Wow, that's quite surprizing!!!! Who would've guessed?

Not me, that's for sure. I hope she'll prove to be an effective witness for the Gospel.

Later in the interview Rice was heard to say, "Have you seen what Max Lucado is dragging in these days?"

Or not.

I'm skeptical, but I'll probably give the book a try. Can't wait for Lestat to show up as Lucifer trying to tempt Jesus into worshipping him. :)

Aww c'mon, Denise. Everybody knows Satan has much more tempting guises. ;-)

*loads a John Debney film score*

A close reading of that interview shows she's drawing the source material for her new book, not from the Gospels, but from the very heresies and false histories of Jesus that were tossed out centuries ago. Who wants to lay odds she got that idea from Dan Brown?

This won't be the first time Anne Rice has written about Jesus, either. As fans of will remember, the author had the vampire Lestat sucking the blood of Jesus Christ while He was hanging on the cross.

No, I'm not making that up. I'd have to be Anne Rice to come up with something that bent. Her, or maybe J.G. Eccarius.

In the Gospel According to Anne, Satan (his pasty faced friends at the Goth clubs call him "Memnoch") was simply misunderstood.

Like God, Memnoch also dedicated to saving, yes, saving souls. They just disagree on the best way. Memnoch The Devil
is full of other blasphemies and theological stupidities.

Calling them heresies would be giving them an importance they don't merit. Nobody will ever be misled by her homoerotic twaddle. The good news is Anne Rice isn't imaginative enough to be Dan Brown.

...and now she's going to do the life of Jesus.

Will somebody tell the woman the story has already been done four times already?

I can't dispute that history tends to support a cynical and/or skeptical view of Ms. Rice's supposed new-found spirituality, or at least the commercial results that may proceed therefrom. And I have never understood or shared in the enthusiasm for novels that attempt to go where the Bible doesn't, even when they're written with a motivation to illumine or encourage. But, that's just me.

OTOH, the power of the Gospel to change hearts in amazing ways is something that we would do well not to ignore.

Actually, I read that article and I didn't read that she claims to be a "born again follower of Jesus Christ" but that she has gone back to her Catholic roots. That's not to say that she hasn't had a conversion experience; clearly she's moved in the direction of increasing faith in Christ, which is a good thing.

I'm cautiously optimistic about her novel. I don't know that I would automatically classify her has a Christian novelist, though.

Jen, I may be guilty of making assumptions that aren't supported by direct quotes. But quotes like this -- "'I promised,' she says, 'that from now on I would write only for the Lord.'" along with the fact that this article was intended to be her testimony, lead me to feel better about my conclusion.

The Bible does warn us that not everyone who acknowledges "Christ the Lord" is saved; even demons recognize who He is. But I'm willing to be ultimately found naive and foolish for giving her the benefit of the doubt at this point.

I guess I'm super cautious in light of new converts like Bob Dylan and Erik Estrada whose supposed conversion to faith is questionable by later actions. I want to believe it is as you say - I wait to see the fruit.

There are people who claim to "write/sing/whatever for the Lord" all over the place whom I doubt worship the same Lord that you and I do.

Of course, for every Bob Dylan there's a Stephen Baldwin. =)

Anne Rice can be a richly rewarding read. I love her wonderful story-telling abilities, and have never tried to attribute any moral lessons from her tales.

If her newest book deviates from her previous formulas and attempts to be a Sunday school catechism book in sheep's clothing, I'll just toss it. It's not why I read her stuff...

But, that's just me.

Jen, I do wish the ratio was at least 1:1, but it never seems to work out that way.

Pattie, while I doubt seriously the book will be a "Sunday School catechism," I do suspect that readers like you are precisely who she was referring to when she voiced concerns about a potential backlash to her new subject matter/style.

I think I read her first novel, and nothing since. I doubt I'll read the newest one, either.

"OTOH, the power of the Gospel to change hearts in amazing ways is something that we would do well not to ignore."

That's very true, Eric. I appreciate you reminding me of that. I'll be the first one to admit I'm prone to forgetting. ;-)

"Actually, I read that article and I didn't read that she claims to be a "born again follower of Jesus Christ" but that she has gone back to her Catholic roots. That's not to say that she hasn't had a conversion experience...."

Wow.

Well, it's kinda hard (but not impossible) to read between the lines of a one-word comment, and Jen can certainly speak for herself, but your "wow" seems to indicate that you perceive some kind of special slam on the Roman Catholic church in Jen's remark.

I'm sure that what she is saying is that affiliation or membership in any religious organization should not be confused with being saved, and the first doesn't automatically lead to the second.

True enough, and point taken.

It was written loosely enough to read any number of ways and I may have mistakenly read it as though, conversion experience or not, one could not be saved through traditional Catholic means.

...one could not be saved through traditional Catholic means.

Um. Well. Let's agree not to get into that, shall we? ;-)

Natalie, Eric read my comment correctly. And I'll leave it at that.

Well, I guess that puts me squarely back on "Wow."

I can live with that.