Why so hostile?

I read a lot of comments on articles and blogs by various Catholic  and non-Catholic columnists and I am troubled by the vicious tenor of so many of them. Many comments are thoughtful and reasoned statements of agreement or disagreement with the author and I appreciate reading such responses. But far too many are of the "argumentum ad hominem" type, "if you don't like the message attack the messenger", both his intelligence and his character. I supopose it is easier to call someone an idiot or a liar than to refute his arguments, but such a lazy response is in itself dishonest and is an admission of inability to point out the actual error of a position.

Such negative debate seems to be a feature of political campaigns this year and contributes to the polarisation of the various parties who seem more concerned with their electoral victories than the good of the nation. Each side is backed into a corner with no possibility of compromise, no ability to find a middle ground, nothing but a stand-off which leaves the economy at a standstill, the various departments of the government without any clearly identified goals and ordinary citizens frustrated by the lack of leadership.
Unfortunately  the same intolerant style of debate seems to be creeping into theological and moral reasoning as well. I am not a fan of the current pope: I feel that the Church has failed to act in timely fashion in the clerical abuse crisis; we have sufferred under autocratic and incompetent bishops appointed solely for their retrograde theology; I know that we have regressed from the joyful and active participation of the laity in the Church consequent on the reforms of Vatican II, that the Church is backpedalling  in its responses to the attacks of secularism and its own internal failures, while casually alienating its natural allies of other faith communities.

Perhaps we need to appreciate the difference between intellectual brilliance and practical, pastoral sensitivity and realize that not everyone has an equal measure of both. Pope Benedict has been described as the most intellectually brilliant pope of the last century but he seems less conscious of the need to be sensitive to the public perception of what he says. However recent events  give  grounds for hope that someone is getting through to him. His recent state visit to Scotland and England displayed an ability to massage the  public ego of a rather secular nation and his beatificatiom of John Henry Newman was a belated recognition of a brilliant churchman whose thinking inspired many of the documents and decrees of Vatican II.