Wild At Heart


#1

Has anyone read this book? It was recommended by a wonderful but horribly catechized Catholic woman. After reading the reviews on amazon, I'm not sure if this is worth the read.

Wild at Heart: Discovering The Secret of a Man's Soul


#2

[quote="kib, post:1, topic:234714"]
Has anyone read this book? It was recommended by a wonderful but horribly catechized Catholic woman. After reading the reviews on amazon, I'm not sure if this is worth the read.

Wild at Heart: Discovering The Secret of a Man's Soul

[/quote]

My former pastor held a men's retreat based around this book. It was not at all anti-Catholic but is written by an Evangelical Protestant so niether is it Catholic, but there was nothing at all offensive to the faith. I have also heard Fr. Robert Barron favorably comment on it, and if he is for it, I would never be against it, he's the best I have seen since Bishop Sheen.


#3

I believe the authors of that (and Captivating) consult with Christopher West...it is basically the family dynamics of Theology of the Body in practical terms.

I highly recommend it.


#4

I have read Wild at Heart and I appreciate the author's exhortation to courage as well as his direct treatment of temptation and the presence of "the enemy" in our lives. It is well worth reading.


#5

I haven't read it, but Christopher West quoted it a few times when I heard him speak. He said he agreed with about 90% of the book.


#6

Well this is good news, I will have to order this asap!


#7

I did not like the book, and am also very suspicious of "Captivating", it's counterpart which is directed towards women (though I have not read it, some of the reviews on Amazon indicated that it also had the flaws of Wild at Heart).

The problem is the book basically teaches people to feel sorry for themselves. It is the product of an attempt to raise men's and women's self esteem, and it does this by teaching them to focus on a "wound" they suffered at some point inflicted by another, typically their parent of the same sex. So, after reading this book, people who have had otherwise normal childhoods (that is, not perfect, but acceptable) are convinced that this wound has affected them mightily. The trouble with this is then people begin to pity themselves and give undue importance to things that should simply be not given the time of day; it teaches someone who has not suffered greately that they really have, and to proudly mention that they are "wounded".

I think it lowers the focus of religion to be human-oriented as opposed to God oriented. Wild at Heart makes many claims that the God is just like Braveheart, reckless and wild, and attempts to reconcile God as someone who is very manly and... "wild at heart". From talking to others who have read Captivating, that book also seeks to make a connection between God and women, showing how romantic God is. This leads to girls saying that God is "romancing them" and refering to God as their lover (yes, I have heard this), in all the wrong ways, including the notion that woman is the pinnacle of creation because Eve was created last. This serves no purpose but to bolster someone's self-esteem, it certainly does not glorify God any more:

"She is the crescendo, the final, astonishing work of God. Woman.
In one last flourish creation comes to a finish not with Adam,
but with Eve... Given the way creation unfolds, how it builds to
ever higher and higher works of art, can there be any doubt that
Eve is the crown of creation? Not an afterthought. Not a nice
addition like an ornament on a tree. She is God's final touch, his
piece de resistance... Look out across the earth and say to yourselves,
'The whole, vast world is incomplete without me.
Creation reached its zenith in me.'" (p. 25, Captivating)

The books did not impress me and some of the advice was just plain bad (in Wild at Heart he advises his son to hit a bully that had been teasing him), and the scriptural interpretation dubious.


#8

[quote="ChiRho, post:7, topic:234714"]
I did not like the book, and am also very suspicious of "Captivating", it's counterpart which is directed towards women (though I have not read it, some of the reviews on Amazon indicated that it also had the flaws of Wild at Heart).

The problem is the book basically teaches people to feel sorry for themselves. It is the product of an attempt to raise men's and women's self esteem, and it does this by teaching them to focus on a "wound" they suffered at some point inflicted by another, typically their parent of the same sex. So, after reading this book, people who have had otherwise normal childhoods (that is, not perfect, but acceptable) are convinced that this wound has affected them mightily. The trouble with this is then people begin to pity themselves and give undue importance to things that should simply be not given the time of day; it teaches someone who has not suffered greately that they really have, and to proudly mention that they are "wounded".

I think it lowers the focus of religion to be human-oriented as opposed to God oriented. Wild at Heart makes many claims that the God is just like Braveheart, reckless and wild, and attempts to reconcile God as someone who is very manly and... "wild at heart". From talking to others who have read Captivating, that book also seeks to make a connection between God and women, showing how romantic God is. This leads to girls saying that God is "romancing them" and refering to God as their lover (yes, I have heard this), in all the wrong ways, including the notion that woman is the pinnacle of creation because Eve was created last. This serves no purpose but to bolster someone's self-esteem, it certainly does not glorify God any more:

.

[/quote]

I think you missed the point. Knowing where one's wounds come from is the first step to healing. You invite Christ into those memories to heal them.

Knowing that women are the pinnacle of creation serves a much larger purpose than self-esteem. That is the truth of being Catholic...helps us understand that women's dignity is worth holding up and fighting for ....that the man needs to step up and protect women.

and yes, Christ is our lover, as he wants to "marry" us as the church. This is all very intricately in theology of the body.


#9

Knowing that women are the pinnacle of creation

?

:shrug:

God created a whole lot of everything and in the animals He created two sexes.


#10

[quote="Barbkw, post:9, topic:234714"]
?

:shrug:

[/quote]

Would you please form a question? What is the problem? This is Catholic teaching.


#11

[quote="agapewolf, post:10, topic:234714"]
Would you please form a question? What is the problem? This is Catholic teaching.

[/quote]

That women are the pinnacle of God's creation?. Pinnacle is which sense of the word?


#12

[quote="Barbkw, post:11, topic:234714"]
That women are the pinnacle of God's creation?. Pinnacle is which sense of the word?

[/quote]

How many senses of the word are there? What is so hard to understand about it?

the peak...highest point or culmination.


#13

[quote="agapewolf, post:8, topic:234714"]
I think you missed the point. Knowing where one's wounds come from is the first step to healing. You invite Christ into those memories to heal them.

[/quote]

Some wounds are psychological - i.e. people are misplacing their priorities and thinking things that don't matter do. For instance, if I have an insecurity about my physical appearance, but am really no different from most people, I shouldn't be worrying about this issue that only exists psychologically and not in actuality. Instead, I should basically "get over it", which is what more people need to be told (although with a bit more sugar coating).

women are the pinnacle of creation

Where does it say that women are the pinnacle of creation? Depending on the translation, Genesis says that woman was created as a "helper" or a "mate". What was written in "Captivating" is quite the opposite of this - it's self-aggrandizement, and the consequence is you have people from both genders convinced that they are princes and princesses (and not in the humble sense that the Parable of the Prodigal Son teaches us).

and yes, Christ is our lover, as he wants to "marry" us as the church. This is all very intricately in theology of the body.

This is not the same as Christ taking us out on a date and out to the movies. It's an oversimplification of Biblical love into romantic love.

From another review I found helpful,

She goes way past biblical when she says "Jack with Rose on the bow of the Titanic, his arms around her waist, their first kiss... Now, put yourself in the scene as the Beauty, and Jesus as the Lover."


#14

[quote="ChiRho, post:13, topic:234714"]
Some wounds are psychological - i.e. people are misplacing their priorities and thinking things that don't matter do. For instance, if I have an insecurity about my physical appearance, but am really no different from most people, I shouldn't be worrying about this issue that only exists psychologically and not in actuality. Instead, I should basically "get over it", which is what more people need to be told (although with a bit more sugar coating).

Where does it say that women are the pinnacle of creation? Depending on the translation, Genesis says that woman was created as a "helper" or a "mate". What was written in "Captivating" is quite the opposite of this - it's self-aggrandizement, and the consequence is you have people from both genders convinced that they are princes and princesses (and not in the humble sense that the Parable of the Prodigal Son teaches us).

This is not the same as Christ taking us out on a date and out to the movies. It's an oversimplification of Biblical love into romantic love.

From another review I found helpful,

[/quote]

Insecurities often times are derived from some kind of wound.

Eros and agape must come together, they are meant to be together with Christ, not separate.

For the 3rd time....in the theology of the body it is explained.


#15

[quote="agapewolf, post:14, topic:234714"]
Insecurities often times are derived from some kind of wound.

[/quote]

Obviously, but the solution is not to tell people to focus more on things that are given too much priority in the first place.

Eros and agape must come together, they are meant to be together with Christ, not separate.

For the 3rd time....in the theology of the body it is explained.

thanks for being so patient, could you reference it for me, and show me in the catechism where it is taught that women are the pinnacle of creation, in the same sense that these protestants wrote about it?


#16

If that's what you need to believe: that women are the highest point of God's creation and we are the culmination of God's creation.

I guess for some, it beats saying that woman were created second - after Adam.

According to your theory, how lucky for us women that God created woman second or we'd be some kind of second class bimbos - like the guys who were created first.

I don't suffer from low self esteem and I find dignity in both sexes, so I doubt I'll ever be telling others that women are the "pinnacle" of God's creation.


#17

For the 4th time. It is in theology of the body. this is also church teaching. And many other documents, many of which written by JPII


#18

definitely! I guess I could write a book and say that Men are the pinnacle because they were created first. Coursing through Wild at Heart, and from the excerpts I’ve read of Captivating, are thinly-veiled attempts at self-validation. God speaking to these authors, telling them how manly/womanly they really are. I just dont think this draws people closer to God, but does a good job at making them feel good about themselves.


#19

[quote="agapewolf, post:17, topic:234714"]
For the 4th time. It is in theology of the body. this is also church teaching. And many other documents, many of which written by JPII

[/quote]

tip: when you are trying to convince someone of something, and they have asked you where specifically because they are genuinely interested, it's a good idea to help them out and provide a quote or two. Saying "it's church teaching" is much easier, though. I guess if I wanted to defend something Aquinas said I could say "It's in Summa", which might be true, but doesn't help to convince anyone.


#20

[quote="Barbkw, post:16, topic:234714"]
If that's what you need to believe: that women are the highest point of God's creation and we are the culmination of God's creation.

I guess for some, it beats saying that woman were created second - after Adam.

According to your theory, how lucky for us women that God created woman second or we'd be some kind of second class bimbos - like the guys who were created first.

I don't suffer from low self esteem and I find dignity in both sexes, so I doubt I'll ever be telling others that women are the "pinnacle" of God's creation.

[/quote]

Where in the world did you get this? That is NOT what is meant by pinnacle of creation and you know it. This is absurd and I resent the hyperbole.

Women are the pinnacle as in their dignity is worthy fighting for by men. Men are charged with protecting and providing ... they are the one who become priests as the initiator of the gift, what is so wrong with this understanding? This is church teaching.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.