"When Christopher West came here to Saskatoon for a Theology of the Body Conference, a meeting was arranged between him and a class of attendees from a local post-secondary institution that runs a one-year program of formation. When introducing himself to the females, West would ask their name. When the young woman would say, “I’m Jane”, West would look her in the eye and say, “Jane, you are a very beautiful woman”. He introduced himself to the next woman, and did the same thing, saying, “you’re a beautiful woman too”. Now, if I was to do that with young Catholic women I just met, I would be labeled as “creepy” and shunned and maybe even slapped out, and rightfully so. But Christopher West is allowed to get away with it because he is Christopher West. Nonetheless, the behaviour is indeed creepy and indicative of deeper problems – with him personally and with his theology and sense of modesty (which would exclude statements such as this)."
Wade St. Onge in his post TOB "Smoking Guns" of West's Theology
Worth the read.
Linkthanks to Dymphna's Road for steering me to his blog From the Ivory Tower.
The Catholic faith is being paganized and pornified.
The term pornography - from Greek pornographos: writing about prostitutes - has developed over time with the development of mediums into a broadened sense. Yet the original definition crystallizes, in that we come to realize the operative part of that definition is the predicate more than the subject. In other words, the pornifying of anything is a grasping after something without any sense of the order of things. Moreover, this grasping after assimilates its subject to the nature of its grasping. (It makes sense that this would originate in a definition whose subject is one who is paid to "assimilate" to one's base gratifications.) In the case of the Catholic Inquisitorial Eroticizers it becomes a whole new level of creepy pornification precisely because they are doing it to that which is most singular and most priceless to our eternal souls. West's "deep transformation" is the rendering of (literally, in gastronomic terms, reducing) and pornifying of and, well, the un-transforming of Christ's conversion of our hearts and minds.
In the words of Michael O'Brien on a different subject which I am nonetheless applying to the Inquisitorial Eroticizers:
"I feel good, therefore I am. By the same token, if a critic makes me feel not-good, makes me question the very thing I love, the thing which has become so pleasurable to me, this critic is assaulting my very being. The connections here occur below the level of the mind's rational processes. It is instinctive loyalty, bond-welded through identification....It is defended by educated people in articulate terms..."
You know, when Christ asked if He would find anyone with faith upon His return, it doesn't necessarily mean a world of faithless people whose faithlessness is a straight expression in an outward mode of apparent faithlessness. This faithless world He seems to speculate about upon His return is likely one that will be proclaiming themselves Christs and speaking the Catholic language.
But it will be all wrong. So wrong that you could not get any more wrong - which is pride.
Of course, what is most wrong is most closely aligned to what is most right, so even as to look the same.