S
Sean_Boyle
Guest
I canāt believe that I get to bring up his name. Iām not worthy really, but he says I am. This is of all times, right?Jesus the Christ.
- Status
I canāt believe that I get to bring up his name. Iām not worthy really, but he says I am. This is of all times, right?Jesus the Christ.
A
abenassi
Guest
St. Paul. Hands down. Well maybe James, because even Peter is confused by Paul. Peter is good too. Actually Iād take any of the apostles.
K
Keith123
Guest
It seems that most of what I have read or heard by the apologists mentioned on the voting listāI havenāt read all of themāare good at making a case for Catholcism for evangelicals. But what about more apologist like Peter Kreeft, or many of the dozens of apologist from the evangelical community(eg Lee Strobel,NT Wright, William Lane Craig, JP Moreland, etc) that make a case for Christianity? How come Catholics do not seem to make the case for Christianityāor are they out there and they just donāt show up on this list, and I am unaware of them?
Keith
Keith
T
TheGreenO
Guest
The poll was on best CATHOLIC APOLOGIST.
The list is very limited though. Might want to add St. Thomas Aquinas in the list. He not only defend the questions, but added questions and defended them too.
I
invocation
Guest
where is Justin Martyr when you need him?
J
jmcrae
Guest
My thought, as well. Didnāt he invent the art of Catholic Apologetics?
K
Keith123
Guest
That was part of my point. It doensāt seem to me that there are apologist that are trying to bring nonchristians into the church. Their apologetics ministry (the one listed on the opeing list)is to convert evangelicals primarily. I want to know where the apologist are who do for Catholics what those people do for mainstream evangelical Christians. Scott Hahn is great at speaking to evangelicals, but why are there not more Catholics like Lee Strobel etc trying to bring nonchristians into the Churchāor do I just not know any of them who do a good job other than Peter Kreeft, and some great dead apologists (Chesterton, Aquinas)? Perhaps I should create a different thread. Iām not trying to change the dirertion of this one.
Keith
R
reggieM
Guest
Fr. Mitch Pacwa does a good job as an apologist for non-Christians. There are some good apologists for Jewish believers also. Fr. George Rutler is very good against secularism and atheism. Fr. Brian Harrison is excellent apologist on the Churchās moral teaching. Paul Vitz has a good apologetical book against atheism.
As for older apologists - Fr. Ronald Knox, Fr. Vincent Micelli, Frank Sheed, Karl Adam, John Stoddard, Abp. Sheehan are a few more.
As for older apologists - Fr. Ronald Knox, Fr. Vincent Micelli, Frank Sheed, Karl Adam, John Stoddard, Abp. Sheehan are a few more.
M
Monica4316
Guest
I like Scott Hahn
K
Keith123
Guest
Thank you!! I will try and get a hold of some of their works. Iāve heard an old tape of Fr. Pacwa where he was debating the then Bible Answer man Walter Martin. I wasnāt aware that he did apologetics for non-Christians. Again, thanks, I think these should be, if they are any good, better publicized on the forums. Just my personal opinion.
Keith
N
nilofc
Guest
Of those in the listā¦I will go for Scott Hahn. But all of these men are warriors of God. These are all great menā¦ we should thank God for all of them.
N
nilofc
Guest
Peter was a fishermanā¦Paul was a Pharisee. Now you know why Paul is more knowledgeable of the law.
But you ā¦yourself should not be confused tooā¦ Peter is the first Pope, it was on Peter that Christ Himself founded the Church, it is Peter whom God has given the keys of the kingdom to.
Paul looks up to Peter for answers regarding controversies to the faith. You might wanna read the Acts of the Apostles where they held the first church council on the issue of cicumcizing gentiles. It was Peterās final decision which settled the issue.
R
reggieM
Guest
Yes, I agree that they should get more publicity.
One thing about Fr. Pacwa though is that much of his apologetics are done on the radio or audio tapes and debates so itās hard to find them.
T
Teflon93
Guest
We have a significant number of people who have Holy Orders to do this. The missionary work of Catholic priest, nuns, and monks has proven far more effective over a far longer period of time than that of the āevangelicalā communities.
Since the thread implies lay apologists, I think many of us presumed that Jesuits and the like were excluded. Just because they are excluded by definition does not mean they do not exist in the Catholic Church, nor that their efforts are inadequate. We did not get to 1.3 billion Catholics by accident.
T
Teflon93
Guest
St Peterās resurrection of the dead as recorded in Acts was a highly effective apologetic argument, donāt you think?
I
Ignatius
Guest
John Martignoni, Steven Ray, . . . . . .
How blessed the Church is to have so many Authentic Catholic Apologists.
N
nilofc
Guest
It may. But then againā¦letās define Apologetics. It came from the greek word āApologiaāā¦meaning āto make defense ofā or āto make a case ofā.
Peter ressurecting someone from the grave is a grace given by God to the Apostles to aid them in spreading the gospel, so that people may believe the works that they have done is from whom they got their mission from is truly the Christ Jesus, whom they are preaching of.
What I am really driving at isā¦ though Paul maybe more knowledgeable of the LAW and more scholarly, he is still under the authority of Peter. Paul may have written 60% of the New Testamentā¦but numbers doesnāt really count here. For Jesus never wrote anything that was recorded in scriptures except the ones he wrote on the sand when they were persecuting an adulteress woman.
One more thing, Paul always called Peter as āPeterāā¦the name given by Christ Himself. A change in name is an office being placed on your shoulders. Itās like calling him Pope, which signifies his office and authority. Peter=Rock. And the apostles follow suit.
J
jmcrae
Guest
I think itās important to keep in mind that āApologeticsā is not the same thing as āEvangelism.ā
An Apologist is someone who is putting out correct information about the teachings of the Church, etc., to correct misunderstandings.
An Evangelist is someone who is actively trying to encourage people to become Catholic, or to be better Catholics than they were before.
So, the best Apologist wouldnāt necessarily be the one who makes the most converts, but rather, the one who is best at getting correct information about the Church out to where people can access it easily.
An Apologist is someone who is putting out correct information about the teachings of the Church, etc., to correct misunderstandings.
An Evangelist is someone who is actively trying to encourage people to become Catholic, or to be better Catholics than they were before.
So, the best Apologist wouldnāt necessarily be the one who makes the most converts, but rather, the one who is best at getting correct information about the Church out to where people can access it easily.
M
Mimi
Guest
I am always impressed of Fr. Pacwaās knowledge of mid-eastern languages and culture. He can explain why a certain term was used, like ākephaā for ārockā, and the cultural context behind it.
Scott Hahn was the first Catholic apologist I became aware of (perhaps 20 yrs ago). I have seen him in person, and his sincerity, charity, and sheer knowledge of scripture and Christianity (and by that I mean Catholicism, of course) is indeed impressive!
I do enjoy all the hosts on Open Line ewtn radio as well.
I could not vote for a ābestā. They are all blessed with special graces and gifts, and each probably reaches a somewhat different population. Thank God for them all!!
Mimi
amateur beginning apologist
D
Donald_Ross
Guest
- Status