In the provinces with the highest concentration of indigenous population, and sometimes in Quito, it happens that at official events indigenous rituals are performed which, according to their spokesmen and producers, represent Andean religiosity. That is, a concrete spiritual path and a specific understanding of man’s relationship to the sacred and transcendent, which in this case would be called Andean, autochthonous or ancestral religiosity. However, in the Constitution, in the first article, the Ecuadorian state is recognized as secular, despite the fact that the introduction refers to Pachamama and God, while recognizing various forms of “religiosity and spirituality”.

In the report of the Office of the Ombudsman for Religious Freedom and the Secular State from 2017, secularism is defined as a process of differentiation of social, political and religious dimensions. It is also stated that a secular state is one that does not recognize a particular religion as its own, does not protect any religion and appeals to neutrality towards any cult or church. It is a “legal-political organization separated from any religion”.

The religious practice held by each of us as a citizen must be protected, and the state is the guarantor that in no case will I be discriminated against, segregated or harmed because of my religion. It must also guarantee that they can practice it and demonstrate it publicly. However, there is a difference when a ministry, secretariat, zone or district includes a religious or spiritual ritual in its program.

State secularism includes all religious and/or spiritual practices regardless of the citizen who professes them.

This issue becomes particularly controversial in indigenous communities or areas where their population is the majority, but this should not be an obstacle to thinking about this particular tension. The same one that begins with the Constitution apparently recognizing two different religious systems, Pachamama and God. What would happen if, in the official acts of a state department, their activities began with mass, Catholic or Evangelical? I am sure and I could identify some groups that would publicly condemn such an event, but at the same time would gladly participate in the Andean ceremony, in fact they would be in favor of the state promoting it.

It becomes more complicated when we note that these indigenous communities would declare themselves, if not entirely, overwhelmingly Catholic and otherwise evangelical. On the other hand, when Andean practices are studied more deeply, elements from Catholicism are found, from its symbolism to the structure of the ceremony.

One of the problems of interculturality and plurinationality is that it requires the state to promote actions in favor of culture, and in this case specific religiosity and spirituality, violating its principle of neutrality and non-discrimination. It is also true that we should review whether there are special institutional relations with the Catholic Church and, if they do, correct them. State secularism includes all religious and/or spiritual practices regardless of the individual professing them. (OR)