Re (2): A call to purity

Samuel,

I think you have very accurately summarized Kreeft's intent with his article. I do not in any way wish to detract from Val's perception of the article, for I gather it must be a sensitive nerve that has inadvertantly been struck. I personally do not see anything condemning, arrogant, or legalistic about Kreeft's article (or else I would not have sent it in the first place); I see the article for what I believe it is: an article written by a professor of philosophy for a Catholic publication with the layperson in mind. I think Kreeft is seeking truth first and foremost, and certainly truth is what set captives free, itself an act of love. There may be an instance or two where he speaks more from opinion than fact—he certainly speaks with the authority of the Catholic church to back him, which some evangelicals might find somewhat objectionable—but by and large his argumentation is consistent with my own research and study. I personally believe he nails the truth pretty squarely on—as I believe do you in noting that "Kreeft's use of the term 'conservative' has no political overtones." Well put.

What DO we read when we read the words of another? The author in me is always curious. Even though I ultimately disagree with Val, I do find her comments of interest, particularly from this standpoint: and because I think they reveal something of her as well. I am most certainly heartened to learn that she thinks of me as an individual who speaks truth with love: this is surely the desire of my heart. (Thank you, Val. I do hope I have caused no undue offense with my comments here.)

God bless,
Eric

The Liberal Arts and Sexual Morality

• Re(3): A call to purity - By Samuel June 13, 2003 at 08:58:14 PM
• Re(3): A call to purity - By Linda June 13, 2003 at 02:50:49 PM
  • Re(4): A call to purity - By Eric June 13, 2003 at 02:57:53 PM