Defenders Of The Faith

by HICKLING, P.L. | Category: N/a | Apr 2008

On the 'head' side of a British coin there is the inscription 'Elizabeth II Dei Gra Reg Fid Def'. This stands for ‘Dei Gratia Regina Fidei Defensor’; 'By the Grace of God Queen, Defender of the Faith'. The Queen takes the title Defender of the Faith because she is the head of the Church of England, a position first taken by Henry VIII at the time of the Reformation. We may not agree with the theology, but she takes her position seriously, believing that she has been called by God to the responsibilities of monarchy.

However, in an interview in 1994, Prince Charles, the heir to the Crown, said that he wanted to be 'Defender of Faith', rather than 'the Faith'. Charles said he wanted to be the defender of belief 'of the divine in existence, the pattern of the divine which is, I think, in all of us but which, because we are human beings, can be expressed in so many different ways.' In speaking like this he was recognising that there are many people of other beliefs among his future subjects, and he was appealing for peace and co-operation between them. This is very laudable; hatred of others is evil, and is specifically forbidden to Christians (Mat. 5:43). However, the thinking is woolly; faith must be in some specific thing. In the case of the Christian faith, it is in a particular Person, Jesus Christ, who He is, and what He has done. 'The Faith' is 'the apostles' teaching' (Acts 2:42), communicated to them by the Lord Himself (Acts 1:3). It is logically impossible to defend two inconsistent beliefs. For instance, it is part of the Christian faith that the Lord Jesus was God and man together, who ‘was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification’ (Rom. 4:25), while Muslims refer to ‘Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob ... and that which Moses and Jesus received ... We make no distinction between any of them’ (Al-Baqarah, 2:136-137). They do not believe that He was raised from the dead, still less in a redemptive work.

A similar controversy has been raised more recently. In 2007 138 Muslim leaders wrote an open letter to the Pope, the Archbishop of Canterbury and 'Leaders of Christian Churches everywhere', asking that Christians should 'come together with us on the common essentials of our two religions'. These were stated to be 'the Unity of God, love of Him, and love of the neighbour'. The Archbishop, Dr. Williams, responded with a statement 'A Common Word for the Common Good' in July 2008. Much that he says is a valid and detailed exposition of Scripture. He takes up particularly the Christian conviction of the love of God and agrees that its consequence should be love for others. However, he places little emphasis on the redemptive work of Christ; as the apostle Paul put it, ‘... the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me’ (Gal. 2:20). Both authors agree that neither faith justifies the use of force to promote the one, or to prohibit the other. Regrettably, history shows that right up to today faith has been used as the pretext for war, terrorism and oppression. Even among the signatories to the first letter there are some Muslim countries in which the promotion of the Christian faith is illegal.

Dr. Williams goes on to refer to 'holding fast to our truth claims whilst rejecting violence', saying that this will 'serve the cause of social unity'. This too is praiseworthy, but the Faith is not to be used as a means to social ends; rather, they flow from it. We are not heirs to the throne, but it is our duty, without being deflected by trends in opinion, ‘to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints’ (Jude 3).

HICKLING, P.L. | Apr 2008
N/a