Interview published in Le Figaro Madame –
Interview by Guillemette de Sairigne —
Guillemette de Sairigné. – Everything in the last century seemed to herald the death of God…
Frédéric Lenoir. – For the major systems of thought that emerged in the 19th century, the matter was settled: religion and the modern world were incompatible. Denounced as intellectual alienation by Auguste Comte, or psychological alienation by Freud, and as the product of socio-economic alienation by Marx, religion was considered a major obstacle to individual and social progress. The decline in religious practice and the crisis in vocations might have seemed to vindicate the prophets of God's death had it not been for the simultaneous observation of the enduring nature of faith.
How is it translated?
In France, regular churchgoers make up less than 10% of the population. But they are highly engaged. They no longer go to Mass simply to perform a ritual; their faith is deeper, and they also have a desire for visibility, hence the large gatherings around the Pope during World Youth Day. Furthermore, even if they are not actively practicing their faith, 67% of Europeans – and as many as 93% of Americans! – claim to believe in God. Between militant faith and atheism, most people are proponents of the "off-piste" path, of spiritual nomadism.
Is this a development that fits well with contemporary individualism?
It's obvious. With the development of critical thinking and free will that emerged at the end of the Middle Ages, culminating in the Enlightenment, how could we imagine that individuals, increasingly making their own emotional, intellectual, and artistic choices, would allow their religion to be imposed upon them? Consequently, they might change their religion, hence the relatively recent phenomenon of conversions; we see this with Westerners drawn to Buddhism or Islam, or with the steady growth in the number of adult catechumens in churches. Even if one remains within their own religion, there is a desire to reclaim their faith.
Is simple, unquestioning faith old-fashioned?
It can be the result of a personal choice. But what we are witnessing above all is the development of a religion à la carte, with people picking and choosing what suits them, while distancing themselves from Catholic morality. One can thus imagine a woman who goes to Mass on Sundays but takes the pill, may have had an abortion, and advises her grown children to use condoms; while remaining sensitive to the message of Christ, she may very well read esoteric books, believe in Reincarnation…
Like a third of Catholics, despite the Church's disapproval!
Eternal life is such an abstract concept! To combat the fear of nothingness, it's easier to imagine returning to Earth to purge what couldn't be purged (which, incidentally, appears to a learned Buddhist not as a consolation but as the very image of hell on Earth, since his dream is to end the cycle of reincarnation and reach nirvana!). Both theories share the idea that we are responsible for our actions, that these actions influence our destiny, but while the idea of Reincarnation is linked to an implacable retribution for deeds, Resurrection introduces the dimension of divine mercy.
However, to carry out these "spiritual tinkering" exercises, one must be familiar with other forms of spirituality…
This is where the second development specific to our time comes in: globalization. Supply and demand converge: at the very moment when individuals are striving to build their own religion, all the world's spiritualities are laid out before them on a silver platter. Anyone can find a spiritual master who will initiate them into Muslim mysticism or reveal the secrets of Kabbalah, a Zen center where they can practice meditation… The advantage lies in increased tolerance: let us remember that, until Vatican II, it was believed that outside the Church, there was no salvation! Only 10% of Westerners today believe that there is only one true religion.
The risk, however, is falling into the most awful syncretism!
This is the great danger of our time: confusion. The danger of creating a kind of metaphysical mush in which nothing has any flavor. If we simply accumulate encounters, workshops, and readings while remaining superficial, we risk going in circles. It is up to modern man to have enough depth and discernment to prioritize these beliefs and practices so that they help him on a true spiritual path, whether or not he intends to remain within the framework of a religion.
Some believers will remain faithful to established religions…
We even observe powerful seeds of renewal there; the most conservative structures have sometimes become masters in the use of modern means of organization and communication. This is very clear in the case of the two main fundamentalisms of our time: Protestantism and Islam. Pentecostalism owes its colossal success to the fact that it gives primacy to emotions, defending the idea that one can already experience, in one's own body, on this earth, an encounter with God, the grace of salvation. All these "born-again" Christians, reinvigorated by the Holy Spirit—numbering some two hundred million in South America, Africa, China, and of course the United States, including George Bush and his main collaborators (to whom we could link the Catholic charismatic movements that directly stem from them)—remain within a Christian framework; they have a strict morality and a living faith. But given the movement's rather weak doctrine, there's a risk it will blend with local religious practices, resulting in a significant impoverishment of the Christian message. Furthermore, there's the proselytizing aspect, which reinforces the American belief that their country is destined to play a messianic role, to bring faith, values, and virtues to the world—hence their complete incomprehension at the French refusal to follow them in their fight against evil, namely, Muslim fundamentalism
Regarding membership in sects, you seem less concerned in your book*…
The danger of cults exists, but it seems to me to be completely overestimated by the media. A whole mythology of indoctrination has been created, whereas most people join and leave cults as they please, spending on average only two or three years in them. The root of the problem is this psychological need that too many of our contemporaries, adrift and without direction, have to join a group that will tell them where the Truth lies.
Isn't it unambitious to define, as you do, the religious dimension of man by "the awareness he has of different levels of reality"?
I would add: “and through belief in a suprasensible reality.” My perspective is anthropological: I try to see what prehistoric man who adorns graves with flowers, the cathedral builder of the Middle Ages, the Hindu monk in his ashram, and the modern European who cobbles together their own little spirituality have in common. For me, it’s not primarily about sharing a religion with a collective ideal, even if that’s still the case for many people, but about believing in invisible worlds, in an afterlife. In this sense, resorting to alternative medicine, personal development techniques, believing in angels or extraterrestrials, being an avid reader of “The Alchemist” or “The Lord of the Rings” or even “Harry Potter”—yes, that is, in a way, being religious.
Not long ago, the physicist Georges Charpak denounced our society's taste for the irrational.
For two centuries in Europe, there has been an alliance between Science and Religion to tame the irrational: for materialists, only what can be experienced through the scientific method has value; for Catholics, the only accepted element of the irrational is that expressed in faith in God. But humankind is also irrational! Sexuality is irrational, and so are art and emotions! The sense of the sacred, the feeling of being connected to something universal, transcendent, can be experienced just as easily by a face or a sunset…
You speak of "re-enchanting the world." But the charade is never far away!
That's true. When we're driven by our emotions, we can be manipulated, which is why we must be careful to maintain our critical thinking to protect ourselves from false prophets. We can also delude ourselves, confusing magic with the sacred. But that doesn't prevent us from reacting against contemporary materialism, against a mechanized world, ruled by technology and money. That's the positive side of all this alternative, New Age-style religiosity, whatever its excesses.
You also speak of the metamorphoses of the representations of God…
Modern man needs a God who is less distant, more internal. A less personalized God, too. He readily equates God with a force, an energy. Finally, he needs a more feminine God, no longer the harsh Father who dictates his Law, but a God of mercy, tenderness, and love.
In this reshaping of the religious landscape, Catholicism certainly has its place…
Yes, if he returns to his evangelical roots, sheds the burden of a guilt-inducing morality, and rediscovers his direct connection with Jesus. If he also accepts taking more open positions on burning contemporary issues, such as priestly celibacy. And then, he cannot indefinitely maintain his current position of superiority, defending the conviction—so dear to John Paul II—that he possesses ultimate Truth. He must embrace the idea that the Word of God was incarnated at a specific moment in history in the person of Jesus, but that he could have manifested himself in other forms, in other eras, and in other lands.
Could it be because you yourself rediscovered the Gospels at nineteen, after studying Eastern spiritualities?
I am indeed convinced that we are eventually moving towards a certain interpenetration of Christianity and Buddhism, towards a synthesis between, on the one hand, the sense of the person, which is the central message of Jesus, for whom every human being is unique, and on the other hand, this work of internalization dear to the Buddha, without which there is no true personal faith, no spiritual growth, this work which, pushing back our shadow side, invites us to release the goodness and compassion that dwell in the heart of every man.
Interview published in Le Figaro Madame