Audrey Taylor

Dr. Raby

The Christian Tradition

12/1/22

In recent years, Christians have gained a reputation from non-Christians and atheists alike for

forcefully pushing their religion onto others. This can be attributed to the rise in Evangelicalism

in America as well as the increase in the intertwining of religion in politics (specifically the

right-wing), that began during President Nixon’s term, in the Trump and Covid era.

Because these events are more relevant in the minds of people today, history is overshadowed

and often disregarded by people who claim that Christians have become less passive in sharing

their beliefs and attempting to get others to believe the same. While there is most definitely truth

to this to an extent, Christians have come a long way in the respect of conversion, transitioning

from violent and assertive missionary colonizations to an attitude of open mindedness and then

to dialogue and acceptance of other religions coming out of the Second Vatican Council. Of

course every era and norm has its opposers and exceptions, including Bartolomé de Las Casas in

the period of colonization, but in general, Christians have been on a progressive path forward

when it comes to the dealing with of non-Christians.

Christians of the past seeing missionary colonization as necessary was attributed to their belief

that membership in the church was key to salvation, an attitude that can be traced back to the

medieval church in the West accepting Augustine’s position of predestination (those who aren’t
part of the church aren’t predestined to Heaven). The greed of the Spanish and Portuguese led to

the “pursuit of colonies and exploitation of native peoples” in Africa for use as part of trading

routes, as well as for expansion of Christianity. The most important base for colonization and

missions, Sāo Tomé, also happened to be the center of the slave trade. The Portuguese crown

was unwilling to intervene in the missions to stop the scandalous behavior of the priests for that

very reason. The slave trade was just too lucrative. The hope among Catholics in Europe that

“much of Africa would soon become Christian as an increasing number of African kings and

ruling elites converted to the faith” was for nothing though, as the colonizers actions came back

to bite them. Because Christianity was interlaced with Portugal’s colonial and exploitive agenda,

there would never be enough converts in Africa for this vision to come to fruition. Overall, early

conversion efforts by Christians and general ways of dealing with non-Christians was a harsh

and aggressive affair.1

With the increase in violent missionary colonization of the Americas for the enslavement of

natives on sugar plantations as well as the addition of locations to the slave trade, came

opponents of these practices, such as Dominican priest Antonio de Montesinos and the former

encomendero he converted, Bartolomé de Las Casas. Las Casas followed Montesinos lead,

becoming Dominican and spending the rest of his life pleading on behalf of natives throughout

the Americas and Europe. 2 He saw the Spaniard conquistadors as similar to predators in the wild

in that they would slay, afflict, torment, destroy, and essentially do anything it would take to

convert the natives, no matter how violent, because they were wicked and greedy, and the natives

1
Peter Feldmeier, The Christian Tradition: A Historical and Theological Introduction, “Colonization and
Missions,” 267-271
2
Peter Feldmeier, The Christian Tradition: A Historical and Theological Introduction, “Colonization and
Missions,” 271-275
being Christian gave them power. He believed that persuading the natives to convert in an

understanding and gentile way would lead them to joining the faith through their own free will

and that conquering and converting through warfare wouldn’t move people to listen because they

would be reluctant to take the word of their oppressors who took everything from them. In his

view, the gospel should be used as an attraction, not a weapon, and the natives should be treated

as rational creatures just as God would do. Las Casas is proof that there were exceptions to the

normally forceful methods of conversion that Christians used during the era of colonization, but

amiability was still not the norm.3

Around the dawn of the 20th century, inter-religious dialogue started to become increasingly

utilized by Christians as they realized that it not only helped foster peace, but also was useful in

bettering their reputation and spreading their religion in a respectful manner. The Catholic church

addressed in full the modernization of their views on other religions and their mission in the

world at the Second Vatican Council. More than 2,500 bishops and 400 theologians gathered in

Rome every fall from 1962 to 1965 to discuss and issue documents on a number of topics.4 In

Nostra Aetate, they rethought how they looked at world religions, especially Judaism. It asserts

that because salvation began in the covenants in Israel, it isn’t exclusive to Christianity because

God wouldn’t retract his gifts from his original holy and chosen people (Jews). It states that all

religions contain truth and have good moral and ethical systems, rejects the former Catholic

position about deicide, and urges non-hostile dialogue and no discrimination of non-Catholics.

Ultimately, it still expresses that Christ is the way, truth, and life, but implies that this doesn’t

3
George Sanderlin, Witness Writings of Bartolomé de Las Casas, “The ‘Only Method’ of Converting the
Indians” and “A ‘Very Brief Account’ of Spanish Cruelty,” 137-150
4
Class Lecture 11/16
mean that hostile conversion is necessary.5 Ad Gentes addresses missionary activity and asserts

that it should not include persecution or political motive, but rather should be done through the

example of lives and witness of the word. It acknowledges that God spoke to the Jews first and

that they aren’t faithless and claims that Christian charity extends to all and Christians should

serve others and always be eager to offer aid.6 Ultimately, Vatican 2 is an inclusive model of

religious pluralism that ushered in a new era for the Catholic church and Christians in general.

While the church did not let go of their belief that Christianity offers the highest view, they

began to also believe that although other religions are not the highest, they are still good.

There is no one clear answer to the question of how Christians live with and among

non-Christians because Christians are ever-changing, and so are their views on other religions

and how to interact with them. One of the biggest challenges for Christians over time has been

balancing what they feel they’re called to do by their religion, what Jesus would do, and what

feels right for them to do personally. Of course this balance has been dealt with slightly

differently among all Christians, which is why there are variances in the religion, but overall

Christians have been on a progressive path when it comes to their approach. Ultimately,

Christians have maintained their main core values at their most fundamental level, while

managing to reduce the violence used to spread them.

5
Second Vatican Council, Nostra Aetate
6
Second Vatican Council, Ad Gentes