Jaarboek Thomas Instituut 2006 - Thomas Instituut te Utrecht

56 PIM VALKENBERG
did not intend to lead men to that goal-of-rest to which Christ
showed the way but rather sought his own glory under the
guise of that goal. A comparison of the law of Christ with the
law of Muhammad wiIl teach [us] that both of these
[alternatives] must believed to be true. I believe that the
following must be maintained: viz. that ignorance was the
cause of [Muhammad's] error and malevolence. For no one
who is acquainted with Christ disagrees with Him or detracts
from Him. Now, my intention is as follows: having
presupposed the Gospel of Christ, to scrutinize the book of
Muhammad and to show that even in it there are contained
those [teachings] through which the Gospel would be
altogether confirmed, were it in need of confirmation, and that
wherever [the Koran] disagrees [with Christ], this
[disagreement] has resulted from Muhammad's ignorance and,
following [thereupon], from his perverse intent. For whereas
Christ sought not His own glory but the glory of God-the­
Father and the salvation of men, Muhammad sought not the
glory of God and the salvation of men but rather his own
glory."
47 "Ego ingenium applicui vt etiam ex alchoran euangelium verum
ostenderem, et vt faciliter fieri posit compendiosum meum conceptum paucis
premittam. Experimus in nobis appetitum quondam esse qui ob motum qui in
eo est spiritus dicitur quodque ratio motus ipsius est bonum. In ratione enim
boni mouetur appetitus.Sic videmus bonum sua vi trahere spiritum nostrum:
ac quod nulla est alia ratio cur bonum appetitur: nisi quia bonum: finis igitur
desiderii. [... ] Iesus autem virginis marie filius christus ille per moysen et
prophetas prenunciatus venturus venit, et viam sepedictam cum nihil
ignoraret manifestissime propalauit: attestante enim mahmet. Certum est
igitur quod qui christum et viam eius sequitur ad comprehensionem desiderati
boni perueniet. Unde si mahmet in aliquot christo dissentit, neeesse est vt hoc
aut faciat ignorantia quia christum non sciuit nee intellexit, aut peruersitas
intentionis, quia non intendebat homines ducere ad ilium finem quietis ad
quem christus viam ostendit, sed sub colore illius finis suiipsius gloriam
quesiuit. Utrumque autem verum credi oportere comparatio legis Christi ad
legem ipsius docebit. Tenendum credimus ignorantiarn erroris et maliuolentie
causam esse. Nemo enim cognoscens christum dissentit ab ipso: aut detrahit
eidem. Intentio autem nostra est presupposito euangelio Christi Iibrum
mahmet cribrare et ostendere ilia in ipso etiam libro haberi per que
euangelium si attestatione indigeret valde confirmaretur, et quod vbi dissentit
hoc ex ignorantia et consequenter ex peruersitate intenti mahmet euenisse:
christo non suam gloriam: sed dei patris: et hominum salutem. Mahmet vero
non dei gloriam et hominum salutem, sed gloriam propriam querente."