Читать книгу Rise of French Laïcité - Stephen M. Davis - Страница 9

In his book Le Château de Ma Mère (My Mother’s Castle),3 Marcel Pagnol recounts the childhood story of young Marcel (b. 1896) who debated within himself the existence of God. This took place upon his uncle’s return from midnight mass one Christmas Eve. During the service the uncle prayed that God would send the family faith. “Of course,” Marcel told himself, “I knew that God did not exist, but I was not completely sure. There are lots of people who attend mass, and even people who are serious. My uncle himself speaks to him often yet he’s not crazy.” Upon further reflection, he arrives at a conclusion which he admits is not really rational: “That God, who does not exist for us, certainly exists for others: like the king of England, who exists only for the English.”4

This quaint story about a young French boy illustrates what many French people in fact believed at that time and sheds light on the contemporary conflict in French society concerning the place of religion and belief in God. During this period, France enacted the Law of Separation on December 9, 1905, which formalized the rupture of Church and State. The law of 1905 guaranteed liberty of conscience to believe or not believe, and the free exercise of religion for those so inclined. The State would no longer provide subsidies for the four recognized religions—Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed, Jewish—and would practice neutrality in order that no religion be favored above another. The Vatican vigorously protested this law while Catholics in France, both clergy and laity, were themselves divided in their acceptance of the law’s provisions. Decades later the French Constitutions of 1946 and 1958 reinforced the substance of the law of 1905 in their first article: “France is an indivisible, laïque, democratic and social Republic. It ensures the equality of all citizens before the law without distinction of origin, race or religion. It respects all beliefs. Its organization is decentralized.”

One must look to the law of 1905 as a pivotal historical point, setting in motion a particular French conception of separation of Church and State (or in this case separation of the Church from the State). The Law of Separation was enacted in the context of centuries of Roman Catholic domination, the sixteenth-century Reformation and Wars of Religion, the French Revolution of 1789, the rise to power of Napoleon and the 1801 Concordat with the Vatican, the restoration of the monarchy (1814–1830), and the intense struggle between clerical and anticlerical forces in the early years of the Third Republic (1870–1940) highlighted in the Dreyfus Affair at the end of the nineteenth century. This book is focused on understanding the French concept of laïcité and its historical development and how laïcité shaped French society in the twentieth century. We will also examine the resurgent debate over the disputed meanings and applications of laïcité in the twenty-first century in light of challenges from Islam and the emergence of Islamic fundamentalism (intégrisme islamiste).5

Professor of anthropology John Bowen presents an interview with a high-ranking French official in the Central Bureau of Religion (Bureau central des cultes). The official commented on the differences between religion in France and the United States. He recounted complaints received along the spectrum from Scientologists to evangelical ministers who felt that the system of laïcité should be changed. His response was simply, “They do not understand French history. Even the French Scientologists with whom I meet, even if they understand it some, they say that they cannot explain it to their American colleagues. So are we supposed to change our laws because you have trouble explaining France?”6

In the century following the law of 1905 there have been endless debates, essays, and books discussing, debating, and dissecting the law of 1905 and its implications for modern society. There are those who return to the law of 1905 as a touchstone or a lens through which they view and interpret current events and challenges to laïcité. There are others who assert that the law is often misapplied when it results in the suppression of the place of religion in French history, considers religion as a subject taboo in public schools, and leads to laws deemed discriminatory toward certain religions. The growth and influence of Islam in France has been the single major factor in a renewed debate on laïcité and on the question of the compatibility of Islam in a laïque Republic.

Despite the wealth of research on French religious history and on the concept of laïcité and modern challenges it presents in a pluralistic society, relatively little has been written on laïcité in English. At the outset, it should be noted that there is disagreement about whether the term laïcité should be used or its English equivalents secularism or secularization. Olivier Roy distinguishes between secularization as a phenomenon of society that does not require any political implementation and laïcité as a political choice which defines in an authoritative and legal manner the place of religion in society.7 He argues that laïcité is specific to France and incomprehensible in Great Britain where customs agents can wear the veil, as well in the United States, “where no president can be elected without speaking of God.”8 The word laïcité itself was not used in the law of 1905 but is found in the French Constitutions of 1946 and 1958. Patrick Cabanel suggests that, although some claim laïcité is untranslatable in other languages, the word national might be an acceptable synonym in certain contexts.9 His book is an excellent source for the meaning of words related to laïcité.

From a historical perspective, Jacques Barzun’s monumental work From Dawn to Decadence begins with the year 1500 AD and sets broad historical parameters for this volume. He affirms that “textbooks from time immemorial have called it [1500] the beginning of the Modern Era.”10 Barzun considers that the years 1500–1660 were “dominated by the issue of what to believe about religion,” the years 1661–1789 “by what to do about the status of the individual and the mode of government,” and the years 1790–1920 “by what means to achieve social and economic equality.”11 Following Barzun’s taxonomy, the first modern period opened in Europe with the Reformation in Germany under Martin Luther in 1517 and provides a convenient reference point to understand the foment of history in forming the French consciousness and setting the scene for future, interminable clashes between Church, State, and citizens.

Luther’s Reformation in Germany crossed into France where the seeds of Reformation were alternately sown and uprooted. Donald Kelley, in his book The Beginning of Ideology and Holt in Renaissance and Reformation in France, examine the influences of the Reformation and the religious conflicts which arose.12 Kelley has a chapter in which he demonstrates the important role of printing in disseminating both Reformation and counter-Reformation ideology, where the “war of words” preceded the Wars of Religion. Philip Benedict and Virginia Reinburg likewise present the importance of the printing press in the dissemination of the evangelical faith in France through the writings of Luther and Calvin.13 Holt explains how the Wars of Religion “proved to be the single most dangerous threat to the French state and monarchy before the Revolution of 1789.”14 These books provide essential historical elements on the early clashes between Protestantism and Catholicism which become crucial in understanding the growing desire for the promised Republican liberty in the 1789 French Revolution.

French religious historian Alain Boyer makes a significant contribution in a chapter on Protestants and their relation to the law of 1905. He states that during the French Revolution, generally speaking, Protestants regarded with envy the Declaration of the Bill of Rights [1791] in the United States.15 He also notes that Protestants accepted the 1801 Concordat between Napoleon and the Vatican because of the favorable treatment accorded Reformed and Lutheran believers. However, they found fault in that the Concordat gave a place of eminence to the Catholic Church and assumed that the head of State would be Catholic.16 He further asserts that the great majority of Protestants, especially Reformed believers, and even more so members of free churches [Églises libres], were favorable toward the separation.17

One particularly noteworthy historical event preceding the law of 1905 was the Dreyfus Affair. L’Affaire, as it has become known, demonstrates the competing forces at work to either reestablish the monarchy and Church in power or to solidify and advance the unfulfilled ideals of the 1789 Revolution. Among the books which connect l’Affaire with the religio-political struggles are the works of Cahm and Begley. Cahm observes, “French Catholicism at the end of the nineteenth century still bore the mark of the Church’s traditional theological anti-Judaism, based on the twin ideas of the Jewish people as deicides and as the embodiment of Evil.”18 A more recent work by Louis Begley notes “the struggle over the role of the Catholic church in education and the state, which the church lost when a law voted in on December 9, 1905, terminated the concordat between France and the Vatican and provided for a strict separation between church and state.”19 L’Affaire provides a window to see more clearly the impulses at that time for Church and State separation.

One of the observations made in this book is that the marginalization of religion has taken place in its removal from public space. Guy Haarscher affirms the classic understanding that laïcité is a political concept where the State does not privilege any religious confession and ensures the free expression of conscience to everyone. He does, however, recognize that laïcité might push religion strictly into the private sphere. In light of the multiculturalist experiences of many nations, Haarscher attempts to reconcile the law of 1905 with its contemporary ideal in France.20 Olivier Roy, cited earlier, is one of many French intellectuals questioning the role of laïcité in French society. His writings are indispensable for anyone wanting an insider perspective. He has written extensively on laïcité in confrontation with Islam. He recognizes that Islam’s presence in France has raised questions about whether Islam is compatible with laïcité française and whether Islam is a threat comparable to or greater than the threat of Catholicism at the beginning of the twentieth century. He warns against making laïcité a civil religion requiring adhesion to a body of common values and concludes that the problem is not Islam, but contemporary forms of the return of religion.21 Jean Baubérot is one of the most prolific writers on the topic of laïcité.22 He advances the idea of a plurality of laïcités from sociological, historical, and political perspectives. Baubérot also writes on religious themes—the foundations and evolution of religions and the intersection of faith and laïcité.23

The French concept of laïcité casts a long shadow over France in contemporary times and provides a lens for understanding current attitudes and events. As stated earlier, the law of 1905 reflects a culmination of events in France’s history and a precursor of events which would frame the French Constitutions in 1946 and 1958. Henri Pena-Ruiz asserts that the experience of the wars of religion and the persecutions tied to creedal obligation contributed greatly to the emergence of a laïque conscience.24 Those interested in understanding the French laïque conscience, or religious worldview, cannot afford to neglect the historical events preceding and surrounding the law of 1905, the far-reaching consequences of the law in the development of a culture imbibed with laïcité, and the present-day challenges in understanding a laïque nation with varying degrees of hostility or indifference to religion. France mesmerizes and mystifies Americans. We are often baffled by their general indifference to religion and their laws forbidding religious symbols in public schools, full-face veils in public places, and even the interdiction of burkinis on French beaches. Understand laïcité and one will gain insight in beginning to understand France and its people.

3. All translations are my own.

4. Pagnol, Le château, 127.

5. Maslowski, “Les chrétiens avec ou sans Dieu,” 214.

6. Bowen, Headscarves, 17.

7. Roy, Laïcité face à l’islam, 19–20.

8. Roy, Laïcité face à l’islam, 29.

9. Cabanel, Les mots de la laïcité, 64.

10. Barzun, From Dawn to Decadence, xvii.

11. Barzun, From Dawn to Decadence, xvii.

12. Kelley, Beginning of Ideology; Holt, “Kingdom of France.”

13. Benedict and Reinburg, “Religion and the Sacred.”

14. Holt, “Kingdom of France,” 23.

15. Boyer, La loi de 1905, 71.

16. Boyer, La loi de 1905, 69–70.

17. Boyer, La loi de 1905, 72.

18. Cahm, Dreyfus Affair, 90.

19. Begley, Dreyfus Affair, 56.

20. Haarscher, La Laïcité.

21. Roy, Laïcité face à l’islam, 172.

22. Baubérot, La laïcité; Histoire de la laïcité.

23. Baubérot, Petite histoire du christianisme; Baubérot and Carbonnier-Burkard, Histoire des protestants.

24. Pena-Ruiz, Qu’est-ce que la laïcité?, 265.