Mark Brumley's "How NOT to Share Your Faith"

[Church_Militant]

Church Militant, as you presented this particular chapter, the timing of it is incredible!
I wonder how many of us recognized that we walked through this during a certain thread earlier this week. It is a most fitting capstone to underscore a major point of how NOT to share our faith.

Well, I hope not because what Mark is saying here is that the person is so turned around that if they fal in some aspect of apologetics that their whole faith comes into question, or even worse, collapses altogether.

One’s faith isn’t based one’s own ability (or lack of) to explain and defend it. That’s what Mark means about the confusion. It should never shakes us that badly because all it really means is that we don’t know that particular area well enough yet and need to dig deeper. Any time we hit a snag…it simply means it’s time for more study.

Apologetics is very much like the way of the Samurai as Yamamoto Tsunetomo states in Hagakure.
.
Throughout your life advance daily
becoming more skillful than yesterday
more skillful than today
This is never-ending.

In fact, that pretty well applies to every aspect of our lives, I would think.

Q. Since I don’t have the book, I rely on you folks to fill in the blanks. What should be the response of those on the receiving end of these dogmatic teachers? Ignore them? Refute as best we can? Does our written word ever convict anyone this headstrong of their error?

I think that that will depend on the circumstances.

Strangers…walk away.
Here on CAF…that’s a tougher call because everyone is pretty much a stranger, (though perhaps somewhat familiar strangers from interaction…) on the intarwebz. I think you have to discern when the person is closed channel and perhaps then dust off and walk. Getting to know people is difficult on the net.
I would be more concerned with Catholics with this problem.

I frankly can’t imagine myself thinking I have much of anything to teach Holy Mother Church.

 

[Sirach2]

I think you have to discern when the person is closed channel and perhaps then dust off and walk.

Sometimes, without a measure of humility, we can get bogged down with wanting to win (another of Mark’s chapters yet to come). Knowing when that time to walk and dust has arrived, and being resolute to abandon the discussion will bring a strong measure of peace. I pray that we remember to humbly entrust the results to the Lord to supply for all that we failed to convey, with the assurance that each seed has its own timetable.

 

[1AugustSon7]

I’ve learned a lot from this thread. I would strongly encourage new Catholics to thoughtfully consider its contents: you can save yourself a lot of grief that experience teaches only painfully and not necessarily with a happy end.

“. . . but most important of all is unbroken fidelity and faithful adoration.”

Understanding and imbibing this affirmation is perhaps the best bedrock we can place in our hearts for keeping the faith. In faith we are, as it were, married to Christ and His Church: to be truly faithful, we need to hang in there through thick and thin, better and worse.

 

[ahs]

Sometimes, without a measure of humility, we can get bogged down with wanting to win (another of Mark’s chapters yet to come). Knowing when that time to walk and dust has arrived, and being resolute to abandon the discussion will bring a strong measure of peace. I pray that we remember to humbly entrust the results to the Lord to supply for all that we failed to convey, with the assurance that each seed has its own timetable.

This is the one I struggle with the most…and to me this ties directly into “reducing the Faith to my ability to argue it”. I know there are times (most of the time) when I don’t know enough about the particular topic and need to study up some more. But just walking away is the hardest thing for me. It’s like a battle in my head…one part saying “okay, you’re getting no where so just let it go for now and maybe it will come back up after you’ve learned more…” and another part saying “if you let it go here, you’ll appear “wrong” and then that makes the Church look “wrong”…”

But yes, this is so important…to not go about it trying to “win”, rather to present the facts the best you can, and pray that God will move things in the right direction. And then pray for the grace and humility to be able to say “ya know…maybe I need to find a better answer or maybe we should agree to disagree for now and we can pray for each other to be open to God moving our hearts on this…”.

 

[Church_Militant]

a measure of humility,
…
I pray that we remember to humbly entrust the results to the Lord to supply for all that we failed to convey, with the assurance that each seed has its own timetable.

Good point! We have to remember that we are not the decisive factor here.

I’ve learned a lot from this thread. I would strongly encourage new Catholics to thoughtfully consider its contents: you can save yourself a lot of grief that experience teaches only painfully and not necessarily with a happy end.". . . but most important of all is unbroken fidelity and faithful adoration." Understanding and imbibing this affirmation is perhaps the best bedrock we can place in our hearts for keeping the faith. In faith we are, as it were, married to Christ and His Church: to be truly faithful, we need to hang in there through thick and thin, better and worse.

I’m glad, and encourage all who can, to invest in this book because it is far more deep than we have been/will be able to, cover here. I am wearing out a highlighter in it.

This is the one I struggle with the most…and to me this ties directly into “reducing the Faith to my ability to argue it”. I know there are times (most of the time) when I don’t know enough about the particular topic and need to study up some more. But just walking away is the hardest thing for me. It’s like a battle in my head…one part saying “okay, you’re getting no where so just let it go for now and maybe it will come back up after you’ve learned more…” and another part saying “if you let it go here, you’ll appear “wrong” and then that makes the Church look “wrong”…”

But yes, this is so important…to not go about it trying to “win”, rather to present the facts the best you can, and pray that God will move things in the right direction. And then pray for the grace and humility to be able to say “ya know…maybe I need to find a better answer or maybe we should agree to disagree for now and we can pray for each other to be open to God moving our hearts on this…”.

I have learned over the years that I am not the only guy who can answer, and so I find myself waiting to give others the chance before I weigh in.

And, like you, I sometimes trip over myself in responding to people, especially if they seem to be just ignoring good Catholic responses instead of actually thoughtfully entering the dialog. It’s annoying and it has sometimes made me less friendly than I need to be and I hate it when that happens.

I mean really…we gotta remember that, “Unless the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it. Unless the Lord keep the city, he watcheth in vain that keepeth it.” Psalms 126:1

 

[Sirach2]

That psalm is one of my favorites, Church Militant.

I heard a good cliché last night while I had a religious program on for background noise. Suddenly the speaker alerted me with his good thoughts.

“Do not remain where you are tolerated :yawn:
— go where you are *celebrated!” *

Jesus was constantly confronted with pharisaical types who did not want to welcome him, but only to trap him. His ministry was never successful with these people due to their pride of heart. Do we have them here at CAF? Silly me, of course! It takes a little while to work through their pretense, though. They come with lip service of wanting to join the Church, and then proceed to trap Catholics with the most insidious arguments against our faith.

If only we could recognize it immediately and dismiss the human tendency to defend our faith in page after page of witnessing to them. I have sometimes thought that
a poignant scripture verse,
a better quotation,
more clarity in teaching,
a spot-on source document,
would eventually help them see the truth.

You folks have been there, too. It never works, and as Church Militant said, we become less friendly in the process.

Dear Lord, help us to dust our shoes, following your example, and move on to where we are ‘celebrated’ as your disciples and bear fruit. Guard this forum from people who would trap our words and give us wisdom to flesh them out.

 

[Through_Him]

This does look like a good book which I will have to order. I have search and rescue and read it but have not had much luck. I have been back for 8 years and so I had to learn my faith before I could be intellectual with it. I am not good with memory but learning to just make short insight phrases to my family and ones I want to share what I have learned in my mind and in my heart. So now I see others like where I was and am learning patience because they also don’t really understand the faith.

Since I have been through the protestant teachings I can understand that I was not seeing the truth, so especially the verse seeing through a glass darkly is where are lot of people are.

I know I made a statement to my brother one time who is in his third protestant church now and because my family usually raises their eyebrows at me I know they have a question but maybe don’t even know what to ask. I said to him you know there isn’t really going to be a rapture, it is a myth. I did not think about making that statement before I made it and thought oh boy now he is going to ask me to prove it. Well he just stood there with his mouth open and the truth just settled on his brain. I wanted to say more but did not. I wanted to say I was lied to and these other faiths are just trying to get the hype and on and on because I felt my anger filling up my emotions. I actually just went home and prayed and then went to the chapel and prayed and then e-mailed my spiritual director and then had a good discussion.

Saying the statement helped my belief and later I could see that it is proved.

 

[uther]

I highly value your opinion on this book, C.M., but I’m not sure I’m cut out to be an apologist. But if we discuss what is in your title, how NOT to share our faith, it would be very helpful.

It would be great to enter into the discussion, so maybe I’ll consider purchasing it. Thanks!

I’m not a fan of apologetics either, to be truthful. The problem is that I invariably find myself in an apologetics situation. I had a friend last night go into a litany of arguments first again Catholicism, then against Christianity in general and finally against faith per se. I felt a little like a Jedi knight with my light sabre, deflecting one lightning bolt after another, in rapid succession. This was on the phone as well, so it was difficult to do anything other than follow the conversation and toss in the the odd seed of doubt against his most strident positions.

He was using a blunderbuss in this case and had I not recognized this for what it was, I would have become very frustrated. But I have found that many people use something like this approach to try to inocculate themselves against anything you might say, because they are somewhat fearful of getting down to a real discussion which might cause them to look at some things that already make them uneasy.

And usually, those things are not intellectual, rational issues at all. I know this from my own experience. My rational conversion to the faith from Evangelicalism I owe in large part to apologetics from many of the sources we all know and love. But at the same time, my own conversion of heart from lack of faith and selfish living back to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ was an entirely different thing, accomplished by the speaking of the Holy Spirit in my heart.

Occasionally, what we are seeing on the part of some individual is really a resistance to the speaking of the Holy Spirit, an angst brought on by conviction of guilt, and the rational arguments are an attempt to fend this off, and we are the ones on whom the attack falls.

Knowing this, we can be much more sympathetic in spirit, can take much less offence, and can calmly and firmly articulate the apologetics defence, knowing that it is only part of the struggle for this person’s soul. Sometimes the only thing that gets right to the real heart of the matter is something like the mention of forgiveness, for like most of us, often that person is carrying some guilt for something they have done, and the rational wall of argument is not the real issue. But it must be answered just the same.

So, Sirach 2, I understand exactly what you mean, and I feel much the same way. I really dislike getting caught in those apologetics debates. What helps me is to realize first and foremost that someone’s conversion of heart ultimately does not depend on me. Then, the realization that apologetics has the beneficial side-effect of helping me to know my own faith much better, because I need to give an answer, whether accepted or not. I don’t have to “win” the debate. Indeed, I cannot say I have ever won a debate with anyone.

 

[uther]

Through Him:

I know I made a statement to my brother one time who is in his third protestant church now and because my family usually raises their eyebrows at me I know they have a question but maybe don’t even know what to ask. I said to him you know there isn’t really going to be a rapture, it is a myth. I did not think about making that statement before I made it and thought oh boy now he is going to ask me to prove it. Well he just stood there with his mouth open and the truth just settled on his brain. I wanted to say more but did not. I wanted to say I was lied to and these other faiths are just trying to get the hype and on and on because I felt my anger filling up my emotions. I actually just went home and prayed and then went to the chapel and prayed and then e-mailed my spiritual director and then had a good discussion.

Saying the statement helped my belief and later I could see that it is proved.

It sounds to me Barbara as if you did exactly the right thing, in exactly the right measure. Sometimes when we are least thinking about it, the Holy Spirit can guide us to say the right thing at the right moment. Anything more that you could have said would not likely have added anything to the effect that this had on your brother.

And you did also the most powerful thing that you could possibly do for him. You took the situation directly to God in prayer. What you did was plant a seed. The Holy Spirit is very powerful in enlightening the mind when once opened and watering that seed so that it can grow. He may well get more information from other people to help him further but you did what God asked you to do at the time. That is all any of us can do.

I remember the anger I felt, the sense of betrayal, when I first discovered that the New Testament Church, that so many Protestant groups claim to want to emulate, was actually thoroughly Catholic in belief and practice. But then I realized that the people who taught me error were taught the same by their parents and grandparents, and there was no use in being angry about it.

And when I see the people who have made those heresies into a lucrative enterprise, a scam to get rich, I have to remember that there have been many over the centuries who have done the same with the true faith in varying degrees and in different places. In fact, often much more of our time in apologetics discussions is taken up with the sins of fellow Catholics than in actually discussing the real doctrines and teachings of our Lord through his Church.

 

[uther]

Do we get a trophy for guessing the guy’s name? On second thought, you’ll need a bunch of them, since I think many of us recognize him. I wonder if the hammer ever meets with the rolling stone? All in God’s time.

:yeah_me: + :yeah_me: + :yeah_me: + :yeah_me:

Hammer, meet rolling stone.

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQe2Pm_yKsCGnnX1NsYGYU910S6ZmkLKMbRYW3h5mDFkFN-DiJV

There’s always a bigger bully than the bully.

I think I know who you mean. Without mentioning the name and getting sidetracked, we must also recognize that within the Church there are many people with different talents and different missions.

I happen to like the guy and his message for a couple of reasons. First, although we have many tools in our toolbox, to continue the analogy, we sometimes do need the hammer, even the sledge-hammer. Second, if we are to solve a problem, we first need to know what the problem is. This problem identification is what he is very good at.

And, to be fair, although the hammer is what this gentleman is most known for, likely because of the set-up of his media presentation, free vs. subscription, a perusal of all that is offered brings this into balance and anyone who takes the time will discover that the hammer approach is only one part of the presentation of orthodoxy. As well, we must recognize that the target audience is not the same as other media, being directed in this case mostly to already baptized Catholics.

Having said all of that, and although his predictions of doom and gloom for the future of the Church are well founded in history, we need not allow that knowledge to paralyse us. That perhaps is what is most deficient in his message.

If we look at the Old Testament history of the people of Israel, the chosen people, the cycle from great faith and fidelity into sloth and nonchalance and finally into infidelity and bondage, is repeated over and over, and for Holy Church the cycle can very well be the same, paralleling the culture. We know that the greatest growth in the Church has followed persecution in the past and that can very well occur again. He is right that our current trajectory is toward bondage and persecution and he is right in pointing this out.

But it does not have to be that way. That is the hope and the motivation for evangelization and apologetics. Pope Benedict said long ago that he expected the Church to become smaller and more faithful. In a sense, that is what is happening, painfully no doubt about it, and sometimes the catalyst for this kind of change is from without and within. The message is not pleasant, and is easy to dismiss as the rantings of one who only has a hammer, but I think the motivation should be then to evangelize within the Church and pray without ceasing for renewal through conversion of hearts.

 

[Sirach2]

Uther, I think we are on the same page knowing the identity. Thanks for your thoughtful response and efforts to spread a little glimmer of light here. Do you think this person would benefit from this thread’s book or discussion?
Do you believe the hammer is a valid way to evangelize? Many people are repelled and simply recoil at this type of strong-arming.

Without meaning to derail the thread, I don’t want to ignore your post, either. You don’t need to answer my Q’s – they are just thinking out loud.

 

[uther]

Uther, I think we are on the same page knowing the identity. Thanks for your thoughtful response and efforts to spread a little glimmer of light here. Do you think this person would benefit from this thread’s book or discussion?
Do you believe the hammer is a valid way to evangelize? Many people are repelled and simply recoil at this type of strong-arming.

Without meaning to derail the thread, I don’t want to ignore your post, either. You don’t need to answer my Q’s – they are just thinking out loud.

Let me respond this way. My grandfather used to tell a story, I don’t know if it was true or not, about a farmer that was on the side of the road with a mule who was standing still and would not pull the cart.
Just as a woman from the city came riding by, the farmer picked up a two-by-four and whacked the mule on the forehead. The woman was horrified and stopped.
“Why don’t you just tell him what you want him to do?” she called out to the farmer.
"I will, " he replied, “but I have to get his attention first!”

 

[Sirach2]

Then maybe you’ve heard the story of the debate between the Sun and the Wind as to who could make a boy take his coat off first. The Wind had first chance and it mustered up all the force of nature beating against the boy. But the harder it blew, the tighter the boy wrapped his coat to himself.

Then the Sun had its chance. No sooner did its warm rays dance upon the boy than he smiled with delight and willingly took off his coat.

BTW, if I were a betting person, I’d say the mule may be paying attention for the moment due to the farmer’s whacking, but I betcha it was boiling on the inside, ready to kick a fuss at the first opportunity.

And with these fine words of wisdom, we can figure out how NOT to share out faith!

 

[uther]

Touche!

 

[Church_Militant]

Well, I am happy to see that this has sparked a bit more discussion.

To conclude this chapter:

" In the final analysis, being a Catholic is not about having the best arsenal of clever arguments or about belonging to the church with the best apologists formulating the best arguments. It is about humbly submitting to God , who is truth, and who can use Balaam’s a s s as effectively as he can the most eloquent and learned of apologists."

Yeah…I can easily agree. Me and that donkey have much in common.

 

[Church_Militant]

Chapter 4: Contentiousness

"Now we turn from arguments to argumentativeness.

Some apologists are always looking for a fight.

Nevertheless, contentious Catholics (and their non-Catholic counterparts), who “prowl around like lions seeking whom they may devour,” can still do damage. Unfortunately,the damage is usually to the cause of Christ and his Church, although many contentious apologists do not or will not see it.

The trouble for the contentious apologists is that he does not know how to handle differences.

…we can recognize them, give them their due, but keep them in their proper place in the scheme of things."

This has got to be one of the most distressingly easy traps to fall into. Being of fine Irish descent I know because some of us would sooner argue (about anything!) than eat. I love a good debate! (unlike the ones on TV in the last few weeks. )

This problem is one reason that no doubt gets so many threads closed here at CAF, because they start off well and then fail to remain on topic as individuals drag up all manner of other stuff to argue over, that’s not related to what the OP began with.

Example: A discussion/debate about the Eucharist that diverts onto Sola Scriptura. Though they may have some common issues with regard to n-C theology, they are not directly related and so…

 

[missadeangelis]

Chapter 4: Contentiousness

"Now we turn from arguments to argumentativeness.

Some apologists are always looking for a fight.

Nevertheless, contentious Catholics (and their non-Catholic counterparts), who “prowl around like lions seeking whom they may devour,” can still do damage. Unfortunately,the damage is usually to the cause of Christ and his Church, although many contentious apologists do not or will not see it.

The trouble for the contentious apologists is that he does not know how to handle differences.

…we can recognize them, give them their due, but keep them in their proper place in the scheme of things."

This has got to be one of the most distressingly easy traps to fall into. Being of fine Irish descent I know because some of us would sooner argue (about anything!) than eat. I love a good debate! (unlike the ones on TV in the last few weeks. )

This problem is one reason that no doubt gets so many threads closed here at CAF, because they start off well and then fail to remain on topic as individuals drag up all manner of other stuff to argue over, that’s not related to what the OP began with.

Example: A discussion/debate about the Eucharist that diverts onto Sola Scriptura. Though they may have some common issues with regard to n-C theology, they are not directly related and so…

Yes, perhaps on this forum a discussion turns from the Eucharist and morphs into a debate about sola scriptura and is shut down, however, in real world situations where real people are discussing real differences in beliefs the two can indeed be directly relevant and interconnected. Just think of a practical conversation between a Catholic and a sola scriptura Protestant. If the latter contests the truth of the Holy Eucharist the only recourse they have is their interpretation of scripture alone. How do you have an effective discussion without addressing sola scriptura, which is the underlying stumbling block? Again, I’m talking about a real life situation in which one’s ultimate goal is conversion (though not necessarily immediate conversion). If one’s ultimate goal is not ultimately conversion for the salvation of souls, there is little reason to worry about sharing one’s faith.

I don’t think the “hammer” approach is the best to use, nor do I think a passive discussion of differences hoping that one has “planted the seeds” is the way to go. Even if it works in certain cases one will not be as effective as possible. I think it takes a skilled hybrid approach in reality. If one truly believes that the Catholic Faith contains the fullness of Truth necessary for salvation, then one should want to share this Truth with conviction and without compromise in an effective and charitable way.

A little zeal isn’t always such a terrible thing IMHO. Many Protestants are pretty aggressive in their evangelization techniques and they have been quite effective in leading not a few Catholics astray in the past few decades. Other ecclesial communities and religions do not share our recently developed Catholic fear of possibly hurting somebody’s feelings. However we come to accomplish it, we live in a world that is in dire need of true Catholic evangelization and conversion sooner than later.

mda

 

[uther]

Yes, perhaps on this forum a discussion turns from the Eucharist and morphs into a debate about sola scriptura and is shut down, however, in real world situations where real people are discussing real differences in beliefs the two can indeed be directly relevant and interconnected. Just think of a practical conversation between a Catholic and a sola scriptura Protestant. If the latter contests the truth of the Holy Eucharist the only recourse they have is their interpretation of scripture alone. How do you have an effective discussion without addressing sola scriptura, which is the underlying stumbling block? Again, I’m talking about a real life situation in which one’s ultimate goal is conversion (though not necessarily immediate conversion). If one’s ultimate goal is not ultimately conversion for the salvation of souls, there is little reason to worry about sharing one’s faith.

I don’t think the “hammer” approach is the best to use, nor do I think a passive discussion of differences hoping that one has “planted the seeds” is the way to go. Even if it works in certain cases one will not be as effective as possible. I think it takes a skilled hybrid approach in reality. If one truly believes that the Catholic Faith contains the fullness of Truth necessary for salvation, then one should want to share this Truth with conviction and without compromise in an effective and charitable way.

A little zeal isn’t always such a terrible thing IMHO. Many Protestants are pretty aggressive in their evangelization techniques and they have been quite effective in leading not a few Catholics astray in the past few decades. Other ecclesial communities and religions do not share our recently developed Catholic fear of possibly hurting somebody’s feelings. However we come to accomplish it, we live in a world that is in dire need of true Catholic evangelization and conversion sooner than later.

mda

I suppose we need to have some definition of what is “zeal”, what is a “hammer”, etc. It seems to me that we have often morphed into thinking that any direct speaking of a truth, regardless of our manner of speaking it, becomes that “hammer.”

Suppose as an attachment to a homily on a regular basis, a priest were to counsel his flock that receiving the Holy Eucharist in a state of mortal sin is itself sacrilege and a mortal sin. That in and of itself would constitute heavy handed tactics for some people, positively medieval, and lacking charity.

But suppose he were to go one further and start listing the major things that are objectively gravely sinful. When he got to contraception and made the connection between that and refraining from receiving communion, would he not be attacked for using the “hammer?” Absolutely he would. People would leave the parish, the bishop would be button-holed about it, the priest would be yelled at.

Yet the man is a priest, not Joe Apologist. It is his duty to tell the truth to the people, to inform their consciences, and even if he is to do so in a gentle manner, the truth itself is the hammer. So then how much more is it objectionable when spoken by an ordinary Catholic? He is labelled a Taliban Catholic or something along those lines, more Catholic than the Pope, etc. The manner of speaking the truth these days has little to do with it. The truth itself is objected to as the hammer more often than not.

That is in a group or media setting.

One on one the dynamic is different, because the situation is interactive. I think the best way to do apologetics in that setting is to be the asker of the questions. It is amazing how a few well directed questions can get to the real issue that a person has with the Catholic faith, Christianity itself, or even the whole idea of God to begin with. Most people have an arsenal at the ready of stock objections and canards etc. that they will throw at you, one at a time or all at once. But underlying all of that is the real issue that bothers them, and it may or may not have anything to do with the barrage of arguments they will hit you with.

Now, it must be said that the truly accomplished public speaker, whether priest or layman, can perfect the same technique of establishing the groundwork and then posing pointed questions, hammering hard on the things that he can reasonably expect his audience, whoever they are, to already agree with, and then turning that into a question that they will be herded into answering in the way that he wants, without appearing to be issuing edicts and proclamations, and people who otherwise might not will often say that person is a great speaker.

 

[Sirach2]

Uther:

Yet the man is a priest, not Joe Apologist. It is his duty to tell the truth to the people, to inform their consciences, and even if he is to do so in a gentle manner, the truth itself is the hammer. So then how much more is it objectionable when spoken by an ordinary Catholic?

I disagree with your definition of a hammer, Uther. Maybe that’s what we should clarify. Is it just telling the truth? Or is it HOW we tell the truth? The new chapter C.M. presented deals with contentiousness, and that would be my interpretation of hammer. Someone who judges and snipes at others with loud insulting arrogance, allowing no other train of thought but his, and projecting it as gospel truth.

I alluded to a post yesterday, which thankfully was closed, where the Catholic poster relentlessly badgered non-C’s to the point of being offensive. Some posts shouted with flagrant huge colored bold fonts when their opinion was countered. I’m not against the zeal that motivated this person, but many were offended by the underlying attitude - a/k/a “hammer.”

I hesitated to share this here, but it if we learn from it, maybe it served a good purpose in spite of the harm it did. The person may have been corrected by the moderator behind the scene.

 

[uther]

I disagree with your definition of a hammer, Uther. Maybe that’s what we should clarify. Is it just telling the truth? Or is it HOW we tell the truth? The new chapter C.M. presented deals with contentiousness, and that would be my interpretation of hammer. Someone who judges and snipes at others with loud insulting arrogance, allowing no other train of thought but his, and projecting it as gospel truth.

I alluded to a post yesterday, which thankfully was closed, where the Catholic poster relentlessly badgered non-C’s to the point of being offensive. Some posts shouted with flagrant huge colored bold fonts when their opinion was countered. I’m not against the zeal that motivated this person, but many were offended by the underlying attitude - a/k/a “hammer.”

I hesitated to share this here, but it if we learn from it, maybe it served a good purpose in spite of the harm it did. The person may have been corrected by the moderator behind the scene.

Perhaps then, to carry the metaphor to its extreme, we may want to ask if the hammer is a legitimate tool to have in our tool box. I’ll say this, what passes for a “hammer” in these times I think is much less than what you are referring to. And perhaps we have exhausted the usefullness of the metaphor.

The difficulty is that so many wish to use the complaint of harshness, etc. to intimidate those whose job it is to teach and preach the truth into avoiding the direct discussion that will cause them moral discomfort.

And when someone else does take up the ball and run with it, however imperfect their presentation, they are castigated for it, ostracized by some whose job it is in the first place, assaulted by “friendly fire” to the extent that they become hardened to it and learn to expect it, and begin to up their criticism and harden its tone. The forming of alliances and allegiences then takes place and you have an internal battle which could have been avoided with a little moral courage in the first place.

We are in a situation wherein the moral and theological error of the culture has infected the Church from the inside. Any kind of straight talk in this environment is inevitably received with hostility and we must not allow that attempt to intimidate us deter us from the truth. As America has seen, the persecution of the Church can very easily come at the hands of those who say they are Catholics. This same scenario is often played out inside the Church as well.

So, in that context, I have come to treat the admonitions regarding “the hammer” with skepticism because I know that in many cases it is just what I pointed out. The case that you mention in these forums is obviously way out of line and just a case of boorishness and out of control anger.

But that is not the norm in my experience. The vicious assaults come from the other direction, against those who would speak the truth, and all too often from those within the Church whose grasp on the truth is shaky and who only want to “play nice.” How many ex-Catholics will tell you that they went down the street to the Baptist church because they wanted to “be fed?” What they are saying is that at the time, the Baptist preacher was not mincing words, whether or not his theology was correct. Had the priest spoken boldly and plainly, avoiding the flowery seminary language and platitudes, and got down to the issues that are right in our faces every day, those people may well have stayed.

That takes courage, I know, and we must not only speak the truth ourselves as God calls us, but we must pray for those priests. Courage for the orthodox, and affliction of conscience for the heterodox. The power of many people praying for the same thing cannot be overstated. Remember St. Peter’s escape from prison.

Two truths here we must not forget.

First, this is not the first time the Church has found herself in a sorry state. Some day it will be the last time, but I am not yet convinced this is the apocalypse, and even if it was we want to take as many souls with us to heaven as we strive to enter the narrow gate ourselves.

Second, let us not forget all of the tools we do have at our disposal as Catholics. In military terms we are well-armed. The current situation is depressing, dispiriting if we allow it to be so, but we can do a lot under the radar, so to speak, with the help of the saints and angels, to move the hearts and minds of people, priests and bishops included. We just need to accept the mission and get at it.