Great Moments in Christian Love

A "Truly Reformed" guy is upset that various Calvinist publications dare to think that Anne Rice's turn away from atheism isn't a bad thing:

Puzzlingly, Anne Rice continues to get a "pass" from Christian/oid writers. I remarked on this phenomenon once here, at its most baffling (WORLD magazine). Now up it comes again here, in a conversion story that, strikingly, features no conversion. Not to Christ, anyway, though it's titled "An atheist returns to Christ." It's really "An atheist returns to Romanism," with its ritualism and false gospel of works. The article is an interesting-enough read, but a sad one. Here's the puzzling punchline: "[Rice] describes sensing with her entire being that she was surrounded by God's love. The next day she went to Mass for the first time in 38 years. Her re-commitment to Christianity began with that miracle shortly before Christmas of 1998, but was not completed until 2002." No, I didn't delete anything. Going to the blasphemous re-sacrifice of Christ = "re-commitment to Christianity." There is nothing in that about the Biblical Christ who saves. But we read that God talks to Rice, tells her to write more books. Not very good books, though, judging by the one I read (to be reviewed later). Towards the end of the article, we read that "to be a Christian is ...to act differently." Well. There y'go. It's all about works after all!

He links to an earlier post, wherein he reported the reason he was allowing his World subscription to end:

Then there was the interview with "convert" Ann Rice, best known for her Interview with a Vampire series, her baldly immoral storytelling.

The article was titled Into the Light, and subtitled "Novelist Anne Rice leaves the vampire Lestat and embraces Christ, 'the ultimate supernatural hero'." You may know the story; Rice became a Roman Catholic. That's right, a Roman Catholic.

Note very carefully: the title and subtitle express a spiritual evaluation of Rice's spiritual condition.

Now, I don't doubt that there are Roman Catholics who do not understand and do not believe the RCC's damning dogmas, and are genuine, if mistaught, Christians. WORLD is ostensibly coming from a Reformed perspective, and its writers and reporters presumably know this also. So naturally, with their readership in mind, the interviewer is going to ask Rice about her conversion, right? What is Rice's understanding of the Gospel, what does it mean to her to be saved, to be a Christian? What drew her to Rome? Just the natural, basic questions every Christian will wonder, all perfectly capable of being asked in a friendly, respectful way.

No. Not at all. Not even close.

Follow-up: in WORLD 's blog's post on this article, I object in posts 3 and 6. In #10 the reporter herself, Lynne Vincent, gives the most clueless sideways response (around me, not to me) that I can imagine, sniffing that it is a "turn off" to examine a testimony when you're reporting on a testimony.

Read that again. Then say it with me: "Huh?" You make sense of that.

But again I note: WORLD had no trouble concluding in its title that Rice had indeed gone "into the light," and had indeed embraced the Lord Jesus Christ. It is just that readers are denied information that would help us understand the basis for that evaluation. Every Roman Catholic -- in fact, let's broaden that and say every "Christian" cultist -- will claim to have embraced Jesus Christ. Mormons, Oneness Pentecostals, Christian Scientists, Jehovah's Witnesses. We can only understand what folks mean by asking questions. It isn't rude, it isn't loveless -- in fact, it is respectful. It is saying, "I respect you enough not to assume that I know what you mean without asking."

But it's a "turn off." To a reporter. One can only sigh and shake one's head.

Putting aside this homage to the 17th Century, the Anne Rice story ought to be significant to all believers.

For example, it is instructive that Rice wrote her vampire stories during a time when she was a committed athiest. With a true atheist mindset, she posited people with superhuman existence - immortality, power, the ability to define their own morals - and what she came up with was a picture of nihilistic, frustrated, bored, empty people ineffectually looking for redemption from their near-godlike existence. She writes on her blog:

Interview with the Vampire, the novel that brought me to public attention, is about the near despair of an alienated being who searches the world for some hope that his existence can have meaning. His vampire nature is clearly a metaphor for human consciousness or moral awareness. The major theme of the novel is the misery of this character because he cannot find redemption and does not have the strength to end the evil of which he knows himself to be a part. This book reflects for me a protest against the post World War II nihilism to which I was exposed in college from 1960 through 1972. It is an expression of grief for a lost religious heritage that seemed at that time beyond recovery.

And:

The existence of my Goth audience continues to create misunderstanding. Yet I remain convinced that many of the young “Goth” readers who write to me are hungering for transcendence. They gravitate to these books because they find their environment sterile, secular, and materialistic and to a large extent unsatisfying. They “identify” with my heroes as my heroes search for beauty and for truth. These young readers have deluged me with poems and paintings in past years. They, as well as other readers, express openness to the painting, music, history and philosophy discussed in my books. These readers are looking for something enduring and something meaningful, and I cherish their response to these books.

And:

For me, the entire body of my earlier work, reflects a movement towards Jesus Christ. In 2002, I consecrated my work to Jesus Christ. This did not involve a denunciation of works that reflected the journey. It was rather a statement that from then on I would write directly for Jesus Christ. I would write works about salvation, as opposed to alienation; I would write books about reconciliation in Christ, rather than books about the struggle for answers in a post World War II seemingly atheistic world.

It is interesting that some of the best books about the shallow trap of atheism are written by atheism. For example, when I read Ian McEwan's "Atonement," it was clear to me that the author was an atheist and that he had accurately described the experience of an atheist who needs forgiveness and redemption and has no way to get the redemption and forgiveness he desperately needs. "Atonement" is in its way a persuasive description of the trap that atheism puts its true adherents - at least those who are not unconsciously positing a way out of their materialims - into self-deception.

So, Rice ought to be recognized as a person on a quest - as are all people in her who find themselves in her situation. She, at least, recognized the problems inherent in materialism and nihilism and moved forward and out of it; we can pray and hope that her legions of Gothic fans can realize that the 'vampire' lifestyle is the problem and not the solution.