Fr. Thomas Michel's Official Website

A. The two oceans

The title of my talk today is taken from a verse of the Qur’an (55:19). The context is a litany of the wonders of God’s creation; one of those wonders is God’s having created a place where the two great seas converge. In this talk, I am using the image metaphorically to refer to the two spiritual universes of Christianity and Islam which come together in the activity usually called dialogue or, more properly, sharing of life. As believers in one and the same God, we Christians and Muslims have much to say to one another and much to do together; even when we disagree, I am convinced that we have much to learn from one another.

Before I go into my topic proper, I should let you know something of my personal journey in Muslim-Christian relations. It began almost 40 years ago in Indonesia in 1969 when my Jesuit superior told me to ask around and see what the needs of our region were so that they could decide what kind of further studies I would take up. At the time I was teaching English in a teachers’ college in which the students were almost equally composed of Muslims and Christians. One day, I mentioned to the students that I was planning to continue my education, and several of the Muslim students suggested: “Why don’t you study Islam, that way you could help Christians to know more about Islam, and you could also help Muslims get a better understanding of Christian faith.” The more I thought about it, I really liked the idea; my religious superiors agreed, and that basically is what I have been doing since. It works out that I spend about half the year teaching Islamic studies in Christian institutions, especially in Indonesia, the Philippines, and Malaysia, and the other half-year teaching Christian theology in Islamic theology faculties in Turkey, Iran, Libya and elsewhere.

After finishing my studies, I returned to Indonesia and worked there until I was sent to be Head of the Office for Islam in the Vatican.  I did that for 13 years.  While I was there, in 1986, the Rector of Ankara University in Turkey wrote to the Pope requesting a Christian theologian to teach an introduction to Christian theology at the university.  We began a search, who could we send to Turkey?  After some time, we were not successful in finding anyone so, in response to the invitation, I went to Ankara.  This was the start of many subsequent teaching assignments in more than ten cities in Turkey.  This long experience of teaching in Turkey led to invitations elsewhere.  Last year, for example, I gave lectures at three universities in Iran, and I have also lectured at Muslim institutes in Libya, Bulgaria, and Malaysia.                   

All of this provided me with a very educational adventure.  From my comfortable office in the Vatican, I was transported into a series of Muslim universities.  Often I was the only Christian in the city in which I was living, usually a totally Muslim environment in which all my students, my colleagues at the university, my neighbors and friends were all Muslim.  And as a Christian, I was able to learn a lot about Islam that I had not come to know through my university studies and reading.

That’s enough about my background; let’s turn to the subject at hand.  The subtitle of my paper is: “issues in Christian-Muslim relations,” and I’d like to discuss some of the main questions that have arisen in recent years.  A key issue is whether Pope Benedict XVI has taken up a different policy toward Muslims from that carried out by Pope John Paul II.

B. Fidelity to Vatican II

A moment’s thought will be sufficient to remind us that when the Pope makes a speech or writes an encyclical he is not free to say or teach anything he pleases.  As the authoritative teacher of the Catholic Church, the Pope must be faithful to the message of Scripture as it has been studied, reflected upon, prayed about, and given practical application by generations of Christians.  This ongoing effort to continually interpret the Scriptural message in the context of the changing needs of our world is what theologians call the “Tradition” of the Church.  The teaching office of the Catholic Church, which is exercised by the Pope together with the worldwide college of bishops, finds its most authoritative expression in an Ecumenical Council, the most recent of which was the Second Vatican Council held in 1962-1965.

In short, in his teaching and pastoral strategies, the Pope - any Pope - must remain faithful to what was decided and decreed by the bishop participants of the Council.  This seemingly obvious point is one that is often missed by secular journalists and commentators.  For example, in commenting on the relations of the Pope to Muslims, a number of analysts have offered the following scenario.  They suggest that the late Pope John Paul II devised a strategy of rapprochement and friendship with Muslims in order to obtain better treatment for Christian minorities living in Muslim-majority regions.  However, by the end of his pontificate, it became obvious that this tactic was not working, so his successor, Pope Benedict XVI devised a new, hard-line strategy that would start from an uncompromising principle of reciprocity derived from the practice of international diplomacy.

What this analysis ignores is the clear teaching of Vatican II to which both Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI must be faithful.  As expressed mainly in the document Nostra Aetate, but also in the doctrinal decree Lumen Gentium, the Council teaching does not focus on strategies or diplomatic relations, but on issues of faith.  In a groundbreaking statement, Nostra Aetate affirms that “The Church regards Muslims with esteem.”  This in itself is astounding.  Has any religious community or church in history ever before stated as part of its own faith understanding that its followers should have esteem for the adherents of another religion? 

The document goes on to give the reasons for this esteem.  Muslims, like Christians, adore the one and only God, who is living and subsisting in Himself, who is merciful, all-powerful, Creator of all that exists, and who has spoken his Word to humankind.  Since the time of the Council, it has happened that some Christians would like to deny that Muslims worship the same God as Christians since they do not know God’s trinitarian nature.  These Christians have their counterparts in the Islamic community, who deny that Christians worship the same God as Muslims and who may even claim that Christians worship three gods, taking them outside the realm of prophetic monotheism.  Neither of these views, however, are those of the Catholic Church as expressed in the Second Vatican Council; the Council teaches clearly that Muslims, like Christians, adore the One God.

The Council teaches that Muslims not only worship the same God, but that they sincerely strive to submit their lives wholeheartedly to God’s decrees.  This is a sensitive recognition of the essence of Islamic faith as “submission.”  The Arabic word Islam actually means submission, the act of submitting one’s life to God’s will and a Muslim is literally a person who submits their life to God.  The Council takes a further step towards acknowledging Muslims as fellow believers by associating Islamic faith with Abraham, the common ancestor in faith to Jews, Christians, and Muslims.

The Council acknowledges that Muslims do not accept the divine nature of Christ, although they pay great respect to him as a prophet.  Other points of similarity and contact are mentioned in the document: the high regard of Muslims for the Virgin Mary, the Islamic expectation of the Day of Judgment, the high value that Muslims place on moral life, and the Islamic commitment to worship God through prayer, alms, and fasting.

However, it is the final line of the Nostra Aetate statement that seeks to move the relationship of Christians and Muslims to a new plane.  The Council Fathers recognize that in the course of centuries many hostilities have risen between Christians and Muslims.  However, the bishops urge all to move beyond the past and to work together sincerely for mutual understanding.  The two communities must not be satisfied with peaceful coexistence or simply coming to understand one another, for the bishops envision a nothing less than a common mission in which Muslims and Christians should work together for the benefit of all humankind to make a joint contribution in four key areas of modern life.  They must work together to build peace, to bring social justice, to uphold moral values, and to promote true human freedom.

In expressing its esteem for Muslims, the Vatican Council is of course speaking of good, pious Muslims who seek to submit their lives to God’s will and pursue their salvation through good works.  Just as the Council could never praise those who call themselves Christians but do wrong to others, so also the Vatican Council does not extol those Muslims who engage in unjustified violence or who oppress and wrong others.

C. The pontificate of John Paul II

One might say that in relation to Muslims the achievement of Pope John Paul II was simply to put into practice the teaching of Vatican II.  This he did with a deep conviction.  The Pope met with Muslims over 50 times in the course of his pontificate.  The mutual trust between himself and Muslims grew gradually.  Although his message of mutual esteem and friendship was consistent throughout his term as Pope, it seemed at first that many Muslims understood his expressions of spiritual friendship mainly as a type of public relations utterance rather than as a sincere expression of faith convictions.

I believe that the Gulf war in 1991 was a turning point.  Many Muslims had presumed that the Pope would support and bless whatever military or diplomatic policies were put forward by the “Christian” nations of North America and Western Europe.  However, at the time of the Gulf War this did not happen.  The Pope strongly opposed the war and tried every possible channel to avoid war by exploring all possible alternatives.  Muslims around the world were impressed by the Pope’s honesty and his clear commitment to peace.

Pope John Paul II appears to have seen himself in his role as Pope as a kind of corporate personality, as someone whose teaching went beyond his own personal views.  Thus, he did not hesitate to “farm out” the drafts of his talks to others, as well as to send out the drafts he had composed himself for evaluation by the Vatican staff.  After this communal process of preparation, the Pope would make the final revisions himself and thus come to “own” the text he would assert publicly.  As one of the lower members on this chain of preparation, I used to receive the drafts of the Pope’s proposed speeches to Muslims and felt that one of the most useful aspects of my work was to remove any possible inappropriate or inaccurate comments.

Another part of my job was to prepare the Days of Prayer for Peace in Assisi.   When the Pope announced the first Day of Prayer in 1986, there was much skepticism on the part of Muslims.  We only wound up with a handful of Muslims, and those were not very representative of the Islamic community.  I think that Muslim leaders were not very sure about what was going to happen and did not want to put themselves into a situation in which they would be manipulated or used for a Christian propaganda event.   By the time of the Second Day of Prayer in 1993, at the height of the war in Bosnia, we had no trouble convincing the Muslims to come for prayer; they willingly took part in good numbers.  Finally, when the Pope invited religious leaders again for a Day of Prayer for Peace in Assisi in 2002, just six months after the 9-11 terrorist attack, there were so many Muslims that were eager to respond that the numbers had to be limited.  The same thing occurred three years later when John Paul died, there was an unprecedented outpouring of prayers and sympathy.  So many important Muslim personalities came for the funeral that the space allotted to them in St. Peter’s Basilica had to be severely limited.   

D. The pontificate of Benedict XVI

When Pope Benedict XVI took office relations between Catholics and Muslims were quite positive.  Some journalists were pushing for a change in policy towards Muslims.  In the days after the death of John Paul II, I was interviewed by several news agencies who felt that John Paul was “too soft” on Muslims and that the new Pope would have to “take a harder line.”

The first occasion on which Benedict XVI met Muslims was at the World Youth Day in Cologne, Germany August, 2005.  His talk was quite positive and could have been given, in fact, by his predecessor.  The Pope began with something on which Muslims and Christians agreed, that is, a condemnation of terrorism.  He held that for Christians and Muslims, the life of every human being is sacred and noted that there is broad scope for the two communities to act together in the service of fundamental moral values.  Together they should communicate a message of human dignity and human rights.  The Pope acknowledged the shameful history of conflict between Christians and Muslims and felt that an awareness of that history should help the two communities to avoid repeating the same mistakes.

Then the Pope repeated the Nostra Aetate teaching on Muslims and added “For us, these words remain the Magna Charta of the dialogue with you, dear Muslim friends; I am glad that you have spoken to us in the same spirit and have confirmed these intentions.”  He concluded by noting that dialogue between Christians and Muslims cannot be reduced to an optional extra.  It is in fact a vital necessity on which our future depends.

Thus, Benedict was off to a good start, but then, a month later, came his fateful speech at Regensburg in Germany.  In retrospect, it is a shame that there were any references to Islam or Muslims in the talk, as these were quite irrelevant to the theme of his address, but created the controversy which came to dominate the public discussion of the talk.  The point the Pope was trying to make was quite different, that is, that the historical encounter between the Gospel message and Greek philosophy was providential, with the result that a “critically purified Greek heritage forms an integral part of Christian faith.”

After the controversy broke out, the Pope added a footnote to the published version of his talk, noting that his reason for referring to Muslims was to reinforce his point that “Not to act in accord with reason is contrary to God’s nature.”  However, Muslims around the world were quite offended by the address and objected specifically to three points.

The Pope cited an 11th Century Muslim scholar, Ibn Hazm, to the effect that God is beyond human logic and reason.  God’s omnipotence is unlimited, so that God is not bound even by His own word.  This old philosophical conundrum was debated among Christian and Muslim philosophers alike.  If God can do all things, can God do the impossible?  For example, can God make a square circle?  Ibn Hazm is expressing his personal view and strongly emphasizes God’s omnipotence.  However, the Muslim scholars pointed out to the Pope that Ibn Hazm is marginal within the Islamic tradition, a footnote in the history of Muslim philosophy and has no followers today.  Hence he should not be cited as typical of Muslim views on logic and reason.

Secondly, Benedict cited the Qur’anic verse: “There is no compulsion in religion,” but commented, erroneously, that this was found in “an early [chapter of the Qur’an] when Muhammad was powerless,” but he noted that later the Qur’an gives instructions for Holy War.  We can understand why Muslims were offended.  The implied accusation is that Muhammad was an opportunist; when he was weak, he was in favor of tolerance but when strong, he advocated force.  Moreover, Qur’anic scholars indicate that the verse was not early, as the Pope declared, but late, when Muhammad was already governing in Madina, so the verse actually comes from a time when Muhammad was in a powerful position.

Finally, the most serious objection was raised to the Pope’s citation of the 14th century Byzantine emperor, Manuel II Paleologos, who wrote: “Show me what Muhammad brought that was new and you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread the faith by the sword.”  Muslim scholars quickly asked where such a command to spread the faith by the sword is found in the Qur’an, which in fact has no concept of holy war.  However, the phrase that caused the most controversy was that which says that Muhammad only brought evil and inhuman teachings.  Although the Pope later added a footnote saying that he did not agree with Manuel’s statement, the damage was done, and the much-publicized protests and rioting followed.

In this low point in relations between Christians and Muslims, the Pope was planning his trip to Turkey, a country with a 99% Muslim population.  Several politicians suggested that the Pope be disinvited.  Although the Turkish government was unwilling to exacerbate the tensions by such a radical measure, the Prime Minister announced that he had a meeting in Europe and would be out of the country when the Pope arrived.  The Sunday before the Pope was to come to Turkey a coalition of those opposed to the Pope’s visit organized what was to be a huge protest demonstration in Istanbul.  The demonstration fizzled and the Prime Minister announced that he would be able to meet the Pope in Ankara after all.  But the main one to received the Pope was the Minister of Religious Affairs, Ali Bardakoğlu.

On 1 December, the Minister received the Pope politely, if somewhat coldly, and noted that the prophets are messengers of Divine project of peace, love and liberation.  Therefore, religious believers must accept that all “religious, ethnic and cultural differences are manifestations of Divine love, mercy, wisdom” and urged that people of all religions should come together to make a joint contribution to solution of problems faced by humankind. The only veiled reference to the Regensburg talk was the concern expressed by the Minister of an escalation in Islam­ophobia, with some people claiming that Islam encourages violence and was spread by sword.

When his turn came, Benedict began by identifying himself with the two most popular Popes in Turkey: John XXIII and John Paul II.  He then noted the common spiritual heritage of Muslims and Christians as belonging to the family of those who believe in the One God and trace ancestry to Abraham.” “This human and spiritual unity in origin and destiny,” he went on, “impels us to seek common path.”  Benedict then cited his medieval predecessor, Pope Gregory VII, who wrote to Emir Al-Nasir of Bejaya that Christians and Muslims owe love for each other “because we believe in one God, praise and worship Him daily.”  The Pope’s conclusion was clearly aimed at reconciliation.  “May we come to know one another better and strengthen the bonds of affection between us in our common wish to live together in harmony, peace, and mutual trust.  As believers, we draw from our prayer the strength that is needed to overcome all traces of prejudice and to bear joint witness to our firm faith in God.”

However, the most dramatic gesture did not come for another two days, when the Grand Mufti of Istanbul was guiding the Pope through the Sultan Ahmet Mosque.  Arriving in front of the mihrab which indicates the direction of the Ka’ba in Mecca, the Pope bowed his head, crossed his hands on his chest, and prayed in silence.  We were monitoring the reactions on Turkish television, and I can testify that this gesture of prayer was headline news on every station.

Although the Turkish trip was successful in healing some of the wounds caused by the Regensburg talk, there remained a level of mistrust among Muslims.  They were not certain how sincere Benedict was in his words and gestures a mere two months after he had expressed such a harsh judgment on their religion.  In the meantime, a group of 38 Muslim scholars gathered to try to answer what they deemed to be errors, inaccuracies, and misunderstandings in the Pope’s Regensburg address.  They sent a joint letter to the Pope and asked for an audience in order to discuss whatever points of difference remained.  There was no official answer from Pope Benedict although many Christian leaders welcomed the measured, respectful tone and the carefully argued content of the letter.

E. A Common Word

Exactly a year later, on 13 October 2007, the group of Muslim scholars, which had grown to 138, sent a second letter to Pope Benedict and, this time, to other Christian leaders as well.  I believe that when the history of Christian-Muslim relations is written, this initiative, entitled “A Common Word,” will be seen as one of the most important initiatives of our day.  This is a broad-based Muslim project, to which over 200 Muslim scholars - Sunni and Shi’a, legal scholars and Sufis, university professors and political figures from over 40 countries – have now signed on.

It all began when the scholars sent an open letter to Pope Benedict, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, Rev. Samuel Kobia, Secretary General of the World Council of Churches, and Archbishop Ramsey of Canterbury, head of the Anglican Communion, as well as other patriarchs and heads of autocephalous Christian churches.

In this letter, the Muslim scholars invite their Christian counterparts to explore with them the foundational principles shared by the two religions.  In their view, these elements come down to three: the commandment to love God with all one’s heart, soul, and strength; the command to love one’s neighbor; and the imperative on both parties to work together to build peace and harmony in the world. 

Although the letter was addressed to Christian leaders, the ample citations from the Hebrew Scriptures indicate the authors’ conviction that the same foundational principles also lie at the roots of Judaism.  This was recognized in a joint statement made by the Archbishop of Canterbury and a delegation of rabbis from Israel: “The ‘Common Word’,” they said, “though addressed to Christian Churches, also makes clear its respect for Hebrew scripture in citing directly from the Book of Deuteronomy and in acknowledging the inspiration that this provided for their understanding of the Qur’anic teachings on the unity and love of God and of neighbour.  We have agreed that in responding to the Common Word, it will be important to consider carefully together how the perspectives of Christians and Jews are properly held together.”

The Muslim letter explicitly invited a response from the Christian leaders.  The most immediate responses were those of Dr. Kobia at the World Council of Churches and of the Archbishop of Canterbury.  A joint ecumenical response was prepared by the professors at the Yale Divinity School, and that response became the basis for the much-publicized New York Times ad on 18 November signed by more than 300 American theologians.

Although many individual Catholics, including several Cardinals and the United States Bishops’ Conference, had responded to the Muslim letter, there was at first no official reaction from the Vatican.  Then on 19 November, Pope Benedict XVI replied to the letter through Cardinal Bertone, the Vatican Secretary of State, expressing “his gratitude to all who signed the letter” and his “deep appreciation for the positive spirit which inspired the text and the call for a common commitment to promoting peace in the world.”  More significant than the gracious words were the Pope’s invitation to the Muslim signatories to send a delegation to meet with him in the Vatican and discuss further the points raised in the letter.  The dates and agenda of the follow-up meetings are now being settled by agreement of both parties.