Summary
Title: Law and Religion - Current Legal Issues 2001 Volume 4
Author: edited by Andrew Lewis and Richard O'Dair
Publisher: Oxford University Press
ISBN: 0199246602
Pro:
• International perspectives on the relationship between law and religion
• Interesting and unusual topics not covered in most books
Con:
• Sometimes too technical or specialized for many lay readers
Description:
• Papers from a colloquium held at the University College of London in 2000
• Discussion of various issues where law and religion intersect
• Variety of viewpoints and perspectives offered
Book Review
Edited by Andrew Lewis and Richard O’Dair, Law and Religion contains some 30 pieces by scholars primarily from Europe and the United States. This provides a truly international perspective which is missing from most books on this topic. All of the articles came out of a colloquium held at the University College of London in 2000.
Unfortunately, the collection starts out on a sour note as Howard Ducharme tries to argue that law and morality require a background belief in the existence of God. Thus the tired, old canard that atheism is incompatible with morality and a law-abiding life gets trotted out and spread around a bit more by a philosophy professor who, one might assume, should know better. The sad fact is that such bigotry against atheists is still not considered problematic by many people — imagine the outcry, however, if Ducharme tried to make the same argument about those who did not believe in the divinity of Jesus!
Fortunately, there is quick improvement, and the rest of the book is much better as different writers tackle some interesting legal topics. Steve Smith, for example, examines the similarity between interpreting legal texts and interpreting religious scriptures:
- “Firstly, both kinds of interpretation treat texts as repositories of hidden or esoteric meanings. Secondly, both kinds of interpretation treat texts as authoritative for our own decisions and conduct. Thirdly, both kinds of interpretation treat a diversity of seemingly disparate texts as forming a harmonious, univocal whole. Each of these features seems sensible if we suppose that the texts under interpretation are the expressions of a divine or superhuman author; conversely, without some such assumptions the practices are an embarrassment.”
Steven Resnicoff and David Bleich explore whether a lawyer’s commitment to religious laws should be permitted to override a commitment to standards of ethics which other lawyers must abide by. This is a different twist on the debate in the United States on just how far religious groups can go when their private beliefs conflict with the civil laws otherwise applicable to everyone.
There are no final answers provided in the article, but many fascinating questions are raised. Do courts have the authority to pass judgments on disputes between religious organizations? Just what should the law include in its understanding of what “religion” means? Do some faiths have a more legitimate claim to the designation “religion” than others?
This book is the fourth in a series entitled “Current Legal Issues,” and I expect that the others are probably as good as this one. It probably isn’t a good book for people with just a passing interest in issues regarding law and religion, but it should definitely be considered by scholars and students of both law and religion.
