# Catholic Controversy



## Scott (Jun 23, 2004)

Has anyone read this:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...2/ref=cm_lm_asin/103-3965725-5643832?v=glance

I would be interested to see interaction with it, whether from the Reformation period or otherwise.

Thanks


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Jun 23, 2004)

It looks rather interesting. I knew that some people returned to Rome under threats but most of them joined the Jahnsenists from what I understood. Looks like an interesting read.


----------



## DTK (Jun 26, 2004)

Yes, I've read St. Francis de Sales, The Catholic Controversy (Rockford: Tan, 1989).

Cheers,
DTK


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jun 26, 2004)

David,
What happened to your signature line??? Board requirements. Please attach sig.

Thanks,
SPB


----------



## DTK (Jun 26, 2004)

Well, I can't say that I really know what happened to my signature line, and by some stroke of ignorance broke the board requirements. I offer my apologies.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jun 26, 2004)

Small thing Pastor. Don't waste another second worrying yourself.

Glad you're here by the way!


----------



## fredtgreco (Jun 26, 2004)

Well I am concerned! If David's signature wasn't there, we would not have that GREAT quote from Owen.

Another one for my file! Thanks David. Have a great Lord's Day.


----------



## Scott (Jun 28, 2004)

I found some of the de Sales pamphlets online. Here is a set:

http://www.angelfire.com/ms/seanie/fds/fds_church0.html

There are others here:

http://www.angelfire.com/ms/seanie/

Just do a find for &quot;francis&quot; on the page.

They are interesting. Is this the guy that Scott Hahn chose as his patron saint? I recall it was somebody responsible for restoring many ex-Protestants to the Catholic Church.

Scott


----------



## Scott (Jun 28, 2004)

David:

What were your thoughts on the de Sales? 

Scott


----------



## Scott (Jun 28, 2004)

This one is interesting:

http://www.angelfire.com/ms/seanie/fds/fds_church1.html

I think the argument would succeed against a radically individual view of sola scriptura (so-called Tradition 0), which is the majority position in the evangelical world. I don't think the arguments would succeed against a view taken by the Westminster Confession, which acknowledges secondary authorities (such as the Confession itself), the power and authority of councils, substantial ministerial authority and the like.

Scott


----------



## DTK (Jun 29, 2004)

*Re: de Sales*

Hi Scott,

[quote:3fd7d338be] David: What were your thoughts on the de Sales? [/quote:3fd7d338be]

Scott, I found the material in this book to be shallow and weak in argumentation, and what we see reproduced almost verbatim in modern day Roman apologists. The book itself is really purported to be a compilation of pamphlets &quot;which he posted on walls and slipped under doors,&quot; and which by this method it is claimed that at the end of four years he had been the instrument of some 72,000 people returning back to Rome. That claim in itself is shockingly fraught with the substance of which fairy tales are born.

I would encourage you to buy a second hand copy of this book, if for no other reason, to see that Roman apologetics today have not advanced beyond the level of this kind of argumentation. Keith Mathison's work on this subject is very helpful. Others have addressed such arguments as de Sales advances, http://www.christiantruth.com/books.html But then, I must confess that my opinion is not altogether unbiased.

Blessings,
DTK


----------



## Scott (Jun 29, 2004)

Thanks. BTW, I love Mathison's book on Sola Scriptura.


----------

