7 Men Begs 7 Questions

7 Men and the Secret of their Greatness by Eric Metaxas is a good read.  It is quite clear that the author has the gift of writing – one of which I wished that I possessed.  He turns great phrases and offers neat connections between the selected cast, their character, the choices they made, and the consequences (whether good or bad) they received.  

Metaxas’ work is 8 simple chapters – an introduction followed by a chapter for his selected group of men:  George Washington, William Wilberforce, Eric Liddell, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Jackie Robinson, Pope John Paul II, and Chuck Colson.  I learned a great deal about Pope John Paul II because, quite frankly, I did not know anything about him.  My knowledge of Jackie Robinson – other than he was a great baseball player – was sorely limited, which makes me wonder how authentic this new movie “42” will be.  Each story has inspiring components that can be utilized as wonderful tools of character or leadership development.  

I found that his middle chapters on Liddell and Bonhoeffer were outstanding, invigorating, attention grabbing (and holding), and packed with truth necessary for our modern times.  Unfortunately, I missed those pieces in the other chapters.   After much thought, I cannot determine a specific reason why these other chapters missed the pizzazz of the others.  Maybe Metaxas tried to do too much by offering a biographical sketch of these men around a limited thesis. 

After having read the book thoroughly, I am left with seven questions which I am listing below:

1. What exactly is the purpose of the book?  
2. Why mention manhood in the opening chapter but then so quickly say that it will not be mentioned anymore in the book?   The opening page of the book says that it hopes to correct some of the confusion related to manhood due to cultural developments in the last two decades.  To do so, Metaxas wants to question what is a man and what makes a man great?  If that is the true purpose, then why abandon it throughout the chapters.  Use them to shatter the modern view of manhood with what it should be.  I do not understand the reluctance there or why the current version of the introduction is written.  There appears to be a tremendous disconnect between the introduction and the rest of the book – this is the book’s greatest weakness.  Maybe a conclusion would have satisfied that struggle for me, but I find that disconnect to be inexcusable for someone with the skill and ability of Metaxas. 
3. Where is the interpretation of the author?  The chapter on Washington was filled with information from the Newburgh Conspiracy.  That’s great but it lacked contextual information that was necessary for those that do not have any knowledge of its importance.  For instance, there is a brief mention that Horatio Gates was involved, but Metaxas overlooked that Gates was an enemy of Washington.  That fact would have given more credence to the author’s statement of the future president’s greatness; however, Metaxas does not appear to want to offer his opinion of why Washington was a true man – unlike much of what we see today. 
4. Why is there an assumption toward faith?  That question arises due to the first chapter on Washington.  Metaxas glibly cites some external sources that Washington was a man of faith and, thus, the case is closed.  The author apparently read Joseph Ellis’ work His Excellency but missed a great deal of it where Ellis questions the religious devotion of Washington.  Yes, our first President believed in “Providence” but seemed to be a deist.  That means Washington believed in “God” but denied revelation or authority of Scriptures.  Was faith a component to be considered by Metaxas as a great man?  If so, a deliberation upon Washington’s faith would be vital for a true picture of this man. 
5. What drove the reliance upon secondary sources for these individuals?  Other than the chapter on Colson, which drew exclusively from his autobiography Born Again, the majority of Metaxas’ sources were secondary.  I understand that some may view this question as “picky,” but I must confess I have a historical background which esteems the value of primary sources for scholarship.  If you are going to judge a person as not a great man, should you not dig deeper to challenge the “assumption filter” that authors often have in writing biography?  Relying upon another’s opinions can be dangerous, especially when you are holding individuals up as examples of greatness. 
6. Who or what is next? 
7. Will there be a companion work entitled 7 Women?  Metaxas did not originally want to author a biography of William Wilberforce, but it became successful.  Then, he wrote one on Dietrich Bonhoeffer that was also a huge success.  Is Eric Liddell or Chuck Colson next?  Is Metaxas going to offer a perspective on great women and the need to challenge the modern notion of womanhood?  If he does, I hope he corrects the issue that I have named in my first two questions above.

Please do not misunderstand me here – I think this is a good read.  I will reluctantly give it 4 stars because it does have some value.  Again, knowing the skill that Metaxas has and the tremendous mind that he possesses, I was sorely disappointed with the lack of coherence between introduction and body of the work, and I view that to be a serious issue with the work. 

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher through the BookSneeze®.com book review bloggers program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”