I found Dr Farooqi's article rather puzzling.
Evidently he neither understands European history nor the foundations of modern Western civilisation.
Firstly he seems to confuse the Renaissance (15th century, Italian Renaissance) with European Enlightenment (18th Century) which are two different things altogether. One gathers he means the European Enlightenment as can be inferred from his statement "a revolution based on science and technology. It also saw the end of priesthood and supremacy of the church in worldly affairs".
He proceeds with further absurdities such as "Christianity came out from the dark ages only due to European Renaissance". One is puzzled as to what that means. It was not "Christianity" that "came out from the dark ages" but Europe. "Christianity" has largely remained the same as what it was in the "dark ages".
He then goes on to make the most puzzling observations: "Muslims can only regain past glory, if they adopt renaissance similar to European renaissance, ... Life of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the best and ideal example for the Muslims to follow his dictates for tolerance, compassion and love”.
While his sentiments can be appreciated, he is completely ignorant of what the Enlightenment meant: a rigorous rebellion against religious dogma and scathing criticism of the church, its dogmas and its doctrines, including the very idea of God.
Is he suggesting that Muslims should follow the footsteps of giants like Voltaire? One goes away with the impression that the author does not understand what he is talking about and is not serious about progress for Muslims.