Wendy St Germain

The Bible's book of Matthew (19:14) says, Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

That makes good sense to me. After all, isn't the soul of a child such a precious thing that it's worth protecting? I think so. As someone who works with words, it stands to reason that if I were to do my bit to help Jesus with his request, I would use the written word. So I did.

Snag is Jesus never had to deal with publishers - more so, with religious publishers.

Have you ever tried to write a book about faith that you wanted to write and not written to any specific guidelines? If not, and if you'd like to do a study in human nature, give it a go. They say one must never discuss politics or religion outside the home. It can anger people. Well, the first thing I learned in writing for the religious market is that even though they publish the stuff, your views on religion can be one hot potato with some editors.

Matthew (17:20) gives authors hope when quoting Jesus as saying, '...if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.' I wonder. When he said this, did Jesus think far enough ahead to realise that some of us mere mortals would be dealing with publishers? Archimedes told his peers that if he was given a place to stand and a fulcrum long enough he could move the world.  He may be right. I figure that shifting the Earth from its position in the universe would be easier than trying to get some religious publishers to understand where you are coming from. I'll tell you why.

Like all authors, I have received my share of rejections. I admit I much prefer emailed rejections, don't you? One click of the delete button and it's like they never existed. You don't have to pull them out of the letterbox, open them and handle them. Those paper ones really make you feel that you've been officially REJECTED. I think this is what gives the emailed rejection its appeal. You don't touch them. But I digress. I learned that when it comes to writing for the religion market, what others would more politely call an 'unsuitable' manuscript gets called a lot of other things instead. At least in my experience it has been this way.

If I were to brainstorm ideas that would come to mind before writing a book about faith, words like smile, candle, silence, church, peace and understanding might be listed. In a nutshell, a calm and respectful feeling. But that's where it ends when you actually start the work. With regard to my manuscript only one rejection I received fit that description. Indeed, that one was also the longest rejection I've ever received. It had a trailing tail of forwards from the reader to the assistant editor to the editor to the senior editor to the Publisher. All with variations of, 'This is interesting, what do you think?' 'This is different, might be worth looking at' and so on. The Publisher wrote back to me explaining that he found it a most interesting and open minded work (I sent three chapters) but as a small outfit that distributed to very conservative organisations, he regretfully declined. However, he gave me the name of a larger publisher who, unfortunately, never replied to my submission. At the rate my rejections went, this was probably a blessing.

I'm not sorry I wrote the book even though, at this point, no one seems to want to touch it. I learned much by writing it. I based it on my own interests and on answering questions that came up during my research among teens and young adults. However, I soon learned that some of the publishers I approached didn't seem too interested in what the target audience was looking for. The general view of a few editors was that young people don't know what they want to know about religion until they have been told what it is they want to know. Yes, the mind boggles, doesn't it? But the lesson here is, unless you know their strict (and I mean strict!) guidelines, trying to get your manuscript published will be like pushing a boulder uphill - with your nose. Having said that, I only submitted to about a dozen places. Maybe I got the worse over with first.

Three of the publishers I submitted to had, 'concerns' about my discussion of other religions. Why would I mention Buddhism, Islam or - shock, horror, the Pagan faiths in a pro-Christian book? Sorry, there is no place for that. One editor added a slightly hostile, '...when ours is the true faith!'  Yes, okay, I also believe that the teachings of Christ form the foundations of a true faith but we can't ignore that other religions exist and some intelligent people are curious about them. Sticking your head in the sand about their existence won't make them go away.

I also received criticism for 'the Catholic angle' from the Protestant publishers and for not citing Catholicism as the 'true' Christian faith from Catholic publishers. My mistake is that I don't divide Christ's teachings up like churches do. Therefore some things I discuss are claimed by Catholics and others by Protestants. I also recognise and respect that not all readers will decide to choose Christianity. By this time red flags were popping up all over the field but I pressed on. Mustard seeds and all that. So far, the mountain was not only NOT shifting but it was growing bigger!

With regard to 'the Catholic angle' I must ask, do people only skim the manuscripts? I state on about page two that while I am a Christian (if I must be categorised at all) I do not identify with a specific branch of Christianity. In this case, the chapter that cost me was my mention of some of the great saints. The saints in question served as good examples for the points I was trying to make. It wasn't a pro-Catholic piece at all. It just so happens that the Catholic Church is big on making saints so naturally, the odds of the saint I discussed being Catholic are quite high.

Then there was the chapter that really bugged a couple of people. It was the one where I explore the possibility that non-human animals are also important enough to our Creator to have souls. Now here's where a few egos were bruised, I can tell you! Given that at least one of those people probably had pets, I was surprised that this idea got a rise out of them. One left me clear on his views. 'There is no way God has elevated animals to the same level as man.' I was half tempted to reply, 'Man? What about women? Don't we get to heaven too, or are we going to wherever our pets are headed?' But I didn't. I have a rule about never replying to rejections. Maintaining dignity and all that.

The worst rejection of all was also the first one I received for this book. In itself, it epitomised the others that were about to follow (barring that courteous one and a few that were simply 'chilly'). In my cover letter and chapter heading list, I mention that as a scientist who has written about 30 titles, most of which are science texts, I feel well qualified in writing the chapter where scientists look at the miraculous. I also state that to my delight I find that in most cases, we are left with the very real possibility that only a creator could have been responsible for the examples given.

As I stated, I have a rule never to reply to a rejection but I broke this rule once, for that first rejection. The rejection was concise and to the point, complete with capital letters in case I didn't get it. 'Scientists DO NOT believe in God and have no business writing about things of which they know nothing!' Well! Would you have let that one go? Once I recovered from reading it, I hit Reply and pointed out to said individual that had she taken the time to read the piece, she would have learned just how many scientists did (and do) believe in a creator - of which I am one. In the book I provide a list of names, and an incomplete one at that, of some of the world's greatest minds (ever heard of Einstein?) who believed in a creator. I figured that even though there was no actual mention of the work being rejected, it was safe to assume that this woman wanted nothing more to do with this heathen's writings.

So, did Jesus think of authors when he preached? I think so. Even though he never had to deal with publishers, I believe he understood the struggles we would undergo and, as he always did, he provided an example we could follow. Think about it. He travelled many miles, for a number of years, in hopes of getting people interested in his words. Sound familiar? That's what our manuscripts do. Like our manuscripts, he experienced much in the way of rejection. Many were critical of his words. Others said he'd never catch on. Ignore him and he will give up and go away. Do you see the pattern here? It's the authors who quit that never know if they could have made it. My book may never get published but I will try sending it out another time - when I'm prepared to deal with this unique breed of editors again. Who knows, I might get a completely different sort of rejections next time. 

We are advised about the value of queries and proposals. I have learned that in the case of religious publishing, this is definitely the way to go before you start writing.  As I said, I may have hit the harshest people first but harsh of courteous, they are all quite rigid with regard to their guidelines.

No, Jesus didn't have to deal with religious publishers but he did have to deal with religious leaders so I guess in a way, there's a similarity there too (starting with the all powerful attitudes some of them have). He tried to show them a different way of thinking - modify the guidelines. One thing he did teach me regarding my writing is that it's people who give up that get nowhere. Jesus never did and neither will I. He preached till the very end. So keep writing, that's what it's all about.

© Wendy St Germain 2009