Sunday, December 06, 2009

Why James White is not a REAL preacher or teacher

“Mr Swan, why do you think that God called Dr White to preach, teach and shepherd a flock? It is self evident that Dr. White meets none of the requirements of a preacher, teacher or shepherd. Those would be: 1. Valid apostolic succession. Read Sacred Scripture (Matt. 10:1,40)…”

That’s a good place to stop. So what does Mt 10:1,40 actually say?

“He called his twelve disciples to him and gave them authority to drive out evil spirits and to heal every disease and sickness…"He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives the one who sent me’.”

Let’s apply that test to validate (or invalidate) the Catholic clergy. A Catholic priest (or bishop or pope) is in valid apostolic succession in case he can go to a hospice and cure every terminal patient, or go into the local ER and heal every trauma patient.

As a fringe benefit, that would also solve the so-called healthcare crisis.


  1. James White is a horrible teacher/preacher but I agree that the Catholic "I'm a priest" isn't the best argument to show that fact.

    A better approach would be to point out James White's deliberate dishonesty and wholly unloving attitude towards his brethren (which includes not a few Roman Catholics).

  2. I thought Matthew did an excellent job of showing that James White could not be considered a Roman Catholic priest.

  3. I've only come across one kind of man that describes Dr. White as dishonest...and that's a dishonest man.

    For the dishonest, it's difficult to believe anyone can be as lucid, exact, well-read, scholarly (without the pomp) and have it not be the result of dishonesty...tells you nothing about Dr. White, but gives you a glimpse of what the heart of academia is.

  4. Wes:

    What would be one example of Dr. White not just being inaccurate, but being (in your words) deliberately dishonest toward Roman Catholics.

    Just one example of deliberate dishonesty, please. I mean, if you want to give more, by all means do.

    The reason I ask is that I see these same sorts of slanderous assertions from folks who have something personal against Dr. White, and they are never able to back it up.

    In fact, Dr. White gave you time on his program to try to substantiate your ridiculous charges against him, and you blew it.

    Folks who want evidence can check out the dialog (link to blog entry of the conversation - link to mp3 of the program)

    In any event, this should provide folks with a context for why you slandering Dr. White on the Internet.



    "A better approach would be to point out James White's deliberate dishonesty and wholly unloving attitude towards his brethren (which includes not a few Roman Catholics)."

    TF already replied to the first allegation.

    Regarding the second:

    i) You hardly exhibit a loving attitude towards White. It would behoove you to emulate the virtues you urge on others.

    ii) In Scripture, there are different types of love. Loving the brethren isn't interchangeable with loving one's neighbor or loving one's enemy.

    White could love Roman Catholics without loving them as fellow-Christians.

    iii) You need to show how, by Biblical standards, a Catholic qua Catholic can offer a credible profession of faith.

  6. by the way:

    Scroll down to the second last entry.

  7. Ah, name calling (kill the messenger). The last resort for those whose arguments are without merit, historically or factually.

  8. For some reason, Wes has a personal vendetta against James White. Ironic for a guy who wraps himself in the mantle of love.

  9. OK, so James White doesn't qualify.

    But what about Patricia King, say?