Content deleted Content added
→See also: Added Central bank independence, Civil control of the military, Civil service independence, Editorial independence, Independent media, and Judicial independence |
|||
| (19 intermediate revisions by 18 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Use dmy dates|date=June 2023}}▼
{{Short description|Principle to separate religious and civil institutions}}
{{Redirect|Church and state|other uses|Church and State (disambiguation)}}
▲{{Use dmy dates|date=June 2023}}
{{Status of religious freedom|expanded=concepts}}
{{Liberalism sidebar}}
The '''separation of church and state''' is a philosophical and [[Jurisprudence|jurisprudential]] concept for defining political distance in the relationship between [[religious organizations]] and the [[State (polity)|state]]. Conceptually, the term refers to the creation of a [[secular state]] (with or without legally explicit church-state separation) and to '''disestablishment''', the changing of an existing, formal relationship between the church and the state.<ref>''The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States'' (1992), Kermit D. Hall, Ed. pp. 717–726</ref> The concept originated among early Baptists in America. In 1644, Roger Williams, a puritan minister and founder of the state of Rhode Island and The First Baptist Church in America, was the first public official to call for "a wall or hedge of separation" between "the wilderness of the world" and "the garden of the church."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Establishment Clause: Separation of Church and State |url=https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/establishment-clause-separation-of-church-and-state/ |access-date=2024-03-28 |website=The Free Speech Center |language=en-US}}</ref> Although the concept is older, the exact phrase "separation of church and state" is derived from "wall of separation between
In a society, the degree of political separation between the church and the civil state is determined by the legal structures and prevalent legal views that define the proper relationship between organized religion and the state. The [[arm's length principle]] proposes a relationship wherein the two political entities interact as organizations each independent of the authority of the other. The strict application of the secular principle of ''[[Secularism in France|laïcité]]'' is used in France, while secular societies such as Denmark and England maintain a form of constitutional recognition of an official [[state religion]].
The philosophy of the separation of the church from the civil state parallels the philosophies of [[secularism]], [[disestablishmentarianism]], [[religious liberty]], and [[religious pluralism]]. By way of these philosophies, the European states assumed some of the social roles of the church
==History of the concept and term==
Line 21:
===Medieval Europe===
{{Main|Church and state in medieval Europe}}
For centuries, monarchs ruled by the idea of [[divine right of kings|divine right]]. Sometimes this began to be used by a monarch to support the notion that the king ruled both his own kingdom and Church within its boundaries, a theory known as [[caesaropapism]]. On the other side was the Catholic doctrine that the [[
In the West the issue of the separation of church and state during the medieval period centered on monarchs who [[sphere sovereignty|ruled in the secular sphere]] but encroached on the Church's rule of the spiritual sphere. This unresolved contradiction in ultimate control of the Church led to power struggles and crises of leadership, notably in the [[Investiture Controversy]], which was resolved in the [[Concordat of Worms]] in 1122. By this concordat, the Emperor renounced the right to invest ecclesiastics with ring and crosier, the symbols of their spiritual power, and guaranteed election by the canons of cathedral or abbey and free consecration.<ref>{{cite book |last= Berman |first= Harold J. |title= Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition |url= https://archive.org/details/lawrevolutionfor0000berm |url-access= registration |publisher= Harvard University Press |year= 1983 |isbn= 0674517741 |oclc= 185405865 }}</ref>
Line 34:
In 1534, [[Henry VIII of England|Henry VIII]], angered by the [[Pope Clement VII]]'s refusal to annul his marriage to [[Catherine of Aragon]], decided to break with the Church and set himself as ruler of the [[Church of England]], unifying the feudal Clerical and Crown hierarchies under a single monarchy.<ref>{{Cite journal|url=http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon41.html|title=Henry VIII: 1509–47 AD|publisher=Britannia History|access-date=2008-03-26|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080320002225/http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon41.html|archive-date=2008-03-20|url-status=dead}}</ref> With periodic intermission, under Mary, Oliver Cromwell, and James II, the monarchs of Great Britain have retained ecclesiastical authority in the Church of England, since 1534, having the current title, ''[[Supreme Governor of the Church of England]]''. The 1654 settlement, under [[Oliver Cromwell]]'s [[Commonwealth of England]], temporarily replaced Bishops and Clerical courts, with a [[Commission of Triers]], and juries of Ejectors, to appoint and punish clergy in the English Commonwealth, later extended to cover Scotland. [[Penal law (British)|Penal Laws]] requiring ministers, and public officials to swear oaths and follow the Established faith, were disenfranchised, fined, imprisoned, or executed, for not conforming.
One of the results of the persecution in England was that some people fled Great Britain to be able to worship as they wished. After the American Colonies [[American Revolutionary War|revolted]] against [[George III of the United Kingdom]], the [[Establishment Clause]] regarding the concept of the separation of church and state was developed but was never part of the original US Constitution.
===
[[File:John Locke by Herman Verelst.jpg|thumb|right|[[John Locke]], English [[political]] [[philosopher]] argued for individual conscience, free from state control.]]
The concept of separating church and state is often credited to the writings of English philosopher [[John Locke]] (1632–1704).<ref name=AFP>Feldman, Noah (2005). ''Divided by God''. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, pg. 29 ("It took [[John Locke]] to translate the demand for liberty of conscience into a systematic argument for distinguishing the realm of government from the realm of religion.")</ref> [[Roger Williams]] was first in his 1636 writing of "Soul Liberty" where he coined the term "liberty of conscience". Locke would expand on this. According to his principle of the [[social contract]], Locke argued that the government lacked authority in the realm of individual conscience, as this was something rational people could not cede to the government for it or others to control. For Locke, this created a natural right in the liberty of conscience, which he argued must therefore remain protected from any government authority. These views on religious tolerance and the importance of individual conscience, along with his social contract, became particularly influential in the American colonies and the drafting of the [[United States Constitution]].<ref>Feldman, Noah (2005). ''Divided by God''. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, p. 29</ref>
Line 52:
In English, the exact term is an offshoot of the phrase, "wall of separation between church and state", as written in [[Thomas Jefferson]]'s letter to the [[Baptists in the history of separation of church and state#American Baptists|Danbury Baptist Association]] in 1802. In that letter, referencing the [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution]], Jefferson writes:
<blockquote>Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.<ref name=Jefferson11
Jefferson was describing to the Baptists that the [[United States Bill of Rights]] prevents the establishment of a national church, and in so doing they did not have to fear government interference in their right to expressions of religious conscience. The Bill of Rights, adopted in 1791 as ten amendments to the [[Constitution of the United States]], was one of the earliest political expressions against the political establishment of religion. Others were the [[Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom]], also authored by Jefferson and adopted by Virginia in 1786; and the French [[Declaration of the Rights of the Man and of the Citizen of 1789]].
Line 83:
The current situation, described as a "principle of state neutrality" rather than "separation of church and state",<ref name="hogan"/> has been criticised by both secularists and religious groups. On the one hand, secularists have argued that government neutrality to religions leads to a "flawed democrac[y]"<ref>Wallace, M. (2005). [http://www.hsnsw.asn.au/MaxWallace.html Is there a separation of church and state in Australia and New Zealand?] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160502154952/http://www.hsnsw.asn.au/MaxWallace.html |date=May 2, 2016 }} ''Australian Humanist'', ''77''. Retrieved 2010-10-10.</ref> or even a "pluralistic theocracy"<ref>Secular Party of Australia. (nd). [http://www.secular.org.au/mnu-viewpoints/mnu-separation-of-church-and-state The Separation of Church and State]. Retrieved 2010-10-10. {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130812090044/http://www.secular.org.au/mnu-viewpoints/mnu-separation-of-church-and-state |date=August 12, 2013 }}</ref> as the government cannot be neutral towards the religion of people who do not have one. On the other hand, religious groups and others have been concerned that state governments are restricting them from exercising their religion by [[Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001#Criticism|preventing them from criticising other groups]] and forcing them to do unconscionable acts.<ref>Davidson, S. (2009, October 27). [http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/27/victorian-abortion-law-overriding-the-conscience-of-doctors/ Victorian abortion law: Overriding the conscience of doctors] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303221920/http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/27/victorian-abortion-law-overriding-the-conscience-of-doctors/ |date=March 3, 2016 }}. ''Crikey''. Retrieved 2010-10-10</ref>
===
[[File:Azerbaijan Republic map.png|thumb|Azerbaijan and its main cities]]
[[Islam]] is the dominant religion in Azerbaijan, with 96% of Azerbaijanis being [[Muslim]], Shia being in the majority. However, Azerbaijan is officially a secular state. According to the Constitution of Azerbaijan, the state and mosque are separate. Article 7 of the Constitution defines the Azerbaijani state as a democratic, legal, secular, unitary republic. Therefore, the Constitution provides freedom of religions and beliefs.
Line 89:
The Azerbaijani State Committee for Work with Religious Organizations controls the relations between the state and religions.
Ethnic minorities such as [[Russians]], [[Georgians]], [[Jews]], [[Lezgis]], [[Avars (Caucasus)|Avars]], [[Udis]] and [[Kurds]] with different religious beliefs to Islam all live in [[Azerbaijan]]. Several religions are practiced in Azerbaijan. There are many Orthodox and Catholic churches in different regions of Azerbaijan.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.counterextremism.com/sites/default/files/Secularism_in_Azerbaijan_June%202015.pdf |title=Secularism in Azerbaijan |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160803174257/https://www.counterextremism.com/sites/default/files/Secularism_in_Azerbaijan_June%202015.pdf |archive-date=2016-08-03 |
===
[[File:Rui Barbosa2.jpg|thumb|upright|[[Rui Barbosa]] had a large influence upon the text adopted as the 1891 Constitution of Brazil.]]
Brazil was a [[Colonial Brazil|colony]] of the [[Portuguese Empire]] from 1500 until the nation's [[Independence of Brazil|independence]] from Portugal, in 1822, during which time [[Roman Catholicism]] was the official state religion. With the rise of the [[Empire of Brazil]], although Catholicism retained its status as the official creed, subsidized by the state, other religions were allowed to flourish, as the [[History of the Constitution of Brazil|1824 Constitution]] secured [[religious freedom]]. The fall of the Empire, in 1889, gave way to a Republican regime, and a Constitution was enacted in 1891, which severed the ties between church and state; Republican ideologues such as [[Benjamin Constant (Brazil)|Benjamin Constant]] and [[Ruy Barbosa]] were influenced by [[laïcité]] in France and the United States. The 1891 Constitutional separation of Church and State has been maintained ever since. The current [[Constitution of Brazil]], in force since 1988, ensures the right to religious freedom, bans the establishment of state churches and any relationship of "dependence or alliance" of officials with religious leaders, except for "collaboration in the public interest, defined by law".
===
{{See also|Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms|Religion in Canada}}
====
{{See also|Laïcité#Québec|Catholic Church in Canada}}
===
{{Main|Religion in China|Irreligion in China|State church}}
China, during the era of the [[Han Dynasty]], had established [[Confucius|Confucianism]] as the official state ideology over that of [[Legalism (Chinese philosophy)|Legalism]] of the preceding [[Qin Dynasty]] over two millennium ago.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://library.thinkquest.org/12255/library/dynasty/earlyHan.html |title=Early Han Dynasty |publisher=Library.thinkquest.org |access-date=2012-04-27 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120202133446/http://library.thinkquest.org/12255/library/dynasty/earlyHan.html |archive-date=2012-02-02 }}</ref> In post-1949 modern-day China, owing to such historic experiences as the [[Taiping Rebellion]], the [[Chinese Communist Party]] had no diplomatic relations with the [[Vatican City|Vatican]] for over half a century, and maintained separation of the [[temple]]s (be it a [[Taoist temple|daoguan]], a [[Buddhist temple]], a [[Church (building)|church]] or a [[mosque]]) from state affairs,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://ilookchina.net/2011/01/06/separation-of-church-and-state-%E2%80%94-part-13/ |title=Separation of Church and State – Part 1/3 |publisher=Ilookchina.net |date=2011-01-06 |access-date=2012-04-27 |archive-date=2012-05-24 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120524104832/http://ilookchina.net/2011/01/06/separation-of-church-and-state-%E2%80%94-part-13/ |url-status=live }}</ref> and although the Chinese government's methods are disputed by the Vatican,<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2007/01/18/benedict-china-070118.html | work=CBC News | title=Pope OK's Communist-chosen bishop in China: report | date=2007-01-18 | access-date=2011-02-22 | archive-date=2011-06-28 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110628225757/http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2007/01/18/benedict-china-070118.html | url-status=live }}</ref> [[Pope Benedict XVI]] had accepted the ordination of a bishop who was pre-selected by the government for the [[Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association]] in 2007. However, a new ordination of a Catholic bishop in November 2010, according to [[BBC News]], has threatened to "damage ties" between China and the Vatican.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11786359 | work=BBC News | title=Vatican warning on China bishop | date=2010-11-18 | access-date=2018-07-21 | archive-date=2022-05-11 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220511193051/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-11786359 | url-status=live }}</ref>
Line 109:
{{Blockquote|[...] No state organ, public organization or individual may compel citizens to believe in, or not to believe in, any religion; nor may they discriminate against citizens who believe in, or do not believe in, any religion. [...] No one may make use of religion to engage in activities that disrupt public order, impair the health of citizens or interfere with the educational system of the state. Religious bodies and religious affairs are not subject to any foreign domination.}}
====
{{Main|Religion in Hong Kong|Hong Kong Basic Law|Hong Kong Sheng Kung Hui|Catholic Church in Hong Kong}}
====
{{Main|Religion in Macau|Macau Basic Law|Catholic Church in Macau}}
===
{{Main|Religion in Croatia|Catholic Church in Croatia}}
[[File:Ustav Republike Hrvatske br 1.JPG|thumb|right|"Constitution no. 1", which is kept in the great hall of the Palace of the [[Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia|Constitutional Court]] and is used on the occasion of the [[Croatian presidential inauguration|presidential inauguration]]]]
Line 128:
The [[Roman Catholic Church in Croatia]] receives state financial support and other benefits established in [[concordat]]s between the Government and the Vatican. In an effort to further define their rights and privileges within a legal framework, the government has additional agreements with other 14 religious communities: [[Serbian Orthodox Church]] (SPC), [[Islamic Community of Croatia]], [[Evangelicalism|Evangelical Church]], [[Reformed Christian Church in Croatia]], [[Protestant Reformed Christian Church in Croatia]], [[Pentecostal Church]], [[Union of Pentecostal Churches of Christ]], [[Christian Adventist Church]], [[Baptist Union of Croatia|Union of Baptist Churches]], [[Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee)|Church of God]], [[Church of Christ]], [[Seventh-day Adventist Church|Reformed Movement of Seventh-day Adventists]], [[Bulgarian Orthodox Church]], [[Macedonian Orthodox Church]] and Croatian [[Old Catholic Church]].
===
The [[Constitution of Finland]] declares that the organization and administration of the [[Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland]] is regulated in the Church Act, and the organization and administration of the [[Finnish Orthodox Church]] in the Orthodox Church Act. The Lutheran Church and the Orthodox Church thus have a special status in Finnish legislation compared to other religious bodies, and are variously referred to as either "national churches" or "state churches", although officially they do not hold such positions.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Khag6tbsIn4C&dq=constitution+of+finland+church+act&pg=PA45|title=State-Religion Relationships and Human Rights Law: Towards a Right to ... – Jeroen Temperman – Google Books|date=August 19, 2020|isbn=978-9004181489 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200819135005/https://books.google.com/books?id=Khag6tbsIn4C&pg=PA45&lpg=PA45&dq=constitution+of+finland+church+act&source=bl&ots=SyaSALeKWe&sig=i9jOA2Ja-zalh7G-KT3JGBj6vKQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1uYX6ronOAhVMWywKHY7DCxgQ6AEIKjAC#v=onepage&q=constitution+of+finland+church+act&f=false |archive-date=2020-08-19 |last1=Temperman |first1=Jeroen |publisher=BRILL }}</ref> The Lutheran Church does not consider itself a state church, and prefers to use the term "national church".<ref>{{Cite web | title = Valtiokirkko purettu kansankirkoksi | trans-title = State Church Dismantled into National Church | publisher = Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland | work = evl.fi | date = 24 November 2006 | access-date = 23 July 2016 | url = http://evl.fi/EVLfi.nsf/Documents/85BBFB4816F713BEC2256FEA003A7232 | language = fi | archive-date = 28 June 2016 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160628125115/http://evl.fi/EVLfi.nsf/Documents/85BBFB4816F713BEC2256FEA003A7232 | url-status = live }}</ref>
The Finnish Freethinkers Association has criticized the official endorsement of the two churches by the Finnish state, and has campaigned for the separation of church and state.<ref>[[Eroakirkosta.fi]] – [http://eroakirkosta.fi/media/taustatietoa/toiminta-ajatus.html Palvelun tavoite: Kirkko on erotettava valtiosta] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160307032405/http://eroakirkosta.fi/media/taustatietoa/toiminta-ajatus.html |date=March 7, 2016 }}</ref>
===
{{See also|Laïcité|1905 French law on the Separation of the Churches and the State|Catholic Church in France}}
[[File:Gérard - Signature du Concordat entre la France et le Saint-Siège, le 15 juillet 1801.jpg|thumb|The Signing of the [[Concordat of 1801]] between France and the Holy See, 15 July 1801., which was repealed by the 1905 French law on the Separation of Church and State]]
Line 144:
Nevertheless, there are certain entanglements in France which include:
* The most significant example consists in two areas, [[Alsace]] and [[Moselle]] (see {{format link|Local law in
* In French Guiana the Royal Regulation of 1828 makes the French state pay for the Roman Catholic clergy, but not for the clergy of other religions.
* In the French oversea departments and territories since the 1939 décret Mandel the French State supports the Churches.
Line 157:
The [[Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany|German constitution]] guarantees [[freedom of religion]],<ref name="Section 4 of German Basic Law">Section 4 of German Basic Law</ref> but there is not a complete separation of church and state in Germany. Officially recognized religious bodies operate as {{Lang|de|Körperschaften des öffentlichen Rechts}} ([[statutory corporation|corporations of public law]], as opposed to private). For recognized religious communities, some taxes ({{Lang|de|Kirchensteuer}}) are collected by the state;<ref>Binder, Gerhard/Wagner, Jürgen, Grundwissen Grundgesetz.p 165.Klett.</ref> this is at the request of the religious community and a fee is charged for the service.<ref>1.5% to 4.5% of the amount collected, depending on the state (''Land'')<br />{{cite book |editor1-last = Leif | editor1-first = Thomas| editor2-first = Rudolf | editor2-last=Speth| title = Die fünfte Gewalt: Lobbyismus in Deutschland|trans-title=The Fifth Estate: Lobbyism in Germany| year = 2006| publisher = VL Verlag| language = de| isbn = 978-3531150338| page = 262}}</ref> Religious instruction is an optional school subject in Germany.<ref name="Section 4 of German Basic Law" /> The German State understands itself as neutral in matters of religious beliefs,<ref>Binder, Gerhard/Wagner, Jürgen, Grundwissen Grundgesetz.p 17. Klett.</ref> so no teacher can be forced to teach religion. But on the other hand, all who do teach religious instruction need an official permission by their religious community.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.erzbistum-koeln.de/schule-hochschule/religionspaedagogik/kb/index.html |title=Kirchliche Bevollmächtigung |publisher=Erzbistum-koeln.de |access-date=2012-04-27 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120406093500/http://www.erzbistum-koeln.de/schule-hochschule/religionspaedagogik/kb/index.html |archive-date=April 6, 2012 }}</ref> The treaties with the [[Holy See]] are referred to as [[Concordats with individual states of Germany|concordats]] whereas the treaties with Protestant Churches and umbrellas of Jewish congregations are called "state treaties". Both are the legal framework for cooperation between the religious bodies and the German State at the federal as well as at the state level.<ref>Christian, Hermes, Konkordate im vereinigten Deutschland. Grünewald.</ref>
===
In Greece, there is considerable controversy about the separation between the State and the Church, causing many debates in the public sphere regarding if there shall be a more radical change in the Article 3, which is maintaining the Greek Orthodox Church of Christ as the prevailing religion of the country. The actual debate concerning the separation of the Church from the State often becomes a tool for polarization in the political competition.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Karyotakis|first1=Minos-Athanasios|last2=Antonopoulos|first2=Nikos|last3=Saridou|first3=Theodora|title=A case study in news articles, users comments and a Facebook group for Article 3 of the Greek Constitution|journal=Kome |volume=7|pages=37–56|doi=10.17646/KOME.75672.31|year=2019|issue=2|doi-access=free}}</ref> More specifically, Article 3 of the Greek constitution argues the following:
Line 170:
Despite 80% of Indian population are [[Hinduism in India|Hindus]], under the [[Constitution of India]], India is a secular country and there are no special provisions favouring specific religions in its constitution. [[Jawaharlal Nehru]] declared India is a secular state in order to avoid [[Hindu nationalism]] and religious conflicts between [[Hinduism]], [[Islam in India|Islam]], [[Sikhism]] and other religions. Religious instructions are prohibited in schools wholly owned by the state.
As a result of such government power over religion, politicians are sometimes accused of playing [[votebank]] politics, i.e. of giving political support to issues for the sole purpose of gaining the votes of members of a particular community, including religious communities. Both the [[Indian National Congress]] (INC) and the [[Bharatiya Janata Party]] (BJP) have been accused of exploiting the people by indulging in vote bank politics. The [[Shah Bano case]], a divorce lawsuit, generated much controversy when the Congress was accused of appeasing the Muslim orthodoxy by bringing in a parliamentary amendment to negate the [[Supreme Court of India|Supreme Court
===Italy===
Line 235:
Since 1978, according to the [[Spanish Constitution]] (section 16.3) "No religion shall have a state character. The public authorities shall take into account the religious beliefs of Spanish society and shall consequently maintain appropriate cooperation relations with the Catholic Church and other confessions."
===
The [[Church of Sweden]] was instigated by [[Gustav I of Sweden|King Gustav I]] (1523–60) and within the half century following his death had become established as a [[Lutheran]] state church with significant power in Swedish society, itself under the control of the state apparatus. A degree of freedom of worship (for foreign residents only) was achieved under the rule of [[Gustav III of Sweden|Gustav III]] (1771–92), but it was not until the passage of the [[Dissenter Acts (Sweden)|Dissenter Acts]] of 1860 and 1874 that Swedish citizens were allowed to leave the state church – and then only provided that those wishing to do so first registered their adhesion to another, officially approved denomination. Following years of discussions that began in 1995, the Church of Sweden was finally separated from the state as from 1 January 2000. However, the separation was not fully completed. Although the status of state religion came to an end, the Church of Sweden nevertheless remains Sweden's national church, and as such is still regulated by the government through the law of the Church of Sweden. Therefore, it would be more appropriate to refer to a change of relation between state and church rather than a separation. Furthermore, the Swedish constitution still maintains that the Sovereign and the members of the royal family have to confess an evangelical Lutheran faith, which in practice means they need to be members of the Church of Sweden to remain in the line of succession. Thusly according to the ideas of [[cuius regio, eius religio]] one could argue that the symbolic connection between state and church still remains.<ref>{{cite magazine|url=http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/januaryweb-only/11.0.html|title=Swedish Church State Separate|magazine=Christianity Today|first=Ted|last=Olsen|date=1 January 2000|access-date=27 December 2014|archive-date=19 January 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160119060652/http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/januaryweb-only/11.0.html|url-status=live}}</ref>
===
{{Main|Religion in Switzerland}}
The articles 8 ("Equality before the law") and 15 ("Freedom of religion and conscience") of the [[Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation]] guarantees individual freedom of beliefs.<ref name=CstCH>[https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19995395/index.html Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160621000507/https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19995395/index.html |date=June 21, 2016 }}, status as of 14 June 2015, [[Federal Chancellery of Switzerland]] (page visited on 17 December 2015).</ref> It notably states that "No person may be forced to join or belong to a religious community, to participate in a religious act or to follow religious teachings".<ref name=CstCH/>
Line 244:
Churches and state are separated at the federal level since 1848. However, the article 72 ("Church and state") of the [[Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation|constitution]] determine that "The regulation of the relationship between the church and the state is the responsibility of the cantons".<ref name=CstCH/> Some [[cantons of Switzerland]] recognise officially some churches ([[Catholic Church]], [[Swiss Reformed Church]], [[Old Catholic Church]] and [[Jews|Jewish congregations]]). Other cantons, such as [[Canton of Geneva|Geneva]] and [[Canton of Neuchâtel|Neuchâtel]] are ''[[laïcité|laïques]]'' (that is to say, secular).
===
{{See also|Religion in Taiwan|Constitution of the Republic of China}}
Line 349:
Since then, critics have challenged the existence of the phrase in the Pledge. In 2004, [[Michael Newdow]], an ordained [[atheist]] minister of the [[Universal Life Church]] challenged a Californian law which required students to recite the pledge. He said the law violated the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the school system in ''[[Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow]]'' due to the fact that the father could not claim sufficient custody of the child over his ex-wife who was the legal guardian and had opposed the lawsuit.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-latest-controversy-about-under-god-in-the-pledge-of-allegiance|title=The history of legal challenges to the Pledge of Allegiance – National Constitution Center|website=[[National Constitution Center]] – constitutioncenter.org|language=en|access-date=2017-12-15|archive-date=2017-10-03|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171003055808/https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-latest-controversy-about-under-god-in-the-pledge-of-allegiance|url-status=live}}</ref>
===
In [[Uruguay]] the principle of separation of church and state is enshrined together with the religious freedom in Article 5 of the [[Constitution of Uruguay|Constitution]], which states: "All religious cults are free in Uruguay. The State does not support any religion. It recognizes the Catholic Church the domain of all temples that have been totally or partially built with funds from the National Treasury, excepting only the chapels intended for the service of asylums, hospitals, prisons or other public establishments. It also declares temples exempt from all types of taxes dedicated to the worship of various religions."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Constitución de la República Oriental del Uruguay |url=https://www.impo.com.uy/bases/constitucion/1967-1967/5 |access-date=2023-09-23 |website=www.impo.com.uy}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Uruguay |url=https://www.state.gov/reports/2021-report-on-international-religious-freedom/uruguay/ |access-date=2023-09-23 |website=United States Department of State |language=en-US}}</ref>
The separation between church and state was officially declared in the [[Constitution of Uruguay of 1918|Constitution of 1918]] and preserved in the following ones.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Pasquet |first=Ope |date=2017-11-14 |title=A cien años de la instauración del Estado laico en el Uruguay |url=https://dialogopolitico.org/debates/a-cien-anos-de-la-instauracion-del-estado-laico-en-el-uruguay/ |access-date=2023-09-23 |website=Diálogo Político |language=es}}</ref> The [[secularization]] of the country, however, began at the beginning of the 20th century during the first administration of President [[José Batlle y Ordóñez|José Batlle y Ordoñez]] as part of the reforms that sought the firm positioning of the State in the public sphere.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2021-03-18 |title=Iglesia, batllismo y la responsabilidad de llevar la administración estatal a todos los rincones de la república {{!}} La Mañana |url=https://www.xn--lamaana-7za.uy/opinion/iglesia-batllismo-y-la-responsabilidad-de-llevar-la-administracion-estatal-a-todos-los-rincones-de-la-republica/ |access-date=2023-09-23 |language=es}}</ref> The measures included the prohibition of religious symbols in public hospitals and government buildings, as well as the suppression of religious teaching in public schools.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Alonso |first=David Fernández |date=2021-04-07 |title=Uruguay: "it is necessary to survive in a secular country!" |url=https://omnesmag.com/en/newsroom/world/america-latina/uruguay-there-is-surviving-in-a-secular-country/ |access-date=2023-09-23 |website=Omnes |language=en-US}}</ref>
==
===Islam===
The separation of mosque and state happened very early on in Islamic history. Muslim scholars were endowed and separated from the state, which they became very critical of. The state needed the [[ulama|scholars]] to legitimize their rule while the scholars did not need the state. Thus, the scholars were generally independent, with some bumps in history like the [[mihna]] being the exception rather than the rule. [[Richard Bulliet]] writes that during the colonial and [[Postcolonialism|postcolonial]] periods of the Muslim world, a main goal of the political tyrants was to remove the independence of the scholars via removing their economic and social independence.
====Ahmadiyya====
Line 396:
Pope John Paul II, in his 2005 letter to the Bishops of France proposed that not only is Separation of State and Church permissible, it is in fact a part of the Church's Social Doctrine. The Pope writes:
"Correctly understood, the principle of ''laïcité'' (secularity), to which your Country is deeply attached, is also part of the social teaching of the Church. It recalls the need for a clear division of powers (cf. ''Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church,'' nn. 571–572) that echoes Christ's invitation to his disciples: "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's" (Lk 20: 25). For its part, just as the non-denominational status of the State implies the civil Authority's abstention from interference in the life of the Church and of the various religions, in the spiritual realm it enables all society's members to work together at the service of all and of the national community. Likewise, as the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council recalled, the management of temporal power is not the Church's vocation for: "The Church, by reason of her role and competence, is not identified with any political community nor bound by ties to any political system" (Pastoral Constitution ''Gaudium et Spes,'' n. 76 2; cf. n. 42). Yet, at the same time, it is important that all work in the general interest and for the common good. The
The Catholic Church takes the position that the Church itself has a proper role in guiding and informing consciences, explaining the [[natural law]], and judging the moral integrity of the state, thereby serving as check to the power of the state.<ref>Grasso, Kenneth L. and Robert P. Hunt, ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=gRNcvjNxXfYC Catholicism and religious freedom: contemporary reflections on Vatican II's declaration on religious liberty] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160520111726/https://books.google.com/books?id=gRNcvjNxXfYC&dq |date=May 20, 2016 }}'', p. 6, Rowman & Littlefield, 2006</ref> The Church teaches that the [[Dignitatis humanae#The fundamental right to religious liberty|right of individuals to religious freedom]] is an essential dignity.
Line 443:
* [[Theocracy]]
* [[Women's rights]]
* [[Central bank independence]]
* [[Civil control of the military]]
* [[Civil service#Civil service independence|Civil service independence]]
* [[Editorial independence]]
* [[Independent media]]
* [[Judicial independence]]
{{div col end}}
Line 483 ⟶ 489:
[[Category:Management cybernetics]]
[[Category:Concepts in political philosophy]]
[[Category:Investiture Controversy]]
| |||