Monday, November 02, 2009

Concise post from another blogger

My husband forwarded this link to me today. It's a short and concise take on some of the recent Christopher West controversy. It also mentions and links to some interesting articles on the connections between Dietrch vonHildebrand, TOB and West's own approach.

TOB Tuesday: A Pivotal Question

2 comments:

Amator Catholicorum said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Amator Catholicorum said...

I certainly welcome the clarifications that West makes, but it still seems like he is not clear. He does say we cannot avoid concupiscence in this life, but he then says that we are called to a state, which we can reach, where we no longer suffer from it. It was always my impression that we will always suffer concupiscence (not merely in regards to sexual urges) but by practice of continence (self-restraint, guarding thoughts, and eyes, etc) we establish a foundation. This foundation of virtue (which I think is what St. Thomas means by saying continence has something of the nature of virtue--since it becomes virtuous when done for the end of acquiring virtue, it takes on the character of virtue) stays with us and indeed must stay, as real chastity is built. The problem is, that though purity can be reached (with the aid of grace) there is no guarantee that we can't regress. Thus, we can't actually attain a state of purity, or rather not a permanent state, but must rather practice with ever more vigilance the negative virtue, the temperance in regard to human sexuality. Temperance is a practice of moderation and control in regards to the earthly goods we can legitimately use, and can thus be regarded as virtue, but continence has the nature of virtue when done for the sake of the higher, namely the right level of using/enjoying the goods of this world. But we always have to practice Temperance, and even overly limit ourselves in it, since the dangers are so great. Thus, Wests' work seems at times unheeding of this, and his presentation definitely seems unheeding of it. His clarification does not seem to be as much of a clarification as I had hoped, since it appears to say two things (JPII says a mature purity is freedom from the domination of concupiscence, not entirely freedom from concupiscence. West still seems to think there is something more to it than that..) There is no doubt that the right truths about the body need to be taught, I just see some issues with how West presents his understanding of Catholic doctrine. I certainly don't question his motivation.... Hope this explains some of my issues....