'Good' vs 'Bad' Kalam

What disproves that scholars of the Salaf categorically censured Kalam are some writings of theirs in which they praise those that utilize it to defend correct beliefs and refute the people of desires.
That is because 'Ilm al-Kalam entails arguments for religious beliefs supported by rational proofs, and refutations of innovators who distort beliefs and turn away from the doctrine of the Salaf and Ahlus Sunnah. That is per Ibn Khaldun's definition. This definition further ascertains al-Bayhaqi and others their explanations of writings relayed from al-Shafi'i and others that seemingly censure Kalam categorically.
I'll present these fanatic, self-proclaimed "Salafis" statements of the people of knowledge, which elucidate that categorical censure of Kalam can't correctly be attributed to the Salaf and that they ought to be reinterpreted. E.g. when Ibn Taymiyya and al-Darimi refuted others with rational proofs in lieu of scriptural proofs (disregarding whether they were right or not). Yet even then they'll claim that Kalam was categorically forbidden by the Salaf!
Therefore, the best way to cut out their legs from under them is to present them a statement by someone from the Salaf that praises someone else from the Salaf. In this case, the praise regards his being proficient in Kalam and his refuting the people of desires!
What I am referring to is what's authentically relayed from Imam Malik bin Anas – he says when praising his teacher Ibn Hurmuz (d.148 AH):
"He was proficient in Kalam and refuted the people of desires. He was among the most knowledgeable of people regarding that which they differed in (i.e. these desires)."
al-Fasawi and al-Khateeb set this narration forth in al-Ma'rifah wa al-Tareekh and al-Faqih wa al-Mutafaqqih (respectively) with an authentic chain going back to Imam Malik.
Imam Malik's usage of the word "Kalam" leaves no room for aberration of the writing. If they [Salafis] say: "Oh but he intends with Kalam the type that isn't censured." Then it's said to them: "Well in a similar fashion, al-Shafi'i intended the censured type, not the praiseworthy type!"
The point is to establish that the Salaf didn't categorically censure Kalam. I swear, I'm well aware that all of this wasn't needed, but we're forced to stoop to arguments with the hope that the lost may be guided.

By Shaykh Hatim al-'Awni