G. K. Chesterton's Advice to Christian Bloggers

While I'm quoting the great saints of old on advice for Christian bloggers I thought I would go ahead and recycle this oldie-goldie which features some advice for Christian bloggers from G. K. Chesterton.   In the interest of truth in advertising I need to say that this isn't quotes from Chesterton himself, rather it is an article in Gilbert Magazine, a magazine devoted to Chesterton.  In this, the writer is suggesting pieces of advice that Chesterton would have given to Christian journalists and I am using it because I think it would be helpful to Christian bloggers in particular. 

As I am reading over this again I get a chuckle, because this says we should never rant. Whew - isn't ranting what we bloggers do best?

Advice to Christian Bloggers from G. K. Chesterton

This month's Gilbert Magazine (a magazine devoted to G. K. Chesterton) has a good little short piece called "Bad Christian Journalism and the G. K. Chesterton Remedy," by J. Fraser Field. Field starts with an example of what he considers "Bad Christian Journalism."

Will Christmas be pushed into the catacombs? A new round of animosity toward Christians is further proof that the political correctness police are busily at work. Furthermore, we are witnessing the re-paganization of Christmas . . . A secular elite, fueld by hostility to historic Christianity, now insists that America surrender Christmas as a public celebration.

Field considers this "bad Christian journalism" for several reasons. 

"A Christian journalists's duty is to inform, edify and even entertain; but even more important, it is to reveal to his reader the face of Christ."

"In purerly practical terms the Christian journalist should never make the mistake of undermining his credibility by overstating his case with exaggerated generalizations that don't follow from the evidence. Let understatement trump overstatement."

"At the very least, don't come across as frustrated and never rant."

Here are three principles of writing that Field gleans from Chesterton.

First, his writing - no matter how serious the subject matter - was always suffused with Christian joy and hope.

Second, a detached playfulness always marked his writing and he was always personal, never taking himself too seriously.

Third, although Chesterton was not averse to a little good-hearted ridicule, the emphasis was always on "good-hearted"; he was never vindictive.

And most important, within his own style and personality, Chesterton's writing comes from a place of such child-like innocence that it always manages to be a beautiful reflection and reminder of the Lord's own voice.

So, here's my analysis of why Field believes the "bad Christian journalist" failed.

The "bad Christian journalist" seems to write from a worried, panicked, mindset. The sky seems to be falling to him. Secondly, where is the "face of Christ" in this? There is no sense of "Christ the overcomer" in this, only "Christ-and-His-cause-are-about-to-be-defeated-and-we-better-do- something- now-or-we're-all- gonna-die, . . . aaaaahhhh!!!!" Third, this is a definite rant. Fourth, no joy and hope here, and this writer definitely isn't detached and playful - he's dreadfully serious.

I think Chesterton, or his interpreter, J. Fraser Field, is on to something here, but it also seems to me that there is a place for deadly serious writing from Christians. As to "ranting," well, Matthew 23 sounds alot like a rant to me, straight from the lips of Jesus. And how about the book of Galatians as a rant from the apostle Paul, especially when he says that he wishes the troublers would, . . . um . . . well, read the book and you'll see what he wished they would do to themselves.

On the other hand, with those caveats I think I mainly agree with Chesterton/Field here. The "bad Christian journalist" has a tone to his writing that is one of weakness and victimization. A sense of victimization is pervasive in Christendom today. And the truth is we are victims of the world's animosity, its just that, per I Peter 2, we're not supposed to act like victims. Hebrews 10:32-35 tells us how we are supposed to respond to victimization:

32 Remember those earlier days after you had received the light, when you stood your ground in a great contest in the face of suffering. 33 Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times you stood side by side with those who were so treated. 34 You sympathized with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting possessions.
35 So do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded.
The Holy Bible  : New International Version. 1996, c1984 (Heb 10:32). Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Whether we are victimized by politicos, the news media or the bully next door, we respond with joy and confidence. Hence, Chesterton's "detached playfulness." Maybe if we take our opponents a little less seriously, they'll take themselves a little less seriously.

I'm not a good example on this. When I get worked up about something I do react like the sky is falling and often take myself way too seriously. But, I think I'll start trying to follow Chesterton's example in this and see what happens.

Related Tags: Politics, Politics & Society, Religion, Christian, Christianity, Christian Journalism, Journalism, Blogs, Weblogs, Rant, Rants, Chesterton, G. K. Chesterton, Gilbert Magazine

This month's Gilbert Magazine (a magazine devoted to G. K. Chesterton) has a good little short piece called "Bad Christian Journalism and the G. K. Chesterton Remedy," by J. Fraser Field. Field starts with an example of what he considers "Bad Christian Journalism."

Will Christmas be pushed into the catacombs? A new round of animosity toward Christians is further proof that the political correctness police are busily at work. Furthermore, we are witnessing the re-paganization of Christmas . . . A secular elite, fueld by hostility to historic Christianity, now insists that America surrender Christmas as a public celebration.

Field considers this "bad Christian journalism" for several reasons. 

"A Christian journalists's duty is to inform, edify and even entertain; but even more important, it is to reveal to his reader the face of Christ."

"In purerly practical terms the Christian journalist should never make the mistake of undermining his credibility by overstating his case with exaggerated generalizations that don't follow from the evidence. Let understatement trump overstatement."

"At the very least, don't come across as frustrated and never rant."

Here are three principles of writing that Field gleans from Chesterton.

First, his writing - no matter how serious the subject matter - was always suffused with Christian joy and hope.

Second, a detached playfulness always marked his writing and he was always personal, never taking himself too seriously.

Third, although Chesterton was not averse to a little good-hearted ridicule, the emphasis was always on "good-hearted"; he was never vindictive.

And most important, within his own style and personality, Chesterton's writing comes from a place of such child-like innocence that it always manages to be a beautiful reflection and reminder of the Lord's own voice.

So, here's my analysis of why Field believes the "bad Christian journalist" failed.

The "bad Christian journalist" seems to write from a worried, panicked, mindset. The sky seems to be falling to him. Secondly, where is the "face of Christ" in this? There is no sense of "Christ the overcomer" in this, only "Christ-and-His-cause-are-about-to-be-defeated-and-we-better-do- something- now-or-we're-all- gonna-die, . . . aaaaahhhh!!!!" Third, this is a definite rant. Fourth, no joy and hope here, and this writer definitely isn't detached and playful - he's dreadfully serious.

I think Chesterton, or his interpreter, J. Fraser Field, is on to something here, but it also seems to me that there is a place for deadly serious writing from Christians. As to "ranting," well, Matthew 23 sounds alot like a rant to me, straight from the lips of Jesus. And how about the book of Galatians as a rant from the apostle Paul, especially when he says that he wishes the troublers would, . . . um . . . well, read the book and you'll see what he wished they would do to themselves.

On the other hand, with those caveats I think I mainly agree with Chesterton/Field here. The "bad Christian journalist" has a tone to his writing that is one of weakness and victimization. A sense of victimization is pervasive in Christendom today. And the truth is we are victims of the world's animosity, its just that, per I Peter 2, we're not supposed to act like victims. Hebrews 10:32-35 tells us how we are supposed to respond to victimization:

32 Remember those earlier days after you had received the light, when you stood your ground in a great contest in the face of suffering. 33 Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times you stood side by side with those who were so treated. 34 You sympathized with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting possessions.
35 So do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded.
The Holy Bible  : New International Version. 1996, c1984 (Heb 10:32). Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Whether we are victimized by politicos, the news media or the bully next door, we respond with joy and confidence. Hence, Chesterton's "detached playfulness." Maybe if we take our opponents a little less seriously, they'll take themselves a little less seriously.

I'm not a good example on this. When I get worked up about something I do react like the sky is falling and often take myself way too seriously. But, I think I'll start trying to follow Chesterton's example in this and see what happens.