Esse livro é para ajudar o cristão se preparar para ministrar aos feridos, cujas vidas foram destruídas pela falsa promessa de liberdade e autonomia. A cultura atual tem cada vez mais menosprezado e banalizado o corpo o tratando apenas como uma simples matéria. Questões como aborto, mal uso do sexo, homossexualidade, entre outras, modificam o corpo e o destroem. Neste livro, Nancy Pearcey mostra de forma abrangente que o corpo humano deve ser amado e respeitado como Templo do Espírito Santo e que o Cristianismo é real, e não apenas palavras, colocando carne e osso nas mensagens de esperança e cura.

A great read, focusing on the philosophical underpinnings of views of sexuality today and how the gospel speaks to and addresses those ideas. Much of the Pearcey's framework is rooted in first source material; she exhibits a rigorous research of primary sources to hold those that she lies in disagreement with in charity and offers a better redemptive solution. This is the mark of a great apologist-- a charitable spirit that goes against the soundbite snark of most Christian defense. This is a comprehensive book for anyone seeking better, biblical answers to modern questions. ( )

Very thought provoking. Also reveals what lies behind the culture wars in USA.

One niggle, she cites Eagleton, implying that he was a Marxist and is now Catholic, whilst I suspect the opposite is true; but that does not make the citation wrong.
Another irritation is her talking about Intelligent Design and resistance to Darwin. I don't think ID is central to her argument, and it is not accepted by a large number of influential Christian scientists on this side of the Atlantic. I do not think her theology of creation requires a seven day earth and she could do with making that clear.

And in all the concern for the unborn fetus by these Americans I wonder whether they ever give as much concern for the living people who are enemies and criminals. They seem happy to see them killed with their guns and capital punishment. And these policies are associated with the right wing, who previously showed no concern for the rights of the poor and oppressed. I remember that when abortion was legalised in this country the main argument was the prevention of the 20 annual deaths resulting from criminal abortion. Some consistency of concern for the living should be emphasised.

Nevertheless her basic argument seems true, that the bodies we are given come with a natural bundle of implications about the way we and our societies should operate, and she interacts very helpfully with the philosophers who were behind the development of modern thought. ( )

I highly recommend this book for all Christians to read! Pearcey has a surgeon's ability with her pen to dissect complicated issues and reveal what is wrong, and more, how to begin the healing process. Here, she explains how only the Christian worldview truly honours the physical human body. In fact, it is the postmodern secular approach that is now codified in American, Canadian and other Western democracies that demeans people suffering under the misguided dictates (would diktat be too strong?) that offer solutions to psychic traumas that do not heal, but rather, harm.
This is an important book, so important in fact, that the proponents of the various shades of thought confronted here, they need to absorb and respond to her incisive commentary.
In the past few years I have come upon several authors with trenchant critiques of modern cultures in a variety of ways. Pearcey, Keller, Abdu Murray and Champagne Butterfield to name just a handful. Pearcey stands right at the top of this list. May her tribe increase. ( )

Summary: Traces how a two story view of reality has led to a dualistic way of viewing human beings, splitting body and person, and traces the working out of this around our understanding of human life, sexuality, orientation, gender, and marriage.

Often Christianity has been accused of prudish attitudes with regard to the body and its functions in contrast with the wider culture's celebration of the body. What if the truth were just the opposite and Christians, in fact, had a truly high view of our embodied life, and the secular world in fact denigrated and reinforced a fallen alienation from our bodies? This is part of what Nancy R. Pearcey means in the title to her new book, Love Thy Body.

Pearcey, who was strongly influenced by the work of Francis Schaeffer, believes one of his most valid insights was the two storied view of truth and reality that prevails in the modern world which might be portrayed as follows:

THEOLOGY, MORALITY, VALUES

Private, Subjective, Relativistic

---------------------------------------------------------------

SCIENCE, FACTS

Public, Objective, Valid for Everyone

Pearcey contends that this bifurcated view of reality has extended to our concept of the body, where instead of a Christian view of embodied persons, we separate the idea of the person and the body, whereby our understanding of what it means to be human is separated from our biological existence. For example, life is defined not when an ovum is fertilized by sperm but by when the fetus becomes a person. The trouble with this is it is not clear when this happens, either before or after birth, or what level of genetic fitness qualifies one to be a person and thus worthy of life. The issue arises at the other end of life as well, where personhood, rather than embodied life define when life should be ended.

Then in successive chapters Pearcey shows how this divided view of reality works out in our understanding of sexuality, orientation, and gender. A hookup culture divorces physical pleasure from mental and emotional bonding (often resulting in great pain when we cannot carry this off). Strangely, at the same time, sex becomes divorced from the body in its obviously procreative function. Sexual orientation becomes an instance where a psychological, autonomous self imposes its own interpretation upon the body, denying the telos of one's biology. Likewise gender is a fluid product of social forces rather than the physical constitution of the body. Furthermore, marriage is reduced to a contract rather than a covenantal relationship where the union of our bodies expresses the union of our lives and the formation of new families.

In the course of her discussion, Pearcey chronicles leading thinkers from Freud to Foucault, and various educational and governmental policies that have supported the divorce of persons and bodies. At the same time, she writes as a professor who has counselled students and her own children as they wrestle with these realities. So she writes with both conviction and compassion. In her chapter on transgenderism, she writes of Brandon, who still considers himself a girl on the inside, and yet recognizes that surgery will not change who he is, and that much of the problem has to do with how gender is defined.

The breadth spanned by this book to underscore its central thesis means that there is much left to be worked out, and many particular situations that only are cursorily addressed. Yet the common origin of all these issues in a bifurcated view of truth is worth noting for understanding where the real difference lies.

Pearcey's argument for the unity of the human being and the value of the body will not satisfy those for whom the social construction of personhood, gender, and orientation are defining. What Pearcey does is articulate a theology of the body as good and that our biology must not be denied in our understanding of the person, but truly celebrated. She articulates compassion and conviction held in tension, something rare in today's discussions. She also suggests a vision of truth as a seamless garment and a life where what we do as embodied beings shapes the persons we are becoming. In a climate where Christians often are accused of hatefulness, she poses a most challenging question in asking, "who really loves the body?"

____________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher in exchange for an honest review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. ( )