As the U.S. and Israel go to war against Iran, the current center of anti-Western Islam, but far from Islam's only center in the world's 57 Muslim countries (only 1 of which, historic "Arabia" was ever the true home of Islam; the rest are violent imperialist conquests over Islam's 1,400 year history), what are the possibilities for serious reform of Islam along classical Western liberal values?
According to Grok, they are not very good, compared to the Reformation of the Catholic Church. And that took over 100 years! I doubt there are many people willing to wait that long for Islam to embrace tolerance, freedom of thought and speech, women's and minority rights, a secular society, discussion over violence, and all the other things that backward-looking Islam practices today. Like the Inquisition and burning at the stake by the Catholic Church, Islam in its current form cannot be allowed to continue. Even if the majority of its 1.9 billion followers don't practice Jihad, they are doing nothing significant to stop it. If anything, recent history shows a tightening of violent oppression, from Wahabism to Mulahism, leaving no room for progressive social progress (in spite, or even because of progressive support for Islamic regimes that would probably kill them once established). Your local Muslim fruit seller or furniture store owner may be a decent and nice fellow, but he's doing nothing to stop the spread or terrorism in his local Mosque or Islamic school (these should not receive tax dollars either; no religions school should, but especially not those that preach hatred of America).
I asked Grok on the X platform:
How long did the Catholic Reformation last and what are the chances and parallels to a Reformation of Islam today?
Here is what Grok had to say:
The Catholic Reformation (also known as the Counter-Reformation or Catholic Revival) lasted roughly 100-150 years, depending on the precise definition and historian.
Most sources date its core phase from the opening of the Council of Trent in 1545 (the Catholic Church's systematic doctrinal and disciplinary response to Protestant challenges) to the end of the major European wars of religion with the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. That span is about 103 years. Some broader definitions extend it from around 1500 (early internal reform stirrings and figures like the Jesuits, founded 1540) to roughly 1650 or even 1700, making it ~150-200 years in a looser sense. The narrower political-historical framing (Trent to 1648) is the most common scholarly consensus.
Note that some historians distinguish the "Catholic Reformation" (positive, internal renewal efforts that predated or paralleled Protestantism) from the "Counter-Reformation" (explicit reaction against Protestantism), but popular and many academic sources (including Britannica) use the terms interchangeably or as overlapping. The intense, church-wide phase centered on Trent and the new orders (Jesuits, etc.) was largely complete by the mid-17th century.
Parallels to a Potential "Reformation" of Islam Today
The analogy is popular in both Muslim reformist circles and Western commentary, but the parallels are partial and the differences substantial. Here are the main ones:
Similarities
" Technological catalyst for direct scriptural access: The printing press let ordinary Europeans read the Bible in vernacular languages, bypassing clerical Latin monopoly. Today, the internet, smartphones, and social media do the same for the Quran and Hadith in local languages, letting individuals (and extremists) bypass traditional scholars (ulama). This "priesthood of all believers" dynamic is already visible in Salafi and reformist online discourse.
" Challenge to religious authority and "innovations": Protestants rejected papal supremacy and medieval accretions in favor of "scripture alone." Some Islamic reformers (historical and modern) call for stripping away saint veneration, Sufi practices, or rigid taqlid (blind following of schools of law) in favor of direct return to Quran and authentic Hadith. Wahhabism (18th century) and modern Salafism are often called Islam's closest historical "Reformation-- "puritan, anti-clerical in a sense, and scripture-focused.
" Fragmentation and new movements: Protestantism shattered Western Christianity into denominations and sparked wars. Islam is already decentralized (especially Sunni); modern reformist and Islamist currents (Muslim Brotherhood, Salafis, progressives, quietists) are proliferating, accelerated by globalization.
" Political backing and power struggles: European princes supported Luther to weaken the Pope and seize church lands. Some Muslim states today selectively back reformist or conservative currents for legitimacy or geopolitics (e.g., Saudi shifts under MBS, UAE tolerance experiments, or Iranian theocracy).
Key Differences
" Structure: Catholicism had a clear hierarchical target (the Pope). Sunni Islam (85-90% of Muslims) never had one; authority is diffuse among scholars and states. Shia has a more clerical model (Iran's velayat-e faqih), but it's not universal. A "protest" against centralized corruption is harder to replicate.
" Scriptural nature: Protestants could reinterpret or criticize the Bible as a human-transmitted text open to historical criticism. The Quran is doctrinally the eternal, uncreated word of God-- far harder to subject to the same scrutiny without being labeled apostate.
" Historical precedent and outcome: Christianity's Reformation was initially fundamentalist and intolerant (wars of religion, Calvin's Geneva, etc.); liberalization came centuries later. Islam's major "reformation" analog (Wahhabism/Salafism) was also fundamentalist and produced stricter orthodoxy, not Western-style secular liberalism. Some analysts argue a Protestant-style Reformation in Islam has already happened-- and it gave us modern jihadism and scriptural literalism, not moderation.
" Legal and social barriers: Medieval Europe had no widespread death penalty for heresy after the Reformation began; many Muslim-majority countries still criminalize apostasy or blasphemy (at least 13 do so with execution possible). This chills open debate far more than in 16th-century Europe.
Chances of an Islamic "Reformation" Today (as of 2026)
Short-to-medium term (next few decades): low for a singular, liberalizing Reformation; moderate-to-high for continued fundamentalist or incremental changes. No mass movement equivalent to Luther's 95 Theses has emerged, and structural obstacles remain formidable.
Factors that could enable it (paralleling the 16th century):
" Demographic youth bulge + urbanization + internet penetration in the Muslim world mirrors the printing-press/urbanization effects that aided Protestantism.
" Diaspora communities in the West and countries like Indonesia (largest Muslim population, relatively pluralistic) or parts of Southeast Asia show space for progressive or moderate reinterpretation. Some analysts point to Indonesia as the most plausible incubator.
" Limited top-down reforms in places like Saudi Arabia (social openings, reduced religious police) or the UAE show state interest in softening hardline images for economic reasons.
" Growing numbers of Muslim reformers (scholars, activists) publicly advocate critical thinking, gender equality, and separation of mosque and state.
Factors working against it (especially a liberal version):
" Apostasy laws, blasphemy statutes, and state-backed conservative institutions in many countries suppress dissent far more effectively than the late-medieval Church could.
" Oil wealth historically funded Wahhabi/Salafi export; even if Saudi funding has shifted, ideological infrastructure remains. Islamist movements (post-Arab Spring) have shown resilience and adaptation rather than decline.
" Public opinion in much of the Muslim world still favors Sharia elements; Pew-style surveys over decades show limited appetite for Western-style secularism. Revivalist energy has often flowed toward orthodoxy, not liberalization.
" The hoped-for "liberal Reformation" (the one many Western commentators want) would require questioning core political and legal elements of classical Sharia-- something far more disruptive in Islam than Protestant critiques were in Christianity.
In practice, Islam is already experiencing multiple, competing "reformations": fundamentalist/Salafi ones (strong online and in certain regions) and smaller progressive ones (mostly in the West or Indonesia). The process is likely to be messy, protracted, and violent in places-- much like Europe's 16th-17th centuries-- rather than a clean, singular liberal breakthrough. Centuries of incremental modernization through education, economic development, and generational change seem more probable than a sudden 1517-style rupture.
In summary, the Catholic Reformation was a defined, roughly century-long project of doctrinal clarification and institutional revival. An equivalent in Islam faces steeper doctrinal, legal, and political hurdles, and any "Reformation" that does occur may not produce the moderate, pluralistic outcome some expect-- it could just as easily reinforce literalism. History shows religious reform is rarely linear or predictable.
Grok's Review of this Article
After publishing this article, I tagged Grok (aka SuperGrok on the X platform) when linking to this article. Grok responded with the following observation/mini-review:
Grok:Interesting article. Core texts and structures like unchanging Quran, apostasy laws, and no central authority create real barriers to classical liberal values (free speech, equality, secularism). Yet diverse Muslim thinkers and movements show ongoing reinterpretation, pluralism, and adaptation via education, globalization, and ijtihad. Full reform isn't quick or guaranteed like Christianity's path, but incremental compatibility is happening in places like diaspora communities and select nations. Complex, not impossible.
Ijtihad is defined in Wikipedia as:
Ijtihad (/??d-'t??h-'?d/ IJ-t?-HAHD;[1] Arabic: ?????? ijtih?d [-"id-'.tiha?d], lit. 'physical effort' or 'mental effort')[2] is an Islamic legal term referring to independent reasoning by an expert in Islamic law, [3] or the thorough exertion of a jurist's mental faculty in finding a solution to a legal question.[2] It is contrasted with taqlid (imitation, conformity to legal precedent).[3][4] According to classical Sunni theory, ijtihad requires expertise in the Arabic language, theology, revealed texts, and principles of jurisprudence (usul al-fiqh),[3] and is not employed where authentic and authoritative texts (Qur'an and hadith) are considered unambiguous with regard to the question, or where there is an existing scholarly consensus (ijma).[2] Ijtihad is considered to be a religious duty for those qualified to perform it.[3] An Islamic scholar who is qualified to perform ijtihad is called a "mujtahid".[2][5]
So, it seems there might be an out, or a chance for modern reform after all. But Wikipedia goes on to say:
For the first five centuries of Islam, the practice of ijtihad continued in theory and practice among Sunni Muslims. It then first became subject to dispute in the 12th century.[6] By the 14th century, development of classic Islamic jurisprudence or fiqh prompted leading Sunni jurists to state that the main legal questions in Islam had been addressed, and to call for the scope of ijtihad to be restricted.[2] In the modern era, this gave rise to a perception amongst Orientalist scholars and sections of the Muslim public that the so-called "gate of ijtihad" was closed at the start of the classical era.[2][7] While recent scholarship established that the practice of Ijtihad had never ceased in Islamic history, the extent and mechanisms of legal change in the post-formative period remain a subject of debate.[8]
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
Post Article Comment and Rate This Article
