Law and Religion: In Search of God

Introduction: This work seeks to trace how the figure of God — in a literal or metaphorical sense — has manifested and evolved in the history of law as the ultimate foundation of the normative order. The article examines how, after the “death of God”, law continues to search for the ultimate foundation of normativity, replacing transcendent authority with secular dogmas (Grundnorm, Constitution, “public reason”).

Methods: The study employs comparative legal and historical-dogmatic analysis, interpretation of Nietzsche’s thesis and Münchhausen’s trilemma, as well as reconstruction of the practices of sacralization of legal text.

Results and discussion: It is demonstrated that both religious and secular theories of law inevitably reach an epistemological limit and compensate for it by creating new “substitutes for God” — canon, procedure, abstract values, and the symbolic authority of the court. This reveals the hidden dogmatism of liberal concepts and the illusion of procedural neutrality. The first part demonstrates the search for the ultimate foundation of law in the absence of an external guarantor, when one is left to seek an immanent axiom — one that is not imposed, yet without which the very experience of law is impossible. In the second part, the authors turn to the “sacralized” legal text and examine law, which, particularly in its dogmatic constructions, constitutes a complex system where the text acts as a canon, and the community of lawyers functions as priests who preserve and interpret its sacred meaning. The third part illustrates the solutions that legal scholarship resorts to in its search for the lost normativity.

Conclusions: Law emerges as an inevitably “faith-based” system, chronically experiencing a deficit of justification and therefore constantly producing new forms of sacralization of its own foundations.

1. Albert, H. (2003) Treatise on Critical Reason. Transl. from German by I. Z. Shishkov. Moscow: Editorial URSS. 264 p. (In Russ.)

2. Asmus, V. F. (1976) Ancient Philosophy. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola. 545 p. (In Russ.)

3. Bourdieu, P. (2016) On the State: Lectures at the Collège de France (1989–1992). Ed.-comp. by P. Champagne, R. Lenoir, F. Poupeau, M.-C. Rivière; transl. from French by D. Kralechkin, I. Kushnareva; preface by A. Bikbov. Moscow: Delo Publishing House RANEPA. 720 p. (In Russ.)

4. Wittgenstein, L. (2010) Culture and Value. On Certainty. Transl. from English by L. Dobroselsky. Moscow: AST: Astrel. 228 p.

5. Gryazin, I. N. (1983) The Text of Law (An Essay in Methodological Analysis of Competing Theories). Tallinn: Eesti Raamat. 187 p. (In Russ.)

6. De Saussure, F. (1999) Course in General Linguistics. Scientific ed. by M. E. Rut, transl. from French by S. V. Chistyakova. Yekaterinburg: Ural University Press. 432 p.

7. Degtyareva, M. I. (2000) Jean Bodin’s elaboration of the concept of sovereignty. Polis. Political Studies. No. 3, pp. 157–169. (In Russ.)

8. Derrida, J. (2000) Of Grammatology. Transl. from French by N. S. Avtonomova. Moscow: Ad Marginem. 511 p.

9. Ilyin, I. P. (1996) Poststructuralism. Deconstructivism. Postmodernism. Moscow: Intrada. 249 p. (In Russ.)

10. Kalinichenko, V. V. (2013) Indirect experience of the transcendental and the principle of eventual decidability in Kant. Bulletin of Vyatka State University. No. 1, pp. 13–17. (In Russ.)

11. Kelsen, H. (2015) Pure Theory of Law. 2nd ed. Transl. from German by M. V. Antonov and S. V. Lyozov. Saint Petersburg: Alef­Press. 542 p.

12. Myedova, A. A. (2024) The idea of God as a condition for the work of reason in Kant’s transcendental theology. Philosophical Thought. No. 2, pp. 1–15. (In Russ.)

13. Nietzsche, F. The Gay Science. Available at: https://nietzsche.ru/works/main-works/svasian/?curPos=1

14. Nietzsche, F. Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Available at: https://clck.ru/3QHaNT

15. Austin, J. L. (1986) How to do things with words. In: New in foreign linguistics. Issue XVII. Theory of speech acts. Moscow: Progress. Pp. 22–130.

16. Pokrovsky, I. A. (2025) History of Roman Law. Moscow: Yurayt. 447 p. (In Russ.)

17. Razuvaev, N. V. (2017) The problem of a universal metalanguage and its applications in postclassical legal theory. Economics, Sociology and Law. No. 2, pp. 87–92. (In Russ.)

18. Foucault, M. (1996) The Will to Knowledge: Beyond Knowledge, Power and Sexuality. Transl. from French by S. Tabachnikova. Moscow: Magisterium Kastal. 448 p.

19. Schlag, P. (2024) Formalism and realism in ruins (outlining the logic of collapse). Theoretical and Applied Law. No. 4 (22), pp. 18–55.

20. Epstein, M. (2019) Postmodernism in Russia. Saint Petersburg: Azbuka, Azbuka­Attikus. 608 p. (In Russ.)

21. Altman, A. (1990) Critical Legal Studies: A Liberal Critique. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 216 p.

22. Berman, H. J. (1983) Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 672 p.

23. Brundage, J. A. (2008) The Medieval Origins of the Legal Profession: Canonists, Civilians, and Courts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 626 p.

24. D’Amato, A. (2010) Legal Uncertainty. Faculty Working Papers. URL: https://clck.ru/3QHaLo

25. Danet, B. (1980) Language in the Legal Process. Law & Society Review. Vol. 14, no. 3. Pp. 445–564.

26. Fogelin, R. (1994) Pyrrhonian reflections on knowledge and justification. New York: Oxford University Press. 238 p.

27. Ссылка на работу удалена в связи с признанием издателя экстремистской организацией в Российской Федерации.

28. Goodrich, P. Law and Religion: Law, Religion, and Critical Theory. URL: https://clck.ru/3QLsQ4

29. Hart, H. L. A. (1958) Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals. Harvard Law Review. Vol. 71, no. 4. Pp. 593–629.

30. Jørgensen, S. (2000) Faces of Truth. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. 119 p.

31. Kennedy, D. (1997) A Critique of Adjudication [fin de siècle]. Harvard: Harvard University Press. 424 p.

32. Kennedy, D. (1976) Form and Substance in Private Law Adjudication. Harvard Law Review. Vol. 89, no. 8. Pp. 1685–1778.

33. Kennedy, D. (1979) The Structure of Blackstone’s Commentaries. Buffalo Law Review. Vol. 28. Pp. 205–382.

34. Pennington, K. (2014) Moderamen Inculpatae Tutelae: The Jurisprudence of a Justifiable Defense. Rivista Internazionale di Diritto Comune. No. 24. URL: https://clck.ru/3QHaLc

35. Rasulov, A. What CLS meant by the indeterminancy thesis. URL: https://clck.ru/3QJ78e

36. Schlag, P. (1991) Foreword: Postmodernism and Law. University of Colorado Law Review. Vol. 62. Pp. 439– 453.

37. Schlag, P. (1991) Normativity and the Politics of Form. University of Pennsylvania Law Review. Vol. 139. URL: https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/penn_law_review/vol139/iss4/1.

38. Schlag, P. (2016) The Knowledge Bubble — Something Amiss in Expertopia. In Search of Contemporary Legal Thought. URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2741144

39. Serano, R. G. Opposable reasons: Solving Conflicts of Fundamental Rights and Norms / Doctoral thesis, Universitat Pompeu Fabra. https://clck.ru/3QHaKS

40. Thier, A. (2012) Scholastic Jurisprudence / The Max Planck encyclopedia of European private law / J. Basedow (Ed.). Oxford University Press. URL: https://clck.ru/3QHaKB.

41. Varga, Cs. (2012) The Paradigms of Legal Thinking. Budapest: Szent István Társulat. 418 p.

42. Wydick, R. C. (2005) Plain English for Lawyers. 5-th ed. Durham: Carolina Academic Press. 139 p.