Why Catholic church afraid to evangelize

[devoutchristian]

Both of which will be very difficult for a minor flying in the face of serious opposition and no support within their family.

But not impossible.

And refusal may be based on other reasons too - possibly the priest has well founded doubts as to whether this young person has been sufficiently catechised or is otherwise ready for baptism.

Unless I’m missing something the priest in question refuses to start the process of initiation. In any case, the OP has given no indication of his age, so that’s probably not an issue.

 

[Trebor135]

And the Church - the Catholic Church - has preached the gospel in hostile nations for centuries.

But–as I asked in post #15–how much tangible fruit has the quietist approach borne in Muslim-majority countries?

 

[PaulJude]

English is not my first language, so I apologize for any misspellings.

In my country it is illegal to evangelize, and the catholic churches are the most churches who afraid to evangelize and the most churches that do not care about what the authorities say are the evangelical churches.

So, I don’t see any logical reason what so ever for Catholic churches in my country to not help people to know about the Lord Jesus Christ, why they are afraid of the people who could hurt the body but can’t do more, where is the Christ in them? Didn’t the Christ asked his people to evangelize. I’m sorry guys, but every time I remember the way the catholic father refused to help me, I keep wonder, do I need to keep with church that its people don’t care of telling others about the christ? Church that evangelize when it is legal but when it is not they are afraid to do so?

Like the Christ said to his followers when he told them to love their enemies, he said what good are you doing if you just love your loved once. and the same thing I ask myself when it is comes to evangelizing and the catholic church, what good are you doing when you just evangelize when there is not danger to do so but you don’t when there is danger by people or authorities?

It is sad your experience of the RCC was like that. But the RCC is the most successful Church in history because of its dedication to evangelism even as is often the case to the poing of martyrdom. We believe that evangelism is our prime mission. I know in some countries Christians in various Curches need to pray a lot before they choose who to evangelise because otherwise they can get the death penalty or be put out and that would lead to no or less evangelism. In Europe most if the Churches and parishes are evangelicaly impotent. There is a psychological persecution of the Church so that christians are often inhibited. This is perhaps one reason why Europe is now post Christian and we are in dramatic decline. Last year alone 183 000 officially left the RCC in Germany. We need to regain our evangelism motivation. But this will not happen so long as we are indisriminantly Confirming the insincere and uynevangelised which is effectively lieing about what it means to become a Christian. Babies too are toon often baptised who are not coming into the Church. ie no Christian parents. Priests figur 90% are being falsely sacramentalised as false members of the Church. this is very damaging. But bishops here lack the courage to steward the sacraments according to Church teaching.
This is the most urgent matter our Church needs to address here in Europe.

 

[TheBreak]

Thank you guys for the answers.

Okay, to the first answer that said “Law is law”. WHAT?!?!?! Ok, I can now stop believing in Jesus Christ and on the judgement day when he ask me why I didn’t believe in him I will tell him “In my country it is illegal to convert to another religion, so law is law!” Right, if I should go by your answer Mr “strange kind catholic”. WHATEVER

Other than that thanks to each one of you guys. Please, pray for me.

 

[JRKH]

Thank you guys for the answers.

Okay, to the first answer that said “Law is law”. WHAT?!?!?! Ok, I can now stop believing in Jesus Christ and on the judgement day when he ask me why I didn’t believe in him I will tell him “In my country it is illegal to convert to another religion, so law is law!” Right, if I should go by your answer Mr “strange kind catholic”. WHATEVER

Other than that thanks to each one of you guys. Please, pray for me.

Prayers are going out to you.

Peace
James

 

[LilyM]

Thank you guys for the answers.

Okay, to the first answer that said “Law is law”. WHAT?!?!?! Ok, I can now stop believing in Jesus Christ and on the judgement day when he ask me why I didn’t believe in him I will tell him “In my country it is illegal to convert to another religion, so law is law!” Right, if I should go by your answer Mr “strange kind catholic”. WHATEVER

Other than that thanks to each one of you guys. Please, pray for me.

But you DO believe in Him

And it is none of your fault that the laws of the country and (rightly or wrongly) your priest are both putting obstacles in your way. The good thief likewise, through no fault of his own, could not be formally baptised, but was saved nonetheless.

 

[LilyM]

But not impossible.

Unless I’m missing something the priest in question refuses to start the process of initiation. In any case, the OP has given no indication of his age, so that’s probably not an issue.

He is not yet college age. And his priest may know him well enough to know he is nowhere near ready without beginning the formal instruction process.

 

[devoutchristian]

He is not yet college age.

You know this how?

And his priest may know him well enough to know he is nowhere near ready without beginning the formal instruction process.

I could be wrong but I got the impression that the priest refused to start the instruction process.

 

[PaulJude]

Are Christians bound by unjust laws?

Let’s look at a pertinent episode from Acts chapter five (emphasis added):

[21b] Now the high priest came and those who were with him and called together the council and all the senate of Israel, and sent to the prison to have them brought.
[22] But when the officers came, they did not find them in the prison, and they returned and reported,
[23] “We found the prison securely locked and the sentries standing at the doors, but when we opened it we found no one inside.”
[24] Now when the captain of the temple and the chief priests heard these words, they were much perplexed about them, wondering what this would come to.
[25] And some one came and told them, “The men whom you put in prison are standing in the temple and teaching the people.”
[26] Then the captain with the officers went and brought them, but without violence, for they were afraid of being stoned by the people.
[27] And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest questioned them,
[28] saying, “We strictly charged you not to teach in this name, yet here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and you intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.”
[29] But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.
[30] The God of our fathers raised Jesus whom you killed by hanging him on a tree.
[31] God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.
[32] And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him.”
[33] When they heard this they were enraged and wanted to kill them.

(Gama’li-el then offers his opinion and in this way intercedes for the apostles and allowing them to continue their work unharmed.)

[40] So they took his advice, and when they had called in the apostles, they beat them and charged them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go.
[41] Then they left the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the name.
[42] And every day in the temple and at home they did not cease teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.

So, we see here that, although the apostles faced admonition and persecution by the authorities (though the latter were clerical, they were able to operate a prison, so were effectively acting in the name of the Roman government), the followers of Christ refused to keep the Gospel to themselves. Why should Christians today remain silent under similar circumstances?

Very good post!

 

[CaptFun]

Very good question - yes - very good. Of course without knowing more details, it is hard to do more than just speculate. However - a few thoughts…

It is sad that the priest was not helpful I cannot say why this was so. It could simply that he is weak and afraid (priests are people too). It could be that priests have been “trapped” by enemies of the Church posing as candidates. It could be that the Church has cautioned the clergy to be very careful.

A possible reason for such institutional caution could be that the Church does not want to risk being shut down and thus unable to minister to those who are already a part of the Church. I’m not saying that this is necessarily a good thing…but such things can get quite complicated.

As to evangelization, the Church evangelizes in many ways - you are here on CAF learning of the faith. Is this not evangelization? It may not be the best way - but at least it does exist.

Question of the non-Catholics - Evangelicals - openly evangelizing…God bless them for their efforts to bring others to Jesus Christ. I hope that their efforts are fruitful and that they do not try to evangelize those who are already Christian away from the Church.

As to why you should continue to pursue the Catholic Church…I can only say it is because we have the fullness of truth. We have the full presence of Christ in the Eucharist - the Sacraments. It is the ancient Church that Christ founded upon Peter.
How many priests have you approached on this matter? Seems like there must be some way…Did the priest say why he could not help you?

However - I will say this. If you are unable to come into full communion because of the political situation - and you are able to be baptized by the Evangelicals, I would say it is worth considering…but only if they are not “anti-Catholic”. I would not wish to be a part of any Christian assembly who disparaged other true Christians.

May God bless you on your journey.

Peace
James

Very good ANSWER(S) James. Yes. Very good!

Blessed are the Peacemakers. Since there is doubt, let’s give the Churchmen the benefit of that doubt. Without contradicting the valid desires of the OP (TheBreak) to see a courageous church – being a prudent church ***can be good ***too.

Yes – the Catholic Church is the “Church of the Bible” … though we must not REST in that, but rather CONTINUE in that. And I appreciated this comment of yours very much:

Question of the non-Catholics - Evangelicals - openly evangelizing…God bless them for their efforts to bring others to Jesus Christ. (< from me too here) I hope that their efforts are fruitful and that they do not try to evangelize those who are already Christian away from the Church. :sad_yes:

Sometimes the devil would have us all fighting with our allies over the straining out of gnats - so that we swallow the camels. That is … we should fight evil not each other so much. And as you pointed out … serving Jesus can get complicated.

Matthew 10:16 "Behold, I am sending you like sheep in the midst of wolves; so be shrewd as serpents and simple as doves.

17 But beware of people, for they will hand you over to courts and scourge you in their synagogues,

Jesus goes on in Matthew 10 to give the apostles instructions on what they should do WHEN they are arrested, etc. But to tempt government to arrest you … when you can quietly (not timidly though) keep evangelizing your flock … seems to be one of those “shrewd as serpents” options available to church leaders.

When they are arrested … Jesus advises them to – give testimony without fear the Holy Spirit will be with you. But it’s true too that – those they were teaching lost a pastor for a while.

Trebor135’s recounting (post #12, and #29) of the apostles preaching in the temple (against clerical authority) and what subsequently happened – was good to ponder too.

St. Paul (as an example of what could be done per TheBreak’s complaint) seems sometimes to evangelize fearlessly and publicly – unto getting beaten and arrested!

Then, at other times in letters Paul urges people to obey licit authority (not only church authority but civil, which would have been Roman … (and officially pagan!) … in matters not pertaining to the faith).

Perhaps having seen what happened to the more confrontational Zealots amongst the Jews (who provoked armed rebellion and lost a war that got the temple closed and their people ousted from the Holy Land) - Paul in those post-uprising days opted for a more “prudent” course of evangelization. Less in-the-streets and in the government’s face - but still zealous and committed in the catacombs – and in private letters to the churches (now scripture) urging them to live the faith and be good citizens. - like you said, it can be complicated.

Thanks for “very good” Questions and Answers.

 

[PJM]

=TheBreak;10432841]English is not my first language, so I apologize for any misspellings.

In my country it is illegal to evangelize, and the catholic churches are the most churches who afraid to evangelize and the most churches that do not care about what the authorities say are the evangelical churches.

So, I don’t see any logical reason what so ever for Catholic churches in my country to not help people to know about the Lord Jesus Christ, why they are afraid of the people who could hurt the body but can’t do more, where is the Christ in them? Didn’t the Christ asked his people to evangelize. I’m sorry guys, but every time I remember the way the catholic father refused to help me, I keep wonder, do I need to keep with church that its people don’t care of telling others about the christ? Church that evangelize when it is legal but when it is not they are afraid to do so?

Like the Christ said to his followers when he told them to love their enemies, he said what good are you doing if you just love your loved once. and the same thing I ask myself when it is comes to evangelizing and the catholic church, what good are you doing when you just evangelize when there is not danger to do so but you don’t when there is danger by people or authorities?

My dear friend in Christ;

The CC Alone was given Personally; directly and exclusively the Mandate to teach “the Faith” [SINGULAR] to he entire world. She does so agressively. [Mk.16:14-16; Mt. 16:18-20]

Not knowing your Country I cannot comment futher. Do you live in a country under Christian Persecution? IF SO. does that not factor in to PRUDENT Evangualization?

God Bless you.

pat/PJM

 

[PaulJude]

Very good ANSWER(S) James. Yes. Very good!

Blessed are the Peacemakers. Since there is doubt, let’s give the Churchmen the benefit of that doubt. Without contradicting the valid desires of the OP (TheBreak) to see a courageous church – being a prudent church ***can be good ***too.

Yes – the Catholic Church is the “Church of the Bible” … though we must not REST in that, but rather CONTINUE in that. And I appreciated this comment of yours very much:

Sometimes the devil would have us all fighting with our allies over the straining out of gnats - so that we swallow the camels. That is … we should fight evil not each other so much. And as you pointed out … serving Jesus can get complicated.

Jesus goes on in Matthew 10 to give the apostles instructions on what they should do WHEN they are arrested, etc. But to tempt government to arrest you … when you can quietly (not timidly though) keep evangelizing your flock … seems to be one of those “shrewd as serpents” options available to church leaders.

When they are arrested … Jesus advises them to – give testimony without fear the Holy Spirit will be with you. But it’s true too that – those they were teaching lost a pastor for a while.

Trebor135’s recounting (post #12, and #29) of the apostles preaching in the temple (against clerical authority) and what subsequently happened – was good to ponder too.

St. Paul (as an example of what could be done per TheBreak’s complaint) seems sometimes to evangelize fearlessly and publicly – unto getting beaten and arrested!

Then, at other times in letters Paul urges people to obey licit authority (not only church authority but civil, which would have been Roman … (and officially pagan!) … in matters not pertaining to the faith).

Perhaps having seen what happened to the more confrontational Zealots amongst the Jews (who provoked armed rebellion and lost a war that got the temple closed and their people ousted from the Holy Land) - Paul in those post-uprising days opted for a more “prudent” course of evangelization. Less in-the-streets and in the government’s face - but still zealous and committed in the catacombs – and in private letters to the churches (now scripture) urging them to live the faith and be good citizens. - like you said, it can be complicated.

Thanks for “very good” Questions and Answers.

I suppose it can depends on the particular situation where and what the Spirit leads you to do.
But always evangelization one way or other is the primary mission of the Church and the Christian.
Pope John Paul Two said that if you are not an Evangelizer you have not been fully evangelized yet.

 

[philv]

I’m Catholic from an Evangelical background and you ask good questions. It was illegal in the Roman Empire. Depending on the country I don’t know what the consequences would be. Do you mean door to door evangelism or even things like soup kitchens? There are many ways to evangelize.

We must remember evangelizing is the cost of persecution, as it was to the apostles. They already knew what would happen, but it didn’t let them stop evangelizing. We’re not of this world, and we must evangelize wherever we are. We must love God more than our own lives. Let God lead us, not fear.

 

[Trebor135]

I had two posts in this thread before. The one containing a long quote from the book of Acts has vanished.

What happened?

 

[fred_conty]

I think if we look at the apostles after Pentecost, all I really see is St. Paul doing the evangelization. I know this isn’t the complete story but that’s the impression that I get.

A lot of evangelization is our light that draws people, or our darkness that pushes them away. Priests are considered pastors, that is the shepherd of his flock, and he leads and feeds them. I don’t know that they were ever taught anything about evangelization so much.
Their idea was to be good holy men and women helping others to be more holy.

Now we do have today missionaries of all sorts in our church which ministers to this work.
So it is going on.

It may seem that we don’t care, but I think we care very much. The sacramental lay person cares as well and would honestly like to do more. I believe much of the problem for them is knowing how to do it, and gaining enough knowedge to do it. And this is a squeaky area.

My own personal view of emphasis would be to catechize the loyal people more about the spiritual side of their faith. To make them more appreciative of what they have and the enormous blessings they were given. Then they wouldn’t be able to be quiet about it but want to share it with everyone. At least it would start a blazing fire in them. When fire is there, others can’t help notice the difference.

Just some mumblings.

 

[Trebor135]

I think if we look at the apostles after Pentecost, all I really see is St. Paul doing the evangelization. I know this isn’t the complete story but that’s the impression that I get.

A lot of evangelization is our light that draws people, or our darkness that pushes them away. Priests are considered pastors, that is the shepherd of his flock, and he leads and feeds them. I don’t know that they were ever taught anything about evangelization so much.
Their idea was to be good holy men and women helping others to be more holy.

Now we do have today missionaries of all sorts in our church which ministers to this work.
So it is going on.

It may seem that we don’t care, but I think we care very much. The sacramental lay person cares as well and would honestly like to do more. I believe much of the problem for them is knowing how to do it, and gaining enough knowedge to do it. And this is a squeaky area.

My own personal view of emphasis would be to catechize the loyal people more about the spiritual side of their faith. To make them more appreciative of what they have and the enormous blessings they were given. Then they wouldn’t be able to be quiet about it but want to share it with everyone. At least it would start a blazing fire in them. When fire is there, others can’t help notice the difference.

Just some mumblings.

A lot of what you say makes sense.

But a question: where are all the Catholics (or, to my shame, Orthodox) debating Muslim apologists in the West? Basically nowhere.

Where are the Protestants doing the same? Not everywhere but definitely out there. (James White, David Wood, Sam Shamoun, Nabeel Qureshi…)

Arguing in public isn’t everything. It isn’t identical with missionary work. But the silence is noteworthy–and disappointing.

 

[fred_conty]

Here are some other considerations on what you mentioned.

The muslems are a very strong people in their religious traditions and have a glue like adhesion to their muslim family culture. I certainly think we should try. But if I were a betting man, I wouldn’t put too much on this. They are a tough bunch.

I think we should try more tho in this country to share with others. But so many are not equiped for the job. I know I was not brought up to think this way, but rather to think more in terms of leading a holier life. But in those days many didn’t go to college either, and we seem to live in peace with one another with our differences. Today it is a different story with mass communication so fast and all kinds of knowledge at our finger tips. Our faith is constantly being buffeted. Dare we not be knowledgable in our faith. A good way to see our faith dwindle away. Maybe with more time and rethinking, our catholics will become other St. Pauls.

Just a thought.

 

[PaulJude]

I think if we look at the apostles after Pentecost, all I really see is St. Paul doing the evangelization. I know this isn’t the complete story but that’s the impression that I get.

A lot of evangelization is our light that draws people, or our darkness that pushes them away. Priests are considered pastors, that is the shepherd of his flock, and he leads and feeds them. I don’t know that they were ever taught anything about evangelization so much.
Their idea was to be good holy men and women helping others to be more holy.

Now we do have today missionaries of all sorts in our church which ministers to this work.
So it is going on.

It may seem that we don’t care, but I think we care very much. The sacramental lay person cares as well and would honestly like to do more. I believe much of the problem for them is knowing how to do it, and gaining enough knowedge to do it. And this is a squeaky area.

My own personal view of emphasis would be to catechize the loyal people more about the spiritual side of their faith. To make them more appreciative of what they have and the enormous blessings they were given. Then they wouldn’t be able to be quiet about it but want to share it with everyone. At least it would start a blazing fire in them. When fire is there, others can’t help notice the difference.

Just some mumblings.

The devil hates evangelism because it is about setting his captives free.
Evangelism is the most merciful thing we can do for those who have not accepted Christ as their Lord and Saviour yet. We Catholics have partly lost our evangelic thrust because many of our Leaders have forgotten the full meaning of Baptism and Confirmation. They commit sacriledge by baptising those who are not coming into the <church and they Confirm those who have not been evangelized. This is the antithises of evangeliyation. It is to lie about what it means to be and to becaome a <Christian. It is damaging the Church and her mission.
Our bishops badly need to implement Church teaching here. They misunderstand and exagerate the ex opera operatio not realising that it pivots on the sincerity and true intentions of recipients of the sacrament of Confirmation. Someone must speak up and hold our bishops to account before they do any more damage. They simply must take courage and stop Confirming until they are evangelised. They also need to get those who are already evangelised to teach candidates prepüaring for trhe sacraments. It has become that bad.

 

[peace2u2]

Here are some other considerations on what you mentioned.

The muslems are a very strong people in their religious traditions and have a glue like adhesion to their muslim family culture. I certainly think we should try. But if I were a betting man, I wouldn’t put too much on this. They are a tough bunch.

I think we should try more tho in this country to share with others. But so many are not equiped for the job. I know I was not brought up to think this way, but rather to think more in terms of leading a holier life. But in those days many didn’t go to college either, and we seem to live in peace with one another with our differences. Today it is a different story with mass communication so fast and all kinds of knowledge at our finger tips. Our faith is constantly being buffeted. Dare we not be knowledgable in our faith. A good way to see our faith dwindle away. Maybe with more time and rethinking, our catholics will become other St. Pauls.

Just a thought.

I agree with your post and that we as Catholics are taught more how to lead holier lifes, but are not taught at all how to share or defend our faith not even among ourselves.

How many times do we hear our own fellow Catholics say something along the lines of not agreeing with whatever it is they don’t agree with the Church, and we just nod our heads and say nothing to explain why the Church has that particular position.

Perhaps our religious ed directors need to come up with a better way to re-catecize us with classes for the parents and other adults so we are better equiped and a better way to equip those that are being confirmed. Personally, I think, religious education should not end in 8th grade. I think 9th thru 12th graders, need these classes more now than when in elementary school! Maybe this would be a good time to introduce Bible studies and classes on morality, and refresher classes on the Sacraments, etc.

But, we also need people to lead these classes and people complain that they don’t have time. But boy we sure have time to spend online :manvspc:

 

[PaulJude]

A great dealof the weakness we have in evangelising at all levels both ourselves and the lost outside the Church is that we effectively lie these days about what it means to be a Christian with our sacraments. No intelligent effort is made to dicern if candidates are ready to validly receive them according to Church law. We confirm as Christians those who have not even been evangelised. We baptise babies that are not coming into the church and who do not have a Christian parent. While our bishops lack the courage to be authentic with how they steward our sacraments of initiation the entire mission of the Church is undermined.
Our Church is in a catastrophic state of decline mainly because we have very poor leadership which has been unable so far to adjust to our post Christendom world. The problem is so urgent I encourage you to note the real teachings of the church on this matter and confront your bishop etc with it my letter. We must no longer engage in this sacriledge with baptism and Confirmation. No wonder we jhave so few sacerdotal vocations. How can the <holy Spirit guide men tomparticipate in sacriledge and obey such errant bishops. We need to help the bishops to have the courage and insight to obey the church.