Posted on by

Hallaq, “The Impossible State: Islam, Politics, and Modernity’s Moral Predicament”

This December, Columbia University Press will publish The Impossible State: Islam, Politics, and Modernity’s Moral Predicament by Wael B. Hallaq (Columbia University).  The publisher’s description follows.

Wael B. Hallaq boldly argues that the “Islamic state,” judged by any standard definition of what the modern state represents, is both an impossible and inherently self-contradictory concept. Comparing the legal, political, moral, and constitutional histories of pre-modern Islam and Euro-America, he finds the adoption and practice of the modern state to be highly problematic for modern Muslims. He then conducts a more expansive critique of modernity’s moral predicament, which renders impossible any project resting solely on ethical foundations.

The modern state not only suffers from serious legal, political, and constitutional issues, Hallaq argues, but it also, by its very nature, fashions a subject inconsistent with what it means to be, or to live as, a Muslim. By Islamic standards, the state’s technologies of the self are severely lacking in moral substance, and the Muslim state, as Hallaq shows, has done little to advance an acceptable form of genuine Shari‘a governance. The Islamists’ constitutional battles in Egypt and Pakistan, the Islamic legal and political failures of the Iranian Revolution, and similar disappointments underscore this fact. Nevertheless, the state remains the favored template of the Islamists and the ulama (Muslim clergymen). Providing Muslims with a path toward realizing the good life, Hallaq turns to the rich moral resources of Islamic history. Along the way, he proves political and other “crises of Islam” are not unique to the Islamic world nor to the Muslim religion. These crises are integral to the modern condition of both East and West, and recognizing such parallels enables Muslims to engage more productively with their Western counterparts.

Posted on by

Religious Freedom Debate Today with Koppelman and Paulsen

A reminder that today CLR will host a debate, “Religious Liberty in the 2012 Election,” at 4:00 PM at the St. John’s University Law School campus in Queens, New York. Our two debaters will be Andy Koppelman (Northwestern) and Mike Paulsen (St. Thomas). Both are known to have strong opinions, so the event promises to be a lively and provocative one.

If you’re in the neighborhood, please stop by. Details are here.

Posted on by ddrakeman

Things I Haven’t Figured Out — Part 2: Establishment Clause Heavy Lifting

Every time a church-state issue pops up – school vouchers or prayer, the Pledge, you name it – everyone runs to the establishment clause to see what the answer is.  And I’m wondering why we’re asking that clause to do so much work.

You’ll think the answer is obvious.  That’s where the Constitution’s governing statement about religion and government is found.  Just look at all those Supreme Court cases.

And you’re right.  The Supreme Court has, for the last 60 years or so, created its church-state jurisprudence around the first few words of the First Amendment.  But it didn’t have to be that way.  And, in fact, it most often wasn’t that way for 160 years before that.

Try this as a thought experiment.  Suppose, just for the sake of argument, that all the establishment clause did when it was adopted was say that there would be no national “Church of the United States.”  (I’ve devoted 1500 footnotes to saying just that in Church, State, and Original Intent, but you don’t have to agree with me.  This is just an experiment.)  In that case, the establishment clause per se wouldn’t have much, or anything, to say about all our hot-button church-state issues.

It seems to me that there could be interesting questions of delegated powers for federal church-state issues (see the Affordable Care Act litigation), and a chance to mull over equal protection issues for state ones (and perhaps federal ones if you favor reverse incorporation).  How about those largely ignored privileges and immunities, and the last couple of provisions in the Bill of Rights?  You can no doubt think of others.

I’m not proposing an answer here – just suggesting that, as a diversion from the inevitable less-filling/tastes-great debates between the strict separationists and their establishment clause foes, it might be intellectually freeing (and, at least in my view, more historically accurate) to think about church-state issues without all those layers of establishment clause doctrine.

Don Drakeman

Posted on by

Gordon, “Invisible Agents”

This November, the Ohio University Press will publish Invisible Agents: Spirits in Central African History by David M. Gordon (Bowdoin College).  The publisher’s description follows.

Invisible Agents shows how personal and deeply felt spiritual beliefs can inspire social movements and influence historical change. Conventional historiography concentrates on the secular, materialist, or moral sources of political agency. Instead, David M. Gordon argues, when people perceive spirits as exerting power in the visible world, these beliefs form the basis for individual and collective actions. Focusing on the history of the south-central African country of Zambia during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, his analysis invites reflection on political and religious realms of action in other parts of the world, and complicates the post-Enlightenment divide of sacred and profane.

The book combines theoretical insights with attention to local detail and remarkable historical sweep, from oral narratives communicated across slave-trading routes during the nineteenth century, through the violent conflicts inspired by Christian and nationalist prophets during colonial times, and ending with the spirits of Pentecostal rebirth during the neoliberal order of the late twentieth century. To gain access to the details of historical change and personal spiritual beliefs across this long historical period, Gordon employs all the tools of the African historian. His own interviews and extensive fieldwork experience in Zambia provide texture and understanding to the narrative. He also critically interprets a diverse range of other sources, including oral traditions, fieldnotes of anthropologists, missionary writings and correspondence, unpublished state records, vernacular publications, and Zambian newspapers.

Invisible Agents will challenge scholars and students alike to think in new ways about the political imagination and the invisible sources of human action and historical change.

Posted on by

O’Connor, “Islam in Hong Kong”

This October, the Hong Kong University Press will publish Islam in Hong Kong: Muslims and Everyday Life in China’s World City by Paul O’Connor (Chinese University of Hong Kong).  The publisher’s description follows.

More than a quarter of a million Muslims live and work in Hong Kong. Among them are descendants of families who have been in the city for generations, recent immigrants from around the world, and growing numbers of migrant workers. Islam in Hong Kong explores the lives of Muslims as ethnic and religious minorities in this unique post-colonial Chinese city. Drawing on interviews with Muslims of different origins, O’Connor builds a detailed picture of daily life through topical chapters on language, space, religious education, daily prayers, maintaining a halal diet in a Chinese environment, racism, and other subjects. Although the picture that emerges is complex and ambiguous, one striking conclusion is that Muslims in Hong Kong generally find acceptance as a community and do not consider themselves to be victimised because of their religion.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian · 2 Comments

Neither Belonging Nor Believing?

Reader John McGinnis sends this interesting piece from the International Herald Tribune on an attempt by the Catholic Church in Germany to encourage its faithful to continue paying that country’s so-called “church tax.” Under German law, religious associations can assesses a tax — really, it’s more like membership fee — on members. The state collects the tax, which typically amounts to 8-9% of the taxpayer’s total liability, and then distributes it to the church the taxpayer designates on his tax form. All a taxpayer has to do to avoid paying the tax is to resign his church membership. Traditionally, however, German taxpayers have continued to declare church membership, and pay the church tax, notwithstanding the relatively low rate of religious observance in that country. Sociologists of religion have described this phenomenon as “belonging without believing,” and it reflects a standard European attitude toward religion.

That may be changing. The IHT suggests that an “exodus” is underway both in the Catholic and Lutheran Churches, as taxpayers increasingly end their formal affiliations to avoid paying the church tax. The Catholic hierarchy has come up with a strategy to stop the departures. Starting this week, Catholics who resign their church membership “may no longer qualify for religious ceremonies such as a Christian burial and may not partake in confession or communion; become a godfather at baptism or confirmation; or hold office within the church.” This has led to protests from Catholics who resent being told they have to pay for such things, as well as perhaps predictable references to the pre-Reformation sale of indulgences — notwithstanding the fact that the Lutheran Church participates in the church tax too.

From an American perspective, this is all very interesting. Americans fund our churches through private (though tax-deductible) donations. Early on, we decided that the state could not collect revenue for religious bodies — not even “three pence,” in Madison’s famous phrase. Many European countries, by contrast, have adopted a state-funding model; the level of private donations is comparatively low. Now, it seems, increasing numbers of Europeans want neither model. Yet they insist on the right to receive church services and protest when someone points out that it costs money to keep a church open. Grace droppeth as the gentle rain from Heaven, but someone has to pay the electric bills. What these protesters seem to be saying is, give us the services, but don’t ask us for anything. Come to think of it, that does sound a bit American.

Posted on by

Sen, “Articles of Faith: Religion, Secularism, and the Indian Supreme Court”

This November, Oxford University Press will publish Articles of Faith: Religion, Secularism, and the Indian Supreme Court by Ronojoy Sen (National University of Singapore). The publisher’s description follows.

This book examines the relationship of religion and the Indian state and seeks to answer the question: ‘How has the higher judiciary in Independent India interpreted the right to freedom of religion and in turn influenced the discourse on secularism and nationhood?’ The author examines the tension between judgments that attempt to define the essence of religion and in many ways to ‘rationalize’ it, and a society where religion occupies a prominent space. He places the judicial discourse within the wider political and philosophical context of Indian secularism. The author also focuses on judgments related to Article 44, under the Directive Principles of State Policy, which places a duty on the state to ‘secure’ a uniform civil code for the nation. His contention is that the Indian Supreme Court has actively aimed at reform and rationalization of obscurantist religious views and institutions and has, as a result, contributed to a ‘homogenization of religion’ and also the nation, that it has not shown adequate sensitivity to the pluralism of Indian polity and the rights of minorities.

Posted on by

Tejirian & Simon “Conflict, Conquest, and Conversion: Two Thousand Years of Christian Missions in the Middle East”

This October, Columbia University Press will publish Conflict, Conquest, and Conversion: Two Thousand Years of Christian Missions in the Middle East by Eleanor H. Tejirian (Columbia University) and Reeva Spector Simon (Columbia University). The publisher’s description follows.

 Conflict, Conquest, and Conversion describes two thousand years of the Christian missionary enterprise in the Middle East within the context of the region’s political evolution. Its broad, rich narrative follows Christian missions as they interact with imperial powers and as the momentum of religious change shifts from Christianity to Islam and back, adding new dimensions to the history of the region and the nature of the relationship between the Middle East and the West.

Historians and political scientists increasingly recognize the importance of integrating religion into political analysis, and this volume, using long-neglected sources, provides the necessary context for this effort. It surveys Christian missions from the earliest days of Christianity to the present, with particular emphasis on the role of Christian missions, both Protestant and Catholic, in the political and economic imperialism of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The authors delineate the ongoing tensions between conversion and a focus on witness and “good works” within the missionary movement, which has contributed to the development and spread of nongovernmental organizations. This volume’s systematic study offers an unparalleled encounter with the social, political, and economic consequences of these trends.