Posted on by

Janina M. Safran, “Defining Boundaries in al-Andalus”

This March, Cornell University Press will publish Defining Boundaries in al-Andalus by Janina M. Safran (Pennsylvania State University). The publisher’s description follows.

Al-Andalus, the Arabic name for the medieval Islamic state in Iberia, endured for over 750 years following the Arab and Berber conquest of Hispania in 711. While the popular perception of al-Andalus is that of a land of religious tolerance and cultural cooperation, the fact is that we know relatively little about how Muslims governed Christians and Jews in al-Andalus and about social relations among Muslims, Christians, and Jews. In Defining Boundaries in al-Andalus, Janina M. Safran takes a close look at the structure and practice of Muslim political and legal-religious authority and offers a rare look at intercommunal life in Iberia during the first three centuries of Islamic rule.

Read more

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Elm, “Sons of Hellenism”

One of the lessons of Peter Brown’s new book, about which I posted last week, is that Constantine’s conversion had only a limited effect on Roman society. For decades afterwards, Christianity and Paganism squared off as intellectual and political adversaries; Christianity’s triumph took time. A recent book by Berkeley historian Susanna Elm, Sons of Hellenism, Fathers of the Church (University of California Press 2012) describes the conflict between Julian the Apostate, the Emperor who tried to restore Paganism, and his chief rival, Gregory of Nazianzus, the Archbishop of Constantinople. She argues that their debate obscures the fact they they shared a common intellectual and social grounding. The publisher’s description follows:

This groundbreaking study brings into dialogue for the first time the writings of Julian, the last non-Christian Roman Emperor, and his most outspoken critic, Bishop Gregory of Nazianzus, a central figure of Christianity. Susanna Elm compares these two men not to draw out the obvious contrast between the Church and the Emperor’s neo-Paganism, but rather to find their common intellectual and social grounding. Her insightful analysis, supplemented by her magisterial command of sources, demonstrates the ways in which both men were part of the same dialectical whole. Elm recasts both Julian and Gregory as men entirely of their times, showing how the Roman Empire in fact provided Christianity with the ideological and social matrix without which its longevity and dynamism would have been inconceivable.

Posted on by

Ragosta, “Religious Freedom: Jefferson’s Legacy, America’s Creed”

In April, the University of Virginia Press will publish Religious Freedom: Jefferson’s Legacy, America’s Creed by John Ragosta (Hamilton College). The publisher’s description follows.

Ragosta sk11.2.inddFor over one hundred years, Thomas Jefferson and his Statute for Establishing Religious Freedom have stood at the center of our understanding of religious liberty and the First Amendment. Jefferson’s expansive vision—including his insistence that political freedom and free thought would be at risk if we did not keep government out of the church and church out of government—enjoyed a near consensus of support at the Supreme Court and among historians, until Justice William Rehnquist called reliance on Jefferson “demonstrably incorrect.” Since then, Rehnquist’s call has been taken up by a bevy of jurists and academics anxious to encourage renewed government involvement with religion.

In Religious Freedom: Jefferson’s Legacy, America’s Creed, the historian and lawyer John Ragosta offers a vigorous defense of Jefferson’s support for a strict separation of church and state. Beginning with a close look at Jefferson’s own religious evolution, Ragosta shows that deep religious beliefs were at the heart of Jefferson’s views on religious freedom. Basing his analysis on that Jeffersonian vision, Ragosta redefines our understanding of how and why the First Amendment was adopted, showing how the amendment’s focus on maintaining the authority of states to regulate religious freedom demonstrates that a very strict restriction on federal action was intended. Ultimately revealing that the great sage demanded a strict separation of church and state but never sought a wholly secular public square, Ragosta provides a new perspective on Jefferson, the First Amendment, and religious liberty within the United States.

Posted on by

Waldron, “Free to Believe”

This May, the Toronto University Press will publish Free to Believe: Rethinking Freedom of Conscience and Religion in Canada by Mary Anne Waldron (University of Victoria). The publisher’s description follows.CLR_1_8

Free to Believe investigates the protection for freedom of conscience and religion – the first of the “fundamental freedoms” listed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms – and its interpretation in the courts. Through an examination of decided cases that touches on the most controversial issues of our day, such as abortion, same-sex marriage, and minority religious practices, Mary Anne Waldron examines how the law has developed in the way that it has, the role that freedom of conscience and religion play in our society, and the role it could play in making it a more open, peaceful, and democratic place.

While the range of cases explored will be of interest to scholars, Free to Believe is also written in an accessible style, with legal terms and concepts explained for those who wish to learn accurate, detailed information about the impact of the law on contemporary social policy issues. As such, this book widens the debate about this fundamental freedom and the influence of public opinion on what is often a misrepresented and misunderstood issue.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Panel: Law and Freedom Put to the Test of Experience (Jan 20)

The Crossroads Cultural Center in New York will host a panel discussion, “Law and Freedom Put to the Test of Experience,” in New York on January 20:

What is the relationship between law, rights, and freedom? When is freedom realized by law? When is it, instead, suffocated or suppressed? The speakers will address these questions in light of the irreducible need for justice and freedom as they emerge in human experience. Does human experience reveal an objective yet inherently personal criteria that enables the individual (regardless of any social, cultural or religious background) to judge both the fairness of a rule and its ability to realize greater freedom? The discussion will relate to a recently published book titled “Elementary Experience and Law” in which four legal scholars apply an innovative take on the concept of “elementary experience” – which is at the basis of Msgr. Luigi Giussani’s fundamental work “The Religious Sense” – to the legal system and the issue of justice.

Details are here.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Blasphemy in Greece

Here’s an interesting report from NPR on two recent prosecutions for the crime of blasphemy in Greece. In the first, the government brought a blasphemy charge against the poster of a Facebook page that mocks a famous Orthodox monk; the government has since dropped the blasphemy charge but has maintained a prosecution for the separate crime of “insulting religion.” In the second, the government is prosecuting the producers of a Greek translation of Terrence McNally’s Corpus Christi, a play that depicts Jesus and his disciples as a group of gay men in Texas.

Most European states have abolished the crime of blasphemy. The UK did so in 2008. Nonetheless, the European Court of Human Rights has held more than once that states may criminalize blasphemy in order to protect human dignity — that is, in order to protect the religious sensibilities of listeners from gratuitous and substantial offense. States can’t ban all criticism of religion, of course, only criticism that is insulting or abusive. Obviously, this is not an easy line to draw. In the US, in fact, the Supreme Court has suggested strongly that blasphemy laws are unconstitutional, in part because of the line-drawing problems.

What about the Greek prosecutions in these cases? I can’t read Greek, but the Facebook page in question, which you can access from the NPR story, seems more tongue-in-cheek than anything else. I’m not surprised the government dropped the blasphemy prosecution, though, of course, the prosecution for “insulting religion” continues. The Corpus Christi case seems closer to those in which the European Court has allowed blasphemy prosecutions in the past. In the 1990s, the court allowed Austria to ban a film that depicted sexual tensions between Christ and the Virgin Mary, and allowed the UK to ban a film depicting the vision of St. Theresa of Avila in erotic terms. So the Court might be inclined to allow prosecution in the Corpus Christi case, too, if the case ever reaches Strasbourg. Then again, Greece doesn’t stand so high in the opinion of European institutions these days.

Posted on by

Mustafa, “On Taqlid: Ibn al Qayyim’s Critique of Authority in Islamic Law”

Next month, Oxford University Press will publish On Taqlid: Ibn al Qayyim’sOn Taqlid Critique of Authority in Islamic Law by Abdul-Rahman Mustafa.  The publisher’s description follows.

Abdul-Rahman Mustafa offers a deft new translation of a large extract from the book I’lam al Muwaqqi’in ‘an Rabb al ‘Alamin, by the thirteenth-century Islamic scholar, Ibn Qayyim al Jawziyya. The I’lam comprises an extensive discussion of the subject of taqlid, or legal imitation. It is one of the most comprehensive treatments of Islamic legal theory and even today serves as a manual for lawyers, judges, and muftis.

In the portion of the I’lam translated here, Ibn al-Qayyim introduces the nature of taqlid and divides it into several categories. He then provides an account of a debate between a critic of the view that taqlid of a particular school or scholar is a religious duty and this critic’s interlocutor. Among the topics discussed are the different kinds of taqlid, the differences between taqlid and ittiba’, the infallibility of religious scholars, the grounds on which one legal opinion might be preferred over another, and whether or not laymen can be expected to perform ijtihad. Ibn Qayyim’s legal theory is a formidable reformulation of traditionalist Hanbalism, a legal-theological tradition that has always maintained a distinctive character in Islamic history and that is now growing more influential due to modern interest in the Wahhabi movement and in Ibn Taymiyya, whose legal and theological thought was edited and refined by his student, Ibn Qayyim.

In his introduction to the translation, Mustafa critically reviews the scholarship on taqlid and outlines Ibn Qayyim’s legal theory and the importance of taqlid within it. Taqlid continues to generate controversy amongst educated Muslims and particularly academics, as Salafi interpretations of Islam, which are generally ‘anti-taqlid,’ come into conflict with the generally ‘pro-taqlid’ stance of traditional schools such as the Hanafis. Mustafa’s translation of a classic account of Islamic legal theory and strong critique of the dominant legal culture is a timely contribution to an increasingly heated debate.

Posted on by

Hassan, “Contracts in Islamic Law”

This month, I.B. Tauris Publishers is publishing Contracts in Islamic Law by Hussein Hassan.  The publisher’s description follows.Contracts in Islamic Law

This book introduces students to the theoretical and philosophical foundations of Islamic contractual law. Islamic law is applied in differing degrees by many countries across the world and especially in the Middle East. Considering the strategic and financial importance of these countries, taken as a whole, it is surprising how little academic writing exists in the West on either Islamic law or Middle Eastern law. Recently there have been signs of a burgeoning interest in Middle Eastern law. However, traditional Islamic law remains a neglected area of study. Hussein Hassan makes a significant contribution by presenting a detailed survey (which utilises both contemporary and classical sources) of a crucially important area of Islamic law – contract law – and by adopting an approach that gives priority to theory and to a comparative analysis with Anglo-American law theory. Contracts in Islamic Law offers an invaluable resource to academics and researchers with a specific interest in Islamic law, to postgraduate students and final year students of law, and to scholars whose main focus is Anglo-American contract law but who are interested in comparative law/theory.

Posted on by

Marinović and Jerolimov on the State and Minority Religious Communities in Croatia

Ankica Marinović and Dinka Marinović Jerolimov (Institute for Social Research, Zagreb) have posted What about Our Rights? The State and Minority Religious Communities in Croatia: A Case Study. The abstract follows.

In December 2007, three registered minority religious communities in Croatia took a discrimination case against the Republic of Croatia to the European Court for Human Rights (ECHR) in Strassbourg. This paper documents the entire case, from the public announcement of the lawsuit to the final decision of the ECHR, which ruled in favour of the three religious communities. In a broader sense, this case study deals with church-state relations in Croatia and points to some important consequences of the case for religious rights, religious freedom, and governing by the rule of law in Croatia.

Posted on by

Sandberg, et al. on Britain’s Religious Tribunals and “Joint Governance”

Russell Sandberg, Gillian Douglas, Norman Doe, Sophie Gilliat-Ray and Asma Khan (Cardiff U.) have posted Britain’s Religious Tribunals: ‘Joint Governance’ in Practice. The abstract follows.

In recent years, there have been a number of moral panics in Western societies about the existence of religious courts and tribunals in general and Shariah law in particular. In England and Wales, these concerns came to the fore following the 2008 lecture by the then Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, on ‘Civil Law and Religious Law in England’. In that lecture, Williams drew upon the work of the Canadian scholar Ayelet Shachar endorsing her concept of ‘transformative accommodation’. In this article, we return to the work of Shachar in the light of our recent empirical study which examined the divorce jurisdiction of three religious tribunals in detail: a Jewish Beth Din; a matrimonial tribunal of the Roman Catholic Church; and a Muslim Shariah Council. We suggest that the focus upon Shachar’s concept of ‘transformative accommodation’ by Williams and subsequent commentators is unfortunate given that Shachar actually proposes ‘transformative accommodation’ as just one variant of what she refers to as ‘joint governance’ (albeit her preferred variant). We propose that the umbrella concept of ‘joint governance’ and its other variants can be developed in a way that could prove to be more useful than ‘transformative accommodation’.