Month: March 2004

Obviously, all else being equal, the answer to this post’s title is “yes.” I think the answer is “yes, but not right now,” and I’ll explain why.
This is a surprisingly neutral article about Evangelical efforts to convert Iraqis to Christianity. Let me first say that I have the highest respect for the zeal and fearlessness displayed by many Evangelicals, and I have no doubts about their sincerity or love of Jesus Christ. The best of them could teach your average Catholic a thing or two about how to live a Christian life without compromise.
That said, I have serious concerns about how Evangelicals run their foreign ministries. They center around two issues: the prudence of evangelizing in Iraq right now, and their attempts to convert Christians to their brand of Christianity, without regard to the Christian communities that already exist in that culture.
Let’s take the second point first. When I was in Nicaragua a couple of years ago, I saw many Evangelical churches aggressively proselytizing in the Juigalpa province, a poor, rural area. I can understand evangelizing a non-Christian population, but the people were uniformly Christian. This is a part of the world where a large town’s main general store is named after the Fatima apparitions, and bus drivers put a religious slogan (“Jesus Bendiga Mi Camino”), a picture of the Virgin, or both on the rear of their vehicles. (I also noted with satisfaction that Catholic churches weren’t even marked as such, and that everyone — Catholic or Protestant — knew where they were.)
Converting Catholics is an explicit denial that Catholicism is Christian. If Evangelicals really believe that it doesn’t matter what church you go to, as long as you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior, then why attempt to lure away poor, believing Catholics? Or active members of other Christian traditions who are entirely orthodox about the nature of Jesus?
Next, take a look at this quotation from the article:

“It is every Christian’s requirement to share Jesus Christ’s gospel with everyone on the planet, including every Muslim,” said Richard D. Land, president of the public policy arm of the largest U.S. Protestant denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention. “If that causes anger and violence, it only shows we must speak more loudly.”

Isn’t that what you’re supposed to do when foreigners misunderstand you? JUST TALK LOUDER!!!
I don’t mean to lampoon Mr. Land or his efforts. (Okay, maybe just a little.) But there’s a serious question as to whether they are undermining the long-term prospects of the Gospel by concentrating on short-term growth of storefront churches. Arabs are enamored of conspiracy theories, and Iraqis are particularly enthusiastic in their love of such things. (Please, spare me any lectures on the evils of “ethnic stereotypes,” because this is generally true. Ask anyone who’s spent time in the Middle East.)
There are many Iraqis — by no means all, but a very significant minority — who believe that the U.S. invaded Iraq to steal its oil wealth and convert the inhabitants to Christianity. Since wealth-stealing and forced conversions are recurring themes in that part of the world, that isn’t as absurd it might seem, and I wouldn’t be too quick to dismiss their concerns.
Right now, the United States and its allies are trying to stabilize Iraq so it can have a decent society. That will be hampered if there is a widespread belief among the populace that the “crusaders” are there to destroy or subvert Islam. The Christian message will find a more receptive audience when the hearers are less paranoid and more self-confident.
I’m not a relativist, and I’m not saying that Iraqis don’t deserve to hear the Word of God. Some places just aren’t ready for the Gospel yet. Why not wait another year or two, when things are more stable and there’s a native Iraqi government in place? Contrary to the comment in the article, there’s no “six-month window” to spread the Gospel in Mesopotamia.