Just a couple of comments:
First of all, I think it a bit melodramatic to mention crucifixion. Why would anyone be publishing books and tape series and traveling the country talking everywhere if he did not have thick enough skin to take some criticism? As for those who are attacked ad hominum online: it happens to everyone who has anything important to say. That is not an excuse for bad behavior, just a reminder that it is not a crucifixion.
As one who blogs on chivalry, I put a premium on courtesy, but let’s not get carried away. Vigorous debate is a good thing.
From what I have read of the various blog posts and comments, many persons have approached West before about their concerns, such as the concerns I have raised in my posts. I have read, for example, West’s response to criticisms about his “Naked Without Shame” tape series” that I found inserted in the tape case. People have been raising these concerns for a long time. Some of his views are inherently controversial. One of West’s defenders on this blog argues that West legitimately uses “provocative arguments,” in order to attract the sex-saturated masses. Chris West is a big boy and can handle himself. Let’s not make him a victim.
Secondly, my own critique (1, 2, 3, 4) is not at all dependent on West’s comparison of John Paul II to Hugh Hefner, nor on my disagreement with West’s sometimes under-dressed, over-exposed discussions. The substance of my own remarks remain unanswered–not that I expect to be on Professor Smith’s radar.
West has placed the following statement up on his website:
I am aware of the recent criticisms that have been published online over the last week. I am currrently traveling, but pleased be assured that a prayerful and considerate response is forthcoming.
Sincerely in Christ,
Hat tip to T. Chan for the West announcement.