James White and the others

[Church_Militant]

kaycee:

Just an honest observation

If only i had the time!

Honest errors are still errors. :yup:
I suggest that you Make the time as opposed to taking cheap shots like that. :nope: I was an “ex-Catholic” for over 34 years and returned to the faith after digging into some of the trash that White and others allege and discovering that it’s all misinformation and misrepresentation.

To this day (over 3 years later) I still say; “If I’d known then what I know now I’d never have left the Catholic Church.” In most cases I find that those who are led astray by such as White, Chick, and others are either sorely lacking in the knowlege of the Catholic faith, or just can’t hack some aspect of Catholic morals. In my case it was both. :irish1: :bible1:
Pax vobiscum,

 

[Church_Militant]

kaycee:

Taking away time from my employer is not appropriate even to evangelize!

I was given the Gospel of Grace by a Baptist friend.

I hope you’re at lunch right now then.

Gospel of Grace from a Baptist huh? I found that “Gospel of grace” lasts only up until you acknowlege that the gifts of the Holy Spirit could also be for today, then you have to be on your way.

If you agree with White then you really don’t know much about the faith that you threw away.
:ehh:
Pax tecum,

 

[Kathleen_Kelly]

deb1:

Good Morning to you.
Most Catholics believe that Protestants stand every bit as good a chance as getting to heaven as they do. Do Reformed Baptist hold the same view of Catholics?

While the above may be true. That is not the teaching of the Catholic Church. It is defined dogma that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.

Exceptions, of course are baptism of desire, baptism of blood, or invincible ignorance. Incapable of being overcome or defeated; unconquerable. ergo. invincible ignorance means that the person cannot possible know that the Church is the true Church.

We can say that we cannot know who falls into these catagories, only God knows, but we cannot say that “Protestants stand every bit as good a chance as getting to heaven as they do”.

Kathleen

 

[Tim_Prescott]

As far as I know, no one is trying to get anyone to convert to or from Rome in this particular thread. To my knowledge, we are talking about James White and (most recently) more specifically his sister’s conversion to Rome and the quality and character of their interaction prior and subsequent to that event.

In fact, we aren’t even really discussing whether or not it was “right” for her to convert. Simply how and how much she interacted with her brother.

Thus, your post seems to be a bit of a non-sequitor. Adding nothing to the conversation other than your assertion that Catholicism is good and Reformed theology is not good (and quite a few exclamation points).

And, for the record, since I believe Reformed theology is biblical, I would say that it is VERY historical. Having been taught by Christ and his apostles. Just some food for thought.
[/quote]

Just remember dude that this is a Catholic forum so naturally people will speak about things from this perspective rather then a reformed one. I am sure the you would see the same/similar things on a Reforned forum thread about Catholicism.

p.s I have following what you have been writing and I was just wandering if you have any answer as yet why James White wont debate Sungenis and come up with every excuse under the sun not to?

 

[Michael_Paul]

Tim Prescott:

Just remember dude that this is a Catholic forum so naturally people will speak about things from this perspective rather then a reformed one. I am sure the you would see the same/similar things on a Reforned forum thread about Catholicism.

p.s I have following what you have been writing and I was just wandering if you have any answer as yet why James White wont debate Sungenis and come up with every excuse under the sun not to?

I realize that the question wasn’t asked of me but I hope that it is okay to comment.

Funny. I read in the past that White doesn’t believe that K. Keating won’t debate him because he (Keating) says that he is too busy with other aspects of his apostolate. However, he expects everyone to take his word for the reason that he won’t debate Sungenis. He says something like Sungenis is not mainstream enough. Then he (White) debates someone like Rutland. I have asked in this forum who Rutland is and no one can (or hasn’t) told me. He is apparently unknown to most if not all folks here. I never heard of him before But I’m thinking that there aren’t many here who do not know who Sungenis is. Did you see the clips of the White/Rutland debate? Rutland may be a very good Catholic but he is not up to taking on the likes of White. Sungenis is. White is obviously afraid of losing. And he would.

MP

 

[SEMPEREFORMANDA]

Hello all,

As I mentioned, I lack the time to really get into any debates. I simply wanted to correct some misapprehensions and give some context.

This may or may not be one of my last posts, depending on how scheduling goes. So, I thought I’d quickly make some points before leaving (Though I’ll probably check back now and again).

Mickey,
I did not mean to hurl insults at and lambast anyone. I tried to give fairly factual statements about his post. Also, my saying that Reformed theology is biblical is hardly a response.

Also, what I meant by it being historical, is that it is older than the RCC, since Christ did in fact teach it.

Finally,
For those who believe that Dr. White misrepresents Rome, he posted this on his blog today:

Finally, Church Militant, whose first name is Michael, just posted this morning,

I was an "ex-Catholic" for over 34 years and returned to the faith after digging into some of the trash that White and others allege and discovering that it's all misinformation and misrepresentation.

I would just love to hear some documentation of this allegation, but, of course, none was offered. We could hope maybe Michael would give me a ring on the DL and share this insight with everyone else?
Well, this thread is on-going, and may well result in even more interesting statements in the next few days. But once again, one is amazed at the conclusions folks draw based upon pure ignorance (can you imagine making the kinds of statements these folks do about me about, say, Karl Keating, without even taking the time to read a single one of his books or listening to anything he’s ever said?) and, quite simply, prejudice. And to Ryan and CatholicDude and Mickey, Michael Gazin, and especially “Church Militant,” etc.: the Dividing Line airs again tomorrow evening, 7pm EDT, 877-753-3341, toll free. Let’s talk.

And, I was mentioned in this blog article…made my day.
aomin.org/index.php?itemid=494

I just wanted to be sure you were all aware of Dr. White’s invitation to explain to him why you believe he misrepresents you. I encourage you to call, and look forward to hearing from you.

God Bless

SEMPEREFORMANDA

 

[Lillith]

Dang…an open invite!! Call the big guns!!!

 

[Jedi_Master]

SEMPEREFORMANDA:

Hello all,

As I mentioned, I lack the time to really get into any debates. I simply wanted to correct some misapprehensions and give some context.

This may or may not be one of my last posts, depending on how scheduling goes. So, I thought I’d quickly make some points before leaving (Though I’ll probably check back now and again).

Mickey,
I did not mean to hurl insults at and lambast anyone. I tried to give fairly factual statements about his post. Also, my saying that Reformed theology is biblical is hardly a response.

Also, what I meant by it being historical, is that it is older than the RCC, since Christ did in fact teach it.

Finally,
For those who believe that Dr. White misrepresents Rome, he posted this on his blog today:

And, I was mentioned in this blog article…made my day.
aomin.org/index.php?itemid=494

I just wanted to be sure you were all aware of Dr. White’s invitation to explain to him why you believe he misrepresents you. I encourage you to call, and look forward to hearing from you.

God Bless

SEMPEREFORMANDA

seems to me he cannot make up his mind why he does not debate Sungenis on Calvinism. Even when Sungenis was “okay” with White, he did not want to debate him on Calvinism.

"To recap, prior to 2002 when CAI was not a “traditional” apostolate, White declines to have a formal debate regarding the core of his religion (Calvinism), and then he chooses not to engender any further debate in print by purposely eliminating Not By Faith Alone from discussion in his book. When we approached White again in 2003 to have a formal debate on Calvinism, he declined again, but this time the excuse was that CAI had “departed from the mainstream of Catholicism” by taking on a traditional slant to its apologetics. Go figure.

Lo and behold, just a few months after White declined the above mentioned debate, he decided to debate another traditionalist, Gerry Matatics, which debate took place in April of that year. When we approached White regarding his hypocrisy, he just made up another excuse, claiming that the debate with Matatics had already been scheduled prior to his refusal to debate me. There is one problem, however: White had already told us that he would not debate “traditionalists” because they were “out of the mainstream,” yet he accepted a debate with Matatics who was even more “out of the mainstream” than CAI.

What’s the upshod of all this? Nothing more than that James R. White is a Pharisaical hypocrite of the first order. Unfortunately, he has so bamboozled his admirerers that they can’t see through the thick smoke screen in which he has surrounded himself."

catholicintl.com/noncatholicissues/james-chicken.htm

White debated Fastigi on Indulgence…and let me tell you…HE DID NOT UNDERSTAND what an indulgence is. Fastigi continuously corrected him on it.

 

[Therese_Martin]

Notice:

This thread is closed. Thanks to all who participated in the discussion.

General reminder:

For the future, please keep in mind this distinction: It is certainly acceptable to discuss the positions of non-Catholic apologists, but such discussions must be kept focused on the positions, not the characters of the individual non-Catholic apologists.