An Ethnographic Reflection on Muslim-Christian Dialogue in The
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2002 An Ethnographic Re ection on Muslim–Christian Dialogue in the North of France: the context of laõ¨cite´1 MALCOLM D. BROWN ABSTRACT This article argues that la¨õ cite´ is one of the most important issues facing Muslims in France, and French society as a whole. It contains an analysis of the historical meaning of la¨õ cite´, its relationship with secularization and secularity and the effect it has had on Muslims in contemporary France. Although la¨õ cite´ and some of its interpretations have been causes of tense relations between Muslims in France and the rest of French society, the alliances and divisions which have emerged have not always been along confessional lines. As well as Muslims having a diversity of attitudes towards la¨õ cite´, members of other religions are faced with similar challenges. Openness and dialogue between Muslims and Christians in France appear to have increased in recent years, perhaps beyond other countries in Europe, and this article hypothesizes that this is due to the common challenge of la¨õ cite´. More precisely, dialogue in France is practical, formal and bilateral, in contrast to the United Kingdom, for example, where it is theoretical, informal and multilateral. These hypotheses are supported by establish- ing the social signi cance of Muslim–Christian dialogue, and by citing published experiences and analyses of Muslim–Christian dialogue, qualitative research which I undertook in the Lille area and comparative ethnography (the point of comparison being the United Kingdom, the ethnography concentrated in Glasgow). This article insists on the complexities of relations between Muslims, Christians, French society and la¨õ cite´, and examines their nature and signi cance. The common challenge of la¨õ cite´ and the process of inter-religious dialogue are themselves complex phenomena, and this contributes to the speci c alliances and divisions which can be seen. Introduction There is a small body of literature which asserts or implies a dialectical relationship between Orientalism and Muslim identities.2 According to this argument, the percep- tions of Islam which exist in the West have an impact (positive or negative) on how Muslims see themselves, and this self-identity has an impact on how the West views Islam. In some cases, the West and Islam have de ned themselves in opposition to each other (Laroui’s principle of complementarity); in other cases, paradoxically, the West has viewed Islam as homogeneous, and this perception has contributed to the growth of diversity within Islam, which, when established, serves to reinforce the West’s perception of Islam as homogeneous. The relationship between Muslims and Christians is one area in which this dialectic is manifested, within a context of the West’s construction of itself. The context is constituted by the differing state polities of established churches, concordats and la¨õ cite´. The dialectic manifests itself in that Islam and the Christian West actually meet, sometimes within a context of the secular West. So, the idea of the Christian West ISSN 0959-6410 print/ISSN 1469-9311 online/02/010005-19 Ó 2002 CSIC and CMCU DOI: 10.1080/09596410120109085 6 Malcolm D. Brown excludes people of another faith from consideration as completely a part of the West, and this exclusion has an impact on Muslim identities. However, when the context of the secular West is much more apparent, Muslims and Christians may see themselves as being on the same side. This article presents an ethnographic study of Muslim– Christian dialogue in the north of France as an illustration of this argument, and some comparative data which address the diversity of variables which have an in uence on dialogue. The point of comparison, which is informed by ethnography in Glasgow and the wider history of church–state relations in the United Kingdom (especially England), suggests that dialogue is more theoretical, informal and multilateral in the United Kingdom, and, conversely, more practical, formal and bilateral in France. By this, I mean that the formal dialogue which exists in the United Kingdom is more concerned with the similarities and differences between Christianity and Islam, while in France there is more of a focus on the common concerns and aspirations of Christians and Muslims. Furthermore, formal groups established for the purpose of Muslim–Christian dialogue are particularly important in France, whereas, in the United Kingdom, the dialogue which takes place between neighbours, colleagues and friends is more signi cant. In addition, signi cant dialogue in the United Kingdom tends to take place within a context of dialogue between several different religious confessions, whereas in France the bilateral dialogue between Muslims and Christians is more self-contained. In this article, I shall demonstrate that these differences between the United King- dom and France are to do with the social and political context, the degree and nature of secularization, and not with theological views about dialogue. Because the context of la¨õ cite´ in France is a particularly signi cant demonstration of this contention, and because the signi cance of bilateral dialogue creates a face-to-face situation in which the dialectic of Orientalism and Muslim identities is played out, this article focuses on the context and ethnography of dialogue in France, limiting the United Kingdom case to a comparator which provides additional evidence of the speci cities and generalities of the French case. In the rst section of the article, I examine the historical and current issues of la¨õ cite´ in France, providing some historical comparisons from the United Kingdom, and a few pointers on the sociological and theological signi cance of Muslim–Christian dialogue. In the second section, I present the ethnography from the north of France, particularly observations from the Groupe d’amitie´ Islamo–Chre´tien du Hautmont-Mouvaux, a group which meets frequently in the vicinity of Lille, and, again, comparative data from the United Kingdom. Finally, I have written an analytic section, which argues for seeing Muslim–Christian dialogue in France, particularly its practical, formal and bilateral nature, within the context of la¨õ cite´. Context Historical Issues of La¨õ cite´ If the affaire du foulard (see below) constitutes the most important current issue of la¨õ cite´, its historical foundations are deep, and, although this article is not intended to be a historical one, it is appropriate to point to some historical explanations for current perceptions of la¨õ cite´. The schoolgirls who wore the h½ija¯b were judged to have infringed the Republican principle of la¨õ cite´, which had been developed from the ideas of the Revolution, and was held to be an important guarantee of religious and civil liberties, even of democracy itself. The national debate concerning the affaire du foulard has been compared by some to the Dreyfus affair at the end of the nineteenth century:3 one part Muslim–Christian Dialogue in the North of France 7 of France saw the h½ija¯b as an attack, either on French values or on the universal value of la¨õ cite´; the other saw its ban as a negation of those same principles, which implied tolerance, religious liberty and the welcome of other people’s cultures and ideas. There are a number of interesting and signi cant parallels. Dreyfus demonstrated the strength of anti-Semitism in the nineteenth century, something which is part of the contempo- rary Lepenist ideology of the extreme right Front National. Dreyfus also highlighted the centrality of religious intolerance to French racism—Protestants were at the receiving end of this in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Jews in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and now, seemingly, Muslims. Ironically, the Dreyfus affair was an important factor in the development of the same principle of la¨õ cite´, which was used against those and other Muslim schoolgirls. It seems that the understanding and application of la¨õ cite´ are at the centre of this affair. Notwithstanding the etymology of the word (which refers to the laity, as opposed to the clergy), la¨õ cite´ is essentially a juridical principle. It dates from a series of laws in the 1880s which separated the Catholic Church from public education, the Jules Ferry law of 1905, which separated church and state, and Article II of the 1958 Constitution: ‘France is a Republic, indivisible, la¨õ que, democratic and social. Equality of all citizens before the law, without distinction on the grounds of origin, race or religion, is assured. The beliefs of all are respected.’4 They are respected, but within the framework of la¨õ cite´ as established in 1905. This framework was clear: ‘the Republic neither recognises, pays the salaries of, nor subsidises any religion or act of worship.’ 5 Some people, examples of whom are cited below, judged that the wearing of the h½ija¯b in school was a request for such recognition, an unacceptable demand that Islam be made an exception to the principle of la¨õ cite´ in the educational institutions of the Republic. The partisans of separation in the 1880s considered the school to be the starting point for a laicization of the whole state.6 So it is felt that any delaicization of the school will lead to a delaicization of the Republic, a new obscurantism and an Islamic invasion of the French body politic. Though la¨õ cite´ is used as a synonym of secularism or secularity (dictionaries tend to translate la¨õ que as secular), there is an analytical distinction to be drawn, opposing the juridical nature of la¨õ cite´ to the socio-political nature of secularity. Nevertheless, Wilson’s famous de nition of secularization as ‘the process whereby religious thinking, practice and institutions lose social signi cance’7 points to something which did happen in France in the late nineteenth century: religious thinking, practice and institutions lost much of their legal signi cance.