Book Review: ‘The Coming Revolution’

No, it’s not the American Civil War. It’s not even the Whiskey Rebellion. According to Richard G. Lee, America’s Second Revolution is happening now. Or at least was happening back when the 2010 election results held promise for many political conservatives and the Tea Party movement was at the height of its popularity.

Many books on current events are outdated by the time they go into print. Lee’s The Coming Revolution is one of them. What might have been a dozen short blog posts has been stretched into 200 pages of some of the most unoriginal thoughts ever written. Lee is a product of the Cold War, evident by his anti-communist paranoia. He’d have kids today believe that the “Marxism” (he means Stalinist communism) and the “Soviet Union” (no, I’m not kidding) are the greatest threats to America’s future. And he wants to fight them by praising America’s better days.

The Coming Revolution: Signs from America’s Past That Signal Out Nation’s Future is not the take-action book it claims to be. Lee spends about 80% of the book gushing over America’s grand narrative, covering no more than any of my grade school textbooks. He never misses an opportunity to brag about his role in bringing on the current Second Revolution, yet if anything, recent events proves just what a poor prophet he is.

The question running through my mind is, why was this book even written? (Well, I’m also wondering why I volunteered to review it.) Lee is an avid opponent of violent revolution, something that he even tries to write out of America’s revolutionary history. He connects that response with anarchism, socialism, and the Occupy Wall Street movement. Instead, he promotes a peaceful overthrow of the old order and installation of a new one…by angry people, no less. As a self-proclaimed leader of the Second Revolution, he can only advise his readers to continue to do exactly what they’ve done all their lives: vote, hold leaders accountable, and stay politically engaged – things that haven’t brought significant changes in the long run. If Lee wants to be a leader of his new revolution, he needs to offer new strategies before he’s replaced or loses the war.

A copy of this book was provided by BookSneeze free of charge for review on this blog.

Novel Homeschoolers: 'When Sparrows Fall'

*WARNING: PLOT SPOILERS*

I kicked the romance novel reading habit by the time I graduated college and haven’t been interested in them since, save as a mere academic curiosity. But when I noticed homeschool historian Milton Gaither’s review on a recently published Christian romance novel, I thought I’ve give the genre another try. Homeschool mother Meg Moseley, the author of When Sparrows Fall: A Novel, cited influences such as Hillary McFarland, who’s controversial blog and book Quivering Daughters: Hope and Healing for the Daughters of Patriarchy made plenty of waves within the Christian homeschool community. I was curious how Moseley would tackle the oppressive cult problem while coming out in the end strong for Christianity and home education.

When most of us think of homeschooling cults, the effect on daughters comes to mind. When Sparrows Fall: A Novel, instead, is about a mother, someone with whom the author might more closely identify. Burdened with a guilty past, widow Miranda Hanford desperately seeks freedom from the clutches of cult leader Mason Chandler. When an accident places her and her six children under the care of her dead husband’s half-brother Jack, Miranda has to learn how to trust a liberal outsider and take control over her life.

Like the worst of fiction (both “Christian” and “secular”), Moseley’s suffers from an epidemic use of deus ex machine (“god out of the machine”). The heroine’s conflict and its timely resolution are brought about providentially rather than through any deliberate action on her part. The reader is expected to believe that Miranda didn’t try to commit suicide, even though everything points to it. The reader is also expected to believe that the no-nonsense sheriff’s office suddenly and without reason becomes sympathetic and willing to side-step the law to save time. Apparently, even the friendly, neighborhood country lawmen are corrupt.

The plot has other problems too. When Miranda tries to inspire her fellow sheep to break free from the wolf shepherd, it’s as if everyone’s programmed to suddenly see the light. As many women who’ve had real cult experiences have written, there’s often a lot of conflict between members of the congregation as they try to justify the leader’s behavior and reach their own conclusions about the situation. I believe that’s what Moseley was trying to show in her book, but it didn’t come out that way. Instead she trivializes how difficult it actually is for people to get out of the subservient cult mindset, and she preserves family units (e.g., spouses join sides with each other, children join sides with parents), rather than showing the type of alienation many suffer when challenging cult authorities.

The characters collectively are a bit wooden with occasional spouts of personality. Most of the time, they seem to be parroting their lines off a script. Miranda is almost bi-polar, convincingly torn between her old puritanical self and her new rebellious one. Her children’s childish antics are genuine. I’m sure a lot of mothers reading the book will get a good laugh from a number of the scenes. Jack, however, is unbelievable in a really bad way. An objective researcher, he’s able to come to all of the “right” conclusions about Christianity and homeschooling, relying on the Internet to tell him what’s “normal” rather than what he sees firsthand in Miranda’s household. Unrealistic to say the least. And that’s not the last of Jack’s problems.

The male lead is a tenure-track professor with graduate students who’s hounded at work as if he’s a desperate adjunct lecturer. His lady boss, Farnsworth, is so badly stereotyped, I can tell you she’s a white, feminist BabyBoomer who doesn’t show up for office hours with her students. Forget the uncomfortable hint of incest. What woman in her right mind would want a hen-pecked anti-social bachelor who couldn’t even man up and rescue her at the end of the book? It just goes to convince me that Jack is Miranda’s “rebound man.” As soon as her health and household are back in order, she’ll find someone else to kiss. And unless you’re still intrigued by Moseley’s plot, I suggest you find another book read.

Thoughts on Al-Qur’ān

Juz' of Qur'an (Egypt, 1438-1453), LACMA (Public Domain) 

While in my early mid-twenties, I attended a speaking event that was hosted by an Islamic mosque and a Christian organization. The Christians who attended each received a copy of the Qur’an (translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali), while the Muslims each were given a copy of the New Testament. Despite everyone insisting that the books were “for reference,” I’m quite sure that both sides viewed this exchange as an opportunity to proselytize the other side. I appreciated the gift as a reference tool, useful for looking up passages quoted in the books I was reading, but I never attempted to read my Qur’an until nearly three years ago. And I finally finished it earlier this week.

The Qur’an is not an easy book to understand, even though each surah reads as if it were concise and complete. I was a little surprised how little content was devoted to religious practices, but perhaps that’s what the hadith is for. I also was surprised at how boring I found the book, since it’s generally the topic of heated conversation. If I were to summarize the book, I would say that it’s most like Revelation, the Apocalypse, a text devoted to eschatology. The Qur’an informs the reader what will occur in what Christians would call the “end times,” when the Resurrection of the dead occurs, and offers instructions on what is necessary to receive final reward and avoid final punishment for deeds done on earth. One thing that stood out to me from the text is the fact the Qur’an seems to self-interpret its “end times” statements as literal. However, there doesn’t seem to be any hint as to when to time the “inevitable event.”

While reading Surat Al-Wāqi`ah (Surah 56), a Meccan or early surah, I immediately made a connection with the “Final Judgment” described in Matthew 25:31-46. Jesus Christ tells of His glorious return, sitting on a heavenly throne and separating the “sheep” from the “goats.” Surah 56 (links A, B, & C) also tells of mankind being divided after the Resurrection. In that case, there are three classes: the Companions of the Right/Right Hand, the Companions of the Left/Left Hand, and the Foremost in Faith. In both texts, those on the right are rewarded while those on the left are punished. In the Qur’an those places of reward and punishment are actually in the right and left positions, while Jesus Christ sends those on the left away to eternal destruction and leads those on the right to Paradise (Matt. 25: 34, 41, & 46).

However, the most glaring contrast is the third position: the Foremost in Faith. The Qur’an has reserved for them the “Gardens of Bliss” that are “Nearest to Allah” and even their own thrones (ayah 11, 12, & 15). Maybe there’s a connection with the promises made to Jesus’ disciples: that twelve thrones upon which they would judge the twelve tribes of Israel awaited those of them who remained faithful (Matt. 19:28). Yes, the text does mention special rewards reserved for those who’ve given up everything to follow Christ (cf. Matt. 19:27-30, Mark 10:28-31, Luke 18:26-30), but the Bible is rather vague on the matter. Jesus continues teaching the disciples with the parable about the hired day laborers who receive the same pay even though they were hired at different times (Matt. 20:1-16). The point of this passage is that we can expect God to give us exactly what He promises us (v. 13), and we’re not to complain when He shows generosity to others (v. 15). The clear implication of this passage is that there will be some who’ve given up less who’ll receive the same reward as those who give up more.

While the Gospel tells us not to expect more, the Qur’an explicitly promises special honors to those who were generous towards the needy and obeyed God (link C)…in other words, people who would be just included among the many other “sheep” (Matt. 25:35-40). This leaves two impressions on my mind: First, Muslims might take comfort in the belief that, even if they cannot make the cut to be in the “foremost” class, they can at least enjoy the benefits of being a part of the “right” (sort of a parasitic nobility, honored but essentially useless from a spiritual perspective). Second and related, Muslims might feel as though they must be guaranteed extra benefits in exchange for their good deeds. In other words, there must be an extra incentive to alter their behavior if they’re going to sacrifice their time and money and even their lives in holy jihad. God, however, expects us to do what is required, because it is right, and not for expected benefit. So, while the Qur’an provides an easy out for those who don’t practice righteousness (the “right”), the Gospel relegates the same people to eternal destruction (the “left”) (Matt. 25:42-45).

Helpful References:
A. The Meanings Of The Holy Qur'an by Abdullah Yusufali Ali (English translation)
B. Qur’ān (English translation)
C. The Meaning of Quran: In Text with Advance Search by S. Abul A'la Moududi (English translation with commentary)
D. The Hadith Library
E. Internet Sacred Text Archive

Books:
1. The Qur’an Translation by Abdullah Yusufali Ali (English translation)
2. HarperCollins Study Quran (whenever they get around to publishing it)