Spirituality: The triumph of the individual and the “Spiritual Supermarket” phenomenon. How can violence be avoided without adding to it? Interview with Professor Denaux (KUL) Louvain, 29 May 2001 (CIP)/ HRWF International Secretariat (14.06.2001) - Website: http://www.hrwf.net - Email: info@hrwf.net All kinds of spiritualities have blossomed into life in the public sphere, rather like a supermarket of beliefs. Newly arrived spiritualities have aroused suspicion, in churches as well as society in general. Are they “sects”? The term is far from neutral, and is thrown into the debate to stand in the way of possible violence. But where does this violence originate? A question that each one must ask themselves, stated Professor Adelbert Denaux (from the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven) in his capacity as a theologian, interviewed by the CIP agency on his return from an international conference held in London. “The Spiritual Supermarket” was the theme of the London conference held from 19 to 21 April, where some 130 experts gathered to discuss new religious movements. The conference was organised by Inform (1), an information network on new religious movements founded in 1988 by the sociologist Eileen Barker, attached to the London School of Economics. On this occasion, Inform was associated with other centres, one of which was Cesnur, set up in 1998 in Turin, Italy (2). Most of the participants had come in their capacity as sociologists or religious historians. There were also several theologians present, one of whom was Professor Adelbert Denaux. Professor Denaux is the Belgium representative for religious phenomenons. He is the president of the Centre for Information and Opinion on harmful sectarian organisations(3), set up in Belgium following the Parliamentary Commission enquiry into sects (1996-1997). On a religious level, he also presides over a interdiocesan workgroup on sects and new beliefs(4). · Professor Denaux, who was the conference at London aimed at?
A. Denaux –
« It wasn’t especially conceived for the attention of civil or religious decision-makers. Rather, the conference had the objective of an exchange of information and scientific approaches to “new religious movements”. This is in fact what interested me. I didn’t go to London in the name of the Information and Opinion Centre or of the interdiocesan group I lead, but as an academic interested to hear points of view from other colleagues and other disciplines. Theologians also have to learn from sociologists. · Sociologists are reluctant to baptise “sects” as new religious movements…
A. Denaux –
« Yes, and more now than ever. The word “sect” is loaded with negative prejudice which makes any any new or minority religious group appear suspicious from the start. This is a priori unacceptable: it opens the door to intolerance and therefore to the violence that we are supposed to combat. «This is what Eileen Barker remarkably showed in her introductory discourse in London. She dealt with the issue not only of religious movements, but also as regards those who observe them. No observer is neutral. Any observer is oriented by a typical preoccupation, which has already characterised their position in relation to the phenomen observed. « Mrs Barker defined five main types of attitudes towards new religious movements. Some might perhaps ask : what danger could these movements represent for society? This is a typical preoccupation of the committees and vigilance centres, either with or without official mandate. She added that within the main Churches, observation is mainly guided by the desire to defend the orthodoxy, ie to oppose a divergent or adverse religious position. Scientists are preoccupied with objectively examining the beliefs of a group and how it relates to society, without taking a position for or against. Other observers site themselves on more legal terrain : defenders of human rights rise up against discrimination that some groups find themselves victims of. Finally the partisans of the groups are typically concerned to show the positive aspects, often to counter perceptions that they feel to be incorrect.» ## ## Observers : never neutral · When a sect is denounced for abuse, are the observers to blame ?
A. Denaux –
« It was not Eileen Barker’s aim to place the responsibility for some tragedies, such as the deaths of the followers of the Order of the Solar Temple, on the shoulders of the observers. But she warned against simplisms. She explained that when the violence of a group is denounced, it never explodes in a vacuum, but rather in a social context where everyone plays a role, the observers included. The example of Waco in Texas where 86 members of a group of “Davidians” (including several infants), perished in 1993 during an assault launched by the FBI on their farm was mentioned. The FBI had at first reported collective suicide in the burning farm. An enquiry later showed that the approach of the FBI and the Bush Administration at the time had contributed to starting the fire at the farm from the exterior. In such a case, where does the violence come from, asked Mrs Barker. Is it from the religious group or from society ? There is even a kind of violence from the state that could push a minority group to commit collective suicide! « We often speak about the threat that sects pose. But these threats do not only originate from that side. There are many other sources of intolerance in society. The issue of violence and the complicity that goes with it cannot be avoided. This is an issue to be taken extremely seriously, and concerns us all, you as well as me. · Are the varied positions taken towards religious phenomenons reconcilable ?
A. Denaux –
« The appearance of new religious movements has evidently aroused a tension which has made the authorities and civic associations edgy along with the followers of the new group. But it was also shown at the London conference that a series of actors can play important mediation roles. This is the case with various experts as well as religious leaders, provided that they are open to dialogue. The role of the media is also not a neutral one : it can make approaches more favourable or, on the other hand, toughen the opposition. The problem often lies in a lack of direct communication : the other side is simply talked about behind their back instead of a meeting being set up … Sometimes, direct communication with some poses a problem in itself. · You spoke about Waco. Are there significant differences between the American and European approach ?
A. Denaux –
« The Waco tragedy should not be labelled as typically American. On the contrary, most of the States of America are markedly more open than European countries to religious movements, whatever they may be. This can be explained firstly by looking at the history of the United States where many of the leading figures were religious dissidents. What is more, this country has developed a very liberal tradition towards deviances … » « In Western Europe, France has taken a rather more specific position. Last May 3rd, the Senate adopted at the second reading a bill “intending to reinforce the prevention and repression of sectarian movements infringing human rights and fundamental freedoms.” In a parallel manner, the senators had beforehand adopted a new law creating the offence of “mental manipulation”. A society must protect its members against abuse. But the problem, evoked by several legal experts, is that the law should be the same for everyone and authorities should not use the law to exclude certain groups from their freedom of expression, association or worship. Currently, it is the notion of “mental manipulation” that remains delicate to handle, according to the legal experts. And on the 3rd May, during the voting of the final amendments of the bill proposed by Nicolas About et Catherine Picard, one senator explained that he could not vote in a text that aimed to combat the abuses from an organisation that he would never be able to define : the sectarian movement! « The position France has taken, that some in Belgium and Germany would like to see followed, is a typical position of a laicist State that tends to take over from the Catholic Church in pronouncing what is good and what is not good for its followers. Taken to the farthest degree, this logic leads to the restoration of a sort of Holy-Office : a censorship organ that directs which are the good or bad religious organisations … The Belgian parliamentary commission on sects was not far from this with its list of harmful sectarian organisations … But Parliament approved the Commission’s report, without the list. «As for Eastern Europe, the situation of minority religious organisations remains difficult. For example, in Russia, where the State and the Orthodox Church are giving each other a helping hand in refusing freedom of expression and worship to minority religious associations. Also in Poland who are taking their lead from the French example to as it were ‘hunt down’ new religious movements. ## ## Pluralism and individualism · The London conference explicitly dealt with religious pluralism in the era of globalisation(5). Is this a battle for pluralism ?
A. Denaux –
« The title of the meeting effectively related to religious pluralism, but it in fact referred to an area of affirmation and observation which is growing more and more visible in this plurality : the Internet. Within a decade, sites of religious groups themselves have multiplied, as have the sites of their critics, nuanced to greater or lesser degrees towards them. The Cesnur site is characteristic ; launched in Turin on the initiative of a man who claims to go back to the historical and sociological approach, Massimo Introvigne, it takes care to proclaim its independence as regards any religious organisation. This independence, of course, must be proved in practice. Cesnur’s Turin centre is at the heart of a worldwide network of specialists and prides itself on being able to provide abundant and quality documentation to all, the first library of its kind in Europe and the second in the world, according to them. Whatever arises from this however, independence must also be on an intellectual level. « All this is interesting, but it also reveals popular culture : the Internet, the reign of the consumer society. Each individual can choose the contents of his own basket, select sites on the basis of how attractive they are and their own centres of interest. And of course, everything is found next to everything else. This is the origin of the impression, from a religious angle, of a vast supermarket of spiritualities. I found this right at the heart of the London conference, where members of the new religious movements were just as welcome as the experts. Additionally, opportunity was given to some of them to express themselves, even ex-members who have cut ties with their organisations. These testimonies revealed that movements often catalogued as “sectarian” have ex-members who don’t regret in the slightest having been a member ! Some of them said that their experience had left a positive stamp on their personal journey through life. In contrast, other ex-members of a well-established Church, come now to express their relief to have left somewhere which still remains completely stifling for them. » · Would you go to that extend to plead the cause of the new movements?
A. Denaux –
« Don’t misunderstand me. I am not pleading the cause of new movements against the Churches and institutions, but I will plead the cause for respect, tolerance, openness and dialogue, on both sides. · Did the experts gathered in London see the future of religions in the sense of a greater explosion of age-old religious traditions?
A. Denaux –
« Can the current pluralism be explained by a more advanced secularisation ? This was the question raised at the London conference by three sociologists from the Erasmus University in Rotterdam, Dick Houtman, Peter Mascini and Marieke Gels. They asked how it was that for forty years in the Netherlands the Churches have been emptying whereas the New Age is progressing ? « Could this be due, as some have believed, to a greater progress in the field of reason and rationality ? Not really, as young people hold to New Age ideas as one would adhere to a religious faith. Additionally, there are young people (and older people) who put their faith in science or technology. The sociologists also noted that amongst the non-believing youths, rationalism is barely stronger than amongst the believing ones. They above all stated that the Dutch youths are markedly less rationalistic than their elders. Therefore the decline of membership of the traditional Churches and the Christian faith cannot be explained by a progress of reasoning abilities. « So how to explain why young people are deserting the secular religious tradition of Christianity for the gnostic conceptions of the New Age. Precisely because New Age is easily able to accommodate ambient individualism. Everyone is free to make their own choice of religion and ethic, just as one does one’s shopping at the supermarket. » ## The theologian’s role · Of course a theologian would not remain indifferent faced with such an evolution ?
A. Denaux –
« Besides a closer attention to the issue of violence, I returned from London as a theologian with reinforced preoccupations». «First of all, it seems to be essential to take what the sociologists are discovering, describing and analysing seriously. This is certainly not the only point of view to be highlighted. But it should be heard, in particular within the Churches, who have a lot to learn in this field. « The role of a Christian theologian is not only to record the social facts and suggest an explanation afterwards. It is to suggest channels of discernment to help Christians situate themselves in their faith, hope and charity. This is what the great Christian thinkers have done since the origins of the Church, they have endeavoured to take account of their faith, to show its coherence and to defend it in situations where it risks being disputed, or even directly decried by adversaries. « It is all the more necessary to provide the same service to followers today as the evolution of society places them in the middle of a supermarket where they immediately have the false impression that everything is worth the same. The theologian needs to find a coherent response to the question of what has become the essence of the Christian faith. « Take the example of Jehovah’s Witnesses, the most widely-spread minority religious movement in Belgium. The Witnesses readily present themselves as Christians. Not only do they give God the name Jehovah on a very questionable basis, but their conception of God has nothing in common with the Christian Creed. The Witnesses do not believe in a God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, as the great Christian Churches proclaim. Therefore it is wrong that some Witnesses present themselves as Christians during their door-stepping, whilst their movement has never been recognised by the Ecumenical Council of Churches. The Witnesses have been presented as one of the multiple sub-branches of Christianity, but here again, a distinction is necessary : a distant cousinship is not a filiation! » · Your preoccupation as a theologian with regards to new religious movements is therefore more as an apologist : to defend Christianity and show it coherence in a positive manner?
A. Denaux –
« That is only one aspect of a theologian’s mission. The other is to use the internal coherence of the Christian faith to help the Christian to widen out themselves in that faith. And it is here that, as a theologian, I distinguish myself the most from a sociologist’s point of view. Often a sociologist will not be interested in the content of what he calls “the beliefs”. Not because he fails to know or distrusts them, but because he cannot be too proud of them for his observation : a number of Belgians, for example, call themselves Catholics and even practising Catholics, whilst believing that God is not really a person, but rather a force of nature. Amongst this fraction of practising Catholics, it does happen that some hesitate over the importance that should be given to Jesus or to evangelical inspiration in their everyday life. I respect these persons, but I cannot share their position. «Sociologists often state with irony that the Christians who claim to share the same essential convictions differ in a series of realities in their moral or political valuations. Of course, freedom of conscience has its own rights. But the theologian in me will never be satisfied with the difference that I remark between beliefs and behaviour. To claim to love God whom one cannot see and to fail to love one’s brother whom one can see, is a serious incoherence towards which Christ’s disciples have had their attention drawn since the beginning ». –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– (1) Inform (Information Network Focus on Religious Movements), Houghton St., London WC2A 2AE (E-mail : Inform@lse.ac.uk ; no Internet site). (2) Cesnur (Centro Studi sulle Nuove Religioni), Via Juvarra 20, I – 10122 Torino (tel. 00–39–011/54.19.50 ; fax 00–39–011/54.19.05 ; Internet site : www.cesnur.org ; E-mail address: cesnurto@tin.it). (3) Centre d’information et d’’avis sur les organisations sectaires nuisibles, Rue Haute, 139 – 1000 Brussels (tel. 02/504.91.68). The official denomination of the Centre integrates the reference to « organisations sectaires nuisibles » (harmful sectarian organisations), as defined in the report published by the Parliamentary enquiry commission : « a group with a philosophical or religious vocation, or presenting themselves as such which, in its organisation or in practice, carries out harmful illegal activities, damaging to individuals or to society or which undermines human dignity ». (« un groupement à vocation philosophique ou religieuse, ou se présentant comme tel, qui, dans son organisation ou sa pratique, se livre à des activités illégales dommageables, nuit aux individus ou à la société ou porte atteinte à la dignité humaine ».) (4) Address of the Interdiocesan group : Secrétariat de la Conférence épiscopale, rue Guimard, 1 – 1040 Brussels. Information : Professor A. Denaux, Tiensestraat, 112 – 3000 Leuven (tel. 016/32.63.93 ou 32.37.93 ; fax 016/32.38.62 ; E-mail address : Adelbert.Denaux@theo.kuleuven.ac.be). The Brussels Catholic Welcome Centre (next to the Bourse) is also open to the public for information or for Christian advice Contact : Bruxelles Accueil – Porte Ouverte, rue de Tabora, 6 – 1000 Brussels (tel. 02/511.81.78 ; fax 02/502.76.96 ; E-mail : bapo@skynet.be). (5) « The Spiritual Supermarket. Pluralism and Globalization in the 21st Century : the Expanding European Union and Beyond ». The many conferences and discourses heard at this meeting are available (in English) on the Cesnur Internet site (note 2).