Sunday, February 10, 2008

Followup to the Holy Water Debate

Gene Bridges has provided a rebuttal (link) to the response (which I addressed at item 2 here) to his previous comments hosted on his own blog. I don't know whether PhatCatholic will continue that dialog. Obviously, the official portion of the Holy Water Debate is complete, but that doesn't mean that we have to stop discussing the matter.



phatcatholic said...

I am aware of the posts by both you and Gene. I've been ill for the past week or so, so I haven't been able to type out a response as readily as you (or I) would have liked. I was starting to get sick when I posted my first response, and it only got worse after that.

The flu is all over my campus right now. One girl even died from it. So, this thing is no joke. I'm starting to feel better now, so I may try to put together a response. I anticipate it taking a while (particularly b/c of how much you wrote), so I might not have the energy for it. If that's the case, I'm fine with giving you the last word. The Catholic Church is true regardless of my proficiency in defending Her.

Just wanted to give you a heads-up.

Pax Christi,

Turretinfan said...

Thanks for the heads up, PC!

"The Catholic Church is true regardless of my proficiency in defending Her."

That's really the ultimate apologetic fallback. It is faith in mother church. There's no way to argue with that, because it is presuppositional. That is to say, it presupposes that the Catholic church is correct, and that consequently any weakness by her apologists is their personal weakness.

On the other hand, if you find yourself unable to defend her, perhaps you ought to consider whether that is because she is mistaken.

Just a thought.