scholarly journals Institutional Religious Freedom in Full: What the Liberty of Religious Organizations Really Is and Why It an “Essential Service” to the Common Good

Religions ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 414
Author(s):  
Timothy Samuel Shah
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
The United States ◽  
Religious Organizations ◽  
Religious Institutions ◽  
Negative Liberty ◽  
Essential Services ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Church

Should the freedom of churches and other religious institutions come down to little more than a grudging recognition that “what happens in the church, stays in the church”? In this article, I provide a more robust definition of what I call institutional religious freedom than a crabbed and merely negative understanding. In addition, I also go beyond a libertarian-style defense of institutional religious freedom as the ecclesiastical equivalent of the “right to be left alone” by suggesting a multitude of reasons why institutional religious freedom in a robust form deserves robust protection. Especially amidst exigent challenges such as the global COVID-19 pandemic, an anemic appeal to an ecclesiastical version of negative liberty on merely jurisdictional grounds will not be enough to defend religious organizations from an increasingly strong temptation and tendency on the part of political authorities—often acting on the basis of understandable intentions—to subject such organizations to sweeping interference even in the most internal matters. In contrast, the article offers an articulation of why both the internal and external freedoms of religious institutions require maximum deference if they are to offer their indispensable contributions—indeed, their “essential services”—to the shared public good in the United States and other countries throughout the world. Underscoring the external and public dimensions of institutional religious freedom, the article follows the work of law and religion scholar W. Cole Durham in that it analytically disaggregates the freedom of religious institutions into three indispensable components: “substantive”, or the right of self-definition; “vertical”, or the right of self-governance; and “horizontal”, or the right of self-directed outward expression and action.

scholarly journals THE MIXED LEGACY OF MAGNA CARTA FOR AMERICAN RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-226
Author(s):  
Steven K. Green
Keyword(s):  
First Amendment ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Religious Institutions ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Magna Carta ◽  
American Law ◽  
The Church ◽  
Government Authority

AbstractIn 2015 Magna Carta celebrated its 800th anniversary. The Great Charter has been widely heralded as a fount of many rights that are highly valued in British and American law. One right that people have identified in the Carta is that of religious freedom. Magna Carta contains two provisions guaranteeing freedom of the church from government authority. In 2013, the United States Supreme Court relied on that authority in a ruling that affirmed the principle of religious autonomy. This article argues that relying on the legacy of Magna Carta for the principle of religious freedom is tenuous: the document had little influence on the development of the First Amendment. Even Magna Carta's authority for the principle of church autonomy is overstated, as the Carta had nothing to do with the development of that principle in American law. Finally, judicial reliance on Magna Carta for the principle of religious freedom risks elevating protections for religious institutions over the interests of individuals. As a result, the legacy of Magna Carta for the principle of religious freedom is mixed, at best.

Observations on the Memorandum “The Crisis in Church-State Relationships in the U.S.A.”

1999 ◽  
Vol 61 (4) ◽  
pp. 704-710
Author(s):  
Samuel Cardinal Stritch
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Church ◽  
Grave Danger

The presentation of what the author calls a “grave danger” which confronts the Church in the United States in my judgment is not comprehensive. All through our history, we Catholics in the United States have had to face this same attack upon the Church from non-Catholics. The point of the attack has been the same all through the years: namely, that Catholics cannot be loyal to the Constitution of the United States and at the same time loyal to their Church. The notion of religious freedom in the non-Catholic mind in the Englishspeaking world derives from the Protestant doctrine upholding the right of the individual to interpret for himself the Sacred Scriptures.

Religious Exemptions

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Affordable Care Act ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
The United States ◽  
Religious Organizations ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Political Debate ◽  
Legal Requirements ◽  
The Right ◽  
Health Laws

Exemptions from legal requirements, especially religious exemptions, have been a major topic of political debate in recent years. Bakers in various states have sought the right to refuse to make wedding cakes for gay and lesbian couples, despite the Supreme Court’s validation of same-sex marriage. Many parents do not want to vaccinate their children, despite public health laws requiring otherwise, and several states grant exemptions. Various religious organizations as well as some corporations have sought an exemption from the requirement to provide contraceptive coverage in employee healthcare plans, as required by the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Religious exemptions have a long history in the United States, but they remain controversial. Exemptions release some people from following laws that everyone else must follow, raising questions of fairness, and exemptions often privilege religious belief, raising concerns about equal treatment. At the same time there are good reasons to support exemptions, such as respect for the right of religious freedom and preventing religious organizations from becoming too closely intertwined with government. The essays in this volume represent valuable contributions to the complex debate about exemptions from legal requirements. In particular, they contribute to the moral dimensions of religious exemptions. These essays go beyond legal analysis about which exemptions are constitutionally appropriate, instead asking when religious exemptions are morally required or morally prohibited.

Theology as Work: The Mandatum and the Rights of Labor

Horizons ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-134
Author(s):  
Patrick T. McCormick
Keyword(s):  
Academic Freedom ◽  
Working Conditions ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Catholic Social Teaching ◽  
Social Teaching ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Church ◽  
Safe Working

ABSTRACTMany oppose the mandatum as a threat to the academic freedom of Catholic scholars and the autonomy and credibility of Catholic universities. But the imposition of this juridical bond on working theologians is also in tension with Catholic Social Teaching on the rights and dignity of labor. Work is the labor necessary to earn our daily bread. But it is also the vocation by which we realize ourselves as persons and the profession through which we contribute to the common good. Thus, along with the right to a just wage and safe working conditions, Catholic Social Teaching defends workers' rights to a full partnership in the enterprise, and calls upon the church to be a model of participation and cooperation. The imposition of the mandatum fails to live up to this standard and threatens the jobs and vocations of theologians while undermining this profession's contribution to the church.

scholarly journals The Impact of the Church–State Model for an Effective Guarantee of Religious Freedom: A Study of the Peruvian Experience during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Laws ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 40
Author(s):  
Susana Mosquera
Keyword(s):  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Current Crisis ◽  
Dual Nature ◽  
Legal Model ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right ◽  
Institutional Guarantee ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Individual Dimension ◽  
The Church

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments established important restrictions on religious freedom. Due to a restrictive interpretation of the right to religious freedom, religion was placed in the category of “non-essential activity” and was, therefore, unprotected. Within this framework, this paper tries to offer a reflection on the relevance of the dual nature of religious freedom as an individual and collective right, since the current crisis has made it clear that the individual dimension of religious freedom is vulnerable when the legal model does not offer an adequate institutional guarantee to the collective dimension of religious freedom.

Religious freedom and the ‘right to discriminate’ in the school admissions context: a neo-republican critique

Legal Studies ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 615-643 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eoin Daly ◽  
Tom Hickey
Keyword(s):  
Public Education ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Religious Discrimination ◽  
Religious Schools ◽  
The Public ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
Republican Theory ◽  
Faith Schools

In law and discourse, it has typically been assumed that the religious freedom of state-funded religious schools must trump any competing right to non-discrimination on grounds of belief. For example, the Irish Constitution has been interpreted as requiring the broad exemption of denominational schools from the statutory prohibition on religious discrimination in school admissions. This stance is mirrored in the UK Equality Act 2010. Thus, religious discrimination in the public education context has been rationalised with reference to a ‘liberty-equality dichotomy’, which prioritises the integrity of faith schools' ‘ethos’, as an imperative of religious freedom. We argue that this familiar conceptual dichotomy generates a novel set of absurdities in this peculiar context. We suggest that the construction of religious freedom and non-discrimination as separate and antagonistic values rests on a conceptually flawed definition of religious freedom itself, which overlooks the necessary dependence of religious freedom on non-discrimination. Furthermore, it overstates the necessity, to religious freedom, of religious schools' ‘right to discriminate’. We argue for an alternative ordering of the values of religious freedom and non-discrimination – which we locate within the neo-republican theory of freedom as non-domination.

Privatization—Chipping Away at Government

2020 ◽  
pp. 106-128
Author(s):  
Donald Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
Public Services ◽  
The United States ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Right

This chapter focuses on the right wing's astonishingly successful efforts to privatize public goods and services. Privatization has been one of the highest priorities of the right wing for many years, and the chapter shows how it threatens both labor and democracy. Intentionally blurring the lines between public and private institutions, private companies and market forces undermine the common good. This chapter documents the history of privatization in the United States, from President Reagan's early efforts to Clinton and Gore's belief in private markets. Showing how privatization undermines democratic government, the chapter describes complex contracts that are difficult to understand, poorly negotiated “public–private partnership” deals, and contracts that provide incentives to deny public services. With huge amounts of money at stake, privateers are increasingly weighing in on policy debates—not based on the public interest but rather in pursuit of avenues that increase their revenues, profits, and market share. Privatization not only destroys union jobs but also aims to cripple union political involvement so that the corporate agenda can spread unfettered. Nevertheless, community-based battles against privatization have succeeded in many localities, demonstrating the power of fighting back to defend public services, public jobs, and democratic processes.

Saeculum–Ecclesia–Caliphate: An Eternal Golden Braid

2019 ◽  
pp. 94-107
Author(s):  
Paul J. Griffiths
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Common Good ◽  
The United States ◽  
Catholic Theology ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Church ◽  
Catholic Perspective ◽  
Secular State

The secular state, the church, and the caliphate are associations that each hold universal aspirations, at least implicitly. While the universal aspirations of the church and caliphate may be obvious enough, every state seeks dominion over the whole world. (“Secular” describes states that limit their vision to this world, as opposed to the transcendence to which both the church and caliphate appeal.) As an essay in Catholic speculative theology, Griffiths asks two questions: Whether Catholic theology supports or discourages the variety of political orders, and whether these orders could be ranked in terms of goodness from a Catholic perspective? In response to these questions, Griffiths appeals to two aspects of St. Augustine’s political thought: Political rivalries serve the common good; and the principal indicator of the degree to which a state serves the common good is its explicit service to the god of Abraham. The United States (a secular state) is compared with ISIS (an attempted caliphate).

The Death and Resurrection of “the Homosexual”

2020 ◽  
pp. 175-210
Author(s):  
Taylor G. Petrey
Keyword(s):  
Religious Freedom ◽  
The United States ◽  
Family Values ◽  
Church Leaders ◽  
First Century ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Political Transitions ◽  
New Policies ◽  
The Church

This final chapter traces the intertwined theological, linguistic, psychological, and political transitions LDS leaders instituted in the first two decades of the twenty-first century. Church leaders adopted new terms like “same-sex attraction,” and eventually returned to the terms “gay,” “lesbian,” and “homosexual” as acceptable. The Church also introduced new teachings about homosexuality in the afterlife and new policies for transgender folks. As same-sex marriage was legalized in the United States, church leaders increasingly shifted away from “family values” to “religious freedom” to frame their opposition.

Religious Freedom and the Churches: Contemporary Challenges in the United States Today1

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 194-204
Author(s):  
Richard W. Garnett
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Sexual Abuse ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
The United States ◽  
Religious Institutions ◽  
General Decline ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Right

A crucial, but often overlooked, dimension of the human and constitutional right to religious freedom is the autonomy of religious institutions, associations and societies with respect to matters of governance, doctrine, formation and membership. Although the Supreme Court of the United States has affirmed this autonomy in the context of American constitutional law, it is vulnerable, and even under threat, for a variety of reasons, including a general decline in the health of civil society and mediating associations and a crisis of confidence and authority caused by clerical sexual abuse and churches’ failure to respond to it.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document