What is the use of talking about the « roots » of a country, as does the President of the Republic and all the right-wing, if not to give, implicitly or explicitly, to those who are connected to them the property right on the country, or at least some ownership over others?

In particular, would talking about Christian roots mean, it would be proper that Christians should be given ownership of France or at least some priority over other citizens? But what priority? And if a Christian becomes an atheist or a Muslim or a Buddhist, would he lose these privileges? Absurd.

First, when do the roots of France start? In the Paleolithic, when were identified the first populations on the territory which later became France? In 481 A.D, when a French king, Clovis, conquered it? Or in 1190 when France took this name?

Then, from what peoples the current French are coming from? This whole page is not sufficient to name the Vandals, Burgundians, Alans, Suevi, Bituriges, Arverni, Eduens, Ambarres, Carnutes and the other Aulerci who became rooted here. Not to mention, later, the Normans, English, and many others.

Finally, what religions have succeeded one another on its territory? Again, it would take pages to name the countless variants of Celtic, Gallic, Greek, Roman, Jewish religions , which succeeded one another or cohabited on our territory before the arrival of innumerable variants of Christianity. And even, in some parts of today’s France, known then under the name of Septimania, Muslims have taken root in the 8th century, before Christendom was really dominant there. And if the first kings of what much later became France have chosen, in the 5th century, to become Christian, the legacy of a secular country is not confined to the religion of a king (who moreover chose to become Christian after 15 years of rule, mainly for political reasons, concerned about the alliance with the powerful family of his second wife, Clotilde).

This is not specific to France: if we looked for the roots of other countries, we would have the same surprises: England named after a German people, Germany has the names of three different peoples, depending on the language in which it is called, while Russia has a name that identifies a people called elsewhere the Vikings.

So we should not play with words: the right-wing only talks to us about the roots to tell us that it refuses the fruits.

This does not mean, of course, that we must reject the Christian heritage, or rather, in the case of France, the Catholic heritage. Because the presence, dominant, of the Catholic Church, from the 9th to the 18th century, in France, eldest daughter of the Church, has shaped much of the values ​​of this country, for better or for worse. For better, by inculcating the ideals of greatness and charity. For worse, by imposing an intolerance that expelled Jews and Protestants, and slowed down the intellectual, scientific and economic development. Nothing tells me more of the sadness of this legacy than the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, nothing tells me more than the greatness of a Spring dawn in the Basilica of Vezelay.

But to put forward, as does today’s right-wing, the Christian heritage of the country, as a measure of the country’s identity is to exclude those who do not identify with that faith. And even exclude those, Christians, who do not want to confuse their faith and citizenship. First it is a small maneuver to exclude Muslims. It is also a pathetic ploy to minimize the formidable legacy of the Enlightenment, which by the way began in France in the 12th century, with the arrival, through Jewish translators, of Muslim texts carrying Greek thought.

It is of all this that we must be proud. It is this that makes the greatness of this country.

A culture, a religion, a nation cannot survive if it is concerned about exclusion rather than seduction. Its legitimacy must not be limited to claiming a place in history, it must also seek to make a place in the future.

So instead of discussing the legacy left by a religion, we should rather talk about how our country (nourished, among others, by the religious fact), will answer the great questions of the future and attract those who will build it.