The renaissance of interest in religious law over the last twenty years has led to increasingly sophisticated academic works. Accounts of religious law are becoming more interdisciplinary, combining insights from law, theology, religious studies, history and sociology. Furthermore, many authors are moving in the direction of comparative religious law, comparing the laws and other regulatory instruments from a range of religious groups. Law, Liberty and Church, the first book by Dr Gordon Arthur, does both: it is an interdisciplinary study and a work in comparative religious law. Theology, legal theory, religious law and history are all present in Arthur's scholarly work, which explores presuppositions underlying authority in five churches in England, namely: the Church of England, the Roman Catholic Church, the Methodist Church, the United Reformed Church and the Baptist Union. It is clear that this innovative tome deserves its place in Ashgate's ‘New Critical Thinking’ series.

Law, Liberty and Church seeks to examine the concept of authority in each church ‘by studying some of the assumptions that underlie its existence’ (p 3). Arthur aims to understand authority structures within their ‘proper theological context’ and works towards identifying the secular influences upon different systems of religious law (p 3). He argues that, although Scripture is a major single influence on authority structures formed by the churches, other influences have shaped the authority structures of particular churches in different directions. This theme is developed throughout the work, culminating in chapter eight, where Arthur elucidates his position on authority and then sets out four principles that he goes on to apply to the five churches, explaining how the polity of each differs from the principles stated and how their current positions may be improved. This is followed by a short final chapter which offers five further conclusions.

The first three chapters set the scene: the first expounds at length what the New Testament says about the ‘exercise of power and authority by humans within the Christian Community’ (p 7); the second outlines the structures of authority in the five chosen churches; and the third pauses to examine differences in the understanding of the related concepts of judgement and justice, examining juridical systems within four different contexts: Roman law, Greek ethical philosophy, the Torah and the New Testament. In each case, Arthur's elucidation of these topics is impressive; the text is densely written and well footnoted. However, the extent to which the text is accessible to an interdisciplinary audience is open to question.

Thankfully, following these chapters, the pace of the book improves significantly as Arthur begins to develop his thesis by examining the factors that proved to be influential upon each church. Chapters four and five examine the use of authority in the episcopal churches. Arthur concludes that canon law has been one of the principal means by which secular ideas have influenced Christian culture. In chapter four, he discusses Roman Catholic canon law, and puts forward the view that the Roman Catholic Church has felt the influence of Roman law and Roman legal theory, resulting in inflexibility and authoritarianism. In chapter five, he discusses the Church of England, and contends that the laws of the church have ‘been influenced by the secular jurisprudence of England, with its emphasis on reason, equity and pragmatism’ (p 125). In both cases, Arthur's method is largely historical and he seems less confident discussing modern influences upon the law. Furthermore, he seems to stress the disadvantages that the secular influences have had. For example, it may be true that the law of the Church of England has followed English civil law in its penchant for ‘fudged disputed issues’, but Arthur does not recognise that the lack of certainty may be a price worth paying (at least theologically) to avoid overly rigid legal structures that are incapable of subtlety and nuance.

Chapters six and seven examine authority within the non-episcopal churches. Chapter six discusses why non-episcopal churches have largely rejected canon law and explores the influence of Aristotle's thought on democracy. Chapter seven continues the story, critically analysing whether alternative structures of authority employed by the free churches perform the same function as canon law in the ways in which they operate. He concludes that the free churches, in rebelling against canon law, have embraced secular notions of democracy and, to a lesser extent, individualism (p 195). The free churches have taken a more democratic, and consequently individualist, approach, due in part to the legacy of Aristotle. Indeed, Arthur concludes that, while the influence of Aristotelian ideas upon the free churches is greater than is often assumed, the Roman Catholic Church is less indebted to him than is sometimes alleged (p 192). These chapters advance Arthur's thesis well but, again, the advantages of the secular influence are somewhat overlooked.

Arthur's general conclusions may be summed up in his comment that ‘Churches have drifted away from the ideal’, where law, reason or liberty have been emphasised to the detriment of righteousness (p 173). This, of course, is based on a value judgment of what the ideal is. It is clear that Arthur sees as the ideal the patterns of authority found in the Early Church and described in the New Testament. However, he does recognise that the development and growth of the Church required and requires new structures to be found (p 197). Arthur's identified principles will no doubt help this task but his constant backward-looking stance may hinder progression. The author concludes with a wish that each of the churches will ‘find both encouragement and challenge’ in his work (p 198). His work will also be of considerable use to the academic community: although it is by no means an easy read, Arthur has produced a fine work of comparative religious law within an interdisciplinary framework. It is also to be hoped that other academics will follow his innovative example and contribute to the growing literature on religious law.