Alpha & Omega Ministries Apologetics Blog
The White Man's Burden...AGAIN?
05/18/2009 - James WhiteI'll admit, I'm dumbfounded. I have often said that Rome's primary American apologists live in a land, far far away from reality. They simply do not care what their most serious critics provide in the way of rebuttal. Once they have produced an argument, they will repeat it, no matter how often it is refuted, shredded, and otherwise turned into apologetic confetti.
Patrick Madrid has suffered some very serious apologetic black eyes over the years. Yet, he seems proud of having produced some of the clearest examples of the "as long as it serves Mother Rome, I'll publish it" pieces of anyone I know. One would think that having produced material that resulted in such thorough and embarrassing refutation would result in someone hoping the evidence of their errors would just disappear with time. But for Madrid, the worse it was, the more he seems to want to promote it!
A few months ago we went through both debates I have done with Patrick Madrid point by point demonstrating the circularity and errors of both of his presentations. Of course, he can trust that most of his audience will never look very closely at the facts, but again, that just illustrates the difference between defending the truth as an apologist and defending a man-made system.
But Madrid was behind one of the most embarrassing published hit pieces I've ever seen put in print. Yet, he continues to promote the article despite the fact that any semi-unbiased person would be shocked at its impudence and dishonesty. If I had ever produced an entire article attacking someone based upon a footnote my conscience would not allow me to continue doing what I do. But, when you serve Mother Rome, evidently, it's OK.
Likewise, long ago Madrid wrote a hit-piece for This Rock seeking to do damage control after our first debate in San Diego. "The White Man's Burden" was a tremendous example of the character of apologetics practiced in defense of Rome. I thoroughly and completed reviewed and refuted the article here. Now, please realize, Madrid has never responded to what I wrote. He has had the opportunity for well over a decade. But given the very surface level character of his published works, I truly do not believe he can, in fact, provide any kind of further depth than the standard argumentation he has presented since his days with Catholic Answers.
So imagine my amazement to see Madrid's current blog entry, here. Patrick often posts old Envoy articles, or in this case, a This Rock article, even when those articles have, since that time, been refuted. But you see, he knows that only a very small percentage of his readers would ever be in danger of actually considering the other side, so, hey, it works. And just there you have the heart of what separates Christian apologetics from...everything else. You see, truth is not a pragmatic thing. It is not a matter of, "Well, that works." There are all sorts of bad arguments that "work" for this group or that. The Christian---at least, the consistent one---can't use such arguments. The enemies of the faith can take the low road, the easy road, all the time. As long as "it works," it's good. But that kind of path is not open for those who seek to follow the One who called Himself the truth.
I think I know why that article appeared on Madrid's blog: we have not been shy about putting the spotlight on Patrick's problems with his followers, and especially with the always embarrassing Art Sippo. Patrick has never been able to control Sippo. Even in Toledo during our debate he allowed Art to get away with all sorts of antics. Then again, I don't believe Patrick would ever call down a Roman Catholic (which is why I'd never let him moderate a debate again), just as he allowed Gerry Matatics to meander about in our first debate without even mentioning the topic of the debate until 14 minutes into his 20 minute opening statement. (I note with some irony that the video of that first debate has never seen the light of day, either; it, like the first two debates with Mitch Pacwa, remains locked in the darkness of Scott Butler's video vault. May I once again encourage Mr. Butler to "do the right thing" and release those videos?). But in any case, I think he dug this old dud out of the closet just because he really doesn't have anything else to do in response to the exposure of the antics on his "Speak Our Mind" web board. I could be wrong---wouldn't be the first time---but I sorta doubt it.