Malc
Added to listOwnedwith 1 book.
A rather laborious read that I had to slog my way through. This is a long book; my copy clocked in at 491 pages, excluding the appendices with various notes and extra content. That's not to say that a long book is a bad thing, but it feels like it was avoidable for this title. By the end, I had the distinct impression that Colson liked the sound of his own voice (or rather, indulges in his own prose). I don't know if that's completely fair for me to say, but this book was just dry for the most part. Much of what he had to say surely could have been condensed and edited.
There are a handful of excellent chapters that recount stories from various people to show how the arguments of the book play out in the lives of real people. These were by far my favorite parts, and I'm glad they were included.
I do think Colson is a bit historically and theologically dishonest in a few places. While this isn't particularly surprising since he spearheaded "Evangelicals and Catholics Together", I am disappointed about it regardless. In Chapter 31, "Saved to What?", Colson writes:
In the very midst of the Reformation battles, a group of Catholic and Protestant leaders, including a cardinal from the Vatican, met at Regensberg, Germany, in the Colloquy of Ratisbon. The group reached an agreement on the doctrine of justification, which had been the great opening wedge of the Reformation (though discussions foundered on other issues, such as the Mass). One of the Protestant participants wrote a letter to a friend, in which he said, "You will be astonished that our opponents yielded so much... [they] have thus retained the substance of the true doctrine." The writer of that letter was a young aide to the Protestant negotiators. His name was John Calvin.
In his quoting of Calvin, Colson conveniently left out a dry remark about the stubbornness of the opposing party. The full quote reads (emphasis mine):
You will be astonished, I am sure, that our opponents have yielded so much... Our friends have thus retained also the substance of the true doctrine, so that nothing can be comprehended within it which is not to be found in our writings; you will desire, I know, a clearer exposition, and, in that respect, you shall find me in complete agreement with yourself. However, if you consider with what kind of men we have to agree upon this doctrine, you will acknowledge that much has been accomplished. [source: https://www.reformation21.org/featured/the-regensburg-colloquy-1541.php]
Colson also neglected to mention what was to soon follow this colloquy. Only four years after, the Roman Catholic Church would call the Council of Trent from 1545-63. Session 6, Canon 9 declares:
CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema. [source: https://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct06.html]
So, it matters little what agreement was reached at Ratisbon if an official council of the RCC undid it almost immediately after. Colson fails to mention this, and instead insists that we need to embrace mere Christianity and embrace the truths of Scripture and ancient creeds (ignoring the fact that Scripture is interpreted very differently among evangelicals and Catholics). The creeds part even I agree with, but I was/am irritated by the lack of academic sincerity on his other points. Both churches can absolutely work together, and do, but pretending that we actually agree on justification is pretty ridiculous.
------------
I know I harped on him a lot for these few things, but it's really not a bad book; it's a majority good. I just think it should be condensed and historically accurate.
A rather laborious read that I had to slog my way through. This is a long book; my copy clocked in at 491 pages, excluding the appendices with various notes and extra content. That's not to say that a long book is a bad thing, but it feels like it was avoidable for this title. By the end, I had the distinct impression that Colson liked the sound of his own voice (or rather, indulges in his own prose). I don't know if that's completely fair for me to say, but this book was just dry for the most part. Much of what he had to say surely could have been condensed and edited.
There are a handful of excellent chapters that recount stories from various people to show how the arguments of the book play out in the lives of real people. These were by far my favorite parts, and I'm glad they were included.
I do think Colson is a bit historically and theologically dishonest in a few places. While this isn't particularly surprising since he spearheaded "Evangelicals and Catholics Together", I am disappointed about it regardless. In Chapter 31, "Saved to What?", Colson writes:
In the very midst of the Reformation battles, a group of Catholic and Protestant leaders, including a cardinal from the Vatican, met at Regensberg, Germany, in the Colloquy of Ratisbon. The group reached an agreement on the doctrine of justification, which had been the great opening wedge of the Reformation (though discussions foundered on other issues, such as the Mass). One of the Protestant participants wrote a letter to a friend, in which he said, "You will be astonished that our opponents yielded so much... [they] have thus retained the substance of the true doctrine." The writer of that letter was a young aide to the Protestant negotiators. His name was John Calvin.
In his quoting of Calvin, Colson conveniently left out a dry remark about the stubbornness of the opposing party. The full quote reads (emphasis mine):
You will be astonished, I am sure, that our opponents have yielded so much... Our friends have thus retained also the substance of the true doctrine, so that nothing can be comprehended within it which is not to be found in our writings; you will desire, I know, a clearer exposition, and, in that respect, you shall find me in complete agreement with yourself. However, if you consider with what kind of men we have to agree upon this doctrine, you will acknowledge that much has been accomplished. [source: https://www.reformation21.org/featured/the-regensburg-colloquy-1541.php]
Colson also neglected to mention what was to soon follow this colloquy. Only four years after, the Roman Catholic Church would call the Council of Trent from 1545-63. Session 6, Canon 9 declares:
CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema. [source: https://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct06.html]
So, it matters little what agreement was reached at Ratisbon if an official council of the RCC undid it almost immediately after. Colson fails to mention this, and instead insists that we need to embrace mere Christianity and embrace the truths of Scripture and ancient creeds (ignoring the fact that Scripture is interpreted very differently among evangelicals and Catholics). The creeds part even I agree with, but I was/am irritated by the lack of academic sincerity on his other points. Both churches can absolutely work together, and do, but pretending that we actually agree on justification is pretty ridiculous.
------------
I know I harped on him a lot for these few things, but it's really not a bad book; it's a majority good. I just think it should be condensed and historically accurate.
Added to listWant Hard Copywith 9 books.
A succinct yet stellar treatment of work that is badly needed in the church and in Western society as a whole.
I read this book after a somewhat tumultuous team transition in my own full-time job as a junior software developer. While in the end, it was a very good thing, the circumstances leading up to it were frustrating and stressful. Some of those circumstances linger in various forms. My desire to go work every day has suffered as a result.
This book is the shot of adrenaline that I need in this slump right now. Bahnsen has done here a wonderful job of defending vocational work in the context of a world that really does see it merely as a necessary evil. I haven't read enough of the Reformers to get a good idea of how the original "Protestant work ethic" was presented, but this book no doubt presents it very clearly. And while Bahnsen primarily focuses on the aforementioned vocational work, I feel encouraged knowing that my "work outside of work" is also a good, biblical activity.
It’s challenging in a few places, but he’s right. We could use some more reflection and critical thinking on something so important. I highly recommend this book.
A succinct yet stellar treatment of work that is badly needed in the church and in Western society as a whole.
I read this book after a somewhat tumultuous team transition in my own full-time job as a junior software developer. While in the end, it was a very good thing, the circumstances leading up to it were frustrating and stressful. Some of those circumstances linger in various forms. My desire to go work every day has suffered as a result.
This book is the shot of adrenaline that I need in this slump right now. Bahnsen has done here a wonderful job of defending vocational work in the context of a world that really does see it merely as a necessary evil. I haven't read enough of the Reformers to get a good idea of how the original "Protestant work ethic" was presented, but this book no doubt presents it very clearly. And while Bahnsen primarily focuses on the aforementioned vocational work, I feel encouraged knowing that my "work outside of work" is also a good, biblical activity.
It’s challenging in a few places, but he’s right. We could use some more reflection and critical thinking on something so important. I highly recommend this book.
This review is full of blatant spoilers! TL;DR: the book is great, I recommend it.
Vision of the Future is the excellent conclusion to the setup of Specter of the Past and much of the New Republic entries in the Expanded Universe in general. The story contained within these two books is both compelling and realistic - of course citizens of the New Republic will use one atrocity as an excuse to revive their own old grudges! Zahn plays with a philosophy of judgement and who should be held responsible for something done by people possibly long-dead. I found it fairly remarkable how many favorite New Republic characters turn out to dislike different alien races, but he also doesn't shy away from the thought that common "sins" in those alien cultures play into such attitudes.
Imperial rule is given a much more sympathetic view in this duology than it was ever given in the original movie trilogy. The noble character of Admiral Pellaeon and various planets joining the Empire under "Thrawn" all back up Zahn's clearly-communicated idea that Imperial rule now is very different than Imperial rule under the Emperor. Even the political philosophy of the Empire's more authoritarian rule is given a slightly sympathetic twist due to the chaos brought on by the Caamas Document Crisis. Clearly, though, the Empire still has much work to do when blatantly evil and corrupt political leaders like Moff Disra remain in power.
Reading this book as an adult, it's clear which EU stories Zahn was fond of and which he disliked. Plot points from the X-Wing novels (which I have not read at the time of this review's writing) are given respect and built on. Zahn's later direct collaborations with Michael Stackpole make it clear that he enjoys that writing.
However, Zahn dedicates practically Luke's entire arc in this duology to fixing his character from the wild deviance of previous entries. While a criticism of those particular stories is out of the scope of this review, Zahn definitely sets things back on track. Rather than have try to do everything himself with the incredible Force power he's capable of wielding, Luke elects to give people more agency and deliberately limit his power. Instead of exhibiting the destructive pride that moves one to unilaterally declare himself a Jedi Master, Luke shows tremendous restraint and humility in this book. And Zahn really proves that this is who Luke is supposed to be by citing the original movie trilogy numerous times. I must say that I had a bit of a chuckle at Mara's possible retcon of the Emperor's clones in Dark Empire: "Personally, I’m not convinced it was really him." Really, the only thing that Luke did that was out of character was to kiss Mara (on the lips!!) as she slept. That's just straight-up gross.
The Nirauan plot with The Hand of Thrawn fortress was an absolutely perfect setup for not only Survivor's Quest and Outbound Flight, but also the New Jedi Order books and the Yuuzhan Vong invasion. "There are a hundred different threats out there that would freeze your blood if you knew about them," Stent says, and he couldn't have been more dead-on. Although it seems that Zahn didn't necessarily have the Vong specifically in mind for this, it still serves the purpose of foreshadowing them. It's a peek into a far graver threat than an evil empire or a civil war: an extragalactic invasion. The fact that Thrawn was so focused on this threat that he cloned himself really sends home how important this is to him.
There's a lot more good that I could say about these novels. Their painstaking faithfulness to Lucas' original trilogy and even the begrudging tolerance of the EU's worst content show a great deal of respect for source material; Zahn knows that he is writing in someone else's universe, not his own. The writing of Moff Disra's "Sinister Triumvirate" perfectly encapsulates Sith traits, especially distrust. Han & Leia are the perfect couple.
A couple minor criticisms:
- Luke and Mara's romance felt just a little bit off. This may be due to the lecture Mara gives Luke about his prior EU escapades. This might be less of a Zahn issue, because he really did need to address that in some way, but maybe it could have been written slightly differently due to the time spent on it. It does at least make sense that their relationship is able to really kick off after all the elephants are addressed.
- Ghent's arc was great, but it hits a bit of a dead end at the Ubiqtorate base. It's excellent that he was willing to sacrifice his life - tremendous character development - but the book clearly hinted at the fact that he could have been killed because of his exact location on the base. His part just ends rather abruptly, and it would have been nice to see it buttoned up more cleanly.
I've written far too much already. SOTP/VOTF tell a truly quality story worthy of the name Star Wars.
This review is full of blatant spoilers! TL;DR: the book is great, I recommend it.
Vision of the Future is the excellent conclusion to the setup of Specter of the Past and much of the New Republic entries in the Expanded Universe in general. The story contained within these two books is both compelling and realistic - of course citizens of the New Republic will use one atrocity as an excuse to revive their own old grudges! Zahn plays with a philosophy of judgement and who should be held responsible for something done by people possibly long-dead. I found it fairly remarkable how many favorite New Republic characters turn out to dislike different alien races, but he also doesn't shy away from the thought that common "sins" in those alien cultures play into such attitudes.
Imperial rule is given a much more sympathetic view in this duology than it was ever given in the original movie trilogy. The noble character of Admiral Pellaeon and various planets joining the Empire under "Thrawn" all back up Zahn's clearly-communicated idea that Imperial rule now is very different than Imperial rule under the Emperor. Even the political philosophy of the Empire's more authoritarian rule is given a slightly sympathetic twist due to the chaos brought on by the Caamas Document Crisis. Clearly, though, the Empire still has much work to do when blatantly evil and corrupt political leaders like Moff Disra remain in power.
Reading this book as an adult, it's clear which EU stories Zahn was fond of and which he disliked. Plot points from the X-Wing novels (which I have not read at the time of this review's writing) are given respect and built on. Zahn's later direct collaborations with Michael Stackpole make it clear that he enjoys that writing.
However, Zahn dedicates practically Luke's entire arc in this duology to fixing his character from the wild deviance of previous entries. While a criticism of those particular stories is out of the scope of this review, Zahn definitely sets things back on track. Rather than have try to do everything himself with the incredible Force power he's capable of wielding, Luke elects to give people more agency and deliberately limit his power. Instead of exhibiting the destructive pride that moves one to unilaterally declare himself a Jedi Master, Luke shows tremendous restraint and humility in this book. And Zahn really proves that this is who Luke is supposed to be by citing the original movie trilogy numerous times. I must say that I had a bit of a chuckle at Mara's possible retcon of the Emperor's clones in Dark Empire: "Personally, I’m not convinced it was really him." Really, the only thing that Luke did that was out of character was to kiss Mara (on the lips!!) as she slept. That's just straight-up gross.
The Nirauan plot with The Hand of Thrawn fortress was an absolutely perfect setup for not only Survivor's Quest and Outbound Flight, but also the New Jedi Order books and the Yuuzhan Vong invasion. "There are a hundred different threats out there that would freeze your blood if you knew about them," Stent says, and he couldn't have been more dead-on. Although it seems that Zahn didn't necessarily have the Vong specifically in mind for this, it still serves the purpose of foreshadowing them. It's a peek into a far graver threat than an evil empire or a civil war: an extragalactic invasion. The fact that Thrawn was so focused on this threat that he cloned himself really sends home how important this is to him.
There's a lot more good that I could say about these novels. Their painstaking faithfulness to Lucas' original trilogy and even the begrudging tolerance of the EU's worst content show a great deal of respect for source material; Zahn knows that he is writing in someone else's universe, not his own. The writing of Moff Disra's "Sinister Triumvirate" perfectly encapsulates Sith traits, especially distrust. Han & Leia are the perfect couple.
A couple minor criticisms:
- Luke and Mara's romance felt just a little bit off. This may be due to the lecture Mara gives Luke about his prior EU escapades. This might be less of a Zahn issue, because he really did need to address that in some way, but maybe it could have been written slightly differently due to the time spent on it. It does at least make sense that their relationship is able to really kick off after all the elephants are addressed.
- Ghent's arc was great, but it hits a bit of a dead end at the Ubiqtorate base. It's excellent that he was willing to sacrifice his life - tremendous character development - but the book clearly hinted at the fact that he could have been killed because of his exact location on the base. His part just ends rather abruptly, and it would have been nice to see it buttoned up more cleanly.
I've written far too much already. SOTP/VOTF tell a truly quality story worthy of the name Star Wars.
