Misconceptions about Christian evangelizing

At this time I'm not going to write a scholarly blog posting with all the pertinent scripture quotes, though I might at some point. But from the news articles I see I need to get some quick talking points out because there is a lot of damage out there due to misconceptions about the exhortations to evangelize (and by implication, work toward conversions).

o Remember that Jesus himself came only to preach to the Jews. He states this clearly when a petitioner who was not Jewish had to beg/debate with him to get him to perform a miracle on behalf of her child. Jesus himself, so far as evangelizing and converting, was here only to work among the Jews. This was his role as the Messiah.

o The second role of Jesus was that of Savior. This was to found the Christian church that would be the foundation of the New Covenant with God. The New Covenant overlays the Old Covenant; it does not dispose of it. This is obvious because Jesus and the Apostles frequently quote what Christians now call the Old Testament. Therefore Jesus is the first priest of Christianity, based on the New Covenant, but the concept of the Kingdom of God and being a priest was not invented out of thin air. Jesus placed the foundation of the New Covenant firmly on the Old Covenant.

o It is only after Jesus died, resurrected and ascended into heaven that the Apostles and disciples received "permission" to evangelize and convert "Gentiles" "throughout the world." This permission was derived by both the Holy Spirit at Pentecost and also by individual exhortation by Jesus, for example to the Apostle Philip and the convert Saul to Paul.

I repeat these points to clarify some of the complexity of the relationship between Jews and Christians. It is wrong to view Jews at either extreme, which is that they have a "free pass birthright to heaven even if they live like unbelieving secularists" or the opposite that they are "conversion fodder to bring on the Apocalypse." Both are demeaning, incorrect, weak in understanding of scripture and unworthy of sophisticated Christian thought.

o The communion of saints included the Old Testament fathers and patriarchs. This is made abundantly clear in both the teachings of Jesus and events that occurred. For example, Jesus during the Transfiguration not only appeared with Moses and Elias but consulted with them (Matthew 17: 2,3). Jesus obviously did not need to "talk" with Moses and Elias, as they would without speech all be operating within only God's will and knowledge. But they spoke together so that the three Apostles present could witness that the patriarchs and fathers are in the Kingdom of God and that the mission of Jesus on earth is fully synchronized with all that the Old Testament fathers said and did. In fact, in Luke 16:20 Jesus tells relates how the beggar Lazarus is comforted in heaven by Abraham. Abraham himself is the one who speaks to the sinful rich man in hell who ignored Lazarus, allowing his suffering and death. Jesus relates how Abraham himself informs the rich man in hell about why he is in hell, why he cannot return to earth in order to warn his brothers (who are presumably sinning in a similar way as the rich man did) and Abraham is the one who has to reject the rich man in hell's request for even a touch of Lazarus' finger in water for his relief. (Notice that the rich man in hell does not dare to ask Abraham himself for water). Abraham is speaking for God. Further, during the rich man's last appeal to Abraham to warn the man's brothers who are still alive, Abraham cites Moses. Abraham explains that they had Moses and the prophets, and "let them hearken to them." Jesus clearly and repeatedly is showing that the entire faith history of the Israelites is alive and operative in God. Otherwise Jesus would have had a miraculous conversation like this one to share with the Apostles that would have gone along the lines of "and now you have Jesus to harken to and heed."

The reason that I make this point crystal clear is twofold. One is that evangelical Christians must stop thinking that the Old Testament does not count except to quote "tsk tsk" passages from it, or to perform some sort of self prophecy based on cherry picked passages that are misinterpreted. Certain evangelical Christians pride themselves in their scriptural knowledge, but they know a few trees but reject the forest. They do not understand how Jesus is a continuation of the groundwork that is laid down in the Old Testament. They only see it in terms of handy dandy quotes, or "who is in the saved club and who is not." And so my second point is that evangelical Christians are in grave error in not understanding the family of Abraham. Jesus himself details how Abraham speaks for God, seated in heaven, and instructing the rich man in hell. Abraham speaks for God, and comforts the saved who have suffered on earth in heaven. And Abraham in his turn cites Moses twice as being the living source of knowledge.

How can any of you miss the importance of this teaching of Jesus, where he relates not a fairy story but reality of dialogue that has taken place? Jesus appears with Moses and Elias in person, and he teaches how Abraham in heaven is empowered to speak on behalf of God. How can you miss that?

And so, how can you think of Jews or Muslims as being "outside" targets for evangelizing? They are all of Abraham. Abraham is the father of the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths. They are by definition "part of the family." This does not mean that you cannot discuss the specifics of faith and invite individuals to partake. But it is arrogant and wrong to view Jews and Muslims as either "unsaved by definition" or as "conversion targets." Christians evangelize and convert, where it is God's will, by sharing the word and setting good examples in your own lives. How can Christians evangelize to Muslims when many of you support abortion, for example? How about evangelizing to your liberal brothers and sisters first?

o Remember that "evangelizing" means bringing the word of God. Jews and Muslims already have the word of God because they are of the family of Abraham. You should spend your "evangelizing" time bringing the word to those who do not have it at all, and by setting good neighbor examples (with no hidden conversion agenda) through charity and alms. It is insulting to Abraham, and therefore to God, to characterize Jews and Muslims as being outside of the family of those who have the word of God. They DO have the word of God. In fact, most Muslims I know are more honorable in reverence in speech and thought to Jesus and Mary than secular Christians are. (And that is not lost on God, let me assure you).

o As usual the Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI has it exactly right. He recognizes that Catholics are very low key in their evangelizing and says that Catholics should do more. But he likewise does not characterize Jews and Muslims as "Apocalypse targets for conversion or cannon fodder" as do all too many evangelical Christians, even though they try to put a brotherly spin on it when it comes to Jews. When the Holy Father speaks of evangelizing he means it in the sense that it is taught by Jesus and Biblically supported, which is to 1) share the word and 2) perform the works. That is evangelizing, not ticking off how many pack your church or you can notch on your conversion belt.

o Notice that there is no where in the Bible that there is talk of the one true Church being the most numerous. In fact, the Israelites were extreme minorities in terms of numbers and they did not convert at all in their history. Jesus confined himself to preaching to the Jews. The Apostles received the mandate from the Holy Spirit, and the resurrected Jesus, to spread the word. But no where did Jesus imply dash board or numbers targets. In fact he says to bring the word and then if they do not listen, dust your feet off and leave. (Once you have brought the word it is up to the Holy Spirit to move souls if they can be moved). YOU don't do it. All conversion and grace comes from God. So how can you have statistical and self gratifying conversion targets? That is not scriptural at all.

o This is why many evangelicals misunderstand and slander the Catholic Church. When we are sad at small attendance at Mass it's not because we cover ourselves in vainglory over the numbers games. It's because we are sad that people are living without the communion of the saints and the sacraments. But we don't care if we "win the number game." I honestly do not care if I live to see the last one hundred Catholics on earth; God will not judge based on who has the most "believers." For example, look at Syria. Many believers lived in Syria during the time just after Jesus Christ and that is good. Fewer believers live today in Syria, but that is just numbers, it's not oppression. And that is good, as Syria has only good agenda toward their own citizens who are Christians. So I do not view Syria as "a country where Christianity did not succeed" simply because there are small numbers of people living who are Christians. First of all, it is a country that honors its Muslim roots in Abraham. And Christians are free to believe and worship. That is a successful country, not a "numbers game" "count the Christians" success or failure.

o Salvation is individual. Even the Apostles, who were the only ones to have genuine guarantees of achieving heaven with Jesus, "lived in hope." The Apostles themselves never puffed themselves up in the vainglory of numbers, being a majority, having a "megachurch" (worse, one that does not celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass as God has mandated), or of "having assurance of being saved." Evangelicals are doing no one's soul a favor when they teach that mindset.

So do as the Bible and Jesus exhort and preach the good word. But where it is not accepted, leave without grudge, and leave it to the Holy Spirit. And be Christian in deed and works and not just words.