M
- Status
In all of these cases, the discussion was heavily focussed on 2 things:
There is much depth to pursue about forgiveness - and this book provides a guide for this:
R
Ryckie
Guest
I agree, thanks!
S
Skithy
Guest
I just want to say THANK YOU for the explanation that I feel exactly the same about with this book. If this is all you get out of this book…then that’s all you need !!! “A man may be faithful- but his sinful nature always travels with him”
P
peggytas
Guest
I agree that there are many good lessons regarding forgiveness to be learned from The Shack. However, I would not recommend the book to someone who is not well grounded in the faith. There are many heresies in the albeit benign packaging. Isn’t that how we are misled? Would someone who is not well cathechized be misledinto disregarding the role of the Church since “jesus” expresses his disapproval of how the Church has developed? Did the Church not develop with guided by the Holy Spirit in Truth? Would the heresy creep in to a person’s mind and heart that the Blessed Mother is not sinless? And what about their last supper of bread and wine “with no ritual?” Does that not suggest that we need not take the Lord’s orders at the last supper literally? These things creep into minds and hearts incrementally–like the frog in the pot with the temperature being gradually raised. He does not realize he is cooked until it is too late. So, I would recommend other spiritual reading, especially for Catholics or anyone that we love and want to be grounded in the truth. Isn’t that everybody? Just my two cents worth.
H
hopefull
Guest
It appears that most of the replies are sorting out into two areas. One is that they loved it and got a lot out of it, explained in various ways. Most of those replies are about how good they feel from reading it; e.g. “insights.” Evil can often be quite attractive.
The second type of responses can be summarized as fear for the souls of others, such as by Peggytas. What deeply concerns me is that those who endorse the book say very, very little about the risk to others’ souls. How can they tell which souls would be at risk? How do they know who is well catechized and who is not. (Many of the poorly catechized have no idea they are, or else they might not be!) We are not to be stumbling blocks to our brothers and sisters in Christ. Anything done to encourage another person to stumble from reading this book is just wrong. Why isn’t that being addressed by those who seem to like it so well? It’s not all about me and how I feel; it’s about what might hurt YOU!
The second type of responses can be summarized as fear for the souls of others, such as by Peggytas. What deeply concerns me is that those who endorse the book say very, very little about the risk to others’ souls. How can they tell which souls would be at risk? How do they know who is well catechized and who is not. (Many of the poorly catechized have no idea they are, or else they might not be!) We are not to be stumbling blocks to our brothers and sisters in Christ. Anything done to encourage another person to stumble from reading this book is just wrong. Why isn’t that being addressed by those who seem to like it so well? It’s not all about me and how I feel; it’s about what might hurt YOU!
A
ATL_Granny
Guest
I will go back to something I posted a long while back on this thread as it’s something that made a profound impact on me several years ago during a similar debate.
There was a very popular movie out at the time and families seemed to be split down the middle as to whether it was harmful or safe for their pre-teen children to see. One set of parents had said “No” to their children, but it seemed all their friends were going to see the movie and they begged their dad to go with them. The dad said he had to think about it and would let them know the next evening.
They were thrilled, believing that his decision to “think about it” was a sure sign he was softening on his position.
The next evening he sat them down at the kitchen table and put a plate of warm brownies in front of them. Excited, they all reached for the brownies, but dad said, “Wait! I need to tell you something about those brownies before you eat them.” He then proceeded to tell them that he had mixed a little bit of the dog’s poop into the batter – just an itsy bitsy little bit.
Naturally, they withdrew in horror and then their dad explained that while MOST of the brownie was good and edible, the small amount of poop corrupted the entire batch. The same thing with the movie – even though most of it was lovely and romantic and sweet, there were most definitely portions of the movie which were harmful to their minds. And, as their father, God was holding him accountable for molding their minds in the right direction – not the wrong direction.
It’s the same with The Shack. Many parts of the book are warm and fuzzy. Forgiveness is a noble gesture and there are several fabulous books about learning to forgive the unforgivable. As Hopeful said, as Christians, we are held to a higher standard. We will be held accountable for leading our brothers and sisters into a false sense that this book is not harmful to their spiritual formation.
There was a very popular movie out at the time and families seemed to be split down the middle as to whether it was harmful or safe for their pre-teen children to see. One set of parents had said “No” to their children, but it seemed all their friends were going to see the movie and they begged their dad to go with them. The dad said he had to think about it and would let them know the next evening.
They were thrilled, believing that his decision to “think about it” was a sure sign he was softening on his position.
The next evening he sat them down at the kitchen table and put a plate of warm brownies in front of them. Excited, they all reached for the brownies, but dad said, “Wait! I need to tell you something about those brownies before you eat them.” He then proceeded to tell them that he had mixed a little bit of the dog’s poop into the batter – just an itsy bitsy little bit.
Naturally, they withdrew in horror and then their dad explained that while MOST of the brownie was good and edible, the small amount of poop corrupted the entire batch. The same thing with the movie – even though most of it was lovely and romantic and sweet, there were most definitely portions of the movie which were harmful to their minds. And, as their father, God was holding him accountable for molding their minds in the right direction – not the wrong direction.
It’s the same with The Shack. Many parts of the book are warm and fuzzy. Forgiveness is a noble gesture and there are several fabulous books about learning to forgive the unforgivable. As Hopeful said, as Christians, we are held to a higher standard. We will be held accountable for leading our brothers and sisters into a false sense that this book is not harmful to their spiritual formation.
J
JosieElaine
Guest
I agree with you. The book is deceiving. The strongly emotional parts leads to more or less being unaware of or forget about the wrong teaching. Why go to such extent to find the good parts in a book full of wrong teaching when there are plenty of books with right teaching ? To follow up on your brownies story, why spend so much time separating the chocolate from the dog poop when there are borwnies with chocolate only ? I read the book because a Christian gave it to me. But I will not pass it on to another Christian, or to anyone for that matter, now that I know how seductive and deceiving it is.
M
mbmjane
Guest
In my first guided review of the Shack - a priest pointed out all of the deficiencies in theology, in understanding of church. Just like in anything we read, we must take full account of the author, who he is, that is the context. We must trust ourselves to be adults with discernment. The presentation of Mack at the start is of a person deeply wounded by ‘religious’ people whose concepts of church and ‘religious practices’ are truly warped. That ‘religion / church’ needs to be rejected.
Discernment is always necessary and analysis of one’s understanding of Trinity, church, etc. are always needed, even among those whose catholic faith is deeply rooted.
At Mass this week,our homilies have all been around the necessity to ‘forgive the unforgiveable’ and ‘to love the unlovable’. These priests did not hesitate to mention that our feelings get in the way, and that our feelings will be so much healed after we forgive and love. Emotions are often so powerful as to totally cloud our reason and prevent behaviour in conformity to Jesus’ teaching and commands.
Does anyone out there know of a novel written by a faithul faithfilled Catholic who had an untainted experience of church as a young person - who has written a book about learning to forgive the unforgivable - and who has presented a conversation with the 3 Persons of the Trinity (in prayer) which reveals how they walked him through the process needed?
Love to all who have read this book and struggle to exercise discernment in their faith as a result - and who have benefited from this insight into forgiveness and the process needed.
M
mbmjane
Guest
How would you [anyone] describe God?
I see this book as a man telling us that God’s love is so wonderful and beyond our imagination that he wants everyone to know how he feels. He speaks for God only in the context of what he feels he has learned from his own personal experiences and he uses images that he thinks will get that across.
It is FICTION and has never puported to be Gospel. I see no danger there. This book I feel will tell any non-Christian that we do have a loving and forgiving God.
If you are a Christian you will have more than likely been influenced by the denomination that you are afflilated with and will see the parts of his theology you don’t agree with and ignore them.
The author of The Shack is not Catholic but he does know God and His love and he is trying to share what he knows.
I pray we don’t ridicule anyone who is trying to show us how much God loves us just because he or she doesn’t say it in the same words we might use.
Thank you for your calm and reflective analysis of the Shack.
I am about to start a month long reflection, with weekly meetings, on this book among a group of Christians with varied denominational backgrounds - Episcopal, Baptist, Methodist, non-affiliated Christian, Lutheran, and others that I do not know. I am quite interested in experiencing their reactions. I will let everyone know. Will they lose their faith? Will they be outraged? Will they think the book is full of New Age theology.Will they be encouraged to face their own forgiveness issues? Will they find the images of the Trinity helpful or a hindrance to their faith? I will let you know as we go along.
I see this book as a man telling us that God’s love is so wonderful and beyond our imagination that he wants everyone to know how he feels. He speaks for God only in the context of what he feels he has learned from his own personal experiences and he uses images that he thinks will get that across.
It is FICTION and has never puported to be Gospel. I see no danger there. This book I feel will tell any non-Christian that we do have a loving and forgiving God.
If you are a Christian you will have more than likely been influenced by the denomination that you are afflilated with and will see the parts of his theology you don’t agree with and ignore them.
The author of The Shack is not Catholic but he does know God and His love and he is trying to share what he knows.
I pray we don’t ridicule anyone who is trying to show us how much God loves us just because he or she doesn’t say it in the same words we might use.
Thank you for your calm and reflective analysis of the Shack.
I am about to start a month long reflection, with weekly meetings, on this book among a group of Christians with varied denominational backgrounds - Episcopal, Baptist, Methodist, non-affiliated Christian, Lutheran, and others that I do not know. I am quite interested in experiencing their reactions. I will let everyone know. Will they lose their faith? Will they be outraged? Will they think the book is full of New Age theology.Will they be encouraged to face their own forgiveness issues? Will they find the images of the Trinity helpful or a hindrance to their faith? I will let you know as we go along.
M
mbmjane
Guest
I just finished the book “The Shack”
I think he came up with the most heinous crime so he could show God’s love and forgiveness is there for EVERYONE that asks for forgiveness. God is love!
This is not to be taken as from God. It is a man writing it and his own life history led him to these conclusions. Take is as that and it is a good book!
Agree!
and
he also learned to do the forgiving! That was the most amazing piece of this book. And just take a look at the end of the book and the absolute peace and insight that Mack had that he totally lacked at the start as he was lost in his ‘great sadness’.
Love that book!
I think he came up with the most heinous crime so he could show God’s love and forgiveness is there for EVERYONE that asks for forgiveness. God is love!
This is not to be taken as from God. It is a man writing it and his own life history led him to these conclusions. Take is as that and it is a good book!
Agree!
and
he also learned to do the forgiving! That was the most amazing piece of this book. And just take a look at the end of the book and the absolute peace and insight that Mack had that he totally lacked at the start as he was lost in his ‘great sadness’.
Love that book!
P
peggytas
Guest
Help me understand why Catholics are studying this book. The Church is characterized by “jesus” as a perversion of what he intended and irrelevant. The sinlessness of Mary is denied. If the last supper of bread and wine without ritual–nothing special here–was not a deliberate allusion to the eucharist, why did they not just have chips and dips? The lessons of forgiveness and why bad things happen to good people are awesome. But the attacks on the Church, Mary, and the Eucharist are enough for concern. Very seductive packaging but contrary to our faith. It is dangerous to think it is no big deal. The damage is incremental. The temperature is rising.
H
hopefull
Guest
All the praise of this book is only serving to prove the point – that it is extremely dangerous, even to people who would like to think they know better. To be well-catechized would be to instantly see the offenses against the Trinity, Mary and all we believe. It would be like seeing your own family slandered in the newspaper and saying “well, the article was well-written.” No amount of feel-good argument is going to change the fact that this book assails the truth and endangers faith. Even to have people arguing for it only proves the depth of the deception!
M
mbmjane
Guest
Using this analogy - I would not dare leave the house in the morning, or read any book, or watch any TV. It sounds like this analogy is a good one for ‘original sin’. Thus, due to Adam, it a description of each one of us as we live our lives and interact with others. Nothing, no-one, no place, no deed, no event, etc. is untainted by ‘p…’. Our jobs as Christians is to wend our way through this mine-field, with the special help that prayer with God provides - that is prayer with each person of the Trinity. And as Jesus taught us ‘Do not be afraid. I am with you always’. And as St Augustine has said of himself - as he spoke to God in his ‘Confessions’: ‘you were always with me, but I was not with you.’
M
mbmjane
Guest
I would like to ask a few questions:
- Could you put words to your assertion that the book contains offenses against the Trinity?
- I don’t recall any mention of Mary in the book!
- The phrases ‘all we believe’ and ‘well-catechized’ mean something specific only to the writer of these phrases. I, as a reader, have no way to know what exactly is in the writer’s mind as to their content. What do you mean???
- In what way has my ‘faith family’, church family’, ‘God family’, or ‘whatver? family’ been slandered. Which family are you talking about? The accusation of ‘slander’ is a serious one since it is on the list of serious sins. Please clarify how the author did that!
- Which truth is being assailed?
- How is ‘faith’ (whose?, yours? mine? ???) being endangered by this book?
- Please help me to understand the depth of my deception? Be specific! Help me!
Love to all who are actively engaged in reflecting on this bood and its challenges.
M
mbmjane
Guest
It is certainly true that the ‘church’ that Mack experienced as a young person was a perversion of the message of Jesus.
M
mbmjane
Guest
Mack’s church as a young person was a definite perversion of what Jesus intended.
The amount of time spent on food seemed excessive but then Jesus spent quite a bit of time converting people over dinner. The ending meal certainly showed that the author had come to some understanding of the centrality of our memorial meal. I suspect that the author has never experienced the memorial meal of bread wine with ritual such as the Catholic church has developed over the centuries.
God bless all of us who are trying to understand and benefit from this book, as well as trying to be discerning about its misrepresentations or misinterpretations or misunderstandings about Jesus and his teachings.
A
ATL_Granny
Guest
mbmjane ~ I think you are missing the point. Yes, of course, our world is full of mine fields to spiritual growth. It doesn’t mean we promote tainted material. THAT is the issue here.
The analogy spoke specifically about the pre-teens’ father refusing to let them go to a movie which “everyone” else was seeing because he will be held responsible for their spiritual formation. In the same way, Christians who hype *The Shack *are all too eager to paint those who see the dangers in the book as not appreciating the “inclusive” nature of this man’s story. By dismissing the heretical – *and yes, I do mean heretical *-- way that the author portrays the Trinity and the Church simply because the author paints the Trinity as warm and loving, those who promote *The Shack *are effectively handing people a plate of tainted brownies, expecting that they will be able to navigate through the heresies without any damage to their spiritual growth.
And, for that, the real Jesus says that it would be better to have a millstone tied around our necks.
P
peggytas
Guest
I believe that the author is the son of a protestant pastor, so he is likely well versed in arguments against the Church. The issues I cited appear to me to be the things that lead people away from the true Church when they are not well grounded in the Faith. Whereas, I agree that his church is one to be avoided, I would disagree that his church is the bride of Christ and the one that Jesus would consider the one that he founded around 33 A.D. Therein lies the problem, in my humble opinion. The church this “jesus” speaks of as his bride is a perversion and irrelevant. This resonates the Baptist tradition that all we need is a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. While I don’t disagree that we need a personal relationship with God, the Church teaches that the Church and sacraments that Christ gave us are the best means to that relationship. This “jesus” disagrees. I do not recall which character states that Jesus is the only sinless human being. This statement denies that Mary is sinless. We should make reparation to her especially today for this affront against her Immaculate Heart. I think that the person who wrote this is well aware of the Church’s teaching on the Last Supper and the Eucharist and has chosen to attack this truth through this last supper of bread and wine with no ritual–no meaning, no significance even. This “jesus” is saying that bread and wine is just that. I have not picked the book apart. These are the things that leapt out at me. The trifecta of heresy and the most common protestant attacks on the church. Coincidence? I think not. I agree with mbmjane, that we do not promote tainted material.
I read the book on a yearly camping trip with treasured friends. One friend is a Baptist, who was raised Catholic. She suggested that we read and discuss on our vacation. Another friend, her sister also raised Catholic, started going to the Methodist church when her children were little because of her husband’s wishes. I believe that she will revert eventually, but she is not well cathechized (by cathechized I mean having a thourough understanding of the Cathechism of the Catholic Church) and I fear that reading these kinds of materials will infiltrate her heart and mind and lead her further in error. Unfortunately, the book discussion never occurred because not all finished the book on the trip.
I read the book on a yearly camping trip with treasured friends. One friend is a Baptist, who was raised Catholic. She suggested that we read and discuss on our vacation. Another friend, her sister also raised Catholic, started going to the Methodist church when her children were little because of her husband’s wishes. I believe that she will revert eventually, but she is not well cathechized (by cathechized I mean having a thourough understanding of the Cathechism of the Catholic Church) and I fear that reading these kinds of materials will infiltrate her heart and mind and lead her further in error. Unfortunately, the book discussion never occurred because not all finished the book on the trip.
H
hopefull
Guest
I’m not going to quote from the book and give it any more publicity, and others on this thread have done admirably well describing the heresy in the book, and replying to #1, 2, 4 and 5 above.
But I will respond to the slander comment. I did NOT accuse the author of slander. I analogized to feeling that your family has been damaged by a lie, and yet still trying to be complimentary to the perpetrator. Why? Slander is an example. I suppose I could have used a physical attack as well. Our Church IS my family, more than brothers and sisters, mother or father. (BIble says so.) When Jesus Christ is assailed or demeaned, our faith is attacked. He is Truth; anything which contradicts what He revealed is LIE. Period. And the word slander cannot be separated from the concept of LIE.
I don’t know how anyone can miss that the argument is about the faith of innocent victims who will be drawn into the book and away from the faith – the CATHOLIC faith. We may never know who the nameless victims will be, until the next world. THen we will know who tried to do something about it, and who winked at their being caught in the net. I don’t know how you can say “We believe” only has meaning to the writer. I am referencing “we believe” as the Creed of the Catholic Church. It’s not a matter of opinion or individual perception or of secular relativism. Catechized is being taught and learning those essential elements of the Catholic faith. Those who think opinion is the same as conscience, that creativity is a valid substitute for untruth, and that we believe whatever we choose to believe aren’t manifesting Catholic teaching.
Yes, there are many dangers in the world, but few like this in which Catholics are actually arguing for the benefits of being drawn into the net. Woe to those who cause a brother or sister to stumble.
It is incredible that those who so support the book can’t see the danger to others, to vulnerable souls. That is the depth of deception of which I write. Hope it helps to clarify.
P
peggytas
Guest
Did you really intend to call our Eucharist, the Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior, the true food sent from heaven, the Cup of the new and everlasting covenant a “memorial meal of bread and wine with ritual such as the Catholic church has developed over the centuries?” This sounds like the words of a protestant. Please prayerfully consider focusing your studies and efforts on the Eucharist. This Truth is central to our Faith. Forgiveness is cerrtainly important. But the Lord did not leave us orphans. He sent the Holy Spirit to guide his bride in Truth. He stayed with us in the tabernacles of the world though we did not stay with Him one hour in the garden. He gave his body and blood, soul and divinity for His bride. Why are you studying this book instead? I offer these comments in love. Don’t waste your time trying to justify this book. Let us pray for each other in Christ.
- Status