In an old episode of his "Dividing Line" Webcast, James White said the following about how some Catholic apologists dismiss scholarship as being "liberal" without interacting with such (the topics in view were the canonicity of the Apocrypha and the earliest references to the assumption of Mary):
Well, generally, when, when Catholic scholarship gores the Catholic apologists' favourite response, they simply dismiss the scholarship as being "liberal," that has been my experience generally is that when they run up against their own scholars, because they're using an invalid defense that they're either ignorant of that scholarship and therefore they give a knee-jerk reaction saying "oh well, he must not be a real Catholic!" (beginning at the 38:51 mark)
This only shows the utter hypocrisy of James White. Why? In his (franky pathetic) response to a piece I wrote (Refuting Jeff Durbin on "Mormonism"), he dismissed much of what I wrote as relying upon so-called "liberal" scholarship without engaging in any meaningful interaction with such nor did he engage in any meaningful exegesis of the relevant biblical texts.