SECULARISM: A HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL ANALYSIS
-KG.M.MURUGAN

Few terms in modern discourse are as widely debated yet poorly understood as ‘secularism.’ While some nations uphold it as a fundamental principle of governance, others struggle with its implications. Though often presented as a neutral, universal concept, secularism has a complex history deeply intertwined with theological, political, and colonial narratives. A critical examination of its evolution—ranging from ancient Rome to the modern era—reveals that secularism is neither a singular nor a universally applicable ideology.

The Roman Foundations: Secularism as a Temporal Construct

The Latin term saecularis originates from saeculum, signifying an age or era. Initially, it had no explicit connection to religion but denoted something bound by time rather than the eternal. This distinction between the temporal and the divine laid the foundation for later interpretations of secularism.

As Christianity rose within the Roman Empire, early theologians like Augustine of Hippo integrated these concepts into religious discourse. In The City of God (426 AD), Augustine framed the world as comprising two cities: the earthly city (secular governance) and the heavenly city (divine order). He envisioned that, over time, the state would align itself with Christian ideals, foreshadowing the religious entanglement with governance that would dominate medieval Europe.

Medieval Europe: Church and State Entanglement

Following the fall of the Western Roman Empire (476 AD), European history was marked by a protracted struggle between religious and political authorities. In the Byzantine Empire, the emperor, known as the Kosmokrator (ruler of the world) and Kronokrator (ruler of time), wielded both secular and religious power—a system later termed Caesaropapism. The emperor appointed the Archbishop of Constantinople, consolidating religious authority under state control.

In Western Europe, however, the Catholic Church amassed immense political power, controlling vast lands and influencing governance. The English Reformation exemplifies this struggle, where King Henry VIII severed ties with the Papacy to establish the Church of England—motivated not by theological differences but by a desire to control wealth and sovereignty. Such conflicts fueled early discussions on the separation of church and state, setting the stage for secular governance models in later centuries.

The Protestant Reformation and the Separation Doctrine

The Protestant Reformation (16th century) was pivotal in reshaping the discourse on secularism. Martin Luther, drawing from Augustine, advocated for a separation between spiritual and state affairs to preserve the sanctity of religion. This notion evolved through the works of John Locke, who championed a government free from religious entanglements.

By the time of the United States’ founding in the 18th century, the principle of a ‘wall of separation’ between church and state had taken root, particularly in Protestant-majority societies. The U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment institutionalized this principle, yet it remained deeply influenced by a Protestant worldview. As an Italian judge remarked in Lautsi vs. Italy, modern secularism is often nothing more than ‘Christian secularism’ in disguise.

The Enlightenment and the Rise of Rationalism

The 17th and 18th centuries saw a shift from theological debates on secularism to a rationalist approach. Thinkers like Descartes, Spinoza, and Locke argued for the supremacy of reason over faith, reinforcing the notion that religious belief should be a private affair, distinct from governance. This transition laid the foundation for modern secular states but also fostered the false dichotomy of faith versus reason.

Secularism’s Varied Global Manifestations

Secularism today takes diverse forms across nations:

• France’s Laïcité: Enforces strict separation between religion and state, banning religious symbols in public institutions.
• United Kingdom’s Model: Retains a constitutional monarchy where the monarch is the head of the Church of England.
• Bharat’s Secularism: Despite being constitutionally secular, the state actively intervenes in religious affairs, particularly Hindu institutions.

This diversity raises a fundamental question: Is secularism a universal model? The answer is evidently no. While some nations emphasize rigid separation, others maintain religious institutions while still claiming secular credentials. This inconsistency exposes secularism as a political construct rather than an absolute principle.

The Core Principles of Secularism: A Reality Check

Despite its varied interpretations, secularism is generally based on three principles:

1. Separation of State and Religion: The state should not be governed by religious institutions, and vice versa.
2. Equality Before the Law: All religious groups should be treated equally, with no favoritism.
3. Religious Freedom: Individuals should have the right to practice or not practice any religion without state interference.

Yet, in practice, these principles are selectively applied. For example, Bharat’s government regulates Hindu temples while leaving other religious institutions largely autonomous, contradicting the supposed neutrality of the state.

The Fallacy of Universal Secularism

Secularism, as imposed by colonial and Western frameworks, often fails to account for cultural and civilizational differences. The concept of Dharma in Bharat transcends the narrow Western definition of religion (religare). Dharma encompasses duty, righteousness, and cosmic law, making the idea of a rigid church-state separation incompatible with Bharatiya traditions.

The Sabarimala case illustrates this issue. The ban on women of reproductive age from entering the temple was rooted in tradition, not discrimination. However, secular legal interventions disregarded these cultural nuances, imposing a Western interpretation of gender equality on a deeply spiritual practice.

Secularism and the Erosion of Cultural Identity

Modern secularism increasingly alienates individuals from their cultural heritage. The rise of Homo Saecularis, as described by Roberto Calasso, refers to individuals uprooted from tradition in the name of being secular. They assume that legality replaces morality and ethics, yet this detachment leads to spiritual emptiness. No material solution can address a cultural or spiritual crisis.

Conclusion: Reclaiming a Balanced Perspective

This analysis does not argue that secularism is inherently flawed, but rather that it must be contextualized. The misapplication of secularist ideals often results in the erosion of cultural identity and social harmony. A nuanced approach, recognizing historical and cultural specificities, is essential to preserving Bharat’s millennia-old traditions while ensuring governance remains fair and just. Understanding the historical underpinnings of secularism allows for a more informed and culturally rooted discourse rather than blind adherence to an imported ideology.

REFERENCES

1. Feldman N. Religion and the Earthly City. Soc Res. 2009;76(4):989-1000.
2. Herrin J. The Formation of Christendom. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1987.
3. Runciman S. The Byzantine Theocracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1977.
4. Grzymala-Busse A. Sacred Foundations: The Religious and Medieval Roots of the European State. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2023.
5. Holland T. Dominion: How the Christian Revolution Remade the World. New York: Basic Books; 2019.
6. Kateb G. Locke and the Political Origins of Secularism. Soc Res. 2009;76(4):1001-30.
7. de Roover J. The Vacuity of Secularism. Econ Polit Wkly. 2002;37(39):3929-32.
8. Taylor C. A Secular Age. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 2007.
9. Taleb NN. We Don’t Know What We Are Talking About When We Talk About Religion [Internet]. Medium. 2017 [cited 2025 Feb 13]. Available from: https://medium.com/@nntaleb/we-dont-know-what-we-are-talking-about-when-we-talk-about-religion
10. Momigliano A. The Disadvantages of Monotheism for a Universal State. Class Philol. 1986;81(4):285-97.
11. Calasso R. L’innominabile attuale. Milan: Adelphi Edizioni; 2017.