Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
logo czasopisma

Articles

Vol. 54 No. 1 (2025): Law and Social Bonds nr 1 (54) 2025

Remnants of Religious Law in Contemporary Law

DOI
https://doi.org/10.36128/PRIW.VI54.1197
Submitted
January 26, 2025
Published
2025-05-09

Abstract

Religion and law mutually interpenetrated and influenced each other both in the early stages of the formation of society and in the further processes of its development. It is impossible to say clearly which of them developed earlier, or which had a greater influence on the contemporary form of the other. At present, the relationship between law and religion is rarely discussed. The dominant view proclaiming the secularization of law, while undoubtedly justified, seems to overlook the religious origins of many contemporary purportedly secular lega institutions, such as the principle of equality before the law, social policy, parental authority or posthumous protection of personal rights. It seems that departing from the religious justification of legal institutions is the right solution, which push legal sciences to seek explanations of the functioning of legal institutions. The aim of this paper is to show that law and religion mutually interpenetrated during the period of creation of their final forms, which resulted in the popularization of legal institutions derived from religious norms. This facilitates the creation (or denotation) of legally protected values ​​and the search for their scientific (non-religious) foundations.

References

  1. Allalyev Ruslan, „Religious origins of the rule of law conception in the United States” Amazonia Investiga, 7 (2018): 212-217.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  2. Bengoetxea Joxerramon, „Legal institutions and the comparison of legal cultures” Oñati Socio-Legal Series, nr 6 (2022): 1647-1673. Doi.ORG/10.35295/OSLS.IISL /0000-0000-0000-1361.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  3. Berger Peter, Thomas Luckman, Społeczne tworzenie rzeczywistości. Warszawa: PWN, 2010.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  4. Berman Harold, „Religious Luckman Foundations of Law in the West. An Historical Perspective”, Journal of Law and Religion, nr 1 (1991): 3-43. DOI:10.2307/1051071.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  5. Berman Joshua, Created Equal: How the Bible Broke with Ancient Political Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  6. Biblia. https://biblia.deon.pl/rozdzial.php?id=102.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  7. Bojarski Władysław, „Czy homo religious?: geneza religijna kodeksów praw antycznych” Acta Universitatis Nicolai Copernici. Historia, nr 31 (1999): 7-12.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  8. Borucka-Arctowa Maria, Świadomość prawna a planowe zmiany społeczne. Wrocław: PAN, 1981.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  9. Broda Marian, „II. European civilization, the sacrality and secularity: Between sacrum and prophanum: Authority, knowledge, Democracy” LIMES: Cultural Regionalistics, nr 2 (2009): 116-125. Doi: 10.3846/2029-0187.2009.2.116-125.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  10. Bront Jerzy, Barbara Nowacka, Różnorodność związków małżeńskich na świecie. Krynica Morska: Laterna, 2008.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  11. Burgoński Piotr, „Modele relacji między religią i polityką”, [w:] Religia i polityka. Zarys problematyki, red. Piotr Burgoński, Michał Gierycz. 216-239. Warszawa: Dom Wydawniczy Elipsa, 2014.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  12. Cochrane Susan, „Children as By-products, Investment Goods and Consumer Goods: A Review of Some Micro-economic Models of Fertility” Population Studies, nr 3 (1975): 373-390. Doi: 10.1080/00324728.1975.10412706.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  13. Diertrich Frank, „Critical Reflection and the Limits of Parental Authority” Journal of Applied Philosophy, nr 4 (2022): 562-580. Doi: 10.1111/japp.12555.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  14. Durkheim Émile, Elementarne formy życia religijnego: system totemiczny w Australii. Warszawa: PWN, 1990.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  15. Echrlich Eugen, Żywe prawo ludów Bukowiny. https://jbc.bj.uj.edu.pl/Content/368030/PDF/NDIGCZAS017172_1912_005.pdf.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  16. Eliade Mircea, The sacred and the profane. The nature of religion. Orlando: Harcourt, 1987.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  17. Grief Avner, Guido Tabellini, „The Clan and the Corporation: Sustaining Cooperation in China and Europe” Journal of Comparative Economics, nr 1 (2015): 1-35. Doi: 10.1016/j.jce.2016.12.003.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  18. Hacker Daphna, „The rights of the dead through the prism of Israeli succession disputes” International Journal of Law in Context, nr 3 (2015): 40-58. Doi:10.1017/S1744552314000354.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  19. Hill Peter, The Ideological Origins of the Rule of Law. sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3166294.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  20. Iwicka Renata, Źródła klasycznej demonologii japońskiej, Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, 2018.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  21. Jakimowicz-Shah Marta, Andrzej Jakimowicz, Mitologia indyjska. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Artystyczne i Filmowe, 1982.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  22. Johansson Therese, Joakim Hjältén, Johnny de Jong, Henrik von Stedingk, „Environmental considerations from legislation and certification in managed forest stands: A review of their importance for biodiversity” Forest Ecology and Management, 303 (2013): 98-112. Doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2013.04.012.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  23. Kieniewicz Jan, Historia Indii. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, 1980.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  24. Koszowski Maciej, Dwadzieścia osiem wykładów ze wstępu do prawoznawstwa. Warszawa: Wyd. CM, 2019.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  25. Kquofi Steve, „Degradation of aesthetic aspects of the natural environment: a case of Accra, Ghana” International Journal of Applied Environmental Sciences, nr 1 (2011): 71-79.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  26. Le Brass Gabriel, „Sociologie religieuse et science des religions” Archives de Sociologie des Religions, nr 1 (1956): 3-17.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  27. Litewski Wiesław, Prawo Rzymskie Prywatne. Warszawa: PWN, 2003.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  28. Löytömäki Stiina, Law and the Politics of Memory. Confronting the Past. Oxon-Nowy Jork: Routledge, 2014.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  29. Macready John, Hannah Arendt and the fragility of human dignity. Lanham: Lexington Books, 2018.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  30. Makarewicz Juliusz, Wstęp do filozofii prawa karnego. Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL, 2009.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  31. Maru Yoseph, Aster Gebrekirstos, Getahun Haile, „Indigenous ways of environmental protection in Gedeo community, Southern Ethiopia. A socio-ecologicalperspective” Cogent Food & Agriculture, 6 (2020): 1-26. Doi: 10.1080/23311932.2020.1766732.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  32. Młynarska-Sobaczewska Anna, „Trzy wymiary prywatności. Sfera prywatna i publiczna we współczesnym prawie i teorii społecznej” Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego, nr 1 (2013): 33-52. Doi: 10.15804/ppk.2013.01.02.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  33. Montgomery Jonathan, „Children as property?” The Modern Law Review, nr 3 (1988): 323-342. Doi:10.1111/j.1468-2230.1988.tb01759.x.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  34. Najman Michał, „Determinants of the Object of Protection of the Crime of Desecration of a Corpse and a Grave and Defamation of a Deceased Person”, Krytyka Prawa. Niezależne Studia nad Prawem, nr 3 (2021): 241-254. Doi:10.7206/kp.2080-1084.483.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  35. Najman Michał, „Jak rozumieć godność w prawie” Przegląd Prawa i Administracji, t. CXXVII (2021): 95-113. Doi:10.19195/0137-1134.127.6.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  36. Nanji Amin, Samuel French, „Relationship between pork consumption and cirrhosis” Diet and Disease, 23 (1985): 681-683. Doi:10.3390/ijerph6092417.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  37. Nongbri Brent, Before Religion: A History of a Modern Concept. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2013.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  38. Nowacka Weronika, „Gdzie kończy się sacrum a zaczyna profanum. Antropologiczna analiza problemu na przykładzie przestrzeni cmentarnej” Pracownia kultury, 9 (2016). www.laboratoriumkultury.us.edu.pl/?p=31244.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  39. Oosten Jarich, „Cultural Anthropological Approaches” Contemporary Approaches to the Study of Religion, 2 (1985): 351-384. doi.org/10.1515/9783110815818.351.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  40. Partridge Ernest, „Posthumous Interests and Posthumous Respect” Ethics, 2 (1981): 243-264.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  41. Plavoet Veerle, „The attribution of limited legal personality to nonhuman species” Journal of Animal Ethics, 1 (2020): 49-58. Doi:10.5406/janimalethics.10.1.0049.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  42. Popiołek Piotr, „Czy chrześcijanin powinien być bogaty?” Magazyn Kontakt, 29 grudnia 2019. https://magazynkontakt.pl/czy-chrzescijanin-powinien-byc-bogaty/.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  43. Purvis Dara, „The Origin of Parental Rights: Labor, Intent, and Fathers” Florida State University Review, (2014): 645-696. Doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2115696.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  44. Romejko Adam, „Religia a troska o ochronę środowiska naturalnego” Studia Gdańskie, t. XII (2017): 247-261.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  45. Russell Bertrand, „On denoting” Mind, Vol. CXIV (2005): 873-887.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  46. Skory Maciej, „Osobowość prawna w sferze stosunków gospodarczych – wybrane zagadnienia konstrukcyjne”, [w:] Osobowość prawna jako przesłanka wykonywania konstytucyjnych wolności i praw, ed. Michał Bernaczyk, Mariusz Jabłoński. 161-178. Wrocław: Prace Naukowe Wydziału Prawa, Administracji i Ekonomii Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 2019. DOI: 10.34616/23.19.151.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  47. Stephenson Barry, Ritual. A very short introduction, Oxford-New York: Oxford University Press, 2015.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  48. Stępień Martyna, „Istota władzy rodzicielskiej” Studenckie Prace Prawnicze, Administratywistyczne i Ekonomiczne, 27 (2019): 61-71. DOI: 10.19195/1733-5779.27.4.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  49. Strang Veronica, „Elemental Powers: Water Beings, Nature Worship, and Long-Term Trajectories in Human-environmental Relations” Kritisketnografi. Swedish Journal of Anthropology, 2 (2021): 15-34. Doi:10.33063/diva-463871.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  50. Vered Ronit, „Prescribing pork in Israel” Gastronomica, 3 (2010): 19-22. DOI:10.1525/gfc.2010.10.3.19.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  51. Vial-Dumas Manuel, „Parents, Children, and Law” Journal of Family History, 4 (2014): 307-329. DOI:10.1177/0363199014554862.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  52. Wesoły Waldemar, „Dlaczego Kościół broni własności prywatnej?” Studia Gdańskie, t. XXVII (2010): 232-344.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  53. Whitehouse Harvey, „Modes of religiosity: towards a cognitive explanation of the sociopolitical dynamics of religion” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion, (3/4 (2002): 293-315. Doi: 10.17192/mjr.2007.11.3623.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  54. Woodhouse Barbara, „Who Owns the Child?” William & Mary Law Review, 33 (1992): 995-1122.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  55. Zhao Bao, „Posthumous Reputation and Posthumous Privacy in China: The Dead, the Law, and Social Transition” Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 1 (2014): 270-352.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  56. Ziembiński Zygmunt, Sprawiedliwość społeczna jako pojęcie prawne. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe, 1996.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>
  57. Zirk-Sadowski Marek, Wprowadzenie do filozofii prawa. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwers, 2021.
    Show in Google Scholar -->>

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.