Author Archive for: DrOakley

   When I checked on the link I have used a number of times recently for my Nicea article in the CRI Journal of July/August, 1997, I discovered it had gone dead. So I contacted CRI, and they contacted their webfolks who are busy migrating their website to a new format. They jumped my article to the head of the line

   A few days ago I began presenting clips from the cross-examination section of the sola scriptura debate from 1997 on Long Island. I did so because Phil Porvaznik, a Roman Catholic apologist of sorts, has posted, on the site I believe is maintained by Apolonio Latar, an 18 second clip which he calls my “concession of defeat.” That anyone would

   “Crimson Catholic,” Jonathan Prejean, has actually attempted to offer an excuse for Hugh Barbour’s refusal in the Envoy article to either name me directly, or even provide meaningful bibliographical references (i.e., so that his readers can do something more than just “trust him” and check things out for themselves). Now, let’s remember that Barbour wrote his article in response to

A few days ago I played a clip of my cross-examination of Gary Michuta on the issue of the canon of Scripture. I had noted that Gary had commented elsewhere that he felt “embarrassed” for me at this point in our debate. I personally think the cross-examination went very well, and exposed some very weak replies. In any case, Michuta

   This clip from the veneration of saints and angels debate with Patrick Madrid starts out with a humorous incident. I am answering a question from Madrid when the moderator, Bill Shishko, who is sitting behind Patrick, bangs his gavel to mark the end of the time. Patrick almost jumped out of his skin. It got a good chuckle out of

The responses we have been receiving from posting video clips have been truly amazing. Most folks really enjoy them. Those on “the other side” do not. Recently I noted the words of Gary Michuta over at the Catholic Answers Forums. I did a little search yesterday, and ran across a fascinating thread here. I do find it intriguing to see

   Sometimes you are tempted to feel sorry for those stuck trying to defend the concept of the infallibility of the Church of Rome. You have to slay your mind upon the Altar of a Thousand Qualifications on a regular basis. We saw this with Gary Michuta telling us that when it comes to whether certain Scriptures are inspired and canonical,

   As most of you know, I have recently gained the knowledge and ability to capture and post video. With very few exceptions, folks have really enjoyed the clips. They do take a while to record, upload, etc., but they seem to be worth the effort.    As a result, I have been seeing some debates on tape or DVD for the

I have done five debates with Mitch Pacwa over the years (starting in January, 1991–those two debates were video recorded, and I’d love to show you clips, but the Roman Catholic side–not Mitch Pacwa personally–have the tapes and have never made them available). Each one has been very useful, respectful, and focused, unlike…the Sungenis debate on the Mass. Here is

DVD available here (#583)

   I truly love how fair and unbiased folks can be. An announcement has been made regarding the upcoming debate between Eric Svendsen and Mitch Pacwa. I happened to run across this post from Art Sippo: Svendsen has already lost the debate. Sola Scriptura is pure Pelagianism. It reduces religious authority to mere human opinion. Sola Ecclesia Romana means that we

DVD available here (#583)

DVD available here (#583)