When we contemplate ecumenism in South Africa in the twentieth century, we often automatically think of the outstanding work of the South African Council of Churches during the years of apartheid. However, it had two precursors in the General Missionary Conference of South Africa (1904–36) and the Christian Council of South Africa (1936–68). Parallel yet integral to these developments we note the significant contribution of the South African Catholic Bishops’ Conference. These did not originate or exist in a vacuum but responded to the needs and currents in society and were active in the midst of para-movements such as the Christian Institute.

This article presents an anthropological account of the European Court of Human Rights' approach to material religion. Focusing on a range of cases involving an alleged violation of Article 9 – the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion – in relation to such diverse religious objects as cassette players, incense, crucifixes, photographs and cross necklaces, it draws on ethnographic studies of material culture to suggest a disconnect between the Court's emphasis on religion as belief and the lived experience of embodied, sensual and object-oriented religious practice. It concludes that Article 9's privileging of the forum internum over material practice has contributed to an immaterial view of religion and religious life. Such an understanding ultimately fails to appreciate the importance of objects in the creation, expression and maintenance of religious worlds.

This study explores juridical aspects of the ecclesiology presented in the World Council of Churches' Faith and Order Commission Paper, The Church: Towards a Common Vision (2013). It does so in the context of systems of church law, order and polity in eight church families worldwide: Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran, Methodist, Reformed, Presbyterian and Baptist. Common Vision does not explicitly consider church law, order and polity or its role in ecumenism. However, many themes treated in Common Vision surface in church regulatory systems. This study examines how these instruments articulate the ecclesiology found in Common Vision (which as such, de facto, offers juridical as well as theological principles), translate these into norms of conduct and, in turn, generate unity in common action across the church families. Juridical similarities indicate that the churches share common principles and that their existence suggests the category ‘Christian law’. While dogmas may divide the churches of global Christianity, the profound similarities between their norms of conduct reveal that the laws of the faithful, whatever their various denominational affiliations, link Christians through common forms of action. For this reason, comparative church law should have a greater profile in ecumenism today.1

The legal and regulatory aspects of Islamic banking present a challenge to most financial and regulatory authorities. To many observers, legal and regulatory complexity in this respect stems from the link between the banking business and Islamic law. Compliance with some Islamic rulings forces the sector to operate an unusual business model, which is different from that of their conventional counterparts. After expounding the ideological foundation of Islamic banking and the sector's evolution, this article examines the genesis of the legal and regulatory challenge by conducting a compatibility analysis between Islam and banking. It will be argued that the conceptions of Islam and banking ought not to conflict, which means that achieving regulatory equilibrium in relation to Islamic banking is possible.

Norman Doe's book Christian Law compares and contrasts the internal regulations of churches and seeks to identify principles common to churches across the denominational spectrum. This response to Doe's work reviews the religious questions that have come before the House of Lords and Supreme Court since 2004 and seeks to identify the principles governing the secular courts' approach to religious questions. The relationship between those principles and the principles outlined in Christian Law is far from clear. While an understanding of the rules of particular religious bodies is sometimes necessary for secular judges deciding civil rights in a religious context, in most cases the courts are not concerned with the conformity of religious beliefs with religious laws, but simply with protecting the freedom to hold and manifest those beliefs.

In recent years there have been protests at Armistice Day services and at the funeral of Margaret Thatcher, but these events seem insignificant compared to the impact of the ‘funeral picketing’ carried out in the United States by members of the Westboro Baptist Church, principally at the funerals of American forces personnel killed on active service. This has caused considerable distress to family members and wide public outrage. In 2011 the United States Supreme Court held in Snyder v Phelps that the right of freedom of speech of the WBC rendered them immune to claims for damages by mourners affected by their picketing. This article will first consider how English secular and canon law could be used to restrict the practice of funeral picketing and secondly discuss whether current law could provide a remedy for mourners distressed by funeral picketing and other forms of protest at funerals, were they to take place.

The taking of oaths of allegiance to the Crown has a long history pre-dating the Reformation. However, the shifting balance of power in the sixteenth century gave greater political weight to the taking of oaths, and developments in the monarchy were matched by developments in the oaths required of clerics. In the present day all clergy are required to take the Oath of Allegiance prior to ordination and on taking up clerical posts. Other office-holders in the church are also required to do so.

This article is a reflection on Norman Doe's book Christian Law: contemporary principles (2013) from a Protestant and Continental perspective. Against the background of the self-evident impact of ecumenical progress in terms of church polity, it explores the relation between ecumenism and church polity from the opposite perspective: can the academic discipline of church polity foster ecumenism, as Doe suggests in his statement that ‘whilst doctrines divide, laws link Christians in common action’? After stating that a more nuanced understanding of the concept of ‘normativity’ is of fundamental importance in this respect, the article then indicates the possible risk of an ideological use of church law. Five reasons are given as to why church polity often hampers rather than fosters ecumenical progress, even if traditional doctrinal issues have been resolved. Finally, the fundamental category of divine law is explored, and its impact on ecumenical progress.

According to the Pew Research Centre, 76 per cent of the world's population live in countries where they face ‘high or very high’ restrictions on religion or belief. Over the five years that Pew has been tracking this metric, the percentage of people that face ‘high or very high’ levels of restrictions by their government has risen from 58 per cent to 64 per cent. What is more alarming is the figure for ‘high or very high’ social hostilities (that is, acts of religious hostility by private individuals and groups, including armed conflict and terror), which jumped from 53 per cent in 2011 to 74 per cent in 2012.

For many years, probably for centuries, bats have hunted and roosted in churches. They have now become less than welcome. In the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, a church in Bedfordshire placed a bounty of 6d per dozen on the heads of the animals, and in the 1930s the organist of Binsey found himself unable to distinguish the black keys from the white because the colours were obscured by bat droppings. The problem, therefore, is not new. More recently, a debate in the House of Lords, initiated by Lord Cormack, a former Second Church Commissioner, produced a short-lived but vigorous spate of articles and letters in the national press. Complaints about the activities of bats came from far and wide, from North Yorkshire to Northampton and Oxford. The problem seems to be especially acute in East Anglia, however. The greatest cause for complaint was the damage caused to woodwork, floor tiles, alabaster memorials and monumental brasses by faeces and urine. As a moment's reflection shows, these are corrosive (the latter more so) and the effects can be disastrous. In any case, where bats are present in any numbers, someone has the distasteful task of trying to remove the droppings and the urine stains on pews, window sills and floors each time the church is used. It is not unknown for bats to defecate on the heads of incumbents at the altar, which raises questions as to the consequences of bat infestation for the health of clergy, congregations and other church users, over and above the damage to buildings and their contents.

When George Abbot, Archbishop of Canterbury, accidentally shot and killed a gamekeeper in 1621, questions were immediately asked about whether the accident had rendered him excommunicate and whether he could, consequently, remain in his post. Within the complex ecclesiastical politics of the day, James I remained sympathetic to Abbot and a solution was sought to free him from any adverse consequences. In the end a royal pardon and a novel form of dispensation, utilising a rare process set up by the Ecclesiastical Licences Act 1533, were brought into play and the archbishop continued in office.

In August 2014 the Court of Appeal for Ontario handed down two decisions concerned with the constitutional status of the Crown in Canada in relation to freedom of conscience and religion pursuant to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In one decision, Teskey v Canada (Attorney General), the court denied that the UK legislative changes to the succession rules to which Canada agreed constituted an infringement of the religious equality rights of a Canadian Roman Catholic pursuant to section 15 (the equality provision) of the Charter. In the other decision, McAteer v Canada (Attorney General) the court denied that the statutory requirement that a person take an oath to Her Majesty as Queen of Canada to obtain Canadian citizenship constituted an infringement of the freedoms of conscience, religion and expression provisions in sections 2(a) and 2(b) of the Charter of persons who regarded her as an ‘Anglican Queen’.

The House of Commons starts each day with Prayers given by the Speaker's Chaplain, beginning with Psalm 67:

It is a privilege to have been invited to deliver the Boydell Lecture and to record my own appreciation of Peter, whom I can picture now – immaculate and affable as always. He was very kind to me as a fledgling Bishop of London. There was at the time an understandable debate about whether the tradition of inviting the bishop to be an honorary bencher of the Middle Temple should be continued. Time pressures had made the connection of some previous bishops very tenuous. Peter argued that +Londin should be given a last chance and this has led as far as I am concerned to a most nourishing and instructive relationship with the Temple and those who work here. As you know, by the Queen's command I do not appear in the Temple Church as bishop but as Dean of HM Chapels Royal and the Visitor, and I relish my connection with a place which preserves memories of so many events which have shaped our nation, as well as a living choral tradition which must be among the finest in the land.

On 1 July 2014 the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Australia passed the Canon Concerning Confessions 1989 (Amendment) Canon 2014, which creates a further exception to the confidentiality of a confession. Under this further exception, a member of the clergy is only required to keep the confession of a ‘serious offence’ confidential where reasonably satisfied that that the penitent has reported the serious offence to the police and, if the penitent is a church worker or a member of the clergy, to the Director of Professional Standards (section 2A(2)). In moving this Bill, I argued that the fundamental theological principle to which it gave expression is that the safety of the members of the Church and the public should be of paramount concern when considering the issue of the confidentiality of confessions, and that accordingly confessions must not operate as a cloak for the concealment of serious criminal offences.

The background to the passing of the Immigration Act is generally well known and it is recognised that the present Government has had concerns – either of its own or pressed upon it – about levels of immigration in this country. It is clear that all political parties are under some pressure to respond to public concerns over this area, which will clearly be one of the major issues in the campaigns leading up to the forthcoming general election.