Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
History and Religion
James Swan Attacks My 1991 Paper (Calvin & Bucer)

James Swan Attacks My 1991 Paper (Calvin & Bucer)

Last updated on: June 6, 2026 at 12:42 am by Dave Armstrong

James Swan Attacks My 1991 Paper (Calvin & Bucer) 2026-06-06T00:42:05-04:00 Dave Armstrong

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I just put up earlier today, a paper dealing with an attempt in 2015 of anti-Catholic Calvinist apologist James Swan, to belittle a mistake regarding Luther’s successor Philip Melanchthon that I made in my research, that actually originates from an erroneous citation made by secular historian Will Durant. I noted in it that this was his frequent methodology, and cited another paper of mine on the Anabaptists, which caused Swan to make a very embarrassing citation error (mistaking a 16th century Anabaptist for a modern editor). In this earlier article I observed:

Now, this may seem like my nitpicking or piling on, in a case of a simple mistake or human error. Readers may wonder why I am making such a “big deal” about it. I do precisely because Swan is always pointing out human errors in Catholic works (he’s noted real or — usually — falsely alleged — ones in my writings for seventeen years). If a Catholic had made such an embarrassing error like this, we can be sure Swan would have trumpeted it from the rooftops as yet more evidence that we don’t know how to properly cite a source, and that we’re always trying to lie about and misrepresent Luther; that we’re, well, kind of dumb, and that we know nothing about context in reading and citing sources.

Curious, after completing this revised upload today, I wandered over to Swan’s blog, Boor’s All, to see what he was up to lately. And lo and behold, I discovered that in his latest offering (5-3-20) he is going after an old citation of mine from a 1991 paper. It’s classic Swan dubious “research” / polemical tactics all-around:

Citing my words and references without noting that they were from me.

Not mentioning the name of my article, so folks can examine it in context.

Not providing a URL / link to my old paper, even though he has obviously tracked it down — or if not is certainly capable of it — (and provides links all over the place to everything else he mentions).

Not bothering to mention that in subsequent revisions of my old 1991 paper (as far back as 10-31-03), I removed the alleged citation. And of course it would be unthinkable to actually commend me for doing so (since I am a lowly, unregenerate, idolater, Pelagian Catholic).

Acting as if this mistake is proof of a general tendency of Catholic apologists (with the implication that Protestant apologists are above ever making such mistakes).

He had done almost all this in his 2015 analysis of Will Durant’s mistake, that I unfortunately unknowingly perpetuated. At the end, however, he actually gave a title of one of my books (without naming me). At least someone could look that up . . .

The alleged citation is as follows (with my introduction):

Despite theological affinities, [Martin] Bucer had quite a low opinion of [John] Calvin: “Calvin is a true mad dog. The man is wicked, and he judges of people according as he loves or hates them.”

Bucer (1491-1551) was a fairly prominent early Protestant leader. Swan wrote about these words:

This quote popped on my radar recently when it was presented in an on-line discussion group focusing on “debate” between Rome’s defenders and the Reformation. The quote has traveled around the Internet for a number of years (at least twenty). Previous to that, it was very popular in nineteenth-century Roman Catholic polemical writings. . . .

Rome’s defenders have once again, not gone deep into history. . . . The documentation I was provided with was “113;v.1:467.” A basic Google search leads to the probable cyber-source: a Roman Catholic apologetics web-page documenting, in part, the sixteenth century “intolerance” aspect of the Reformers against each other. “113” corresponds to an entry in a web-page bibliography: “Spalding, Martin J. {Archbishop of Baltimore}, The History of the Protestant Reformation, 2 vols., Baltimore: John Murphy, 1876.” This information is accurate, as far as it goes, but unfortunately, it doesn’t go that far to the actual primary source. . . .

I’m confident that Roman Catholic polemicists are those ultimately responsible to substantiate the claim that “Bucer had quite a low opinion of Calvin.” The proof they’ve used thus far, a spurious quote devoid of context, put forth by Calvin’s known enemy, fails as evidence.

The citation came from a book chapter originally intended for the original massively larger version of what became my first (1996) book, A Biblical Defense of Catholicism, completed on 3 June 1991: just under three months after I was received into the Catholic Church. Back then there was no Internet. I typed it on an electric typewriter.

There were also, of course, no links or cutting-and-pasting like today, and no Google Books and Internet Archive and wondrous search tools that Swan utilizes to save scores and scores of hours of research time in his relentless effort to undermine, embarrass, and discredit Catholic apologists. I had whatever books I managed to amass in my personal library, and a few photocopies of portions of Catholic works obtained from the massive library at the Jesuit University of Detroit.

Fresh upon conversion, and one which to a significant degree was based on having read about the so-called “Reformation” from a Catholic viewpoint, I was eager to find more Catholic historical sources. One of these was this work mentioned above by Archbishop Martin Spalding. I assumed he could be trusted in his scholarship, being a bishop, but this is not always the case. The temptation of anti-Protestantism in those days (1876) was often too strong and led to shoddy research.

I didn’t know that yet, in 1991, but I would eventually come to see that it was true. I probably could have figured it out if I thought about it very much (based on the analogy of Protestant anti-Catholic bias), but this is one of the usual flaws of the young zealous convert. I was simply using whatever Catholic sources on early Protestantism that I could get my hands on.

Starting in February 1997 when I began my website: Biblical Evidence for Catholicism (still called that today), this paper went online, entitled, “The Protestant Inquisition (‘Reformation’ Intolerance and Persecution).” One can see the dubious citation in question in the first version of the paper: scanned on 13 August 2001.

I was to revise this paper twice: on 31 October 2003 and 7 March 2007; also I would “greatly” abridge it on 14 September 2017 (see the present version). The 2003 revision of the paper can be seen in a scan from 5 April 2004. In this scan, it can be verified that any references from Abp. Spalding’s work (there were twelve) were removed.

This was also true of another work that was greatly discredited by anti-Protestant bias and inaccuracies, The Facts About Luther: a 1916 volume by Patrick O’Hare that I found in a local Catholic bookstore and used quite a bit when I first converted. There was very little Catholic material critical of Luther available in those pre-Internet days. In due course, I discovered that both were untrustworthy sources, and I purged them from any online papers of mine (and even from my personal library). We live and learn.

Now, what is particularly dishonest and unethical / underhanded about Swan, when he is dealing with anything to do with me, is how he will deliberately ignore the fact that I often have revised my early papers (or in some cases removed them altogether). We know this to be true without a doubt, because I have seen him make note of revisions of my papers, when it suits his cynical purpose. To him, it appears to be some big joke, and (as he fancies) my attempting to cover up my tracks when caught, so no one will know what an atrocious researcher I am.

In actuality, it is the process of ongoing learning and revision and growth in particular knowledge that every honest, truth-seeking researcher / apologist / thinker goes through. The more I learn, I revise, because my writing is influencing others, and I want it to be as accurate as it possibly can.

So here we have a case of Swan troubling himself to write about this one bogus citation, drawn from my 1991 paper (online since 1997), which I had removed by 31 October 2003 (that’s over 16 years ago), and still trying to rub my face in it. It’s simply dishonest. The honest, fair researcher would never have mentioned it in connection with me (which could be deduced — even without my name being mentioned — if someone dug deeply enough).

Swan has literally been writing about me since 2002: often virtually obsessed with my work (though he later deliberately removed my name from almost every reference), and his readers know full well that I am often in the picture with regard to posts like this from him (i.e., things having to do with Luther, Calvin et al).

So the honest thing to do would have been to either not mention my connection with ongoing use of this “citation” at all, or if I am brought up (and he should do so fairly with my name and a link or links), make it plain that I have removed this citation over 16 years ago, and that if someone is drawing it from my work, it is from an outdated earlier version, that I myself have in effect renounced.

Swan habitually avoids doing things like that, out of his extreme personal derision towards me. He thinks the sky would fall down if he recognized anything good in myself or my work. I must (as a hideous Catholic, and an apologist for the Beast) be demonized, caricatured, and dismissed. And I think that stinks and gives a bad name to not just Protestant anti-Catholic polemical apologetics, but all apologetics. We apologists have a responsibility to do much better than this. James Swan falls far short in living up to the Christian ethical standard and ideal. And that reflects (however remotely) on my own work, and makes it harder to do legitimate, constructive apologetics.

***

Photo credit: Engraving of Martin Bucer in 1544 (age 53) by René Boyvin (1525-1598) [public domain / Wikimedia Commons]

***

Bucer's opinion of Calvin

John Calvin & Martin Bucer

Martin Bucer

Protestant founders

Protestant Reformation

Protestant Revolt

Roman Catholic Church

Romanism

Previous Post

May 5, 2020

James Swan Silliness, Melanchthon, Bishops, & Princes

Next Post

May 6, 2020 Ultra-Hypocritical James Swan Insultapalooza Post

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category & Last Things About Me Anti-Catholicism Atheism & Agnosticism Baptism and Sacramentalism Bible and Tradition Blessed Virgin Mary Books by Dave Armstrong C. S. Lewis Calvinism & General Protestantism Catholic Apologetics Catholic Apologists Catholic conversion Catholic converts Christmas Church (Ecclesiology) Church History Conversion and Converts Development of Doctrine Eastern Orthodoxy Ecumenism & Christian Unity Eucharist & Liturgy Fathers of the Church French Translations G. K. Chesterton Hell Hell & Satan Hell & Satan & Last Things Heresies & Comparative Religion Holistic Health Inquisition & Crusades & Scandals James White Jews & Judaism & Old Testament John Calvin John Henry Newman Liberal / Modernist Theology Life Issues Literary Resume Lutheranism Mariology Martin Luther Music Orthodoxy Papacy & Infallibility Personal Page Philosophy & Science Political & Ethical & Moral Issues Protestant Persecution & Intolerance Protestantism Purgatory Purgatory & Penance Romantic & Imaginative Theology Saints & Purgatory & Penance Salvation Salvation & Justification Satan & Last Things Sexuality and Gender Issues Spanish Translations Traditionalism vs. Radical Catholic Reactionaries Traducciones al español / tradução para português Trinitarianism & Christology Uncategorized Videos

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 April 2010 March 2010 December 2009 October 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 March 2009 February 2009 October 2008 September 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 May 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 October 2005 June 2005 April 2005 February 2005 July 2004 May 2004 April 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz