1. Introduction
The concept of secularism is foundational in modern political theory, referring to the separation of religious institutions from state institutions. Secular countries uphold this principle to varying degrees, ensuring freedom of religion while preventing the establishment of an official state religion. This article examines the definition, typology, historical emergence, contemporary examples, and implications of secular countries in global governance and society.
2. Definition of Secularism and Secular Countries
Secularism derives from the Latin saeculum, meaning “worldly” or “temporal” (Taylor, 2007). It denotes the principle that government and religious institutions operate independently, with state policies based on civil law rather than religious doctrine. A secular country is thus defined as a nation-state that maintains constitutional or practical separation between religion and state, ensuring religious neutrality in governance (Casanova, 1994).
3. Typology of Secular Countries
Secular countries can be categorised into three main types:
3.1. Constitutionally Secular States
These countries enshrine secularism in their constitutions, explicitly declaring no official religion and guaranteeing freedom of religion. Examples include:
- India: The Constitution declares India a secular republic (Constitution of India, Art. 25–28), though its society remains deeply religious (Smith, 2017).
- France: Embraces laïcité, a strict form of secularism prohibiting religious symbols in public institutions (Baubérot, 2009).
3.2. Practically Secular States
These countries do not explicitly define themselves as secular in constitutional terms but operate with strong secular traditions in practice.
- Japan: Despite Shinto being historically linked to nationalism, post-war reforms established functional secularism (Breen & Teeuwen, 2010).
- South Korea: Government policies remain religiously neutral, although Christianity and Buddhism are influential in society (Kim, 2001).
3.3. Officially Atheist or Communist States
These are states that, under communist ideology, adopted atheism as state policy, suppressing or regulating religious practice.
- China: Formally atheist under communist doctrine, yet permits regulated religious expression (Yang, 2012).
- Vietnam: Similarly upholds atheism in party doctrine while allowing controlled religious practice (Taylor, 2007).
4. Historical Emergence of Secular Countries
The rise of secular countries is deeply linked to the European Enlightenment, which challenged the fusion of church and state that dominated medieval Europe (Israel, 2001). The Treaty of Westphalia (1648) and subsequent political philosophies, such as those of John Locke, advocated religious tolerance and laid intellectual foundations for secular governance (Locke, 1689/1983). In Asia, secularism emerged largely through colonial influence and modern constitutional design (Bhargava, 1998).
5. Contemporary Examples of Secular Countries
| Country | Secular Typology | Key Notes |
|---|---|---|
| France | Constitutionally Secular (Laïcité) | Strict separation, bans religious symbols in public schools |
| India | Constitutionally Secular | Guarantees freedom of religion, but faces communal tensions |
| USA | Constitutionally Secular | “No establishment” clause, yet strong religious influence in politics |
| Japan | Practically Secular | Shinto and Buddhism culturally influential, minimal religious governance |
| Sweden | Practically Secular (Nordic Model) | State church separated in 2000, highly secular society |
| China | Officially Atheist | Communist atheism, controlled religious practice |
6. Implications of Secularism in Governance and Society
Secularism ensures religious freedom, pluralism, and minority protection (Taylor, 2007). However, it can also produce tension, as seen in France’s debates over religious symbols. In officially atheist states, secularism may morph into state-imposed irreligion, suppressing religious rights (Yang, 2012). Conversely, practical secularism, as in Japan and Sweden, maintains neutrality while allowing vibrant cultural religious expression.
7. Criticisms and Challenges
Critics argue that strict secularism may marginalise religious identity in public life, violating cultural freedoms (Casanova, 1994). Furthermore, countries like India face challenges of communalism despite constitutional secularism, raising questions about implementation versus ideological commitment (Bhargava, 1998).
8. Conclusion
Secular countries, whether constitutionally declared or practically functioning, play a crucial role in shaping governance models that respect religious diversity and uphold freedom of belief. The variety in secular implementation highlights the complex relationship between religion and state, necessitating nuanced policies to balance religious rights with civic unity.
References
- Baubérot, J. (2009). Laïcité Explained to Mr Sarkozy and Others. Éditions Albin Michel.
- Bhargava, R. (1998). Secularism and Its Critics. Oxford University Press.
- Breen, J., & Teeuwen, M. (2010). A New History of Shinto. Wiley-Blackwell.
- Casanova, J. (1994). Public Religions in the Modern World. University of Chicago Press.
- Constitution of India. Articles 25–28.
- Israel, J. (2001). Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and the Making of Modernity 1650–1750. Oxford University Press.
- Kim, A. E. (2001). Political Insecurity, Social Chaos, Religious Void and the Rise of Protestantism in Late Nineteenth-Century Korea. Social History, 26(3), 267–281.
- Locke, J. (1689/1983). A Letter Concerning Toleration. Hackett Publishing.
- Smith, D. E. (2017). India as a Secular State. Princeton University Press.
- Taylor, C. (2007). A Secular Age. Harvard University Press.
- Yang, F. (2012). Religion in China: Survival and Revival under Communist Rule. Oxford University Press.