About
By Francis X. Maier
For three of my 27 years on diocesan staff, I had the attached duty of ecumenical and inter-religious affairs. It was great work. We had good relations with local Protestant and Latter-Day Saint communities; cordial discussions with local rabbis; and personal friendships with local Greek Orthodox and American Jewish Committee leaders.
With Islam, the story was different. Over the years, we had a total of two contacts: one letter from a local imam insisting that we convert, and one visit from a young, formerly Catholic imam eager to explain how all the good in Christianity was really derived from Islam, the (allegedly) original divine revelation. Alas for him, he picked an unreceptive audience.
I mention this for a reason. During those same years, I remember at least one night sitting through a parish presentation on the three "Abrahamic" faiths. In it, the parish DRE repeatedly, with the best of intentions, compared "the Bible" and "the holy Qur'an." I then had the delicate task of explaining that, in Christian belief, the Bible is holy and inspired by God. The Qur'an – whatever its beautiful elements might be – is neither.
Christians do not recognize Muhammad as a true prophet. Nor is Islam the product of divine revelation, much less the original one. And the three "Abrahamic" religions – as Rémi Brague, Jacques Ellul, and many others have noted – have far deeper differences than similarities.
Simply put, inter-religious dialogue, including with Islam, is an admirable goal. But confused irenicism serves neither the truth nor a healthy mutual understanding.
Brague, the distinguished French Catholic philosopher and Arabist, describes the limits of Christian-Muslim dialogue:
For Islam, the survival of the Christian religion is an anachronism. Islam presents itself. . .as the true Christianity, given that, according to Islamic thought, Christians have disfigured the authentic Gospel, just as the Jews, for their part, have sold out the authentic Torah. Thus it is out of the question to appeal to common Scripture. This means, from the Muslim point of view, the "Islamo-Christian dialogue" is a dialogue between true Christians (that is, the Muslims themselves) and people who imagine themselves to be true Christians, but are not. This is why dialogue interests Christians more than it does Muslims.
In practice, Islamic ignorance of, and chronic disinterest in, the actual content of Christianity can be astonishing. Bernard Lewis, the great Jewish scholar of Muslim civilization, noted that over the centuries and into the modern era, most Muslims have believed that "the Trinity, the worship of which Islam condemns as near-polytheistic blasphemy, [consists] of God, Jesus, and Mary."
Most Christians know that they don't know Islam. But the opposite is not true. Most Muslims tend to assume that they already know everything they need to know about Christianity since the Qur'an speaks of Christians. The result is a gulf made unbridgeable by Islam's claim to be the original, and the only pure, divine revelation, superseding all others.
None of this need preclude honest attempts at mutual respect and understanding. But it should preclude Christian naïveté. Catholics pray the Nicene Creed at every Sunday Mass. It's the constitutional expression of what we believe. Across 17 centuries, men and women have died defending it. With the exception of the Creed's first line, Islam rejects every key element of the text.
Historically, in Muslim-dominated cultures – as Rémi Brague notes, and we too often forget – "Jews and Christians were subjected to various measures explicitly designed to make them understand, by humiliating them, that it would be in their interest to adopt Islam." Similar forms of Muslim behavior continue today. Christians face prejudice, persecution, abductions, and forced conversions in various Muslim states.
This week we mark the 25th anniversary of 9/11. Blaming an entire religious community for the actions of...
For three of my 27 years on diocesan staff, I had the attached duty of ecumenical and inter-religious affairs. It was great work. We had good relations with local Protestant and Latter-Day Saint communities; cordial discussions with local rabbis; and personal friendships with local Greek Orthodox and American Jewish Committee leaders.
With Islam, the story was different. Over the years, we had a total of two contacts: one letter from a local imam insisting that we convert, and one visit from a young, formerly Catholic imam eager to explain how all the good in Christianity was really derived from Islam, the (allegedly) original divine revelation. Alas for him, he picked an unreceptive audience.
I mention this for a reason. During those same years, I remember at least one night sitting through a parish presentation on the three "Abrahamic" faiths. In it, the parish DRE repeatedly, with the best of intentions, compared "the Bible" and "the holy Qur'an." I then had the delicate task of explaining that, in Christian belief, the Bible is holy and inspired by God. The Qur'an – whatever its beautiful elements might be – is neither.
Christians do not recognize Muhammad as a true prophet. Nor is Islam the product of divine revelation, much less the original one. And the three "Abrahamic" religions – as Rémi Brague, Jacques Ellul, and many others have noted – have far deeper differences than similarities.
Simply put, inter-religious dialogue, including with Islam, is an admirable goal. But confused irenicism serves neither the truth nor a healthy mutual understanding.
Brague, the distinguished French Catholic philosopher and Arabist, describes the limits of Christian-Muslim dialogue:
For Islam, the survival of the Christian religion is an anachronism. Islam presents itself. . .as the true Christianity, given that, according to Islamic thought, Christians have disfigured the authentic Gospel, just as the Jews, for their part, have sold out the authentic Torah. Thus it is out of the question to appeal to common Scripture. This means, from the Muslim point of view, the "Islamo-Christian dialogue" is a dialogue between true Christians (that is, the Muslims themselves) and people who imagine themselves to be true Christians, but are not. This is why dialogue interests Christians more than it does Muslims.
In practice, Islamic ignorance of, and chronic disinterest in, the actual content of Christianity can be astonishing. Bernard Lewis, the great Jewish scholar of Muslim civilization, noted that over the centuries and into the modern era, most Muslims have believed that "the Trinity, the worship of which Islam condemns as near-polytheistic blasphemy, [consists] of God, Jesus, and Mary."
Most Christians know that they don't know Islam. But the opposite is not true. Most Muslims tend to assume that they already know everything they need to know about Christianity since the Qur'an speaks of Christians. The result is a gulf made unbridgeable by Islam's claim to be the original, and the only pure, divine revelation, superseding all others.
None of this need preclude honest attempts at mutual respect and understanding. But it should preclude Christian naïveté. Catholics pray the Nicene Creed at every Sunday Mass. It's the constitutional expression of what we believe. Across 17 centuries, men and women have died defending it. With the exception of the Creed's first line, Islam rejects every key element of the text.
Historically, in Muslim-dominated cultures – as Rémi Brague notes, and we too often forget – "Jews and Christians were subjected to various measures explicitly designed to make them understand, by humiliating them, that it would be in their interest to adopt Islam." Similar forms of Muslim behavior continue today. Christians face prejudice, persecution, abductions, and forced conversions in various Muslim states.
This week we mark the 25th anniversary of 9/11. Blaming an entire religious community for the actions of...