Religions and society

“Religions, a threat or a hope for societies?” This is the theme of the 83rd edition of the Social Weeks of France, scheduled for November 21-23 at the Congress Centre in Lyon. 4000 European participants will attend this year’s edition, including a large delegation from Eastern Europe while representatives of world religious traditions will liven the inter-religious dialogue panel. “Religions are a factor of division, as some say, or do they truly contribute to social cohesion as they themselves proclaim?”. Jérôme Vignon, Chairman of the Weeks, raised the question, and pointed out that “in Europe, States’ moral authority is declining and politics’ approaches are more practical than visionary”. A number of workshops will focus on: religion in the public arena; religion in the media and its cultural expression; religion, education and formation of citizens; religion and social cohesion; religion and society faced with scientific and ethical dilemmas. A final statement will be drawn up at the end of the sessions. The Social Weeks of France were created in 1904 with the purpose of spreading Church teaching and contribute to public social debate. Info: www.ssf-fr.org.  The quest for meaning. Vignon holds that “on the one side, the loss of authority and of meaning has entailed the development of limited self-identities, while on the other it triggered public debate within civil society”. This is an unprecedented situation that requires “specific discernment by all stakeholders, in society and in the public realm”. In this framework, the quest for “meaning and values crosses the traditional borders between the private and public realms”. “Churches and religions – concluded the president of the Social Weeks – are challenged to respond to this expectation; without going beyond their own mission. They could act as long-term referents in democracy”.Religion as a “political question”. “The question regarding religions’ participation to the public debate is indeed raised throughout the Western world with different modalities according to the Country”, confirms philosopher Paul Thibaud in his introductory note to the Weeks. In France, he pointed out, “Traditional secularity placed a dogmatic barrier between the public and private realms that has led to its impoverishment”. “The current situation is very different from the one that brought about its establishment over a century ago. Present secularity witnessed unexpected success”. “The French became ‘secular’, and in the past decades especially they gradually relinquished tradition”. The opposite side of the coin is that for philosophers “our lay society of emancipated people has lost the tools to inspire the community”. This is why, against all expectations, “religion has returned to be a political question with a negative connotation, since the annihilation of Christian religious patrimony eliminates a cornerstone whose importance is grasped only at a later time. The positive aspect is the increasing importance ascribed to “minority religions” in the public arena”. Innovative secularity. “A secular stance that is on the defense and rejects the development of moral consensus, will inevitably surrender to all the lobbies”, claimed Thibaud, taking as an example “the rulings of the Court of Strasbourg on homosexual marriages” contracted “following mainstream positions” or the inability “of ethical committees to resist the appeal of laboratories”. “This secularity – he affirmed – is no longer a point of convergence and confrontation. Rather, is has become a battlefield”. Thus, he continues, “The current paradox is that secularity prevails to the detriment of the Churches, and not of Communist thought. It triumphs more in the realm of opinion than in society and this makes it similar to empty rhetoric”. Thus, the challenge “is not embittering or breaching through secularity. Rather, is it a question of establishing a link with the new questions raised by society”. Hence the importance of “innovative secularity” that “in order to abide to its inspiration” will not be concerned with the “prerogatives of religious groups”, but rather “with the way in which the latter can be brought in the public arena and involved in the public debate”. This will take place with the recovery of a new “secular approach that is dialogical and not monopolistic”. “In order to fulfill this task, the role of religions, Judaism and Christianity in particular, is crucial”.