The Sci Fi Catholic Yak Module
Interesting. When I was Catholic, I never felt the presence of God in the Eucharist. AFter I converted to the other side, I did sense His presence, and have had a few, rare but intense, experiences classifiable as mystical, where God's presence was strong, and even a couple of occasions when his direction to do something was validated as giving special knowledge of the situation of persons in the church.
I think all of us find what we need to express or hear from God in different arms of the faith. I didn't find it in the Catholic church, but you did. IT's one Savior. And it's one Spirit, and each acts very much and very vividly in all parts of His body.
The very fact that the Catholic Church is hemorrhaging believers in the third world to Pentecostalism (I'm not Pentecostal, btw), and that some of the people would say that they FEEL God's presence in those services, serves as a counterpoint. Are the healings and speaking in tongues even greater validation that THEY have the presence of the Spirit?
I don't buy feelings as the ultimate proof of anything. I am firmly on the side of faith, even when feelings are absent, just as I know Christ is THERE and HERE, even if my eyes don't see his face, and won't until I die or He returns.
I read the novel, as an Evangelical, and didn't feel the sense that the Old Testament was better or that Verses were not enough. In fact, it was recovery of the Verses that was the most important thing in theological terms. Holding on to the Word, which is what should guide feelings.
Mir
"Israel was not meant to survive without the presence of God in the tabernacle or temple, and the Church is not meant to survive with the presence of God in the “tabernacle,” which is what we call the box where the Eucharist is reserved."
You mean "without," I should hope?
God's tabernacle is now His people. His Spirit resides in us. We are the temple. We are the tabernacle. We are the body.
Mir
"His Spirit resides in us. We are the temple. We are the tabernacle. We are the body."
True: all Christians, having been baptized, are temples of the Holy Spirit. But what if we sin? Will God remain in a defiled Christian temple, if He abandoned the defiled Jewish temple?
Furthermore, the fact that God is spiritually present in us does not exclude His being physically present in the Eucharist.
"I think all of us find what we need to express or hear from God in different arms of the faith."
That's where I disagree most vehemently. You imply that Christianity is varied so everyone can get what they need from God; I believe that the Catholic Church and her teachings suffice for everyone, whatever their temperament. I think you can stay in the Catholic Church and get what you need from God.
"IT's one Savior. And it's one Spirit, and each acts very much and very vividly in all parts of His body."
Which is why almost all non-Catholics are not depraved monsters, if you'll pardon me saying.
Histor
I think you can be outside the Catholic Church and get what you need from God, but more importantly, you can know God and walk with God, which is what it's all about.
Mir
"...more importantly, you can know God and walk with God, which is what it's all about."
Actually, it's all about loving God and doing His will. If God wants us to belong to the Catholic Church (my belief), we should become Catholics, not look for other arms of Christianity, however good they may be.
After all, Adam and Eve knew God and walked with God, but didn't do His will...
"I think you can be outside the Catholic Church and get what you need from God..."
Naturally, because otherwise the vast majority of mankind would be damned whether or not they deserved it.
Anyhow, why did you mention "get[ting] what you need from God?" Sounds like God's some kind of spiritual ATM when you phrase it that way.
Histor
DGD, interesting post and I think it gets to the heart of why you didn't like The Restorer. I'm guessing, unless the theology agrees with Catholicism, you will not like Christian fantasy. I can't fault you on that. Certainly, I'm more prone to appreciate works that touch on truth as I know it to be.
I was planning on pointing out that one of your main criticisms—that quoting the Verses solved all the problems—wasn't valid because Hinck used Scripture very differently in this book than other writers of Christian fiction. (I would agree some Christian fiction includes a simplistic use of Scripture—as if it is a cure all for poverty, world hunger, and the price of petrol. 
)
In The Restorer the nation is called People of the Verses. In other words, Hinck constructed a world that valued the Verses in a way that was central to the story. Consequently, it is perfectly believable that the Verses would be the key to dealing with the conflicts the characters faced.
Hinck was being consistent. How off would it have been for her to create the world where the Verses were preeminent, then have her husband tote in a gun from this world and blast the enemies away? Or any other such solution, The resolution needed to be consistent with the framework Hinck created.
That you don't like or agree with that framework, I understand. That you criticize Hinck for pulling it off, I don't see.
Becky
"it is perfectly believable that the Verses would be the key to dealing with the conflicts the characters faced."
Much as America, founded on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, uses those documents to determine its policies.
Histor, I'm guessing from your previous comments, you're being facitious.
No, not like America, because this is a real place, where coincidence actually exists, people behave in seemingly irrational ways, and natural disasters can change everything. In fiction these things should not be. The world has to make sense unto itself.
I suggest you read the book, Histor, and judge for yourself. If you leave a comment over at Tina Kulesa's site you might even win a free copy.
Becky
"Histor, I'm guessing from your previous comments, you're being facitious."
I am. I apologize for that. And I'll try to find a way to read the book.
Histor
It's not likely that I will, though.
Histor, thanks for catching my typo. I did indeed mean "without."
Becky, I have enjoyed non-Catholic Christian fiction. I generally enjoy Frank Peretti, for example, even though I have a different theology from his (and I think I always have) and even though he sometimes criticizes Catholicism for reasons I've come to find silly. I enjoy Peretti because he's a good writer who knows how to write and construct a story. I do think Peretti would be a much better writer (and I think I always have) if the Christianity he used in his books were a bit deeper. Incidentally, I've also read Catholic novels I thought were atrocious.
In the review, I discussed the inconsistencies in the world first, and only after that discussed Hinck's use of scripture. Her use of scripture is not one of the internal inconsistencies. But I do find it a little frustrating. I'm not sure I can explain why at the moment; perhaps it was too convenient a solution, too repetitive, and too obviously allegorical.
People do act irrationally and natural disasters do happen. I don't see the introduction of such things as something that "must not be" in fiction. They can be in fiction, but must work well with the story being told. Nobody ever acted out of character, no matter how irrational his actions may seem to bystanders. If the character is well developed, his irrational acts will be acceptable to the reader.
Mir, Latin America is hemhorraging Catholics largely because they haven't been properly catechized and because they want birth control. These reasons, coupled with frequent anger at a priest or other Catholic, are major reasons for Catholics converting to Protestantism. By contrast, I doubt if many Protestants become Catholic because they're mad at a Protestant pastor, and I really doubt if many besides me become Catholic because they want to be taught that birth control is immoral. I have heard even Evangelical leaders admit they're picking up converts from Catholicism for all the wrong reasons.
Truth is not divided. I had it hammered into me when I was Fundamentalist--and thank God (I mean that) that I did--that truths cannot contradict each other. This basic element of logic is the death of the denominational theory of the Church, and the death of the denominational theory is the death of Protestantism. The Church must be singular in order to be the Church, because it cannot teach differing doctrines as true. Even on the most fundamental issues, such as justification, Protestants, even Evangelicals, are sharply divided. This kind of division on basic principles cannot represent Christ's Church.
The Church, big C, is singular. Christ's body. And I believe that the basis for being part of Christ's body is the simple gospel--"believeth on him has eternal life." Him being God's Son. Him being Savior. Him being the atonement. The fulfillment of promises. The one who paid the price for sin. The lamb. The King. The Judge. I believe that all who truly turn to God and believe the gospel of Christ are part of the body, no matter what outward manifestation of it there is, or what church they call home. There are secondary doctrines that do not touch the core. The core is what was preached, repent, confess Christ as Lord with faith, and if that is a true confession, the Spirit is your seal of salvation. After that, there are many things the Word teaches us and the Spirit guides us into if we will heed and follow.
But the Church is the one faith, and the one baptism (which is the Spirit baptism that seals, imo, but even if it is the water baptism of witness, then so be it).
I believe that whether Orthodox, Catholic, Anglican, Baptist, Pentecostal, Methodist, etc, if the person looks upon Christ the Savior and says, "I am a sinner. Forgive me. You are Lord," and this is absolutely the cry of their heart and soul, and they follow, then they are His and are of the Body.
I do not see priests in the N.T. I do not see adoration of Mary. I do not see confessionals. I do not see rosaries. I see people meeting, breaking bread, remembering the Lord, baptizing, heeding the Scriptures, and above all, calling Jesus Christ Savior and Lord and Son of God, worthy of worship, praise, honor, love and obedience.
Those who are called may sit in pews of different places, but the core, the core of what changes the heart and gives new birth to the spirit, that is found in every denomination with a sound central doctrine. The Creed is a sound central doctrine. Father, Son, Spirit--virgin birth, atoning death, victorious resurrection, life through the Spirit, a judgement and resurrection to come, hope in the holy and eternal kingdom to come.
I know in whom I have believed. I know who He is. He lives in me. He speaks in me. and He has saved me.
I know I have brothers and sisters in churches across the globe. We may give ourselves adjectives--Catholic, Orthodox, Evangelical--but what matters is CHRISTIAN.
Mir
But you gave up the Eucharist for lesser truths, Mir. Sad.
Commenting by HaloScan
