Protestant posters, why ...?

[Dave_Noonan]

Not trying to offend any of you protestants, but I’d like to take a moment to describe what I think is one of your worst posting habits: You (well, not every single one of you, of course, but by-and-large) seem to seize upon all the really awful posts made by Catholics and say “Aha! A Catholic said blank!”

Okay, maybe that last paragraph was a little biased … I don’t doubt that Catholic posters on protestant forums likewise seize upon the really awful posts made by protestants and say “Aha! A protestant said blank!” But regardless, I don’t get why protestants or Catholics do that. Wouldn’t it be better to ignore the garbage and focus on the good posts?

It’s an interesting question. People would certainly be better off ignoring the garbage, but I’m not sure if they are often knowledgeable enough to sort through things and discern the good stuff from the bad stuff.

For me, the entire Catholic apologetics enterprise, its acceptance, and its sort of self-created authority is fascinating. Despite the fact that the popular apologists are held to no scholarly standards whatsoever—most articles aren’t even footnoted—nearly everything they say seems to believed and repeated (sort of like folklore) in places like these fora, or at least that’s my perception. I do think if they would say something against church teaching there’s sort of a natural corrective from the institutional church–and I have always maintained they do an excellent job of presenting Catholic teaching, but outside of that: history, other religions/denominations, the Bible, biblical languages, etc. it’s sort of a wild west “say anything.” Sometimes they are right, but more often, no.

Maybe because these apologists build up media exposure or fill some sort of educational gap in the Catholic Church (I honestly have no idea because I’m not Catholic) people generally believe what they say–at least that’s the way it seems to me. So for me, if Jimmy Akin, or Fr. Mitch Pacwa, or (take your pick) says something that I know is just an out-and-out error, it’s not so disturbing that they made the statement itself: “aha, a Catholic said X” it’s just that ordinary people don’t seem to have the critical faculties to sort out whether what they are saying is actually true or not, and then the error gets replicated a thousand times. And maybe because the apologists do such a great job of presenting Church teaching, people sort of let their guard down on the other stuff.

Maybe Catholic apologists don’t officially speak for the church, but in a way they almost seem to because of their place as authorities among Catholics…I don’t know.

 

[dronald]

This question doesn’t make too much sense to me, seeing that this is a discussion board where the entire point is to offer differing opinions. Invite Protestants to a Catholic forum and we’ll certainly pick apart your every word.

But I will say that I find Catholics are more likely to pick on me as an Evangelical than a Lutheran, Anglican, Presbyterian or Baptist. It seems that although Protestants don’t agree on every issue, we really aren’t out for each other.

Take for example William Lane Craig; he’s never debated a Catholic and he doesn’t plan on it. What about the greatest textual critic of all time Daniel B Wallace? No argument against Catholicism from him either. C.S. Lewis would list his denominations alphabetically for the sake of avoiding conflict.

However, the best Catholic apologists have to discuss the flaws in every Protestant denomination. It would be nice to see a “Ravi Zacharias” of Christianity who happens to be a Catholic as well and can defend Christianity at universities the way others do, without attacking a different denomination.