www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology What is proselytizing?

We've discussed the Balamand Accord recently. It says that Catholics and Orthodox should not proselytize each other.

To clarify: what is proselytizing? Certainly there are differences between Catholic and Orthodox and certainly we can talk about them. How do we reconcile frank dialogue and freedom of conscience with no proselytizing?

Is proselytizing different than using persuasive speech where one hopes to convince the other of the truth of one's position and leaving the Holy Spirit to move them to "convert"?

Dave Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

Doxa Theo!

I don't think that frank discussion is ever a problem. I think having a frank discussion with the intention of converting someone to the other's faith tradition would be proselytizing.

Fr. Deacon Edward

Father Deacon is correct. Witnessing what one believes as either Catholic or Orthodox is quite different from trying to convert someone.

As East and West move closer we need to be less worried about people moving from one jurisdiction to the other (i.e., from Catholicism to Orthodoxy or from Orthodoxy to Catholicism). We in the Byzantine Catholic Church (and perhaps other Orthodox as well) are already fairly comfortable with this since it is not uncommon for relocating or visiting Byzantines to go to the closest Byzantine parish (Catholic or Orthodox) without regard to jurisdiction. Pope John Paul II and Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios I put it clearly in 1987: "We reject every form of proselytism, every attitude which would or could be perceived to be a lack of respect". [Quoted in the Balamand Document #18] Perhaps the key here is respect for one another?

When full communion between East and West comes (pray God soon!) then we are going to need to accept and respect those individuals who move from East to West or West to East. As pointed out in another thread, full communion will not come from above (i.e., the bishops) but from the everyone in the Church - especially us lowly folks!

Glory to Jesus Christ ! A good example of a planned proselytizing were the various missions carried out to convert Orthodox Slavs during the pontificates of Pius XI (1922-1939) and Pius XII (1939-1958). The best documented study of this policy is the massive dissertation "Bishop Michel d'Herbigny SJ and Russia: A Pre-Ecumenical Approach to Christian Unity" by Leon Tretjakewitsch. Remember that it is a very dense doctoral dissertation. It focuses on the thought, work and influence of the Jesuit bishop who was behind the papally sponsored missions to convert Russian Orthodox in the Soviet Union. Tretjakewitsch does not advocate his canonization. Other worthwhile accounts include Cyril Korolevsky's "Metropolitan Andrew (1865-1944)" and one of my favorites Stephen Bachtalowsky's "Nicholas Charnetsky, CSSR, Bishop-Confessor." This work provides eyewitness accounts of the collapse of Orthodoxy in several post-WW I Ukrainian parishes and villages with the arrival of the Ikon of the Theotokos of Perpetual Help, this saintly Redemptorist preacher, and his hieromonks. Regarding Jesuit missionaries the classic and most accessible account remains Walter Ciszek's "With God in Russia." One can understand how an Orthodox Christian out of communion with Rome could be offended or even feel threatened by Catholic proselytizing.

[This message has been edited by Doulos of Fatima (edited 10-27-1999).]

Thanks, Doulos, for bringing up these incidents. We are digressing a bit but I think it helps to contrast the former views with the current views. This was posted recently on another BB but it highlights the pre-Vatican II approach to "Greek Rite Schismatics." It's from the Byzantine Catholic prayer book _Heavenly Manna_, published in 1941 with the imprimatur of Bishop Basil Takach (Third printing 1960.) It's the prayer "Prayer to Mary Immaculate for the Conversion of Schismatics" found on page 206:

"O Immaculate Virgin Mary, we Thy clients and children of the Holy Catholic Church, confident of Thy great protection, beg of Thee, deign to obtain of God the Holy Ghost, for the reverence and glorification of His eternal procession from the Father and the Son, an abundance of His graces for our misled brethren, the Greek Rite Schismatics, that being enlightened by His grace they may return to the fold of the Catholic Church under the infallible guidance of their first Shepherd and Teacher, the Pope of Rome, and that thus united to us by the bonds of one faith and one charity, they may in union with us glorify the Blessed Trinity by their good works and glorify Thee, O Virgin Mary, full of grace, in time and for eternity. Amen."

I hasten to add that probably worse things have been printed by Orthodox regarding Catholics. I bring this up to give us some historical perspective to attitudes that are not so old--attitudes which still persist in varying degrees on both sides of the fence.

The issue of proselytizing is particularly sensitive to Orthodox due to conflicts in Eastern Europe and in the Middle East. And yet the issues dividing us cannot be glossed over. We've also discussed Roman Catholic apologists recently. Does their approach to Orthodoxy need to factor in the principles of Balamand?

Dave Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

I think the practical impact of this for the Churches is not a few photocopied pamphlets passed around on the streetcorners of New York. I think it is fair to say that neither Church tries very hard to directly convert practicing members of the other. The most sensitive aspect is evangelization of non-practicing even unbaptized persons in formerly or historically Orthodox societies.

Currently, in deference to the Orthodox, the Vatican has restricted Byzantine Catholics from re-establishing the Exarchate for Russia, leaving the Russian Catholic parishes and communities without any oversight. In Eastern and Central Ukraine, the Vatican has allowed only an Archexarchate, not an eparchy. I assume this is a dilemma to those who feel Rome should take a lighter hand in regulating Eastern Catholics but who also desire better relations with the Orthodox. Am I right?

SLAVA NA VIKI

The term "proselytism" carries a negatively charged definition for me. It implies not only criticism of another faith (which is often valid), but harsh denigration of that faith; this should definitely be avoided if we wish to "speak the truth in love".

A follow up question:

It is well known that historically the Catholic Church has held that Orthodox orders are valid. Are Orthodox orders licit? I believe the pre-Vatican II position would have answered no. Am I correct in assuming the Catholic position now is that Orthodox orders are *both* valid and licit?

Dave Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

Hey Dave,

You asked me this second question privately and I said I didn't know. On more reflection I think I have the answer.

Validity in the RC view would be a doctrinal position having to do with the nature of a sacrament. Licitness has to do with the discipline of the Church and could certainly be changed. To put it in a very RC way, if the Roman Pontiff says they're illicit, then they're illicit; if he says they're licit then they're licit. It's that universal jurisdiction thing; according to our view he has the authority to change that.

Dave,

Or to put it another way. The Catholic Church doesn't now have a different answer to that question; it doesn't have the question anymore.

Dear Dave,

I can think of some very interesting articles from "The Christian Activist" which denigrate the Catholic Church.

Sincerely yours in Christ,