In The Name of Allaah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

A person asked, “In the name of Unity, two Christian leaders agree to allow something that is prohibited in the pure teachings of all the Prophets. One of them says that he is happy that some of his brethren in faith – amongst their religious leaders – will be allowed to offer blessings to two people who seek a marriage contract that is forbidden by the Lord, but he will not get involved personally. Is this not absurd or tantamount to making a mockery of religion ‘In The Name of Unity?!”

Response: In order to understand the basis of the misguidance of the Christian Priests in relation to terms and expressions, one must refer back to a precise statement of Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah [may Allaah have mercy upon him]. He said, “It obligatory to know that the reason behind the misguidance of the Christians and their ilk – amongst those who go beyond bounds, such as those devoted in worship, the Shiites and other than them- is due to three affairs: firstly, utilizing ambiguous general terms and terms that are difficult to understand, and then turning away from terms that are clear and unambiguous. Whenever they hear a term that carries ambiguity, they cling to it and embrace it in their religion, even if it not a proof for it. As for the explicitly clear terms that are in opposition to their path, either they abstain from utilizing them or give them a false interpretation just as the people of falsehood do”. (1)

As for some of those who ascribe to Islam, Shaikhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah [may Allaah have mercy upon him] said, “The one who does not know the language of the Prophet’s companions- the language they used when speaking to (one another), the (language) used by the Prophet [peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him] when he spoke to them and the manner in which they spoke in general, he will change words from their right places. For indeed many people are nurtured upon the idioms of their people and their customary usage of words, so he finds those words in Allaah’s Speech or the speech of Messenger or that of the Prophet companions and thinks that what Allaah intends or what His Messenger (intend), or what the companions (intend) is what is intended by the people of his custom and their oral expressions, even though what Allaah and His Messenger intend is the opposite of that. This occurred from a group of people- the people of philosophical rhetoric, the people who spoke about Fiqh, the people who spoke about the Arabic language, the common people and other than them. And there are others who deliberately devise other meanings for the words of the Prophets and that of their [true] followers-meanings that are in opposition to their (true) ones. Then they spoke with those words whilst intending to aid themselves, saying: ‘’Indeed, we are in agreement with the Prophets.’’ This is found in abundance in the speech of the heretical philosophers, the Ismaa’eeliyyah (Rawaafid) and those similar to them amongst the heretical philosophers, rhetoricians and the soofees. The one who (truly) knows the Prophets and what they intend (by their speech) he will know by necessity that the (speech of those heretics) is not what is intended by the Prophets”. (2)

Finally, unity can be a praiseworthy word; however, they’ve utilised it to agree upon sin and as a weapon against those who reject this agreement, and those who enjoin good and forbid evil.

[Ref 1: An Excerpt from Al-Jawaabus Saheeh Liman Baddal Deen Al-Maseeh. Vol 1. Pages 277-278]
[Ref 2: Al-Haqeeqatus Shar’iyyah Fee Tafseeril Qur’aan Al-A’dheem Was-Sunnatin Nabawiyyah’ page 17]