The National Register portal reports on a commentary by Zubair Simonson, a convert from Islam, who uses the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha to compare and contrast Islamic and Christian theology. While the article attempts to present a charitable and nuanced view of Islam, it ultimately fails to adequately confront the fundamental theological errors and dangers inherent in Islamic doctrine, instead offering a dangerously relativistic framework that undermines the exclusive salvific mission of the Catholic Church.
The Danger of Theological Relativism
Simonson’s commentary, while well-intentioned, falls into the trap of modernist indifferentism condemned by Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors. He describes Islam as “a mixture of affirming, as well as denying, those truths that compose the Truth,” suggesting that Islam contains partial truths that can be harmonized with Catholic doctrine. This is precisely the error condemned in Quas Primas, where Pius XI warns against equating Christianity with other religions. The Catholic Church has always taught that she alone possesses the fullness of truth, and that other religions, while they may contain elements of natural truth, are fundamentally deficient and cannot lead to salvation.
The article’s charitable tone toward Islam, while admirable in terms of natural virtue, fails to recognize the supernatural danger posed by a religion that explicitly denies the divinity of Christ, the Holy Trinity, and the salvific nature of the Cross. As St. Pius X warned in Lamentabili sane exitu, the modernist error consists precisely in treating religious truths as subject to historical development and cultural interpretation, rather than as immutable divine revelations.
The Sacrifice of Isaac: A Prophetic Mystery Denied
Simonson correctly identifies the near-sacrifice of Isaac as a foreshadowing of Christ’s sacrifice, but fails to draw the necessary theological conclusions. The article notes that Islamic tradition substitutes Ishmael for Isaac, but does not adequately condemn this as a deliberate distortion of Sacred Scripture designed to sever the prophetic lineage leading to Christ. This is not merely an academic quibble but a fundamental attack on the economy of salvation.
The Catholic Church teaches that the Old Testament sacrifices, including that of Isaac, were types and figures of the one true sacrifice of Calvary. By substituting Ishmael for Isaac, Islam effectively denies the prophetic typology that points to Christ as the fulfillment of God’s promises to Abraham. This is consistent with Islam’s broader rejection of the supernatural order and its reduction of religion to mere natural morality.
The Nature of God: Transcendence vs. Immanence
The article contrasts the Islamic concept of God with the Christian understanding, noting that Islam emphasizes God’s transcendence while Christianity emphasizes His immanence. However, this comparison is superficial and fails to address the fundamental theological errors in Islamic doctrine.
Islam’s strict monotheism, while affirming God’s unity, denies the Holy Trinity, which is the central mystery of the Catholic faith. The article quotes the Quranic verse “I did not create jinn and humans except to worship me” (51:56), but fails to note that this reduces the purpose of creation to mere servitude, rather than the supernatural union with God that is the ultimate end of human existence. As the Syllabus of Errors condemns, the modernist error consists in reducing religion to natural morality and denying the supernatural order.
The Problem of Religious Liberty
Simonson’s charitable conclusion, “Eid Mubarak,” while well-meaning, reflects the modernist error of religious indifferentism. The Catholic Church has always taught that there is no right to error, and that the state has a duty to recognize the true religion and protect it from false worship. As Pius IX declared in Quanta Cura, the proposition that “every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true” is a condemned error.
The article’s failure to adequately condemn Islamic errors while maintaining a charitable tone toward individual Muslims reflects the post-conciliar confusion between tolerance of persons and tolerance of error. The Catholic Church has always distinguished between the sinner, who is to be loved and prayed for, and the sin, which is to be condemned and rejected.
The Necessity of Conversion
While Simonson’s personal conversion from Islam to Catholicism is commendable, the article fails to adequately emphasize the necessity of conversion for all Muslims. The Catholic Church teaches that outside the Church there is no salvation, and that all men are called to enter the Church through baptism and faith in Christ.
The article’s relativistic approach to Islam, while perhaps intended to foster dialogue and understanding, ultimately undermines the Church’s missionary mandate. As Pius XI declared in Quas Primas, the Church has a duty to teach, govern, and lead all men to eternal happiness, and this includes calling Muslims to conversion and baptism.
Conclusion
Simonson’s commentary, while containing some valid observations about the differences between Islam and Christianity, ultimately falls into the modernist trap of religious indifferentism. By treating Islam as a partial truth rather than a fundamental error, the article fails to adequately defend the exclusive salvific mission of the Catholic Church. The Catholic response to Islam must be one of firm theological clarity combined with supernatural charity, recognizing that true love for our Muslim neighbors requires calling them to the fullness of truth found only in the Catholic Church.
Source:
What Eid Tells Us About Islam and Christianity (ncregister.com)
Date: 27.05.2026