Ethics of Proselytization

[zippy2006]

In hindsight perhaps I focused too much on my personal experience...

Most of us are looking at your OP and saying, "I see nothing wrong with what they did." The onus is on you to explain why this encounter was noteworthy. If you didn't think it was noteworthy and problematic, then why would you have written the OP at all?

I am especially adverse to duplicity and deception;

The difficulty is that you are trying to object to what your coworker did while at the same time not objecting to what your coworker did. If they did something that you believe was objectionable or even noteworthy, then you need to say what that is. If they did nothing that you believe was objectionable or noteworthy, then it seems that you agree with us and the thread will have been a bit of a dud. Whether the scenario is taken as a hypothetical or as a personal event doesn't change any of these points. If you had written up the OP as a fictional scenario we would be in the exact same place.

This is almost certainly going in the direction of you explaining why the way you were taught to evangelize in your youth was an insincere way to evangelize.

 

[Fervent]

This is something I've put quite a bit of thought into, and I think it takes having been exposed to the hyper-evangelistic protestant churches that objectify non-Christians by calling them things like "mission fields" and similar dehumanizing terms to appreciate. There is definitely a fine line between reaching out and sharing the gospel and reducing people to objects while lionizing oneself as bringing them salvation. In the case you're discussing, it doesn't necessarily seem to be much to indicate that is the case, but its not out of the realm of possibilities.

 

[RDKirk]

In hindsight perhaps I focused too much on my personal experience. That wasn't really my intent, that was intended more as an opener for further conversation.

Allow me to clarify some things.

I don't dislike the person I mentioned in my OP. We aren't close, we just speak occasionally at work. I don't believe they are a bad person. I didn't feel offended by anything they did. I may have used choice words that overstated: The most negative emotion I felt was suspicion/wonder--I indulged a curiosity: Were previous interactions part of a deliberate tactic, or did our already established previous interactions mean she felt comfortable reaching out with this?

Most importantly, and I think I haven't stressed this enough I think; this isn't really about me. That is, how I feel about the situation isn't really the issue. The focus I had was really more on me contemplating how other people feel about proselytizing efforts. I wanted to put myself in the shoes of other people, I wanted to explore the ethics of specifically religious outreach with the tone of how others experience it, how as a Christian I can learn from that, and digest ways to be considerate of others while remaining faithful to what I believe is a general Christian calling in bearing witness to my faith in Jesus.

As a person who inhabits a complex and highly pluralistic world, who is called to love my neighbor, treat others as I want to be treated, and to be bold in my confession of Jesus as Lord and Messiah; it matters to me the shape of evangelism. And ethical concerns here are deeply important to me. I have, on a few occasions already mentioned my background and--if it wasn't clear--my very real rejection of gimmick based "evangelism" (I would go so far as to say it's not evangelism at all, it's mere proselytizing, and as I indicated in an earlier post I do distinguish between the two). I am especially adverse to duplicity and deception; when I talk about my faith with others I make an effort to be frank, honest, and also respectful. St. Peter writes that when we "give answer" to our hope we are to do so with gentleness and respect; as such I desire a level of sincerity, authenticity, and desire to make an attempt to be myself in such interactions. I'm not here to give a sales pitch, my religion isn't a consumer product to be marketed; it's a real belief in a good Creator God who made heaven and earth, who, through the real Jesus Christ, comes down to mend the broken and heal the hurt of a world fractured by sin and death. And that's what I want to communicate. And that's why I think having a frank and open conversation about this subject matters. Not just in an explicitly inter-Christian dialogue; but in a more "open house" setting. That's why I chose to have this conversation here, open to non-Christians to participate and share their thoughts, their grievances, their experiences, perhaps to also help those of us who are Christians hear, learn, consider, and contemplate.

I wanted something frank, open, honest. Because to me being faithful to Jesus does involve establishing bridges of communication with those with whom I do not share a religious agreement. Christianity isn't a tribe and I take up my spear against the next tribe over, it's who and what I am in the context of being a human among other humans.

-CryptoLutheran

At this point, though, you don't seem to know whether that person was trying to proselytize you, evangelize you, or just seeing if you aren't already a brother in Christ who wouldn't mind having occasional friendly chats about Jesus.

Over my life, I have found it so highly enriching to have someone in Christ to talk to at work that I'd "risk" that kind of invitation to find one. If she's only interested in proselytizing you into "her" kind of Christianity, you can just move on. Otherwise, you've found a friend: "Whenever two or more of you come together in My name...."

That gain is worth the risk.

If the person were trying to evangelize you...what do you think she should have done differently beyond getting to know you first and showing herself to be friendly on a long-term basis?

 

[Larniavc]

That someone cares enough about you and the faith to take it all seriously.

In the UK many people view those people who stand in the street trying to engage people about God in the say way as those charity or survey people who lurk in similar high traffic areas.

But in my experience the former are far less intrusive. I have been hailed by the latter many times but never by the former in the street.

Edit: now that I think about it I have never been approached in the street by a religious person.

 

[Larniavc]

What's interesting here is that friendships without challenges actually lack integrity, and to avoid all serious topics and disagreements (religious, political, etc.) is actually a sign of a shallow friendship. Nowadays there's easily as much danger of banal, mutually-affirming "friendship"* as forms of objectification.

* Friendships of pleasure but not virtue, according to Aristotle.

I disagree. Knowing that my friends and I disagree on many things (and therefore don’t discuss those subjects) is a sign of friendshipsual strength.

 

[zippy2006]

If she's only interested in proselytizing you into "her" kind of Christianity, you can just move on. Otherwise, you've found a friend: "Whenever two or more of you come together in My name...."

That gain is worth the risk.

Indeed.