Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Retroactive first-strike

“But then, we have seen (in what I documented) that you freely questioned Catholic teachings about the nature of the Godhead, even while being a Catholic. So I seriously question whether you ever gave up private judgment totally, at any time.”

Catholics love to trumpet conversions from Evangelicalism to Catholicism. But, of course, that cuts both ways. So it puts them in a bit of the bind when a Catholic deconverts from Catholicism.

For example, David Waltz recently defected from Roman Catholicism. And this is more conspicuous since he had been a Catholic epologist.

So this creates a dilemma for some other Catholic epologists. Back when he was a loyal comrade, bashing evangelicalism in general and Calvinism in particular, he was a valued member of the brigade.

But when he defects, he then poses a threat. So Dave Armstrong tries to contain the damage by staging a preemptive strike. However, Armstrong’s tactic labors under the handicap of relative chronology, since his “preemptive strike” is ex post facto.

He therefore tries to sidestep the anachronism by backdating his preemptive strike. As it turns out, Waltz was never “really” a good Catholic. He was always a closet Protestant or Arian or whatever. A ticking timebomb just waiting to go off.

Of course, this would be a tad more convincing if Armstrong had made this discovery before Waltz flew the coop. As long as Waltz was a stalwart defender of Rome, his Catholic credentials were impeccable. But once he defected, Armstrong suddenly uncovers a hitherto unsuspected fault-line in the foundation of his erstwhile Catholicism.

If I didn’t know better, I’d almost think the timing of Armstrong’s revelation is a little too convenient to be credible.


  1. If I didn’t know better, I’d almost think the timing of Armstrong’s revelation is a little too convenient to be credible.

    Well, you've always been a bit slow at catching on to these things Steve. ;-)

  2. Is there a link that you can provide us whereby David Waltz explains his journey away from Rome?

    Sort of like Francis Beckwith's explanation of why he swam the Tiber, but only in reverse.

  3. It's this posting and the following several posts:

  4. Thanks John.

    It's not the earthquake event that Francis Beckwith's re-conversion to Rome was, but it's still quite notable nonetheless.

    Incidentally, as I was browsing David Waltz's blogsite, I quick-scanned his post that quoted from Charles Hodge, a well-respected Reform figure, who considers the RCC to be a true Christian church. It was quite an interesting read.

    And since I'm a proponent of the Manhattan Declaration which argues for co-belligerency between Protestants and Catholics on issues such as the sanctity of life, biblical marriage, and religious liberty, I appreciate Charles Hodge's arguments.

    Thanks again, John.

  5. According to DA, David Waltz was never "really" Catholic. Does that also mean that Protestants that convert to Catholicism were never "really" Protestants?

  6. Did Mr. Waltz leave Catholicism for Eastern Orthodoxy or for Protestantism?

    And I also thought of EA's comment too. If he's going to apply that line of reasoning to David Waltz, then it's just as applicable to Tiber-swimmers such as the Called to Communion guys.

    BTW, Charles Hodge was quite the theologian according to Wikipedia.

  7. Hi John,

    That post where David Waltz announces that he's leaving Catholicism is titled:

    "A solemn announcement (but, with no thanks to Hays, Kepha, TurretinFan, White, et al.)"

    In my two-cents opinion, God probably used Steve Hays, Turretin Fan, and James White as His instruments to show how Catholicism does not have the fullness of faith.

    If it were me, I'd be (eventually) thankful for God's chosen instruments.