poker 581

poker 581

poker 457

poker 457

The fact that she may use the story about Jesus bringing a dead bird to life is not really an issue, what she does with the annecdote and what point she is trying to make will be the real crux of it.
I think you're mixing two different stories.
Anne Rice is using two stories from the Infancy Narrative Gospel of Thomas (not to be confused with the Sayings Gospel of Thomas).
In the first, the five year-old Jesus makes twelve clay birds on the Sabbath. A "certain Jew," seeing this, goes to Joseph and says Jesus has been violating the Sabbath. When Jesus is confronted by Joseph, he claps his hands and the sparrows fly away. He didn't bring a dead bird to life here, he brought inanimate birds to life.
In the second story Rice plans to use, Zeno, one of Jesus' playmates, is accidentally killed by falling from a great height. The parents respond, apparently, by threatening Jesus. (The parents' concerns are not unwarranted. So many people are killed or cursed by Jesus' anger in this book that it says "And no one after that dared to make Him angry, lest He should curse him, and he should be maimed.") Jesus asks the dead Zeno, in the presence of Zeno's parents, whether he threw him down. Zeno comes to life and clears Jesus of the charges. Seeing the miracle, Zeno's parents worship Jesus. Here Jesus didn't bring dead birds to life, he brought a dead boy to life.
Those are the stories Rice is planning to include.
As I mentioned, according to the Infancy Narrative Gospel of Thomas, more than one child dies because he angered Jesus. The son of Annas "let out the waters which Jesus had collected," so Jesus dries up the boy. Another boy who hits Jesus falls down dead. When the parents of the second boy complain, they are struck blind. Many other people are cursed by the young Jesus, too, which is why it says "And no one after that dared to make Him angry, lest He should curse him, and he should be maimed." Thomas' Jesus is not the loving Healer portrayed in the canonical Gospels.
I hope that Rice has not chosen to include these more problematic portions, and I really doubt she has. The difficulty about excluding them, I think, is that Jesus' lethal dangerousness is the reason Zeno's parents suspect him of pushing Zeno out of the upper room. I don't know how Rice gets around that, but I'm sure she'll come up with something.

I hope she remains Catholic, I wonder what made her convert and this is really the first I've heard about it. I hated all her vampire books, I was never a huge Rice fan, she once thought of Lestat as her actual lover, which is odd, to say the least. Her past books were pornographic and too violent, too macabre, too dark and it was annoying how tortured her characters seemed to think they were and how they would lament and complaint about it through-out the entire book. The only thing I did like out of all her books was her discription of Ancient Rome in Pandora.

I think we are seeing the Lord's hand in this. If she had never written her vampire novels or reached the fame she has, this new work would hardly register at all on the radar. But now because it is "Ann Rice" this book will recieve an incredible amount of attention and yes we should all pray that it reflects the truth and does not leave people with a skewed view of the faith. But we also have to cut her a little creative slack. There are many areas, such as the boyhood of Jesus, in which the church has no official position. These are the areas for the artists and storytellers. The so-called infancy narratives (gospels) are not accepted as cannon but as long as they do not contradict church teachings the artist is free to mine them for the materials to produce those "new epiphanies" that John Paul the Great spoke of. Sure we have reservations, and some skepticism. But suppose we accept everything the author has said at face value. It sounds like she is well on her way in her own spiritual journey and these new novels are a signpost along the way. When she finishes them she said she expects to be writing a new type of fiction. Wouldn't it be wonderful to have such a high profile author writing novels that reflect a deep catholic spirituality? I would throw in talented but as interested as I am in mythology and folklore I've never read her books so I cannot speak to her talent. What I do know of her vampire series is that the last thing they were about is mythology or folklore.
The fact that she may use the story about Jesus bringing a dead bird to life is not really an issue, what she does with the annecdote and what point she is trying to make will be the real crux of it.
So let's wait and see and keep her in our prayers. It sounds like she's been to Hell and back.

At least with this new book her fans can rest assured that she is still writing fiction!!
And if they think it is not fiction... well Dan Brown would be proud!!

Hmph.
Gnostic, eh? Good thing I am not in "fiction" mode anymore.
I have often wondered why more people do not effectively exploit the classic horror genre to show Catholicism as the shining light in the darkness.
After all, we invented Gothic.

At least, she's not going with "James is Jesus' biological brother" meme.

Considering that Kirkus Reviews calls it one of the bolder retellings since The Last Temptation of Christ and she includes the story of Jesus creating a bird then killing it from a Gnostic gospel - I don't have high hopes for this one.

In his preface to "The Screwtape Letters", C.S. Lewis lamented that the book was not balanced by advice from an archangel to the patient's guardian angel. He wrote: "Even if a man--and he would have to be a far better man than I--could scale the spiritual heights required, what 'answerable style' could he use?...Mere advice would be no good; every sentence would have to smell of heaven."(page xiv). I think Anne Rice is attempting something that would have been beyond St. John the Apostle.

You'll post a review after you've read/heard the book, won't you, Jimmy? Please? I'm very interested in what you'll have to say about it.

Surely this is a sign of the end times LOL She used to not necessarily slam catholicism, but she certainly did slight it in interviews when she spoke about how she was all "spiritual" now and such.
Btw... I can still keep writing about vampires and zombies and still be Catholic... right??

First Brian Welch, now her(no, Brian isn't Catholic, before any rumors start.) Personally, I've been praying for Marlyn Manson for quite some time.
I agree with Tim and hope that this is seed that has been strewn into good soil (so to speak.)
I'll definately be praying for her.

A number of celebrities seem "fascinated with the idea" of Christianity, for a while.
Unfortunately, it seems most (like Little Richard or Bob Dylan) fail to really let Christ transform their lives.
This seems different, and I pray that it is - not only for Anne Rice, but for all those who might be touched by her art.

i think that the loss of both her husband and son had a galvanizing effect upon her. It caused her to reflect upon areas of her life that were less than stellar. She also said in an interview that she returned to the Church because she was attracted to the redemptive power of Christ through the Cross. Let's hope that this conversion is not just a passing fancy.

i think that the loss of both her husband and son had a galvanizing effect upon her. It caused her to reflect upon areas of her life that were less than stellar. She also said in an interview that she returned to the Church because she was attracted to the redemptive power of Christ through the Cross. Let's hope that this conversion is not just a passing fancy.

i think that the loss of both her husband and son had a galvanizing effect upon her. It caused her to reflect upon areas of her life that were less than stellar. She also said in an interview that she returned to the Church because she was fascinated with the idea that Christ had died for her sins. Let's hope that this conversion holds up.

Her vampire books were grotesque and horrifying. I read the first 2 in my unformed 20's and even then put them down in disgust and didn't go on. She did publish an earlier work titled "The Feast of All Saints", which 1) features no supernatural action; and 2) is an interesting commentary on race relations in 19th century New Orleans. A caveat: I read it a long time ago and it was not compelling enough for me to pick it up again.
It is good to hear that she's reverted back to Catholicism, though.

Wow. I didn't know that she had reverted.
I was reading the first couple Vampire books about the time that I was reverting. I recall being very impressed with her use of language and ability to tell a story. However I was far enough long in the journey to be disturbed by the violence and her depiction of the Eucharist.
If she has truly returned to the faith, she could be immensely powerful. Like, Mel Gibson powerful. What a massive and risky undertaking this book is tho. Especially for someone newly returned to the faith. I hope she has surrounded herself with some rock-solid advisers.
I'll definitely be picking up a copy...

She's had a small ad in the "Catholic" Jesuit magazine America for several years. I hope that she doesn't believe that America is representative of true Catholicism.
I am praying that her faith journey brings her home to the Church. Her novels (particularly her pornographic series written under the pseudonym A.N. Roquelaure) did a lot of damage, so she's got a lot of work to do.
'thann

In issue #819 of "Entertainment Weekly," Anne Rice said something to the effect that longtime fans would appreciate familiar themes in the new book. I couldn't help but wonder, "What? Drinking blood?"