Behind the Christian fiction debate is two different paradigms, two contrasting views of Christianity. In one sense, those views are theological. But in another sense, they are cultural. In other words, the reasons Christians can’t agree about what Christian fiction should be is because they don’t agree about what Christianity is and what its followers should be.
I realize what I’m about to say is pretty simplistic, even potentially divisive. But the more I watch the debate unfold, the more I get the sense we’re talking past each other, employing two different sets of terminology. As a result, we’re seeing the emergence of two camps. I’ll call them The Holiness Camp and The Honesty Camp.
- The Holiness Camp — These writers / readers emphasize our separation from the world; we are saints and our conduct, values, and entertainment should be categorically different from secular society. Thus, we should critique the world, avoid what is impure and have no fellowship with darkness, either philosophically or culturally. This separation should be reflected in our stories. Law is the driving principle of those in the Holiness Camp.
- The Honesty Camp — These writers / readers emphasize our association with the world; we are all sinners and sin takes on monstrous forms. Thus, we should engage the world, identify with the fallen, look with unflinching candor and deep empathy upon the wreckage of humanity and its redemptive struggle. This should be reflected in our stories. Truth is the driving principle of those in the Honesty Camp.
It’s a simplistic division, granted, and can easily be interpreted (or misinterpreted) as an unjust stereotype of either side. Of course, it’s not to suggest that writers who emphasize Holiness avoid honesty, or that those who value Honesty are somehow unholy. It’s just my way of trying to think this through. Nevertheless, I believe this classification accurately captures a polarization occurring within the market of Christian readers and writers.
As long as there are two camps, two intrinsically different views about what Christianity is and what its followers should be, there will be a demographic of Christian readers who are outside the camp. For the most part, the Holiness Camp has been the one to define what Christian fiction is. Which forces lots of writers and readers outside.
If you think about it, many of the objections to mainstream Christian fiction have to do with cultural preferences and codes of conduct (i.e. cursing, smoking, drinking, sex, etc.), and expectations about what Christian art should accomplish (i.e. glorify God, offer hope, offer an alternative, condemn sin, illustrate Scripture, etc.). The two camps hold fundamentally different views regarding what their art should accomplish.
Martin Luther once said: “It is better to think of church in the ale-house than to think of the ale-house in church.” Whereas some believers want to take our light to the ale-house, others aim to shut down all ale-houses. Likewise, some Christian writers and readers approach art as a means to leave the ale-house. Others view their art as a means to engage the ale-house.
Both sides have problems. The Holiness Camp is potentially cloistered in their own Geneva, drifting further from the world we’re called to influence, hedged in by their own theology and “thou-shalt-nots.” We are so busy straining at gnats (like whether or not we can say “damn” in our stories) that we’re swallowing camels. Conversely, people in the Honesty Camp can be viewed as worldly, compromised, sellouts. Our liberalism regarding Christian Fiction is proportional to our moral laxness. We are so busy trying to engage the world that we have become like them. We are prone to theological murkiness and our stories are little different from those of the secular marketplace. And thus, the standoff.
Though many suggest there is a balance between “safe” and “edgy” Christian fiction, what’s ultimately at odds is our theology. The two camps hold fundamentally different conceptions about God, the world, and our relationship with it. One seeks to critique the world and separate the Church, while the other seeks to contribute to the world and bring the Church to it.
But as long as we Christians define our witness primarily in terms of Law — no cussing, smoking, drinking, dancing, or sex — and see our fiction as a tool to perpetuate those values, we are destined for tension. Go ahead, call me carnal and worldly. But after all is said and done, the debate about Christian fiction is not about fiction at all — it’s about the nature of Christian witness.
It IS a simplistic division, but I get your meaning. The debate isn’t about fiction as much as it is about rules. I want to focus on the STORY.
Well said.
I remember reading a review of one Christian sci-fi novel that was appalled at the addiction element and character chemistry. I found that novel refreshing, because the characters weren’t perfect cardboard cutouts. They were wrong, right, foolish — they had realistic flaws. It was tactful, didn’t go into gross detail, but one main character had a serious addiction problem and succumbed at least once, that I recall.
Look, I like tact. I don’t even mind if an author obviously thinks certain items sin that I and my church believe are matters of Christian liberty when kept in moderation.
I mind when grown characters, particularly ones that are supposed to be paradigms of rationality, act like whiny children, on par with “You shouldn’t do that! I’m telling Daddy!”
If you want to only read crisp-clean things that show Christians as perfect, be my guest. See, lover of crispy-clean, I understand that you find your books uplifting.
I find ’em darn depressing. We aren’t perfect. We have temptation. We have addictions, even if it’s only to salt or sugar or caffeine — which, yes, damage your body in excessive quantities, just like, oh, cocaine.
But then, I’m also the type of person who prefers gothic, symphonic, and punk music when I’m happy. If I’m listening to the cheery teen girly pop, I’m probably upset or depressed. (“Gothic” tends to mean “interested in death and what comes after”. I prefer that over focused-on-this-life-@#$@#!-the-next-one, thanks.)
*points to Genesis, Judges, and Song of Solomon*
I’ve run into a lot of this in the indie Christian filmmaking circles. (outside hollywood versus inside hollywood) Drives me nuts because of the bitterness that occurs between the two camps.
I tend to naturally gravitate towards the Holiness Camp when I write because it’s the way I was raised: but the Honest Camp is the one that actually produces stories that resonate with me. It’s where I want to write. I just tend to be scared of it.
“But as long as we Christians define our witness primarily in terms of Law — no cussing, smoking, drinking, dancing, or sex — and see our fiction as a tool to perpetuate those values, we are destined for tension.”
Exactly!!!! Well, said, Mike!
Mike, I think you pretty well nailed it. And I think the key to ultimately figuring this whole thing out…is a key that isn’t figured out easily at all. On the one hand, Jesus prayed in John 17 that God would not take us disciples out of the world but would instead protect us from the evil one. On the other hand, Paul tells us that everything we do should be done in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ. So how do we as Christians do this: how do we make art in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ without taking ourselves out of the world in a way Jesus never intended. There’s a lot of tension here, but I think it’s a good tension to wrestle with; it prevents an easy answer. It forces us to ponder, think, reflect, and pray instead of just “tossing” out an easy answer. For me, I’ve discovered that as I read more mainstream fiction of varying genres, my mind has become more free to see interesting story ideas wherever they may be found. Last night I came up with a speculative fiction idea involving July 4. There’s nothing inherently Christian about it that I can see necessarily, so does this mean I shouldn’t write it? I hope not. Especially since the idea came about as the result of a Christian reflecting on something that troubles him about society. Where does this leave me? Still wrestling.
{Sigh} This is so very true. Sad, really.
I think that my issues with this whole issues is that it obscures why we’re choosing to write Christian fiction. Is it to gain an audience? Get nominated for a Christy? Find a spot on a shelf at Barnes & Nobel? Allow the reader to escape the funk of the world?
OR…are we in this to point to Jesus?
Motive is HUGE! We should always consider our motives, and let us not be deceived.
This is so, so encouraging. I thought I was the only writer out there who was tired of the holy stories and sought honesty.
I had a bad experience recently with a Christian contest judge who told me that “stories about pastors who cheat on their wives won’t sell in the Christian market” and that “you can’t have this guy be your Christian hero if he’s going to interrupt his wife like that.” Needless to say, I was very discouraged and a bit angry, especially since the general theme of the book is grace. WE NEED STORIES ABOUT GRACE and I don’t think we can give them to the world unless they’re about messy people.
My question is this: If our real goal (those of us in the honesty camp, that is) is to hang out in the alehouses and get readers of all stripes to read us, laugh with us, cry with us and perhaps get a taste of Jesus’ complete acceptance , why do we waste so much time worrying about what the holiness camp think about us? I’m asking myself as well as others.
You don’t know how encouraging this post was for me today. I almost gave up writing . . .
Katharine, you ask a very important question: Why worry about what people in the other Camp think? Why not just write our stories, aim them at our targets, and stop rocking the boat? My answer: Because I am a Christian and have a stake in how Christiaity is portrayed in our culture. Frankly, I am embarrased sometimes by what we label “Christian.” Hey, thanks much for your comments and encouragement.
Hmm. I feel there should be a part 2 to this post. So much more to say. But in the end, aren’t we just going around and around without ever coming to a conclusion that all find satisfactory? I’m not sure you will ever put this issue to bed. It may be one where we, as brothers and sisters in Christ, have to agree to disagree. I’m firmly entrenched in The Honesty Camp and that’s where I intend to stay. Having said that, I respect others who are on the other side of the fence, even though I may not agree with their stance on many issues, I understand where they’re coming from. What I don’t appreciate is discussions on this matter that get way out of hand and end up as a free for all, each side throwing flaming arrows at the other. What a great witness that is. Bottom line, reality is harsh, ugly and not so nice at times, no matter which camp you reside in. It is why we were given grace. If only we could learn to use it.
Well, I definitely don’t want to launch “flaming arrows” into “the OTHER camp.” Which is why I made a point to pose potential problems with both “camps.” But on agreeing to disagree, I’m not so sure. I’m for clarity over agreement. But if we can’t agree on what divides us, if there is unclarity as to the theology that frames the genre, then we will constantly be talking past each other and portraying a false caricature of Christianity. Thanks for commenting, Cathy!
I think there’s room and need for both approaches in Christian fiction, and they can coexist peacefully and cooperatively if we’ll all just stop doing spirituality checks on each other and write the stories God is leading us to write.
I don’t think many “holiness” folks will argue against the need to engage in dialogue with the world, and likewise, “honesty” folks would agree that Christian community must be qualitatively different from the wider society we’re trying to engage. Stories will be different depending on the audience we’re speaking to. It isn’t productive to slam a story written with unbelievers in mind because it’s not optimized for the believing audience, and vice-versa.
It’s like criticizing a Ferrari for poor off-road performance or a Jeep for sub-par acceleration. Each vehicle shines in the venue for which it was designed, and it benefits the entire car-buying community to have both available.
“I think there’s room and need for both approaches in Christian fiction, and they can coexist peacefully and cooperatively if we’ll all just stop doing spirituality checks on each other and write the stories God is leading us to write.”
Yep. This sums it up.
Agreed.
Fred, thank you. This is an excellent point. Not all stories are aimed at the same audience and therefore will not communicate the same truths.
There’s no shame in holiness. God is holy and we are to be like Him. Scripture says we are to be in the world but not of it (see John 17:14 and 16 – they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.), implying some sort of separation surely. Holiness, by the way, is not the same thing as legalism (which is a sin and therefore disqualifies anyone form being part of the holiness camp. 😉 )
Mike, another problem with the two camp theory is that neither one, as you’ve described them, seems concerned about telling the truth about God. Your honesty camp apparently wants to be honest only about the fact that people sin against one another in horrific ways and suffer and struggle (I’m painting with the same simplistic brush you were), but I don’t see concern about portraying God honestly.
Becky
Becky, I think both group’s objectives are to tell the truth about God. However, one approaches that through Holiness, the other through Honesty. (Again, this is very simplistic.) I think both approaches can work TOGETHER. But at the moment, Holiness (or moralism) is the primary approach of Christian fiction.
Well, the lines you drew left God out, Mike. The holiness you described was legalism and the honesty you described was all about man. I think a great deal could be changed in Christian fiction if we started thinking more about how God comes off in the story. For what it’s worth, that’s what I was wrangling with at Spec Faith on Monday. Looks like Stephen addressed it today, also. I haven’t had a chance to read it yet.
Becky
Fred, I hope you don’t interpret this as a “slam” against anyone. I’m not sure I agree that there’s “room for both approaches,” at least not in the current Christian market. Most Christian fiction is aimed at “believers.” The Christian author who wants to aim at seekers or “unbelievers” is often forced to publish with a secular publisher. So if there’s “room for both approaches, I’m not sure that room exist in the current Christian market. Fred,I appreciate your comments.
Mike:
“Fred, I hope you don’t interpret this as a “slam” against anyone…”
Oh, not at all. If anything, you were arguing *against* the slammers on either side of the divide who can’t see the value in any position but their own. And in the sense of the market, you may be right–ideally, there is and should be room for both approaches, but, as in the school cafeteria, just because there’s a space at the cool kids’ table doesn’t mean you’ll be welcomed there.
As for the secular publishers, well, at some point it may be necessary to figuratively shake the dust off one’s sandals and go to the Gentiles. I expect that’s where most of the seekers are, anyhow.
Nice column, Mike. You’ve got a knack for hitting the topics that people are itching to discuss and setting the stage for a spirited debate.
Mike, you’d be surprised at the number of authors who say they are writing to evangelize. Why else the conversion scenes? It isn’t Christians who need to know how to come to God through Christ. I’ve actually appreciated the growth in this area. I think there are more writers now aiming at Christians, writing to the issues that believers face.
I recently read Sibella Giorella’s The Mountains Bow Down for example, and it dealt with a Christian character interacting with family and family friends and colleagues, in conflict. The internal struggles were not the same as Everyman though the external ones were.
I read another book, this one a YA, about a Christian character facing the problem of cliques and loving an enemy. Again, the issues were what any student might encounter, but because of this character’s faith, she had different desires and faced different pressures (one being her Christian roommate advising her to pray for a manipulative snob instead of trying to befriend her because the snob might influence her negatively).
I could list any number of others. I think it’s a real positive. If Christians are writing for Christians, they need to be honest about where Christians are at and what conflicts we deal with.
Becky
“Mike, you’d be surprised at the number of authors who say they are writing to evangelize. Why else the conversion scenes? It isn’t Christians who need to know how to come to God through Christ.”
Becky, are you suggesting that Christian fiction is aimed at unbelievers? I have no problem believing Christian writers want their stories to inspire others to faith. Heck, I’m one! Problem is, our stories are not aimed at the ale-house, but primarily marketed to Christians, sold in Christian venues and Religious aisles, and scripted to appease Christian censors.
Becky, are you suggesting that Christian fiction is aimed at unbelievers? Some is, Mike, yes. Because you haven’t read them doesn’t mean they aren’t being written.
Writers published by ECPA houses are constantly bemoaning a) the lack of presence in general market stores; and b) the shelving there in the “ghetto” section of Christian fiction. Why do you think they care if they were writing strictly to a Christian audience?
It seems we keep covering the same territory. I believe part of the issue is an either-or mentality.
You categorize “holiness,” which is actually legalism” as what defines most Christian fiction, then name “no cussing, smoking, drinking, dancing, or sex” as the tell-tale elements. The problem is, these standards you decry are no longer standards in Christian fiction, apart from cussing and no on-the-page graphic sex.
Because you mention it so often, I can’t help but wonder if you would no longer feel Christian fiction so confining if you could just use some cussing in your WIP.
I find this baffling — that anyone would define themselves in this way. (I’m the author that uses cussing in my stories rather than I’m the author that writes such good stories readers don’t want to put the books down.)
Becky
Becky, your resistance toward the inclusion of any language in Christian fiction, the fact that you are baffled by my suggestion that this is potentially legalistic, is perfect evidence of the “two camps” concept. We have very different ideas about what Christian art and witness should be.
MY resistance, Mike? Not sure why you’re crediting me with that one. If only I had that kind of power in the publishing world! 😆
Potentially legalistic, sure. I’m not baffled by that idea. I’m baffled by the fact that you, an outstanding writer, get so exercised over the issue. You obviously see it as limiting, but I think you’re better than that.
Just like a mutual writer friend who wrote a “no sex” paranormal romance that shocked her ABA writing compatriots because it was so good and so clean, you could do the same without compromising what you believe about showing people honestly, don’t you think?
Becky
Becky, once again I think your comments illustrate how Christians really do operate on two different paradigms regarding Christian fiction. I only use restrictions on language to illustrate one of the many conventions that have come to define Christian fiction. I personally believe someone can be a great writer and write a great “Christian” story w/out that story being “clean.”
Mike, I don’t know what I’m saying that gives you the idea that I think legalism is a good thing and that I support it in fiction. I don’t support it in life, so why would I believe it’s a good approach to stories?
I’ll end my involvement in this discussion with this: some Christian fiction is as you describe it — aiming to be “safe,” to give readers a story that reinforces certain behavioral standards deemed “clean.” However, there are many authors who do more.
Mike, if someone on another site said the things you’re saying, they would be implying that your book is one of those “holiness” stories because you’re “inside the camp.” I’d be having this same discussion, trying to let them know there’s a writer whose book I’ve read who is doing something different.
No, they’d answer, if he’s inside the camp, he’s “holiness.” Only outside the camp are the “honest” books.
You know that isn’t true about your book. I know it about yours and a growing number of others.
Why, then, must people like you be labeled with a tag that doesn’t fit? Either you’re labeling your own book as a “holiness” volume because it’s published by a Christian house, or you’re saying yours is the only one that is honest and inside the camp.
The other alternative is to consider that maybe, just maybe there is a growing number of writers doing something different from what you’ve perceived.
Becky
Becky, I know you don’t believe legalism is a good thing. This post is about why Christians disagree about what Christian fiction is. I think our exchange is a perfect example. Thanks for pitching in!
The problem I have with writers who write to convert is that they seem to want to have their cake and eat it too.
Non-Christians are not going to read a Christian book. It doesnt matter how good other Christians think it is. They will not do it. Full stop.
I think it is sort of dismissive to winnow the discussion down to “cussing in books” because that is NOT the issue.
The issue is that in order to reach non-Christians, we have to eat with the tax collectors and whores. The books most Christian writers author with the intent to convert look more like a Ladies Fellowship Tea. Christian Missional Fiction (CMF) wants to hew to the coziness of the saved world, while reaching a hand out the window. It doesnt work.
Even if there is the occasional “shit” or “damn” in the story, it is still clearly a product of a sanitised culture. And it is that sanitised culture which is a turnoff to the unsaved.
No, we dont glamourise sin when writing for the lost. But we are honest about it. And it is harder to write, because you have to take your mind into rocky territory. You cant stay in the writers’ safe place of an idealised world and still create a meaningful story to anyone other than those who like to escape into that flavour of idealism.
It’s somewhat like a Sunday School teacher for children comparing herself to a missionary to the Amazon.
Both works are essential to the Church. Really. Kindergartners need training in the Word just as much as cannibals in the rainforest. But to pretend both jobs carry the same risks and skillset is a bit insulting to the Amazon missionary. And reducing Fiction with World Appeal to “books with cussing” is like saying the Amazon missionary just likes to get naked and canoe on the river. It’s really dismissive.
Well, I’m definitely not arguing that “books with cussing” are the ticket to reaching the lost. Language is just an easy target and illustrates the “sterilized culture” that many Christian writers, like me, struggle against. This post is not about the silly restrictions on language demanded by some Christian readers… although I have a share of such posts.
I think this is as much a discussion about the cultural differences between those who came to Christ after 12/13 years of age as opposedto those who grew up in a church-heavy home–with the usual PK/TCK element switching sides.
I usually find that those who grew up in a churched home (3x a week, 3x a day on Sunday) tend to think of Christianity as a shelter and a haven. They associate the church with nurturing, childhood, safety, assurance that “being different from everyone else is okay”.
Those who make a faith decision apart from their home culture tend to be more flexible with the cultural aspectof Christianity. They also often sorta feel like outsiders; what is safe to a ChurchChild is constricting to a Nonchurch child.
Since PKs and TCKs experience of church as children is ascompetiton for parental love and a political force that disrupts their home life the often fall inwith the other side.
I agree completely. I’m an “outsider”. Church culture is always going to seem a bit odd to me. I tried to assimilate for awhile, or at least “keep quiet”, but now I realize that’s silly. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with the culture, or that it is constricting, because no one is forcing my involvement. It’s just different… And it’s okay if I don’t quite fit in.
The debate in my mind is always, “Is it for entertainment, or evangelism?”
If I’m writing something where the Christianity is clearly just the flavoring for my story, then the holiness vs honesty debate is irrelevant. I’ll write whatever story I want to write, with characters as flawed and a world as fallen as I like.
But if it’s for evangelism, then I think it takes on a different responsibility. You HAVE to ask yourself if what you’re writing accurately presents the plan of salvation, otherwise it’s just fiction for its own sake. And on the other end, if how you’re presenting it, will cause someone to stumble if it showcases the darker sides of humanity in any sort of favorable (even if it’s ‘real’) light. This inevitably means that Christian writing becomes much more bland and safe and following a boring template we see way too often, even more so in Christian movies.
I don’t know that there’s an answer. If a Christian novel or movie doesn’t have a Biblically accurate call to action in it, then it’s ultimately just a story that uses Christian ‘mythology’ much the same way a novel uses Greek myths or arcane Catholic tradition and rituals as a backdrop. The movies “End of Days” and “Constantine” use all sorts of Catholic imagery and lore, but in no way would anyone (except those ignorant of any of actual Catholic/Christian beliefs) think that those movies are Catholic or religious movies.
So in the end, is it for entertainment, or for evangelism? If it’s NOT for evangelism, then don’t call it a Christian novel. It’s a sci-fi/mystery/romance/whatever novel with a Christian backdrop. Nothing wrong with that, but it changes a reader’s expectations (or prejudices) going into it.
Sorry, I don’t have time for more than a quick comment, but I’d like to point out that evangelism and entertainment aren’t the only two options. What about novels that are written for the purpose of making Christians examine their beliefs? That’s not strictly entertainment, but it’s not evangelism either.
But at the end of the day, that still falls under edification. The goal is to leave the reader with a more positive outlook of Christianity, be they non-believer, or lapsed believer, or struggling believer, or confident believer. If the book leaves me in a state of doubt, or questioning my beliefs, then that’s definitely not a Christian novel.
It’s not fair from a purely literary standpoint in that Christian novels can’t just exist for their own sake and be evaluated on purely literary merits. They WILL always be judged by publishers and other readers (whose word-of-mouth is critical for any sort of Christian book success) on if they meet the added criteria of Biblical accuracy or acceptability. I personally won’t recommend a Christian novel (labeled as such) to someone, even if it’s highly entertaining, if I don’t agree with the theology presented inside. Coming from me, a Christian, I don’t want them thinking that this is an accurate example of what I believe or what Christianity means. If it’s someone I know who isn’t shaky in their beliefs, I’ll recommend it, but with the caveat that “This is neat, but silly in its theology. Let’s discuss after you read it.” Is that hypocritical of me? I wonder sometimes.
I think you’re on to something. I’ve seen this in debates over “Christian Music” as well– the divide is a symptom of deeper inherent rifts over theological assumptions.
The irony of course (as long as we’re painting in broad strokes) is that “Holiness”-style stories very often wind up teaching moralism, and moralism isn’t the gospel.
We need both positions. Even though I’m in the honesty camp, I have my own set of rules. For example, in the 90s, a certain set of literary novelists felt it necessary to have bestiality in their stories–to demonstrate that men just do this sort of thing all the time, naturally (I guess!). I prefer to believe that men don’t do this all the time, and I also prefer to believe that many men wouldn’t think of molesting their daughters or their neighbors’ daughters. If I were to look at a certain set of literary novels, I’d believe that all men are vile perverts out to screw anything that moves, or doesn’t. This sort of literature may, indeed, highlight truths that humanity is frightened of. But I don’t want to read it. I don’t want to make that the reality of the world around me. Some things are hidden because they are REPULSIVE.
And to change the subject a little, I recently had a Christian beta reader tell me she didn’t think my Lutheran protagonist would get drunk off whiskey, but wine rather. I told her I’d get drunk off either (um, before you send me to AA, I was just joking), and my beta laughed and said, “So would I, but your character wouldn’t.” Honesty must be integral to characters. Pushing the lines just to push them is about as obvious as overt preaching.
I think this post is dead-on–but I think the answer lies in middle ground. Both camps are there and that tension is needed in every Christian’s life. That’s just “part of it”.
Where I see problems are when people in both camps take a self-righteous view of their camp. Obviously the “thou shalt not” folks can be very rigid and considered “hoity toity” or out of touch with reality. But, on the same token, I see just as much pride in the Honesty camp. “Look at us, we’re so ‘real’ and we’re engaging the world. All you others are just sheltered grannies.” I’ve been on the receiving end of that attitude too many times. I think it’s unfair.
I actually consider myself leaning towards the Honesty camp–but I don’t feel a burning need to drop f-bombs in my stories. Every once in awhile I’d like a “damn” thrown in for good measure, sure, but I don’t subscribe to this whole “Well, that’s just how everybody talks. Everybody cusses.” No. Not everybody cusses–and not just prudish church ladies either.
Cussing, drinking, smoking, and pre-marital sex are not prerequisites of “honesty”.
I think there’s a way to be honest about the world, to face it, to confront it, without being a part of it. So, I say we need both idealogies, and we’ve got to rest somewhere in the middle.
I love the directive!
Dialectic begs for a synthesis…:)
Doubt is, I believe, the common denominator to both, the holiness and the honesty seekers. Doubt, while considered the enemy, is in both cases the catalyst to a deeper walk. Dietrich Bonhoeffer once said that he appreciates the curse of the heathen at times over the praises of the Christian. This is of course to be understood in its context of the hypocrisy that he encountered while ministering as an intern for a year at a Lutheran church in Barcelona Spain.
Doubt is good, it puts in question even our most honorable intentions and moves ultimately toward the place that the woman took at Jesus’ feet, ignoring the threat of her greater audience. Whether we get there by recognizing our own need for the cleansing waters of our tears that flow from His throne or through the realization that the woman could not have ignored the leaders of Israel assembled in the room without understanding the resoluteness of Jesus’ embrace, is immaterial, really. Ha, the Pharisees present, in their cutting ways, deliciously promoted truth, did they not?
Ya, a good old dousing in the kind of doubt that makes us move in the right direction is what we really want. I vote for “doubt” being the synthesis, one that leads us all to the washing of His feet with our tears.
I tried my best to not read the other comments before leaving mine. However, Strange Man, Greg Mitchell’s remark was the last one in line and I agree with him completely. All I would add is that there is much more than a middle ground. Christians writers and readers are not two homogenous groups.
My question still remains a simple one. Why does there have to be this debate between camps at all? If I feel led to write to those outside the camp then that is what I should do. When acquisition editors ask for changes in order to be published through their house I then have to make some choices:
1. Take a stand on principle and leave all the damns and hells and whatever else I feel lends authenticity to the story in. They of course then have the right to send me on my way.
2. Seek a publisher without these requirements even though the road may be longer.
3. Make a judgment call and rewrite the story to meet the requests.
4. Work as you are to try and change the industry’s viewpoint. This one of course doesn’t help me with anything current because we all know even if changes are made it will be years before they show up in books on shelves.
There is more to say about your choice of designations for the two camps
but I think I’ll let it rest here for now.
“Why does there have to be this debate between camps at all?”
Because one camp has defined the genre. Which is why it IS an either / or option. Either remove the “damn” or get published elsewhere. Of course publishers have the right to determine whatever guidelines they want. But when that industry uses the name “Christian,” you must realize, I am a shareholder. Grace to you, Tim!
My question was really meant to be a personal musing rather than a challenge. The truth is the consumer has defined the genre. By the numbers, CBA fiction is one of the few growth sections of the fiction publishing industry over all in the last three years.
Personally, I think this question is going to become moot over the next 3-5 years. The gatekeepers are calling in their troops from the outer regions. I really question how much longer any one traditional publisher or group of such publishers will be able to define a market. Too much is changing about how novels are available.
I know of one exciting project under way right now that involves the biggest names in CBA suspense that bypasses the CBA and general market publishers alike. Wished I could say more but have been sworn to secrecy. Let’s just say, it may well do for faith based suspense what Analog magazine did for Science Fiction 40 years ago.
Ah, who does not like a good suspense? It would not be to KINDLE the fastest way a tree does not have to be cut down-load a book?
When will ever get you guys to quit using the generic KINDLE as though it is the only game in town? O|O
As to the suspense, it does involve digital content but not in a way this consortium of authors or anyone else in their genre has ever attempted before.
KK, Tim…:)
Ole’– I mean OLED, haha I love suspense!
I agree that pretty soon we’re going to hit the paper/digital tipping point, and our gatekeepers will no longer be libraries and bookstores. I believe books will become a curated form of entertainment in that we’ll read a book recommended by someone whose tastes we trust, and we won’t have to wait for them to lend the book to us or for the library to have it available, or the bookstore to order it, they’ll just share a link and five seconds later we’ll have the book available to read.
Also, (and I can’t remember the name of it), but there’s an app coming soon that will basically be an overlay over ebooks that allow you and your friends (especially through Facebook) to ‘read along’ with you. As you read, you can post little notes of things you noticed, highlight certain passages, pose discussion questions, paste links to relevant media associated with it (such as a song referenced in the text), etc. As you read the book, those notes will pop up if you’ve enabled them, and it becomes a shared reading experience. Additionally, the author can get in on the act and answer questions directly, post “lost scenes” or extended scenes from a chapter, rough drafts of a chapter, etc, making the book itself the gathering point for discussion. You can enable the notes to be just friends, or everyone.
And when this happens, the stuff I’ll move to the top of my reading stack will be those items that my friends are most excitedly discussing and sharing. I’ll be able to join in with a click. And at that point, a bookstore or publisher’s power and influence will diminish rapidly. A little self-published ebook CAN get noticed, especially if the author is involved in the discussion. And more than probably any other genre, Christian fiction is the most ripe for in-depth discussion, especially with the author. “Why DID you use that cuss word?” “Well, let me tell you why….”
Of course, there will be many authors that oppose this sort of thing because they want to let the book stand on its own, but so what? Let them.
I really believe this will revolutionize reading as a shared experience.
I think you’ve got a point here, Mike.
I publish stories in secular markets as well as Christian markets, and I find that secular markets (specifically SF markets) are more open to spiritual themes than we give them credit sometimes. Maybe engaging the world means engaging this market, rather than trying to convince the Christian market to do so.
Great perspective here Mike. You’re asking great questions, though I suspect that answers will be hard to come by.
In doing lots of book reviews of Christian fiction for my blog over the last year, I’ve seen very little theology expressed explicitly. For some, that’s okay. Others will be dismayed that there’s not strong expression of the Gospel or strongly communicated “moral to the story.”
In some ways, I look at Christian novels like an R-rated movie that broadcast by one of the big networks. All nudity, explicit sex and strong profanity have been edited out. In short, fiction for believers is pretty much a PG version of fiction for unbelievers.
One interesting example of the difference between Christian and secular fiction is best-selling author Andrew Klavan. His secular novels, psychological thrillers like The Animal Hour and Empire of Lies, are extremely graphic and hard-hitting. There is often a powerful moral message communicated, but there’s plenty of carnage and depravity before you get there (kind of like my life). His Christian novels, the Homelander series, is entertaining but very sanitized (perhaps partly because they’re written for young adults). To be honest, his secular work seems much powerful, though there are not a lot of folks in my church that I’d be comfortable recommending them to.
By the by, I’d like to think that there’s a third camp … one where holiness and honesty are both valued.
Dave
I’m the daughter of an artist, and Mom always taught me that you have to paint dark to show the light. Which is why, I think, a secular novel that shows light is often much more powerful than a CBA novel that perhaps points out the existence of darkness but doesn’t portray it.
Becoming a Catholic and an SFF writer has set me outside of this debate a little, but I do feel both camps tugging at me even in writing for the mainstream market. The struggle between wanting to turn from evil and wanting to write honestly is constant.
Mike, I think you’re right that these two camps exist and debate at the level of theology and witness, not fiction.
Dave, I think you’re right that holiness and honesty must both be valued. After all, Christ himself was wholly pure and surely found evil repellent, yet He ate with tax collectors and defended the prostitute and the adulteress. It’s an insanely difficult concept to live by, but it’s the goal of the Christian life.
Andrew Klavan is an author!? I’ve been watching him on PJTV for months now. He’s awesome. . .I. MUST. READ. HIS. BOOKS. O_O
Why are some Christians against the idea of entertainment?
Both camps are important. Both camps are right. Both need to shut up and get to work.
Not all people are called to evangelize so much as teach, or comfort. I think the teachers, the healers, find themselves gravitating to the “Holiness Camp.” Then there are those who want to reach the world. Who want to say, “I understand, and there’s another way.” These are the evangelists. The “Honesty Camp.” Both are branches on the same Christian tree without which the tree would be incomplete.
To put it another way:
If Christianity was a nation rather than a religion:
The Holiness Camp is like The National Guard
The Honesty Camp is like The Marines
We can’t agree on what is Christian Fiction because Christian fiction is not a single thing. It’s many things just like The Church is made up of many people. Like a government is made up of many branches. It’s time we realize this and learn that we can do so much more if we work together.
I bow to your sentiment in total.
“We can’t agree on what is Christian Fiction because Christian fiction is not a single thing.”
I agree with this statement in theory, Tony. The problem is, what we now call “Christian art” is defined primarily by those of a Holiness approach. Which is why you can’t say “damn” in contemporary Christian fiction. So this notion of “working together” is great and all, but if we do have fundamental disagreements over what Christian art and witness should look like, there is no practical way for that to happen. Thanks for commenting!
Well, not in CBA circles, no. They are defined by the market, and the market doesn’t seem to want that sort of stuff. But authors with strong Christian messages in their works have gotten published in secular circles — precisely the circles the “Honesty Camp” is trying to reach. These authors include Dean Koontz, and William Peter Blatty.
CBA just so happens to favor those already on their side. It’s a Christian market selling Christian things to Christians. Even if they DID start allowing more “Honesty Camp” stuff, what would be the point? I’ve heard time and again from the non-religious that they would never read anything considered “Christian Fiction.” And no matter how well you write, or how honestly, if you write for the CBA market, you’re labeled Christian loud and clear. Seems counterproductive.
I don’t tend to write the sort of stuff that Thomas Nelson would publish any time soon. Or that I’d be quick to read aloud in church. But you know, I don’t intend to read it aloud in church, or submit those particular pieces to Thomas Nelson. I’ll submit the work to its proper market: Be that a small press niche market, or a secular one.
I can’t take issue with the fact that the CBA market won’t accept my secular-aimed material any more than I could with TOR books rejecting a splatterpunk horror novel. It’s just not the right market. Not the proper target audience.
My thoughts, anyway.
Thank you for this timely and much-needed post, Mike. I’ve been frustrated with this issue and unable to express my feelings without bitterness, but in presenting this debate in a calm, respectful tone, you’ve given a rational voice to my struggle.
Nicely put. I grew up in fundamentalism, and I know about the Law. Thanks for this thoughtful post.
Wow. you absolutely nailed it this time, Mike. It’s the same reason we have denominations and there is little likelihood that that is going to change any time soon. As one responder said, however, there is room for both camps and we should probably stop trying to convince the other side to join which ever philosophy we espouse. Rather than simplistic, I think we boiled the debate down to the essential elements which just might help those engaged in the debate see the validity (and necessity) of the other point of view.
This is probably my own bent toward the ‘truth’ camp talking however . . . Those on the far right of the holiness camp might not be so quick to be all inclusive . . . Either way, this was an awesome post and sparks lots of great comments, too.
The more I think about this the more I feel uneasy with these distinctions. Legalism is indeed an insidious and often illusive thing. It sometimes hides behind the mask of piety aka holiness but it also can wrap itself in truth aka honesty. It is no more hypocritical to insist someone is only “spiritual” if they look, act, dress, and talk a certain way than to position oneself as following the superior way because you don’t insist on these things.
In my pilgrimage I have managed to be fallen enough to wear both masks at one time or another. Most of us go through life either being judgmental or being judgmental of the judgmental. We either look down our nose at those who don’t cross the same Ts we do or we fancy ourselves in the place of Christ driving the pious Pharisees out of the temple. About both we should be most aware and most careful to look to Christ rather than self or each other.
“The more I think about this the more I feel uneasy with these distinctions.”
Well, I’ve been clear about them being simplistic, my own construct. But I think the comments on this post, and some of my other posts, indicate that there are different camps to the christian fiction discussion. Tim, if you haven’t already, please purchase author Tim Downs’ Saturday Keynote Address at last years ACFW conference, because he says a lot of this same stuff.
And as for the inference of legalism, I intend to infer that. Those in the Holiness camp can potentially become legalistic. those in the Honesty camp can potentially become carnal and irreligious.
I did listen the address by Downs and concur with much of it.
I’m still not entirely sure who the obstacle is in this entire discussion. Is it readers not wanting to buy certain kinds of Christian books or recommend them to friends? Is it writers only wanting to write certain kinds (ruining it for diversity) or only write books that will sustain a career? Is it publishers who will only publish/invest/risk putting out books with narrow topics ?
Are any of these things actual obstacles to any of us writing whatever kind of book we want? “The Shack” guy did it his own way at first.
Maybe another question is can a book find its own audience (self-publishing), or do we need to rely on publishers and bookstores to provide the potential audience for us?
What’s stopping us from writing our book the way we want to? Who are we angry at? lol
“I’m still not entirely sure who the obstacle is in this entire discussion. ”
Vic, the “obstacle” as I see it is no one person, publisher, or reader. Which makes it hard to quantify. It is a mindset birthed by early Fundamentalism that caused Christians to withdraw from the world rather than “go into all the world.” It is a mindset that seeks to forge “alternatives” to culture rather than contribute to culture. As I see it, the Holiness camp is the byproduct of our Fundamentalist roots. It frames our art and witness in ways, I believe, that do a disservice to the Church and the Gospel.
You asked, “What’s stopping us from writing our book the way we want to?” Nothing. Having it published by a Christian publisher, or perceived as “Christian” is another story.
Okay, maybe here’s another way of framing the question (and it’s overly simplistic, I know): What does a more ideal solution look like to you (and others)? My guess would be:
1. I get to write what I want the way I want with no external restrictions placed on the content. If I want to write a G-rated novel, that’s up to me, not the publisher.
2. Christian publishers massively diversify their output, leading to a far less restrictive and homogenized label for “Christian fiction”.
3. Readers chill out and realize that there’s different types of Christian fiction for an amazing wide range of readers who might read books with the Christian faith as a central core of the story, everything from safe, bland, unchallenging books FOR Christians, to edgy, worldly, even profanity-laced faith-based novels intended for people who think they’d never step foot in a church.
Number 1 is entirely up to us individually. Whether or not we can sell enough copies to justify it as a career choice is another thing.
Numbers 2 and 3 seem like they will forever be out of our control. That seems like a train that has already left the station. But it seems like it’s such a SMALL train. I found and purchased “The Resurrection” at a Books-a-Million in Louisiana, so clearly it has to be helping you out. But in actuality, what has been the long-term effect of being “in the system”? Are the sales enough to justify having to write within that current publishing environment? What other benefits (besides not having to pay to have copies of your own book printed) do you get from being aligned with a publisher?
Point being, has been enough of a bump that you’re better off than self-publishing and writing EXACTLY the book you want to write and finding your readership? Is the Holiness Camp, from a readership perspective, THAT huge that to write them off would be career suicide?
Wow! Huge questions. Being published has been great for me, Vic. And Charisma House has let me tell my story with minor changes (yes, I had to remove the language, which I considered minor). I would probably not have self-published. I write from a Christian worldview, love Christians, and, if you’ve read The Resurrection you’ll find, I also love to poke around at religious / philosophical / spiritual content. But this works for and against me.
For instance, some Christian publishers rejected the story on the basis of the “paranormal” factor. You see, Christian publishers have problems with ghosts and too much creepiness. Which is one reason I was asked to write the Afterword, “What Is Mr. Cellophane?” Secular publishers have no such issues. It’s the religious content they stumble over. In my upcoming book, I delve into angels, angelic alphabets, and an “angel hunter.” And, once again, I anticipate some “theological” pushback. Why? Simply because the current Christian market is conservatively cordoned. So has being “in the system” helped me? Absolutely! But it’s also given me a better vantage point.
I was asked in an interview recently, If I could make one change to Christian publishing, what would it be? I answered simply, “Start over.” At this stage, changes come incrementally. Contrary to what some may think, I don’t hate Christian fiction nor want to see it done away with. I just believe our reach and vision are calcified. Last month, I received an encouraging email. the author wrote, “You are doing something brave that will benefit your career in the long run. By midwiving Christian fiction to a different place (and that includes commentary and critique) you are serving the industry as well as your own work. You will feel bruised. You will be bullied. I know it sucks. But I think it’s a good thing youre doing nonetheless.” This was SO encouraging and, frankly, left me teary-eyed. I really hope that this person is right.
Anyway, sorry for the lengthy response. I appreciate your comments on this thread, Vic. Have a great weekend!
Mike, thank you so much for posting your thoughts on Fundamentalism and how its early versions led us to withdraw from culture. This tells me that I’m probably in a place of growth right now because I’m learning to wrestle with the tension that comes from doing everything (including writing) in the name of Christ (Colossians 3:17) with remaining in the world and not withdrawing from it (John 17).
Let me ask, please: 1 Peter 2:12 tells us that we are to live such good lives among nonbelievers that they’ll see our good works and thereby glorify our Father. Now with a carpenter who’s also a Christian, I would see this as nonbelievers highly respecting his work even if they didn’t much care for what he labeled “sin.” So should we as Christian writers be trying to craft stories so powerful and compelling that even if nonbelievers didn’t much care for our theology, they’d have no choice other than to publish the story because it’s so compelling? Should we be giving ourselves permission to write the ideas we get even if they don’t appear to be “Christian” by CBA standards?
One of the primary reasons I refuse to accept the label “Christian filmmaker” is because that seems to somehow come across as permission for people of faith to feel free to speak in an extraordinarily offensive way to the presumed theological content of my work.
I do not think the “holiness” approach automatically disqualifies the work from being “honest.”
I do, however, believe that there is something innate and destructive in modern American conservative evangelical Christian theological correctness that seemingly inevitably compels storytellers from that worldview (one I ironically share a theological foundation with) to tell stories which are trite, simplistic, didactic and fundamentally disconnected from the values and purpose most people see in story.
Cheers,
Calix
[em](…cross-posted to http://www.christianfilmmakers.org, just for the fun of it…)[/em]
Calix,
ya! I agree with you. There is a great rift between the didactic of the self-reflective correctness of an evangelical leader and the reflection that is going on in response to such didactic from the target audience. The sad part is that in the end the audience is disillusioned and the leaders are frustrated. Until the evangelical movement organizers and their following realizes that there is a serious problem in their/our own ranks and that the answers that we have are limited and often obscure the very God we promote to the world, this debate has nowhere to go. Transparency precedes humility and humility admits to its own limitations and faults. God can handle that, what he can not stand is our hypocritical knowing it all.
I love this scripture, its somewhere in Corinthian I think but am not sure: “If you think you know, you do not know yet the way you ought to know.” Isn’t that good? Yeah, it will be an unspeakable pleasure for us to join those heaven-lies ONLY and ONLY if we are prepared to embrace those who shouldn’t be there according to our absolute certainties…ha!
Matt
Well said, Mike. Thank you.
This last paragraph struck me however:
“But as long as we Christians define our witness primarily in terms of Law — no cussing, smoking, drinking, dancing, or sex — and see our fiction as a tool to perpetuate those values, we are destined for tension. Go ahead, call me carnal and worldly. But after all is said and done, the debate about Christian fiction is not about fiction at all — it’s about the nature of Christian witness.”
Is our Christianity, our witness to the reality of God and the Resurrection seen in what we DON’T do? The absence of “negative” behavior? How is that genuinely effective? Holiness can’t be a vacuum. The call is to go in God’s love and truth and be kept in the world.
I figure that like Jesus, we are commanded to leave the safety of our gated communities and deal with people at the point of need. We don’t need to relish Sin, but we do need to recognize it. That’s the only way to apply a remedy.
That said, my “Run and Gun with Jesus” Sci Fi novel isn’t going to change anyone’s life. It’s action based entertainment with a touch of substance, but I’m definitely in the Honesty Camp.
Thanks again for an excellent Post.
For me, it’s a simpler equation. If we say telling fiction stories is a sin, then we are calling Jesus a sinner, for what are parables? Jesus is The Great Storyteller. He used our inborn hunger for a good story to teach us. I don’t thing we need to get crass or grotesque to tell stories about our world. Good writing is the ability to indicate this without the slow motion Quintin Tarrantino bullet through the head. How about the old movies that left us with the couple in an embrace and the door closes? We don’t have to be gratuitous. This is usually a device for shock value. Koontz has been very successful and, as far as I know, he is not a Christian and he is never detailed even about violence. That is the art of it. My opinion.
I am a crystal goblet, ringing in resonant vibration.
A friend asked me how she can write more honestly.
And I advised her “write that thing in your heart that you believe God sees as too dark for you to write, and then ask Him what He thinks about it.”
Cheers,
Calix
That’s a good answer.
After all, God sees into the darkness of our hearts.
Well thought out. Well said.
As writers, we live in a world where we submit our work to others–if not for personal validation, then for publication (which is a type of approval.) And the powers that be can establish their own standards that we can choose to adhere to. Or not.
Self-pubbing is obviously pushing past those barriers, but it’s fighting it’s own stigma. (Quality or not?)
I know of one award winning author whose faith was called into question because she had the word “damn” in one of her novels. The scene was so compelling, I glossed right over that four letter word.
It sometimes seems to me that believers have higher standards than God has for us. Let’s be honest about holiness–according to Scripture we’re complete in Christ. But here on earth, we’re like Paul who wondered why he still did the things he didn’t want to do. Striving for holiness, yet failing. And covered by God’s grace.
Those are the kind of books I want to write.
So what’s the definition of “holiness” here?
When God made a thing ‘holy’ it was set aside for a distinct use.
“It sometimes seems to me that believers have higher standards than God has for us. Let’s be honest about holiness–according to Scripture we’re complete in Christ. But here on earth, we’re like Paul who wondered why he still did the things he didn’t want to do. Striving for holiness, yet failing. And covered by God’s grace. Those are the kind of books I want to write.”
Amen, Beth. And I honestly don’t think about the marketplace as I write–CBA or ABA–I just think about the story. And God’s grace.
I also write with the story in mind. I did not set out from the beginning to make my novels Christian, although both took on a message of peace, which I would argue is quite Christian. I may or may not write something more overtly Christian in the future, but I am not going to limit myself one way or the other.
I think I know what you mean, Will. The stories themselves make these decisions for us. My first novel had to be overtly Christian because it’s about spiritual abuse in conservative Christianity, but the one I’m working on now is different. The spiritual elements are there, but only as much as the story requires them. I hope they’re subtle.
Meg,
I have several ideas for books I plan to write. One is going to be about abortion, and I plan to write it with a strong anti-abortion message that comes from my faith. It will be a novel.
I am also experimenting with horror and am writing a short story that I’ve been thinking about for some time.
I don’t think I can, or should, limit myself to one type of story, but I am proud of my first two books and hope young adult readers will enjoy them and think about the theme of peace I have included in them.
Mike, this is one of the best posts I’ve read and it really hits home for what Christian Art is and where it’s going.
I believe that there will always be a tension between the two camps because both sides are very passionate about what Christian Art should be.
I must admit I’m in the Honesty Camp and I’ve thought about this tension every since I’ve became a Christian almost 10 years ago.
I’ve read a lot of secular fiction in my time and when I became a Christian I thought I had to give up reading those books because that type of art didn’t edify the Kingdom.
Well, I’ve done some reading over the past few years about what Christian Art is and should be.
Reading books like Art and Bible by Francis Schaeffer, Creating Culture by Andy Crouch, Imagine by Steve Turner and Scribbling in the Sand by Michael Card have really helped me formulate my thinking about Christian Art and the book that has helped me the most is Word Pictures by Brian Godawa.
http://kammbia1.wordpress.com/2011/02/28/book-review-7-word-pictures-by-brian-godawa/
Authenticity to the story is the key for me. The characters, plot (or storyline), setting, and theme should dictate everything. I understand that we have to write for a market in order to get published.
But propganda or didacticism can (and usually does) get in the way of a story’s authenticity.
A Christian Worldview will always enter our stories because of our promixity to and living out Christianity. But, a novel is not meant to be a sermon or some kind of evangelistic track to convert the rest of humanity.
This is a much needed discussion and maybe there is some real growth taking place in Christian Fiction.
Thanks, Mike.
Marion
?
Well framed argument, Mike. And *fantastic* discussion in the comments. So many people there have already verbalized my thoughts eloquently. One wrinkle to add that hasn’t been addressed:
Both the Holiness camp (I would use the term Idealism) and the Honesty camp (Authenticity) spring from more than just theological or cultural roots…Those two polarities draw from fundamentally different bents of the individual human personality.
Analytical type personalities, who enjoy chewing over positions & perspectives in depth and thinking deeply, tend to look at the world “as is”…warts and all. They focus on “realism,” and “truth” more than on how those truths make themselves, or other people *feel*. Analytics engage the world by dissecting it in all its ugliness and beauty, in order to understand.
Social type personalities live more empathically, more finely tuned-in to emotions and the bond of relationships than to arguments & theories. They live more in the experiential world of feelings than of thought. The stronger this personality bent, the more important that life (& fiction) adhere to their picture of “what should be”… a preference for the idealistic and optimistic. Because these individuals have a stronger “antenna” for picking up the emotional mood of a story, they are more sensitive to what they would term “dark” subject matter, and more repelled by it. Socials are drawn to visioning the ideal possibilities, and generally seeking the best and warmest side of things. Thus, they look to find that mirrored in their fiction.
Great points; and probably why there is so much friction.
Tell me then..if we arent to be separate from the world, why did Jesus tell us to be? A friend of mine was addressing this topic to me the other day and since I cant say it better myself, I am going to quote her:
“The Bible is full of stories. The Bible is full of characters, that are just as human today as they were then. Man’s ways are either done by flesh or by Spirit; simply put. When I hear authors say that the only way they can depict a villain or crude person in their story is to use such immoral language, I question them: “Are you writing this book out of fleshly desires or out of God inspired desires?” Now, I can ask this question because the author is posing as a Christian Writer. If I place Christ’s name on something, I better be ready to represent Christ in a Biblical way as he “IS”, not as how I see him. The Bible tells of vicious men and woman without having to use vulgar language to get that message across. I say those authors need some time in the Word to learn how to write.
Not only do the authors need to “Know” the Bible if they are going to write Christ like books, but they need to “know” their audience. There are some professing Christians who are still “babes” and they can be influenced either direction. These are the ones who say, it’s ok… I am use to hearing bad language…everyone does it. This is because they know no better, they are not “mature” in their walk with Christ knowing how this grieves him, because he called us to be set apart from the world. We are to be “in” the world, but “not” of the world. Our ways are not His ways, Our thoughts are not His thoughts. So “who” is my audience? For me, if I am writing a Christian novel then my audience is “CHRIST Himself”. If I want Christ to read it, then I won’t have a problem with anyone reading it, and the mature Christian won’t have a problem, and the Babe Christian won’t have a problem (unless the Spirit moves them to grow) and this is pleasing to God, who I serve, not man.
I don’t like Christian novels that have all that garbage language, really I think this makes the author less of a writer. It doesn’t take a lot of work to use slang and garbage; however; it does take a lot of work to find that right way of expressing a sentence or finding a unique word to describe the characters traits. It’s laziness if you ask me. I don’t want to read what I can hear on the streets everyday,… bad company corrupts good character…, you are to build one another up..not tear down. I think these authors who fight to have bad language or actions in a Christian novel are trying to “conform” to what the World screams at them that they want to hear. The world will always scream with the flesh. That’s why a talented, God gifted author is rare. That’s what makes them stand out from all the others out there. Noone said it would be easy to follow Christ, and writing for Christ is no different. You will have to suffer just as Christ suffered, but the reaping of what you sow will be worth it, my good and faithful servant.
Ultimately, God gave me the gift, and I will use it for His Glory, not “my” glory. Will other Christian authors do they same? Just read their work.”
“… if we arent to be separate from the world, why did Jesus tell us to be?”
Candy, Jesus was also accused of being “a glutton and a drunkard” (Matthew 11:19) because He associated with sinners. So was He “separate from the world”? Obviously, a person can be close to sinners and/or a sinful lifestyle without partaking in sin. Jesus did it! Likewise, I believe it’s possible to write about “sinful” events without partaking in sin.
Thanks for chiming in!
Yes He was, and that is exactly the point I am trying to make. We are to be separate from worldly living so to speak, yet win those in the world to Christ. That is why our fiction should remain different from the world’s view. To quote Ephesians 4:29, “Don’t use foul or abusive language. Let everything you say be good and helpful, so that your words will be an encouragement to those who hear them.” This is as plain as it gets. I have said over and over that I hear this language every single day of my life and I sure don’t want to read it when I pick up a book that is supposed to be Christian fiction. If I pick up a book that I know is not Christian fiction, I won’t say a word about the language. I may not read the book, but I won’t say anything because I have crossed into “the other territory” for lack of a better term. I hate that we are even having this argument in Christian fiction. There is no wonder people feel like giving up–when those who are supposed to be on the same side tear each other up over what the Bible says and what should be left alone.
Candy,
I must admit the foul language is not my issue. I respect that you don’t want to be read a Christian novel with that type of language in it. Ok.
But as a writer (and artist) one has to faithful to characters in the story they are telling. If one of the characters curses and it’s in context of what the character should be doing in the novel then the writer has remain faithful to the story.
It doesn’t give that novelist a license….just to write a bunch of curse words in order to make it real. Gratuitous bad language ( as well sex and violence) are a turn off for me too.
While you quote Ephesians 4:29…I could quote other scriptures showing how God wanted to live amongst us even with our sinful behavior.
The point isn’t to beat each other up….but to have a healthy discussion on what Christian Fiction is and should be. The point for me is to be authentic to the art and your worldview as a Christian will show itself regardless.
I look at Paul in Athens in Acts 16 using his adversaries’ philosophy against them to describe Jesus as the one and true God.
It’s funny how secular artists have had the freedom to use Biblical concepts and themes for their stories and subvert for their own humanist worldview. But Christian artists (some of them) are afraid to do same….so we won’t get infected by the world. Hmm…
Candy, I respect your viewpoint and hopefully we are having an honest and civil discussion about this topic.
God Bless,
Marion
Wow, but this is a tricky topic. I kinda go back and forth on this as each new good point is made.
In regards to ‘adult content and/or language’, if a book is going to be labeled and promoted in any way as a “Christian Book”, I’m at the point of agreeing that it SHOULD be a place of refuge from the entirety of the rest of the publishing world that doesn’t have any qualms about using any type of language or content. My current take on it (likely to change as this neat debate continues, lol) is to liken it to PG films. I have seen untold numbers of AMAZING PG films (and even Pixar’s G-rated films) that have never had the need to stray into adult-oriented content. I’ve read tons of books that tackled real, grown-up issues and didn’t need to use profanity to prove that it’s got cred. It’s absolutely NOT needed. After a steady string of fantastic, deep, and non-objectionable Pixar films in the 90’s and early 2000’s, we were t hen assaulted with Dreamwork’s “Shrek”. It had its funny moments, but I was stunned that a movie marketed to kids had so many questionable jokes and situations in it. It was annoying that what should have been a refuge from that sort of thing was even in a kids film, where it wasn’t needed and wouldn’t have been missed if they had left it out.
Point is, I’m thinking that anything marketed as a “Christian Book” should be able to tell its story without having to be defiant about it and want to use big, grown-up content to prove it’s not afraid to be ‘real’. And it should be a refuge from every other type of book. A Christian should never have to worry about picking up a book that is promoted as Christian and finding stuff that is decidedly NOT. Doesn’t matter if it’s “real” or not, that shouldn’t ever be a surprise for them. Imagine getting a children’s book and giving it to your kid and then later finding out it has adult content in it because the writer felt that it doesn’t hurt kids to be exposed to the realities of life.
To be ‘real’, I think it pretty much means it has to be marketed and labeled as something else. And yes, that will probably instantly wipe out a huge swath of potential readers.
But where is the line? What’s too far? To be ‘real’ and show people that even Christians have an edge to them, why can’t an argument be made for Christian porn? (yes, that’s ridiculous, but why, within the context of this discussion)?
This whole discussion kind of reminds me of the joke/observation that “When I’m on the road, anyone who drives slower than me is an idiot, and anyone who drives faster than me is a maniac.” What we each consider appropriate is going to vary wildly from person to person.
Candy, just because someone strives to not be “worldly,” refrains from cussing, or watches only “family friendly” films, does not automatically make them any more holy, healthy, or happy than someone who doesn’t. In fact, the Bible warns that there may be a subtle danger in consigning ourselves only to what is “clean.”
In Jesus’ day, the Pharisees followed the Law to a “T.” You could say, they were “clean freaks.” They washed ceremonially before meals, said their prayers at the precise times, and stoned those who required death. You’d think Jesus would applaud their righteousness. But He didn’t. In fact, He called the Pharisees “children of the devil” (Jn. 8:44). And if that weren’t enough, Christ told a story about those who would stand before God pleading their good works — “Didn’t we heal the sick and cast out demons?” — only to be told they were “workers of iniquity” (Matt. 7:22-23). In both these cases, it was the “clean,” the seriously religious, who were deceived.
So just because some stories are free of profanity, violence, and nudity, does not make them impervious to spiritual deception. In fact, the desire to read or write only what is “free of profanity, violence, and nudity” may itself be a spiritual deception.
I’m not so sure I can agree with your interpretation of that. I mean, yes, it could mean what you’re saying but it seems like a stretch. The Pharisees were proud hypocrites, and they neglected their relationships with God on a personal level — an issue from which rule-following cannot save you.
What I’m getting at is, the fact that they were “clean freaks” wasn’t the problem. Jesus never implied any such thing. The problem is that they believed that works alone could gain them favor in the eyes of the lord. That said, works (which includes rules) AND faith are required.
That’s what I got from it, anyway. I’m certainly no scholar. It’s always possible I’m talking pure nonsense. 😉
And remember, Jesus was as much a “clean freak” as anyone. He may have sat with sinners, but he didn’t partake in their sin.
Not saying that I agree that swearing is sinful. I don’t personally believe that, but if I did I certainly wouldn’t write it.
The Pharisees were wrong because of their love of the Law over their love of others. I totally AMEN your point, Mike. Stunningly true. To a T. I got goose bumps.
And Jesus wasn’t a “clean freak.” If you know the Jewish Law then you’ll know he was breaking several of the “rules” on a regular basis. Take the woman at the well. That story alone speaks volumes about the “truth” of his life. These are the rules he broke:
1. he spoke to her (huge no-no! Single man speaking to single woman–not a Jew, in fact a Samaritan, who were known to be “unclean,” as well as she was a fornicator).
2. he drank from her cup (double no-no! Now he just jumped off the “clean” cliff).
I could go on and on with these examples from the gospel.
When you read the NT in context of the Jewish Law of the day, it’s quite eye-opening. Jesus was revolutionary for a reason. If he was a “good Jewish boy” he never would have been hung on a cross.
There is a fine line in this debate, but the line is for the artist to decide. I think it’s important to not make judgements on others in The Body if they feel led to create something others may find “unworthy” of the word, Christan. As artists we should understand that this could very well be a judgment on the soul of the artist as well.
Of course He was separate from the world! In Romans 12:2 we are told Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is–his good, pleasing and perfect will. NIV – there is a reason that was impressed upon Paul to write. He may have ate with the tax collectors, hung with sinners, yet He was completely SEPARATE from them.
I think Christian authors need to be careful when writing edgy fiction. I can see an author using foul language when writing a gang character, and then showing that character’s turn if it happens to salvation. It needs to fit the plot and direction of the book. To just have language and other edgy material in the book for no reason, that for me is nonsense.
I am very pleased that authors are taking on subjects that happen to Christian families. Just because we follow Christ doesn’t mean we aren’t touched by the horrors of the world.
As for holiness vs. honesty . . . get away from the legalism! That is going to trip you up all the time. Christ makes us holy by dwelling within us and we choose daily, hourly etc to walk in that holiness.
Hi Andy,
During the time of graduate studies I remember talking to a professor about the then actual scandals in Evangelicalism. Pastors were unfaithful to their wives etc. and every second follower of Jesus was going through a divorce and for the strangest reasons. Since then we heard of more bizarre stories, pastors, priests and evangelists being arrested for the most heinous crimes. (Try google the simple line: Pastor arrested…” You will be amazed.) I remember the professor then (80’s) saying: “Matt, if it were just an isolated case… but this is endemic.” I remember when I was made aware of this fact, (check me out on this) when a youth pastor convention came to Fort Worth Texas, the hotels were readying themselves for the sky rocketing porn on demand they would have to answer to and cash in on.
Lol, here in Denver we have the Haggards and the Brauns, Evangelical leaders of the highest order.
I believe it is due to the set-up. The sterile environment that we are presenting to the world the is in fact unsustainable. I would say it would be a good thing if married people would help themselves to the song of songs every once in a while, in that wonderful and powerful way described in the word of none less than our amazing God, that He is. Haha, he created porn when he created Eve…lol.
So, ya, someone of these wonderful authors ought to rewrite it in modern language, do a good research on what Salomon was really talking about and have it also cross phenotype at that . Haha, that would be good and so juicy, the world would leave its cheap imitations and flock to the one true God. Check it out, it really is amazingly descriptive.
Na, as long as we think ourselves as holier than Thou, we will continue to produce an impossible sexual environment that breads unnatural appetites for the grass that is greener on the other side. The social statistics will continue to prove us hypocrites and we will continue to have leaders that will fall from their superficial thrones of the godmen that the congregations have condemned them to.
The model that we are following in “Church” is ABSOLUTELY NOT Biblical. Anyone placating to that model, perpetuates an environment that is producing the most impossible behavior.
Mike, thanks for bringing up Matt 11:19 in response to Candy.
Also throughout the Bible, God reached out to humanity. We are studying the Book of Jonah at our church.
While the story is well told….the essence of the book is that God wanted to save the people of Nineveh. (besides Jonah being obedient to God’s call) And Jonah was upset at God for not killing the people of Nineveh for their sinful ways. I must admit…I feel sometimes Christians can act like Jonah towards our modern world.
God didn’t want to separate himself from his creation. So I’ve always wondered (even before I came a Christian) why Christians are so quick to say we need to be in the world and not of the world. I must admit that never made any sense to me.
I do understand that we don’t want every worldly influence to shape us as Christians…but God took the greatest risk and sending his son to sacrifice himself for all of humanity. He didn’t isolate himself from us and Christians are so ready to isolate themselves from the rest of humanity. Hmmm….interesting.
Thanks for the post, Mike.
Marion
Hi Marion,
During the first year of following Jesus a strange thing took place. Living on the streets as a runaway kid and having been part of the scene, the people that where living there also came after me to win me back over. It was really weird. They came from the city to my home town even though a number of them I didn’t even know. They wanted me and they were in their own way spiritual, only in a magical, dark way.
Another thing developed during that first year and while I was reaching out to kids in my home town, some very popular kids (17-20 year olds) tried every trick in the book to get me sexually in trouble. Get this, I was invited at a Barons’ home where the daughters had a party. Its a long story of course, but here you go…. There was a dude from back when I was on the street a guy i very much liked and it didn’t make sense at all that he was there and he played the flute. Wow, he played the magical flute and it felt like there was a snake inside of me. Ya, and then the older daughter was all over me to a point where I had to free myself and guess what? I am not making any of this up, really, i know it all sounds so weird. Well it was and I ran away, i really did. the Barons’ small, but none the less “castle”, was about 3 miles from my home town in Germany and i ran all the way home. i still remember what that felt like, so freeing, so amazingly freeing. So ya, really we are not off this world, we are aliens I guess but we are good aliens. You know we are meant to have a drink and sit down and love them where they are but we also know when to quit.
By the way, I am not very good at not getting mad when I am alone. I can get really angry and despair at times at all the bad stuff that is happening in the world, so much so that I feel like giving up’n stuff. I am really struggling myself in my walk and have really given up on Christendom because it lacks the transparency that is needed to be in This world but not of it. I am so tired of the organizers and usurping leaders who are holding the true God and faith captive b their power plays.
Matt,
That’s an incredible story.
I must admit I don’t have any pat religious answers for your struggle.
I just don’t see us as aliens….because having that mindset would put me as an isolationist. And since I became a Christian…I’ve had to learn from God I can’t do everything myself. And I even tried to be a Lone Ranger Christian and God has shown me that doesn’t work for Him.
Humanity is sinful and flawed but we have a God (shown throughout scripture) he wants to be with us and not distant from us. That doesn’t mean he is going to make everything smooth for us….but he will guide us while we live on earth.
I must admit that’s why it bothers that a lot of Christianity is ready to separate themselves from humanity…when our Savior embraced us and lived amongst his creation.
There is no other religion like Christianity on the planet because of that.
I do agree the Church has made some mistakes and been warped somewhat of “Pop Christianity and Candy Store Theology” but the essentials of the faith still remain despite our attempts to subvert for power in this world.
Matt, I will keep you in my prayers and may you have a deeper connection with the Lord and that whatever struggle you are going through in your faith….it will pass.
Here’s my favorite scripture from my favorite book in the Bible, Ecclesiastes. It has helped me tremendously with I’ve had doubts about and struggles with my faith.
“Consider the work of God,
For who is able to straighten what He has bent?
In the day of prosperity be happy,
But in the day of adversity consider
God has made the one as well as the other
So that man will not discover anything that will be after him.”
(Ecclesiastes 7:13-14 NASB)
God Bless you..Matt!
Marion
Hey Marion,
Thanks, you are nice. Thanks for wanting to pray for me, I know that prayer is an amazing way to breathe spiritual life into this weird world and more specific into the circumstances of our lives, or even more carefully put, .
I feel alien, always, mostly when I am among Christians who are so “weltfremd” that one can hardly have a real conversation. Being followers of Jesus is just that not speaking King James english all the time. Luther once said, “Man muss den Leuten aufs Maul sehen.” It means: “You have to look the people on the mouth. But “mouth” here is the mouth of animals. (I know, Luther is a weird dude also.) What Martin means to say really is that, when you go on the streets or wherever to help people of this world to see Jesus for all He is, you need to speak their language and understand how to speak so they can understand and feel like you are not so “ete pitete”, high nosed or absorbed with yourself that you can’t love who they are or where they are. I do agree with him and you know whenever Martin was in a town away from home he would write in his letters to his wife about the great beer he was having or not so great…lol.
To explain a little where I am at…I am in free-fall, have left the safety blanket of many years of placating the Evangelical community because there is too much reliance on a Weltbild and Zeitgeist that lacks the vibrancy of the God of my younger years. I have let go of much of what I learned in order to fall… into the hands of the one true, living God. Remember first love? It is a most memorable thing.
I think a lot of readers are getting hung up on the curse words and sex stuff, when I don’t think that’s really the problem in Christian fiction. If they want a G rating in all their works, that’s fine. The problem is the desire for nice, easy answers to all the problems. Where simplistic theology trumps reality. Where getting saved solves everything. This attitude is what weakens Christian fiction, I think, and makes it difficult for writers, especially SF writers, to explore the boundaries and ask the hard questions.
Hi Donald.
I think you totally nailed that! Ya, thanks, the simplistic answer people pride themselves to have child like faith. Paul, puts it this way in the dead center of the most amazing, breathtaking discourse on divine l o v e. “When I was a child, I acted like a child….” Now having said that, and when it appears that child likeness has lost its initial appeal, we are reminded of Jesus’ essential teaching that, “Unless you turn around and become like a child you can’t enter into heaven.” So, here we are told to have the essential qualities of a child and the maturity that is not childlike? NO! The maturity that has rid itself of childishness. The distinction here is one of character. Childishness is typically ascribed to teenagers that have a hard time growing up. In Hebrews the author complains about the people as needing milk again when they were meant to be teachers of the more complex questions life dishes out.
So, ya, I so agree with you, being childishly bent on explaining everything away with notions like those Job’s friends pestered him with is not going to wrestle with real life nor fight the true enemy in the trenches. We’ll just end up fodder to our own stupidity when the shit of life hits the fan.
Donald, I agree. Simplistic theology is bad theology. God is beyond our comprehension. Why should our fiction be limited to one narrow view of Christianity? Fiction should broaden our minds and make us think. I’m thankful that my editors let me keep a few elements that aren’t usually found in CBA fiction and a few questions that don’t have easy answers, because that’s the way life is. I think that’s the big issue. Not the curse words, etc.
“I think a lot of readers are getting hung up on the curse words and sex stuff, when I don’t think that’s really the problem in Christian fiction.”
I agree with this point, Donald. But the fact that this discussion IS getting “hung up” on “curse words and sex” illustrates my point about two different perspectives, paradigms, or theologies framing our approach. Like you, my issue with Christian fiction is not that it’s G-rated. I have NO problem that some readers want “clean” stories. My concern is that “Christian fiction” is primarily defined by “simplistic theology” and sanitized morality. Which is why PG and R-rated Christian fiction, or stories with more nuanced or more complex “messages” are often driven out of the Christian market.
When we first met you said I seemed bitter.
I strove toanswer you honestly, yet I’m not sure I made emphatically enough this particular point:
I am a Christian who writes for (and spends most of her time with) secular audiences. They know I am Christian, and my testimony is both strong and missional.
Yet time and again I am judged by other Christians about the “goodenoughness” of my faith. I am told that because I watch ‘The Wire’ i am not focusing on things that are holy. I am told that because I listen to Meat Loaf and Pink Floyd I am not living apart from the world.
EVEN THOUGH I AM IN _CONSTANT_COMMUNICATION WITH THE SPIRIT , living the life God has called me to live. Other Christians constantly feel the need to dictate the terms of lifestyle to me, using cultural yardsticks and prooftexting. As a writer this is no more glaring than in the world of debate over Christians who write fiction.
That is why I am inherently uncomfortable when the question comes up. There will invariably be those who feel the Body should be all eyes or hair or rosy cheeks or whatever. They simply can’t accept that there are those of us who are the feet…we put on shoes and walk the message through the marketplace. Dirt roads, rocks and all. Believe me that i am living as called and consecrated by God. It is no man’s place to pass judgment on that.
It makes me uncomfortable as well, which is why I posed the rhetorical, “Why the debate,” earlier. If some feel called to write in a way they feel better reaches a particular type of reader, so be it. If others are led a different way, so be it. I have interviewed publicly and talked in private with numerous established CBA authors and asked them for their thoughts on edgy Christian fiction. In four years of doing this not one has thrown a stone at what is being labeled here as the “honesty” camp. Not one hint they see that side as less holy, less Christian, or less anything. In fact, most don’t talk about sides. They talk about why they write what they write and how they hope God uses it in some way.
Are there things that make no sense on the publishing side of things? The only people who answer, no, or those who know nothing about it. Half of the CBA houses are not even owned by Christian corporations but are imprints of larger secular houses. All of them often tend to look like a cat trying to catch its tail as they react to market trends in slow motion. Regardless of the impression given by a few, the general market is no better. Only a few established authors are given freedom to pursue new paths or try anything out of the norm for the house they write for.
With all that said, please know, Katherine, the only reason I no longer listen to Pink Floyd is my wife can’t stand the music and I’m afraid Dark Side of the Moon might throw a switch in my brain that also opens the door to the too many hits I took while listening back in the day. Though I do confess, Emerson, Lake and Palmer and Jethro Tull do appear on my iTunes playlists.
Tim, I hope you don’t think of me as throwing a stone at CBA writers or portraying them as “less holy, less Christian, or less anything.” I’m not. There are problems, as I’ve said, with those in the OTHER camp. Christian history and the Church is full of vigorous debate. Sometimes it led to splits and dissension. Often, it made believers stronger and their vision more refined. I believe that these issues are worthy of that kind of debate.
I wasn’t thinking about you at all when I made that statement. But there is more than one in this site’s discussions constantly making statements about the inferiority of CBA novels, which of course implies the inferiority of the authors who write them.
I seldom make a statement like this in public but I will now. There is a LOT of inferior work put out by CBA houses. But those works, apparently meet the need of a demographic I am not a part of. Why, I do not know. There is also a lot of inferior writing in the general market. And, apparently those books meet the need of some demographic I also do not relate to. So why not just talk about inferior writing period? I am game for that.
Why no discussions here about the problems Christian writers have with general market houses in leaving in faith based elements? Let’s face it. The numbers are just against most of us getting anything into Lifeway or any other Christian book store unless there is a buggy or bonnet on the cover somewhere. Unless of course, it’s The Shack, and I don’t even want to go there. Perhaps the better discussion should be aimed at how we can change the market or make inroads into general market publishing houses.
It is easy to mistake heat for light. We are all guilty of that beginning with me. I have nothing against anyone here but rather feel the need to offer some counterbalance from time to time. Like most of you, I am passionate about what I do. It shows through in our conversations and that is indeed a good thing. Somehow I just wish we could put our heads and hearts together and see if we can’t come up with some real solutions. Maybe I am hoping for too much.
Tim, a couple of things. You said, “…there is more than one in this site’s discussions constantly making statements about the inferiority of CBA novels.” I think it’s important to be specific here. If there is someone you have an issue with, address them. REPLY to the comment you have an issue with. This type of un-attributable charge has got us into problems before.
Second, you are obviously uncomfortable with these critiques of Christian fiction, so much so that you feel the need “to offer some counterbalance.” Frankly, this intrigues me. I guess I could understand it if the charges were all unfounded. But the fact that Christian artists DO wrestle with these issues validates, I think, our need for discussion. So I’m wondering if the very thing you’re uncomfortable with isn’t part of the “solutions” you and I both seek. Thanks, Tim!
I really don’t want to get into a flame war and do not intend to. The instances of “a CBA author I won’t name” or “an author I know who writes erotica and also writes in the CBA” or how we need to pull Christian fiction “out of the gutter of the CBA” abound in these continuing conversations so I see no need to single people out by name. If anyone needs me to give references I will do so.
One only needs to look at my comment before this to know I am more than comfortable with critiquing Christian fiction. All Christian fiction. Not just CBA. I’m really not sure a lot of people even understand what the CBA is. It is the Christian Booksellers Association. It is a retailer’s association, period. It is a market driven organization, period. Yes, there are good people within it. Yes, it serves a great purpose. But no, it is not dedicated to changing the buying habits of readers. It is dedicated to what it perceives as its market.
Our choices are then to:
1) Try to change the CBA – which doesn’t happen overnight. It takes years to develop a brand and quite a bit of money. Because of that most CBA houses are very timid about testing the waters. In good economic times they were more willing to give writers their head. If they weren’t, Ted Dekker would have never made it in the CBA. Even then, he got his start by writing more traditional stories with Bill Bright’s name as co-author plastered across them . It’s no secret that Dekker had a long range plan to get right where he is now, outside of the CBA.
Maybe these type of conversations will change the CBA. I’m too much a realist to become overly hopeful about that.
2) Target a Niche Market – This one takes a lot more thought and a great deal of dedication. Jeff Gerke and Marcher Lord Press is the gold standard right now for this approach. Gerke was a longtime CBA guy and maintains close ties with many in that realm. Even so, he knew the CBA was never going to effectively or consistently allow stories that catered to people who know one wit about Sci-fi or speculative fiction. And, I think most who have commented here would be uncomfortable with Jeff’s guidelines for what can and cannot be in a MLP novel. If MLP proves consistently profitable I wouldn’t be surprised to see some major house make an offer to bring them into their fold. But that is a long way off.
3) Become true missionaries in the general market – Since those who feel more comfortable with an “honesty camp” label see their fiction as a tool to speak to people outside the camp of the evangelical church then the best approach for them is probably to go to a publishing house outside the camp as well.
A number here have cited Dean Koontz as a good example of real Christian writing as opposed to CBA. He is my second favorite living author and I have spent good money to have most of his novels. And, I see far more spiritual themes in some of his works than a good bit of what comes across my desk from CBA houses.
But let’s get honest here. Koontz has spiritual themes but not evangelistic ones. Overt Christian themes that include any hint of needing Christ aren’t going to fly with general market houses. If anyone can give me an example I would love to read that book. And that’s okay. Christian authors who want to present spiritual themes without shutting themselves off from that market will have to go that route. Otherwise, they will have to modify some things and write within the CBA or find a niche publisher like Grace Bridges, Jeff Gerke or others who are seeking to bridge the gap between “CBA vanilla safe” and general market “you can talk spiritual just not about Jesus.”
Tim, I wish you would address commenters you think are inaccurate. When I take issue with what someone comments here, I usually direct a comment at them, like I did with Candy, Rebecca, Vic, and now you. No need to start a “flame war” to do this.
I’m not sure I side with any of your three choices, although all three are in the mix. I’m a Christian artist who believes the current view of Christian art is far too narrow, cloistered, and potentially unbiblical. I also know there is a high level of frustration among Christian artists and authors who feel forced out of the discussion, alienated, and disillusioned. Why else would I get over 100 comments on a post like this? And, truthfully, your either/or approach feels like part of the “fish or cut bait” mentality so prevalent in these discussions. “If you don’t like Christian fiction, go elsewhere.” I just think that approach is far too simplistic and, if there are theological / cultural issues in play, perpetuates them.
All I’m really doing is keeping the subject open. I’m not really trying to change the CBA, blow up the CBA, forge a new market, or equip the next wave of General Market Evangelists. If any of those things happen, I doubt it will be because of something I say on my blog. I’m just talking openly about what I perceive as problematic aspects of Christian fiction and the market it supplies.
lol… I think this discussion has gotten a bit muddled and I think there are two (or more) different arguments taking place. I for one and still confused over what it’s about.
Reading Tim’s last comment, everything he says seems absolutely reasonable. He’s discussing the marketplace and avenues of publication and distribution. To me, that’s what it all boils down to. We want people to PAY us for our work (otherwise it’s fan fiction or a fun hobby).
As someone who is working on a Christian-based vampire film, I know full well going into it that it’s an uphill struggle to get it made (if I want external financing). Likewise, it will be nearly impossible, probably, to find distribution from either Christian or mainstream horror. And likewise, I doubt it would ever gain the support of churches like “Fireproof” or “Soul Surfer” has.
Is it narrow-minded or legalistic gatekeepers who are preventing a more well-rounded diversity of faith-based perspectives and content from coming into the market? Maybe. But that’s the market. Just like every market has it’s self-imposed restrictions and guidelines and assumed reader expectations. Mainstream low-budget horror wants lots of blood and gore and copious female nudity and profanity. If I want to make a horror movie that eschews those elements, then I’m reducing my chances of distribution to microscopic levels. But I know that going in.
Tim’s three options seem perfectly reasonable for any established marketplace. Besides wishing that people would just stop being so narrow-minded and railing against the unfairness of it all, what’s a potential solution?
I want to make a Christian vampire film. My options are to remove the vampires to make it palatable to a mainstream Christian audience, gore it up (and remove Christian aspects) so it can appeal to a horror audience, tweak it to fit in with some (mythical at this point) Christian horror distributor, or make the film exactly the way I want to make it, knowing it will most likely just be ignored by all markets, but trust that if there’s any merit to what I’ve created that God will put it in front of the people that need to see it.
If there’s another option, I’d love to hear it.
In response to Vic above…
Vic, I think you’ve summed up the options pretty well. But, once again, I’m not offering options or alternatives here. I’m simply stating that I believe Christians view art through two different lenses. I believe those “lenses” have influenced and shaped the market. And those “lenses” also taint this debate and muddle our conclusions. But as far as the options you’ve given, I think those are reasonable.
Tim,
With regard to Koontz’s writing (I love him also, by the way; very intense stories)…is it possible that we as Christian artists need to put less emphasis on ourselves in the salvation process and more emphasis on God? For a very long time, I believed I needed to somehow present the Gospel in my work. But at the same time, Paul describes himself and Apollos as two workers in the field, each with a different purpose. Perhaps we as Christians need to be less focused on writing “evangelistic” fiction and instead need to be more focused on writing fiction that causes our audience to wrestle and question their assumptions–thereby leaving them open to deeper interaction with God later down the road?
If it doesn’t have the Gospel message in it somewhere, then it’s simply “spiritual”. A recent fun sci-fi film, “The Adjustment Bureau”, had a strong spiritual basis (spoiler alert!), but it was a totally generic spirituality. My favorite eye-rolling line in the film was discussing God in cute terms of “he..OR she”. But as usual, there’s no Jesus in there. But I lost track of how many reviews I read referred to its religiousness and even Christian-ness.
Was it spiritual? Yes. Did it invite discussion about God? Maybe. But I think it did more to reinforce many people’s vague, new-agey feelings of an abstract type of God that Oprah would promote. I find this more damaging and closer to false teaching than inviting worthwhile discussion. Is this too much in the Holiness camp? Christianity is an incredibly SPECIFIC belief system. As a religion, you can’t get vague with it or downplay some elements that might scare some people off. Christ died, rose, and when we believe we get to be with him for eternity. All of us here BELIEVE this. I just don’t see how any obscuring of this message can allow something (be it music or fiction or movies) to be able to call it self “Christian”. Christianity isn’t a genre, it’s (to us) the only belief system that matters. Anything less is generic (and ultimately worthless) spirituality.
Paul made direct reference to “The Unknown God”, but he didn’t leave it at vague and hope that the Athenians discussed it among themselves later and came to the right conclusion. He directly and boldly brought Christ into the discussion.
Hmmm… In a way, that was almost like Paul writing some speculative fiction. “There’s this cool unknown God everyone knows about, but let me tell you the story of his identity…”
It’s the discussion that won’t die! There’s no easy answer. But I am really enjoying how many facets of this discussion keep emerging.
I recently had very in-depth discussion about this with a friend/CBA author and his decision to leave his CBA pen name behind and return to the secular market. Prior to writing for the CBA, he wrote several secular crime/suspense/thriller novels, paperbacks and then eventually a hardcover deal that did well.
Eventually, things turned sour in his life; he got divorced, sought Christ out, changed his life and became a Christian. At first content never to write again, he suddenly found himself writing a novel – which was excellent, BTW – and published with a CBA house under a pen name.
Enthusiastic, he dived head first into the CBA world, feeling this was God’s new calling for his life. He began reviewing for major CBA review sites, embarking upon a new career.
However, this new Christian was quickly frustrated. Not only were most the books sent to him for review not even close to the standards he was used to competing against in the secular market, let alone reading for personal pleasure, but after an initial burst of sales, his novel dropped off and this CBA house struck out an initial three-book deal to dropping him entirely. Part of that was probably due to the insistence of the CBA publisher in his using a pen name, to “distance” him from his former career – also cutting him off from a fairly loyal fan base.
Eventually, he pitched a vampire novel – of which I’ve read many parts, and it’s also very well written – to a different CBA house reputed to be more liberal, and was continually told by his editor it “just doesn’t have enough ‘God’ in it’.” This writer was confused, thinking: “Wait. This isn’t Twighlight or even Buffy. No gray lines, here. Main character is of the clergy. This a classic vampire tale. Good VS. Evil. People reading those novels ‘get’ that God’s working behind the scenes, don’t they?
He’s now made the decision to leave the CBA entirely, resume his real name, and try to write for the secular market with his new faith as an impetus. So his problem was never “cussing, sex, drugs, etc”, it was the fact that he couldn’t “make up what he wanted to serve the story first” in a novel that’s supposed to be “fiction” in the first place, despite the fact that he’d very obviously write from a Christian standpoint, with a Christian thrust. He’s one of the “cleanest” writers I know, and the CBA’s tight/tight rules basically frustrated him.
I’ve had similar discussions with more than one CBA acquisition agent myself concerning my current WIP. Now, granted, I never sent it to them so I don’t know, but in the end, “swearing, sex”, etc was never the issue. I’m very confident I can write without using those things, especially after discovering SECULAR “quiet-horror” authors like Charles Grant and T. M. Wright, who both write with a lot of restraint.
I just couldn’t “bend” the plot in a way I thought would be appropriate or pleasing to CBA rules, and doing so made me hate my story. Even a story idea about a traveling “demon hunter” who uses all the typical Buffy/Supernatural “tricks of the trade” who eventually learns to trust faith alone I’ve given up on, because I can imagine the issues a guy using holy water, a cross, salt, etc would give CBA editors.
It is my experience that when an “honesty” camp writer or fan critiques “holiness” camp work, it’s generally presented in terms of technical flaw.
But when an “holiness” camp writer or fan critiques “honesty” camp work, the focus is inevitably thrown on the Godliness (or lack thereof) perceived.
Take – for example – the film Soul Surfer (as I am a film writer primarily these days.)
The objection to all of the criticism that film has received is that the critiques have rejected the story as too simplistic and moralistic.
The defense of the film against the charges has been “but that’s the way it happened”
And my reply is, “if that’s the way it happened, then it’s an inspiring real-life story, but not a functional film story.”
So many people chafe at a core truth regarding fiction: “Reality is never a defense.”
But when the standard of fiction becomes one at the core of “theological correctness,” art suffers – in my experience.
Cheers,
Calix
Ya, but art MUST suffer or it can not expose theological “correctness” at its core and render it the work of the ideologues of two millenia.
“We see through a dark glass dimly…” Is art not the dark through which the light shines dimly, while mere intellect simply knows it to be of quantum possibilities? Or does faith do this for us? Ya, faith, FAITH.
Was it not by faith that Judah’s intercourse with his daughter-in-law Tamar produced Perez, who in turn becomes part of Jesus’ lineage? Was it not art that convinced Judah of her superior morality? Through a veil dimly? (Genesis 38)
Faith and art are inseparable are they not? Art allows for a translucency that exposes humanity to its resistance to truth. True art does, that is.
Wow… what a *fascinating* definition of “art” you imply… although I’m not sure where exactly faith was involved in the Judah & Tamar story. Seems to me Tamar pulled a shrewd trick because she was getting ripped off, but somehow–though it’s true she was “more righteous than him”–I really don’t think it was God’s preferred solution to the difficulty!
Still, you really made me think about this story. Now I want to write something about it…
Anyway, I really like your last paragraph there. I think that art is about telling the truth about human experience. Which, yes, exposes lies, and points to the truth about all things. I’m in the Honesty camp, obviously.
Hi Heather,
Thanks for the reply.
Please let me know if you do write about Tamar, I would love to read about it.
You asked why I see a deep faith connection.
Tamar had been wronged in any number of ways. When injustice takes place there are principles at work that have been worked out from before the creation. When Tamar acts upon those principles, she does so through a glass dimly, but nonetheless by faith. What motivates her is the same audacity that the old widow applied, when she looked for justice before the judge in the NT. Faith, by definition is a conviction that something is anchored in truth and Tamar’s reliance here in our story on principles that must be heard for wrong to be made right. God, as little as we understand and know him is “Elohei Mishpat”, the God of justice, or He who vindicates.
Jesus teaches that those who hunger for righteousness are especially blessed because God lives to satisfy such hunger. In this sense, the sexual intercourse as pure sex act (Judah’s motivation) Tamar uses to bring justice to her situation. God affirms her in this by giving her two boys and a place in the lineage of the Royal Priest, God’s own begotten son, Jesus the Christ.
But Justice and Righteousness are not the same thing.
I believe Tamar did seek justice and the redress of wrongs. The God of Justice vindicated her in the same way that God vindicated Hagar.
But Tamar was not a seeker of righteousness in the same way that Abraham was. Her belief wasn’t in The LORD, but in the rightness of her position within the Law. So she wasn’t acting in such a way that would be counted to her as Righteousness.
It’s a fine line, but one which MUST be drawn if we are to avoid mischaracterising a human quest for earthly justice as a holy quest for righteousness.
Keep in mind also that the Law under which Tamar’s actions could be viewed as justified is also the same Law under which we as Christians no longer live.
Hi Kathrine,
Thank you for your reply.
Actually, righteousness and justice are as concepts not only akin but inseparable.
I think the distinction that you are making is one of law verses grace? One judges our impotence to be holy and the other moves us to an imputed state of the same. Nothing at all to boast about, I guess. I did not mean to enter such a debate, although I am not opposed to it either.
In my reflections on Tamar’s situation I was simply speaking of the faith that she had in a justice (however dim in her and our understanding) underlying her predicament that she wanted addressed and found a way. I do not think we have any idea today how much feeling and knowing yourself right with God had to do with whether a woman would bear offspring or not. But Tamar was well aware, to the level of intense pain, as was Sarah, Hannah and others. The shame that was felt was MANY MILLION times the shame a poor person feels in the midst of prosperity gospel followers today.
To be right with God meant to have children. The whole society believed this and such faith made her hunger and thirst for righteousness. God loves the underdog and so do we!
I am a barren woman. I know full well the stigma that comes with that.
Um…I think you may be miss reading the Judah story, actually. But maybe I’m just missing your point. I do, however agree with your last statement.
The amazing thing about the Judah story to me is how clueless the man was. And God used that cluelessness for His glory. I just love God’s sense of humor.
And: beware the cleverness of women… lol 😉
Hi Rachel,
Nice name, my youngest daughter’s also.
I did not address Judah, really. But I am glad to.
It depends on what you call clueless,– “no knowledge, no understanding, and no ability”?
If we were to profile Judah, I see a father with poor perhaps the poorest morals, a viscous, self-righteous, vengeful, borderline personality. (I am thinking in terms of all that we know from scripture about him.) He loses two suns who were married to Tamar. This reeks of “curse”, to Judah. He hatefully redirects his attention toward Tamar losing his sons. This is, when you pay careful attention to yourself and other human beings, a natural tendency. We seek fault first and foremost in others. “She is just no good for anybody, and I am not going to sacrifice another son of mine!”
There is no doubt whatsoever from the context of our story that Judah’s sons are to blame for their demise. There is no connection made to Tamar’s influence whatsoever.
Of course you can call all injustice perpetrators clueless and when I look at our society by and large, Americans are completely clueless when it comes to their collective guilt in this world. But being clueless or ignorant of once own evil doing does not keep you innocent before a higher law. This is the case in point here in our story. While his sons are dead, (just as dead as those who died early in the NT due to being stupid about communion), who should have provided an heir to the lineage of the Christ, God will choose Perez instead because he is a child born to Judah to take him from clueless to “in his face” child of God’s own choosing.
If we don’t understand God’s choice of Perez, we don’t understand what his story is doing in the Bible. The American “clueless” is typically used to make fun of a person and in that context Tamar is simply a clever femme fatale. Not what I see in this story, sorry.
Been in the holiness camp. Was saved in a holiness church. That’s where I also learned that telling the truth about your struggles upsets people who don’t want to acknowledge that people struggle with sin. So I found that many of the people just lie and say all is well. That’s not a safe place to grow, I found, because I don’t want to be someone who covers up the truth to look good. I eventually switched over to the Grace camp. I believe that it’s closer to what Jesus taught and lived, so I am now on the other side. The holiness group tends to be too much like the Pharisees and I got tired of feeling like I would never measure up to the ideal Christian. I’d rather tell the truth and be who God made me to be. Do I get a bit dirty sometimes in the process of reaching out to the world? Yes. Do I regret switching sides? Never. Why? Because unsaved people want to see real faith, not unreachable faith. I can do real faith. I love to write about it, too. What pleases me most is when someone tells me they want to know more about Jesus because I don’t fit the stereotype of someone who is ready to judge others, and they see me as someone they can talk to about what is REALLY going on in their live. I love that, so that is the kind of stuff I (as an author) write about. Stories that will reach people who feel like they can’t go back to church or can’t be forgiven. People who don’t understand grace and feel like it doesn’t apply to them or their situation. I love those people and identify with them, because when I was in the holy camp, I didn’t truly understand it either. But I did understand salvation, and I’m thankful I found it it a holiness church. I’m thankful for my salvation every day and for the calling that God has put on my life. He doesn’t waste anything if we give our entire life to Him.
I should add that I’ve found it very difficult to sell anything that I write to larger Christian publishing houses. It’s not sanitized enough for their general readership. But that’s another story for another day.
In defence of the Holiness side of things (which seems to be taking it on the chin a bit here), there are people who are called to live in such a world, suited to their personalities and demeanor. They minister to Christians as teachers in Christian schools (my mom), cooks in Christian camps (my mother in law), pastors (father in law), pastors’ wives(mil, sister in law), editors at Lifeway (good friends)… While some of their personality traits seem legalistic to others, they practise strict adherence to a sociocultural form of faith that most closely mirrors their devotion and to which THEY HAVE BEEN CALLED.
They are no worse than those in the other camp, and no less called or equipped for the call.
Yes, and there are writers who write fiction for the people in that camp. Like I said, I was saved in a holiness church. I’m not knocking it, just saying what my experience has been. I don’t write for people in the holiness camp because it’s not what I’ve been called to do. That’s just the way it is. My calling is different from theirs, but we’re all brothers and sisters in Christ.
I appreciate where you’re coming from here, Katherine. But at some point a “strict adherence to a sociocultural form of faith” can go from being simply sincere devotion to something unhealthy. I’m not foolish enough to suggest that everyone who believes mascara and booze are evil, are themselves, evil. You’re right — they may be very sincere and devout, and I have no place to judge them. But at some point, a line can be crossed where these “societal forms of faith” become pigeonholes to caricature folks, if not bludgeon them.
As for those in “the other camp” having equal issues, I hope I made that clear:
“Conversely, people in the Honesty Camp can be viewed as worldly, compromised, sellouts. Our liberalism regarding Christian Fiction is proportional to our moral laxness. We are so busy trying to engage the world that we have become like them. We are prone to theological murkiness and our stories are little different from those of the secular marketplace. And thus, the standoff.”
As I said, I’m definitely not of a Holiness persuasion. But there are extremes and potential problems on both sides of the aisle. Thank you for your comments, Katherine!
This is true. I have met people from the grace camp who are living together and not married and they are not in the least bit concerned and keep going to church and everything. So yes, the extreme on either end is disconcerting. Balance is the key, of course. And sound theology helps quite a bit. I have read some Christian fiction where I am saying to myself by books end…where is the difference from secular fiction? Sometimes I don’t even see an obvious moral theme. So the book was clean, but so what? Again, regardless of what the characters are doing in the book, there must be (for me anyway) a redemption theme to make the story worth reading. I want to see God moving in the lives of the characters be it subtle, or be it in your face. Christian fiction is about the heart of the story and the end should glorify God, though it need not be a clean ending with loose ends tied up. Life isn’t clean and I usually have at least one character in every book who never “gets” it and thus doesn’t change. Real life is like that. People don’t do what we want them to. People don’t always forgive. Life can be hard at times. Stories can show all of that without giving the reader a hopeless feeling at the end (like secular fiction often does.) Since we were talking about why Christians can’t seem to agree on what Christian fiction is, I thought I’d toss that in there.
Funny how what may have appeared to be heat between some of us there really is a lot more agreement than disagreement. Though it may not have been evident from me before, I do have quite a beef with a good bit of Christian fiction. Not because it isn’t edgy enough (language, situations, etc…) but because it is so generic. Few Christian novels are published that take a risk. That do something – anything different. That quit wrapping everything up in a neat package. Can we for once allow the main character to die at the end, or walk away from the truth, or leave us scratching our heads when all is said and done. And for that, Mike, I applaud the way you ended The Resurrection.
Still not sold on the labels or the two camp idea. And you admitted it was simplistic for the sake of discussion. I think, I’m going with Neat, Messy and Hopeless. Neat is Buggies and Bonnets and everything works out great in the end. Hopeless is just about anything with the term literary stuck on the front of it. Messy is what life is really like. For this I do wish CBA houses would allow more room. And when a voice emerges within the CBA that offers that we all need to applaud both writer and publisher.
Tim, I liked Alan’s comment above using Idealism (in place of Holiness) and Authenticity (in place of Honesty). That’s less volatile.
I like the different wording, too. Many Christians are idealists and there is nothing wrong with that….unless you end up in a bubble where you can’t relate to people outside of that safe zone. But there are people called to minister to Christians who are living inside that bubble. I’m just not one of them. I couldn’t write a “safe” story if I tried. But I have many friends who do live inside the bubble, and that’s okay. I would never criticize them for it because it’s much safer. I’m done with safe, but I don’t have a problem with people who feel comfortable there.
I feel much better about this whole conversation as I call it a night. And Michelle I agree with you take on idealism which is what I meant about messy as opposed to neat. But for now, the whole conversation seems somewhat inconsequential as I think of your loss. My father died 42 years ago and I still miss him. May God give you grace and peace in your less than idealistic time of life.
Thanks. My mom died 13 years ago. My parents were both believers. Now my siblings and I are orphans. Thankfully we are all adults, but I’m only 44. It seems kind of young to have lost both of my parents at my age. Anyway, thanks again for the comment. I am sad, but also glad he’s no longer suffering.
This is in response to Alan, Mike and Michelle.
While I like the term “authentic” a lot, especially as it relates to the deeper lying struggle of working out our faith and our relationships with each other and others. The other term “idealism” is not worthy of those who follow Jesus since God is not a mere abstraction of mind. It is tragically the very worship of the ideal in separation from the real that sterilizes our faith. The God who died is not an ideal, He died for real. “Be perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect”, is not to be understood as a call to the worship of the ideal but a call to be real, as in surrender to a perfect love that can afford me.
When I first became a follower of Jesus, He said to me, “Yes Matt, I know who you are, and yes, I can handle it, and what I have begun in you I can finish.” While there are many ideologues who use the ideal to lord it over people, I can not imagine that all those who desire greater purity in their walk with Christ, and have found a way, are thereby idealists.
The father of the prodigal had two sons. We are either the one or the other. We are either envious of the father’s love for the returning or we are the returning. Forever returning?
(I am physically very tired as I am writing. Have been out with the horses. I think you are all so great to be who you are. I can’t wait to read some of your books as you wrestle with angels and with demons and seek His holiness. Thank you for letting me be part of this.)
Matt, with your observation on “sterile faith” I think you’re putting your finger right on the potential pitfall of the Idealistic-type personality trait. This social orientation carries with it a lot of potential benefits and blessings for the Christian…warmth and caring; empathy; outreach; a generally hopeful, trusting and forgiving spirit. But taken to the extreme and unchecked, this positive bent can produce a Christian who *only* wants to consider the parts of reality that fit within a wish-fulfilling comfy-world. And that person will seek fiction that follows suit.
(Those who traffic in Authenticity, on the other hand, may spend more more time thinking about issues in-depth, and carefully observing the world “as it is,” and they may “see” problems more acutely and have a stronger stomach for edgy fiction, but they have their own issues to guard against…including cynicism; increased rates of depression and discouragement, and judgmentalism.)
I’m so glad you’re adding your voice to the discussion, here.
Hey, I am not of that persuasion either. 🙂 (There is a reason we live 500 miles from either set of family.)
But I just want to make it clear that there ARE upsides to living in a certain way, especially if that is where one is called.
My question is what kind of Christianity/picture of God are they transmitting to the folks around them? Start with a flawed premise, and eventually it either crumbles in the face of reality or can only survive in a sheltered environment. (Baptisney-land)
Like Michelle S above, I left a ‘holiness centered’ church because A. it wasn’t a genuine picture of reality as portrayed by the Scripture, history, or life around me, and B. that’s not the kind of Christian I wanted to be.
Being inherently dishonest, I wonder if the character and tone of that worldview doesn’t ultimately run counter to redemption.
Patrick, for an opposing view you may want to check out the discussion started by my friend Becky Miller: Holiness Is Not a Dirty Word and Holiness Means What Again?
Oh, and if I suddenly drop out of this discussion, I’m not offended by anyone. My father died and I’m flying to NY for a week to attend the funeral. I leave on June 1st and I won’t have access to a computer.
Michelle, my prayers are with you. That sounds awful; losing a parent at any age is horrid.
Well done. The conflict is about how Christianity itself is viewed. I agree.
You guys, thanks for the ride.
For years my friends have been trying to get me to write and I am finally succumbing. When I was a kid in Germany I had a wonderful grip on the German language. Now my feelings and thinking are in English. So ya I am conceptualizing several ideas and am actively working on my first Novel. It is situated in the near future, stooped in current national and international controversial affairs. In that sense it might be considered a historical SciFi.
I will probably write half before I venture to have it represented. Any directions, links and advice you can shoot my way would be very much appreciated.
The other projects are, 1. The story of my own life as it spans two continents, cultures, a tumultuous youth, before and after faith and ultimate disillusionment in Christendom. 2. A critical analysis of the American and Western Christian traditions: “Ideologues” The Spartan Horse People inside the Christian Faith.
So, thanks again for a great introductory experience, venturing beyond my mind to deCompose.
One thing about Christian literature that I think we need to point out is while some is directed at those already saved, some is not. Some Christians are harvesters and prefer to stay in the fields surrounded by the “wheat”. You will find books geared toward these Christians in Christian bookstores.
Other Christians are the type that “plant seeds” and our fiction is written for those who aren’t saved, to bring them to salvation.
When Jesus hung around the wharves, the prostitutes, and those possessed by demons, He was exposed to sin. We in this world are exposed to sin on a daily basis too. If you would rather limit your exposure in what you read, great. But if you are on the front-lines of evangelism, sin is going to be in your face. Some can handle it as Jesus did, and some cannot.
We can try to isolate ourselves from the secular world or we can be a “light” in the darkness. God has called me to be a “light” in the darkness.
What I would appreciate is backing-up from Christians who are not called to be on the front-lines and to recognize there is a need for seed planting, for without it, they will have nothing to harvest.
I like this description of the divide, Mike. Helps me know better how to form my own argument on the matter.
Are you and Becky gonna duke it out tomorrow over this one. 😉
A very interesting post, Mike! Author Tracy Krauss picked up on your article, and here was my response to the topic at hand:
The answer to your question from my point of view: Yes, there is definitely room for everyone.
“Honesty vs. Holiness…” My take is honesty AND holiness, and by holiness, I don’t mean that in a puritanical sense. Remember when Jesus took the whip and drove out the “robbers” in the temple (John 2:15)? Was that not a little bit of violence happening there? Wasn’t that a bit of honesty and holiness happening at the same time? A bit of righteous and holy anger?
What about when Elijah had the 450 prophets of Ba’al slain (1 Kings 18:40)? Again, there was violence, righteous anger, and holiness happening at the same time. I could use many more examples from the Bible, but I think the point has been made: there is room for honesty and holiness.
To CBA or not to CBA, that is the question. I’m thinking about the apostles Paul and Peter right now. Peter was more inclined to minister to the Jewish congregation (the church), and Paul began taking it to the streets, by setting out on journeys and focusing on the Gentiles… thus, he left the four walls of the church… a more out-into-the-world approach.
Both were relevant; both approaches were needed and were a part of the Master’s plan in drawing all men to Him. Such is the same with writers holding to a Christian worldview. There is a need to exhort those within the walls of the church, and a need to reach those outside of those walls, whether by witnessing to the lost, or by calling out to wayward souls who may have wandered away from the Shepherd.
Jesus, our chief example in all things, did both: He spoke to those in the temple- and they were astonished at His teachings… “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas?” Mat. 13:55 He also went out into the world and spoke with the “less than desirables,” telling it like it is. Example: the Samaritan woman at the well… “The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true.” John 4:18
A resounding YES! There is room for both types of writers: Those ministering to those in the fold, and those who minister to those outside of the fold. Two different types of callings; both serving the will of the True and Living God.
I conclude with Romans 10:4- “How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?”
Whether a writer is called to minister to the congregation through their works, or called to reach the lost, both are hitting the people where they live. Both are needed, and ALL are on the same team.
My works are avant garde; I write to reach the lost and the wayward. I write in honesty: telling it like it is which is sometimes unsavory, and I write in holiness. All of the honesty only serves to expose the darkness and our dire need for the Light of the World: the Way, Truth, and Life. I also include scripture references at the end of my books to show the firm foundation that my stories are built upon.
I am not in competition with any author, be they those who write for the Church, or those who script for the lost and wayward. It should never be brother against brother, sister against sister. That is the only tragedy in all of this.
What matters is that we are obeying God’s will and calling. May we all keep writing the good write!
As iron sharpens iron…
Teric Darken
Teric, thanks, you have a balance in your words.
As an avant-garde artist you push a lot of buttons I presume.
“The heart is more deceitful than all else And is desperately sick; Who can understand it?” Jer. 17:9
Is this not a most perplexing statement? “Deceitful than all else?” Me? Hey, hey, hold your horses. Wait! Not what Jesus would say, eye? Surely, I am not as evil as Satan? I am holy!
Mark 7:21,22 “For from within, out of men’s hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly.”
“Hey, hey”, Jesus’ towns people said, “that’s enough already, lets take this ding dong out’a here, you know there where the cliffs give him an elevated opportunity, he he. Let’s make him fly, let him preach to the birds on his way down. Last, he will insult with his mambo jumbo.”
While this is not the way the leaders talked, but found fault with him cloaked in “righteousness”, it is in every way Jesus’ avant-garde approach to exposing false motivations of the heart that caused the violent reaction.
So, Teric, I am glad to here you have been given the gift to squeeze the boils of a diseased world. When they puff open, puss comes out, doesn’t it? The real challenge is to remember that those who think they need no doctor, are often the most diseased of them all.
Mark 2:17 On hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”
How about us?
9What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin;
10as it is written,
“THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE;
11THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS,
THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD;
12ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS;
THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD,
THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE.”
13“THEIR THROAT IS AN OPEN GRAVE,
WITH THEIR TONGUES THEY KEEP DECEIVING,”
“THE POISON OF ASPS IS UNDER THEIR LIPS”;
14“WHOSE MOUTH IS FULL OF CURSING AND BITTERNESS”;
15“THEIR FEET ARE SWIFT TO SHED BLOOD,
16DESTRUCTION AND MISERY ARE IN THEIR PATHS,
17AND THE PATH OF PEACE THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN.”
18“THERE IS NO FEAR OF GOD BEFORE THEIR EYES.”
Um… I think we have forgotten where we came from. I sure would love to understand the fear better that is healthy, than the casualness that portrays me as a body of grace. Or understand better the question than the answer.
Please excuse me for being late to this party – I followed the thread with interest a week ago, but have now found an article that gives a very good balance to this whole thing. I highly recommend taking a look at http://newauthors.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/put-down-your-sword-and-write – A brief quote: “The pen may be mightier than the sword, but it is not mightier than Jesus.”
Thanks for linking to that post over at New Authors! It hits on so many cylinders that most of our debated are missing on quite a bit. Everyone will just have to go over there to see for themselves.
You might try:
http://faithandsciencefiction.blogspot.com/2011/06/slice-of-pie-when-did-fiction-splinter.html
where I add my DEFINITIVE two cents worth!
Mike,
I just finished reading Lost Mission by Athol Dickson. I believe this novel shows how good Christian Fiction can be.
I posted a review of the novel on my blog.
http://kammbia1.wordpress.com/2011/06/19/book-review-9-lost-mission-by-athol-dickson/
And because of this post prompting so much discussion…just maybe Christian Fiction is really trying to grow and stretch to a new level.
Thanks,
Marion
One problemwith Christian fiction is if your main character is a non-Christian, especially a young person, it’s hard to accurately depict that person without using some vulgar language, or at least alluding to it with a series of blanks. Non-Christian characters, especially rough types, don’t talk like Ned Flanders, and you have to reflect this to create the character. Even if your main character is a believer, you’ll probably need to play him off against some lost characters, since a story needs a problem and this isn’t a perfect world.
To be honest this is one of the reasons why Tyler Perry is so popular. He resonates with Christians that aren’t holy rollers.
http://www.blackperception.com/2011/06/how-holy-and-righteous-should-christian.html
How holy and righteous should Christian art be?
“Divisive”?
Only to those who are committed to one camp or the other.
But the reality is the honesty is required before holiness is granted. And yes, this enters all those nettlesome questions regarding salvation by grace, not works, etc… questions which we have “solved” only in theological treatises but not actually in life itself. For does it not appear possible for “saved” christians to be dishonest? Or for honest christians to question their salvation?
Despite that we’re to be both honest and holy.
— Chris Curzon
Chris, thank you for the Black Perception blog link. Great writing!
You helped me to clarify something that I was struggling with as well, the “one camp or the other” issue.
I think I will just go ahead, make a mess, and trust God to use what He can and clean up the rest. After all, that is what he’s been doing in my life all along anyway. Why not in my artwork?
I’m not sure about the Tyler Perry thing, we just do not know how God is working in his life. He may be leading him deeper into the, “Great Temple of Hollywood” because God has a specific person, or people He needs him to connect with and this is the only way. Or, he may be allowing him to make a huge mess so there will be testimony later… or none of the above… only He knows.
Jesus was accused of being a drunk for hanging out with a party crowd. In those days, to an extreme legalist, drinking anything but dirty water was not only unholy, but definite sign of familiarity with the devil.
I am going to take it easy on Tyler. We just might have to wait till we are on the other side to see just what God is doing in his life. For many Christians, this is almost an impossible task.
🙂
Soni
Good points about Tyler Perry.
Well, think about what Queen Esther had to do.. these days, she would have been called all kinds of things by legalistic onlookers… I’d like to have seen John Calvin send his daughter to do the same!
Your arguments helped me understand my own motives for writing the kind of fiction that engages with the world. For 33 years I lived in a world without Christ and it was bleak, lonely, abusive, destitute. I was ready to end it all when, at last, Christ came into my being and I surrendered my will to his saving Grace and Lordship. Everything changed! I was new! He reigned!
The power of that transformation and the vast improvements I experienced in my new life got me fired up — how could anybody not want the miraculous changes that were available through the Holy Spirit? That became the purpose of my mission to write. Through my stories I wanted to invite readers to consider this marvelous possibility for their own lives, and to allow God to enter their souls with his anointing Spirit.
When you said, “… we should engage the world, identify with the fallen, look with unflinching candor and deep empathy upon the wreckage of humanity and its redemptive struggle,” I shouted AMEN! Literally. For me those words were a battle cry. They captured the essence of why I write and defined my writing goals. They also stirred the energy – the boundless, Spirit-led energy – that motivates my sitting down at the keyboard day after day.
I, too, seek to contribute to the world and bring the Church to it, and my personal zeal fuels my witness both as an author and as a man on the street. The debate, as you said, “is not about fiction at all – it’s about the nature of Christian witness.” I know which side of the divide I choose to be on, and I’m delighted there are many like us.
I greatly appreciate the article.
After suppressing the desire and call to write fiction for nearly four decades I have nearly completed my first novel. Because of this debate–that is, to avoid professional repercussions–I expect to publish under a pseudonym.
In terms of marketing, I imagine my novel is too Christian for non-Christian publishers but would be rejected as “inappropriate” by Christian publishers. It is neither sexually explicit nor does it contains gratuitous violence but it does contain “foul” language.
Without the language this story would lack authenticity. But note, in one scene the characters–Christians–discuss the use of such words. In another scene the protagonist loses his cool and uses foul language. Why? Because he is human. Do I use such language? Generally not but to my utter shock and amazement I, after a twenty something year hiatus and in a fit of uncharacteristic anger, dropped the f-bomb the other day. (You should have seen my wife’s face.) Christ has done a remarkable work in me but apparently this clay is still on the potter’s wheel…as are the characters in my novel.
As Mike points out, the holy-honest dichotomy is not perfect. In fact, we may do better to think of it as a spectrum or a sliding scale than a t-chart. Context has a lot to do with it. For example, a wannabe gangster from Harlem or South Central is not going to speak the King’s English. Just because I depict him “honestly” does not mean I condone his language or actions. Again, I think what really makes a story “Christian”, and by this I mean redeeming, is not what subjects are being treated but HOW.
To illustrate what I mean, I turn to an unlikely source: an article on homeschool-friendly colleges. One school, though pro-homeschool, was considered to pietistic and legalistic. The site quoted the student handbook which reads:
“Students are to avoid any types of entertainment that could be considered immodest or that contain profanity, scatological realism, sexual perversion, erotic realism, lurid violence, occultism, and false philosophical or religious assumptions.”
It then makes an almost comical observation:
“Ironically, the Bible includes all of these elements, and so students are either not allowed to read the Bible or are not allowed to be entertained by the Bible.”
We could sweat the details but you see my point. The bible is both holy and honest.
That said, I no longer bother to watch “Christian” films as I find them so “holy” as to be verging on dishonest. A former student called them “Jesus Button” movies: things are bad, protagonist pushes the “Jesus button”, everything is now wonderful. And in their evangelistic zeal, story falls by the wayside. Rather odd since these movies only appeal to presumably born again Christians who need no invitation.