On Coercion & Faith

As I was writing the previous post, the phrase "spread by the sword" triggered comparative thoughts as to how Christianity is spread.

If there is a "sword" in Christianity, it is the Word of God. Saint John's symbolic imagery in Revelation 1:16 of the Messiah with the sword coming from His mouth is very apt.

"In his right hand he held seven stars. A sharp two-edged sword came out of his mouth, and his face shone like the sun at its brightest."

The Word does not spread by violence but by the acquiescence of faith and personal choice. It is freely given and freely received.

Historically speaking, Christianity has never been very good at forcing conversions. Nor should it be. If God is all-powerful He could have forced every human being who ever lived to a forced, robotic type of worship.

But God doesn't want robots. Out of love for us He wishes us to choose Him of our own free will. To return in love what love has done for us. Not out of fear alone.

How, then, could a follower of God use force to accomplish what God himself refuses to do?

I thought of this when I saw the 2008 numbers of the growth of the Roman Catholic church in the United States. A bit over 1 million new members added to the rolls, and of these nearly 125,000 were adult baptisms and professions of faith.

I'm sure the growth of other Christian denominations in the U.S. was healthy last year, although I do not have those stats.

And not one of those new members was brought in at the point of an actual sword, or gun.

But, someone will say, Islam doesn't spread by the sword so much anymore.

And I will answer, not in those places of the world where there is a free press. But there is still coercion; there is persecution. There are plenty of places under Islam's influence where churches are not allowed. There are countries where there is ongoing violence where churches are burned and Christians are threatened. There are dhimmis whose freedoms are truncated, where many people ultimately decide to "go along to get along."

Someone will also say, in the case of Catholics, you baptize your children before they can decide for themselves. Isn't that coercion?

And I will answer, no. It is the responsibility of all parents, of all faiths, to bring up their children with knowledge of God. Our children are expected to reaffirm their baptismal commitments when they attain the age of reason. Most do. Some do not. Some do, but then are lured away by the glamor of an evil culture. A few others join Protestant groups. We note that the largest group of Christians in the United States -- 68 million at this point -- are Roman Catholics. And the second largest Christian group in the U.S. are "fallen away" Roman Catholics, estimated at about 30 million.

By the way, this isn't a problem only for Catholics. It happens with all Christian groups.

It isn't something we're happy about, but on the other hand, we do not issue fatwas of "death to apostates." No church does. Our prayers for the fallen away continue, and the possibility, in this life, of a return to faith remains. Not only does hope remain, but it happens that frequently enough lost sheep return to the fold.

"If a man has a hundred sheep and one of them goes astray, will he not leave the ninety-nine in the hills and go in search of the stray? And if he finds it, amen, I say to you, he rejoices more over it than over the ninety-nine that did not stray." (Matthew 18: 12-13)

We rejoice when this happens, and not only us:

"I tell you, in just the same way there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who have no need of repentance." (Luke 18:7)

But you cannot rejoice when the lost are put to death. You cannot coerce repentance any more than you can coerce belief in the first place. It must be an act freely chosen by the individual.

Until the coercive element is stricken from the teachings of Islam, there is no compelling logic to consider the two faiths equal in freedom.