Why I Don't Think "Alpha and Omega Ministries" Would Engage the Members of "Splendor of the Church" Ran By Abe Arganiosa in Any Formal Debate
I remember the time I had my slow transition from fundamentalist nutjob (like Jesus-is-Savior and Chick Publications) towards a more reformed view. Take note that I don't consider all fundamentalist Baptists to be nutjobs. I don't think all King James Version Only or KJV Only are belligerent like nutjob Steven Anderson of Faithful Word Baptist Church. One of the authors I started to embrace is James White of Alpha and Omega Ministries. White is a Reformed Baptist pastor and the author of many books such as "Sola Scriptura" and "The King James Only Controversy". I used to think debates are useless. The context of 1 Timothy 2:16 is to shun profane babblings - it doesn't mean that formal (and professional) discussion isn't allowed. A formal debate can be helpful in helping see the truth. White has had Catholic apologists in his show every now and then. One of them is Catholic apologist Trent Horn (who is part of Catholic Answers) whom he's had some formal debates with. However, one Roman Catholic organization from the Philippines he wouldn't want in his show would be from The Splendor of the Church ran by Abraham "Abe" Arganiosa, a Novus Ordo priest.
I remembered the time I used to actually try and refute the arguments of The Splendor of the Church. It was that time I was still into Chick Publications (and yes, Alberto Rivera turned out that he was a fraud and not a real former Jesuit priest), Conspiracy World by Texe Marrs, or even the notoriously nasty Jesus-is-Savior by David J. Stewart. I didn't easily believe Stewart was a sexual reprobate and that's why he was arrested in Guam prior to his release. Later on, I decided to simply focus on refuting false doctrine than keep arguing with them. The site is so full of unprofessional behavior. Some of the articles look like they were written by Catholic apologist wannabes than real Catholic apologists. The quality of articles by The Splendor of the Church is rather substandard in contrast to what Catholic Answers would give. They're really no better than the articles that Stewart writes in his fundamentalist mess of a site called Jesus-is-Savior.
Members of Splendor of the Church could brag that White wouldn't invite any of them out of fear. However, the real issue is White knows how to choose his battles. Why do you think Mitch Pacwa, a Jesuit priest, gets invited to a debate over their "hero" Arganiosa? Pacwa is very professional in how he defends the doctrines of faith of the Roman Catholic institution. The way Pacwa handles himself in debates with the late Walter Martin is very different than how Arganiosa does his job. Notice that White invites members of Catholic Answers or other professional Catholic apologist organizations. I admire how Pacwa as an unbeliever avoids doing personal attacks and sticks to the topic. That action alone shamed me with how I tend to argue out of the topic in order to win. Meanwhile, it seems Arganiosa loves to shoot red herrings such as the false accusation that Protestants hate Mary. Fortunately, his comrade Atty. Marwil N. Llasos exonerated born again Christians don't hate Mary. I feel ashamed to think that I've done so much unprofessional stuff before while Pacwa keeps his cool in many of the formal debates he's entered into.
Catholic apologist Taylor Marshall shows the five mistakes that Catholics make in defending their faith. I feel the members of Splendor of the Church doing most of them if not all of them. Too many of the writers look like that they're just too focused on being right than on what's right. Professional Catholic apologists are more focused on what they believe is right than being right. White is really in the right when he chooses to debate with members of Catholic Answers (which Horn is one of them) over the members of Splendor of the Church. That's why some people end up making a difference between a Catholic Faith Defender over a Catholic Fake Defender. A real Catholic faith defender would try to keep with Marshall's advice on what not to do in apologetics. A real Catholic faith defender would try to act as professionally as possible knowing they represent their organization. A fake Catholic faith defender could care less and act like they don't have any care about the reputation of their Roman Catholic faith.
This also serves as a reminder to myself in declaring the faith and the mistakes I made early on. Am I also making those five mistakes that Marshall warned about in Catholic apologetics? Just because Marshall is a Catholic doesn't mean he's wrong to address such behavior. Otherwise, it would be Ad Hominem or attacking the person instead of the discussion. I'd like to apologize for also making hasty generalizations towards Catholic apologists since some of them are humanly speaking, good citizens. Some of them are living decent lives and would shake their heads over the hypocrisies in their parishes. Some of them are doing their best to stay professional. It also makes me ask myself if I'm doing my best to stay professional in defending my faith. It makes me examine myself even further whether I could keep my cool, am I still engaged in childish or immature tactics, or am I really seeking to be professional. The question worth asking is if real Catholic apologists can be professional (and they're not saved) then how much more the children of God should be professional in defending their faith.
Soli Deo Gloria!