¶10 On the other hand, it is quite certain, as we also indicated above, that it is in Catholicism alone that what still subsists, despite everything, of traditional spirit in the West has been maintained;1 does this mean that, there at least, one can speak of an integral preservation of tradition, sheltered from every attack of the modern spirit? Unfortunately, it does not seem that this is so; or, to speak more exactly, if the deposit of tradition2 has remained intact, which is already a great deal, it is rather doubtful that its profound meaning is still effectively understood, even by a small elite, whose existence would doubtless manifest itself by an action or rather by an influence that, in fact, we observe nowhere. It is therefore more likely a question of what we would willingly call a preservation in a latent state,3 always allowing those who are capable of it to rediscover the meaning of tradition, even if this meaning is not currently conscious for anyone; and moreover, there are also, scattered here and there in the Western world, outside the religious domain, many signs or symbols4 that come from ancient traditional doctrines, and which are preserved without being understood. In such cases, a contact with the fully living traditional spirit is necessary to awaken that which is thus plunged into a sort of sleep, to restore lost understanding; and, let us say it once again, it is above all in this that the West will need the help of the East5 if it wishes to return to the consciousness of its own tradition.
←
→

Summary

Guénon states that the only remaining traditional spirit in the West has been maintained in Catholicism, but integral preservation sheltered from the modern spirit does not seem to exist. While the deposit of tradition has remained intact, its profound meaning is no longer effectively understood, even by a small elite whose influence is nowhere observed. Instead, tradition is preserved in a latent state, allowing those capable of it to rediscover its meaning, though it is not currently conscious for anyone. Scattered signs and symbols from ancient traditional doctrines also survive outside the religious domain, but they are preserved without being understood. To awaken this dormant understanding, contact with a fully living traditional spirit is necessary, and for this the West will need the help of the East to return to the consciousness of its own tradition.

General notes

  1. Catholicisme — Rendered as ‘Catholicism’. Guénon recognises that, among Western Christian denominations, Catholicism is the only one that has preserved a minimal traditional structure: hierarchical priesthood, apostolic succession, sacraments, doctrinal magisterium, veneration of saints, and a distinction between clergy and laity. Protestantism, by rejecting ecclesiastical authority, broke with this structure. However, as Guénon will qualify, the mere preservation of the external organisation does not guarantee the living understanding of the spiritual content. Catholicism has preserved the ‘letter’ of tradition, but the ‘life’ (the inner intelligence) has largely become obscured. ↩︎
  2. dépôt de la tradition — Rendered as ‘deposit of tradition’. The expression ‘deposit of tradition’ (depositum fidei in Latin) designates, in Catholic theological language, the totality of revealed truths transmitted by the Apostles and preserved by the Church. Guénon takes up this notion but broadens it: for him, the ‘deposit’ includes not only doctrinal statements but also rites, symbols, and methods of spiritual realisation. Even if this deposit remains formally intact (texts, dogmas, and rites are still present), its effective understanding can be lost, reducing it to the state of a ‘dead letter’. ↩︎
  3. conservation à l’état latent — Rendered as ‘preservation in a latent state’. Guénon here introduces a capital distinction: tradition can be preserved either in a ‘living’ state (effective understanding and transmission of its profound intelligence) or in a ‘latent’ state (the external forms — texts, rites, symbols — subsist, but their profound meaning is no longer currently perceived by anyone). In the latter case, tradition is not destroyed but ‘asleep’; it can be awakened by external contact with a fully living tradition. This is precisely what, according to Guénon, has occurred in the West: the Catholic deposit is intact, but its intellectual sense has become obscured, necessitating the help of the East for a restoration. ↩︎
  4. signes ou symboles — Rendered as ‘signs or symbols’. Guénon means by this cultural elements which, although originally bearers of a traditional significance, have been preserved unconsciously after the disappearance of the civilisation that produced them. These may be architectural motifs (Gothic cathedrals, Romanesque ornaments), heraldic emblems, folktales, folk rituals, Masonic symbols (in their degraded form), or vestiges of hermetic or alchemical philosophy. These signs are like ‘fossils’ of the ancient tradition, capable of being reactivated by an enlightened gaze. ↩︎
  5. secours de l’Orient — Rendered as ‘help of the East’. Guénon designates by ‘East’ those traditional civilisations which have preserved an uninterrupted spiritual life and a fully awakened metaphysical intelligence: principally Hindu India (Brahmanism and Vedānta), Buddhist Tibet, esoteric Islam (Sufism), and the Far East (Taoism, traditional Confucianism). The ‘help’ of the East does not consist in imposing its external forms on the West, but in providing a living contact with the universal truth (the sophia perennis), which will allow Westerners to ‘awaken’ the profound meaning of their own Christian tradition, which has remained latent. This is a central theme of Guénon’s work. ↩︎