Separation of the Church and the State in 1905

The separation of the Church and the State is an event founder of the French company of the 20th century. Even if it applies to the four principal confessions then represented in France (the Catholicisme, the Église of the Confession of Augsburg or Protesting S Lutherans, the reformed Churches and the Judaïsme), the law which makes vote the socialist deputy Aristide Briand the December 9th 1905 is before all the completion of a violent confrontation which lasted almost twenty-five years and which opposed two visions of France: royalist catholic France and republican and laic France. It replaces the mode of the Concordat of 1801.

Towards separation

Bases of a separation

Partisans of secularity

The partisans of the Secularity, in other words of the separation of the religious affairs and policies, divide themselves in two camps:

the first (Emile Combes, etc), heirs to the tradition jacobine, dream of éradiquer the Christian religion or to confine it in the strictly private field,
the seconds (Jean Jaurès, Aristide Briand, etc) are more moderate. They want on the one hand to affirm the neutrality of the State with regard to all the beliefs, on the other hand to guarantee the freedom of conscience of each one in conformity with the Déclaration of the Human rights and the Citizen.

One knows the place which the Protestants in the genesis of “secularity held with the Frenchwoman”: a professor of the faculty of Protestant theology of Paris, Raoul To combine, played a decisive part at Briand in the development of a “liberal” version of separation.

The public school of Ferry

A painful separation

Waldeck-Rousseau: the moderate one

After Ferry, it occurs nearly twenty years without true projection in the fields to laicization. The “block of the lefts”, a coalition gathering radical and Republican left, arrives then at the capacity and takes again the work started by Ferry. The policy of the Block of the lefts is different nevertheless from its predecessors by the virulence of his anticlericalism. However, one must distinguish the more moderate action from Waldeck-Rousseau of the militant action of Emile Combes.

The radical republicans, and more particularly republicans, worry in this beginning about 20th century, where the IIIe République appears still fragile, of control that guard the Catholic church on the education of the young people by the means of the congregations. The goal of Waldeck-Rousseau is not to remove all the congregations, but rather to prohibit most awkward and to supervise the others. It is in this spirit that the law of July 1st 1901 on associations is voted. It envisages on the one hand a mode of freedom for the creation of associations but more especially it provides on the other hand that each congregation will have to be authorized by a law and that they could be dissolved by a simple decree. The majority of the congregations (approximately 4 out of 5) conform to the procedure. Those which refuse there are dissolved in October 1901, but the law remains applied initially in a relatively liberal way, moreover Waldeck-Rousseau informs the the Vatican that the requests for authorization will be examined with measurement. In January 1902, the Council of State establishes that prior approval necessary to the congregations is essential from now on on any school where sign would be this one congregationalist. It is the way open to all excesses, and when Emile Combes arrives at the capacity, in 1902, it is engulfed in this breach.

Anticlericalism of Combes

Indeed, the come to power of Emile Combes after the elections of 1902 will modify the facts of the case. The new President of the Council does not hide as of his nomination his will to follow energetic policy an “of secularity”. This declaration will be followed immediately hardening of the provisions taken previously by Waldeck-Rousseau:

In July 1902, schools not - authorized (approximately 3000) of the authorized congregations are closed: this measurement gives place to many incidents and 74 bishops sign a “protest”.
the government retorts by suspending the treatment (wages) of two bishops.
a new stage is crossed in March 1903: all the requests for authorization of the male congregations are rejected. In July 1903, the female congregations undergo the same fate, which causes dissensions with the center even of the Republican majority, Waldeck-Rousseau reproaching even Combes for having transformed a law of control into law of exclusion.
Deaf with criticisms, Combes wants to go until the end in its fight vis-a-vis the congregations: the law of the July 7th 1904 prohibits this time at the members of the congregations any form of teaching.

Rupture of the diplomatic relations with the Vatican

The policy of Combes worsens the tensions with Rome, and one feels well from now on whom there is nothing any more but one step to cross towards Separation. But Combes itself hesitates to engage firmly for the separation of the Church and the State: indeed, the relations between the Church and the State in 1904 are always controls by the Concordat signed between Napoleon Bonaparte and the pope one century earlier, and this legal settlement makes it possible the government to control the French clergy by naming the bishop S. Combes fears to lose this control on the Church while beginning for separation, but the continuation of the events hardly will leave him of another solution:

on the one hand, in June 1903, a majority of deputies decides that it is necessary to discuss of a possible separation and constitutes a commission whose Aristide Briand is elected rapporteur.
in addition, the Pope Leon XIII dies in July 1903, and its successor, Pie X, does not have his flexibility: the incidents between France and the the Vatican multiply.

The visit of the president of the Republic Emile Loubet with the king d' Italie Victor-Emmanuel III that the Vatican refuses to recognize is the water drop which makes overflow a vase already quite full: the Vatican sends letters of protest anti-Frenchwomen to the European chancelleries. When the French government has echo of it, in May 1904, it immediately breaks the diplomatic relations with the Holy See.

The end of the relations between the French State and papacy makes the mode certificated null and void: separation is thus urgent, and Combes joins there: he proposes a project without taking account of work of the Briand commission, but it is destabilized and constrained to resign by the scandal of “the Affaire of the cards”. It is the successor of Combes, Maurice Rouvier, which will carry out separation until its term.

The decisive action of the rapporteur Aristide Briand

The new bill filed in as of the formation of the government is inspired much more of work by the commission directed by Aristide Briand. The commission arrived at the end of its work and on March 4th, 1905, Briand presents his report/ratio: from the start he declares that the conclusions of the commission are that the solution of the interior difficulties that France knows lies in “a honest and complete separation of the Churches and State”. The task of Aristide Briand is announced complex: it will have to convince part of the religious right-hand side that this law is not a law of persecution anti-Christian woman, without however showing itself too much reconciling with the eyes of a radical left or an extreme left which would like éradiquer the “block Roman”.

The interests and the stakes are complicated: they cause stormy debates and impassioned: the groups of left as of right-hand side are divided, and one will need all the talent of speaker of Aristide Briand to join together everyone around a text, at the price of some compromises. The chance of Aristide Briand is that each one in the hemicycle seems to have understood that Separation had become inescapable, and its first victory is due to the fact that part of the catholic right-hand side agrees to advance the debate, not as partisans of Separation, but to obtain concessions which will make Separation less painful for the catholics.

Aristide Briand is aware indeed well that if to make vote the law is a thing, to make it apply in will be another, and that a law of separation, voted by the left and refused by the catholics would be inapplicable on the ground. This is why it makes a point of showing that one should not make a law “directed on the Church like a revolver”, but fascinating of account acceptable remarks of the catholics. One can consider that the largest stone brought to the building of separation resides in the acceptance of article 4 of the law, so much this one will have been the object of fears on both sides of the Assemblée: it is the article which must say to which, in the new mode of the worships which is Separation, will return the movable and real goods of the Church.

The catholics fear that the State does not want to dislocate the Church and to cause schisms, whereas the republicans fear that one gives a too great capacity to pertaining to worship associations which could be based abroad. Through compromise and in particular by declaring that the republican country will be able to show of good sense and equity, article 4, whose Briand agreed to re-examine some formulations, is adopted with a very great majority. Lastly, and in spite of rather strong divergences (the spirit of compromise whose Briand made proof not having been enough to conceal fears and the protests of the catholics, and having even divided part of the radical left), the law will be promulgated the December 9th 1905 (Published in the Official journal the December 11th 1905) after being voted with the Parliament (341 For, 233 Contre) and with the Senate (181 For, 102 Contre).

The law of separation and its consequences

Contents of the law

Deploying an eloquence charming lady, the rapporteur Aristide Briand alleviates the spirits. The new law puts an end to the Napoleonean Concordat of 1801 which governed the relationship between the French government and the Catholic church. Inventing secularity with the Frenchwoman, she proclaims the freedom of conscience and guarantees the free exercise of the cultes.

Article 1st: “The Republic ensures the freedom of conscience. It guarantees the free exercise of the worships”. The first article creates a broad consensus. The text leaves only little margin for its application, by the words “ensures” and “guarantees”.

Article 2: “The Republic does not recognize, does not pay nor does not subsidize any worship”

By this law, the State expresses its will of religious neutrality but does not exonerate its responsibilities.

He wants “to guarantee” to each one the means of freely exerting his religion in the respect of those of others. It is in this spirit that chaplaincies in the closed circles are instituted (barracks, colleges, prisons, hospital)… and, later, of the religious emissions on the public channels of television. The State does not hear in any way of limiting the freedom of conscience nor to confine the religion with the private sphere. On the domanial and financial level, the law has three major consequences:

the ministers of religion (bishops, priests, pastors, rabbis…) are not remunerated any more by the State (whereas before 1905 this budget was of 40 million francs) and this one ignores their nomination completely (before, the State named the bishops),
the public corporations of the worship dissolved and are replaced by pertaining to worship associations; these last will be able to receive the product of the searches and the collections for the expenses of the worship, but they will not have to in no case to receive State grants, departments or communes.
the religious goods commune or state-owned property since 1789 remain it but the State reserves the right to entrust them free to the representatives Churches for the exercise of the worship. The law of separation thus lays down an estimated inventory of the movable and real goods of the factories and Consistoire S before entrusting them to the pertaining to worship associations.

If the vote of the law contributes to alleviate the spirits, the episode of the inventories which it includes will prove to be the last painful episode which once more will place France at the edge of the civil war. Actually, because of catch in charge trickle of the buildings by the State, the financial results will be finally positive for the Catholic church (paradoxically, the Protestants which accepted the law will be less favoured!), but this will be visible only well later. On the one hand, the ministers of religion and in particular the bishops will gain in independence, being held to return accounts to the administration. In addition, the Churches (but not Protestants) any more will not have to their load the very expensive maintenance of the religious buildings (cathedrals, churches…) preexistent with the law of 1905. As for those which they will be brought to build after the law of 1905, they will be their full and whole property.

The Library S of the parishes, évéchés and seminars also return to the State. Entrusted to different public libraries, they contribute to enrich their funds in sometimes rare or invaluable works, relating especially to the religious questions but not only.

The storm of the inventories

At the time of the parliamentary debates on the law of separation of the Churches and the State, the idea of an inventory of the goods of old the establishments of the worship naturally was essential. Therefore the December 29th 1905, there will be a decree of public administration concerning the inventories. Goods of these establishments having to be then given to new pertaining to worship associations. It was the object of article 3 of the law. These provisions are logical, and their execution such as it is envisaged is reasonable. Only the question of possible former debts animated a little the parliamentary debate. The February 2nd 1906, a circular intended for the civils servant of the Fields contains a provocative sentence which will put fire at the powders: “the agents in charge of the inventory will require the opening of the Gate vaults”. Useless and of a doubtful relevance, this provision will start protests. The preserving political circles will not be long seizing the business and in causing the popular emotion in certain areas. A governmental official statement will be emitted to reassure the catholics: “No inventory will take place before the discussion of the fixed interpellation on January 19th”.

All consequently seems to have to occur without incident, but from important series of demonstrations will take place in front of many churches. The majority of the catholics think that the operation of the inventories is a profanation. According to them, it is about an attack to the personal property. Indeed, if the catholics have as a whole accepted the law of separation, they refuse that one “plunders” their churches. The agitation of the inventories takes in certain areas a dramatic form: in several places, gendarmerie and army had to intervene. In fact, it is a whole rural people, attached to his churches and its devotions traditional which will protest. With the advertisement of the inventory, the demonstrators gather per hundreds, even per thousands.

The first bloody incidents burst in the Haute-Loire, in the Velay, on the borders of the Cevennes. The February 27th takes place the inventory of the Vault of pilgrimage of Champels (commune of Monistrol-in Allier). Some 150 demonstrators, armed with sticks, forks, and for some of iron bars, ruent themselves on the receiver of the recording: the “shooting” of Champels makes only slightly injureds, but it propagates agitation in all the area, an agitation in which several gendarmes are killed. Following this business, the Minister of Interior Department Georges Clémenceau decides to give up the operations of inventory whenever they meet a violent resistance. The situation of the government seems already quite delicate when the news of the incident of Boeschepe comes from: March 6th, near the Belgian border, an inventory turns to the drama and results in the death of a man. The prefect of the department of the Northern , confronted with a true excitement in his area, was only too happy to suspend the inventories at the request of the Minister of Interior Department. Thereafter, a parliamentary debate is organized between Briand and the other parties, in which they decide to leave the law as it is, and thus not to yield, which involves the fall of the ministry.

The new ministry set up is centered definitely more on the left than the precedent, and he wants absolutely to solve the business of the Inventories as soon as possible. The March 16th 1906, a confidential circular addressed to the prefects invites them to suspend the operations of inventory if they must be done by the force. Clemenceau will specify that “that does not want to say that we gave up the application of the law, only approach we it with our manner”. The agitation born of the inventories, localized but considerable, ends.

France divided before the appeasing

Episode of inventories, which as one saw suffered at the same time from meanness on behalf of the republicans and the anger of the pope Pie X who did not do anything to arrange the things, was the last peak of tension between catholics and anticlericals. But the division of France was deep in the campaigns but also in the political scene:

the left was divided into two tendencies:

* one, radical, which wanted to eliminate the religion completely,

*l' other, moderated and which finally triumphed, which was for the freedom of conscience within the framework of Separation.

the line was it also divided on the question of Separation:

*une left accepted it while trying however to mitigate the effects of them.

* another was limited to reject it in block.

It is included/understood whereas the scars resulting from this painful divorce between Église and State spent a few years to be closed again: it was to some extent the mission of the following government, carried out by Armand Fallières (president of the Republic), Georges Clémenceau (president of the Council) and Aristide Briand (Minister for the State education and the Worships) The law of January 2nd, 1907 concerning the public exercise of the worship settles the question of the buildings belonging to évêchés and the “factories” (thus one called catholic associations which managed the parochial goods).

Finally, in 1907, more than 30.000 buildings are placed free at the disposal of the Churches and the March 28th 1907 a new law authorizes the believers to be met without preliminary declaration. The ringings of bells are authorized. Generally, administrative jurisprudence legitimates the public demonstrations which satisfy with local traditions and practices (religious burials, etc).

It is at the time of the First World War that the religious question is relegated to the second plan and that the “sacred union” gathers France linked under the tricolor banner. With leaving the War, the government at the same time decides all to transfer to the the Pantheon from Paris the heart from Gambetta, illustrates founder of the Republic, and to honor the memory with Jeanne d' Arc by proclaiming national festival second Sunday of May. The diplomatic relations are thus restored with the Vatican, whose new pope Benoît XV shows himself differently more reconciling that Pie X, in particular while promising to consult Paris before the nomination of the bishops. Of dimensioned sound, the French State concedes with the associations diocésaines placed under the authority of the bishops the statute of “pertaining to worship associations”; in other words, he recognizes the bishops like legitimate interlocutors. The anticlericalism militant declines and ends up dying out.

The religious war threatens to be re-ignited after the success of the Trust of the lefts, a coalition of Socialists and radicals, with the legislative elections of the May 11th 1924. But the bishops mobilize the catholics with the assistance of the general of Castelnau, hero of the Great War, and the government gives up calling into question former arrangements. The anticlericalism militant ends up declining however that the Churches find, with their freedom, a new strength.

Assessment and prospects

The vote and the application of the law of separation were the last stages of the movement of laicization and secularization engaged in 1789. The December 9th 1905 is a capital date which puts an end to the Napoleonean legal settlement, but more especially with the antique union between the Catholic church of France and the political power: this law of separation invents secularity with the Frenchwoman.

The Alsace and the the Moselle not being French at the time of the promulgation of the law, those have a special statute still today, left last heritage of the legal settlement, the bishops and the priests being always compared to civils servant and the maintenance of the buildings paid by the State. 37 million euros would have been devoted there in 2004.

On this subject, to see Legal settlement in the Alsace-Moselle.

In 2003 the law undergoes a change with regard to the wearing of open religious signs at the school. This suggestion caused many criticisms in certain French political circles, which fear a return to a union of the State and religion, thus reinstating the religion in the public domain.

In 2004, the day before the celebration of the centenary of the law melting republican secularity, Nicolas Sarkozy, then Minister for the Economy, but outgoing of its post of minister of the Interior and the Worships wonder in one entitled book the Republic, the religions, the hope about a possible modification of the law, without however calling into question its bases.

He proposes to give to the State the means of being able to control the financing of the worships effectively, in particular the Muslim cult, financed currently mainly by islamist powers near and Eastern average. This control would make it possible, according to him, to release the French Muslim cult of the supervision extremist and thus to be able to limit the drifts extremists and terrorists within the French mosques. This control would imply like side effect of the facilities granted by the State as regards formation of the agents of the worships, while placing for example at the disposal of the teachers for the nonreligious matters for the formation of the priests, pastors or Imams.

See too

Related bonds

On the site of the National Assembly, the transcription of the debates to format pdf
Commission on the separation of the Church and the State: genesis of the law
Vehementer our , an Encyclical of the pope Black and white X which condemns the law.
Relationship between States and religions
Raoul To combine

External bond

the law of separation of 1905 or impossible rupture by Mathilde Guilbaud.
secularity: debates 100 years after the law of 1905 File of topicality of French Documentation.

Random links:

Qing dynasty | Shep Pettibone | Varan of Timor | Lantremange | Martine Martinel