It's
really kind of chilly this morning. It's cold. And
I can say what today isn't
because it's cold: It isn't a day to be responding to retreaded
arguments against Roman Catholics. Actually, the weather is
never
right for retreaded arguments against Roman Catholics. And
today
really wasn't my day for other reasons.
After wasting two
hours yesterday because someone had pestered me for over a month to
write a response to one set of Roman Catholic apologists, I finally
found enough time in my schedule to answer a simple letter enunciating
some RC arguments. Frankly, I didn't want to because I had
changed the
name of my site, and advised my querent to read a couple of useful
books and answer it himself, if he wanted to be helpful. No
good. He
wanted ME to write it. Well, frankly, I have a million things
going on
in my personal life, and I didn't WANT to respond to it because I had
other things to do. But finally, I wasted a couple of good
hours of my
free time to do so.
I then called this monastery and introduced
myself because people on the Internet rarely realize they are dealing
with HUMANS, with LIVES. That doesn't just go for me, it goes
for
people who write stuff like this of any religion. While it
was
somewhat confrontational-- it's how I do things-- I believe it was
friendly and then call waiting happened (see? we have lives and
everything-- on his part the man was working on a religious video but
took time out to chat for a minute). I gave him the address
and left
it at that.
My dear fianceé questioned the value of this
response of mine, visiting after she came back from work, asked me why
I was writing it, and I explained it was to help a confused person who
pestered me-- and that I had spoken to Brother Dimond so it might be
useful to him too. I didn't convince her, but I sure
convinced me, and
went to bed. So my eyes bulged this morning when I opened my
email to
find that my "desperate individual" had taken a month's worth of
irritation versus the desire to answer in Christian truth-- and
forwarded it to James Likoudis. (I am not going to print
Likoudis'
response-- I would hate to embarrass him-- but frankly, I am a little
annoyed that this old man still has a following. I guess it
sells
better if you are an RC apologist and a "real live former ethnically
Orthodox". Anyway....) Likoudis' response was so
laughable -- to be
fair, he did point out a textual error-- 1300's = 14th century, I knew
that really, thanks-- that I am still dumbfounded as to WHAT
to say.
And then it dawned on me for a second: Why did my "desperate person"
send it to Likoudis a DAY after I wrote it?
I
am a little irritated to say the least, and I really hope this wasn't
some cheap RC goad, since we are way too close to the end to waste our
time with such dumb games (Unless, it seems, you are James Likoudis,
whom I assume is retired.) But I am STILL going to assume that this
person who wrote me, against all evidence, wrote me with totally pure
intentions. So I am going to solve HIS-- and any future
wanna-bes who
want to become Orthodox apologists, or RC apologist-kids (real
apologists of most denominations, in general, have a low threshold of
patience with this sort of stupidity) who want a good fight, with a
reading list.
If
someone has a question that is not based SPECIFICALLY on something that
I have already answered or referred to another place, they can refer to
the reading
list. If someone wants to respond to something I wrote, they
can refer
to to the list first. If
I send you to the reading list, guess what? I am not going to write you
an answer! Why?
Because this isn't an apologetics site anymore! I have other
things to
do. I am not going to sit here and argue with well-heeled
organizations, large, bloated organizations like James Likoudis.
I
simply have other things to do.
And with this, I'd like to
apologize to Brother Dimond. He never contacted me, nor did
he try to
convert me. I certainly did not mean to bother him in his
work. I am
sure anyone's gut reaction on that RC side, it's sort of an automatic
one, is to want to respond. Don't bother. Just
accept my apology. I
hope he considers Orthodoxy, but after this introduction, who would
want to? If the person who sent me that letter was Orthodox,
were you
thinking about the man's soul? Mine? Even, maybe, your own?
|
READING LIST
For Apologist Wannabes:
Most
of these books ARE available ONLINE. The ones that AREN'T are
fairly
low cost. If I refer you to any of these books (including a
Patristic
text). No, I am not going to include links. Just read.
YOU
MUST START HERE.
The Papacy,
Abbe Guettee (Fr Vladimir). If you don't start here but want
to argue
anyway, prepare to waste your time. Reading this text takes
some
humility and some time. However, you must be able to see the
Papacy in
a different context than how it is "normally seen" by Roman Catholics.
Without it, forget it. You will be arguing with
walls.
Orthodox
Apologetic Theology, Ivan M. Andreyev.
Anything by the Church Fathers as COMPLETE TEXTS.
Two Paths,
Michael Whelton.
Franks,
Romans, Feudalism and Doctrine, Fr John
Romanides.
The History
of the Council of Florence, Oustromoff.
Catholic
Orthodoxy and Anglo-Catholcism, Dr Joseph Overbeck.
The Orthodox
Veneration of the Mother of God, St John Maximovitch.
The Soul
After Death and Genesis,
Creation and Early Man, Fr Seraphim Rose.
Sola
Scriptura: In the Vanity of Their Minds, Fr John Whiteford.
The
Jordanville Prayer Book
|
