Logres Hall Family Storytelling

Birthday Verse

2007-07-20T12:15:00.000-04:00

I am trying to get into the habit of writing short poems for special family remembrances: birthdays, anniversaries, and the like. Here are a couple composed recently for the birthdays of my two sons. William just turned four yesterday, and Nathanael was one year old in May. Here's William's, first:

Four
A Poem for William’s Fourth Birthday

Four Seasons our Lord sends;
Four Corners, the World’s Ends;
Four Evangelists nobly bring
Four Gospels for One King.

Four great Winds around us blow;
Four Directions a man may go—
East, West, South, North;
And Four brief years since you came forth.

Four years since your happy birth
(In this Fourth Age of Middle-earth);
Four Rivers flow in Paradise:
Drink deeply, and be strong and wise.

May the God of truth your heart enflame
(He of the great, Four-lettered Name)
With all the Four high Virtues, son—
Do not neglect a single one.

Ride on with valour, bravely fight
The Four Dark Horsemen of the Night;
And from this never turn aside:
The Foursquare City of the Bride.

And here's the one written for Nathanael:

A Poem For Nathanael On His First Birthday

A year has passed (as of today);
Again it is the third of May.
The Earth has travelled ‘round the Sun,
And now my little boy is one.

I think that you’re too young to guess
Your father’s pride and thankfulness
(Though I suspect you see and know
More than the experts say is so).

The mysteries behind your eyes,
The parables of infant cries—
So long would take to comprehend,
While our brief time will quickly end.

So while the days are young, and new,
God grant that I may be for you
A father: noble, strong and wise,
Who seeks the truth behind your eyes.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

2007-07-18T12:52:00.000-04:00

Happy Harry Potter Week to all of you. This first: I am not subject to what might be described as Harry Potter Mania—as I’ve said before, a little Harry Potter goes a long way with me—though I admit it’s hard not to get caught up in the Euphoria this week. Can anyone remember any comparable scenario (recently - say, since Dickens and the serialized Old Curiosity Shop), with this level of excitement over the release of a book, of all things?

But I thought I might draw your attention to several articles of great interest, discussing predictions for the imminent Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (see below). Among the more interesting predictions:

1. Harry returns to Hogwarts as Defence Against the Dark Arts teacher (a post that Dumbledore, in Half-Blood Prince, admits has been cursed since he refused the job to Tom Riddle, AKA Voldemort, years before.

2. Dumbledore actually died earlier, maybe as much as a couple of years earlier, and someone (Snape?) has been masquerading as him in Polyjuiced form, a la Alastor Moody in Goblet of Fire.

3. Snape killed Dumbledore, but only on the headmaster’s orders (Severus…please…) in order to save Malfoy from the Dark Side.

4. The Climax of the book takes place beyond the Veil of the Death Chamber in the Department of Mysteries (the cover of the American edition is said to be depicting part of this). Here Harry (dead, presumably) is reunited with his parents, Sirius, and Dumbledore.

What about the alleged Christian connections? Here’s a fascinating quote from J.K. Rowling, often overlooked, I think:

‘Every time I’ve been asked if I believe in God, I’ve said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely about that I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what’s coming in the books.’ (Source for this quote may be found here.)

I have often said that the overall meaning of the series is something best discussed after Book VII is released. John Granger has made the point that Rowling, while in a certain sense a Postmodern writer, is actually taking on Postmodernism and defeating its worst reductionist and relativist notions, much as the Inklings took on Modernism in their day. I hope he’s right, for I have secretly harboured fears of a Matrix-like anti-climax to Potter, with nothing ending up being what we thought it was—in which case Postmodernism would win out over Rowling’s Christian beliefs.

I’ve never been one for the midnight book release parties—in fact, Half-Blood Prince is the only of the six books that I read upon its initial release—but I think I might wander on over to Books-a-Million, where my pre-ordered copy awaits (thanks, Mom), around midnight of the release date. With all the spoilers out there, I figure it’s best to read the thing before venturing out into the world of loose-tongued fast readers. Besides, I’m not sure that all this hype is bad: thank God it’s not over the release of the new CD from whoever the current popular rap-mongers are. It’s over (I repeat myself) A BOOK. I can’t help but see this, all things being equal, as a good thing. Sure, it’s just a fantasy-world soap opera to some readers (the so called ‘shippers,’ who only care about the relation-ship, or romantic, aspects of the book). But much of what I’m reading is from people who care about the Story, and are immersed in trying to understand what this author is trying to say thereby. Like I say, we’ll wait to see how it ends, but I do think Rowling has given enough in the first six volumes to be hopeful for something good.

You may be interested in reading my three-part series on Harry Potter, including an interview/discussion with John Granger, author of Looking for God in Harry Potter, as well as Unlocking Harry Potter: Five Keys for the Serious Reader. John also edited Who Killed Albus Dumbledore? What Really Happened in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince?

Here is my three-part series on Harry Potter, including the interview with John Granger:

Part I

Part II

Part III

Here are the links to the articles I mentioned earlier:

Waiting for Harry: Will the Boy Who Lived Live? (One of the best 'looking ahead' articles I've read)

Harry Potter Predictions (Insightful thoughts on the final book)

Harry Beyond? (Thoughts by the same author on Harry Potter and death, and Christian faith)

The very best Harry Potter website is The Harry Potter Lexicon, which has an absolutely astonishing amount of information. Here you can do what I did, if you like: read the chapter by chapter synopsis of Half-Blood Prince, or any of the others, so you can brush up before reading Book VII. This is a good idea, because Rowling’s world of magic is the most thoroughly developed sub-creation since Middle-earth, and the vast array of names, places, people, spells, and events, is (almost) as bewildering as trying to remember all the names in The Silmarillion. Also, it’s been two years since I read Half-Blood Prince, and, not being one of those that has read the books multiple times, I am apt to forget details, which would otherwise likely result in a lot of confusion on my part while working through Deathly Hallows.

Harry Potter vs Public Schools?

2007-07-18T12:33:00.000-04:00

A thought on Harry Potter: watching the just-released film version of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, I was reminded of some thoughts I had when reading that book a couple of years ago. Does anyone else notice that, with the intrusion of the Ministry of Magic’s Dolores Umbridge as Defence Against the Dark Arts teacher (and eventually headmistress), that Hogwarts goes from being a private school to being a public (government-run) school? The walls are soon filled with newly issued 'Educational Decrees,' and Umbridge goes on a spree of banning and prohibiting and forbidding with the zeal that only a bureaucrat can know.

These books are known, among other things, for their satire: Rowling is particularly ruthless in her portrayal of unscrupulous and inept politicians and media-hounds. We know, from other interviews with Rowling, that magical children are homeschooled until they reach the age of eleven, upon which many go to schools like Hogwarts, or Durmstrang, though some continue on as homeschoolers. There certainly seems to be an underlying satire against government-sponsored education in these books, and especially in Order of the Phonenix. In one part of the movie (can’t remember if this line is in the book or not), Hermione says, ‘The Ministry [of Magic, i.e., the Government] is interfering at Hogwarts.’ This is obviously considered a bad thing, in these stories. I wonder how many readers/viewers will get the point and pull their kids out of government schools?

What Our Family is Reading, Listening To, and Watching

2007-06-05T12:47:00.000-04:00

A few more recommendations for your enjoyment, in no particular order...

Comus, adapted and illustrated by the magnificent team of Hodges and Hyman, is a retelling of John Milton's Comus: A Masque Presented at Ludlow Castle, which itself was an adaptation of an old English Faerie Tale, Childe Roland. I recently read the original Comus by Milton and this adaptation by Hodges is very faithful, but written on a level for children to enjoy (it does, however, downplay the allegorical references to chastity that were so integral to Milton's version). Anything by these gifted ladies is highly recommended.

The coolest new book to come along in a good while. This book shows boys how to do so many of the things that are defining to boyhood, but neglected in our current prissy, safety-obsessed, politically-correct culture. Here's just a sampling: coin tricks, making the perfect paper airplane, hunting and cooking a rabbit, famous battles, making a battery, books every boy should read, making a bow and arrow, finding north in the dark, and bunches more. A must for every father with young sons.

Still trying to read through the Potter books before Book VII comes out, though I won't make it (a little Potter goes a long way for me). I'm about halfway through this one (Book IV). One thing I remember from the ending is the Black Mass in the graveyard with its perversions of both Baptism and the Lord's Supper, pointing out that the Evil characters in the story are particularly at war with the Christian faith.

Along those lines, John Granger has written a helpful book explaining the Christian significance of these books. The updated paperback edition has a chapter on Half Blood Prince and musings on possible outcomes for Book VII, Deathly Hallows. My interview with John is on the right under 'Key Articles.'

Just checked this out from our church library. Filmed during the Bach Revival of the 1970s and hosted by Brian Blessed (Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves, and Hamlet, among many others) who also plays the part of Johann Sebastian Bach, this is a wonderful introduction to this greatest of composers. My children (ages 6 and 3) loved it. We're going to look into getting the DVD. The film shows a variety of different performances of Bach, by choirs, soloists, and street performers, as well as talking a lot about Bach's life and faith. They do not shy away from the point that Bach's faith in Christ drove everything he did. Highly recommended.

Debut novel for young readers from N.D. Wilson, son of Reformed minister and author Doug Wilson (click here to read Doug Wilson's blurb for my book, Talking of Dragons). This is a really well-done adventure story, and, as nearly every reviewer points out, draws inspiration from The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, The Odyssey, and Robinson Crusoe, among others. The themes of true and false fatherhood are nicely explored as well. This is what Christian literature ought to be these days. Please skip Left Behind and read something like this instead.

I'm always amazed at how many people these days have never seen a Marx Brothers film, or (worse yet) never heard of them. My kids love these films, and so do I. My two oldest children often just call them 'the funny guys,' which says it all, I suppose. Best one of this batch is A Night at the Opera, but they're all worth the time.

From John Milton's Complete English Poems, I have just finished reading (as mentioned above) Comus: A Masque Presented at Ludlow Castle. The Everyman's Edition, which I picked up cheap at a second-hand shoppe, is outstanding and beautiful.

We have several of the Classical Kids CDs, but this one is our favourite. Introducing children (and most adults who hear it, I daresay) to Early/Pre-Baroque/Medieval/Renaissance music through the story of a prince and princess who must seek the aid of Merlin to cure their sick mother, The Song of the Unicorn is wonderfully effective. Listeners learn about the history of music, the various instruments of the era (lyre, lute, recorder, etc), as well as the relationship of this era to later classical composers. Also, most importantly, they hear the music itself, and the selections here, which range from Gregorian chant to Celtic harp to Tallis, are outstanding. Other good Classical Kids CDs would include Mr Bach Comes to Call and Mozart's Magnificent Voyage.

Also started re-reading this one for the first time in a long while. Tom and Huck were certainly among my top literary favourites when I was a boy (I once read Huckleberry Finn in a single day when I was in bed sick all day). One of the scenes I love the most, and always have, is the one in which Tom and Joe Harper are playing 'Robin Hood.' Twain tells us that they played it 'by the book,' which meant that they actually quoted passages from the text and allowed for no variation from the canon when it came to what actually happened. When Joe, playing Guy of Gisborne, wants to kill Robin Hood for once, Tom refuses with the all the enthusiasm of a Bible-thumper:

By and by Tom shouted:

"Fall! fall! Why don't you fall?"

"I sha'n't! Why don't you fall yourself? You're getting the worst of it."

"Why, that ain't anything. I can't fall; that ain't the way it is in the book. The book says, 'Then with one back-handed stroke he slew poor Guy of Guis- borne.' You're to turn around and let me hit you in the back."

There was no getting around the authorities, so Joe turned, received the whack and fell.

"Now," said Joe, getting up, "you got to let me kill YOU. That's fair."

"Why, I can't do that, it ain't in the book."

"Well, it's blamed mean -- that's all."

"Well, say, Joe, you can be Friar Tuck or Much the miller's son, and lam me with a quarter-staff; or I'll be the Sheriff of Nottingham and you be Robin Hood a little while and kill me."

It don't get much better than that.

Jerry Falwell: Requiescat in Pace

2007-05-24T17:56:00.000-04:00

Christian minister and political heaven-raiser Jerry Falwell died last week at the age of 73, as everyone has heard by now. It is an understatement to say that he was a controversial figure, as even a cursory perusal of the comments after his death will reveal. Some are actually rejoicing at his passing. Many, many, are mourning. Others, while disagreeing with him, recognise the fact that he made an enormous impact on the worlds of American politics and religion. But he made enemies both without and within the Church. Sometimes this is a good thing. I can understand well why the cultural enemies of the church hated him: he stood against their worldviews (without, I believe, ever hating them as people) and would not compromise. He was not afraid to draw heat and fire for speaking what he believed to be the truth. But I find the hatred, or even the cool arrogance of some Christians difficult to understand. Granted, even those who might describe themselves as somewhat conservative, found themselves at odds with Falwell's words, which, as he himself admitted, were ocassionally intemperate. But what I really don't get is their opposition to him on the grounds that he was politically involved. That had to be the best thing he ever did for the conservative wing of the church. Fundamentalism is, in its history and essense, a retreatist theology that is content to let the world burn, so long as souls don't. Then Jerry Falwell comes along and talks as if, I don't know, Christians have a duty to labour for the good of the world, or something. Whatever you think of his theology (I would agree with him on the basics while disagreeing on many secondary articles), or his politics (ibid), he certainly challenged, successfully, millions of Christians to get involved in one side of the fight that they had been neglecting for too long. No, as many will be quick to point out, God is not a Republican. The Republican Party, for what it's worth, is a bloody mess, right now. So, maybe you won't like Falwell's party affiliation. But how many Christians (I mean the kind that actually believe the Bible to be a little more binding than, say, the Pirate's Code) can disagree with the things Falwell fought for? Anyone want to argue for the expansion of abortion on demand? Any anti-family conservatives out there? Then what's the big problem with Christians trying to fight for such things? Maybe it's a question or tone, or method, I don't know. But when the Church leaves a culture to rot, it will certainly do so. Q.E.D.

Here are several interesting, posthumous comments about Falwell from various sources:

'My own sense, having spent a lot of time in the States over the years, is that he was a classic of his type and with a lot more integrity than some of the shady characters in the religious penumbra.' (N.T. Wright, Bishop of Durham)

'No man in the last century better illustrated Jesus' warning that "All men will hate you because of me" than the Rev. Jerry Falwell, who left this world on Tuesday. Separately, no man better illustrates my warning that it doesn't pay to be nice to liberals...From the news coverage of Falwell's death, I began to suspect his first name was "Whether You Agree With Him or Not." Even Falwell's fans, such as evangelist Billy Graham and former President Bush, kept throwing in the We didn't always agree" disclaimer. Did Betty Friedan or Molly Ivins get this many "I didn't always agree with" qualifiers on their deaths? And when I die, if you didn't always agree with me, would you mind keeping it to yourself? Let me be the first to say: I ALWAYS agreed with the Rev. Falwell...Despite venomous attacks and overwhelming pressure to adopt the fashionable beliefs of cafe society, Falwell never wavered an inch in acknowledging Jesus before men. Luckily, Jesus' full sentence, quoted at the beginning of this column is: "All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved."' (Ann Coulter, Conservative Author and Speaker)

He held God’s promises close to his heart throughout his 55 years as a Christian and more than 50 years as a pastor, never losing sight of the unique vision God had planted in his heart.
I saw through the years that my dad always sought God’s direction and then boldly, even audaciously, went to work to carry out what God placed in his heart...I never once saw my father stray from God’s direction. I never doubted dad’s walk with God because I witnessed his unswerving commitment to follow God’s principles every step of the way...As I think back on my dad’s nearly 51 years of ministry, I can only attribute its great success to God and a man who understood vision. I hope that I, too, will be able to effectively teach these principles to my children in the years to come. And, I hope that as I continue teaching these principles — to the church and to my own family — that it will be far more than just words. I am praying that God will allow me to embody the dedication to the Gospel in my life that I saw in my father’s life.
May people see these principles lived out every day in my life, just as I had the great privilege of witnessing this in my dad’s life. (Jonathan Falwell, son of Jerry Falwell)

Justorum animae in manu Dei sunt, et non tanget illos tormentum mortis.
Visi sunt oculis insapientium mori, et aestimata est afflictio exitus illorum
illi autem sunt in pace.

('The souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, and the torment of death will not touch them. In the sight of the unwise they seemed to die, and their departure is taken for misery - but they are at peace.')

Atesten Tac: Polycarp: The Crown of Fire Now Available in Turkish

2007-05-14T21:27:00.001-04:00

Much attention has been focussed on the Middle East in recent years, and Islamic religion and culture have been in the forefront of current events. This being the case, it was with no little feeling of gratitude to the Lord that I made an announcement on this blog back in December, that my first book, Polycarp: The Crown of Fire, would be translated into Turkish, based on a request from missionary contacts in the Middle East. That has now happened, and Atesten Tac: Polikarp (Izmir Episkoposu) is available. As I mentioned in that announcement, Polycarp was the bishop of Smyrna, which survives today as the city of Izmir in modern Turkey. This may in fact account for part of the interest, as Polycarp would be better known there than in many parts of the world. Interestingly, it seems that the translator used 'Izmir' throughout the text (and in the title, as you can see in the picture above) rather than the older 'Smyrna,' perhaps in an effort to provide a point of contact with modern inhabitants of Polycarp's home town. I'd like to comment further on the translation, but my Turkish is, shall we say, a bit rusty. But my publisher has provided new artwork for the cover, which my wife thinks is a decided improvement over the old one for the English edition. If you know of anyone for whom this translation could be of some benefit, here is a Turkish website that has the book available. The book arrived in the mail, interestingly, on the very day of mass demonstrations in Polycarp's home town demanding that Turkey remain a secular state, and not be ruled by Islamic sharia law; and two days after a bombing in Izmir. We are immensely grateful for this translation, which is the first time anything I've written has been translated into another language, and our prayers are that God would be pleased to use this for His glory in that part of the world.

What Our Family Is Reading

2007-04-22T01:30:00.000-04:00

Here are some books we can recommend from recent personal experience.

We've been reading a few selections from the famous Oxford Book of English Verse most nights after dinner. Milton, Shakespeare, Spenser, Donne, and many more. George Grant says to only get the one edited by 'Q,' and, so far, I've not been disappointed.

Angela has been reading through some of the stories from Teach Them to Your Children to (appropriately enough) our children in the evenings. Part cautionary tales, part devotional stories, our children have found them fascinating.

The Children's Illustrated Bible is a fairly decent book of Bible stories, with lots of good historical background. Once in a while the interpretation leaves something to be desired, but overall, not bad. We read this at supper: I read the story, and my wife reads the historical background stuff. 'Mommy, now it's your time to read the historical facts,' my six-year old daughter, Grace, says each evening.

Book VII, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, is out in a few months, so I'm rereading the first six as time permits. I'm currently in Book III, Prisoner of Azkaban, which, though a bestseller like all of them, is often cited as a least favourite among fans, due to its dark and depressing nature. Check out 'Key Articles,' below on the right, for a three part series of articles I wrote on the Harry Potter series, including an interview I did with John Granger, author of Looking for God in Harry Potter.

Angela is reading this one, Paedofaith: A Primer on the Mystery of Infant Salvation and a Handbook for Covenant Parents, by Rich Lusk. A book every Christian parent should ponder, and also a must read if you want to understand the key issue in the Federal Vision controversy: are young children, even infants, capable of faith, and therefore salvation?

Just started reading Farmer Giles of Ham to my daughter, Grace, who finds is terribly funny. This is one of Tolkien's lesser known stories, but is a wonderfully fun tale. If you're interested in knowing more about some of Tolkien's other lesser known writings (and some of the more famous ones) check out my book, Talking of Dragons, over to your right, somewhere near the top of the page.

A couple of nights ago I read this one to my oldest son William for the...I don't know how many times we've read this. We have several of these matchless picture books written by Margaret Hodges and illustrated by Trina Schart Hyman. The writing is beautiful yet simple, and the illustrations are magnificent. The one on St George and the Dragon (adapted from Spenser's Faerie Queene) is illustrated like an illuminated Medieval manuscript. This one's the story of Sir Gareth of Orkney, from the King Arthur legendarium. Other must-reads from Hodges and Hyman include Comus, adapted from John Milton's masque of the same name, and Merlin and the Making of the King, adapted from Sir Thomas Malory's Le Morte D'Arthur.

Anyone serious about understanding current New Testament scholarship needs to read N.T. Wright. He is a fine writer and communicator, and something of a controversial figure, but certainly no heretic. I've just begun his book Paul: Fresh Perspectives, which should get into some of the controversial stuff. But he's a first-rate scholar, and has done a great service to the church by reminding the world that the central claim of the Christian faith is not some timeless truth or other, but an event that actually happened in history: the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. His book The Challenge of Jesus, which I recently read, is very good, as is his little book For All the Saints? Remembering the Christian Departed.

Speaking of Wright, I have about three pages left in this book, which I have found very helpful: The Last Word: Scripture and the Authority of God: Getting Beyond the Bible Wars. I can't agree with every word in the book, but overall it's very helpful and thought-provoking. His metaphor for understanding history as a five-act play (Act One: Creation, Act Two: Fall, Act Three: Israel, Act Four: Jesus, Act Five: Church) is outstanding, and I wish everyone would begin to think more along these lines. I have taught the five act model, in a rudimentary way, to my daughter, and have also taught her, following Wright, that we are in the fifth act, and our responsibility as Christians is to know the first four acts (the Bible) inside out so that we can understand how best to play out our part in the fifth act. For more on N.T. Wright, including a lot of free audio lectures and sermons, visit The N.T. Wright Page.

Angela and I are reading The Wise Woman from this collection of George MacDonald's fairy tales. Every parent should read this one: it's all about the right and wrong ways to teach children to obey.

Finally, here's my current personal favourite: the newly released The Children of Hurin, the first new J.R.R. Tolkien book in thirty years. This is a longer, more developed version of a tale that was told in The Silmarillion, but that version was something like 35 pages, whereas this one is well over 200. This is a must, must read. I'm about four chapters in, and this is mountaintop stuff. Last I checked it was # 2 on Amazon after, of course, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.

Brothers and Sisters

2007-03-15T22:32:00.001-04:00

But Beauty, like the fair Hesperian tree

Laden with blooming gold, had need the guard

Of dragon-watch with unenchanted eye

To save her blossoms, and defend her fruit,

From the rash hand of bold Incontinence.

You may as well spread out the unsunned heaps

Of miser’s treasure by an outlaw’s den,

And tell me it is safe, as bid me hope

Danger will wink on Opportunity,

And let a single helpless maiden pass

Uninjured in this wild surrounding waste.

Of night or loneliness it recks me not;

I fear the dread events that dog them both,

Lest some ill-greeting touch attempt the person

Of our unownéd sister.

John Milton, Comus: A Masque Presented at Ludlow Castle

Angela's Birthday

2007-03-13T22:10:00.000-04:00

Today is my wife's birthday, and I thought I'd post a short poem I wrote for her. All men should write poetry for their wives, though they will, understandably, complain of a lack of time, or of inspiration. This bit of verse (poor though it is, I've no doubt), written during my lunch break at work, proves that an unromantic setting can (with imagination) be overcome, and that even such time as we have can be put to some use.

May the day of your birth be remembered always,
By all who love Goodness, her Motherly ways;
By all who love Truth, who from her would not part;
By all who love Beauty, her glory and art.

May the day of your birth be never forgotten,
By all of your children, unborn and begotten;
By kith and by kin, by allies and foes;
By a bridegroom whose love for you kindles and glows.

St Valentine’s Day Reminiscences

2007-02-23T12:52:00.001-05:00

He who finds a wife finds a good thing and obtains favor from the LORD.

King Solomon, The Proverbs of Solomon, Son of David, King of Israel

Prince, thou art sad; get thee a wife, get thee a wife…

William Shakespeare, Much Ado About Nothing (Act V, Scene IV)

Though it was over a week ago, I haven’t had the opportunity to write about some wonderful Valentine’s moments our family had. Somehow, the idea of ‘surprise’ seemed to be an infectious one, as you will see, if you read on.

During the day, I received two Valentine’s email cards: one from my wife and children, and one just from my wife. I also found, in the backpack I always carry, a homemade card, with contributions by all, and the message, ‘Daddy, our love for you grows everyday.’ This one will remain on display in my office for quite a long while.

On the evening of St Valentine’s, I arrived home from work to find the door open, and my two oldest children, Grace (6) and William (3), dressed in their Sunday best (colour-coordinated, too!), and with big smiles on their faces, waiting at the door. Grace had a nice towel draped over one arm, and William had a moustache (curled up on each end) and pointed beard pencilled on his face.

Grace, very prim and proper, spoke: ‘Welcome to Newsom Café. Our menu.’ This last as she gestured toward a sign on the dining room door with the afore-mentioned appellation, and a second sign on which was drawn, in the very best crayon, a picture of the dinner menu.

Grace took my backpack, and William took my coat; then they led me to a place of wonder where my beautiful wife, Angela, sat waiting for me in a dining room darkling except for seven candles on the table. She was also dressed in fine clothes (making me feel just a little out of place in my workaday raiment!) and was also smiling. The soup course was on the table, along with homemade breadsticks and salad. My surprise was to be a candle-light dinner with my bride, and two of my children as waiter and waitress (is it politically-correct to say ‘waitress’ any more? Because, if not, I…oh, wait, that’s right—I don’t care.)

During the course of the meal, the children brought the food to us (except the main course, which was beyond their abilities of strength and balance), and took our dishes away when we were done. When they were not so engaged, they sat in two chairs, some little distance from the table, where they picked up instruments—Grace, a recorder, William, a ukulele, neither of which they know how to play—to provide us with soft, dinner music. Sometime during the excellent spaghetti and meat balls, my youngest son, Nathanael (9 months) awoke from a late nap, and, when he was brought in, I found that he, too, was dressed in tie and pencilled-in facial hair.

There was candy, and dessert, and a lot of fun. The children really seemed to enjoy an opportunity for responsibility and service (plus playing a part in what must have seemed like a mini-masque or play). It was a wonderful evening, and a grand surprise for old Dad. Truly, I am blessed far beyond deserving to have such a delightful family, and I honour them for their love and thoughtfulness.

Unknown to any of them, however, I was planning my own little surprise for the weekend. This one will take more time to tell, not because my surprise was more important, but because, my wife and children far exceeding me in intelligence, it was far harder for me to surprise them that it was for them to surprise me.

Angela and I had planned to go out for a Valentine’s dinner on Friday night, and I had made the arrangements for it. My parents were to keep the children for the evening, and we were to return by about 9 or 10. We dropped off Grace, William, and Nathanael at my parents' house, and took to the road.

But on the way, I revealed the surprise: I was actually taking Angela away for an overnight excursion—our first alone since well before our oldest child was born—and we would not be returning until Saturday evening. My parents, I told her, were prepared to keep the children overnight until our return.

Now, men with wives can easily imagine the kinds of questions that will, of necessity, attend such a surprise, like an inevitable conclusion following hard upon the heels of logical premises. Such queries will normally include the following:

‘What?’

‘No, seriously, what?’

And a host of other questions, all beginning with a preamble of ‘but what about…?’

Actually, my wife was, as I could have told you beforehand, a wonderful good sport about it, and was thrilled at the prospect of this little adventure, once she got used to the idea. She did, of course, want to know that everything had been taken care of for the children, and, though she did not say it, I don’t doubt that her feminine mind experienced no inconsiderable doubt re the ability of men, in general, to successfully pack everything a woman would need for an overnight jaunt. Complicating this was the fact that she is nursing our youngest child, and had never been away from him for more than a few hours. Parents of nursing infants will know the kinds of preparations that have to be made when Mommy is away from the little one even for a short time.

I am pleased to report that she was pleased, and informed me later that I had not overlooked a thing. Here’s part of how I pulled it off (this, I believe, was my Dad's idea): a couple of weeks earlier, I told my wife that I was working on a scene in my new book (a novel) in which a woman packs her things for an overnight trip. I told her that I was weaving certain storytelling symbolisms into the choice of items, and that the symbols in this scene were vital to an understanding of the book as a whole. Therefore (said I), it is important that I have a realistic understanding of just what sort of things a lady might pack for a short trip. Can you help me, my dear?

None of it was true, of course, except that I am writing a novel, and I did need such a list of items. She told me later that she thought it an odd sort of request at the time, but, as I really am writing a new book, she didn’t think much of it, and duly provided the information. I also consulted my Mother and Mother-in-law to make sure I had not overlooked anything (I had). My Mother-in-law uses some of the same make-up-type items as my wife, and was able to describe the various bottles and whatnot that she uses so that I would be sure to get the right things.

I packed our clothes, and bags for the children, over the couple of nights before our trip, and took the children’s stuff to my parents’ house on the way to work Friday morning. I hid the bag with mine and Angela’s clothes in the back of our minivan. I got off work early, and returned home. I had not been able to pack things like toothpaste, hair items, makeup, and so on, because, of course, she would need them just before leaving. So, we got into the van, ready to take the children to my parents’ house for what Angela still believed was an evening away, and then I told her I had forgotten her present, and had to go back inside to get it. What I got instead, however, was the makeup, toothpaste, and so on, that I had not been able to pack earlier.

Such were the machinations of my tortured mind as I carried out this diabolical plot. I could not have pulled it off without the help of my parents and in-laws, and probably would have made a shocking mess of things otherwise. Back to the moment of surprise: when my wife, on the way to our destination, was at last convinced that everything was well-prepared, she, while still, like a good mother, harbouring some anxiety about the well-being of the baby, settled down to enjoy our journey. I took her to a wonderful bed and breakfast in Winston-Salem, Colonel Ludlow’s, which is about an hour from our home. I chose this spot because Angela had surprised me by taking me to the same place exactly ten years ago, for Valentine’s Day. It is a beautiful, Victorian-era (1887) mansion, in the heart of the city’s historic district. The rooms feature stained-glass windows, antique art and furniture, as well as all the modern conveniences. For a short, one-night-only, tightly budgeted getaway, it was a wonderful choice.

After checking in, we walked one block to the restaurant where we had dinner reservations at six: The Old Fourth Street Filling Station, also located in an historic building. The food there was outstanding (filet mignon for her, southwest flank steak for me, with crab bisque soup, barbecue quesadillas, and a most unbelievably delicious Lemon Mist Cake for dessert). We dined on their outdoor patio—yes, it’s February, but it is a heated patio, so the cold air was not a factor. Returning to our room, we called the children to tell them (surprise!) that they would be staying overnight with Papa and Grand-mama. They were delighted, as I knew they would be.

Throughout the weekend, I gave Angela homemade cards, with little poems in them I wrote just for her. On Saturday, we breakfasted in our room on polish sausage, Amaretto French Toast, ham biscuits, and quiche, after which we visited the historic Reynolda house (the mansion of tobacco magnate R.J. Reynolds), which is now an American art museum. Here we saw an exhibition of the paintings of Grandma Moses, and toured the family manse. Angela, who does some decorative/scenic painting on the side, was greatly inspired by the artwork of Grandma Moses. Afterwards, we lunched on burgers and bean and bacon soup at Mayberry Ice Cream in Reynolda Village, and caught a movie, A Night at the Museum (quite good, and with the surprising message that we neglect a good knowledge of history at our own peril).

All in all, about twenty-seven hours of having my wife all to myself, and it was truly one of the most delightful days I’ve ever had. We laughed, and loved, and lived, just delighting in being together. We had more time to talk than we ever get in the course of a busy week. I knew, even before this weekend, that I was thankful for her. After all, she has been faithful to me, lo, these many years (17, including our years of courtship, or, as we called it in the old days, ‘dating’), she is the mother of my children, and diligently educates them in our little homeschool (The St George Dragonslayer Academy), and she is as happy and contented a wife as ever drew breath. She loves me unconditionally, and is not at all hard to please— which, of course, is why I went to such great lengths to please her with this surprise trip. She doesn’t complain, or nag: she has grown in grace over the years, and we are far closer than we have ever been before.

So, as I say, I knew beforehand that I was thankful for her. But this brief journey brought it all before my eyes again, like the vivid pictures of a relief sculpture in a Roman arch. Angela is patient with me, supportive, tender, and loving. She manifests the grace of God in my life, and, though we are very different in many ways (thank God she’s not just like me!), she is perfectly suited for me, and I cannot believe my good fortune (under Providence) in such a wife. She is a magnificent companion, a noble mother, and my best friend.

I write all this, partly to express my own heart on the matter, and partly to encourage those who are, for whatever reason, sceptical or jaded about marriage in a world of broken homes. I can claim no credit for the fact that I chose such a wonderful wife, except that I did see her quality, even then—but God knows I was far from the wisest eighteen-year-old when Angela and I first began seeing each other, and it scares me to think how easily, in my folly, I might have ended up with someone else. God’s mercy is very great. But to you who are contemplating marriage, or contemplating contemplating marriage, or are too afraid, or hurt, to think about marriage, I say this: all the effort and pains it takes to really get to know someone, all the time it takes to find a good mate, is eminently worth it. There is really nothing like a good marriage: though it involves sacrifice, though it involves denying ourselves and killing our own selfish tendencies, though it is, quite often, just plain old hard work—it is all worthwhile. The pain and frustration are overwhelmed by the comfort and joy. To ‘God, the best maker of all marriages,’ and the giver of all good things, I give all praise. To my wife, I rise and call her blessed. She is my crown of glory.

On Friday night of our trip, I gave her another poem, longer than the short pieces in the cards I made. It is actually a song, but the music is still being written, so it exists for now as a poem. It is, I think, weak in spots, and I plan to give it something of a revision, but here it is in its unedited state, written quickly in a whirlwind hour of inspiration, when the thoughts and feelings were tumbling out almost faster than I could write them.

Museum
For Angela
15 February 2007

Take my hand, walk through the gate:
Inside, a display of what some call Fate.
Galleries, rooms, every one filled
With relics of Something we’re trying to build.

Ancient artefacts, treasures beyond price;
History’s haven, virtue and vice:
All on display, awaiting our eyes,
And maybe our judgment, as though we were wise.

This is our Museum…

It’s all in this place, every moment and choice:
Exhibit of memories, History’s voice;
Ours to remember, rejoice, regret;
Too many things we’d like to forget.

Doom whispers coldly: accuse and condemn—
‘In this Museum, I’ll crucify them.’
Not his the last word, no sentence to speak:
Divinity’s blood is sustaining the Weak.

This is our Museum…

Here in this Museum, I witness my life;
Sorrow has ravaged—but you are my wife.
Wherever I turn, there’s your face on display,
Turning the Enemy, winning the Day.

A story is told in these hushed galleries,
Of triumph, revenge over dark enemies.
And all is not over, there are empty rooms still:
Let us fill them with relics of war and good will.

This is our Museum…

In the fire, and the furnace, let us forge a great Love:
With the lustre of laughter, the fruit of the Dove;
Dip our fingers in the ashes of the ruin of all,
And write of our joy on the eternal wall.

Let us love so wildly that even in death,
The living will envy these two without breath.
A thousand years in the Cathedral we’ll stay,
And the evening and the morning were the first day.

This is our Museum…

And I will find you beyond the circles of the world,
When the flag of the universe at last is unfurled;
We will taste the twelve fruits, and never more part,
I will hold you in wonder, my eucharist-heart.

I will hold you forever, both now and then:
Flesh, then Spirit, then Flesh once again.
‘Til then, we’ll wander the Gallery-halls
Of this old Museum, where history calls.

This is our Museum…

St Valentine's Day

2007-02-14T15:13:00.000-05:00

It is that time of year, when a young man's thought turns to love, or something like that. Few people know much about St Valentine, the man for whom this day is named (in case you were wondering, he wasn’t some sort of Don Juan or Cassanova, at least not that we know of). Here’s what New Advent has to say about him, or, rather, them:

'At least three different Saint Valentines, all of them martyrs, are mentioned in the early martyrologies under date of 14 February. One is described as a priest at Rome, another as bishop of Interamna (modern Terni), and these two seem both to have suffered in the second half of the third century and to have been buried on the Flaminian Way, but at different distances from the city. In William of Malmesbury's time what was known to the ancients as the Flaminian Gate of Rome and is now the Porta del Popolo, was called the Gate of St. Valentine. The name seems to have been taken from a small church dedicated to the saint which was in the immediate neighborhood. Of both these St. Valentines some sort of Acta are preserved but they are of relatively late date and of no historical value. Of the third Saint Valentine, who suffered in Africa with a number of companions, nothing further is known....

The popular customs associated with Saint Valentine's Day undoubtedly had their origin in a conventional belief generally received in England and France during the Middle Ages, that on 14 February, i.e. half way through the second month of the year, the birds began to pair…For this reason the day was looked upon as specially consecrated to lovers and as a proper occasion for writing love letters and sending lovers' tokens. Both the French and English literatures of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries contain allusions to the practice. Perhaps the earliest to be found is in the 34th and 35th Ballades of the bilingual poet, John Gower, written in French; but Lydgate and Clauvowe supply other examples. Those who chose each other under these circumstances seem to have been called by each other their Valentines.'

So, another Christian holiday whose origins are nearly completely forgotten by our post-Christian culture. Who’da thought it?

I am one of those fortunate ones who live in great love with their Valentines. And here’s a detail that many will insist is mere fiction for effect, but is, nonetheless, quite true. My wife and I first went on a date on Valentine’s Day, seventeen years ago today. Now, in the interests of historical accuracy, she did accompany me to a Christmas banquet a couple of months earlier, but only as a friend, and we had not kept in touch during the interim. But on 14 February, 1990, she accompanied me to church (it was a Wednesday), and we went to dinner afterwards. At that time I declared my interest in her and my desire to spend time with her, and we came to an accord, namely, that we would begin to see something of each other. On 14 August, 1993, three and a half years later, to the day (the length, in some ecschatological schemas, I note in passing, of the Great Tribulation, a fact that is completely inapplicable in this case), we exchanged vows before God and Man, and were wed in the holy covenant of marriage. She is that rarest of jewels: a good wife, perfectly suited to me, and I can abide no thought of spending my life with anyone else. Angela, you are my crown of glory, and I love you.

Here is a poem I wrote for Angela, on St Valentine’s Day, two years ago:

A Short Poem for Angela Upon St Valentine’s Day

For this was sent on Seynt Valentyne's day Whan every foul cometh ther to choose his mate.
Chaucer, Parliament of Foules

This is the day when birds are wont to choose
From all the other birds their ‘destined mate;
And I that to a bird would nothing lose,
Did make my choice upon that self-same date.

St Valentine’s, the day of love and choice;
St Valentine, who loved and chose to die;
A martyr, whose brave death gave love a voice,
Who lent his name to those whose hearts shall fly.

Three things I seek and ever long to see:
For Goodness, Truth, and Beauty mark the Wise.
And under God, I, blessed, have found all three
Within thy heart, thy mind, and in thine eyes.

St Valentine’s Day, 2005

2006 Books List

2007-01-27T01:24:00.000-05:00

I decided at the beginning of 2006 to try to keep up with the books I read during the year. Below is a list that I think must be incomplete, since I don’t believe I wrote everything down. First are the books that I read completely, followed by a second list of books that I read only in part, which could mean anything from a few paragraphs to a couple hundred pages. The fact that I only read part of a book does not imply that it was a bad book or couldn’t keep my attention (though in some cases that is true); rather, it means that, for one reason or another, I wasn’t able to complete it at the time. Sometimes I have to stop what I’m doing and read something related to a writing project I'm engaged in. Sometimes a discussion with a friend or family member prompts me to read something to be better informed on the subject. Sometimes I just pick up an old favourite and just jump into it for a random chapter or two. At times I just don’t get back to the previous book, or at least for a while.

Apart from grouping an author’s books together, these are in no particular order. Short stories are included in the second list, as they don't represent an entire book read.

What were your favourite books during the year?

Here are the books read entirely:

1. The Everlasting Man (G.K. Chesterton)
2. The Flying Inn (G.K. Chesterton)
3. Four Faultless Felons (G.K. Chesterton)
4. The Man Who Was Thursday (G.K. Chesterton) (3rd time)
5. The Club of Queer Trades (G.K. Chesterton)
6. The Man Who Knew Too Much (G.K. Chesterton)
7. Lepanto (G.K. Chesterton)
8. Wise Blood (Flannery O’Connor)
9. The Da Vinci Code (Dan Brown)
10. Wise Words: Family Stories That Bring the Proverbs to Life (Peter Leithart)
11. Against Christianity (Peter Leithart)
12. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (J.K. Rowling) (2nd time)
13. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (J.K. Rowling) (2nd time)
14. Carry On, Jeeves (P.G. Wodehouse) (2nd time)
15. Very Good, Jeeves (P.G. Wodehouse) (2nd time)
16. Jeeves in the Morning (P.G. Wodehouse)
17. The Magician’s Nephew (C. S. Lewis) (Can't remember how many times)
18. The Silver Chair (C.S. Lewis) (Can't remember how many times)
19. Taliessin Through Logres/The Region of the Summer Stars/Arthurian Torso (Charles Williams/C.S. Lewis)
20. War in Heaven (Charles Williams)
21. The Last Disciple (Hank Haanegraaff and Sigmund Brouwer)
22. The Essential Calvin and Hobbes (Bill Watterson)
23. Yukon Ho (Bill Watterson)
24. The Leper of St Giles (Ellis Peters)
25. Godless: The Church of Liberalism (Ann Coulter)
26. For All the Saints? Remembering the Christian Departed (N.T. Wright)
27. More Than a Skeleton (Paul Maier)
28. Never Call Retreat: Lee and Grant: The Final Victory (Newt Gingrich/William R. Fortschen)
29. Cricket on the Hearth (Charles Dickens)
30. America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It (Mark Steyn)
31. Zeal of Thy House (Dorothy L. Sayers) (4th time)

Here are the books that were regrettably (in most cases) unfinished:

1. The Foresters: Robin and Marian (Alfred Lord Tennyson)
2. The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering Who Jesus Was and Is (N.T. Wright)
3. The Crown and the Fire: Meditations on the Cross and the Life of the Spirit (N.T. Wright)
4. The Case for Covenant Communion (Greg Strawbridge)
5. The Case for Covenantal Infant Baptism (Greg Strawbridge)
6. Paedofaith: A Primer on the Mystery of Infant Salvation and a Handbook for Covenant Parents (Rich Lusk)
7. The Federal Vision (Steve Wilkins/Garner)
8. The River/Good Country People/The Displaced Person/Wildcat/A Good Man is Hard to Find/A Temple of the Holy Ghost (from O’Connor: Collected Works, Flannery O’Connor)
9. Trinity and Reality: An Introduction to the Christian Faith (Ralph Smith)
1o. A Generous Orthodoxy: Why I am a Confused, etc, Christian (Brian McLaren)
11. Lee and Jackson: Confederate Chieftains (Paul D. Casdorph)
12. How the Irish Saved Civilization: The Untold Story of Ireland’s Heroic Role from the Fall of Rome to the Rise of Medieval Europe (Thomas Cahill)
13. Lillith (George MacDonald)
14. The Wise Woman (George MacDonald)
15. The Valley of Fear (Sir Arthur Conan Doyle)
16. The Abominable History of the Man with Copper Fingers (from Lord Peter: The Complete Lord Peter Wimsey Stories, Dorothy L. Sayers) (2nd time)
17. Creed or Chaos (Dorothy L. Sayers)
18. Henry V (William Shakespeare)
19. The Return of the King (J.R.R. Tolkien)
20. Descent Into Hell (Charles Williams)
21. How Right You Are Jeeves (P.G. Wodehouse)
22. The Most of P.G. Wodehouse (P.G. Wodehouse)
23. City of God (Augustine)
24. A Reformation Debate (John Calvin, Jacopo Sadoleto)
25. The Origin of Species By Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (Charles Darwin)
26. How Should We Then Live: The Rise and Decline of Western Thought and Culture (Francis Schaeffer)
27. Knowing God (J.I. Packer)
28. Demon Possession (ed, John Warwick Montgomery)
29. More Liberty Means Less Government: Our Founders Knew This Well (Walter Williams)
30. Omnibus III: Reformation to the Present (ed, Douglas Wilson and Ty Fischer, with a contribution by Yours Truly)
31. Mother Kirk: Essays and Forays in Practical Ecclesiology (Douglas Wilson)
32. Federal Husband (Douglas Wilson)
33. My Life For Yours: A Walk Through the Christian Home (Douglas Wilson)
34. The Oxford History of Christian Worship (ed, Geoffrey Wainwright and Karen B. Westerfield Tucker)
35. From Cottage to Workstation: The Family’s Search for Social Harmony in the Industrial Age (Allan C. Carlson)
36. Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer (C.S. Lewis)
37. God in the Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics (C.S. Lewis)
38. The Pilgrim’s Regress: An Allegorical Apology for Christianity Reason and Romanticism (C.S. Lewis)
39. The Gospel According to Tolkien: Visions of the Kingdom in Middle-earth (Ralph Wood)
40. The Encyclopaedia of the Middle Ages (Norman Cantor)
41. Bullfinch’s Mythology: The Age of Chivalry (Thomas Bullfinch)
42. Piers Plowman (William Langland)
43. The Writer’s Digest Handbook of Novel Writing
44. General Washington’s Christmas Farewell: A Mount Vernon Homecoming 1783 (Stanley Weintraub)
45. Our Nation’s Archive: The History of the United States in Documents (ed, Erik Bruun and Jay Crosby)
46. The Journals of Lewis and Clark (Meriwether Lewis and William Clark, ed, Anthony Brandt)
47. The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War (Thomas J. DiLorenzo)
48. Lincoln Unmasked: What You’re Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe (Thomas J. DiLorenzo)
49. An Honourable Defeat: The Last Days of the Confederate Government (William C . Davis)
Theodore Roosevelt (Louis Auchincloss)
50. Southern Tales (Webb Garrison)
51. Scotland: The Story of a Nation (Magnus Magnusson)
52. Scotland: A Short History (Christopher Harvie)
53. 1314: Bannockburn (Aryeh Nusbacher)
54. Troubadour for the Lord: The Story of John Michael Talbot (Dan O’Neill)
55. In the Arena: An Autobiography (Charlton Heston)
56. The Size of Chesterton’s Catholicism (David W. Fagerberg)
57. Crossing the Threshold of Hope (John Paul II)
58. Triumph: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church (H.W. Crocker III)
59. The Blood of the Moon: The Roots of the Middle East Crisis (George Grant)
60. The Autobiography of G.K. Chesterton (G.K. Chesterton)
61. Glory and Honor: The Musical and Artistic Legacy of Johann Sebastian Bach (Gregory Wilbur)
62. Michelangelo and the Pope’s Ceiling (Ross King)
63. Stonewall Jackson: The Black Man’s Friend (Richard G. Williams, Jr)
64. Roosevelt: Letters and Speeches (Theodore Roosevelt)
65. America: The Last Best Hope, Vol I: From the Age of Discovery to a World at War (William J. Bennett)
66. American Courage: Remarkable True Stories Exhibiting the Bravery That Has Made Our Country Great (ed, Herbert W. Warden III)
67. Confederate Emancipation: Southern Plans to Free and Arm Slaves During the Civil War (Bruce Levine)
68. Encyclopedia Brown and the Case of the Secret Pitch (Donald J. Sobol)

My Space

2007-01-26T23:56:00.000-05:00

Not sure why, but I have a My Space page, now. I've actually had it for a while, but it didn't seem important enough to mention. However, if you'd like to check it out, you can do so by clicking the title of this post, above.

Happy 200th Birthday, General Lee

2007-01-19T23:49:00.000-05:00

Today is the 200th anniversary of the birth of a man who (it should not be so difficult to say) is certainly one of the greatest Americans in history: General Robert Edward Lee. It is only difficult because our culture does not understand honour and righteousness as well as it once did. Lee was a man of almost unbelievable honour and integrity. After the war, he did, as one biography put it, more than any other American to heal the divisions between North and South.

We celebrated with our children by watching Ron Maxwell’s fine film, Gods and Generals. Focussing attention on three battles in the first two years of the War Between the States—First Manassas, Fredericksburg, and Chancellorsville, the movie portrays the greatest military partnership of all times, that of General Lee with his ‘right arm,’ commander of the second corps of the Army of Northern Virginia, General Thomas Jonathan ‘Stonewall’ Jackson.

There are many fine moments in the film, including a heart-wrenching battle before the stone wall at Fredericksburg between two Irish regiments: one Northern, one Southern. ‘Don’t they know we’re fighting for our freedom?’ cries a Southern Irish officer, incredulous that his old countrymen could be fighting for the Yankees. ‘Didn’t they learn anything at the hands of the English?’ ‘These Irish Rebels are our countrymen,’ shouts the Northern Irish officer, even as he urges his men on in their hopeless charge. But one of the most telling moments in the film is also just before the battle of Fredericksburg, when Colonel Joshua Chamberlain of the Twentieth Maine (later to earn lasting glory for his heroic defence of Little Round Top at the Battle of Gettysburg), speaks to his men before the battle, just as the vanguard of the Union forces are crossing the Rappahannock river into Virginia. Maxwell puts into Chamberlain’s mouth the words of Marcus Lucanas, Roman poet, chronicling the military crossing of the Rubicon (an act unlawful under Roman law) by Julius Caesar. I say it is telling, because at the same moment as this speech, the Union Army of the Potomac is also crossing a river, and invading their own country. Notice the italics, which are my own, and ask your self whether Maxwell’s intention as a screenwriter and as a director could be clearer:

In the Roman civil war, Julius Caesar knew he had to march on Rome itself, which no legion was permitted to do. Marcus Lucanus left us a chronicle of what happened. ‘How swiftly Caesar had surmounted the icy Alps, and in his mind conceived immense upheavals, coming war. When he reached the little Rubicon, clearly through the murky night appeared a mighty image of his country in distress; grief in her face, her white hair streaming from her tower-crowned head. With tresses torn and shoulders bare, she stood before him and sighing, said: “Where further do you march? Where do you take my standards, warriors? If lawfully you come, if as citizens, this far only is allowed.” Trembling struck his limbs, and weakness checked his progress, holding his feet at the river's edge. At last he speaks. “Oh, thunderer, surveying great Rome's walls from the Tarpeian rock. Oh, Phrygian, house gods of Lulus, clan and mysteries of Quirinus, who was carried off to heaven. Oh, Jupiter of Latium, seated in lofty Alba and hearths of Vesta. Oh, Rome, equal to the highest deity, favor my plans. Not with impious weapons do I pursue you. Here am I, Caesar, conqueror of land and sea, your own soldier everywhere, now too if I am permitted. The man who makes me your enemy, it is he will be the guilty one.” He broke the barriers of war and through the swollen river swiftly took his standards. When Caesar crossed the flood and reached the opposite bank from Hesperia 's forbidden fields, he took his stand and said: “Here, I abandoned peace and desecrated law. Fortune, it is you I follow. Farewell to treaties. From now on, war is our judge.”

Hail Caesar. We who are about to die salute you.'

Maxwell compares Lincoln’s armies to Caesar, unlawfully inciting war against his own countrymen, and feeble pleas of patriotism (‘O Rome, equal to the highest deity…the man who makes me your enemy, it is he will be the guilty one’) his only excuse. He tells us that the North, ‘abandoned peace and desecrated law,’ and said ‘farewell to treaties…from now on, war is our judge.’ Implicitly, the South is the 'mighty image of his country in distress,’ pleading for peace. In the movie, Southerners, like Jackson, quote Scripture, while Northerners, like Chamberlain, quote pagan (albeit beautiful) poetry. The meaning is clear enough, and the sympathies of filmmaker Maxwell (blessings upon him), equally clear (though certainly he would also sympathise with many of the fine soldiers—like Chamberlain and General Winfield Hancock, for instance— in the Union forces as well). It is a fine movie, and a fine way to celebrate the birth of one of our great national and Southern heroes, Robert E. Lee.

The War Between the States was one of the saddest, most glorious, beautiful, horrifying, tragic, noble moments in our country’s history. We are fools if we ignore its stories, or its lessons. Let this day be a reminder to us of our own history, and especially of the nobility of this great and good man.

Polycarp: The Crown of Fire in Turkish

2006-12-19T12:18:00.000-05:00

Another reason to be thankful during this Advent Season. I received an email today from Catherine MacKenzie of Christian Focus Publications, who published both Polycarp: The Crown of Fire and Talking of Dragons. Catherine also served as editor on Polycarp. She told me that they had been approached by a missions contact in the Middle East who wanted to arrange a translation of Polycarp into Turkish. At this point, we have no definite date for when this will happen, or when work on the translation will begin, but it is sufficient cause for thanks to know that it is being read by folks in that part of the world who would like to see the book in the language of the people. Even more interesting is the fact that Polycarp was the bishop of Smyrna, which survives today as the city of Izmir in modern Turkey. This may in fact account for part of the interest, as Polycarp would be better known there than in many parts of the world.

Omnibus III

2006-12-15T12:39:00.000-05:00

Last year, Doug Wilson and Marlin Detweiler graciously invited me to write an essay for their Omnibus literature curriculum, published by Marlin's Veritas Press. Omnibus I and Omnibus II, which were written for seventh and eighth graders, respectively, came out last year and the year before last. Omnibus III, including my contribution - an essay on Ernest Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea - ships on 22 December. This is a great resource for homeschools and classical schools, and I am honoured to be a part of it. The series also includes contributions from the likes of Doug Wilson, who also co-edited the book, Peter Leithart, George Grant, Steve Willkins, and many others.

Homeschooling I

2006-11-08T22:10:00.000-05:00

'I advise no one to place his child where the Scriptures do not reign paramount. Every institution in which men are not increasingly occupied with the Word of God must become corrupt...I am much afraid that schools will prove to be the great gates of hell unless they diligently labour in explaining the Holy Scriptures, engraving them in the hearts of youth.'

Martin Luther

This is the first of what I hope to be many posts telling the story of how we came to settle on homeschooling as the best option for the education of our little ones. I also plan to answer some questions and concerns about homeschooling (not that there aren’t many fine resources available for the curious: perhaps I will dedicate an entire post to listing some of these resources).

It began with a desire to come to grips with Scriptural teaching on raising our little ones. Not surprisingly, our first step on this path was the realisation that there was no bloody way we could ever send our kids to the public schools (hereafter, ‘government schools,’ which is more accurate). Why? One of the clearest teachings of Scripture is that parents, and especially fathers, are responsible for the education of their own children. Not the State. Not even the Church, primarily, but parents. Here are the key passages:

Now this is the commandment, the statutes and the rules that the LORD your God commanded me to teach you, that you may do them in the land to which you are going over, to possess it, that you may fear the LORD your God, you and your son and your son's son, by keeping all his statutes and his commandments, which I command you, all the days of your life, and that your days may be long… Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates. (Deuteronomy 6:1-2, 4-9)

Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord. (Ephesians 6:4)

Here the responsibility is given to fathers to teach their children. But that’s just talking about religious teaching, right? Government Schools should teach the important, er, the other stuff, right?

Wrong. The word translated ‘instruction’ in Ephesians 6 is the Greek word paideia. It was a very familiar word to Greeks, and meant, in essence, an entire life-and-worldview education, including everything from history to art to language to athletics to politics to family life to mathematics and science and philosophy. In our culture, this would also include how we view things like television, movies, and popular music. Everything, in other words. This, the father is to give to his children. This kind of education was not unknown to the classical culture. In ancient Rome, for example, Cato the Elder was known for teaching his son everything from military training to morals and academics. St Paul is saying that fathers should provide the same thing for their children, with this exception: it is ‘the paideia of the Lord,’ so this whole life worldview education should be from the perspective of the Christian faith.

This means that government schools are patently unbiblical, and never an option for Christians (never!), for how can the State, an agnostic institution, teach our children ‘the paideia of God’? But this also means, unavoidably, that homeschooling is the best option. Christian schools fill a much-needed place for those who have come to realise that they must immediately get their children out of the government schools, but with Christian schools, fathers and mothers can do little more than occasionally check in on what their children are being taught, since nearly all of the teaching has been delegated to others. This is hardly in keeping with the Scriptural admonition for parents to do this teaching.

There is really no need to answer the expected rejoinder that ‘most parents don’t know algebra, biology, history, Latin, etc, enough to be able to teach them to their children.' Suffice it to say that the curriculum options have rather come of age in recent years, and there are extremely sophisticated options developed with the learning parent in mind, so that the parent can first learn, and then teach.

‘School,’ then, as popularly conceived, was out. Douglas Gresham, stepson of C.S. Lewis, put it wonderfully:

'as someone who has been trained and works in the field of post-childhood abuse trauma, and has devoted considerable thought to the matter, I have formed the opinion that the entire concept of school is flawed. In fact, it is a terrible mistake.

'Look what we do: we observe what God has designed, a pair of parents, one of each sex, and two pairs of grandparents, often with a few aunts and uncles thrown in. In fact, a Family. This is the unit designed by God Himself for the specific purpose and ministry of raising each new generation.

'Then what do we do? We take the child and remove him from this carefully designed support group of parents and close family members, all of whom share a genetic bond with the child, and plunge him into a mass group of his peers, all of whom are as ignorant and as demanding as he is, with one adult stranger supervising. In terms of the psycho-emotional development of the child, this is complete madness…

'Satan hates what God loves and God loves us, Mankind. The basic unit of Mankind is the family, so Satan has targeted the Family, and he has been pretty successful, mostly by using “good intentions.” I think that “School” is one of his very clever inventions. As far as I am concerned, schools are for fish.' (quoted from http://www.homescholar.org/Lewis%20articles.htm)

I heartily concur with Gresham’s statement and am so glad to have someone of his calibre speaking the truth about this issue.

And so, we are homeschooling our three little ones (all of them, not just the oldest, who is now ‘school age’). This education begins, like life, at conception, and never ends. It involves what R.C. Sproul Jr has called ‘the three Gs’: who God is, what God has done, and what God requires. To accomplish this with the most breadth and depth, and in keeping with the implications of Paul’s ‘paideia of the Lord,’ we are using what is generally known as the Classical method of education. This is an academically rigorous approach to education that responds to children as they naturally develop, and the strengths of the various developmental phases through which they pass on their way to adulthood. My next post on this subject will look more closely at the Classical method, and what it means.

Some will say, ‘is homeschooling legal?’ Or, as it is sometimes put, when someone finds that we are not putting our children in school, or are not operating on the school-year schedule of the government or even private schools, ‘isn’t that against the law?’

Only a few years ago, homeschooling was actually illegal in many states. It is now legal in all fifty states. There are only light regulations for homeschoolers in my state (North Carolina). There shouldn’t be any, of course. Truly, we no longer have any idea what words like ‘liberty’ or ‘freedom’ mean, or we would never tolerate even the slightest attempt at governmental oversight of our children’s education.

But for now, homeschooling is legal throughout the United States. We as parents choose both the form and content of our children’s education, which is as it should be. We seek to do so in wisdom, weighing our options carefully, determined to make the best use of these precious years. Little children love to learn, and I have no desire to miss even the smallest opportunity to teach them what is true, good, and beautiful. In future posts, I plan to discuss the choices we have made both with regard to curricula, and to schedule. I would encourage every Christian parent reading this to consider carefully, above all, the question of whether to keep their children’s education in the hands of our enemies. A good place to start is Doug Wilson’s outstanding book, Excused Absence: Should Christian Kids Leave Public Schools? (Crux Press, 2001).

Brian McLaren vs The Middle Ages

2006-11-07T12:42:00.000-05:00

Click the title above to go to the original post that prompted me to write this. This was a comment I made on a blog called 'The Rabbit Hole.' The original post was an extended quote from Brian McLaren's book A New Kind of Christian, in which McLaren, in the course of making an unrelated point, attacks Medieval Christendom, which always amounts to fightin' words for me. Brian McLaren, who also wrote the book, A Generous Orthodoxy, is a popular author and leader of the so-called 'Emergent Church' movement. Here is my response in full.

Your quote from Brian McLaren: ‘But on a deeper level, if you told them [Medieval Christians] you didn't believe in the pope and you didn't accept that kings ruled by divine right and you didn't believe that God created a universe consisting of concentric spheres of ascending perfection, and if you let it slip that you agreed with Copernicus that the earth rotated around the sun, you would surely be tried as heretics and perhaps burned at the stake.’

Couldn’t let this outrageous statement pass unchallenged. While there is perhaps something to be said for McLaren’s larger point that people tend to see the Christian faith through the lens of whatever worldview they already hold (and that we are just as guilty of this as the Medievals or anyone else), McLaren’s view of Medieval Christendom is far too simplistic (as is his view of many things, sad to say), not to mention wildly inaccurate. A standard text (Norman Cantor’s The Encyclopaedia of the Middle Ages) that I picked up from a shelf at home, almost at random, is sufficient to demonstrate this, but others could just as easily be used.

Believing that ‘God created a universe consisting of concentric spheres of ascending perfection’ (he’s referring here to the Aristotelian/Ptolemaic model of Astronomy), though widely held, was not exactly a litmus test for Christian orthodoxy. While there was controversy over Copernicus’s theory, and later over Galileo’s support of Copernicus through his new invention of the telescope, there was no persecution of those who differed. And Copernicus was opposed as much by the scientific community of his day as by the ecclesiastical, a fact that is often forgotten. Further, it must be remembered that ‘…the breakthrough astronomical concept—that some bodies in the sky revolve around something other than the earth—had already been made by the beginning of the Middle Ages.’ (Cantor, The Encyclopaedia of the Middle Ages) It is true that scientists and churchmen at the time of both Copernicus and Galileo felt that the theory did not yet have sufficient proof (a fact that has been admitted by some in our own day) to establish it as factual. It is also true that they believed a heliocentric model contradicted Scripture, an idea that is now universally recognised (by the Church) as untrue. So, yes, the Church was in error, but, contra McLaren, no one was ever burned at the stake for believing in the Copernican system. This notion of McLaren’s that knowledge was somehow static during the Middle Ages, and that anyone who questioned that knowledge was immediately denounced or executed, is utterly ridiculous, even slanderous. The Middle Ages lasted a thousand years: does he truly think that the whole of that period can be reduced to his simplistic summaries?

McLaren’s statements regarding the divine right of kings needs serious adjusting as well. Cantor points out that there were several competing views of kingship in the Middle Ages, only one of which could be labelled as ‘the divine right of kings,’ a notion inherited from the Roman Empire. Indeed, it was in the Middle Ages that men first began to assert that constitutional law was higher than the king, and that the king’s will could be opposed if it went contrary to the law. The Gregorian Reform (late eleventh century) was a prime example of this. Cantor puts it this way:

‘…the papacy [began] talking about kings in a purely functional manner, comparing them to swine herders…vanguard ecclesiastical thinkers…developed liberal ideas aimed at limiting the claims and exercise of kingship. A king’s actions that flouted justice lost their validity, it was held. The law vested in the people and its constitutional assemblies stood higher than the king…These disputes about the nature, functioning, and limits of kingship were an important legacy of the Middle Ages…’

As regards the pope, the Medieval movement towards Conciliarism began to assert that the whole Church, assembled in ecumenical council, was a higher authority than the pope. Or we could consider the East-West schism of the eleventh century (1054) in which the whole of the Eastern Church (which had never truly accepted the sole authority of the bishop of Rome) finally rejected the rule of the Western pope. Or the Great Schism of the fourteenth century, in which there were two competing popes: one in Rome, and one in Avignon (later, there were three popes for a short period of time). During this Schism, Conciliarism was invoked to establish general councils as a higher authority than the pope, even reserving the right to declare and depose popes. Dante (died 1321), in his vision of Hell (The Divine Comedy), meets, not only such desperate sinners as thieves, gluttons, and even Judas Iscariot himself, but also popes! And William Langland (died 1385-1386), in his Piers Plowman, challenges Christians to trust more to God’s mercy than to Papal pardons and indulgences. Contra McLaren, one might almost say that anti-papacy, far from being foreign to the Medievals, was almost characteristic of the Middle Ages.

Also, McLaren said this: ‘To the Christian culture of medieval Europe, none of you today could be considered real Christians.’ The Medieval view of the Church was much higher (not to mention more Generous and more Orthodox) than McLaren is evidently capable of grasping. Are you baptised in the Triune name? Then you are (in a certain sense) a Christian, and would be considered so by Medieval men and women. Whether you are a good Christian is another question, perhaps, as it always is. For now, it is enough to say that McLaren’s view of our Medieval forefathers is anything but ‘Generous.’

Look, I know that all this is hardly the point McLaren was making, but it is never right to tamper with the truth (whether deliberately or through laziness in fact-checking) in order to make a good point. And this laziness has resulted in an unwarranted broadside attack against our fathers in the faith—something that McLaren seems to be well-known for.

William Chad Newsom
Familystorytelling.net

The Amish Are Right

2006-10-10T12:24:00.000-04:00

Below is an article written by my sometime editor (and the first man to pay me for writing - thanks, Warren!), Warren Smith of World Newspaper Publishing. Here Warren wrestles with the very different approach to 'youth ministry' one finds among the Amish and Mennonite Communities, in light of the recent tragic shootings of several Amish children. 'Different,' that is, from the manifestly failed system in most evangelical churches. Historical note: the Amish are the descendents (spiritual and lineal) of the Anabaptists, who first came to prominence as part of the 'Radical Reformation,' which believed that Luther and the other magisterial Reformers did not go far enough in purging the church of heresy and immorality. Some, like Thomas Müntzer, were radical and revolutionary, while the Amish and Mennonites, of course, are peaceful. Warren's article is excellent and right on target. Each Christian father and mother, especially those of us idenitifiable within the broader 'Evangelical' community, should take these words to heart.

Learning From The Amish

By Warren Smith

COMMENTARY--Since World War II, the evangelical church has spent a lot of time, money, and energy on activities designed to grow the church – from bus ministries in the 1960s to rock music in the 70s and 80s to direct mail campaigns today. Individual churches have grown dramatically, but the truth is that there are more people and fewer churches in America than at any time in the last half-century. And the influence of the church in this country is perhaps at an all-time low.

A couple of items in the headlines this week provide a hint as to why things have become this way. The first item that caught my eye was a "New York Times" article from Oct. 6 titled "Evangelicals Fear The Loss Of Their Teenagers." The article quoted a Barna survey saying that most evangelical teenagers leave their faith when they reach adulthood. The article also quoted Ron Luce, who leads a ministry called Teen Mania. Luce told the "Times," "We’ve become post-Christian America, like post-Christian Europe. We’ve been working as hard as we know how to work — everyone in youth ministry is working hard — but we’re losing."

Of course, I think a case could be made – and this is one of the ironies here -- that the REASON we’re losing our teens is because we have "outsourced" the discipleship of our children to ministries such as Teen Mania. It’s much harder to talk with our children about Jesus than to send them to someone who does that for a living. And as long as their friends are there, and you keep the program moving along, the kids don’t seem to notice that they’re not getting the best of their parents.

In short, we lose our teens because they eventually grow up and wise up at least enough to realize they’ve been cheated by their parents and by the church.

By the way, Teen Mania does about $25-million a year in revenue, mostly from product sales and conference registrations. Maybe my journalistic cynicism has gotten the better of me, but I’m growing weary of millionaire ministers telling me how bad things are so I will send them money – money they will use with good intentions, but which is actually -- clear-headed analysis shows -- making things worse.

Compare that approach to "youth ministry" to what we saw from the Amish this week. I learned more about Jesus from the Amish grandfather who forgave the killer of his grandchildren than I have learned from many a seminar or survey. The families of the victims embraced the family of the killer, even inviting them to the funeral and setting up a fund for the killer’s wife and children.

This week I interviewed Dr. Donald Kraybill, one of the nation’s leading experts on the Amish and Mennonite cultures, and he told me that the Amish don’t have the problem that evangelicals are wringing their hands over, this problem of their kids leaving their faith. In fact, more than 90 percent of their children embrace their parents’ religion when they reach adulthood. And it’s not because these Amish fathers and grandfathers are trying to be "relevant." Just the opposite. These Amish kids embrace their parents’ faith because they spend time with them, and know their hearts, and ultimately discover that the faith of their fathers is the real deal.

I’m not quite ready to give my car away and join the Amish or the Old Order Mennonites, but you’ve got to admit that they’re doing something right. The tragic shooting of 10 Amish children in Pennsylvania clearly demonstrates that you can’t fully insulate yourself from the evils of the world, but one of the reasons this story has become an international sensation is precisely because it happens so rarely in such communities, and when it did happen, we learned how genuine and deep the faith of these people really is.

As evangelicals we’ve got to remember that the Great Commission tells us not to make converts, but to make disciples. Jesus said to teach all things I’ve commanded. We evangelicals – and I include myself in that number – have become too enamored with what I call body count evangelism. How many people walked the aisle this week? How many people showed up at our conferences? How much money are we taking in and spending? What we should be concerned about is how many of us are still standing firm for Jesus when the times get hard.

For the people in Nickel Mine, Pennsylvania, the times got very hard indeed this week. But from what I can see, they also have a faith that will see them through. A faith about which many of us – even those of us who call ourselves committed, evangelical Christians – still have a lot to learn.
---------
Warren Smith is the publisher of the Evangelical Press News Service. You can e-mail him at warren.smith@thecharlotteworld.com

St Anne's Pub Interview

2006-10-06T12:38:00.000-04:00

Late last year I was privileged to be interviewed by St Anne's Pub, a fine audio journal dealing with issues of theological and cultural importance. This interview was their # 1 downloaded item during December of 2005 (timing was the key here: we talked a lot about C.S. Lewis and The Chronicles of Narnia, and the interview was released around the time of the film version of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe). Stuart Bryan and I talked about my latest book, Talking of Dragons, the use of magic in stories, the Bible and mythology, the Santa Claus myth, Lewis and his friend J.R.R. Tolkien, and much more. The interview was part of St Anne's 'On Tap' feature, which used to be available only for a short time, so when they took it off the site, I added the MP3s of the interviews here on this website. Subsequently, there were problems with the files and they have been unavailable for a while, now. But St Anne's has now reposted all their 2005 'On Tap' features, including the three-part interview they did with me. You can listen to the interview here. My interview is found on entries # 5, 6, and 7. If you want to know more about my writing, and why I do the things I do, this is the best place to start. Thanks again to Stuart, Michael Collender, Joost Nixon, and all the fine folks at St Anne's Pub.

Legends for Little Ones

2006-07-24T18:49:00.000-04:00

I recently completed a manuscript for a series of books for younger children, Legends for Little Ones. These books, inspired by a reading time with my son, William, are simple retellings of great legends from history and literature, aimed at children anywhere from birth to around five or six years old. They are intended to be read to children by their parents, and for young readers to read on their own. The first twelve cover legends from the lives of Ignatius of Antioch, St George, St Patrick, St Brendan, King Arthur, Cædmon, Boniface, Alfred the Great, Robin Hood, Robert the Bruce, and Martin Luther. I am currently talking to two publishers, both of whom have very kindly expressed an interest in the series. And I have been wonderfully blessed to receive an endorsement of the books from one of my favourite authors and speakers, Dr George Grant. I will post more about Legends for Little Ones later, but for now, here are Dr Grant's gracious words:

'In an age where heroes are few and far between and when the great stories of our Christian legacy are either lost and forgotten or despised and repressed, Legends for Little Ones is a rich gift to us all. These stories are, as you will soon discover, both timeless and timely. So, curl up in a big chair, pull your little ones into your lap, and discover anew the glories of our magnificent legacy of beauty, goodness, and truth.'

Dr George Grant, director of The King's Meadow Study Center, and author of The Christian Almanac, The Micah Mandate, and The Patriot's Handbook.

Tolkien and Lewis: Moses in Narnia?

2006-06-23T15:08:00.000-04:00

Here's something from my notes a year ago when I was writing Talking of Dragons. This is also in the book itself.

Recently, it occurred to me that there is a Bible story told in miniature in The Last Battle. This is nothing unusual: Lewis' writings are filled with this sort of imaginative re-telling (the story of the Garden of Eden in Perelandra; the Tower of Babel in That Hideous Strength; the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe), usually with a creative twist, but this is one I've not noticed before.It involves Tirian, last king of Narnia in The Last Battle. Notice some key facts about his story:

1. He is of the royal house in a great country.

2. His people have become enslaved by a foreign power.

3. He sees one of the slave-drivers beating one of his countrymen.

4. He flies into a rage and kills the slave-driver.

5. He flees for his life.

6. This act causes him to lose his noble and royal position.

7. He returns to lead his people to freedom.

Sound familiar? It should, for it mirrors the story of Moses as recounted in the book of Exodus. But remember: Lewis usually adds a twist when incorporating these Biblical narratives into his fiction. In this case, it involves the entrance into the 'Promised Land': Aslan's Country. Moses is forbidden (at least for the time being) to enter the Land, but Tirian, in this apocalyptic reversal, does enter the Land. Of course, the Land he enters is the True Narnia, of which the Narnia of Tirian's world (and the Caanan of Moses's world) is but a type and a shadow. Through Aslan (Christ, the greater New Covenant counterpart to Moses), we have been guaranteed entrance into that Country by faith alone. When we do get there, we shall surely find, like Tirian, that, 'the term is over: the holidays have begun. The dream is ended: this is the morning.' (The Complete Chronicles of Narnia, 524)

Contact Us

2006-06-23T10:11:00.000-04:00

Email me with any questions, or to schedule a speaking engagement for your church, home school group, or book study group: chad@familystorytelling.net

Polycarp: The Crown of Fire

2006-06-22T12:49:00.000-04:00

Here is information on my first book, Polycarp: The Crown of Fire.

Praise for Polycarp: The Crown of Fire

'A stirring read for young people.'
Reformation Heritage Books.

'...very well researched and blends fact with fiction to make an exciting adventure story for seven to 12-year-olds, set in the days of the persecution of the early church by the Roman Empire.'
Wendy Mason, Evangelicals Now

'Let yourself be transported to a world far different than our own through the writings of Newsom. It is a very insightful lesson.'
Trisha Bleau, Christianscoop.com

This was my first book, a children's historical novel (though it is a book, I trust, that adults can enjoy as well) on the life of one of the most famous martyrs in church history. It is the third in the Torchbearers series (novels on the lives of Christian martyrs) published by Christian Focus in Scotland. Click the linked title above above to buy the book at the CBD (Christian Book Distributors) website, where they also have a summary and an excerpt from the book. You can also buy or order it through local bookstores.

Reviews

Polycarp: The Crown of Fire

So few people understand what happened in early Christian history. They have never even heard of names like Polycarp. They need to read books like this one in the TorchBearers series, which is amazing, so that they can meet these great figures in Christian history. These people, like Polycarp, have amazing stories to tell, if only we are given the chance to learn them and read. Author William Newsom has given us that chance now. He has shared his research and learning, as well as his creative imagination, as he has put together this story on Polycarp. Readers are introduced to the early church during the time of the Roman occupation and the extreme persecution that drove the Christians underground in to the catacombs. Let yourself be transported to a world far different than our own through the writings of Newsom. It is a very insightful lesson.

Trisha Bleau, Christianscoop.com

Faithful to death

Polycarp was the bishop of Smyrna and a disciple of the apostle John. It was to Polycarp’s church that John wrote in the book of Revelation: ‘Do not fear what you are about to suffer... Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life.’ And suffer he did, choosing martyrdom in his old age rather than denying Christ.

The book is very well researched and blends fact with fiction to make an exciting adventure story for seven to 12-year-olds, set in the days of the persecution of the early church by the Roman Empire.

To help separate fact from fiction in the telling of the story, there is a time line at the back of the book of actual historical events, and a synopsis of the lives of some of the characters who appear in the story.

I have a little gripe about the presentation of the book. The print is very small and the cover uninspiring, but these things are reflected in the price. I also wonder if the author has tried to cover too much ground for young readers by addressing some of the conflicts faced by the early church, interesting to adults but perhaps detracting at times from the excitement of the story.
Nevertheless, we all, young and old alike, need to be reminded of early church history and of those who laid down their lives for the gospel that the legacy of truth might be passed on to future generations.

Wendy Mason, Park Evangelical Church, Stoke on Trent

G.K. Chesterton

2006-06-20T10:14:00.000-04:00

I recently listened to a great lecture on G. K. Chesterton by the inimitable George Grant. Having heard it, I rushed, as any sensible person would, to read some Chesterton. I re-read his novel (actually he says it's a nightmare, not a novel) The Man Who Was Thursday. I got more out of it the second time around, as you might expect. Since then, I have read The Flying Inn, Four Faultless Felons, and The Everlasting Man. Chesterton wrote everything: literary criticism, social and political commentary, theology, epic poetry, novels, detective stories (The Father Brown stories, which no mystery lover should deprive himself of), and much more. He is unique in the world, and there is no excuse for a Christian (especially) who, in the Providence of God, lives after the time of Chesterton, not to read this remarkable writer. Besides, he is immensely entertaining. You can also read him without spending money, for much of his work is now in the public domain and available online (click here for a list of his online works, though I hasten to add that a bookshelf or home library without Chesterton is rather like Christmas without gifts and good food). I am also a big fan of his epic poem, The Ballad of the White Horse, about King Alred the Great, which you can also find at the website I just mentioned. And a fine site for an introduction to the man and his work is the American Chesterton Society, for which click here.

Talking of Dragons

2006-06-19T17:09:00.000-04:00

Here's some information on my most recent book: Talking of Dragons: The Children's Books of J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis.

Praise for Talking of Dragons

'This readable book is excellent for parents who wish to have a deep quality of communication with their children. It will also be very useful for librarians and primary school teachers, and those in churches who have responsibilities with children. The author has a firm grasp of the books of Tolkien and Lewis for children, and why they are such powerful examples of Christian writing for today’s world. William Chad Newsom reminds us to savour and treasure the work of two great storytellers who were masters of incarnating Christian meaning in powerful and enduring symbols..'

Colin Duriez, author of The C.S. Lewis Encyclopedia, J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis: The Story of a Friendship, Tolkien and The Lord of the Rings, A Field Guide to Narnia, and The C.S. Lewis Chronicles.

‘William Chad Newsom has accomplished some very important work with this book. Many modern Christian parents do not grasp the importance of story to their children's spiritual and moral health. But not just any story will do. Using the stories of two of the twentieth century's most gifted and important story-tellers, C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien, Newsom provides very shrewd and practical help to parents who want to grow in their love of story, along with their children.’

Douglas Wilson, minister of Christ Church, Moscow, Idaho, author of Recovering the Lost Tools of Learning: An Approach to Distinctively Christian Education, Reforming Marriage, and the CD study series, What I Learned in Narnia.

‘Mr. Newsom offers us many excellent insights into the minds of Tolkien and Lewis. Most importantly, Newsom understands the meaning of story for a Christian…Stories—along with words—contain immense power, and we should use that power, aided by Grace, wisely. When we do so, Newsom reminds us, we pursue the Good, the True, and the Beautiful. And, the words we read—for good or ill—have power…Therefore, we must always be vigilant—as parents, teachers, and Christians—about the books we read, the books our children read, and the books our friends read. As long as we rely on the Grace of the Logos, we will do well and good, and the whole of western and Christian civilization may very well be renewed, refreshed, and reformed. Armed with imagination and devout dedication to Christ, Tolkien, Lewis, and Newsom are leading the way. Swords drawn, let us follow…and slay dragons.’

From the foreword by Bradley J. Birzer, author of J. R. R. Tolkien’s Sanctifying Myth: Understanding Middle-earth

Christian Focus Publications released Talking of Dragons, my second book, in November, 2005 (U.K.) and December in the U.S., just in time for the release of the much-anticipated film version of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. This book is a family-centered introduction to the children's writings of two great authors: J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis. Included are chapters on The Hobbit and The Chronicles of Narnia, but the book also looks at lesser known children's writings, such as Tolkien's Roverandom, Mr Bliss, and The Father Christmas Letters, as well as Lewis' Letters to Children, and Boxen. Other chapters explore the friendship between Lewis and Tolkien, their storytelling methods, a Biblical view of Fairy Tales, and more. My publisher retained the services of famed Lewis and Tolkien scholar, Colin Duriez, to edit the book. Duriez is the author of many books on Lewis and Tolkien, including The C.S. Lewis Encyclopedia, Tolkien and C.S. Lewis, A Field Guide to Narnia, and The Inklings Handbook. He also appears on the behind the scenes features of Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings DVDs. Mr Duriez was most helpful and also very graciously provided an endorsement, which is on the cover of the book (and is also printed above). Click the linked title to buy the book at Amazon.com. Below is the publisher's summary of Talking of Dragons, which appears on the back cover of the book. Following that is an excerpt from the book.

How good are your story-telling skills?

The record-breaking success of the films of J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings and the recent release of C.S. Lewis’s The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe has meant that parents, perhaps unfamiliar with these stories, have found themselves in a culture awash with references to ‘Middle Earth’ and ‘Narnia’.

This book is for those who want to know more about the stories of these great authors. Those already acquainted with the writings of Tolkien and Lewis will find it a fascinating insight into their friendship and subject matter but what William Chad Newsom seeks to do is introduce these books to new readers, with a particular emphasis on the role of parents as storytellers.

Each chapter contains advice on how to get the most from each book when parents read them to, or together with, their children.

Lewis once wrote a snippet of poetry to Tolkien in which he refers to the importance of ‘talking of dragons’: of capturing the imagination of young minds. This delightful book explains that if parents want their children to grow up trusting in God then they, too, must ‘talk of dragons’: stretching their children’s imagination outside the materialistic world into a spiritual one.

Full of suggestions and insights Talking of Dragons will prove a joy to your family as you discover the wonderful tales of Lewis and Tolkien.

Chapter Four
Starting at Home: The Children's Writings of J. R. R. Tolkien

It is true that the age of childhood-sentiment has produced some delightful books (especially charming, however, to adults) of the fairy kind or near to it; but it has also produced a dreadful undergrowth of stories written or adapted to what was or is conceived to be the measure of children's minds and needs.
J. R. R. Tolkien

It seems strange to imagine, but the very idea of children's books is a recent historical invention. The late Kathryn Lindskoog, who wrote many books on the writings of C. S. Lewis, notes that, for most of history, "...there was no such thing as a children's book. There were no children's writers at all. People told stories to children, but no one wrote a storybook for them to enjoy until 250 years ago. Books for children came along like an afterthought in the book world."
There has not always been a "market" for such books, and for a very good reason: storytelling was once primarily the domain of the family. Fathers and Mothers told stories to their children, who in turn told them to their children. Stories were a major part of the culture that was passed down from generation to generation.

This notion of a storytelling culture, handed down from father to son, from mother to daughter, may seem strange to those of us raised in the modern world. After all, our diversions and amusements come packaged according to highly specific demographic categories: Dad reads his mystery thriller, Mom her paperback romance, brother his Harry Potter, and sister her Sweet Valley High book. Each member of the family has his or her own music, movies, clothing styles, magazines, schedule, and life. We are no longer families, with unique family identities; we are merely loosely connected groups of individuals who happen to live under the same roof.

It was not always so. Families once read together, enjoying the same stories, songs, and foods. They were themselves a part of a larger culture that supported them in this, but each family was itself a little culture, developing its own traditions, rituals, and memories. Today, Mom and Dad have no stories that were handed down to them (except maybe their memories of Disney films), and so they have nothing to pass on to their little ones. Today, many children's books are written by "specialists," who may or may not have children of their own. Child psychologists write books that are the product of much research, ensuring that each reader will have age-appropriate storylines, themes, characters, and vocabularies. Never mind that the stories are often as thin as the paper they are printed on: the scientific age has declared its findings, and one discovery is that parents are no longer capable, apart from professional assistance, of telling stories to their children.

One of the goals of this book is to encourage a culture of storytelling in families, and a good way to do this is by highlighting those authors who wrote, not only for "children" as a class, but for specific children, whose names and faces the author knew (usually because they belonged to his own children). This was once more common than now: A. A. Milne wrote his famous Pooh stories for his son, Christopher Robin. George MacDonald, the famous nineteenth century Scottish novelist and fairy-tale writer, read to his children, and his stories, in addition to their wider publication, were handed down through his family as well. His granddaughter remembered, 'My love for my grandfather's Fairy Tales was started at an early age - about five, I think - because my father (Bernard MacDonald) read them to me at night as bedtime stories. As I grew older, the children's books...became very familiar to me and my small friends.'

One of the best examples of a children's writer who wrote primarily for his own children is none other than J. R. R. Tolkien. All of Tolkien's published children's writings were, in their origin, stories he made up for his own children. Indeed, several were not published until after his death, when demand for his writings had increased dramatically. Tolkien made up stories for his children in a variety of situations: when his eldest son, John, could not sleep, he told him stories about Carrots, 'a boy with red hair who climbed into a cuckoo clock and went off on a series of strange adventures.' Every year, as Christmas neared, he would compose a letter from Father Christmas, addressed to the Tolkien children. These letters were posthumously collected and published as The Father Christmas Letters. The Tolkien family's purchase of their first automobile sparked the tale of Mr Bliss, who has a series of misadventures related to his car. When his son, Michael, lost a favourite toy dog on the beach, Tolkien spun a tale about just such a dog who, having been turned into a toy by a wizard, is lost by a little boy on a beach, and then embarks on a variety of adventures on the moon and under the sea. This story was published in 1998, twenty-five years after Tolkien's death, as Roverandom. And of course, the most famous of Tolkien's children's books is the story of Bilbo Baggins, and his adventure recapturing the treasure of the Dwarves from Smaug, the Dragon--a story known to the world as The Hobbit, and which later led to the creation of his master work, The Lord of the Rings.

It is worth noting that Tolkien had no desire to be a 'children's author' as we usually define it, once stating that he had no particular interest in writing for children. Yet, as we have seen, he did have an interest in four children, in particular: John, Michael, Christopher, and Priscilla Tolkien. To them, not to children considered as a target readership, he gave his ever-expanding gift for tale-spinning. But his views on writing for children did change over the years. When he wrote The Hobbit, for example, he was still under what he saw as a modern fallacy - the idea that fairy tales are especially, or perhaps uniquely, for children. In his famous essay, 'On Fairy-Stories'Tolkien attacked that notion, and his more mature reflection resulted in the fairy-story known as The Lord of the Rings.

Tolkien's approach turns modern wisdom on its head: his children's writings would probably be judged, to some extent, as 'over the heads' of most children (sadly, there may some hint of truth in this) because of the vocabulary and perhaps even the themes. On the other hand, The Lord of the Rings, certainly much more of an adult book than its predecessor, and, by the author's own admission, not written for children in particular at all, seems, nevertheless, to hold an appeal for children. Tolkien once wrote that he had heard of even young children reading or listening to The Lord of the Rings, and expressed his hope that it would help build their vocabularies. As a life-long reader of Tolkien, I can testify to both the appeal to children, and the aid to vocabulary. I had read The Hobbit (far and away the favourite book of my youth) some nine times by the time I was twelve, at which tender age I read The Lord of the Rings for the first time.

The worthiness of Tolkien's children's stories is in part a result of the covenantal context that led to their creation - again, writing for the children of one's own blood rather than attempting to break into the market of kid's books. But writing stories for one's own children is counter-intuitive in the Age of Specialists. Whereas modern child psychologists argue, in a sense, from universals to particulars ('this is what children, as a class, want and need; therefore, individual children, whoever they are, will like it'), Tolkien worked from particulars--his own children--to universals--children in general. That is, the stories were a success with John, Michael, Christopher, and Priscilla, who, as normal, typical children, turned out to be very good indicators of what millions of other children would like. Not, of course, that Tolkien told the stories as some kind of advance market research; he just wanted to delight his children. And because this was his aim, he was able to write stories that delighted many others as well.

The Red Crosse Knight

2006-06-19T12:59:00.000-04:00

The knight of the Redcrosse when him he spide,
Spurring so hote with rage dispiteous...

Edmund Spenser, The Faerie Queene, Book 1, Canto 2.

Here's William, the Knight of the Red Crosse (or, mayhap, the Red Eye).

Me and the Boys

2006-06-19T12:56:00.000-04:00

Another favourite from Nathanael's birthday. My Two Sons (sounds almost good enough for a sitcom title) and I at the hospital. William Alfred Alexander Newsom greets his little brother, Nathanael Cædmon Charles Newsom.

Nathanael

2006-06-19T12:48:00.000-04:00

'He married a fat widow and had a passel of kids on the Blanco river. And you might as well have done the same since you don't want to chase buffalo.' (Augustus McCrae in the film version of Lonesome Dove.

My brother Chris and I have debated the exact boundaries of a 'passel' (Merriam-Webster simply has 'a large number or amount') but he insists that with three kids I'm closing in fast. Here's a picture from Nathanael's birthday last month: first time reading Holy Scripture to our new little one.

Media: Connection Article

2006-06-19T12:30:00.000-04:00

By day, I am a mild-mannered customer service trainer for an insurance company. They're a good bunch of folks to work with, not least because they seem to take a real interest in one's life outside the workday. As an example, when my colleagues heard that I had published a couple of books, they showed support in several ways, including setting up a couple of in-house book signings, and by publishing the article below in The Connection, our customer service newsletter. So, in the bio category, here it is (thanks to Liz Plummer for a fine article and for permission to reprint):

Spotlight on William Chad Newsom, Author

We’re all familiar with New Year’s resolutions and the process of setting personal and professional goals. Some goals are perennial favorites – lose weight, exercise more; others are a bit more unusual. William Chad Newsom, a Customer Service Training Specialist, set a personal goal five years ago, to work on getting a book published. And he’s succeeded – twice, so far.

Chad has always had a strong interest in storytelling, and has been writing poetry, songs, short stories, and novels since childhood. After completing some projects and submitting manuscripts for consideration, he researched a publishing website and noticed that they were looking for authors to complete a series of youth books on Christian martyrs. He submitted a proposal for a book on the life of Polycarp. The publisher asked for a few chapters, liked what they saw, and sent him a contract to complete the book. The result is Polycarp: The Crown of Fire.

Next, Chad ventured into Narnia and The Shire:

“I had an idea to write a book on C.S. Lewis and his friend J.R.R. Tolkien. Originally it was an idea for a biography, and that idea ended up changing a lot. I’ve been a fan of both writers since I was a kid, and I enjoyed The Chronicles of Narnia, The Lord of the Rings and some of their other writings – they both wrote in a pretty wide range of categories.” Chad wrote an entire manuscript called Talking of Dragons: The Children’s Books of C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien and submitted it to the publisher for review. This non-fiction book explores The Chronicles of Narnia and The Lord of the Rings, as well as some lesser-known works by both authors. Chad also discusses the authors’ personal friendship and the Christian themes that wind through their collective works.

“I’ve described it as a family book, in the belief that one of the best ways to teach our children is through good stories, and therefore that we ought to try to create a culture of storytelling in our homes. This book takes the children’s writings of J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis and uses them as a starting place. They’re a great place to start; these authors lived only a few decades ago and are pretty accessible to modern readers. And they’re a good starting place to go from there to get into some other great tales and make that a great feature of family life. The book takes these stories and introduces them to families. At the end of every chapter we have some family activities, suggestions for ways to take these stories and let them spark creativity in the home, to get kids interested in writing their own stories or creating other works of art, doing things with the family.”

Some writers spend their entire adult lives trying, without success, to sell a manuscript. How did Chad manage to get 32 articles and two books published? Apparently, it’s not as easy as he makes it seem: “It’s a process of much rejection and a little bit of success. You have to do a lot of homework, you have to dig into what’s out there, which publishers publish what kind of book, what their requirements are for submission of a manuscript. You have to know what kind of book you’re writing, who publishes it, and you just have to be fairly diligent in sending out manuscripts. I remember reading about one writer who sent a book to 26 different publishers and got rejected every time, and the 27th sent him a contract.”

Chad recently completed a contribution to Omnibus, a series of books that Chad describes as “a classical school literature curriculum.” Veritas Press will publish Omnibus III, including Chad’s contribution, later this year. In addition, he’s also working on a series of “board books” – those short, colorful cardboard books for toddlers. “Even little kids can understand stories and the flow of a narrative – people don’t give them enough credit. I’m writing a series of board books on the great legends, everything from Robin Hood to St. George and the Dragon, told on a very simple level, just as an introduction, and then maybe in a few more years, they can graduate to a more thorough rendering of the story.” And Chad is working, along with his father, on his first adult novel, which is in the very early planning stages.

Chad has also found time to create his own website, called Logres Hall (www.logreshall.com). This site features a variety of articles and interviews, including an interview with John Granger, author of Looking for God in Harry Potter, which explores Christian themes in J.K. Rowling’s series of Harry Potter books.
-- Liz Plummer

Grace and William

2006-06-19T10:10:00.000-04:00

Thought I'd post the occasional picture. Here's my two oldest (of three), Victoria Grace and William Alfred Alexander, in the chapel of our church this past Easter. This was just a few weeks before the birth of their baby brother, Nathanael Cædmon Charles. Pics of him soon...

Chris Newsom Music I

2006-06-11T00:39:00.000-04:00

My brother Chris's web site is linked off to the right. The picture is of myself (bass guitar, far left), my other brother Sean on guitar, Chris in the middle on lead vocals and guitar, and our friend Kerry Lewis (whose blog is also linked on the right) on guitar, performing year before last, I think (it's not us playing on the demos, though). You can hear Chris's music by visiting his website. Enjoy the music.

Harry Potter III Commentary on the John Granger Interview

2006-06-10T22:32:00.000-04:00

First, thanks again to John for taking time to engage in this conversation. Here are some additional thoughts inspired by John’s answers. I have told John I would print anything he might like to say in response to these thoughts. John’s words are in bold print, and my answers are in normal type.

Ms. Rowling is a Postmodern writer, and, as such, she not only combines genres with remarkable flair (there are at least 10 working simultaneously in the books)…A good question for future consideration (by all involved) is whether Rowling is Postmodern in any other ways. I say this because I believe that Postmodernism is, on the whole, a bad thing (for an interesting online discussion of this issue, I would encourage you to click here and start reading from the bottom of the page). ...she certainly doesn’t give a rip about conventional mental categories or ‘metanarratives,’ something like ‘evil’ to her and the bulk of her readers. I assume John is talking about the traditional use of witches as a ‘metanarrative’ of evil, rather than the concept of evil itself. ‘Good witch,’ consequently, is not the ‘square circle’ it is to those readers trying their bearings exclusively from the Levitical texts (and applying them selectively…). While he has a point here, it’s worth noting that I was appealing, not to the Levitical texts, but to literary history (i.e., George MacDonald).

Symbols work or they don’t. Inverting them is nonsensical, at least in the examples you suggest. A symbol of the resurrection like a stag’s antlers regenerating or a phoenix’s rebirth doesn’t transfer to a psychic, fallen reality but to a spiritual and contranatural one.’ I would agree that inverting symbols is often ‘nonsensical’, which is why I am troubled by Rowling’s inversion of the witch-symbol. As I have noted elsewhere, I don’t think this is enough to condemn the Potter stories, but I think the question is at least worth pursuing a little further.

I’m a little slow but you’ve lost me here. There are Potions that are involved but far and away most of the magic is done by mechanical voice command in spells and charms. This is incantational, ‘harmonizing’ magic with the fabric of the created world (i.e., with the Creative Word) – nothing laborious or scientific about it. If anything it is a contrast with technology and science. In general, I agree, though Rowling does seem to expend a lot of her creativity on things like ear-wax flavoured jelly beans and appearance-altering potions. And the Potions were my primary example of the ‘scientific’ sort of magic. But I do think that there are clues in HBP that seem to suggest that the cauldrons and wands are only for beginners, which may be a good sign.

Ms. Rowling is simultaneously laughing at New Age divination types and allowing that there is more to the world (including understanding of time and space) than is dreamt of in worldly philosophies, Horatio. Even risible characters like Trelawney have their moments and the story is wonderfully nuanced this way; again, qua Postmodern, she is fighting any sort of pigeon holing and easy categorization and dismissal. Actually, this is as good an answer as I have heard to this question, though I begin to get edgy at Rowling’s Postmodern refusal to be categorised. Why this fear of forms? Sure, take the form and be creative, original with it, but there’s nothing wrong with conventions: a murder mystery with no one being killed is not a murder mystery, however creative it may seem at the time. But the answer to the divination question is sound enough, though I still think it inadvisable to use such a loaded term as divination when there are so many other ways to go. Tolkien, the anti-modernist, used the word ‘magic’ only with a great deal of reluctance, and only because he knew no other term to use, and he went to a great deal of trouble to qualify the word. Rowling, the postmodernist, seems to use words like ‘divination’ almost cavalierly, even with readily available alternatives (Prophecy? Foresight? Revelation?) and with, seemingly, no attempt at qualification.

I’d differ with you first on ‘many moments of true beauty and high nobility;’ that’s a bit of a stretch. More to the point of your question, though, I wonder if the reason Ms. Rowling’s books enjoy the success they do, isn’t because their heroic, magical characters – sacrificial, faithful, and loving – are not so much like their readers are. Tolkien is magisterial, but he isn’t especially accessible, is he, except in the Jackson screen translation? I wrote back to John, explaining that by ‘beauty and nobility’, I was talking about things like the Patronus charm, Harry's mother's sacrificial love as a protective shield, and the times when Harry or others (Dumbledore in HBP) put their lives on the line for the sake of friends. While not as high and lofty as, say, Sam Gamgee, or St George, these are glimpses of beauty and nobility. At the same time, I am willing to admit I probably over-inflated the language a bit. On reflection, I would probably simply say, ‘there are examples of beauty and nobility’ in the books. As to attributing Rowling’s success to how similar her characters are to her readers (and the implication that such is not the case in Tolkien), I can only say that John is undoubtedly correct. But I hasten to add that this is the very reason I like Tolkien so much better. Frankly, a book where the characters were just like me would be rather boring. Give me the unstained nobility of Aragorn or Faramir (which means skipping Jackson’s vacillating versions) any day. Is it so much for us to believe that such lives are possible? Then we have forgotten Athanasius, Luther, Lee, and TR. But I hesitate even to mention this, because I actually think some of this sort of valour is evident in the Potter stories—it is worth emulating, and Rowling is to be commended for it.

Rowling is renovating a slew of literary genres from alchemical drama to morals and manners fiction a la Austen for a postmodern audience and criticizing aspects of postmodernity (much as the modernist writers in the Inklings did the same for their period). I do hope this is so, for Postmodernism has a face just waiting to be slapped around. She is more inviting and more in touch with readers today than Oxford dons from the trenches of WWI. Should we be surprised at this? Perhaps not. It is understandable, in a way, that someone from our own time would be more ‘in touch’ with contemporary readers. Perhaps Lewis was thinking of his own posthumous self (nah) when he wrote that ‘It is a good rule, after reading a new book, never to allow yourself another new one till you have read an old one in between. If that is too much for you, you should at least read one old one to every three new ones.’ Why is this? All of us, Lewis wrote, ‘need the books that will correct the characteristic mistakes of our own period. And that means the old books.’ In fact, Lewis went so far as to write, ‘if [a reader] must read only the new or only the old, I would advise him to read the old. And I would give him this advice precisely because he is an amateur and therefore much less protected than the expert against the dangers of an exclusive contemporary diet. A new book is still on its trial and the amateur is not in a position to judge it. It has to be tested against the great body of Christian thought down the ages, and all its hidden implications (often unsuspected by the author himself) have to be brought to light.’ Huh. I wonder how many Harry Potter fans read anything old while waiting for Rowling’s latest? By the way, these are just thoughts and observations, not an answer to anything John wrote. As a teacher of the great books himself, John is one of those out there encouraging the reading of old books. But as I look around at the Harry Potter world, I wonder how many will be encouraged to go on from there to read Spenser or Malory. Or even Tolkien and Lewis. Perhaps some will—Rowling certainly includes elements of an older world, a world that is certainly at war with the modern world in many ways—and yet I wonder if the very elements that make Rowling so accessible to the Postmoderns will only increase her readers’ immunity to the glories of the old books. As John himself noted (see below), many Potter fans are only interested in questions of ‘shipping’ (the dating/romantic relationships between the various characters: Harry and Hermione? Or Ron and Hermione? Harry and Ginny?), and who have thus reduced the books to a sort of mythopoeic soap opera (an unwarranted reduction, I’ll admit). Still, it’s worth remembering Lewis’s words, especially in light of the fact that the Harry Potter books have not had time to ‘be tested against the great body of Christian thought down the ages, and [to have] all its hidden implications…brought to light.’ In fact, even Lewis and Tolkien are too contemporary by this standard, though we do have a little historical space in which to evaluate them. But even these great authors need the correction of older books, as Lewis himself admitted: ‘Wherever you find a little study circle of Christian laity you can be almost certain that they are studying not St. Luke or St. Paul or St. Augustine or Thomas Aquinas or Hooker or Butler, but M. Berdyaev or M. Maritain or M. Niebuhr or Miss Sayers or even myself. Now this seems to me topsy-turvy.’

John and I engaged in a bit of email banter on the question of 'accessibility'. Here is that brief exchange:

Chad: As to your question about whether Tolkien is accessible beyond Jackson's movies, 100 million readers would seem to say yes, would they not?

John: 100 million divided by 3 divided by 50 is JRRT's per year of sale rate (I doubt he was anywhere near 100 million, too, before the movies). Go ahead and compare that to Ms. Rowling's figures similarly calculated and that none of her books have been used in classrooms or have multiple critical editions(300 million divided by 6 divided by 7) and I think you have an accessibility quotient. Tolkien is to Rowling as Sophocles is to Shakespeare - there's very little for the groundlings in Tolkien.

Chad: No argument on the sales: everyone knows that Rowling is a record-breaking author. The reasons for that are complex, and you have hit on some of them, I believe. My only point is that Tolkien has also survived as one of the most widely-read authors in history, and that this would probably not have happened had there been 'very little for the groundlings'. We've all heard the 'Author of the Century' accolades piled on this Anglo-Saxon professor, and I can testify to having first read The Lord of the Rings (and gotten a lot out of it) as a child. Tolkien, in his Letters, wrote that he had heard of children reading The Lord of the Rings, or having it read to them, and that he hoped it would increase their vocabularies. This raises an additional point: Tolkien is more complex, and therefore harder to read (though not objectively hard, I would say) than Rowling. But, as someone once said, raking leaves is easier than digging for diamonds, though you only end up with leaves - which is not to say that Rowling only offers leaves, but that there is more to be gained from reading Tolkien. This should be self-evident, given the extent of Tolkien's sub-creative efforts with Middle-earth. However, Rowling has certainly engaged in a good bit of sub-creation as well, though not to the same extent, and I think this aspect of her work is one that Tolkien certainly would have appreciated. So, accessibility is an important, but not the most important, factor - Britney Spears is much more accessible than Bach! (Again, not to say that Rowling is like Britney Spears.)

I also am terrible with ‘shipping’ questions; unfortunately, this robs me of any authority with a large part of Fandom which equates ‘shipping’ profundity and focus with genius and right understanding. If Lewis is right that books may be judged, in part, by the type of readers who read them (see An Experiment in Criticism), then John’s answer here bodes ill for the Potter stories. However, this is not an absolute: one thinks of the drug-hazed flower children that embraced The Lord of the Rings as a sort of hippie-Bible. The difference, I would say, is that Potter, in some ways, invites the ‘shippers’ to indulge in their vicarious romantic entanglements, while the hippies’ love of Tolkien was based on a misunderstanding of the nature of those books. Still, those who care about nothing but whether Hermione ends up with Ron or Harry have missed a good deal of what the Harry Potter stories are all about.

The only purpose the movies serve, in my bookish position, is that they seem to create more interest in the books both among current readers and new readers. Certainly the movies more than any argument I made are more responsible for the quieting of Christian objections to the stories. Christians went to or rented the movies – and found the stories to be edifying or at least anything but the advent of the anti-Christ. This is undoubtedly true, particularly, I think, in the case of the first two movies.

And don’t neglect The Children's Homer : The Adventures of Odysseus and the Tale of Troy by Padraic Colum, Willy Pogany (Illustrator). Our family’s favorite… As I said earlier, John encourages children to read the older books. Though they are newer versions, books like this are a good way to introduce children to classic stories, better preparing them to read the older versions some day.

I’m working on a book called Harry Meets Hamlet and Scrooge: The Serious Reader’s Guide to Harry Potter in which I tour the ten genres Ms. Rowling ‘rowls’ together in her books seamlessly. I hope to put together a short book on Half-Blood Prince with what I think happened just off-screen in this book (which we mis because of the author’s masterful use of narrative misdirection). I’m also working on a Bible memory text book for longer passages of scripture, a ‘trot’ for the Latin translation of HP1, and a cookbook for a sacramental idea of food and eating. Looking forward to these, John, especially Harry Meets Hamlet and Scrooge, the book on Bible memory, and the cookbook. Thanks for all your work, and for taking time to engage in this conversation.

Harry Potter II An Interview with John Granger

2006-06-10T13:12:00.000-04:00

Here's more from the Logres Hall site:

John Granger, author of Looking for God in Harry Potter, engaged in an email conversation with me on the Harry Potter stories. Thanks, John! For a wonderful array of articles on the Harry Potter books, please visit John's website: hogwartsprofessor.com. I also highly recommend his book, Looking for God in Harry Potter. As I told John beforehand, I am, to some extent, playing Devil's Advocate with these questions, though I am genuinely curious.

Chad: You have made what I consider an excellent case for the distinction between incantational and invocational magic in Looking for God in Harry Potter, and for the fact that the good characters in the Potter books make use of the former, not the latter. But is there another distinction to be made? Symbols of good and symbols of evil? What of the use of the witch—a traditional fairy-tale symbol for evil— as a symbol of good? Certainly Hermione is not the White Witch and Harry is not Faustus: Rowling has taken care to recast traditional witches in a better light. But older writers seemed to take the traditional symbolism for granted. George MacDonald, for example, wrote the following: ‘For the power of the fairies they have by nature; whereas a witch gets her power by wickedness’ (At the Back of the North Wind); also, this: ‘In some countries she would have been called a witch, but that would have been a mistake, for she never did anything wicked, and had more power than any witch could have (The Wise Woman, emphasis mine). Or one thinks of Lewis’s Peter asking, ‘Aren’t they [Robins] on the right side in all the stories?’ Are Rowling’s good witches a confusion of symbols? Even if we can say that Rowling has taken enough care to make the contrasts obvious, is it not at least a misstep on her part, especially given your argument that she is ultimately writing Christian fiction?

John: Ms. Rowling is a Postmodern writer, and, as such, she not only combines genres with remarkable flair (there are at least 10 working simultaneously in the books), she certainly doesn’t give a rip about conventional mental categories or ‘metanarratives,’ something like ‘evil’ to her and the bulk of her readers. ‘Good witch,’ consequently, is not the ‘square circle’ it is to those readers trying their bearings exclusively from the Levitical texts (and applying them selectively…).

Chad: A follow-up: if the inversion of symbols in this instance is acceptable, is there anywhere we should draw the line in terms of preserving the symbolic norms of traditional fairy stories? Is it OK to use a traditional Christ-symbol (a stag or a phoenix) as a symbol for Satan? Can a demon be used as a good character?

John: Symbols work or they don’t. Inverting them is nonsensical, at least in the examples you suggest. A symbol of the resurrection like a stag’s antlers regenerating or a phoenix’s rebirth doesn’t transfer to a psychic, fallen reality but to a spiritual and contranatural one.

Chad: Tolkien described with disdain ‘the vulgar devices of the laborious, scientific magician’. One also thinks of a quote from the Harry Potter series: ‘Many witches and wizards, talented though they are in the area of loud bangs and smells and sudden disappearings, are yet unable to penetrate the veiled mysteries of the future.’ Much of the Potter magic seems to be the ‘laborious, scientific’ sort: ‘loud bangs and smells’, though there seem to be recent indicators that a deeper sort of magic (sans potions and wands) exists. Given this, and given your assertion that Rowling is writing in the tradition of Tolkien, Lewis, and the other Inklings, what do you think Tolkien would have made of the Potter stories? And why does Rowling focus so much on the cauldron-brewing, spell-casting, ‘scientific’ kind of magic?

John: I’m a little slow but you’ve lost me here. There are Potions that are involved but far and away most of the magic is done by mechanical voice command in spells and charms. This is incantational, ‘harmonizing’ magic with the fabric of the created world (i.e., with the Creative Word) – nothing laborious or scientific about it. If anything it is a contrast with technology and science.

Chad: Even given the incantational/invocational distinction, how do you reconcile the use of Divination with the Bible’s flat prohibition of it by name (Deuteronomy 18:9-12)? Are there incantational and invocational types of Divination? Or does the answer lie in the scepticism of some of the major Potter characters (i.e., Hermione, Dumbledore) towards Divination? If so, how can we reconcile this with the fact that Professor Trelawney does seem to possess something of a prophetic gift? Should she be considered a sort of Balaam-character: a true prophet, but one with serious flaws and problems?

John: Ms. Rowling is simultaneously laughing at New Age divination types and allowing that there is more to the world (including understanding of time and space) than is dreamt of in worldly philosophies, Horatio. Even risible characters like Trelawney have their moments and the story is wonderfully nuanced this way; again, qua Postmodern, she is fighting any sort of pigeon holing and easy categorization and dismissal.

Chad: While there are many moments of true beauty and high nobility in the Potter stories, one notices that even Rowling’s good kids bear a remarkable resemblance to the hip, pop-culture-saturated teenagers of modern/post-modern society. Crass humour, dating dilemmas, swearing, obsession with celebrities—the Hogwarts kids are not immune to these temptations to a sub-Christian lifestyle/worldview. In personal correspondence, Brad Birzer, author of J.R.R. Tolkien’s Sanctifying Myth, told me that he likes the Potter books, but believes they are not for children. You have said these are great books for teaching virtue to children. Is there any danger in children having what older generations might have labelled ‘worldly’ kids as their heroes?

John: I’d differ with you first on ‘many moments of true beauty and high nobility;’ that’s a bit of a stretch. More to the point of your question, though, I wonder if the reason Ms. Rowling’s books enjoy the success they do, isn’t because their heroic, magical characters – sacrificial, faithful, and loving – are not so much like their readers are. Tolkien is magisterial, but he isn’t especially accessible, is he, except in the Jackson screen translation?

Chad: On the same issue: is it somehow inauthentic or unrealistic to have truly noble characters in stories—characters (though admittedly imperfect) without glaring moral flaws? Characters who don’t fall in with the goose-stepping individualism of pop-culture? Harry and his friends are certainly noble with respect to virtues like loyalty and courage, though it could be argued that they are a lot like the MTV generation in other ways. Are characters like Peter Pevensie, or MacDonald’s Diamond or Curdie, hopelessly out of touch with the lives of today’s jaded, cynical youth?

John: Story orders lives, especially disordered lives, something like what Liturgy does, as a friend pointed out to me recently. My children like Lewis, Tolkien, and MacDonald; they love Harry Potter – and they are not a cynical, MTV crowd. Nobody farts or tells Uranus jokes in Narnia or Middle Earth, which because they are renovations of Fairie and Myth, respectively, for moderns (not postmoderns), makes sense. Rowling is renovating a slew of literary genres from alchemical drama to morals and manners fiction a la Austen for a postmodern audience and criticizing aspects of postmodernity (much as the modernist writers in the Inklings did the same for their period). She is more inviting and more in touch with readers today than Oxford dons from the trenches of WWI. Should we be surprised at this?

Chad: You have played the role of Hogwarts futurist over the course of the last several books. What has been your best prediction, and, on the other side of the coin, what has been your biggest surprise?

John: Calling the death of Dumbledore as the climax of the ‘white stage’ of the alchemical drama was my best call (and detailing everything from the weather to the color of Luna’s dress in the last book). Assuming the white book was due in HP5, which turned out to be the Black book featuring the death of Sirius Black was my greatest blunder. I also am terrible with ‘shipping’ questions; unfortunately, this robs me of any authority with a large part of Fandom which equates ‘shipping’ profundity and focus with genius and right understanding.

Chad: Have the Harry Potter movies remained sufficiently faithful to the books? Are there any major errors of omission or addition that you would like to address?

John: The only purpose the movies serve, in my bookish position, is that they seem to create more interest in the books both among current readers and new readers. Certainly the movies more than any argument I made are more responsible for the quieting of Christian objections to the stories. Christians went to or rented the movies – and found the stories to be edifying or at least anything but the advent of the anti-Christ.

Chad: Besides Harry Potter, what are some other contemporary examples of great children’s literature (or, at least, literature that children would do well to read)?

John: My three youngest children have an insatiable appetite for Brian Jacques’ Redwall stories. They’re really violent in spots for talking animal stories, at least (this ain’t The Wind in the Willows) and many of the characters seem to move from book to book – a Foremole, a heroic mouse or squirrel, etc. But this man can tell a great yarn and tell variations of it again and again and never put you to sleep. We love them.

I like Ralph Moody’s Little Britches novels, too, if they are anything but ‘fantastic’ in being fantasy tales. They are the tales of a boy growing up at the turn of the last century in the West and in the Eastern parts of the US. Engaging, challenging, fun. Little House books for boys with a lot more variety in scenery and occupations.

And don’t neglect The Children's Homer: The Adventures of Odysseus and the Tale of Troy by Padraic Colum, Willy Pogany (Illustrator). Our family’s favorite…

Chad: What are your future writing plans?

John: I’m working on a book called Harry Meets Hamlet and Scrooge: The Serious Reader’s Guide to Harry Potter in which I tour the ten genres Ms. Rowling 'rowls' together in her books seamlessly. I hope to put together a short book on Half-Blood Prince with what I think happened just off-screen in this book (which we miss because of the author’s masterful use of narrative misdirection). I’m also working on a Bible memory text book for longer passages of scripture, a 'trot' for the Latin translation of HP1, and a cookbook for a sacramental idea of food and eating

Media: News and Record Article

2006-06-06T12:05:00.000-04:00

As I continue to bring over the Logres Hall material, here is an article from our local paper, The Greensboro News and Record, for which I was interviewed. The article came out just before the film version of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe hit theatres, and the reporter asked me many questions regarding the Christian theology behind the Narnian tales. It was a great opportunity to talk about things often left un-discussed, particularly in a secular publication. Joe Killian, a reporter for the Life section of the newspaper, interviewed me regarding my book Talking of Dragons, the upcoming Narnia movie, teaching Christian doctrine to children through fairy tales, the Harry Potter stories, and more. This article was run on 6 December as the centrepiece of the paper's Life section. For the original article at the News and Record site, click here. The entire text of the article is included below, with one correction: the copy editor at the paper confounded the terms 'incantational' and 'invocational' and I have altered that here.

Article published Dec 6, 2005

Narnia's message to young people
By Joe Killian Staff Writer

GREENSBORO -- When is a children's story more than a children's story? When it's "The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe."

This week, the film version of C.S. Lewis' book will premiere in Greensboro, and excitement over the movie -- a fantasy epic on the level of the Academy Award-winning "Lord of the Rings" films -- has sparked renewed interest in the original books.

There's plenty of anticipation (and some controversy) in the Christian community, where the books are often praised as religious allegories. But in a new book, one Triad author explains why the Narnia books, like most great children's literature, are more than heavy-handed morality tales."

There's no denying these are Christian works," said William Chad Newsom, author of "Talking of Dragons: The Children's Books of J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis."

"Lewis was very clear on that. But they're also enormously popular books and have been for years. I think it's true that a non-Christian moviegoing audience will get something out of this, too. The idea of facing danger with courage, of overcoming sorrow with love and compassion -- these are universal things."

Newsom's book takes a look at the way in which Tolkien and Lewis -- fantasy authors who were also good friends -- used elements of traditional fairy tales to breathe new life into biblical stories. Although Newsom said the books are first and foremost great stories, he said they're also good tools to help parents talk with their children about spirituality.

The book, the first in Lewis' "Chronicles of Narnia" series, is the story of a group of English children who travel through a magical wardrobe into the land of Narnia. The children join forces with Aslan, a magical lion, to defeat the evil White Witch and save Narnia. Lewis intended the story to be a thinly veiled retelling of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, complete with references to God, Jesus, Judas and St. Peter.

"Lewis' friend, (the author) Dorothy L. Sayers, always said that the problem with teaching children the gospels and the story of Jesus is that we have, over the years, made the most exciting story of all time the most boring," said Newsom.

"Lewis thought that if he could take Christian stories and strip them of their stained glass and Sunday school associations, he could get children to understand the emotions they were supposed to take from the Christ story."

Throughout Lewis' life he exchanged letters with fans -- many of them children. Once, said Newsom, Lewis got a letter from a mother who wrote that her son was distraught. After reading Lewis' books, she said, her son worried he loved Aslan more than Jesus. Lewis wrote back that her son should not worry -- if he understood his love for Aslan, he understood the way he should love Jesus.

It is, according to some parents, a phenomenon that's still happening now."We have read all the Narnia books with our oldest children, and we're doing it again with our youngest," said Margaret Hanes, a Greensboro mother of three. "You'd be amazed how quickly they pick up on the spirituality in the books without any help from an adult. It makes it easier and a lot more fun to talk to them about God and Jesus than giving them a lecture on what they should believe. It helps them understand that on their own, through a story they enjoy."

Hanes was just one of many Narnia fans at a Greensboro Barnes & Noble where handsome reissues of all the Narnia books are on display in advance of the movie.

"With the movie coming out, I believe they're going to be hot Christmas items," said Susan Carroll, a bookseller at the store. "We do have people coming in asking for them, and we're selling a number of different Lewis titles, including all the Narnia books in one volume."

There has been some controversy over recent movies based on children's books, such as "The Hobbit" and the Harry Potter series, that use magic, witches and wizards to teach moral lessons to children. Ironically, explicitly Christian works, such as the Narnia series, are sometimes lumped into lists of books with "occult" messages. But, said Newsom, fairy tales historically have used veiled Christian symbols and morals to teach children right from wrong.

"I think part of the problem some Christians have with magic in stories like these is in differentiating between magics," Newsom said. "There's a very good book called 'Looking for God in Harry Potter' in which (Christian writer) John Granger explains the difference between 'invocational magic' and 'incantational magic.' When someone in a story is doing invocational magic they are calling upon dark spirits in a Faustian deal to gain powers through magic. Incantational magic comes from within a person and is often a gift from God. Many prophets and other characters in the Bible are given this sort of magical power.

"That's the sort of magic you'll see from heroic characters in the works of Tolkien and Lewis, and there's always that distinction," said Newsom.

Newsom, who lives in Liberty and works in Greensboro at Jefferson Pilot Financial, also has written his own children's book, "Polycarp: The Crown of Fire," which uses fairy-tale elements to teach children about Christian history. He is reading the Narnia books to his 5-year-old daughter who, he said, already understands and loves the tales.

"One of the themes of my book is that one of the best ways to instill these lessons is to turn the home into a storytelling culture," said Newsom. "Filling the home with great literature and fairy tales -- the great stories of the world -- can help our children understand what it means to be a good Christian and a good person. The best children's stories are fun to read but they also incarnate truth."

Contact Joe Killian at 373-7023 or jkillian@news-record.com

Veggie Fables

2006-06-05T17:59:00.000-04:00

I'm going to start posting some material from the Logres Hall website, for those who may only be readers of this blog. Here's the first such post, one on the ever-popular Veggie Tales.
The heart of Logres Hall is the desire to build a culture of storytelling in the Christian family. Built on the foundation of the Bible, this culture would be a like a small cathedral - carefully crafted to embody goodness, truth, and beauty in its very architecture. I have posted some original short stories and poetry (some attempts at bringing the storytelling culture to life), but I also want to offer some thoughts and observations on the work of building. Besides the goodness, truth, and beauty, the purpose of such a culture is to build character in the lives of our children. There is no better way to do it. But we want to think biblically about the various attempts at storytelling around us, and the article below is one attempt at doing just that. The idea is to provide reviews of children's books and films (contemporary as well as older works) and articles on the art of storytelling. These are merely conversational catalysts, not authoratative pronouncements, and I welcome any comments.

Veggie Fables

'We pursue great art because we are convinced that great art - combined with great storytelling - can change the world.' Phil Vischer, founder of Big Idea Productions

Few Christian success stories can rival that of the meteoric rise of Big Idea Productions, and their centerpiece work, Veggie Tales. Starting small, they still managed to beat everyone else, including Disney and Pixar, in releasing the first fully computer-animated video (Where's God When I'm S-Scared) in history. Millions of videos, t-shirts, lunchboxes, coloring books, and dollars later, they are at the top of the children's entertainment world, both Christian and secular. Even recent news that the company has filed for bankruptcy has not diminished the wild popularity of Veggie Tales.

Obviously, all successes have their detractors, and Veggie Tales are no exception. Nathan Wilson, whose well-known pop Douglas Wilson founded the edgy Reformed journal Credenda Agenda, found no kind words to say about the biggest Veggie project to date: Jonah: A Veggie Tales Movie, calling it 'The only movie more pagan than The Matrix: Reloaded that I have seen recently.' Wilson explains: 'Where Matrix merely blasphemes through false and twisted allusion, Jonah claims friendship to the faith, and then spits on the Ark of the Covenant for laughs.' Since some may not have got the point, he adds this for emphasis: 'While I'm sure they're out there, I can't think of a movie more disrespectful toward Scripture since Life of Brian from Monty Python.' Jonah, he writes, is little more than 'smiling evangelical goop.'

Other writers have leveled criticism, without as much fist-shaking as Wilson. Gary DeMar, perhaps best known for critiquing the theology of Tim LaHaye's Left Behind, wrote an article for his own magazine, Biblical Worldview, in which he suggests that, while the Veggie videos are clever and well-produced, they ought to lay off the Bible stories. The Veggie Tales Biblical adaptations, he says, 'present the Bible as a compilation of morality tales and obscure its redemptive message by presenting morality as the Bible's end-message.'

If you want to enjoy Veggie Tales,' DeMar adds, 'stick to Silly Songs and moral lessons, and leave the telling of Bible stories to someone else.'

I don't wish to challenge either Wilson or DeMar, for I think they both make good points, if somewhat open to challenge here and there. Rather, I want to suggest a paradigm for defining Veggie Tales at its best, and what I am proposing is that the Veggie Tales stories represent a contemporary, albeit pop culture version, of the classic beast fable.

If it needs to be said, let me say it: of course they are vegetables, not beasts, but I am arguing that Bob the Tomato and Larry the Cucumber function in much the same way as Brer Rabbit, the Three Little Pigs, Rat, Mole, Toad, and Badger from The Wind in the Willows, or Chanticleer the Rooster from Chaucer's The Nun's Priest's Tale. And whether they are as good as those classic stories is not the point. Britannica defines a beast fable as 'a prose or verse fable or short story that usually has a moral.' I could almost stop here, letting the definition alone make the point. Usually prose, sometimes in verse ('Silly Songs with Larry' comes to mind), Veggie Tales certainly qualify as short stories with morals. In many ways, that is the whole point of their existence.

Indeed, a friend of mine has wondered whether they don't lapse into mere moralism at times. But while thinking Christians rightly reject moralism (the reduction of the Christian faith to mere ethical norms), we heartily embrace morality, and the idea of objective good and evil. Unless we are looking to Veggie Tales for theological guidance (and of course we should not), we ought not accuse them of moralism when they are merely performing the function of classic morality tales, such as the beast fables.

But the beast fable is not merely a morality tale, and theological truth need not be absent - would anyone suggest that there is no theology in The Wind in the Willows? And of course it's true that if Veggie Tales serves up theology through trivialized retellings of Bible stories, then they likely will end up with the narratives of Scripture coming off as just so many Chinese proverbs. But theological truth can become incarnate in a story, and the Veggie Tales characters occasionally manifest such truth, as we will see.

Britannica adds this to its definition: 'In beast fables animal characters are represented as acting with human feelings and motives.' Tolkien, in his famous essay 'On Fairy Stories,' goes farther, noting that beast fables are 'stories in which no human being is concerned; or in which the animals are the heroes and heroines, and men and women, if they appear, are mere adjuncts; and above all those in which the animal form is only a mask upon a human face, a device of the satirist or the preacher....'

Of course the good satirist or preacher wants to delight and entertain as well. And this is precisely what Veggie Tales videos do: entertain while satirizing and teaching. Again, we might debate how well they do this, and I am not suggesting that the Veggie videos are on the same artistic level as Aesop or Chaucer, but I am saying that, as stories, they belong in the same category. If this is the case, then it is wrong to attack them for a lack of theology, for this is not their function, and in fact would probably be out of place.

Though, for the record, it is not impossible to find theological statements in Veggie Tales. One example comes from the video The Star of Christmas, in my opinion the best Veggie production so far. After Bob and Larry wreak havoc trying to produce a play that will teach Victorian-era London 'how to love,' an imprisoned thief gives his opinion of the matter: 'if you ask me, you can't teach a man how to love. It's not in his nature.' Simple, yes, and not particularly profound, but it is a theological statement (file under 'H' for "Hamartiology") and it is accurate, as far as it goes. Further, it is far better than the syrupy 'everyone is basically good' drivel that one finds in so many other Christmas programs for children.

Another example is in the recent Sumo of the Opera, in which a new segment, 'Lutfi's Fanciful Flannelgraph,' in the course of telling the story of St Patrick, actually teaches children the doctrine of the Trinity in perfectly orthodox language ('He is God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. One God, Three Persons.').

But again, doctrinal instruction is not the function of a beast fable. Entertainment via satire and moral highlighting is. And few would deny that Veggie Tales do both.

Consider a few examples: the Veggie story Madame Blueberry hilariously lampoons both greed and consumerism, making moderation and contentment look attractive in the process. Lyle, the Kindly Viking thrusts a spear through theft, the worship of power, even piracy (sort of), while highlighting the virtues of love, courage, and mercy. And the various Larry Boy stories have taken on such evils as gossip and lying while lifting the standard of truth-speaking for all Bumblyburg to see.

Notice that in each example, a moral dialectic is employed, portraying an antithesis between good and evil. Not content merely to scold, these fables present the alternative virtues as not only right, but good and lovely. And - I must add - it's hard not to love anyone who takes such a great shot at the perverted joke Disney has become: in the aforementioned Sumo, again during the story of St Patrick, the Druids are described as those who 'did not know about God. They practiced a religion known as 'Paganism...instead of praying to God, Pagans prayed to things like twigs ("Oh, mighty Twig, you are powerful and twig-like") and pond scum ("Oh mighty Pond Scum, you are powerful and, uh, scummy") and they painted with all the colors of the wind." (Emphasis added. If you don't get it, watch Disney's Pocohantas - but not with your kids.)

Veggie Tales are certainly open to legitimate criticism, largely for their oft-hapless attempts at adapting Bible stories (the narrative of David's lust for Bathsheba, for example, is recast as King George's lust for rubber duckies), as DeMar points out so well. And certainly, kids can live and grow up without them. Beowulf, Sir Gawaine and the Green Knight, Aesop, The Hobbit, The Chronicles of Narnia, The Princess and the Goblin- these are indispensable in our children's cultural lives, unlike Veggie Tales and other pop fare. But if we recognize them as pop-culture variations of the beast fable, and if our children's literary canon extends beyond, say, Left Behind: the Kids, then I daresay an occasional serving of raw cucumbers and tomatoes won't hurt them.

So if Mom and Dad enjoy the sophisticated humor and eye-catching animation of Veggie Tales, but feel guilty about it, perhaps an understanding of the literary place of the Veggie stories - as contemporary beast fables - will encourage them not to write these videos off as mere kiddie fare, nor to expect them to be the Saturday morning equivalent of the Shorter Catechism.

But maybe Mom and Dad should be the ones to teach the children about Jonah.

Why Logres Hall?

2006-06-04T15:18:00.000-04:00

Below is an introduction to my work here in Logres Hall. If you wonder what it's all about, this is a good place to start.

Ronan Coghlan's fine reference work The Encyclopaedia of Arthurian Legends describes Logres as 'The name of England in Arthurian Romance.' In C.S. Lewis's masterful novel, That Hideous Strength, we are given a little more, as one of the characters reveals that the great conflict in which they are engaged (for which, read the book) actually began 'when we discovered that the Arthurian story is mostly true history. There was a moment in the Sixth Century when something that is always trying to break through into this country nearly succeeded. Logres was our name for it - it will do as well as another. And then gradually we began to see all English history in a new way. We discovered the haunting. . . . Something we may call Britain is always haunted by something we may call Logres.' Lewis took part of his concept of Logres from his friend Charles Williams's great work Taliessin Through Logres, in which Logres is sort of compared with the work of the Logos, the Son of God (John 1). For Lewis's purposes, Logres became true England, the real England, the faithful sons of England huddled together, back to back, ready for battle, while the inhabitants of 'England,' or the corruption that it has become (in the novel, at least) surrounds them on every side.

In a certain sense, then, Logres is parallel to the Old English concept of Middengeard, or Middle-earth, which Tolkien incorporated so brilliantly in The Lord of the Rings. 'Middle-earth' has been decribed by one writer, reaching back to the Old English word for 'earth' or 'yard,' as 'a cultivated portion of land surrounded by wilderness. The wilderness is modernity, full of monsters, and the yard is a small and pleasant shire. While our children are little, we want to imitate our medieval forefathers and tell our children the truths in fairy tales that will keep them out of the woods. When they are grown, they will be able to fight the monsters and expand the fences of middle earth.' (Douglas Jones, from Douglas Jones and Douglas Wilson, Angels in the Architecture: A Protestant Vision for Middle Earth).

Logres, then, is Middle-earth: the Church of Christ, surrounded by the wilderness of modern unbelief, holding a torch of Truth, Goodness, and Beauty against the darkness of Error, Evil, and Ugliness. As Jones notes, we are to be 'expand[ing] the fences of middle earth.' One day Logres, the remnant of the faithful, will fill all the world with Light, but this expansion of the kingdom of God (for that is what we have been talking about) works slowly, like the growth of a mustard seed, or like yeast working through three measures of meale (Matthew 13). So we work patiently, waiting for the Lord of the Harvest to bring about the increase. We do kingdom work: laughing and feasting, preaching and praying, telling our children stories, writing poetry, chanting Psalms, developing new technology, farming and carving and painting and changing diapers and singing and worshipping and fixing cars and writing and talking and...expanding the fences of middle-earth.

Logres Hall exists as a resource, a starting point for those who wish to expand those fences, to keep out the modern wilderness, and to protect and prepare their families for such work. In the belief that one of the best ways to do this is by creating a storytelling culture in the home, wherein the stories both of Holy Scripture and great literature shape the life and character of the home, Logres Hall is committed to focusing on this aspect, in particular, of the work of middle-earth.

Welcome to Logres Hall.

A Classic Role Revisited: A Review of the animated Ben Hur

2006-06-04T01:20:00.000-04:00

My family recently re-watched the new, animated version of Ben Hur, and it reminded me of this previously unpublished review I wrote of the film several years ago when it first came out. My kids give the DVD five stars, which ought to go at least as far as anything I could say. For further reading and entertainment, try the new, four disc edition of the 1959, Oscar-winning version of Ben Hur, as well as Charlton Heston's autobiography, In The Arena, which is an absorbing, well-written account of the great actor's life and work. Favourite Heston quote: (speaking of Robert DeNiro): 'It's ridiculous for an actor that good to keep playing Las Vegas hoods.'

In 1959, legendary actor Charlton Heston delivered the definitive portrayal of Judah Ben-Hur, the hero of General Lew Wallace’s nineteenth century blockbuster novel, Ben Hur, A Tale of the Christ. Heston won the Best Actor Academy Award for Ben Hur, one of a record eleven Oscars (1997's Titanic finally matched the record without surpassing it, as did 2003's The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King). Recently, the American Film Institute voted Ben Hur one of the 100 best films of all time, and the movie’s stunning chariot race is widely regarded as perhaps the best action sequence ever filmed.

Now, 44 years later, Charlton Heston reprises his most famous role in the new, animated version of Ben Hur (Agamemnon Films/Good Times Entertainment), a production that brings the classic story to a new and younger audience. For those unfamiliar with the story, Ben Hur, A Tale of the Christ, follows the life of Judah Ben-Hur, a young Hebrew prince, and his childhood friend, Messala. After five years in the army, Messala returns to Jerusalem as a Roman centurion, and Judah realizes that the closeness he once shared with his old friend has withered in the heat of Messala’s radical devotion to Rome. When Judah refuses to betray his people by acting as a spy among them, Messala falsely accuses him of trying to assassinate the Roman procurator. Judah’s mother and sister are thrown in prison, and Judah himself is enslaved, consigned to the galleys of a Roman war ship. More than five years pass before Judah escapes from the ship in dramatic fashion, and begins his long journey home; a journey marked by an epic sea battle, a heart-stopping chariot race, and an enduring faith in God.

The context for the story is the birth, life, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Indeed, the story begins with the search of the Magi for the Christ child, and continues thirty years later with Balthazar (one of the Magi) searching again for the child who had become a man. And in some ways, Christ is a more prominent character in this adaptation: unlike William Wyler’s 1959 version, for instance, the face of Jesus is shown throughout. Dying of thirst on his way to the galleys, Judah is helped by a kind carpenter who gives him water. Later, Judah meets that same carpenter again, hears his teaching, and determines to follow him. Though Judah triumphs over Messala in the chariot race, it is a bitter victory, immediately followed by the news that his mother and sister are alive, but have become lepers and outcasts. Judah determines to bring them to Jesus, and on learning of Christ’s arrest, tries—unsuccessfully—to raise an army to free him. As Judah stands on Golgotha and witnesses the crucifixion of Christ, he realizes that the salvation offered by the carpenter from Nazareth is not merely political liberation or military victory, but something far greater. Ben Hur movingly tells a story that undoubtedly happened time and again, in various ways, in the lives of those who met Jesus.

The animated Ben Hur is much shorter than its Oscar-winning predecessor, clocking in at less than an hour and a half. One reason for the shorter running time is the fact that the action sequences (particularly the sea battle and the chariot race), while expertly portrayed, are not given nearly as much screen time as in previous film versions. This is in keeping with Agamemnon’s stated mission of 'emphasizing story, structure and character over action or special effects.' Even the name, Agamemnon, hearkens back to the days of Greek drama, when Aristotle, in his Poetics, developed the six principles of drama: Plot, Character, Diction, Thought, Spectacle, Song. Plot, that is, the agon, or dramatic development of the story, is more important than Spectacle, or what we today would call 'action scenes.' The new Ben Hur succeeds in this emphasis, and the Spectacle, when present, is always appropriate, and never gratuitously violent. As a side note, a film company, with stated goals like those of Agamemnon, is one that Christians should want to support, not merely because they sometimes produce films sympathetic with Christianity, but because they have the right perspective on art. And art, when it is well done, always points to the glory of God, whatever the thematic content.

And this is a fairly well-crafted piece of animated art. The 2D animation is not on the level of, say, the better Disney stuff, or Dreamworks's Prince of Egypt or Joseph: King of Dreams, but the interesting work is in the skillful blending of traditional and computer-generated animation. Character shots and close-ups are produced using traditional 2D animation (though enhanced by computer technology), while wider shots, battle scenes, crowd shots, etc., are 3D, CGI work. It's an interesting blend of techniques, though the obvious differences in appearance are sometimes jarring. The producers made a point of striving for historical accuracy, especially in recreations of the film’s various settings: Jerusalem, Rome, the galleys of a first century Roman war ship; all contributing to the movie’s overall effect of a good story, well-told.

The film is capably directed by William R. Kowalchuk, who provides an interesting Director’s Commentary on the DVD version, and Charlton Heston’s son, Fraser (co-founder with his father of Agamennon), serves as Executive Producer (movie trivia: shortly after he was born, Fraser played the part of Baby Moses in the classic movie, The Ten Commandments, in which his father, of course, played the part of the older Moses). Charlton Heston also narrates Ben Hur, and the DVD contains an interview with Mr. Heston, as well as the original trailer, and a behind-the-scenes look at the making of the movie.

The new script adaptation generally manages to avoid the dumbing-down that often accompanies the rendering of literature for youngsters. Screenwriter Jerome Gray crafted his script by returning to Wallace’s own novel, creating an entertaining version of the story, with some interesting departures from previous adaptations (the resolution of the Messala story-line, for instance), and while the revenge motif is somewhat down-played, it still looms large over the story, a temptation for Judah to overcome.

One of the delights of this version, and which in itself makes it a film worth seeing, is Charlton Heston’s reprisal of his famous role. Heston is a national treasure, certainly one of the greatest American actors, with an unequaled richness of voice that is a joy to hear. As many know, Mr Heston contracted Alzheimer’s disease a few years ago, and each new work by this legendary artist only increases in value. 'This wonderful story has been told many times in the last hundred years, once as a highly successful stage play and three times as a feature,' said Heston. 'Ben Hur is a classic tale of love, forgiveness and redemption, known throughout the world. I’m delighted to be able to bring it to family audiences in this marvelous new format.' And families everywhere will be delighted to see it, Mr Heston.

George Grant on Reading to Children

2006-06-04T00:32:00.000-04:00

The post below was written by George Grant, who, although I don't know personally, I have met once; we are co-authors, after a fashion, having both contributed to the forthcoming Omnibus III, published by Veritas Press. George is a fantastic speaker and writer, and his writings are wide-ranging and prolific. I highly recommend his work to you, particularly his historical lectures, many of which can be found for free or minimal cost at Sermon Audio or Word MP3. The post below is a wonderful bit of thoughtfulness on the subject of reading to children. Anyone who has read my book, Talking of Dragons, knows this is a subject near and dear to my heart, and I would suggest reading George's good ideas on the subject.

Reading Aloud

"'Dear Pig, are you willing to sell for one shilling
Your ring?' Said the Piggy, 'I will.'
So they took it away, and were married next day
By the Turkey who lives on the hill.
They dined on mince, and slices of quince,
Which they ate with a runcible spoon;
And hand in hand, on the edge of the sand,
They danced by the light of the moon,
The moon,
The moon,
They danced by the light of the moon."
Edward Lear (1812-1888)

Silent reading is a fairly modern innovation. As late as the eighteenth century, it was thought that the best way to truly appreciate the classics was to read them aloud--all the better to relish the beauty of the words, the music of the composition, and the architecture of the ideas. Of course, the classics are not limited to great philosophical tomes by the likes of Aristotle, Augustine, and Aquinas. In fact, some of the greatest classic works ever written are books for children--books that are at their very best when read aloud.

The best thing about reading aloud to children aside from developmental progress and all that good stuff, is onomatopoeia. “Clang, clang!” “Harrumph!” “Chugga-chugga” “Choo-Choo” “Splat” “Ring! Ring!” “Flutter, Flutter.” Wonderful children’s literature doesn’t just progress along the pages in staid font transferring information, it sings out from the very book at us! Be it Mike Mulligan’s steam shovel digging away furiously or Peter Rabbit hopping lippity, lippity through Mr. MacGregor’s dangerous garden patch, we are fully engaged from once-upon-a-time to everyone-lived-happily-ever-after. Ducks wear poke bonnets, trains wish desperately to make children happy, dreams come true, elephants and carpets fly, and small children affect the outcome of their worlds. Adults who wear business attire and behave perfectly appropriately in steel and glass towers day after monotonous day transform themselves into snakes, mean old hags, princesses with snooty accents, and sorrowful baby bears when a small child is snuggled on their lap with a good book. Is it any wonder that a happy child’s evening litany includes “Read one more book, please?”

Children’s classics are those books that can be read over and over and over again, with great anticipation and satisfaction. Character traits that would serve well both presidents and street sweepers are inculcated between the few pages, and good, while often tattered, does overcome evil in the end. Lost battles are still worth the fight. As in real life, the honor and import of the struggle count more than winning.

Do you miss it? Then rush out to a school in your own neighborhood and ask for the privilege to read to some children once a week. Better yet, ask for the greater privilege of teaching someone to read as a volunteer tutor in a local school. The rewards of macaroni necklaces, somewhat sticky hugs, long, extremely detailed stories of the day’s adventures, and glittery homemade cards are surprisingly as touching as gifts from your own loved ones, as well as the quiet inner assurance that you are making a difference in the world forever after.

Rather than purchasing huge quantities of books for your children, purchase quality copies of some great ones, and read these over and over again.

Reading quietly to a small child in the tub just after the dinner hour has a calming effect on the entire household.

Do you have one of those busy little people in your family who finds it very difficult to sit still? They really can concentrate better on the story you’re reading if they have a crayon and paper in front of them or a small car to hold in their hands as you read

.Keep wonderful books such as The Chronicles of Narnia or the G.A. Henty adventures or the Jan Karon Mitford novels in the car and read aloud to the entire family if you have a regular long commute together, or will be together on vacation.

Make sure each child has a bookshelf of their own or a space of their own on the family bookshelf. Books should never be kept in toyboxes where they will be destroyed. Treat them as if they are very valuable.

Your children must see you reading if they are to take reading seriously themselves.

Perhaps you missed out on many wonderful children’s classics as a child. Buy them, read them, then donate the books to area school libraries or create a small library at a shelter for kids in transitional housing. Any schoolteacher can provide you with the name of a young student who needs and would appreciate a book for Christmas.

If you have more than one child in your family, their reading skills will vary. Some children simply don’t read well; it is work for them, and not unadulterated joy. For these children especially, reading aloud to them for as many years as they will listen is especially important for their cultural understanding and development. Things as simple as the inflection in your voice when you read about an inappropriate action by a character will imprint upon your child’s moral character if read to often.

Some children simply aren’t as affectionate as others. They often get left out when it comes to reading time merely because it isn’t as sensuously enjoyable for everyone as with a snuggling sweetheart engaged in the story. These children need your patience and time even more than others, who will probably find ways to get their needs met in life through normal daily interaction. Do whatever it takes to keep their attention: feed them cookies, let them blow bubbles, and concentrate on rhyming, fast-moving stories and beautiful illustrations. You may be the only person in their entire life who will take the time to interest them in books. A lot of extra stimulation is not advised however for a child easily read to. Imagination develops in wonderful ways when pure listening skills are employed.

"There is a great deal of difference between the eager man who wants to read a book and the tired man who wants a book to read. A man reading a Le Quex mystery wants to get to the end of it. A man reading the Dickens novel wished that it might never end." George MacDonald (1824-1905)

"Mediocre minds usually dismiss anything which reaches beyond their own understanding." Duc de la Rochefoucauld (1613-1680)

"You can find all the new ideas in the old books; only there you will find them balanced, kept in their place, and sometimes contradicted and overcome by other and better ideas. The great writers did not neglect a fad because they had not thought of it, but because they had thought of it and of all the answers to it as well." G.K. Chesterton (1874-1936)

"The oldest books are still only just out to those who have not yet read them." Samuel Butler (1835-1902)

Images

2006-06-04T00:02:00.000-04:00

This is a test post to see if I am correctly posting images to the site.

Treasure Hunt

2006-04-01T02:15:00.000-05:00

One of the most excellent ways to create a storytelling culture in the home is to act out stories together. Though I have explored this idea somewhat in my book on Tolkien and Lewis (Talking of Dragons), I’m no more an expert on this than anyone else, so it’s just a matter of trial and error with our family. We have several ways we have tried this with our own small children (ages 5 and 2). One of our household favourites is called ‘Treasure Hunt.’ This is a wonderful way to teach very young children about such virtues as courage, watchfulness, and loyalty.

It’s actually very simple, and can be played indoors or out. You can elaborate over time, especially as the children get a little older. The simpler, indoor version (great for rainy or snowy days) goes like this:

1. Draw a simple treasure map, based on the topography of your living room/hallway/bedroom/playroom, or similar. Name the various bits of furniture: our large recliner is The Green Mountain. We have a small, flower-shaped rug that has been dubbed The Western Gardens. Couches can be called The Red Mountains, or the Rocky Hills. Names can be as simple or as elaborate as you like: Tolkien, for all his Elvish unpronounceables, gave most of the place names in The Hobbit simple, descriptive names: The Misty Mountains, The Long Lake, The River Running, The Lonely Mountain. Name each locale on your map, and, Indiana Jones notwithstanding, X always marks the spot.

2. Get the ‘treasure’. If you can find a small toy treasure chest, great, but any box will do. Fill it with some kind of treat or goodies: we have used candy, raisins, nuts, etc. Bury it: under some pillows, under a couch, in a closet, under some blankets, or wherever your imagination carries you.

3. Plan for various adventures along the way. Hide five or six stuffed ‘mountain lions’ (or wolves, or dragons, or anything appropriate) that you can quickly grab along some mountain pass for a surprise attack. If you have a small, decorative suit of armour, this makes an excellent ‘evil knight’ for your young son to cross swords with. A white blanket can be used to simulate a snowstorm. Come up with ideas as a family.

4. Next, you’ll need one or two small children (or four, or six, as the case may be): outfit them with a variety of ‘travelling gear’: toy swords are a must for the boys; or toy riding horses (the ones with a horse head on a stick are perfect) for either girls or boys. Take along a few cups and plates for campfire meals. Roll up the gear in a blanket (except for swords, which should be placed in belts, ready for action).

5. Set out, but always begin and end each adventure with prayer. Have the children ride through the halls on their toy horses, or even march in place, for a minute or two. Point out the ‘sights’ of the countryside: hills and rivers, lakes and waterfalls, mountains and oceans. Help the children to begin to use their imaginations to see the wonders of the world, right in their own living room.

6. At the appropriate time, have the lions, or dragons, or evil knight, attack the little party. The boys should be taught to protect their sisters, and the sisters must not engage directly in the battle (they may be taught to pour arrows into the ranks of the enemies from a safe distance). Make sure anyone who fights with swords cleans their blade afterwards, as Aslan taught us. Another idea is to have a ‘Gate Guardian’: an old man, or a mysterious knight (the suit of armour, or another toy figure), who will not let the company pass until they have solved a riddle. Make up a simple riddle beforehand: the answer could be ‘grass’ or ‘stars’ or ‘trees’. Example: ‘I am the little light that shines at night; though I am far away, I bring light to the whole world’. Something simple that even young children will be able to figure out. Increase the complexity of the riddles as they get more adept at solving them. In general, try to have something important for each child to do on each Treasure Hunt: if little brother’s calling is to slay the dragon, big sister can solve the riddle.

7. Let the adventure last several ‘days’. After marching for a while, set up camp: have a pretend meal (don’t forget to feed the horses), and then go to bed. Everyone should sleep for a short time (thirty seconds to a minute, depending on the ages and attention spans of the children). Sometimes, you may want to have a surprise night attack: otherwise, sound the ‘Morning Horn’ (if you have a toy horn, use that, or just make a shofar-like sound). That is the signal for the day to begin. Have a march of several days, and plan a few adventures along the way.

8. When you reach the X, have everyone dig (toy shovels are great for this purpose). Let the digging last for a while (patience is one of the virtues). When the treasure is found, there should be appropriate rejoicing and thanksgiving: prayer, dancing, laughing, singing. Then, distribute the goods (the candy, raisins, or whatever).

9. You can also work a storyline into your Treasure Hunt: part of the mission could be rescuing a noble knight or princess from the dungeon of a wicked sorcerer. Use whatever toys you have around to set the scene.

10. Use every opportunity to teach Christian virtue and honour. Teach the children to look out for one another, to help out when someone is in trouble (a large floor rug has become our Red Marshes, and whenever someone falls in, the others have to help him out). Teach them to love the beauty of the ‘sights’ all around on the journey. Let the imagination see and hear birds, and splash in cold streams. This game can also be played, on a larger scale, in the yard, but even if you are starting small indoors, show your children what it is like to delight in God’s creation, and to sacrifice for one another in life’s great Treasure Hunt.

Dire Warnings

2006-04-01T02:04:00.000-05:00

The next installment in this series of my older writings is a short story written about three years ago. Comments are welcome...

Dire Warnings

“The problem with this energetic exercise in imagination,” said Professor Durus, with a kindly smile, “is simply a lack of evidence.”

He was walking to the parking lot with his colleague, Professor Roth. They regularly engaged in various informal disputations, usually at the behest of Roth, a perpetual axe-grinder. Durus enjoyed their informal debates, wearisome though they often were—especially as Roth never managed five sentences without lapsing into insult and invective. But Durus was considerate and patient. Roth was ardently religious, a passionate believer in the supernatural, and Durus held a private opinion that this faith too often made a Zealot of him. Not surprising, Durus had sometimes thought. Hot ideology makes hot heads.

Durus himself was quite the opposite, renowned for a tolerant spirit, for facing life’s challenges with a cool-headed serenity that invoked the admiration of all who met him. Casual acquaintances thought him honest, pleasant, and charitable, and friends knew him to be so. His goodwill even extended to the few that, like Roth, actually disliked him.

“Come off it,” said Roth with an acrid tone. “Don’t make me drag out the theistic proofs. You don’t believe in the supernatural because you don’t want to believe.”

Durus considered that. One can never completely know one’s own mind, after all, but he sincerely did not think Roth’s assertion true. “I want only evidence,” he said. “I know the traditional arguments for God’s existence, and I find them unconvincing. Perhaps it’s true that I use my agnosticism as a shield against error, as a handrail to keep me from falling off either side of the bridge. Still, it seems to me that Reality, as we know it, can be accounted for apart from the existence of a superior being that made it all. A beautiful thought if true, but…

“However,” he added, “my objections are both philosophical and practical.”

Roth snorted in disgust. “What does that mean?”

“The supernatural is wonderful for mythology, but decidedly bad for real life. I object to your brand of religion—miracles, angels, and all the rest—because of the type of person it produces: either Crusaders, valiantly fighting to force belief on others—“ here he resisted the temptation to provide a convenient illustration—“ or Slaves, who sink from belief into delusion.”

“Delusion?” said Roth. “Don’t be a fool. Delusion is the legacy of atheism. Give me one example of real faith producing delusion. Not cultic sectarianism, mind you, but a major religion.”

They had reached Durus’ car. He turned to Roth and smiled again. “I’ll give you one, and then I really must go. You’re an historian, Roth: surely you are familiar with The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle?

Roth rolled his eyes. “Of course. What’s your point?”

“Well, the Chronicle is a fairly straight-forward historical account of early Medieval English history. Yet what do you find in the record for the year 793?

Roth didn’t remember, but also didn’t let on. “What about it?”

Durus quoted the passage. “’Dire warnings were come over the land of the Northumbrians and sadly terrified the people. There were tremendous lightnings and fiery dragons were seen flying in the air.’”

He looked at his colleague as if trying to determine his thoughts. “Dragons, Roth. In an otherwise sane, historical report. Matter-of-fact, as if recording the outcome of a battle. Why? It was a culture that believed in angels and devils, so why not dragons? Why not giants or fairies? And that’s my point: a strong belief in the mythological side of religion obscures reason, causing delusion in otherwise rational, sentient people.”

Roth snorted again, but said nothing. Durus clapped him on the shoulder, good-naturedly. “Don’t get me wrong, Roth. Religion has high value. It teaches us to be honest, to help the needy, to endure suffering with patience. That’s enough religion for me.”

“Oh, yeah?” retorted Roth. “Well, I wouldn’t recommend trying out your secular religion when you’re standing next to your kid’s coffin.”

That was a bit much, even for Durus. But he refused to let it draw him out. He sighed, sadly, and said goodbye to his intolerant acquaintance. As he drove home, Durus reflected on the conversation. Like Roth, he’d grown up in what he now called “fairy tale religion”—angels, devils, witches, giants—and had grown up a selfish cad. Only when he abandoned the mythical elements of faith, accepting religion’s moral teachings, had he gradually transformed into a man of compassion and tolerance.

But he recalled his closing words to Roth: “religion teaches us to endure suffering with patience.” That’s the hard part, he thought. Durus, in fact, had suffered little in life. Born to wealth, with a near genius I.Q., he had married the most beautiful girl at Oxford, and now enjoyed money, status, and two great kids. What would he do if suffering came, as it surely would? Endurance is the key. I can’t help what happens, but I can control my own response to tragedy, and not let it overwhelm me.

He turned his car into his own neighborhood, onto his own street. Instantly, he was offered a chance to prove the ethical and psychological superiority of his religion, for his house—his own home—was on fire. A wall of flame illumined the late afternoon sky with blazing light. He skidded to a stop in the driveway, breathing words of thankfulness, to no one in particular, that his family was away for the day.

He jumped from the car, fumbling for his cell phone, for no one had yet arrived on the scene. Panic and fear swelled and threatened to crush him, and he dropped his phone. But he took a deep breath, and began to calm himself, even briefly thinking how good it was that he would now have an opportunity to exercise his religion in real life. He would endure, and hold down the storm of emotions that were rising in him. Durus’ head was spinning, despite his valiant efforts to remain calm, and his senses were cloudy. But help would come. In fact…

A shadow passed overhead. A rain cloud, he thought. A downpour would certainly help. A roar of wind, and a frightfully loud noise, like thunder, boomed above him. Yes, it’s going to rain. He felt the ground move behind him, and heard a high-pitched, piercing noise, like a siren. The firefighters are here. They’ll save my house. He turned, and squinted in the glow of two bright, yellow lights. Vehicle headlights. The fire engine.

A blinding flurry of ghastly images assaulted his eyes—a gaping mouth; a face marked by malice, intelligence, and twisted pleasure; a burning, malevolent smile; huge, scaly wings; razor-sharp fangs. His final thought, as the fiery breath hurled him into the surprisingly real world of Supernature, was of Roth, his fanatical colleague.

The Three Allegorical Pigs

2006-03-30T23:36:00.000-05:00

Here's an unpublished skit I wrote a few years ago, the first posting of some of my older work. Comments and criticisms are welcome. Historical note: I used to head up a drama program at my church, years ago, and, along with my wife, wrote and directed some plays and sketches from time to time (not during the worship service, or anything nutty like that, though). This one was never performed. I actually haven't re-read it yet, so I renounce, in advance, anything silly that I used to believe back then. Looking forward to your thoughts...

The Three Allegorical Pigs
(In which three symbolic swine learn an important lesson)
Theme: Building on the Right Foundation

CHARACTERS:
NARRATOR: male with good speaking voice
CRUISER: a good-timin' pig who is confident that the future is bright
WORKER: an industrious pig who is certain that nothing in life is free
TRUSTER: an honest pig who is convinced that his need exceeds his ability
FENRIS OAF: the Big Bad Wolf

SET: Just a chair for the NARRATOR, plus the three “house props” (See Production Note below).

PRODUCTION NOTE: Each PIG needs a “house” to live in, and one suggestion would be to create a small, hand-held “house prop” out of cardboard or even wood. Each prop would have a wooden handle at the bottom for the PIG to carry (yeah, it sounds cheap, but it fits with the wacky, symbolic mood of the skit, as well as the NARRATOR’S complaint about budget cuts). The main body of the prop would be in the shape of a house, and the straw and stick versions should have some loose straw and sticks that can be tossed in the air for effect when the WOLF blows them down. There should also be straw or stick glued or otherwise attached to the prop so that the audience will realize what it’s supposed to be. The brick prop can just have red bricks painted on, and, as it does not get blown down, does not need loose parts.

(AT RISE: The NARRATOR enters, stands stage right, and speaks to the audience.)

NARRATOR: Good evening, ladies and gentleman. Once upon a time, there were three little pigs. Their names were Cruiser...

(CRUISER takes the stage and waves to the audience.)

CRUISER: Yo, how y’all doin’?

NARRATOR: Worker...

(WORKER takes the stage and waves to the audience.)

WORKER: Hello.

NARRATOR: And Truster.

(TRUSTER takes the stage and waves to the audience.)

WORKER: Good day.

NARRATOR: And I'm the Narrator. Unlike the traditional story about three pigs, this tale is an allegory.

CRUISER: I thought allegories only lived in the swamps. (He laughs and snorts at his own joke, though no one else does.)

NARRATOR: (Trying to ignore the bad joke.) An allegory, I say, in which grand and glorious lessons are taught in a meaningful fashion. How do we do this, you ask? In an allegory, all the characters represent certain types of people, even certain attitudes and beliefs. That's why, instead of giving our pigs normal names like, say, Abner, Beaurialis, and Rothchild, we give them exceedingly weird names like Cruiser, Worker, and Truster. Those names are symbolic of people who think in certain ways. What, precisely, are they symbolic of? (A knowing smile, a little chuckle.) Well, you'll have to determine that yourselves. (Beat, as he turns serious. The following lines are spoken with increasing passion and volume.) We can't be giving you too much help, now can we? How will you ever learn if we just give you the answers? You've got to think for yourselves! I'm not standing up here for your entertainment. I mean, come on people, throw me a bone every now and then, huh? Day after day, work, work, work: for what? Heartache!

(TRUSTER loudly clears his throat.)

NARRATOR: Oh, uh, sorry.

(The PIGS shake their heads with grave disappointment.)

NARRATOR: Hey, fellas, I'm working on it; really, I am. (He clears his throat and prepares for a new start.) Once upon a time -

WORKER: (Interrupting.) You did that already.

NARRATOR: Oh, right. Uh...oh, yes: When the three little pigs came of age, their parents sent them out into the wide, wild world to seek their callings. On the day they left home, Cruiser, Worker and Truster had a talk.

(The NARRATOR sits down.)

CRUISER: Well, boys, this is it: the first day of the rest of our lives.

WORKER: What do you mean, Cruiser?

CRUISER: Come on, man, think about it! We are about to start living for the first time. Everything up to now has been dress rehearsal. No, worse: it's been like one bad audition after another. But now, baby, we're on the big screen at last!

(He throws his arms wide as if to embrace the world in all its potential fun.)

TRUSTER: I don't know. I was pretty happy at home. In fact, I'm a little sad to be leaving.

CRUISER: You've got to be kidding! I've been waiting for this day all my life!

TRUSTER: I've been dreading this day all my life. Who will lead us in this dark world?

WORKER: Lead us? Shoot, I don't need no leader. Life is tough, but "to the diligent go the spoils", or something like that. Work hard, just like Ma and Pa taught us, and you can have anything you want. "What the mind can conceive, we can achieve," after all. And all is what I'm after. Yes sir, Truster, I want it all: the girl, the gold watch, and the whole -

CRUISER: Yeah, yeah, yeah. We're all impressed with your subscription to Cliche Weekly.

WORKER: Oh, right, this from the guy who just offered the profound insight that (Impersonating CRUISER.) "Today is the first day of the rest of our lives." Whatever. All I’m saying is that I ain't askin' nobody for nothin', if I can't get it on my own. So if you don't like the way I'm livin', you just leave this long-haired country pig alone!

TRUSTER: That's all well and good, Worker. But there's a lot of questions that your "work hard, earn it all" philosophy doesn't answer.

WORKER: Yeah? Like what?

TRUSTER: Well...what about housing?

WORKER: What about housing?

TRUSTER: You know that the most important thing we can do, now that we're on our own, is to start building homes to live in.

WORKER: Yeah, so?

TRUSTER: What will we build with? We need a strong foundation, a solid structure, to protect our families -

CRUISER: (Interrupting.) We don't have families.

TRUSTER: But we will have families, some day. And we need to take thought for them.

WORKER: Sure we do, but why are you worrying? We can find something to build our houses with that'll work just fine.

TRUSTER: Yeah, but have you forgotten...(Looks around nervously.) The Big Bad Wolf?

CRUISER: The Big Bad Wolf? Ha! Truster, please don't tell me you still believe in the Big Bad Wolf? I figured out about him when I was four; the same day I figured out about Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.

WORKER: Well, Truster's just saying that...wait a minute: what about Santa Claus?

TRUSTER: Of course I believe in the Big Bad Wolf. He has the ability to blow whole buildings down. And...(Looking around nervously again) he has an appetite for pork!

WORKER: I thought it was dragons that blowed buildings down.

TRUSTER: Dragons breathe fire.

CRUISER: Dragons don't breathe anything. They're not real. Look, Truster, you're gonna have to let go of these childhood myths sooner or later. I believe it's good to have a healthy spirituality, and all that - that is to say, I don't mind a little meditation here, a bit of yoga there. But there is no Big Bad Wolf. In fact, such a belief may well be the ultimate heresy! The world is a great place to live in, and life - if you know how to live it - is easy and fun!

TRUSTER: I wish I shared your optimism, brother. But I fear that you're wrong; horribly wrong. I've been worrying about this for years; ever since the first time I thought about building a house of my own. (He puts his head in his hands.) What shall I do?

(The NARRATOR stands up.)

NARRATOR: Now, maybe you're thinking to yourself: "Three little pigs, all with such different opinions. Didn't their parents teach them how to build their houses when they left home?" Well, it turns out that their parents - whose names were Apostate and Postmodern, by the way - were quite the free-thinkers. They didn't believe in imposing their architectural views on their children. They thought that kids should decide those kinds of things for themselves.

(The NARRATOR smiles, and just stands there looking silly for a few seconds. Finally, WORKER speaks up.)

WORKER: You done?

NARRATOR: Oh, um, of course. Carry on. (He sits down.)

CRUISER: Now look, Truster, I'm gonna level with you: maybe there’s not an actual Big Bad Wolf, but I do know that we have to overcome the "Big Bad Wolf" in all of us. See, the (He makes quotation gestures with his hands) "Big Bad Wolf" is just the projection of all of pig-kind's negative energy; an attempt on the part of Organized Architecture to suppress the spark of divinity we all possess, and keep us from having any fun. To deal with this negativity, we need to be real with our feelings; get in touch with our inner-swine and be open and vulnerable with each other, and with our selves.

WORKER: (Sarcastic) Thank you, Oprah.

(CRUISER rolls his eyes.)

TRUSTER: I suppose you don't believe in the Master Builder, either?

CRUISER: Some ancient prince doling out advice to home-builders? Maybe you should lie down, Truster.

TRUSTER: He's real! He made all of the great, old buildings in the land. And He doesn't like people building with just any old materials.

CRUISER: Come on! (Sarcastic) The "Master Builder", son of the Emperor (who, by the way, lives so far off that no one has ever seen him) wants to make sure you build your home strong and sure. Please! Even if this Master Builder exists, why on earth would he care what I use to build my house with?

TRUSTER: Because He cares about you, and He wants to protect you from the Big Bad Wolf.

CRUISER: Back to that again, are we?

WORKER: Hold on, now, Cruiser.

CRUISER: What? Don't tell me you believe in these fairy-tales too?

WORKER: No, I didn't say that.

TRUSTER: You mean you don't believe in them, Worker?

WORKER: I didn't say that, either. I'm just not sure, that's all. I'm an...what do you call it? Hagnospick...Acrostic...

TRUSTER: Agnostic.

CRUISER: (Offers a handkerchief.) Bless you.

WORKER: I just don't think we can know for sure, you know? And I don't think we should waste our lives waiting on Emperors that don't rule, and Builders that don't build. We've got to make our own way in this world. There's a lot to be done, and the rewards are great for those that are willing to keep the snout to the old grindstone. And if the Emperor and the Master Builder do exist...well, I'm sure that they'll look at the buildings we've constructed, and sort of, you know, weigh our good buildings against our bad ones, and hopefully, if we've done our job and all, we'll have more good ones than bad, and hey, we'll be all right, you know?

TRUSTER: I don't know, Worker. Have you ever read the Master Builder's Blueprints?

CRUISER: Blueprints?

TRUSTER: Yeah, it's a written record of how to go about building your home. Written by the Emperor and the Master Builder.

CRUISER: And the madness continues. Truster, come on, man, think about it: those Blueprints were written by Organized Architecture to try to run people's lives. I'll bet that's where you learned about the Big Bad Wolf, too.

TRUSTER: Well, now that you mention it -

CRUISER: (Interrupting.) I knew it! You see? It's all part of the same big scam.

WORKER: Well, even if it's not a scam, it's still not the best way to make your plans, Truster. I've seen the Blueprints, and let me tell you: you'd need an architecture degree just to understand them. All those big, architectural words. Besides, it's a very old document, and it was originally written in an ancient language that no one speaks anymore.

CRUISER: Pig Latin?

WORKER: How should I know? The point is, it's been translated so many times, it can't possibly be accurate anymore.

TRUSTER: Well, I admit some of it is open to interpretation, but no one said that life would be easy.

WORKER: Actually, Cruiser did.

CRUISER: (With a big smile.) Oh, yeah.

WORKER: Anyway, Truster, what did the Blueprints say?

TRUSTER: I don't remember most of it, but I do know that it gave detailed instructions for building houses, including what materials to use.

CRUISER: Well, you fanatics can sit around talking about invisible builders all night if you want, but I'm moving on.

WORKER: Yeah, those houses aren't going to build themselves.

(The NARRATOR stands up.)

NARRATOR: So the three pigs went out to find land and building materials. It won't surprise you to learn that they all took different approaches to their tasks. Cruiser, for example, in keeping with his "the world owes me a living" mentality, decided to purchase building materials that were both cheap and easy to work with; he built his house out of straw.

CRUISER: Straw was perfect. I was in and watching TV in two days. Straw really expresses who I am at this time in my life. It was just something I needed to do, for me.

TRUSTER: It won't be nearly strong enough to withstand a blast from the Big Bad Wolf.

CRUISER: Yeah, right.

NARRATOR: Worker, being a much harder, er, worker, decided to use the best materials he could find, given his budgetary limitations. In the land where the pigs lived, that meant wood. (He sits.)

WORKER: Sticks of wood, mostly. But good, sturdy stuff. I would've used bricks, but that would mean going up to the capital, and buying from the Master Builder. Yeah, it turns out He's for real, after all.

CRUISER: So you say.

WORKER: And so would you, if you'd been there. But the problem is, the only way you can get bricks is if you turn over the whole planning of your house to Him.

TRUSTER: Why is that a problem?

WORKER: Because I ain't turning the reins over to anybody, that's why. I work hard for what I have, and the least reward I expect is to be able to make the decisions myself. I don't ask nobody for help, and I don't blame nobody when the apple cart gets upset. It's all on me. No offense to the Master Builder; He's made some fine buildings in the past, but nobody knows what my house should be better than I do. So I made the best, strongest house I could make, out of the best wood I could find.

TRUSTER: Not strong enough, I fear.

CRUISER: So what did you build with, Mr. Critical?

TRUSTER: Bricks and stone, of course.

WORKER: So you gave up control of your own home -

CRUISER: Just because you’re afraid of some mythological creature?

TRUSTER: Just for the record, I dispute your choice of adjective. But yes: that was part of it, in the beginning. But as I got to know the Master Builder, I began to see the great wisdom that He has. In the end, I realized that it would be foolish to have anyone else build my home.

CRUISER: Well, I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree. When the years have rolled by, and no wolf ever comes, and I'm napping comfortably in my low-maintenance home, then maybe you'll get the point and give up on your superstitious ideas.

(The PIGS exit. The NARRATOR stands.)

NARRATOR: And the years did roll by. The pigs got older; they married and had children. And their homes served them well. (Beat.) At least for a while. For a day came when all the land was troubled by rumors of an evil presence. A dark shape was seen in the woods. Yes, that's right: he had come at last. Fenris Oaf, otherwise known as...The Big Bad Wolf!

(The WOLF enters and growls menacingly.)

NARRATOR: The Wolf had been playing the provinces in recent years, and the pickin's were mighty slim; mighty slim. In particular, he had met very few pigs in his travels, and he was mighty hungry; mighty hungry.

WOLF: Man, where do you people get this dialogue?

NARRATOR: Uh, as I was saying, the Wolf had a distinct and overpowering craving for little pig. So, he roamed the countryside, and at length, he came to a small, rather hasty-looking house made of straw.

(CRUISER enters, holding his "house prop" [see production notes at beginning of script]. He is whistling, obviously living out his "life is great" philosophy. The WOLF licks his lips, rubs his hands diabolically, and creeps up to the house.)

NARRATOR: The Wolf, having imagined this moment for years, had written a great opening line.

WOLF: Little pig, little pig, let me in!

(The NARRATOR effects a puzzled, disappointed look.)

NARRATOR: What, that's it? That's your great opening line?

WOLF: Hey, you're a narrator, not a dramatic critic. Pipe down, or you're next!

NAARATOR: All right, all right. (Muttering.) Boy, you give some people fangs and a scary-sounding name and they go Nero on you.

WOLF: Heard that.

NAARATOR: Sorry. Look, you'd better say that line again; I don't think he heard you.

WOLF: (Louder.) Little pig, little pig, let me in!

CRUISER: Hey, quiet down, out there! Touched By An Angel is on!

WOLF: (ALMOST ROARING.) LITTLE PIG, LITTLE PIG, LET ME IN!!!

CRUISER: All, right, you don't have to yell. Who's there? (He sees the WOLF.) What the - (His voice starts quivering.) Hey, you're not the...are you the...you can't be the...the Big Bad Wolf?

WOLF: You were expecting maybe Publisher's Clearing House?

(CRUISER squeals in fright.)

WOLF: Let me in!!!

CRUISER: No way, dude. Not by the hair of my carefully groomed goatee! Go away!

WOLF: (Dramatically. Too much so.) Then I'll huff, and I'll puff, and I'll blow your house in!

NARRATOR: (Rolling his eyes.) Oh, brother.

WOLF: (To the NARRATOR.) Quiet, you. (To CRUISER.) Last chance, swine: do you let me in, or do you lose your house?

CRUISER: Go away!

WOLF: You asked for it! (He huffs and puffs, etc.)

NARRATOR: So the Wolf huffed, and he puffed...(Sort of ad-libbing as the wolf struggles to work up a good breath) and then he huffed again, and after that...oh yeah, he puffed.

(The WOLF breaks out in a violent coughing fit.)

NARRATOR: (Grinning broadly, speaking rapidly.) But the Wolf was a four-pack-a-day chain-smoker, and couldn't extinguish a candle, much less blow down a whole house. So, hey, don't smoke, kids!

(He winks and gives them an "ok" hand gesture. WORKER pops his head out.)

WORKER: (Shaking his head in disbelief.) How do you like that? Every skit has to have a message. Sheesh!

WOLF: (To WORKER, who quickly ducks backstage, though not without a defiant shake of the fist.) You're next! (To the NARRATOR.) And I'm coming after you, editorial-boy. Just give me a second here...(he begins huffing and puffing again. Then, with a mighty blow, the straw house comes down.)

WOLF: Ha Ha!

CRUISER: Yipes! (He runs out, with the WOLF in hot pursuit.)

NARRATOR: But Cruiser escaped to his brother Worker's house, racing inside and locking the door only moments ahead of the Wolf.

(WORKER and CRUISER enter, carrying WORKER'S "house prop." The WOLF follows close behind.)

WOLF: Hey, I like this: Two little pigs. And nothing but a bunch of twigs in the way. All right, boys: you know the drill. Little pigs, little pigs, let me in!

WORKER: (Defiant.) Not a chance, furball.

CRUISER: (Trying to be defiant, though it comes out a bit squeaky.) Not by the hairs of our chinney-chin-chins!

WOLF: No? Then I'll huff, and I'll puff, and I'll -

(He collapses into coughing again. The NARRATOR shakes his head, but says nothing. With another effort, he hurls a blast of wolf-breath at the house, but though it shakes and wavers, it holds up.)

WORKER: Ha! Good timber, that. See, Cruiser, hard work always pays off.

CRUISER: Yikes! Here he comes again!

(With another mighty blow, the WOLF succeeds in bringing the house down. The PIGS run off - WORKER shaking his fist at his enemy - and the WOLF again pursues.)

NARRATOR: Now two of the brothers were bereft of kith and kin. (Beat.) Or kith, at least. They still had their kin. (Beat.) No, kith is a synonym for kin, and I just said they still had their kin. Ergo, and assuming the veracity of my first premise, they still had both kith and kin. (Beat. He's a bit confused.) So what were they bereft of, I wonder? (Another beat, only longer.) Oh, yeah, now I remember: hearth and home. That's it. The two pigs were bereft of hearth and home. And, with the Wolf in hot pursuit, our bereaved brothers high-tailed it to - yes, you guessed it - good ol' Truster's house. (Beat.) You know, the brick one.

(CRUISER, WORKER, and TRUSTER enter, with TRUSTER'S house prop. The WOLF enters moments later.)

WOLF: This day just gets better and better: Three pigs now. Brick this time, but hey, it's not for nothing that they call me...THE BIG BAD WOLF! (An evil laugh. Then, to the PIGS.) One more for the road, boys: (At the top of his lungs.) LITTLE PIGS, LITTLE PIGS, LET ME IN!

WORKER: Not by the hairs of...ah, forget it. Go away, you disgusting, ugly, dog-faced excuse for a wolf.

WOLF: (In mock terror.) Taunts and Insults! My evil powers are useless against them! (Parody of The Wizard of Oz.) I'm melting! Melting! Oh, what a world! (Then, with renewed anger.) Forget it, bacon-boys: I'm coming over for dinner! Honey! I'm home!

CRUISER: (Frightened. He's just seen the WOLF blow down two houses, and lacks confidence in TRUSTER'S bricks.) W-w-wouldn't you rather have beef? There's a big dairy farm just down the road, you know.

WOLF: (Sarcastic.) Yeah, I'm taking menu advice from a bunch of rejects from the Muppet Show. No thanks.

CRUISER: (Desperate. Almost squealing.) No meat on Fridays!

WOLF: What do I look like, a Jesuit? Besides, it's Thursday.

TRUSTER: Look here, we're not just gonna open the door and let you eat us. It's just not reasonable for you to expect that. Besides, I'm quite confident in the structural integrity of my home. Designed and constructed by the Master Builder, you know.

WOLF: Your point?

TRUSTER: You're no match for Him, and you know it.

WOLF: Well, I guess we'll see about that...WHEN I HUFF, AND I PUFF, AND I BLOW YOUR HOUSE DOWN!!!

(He huffs, puffs, etc. Then...yep, more coughing.)

NARRATOR: Don't worry, folks: he eventually found his inhaler. And when he did...

(The WOLF huffs, and puffs, and, with a mighty gust of breath, the house...remains standing. It doesn’t even budge.)

NARRATOR: After all that huffing, etc., the Wolf found that -

WOLF: (Interrupting.) They know! They know! Can't expect brick to come down on the first try, you know.

(He tries again. Nothing.)

NARRATOR: Once again, the Wolf failed to bring down the house of brick.

WOLF: (Panting.) I...can't understand it...why can't I...blow this doggoned house down?

NARRATOR: But Fenris Oaf wasn't a quitter. He tried again. (The WOLF does so.) And again. (Another try.) And again. (Yet another try.) But in the end, he was defeated. Try as he might, he could not bring down the house that the Master Builder had built.

(The WOLF faints from exhaustion. CRUISER, WORKER, and TRUSTER emerge from the house and dance a merry jig around their fallen foe.)

NARRATOR: There was rejoicing in the land, and merriment for many nights thereafter. And when the time of joy had ended, the three brothers had another talk.

(The brothers step in front of the WOLF. The NARRATOR sits.)

WORKER: Well, all's well that ends well, they say. And never in my life have I been so happy and yet so ashamed, all at the same time. I've learned my lesson, I think. Truster, you were right. Not only about the Master Builder, but about the foolishness of trying to build our own houses. No, when my house came down, my pride came down with it. All the hard work in the world is not enough to make our homes stand in the day of Judgment.

TRUSTER: What about you, Cruiser?

(CRUISER is still somewhat reluctant, but more than a little humbled.)

CRUISER: Life is not as easy and care-free as I had imagined. I've learned that I can't just cruise through life, expecting the world to make it easy on me. And I've learned that there are things in this world that it's good to be afraid of. (Beat.) I, uh...I've also learned that the Master Builder is real.

TRUSTER: Oh?

CRUISER: Yeah. (Smiling now.) And...you'll be glad to know that I turned over the construction of my new home to Him. Soon, there'll be a new brick house around here.

(TRUSTER smiles broadly.)

WORKER: Two new brick houses. But what about you, Truster? Gained any new insights from our harrowin' experience?

TRUSTER: (After thinking a moment.) Two things. First, that although fear, pain, loss, and even death are a part of our world, a time comes when the last enemy will fall; when restoration and rejoicing will return.

CRUISER: And the second lesson?

TRUSTER: That even trust is only as good as its object. All the faith in the world wouldn't have made straw and sticks as strong as brick and stone. And the strength of the brick and stone was only found in the perfection of the Master Builder and His Blueprints.

NARRATOR: And so, the three little pigs rode off into the sunset -

(The WOLF momentarily raises his head before passing out again.)

WOLF: Wrong story!

NARRATOR: Right. Well, they left, anyway, talking amiably amongst themselves.

(The brothers walk offstage, speaking the next few lines as they go.)

WORKER: (To CRUISER.) You really watch Touched By An Angel? Ha!

CRUISER: Hey! That show's helped a lot of people.

WORKER: I think you're the one that needs help.

TRUSTER: Can we have supper now, or do we have to wait until the argument's over?

(THEY EXIT.)

NARRATOR: (Smiling.) You will starve if you wait for that. (To the audience.) Thus ends our little allegory. Did you learn anything? I hope so, though I have my doubts. We've had a lot of budget cuts lately, and making profound moral and theological lessons spring to life through cute fables just ain't as cheap as it used to be. (Beat. He's about to start pontificating again.) I mean, it's not my fault. I suggested several ways to cut expenses, but did they listen to me? Noooo. I tell you, our producers are really a piece of work -

(The WOLF pops his head up again before passing out a third time.)

WOLF: (Interrupting.) This is neither the time nor the -

NARRATOR: (Interrupting as the WOLF faints.) So thank you for joining us on this little journey through the land of symbolic storytelling. We hope you enjoyed it. I'm the Narrator, and that's news to me.

(He exits. Blackout/curtain.)

Books on the Nightstand I

2006-03-30T22:57:00.000-05:00

Here's what I have been reading lately, but caveat emptor: while I do recommend that Christians read the following books, for one reason or another, let none suppose that this is always because I agree with everything in these volumes, or even that they are all necessarily good books. Chesterton once said something to the effect that a bad book is in a sense more profitable reading than a good book, because, while the good book tells you something about the author, a bad book tells you something about your culture, and the people who enjoy such books. That said, most of these books are wonderful, and highly recommended. These are in no particular order, and have only in common the fact that I have recently (within the last several months) finished reading them:

Taliessin Through Logres/The Region of the Summer Stars/Arthurian Torso (Charles Williams and C.S. Lewis)
The Flying Inn (G.K. Chesterton)
The Everlasting Man (G.K. Chesterton)
The Magician's Nephew (C.S. Lewis)
The Silver Chair (C.S. Lewis)
The Da Vinci Code (Dan Brown)
War in Heaven (Charles Williams)
Black and Tan (Douglas Wilson)
The Last Disciple (Hank Hanegraaff and Sigmund Brouwer)
The Essential Calvin and Hobbes (Bill Watterson)
Yukon Ho! A Calvin and Hobbes Collection (Bill Watterson)
The Courage and Character of Theodore Roosevelt: A Hero Among Leaders (George Grant)
Grant Comes East: A Novel of the Civil War (Newt Gingrich and William R. Fortschen)
'The Displaced Person' and 'A Good Man is Hard to Find' from The Complete Stories (Flannery O'Connor)

Other books I am working through:

A Generous Orthodoxy (Brian McLaren)
In Freedom's Cause: A Story of Wallace and Bruce (G.A. Henty)
Trinity and Reality: An Introduction to the Christian Faith (Ralph A. Smith)
How the Irish Saved Civilization (Thomas Cahill)
Four Faultless Felons (G.K. Chesterton)
[With my daughter, Grace] Wise Words: Family Stories That Bring the Proverbs to Life (Peter Leithart)

Happy Reading.

Families As Storytelling Cultures

2006-01-28T00:29:00.000-05:00

Here are a few thoughts on building a storytelling culture in the home, which is the focus of Logres Hall. I will be posting more such ideas in the future, as time permits, as part of an ongoing discussion of this important issue. For a more in-depth discussion of this idea, as well as lots more practical tips, see my book, Talking of Dragons: the Children's Books of J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis.

1. Parents Must Be Readers! Dad and Mom are the pacesetters in the home, and if you, the parents, are not ‘into’ books, chances are good your children won’t see the value of reading either. Don’t wait for the schools to teach them! You are the most important influence on your child. If reading doesn’t come naturally to you, start off slow—one doesn’t prepare for a marathon by running fifty miles the first day. Build up your ability to read great works. Then pass on that ability to your children. Get the book How to Grow a Young Reader by Kathryn Lindskoog and Ranelda Mack Hunsicker and use it as a guide.

2. Find Remote Controls. Locate ‘Off’ Buttons. Push them. Make a determined effort to make your home less centred on electronic amusements. Consider that the word ‘amuse’ literally means ‘no thought’. Don’t just find more wholesome shows—turn it off completely! This should include TVs, radios, CD players, Playstations, etc. Gather the family around a good book. Make the telling of tales central in your home.

3. Act Out Your Favourite Stories. Make simple costumes (everyday clothes, towels, whatever) and gather a few accessories (toy swords, toy horses, etc) and act out some of your favourite stories, or a few scenes from them, anyway. Let the children play various parts in the story, and coach them on what to say and do.

4. Carry on a Great Story. Take one of your family’s favourite books. Gather everyone together and have a time of creativity. Create new adventures for the characters in the book. If it is a book about a dog who has adventures (Tolkien’s Roverandom is excellent), make up a new story in which the dog meets your family pet. Encourage each person to create a work of art related to the story (drawing, Play-doh sculpture, poem, story, song, recipe, etc).

5. Remember and Relate. A storytelling culture isn’t all about the stories of other people, but about your stories. Around the dinner table, or in the car while travelling, tell the children stories of things that happened when you were a child, or stories your parents or grandparents told you. Every family is its own little culture, with its own traditions, rituals, memories, and stories. Cultivate that cultural identity in your children, and they won’t be so quick to seek identity and acceptance elsewhere. Above all, spend time with them. ‘Quality’ time is a poor excuse for the absence of a large ‘Quantity’ of time.

C.S. Lewis and Racism

2006-01-28T00:22:00.000-05:00

Back in December, as the release date of the film version of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe began to get excitingly close, USA Today ran an article: ‘Is that Lion the King of Kings?’, which specifically examined the debate over whether these stories are Christian, whether non-believing audiences can enjoy them, whether even Christians should take the trouble to lead their children to see whatever Christian elements are there (Note: for an article in which I give my views on this subject, check out The Greensboro News and Record right here).

A sidebar article raised the issue of possible productions of the other Narnia books. Andrew Adamson, Wardrobe director, said that, if he were to direct a film version of The Horse and His Boy, he would change one thing, at least: the portrayal of the Calormenes (a kingdom south of Narnia) as a Muslim culture (as Lewis does in the book).

Adamson, and others interviewed, said to follow Lewis at this point would be to ‘exacerbate ethnic tensions and prejudice against Arabs’ in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks by Muslim extremists. He said he would recast the Calormenes as another race entirely, probably something not even human.

Two points are in order: first, the books themselves have never been changed, and yet, despite sales of nearly 100 million, there is no evidence they have caused ‘ethnic tensions’.

Second, I think this boils down to a failure to understand what Lewis was doing. Anyone who thinks Lewis created the land of Calormen out of some sort of racial vainglory truly does not understand Lewis at all. In the same USA Today article, Alan Jacobs, an English professor at Wheaton College (a Christian institution), and who should know better, makes a rather silly statement. ‘I think Lewis thought he could draw on the ancient tradition in Europe of fearing the Ottoman Empire,’ Jacobs said. ‘So he changed the name, but kept all the imagery of the dangerous Middle East, something everybody in his generation could recognize and respond to. But then things changed, and in the 20th Century all the threats to Europe were internal. And so that whole tradition was swept away.’

What’s wrong with this analysis? Jacobs acts as though Lewis wrote The Horse and His Boy (the first book in which the Calormenes play a significant part) before he realised that the greater threats to Europe were going to be internal (Germany, say). This is ridiculous: Lewis wrote The Horse and His Boy in 1954, nearly a decade after the end of World War II, and nearly forty years after Lewis himself fought the ‘internal threat’ of Germany in World War I.

But more to the point, I think Lewis’s Calormenes are intended to make, not a racial, but a theological point. Lewis wrote an almost-forgotten work called Williams and the Arthuriad, a commentary on his friend Charles Williams’s cycle of Arthurian poetry (Taliessin Through Logres and The Region of the Summer Stars). In that work, Lewis comments on one of the poems, The Coming of Palomides, and on Williams’s use of Palomides, a Saracen knight. Williams used the Muslim, according to Lewis, as a symbol of ‘all religions that are afraid of matter and afraid of mystery, [of] all misplaced reverences and misplaced purities that repudiate the body and shrink back from the glowing materialism of the Grail’; in short, because ‘Islam denies the Incarnation.’

A full treatment of Lewis’s, and Williams’s, point would be beside our point. It is enough to say that neither man expressed any racial animosity towards Arabs or Muslims at all. Indeed, during his discussion of The Coming of Palomides, Lewis describes Muslims as ‘strong, noble, venerable; yet radically mistaken.’ That is, he admired the people, but disagreed with their doctrine.

This is consistent with Lewis’s own use of the Calormenes in The Horse and His Boy, and later, The Last Battle.

Indeed, the Calormenes, far from being a despised race, completely foreign to their Northern neighbours (Narnia and Archenland), are actually close cousins. In his book, A Field Guide to Narnia, Colin Duriez notes that, ‘Calormen originated in the Narnian year 204, when outlaws fled south from Archenland.’ This fact means that the Calormenes are originally blood relatives of both Archenlanders and Narnians (Archenlanders, like Narnians, were descended from Frank I, first king of Narnia (see The Magician’s Nephew). Thus, Narnians, Archenlanders, and Calormenes all descend from the same man, which is as much as to say, God ‘made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth’ (Acts 17:26).

In addition, there are two noble Calormenes depicted in the books: Aravis (in The Horse and His Boy) and Emeth (in The Last Battle). Granted, their nobility consists, in part, in their rejection of certain aspects of Calormene culture (Aravis leaves an oppressive life in Calormen for freedom in Archenland and Emeth rejects the worship of Tash, the Calormene god), but the point is that their nobility, and their acceptance by the ‘white’ Narnians, has nothing to do with their ethnicity or the colour of their skin. In fact, in The Last Battle, Jewel the unicorn says of Emeth, ‘By the Lion's Mane, I almost love this young warrior, Calormene though he be. He is worthy of a better God than Tash.’ Here again, race or skin colour are irrelevant, and only a man’s words and deeds are taken into account. Critics may still cringe at even this 'theological supremacy' but they may not with any accuracy describe it as racism.

By the way, for a rather silly discussion of Lewis’s ‘racism’, see this article. I don’t know who these people are, but though they have at least some knowledge of the content of the Narnian books, listening to their speculations on the meanings of the stories are rather like watching a drunk alone at a shooting range: nothing alive to shoot at, but the drunk sure seems to think so.

Days of Old Long Ago

2005-12-10T00:45:00.000-05:00

History records the origins of our secular New Year’s Day as harking back to Julius Caesar and the calendar that bears his name, developed by astronomer and mathematician Sosigenes. 1 January is nearly universally recognised as the beginning of yet another year, though other calendars are still observed in various cultures. Calendars, of whatever sort, are essentially ways of marking the passing of time, and the New Year is often regarded as a time of reflection, of remembering and pondering the realities and possibilities of the Already and the Not Yet.
On the vigil, we sing 'Should auld acquaintance be forgot, and days of auld lang syne'. Few, perhaps, know this Scots phrase, meaning, ‘old long ago.’ We remember, we sigh for the good old days, even while resolving to live better in days to come. We laugh, and kiss, and party, celebrating Time’s changing of the guard. We drink a cup o' kindness, for days of old long ago.
But while Dick Clark and ABC are still in the planning stages for the next Rockin’ New Year’s Eve, another New Year’s Day recently slipped quietly by, as it does each year, largely unnoticed by the revelers, waiting in the wings. Near the beginning of December, the Church Year began again, with the dawning of the Advent Season. The Christian Church marks the passing of time by remembering the Days of Redemptive History: the life of Christ. Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Palm Sunday, Easter, Pentecost, the Ascension—we pass from waiting to fulfillment, from sorrow to sorrow and joy to joy. The mourning of Tenebrae on Good Friday is shattered by the trumpet blasts of triumphant rejoicing on Resurrection Sunday. We remember the Trinity, Christ the King, the Holy Innocents. We repent during the Lenten Season and feast during the Christmas season.
A friend of mine says the Church Calendar should always be at war with that of the unbelieving world, at least until the former shapes the latter. In other words, the Church should always hold to its own days, while observing civic holidays only after consideration, and then, perhaps, not even on the same days: he even suggested that perhaps we should always observe alternate days—Thanksgiving on Friday, for instance—to make the point that the Church is not subject to the State in such matters. Others say that the Church Year is only tradition, and not required by Scripture. Though this is true, the example of a liturgical calendar can still be found in the pages of Holy Writ, while Jesus Himself attended religious festivals not required by the Law.
But wherever a church finds itself on this spectrum of opinion, it is certainly true that for Christians—wary of mere tradition, but never afraid of it—the more important New Year should be obvious, though I am not saying it is a sin to hang a January-December calendar on the wall (for the sake of convenience, if nothing else; we’re not yet to the point where you can call your doctor to see if he has anything open the second Tuesday after Trinity). Surely even those whose churches don’t observe the Church Calendar can see the contrast between the two ways of marking time: Sosigenes’ mathematical divisions of days—or the events of the life and work of Jesus. ‘Thirty days hath September,’ or the birth, life, miracles, death, resurrection, and ascension of the Messiah—great deeds in days of Auld Lang Syne.
Happy New Year.

What's New

2005-11-26T20:45:00.000-05:00

The latest is an article here on Blogres Hall: Start at the Beginning: Seeing Christ in all of Scripture, which you can find just below. And, on the Logres Hall website, a new addition to our Classic Reviews Page: C.S. Lewis's The Great Divorce. You can read that by clicking here.

Stay tuned, for there is more to come.

Talking of Dragons on Blog and Mablog

2005-11-24T04:08:00.000-05:00

Doug Wilson was kind enough to write a blurb for my forthcoming book, Talking of Dragons (for which, see here). He keeps a Book Log on his website, on which he lists books he has read, along with the author's name, and his one or two word label for it: 'Excellent'; 'Really Good'; 'Whattabook'; 'Atrocious'; 'Appalling'; 'Bleh'; and so on. He listed Talking of Dragons in September's Book Log, with the epithet, 'Really Good', which was very gratifying, of course. I highly recommend his blog (wonderfully titled 'Blog and Mablog'). It will make you think, laugh, and, quite possibly, howl with rage. Check it out here.

Start at the Beginning

2005-10-28T04:28:00.000-04:00

Start at the Beginning
Seeing Christ in all of Scripture

Many thanks to Kerry Lewis for helpful suggestions that greatly improved this article.

OK, so this guy walks into a bookstore (stop me if you’ve heard this one) and after absolutely no searching at all, finds a huge display with about four thousand copies of the Harry Potter books. He’s hasn’t read any of the six titles released so far, but has finally succumbed to cultural peer-pressure and decided to see what all the fuss is about. He buys one of each and heads for home.

Back at the house, he has all six books spread out on his coffee table. They all have interesting covers and he ponders where to begin. Finally, he notices that each of them seems to have some sort of chronological designation: year one, year two, and so on. But he likes the cover of book 4 better than book 1, so he decides to begin there. Puzzled by the end, he then skips to the newest entry, book 6, and reads that one. Even more confused, he next reads book 5, but there is obviously a back-story he is missing, so he goes back to book 2, then, 3, and finally, book 1. At last, he chunks them all in the trash, deciding that if the author can’t make herself clearer than that, she should find another job.

Ridiculous, you say? Unreasonable? I agree, but why? Obviously, because, though there are many books in the Harry Potter series, there is only one story. Those who start in the middle are bound to be confused. Not only will they misunderstand what’s going on, they will actually miss a lot of it. No one would recommend that a new reader start in the middle of a story.

No one, that is, except Christians. What’s the first thing we do with a new believer? Why, send them to the Gospel of John, of course, which, in some ways, is just like starting with book 4 of Harry Potter.

“But,” some will say, “that’s because we want new Christians to start with the story of Jesus, the most important part of the Bible, and not get confused with a lot of stuff that doesn’t have anything to do with Him!”

Now, it is perfectly true that we should start our Bible reading with the story of Jesus. The question is: where does this story begin? “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made” (John 1:1-3). The Word, of course, is Jesus Christ. According to St John, He was “in the beginning” and indeed, the one through whom “all things were made.” The story of Christ, then, begins, not in first century Bethlehem, but before the world was made. Not in John 1, but in Genesis 1.

So, yes, by all means, let new readers begin their reading with the story of Jesus; but you must realize that this will include, not only the Gospels or Epistles, but the writings of the Old Testament as well. Put another way, there is only one story in the Bible, and it is all about Jesus Christ.

Surprised? Perhaps you have been taught, like many, that the Old Testament is a lot of confusing stuff that doesn’t relate to “New Testament” Christians. Before answering that objection, I should probably point out that I am not saying “don’t read the New Testament until you’ve read the Old.” For children, especially, a focus on the narratives of Christ’s Incarnation, the days when He walked the earth, is essential. Any good Bible teaching plan should do that. In addition, it would be beneficial to include appropriate passages from the letters of Paul, or John, or Peter (to help understand the significance of the story of Christ), and readings from the Old Testament, including a generous portion of the Psalms (to help understand the context of the story of Christ). Whatever you do, don’t just skip the Old Testament, or treat it as something completely alien to the New Testament accounts.

But again, what does the Old Testament have to do with the story of Jesus in the New Testament? Scripture itself teaches us the connection. After His resurrection, Jesus walked with two disciples on the road to Emmaus. Luke tells us that, “…beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” (Luke 24:27) Note carefully what is said here. Jesus goes through the Old Testament (“Moses and all the Prophets”) and shows them “the things concerning himself.”

On another occasion, the Jews asked Jesus (who had just informed them that “if anyone keeps my word, he will never taste death”), “Are you greater than our father Abraham, who died?” Jesus responded:

“Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:53, 56-58)

Here we see Christ’s claim to be the eternal God, “I Am,” who revealed His name to Moses and said he was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Exodus 3:6).

These passages are important, for they show that the life of Jesus was a fulfillment of all that the Old Testament looked forward to. There are three main ways in which Jesus is revealed in the Old Testament. For simplicity and clarity, we will call them prophecies, appearances, and symbols.

First, prophecies: Jesus was the promised Messiah, the long-awaited Saviour of God’s people. Hundreds of years before his birth, God sent prophets who foretold many things about the Messiah, all of which were fulfilled in the life of Jesus. Just a few examples would include his birth in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2), heralded by a star (Numbers 24:17); his conception by a virgin (Isaiah 7:14); his flight to, and return from, Egypt (Hosea 11:1; cf. Matthew 2:15); his death by crucifixion, and his resurrection (Psalm 22:1-18; Isaiah 53).

Second, appearances: “the LORD appeared to [Abraham] by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the door of his tent in the heat of the day. He lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three men were standing in front of him” (Genesis 18:1-2). Many Biblical scholars understand this to be an actual appearance of Christ, the Son of God. The Second Person of the Trinity comes to Abraham in the appearance of a man. Puritan John Gill wrote that, “the truth of the matter seems to be this, that one of them was the son of God in an human form, that chiefly conversed with Abraham…and the other two were angels in the like form that accompanied him in that expedition….”* This happens throughout the Old Testament. When Jacob wrestled with a “man” (Genesis 32:24), the patriarch himself concludes, “For I have seen God face to face, and yet my life has been delivered” (v. 30). Often, when “the Angel of the Lord” appears to God’s people in the Old Testament (for example, Gideon, in Judges 6, or Manoah in Judges 13), he is also referred to as “the LORD” or “God.” Biblical scholars suggest that these are appearances of Christ, not the Father, or the Holy Spirit, who are never said to appear as humans.

Third, symbols. Many Old Testament passages refer to Christ in an indirect manner, by way of types or symbols. From St Paul, for instance, we learn that even the Israelites wandering in the wilderness knew Christ, and he compares their experience with what New Testament Christians receive in Baptism and the Lord’s Supper:

I want you to know, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ. (I Corinthians 10:1-4)

The prophet Jonah was a symbol of Christ, as Jesus himself tells us: “just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (Matthew 12:38-40). Think of the ways Jesus is described in the New Testament: “the lamb of God” (John 1:29); “the good shepherd” (John 10:11); “prophet” (Luke 24:19); “priest” (Hebrew 3:1); and “king” (Matthew 2:2; 27:11). Yet God had given to the people of Israel lesser prophets, priests, and kings, as well as sacrificial lambs. In addition, there are shepherds in the Old Testament, like Jacob, David, and Amos. So, when we read the Scriptures, and read about a lamb, a shepherd, a prophet, a priest, a king (and these are just a few examples), we should think of Jesus, and see what we can learn about Him from these types and symbols.

In doing this, we should let the New Testament be our guide. Even the simple tool of a good reference Bible can help. When the New Testament quotes a passage from the Old Testament, or the margins list an Old Testament reference, look it up. It will enhance your ability to help children understand the significance and context of whatever passage you are teaching.

The Bible is essentially one book, one story, though made up of many individual books and stories, just as the tales of Lancelot, Galahad, and Gawain are all parts of the legend of King Arthur. Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is at the centre of the Bible’s story.

Look around at the landscape painted by Scripture, and on every hill, in every valley, in every wood and plain, there is Christ. Hear the story of God’s people, and in every scene, at every moment, there is Christ. Read the scriptural account of God’s work in history, and on every page, in every song and letter, there is Christ.

With this understanding, all of Scripture takes on a new significance for parents and teachers. We come to see, for example, that the story of David and Goliath is not primarily about “how to conquer the giants in our lives.” Rather, this story is told because it is a significant moment in the life of David, the ancestor of Christ, who was the Son of David (Matthew 1:1; 9:27). Adam’s story foreshadows the Second Adam, Christ (I Corinthians 15:45). Moses points ahead to One greater than Moses (Hebrews 3:1-6). All of this ought to infuse our teaching with life and energy, with drama and wonder. All is about Christ. Every book, every chapter, every passage, every verse, no matter how difficult or obscure, ultimately finds meaning in union with the story of Jesus Christ. As the Apostle Paul put it, “For from him and through him and to him are all things” (Romans 11:36). Children, with this understanding of the Bible, will not be bewildered at the vast array of stories and characters, but will begin to see this diversity as part of the unity of the One Story, the story of Christ. Add to that the fact that it is, above all, a true story, and you have (of course!) the greatest tool for the transformation of young lives that could ever be imagined.

*From the commentary on Genesis 18 in John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible, which can be found here.

Tolkien and Lewis Resources

2005-10-01T02:59:00.000-04:00

My forthcoming book, Talking of Dragons: The Children's Books of J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis, went to the printers a couple of weeks ago. I had written up a brief resource/reading list for further study, but the constraints of space required that it be left out. So, I thought I would put it here, for those who may be interested. Enjoy.

For Further Study

What follows is a short list of resources—books, films, CDs, websites—that are recommended for those who would like to delve deeper into the lives of Tolkien and Lewis, the worlds of Narnia and Middle-earth, and some of the thoughts and ideas that shaped those worlds.

Books:

Bradley J. Birzer
J. R. R. Tolkien’s Sanctifying Myth: Understanding Middle-earth

Devin Brown
Inside Narnia: A Guide to Exploring The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe

Kurt Bruner and Jim Ware
Finding God in The Lord of the Rings
Finding God in the Land of Narnia

Humphrey Carpenter
J. R. R. Tolkien: A Biography

The Inklings: C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, Charles Williams and Their Friends

David Day:
A Guide to Tolkien

Colin Duriez
A Field Guide to Narnia
The Inklings Handbook: The Lives, Thought and Writings of C. S. Lewis, J. R. R. Tolkien, Charles Williams, Owen Barfield and their Friends
Tolkien and C. S. Lewis: The Gift of Friendship
The J.R.R. Tolkien Handbook: A Concise Guide to His Life, Writings, and World of Middle-earth

Paul F. Ford
Companion to Narnia: A Complete Guide to the Enchanting World of C.S. Lewis’s The Chronicles of Narnia

Douglas Jones and Douglas Wilson
Angels in the Architecture: A Protestant Vision for Middle Earth

C. S. Lewis
The Letters of C. S. Lewis
Letters to Children
Surprised by Joy: The Shape of My Early Life
The Four Loves
An Experiment in Criticism
The Discarded Image: An Introduction to Medieval and Renaissance Literature
Boxen: The Imaginary World of the Young C. S. Lewis
The Complete Chronicles of Narnia
Of Other Worlds: Essays and Stories
The Ransom Trilogy (Out of the Silent Planet, Perelandra, That Hideous Strength)
The Pilgrim’s Regress
Mere Christianity
Miracles
Till We Have Faces: A Myth Retold

Kathryn Lindskoog
Journey Into Narnia
C. S. Lewis: Mere Christian
Light in the Shadowlands: Protecting the Real C. S. Lewis
How to Grow a Young Reader: Books from Every Age for Readers of Every Age (with Ranelda Mack Hunsicker)

George MacDonald (the author that C. S. Lewis called his ‘master’)
Phantastes
The Princess and the Goblin
The Princess and Curdie
At the Back of the North Wind
The Gifts of the Child Christ & Other Stories and Fairy Tales

Michael D. O’Brien
A Landscape With Dragons: The Battle for You Child’s Mind

Joseph Pearce:
Tolkien: A Celebration

Frederick Rebsamen
Beowulf: A Verse Translation

Tom Shippey
The Road to Middle-Earth: How J. R. R. Tolkien Created a New Mythology
J. R. R. Tolkien: Author of the Century

Mark Eddy Smith
Tolkien’s Ordinary Virtues: Exploring the Spiritual Themes of The Lord of the Rings

J. R. R. Tolkien
The Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien
The Silmarillion:
The Hobbit (The Annotated Hobbit is highly recommended)
The Lord of the Rings
Roverandom
The Father Christmas Letters
Mr Bliss
Tree and Leaf: Including the Poem Mythopoeia, the Homecoming of Beorhtnoth
Morgoth’s Ring (The History of Middle-earth, Volume X. See especially ’Athrabeth Finrod Ah Andreth’, which sheds much light on the Christian foundations of Tolkien’s mythology)

Turgon (from theonering.net)
The Tolkien Fan’s Medieval Reader (Texts of many of the Old English, Middle English, Old Norse, and Celtic tales that shaped Tolkien’s stories)

Recordings:

BBC
The Hobbit (Radio adaptation)
The Lord of the Rings (Radio adaptation)

Focus on the Family Radio Theater
The Chronicles of Narnia (Paul McCusker’s excellent radio adaptation of all seven books)

R. C. Sproul, Jr.
Further Up and Further In: Studies in Narnia (CD set)
Basement Tapes #24: You Don’t Know Jack (CD set on C. S. Lewis)

Douglas Wilson
What I Learned in Narnia (CD set)

Periodicals:

Christian History Magazine, Spring 2003: Tolkien: Man Behind the Myth
Credenda/Agenda: Volume 13, Issue 5: Jack: A Reformed Appreciation of C. S. Lewis
St Austin Review, January, February 2003: Tolkien Revisited (see especially Bradley J. Birzer’s fine article, ‘Grace and Will in Tolkien’s Legendarium’)

Websites/web articles:

theonering.net (fan site)
lordoftherings.net (official movie site)
narniaweb.com (official movie site)
cslewis.drzeus.net (Into the Wardrobe: C. S. Lewis site)
tolkienlibrary.com (the books of Tolkien)
christianitytoday.com/history/newsletter/2003/aug29.html (This is an interview with Colin Duriez on the friendship of Tolkien and Lewis. At the bottom of the page are links to a number of other articles, including a fascinating email conversation between Bradley J. Birzer and Mark Eddy Smith)

Video:

The Chronicles of Narnia (TV adaptations by the BBC of four of the seven books)
The Lord of the Rings (Big screen adaptations directed by Peter Jackson)

The Agony and the Ecstasy

2005-10-01T02:55:00.000-04:00

Just wanted to mention something that is actually rather old news, though I just found out about it. One of my favourite movies was finally released on DVD earlier this year. The Agony and the Ecstasy, starring Charlton Heston as Michaelangelo and Rex Harrison as Pope Julius II, tells the story of the painting of the Sistine chapel. I hope to write a review later for the Logres Hall Classic Reviews page, but for now just wanted to mention it here. My previous copy was a cheap pan and scan ('This movie has been formatted to fit your screen'; it's not widescreen, in other words) VHS with terrible audio and picture quality. The DVD is a restored version of the film and it is truly glorious. There is so much I had really never seen before. A great film about issues of art, life, and faith, and some of the best acting you are likely to see anytime soon. Superb script, too. Highly recommended.

Patch the Pirate and "Reality"

2005-08-18T21:40:00.000-04:00

Some time ago, David W. Cloud, a fundamentalist Baptist preacher and writer, offered some written criticisms of the Patch the Pirate children’s recordings. I won’t go into his criticisms here, nor will I say much about the Patch recordings in general, except this: Patch the Pirate is a bit silly at times, but some of the songs are good, and they are decent children’s entertainment for very young children (though they can be enjoyed by older children, one hopes they will have moved on to more substantive things by then).

The following was a comment one of Cloud’s readers made in response to the original article, and this is what I wanted to talk about:

"I have a very strong position that is in opposition to ‘Patch’, but for reasons not mentioned in your article. ‘Patch’ is based on Non-Reality. This is a very dangerous foundation upon which to ‘minister’ to young people. Bible-believing Christianity is REAL, not fantasy as presented by ‘Patch’. Nowhere in the Bible do you find Bible truth presented in fantasy form. This false method of ‘evangelism’ or ‘teaching’ leads young people into a fantasy world, not into the reality of true Christianity. To add to this error, the hero ‘Patch’ is a pirate. I can find no pirate in all of history that is good. Is this calling ‘good’ ‘evil’? This type of ‘ministry’ is a bane on the church. Dobson does the same thing with his ‘Odyssey’ program. I would like to see someone research this and present it through your medium. I deeply appreciate your ministry. God bless you, my dear Brother."

I actually deal more at length with this kind of criticism of fiction in my forthcoming book Talking of Dragons, but here are a few thoughts.

First, the writer asserts his opposition to Patch the Pirate on the indisputable grounds that it is “based on Non-Reality.” He asserts that this is a “dangerous foundation upon which to ‘minister’ to young people.” He supports this assertion with another assertion: “Nowhere in the Bible do you find Bible truth presented in fantasy form. This false method of ‘evangelism’ or ‘teaching’ leads young people into a fantasy world, not into the reality of true Christianity.”

Taking these statements together, then, it seems that by fantasy the writer means Non-Reality. Presumably, what he means is that the events in the Bible really happened, while the events of Patch the Pirate, Adventures in Odyssey, etc., did not, and thus should be categorized as “Non-Real.” Now to begin with, I wholeheartedly agree that the Bible is primarily a book of history. I accept without qualification the historicity of the miracles of the prophets, Christ, and the apostles, including the great miracles of the Virgin Birth and the Resurrection of Christ. In this sense, the Bible stories are “Real,” while fictional stories are “Non-Real.”

The question has to do with whether fictional stories are really, as the writer claims, “dangerous.” Since he asserts that, “Nowhere in the Bible do you find Bible truth presented in fantasy [fictional] form,” I presume he would change his mind if we could show him examples of just such “Non-Reality” in the Scriptures themselves. This I intend to do. So let’s just briefly mention a few examples of passages that the Anti-Patch writer would have to cut from his Bible to avoid such “dangerous” “Non-Reality.”

In II Samuel 12:1-7, we have the prophet Nathan’s story of the rich man stealing the poor man’s lamb. He told this story to King David after his adulterous affair with Bathsheba, and the murder of her husband, Uriah the Hittite. Nathan comes to confront David but does so obliquely (at first) by telling him a fictional story. Ultimately, the story was true, in the sense that David had done, in effect, the same thing as the man in the story. But then, the same could be said of most fictional tales. The fact remains that there really was no rich man who had stolen a poor man’s lamb. What really happened (and remember Anti-Patch’s insistence on only the “REAL”) was that a king had stolen a soldier’s wife. Why couldn’t Nathan just stick to reality? Obviously, because one benefit of fiction is that it helps us see truth and reality that we would otherwise have missed. By telling David a fictional story of a gross injustice, Nathan stirred David’s righteous anger to the point of admitting that the man in the story deserved to die. Then, the kicker: David, “thou art the man.” Can you imagine a more powerful way to turn the mirror on a man’s soul, driving him to his knees in repentance before a holy God? Such is the power that God has given to Story.

Other examples could be multiplied. In Revelation, God shows John visions of things that even the most conservative of scholars admit are often symbolic (i.e., the most die-hard literalist Baptist does not believe that the Anti-Christ has ten horns and seven heads). These symbols are true, in the sense that they point to something beyond them that is true, but the symbols themselves are, strictly speaking, imaginary, fantastical, and fictional. Yet if we live by Anti-Patch’s arbitrary insistence on only “REAL” events, we will miss nearly everything that the book of Revelation has to teach us about God’s sovereignty and triumph over His enemies, because we would not be allowed to read Revelation.

Most tellingly, we have the parables of Jesus Himself. These are short, fictional stories designed to teach truth for those who have ears to hear, and to confuse those who do not (Matthew 13:9-16). Shouldn’t Jesus just have stuck to teaching eternal truths, as in the Sermon on the Mount? Why delve into “Non-Reality”? The same reason Nathan told David a story instead of jumping right to the “Thou art the man,” as many contemporary “prophets” would have done: Story is powerful. Now, some may say that Jesus, being God, could have known of true stories in which a woman lost a coin, or an enemy sowed weeds among the wheat, or a man was robbed, ignored by his countrymen, and then helped by a foreigner. Granted. But Jesus doesn’t present them that way, as if they were AP news stories. He doesn’t tell us the names of the people involved, as the Bible usually does when recounting true history. The point of these stories is that they apply to everyone, because they could have happened to anyone.

Finally, just a word on Anti-Patch’s condemnation of Patch the Pirate on the grounds that he is a pirate. I find it hard to imagine that children will suddenly develop a desire to loot and pillage after listening to Patch. Obviously, this is not a pirate in the sense of “we extort, we pilfer, we filch and sack, drink up me hearties, Yo ho!” There are other, symbolic (there’s that nasty, Non-Real word again) ways to use the image of a pirate. Michael Card’s haunting song, Why, comes to mind: “Why did it have to be a heavy cross He was made to bear?…It was a cross, for on a cross, a thief was supposed to pay. And Jesus had come into the world to steal every heart away.” Or, more interestingly, we have another of Jesus’ fictional parables, in which He says, “how can someone enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Matthew 12:29). The hero of this parable actually enters someone’s house and “plunders” it (“steals,” “loots,” “pillages,” “sacks,” are listed by Merriam-Webster as synonyms, though they forgot to add, “drink up me hearties, Yo ho!”). So, it would seem the image of a thieving marauder can be used to good purpose in fictional stories, obviating both of Anti-Patch’s criticisms in one fell swoop.

Yo ho, Yo ho, a pirate’s life for me.

Poetry - Old as Mountains

2005-08-07T05:07:00.000-04:00

Below are the lyrics of a song I wrote a few months back. My brother Chris is a songwriter and singer living in Nashville, and I wrote this for him to perform. The music is kind of a rootsy country/bluegrass sound, and the lyrics are written in Medieval alliterative verse (though, unlike traditional alliteration, with a rhyming scheme added on), a combination only tried occasionally, by acts like Trick Pony and Tim McGraw*. The lyrics are actually a bit of a riddle, with an implied question at the end: "who am I?" Feel free to post your thoughts on who the song is talking about. Incidentally, in the interests of full disclosure, the first and last lines of the song are straight out of Tolkien; everything else is original.

*This is what philosophers of earlier eras called a joke, though they may have spelled it differently.

Old as Mountains
William Chad Newsom

Learn now the lore of living creatures
All the elders of this earth unmade
Threescore and Ten to thrive under Heaven
Passing privilege to ply our trade

But there are those whose thoughts reach further
Beyond the years, the yesterdays of all
And standing still, like stone unmoving
Won’t see the setting of the sun’s last fall

Chorus:
Mark the memory, immortal fountains
Of the ancient ones, old as mountains

I’m seeking signs, a sight of glory
A little lower than the lords on high
I’ll look for lore of lost Long-livers
Await the wisdom of the Wielder’s cry

And now I know, for none have perished
Of all the ancient Sires of Earth’s great stage
They walk at will, the Wielder’s heralds
Behold the Harvest of the Heav’nly Page

Chorus
Mark the memory, immortal fountains
Of the ancient ones, old as mountains

(Instrumental)

Chorus
Mark the memory, immortal fountains
Of the ancient ones, old as mountains

Repeat Chorus

Of the ancient ones, old as mountains
Oh, the ancient ones, old as mountains
Ent the Earthborn, old as mountains

Thoughts on Harry Potter, Part I

2005-08-04T21:33:00.000-04:00

In this space, I will be posting some thoughts on the Harry Potter phenomenon, a little at a time. I have recently finished reading the sixth and latest installment in the series, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, and I am currently reading John Granger’s book, Looking for God in Harry Potter. I have also been reading sundry other writings on Harry, pro (Granger) and con (Michael O’Brien).

Thoughts on Harry Potter, Part I

Magical Distinctions

I must begin this effort with a caveat: I think that sweeping conclusions on the meaning of the Potter books both hasty and unwise, until the final book has been published. This is because J.K. Rowling, author of the series, is all about surprises, and we may find that the seventh volume is the left hand that takes away what the right hand has given. This will almost certainly be true in some ways (just whose side is Snape on, anyway?), and may be true in bigger ways than we can now guess, though one hopes the final book won’t yank all available rugs as, say, the final film in The Matrix did (reportedly: I have not seen it, having lost interest in the series during the second film). Because of this, I will be cautious about big conclusions, offering instead what I hope to be food for thought, interaction on the Potter books and the controversy swirling around them.

That said, on to our subject. Granger’s above-mentioned book is valuable for many reasons, largely because he deals with the series as a Christian, homes-schooling father who is concerned about what his children watch and read (indeed, he only read the first Potter book in order to let his kids know “why we don’t read this stuff”). But he is convinced the books are great, classic literature that will stand the test of time, and that, further, the books are actually Christian fiction, in the tradition of the Inklings, as well as older Christian writers (Shakespeare, Donne, Eliot). In addition, he answers the concerns of Christians who see in these books a glorification of the occult. It is this magical element of Harry Potter that I wish to briefly address today.

Granger distinguishes, helpfully, between two kinds of magic: invocational and incantational (wow, my spell-checker really hates those words). Invocational magic involves calling on demons to provide magical power. Incantational magic is more of an inherent ability to do wonders, and which Granger says is the literary equivalent of a belief in the supernatural existence and power of God. Put another way, the presence of incantational magic in a story is an oblique assault on the modern philosophy of naturalism, which asserts that the material universe is all there is or can be (thus denying the reality of God, angels, miracles, etc.). Incantational magic is the ability to do miracles with a word or a touch, just like the Prophets, the Apostles, and Christ Himself. Elisha touches the river with Elijah’s cloak and the waters part. Jesus speaks to the storm and it calms. “Arise and walk,” Peter says to a lame man, and he does so. Such wonders are the historical archetypes for the incantational magic of Christian literature. Invocational magic, however, is what C.S. Lewis illustrated in Prince Caspian, when Caspian fights the dwarf Nikabrik (his former ally) over his plan to engage in “Black sorcery and the calling up of an accursed ghost.” Granger notes that, in Harry Potter, absolutely no invocational magic is used. All is incantational, and no different from the magic of Tolkien’s elves.

There is some truth in this, perhaps a lot, but I still wonder if something else is being missed, here. Surely the distinction itself is a valid one, but there is another magical distinction, this one found in the writings of Tolkien himself, that narrows the field a bit further. Tolkien once said of his wizard characters that they are “utterly distinct from sorcerer or magician.” So far, this falls in line with Granger’s incantational/invocational distinction But Tolkien, in another place, made a further division between kinds of magic: the magic of Faerie (which is certainly of the incantational variety) on the one hand, and what he called “the vulgar devices of the laborious, scientific, magician,” on the other. Here, I think, is where Rowling’s magic differs from that of Tolkien or Lewis. Surely the cauldron-brewing, potion-mixing, wand-waving, fortune-telling magic of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry is more akin to “the vulgar devices of the laborious, scientific, magician,” than to the “Elf Magic” that Frodo and Sam found in Lothlorien (the thing that amazed Sam was that, in Lothlorien, no one seemed to be doing any magic):

'It’s wonderfully quiet here. Nothing seems to be going on, and nobody seems to want it to. If there’s any magic about, it’s right down deep, where I can’t lay my hands on it, in a manner of speaking.'
‘You can see and feel it everywhere,’ said Frodo.
‘Well,’ said Sam, ‘you can’t see nobody working it…I would dearly love to see some Elf-magic, Mr. Frodo!'

Magic, for Tolkien, was actually Art, without the normal human limitations. It was anything but sorcery or witchcraft. While Granger seems to be right in his assertion that Potter magic is not sorcery, I can’t help but think that Tolkien would not have cared for the more scientific magic we find at Hogwarts. Still, as I said, the seventh book is not yet written, and Rowling now seems to be hinting that there is something greater than this laborious, scientific approach to magic. In Half-Blood Prince, Harry and his friends are beginning to learn non-verbal spells, which is perhaps a little closer to the unseen magic of Lothlorien. And Dumbledore suggests that all the accoutrements and paraphernalia of magic are only for the wizarding novices, not for those who have truly mastered their gifts at incantational power. I truly hope there are further developments like this in the final book.

The image of witches is interesting, too. In Narnia, witches are always evil, and have to be defeated. In Tolkien, the Lord of the Nazgul, chief of the servants of the Dark Lord, Sauron, is also called the Witch King of Angmar. Rowling has adapted the more fanciful, fun elements of traditional witch-images (flying on brooms, for example) and turned them into something new and different. The witches and wizards of Harry Potter are completely different from, say, Faustus or the witches in Macbeth. Certainly it would be unfair to equate Hermione with the White Witch, for example, though I can’t help but wonder about the wisdom of using witches as symbols of good, even if they are the exact opposite of the mediums of Scripture or the hags and evil queens of Narnia. I am not willing to condemn the books on these grounds, but I do wonder if maybe this was a misstep. In The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, Edmund questions Peter’s wisdom in trusting a Robin. Peter responds that Robins are on the right side in all the stories. Such a statement assumes the reality of what Tolkien called “the True Tradition” of fairy tales, in which certain kinds of characters function as symbols of good or evil. I can’t help but think that, the more these symbols are subverted in newer books, the less power the traditional stories will have to move our children to love the good, the true, and the beautiful.

What I'm Watching

2005-06-29T21:18:00.000-04:00

A few recommended movies, new and old. First is the 2003 release Luther, starring Joseph Fiennes and Sir Peter Ustinov. Just got this on DVD, though I saw it a couple of times in the theatre. It is excellent, but extraordinarily fast-paced. Those who know the story will be amazed at how much ground it covers, especially in the first half hour. But the script, acting, and cinematography are top-notch, and you will seldom find a major Hollywood film with this clear a presentation of the Gospel, and they did it without ever mentioning the Rapture or the Antichrist!

Second is The Forgotten. This came out last year, I believe, and I saw it recently on DVD. This is a fairly creative suspense/thriller with some unexpected punches, not the least of which is a surprisingly vivid pro-life message. It also highlights a key Biblical theme, which is that of remembering (Deuteronomy 32:7; I Chronicles 16:12; Psalm 78; Psalm 88:12). In a key moment, one character says, "there are worse things than forgetting." The main character responds, "No, there aren't." A wild ride, and thoroughly worth the time.

Third, The Incredibles. Saw it on DVD for the first time recently. Very unusual, for a super-hero movie. Not many in this crowded genre will go out of their way to praise the virtues of family life, or skewer American egalitarianism, or what one character describes as "new ways to reward mediocrity." Another time, one character says that "everyone is special," to which an insightful child replies, "which is another way of saying that no one is." As I say, rare stuff. In one deleted scene, which is included in the special features, a mother blasts a smart-mouthed "professional woman" for suggesting that being a mom and homemaker is throwing away life. But it's not just the Christian and moral themes: the animation is stunning, the writing is stellar, and the characters are staggering (so much for the alliteration). A thoroughly enjoyable piece of work, and the bad guy (Warning: spoiler ahead!) eats it in the end, blasted to smithereens in a most satisfying conclusion. I'm with C.S. Lewis on this: let the witches, giants, dragons, super-villains, etc., be soundly killed at the end. How else can we teach our children about the utter folly and certain death of Evil?

What I'm Reading

2005-06-26T05:12:00.000-04:00

Many things, but two deserve special mention. The first is The Courage and Character of Theodore Roosevelt, by George Grant. It is an excellent, fascinating introduction to the life of (no lesser description will do) one of the greatest men in American history. Roosevelt was stunningly acomplished in many fields; indeed, he did the work of probably a dozen men, and was more successful in each endeavour than many who focused on only one vocation. He was also that rarest of creatures - a politician of genuine character and virtue. We need a man like Roosevelt today, but alas, we simply do not have one.

Second is Charles Williams' Taliessin Through Logres. This is his cycle of Arthurian poems, and it is brilliant. It is also very heavy reading, and not something to begin (as I did, first go-round) when you are particularly tired. This is not because it is boring, but because it requires especially alert eyes to be able to see even a few of its majestic beauties. The book includes Williams' own unfinished (and you should know that even the work as a whole was unfinished at his death) prose study of the Arthurian Legend, and C.S. Lewis' indispensable commentary on the work. I have been reading along with Lewis while working through the poems, and, at least for a beginner, this is the only way to fly. Highly recommended, though difficult to obtain: I ran across this by chance, as we say in Middle-earth, in a used bookstore not long ago, and was plum pleased with my treasure-hunting skills.

The Princess and the Goblin

2005-06-25T22:57:00.000-04:00

I just posted a review at Logres Hall of George MacDonald's The Princess and the Goblin. Here is that review, in full:

George MacDonald's The Princess and the Goblin:
A Short Review
William Chad Newsom

I just finished reading George MacDonald's book-length fairy tale for children, The Princess and the Goblin. Here at Logres Hall, we encourage regular reading of fairy tales as a way of reinforcing both the doctrine and morality of the Bible. MacDonald's book is a good example of that, especially in the way it skewers naturalism and praises faith through the character of Irene (the princess) and her relationship with her great-great-grandmother.

The problem for Irene is that no one else has seen her grandmother, nor, apparently, can they, or at least not at first. Readers of C. S. Lewis will know that Lewis called George MacDonald his "master," and said that he had probably quoted MacDonald in every book he ever wrote. Here we can see some of that influence, as The Princess and the Goblin inspires a scene in Prince Caspian, from Lewis' The Chronicles of Narnia. In the former book, Irene's friend, Curdie, cannot see her grandmother, because he is not yet "able" to see her. In the latter book, only Lucy can see Aslan at first, while the others cannot see him until they have learned to trust, and to act on that trust. And yet, both the grandmother and Aslan were really there to see, for those to whom it had been given (Luke 8:10). As Irene's grandmother puts it, "Seeing is not believing - it is only seeing."

The book also has something that every children's book should have: noble children. In this book, nobility is defined primarily by the character of the Princess, Irene, and how she behaves - one chapter is titled, "Irene Behaves Like a Princess," and we are told, by Irene herself, that "a princess must not break her word." In addition, Irene, though not perfect, is valiant, faithful, and kind, though she is sorely tested in these areas throughout the story. By instilling these virtues in the character of a princess, MacDonald is telling us that such virtues are high and noble, but not that they are only for those of high office - in the character of Curdie, the son of Peter, the miner, we also see a fierce nobility, daring courage, and a conscience sensitive to the touch of both good and evil. In their battles with the goblins, and their growing trust for one another, even when that seems to require believing what seems to be nonsense, both Irene and Curdie show a strength of character few adults possess. This book is valuable if for no other reason than that it clearly shows parents their goal: noble children who will one day be noble adults. We must resist our culture's view that such expectations are necessarily too high, that such nobility in the young is an unatttainable ideal. It is attainable - but not for those who refuse to read stories like The Princess and the Goblin to their children.

The adventures of Irene and Curdie are continued in The Princess and Curdie, which we will take a look at once I read it.

New Logres Hall Website!

2005-06-21T03:00:00.000-04:00

The Home Page for Logres Hall is finally up and running, at its new home: logreshall.com There's lots of new stuff, so come visit us soon.

Thoughts on the Death of Pope John Paul II

2005-06-21T02:56:00.000-04:00

In an effort to recover and republish some of the material from the earlier blog, here is a post I originally wrote on Friday, April 8th 2005.

Thoughts on the Death of Pope John Paul II

"Doctor Martin, if you leave the Christian to live only by faith; if you sweep away all good works, all these glorious things you dismiss as mere 'crutches,' what will you put in their place?"

Johann Staupitz to Martin Luther, in the 1953 film, Martin Luther

There are undoubtedly a plethora of thoughts and emotions swirling through the minds of those who would describe themselves as Protestants or Evangelicals at the news of the Pope’s passing. Everything from, “that’s so sad,” to “John who?” to “die, Papal devil! Ya-hoy!” I found myself experiencing a curious (though not completely unfamiliar) sensation: a wild desire to run straight to the local Catholic Church and bow in submission to Mother Church.
Strange, you say? Horrifying, you think? Perhaps not. Interest in the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church will certainly be at a peak now, until the novelty wears off, anyway. Many Protestants may feel a similar stirring. But I think there was something deeper at work here. In fact, having given it some thought, I am inclined to elevate my experience to a proverb: “he who feels no emotional inclination to join Rome after the death of a good pope has a view of the Church that, were that view a movie-goer, would never be able to see the film over the heads of those in front of him.” Or something like that. It’s too low, in other words (his view of the Church, I mean).
Put another way, we Protestants and Evangelicals ought to lament all that we have lost by our separation from Rome. Not that we don’t also recognize that there was much that needed to be lost: Rome has many errors, but the proper response to those errors ought not be a haughty, “God, I thank thee that I am not as other men are, or even as this Catholic.” Rather, we should mourn and grieve for the falsehoods that keep us at arm’s length from our brothers and sisters in the Roman communion—their errors, and ours as well. And we should readily admit that, as Peter Leithart recently said of John Paul,

"Flawed though his theology was, he remains far and away the greatest Christian leader of the past century. No Protestant comes anywhere close. Billy Graham may have preached more (maybe!), but Graham had nowhere near the political weight or the theological depth of Pope John Paul II. John Paul II's life is not only testimony to the wonders that God can perform through imperfect instruments but an inspiration for all Christians, whether or not we aspire to pope."

If Rome has forgotten the justification of God, Evangelicals have forgotten the beauty of God. If Rome has falsely elevated Tradition, Evangelicals have falsely denigrated it. Where Rome has given overmuch reverence to Saints, Evangelicals still think Saints come from New Orleans. We have much to learn. Some will think such words a compromise with false doctrine (the “Papal Devil” crowd). So be it. If they want to lump Chesterton, Tolkien, and John Paul in with Hitler, Nero, and LaVey, they’re welcome. They would probably do the same to Luther and Calvin, too. But R. C. Sproul, Jr. (no closet Papist, he) recently managed to write both these statements in the same article:

"I believe that Rome is an apostate church which preaches a false gospel."

"God’s grace isn’t constrained to flow only in those places where His gospel is rightly proclaimed."

R. C. is right, on both counts. And we cannot, of course, return to Rome: not yet, anyway. Not until God is pleased to bring both Reformation and Revival to his wayward Church. When Rome and Evangelicalism have duly repented of their sins, the Church may—nay, someday it will—be one again. It was while working through these Romanish thoughts that I dug out my old VHS copy of the 1953 film Martin Luther, in which the line at the top of this post was delivered. So what was Luther’s answer? Just what would he set in the place of the “crutches” of relics and indulgences?
“Christ,” was Luther’s simple answer in the film’s best moment. “Man only needs Jesus Christ.”
This is what our Roman Catholic brothers and sistersneed to realize, even as we mourn with them the passing of a pope who might havesoftened even the heart of a Wittenberg monk. When we cry “sola fide!” (“Faithalone”) it is only ever in the light of “solusChristus!”(“Christ alone). We say Rome has denied, whetherwittingly or no,sola fide,but we are not passing through the fire andtumult of religious controversy to win the right to install correct sentences inpeople’s brains.Sola Fideis vital because to deny it is to denySolus Christus.AndChristusis not a proposition: He is the Sonof Man, the Lord of Glory, Yahweh veiled in human flesh, the very TrinityIncarnate. “Faith alone” must ever be our battle cry, until God grants somefuture pope repentance, and we are again one, because “Faith alone” points everto the Christ of “Christ alone.”

New Logres Hall Blog

2005-06-19T19:07:00.000-04:00

The old Logres Hall Blog was experiencing apparently insurmountable problems, so here is the new one. New postings coming soon, but in the meantime, check out the new improved Logres Hall home page at logreshall.com