Christians are simply not that way

If the intention of the violent attacks against Christian churches worldwide is to provoke retaliation and spark a religious war, then the perpetrators have gravely miscalculated their bloody gambit.

That is not the way of Christians. While history may contain some profound examples of Christian violence, whether of their own instigation or as a means of retribution, such violence find no proof of being part and woven into Christian character and doctrine.

 Christianity, as a religion, simply finds no merit in and lacks any passion for violence. There is nothing in its belief and practice that glorifies and bestows honor and reward for any violent act, whether by Christians acting singly, or as a matter of collective initiative.

 But that is not the only reason why Christians seem all too willing to ignore violent provocations. There, too, is the lack of fiery and charismatic leadership so common in other religions.

 Maybe that is just the way Christianity is cut in the scheme of all things. And perhaps it is just as well. For to have fiery and charismatic religious leaders is to also endure the dangers of placing religious power in unworthy hands.

 As far as religion is concerned, all power should remain in the hands of God. Religious leaders should have no other authority than to minister to the religious needs of their followers and act as guideposts in the path toward divine fulfillment.

 With all power vested in God, religious authorities ought not to have any right to order adherents to commit acts of violence. Sadly, that is what the fiery and charismatic leaders of other religions seem to have the knack for, and relish in doing.

 There is no Christian leader today, not even the pope, who can command, and expect to be obeyed, any call to arms to resist provocative acts of violence. Again, there may be some pockets of resistance erupting here and there. But these will be more of mere semblance than substance.

 Overall, Christians will remain more likely to just bear the abuse, despite the fact that there are more of them than in any other religion. Not that they do not agonize from the added burden. It is just that there seemingly is no getting beyond just agonizing.

 Perhaps it is a blessing in disguise for Christianity to not have fiery and charismatic leaders who may err in judgment and lead us over the precipice. The flipside, of course, is a religion with leaders who increasingly cannot command even the smallest respect.

 This is one of the great contemporary realities that, while it differentiates Christianity, and more specifically Roman Catholicism, from other religions, also saddles it with the burden of shallowness.

 Christian and Catholic leaders know they cannot call upon adherents to take a bullet in the name of the faith. But if that is too extreme a sacrifice to be demanded, try analyzing the failure to make adherents to toe the line on dogma, such as in the RH bill debate.

 I do not profess to know why there seems to be such a great parting of ways between Christian leadership and followers. Of course I have my suspicions, about which I have amply pointed out many times in this space.

 But even then, these individual failings of Church leaders are not sufficient to explain why nobody is expected to heed any call to arms. Not that we want to or should. It is just that, even if such a call does come, it will be a call destined to drown in its own hollowness.

As I was writing this, I was actually counting in my mind the names of the different Roman Catholic leaders that I know of, and with each name the question of whether I would heed a call so drastic to contemplate. It came as no surprise that, to each name, I had to say no.