must<\/em> be) so think that to go beyond the line of English common sense, (e.g. to continue my instance to prove the doctrine of the Holy Trinity as St Augustine does by the memory, intellect, and will) would be a great mistake in a Magazine. (v. 21; To Henry James Coleridge, 16 June 1865)<\/p>\nThe first duty of charity is to try to enter into the mind and feelings of others. This is what I love so much in you, my dear Keble; but I much desiderate it in this new book of Pusey\u2019s \u2013 and I deplore the absence of it there . . . (v. 22; To John Keble, 8 Oct. 1865)<\/p>\n
Objections are for the most part like blots or disfigurements on a picture; we understand that the picture represents a definite scene, and what that scene is, in spite of such drawbacks. (v. 25; To an Unknown Correspondent, 19 June 1870)<\/p>\n
Every one has his own difficulties and his own way of solving them. Others can but give him suggestions from time to time, and on particular points. (v. 25; To William Dunn Gainsford, 10 Nov. 1870)<\/p>\n
It is simply impossible I can to any good purpose answer your difficulties, unless we agree in principles . . . (v. 26; To Henry Tenlon, 23 March 1873)<\/p>\n
My view has ever been to answer, not to suppress, what is erroneous \u2013 merely as a matter of expedience for the cause of truth, at least at this day. It seems to me a bad policy to suppress. Truth has a power of its own, which makes its way \u2013 it is stronger than error \u2013 according to the Proverb. (v. 26; To W. J. Copeland, 20 April 1873)<\/p>\n
Is Apologetics Only for Non-Catholics or Non-Christians?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n[T]here are two reasons for writing quite distinct from conversion, and, considering all things, I prefer them to any other reason \u2013 the one is to edify Catholics. Catholics are so often raw<\/em>. Many do not know their religion \u2013 many do not know the reasons for it. And there is in a day like this, a vast deal of semi-doubting. There are those who only wish to convert, and then leave the poor converts to shift for themselves, as far as knowledge of their religion<\/em> goes. The other end which is so important, is what I call levelling up. If we are to convert souls savingly they must have the due preparation of heart, and if England is to be converted, there must be a great move of the national mind to a better sort of religious sentiment. (v. 25; To Sister Mary Gabriel du Boulay, 2 Jan. 1870)<\/p>\nShould Laymen Have a Working Knowledge of Apologetics?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nIt is to be considered, that our students are to go out into the world, and a world not of professed Catholics, but of inveterate, often bitter, commonly contemptuous Protestants; nay, of Protestants who, so far as they come from Protestant Universities and public schools, do know their own system, do know, in proportion to their general attainments, the doctrines and arguments of Protestantism. I should desire, then, to encourage in our students an intelligent apprehension of the relations, as I may call them, between the Church and society at large; for instance, the difference between the Church and a religious sect; between the Church and civil power; what the Church claims of necessity, what it cannot dispense with, what it can; what it can grant, what it cannot. A Catholic hears the celibacy of the clergy discussed; is that usage of faith, or is it not of faith? He hears the Pope accused of interfering with the prerogatives of her Majesty, because he appoints an hierarchy. What is he to answer? What principle is to guide him in the remarks which he cannot escape from the necessity of making? He fills a station of importance, and he is addressed by some friend who has political reasons for wishing to know what is the difference between Canon and Civil Law, whether the Council of Trent has been received in France, whether a priest cannot in certain cases absolve prospectively, what is meant by his intention<\/em>, what by the opus operatum<\/em>; whether, and in what sense, we consider Protestants to be heretics; whether any one can be saved without sacramental confession; whether we deny the reality of natural virtue, and what worth we assign to it. Questions may be multiplied without limit, which occur in conversation between friends in social intercourse, or in the business of life, where no argument is needed, no subtle and delicate disquisition, but a few direct words stating the fact. Half the controversies which go on in the world arise from ignorance of the facts of the case; half the prejudices against Catholicity lie in the misinformation of the prejudiced parties. Candid persons are set right, and enemies silenced, by the mere statement of what it is that we believe. It will not answer the purpose for a Catholic to say, \u201cI leave it to theologians,\u201d \u201cI will ask my priest;\u201d but it will commonly give him a triumph, as easy as it is complete, if he can then and there lay down the law. I say, \u201clay down the law;\u201d for remarkable it is, that even those who speak against Catholicism like to hear about it, and will excuse its advocate from alleging arguments, if he can gratify their curiosity by giving them information. Generally speaking, however, as I have said, such mere information will really be an argument also. I recollect some twenty-five years ago three friends of my own, as they then were, clergymen of the Establishment, making a tour through Ireland. In the West or South they had occasion to become pedestrians for the day; and they took a boy of thirteen to be their guide. They amused themselves with putting questions to him on the subject of his religion; and one of them confessed to me on his return that that poor child put them all to silence. How? Not of course by any train of argument or refined theological disquisition, but merely by knowing and understanding the answers in his catechism. Nor will argument itself be out of place in the hands of laymen mixing with the world. As secular power, honour, and resources are never more suitably placed than when they are in the hands of Catholics; so secular knowledge and secular gifts are then best employed when they minister to Divine Revelation. Theologians inculcate the matter and determine the details of that revelation; they view it from within; philosophers view it from without; and this external view may be called the Philosophy of Religion, and the office of delineating it externally is most gracefully performed by laymen. In the first age laymen were most commonly the apologists. Such were Justin, Tatian, Athenagoras, Aristides, Hermias [sic], Minucius Felix, Arnobius, and Lactantius. In like manner, in this age some of the most prominent defences of the Church are from laymen; as De Maistre, Chateaubriand, Nicolas, Montalembert, and others. If laymen may write, lay-students may read; they surely may read what their fathers may have written. They might surely study other works too, ancient and modern, whether by ecclesiastics or laymen, . . . (v. 19; \u201cLay Students in Theology,\u201d The Rambler<\/em>, May 1859)\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\nHow is Faith Related to Apologetic Inquiry?<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nThe advantage of subscription (to my mind) is its witnessing to the principle that religion is to be approached with a submission of the understanding. Nothing is so common, as you must know, as for young men to approach serious subjects, as judges \u2013 to study them, as mere sciences. Aristotle and Butler are treated as teachers of a<\/em> system, not as if there was more truth in them than in Jeremy Bentham. The study of the Evidences now popular (such as Paley\u2019s) encourages this evil frame of mind \u2013 the learner is supposed external<\/em> to the system \u2013 our Lord is \u2019a young Galilean peasant\u2019 \u2013 His Apostles, \u2019honest men, trustworthy witnesses\u2019 and the like. . . . In all these cases the student is supposed to look upon the system from without, and to have to choose it by an act of reason before he submits to it \u2013 whereas the great lesson of the Gospel is faith, an obeying prior to reason, and proving<\/em> its reasonableness by making experiment of it \u2013 a casting of heart and mind into the system, and investigating the truth by practice. (v. 5; To Arthur Philip Perceval, 11 Jan. 1836)<\/p>\nNo truth, no conclusion about what is true, is without its difficulties. You must give up faith, if you will not believe till all objections are first solved. (v. 10; To an Unknown Correspondent, August [?] 1845)<\/p>\n
As to the divine foundation of the certitude of faith being not historical but from the grace of God, this is quite true, but irrelevant. It only means you cannot make an act of faith by your own strength, and that, when you make a saving act of faith, you believe in God<\/em>, not in man, though you come <\/em>to believe in Him through<\/em> history, through<\/em> argument. Private judgment must<\/em> be your guide, till<\/em> you are in the Church. You do not begin with faith, but with reason, and you end<\/em> with faith. How are you to get into the way of faith, but by history or some other equivalent method of inquiry? You must<\/em> have some ground<\/em> of becoming a Catholic, . . . (v. 24; To Mrs. Helbert, 10 Sep. 1869)<\/p>\nIf there is any definite question that I can answer you, I will do so \u2013 but I can\u2019t give the gift of faith. (v. 25; To Mrs. Wilson, 8 Jan. 1870)<\/p>\n
How is Grace Related to Apologetics and Rational Argument?<\/em><\/span>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\nGrace alone surely can guide our argumentative power into truth, and grace is not attained in such anxious and difficult enquiries as those which are in question between us without fasting and prayer. (v. 7; To W. C. A. MacLaurin, 8 and 16 Oct. 1840)<\/p>\n
I would gladly help you in your difficulties of faith, if I could \u2013 but, as you know well, you must wait upon God, and He will hear you and not forsake you. If you ask Him to teach you the truth, He will do so, slowly perhaps, but surely. (v. 25; To S. S. Shiel, 25 Jan. 1870)\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\nIs Logical Demonstration All There is to Apologetics?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nYou say that \u2019the dry external argument is inadequate as a demonstration of Christianity\u2019 etc I most entirely agree with you, . . .\u00a0 I have been for some years preaching University Sermons, as I have had opportunity, on this one subject, that men judge in religion, and are meant to judge by antecedent probability much more than by external evidences, and that their view of antecedent probability depends upon their particular state of mind) I consider with you that \u2019the alleged historical proof of miracles is unsatisfactory\u2019, separate from the knowledge of the moral character of the doctrine. (v. 7; To [brother] Francis W. Newman, 10 Nov. 1840)<\/p>\n
How Are Faith and Reason Related?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nThe Catholic doctrine concerning Faith and Reason is this \u2013 that Reason proves that Catholicism ought<\/em> to be believed, and that in that form it comes before the Will, which accepts it or rejects it, as moved by grace or not. Reason does not prove that Catholicism\u2019 is true<\/em>, as it proves mathematical propositions are true; but it proves that there is a case<\/em> for it so strong that we see we ought to accept it. There may be many difficulties, which we cannot answer, but still we see on the whole that the grounds are sufficient for conviction. This is not the same thing as conviction. If conviction were unavoidable, we might be said to be forced<\/em> to believe, as we are forced to confess that two sides of a triangle are greater than the third; but, while there is enough evidence for conviction, whether we will<\/em> be convinced or not, rests with ourselves. (v. 31; To Catherine Ward, 12 Oct. 1848)<\/p>\nSurely, enough has been written \u2013 all the writing in the world would not destroy the necessity of faith \u2013 if all were made clear to reason, where would be the exercise of faith? The simple question is whether enough<\/em> has been done to reduce<\/em> the difficulties so far as to hinder them absolutely blocking up the way, or excluding those direct and large arguments on which the reasonableness of faith is built. (v. 14; To James Hope, 20 Nov. 1850)<\/p>\nTheology tells us that faith is more certain<\/em> than demonstration \u2013 this is a theological truth \u2013 it must<\/em> be true- but it is not deduced from experiment, from testimony, from feeling. A man<\/em>\u2019s consciousness does not attest it<\/em>. (v. 14; To J. Spencer Northcote, 25 March 1851)<\/p>\n[C]an a more fatal suicidal act be committed on the part of our controversialists, than to imply an opposition between reason and faith, or at least to encourage the notion that the intellect of the world is naturally and properly on the side of infidelity [?]. (v. 15; To Edward Healy Thompson, 7 Oct. 1853)<\/p>\n
God will be sure to prosper, guide, and reward so strong and pure a resolve. The self command you go on to speak about, by which the mind rules itself to believe, I consider in the highest degree meritorious, and sure of a reward \u2013 but I don\u2019t word<\/em> it as you do. It is not, that faith is an act of the will <\/em>\u2013 but the will obliges the reason<\/em> to believe. Nor is there a want of faith and of acts of faith in the reason<\/em>, in the case you put- but a languor of the imagination<\/em>. For I consider the \u2019realization\u2019 you speak of is to be as distinct from faith, as emotion is. It is a state of the imagination. (v. 18; To Catherine Anne Bathurst, 22 March 1858)<\/p>\n[T]here is scarce a subject in Theology which can be fully demonstrated to the conviction of the world, by reason, or by antiquity, or by Scripture \u2013 that most doctrines admit of proof up to a certain point \u2013 but that, whereas to receive them savingly, we must receive them on the authority of the Church, so for receiving them with certainty<\/em> we are thrown upon her enunciation, not on our own individual investigations and conclusions. After all our reasonings, something must be ever left to faith. (v. 20; To William Robert Brownlow, 16 Oct. 1863)<\/p>\n[Y]ou argue as follows: That which is a conclusion in reason cannot also be an object of faith; since then the being of a God is an object of faith, it is not a conclusion of the reason. Now here a great deal might be said, did my paper admit of it, on the difference between a conclusion and an object; but I will only say this, that the same truth may at once be proved by reason and held by faith. For instance, the truth of the Newtonian system is a conclusion in reason; yet by the mass of the community it is held, not as a conclusion which they have proved, but as a truth received on faith in scientific men, . . . Or, (what is more simple,) the fact that, contrary to the evidence of sight, the earth turns on its axis, some conclude on grounds of reason, most men only believe \u2019because every one says so, because men of science say so.\u2019 Nay, the very same person may hold the same fact at once upon faith and upon reason. 1. I may have satisfactorily proved to myself by pure reason that the nebular theory is true; and then, on turning to Scripture, may find that light was created before the sun. Here faith confirms reason, or I hold a fact first by reason, and then in addition by faith. 2. I may receive on faith that the whole human race descends from Adam, and at some future time may be able to prove it from philology, ethnology, geology, and archeology. Here reason confirms faith, or I hold a fact, first by faith, and then in addition by reason. 1. I do not cease to conclude because I believe. 2. I do not cease to believe because I conclude. (v. 21; To an Unknown Correspondent, 23 Sep. 1864)<\/p>\n
It is an odd sort of faith, which only believes what the reason understands, what the reason approves of. (v. 26; To Lady Chatterton, 13 June 1873)<\/p>\n
What I have written about Rationalism requires to be expanded. If you will let me be short and abrupt, I would contrast it with faith<\/em>. Faith cometh by hearing, by the Word of God<\/em>. Rationalists are those who are content with conclusions to which they have been brought by reason, but \u2019we are saved by faith,\u2019 and even in cases and persons where true conclusions can be arrived at those conclusions must be believed on the ground that \u2019God has spoken.\u2019 A man may be a true and exact theist and yet not have faith. What he lacks in order to faith is the grace of God, which is given in answer to prayer. (v. 31; To Richard A. Armstrong, 23 March 1887)<\/p>\nIs Apologetics the Same as Proselytyzing?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nI willingly talk to young men on Church subjects . . . they are most elevating and striking and therefore from their novelty most exciting subjects . . . and they will excite when preached just in proportion to the degree in which they have beforehand been neglected. . . . I never have tried to proselyte \u2013 but when persons are perplexed and come to me for information, then I am induced to write Lectures to meet that existing perplexity. (v. 6; To Thomas Henderson, 2 August 1838)<\/p>\n
I <\/em>did not make his state of mind: I found it. I <\/em>could not change it, even if I had been called to do so. I<\/em> did not intrude my advice upon him; he asked it. . . . It has never been my way . . . \u2019to make a proselyte to my communion.\u2019 But when a man comes to me and asks me plain questions, how can I answer it to God, if I conceal from him what I believe God has taught me? (v. 24; To James Skinner, 13 May 1868)<\/p>\nI can quite understand a man being in good faith a member of the Anglican Church \u2013 and I feel the greatest difficulty of attempting in that case to stir him from his position \u2013 for I might merely unsettle him, and lead him to give up the truth which he already has instead of embracing what is fuller truth. (v. 24; To H. A. Woodgate, 30 Dec. 1868)<\/p>\n
Is <\/em>\u201cControversy<\/em>\u201d in Apologetics a Good Thing?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nYou caught at that Lutheran\u2019s saying that Dr. W. [Nicholas Wiseman] was an unscrupulous controversialist. I dare say he is. But who is not? Is Jeremy Taylor, or Laud, or Stillingfleet? I declare I think it is as rare a thing, candour in controversy, as to be a Saint. (v. 8; To Frederic Rogers, 10 Jan. 1841)<\/p>\n
The one thing I feared and deprecated years ago, when we began the Tracts for the Times, was utter neglect of us on the part of the Church. I was not afraid of being misrepresented, censured or illtreated \u2013 and certainly hitherto it has done no harm. Every attack hitherto has turned to good, or at least is dying a natural death. But Controversy <\/em>does but delay the sure victory of truth by making people angry. When they find out they are wrong of themselves<\/em>, a generous feeling rises in their minds towards the persons and things they have abused and resisted. Much of this reaction has already taken place. Controversy too is a waste of time \u2013 one has other things to do. Truth can fight its own battle. It has a reality in it, which shivers to pieces swords of earth. As far as we are not on the side of truth, we<\/em> shall shiver to bits, and I am willing it should be so. (v. 8; To Robert Delaney, 25 Jan. 1841)<\/p>\nEveryone knows how commonly it happens in life, that you cannot <\/em>defend yourself without attacking your opponent, little as you wish to do so. One or other<\/em> must be bad<\/em>. Now this is emphatically the case in the controversy with Rome \u2013 either<\/em> the Holy See is tyrannical, or<\/em> Protestants are rebels. (v. 13; To Frederick A. Faber, 22 Nov. 1849)<\/p>\nI don\u2019t think I have written anything controversial for the last 14 years. Nor have I ever, as I think, replied to any controversial notice of what I have written. Certainly, I let pass without a word the various volumes which were written in answer to my Essay on Doctrinal Development, and that on the principle that truth defends itself, and falsehood refutes itself \u2013 and that, having said my say, time would decide for me, without any trouble, how far it was true, and how far not true. And I have quoted Crabbe\u2019s line as to my purpose, (though I can\u2019t quote correctly):-<\/p>\n
Leaving the case to Time, who solves all doubt,<\/p>\n
By bringing Truth, his glorious daughter, out.<\/p>\n
(v. 22; To Edward B. Pusey, 5 Sep. 1865)<\/p>\n
Should a Person Exercise Faith if Still Plagued by Difficulties?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nWhat Mrs H. [Houldsworth] requires is for one to write a book. Any one can ask questions and in no time, but it requires many words to answer any one of them. Some of her present questions she has asked me, and I have answered, already. You doubtless have answered others. She must<\/em> take something<\/em> on faith. The question is whether she has not enough evidence in order to make it her duty to put away questions she cannot answer to her satisfaction, as mere difficulties. If she inquired into the New Testament in the same minute way, she would not believe in the Bible \u2013 if into the proofs of a God, the bare existence of evil would hinder her from believing in Him. . . . Adverse arguments, must, when we have once made up our minds, be ignored entirely. If a jury find a man guilty, because ten credible witnesses have sworn against him, and one or two for him, they consider that the testimony of the ten annihilates that of the two.\u2019 This is a law of the human mind \u2013 that is, the will of God. I am sure that it is for her good that I thus insist. Till she understands that she cannot have a proof devoid of difficulties, she will believe nothing. . . . She has written to me herself within the last month \u2013 and told me that, at the end of the time which I appointed her, she found herself so confused by contrary arguments that she did not know where she stood. On this I said to her \u2013 \u2019Well then \u2013 put aside all arguments on both sides \u2013 don\u2019t read or think about them \u2013 don\u2019t talk with anyone \u2013 But for two months give yourself simply to prayer and communing with God \u2013 and then see where you are<\/em> at the end of the time \u2013\u2019 . . . (v. 25; To Catherine Froude, 24 July 1871)<\/p>\nShould we Avoid <\/em>Ad Hominem Attacks in Argument?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nI detested a certain peculiarity which he was apt to let his language run into, and that is, abuse<\/em> \u2013 and on this certainly I ever have had a very strong opinion. By \u2019abuse\u2019 I mean strong and violent expressions of opinion<\/em> on persons and things as distinct from the expression of facts<\/em>. I see nothing of this in his speeches in Parliament \u2013 they are measured<\/em> in language<\/em>, and profuse<\/em> in facts<\/em>; \u2013 the truest virtues in controversy and debate. (v. 15; To Mrs. William G. Ward, 17 March 1853)<\/p>\nAbuse is as great a mistake in controversy, as panegyric in biography. Of course a man must state strongly his opinion, but that is not personal vituperation. (v. 22; To Henry James Coleridge, 13 April 1866)<\/p>\n
What is the Reward of Apologetics?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n[O]f course it is a most welcome thing to be told that anything oneself has written has been made at all instrumental in impressing religious convictions on the mind of another . . . (v. 7; To Miss Mary Holmes, 29 May 1840)<\/p>\n
Should we Know People Before Trying to Persuade Them?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nI have a great dislike of controverting or the like with people I do not know. I do not think it answers. Very seldom have I been persuaded into the attempt \u2013 and never, I think, with success. I have hitherto succeeded in keeping people in our Church whose turn of mind, opinions etc I know \u2013 but I have failed whenever I have been asked to write to strangers. (v. 9; To Miss Mary Holmes, 24 March 1843)<\/p>\n
Does Proclaiming Theological Truth Offend Some People?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nIt is a very difficult thing to speak the truth without giving offence. . . . I think my greatest friendliness will be shown in speaking out what I think to be christian truth; with God\u2019s help I will ever do so, and I doubt not that, tho\u2019 I may be misunderstood and thought harsh for a while, yet in the end I shall get honor for my honesty even from those who differ from me. (v. 4; To Mr. Jubber, 19 July 1834)<\/p>\n
Are There Times When Trying to Argue with People is Futile?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nAs to Mr Askew\u2019s Letter, it is at once angry and pompous, and it would be very easy to demolish his whole structure \u2013 but I do not think it is worthwhile. There is no call on you to answer everyone who chooses to make free with you \u2013 and I do not suppose it would do any kind of good for anyone else to get into controversy with persons who have prejudged the matter, and who think every refutation of their opinions only serves to make those opinions more irrefragable and more engaging. (v. 14; To Viscount Feilding, 15 Nov. 1850)<\/p>\n
[I]t is hopeless for two men to talk when they more or less have different principles, or see the true [first principles] variously. (v. 15; To Robert Isaac Wilberforce, 27 Dec. 1853; Greek word used for the bracketed translation)<\/p>\n
Does the <\/em>\u201cArgument from Longing<\/em>\u201d Suggest that Heaven Exists?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nI am very regular in my riding, . . . It is so great a gain to throw off Oxford for a few hours so completely as one does in dining out, that it is almost sure to do me good. The country too is beautiful \u2013 the fresh leaves, the scents, the varied landscape. Yet I never felt so intensely the transitory nature of this world as when most delighted with these country scenes \u2013 and in riding out today I have been impressed, more powerfully than I had before an idea was possible, with the two lines \u2013 \u2018Chanting with a solemn<\/em> voice, mind us of our better choice.\u2019 I could hardly believe the lines were not my own and Keble had not taken them from me. I wish it were possible for words to put down those indefinite vague and withal subtle feelings which quite pierce the soul and make it sick. . . . What a veil and curtain this world of sense is! beautiful but still a veil . . . (v. 2; To [sister] Jemima Newman, 10 May 1828)<\/p>\nHow Can we Communicate Catholic Truths to Protestants?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nYou have shown that a case<\/em> may be made out for Catholics. You can\u2019t expect to prove the truth of their religion, much less to convert the Protestants of Stafford by a letter, or twenty letters, in a Newspaper; but you can show them, and this you have done, that it is not so easy to show Catholicism is false, or that it is not as good as Protestantism, as some people think. (v. 21; To Michael O\u2019Sullivan, 1 February 1864)<\/p>\nOf course your weak point is the cultus of our Lady \u2013 but so it will be, if you are bound to take St Alfonso\u2019s words as de fide. I think they would, (taken in the lump,) startle, not to say shock, most Catholics of our latitude . . . They may be very well for the South. . . . What is beautiful as devotion, is harsh as dogma \u2013 St Alfonso is devotional \u2013 but if people do not spontaneously run with<\/em> that devotionalness, then it looks to them like dogma and startles them. Subjectively received, it is pleasant \u2013 objectively contemplated, it is perplexing[.] (v. 21; To Michael O\u2019Sullivan, 1 February 1864)<\/p>\nBIBLIOGRAPHICAL SOURCES<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\nDrawn from The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman<\/em><\/p>\n[excluding volumes 11-12, 27-30, 32]<\/p>\n
Vol. 1 Edited by Ian Ker and Thomas Gornall, S.J.; Ealing, Trinity, Oriel: February 1801 to December 1826<\/em> (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978).<\/p>\nVol. 2 Edited by Ian Ker and Thomas Gornall, S.J.; Tutor of Oriel: January 1827 to December 1831<\/em> (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979).<\/p>\nVol. 3 Edited by Ian Ker and Thomas Gornall, S.J.; New Bearings: January 1832 to June 1833<\/em> (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979).<\/p>\nVol. 4 Edited by Ian Ker and Thomas Gornall, S.J.; The Oxford Movement: July 1833 to December 1834<\/em> (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980).<\/p>\nVol. 5 Edited by Thomas Gornall, S.J.; Liberalism in Oxford: January 1835 to December 1836<\/em> (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981).<\/p>\nVol. 6 Edited by Gerard Tracey; The Via Media and Froude<\/em>\u2019s Remains: January 1837 to December 1838<\/em> (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984).<\/p>\nVol. 7 Edited by Gerard Tracey; Editing the<\/em> British Critic: January 1839 <\/em>\u2013 December 1840<\/em> (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995).<\/p>\nVol. 8 Edited by Gerard Tracey; Tract 90 and the Jerusalem Bishopric: January 1841 <\/em>\u2013 April 1842<\/em> (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999).<\/p>\nVol. 9 Edited by Francis J. McGrath, F.M.S. and Gerard Tracey; Littlemore and the Parting of Friends: May 1842-October 1843<\/em> (Oxford University Press, 2006).<\/p>\nVol. 10 Edited by Francis J. McGrath, F.M.S.; The Final Step: 1 November 1843 <\/em>\u2013 6 October 1845<\/em> (Oxford University Press, 2006).<\/p>\nVol. 13 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain; Birmingham and London: January 1849 to June 1850<\/em> (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1963).<\/p>\nVol. 14 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain and Vincent Ferrer Blehl, S.J.; Papal Aggression: July 1850 to December 1851<\/em> (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1963).<\/p>\nVol. 15 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain and Vincent Ferrer Blehl, S.J.; The Achilli Trial: January 1852 to December 1853<\/em> (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1964).<\/p>\nVol. 16 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain; Founding a University: January 1854 to September 1855<\/em> (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1965).<\/p>\nVol. 17 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain; Opposition in Dublin and London: October 1855 to March 1857<\/em> (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1967).<\/p>\nVol. 18 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain; New Beginnings in England: April 1857 to December 1858<\/em> (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1968).<\/p>\nVol. 19 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain; Consulting the Laity: January 1859 to June 1861<\/em> (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1969).<\/p>\nVol. 20 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain; Standing Firm Amid Trials: July 1861 to December 1863<\/em> (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1970).<\/p>\nVol. 21 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain and Edward E. Kelly, S.J.; The Apologia: January 1864 to June 1865<\/em> (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1971).<\/p>\nVol. 22 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain; Between Pusey and the Extremists: July 1865 to December 1866<\/em> (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1972).<\/p>\nVol. 23 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain and Thomas Gornall, S.J.; Defeat at Oxford. Defence at Rome: January to December 1867 <\/em>(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973).<\/p>\nVol. 24 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain and Thomas Gornall, S.J.; A Grammar of Assent: January 1868 to December 1869<\/em> (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973).<\/p>\nVol. 25 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain and Thomas Gornall, S.J.; The Vatican Council: January 1870 to December 1871<\/em> (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973).<\/p>\nVol. 26 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain and Thomas Gornall, S.J.; Aftermaths: January 1872 to December 1873<\/em> (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974).<\/p>\nVol. 31 Edited by Charles Stephen Dessain and Thomas Gornall, S.J.; The Last Years: January 1885 to August 1890; With a Supplement of Addenda to Volumes XI <\/em>\u2013 XXX<\/em> (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977).<\/p>\n***<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
From my book, Cardinal Newman: Q & A in Theology, Church History, and Conversion\u00a0(May 2015, 367p): Chapter One (pp. 25-39). Only the words in blue below are my own (for the purposes of organization of material). You can purchase it for as low as $2.99 in various e-book formats. See the previous link. See also […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":52648,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,112],"tags":[2347,258,305,12304,2332,2333,94,2538,2537,93,2540,2539,1706,306,2019,345,9597,8293],"class_list":["post-52645","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-catholic-apologetics","category-philosophy-science","tag-apologetics","tag-atheism","tag-cardinal-newman","tag-cardinal-newman-apologetics","tag-catholic-apologetics","tag-catholic-apologists","tag-debate","tag-defense-of-christianity","tag-defense-of-the-catholic-faith","tag-dialogue","tag-discussion-ethics","tag-internet-discourse","tag-internet-ethics","tag-john-henry-cardinal-newman","tag-lay-catholic-apologetics","tag-secularism","tag-st-john-henry-cardinal-newman","tag-theology"],"yoast_head":"\n
St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"From my book, Cardinal Newman: Q & A in Theology, Church History, and Conversion\u00a0(May 2015, 367p): Chapter One (pp. 25-39). Only the words in blue Collection of brilliant comments on many aspects of Catholic apologetics from one of the all-time great Catholic thinkers: St. John Henry Cardinal Newman ("Newman on apologetics").\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"From my book, Cardinal Newman: Q & A in Theology, Church History, and Conversion\u00a0(May 2015, 367p): Chapter One (pp. 25-39). Only the words in blue Collection of brilliant comments on many aspects of Catholic apologetics from one of the all-time great Catholic thinkers: St. John Henry Cardinal Newman ("Newman on apologetics").\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-11-19T19:07:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-11-19T20:53:16+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/11\/Cover-555-x-839-138k.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"508\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"768\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"27 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html\",\"name\":\"St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-11-19T19:07:11+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-11-19T20:53:16+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"From my book, Cardinal Newman: Q & A in Theology, Church History, and Conversion\u00a0(May 2015, 367p): Chapter One (pp. 25-39). Only the words in blue Collection of brilliant comments on many aspects of Catholic apologetics from one of the all-time great Catholic thinkers: St. John Henry Cardinal Newman (\\\"Newman on apologetics\\\").\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/\",\"name\":\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\",\"description\":\"Catholic biblical apologetics\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\",\"name\":\"Dave Armstrong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dave Armstrong\"},\"description\":\"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \\\"This Rock\\\" (now called \\\"Catholic Answers Magazine\\\"), \\\"Envoy Magazine\\\" (Patrick Madrid), \\\"The Catholic Answer,\\\" \\\"The Coming Home Journal,\\\" \\\"Gilbert Magazine\\\" (American Chesterton Society), and \\\"The Latin Mass.\\\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \\\"The Michigan Catholic\\\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \\\"Catholic Answers Live\\\" (twice), \\\"Faith and Family Live\\\" (Steve Wood), \\\"Kresta in the Afternoon,\\\" \\\"Son Rise Morning Show,\\\" \\\"Catholic Connection\\\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \\\"The Catholics Next Door.\\\" His large and popular website, \\\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\\\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \\\"index\\\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \\\"Surprised by Truth\\\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \\\"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\\\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \\\"The Catholic Verses\\\" (2004), \\\"The One-Minute Apologist\\\" (2007), \\\"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\\\" (2009), \\\"The Quotable Newman\\\" (editor: 2012), and \\\"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\\\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \\\"The New Catholic Answer Bible\\\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \\\"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\\\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \\\"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\\\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \\\"Quotable Wesley\\\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics","description":"From my book, Cardinal Newman: Q & A in Theology, Church History, and Conversion\u00a0(May 2015, 367p): Chapter One (pp. 25-39). Only the words in blue Collection of brilliant comments on many aspects of Catholic apologetics from one of the all-time great Catholic thinkers: St. John Henry Cardinal Newman (\"Newman on apologetics\").","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics","og_description":"From my book, Cardinal Newman: Q & A in Theology, Church History, and Conversion\u00a0(May 2015, 367p): Chapter One (pp. 25-39). Only the words in blue Collection of brilliant comments on many aspects of Catholic apologetics from one of the all-time great Catholic thinkers: St. John Henry Cardinal Newman (\"Newman on apologetics\").","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_published_time":"2020-11-19T19:07:11+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-11-19T20:53:16+00:00","og_image":[{"width":508,"height":768,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/11\/Cover-555-x-839-138k.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"27 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html","name":"St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-11-19T19:07:11+00:00","dateModified":"2020-11-19T20:53:16+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"From my book, Cardinal Newman: Q & A in Theology, Church History, and Conversion\u00a0(May 2015, 367p): Chapter One (pp. 25-39). Only the words in blue Collection of brilliant comments on many aspects of Catholic apologetics from one of the all-time great Catholic thinkers: St. John Henry Cardinal Newman (\"Newman on apologetics\").","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/11\/st-john-henry-cardinal-newman-on-apologetics.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"St. John Henry Cardinal Newman on Apologetics"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/","name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","description":"Catholic biblical apologetics","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e","name":"Dave Armstrong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dave Armstrong"},"description":"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \"This Rock\" (now called \"Catholic Answers Magazine\"), \"Envoy Magazine\" (Patrick Madrid), \"The Catholic Answer,\" \"The Coming Home Journal,\" \"Gilbert Magazine\" (American Chesterton Society), and \"The Latin Mass.\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \"The Michigan Catholic\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \"Envoy Magazine.\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \"Catholic Answers Live\" (twice), \"Faith and Family Live\" (Steve Wood), \"Kresta in the Afternoon,\" \"Son Rise Morning Show,\" \"Catholic Connection\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \"The Catholics Next Door.\" His large and popular website, \"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \"Envoy Magazine.\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \"index\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \"Surprised by Truth\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \"The Catholic Verses\" (2004), \"The One-Minute Apologist\" (2007), \"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\" (2009), \"The Quotable Newman\" (editor: 2012), and \"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \"The New Catholic Answer Bible\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \"Quotable Wesley\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52645","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2331"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=52645"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52645\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/52648"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=52645"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=52645"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=52645"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/11\/Cover-555-x-839-138k.jpg\")
<\/p>\n