Why Don't They Listen?
John Stott on the most pernicious obstacles to effective world evangelism
Gary Barnes | posted 9/01/2003 12:00AM

2 of 3

The other word we need to define is proselytism. To proselytize and to evangelize are not synonymous. The best way to distinguish them is to understand proselytism as "unworthy witness." The World Council of Churches and the Roman Catholic Church produced a helpful study document in 1970 titled Common Witness and Proselytism. It identified three aspects of proselytism. Proselytism takes place (1) whenever our motives are unworthy (when our concern is for our glory rather than God's), (2) whenever our methods are unworthy (when we resort to any kind of "physical coercion, moral constraint, or psychological pressure"), and (3) whenever our message is unworthy (whenever we deliberately misrepresent other people's beliefs).
In contrast, to evangelize is (in the words of the Manila Manifesto) "to make an open and honest statement of the gospel, which leaves the hearers entirely free to make up their own minds about it. We wish to be sensitive to those of other faiths, and we reject any approach that seeks to force conversion on them."
What impact did the first Lausanne Congress have on the church and the world?
Participants left Lausanne excited, determined, and committed to the fulfillment of the task. And many fine initiatives have been taken, more local than regional or global. The covenant proved to be a solid basis on which evangelical believers could unite in mission.
Why then was more not accomplished? Different answers are given. But perhaps the greatest hindrance to world evangelization remains our failure to be what we profess to be. The covenant still challenges us to look like what we are talking about: "Nothing commends the Gospel more eloquently than a transformed life, and nothing brings it into disrepute so much as personal inconsistency" (Manila Manifesto).
Are there lessons the Western church can learn from the church in Africa, Asia, and the Latin world?
We must be careful not to romanticize the churches of the developing world, for they have their blemishes, as we have ours. It is unwise too to bracket "Africa, Asia, and Latin America" as if we could generalize in relation to them.
Nevertheless, we can affirm that their God is the living God, and that they refuse to place human limitations on his power. Their faith is uncluttered. They believe God hears and answers prayer. They also exhibit freedom and joy in their worship, and their extended families are living expressions of hospitality and care. They take naturally to evangelism, and new converts are expected immediately to witness to Christ their Savior. Spontaneity is the word which springs naturally to my mind to describe their Christian discipleship, and the most appropriate Greek word might be parresia which means outspokenness; it denotes a holy boldness and freedom in both worship and witness.
Do you have concerns about the church in the West?
My main concern for the church everywhere is that we often do not look like what we are talking about. We make great claims for Christ, but there is often a credibility gap between our words and our actions.