Monday, January 07, 2013

The Fans Speak Out

The following fan club testimony is from this blog post.


  1. Dozie said,

    January 7, 2013 at 2:17 pm
    Yet the problem in part as James complains, is Dozie’s link to James’s article at BeggersAll. The same which does nothing more than walk through Luther’s statement and put it in context.”
    I was going to let Ron and GB have the last word on this but now something has to be said about James Swan’s defense/adoption of Luther’s abominable statements.
    First, I disagree that James Swan’s article “does nothing more than walk through Luther’s statement and put it in context.” One has to appreciate the fact that James Swan has earned the reputation of being a Luther apologist and has been defending Luther in all manner of situations for some time now. In this role as Luther apologist, one has to ask: “how many match sticks does it take to burn down the house”? How many Luther bombastic statements does it take to discredit Luther and all those who defend him? Intelligent people bring up statements attributable to Luther (statements that ordinarily would not be indefensible) but James Swan in his singular role attempts, in the name of contextualization, to pull the blanket over some people’s eyes. In the particular instance in question, Luther claims: “Your sin cannot cast you into hell”. An unbiased person attempting to contextualize this statement will be obligated, first of all, to distance him/her self from the statement. There is nothing in James Swan’s analysis that indicates he finds the statement offensive or that the statement may create the wrong impression in others. He does not say that “the statement is misleading, but here is the context” or that the statement is wrong on its face. No, he simply justifies the statement by supplying or making up contexts that really sound bizarre to thinking Christians.
    Interestingly, even Lutherans are not impressed with James Swan’s hypocritical attempt to cover up for Luther. I know Paul McCain is not. Here’s a question put to James Swan by a Lutheran woman:
    “Dear James, it comes down to the question: if Luther was so right, why a Calvin? Does it not?” (This question was left unanswered). And then in the same comment, the lady points out: “And all the messes James is cleaning up, are just not as interesting to Lutherans who want to be more interested in the gospel than in Luther” (http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=19795707&postID=8878445420994759274).
    This Lutheran woman lady realizes that Luther created a mess which even Lutherans are not willing to touch; James Swan enters to clean up Luther but he does not find Lutheranism persuasive enough to sign on the dotted line. This is a sad commentary on the nature of Protestantism – happy in division. But the question remains: if Luther was so right, why Calvin?



  1. jamesswan1 said,
    January 7, 2013 at 3:32 pm
    One has to appreciate the fact that James Swan has earned the reputation of being a Luther apologist and has been defending Luther in all manner of situations for some time now.”
    I thought I was simply a person with a blog.
    In this role as Luther apologist, one has to ask: “how many match sticks does it take to burn down the house”? How many Luther bombastic statements does it take to discredit Luther and all those who defend him?”
    Where Luther was in error, I’ve pointed that out.
    “Intelligent people bring up statements attributable to Luther (statements that ordinarily would not be indefensible) but James Swan in his singular role attempts, in the name of contextualization, to pull the blanket over some people’s eyes.”
    This sort of statement is a good example of why you’ve been banned from my blog, off and on, over the years. You are one of of maybe 3 or 4 people that have earned the honor of having your comments immediately dumped off the Beggars All blog.
    In the particular instance in question, Luther claims: “Your sin cannot cast you into hell”. An unbiased person attempting to contextualize this statement will be obligated, first of all, to distance him/her self from the statement. There is nothing in James Swan’s analysis that indicates he finds the statement offensive or that the statement may create the wrong impression in others. He does not say that “the statement is misleading, but here is the context” or that the statement is wrong on its face. No, he simply justifies the statement by supplying or making up contexts that really sound bizarre to thinking Christians.”
    The context of Luther’s comment was provided in my blog entry for anyone to read. It’s not my fault if you can’t see past your own Romanism to understand what Luther is saying. Before I searched out the context, it was close to impossible to know where the quote was from. So you tell me who’s being dishonest here: the person that originally posted the comment without a reference, or my blog article which provides the context, and also a link to the writing it was taken from.
    Interestingly, even Lutherans are not impressed with James Swan’s hypocritical attempt to cover up for Luther. I know Paul McCain is not.”
    That’s news to me. I’ve had cordial interaction with Rev. McCain for a few years, and I don’t recall ever having any problems with him. If you have any comments from Rev. McCain implying he’s “not impressed with James Swan’s hypocritical attempt to cover up for Luther,” I certainly haven’t seen any such statements. Certainly Rev. McCain doesn’t appreciate my Reformed theology, but I don’t recall ever being criticized by him for any of the obscure Luther quotes I’ve looked up. In fact, Rev. McCain himself has posts that refute the nonsense attributed to Luther.
    Here’s a question put to James Swan by a Lutheran woman
    A Lutheran woman, by the way, who is a friend of mine and who does appreciate my Luther entries.
    This Lutheran woman lady realizes that Luther created a mess which even Lutherans are not willing to touch;”
    That’s nonsense. In fact “this Lutheran woman” actually helps me with translating Luther’s German so I can complete some of my entries. She’s actually been a great help over the years.
    James Swan enters to clean up Luther but he does not find Lutheranism persuasive enough to sign on the dotted line. This is a sad commentary on the nature of Protestantism – happy in division. But the question remains: if Luther was so right, why Calvin?”
    It’s odd how you can read my blog in such a Talmudic way and yet miss the obvious: It’s often the case that what Luther is saying (or not saying) isn’t really the point- It’s the fact that Romanism, particularly pre-1920 Romanists and recent online e-pologists have a terrible time with contexts, that is, if they even bother to look up a context.

2 comments:

Brigitte said...

James does meticulous research and gives reasonable, intelligent answers. He has had endless, saintly patience showing amateur "apologists" the way, so to speak, but it does not seem to take with some of them.

Luther teaches a thoroughly biblical theology which centers in Jesus Christ the Son of God and also of Mary, according to his human nature. In him alone is our redemption, and this is THE GOOD NEWS. This is the good news that captured our hearts, and Christ is the Lord whom we follow. I assume this is the message that has also captured James.

Luther has brought this message into the bright light and many of us would be glad to kiss his feet for that. He towers so far above all other theologians, it is not funny. Many Roman Catholics know that he was a deeply spiritual and profound man, along with courageous and honest. Many Roman Catholics also trust in Jesus Christ alone. The church's ministrations are only there to teach and reinforce this faith. Baptism now saves us because in it we are assured that God has indeed saved and redeemed us also. It is entirely for our own benefit.

Luther also had an astonishingly long career and wrote an astounding amount of material, over 100 large library volumes. His opinion was sought and all kinds of issues, including those not in his line of expertise. Every word he said was practically written down by someone. As James Swan points out, and demonstrates untiringly, context always matters when you are being fair, honest and scholarly. Picking out some sentences and holding them up for all to deride, is not just and right. -- I am sure I said something at breakfast today, that could not stand this kind of scrutiny and taking out of context.

When Luther's thoughts, sermons, documents are analyzed it takes some seriousness and not just the looking for sensational, supposed "messes". (I didn't know what the issue was when I commented in the thread highlighted here. Maybe I should not have commented.)

The very corrupt Roman Catholic church of Luther's day refused to listen to its critics. Everyone was expected to toe the line, no matter how much the poor people were exploited, no matter how money-grabbing and selfish the bishops. The church had become a joke to more secular minded people. Has anyone been watching the Borgias and read some Machiavelli? There is some context.

It was the pastoral heart of Luther and the zeal for what is right and true which moved Luther's heart. But the "church" excommunicated him and dealt with him unfairly decade after decade without much change. Plently of important and fair-minded current Catholics have seen this and bemoaned it.

Some of the critics, now, may have a second thought and pause, and consider what injustices they are perpetrating themselves. As Jesus said, we will be accountable for every word.

Nevertheless, I have severe problems with Calvin, as far as I have read him and this is no joke to me. I have also spent ages looking for signs of regeneration with me and only landed in distress. Whenever we are looking to add something to
Christ work, even the evidence of a changed life, we are in severe danger of pride or despair. But Roman Catholics know that we need to keep coming back to church and need to receive again forgiveness, availing ourselves of the means of grace and reassurance.

While I like and admire James and gladly translate for him (though he is very generous in mentioning my contributions; they have been truly minor), I have to say for his Reformed confession, I have not seen it come into conflict here. This is speaking specifically of James.

James Swan said...

Brigitte,

Thanks so much for the lengthy reply and kind words.