Introductory Remarks
The second half of the 19th century was marked by immense progress in science and industrialization, as well as the continuous secularization of life and thought. Realism, positivism, Darwinism, Marxism, and liberalism reacted against the romantic, religious, and metaphysical interpretations of nature and society, focusing instead on an empirical worldview that surpassed the Enlightenment ideals (Perry, 2020). Marx’s critique of religion was aimed at rejecting all spiritual values, and his philosophy—secular and non-theistic—served as a gateway to the full realization of individualism (Fromm, Marx, 1994).
A century later, the societal landscape was filled with numerous contradictions and paradoxes stemming from the evolving relationship between secularism and religiosity, which found its most rigid expression in the socialist one-party system. Consequently, the rise of democratic movements in the second half of the 20th century was perceived as an opportunity for a decisive victory over rigid political systems. States that had suffered under totalitarian and authoritarian regimes eagerly embarked on their processes of democratization, expecting to establish systems based on constitutionally limited government, the rule of law, and the respect for human rights and freedoms. However, this proved to be a long and arduous process, contributing to uncertainty, dysfunctional and highly partisan state institutions, a weak civil society, and numerous violations of human rights and freedoms. Thus, the initial enthusiastic movements were soon replaced by a high degree of distrust in institutions, which often remain deaf to the demands of the demos (Treneska-Deskoska, Hristovska-Trajkovska, Krtolica, 2023).
In the contemporary context, even within societies that long ago proclaimed democracy, the emergence of hybrid regimes has been observed, reflecting serious challenges to the potential for developing alternative socio-political frameworks. This phenomenon does not exclude fundamentalist ideas, present among certain minority and majority groups, whose movements, “in the spirit of democracy,” have frequently hindered societal development and led to evident deviations that undermine democratic values.
Today, we can assert that a country has a consolidated democracy only if democratic relations are represented in all segments of social life. Democracy, beyond free and fair elections, equality before the law, the rule of law, social, economic, and political pluralism, and tolerance, is also closely linked to the respect for religious rights and freedoms. These rights are considered a particularly serious responsibility for states, which are obligated to implement the provisions of international agreements they have ratified in this regard.
A key dilemma in the contemporary context is the prevailing stance that once again draws a rigid line between government and religion, insisting that they must exist separately, without direct influence or intervention. However, it is undeniable that the government must take into account the unique capacity of religious organizations, communities, and faith-based groups in maintaining peace, fostering cooperation, promoting tolerance, strengthening solidarity, and facilitating intercultural dialogue among citizens. Furthermore, the state bears the responsibility of educating its citizens on the significance and importance of religions. In this respect, education plays a crucial role in cultivating these values, as it serves as the key instrument in combating all forms of ignorance, stereotypes, and civic intolerance (Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, Spasenovski, 2018).
Secularism and Democratization
The second half of the 18th century was dominated by Enlightenment and secularist ideas, which sparked debates across various societal contexts, particularly concerning the relationship between the Church and the state. These ideas culminated in the French Revolution (1789–1793), which ultimately established the secular state as a negation of the medieval state founded on theological principles, marking what was perceived as the transcendence of the so-called Ancien Régime. This shift was further reinforced by the ideas of Émile Durkheim and Max Weber, who believed that “the iron law of history inevitably leads to secularization”; Karl Marx, who labeled religion as “the opium of the people” (Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, Spasenovski, 2018); and Friedrich Engels, who argued that religion emerged as a primitive human attempt to explain natural and social forces that surpassed the capabilities of sensory perception or rational understanding (McKown, 1975). Many theorists who viewed religious conviction as irrational considered religion to be one of the cultural obstacles to democracy, predicting that it would fade away under the influence of development and modernization. Their forecasts extended so far as to suggest that religious ideas would have to give way to rational aspirations and progress (Fukuyama, 2002).
The political history of nations and states has been marked by episodes of religious intolerance, religious wars, and inquisitions. In response to this, Western European states in the 20th century established the democratic principle of religious freedom, whereby governments proclaimed their neutrality in religious matters, leaving each citizen to decide independently whether or not to adhere to religious beliefs. From this principle emerged the concept of laïcité, which implies a neutral stance by the state regarding religious affairs, refraining from endorsing or supporting any particular religion (Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, Spasenovski, 2018).
When it comes to the secular state, it encompasses three types of relationships between the state, on one hand, and religious organizations and citizens, on the other. In the relationship between citizens and religion, the state remains excluded, just as religion is excluded from the relationship between citizens and the state. According to one definition, secularism is a doctrine that seeks to establish appropriate principles within a society based on rational knowledge and experience rather than theology or the supernatural. However, while dominant definitions of secularism emphasize the exclusion of religion and religious thought from state affairs, this does not necessarily mean that secularism is inherently anti-theistic. In fact, within secularism, no religion holds an officially recognized status, and all religious organizations are treated equally, with religious discrimination strictly prohibited. The secular state has the right to rely on certain universal ethical principles inherent in dominant religious traditions, but it is not permitted to allow any specific faith to dictate state policies. Under secularism, citizens are free to choose whether to believe or not, and religion is interpreted as a private matter beyond the jurisdiction of the state (Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, Spasenovski, 2020).
The Former Yugoslav Socialist Sphere
After World War II, the religious and social reality in the countries of the former Yugoslavia underwent a drastic transformation. The ideological and political foundation of the Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY), which was built upon Marxist atheism, led to sharp divisions and conflicts between Yugoslav communists and religious leaders. The communists viewed religion as a phenomenon born out of and sustained by specific historical conditions of material and spiritual backwardness. The religious system was understood as a system of false beliefs and societal blindness, which, in accordance with the rhetoric and practice of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia (SKJ), had no positive contribution to human development in any sense (Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, Spasenovski, 2020).
Socialism, with its positivist orientation, manifested in the Yugoslav context through an anti-religious ideology and militant state atheism, for which there is substantial historical evidence. The primary tool in this struggle was public education and the promotion of knowledge, which had to be liberated from the constraints of theology. Anti-religious propaganda was organized through public discussions, the publication of specific literature in favor of atheism and materialism, and, most significantly, the dissemination of knowledge that was expected—gradually but inevitably—to dismantle any religious worldview. In this sense, secularization was understood as a process of emancipation of human reason, and of humanity as a whole. From the perspective of socialist secularists, religion was the adversary of this emancipation, opposing the freedom of reason. Consequently, everything religious was to be excommunicated or marginalized.
At the same time, despite these conditions, the state formally guaranteed citizens freedom of conscience and freedom of religion. The Church was separated from the state, and religious communities whose teachings were not unconstitutional were free to conduct their activities and religious rites. Theological seminaries were also permitted to function but remained under state supervision. The misuse of the Church and religion for political purposes was strictly prohibited, along with the establishment of political organizations based on religious affiliation. Schools and religious institutions were distinct entities, as were the state and religion, yet the state retained the ability to provide financial support to religious communities (Constitution of the FPRY, 1946).
Despite its legal framework, the Constitution of the Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY) under Tito’s regime, along with its three amendments (1946, 1963, and 1974), indicates that the established changes were not substantive when it came to the Constitution’s relationship with religion as an institution or the activities of religious communities in society. All three amendments guaranteed the right to freedom of conscience and the practice of religion as a fundamental principle of individual freedom within the socialist community. In other words, none of the three editions of the Yugoslav Constitution explicitly prohibited religious practice. In this regard, the adoption of democratic standards set by the civilized world—which were formally accepted by the Federal Yugoslavia—meant, in practice, only one thing: religion was not being directly annihilated through legal prohibitions but was being eradicated through an active policy promoted by science and public education (Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, Spasenovski, 2020).
Secularization, when approached correctly, can undoubtedly be beneficial. However, the social circumstances under the one-party system created an ideological uniformity that led to the stigmatization of anything that did not conform to socialist ideological values. In this context, it is justified to argue that the ideology of socialist secularism exceeded the legal protection of religious freedoms. Consequently, in the early 1990s, what was recognized in the West as “freedom of religion” through democratization processes was met with surprise by the inheritors of the Yugoslav socialist system. This was because, in everyday practice, the notion of religious freedom meant nothing more than the systematic violation of constitutional rights concerning religious practice over an extended period (Ognjenović, Jozelić, 2014).
Thus, a fundamental question arises: Can religious rights and freedoms be genuinely expressed under conditions of constitutional legality but without substantive religious freedom? Furthermore, what is the significance of subjective religious freedom if it cannot be openly manifested, given that a believer was perceived through the lens of an ideology that deemed religious individuals as unfit for development and emancipation? And was it possible to avoid the stigma or the moral sanctions imposed and enforced by the informal public opinion of the community, despite these not being part of the formal legal mechanisms of the state at the time?
Religious Education in Light of the Socialist Legacy
Religious instruction was a regular subject in the schools of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia before World War II. However, after the war, in accordance with the changed relationship between the state and the Church, religious education was removed from schools. The new socialist government, committed to a secular model of societal organization, drew a rigid line between the state and the influence of religious communities through religious education in schools.
The Constitution of the FPRY defined the state’s stance on the issue of religious freedom, guaranteeing all citizens their rights based on the principle of secularism, that is, the separation of religious organizations from the state. On the other hand, Article 38 of the Constitution, which addressed the right to education, severed the connection between religious organizations and public education by stipulating that state schools were separate from the Church. Similarly, the 1946 Constitution of the People’s Republic of Macedonia mirrored the provisions of the FPRY Constitution in the same form and text. Specifically, in Chapter V, titled “Rights and Duties of Citizens,” Article 38 of the FPRY Constitution was transferred verbatim as Article 37 in the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Macedonia (Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, Spasenovski, 2020).
After the dissolution of Yugoslavia, religious education was immediately reinstated in the public education systems of Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, whereas in the Republic of Serbia, it was reintroduced only in 2001 and 2002. In the case of the Republic of Macedonia, religious education was reintroduced in schools in 2003, only to be abolished shortly thereafter. The introduction of religious instruction in the former socialist states was seen as a partial rectification of the injustices committed against the Church and believers during decades of socialist rule. It also marked the end of the systemic discrimination against believers that had persisted throughout the socialist period.
Comparative and Legal Perspective
From today’s perspective, in most secular states, the influence of religion remains significant, particularly in the field of education. For example, Europe has recognized that religious education promotes social tolerance, peace, and respect for diversity, granting it a special place within public schools. The very presence of religious education helps shape morally conscious individuals who are capable of recognizing and properly selecting among different value systems while also advocating for the preservation of democratic principles within their respective societies. The more liberal model of secularism acknowledges that the Church cultivates the religious and moral dimension of the human soul. States that, under the influence of specific historical and cultural circumstances, have established such a secular model regulate their legal systems in a way that removes any obstacles to the development of spiritual culture in individuals. These states do not view religion as an adversary; on the contrary, they recognize it as a powerful factor that contributes positively and assists in the successful fulfillment of their broader societal objectives for the common good of all citizens.
Freedom of religion is protected under Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The United Nations General Assembly adopted two international human rights treaties: the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Through these covenants, the provisions of the UDHR, including those concerning freedom of religion, were transformed into legally binding norms for the states that ratified them (Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, Spasenovski, 2020).
Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights explicitly states that every individual has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. This right includes the freedom to adopt or change a religion or belief according to personal conviction, as well as the freedom to manifest that religion or belief either individually or in community with others, in public or private, through worship, religious practice, rituals, and religious education. The states that are parties to this covenant are obligated to respect the freedom of parents—and, in certain cases, legal guardians—to provide their children with religious and moral education that aligns with their personal beliefs (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights).
The Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1981, further guarantees children’s right to access religious education in accordance with the wishes of their parents while simultaneously prohibiting discrimination against children on the basis of religion or belief (Declaration). Article 2 of the First Protocol to the ECHR stipulates that no one shall be denied the right to education. In carrying out its educational and instructional responsibilities, the state is required to safeguard the principle of non-discrimination and to respect the right of parents to ensure education and instruction in conformity with their religious and philosophical beliefs (Convention).
Consequently, the state is not only responsible for guaranteeing the right to education for all individuals but also for ensuring the right to religious education. By enabling the exercise of this right within schools, the state is fulfilling its duty toward its citizens rather than toward the Church, religious communities, or religious groups. At the same time, the principle of secularism within the state is upheld, as there is no interference in the relationship between the state and religious communities; rather, the state ensures the unobstructed realization of citizens’ right to education (Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, Spasenovski, 2018).
The right to study religions, to understand their history and development, and to learn about one’s own religious tradition is a universal and civilizational right that extends far beyond the interests of the Church or other religious communities and groups. Religious education is a fundamental value of any pluralistic society, as religion forms an integral part of the national history, culture, and tradition of every country.
The State and Challenges of Religious Education in North Macedonia
In the recent history of North Macedonia’s democratic society, debates regarding the introduction and sustainability of religious education in the public education system have been perceived as a contentious issue. Invoking the secular model of state-religion relations, certain political actors have repeatedly abolished or undermined religious education, viewing it as a threat to secularism. On the other hand, despite their positive stance on religious education, other political entities have failed to establish appropriate legal solutions for its incorporation into the public education system.
Regarding the issue of religious education in educational institutions, Macedonia has experienced a turbulent history. Religion was reintroduced into primary education in 2002, but it was soon removed from the public education system following a decision by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Macedonia. This decision came after a citizen filed an initiative to annul the Ministry of Education’s resolution. In 2008, religious education was reinstated for a second time, only to be abolished again in 2009 by the Constitutional Court. This ruling followed an initiative brought forward by a political party challenging the constitutionality of Article 26 of the Law on Primary Education, which regulated religious education. The Constitutional Court repealed Article 26 on the grounds that it exceeded the constitutional boundaries of secularism in Macedonian education. The judges argued that the introduction of religious education in public schools compromised the academic and neutral character of education, which is a defining feature of public schooling, and that it involved the state in organizing religious instruction, thereby violating the constitutional principle of separation between the state and the Church.
Nevertheless, as a result of prolonged public debate and pressure, a certain balance was achieved. The state permitted the study of religions in primary education from a secular (neutral) perspective, ensuring that the constitutionally established separation of church and state was not compromised. Consequently, the subject Ethics in Religions was introduced as a mandatory elective for sixth-grade students, focusing on the moral aspects of recognized religious traditions in Macedonia from a secular standpoint (Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, Spasenovski, 2018). However, with the latest Concept for Primary Education from 2021, Ethics in Religions was further downgraded, becoming part of a group of freely elective subjects, rendering its presence in the curriculum practically nonexistent.
From today’s perspective, it remains unclear why the previously established alignment between the Constitution and the Law on Primary Education, as well as the balance between the secular state and the will of the religious majority, was disregarded. European secular states have long unified their approaches toward greater inclusion of religious education in schools, recognizing its role in addressing societal issues, reducing social deviance, and fostering acceptance of diversity. In this regard, Macedonian students should also have the opportunity to familiarize themselves not only with their own ethical and religious system but also with those of others throughout their primary education.
It is crucial to emphasize that Ethics in Religions contributes significantly to social cohesion and unity. It does not serve as a tool for religious indoctrination but rather aims to introduce students to the culture and traditions to which they belong. In the Macedonian social context, religion is deeply intertwined with national culture, art, and literature, which have developed continuously over centuries. In fact, alternative cultural, artistic, and literary traditions in Macedonia are almost nonexistent (Gjorgjevski, 2018).
In the modern context, when discussing the protection of human rights and freedoms—including those of students—it is essential to address the right to religious education and the benefits of its reintroduction into the public education system. This measure would undoubtedly protect children from distorted worldviews, including misleading religious education and misinformation. Moreover, making decisions in light of the obligations arising from ratified international agreements would help dismantle the widespread misconceptions about the relationship between the state and religious communities. Consequently, a political leadership that demonstrates its full democratic capacity by resolving this issue would accomplish a historic act—correcting a great injustice resulting from the violation of children’s right to religious education in Macedonia. Furthermore, it would put an end to the discrimination against professional educators trained to systematize and teach this form of education in Macedonian schools. In this context, Recommendation No. 1804 (2007) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe is highly relevant, stating that: “Education is the key to combating ignorance, stereotypes, and misunderstandings about religions and their leaders” (Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, Spasenovski, 2018).
Therefore, the school environment must play its crucial role. This can only be achieved if the educational component fosters a spirit of cooperation, openness, pluralism in thinking, and dialogue with all different members of society. Understanding and effectively arguing for the need to study ethical-religious value systems in Macedonia’s public education system goes far beyond simply respecting basic democratic rights and freedoms. This necessity reaches deeper into the social fabric, where all forms of religious and ideological fundamentalism can be effectively countered by providing young people with a proper education on the history and philosophy of major religions in an objective and impartial manner (Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, Spasenovski, 2018).
We firmly believe that the issue of expanding ethical-religious education in public schooling will finally be examined in a positive light, free from fear and prejudice. After all, the goal is to create access and opportunities for everyone to embrace the challenges of today’s social reality—because only together can we transform it. Ethical-religious education must not remain on the margins but should be integrated into the core of primary education. This is where the foundations of a society’s cultural development are laid, shaping the spirit of an entire era.
References
- Delovska, I. (2020). The Relationship Between Pedagogy and Religion. Skopje.
- McKown, D. (1975). The Classical Marxist Critiques of Religion: Marx, Engels, Lenin, Kautsky. Springer Science & Business Media.
- Fromm, E., & Marx, K. (1994). Marx’s Concept of Man. Bloomsbury Academic.
- Fromm, E. (2016). The Sane Society. Belgrade.
- Fukuyama, F. (2002). The End of History and the Last Man. Podgorica.
- Đorđević, B. D. (1984). Escape from the Church. Knjaževac, Nota.
- Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, T., & Spasenovski, A. (2018). Handbook on the Rights of Religious Communities and Freedom of Religion in the Republic of Macedonia. KAS, Skopje.
- Karakamisheva-Jovanovska, T., & Spasenovski, A. (2020). Law and Religion. KAS, Skopje.
- Ognjenović, G., & Jozelić, J. (2014). Politicization of Religion, the Power of State, Nation, and Faith: The Case of Former Yugoslavia and Its Successor States. Palgrave Macmillan, United States.
- Perry, M. (2020). Intellectual History of Europe. Belgrade.
- Stres, T. (1976). Marxist Theory of Religion in Yugoslavia Yesterday and Today. Bogoslovska Smotra, XLV.
- Treneska-Deskoska, R., Hristovska-Trajkovska, J., & Krtolica, M. (2023). Political System. FES.
- Constitution of the Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia (1946), Chapter V, Rights and Duties of Citizens, Article 25.
- Ćiparizović, R., & Dragana, D. (2006). Religiosity and Tradition. Institute for Sociological Research, Faculty of Philosophy, Belgrade.
- European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, accessed on 22.01.2025: https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/convention_MKD
- Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, op. cit., accessed on 22.01.2025: https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/declaration-elimination-all-forms-intolerance-and-discrimination
- Gjorgjevski, Gj. (2018), accessed on 18.01.2025: https://bigorski.org.mk/etika/religioznata-edukacija-vo-evropskite-ucilishta/
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, accessed on: https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-rights
