To My Favorite Catholic Apologist...

******UPDATED 9/17/2007 *****(See the end of this entry)*****


Thanks once again for featuring me on your blog. It indeed humbles me that you, a professional well-respected Catholic apologist would take the time out of your busy schedule of teaching, book writing, interviews, lecturing, and public debating, to spend your valuable time (desired by so many others of more worth), to compose such an insightful example of cogent prose, truth, and devout Christian virtue. Indeed, the entry you penned reminded me of how well you fulfill the words written by the martyr Ignatius:

"In response to their anger, be gentle; in response to their boasts, be humble; in response to their slander, offer prayers; in response to their errors be 'steadfast in the faith'; in response to their cruelty, be gentle; do not be eager to retaliate against them. Let us show ourselves their brothers by our forbearance, and let us be eager to be imitators of the Lord to see who can be the more wronged, who the more cheated, who the more rejected, in order that no weed of the devil might be found among you, but that with complete purity and self-control you may abide in Christ Jesus physically and spiritually."

Indeed, in following your career, I'm not sure how you have been able endure the attacks and slander constantly hounding you by the jealous and devious Protestants. You are truly the Ignatius of 2007: one willing to speak the truth in love, humility, and gentleness, no matter what the cost.

I want to take this opportunity as well to offer my sincere apology about recently deleting two of your comments from this blog. I realize, I've not done this before, you've always been given full access to speak any words of wisdom you've desired on this blog, and the amount of spiritual growth I've gleaned from your words stands above any other writer that has influenced me. I really was only hoping to emulate the example you have set. I recall you deleting comments and banning, at least one person from your blog in the past. In following your example, it is an honor to stand with you far above the likes of the Envoy Forum, which arbitrarily bans and deletes for no other reason but to keep people from hearing anything except that which gives sour milk to the sheep. Even though I deleted your two comments, I left plenty others up, including those comments you posted linking to your blog responses to the issues in question. Of course, Envoy would never allow this. But you and I Mr. Armstrong, will set an example for them: showing them that one should not fear that which takes a contrary position.

I thought for many hours about what might happen if I deleted anything you wrote. I felt the same fear Paul probably felt when he directly confronted the Pope (as recorded in Galatians). Paul must have spent many days and weeks in prayer and fasting. Paul probably called out in prayer to as many of the great saints he could think of. This may have been the most daring act he ever performed: much more dangerous than any of the attempts on his life he faced! Imagine...confronting the Pope! The most powerful supreme being on the earth! That's how I felt when confronting you about your comments. You are by far, the greatest living Catholic apologist. You've defeated every person you've ever faced, whether in dialog, or in the plentiful in-person debates you've been in. I know of no other Catholic apologist that has written more than you, or expressed the profound truth offered by the Roman Catholic Church as you have explained it. So in the greatest of all humility, I prostrate myself before you, and beg you, as a pupil to a supreme master: please, please, please forgive me for deleting your two comments from my blog, but understand, I was only trying to follow the highest of standards of which you have set the bar. If the Pope could bear with the correction of Paul, I feel somewhat confident you will likewise follow with mercy.

And this brings up another area in which I must humbly beg and plead for mercy, that is, in regard to our discussion on Luther citations. I always benefit from your correction, and grant that you should be able to quote Luther however you want, with or without ever reading the context of Luther's words. If you find a Protestant scholar that agrees with your understanding of Luther, this is good enough. You don't need to actually read the context of Luther's words. I'm not sure if I've ever expressed to you my own feeble opinion, which is that, whatever, anyone says, whether Protestant or Catholic, whether friend of foe, all are held to a standard of accuracy and truth. Thus, Hamilton (the writer in question), may make both right and wrong points. The only way to determine this would be to actually read the context Hamilton worked from. I am not so depraved that I would not criticize a Protestant scholar, simply because he agrees with me. In fact, for example, I have criticized Preserved Smith, Roland Bainton, and even the almighty-nearly-infallible Martin Luther himself (God forgive me for uttering that!). Let my publicly state that Hamilton erred with context. I treasure the fact that you pointed this out to me, and will never forget it. it is like a gift of wisdom from you to me.

I must also beg forgiveness from you one more time, and I do so with the hopes that your mercy and compassion are of the great depth I have come to know from your writing. Your latest blog entry of exhortation directed towards me went far beyond my ability of comprehension... so much so, that I ended up skimming parts of it. It was simply too much truth to handle! I need to be spoon-fed, like the infant I am. I plan on reading your words slowly, and devotionally, every night before bed, as part of my "quiet time."

I did though briefly look at the comments section of your blog post. Randy, of your devoted followers stated,

"Good job Dave. In some way a nit picky critique is the highest praise. They are essentially saying they want to spend time shooting down your writing but can't find a way to rebutt the central thesis. So they take some shots around the edges. It also wonder why James Swan went after this rather than responding to you Chemnitz reviews. To me it says he hasn't found those arguments very easy to counter."

If you have a private moment with Randy, could you explain to him that I don't even own a copy of Chemnitz? In other words, I haven't really read very much of Chemnitz, thus I would never dare to even begin to digest and reflect upon your most thorough refutations. In fact, Concordia Seminary hasn't responded to your blog posts on Chemnitz either, showing, once again, your great superiority, the truth of Roman Catholicism, and the shallowness of Chemnitz and all Lutherans in general. Dave you have the truth of the Papacy on your side! It's about time someone crushed the lies of Chemnitz. All the other Roman Catholics apologists have feared to even open his books. You though, showing no fear, like Ignatius on the road to martyrdom, jumped immediately into the enemy's book, and destroyed it so thoroughly, Concordia will probably ban all links to your website (like Envoy would do when confronted!). I eagerly await your next book, which should be a full length response to Chemnitz. A book like this would be exactly what Sophia Press needs to counter the $75,000 debt they have accrued.

I'm sorry I can't spend any more time writing to you at this time. My free time is being taken up with a class in Systematic Theology. I am being forced to read Van Til, Calvin, Warfield, Murray, and Vos... All Prot writers that are easily refuted by Roman Catholic apologists like yourself. As I read through their works, it provokes me to long and crave for the time to read your blog.

******UPDATED 9/17/2007 *****

Here are some jewels of wisdom from professional Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong in response to this entry:

"Swan's standard "response" to me now is dripping sarcasm, of the very worst sort (not related to truth)..."

"This guy is a juvenile, pompous ass. I'm through with this clown. He can write whatever he wants against me. I'll ignore it. We know, after many many examples, that it'll hardly be worth reading, anyway. If I reply rationally, he comes back with this hogwash. He doesn't deserve anyone's time.

To the extent that I deal with anti-Catholics at all, I'll stick to at least influential ones like James White. He affects a lot of people, and so, needs to be countered and refuted. But Swan is a lightweight in the anti-Catholic apologetic world. Let him write posts like this, then. I have better things to do than to waste my time reading them, let alone responding."
Dave Armstrong Homepage 09.17.07 - 10:52 am #

This isn't the first time Professional Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong has called me an "ass", nor is this the first time he's called me names, he's taken this approach for years. "The things that come out of the mouth come from the heart." Let me state exactly how I feel about Mr. Armstrong, though it has never been a secret. I do not take him seriously. I have taken this approach for years, and it is reflected in my writing. A few months back I attempted to offer a serious response, only to get the typical Armstrong response back (I think Dave later had re-edited his response to tone down his hatred). There isn't any way this guy should be taken seriously as a professional apologist. He's a guy sitting behind a computer, somewhere in Michigan.

If indeed these are the last words of wisdom from professional Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong directed towards me, I would be amazed and grateful. Unfortunately, professional Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong has a habit of making promises like this, and not keeping them.


One Further Update 9/18/07

In case anyone thinks I was too hard on Armstrong, the initial entry Dave wrote included this picture of a clown on top of his post, I can only speculate it was intended to represent me. Again, "The things that come out of the mouth come from the heart."
This is only one of the mocking pictures directed at me. There is also this one, of which one of the three ghouls is said to be me. These are only two examples of Dave's way of being a professional Catholic apologist . I'm not even going back to all the previous derogatory remarks, pictures, etc. Obviously, Mr. Armstrong is not the pillar of virtue or the martyr he makes himself out to be. I intend to treat Mr. Armstrong as he deserves, not seriously.