Is it polite for Muslims to recite the Qur’an in churches?

A reflection on the recent controversy over the Qur’an recitation at St Mary’s Cathedral in Glasgow.

A reflection on the recent controversy over the Qur’an recitation at St Mary’s Cathedral in Glasgow.

I have on a number of occasions been invited to talk about Islam in churches; and each time, as a former practising Christian and erstwhile cathedral chorister, I have taken great pains to ensure that I do not knowingly cause offence to my host; and I have assumed that other Muslims would obviously do likewise. Imagine then my surprise when, unusually given his pride at being a technophobe, my father phoned to ask if I was aware what was trending on the BBC news website.

Based on my father’s description, and on what I then found on the webpages of the BBC, Scottish Episcopal Church and elsewhere, with the suggestion that the recitation related to the Annunciation and included a denial of Christian orthodoxy on the nature of Christ, my assumption was right that the Qur’anic passage must have come from chapter 19, Surat Maryam, and included verse 35: {It does not behove God to adopt a son. Glory be to Him! Whenever He decides on a matter, He has only to say, “Be!” and it is.}

Advised by the imam of my local mosque that a recording of the recitation had been posted on social media, what I found at first was the recitation of a passage recited from the third chapter, Surat Al Imran, verses 42-48, in which no mention of the Christian doctrine of “Son of God” is made. Yet, although it too came from St Mary’s Cathedral, it turned out to be from two Christmases ago; and the most obvious – albeit not the only – possible cause for offence given on that occasion was the use of ‘Allah’ instead of ‘God’ in the English translation.

Among the guiding principles of positive interfaith dialogue from the Qur’an, I could cite this command (Q.3:64) to the Prophet to {Say, “O People of the Covenant, step up to a statement acceptable to us and you, that we worship none but God, that we associate nothing with Him…} Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews at the time would have been supremely relaxed about the use of the name ‘Allah’ since, unlike many WASPish Christians today, they had been using it long before the Qur’an was revealed. Another relevant piece of advice (Q.16:125) to the Prophet is to {Call to the path of your Lord with wisdom and good counsel; and contend with them only with what is best…} And finally from the Qur’an, a warning (Q.29:46) to all Muslims, {And do not contend with the People of the Covenant except with what is best – other than those amongst them who have done wrong – and say, “We believe in what was sent down to us and sent down to you; our God and your God is One…} To pick just one authentic hadith, or saying, of the Prophet Muhammad, what person of faith could disagree with the exhortation that “whoever believes in God and the Last Day, let him honour his neighbour”?

Based on these principles, and as an educated Muslim, I can understand the former Bishop of Rochester, the Right Reverend Michael Nazir-Ali, when he wrote that “Christians should know what their fellow citizens believe and this can include reading the Koran for themselves, whether in the original or in translation. This is not, however, the same thing as having it read in Church in the context of public worship.” And his view is not new but can be traced back to the late 5^th century Decretum Gelasianum de libris recipiendis et non recipiendis.

Looking back at the Christmas Day service in 2014 at St Mary’s Cathedral, Glasgow, even that fell foul of that decree, since it included a recitation of Q.3:44 {… and you were not with them when they cast lots as to which of them would be Mary’s guardian…} While seemingly quaint and innocuous perhaps to unschooled Christian ears, the incident referred to this verse is found not in the canonical books of the New Testament, but in the book known as the Gospel of the Infancy. And therein lies the problem, as that apocryphal work has the distinction of being mentioned in Pope Gelasius’ decree, but not amongst the writings whose authority the Church in the West at that time accepted. Rather it was classed with the books which ought to be avoided, recognised only by heretics and schismatics.

So, seen from both Christian and Muslim perspectives, and notwithstanding the laudable desire to foster good community relations, it was as unwise of the Scottish Episcopal Church to invited someone to recite from the Qur’an as it would be impolite of a Muslim to accept it, assuming it was known that Q.19:35 was to be included.