Why do the heathen rage - how to respond

[paul_c]

the comments to articles about Pope Benedict’s resignation in the secular press are loaded with hatred and vitriol aimed at the church in general and the Pope in particular. On the Washington Post website, for instance,these comments were about 90% of what was shown.
It is equally bad on the sites of the Telegraph and the New York Times. The question is, how or if the faithful should respond?.

For certain, if we do want to respond, it can not be in kind. We must be factual and loving. To do anything else betrays the message.

Many of those people who comment negatively do so because they advocate positions that the Church finds objectionable. They support gay marriage, abortion, sex outside of marriage, etc. For them, patiently explaining the church’s position is fair to do but unlikely to change the minds of the most hardened.

Others are athiests who just condemn religion in general. These are often the most stridently negative. You can counteract their specific claims if they make any in the hopes of giving a fair account for the onlookers.

What do you do when you read these comments?

 

[ACanthony]

I had the same question myself so thank you for posing it!

For me personally, sometimes I find myself reading the comments then I am wondering why I am reading them. There are lots of hateful comments there, and very little room for actual discussion of issues. Although one small part of me thinks it may be wise to respond to every single hateful comment and then pray for that person, I kind of think this is a spot to pick and choose your battles. Is it really worth it?

I kind of think I shouldn’t be reading much of these comments anyways. I see a lot of hateful and often bigoted remarks. I obviously think it is necessary to evangelize but to me I’d rather preach (or rather LIVE) the Gospel to those that are open to it, and do whatever I can to pray for those that oppose it. Like Jesus said, preach, and then if people are not open to it, we should move on.

 

[BobCatholic]

The reason is the heathen rage is because their god is the pelvic region. How dare we Christians say that there are actual ethics when it comes to sex? Absolutely scandalous! Who are they to say our religion (worshiping the pelvic region) is wrong!

 

[paul_c]

The reason is the heathen rage is because their god is the pelvic region. How dare we Christians say that there are actual ethics when it comes to sex? Absolutely scandalous! Who are they to say our religion (worshiping the pelvic region) is wrong!

There are many reasons why the heathen rage.
Wading into these comment sections are like wading into a cesspool → you know that all you wil find is filth. part of me wants to say:

You can serve God or Satan. You will know which one you are serving by the tenor of your comments. God is love, Satan is Hate. Read your comments and judge for yourself.

Do you think that would sway anyone?

 

[paul_c]

I had the same question myself so thank you for posing it!

For me personally, sometimes I find myself reading the comments then I am wondering why I am reading them. There are lots of hateful comments there, and very little room for actual discussion of issues. Although one small part of me thinks it may be wise to respond to every single hateful comment and then pray for that person, I kind of think this is a spot to pick and choose your battles. Is it really worth it?

I kind of think I shouldn’t be reading much of these comments anyways. I see a lot of hateful and often bigoted remarks. I obviously think it is necessary to evangelize but to me I’d rather preach (or rather LIVE) the Gospel to those that are open to it, and do whatever I can to pray for those that oppose it. Like Jesus said, preach, and then if people are not open to it, we should move on.

I am in general agreement with you. I used to spend considerable time on the Washington Post " on faith" website doing apologetics. On Faith by the way is moderated by an athiest, so you know their leanings right away. I would inevitably find my self accosted by a dozen or so people who were vehemently anti-religious and a few others who were religious but anti-Catholic. I assume that there were lurkers who might have benefited from the truth, but none that would ever carry on an intellectual discussion. I spend considerably less time there now.

People who come to Catholic websites like this are usually led here by the spirit and are open to real discussion (or else they are shortly banned by the moderators.

Nonetheless, It seems like we should have a presence on secular websites

 

[tabycat]

To respond or not to respond: Is this the hill you what to die on?

 

[paul_c]

To respond or not to respond: Is this the hill you what to die on?

I am torn between wanting to give witness in a hostile environment or to just leave these people to their own devices. It seems like the first option is the more loving and the last is simply an easy way out.

Having said that, the question remains - what tactic would be the most beneficial?

 

[TimothyH]

The question is, how or if the faithful should respond?.

What do you do when you read these comments?

We respond with our lives first.

The primary response of a Christian to God’s invitation of love is prayer. Prayer comes first. One sign of having made real spiritual progress is is when our habitual reaction to insult and injury is prayer instead of anger. Lack of anger in one’s life is a sign of holiness. Apologetics is a waste of time without prayer.

Living our lives in a state of peace and calm is how we should respond, and that comes from frequenting the sacraments and prayer. When the world is in a rage and everyone is freaking out over the latest crisis, and we remain at peace, calmly going about the business placed before us in the “Sacrament of the present moment”, people will notice. People will want to be like us, and will ask us how we can be so peaceful, calm and joyful when the world seems to be going to Hell. Then it is time to speak, not before.

I am torn between wanting to give witness in a hostile environment or to just leave these people to their own devices. It seems like the first option is the more loving and the last is simply an easy way out.

Having said that, the question remains - what tactic would be the most beneficial?

I recommend the latter. I wouldn’t worry about it. The world is going to do what it is going to do, and for the vast majority of us, we touch other people one-by-one and in person, intimately, not through comments on news articles which are only designed to generate advertising revenue for the newspaper.

I certainly wouldn’t argue with anyone online. If anything, I would make a comment and leave it there.

The greatest apologetic consists of how we live our lives and how we show ourselves to be Christians to others. That’s just my opinion.

-Tim-

 

[BJPeterson]

I’m not a religious person (i.e., I do not hold supernatural/spiritual beliefs), so maybe my perspective could be of some interest. I think the most important thing to remember is that most people who post their opinions on the internet are looking to stir up trouble, not to engage in an interesting discussion. This is true of many atheists and many Christians, and people of many other religions. People are people, which makes them predictable–and people predictably behave in quite awful ways some of the time.

Having said that, I think there are at least two major groups of “heathens” you are pointing out, but you had not made the necessary distinction between them. There are the vitriolic anti-religious folks out there who stoop to any depth to ridicule the pope. Then there are others who are not so much hateful as concerned/disappointed with the human institution of religion, Catholic Church included. Some posters might comment to express their great displeasure with what they perceive to be the moral failings of the pope. To post as the former is unreasonable and should be unwelcome everywhere, but to post as the latter is not.

So, I agree there are a lot of terrible comments out there. I would ignore them, because the internet is full of trolls. We each tend to spot those trolls on “the other side” more easily then we see those with whom we might be inclined to agree. But don’t forget to remember that not everyone expressing displeasure with the pope and hoping for a new direction are terrible people. They are merely people who don’t share your beliefs.

As a final note, although I find many of you interesting and respectful, not all are. (Again, this is just human nature, and is probably largely independent of belief system). For example, when people like BobCatholic post trite assertions about the motivations of others (as he does above), the conversation definitely is not advanced. If anything, I am concerned that such language within an in-group only serves to further rhetorically isolate the bulk of the group from any understanding of those from the out-group.

 

[BobCatholic]

Do you think that would sway anyone?

Those who are controlled by their pelvic regions are incapable of reason. Words will not sway them, regardless how awesome the argument, how logical, how reasonable, nor how charitable.

MAYBE if we have the ability to do signs and wonders, and work mighty miracles, then we can reach them. I think at this point only the Boss can do that.

 

[tcay584]

I would ignore. There’s no sense in replying when a genuine dialogue is unwanted as evidenced by the level of vitriol in some of the postings. Just go about your day and be glad you know God

 

[Theologus]

TimothyH

“*The primary response of a Christian to God’s invitation of love is prayer. Prayer comes first. *”
Absolutely! loving prayer is the greatest power and distance is no barrier.

“going about the business placed before us in the “Sacrament of the present moment”, people will notice. People will want to be like us, and will ask”
Absolutely! And they will trust the proven power of what you know.

“I wouldn’t worry about it.”
If you worry, why pray? If you pray, why worry? – back to prayer.

“I certainly wouldn’t argue with anyone online”
Good rule. Argument and debate both demands a winner. Dialogue demands truth and truth requires an openness that risks conversion.

“The greatest apologetic consists of how we live our lives and how we show ourselves to be Christians to others.”
Absolutely! Christians are known by their love and consequently believed. To doubt the power of God to convert the heart is idolatry. It enthrones personal opinion instead of watching God move on the face of the waters.

Theologus