I would like to ask the people of Cathinfo my question in the subject title.

Should we be rude to hostile atheists?

For whatever strange reason, this topic has gotten me banned from a Traditional Catholic forum.  I can't imagine why exploring this question is such a hot topic, since we are supposed to be evangelizing people in the first place.  But I never really reached a conclusion.  I still desire to know how we should approach hostile atheists in the online social spaces.  I know a lot of thin-skinned Trads fear talking about this and want to shut out the conversation if possible, but I am confident that people here will be able to openly consider, ponder, and address my queries on this matter.  

Now, for the topic at hand.  Admittedly, I have become more aware and robust in situations when I find myself in an atheist's midst.  

When I think of different saints, I feel as though I'm in good company.  Consider St. Francis of Assisi, who once boldly told the Muslims "I am sent by the Most High God, to show you and your people the way of salvation by announcing to you the truths of the Gospel."  Can you imagine saying that to a gaggle of atheists who despise you?  To think that a man would have the nerve to come to an entire collection of people who believe something different, and then telling them that they are wrong in their ways an need to convert.

Or, consider St. Francis' five Franciscan Friars who went to Morocco to convert the infidels.  They preached in the streets and marched right into a mosque and denounced Mohammed right then and there.  When they were imprizoned and tortured, they tried converting the jailers.  According to a Father Cuthbert, "[T]he five Friars knew nothing of diplomacy and had not the temper to live and let live. Mohammed was, in their eyes, the enemy of Christ, and the souls of this people were rightful spoils for their Divine Redeemer.  To go back upon their mission would be a traitorus backsliding from their fealty to their Savior."

St. Augustine of Hippo once said of the Pelagians: "There is an opinion that calls for sharp and vehment resistence -- I mean the belief that the power of the human will can of itself, without the help of God, either achieve perfect righteousness or advance steadily towards it."

Consider when St. Cyril of Alexandria once stated: "Truth reveals herself plain to those who love her."  Do you know what that implies?  It means that those who do not know the truth do not love truth, but they love deception.  How passive aggressive.  Such a statement's tone could be seen as very hostile to those who didn't agree with St. Cyril.

And then, check out the audacious tone of St. Thomas Aquinas: "This then is what we have written to destroy the error mentioned [Latin Averroism], using the arguments and teachings of the philosophers themselves, not the docuмents of faith.  If anyone glorying in the name of false science wishes to say anything in reply to what we have written, let him not speak in corners nor to boys who cannot judge of such arduous matters, but reply to this in writing, if he dares.  He will find that not only I, who am the least of men, but many other zealous for the truth, will resist his error and correct his ignorance."

One of my favorite quotes, which happened to aid me in getting the boot from The Echo Chamber, comes from Santa Clause.  When confronted by a cult of Artemis, St. Nicholas said: "Go to Hell's fire, which has been lit for you by the Devil."  Of St. Nicholas' war against that cult, the St. Nicholas Center says the following: "Legends tell of fierce warfare between Nicholas and Artemis, conflict which lasted all of the saint's life and even beyond. Nicholas attacked this great temple with tremendous might and vigor, absolutely determined to bring about its total ruin. The very foundations were uprooted from the ground, so complete was the destruction. It is said that the fleeing demons inspired the people's awe of God."

Has anyone read the account of St. Catherine of Sienna, who was quite blunt in speaking to people?  Once, when addressing three Italian Cardinals who supported the anti-pope, she called them a "stench that makes the whole world reek."

I hear that St. Jerome was quite a firebrand as well.  

Heck, even Michael Voris--who certainly has mixed reviews from people here in the Traditional Catholic circles--thinks that men in the Church need to be more masculine.  

Why am I bringing this up again?  I suppose it stems from Vox Day's latest blog post today, titled: Punch Harder.  In his latest post, he talks about the trials and travails of dealing with online Social Justice Warriors.  Vox said the following:

The thing is, if you're going to be a public figure and express your opinion on the Internet, you are going to upset a subset of the people who encounter it. A subset of that subset are going to respond by attacking you using nothing but rhetoric. I've had people calling me nearly every name in the book on the Internet since 2001. So what? It clearly hasn't harmed me in the slightest. I quite like that it also gives me complete carte blanche to call everyone else anything I please since it seems to bother most of them considerably more than it bothers me.

The first rule of dealing with SJWs is Andrew Breitbart's: always punch back twice as hard. The second rule is this: keep punching. Women are particularly susceptible to attacks on their appearance and their sɛҳuąƖ behavior, so those are the most effective subjects to target with rhetoric. Once it is clear that they're not engaging in honest dialectic or rational discourse, your best bet is to either ignore them or nuke them rhetorically.

The third rule is this: quote them and quote them ruthlessly. Patrick Nielsen Hayden is a self-admitted racist. John Scalzi is a self-admitted rapist. NK Jemisin is a self-admitted savage... and proud of it.

The SJWs have to choose. Either they can engage in rational discourse or they can accept being called sluts and savages and racists and evil, ugly feminists on a regular basis. What is not on the table is one-way communication where they attack and lecture us and we humbly accept it in dutiful silence.

Admittedly, I do like Vox Day's approach here.  I feel as though Christians have been flacid and ineffective in the last century in holding their own fort and successfully combating the encroaching societal evils.  We can spend all day navel gazing how we got here.  But the fact is, we need field officers.  We need people unafraid to do field work.  And, we need people fighting in the field.  We need to send our troops out there.  I'm unsure hunkering down in enclaves is going to be an effective defense against Satan in the 21st Century.  

With Vox's approach, we can put on our swords, keep loaded pistols in our holsters, and ride out onto the battlefield ready for action.  

But, I am a little conflicted, which is why I created this thread today, and which is why I created that thread over at Suscipe Domine last year--which ultimately got me booted from the site.  I hope that bringing this up will not get me ostracized in the same way, as I am only looking for an answer here.  Please consider my question that I posed to Vox Day this afternoon:

Vox, about punching harder, I have this question in relation to other online opponents, the atheists.

I truly enjoy watching our side get ruthless with the other side.

I've been at it with atheists online lately. They can be pretty vile. However, as I read different apologists, they state that we are to be humble and respectful.

Here is an excerpt from Trent Horn's book, Answering Atheism: How to Make the Case for God With Logic and Charity.

"Theists do their cause a great disservice by ridiculing atheists or saying that it is obvious atheism is false. If atheism were simply irrational, then why would believers have to guard against being 'drowned' by unbelief? Likewise, atheists should know that many people have wrestled and struggled with the question of God's existence before they converted to religious faith. Both sides should accept each other's doubts and journey toward the truth together in a spirit of mutual humility."

The above passage comes from a section called "Getting Rid of Bad Attitudes."

I have not been completely kind. On occasion I return their hostility. Not in a boisterous explosive and emotional way. But sort of in a straight matter of fact way. And I feel heartened when I see people from my side pull out their stilletos and take charge against ruthless hostile ridicule.

Ought we be more pleasant and just take the hits? I'm a little divided on this one.

If it is one thing that Catholic Answers has going for it, it is that they have Trent Horn.  His book Answering Atheism is a real gem of a tool in figuring out how to deal with the rise of faithlessness in our culture.  I assure you all, atheism and agnosticism will be very large problems for all believing Catholics 25 years from now.  If you have babies and toddlers, then by the time your children are grown adults, they could be facing the open persecution that we only read about when we read of the Vendee in France, persecuted Catholics in Vietnam, or the Christeros in FreeMasonic Mexico.  Horn's book is a good beginning.  

Yet, is Horn completely correct?  Do we truly need to get rid of bad attitudes?  Are we truly doing ourselves a disservice by ridiculing atheists?  Should Horn time travel back to the outspoken saints who combatted the heresies and cults of their times?  In my mind, on this point, it looks like it is the 21st Century Trent Horn vs St. Francis and his Friars, St. Augustine, St. Cyril, St. Thomas, St. Catherine, and St. Nicholas.

I would appreciate your thoughts on this matter.  I have addressed this before elsewhere.

(See: www.thehirschfiles.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-echo-chambers-fears-of-honesty-and.html)

I trust that the question will be reasonably recieved here.  


UPDATE:

Here is Vox's reply to my questions:

Here is an excerpt from Trent Horn's book, Answering Atheism: How to Make the Case for God With Logic and Charity.

I don't have to read any more than that to know he's an ineffective and quite possibly a jackass to boot. Christians who talk about charity in that sense are like liberals who talk about being thoughtful.

Ought we be more pleasant and just take the hits? I'm a little divided on this one.

No. If they are taking shots like that, their issue is pride in their pseudo-reason. Break it with the real thing.

I will forward this question of mine to other Catholic forums, as I want to hear other Catholics' opinions on this matter.  

Hello LaramieHirsch,

Allow me to give my two cents on your unfortunate situation.

"Should we be rude to hostile atheists?"

Maybe wording it as, "Should we stand firm and go on the offensive against vocalized enemies of the faith?" might be a little bit better, not to pick on you.

Seeing it that way, by all means!!

 :dwarf: :dwarf: :dwarf: :dwarf: :dwarf: :dwarf: :dwarf:

I've never been bashful when it comes to having myself set within a debate (although starting one or calling someone out on their faults at first has always been my issue). Never feel ashamed to call a spade a spade, do not be afraid to call that atheist for what he is, a fool! Within good reason, of course. No profanity should be used, we are not as the heathen!

For...

"The foole (a) hath said in his hart: There is no God. They are corrupt, and are become (b) abominable in their studies: there is (c) not that doth good, no not one."

Here are the commentaries from this verse:

a) Wicked men drowned in sinne are at last so besotted in their vnderstanding, that they thinke in their heart (though they dare not vtter it) that there is no God: that is, none that hath (divine) (providence) in governing the world, not that wil judge al in the end.
b) Defiled with al sorts of sinne.
c) Not only the most wicked, but also al mankind were vnable without a Redeemer to doe good.

We must allow the righteousness of the Catholic Church to be ever present, we must never back down and deny Our Lord Jesus Christ.

The utter stupidity and rashness of denying that a God exists only serves as a testament to the sheer depravity that we have reached! The very fact that negligence has brought us here, yes, it is a shame.

Remember, that this Age has been accorded the Gift of counsel. However, the opposite of the Gift of counsel is that of the vice of sloth, and by extension neglect. This is the "spirit of the age". We must try to not have ourselves get caught in the spirit of the age, my friend. Now, you have experienced first hand what this theory means in your life.

Of course, at first we must be charitable. Yet, if they remain firm and even go so far as attack the Catholic faith, again by all means you are obliged to resist that threat and defend Our Lord Jesus Christ!

I hope this helps. You are not in the wrong here, LaramieHirsch. I do, indeed, applaud you for this.

 :applause:

It isn't being rude.  It is being truthful and curt.  

I think this couple of chapters from the classic book The Imitation of Christ give sound advice when eocuntering such situations:

Shunning Over-Familiarity

DO NOT open your heart to every man, but discuss your affairs with one who is wise and who fears God. Do not keep company with young people and strangers. Do not fawn upon the rich, and do not be fond of mingling with the great. Associate with the humble and the simple, with the devout and virtuous, and with them speak of edifying things. Be not intimate with any  woman, but generally commend all good women to God. Seek only the intimacy of God and of His angels, and avoid the notice of men.

We ought to have charity for all men but familiarity with all is not expedient. Sometimes it happens that a person enjoys a good reputation among those who do not know him, but at the same time is held in slight regard by those who do. Frequently we think we are pleasing others by our presence and we begin rather to displease them by the faults they find in us.

And

Avoiding Idle Talk

SHUN the gossip of men as much as possible, for discussion of worldly affairs, even though sincere, is a great distraction inasmuch as we are quickly ensnared and captivated by vanity. Many a time I wish that I had held my peace and had not associated with men. Why, indeed, do we converse and gossip among ourselves when we so seldom part without a troubled conscience?

We do so because we seek comfort from one another’s conversation and wish to ease the mind wearied by diverse thoughts. Hence, we talk and think quite fondly of things we like very much or of things we dislike intensely. But, sad to say, we often talk vainly and to no purpose; for this external pleasure effectively bars inward and divine consolation. Therefore we must watch and pray lest time pass idly.

When the right and opportune moment comes for speaking, say something that will edify. Bad habits and indifference to spiritual progress do much to remove the guard from the tongue. Devout conversation on spiritual matters, on the contrary, is a great aid to spiritual progress, especially when persons of the same mind and spirit associate together in God.

Let's establish first that there is all the difference in the world between a poor soul plagued by doubt, struggling to believe, but seeking the Truth with a good will; and a hateful, God-denying, diabolically proud atheist.  Both are deserving of charity, but that manifests itself in very different ways, each according to his due. Treat the former with an abundance of patience, appeal to his good will by directing him to books, writings, sermons, etc that will address his doubts and direct him to the nearest Traditional priest for further counsel.

As for the latter - proud, avowed atheists are just about the lowest wretches of the human race entire. They are worse than heretics, schismatics and even pagans because they are not merely wrong about a matter of doctrine, and do not merely belong to a false religion, but proudly repudiate religion as such, and willfully shut out the innate knowledge of God written into every man's soul. Meeting such a hardened enemy of God with all the patience and compassion you've afforded to the good-willed doubter is a wasteful casting of pearls before swine. Appeal to him with hard logic and reason, and if he shuts you out with puerile insults and utter nonsense about teacups and spaghetti monsters (as he inevitably will), then shake the dust from your feet in testimony against him and walk away.

Downthumber - As always, a "hit and run" downthumb that is not accompanied by a verbal expression of disagreement and / or refutation communicates nothing apart perhaps from contrarian petulance is therefore utterly worthless.

Feel free to prove me right by hit-and-run downthumbing this post as well.

Moreover, if these same idiots are in your presence while they blaspheme Christ in any way, or assault the Blessed Virgin Mary, then they should receive physical reprisals within your capability.

Hear, hear! The holy zeal of Saints Nicholas and Pius X has been all but snuffed out in Catholic men thanks to the damnable modern tendency to confuse Charity with "niceness." One laudable exception is an incident I recall hearing about a decade ago or so when, at a pilgrimage (I forget to which site) a group of Protestants stood on the sidelines to mock the piety of the pilgrims as "idolatry," and when they turned from insulting the pilgrims to blaspheming the Blessed Mother, a group of eastern rite young men (either Syrian or Iraqi, again it's been awhile) immediately fell upon the blaspheming heretics and beat them with fists. God bless them.

Quote from: ascent

Moreover, if these same idiots are in your presence while they blaspheme Christ in any way, or assault the Blessed Virgin Mary, then they should receive physical reprisals within your capability.

Hear, hear! The holy zeal of Saints Nicholas and Pius X has been all but snuffed out in Catholic men thanks to the damnable modern tendency to confuse Charity with "niceness." One laudable exception is an incident I recall hearing about a decade ago or so when, at a pilgrimage (I forget to which site) a group of Protestants stood on the sidelines to mock the piety of the pilgrims as "idolatry," and when they turned from insulting the pilgrims to blaspheming the Blessed Mother, a group of eastern rite young men (either Syrian or Iraqi, again it's been awhile) immediately fell upon the blaspheming heretics and beat them with fists. God bless them.

True Catholic men, defending our Blessed Mother.
Heck, even Pope Francis the Modernist has advised the same!

If my good friend Dr. Gasbarri says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch,

One plus One is Two.  Christ was truthful when He told Peter, "Get behind me, Satan".  Truthful with the money changers, Truthful when He stated "men in white seplacurs.  

Father Solanus Casey would refer to infidels as "Damned Fools!"

The only time you get into positions like that, is not too often.

My neighbor, the Lutheran Minister, who takes that job as #2, asked me if Billy Graham was a Christian, being I was Catholic.  I responded with "He thinks he is." And the Lutheran Minister asked, "what do you mean?"  I answered, "If there is One  God there is One True Faith, true I asked?"  Therefore, Billy thinks he is. My neighbor has never asked me a question since and that was 20 years ago.

I think the best thing is to keep these people always in prayer, that is our duty, to convert.  That is how it is to be done. Fly's are attracted to honey and we bring them to the good news, Truth, and keep it to prayer.