The shack IV--HERE BE SPOILERS

Thinking about it some more, it is odd, as a student said to me today, that "one book could hit all those hands" of the different Christological heresies. So I'll back off that portion of my critique for now. I can come back to it and cite what I found for evidence of these things if anyone is interested. I'm not.

But here is the critique of organized religion. As I said in a previous post, the equation of organized religion with institutional Christianity is an assumption questionable for entirely different reasons, which I will leave aside for the moment. In literary theory, the 20th century Russian formalist critic Mikhail Bakhtin did significant work in examining the distinction between two different kinds of narrative speech. These usually apply to works of fiction, but not always. On the one hand, Bakhtin defines "reporting speech" as what the narrator says to tell the story. For example, Mack (protagonist in The shack) receives an odd letter in his mailbox, slips and falls on the driveway, borrows his friend's jeep, etc. etc. etc. What Bakhtin calls "reported speech," on the other hand, is the narrator telling us what x or y said to a or b, and what a or b responded, and so on. Often, both the "reporting speech" and the "reported speech" betray the point of view/interests of the narrator (express or implied) and/or author much more than that of the characters themselves.

How does this come to play in The shack? First of all, I criticized the book for having far too much dialogue or reported speech and, consequently, far too little action or reporting speech. Secondly, the implied narrator's viewpoint comes through quite clearly in the following couple of passages put into the mouth of Jesus. For those who are not paying attention, ascribing these words to Jesus may well grant them a particular kind of authority, since, well...it's Jesus. Consider the following:

"Put simply, these terrors are tools that men use to prop up their illusions of security and control. People are afraid of uncertainty, afraid of the future. These institutions, these structures and ideologies, are all a vain effort to create some sense of certainty and security where there isn't any. It's all fake! Systems cannot provide you security, only I can." (179-80)

This statement put into the mouth of Jesus reminds me a lot more of Freud and Marx than St. Francis or Marcarius the Egyptian! And it gets worse. Again from "Jesus:"

"Mack, the world system is what it is. Institutions, systems, ideologies and all the vain, futile efforts of humanity that go with them are everywhere, and interaction with all of them is unavoidable. But I've given you freedom to overcome any system of power in which you find yourself, be it religious, economic, social or political. You will grow in the freedom to be inside or outside all kinds of systems and to move freely between and among them. Together, you an I can be in it and not of it." (181)

But the clearest example of all of this comes a few pages earlier. In this last example, there is a bit of reporting speech that demonstrates how the implied narrator wants us to read Jesus' words in a certain way:

"Marriage is not an institution. It's a relationship." Jesus paused, his voice steady and patient. "Like I said, I don't create institutions; that's an assumption from those who want to play God. So me, I'm not too big on religion," Jesus said a little sarcastically, "and not very fond of politics or economics either." Jesus' visage darkened considerably. "And why should I be? They are the man-created trinity of terrors that ravages the earth and deceives those I care about. What mental turmoul and anxiety does any human face that is not related to one of these three?" (179, emphasis added)

And, now for the 50-kiloton bomb to be dropped on The shack. This last quote from "Jesus" is no better than the similar quote from the character "Leigh Teabing" in The DaVinci code! I do not own that horrid book either, filled with errors of historical fact as it is, and I was unable to find the quote to which I'm alluding in the movie version, but it essentially accuses Christianity of being the most murderous sect ever to arrive on the planet Earth, the cause of all manner of suffering and injustice, and Teabing wanted the lie on which Christianity was built--according to the plot of The DaVinci code--exposed so that the whole stinking edifice could be brought down onto itself. I have publicly illustrated my avoidance of The shack by reference to how long I avoided reading The DaVinci code, so it is interesting, and more than a little ironic, that I have boiled over in rage at The shack for essentially the same reasons as what generated that reaction in The DaVinci code--lies, innuendo, half-truth, rumor, sophistry, and cariacature of real historical Christianity for the author's own misguided ends. Cloaked in the veil of a well-written story--at least The DaVinci code had that in its favor; The shack does not--this seething attack on a straw figure "organized religion" is pathetic and trite. It is no better than Bertrand Russell in Why I am not a Christian. All of these people ought to know better and ought to be better abreast of the facts before they lash out in attack without really understanding the "enemy."

And this is not even to get to the racist undertones of the novel's presentation of God as a semi-inarticulate black woman (119) who is always cooking for everybody else. It bothers me tremendously that God is Aunt Jemima! Yet, later on p. 218, Aunt Jemima has become General Lee, or perhaps Colonel Sanders (complete with long white beard), for "This morning, you're going to need a Father" (219). This is the scene where God and Mack go off to see the remains of his little girl, which is what gets everything started at the beginning of the novel.

I could go on, but it's nearly 10:30 PM and I have to teach in the morning, so... Suffice it to say, that The shack, far from being the new Pilgrim's progress, should rather be assigned to a dark corner of a library somewhere, with a sign on the shelf like they used to put up in medieval monasteries: Hic sunt leones, "Here be monsters."

The shack III--HERE BE SPOILERS

I don't have time to post a lengthy response to The shack. I may post such later when I get done with my work for today. But I can say briefly that it is something other than historic Christian theology. It is infected with just about all of the major Christological heresies from the first few centuries CE: Docetism, Apollinarianism, Nestorianism, Sabellianism, Monophysitism, Monothelitism, Gnosticism. The only one I didn't see what Arianism, which I suppose is a point in the novel's favor.

A point for later: the book attacks organized religion, which is equated with institutional Christianity, a separately questionable assumption. The attack is carried out from the standpoint of a Christian. The "about the author" blurb on the back cover brags that the author was raised by missionary parents "among a stone-age tribe." Incidentally, though he shares a name with the author, the implied narrator doesn't seem to have this in his background. So this is an attack upon Christianity from within Christianity, much like what one finds in Søren Kierkegaard (see esp. An attack upon Christendom). But at least Kierkegaard knew what he was doing.

And not only this, but from the standpoint of a writer it is filled with technical errors and general aesthetical unpleasantness. I can't imagine where front-cover blurbist Eugene Peterson--a writer of whose books I own at least six and respect very deeply--gets the idea that this book can be for this generation what The pilgrim's progress was for its time. To paraphrase the best line from the 1988 US Vice-Presidential debate (credit to former Sen. Lloyd Bentsen): "I knew John Bunyan. John Bunyan was a friend of mine. Author, you're no John Bunyan!"

The shack II

It's a fast read. I read about half the book in a little over three hours yesterday. I read a little bit over breakfast and dinner, but then sat down about 8:00 last night and read most of it. And I've gotten a few more pages in this morning. But now I'm at the computer blogposting (is that a verb?) and I have to write a couple of lectures today, so "fun stuff" has to wait.

Preliminary report: It is interesting, and I can see why it would capture the popular imagination, but (as expected) I have a few mild-to-serious issues with it. More to come, perhaps...but I don't want to prejudice one of my commenters who is reading it for a book club.

The shack

I've been working on lectures all day today and my brain is mush. I prepared two lectures for Intro to Old Testament and one for Pentateuch. My goal this Reading and Research week has been to finish the lecture prep for the remainder of the semester, so that I can focus on other projects through October (mainly the Jeremiah commentary project).

I am about to turn off the computer for the evening (it's 7:32 PM, early shut-off for me), but I wanted to post about getting ready to read The shack, a novel that has gained some notoriety of late. I borrowed it from a friend and I am a few pages in already. It's interesting, seemingly having to do with theodicy and dark nights of the soul, in the former of which I'm interested as a scholar and the latter of which I myself experienced a few years back. When a book gets this much hype in the popular press, I generally try to avoid it on principle. It took me several years to read The DaVinci Code, for example, although I almost picked it up when it was first published and before all the hoopla started. I hadn't heard of The shack until this same friend asked me about it. He says he's interested to hear what I might have to say about it. To be honest, so am I.

What will heaven smell like?

I had a thought in the middle of the night, and although thoughts in the middle of the night usually are scary propositions, I stumbled out into the front room and found a piece of paper to scribble it on. I discovered, later, when I had resumed full consciousness (coffee helps) that I had written this new note over an old note that had been fulfilled and scratched out. But even though I could not read it, I still remembered the thought, perhaps simply because of having stumbled out of bed to write it down at 1:30 in the morning or whatever godawful time it was.

The thought is this: What will heaven smell like? Scripture and both Jewish and Christian extracanonical apocalyptic literature abound with descriptions of what the faithful who endure to the end will see, hear, taste, and touch on the other side of the cord--or whatever--but to my recollection there is not much at all in the way of what the faithful will smell when they get to heaven.

By contrast, there is plenty of description of what hell smells like: sulfur, brimstone, burnt things, rottenness, dankness, probably even waste material, decaying flesh...all sorts of wonderful things that you love reading about, especially right after breakfast. Near Manila as I am, my nose is filled will all manner of unsavory aromas, such that Han Solo's complaint to Princess Leia was the first thing on my mind when I stepped out of the airport into the city back in June. I've gotten used to diesel fumes, though my lungs are probably filled with soot by now, and you never quite get used to the odor of a public market with fresh fish (including the heads) mixed with chicken mixed with durian mixed with pork mixed with mangoes mixed with avocadoes mixed with rice mixed with various and sundry vegetables mixed with...well, you get the idea.

But, alas...I can recall nothing from apocalyptic literature on what heaven should smell like. There are descriptions of sights: angels, golden streets, heavenly host, visions of God, sometimes clouds. There are descriptions of things to touch: beautiful buildings, tapestries, again with the golden streets. There are descriptions of sounds: harps, pleasant conversation, unceasing worship of God. There are descriptions of tastes: sumptuous food (that seems never to make you fat), abundant drinks, fruits, vegetables--all the great stuff I might find at the public market, but without the scent. And that "without the scent" has a dual meaning, of course. On one level, the (generally) good food available at a public market often is masked over by the mixed aroma, and so in heaven you don't have the unpleasant smells to go with the food. But on the other level, there is no description of what anything would smell like. To conclude, this idiomatic question seems oddly appropriate:

Is this a cutting off of the nose to spite the face?

Reading and research week

This is reading and research week at Asia-Pacific Nazarene Theological Seminary. It is designed to give students time to work on semester projects without having to attend class in the meantime. When I was a student at Nazarene Theological Seminary in Kansas City, I never used the similar week for reading and research, but always for another "R & R." I suspect many of the students here are doing the same, which is fine. It's good to have a break sometimes, but now as a professor R & R week will actually be spent doing reading and research--preparing the last few lectures for this semester, getting started on next, and working on various writing projects. I have much to do, and none of it includes making posts to a blog. :-)

Scriptures read for class devotions: Week 12

I confess. I've quit reading the Hebrew even before the end of the first semester like I promised in the last post. It just seemed pedantic, especially toward the end of the semester when less and less people are there right as class begins. I've even stopped being worried about duplicating a particular reading in class or trying to fit the Scripture chosen to the topic of the lecture that day. The former is a good thing, because I needn't worry about such simple things, but the latter is somewhat more serious because it may tend toward eisegesis or at least a rather contorted interpretation. But, in any event, here are the English-only biblical texts read in class this past week:

Intro to Old Testament:
9/16 Ezekiel 37:1-14
9/18 Micah 6:6-8

Pentateuch:
9/16 Numbers 6:22-27
9/18 Numbers 9:15-9:23

Scriptures read for class devotions: Week 11

I've finally come to a decision. I am not going to continue the Hebrew readings in subsequent semesters. It's been interesting, and it has helped me gain a new appreciation for the language of the Bible, and it has generated in some students the desire to know more...but on the other hand it has created a good bit of stress and it is of dubious pedagogical value. The stress it has generated has mostly to do with my desire to avoid duplication of passages in either of the classes, but also with sometimes having forgotten to practice and learn one in time for a class meeting on Tuesday or Thursday. As for the dubious pedagogical value, it seems that this, like other attempts at innovation, catches the minds of some students while flying unreachably over the heads of others. The promise of a given innovation, in my mind, lies in the proportion of students who "get it" to those who either do not understand the practice or think that it is pedantic. If A=>B+C, then the practice should be continued. But, alas, in this case it is not. I will continue it through the end of this semsester (five weeks), but will stop afterward. Pedagogical value aside, it is also of dubious spiritual value as a devotional practice which, should, after all, be the main point of the exercise, especially seeing how I have titled most of the relevant blog posts as "Scriptures read for class devotions:"

Intro to Old Testament
9/9 Isaiah 40:1-8
9/11 Jeremiah 20:7-9

Pentateuch
9/9 Leviticus 18:1-4
9/11 Numbers 24:1-9

Sayang (too bad)

I took my last formal Tagalog lesson today. I am picking up the language well, but I simply do not have (or cannot find, or have not made) the time to study. I am pretty well a perfectionist, or I set high standards for myself at any rate, so I cannot do something half-heartedly. I want to be able to put my full effort into it or not do it at all. Throughout the ten weeks or so that I had these lessons on Friday mornings, I found I was sitting down late Thursday night cramming over my materials, which is simply insufficient. And even this past week when I was ill and canceled class, the extra week to prepare did not make me any better prepared. I still sat down late last night and crammed over my notes for a little bit. So my teacher gave me some good information about verbs and such, seeing as how it was the last session. I may try to pick it up again later, but for now I cannot. It simply isn't a priority, since the principle language is English within the compound anyway, and I can ply my friends for vocabulary and informal lessons. Sayang.

No time

I see I'm heading toward another very lean month in terms of blog posts. Do not really have time to correct that right now, as small groups are about to begin. In any event, while posting to the blog is very important for communication back home, it's not really a priority now with the semester winding toward a close. I'll do better. I promise.

Top ten bad Bible geek jokes

I don't know why I'm doing this, but I am sick today so I can chalk it up to delirium if anyone asks. ;-) I posted the first of these on a NT PhD student's Facebook wall, and it got me to thinking about others that could be made. Any non-specialist who gets these needs a thorough head exam:

1. I don't like reading Wrede. He's too secretive.
2. I heard when Robert Funk arrived at the pearly gates the angels did the marble thing to see if he got in.
   
3. Know how Wellhausen first came up with JEDP? Alpha-Bits.
4. No way David could beat Goliath. He had to be juicin'!
5. Did Inigo Montoya get the idea from Ehud?
6. I wonder what funny stories the Ammonites and the Moabites told about Israel's ancestry.
7. If Bugs Bunny were an Israelite: "Shoulda taken that left turn at `Aradluquerque!"
8. Matthew's a man, Mark's a lion, Luke's an ox, John's an eagle. Is Jeremiah a frog?
9. If Bultmann got the whirlwind speech: "Demythologize this, pal!"
10. C. H. Dodd never realized his eschatology was so influential.

Wow...those are really bad. I wonder if there's a competition somewhere for bad jokes...

Scriptures read for class devotions: Week 10

It's hard to believe that I'm already on the down side of my first semester as a teacher. It's been an extremely fun couple of months, but also taxing and stretching in ways I could never have imagined. With this week's Scriptures, there is a gap because of having called off Pentateuch class today, but here are the rest of them. (I'm not sure if I'm going to continue this practice in the next and following semesters, or revamp my strategy/rules for it. Stay tuned.):

Intro to Old Testament
9/2 2 Kings 18:1-8
9/14 Deuteronomy 18:18-22

Pentateuch
9/2 Deuteronomy 28:1-6

Sick

Sick for the first time in the Philippines. Stuffy head, runny nose, body aches--the whole nine. Actually called off class this afternoon, something I wouldn't usually think to do. I'm relaxing now, drinking lots of fluids, and letting myself heal. It's a good thing this happened on a Thursday so I have the weekend to recuperate.

Prepositions, pre-positions

Wow...I feel ashamed, kinda. I looked over the blog archive and saw: 30 posts in June, 35 posts in July...and 11 posts in August. I've allowed myself to get behind, in my class preparation, in my language lessons, in my blog...well, I'll try to do better in the future. I'm not about to say that I'm having a hard time keeping everything going. After all, I am still engaging in my dream employment, putting to work the degree I spent so long trying to achieve. And I'm serving the church to boot...you just can't get any better than that.

Chapel sermon by one of my faculty colleagues this morning really made me think. She said, in part, "So much of our theology as we speak it in English depends upon and revolves around our prepositions." I'm not sure if that's an accurate quote, but it's close enough. Her essential point is when we come to the Cross, when we are at the Cross, when we are near the Cross, we realize that Jesus was not just on the Cross, but that he came through the Cross to save us.

Jesus, keep me near the Cross,
there a precious fountain,
Free to all, a healing stream
flows from Calv'ry's mountain!

Near the Cross, a trembling soul,
love and mercy found me;
there the Bright and Morning Star
sheds its beams around me.

Near the Cross! O Lamb of God,
bring its scenes before me;
help me walk from day to day
with its shadows o'er me.

Near the Cross I'll watch and wait,
helping, trusting ever,
Till I reach the golden strand,
just beyond the river.

In the Cross, in the Cross,
be my glory ever,
till my raptured soul shall find
rest beyond the river.
--Fannie J. Crosby (1869)