Where do I even begin...
Not going to lie, I had an opinion about this book before I ever picked it up. A good chunk of my life was shaped by Josh and Shannon Harris, so after the bombshell announcement that was their divorce and subsequent departure from the faith a few years back, I knew her memoir would be uncomfortable and would likely open some pretty deep wounds. I also knew I would learn a lot — and I did. While I had an immediate assumption based on the title of the book and on my own observations of the Harris clan via social media, I am of the belief that every person deserves to tell their story and be heard, so I grabbed "The Woman They Wanted" with an open mind, eager to read Shannon's words for herself.
First, the positives. The book is easy to read with small, one-to-two page chapters, although near the end, it felt like she was bouncing around just to rant. I will say that getting a more rounded look at Shannon's life was very helpful in understanding where she was coming from and, more importantly, what she actually believed (both then and now).
Now, the negatives. I have truly never read a memoir so saturated with self-worship. Listen, I get it. Writing your story is tricky, but this book is absolutely dripping with bitterness and with victimization. Everybody aside from Shannon's parents and one best friend was somehow at fault for her ending up depressed and “detached from herself." Even while she claimed to know God (kinda), threaded throughout the entirety of the book was snarky cynicism against God, Bible reading, prayer, church, ministry, men, and servanthood. Shannon's "healing" consisted of talking disparagingly about the church, its people, and the Bible in the name of “wholeness” and “self-celebration.” It was extremely off-putting.
Another thing I noticed was the nonstop diatribe that complementarianism equals the devaluation of women. This is biblically illiterate rhetoric. The Bible teaches (clearly - not hidden away in some theological code to crack) that women have value, have authority in specific spheres, are important, are useful, are essential to the body of believers, and are to be loved and treated tenderly by their husbands. Husband and wife are to serve each other together and subdue the earth together and raise children together, so to say that affirming gender roles and responsibilities within the home and church (i.e. complementarianism) means you devalue women is not only ridiculous, it is completely unbiblical. One such example of this is when she writes about how mad and oppressed she felt because the church taught that motherhood was more important than her music career (because, um, it is more important), then later she writes about her feeling so angry when her husband suggested she get a job. This is just childish behavior.
Shannon says so much that begs addressing. She writes:
"I became the woman the church leaders wanted until I was a shell of the woman I knew myself to be." — I wasn’t there, so I don’t know what happened with Covenant church, but I do know this: If the elders of her church - who are responsible before God for the souls of their congregation according to 1 Peter - instructed her according to the Bible and she rejected it because she didn't like it, the problem is her sin. If they did not instruct her biblically, the problem is the sin in them for which they will be held accountable. Neither of these things make biblical doctrine incorrect, which was the context of her statement.
"I pressed down my dreams, wants, and needs in big and small ways. I put myself under my husband - I deferred to him. Instead of wanting things, I was content. Instead of doing things I wanted to do, I died to self. Instead of standing up for my preferences, I just tried not to have them.” — You mean you deferred to your husband like the blueprint in Ephesians 5? You mean you aimed for contentment as instructed in Philippians 4? You mean you died to yourself like Galatians 2 teaches? You mean you served like the example Jesus set in the gospels and we read about in Philippians 2? How about some fries with that bitterness? What Shannon is scorning, here, is the gospel.
"What was the point of being alive if not to find things that spark our souls into aliveness?” — The point of being alive is to glorify God in all that we do. Dreams are beautiful but personal ambition never supersedes our creative purpose.
The most troubling chapter was "Freeing Eve" where Shannon takes Genesis 3 and completely rewrites it. She says; "We have a woman who has just been created by God and declared a thing of goodness and beauty and in the very next breath she is awful and wrong... Here is Eve, she is naked and lovely, and no one is bothered by this at first." — Yes, because this was prior-to the fall when both Adam and Eve were naked and unashamed.
She laments over the Garden of Eden having a name, Adam having a name, Eve having a name, the tree having a name, while the forbidden fruit is nameless. Therefore she deems its namelessness as a “convenient omission” that makes it possible for the fruit to be “whatever someone in authority wants it to be" before she goes on a rant about the patriarchy. — Um, you mean like God? The “Someone” is God.
"Eve’s judgement comes down just as soon as she had taken a bite of her fruit… As soon as she realized what a glorious thing she’d found she went to share it with the one person on earth she had to share it with! Meanwhile, someone is bothered by her nakedness, so she must cover up with a leaf.” —So Eve's sin is "glorious"? Ugh, there is so much that is wrong with this. First, the consequence of sin fell on BOTH Adam and Eve (a vital piece of information Shannon leaves out because it doesn’t fit her narrative). Both Adam and Eve were naked; both Adam and Eve sinned. Both Adam and Eve ran to hide; both Adam and Eve used fig leaves to cover their nakedness, both Adam and Eve were guilty. But whose name did God call when He walked in the garden after they sinned? Adam's name. Shannon’s victim mentality is strong here.
"I see a woman who has been misrepresented and punished unjustly to be used as an example. I see a brave woman who took initiative and was punished severely for it. A woman whose wisdom is discounted in order to make another’s appear superior.” — So basically Shannon is parroting the serpent and calling God a liar. I find it amusing that just a couple chapters later, Shannon talks about Jesus being so loving when He came - sidestepping the fact that Jesus came BECAUSE of the fall. God promised in Genesis 3 that the seed of the woman (Jesus) would crush the head of the serpent, demonstrating His mercy and grace even then. But sin and salvation have no place in Shannon’s mind. It's just all about self. Then again, the gospel is foolishness to those who do not believe.
"What if Eve did exactly right by taking the fruit? What if she was supposed to have wisdom? What if she didn’t need to cover up all her girly parts with a fig leaf because someone was afraid of her? Because do you realize what that would mean? That would mean that we, the daughters of Eve, could have everything in the garden." — This is called heresy.
The cherry on top of the heretical sundae was, “Eve’s story is a story church men have told about a woman they have never met… If we free Eve from the false narrative that clings to her, we can free ourselves from our own." — Boy howdy. This is the problem with interpreting Scripture through your own lens.
In literally every chapter, Shannon writes that she could not be her true self but in reality I believe that her true self was there all along. It's crystal clear that she did not like doctrine, she hated authority, she did not value holiness, and she resented anyone who got in the way of her "fulfilling her dreams." In the name of "authenticity," she attacked people she never agreed with in the first place for "making" her change. Never mind that she chose to go to and join a church who affirmed things she didn't agree with - and when you join a church, you are publicly stating your agreement with their doctrinal statement and bylaws. Furthermore, Shannon chose to marry a man who toured the globe as an evangelical celebrity talking about high purity standards, so her disdain for the "rules" regarding sex and marriage only begs the question: "So, why did you marry him??" I mean, take some responsibility.
I absolutely believe that there are people who abuse women within the church. Been there, done that. But ultimately, the church is not the culprit. God is not the culprit. The problem is always, always, always the sinfulness of man. Shannon didn't talk of sin except in anger when her own sin was pointed out. She also has no authority to use God's Word to condone sin, so the chapters where she uses the Bible to excuse homosexuality and drunkenness cross a serious line.
Was Shannon fooled by Josh? Frankly, I think they both fooled themselves. I think both of them pretended to be people they were not until they could no longer sustain themselves - because only the Holy Spirit can produce truly righteous living and endurance in the faith. "The Woman They Wanted" reads like the Parable of the Sower in Matthew 13. When the pressure of life came, Josh and Shannon withered away, proving that they were not rooted after all (see Psalm 1; Matthew 7:21; John 15; Romans 8:9). My heart grieves for them, for their children, and for the thousands who are taking cues from their “deconstruction journey.”
The book ended with Shannon's attempt at celebrating her whole "self-discovery" thing, but the only thing I felt and still feel is a burden for her and for the masses who will read this book and conclude that Biblical Christianity is whatever they decide to make it. That is the illusion that truly needs shattering.