Multi-Faith Spaces (MFS) are a relatively recent invention that quickly gained in significance. On the one hand, they offer a convenient solution for satisfying needs of people with diverse beliefs in the institutional context of hospitals, schools, airports, etc. On the other hand, as Andrew Crompton pointed out, they are politically significant because the multi-faith paradigm “is replacing Christianity as the face of public religion in Europe” (2012, p. 493). Due to their ideological entanglement, MFS are often used as the means to promote either a more privatised version of religion, or a certain denominational preference. Two distinct designs are used to achieve these means: negative in the case of the former, and positive in the latter. Neither is without problems, and neither adequately fulfils its primary purpose of serving diverse groups of believers. Both, however, seem to follow the biases and main problems of secularism. In this paper, I analyse recent developments of MFS to detail their main problems and answer the question, whether the MFS, and the underlying Multi-Faith Paradigm, can be classified as a continuation of secularism.