Ignorance may be bliss but wilfull [sic] misrepresentation is virtually orgasmic. White does not over document. He cobbles together misleading combinations of citations from popular Catholic religious works and pawns them off as Magisterial statements. He also is incapable of distinguishing the devotional from the doctrinal and what is permissible from what is defined Chruch [sic] teaching. And his presupposition is always that his wown [sic] interpretation and beliefs are normative while those of the Catholic Church are questionable.
Patrick, believe whatever you want. You have free will. If you hate the Catholic Church and us who are members of it, then you have chosen to do so for your own reasons. But don’t come here expecting us to take an ignorant bigot like White seriously. He is too cxowardly [sic] to face me in open debate on the very doctrine upon which the prot fraud stands or falls. Why? Because he knows I will demolish him. I already have and I would do it again if he were man enough to face me.
Let’s ponder another example of Art Sippo’s world. If my works are filled with “misleading combinations of citations from popular Catholic religious works” that I then pawn off as “Magisterial statements” it would be real easy to prove this, yes? Will Sippo do so? Of course not! He can’t. And if someone had the guts to challenge him to provide a single example, he’d simply bluster about their being hate filled prots and move on from there.
Now, let’s remember the truth here: Sippo will not debate me on the Papacy. Sippo will not debate me on purgatory. Sippo will not debate me on the Mass. Sippo will not debate me on the Marian dogmas. Sippo will not debate me on anything but one topic: he wants to reprise his outrageous behavior in Toledo Ohio on the subject of justification. He will not debate in writing, either. He is dodging challenge after challenge, but, in his little kingdom, his servants are not informed of this reality.
So, I confess, I have tired of this man’s constant outrageous behavior and the utter hypocrisy of his compatriots in allowing him a platform for it. So, since Art Sippo thinks the New Perspective on Paul is his “ace,” and suffers under the delusion that NPism aids him in his position, how about this: I am already scheduled to present a seminar on New Perspectivism in St. Louis (Sippo lives in the area) the first weekend in December. I have already contacted the church where I will be speaking and they are willing to assist in this endeavor. I challenge Art Sippo, M.D., to debate the following proposition at the Covenant of Grace Church in St. Charles on December 1:
“Resolved: We are initially justified before God by baptism, our justification is increased by doing good works; and subsequently, should the grace of justification be lost, we are again justified through the sacrament of penance.”
This is the very position of Roman theology, enshrined in her dogmatic teachings. So, Dr. Sippo, I’m coming to your area, to your own back yard. You don’t have to travel. You don’t have to pack a single bag. You will not debate me on every single one of the topics your compatriots have been willing to tackle: here is your one subject, justification, and I will even allow you the positive position and the first word. How about it, Dr. Sippo? I await your response.