Sometimes the question is raised whether there exists a need for a European Islam. Hereafter I defend that at its core there is no need for such a thing and that it certainly is not up to atheists like myself to create something like a European Islam. I do believe that in the margins there might be room for a European “format”. I will explain that at another time in another text.
Of course we should not be naïve and be aware that if European governments apply the principle of separation between state and religion, the outcome may be that in practice Moroccan, Turkish, Saudi or Qatari governments organize Islam in our cities or preach their versions of Islam in our land. We should ensure that this does not happen.
What we can however offer to the Islam in Europe is a critical dialogue with Islam. Such a critical dialogue is not possible in its homelands, be it Saudi-Arabia or Iran. We can question the key values and their underpinning, their sources and the basic reasonings. We can question whether practices are really religious or rather cultural. However, again we should not be naïve.
In November 2014 the eminent Flemish professors Rik Torfs and Etienne Vermeersch gave an interview in the Flemish newspaper De Standaard. Earlier, Etienne Vermeersch, renowned atheist, had in another discussion with a hijab wearing muslima on television, stated in a very affirmative way that the Quran did not impose the wearing of the hijab. In the interview in de Standaard of November 2014, Rik Torfs, professor at (and at that moment also Rector of) the KUL questioned why the atheist professor tried to convince the Muslima of his point of view. According to the catholic professor, there was no reason why the atheist professor would intervene in what the catholic professor called an internal religious debate. According to me, Vermeersch answered correctly that his only intention was to correct a wrong statement by the muslima. Whether Vermeersch was correct with his statement on the hijab is in this context irrelevant. What we see at work is how an overall “rationalist” catholic professor tries to stonewall religious discussions against an atheist discours.
In his book “Snow”, the Turkish Nobel Prize winner Orhan Pamuk describes a discussion with a muslima who states that “when God makes a clear and definite command, it’s not a matter for ordinary mortals to question”. However , she adds : “but do not assume from this that our religion leaves no room for discussion.” But she concludes : “I will say that I’m not prepared to discuss my faith with an atheist – or even a secularist. I beg your pardon.” (page 114)
These two examples demonstrate a refusal by religious people to discuss the religious phenomenon with outsiders. Religious people might prefer to flee (hide) in their “mental parallel-communities”, but that is something the Free, Critical West should not allow.
