Professional Documents
Culture Documents
113
114 Secularism & Secularity
of French secularity today. In this short chapter I transpose the term secular into
the French context. Hence I do not confine the definition of the term secular to
that of laïque, but also extend it to the sociological meaning it has acquired in
English, that of “non-religious.”
relationship between the political and religious spheres and, more broadly,
religion and society.
Scholars have distinguished between laïcisation and secularization and
shown that laïcisation aimed to reduce the social significance of religion as an
institution by engaging political power, whereas secularization is the outcome of
social evolutions to which political power adapted or in which it participated.10
The historian Jean Bauberot has argued that laïcité was the result of a conflict in
which the state had to destabilize religious institutions—mainly Catholic —to
assert its authority and ensure democratic liberties, whereas secularization should
be viewed as a cultural transformation that has taken place mostly in countries
with a Protestant culture.11 Hence “French laïcité cannot be properly understood
without taking into account the struggle against clericalism, namely against the
power of the Church over society and individuals, particularly in the field of
education,” and that struggle originates the French specificity.12
Laïcité is a result of a historical process of laïcisation that started during
the Revolution, when the old monarchical regime collapsed and with it the
religious origin of its sovereignty. 13 In August 1789 the authors of the Declaration
of the Rights of Man and the Citizen declared “The principle of all sovereignty
resides essentially in the nation” (Article 3) and asserted liberty of conscience
(Article 10).
The domination of the Catholic Church, which legitimized the Old Regime,
was subsequently challenged as the Church was subordinated to the state: clerical
property was nationalized and the Civil Constitution of the Clergy reorganized
the hierarchical structure of the Church. After the fall of Robespierre, who had
imposed a deistic religion called “the Cult of the Supreme Being” the principle
of church and state separation was reestablished (1795) without, however, being
fully implemented.14 Napoleon’s Concordat in 1801 recognized the Catholic
Church as the majority religion while preserving the religious liberty acquired
by the Revolution.15
In the 19th century, a fierce confrontation opposed the “two Frances,” a
Catholic France and a republican France. Put differently, two different visions
waged “a war of religion:” one considered France the “eldest daughter of the
Church” (“la fille aînée de l’Église”) and the other saw France as the daughter of the
Revolution.16 In the second half of the century free thinking and anticlericalism
based on reason and the progress of science radicalized the conflict. So did the
debate on secular schooling (l’école laïque) in the 1880s when primary education
became free of charge, mandatory and secular. Religion was no longer taught
in schools, but one school-free week day was made available for religious
education.
116 Secularism & Secularity
The law on the separation of church and state, which was eventually passed
in 1905, abolished the Concordat. It was supported by the Jewish and Protestant
minorities, which were seeking to resist the hegemony of the Catholic Church.
Its principles established that “the Republic assures freedom of conscience.17 It
guarantees the free exercise of worship” (Article 1) and says that “The Republic
neither recognizes, nor salaries, nor subsidizes any religion” (Article 2). The law
was not applied to Alsace-Lorraine, which was then part of the German empire.
Nor was it extended to French Guyana, a colony. To this day the law does not
apply in those regions.
As the relationship between church, state, and society became less strained,
compromises were reached under the acceptance of a “secular pact” (pacte
laïque).18 Attitudes towards religion became more benevolent and less hostile—
“more open.”19 Today, laïcité is widely accepted.
Contrary to what is often said, the 1905 law had not confined religion to
the private sphere, but it had privatized the institution of religion by giving
religious groups the status of non-profit associations. Laïcité does not exclude
religious expression from the public sphere, but respects all beliefs by establishing
a distinction between an individual’s private life and his public dimension as
citizen, based on the idea that “it is as a private individual that, in his personal
life, an individual adopts spiritual or religious convictions, or does not, which he
can of course share with others.”20
The process of laïcisation and the subsequent 1905 law, however, have
fashioned a reserved behavior vis-a-vis religion and rendered the public expression
of religious beliefs sparse—French people do not talk about religion—and even
out of place, in the case for example of a president or any political figure bound
by the neutrality of the state. Besides, while ensuring the “social recognition of
religion,” laïcité has fostered a somewhat paradoxical lack of acknowledgement
and knowledge of religions—the French state and by extension French people
tend to ignore religion.21 And yet France is a secular state with a Catholic culture,
as the persistence of the religious elements in French public life demonstrates.
One striking example is the number of public holidays in the French calendar
—Easter Monday, Ascension Thursday, Pentecost Monday, Assumption Day,
All Saints’ Day, Christmas—the Christian orientation of which comes under
regular criticism by secularists or members of religious minorities.22
left sought to unify the private and state systems of education and in 1994 the
right favored resorting to public funding for the construction of private religious
schools. The scope of the resistance, which in both cases forced the governments
to abandon their proposals—together with the more recent debate on the
Muslim “veil” (headscarf ) in schools show that “school remains the place where
the historical trace of the war between the two Frances, persists.”23
The understanding of secularity in France indeed cannot be dissociated
from a full appreciation of the crucial role of public (state) schools, secular places
par excellence. The link between schools and laïcité was conceived in reference to
the Enlightenment motto “Sapere aude! ” and Condorcet’s idea that “instruction,”
as distinct from parental education, was political and schools the vehicle for
emancipation, universal progress, liberty, and equality.24 The champion of secular
schools is the FCPE, the largest parents’ union, which emphasizes that secular
schools are where “children of all origins learn how to live and work together
whatever their religious and philosophical convictions.” Freedom of conscience
and freedom of thought coexist to combine respect for religious pluralism with
the construction of critical minds.25
As in other secular countries, laïcité is now confronted with issues of
pluralism. The main change France is faced with is the growing presence of
Islam, which is now France’s second religion and which, as Daniele Hervieu-
Leger remarks, although hardly a new phenomenom “questions and disturbs
the normal way [European] society deals with religion in the public space.”26
Other changes must also be taken into account. These testify to the vitality of
religion within the secular framework, namely the arrival of North African Jews
in the 1960s who had a much more visible religious culture than the already
existing Jewish population, the increasing visibility of evangelical and Pente
costal Protestantism, the attraction of Buddhism, as well as the multiplication
of “new religious movements” and the related fear of “cults.”27
In 2003, the law banning conspicuous religious symbols in public schools
raised new passions which, as it was debated, divided the proponents of laïcité.
Two years later, the centenary of the law on church-state separation provided
the opportunity for an in-depth reflection on the meaning of France’s founding
principle as well as a debate over the relevance of a revision of the 1905 law.28
Three major secular attitudes can be broadly defined in relation to laïcité.
Some, advocating an “open laïcité,” are concerned with the free exercise of
religion, but are also tempered by a revision of the 1905 law. Those favoring a
“laïcité in movement” are sensitive to social and religious change, but
remain faithful to the history of the secular ideal. Finally, the more militant
laics defend the French republican model by denouncing the dangers of
118 Secularism & Secularity
Conclusion
This chapter defines two distinct meanings of the word secular in the French
context. One is related to issues of laïcité and individual attitudes towards the
relationship between religion and society. Following the work of other authors,
it has distinguished three ways of looking at laïcité today, one being “open” to
change and hence revision of the law on church and state separation, the other
two varying in degree in their defense of strict separation. The second meaning
of “secular” refers to non-religious worldviews and private attitudes to religious
and spiritual feelings.
The French are obsessed by laïcité, but they know little about it and also
about the role of what it is supposed to protect, namely religions.49 They have
reservations about religion in the world, but tend to ignore the evolution of
private religiosity in France.50 Looking at this cherished French idea through
American glasses, at a time when it is challenged by the vitality of religion
and confronted with pluralism, provides useful insights into the current
transformation of French society. Conversely, probing into the uses, meanings,
and interpretations of the term “secular” from a foreign perspective should help
to assess the significance of the controversial use of the term in the U.S.
9. Laïcité and Secular Attitudes in France 121
Endnotes
1. “Secularism: A Symposium,” Religion in the News, vol. 8, n°3, Winter 2006.
2. See for example “Churchgoing Closely Tied to Voting Patterns,” USA Today, June
2, 2004; Samuel Huntington, Who are We?: The Challenges to America’s National
Identity (Simon and Schuster, 2004), p. 82-83.
3. In his study of baby-boomers’ religiosity, Wade Clark Roof identifies a category
he labels “Secularists,” in “Toward an Integration of Religion and Spirituality,”
Michele Dillon, ed. Handbook of the Sociology of Religion (Cambridge University
Press, 2003), p. 147. This category is growing in the US, see Barry Kosmin and
Ariela Keysar, Religion in a Free Market: Religious and Non-Religious Americans—
Who, What, Why and Where (PMP, 2006). On the use of the term by religious con-
servatives David Klinghoffer, “That Other Church: Let’s Face it: Secularism is a
Religion. Let’s Treat it as Such,” Christianity Today, Dec. 21, 2004.
4. Françoise Champion, “La laïcité n’est plus ce qu’elle était,” Archives de sciences socia-
les des religions, 116 (2001), [On line], URL: http://assr.revues.org/document2775.
html. Page viewed June 9, 2006. This critical note on four recent books on laïcité
underlines the polymorphous quality of laïcité. In conclusion, the author calls for a
reflexion on “what is laïcité today?”.
5. Senate, Annex to the Minutes of the February, 25, 2004 session; Jacques Chirac,
December 12, 2004; Commission de réflexion sur l’application du principe de
laïcité dans la République, Rapport au président de la République, December 11,
2003. The Stasi commission, named after its head, Bernard Stasi, was in charge of
the report on religious symbols in public schools which inspired the 2004 law. “Re-
publican pact” has become a buzz phrase in French political rhetoric. It was popu-
larized by General De Gaulle in the mid-1940s to refer to what united the French
when the Fourth Republic was created following WW2.
6. “La France est une République indivisible, laïque, démocratique et sociale. […],”
Constitution of 4 October 1958, Assemblée Nationale. French laïcité was already
inscribed in the 1946 Constitution.
7. Phillip E. Hammond, David W. Machacek, and Eric Michael Mazur, Religion
on Trial: How Supreme Court Trends Threaten Freedom of Conscience in America
(Walnut Creek, AltaMira, 2004), p. 11.
8. Henri Pena-Ruiz, Qu’est-ce que la laïcité ? (Paris, Gallimard, 2003), p. 21.
9. Jean-Paul Willaime, “Laïcité et religion,” Grave Davie et Daniele Hervieu-Leger,
dir., Identités religieuses en Europe (Paris, La Découverte, 1996), p. 156.
10. Jean Bauberot, Histoire de la laïcité en France (Paris, Que Sais-je, 2000), p. 20 n.1.
See also Karel Dobbelaere, Secularization: A Multidimensional Concept (London,
Sage Publications, 1981).
11. Jean Bauberot, “Laïcité et sécularisation dans la crise de la modernité de l’Europe,”
Cahiers français, n° 273, oct.-nov. 1995, p. 29-30.
12. Willaime, “Laïcité et religion,” op. cit., p. 156.
122 Secularism & Secularity
13. Bauberot, Histoire de la laïcité en France, op. cit., p. 4. The author points out that the
notion of a secular (laïque) state truly emerged during the Revolution and refers to a
“prehistory” of laïcité, namely the long secularizing process prior to 1789 by which
institutions progressively dissociated themselves from the Catholic Church.
14. Ibid., p. 16.
15. Ibid., p. 19. The Concordat was signed in July 1801 by Pope Pius VII and Napo-
leon. For Henri Pena-Ruiz, it partook of a “logic of Old Regime theologico-political
domination more than it was “a step in the process of laïcisation” as Bauberot has
it (Qu’est-ce que la laïcité ? op. cit., p. 151)
16. Bauberot, Histoire de la laïcité en France, op. cit., p. 29.
17. Freedom of conscience refers to the freedom of thinking for oneself, which includes
agnosticism and atheism and integrates freedom of religion.
18. Bauberot, Histoire de la laïcité en France, op. cit., p. 87-88. Bauberot’s notion of
“pacte laique” is criticized by Pena-Ruiz who contends that the 1905 was not the
result of negotiations, but a governmental decision (Qu’est-ce que la laïcité?, op. cit.,
p. 302). On the compromises showing that the separation between Church and
State is not absolutely strict, see Jean Bauberot, “La France, République laïque,”
Jean Bauberot, dir., Religions et laïcité dans l’Europe des douze (Paris, Syros, 1994), p.
63-64.
19. Willaime, “Laïcité et religion,” op. cit., p. 164.
20. Pena-Ruiz, Qu’est-ce que la laïcité ?, op. cit., p. 12.
21. On the occasion of the centennial of the 1905 law Archives des sciences socia-
les de la religion published a special issue on the notion of state “recognition” of
religion banned by Article 2 (n°129, 2005). The question of religious studies
(“l’enseignement du fait religieux”) is another debated issue in France today. See
Regis Debray, “L’enseignement du fait religieux dans l’école laïque,” rapport au
ministre de l’Éducation Nationale, February 2002, 8-15.
22. Pentecost Monday, traditionally a public holiday, was transformed in 2005 by Prime
Minister Raffarin’s conservative government into a working “Day of Solidarity”
as part of a program designed to benefit old and handicaped people. The issue is
highly controversial, not because the move secularized the calendar, but because it
changed a paid holiday into a working day…
23. Jean Bauberot, “La France, République laïque,” Jean Bauberot, dir., Religions et
laïcité dans l’Europe des douze (Paris, Syros, 1994) p. 67.
24. Condorcet, Sur l’Instruction publique, 1791-1792.
25. Fédèration des Conseils de Parents d’Élèves des Écoles Publiques website, http://
www.fcpe.asso.fr/themes.aspx?idT=1, page viewed June 9, 2006.
26. Daniele Hervieu-Leger, “Islam and the Republic: The French Case,” Thomas
Banchoff, ed., The New Religious Pluralism and Democracy (Cambridge University
Press, forthcoming). The number of Muslims – secular and practicing – is estimated
at 5 or 6 million. Laïcité proscribes questions on religious belonging in the national
census.
9. Laïcité and Secular Attitudes in France 123
40. INSEE, Pratique religieuse par categorie socioprofessionnelle, 2004. Accessible on-
line.
41. Lambert, “Religion” , op. cit., p. 170.
42. Sylvette Denefle, Sociologie de la sécularisation: Être sans-religion en France à la fin
du XXe siècle (Paris, L’Harmattan, 1997), p. 8. The author has conducted her own
survey, but also refers to G. Michelat, J. Maître, J. Potel, J. Sutter, Les Français sont-
ils encore catholiques ? (Paris, Cerf, 1991) p. 105-110.
43. In Dominique Vidal, La France des ‘sans-religion’,” Le Monde Diplomatique,
September 2001.
44. Lambert, “Religion” , op. cit., p. 174.
45. Ibid., p. 175-182. The author points out that women are more likely to turn to
after-life or parallel beliefs, thus echoing previous patterns.
46. Ibid., p. 183. In 1999, 27 percent of convinced atheists believed in a life after
death.
47. Ibid., p. 184. In 1999, the rate was 10 percent for people aged between 18 and 29.
48. Daniele Hervieu-Leger, Le pèlerin et le converti: La religion en mouvement (Paris,
Flammarion, 1999).
49. The point that French people’s familiarity with laïcité prevents them from knowing
it well is made by Bauberot, Histoire de la laïcité, op. cit., p. 3.
50. CSA poll, September, 7, 2005. Accessible on line.