Proselytize vs Evangelize

[YinYangMom]

Proselytize: to try to persuade people to join a religion, cause, or group
Evangelize: to preach the gospel to; to convert to Christianity
~Merriam-Webster

Since the call for the New Evangelization I’ve been struggling with what that means, what it would look like in my daily life. What form does it take? How am I to respond to the call?
I’m better at defending the faith when the opportunity arises. That’s a good start, but I still find myself hesitating to put myself out there in terms of taking the initiative.

There’s a rule here on the forums against proselytizing: “Proselytizing Catholics or encouraging them to leave the Church”. I think that’s where my hesitation stems. It seems there is a very fine line between that and evangelizing. If we don’t want it done to us, why then would we do it to others?

Within my extended family (christian, non-Catholic) we may start out sharing the gospel, but it always comes to a point where sacraments and devotions come into play. At that point I find I stop myself because I don’t want them to get the idea I’m trying to convert them, which in my mind crosses the line from evangelizing to proselytizing.

How does one share the gospel without getting caught up in the zeal to convert souls in the process?

 

[Della]

Evangelizing is sharing the joy within you that comes from knowing and serving God in his Church. So, if you merely share the good things you have received from the sacraments/prayer/Bible reading/what you’ve learned no one can feel they are being pushed into anything. Of course, you don’t want to make this the only things you share, but sharing God’s love with others and the joy of being Catholic and being there for friends and family through thick and thin, taking a stand when needed, these are the best witnesses you can have.

Proselytizing, OTOH, involves telling others their faith and beliefs have to be abandoned and they are living their lives in the wrong way when they are being the best Christians they can be within their ecclesial communities. It’s one thing to admonish sinners and another to try to persuade others their faith and values are not right.

When I started RCIA I feared being told I had been all wrong before seeking reconciliation with the Church, but that didn’t happen. On the contrary, I was told, and it’s true, that my faith journey and experience of God were valid–that whatever good I had had in my previous faith associations could/should be brought into my life as a Catholic. It took a tremendous weight off my shoulders knowing that God had indeed been guiding my life and that I had had his grace in my life.

We should uphold whatever is true and encourage others not try to undermine their faith, but rather show them the riches they have been missing and that could be theirs within Christ’s Church.

 

[YinYangMom]

… share the good things you have received from the sacraments/prayer/Bible reading/what you’ve learned no one can feel they are being pushed into anything.

Most helpful, Della, thank you! It makes clear sense the way you put it. When I speak about the sacraments it should be from my perspective, how they have helped me find peace, not so much the theology behind them. I’m on good footing with the respecting other’s journey part already, but that was helpful too.

 

[MaryT777]

Evangelizing is sharing the joy within you that comes from knowing and serving God in his Church. So, if you merely share the good things you have received from the sacraments/prayer/Bible reading/what you’ve learned no one can feel they are being pushed into anything. Of course, you don’t want to make this the only things you share, but sharing God’s love with others and the joy of being Catholic and being there for friends and family through thick and thin, taking a stand when needed, these are the best witnesses you can have.

Proselytizing, OTOH, involves telling others their faith and beliefs have to be abandoned and they are living their lives in the wrong way when they are being the best Christians they can be within their ecclesial communities. It’s one thing to admonish sinners and another to try to persuade others their faith and values are not right.

When I started RCIA I feared being told I had been all wrong before seeking reconciliation with the Church, but that didn’t happen. On the contrary, I was told, and it’s true, that my faith journey and experience of God were valid–that whatever good I had had in my previous faith associations could/should be brought into my life as a Catholic. It took a tremendous weight off my shoulders knowing that God had indeed been guiding my life and that I had had his grace in my life.

We should uphold whatever is true and encourage others not try to undermine their faith, but rather show them the riches they have been missing and that could be theirs within Christ’s Church.

Very well said.
Mary.

 

[Della]

Most helpful, Della, thank you! It makes clear sense the way you put it. When I speak about the sacraments it should be from my perspective, how they have helped me find peace, not so much the theology behind them. I’m on good footing with the respecting other’s journey part already, but that was helpful too.

You’re welcome. :tiphat:

 

[coachdennis]

Most helpful, Della, thank you! It makes clear sense the way you put it. When I speak about the sacraments it should be from my perspective, how they have helped me find peace, not so much the theology behind them. I’m on good footing with the respecting other’s journey part already, but that was helpful too.

I am sorry for the bluntness, but that is often how I am.

Do what you wrote in this quote, share how God has given your peace. If people want to hear more, then the theology will come later. Proselytizing first is no more than doing a commercial. The Gospel message deserves better!

 

[Pancras]

Is this the right thread?

THIS thread was locked because this one already covered the discussion, it was said.

 

[Pancras]

Is this the right thread?

THIS thread was locked because this one already covered the discussion, it was said.

I’m new here and I’m kind of lost. I’m quoting myself because after thinking about this, I have a question but I don’t know where to ask so I’ll ask right here because this is “where it’s at.” The thread I linked above has been locked, but there are several posts in it that I would like to respond to because they are important things and I have something to say about them. However, I cannot reply to them in their context because, well, I already explained that. My question is, can I quote them and post the quote on this thread? Would that be breaking some kind of rule that I haven’t found explained somewhere?

To summarize: Thread A, with 16 posts over 8 days (16-8) was locked with the explanation that the topic has been well-covered in Thread B. I would like to post replies to Thread A but I can’t. Going to Thread B, I find a 6-month old thread that died after 6 hours with 6 posts (666). Question: Am I allowed to import a quote from Thread A into Thread B with my reply attached? — If so, what chance is there that the member to whom I would be posting a reply will ever see my post since it’s in a thread they did not post in (A) because A was locked?

(Note: I do not see any posts in B that I want to reply to, but I do see posts in A that I want to reply to, and since A was locked, I think re-starting it might not be very well viewed, considering the outlook by way of which it was decided to lock A in the first place.)

I’ll wait a day or two to see if any answer shows up here before I start looking for how to post questions in another forum or whatever.
.

 

[Joe_5859]

I’m new here and I’m kind of lost. I’m quoting myself because after thinking about this, I have a question but I don’t know where to ask so I’ll ask right here because this is “where it’s at.” The thread I linked above has been locked, but there are several posts in it that I would like to respond to because they are important things and I have something to say about them. However, I cannot reply to them in their context because, well, I already explained that. My question is, can I quote them and post the quote on this thread? Would that be breaking some kind of rule that I haven’t found explained somewhere?

To summarize: Thread A, with 16 posts over 8 days (16-8) was locked with the explanation that the topic has been well-covered in Thread B. I would like to post replies to Thread A but I can’t. Going to Thread B, I find a 6-month old thread that died after 6 hours with 6 posts (666). Question: Am I allowed to import a quote from Thread A into Thread B with my reply attached? — If so, what chance is there that the member to whom I would be posting a reply will ever see my post since it’s in a thread they did not post in (A) because A was locked?

(Note: I do not see any posts in B that I want to reply to, but I do see posts in A that I want to reply to, and since A was locked, I think re-starting it might not be very well viewed, considering the outlook by way of which it was decided to lock A in the first place.)

I’ll wait a day or two to see if any answer shows up here before I start looking for how to post questions in another forum or whatever.
.

If there’s a particular poster you would like to engage in conversation, you can always send them a private message either to let them know that you have responded to their post in the open thread or else to simply carry on the conversation that way.

 

[Pancras]

.
Thanks, Joe. But there is no particular poster I wanted to engage, in this case. I want to know if it is against the rules to import posts from a closed thread, when it was closed because the topic was already “well-covered” in an old (obsolete?) thread which is (curiously) still open (i.e., this thread right here).

I was interested in the (closed) thread contents, and was frustrated to see it was suddenly locked, so I was unable to post my responses to the (locked) thread. I just don’t want to break any forum guidelines, inadvertently.

If I were to post my replies in this 666-thread, I’m afraid it would not be obvious ***to what ***I was replying, unless I would also import the contents of the posts to which I would be replying (since they’re not posts found in this 666-thread). Is that okay to do? That is my question.

Angela Tate’s closing of the thread is accompanied by her statement that this topic was “well-covered” in the thread she then linked, as if to say: **Stop Posting Here, and instead, take your discussion to this 6-month-old thread **(even though it had died 6 months ago after 6 hours with only 6 posts, IOW a 666-thread). (But I’d prefer not to pester a mod if it’s unnecessary.)

I don’t know if that’s what she meant because **these **are my words, not hers, but it seemed to me that is the meaning of the closure post.

So, I’d like to know if I can copy and paste the posts to which I’d like to respond; that is, copy them from the closed thread (which had 16 posts over 8 days on current issues) and paste them to the 666-thread, with my responses attached. I don’t want to break any rules, which is why I’m asking this question.
.

 

[Pancras]

.
I’m still getting used to this rig.
I wanted to make a correction but I timed out – you’d think 20 minutes is enough time!

Where I said that moderator Tate had the new thread’s topic was “well-covered” in this thread, that was an inaccurate quote, because her words were “previously discussed quite well here.”

There. I now included the link to the closure post, #17.
.