Why don’t we Proselytize?
by James W. Bannister, B.A., LL.B.
Here’s a word you won’t hear from today’s Roman Catholic Churchmen. The word is PROSELYTIZE.
Look it up. Dictionary.com Unabridged defines it as “to convert or attempt to convert as a proselyte; recruit”. The American Heritage Dictionary says “To induce someone to convert to one’s own religious faith,” and “To convert a person from one belief, doctrine, cause or faith to another.”
The reason you won’t read it or hear it in the Church today is that we don’t do it anymore. Why not?!
In the “bad old days”, before Vatican II, we used to do a lot of proselytization. Jesus Himself commanded His disciples to do so. “Go ye into the whole world” He said “and preach the gospel to every creature.” (St. Mark 16:15)
Why? So that all might have the opportunity to hear the Gospel, the opportunity to be saved. “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be condemned.” (St. Mark 16:16)
Before Vatican II, we used to cite these words of Our Lord as authority for the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (there is no salvation outside the Church). Therefore, we knew, it was our duty as followers of Christ to go out and convert others, to preach the goods news of the Gospel to them, to do everything in our power to bring them all — all the unbelievers, nonbelievers and disbelievers — into Holy Mother Church, for the salvation of their immortal souls.
Starting with Saint Paul, devout Catholics have always taken very seriously this Great Commission, as it is sometimes called. Think of the great missionary saints: Saint Thomas the Apostle, Saint Francis Xavier, Saint Patrick, St. Jean Brébeuf, St. Isaac Jogues ... the list goes on and on. They endured hardship, suffering and even martyrdom for this God‑given missionary imperative.
No more. That was before Vatican II. The post‑conciliar Church doesn’t bother, it seems, to send out missionaries to convert the heathens and minister unto the pagans, even though they are certainly doomed to hell unless they believe and are baptized.
Why? Because, although the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has not been and can never be “repealed” or changed, most of today’s Churchmen have chosen, since Vatican II, to ignore it. It seems they are not sure, any more, that it is “correct”, even though Our Lord Himself said quite clearly “he that believeth not shall be condemned”.
But no! Now, in the name of a false ecumenism, we find good in all “churches”. After all, the Protestants and “our separated brethren” are Christians, aren’t they? The Jews and Muslims claim to believe in “one God”, don’t they? (They say this even though Jesus Christ said to the Pharisees “You claim to have God for your Father but you do not recognize Me and I am the image of the Father. No, your god is the devil.”) As for the pagan “religions”, even though they worship idols, surely they must be seeking God, only in their own way? What rubbish!
The same kind of reasoning misleads us into thinking that the Consecration of Russia has already ‘been done, or isnt even necessary. Those who oppose the Fatima Message argue that the Orthodox are, “Sisterchurch”. Who are we to try to convert them to our particular “brand” of Christianity? It is not “helpful”, they say. It is no longer “politically correct” to insist on the necessity of the conversion of the Russians.
The words “politically correct” should be read quite literally. Read Section VIII of Father Nicholas Gruner’s World Enslavement or Peace and see how the Vatican, in 1962, in order to secure the attendance of Russian Orthodox observers at Vatican II, made an agreement with Moscow, in which they promised to cease their attacks on the Communist régime and way of life. That included the Russian Orthodox “church” which was and is the only “church” tolerated by the Communists. (This is understandable given that the Orthodox clergy was thoroughly infiltrated by Communist Party members and agents and was in effect a willing tool of the Communist Party.)
The Moscow‑Vatican Agreement — which the Vatican considers itself bound by even today — is the real obstacle to the Collegial Consecration of Russia requested by Our Lady of Fatima. The Vatican Secretariat of State continues to order the affairs of the Church according to this perfidious agreement, even though it has become clearly disastrous for the Church.
Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI (when he was Cardinal Ratzinger) have publicly expressed their disenchantment with the Vatican‑Moscow Agreement. It was because of this agreement that John Paul II was never able to visit Russia. Why? Because he was told by the Secretary of State that his visit might be seen as proselytizing! No, that is something the post‑Conciliar Church must not do, least of all with the nation whose conversion Our Lady of Fatima commanded.