Monday, January 14, 2013

False Opposites Attract

Waywardson comments on my latest Christopher West post thusly ...

Kevin O'Brien: Your response says more about your own struggles with lust
than it says about me or Christopher West.

It also shows that your real problem is with John Paul II, not Christopher
West.

I do not think that God meant for us to avoid half the human race out of
fear of our own sinful nature.

So, my point by point rebuttal ...


  • As to my own struggles with lust, you have no idea, my friend, no idea.  I won't even bring up that nasty business with the chandelier and the juggling midget barmaid.  I'm just happy there were no charges filed.  But who knew Nutella had such a variety of uses? 

  • Apparently, Christopher West = John Paul II.  This is said by both people who love Christopher West, and by people who hate John Paul II.  Of course there is the chance that West might not be interpreting JP2 accurately, but you can't argue with a mathematical equation, and that "equals sign" is pretty darned convincing.  This might be why they were never seen together, like Bruce Wayne and Batman.

  • Yes, Waywardson, you got me.  I am a Puritan.  I think God means for us to avoid half the human race, the other sex.  That is clear not only from my posts in which I bash Puritans (like this one here) but from my most recent post on Christopher West, where I said it's not a good idea to gaze at naked women, despite West endorsing said practice, whether or not you've attained "mature purity".  I, for one, have not attained "mature purity".  I've not even attained "maturity".

But the internet continues to be fun.  

So carry on, my Waywardson.

1 comment:

Joey Higgins said...

While the "this says more about you than your target" usually works if the "attacker" is using an ad hominem or is being overly emotional - it doesn't work when "the attacker" has actual, logical, reasons for making the attack.

Clearly there are at least, "troubling," or, "questionable," aspects of the Christopher West's teachings - if that is in question - we probably can't even begin to have a conversation. EVEN IF we were to take such weak of a position, it would still be worth the discussion to make sure it was clear what the confusion was about.

You can't go on 60 minutes, compare the Pope to Hefner and think everything is a-o-kay.

Lastly, if Kevin, you were actually wrong, it would be good to point out the specifics of how you are wrong instead of throwing ad hominems.

Article from a liberal source that lists some of West's "antics" if they were not already known. I forgot about the "praying over spouses gentiles." That's just weird, doesn't even get to the "should this be licit" level.

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/faithbased/2009/06/what_do_pope_john_paul_ii_and_hugh_hefner_have_in_common.html

Fun quotation from the article:

Not since the Renaissance papacy have sex, religion, and money combined in such an explosive and vulgar way. West produces videos telling us to pray over our beloved's genitals. At least the Renaissance popes built great works of art and architecture.