunch of others. I think the whole idea of these people trying to tell the rest of us about morality is silly.

Buchanan blames our misadventures in Iraq on folks who have a "passionate commitment" to Israel "that causes them to subordinate the interests of their own country." Really? I'm not so sure that American actions in Iraq were even that useful to Israel in the first place. And I think such a comment might apply even more to those whose passion to damage Israel causes them to subordinate the interests of their own country. Buchanan also makes fun of the idea that imposing "peace" on Israel might simply be a replay of Munich in 1938. He adds that "U. S. and Israeli interests are not identical. They often collide, and when they do, U. S. interests must prevail." Okay. That's fair. I would like to add that the interests of the United States and some extremist and racist Arab opponents of Israel are not identical. And when these interests collide, American interests must prevail!

Hilarion Capucci is both a thug and an archbishop of the Catholic Church. He used his status as a bigwig to smuggle weapons to terrorists. On August 18, 1974, he was finally arrested by Israeli security forces; his car was found stuffed with TNT and guns. Although Capucci was sentenced to twelve years in prison, the Pope pleaded for an earlier release, and he got out in 1977, with an understanding that he would stay out of politics. He hasn't exactly done that. I find it hard to believe that the Vatican would put up with such a misuse of an archbishop's status: does the Vatican really want the Catholic Church's leaders to have their limousines stopped and searched all the time for weapons? Or worse, have their churches inspected for weapons as well? All because it supports having an archbishop smuggle weapons to a terrorist group that's mostly Muslim and anti-Catholic in the first place?

I do not recommend this book, and I think it says a great deal that Capucci was chosen to write an introduction for it.

I must simply quote Thomas Woods here: "I have never recommended a book as strongly as I am recommending "Neoconned" and "Neoconned Again", two new collections of essays that make just about every argument you can think of against the war in Iraq. Now if you're thinking that you've read enough about this subject already, or that such books just aren't your cup of tea, or that you have too much to read as it is, I urge you to abandon such thoughts right away. These books need to be purchased by everyone, right away, this minute, and need to be circulated just as far as possible.

I was asked early last year to contribute an essay to these volumes. At that time I was consumed by the task of writing The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, along with my usual dozen other projects, and unfortunately had to decline. All I can say is, they sure didn't need my essay. Light in the Darkness Publications has assembled one of the most impressive lineups of scholars and commentators I have ever seen on any subject. Many of the names will be familiar to LRC readers; see the list for volume 1 here and volume 2 here.

Worth the price of the two volumes alone is the very lengthy interview with the late, great Jude Wanniski, the supply-side theorist who had such influence on President Ronald Reagan (and who therefore cannot be dismissed so easily as a leftist peacenik). In recent years Wanniski had become - along with all too few other conservatives - skeptical not only of government intervention on the domestic front but of its foreign interventions as well. (Recall Joe Sobran's amusing dictum: if you want the government to intervene domestically you're a liberal, if you want the government to intervene abroad you're a conservative, if you want the government to intervene both domestically and abroad you're a moderate, and if you don't want the government to intervene either domestically or abroad you're an extremist.)

It may sound like an exaggeration to say that just about every major claim made about Iraq and Saddam by the U.S. government since the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait has been misleading or simply false, and that the mainstream media has bought into these distortions with nary a peep of opposition, but that's just about the only conclusion one can draw from Wanniski's case. If you think it's an open and shut case that Saddam "gassed his own people," not to mention countless other episodes routinely cited to work us into a frenzy for war, you need to read this. (Saddam did brutally suppress uprisings against his regime, but violence in the service of nationalism seems to disturb the neoconservative conscience only selectively - China and Iraq bad, Russia and the United States [under Lincoln] good.)

Although not every essay touches on the issue explicitly, the first of the two volumes is organized around Catholic just-war theory and what it has to say about the war in Iraq. Now hold on a minute before you say you're non-Catholic and just move along. The principles of Catholic just-war theory, long appropriated and developed by a great many non-Catholics, are widely regarded as useful tools for moral reflection, and you'll be surprised at just how satisfying it is to see how dramatically short the war in Iraq falls on the basis of every one of those principles.

Wanniski also reminds us of the real history of the past 15 years. He recalls the destruction of the Iraqi infrastructure, including the deliberate targeting of water treatment facilities (followed by a sanctions regime that forbade the entry into Iraq of equipment needed to repair them) and other installations vital to civilian life. This was all necessary, say the shills, because Saddam was such a bad person. The sanctions, too, which led to half a million children dead - "worth it," according to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who did not question that figure - were routinely defended on the same grounds. (Wanniski also addresses the "if Saddam hadn't built so many palaces he could have fed his people" argument.) A prosperous, secular country that was liberal by regional standards, and which could boast one of the finest health care systems in the Middle East, was reduced to an economic basket case, and plagued by a nightmare of disease, malnourishment, and sick and deformed children - all as the result of a vain effort to dislodge its leader. If the "Saddam was bad" defense strikes you as insufficient to justify the infliction of this degree of suffering - of which this is the tip of the iceberg - welcome to the human race.

That people who describe themselves as Christians supported this policy is but the icing on the cake. As I recall, there was a Christian theologian of no small importance who condemned the idea that we should "do evil that good may come."

A surprising contributor to these volumes is Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani, who headed what in his day was known as the Holy Office of the Catholic Church. Cardinal Ottaviani was known for his outspoken opposition to the new rite of Mass, which he considered an intolerable liberal innovation, so it would not be easy to accuse him of "liberalism." And yet the editors include for us a wonderful and compelling essay of his called "Modern War Is to Be Absolutely Forbidden." Let's see pro-war Catholics wiggle out of this one.

Professor Peter Chojnowski, another traditional Catholic, contributes a surprisingly radical essay on the right of conscientious objection. He reminds us of an important statement by the Ethics Committee of the Catholic Association for International Peace six decades ago. That committee included distinguished and orthodox scholars such as Msgr. Fulton Sheen (who wrote scholarly books early in his career) and Msgr. John A. Ryan. It concluded:

Practically speaking, the task of deciding the justice or injustice of any particular war devolves upon the conscience of the individual conscript or soldier. It is his conscientious duty to decide, as a matter of concrete fact, whether any particular war is aggressive or defensive, and, if defensive, whether it is justified or unjustified, and, in consequence, whether he is free or obliged or forbidden to participate formally in it, whether he is free or obliged or forbidden to be a conscientious objector.

That's another small taste of the hidden history that these books have made available.

Volume 2 is, if anything, more impressive still, and features a wider variety of ideological perspectives. No, I don't much care for some of what Noam Chomsky says, but I am prepared to give a respectful hearing to anyone with the intelligence and the strength of character to denounce wickedness and folly, especially this particular case of wickedness and folly. Featuring an introduction by former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter, volume 2 includes dozens of essays by such authors as Claes Ryn, Kirkpatrick Sale, Alexander Cockburn, Gordon Prather, Mark and Louise Zwick, Justin Raimondo, Robert Fisk, and Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski.

Like many Americans, I've grown sad and frustrated at the triumph of neoconservative foreign policy. It was sold to Americans not merely on the basis of lies, but also by means of bumper-sticker slogans trotted out - and dutifully absorbed and repeated by shills determined to live down to every caricature of conservatism ever devised - by a White House that cynically exploited ordinary people's patriotic inclinations in order to prosecute a war whose aims remain obscure to this day.

These books, a small victory in themselves, actually lifted my spirits. It was a great pleasure to see how many serious, intelligent observers were keeping a watchful eye on the Bush administration well before criticism of the Iraq misadventure became fashionable, and to see their case against it laid out with such devastating precision. That case is so powerful and overwhelming that it will leave you more dumbfounded than ever that anyone ever fell for it, that anyone got away with denouncing skeptics of transparent White House propaganda as "unpatriotic," or that so many people believe conservatism involves no higher value than giving intellectual cover to a series of ever-changing, ad hoc rationalizations for war.

These books deserve to become bestsellers. To those who opposed the Iraq war, think of purchasing these books as casting a vote against the War Party, against the war-war choice of Bush/Kerry that we got in 2004, and against a cowardly, servile mainstream media whose mea culpas about pre-war intelligence came, well, rather too late.

If you have friends on the left or the right, or even in the center for that matter, please forward this column to them. The same supposedly "liberal" media that brazenly repeated White House fabrications that a simple Google search could have refuted are unlikely to showcase these books. (Can someone please remind the major conservative publications that the "liberal" media supported this war with a vengeance?) They belong not only in Americans' homes but also in classrooms, libraries (buy a set and donate it!), and wherever intelligent Americans may be found.

Ordinary Americans who were too busy with their own lives to investigate the administration's claims too closely may come to see they've been had, if they haven't realized it already. But the most outspoken of the war's supporters are all but impossible to persuade. Some of them are simply venal, eager to curry favor with the regime no matter how idiotic or intellectually insulting the line they are expected to tow. Others, whether they realize it or not, look at the world as a giant baseball game, with the U.S. government as our team. They'll rush out of the dugout to protest an obviously sound call at first base or a called strike that was in fact well within the strike zone. When in matters of foreign policy their team sets forth a barrage of propaganda they would have laughed at had it come from the Soviet Union in the 1980s or Syria today, they cannot defend it enthusiastically enough. Go, team.

Such a juvenile mentality would have been considered utterly beneath conservatism in, say, the 1940s. At that time, you could find major conservatives who were willing to hold their own government to the same moral standards they applied to others. Even a man known as "Mr. Republican," Senator Robert Taft, could cast a skeptical eye on the Truman administration's early Cold War foreign policy as - no, this isn't a misprint - gratuitously provocative.

Today, even to look for motivations behind 9/11 is to invite accusations of "blaming America" for the attacks, as if a detective seeking a killer's motive should be accused of blaming the victim for his fate. It is next to impossible to render serious judgments about foreign policy when public discourse is dominated by anti-intellectual hysterics calling themselves patriots. These two books do the best job yet.

It may be worth noting, if only in order to underscore the intensity of my feelings about these volumes, that not only do I have no relationship to Light in the Darkness Publications, an imprint of IHS Press (no relation to the Institute for Humane Studies), but I have actually had some public and contentious exchanges with J. Forrest Sharpe, one of the editors of Neoconned, on unrelated matters. I am happy to let bygones be bygones. Sharpe has done his country and the cause of truth a valuable service and deserves only the most enthusiastic support.

It is not possible to do these books justice in a single column. All I can say is that they are of the utmost importance. I cannot urge readers of this column strongly enough: put aside any inclination you may have to let these volumes pass you by, or even to put off buying them until a later date. Buy them right now. You will not regret it."