Secularism and the Freedom to (Self-)Regulate: A Response to Michael McNally's Defend the Sacred

IF 0.6 0 RELIGION
Charles McCrary
{"title":"Secularism and the Freedom to (Self-)Regulate: A Response to Michael McNally's Defend the Sacred","authors":"Charles McCrary","doi":"10.1017/jlr.2021.77","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I am grateful for the opportunity to read and discuss this provocative and deeply learned new book. With Defend the Sacred, Michael McNally has produced an immensely valuable work that combines meticulous explanations with strong, creative, and, above all, useful arguments. I am a religious studies scholar who is often critical of religious freedom, and this book is just what I needed to read. McNally grants the legitimacy of the critiques raised both by many interested parties and by religious studies scholars. And he generally agrees that religion is a colonialist category; religious freedom privileges individual believers; it perpetuates racial liberalism; and Native Americans almost always lose free-exercise cases. This book is not a call to double down on the narrow protections of First Amendment free exercise claims, hoping that the protection of sacred sites, for instance, will eventually be regarded by federal judges as a matter of ensuring the protection of sincerely held beliefs. Indeed, McNally takes the failures of free-exercise claims not as an occasion to abandon religious freedom but as an invitation to think more capaciously, creatively, and strategically about what religious freedom is and can do. Other contributors to this forum are better equipped than I am to assess the plausibility and promise of McNally’s suggestions. In many ways, McNally thinks like a lawyer (here, I mean that as a compliment), which is to say, strategically, in order to accomplish his aims. In so doing, though, he is not doctrinaire or pedantic; he has a pragmatic will to try, to collaborate and experiment and see what works. This is an approach to law and religion that is too rare, and I found it a refreshingly practical, sensible, and grounding book to think with. Leaving the more fine-grain analysis to those with more expertise, I respond to this book by discussing three related clusters of thoughts it provoked. In what follows, I first put McNally’s work in conversation with secularism studies and ask what this book can teach us about how secular governance works in practice. Second, I think with McNally about spirituality and sincere belief. And finally, I conclude with some brief thoughts on the postsecular and the sacred.","PeriodicalId":44042,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and Religion","volume":"10 1","pages":"191 - 195"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and Religion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jlr.2021.77","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

I am grateful for the opportunity to read and discuss this provocative and deeply learned new book. With Defend the Sacred, Michael McNally has produced an immensely valuable work that combines meticulous explanations with strong, creative, and, above all, useful arguments. I am a religious studies scholar who is often critical of religious freedom, and this book is just what I needed to read. McNally grants the legitimacy of the critiques raised both by many interested parties and by religious studies scholars. And he generally agrees that religion is a colonialist category; religious freedom privileges individual believers; it perpetuates racial liberalism; and Native Americans almost always lose free-exercise cases. This book is not a call to double down on the narrow protections of First Amendment free exercise claims, hoping that the protection of sacred sites, for instance, will eventually be regarded by federal judges as a matter of ensuring the protection of sincerely held beliefs. Indeed, McNally takes the failures of free-exercise claims not as an occasion to abandon religious freedom but as an invitation to think more capaciously, creatively, and strategically about what religious freedom is and can do. Other contributors to this forum are better equipped than I am to assess the plausibility and promise of McNally’s suggestions. In many ways, McNally thinks like a lawyer (here, I mean that as a compliment), which is to say, strategically, in order to accomplish his aims. In so doing, though, he is not doctrinaire or pedantic; he has a pragmatic will to try, to collaborate and experiment and see what works. This is an approach to law and religion that is too rare, and I found it a refreshingly practical, sensible, and grounding book to think with. Leaving the more fine-grain analysis to those with more expertise, I respond to this book by discussing three related clusters of thoughts it provoked. In what follows, I first put McNally’s work in conversation with secularism studies and ask what this book can teach us about how secular governance works in practice. Second, I think with McNally about spirituality and sincere belief. And finally, I conclude with some brief thoughts on the postsecular and the sacred.
世俗主义与自我调节的自由:对迈克尔·麦克纳利《捍卫神圣》的回应
我很感激有机会阅读和讨论这本发人深省的新书。在《捍卫神圣》一书中,迈克尔·麦克纳利创作了一部非常有价值的作品,将细致的解释与强有力的、创造性的、最重要的是有用的论点结合在一起。我是一名宗教研究学者,经常对宗教自由持批评态度,这本书正是我需要读的。麦克纳利认为,许多利益相关方和宗教研究学者提出的批评都是合理的。他大体上同意宗教是殖民主义的范畴;宗教信仰自由使信教个人享有特权;它延续了种族自由主义;印第安人几乎总是输掉自由运动的案子。这本书并不是呼吁将第一修正案对自由行使权利的狭隘保护加倍,而是希望联邦法官最终能将对宗教场所的保护视为确保对真诚信仰的保护。事实上,麦克纳利认为,宗教自由主张的失败不是放弃宗教自由的理由,而是一种邀请,让我们更广泛地、创造性地、战略性地思考宗教自由是什么以及它能做什么。本论坛的其他撰稿人比我更有能力评估麦克纳利建议的可行性和前景。在很多方面,麦克纳利都像个律师一样思考(在这里,我的意思是说,这是一种恭维),也就是说,为了实现他的目标,他会从战略上进行思考。不过,他这样做并不是教条主义或迂腐;他有一种务实的意愿去尝试,去合作,去实验,看看什么是有效的。这是一种非常罕见的关于法律和宗教的方法,我发现这是一本令人耳目一新的实用、明智和基础的书。把更细致的分析留给那些更有专业知识的人,我通过讨论它引发的三个相关的想法来回应这本书。在接下来的文章中,我首先将麦克纳利的著作与世俗主义研究进行了对话,并询问这本书可以教会我们世俗治理在实践中是如何运作的。第二,我和麦克纳利一起思考灵性和真诚的信仰。最后,我将以一些关于后世俗和神圣的简短思考作为总结。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and Religion publishes cutting-edge research on religion, human rights, and religious freedom; religion-state relations; religious sources and dimensions of public, private, penal, and procedural law; religious legal systems and their place in secular law; theological jurisprudence; political theology; legal and religious ethics; and more. The Journal provides a distinguished forum for deep dialogue among Buddhist, Confucian, Christian, Hindu, Indigenous, Jewish, Muslim, and other faith traditions about fundamental questions of law, society, and politics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信