Thursday, January 14, 2010

The Term Anti-Catholic is Widely Used by Scholars of Many Types -- Including Non-Catholics (Will Anti-Catholics Ever Comprehend This?)

[AfterAnti-Catholicism(Book).jpg]

For the record, an anti-Catholic is anyone who disagrees with Dave Armstrong. I know he's got this pretend definition that he pulls out, but when you look at who he calls an anti-Catholic it's pretty clear that it's nothing but a sledge-hammer to use against those he hates.


(anti-Catholic Protestant Peter Pike, 12-14-09)

Here's the latest silliness along these same lines from the peanut gallery over at the anti-Catholic bastion of circular reasoning, Tribalblogue (my initial comments are in brackets):

* * * * *

"Truth Unites . . . and Divides"

Q: What and who defines "anti-Catholicism" or "anti-Protestantism?"

Steve Hays

Dave Armstrong defines "anti-Catholicism." He's the Pope of lexicography!

"Truth Unites . . . and Divides"

(1) Yes, he probably does. [No, he certainly doesn't] But it's quite likely that his definition is subjective and relative. I.e., anti-Catholicism is in the eye of the beholder [not at all].

(2) Would he stipulate, then, that there might be (or are) Protestants who, using their own subjective and relative tastes (just like he does), who would deem many of his posts as being offensive "anti-Protestantism" rants? [occasionally, yes, but if so, they are utilizing an essentially different definition, since I regard Protestants as Christians]

(3) What if anti-Catholicism simply distills to an ad hominem attack as a rhetorical method to divert attention away from arguments showing that some Catholic doctrine is silly, wrong, poorly reasoned, lacking evidence, self-refuting, or just plain wrong? [they do this all the time (how well I know!), mixed in with some actual rational -- albeit very poor -- argumentation; I just documented yesterday how Steve Hays himself resorted to this sort of idiocy, as he often does; Bishop James White has for many years now also]

. . . But when we start slinging around labels of "anti-Catholicism" or "anti-Protestantism" to casually and easily dismiss arguments of the loyal opposition [everyone knows how I have never argued against Protestants and the tiny fringe minority of anti-Catholic Protestants in my 600 or so posted online debates], well, that's what I find offensive. [me, too, which is why I take care to use the proper definition of the word, and to not use a mere word to avoid dealing with non-Catholic argumentation]

So if Dave Armstrong, Scot Windsor, the Called to Communion guys, et al are unthinkingly slopping around the "anti-Catholicism" canard to avoid dealing with the defects of Catholic doctrine, [everyone knows how I have never argued against Protestants in my 2537 posted papers and 20 books, including the next one entirely devoted to replying to John Calvin] then they should understand that they are doing themselves no favors. [amen! Good principle, but wrong facts in my case]

Dave Armstrong

See:

Use of the Term Anti-Catholic in Protestant and Secular Scholarly Works of History and Sociology (vs. "Romans 45")

The Legitimacy of the Term Anti-Catholic as a Noun as Well as an Adjective

Scholarly Use of the Term Anti-Catholicism in Precisely the Way I Habitually Use It (the Theological or Doctrinal Sense)

Does the Term Anti-Catholic Have a Proper Theological / Religious Application (as Opposed to Political / Social)? (vs. Frank Turk)

Does the Term Anti-Catholic Have a Proper Theological / Religious Application? Counter-Reply to Frank Turk

Reiterating the Meaning of "Anti-Catholic" With an Anti-Catholic and Getting Nowhere, As Usual (vs. Peter Pike)

Fruitful Discussion With a Protestant About the Definition of Anti-Catholicism, Knowing Jesus Personally, and Constructive Dialogue


The Strange Saga of James White's On-Again, Off-Again Use of the Pejorative Terms "Romanism" and "Romanist"

James White's Use of "Anti" Terms & More "Tired" Rhetoric and Anti-Catholic Terminological and Ethical Double Standards

James White Outdoes All With His "Anti" Language

James White's Continued Comical Double Standard on "Anti' Language

James White: Anti-Intellectual? (Double Standards in "Anti" Language Yet Again!)

James White's Continued Idiotic Opposition to Catholic Use of the Term Anti-Catholic

"Free grace's" Glaring, Ludicrous Double Standards Regarding Anti-Protestant and Anti-Catholic (see exchange in the comments thread)

Our Friend "Carrie" and the Difference Between a "Protestant" and an "Anti-Catholic (Protestant)"

I Love the Word Popish: Steve Hays and Bigoted Anti-Catholic Titles

Steve Hays and His Band of Merry Mockers Join the "Anti-Catholic" / "Anti-Calvinist" Terminological Hypocrisy Bandwagon

King David T. King Sez Catholics R the Biggest Anti-Catholics There Is. Huh??!!!

Ironies of Anti-Catholic Reformed / The Loaded Term Papalism (critique of a remark by R. C. Sproul, Jr.)


Anti-Catholic TAO Compounds His "Category Absurdities" in Touting Catholic Dinesh D'Souza as Champion of Christianity (!)

Anti-Catholic "Turretinfan" Joins His Cronies in Exhibiting "Anti" Language Hypocrisy and Double Standards

Eric Svendsen's & Other Anti-Catholics' Inconsistent Use of Anti-Evangelical as a Description of Catholics

More Examples of Eric Svendsen's Hypocritical Double Standards for "Anti" Language


2 comments:

Adomnan said...

Calvinist insistence that God the Father punished an innocent man (Jesus) to satisfy His justice and that the Bible teaches Christ's righteousness is imputed to anyone are "silly, wrong, poorly reasoned, lacking evidence, self-refuting, (and) just plain wrong," to borrow Steve Hayes's somewhat redundant language.

So who are they to correct others?

Adomnan said...

I should have written IS "silly, wrong, poorly reasoned, etc," given that the subject is "insistence."