|
|
 |
Question I
Why has Christianity rejected many expressions of sexuality as antithetical to spirituality while various
Eastern traditions — Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism — have been more accepting of sexuality, have
even embraced sex as a vehicle for spiritual transcendence? What do you think about the connection, if any,
between sexuality and spirituality? In the Christian view, is Shakespeare's mortal coil, Milton's perfidious
bark, just a weight holding us down, preventing us from achieving greater divinity, or is the body, as Blake
explains, a portion of the soul discerned by the five senses?
|
|
Looking
at my initial answers to the questions, I wonder how Sandor Ferenczi, who was
brilliant at spotting unusual neuroses, would interpret my verbosity. Which leads me to
note how much I appreciate
Camille Paglia's comment,
"neurosis and creativity are intertwined."
I assume we are all neurotic, especially in our sexuality. If we're going to judge
sex by its absence of neurosis, we're not talking about human sexuality. I think that's the
point of sex: It leads us deeper into ourselves and into life. Being neurotic about it means
that we still have some distance to go, and I doubt that anyone ever reaches the end of the
road.
Moore responds to
Francoeur,
Kissling and
himself
|
|
|
|
|
|
