In Europe, the Catholic Church as discussed earlier had been dominating life, society, state and people in the name of religion. It extended its dominance over kings and rulers, from the perspective of the idea of divine authority. It would authorize ruling for them, providing them the necessary legitimacy. Thus, rulers and kings would submit to the Catholic Church. At times they would ally with the Catholic Church for the sake of their interests. The Catholic Church extended its dominance over the people by claiming that it had possessed the right of forgiveness, through absolution and sacrament. Whosoever violated its teachings would be subjected to brutal inquisition and punitive excommunication. The Church controlled the economy by possessing lands and wealth resulting from tithes and others. However, from the beginning of the sixteenth century CE, its influence began to gradually wane. This was due to many factors, the most important of which is the Protestant Reformation led by Martin Luther. Reformation paved the way for what the Westerners assert is the dominance of the state and the separation of religion. In his book, The Advent of Democracy Volume 1 The Modem Revolution (French: L'avenement de la democratie I La revolution moderne), Marcel Gauchet said, “Luther's operation strikes at the principle of mediation at the heart, at the auspices of the Church, the pivotal institution which materialized it in the Christian world... The questioning of what the unity between the Heaven and the Earth engages over, is the first step of the modern era. (French: L’operation de Luther frappe le principe de mediation au coeur, sous les traits de I’Eglise, I’institution pivot qui le materialisait dans le monde Chretien... La remise en question de I’unite du Ciel et de la Terre qu’elle engage est le premier pas de I’ere moderne.)”.

As a result of the emergence of Protestantism, England abandoned the Catholic doctrine and established the Anglican Church to emphasize royal supremacy over it, separating from Rome and the Papal authority. Then the Thirty Years War broke out, in which the Hapsburg monarchy, the Spanish Empire, France, Sweden, Denmark-Norway and Germanic entities participated. The war continued until 1648, the year in which the treaties constituting the Peace of Westphalia began to be signed, ending the religious war. It marked the beginnings of the emergence of the modern nation state, as it included the reference to the secularization of church assets, meaning that they were transferred to non-religious authorities, i.e. temporal state authorities. All of this coincided with economic developments witnessed by Europe, after the stage of geographical discoveries. Also, it coincided with the change in view about the Church, its teachings and knowledge, through the intellectual and scientific revolutions that has been mentioned previously.

As a result of all these factors, Europe welcomed the eighteenth century CE within an atmosphere conducive to separating religion from life, as affirmed by the principles of the French Revolution of 1789. The idea was not consolidated and implemented until the end of the nineteenth century CE and the beginning of the twentieth century CE, when it was later known as secularism. The origin of secularism is in the sense of Earthliness and worldliness from the sense of the world (^) and not from knowledge or science (<^). It is called LaTcite in the Francophone and Catholic nations. It is worthy of mention that not all Western nations that adopted secularism, stipulated secularism in their constitutions. Instead, some, like England, stipulate a particular church or a particular religion as the religion of the state. However, France, as a contrasting example, enacted Article 1 of the French Constitution discouraging religious involvement in government affairs, based on the 1905

French law on the Separation of the Churches and the State (French: Loi du 9 decembre 1905 concernant la separation des Eglises et de I’Etat). It is considered an anomaly in the context of historical, intellectual and political considerations. That is why, some Westerners differentiate between secularism and Laicite as Laicite is the secularism stipulated by France constitutionally.

Secularism is often defined as the separation of the Church from the state. However, this first definition neither completely encapsulates the philosophy nor fully elucidates its doctrine. Instead it only expresses the consequence, which is that the West reached the conviction of separating of religion from life. This is the concept of secularism followed by the West since the eighteenth century, in both doctrinal and philosophical realms. However, the most distinct characteristics are practically determined by the two bodies that symbolize secularism. They are, on the one hand, the Church, as a body expressing the religion with its ancient beliefs and teachings, and, on the other hand, the state as a body expressing life with its modern, rationalist modalities.

The reality of secularism or Laicite, in the definitions of the Westerners themselves, also appears as a second definition, the separation of religion from life. For example, Maurice Barbier says in his book La Laicite, “In its broad sense, Laicite means the separation between the religion and worldly realities (les realites profanes).” It assumes that these worldly realities are subject neither to the inclusion nor influence of religion. What is meant by religion is beliefs or any group or any religious authority. Thus, we see that the philosophy in the West is independent of theology. Various sciences were formed outside the framework of Christianity. Indeed, the sciences were polar opposites to Christianity at times. Similarly, all the human realities such as political, social and cultural and other realities, are to be independent of religion. This was achieved by the long-term separation, which is what we call secularization or laicization.

It is for this reason that we can characterize any society or thought or morality as LaTcite, if it is completely devoid of any religious influence, and if it only follows the principles within the rationalist or humanist regimes. In the narrow sense of the word, we can characterize education in LaTcite, for example, as not containing any sectarian (denominational) or religious characteristics. The philosopher Charles Taylor, in his book, A Secular Age, distinguishes between three definitions of secularism held in the West, “One understanding of secularity then is in terms of public spaces. These have been allegedly emptied of God, or of any reference to ultimate reality. Or taken from another side, as we function within various spheres of activity—economic, political, cultural, educational, professional, recreational—the norms and principles we follow, the deliberations we engage in, generally don’t refer us to God or to any religious beliefs; the considerations we act on are internal to the “rationality” of each sphere—maximum gain within the economy, the greatest benefit to the greatest number in the political area, and so on. This is in striking contrast to earlier periods, when Christian faith laid down authoritative prescriptions, often through the mouths of the clergy, which could not be easily ignored in any of these domains, such as the ban on usury, or the obligation to enforce orthodoxy.”.

As for the third Western definition of secularism, it focused on the denigration of religion. In the words of Charles Taylor, “As children, we have to see ourselves as surrounded by love and concern, or we shrivel up. But in growing up, we have to learn to face the fact that this environment of concern can’t extend beyond the human sphere, and mostly doesn’t extend very far within it. But this transition is hard. So we project a world which is providential, created by a benign God... So religion emanates from a childish lack of courage. We need to stand up like men, and face reality.”.

Some Western thinkers go on to classify secularism- Laicite, without regarding it as a single, cohesive political- philosophical paradigm. Yet other thinkers sub-divide it into French and Anglo-Saxon secularist traditions. Some of them sub-classified secularism into “soft” and “hard” variants. Some of them classified as Laicite ouverte (open secularism), with greater tolerance of religion as in the US, and Laicite militante (militant secularism), which is more like France. Some of them classified secularism into atheist and non-atheist variants. Amongst them are those who sub-classified secularism into partial or comprehensive and so on. All these classifications, particularly the partial and comprehensive divisions of secularism, that are common amongst some of the Muslims, do not change the reality of secularism or Laicite in its nature. Secularism’s nature is that of separating the religion from life, which in turns results in the separation of religion from the state. Partial secularism is not just a pragmatic, operational view. Instead, partial secularism is an intellectual viewpoint based on the rationalist philosophy, which does not recognize the validity of religion to rule and take care of the affairs of people. The operational aspect of secular solutions cannot be separated from the intellectual and philosophical aspects, as some may hold. This is because the one who advocates partial secularism needs to justify the truth and validity of the approach, intellectually and philosophically. Therefore, secularism-Laicite is the separation of religion from life. Secularism is the creed, intellectual basis and intellectual leadership of the West.

As for secularism being the creed of the West, this is because it is the fundamental thought affirmed by the West conclusively. Secularism is considered by the West as the solution for the greatest problem of humankind, representing a comprehensive viewpoint about universe, man and life, in all of their relationships with what is before and after this worldly life. As for secularism being the intellectual basis of the West, this is because it is the foundation (usoo/) upon which all the sub-thoughts (branches) are built. It is the foundation from which the system for living emerges. As for secularism being the intellectual leadership of the West, this is because the West leads all those who adopt secularism into a specific viewpoint about life, into a specific way of living and into a shared criterion for judging thoughts, facts and events, all from a specific angle.

Secularism is corrupted with respect to its being a creed, intellectual basis and intellectual leadership. Its corruption arises from several aspects, some of which are: