secularism in France

{{lang|fr|Laïcité}} relies on the division between private life, where adherents believe religion belongs, and the public sphere, in which each individual should appear as a simple citizen who is equal to all other citizens, not putting the emphasis on any ethnic, religious, or other particularities. According to this concept, the government must refrain from taking positions on religious doctrine and consider religious subjects only for their practical consequences on inhabitants' lives.

It is best described as a belief that government and political issues should be kept separate from religious organizations and religious issues (as long as the latter do not have notable social consequences). This is meant to both protect the government from any possible interference from religious organizations and to protect the religious organization from political quarrels and controversies.

Proponents argue that {{lang|fr|laïcité}} itself does not necessarily imply any hostility of the government with respect to any religion, asserting that French state secularism is actually based upon respect for freedom of thought and freedom of religion. Therefore, the absence of a state religion—and the subsequent separation of the state and church—is considered by proponents to be a prerequisite for such freedoms.

{{main|History of secularism in France}}

The French word {{Wikt-lang|fr|laïc}} comes from Latin {{Wikt-lang|la|laicus|lāicus}}, which is a loanword from the Greek {{transliteration|grc|lāïkós}} ({{lang|grc|λᾱϊκός}}, 'of the people'), itself from {{transliteration|grc|lāós}} ({{lang|grc|λᾱός}}, 'people').Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary. Retrieved September 30, 2008, from Dictionary.com website: [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/laic laic] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303175343/http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/laic |date=3 March 2016 }}{{Cite web |url=http://www.cnrtl.fr/lexicographie/laicit%E9 |title=TLFi dictionary |access-date=6 November 2008 |archive-date=7 January 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200107205221/https://www.cnrtl.fr/lexicographie/laicit%E9 |url-status=live }}{{efn|While the term was first used with this meaning in 1871 in the dispute over the removal of religious teachers and instruction from elementary schools, the word {{lang|fr|laïcisme}} dates to 1842.{{citation|last=Ford|first=Caroline C.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZW5eFfumuYMC|title=Divided houses: religion and gender in modern France|page=6|publisher=Cornell University Press|year=2005|access-date=February 10, 2012|isbn=0801443679|archive-date=18 January 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230118184958/https://books.google.com/books?id=ZW5eFfumuYMC|url-status=live}}}} The French suffix {{Wikt-lang|fr|-ité}} is equivalent to the English {{Wikt-lang|en|-ity}}.

Secularism is a concept rooted in the French Revolution, beginning to develop since the French Third Republic after the Republicans gained control of the state.

While the term was originally the French equivalent of the term laity (i.e., everyone who is not clergy), this meaning changed after the Revolution, and came to denote the keeping of religion separate from the executive, judicial, and legislative branches of government.{{citation needed|date=December 2015}} This includes prohibitions on having a state religion and on the government endorsing any religious position, be it a religion or atheism.

From the end of the 19th century, the word {{lang|fr|laïcité}} has been used in the context of a secularization process—among countries where the Catholic Church had retained its influence—to mean the freedom of public institutions (especially primary schools) from the influence of the Church. Today, the concept covers other religious movements as well. Secularism took form for the first time during the French Revolution: the abolition of the Ancien Régime in August 1789 was accompanied by the end of religious privileges and the affirmation of universal principles, including the freedom of opinion and equal rights expressed by the 1789 Declaration of Rights of Man and Citizen. The texts of the Declaration of Rights of Man and Citizen were incorporated into the preamble to the Constitution of October 4, 1958. Among them is article 10 of the declaration "No one should be worried about his opinions, even religious, provided that their manifestation does not disturb the public order established by law."

Public education has been secular since the laws of March 28, 1882, and October 30, 1886, which established "moral and civic instruction" in place of teaching religious morals and secularism of personnel and programs, respectively.

In the 19th century, secularization laws gradually separated the state from historical ties with the Catholic Church and created new sociopolitical values constructed on the principles of republican universalism. This process, which took place in a larger movement linked to modernity, entrusted the French people with redefining the political and social foundations: the executive, legislative and judicial powers; the organization of the state, its components, its representations; the education system, the rites of civil life, and the development of law and morality; regardless of religious beliefs. The Third Republic notably recreated the organization of the school system, by establishing public, secular, and compulsory education (Jules Ferry laws). The Jules Ferry laws (1881–1882) are supplemented by the Goblet law (established in 1886) on the organization of primary education, article 17 of which provides that education in public schools is exclusively entrusted to secular staff. This process culminated in 1905 with the Law of Separation of Churches and State, which solidified secularization.

Although the term was current throughout the 19th century, France did not fully separate church and state until the passage of its 1905 law on the separation of the Churches and the State, prohibiting the state from recognizing or funding any religion.

However, the 1905 law did not use the word {{lang|fr|laïcité}} itself, and so the notion of {{lang|fr|laïcité}} as a legal principle is open to question, as it was never defined as such by the text of a law.{{Cite book|last=Roy|first=Olivier|url=https://archive.org/details/secularismconfro00royo|title=Secularism Confronts Islam|publisher=Columbia University Press|year=2007|isbn=978-0-231-14102-4|location=New York Chichester, West Sussex|pages=[https://archive.org/details/secularismconfro00royo/page/n32 17]–18|url-access=limited}} It was not until the Constitution of 1946 from the French Fourth Republic that the word appeared explicitly as a constitutional principle entailing legal effect, but without being further specified. If built before 1905 religious buildings in France (mostly Catholic churches, Protestant chapels, and Jewish synagogues) became the property of the city councils. Those now have the duty to maintain the (often historical) buildings but cannot subsidize the religious organizations using them. In areas that were part of Germany at that time, and which did not return to France until 1918, some arrangements for the cooperation of church and state are still in effect today (see Alsace-Moselle).

Secularism is a core concept in the French Constitution: Article 1 formally states that:

{{Translation table|lang1code=fr|lang2code=en|text1=La France est une République indivisible, laïque, démocratique et sociale. Elle assure l’égalité devant la loi de tous les citoyens sans distinction d’origine, de race ou de religion. Elle respecte toutes les croyances.|trans1=France shall be an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic. It shall ensure the equality of all citizens before the law, without distinction of origin, race or religion. It shall respect all beliefs.}}

{{More citations needed section|date=October 2014}}

The principle of {{lang|fr|laïcité}} in France is implemented through a number of policies, primarily based on the 1905 law. The French government is legally prohibited from recognizing any religion (except for legacy statutes like those of military chaplains and the local law of Alsace-Moselle). Instead, it recognizes religious organizations, according to formal legal criteria that do not address religious doctrine:{{Citation needed|date=November 2020}}

• whether the sole purpose of the organization is to organize religious activities (so that, for instance, the pretense of being a religious organization is not used for tax evasion)
• whether the organization disrupts public order.

French political leaders, though not by any means prohibited from making religious remarks, mostly refrain from it. Religious considerations are generally considered incompatible with reasoned political debate. Political leaders are not allowed to practice any religion and are expected to differentiate whatever religious beliefs from their political arguments. Christine Boutin, who openly argued on religious grounds against a legal domestic partnership available regardless of the sex of the partners, quickly became the butt of late-night comedy jokes.{{Citation needed|date=November 2020}}

Many find that being discreet with one's religion is a necessary part of being French, which has led to frequent divisions with some non-Christian immigrants, especially with part of France's large Muslim population. As such, the debate has taken place over whether any religious apparel or displays by individuals (e.g., the Islamic hijab, Sikh turban, Christian crosses, and Jewish Stars of David and kippah) should be banned from public schools. Such a ban in France came into effect in 2004. In the spring of 2011, the official non-discrimination agency, la HALDE, reinforced {{lang|fr|laïcité}} in hospitals—as advocated by the Minister of the Interior, Claude Guéant—and in public service generally.{{Citation needed|date=November 2020}}

The strict separation of church and state which began with the 1905 law has evolved into what some religious leaders see as a "form of political correctness that made bringing religion into public affairs a major taboo."Beita, Peter B. [http://www.christiantoday.com/article/french.presidents.religious.mixing.riles.critics/16423.htm French President's religious mixing riles critics] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160420223313/http://www.christiantoday.com/article/french.presidents.religious.mixing.riles.critics/16423.htm |date=20 April 2016 }} Christianity Today, Jan. 23, 2008, Former President Nicolas Sarkozy initially criticized this approach as a "negative {{lang|fr|laïcité}}" and wanted to develop a "positive {{lang|fr|laïcité}}" that recognizes the contribution of faith to French culture, history, and society, allows for faith in the public discourse, and enables government subsidies for faith-based groups. Sarkozy saw France's main religions as positive contributions to French society. He visited the pope in December 2007 and publicly acknowledged France's Christian roots, while highlighting the importance of freedom of thought,{{cite web|url=http://www.christiantoday.com/article/sarkozy.breaks.french.taboo.on.church.and.politics/15760.htm|title=Sarkozy breaks French taboo on church and politics - Christian News on Christian Today|access-date=29 April 2016|archive-date=7 February 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120207184301/http://www.christiantoday.com/article/sarkozy.breaks.french.taboo.on.church.and.politics/15760.htm|url-status=live}} arguing that faith should come back into the public sphere. On 12 September 2008, in line with Sarkozy's views on the need for reform of {{lang|fr|laïcité}}, Pope Benedict XVI said that it was time to revisit the debate over the relationship between church and state, advocating a "healthy" form of {{lang|fr|laïcité}}.{{citation|access-date=2012-02-10|last=Allen|first=John L.|url=http://ncronline.org/node/12101| journal=National Catholic Reporter|date=2008-09-12|title=Pope in France: The case for 'healthy secularism}} Meeting with Sarkozy, he stated:

{{blockquote|In fact, it is fundamental, on the one hand, to insist upon the distinction between the political realm and that of religion in order to preserve both the religious freedom of citizens and the responsibility of the state toward them.{{nbsp}}[...] On the other hand, [it is important] to become more aware of the irreplaceable role of religion for the formation of consciences and the contribution which it can bring to – among other things – the creation of a basic ethical consensus within society.}}

In 2009, Sarkozy changed footing on the place of religion in French society, as he publicly declared the burqa as "not welcome" in France, and favoring legislation to outlaw it. In February 2010, two people in burqas managed to pass the security doors of a post office in their full veils, after which the two removed their head coverings, pulled out a gun, and held up the post office.{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/07/2812378.htm|title=Burqa-clad robbers hold up post office|work=ABC News|access-date=29 April 2016|date=2010-02-06|archive-date=17 November 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101117173857/http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/07/2812378.htm|url-status=dead}} Following March 2011, local elections strong disagreement appeared within the governing UMP over the appropriateness of holding a debate on {{lang|fr|laïcité}} as desired by the French President. On 30 March 2011, a letter appeared in {{lang|fr|La Croix}} signed by representatives of 6 religious bodies opposing the appropriateness of such a debate.

A law was passed on 2011 April 11 with strong support from political parties, as well as from Sarkozy, which made it illegal to hide the face in public spaces, affecting a few thousand women in France wearing the niqab and the burqa.

Scholar Olivier Roy has argued that the burkini bans (2016) and secularist policies of France provoked religious violence in France (though the main islamist attacks happened in 2015, which evidencies the lacks of Roy's point of view), to which Gilles Kepel responded that Britain, which has no such policies, still suffered a greater number of attacks in 2017 than France.{{Cite news|url=https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/london-gave-shelter-to-radical-islam-and-now-it-s-paying-the-price-1.5482356|title=London Gave Shelter to Radical Islam and Now It's Paying the Price, French Terrorism Expert Says|last=Lerner|first=Davide|date=2017-06-14|work=Haaretz|access-date=2018-06-09|language=en|archive-date=4 May 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220504200920/https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/london-gave-shelter-to-radical-islam-and-now-it-s-paying-the-price-1.5482356|url-status=live}}

Lebanese-born French author Amin Maalouf has criticized the characterization of France's political structure as truly secular, remarking: "I have never understand how a country that called herself secular could call some of her citizens 'French Muslims', and deprive them of some of their rights merely because they belonged to a religion other than her own."{{Cite book|last=Maalouf|first=Amin|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/44398190|title=On identity|date=2000|publisher=Harvill|isbn=1-86046-729-6|location=London|oclc=44398190}}

In 2021, the French Senate approved a measure to ban the hijab for women under the age of 18. The amendment was part of a proposed law “reinforcing the respect of the Republic’s principles” under President Macron’s administration. Even if not officially codified, such proposals serve as political signals. Measures framed under laïcité, or French secularism, are frequently used by conservative lawmakers to test public reaction and determine how, or when, to push them through. Past anti-Muslim laws in France have followed similar trajectories. The now-enforced 2004 law banning hijabs and all “ostentatious” religious symbols from public schools began as a controversial proposal in the 1990s. The 2021 amendment would build on that by extending restrictions beyond the school setting, effectively outlawing hijab for all minors in public spaces.

Although such laws are written broadly enough to apply to all religions, their implementation has primarily targeted Muslim women and girls. Many report feeling forced to choose between their education and their religious beliefs. Given that France is home to Europe’s largest Muslim population, over three million people, such policies have wide-reaching effects. Contradictions are evident in how Christian holidays remain national public holidays, despite the state’s supposed religious neutrality. This selected application of secularism shows how such laws regulate who is allowed to fully participate in the public sphere and under what conditions.

Legal scholar Rim-Sarah Alouane contrasts France’s laïcité with the American secular model, noting that while the U.S. model protects believers from state interference, French secularism is designed to shield the state from religion itself. Alouane also emphasizes the historical and colonial context of these laws. The first wave of hijab-related controversy dates back to 1989, when Muslim girls in a Paris suburb were expelled from school for violating laïcité. Though France’s highest administrative court initially ruled that religious symbols could be worn as long as public order wasn’t disturbed, public debate continued. In 2004, a formal ban on all religious signs in public schools was passed, extending the principle of state neutrality to students as well. Attempts to extend the ban to universities failed, but the targeting of Muslim minors has continued.

This legal and cultural hostility toward visible expressions of Islam is closely tied to France’s colonial history. In Algeria, which was considered an extension of France itself, Muslims were treated as second-class citizens and denied full French identity. The veil, once a symbol of resistance against colonial rule, came to carry both orientalist and threatening connotations. Alouane also notes that in France, the hijab is caught in a dual frame: exoticized through orientalist fantasies and simultaneously feared as a symbol of anti-colonial defiance.

{{More citations needed section|date=February 2020}}

Other countries have followed in the French model, having forms of secularism—examples include Albania, Mexico, and Turkey.{{citation|access-date=2012-02-10|last=Burma|first=Ian|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=YaC6-yO4mMEC|title=Taming the gods: religion and democracy on three continents|page=111|publisher=Princeton Univ. Press|year=2010|isbn=978-1400834204|archive-date=18 January 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230118184959/https://books.google.com/books?id=YaC6-yO4mMEC|url-status=live}}

{{Anchor|Québec}}

{{See also|Quiet Revolution}}

Public discourse in Quebec, the only predominantly French-speaking province in Canada, has been greatly influenced by the secularism of France since the 1960s. Prior to this time, Quebec was seen as a very observant Catholic society, where Catholicism was a de facto state religion. Quebec then underwent a period of rapid secularization called the Quiet Revolution. Quebec politicians have tended to adopt a more French-style understanding of secularism rather than the rest of Canada which is similar to the United States. This came to the fore during the debate on what constitutes the "reasonable accommodation" of religious minorities.{{cite web|url=http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2011/10/secularism-and-its-discontents/|title=Secularism and its discontents – The McGill Daily|author=admin|access-date=29 April 2016|archive-date=4 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304054740/http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2011/10/secularism-and-its-discontents/|url-status=live}}

In September 2013, the government of Quebec proposed Bill 60, the "Charter affirming the values of State secularism and religious neutrality and of equality between women and men, and providing a framework for accommodation requests." The bill would alter the provincial human rights law to prohibit public employees from wearing objects that overtly indicate a religious preference. The people who would be most impacted by such a law would be Muslim women wearing a hijab, Jewish men wearing a kippah, and Sikh men (or women) wearing a turban. Employees who do not comply with the law would be terminated from their employment. The party that had proposed the bill, the Parti Québécois, was defeated in the 2014 election by the Quebec Liberal Party (who gained a majority of seats), which opposed the bill. As a result, the bill is considered 'dead'.

In 2019, Premier François Legault's CAQ government passed Bill 21, a secularism law banning public officials in positions of coercive power from wearing or displaying any religious symbols. However, the display of religious symbols affixed in public institutions like hospitals will be left for each administration thereof to decide. To counter charges of hypocrisy, the crucifix in the Quebec National Assembly was also removed.{{Cite web| url=https://montrealgazette.com/news/quebec/premier-legault-to-address-quebecers-on-secularism-sunday-at-530-p-m| title=Legault says Bill 21 is moderate approach to an old problem | Montreal Gazette| date=April 2019| access-date=19 April 2019| archive-date=5 April 2019| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190405112421/https://montrealgazette.com/news/quebec/premier-legault-to-address-quebecers-on-secularism-sunday-at-530-p-m| url-status=live}}

French {{lang|fr|laïcité}} influenced the Constitution of Mexico despite the Catholic Church maintaining strong influence. In March 2010, the Chamber of Deputies introduced legislation to amend the Constitution to make the Mexican government formally {{lang|es|laico}}—meaning 'lay' or 'secular'.Goodrich, Luke, [http://www.offnews.info/verArticulo.php?contenidoID=20974 Mexico's Separation of Church and State ] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110718011021/http://www.offnews.info/verArticulo.php?contenidoID=20974 |date=18 July 2011 }} OffNews March 18, 2010, originally published in the Wall Street Journal Critics of the move say the "context surrounding the amendment suggests that it might be a step backward for religious liberty and true separation of church and state".

Coming on the heels of the Church's vocal objection to legalization of abortion as well as same-sex unions and adoptions in Mexico City, "together with some statements of its supporters, suggests that it might be an attempt to suppress the Catholic Church's ability to engage in public policy debates." Mexico has had a history of religious suppression and persecution. Critics of the amendment reject the idea that "Utilitarians, Nihilists, Capitalists, and Socialists can all bring their philosophy to bear on public life, but Catholics (or religious minorities) must check their religion at the door" in a sort of "second-class citizenship" which they consider nothing more than religious discrimination.

{{Main|Separation of church and state#Switzerland}}

{{Main|Secularism in Turkey}}

In Turkey, a strong stance of secularism ({{langx|tr|laiklik}}) has held sway since Mustafa Kemal Atatürk's Turkish revolution in the early 20th century. On March 3, 1924, Turkey removed the caliphate system and gradually after that, all religious influence from the state. Sunni Islam, the majority religion, is now controlled by the Turkish government through the Department of Religious Affairs,{{Cite journal|last=Öztürk|first=Ahmet Erdi|date=2016-10-01|title=Turkey's Diyanet under AKP rule: from protector to imposer of state ideology?|journal=Southeast European and Black Sea Studies|volume=16|issue=4|pages=619–635|doi=10.1080/14683857.2016.1233663|s2cid=151448076 |issn=1468-3857|url=http://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/5402/1/Turkeys-Diyanet-under-AKP-rule-from-protector-to-imposer-of-state-ideology.pdf|access-date=19 July 2020|archive-date=6 May 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200506210706/http://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/5402/1/Turkeys-Diyanet-under-AKP-rule-from-protector-to-imposer-of-state-ideology.pdf|url-status=live}} and is state-funded while other religions or sects have independence on religious affairs. Islamic views that are deemed political are censored in accordance with the principle of secularism.

This system of Turkish {{lang|fr|laïcité}} permeates both the government and the religious sphere. The content of the weekly sermons in all state-funded mosques has to be approved by the state. Independent Sunni communities are also illegal. Minority religions, like Armenian or Greek Orthodoxy, are guaranteed by the constitution as individual faiths and are mostly tolerated,{{cite web |url=http://ovipot.hypotheses.org/1348 |title=Les minorités non musulmanes en Turquie: "certains rapports d'ONG parlent d'une logique d'attrition" |author=Jean-Paul Burdy |publisher=Observatoire de la Vie Politique Turque(Ovipot.hypotheses.org) |language=fr |access-date=2013-09-28 |archive-date=28 November 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171128183620/http://ovipot.hypotheses.org/1348 |url-status=live }} but this guarantee does not give any rights to any religious communities including Muslim ones. Turkey's view is that the Treaty of Lausanne gives certain religious rights to Jews, Greeks, and Armenians but not, for example, to Syrian-Orthodox or Roman Catholics, because the latter ones did not play any political roles during the treaty. However, the Treaty of Lausanne does not specify any nationality or ethnicity and simply identifies non-Muslims in general.

In 2009, the desire to reestablish the Greek Orthodox seminary on Heybeli Island near Istanbul became a political issue in regard to Turkey's accession to EU membership. The EU considers such prohibition to amount to suppression of religious freedom.[http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-11/03/content_12374026.htm Clinton criticizes Turkey for shrinking Christian population] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100501132912/http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-11/03/content_12374026.htm|date=1 May 2010}} Xinhuanet.com from Chinaview.cn, 3 November 2009.

{{Main|Separation of church and state in the United States}}

In the United States, the First Amendment to the Constitution contains a similar federal concept, although the term laicity is not used either in the Constitution or elsewhere and is sometimes used as a term to contrast European secularism with American secularism. That amendment includes clauses prohibiting both congressional governmental interference with the free exercise of religion and congressional laws regarding the establishment of religion. Originally this prevented the federal government from interfering with state-established religions. However, after the 14th amendment, these clauses have been held by the courts to apply to both the federal and state governments. Together, the "free exercise clause" and "establishment clause" are considered to accomplish a "separation of church and state."

Nonetheless, separation is not extended to bar religious conduct in public places or by public servants. Public servants, up to and including the President of the United States, often make proclamations of religious faith. Sessions of both houses of the United States Congress and most state legislatures typically open with a prayer by a minister of some faith or other, and many if not most politicians and senior public servants in Washington, DC, attend the annual Roman Catholic Red Mass at the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle regardless of their personal religious convictions. In contrast to France, the wearing of religious insignia in public schools is largely noncontroversial as a matter of law and culture in the US; the main cases where there have been controversies are when the practice in question is potentially dangerous (for instance, the wearing of the Sikh kirpan knife in public places) and even then the issue is usually settled in favor of allowing the practice.{{Citation needed|date=June 2021}} In addition, the US government regards religious institutions as tax-exempt non-profit organizations,{{citation|access-date=2018-08-14|title=Publication 557|url=https://www.irs.gov/publications/p557|publisher=Internal Revenue Service|year=2018|archive-date=15 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180815024345/https://www.irs.gov/publications/p557|url-status=live}} subject to limitations on their political involvement.{{citation|access-date=2018-08-14|title=Revenue Ruling 2007-41|url=https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-07-41.pdf|publisher=Internal Revenue Service|year=2007|archive-date=6 September 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180906044846/https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-07-41.pdf|url-status=live}} In contrast to Europe, however, the government cannot display religious symbols (such as the cross) in public schools, courts, and other government offices, although some exceptions are made (e.g. recognition of a cultural group's religious holiday). The United States Supreme Court has also banned any activity in public schools and other government-run areas that can be viewed as a government endorsement of religion.

The French philosopher and Universal Declaration of Human Rights co-drafter Jacques Maritain, a devout Catholic convert and a critic of French {{lang|fr|laïcité}}, noted the distinction between the models found in France and in mid-20th century United States.{{citation|access-date=2012-02-10|last=Carson|first= D. A.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=pIwE74bxvpAC|title= Christ And Culture Revisited|page= 189|publisher= Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing|year= 2008|isbn=9780802831743}}

He considered the US model of that time to be more amicable because it had both "sharp distinction and actual cooperation" between church and state (what he called "a historical treasure") and admonished the United States, "Please to God that you keep it carefully and do not let your concept of separation veer round to the European one."

{{Portal|Religion|Politics}}

• {{annotated link|Anti-Sacrilege Act|1825 Anti-Sacrilege Act}}
• {{annotated link|Anti-clericalism}}
• {{annotated link|Centre d'action laïque}}
• {{annotated link|Civil religion}}
• {{annotated link|Dechristianization of France during the French Revolution}}
• {{annotated link|Freemasonry and Catholicism}}
• French ban on face covering
• Islamic scarf controversy in France
• {{annotated link|Politics of Turkey}}
• {{annotated link|Secularism in Turkey}}
• {{annotated link|Secular education}}
• {{annotated link|Secular humanism}}
• {{annotated link|Secular state}}
• {{annotated link|Secularism}}
• {{annotated link|Laicism}}
• {{annotated link|Self-determination}}

{{notelist}}

{{reflist|2}}

{{Commons category|Secularism in France|Secularism in France}}

• [https://archive.today/20091124031706/http://www.hlrecord.org/news/french-secularist-defends-country-s-ban-on-religious-items-in-schools-1.937771 One of the architects of the law against religious symbols in schools defends the liberalism of laicite] in the Harvard Law Record
• {{cite news |last1=Astier |first1=Henri |title=The deep roots of French secularism |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3325285.stm |agency=BBC News |publisher=BBC News Online |date=1 September 2004}}
• {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070926113219/http://www.hsfk.de/fileadmin/downloads/prif78.pdf|title=Turkey. Islam and Laicism Between the Interests of State, Politics and Society}} by Peace Research Institute Frankfurt (PRIF), Germany, PRIF-Report No. 78/2007.
• [https://archive.today/20120909020115/http://www.logehiram.com/ Conference on Laicite and secularism]

{{Secularism in France|state=autocollapse}}

{{Europe topic|Secularism in}}

{{France topics}}

Category:Law of France

Category:History of Catholicism in France

Category:Religious policy

France