Pomposity, Pettiness, Pride, and Projection
Below, I will document that this supposed intransigence regarding ever admitting that I was wrong is a lie, which is super-easy to do with the search engine on my blog. It’s good to do because this is one of the lies about me that I hear frequently from those predisposed to despise me, and I’ve had enough of it. Facts are facts. And lies are lies. It’s easy as pie for someone to throw out ludicrous accusations about someone, without anywhere near sufficient documentation about the alleged severe character fault. And as I have explained, this harms my apostolate and my name and reputation: all of which I will defend against scurrilous lies.
*****
My Odyssey from Evangelicalism to Catholicism [title] (9 December 1990 / revised: July 1992 / expanded: 1993)
Martin Luther: Beyond Mythology to Historical Fact [14 January 1991; was once posted as an online paper, but eventually taken down, as I learned more and more about Luther and honed or revised several of my opinions; . . .]
I apologize upfront for any excess of language or undue judgment or rashness. (8-22-00)
I have, therefore, modified my opinion of the strength of this proof text for the eternal existence of Jesus. (11-3-03)
Note: this was written in 1992. I’ve learned tons of things about Martin Luther since that time; even in just the last few years, as I continue to do further research and reading. In several cases, I have changed my opinion on particular elements of his beliefs and behavior. Thus, I wouldn’t express several things in this article the way I did then, and I’ve discovered one definite inaccuracy; see the next note below. I have kept this article online, listed on my “Resume” because it was my first published article. But I don’t list it on my Luther web page, due to its outdated nature and relative lack of documentation. At the time I wrote it (before I was even online), I didn’t have nearly the resources available to me that I now have. (5-27-04)
One may indeed question the criteria by which “denomination” was defined. This ultimately led to my own skeptical position, and caused me to change my opinion only a short while after I wrote my paper, upon further reflection (and to remove the paper from my website). Strangely enough, one person who helped convince me to change my mind was the anti-Catholic Eric Svendsen (who despises my work and thinks little of me even on a personal level). But I don’t care where truth comes from: truth is truth. Eric made a good argument, that I found compelling. (9-4-04)
My first paper on Luther dates from 1991. Needless to say, I have learned a great deal about Luther since that time (anyone can see how much I have written about him, including now two books [one / two]) and have refined many of my opinions, as I learned more and more. Swan knows this full well. He knows that I systematically purged virtually all references to O’Hare’s citations from my papers way back in 2002 (because he noted it in a post from 10 October 2006; the original version mentioned my name; the present one doesn’t, but still cites my words).
But Swan loves to keep citing my old papers, knowing that I have modified many opinions in them. I continue to develop my beliefs about Luther on an ongoing basis, and remove old stuff; he keeps bringing it back, without noting (apart from a very rare and reluctant “nod” like the above paper) that I have changed my mind. This is unethical: pure and simple. (8-27-11)
Sometimes I will change my opinion, if I think the facts warrant it. People have to accept (or “take”) me as I am. I call things as I see ’em. I have opinions and sometimes I change my mind (I did recently, for example, [see link] regarding my discontinuance of the term, radtrad: which had some serious problems in usage and reception). (8-12-13)
Waterboarding: How and Why I Changed My Mind [title] (1-31-15; rev. 1-17-19)
I expressed my opinion that Amoris Laetitia was sufficiently clarified already (11-16-16). Then I modified my view somewhat (though not essentially), in terms of thinking that further clarification from the pope (in reply to the dubia from the four cardinals) would be helpful and indeed is necessary in our present “confused” circumstances (12-1-16).
Capital Punishment: I’ve Changed My Mind [title] (12-4-17)
Review of Keating’s “Francis Feud” Removed, w Apology [title] (12-24-18)
In fact, on reflection, I have decided that the overall argument I made there is too weak for me to continue to have the paper on my blog, so I have removed it. (2-23-19)
I modified my view of Luther’s view of the Immaculate Conception, which he changed later on in life. I call his position “immaculate purification,” because he no longer placed it at her conception. I changed my mind [on 10-2-10] in part because of some arguments produced by anti-Catholics. Truth is truth, wherever it is found. (5-9-20)
I apologized for that and removed it from Amazon (even though your book mentioned me 99 times and you didn’t bother to let me know before publication), . . . (12-4-20)
If you want to talk about individual examples of where you think you saw this behavior in me, I’d be more than happy to explain why I reacted as I did, and why; and will apologize, retract and modify or remove materials if necessary, just as I apologized to WCB within the last half hour. . . . Now it’s true that I sort of lumped you in with a general atheist ignorance of theology. I did that because I see this sort of thing all the time and it’s ultra-frustrating. But it was nothing personal, and to the extent that I over-generalized or broad-brushed you, I apologize. It’s unfair to make you the epitome of atheist undereducation about Christian theology. (12-21-20)
I apologized for an unfortunate title of my first reply, and changed it. I also changed words in the first paragraph. . . . Fair point about your not saying I “deliberately” did so. I think I characterized it that way once or twice, and I will remove that word. Thanks, and my apologies for that. . . . I made a mistake. I already apologized. . . . I’ve apologized for it, changed the words, and clarified. (6-4-21)
I will apologize and retract if you show me where I have attacked you personally. Here, I apologize for using the phrase “intellectual dishonesty.” I must have been overly frustrated. I don’t believe this about you. (6-17-21)
Audrey Assad’s Journey: Apology & Retraction [title] (10-2-21)
I have removed all of my original post after the above introductory citation because my basic explanation (speculative!, but in retrospect too much so) for why she left the faith was a lack of apologetics reading. She has clarified that she has read quite a bit of that. Fair enough. I was wrong in that respect. I apologize for any offense. (10-2-21)
***
Photo credit: eric niu (3-31-06) [Flickr / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 license]
***
Summary: Sanctimonious self-appointed judges sometimes claim that I rarely ever admit I’m wrong about anything and need to relentlessly be correct. Nonsense, as I prove.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In