Paper short abstract:

What does it mean to “do” the law from the site of its very undoing? Based on ethnographic research alongside the German "church asylum" movement, this paper explores the theological-political contestations at the heart of contemporary practices to shelter rejected asylum-seekers from deportation.

Paper long abstract:

Since the early Middle Ages, churches have often been considered sacred spaces in which persons fleeing political persecution may seek refuge. Over the past several decades, Protestant and Catholic churches in Germany have consistently rooted themselves in this tradition, offering sanctuary to thousands of rejected asylum-seekers pending deportation. Due to an informal agreement between church leadership and federal immigration authorities, church asylum [Kirchenasyl] in Germany is “tolerated” in cases where churches are willing to assemble dossiers explaining why a negative asylum decision should be reconsidered. In this sense, churches become tasked at once with criticizing and defying contemporary asylum law, at the same time as they are given the opportunity to ensure its most authentic implementation.

Based on ethnographic research alongside the German sanctuary movement, the following paper interrogates what it might mean to “do” the law from the site of its very undoing. Taking seriously “the permanence of the theological-political” (Lefort 1986), the paper seeks to understand how Christian conceptions of the moral law “reoccupy” (Blumenberg 1991) gaps that are continually left vacant by secular determinations of political belonging. Building on work that explores how certain modern religious practices remain authoritative even when they are not legally binding (Agrama 2010; Lemons 2019), the paper outlines how and to what extent Kirchenasyl, a practice that is not legally codified, prompts crises of ethical obligation on the part of the state, actively (un)doing legal categories at the intersection of religion and migration politics.

Paper short abstract:

This paper examines how debates between state legislators on how the state should understand and respond to religious violence have come to operate as a site for (un)doing recent social and political transformations in Brazil.

Paper long abstract:

This paper examines how debates between state legislators on how the state should understand and respond to religious violence have come to operate as a site for (un)doing recent social and political transformations in Brazil. In May 2021, the Legislative Assembly of the State of Rio de Janeiro inaugurated a special parliamentary commission of inquiry that was tasked with developing a deeper understanding of and proposing a solution to an explosion in Evangelical Christian attacks on African origin religions in the state. The commission was composed of legislators from across the religious spectrum, all of whom were committed to resolving the problem of religious violence. However, on closer examination, they did not all share an understanding of what the commission should focus on. Was it to be delimited to the analysis of violence against African origin religions or was it to forward a proposal for addressing religious violence more broadly? These differences of perspective were encapsulated in a debate on what term – “religious intolerance” or “religious racism” - was to be used to describe the commission’s object of inquiry. To understand the stakes of the debate and how it participated in broader efforts to (un)do recent social and political transformations in Brazil, I examine how arguments for each term worked to construct and in so doing anchor the commission and its purpose within different religious and racial imaginaries of the nation and its social problems.

Paper short abstract:

This paper investigates legal processes to mitigate social conflicts unfolded in 2008 and to balance religious accommodation in the South Korean society, to understand how those religious identity-based claims refined state's secular identity.

Paper long abstract:

This paper investigates legal processes to mitigate social conflicts which unfolded in 2008 and led to the emergence of the notion "religious discrimination" in the South Korean society.

Some religious groups denounced the civil servants behaviors, including the president Lee Myungbak, which raised doubts on their distinctive connections with certain Protestant churches. They organized protests of historical scale accusing "religious discrimination”. These religious identity-based claims engendered a sensitisation of social awareness regarding religious freedom and equality. In order to mitigate those groundbreaking social tension, the state initiate the changes. In 2008, Religious neutrality is inserted in the norms of government officials. In 2009, the National Assembly explicitly incorporated the prohibition of religious discrimination into the laws of national and regional civil servants, as well as the Constitution.

This research attempts to align with many other researchers taking into account the point that a decline of religion does not occur in the world (Casanova 1994). Without abandoning the theory of secularization itself, it will take a distance from the European-western model of the social sciences and reinforce the validity of social science itself ((Chakrabarty 2000; Kuhn 2013).

Exploring social and political dynamics to balance religious accommodation in South Korea will enhance our understanding of how the secular and the religious are deeply entangled and how legal and constitutional reforms can solidify the human rights framework and promote conflict mitigation (Bâli & Lerner 2017).

Paper short abstract:

The paper will focus on the (im)possibilities of activist modes in the study of religions, including anthropology and other social sciences. It will reflect on the limits of engagements of a scholar dealing with religion and it will propose a radical non-confessional religious studies curriculum.

Paper long abstract:

Scholars of religion are constantly confronted with the limits of their engagement either during ethnography or while reflecting on particular cases when the religion, law, public sphere and consensual democracy intersect. Growing out from Polish cases I would like to open the field for discussing activism modes in studying religion and rethinking the stigma of (dis)engagement while studying religion.

I will base my argument on juridical proceedings common in Poland in the recent years, where scholars dealing with religion are employed as experts. The cases consider accusations of the “offence of religious feelings” a criminal law existing in Polish juridical system since the twenties of 20th century. This law is used in Poland to locate religion in the public sphere and delimitate its scope, rights and claims. At the same time this juridical proceedings depend on involvement of the scholar working with religion. This means that the shape of the public sphere is relational to attitude, worldview, conviction, level of expertise and ego of the expert scholar.

In contrast to public anthropology the research and study of religion is still considered this particular field where activist modes and engaged modes of research and knowledge production are universally unaccepted either by other scholars or by common public. Therefore there is urgent need to debate both the relationality of secular public and religious space, and the figure of researcher in undoing the particular position of religion in the contemporary public space and legal structures. Importantly, debated activist mode is non-confessional and secular.

Paper short abstract:

The paper investigates Catholic canon lawyers’ ontological and epistemological approaches to the unchanging nature of divine law of revelation as one expression of the steadfastness and commitment to tradition of the Catholic Church in the face of social transformations.

Paper long abstract:

The Catholic Church has been criticized for abuse scandals, gender inequality, homophobia, outdated sexual morals, authoritarian hierarchical structures and fundamental contradictions between the teaching and practice of Catholic clergy. The institution of the Catholic Church appears to be outdated and incapable of change for many people in the Global North. In contrast, the Catholic church remains the largest religious community in the world with increasing membership when seen in a global perspective. The steadfastness and commitment to tradition of the Catholic Church in the face of social transformations is seen by many Catholics as a reason for the continued existence of the oldest global institution in the world. In Catholic canon law, this steadfastness finds expression in the concept of the divine law of revelation, which refers to the God given unchanging elements in the structure of the Catholic Church. Based on fieldwork in central institutions of the Roman Curia and an analysis of canon lawyers’ discourse on divine law, the paper explores what parts of canon law are seen unchangeable by canon lawyers, how the unchangeable nature of parts of canon law is explained and how the tension between historical transformations of canon law in the face of its immutable nature are dealt with. I argue that there are either ontological approaches that understand the ability to change as an “incarnational” historicization of divine law or epistemological approaches that differentiate in various ways between an unchangeable substance and a transforming and contextualized form of divine law.

Paper short abstract:

This paper aims to identify tensions of religiously-influenced extra-judicial dispute resolution forums in Germany. The recognised ecclesiastical jurisdictions are compared with the othered extrajudicial dispute resolution forums, to formulate possible solutions from a normative legal perspective.

Paper long abstract:

So-called "religious parallel justice" or extrajudicial dispute resolution has been the focus of interdisciplinary and political debates. This paper aims to identify the tensions and formulate possible solutions inherent in various religiously-influenced extra-judicial dispute resolution forums. In Germany, we find a range of recognised extra-judicial dispute resolution systems, in particular the ecclesiastical jurisdictions, which are supported by the state and socially recognized (Wittreck 2015). From a normative legal perspective, the framework conditions of religiously characterised extrajudicial dispute resolution forums in Germany will be shown. Ethnographic research will be used to analyse the allegedly Islam-influenced out-of-court conflict resolution forums (Tas 2016). The reflexive look at recognised ecclesiastical jurisdictions and forums in Germany should make it possible to reclassify and negotiate the supposedly "other" with a legal perspective (Brocker 2012; Dienstbühl 2013; Funke 2011; Rohe 2003).

The aim is to show that these forums, contrary to hasty legal scrutiny, can be practised quite 'legally'. These forums are used, because those affected are often denied access to the state justice system due to community pressure, as the state courts do not take into account their specific normative and procedural needs (Rohe 2011; Foblets 2000; Tas 2016). But ethnographic research has shown that some forums have not adapted basic procedural and human rights. The individual freedom to use the practices of one's own community is counteracted by the problematic treatment of human rights and fundamental legal rights. The way the law, especially the judiciary, deals with this social tension, will enable an interdisciplinary discussion.

Paper short abstract:

This paper will explore recent juridical interventions on the question of compulsory endogamy among a section of Christians in India. These interventions illustrate the ongoing contestations between global conventions and local customs that animate the everyday practices of South Asian Christianity.

Paper long abstract:

Knanaya Christians (or Southists) of Kerala, India are a multi-denominational endogamous community who trace their origins to a fourth century Mesopotamian merchant named Thomas of Kana. In the early 20th century, they were successful in carving out an autonomous diocese ( known as the Kottayam diocese) within Catholicism. The Kottayam diocese historically maintained rules of compulsory endogamy, with no scope for marital conversion. In 1989, Biju Uthup's civil suit in a local court challenged the 'christianness' of this rule and catalysed a reform movement against blood marriages and expulsions in the diocese and beyond. This paper is a sociological reading of the Uthup judgement and other relevant court utterances from the past three decades to highlight the conflicts between: one, the 'endogamy-breaking' individual and the community; two, global Catholicism and local customs. The petitioner and defendants position themselves as guardians of the faith, fighting over its meanings using conflicting interpretations of the bible. In this conundrum, the Indian court tries to resolve the conflict within a postcolonial secular logic that places Christianity as irretreivably different from a caste-based Hinduism . This paper analyzes these standpoints and provides a glimpse of how Indian Christianity is an active field of socio-legal discourses on endogamy. This paper is also a contribution to ongoing anthropological conversations that challenge attempts to conceive South Asian Christianity simply as an annexure to European colonialism with little say in postcolonial or decolonial paradigms. It highlights social configurations that necessitate new ways of approaching Christian lives.

Paper short abstract:

This paper explores the emerging tensions between church and state in the context of asylum claims based on conversion to Christianity and fear of religious persecution, which point to a much wider struggle over citizenship (Vetters 2022) and the role of religion in society.

Paper long abstract:

Among recent migrations to Europe, a significant number have based their applications on fear of religious persecution following a conversion from Islam to Christianity. The assessment of these asylum applications is based on (1) the credibility of the applicants’ conversions and on (2) whether the religious conversion will lead to persecution of the asylum-seeker if deported back to their country of origin. The outcomes of these deliberations thus determine the fate of the asylum-seeker in question. Yet, they raise the following critical questions: how can one correctly assess the genuineness of a conversion to Christianity? Can, or should, this be the role of the secular state and its legal decision-makers? If so, how does the state decide which forms and practices of Christianity are ‘acceptable,’ and to whom? In this complex set of questions, the role of pastors as supporters of the new converts and “activists” for different asylum outcomes is particularly telling. Drawing on case law, ethnographic observations at asylum appeal hearings based on conversion at German courts as well as church workshops and interviews with all actors involved, this paper explores the ensuing struggle over authority in assessing what makes a ‘true’ convert worthy of protection. Given that in such hearings, pastors, lawyers, claimants, and judges evaluate the claimants’ belonging to Germany’s dominant religion, Christianity, the emerging tensions between church and state point to a much wider struggle over citizenship (Vetters 2022) and the role of religion in society.