[quote=PhilVaz]I would reply to it with a semi-humorous series entitled :rolleyes:
Orthodox Catholic or Catholic Orthodox,
But Definitely Not Protestant Evangelicalism
which had No Existence in the Fathers, Doctors, or Saints of the Catholic Church (And Everyone Knows That But Let’s Make This Absolutely Clear)
a/k/a OCOCOBDNPEWHNEITFDOSOTCC (AEKTBLMTAC)
That Jason Engwer is like an anti-Catholic machine, he’s got his pet arguments against Catholicism down pretty well. Better than your typical “evangelical” arguments, but still lame.
Let me summarize all of them in a few sentences. Some of the early Fathers were “premillennial” therefore evangelicalism and dispensationalism is true; and some of the Fathers because they didn’t mention baptism, taught justification by faith alone (Clement, Mathetes); and some of the Fathers taught against the full canonicity of the deuteros (Jerome) therefore evangelicalism is true; and some of the Fathers seem to imply Mary had minor faults (Chrysostom), therefore evangelicalism is true; and some of the Fathers weren’t clear about the infallibility of the Bishop of Rome, therefore “evangelical Protestantism” (with its own a thousand contradictory doctrines based on the Bible, mind you) is true.
That’s about it, now you don’t need to read the series. If Jason Engwer is a JND Kelly patristic scholar, then I’m John Carmack of id Software. Nice to meet you. :eek:
Phil when will this one, “HOLY BAPTISM, INFANT BAPTISM AND BAPTISMAL REGENERATION” be available?