This analysis requires further clarification. Since the command to “compel” applies even in the present era, why is this law not explicitly stated in the Shulchan Aruch or by its commentators?
Moreover, this command obligates every Jew who has the ability to “compel.” Now, it is well known that in earlier generations there were many Jews who possessed the necessary influence and circumstances to fulfill this command. Thus, they surely were meticulous in carrying it out. Consequently, practical questions must have arisen — such as the precise scope of this obligation, or the proper manner of such “compulsion.” Why, then, do we find no discussion of this matter in the extensive literature of responsa, where such questions would ordinarily be addressed?
The explanation is as follows. Throughout Jewish history, it was well known that even in countries where conversion to Judaism was not formally prohibited by the ruling authorities, Jews exercised extreme caution. They avoided any action that could be interpreted as assisting someone in conversion — even in cases where the prospective convert came forward on his own initiative — and certainly refrained from anything that might be perceived as actively encouraging or promoting conversion. This caution stemmed from the real danger posed by blood libels and false accusations that such activities could provoke. There was great fear that the authorities would seize upon such actions as a pretext against the Jewish community, as we see repeatedly in the disputations throughout the Middle Ages, and even in more recent generations.
It is thus self-evident that any effort by a Jew to influence a non-Jew — and certainly in a manner described as “compulsion” — to observe the Seven Laws involved a similar danger. Such conduct could easily be perceived as an interference in the local faith, etc. This risk was especially pronounced because the Jew would be required to state explicitly that the non-Jew should observe these laws specifically because “because the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded them in the Torah, and informed us through Moshe Rabbeinu.”
As a result, throughout most of history, Jews were generally forced to refrain from this activity on account of pikuach nefesh — the preservation of life. In the rare instances where such efforts were undertaken, they were carried out with appropriate caution and without publicity.
This explains why no responsa addressing this subject were published. For the same reason, this law is not mentioned in the Shulchan Aruch or its commentaries: in those times and places, publicly addressing this matter involved mortal danger.
It follows, then, that in a time and place where this fear is entirely non-existent — such as in this country (the United States) — the command to “compel” (through persuasion and influence) returns with its full original force.
