Headline Bistro seems to have republished today an article by David L. Schindler from a few years back that really trumps everything else written about Christopher West in its conciseness, its focus, and above all its fairness to West and his good intentions.
Some money quotes (emphases mine) ...
West misconstrues the meaning of concupiscence, stressing purity of intention one-sidedly when talking about problems of lust. When I first pointed this problem out to him several years ago, his response was that he refused to limit the power of Christ to transform us. My response is that concupiscence dwells "objectively" in the body, and continues its "objective" presence in the body throughout the course of our infralapsarian existence; and that we should expect holiness to "trump" temptations or disordered tendencies in the area of sexuality exactly as often as we should expect holiness to "trump" the reality of having to undergo death.
West, in his disproportionate emphasis on sex, promotes a pansexualist tendency that ties all important human and indeed supernatural activity back to sex without the necessary dissimilitudo.
West presents a problem for the Church, not because he lacks orthodox intentions, but because his unquestionably orthodox intentions render his theology, a priori, all the more credible.