Have you read the book? It’s interesting! Makes some very good points. AND, I found that I was engaging in some of them. He goes into a very brief description of the “seven habits of effective apologists” at the end of the book. Hopefully he’ll write another book that goes more in depth into those.
Brumley cites such things as trying to prove the unprovable, biting off more than we can chew, being mindful of ecumenism not only in dialogue with people of different beliefs but among fellow Catholics; trying to “win,” pummeling the other person…and on…I think the one with the most serious implications is pride. However, I really recommend that you read the book. It’s short, a good read, and you will have answered your own question with an insight more satisfactory than an answer give by someone else.
I think his comments about charity, under ‘effective apologetics’ were especially important. It’s so easy to get frustrated when someone, after a kajillion posts, just doesn’t seem to get it. The things we grow up with and perhaps take for granted are not necessarily readily perceived by others who may be encountering them for the first time or trying to understand them for the first time.
Where is the line between pummeling the other person and debating? By debating I mean addressing one to several points in the other person’s argument and subsequent points s/he may bring up as the discussion continues.
Wow!!! High schoolers in an apologetics class??? I am IMPRESSED!!!
I really think you answered your own question.
I think you answered your question, but I’ll give you a quote from the book. “it is much better to let someone discover the truth for himself than to try to browbeat him into submission to your case for the truth.” pg.72
Yes.
I had started a thread that didn’t seem to go anywhere in which I noted that the Church’s teaching on invincible ignorance seems to make Catholics indifferent and lax about their own membership in the Church and about leading others to the Church. I asked how can you make a compelling case for becoming Catholic when Catholic teaching seems to say one can be saved without being Catholic. From the many theads on the topic, it seems that one response is to deny that invincible ignorance happens very often, and EENS. (I think we have gone down that road, and don’t need to do it again.) But I still have the practical question: how do you make the case for the Church without falling into the indifferentism of false ecumenism, or scaring them off with EENS? How do you tell people being Catholic makes a difference without turning into marineboy (which I really would like not to do)? It is my experience that many (perhaps, most) Catholics are at “you know what, it really doesn’t matter.”