LAICITÀ DELLA REPUBBLICA E PROGRESSO SPIRITUALE DELLA SOCIETÀ

The interpretative hypothesis from which the present work moves is that the “spiritual progress of society”, as the collective projection of a multiplicity of instances of conscience, can condition the evolution of legal systems, which, before being systems of rules of conduct, constitute “sets of values of human action deriving from a common life and made manifest by a common experience and culture” (thus in the perspective of the axiological theory of law). This is a thesis that we have attempted to prove by means of a diachronic investigation, having as its object not only the dynamics of collaboration and conflict between public powers and religious denominations (and specifically between the State and the Catholic Church), but also the models of the relationship between law and culture that have occurred in the various historical phases of the Italian State. From the analysis that has been carried out, it has emerged first of all the axiological gap that exists between the current constitutional order and the previous systems (so-called liberal and fascist), which, albeit in different ways, equally sought to instrumentalise the religious and cultural spirit, in order to contain the ethical development of society within pre-established tracks. The Constitution, on the other hand, wanted to give back to the civil community the responsibility (before the power) to self-determine from the point of view of values, placing on all citizens the duty (and not the right) to contribute to the “spiritual progress” (not of the individual, not of the State, but) of “society”, as an alternative or in addition to the commitment to “material progress”. This is what seems possible to argue starting from Article 4, second paragraph, of the Constitution, which, together with other constitutional provisions, contributes to structuring the physiognomy of the Republic in a laic, pluralist and - technically – “progressive” sense. The reference to the “spiritual progress [...] of society”, indeed, characterises in a 'dynamic' sense the axiology of the system, which adapts to the perennial changes of its community formant. In this sense, the norm contributes, although not expressly cited in this sense, to delineating one of the profiles of the form of State: the supreme principle of “laicità”. The absence of any mention of the article in Constitutional Court ruling No 203/1989 does not testify to the contrary. Indeed, from the moment of its inventio at the hands of the Constitutional Court, the value heart of “laicità” lies in pluralism, not only confessional, but also cultural; a “pluralism of values”, as clarified by Constitutional Court ruling no. 67/2017 and, more recently, by ruling no. 24414/2021 of the United Sections of the Supreme Court of Cassation. However, there are many interpretative knots to be unravelled. First and foremost, the reference to the idea of progress, which, by virtue of the meaning taken on by the Enlightenment, would seem to imply a pre-established path of social development, apparently in contrast with the neutral character of the 'living' order. This is an antinomy that we have attempted to dissolve through a conceptual refinement of the terms in question and, at the same time, through an actualisation of the duties of solidarity in the post-secular landscape.