Wade St. Onge has published a letter he wrote to Cardinal Rigali concerning Christopher West.
What interests me most about this are the footnotes, in which St. Onge displays, quite disturbingly, what West's most ardent followers believe and practise.
... one family “who teaches ‘God’s plan’ [West’s DVD series] shared with us their graphic description of their love making which they share each morning with their 6 year old at breakfast.” The other family “who teaches it, has recently taken it upon themselves to walk around the house naked and they have children 7 and under.”
Other Westians St. Onge profiles believe quite whole-heartedly in the things I am arguing are implicit in West's teachings, such as the moral neutrality of public nudity, the ability to look at others with arousal but not lust, and the carte blanche to indulge an appetite they feel has now been "redeemed".
Is it possible such ardent followers (some of whom have heard over one hundred of West's talks) are mis-interpreting him? Certainly. But if this is so, then it is incumbent upon West to clear up these misapplications of his teaching and to distance himself from defenders who publicly make the case for the exact errors I've been warning about in these past several posts.