I have been and still am, deeply blown away buy this wonderful little book of fiction. The following article is a fantastic review and commentary on all the “controversy” surrounding Young’s literary triumph. It’s worth the 5 minutes to read Kim’s words.
The Real Controversy about “The Shack” by Kim Gentes
A culture of change has become the pervading surety of our modern (and post-modern) society. The old adage rings truer than ever- “The only thing constant is change”. A couple weeks back, I was stuck in a Wal -Mart at midnight, looking for some power cabling for my laptop. While I waited for someone, I was browsing the book selection. I found an interesting looking title called “the Shack”. Little did I know it was the current “buzz book” in the church in the last year. I am not a fast reader, so it took me a couple weeks to get through it. It was a delight.
As I read the book my heart softened, but not gently. I was wounded, beaten, blessed, nurtured, comforted and loved in a cascade of amazing imagery and powerful writing that wore down the pretentious religiosity that lives, to some degree, in each of us. William Young attacks the prejudices of a Christianity lived outside of actual personal relationship with Christ. He uses various devices in his fictional story to bring home the point that we must stop living and believing in a God that is as limited in scope and understanding as we are. His poignant reality in the lives of his characters in “the Shack” echos our cold hearts, living in a rules-based, shame-centered religiosity that claims as many victims as it saves. Critics have assailed the book as being bad theology, but for fictional a script that never claims to be doctrine it hits the jugular of where American Christianity has failed time and time again– at understanding and living in the love of God.
One could argue that the images and metaphors may not sit well with the buttoned-down theocrats , and that, yes, perhaps the allegories aren’t perfect at every level. But the over-arching nuance of Young’s book is not that we need a theology class- it’s that we need to actually live what we say we believe. That God is love. That His efforts towards us have always been completely done in love, and will continue so. That His primary purposeful intent in dealing with mankind is to make Himself and His love completely and gloriously sufficient for us, whilst giving us the freedom to reciprocate that love back to Him in words and lives of praise, thanksgiving and worship. I am purposefully not going to give away any of the book plot.
I do want to comment on the most controversial parts of the book, that are drawing criticism. Primarily, readers will discover that the book centers around the main character (Mack) and his weekend encounter with God. In Young’s story, the Trinity is articulated through 3 distinct personalities. Specifically, the Father is portrayed as a joyful, and thoroughly loving, black woman. For some Christian leaders, even though this is a fictional story, this rendering has them railing against “the Shack”. It’s no wonder the truly brilliant creative voices leave the church with remarkable regularity. The point of the imagery in the story is stated and restated so that any clear-headed reader understands the portrayal. It’s fiction after all, but with a purpose. It’s too bad some Christian leaders who think they are “smart” have missed that point.
That said, I would also argue that even more controversial than the rendering of God as a woman, is a more fundamental angst that many have with “the Shack”. Simply put, we can’t deal with a God who is so personally in love with people that He would express Himself with such unguarded intimacy. In the pages of Mack’s journey and visit with the Trinity, we find a God that is so overwhelmingly in love with each of us that it shakes us to the core. He isn’t waiting for us to “go one step to far” before He brings down judgement. He isn’t standing at a distance, concerned that He may get Himself dirty with the grime of our puny existence. In this book, we find a God so completely in love with us that He stands in the midst of our pain, of our judgment, of our destructive self-loathing, and even our anger charged accusations towards Him. He stands in the midst of it, and breathes out words of love, life, healing and invitation. He draws into our world with such intimacy, such “motherly” care (which is often a much better metaphor to which Americans could relate with real love) and comfort, that most of us simply recoil back.
While many may say that the most controversial part of the book is using a personality of a woman to portray God, I think more poignant to those same people is a deep seeded repulsion to see God as wholly and completely intimate with our very earthly, human and pain-filled lives. Would God walk with us, eat with us, hold us, cry with us, be patient with us?! Would He? “The Shack” resounds with a resplendent “Yes!”
What is sad is that it is very likely that the people most offended by “the Shack” are the people who need to hear it’s message most desperately.
With suspenseful drama, well-thought subplots and astounding imagery, Young’s writing of “the Shack” may be the best fictional book since the Lord of the Rings trilogy. You may not agree with the message of “the Shack”, but that is the whole point- be challenged and forced to think on your prejudices about God. And all the while, you are taken on a beautiful journey of suspense, love, pain and restoration. Brilliant!
Review by Kim Gentes
The most stunning and relevant message of the book for me, and possibly what is really disturbing the critics, is that Jesus doesn’t need us to go to church or be a “Christian” to have a relationship with him. I am a survivor of spiritual abuse from both pastors and lay members of a mainstream denomination. I ran from church and have felt guilty ever since. This book lifted the guilt from me, confirming what my head knew but my heart doubted – God loves me and I can have a relationship with God without exposing myself to the dangers of organized religion.
I think you have missed the point. Community. The whole book is centered around relationship.
[...] Kim Gentes writes, “One could argue that the images and metaphors may not sit well with the buttoned-down theocrats, and that, yes, perhaps the allegories aren’t perfect at every level. But the over-arching nuance of Young’s book is not that we need a theology class — it’s that we need to actually live what we say we believe. That God is love. That His efforts towards us have always been completely done in love, and will continue so. That His primary purposeful intent in dealing with mankind is to make Himself and His love completely and gloriously sufficient for us, whilst giving us the freedom to reciprocate that love back to Him in words and lives of praise, thanksgiving, and worship.” [...]
I think Kim is missing the actual real problem with the Shack. I appreciated reading the Shack, and I have no problem recommending it to many people. The problem is not the “feminine picture” of God or the intimacy of God. Neither is WRONG, and, albeit brave and risky, they are both refreshing and beautiful.
The only theological problem with the Shack is a big one. And that is the depiction of all three parts of the Godhead being on the cross with Jesus, especially God the Father. This depiction endangers the theology of Justification, as it is a CRUCIAL aspect of salvation that Jesus was rejected by the Father. He was not joined on the cross by the Father, he was rejected by the Father. If he was not rejected by the Father, then the wrath of God has not truly been poured out on sin, and we cannot be saved through the sacrificial propitiation of Christ’s death, because sin would not be paid for. This is a big issue. If one of the bestselling Christian books is just placing this seed of wrong theology in millions of readers, it will show up in the worldviews of Christians years from now, and jeopardize this doctrine of justification.
This books beauty is it’s visual imagery and metaphors strewn throughout the fictional parable. The book never says the Holy Spirit and God the Father were crucified. It does give us images of crucifiction scars on Papa (God) and Suraya (Holy Spirit.) The point I got from this image had to do with a HUGE point of the book: God told Mack He never left Missy’s side when she was abducted and murdered.
Your point that God rejected Jesus at crucifiction is well stated. He did reject him, but He never left him. I don’t think this will plant the seeds of wrong theology, as I have spoken to many readers of this book at lenght and not one of them said: “Wow! God and The Holy Spirit were crucified along WITH Jesus!” We first see them as a large black woman and an Asian woman…. If one is basing theology on a metaphor laiden, auto accident induced coma, fictional dream of a parable, God help us all.
Good thing God didn’t come out as a Pirate with a parrot on his shoulder. I’m sure there then would be arguments as to whether the parrot belongs in Christian theology in our future?
I obtained a login identity JUST so I could post about this book–something I never do–and realize it’s so long since the previous post that no one else may read this!
My sister and I have both just finished this book, following a singularly horrible family tragedy. The book is beautifully written, emotionally cathartic, and spiritually BIG, even if every detail in it does not match up with any of the theological beliefs held by ANY of the blue-million different denominations/religious groups in the world, each of whom believes THEIR way is the one/only/true way.
What this book did for my sister was particularly profound, because it gave her hope, both in THIS tragedy, but also in the 20-year-previous death of our mother. Young’s words that God had never left Missy as she was dying so horribly, so tragically….the WAY he wrote this, the LOVE from God helping her through it all….that gave my sister peace that all the words of all the (truly) well-meaning preachers/laity could not impart all these years. NONE of them could point her to God’s love and comfort in a manner convincingly enough even with Scripture (which we both deem as Holy). Young’s words DID. Interestingly, it is this revelation — from a source that does not PRETEND to be “authority” — it is this revelation that has put my sister back IN church, where she can finally face and “relationship” with a God that she no longer fails to understand.
Yes, the Bible IS God’s Word…..but man continues to limit God any time he tries to say that God can’t or doesn’t or WON’T speak to us in other ways/forms. God can do anything. I, for one, have never doubted that. And He has given ME a great gift with this book as I’ve watched the words in it open my sister’s heart back up after two decades. If He can raise up stones as children to Abraham if He so chooses (words in the Bible)–something that, since He chose not to do it, it would seem was included in the Bible to remind us that He can do whatever He pleases, even if we don’t understand it/agree with it/or think it’s too unusual to do–then He can most assuredly open our hearts with any words He chooses.