"Ostentatious"? Well, That Wouldn't Do, Now, Would It?

It seems that the court in a little town in France has decreed that a statue of St John Paul be removed from a town square.

At the unveiling ceremony for the statue in 2006, Ploermel's Mayor Paul Anselin described John Paul II as "a giant of the 20th Century who participated in the fall of the Iron Curtain".
But opponents applied to French courts for the removal of the statue, claiming it violates French law on the separation of church and state.

I don't actually find this all that troubling.
You want "troubling"?

A 15-year-old Muslim girl has been banned from class twice for wearing a long black skirt seen as too openly religious for secular France...
The girl was stopped from going to class earlier this month by the headteacher who reportedly felt the long skirt “conspicuously” showed religious affiliation, which is banned in schools by France’s strict secularity laws.
“The girl was not excluded, she was asked to come back with a neutral outfit and it seems her father did not want the student to come back to school,” local education official Patrice Dutot told AFP on Tuesday.
He admitted that the student always removed her veil before entering school premises in the north-eastern town of Charleville-Mezieres, as is specifically stipulated by law.

As I understand it, a Christian girl or an atheist girl would have been permitted to wear fashion of that length and fit.
(And perhaps a boy would have been allowed? I don't know where France is running in the Crazy Stakes.)
But back to the original topic.

According to the court, the dimensions of the statue and its placement are “ostentatious” in  character.

And we all know how refined and tasteful, how opposed to ostentation the French are, how they lionize subtlety...