The Begotten: A "Gift" and a Challenge Part 2

I must admit that when I heard this described as a Davinci Code for Christians that I was immediately concerned. It is one thing for a secular writer writing to a secular audience to use suspect "history" to create an engaging, but, let's face it, heretical story. However, a Christian writer writing for a Christian audience needs to be a bit more careful about the truth. Fortunately, most of those particular fears faded as I read the book.

Likewise, I was also fearful that the story would end up treating the gifts of the spirit like super-powers and the story would turn into a renaissance spiritual Legion of Superheroes. I loved those comics as a kid, but superpowers are controlled by the superhero. The operation of spiritual gifts must be controlled from on high. Fortunately, Bergren handled the exercise of the gifts mostly in a sensitive and reverent manner used only at the unction of the Holy Spirit of God.

So, the story was less problematic than I feared it would be. Nevertheless, I still had some concerns. Before I address those concerns, I feel I need to set forth my own background for the sake of full disclosure. I am a third generation Pentecostal. My grandparents on my mother's side were at Azusa Street and my grandparents on my father's side were at Hot Springs, Arkansas. These are two of the places where the modern Pentecostal movement was birthed. Of course, the operation of the Holy Spirit through individuals has been part of church history from the beginning. I have written extensively about the nature and operation of the Gifts of the Spirit as well as the Person and Character of the Holy Spirit, third person of the Holy Trinity.

I will try to keep denominational doctrine to a minimum in this discussion, but since this is a subject area largely ignored by denominations other than Pentecostal/Charismatic groups, that doctrinal bias (hopefully based on scripture and not just a blind following of church doctrine) will be present. I'm not apologizing, just putting my next few comments into perspective.

So, onward to my concerns.

The Problem of Assigning Authority to Non-Canonical Documents

One characteristic of many cults is what I've called the "Element of the Extra Book." Somehow the revelation of the Bible is insufficient and we need another revelation. Recently, we have seen this emerging in a revised interest in the Gnostic pseudo-gospels and epistles. There is always hidden in these type of discussions some sort of assumption that there is a conspiracy to keep these incredible revelations from Christians. They imply that Canon was decided upon by a group of men based pretty much on their own judgment of what they liked and disliked, and that they more or less capriciously made these decisions.

This view is a false view. For the most part, the canon was established based on what was already recognized as inspired and authentic by the church fathers for centuries.

for well over a century the books we find in our New Testament had often been copied together and distributed in a form not unlike the canonical New Testament of later years. The Chester Beatty Papyri contains most of the New Testament and dates to about 200 A.D. at least 100 years before the Canon was settled by the Church Councils and Synods of the Fifth Century.

As early as 150 A.D. the four gospels or “traditions” as they were often called were being distributed together. Likewise, by the middle of the Second Century, the Pauline epistles were collected and distributed as a single volume.

The Canon of scripture then was not a matter in which a group of men sat around and decided what books were and were not good ones to have in the canon. It was a recognition of what has already been accepted as inspired and authoritative.

In The Begotten a document of undetermined authorship and mysterious origin is elevated to near equality with the Holy Canon. In one instance, (see below) it is even given priority over the Word. While Bergren is careful to indicate that the document does not contradict scripture, it is nonetheless treated as scripture. Given the current world view that questions the authority of scripture even in many churches, I find it disturbing that the heroes in a Christian novel seem to need another mystical document other than the Bible to guide their actions.


The Problem of Exclusivity

While I am sure that Bergren did not intend to create a spiritual elite in her story, by default that happened. The use of the term The Gifted, by it's nature implies that the other Christians do not have gifts. However, a careful reading of the Canonical I Corinthians 12, which is our primary source of information about the Gifts of the Spirit discussed in this book, assumes that all parts of the body of Christ are "gifted" in some way. The gifts are discussed in the context of the body and the point of the chapter is not so much to talk about spiritual gifts but to correct a tendency the Corinthians apparently had of considering some gifts more important than the others and consequently considering some members of the body more important than others.

"The Gifted" are almost treated in this book like "The Charmed Ones" from the now defunct WB TV series. They are reluctantly set apart for great things, and while fallible human beings, they are still just a little bit better in many ways than everyone else. Or at least set apart form them. Perhaps it is more like an exclusive club. How many times in the book did someone say, "Are they one of us?" As opposed to what? One of "them," those other people out there who are not "gifted" like us? Again, I doubt that was intended, but unintended consequences are consequences nonetheless.

Building a heirarchy of blessing among believers is a dangerous thing. As a Pentecostal teacher, one of the things I have had to struggle with is keeping my students from feeling superior to those who do not share our belief that the operation of the gifts of the spirit did not cease with the end of the Apostolic era and the close of canon. Ranging from an arrogant assumption that we were spiritually stronger and more effective than our counterparts in non-Charismatic churches to a patronizing pitying of those who do not 'have the light' on the subject we have often been guilty of acting superior to others.

One may try to excuse this by pointing to years of persecution, mocking, and being accused of being in league with the devil by some parts of Christendom. But, there is no excuse, even that of persecution, that justifies spiritual pride. That was the sin of the Pharisees.

But one need not feel superior to others to shut them out or adopt an us verses them attitude. Certainly, we do not see overt spiritual pride in this book, but we see a definite suspicion of those outside the club leading even to a reticence to glorify God in public for these gifts. Certainly, the fear of torture and death is a deterant, yet, the early church faced the same threats and preached, healed and worked miracles on the street corner.

The Problem of Tongues

One obvious bias found in this book is a bias against the Gift of Tongues. Bergren does not deny it as a gift from God, but it is definitely treated as a second class gift. Indeed, when a woman comes to them speaking in tongues (actually praying in tongues to be accurate) she is immediately suspect, and generally discounted since the non-Canonical letter to the Corinthians they are following does not mention it. The fact that the Canonical epistle does as an equal to healing and miracles is discounted in light of the "suppressed" document.

In this case, the story defers to this document as opposed to the recognized general revelation of scripture. Now, I know this is fiction, but when the good guys discount scripture for an apocryphal document that is hardly in keeping with sound doctrine. And someone in the story should have pointed that out. However, the author's bias against tongues was too strong. How do we know this? Consider the following. First, the characters without correction defer to the seven gifts of the apocryphal document over the canonical epistle. Secondly, the one in the book with the gift of tongues is unstable, kept on the fringes of the company and eventually betrays them. This reinforces the image of people who speak in tongues as driven by emotion without ability to reason. Finally, in her study guide at the end of the book, Bergren makes it clear that she considers tongues to be of less importance than the other gifts by taking a couple of Pauline statements out of their context.

Now, someone can make the case (erroneously I believe) that the gifts stopped operating at the end of the apostolic era rejecting all of the gifts. However, there is no Biblical justification for accepting some of the gifts and excluding two because they are - well a tad embarrassing. Hey, on the Day of Pentecost, the people heard the disciples speaking in tongues and thought they were drunk. Yet, I might point out that the first gifts to be expressed in the apostolic era were the verbal ones - Tongues and Prophecy. Perhaps this is because the last thing most of us are willing to give up is what we say. Paul says that the tongue is like the bit in the horses mouth. If God can control the tongue he has control of the rest of us. That doesn't make tongues more important. It just explains why so many of us would like to blot it out of the panoply of gifts.

So, these are a few of the theological concerns I have. I still find the book well written and I would probably want to read more in the series. However, in my role as a consumer advocate, I have to warn you that some parts of the theology are shaky and just remember it's a story, only a story, and your theology needs to come from the Word of God found only in the Holy Bible.

So, what is the intersection of theology and fiction writing? When do extra-Biblical issues play a legitimate role in writing? How do we bring this together? I'm not sure I have all the answers, but maybe we need to raise the questions. Let's talk about that tomorrow. Meanwhile see what others are saying about The Begotten.

Sally Apokedak
Brandon Barr
Jim Black
Justin Boyer
Jackie Castle
Karri Compton
CSFF Blog Tour
Gene Curtis
D. G. D. Davidson
Jeff Draper
April Erwin
Beth Goddard
Marcus Goodyear
Todd Michael Greene
Jill Hart
Michael Heald
Christopher Hopper
Joleen Howell
Jason Joyner
Kait
Carol Keen
Mike Lynch
Terri Main
Margaret
Rachel Marks
Melissa Meeks
Pamela Morrisson
John W. Otte
Rachelle
Steve Rice
Ashley Rutherford
Chawna Schroeder
James Somers
Rachelle Sperling
Stuart Stockton
Steve Trower
Speculative Faith
Robert Treskillard
Jason Waguespac
Laura Williams
Timothy Wise
Karina Fabian

Christian Influence Writing: Writing for a secular audience without going over to the Dark Side

I've put off writing this one in part because there are many different perspectives on the issues I raise. But I've decided to go with my own convictions, while trying to give a reasonable presentation of opposing view points.

Someone mentioned in a blog response to this topic about "sanitizing" Christian fiction. The implication was that one could not write for a secular audience without using profanity, sexually suggestive or explicit scenes or graphic violence. That may not have been the intent, but I run across that attitude a lot.

The reasoning goes that Christian literature has been too "squeaky clean." People have children, but somehow never have sex. The only problems the kids have are cheating on tests or sassing parents. It's like a flashback to Leave it to Beaver.

This is a legitimate criticism. Many Christian writers are afraid to tackle the tough issues such as pre-marital sex, adultery, drug abuse, abortion, environmental destruction, criminal activity, corporate or political greed, or corruption in religious organizations. Some are afraid of being politically incorrect within the context of the current evangelical political arena. They are afraid of going against conservative political philosophy, even when such philosophy is not supported one way or another by scripture. The environment being a case in point. I have difficulty understanding how Christians can approve of destroying the world God gave us simply to feed corporate greed. Likewise "liberal" issues such as care for the poor, health care, or compassion for those society has rejected are not liberal or conservative values, they are Biblical ones.

There are many ways, Christian literature has been "sanitized" and has lost its ability to speak to the realities of the real world. However, that does not mean that the Christian influence when writing for a secular audience should stop at the selection of a Christian as a main or supporting character. How we approach ethics, personal behavior and language in writing also matters.

I am sometimes shocked at how some "Christian" characters act in stories by Christian writers. I have read science fiction stories in which members of a persecuted church of the future shoot their way out of trouble with blasters killing everyone in sight without so much as a tear shed for any of the dead. This is hardly in keeping with the example of our founder who went to his death peacefully, healed one of the guards taking him to his trial and eventual death, and forgave those crucifying him. Nor is it in the character of the early church who won over the populace of the ancient world by a peaceful lifestyle and a gentle power in the face of the worst persecution the church ever knew to the current day.

Some Christian writers are so anxious to create Christian action heroes that appeal to a society fed a diet of bloody video games and gory movies that the characters become indistinguishable from the non-Christian characters except in professed religion. These characters bear more resemblance to James Bond than to Jesus Christ. They stand in stark contrast to the quiet courage of the first century martyrs who "turned the world upside down."

Another question, which is maybe harder to deal with is language. Now, Wayfarers Journal has a strict "No profanity" rule. However, the argument can be made that in the real world you hear profanity. This is true. Although, to be honest, that depends heavily on what part of the real world forms your world. As a college professor, I hear very little. The professors are articulate enough to not need to use profanity to be expressive, and the students are more likely to use expletives among themselves than with teachers. I, frankly, hear more profanity on TV than in real life.

However, the point is well taken. Everybody doesn't say, "Ah shucks" when they are disappointed or "fiddlesticks" when they hit their thumbs with a hammer. The question is whether or not one needs to actually use the profanity in their writing for the sake of realism. The arguments in favor are that people are used to reading it in secular literature, that characterization may suffer without using it as part of the dialog, and that it is necessary to be realistic. Some point out that even C.S. Lewis used four-letter words in his writing. (Although, to be honest, you can count on one hand the number of instances, and in a couple of cases, the word "damned" is used in the context of something that is condemned and not as a curse word.)

These are compelling arguments. However, I disagree that one needs to actually print profanity for the sake of realism. All secular literature does not use profanity. I am an avid reader of mystery stories of the "country cozy" variety. Two particular favorites are Ellis Peters' Brother Cadfael mysteries and Lillian Jackson Braun's The Cat Who series. Neither of these series contain a lot of profanity. One could say, legitimately, that one would not expect a 12th century Monk to use profane language, but the story takes the monk out of the monastery into the streets among coarse peasants and into taverns. The Cat Who series follows a hard-bitten investigative reporter relocated to a small town filled with the descendants of miners, fishermen, farmers and bootleggers, yet there is little profanity. Both Peters' and Braun created best selling series. Tolkien created realistic villains without recording every profane word that came out of their mouths. And his Lord of the Rings trilogy is more popular with modern audiences than every before.

So, it is a myth, that everyone is doing it and you have to as well to get a readership. Good writing will draw readers and not just sprinkling your writing with vulgarity. But that's the point, can you develop certain types of characters without some of them using profanity? Certainly, some of your characters might use profanity, but does that mean you have to record it word-for-word? You can write, " One-Eye Louie spat on the ground and said, "Now you @%$#!@'s , I'm gonna *&%$((^&% your (*&^$%$).' Then he hit John across the face with a piece of pipe . " Or you can write. "One-eyed Louie cursed, spat on the ground and hit John across the face with a piece of pipe." The second actually has more economy of language and it gets across the point that the guy is no Sunday school boy.

Truthfully, there is a secular market for clean stories. The success of TV channels like TV Land, Nick at Night and The Hallmark Channel demonstrate this. Just because someone is not a Christian doesn't mean they actually want to read someone where every sentence is profane, and violence is glorified. Christian influence stories can help fill this niche and appeal to both Christians and non-Christians alike.

More than an Opinion: Writing an Effective Book Review

Some people think it is an easy thing to write a book review. They think all it means is to read the book and write down what they thought about it. You can do that, but that is not a review. It's a reaction. Unless you already have a following, the reader doesn't actually care much if you enjoyed the book or not. The reader looks to the reviewer to find out if he or she will enjoy the book. That is a significant difference.

The reviewer is an advocate for the reader. He or she provides the reader with enough information and analysis for the reader to make a buying decision. That means that the reviewer can't be concerned about the author's feelings, the publisher's reaction or even their own personal enjoyment of the book.

A book can be informative and well written and not be interesting to me personally because it is a genre or on a topic which is uninteresting to me, or the writer employs a style of writing that I don't like. Those are often matters of taste and preference. The reviewer has to move beyond personal taste and review a book on a fair evaluation of it’s merits.

Reading Like a Reviewer

To be a good book reviewer you need to analyze the book at a deeper level than you would if you were just reading the book for pleasure. This analysis means that you need to judge the book against a set of criteria. When reading you need to pay attention to these criteria, therefore if the book is fiction, you need to ask yourself questions like:

• Are the characters believable?
• Is the dialog natural? Is the pacing of the action appropriate to the genre and style of writing? Are the settings and descriptions engaging?
• Does the plot move along naturally or does it seem forced in parts?
• Is the style of writing engaging?
• Is the work original or derivative?
• Does the work capture the readers attention at the beginning and hold it to the end?
• If part of a series, how easy would it be for a reader new to the series to pick up on the action?
• What about the handling of controversial or potentially offensive elements such as sexuality and violence? Is it handled with subtlety within a proper moral context? Is it explicit? Does it have an implied approval of violent or sexual acts which might be contrary to the ethics of your readers?

For nonfiction books the questions include:

• What is the target audience for this book?
• Regardless of the obvious audience for this book, what group or groups of people would benefit most from reading this book. Which ones would benefit least?
• What is the theme or thesis of the book?
• How well did it serve the needs of that audience?
• Was the information helpful?
• Was the writing style engaging holding the readers attention even when discussing technical matters?
• Was the format and organization of the book helpful to the reader?
• How could the reader apply this to their personal lives?
• Did the book focus mostly on theory or practice or both?
• How did any illustrations used in the book support the subject matter of the book?
• Was everything in the book necessary or did it seem that the author was padding the writing to reach a certain word count?
• Is the information given accurate? Did you find any significant fact errors, misquoted scripture, etc.
• Is the theology doctrinally sound?
• Is the exegesis of scripture consistent with accepted principles of hermeneutics?
• Were scriptures taken out of context or interpreted inappropriately?
• What level of spiritual maturity or Bible knowledge is required to understand the concepts in this book?

You will note that some of these questions do not elicit answers which make a book good or bad, but rather give us information about aspects of the book which might make it more or less appropriate for specific groups of people or which might cause it to appeal to or lack appeal for certain tastes. It is important to go beyond a Good Book-Bad Book dichotomy in your review.
Of course, all of these elements that you considered in your reading won’t be covered in every review. Some of these elements are more important in some books than in others. Likewise, this is not a comprehensive list. Certain genres of writing have their own criteria for excellence. Learning about those genre-specific criteria is especially important if you choose to specialize in that genre.

Once you have a complete understanding of not only how you liked the book, but how the book was constructed and written, then you can begin to write your review focusing on those relevant criteria.

Elements of a Review

There are three basic elements to a good review: Summary, Critique and Recommendation.

Summary. Early in your review you need to give the reader a basic sense of the content of the book free of commentary. For a fiction book, this means giving the basic premise for the plot and maybe introducing the main characters. For nonfiction, it means to give the general theme of the book and a summary of the topics covered.

What you don’t want to do in the summary portion of your review is try to summarize the entire book. It’s a balancing act. You want to give the reader enough unbiased information to decide if the content is of interest or not, but on the other hand, having someone try to summarize the entire book gets boring pretty quickly. I tell my students when writing book reviews to limit this to no more than three paragraphs and aim for one.

Analysis and Critique. Obviously, the bulk of the review is critique. This is where you evaluate the book according to the appropriate criteria for that genre. This is where the notes you made while reading the book will come in handy. Use those questions we posed earlier as a guide for your evaluation. That will keep you from simply responding to a general impression which might be based more on your personal tastes rather than on solid literary grounds for critique.
In this section choose a limited number of specific items (3-4) author did well and tell why they are good. Be specific and use examples and quotes from the book whenever possible. Then focus on those things which were not done so well. Again, tell why you gave that judgment and present specific examples of where the book failed to fulfill its promise.

Obviously, if the book is a positive review, you will spend more time on the good points. If you found the book to be not so good, then you will spend more time on the negative points. However, to be fair, most books are not universally good or universally terrible. The worst books usually have one or two good points, and there is usually something in the best books that could have been done better. A balanced review acknowledges both the strengths and the weaknesses of the work.

Recommendation. This is usually the last paragraph. In it, you give your recommendation concerning the book. It can be an unqualified recommendation or a qualified one. An unqualified recommendation is one in which you state without reservation that the book is a "good read" (although that phrase has been somewhat overused) or that the book is not worth reading. Remember, before you give such a recommendation, that your reputation is on the line. Be sure you have given adequate reasons for this judgment earlier in your review so the reader can say, "Yes, I can see that."

You can also give a qualified recommendation. You might think that a book is generally good, but either it has some flaws or it may not be good for everyone. For instance, there is a popular secular book about healing from childhood abuse. It is an excellent book. However, the author says that it is not important to forgive the offender. She misunderstands the meaning of forgiveness and confuses it with excusing the abuse. So, whenever I have written about that book, I tell people it is good, but to ignore the chapter on forgiveness. That is a qualified recommendation.

Also sometimes the book is better suited to a particular group of readers. For instance, an "edgy" Christian suspense novel may have several violent scenes which might not be suitable for younger readers. So, you might include a warning about that.

At this point, you may be saying to yourself, "Wow, that’s a lot of work!" It is, but you will find that you will not only provide a service to others, but also enhance your own enjoyment of the books you read.

Christian Influence Writing Part III: Sermons or Stories

I remember taking a creative writing in college. I wrote a story with lots of "meaning." It had a "message" and my characters spouted that message at every opportunity. My teacher, a very blunt spoken man, asked, "What were you trying to do with this story?" (Okay, he had a few words of description before the word story, but I don't use that language.) I told him all about the message I had in mind.

He looked me straight in the eye and said, "If you want to send a message call Western Union," then he threw down the paper and said, "Next time write me a story and not a sermon."

Only when I became a teacher and later an editor, did I fully understand his point. Way too many people try to wrap sermons into stories. Even when writing for Christians, the reader doesn't want to read a short story or novel with some heavy-handed message hitting them in the face. They want to be entertained, inspired, even challenged, but they don't want to be preached at.

When writing Christian-Influence fiction for a more general audience, it is even more essential that one resist the temptation for sermonizing. Nothing is going to cause a website visitor to surf away quicker than to think they are going to read an entertaining bit of fiction and then be hit with some sort of polemic about how they should think or believe. And an editor for a general interest or genre publication is going to be reaching for the SASE after just a couple of pages of didactic fiction.

Does this mean that a piece of fiction can't have a message? Absolutely not. Good pieces of fiction often have a message. Huckleberry Finn, Grapes of Wrath, The Time Machine, The Great Gatsby, and hundreds of other classics contain lessons, but those lessons, those messages grow out of the story. They are not imposed on the story. The story comes first and the message lays beneath the surface glimpsed occasionally as one skims across the the water chasing the plot.

And in the best stories the general essence of the message is clear, but it's details are not so clear. Is Huck Finn a racist product of his time with compassion for one slave or is he making a statment about slavery as a whole? Is H.G. Wells making a statement about class warfare in The Time Machine or is he warning against an unquestioning acceptance of an easy life without engaging in the work that makes that life possible?

Personally, I would like to see more entertaining secular short stories which simply have Christian characters in them Too many stories are about Christianity or the Christian walk. But where are the mystery stories in secular publications in which the main character happens to be a Christian, just as Sherlock Holmes happened to play the violin and organized his files by the amount of dust on them. Where are the science fiction stories in which one of the crew members on a planetary survey expedition prays before he puts on his suit for an EVA, but in which the story doesn't revolve around his religious beliefs?

There are some. The Father Brown mysteries, in a different form Zenna Henderson's stories of devout people in extraordinary situations, and a few other places.

It is easy to blame the "godless" secular media for barring access, yet, one of the most popular TV shows on CBS for several years was Touched by an Angel with a Christian producer and some Christian actors.

But a Christian created, produced and advocated with the network for the show. And she created good compelling secular stories with a spiritual twist. Perhaps one of the most extreme examples of Christian Influence writing.

Maybe part of the problem is a reticence among secular publishers to include stories which include Christian main characters. But maybe it's also because Christian writers aren't writing stories which include Christian characters which don't become sermons.

If we want more Christian characters in secular fiction, then we will have to write mainstream and genre stories with Christian characters, and we need to advocate for them with editors and publishers. After all, if we don't do it. They won't.

Next Time: Writing Christian Influence fiction without going over the "The Dark Side."