I'm a little confused because I have read it's a good thing to be militant and to put heretics in their place and to be combative etc. but then I have also read that you should be nice and charitable to all and not get into debates and confrontations etc.

I don't remember right now where exactly i have read both things but it has been in pre-Vatican 2 stuff.

This is confusing because these two things are mutually exclusive and you end up not knowing what to do.

We should be most militant with ourselves first, never giving in to prideful or otherwise sinful thoughts, much less words or actions.

The North American Martyrs were trained from childhood, as all children in faithful Catholic families have been, to discipline themselves with mortification, prayer, and good works. Then as young men they studied for the priesthood, were trained, and then were hand-picked to teach the Faith to the savages in the New World. They were more civilized than we might ever hope to be, as far as I can understand, because their whole culture nurtured the Catholic Faith. I will never know what it might have been like to have been trained from such an early age not only by my parents, but by each and every one of my family members, neighbors and teachers. Of course there were sinful people in those times too, but because the Church was free, it was more difficult to sin then than it is now.

When these French Jesuits came to the New World they were confronted with real savages, as we all know. I think I recall reading from the Jesuit Relations that almost every sentence that came from the mouth of any of them, including children, contained either a curse, a lie, something vulgar or some blasphemy. I can't imagine surviving even 5 minutes in that kind of situation without falling into sin myself, but I didn't have their training.

They're our examples. They were prepared to die before they would consent to a single venial sin. We know what the venial sins are against pride and anger and other species of sin. I think we must form the habit of avoiding sin before, during, and after we think of converting anyone else. Others might disagree, saying 'But if a house is on fire, you don't think of anything but saving those who might be trapped inside, and if they refuse to be helped, you knock them out and drag them to safety.' I would answer that's not a good analogy because there are no true forced conversions.

I'm pretty sure that every possible means of getting to Arius was tried before that shot was delivered by St. Nicolas. I think I read that Arius was given a long time to voice his views before that shot. St. Nicolas did many charitable works, as you probably know, before and after that shot. How many of us can say we've trained ourselves to that degree?

Since we don't live in a Catholic culture, we have to humble ourselves and start with appropriate goals suited to our state of soul. Too much ambition in this practice can be prideful, and too little can be slothful. Either can lead to despair.

I think the most challenging duty we have is this one to try to convert others. But once we've acquired the habit of overcoming our self-love, it should be easy to talk to non-Catholics about the Faith.

And Pope St Pius X said "Modernists should be beaten with fists!"

Theres a difference between hard-line heretics/freemasons/etc who are out to attack Christianity and lead souls away from the truth and into hell (of which St Pius X was speaking), and a heretic who is one because they follow the errors of the former hard-liners.

It can be a fine line sometimes, but if a heretic is obstinate, then true charity would be to attack his errors, not "be nice" to him, because he needs a "wake up call" and may be leading others astray.

.......and, look where we are today, Clare. Modernists occupy every post; they rule the roost.  Better that they had been beaten with fists ....

Ah, this is where the virtue of Prudence comes in, often referred to as as mother of all virtues.  So much depends on who you're talking to, under what circuмstances, what damage the person might be doing to others, what effect you might anticipate from either being harsh or being gentle, etc.  In the case of some recalcitrant heretic who's damaging the faith, they often need to be put down hard.  In the case of some individual who's simply searching on their own and confused, etc., then a more gentle approach would be called for.  There's no absolute answer here.  St. Jerome was extremely harsh with some of the heretics in his day.

I agree ! It is painful to see error stricken catholic's in today's world.
I feel like a volcano erupting when i hear or see it. To much some time.

I think in our time, with the MM being what it is, it's fair to say that anyone over the age of something like 10 who isn't a faithful Catholic has suffered some degree of brainwashing.

What's the MM? Modern something?

I'm a little confused because I have read it's a good thing to be militant and to put heretics in their place and to be combative etc. but then I have also read that you should be nice and charitable to all and not get into debates and confrontations etc.

While I believe the former, I've been banned from Catholic forums for daring to even discuss the former option.  

Not only did St. Nick punch Arius in the face, get a load of what he yelled at members of the cult of Artemis.  He said:

Go to Hell's fire, which has been lit for you by the Devil.

And then, let's not forget that St. Thomas Aquinas suggests killing anyone in society who is a corrupter to the community.  


(I got the following quotations from here:
http://taylormarshall.com/2015/11/islamic-refugee-crisis-good-samaritan-or-maccabean-response-or-both.html)

“Therefore if a man be dangerous and infectious to the community, on account of some sin, it is praiseworthy and advantageous that he be killed in order to safeguard the common good.” STh II-II q. 64, a. 2.

It is permissible to kill a criminal if this is necessary for the welfare of the whole community. However, this right belongs only to the one entrusted with the care of the whole community — just as a doctor may cut off an infected limb, since he has been entrusted with the care of the health of the whole body. STh II-II q. 64, a. 3.