From Interdenominational to Interreligious Ecumenism at Taizé and Le Jour du Seigneur

3.1 The Secular Structure of LJS

Le Jour du Seigneur was created in 1949 by the Dominican Raymond Picard as a missionary endeavor best understood in its historical context. In the 1940s, the church of France became painfully aware of the general dechristianization of the country. The best-known expression of this awareness was the book by Henri Godin and Yves Daniel, La France, Pays de Mission? [“France, Country of Mission?”]. Fifty editions were published between 1943 and 1962. In 1941, the assembly of French bishops decided to create a seminary to prepare priests to work in the most “de-Christianized” places of France. ⁴ In 1943, the archbishop of Paris created the Mission of Paris to train priests to work in blue-collar parishes. The worker–priests movement began in 1942 and spread quickly in the collective imagination. ⁵ Clearly, we are in an evangelization context.

Fr. Raymond Picard created a program of television pre-evangelization with the following characteristics: (a) a dialogue with the secular world in order to (b) hopefully attract secular viewers to attend Mass, and (c) broadcast by the secular state with its financials supported. These three characteristics have been operating successfully since 1940. This program, Le Jour du Seigneur, is broadcast once a week on Sunday morning. It attracts over half a million people every week and is probably the only religious television program that has catered to both believers and non-believers for over 70 years.

The organization body of this program, the CFRT (Comité Français de Radio-Télévision), is secular, not clerical. This committee consists of six lay persons and three Dominicans who negotiate with the French state. The religious position of the CFRT is clearly stated: its mission today is to continue the work of Fr. Picard, which is “to announce the message of the gospel on television, and to respond, in its own way, to the quest of meaning of our contemporaries.” ⁶ It has a double mission: announce the gospel, but as a response to people's quest of meaning and not in the traditional form of preaching; hence it implies a dialogue between faith and the secular French culture. Notably. this lay committee is independent of the Catholic hierarchy and its mission is to share the values of the gospel, not to teach Catholic doctrine. What is special to LJS is that it is a lay organization with the purpose of announcing the gospel.

The word “Catholic” is not used in the identity and mission of the CFRT. In French culture, to identify oneself as a Catholic suggests that one is a churchgoer, probably of a conservative bent; many practicing Catholics would identify themselves as such. In the intellectual and the youth culture, however, one is more likely to identify as a Christian. The implication is one of commitment to an ultimate cause, of being a committed Christian (chrétien engagé); it does imply regular church attendance although it may not be the case. The emphasis is on the gospel rather than Catholic doctrine. While there is a long tradition of hostility to Catholicism in France, the general attitude towards Christianity, especially towards committed Christians, is generally positive. Yet this terminology implies a distinction between gospel-centeredness and church- or clergy-centeredness, inspired by a latent anti-clericalism.

The laity and the clergy belong to two subcultures, but they cooperate harmoniously within the CFRT. Yet the lay members are the majority, and their influence has prevailed in several instances: for example, in omitting the word “Catholic” in defining the CFRT. Engaged Catholics are introduced as “Christians,” not as “good Catholics.” The clergy speaks of the eucharist, while the laity continues to speak of the Mass. For committed Catholics, the Mass may be seen as less important than their engagement in the name of the gospel; few priests would agree. Finally, the laity and the clergy may evaluate the liturgy differently. The magazine of LJS has an attitude of openness to the world and may favor more liturgical openness to the outside world. For the clergy, the liturgy is taken as fixed by the rubrics and the Roman directives. These differences of attitudes come to the fore at the end of this article in the evaluation of the liturgy (in section 3.4 “The Inward-looking Liturgies and Homilies”): the laity may see a gap between the liturgies and the rest of the program, while the clergy would not. In my description below I shall develop the point of view of the laity.

The official ideology of the French state is laicité (“secularism”), but its practice is very flexible. Despite a rigid separation between church and state in France, private schools, mostly Catholic, are financially supported by the state. Religious programs on television are considered of public interest, hence supported by the state. The Léotard law of 1986 on “Freedom of Communication” has only three lines on religion: “The French television airs on Sunday mornings religious programs related to the basic religions in France.” And “the cost of these programs is taken care of by society,” that is, the state, up to a maximum which is currently 10 million euros per year. ⁷ The language of this law is intentionally vague; it had to justify the practice of the state subsidizing a Catholic program by implying that it has been accepted for generations. For the organizers of LJS, financial, technical, and intellectual support from the state is most welcome.

The program of the Sunday show consists of two parts. The first part is le magazine, a form of publication that is very flexible, as exemplified by Time Magazine, Vogue, Paris Match, and the American Jesuit publication, America Magazine. Each week le magazine concentrates on a burning national issue. The second part of the program is the Sunday Mass, celebrated each week in a different parish. Furthermore, each year an interreligious dialogue occurs among the main religious organizations; it is to these yearly interreligious events that I want to turn first.

The state television France-2 broadcasts religious programs on Sundays from 8:00 am to 12 noon. Buddhist Wisdoms and Judaïca are granted 15 minutes each; Islam, Orthodoxy, Oriental Christians, and Protestant Presence are allotted 30 minutes each; and, starting at 10:30 am, LJS enjoys 90 minutes. From this timetable, it seems that Islam, Orthodoxy, Oriental Christians, and Protestantism are of equal importance, and that Catholic LJS stands in competition not with Protestantism but all other religions. Here, ecumenism does not mean church reconciliation but interreligious dialogue.

3.2 The Yearly Conferences of Interreligious Dialogue

Every year, the organizers of the seven religious programs plan a joint session that lasts from 8:30 to 11 am. These programs are called interreligious as well as ecumenical. Several months ahead of these yearly meetings, a topic is selected to create documentaries. It is these videos that serve as a basis for the discussion among representatives of the seven organizations. I shall first present the program for 2016, and next that of 2021 to suggest the evolution underway.

Usually only four guests are invited for the discussion. At the 2016 discussion on “Believing in Interreligious Dialogue,” the guests were the director of a scholarly project that translates Jewish texts into Arabic languages; a specialist of Islamic philosophy; a researcher who specializes in secular spirituality and Buddhism; and Bishop Michel Dubost, president of the council of interreligious relations of the French bishops who speaks for the various Christian denominations. The topic was interreligious, not interdenominational dialogue. The theme of the 2016 meeting was very general, as indicated by its title, believing in dialogue.

There were nine documentaries of about 10 minutes each, taking more time than the discussions which followed. The first one covered the thirty years of interreligious prayers in Assisi initiated by John Paul II in 1986 and repeated by Pope Francis in 2016, a few weeks before this television program. Other documentaries presented various interreligious initiatives: those of the Dalai Lama, encounters involving Jews and Christians, neighborhood visits to Protestant, Catholic, and Muslim worship centers, and the joint celebration of the Annunciation by Oriental Christians and Lebanese Muslims.

In summary, the 2016 documentaries and discussions exhibited a strong commitment to interreligious encounters for mutual understanding, but nothing about inter-Christian reconciliation. During the discussion, it was stated that praying in common was difficult and rare. The implicit consensus emphasized doing things together rather than praying together. Believing in interreligious dialogue was generally accepted, but it appeared that more was needed.

The 2022 topic on “How to Build Universal Fraternity” was introduced as an “interreligious program,” not as an interreligious dialogue as in previous years. For the organizers and the public, the time had come for cooperation on a common goal. In 2022, the goal was national and international fraternity. The participants in the discussion were a female Buddhist, two female Muslims (half the discussion time, each), the Grand Rabbi of France, and a Maronite priest from Lebanon to represent all Christian confessions. Participation in the discussions seemed to represent the wishes of the public: interreligious cooperation without overwhelming Catholic presence, strong presence of women and Muslims (Islam is the second most important religion in France), and the appealing voice of Buddhism.

The discussions were introduced by seven documentaries. The first three were informative about: (a) the importance of fraternity in French history since the Revolution of 1789, (b) the notion of fraternity in the various religious traditions, and (c) its practice in religious communities (Orthodox, Catholic, and Buddhist). The second part, entitled, “Living Fraternity in Solidarity” provided many examples of solidarity by various religious groups. We learned about the assistance to the homeless by a Coptic Orthodox youth group, and the help to autistic children by a Jewish association. More original was the anonymous help to the homeless of the “refrigerator of solidarity,” placed in front of a restaurant where anyone can give or take food, according to one's needs. Of ecumenical interest was a group of Catholic, Jewish, and Muslim church leaders in Lyon who gathered as one at the suggestion of the Rector of the Grand Mosque after the burning of the local synagogue.

Another innovation presented in a video was that of the mayor of Sarcelles, a mid-size French town, who created a City Fair to bring together the various religious and non-religious communities of the city. Every year in the fall, there is a day of cultural and sports events in which several hundred groups participate, most notably religious communities. The mayor's stated goal was to support “communitarianism” and overcome “individualism,” that is, community isolation and sectarianism.

While four representatives discussed universal fraternity in February of 2020, Pope Francis finished writing his third encyclical, “On Fraternity and Social Friendship” (Fratellli Tutti), published in October of the same year. The above examples of religious cooperation to assist the homeless and autistic children, the secular cooperation in the running of the “refrigerator of solidarity,” and the City Fair of Sarcelles could easily find place in Francis’s program.

Two complementary dimensions characterize this encyclical, indeed, Francis’s whole pontificate, namely (a) interreligious dialogue and (b) cooperation with the whole world. For his encyclical Laudato Si’, Francis sought the support of the Orthodox patriarch Bartholomew. For Fratelli Tutti, Francis turned to the Grand Imam Ahmad Al-Tayyeb, mentioned at the beginning and the end of this encyclical. Together they declared that “God has created all human beings equal in rights, to live together as brothers and sisters.” ⁸ At the end, the pope, and the Grand Imam, “resolutely declared that religions must never incite war, hateful attitudes, hostility, and extremism, nor must they incite violence or the shedding of blood.” ⁹ Francis stretched an open hand to Muslims, the Orthodox, and the Jews, but he seldom mentioned the Reformation and its aftermath. Like the pilgrims attending the Taizé meeting in Strasbourg, and like the interreligious dialogues of LJS, Pope Francis seeks dialogue with other religions rather than intra-religious ecumenism. This is where the wind is blowing today.

The titles of two chapters of Fratelli Tutti can be seen as major aspects of the program of his pontificate: “A Heart Open to the Whole World” (chapter 4) and “Religions at the Service of Fraternity in our World” (Chapter 8). This is not a program for secular humanism but the grand design of God “to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, Christ” (Eph. 1:10). This is also a program of pre-evangelization. Next, we turn to pre-evangelization in le magazine, and after that, the Sunday Mass.

3.3 The Intellectual Ministry of Pre-Evangelization of the Magazine

The 90-minute program of LJS is broadcast on Sundays from 10:30 to 12 noon. The first part takes place in the Paris studio. Each week, the magazine discusses a topic in a flexible format. It often begins with a humorous presentation of the topic followed by an interview with a specialist. A short video presents this specialist's daily activities, followed by comments. Often, a quotation from Pope Francis is projected on the screen, to which the interviewee is invited to respond. There may also be a comic strip for children on the topic. Always, a literary presentation of recent books, movies, and exhibits is offered, because the readers are encouraged and expected to read, and to read quality books. At the magazine, the intellectual standards are high.

Pre-evangelization may be envisioned as a lower form of evangelization, but in the magazine, it can be seen as a form of intellectual ministry. To present each week a different topic for reflection is a very intellectual challenge. Some major topics presented over the last few years, classified by broad topics, include Politics as a universal concern. At the time of the French Presidential elections when unemployment hovered around 20 per cent, the magazine discussed “how to survive unemployment.” At the time of terrorist attacks, the topic of immigrants and migrants was a burning issue. “Will Catholics re-elect Trump?” was a great interest to French voters. France has a heavy past of colonialism and slavery. Two programs described slavery and its consequences in two former French colonies. These topics obviously could not be discussed in political and partisan terms but as moral issues. The magazine also joined the national debates on in-vitro fertilization, surrogate motherhood, and medically assisted suicides. These topics were discussed as moral issues, not as Catholic doctrines.

Some topics are of great social concern, especially health and poverty. One Sunday was dedicated to caring for the sick, another Sunday to caring for the mentally handicapped, another to the homeless. Especially moving was the celebration of Mass in a tiny chapel built 50 years ago by the homeless and, then, honored with the presence of a few survivors. Another Sunday celebrated with great liturgical pomp the victims of a Parisian terrorist attack that killed 137 people.

The challenges of COVID-19 required imaginative innovations. At the time of the strictest home confinement, the magazine aired its studio Easter Mass in Eurovision so that people all over Europe could see it; technology allowed international diffusion when all people were confined to the home. When the strict pandemic rules were relaxed, the magazine discussed the prevailing covid anxiety, and later the anxiety of parents and teachers when children returned to school. Another topic was the economic disaster of the pandemic for local businesses, such as the pilgrim industry of Lourdes, which depends on visiting pilgrims.

Rebirth and renewal have been a constant theme over the years. It became an obvious topic after the ruinous fire at the Notre Dame Cathedral of Paris. A general documentary about building cathedrals presented the project as something transcending individual achievements; it was a metaphor for building the reign of God on earth. There was a documentary about rebuilding French cathedrals that have been destroyed over the centuries, another about rebuilding the cathedral of Baghdad recently destroyed by war, and numerous short documentaries about the various crafts at work in the restoration of the Notre Dame cathedral. More than material renewal is needed. Several Sundays developed the theme of rebirth: the rebirth of the church of Lebanon destroyed by internal violence and the rebirth of the Catholic Church among the de-Christianized popular classes. Most intellectually challenging was the discussion of the rebirth of a parish whose priest had been assassinated by Muslim terrorists, with the participation of the mayor of the city, a prominent Marxist member of the French Parliament but exceptionally open to forgiveness and spiritual rebirth.

The intellectual ministry of le magazine is not just to discuss issues of national concern but also events of Christian concern in other countries. This is something all parishes could do.

3.4 The Inward-Looking Liturgies and Homilies

Every Sunday, Mass takes place in a different parish. This can be a mind-opener for many Catholics who know only their home church. Mass can occur in a village of only 700 inhabitants or in a majestic cathedral. The inside of all churches usually exhibits beauty and care that make these buildings worthy places of worship. Of special interest to viewers may be the level of engagement of the ministers, the choir, and the assembly. From the entrance to the exit, all worshipers show high engagement in the liturgy. This high quality was facilitated by giving the parishes a few weeks to prepare for the event. In most cases, the singing of the choir was inspiring as well as the singing of the faithful who actively participated. A few outstanding examples are worth mentioning. In a small parish with no resident priest, the parishioners recited the “Our Father” in Aramaic to honor their Middle Eastern immigrants. During Covid, parishioners elsewhere rehearsed sign language for months so they could exchange the peace in sign language during Mass. In another Mass, parishioners recited the “Our Father” in Arabic for the persecuted Christians in the Middle East.

Most liturgies represented were of high quality but also mostly inward-looking. There was no evangelization or pre-evangelization, and no ecumenical dimension. This was most obvious in the homilies which were generally unrelated to the topics discussed in the magazine. When “Show me your Face” was the theme of Lent, different faces were unveiled each week in the magazine—faces of ex-felons, of homeless, of handicapped, and youth in trouble, but the homilists had nothing to say about these rejected faces. And when “Rebirth” was the theme, the magazine showed how various groups recovered from failures, namely the migrants, the Lebanese after the Beirut port explosion in 2020, tourists in a landslide in southern France, men out of work, and a parish after the assassination of its priest, but the homilist ignored the theme. Many topics discussed in the magazine called for a theological reply on the part of homilists, more particularly the topics of assisted suicide, homosexuality, reparation for the victims of clerical sex crimes, forgiveness in family life, ecology, spirituality, and help to the refugees of Ukraine.

The two dimensions of LJS, the magazine and the Mass, cannot totally function independent of one another because the magazine is expected to lead to the Mass which is to be the high point of the program. At LJS, the liturgy is called “the Mass,” the term generally used by the faithful rather than “the Eucharist” which is preferred by the clergy. For generations, attendance at Mass was seen as a Catholic obligation, while Vatican II placed the emphasis on active participation not just in the Sunday celebration but also in parish ministries. Nearly every week, the Sunday liturgy was implicitly presented as a Mass of obligation rather than a Eucharist of engagement because in practically no parish was there any mention of the activities practiced in the parish (devotions, prayer groups, committees, help to the poor, and so forth). In nearly all parishes, the homily was a reflection on the Sunday readings without mention of the topic discussed in the magazine. Moreover, the homilies were geared to churchgoers, not the non-believers in the television audience.

By contrast, the practice of David Milliat, the presenter and interviewer, is to invite people to “go to Mass” as if it were a continuation of the magazine. We are first shown a short video about the town and the church where the liturgy will occur. Next, the lay volunteers of the parish are interviewed, but seldom the pastor. During the clergy procession to the altar, Milliat usually introduces the priest and the liturgy of the day. Several times during the Mass, he offers comments, for example the name of the homilist or a prayer during holy communion. When the Mass is over, there is usually a short video by a personality from social media, followed by an announcement by Milliat of the topic and place of worship the following week. The magazine seemingly does everything possible as a pre-evangelization project to entice people to come to Mass, but this pre-evangelization effort is not implemented by the liturgy. Ecumenism between the church and the secular world is clearly a central issue that is not addressed here in the liturgy.