Conference: “The Religious Roots of Contemporary European Identity”
Cambridge, 10 July 2006

President of the International Council of Christians and Jews,
Distinguished Guests,
Ladies and Gentlemen:

It is a pleasure to be with you today at this famous, prestigious place of
knowledge – at the University of Cambridge. I am grateful for the opportunity
provided by this conference to share some thoughts on the European identity, on
the dialogue between cultures, and on religions. I congratulate the Centre for the
Study of Jewish–Christian Relations and the Centre for Research in the Arts, Social
Sciences and Humanities for organising this event.

Objective reflection on contemporary European identity is much needed at
the present stage of Europe’s process of integration. There has been a lively debate
on European identity in the past few months; it seems that Europe is engaged in a
serious soul–searching exercise—and not a moment too soon. More and more in
the process of integration issues of identity, citizenship, borders and cultures of
Europe are discussed.

There are several historical reasons for this; let me just point out one for
your consideration. The 2004 enlargement increased the internal diversity of the
Union and brought its eventual borders in sight. From 2007 on we will have 23
official languages (Bulgarian, Romanian and Irish added) using three alphabets
(Cyrillic comes to join Latin and Greek ones). But this diversity should not be seen
as a problem, but as our definition, our genetics. It makes Europe the Europe. Now
that we can see what may well become our final geographical limits, the next
obvious question is: “What is it exactly that these borders encompass”?

The question is logically unavoidable, because any discourse about borders –
geographical as well as metaphysical – entails ontological questions. However, the
political implications are much more important. As a matter of fact, if one can
answer questions such as “What is Europe?” or “What does it mean to be
European?”, one will find it easier to answer more political questions, such as
“What do we want the Union to be and to do?”. These are important questions for
Europe’s political leaders today, whether they are national leaders or – like myself –
politicians with the mandate to defend and develop the interests of the Union as a
whole.

But this conference wants to explore the relationship between religion and
European identity, and this adds a fascinating twist to the debate. The countries that
have joined the Union over the years have widened the spectrum of its intellectual
and political traditions. The enlarged Union is a more European one, is a more
complete community of European states and people.

As regards the relationship between religion and the state, some national
traditions are more secular than others. As a consequence, I believe that religious
issues are inevitably part of any debate about European identity. Peoples’ beliefs
and convictions are in the centre of their cultures, they influence or steer their
behaviour and relations. However, this should not be used as a means of pre
empting the debate.

Of course, we also need to integrate histories, values and world views that go
beyond faith and beliefs. I am convinced that communities of faith and conviction
should be an important part of a wider intercultural dialogue.

---

When it comes to imagining a collective identity for the peoples of Europe,
we cannot draw many lessons from history; our process of integration is too recent
and too unique. Europe is far more diverse – in real and in symbolic terms – than
any of its national and sub-national communities. And let us remember that Europe
is already very much a multicultural society.

The notion of European identity is difficult to pin down, but I think that it
has two dimensions:

An internal dimension that corresponds to the efforts to bring together the
countries, regions, and peoples of Europe while preserving their diversity.

An external dimension that corresponds to the attempt of defining ourselves as
non-Americans, non-Asians, etc.

I think that in both respects we should resist the temptation to define Europe
solely in terms of its oppositions. To borrow Prof. Mach’s formulation, we should
not limit ourselves to asking questions such as: “Who are we in relation to them?”
and “Who are they in relation to us?”

In our quest for Europe’s identity, we will never reach a crossroads where
we have to decide to take either the right or the left. Europe will always be a
pluralist community and one that evolves dynamically over time. This pluralism
stems precisely from our diversity. However, as we all know, diversity can often
be a source of divergence and conflict.

Europe was a cradle of democracy, civic society, international law, theatre,
Olympic ideals … But concentration camps, gulags, and gas chambers have been
invented and used en masse in Europe, too. Our history and development always
depend on our commitment to universal human values. And, first of all, it depends
from our commitment to human dignity for all and everywhere. Free, democratic,
integrated Europe can be based only on free, democratic and cohesive societies and
their states. This challenge is in the hands of all citizens, but especially in those of
power-holders (policy-makers, media, economic actors …). But academia,
educators, religious leaders, cultural figures may provide also strong input.

We need to step up in our debates from passive descriptions of multi-cultural
realities and problems in our countries and in the Union towards a more active
inter-cultural approach. It starts by curiosity, knowledge, leads to dialogue and
mutual respect. Inter–religious dialogue should represent a parallel to the wider
intercultural dialogue, with a lot of interdependence.

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I believe that people tend to understand each other’s viewpoint, if they are
open. The right conditions are also very helpful. Setting the right conditions for
dialogue is the main rationale behind an initiative of the European Commission that
is very close to my heart: the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue. I launched
the idea as soon as I was appointed Commissioner for education and culture. My
proposal quickly gathered consensus and it is now planned for 2008.

Why should the Union work on intercultural dialogue now? Because the
cultural landscape of Europe has been changing fast over the past few years:

A number of countries – including my native Slovakia – have joined the Union;

European integration has become a reality for thousands of fellow citizens who
move across the Union for work, study and leisure;

And then there are the effects of globalisation: growing exchanges of material
and symbolic goods and increased migratory flows around the world.

As a result, Europeans today come into contact with different cultures,
languages, and religions as never before. This holds out tremendous opportunities,
but also poses a serious challenge.

European Union has chosen its motto in the words diversity in unity.
Through enlargements and migration, diversity is growing evidently. For the sake
of cohesion it is important to deepen also the unity. And real unity is possible only
around common values, not around geography or the single market. Human
dignity, freedom, justice, solidarity – these are fundamental values important for all
of us – individually and collectively. We have to promote them in everyday life and
decision-making. We think of diversity as a distinctive feature, a source of
symbolic and material wealth, and the important principle of our process of
integration.

Unfortunately – as we all know – this attitude has come under strain in the
past few years. Our societies have been shaken by violent conflicts. There are
worrying signs that racism, xenophobia and intolerance are raising their ugly heads
again – in Europe and in other parts of the world. There may be several reasons for
this: ranging from cultural disorientation and social exclusion, to simple economic
factors.

However, the common denominator is that people fear and reject what they
do not know. I believe that ignorance is the main factor. Ignorance breeds
intolerance!
This is why I thought this was the time to put dialogue between
cultures more firmly on the European agenda.

If we are serious about forging closer links between the peoples living in
Europe, the very first condition is that we get to know each other better. We should
raise the awareness of European citizens and of those living in the Union about the
need for intercultural dialogue. Schools have to provide children with inter alia
better competence in languages, history and culture, educate for mature citizenship
and responsibility. We should develop social and personal habits that will make it
easier for us to deal with a more open and complex cultural environment.

Finally, we also need to create the right conditions to enable people to feel a
part of Europe and to understand the European citizenship which belongs to them.
The Union is not Brussels: we all are the Union.

---

As I said earlier, inter-religious dialogue should be part of this process. Here,
I would like to add a couple of reasons to those I’ve already given.

First, intolerance should be unacceptable to those who subscribe to a
universal system of belief. Human behaviour is a function of culture. And culture is
defined by people´s faith and conviction. The religions of the Book, the main
religions in Europe – Christianity, Judaism, and Islam – promote unconditional
respect for what is essential to mankind. Therefore it should in principle be easy for
goodwill men and women of faith to seek avenues of mutual understanding
between peoples and to join forces to fight intolerance and violence.

Second, inter–religious dialogue can meet the demand for a sense of
meaning that comes from society, especially among the most excluded. Frequent
expressions of hatred towards the other – along ethnic, religious, or other lines – are
simply the symptom of an empty cultural landscape and an inarticulate sense of
self. For dialogue to be significant, it should be based on the acceptance of cultural
and religious diversity, a genuine effort to understand others, and mutual respect.

In this perspective, getting to know another culture or religion is like
embarking on a voyage. And those who have travelled abroad to discover new
unknown territories (terra incognita) know that you always return to find that the
journey has changed you. Such journey may bring us from our local and regional
space through national and continental dimensions to the global world, to discover
a mosaic of universal human family. I am giving you this comparison because I
want to make a point that I regard as a precondition to any form of dialogue. And a
real dialogue is more than an exchange of two monologues. One plus one can be
more than two when understanding or mutual enrichment or sympathy is created.

It takes courage to leave home, because we do not know which parts of
ourselves will be different when we return. Any community of faith and conviction
that is serious about dialogue will have to reflect on its own attitude on this one
point before setting sail. With this in mind, it should be perfectly clear that we
regard religious communities as essential for our efforts to prevent conflict and
social strife, promote peace, support democracy, and uphold human rights.

The EU is respectful of all churches and religious communities in their own
right and appreciates the good work they do in our societies. For years, the
Commission has engaged in dialogue with them. At present, there are over 50
religious organisations represented in Brussels and they meet the European
Commission on a regular basis.

In addition, we have many examples of the excellent work religious
organisations carry out, in particular with young people. Some of them already
have a unique and specific expertise in intercultural dialogue. We want to involve
communities of faith and belief in our efforts, because I am sure they will in turn
bring a wealth of experience and enthusiasm from many committed individuals.

The European Year of intercultural dialogue will provide a unique
opportunity to raise awareness and to exchange best practice. We want to ensure
that it has a long-lasting impact and marks the beginning of what will be a long
term process. Of course, the intercultural dialogue will be nurtured also by our
community program Culture 2007 which starts in January and will keep running for
the next seven years.

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I have said that developing a sense of belonging to Europe was among the
desirable outcomes of the work we plan to do on intercultural dialogue. We want to
contribute to creating the right conditions for people to have a more active sense of
European citizenship. The decisive conditions for a coherent future of the EU are:

1) Consciousness of togetherness, of belonging

2) Shared responsibility
As regards European identity – whatever form it takes – it will always be
about an open-ended, diverse and pluralist interaction. It will always look like a
dynamic process rather than something clearly defined and static.
I am convinced that this lies at the heart of our process of integration and this
is the main idea I wanted to share with you today.
What are the forces that will drive this process on?
Respect for diversity,
Eager curiosity to find out about the ways and beliefs of others, and
An effort to build lasting and peaceful relations between different cultures and
visions of the world.

I am certain that all the communities of faith and conviction that are active
on the territory of the EU will help us to reach these goals. Thanks for your
individual and joint engagements. Speaking to the ICCJ I have to remind that
Judeo-Christian roots of Europe are the oldest and the boldest ones. They represent
an undeniable contribution to European values. Roots are important not only in
nature, but also in society. According to a recent Eurobarometer survey (Special
Eurobarometer 225 on “Social values, Science and Technology”), 52 % citizens of
EU25 believe in God and additional 27 % in a spiritual life or force.

European identity and our community are built on cultural, religious and
humanist inheritance. Our unity is not defined by geography, business or market.
We all recall that the founding fathers of the Community were men of deep, active
faith. Therefore they were strong architects of reconciliation and international
relations based on the respect for human rights, on the rule of law, not force. This
led to European stability, security and prosperity.

This European mission is not completed:

1) Upbringing to humanity and solidarity is a permanent task, repetitively needed in
every new generation. Every generation must embrace its responsibility for
freedom, democracy, and community.

2) Enlargement respectively accession process continues. It is in Europe’s interest.
Mature enlargement is not a problem for the European Union; it’s part of a solution
to problems.

I wish you a successful and inspiring conference here, in Cambridge.
Thank you.