THE SALVATION OF NON-CHRISTIANS,
SPECIFICALLY MUSLIMS


The question of the salvation of non-Christians, and of Muslims in particular, revolves around two issues. The first is whether the divine choice of a particular people or religion, such as the Jews in the Old Testament and the Church in the New, can be reconciled with an extension of God’s saving plan to those outside this choice. The second issue, if such an extension is admitted, is by what means God extends his salvation to such people.

The first issue can be clarified by a brief survey of Scriptural passages highlighting opposite sides of the question and some examples of how the same tendencies are reflected in the history of Catholic theology and practice. Thereafter we can summarize contemporary opinions on the subject and propose a solution.

In discussing the second issue, we will address particularly the salvation of Muslims, taking into account their explicit rejection of the saving role of Christ, and the place of Islamic teachings and practices in the living of their faith.

I. THE POSSIBILITY OF SALVATION FOR NON-CHRISTIANS

Scripture and Church understanding

In the Bible we can see two different perspectives. One focuses on a chosen, covenanted people, the Jews in the Old Testament (Dt 7:6; 14:2 etc.), and the Church in the New Testament (1 Pt 2:9-10 etc.).

A broader perspective, rooted particularly in the wisdom tradition sees a plan of salvation for outsiders, usually with some reference to the chosen people. God’s covenant with Noah (Gen 9) hints at this, which is more explicit with regard to the holy pagans of the Old Testament. Footnote

In the New Testament one can likewise notice on the one hand the accent on proclamation in Acts and in Paul, while on the other hand the letters of Peter emphasize witnessing. Footnote “Theology of witnessing focuses on the Spirit of Christ who is at work beyond our immediate reach, whereas a theology of proclamation concentrates on Christ at work in the Church which concretely mediates his presence and action today.

Not only in Peter, but throughout the New Testament there are allusions to the universal work of Christ. A few examples may illustrate this: “God so loved the world...” (Jn 3:16); Jesus is “the Saviour of the world” (Jn 4:42); he has “other sheep which are not of this flock” (Jn 10:16). “God wants all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of truth (1 Tim 2:4). Jesus “offered himself as a ransom for all” (1 Tim 2:6). “When gentiles, not having the Law, still through their own innate sense behave as the Law commands, then, even though they have no Law, they are a law for themselves. They can demonstrate the effect of the Law engraved on their hearts, to which their own conscience bears witness” (Rm 2:14-15). Cornelius’s prayers were accepted before he knew of Christ (Acts 10:4); similarly people of the Old Testament are praised for their living faith (Heb 11). The explicit faith of those who say “Lord, Lord” is not enough (Mt 7:21), but at the last judgement Jesus the King will welcome those who had been showing mercy to his little ones without knowing that they were doing it to him (Mt 25:31-46); these could not be Christians, since every Christian should be aware that his kindness to others is kindness to Jesus.

One could also study the gift of the Spirit who blows where he wills (Jn 3:8) and jumps ahead of the Church’s preaching (Acts 10:36). The theme of the coming of the Kingdom of God also points to an independent universal work of Christ outside the boundaries of the Church. Footnote

Among the Fathers of the Church, Footnote we can point to the answer of St. Augustine to the objection that Christianity was slow in appearing in history. He says that “from the beginning of the human race, there were people who believed in Jesus Christ, knew him and lived a good and devout life according to his commandments. No matter when or where they lived, they without doubt were saved by him.” Footnote

The Church has always been open to the theoretical possibility of salvation for non-Christians—This is very clear in Thomas Aquinas, as we will see below—but the practical judgement varied from one time and place to another. St. Francis Xavier supposed that the thousands of Asians to whom he preached would not be saved unless they accepted the Christian Faith and were baptized. The Jesuit missionaries of the 17th century were more broad-minded. Yet in the 18th and 19th centuries the view prevailed that only Christians could be saved. Footnote Pius IX had to insist that those who followed the divine law written in their hearts would reach eternal life by divine grace. Footnote

Vatican II and subsequent statements by Pope John Paul II, as we will see below, are even more decisive in favour of the possibility of salvation for all non-Christians.

Contemporary opinions

Some, particularly Pentecostals, take passages such as “No one can come to the Father except through me” (Jn 14:6) as demanding explicit faith in Jesus as “personal Lord and Saviour”. They do not include membership in the Church, since they divorce the Church from Christ and regard it as a mere human thing; their pastors’ ministry does not derive from the Church but is founded on a direct personal “anointing”.

An opposite, liberal opinion sees Jesus’ mediation as extending only to Christians, while God saves others through the rites of other religions or faith in God apart from faith in Christ. R. Pannikar, J. Hick and P. Knitter, for example, want to abandon a Christocentric model for a theocentric model, so as to recognize the great religions of the world as different human responses to the same divine reality. Footnote This tendency has been criticized as irreconcilable with the Christian Faith. Footnote

A modification of this view sees the divine Logos, the second person of the Trinity, as the universal agent of salvation, but operating apart from the humanity of Jesus which, in Nestorian fashion, they say cannot exhaust or mediate the infinite fulness of the Logos. Footnote

Likewise, the syncretism represented by the New Age movement has no real respect for the faith and identity of any religious tradition, since it reduces dialogue between people to an imaginary synthesis of all possible beliefs. Footnote

All these opinions differ from official statements of the Church, notably the Vatican II documents and the more recent Dominus Jesus, as well as from the theology of Thomas Aquinas, which we will see below.

Christological suppositions

Any discussion about the possibility of salvation of Christians or non-Christians depends on theological suppositions about who Christ is, and the extent and mode of his saving action.

The starting supposition is that Christ is a hypostatic union of a complete human nature, body and soul with intellect and will, with the divine nature of the Word in the one divine person. Footnote

Another supposition is that Christ is a mediator and saviour precisely in his humanity and his human actions, which are God’s instruments in dealing with men and are the bridge through which men approach God. Footnote

Another supposition is that the Church is the body of Christ, and he, as head, mediates and saves through the instrumentality of the Church, in its preaching and sacraments. Footnote

Another suppostion is that the Spirit of Christ, that is, the Trinity in concert, extends the action of Christ’s humanity beyond his immediate reach and the immediate reach of the Church to every human person, hiding in any corner of the globe or any year in the history of mankind. Yet even here, no one can belong to Christ without in some way belonging to his Church, as Vatican texts below show.

Vatican II and subsequent Papal statements affirm the possibility of salvation for non-Christians

The theological peak of the Vatican II Council was the statement on non-Christians in Gaudium et spes, n. 22:

By his incarnation the son of God has in a certain way united himself with each man... This holds true not for Christians only but also for all men of good will in whose hearts grace is active invisibly. For since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery. Footnote

Lumen Gentium explains:

Those who for no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their action to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation.” Footnote

This was not an easy position to take, since the possibility of salvation for everyone has to be reconciled with the unique mediation of Christ and the teaching that “outside the Church there is no salvation”. At the beginning of the Council Karl Rahner stated that religious pluralism should be more a threat and a reason for worry for Christianity than for any other religion. That is because no other religion, even Islam, maintains so absolutely that it is the only true religion, having the only valid revelation of the living God, as does the Christian religion. Footnote

A balance between the uniqueness of the Christian way and the work of the Spirit outside the Church is reflected in the writings of the Popes after the Council. John-Paul II’s Redemptor hominis is the most notable statement on the subject. In numbers 8 and 9 he summarizes Gaudium et spes, n.22, and then says:

This concerns every person whatsoever, since all are included in the mystery of the Redemption and by the grace of this mystery Christ has joined himself with all for all time... They all participate in this mystery from the moment they are conceived in the womb of their mother. (n.13).

Every person, with no exception, has been redeemed by Christ, since Christ has been joined with every person, without exception, even though the person may not be conscious of this. (n.14) Footnote

Since the union of Christ with each person, which the Holy Father is speaking about, does not necessarily demand the presence of sanctifying grace, but only opens the possibility for it, so also the statement that this union with Christ begins with conception, leaves open the question whether everyone receives sanctifying grace at his conception, before any act of his reason. In this regard, Pope Benedict XVI has asked the International Commission of Catholic Theologians to continue their study of the question of “the fate of children who die without Baptism in the context of the universal salvific will of God, of the one mediation of Jesus Christ and of the sacramentality of the Church.” Footnote

Speaking to the Cardinals and the Curia after a religious gathering at Assisi, John-Paul II repeated certain points:

There is only one divine plan for every person who comes into this world... Since there is no man or woman who does not bear the sign of a divine origin, likewise no person can remain outside or on the fringe of the work of Jesus Christ, “who died for all” and is thus “the Saviour of the world” (Jn 4:42). “We must therefore hold that the Holy Spirit gives to all, in a way that God knows, the possibility of being associated with the Paschal mystery.” (Gaudium et spes, 22).

Then the Pope applies these principles to the situation of religious pluralism:

People can often be unaware of their radical unity of origin, and of their destiny and inclusion in God’s own plan. While they profess different religions which are incompatible with one another they can think that their divisions are insurmountable. But in spite of that they are included in the great and unique plan of God in Jesus Christ, who “in some way is united to all people” (Gaudium & spes, 22), even if they are not conscious of this. Footnote

Again, in Redemptoris missio, John-Paul II says:

The universality of salvation does not mean that it is given only to those who believe explicitly in Christ and have joined the Church. If salvation is meant for all, it must be offered concretely to all... For them the salvation of Christ is available by means of a grace which, while relating them mysteriously to the Church, does not bring them into it formally, but enlightens them in a manner adapted to their state of spirit and their way of life (n. 10).

This way of looking at the question sees the influence of Christ on all, from the beginning of the world to its end, “when Christ will hand over the kingdom to God the Father... so that God may be all in all” (1 Cor 15:24,28). Footnote


II. THE QUESTION OF HOW

Thomas Aquinas

Through “implicit” belief

In several places St. Thomas Aquinas discusses the question of what one one must believe in order to be saved. He always starts with the two rock-bottom articles of Hebrews 11:6: “Someone approaching God must believe that he exists and that he is the remunerator of those who seek him.” In his commentary on this letter, he asks whether these two articles are sufficient, and goes on to say:

I answer that after the sin of our first parents, no one can be saved from the debt of original sin except by faith in the Mediator: but that faith varies as far as the mode of believe is concerned, for different times and states. But we to whom such a great benefit has been shown must believe more explicitly than those who existed before the time of Christ. At that time some believed more explicitly, as the greater fathers and some to whom a special revelation was made. Furthermore, those under the Law believed more explicitly than those before the Law, because they were given certain sacraments by which Christ was represented as by a figure. But for the Gentiles who were saved it was enough if they believed that God is a rewarder; and this reward is received through Christ alone. Hence, they believed implicitly in a mediator. Footnote

We see the same in Quaestiones disputatatae de veritate, q. 14, art. 11: Footnote

Accordingly, before sin came into the world, it was not necessary to believe explicitly the matters concerning the Redeemer, since there was then no need of the Redeemer. Nevertheless, this was implicit in their belief in divine providence, in so far as they believed that God would provide everything necessary for the salvation of those who love Him. Before and after the fall, the leaders in every age had to have explicit faith in the Trinity. Between the fall and the age of grace, however, the ordinary people did not have to have such explicit belief. Perhaps before the fall there was not such a distinction of persons that some had to be taught the faith by others. Likewise, between the fall and the age of grace, the leading men had to have explicit faith in the Redeemer, and the ordinary people only implicit faith. This was contained either in their belief in the faith of the patriarchs and prophets or in their belief in divine providence.

Disussing faith in the Summa theologiae I-II, q. 1, art. 7, Thomas again begins with the two articles stated in Hebrews 11:6, and goes on to comment:

For the existence of God includes all that we believe to exist in God eternally, and in these our happiness consists; while belief in His providence includes all those things which God dispenses in time, for man's salvation, and which are the way to that happiness: and in this way, again, some of those articles which follow from these are contained in others: thus faith in the Redemption of mankind includes belief in the Incarnation of Christ, His Passion and so forth.

Accordingly we must conclude that, as regards the substance of the articles of faith, they have not received any increase as time went on: since whatever those who lived later have believed, was contained, albeit implicitly, in the faith of those Fathers who preceded them. But there was an increase in the number of articles believed explicitly, since to those who lived in later times some were known explicitly which were not known explicitly by those who lived before them.

In the next question, article 7, Thomas discusses the necessity of explicit faith in the Incarnation, and addresses the problem of gentiles who have neither explicit norimplicit faith. He explains that if they were saved, it was in virtue of an “implicit faith in divine providence, since they believed that God would deliver mankind in whatever way was pleasing to Him, and according to the revelation of the Spirit to those who know the truth.” Footnote

Similarly, remarking about Cornelius, who was told (Acts 10:30) that “your prayer has been heard and your almsgiving remembered before God,” Thomas says: “Cornelius was not an unbeliever; otherwise his action would not be acceptable to God, to whom no one can be pleasing without faith. He had an implicit faith before the truth of the Gospel was made manifest to him.” Footnote

In I-II, q. 106, art. 1, discussing the characteristic of the New Law that it is written in our hearts, Thomas takes up the objection that this is also true of people who lived the life of grace in the Old Testament. He answers that “no one ever had the grace of the Holy Spirit without explicit or implicit faith in Christ. By such faith in Christ, one belongs to the New Testament. So, in so far as anyone is endowed with the law of grace, that person belongs to the NewTestament. Footnote

Again on the difference between the Old and the New Testament, in question 107, art.1, Thomas explains that the Old Testament is imperfect, inducing people to do good out of fear of punishment or for a temporal reward, whereas the New Testament is perfect, inducing people to do good out of love. Then he faces the objection (2) that in the Old Testament love was commanded and practiced and spiritual rewards were promised, while even in the New Testament temporal rewards are mentioned. He says:

In the Old Testament there were people who had charity and the grace of theHoly Spirit, motivated principally to spiritual and eternal promises. By virtue of this, they belonged to the New Law. Likewise, in the New Testament there are some carnal people who do not yet have the pefection of the New Law, and even under the New Testament must be induced to the works of virtue by fear of penaties and by promises of temporal rewards. But even though the Old Testament contains precepts of love, it is not the means by which he love of God is poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit given to us” (Rm 5:4). Footnote

      The nature of “implicit” belief

At this point we may want to examine further the nature of this implicit faith and what kind of knowlege it gives us of the mysteries of God. With reference to implicit faith, in I-II, q. 1, art 7 Thomas quotes Eph 3:5: “This mystery was not made known to human beings in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.”

The “implicit” articles Thomas is talking about are not articles that an intelligent person could tease out of a text. Implicit knowledge can only be generic knowledge, which cannot be pefected without new data from the outside—from further revelation.

Thomas’ Lectura Romana on the Sentences distinguishes three kinds of knowledge of God: Footnote

(1) One is knowing him in his effects only, as when someone knows being or anything created he has some kind of knowledge of God the creator who created him. That everyone has naturally from the beginning. (2) Another is to consider God in himself, still through knowledge of his effects, as someone can reason from knowledge of the effects to a knowledge of God himself. This does not happen at once, but can be had through the inquiry of natural reason. Thus the philosophers and other wise men attained a knowledge of God in so far as this can be acquired. (3) The third knowledge is to know him in himself and in what is disproportionate to his effects. That is not in man naturally, nor acquired by a process of reasoning, but through an infused supernatural light.

Thomas goes on to say that only the last type of knowledge suffices to love God in himself and be united with him in charity.

But in the Summa theologiae, I-II, 89:6, Thomas approaches the question of knowing or believing in God from a different direction. He asks whether someone in a state of original sin can commit a venial sin without committing a mortal sin. He answers no, since “before a person reaches the age of reason, his immaturity which prevents the use of reason excuses him from mortal sin, and all the more so from venial sin, should he commit any act that is of that type. But once he begins having the use of reason, he is not altogether excused from venial and mortal sin. But once he has the use of reason, the first thing he can think about is his own condition. If he orders himself towards the right end, grace comes in and removes original sin; if he does not order himself towards the right end he sins mortally, by not doing what is in his power to do. In that case he cannot have venial sin without mortal sin, unless all his sin is forgiven by grace. Footnote

A considerable amount needs to be filled in here to bridge this article with what we saw before. How can a child growing up in a totally non-Christian environment choose, in his first rational act, the “right end”, which is God?

How does the child have any idea of God? Apart from what he might hear from his parents, the child must have the first of the three kinds of knowledge mentioned above: “When someone knows being or anything created he has some kind of knowledge of God the creator who created him.” That gives the child an intuitive knowledge that God exists and is a remunerator.

But that knowledge, Thomas observes, available by both human reason and revelation, is not sufficient for salvation. Why? Because to know or to believe in these two articles falls under credere Deum—to believe that God is such and such. What is required for salvation is credere in Deum—to believe in God. That happens when divine grace moves a person to commit his mind to God’s authority and truth. He is then joined to God by both faith and love.

Believing in God does not add any content to the articles one already knows. That knowledge, however primitive or implicit it may be, I-II, 89:6 makes clear, can be uplifted by grace to a supernatural contact with God.

The role of reason and of the teachings and practices of other religions

It should be sufficiently clear that non-Christians can be saved through the grace of Christ moving them to make an act of faith in God and his Providence, and implicitly in Christ as a saving mediator, and receive the outpouring of God’s love through the gift of the Holy Spirit. It now remains to examine the role of the human reason as well as the teachings and practices of non-Christian religions or in the genesis and practice of such a person’s faith.

We see in the Bible respect for the wisdom and institutions of other cultures. Thus the Wisdom movement of the Old Testament freely borrowed the sayings and wisdom of neighbouring nations, although incorporating them in a triumphalist Yahwehism. The process of borrowing and adopting is evident also in the Pentateuch, with its Mesopotamian background.

In the New Testament we notice the recognition of the secular value of the Roman empire (Mt 22:20; Rm 13:1-7; 1 Tim 2:1-2; Tit 3:1; 1 Pet 2:13-15), and Paul’s respect for the belief of the Athenians in one unknown God (Acts 17:16-34).

This Biblical respect for the wisdom found in human cultures does not distinguish between rational wisdom, whether in the form of proverbs and stories or in the form of systematic philosophy, and wisdom in a religious garb.

The early Fathers of the Church were totally opposed to the religion of the Greeks and Romans. If they found in them some undeniable truths, they explained that they were borrowed from the revelation made to the Jews.

In contrast to Greek and Roman religion, many Fathers, notably Justin and Clement of Alexandria, had high respect for the philosophical wisdom of the Greco-Roman world. Justin used the term “seed of the Word” to designate the power of the human mind emplanted in man by nature. This human intelligence (logos) is a participation in the eternal Word (Logos) of God. When people live by this intelligence they belong to Christ (Apologies, 1). Footnote

Such a wider viewpoint had to wait for Vatican II to find expression, in Ad gentes (n.3 & 11), Lumen Gentium (n.16) and especially in Nostra aetate, which surveys the admirable aspects of Hinduism and Buddhism, with reference also to other religions. Nostra aetate then states the following principle:

The Catholic Church does not reject anything that is true and holy in these religions. It studies sincerely those ways of acting and living, those commandments and teachings which are in many ways in disagreement with what it holds, yet nevertheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. (n. 2)

Then, in a well-known paragraph, it reviews the bonds between Christianity and Islam, and then Judaism, applying the previous principle more extensively, since Islam and Judaism have more than a few “rays of the Truth”, or what Ad gentes calls “seeds of the Word”:

In order that they may be able to bear more fruitful witness to Christ, let them be joined to those men by esteem and love; let them acknowledge themselves to be members of the group of men among whom they live; let them share in cultural and social life by the various. undertakings and enterprises of human living; let them be familiar with their national and religious traditions; let them gladly and reverently lay bare the seeds of the Word which lie hidden among their fellows. (n. 11)

Note that Vatican II goes beyond Justin, first by changing his term “seed”, referring to the power of the human mind, to “seeds”, referring to truths which the divine Word enables the human mind to attain. Secondly Vatican II sees these truths present in religious traditions; this was far from the mind of Justin, who championed philosophical truth against Greco-Roman religious fables. Footnote

Nevertheless, as Claude Gillot remarks, “the declaration of Nostra aetate does not go so far as to say that non-Christian religions are ‘means of salvation’”. Footnote But inter-religious dialogue and interaction reveal the concrete work of grace in these communities. For example, at the Assisi inter-religious gathering in 1986, the Pope made the following remarks:

There we discovered in an extraordinary way the unique value of prayer for peace, and that peace cannot be achieved without prayer, the prayer of all, with each one praying in his own way while looking for the truth... We can really hold that every authentic prayer is inspired by the Holy Spirit, who is mysteriously present in the heart of every man. Footnote

This is a recognition of the value of one of the “pillars” of non-Christian religions, not as established and prescribed by each religion, but as practiced by its adherents. We could extend the recognition to the value of fasting and aid to the needy.

In Redemptoris missio the Pope remarks that “the Spirit’s presence and activity affect not only individuals but also society and history, peoples, cultures and religions. Indeed, the Spirit is at the origin of the noble ideals and undertakings which benefit humanity on its journey through history... Again, it is the Spirit who sows the ‘seeds of the Word’ present in various customs and cultures, preparing them for full maturity in Christ” (n. 28).

The instrumentality of seed/seeds of the Word for salvation

We take the “seed of the Word” as God-given intelligence, and “seeds of the Word” as truths ultimately coming from God, but discovered by the human mind or borrowed from divine revelation. The latter phenomenon is quite widespread. Post-Christian European institutions and thinking are replete with the debris of Christian teachings. The story-tellers of the Arabian peninsula at the coming of Muammad had a large repertoire of Biblical and Apocryphal material. Non-Christians the world over take to heart words from the Pope and other Christian voices.

Paul asked, “How then are they to call on him if they have not come to believe in him? And how can they believe in him if they have never heard of him? And how will they hear of him unless there is a preacher for them?” (Rom 10:14). Preaching, then, is the normal way of coming to have faith, even implicit faith in Christ, Footnote and we need neither suppose any special revelation to the individual nor suppose that he is is abandoned solely to the fallible resources of his own mind, whereby only a few succeed in knowing the truth, and that with many errors.

Whether a person has in his mind a philosophical truth that he grasps or a truth he has heard preached, we need not worry whether this truth is purely on the natural order and incapable of relating the person to God as saviour, as Henry Donneaud states in replying to Depuis. Footnote To restrict the Vatican II term “seeds of the Word” to a purely natural level would make it very difficult to explain how Christ’s saving action touches every human person without exception.

The way out is to recognize that a person’s knowledge of God may be on the natural, rational level, but God’s grace can use it instrumentally to put the person in contact with divine truth. How else could we explain Thomas Aquinas’ proposal that any person’s first act of the will must be a choice of God as his final end—putting him in a state of supernatural grace—or something opposed to God. The notion of instrumentality also allows us to bypass the poetic ramblings of Jacques Maritain on how a non-Christian grasps supernatural truth. Footnote

It is true that “a seed is not a tree”, but the seed in this case is not the natural order as opposed to the supernatural, but implicit faith as opposed to explicit faith.

Is implicit faith distinct from explicit faith substantially or simply in degree? If we admit that by implicit faith one actually believes in God, has sanctifying grace and in some way belongs to the Church and the New Testament, we cannot say it differs substantially. Nor can we minimize the importance of the difference in degree. Implicit faith is crumbs from the table, something provisional, unfinished, in need of completion. Implicit faith in the Incarnation is a generic knowledge of the way to eternal happiness, with ignorance of the specifics. Various hints and symbols may keep the person on the right way, but he really does not see the road at all, nor the Trail-blazer whose steps he should follow. Nor does he see the refreshment points on the way (the Eucharist), nor the rehabilitation points (reconciliation, anointing of sick) etc. But he travels in the dark, anonymously assisted by the invisible grace of Christ. Footnote

Theologians continue to discuss how the Spirit acts in non-Christian religions and in their rites. Certain extreme positions have been discredited, and the main outlines of a coherent position are taking place. Footnote

How these principles apply to the special situation of Islam

Islamic theology distinguishes between rational principles of faith (`aqliyyât) and revealed truths that cannot be known by reason (sam`iyyât). It has no place for manqûlât—borrowed truths, because the whole is believed to have been heavenly delivered to Muammad. A non-Muslim, by definition, does not believe that the Qur’ân came directly from God to Muammad (through Gabriel), bypassing all human imput. A Christian, therefore, will regard those beliefs which reaffirm beliefs already held by Jews and Christians as an appropriation of these beliefs, and would readily recognize this appropriation as taking place by divine inspiration. This is a case of respectful difference of perspective.

A Christian will recognize in the Qur’ân principles that concord with reason and common sense which also echo Biblical teachings, such as the existence of one God, all-knowing and all-powerful, and numerous prescripts of natural justice. The Ten Commandments are fully there, although in different words, together with strong insistence on assisting the needy, kind and respectful speech, forgiveness etc. Footnote He will also recognize echos of Biblical teachings that go beyond human reason, such as the final resurrection and judgement, with an eternity of happiness or unhappiness. He also sees religious exercises such as fasting and prayer, although differing from his own, as valid ways of inviting and receiving God’s inspiration, grace and blessings. All this is summarized in Vatican II, Nostra aetate:

The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin Mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their desserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting. (n. 3)

In Islam we find the minimum requisites of explicit faith: faith in God and his provision of salvation in the way he knows best. The problem of saying that Muslims therefore implicitly believe in the Incarnation is the fact that they explicitly deny it, along with the Trinity and Jesus’s death on the cross.

A solution may be found in a comparison with the treatment of atheists in Gaudium et spes: “Again some form for themselves such a fallacious idea of God that when they repudiate this figment they are by no means rejecting the God of the Gospel” (n. 19). If those atheists can be excused in their rejection of God who meet an impasse of understanding, so Muslims can be excused in their rejection of the divinity of Jesus when they find that utterly incomprehensible and irrational. Muslims reject the divinity of their understanding, but not the Jesus of the Gospel. The Qur’ân says: “Say, ‘If the Merciful One had a son, I would be the first to worship him’” (43:81). We can conclude that a sincere pious Muslim believes that God’s grace is at work in his life and will lead him to his presence in the next life, but he does not recognize that this grace comes through the Jesus he reveres as a prophet. Footnote

There are other serious differences. The formal denials of key Christian teachings noted above eliminate the divine intimacy that goes with the Incarnation, such as presence of the Holy Spirit, the indwelling of the divine persons, the active presence of Jesus in the sacraments etc.

Apart from that, Islam claims to be a new, final and perfect revelation, superseding Christianity. Even though the Qur’ân says it “confirms” previous revelations, it rejects much of it, and what it accepts is sufficiently contained in the Qur’ân; so a Muslim has no need to consult Christian Scripture. This, of course, contradicts the Christian claim to be the final revelation, based on Hebrews 1:1, where it is stated that God finally spoke through his Son, his Word, who expresses the fulness of his substance. He is the culmination of revelation, and there can be no more.

On the legal level, one notable difference is the Islamic provision for multiple wives and slave girls, and provision for divorce, although in practice many or most Muslim marriages tend to be monogamous and stable.

On the moral dimension, obedience to God and justice to one’s neighbour, together with the use of force to achieve justice, are given prominence. In the New Testament, however, love is paramount, with its demands spelt out particularly in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5-7); the use of force is discouraged and restricted, but not eliminated. In spite of the different emphasis, the same moral virtues can be found in both traditions, and both Muslims and Christians can be found who excel or are deficient in them.

While a Christian may have good reason to admire the lives of so many Muslims, he will also feel a certain pity for their being deprived of so much which he enjoys as a Christian.