The Beatitudes Community Affair

The affair of the Beatitudes community

By CICNS (updated November 2011)

The Beatitudes community has been the subject of substantial media coverage in recent years, owing to a number of complaints filed against it. Below we offer a recap of these events and highlight the role of the media in the construction of a negative image of this group, independently of the facts that may be alleged against some of its members, which are currently being dealt with by the courts.

Origins and statutes

The community was born in France in 1973, in the charismatic movement, under the name “Community of the Lion of Judah and the Sacrificed Lamb”. Gérard Croissant, known as Brother Ephraïm, a married man, was at its origin, together with another couple. It was in 1987 that the community decided to take the name “Community of the Beatitudes”. The change became official in 1991. It is today established on five continents, in 65 dioceses.

“An international association of the faithful of pontifical right since 2002, the community comes under the Pontifical Council for the Laity and no longer directly under its diocese of origin” (La Croix, 24 June 2008).

“The Community of the Beatitudes was recognised “ad experimento” (provisionally, editor’s note) in 2002 by the Vatican for a period of five years. As its definitive recognition had not been achieved, the provisional status was extended by two years, Father Jean-Baptiste Tison, one of the members of the Notre-Dame de Bonnecombe community, told AFP” (AFP, 17 October 2008).

Complaints and judicial proceedings

In April 2005, Myriam and Pascal Michelena, former members of the community, filed a complaint against this organisation for fraud and abuse of weakness. The courts dismissed the Michelenas’ complaint without further action: “In her referral order (…), the investigating judge considers that there was no abuse of weakness but rather a feeling of “mental manipulation”, a notion which does not enter into the law as such” (La Dépêche).

The article specifies that the judge did not rule on the fraud allegations, since they were time-barred. Myriam and Pascal Michelena explain: “If we were slow to file a complaint, it is because we first tried to find a solution with the Church institutions and the ecclesiastical court of Toulouse. Not having been heard, we turned to the criminal courts. Today, we are sickened by all of this. But we want to turn the page, hoping that other victims will find the courage and the energy to take over” (ibid.)

Following this court decision, many other complaints would emerge, giving rise to various judicial proceedings.

Four members of the Beatitudes religious community in Aveyron reported Brother Pierre-Étienne Albert for “sexual touching of minors” (AFP, 12 June 2008). This 57-year-old man confessed to the courts to “some fifty sexual assaults committed across the whole of France on children aged 5 to 14 between 1985 and 2000” (La Dépêche, 3 October 2008). “He was placed under formal investigation and under judicial supervision in February 2008 in Rodez” (AFP, 17 October 2008).

According to Pierre-Étienne Albert: “The community’s hierarchy was perfectly aware of his actions and allegedly did nothing to put an end to them, contenting itself with moving him from “house” to “house”.” (Sud Ouest, 3 October 2008)

“It is in this context that a judicial inquiry for failure to report sexual assaults on minors was opened in Rodez (12). Six Beatitudes officials were placed in police custody in recent days in Toulouse, La Roche-sur-Yon (86) and Prayssas (47). In Prayssas, it was a retired couple, organisers of an association linked to the community, Alliances internationales, who were questioned by the gendarmes of the Toulouse investigation service. Placed in custody on Monday, they were released the next day without any charge being retained against them. At the same time, the investigators also searched the property of the Kinor association, in Labrit (40), regarded as the home of the founder of the Beatitudes, Gérard Croissant” (Sud Ouest, 3 October 2008).

Nicolas Le Port-Letexier, 28, a pupil from 1995 to 1999 at the cours Agnès de Langeac, the community’s secondary school located in Autrey (Vosges), gives the following testimony: “The head of the Autrey community, whom we called the shepherd, would come and soap me in the shower. In the evening, he would invite other youngsters to massage him naked on the bed in his room. He stroked the buttocks and kissed the chest of another. Some officials had sexual relations with pupils (…) Eight young people, to my knowledge, have taken their own lives” (Le Parisien). It should be noted that Le Parisien headlined its article “Investigation into a series of suicides in a religious community”, whereas in its issue of 21 January 2009 it specifies that one of the persons took their own life in a hotel in Toulouse.

“The Épinal prosecutor, Bernard Marchal, has decided to open a preliminary inquiry following “new elements” about the events that occurred within the Agnès de Langeac school, between 1995 and 1999, in Autrey (Vosges)” (Le Parisien, 21 January 2009).

A member of the prayer groups of the Beatitudes community of Vaumoise approached an anti-cult association: “He felt trapped and feared that this religious community was substituting itself for medicine, treating people with prayers during certain services” (Le Parisien, 8 August 2008).

Olivier Demarle, who had joined the community established in the château de Thy in Belgium, says he was confronted with mental manipulation and a “highly dangerous” therapy (Le Parisien – Aujourd’hui en France, 15 December 2008).

“Gérard Croissant, 59, the founder of the Catholic community of the Beatitudes (…) was arrested as he stepped off a plane on Tuesday morning at Roissy airport. He was arriving from Rwanda, where he had taken refuge for the previous ten months. (…) He was released but will be summoned by the investigating judge to be placed under formal investigation for “failure to report sexual assaults on minors under 15”.” (Le Parisien, Thursday 6 November 2008)

The Pontifical Council for the Laity, for its part, stressed “the need to get to the bottom of the problems raised and to undertake from now on a path of spiritual and structural refoundation” and asked that the general assembly be held before November 2009 (AFP, 17 October 2008). It was held from 1 to 31 October 2009 at Châteauneuf-de-Galaure and still authorises the community to keep “for some time yet the status of private Association of the Faithful of pontifical right, as has been the case since 8 December 2002. A major surprise! For many religious observers, this general assembly was expected to do nothing less than sign the end of the coexistence of the different states of life within the Beatitudes” (Famille Chrétienne).

MIVILUDES and anti-cult associations

In an article in the Canard Enchaîné of 10 January 2007, the journalist Didier Hassoux reports a comment by Jean-Michel Roulet (then president of MIVILUDES) on the Beatitudes community: “A concordant body of evidence fully justifies referring the matter to the courts”, because “families have described to us situations that can be qualified as dérives sectaires”. The current president of MIVILUDES, “Georges Fenech and his advisers went to the national and international headquarters of the Beatitudes in Blagnac, where they met the general moderator François-Xavier Wallays, his deputy and several members”. The MIVILUDES president explains: “I have initiated a method which is to go out into the field rather than staying in an office (…). We had received some twenty complaints or reports, from former members or their families, concerning the Beatitudes: sexual assaults, family ruptures, abandonment of assets followed by unpaid volunteer work, psycho-spiritual practices, confusion with the religious practice of a congregation of consecrated life while an application for congregation status is being examined by the religious-affairs bureau of the Interior Ministry (…) I have referred the matter to the prefect of Haute-Garonne to verify the lawfulness of the volunteer work, and to have him ask where the daughters of a couple who are without news of them are. I am going to convene the council around me. We are at the reflection stage. But MIVILUDES surveillance is needed.” (La Dépêche).

Jean-Michel Roulet’s tone remains cautious, and Georges Fenech utters neither the expression “dérive sectaire” nor the expression “mental hold”, though both are “consecrated” in the mission’s rhetoric. These expressions are nevertheless used by complainants and by the press.

It is interesting to compare Georges Fenech’s remarks on the Beatitudes community with those he made about the “Amour et Miséricorde” community in the Jura, very quickly accused of being a “cult”: according to MIVILUDES (…) the information gathered “attests to conduct constituting dérives sectaires within this group, through testimonies revealing a process of hold over its members, of rupture with the family and social environment, and of financial pressure.” If one compares the complaints filed against these two groups, it is nonetheless clear that the Beatitudes community is the more controversial.

The difference in treatment apparently stems from this community’s closeness to the Catholic Church, which has a special status in France; anti-cult terminology cannot be used without precautions. Far be it from us to regret MIVILUDES’s caution, but this attitude, rather than a salutary overall stepping-back, illustrates the variable-geometry laïcité that characterises our country.

Some commentators, moreover, criticise MIVILUDES’s new strategy of action: “There is indeed a blurring of roles: while deputy Fenech is indeed charged with a mission of evaluating the judicial mechanisms designed to fight dérives sectaires more effectively, he is not a judicial police inspector, and his searches/visits at communities amount to a blurring of roles” (Michel Janva, Chrétienté.info).

In an article in the Nouvel Observateur of 29 March 2007, the journalist Marie Lemonnier reports the words of Guy Rouquet, president of Psychothérapie Vigilance, who laments: “There are many sincere people inside the community who do not see the superstructure and the way in which they are used and abused”.

The theme of mental hold is the favourite argument of anti-cult associations. It has the appreciable particularity of being anxiety-inducing, which generally spares one from having to provide any proof, and the double function of discrediting from the outset the person or persons accused of these practices and of striking their supposed victims with irresponsibility.

Reactions of the community, its neighbours and the Catholic Church

The community has filed a number of complaints for defamation: “This brings to around ten the number of complaints filed against media outlets: television channels, national and regional daily newspapers, a weekly, a free paper and even a website” (La Dépêche, 20 January 2009).

Following the statements of a member of the Vaumoise community fearing that the community was substituting itself for medicine, Bernard Grenier, the vicar general of the diocese of Beauvais, declares: “That is not the case! They take under their wing those who ask them for help. I think the man who took alarm and believed he was dealing with a cult must have been surprised by the manifest fervour of the religious. Perhaps he was invited to take part in prayers, and perhaps he did not recognise himself in them?” The same story from the mayor of Vaumoise, Germain Nicolas, for whom this was an unfortunate misunderstanding. “We have lived alongside them for twenty years. Thanks to them, some communes deserted by priests have got a service back. The healing services do indeed exist, but it is in no way a matter of treating people through prayer. It is called the office of the sick and takes place roughly once a quarter. People come to pray for those who feel condemned or who have a serious illness that medicine has not managed to cure. They are looking for comfort, that is all. Besides, let those who have questions about this community come to their open day on 16 September. There is nothing to hide.” (Le Parisien, 8 August 2007)

Following the accusations made against Brother Pierre-Étienne Albert, internal tensions came to light: “‘We are living through a sort of inquisition. It is the consequence of the reporting,’ declared this laywoman to AFP, regretting that everyone was passing the buck”. “The truth has ruined our life, our integrity,” lamented this woman, for whom “it is we who are the criminals now”. Muriel, who accompanied the perpetrator of the acts for seven years, felt that with more courageous men and bishops with more conviction, the situation would have been different. “This story must serve a purpose,” stressed this trainee on the path to committing to the community, present at the abbey since 2000 (AFP, 12 June 2008).

Cardinal Bernard Panafieu, archbishop emeritus of Marseille, entrusted by the Vatican with a mission to the Beatitudes, speaks of “recent painful events affecting (the) community” (AFP, 17 October 2008).

The Pontifical Council for the Laity, for its part, stressed “the need to get to the bottom of the problems raised and to undertake from now on a path of spiritual and structural refoundation” and asked that the general assembly be held before November 2009 (AFP, 17 October 2008).

“From a legal point of view, the Holy See expects each state of life to be clearly ‘defined’ within the community: laity, consecrated men and women, religious brothers and sisters, families… “So we are moving towards the creation of a female religious institute, a male institute, and an association of families, Rome indicates. At present, this is not yet the case, which sometimes gives rise to confusion. We have pointed out to them a possible way forward, which involves a thorough renewal."" “For the archbishop emeritus of Marseille, this ‘growth crisis’ will have allowed the Beatitudes (1,100 members spread across the world, including around a hundred priests) to ‘take stock and readjust (their) orientations’, with a view to rooting their ‘dynamism’ in the life of the Church” (La Croix)

The media treatment

Marie Lemonnier’s article in the Nouvel Observateur opens thus: “Strange things are happening in this “new community”, one of the largest in the Catholic world. Several of its members denounce mental manipulation, abuses of power, even a racketeering enterprise. Its founder has disappeared. The courts have been seized of the matter, and the Church is deeply embarrassed”. As for the founder: “He has (…) a vaguely Mephistophelian beard”. At no point does the journalist seem to take an interest in the views of members satisfied with their membership of the community. The article is constructed like those spine-tingling stories that magazines treat us to in summer to entertain us, and this with no regard for the consequences for the people who still take part in this community. This journalistic style can be described as “social contempt”, an attitude the editors of the Nouvel Observateur would forbid themselves… if the newspaper’s code of ethics is to be believed. Faithful to its satirical style (it was difficult to hope for better) Le Canard Enchaîné angles its article on the financial deviances of the organisation, whose object is said to be the “multiplication of the dough”. Any figure at all is used to demonstrate the fraud. The cost of a 4-day training course “ranges between 400 and 800 euros”, a figure which, in itself, has little chance of provoking reactions. Never mind: “as the faithful are asked to perform works of charity, they pay an additional offering, in cash or by cheque, but with no payee named, if you please…”. To secure the reader’s definitive assent, the journalist invokes a sure-fire source of indignation by mentioning the alternative therapeutic practices of Doctor Hamer that are supposedly used within the community. In the space of a few lines, hundreds of people are devalued: either as swindlers, or as poor unwitting victims.

Le Parisien, in Stéphanie Forestier’s article of 8 August 2007, balances its account with positive testimonies about the community. The announcement of an open day at the Vaumoise community nevertheless inspires this comment from it: “one may wonder about the discretion displayed by the community, which does not seem to want to open its doors before mid-September”. It would suffice for this journalist to recognise the anti-cult climate that reigns in France to understand the caution of spiritual minorities towards the media.

While it is natural for the complaints and the context of the cases cited to be reported in the press and on television, we note once again that many journalists let off steam at little cost against communities of people about whom they know almost nothing, except through the testimonies of a few complainants. Their generally very partial treatment of information in so-called “cult” cases does not invite the groups so labelled to open up. Nobody, indeed, has a taste for media lynching, particularly when judicial proceedings are under way. Is the objective of producing information that is more balanced and more respectful of judicial time really so difficult a goal to attain?

Following the articles published at the end of May 2008 in the columns of the French daily newspapers Nord Éclair and La Voix du Nord against the community, the courts convicted the two newspapers on appeal of public defamation (source).

The Beatitudes community is also suing the newspaper Le Parisien-Aujourd’hui en France for defamation. The newspaper has just been made the subject of a referral order before the criminal court (source)

In a communiqué dated 15 November 2011 (Église Catholique), the Pontifical Commissioner and the General Council of the Community of the Beatitudes take stock of this community’s situation. They note that, following three initial decades of rapid growth and dynamism, “the fragilities, the defects, the deviations appeared more clearly which, without calling into question the overall value of its mission, have gravely affected its growth: ill-balanced psycho-spiritual practices, confusion in the common life of the different states of life (laity, consecrated), problems of governance, serious offences committed by some of its members. (…) In 2007, the Holy See set the Community an imperative of spiritual and structural refoundation. (…) This process led to the approval of new statutes and to its refoundation as a “public association of the faithful of diocesan right”, by Mgr Robert Le Gall, Archbishop of Toulouse, on 29 June 2011. (…) The Community deplores (…) the simplistic and erroneous conflations which take no account of its recent evolution, carried out under the guidance of the Church.

It denounces the false and defamatory accusations made against it, in particular when it finds itself called a “cult"".

[CICNS:] The Pontifical Commissioner and the General Council of the Community of the Beatitudes are right to denounce the “simplistic and erroneous conflations”, but they immediately contradict themselves by seeking to extract themselves from the label of “cult” without refuting it in general terms. They thereby validate the use of this term for other groups that are victims of the same simplisms as those that overwhelmed the community of the Beatitudes. Without the Vatican’s support, this community would have fallen under the blows of MIVILUDES, which has professionalised the technique of conflation.