Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Berner on Educational Pluralism

I’m late getting to this, but I did want to note Ashley Rogers Berner’s most recent book on educational pluralism, Educational Pluralism and Democracy: How to Handle Indoctrination, Promote Exposure, and Rebuild America’s Schools (Harvard). Ashley, a professor of education at Johns Hopkins, is a longtime friend of the Mattone Center who participated in our Tradition Project several years ago. She has written a great deal about how different perspectives, including religious, can benefit K-12 education, and is always worth reading. Here’s the description of the book from the publisher:

In Educational Pluralism and Democracy, education policy expert Ashley Rogers Berner envisions a K–12 education system that serves both the individual and the common good. Calling for education reform that will enable US public schools to fulfill the longstanding promise of American education, Berner proposes a radical reimagining of both the structure and content of US public school systems. She urges policymakers to embrace educational pluralism, an internationally common model in which the government funds diverse types of schools that deliver more universal content.

Providing an incisive assessment of democratic education throughout the world, Berner argues that educational pluralism can build students’ exposure to diverse viewpoints and shared knowledge within distinctive school communities. She shows how pluralism steers a middle path that enables equitable access, promotes academic excellence, and avoids the zero-sum games that characterize US education policy. Pluralism, she observes, will ultimately serve democracy by defusing polarization and increasing social mobility, political tolerance, and civic engagement.

In this thought-provoking proposal, Berner lays out a roadmap for big-picture reform, expertly delineating the mechanisms through which educational norms can change. A practical conclusion describes concrete moves that advocates can pursue to garner support and advance new legislation.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Moschella on the New Natural Law

This month, the University of Notre Dame Press publishes an introduction what it calls the “new natural law,” Ethics, Politics, and Natural Law: Principles for Human Flourishing, by philosopher Melissa Moschella (Notre Dame). I’m in over my head here, but as I understand it, its proponents argue that new natural law theory (NNLT) integrates the three elements of goods, norms, and virtues more successfully than other approaches. Readers must judge for themselves. Here’s the description from the Notre Dame website:

The foundational principles of ethics and politics are principles that guide us to respect and promote human flourishing. In Ethics, Politics, and Natural Law Melissa Moschella provides an accessible explanation and development of the new natural law account of these principles while clarifying common misconceptions.

As a commonsense ethical theory, natural law grounds ethics in the fundamental dimensions of human flourishing. Moschella lays out the basic principles of natural law, their relationship to the virtues, and their social and political implications. Highlighting the importance of communities for flourishing, Moschella explains how this should shape our understanding of justice and the common good, and shows how natural law principles support limited government and civil liberties. She also considers the relationship between morality and God, and how natural law relates to Christian revelation. This fresh and compelling account of new natural law is the go-to resource to understand this important and influential theory.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Marginalized Religions in the Roman Empire

Most are familiar with the Roman Empire’s treatment of Christianity–which, the conventional account goes, was uniquely bad. But, argues classicist K.P.S. Janssen in a book out this month from Oxford University Press, Marginalized Religion and the Law in the Roman Empire, Rome marginalized other religions as well, and treated them quite similarly in legal terms. Readers can evaluate the argument for themselves. Here’s the description from the Oxford website:

The Roman Empire’s approach to religion has traditionally been described in paradoxical terms. On the one hand, Rome has often been regarded as almost proverbially tolerant, as well as highly flexible in its dealings with the diverse range of religious cults and practices within its territories. On the other hand, the Roman religious landscape was not without its limits, and there were certain groups who found themselves, for one reason or another, on the outside. The legal interactions between these groups and the Roman authorities have largely been studied in isolation. In Marginalized Religion and the Law in the Roman Empire, K. P. S. Janssen instead takes a comparative approach, and investigates how members of various marginalized religious groups were embedded in, and interacted with, the wider Roman legal system. The legal positions of private diviners, Jewish communities and early Christians are compared and contrasted to provide a broader perspective on the legal treatment of marginalized religion in the Roman world. Janssen argues that the known interactions between these respective groups and the Roman authorities are best understood within the wider context of Roman law and administration, and that they furthermore shared a number of important characteristics. While the treatment these groups received was certainly not in all respects identical, the procedural, socio-political, and ideological mechanisms that underpinned the relevant legal measures were nonetheless conspicuously similar.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Theocratic Criminal Law in Iran

The word “theocratic” gets tossed around a lot these days. Usually, it is used to designate what the speaker believes to be a too-close relationship between religion and the state that results in a law or policy the speaker doesn’t like. But genuine theocracies, where clerics serve as the ultimate political authority, are pretty scare. One such theocracy is Iran. A new book from Oxford University Press, On Theocratic Criminal Law: The Rule of Religion and Punishment in Iran, discusses the situation. The author is Bahman Khodadadi (Harvard). Here’s the description from the Harvard website:

On Theocratic Criminal Law explores the roots and structures of the criminal law system of the world’s most prominent constitutional theocracy, the Islamic Republic of Iran. 

While discussing the processes of forced de-westernization and de-modernization which occurred in the wake of the Islamic Revolution, this work examines how the Islamic conception of civil order and polity has been established within the legal and theological framework of the Iranian Constitution. The book engages in a process of ‘rational reconstruction’ of Iranian theocratic criminal law and offers a critical analysis of the way criminal law functions as the centrepiece of this mode of political domination. It illuminates how this revelation-based, punitive ideology functions, how the current Islamic Penal Code (IPC) mirrors prevailing Shiite jurisprudence, and ultimately, from what sort of fundamental defects theocratic criminal law in Iran is suffering. 

This work provides a critical assessment of the criminalization and sentencing theories that have stemmed from the shariatization (Islamization) of all law in the wake of the Islamic Revolution of 1979. By embarking upon a typology of punishment in Shiite Islamic jurisprudence and the Iranian Islamic Penal Code the book then provides a systematic critical analysis of the three types of punishment stipulated in the Iranian Penal Code, namely ta’zir, hadd, and qisas. It also explores the jurisprudential principles and dynamic power of Shiite Islam not only as a driving force behind political and social change but as a force that has been capable of forging a whole theocratic legal system.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Wearing Religious Symbols in Italy

The US doesn’t have too much trouble with people wearing religious symbols in public places. In Europe, though, this has been a consistent controversy–famously in France, but in other jurisdictions as well. A new book from Routledge, Secularism and Freedom of Religion in Italy, addresses the approach of Italian law. The author is political scientist Maria Cristina Ivaldi (University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli). Here’s the publisher’s description:

The display of religious symbols in the public space has been the subject of much debate. This book provides an overview of the presence of religious symbols in Italian public institutions from a legal standpoint.

The situation is analysed from the perspective of the principles of laicità/secularism, as defined by the Constitutional Court, and freedom of religion. It is argued that while the display of religious symbols in public institutions has been widely investigated doctrinally, the wearing of religious symbols in Italy has generally been neglected. Key cases are examined in light of national jurisprudence as well as intervention by the European Court of Human Rights and relevant judgments from foreign courts regarding this issue. Finally, the work considers the presence of religious symbols that transcend national borders, as in the case of arts, sport and advertising. A comparison is made with the French system which takes a very different approach. The book outlines possible ways forward in light of the growing interculturality of European societies.

It will be a valuable resource for academics, researchers and policy-makers working in the areas of law and religion, and comparative law.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Burge on the American Religious Landscape

For many years, I have profited from the work of political scientist Ryan Burge (Eastern Illinois University). His monographs on the composition of religious groups in the US have been quite valuable, especially when it comes to chronicling the rise of the Nones. He’s always thorough, readable, and insightful. So I’m looking forward to his latest monograph from Oxford University Press, The American Religious Landscape: Facts, Trends, and the Future. Oxford will release the book next month. Here’s the description from the Oxford website:

At its founding, the United States was an overwhelmingly Protestant country. However, over the last 250 years, it has become increasingly diverse with tens of millions of Catholics, millions of Latter-day Saints, Muslims, Hindus, and Jews, alongside a rapidly increasing share of Americans who claim no religious affiliation at all. 

The American Religious Landscape uses an in-depth statistical analysis of large datasets to answer foundational questions about this diversity, such as: How many Hindus are there in the US? Which state has the highest concentration of Muslims? Are atheists more highly educated than the general population? How many Roman Catholics attend Mass weekly? It focuses on the overall size, geographic distribution, and demographic composition of twelve different religious groups in short and accessible chapters that, taken together, serve as a basic introduction to the state of religion in America. Through dozens of charts, graphs, and maps–designed for readability and clarity–readers will be left with a solid understanding of the contours of contemporary American religion and what it could look like in the future.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

In Search of Common Ground: An Upcoming Online Symposium

I look forward to participating, along with many friends and colleagues, in what promises to be a fascinating symposium on religion, secularism, and liberalism organized by Steven Heyman and Kathleen Brady and hosted by the Chicago-Kent Law Review: “In Search of Common Ground: Religion and Secularism in a Liberal Democratic Society.” The online symposium, scheduled for February 21, will be open to the public; the link is below. It’s a fabulous lineup of scholars and I’m very grateful to be among them:

Over the past several decades, America’s religious diversity has continued to grow rapidly, as have the percentages of Americans who either are not religious or are not affiliated with a specific religious group or denomination. At the same time, America’s deepening cultural and political divisions have often followed these expanding religious fault lines. These developments have raised new challenges for defining the relationship between law, religion, and secularism under the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment and beyond. At the Chicago-Kent Law Review’s Symposium, leading law-and-religion scholars who represent a broad spectrum of views will explore a range of doctrinal issues – such as free exercise exemptions, government expression and funding, and the meaning of religion under the First Amendment – and will discuss how people who hold very different worldviews can live together in contemporary society.

For more information, check the link above. Thanks!

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Christianity and American Democracy

Historically, the American approach to church-state relations has had two primary, and complimentary, influences: the Evangelical Christian tradition and the Enlightenment Liberal tradition, both of which support official state neutrality and freedom of conscience. A new book from Jonathan Rauch (Brookings) argues that Christian influence in the US is fading and that the historical bargain between Christianity and liberalism is falling apart. Although he’s an atheist, Rauch regrets this development, which he sees as a threat to America’s future. The book is Cross Purposes: Christianity’s Broken Bargain with Democracy and the publisher is Yale University Press. Here’s the description from Yale’s website:

What happens to American democracy if Christianity is no longer able, or no longer willing, to perform the functions on which our constitutional order depends? In this provocative book, the award-winning journalist Jonathan Rauch—a lifelong atheist—reckons candidly with both the shortcomings of secularism and the corrosion of Christianity.
 
Thin Christianity, as Rauch calls the mainline church, has been unable to inspire and retain believers. Worse, a Church of Fear has distorted white evangelicalism in ways that violate the tenets of both Jesus and James Madison. What to do? For answers, Rauch looks to a new generation of religious thinkers, as well as to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which has placed the Constitution at the heart of its spiritual teachings.
 
In this timely critique Rauch addresses secular Americans who think Christianity can be abandoned, and Christian Americans who blame secular culture for their grievances. The two must work together, he argues, to confront our present crisis. He calls on Christians to recommit to the teachings of their faith that align with Madison, not MAGA, and to understand that liberal democracy, far from being oppressive, is uniquely protective of religious freedom. At the same time, he calls on secular liberals to understand that healthy religious institutions are crucial to the survival of the liberal state.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

A New Book on Law & Religion in China

This month, Wolters Kluwer releases the third edition of Religion and Law in China, a practitioners’ guide that looks useful for academics as well. The book covers such topics as the constitutional status of religion, religious freedom, and the effect of international law on religious communities. The author is Zhao Jianmin. Here’s the description from the Wolters Kluwer website:

Derived from the renowned multi-volume International Encyclopaedia of Laws, this convenient resource provides systematic information on how China deals with the role religion plays or can play in society, the legal status of religious communities and institutions, and the legal interaction among religion, culture, education, and media.

After a general introduction describing the social and historical background, the book goes on to explain the legal framework in which religion is approached. Coverage proceeds from the principle of religious freedom through the rights and contractual obligations of religious communities; international, transnational, and regional law effects; and the legal parameters affecting the influence of religion in politics and public life. Also covered are legal positions on religion in such specific fields as church financing, labour and employment, and matrimonial and family law. A clear and comprehensive overview of relevant legislation and legal doctrine make the book an invaluable reference source and very useful guide.

Succinct and practical, this book will prove to be of great value to practitioners in the myriad instances where a law-related religious interest arises in China. Academics and researchers will appreciate its value as a thorough but concise treatment of the legal aspects of diversity and multiculturalism in which religion plays such an important part.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

A Very Short Introduction to Toleration

In my law and religion seminar this semester, we’ve been spending a lot of time on John Locke, specifically, the Letter Concerning Toleration. For Locke, toleration, which presumes distance from and even disapproval of those not like oneself, is the guarantor of social peace in a liberal order. The fact that many people today view tolerance as disagreeable–we feel entitled, not to tolerance, but approval–helps explain why liberalism is having such trouble.

A new book from Oxford University Press, Toleration: A Very Short Introduction, surveys the history of the concept, from its initial focus on religious difference to its expanded scope, and considers its role in politics today. The author is political scientist Andrew R. Murphy (University of Michigan). Here’s the publisher’s description:

Toleration is one of the most foundational and contentious concepts in contemporary political discourse. Although its modern origins lie in the realm of religious dissent, toleration remains one of our most contentious and broad-ranging concepts, invoked in today’s debates about race, gender, religion, sexuality, cultural identity, free speech, and civil liberties. Questions of toleration arise wherever unpopular groups face hostile environments and stand in need of protection from state interference or the actions of their neighbors.

Toleration can seem counterintuitive at first glance, since it involves a complex mixture of rejection and acceptance, combining disapproval – of particular individuals, groups, beliefs, and practices – on the one hand with legal and political guarantees for such groups on the other. Toleration has long been considered a cardinal virtue of liberalism, endorsed by central figures such as Locke, Mill, and Rawls. Although toleration has been criticized as unduly minimal, compared with more expansive terms such as recognition or acceptance, it has routinely played a key role in the protracted struggles of marginalized groups of various sorts (a necessary, if not always sufficient, condition for liberty). Toleration: A Very Short Introduction will concisely canvass the history, development, and contemporary global status of toleration as both a concept and a contested political and legal practice.