2 of 4

For the Caners, the issue is not any inherently violent core in Christianity, but the inherently dangerous mixing of church and state, combined with the inherent violence residing in the human heart. They say whenever the state and the church get married, it is not an equal partnership. Instead, the state uses the church to enhance its own power before eventually discarding the church as just another whore.

One particularly intriguing part of Christian Jihad is the eerie juxtaposition of the rhetoric of Pope Urban II, who launched the First Crusade, with the 1998 "Call to Crusade" from Islamic terrorist Osama bin Laden. Both statements describe the threat of an unholy enemy, the slaughters allegedly perpetrated by that enemy, the obligation to fight against the infidels, and the promise of forgiveness of sins for those who join the holy war.

Even more disconcerting are their horrific descriptions of church-sanctioned violence. Let's just say that the Muslims who behead civilians in Iraq would no doubt admire the brutal work of their Christian predecessors.

While jihad is by no means the whole story of the Christian faith, far too often Christians—seeking to inaugurate heaven on earth—have instead brought a taste of hell. Like Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, and atheist utopians before and since, Christians too have been corrupted by state power.

The American experience suggests a better and safer course. Eschewing both a godless state and a state church, the United States was built on the foundation of Judeo-Christian virtues, but not on a state religion. Yet while church and state may be legally separate here, they are not enemies. Rather, they are partners for the good of the republic. This experiment has worked, for over two centuries.

Today, however, there are some clear signs of wobbling in this delicate tightrope dance. While some of the rhetoric emanating from the Christian camp about secularization of the nation's institutions and culture may be overheated (such as the title of David Limbaugh's otherwise fine 2003 book, Persecution), clearly there are efforts under way in the courts and elsewhere to marginalize the influence of Christians in an irony-laden attempt at enforcing "tolerance." Many Christians, claiming that America is or was a Christian nation, are on the offensive, rightly fighting such creeping secularization in the courts of law and public opinion. However, the Caners' volume counsels caution that we not seek too close a union of church and state.

While the Caners deserve much credit for documenting a theological descent into darkness, one could wish for more prescription to accompany their description. Mention of contemporary efforts at interfaith understanding and bridge-building is mostly lacking, although the 1996-1998 Reconciliation Walks do appear. Discussion of recent attempts by moderate Muslims to seek a harmony of democracy and Islam would have been helpful, especially by two former Muslims. The recent prominence by evangelicals in international religious liberty issues also would have been worth exploring.

Aside from these matters of substance, the style of Christian Jihad leaves something to be desired. Quoting series after series of long passages taken from primary sources, followed by the Caners' summations, at times the going gets tedious. Once you get past the book's central thesis–that the problem lies not in Christianity per se but in an unholy intertwining of church and state–Christian Jihad is mostly a compilation of quotes supplemented by author commentary.

next page... |  2 of 4

share this page

January (Web-only) 2005, Vol. 49