In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful,
Praise be to the Lord of the universe who has created and formed us into tribes and nations so that we may know each other, and not so that we may despise each other, Peace be upon all auspicious prophets of God, from Adam, Noah and Abraham to Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed Mustafa, who pulled humanity out of darkness into the light and became guides to peace
…
the translated succession of prophets is a comprehensible assertion of Islamic theology which errs (to put it mildly), and may cause some theological disquiet (putting it milder still). The succession of prophets “from Adam, Noah and Abraham to Moses, Jesus and Mohammed Mustafa” is chronological: the first four are common to the prophetology of Judaism, Christianity and Islam; Jesus as a prophet is common to Christianity and Islam (with disparity over priest and king); and Mohammed is a prophet of Islam alone (indeed, ”˜The Prophet’). ”˜Mustafa’ is an epithet ascribed by Muslims to Mohammed: it means ”˜The Chosen One’.
For Christians, of course, it is Jesus who is the Anointed of God; the Christ; the Messiah; the Chosen One..
…
it is not simply a benign multifaith expression of ecumenical respect in a commemorative service of reconciliation: it is a dogmatic affirmation of a perfected prophethood to which Jesus is subordinate, and His divinity thereby denied.
…
It may not be very PC or neighbourly or conducive to interfaith relations to say it, but Mohammed was a false prophet (Jer 14:14-16; 1Jn 4:1; Acts 4:12; 2Cor 11:3f). By rejecting the crucifixion and denying the resurrection of Christ (who is not the ”˜Chosen One’), Islam espouses ”˜another Jesus’, ”˜another spirit’ and ”˜another gospel’. They are and ought to remain free to proclaim their religiosity, however false and erroneous it may be. But not, please God, in The Collegiate Church of St Peter (aka Westminster Abbey), which is a Royal Peculiar of the Supreme Governor.
Why not add David Karesh or Jim Jones? Mohammed preached a false gospel of good works. He denied the incarnation and resurrection. I know that this puts him in good standing with many in the church today and this is very sad.
This is nuts. Did somebody write a book on the rehabilitation of Mohammed, and has it worked its way into seminary reading lists?
I keep expecting to wake up and find I’ve been dreaming. This news seemed so shocking today… and perhaps even more shocking is the lack of outrage, the fact that this seems to be greeted with a yawn or a shrug. Granted it’s a busy newsday. Nepal, Baltimore, SCOTUS & gay marriage. But a prayer equating Jesus & Mohamed as prophets in Westminster Abbey. REALLY?!?!
I hope Her Majesty gets wind of this and somehow shakes up the CoE establishment, including +Justin Welby, in making [b]her[/b] outrage & disapproval known.
I am horrified. How could this be permitted?
Westminster Abbey just demoted Jesus from the Christ, the Messiah, the Son of God, the Firstborn of the dead, the King of kings, and the Lord of lords to . . . a prophet subordinate to Mohammed?
Big mistake. God is not to be mocked.
The chapter of Westminster Abbey is proving the Gafcon leaders’ point for them, in spades.
Surely this is satire – a sick joke. Islam is one of the heresies.
Why am I not surprised? Am I becoming that disillusioned and cynical?
8. Disillusionment set in a very long time ago for many of us…
This seems to absolutely in character with the apostates involved.
Remember! Between God and Satan, there is no stopping place. One is either with
GOD
or NOT.
There is no in-between.
Anathema!
It is illogical to think that Mohammed is a prophet: Why would God send a prophet after sending His Son? Is this what the vineyard owner would do?
Only if one does not believe that Jesus is the Son can one entertain the possibility that Mohammed is a prophet.
Been offline for 36+ hours due to internet problems. Glad to see more comments here. In rereading the Cranmer piece, I realize the Queen MAY have been in attendance at the service. Can anyone clarify?
Obviously given that the prayer in question was in Turkish, I do not expect her to have known what was prayed, but I do hope that somehow this will get publicity in England and that a stand may be taken.
It may be a futile hope, but I’m praying that somehow this becomes a wake up call…
The post says it was “in the presence of the Queen,” presumably at the ANZAC remembrance service, or so it was described. The post shows an English translation on paper which looks like the other. Was that translation in the bulletin for the service, or is “Cranmer” providing it to look like it was?
#13 Katherine. In case it helps, the order of service is here and a report is here.
The Muslim prayer was organised and given as part of the Abbey prayers.
For my part, I am deeply dismayed, and thought of the comment of the GAFCON Primates in their communique:
We do little to help our suffering brothers and sisters, instead we undermine them, particularly when we are seen kneeling before Rome and Alexandria instead of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Thank you, Pageantmaster. The prayer was indeed in the service bulletin with the translation as given, so the organizers had every reason to know that the prayer would treat Jesus as a prophet in a line ending with Muhammad. This is inappropriate in a Christian church.
I don’t, myself, think it is wrong for Christians to ask for the prayers of Christians from other communions. The inclusion of the Al Azhar representative in that photo is in conjunction with the earnest efforts of the Copts, Catholics and Greek Orthodox (and Anglicans) in Egypt to establish respectful non-dhimmi relations among the faiths. I don’t think it is a case of +Welby submitting to any of those for whose prayers he asked. I have worshipped personally at All Saints, Cairo, and I am privileged to know Bishop Mouneer. I would be beyond shocked if I heard that a prayer like the one permitted in Westminster Abbey were permitted at All Saints. Respectful relationships are not the same as surrendering one’s beliefs.
Thanks Pageantmaster & Katherine for the clarification & follow up comments. It’s been a crazy busy week for me, so I really hadn’t had time to look closely at the service leaflet. It does seem that with the translation posted clearly, there is no excuse for this and it is a very serious breach of orthodoxy.
Katherine, I agree with the distinction you’ve made between building inter-faith relationships versus compromise in such a way. I will be interested to see the Global South response on this.
Pageantmaster, would you be able to post email addresses we might be able to use to write +Justin or others to express our outrage over this and call out the heresy involved here? I’d look it up myself, but my internet connection is terrible tonight, and I need to use my limited internet time as efficiently as possible. Thanks. I’ll try to check back tomorrow some time.
“Respectful relationships are not the same as surrendering one’s beliefs.”
While I agree with this statement, I can’t help but question the beliefs of those promoting such things. If one lacks meaningful Christian beliefs, it becomes rather easy to behave in this manner. The witness is terrible.
Snarkily, I might also observe that in terms of establishing progressive, edgy, reappraising credibility – this strikes me as nearly complete failure. First, the average attendee was unable to appreciate the ‘urbane’ and ‘sophisticated’ choice of opportunity to be inter-faith. Second, the integrity of Westminster was compromised in a display one might refer to at best as ‘old hat’ in the National Cathedral of TEC, in Washington DC.
This is the sort of second rate political gesture one expects from remote venues that are only just now getting round to sand mandalas in churchyards, native american smudging, VHS tapes of the Jesus Seminars during adult education, or book studies of anything Spong.
It is all so 1980s.
tired, #17, if by “promoting such things” you mean the event at Westminster Abbey in which an inappropriate prayer was included, I agree with you. If you mean the efforts of Christians in Egypt to seize the moment in which the President of Egypt is calling for respectful relations among the faiths, I don’t agree.
#18 My comment, in its entirety, was confined to the former.
Oh, dear. The Dean of Westminster Abbey [url=http://www.christiantoday.com/article/dean.of.westminster.defends.inclusion.of.muslim.prayer.in.abbey.service/53148.htm]defends the inclusion of this prayer[/url] because of “hospitality.”
I don’t object to the inclusion of the Turks at these remembrances. I have been to Gallipoli. Turkish losses were enormous. I don’t object to the use of the quote from Attaturk. What the Dean needs to see is that he should have asked the Turks to pray, in a Christian church, a prayer which does not specifically deny the Christian faith. This could easily be something like, “Oh God [calling him Allah, as they do] our prophet taught us to live in peace. May that peace be among all peoples.” The Dean’s statement says he thinks the problem was calling Muhammad “Mustafa,” the Chosen One. No, the problem was listing him as the seal of the prophets in a list which includes Jesus as a prophet.
#20 Katherine, well that article from Ruth Gledhill diverges almost 180 degrees from her earlier article – shows balance I suppose 🙁
However, there are a number of surprising assertions in it. The one which stood out was this:
Really Doctor Hall, you quote the Queen’s speech at Lambeth Palace? Why would you quote a speech given at Lambeth Palace unless you had been primed by them? Looks like you have had help from Lambeth Palace, but aren’t both of you over-reaching yourselves in suggesting that HM has approved the use of this Muslim Prayer with its Muslim theological assertions in this service? Have you really asked HM? Has she really given her approval? Or is it the case that you are taking her words at Chez Welby given in the context of the Church of England supporting the liberty of other faiths as well as of Christians in this country in order to suggest that HM is OK with assertions that Jesus is just another non-divine Prophet under the Prophet Mohammed, the ‘Chosen One’ in the prayer Westminster Abbey organised and printed in its order of service?
I think that Lambeth Palace is on dodgy ground on this one, even if their press lady is Ailsa Anderson the former Palace flunkey, and the same for Dean Hall. Perhaps someone should drop a line to Buckingham Palace to see if HM approves of the use of her name in aid of the Dean and Chapter’s and it appears now Lambeth Palace’s huge gaffe.
By the way, anyone seen the Bishop of London and Dean of HM’s Chapels Royal recently? Has he had anything to do with this?
Well, that is interesting. I have just checked the Archbishop of Canterbury’s staff for the latest on Ailsa Anderson. Lo and behold, the Archbishop of Canterbury’s correspondence secretary seems to have grown a department under himself and is not only the gatekeeper for the Archbishop’s correspondence and so diary keeper, but is also listed:
I expect CDM Officer means Clergy Discipline Measure Officer which means that he is the first port of call for all incoming reports under the Clergy Discipline Measure including Bishop Nick Holtam’s Clergy Discipline Measure complaint lodged against Bishop John Ellison.
That would be the ‘Correspondence Secretary and CDM Officer,’ Andrew Nunn the gay activist, against whom complaints of bias and over-reaching himself speaking for the Archbishop of Canterbury were made last year. Something smells very off at Lambeth Palace and raises question marks over the way the Bishop of Salisbury’s complaint has been accepted and dealt with.
Stinkier and stinkier rotten Lambeth Palace and its incumbent appears to be.
I quite agree with your #21, PM. “Protecting the free practice of other faith traditions” is not the same thing as permitting anti-Christian theological statements in a prayer service in a Christian church.
I’m not sure that I agree with most of these comments. It was a state commemoration involving the participation of several religions. Going from the order of service, the speaker for this prayer was Mahmut Özdemir, of the Presidency of Religious Affairs of the Republic of Turkey, who is presumably a Muslim. I don’t know how they do these things in England but, in Canada on state occasions of commemoration, such as the service for the victims of the Tsunami, as well as for remembrance for fallen peace officers, representatives of different religions offer their prayers— they were in different venues and, in my experience, in secular, Anglican, and RC settings. In my former professional life as a bureaucrat who was sometimes asked to work state ceremonial occasions, I sat in on these discussions, and was impressed by the mutual respect involved. Reading carefully through the order of service, it seems an appropriate ordo for an official memorial observance. Note, as well, that Her Majesty, who is a devoutly observant Anglican, would have had to approve the service– and she has been known to make changes in proposals when she wanted to do so (I have seen documents with changes in her own hand for state ceremonial events in Canada).
“It was a state commemoration involving the participation of several religions.”
Sure, but that just begs the question, why was it held in a Christian church?
In Australia we do not hold such services in Christian churches, that I know of. Nor do we expect to be permitted to pray in Mosques. It is possible for those of non-Christian faiths to pray at a commemoration service, for example at a Cenotaph, but that is a different matter.
“Note, as well, that Her Majesty, who is a devoutly observant Anglican, would have had to approve the service….”
What is the relevance of this? Nobody knows what Madge did or did not get the opportunity to approve. But even if she did approve it, that doesn’t make it right.
And since this story broke, things have become worse, with the Dean of Westminster demonstrating his poor grasp of Christian theology:
[blockquote] “This particular isolated prayer is within orthodox Christian worship behaviour, teaching and everything. It does not overturn in any way our belief that Christ is the Son of God, that he is the revelation of the Father, that no-one comes to the Father but by him.” [/blockquote]
Which is incorrect, on both counts.
I’ll respond to MichaelA, but very briefly, as I am soon off and away on family business. I would imagine that was held in a church as England has a state church, and state functions or commemorations are often held in CoE churches, notably cathedrals and Westminster Abbey. Memorial services of a secular nature are frequently held in them. Even in countries without state churches, such as Canada, feature commemorative ceremonies or services in churches— I have attended (and worked at) some in both Notre Dame Basilica and Christchurch Cathedral in Ottawa. Former Prime Minister Martin (practising RC) wanted such ceremonies held in secular facilities, but his predecessors seemed to like having them in churches. State or official funerals are held wherever the family prefers– Jack Layton’s was in a university hall, but Mr Flaherty’s was in Saint James’ Cathedral in Toronto.
The reference to the Queen was in response to an earlier post. My guess, based on experience in the field, is that she knew and approved, and that she did so in the context of the service’s intent. A bit of googling on Commonwealth Day services may prove of interest.
Of course, that does not indicate that her decision was right or not– sovereigns, unlike popes, do not claim infallibility.
I have again reflected on the posts and on the order of service and, while I understand where posters are coming from, I think that it was an appropriate example of interfaith participation in a commemorative service. There are plenty of valid examples of fuzzy-brained syncretism in Anglican circles (given a glass of Lagavulin 16-year old and a few hours, I can likely dig up a bunch), but I do not believe that this is one of them.
Hi OP, your response doesn’t seem to be an attempt to respond to the question I asked, nor to support your position.
Why is a Muslim cleric invited to pray in a Christian church, particularly using a prayer which is antithetical to Christian teaching? I am still waiting for some attempt at answering that question, by anyone.
It was a very good response– it’s just that you (like others) don’t like the fact of it. This was a state ceremony, interfaith in nature because of the commemoration involved, held by a state (England) with a state church (CoE). Westminster Abbey is a traditional spot for such things. We may not like what a state church might do from time to time, but if for those who have been to Commonwealth service over the years, that’s the sort of thing that happens and we should not be surprised.
OP, no, its not a matter of not liking an answer, but of pointing out that the answer just doesn’t respond, as a simple matter of logic.
You have repeated, as a mantra, that the CofE is a “state church” (which is not necessarily an accurate description, but let’s go with it for the moment). But you haven’t explained why that status then leads to the conclusion that an anti-Christian prayer may be prayed there. You haven’t even attempted to explain it.
So far as I am aware, the “state” nature of Church of England churches does not provide an excuse for holding a plethora of things in them, e.g. gambling contests, courts of law, farmer’s markets, toddler beauty pageants or Wiccan rituals, to name a few. Why in particular should Muslim prayers be permitted there?
I am with others in agreeing that even if it is a “state church” and this was an interfaith gathering, it does not mean that such a prayer was suitable.
The prayer included in this service in its essence acknowledges that Jesus is just one of many prophets and LESS than Mohamed (since Muslims believe that since Mohamed came last, he was therefore God’s FINAL revelation, the “seal of the prophets”). This is directly contradictory to Scripture and orthodox Christian belief. Jesus is God’s Final Word. He is not only a prophet, but Deity Himself:
[i] Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power.[/i] (Hebrews 1:1-3 ESV)
It would be very easy to write a prayer for an interfaith service which praises God our Creator for the diversity of cultures, and prays for greater understanding among peoples, nations and faiths, without compromising Christian belief.
But the prayer above is NOT innocuous. I especially take offense at the phrase “guides to peace”
[i]Peace be upon all auspicious prophets of God, from Adam, Noah and Abraham to Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed Mustafa, who pulled humanity out of darkness into the light and became [b]guides to peace[/b][/i]
Jesus was not just a guide to peace. He IS our peace. He is THE way, THE truth, THE life. He did not just help guide out of darkness, He IS the light of the world whom darkness could not overcome.
Mohamed was NOT a guide out of darkness, nor did he bring peace, but rather he brought confusion, darkness, wars, and lies, which enslave millions today and blind them to the life that is theirs in Christ.
Sorry, I hit send before I was finished…
“guides to peace” implies equality. Abraham = Moses = Jesus = Mohamed. This cannot be affirmed by any Christian.
For a workshop once on the topic of inter-faith dialogue, I had to read a document produced by the Presbyterian Church (PCUSA) in 1997 called “Respectful Presence” guidelines for interfaith prayer [url=https://www.pcusa.org/resource/respectful-presence-document/]link[/url]
Although PCUSA is far more liberal than I and there is much typical mainline “mush” in this document, this is actually a pretty helpful document in several ways. It outlines different types of interfaith services and gatherings, and it also does uphold a clear call to recognize that even within a context of respect, there are limits.
“We must not bend or trim our faith in God’s revelation in Jesus Christ in order to achieve an artificial agreement with the doctrines of other religions.” (p. 9)
Amen.
Here’s an example of three prayers from an interfaith service for peace in the Middle East, supposedly representing, in order, the Jewish tradition, Christian tradition, Muslim tradition. They are not heretical, nor offensive to other faiths. Something similar to any of these three would have worked fine at Westminster Abbey:
[blockquote]Sustain together in undiminished hope, O God of hope,
those who continue to labor with undiminished determination
to build peace in the land from which, of old,
out of brokenness, violence and destruction,
nevertheless hope emerged for so many of faith.
Bless all the spiritual seed of Abraham together
with the light of your Presence.
From the light of your Presence
we have found a way of justice and mercy
and a vision of Peace.
We praise you O God, Giver of Peace,
who commands us to Peace. Amen.
God our Creator, who made the earth a peaceful garden,
help us restore that peace wherever it has been broken
by terrorism and injustice, especially in the Middle East.
We repent for the times when religious language
has fostered hatred and division.
Bring healing to those whose lives
have been shattered by violence.
Instill a renewed spirit of reconciliation in those
who lead our people politically and religiously. Amen.
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful,
Accept our prayer to sustain us
and our brothers and sisters of different beliefs
in our desire for peace.
Help us to find this peace in our living together,
and receive mutual sustenance from our neighbor. Amen.[/blockquote]
(From pages 45 – 47 of “Respectful Presence” – linked above)
Basically, in interfaith prayer gatherings, if they are to not compromise Christian orthodoxy, “less is more” – you need to find some kind of common denominator that all can accept.
On the final page of the document, is this suggested set of Guidelines on Interfaith prayer. I think most of the points are quite valid (even though prayers addressed generically to “the Source of our Being” etc. make me tend to gag…!):
[blockquote]Excerpts from “Guidelines for Civic Occasions†prepared by The National Conference [of Christians and Jews]
Prayer on behalf of the general community should be general prayer. General public prayer on civic occasions is authentic prayer that also enables people to recognize the pluralism of American society.
General public prayer—
• seeks the highest common denominator without compromise of conscience.
• calls upon God on behalf of the particular public gathered; avoids individual petitions.
• uses forms and vocabulary that allow persons of different faiths to give assent to what is said.
• uses universal, inclusive terms for deity rather than particular proper names for divine manifestations. Some opening ascriptions are “Mighty God,†“Our Maker,†“Source of all Being†or “Creator and Sustainer.†Possible closing words are “Hear Our Prayer,†“In Thy Name,†“May Goodness Flourish,†or, simply, “Amen.â€
• uses the language most widely understood in the audience, unless one purpose of the event is to express ethnic/cultural diversity, in which case multiple languages can be effective.
• remains faithful to the purposes of acknowledging divine presence and seeking blessing, not as opportunity to preach, argue or testify.[/blockquote]
The prayer offered at Westminster Abbey violated the above guidelines by:
1) Praying specifically to Allah. That is as offensive to many conservative Christians as a prayer “in Jesus name” would be to many Muslims. [I’m not wanting to raise the is Allah God debate here. Just acknowledging that prayer in Allah’s name IS offensive to a significant percentage of Christians, and therefore perhaps something that should have been avoided.].
2) including a statement acknowledging Mohamed is a prophet (equal to Jesus) that orthodox Christians DO NOT and CAN NOT assent to. It does entail a compromise of conscience for Christians, as this thread clearly demonstrates.
Anyway, got to stop commenting and get back to work. Just wanted to come back to this thread after several days offline, in case anyone is still reading.
Thank you for those comments, Karen B., with which I agree. My only (small) disagreement is that the prayer from the Turkish representative was recited in Turkish, in which case, calling God “Allah” is correct — in Turkish. The rest of the prayer has the problems you cite and was not appropriate for an interfaith event in a Christian church.