The other day I received my three copies of "A Pure Heart Create for Me: Theology of the Body Today, edited by Robert Colquhoun and published by Family Publications.
The book is a collection of the lectures given at St Patrick's Soho Square last year to commemorate the 40th anniversary of Humanae Vitae. The first part of the book consists of lectures specifically on the Theology of the Body and the second part deals with "specific issues for today". There are contributions from Edmund Adamus, Fr Anthony Doe, Fr Richard Aladics, Nicole Parker, Teresa Klepacka and others - the book is well worth reading.
My own lecture ("A challenge to the culture") is included in the second part, along with the lecture by Fr Stephen Langridge on AIDS, Condoms and the Catholic Church. Fr Langridge generously acknowledges my own talk on the subject which I gave in his parish a while ago but I am happy to say that his paper is a very good summary of the relevant points with important new material on the statistical evidence.
I mentioned the book launch a couple of weeks ago so please do email St Patrick's if you are going so that they can get an idea of numbers attending.
On the question of the Theology of the Body in general, some correspondents have expressed concern about some of the statements of Christopher West. I would recommend Jimmy Akin's fair and balanced post on this subject.
4 comments:
One of these days we'll have to make the time to examine the epistemological basis for theology of the body.
In courses with now Cardinal Caraffa at the original JPII Institute for the Family at the Lateran years ago -- for I was his student there -- I noted how he systematically rejected the epistemology found in De Veritate and the Summa, for instance, to push for a more intimate kind of knowledge, a phenomenological knowledge which shuns abstractions into universals as that which cannot allow true love to flourish. Of course, such a thomistically described epistemology is necessary for those with bodies (a bit ironic for theology of the body crowd to reject this), and, all things being equal, merely stops us from projecting ourselves onto others, which is good.
JPII had no idea where the logical steps of a relativistic phenomenology would lead, much like Descartes had no idea where his equally relativistic "Cogito ergo sum" would lead. It's all very individualistic, really, which is just what TOBers don't want. But there we have it.
With all this the primary and secondary ends of marriage, procreation and unity, must be inverted. When they are, anything goes, and that's what we now see in America.
Unspeakable acts, such as sodomy, are now hailed as holy for those whose phenomenological appreciation leads them to that kind of thing.
TOB was the Catholic icon, but one should take a second look [!] and see what is there. I would ask TOBers not to hide behind JPII, who would immediately reject what his would-be proponents claim to say in his name.
Father George bloggingLOURDES
I would recommend this article on T.O.B. and Christopher West:- http://www.christianorder.com/features/features_2009/features_apr09.html
Your comments are unfair. Christopher West and JPII do not condone sodomy. I am currently stuidying the most recent and accurate translation of the pope's 133 talks given to his Wednesday audiences (which, by the way, are times of catachetical teaching, thus making his TOB a work of infallible teaching!!!). The priest giving this 11 week course actually studied with Dr. Michael Waldstein who translated the talks. I have not yet gotten to the point of JPII commenting on sodomy (don't know if he actually comments on this). But Mr. West certainly does not condone this act. He actually indicates it's morally twisted. I wish you would refrain from commenting on a topic you probably have not studied, nor have you taken the time to listen to any CD's or DVD's of Christopher West or anyone else who teaches the Pope's TOB.
His teaching is far from relativistic. He starts with examining Jesus' own words in matthew 19: 3-8. The last sentence refers to "the beginning". Do you know what this means? Then JPII talks about our Original Solitude, Original Innocence and then our fall from grace--Original Sin and the entering of Concupiscence. He talks about the effects of and the battle with concupiscence we have. He's not delusional to teach we can get rid of it. However, Jesus came to redeem us. I have yet to get to this part in the teaching. Mr. West definitely teaches in accordance with JPII's work. He deals with our struggles with sin and lust. The effects this has on the human person. Sodomy has definitely not been hailed as HOLY!!!! Your words and other comments such as yours do nothing but murder a person's character. You may not accept this. But please, I beg of you, refrain from commenting until you actually know what you're commenting about!!!!
I say you should take a first look to see what's in the TOB. You might be surprised. JPII is not being called "the Great" for nothing.
Canadagirl - perhaps you might like to read my post again to assess whether your comment actually relates to anything I said, or indeed to anything said by Jimmy Akin whose balanced discussion I linked to.
The post was mainly about a book which gave a positive presentation of the Theology of the Body - a book to which I contributed a chapter.
As Fr Z often reminds people. Read the post carefully first... then comment.
Post a Comment