Clericalism and secularism in the canton of Fribourg (Switzerland)

Answer

The absence of faith does not imply the struggle against beliefs. There are atheists who are indifferent or benevolent towards religions. For example, Michel Bavaud published several books to declare his atheism, but continues to go to mass and pay Church tax. On another level, Buddhism and atheism are compatible. Those who did not live in the era when the Church exercised social control are more inclined to indifference. In any case, a distinction must be made between people and doctrines. It is necessary for all atheists to be tolerant and respectful towards believers, just as it is necessary for all believers to be tolerant and respectful towards atheists.

But doctrines must be subjected to criticism. If my social environment discriminates against me in the name of religion, it leaves me with only two options: to submit or to resist. An environment with a totalitarian tendency incites a brittle tone. A form of defence is expressed by rejection, which is totally different from attack.

Each person has his or her own story. As far as I am concerned,

• during the period 1948-1968, I lived in Valais where Catholicism was the state religion; I underwent 13 years of indoctrination, of which 5 years were brainwashing; the experience of clericalism made me anticlerical;
• the pre-Vatican II Catholicism I was taught did not recognise religious freedom and condemned human rights, which led me to reject Catholicism and to approach agnosticism;
• between 1968 and 1978 I studied mathematics, which contributed to the adoption of a rationalist point of view; the epistemology of the sciences, by highlighting the lack of objective foundations of religions, led me to atheism;
• from 1978 onwards, in the high school where I taught, I was deprived of religious freedom and forced to hide my atheism even in my private life; an example of the misappropriation of the philosophy course for religious purposes led me to support secularism.

I have suffered the assaults of a society that was trying to maintain old dominant positions, before having to retreat and deploy on new lines that it could defend with less activism and fewer means. I feel I have the right - the same right as that of self-defence - to write that I pass a negative judgement on Catholicism, while respecting Catholics as individuals.

The valiant defenders of the values conveyed by the Church - teachers and political authority combined - the defenders conscientiously prescribed to me what I was to think. If I have received their solicitude with ingratitude, it is because my suffering is neither understood nor recognised. It is the adherence of the schools in Valais and Fribourg to the objective of the Christian state that annihilates the empathy I desire.

Why does society view resistance to religion with a hostile eye when it favours religious indoctrination through a crypto-clerical policy known as "culture based on Christian values"? Other notices must be present in the public square. I call for more benevolence towards atheists.

Answer

Politics and religion should not be mixed. "Religious parties should be replaced by secular parties." This advice given to Muslim countries also applies to the canton of Fribourg. Switzerland does not need a party that wants to maintain the remnants of clericalism.

Answer

The separation of Church and State concerns several issues, among which the financing of the official Churches through church tax is a prominent one. This separation is feasible since two cantons have achieved it: Geneva and Neuchâtel. In hospitals, prisons and centres for asylum seekers, the doors of these establishments can be opened to outside contributors in order to respond to requests. Any remuneration of external actors must be borne by those who call upon them and the communities that support them. As for charities, the State should favour those that are apolitical and non-religious so that the aid provided is not linked to propaganda, even if it is light or indirect. Public social assistance will be adapted and, if necessary, strengthened. It may not be distributed among religious organisations, as the latter do not cover the entire population.

As the Church is not a public service, it should not be financed as such.

Answer

This is a mistaken analysis. Secularism makes it possible to live together in good harmony. Unfortunately, some people reject it and oppose it with all their might, including violence. This is the problem.

Do not accuse secularism when it is a question of religious aberrations.

I have suffered the abuses of the religious policies of the cantons of Valais and Fribourg. This is proof that the legislation granting substantial privileges to recognised (not to say official) religions is deficient. It is necessary to give it a secular framework.

Answer

Religious sensitivity is a turn of mind built on personal dispositions, reinforced and supported by education in a cultural environment imbued with religiosity. Remove social pressure and much of it will evaporate.

For many people who have reached retirement age, religion is seen as the pillar that sustains society. This is no longer the case for young people who see religion as a strictly personal matter. It can be predicted that within a generation, the secular nature of the state will become established and separation from the church will be achieved, including in the cantons of Fribourg and Valais. There are already tangible political signs: some sections of the Socialist Youth and the Liberal-Radical Youth are making such demands. Unfortunately for them, the Swiss method - the so-called consensus method - is not to abolish clericalism, but to wait until the system falls into disuse. Resistance to religious indoctrination, mainly in the passive form, is ongoing.

We should not jump to conclusions. In ordinary human functioning, intelligence is put at the service of feelings, among which we must count fear and religiosity. When faith burns, reason capitulates and subordinates itself to it with zeal and application. This is why religions will not pass.

The evolution of the Muslim world in recent decades provides us with a sad example of a return to fundamentalism. The course of history is not linear. For example, Turkey is moving away from secularism and wants to give a more important role to Islam. Societies are not only transformed by adaptation, but also by resistance to change. We are then reduced to containing religious movements so that they do not become invasive again.

At present, the fragmentation of society into separate religious communities is growing, which should stimulate our vigilance. The only bulwark against a return to the past is the secularism of the state and the school. There will be no end to the struggle against those who want all citizens to live in a society with a privileged religious faith: the minority need only adapt. I have another conception of democracy in which minorities are respected.

Answer

It was a rearguard education, imposed in the name of "true faith", that aroused my resistance to religious indoctrination. What is non-retrogressive education?
In political matters, I am campaigning for the state to abolish the privileges granted to certain religious communities, such as the right to levy an ecclesiastical tax, to have a confessional window in public education, to contribute to the maintenance of the theological faculties, etc. The state does not have to interfere in the religious life of citizens. Resisting the residues of clericalism remains as relevant as ever!

In 2014, the launch of the popular initiative "For a secular Valais" shows that the issue is on the political agenda. In order to succeed, the initiative had to collect 6'000 signatures in one year. As it only collected 2'000, it was withdrawn. In my opinion, in the future, the separation of church and state will become a struggle throughout Switzerland.

Answer

I do not understand how this argument would exonerate the State and allow the Church to maintain a status that remains privileged.

When you say "It's not like that anymore", you have to understand that it's not like when the Catholic lobby put the State at its service. We have left those times, but not completely. The evolution of the canton is effective, but the credit for it does not go to the Church, who reluctantly underwent it.

Today, in 2019, I am 71 years old. What do I do with the phrase "It's not like that anymore"? Are you offering me the opportunity to relive my life in better conditions? And in the history of the canton of Fribourg, what period in the history of the canton of Fribourg should I ignore? And in the history of Christianity? The simple attenuation of clericalism does not satisfy me.

A problem that we consider to be solved may turn out to be one that we want to conceal, consciously or through lack of attention. But no, it is far from over; there are still some nice leftovers: the church tax, the state financing of the Faculty of Theology, the privileges granted to Christianity in education, crosses in public buildings and schools, etc. It is clever of Catholic activists to spread and make people accept the idea that "It's all over", because this defuses all protest, since there is nothing to protest against. We do not want to see that, despite the improvements that have taken place, the weight of religion remains important, including in the functioning of the state. One does not respond to obvious abuses by simply mitigating the biggest ones, leaving in place the whole system that produces them and keeping clericalism to the maximum that social constraints allow.

Whoever adheres to the faith taught is fulfilled by it. If what is asked of us corresponds to our desire, the process is carried out in serenity. Unfortunately, the heaviest aspect of the teaching I have received is the pretension of reigning over the conscience of others. It is then necessary to make an effort to imagine the discomfort of one who must, in conscience, refuse the proposed faith.

Only a few events whose veracity is difficult to dispute have been reported here. The situation would appear much more damning if it were possible to examine the underwater part of the iceberg. Among teachers, for example, there are relatively more openly Christian teachers than among the rest of the population. One explanation could be that when I was hired as a teacher of mathematics and physics at a public college, I was required to add the heading "religion" to my curriculum vitae. It would seem that the label "committed Christian" makes it easier to get a teaching position. The time of the state as a great supporter and sponsor of religion is far from over! Why in the Council of State is the Christian Democratic Party so keen to run the Department of Public Education?

Among the teachers, there are bound to be supporters of secularism at school in the manner of the cantons of Geneva and Neuchâtel. Why don't they dare to express themselves? I put the question to colleagues, who replied: "You have been appointed to a single school on a full-time basis for a long time. My situation is much more fragile". They are thus following the path chosen by society: waiting silently for the changing mores to reduce the role of religion even further.

In the mouths of those nostalgic for the past, I have the impression that the expression "it's not like it used to be" means "what remains of the state's support for Christianity must be maintained". It is true that society has partly freed itself from the weight of the church, but in a heterogeneous way. For example, while the newspaper La Liberté emancipated itself from religious tutelage, public education remained under the influence. The canton of Fribourg remains far removed from secularism. That it was worse in the past does not excuse the current situation, and important progress remains to be made. I do not agree with those who think that, since things are better than before, we must bravely support the tools of clericalism that have survived. Who will be the François Gross of the Directorate of Public Education, Culture and Sport, capable of resisting the Catholic lobby?

Behind the denial of the problem lies something deeper, which calls into question the Church's credit, because discrimination has been practised in the name of defending religion. When one takes advantage of an ideology revealed by God, it is not enough to declare "We don't do that any more" to clear oneself, because what is at issue is that clerical political practices, even today watered down, do not seem to have been inspired by a respectful, just and good God. The past tells us about the true nature of the Church.

Answer

The texts on my site relating to religion represent, in quantity, less than one thousandth of the Catholic indoctrination I received over thirteen years. Fortunately, I am not trying to restore a fair balance! I did this work to resist. Writing clarifies thought, gives it the coherence that takes it out of confused perception.

Most importantly, I feel much better now that some of the nonsense that the school had instilled in me has been removed from my head. In a secular state, the exercise I have been doing would be pointless. It's society that has a problem!

Answer

There is no confusion since the two subjects, indoctrination and beliefs, are developed and justified independently, with specific arguments.

For me, the important thing is that no authority - be it family, school, State or Church - should catch us in the net of a religious ideology. Everyone must remain free in their choices in spiritual matters. As such, even if it differs from mine, I can only respect and encourage your approach. On the other hand, I distance myself from all those who claim to submit to a Church or any other form of religious authority: the centre of decision is, and must remain, one's personal conscience.

I agree with you that the existence of a Creator is a matter outside the scope of our knowledge. However, in my life experience, clericalism mixes everything up and puts its opponents on the defensive. Since the conservative party is based on faith, it incites its critics to make a critical analysis of religion. I am convinced that a God who points his finger at every man and says, "I will judge you and if my scales are tipped the wrong way, you will be put in a torture chamber" is a belief to be rejected, but I accept other opinions without any problem.

To the defenders of an orthodoxy, I prefer those who demonstrate their intellectual autonomy by freeing themselves from religious tutelage, because this changes everything as regards the claim to reign over the conscience of others. This is the sign of success that I applaud, whatever personal path one chooses.

Answer

The queen of science has gone from theology in the Middle Ages to economics today. Like the Fribourg radicals who have changed sides (yesterday's anticlericals now support the residues of clericalism), intellectuals have little criticism to make of the clerical regime. Are they satisfied with a simple attenuation of clericalism or are they usurping their title as intellectuals? For those who are concerned about their careers, the opportunism of those who know where the places of power are is more profitable than the critical spirit. To be recited piously every day: "Religion, Catholicism in particular, is an excellent thing to support. Vote for the church tax and give public funding to the Roman Catholic theological faculty".

Why do the many advocates of less state intervention exclude religion from the scope of their principles?

The new generation looks better. In Switzerland, certain sections of the young radicals and young socialists have taken a clear stance in favour of secularism. But their elders are urging them to mute it.

Answer

At that time, I was 20 years old, I was still in boarding school, and I only saw a few rare images of the events of May 1968 that were reported by the newspapers during the weekends. The "Nouvelliste et Feuille d'avis du Valais" (the largest newspaper in the canton of Valais) discredited and misinformed the movement. I was effectively kept away from all "subversive ideas" and indoctrinated against all non-Catholic ideologies. It was only much later that I understood what had happened. The events of May 1968 - a revolt against social control - were only the scum of a profound change in society. The motto "Don't coerce more than necessary" changed the distribution of power throughout the Western world. To understand the evolution, one has to know the state of society before 1968.

I am always amazed to hear women say the word "May 1968 supporter" in a contemptuous tone when at that time they did not even have the right to vote. In the Catholic cantons, the good old days are the good old days of true values: the wife had to obey her husband and the children had to go to Sunday mass under the guidance of their teacher. By today's standards, the institutions of family, school, employers, church and state curtailed individual freedoms and commonly practised abuse of authority. For example, the law prohibited cohabitation of unmarried couples. It may be instructive to study the role of certain public schools, such as the teacher training college in the canton of Valais.

Answer

Christians and Muslims should not be separated into two separate communities, each with its own culture, religion and schools. Each community must avoid investing its energy in indoctrinating its members, coercing their behaviour and promoting proselytism, the aim being to convert the lukewarm and bring them back to the "right path". This is an effective means of generating conflict and intolerance. To find out what happens next, all you need to do is open a history book. Since the Enlightenment, our Western culture has been fighting against these abuses. We must see it as a break with the previous world dominated by religion and authoritarianism. Since then, culture has had the right to a secular space, and every person has the right to religious freedom. Christians, atheists, Muslims, Buddhists and others must blend into the same secular society. In order to avoid deepening confessional divisions, the state must remain neutral by refraining from intervening, without formalising certain Churches or supporting certain communities.

Today, Swiss public schools must cease to be places of religious propaganda. Just as one does not combat the plague by spreading cholera, it is counterproductive to counter one religion by developing another. It is not the Church that must be put back in the centre of the village, but man and the forum.

We want to be characterised by values that are more open and universal than the cult of credulity within a communitarian framework, namely human rights, democracy, respect for minorities, tolerance and secularism. The Western culture to be defended is precisely there.