Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:

  • In U.S. Navy SEALs 1-26 v. Austin, a Texas federal district court found the repeal of the military’s COVID vaccine mandate only partially addressed a lawsuit by Navy SEALs denied religious accommodations. The SEALs argue the mandate exposed flaws in the Navy’s religious accommodation process, including delays and discriminatory practices, which remain unaddressed. The court noted ongoing issues such as indefinite request delays, lack of individual assessments, and coercive tactics against servicemembers seeking accommodations.
  • Members of the U.S. House Freethought Caucus criticized the invitation of Pastor Jack Hibbs to deliver an opening prayer in the House, labeling him a radical Christian Nationalist linked to the January 6th insurrection. They expressed concern over his history of controversial remarks towards non-Christians, immigrants, and the LGBTQ community, questioning the appropriateness of his role as Guest Chaplain.
  • The European Court of Human Rights ruled that Belgium’s elimination of exemptions for ritual slaughter without stunning, affecting Halal and Kosher practices, did not violate religious freedom or discrimination protections under the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court recognized animal welfare as a legitimate aim under the concept of public morals, emphasizing the evolving nature of societal values towards the ethical treatment of animals.
  • The British Columbia Supreme Court denied the Matsuri Foundation of Canada, a Shinto organization, a property tax exemption for Knapp Island, sought as a “place of public worship” under the Taxation (Rural Area) Act. The court found that the island’s worship use was private, lacking public access and invitation, and rejected Matsuri’s equity-based exemption argument for Knapp Island compared to other British Columbia properties.
  • The Church of England faces scrutiny over claims that it has unwittingly aided Muslim migrants in seeking asylum by converting to Christianity, motivated by the prospect of persecution claims. Bishop Guli Francis-Dehqani acknowledged the difficulty in discerning genuine conversions, highlighting a small number of abuses. The Church defends its actions, emphasizing its biblical duty to care for strangers, while stating that assessing asylum claims is the government’s responsibility.
  • Greece became the first Christian Orthodox country to legalize same-sex marriage, following a Parliamentary vote of 176-76, led by Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis. The legislation, however, restricts same-sex couples from surrogacy rights, sparking criticism from LGBT groups. The Orthodox Church had opposed the legislation for different reasons and threatened supporters with excommunication.
Posted on by Liam Ray

Bowring, “In Search of the Way”

In February, Oxford University Press will release In Search of the Way: Thought and Religion in Early-Modern Japan, 1582-1860 by Richard Bowring (Cambridge). The publisher’s description follows:

in-search-of-the-wayIn Search of the Way is a history of intellectual and religious developments in Japan during the Tokugawa period, covering the years 1582-1860. It begins with an explanation of the fate of Christianity, and proceeds to cover the changing nature of the relationship between Buddhism and secular authority, new developments in Shinto, and the growth of ‘Japanese studies’. The main emphasis, however, is on the process by which Neo-Confucianism captured the imagination of the intellectual class and informed debate throughout the period. This process was expressed in terms of a never-ending search for the Way, a mode and pattern of existence that could provide not only order for society at large, but self-fulfilment for the individual. The narrative traces how ideas and attitudes changed through time, and is based on the premise that the Tokugawa period is important in and of itself, not merely as a backdrop to the Meiji Restoration of 1868.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Yasukuni and Nice Distinctions

Photo from the International Business Times

Last week, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe fulfilled an oft-repeated wish to visit Tokyo’s Yasukuni Shrine while in office. In Shinto belief, the shrine houses the souls of millions who died in the service of the Japanese Empire. Abe has expressed regret that he did not visit the shrine during his last stint as prime minister, from 2006 to 2007.

You’d think a visit to such a shrine by a sitting prime minister would be entirely proper, like an American president visiting Arlington National Cemetery. Abe’s visit has caused great controversy, however, as Abe surely knew it would. Among the souls commemorated at the shrine are a thousand convicted war criminals who fought for Japan in World War II, including wartime Prime Minister Hideki Tojo. China and Korea, which both suffered greatly at Japan’s hands in that war, deeply resent official visits to Yasukuni and, naturally, objected to Abe’s visit. So, unusually, did the United States, which expressed disappointment “that  Japan’s leadership has taken an action that will exacerbate tensions with Japan’s neighbors.” Walter Russell Mead does a good job explaining the diplomatic implications.

For his part, Abe said he had not intended to offend Japan’s neighbors or send a crypto-imperialist signal. He did not visit Yasukuni to honor war criminals, he insisted, but to express to the souls housed there his determination “to create an age where no one will ever suffer from tragedies of wars.” In addition, Abe’s spokesman stressed that the prime minister had visited the shrine, and made a donation, strictly as a private citizen exercising his “religious freedom.” This last part is important for purposes of Japanese law. According to the Japanese Supreme Court, the constitutional “separation of state and religion” forbids officials from making financial contributions to Yasukuni for use in Shinto ceremonies.

So, is everything clear now? It was crucially important for Abe to visit Yasukuni while in office–but strictly in an unofficial capacity. A very lawyerly distinction, but one unlikely to persuade anyone in China or Korea. Maybe not even in Japan.

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Religion and the Yasukuni Shrine Controversy

At Via Meadia, Walter Russell Mead has been doing a great job covering the controversy surrounding visits last week by top Japanese officials to the Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo. Yasukuni is a Shinto shrine; in Shinto belief, it houses the souls of millions of people who died in the service of the Japanese Empire, including during World War II. Among the millions commemorated are approximately 1000 convicted war criminals, including wartime Prime Minister Hideki Tojo.

Japan’s neighbors, China and Korea, perceive official visits to the shrine as an outrageous insult and a sign that Japan has not fully repudiated the imperialism of its past. (In response to last week’s visits, China sent a fleet of patrol ships into Japanese territorial waters.) The latest controversy erupted when top officials in Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s cabinet, as well more than 150 parliamentarians, visited the shrine for the annual Shinto Spring Ceremony–the largest official delegation in decades. In response to Chinese and Korean complaints, Abe doubled down, declaring in a parliamentary debate, “It’s only natural to honor the spirits of those who gave their lives for the country. Our ministers will not cave in to any threats.” Abe doubtless feels buoyed by opinion polls showing that he has a 70% approval rating from the Japanese public.

Official participation in ceremonies at Yasukuni have been controversial inside Japan as well. The Japanese Constitution, adopted after the war, disestablished Shintoism and effected, in the words of the Japanese Supreme Court, the “separation of state and religion.” In fact, in 1997 the Supreme Court ruled that the government officials could not make financial contributions to Yasukuni for use in Shinto ceremonies. With respect to this month’s visits, the officials involved were careful to point out that they were participating only as private citizens, not government officials, but that explanation has not satisfied critics. “”It doesn’t matter how or in what role Japanese leaders visit the Yasukuni shrine,” a Chinese spokesman said. “We feel it is in essence a denial of Japan’s history of militarist invasion.” And Japanese legal scholar Keisuke Abe (no relation to the Prime Minister, I believe) argues in a symposium in the St. John’s Law Review that most Japanese wouldn’t recognize the distinction, either. “Whatever the purpose of” a visit to the shrine, he writes, “the general public is likely to consider it as the government giving special support to Shintoism, associated with ancestor worship.”