A Dialogue with Becky Miller, Part 2

This is Part 2 of my conversation with Becky Miller. Check yesterday's post for the first part.

JMB: Believe me, I appreciate the difficulties, but I think “staying with generalities” is one of the things that makes this discussion so frustrating for writers who agree in principle with the goal you’re setting forth, but don’t know how to make it work in practice. Maybe we could approach the question differently. What sort of things might a writer do, in practical terms, in order to bring a greater measure of truth to the page? What have you found beneficial?

RLM: First and foremost, I’d recommend spending time in God’s Word. I know some people will balk at this, thinking it is a dodge of your question or even self-righteous presumption. Let me say right away, I am not suggesting other authors don’t spend time in the Bible.

I can only answer for my own experience here: it is in the pages of Scripture that I come to see and know God more intimately. Reading and studying God’s word gives me a passion for making Him known. And it also gives me ideas how to accomplish it.

I guess what I’m saying is, to bring a greater measure of truth to our fiction, we need to be immersed in Truth.

I can already hear some people saying that fiction needs to also tell the truth about the world, not just about God. The thing is, the Bible tells the truth about the world. Consequently, when I read or study other sources, these make sense because of the Truth I’ve gleaned from the Bible.

JMB: Actually, I like the way you put that, because I think too often when people like me say, “We need the freedom to tell the truth about the world,” there’s an assumption that it’s an either/or proposition -- i.e., that people who want to tell the truth about the world aren’t interested in telling the truth about God, or vice versa. Calvin opens the Institutes with that famous line about how all our knowledge consists either of knowledge of God or knowledge of man, but that “which one precedes and brings forth the other is not easy to discern.” Can we really tell the truth about God without telling the truth about the world, or the truth about the world without the truth about God?

RLM: I don’t believe we can tell the truth about God without telling the truth about the world.

As to the second part, it depends on what you mean by “truth.” I can make true statements that don’t tell the truth about God, such as two plus two equals four.

Consequently I think it’s possible to write a novel that tells the truth about the world without telling the truth about God. It would be no different than me saying, All men have sinned. That is true as far as it goes, but the part that tells the truth about God is to follow: “ … and fall short of the glory of God.”

If we only show men as sinners, I’m not convinced that means, by extension, we show God’s glory.

JMB: That actually sparks two questions in my mind. First, does every author in every book have to share the whole truth of Scripture, or is it enough to communicate one aspect of the truth? Second, if showing men as sinners doesn’t show God’s glory, what exactly would? (In other words, what cannot be absent if the goal is to show God’s glory?)

RLM: The first part is easy—I don’t think it is possible for a novel to share the whole truth of Scripture. If we listed out the tenets of our creed, and agreed they reflected the “whole” truth of Scripture, can we actually incorporate all those into one novel? I don’t see it.

The second part is harder. Man’s depravity is Truth and Scripture reveals this to be so, but in that one statement, the spotlight is on Man’s failure—ultimately his rejection of God.

A novel about a man’s rejection of God could be God-glorifying, but it could also glorify the sinner or the sin.

Reminds me of when I was a kid hearing some drug addict’s testimony. He spent the bulk of his time detailing all the debauchery of his life, then spent a minute or so (I don’t really remember how long—in proportion, it was a small amount of time) telling us how Jesus saved him. Is that a God-glorifying testimony? God can receive glory from it because man must realize his sin if he is to claim a Savior.

I guess it’s all in the why and how. Does an author want to create a hard-swearing character, for instance, because “it’s realistic,” or because he wants to show the slide away from God? Is the story structured to bring attention to the character and what he goes through or to God?

To the second part of your question, what cannot be absent? God. At least through type or symbol, God must be critical to the kind of story that intends to bring Him glory, even the one showing man as sinner. But I’m talking about God as He shows Himself in the pages of Scripture—the One who tells His followers to strap on a cross, to love Him more than wife and child, to expect blows, to forgive extravagantly, to invest in eternity.

Can we show all of Who He is in a novel? Not even in a lifetime of novels. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t make a start.

I’m just about finished with a novel that depicts God in a way I don’t agree with, and yet I see great truths embedded in the story, too. I’m glad this author made the attempt. Last year, I wrote a short story called “The King or the Shaman” which I intended to be God-glorifying, but in the end the symbolism may have been too obscure. Still, I think the attempt was worthwhile, if for no other reason than I learned more about showing God.

JMB: This has been a fascinating conversation, Becky, and I’m grateful to you for taking the time to flesh out your perspective. At the end of the day, it seems to me that individual artists have to explore these matters on their own, and they’ll succeed or fail to varying degrees, and have different visions of what success would look like. My idea is that, if we give them the freedom to pursue those visions, even when they don’t look like ours, we have a better chance at getting a glorious result than if we attempt to define a single vision for an entire genre or industry. Do you think we can achieve the kind of artistic success we’d like to see without giving our fellow artists -- and ourselves -- the freedom to fail?

RLM: I guess, for me the good news is, I know God uses some earthenware as crock pots and some as china. Plus, He redeems what looks to me like my failures.

Does that mean I’m excited about a Christian novelist exploring universal salvation or another depicting the mystery of God, when I believe what we desperately need to show is our relational God who made Himself known through the Incarnation? I am not.

Do I think these authors should have the “freedom to fail”?

From the publishing side, if I were running a publishing company, I would only accept novels that agreed with my theology, so I can’t fault a company that posts a mission statement and sticks to it, even though in doing so, some authors will never publish with them.

Does that mean these publishing houses are somehow not giving authors the “freedom to fail”? I suppose so, at least not on their dime (or $75,000, or whatever the cost is currently to get a book published). As I said, I don’t fault them for their position though I may not agree.

To give an extreme example, I don’t expect Harlequin or some other romance publisher to accept my fantasy trilogy. I understand I’m doing something different than they are. Unfortunately I think some authors don’t realize they are doing something different from certain CBA publishing houses.

For me as a writer, I don’t really have a part in giving or denying the “freedom to fail.” What I can hope to do is raise questions in my fellow artists’ minds that might lead to more attempts at fiction that depicts the truth about God.

Speaking of raising questions, thanks for these, Mark. You’ve stretched my thinking, which is always good. Ultimately, you’re right, though your conclusion is one I resisted voicing throughout this conversation. Our writing efforts are as unique as each of us. We bring to our work our personal experiences, including the unique way God treats each of us. Why, then, would we expect to hammer out a single vision for the industry?

Comments

[Nicole]

Both of you have made insightful comments. Let me add just this. While each writer must have that "freedom to fail", I do think if they think they can reach the lost somehow with a vague reference to God in their so-called Christian worldview writing, they are probably mistaken. The world is filled with vague references to a god not found in Truth. There is no reason to assume a reader with no accurate depiction of who He is will find Him from an obscure hint.

Some writers, however, insist they have no "ministry" in mind with their writing but are certain their worldview will prevail.

[Nathan Knapp]

Thanks for the thought provoking dialogue, Becky and Mark! Always worth the time.

[Rebecca LuElla Miller]

Nicole, I agree with you that vague references to God will not bring a reader to Christ, but I don't believe every writer is called to evangelism. Writers that want to spell out the way to salvation--showing a sinner made aware of his sin and then bringing him to a point of repentance--have a huge task. It's a familiar story and fraught with pitfalls. Some few pull it off well.

I think there is more for us to learn about God, however. The thing we seem to neglect is that Jesus came as The Way to God. In other words, Jesus is the beginning, not the end, of the relationship.

One more thing many others have noted. Some writers in writing from their Christian worldview without spelling out the plan of salvation are still doing the grunt work--the weeding and feeding that needs to take place if a vine is to flourish and eventually bear fruit. Can any of us point at another writer's book and say, God won't use that. And if He uses it even in the life of one person, angels in heaven will rejoice. How great is that!

That being said, I still think it is incumbent upon us to write the truth about God, which, in my opinion, is a much harder thing to do than to write the truth about the world. So much emphasis on writing the truth about the world ... so little put on writing the truth about God.

Becky

[Nicole]

I'll go out on a limb here in light of some of yesterday's comments. Shoo Fly Pie and Chop Shop are two novels written by Tim Downs and produced by Howard Publishing before Simon & Schuster bought them. In the front of Shoo Fly Pie, Howard Publishing printed its mission statement. (The mission statement did not appear in Chop Shop.)

I've read all four of Tim Downs' novels and happen to think he's a good writer. The "Bug Man" books have one of the most exceptional and unique characters I've ever had the pleasure to read about. However, out of his four novels, the only one which even remotely could be "classified" as a "Christian" novel is Plague Maker. The other three could best be described as "agnostic" if we had to find a semi-spiritual qualification.

A lot of people have "fox-hole" prayer times and then when danger or crisis pass, they are no more closer to truly knowing the Lord than they were before they threw up their desperation prayers. Does reading a novel which reflects that same obscure "relational" approach to God enhance their comfort zones of being "okay" in this world?

And if God has given us the ability to write, our relationship with Him will most likely determine how we write our fiction to glorify Him.

[Christopher Fisher]

Becky,

As always, half the time I'm right there with you, the other half I'm standing back scratching my head.

You wrote:
"if I were running a publishing company, I would only accept novels that agreed with my theology..."

I was wondering if you could clarify this. Because on the one hand, I'm thinking, "Of course!" If I were the publisher I would not want to print something blatantly anti-Christian. And it's not because I think such a book could in any way damage the cause, but simply because I wouldn't want to be associated with it.

On the other hand... if we aren't talking about rejecting blatant and severe deviations from the traditions of the Church (i.e., heresies) but merely rejecting points of view with which we happen to disagree, then I'd have to say this attitude is a big part of the problem. "Theology" is such a broadly-encompassing term these days, no longer refering to a larger Christian creed but to the countless personal takes on non-essential issues not clearly laid out in scripture. Though I believe you and I share the same faith in Jesus Christ, I'm sure our own personal "theologies" will difer considerably. And for me, or you, to run a publishing house on the standards of our own narrow, limited take on a larger Christianity seems a bit... well, arrogant. The result of such an approach is not a publishing house, but a propaganda mill. Which is, one could argue, exactly what we have in the CBA today.

[Merrie]

Excellent discussion and I applaud you, Mark, for this new forum!

I have two quick comments:
1. I think to whom much is given, much is required. Or in other words, those who understand deep scriptural truths are accountable to God (and unfortunately, not to us) to find a way to communicate those truths.

2. I strongly believe that some writers may appear to be writing "fluff" or presenting a light-handed gospel, but they may in fact be used mightily by the Lord to reach people as a first wave, like Becky mentioned, "the weeding and feeding." I think we need to allow fantastic writers to write for ABA and sometimes toss in a Christian reference, and at the same time, allow fantastic writers to write for CBA and not put in a strong reference at all. I believe God can use what we offer Him, when we do it with a pure and completely committed heart.

I think for Christian writers, in any genre, the first essential element is a relationship with God. And I whole-heartedly agree with what has been discussed here today. Spending time in God's word is critical if we want to accurately represent who He is to others.

[Jason Joyner]

Perhaps this is a timely post per the dialogue above? Of course, it is easy to say what it does in numbered points. The discussion here was a thoughtful wrestling.

Link:
http://www.dickstaub.com/culturewatch.php?record_id=1153

[Rebecca LuElla Miller]

Nicole, I think Merrie has hit upon the point I was trying to make. We really can't answer for other writers, just ourselves. I know what God has called me to. I want with all my heart to show Him in a fresh way that will help Christians and non-Christians alike think about Him anew. It may be a lofty goal, one I'll never attain, but I'll get a lot closer by aiming for it rather than saying it's impossible and not trying. But what if God has directed someone else to write a novel that will prepare the hearts of readers, or even A reader, to be able to hear His call? What if their novel is exactly what the Holy Spirit will use to show readers their own empty life? The point is, we don't know what God has called other writers to write, nor how God intends to use what they write.

My intention is to present an alternative to what some writers THINK will make their fiction more viable. They say the problem with Christian fiction is the restrictions that keep them from showing the world as it is. I want to suggest that we should care as much or more about showing God as He really is--and in the process, we will show the world as it is.

Chris, you have a valid question. I'll give you the long answer. ;-) Recently Chip MacGregor posted a list of trends on his blog. One was more charismatic books, I think he called them. He said 10 years ago CBA stores wouldn't touch them. Now they couldn't survive without them. He may have mentioned Joel Osteen and a few other authors. A friend of mine took issue with the idea that such books "have" to line shelves. I thought it was high time I found out what the fuss was about, so I turned on TBN and watched a sermon--or talk. I even took notes.

Here are a few lines from one of these authors:
"God is limited by your thinking."

[To an auditorium seating thousands] "God was saying this is your season of favor that I'm announcing to you. You're about to enter into a time of ease. You're about to enter into a season of vindication. You're about to enter into a season of increase... I can sense this is my season of favor. I have a feeling down here [pointed to his stomach] That's God talking to your spirit."

He then used the example of Elijah telling Ahab that it would rain when there wasn't a cloud in the sky. "He could sense it down in here" [pointed to his stomach].

"It's good to remind God of what you've done. At the time of difficulty its good to call in your seeds ... Every time you come to church or watch you are storing up mercy ..."

"With our faith we can change God's mind."

[Said of Hezekiah when he was healed after the prophet told him he would die.] "When did his season of favor begin? When he began to believe, when he began to expect God to work."

Chris, this is the kind of false teaching I was thinking of when I said I wouldn't publish books with theology I don't agree with.

"Theology" to me isn't personal preferences or traditions. It is the study of God--His work, His word, His person, His plan.

In a culture that has more and more religious people, matched by more and more false ideas of spirituality, Christians need to become passionate about what matters most. As I see it, that means we should be about telling what we know about God.

Becky