Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Religious Freedom & National Security

Before states established religious freedom as a constitutional principle, they saw it as a matter of diplomacy and national security. “Cuius regio eius religio” was meant to keep peace among nations, not so much within them. And religious freedom continues to figure in international relations today–though, sadly, religious freedom is often honored more in words than deeds. A new collection of essays from Routledge, Security, Religion, and the Rule of Law: International Perspectives, argues that national security depends on states’ honoring the religious freedom of their own citizens. The editors are Tania Pagotto (University of Milan-Bicocca), Joshua Roose (Deakin University) and G.P. Marcar (University of Otago). Here’s the description from the publisher’s website:

Security, Religion, and the Rule of Law argues that true, substantive, and sustainable national security is only possible through respect for the rule of law, human rights, and religious freedom.

Despite the emphasis on national security and the war on terror that has preoccupied governments for over two decades, nations – and the world – seem to be more divided than ever, with a concomitant impact of increasing the risk of terrorism and religious and political violence. The national security paradigm, previously reserved primarily for foreign threats, has been turned increasingly inwards, focusing on a state’s own citizens as potential threats. This is often along religious lines, threatening fundamental human freedoms. This book provides a series of critical engagements on some of the most pressing issues at the interface of religion and security today, including proposing a deeper engagement with theology when dealing with freedom of religious belief, exploring a better understanding between domestic peace and international relations, abiding by the rule of law while countering terrorism, and developing a broader understanding of identities and of the nature of citizenship. It provides the resources to further reflect upon and address these topics, as well as stimulate further discussions on religion and security matters across a range of different disciplines. Wide-ranging case studies consider Australia, China, Europe, the Kurdish people, Nigeria, Russia, Ukraine, the United Nations, and the United States.

This book will appeal to students and scholars across a range of disciplines, including international relations, law, philosophy, political science, religious studies, security studies, and theology. It will also appeal to human rights lawyers, judges, NGO researchers, governmental agency specialists, and policy makers.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

On Law & Ritual in Hasidic Judaism

This one is a little outside my wheelhouse, but it looks quite interesting. Hasidic Judaism is known for its ecstatic approach. And yet, ironically, it is also one of Judaism’s most traditional expressions, with a serious focus on religious law. What explains this paradox? A new book from Stanford University Press, Laws of the Spirit: Ritual, Mysticism, and the Commandments in Early Hasidism, argues (if I understand it right) that Hasidism sees law as a matter of ritual rather than rules for worshippers to work out and follow. Of course, ritual is important in most religions, and in secular law as well, and I wonder if these insights could in some way apply in other contexts, too. The author is religious studies scholar Ariel Mayse (Stanford). Here’s the publisher’s description:

The compelling vision of religious life and practice found in Hasidic sources has made it the most enduring and successful Jewish movement of spiritual renewal of all time. In this book, Ariel Evan Mayse grapples with one of Hasidism’s most vexing questions: how did a religious movement known for its radical views about immanence, revelation, and the imperative to serve God with joy simultaneously produce strict adherence to the structures and obligations of Jewish law? Exploring the movement from its emergence in the mid-1700s until 1815, Mayse argues that the exceptionality of Hasidism lies not in whether its leaders broke or upheld rabbinic norms, but in the movement’s vivid attempt to rethink the purpose of Jewish ritual and practice. Rather than focusing on the commandments as law, he turns to the methods and vocabulary of ritual studies as a more productive way to reckon with the contradictions and tensions of this religious movement as well as its remarkable intellectual vitality.

Mayse examines the full range of Hasidic texts from the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, from homilies and theological treatises to hagiography, letters, and legal writings, reading them together with contemporary theories of ritual. Arguing against the notion that spiritual integrity requires unshackling oneself from tradition, Laws of the Spirit is a sweeping attempt to rethink the meaning and significance of religious practice in early Hasidism.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

A New Book on Christianity and Law

Christianity has a complicated relationship to law. Unlike Judaism and Islam, which are nomocentric religions, Christianity doesn’t have a law per se. Believers don’t worship God primarily by discovering and following a system of divinely ordained rules. There is no Christian “law” of inheritance, for example, that directs beneficiaries how to divide up property. But Christianity doesn’t entirely reject law. The Catholic tradition, in particular, places emphasis on natural law as a rational system–an emphasis that Orthodox and Protestants view with great suspicion. As I say, it’s complicated.

When it comes to the relationship between Christianity and civil law, things are complex as well. The Bible teaches Christians to give Caesar his due, but not more than that–to comply with civil law, but not if that means violating God’s law. Where to draw the line, especially in a contemporary, religiously pluralistic society, is often debatable.

A new book by Australian law professor Benjamin Saunders (Deakin University), The Crisis of Civil Law: What the Bible Teaches about Law and What It Means Today, addresses these complications. The publisher is Lexham Press. Looks very interesting. Here is the description from the publisher’s website:

How should Christians think about law?

In every age, this is one of the most difficult questions faced by followers of Christ. Within the modern church, there is little unity on how Scripture addresses issues like gun control, abortion, and whether we should disobey unjust laws. In The Crisis of Civil Law, legal scholar Benjamin B. Saunders draws from Scripture and the Christian tradition to provide valuable guidance on contemporary legal questions and the role of civil government. We can gain greater clarity by wisely applying the moral law found in Scripture—as well as the universal standards of the natural law—to the changing circumstances of human societies.

The Crisis of Civil Law includes detailed discussion of the biblical material on law as well as practical case studies that contextualize scriptural principles in modern Western society.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Teaching American Religious History

Here at the Mattone Center, we focus on the study of law-and-religion, that is, the relationship between these two social institutions. Mostly, we emphasize the “law” part. But from the beginning we have tried to pay attention as well to religion as a subject in itself, especially to the history of religion in the West generally and the United States particularly. In my law-and-religion seminar, for example, I spend significant time on American religious history, much of which students are learning for the first time. I believe the material is essential. Without a knowledge of our religious history, it’s difficult to understand why our law with respect to religion has developed as it has.

A book out this month from the University of Wisconsin Press, Understanding and Teaching Religion in US History, seems a very good resource for instructors getting into this material. The editors are historian Karen J. Johnson (Wheaton College) and religious studies scholar Jonathan M. Yeager (University of Tennessee at Chattanooga). Here’s the description from the publisher’s website:

How to learn, think, and teach about a vital and sometimes contentious topic

Religion is deeply embedded in American history, and one cannot understand American history’s broad dynamics without accounting for it. Without detailing the history of religions, teachers cannot properly explain key themes in US survey courses, such as politics, social dynamics, immigration and colonization, gender, race, or class. From early Native American beliefs and practices, to European explorations of the New World, to the most recent presidential elections, religion has been a significant feature of the American story. In Understanding and Teaching Religion in US History, a diverse group of eminent historians and history teachers provide a practical tool for teachers looking to improve history instruction at the upper-level secondary and undergraduate level.

This book offers a breadth of voices and approaches to teaching this crucial part of US history. Religion can be a delicate topic, especially in public education, and many students and teachers bring strongly held views and identities to their understanding of the past. The editors and contributors aim to help the reader see religion in fresh ways, to present sources and perspectives that may be unfamiliar, and to suggest practical interventions in the classroom that teachers can use immediately.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Movsesian on Munoz on Original Meaning

Happy to report that my review of Phillip Munoz’s excellent new book on the original meaning of the religion clauses, Religious Liberty and the American Founding, is up on the website of the Journal of Law & Religion (Cambridge). Munoz persuasively argues that the Framers disagreed on precisely what the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment protect, apart from the freedom to worship. And, I argue, that’s why original meaning can’t provide closure on many of our debates about religious liberty today.

Here’s an excerpt:

Religious Liberty and the American Founding is a pleasure to read. Muñoz writes well and exceptionally clearly, and his book will appeal both to the educated public and to constitutional lawyers and scholars who spend their time immersed in doctrinal debates. He offers a wealth of detail on the drafting and ratification of the religion clauses. And the story he tells is a persuasive one. History is argument without end, but Muñoz’s basic point that the framers disagreed on the precise meaning of establishment and free exercise in the First Amendment but understood those terms in light of their background conception of religious liberty seems entirely plausible. Precisely because the framers could not agree on what the natural right of religious liberty itself entailed with respect to specific government policies, though, it is not clear how helpful a natural-rights construction of original meaning can be in resolving specific constitutional disputes.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

A New Collection on Human Dignity

In this week’s Scholarship Roundup, I’m delighted to note a book edited by three friends: Brett Scharffs (BYU), Andrea Pin (Padua) and Dmytro Vovk (Yeshiva): Human Dignity, Judicial Reasoning, and the Law: Comparative Perspectives on a Key Constitutional Concept. “Human dignity” is something human rights law endorses in principle–pretty much everyone agrees about that. But legal cultures define human dignity quite differently, and the consensus can quickly fall apart when one starts to talk about concrete cases. Comparative work is necessary if we are to understand what judges, lawyers, and religious leaders mean when they say they are committed to human dignity. This new new book, from Routledge, is thus very welcome. Congratulations to Brett, Andrea, and Dmytro!

Here’s the description from the Routledge website:

This volume explores how national and international human rights courts interpret and apply human dignity. The book tracks the increasing deployment of the concept of human dignity within courts in recent decades. It identifies how human-dignity-based arguments have expanded to cover larger sets of cases: from the right to life or the right to integrity or anti-discrimination, the concept has surfaced in disputes about political and social rights and rule of law requirements, such as equality or legal certainty. The core message of the book is that judges understand, interpret, and apply human dignity differently. An inflation in the judicial recourse to human dignity can saturate the legal environment, depriving the concepts as well as human-rights-based narratives of salience, and threaten the predictability of court decisions. The book will appeal to philosophers of law, constitutional theorists and lawyers, legal comparativists, and international law specialists. While being dedicated specifically to human dignity jurisprudence, the book touches on many aspects of judiciary and as such will also be of interest to researchers studying legal reasoning, interpretation and application of the law and courts, as well as social philosophers, political scientists, and sociologists of law, politics, and religion.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Missionary Diplomacy

American Christians have been trying to influence US foreign policy for hundreds of years. Occasionally, they have succeeded–where their advocacy coincided with what the US Government perceived of as the national interest. Protestant missionaries were historically quite active in this regard, especially in places like Ottoman Turkey, where their advocacy for Armenian and other Christians in the 19th century led to what Peter Balakian has called the first international human rights campaign in US history. (Unfortunately, this was one of the occasions where the missionaries’ efforts did not lead to significant US government support, a history I have recounted elsewhere). A new book from the Cornell University Press, Missionary Diplomacy: Religion and Nineteenth-Century American Foreign Relations, explores the role that missionaries have had in US foreign policy. The author is historian Emily Conroy-Krutz (Michigan State). The publisher’s description follows:

Missionary Diplomacy illuminates the crucial place of religion in nineteenth-century American diplomacy. From the 1810s through the 1920s, Protestant missionaries positioned themselves as key experts in the development of American relations in Asia, Africa, the Pacific, and the Middle East. Missionaries served as consuls, translators, and occasional trouble-makers who forced the State Department to take actions it otherwise would have avoided. Yet as decades passed, more Americans began to question the propriety of missionaries’ power. Were missionaries serving the interests of American diplomacy? Or were they creating unnecessary problems?

As Emily Conroy-Krutz demonstrates, they were doing both. Across the century, missionaries forced the government to articulate new conceptions of the rights of US citizens abroad and of the role of the US as an engine of humanitarianism and religious freedom. By the time the US entered the first world war, missionary diplomacy had for nearly a century created the conditions for some Americans to embrace a vision of their country as an internationally engaged world power. Missionary Diplomacy exposes the longstanding influence of evangelical missions on the shape of American foreign relations.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Rethinking Law and Religion

Law and religion, as an academic discipline, seems to be on the cusp of something new and different. It’s not just recent SCOTUS decisions that overturn 50 years of precedent, although that’s part of it. Crucially, Americans’ understanding of religion itself seems to be changing. And the polarization between traditional believers and more secularly-minded Americans continues to grow. So it’s not surprising that scholars (like my former colleague Marc, e.g.) are beginning to wonder just what “law and religion” will mean in the future as an academic subject. A new book from Edward Elgar, Rethinking Law and Religion, argues for a new, critical and interdisciplinary conception of the field. The author is Russell Sandberg (Cardiff University), and the publisher’s description follows. Thanks to our friend Paul Horwitz for drawing our attention to this.

This incisive book delineates the development of Law and Religion as a sub-discipline, critically reflecting on the author’s own role in constructing the field. It develops a subversive social systems theory in order to take both law and religion seriously and to challenge them equally.

Russell Sandberg crafts a new agenda for academic scrutiny of the interaction between religion and the law. Sandberg criticises scholarship to date for focusing on the legal regulation of religion, which reduces the field to an academic sub-discipline in Law Schools. Instead, Sandberg argues for a re-conceptualisation of Law and Religion as an interdisciplinary interaction, comparing it to fields such as legal history and legal geography. He contends that Law and Religion should take on a critical perspective, interrogating the content, nature and purpose of law, and drawing from literature on law and race and law and gender.

Provocative, personal and sometimes surprising, Rethinking Law and Religion is an illuminating read for students and scholars of law and society, legal theory, and sociology of law and philosophy.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

How Islam Rules in Iran

People in the West often assume that government in Islam is a theocracy, but that isn’t quite true. If we define theocracy in traditional terms, as rule by clerics, classical Islam wouldn’t qualify–and very few contemporary Muslim-majority states would meet the definition, either. But the Islamic Republic of Iran is a theocracy–the Supreme Leader is a Shia cleric. A new book from Cambridge University Press, How Islam Rules in Iran: Theology and Theocracy, discusses the place of Islam in present-day Iran. The author is government scholar Mehran Kamrava (Georgetown University in Qatar). Here’s the description from the Cambridge website:

This study provides a comprehensive examination of the evolution of Islam as a ruling framework in postrevolutionary Iran up to the present day. Beginning with the position and structure of Iran’s clerical establishment under the Islamic Republic, Kamrava delves into the jurisprudential debates that have shaped the country’s political institutions and state policies. Kamrava draws on extensive fieldwork to examine various religious narratives that inform the basis of contemporary Iranian politics, also revealing the political salience of common practices and beliefs, such as religious guardianship and guidance, Islam as a source of social protection, the relationship between Islam and democracy, the sources of divine and popular legitimacy, and the theoretical justifications for religious authoritarianism. Providing access to many Persian-language sources for the first time, Kamrava shows how religious intellectual production in Iran has impacted the ongoing transformation of Iranian Shi’ism and ultimately underwritten the fate of the Islamic Republic.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Call for Papers: Australian Journal of Law & Religion

Our friends at the Australian Journal of Law and Religion have announced a call for papers for their 2024 General Issue, which will include a symposium on the rise of the Nones. Details in the link below:

Call-for-Papers-for-Australian-Journal-of-Law-and-Religion-2024-General-IssueDownload