The difficult questions

Persecuted Christians, forced to emigrate or to convert in Iraq, oppressed by the lack of stability and employment in the Holy Land, restricted, or even hindered, in their right to the freedom of religion and worship in almost all Islamic-majority Countries. Seen from this perspective, the foreshadowed clash of civilizations – in this case involving Muslims and Christians – would appear to be true. However, according to Samir Khalil Samir, Egyptian Jesuit priest, one of the major experts in Christianity and Islam, professor of Arabic and Islamic culture and history and founder of Cedrac, Centre de Documentation et de Recherches Arabes Chrétiennes, the clash can lead to an encounter. Dialogue is important, but it’s even more important for the West not to adopt an attitude of closure vis à vis Islamic acts of violence. This would risk confining Muslims to fundamentalism. At the same time however, the Islamic world can repose its hopes in a cultured Islam in Europe, a Westernization which does not reject faith. Daniele Rocchi interviewed Father Samir, who addressed these issues at length on the occasion of a meeting on religious freedom held in Amman, Jordan, promoted by the Study Centre Oasis, which is part of the Patriarchate of Venice. Do the difficulties experienced by Christian communities in the Middle East render dialogue with Islam an act of will, or is it instead the result of a need? “There is a risk that dialogue may constitute a necessity for Christians. The reason lies in the fact that Muslims don’t feel the need to engage in dialogue, since they represent the majority. Indeed, the major difficulty experienced by Muslims lies in the fact that having lived practically always on their own, they have not gone through the experience of being a minority group. As a matter of fact, when they become numerous, they start to claim independent stands. This happened in different places, in Mindanao, in Kosovo, in the Philippines. Islam has it own system, whereby minorities are being integrated through coercion. They are simply grabted their freedom of worship. Muslims cannot live as a minority, they are not aware of the difficulties experienced by the other. Thus, Christians living in Muslim Countries have two possibilities: they can either confine themselves in ghettos and live there independently – a solution chosen by many migrants, but not by Christians born in Muslim Countries who reject the idea of being perceived as strangers – or else they can resort to dialogue for their own survival. This is a positive approach, since it leads Christians to do what they should, that is, engage in dialogue. In order to survive, minorities ought to be clever, strong, and develop different professional skills. This will enable them to integrate and occupy pre-eminent social positions”.In Europe Islam is a minority: is this where integration difficulties stem from? “It’s one of the few cases where Muslims are a minority, in spite of themselves. They claim a series of things, such as the land to build their mosques, as if they were living in their native Countries where the government accounts for these needs. They are used not to separate the religious and the political sphere. For example, they ask to change working or school hours on the occasion of Ramadan festivities. Social life is managed by the State on the basis of Muslim precepts. In European States, marked by a secular approach, this is unheard of. This leads to the question regarding integration. Integration is difficult, since European societies no longer recognize the value of religion, which is practically confined to the personal sphere instead of being given public relevance. A secularized society makes Muslims’ integration harder. It would have been better if it had been Christian. A step in this direction is therefore crucial”. Which?“That of saying: I accept to be a European Muslim. In Islam, like in all religions except for Christianity, race, origin, and the religion itself, create unity. Religion transmits a sense of belonging. Christianity is bound to no specific culture. This is made clear in the Gospels since its very nature is universal. In our world it’s important to be able to say I am Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, and I am American, French, Italian. In the past, if you were Arab you were necessarily also Muslim, if you were Algerian you were Muslim. Now this is no longer the case and we must accept, for example, that there may be Christian Algerians. This outlook entails serious problems regarding freedom of conscience, since non-Muslims are accused of breaking national unity. For the Muslims arriving in Europe, the definition of ‘European’ means to be a foreigner. This is a hard task, but Europe has the duty to help Muslims take this step as brothers: they need to be encouraged to be good Muslims of German, French, Italian nationality. Christians can help Muslims reconcile the two integral identities. Islam ought to be helped to separate politics from religion and the West can achieve this task by putting a check on the fundamentalist requests made in Europe on the veil, on licit meat, on the freedom of Muslim teaching and regarding the mosques where religious claims conceal political stances”. Do you mean to say that Christianity could help Islam discover its secular trait? “Christianity is a chance for Islam and the flee of Christians from Muslim Countries would be a tragedy especially for the entire Middle East. There are 22 Arab Countries, one of these is not Muslim, and that is Lebanon, an Islamic-Christian Country. The remaining 21 are all Islamic States. The difference is evident also in the attitude of Lebanese Muslims who are more open, tolerant and modern, open to discuss their religion. This is due to the fact that they live with a different culture, which in this case is Christian. To accept being a Muslim doesn’t only mean following specific dietary rules, just like having a nationality does not rule out traditions or religious precepts. It simply entails speaking its language, knowing its culture and its lifestyle. The alternative is to remain at the margins without integrating. The only solution is that of accepting a multiple identity which will harmonize the different realities we live in”. Could this identity you describe be the feature of a European Islam? “It’s my hope. The hope for Islam lies in Europe. Without a European Islam the present conflict will continue. Muslim population is paying the price of these conflicts. It’s not the Wesa that is paying the highest price of Islamic violence: 200thousand were killed in Algeria, tens of thousand victims in Iraq, along with the wars in Iran and Lebanon. Islam identifies itself with culture. To emerge from a culture and enter another can help have a clearer view of one’s faith. This is the challenge for Islam: being able to confront other cultures and religions”.By paradox, could Europe encourage Muslim-Christian dialogue along with Muslims’ integration by recovering its Christian culture? “Certainly, but it doesn’t happen. Europe tends to ascribe practically the same value to all cultures and religions, but this implies keeping them stuck in the past. Immigrants’ tragedy is that they are influenced by their past, but when living in a different culture, and in a different Country, it’s important to look ahead and accept its rules otherwise it’s preferable to return to one’s Country of origin. I am European not because I was born in a European Country but because this is my choice”. Turkey requested adhesion to Europe. Do you agree? “Given the present state of things, I don’t agree with Turkey’s entrance in the EU, at least until it has clarified its identity. At the moment there are two opposing secular and Islamic trends. The secularity of Ataturk was imposed, now it’s important to choose. Once the issue is solved, it will be clearer whether the Country’s orientation is European. The Turks are free to decide. Europe shouldn’t be the one to decide for them. I don’t accept Europe’s pressure on Turkey, since it is motivated by economic interests. Turkey is a market of 80 million people. Economic foundation is not enough. Everything cannot be reduced to economy. I’m not concerned about the 15 million Muslims living in Europe but about the absence of a Christian conscience in European society. If we aren’t clear about our identity, we cannot engage in dialogue with anyone”. Benedict XVI often underlines the question of identity in the dialogue. Analysts have seen this as renouncing or distancing from inter-religious dialogue… “Benedict XVI didn’t renounce dialogue, he only stressed a series of underlying conditions for its prosecution. No violence, freedom of conscience, freedom of proclamation in reciprocity. I believe that he has re-launched this dialogue, placing special emphasis upon the identity of the partners in the dialogue, and not on the exchange of favours. This can happen in everyday life for reasons of coexistence, but not at theoretical level. Christians will never recognize Mohammed as God’s messenger or the Koran as the Book revealed by God since it would contradict their own faith. In the same way, Muslims will never say that Christ is the Son of God. This takes nothing away from dialogue and friendship, which is strengthened by the good will of all the parties. The Pope’s stand is firm as relates to issues such as the freedom of conscience. Over a month ago Benedict XVI recalled that evangelization is a necessity for Christians. A cultivated and intelligent Imam in Beirut aggressively replied that we’ve gone back to the Middle Ages. But this is not the case: I grant you the freedom of proclaiming the Koran as a source of life and if you don’t do so you’re an infidel. But I have the same right. We cannot discuss doctrine. Instead, we can discuss human rights, equality, and freedom. This stand is in continuity with John Paul II. Dialogue must take place in an atmosphere of truth and love”.