by Diane Leclerc and Brent Peterson
Have you ever asked yourself what Jesus dying on the cross really means? Have you ever questioned the wrath of the Father demanding the sacrifice of the Son? Have you or someone you know shied away from God because the way God has been portrayed has seemed abusive and unkind?
The Back Side Of The Cross deals with these questions and outlines an alternative to popular atonement theology. It walks readers through some common interpretations of the atonement and shows how these modern interpretations can harm those who’ve been abused and sinned against. It exposes how some current theologies are good at forgiving the sinner but not so good at helping the sinned against. Because of this, many scandals get brushed under the church’s carpet or ground into the rug instead really cleaned. In other words, the sin gets ignored, the victim is told to “forgive and forget,” and healing does not happen. In the authors’ words, this “back side of the cross” is where the abused and abandoned stand. Dare they approach the cross? Is the cross for them? This book gives a resounding “Yes!” to those questions. If our theology is making it difficult for the those on the back side of the cross to approach, maybe we need to rethink our theology.
My husband is one of those who experienced much abuse and abandonment and neglect as a child. To picture God as a father who has to kill his son in order to forgive is not a helpful picture for him. It puts great distance between himself and God. He has struggled with this concept and felt there must be another way of looking at the cross. The first book that really helped him to begin changing his view of God was The Shack (by William P. Young). The Back Side Of The Cross takes some of the same ideas The Shack story expounded on and digs even deeper. This book has brought my husband hope and inspired him in his role as a “wounded healer.” (See paragraph 6 below.)
In the book, the authors choose to call the Father person of the Trinity, the First Person, since the concept of Father is so negative for some of the abused. So, I will refer to the Father as the First Person in this review. Not only is a different name used for the First Person, but the authors also help readers to better understand the First Person’s nature. This radical statement caught my attention, “God did not causally will, desire, or need Jesus to be killed to forgive and redeem creatures.” (page 86) The authors go on to remind readers that Jesus and the First Person’s natures are the exact same. They are One! If Jesus is forgiving, then the First Person is forgiving. If Jesus is willing to suffer, then the First Person is willing to suffer. Did the First Person demand Jesus’ death on the cross or did the First Person allow Jesus to choose willingly to take on the cross? There is an important difference. All of God was on that cross. The author says, “God is a crucified God,” (page 114), just like The Shack showed the nail scars in Papa’s (the Father’s/the First Person’s) hands too. The authors go on to say, “Jesus’ blood being shed is not about a bloodthirsty God; it is about entering into solidarity with those whose blood has already been or is being shed.” (pages 114-115) So, yes, the cross is for the sinner (as the church has overly emphasized), but it is also for the sinned against. Patrick Miller is quoted in the book as saying, “Jesus died for our suffering as much as our sins.” The authors then explain, “The atonement was not only about “bridging the gap” that sin had caused between us and a holy God; it was also about addressing the suffering and sorrow in our lives that the depth of sin has left behind, on sinner and sinned-against alike.” (page 218) This whole new look at the atonement is really good news for those on the “back side of the cross.”
We see far too many examples today of how the church has sided with the perpetrator and not the victim. It has hidden its abusers. It has asked victims to forgive and forget, or to even repent and change their ways in order to win back their abusers. This is wrong. It has instructed victims to lay down their lives like Jesus did, which they have interpreted as having to put up with abuse. The church has too often been careless in its teaching of forgiveness. It has emphasized forgiveness for the perpetrator more than healing for the victim. This has been unhelpful, damaging, and cruel. This book calls the church to take a. hard look at its teaching on forgiveness and what is really meant by the concept. The book suggests that perhaps Jesus’ cry from the cross was not so much, “I forgive them,” as it was, “Father, forgive them because I cannot.” Rethinking how we teach forgiveness is so important if we are going to reach the abused and abandoned.
Another concept this book calls into question is the idea that pain comes from God. God does not cause our pain and suffering. Out of their suffering, so many feel the need to ask “why,” but suffering cannot and does not need to be explained. It is meaningless. God never causes the suffering, but rather God joins us in it. On the cross Jesus showed this incredible solidarity. The authors state, “God does not cause us to be victimized. Suffering of this magnitude is truly absurd and meaningless. But the redeeming God, in the aftermath, can use our wounds as a source of comfort, even healing, in the life of another as we offer them in empathy; such offering also heals us as we progress in the mending journey.” (page 164) What a beautiful idea, that the pain never comes from God, but that the solidarity of Jesus heals us! Henri Nouwen calls it being “wounded healers.” As we accept Jesus’ solidarity with us, we can then be in solidarity with others, which leads to further healing in our own lives and in the lives of those we touch. It’s a poignant and powerful cycle.
There are two chapters near the end of the book that the authors devote to lament and communion, and give resources for pastors and churches. We have lost the practice of lament to a large degree in our churches. Yet lament is something we need to do when we look at the terrible things that happen to our own selves or to people in our world. And God can take our laments. God can take our anger. God is even willing to be forgiven. The author asks, “Is there a place infinite enough in the loving heart of God where there is a willingness to not only forgive, but to be forgiven?” (page 136) And perhaps after we participate together in lament, we can go on to participate together in communion. The book explains well the theology behind having a welcoming table where all are invited to come and partake of the meaning of the cross. It concludes with a beautiful litany of communion. An example is the rewording of this familiar communion line, “On the night in which he gave himself up for us and entered into solidarity with those who have been victimized by sin, Our Lord Jesus took bread, gave thanks….”
In conclusion, this book is needed by those in the church today. It is worthy of being read and discussed in length. I hope it will become one resource to help the church think through some of its theologies and liturgies and begin to implement theologies and liturgies that bring healing and hope to those on the “back side of the cross.”
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the author and/or publisher through the Speakeasy blogging book review network. 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.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Leave a Reply