Into the Fire

Controversy can be an interesting beast. Roaring or subtle. Raging or slippery. Shouted or whispered. How Christians handle it can either be a lesson in diplomacy or a spectacle of jeering.

Apparently Ted Dekker created some noise about romance novels and writers, and the Steeple Hill Love Inspired imprint which bans certain words from appearing in its stories. At the bottom of this post in the Technorati Tags, you can click on and visit agent Chip MacGregor’s comments on Ted’s exposé, and/or you can visit Mike Duran’s take on Ted’s post over at Decompose.

When a writer—known or unknown—decides to wage ideologies, thoughts, or opinions on the offerings of other writers, said writer will invariably inject himself into some kind of controversy. If because I don’t care for the fantasy genre, I decide to minimize or mock those who write in that genre, what does that say about me?

I haven’t yet read Ted’s post, might not read it, but I did comment on the banned word list on Mike’s blog because the rather comprehensive list does imply that within a story these words would somehow portray either unclean or unsafe reading. Honestly, I can’t comprehend that. And, although I know there are incredibly capable authors able to work within the framework of the Love Inspired guidelines in order to tell meaningful stories, the absence of those for-the-most-part totally inoffensive words seems excessive and unnecessary.

Don’t get me wrong: I think any publisher can dictate whatever restrictions they desire. It’s their business, and they should have the right to structure their guidelines any which-way.

I think my point here is twofold. Today I’ll just address this one. Criticism by Christians of a particular facet of Christian publishing must be couched in straightforward words with a healthy dose of kindness. Picking apart writers, their styles, choice of genres, or anything else in the industry really should be done carefully. Not because there aren’t areas in need of improvement. Not because there aren’t books in need of a bad review. Not because there aren’t valid reasons to point out weaknesses, but because criticism can be toxic when it’s leveled in the wrong spirit. It can point a finger right back to the individual leveling the criticism and eventually come back to roost in their nest. It’s the reap what you sow principle, and it works.

You know I’ve written a few bad reviews. You know I’ve got a few negative opinions regarding certain aspects of the publishing industry. You know I’m not afraid to speak my mind. But God forbid I should ever be ugly or demeaning in my words, degrade any individual or company for exercising their professional “rights” or preferences.

If you choose to read Ted’s post, I’d be interested to hear your thoughts . . .

Father, I’m responsible to you for my words. I fail often. I know you will watch over me and hold me accountable. Help me to honor you with my words. In the Name of Jesus, Amen.

***Addendum: After taking a look at Chip’s and Mike’s and Ted’s posts, please click on Ted Dekker’s apology on his Facebook entry. Apparently, he failed to make his position perfectly clear and seeks to rectify his faux pas.***