Christians and the State

b. Christians and the State_b. Christians and the State 12/12/2011 15:18 Page 1

Christians and the State The place of religious freedom and the law by John Duddington

All booklets are published thanks to the generous support of the members of the Catholic Truth Society

CATHOLIC TRUTH SOCIETY PUBLISHERS TO THE HOLY SEE

b. Christians and the State_b. Christians and the State 12/12/2011 15:18 Page 2

2

Contents Christians and the law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 God and Caesar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 A Christian’s say on what the law should be . . . . . . . .14 A Christian’s right to freedom of expression . . . . . . . .18 Is Christianity part of the law of England? . . . . . . . . .20 Principles by which Christians should judge secular law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 Applying these principles in practice: natural law . . . .32 Legal positivism: is the law, law? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 When can Christians claim exemption on grounds of conscience? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51 Christians and human rights law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68 Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70

b. Christians and the State_b. Christians and the State 12/12/2011 15:18 Page 3

3

Christians and the law Let’s look at two actual cases first which both involved Christians at work and a conflict between their faith and the requirements of the law, as set out in their contracts of employment. Mr Copsey and working on Sundays Stephen Copsey worked for Devon Clays at the site of their quarry near King’s Lynn.1 Devon Quarries won a new order which substantially increased the amount of sand which they were required to produce and so they introduced a shift system which required seven day working by all twelve workers involved. Mr Copsey refused on religious grounds to work on Sundays unless there was a genuine unexpected and unavoidable emergency. He was offered alternative positions within the company but in each case the company could not guarantee that he would not be required to come in on a Sunday. Eventually he was dismissed and he claimed that ‘I have been unfairly dismissed because I am a Christian.’ The court accepted that there was a connection between his dismissal and his religious beliefs.

b. Christians and the State_b. Christians and the State 12/12/2011 15:18 Page 4

4

Was the insistence that Mr Copsey had to work on Sundays in breach of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights? We shall examine this in more detail later but briefly it provides that ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion’. There was no suggestion that the requirement to work on Sundays interfered with Stephen Copsey’s attendance at a place of worship. The Court of Appeal applied previous cases which held that if the employer’s working practices and the employee’s religious convictions are incompatible, the employee is free to resign in order to manifest his religious beliefs and in this way his freedom of religion is protected. Thus there was no interference with freedom of religion. The case was then whether Devon Clays had acted fairly and the court held that they had. The required increase in production requirements was an economic necessity for Devon Clays and a good reason for seeking to impose the seven day regime on all employees. They had also considered the well-being of the other employees working at the plant and had obtained the agreement of the vast majority of them, and the union, to the change. Finally other employees lacked sympathy and support for Mr Copsey’s position. I suggest that this case tells us that the arguments about Christians and the law are not always clear cut. Consider three points:

b. Christians and the State_b. Christians and the State 12/12/2011 15:18 Page 5

5

(a) Mr Copsey was of course quite right to mention the commandment to ‘keep the Sabbath day holy’. If we have a society where employers are able to pressurise employees into working on Sunday then of course this will conflict with the commandment. It will also be detrimental to family life as families will not be able to be together on Sundays. (b) However, if Mr Copsey had won then this might have meant that Devon Clays would have been unable to fulfil the contract and his colleagues could have lost their jobs. As Christians we must love our neighbour and have regard to the common good. (c) Mr Copsey’s employer was not hostile to his religious beliefs. On the contrary it made every effort to accommodate them. In the end it did not succeed in doing so. Mrs Williams-Drabble and working on Sundays However, there was another issue: at the date of this case there was no law which protected employees, and others, from discrimination because of their religious beliefs. Would the decision have been different if there had been? We do not know, as the court would have had to consider if the requirement to work on Sundays was religious discrimination.

b. Christians and the State_b. Christians and the State 12/12/2011 15:18 Page 6

6

Take the case of Mrs. Williams-Drabble in 2005. She worked for Pathway Care Solutions at one of their homes. At her interview, she said that, as a consequence of her faith, she could not work on a Sunday but she was later given a rota which required Sunday working. When she refused she was told that she would have to hand in her notice. The tribunal held that her employer was guilty of discrimination against her on religious grounds. Stephen Copsey might have won his case on the ground of religious discrimination but I suggest that his was less clear cut as there was the effect on other workers of his refusal to work on Sundays. The message from these two cases is that we need to look carefully at each issue and not always jump to conclusions. Sometimes the duty for Christians will be clear: a law is unjust and must be resisted to the end. However this will not always be so. Should I be bothered about the law? If you have picked up this booklet and are not a lawyer then please do not think that it is not for you! This pamphlet is for anyone who is interested in the relationship between secular law and Christianity and it does not presuppose any previous legal knowledge or acquaintance with the law.2 This pamphlet is written from a Roman Catholic standpoint but the issues raised here concern not only all

b. Christians and the State_b. Christians and the State 12/12/2011 15:18 Page 7

7

Christians but also all believers. Moreover, many if not all of the principles which we shall examine, such as human dignity and the common good, will evoke the same response right across the religious spectrum. Law does not operate in a vacuum. Laws are made because of the beliefs of society that certain types of conduct are wrong and others are right. So in turn our attitude to the law as Christians must be shaped by our own ethical views and in particular by the social teaching of the church. Accordingly you may find it useful to read this pamphlet in conjunction with the others on Catholic Social Teaching published by the CTS. Ultimately our ideas on the proper place of law in society must be governed by our faith that Christ is the Lord of all Creation and in the end will gather all things unto himself. As St Paul puts it, God the Father ‘would bring everything together under Christ as head, everything in the heavens and everything on earth’. (Ephesians 1:10). Thus the insights of theology, and in particular of political theology, are vital in placing law in the Christian context.3 Lastly, there are three issues which you might care to bear in mind as you read this pamphlet as together they form the nub of the relationship between Christianity and secular law: (a) To what extent can Christians in conscience disobey the secular law?

b. Christians and the State_b. Christians and the State 12/12/2011 15:18 Page 8

8

(b) To what extent can Christians require the law to accommodate their religious beliefs? (c) To what extent can Christians claim to have a voice in actually deciding what the law shall be?

b. Christians and the State_b. Christians and the State 12/12/2011 15:18 Page 9

9

God and Caesar Let us start with an example: John is a devout Christian. He feels strongly that it is wrong that shops should open on Sundays and that this law is completely unjust. He mentions this to his friend, Tim. Tim’s answer is simple. He tells John: ‘Your religion is your own affair. The Sunday Trading Act was passed by Parliament and so it is the law of the land. This means that we must all obey it. Religious beliefs are one thing and the law is another’. This exchange puts the debate between the claims of God and Caesar in a nutshell. One view, represented by Tim, is that there are God’s commands, which apply to His followers, and those of the State, as represented traditionally by Caesar, which apply to everyone. If it happens that God’s commands conflict with those of Caesar then as everyone must obey the law it is God’s commands which must give way. What should the attitude of a Christian be? The starting point is of course the famous exchange between Jesus and some of the Jews on whether it is lawful to pay taxes to Caesar. (Luke 20:20-26; Mark 12:13-17; Matthew 22:15-22.) The dialogue can only be

b. Christians and the State_b. Christians and the State 12/12/2011 15:18 Page 10

10

understood if we remember that the Jews objected to heads on coins as it violated their law against images. So the Romans minted copper coins without the Emperor’s head for internal circulation inside Palestine. (This, incidentally, is a good example of secular law taking account of religious beliefs and is a precedent which modern legislatures should follow and sometimes do). However, what was in effect a poll tax paid to the Roman Emperor had to be paid in silver coin with the Emperor’s head on it and it was this coin which led to Jesus’ reply, in Mark’s version: ‘Give back to Caesar what belongs to Caesar – and to God what belongs to God’. This does not mean that the secular and the sacred belong to two separate compartments of our existence. What it does mean is that God sometimes deals with us directly and sometimes through the civil authorities and provided that Caesar and all civil authorities perform their task, under God, of promoting the common good, then they are entitled to what is due to them. This can be the payment of taxes and, more broadly, obedience to the secular law. This has always been the faith of the Church. In 492 Pope Gelasius I wrote to the Emperor Anastasius that: ‘there are two powers by which the earth is chiefly ruled: the sacred authority of bishops and the royal power. Of these the priestly power is much more important, because it has to render account for the kings of men themselves at the judgement seat of God’.

b. Christians and the State_b. Christians and the State 12/12/2011 15:18 Page 11

11

So, to return to the example, both Tim and John are partly right and partly wrong. John is right in that religious beliefs should have some consideration when a law is made but John is wrong if he thinks that religious beliefs should override the law. Tim is wrong in thinking that religion is a private matter but he is right to emphasise that the law on Sunday trading, much as many Christians may dislike it, must be respected as the law of the land. Religion and politics This is God’s world and nothing is outside His love and care. The existence of civil government does not exclude God’s law. Instead it is the task of Christians to ensure that the civil authorities uphold Christian principles. When people sometimes say: ‘Religion and politics should not mix’ they are terribly wrong and as Christians we should, politely but firmly, point this out. There are a number of passages in the New Testament which deal with the relationship between citizens on the one hand and governments and secular law on the other. ‘For the sake of the Lord, accept the authority of every social institution: the emperor as supreme authority, and the governors as commissioned by him to punish criminals and praise good citizenship’ (1 Peter 2:13-17). This could be read as advocating that Christians should adopt what seems a subservient attitude to governments.

b. Christians and the State_b. Christians and the State 12/12/2011 15:18 Page 12

12

Note though what St Paul writes: ‘You must obey all the governing authorities. Since all government comes from God, the civil authorities were appointed by God and anyone who resists authority is rebelling against God’s decision, and such an act is bound to be punished’ (Romans 13:1- 3). Although St Paul does indeed advocate obedience to the authorities he points out very clearly that ‘all government comes from God’. Similarly St Peter begins ‘For the sake of the Lord’. It is clear that neither Peter nor Paul wished Christians to needlessly upset the ruling powers, and indeed the peace enforced by the Romans enabled both of them to journey to Rome. Moreover it was the stable government of the Romans, and the Pax Romana which covered the whole Mediterranean area in the first century, which provided the conditions under which the infant religion of Christianity could spread. On the other hand they both emphasise that the authority of governments comes ultimately from God and so governments are ultimately accountable to Him. This point, that Christ is the Lord of all Creation, is clearly brought out in the dialogue between Jesus and Pilate (John 19:10-11). Pilate lets Jesus know of the extent of the civil power to which Jesus is subject: ‘Do you not know that I have power to release you, and power to crucify you?’ Jesus’ answer is unequivocal: ‘You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above’. This, as Tom Wright

b. Christians and the State_b. Christians and the State 12/12/2011 15:18 Page 13

13

expresses it4 ‘does not mean that Jesus’ kingdom is a mere spiritual one, a gnostic dream of escape that has nothing to do with the present world ... Jesus’ kingdom does not derive from the world, but it is designed for the world’.5 It is, he says: ‘the kingdom of the wise Creator God who longs to heal the world’. It is also worth noting, before we leave Peter and Paul, how they both see a dual role for government and therefore law. It is clear that they regard law as being necessary to deal with behaviour which is contrary to justice but in addition they regard law as having a positive force in promoting what is good. Thus St Peter says in the same sentence that governors have powers ‘to punish criminals and praise good citizenship’. Again St Paul, later in the same passage (13:4) points out that ‘The state is there to serve God for your benefit’. The Christian duty to not only avoid evil but also promote good is also the duty of lawmakers.6