“Not Worthy” posted this on another this forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=151437&page=6 thread, and I am responding to it here since its off-topic. It is a response to this quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4 forums.catholic.com/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
To those that think White is lame, why not call him on his program or see if he will debate you. Maybe you can do what i have yet to hear any catholic do in those debates. How is it possible that a person with a “sub par” degree can beat catholic apologists say about your church?
[NotWorthy responded]: **One way I can think of when a Catholic is called to defend something. Any time you are in defense of something, the offense can choose their mode of attack. **
Let’s say it’s the Real Presence and this is only an example. Mr. White can try and go through Scriptures interpretations to attack it. He could try and go through the Early Church Fathers to attack it. He could try and go through the various minor changes in tradition to attack it. Or He could come up with some unique way that hasn’t been heavily focused on before. Mr. White has the choice of which means he’s going to concentrate on and really focus on that line of attack.
Meanwhile, the Catholic Defender has to be prepared for ALL of these forms of attack, as well as be so solidly grounded in Scripture and Church Writings as to be able to defend even when a unique attack comes around.
I see this time and time again on these Forums where I have to defend against one person that the Church’s Traditions aren’t even found in Scripture, while the next person is arguing that the Church’s Scripture interpretations are too literal in establishing our traditions.
Good points! This also reminds me of a recent Francis Beckwith quote from this new thread forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=158250:
Originally Posted by Randy Carson forums.catholic.com/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
[Francis Beckwith]: …I do not believe, however, that the misrepresentation is the result of purposeful deception. But rather, it is the result of reading Trent with Protestant assumptions and without a charitable disposition…
Yes, this is how James White debates - with a complete lack of charity. His exudes a most worldly essense in how he debates, and certainly in his words about his sister. What is more worldly than lack of charity? That lack of charity is boring, it makes me run the other way. Because I am a Christian, I am in love with Jesus, and I am drawn to my Shepherd, and my Shephard is Perfect Charity. I am repelled by one who is opposite that. That is why I find James White debates so boring. One wants Christianity from a Christian debate, and how do you know one is a Christian? By their love. When I listen to one of White’s debates, I feel cheated. It was supposed to be a Christian debate. Where is the Christianity? Where is the love?
What Not Worthy has said here about the style of White’s debates is true. He puts himself in a postion to win by being the attacker, from whom one must defend oneself.
I don’t think much of a professed Christian whose career is all about putting himself in a perpetual position of attack. Is that really being an apologist?
I respect what apologist Karl Keating has to say about his life as an apologist on his May 29th newsletter. I think there is a thing to be said about not only becoming proficient in ones profession but also endeavoring to be a well-rounded person with other interests. And there is a whole lot to be said for being a person who debates whith charity, like he does, and like so many other Catholic apologists also do.