A papistical syncretistic mariolatrous schismatic

***QUOTE***

1. Jonathan Prejean Says:
February 1st, 2006 at 1:12 pm

And by the way, these are the same folks who referred to Dr. Paul Owen as “Paul-the-papistical-syncretistic-mariolatrous-schismatic-Owen.” What could possibly be the point in wasting time on this nonsense? They have no argument, no reason, no facts, just assertion and rhetoric. People who aren’t even going to abide by a modicum of reason don’t deserve to have their delusions treated seriously.

***END-QUOTE***

Several corrections are in order:

1.“Paul-the-papistical-syncretistic-mariolatrous-schismatic-Owen,” is my coinage. Everyone is more than welcome to adopt my coinage, but if Prejean wishes to find fault, he should go to the source.

2.Prejean says that we “have no argument, no reason, no facts, just assertion and rhetoric."

There are only two little problems with this accusation:

i) Anyone who bothers to study the many essays on Paul Owen posted over at Triablogue will find plenty of facts and reasons marshaled against him.

So Prejean either speaks in studied ignorance of the public record, or else he speaks with a forked tongue.

ii) In the very course of saying that we “have no argument, no reason, no facts, just assertion and rhetoric,” Prejean, himself, offers no argument, no reason, no facts to back up his allegation, but only assertion and rhetoric.

3.In what respect is my characterization of Owen nonsense?

i) Why would a Roman Catholic like Prejean take exception to my statement that Owen is a schismatic? Does Owen’s breakaway sect have any serious purchase on apostolic succession?

ii) Owen says that Protestants are still under the Pope. Indeed, he even says the primacy of the Bishop of Rome is a “fundamental doctrine.” I say that makes him a papist.

In (i)-(ii) I’m not offering a value-judgment, just a statement of fact. I’m not saying schism is good or bad. I’m not saying the papacy is good or bad.

I’m merely describing Owen’s own affiliations, or lack thereof.

iii) Is Owen a syncretist? Well, to take just one example, he recently said that Muslims adore the true God. I call that syncretism.

iv) As to the charge of Mariolatry, Owen belongs to an Anglo-Catholic sect. One of the distinguishing features of Anglo-Catholicism is its Catholic Mariology.

Now, as late as last year, Owen identified himself as a “convinced Presbyterian,” and quoted very liberally from the Westminster Confession. But by Puritan and Old School Presbyterian standards, Owen is now a Mariolater.

Indeed, you could argue that he’s a Mariolater by classic Anglican criteria as well. There’s a reason the Tractarians were so controversial in their day and age.