Is Europe’s tradition of secularism adequate to meet the challenges of highly globalised 21st century societies? We can discover better ways of living alongside different faiths and cultures which encourage and celebrate a diversity of spiritual expression.
Is Europe’s tradition of secularism adequate to meet the challenges of highly globalised 21st century societies? We can discover better ways of living alongside different faiths and cultures which encourage and celebrate a diversity of spiritual expression.
The current controversy in France over the government’s decision to ban Muslim headscarves and other religious symbols from state schools goes right to the heart of a fundamental issue - whether Europe’s tradition of secularism (separating religion from state) is adequate to meet the challenges of highly globalised 21st century societies.
All religions have something to say on human duties and obligations, and on how people should relate to each other. In this sense Christianity as much as Islam has a political dimension to it. Today it is easy to forget that the principles of secularism were forged out of two centuries of bloodshed in Europe as Protestants and Catholics, each with different visions of the state, fought for political dominance. The claims of religion on political life are not easily surrendered.
In an address to the French Nation on December 17th, President Jacques Chirac described secularism as ‘one of the great achievements of the Republic’, and ‘a crucial element of social peace and national cohesion’. The reason for this, he said, was ‘the neutrality of the public sphere which enables the harmonious existence side by side of different religions. Like all freedoms, the freedom to express one's faith can only have limits in the freedom of others, and in the compliance with rules of life in society.’
It is hard to disagree with this. The problems arise when the neutral public sphere is defined as a place where religious expression is banned. The reason for this goes back to Europe’s experience of religious conflict, and the deep assumptions which grew out of it that (a) religion is an inevitable cause of conflict and (b) different religions are incapable of finding a shared vision for society.
Secularisation has led to several unforeseen problems. First, a religion limited to ‘private life’ has much less appeal than one which gives a vision for how human society as a whole should live.
Secondly, when the basis for social cohesion moves from a morality sanctioned by religion to the rule of law there is a corresponding shift in motivation from ‘acting morally because it is right’ to ‘following the rules so I won’t get caught and punished’.
Thirdly, when the neutral public sphere is no longer a place for discourse on the fundamental questions of life’s meaning and purpose, life becomes meaningless and purposeless for many people. The aggressive pursuit of material possessions is, in part, driven by an attempt to fill that emptiness - with dire consequences for the environment.
Is there an alternative? I believe there is. Religions have come a long way in the last two centuries and, whilst not agreeing on metaphysics (the nature of God for instance) they have found a surprising amount of common ground on issues of morality. The ‘Parliament of World Religions’ in 1993 produced a ‘Declaration of a Global Ethic’ which, I imagine, most atheists and agnostics would also be happy to subscribe to. Furthermore, mainstream religious institutions have matured politically to the point where they no longer sanction violence and war as a means to religious ends.
Admittedly, this still leaves lots of scope for tension between religions, but my experience (and the experience of Initiatives of Change over the last 60 years) has been that when the following principles are applied it is possible to fully express my own faith whilst working with people who are whole-heartedly living out a different faith:
1. Focus on the task of shaping the world around a shared moral vision. In this task much more unites us than divides us.
2. Turn the searchlight inwards. We all have a natural tendency to judge ourselves by our ideals and to judge others by their actions. Instead of blaming the other for their failings, first observe and correct where I fall short.
3. Listen with respect. It is hard enough to understand my own faith, so what chance do I have of beginning to understand another’s faith unless I listen first.
When I apply these principles I find a deepening of my own faith and a growth in my spirit.
As a European Christian, I humbly have to accept responsibility for secularism’s more anti-religious sentiments which largely stem from the failures of previous generations of Christians. However, I hold out the hope that we can discover better ways of living alongside different faiths and cultures which encourage and celebrate a diversity of spiritual expression.
NOTE: Individuals of many cultures, nationalities, religions, and beliefs are actively involved with Initiatives of Change. These commentaries represent the views of the writer and not necessarily those of Initiatives of Change as a whole.
English