This is last of four essays that, beginning a discussion of French novelist Tournier, has evolved into a debate on qualities that fiction must have to be considered Christian. In first essay John M. Dunaway argued that claims to be a writer but publishes novels contrary to Christianity, and specifically criticized Tournier's novel about Magi, Gaspard, Melchior et Balthazar. In replying, offered evidence that does not claim to be a writer but that nevertheless Gaspard, Melchior et Balthazar is a novel. Professor Dunaway has since answered, graciously accepting my definition of a novel and clarifying some of his points. In this, my second reply, will further explore our disagreements: whether claims to be a writer (he does not), whether Gaspard, Melchior et Balthazar is a novel (it is), and why Tournier's other fiction cannot be classified (its ideas are too heretical). Beyond those questions, though, is a broader one--namely, how fiction may treat the ethics of `sexual orientation' (Dunaway, 107). That is where we disagree most strongly. In his second article Dunaway reiterates a point that, though prominent his original essay, has now relegated to an endnote: claim that has called himself a writer (Tournier 108n1). There is no point repeating evidence have already presented showing that statement by quoted by Dunaway is more accurately translated I have always considered myself a writer who is also a believer (Petit, Michel Tournier 313-14). must, however, contest Dunaway's assertion that in a predominantly culture if one says one is a one will naturally be understood to mean a Christian (Tournier 108n1). Surely when precise a writer and speaker says is a believer, that is what means and not something else. (1) Of more moment, however, is whether Gaspard, Melchior et Balthazar is a novel. Dunaway has accepted my definition that a novel must be considered if, as a whole, it reflects beliefs more or less explicitly and a fashion that presents those beliefs true. The beliefs need not be those of a particular church, but they must conform to central doctrines of churches generally or derive clearly from Gospels and tradition Tournier 320). Although Dunaway says that Gaspard, Melchior et Balthazar fails to qualify under this definition (Tournier 106), his reasoning is unpersuasive. One of Dunaway's objections has to do with passages from a different novel by Tournier, Le Roi des aulnes, and is therefore irrelevant. His only specific complaint concerning Gaspard, Melchior et Balthazar itself is that novel's focus on Incarnation strikes [him] being too much like theology of Thomas J. J. Altizer and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (Tournier 106). This claim is unconvincing because does not show what novel suggests those authors' ideas, does not explain why cannot consider their theologies to be Christian, (2) and does not explain why focusing on Incarnation would disqualify Gaspard, Melchior et Balthazar a novel. The Incarnation is of supreme importance novel, but that is to be expected a book about Magi. One may certainly question novel's theology. have said elsewhere that because fourth wise man, Taor, is carried bodily to heaven before Crucifixion, he is not saved by Christ's death [and] not justified by his Resurrection, because those events have not yet happened (Michel Tournier's Metaphysical Fictions 146). The plot and themes of Gaspard, Melchior et Balthazar, however, center around Incarnation, Crucifixion, and Resurrection of Jesus, which not only are presented true but are expounded by archangel Gabriel on Christmas Eve near center of novel (169-73). …
Read full abstract
Aug 13, 2024
Kirsten Slungaard Mumma 
Open Access