Even though many may not compare the three, the principles of politics, law and theology were explored in conferences this weekend at the University of Wisconsin Law School.

The interdisciplinary conference “The Place of Theology in the Liberal State and the Globalized World” included experts in the fields of philosophy, theology, history and law. Diverse topics such as “The Theology of Sovereignity,” “Shi’ism and the State,” and “Materialism and Transcendence” were discussed by academics hailing from all over the world.

The event was sponsored by the Project for Law and the Humanities and organized by professors Leonard Kaplan and Charles Cohen.

Professor Ann Althouse, who spoke on “Traces of the Divine in American Constitutional Discourse,” contrasted the views of the emperor Cicero with Oliver Wendell Holmes in her presentation.

“True law is right reason,” she began, quoting Cicero. “One eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all times, and there will be one master and ruler, that is, God.”

Althouse contrasted this reliance on a higher law with the view of Holmes, who believed state and federal judges were directors of the source that gave them the authority to judge or govern.

Althouse argued that “Judges find the law, they don’t make it. You don’t really need this deep opinion of truth.”

Relating the story of a near-death experience, Althouse showed how Holmes was surrendering to the forces around him — the people’s opinions and the events of the day. Holmes was quoted as saying that life and death was “like a leap into darkness”.

“There’s more religion, more serenity in that sense of surrender,” she said.

Althouse questioned whether present day judicial restraint was mired too much in this sensibility.

In another presentation, Lobsang Sangay, of Harvard Law School, spoke on the Dalai Lama and the constitution of Tibet.

“Tibetan Buddhist society is becoming legally rational,” Sangay informed the audience.

Using a brief historical synopsis, Sangay illustrated how the Dalai Lama legally impeached himself and handed over power to the Parliament of the country beginning in about 1960.

“The Dalai Lama has traded political power for spiritual solace,” Sangay said, as he explained the difference between theology and politics in his home government.

“Buddhism is based on faith, democracy is based on suspicion,” he said. “The Tibetan people work on embracing, adopting and adapting democratic principles within Buddhism.”
Question-and-answer sessions followed each speech. Sangay, especially, was treated to a rigorous bout of questioning from the multicultural audience.
When a Pakistani woman asked how the Dalai Lama could be giving up political power when spiritual power was really the basis of his prestige, Sangay did not mince words.
“He’s an extremely patient person,” he replied. “If he wanted to, and he has the power to, he could dissolve the Parliament. He chose democracy.”