The desire of our Lord is that all should be saved and come to the
knowledge of truth. God brings international students to universities in our
country, and we as Christians have the opportunity of helping the many who
do not yet know Jesus. By the working of His Holy Spirit some students
believe and trust in Him for eternal life. The opportunity to talk to the
international student about Jesus is usually preceded by a loving concern
for the international that has many needs (language, friendship, culture,
travel and others) when he/she arrives at the university.
Because of these needs and
unfamiliarity with the United States, an international can be very
vulnerable to being manipulated and taken advantage of by unscrupulous
people, some of whom may be religious people. The foreign student advisor's
office at the university has among its many responsibilities the welfare of
the international student. It seeks to protect the student from those
elements that would be harmful to the student's welfare and education.
The National Association of
Foreign Student Advisors is governed by the NAFSA
Ethics Program: Ethical Practice in the International Education Exchange.
Section 10 of that manual clarifies for the foreign student advisor issues
to consider when working with community organizations such as campus
ministries or local congregations. The following section, giving both the
general guidelines as well as detailing principles, is taken from the NAFSA Ethics Program manual.
10. Members with
responsibilities in community organizations working with foreign students
and scholars shall:
Make certain that
organizations providing programs for foreign students and scholars have
clear statements of purpose and responsibility, so that all parties can
know what is expected of them.
Accurately portray their
services and programs, making clear the identity, the intent, and the
nature of the sponsoring organization and of each particular event or
service.
Provide appropriate
opportunities to observe and to join in mutual inquiry into cultural
differences.
Provide adequate
orientation for volunteers and participants in community programs so they
may understand each other and may interact constructively. The
organization should make clear that surreptitious, deceptive or coercive
proselytizing is unacceptable.
In the Winter 1995 issue of the International
Educator, proselytizing was addressed in an article titled, "The
New Proselytes" by David Austell, Jr., the Director of International
and Student Services at the University of South Florida in Tampa. The
following are selected sections from that article.
What is a Proselyte?
The Oxford English Dictionary
informs us that "proselyte" derives from the Latin proselytus and before to an earlier Greek form which in ancient
times was associated with religious conversion, particularly that of a
gentile to Judaism. Today, a proselytizer is defined as one who induces an
individual to convert to another faith, political party, institution, or
cause. Proselytization is still very much with us.
NAFSA has formally addressed the
proselytization of internationals on a number of occasions. For example, in
its 1981 revision of "Standards and Responsibilities in International
Educational Exchange," NAFSA recommended that "there
must never be any attempt to proselytize, and any invitation to a foreign
student or scholar to an event sponsored by a religious or political group
should clearly indicate the nature of the event and its sponsorship."
More recently, NAFSA's Committee on Ethical Practice refined its guidelines
on proselytization and published its recommendations in the "Code of
Ethics" (1992). The new guidelines state firmly that community
organizations working with internationals "should
make clear (to volunteers and participants) that surreptitious,
deceptive, or coercive proselytizing
is unacceptable" (emphasis supplied). The wording suggests that it
is not the making of converts itself that is troublesome, but rather
"surreptitious, deceptive, or coercive" activities. Despite the
Code's evenhanded approach, proselytization remains a controversial issue in
the international community.
The pall of disfavor surrounding
the proselytization of internationals stems from a misconception and a
stereotype. The misconception is that all proselytization is coercive and
deceptive. Although the ultimate purpose of a campaign of persuasion may be
to convert (for example, to convert a person from the Democratic to the
Republican stance) the effort need not be unethical. A stereotype adds to
this misconception. The stereotypical proselytizer is a creature out of a
nightmare: a concealing, conniving, and premeditating zealot who
deliberately preys on the vulnerabilities of homesick and culture-shocked
internationals and isolates them further from the world of education,
culture, family, and friends. The stereotype is more often than not a
Christian evangelical of marked conservative sensibilities. It is a potent
image. Because of its potency and the lingering misconception that
proselytization is always unethical, convert-making is often vilified,
whether or not unethical behaviors are present.
However powerful the stereotype
might be, however widespread the misconception, they are both nonetheless
incomplete mirrors of nature. In reality, proselytization is less
stereotypical and more subtle and, when unethical behavior is present,
includes pressures to convert to ideologies far more numerous and disparate
than the stereotype implies. It is probably not true that in most cases the
unethical proselytizer is a shouting evangelist poised in front of the
student union. In fact, it is too narrow to view proselytization as
operating only in religious contexts, when there are political, social, and
even economic contexts in which convert-makers attempt to snare the
proselyte as surely as any stereotypical itinerant preacher.
Ethical Ripples
The issue of proselytization in
the environment of international education engenders strong emotions and
heartfelt and widely varying opinions. Questions stemming from any
examination of convert-making are virtually endless, and many of
these—essential to clear understanding and civil discussion—have not
been clearly answered. A few key examples:
- Is there a threshold at which
the free sharing of ideas becomes coercive and inappropriate
proselytizing?
- Because proselytization can
occur in other than religious environments, are there specific ethical
guidelines that should be developed or adapted for use by persons in
these other environments (political, social, economic)?
- How can professionals in
international education best disseminate information to the community
regarding both ethical behavior in convert-making (for example, free
sharing of ideas, full disclosure of intentions, voluntary participation
in discourse, respect for diversity of opinion and belief), and
unethical behavior, (e.g., concealed intentions, coercive behavior,
disrespect, and insensitivity toward different opinions and beliefs)?
These and other questions about
proselytization must be addressed in an effort to understand clearly the
full range of the phenomenon as it applies to internationals. Such ongoing
discussions should begin with its central definition as an activity of
convert-making. The concept itself should not be misconceived and vilified
but, rather, should be considered as a separate from the unethical behaviors
of its evil twin. Proselytization, whether to Republicanism,
multiculturalism, or any religious creed, is not in itself an evil. It is
not innately synonymous with coercion, deception, or other unethical
behaviors. From a constitutional standpoint, it cannot and should not be
prohibited, lest we alienate ourselves from our community. What can and must
be stemmed is unethical behavior in convert-making. A focus on ethics lends
itself to viable and effective action. Prohibition does not.
Finally, it is important to
consider that the unethical and stereotypical religious proselytizer is not
a total fabrication; such persons do exist in the world, and their improper
behavior must be seen for what it is and thwarted. However, the religious
stereotype alone should not be focused on as the sum total of
proselytization gone wrong. Unethical behavior in convert-making elsewhere
will then go unlooked for, unseen, and unchallenged.