REPENTHOUSE

FOSTERING COMMUNITY AMONG THOSE WHO BELIEVE

 

 

“As ye go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils:

freely ye have received, freely give...’”

 

Matthew 10:7-8

 

PART ONE: SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

 

1.

Authors should craft original, engaging, expertly written narratives with fully developed characters, carefully constructed plots that lead to satisfying conclusions, and spiritually uplifting themes that encourage readers to draw nearer not only to God but also to their fellow human beings.   The narrative should hold the reader’s interest from start to finish while presenting novel ideas, inventive turns of phrase, and a strong but never heavy-handed moral sense.  Clichés, stereotypes, and deus ex machina resolutions are all to be avoided, except perhaps in farcical writing. 

            Stories may feature traditional heroes and heroines, their companions and accomplices, and villains who oppose and often threaten them, but need not avoid employing antiheroes, antivillains (that is, sympathetic villains), clowns, doubters, nerds, outcasts, and tricksters – as long as they and their actions are presented realistically and within a strong though understated moral framework in which sinners can atone for their sins, and in which at least one typically does.  Angels, demons, and other spirits may also play a part in the narrative, provided they behave according to Scriptural principles.  Preternatural creatures such as aliens, cryptids, dragons, dwarfs, fairies, genies, ghouls, giants, goblins, lwa, trolls, vampires, werewolves, and zombies usually serve as stand-ins for human beings and are allowed in works of fantasy and science fiction.  Authors should consider whether the behavior of such creatures is tainted by the sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:1-24 and Romans 5:12), though that topic need not be addressed directly. 

            Special care should be taken with magicians, pagans, soothsayers, warlocks, witches, wizards and other practitioners of potentially malevolent magic.  Such conjurers may claim to use only benevolent or “white” magic in their spells, but their often manipulative actions typically reveal otherwise.  Bear in mind that dabblers in the dark arts are human beings who may freely renounce their sins and be saved from them.  Though determinism of various sorts may be explored, characters should exercise free will as much as possible within the bounds of the narrative’s theme and plot.          

 

2.

Characters, furthermore, should diligently seek and generally find logical, sensible, workable solutions to contemporary, pressing, real-world problems by means of prayer, Bible study, reflection, meditation, repentance, soul searching, and fellowship with true believers dedicated to making the world a better place for everyone.  Readers should be able to identify with, and learn valuable lessons from, at least one of these characters as they struggle to secure (or recover) truth, health, faith, hope, love, mercy, justice, redemption, and serenity in an increasingly cold, hostile, greedy, corrupt, unjust, exploitative, and sinful world that has largely devolved into indifference to the fate of humanity.  Authors should never lose sight of the cultural, ethnic, generational, sexual, and societal differences among individuals and groups that make up the boundless diversity of God’s orderly universe. 

            Narratives should stimulate empathy, sympathy, and sometimes pity for those undergoing trial, tribulation, and temptation.  Authors should also at least contemplate the Apostle Paul’s intent in writing 1 Corinthians 10:13, which says, “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.”  This doesn’t mean that some people can’t at times be driven over the brink in terms of their ability to endure misfortune.  Until such time as we are raptured into heaven, we all succumb to disease and death, and most of us to debility as well.  Whether or not we choose to explore these themes in depth, we should keep them in mind, along with other life lessons we learn through Scripture.

 

3.

The three key elements of successful contemporary literature are clarity, consistency, and concision.  To these may be added a fourth: cleverness, which enables one body of writing to stand out from others like it.  Concision is not to be equated solely with brevity, however; it includes avoiding overstatement, overemphasis, and sermonizing while demonstrating to the reader how the Lord works subtly through virtually all aspects of human endeavor to redeem His children from lives of sin and suffering.

 

                                                                                    God moves in a mysterious way

                                                                                    His wonders to perform;

                                                                                    He plants his footsteps in the sea

                                                                                    And rides upon the storm.

                                                   

                                                                                                        William Cowper, Hymn, Light Shining out of Darkness (1779)

 

            It goes without saying that narratives should be internally consistent, coherent, and logical – even though literary characters, like the flesh-and-blood human beings who inspire them, are usually bundles of contradictions.  One of the purposes of literature is to disentangle these contradictions and present them in a sensible way to help us understand our own motivations.  Skillful writing should lift the reader’s spirit by arousing at first a curiosity, and later a zeal, as to how we can best fulfill God’s will for His creatures on earth.  Characters should face the same obstacles with which we struggle in everyday life, among them temptation, pride, vanity, and the seeming triumph of wrongdoing in spite of our best efforts to contain it.  How do we attain the greater good if we have to accept the lesser of two evils?  Is there room for compromise, and if so where, when, to what extent, and for how long?  If I’m not succeeding in life, am I doing something wrong?  Or is God testing my faith?  Am I passing or failing the test so far?  Are the odds against me?  If so, can I – and should I – try to even the score?  How much should we leave in God’s hands?  Is anything ultimately ever out of God’s hands?  How can we best discern His will for our lives and put it into practice?  Does God truly “help those who help themselves,” a principle not found as such in the Bible.  If it’s true that “God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able [to endure]; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it” (1 Corinthians 10:13), why do people wind up on the street begging for food?  Why are there so many people in mental institutions?  You might also ask where there aren’t more people in decent mental institutions?  Should more people be housed in such facilities to ensure they’re given the care they need?  Is there a hidden message in those and other faith-defying verses that we’re missing?  If so, how can we unlock it and put it into practice?

 

4.

Authors need not back away from controversy, but should avoid sensationalism for its own sake.  A compelling story will also present conflict on multiple levels – struggles with oneself, one’s family, one’s friends, one’s beloved, one’s coworkers, one’s community, one’s government, one’s country, one’s church, one’s past, the devil, and even, occasionally, with the Lord.  Recall Jesus’ words in Matthew 10:34-36:

 

                                                                                      “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth:

                                                                                     I came not to send peace, but a sword. 

                                                                                    For I am come to set a man at variance against his father,

                                                                                    and the daughter against her mother,

                                                                                    and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 

                                                                                    And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.” 

 

Most, though not always all, of these conflicts will be resolved by the end according to Scriptural principles, provided the final outcome is realistic and plausible and never facile or simplistic.  The faithful may be rewarded, yes, but often at great cost to their health or livelihood.  A camel does not pass through the eye of a needle intact (Mark 10:25).  The wicked need not be punished so much as taught valuable lessons about the will of God, lessons that, given the opportunity, they may easily forget.  Virtue triumphs, but evil is never completely eradicated, at least not on earth during the present age.  You may show readers sin with all its filthy allure – debauchery, deceit, envy, gluttony, gossip, greed, hatred, hypocrisy, lust, prejudice, presumption, pride, recklessness, slander, sloth, vanity, and wrath, among others – but don’t forget (or omit) the wages of sin (Romans 6:23).  Death, eternal death, is of course the ultimate wage assessed for a life of sin, but authors must not forget the many minor payments parceled out along the path to perdition – lesser compensations such as debt, delinquency, dementia, depravity, depression, despair, destitution, disease, divorce, doubt, drug dependence, exposure, guilt, isolation, loss, and shame, among others.  They must never forget the lessons taught in the Book of Job either, explaining as they do in part why the righteous suffer.

            Narratives should offer at least the hope of redemption from a life gone wrong.  Show us the overwhelming power of God’s grace to lift the most loathsome of louts and lechers into the company of the blessed.  We are all sinners saved by grace (Ephesians 2:8), and as such encouraged by lifelike and lively depictions of that saving, cleansing, transformative grace in action.  Even diehard degenerates can often perceive the changes that take place during the process of sanctification (1 Thessalonians 5:23) even though they will probably never experience any of them themselves.  Furthermore, however climactic the act or process of salvation may seem, it should seldom if ever end a story.  Show the reader a redeemed sinner struggling to resist temptation and overcoming Satan’s stealthiest strategies for dragging him or her back down into the ditch of degradation.  Jesus not only saves; He also heals, liberates, and regenerates ordinary human beings who surrender to the Lord’s will (Matthew 7:21), in answer to the Psalmist’s prayer, “Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me” (Psalm 51:10).   

            Authors should never avoid confrontation.  Characters should stand up for what they believe in, whether it is fundamentally right or wrong.  Those willing to learn from the consequences of their choices typically come out ahead, while those unwilling to learn, adapt, obey, or believe often suffer calamity.  Authors will be given the opportunity to offer their responses to the burning questions of the ages, among them, Why is there so much suffering in the world? and What can we mere mortals do about it? 

            Conflicts eschewed in real life to maintain peace and tranquility should be probed in depth in literature, albeit within the bounds of believability and generally without sadism or violence for its own sake.  A narrative’s major conflict should be resolved by the end, but minor conflicts may remain unresolved.  Characters may be offered a resolution, often a difficult one fraught with conditions, that they may consequently accept or reject.  The end of one narrative often suggests the beginning of another.  Readers should in any case finish reading the work reassured by the words of the prophet Nahum (1:7), “The Lord is good, a strong hold in the day of trouble: and He knoweth them that trust in Him” – even if the troubles are not vanquished completely.  Every narrative should reach a conclusion that in some way satisfies readers while making them yearn for further experiences with the same characters and (often) situations and settings that have resonated with them during their reading of the work.

 

5.

Although the Lord unquestionably performs miracles in the lives of real people every day, overtly miraculous occurrences should be invoked in narratives as rarely as possible.  Characters should instead rely on the resources Providence has put at their disposal, beginning of course with the Bible but continuing with works by devout men and women of God from Thomas à Kempis’s Imitation of Christ to C.S. Lewis’s Mere Christianity to Beth Moore’s Get Out of That Pit! Straight Talk About God’s Deliverance – which they interpret with the mental, spiritual, and, yes, logical faculties bestowed on them by their Creator.   Strange as it may seem, a healthy skepticism will bring the believer closer to God.  Angels may appear, for example, and interact with humans, but the messages they deliver may raise more questions than answers.

 

6.

Skilled authors never shy away from depicting the rich complexity of human emotions, even the darkest and fiercest among them, but will instead hold them up as prime examples of human interaction from which readers may derive keen insight into the inner workings of the psyche.  Show the reader the heights of rage, resentment, and rebellion – but also the depths of reproach, remorse, and redemption as one state of mind, body, or spirit inevitably gives way to another.  Inspirational writing, furthermore, must never overlook the abiding love of God for His people, of Christ for His church, or of the Holy Spirit for sinners He seeks to convict of their sins.  This transcendent passion should underlie the entire narrative, albeit subtly, nurturing the fruit of the spirit, “love, joy, peace, longsuffering [that is, patience], gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against [which] there is no law” (Galatians 5:22-23). 

            While it is true that at bottom “we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses,” that is, our attempts at self-righteousness, “are as filthy rags” [in God’s sight] (Isaiah 64:6), we are nevertheless “fearfully and wonderfully made” (Psalm 139:14) and as such amenable to salvation from sin “according to the riches of [God’s] grace” (Ephesians 1:7).  Only in the most simplistic narratives, such as those written for preschoolers, may characters be described as truly good or truly evil.  We all aspire to greater things; we all stray from the path of righteousness from time to time; we all succumb to temptation; we all suffer; we are all mortal.  Some rise up again and conquer fear with faith.  That is the kind of character who inspires us.     

            Romantic love must similarly be based more on devotion than simple desire, though authors need not ignore the harsh realities of adversity, anger, argumentation, envy, jealousy, and even lust that trouble the lives of real people (and the realistic characters in their narratives) day in and day out.  Show readers what commitment means to you, why it is sometimes threatened, and how it ultimately survives the challenges life presents.  Demonstrate if you can the transformation of at least one sinner, by means of God’s grace, which may sometimes be expressed through romantic love, into a saint, never forgetting that saints too may occasionally stumble.  If you believe, for instance, that divorce is – or should be – permitted under certain circumstances, illustrate in your writing the steps you followed to reach that conclusion, as either a series of logical arguments (in an essay, for example) or a story arc demonstrating how a marriage has failed (in a novel, for example).  It also helps to research how great religious leaders throughout history have addressed the same problem.  Do you live in a world fundamentally different from the one Jesus lived in?  

 

 

 

7.

Contemporary (which to say, non-archaic) grammatical rules should be followed to the letter.  We make allowances for sociolinguistic register and regional usage.  We furthermore distinguish between narrative and speech in terms of the application of these rules.  The overall tone of each piece of writing may vary from formal to informal, and from serious to jocular, depending on the author’s theme, intent, and style.  Switching between extremes in tone, when necessary, must be handled with care.  It is best avoided by beginning authors. 

            Because Repenthouse is based in the United States, we default to American usage and style.  We specialize in the Southern regional dialects spoken from Rhode Island to New Mexico.  We will, however, review manuscripts in the various regional varieties of Commonwealth English (now including Australian, British, Canadian, Indian (or South Asian), Irish, New Zealand, South African, and Welsh dialects).  Scots English is so different from the standard variety that it is widely considered a separate language.  A glossary should be included, and as editors we may ask for clarification of the meaning of words or expressions.  Note that English is now the official language in the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Botswana, Brunei, Burundi, Cameroon, Eswatini (formerly Swaziland), Fiji, the Gambia, Ghana, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, Kenya, Kiribati, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Mauritius, Micronesia, Namibia, Nauru, the Philippines, Sierra Leone, Singapore, the Solomon Islands, South Sudan, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe, among others.    

 

 

PART TWO: GENERAL WRITING GUIDELINES

 

1.

Accuracy is essential, particularly with Biblical, geographical, and historical references.  Manuscripts will be vetted, but only to a limited extent.  If we start noticing a lot of errors in them, we will return them you to emend.

 

2.

Beginning a sentence with a coordinating conjunction (such as and or but) is allowed, provided the construction is not overused.  Coordinating conjunctions may even begin a paragraph if the context demands such usage, as in the phrase And another thing… or And it came to pass…

3.

Clarity must never be sacrificed in the interest of concision.  The author must maintain control over characters, dialogue, plot, theme, and moral tenor at all times – even as these elements may wind their way through a narrative in seeming disarray.  A reader’s image of the proceedings should be blurred only to achieve a desired effect – to conceal an inconvenient truth, for example – and then only temporarily, its fundamental sharpness being restored after a brief interlude, though of course a narrative may ultimately raise more questions than it answers.

 

4.

Compounding negatives can sometimes lend emphasis – or crudeness – to a sentence, but is to be avoided in serious writing.  We couldn’t never imagine disobeying our daddy might work in regional speech in place of we could never imagine disobeying our daddy, but not elsewhere.  We couldn’t not obey, however, though somewhat awkward, is correct in the sense of we couldn’t help obeying.

 

5.

Compounding modal verbs occurs in regional dialects but should be avoided in standard written English.  These auxiliary verbs are defective and have no infinitive forms that can be used in tandem with other modal verbs, thus, except in quoted speech from the lower registers, they might be able to contribute is used instead of they might could contribute.  The same rules apply to the semi-modal auxiliaries dare, had better (from which had is often dropped colloquially), and ought, as well as need when it is used as an auxiliary (e.g., he need only ask, she need but acknowledge our letter, and they need not comply, all three of which are quickly becoming archaic outside the American South, where the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible still influences common parlance).

 

 

6.

Distinguishing subject pronouns from object pronouns is a hallmark of fine writing and careful speech.  The objective forms (me, thee, him, her, us, them, you, and whom) are used as the objects of both prepositions and transitive verbs: thus Lord forgive me, be merciful to us all, but we sinners are called to repent.  Between you and I is wrong because the preposition between governs the objective case, and the conjunction and does not undo this underlying rule.  You and I is not a more formal substitute for you and me when the latter phrase is used as an object.  Whom is used as the object of a preposition or a transitive verb, not as a formal equivalent of who, thus to whom it may concern and I have no idea whom I can tell but I can’t be sure who will listen and remind whoever has arrived that I’m on my way (in which the pronoun whoever plays a dual role, acting as both the object of the verb remind and the subject of the verb phrase has arrived; the nominative form is used in such cases).  Who may be used in place of whom in the lower registers of speech, but the converse isn’t true.  Whom am I speaking to? sounds awkward in everyday parlance, as does to whom am I speaking? which is correct in formal writing.  Whom came to call is an abomination.  With ye may occur in regional dialects, but in the KJV the objective form of ye is you: “I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you” (Genesis 9:9).

    Note also that constructions like between winning or losing are always incorrect because the preposition between links pairs; it doesn’t offer alternatives.  Remember that those caught between the devil and the deep blue sea, originally a nautical phrase, need not directly encounter either extreme.

 

7.

Doubling a copula is generally to be avoided, thus the crux of his argument is [that, not is] Christ can redeem the worst sinners.  It may be used when a dependent clause functions as the subject of a sentence, as in what the truth is, is that fire again devastated Rome a year after Nero died.  This usage is discouraged because of the general weakness of the copula.  We once had an English professor who warned of the dangers of what he termed colorless passives and dreary copulation.

 

8.

Ending sentences with prepositions is generally allowed in all but the highest registers, as long as their usage is not redundant.  Thus what are you driving at? is perfectly acceptable, while where are we going to? is not.  (Where are you going at? is even worse, except in restricted regional usage.)  The ultraformal At what are you driving? sounds like robotspeak.  The adverb where can mean either in what place or to what place.  The exact meaning might be confusing in isolation, so taxi drivers are permitted to ask, “Where to?” to express the more formally worded “Where do you want me to drive you?” In the English of the KJV, the latter sense would have been handled by the now-archaic adverb whither.  Like where to? constructions such as who by? and who with? are allowed in informal speech, as are phrasal verbs whose prepositional element serves as an adverb: try to keep up.  Where at? is another abomination.

 

9.

In American usage, apples are different from oranges.  In British Commonwealth usage, fruits are different to nuts.  The same rule applies to adverbs if the referent is a noun or pronoun: they speak differently from us [or to us in British usage].  Thus, the experience was completely different from [or to] what I was expecting.  The conjunction than may be used, though not without controversy, only with clauses: they pronounce the words differently than we do.  Prepositional phrases are preferred wherever possible: differently from us.

 

10.

Be careful with imperative constructions, whose implied subject is you (or ye in some cases).  In the sentence once completed, [you] leave the exams on my desk, it isn’t you (the unstated subject of the main verb leave) who has been completed; it’s the exams.  Thus once they’re completed, leave the exams on my desk.  Even better in the interest of concision is leave the completed exams on my desk.

 

11.

The use of simple intensifiers such as rather and very, along with the ubiquitous super, should be kept to a bare minimum if they’re used at all.  Certain adjectives, moreover, already describe extreme situations, such as irate and livid, for example, and should never be modified with intensifiers, though other adverbs may be used to limit their range, not expand it, as in uncontrollably incensed.

 

12.

The adjective less is normally used with collective, mass, or otherwise uncountable, and therefore singular, nouns: thus less desire, less effort, and less worry.  With plural nouns, the adjective fewer is preferred: fewer [individual] desires, fewer efforts, and fewer worries.  In comparative expressions with the conjunction than, however, the pronoun less is more common (and usually correct) unless the plural noun refers to individuals considered separately.  Thus fewer than five bonobos were injured in the flood presents the bonobos as individuals, while less than five bonobos were injured in the flood presents them as a group, that is, a unit.  (The proper name for a community of bonobos is party or troop.)  Fewer than adds precision where it may not be needed or even desired.  Fifteen items or fewer is correct but sounds stilted in most contexts.  Because the totality of the items is the topic under consideration, not the individual characteristics of each item, fifteen items or less is preferred, as it typically is in expressions of age, amount, distance, duration, and mass (referring to large numbers of people or things). 

    The use of less as an adjective with plural nouns remains controversial and is best avoided in formal writing, thus you’ll attract less insects with this formula is better expressed as you’ll attract fewer insects with this formula, even though the insects are regarded as a group instead of  individuals.  Circumlocutions are also often helpful: you’ll have less of a problem with insects or you won’t attract as many insects.

 

13.

Misplacing modifiers creates confusion. This simple rule for avoiding them is to make sure it is clear who is doing what to whom (or what to what).  In the sentence sitting in the waiting room, my boss walked in, it isn’t my boss who is sitting in the waiting room; it is the observer.  It should be recast as either we were sitting in the waiting room when my boss walked in or sitting in the waiting room, I saw my boss walk in.  In either case it is obvious who is sitting and who is walking in.  Similarly in worried about the future, a solution occurred to me, who is worried?  Certainly not the solution that occurred to you, therefore the sentence should read while I was worried about the future, a solution occurred to me.  Note that while worrying is still a participial clause that generally modifies the subject of the sentence. 

    Participles are not the only duplicitous danglers. Often the words need only be rearranged a bit, as in drunk, Mom wouldn’t let Dad in the house.  Rewording the sentence as Mom wouldn’t let Dad in the house drunk, while drunk, or (best of all) while he was drunk clarifies the meaning.  Witness further the example, at these prices, who can complain?  It is commodities that are offered for sale at varying prices, not their prospective purchasers, therefore who can complain about these prices?  Likewise, in as a child my father never spanked me, it is obvious that the writer is the child referred to, not the father, hence the correct wording should be as a child I was never spanked by my father.  Rearranging the words can still leave the meaning muddled, thus my father never spanked me as a child is best expanded to my father never spanked me when I was a child because the prepositional phrase as a child here refers to the sentence’s complement, not its subject.  Contemporary usage allows such phrases to modify complements when the sense is unambiguous, as in it strikes me as an author that these rules should be regularly reviewed.

 

14.

The much maligned passive voice boasts a productive purpose and needn’t be avoided entirely, as many grammarians and writing coaches recommend.  When handled skillfully, it often moves the narrative focus away from the actor to the action.  It may be the perfect form for the whodunit, and it can lend objectivity to a description.  An important rule to remember is never to allow the passive just to lie there.  Bring it to life even if it has been declared clinically dead by the county coroner himself: the process of decomposition is a busy and prolonged one whether it involves persons or participles.  With all due respect to Col. William Menninger (who defined the term passive-aggressive), in literature the more aggressive the passive, the more it will accomplish.  “The seventh apartment was closely shrouded in black velvet tapestries that hung all over the ceiling and down the walls…” (from Edgar Allan Poe’s “Masque of the Red Death”).  The passive shouldn’t be overused, however, especially when prepositions or phrasal verbs are involved.  With its moribund nature, it more often obstructs free expression instead of stimulating it.  Knowing when and how to use it properly takes practice.  Although horror writer Stephen King advises against using the passive voice in his guide On Writing, a careful reading of his work will demonstrate that he’s no stranger to it.  He often uses it to create suspense.

    In confusion may be avoided by following these rules, who is performing the recommended act of following the rules?  Certainly not confusion: how can it follow any rules?  Confusion is what is avoided in the passive construction.  He we are probably referring to an author, though a reader will also follow rules set forth by the author.  This agent of the passive verb may have to be named, thus confusion may be avoided by readers who follow the rules.  Authors must gain their readers’ trust.  To do so they must believe in the account being related, even if the narrator proves to be unreliable or even outright deceptive.   

 

15.

Profanity, including vulgar terms for body parts, bodily fluids, bodily functions, sexual acts, and marginalized groups and their members, is best avoided whenever possible, especially in publications intended for a juvenile audience.  It may be used with restraint in direct quotations from persons who are not serving as role models at the time their crude speech is uttered.  As the Apostle Paul taught, “Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers” (Ephesians 4:29).  Ordinary speakers use foul language to denigrate or disparage themselves and others, and it has become deeply entrenched in everyday conversation, setting much of its emotional tone.  True believers, on the other hand, don’t fall into this trap.  Instead we learn to bridle our tongues (James 1:26), which is no easy task without the Lord’s constant help and guidance (James 3:2-17).

 

                                                                                    “ Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true,

                                                                                    whatsoever things are honest,

                                                                                    whatsoever things are just,

                                                                                    whatsoever things are pure,               

                                                                                    whatsoever things are lovely,

                                                                                    whatsoever things are of good report;

                                                                                    if there be any virtue,

                                                                                    and if there be any praise,

                                                                                    think on these things.”

 

                                                                                                                        Philippians 8:4

   

            That leaves us with the following questions.  When is a so-called dirty word, or an obscene expression, admissible in a Repenthouse publication, and under what specific circumstances?  We understand that many of our contributors want to relate the details of specific events vividly.  Otherwise who’s going to believe the level of torment your Godless parents put you through as a child, for example, or how truly nasty the stories your husband told you before he found Jesus and learned to purge unseemly thoughts from his mind?  We appreciate the need for detail in such instances, but by the same token we don’t want to put off our more sensitive readers with an excess of salacious language.  The righteous simply have no need for it to express their thoughts.  Our primary purpose in writing inspirational literature is to inspire, not to debase; is to edify, not to vilify; to lead, not to mislead; and to educate, not to vitiate.  Furthermore, if we must arouse others, it should be toward righteous action, not toward fleshly lusts, whether these take the form of anger, concupiscence, despair, doubt, envy, jealousy, malice, overindulgence, recklessness, ridicule, spite, vengeance or any other fundamentally destructive impulse.  Therefore we feel that one or two examples of crude behavior, not limited to obscenities, will more than suffice to convey the outrage we should feel at having to deal with such wickedness.  We must rise about it, remembering that “a soft answer turneth away wrath; but grievous words stir up anger” (Proverbs 15:1).   

            That said, the words damn and hell frequently appear in the text of the KJV and may be quoted and used in a more or less literal sense elsewhere: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned,” that is, condemned to hell (Mark 16:16).  “Damn [i.e., curse; to hell with…] the torpedoes!” (Rear Admiral David G. Farragut, 1864); I’ll be damned [i.e., cursed, a fate to be avoided] if I’m going to listen to that.  Eventually, the meaning of damn was broadened to mean a moment of concern, care, or attention.  Thus, “My dear, I don’t give a damn” (Margaret Mitchell in Gone with the Wind).  Although it can refer to a bit of almost anything, it more often acts as an intensifier that, like most expletives, simply coarsens whatever follows: it’s a damned [or damn] shame that she left home.  Hell, similarly, may refer to any place or occasion of difficulty: it was a living hell.  The hell I will is another variant of I’ll be damned.  These ugly words are often little more than meaningless grunts intended to roughen up speech for the sheer effect: [I’m] damned if I know and hell if I know.

            The KJV unabashedly uses the term whore in a variety of senses, its synonym harlot having become archaic during the 19th century.  Euphemisms more sensitive to the plight of such persons, who may now be male, female, or anything in between, are therefore recommended, such as the less judgmental prostitute, sex worker, hustler, and even hooker.  Even the relatively vulgar slang term ho has its uses.

            The KJV also uses the word piss half a dozen times to mean urinate or urine.  It has been euphemized into pee (or pee-pee for children), which has lost most if not all its original vulgarity.  Slightly more questionable (and potentially offensive) is the derivative pissed off, sometimes shortened to pissed, both of which are widely used in the public media to mean “irritated,” based hypothetically on the assumption that urination shrugs off a physical necessity.  In Commonwealth nations, pissed more often means “drunk,” this sense no doubt derived from the observation that drunkards occasionally urinate on themselves.  This usage is somewhat less vulgar than the sense of being shrugged off or irritated by fate or circumstance.     

            As a general rule, more potent examples of profanity should appear only in quotations from public figures, like Larry Flynt or Madalyn Murray-O’Hair, who are known to have used profane language in public often.

            Authors interested in learning more about our house rules may refer to this page, which features several long lists of potentially objectionable words arranged by category.  Enter at your own risk.  Don’t say we didn’t warn you.

 

16.

Redundancies should be avoided in formal writing, even though they’ve become entrenched in everyday speech.  The worst among them are ATM machine, continue on, equally as, exceed over, other alternatives, protest against, reply back, respond back, and return back, all of which are dreadfully (!) common even in the media.  Experienced writers understand why they’re all wrong.  They actually insult a reader’s intelligence by unnecessarily repeating an element of expression.  A few unobtrusive ones may be allowed to fly under the radar in more informal writing, among them end result, free gift, and natural instinct.

 

17.

Slang and the nonstandard forms of words should be used only in the appropriate context, such as in dialogue or personal narration.  Needless to say it should never be overly profane.

 

18.

Splitting infinitives is allowed only when the alternative would sound awkward in speech, which means they are rarely if ever split by the adverb not (and also, by extension, never): thus to be or not to be and we all agreed never to mention the matter again.  Sentences like we expect that number to nearly double by the end of the year might sound stilted if the adverb nearly were to be moved to the front or back of the intact infinitive.  Purists might try we expect that number to double, or nearly so, by the end of the year, though that slows down the sentence somewhat, as is the case with their purpose was to venture, and venture decisively, into previously unexplored realms.  What’s wrong with the number will likely nearly double by next year?  Split infinitives are not used in the KJV or most other English-language versions of the Bible, so we observe this rule out of respect for tradition more than for any other reason.  Our experienced editors reserve the right to determine which such constructions sound awkward to the ears of contemporary readers and which do not.

 

19.

Though often omitted from grammatical guides (including Strunk and White’s Elements of Style) and ignored by some journalists, the subjunctive mood is still alive and well in English, though less productive than it was in the English of the KJV.  A hallmark of “educated” literary usage, it occurs in several set expressions, where it is used in contrary-to-fact constructions like these: God bless us; if I were you; be that as it may; and come what may.  The most common version of theologian Reinhold Niebuhr’s famous Serenity Prayer begins with a subjunctive construction: “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change…,” which is to say, may God grant me the serenity…

 

20.

Than must not be confused with then, nor their with there or they’re.  Note also the following commonly confused pairs.  We will allow the occasional error but will send your manuscript back to you if they occur too frequently. 

 

 

 

                    Note the five triumvirates of confusion:

(Though seldom used today, yore may still turn up in literary writing and quotations).

 

 

                    Here’s a quadrumvirate:

 

dew - do - doo - due

 

                    Finally there is a quinumvirate:

 

thorough - though - threw - through - thru

 

Remember that the KJV uses both thoroughly (Genesis 11:3) and throughly (2 Timothy 3:17), but never thorough.  Threw is the past tense of throw (as blew is to blow).  Thru is always informal for through, although is has become almost standard in thruway and possibly thruput.  Words like alot and alright are still considered substandard, in part because alittle and alwrong are never used.  Similarly, we admit backyard as an adjective (as in a backyard barbecue) but not, despite its frequent usage in that sense, as a compound noun (tables were set up in the back yard).  The form frontyard is never used (e.g., the Joneses moved their front[-]yard gnomes to the back yard).  Note that an everyday occurrence need not occur every day of the week.

 

 

21.

Using they as a singular referential pronoun is best avoided in formal writing, even though this usage turns up occasionally in the KJV (as for example in Numbers 15:12, “According to the number that ye shall prepare, so shall ye do to every one according to their number”).  The possessive pronoun its was still establishing its place in English during the Jacobean period.  Substitute plural constructions whenever possible to avoid awkward he or she and him and her constructions. 

    Note that both sets of third person pronouns (he, him, his, and himself vs. she, her, hers, and herself) may technically refer to either sex in any generic sense in which either a male or a female may fill the role denoted.

 

                                                                                    A journalist need not reveal his sources.

                                                                                    A journalist need not reveal her sources.

                                                                                    No journalist need reveal his sources.

                                                                                    No journalist need reveal her sources.

                                                                                    Journalists need not reveal their sources.

                                                                                    A journalist need not reveal any sources.

 

            Thus we refer to his sperm and her eggs, his prostate and her ovaries, because members of each sex produce their own gametes – usually.  That’s basic biology, to which there is always more than meets the eye.  We allow their pregnancy when referring to the shared experience of both expectant parents, but we don’t actively recommend it because it’s clearly the woman who actually carries the child to term, not the man.  Perhaps in the future these situations will change.  It was gay filmmaker John Waters who first brought these ideas to the public’s attention in his cult films: it is now possible in some contexts to refer to her penis and his vagina.    

            We understand that some authors consider any usage with him or her at least potentially sexist.  Repenthouse has taken the more traditional side in the pronoun debate playing out across the world today.  We find a singular they to be jarring and confusing in many if not most cases.  That stated, we have accepted the need for gender neutrality, formerly known as non-sexist usage, as a general rule. 

            Among the many proposals for pronoun reform, we find feminist Marge Piercy’s suggestion from her 1979 novel Woman on the Edge of Time to be the most direct and efficient overall: the pronoun per, short for person, with its inflected forms pers and perself.  I love per; per loves me; it was per decision; even the idea was pers; if per does say so perself.  Sasha Newborn’s hu (from human, with inflected forms hum, hus, and humself) is perhaps a bit more awkward, if equally original.  Hu rhymes with hue (and the proper name Hugh), but does hum rhyme with gum or Hume?       

 

 

PART THREE: MANUSCRIPT FORMATTING GUIDELINES

 

As fastidious as we are about proper spelling, grammar, punctuation, register, tone, clarity, consistency, accuracy, and (above all) an understated but ever-present morality, you’ll find we are less demanding when it comes to manuscript formatting.

 

1.

Print black text on a solid white background.

 

2.

Use a 12-point typeface.

 

3.

Insert a one-inch (or 2.54 cm) margin around each page.

If your software or device only measures in metric units, then a margin of 2.5 cm is acceptable.

 

4.

Double-space the text, but don’t insert an extra space at the end of a normal paragraph.

 

5.

We prefer that you leave two spaces at the end of every sentence, but we will allow only one space provided your usage is consistent.

 

6.

Indent each paragraph half an inch, or 1.25 cm, using the tab function.

Don’t indent too often or too infrequently to impede reader comprehension.

Each page need not be justified, but preferably flush left and jagged right.

 

7.

Pages must be numbered, with the page number centered at the bottom of the page.

 

8.

The font should not draw undue attention to itself,

so don’t use blackletter, caps-only, comic, or cursive typefaces,

or those with special effects such as stars or neon lights.

The fonts need not have serifs.

 

We recommend Times New Roman

along with serif fonts

Baskerville, Bell MT, Bembo, Bodoni, Book Antiqua, Californian FB, Callisto MT, Cambria, Century,

Constantia, Footlight MT Light, Garamond, Goudy, High Tower Text, Mrs Eaves Roman, Palatino Linotype, Sabon, and Sylfaen.

We allow Courier, Didot, Georgia, Lucida, and Rockwell but don’t prefer them.

Among sans serif fonts we recommend Arial,

along with Calibri, Candara, Corbel, Franklin Gothic, Frutiger, Gill Sans MT, Myriad, Tahoma, and Verdana.

We don’t prefer Futura, Gotham, Helvetica, or Roboto.

Note that any font you use is likely to be changed in the published version of your work.

 

Make sure the typeface you use contains all the necessary characters for any language you may include in the text. 

Not all the most common examples contain the Hebrew and Greek letters that may be needed for Bible study texts

(e.g., grace, in Hebrew חֵן, chen; in Greek χάρις, charis). 

Your system in transliteration should be internally consistent, and it may be superseded with our house conventions. 

For instance, will the Hebrew vowel qamatz (or kamatz) be transliterated a or ā (or in some other way)?  How will it be distinguished from its sometime homophone patach?

 

9.

Always use a serial comma, which is placed before the final conjunction in a series of three or more, thus hook, line, and sinker.

 

       “ For there are three that bear record in heaven,

the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:

and these three are one.

 

1 John 5:7

 

 

10.

Each page should contain a header stating the author’s last name (or pseudonym) and at least a short title of the work.

Flannery O’Connor’s short story “Parker’s Back,” for example, would be flagged like this:

O’Connor / Parker

or, since the title is already fairly short,

O’Connor / Parker’s Back.

 

11.

The work’s title should be centered on a separate page and must also include, in the following order:

a) the author’s legal name,

b) any pseudonym he or she wants to use,

c) the author’s complete current address, phone number, and email address,

d) the word count (within one hundred words of the exact total), and

e) the page number, starting with the title page.

If the submission is part of a series, the series name should be entered

on a separate line immediately after a or b.

 

12.

Use as few abbreviations as possible, except in

a) business types (Co., Corp., Inc., LLC),

b) common acronyms (A.A.A., A.C.L.U., B.B.B.),

c) full addresses (e.g., 124 Main St., Ste. 100, Dept. A, San Francisco, CA 94105),

 

Note that the words are usually spelled out if only part of the address is provided, thus,

“I’ve been working nights at a warehouse on East Main Street.”

 

d) generational indicators (e.g., Jr., Sr., II, III),

e) professional titles and degrees (e.g., Dr. Luke Smith, M.D.),

f) radio modulation types (AM and FM),

g) time and date references (e.g., A.D., A.M., B.C., and P.M.),

and h) temperature scales (e.g., C, F, K).

As a general rule, write the name most commonly heard in everyday speech, thus,

“I had to call A.A.A. [pronounced as Triple-A] to have my car towed out of the swamp,

so I got to the A.C.L.U. an hour late”;

but “I thought you were headed to the Better Business Bureau.”

Note that there is an increasing tendency to omit periods in abbreviations.

 

The names of days and months should not be abbreviated.

Note that editorial functions (e.g., et al., etc., ibid., Op., etc.), may be used in scholarly works but not ordinary prose.

Similarly, the names of the books of the Bible should be spelled out on full unless over twenty of them are named in the text.

Note the proper usage of Psalm 23:2 but Proverbs 14:1.

(Each psalm is considered a separate composition; each chapter of Proverbs is not.)

The final book of the New Testament is Revelation, not Revelations.

 

 

 

Repenthouse Publications

Prayer Box 2925

Antioch, CA 94531-2925

USA

 

 

Back to the Top / Back Home

 

Skim Our FAQ / Read Our Blog / Propose a Project / Submit a Story / Meet the Lord