For example:
Baptists like Charles Stanley
Evangelical Free Church writers like Swindoll
Church of Christers such as Max Lucado

These writers, some of your best-selling authors, come from a “free church” tradition that tends to shy away from an official written creed, no matter how much it may actually line up with their beliefs!

For example:
Baptists like Charles Stanley
Evangelical Free Church writers like Swindoll
Church of Christers such as Max Lucado

These writers, some of your best-selling authors, come from a “free church” tradition that tends to shy away from an official written creed, no matter how much it may actually line up with their beliefs!

You can submit these to:

Ms. Laura Minchew
Thomas Nelson Publishers
501 Nelson Place
Nashville, TN 37214
USA

Thanks,

Mike

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. I am not looking for the “perfect” set of standards. I just want something that points us in the right direction and provides guidelines and a vocabulary for making decisions. I believe our standards do that.

I also don’t believe that these are divisive. Certainly, not everyone will agree, and that’s okay. Any time you provide clarity, people are going to disagree. But ambiguity resulting from a lack of standards is not a good foundation for unity.

While we have had some criticism, to be sure, I have also received scores of e-mails from authors and customers who are celebrating this move.

I am glad you feel the freedom to disagree. I want a culture that is “safe for dissent.”

Thanks again for your input,

Mike

While I applaud the motivation behind the Christian-authors-only position of Nelson, I am also aware of some of the problems with it. (Full disclosure – I’m a Nelson employee and founder of Rutledge Hill Press.) Nelson is now taking the position of publishing only authors who ascribe to the Nicene Creed, who live according to Philippians 4:8, and who have a Christian worldview. Again, let me emphasize that I believe the motivation is right and good. The problems to the solution we have taken, however, are . . .

1. The term “Christian worldview” and “biblical worldview” have been hi-jacked by the “religious right” so that they are frequently used to mean “agree-with-me.” Although you referred to Jimmy Carter as an author who Nelson would publish under these standards, Jimmy Carter does not fit what many advocates of a “Christian worldview” mean by the term. “Christian worldview” and “biblical worldview” are wonderful terms that are full of rich meanings. But their hi-jacking has led to watering down the richness of the terms. It’s not clear what you really mean. Which leads to the second problem.

2. There is not a unified understanding among Nelson publishers of what “Christian worldview” means. It’s not even that there is varying legitimate positions. Too many of us just don’t get it. Leading to the third problem.

3. Some interpret having a Christian worldview to mean that if an author belongs to a Methodist (or Catholic, or Baptist, but not Mormon) church, he or she is OK. The fact is that too many people in our churches today have their worldview shaped by the culture rather than by the Scripture. I’m reminded of the baptism scene in “The Godfather” when Al Pacino affirmed his faith at his baby’s baptism and Coppola alternated scenes from the church with scenes of executions being carried out at Pacino’s direction. Being a church member does not mean you have a Christian worldview.

4. Publishing only authors who meet our three qualifications is a divisive position and draws boundaries where they should not be drawn. Most likely this would not be so if Nelson had always been a “Christian publisher” (There would not be any discussion if Moody Press said what Nelson has said.), but Nelson is changing from what it has historically been to being a “Christian publisher,” and so it is having to tell some of its authors that it can no longer publish them because they don’t meet the criteria. Alienation in the world is reaching epidemic proportions. We as Christians are called to be “ministers of reconciliation.” My fear is that this step will build walls, not bridges. A Christian is not someone who believes a certain thing, who engages or doesn’t engage in a certain practice, but someone who has been transformed by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. And the mark of the Christian is love. But all that does not fit neatly in a box.

I applaud your motivation and your explanation of that motivation. I just question the effectiveness of the route you have taken to try to solve the problem we have encountered of “coloring outside the lines.”