Book Review - "Christ the Lord: The Road to Cana" by Anne Rice
Anne Rice has undergone a radical transformation. A bestselling author, whose novels have sold over 100 million copies, she recently returned to the Roman Catholic faith of her youth, and in so doing abandoned her former subject matter (vampires) and turned instead to a series of books dramatizing the life of Jesus Christ. The first book in Rice’s series, Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt (released in the fall of 2005) was critically acclaimed and sold well. The movie rights for the book and its sequels were recently purchased by L.A.-based Good News Holdings which is run by Christian pollster George Barna. He will attempt to bring them to the big screen. Where the first book covered Jesus’ childhood, the second volume seeks to find a story in the “lost years” that fall between His birth and the beginning of His public ministry. The Bible is almost silent on these years (saying only that Jesus “grew and became strong” and “was filled with wisdom”), so Rice has to rely on her imagination and her studies of Jewish culture to find a likely story.
Before turning to this new novel, it is useful to review just a few of the concerns and inaccuracies from her first effort (as detailed in Derek Thomas’ review found at Discerning Reader):
- She approaches a life of Jesus through an interpretation of Philippians 2, that Jesus emptied himself “of his Divine awareness in order to suffer as a human being.” Hence Jesus has to grow into an awareness of his Divinity.
- She adapts the Eastern rather than the Catholic or Protestant view of Jesus “brothers” and “sisters”—they were Joseph’s children by a former marriage, whose mother died before his betrothal to Mary; Catholics have assumed them to be “cousins” and Protestant, who have not held to the doctrine of perpetual virginity, have argued that they were children of Mary and Joseph after the birth of Jesus. This makes Jesus not the eldest member of the family, but the youngest.
- She records as fact miracles attributed to Jesus in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas which recounts that the boy Jesus could strike a child dead, bring another to life, and turn clay birds into living creatures.
Perhaps of greater concern is that the fact that Rice’s young Jesus was continually conflicted and confused. Heavily protected by Joseph, who intervened to ensure Jesus is not told the reason why they left Jerusalem, or the manner of his birth, Jesus is a dutiful son who gradually comes to terms with what he first only senses—that he is the Son of God. Even in the second book He has not fully come to terms with His identity as the God-man. In fact, this tension, in which Jesus seeks to understand His nature and mission, forms the basis for much of the book’s plot. This, however, is a significant deviation from Christian orthodoxy. As Derek Thomas pointed out, “That Jesus was always fully divine and fully human is a fundamental point of Christological orthodoxy, even though the self-consciousness on the part of Jesus as to his divine identity is a matter which Scripture does not elaborate upon with any detail.”
The Road to Cana begins in the winter preceding Jesus’ baptism at the hand of His cousin, John. Jesus is wrestling with His feelings towards a young woman named Avigail. Though He has not yet arrived at a full realization of who He is and what He will be called to do, Jesus knows that He must remain unmarried. His heart aches as He refuses the attempts of His family, His community, and eventually Avigail herself, while they seek to have him marry and settle down. As the story progresses, Jesus proves himself a leader, a sage and a peacemaker. People know He is somehow different, but they, like the reader, can only wonder and wait.
The story begins to come to life once it catches up with the Scriptural narrative of the early days of Jesus’ ministry. Readers familiar with the Bible will recognize the prophetic ministry of John the Baptist, the baptism of Jesus, His forty days in the wilderness and subsequent temptation at the hand of the devil, the calling of His disciples and His miracle during the wedding feast at Cana. Some aspects of the biblical account are enjoyable and even moving when told through the descriptive ability of Anne Rice. She captures well the excitement that ripples through the Jewish community with the coming of John the Baptist, the first prophet to be seen for four hundred years. The story of Jesus’ temptation by Satan is powerful as is the description of His baptism (though Baptists may object to read of the baptism being performed not by immersion but by water being poured over His head!). Some of these familiar stories sparkle with the addition of detail and description. How often do we pause to imagine what people might have said or felt or what they might have wondered as the Spirit descended upon Jesus at His baptism? How often do we try to look through the eyes of the apostles as they began to heed the summons to follow Jesus? Other portions of the story, such as the miracle of turning water in wine, suffer from the author’s attempts to expand the story beyond the biblical framework. The terseness of the biblical account seems to suggest an urgency and a wonder that is lost as it is expanded from a few words to a few pages.
Despite some literary successes, there are several concerns with the book’s underlying doctrine. The Bible makes it clear that the miracle at Cana was Jesus’ first miracle and it attaches some significance to this. Yet in Rice’s account, He has already performed several miraculous deeds as both a child and an adult. In this story He publicly invokes and them calms a storm, though He seems surprised at His own ability to do so. Near the story’s end, yet before Cana, Rice introduces Mary Magdalene and describes Jesus casting seven demons out of her. This is a strange liberty. Perhaps Rice felt Mary’s request of Jesus at the wedding can best be explained if He has already shown His ability to do miraculous deeds. Yet this is a liberty that detracts from the wonder of turning water into wine and the challenge of understanding Mary’s simple words, “They have no wine.” Was she asking Jesus to do a miracle? Or was she just asking Him to do anything? It seems, from the biblical account, that she did not yet grasp that He could do the miraculous. It is more plausible that she was merely telling Jesus as the resourceful eldest son, hoping He might think of some way of sparing the bridegroom the embarrassment of not being able to provide for His guests. The story gains nothing by making Jesus a miracle-worker too early in His ministry.
To balance the humanity and divinity of Jesus is a difficult task. It may well be an impossible task. Apart from teaching that Jesus was as fully human as He was fully divine, the Bible gives us little detail on how Jesus’ two natures interacted with each other. We do not know how He could be fully human and divine at the same time. It has always been a challenge to navigate this dangerous and difficult territory. And in The Road to Cana we see how a story like this may be doomed to suffer from such a problem even before it begins. There is too much we do not know; too much we cannot know; too much God did not want us to know. It is far easier to portray Jesus in His humanity than in His divinity and this is what we see in Christ the Lord. We see a Jesus who is fully human, to be sure, but somewhat less than divine. It feels like there is tension, rather than harmony, in the natures of Jesus. This is bound to happen when we attempt to describe what is too wondrous to understand. It is a difficulty inherent in the genre. How is the reader to know which aspects of the Jesus of The Road to Cana are based on the Bible and which are based on Rice’s imagination? The casual reader or the reader unfamiliar with the Bible may assume it is all based on fact, or may as easily assume it is all fiction. There is a troubling blending of fact and fiction, true with could-be-true. Where fact ends, historical deconstruction (and reconstruction) inevitably begins.
There are other concerns. According to interviews with Rice, the faith she now proclaims is a faith far wider than that which the Bible prescribes. “I continue to be a Catholic because I profoundly respect the unbroken 2000 year old tradition of teachings, scholarship, and the ongoing revelations of the saints. But I think what is important in this world is that you go with the religion that brings you closest to God. Howard Storm the mystic said this actually. When he was in Heaven with the angels, he asked them: What is the best religion? And they said, ‘The one that brings you closest to God.’” And again, “Christ is for everyone—gay, straight, Jew, Christian, athiest, (sic) Buddhist, Hindu. We are the children of God.” A nice sentiment, perhaps, but utterly at odds with the testimony of Scripture. The reader may find shades of this universalism in her account of the temptation of Jesus. “Think of the thousands upon thousands who rise each day and go to sleep without ever thinking evil or doing evil,” says Jesus to Satan. “Think of them in every land and every language, think of them as they hunger for the Word of God even where there is no one to give it to them, how they reach for it, and how they turn from pain and misery and injustice, no matter what you would have them do!” Though she conveys much truth in this mostly-fictionalized account, there is much that does not easily accord with the Bible.
Derek Thomas concluded his review of the Out of Egypt with these words: “All in all then, an interesting read that serves, in the end, an agenda of historical deconstruction. Anne Rice’s Jesus is accepting of all, tolerant of everyone—even vampires? There is, thankfully, little scope to elaborate on the inner struggles of a seven year old, but the aleatoric scope for a novelist describing the inner struggles of a pubescent adolescent is troubling. But get ready, it is on its way.” And in this book it is beginning to arrive. While, especially in the book’s second half, Rice does stay quite close to the biblical storyline, there are a handful of significant departures. I do not wish to impugn Rice’s motives; her attempt is noble, but I think it may be flawed from the start. The Jesus of this story may go by the same name as the Jesus of the Bible, but they are beginning to look less and less alike.




Comments (24) »
1. donsands
February 26, 2008
9:23 AM
I wouldn’t be able to read such a book. I am wired so different. Thanks for the review. Good to know these things, because I’ll most likely bump into someone who read this book, and will swallow it, hook, line, and sinker. Satan is an angel of light. He has thousands of ways to bring people close to th Gospel, but keep them just at hand, so that they die without ever coming to the Truth, the genuine Good News of who Christ Jesus is.
2. deborah
February 26, 2008
10:27 AM
Oh dear. I’m still a bit fatigued from the Da Vinci Code interventions. Thanks for the review. I’ll be ready before the movie comes out.
3. Anna
February 26, 2008
11:26 AM
Excellent review. Acknowledges literary successes along with doctrinal weaknesses, a balance few reviews will be able to strike, I’m sure. Deborah’s comment made me chuckle.
4. Nathan White
February 26, 2008
11:49 AM
For those interested, Mike Horton and the White Horse Inn interviewed Anne Rice last summer. The interview can be downloaded here.
5. Terry Rayburn
February 26, 2008
12:44 PM
I really care about Anne Rice, and I pray God will open her heart to the truth of the Gospel.
She was interviewed on White Horse Inn a while back, and I was shocked that they didn’t even question her new-found “religion”, let alone share the Gospel with her in the interview. Unless they spoke more after the interview, she had to have left thinking we’re all one big happy literate religious family.
Her credibility as a gifted author is well established. But her subject matter is not as far removed from vampire stories as might meet the eye — supernaturalism without the Gospel.
With the Roman Catholic Church traditionally (no pun intended) playing a significant part in vampire stories, she has merely changed sides. Sort of like switching from sympathizing with the Orcs and joining hearts with Aragorn’s band. But Aragorn’s band, like Anne’s church, can’t save her.
In the unlikely event that Anne googles her reviews by bloggers, may I say:
“Anne, salvation comes not by any church, nor by any sacraments, nor by any works or merit of of any kind. But it is a free gift given upon believing in the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Who died to pay for sins, was buried and rose again.
“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved. For by grace are we saved, and that not of ourselves. It is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.
“He said on the Cross, ‘It is finished’, referring to the fact that He fully paid the price for the sins of all who will believe in Him. Which is why He could say, ‘If anyone comes to Me, I will in no way cast them out’. And ‘Whoever will may come’.
“Abandon the works and sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church, believe on the Lord Jesus Christ alone, and He will indeed work in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.”
6. ReformedMommy
February 26, 2008
2:27 PM
Thanks for the review Tim. Balanced and careful as usual.
Some of the divergences you mention are serious. Were she a theologian, and this a scholarly work meant to educate, I think they would be cause for even louder rebuke. But everything I’ve read/listened to from her indicates that she is not declaring herself that at all, but rather she is a writer by vocation who no longer wants to write as she did before (praise God!) and to use her skills to exalt Christ and point others to Him. She was led to this place because after a season of intense study she came to the conviction that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God. In her subsequent public pronouncment of the same, she faced intense rejection and scorn by the literary circles who once embraced her. Do I pray that God will continue to reveal His grace and mercy to her, as He did to Martin Luther, through the study of Galatians and Hebrews, so that she knows the freedom from the law that He offers in Christ alone? Absolutely! And do I pray that her readers will be led to the Jesus of inerrant Scripture. Yes, yes, and yes. But I don’t know that I would be so quick to reject her current profession of faith any faster than I would the profession of Zaccheus, either.
I once came across a diary I had kept very early on in my Christian life and was, frankly, so dismayed by a lot of what I read that I threw it out in shame. Perhaps I should have held on to it, as it did give me much cause to thank God for how He has grown me in His grace and knowledge these past 19 years, and much cause for humble reflection over how much more there is to learn. May we pray the same for Anne Rice!
7. Stefan
February 26, 2008
2:31 PM
Even those who reject the supremacy of Christ can unintentionally speak the (partial) truth sometimes.
Rice quotes “Howard Storm the mystic” as saying, “Christ is for everyone—gay, straight, Jew, Christian, athiest, (sic) Buddhist, Hindu. We are the children of God.”
It’s true that “Christ is for everyone.” What Storm neglects to say is that God calls us out of our upbringing, parental beliefs, and circumstances to be made the children of God by confessing our sins and bowing our knee to the One to Whom has been given all power and dominion and glory, Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour.
8. Stefan
February 26, 2008
2:34 PM
I should have expanded that first sentence, too. Christ is for everyone whom the Father has given to Him—gay, straight, Jew, (nominal) Christian, atheist, Buddhist, Hindu.
9. Larry Thompson
February 26, 2008
2:36 PM
I don’t know that it is a “noble effort”. Why do we need to speculate on what Jesus did as a child? If God wanted us to know, he would have told us in his word.
10. ReformedMommy
February 26, 2008
4:28 PM
I think one of the great blessings of motherhood is all the opportunities it gives you to contemplate the incomprehensible realities of Jesus humbling Himself to be born as a babyand grow as a child. Jesus wore diapers, He got the flu, He learned to walk, talk, run, read, write! What mother of a 2year old boy doesn’t wonder where the line between humanity and depravity is between her rambunctious son’s need to climb on everything, play in the toilet and break into the kitchen cupboards to eat all the cooking chocolate? Jesus crawled, and then walked that line every day. I wonder if one reason we don’t know a lot is because, as we do in a lot of other ways, we would fixate on those details, rather than His heart and His mind as He revealed it through what He taught, and what He did do. Can you imagine if we knew what kind of toys He liked to play with? “Mom, Jesus had really great blocks to build with, so I need to have really great blocks - don’t you want me to have what Jesus had?” :)
11. Ken S
February 26, 2008
7:37 PM
It’s too bad that this is seemingly at odds with what she wrote in her afterward to “Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt.” I keep that book on my shelf simply for the afterward, in which she explains her journey from skeptical views of Jesus to a more historic view. She explains how flimsy the skeptical views began to appear, and how increasingly persuasive she found the evidence for biblical accounts. I’d encourage anyone to read it (and I wonder if Tim Challies commented on this in years gone by).
Let’s pray for Anne Rice.
12. Stanhope
February 26, 2008
8:29 PM
I’d be careful about overstating Rice’s ‘transformation’ or claiming she has ‘abandoned’ vampires when just yesterday Rice was quoted as having at least one more Lestat novel to write.
Rice is a supremely gifted writer who has found a new subject for her talents. Personally, I’m less interested in what any particular dogma loses by her efforts than in what literature gains by them.
13. Greg Ryan
February 26, 2008
8:34 PM
This is close minded and maybe even a little overprotective but I really do not want to read an educated guess of the life of my Savior.
We are bombarded with negative images everyday and I just can not afford to put in my mind any image of Jesus that may not be Biblically accurate.
If Anne Rice writes a book on the life of Paul, maybe, but not a fictional account of Jesus.
I guess I just don’t need to be that well rounded.
14. Justin
February 26, 2008
10:17 PM
This is fiction….FICTION. What’s wrong with her IMAGINING the lost years of Christ. Why does her FICTION have to conform to another person’s view of her main character before she gets bashed theologically. I really don’t think she has a theological agenda, just EXPLORING possibilities of Christ. She’s not discrediting the person and work of Christ, just taking a inquisitive interest in her new-(re)found faith.
Greg says: “We are bombarded with negative images everyday and I just can not afford to put in my mind any image of Jesus that may not be Biblically accurate.” Unfortunately, there are are “biblical” accounts of Christ growing up. I love that people get all out of whack when ANY part of Christ being human is imagined or explored. I read her first part of this series and didn’t think that she played down the divine Christ. As a writer, she knows that people who read her books will connect with the human character. So she brings out the POSSIBLE human characteristics of Christ, but IMHO, doesn’t diminish the divine. I think the bigger issue is that most Christians are scared to delve into the human side of Christ (because the paradox of fully divine and fully human is very confusing and tough to grasp…no one has done it completely yet!), so they err on the side of protecting the “fully divine”.
I know personally that I resonate with the humanity of Christ….times where he seems to struggle. Times like the “temptation” and the in the garden. I’m not convinced that Christ emerged from the womb knowing fully who he was and every step of his life on earth. That’s an unrealistic view. I’m sure he learned…as a matter of fact I think when we really read Christ’s story we see that his life was indeed a JOURNEY that ultimately ended up on the cross and resurrection. This doesn’t diminish Christ at all, but actually makes him…well….more fully human. That’s not to say that God didn’t know where and how the journey would end, but does that mean Christ had to know from the beginning? There’s that paradox at work again.
I’m not trying to devalue this review in any way… I just wonder why people are so SCARED of others exploring the unknown about Christ. Why people are unsettled by another person exploring her own faith through her gifts. I understand if this were a theology textbook, but again, its fiction. I’m not trying to be mean, just trying to figure this out. I mean it’s because great people have explored and questioned their faith that we have spiritual heroes all throughout Ch. history.
I’m not sure if I will get around anytime soon to reading this book, honestly Rice is not an author with who’s writings I personally connect, but that doesn’t mean she doesn’t have the right to imagine the era that we don’t know about Christ’s life without being criticized for her “theology” Just because she writes it doesn’t mean she believes it, nor does it make it true.
Again, the above post I think sums up a lot, “This is close minded and maybe even a little overprotective but I really do not want to read an educated guess of the life of my Savior.” I respect a person’s view on this and do not criticize it, but also think that curiosity is not something to be criticized, esp. when it comes from a passion for a person’s faith. I don’t think that she should be held to the same standards as Christian non-fiction….or even Christian fiction. Perhaps I’m alone in this on here, but I celebrate her exploration of her faith, esp. since she has returned from a sabbatical of many years. I’m celebrating over the lost coin, sheep, and son (or daughter in this instance)
blessings to all justin
15. Greg Ryan
February 27, 2008
12:00 AM
Again, I understand this is fiction. I probably could have been clearer about my reservations. And I have not “asked God” if this is something I should read but my “gut” reaction is, stay away.
I am not condemning anyone for reading Anne’s books or exploring Christ’s humanity. It’s just when I read fiction I get a picture of the “fictional” character in my mind and I already have a picture of Jesus there and I do not want someone else’s interpretation clouding my “picture of Christ”.
Jesus is not a fictional character, He is God. For me, again, I say for me, letting anyone else paint a mental picture of Him and His humanity, does not appeal to me.
I think the tricky part is Jesus is still alive and seated at the right hand of the Father and to have someone besides Him paint a different picture strikes a little like gossip or slander. If Jesus wanted me to know more about His human side, He would have included it another book I am reading. (I know that may be a little over the top but I think that is the heart of the matter for me.)
16. Frank Turk
February 27, 2008
10:32 AM
I reviewed the original book in this series when I was King for a Week here at Challies.com (note to Tim: Heinrich got a second round of recongition and I didn’t? Pheh — I’ll get mine back at BoB).
I haven’t read the second one yet, but I intend to. I also strongly recommend that anyone thinking about these books go and find Mike Horton’s interview with Anne Rice about her journey from liberal atheism back to Catholicism as it lends some apologetic weight to the conversation between those of us who are disciples of Christ and the world at large. I don’t have a link, but someone may have it archived; if no one does, I’ll see if I have it someplace.
Anyway, that said, I think it is possible that we, as Christians, have lost sight of the fact that there’s a massive distinction between “fiction” as a literary category and “lie” as a moral offense. There is no question: Mrs. Rice’s books depict an other-than-orthodox (small-“o”) Christ. But she makes no bones about wanting to write devotional fiction and not theological treatises.
What if we were reading this book, and used its platform to speak to people about why John calls this man “the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world”? What if we lead them back to Scripture?
It seems to me that if we see a man sitting by the side of the road reading this book, and we go to the other side of the road to avoid contact with Mrs. Rice’s book, we are in fact too pious and too concerned about how pure we are rather than how good the good news is.
Others may disagree. I welcome their feedback.
17. Tim Challies
February 27, 2008
10:40 AM
Anyway, that said, I think it is possible that we, as Christians, have lost sight of the fact that there’s a massive distinction between “fiction” as a literary category and “lie” as a moral offense.
I think you may well be right. Still, I think a certain amount of precision is valuable when writing about God. While I have little question about the author’s motives, I do think the results may be, in some cases, other than she expected or hoped.
18. donsands
February 27, 2008
11:30 AM
Her book seems more like Sortof-fiction, and Sortofnon-fiction.
It’s different than the DaVinci Code, but similar, and yet different than Harry Potter altogether.
Good thoughts by Frank though. Lets be happy to discuss the errors, and then point to the Scriptures.
19. Stefan
February 27, 2008
1:42 PM
I’ve found a link to Horton’s radio interview with Rice, here.
For those of us for whom it’s more convenient to read than to listen, I don’t know if there’s a transcript floating around out there anywhere….
20. Terry Rayburn
February 27, 2008
3:12 PM
Frank Turk wrote:
“It seems to me that if we see a man sitting by the side of the road reading this book, and we go to the other side of the road to avoid contact with Mrs. Rice’s book, we are in fact too pious and too concerned about how pure we are rather than how good the good news is.”
Agreed.
The problem is I don’t see anyone telling Anne the Good News, including Michael Horton. She is being embraced as already having the Good News, since “returning to the Christianity of her childhood”, but that which she has returned to is the Roman Catholic Church.
There’s something in the water when so many are treating Catholicism as just another Bible-believing denomination. I can’t tell you how many “staunch” Calvinistic teachers and preachers I’ve read lately who think Peter Kreeft is one of the great teachers of our times. And many more who revere Thomas Aquinas. Or who “dialogue” for common ground.
I don’t get it. But then when one migrates from a major Protestant teaching post to the Roman Church, people are shocked, at least for a couple days of blogging.
Anne Rice is steeped in Legalism and calling it Grace. She does honor a brush with Protestantism by mentioning the greatness of N.T. Wright, who has perverted Justification by Faith nearly as thoroughly as Roman Catholicism has, albeit more subtly.
“Love God and do what you will”. Read Anne Rice and Stephen King, for that matter. Just have the wisdom to know that there’s biblical Christianity, and then there’s the unbiblical salvation-by-works cult of Roman Catholicism, holding captive precious souls we should be loving.
21. Barbara
February 28, 2008
7:05 AM
Were the prayers that I prayed as a child on my knees in front of my statue of Mary with the infant Jesus on her lap any less important to God than the prayers that I pray today with an open bible in my hand as a reformed Protestant?
When God saved me I knew nothing of doctrine; I knew only that I could not take one more breath with the weight of my sin bearing down on me. And, at that moment, Jesus crawled off of Mary’s lap in my mind’s eye and became my Atonement.
22. donsands
February 28, 2008
9:22 AM
I was a Catholic. And when God began to bring me out of the darkness, and into His marvelous light, I went back to the Catholic Church. I was there for a couple years, before I came to see Catholicism as a false religion. I prayed a lot of worthless prayers, not only to Mary, but to God as well. Though I was one of God’s elect from my mother’s womb.
Was I a Cornelius at this time? I don’t know. Maybe. Maybe not.
But somewhere along the way God brought the Gospel to me, and I was convicted, and repented, and understood that I was a sinner, and I needed forgiveness, and Christ’s death on the Cross was the only way to receive God’s remission for my sins, and that He was a risen Lord, and I must bow my knee to Him.
Once born again I began to grow in the Word of His grace.
23. glenn woods
March 4, 2008
9:23 AM
i cannot believe what i am reading here. anne rice has given her life over to the service of our Lord Jesus Christ and you people want speculate on her faith and purpose. there are just as many Catholics out there you will see in heaven as any other group. you people should be ashamed of yourself. it’s like a bunch of Pharisees were raised from the dead and got on this site to post comments. May God open your judgmental eyes. wake up people, God said many of you would say, “Lord, Lord, did i not…” and he will say “depart from me…” i would be very careful who or how i judge if i were you.
24. Jeremy
March 4, 2008
10:32 AM
WOW, talk about double standards. Other Christian writers can write Christian fiction about Jesus, The End of Times and other religious related subjects, but once a Catholic author writes Christian fiction not only she gets bashed but also her beliefs…
“If anyone says, ‘I love God,’ yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen” (1 Jn 4:20).