Spirit & Life

G.K. Chester ton, no stranger to argument and debate, wrote: “It is generally the man who is not ready to argue who is ready to sneer.” And not just sneer but also glare, shout, scream — and demand a duel to the cyber-death with flaming e-mails heavy with emotion but light on logic.

I encounter these irritable attitudes often, as argument is a staple of the apologetics diet. (“Argue” comes from a Latin word meaning “to prove.”) Civilized argument and debate, when pursued in the interest of learning more about the truth, are good things. But many people, even some who engage in apologetics, don't like the necessary give-and-take. They want to give but not take; they like to talk but aren't into listening.

True confession: I've been guilty of this myself, and on more than one occasion. “How come this silly person won't listen to me?” I have occasionally thought to myself. “After all, I'm right. Isn't it obvious?” Perhaps I was right, but my approach was all wrong. Without really listening to the question or argument of the other person, I failed to demonstrate the reasonable nature of my belief.

Once, as a young evangelical Protestant, I passionately informed a Methodist lady that, unless a person outwardly hears the Gospel and the name of Jesus Christ, they have no chance for salvation. The lady made many good points against this flawed position, but I comforted myself with the knowledge that she believed in the ordination of women and thus could not be taken seriously.

Since becoming Catholic I've sat in that Methodist's seat. Catholic apologists are often informed that the Catholic position cannot be taken seriously because — take your pick — the Pope tells Catholics what to think, Catholic tradition is not biblical, Catholics might not even be Christians or Catholics are the spawn of the Antichrist.

Especially irritating are e-mails that say they offer “arguments” along these lines: I watched you on television. I didn't like that you criticized non-Catholics. I feel like you are a very angry person. Why are you so divisive? Shouldn't Christians get along? By the way, I doubt Catholics are Christian.

A more aggressive variation goes like this: I read one of your articles. You don't know anything. You obviously haven't read the Bible. You are a liar. Repent.

One recent e-mail — very long and repetitive — stated that my hour with Father Mitch Pacwa on EWTN had been “a futile exercise to protect Roman Catholic doctrine and not the explanation and extension of the Christian faith through Scripture.” No examples or proof of this was given, possibly because Father Pacwa and I spent most of the show examining passages of the Bible. The writer then claimed that to “argue these theological differences in the public media leaves both Catholic and Protestant Christians confused and unfulfilled.”

This person's ability to see into the heart and mind of everyone who viewed the show would be breathtaking — if it were real. As for arguing, didn't Jesus and his apostles have an argument or two with those who opposed his teachings and the Gospel? Of course they did, in part because they cared too much to leave people confused about vital dif ferences of belief.

So argument and debate can be necessary and good things. Don't agree? Please don't sneer — I think we can all agree that sneering is not good, or necessary.

Carl E. Olson is editor of Envoy magazine and author of Will Catholics Be ‘Left Behind’?