The Separation of Church and State in France, and the Concept of Laïcité
by Matt Suhosky
Before the Revolution at the twilight of the 18th century, there was no clear sense of a separation between the Catholic Church and the French government, which in large part was the French monarch. Seeing this lack of partition and the abuses of the French monarchs, once the French Republic was established, a top priority of the young government was to legitimize the secularity of the government. And so, Article I of the French Constitution firstly defines France as a "secular" Republic.
While the United States maintains its secularization via the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of our Constitution, France does so by their definition of themselves as a "secular" state, implemented through a concept called "laïcité." Very different from the American system of separation of church and state, laïcité revolves around the idea that religion is a private and personal matter for citizens, and has no place in a public setting.
The French government has gone so far to protect this advanced secularization that in 2004, the French government banned students in public schools from wearing large "conspicuous" crosses, headscarves, turbans, and kippas. To the French, wearing these religious items would bring the individual, private concept of religion to a state-sponsored institution, violating the sacred principle of laïcité. In the United States, The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment maintains that all United States citizens are guaranteed the right to practice their own religion without the interference of government, which includes the right to wear and display religious symbols in public. However, the French's idea of separation of church and state holds that the two must be unconditionally separated, including the display of religious symbols in a public space.
For more information of the history and practicalities of laïcité, this short clip provides great insight into the French's interpretation of the separation of church and state:
Gaudium et Spes declares that "The Church, by reason of her role and competence, is not identified in any way with the political community nor bound to any political system." Gaudium upholds the doctrine that the Church and the government should be separate entities, and that neither should be bound to one another.
However, Gaudium also maintains that one of the basic rights of individuals is to "profess one's religion both publicly and privately." The Church fathers hold in Gaudium that it is a fundamental right for citizens to not only practice their religion, but to profess their religion in public. The Church would agree that a part of professing one's religion in public is wearing religious garb, notably crosses, headscarves, and kippas. Seeing how important religion is to the citizens of a state, the Church holds that the state should not infringe on an individual's right to profess their religion in a public or private setting.
This belief of the Church seems to completely counter the foundations of laïcité. While French understand that religion is an important part of a good proportion of their citizens, they consider religion a private matter with an irrelevant role in the public scene. The Church, however, also understands the importance of religion, and views it as a right that citizens be able to freely and openly profess their religion in public, which includes wearing garments and accessories appropriate to each's respective religion.
While the Church's view of the separation of church and state no doubt clashes with the concept of laïcité, it is doubtful that France will abandon their implementation of their interpretation of the role of the church and the state. Thankfully, the United States, since the adoption of the Constitution as the law of the land, has been parallel to the teaching of Gaudium et Spes, in that it is basic right of the citizen to profess their religion in a public and private atmosphere.
Sources:
1.
http://www.normandyvision.org/article12030701.php
2.
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/11/charlie-hebdo-france-secular-paris-attacks-lacite/
3. http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html
Here we have two different approaches to how to handle religious and secular lives. Is religion to be private or public? It is a hard question especially since both sides are doing what they think is best for both parties involved. Laïcité is an interesting concept. This is not the first time I have heard of how France operates. I took French in high school and college and their religious freedom practices were topics that came up. I think that it is easier for a person to appease everyone by not bringing up religion. It takes a braver person to stand up for what they believe, make it publically known, while still respecting everyone else’s different choices. By taking on this challenge, I think we as Americans are making a riskier choice, but ultimately a better one.
ReplyDeleteThough France's law means to protect and keep its citizens happy, I believe it may have taken its secularization too far. If one is not allowed to wear a religious clothing or item, it essentially forbids one to express part of the identity. I like the way you compare the two countries approaches on secularization!
ReplyDeleteI did not know anything about laicite before reading this post, and now I can say that I am much more informed on the concept. Your comparison between France's separation of Church and State and the US's in light of Gaudium et Spes was very interesting, and it seems clear that France's stance on the issue is to promote a sort of freedom from religious expression rather than a freedom of religious expression. Really good post!
ReplyDelete