On the evening of January 19, 2024, the Lyon Missionary International House (MIM) hosted a remarkable event titled “Theological Aperitif” at the Brésillac Hall. This special occasion was dedicated to delving into profound discussions on interreligious dialogue between Christianity and Islam.

Professor Michel YOUNES, the Dean of the Ecclesiastical Faculty of Theology at the Catholic University of Lyon, skillfully led the engaging gathering. With expertise and insight, he guided participants through an enlightened exploration of this crucial topic, fostering a deeper understanding of the dynamics between these two prominent religions.

As the director of the Center for the Study of Cultures and Religions (CECR), founder and general coordinator of PLURIEL, and deputy director of the “Confluence Sciences and Humanity” Research Unit at UCLy, Professor YOUNES initiated the discussion by framing the conversation and addressing various approaches to interreligious dialogue.

He emphasized the evolution of the question of Islam in France, shifting from a perspective focused on welcoming migrants 20 or 30 years ago to the current approach where Muslims are established. He highlighted changes on the international stage and stressed the importance of considering context when engaging in interreligious dialogue. Professor YOUNES invited participants to reflect on how their perspectives can adapt to societal changes without succumbing to prejudices.

To deepen the discussion, Professor YOUNES proposed a typology based on the thought currents of Islamic scholars, drawing inspiration from the works of George Anawati. He discussed three currents: the minimalist, the maximalist, and a middle path. Professor YOUNES urged participants to contemplate the applicability of these currents 40 years after.

In essence, Professor YOUNES encouraged reflection on these approaches and their current applications, emphasizing the importance of acknowledging differences and similarities while fostering a respectful and constructive dialogue among different religious communities.

Fundamental to this discussion is the consideration of underlying assumptions. One can contemplate that, fundamentally, we share the same roots, that we are branches of the same tree, and that ultimately, it is about Abraham, about God. While there are differentiations, they are nuances of appreciation. Some theologians have even asserted that fundamentally, the Quran is a word of God, different indeed, but a divine word nonetheless, capable of nurturing and nurturing children in the Abrahamic faith.

The desire to maximize commonalities while minimizing differences has led some authors, in a semi-academic context, to discuss concepts such as the “double theophany of the Word,” as developed by Paul Odalolio. This approach differs from preconciliar exclusivism, which often excluded others from God’s salvific project, thus presenting a triumphalist image of the Church.

Some Christians adopt a maximalist approach, emphasizing commonalities and engaging in deep dialogue to better understand and draw from each other’s richness in approaching God. Some theologians, such as the Sufi, even consider that the essence of Islam is expressed through Sufism, creating continuity between the Abrahamic house and the mystical sensitivity.

However, this maximalist perspective can also face criticism, especially regarding aggressive proselytism. On the contrary, some Christians seek balance, a via media, recognizing differences while seeking points of convergence, thus fostering a respectful dialogue.

This via media may be perceived as a middle ground by some, criticized for not being firm enough at times and not flexible enough at other times. Nevertheless, it seeks to avoid extremes, steering clear of either exclusion or excessive relativization. It represents a search for middle ground, sometimes taking the best of both positions and sometimes facing criticism from both sides.

In this analysis, it appears that the majority of Catholics today seem to be in this middle path, sometimes struggling to make their voice heard in a landscape where extremes seem to dominate. The challenge in the coming years seems to be to give backbone to this position, so it remains a strong voice of challenge without falling into excesses, while continuing to draw the best from both positions.

Pope Francis, through his constant calls for multifaceted dialogue, encourages Christians to avoid extremes and to better understand Islam without falling into naivety, drawing from all lived experiences and avoiding selective experiences. He emphasizes the need for an authentic encounter that does not favor either successes or difficulties but allows for a deep and nuanced understanding of the pluralistic reality in which the Church operates today.

Reacting to this reflection, Father François du Penhoat, superior of the Lyon province, argued that, given his experience in Africa, they navigated between several currents without worrying about establishing communal life with Muslims. They sought harmony as much as possible, sometimes through low-level apologetic discussions. He emphasized that for them, in France, it is a truly foreign world. Although they acknowledge its presence, they do not have as much contact in their villages. In Africa, it was a daily reality, and he expresses the need to continue promoting these encounters.

Professor Younes responded by highlighting that, in Father François’s immediate context, where there is little interaction with Muslims, it heavily depends on neighborhoods and professional environments in France. He observed that in some environments, there is little contact or low representativity, while in others, it is much more significant. Contacts, once frequent, have diminished, perhaps due to intentional withdrawal or the consequences of the overall political atmosphere. Some Muslim leaders have expressed a form of weariness among Muslims and perhaps among Christians, attributing it to disappointed expectations and a sense of despair.

He also mentioned groups in Lyon that were active a few years ago but are now dormant, facing difficulties in finding topics. He criticized initial meetings where superficial topics were discussed without truly delving into questions that could lead to apologetics. He emphasized the importance of moving beyond simplistic expectations to avoid disappointments.

Father Cesare Baldi, director of the Pastoral Institute of Religious Studies (IPER) at the Catholic University of Lyon, noted that the context significantly influences Christians. He highlighted the need to minimize points of disagreement and maximize commonalities but also acknowledged the difficulties and conflicts that can arise, influenced by different contexts.

Michel Younes reacted by pointing out how perceptions can be influenced by stereotypes and generalizations based on the behavior of a few individuals. He warned against the tendency to associate negative individual behaviors with an entire community, emphasizing that this can lead to stigmatization and social division.

He then addressed the issue of weariness and withdrawal, noting that some may be discouraged by unrealized expectations. He stressed the importance of maintaining dialogue despite difficulties, citing Pope Francis who posed the question of what the world would become without dialogue.

Finally, he addressed the complexity of dialogue, emphasizing that it goes beyond simple encounters and requires a deeper understanding of each other’s life experiences. He discussed individual responsibility in dialogue and the need to recognize at least a minimum of dignity and mutual recognition for dialogue to be possible.

Michel Cartateguy, former archbishop of Niamey-Niger and current adviser to the Lyon province, emphasized that, unlike the proposed model that favors dialogue, he prioritized encounter over dialogue. According to him, dialogue finds its voice in face-to-face encounters, where mutual knowledge is established, fostering a conducive environment for dialogue. He insists that working together, sharing the same horizon, strengthens bonds and mutual understanding.

He shared an anecdote from an African sage emphasizing the importance of daily brotherhood. He warned against the risk of passionate debates evolving into conflicts, noting that some conceptions can legitimize violence towards others if not questioned.

Responding to Cartateguy, Professor YOUNES noted that encounter and dialogue are not opposed but rather differ at different levels. He mentioned four dimensions of dialogue: daily encounter, dialogue for action, theological dialogue, and dialogue for spiritual sharing. While the encounter is crucial, he believes that, from his experience, it is not enough in the face of fundamental tensions.

He mentioned the Lebanese experience to illustrate his point, emphasizing that situations of tension can arise even in apparently harmonious contexts. He stressed the need to reconsider certain conceptions and prepare together to face difficult situations.

He concluded by addressing the notion of brotherhood, emphasizing that unrefined brotherhood can lead to fragilities, and a dynamic approach to dialogue is essential. He shared his view that the Catholic Church, whether majority or minority, has in its DNA the necessity of dialogue. He insisted on the importance of remaining faithful to this theological vocation and highlighted the responsibility of teaching children to avoid excessive judgments in the name of faith.

In conclusion, Professor Younes proposed a book on religions tested by freedom of expression, emphasizing that dialogue requires steps from both sides to create a balance of reciprocal imbalance.

In the context of interreligious dialogue in France, a recent study by the Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques (Insee) offers significant insights into the changing religious landscape in metropolitan France. For the period 2019-2020, 51% of individuals aged 18 to 59 say they have no religious affiliation. This trend towards religious disaffiliation has grown steadily over the past decade, affecting notably 58% of people with no migration history, 19% of immigrants who arrived after the age of 16, and 26% of individuals with two immigrant parents.

Although Catholicism remains the dominant religion, with 29% of the population identifying themselves as Catholic, Islam is consolidating its position as the second largest religion in France, with 10%. There has also been a notable increase in the number of people identifying themselves with other Christian denominations, reaching 9%. The frequency and intensity of religious practice varies according to affiliation, with only 8% of Catholics regularly attending a place of worship, compared with just over 20% for other Christians, Muslims and Buddhists, and 34% for Jews.

The long-term religious landscape is strongly influenced by intergenerational transmission processes. The study reveals that 91% of individuals raised in Muslim families continue to practice their parents’ religion. A similar pattern is observed among Jews, with 84% following the religion of their upbringing. However, the transmission of religious affiliation is slightly less marked among Catholics (67%) and other Christians (69%).

These findings shed light on the changing dynamics of religious identity and practice in France, highlighting not only the growing trend towards disaffiliation, but also the diverse patterns of observance within different religious traditions. As the country undergoes significant demographic and cultural change, understanding these trends is crucial to grasping the complexity of religious life in contemporary French society.

The long-term religious landscape is strongly influenced by intergenerational transmission processes. The study reveals that 91% of individuals raised in a Muslim family continue to practice their parents’ religion.

The “Theological Aperitif” event by MIM has thus opened doors to a deeper and nuanced understanding of interreligious dialogue, transcending theological boundaries to create a space for encounter, reflection, and mutual enrichment.