Catholic Evangelization?

June 3, 2015 at 1:17 am #12141
marshallD
Marshall D
Member
Hey fellow muskoxen,

I’m just curious, as catholics, how do you evangelize to others?

Growing up in a baptist tradition, evangelization is always focused on sharing the gospel message and the non-christian saying the sinners prayer and accepting Christ into their heart. Maybe one would invite the un-saved to a bible study, ask them some questions, share your testimony be-friend this person and eventually you would share the gospel with them or hope they would walk up the aisle during an altar call. Ultimately, salvation hinges on a one-time event: a prayer of forgiveness and declaring one’s trust in Jesus. After that, there would be some follow up, some discipleship of sorts BUT nothing too extreme is asked of the new christian. Have a solid prayer life and read your bible pretty consistently. Show up to church on Sunday mornings, maybe you join a choir or a worship team. You would obviously be welcomed to participate in the occasional communion service and maybe you even get baptized (but it’s not forced upon you. after all, baptism isn’t necessary for salvation, right?). I suppose my point is this: For a baptist, after the one-time salvation experience, one isn’t expected to do too much. A church service is really catered to the members. Good multi-media, really good worship band, pastor who gives inspirational sermons. You would want the new christian to feel like they belong and are part of a community. That’s a big thing too. Community focused. Community or life groups. Live life together.

BUT for a catholic, how in the world do you reach out to the un-churched? As a protestant, it already seems quite difficult to evangelize to skeptics but once they are convinced of the Gospel they are good to go. For a catholic, even if the skeptic is convinced of the truth of the gospel, they need to attend a 6 month RCIA program, accept papal infallibility, that the eucharist is the real presence of Christ, Mariology, accept the fact they will need to go to confession, baptism is a part of the salvation process, no more birth-control, etc, etc. There are so many things asked of the new-believer!

So, how do you guys do it?

June 3, 2015 at 4:44 am #12145
mattmp
Matthew M
Member
Thank you, Marshall, for your thoughtful question. As a life-long Catholic, I am willing to take a stab at it. A point of clarification, though, please. Do you intend your question for only the present-day, or historically?

June 3, 2015 at 7:13 pm #12157
marshallD
Marshall D
Member
Thanks Matthew,

I suppose I meant in the modern day but I’m interested in both. Please share.

June 3, 2015 at 8:02 pm #12159
mattmp
Matthew M
Member
Ooooh boy, ok. I invite the critique of others, but this is mine, imho. First, Catholics are not good at the type of evangelization you mention in the modern day. It is not our way, traditionally. Why? When the Church began, we may have been better, closer to what you mention, but secretive. Christians, as we know, practiced in secret. The faith was under persecution, and there was a long period of initiation to make sure catechumens were sincere and faithful, and not pagan spies who would turn the faithful over to the authorities for whatever reward offered.

I suppose, in this early period, Tertullian was and is correct even today, “The blood of the martyrs, is the seed of the Church.” When we witness to the point of death, we witness, which is the definition of “martyr”, in the most powerful way possible, Jn 3:15. When the actual persecutions by pagans were over and the Church needed reform and good examples, the monastic orders appeared, a kind of “living martyrdom” still spoken of today for those men and women who enter religious life, in fact, in some orders, at least historically, when final vows are professed, a shroud, like a burial shroud, covers the soon-to-be-professed. They “die to the world”, to live for Christ and his Church. Still a powerful witness.

When the Church became the official state religion of the Roman Empire, there was no need to hide anymore. Converts flocked to the Church, not always out of the desire of holiness, but the official approval, offices, or other benefits they might receive being part of the state religion. We know, historically, up until the American Revolution the connection between Church and state was strong and inherent. This dragged the Church into many unholy political conflicts and intrigues. When heresies broke out, the heresy was viewed not-so-much as a matter of religious opinion, as we do today, but as a matter of loyalty or lack thereof to the state. If state and religion are entwined, and you go your own way on religion, you would be viewed as disloyal, a traitor, to the state, and that is why heretics were handed over to the state when the Church had done all it could to turn them around.

When the Protestant Reformation/Revolution broke out, it was treated very much the same way as described above. When Protestantism could not be “put back in the bottle” by the traditional methods, Catholicism adopted a somewhat of a “fortress” mentality. Vatican II only said, “it was possible”, not regular, not reliable, not reasonably to be expected, that those outside the Church under certain conditions could be saved, “Extra Ecclesia Nulla Salus”, which had generally been accepted up until Vatican II to a great, but perhaps not an exclusive, but unspoken degree. Translated literally, “outside the Church there is no salvation”. Put into a more positive spin, “All salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body” (CCC 846).” The Church has always emphasized the importance, primacy, and necessity of the Catholic Church. Many have misinterpreted Vatican II to mean, when it spoke of the possibility of salvation outside the Church, that the Church is just another, just as viable means towards salvation. The Church has never said this.

So, after the Protestant Reformation could not be undone, Catholics went into this bunker mentality, and we remained there, “We’re right, you’re wrong. Go be wrong if you want to, i.e. see the above regarding salvation.” Catholics, religiously, did not have much to do with non-Catholics and inter-marriage was unusual and rare, the Church not encouraging. With Vatican II, ecumenism began to “open the windows, and let some fresh air in”. Some traditionalist Catholics eagerly want to return all things to the bunker-fortress, “you’re wrong”, pre-conciliar world, believing it was “the best of times”.

The Catholic Church has long relied, and still does, on traditional Catholic obedience and still speaks in these terms. The Church has not traditionally needed to evangelize (the great missionaries, often backed up by the colonizing state, notwithstanding). We were satisfactory “unto ourselves”. The rise of secularism and the dissipation of “the Catholic ghetto” in the 20th century, and the integration of Catholics into mainstream society, some argue, have diluted the Church, weakened the faith, and led to “cafeteria Catholicism”. With the New Evangelization, the Church is trying, but it is definitely out of practice, to take a very beautiful, albeit sometimes very difficult to translate into modern terms, i.e. sound bites, ideology out back into the world. To once again “be ready to give an answer for our hope.” 1 Peter 3:15.

And, Marshall, for the Catholic, Baptism IS necessary for salvation:  http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-necessity-of-baptism

Marshall, does that weak attempt help at all? We’re out of practice for all the reasons mentioned above.”

Love,
Matthew