Evangelization vs. Proselytization

[uther]

I did a keyword search and scanned the threads but didn’t immediately see a thread specific to this question.

This is a serious question. I don’t know the answer and would appreciate some insight. Here’s what brought it up for me. I was scanning through the 58 proposals that the Synod of Bishops on Evangelization forwarded to the Holy Father. This one caught my eye;

Proposition 10 : RIGHT TO PROCLAIM AND TO HEAR THE GOSPEL
To proclaim the Good News and the person of Jesus is an obligation for each Christian, founded in the Gospel: “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (Mt 28: 19).
At the same time, it is an inalienable right for each person, whatever one’s religion or lack of religion, to be able to know Jesus Christ and the Gospel. This proclamation, given with integrity, must be offered with a total respect for each person, without any form of proselytizing.

If I were to just connect the two phrases that I have highlighted it would read like this;
Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations without any form of proselytizing.

What is the significant difference that makes proselytizing bad, while making disciples is good, in fact the command of our Lord?
I presume the difference must lie in the methodology but frankly that is as far as I get.

Any thoughts?

 

[MaryT777]

Thank you for posting this great question. I eagerly await answers from the members.
Mary.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I did a keyword search and scanned the threads but didn’t immediately see a thread specific to this question.

This is a serious question. I don’t know the answer and would appreciate some insight. Here’s what brought it up for me. I was scanning through the 58 proposals that the Synod of Bishops on Evangelization forwarded to the Holy Father. This one caught my eye;

If I were to just connect the two phrases that I have highlighted it would read like this;
Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations without any form of proselytizing.

What is the significant difference that makes proselytizing bad, while making disciples is good, in fact the command of our Lord?
I presume the difference must lie in the methodology but frankly that is as far as I get.

Any thoughts?

Looks like someone got confused. All evangelization should be regarded as proselytizing - the intention is to convert the listener to the Faith. If not, what is the point? But most of us don’t have to worry about it because we lack the ability and/or the psychological make up to " evangelize " in the way the Apostles did. Most of us will evangelize by sanctifying our daily activities. Like ST. Francis, preach always and even use words if you have to.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations without any form of proselytizing.

“Preach the Gospel constantly; if necessary, use words.”

“If all Christians acted like Christians, the whole world would convert to Christianity.”

“Love one another; as I have loved you.”

“Start with the person closest to you.”

 

[Jala]

I don’t know if there is a difference between the two words; I’ve always thought they meant the same thing. Neither my church (Essene) nor my late husband’s church (Swedenborgian) does either one.

It’s one thing to tell people how happy you are in your faith. It’s quite another to tell them that it’s the only way they’ll be happy too.

Jala

 

[kkollwitz]

Where I live, if you’re annoyed, it’s proselytizing. If you’re intrigued, it’s evangelizing.

 

[PJM]

=uther;10149773]I did a keyword search and scanned the threads but didn’t immediately see a thread specific to this question.

This is a serious question. I don’t know the answer and would appreciate some insight. Here’s what brought it up for me. I was scanning through the 58 proposals that the Synod of Bishops on Evangelization forwarded to the Holy Father. This one caught my eye;

If I were to just connect the two phrases that I have highlighted it would read like this;
Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations without any form of proselytizing.

What is the significant difference that makes proselytizing bad, while making disciples is good, in fact the command of our Lord?
I presume the difference must lie in the methodology but frankly that is as far as I get.

Any thoughts?

****Here’s the deal;

Each of us [ALL OF US] are to:

Know our faith well enough to Live it Fully and publically; share and expalin it when GOD presents the opportunity; and defend it in charity and factually when needed.

What we may not do is force anyone to accept our beliefs:

The CODE of Canon Law:**

Can. 748 §1. All persons are bound to seek the truth in those things which regard God and his Church and by virtue of divine law are bound by the obligation and possess the right of embracing and observing the truth which they have come to know.

§2. No one is ever permitted to coerce persons to embrace the Catholic faith against their conscience

This my friend is the meaning of what was shared by the Bishops. May God Bless them!**

 

[aragonjohn1]

I did a keyword search and scanned the threads but didn’t immediately see a thread specific to this question.

This is a serious question. I don’t know the answer and would appreciate some insight. Here’s what brought it up for me. I was scanning through the 58 proposals that the Synod of Bishops on Evangelization forwarded to the Holy Father. This one caught my eye;

If I were to just connect the two phrases that I have highlighted it would read like this;
Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations without any form of proselytizing.

What is the significant difference that makes proselytizing bad, while making disciples is good, in fact the command of our Lord?
I presume the difference must lie in the methodology but frankly that is as far as I get.

Any thoughts?

Evangelization as far as I know is leading by example but not always with words.
Proselyting is constantly letting someone know that you don’t respect a person or you’re religion does not.

Shalom
God bless

 

[uther]

****Here’s the deal;

Each of us [ALL OF US] are to:

Know our faith well enough to Live it Fully and publically; share and expalin it when GOD presents the opportunity; and defend it in charity and factually when needed.

What we may not do is force anyone to accept our beliefs:

The CODE of Canon Law:****

Can. 748 §1. All persons are bound to seek the truth in those things which regard God and his Church and by virtue of divine law are bound by the obligation and possess the right of embracing and observing the truth which they have come to know.

§2. No one is ever permitted to coerce persons to embrace the Catholic faith against their conscience

This my friend is the meaning of what was shared by the Bishops. May God Bless them!

I think that is to the point. Moreover, I don’t think I or anyone I know is doing that. Of course, it may be worthwhile to know what coercion means with respect to the Code. Clearly, the extremes are easy to understand. I can’t put a gun to your head or a sword to your throat and say “Convert, die, or pay a heavy tax for not converting.” That kind of thing is obvious.

But here is what the online Miriam-Webster dictionary has to say about the word “proselytize.”

pros·e·ly·tizedpros·e·ly·tiz·ing

Definition of PROSELYTIZE

intransitive verb
1
: to induce someone to convert to one’s faith
2
: to recruit someone to join one’s party, institution, or cause
transitive verb
: to recruit or convert especially to a new faith, institution, or cause
— pros·e·ly·ti·za·tion noun
— pros·e·ly·tiz·er noun
See proselytize defined for English-language learners »
See proselytize defined for kids »
Examples of PROSELYTIZE

He uses his position to proselytize for the causes that he supports.

They are a sport-shirted, discomforted lot, pacing, puffing feverishly on cigarettes, perspiring freely and proselytizing furiously. —Nicholas Dawidoff, Sports Illustrated, 19 Aug. 1991
Mormons are urged to use their social contacts with Gentiles to proselytize, by doing such favors as babysitting, running errands, and lending lawnmowers. —Malise Ruthven, Wilson Quarterly, Spring 1991
His prodigious correspondence with twenty-five hundred scientists, politicians, and men of letters … proselytized for his new science of statistics. —Daniel J. Boorstin, The Discoverers, 1983

What I highlighted I found interesting. Not because of the Mormon connection but because of what is described. Would it be considered coercion to do good things for people and thereby placing them in a debt of gratitude which may be the reason they accept your invitation to go to mass, or some conference, etc.? That is the implication of the use of the term here.

Is that a form of coercion? Some may say yes. I don’t necessarily think so. And I do believe Can. 748 is spot-on because we are talking about faith here. It cannot be forced anyway. Coercion can bring about the outward acquiescence but doesn’t touch the soul. Christ’s two commandments were to love God and to love our neighbor. We cannot be forced to love, even the agape kind. We may even give the outward appearance and practice without the conversion of heart.

But then, when is that admonition of the Bishops truly applicable? What would qualify as coercion? It has me curious. I don’t think I have ever seen this in action, particularly from a Catholic. I have seen the odd evangelical practice that has come close, I suppose, although being raised in that environment I never got the impression that anyone was advocating removing someone’s free will.