Question for Evangelicals/Fundamentalists

windyrdg · Apr 30, 2008

Let me start off by emphasizing that this is not intended to start any kind of controversy. I don't particularly care what anyone believes, I'm just interested in some feedback.

That said, what is your feeling about the stigmata.

Personally, I tend to be somewhat open-minded about it, treating it like speaking in tongues, or any other religious phenomenon I have never personally experienced.

My point in this is to see if it can be introduced into Christian Fiction without a large group of readers becoming apoplexic.

Thanks.

citymouse · Apr 30, 2008

windyrdg said:
Let me start off by emphasizing that this is not intended to start any kind of controversy. I don't particularly care what anyone believes, I'm just interested in some feedback.

That said, what is your feeling about the stigmata.

Personally, I tend to be somewhat open-minded about it, treating it like speaking in tongues, or any other religious phenomenon I have never personally experienced.

My point in this is to see if it can be introduced into Christian Fiction without a large group of readers becoming apoplexic.

Thanks.

The word "Fiction" is your out. People who read fiction expecting it to be real remind me of a neighbor lady I once knew. One gloomy Good Friday she remarked that it must have been the same as when Jesus was crucified. She could see it all now, "with Victor Mature crying at the foot of the cross."

The stigmata is well documented, even in modern times where it has been examined without the collective hysteria that so often attends these events. I feel that the stigmata is a personal "happening" that should remain between the sufferer and Jesus. BTW anyone who knows anything about stigmata has to know the there is a great deal of suffering involved.

It doesn't matter whether one believes in stigmata, or better put the miracle of stigmata, it is certainly a fit subject for fiction.
C

Roger J Carlson · Apr 30, 2008

I consider myself both Evangelical and Fundamentalist (although the popular usage of both of those terms no longer match mine precisely). At any rate, given that viewpoint, I don't believe stigmata have any divine origin. No offense to those that do. That's just my view. As with most things spiritual, I go back to the Bible and I don't see anything there to support it.

I suppose how you used it in fiction would determine my apoplexy quotient.

Judg · Apr 30, 2008

I consider them to be psychosomatic. I'm an evangelical, although perhaps not a fundamentalist, depending on your definition. The use of the term in the press is almost always incorrect.

JoNightshade · Apr 30, 2008

I feel about the same as Roger and Judg. I don't really buy into it in real life.

But that doesn't mean I wouldn't buy it in fiction. I would totally go for it.

Regarding the terminology of "fundamentalism" - this past weekend I was at the LA Times Book Fair. Someone was walking around handing out pamphlets saying, "Read this if you're concerned about religious fundamentalism in America! Stop religious fundamentalism!" She tried to hand me one and I was like, "Uh, I AM religious fundamentalism."

I think that term is slowly becoming derogatory more than descriptive. (Not that I think the OP was derogatory, I just think it's interesting.)

Appalachian Writer · Apr 30, 2008

"Our thoughts are not His thoughts, and His ways are not our ways." Who knows what the stigmata is? I wouldn't make a judgement in real life, and I know I wouldn't make a judgement on fiction. If it's written well, it's a good book either way.

Lyra Jean · Apr 30, 2008

Stigmata was a decent movie.

Francis of Assisi was a sufferer of Stigmata.

windyrdg · May 1, 2008

Thanks for the input...more are welcome.

Maybe I should have clarified that I'm not talking about modern fiction, but Biblical fiction. Specifically, Galatians 6:17

King James - ...for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.

New International - ...for I bear on my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.

Revised Standard - ...for I bear on my body the marks of Jesus.

III · May 1, 2008

I think Paul was talking about his numerous scars he received for the sake of the Gospel, but if you were writing a Biblical Fiction story and interpreted it to mean stigmata I think that could be really neat and imaginative.

windyrdg · May 3, 2008

III -
Thanks for the support. My fear has been that many people would reject the very idea. Who knows, a Christian publisher may.

Plot Device · May 3, 2008

Most people who even believe stigmata is officially from God (as opposed to being either self-inflicted or from some inner psychosis) are Catholic. Not too many from the Protestant end of the table put much stock in it.

And since anyone who is rightly labeled an Evangelical is also some form of Protestent ... well, there's little apoplexy to be concerned about there.

Now ... if you're worried about offending CATHOLICS, that's another question all together.

rwam · May 4, 2008

I'm not Catholic, and even though I belong to a Protestant church, I have come to accept that SOME occurances of stigmata (ie Francis of Assisi) are of supernatural origin. God not only does as He chooses, but He also reveals Himself to us as He chooses.

I'm also sure (if I know humans well enough) that people have faked stigmata over the centuries to garner attention and/or praise. I suspect it's also possible for some cases to have been either subconsciously self-inflicted or psychosomatic.

One reason stigmata is a controversial subject is because of what the stigmata symbolizes: that the person has grown so close to Christ that he/she is bearing His wounds. Think about it. If your best friend has stigmata, what does that say about your faith?

So, if you're writing a book about stigmata, I would think some possible reactions could be:
a) Pride/Arrogance on the part of the person who has it
b) Jealousy/Anger/Condemnation on the part of the people who don't have it.

As for Christian publishers rejecting it, I think many who publish for the CBA marketplace could if you created a novel as controversial as STIGMATA (the movie) was. But if you're writing a novel that eventually debunks stigmata, then you probably wouldn't be hurting yourself. With that being said, you've got a spark within you to write your story.....so write it the best you can and don't worry too much about some high-falutin' publisher who has his own agenda to peddle.

johnnysannie · May 5, 2008

Plot Device said:
Most people who even believe stigmata is officially from God (as opposed to being either self-inflicted or from some inner psychosis) are Catholic. Not too many from the Protestant end of the table put much stock in it.

And since anyone who is rightly labeled an Evangelical is also some form of Protestent ... well, there's little apoplexy to be concerned about there.

Now ... if you're worried about offending CATHOLICS, that's another question all together.

I am Catholic and I believe that true occurences of stigmata are divine in origin.

If for some reason that is something that Protestants find impossible, then that is their perogative although I would appreciate not being bashed for stating my beliefs.

And ignore the insinuation that somehow Catholics are quicker to take offense.

Roger J Carlson · May 5, 2008

johnnysannie said:
I am Catholic and I believe that true occurences of stigmata are divine in origin.

If for some reason that is something that Protestants find impossible, then that is their perogative although I would appreciate not being bashed for stating my beliefs.

And ignore the insinuation that somehow Catholics are quicker to take offense.

No one has bashed you here, nor has there been any insinuation that Catholics are quicker to take offense.

Norman D Gutter · May 5, 2008

windyrdg said:
Let me start off by emphasizing that this is not intended to start any kind of controversy. I don't particularly care what anyone believes, I'm just interested in some feedback.

That said, what is your feeling about the stigmata.

Personally, I tend to be somewhat open-minded about it, treating it like speaking in tongues, or any other religious phenomenon I have never personally experienced.

My point in this is to see if it can be introduced into Christian Fiction without a large group of readers becoming apoplexic.

Thanks.

As one who was raised English Catholic (i.e. Episcopalian) but has been an evangelical for 35 years: stigmata is not on my radar screen. I assume you are referring to Paul's "thorn in the flesh". I have never heard the term stigmata as a doctrinal issue. And I consider myself well read in Christianity (though yet to read St. Francis of Assisi; he's on my future reading list). I think most of your readers will never have given it any thought.

NDG

johnnysannie · May 5, 2008

Plot Device;2320824}Now ... if you're worried about offending CATHOLICS said:
Now ... if you're worried about offending CATHOLICS, that's another question all together.

Roger J Carlson said:
No one has bashed you here, nor has there been any insinuation that Catholics are quicker to take offense.

No? Then what's with the quote above that singles out Catholics?

Roger J Carlson · May 5, 2008

Plot Device pointed out that this thread is specifically about whether Evangelicals/Fundamentalists would be offended. Most Evangelicals don't believe in stigmata (PD asserted), so therefore whether Catholics (many of whom do believe) would be offended IS another question.

Nowhere did it imply that as a group, Catholics are quicker to take offense, although it's certainly possible that they are more sensitive about this issue. That is the "another question."

johnnysannie · May 5, 2008

Roger J Carlson said:
Plot Device pointed out that this thread is specifically about whether Evangelicals/Fundamentalists would be offended. Most Evangelicals don't believe in stigmata (PD asserted), so therefore whether Catholics (many of whom do believe) would be offended IS another question.

No where did it imply that as a group, Catholics are quicker to take offense, although it's certainly possible that they are more sensitive about this issue. That is the "another question."

But why capitalize CATHOLICS then?

Calla Lily · May 5, 2008

Former Franciscan nun who is no longer Catholic weighing in.

With a slight derail, perhaps?

St. Francis' writings are cool--and even cooler is the early life of Francis by one of his first followers--someone of Celano, I think. My Francis source book is laden with dust, I fear.

When Francis receives the stigmata, he comes out of his cave retreat with bandages concealing the wounds, and possibly the sleeves of his habit covering the bandages. He poses a hypothetical scenario to his core group: If someone has received an extraordinary blessing from God, should he keep it to himself, or share it for the edification of others? His core group are no dummies. They figure that soemthing Big has happened to Francis, and all say that--hypothetically, of course--edification is a good thing. So Francis comes clean. IIRC, they didn't make a big thing of this, because Francis was all about "I'm the finger pointing to God; look at God, not the finger."

If Paul's thorn in the flesh was the stigmata (something I've heard proposed once or twice) then it seems Paul was the same: "I'm just the finger, bozos."

All that meandering to say that absolutely I believe stigmata exist and are pretty much the apex of blessings. Why I'm not worthy to tie on Francis' sandals. Go for it, waylander.

Although I did think the movie Stigmata was weird--a priest possesses Patricia Arquette to get his message across? Sorry; good can't be accomplished by evil means. Although Gabriel Byrne was one hot-hot-hot priest in that movie.

And to conclude the derail--I saw Stigmata in a nearly empty theater. Byrne's priest friend explains how they just got a super-secret ancient manuscript to traanslate. Byrne asks what it's about, and the priest says he doesn't know, because super-secret ms translation jobs are always divided: 1/3 to the Dominicans, 1/3 to the Jesuits, and 1/3 to the Franciscans. I laughed out loud, and the others inthe theater turned around to stare at me. Because the orders don't trust each other! No one else I know thinks that's a funny line, LOL.

Derail over.

Roger J Carlson · May 5, 2008

johnnysannie said:
But why capitalize CATHOLICS then?

It's quite a leap to equate capitalizaton with bashing or insinuating negative things about a group.

The purpose of this board is to promote open discussion. Generally, we assume best intentions there are statement that can be taken either way. However, if you have a problem with someone else's post, please bring it to a moderator's attention.

windyrdg · May 11, 2008

Hey guys, cool down!
My first line read, "Let me start off by emphasizing that this is not intended to start any kind of controversy."

PD: The reason I mentioned Evengelicals/Fundamentalists is because I understood that most Catholics have little, or no, problem with the stigmata. Unless I started attacking Saint Francis, or the concept as a whole, I would be surprised if it bothered any RC.

I'm well aware that this is a Catholics do/Protestants don't type of issue. That's why I wondered how Protestants would view it as a plot point.

My concept is-
A person who witnessed Saul's persecutions in Jerusalem first hand encounters him later in Antioch as Paul. Even though James and Peter have accepted him and Barnabus, Luke and the rest are cool with him, this person (harboring a grudge) refuses to have anything to do with him.

One day she goes to find him when he doesn't show up for an appointment and finds him in his room bleeding. (He's done everything he can to keep it a secret.) Horrified, and afraid he's been injured, she says she'll get him a physician. He stops her saying, "It is not as you think. You see, my body bears the marks of the Lord Jesus."

Realizing that she's been wrong, she confesses and believes in his conversion experience. He re-assures her and tells her he's prayed for the Lord to remove this thorn in his flesh, but the Lord has not chosen to do so.

My research tells me that some people have, at times, interpreted Paul's words to mean that he had the stigmata. My practice in historical fiction is: if there is no evidence that positively contradicts it, then my supposition is just as valid as the next guys. This is a case in point. Whether Paul did, or didn't, have the stigmata is impossible to prove from our vantage point.

What I don't want to have happen is a Protestant reader stop at that point and say, "Look what he's trying to sell me now." and reject the whole book on that basis.

I can see an editor who won't allow a character to smoke or drink a beer at a picnic, going beserk with their red pen and screaming, "Out...out damn spot! Scofield never said this. It contradicts all standard interpretations and theology!"

Deb Kinnard · May 12, 2008

windyrdg said:
I can see an editor who won't allow a character to smoke or drink a beer at a picnic, going beserk with their red pen and screaming, "Out...out damn spot! Scofield never said this. It contradicts all standard interpretations and theology!"

It doesn't take anything as unusual as stigmata to make editors go berserk. I was once told by a reputable agent not to mention Chartres Cathedral in a novel because it was a Catholic church. I kid you not! Some folks cannot stand differences.

Question for Evangelicals/Fundamentalists

windyrdg

New kid, be gentle!

citymouse

fantasy dweller

Roger J Carlson

Moderator In Name Only

Judg

DISENCHANTED coming soon

JoNightshade

has finally arrived

Appalachian Writer

Somewhere in the hills....

Lyra Jean

Two years old now.

windyrdg

New kid, be gentle!

III

rockin the suburbs

windyrdg

New kid, be gentle!

Plot Device

A woman said to write like a man.

rwam

johnnysannie

Roger J Carlson

Moderator In Name Only

Norman D Gutter

Engineer Sonneteer

johnnysannie

Roger J Carlson

Moderator In Name Only

johnnysannie

Calla Lily

On hiatus

Roger J Carlson

Moderator In Name Only

windyrdg

New kid, be gentle!

Deb Kinnard