The Pope's visit to Brazil last week generated a lot of attention to the success of Protestant evangelistic efforts there. Pete Acosi raised an important point last week in his comments on the “God is a God of the Present” post below:
"I think we can take two courses of action when we see God clearly working among our Protestant brothers and sisters - we can 1) react or 2) humbly learn (as JPII encourages us in Ut Unum Sint) and grow. Though it puts us in a position of "weakness" - I think that is a good thing. Listen to the words of Cardinal Avery Dulles:
“The Church therefore has one inescapable task: To lift up Christ. When she seeks to lift herself up she becomes weak, but when she acknowledges her own weakness and proclaims her Lord, she is strong.”
Or we can imitate St. Paul - who tells the Church in Philippi that some are preaching Christ for this reason or that ... and he goes on to say, "What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in that I rejoice!" (1:18)
In many ways Christ is being partially or fully proclaimed in many churches for many different sincere, insincere, or ignorant reasons ... but like St. Paul, I think we can learn to first rejoice as long as Christ is proclaimed... and then move from there... because, if our reaction isn't one of first rejoicing in the proclamation of Christ and him crucified - then we may need to allow God to purify our hearts..."
Sherry's response:
I think that there are a couple important issues here that are often conflated:
1) What is to be our response to non-Catholics who are effectively preaching Christ as they understand him?
2) How should we, as Catholics, preach Christ?
Issue number one: Our response to the evangelistic efforts of non-Catholics:
I think Pete is absolutely right. We should first be rejoicing that Christ is proclaimed, even if partially. (As will be outlined below, I don’t think this need be our only response.) Evangelicals are seeking to fulfill the “great commission” in Matthew 28 with great sacrifice and creativity and prayer and it makes no sense for us to grumble because they have been exceptionally faithful in this area in recent years and we have not.
(This wasn’t always the case. It was Catholics who were the great, creative, unstoppable missionaries of the 16th and 17th centuries when Protestantism was pre-occupied with other things. It was the great preachers of the 18th century – the Wesleys and Whitefields and the experience of the great awakening that began to change that. The evangelical missionary movement really didn’t get going until the 19th century and exploded in the late 20th century, just when Catholic commitment to the mission ad gentes imploded.)
Issue number two: How should we, as Catholics, preach Christ?
This is our real problem: We simply aren’t effectively proclaiming Christ to this generation. And so the evangelistically oriented among us naturally turn to those we regard as “experts” – evangelical-Pentecostal Christians.
I’ve spent time with Catholic leaders who were so frustrated with Catholic apathy and cluelessness in this area that they had come to these conclusions: 1) Catholics don’t evangelize; 2) the sacraments are only relevant to on-going, not initial conversion, therefore, 3) Catholicism has nothing to say about initial conversion and
4) therefore, we must think outside the “Catholic box” by following the methodology of our evangelical brothers and sisters.
We’ve got a problem when Catholics use evangelical evangelistic resources, approaches or programs, without vetting and amending them to reflect the fullness of Catholic teaching. That’s because evangelistic resources teach as well as evangelize.
Such resources explicitly teach the classical Reformation view of salvation – one’s personal faith alone is both the pre-requisite and the instrument through which one becomes a Christian, receives forgiveness for all sins, justification, adoption as God’s child, and eternal life.
We can’t expect them to teach the Catholic understanding that : “. . .the "good news" is directed to stirring a person to a conversion of heart and life and a clinging to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior; to disposing a person to receive Baptism and the Eucharist and to strengthen a person in the prospect and realization of new life according to the Spirit “ (Catechesis in Our Time, 6).
When we use evangelical materials, the sacraments are presented, at best, as symbols of the real salvific event which has already happened in the privacy of one’s heart. Once you have absorbed the idea that work of salvation happens entirely through the disembodied, invisible, and interior means of one’s personal faith, the proposal that the grace of God is truly made available to us through the visible, physical, public means of the Church and the sacraments makes no sense at all.
If Catholics rely entirely upon evangelical materials, they may be making one of the most important parts of our faith not only obscure but practically unimaginable. At a point of tremendous spiritual openness – perhaps the first in someone’s life - we would not be taking the trouble to tell them the whole truth.
Catholics should be preaching both-and: personal faith in Christ and repentence in the context of the sacraments and the Church. Of course, if the folks doing the lion’s share of proclamation don’t possess the fullness of the faith, we really can’t expect them to proclaim it.
As Billy Graham famously quipped “I prefer the evangelism that I’m doing to the evangelism that you’re not doing.”
The man has a point. It’s our job and, for the most part, we haven’t shown up for work.
9 Comments:
While in part I agree with the fact that Catholics are not known for their public evangelism, there is a private evangelism and can and should be done; prayer for all of our brothers and sisters in the world. Our prayers call down grace upon everyone, and draws them to Christ. Secondly, our lives and actions should be an evangelism in and of themselves. I will never hesitate to defend and explain my Catholic faith, but I would wish my prayers to be effective and my actions to be explanatory.
I take it that by "private" evangelism, you mean "wordless"?
While everyone here at ID would certainly agree with you on the absolute necessity of prayer and a life whose witness arouses genuine curiosity about Christ, the Church teaches that it isn't enough by itself:
“. . .even the finest witness will prove ineffective in the long run if it is not explained, justified—what Peter called always having "your answer ready for people who ask you the reason for the hope that you all have" —and made explicit by a clear and unequivocal proclamation of the Lord Jesus. . .
There is no true evangelization if the name, the teaching, the life, the promises, the kingdom and the mystery of Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God, are not proclaimed.”
Evangelii Nuntiandi (Evangelism in Our Time, 22)
We are not just supposed to wait until someone asks us a question to use words. We can actively seek to raise the topic and foster spiritual seeking by the words we use as well.
It's "both-and".
I have a coworker who, when I gave her a Bible (NIV..she's baptist), said "Oh, I can't read that, its too big and complicated." I wonder if she'll read the just out "Jesus of Nazareth" and find it as helpful as I do.
What about Pope Benedict's remark that Catholicism "attracts," but does not proselytize. Surely, that was aimed at the aggressive proselytization of evangelical sects. So why should any Catholic adopt evangelical methods if we take Pope Benedict's words to heart? I think the Holy Father recognizes the caritas at the center of Catholicism that attracts converts, not the proselytization that may not have any follow through in acts of charity. If one has a truly deep personal relationship with Jesus Christ, it shows itself, as the Pope said in Deus caritas est and in his several addresses to the people and bishops of Brazil, in works of charity, which go to anyone, not just those who want to become Catholic.
The Pope also referred continually to disciples and mission and to the Church and sacramental life. They are the bases for any further action in the mission field by Catholics. The Pope also referred several times to the religious orders, especially those enclosed, as a vital part of the missionary effort.
What you and the anonymous Catholic leaders take for "apathy" and "cluelessness" may be, in fact, a difference in "strategy." I don't think it necessarily leads to the conclusion that we must adopt evangelical Protestant methods. There's a wide gap between Catholicism and Protestantism in general, let alone evangelicals. And to think that methods are pure in and of themselves, without reference to their content is at least arguable, if not naive. If your premise was so obvious, I think it would have occurred to Pope Benedict. It is my understanding that he didn't even bother to meet with the leaders of the sects, but only with those of the mainline faiths. And he made it clear that, while we should respect those in the evangelical sects, we ourselves should be clear about our own identity. The Pope has been extremely careful in his use of terms: disciples, mission, missionary, evangelization. He does not use "evangelical." He clearly wants a bright line between Catholicism and the sects, not only on content, but with respect to "style," if you will.
I've also read some of the commentary from evangelical Christians themselves. Not every evangelical Christian is known for his or her deep personal relationship with Christ. And some of the remarks after Beckwith's return to the Catholic Church make it clear that there is still deep dislike for Catholics. So why should or would we adopt their methodology? It doesn't always work even with them and it presupposes many things at odds with Catholicism, even when stripped of its content.
starting in Chapter 3 (of Jesus of Nazareth), there is an extensive and complex discussion of the relationship between the Kingdom of God and the Church, revolving around the nature of the King. In my opinion, this is central to Catholic thinking about evangelization.
I think excessive references to "them" (evangelicals) versus "us" (Catholics) - and "their methodology" versus "our methodology" betrays the theological truth that we are brothers and sisters (though seperated) - drawing from our common sonship and infilling of the Holy Spirit that occurred in baptism (the fact that we are "seperated" doesn't deny the profound truth of our being "in Christ" - not something to take lightly).
I don't think there is a wrong way to proclaim Christ - so long as in "all things Christ is proclaimed - and in that I rejoice" (St. Paul).
I know so many Catholics who have been witnessed explicitly to about the person of Jesus by Protestants - and God has used that to draw them into a deeper relationship with himself in the Catholic Church.
The proclamation of the Gospel (the power of God unto salvation) carries a power with it - the Word is life-giving and it is the Word that transforms ... the methodology has something to do with it ... but it is ultimately his Holy Spirit that causes one to come to repentance and faith (the true result of primary proclamation).
Sherry, I suppose it should be "both-and" in the big picture, but I think the life I lead as a Christian may be my own best way to evangelize others.
I help out with RCIA at my parish (having gone through it five years ago, I just kept showing up!), and at least twice as part of coming-to-the-church stories I have heard people mention the holy lives of others leading them toward the church. In one case, the exemplar was a relative, in the other case not.
If I am really living as Jesus wants me to--it's not as if that is something common or normal!--people notice, and that is the best preaching there is; that word "attractive" certainly applies.
I don't want to exclude the value of a more active, goal-oriented kind of evangelizing, but I think my own first job in spreading the gospel is to live the gospel--and I do have a ways to go on that job yet!
Meanwhile, it seems there is quite a lot of active evangelizing going on in a certain sector of the American Catholic world, i.e., among a bunch of very active lay people, many of them converts from Protestantism, who are doing what they call "apologetics." I'm thinking of the Catholic Answers group and individuals who set up Catholic ministries that look a lot like the mini-empires created by American Protestant religious entrpreneurs.
What is your take on this sort of activity?
In my part of the world (mid-Michigan) I am able to pick up two Catholic radio stations, one affiliated with Michigan Catholic Radio, the other with Ave Maria Radio, and both of them connected with the movement I'm talking about. I have to say, I listen to both stations often and find a lot there to nurture my faith; and yet I find some of the conservative- Catholic, pro-"orthodox" partisanship disturbing ("liberal" Catholics are often harshly atacked), not to mention the conservative political partisanship which sometimes rears its ugly head.
Dave
Hi Dave:
Good to hear from you.
It is "both - and" - The Church is clear about that but if I can a dime for every Catholic who has said to me " I think the life I lead as a Christian may be my own best way to evangelize", I'd never have to raise money for the Institute again.
Another place where lived Catholic culture (together with our natural fears and the secularist assumptions of our culture) utterly trumps Church teaching.
All of us have a long way to go in living the Christian life - so if all of us wait until we're perfect, no one would ever hear about Christ! It's not about being perfect. It's about being available.
Because right now, there are millions of people seeking life's purpose and we could be the one whom God is sending to help them - if we are willing.
.
Re: apologetics - its one important aspect of evangelization - clearing away misconceptions, giving reasons to believe - but it sounds like you've been listening to some people who have gotten apologetics and the culture wars mixed up.
You are right - "orthodox" does not equal "conservative" (or for that matter, "liberal"). They aren't Catholic categories. So feel free to skip the nasty stuff. There are some wonderful Catholic apologists out there who are not like that.
Hi,
I'm a new Catholic Convert after spending over 20 years of adult life as an Fundamental-Evangelical. I started the following thread:
http://www.surprisedbytruth.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5875
Many of you all may find it interesting
Pax Christi,
Brian
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home