I didn’t like the book. I expected to like it more because I’m also a literary wonk and any friend of C.S. Lewis must be a pretty good guy, but even Lewis advised Blamires to write in his own field. So, I’ll list the couple of things I found helpful but the opposite weighs foundationally heavier. I simply disagree that it’s possible to consider the Christian mind from the Christian mind thinking. This is compartmentalization at its worst, and actually detracts from the thesis. Additionally (and more importantly), the attributes Blaimires lists as “marks” are themselves not uniquely Christian (except perhaps the last).
I thought his treatment of Samuel Beckett was terrific and it made me wish he had spent more time in his forte. His description of man’s pathos (with a nod to Lear) was splendid and on this point I completely agree – our authoritative mandate is sola scriptura but our frame of reference is furthered by non-Christian literature because, as Blaimires says “there is no Christian dialog on this topic.”
A much easier point to which we can align is that of politics. Yes, people are much more evangelically political and our educational system is foolish to ignore it. We will go much farther in advancing our curriculum if we advance our theological tenets to both sociological and communal application more forthrightly.