Rise of French Laïcité. Stephen M. Davis

Чтение книги онлайн.

      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.

      1

      Laïcité and the

      Religious Question

Any attempt to understand the history of French laïcité is confronted with the challenge of where to begin, what to include, and what to omit. For present purposes, it must suffice to survey major events, personages, and themes which marked French history and contributed to the emergence of juridical laïcité in the early twentieth century. We seek to understand the historical context out of which the French concept of laïcité arose, the implications of the 1905 legal separation of Church and State, the demise of religion in France, and the current revival of interest in the subject of laïcité with the emergence of Islam and its claims. According to French philosopher and historian Marcel Gauchet, the history of laïcité in France is closely linked to the history of the State as one of the major actors in the process of the removal of religion from the public sphere. Although this has happened elsewhere, in France there has been a greater marginalization of religion.1

      French history might be likened to peeling back layers of an onion, where one not only weeps, but one also finds the need to go deeper to the core. This book does not attempt to provide a comprehensive treatment of French history on which almost countless volumes have already been written. The history of the great nation of France is long and vast with innumerable events of importance and influence. Few nations have had a greater influence on world events than France. As historian William Stearns Davis observes:

France has been a participant in, or interested spectator of, nearly every great war or diplomatic contest for over a thousand years; and a very great proportion of all the religious, intellectual, social, and economic movements which have affected the world either began in France or were speedily caught up and acted upon by Frenchmen soon after they had commenced their working elsewhere.2

One of the most well-known events in modern history is the French Revolution. Gildea asks whether the French Revolution was good, bad, or both at the same time or at different times. How did the ideals of 1789 lead to the Terror of 1793? How did the guillotiners become the guillotined? The answers often depend on whom you read and on the pre-commitments and perspectives of the writers. The interpretation of events may differ according to the underlying agenda or political loyalties of the reader. To this day there are divergent opinions from different quarters of French society, from those on the political Left to those on the Right. On the political Right, there are those who contend that the French Revolution was a disaster in its attack against the Church and monarchy and that it ruined the advanced economic status of France when compared to other European nations. The Terror of 1793 was the natural consequence of anarchy, and revisionists cannot paint over the destruction of a society that the monarchy might have been able to reform if given time. On the political Left, defenders of the Revolution claim that the Revolution continues and the terror was justified to safeguard the Republic and procure freedom. Robespierre was a hero and admirable in his defense of the nation against monarchists and religionists. In fact, the guillotine was seen as more humane than former methods of torture and persecution, and both revolutionaries and counterrevolutionaries committed atrocities.3

      These observations do not devalue historical recording and recollection. They act as safeguards in recognition of one’s own prejudices and those of others. They provide evidence that consensus is lacking on the interpretation of historical events, that there is no single collective memory among French people, and that outsiders should tread carefully and avoid stereotypical misrepresentations of the history of others. However, given the above-mentioned cautionary remarks, there are broad brushes which appear incontestable. Few nations have experienced the centuries of upheaval suffered by the French people in the name of religion. This history contributed to the separation of the established Church from the public sphere, juridically in 1905 and constitutionally in 1946 and 1958. Over the last century there has followed a rapid demise of the dominant religion with the inauguration of a laïque Republic. Cesari observes:

For reasons particular to France’s historical situation, most notably the resistance of the Catholic church to the law of separation, this rejection of religion eventually took on a radical character. The conception of secularism [laïcité] in France is thus an extremely rigid one, in which any and all signs of religion must be eradicated from public space.4

      On one hand, this book examines the failures of the established Church in France to be truly Christian in many respects, particularly in its monopolistic form and in wielding political power prior to its forced disestablishment in 1905. The failures of the Church in France are well documented, and many failures have been recognized by the modern Roman Catholic Church. Without question the Church battled forces opposed to her authority and resisted until all resistance became futile. At times, the Church contested attempts to remove her from political power. At other times, she made compromises with secular authorities. At most times, she sided with monarchism in both its absolute and constitutional forms. For example, as will be seen later, the Church gave her allegiance to Napoleon III (1808–1873) during the establishment of the Second Empire (1852–1870). This would contribute to the Church’s undoing in the Third Republic (1870–1940) when anticlerical Republicans came to power in 1879 determined to regulate the Church-State problem once and for all.

On the other hand, in all fairness to the spirit of that age, even if the Church had been faithful to her calling, the conflict between the Church and State was perhaps inevitable. The arrival of the Reformation with its emphasis on the authority of Scripture, the priesthood of the believer and the freedom of conscience, the invention of the printing press, and later Renaissance humanism in France with its emphasis on individual autonomy, conspired to undermine the Church’s authority. Man was placed at the center of the universe and became master of his own destiny on earth. The great eighteenth-century philosophical movements inspired by critical thinking, the progress of knowledge, and the ideals of tolerance and liberty sharpened the conflict against prevailing religious thought. Barzun affirms that “the zeal for explanation by measuring the regularities of nature kept strengthening Deism and atheism and weakening the credibility of a Providence concerned with individuals. Western culture was inching toward its present secularism.”5 In the nineteenth century, the conflict intensified with scientific progress, the elevation of reason, and the influence of Cartesian thought. Man became master of nature. Religious dogmas, ancient texts, and devotion to tradition previously passed on from generation to generation were viewed as backwards and prescientific. With the entrance of democracy and universal suffrage, the only source of legitimate power was found in the people which replaced the divine unction consecrating the monarchy. All this conspired to put an end to the mingling of political and religious authority and the union of the throne and altar.6

From the time of the conversion of Roman emperors to Christianity to the official separation of Church and State in the early twentieth century, the Church held or sought political power and declared itself as the only true religion as found in Holy Scriptures.7 Now, after centuries of Christian influence, the rapid dechristianization of France and most of Western Europe has taken place in a relatively short period of time. Today the great cathedrals of France are mostly known as tourist attractions. Church attendance on any given Sunday has steadily declined. This decline has been well documented and statistically France has had sharper declines than her European neighbors.8 Dechristianization СКАЧАТЬ