Why evangelize?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nabooru
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I disagree. The entire gospel can be presented in just a few Bible verses. It doesn’t have to be complicated. Later on, as a person grows, goes to church, etc., he or she will get more details and grow in understanding, but the initial gospel presentation need not be theologically complex.
I don’t think the sort of life that the true Gospel requires can be presented in a few words. I think this is a very dangerous road - it leads to the sort of easy believism that many protestant denominations defend. Notably many of the ones that are most active in street evangelism. Simple assent to just a few Bible verses is not salvation.

I wonder how much of the Catholic view you understand, from the way you talk. The gospel is not a one-time “conversion” deal. It’s a life-long commitment to involvement in the Church. A little tract or a few bible verses is like giving someone their first day of school - you can’t say they know how to read because you got them to recite the alphabet.
 
I don’t think the sort of life that the true Gospel requires can be presented in a few words.
No, of course not, but you have to start somewhere. You start with the basics of salvation, reaching out to people with those basic truths, and then trusting God for opportunities to work with those people further to teach them to observe all that Christ commanded. It makes no sense to take an all-or-nothing stance whereby we believe that if we can’t communicate to them everything about the Christian life then we won’t try at all. The apostles definitely did not have that attitude. When they went to a new place and preached the gospel, they had to start somewhere, so they preached. God brought new converts into the church through that preaching, and from there churches were raised up.
I think this is a very dangerous road - it leads to the sort of easy believism that many protestant denominations defend. Notably many of the ones that are most active in street evangelism. Simple assent to just a few Bible verses is not salvation.
It is if it is faith perfected by works. Growth will come about in time as those people submit themselves to church teaching, learn more about the faith and what Christ commanded us to observe. Like I said, you have to start somewhere.
I wonder how much of the Catholic view you understand, from the way you talk. The gospel is not a one-time “conversion” deal. It’s a life-long commitment to involvement in the Church. A little tract or a few bible verses is like giving someone their first day of school - you can’t say they know how to read because you got them to recite the alphabet.
But it’s enough for them to have faith, which is the beginning of justification. That is what the Catholic Church teaches. You have to start somewhere. 🙂
 
Here’s the places I find people preaching in the Bible:

(1) In the synagogue
(2) In houses
(3) In their own churches
(4) In the forum (a place designed for public discussion)

You claim that my view is unbiblical, I think you’re reading a modern practice back into the Bible. And like I said, I think it’s often a way people take because it’s the “easy way” of evangelization, the one that doesn’t require true virtue and sacrifice on their part. If we do our evangelization without considering where people are and how to meet them there, then I don’t think we really have succeeded in loving them.
I’m sorry, could you quote the Scripture that you’re talking about?

I can’t have a Biblical discussion with someone who doesn’t tell me what Scripture they’re talking about.

When I read verses like 1 Corinthians 12:22-24, and Ephesians 4:11-12, I think that your view of Evangelism conflicts with these verses. That’s why I think that your view is not Biblical.
  1. Preaching isn’t a modern practice, I have full confidence that I could find a saint in every century famous for preaching… I could probably find 10 or 20 in all honesty for every century. Starting with Saint Peter. How is what Saint Peter and the Apostles did a “modern practice”?
St. Peter converted 3,000 people with one sermon. And the most recent example of that kind of success would be Billy Graham, IMO.
  1. I would honestly like a better response to my last reply to you. The gift of preaching is a gift of the Holy Spirit. And somehow you’re acting like this whole realm of evangelism should NEVER be done. Only the corporal works of mercy… never do the spiritual works of mercy.
Look, if that’s not what you believe I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but that’s the vibe I’m getting.

The Spiritual Works of Mercy are just as valuable as the Corporal Works of Mercy.
 
Just FYI: I’m rather suspicious of the conversions of people like Billy Graham. I grew up in a church that followed that sort of thing - I really doubt most of them were saved. But they’d prayed a prayer, and they followed all the right rules, so they figured that was enough.
 
Is evangelism even still necessary? And I ask this rather joyfully.

With the oversaturation of the Good news do we still really truly need to evangelize to anyone anymore? The early church certainly did. I can see why there was a push to evangelize in order to get the movement off the ground. But the movement is something to the tune of 8million strong. So is evangelism still a necessary component of the movement?

It seems like nowadays Evangelism is more about spreading your Opinion of the Good news as opposed to spreading the Good news itself. Let’s face it the Word is already out! This could suggest that evangelism in its modern form is nothing more than religious competition.

Perhaps we can make some good of this oversaturation of the Good news and end the competitive nature within this once noble commission. The idea that God no longer needs to be brought to your door step could mean that we no longer need to recruit, but we could simply allow people a “Seek and ye shall find” mentality.
A mentality characterized by people who are earnestly looking, and want the connection to God. As opposed to people who get bamboozled into conversion because they were simply uninformed about God and the first denomination to get to these people win’s their membership.

The “Seek and ye shall find” mentality could be liken to Jesus wondering the desert for answers for 40 days. A push God puts within. So if you’re seeking to find out if Jesus was God out of desire how miraculous!

Should we deny people this prompt from the Holy Spirit? Or should we continue to hunt them down, spoon feed the answers and hand them our manual. Why not allow them the fruits of suffering in confusion as Jesus did? Wandering in the wilderness for the sole purpose to understand your beloved is a wonderful journey to take part in. Who are we to deny someone this journey?

This way converts are developed into a Christian born from sincere desire and the hardship of the wilderness, as opposed to a Christian born from an inability to win a debate. If you had to take a guess………which one of these types of converts will put their cross down first when the going gets tough? The one who was spoon feed Christianity? Or the one who scratched and clawed relentlessly for the love of it?

Perhaps it is no longer God that needs us to evangelize, perhaps it is our own egos that need to evangelize?
 
What does the Catholic faith have that others do not? I want honest answers from honest Catholics.

Protestants evangelize to save souls that would otherwise be lost. Buddhists evangelize to save the unenlightened from perpetuating the cycle of suffering. Militant atheists evangelize because they think a religious person is a bad person.

But why Catholics? I’m just curious. To me it seems most Catholics don’t feel the need. I come from a very Roman Catholic city, and they have churches and schools everywhere, and it’s not rare to still see nuns and monks here. But none of them ever talks to anyone about faith with an eye towards turning to Christ. To most of them, to be Catholic is just one option among many.

It could be said that evangelization on Catholics’ part is to offer people the richness of the Catholic experience. But what if the people are happy just the way they are? What if they think they don’t need a faith, any faith? Does the Church turn away, give up, or keep trying, one way or another? Why should it keep going?

I’m just curious. I’ve been brought up Protestant, and was a Hindu-Buddhist for a long time. I know why they seek out new converts. But for all the religiosity of Catholics, they’re just not as interested in claiming souls for God.
I would agree with you if you mean that some Catholics don’t seem interested in their faith, have a weak faith, or little knowledge of their faith, or don’t put much stock in the faith itself. They of course they don’t see the treasures in the catholic church and only see all churches in a blurry way.

But then we also have Protestants of the same caliber.

I have known both Catholic and Protestant individuals who lived good holy lives and took their faith seriously in that way. They were lighted candles in the darkness we live in to show the way to those who are interested to follow the path to Jesus Christ. This is evangelizing in the best kind of way.

The Catholic church has hundreds of orders, congregations, houses, of religious men and women who live single dedicated lives for this very reason. To bring Jesus to the whole world, which is evangelizing. When these men and women dedicate themselves body and soul for this work of Jesus, it is their testimony as catholics that this work is taken seriously.

Just a few thoughts.
 
Is evangelism even still necessary? And I ask this rather joyfully.

With the oversaturation of the Good news do we still really truly need to evangelize to anyone anymore? The early church certainly did. I can see why there was a push to evangelize in order to get the movement off the ground. But the movement is something to the tune of 8million strong. So is evangelism still a necessary component of the movement?

It seems like nowadays Evangelism is more about spreading your Opinion of the Good news as opposed to spreading the Good news itself. Let’s face it the Word is already out! This could suggest that evangelism in its modern form is nothing more than religious competition.

Perhaps we can make some good of this oversaturation of the Good news and end the competitive nature within this once noble commission. The idea that God no longer needs to be brought to your door step could mean that we no longer need to recruit, but we could simply allow people a “Seek and ye shall find” mentality.
A mentality characterized by people who are earnestly looking, and want the connection to God. As opposed to people who get bamboozled into conversion because they were simply uninformed about God and the first denomination to get to these people win’s their membership.

The “Seek and ye shall find” mentality could be liken to Jesus wondering the desert for answers for 40 days. A push God puts within. So if you’re seeking to find out if Jesus was God out of desire how miraculous!

Should we deny people this prompt from the Holy Spirit? Or should we continue to hunt them down, spoon feed the answers and hand them our manual. Why not allow them the fruits of suffering in confusion as Jesus did? Wandering in the wilderness for the sole purpose to understand your beloved is a wonderful journey to take part in. Who are we to deny someone this journey?

This way converts are developed into a Christian born from sincere desire and the hardship of the wilderness, as opposed to a Christian born from an inability to win a debate. If you had to take a guess………which one of these types of converts will put their cross down first when the going gets tough? The one who was spoon feed Christianity? Or the one who scratched and clawed relentlessly for the love of it?

Perhaps it is no longer God that needs us to evangelize, perhaps it is our own egos that need to evangelize?
I don’t know where you’re coming from, but I certainly disagree with you.
  1. You interestingly note that the Christian “movement” is 8 million strong. And yet you don’t think evangelism is necessary? I personally think that Christianity numbers, at least nominally to around 2 billion, and I think evangelism is still essential.
  2. It isn’t how someone arrives at the truth, as long as they get there. Whether you are prompted to find God, or whether someone evangelizes you, I would hope that both methods would lead to equally strong Christians. Losing arguments doesn’t make someone Christian, knowing Christ makes them Christian. And that’s something that no one can force you to do.
  3. Evangelism today is very rarely defined by competition amongst Christian denominations (and certainly not in the U.S., but maybe in some countries). Take an article I was reading about Christianity in Germany yesterday… historically regions identified and were split up between being majority Catholic and majority Protestant.
Today in Germany there are only 2 regions that still have a Catholic majority. There is only 1 region that has a Protestant majority. Every other region does not have a majority. What does this mean? It means that there aren’t just 2 players on the block anymore.

When the situation was solely Catholic vs. Protestant… every region had an absolute majority… there were either more Catholics or more Protestants. Today there are so many secularist/ non-religious people, in addition to Muslims, that every region in Germany, except 3, has no majority of anyone. Because of how many Christians have lost faith and are now secularists.
  1. If there are more atheists and agnostics today than there ever were before, than how can you claim there is an “over-saturation” of the Good News.
  2. If ego is the reason people evangelize, I hope they would stop. However, I think the reason most people evangelize is because they want to Glorify God and do His Will.
So, like I said at the top… I don’t know where you’re coming from. What Church do you belong to? Because I have a hunch that your definition of what a Christian is differs from mine and the Catholic Church’s.
 
I think part of it has to do with infant baptism being the primary way people become Catholic. I know there are adult converts, but I bet the high percentage of Catholics in any parish were baptized Catholic as infants.

Protestants think that people should be baptized after believing in Christ. And that they need to hear the gospel in order to believe. Thus, there is much more motivation for evangelism.

Catholics like to follow the idea of St. Francis, “preach always and use words if necessary”. Sounds great, but people still need to hear the gospel to believe it.
 
Semper Zelare I will politely agree to disagree. But allow me to clarify my point since it wasn’t clear. Though Im sure we wont agree even when I’ve clarified myself.

I define the “over saturation’ of the Good news as:
The bible (last I checked) was the number one selling book of all time.
Bibles (when I was a kid) were in every hotel room
Midnight Mass on TV
Joel Osteen has more books than the Encyclopedia Britannica
Awake pamphlets in doctor offices, hotel lobbies, and airports while you wait
Christian music legitimately competing on the Billboard charts.
The message that “Jesus is Risen” is everywhere. You don’t have to look for the Good News any more. You’d have to try not to accidentally trip over it.

Since the heart of the message is everywhere, that only leaves room for people to spread the Gospels according to their version. This is how I define evangelism in its current form. This typically gives birth to the “I’m right & they’re wrong” mentality.

This perspective in its most benign form leads to competition. In its most severe form it leads to hostility, condemnation and war. So whether its Shiites vs. Sunnis, Catholics vs. Protestants or Siths vs. Jedi’s Each side equally believes their side is right and the other side is wrong.

Maybe you’ve been spared the bickering but that’s what evangelism has become as I’ve experienced it.
“I’m right, they’re wrong, and here’s where it says I’m right in the bible/history/archeology/sociology, etc”
Maybe religions sing Kumbaya where you are. God bless you for it. But not where I am.
And truthfully, it’s this very bickering and high school style gossip amongst religions, which is a turnoff for an atheist friend of mine. Who can blame him? I don’t think the rise of atheist should be only seen as why we need more steadfast evangelism. I think the rise in atheism should be equally considered as indicative of the harm steadfast evangelism can cause. IMHO Evangelism today is like a kitten licking you. It’s sweet in its intention, but can be rather abbrassive.

So…where am I coming from: Why compete anymore? Why be abbrassive? Take advantage of the information age and let people come to you. I can easily research Islam as I can Christianity. I can easily open up the Qur’an as I can the Bible. I can easily sit and converse with an Imam as I can a Priest. The information isn’t at risk of being censured the information is ANYWHERE. Thus, “Seek and ye shall find”. Why not put the onus on the seekers as opposed to putting the onus on the believers. It places tension amongst believers to do so. And that very tension has kept Israel in conflict with its neighbor since…forever.

All I want is peace and unity for the Body of Christ. Perhaps it is time to consider, peace can come from not forcing the issue (aka steadfast evangelism) but maybe by simply softening how we evangelize ”

Cheers
 
I define the “over saturation’ of the Good news as:
The bible (last I checked) was the number one selling book of all time.
Bibles (when I was a kid) were in every hotel room
Midnight Mass on TV
Joel Osteen has more books than the Encyclopedia Britannica
Awake pamphlets in doctor offices, hotel lobbies, and airports while you wait
Christian music legitimately competing on the Billboard charts.
The message that “Jesus is Risen” is everywhere. You don’t have to look for the Good News any more. You’d have to try not to accidentally trip over it.
Joel Osteen is not the “heart of the message”, actually what he believes is a false Gospel called the Prosperity Gospel. Christian music is not the “heart of the message”. If I ask someone if they are a Christian and they answer “yes absolutely! I listen to Christian rock all the time!”… then I’m going to have to prod them a little further. *.

People have to try not to trip over it? Look, on my campus where I go to school, people have been chalking things like “Jesus saves”, “Jesus is love”… but that isn’t an over saturation of the Gospel.

What you never addressed is what I wrote about Germany. There are millions and millions of people that by all right SHOULD be Christian, but now they are agnostic/ atheistic/ secularists. They are not Christians. Hence, they need to hear the Gospel, because they haven’t heard it and embraced it.

Furthermore, let me just say this. What you are essentially saying is akin to saying: There’s too much talk about Jesus. There are too many Bibles. The Gospel is OVER-saturated. Really?

You can’t have too much of a good thing. There’s no such thing as “you’re too religious”… no such thing. The Gospel is too prevalent? No, the Gospel can’t be too prevalent. The world will always need more and more people spreading the Gospel until Jesus Christ returns and every knee bows and every tongue confesses.

P.S. Midnight Mass on TV? There are maybe 10 religious tv stations. Then there are like 900 that are not. And the ratings of those religious tv stations aren’t exactly too hot.
Bodhi:
Maybe religions sing Kumbaya where you are. God bless you for it. But not where I am.
You live in New York. The vast majority of people there aren’t religious. The vast majority of people there do not go to Church. They are unChurched. They are non-Christian. They need the Gospel. Most of the Churches I’ve encountered where I live don’t “sing Kumbaya”, but they pray for each other. There is a sense that we are the practicing Christians, and we need to stand together because the VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE are -]Godless/-] secularists. Acually, scratch that, the vast majority of people serve Gods which are idols… be it themselves or the world, money, greed, etc. They do not serve the Judeo-Christian God.

And I live in Alabama. 58% of people here go to Church every week. In New York only 35% of people go to Church every week. [According to a Gallup survey 2010]
Bodhi:
And truthfully, it’s this very bickering and high school style gossip amongst religions, which is a turnoff for an atheist friend of mine. Who can blame him? I don’t think the rise of atheist should be only seen as why we need more steadfast evangelism. I think the rise in atheism should be equally considered as indicative of the harm steadfast evangelism can cause.
So, the opinions of atheists should influence our methods of evangelism? In the words of Pastor Leonard Ravenhill, “The Gospel hasn’t been tried and found wanting. The Gospel has been tried, found difficult, and abandoned”.
Bodhi:
So…where am I coming from: Why compete anymore? Why be abbrassive? Take advantage of the information age and let people come to you. Why not put the onus on the seekers as opposed to putting the onus on the believers. It places tension amongst believers to do so.
First of all because we are commissioned by God to evangelize. If you are a believer, part of your faith MUST be evangelism. That is a command by our Lord Jesus Christ, and if you want the Bible to prove it, I’ll give it to you.

Secondly, people aren’t walking into Church anymore. People don’t come to investigate anymore. The people that are “seeking” for themselves the God of the world are few and far between. So, you have a trickle of people coming into the Church, and a torrent of people flooding out of it. The “information age” is making society Godless and secular, it’s not helping Christianity, it’s not leading people to Christ, on balance it is leading droves of people away from Christ.

Third, friend I still don’t know where you’re coming from exactly. I don’t know which Church you belong to. But, to me it sounds like you have a lot of negative things to say about Christians, and nothing negative to say about atheists. Personally, you’ll find that I’m the exact opposite. You won’t hear me saying that the words of an atheist bear any truth.
Bodhi:
All I want is peace and unity for the Body of Christ. Perhaps it is time to consider, peace can come from not forcing the issue (aka steadfast evangelism) but maybe by simply softening how we evangelize ”
A diluted Gospel is no Gospel at all. I hope “softening how we evangelize” isn’t a nice way to say: Christianity should be watered down. Christ demands we evangelize. He demands it of all believers. I’d be happy to pull out my Bible and show that to you.*
 
Wow! Never got a fire and brimstone sermon from a Catholic before. It’s kind of scary. I always felt Catholics were the sensible Christians. Guess being from the Bible Belt there is some cross over. I hear a lot of wrath and anger in your post and my only hope is that you said you’re on a campus so that means youre young and there is still time for your zealous youth to be soothed. I’m not going to address everything you said because you’re right I’m wrong and I bet you can show me where in the bible/archeology /history/ etc why that is.
  1. I’m not angry at Christians just hold us to a higher standard.
  2. I show compassion to an athiest while you proclaim to love to hate them. By me doing that are you still concerned if im really a Christian?
  3. If people are leaving Churches and are not walking in the door. As sheepherds of love we have to see that as a reflection on us first rather than blame the secular world. That only absolves us of taking any responsibility and prevents us from returning the sheep Lovingly to the flock.
  4. You seem to have that Us vs. Them mindset I was talking about. I had it too for many years. It fills you with hate then justifies it with God. That’s a dangerous mix.
  5. Up here in NY when someone calls you friend. They consider you everything but a friend. You seem to need an enemy. When i had that mentality i did too. Allow me to be that for you, as a Catholic Priest was once for me. “Point all your anger at me so you won’t have to aim it at someone else.” He said. Fr Zona. The greatest man I ever knew.
Cheers
 
Wow! Never got a fire and brimstone sermon from a Catholic before. It’s kind of scary. I always felt Catholics were the sensible Christians. Guess being from the Bible Belt there is some cross over. I’m not going to address everything you said because you’re right I’m wrong and I bet you can show me where in the bible/archeology /history/ etc why that is.
If you thought that was “a fire and brimstone sermon” then I would suggest to you that there was a disconnect in what I said because only 7% of what I wanted to convey can be done so through text alone. The other 93% of communication (tone, body language) wasn’t done at all. I guarantee you that if I told you that in person you wouldn’t say I gave you anything close to fire and brimstone.

However, I take exception to your saying I’ve been influenced by the Bible Belt like that’s a bad thing. Once more, 58% of people go to Church every week here. Only 35% do so in New York. So… you tell me which is better.

Bodhi said:
1. I’m not angry at Christians just hold us to a higher standard.

I never said you were angry, I just said you have nothing positive to say about Christians. Which is true, I can’t find a single positive thing you’ve said about Christians in any of your posts.
Bodhi:
  1. I show compassion to an athiest while you proclaim to love to hate them. By me doing that are you still concerned if im really a Christian?
Wow. I love to hate them? Try doing a “control F” search, and you’ll find that I never used the word “hate” until now. What I said was that you’ll never hear me say anything positive about atheists. I’ll never listen to what they have to say about the Church. Why? Because they don’t know God. If someone doesn’t know God and complains about His Church why should I listen to them?

If you don’t know God. If you don’t know His Will. If you don’t love His Church. If you aren’t a Servant of the Lord… then why would a Christian listen to you about what’s wrong with the Church? How can they possibly know that? They don’t even pray! I’ll listen to the advice of a Christian any day of the week about what’s wrong with the Church over an atheist.

How does someone who doesn’t go to Church understand what’s wrong with the Church? If you don’t experience the ministry, how are you qualified to criticize it?

If a restaurant gives me a survey in the mail to rate my dining experience I’ve had with them, and yet I’ve never eaten there, I’m going to throw it out. If you’ve never eaten at a restaurant how can you criticize it?

If you’ve never been to Church, how can someone criticize it?
Bodhi:
  1. If people are leaving Churches and are not walking in the door. As sheepherds of love we have to see that as a reflection on us first rather than blame the secular world. That only absolves us of taking any responsibility and prevents us from returning the sheep Lovingly to the flock.
Secularism is leading people to Hell. It’s just the newest heresy in a long line of heresies. The Catholic Church, in her infinite wisdom, doesn’t just preach Christianity; it also has to deal with every other ideology out there which is false. Christianity is the truth, but the Church can’t just proclaim the truth, it must show the falseness of other ideologies.

Did St. Paul preach only for Christianity? No. He also preached against the Jews, and the Judaizers.
Bodhi:
  1. You seem to have that Us vs. Them mindset I was talking about. I had it too for many years. It fills you with hate then justifies it with God. That’s a dangerous mix.
Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, an the Holy Spirit. I’m not filled with hate, I’m filled with love. If you have Christ-like love for someone, then necessarily you will want them to be saved. I want all people to be saved.

As a sinner, I might want to judge people. But, what’s really helped me is that I’ll look at someone who I would judge. And try to imagine that person kneeling in Church. Every person Earth will kneel before God and confess with their tongues that Jesus Christ is Lord.
I just want that to happen sooner than later. I want more people to do so out of love than out of fear. Because, when Jesus Christ comes again, all the atheists will be kneeling and confessing out of fear. I want them to be doing so out of love of God, and not out of the fear of His wrath.
Bodhi:
  1. Up here in NY when someone calls you friend. They consider you everything but a friend. You seem to need an enemy. When i had that mentality i did too. Allow me to be that for you, as a Catholic Priest was once for me. “Point all your anger at me so you won’t have to aim it at someone else.” He said. Fr Zona. The greatest man I ever knew.
Down here in Alabama, when someone calls another person that they don’t know ‘friend’, it’s basically one step away from them inviting you to their house for lunch or dinner. 😃
At the very least having a friendly conversation with them, or going for coffee or something.

I don’t need an enemy. I’m defending the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I think it’s very dangerous for anyone to go around saying, “There’s no need to evangelize! The Gospel is already everywhere! Christians shouldn’t share the Gospel anymore!”

That is what you’re saying. THAT. Can you step back and realize what you are saying? In lieu of the message which you are giving, I have been very charitable.

What you are saying is the polar opposite of the message of Jesus Christ in the Gospels.

Find me 1 verse of Scipture which backs up your view that we shouldn’t spread the Gospel anymore. That we are “over-saturated” with the Gospel. And I will 1. correct your interpretation of that verse, and 2. find you 5 verses that say otherwise.
 
What does the Catholic faith have that others do not? I want honest answers from honest Catholics.

Protestants evangelize to save souls that would otherwise be lost. Buddhists evangelize to save the unenlightened from perpetuating the cycle of suffering. Militant atheists evangelize because they think a religious person is a bad person.

But why Catholics? I’m just curious. To me it seems most Catholics don’t feel the need. I come from a very Roman Catholic city, and they have churches and schools everywhere, and it’s not rare to still see nuns and monks here. But none of them ever talks to anyone about faith with an eye towards turning to Christ. To most of them, to be Catholic is just one option among many.

It could be said that evangelization on Catholics’ part is to offer people the richness of the Catholic experience. But what if the people are happy just the way they are? What if they think they don’t need a faith, any faith? Does the Church turn away, give up, or keep trying, one way or another? Why should it keep going?

I’m just curious. I’ve been brought up Protestant, and was a Hindu-Buddhist for a long time. I know why they seek out new converts. But for all the religiosity of Catholics, they’re just not as interested in claiming souls for God.
This is a very interesting question, and it’s even more interesting that it’s being asked. You would NEVER see this question in an evangelical forum. They, as a general rule, tend to be much more aware of, knowledgeable about, and committed to what they’re trying to do.

The real sad and embarrassing truth is that the Catholic Church needs to re-evangelize itself from the inside out. Catechesis has been so poor for decades that we can’t really hope to evangelize others until we ourselves know what we’re about and start to behave like it.
 
…I disagree. Profoundly. See the quote in my signature. 🙂
I also disagree profoundly, but probably in a different way and for different reasons than Koineman does.

I believe that it does no good to approach non-Christians if we, ourselves, aren’t clear about the basics of the CHRISTIAN CATHOLIC faith, which many Catholics are not. Christianity is 2000 years old, with a very Scriptural and historical basis. And it involves behaving in certain ways consonant with that very Scriptural and historical basis.

It is not primarily about supporting the general population with government welfare schemes, having good table manners or getting that glowing feeling between your ears when you smell incense or hear the right kind of political commentary. It’s not about conservative vs. liberal, because that’s only about 200 years old anyway, and the church is much older than that.

The first evangelization has to happen INSIDE the Church, and then the second as outreach. Smugly sitting around “preaching without words” never worked and never will, unless there is not only holy and believing, but MORAL, behavior to go with it. Even St. Francis (who by the way never uttered that trite little quote) knew that. He was up and at em for miles around Assisi preaching to anyone who would listen, even the animals and the birds, while living out loud what he was preaching out loud.

But…We–American Catholics–are not ready or prepared to go knocking on doors or anything of the sort yet. There is a lot of prep work that would be necessary before anything like that could ever happen credibly.
 
I also disagree profoundly, but probably in a different way and for different reasons than Koineman does.

I believe that it does no good to approach non-Christians if we, ourselves, aren’t clear about the basics of the CHRISTIAN CATHOLIC faith, which many Catholics are not. Christianity is 2000 years old, with a very Scriptural and historical basis. And it involves behaving in certain ways consonant with that very Scriptural and historical basis.

It is not primarily about supporting the general population with government welfare schemes, having good table manners or getting that glowing feeling between your ears when you smell incense or hear the right kind of political commentary. It’s not about conservative vs. liberal, because that’s only about 200 years old anyway, and the church is much older than that.

The first evangelization has to happen INSIDE the Church, and then the second as outreach. Smugly sitting around “preaching without words” never worked and never will, unless there is not only holy and believing, but MORAL, behavior to go with it. [General fact, no finger-pointing at anybody in here.] Even St. Francis (who by the way never uttered that trite little quote) knew that. He was up and at em for miles around Assisi preaching to anyone who would listen, even the animals and the birds, while living out loud what he was preaching out loud.

But…We–American Catholics–are not ready or prepared to go knocking on doors or anything of the sort yet. There is a lot of prep work that would be necessary before anything like that could ever happen credibly.
 
Everyone evangelizes differently depending on their gifts and moral example. I personally write and perform original Catholic music that shares about Christ and my own struggles as a Christian in hope it will build others, and I also share doctrine that is based on scripture with my skill in videos and technology. I am also an example for my non-Christian friends, and they see that difference and ask me what makes me so different. Additionally, I mentor kids and help them in their own struggle, and I am an example to them. It’s not always about bible-thumping, but precisely through love. It really just comes down to your skills. Paul says we all have different parts in the church. People will see your faith and will want to know more, so know your faith and share it! So know you’re not alone. Trust that Catholics are using their skills, and then focus on your skills to bring people to Christ.
 
My approach to evangelization is to subtly reveal that I’m Catholic and then preach by example. I won’t engage people in theological conversation unless they ask. My hope is that through my prayers and example they will seek God. I leave the more proactive style of evangelization to the professionals - those missionaries mandated by the Church…
This. In light of our increasingly polarized society, I’ve decided to let it show that I’m Catholic and not care who knows
Ah yes, that horrible quote. I know it well. It’s like saying: “Give out your phone number. Use digits if necessary.” 😃
False analogy. Also, you can always do something like pantomime your number 🤷
I always felt Catholics were the sensible Christians.
Even when we have a more traditional view on something, it’s still taking a third option:
-Evolution or God? How about both?
-“Homosexuality is fine and not a choice” or “even the concept is a sin and they’re choosing to sin”? It’s a sin to act on it, but we still agree it’s not always a choice (to be homosexual, that is)
 
=Nabooru;9814914]What does the Catholic faith have that others do not? I want honest answers from honest Catholics.
Truth like God is “singular.”

God always with unfailing consistancy has taught and I can prove it]; believe only in:

One God [Triune]

Because there IS only One God ; logically there can be [accoerding to both God and logic] Only One set of Faith beliefs

And Because there is Only One God and His Only One set of Faith beliefs there can be according to God; logic and the bible: only One Church; for which there are more 100 evidences of in the NT alone:)

John.10: 16 “And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd”

Ps.127:1 “Unless the LORD builds the house, those who build it labor in vain.
Unless the LORD watches over the city, the watchman stays awake in vain”
Protestants evangelize to save souls that would otherwise be lost. Buddhists evangelize to save the unenlightened from perpetuating the cycle of suffering. Militant atheists evangelize because they think a religious person is a bad person.
Actually this is highly questionable based on my response above.:o
But why Catholics? I’m just curious. To me it seems most Catholics don’t feel the need. I come from a very Roman Catholic city, and they have churches and schools everywhere, and it’s not rare to still see nuns and monks here. But none of them ever talks to anyone about faith with an eye towards turning to Christ. To most of them, to be Catholic is just one option among many.
Now THAT friend is a profound question:)

I suspect it has to do with our training and our belief that true Faith is singular and MUST orginate from God’s Grace. Those offered Grace and TRUE Faith will seek then to find the singular truth. Catholic Missionaries are not rare; and are very effective; because we alone have the truth to offer.

Still your point is excellent. And I thank you for sharing it.👍
It could be said that evangelization on Catholics’ part is to offer people the richness of the Catholic experience. But what if the people are happy just the way they are? What if they think they don’t need a faith, any faith? Does the Church turn away, give up, or keep trying, one way or another? Why should it keep going?
That gets to the crux of the matter. Truth; True-Faith are singular. hell is much larger than is heaven because so many choose to believe that they "Know more; or Know better; than God; Christ and His One God; Faith and Church; Catholic Church.

Matthew 7:13 "Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat…Luke 13:24 “Strive to enter by the narrow gate; for many, I say to you, shall seek to enter, and shall not be able” …Matthew 7:14 “How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it!”

EACH of the following prove the One God; Faith and Church Bibles teaching as they apply ONLY to Christ and the Apostles from whom the essentail Succession is handed on to the CC alone. [Mt. 28: 16-20]

“And the eleven disciples [Apostles] went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying:** All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.** Going therefore, teach** ye**[only the Apostles] all nations;[NOW TO THE ENTIRE WORLD MAKING SUCCESSION ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY] baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.”

Mt. 10:1-8
Mt. 16:15-19
Mt. 18:18
Mt. 28:16-20
John 14;16-17
John 20;19-23
John 17:15-19

There lots amore but htis confirms my points.
Christ actual and real Power and authority as God is handed on to first the Apostles then then through Peter and the Apostles to the CC in: **Mt. 10:1-8; Mt. 16:18-19; Mt. 18:18; John 17:22; John 20:21 and Mt. 28: 18-19 **
I’m just curious. I’ve been brought up Protestant, and was a Hindu-Buddhist for a long time. I know why they seek out new converts. But for all the religiosity of Catholics, they’re just not as interested in claiming souls for God.
No my friend; simply not credited for for doing so. There are more than ONE BILLION Catholics World wide; and a GREAT Many like me; the founder of this site and many Catholics who post on it have very actice teaching Ministeries. PLEASE check our by Blog site.😃

THANK tyou so very much for your post.🙂

God Bless,
pat/PJM here on this Forum
 
I agree, and well said. There is a inexcusable dearth of desire to do evangelism among most Christians, whether Protestants or Catholics, and many are just making excuses for why they don’t go out and bring the gospel to the lost.

Countless people need–it’s not optional–to have the revelation of the gospel passed on to them, but we keep it to ourselves. To withhold from someone what they desperately need is the exact reverse of charity. The widespread disregard of the spiritual need of people around us is as selfish as it is alarming.
Could it be lack of faith? Maybe most church-goers have too much internal doubt that the foolishness of the cross is a good enough explanation for how to be saved… maybe this is a product of our relativistic culture.

We doubt whether the truth of Christ that “works” for us is good enough to be the truth that works for everyone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top